Journals / Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences / 2013 / Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 6

The effects of barley/triticale silage on performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality of lambs

Pages
727–733
Publication Date
2013-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It can be concluded that barley/triticale silages offered with concentrate had no unfavorable effect on lamb performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was conducted to investigate the performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality of lambs fed barley/triticale silage treated with/without inoculant and enzyme mixture-based diets with similar barley supplementation.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Thirty Tahirova × Sakız crossbred weaned ram lambs (mean body weight: 34 ± 0.5 kg) were used in this study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It can be concluded that barley/triticale silages offered with concentrate had no unfavorable effect on lamb performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:triticale · barley · silage

Abstract

This study was conducted to investigate the performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality of lambs fed barley/triticale silage treated with/without inoculant and enzyme mixture-based diets with similar barley supplementation. Thirty Tahirova × Sakız crossbred weaned ram lambs (mean body weight: 34 ± 0.5 kg) were used in this study. Lambs were randomly divided into groups of 3 and fed the respective diets. These 3 diets were: 1) hay grass + barley, 2) triticale/barley silage + barley, and 3) triticale/barley silage with inoculants and enzyme mixture + barley. There were significant differences among groups in daily live weight gain (P < 0.001). Cold carcass weight and dressing percentage based on empty body weight and carcass conformation scores were not significantly different among groups, but fatness scores and proportion of omental and mesenteric fat were significantly affected by diet (P < 0.05). No differences were found in terms of meat lightness (L*), redness (a*), and yellowness (b*) values for M. longissimus thoracis muscle. However, silage-fed lambs in both groups had higher shear force values than hay-fed lambs in the current study (P < 0.05). It can be concluded that barley/triticale silages offered with concentrate had no unfavorable effect on lamb performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality.

🔖

Cite This Article

DEMİREL, G., PEKEL, A. Y., EKİZ, B., BİRİCİK, H., KOCABAĞLI, N., ALP, M. (2013). The effects of barley/triticale silage on performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality of lambs. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 6, 727–733. https://ajindex.com/articles/121937

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Khan SH, Shahzad MA, Nisa M, Sarwar M. Nutrients intake, digestibility, nitrogen balance and growth performance of sheep fed different silages with or without concentrate. Trop Anim Health Prod 2011; 43: 795–801.
  2. Bolsen, KK, Berger LL, Conway KL, Riley G. Wheat, barley and corn silages for growing steers and lambs. J Anim Sci 1976; 42: 185–191.
  3. Filya I, Ashbell G, Hen Y, Wienberg ZG. The effect of bacterial inoculants on the fermentation and aerobic stability of whole-crop wheat silage. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2000; 88: 39– Jones R, Woolford MK. Technology of forage preservation. In: Proceedings of the 11th Interntional Silage Conference, Aberystwyth, Wales, UK; 1996; pp. 232–233.
  4. Rooke JA, Kafilzadeh F. The effect upon fermentation and nutritive-value of silages produced after treatment by 3 different inoculants of lactic-acid bacteria applied alone or in combination. Grass Forage Sci 1994; 49: 324–333.
  5. Barker SB, Summerson WH. The colorimetric method for determination of lactic acid in biological material J Biol Chem 1941; 138: 535–554.
  6. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Method for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 1991; 74: 3583– 35 Goering HK, VanSoest PJ. Forage Fiber Analysis. USDAARS Agriculture Handbook No. 379. Washington, DC, USA: Government Printing Office; 1970.
  7. Ruiz de Huidobro F, Miguel E, Díaz MT, Velasco S, Lauzurica S, Pérez C, Onega E, Blazquez B, Caneque V. Carcass classification in suckling lambs. II. Comparison among subjective carcass classification methods: Fatness scales and conformation scales with 0.25 point-intervals. Meat Sci 2004; 66: 135–142. Fisher AV, de Boer H. The EAAP standard method of sheep carcass assessment. Carcass measurements and dissection procedures. Livest Prod Sci 1994; 38: 149–159. Honikel KO. Reference methods for the assessment of physical characteristics of meat. Meat Sci 1998; 49: 447–457.
  8. Hoffman LC, Muller M, Cloete SWP, Schmidt D. Comparison of six crossbred lamb types: Sensory, physical and nutritional meat quality characteristics. Meat Sci 2003; 65: 1265–1274.
  9. Ekiz B, Ekiz EE, Kocak O, Yalcintan H, Yilmaz A. Effect of preslaughter management regarding transportation and time in lairage on certain stress parameters, carcass and meat quality characteristics in Kivircik lambs. Meat Sci 2012; 90: 967–976.
  10. SPSS, Inc. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, Release 0. Chicago, IL, USA: SPSS; 1999.
  11. Kung L, Ranjit NK. The e