Alternative pork carcass evaluation techniques: I. Differences in predictions of value.

M. A. Boland, K. A. Foster, A. P. Schinckel, J. Wagner, W. Chen, E. P. Berg, J. C. Forrest

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

Dissected and predicted wholesale and lean boneless values for 154 pork carcasses representing seven genotypes with substantial variation in carcass composition and percentage of lean were determined. Dissected carcass value was determined using a component pricing model, and four alternative models were specified to predict that value. The models included measurements from a ruler (RULER) and two carcass evaluation technologies, Hennessy probe (PROBE) and electromagnetic scanner (EMS1). A combination of the PROBE and EMS1 models (EMS2) was also used. For wholesale value, R2 were .40, .70, .59, and .74, and the RSD were 8.18, 5.77, 6.76, and 5.38 ($/100 kg of carcass value) for RULER, PROBE, EMS1, and EMS2, respectively. For lean boneless value, the R2 were .41, .73, .59, and .74, and the RSD were 8.34, 5.67, 6.99, and 5.51 ($/100 kg of carcass value) for RULER, PROBE, EMS1, and EMS2, respectively. The results indicate that a combination of probe and electromagnetic scanner measurements provided the best fit to dissected value.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)637-644
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of animal science
Volume73
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1995

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Alternative pork carcass evaluation techniques: I. Differences in predictions of value.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this