| The experiment was conducted to study the effects of lactic acid bacteria on growthperformance, carcass traits and pork quality of finishing pigs. The objective of the studywas to enhance breeding efficiency of large-scale pig farms, and provide objective scientificproduction basis of high quality pork and high quality pig. The experiment was divided intotwo parts, experiment one: preliminary study of feeding lactic acid bacteria on carcass traitsand pork quality of finishing pigs; experiment two: effects of feeding lactic acid bacteria ongrowth performance, carcass traits and pork quality of finishing pigs, and the experimenttwo can determine the optimum dosage of lactic acid bacteria liquid. The lactic acid bacterialiquid was fermented by the lactic acid bacteria fermentation tank and the lactic acidbacteria fermentation tank was produced by Shandong Baolai-Leelai Bioengineering Co.,Ltd. The live lactic acid bacteria amount of lactic acid bacteria liquid was about109cfu/ml,lactic acid content≥30mg/ml, pH between3.5-4.5.Experiment one (preliminary study of feeding lactic acid bacteria on carcass traits andpork quality of finishing pigs) was carried out in the Shandong Yanggu Huaxin BreedingCo., Ltd.72pigs (Duroc×Landrace×Yorkshire) were divided into two groups. Each group36pigs.The72pigs were healthy and uniform growth. The treatment pigs diet contained100ml lactic acid bacteria liquid from30kg to100kg body weight and the control pigs dietwere only basic diet. Results of experiment one showed as follow:(1) The carcass length oftreatment pigs was higher than that of the control pigs (P>0.05). The backfat thickness wassignificantly lower than the control pigs (P<0.05).(2)The weight of dry matter, meat waterholding capacity, crude protein, crude ash of the treatment pigs were significantly higherthan that of the control pigs (P<0.05); the meat shear force and total cholesterol of thetreatment were lower than that of the control(P>0.05).(3)The weight of dry matter, crude ash of the treatment streaky pork were more than the control16.84%(P<0.01),1.69%(P>0.05), and the crude protein, total cholesterol of the treatment streaky pork wereless than the control24.14%(P<0.01),6.35%(P>0.05).(4)The collagen content of thetreatment meat was higher than the control pigs, and the delicious amino acids, essentialamino acids, and amino acids sum of the treatment meat were higher than that of the controlpigs, but the difference was not significant (P>0.05).(5) The C18:0and C18:1between thetreatment and the control meat were significant difference (P<0.05). The treatment contentof C18:2, C18:3, DPA, DHA, PUFA were higher than the control meat. The treatmentcontent of MUFA in meat was lower than the control (P<0.05)(6)The C18:0, C18:1andC20:0of streaky pork were significant difference (P<0.05).The UFA and MUFA of thetreatment streaky pork were significantly lower than that of the control pigs (P<0.05). TheSFA of the treatment streaky pork were significantly higher than that of the control pigs(P<0.05), and the PUFA of the treatment meat were higher than that of the control pigs(P>0.05).(7)As storage prolonging, SOD activity in postmortem muscle and streaky porkwas tended to decrease, but MDA content was tended to increase. From1d to6d, SODactivity of treatment meat and streaky pork were always higher than the control, and MDAcontent of treatment meat and streaky pork were always lower than the control.Experiment two (effects of different lactic acid bacteria amount on growthperformance, carcass characteristics and pork quality of finishing pigs) was carried out inthe Shandong Yinbao Farms.216pigs (Duroc×Landrace×Yorkshire) were divided intofour groups, and each group54pigs. The216pigs was healthy and uniform growth. Thelactic acid bacteria liquid amount of per pig feeding: group one50ml/day; group two100ml/day; group three150ml/day; the control group0ml/day. The lactic acid bacterialiquid was fed by drinking water. Other conditions were same. Experiment two showed asfollow:(1) Average daily gain of group50ml, group100ml and group150ml were notsignificant (P>0.05), more than the control group. Average daily gain of group100ml weremore than the control group18.19％(P<0.05).(2) Feed intake/weight gain of group50ml,group100ml and group150ml were less than the control group7.43％、8.67％、10.84％, but the difference was not significant (P>0.05).(3) Average daily intake of group100mlwas highest, group150ml was the lowest, and four groups were not significant (P>0.05).(4)Survival rate of group50ml, group150ml were more than the control group2.13％,6.38％.Group100ml was the same to control group. Survival rate of group150ml was the highest,and four groups were not significant (P>0.05).(5)Carcass weight of group100ml weremore than other groups, and group100ml was significant difference with the other threegroups (P<0.05); carcass weight of group50ml, group150ml and the control group werenot significant difference(P>0.05).(6)Carcass length of group50ml, group100ml and group150ml were more than control group; group100ml and control group were significantdifference (P<0.05); group50ml, group150ml and control group were not significantdifference group (P>0.05).100ml was the highest and more than group50ml, group150ml,control group5.8％,4.35％,6.05％(P<0.05).(7)Eye muscle area of group50ml, group100ml and group150ml were more than control group; group100ml was the highest andmore than control group20.5％, but the difference was not significant (P>0.05).(8)Backfatthickness of group50ml was the lowest; group100ml was the highest; group50ml andgroup100ml were not significant (P>0.05).(9) Meat color score, marbling score, water losspercentage, drip loss, cooking loss, napole yield of four groups were not significant(P>0.05); water holding capacity of group150ml was better than others. The Shear force ofgroup50ml, group100ml and group150ml were less than control group, the difference wasnot significant (P>0.05). Intramuscular fat of group50ml were better than others, and crudeprotein of group150ml were better than others, and the difference was not significant(P>0.05).(10) The total cholesterol of group50ml, group100ml and group150ml were lessthan control group9.65％、5.11％、2.02％, the difference was not significant (P>0.05). Theinosine monophosphate of group50ml, group100ml and group150ml were more than thecontrol group15.38％(P>0.05)、53.85％(P<0.05)、23.08％(P>0.05), and group100ml washigher than other three groups. The TC content of group50ml, group100ml and group150ml were more than the control group, and group150ml was the highest, four groupswere not significant (P>0.05).(11)SOD activity of group50ml, group100ml and group 150ml were not significant (P>0.05), more than control group12.19％(P<0.05),39.05％(P<0.05),34.81％(P<0.05). MDA content of group100ml was the same to group150ml,and MDA content of group50ml was the same to control group; MDA content of group100ml and150ml were less than group50ml and control group10.53％, the difference wasnot significant (P>0.05).In a word, our study indicated that feeding lactic acid bacteria liquid can improve thepig growth performance, carcass traits and the income of average each pig, and feeding100ml lactic acid bacteria liquid had the best effect. Feeding lactic acid bacteria liquid canimprove the survival rate of pigs, and feeding150ml lactic acid bacteria liquid had the besteffect. Feeding lactic acid bacteria liquid can improve the TC content of meat, and feeding150ml lactic acid bacteria liquid had the best effect. Feeding lactic acid bacteria liquid canimprove the tendernesst of meat, and feeding100ml lactic acid bacteria liquid had the besteffect. Feeding lactic acid bacteria liquid can reduce the total cholesterol content of meat,and feeding50ml lactic acid bacteria liquid had the best effect. Feeding lactic acid bacterialiquid can improve the inosine monophosphate content of meat, and feeding100ml lacticacid bacteria liquid had the best effect. Feeding lactic acid bacteria liquid can improve themeat oxidation resistance, and effect of feeding100ml lactic acid bacteria liquid was the best. |
PDF Full Text Request