Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 420

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Vaccination of boars with a GnRH vaccine (Improvac) eliminates boar taint and increases growth performance.

Dunshea, F R, Colantoni, C, Howard, K, McCauley, I, Jackson, P, Long, K A, Lopaticki, S, Nugent, E A, Simons, J A, Walker, J, Hennessy, D P·2001·Journal of Animal Science

Abstract

Peri- and postpubertal boars accumulate substances (e.g., androstenone and skatole) in their fatty tissue that are responsible for boar taint in pork. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of a GnRH vaccine, Improvac, in eliminating boar taint. Three hundred male (200 intact boars, 100 barrows) crossbred (Large White x Landrace) pigs were used in a 2 x 3 factorially arranged experiment. The respective factors were sex group (barrows, boars treated with placebo, or boars treated with Improvac) and slaughter age (23 or 26 wk). Vaccines were administered 8 and 4 wk before slaughter. All Improvac-treated pigs exhibited anti-GnRH titers. Testes and bulbo-urethral gland weights in treated pigs were reduced by approximately 50% (P < 0.001) and serum testosterone levels were below 2 ng/mL in the majority of treated boars (94 and 92% across both age groups at 2 and 4 wk, respectively). Boar taint, as assessed by the concentration of androstenone and skatole in s.c. fat, was suppressed to low or undetectable levels in 100% of Improvac-treated boars. No Improvac-treated pigs had significant concentrations of either androstenone (> 1.0 microg/g) or skatole (> 0.20 microg/g). In contrast, 49.5% of placebo-treated controls had significant androstenone and 10.8% had significant skatole levels, resulting in 10% of the control boars with high concentrations of both compounds. The mean concentrations of taint compounds in the Improvac-treated pigs were not significantly different from those in barrows. Improvac-treated boars grew more rapidly (P = 0.051 and < 0.001 for pigs slaughtered at 23 and 26 wk of age, respectively) than control boars over the 4 wk after the secondary vaccination, possibly because of reduced sexual and aggressive activities. Compared with barrows, Improvac-treated boars were leaner and had superior feed conversion efficiency. The vaccine was well tolerated by the pigs, and no observable site reactions could be detected at the time of slaughter. Vaccination of boars with Improvac allows production of heavy boars with improved meat quality through prevention and control of boar taint.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2527/2001.79102524x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 420

Metadata

Authors
Dunshea, F. R., Colantoni, C., Howard, K., McCauley, I., Jackson, P., Long, K. A., Lopaticki, S., Nugent, E. A., Simons, J. A., Walker, J., & Hennessy, D. P.
Venue
Journal of Animal Science
Published
2001
Volume
79
Issue
10
Pages
2524
ISSN
0021-8812 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2403256101
Cited by
420
References
0
FWCI
11.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Vaccination of boars with a GnRH vaccine (Improvac) eliminates boar taint and increases growth performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2527/2001.79102524x
The paper
Dunshea, F. R., Colantoni, C., Howard, K., McCauley, I., Jackson, P., Long, K. A., Lopaticki, S., Nugent, E. A., Simons, J. A., Walker, J., & Hennessy, D. P. (2001). Vaccination of boars with a GnRH vaccine (Improvac) eliminates boar taint and increases growth performance. Journal of Animal Science. https://doi.org/10.2527/2001.79102524x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.