The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impact of piglet birth weight, birth order, and litter size on subsequent growth performance, carcass quality, muscle composition, and eating quality of pork1
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate the relationships among birth weight, birth order, or litter size on growth performance, carcass quality, and eating quality of the ultimate pork product. Data were collected from 98 pig litters and, with the addition of recording birth weight and birth order, farrowing and piglet management were according to normal barn practices. In the nursery and during growout, the pigs received the normal feeding program for the barn and, with the addition of individual tattooing, were marketed as per standard procedure. From 24 litters, selected because they had at least 12 pigs born alive and represented a range of birth weights, 4 piglets were chosen (for a total of 96 piglets) and sent to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada-Lacombe Research Centre (Lacombe, Alberta, Canada) when they reached 120 kg for extensive meat quality and sensory analysis. Individual BW was measured at birth, on the day of weaning, 5 wk after weaning, at nursery exit, at first pull, and at the time of marketing. Litter sizes were divided into 3 categories: small (3 to 10 piglets), medium (11 to 13 piglets), and large (14 to 19 piglets). There were 4 birth-weight quartiles: 0.80 to 1.20, 1.25 to 1.45, 1.50 to 1.70, and 1.75 to 2.50 kg. Increased litter size resulted in reduced mean birth weight (P < 0.05), but had no effect on within litter variability or carcass quality (P > 0.05) when slaughtered at the same endpoint. Lighter birth-weight pigs had reduced BW at weaning, 5 and 7 wk postweaning, and at first pull and had increased days to market (P < 0.05). Birth weight had limited effects on carcass quality, weight of primal cuts, objective quality, and overall palatability of the meat at the same slaughter weight (P > 0.05). In conclusion, increased litter size resulted in decreased mean birth weight but no change in days to market. Lighter birth-weight pigs took longer to reach market. Despite some differences in histological properties, birth weight had limited effects on carcass composition or final eating quality of the pork when slaughtered at the same BW and large litter size resulted in more pigs weaned and marketed compared with the smaller litters. We concluded that based on the conditions of this study, other than increased days to market, there is no reason based on pig performance or pork quality to slow down the goal of the pork industry to increase sow productivity as a means to increase efficiency.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Nutrient Requirements of Swine: Eighth revised edition, 1979
(1979) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/19882 · Cited by 4,196
Guide to the care and use of experimental animals
Olfert, E. D. (1993) · Cited by 3,184
Nutrient Requirements of Swine: 10th Revised Edition
(1998) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/6016 · Cited by 2,319
Laboratory methods for sensory evaluation of food
Larmond, E. (1977) · Cited by 1,000
Rehfeldt, C., & Kuhn, G. (2006) · Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.2527/2006.8413_supple113x · Cited by 387
Muscle development in large and small pig fetuses.
Wigmore, P. M., & Stickland, N. C. (1983) · PubMed · Cited by 364
The biological basis for prenatal programming of postnatal performance in pigs1,2
Foxcroft, G. R., Dixon, W. T., Novak, S., Putman, C. T., Town, S. C., & Vinsky, M. D. A. (2006) · Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.2527/2006.8413_supple105x · Cited by 339
Milligan, B. N., Fraser, D., & Kramer, D. L. (2002) · Livestock Production Science · doi:10.1016/s0301-6226(02)00012-x · Cited by 339
Development of thermoregulation and neonatal survival in pigs
Herpin, P., Damon, M., & Le Dividich, J. (2002) · Livestock Production Science · doi:10.1016/s0301-6226(02)00183-5 · Cited by 321
Muscle cellularity and postnatal growth in the pig1
Dwyer, C. M., Fletcher, J. M., & Stickland, N. C. (1993) · Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.2527/1993.71123339x · Cited by 206
Cited by
Cave, N. J., Bridges, J. P., Weidgraaf, K., & Thomas, D. G. (2018) · Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition · doi:10.1111/jpn.12930 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Beaulieu, A. D., Aalhus, J. L., Williams, N. H., & Patience, J. F.
- Venue
- Journal of Animal Science
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-08-01
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 2767-2778
- ISSN
- 0021-8812 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-3163
- OpenAlex
- W1966037893
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 18.57
- 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: Impact of piglet birth weight, birth order, and litter size on subsequent growth performance, carcass quality, muscle composition, and eating quality of pork1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2527/jas.2009-2222
- The paper
- Beaulieu, A. D., Aalhus, J. L., Williams, N. H., & Patience, J. F. (2010). Impact of piglet birth weight, birth order, and litter size on subsequent growth performance, carcass quality, muscle composition, and eating quality of pork1. Journal of Animal Science. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-2222
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.