- Title
- Effect of dietary inclusion of Moringa oleifera Lam leaf meal on feed conversion efficiency, meat quality, fatty acid composition, shelf life and consumer health-related perceptions of pork
- Creator
- Mukumbo, Felicitas Esnart
- Subject
- Moringa oleifera
- Subject
- Meat -- Quality
- Subject
- Feed utilization efficiency
- Date Issued
- 2013
- Date
- 2013
- Type
- Thesis
- Type
- Masters
- Type
- MSc Agric (Animal Science)
- Identifier
- vital:11827
- Identifier
- http://hdl.handle.net/10353/d1016071
- Identifier
- Moringa oleifera
- Identifier
- Meat -- Quality
- Identifier
- Feed utilization efficiency
- Description
- The objective of the study was to determine the feed conversion efficiency (FCE), carcass characteristics, physico-chemical quality, fatty acid (FA) composition and shelf life of pork from pigs fed diets containing either 0% (T1), 2.5% (T2), 5% (T3) or 7.5% (T4) Moringa oleifera leaf meal (MOLM). Consumer health-related perceptions on pork and fatty acids were also investigated. Twenty four crossbred Large White x Landrace pigs of both sexes at 18 weeks of age and initially weighing 71.6 kg on average were housed individually and had ad libitum access to one of the four dietary treatments for a period of six weeks. Average daily feed intake (ADFI) and average daily gain (ADG) and feed conversion ratios (FCR) were calculated as an indication of FCE and pigs were slaughtered at an average live weight of 99.6 kg. Carcass traits such as back fat thickness (BFT), carcass temperatures and pH readings taken 45 minutes and 24 hours (pH45 and pHu) post mortem were recorded. M. longissimus thoracis et lumborum (LTL) samples were taken from each carcass for the determination of lightness (L*), redness (a*), yellowness (b*), thawing loss percentage (TL%), cooking loss percentage (CL%), Warner Bratzler Shear Force (WBSF), shelf life and FA composition. Furthermore a survey was conducted amongst 80 University of Fort Hare Students to determine their health-related perceptions on pork and fatty acids as well as their pork consumption frequency using questionnaires. The FCE of pigs fed on 0-5% MOLM (T1, T2 and T3) diets did not differ significantly, but the FCE of pigs fed 7.5% MOLM (T4) was significantly (p<0.05) reduced. No significant relationship was reported between inclusion of MOLM carcass characteristics and physico-chemical pork quality. There was however a significant improvement (p<0.05) in the shelf life of the pork from MOLM fed pigs in terms of colour and odour during 10 days of refrigerated storage (at 3±1°C). There was a significant (p<0.05) reduction in the total intramuscular fat (IMF) content and the saturated fatty acid (SFA) C18:0 (stearic acid) content and an overall non-significant (p>0.05) increase in the poly unsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) content of pork from MOLM fed pigs. The possible reason for this is that the feeding of MOLM was commenced when the pigs were at an advanced age and weight. The survey revealed that the majority of interviewed students consume fresh (39.7%) and processed (32.4%) pork two to three times a week, perceive pork to be generally healthy (70%) and the second most healthy meat type (39.5%). While the majority (55.4%) were aware of the health implications of FAs they did not know which FA classes pose more of a health risk (51.3%). In conclusion2.5% and 5% of MOLM in finisher pig feed did not negatively affect FCE, carcass characteristics or physico-chemical meat quality; significantly improved pork shelf life and reduced total IMF and SFA content of pork but 7.5% MOLM negatively affected FCE; and the majority of students perceive pork to be the second most healthy type of meat and are generally aware of the health implications of FAs.
- Format
- 140 leaves; 30 cm
- Format
- Publisher
- University of Fort Hare
- Publisher
- Faculty of Science & Agriculture
- Language
- English
- Rights
- University of Fort Hare
- Hits: 890
- Visitors: 1093
- Downloads: 373
Collections
UFH Department of Livestock & Pasture Science
| Thumbnail | File | Description | Size | Format | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| View Details Download | SOURCEPDF | 1 MB | Adobe Acrobat PDF | View Details Download |