Comparative Evaluation of Processed Pork Cuts from Finisher’s Pigs Fed Rice Offal’s and Millet Hulls Base Diets.

Akhigbe; Omotoso; O.B; Ojinnaka; P.E; Chia; V.

doi:10.56201/ijaes.vol.11.no6.2025.pg64.73

📄 Download Paper

Comparative Evaluation of Processed Pork Cuts from Finisher’s Pigs Fed Rice Offal’s and Millet Hulls Base Diets.

Akhigbe, O, Omotoso, O.B, Ojinnaka, P.E and Chia, V.

Abstract

The experiment was conducted to evaluate processed (smoked) pork products of finisher pigs fed rice offal and millet hulls-based diets. A total of eighteen grower pigs were randomly allotted to three dietary treatments designated as T1, T2 and T3.T1 served as control and was fed with maize offal-based diet as a sole fiber source. T2 and T3 served as treatment groups to which maize offal was replaced with 100% millet hulls inclusion level and 100% rice offal inclusion levels respectively. The experiment lasted for 56 days. Thereafter, three finisher pigs were slaughtered and processed and the following parameters were evaluated, crude protein, ash, ether extract, moisture, dry matter, pH, potassium, Calcium, iron and phosphorus as well as sensory characteristics-aroma, flavor, texture and appearance from the specific pork cuts. At the end of the experiment, it was observed that replacing maize offal with rice offal and millet hulls had no adverse effects on the meat quality in terms of proximate composition. values gotten from the smoke hind limbs showed no significant difference for crude protein and ether extract. T3 yielded the most potassium and phosphorus values with 213.56 and 223.43 respectively for smoked bacon. There was no significant difference between the values of crude protein and ether extract.T1 yielded the highest value for phosphorus content with 215.78.T3 smoked pork shoulders yielded the highest crude protein values with 24.65.T1 had a superior value of 5.11 compared to T2 and T3.T3 had the most phosphorus content with 219.56 the results shows that the use of properly processed millet hulls and rice offal up to 100% level as a replacement to maize offal is an effective way to finish pigs used for production of processed(smoked)pork cuts.

References

"The Meat You Eat – What's Good for You?". WebMD. Retrieved 2022-05-19(Wikipedia) Andersen, H. J. 2000. What is pork quality? In C. Wenk, J. A. Fernández and M. Dupuis, Quality of meat and fat in pigs as effected by genetics and nutrition (EAAP publication No. 100). Wageningen Pers. Zurich, Switzerland. 15-26 pp. AOAC (2003): Association of Analytical Communities, International Official methods of analysis. 17th edition. 2nd revision. Gaithersburg, MD, USA. AOAC (2016). Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 20th ed. Rockville, USA: AOAC International. Bajerholm, C., Aaslyng, M.D., 2004. Cooking of Meat. In: Devine, C., Dikeman, M. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Meat Sciences. Elsevier, Oxford, UK, pp. 343–349. Bryhni, E. A., Byrne, D. V., Rødbotten, M., Møller, S., Claudi-Magnussen, C., Karlsson, A., Agerhem, H., Johansson, M. & Martens, M. 2003. Consumer and sensory investigations in relation to physical/chemical aspects of cooked pork in Scandinavia. Meat Science 65, 737- Dugan, M. E. R., Aalhus, J. L. and Kramer, J. K. G. 2004. Conjugated linoleic acid pork research. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 79: 1212S1216S. EOS, (2005). Egyptian Standards No. 1972 for sausage, Egyptian Organization for Standardization and quality, Arab republic of Egypt. Feiner, G. (2006). Meat products handbook: Practical science and technology, Elsevier. Harrigan, W. (1998). Laboratory methods in food microbiology. 3rded. Academic Press, San Diego, Calif. pp. 43–70. Higgs, J., Pratt, J., 1998. Meat, Poultry and meat products. Nutritional value. In: Sadler, M.J., Strain, J.J., Caballero, B. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of human nutrition. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 1272–1282 Jauregui CA, Regenstein JM, Baker RC. A simple centrifugal method for measuring expressible moisture, a water-binding property of muscle foods. J Food Sci 1981;46: 1271. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1981.tb03038.x Lawrie, R.A., Ledward, D.A., 2006. Lawrie’s Meat Science. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge, England. Lebret, B., 2008. Effects of feeding and rearing systems on growth, carcass composition and meat quality in pigs. Animal 2, 1548–1558 Mandigo, R. W. 2000. Quality lean growth modeling bacon quality assessment NPB #971999. Pages 183 Research Report: Pork Quality. University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Lincoln, NE. Ngapo, T.M., Gariepy, C., 2008. Factors affecting the eating quality of pork. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 48, 599–633. Pearson, A. M. & Gillett, T. A. 1996. Processed meats. 3rd edition. Chapman & Hall. London. 448 pp. Pereira PM, Vicente AF. Meat nutritional composition and nutritive role in the human diet. Meat Science. 2013 Mar 1;93(3):586-592 PorkCheckoff. 2009. Quick facts: The pork industry at a glance. [Online] Available: http://www.pork.org/MediaLibrary/ FlipBooks/QuickFacts2010/document.pdf [2013 Jul. 06] Ramadhan, K., Huda, N. and Ahmad, R. (2012). Physicochemical and sensory characteristics of burger made from duck surimi-like material. Poultry Science, 91(9), 2316-2323. Schwob, S., Lebret, B., Louveau, I., 2020. Genetics and adiposity in pigs: state of the art and new challenges for meat product quality. INRAE Productions Animales 33, 17–30. Shackelford, S. D., Miller, M. F., Haydon, K. D., & Reagan, J. O. (1990). Effects of feeding elevated levels of monounsaturated fats to growing-finishing swine on acceptability of low- fat suausage. Journal of Food Science, 55, 1497-1500. Sheard, P. R., Enser, M., Wood, J. D., Nute, G. R., Gill, B. P., & Richardson, R. I. (2000). Shelf life and quality of pork and pork products with raised n-3 PUFA. Meat Science, 55, 213- Stone, H. and Sidel, J. L. (1993). Sensory Evaluation Practise, Academic press, inc, San Diego. Varnold, K. A. (2009). The impact of conjugated linoleic acid and distillers dried grains with solubles on pork fat quality. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Comparative Evaluation of Processed Pork Cuts from Finisher’s Pigs Fed Rice Offal’s and Millet Hulls Base Diets.

Abstract

References

More Articles from INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND EARTH SCIENCE