4.3 Article

Effects of supplementary feeding on carcass and meat quality traits of young llamas (Lama glama)

Journal

SMALL RUMINANT RESEARCH
Volume 114, Issue 2-3, Pages 233-239

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.smallrumres.2013.06.011

Keywords

Llama; Feeding; Carcass; Meat quality

Funding

  1. MECESUP2 AUS 0601
  2. School of Graduates of the Faculty of Veterinary Science, Universidad Austral de Chile

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sixty llamas were used to study the effect of a 90 days feed supplementation on performance, carcass traits and meat quality. Treatments were: GR= llama on native pasture until slaughter; GR+SH = like GR, but llama had overnight access to barley/alfalfa hay (0.30 kg/animal/day), GR + SC =like GR, but llama had overnight access to wheat bran/sorghum grain concentrate (0.30 kg/animal/day). The characteristics of daily weight gain, final live weight, hot and cold carcass weight, perirenal fat weight, loin eye muscle area and marbling score were significantly increased by concentrate supplementation (P< 0.05). Concentrate supplementation of grazing llamas also provided animals with greater morphometric measures in vivo and in carcass (thoracic perimeter, leg perimeter, hindquarter perimeter). Carcass dressing percentage was improved by both hay and concentrate supplementation compared to grazing only (P< 0.01). Perirenal fat had a higher mean b* value (was yellower) and a lower mean L* value in GR+SH fed llamas compared to GR+ SC (P<0.05), but did not differ from controls. In conclusion, supplementation of young llamas grazing native pasture with concentrate led to greater live weight, greater carcass weight, greater fat deposits and improved carcass characteristics, supporting the idea that it is a good alternative in the production of llama meat, especially in the dry season where there is poor pasture availability. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available