4.7 Article

Effect of different levels of organic zinc supplementation on pork quality

期刊

MEAT SCIENCE
卷 186, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2021.108731

关键词

Intramuscular fatty acids; Antioxidant capacity; Fat-soluble vitamins; Antioxidant enzymes; Lipid oxidation; Meat shelf-life

资金

  1. University of Catania, Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment (project QUALIGEN
  2. Linea 2-Piano di Incentivi per la Ricerca di Ateneo 2020/2022)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the effect of zinc glycinate supplementation on performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality of growing-finishing pigs. The results showed that appropriate zinc glycinate supplementation could improve the oxidative stability of pork subjected to strong pro-oxidant conditions.
This study investigated the effect of two supplementation levels of zinc glycinate (ZnGly) on performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality of growing-finishing pigs. Thirty pigs (bodyweight: 61 +/- 4.0 kg) were assigned to three treatments and fed ad libitum for 56 days a diet supplemented with 0 (control), 45 (Zn45), or 100 mg/kg (Zn100) of ZnGly. The highest ZnGly supplementation lowered the average daily gain (P = 0.031); while, cold carcass weight did not differ between treatments. Both ZnGly levels reduced carcass chill loss (P < 0.001). Micromineral content, color stability, and fatty acid profile of meat were not altered by ZnGly. Super -oxide dismutase activity was lowered by Zn45 compared to control (P = 0.007); while, catalase activity was enhanced by Zn100 (P = 0.003). Although ZnGly supplementation did not influence lipid oxidation in raw meat and in meat homogenates incubated with pro-oxidant catalysts, Zn45 limited lipid oxidation in cooked meat (P = 0.037). Our results demonstrated that supplementing pigs with 45 mg/kg of ZnGly could improve the oxidative stability of pork subjected to strong pro-oxidant conditions, but this effect needs to be further elucidated.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据