Young Scholar Presentation: Pork Quality Considerations for Swine Nutrition

Maximizing live gain and efficiency with the lowest input cost is a primary goal of many pig producers. Such a formula maximizes profit for producers, although, this strategy does not necessarily translate into similar results when it comes to the final product: pork. Diet profoundly affects pork quality, influencing yields and palatability, but the consequences on pork quality can be an afterthought further up the supply chain. Our lab has conducted several studies focused on how bottom-line driven nutrition strategies affect pork quality and shelf-life. First of these focused on the effects of feeding meal or pelleted diets without or with distiller’s dried grains with solubles (DDGS). There were no diet x DDGS interactions (P ≥ 0.06), and the effects of DDGS were in-line with previous reports. Pelleting diets increased ADG by 3.2%, G:F by 5.5%, HCW by 2.5 kg, and BF thickness by 17 mm (P ≤ 0.01) compared with meal-fed pigs. Diet form did not affect (P > 0.07) 1 d postmortem loin quality, but bellies of pellet-fed pigs were 5.1% heavier and had 3.1-unit greater IV (P < 0.0001) than meal-fed pigs. Despite increased IV, there was no effect (P > 0.16) of diet form on commercial bacon slicing yield. In another study finishing pigs were fed soybean oil (SO) cooked to different temperature-time treatments; 22.5C/0H, 45C/288H, 90C/72H, and 180C/6H. Growth performance, carcass and loin quality, and product shelf-life were evaluated. Feeding 90C/72H SO reduced (P < 0.02) G:F 6 to 8% and tended to reduce (P < 0.06) ADG, leading to a 6 to 9 kg reduction (P < 0.01) in HCW compared to the other treatments. There was no effect (P > 0.13) of SO on 1 d postmortem loin quality or on color and lipid stability during retail display (P > 0.09). Feeding pigs 90C/72H SO increased (P = 0.05) belly flop distance and decreased (P < 0.01) iodine value (IV) 10 to 14 units compared with the other treatments, but there was no difference (P > 0.08) in commercial bacon slicing yields, lipid oxidation (P > 0.46), oxidized flavor (P = 0.79), and odor (P = 0.69) among treatments during storage. In conclusion, changes in nutritional strategies geared toward improving growth or reducing diet cost will often affect the quality of pork products, and it is important to determine how these changes present and whether they meaningfully impact pork quality and salability.