The incorporation of fat in diets for heavy pigs may be necessary in order to increase their energy intake in the finishing period. Lard may be a good lipid source but it contains 10–13% of linoleic acid, which makes the subcutaneous fat less suitable for long term curing of raw ham. Partial hydrogenation of lard decreases linoleic acid content, but increases trans-fatty acid content. This trial involved two groups of pigs of 114 kg live weight, fed for the last two months before slaughter with diets containing 3% lard (L) or 3% partially hydrogenated lard (PHL). The PHL contained about 10% trans-fatty acids and 2.5% linoleic acid. Rearing performance and carcass characteristics were unaffected by treatment. The group fed PHL showed a lower percentage of linoleic acid in the backfat (PHL 12.28% vs. L 13.04%) and a higher percentage of C18:1 trans-fatty acids both in backfat (0.5% vs. 0.06%) and in intramuscular fat (0.2% vs. 0.04%). 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Effect of feeding partially hydrogenated lard on trans-fatty acid content of muscle and backfat of heavy pigs

BOCHICCHIO, DAVIDE;MARANESI, MAGDA;MORDENTI, ATTILIO;
2005

Abstract

The incorporation of fat in diets for heavy pigs may be necessary in order to increase their energy intake in the finishing period. Lard may be a good lipid source but it contains 10–13% of linoleic acid, which makes the subcutaneous fat less suitable for long term curing of raw ham. Partial hydrogenation of lard decreases linoleic acid content, but increases trans-fatty acid content. This trial involved two groups of pigs of 114 kg live weight, fed for the last two months before slaughter with diets containing 3% lard (L) or 3% partially hydrogenated lard (PHL). The PHL contained about 10% trans-fatty acids and 2.5% linoleic acid. Rearing performance and carcass characteristics were unaffected by treatment. The group fed PHL showed a lower percentage of linoleic acid in the backfat (PHL 12.28% vs. L 13.04%) and a higher percentage of C18:1 trans-fatty acids both in backfat (0.5% vs. 0.06%) and in intramuscular fat (0.2% vs. 0.04%). 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Bochicchio D.; Faeti V.; Marchetto G.; Poletti E.; Maranesi M.; Mordenti A.L.; Della Casa G.
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/22762
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 6
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 6
social impact