Randomized study shows dietary treatments influenced carcass performance and mutton quality, suggesting effective feeding strategies for Horro sheep.
The study evaluated the carcass performances and meat quality of yearling Horro rams with an initial body weight of 25.35 ± 2.34 kg (mean ± SD) under different feeding regimes. The rams were grouped based on their initial body weight and tied in individual pens for 90 days. The experiment was arranged in a completely randomized block design with five treatments and five replications. All dietary treatments consisted of Rhodes grass hay offered ad libitum, supplemented with the following mixed diets: Treatment (T1) = 69% wheat bran (WB) + 29% noug seed cake (NSC) + 1% salt + 1% limestone, T2 = 56% wheat bran + 12% sorghum + 30% soybean + 1% salt + 1% limestone, T3 = 52% wheat bran + 14% maize + 32% NSC + 1% salt + 1 limestone, T4 = 47% wheat bran + 51% Cajanas cajan + 1% salt + 1% limestone, T5 = 47% wheat bran + 51% Dolichos lablab + 1% salt + 1% limestone. At the end of the experimental periods, rams were slaughtered to investigate carcass traits and meat quality. The results showed that the diets affected the carcass performances, edible and non-edible offal components, and the meat quality of Horro lambs. However, there were comparable carcass components, total edible and non-edible offal, and sensory and instrumental tenderness between T1, T2, T3, and T5 dietary treatments. In this study, most of the quality parameters did not show significant correlation with carcass yield parameters, except that Warner-Bratzler Shear force (WBSF) had a significant relation (p < 0.05) with hot carcass and forequarter. Since the result exhibited comparable biological performance, the feeding strategy can be demonstrated depending on the availability of the diet to maximize the performance of the feedlot for Horro sheep. Future research is also warranted to explore the effects of this feeding regime on fatty acid composition, meat color, and chemical composition of Horro rams meat.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Muleta et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: