Serviços Personalizados
Journal
Artigo
texto em 
Inglês (pdf)
Artigo em XML
Referências do artigo
Tradução automática
Enviar este artigo por emailIndicadores
-
Citado por SciELO -
Acessos
Links relacionados
-
Similares em
SciELO
Compartilhar
Permalink
Revista mexicana de ciencias pecuarias
versão On-line ISSN 2448-6698versão impressa ISSN 2007-1124
Rev. mex. de cienc. pecuarias vol.12 no.4 Mérida Out./Dez. 2021 Epub 06-Jun-2022
https://doi.org/10.22319/rmcp.v12i4.5594
Articles
Effectiveness of canola oil in pig diets to improve the lipid profile of meat
a Colegio de Postgraduados. Campus Montecillo. Programa de Ganadería. Km 36.5 Carretera México-Texcoco. 56230, Montecillo, Texcoco, Estado de México. México.
b Colegio de Postgraduados. Campus Córdoba. Congregación Manuel León, Municipio de Amatlán de los Reyes, Veracruz, México.
c Universidad Autónoma Chapingo. Departamento de Zootecnia. Texcoco, Estado de México, México.
d Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla. Programa Educativo de Ingeniería Agronómica y Zootecnia. Tlatlauquitepec, Puebla, México.
The objective of this study was to determine the maximum level of inclusion of canola oil (CO) in diets for finishing pigs, to increase the content of oleic acid and unsaturated fatty acids and improve the Ω6:Ω3 ratio in meat, without affecting the productive performance, carcass characteristics and physicochemical characteristics of the meat. The treatments were: the gradual substitution of soybean oil (6 %) for CO in diets for pigs at finishing stage I and II (0, 2, 4 and 6 % of CO). The experimental units were 48 castrated pigs with initial live weight of 50.00 ± 4.5 kg, evaluated for four weeks at each stage. With the data obtained, an ANOVA was performed, and linear or quadratic trends were detected (P≤0.10). At finishing stage I, the average daily gain decreased with the inclusion of 2 % of CO, although the incorporation of 2 and 4 % of CO had no effect. At finishing stage II, a level between 2-4 % of CO reduced average daily feed intake and improved feed conversion (P≤0.05). The addition of CO did not modify the characteristics of the carcass and did not affect the physicochemical characteristics of the meat (P≥0.10). CO in the diet increased the concentration of monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs) and oleic acid (P≤0.05); it reduced linoleic acid (P≤0.03), polyunsaturated fatty acids (P≤0.07) and the Ω6:Ω3 ratio (P≤0.01). In conclusion, the addition of CO (2-6 %) in the diet of finishing pigs gradually increases the content of oleic acid and MUFAs, in addition, it improves the Ω6:Ω3 ratio in pork, without affecting the productive variables and the quality of the meat.
Key words Productive performance; Carcass characteristics; Fatty acid profile; Oleic acid
El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar el nivel máximo de inclusión de aceite de canola (AC) en dietas para cerdos en finalización, para incrementar el contenido de ácido oleico y ácidos grasos insaturados y mejorar la relación Ω6: Ω3 en la carne, sin afectar el comportamiento productivo, características de la canal y fisicoquímicas de la carne. Los tratamientos fueron: la sustitución gradual de aceite de soya (6%) por AC en dietas para cerdos en etapa de finalización I y II (0, 2, 4 y 6% de AC). Las unidades experimentales fueron 48 cerdos machos castrados con peso vivo inicial de 50.00 ± 4.5 kg, evaluados durante cuatro semanas en cada etapa. Con los datos obtenidos se realizó un ANDEVA y se detectaron tendencias lineales o cuadráticas (P≤0.10). En finalización I la ganancia de peso disminuyó con la inclusión de 2% de AC, aunque la incorporación de 2 y 4% de AC no tuvo efecto. En finalización II, un nivel entre 2-4% de AC redujo el consumo de alimento y mejoró la conversión alimenticia (P≤0.05). La adición de AC no modificó las características de la canal y no afectó las características fisicoquímicas de la carne (P≥0.10). El AC en la dieta aumentó la concentración de ácidos grasos monoinsaturados (AGMI) y ácido oleico (P≤0.05); redujo el ácido linoleico (P≤0.03), ácidos grasos poliinsaturados (P≤0.07) y la relación Ω6:Ω3 (P≤0.01). En conclusión, la adición de AC (2-6%) en la dieta de cerdos en finalización incrementa gradualmente el contenido de ácido oleico y de AGMI, además, mejora la relación Ω6:Ω3 en la carne de cerdo, sin afectar las variables productivas y la calidad de la carne.
Palabras clave Comportamiento productivo; características de la canal; perfil de ácidos grasos; ácido oleico
Introduction
The quantity and quality of the fat in diet affect human health1. Low intake of saturated fatty acids (SFAs)2, high consumption of monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs) and polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs)3 are related to aspects beneficial to human health. Likewise, the consumption of Ω3 fatty acids (FAs) represents potential benefits in health and prevention of certain diseases4; however, human eating patterns have led to lower consumption, causing an inappropriate relationship with Ω6 FA5. On the other hand, the consumption of oleic acid has shown positive effects on health, preventing human diseases6,7. Due to the above, it is important to consume foods that improve the dietary fatty acid profile of people8.
The amount and composition of fatty acids in the pig diet reflects and changes the lipid composition in meat9. In swine nutrition, typical feeding practices (cereal-soybean meal) give it a high ratio of PUFAs and a high Ω6:Ω3 FAs ratio to meat10-13. To change the profile and improve the ratios between FAs, it is necessary to supply food components with a fat profile related to the objective pursued14,15.
The use of canola oil (CO) in the diet of pigs appears to be a good lipid source of MUFAs and PUFAs because it is composed mainly of oleic (59.8 %), linoleic (20.6 %), linolenic (8.49 %) fatty acids and an appropriate ratio of Ω6:Ω3 FAs16. However, a higher proportion of MUFAs and PUFAs could have a negative influence on the technological properties of pork and its oxidative stability, as well as on the sensory characteristics1.
Some studies17,18,19 have explored the possibility of using CO (2-4 %) in swine nutrition as a source of unsaturated FAs in meat, without affecting the productive performance and physicochemical characteristics of the meat. In general, it is observed that the inclusion of CO in the diet increases the content of oleic, linolenic acid and MUFAs, reduces the concentration of linoleic acid, PUFAs, and improves the Ω6:Ω3 ratio in meat.
Considering that the profile of ingested fatty acids can alter the development of the adipose tissue of pig and be deposited directly in the body fat, the objective of this study was to determine the maximum level of inclusion of CO in diets for finishing pigs to increase the content of oleic acid, unsaturated fatty acids and improve the Ω6:Ω3 ratio in meat, without affecting the productive performance, carcass characteristics and physicochemical characteristics of the meat.
Material and methods
The study was carried out at the Swine Unit of the Experimental Farm of the Colegio de Postgraduados, located in Montecillo, Municipality of Texcoco, State of Mexico, located at 98º 48’ 27” W and 19º 48’ 23” N and an altitude of 2,241 m asl, with a temperate subhumid climate with summer rains, average annual temperature of 15.2 °C and average annual rainfall of 644.8 mm20.
Animals and experimental diets
The treatments (Tr) consisted of the gradual substitution of soybean oil (6 %) for CO in diets for pigs in the finishing stages I (50-75 kg of weight) and II (75-100 kg of weight): 0, 2, 4 and 6 % of CO (Table 1). The experimental units were 48 castrated male hybrid (Landrace×Yorkshire×Pietrain) pigs (12 animals per treatment in both stages), with average initial live weight (ILW) of 50.00 ± 4.5 kg evaluated for four weeks in each stage, distributed in a completely randomized design. The pigs were housed in individual pens equipped with hopper-type feeder and nipple drinker. The diets were formulated with the Solver command21, according to the requirements suggested by the NRC22 for the two stages (Table 1). For the diet of pigs from 75 to 100 kg, ractopamine (10 mg kg-1) was added to all treatments, for which the concentration of nutrients recommended by the NRC22 when using this additive was considered.
Table 1 Experimental diets for finishing pigs
| Ingredient (%) | Finishing I (canola oil %) |
Finishing II (canola oil %) |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | |
| Sorghum | 62.19 | 62.49 | 62.80 | 63.10 | 66.19 | 66.52 | 66.84 | 67.17 |
| Soybean meal | 14.53 | 14.48 | 14.44 | 14.40 | 10.08 | 10.01 | 9.94 | 9.87 |
| Wheat bran | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 |
| Soybean oil | 6.00 | 4.00 | 2.00 | 0.00 | 6.00 | 4.00 | 2.00 | 0.00 |
| Canola oil | 0.00 | 2.00 | 4.00 | 6.00 | 0.00 | 2.00 | 4.00 | 6.00 |
| Calcium carbonate | 0.54 | 0.54 | 0.54 | 0.55 | 1.01 | 1.01 | 1.01 | 1.01 |
| Orthophosphate | 0.94 | 0.94 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.20 |
| Sand | 4.40 | 4.14 | 3.88 | 3.62 | 4.65 | 4.39 | 4.13 | 3.87 |
| Vitamins and mineralsA, B | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.35 |
| Lysine | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.70 |
| Methionine | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.09 |
| Salt | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.30 |
| Threonine | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| Tryptophan | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.22 |
| Nutritional contribution (%) | ||||||||
| ME (Mcal/kg) | 3.30 | 3.30 | 3.30 | 3.30 | 3.30 | 3.30 | 3.30 | 3.30 |
| CP | 14.87 | 14.88 | 14.89 | 14.90 | 13.50 | 13.50 | 13.50 | 13.50 |
| Arginine | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.64 |
| Lysine | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 | 0.93 |
| Methionine+Cystine | 0.41 | 0.41 | 0.41 | 0.41 | 0.42 | 0.42 | 0.42 | 0.42 |
| Threonine | 0.52 | 0.52 | 0.52 | 0.52 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 | 0.57 |
| Tryptophan | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.16 |
| Valine | 0.66 | 0.66 | 0.66 | 0.66 | 0.56 | 0.56 | 0.56 | 0.56 |
| Total calcium | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.64 |
| Total phosphorus | 0.45 | 0.45 | 0.45 | 0.45 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.30 |
A Provided per kg of feed: vitamin A, 15,000 IU; vitamin D3, 2,500 IU; vitamin E, 37.5 IU; vitamin K, 2.5 mg; thiamine, 2.25 mg; riboflavin, 6.25 mg; niacin, 50 mg; pyridoxine, 2.5 mg; cyanocobalamin, 0.0375 mg; biotin, 0.13 mg; choline chloride, 563 mg; pantothenic acid, 20 mg; folic acid, 1.25 mg. B Provided per kg of feed: Fe, 150 mg; Zn, 150 mg; Mn, 150 mg; Cu, 10 mg; Se, 0.15 mg; I, 0.9 mg; Cr, 0.2 mg
Response variables and carcass characteristics
The response variables studied in both experimental stages were: productive performance (average daily feed intake, ADFI; average daily gain, ADG; feed conversion, FC; fat free lean gain, FFLG; and final live weight, FLW) and carcass characteristics (backfat thickness, BT; lean meat percentage, %LM; Longissimus dorsi muscle area, LMA). DF and ALM were measured using real-time ultrasound (SonoVet 600, Medison, Inc., Cypress, California, USA) at the beginning and end of each stage. With these data and with the initial and final live weight, FFLG was calculated using the equation of the National Pork Producers Council23.
Physicochemical characteristics
At the end of the second experimental stage, five pigs per treatment (about 100 kg of live weight) were randomly selected and slaughtered. The slaughter was carried out at the slaughterhouse of the experimental farm, complying with the Official Mexican Standard NOM-033-SAG/ZOO-201424. A sample of leg (Biceps femoris) meat and a sample of loin (Longissimus dorsi) meat were obtained from each animal, and pH, color, water retention capacity and texture were measured. Meat samples were kept in refrigeration at 4 °C. Part of the samples were frozen until the determination of fatty acids.
Color determination was measured at 24 h post mortem, using a portable colorimeter (Hunter Lab, Chroma meter CR-410, Konica Minolta Sensing, Inc. Japan). It was calibrated with the white color at three different points on the surface area of the leg and loin of the pig (in a meat sample 15 mm thick) to measure the variables luminosity (L*), red (a*) and yellow (b*)25.
The pH was measured directly in the leg (Biceps femoris) muscle and the loin (Longissimus dorsi) at 24 h post mortem with a portable puncture potentiometer (Model pH1100, Hanna® Mexico)26.
The water retention capacity (WRC)26 was performed 24 h post mortem: 2 g of finely chopped leg and loin meat were weighed, placed in a centrifuge tube, samples were homogenized with 5 ml of a 0.6 M sodium chloride solution and stirred in a vortex (1,000 rpm) for one minute. The samples were left to stand for 30 min in a refrigerator at 4 °C and then centrifuged for 15 min at 3,500 g (Beckman J-MI centrifuge). The supernatant was decanted and measured in a graduated cylinder. The retained volume of distilled water is reported as the amount of water retained in 100 g of meat. Measurements were made in triplicate, average measurements were calculated and recorded.
Texture determination was performed 24 h post mortem; leg and loin meat samples were taken, a TA-XT2 texture analyzer (Texture Technologies Corp., Scarsdale, NY) with a Warner-Bratzler razor were used. Cubes of raw meat of 1 cm3 were cut, placed with the muscle fibers transversely on the razor’s edge, using the record of the maximum force to cut and the known force27. Measurements were made in triplicate, average measurements were calculated and recorded.
Fatty acid profile
The fatty acid profile in meat was determined based on the method described by Folch et al28. For the determination of the fatty acid profile, the standard HP® (Model 6890) chromatograph of Supelco 37 (Component FAME Mix Catalog N0.47885-U) methyl esters was used, with a Supelco column (SPTM- 2660 FUSED SILICA Capillary Column, 100 m x 0.25 mm x 0.2 μm film thickness).
Helium was used as a carrier gas at 0.8 ml/min; the sample injection was 1 μl in 1:10 Split mode manually, with an initial temperature ramp of 140 °C by 1.00 degree min-1, with an increase to 3 °C min-1 at a temperature of 210 °C, and a decrease of 0.7 degrees min-1 and a final temperature of 235 °C. The total time to analyze each sample was 60 min.
Statistical analysis
For the two experimental stages, a completely randomized design was used, with four treatments and twelve replicates in each, considering each pig as an experimental unit to evaluate the productive performance. For the fatty acid profile and physicochemical characteristics of the meat, five pigs from each treatment were randomly selected at the end of the second experimental phase. When the pigs were slaughtered, a leg and a loin sample were taken from each animal. The Shapiro-Wilk and Levene tests were used to verify the normal distribution and homogeneity of the variance of the variables. With the data obtained, an ANOVA was performed using the GLM procedure and to detect linear and quadratic trends in response to the inclusion of canola oil in the diet, orthogonal polynomials were used (P≤0.10)29. ILW was used as a covariate for ADFI, ADG, FLW, FC and FFLG (P≤0.10). Whereas, for BT, LMA and %LM, their respective initial measurements were used as a covariate (P≤0.10).
Results
The results of the productive response and carcass characteristics are shown in Table 2. In the finishing stage I (50-75 kg LW), ADG and FLW showed a quadratic trend (P=0.08), decreasing with the inclusion of 2 % of CO in the diet; the incorporation of 4 and 6 % of CO had no negative effect. The rest of the variables in the finishing stage I were not modified by the substitution of soybean oil for canola oil (P>0.10). For the finishing stage II, ADFI behaved quadratically (P=0.03), reducing with a level between 2 and 4 % of CO without affecting ADG and FLW, which led to the improvement of FC (P=0.05) with these same levels of CO. In the finishing stage II, backfat thickness decreased linearly (P=0.01), and the percentage of LM increased linearly (P=0.05) in response to the inclusion of CO in the diet. For the rest of the variables, there was no effect (P>0.10) when substituting soybean oil for CO in both stages.
Table 2 Productive performance of finishing pigs fed four levels of canola oil in the diet
| Finishing stage I | Finishing stage II | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canola oil (%) | P-value | Canola oil (%) | P-value | |||||||||||
| 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | SE | L | Q | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | SE | L | Q | |
| ADFI, kg d-1 | 2.66 | 2.47 | 2.54 | 2.59 | 0.10 | 0.77 | 0.24 | 3.06 | 2.82 | 2.92 | 3.08 | 0.09 | 0.72 | 0.03 |
| ADG, kg d-1 | 0.71 | 0.63 | 0.69 | 0.67 | 0.02 | 0.53 | 0.08 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.85 | 0.81 | 0.03 | 0.55 | 0.52 |
| FLW | 73.41 | 70.95 | 72.62 | 72.30 | 0.58 | 0.52 | 0.08 | 96.20 | 96.14 | 96.51 | 95.32 | 0.85 | 0.54 | 0.52 |
| FC | 3.74 | 3.97 | 3.71 | 3.85 | 0.13 | 0.87 | 0.73 | 3.64 | 3.39 | 3.45 | 3.90 | 0.18 | 0.29 | 0.05 |
| FFLG, kg d-1 | 0.27 | 0.24 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.01 | 0.62 | 0.29 | 0.26 | 0.27 | 0.29 | 0.27 | 0.01 | 0.44 | 0.40 |
| BT, mm | 10.61 | 10.39 | 10.57 | 10.77 | 0.48 | 0.77 | 0.66 | 15.34 | 14.53 | 13.78 | 13.31 | 0.60 | 0.01 | 0.75 |
| LMA, cm2 | 28.05 | 27.19 | 27.88 | 27.66 | 0.72 | 0.88 | 0.66 | 32.72 | 32.71 | 33.56 | 33.58 | 0.94 | 0.92 | 0.61 |
| % LM | 39.27 | 39.33 | 39.21 | 39.36 | 0.28 | 0.90 | 0.89 | 37.01 | 37.21 | 37.65 | 37.59 | 0.24 | 0.05 | 0.62 |
ADFI= average daily feed intake, ADG= average daily gain, FLW= Final live weight, FC= feed conversion, FFLG= fat free lean gain, BT=backfat thickness, LMA= Longissimus muscle area, LM= lean meat, SE= standard error of the mean, L= linear effect, Q= quadratic effect.
The results of the physicochemical characteristics of leg and loin meat are shown in Table 3. For color, WRC and texture, no significant differences (P>0.10) were found due to the effect of CO levels, with the exception of L* (P=0.03), which increased in loin meat when using 2-4 % of CO. In leg and loin, the pH tended to decrease (P=0.01) as the concentration of CO in the diet increased.
Table 3 Physicochemical characteristics of the meat of finishing pigs 75-100 kg, fed four levels of canola oil
| Leg meat | Loin meat | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canola oil (%) | P-value | Canola oil (%) | P-value | |||||||||||
| 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | SE | L | Q | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | SE | L | Q | |
| pH | 6.74 | 5.43 | 5.44 | 5.70 | 0.10 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 6.64 | 5.63 | 5.49 | 5.69 | 0.20 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| L* | 45.38 | 46.54 | 46.20 | 47.52 | 1.60 | 0.41 | 0.96 | 55.98 | 58.84 | 56.24 | 54.10 | 1.71 | 0.92 | 0.03 |
| a* | 19.44 | 19.78 | 19.56 | 19.40 | 0.52 | 0.89 | 0.64 | 17.24 | 16.86 | 17.62 | 16.84 | 0.51 | 0.84 | 0.70 |
| b* | 4.36 | 4.54 | 4.00 | 4.94 | 0.53 | 0.62 | 0.49 | 6.04 | 9.38 | 5.80 | 5.22 | 1.21 | 0.28 | 0.12 |
| WRC, ml/g | 0.89 | 0.99 | 0.86 | 0.87 | 0.13 | 0.96 | 0.84 | 0.89 | 0.87 | 0.88 | 0.86 | 0.15 | 0.95 | 0.83 |
| Texture, g | 1225 | 1318 | 1294 | 1443 | 155 | 0.38 | 0.86 | 1791 | 1406 | 1446 | 1445 | 222 | 0.34 | 0.39 |
L*= luminosity; a*= red index; b*= yellow index; WRC= water retention capacity, SE= standard error of the mean, L= linear effect, Q= quadratic effect.
Table 4 shows the results of the lipid profile of leg and loin meat. In both samples, myristic acid (P=0.01) and palmitic acid (P=0.06 and P=0.01 respectively) showed a quadratic trend, observing a reduction with 2 % of CO. In both leg and loin, the concentration of oleic acid increased linearly (P=0.01), and linoleic acid reduced (P=0.03 and P=0.01 respectively) in response to the increase in dietary CO. The linolenic acid content in meat was not modified (P>0.10); however, the Ω6:Ω3 ratio reduced linearly (P=0.01) in leg meat when substituting soybean oil for CO. The total SFAs in leg and loin reduced (P=0.06 and P=0.01 respectively) with 2 % of CO, although the other levels of CO did not modify the concentration of these fatty acids. In leg and loin, MUFAs increased linearly (P≤0.01) and PUFAs reduced (P=0.07 and P=0.01 respectively) linearly due to the effect of the inclusion of CO in the diet.
Table 4 Fatty acid profile of the meat of finishing pigs, fed five levels of canola oil
| Fatty acid | Leg meat | Loin meat | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canola oil (%) | P-value | Canola oil (%) | P-value | |||||||||||
| 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | SE | L | Q | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | SE | L | Q | |
| Myristic | 1.99 | 1.28 | 1.41 | 1.79 | 0.19 | 0.56 | 0.01 | 2.04 | 1.35 | 1.51 | 1.93 | 0.19 | 0.84 | 0.01 |
| Palmitic | 24.80 | 22.37 | 23.25 | 23.22 | 0.65 | 0.18 | 0.06 | 26.17 | 23.17 | 24.56 | 24.39 | 0.54 | 0.09 | 0.01 |
| Stearic | 11.94 | 10.17 | 11.24 | 10.79 | 0.58 | 0.37 | 0.27 | 12.53 | 10.67 | 11.83 | 11.48 | 0.60 | 0.43 | 0.21 |
| ∑SFAs | 38.73 | 33.82 | 35.9 | 35.8 | 1.14 | 0.23 | 0.06 | 40.74 | 35.19 | 37.9 | 37.8 | 1.07 | 0.17 | 0.01 |
| Palmitoleic | 3.07 | 3.09 | 2.67 | 3.17 | 0.26 | 0.92 | 0.34 | 3.28 | 3.31 | 3.49 | 3.40 | 0.20 | 0.55 | 0.78 |
| Oleic | 39.90 | 42.07 | 42.86 | 45.09 | 1.13 | 0.01 | 0.98 | 40.49 | 45.06 | 45.23 | 46.45 | 0.86 | 0.01 | 0.07 |
| Eicosanoic | 0.53 | 0.72 | 0.68 | 0.74 | 0.09 | 0.11 | 0.44 | 0.60 | 0.69 | 0.63 | 0.60 | 0.06 | 0.82 | 0.35 |
| ∑MUFAs | 43.5 | 45.88 | 46.21 | 49.0 | 1.21 | 0.01 | 0.86 | 44.37 | 49.06 | 49.35 | 50.45 | 0.94 | 0.01 | 0.09 |
| Arachidonic | 1.08 | 1.35 | 1.28 | 1.03 | 0.10 | 0.79 | 0.12 | 0.84 | 0.93 | 0.76 | 0.93 | 0.13 | 0.86 | 0.73 |
| Linoleic | 14.75 | 16.36 | 14.41 | 11.63 | 1.07 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 12.26 | 12.84 | 10.39 | 8.94 | 1.02 | 0.01 | 0.31 |
| Linolenic | 1.38 | 1.83 | 1.59 | 1.73 | 0.15 | 0.22 | 0.27 | 1.33 | 1.42 | 1.15 | 1.21 | 0.15 | 0.30 | 0.87 |
| Eicosadienoic | 0.55 | 0.74 | 0.60 | 0.55 | 0.10 | 0.77 | 0.20 | 0.45 | 0.53 | 0.43 | 0.27 | 0.11 | 0.21 | 0.28 |
| ∑PUFAs | 17.76 | 20.28 | 17.88 | 14.94 | 1.17 | 0.07 | 0.04 | 14.88 | 15.72 | 12.73 | 11.35 | 1.19 | 0.01 | 0.32 |
| Ω6:Ω3 | 12.04 | 10.19 | 10.54 | 7.64 | 0.69 | 0.01 | 0.48 | 10.57 | 10.22 | 10.65 | 8.65 | 1.21 | 0.29 | 0.47 |
SFAs=saturated fatty acids, MUFAs= monounsaturated fatty acids, PUFAs= polyunsaturated fatty acids, L=linear effect, Q=quadratic effect
Discussion
The quadratic behavior of ADG and FLW has no clear explanation, since the diets were formulated isoenergetic and isoprotein, assuming that the energy values and nutrients in general for each diet and oil source22 were appropriate for the productive stage, and therefore a similar response would be expected in the productive variables. According to some authors10,13,30, when evaluating different sources of fat (soybean, palm, olive and flax oil) in isocaloric diets for finishing pigs, they found no negative effect on the productive performance and carcass characteristics.
The change in the lipid profile of the diet when substituting 2 % of soybean oil for CO was marginal, considering that in diets where the productive performance was not affected, substitution was 4 and 6 %, modifying the fatty acid profile to a greater degree. Therefore, a change in the productive response (negative or positive) would be expected when using a greater amount of CO in the diet. Unlike what was obtained in the present research, studies on pigs in the finishing stage19,31,32 report that the inclusion of CO (4, 3, 2.5 and 3.5 % respectively in each of the studies) in substitution of other oils of vegetable origin (soybean or corn) or animal fat did not affect the productive parameters, as long as the concentration of nutrients in the diets was respected, emphasizing mainly energy. Moreover, when evaluating CO levels of 0, 5 and 10 %, there was a linear effect to improve feed consumption, weight gain and feed conversion in growing-finishing pigs, in addition, there was no effect on backfat thickness and LMA33.
In the present work it was assumed that, by not altering the general concentration of nutrients, but that of some fatty acids, the physicochemical characteristics of the meat could have minimal alterations. This assumption was supported by studies conducted with the addition of 2.5-4 % of CO in the diet of pigs on meat characteristics, where it is reported that the inclusion of CO had no negative effect18,19,31. In fact, other researchers16 found that the inclusion of 2 % of CO in the diet of pigs increased the pH, favored the sensory characteristics and the marbling of the meat, compared to diets without the addition of oil. Although the use of very high concentrations (10 %) of CO in the diet affected the marbling and color of the meat, it also reduced the firmness of fat33, probably because that level of oil addition in the diet provides too many monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids, which are deposited in adipose and muscle tissue, which changes the characteristics of meat and fat.
In the present investigation, the increase in CO reduced the pH, tending to reach the maximum and minimum pH values (5.4-5.8)34. In this post-rigor interval of the meat, they indicate that the production of putrefaction compounds, such as biogenic amines, aldehydes, ketones and short-chain fatty acids, has not begun, since the pH depends on the time: post-mortem temperature relationship, consequently, chemical compounds that cause the pH to increase are generated34. Also, the texture in leg and loin was not affected by the different treatments, probably because the long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids were incorporated into the fatty tissue and not into the muscle tissue, since the hardness of the meat is due to the structures of the muscle fibers formed in a high percentage by proteins, therefore, polyunsaturated fatty acids did not affect the hardness of the meat as lipids were not significantly incorporated into the muscle fibers35. Regarding the WRC variable, in the same way, it was not affected in leg and loin by the different treatments; this is probably explained because when adding long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids to non-ruminant diets, there is an increase in the ratio of saturated to unsaturated fatty acids in the fat of the pig, since the higher the degree of unsaturation, the lower the quantity of electrical charges that can interact with water36.
The decrease in linoleic acids and PUFAs, and the increase in oleic acids and MUFAs as the level of CO increased, coincides with the results obtained in other studies when adding from 3 to 10 % of CO3,19,33. In previous reports3,19,31, they found no changes in the content of myristic acid and SFAs when substituting some type of oil for CO, contrary to what was found in the present study; however, the reduction of palmitic acid was observed when adding from 4 to 10 % of CO3,33.
Supplementation from 3-4 % of CO in substitution of soybean oil in diets for pigs in the finishing stage increased the content of oleic, linolenic acids and MUFAs, reduced the concentration of linoleic acid, PUFAs, total Ω6 and the Ω6:Ω3 ratio in meat fat3,19. By adding 5 or 10 % of CO in diets for finishing pigs, oleic, linoleic, linolenic acids, MUFAs and PUFAs increased linearly, and palmitic acid in meat fat reduced compared to oil-free diets33. CO (2.5 %) in diets for finishing pigs increases the content of oleic acid and MUFAs, reduces the amount of linoleic acid and PUFAs in body fat31, increases the content of linolenic acid and improves the oxidative stability in meat17,18,31 compared to corn oil.
Another possible option to try to improve the lipid profile of pork would be to use different types of oil, since in some studies19,37, they have found that the combination of CO (1-1.5 %) with flaxseed oil (1.5-2.3 %) has a favorable response in the fatty acid profile in meat, since they increase oleic, linolenic acids and MUFAs, decrease linoleic acids, PUFAs, total Ω6 and the Ω6:Ω3 ratio.
The results of the present work show that the fatty acid profile in pork is modified depending on the content of FAs in the oil source of the diet; since CO and soybean oil have different fatty acid profiles22 with a predominance of oleic and linoleic unsaturated fatty acids, respectively.
In pigs, the fatty acid profile of the diet is reflected in the body fat, because part of the ingested fatty acids is deposited directly in the tissues30,38,39. The degree of change of body fatty acids depends on the time and percentage of fat supplementation in the diet40,41. Specific fatty acids have different rates or potential for change in body fat induced by the fat supplementation in the diet12,19,38. In addition, the supply of fats in the diet reduces lipogenesis42,43, therefore, an increase in the incorporation of the fatty acids of the diet into body fat.
Conclusions and implications
The inclusion of canola oil (2-6 %) in the diet of pigs in the finishing stage is effective in proportionally increasing the oleic acid content, improving the Ω6:Ω3 ratio, reducing the content of saturated fatty acids and increasing monounsaturated fatty acids in meat. In addition, the use of up to 6 % canola oil in the diet does not affect the productive performance, carcass characteristics and positively stabilizes the pH of the meat.
Acknowledgements and conflict of interest
Thanks to the Colegio de Postgraduados for the funding of this work. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest with respect to this work.
REFERENCES
1. Jasinska K, Kurek A. The effect of oil plants supplementation in pig diet on quality and nutritive value of pork meat. Anim Sci Pap Rep 2017;35(2):137-146. [ Links ]
2. Clarke R, Frost C, Collins R, Appleby P, Peto R. Dietary lipids and blood cholesterol: Quantitative meta-analysis of metabolic ward studies. Br Med J 1997;314(7074):112-117. [ Links ]
3. Vehovsky K, Stupka R, Zadinova K, Sprysl M, Okrouhla M, Lebedova N, et al. Effect of dietary rapeseed and soybean oil on growth performance, carcass traits, and fatty acid composition of pigs. R Bras Zootec 2019;48:e20180131. [ Links ]
4. Saini RK, Keum YS. Omega-3 and omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids: Dietary sources, metabolism, and significance- A review. Life Sci 2018;203:255-267. [ Links ]
5. Simopoulos AP. Evolutionary aspects of diet, the omega-6/omega-3 ratio and genetic variation: nutritional implications for chronic diseases. Biomed Pharmacother 2006;60(9):502-507. [ Links ]
6. Sales-Campos H, Reis SP, Crema PB, Santana SJ, Ribeiro CC. An overview of the modulatory effects of oleic acid in health and disease. Mini Rev Med Chem 2013;13(2):201-210. [ Links ]
7. Karacor K, Cam M. Effects of oleic acid. Medical Sci Discovery 2015;2(1):125-132. [ Links ]
8. Castellanos L, Rodriguez M. El efecto de omega 3 en la salud humana y consideraciones en la ingesta. Rev Chil Nutr 2015;42(1):90-95. [ Links ]
9. Skiba G, Polawska E, Sobol M, Raj S, Weremko D. Omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids metabolism pathways in de body of pigs fed diets with different sources of fatty acids. Arch Anim Nutr 2015;69(1):1-16. [ Links ]
10. Teye GA, Sheard PR, Whittington FM, Nute GR, Stewart A, Wood JD. Influence of dietary oils and protein level on pork quality. 1. Effects on muscle fatty acid composition, carcass, meat and eating quality. Meat Sci 2006;73(1):157-165. [ Links ]
11. Apple JK, Maxwell CV, Galloway DL, Hamilton CR, Yancey JWS. Interactive effects of dietary fat source and slaughter weight in growing-finishing swine: II. Fatty acid composition of subcutaneous fat. J Anim Sci 2009;87(4):1423-1440. [ Links ]
12. Apple JK, Maxwell CV, Galloway DL, Hamilton CR, Yancey JWS. Interactive effects of dietary fat source and slaughter weight in growing-finishing swine: III. Carcass and fatty acid compositions. J Anim Sci 2009;87(4):1441-1454. [ Links ]
13. Benz JM, Tokach MD, Dritz SS, Nelssen JL, DeRouchey JM, Sulabo RC, et al. Effects of choice white grease and soybean oil on growth performance, carcass characteristics, and carcass fat quality of growing-finishing pigs. J Anim Sci 2011;89(2):404-413. [ Links ]
14. Dugan ME, Vahmani P, Turner TD, Mapiye C, Juárez M, Prieto N, et al. Pork as a source of omega-3 (n-3) fatty acids. J Clin Med 2015;4(12):1999-2011. [ Links ]
15. Leikus R, Juskiene V, Juska R, Juodka R, Stankeviciene D, Nainiene R, et al. Effect of linseed oil sediment in the diet of pigs on the growth performance and fatty acid profile of meat. R Bras Zootec 2018;47:e20170104. [ Links ]
16. Kolacz R, Korniewicz A, Dobrzański Z, Bykowski P, Kolacz D, Korniewicz D. Effect of dietary fish and rapeseed oils on sensory and physicochemical characteristics of pigs M. Longissimus dorsi and fatty acid composition. J Anim Feed Sci 2004;13(143):143-152. [ Links ]
17. Corino C, Magni S, Pagliarini E, Rossi R, Pastorelli G, Chiesa LM. Effects of dietary fats on meat quality and sensory characteristics of heavy pig. Meat Sci 2002;60(1):1-8. [ Links ]
18. Pastorelli G, Magni S, Rossi R, Pagliarini E, Baldini P, Dirinck P, et al. Influence of dietary fat, on fatty acid composition and sensory properties of dry-cured Parma ham. Meat Sci 2003;65(1):571-580. [ Links ]
19. Bertol TM, De Campos RML, Ludke JV, Terra NN, De Figueiredo EAP, Coldebella A, et al. Effects of genotype and dietary oil supplementation on performance, carcass traits, pork quality and fatty acid composition of backfat and intramuscular fat. Meat Sci 2013;93(3):507-516. [ Links ]
20. García E. Modificaciones al sistema de clasificación de Köppen. 5a ed. México DF: Instituto de Geografía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; 2004. [ Links ]
21. Microsof Excel. Microsoft Corporation. 1985-2001. Redmond WA, USA. 2007. [ Links ]
22. NRC. National Research Council. Nutrient requirements tables and feed ingredient composition. Nutrient requirements of swine. 11th ed. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press; 2012. [ Links ]
23. Burson D, Berg E. Procedures for estimating pork carcass composition. Pork quality facts. Des Moines, IA, USA: National Pork Producers Council; 2001. [ Links ]
24. SAGARPA. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación. Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-033-SAG/ZOO-2014. Métodos para dar muerte a los animales domésticos y silvestres. México. 2014. En: En: https://www.dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5405210&fecha=26/08/2015 Consultado26 Nov, 2019. [ Links ]
25. Mancini RA, Hunt M. Current research in meat color. Meat Sci 2005;71(1):100-121. [ Links ]
26. Braña VD, Ramírez RE, Rubio LMS, Sánchez EA, Torrescano UA, Arenas MML, et al. Manual de análisis de calidad en muestras de carne. 1er ed. Querétaro, México. Centro Nacional de Investigación Disciplinaria en Fisiología y Mejoramiento Animal; 2011. [ Links ]
27. Guerrero LI, Ponce AE, Pérez ML. Curso práctico de tecnología de carnes y pescado. México DF: Universidad Metropolitana, Unidad Iztapalapa; 2002. [ Links ]
28. Folch J, Lees M, Sloane SGH. A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipids from animal tissues. J Biol Chem 1957;226:497-509. [ Links ]
29. SAS. SAS/STAT User’s Guide (9.4) Cary NC, USA: SAS Inst. Inc. 2010. [ Links ]
30. Olivares A, Daza A, Rey AI, Lopez-Bote CJ. Interactions between genotype, dietary fat saturation and vitamin A concentration on intramuscular fat content and fatty acid composition in pigs. Meat Sci 2009;82(1):6-12. [ Links ]
31. Rossi R, Corino C. Influence of long-term nutrition with different dietary fats on fatty acid composition of heavy pigs backfat. Ital J Anim Sci 2002;1(1):7-16. [ Links ]
32. De Sousa RV, Ribeiro O, Zangeronimo MG, De Sousa VC, Da Silva MSF, Pereira LJ. Total cholesterol and its fractions in the blood of finishing pigs fed diets with different levels of canola oil. Acta Sci Vet 2013;41(1):1-6. [ Links ]
33. Myer RO, Lamkey JW, Walker WR, Brendemuhl JH, Coms GE. Performance and carcass characteristics of swine when fed diets containing canola oil and added copper to alter the unsaturated:saturated ratio of pork fat. J Anim Sci 1992;70(5):1417-1423. [ Links ]
34. Guerrero LI. Meat spoilage detection. In Nollet L, Toldrá F editors. Handbook of processed meat and poultry analysis. Boca Raton, Florida USA: CRC Pres; 2009:445-460. [ Links ]
35. Pérez MI, Larrea V, Quiles A, Llunch MA. Microstructure of muscle foods. In: Nollet L, Toldrá F, editors. Handbook of processed meat and poultry analysis. Boca Raton, Florida USA: CRC Pres ; 2009:335-352. [ Links ]
36. Lo Fiego DP, Macchioni P, Santero P, Pastorelli G, Corino CC. Effect of dietary conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) supplementation on CLA isomers content and fatty acid composition of dry-cured Parma ham. Meat Sci 2005;70(2):285-291. [ Links ]
37. Lisiak D, Grzeskowiak E, Borzuta K, Raj S, Janiszewski P, Skiba G. Effects of supplementary vegetable and animal fats on the slaughter values of fatteners, meat quality, and fatty acid profile in pigs. Czech J Anim Sci 2013;58(11):497-511. [ Links ]
38. Apple JK, Maxwell CV, Galloway DL, Hutchison S, Hamilton CR. Interactive effects of dietary fat source and slaughter weight in growing-finishing swine: I. Growth performance and Longissimus muscle fatty acid composition. J Anim Sci 2009;87(4): 1407-1422. [ Links ]
39. Juárez M, Dugan MER, Aldai N, Aalhus JL, Patience JF, Zijlstra RT, et al. Feeding co-extruded flaxseed to pigs: Effects of duration and feeding level on growth performance and backfat fatty acid composition of grower-finisher pigs. Meat Sci 2010;84(3):578-584. [ Links ]
40. Romans JR, Wulf DM, Johnson RC, Libal GW, Costello WJ. Effects of ground flaxseed in swine diets on pig performance and on physical and sensory characteristics and omega-3 fatty acid content of pork: II. Duration of 15% dietary flaxseed. J Anim Sci 1995;73(7):1987-1999. [ Links ]
41. Kouba M, Enser M, Whittington FM, Nute GR, Wood JD. Effect of a high-linolenic acid diet on lipogenic enzyme activities, fatty acid composition, and meat quality in the growing pig. J Anim Sci 2003;81(8):1967-1979. [ Links ]
42. Allee GL, Baker DH, Leveille GA. Influence of level of dietary fat on adipose tissue lipogenesis and enzymatic activity in the pig. J Anim Sci 1971;33(6):1248-1254. [ Links ]
43. Smith DR, Knabe DA, Smith SB. Depression of lipogenesis in swine adipose tissue by specific dietary fatty acids. J Anim Sci 1996;74(5):975-983. [ Links ]
Received: January 15, 2020; Accepted: January 06, 2021
Este es un artículo publicado en acceso abierto bajo una licencia
Creative Commons
