In Utero Heat Stress Has Minimal Impacts on Processed Pork Products: A Comparative Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Animal Care and Use
2.2. Sample Preparation
2.2.1. Manufacturing of Patties
2.2.2. Manufacturing of Emulsion-Type Sausages
2.3. Proximate Composition
2.4. Moisture Loss of Pork Patties
2.5. Cook Loss and Fat-Binding Capacity of Emulsion-Type Sausages
2.6. Textural Profile Analysis
2.7. pH Measurement
2.8. Lipid Oxidation
2.9. Instrumental Color
2.10. Fatty Acid Profiling
2.10.1. Methyl Ester Preparation
2.10.2. Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) Determination
2.11. Statistical Analysis
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Proximate Composition
3.2. Fluid Losses
3.3. Texture Profile Analysis
3.4. pH Values
3.5. Lipid Oxidation
3.6. Instrumental Color
3.7. Fatty Acid Profiling
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ross, J.W.; Hale, B.J.; Gabler, N.K.; Rhoads, R.P.; Keating, A.F.; Baumgard, L.H. Physiological consequences of heat stress in pigs. Anim. Prod. Sci. 2015, 55, 1381–1390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- St-Pierre, N.; Cobanov, B.; Schnitkey, G. Economic Losses from Heat Stress by US Livestock Industries. J. Dairy Sci. 2003, 86, E52–E77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gonzalez-Rivas, P.A.; Chauhan, S.S.; Ha, M.; Fegan, N.; Dunshea, F.R.; Warner, R.D. Effects of heat stress on animal physiology, metabolism, and meat quality: A review. Meat Sci. 2020, 162, 108025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Johnson, J.S.; Sanz Fernandez, M.V.; Gutierrez, N.A.; Patience, J.F.; Ross, J.W.; Gabler, N.K.; Lucy, M.C.; Safranski, T.J.; Rhoads, R.P.; Baumgard, L.H. Effects of in utero heat stress on postnatal body composition in pigs: I. Growing phase. J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 93, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Johnson, J.S.; Sanz-Fernandez, M.V.; Patience, J.F.; Ross, J.W.; Gabler, N.K.; Lucy, M.C.; Safranski, T.J.; Rhoads, R.; Baumgard, L.H. Effects of in utero heat stress on postnatal body composition in pigs: II. Finishing phase. J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 93, 82–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Boddicker, R.L.; Seibert, J.T.; Johnson, J.S.; Pearce, S.C.; Selsby, J.T.; Gabler, N.K.; Lucy, M.C.; Safranski, T.J.; Rhoads, R.P.; Baumgard, L.H.; et al. Gestational Heat Stress Alters Postnatal Offspring Body Composition Indices and Metabolic Parameters in Pigs. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e110859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cruzen, S.M.; Boddicker, R.L.; Graves, K.L.; Johnson, T.P.; Arkfeld, E.K.; Baumgard, L.H.; Ross, J.W.; Safranski, T.J.; Lucy, M.C.; Lonergan, S.M. Carcass composition of market weight pigs subjected to heat stress in utero and during finishing. J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 93, 2587–2596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Serviento, A.M.; Merlot, E.; Prunier, A.; Quesnel, H.; Louveau, I.; Lebret, B.; Renaudeau, D. Heat stress in pregnant sows: Effects on growth performance and carcass composition of the offspring. In Energy and Protein Metabolism and Nutrition; Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Tuell, J.; Nondorf, M.; Maskal, J.; Johnson, J.; Kim, Y. Impacts of in Utero Heat Stress on Carcass and Meat Quality Traits of Market Weight Gilts. Animals 2021, 11, 717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wood, J.D.; Enser, M.; Fisher, A.V.; Nute, G.R.; Sheard, P.R.; Richardson, R.I.; Hughes, S.I.; Whittington, F.M. Fat deposition, fatty acid composition and meat quality: A review. Meat Sci. 2008, 78, 343–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McGlone, J.; Federation of Animal Science Societies. Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching. 2010. Available online: http://www.fass.org/page.asp?pageID=216 (accessed on 12 January 2021).
- Maskal, J.M.; Duttlinger, A.W.; Kpodo, K.R.; McConn, B.R.; Byrd, C.J.; Richert, B.T.; Marchant-Forde, J.N.; Lay, D.C., Jr.; Perry, S.D.; Lucy, M.C.; et al. Evaluation and mitigation of the effects of in utero heat stress on piglet growth performance, post-absorptive metabolism, and stress response following weaning and transport. J. Anim. Sci. 2020, 98, skaa265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Research Council. Nutrient Requirements of Swine, 11th ed.; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2012; ISBN 978-0-309-22423-9. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, H.W.; Setyabrata, D.; Lee, Y.J.; Jones, O.G.; Kim, Y.H.B. Pre-treated mealworm larvae and silkworm pupae as a novel protein ingredient in emulsion sausages. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2016, 38, 116–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Analytical Laboratory Accreditation Criteria Committee. AOAC INTERNATIONAL Guidelines for Laboratories Performing Microbiological and Chemical Analyses of Food, Dietary Supplements, and Pharmaceuticals, An Aid to Interpretation of ISO/IEC 17025; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Setyabrata, D.; Kim, Y.H.B. Impacts of aging/freezing sequence on microstructure, protein degradation and physico-chemical properties of beef muscles. Meat Sci. 2019, 151, 64–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bloukas, I.; Honikel, K. The influence of additives on the oxidation of pork back fat and its effect on water and fat binding in finely comminuted batters. Meat Sci. 1992, 32, 31–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, H.-W.; Miller, D.K.; Lee, Y.J.; Kim, Y.H.B. Effects of soy hull pectin and insoluble fiber on physicochemical and oxidative characteristics of fresh and frozen/thawed beef patties. Meat Sci. 2016, 117, 63–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kim, H.-W.; Setyabrata, D.; Lee, Y.; Jones, O.G.; Kim, Y.H.B. Effect of House Cricket (Acheta domesticus) Flour Addition on Physicochemical and Textural Properties of Meat Emulsion under Various Formulations. J. Food Sci. 2017, 82, 2787–2793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Color, A.M. Measurement Guidelines; American Meat Science Association: Savoy, IL, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- O’Fallon, J.V.; Busboom, J.R.; Nelson, M.L.; Gaskins, C.T. A direct method for fatty acid methyl ester synthesis: Application to wet meat tissues, oils, and feedstuffs. J. Anim. Sci. 2007, 85, 1511–1521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cheng, Q.; Sun, D.-W. Factors Affecting the Water Holding Capacity of Red Meat Products: A Review of Recent Research Advances. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2008, 48, 137–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keeton, J.T. Effects of Fat and NaCl/Phosphate Levels on the Chemical and Sensory Properties of Pork Patties. J. Food Sci. 1983, 48, 878–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiong, Y.L. Role of myofibrillar proteins in water-binding in brine-enhanced meats. Food Res. Int. 2005, 38, 281–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, D.; Kim, Y.H.B. Proteolytic changes of myofibrillar and small heat shock proteins in different bovine muscles during aging: Their relevance to tenderness and water-holding capacity. Meat Sci. 2020, 163, 108090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, W.; Xu, X.L.; Zhou, G.H. Effects of Meat and Phosphate Level on Water-Holding Capacity and Texture of Emulsion-Type Sausage during Storage. Agric. Sci. China 2009, 8, 1475–1481. [Google Scholar]
- Foxcroft, G.R.; Dixon, W.T.; Novak, S.; Putman, C.T.; Town, S.C.; Vinsky, M.D.A. The biological basis for prenatal programming of postnatal performance in pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 2006, 84, E105–E112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Choi, Y.-S.; Choi, J.-H.; Han, D.-J.; Kim, H.-Y.; Lee, M.-A.; Kim, H.-W.; Jeong, J.-Y.; Kim, C.-J. Characteristics of low-fat meat emulsion systems with pork fat replaced by vegetable oils and rice bran fiber. Meat Sci. 2009, 82, 266–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Forrest, J.C.; Aberle, E.D.; Hedrick, H.B.; Judge, M.D.; Merkel, R.A. Principles of Meat Science; W.H Freeman and Company: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
- Johnson, J.S.; Stewart, K.R.; Safranski, T.J.; Ross, J.W.; Baumgard, L.H. In utero heat stress alters postnatal phenotypes in swine. Theriogenology 2020, 154, 110–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rhee, K.; Anderson, L.; Sams, A. Lipid Oxidation Potential of Beef, Chicken, and Pork. J. Food Sci. 1996, 61, 8–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Font-i-Furnols, M.; Guerrero, L. Consumer preference, behavior and perception about meat and meat products: An overview. Meat Sci. 2014, 98, 361–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhattacharya, M.; Hanna, M.; Mandigo, R. Effect of Frozen Storage Conditions on Yields, Shear Strength and Color of Ground Beef Patties. J. Food Sci. 1988, 53, 696–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mancini, R.A.; Hunt, M.C. Current research in meat color. Meat Sci. 2005, 71, 100–1215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faustman, C.; Sun, Q.; Mancini, R.; Suman, S.P. Myoglobin and lipid oxidation interactions: Mechanistic bases and control. Meat Sci. 2010, 86, 86–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Apple, J.K.; Maxwell, C.V.; Galloway, D.L.; Hamilton, C.R.; Yancey, J.W.S. 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, 1423–1440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheard, P.; Enser, M.; Wood, J.; Nute, G.; Gill, B.; Richardson, R. Shelf life and quality of pork and pork products with raised n-3 PUFA. Meat Sci. 2000, 55, 213–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
IUC | FC | Storage (S) | IUC*FC | IUC*S | FC*S | IUC*FC*S | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | ||
Proximate | Moisture | 0.4024 | 0.1556 | 0.4024 | <0.0001 | / | / | 0.5691 | 0.3296 | / | / | / | / | / | / |
Protein | 0.1926 | 0.2398 | 0.1926 | <0.0001 | / | / | 0.2554 | 0.6578 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Ash | 0.0260 | 0.6250 | 0.0260 | <0.0001 | / | / | 0.0367 | 0.9633 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Fat | 0.5001 | 0.0439 | 0.5001 | <0.0001 | / | / | 0.7072 | 0.3592 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Fluid Loss | Drip loss | 1.167 | 0.1601 | 1.167 | 0.3142 | / | / | 1.650 | 0.5759 | / | / | / | / | / | / |
F/T loss | 2.063 | 0.6299 | 2.063 | 0.0555 | / | / | 2.238 | 0.7878 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Cooking loss | 1.765 | 0.6169 | 1.765 | 0.7556 | / | / | 2.495 | 0.4132 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Textural profile analysis | Hardness | 789.4 | 0.4172 | 789.4 | <0.0001 | / | / | 1001.4 | 0.0318 | / | / | / | / | / | / |
Adhesiveness | 0.1147 | 0.555 | 0.1147 | 0.1655 | / | / | 0.1498 | 0.2191 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Resilience | 0.9493 | 0.4551 | 0.9493 | <0.0001 | / | / | 1.3425 | 0.329 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Cohesiveness | 0.0183 | 0.6496 | 0.0183 | <0.0001 | / | / | 0.0259 | 0.6611 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Springiness | 2.322 | 0.7332 | 2.322 | 0.001 | / | / | 3.284 | 0.4016 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Gumminess | 546.8 | 0.2689 | 546.8 | <0.0001 | / | / | 739.4 | 0.0545 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Chewiness | 467.3 | 0.2585 | 467.3 | <0.0001 | / | / | 644.0 | 0.0555 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Physicochemical property | pH values | 0.0420 | 0.2355 | 0.0420 | 0.7074 | 0.0420 | 0.2646 | 0.0519 | 0.9420 | 0.0519 | 0.8719 | 0.0519 | 0.9722 | 0.0675 | 0.9722 |
TBARS | 0.0977 | 0.6421 | 0.0977 | 0.8603 | 0.0989 | 0.0063 | 0.1002 | 0.5864 | 0.1027 | 0.3427 | 0.1027 | 0.2015 | 0.0782 | 0.2707 | |
Color attributes | L* value | 0.5177 | 0.0633 | 0.5177 | <0.0001 | 0.6040 | 0.0002 | 0.5767 | 0.0005 | 0.7254 | 0.9405 | 0.7254 | 0.0588 | 0.9213 | 0.9828 |
a* value | 0.6081 | 0.0204 | 0.6081 | <0.0001 | 0.8295 | 0.0387 | 0.7628 | 0.1487 | 1.104 | 0.5994 | 1.104 | 0.5179 | 1.510 | 0.6141 | |
b* value | 0.6305 | 0.6742 | 0.6305 | <0.0001 | 0.6551 | 0.0073 | 0.647 | <0.0001 | 0.6942 | 0.4530 | 0.6942 | 0.0912 | 0.7665 | 0.9781 | |
Hue | 1.524 | 0.0021 | 1.524 | <0.0001 | 1.672 | 0.0501 | 1.6246 | 0.0003 | 1.894 | 0.9663 | 1.894 | 0.5020 | 2.272 | 0.8368 | |
Chroma | 0.8178 | 0.0262 | 0.8178 | <0.0001 | 0.9795 | 0.0259 | 0.9287 | 0.0325 | 1.202 | 0.4538 | 1.202 | 0.3112 | 1.553 | 0.6038 |
Fat | Lean | Storage (S) | Fat*Lean | Fat*S | Lean*S | Fat*Lean*S | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | SEM | p Value | ||
Proximate | Moisture | 0.5186 | 0.8555 | 0.5186 | 0.0332 | / | / | 0.3667 | 0.0052 | / | / | / | / | / | / |
Protein | 0.1554 | 0.0271 | 0.1554 | 0.2765 | / | / | 0.2198 | 0.2005 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Ash | 0.0460 | 0.8600 | 0.0460 | 0.0721 | / | / | 0.0651 | 0.9186 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Fat | 0.3881 | 0.1995 | 0.3881 | 0.0034 | / | / | 0.3659 | 0.0010 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Functional property | Cooking loss | 0.0856 | 0.0426 | 0.0856 | 0.3377 | / | / | 0.1106 | 0.7347 | / | / | / | / | / | / |
Fat-binding | 0.7525 | 0.6535 | 0.7525 | 0.5246 | / | / | 0.8337 | 0.8942 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
pH | 0.0812 | 0.1597 | 0.0812 | 0.1735 | 0.0559 | 0.0446 | 0.0623 | 0.0057 | 0.0559 | 0.4843 | 0.0559 | 0.8168 | 0.0803 | 0.8223 | |
Lipid oxidation | TBARS | 0.0213 | 0.4145 | 0.0213 | 0.3469 | 0.0213 | 0.8112 | 0.0200 | 0.6596 | 0.0200 | 0.1810 | 0.0200 | 0.1991 | 0.0313 | 0.3614 |
TPA | Hardness | 373.4 | 0.1544 | 373.4 | 0.4330 | / | / | 262.84 | 0.0794 | / | / | / | / | / | / |
Adhesiveness | 2.5667 | 0.6949 | 2.5667 | 0.3708 | / | / | 1.9804 | 0.1459 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Resilience | 1.8300 | 0.8171 | 1.8300 | 0.4988 | / | / | 1.6619 | 0.1420 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Cohesiveness | 0.0278 | 0.7418 | 0.0278 | 0.4016 | / | / | 0.0278 | 0.3701 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Springiness | 1.8061 | 0.6656 | 1.8061 | 0.9040 | / | / | 1.4547 | 0.0457 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Gumminess | 341.24 | 0.3364 | 341.24 | 0.7789 | / | / | 241.3 | 0.1201 | / | / | / | / | / | / | |
Chewiness | 296.92 | 0.3891 | 296.92 | 0.7663 | / | / | 213.38 | 0.1221 | / | / | / | / | / | / |
Moisture % | Protein % | Ash % | Fat % | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
TN_0 | 69.09 A | 23.80 A | 1.32 A | 5.79 C | |
Patties | HS_0 | 69.39 A | 24.19 A | 1.33 A | 5.08 C |
TN_25 | 53.90 B | 19.15 B | 1.03 B | 25.93 A | |
HS_25 | 55.38 B | 19.33 B | 1.05 B | 24.24 B | |
HSF–HSL | 57.10 b | 12.25 | 2.87 | 27.78 a | |
Emulsion sausages | HSF–TNL | 58.79 a | 12.82 | 2.99 | 25.40 b |
TNF–HSL | 58.26 ab | 13.15 | 2.86 | 25.72 b | |
TNF–TNL | 57.81 ab | 13.10 | 2.97 | 26.12 b |
Pork Emulsion | Hrds (g) | Adhes (g*sec) | Resi (%) | Cohes (%) | Spris (%) | Gums (kg) | Chws (N) | CL (%) | FBC (%) | pH |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HSF–HSL | 5197 | −20.08 | 34.86 | 0.67 | 78.67 | 3498 | 2763 | 0.74 | 6.08 | 5.68 b |
HSF–TNL | 5569 | −18.64 | 36.33 | 0.69 | 81.02 | 3557 | 3103 | 0.56 | 5.71 | 5.85 a |
TNF–HSL | 5889 | −17.70 | 35.45 | 0.67 | 81.40 | 3619 | 3220 | 0.89 | 5.65 | 5.90 a |
TNF–TNL | 5162 | −23.25 | 36.04 | 0.69 | 78.98 | 3571 | 2826 | 0.76 | 5.11 | 5.93 a |
Treatment | Hrds (g) | Adhes (g*sec) | Resi (%) | Cohes (%) | Spris (%) | Gums (kg) | Chws (N) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HS_0 | 18,119 a | 0.20 | 29.57 | 0.68 | 82.43 | 12,265 | 10,124 |
HS_25 | 4897 c | 0.11 | 17.85 | 0.46 | 62.61 | 2263 | 1444 |
TN_0 | 15,151 b | 0.11 | 26.77 | 0.65 | 81.11 | 9790 | 7952 |
TN_25 | 6355 c | 0.11 | 17.78 | 0.45 | 65.84 | 2942 | 2015 |
L* | a* | b* | Hue | Chroma | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
In utero condition (IUC) | IUHS | 54.76 | 13.85 a | 7.48 | 28.5 b | 15.93 a |
IUTN | 55.44 | 12.27 b | 7.57 | 31.20 a | 14.50 b | |
Fat content (FC, %) | 0 | 51.14 b | 11.46 b | 5.23 b | 25.54 b | 12.77 b |
25 | 59.07 a | 14.66 a | 9.52 a | 34.24 a | 17.66 a | |
IUC–FC interaction | HS_0 | 50.11 c | 11.77 bc | 4.96 d | 22.63 c | 12.80 c |
HS_25 | 59.41 a | 15.93 a | 10.00 a | 34.52 a | 19.07 a | |
TN_0 | 52.17 b | 11.15 c | 6.09 c | 28.45 b | 12.74 c | |
TN_25 | 58.72 a | 13.40 b | 9.04 b | 33.96 a | 16.25 b | |
Storage (d) | 0 | 56.97 a | 14.48 a | 8.18 a | 28.91 b | 16.73 a |
1 | 56.97 b | 14.30 a | 7.54 abc | 28.70 b | 16.38 ab | |
2 | 54.68 b | 12.41 ab | 7.15 bc | 29.05 b | 14.41 bc | |
3 | 54.54 b | 12.00 b | 7.72 ab | 31.95 a | 14.35 c | |
4 | 54.98 b | 12.12 b | 7.02 c | 30.84 ab | 14.21 c |
Fatty Acids | IUHS | IUTN | p Value | SEM |
---|---|---|---|---|
C8:0 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.32 | 0.00 |
C10:0 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.13 | 0.01 |
C12:0 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.32 | 0.01 |
C14:0 | 1.28 | 1.35 | 0.22 | 0.08 |
C14:1 cis9 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.18 | 0.00 |
C15:0 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.59 | 0.01 |
C16:0 | 25.93 | 26.54 | 0.51 | 1.11 |
C16:0 15-methyl | 1.13 | 1.04 | 0.35 | 0.12 |
C16:1 cis9 | 1.94 | 1.90 | 0.75 | 0.14 |
C16:0 14-methyl | 0.22 | 0.15 | 0.14 | 0.03 |
C16:1 cis7 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.21 | 0.01 |
C17:0 | 0.37 | 0.32 | 0.50 | 0.10 |
C17:1 cis10 | 0.22 | 0.19 | 0.27 | 0.05 |
C18:0 | 13.45 | 14.03 | 0.68 | 1.27 |
C18:1 trans11 | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.70 | 0.02 |
C18:1 cis9 | 30.22 | 30.07 | 0.90 | 0.97 |
C18:1 cis11 | 2.67 | 2.53 | 0.39 | 0.15 |
C18:1 cis13 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.33 | 0.01 |
C18:2 cis9 cis12 | 19.32 | 18.96 | 0.77 | 1.87 |
C19:0 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.93 | 0.01 |
C19:1 cis10 | 0.023 | 0.02 | 0.93 | 0.00 |
C19:1 cis UN | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.17 | 0.01 |
C20:0 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.72 | 0.02 |
C18:3 cis9 cis12 cis15 | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.87 | 0.06 |
C20:1 cis11 | 1.00 a | 0.79 b | 0.01 | 0.05 |
C20:2 cis11 cis14 | 0.77 | 0.60 | 0.08 | 0.06 |
C20:3 cis5 cis8 cis11 | 0.02 b | 0.03 a | 0.05 | 0.00 |
C20:3 UN | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.30 | 0.00 |
C20:3 cis8 cis11 cis14 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.38 | 0.01 |
C22:0 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.91 | 0.00 |
C20:4 cis5 cis8 cis11 cis14 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.77 | 0.01 |
C22:4 cis7 cis10 cis13 cis16 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.38 | 0.01 |
SFA | 41.50 | 42.71 | 0.64 | 2.36 |
BCFA | 1.34 | 1.19 | 0.26 | 0.15 |
MUFA | 36.30 | 35.73 | 0.66 | 1.20 |
PUFA | 20.86 | 20.37 | 0.72 | 2.01 |
n3PUFA | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.87 | 0.06 |
n6PUFA | 20.39 | 19.87 | 0.70 | 1.94 |
n6/n3 | 45.52 | 44.18 | 0.50 | 2.13 |
LCPUFA | 1.10 | 0.96 | 0.21 | 0.09 |
LCn3PUFA | 0.00 | 0.00 | / | / |
LCn6PUFA | 1.07 | 0.92 | 0.16 | 0.08 |
Trans FA | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.70 | 0.02 |
CLA | 0.00 | 0.00 | / | / |
SI | 0.73 | 0.77 | 0.63 | 0.08 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Xue, S.; Park, J.-y.; Tuell, J.R.; Maskal, J.M.; Johnson, J.S.; Dinh, T.; Kim, Y.H.B. In Utero Heat Stress Has Minimal Impacts on Processed Pork Products: A Comparative Study. Foods 2022, 11, 1222. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11091222
Xue S, Park J-y, Tuell JR, Maskal JM, Johnson JS, Dinh T, Kim YHB. In Utero Heat Stress Has Minimal Impacts on Processed Pork Products: A Comparative Study. Foods. 2022; 11(9):1222. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11091222
Chicago/Turabian StyleXue, Siwen, Jun-young Park, Jacob R. Tuell, Jacob M. Maskal, Jay S. Johnson, Thu Dinh, and Yuan H. Brad Kim. 2022. "In Utero Heat Stress Has Minimal Impacts on Processed Pork Products: A Comparative Study" Foods 11, no. 9: 1222. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11091222