All Issue

2024 Vol.51, Issue 2 Preview Page

Animal

Assessing the relationship between muscle-to-fat ratio in pork belly and Boston butt using magnetic resonance imaging
Sheena Kim1†
,
Jeongin Choi2†
,
Eun Sol Kim1
,
Gi Beom Keum1
,
Hyunok Doo1
,
Jinok Kwak1
,
Sumin Ryu1
,
Yejin Choi1
,
Juyoun Kang1
,
Haram Kim1
,
Yeongjae Chae1
,
Yujung Lee2
,
Dongjun Kim2
,
Kuk-Hwan Seol3
,
Sun Moon Kang3
,
Yunseok Kim4
,
Pil Nam Seong4
,
In-Seon Bae4
,
Soohyun Cho4
,
Hyo Jung Kwon2
,
Samooel Jung5
,
Youngwon Lee2*
,
Hyeun Bum Kim1*
1Department of Animal Biotechnology, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, Korea
2College of Veterinary Medicine and Research Institute of Veterinary Medicine, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Korea
3Planning & Coordination Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration, Wanju 55365, Korea
4Animal Products Utilization Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration, Wanju 55365, Korea
5Division of Animal and Dairy Science, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Korea
*Corresponding Author
*Corresponding Author
†These authors equally contributed to this study as first author.
1 June 2024. pp. 187-192
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

This research aimed to investigate the relationship between meat quality and muscle-to-fat ratio in specific cuts of pork (pork belly and Boston butt) utilizing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Twenty-eight pigs were selected, and 24 hours post-slaughter, pork belly and Boston butt samples were individually extracted from the left half carcass for MRI assessment. The MRI scans were reviewed using the Picture Archiving and Communications System. Muscle and fat volumes in the pork belly and Boston butt from the cross-sectional images captured by MRI were estimated using Vitrea workstation version 7. Subsequently, these data were processed using Vitrea post-processing software to automatically determine the volumes, measured in milliliters (mL). Additionally, a three-dimensional reconstruction of the organ being studied was generated. The relationship between regions (pork belly and Boston butt) was assessed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient, and statistical analysis was conducted using GraphPad Prism 8. The muscle-to-fat ratio determined by MRI for pork belly was 1 : 0.64, whereas for Boston butt it was 1 : 0.35. Results of comparing the muscle-fat ratio, the correlation coefficient between pork belly and Boston butt was found to be 0.6127 (R2 = 0.3754, p < 0.001) based on MRI analysis. As a result of measuring the muscle-to-fat ratio using MRI as a non-destructive approach, there was a positive correlation between the muscle-to-fat ratios of pork belly and Boston butt.

Keywords
Boston butt
magnetic resonance imaging
muscle and fat ratio
pork belly
References
1

Baulain U. 1997. Magnetic resonance imaging for the in vivo determination of body composition in animal science. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 17:189-203.

10.1016/S0168-1699(96)01304-X
2

Baulain-Neustadt U, Wiese M, Tholen-Bonn E, Horeth-Kulmbach R, Hoppenbrock KH. 2004. Magnetic resonance tomography as a reference technique to determine body composition in pig performance testing. Fleischwirtschaft 84:101-104.

3

Collewet G, Bogner P, Allen P, Busk H, Dobrowolski A, Olsen E, Davenel A. 2005. Determination of the lean meat percentage of pig carcasses using magnetic resonance imaging. Meat Science 70:563-572.

10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.02.00522063881
4

Fowler PA, Fuller MF, Glasbey CA, Cameron GG, Foster MA. 1992. Validation of the in vivo measurement of adipose tissue by magnetic resonance imaging of lean and obese pigs. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 56:7-13.

10.1093/ajcn/56.1.71609764
5

Goodpaster BH. 2002. Measuring body fat distribution and content in humans. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care 5:481-487.

10.1097/00075197-200209000-0000512172470
6

Gronemeyer SA, Steen RG, Kauffman WM, Reddick WE, Glass JO. 2000. Fast adipose tissue (FAT) assessment by MRI. Magnetic Resonance Imaging 18:815-818.

10.1016/S0730-725X(00)00168-511027874
7

Hoa VB, Seol K, Seo H, Kang S, Kim Y, Seong P, Moon S, Kim J, Cho S. 2021. Investigation of physicochemical and sensory quality differences in pork belly and shoulder butt cuts with different quality grades. Food Science of Animal Resources 41:224-236.

10.5851/kosfa.2020.e9133987545PMC8115004
8

KAPE (Korea Institute for Animal Products Quality Evaluation). 2018. Article 35. Grading of livestock products in Livestock Industry Act. Accessed in http://www.ekape.or.kr/index.do on 22 May 2024.

9

Kim GW, Kim SE. 2009. Analysis of the domestic consumer's preference and consumption behaviors on pork. Journal of Animal Science and Technology 51:81-90.

10.5187/JAST.2009.51.1.081
10

Kim H. 2015. Shape and characteristics of Korean's favorit pork belly. Food Science of Animal Resources and Industry 4:30-44.

11

Kim J, Han HD, Lee WY, Wakholi C, Lee J, Jeong YB, Bae JH, Cho BK. 2021. Economic analysis of the use of VCS2000 for pork carcass meat yield grading in Korea. Animals 11:1-16.

10.3390/ani1105129733946499PMC8147211
12

Kloareg M, Noblet J, Van Milgen J. 2006. Estimation of whole body lipid mass in finishing pigs. Animal Science 82:241-251.

10.1079/ASC200529
13

Kremer PV, Förster M, Scholz AM. 2013. Use of magnetic resonance imaging to predict the body composition of pigs in vivo. Animal 7:879-884.

10.1017/S175173111200234023228200
14

Lim D. 2018. Effect of Carcass weight and thickness of back fat on the ratio of Intramuscular Fat in Pork Belly and Shoulder Butt. Food Science of Animal Resources and Industry 7:74-83.

15

Mitchell AD, Elsasser TH, Wang PC. 1991. Determination of fat and water content in vitro and in vivo by proton nuclear magnetic resonance. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 56:265-276.

10.1002/jsfa.2740560303
16

Mitchell AD, Scholz AM, Wang PC, Song H. 2001. Body composition analysis of the pig by magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Animal Science 79:1800-1813.

10.2527/2001.7971800x11465367
17

Monziols M, Collewet G, Bonneau M, Mariette F, Davenel A, Kouba M. 2006. Quantification of muscle, subcutaneous fat and intermuscular fat in pig carcasses and cuts by magnetic resonance imaging. Meat Science 72:146-154.

10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.06.01822061385
18

Monziols M, Collewet G, Mariette F, Kouba M, Davenel A. 2005. Muscle and fat quantification in MRI gradient echo images using a partial volume detection method. Application to the characterization of pig belly tissue. Magnetic Resonance Imaging 23:745-755.

10.1016/j.mri.2005.05.00116198830
19

Rosenvold K, Andersen HJ. 2003. Factors of significance for pork quality-a review. Meat Science 64:219-237.

10.1016/S0309-1740(02)00186-922063008
20

Ross R, Goodpaster B, Kelley D, Boada F. 2000. Magnetic resonance imaging in human body composition research. From quantitative to qualitative tissue measurement. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 904:12-17.

10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb06415.x10865704
21

Szabo C, Babinszky L, Verstegen MWA, Vangen O, Jansman AJM, Kanis E. 1999. The application of digital imaging techniques in the in vivo estimation of the body composition of pigs: A review. Livestock Production Science 60:1-11.

10.1016/S0301-6226(99)00050-0
22

Williams SE, Heemskerk AM, Welch EB, Li K, Damon BM, Park JH. 2013. Quantitative effects of inclusion of fat on muscle diffusion tensor MRI measurements. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 38:1292-1297.

10.1002/jmri.2404523418124PMC3664247
Information
  • Publisher :Institute of Agricultural Science, Chungnam National University
  • Publisher(Ko) :충남대학교 농업과학연구소
  • Journal Title :Korean Journal of Agricultural Science
  • Journal Title(Ko) :농업과학연구
  • Volume : 51
  • No :2
  • Pages :187-192
  • Received Date : 2024-03-29
  • Revised Date : 2024-05-03
  • Accepted Date : 2024-05-16
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.7744/kjoas.510209
Journal Informaiton Korean Journal of Agricultural Science Korean Journal of Agricultural Science
Online Submission
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • crossref funder-registry
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close