ABSTRACT EFFECT OF DIET ON THE FATTY ACID COMPOSITION OF PORK FAT BY Duane Elm er Koch A total of 21 hogs averaging 97 lbs. live weight were placed in three lots. Lot A contained six hogs, which were fed a control ration (corn - SBOM). Lot B contained six hogs, that were fed a 10% safflower oil ration (barley - SBOM). Lot C contained nine hogs and they were fed the same ration as Lot B for 5 weeks, after which they were placed on a 10% tallow ration (barley - SBOM). Three hogs from each of Lots A and B were slaughtered after 5 weeks and three from each were slaughtered after 11 weeks. Three hogs from Lot C were slaughtered at 2, 4, and 6 weeks subsequent to being fed tallow. Each slaughter group contained at least one barrow and one gilt. Fat samples were collected from the leaf fat, intramuscular fat from the Longissimus dorsi muscle at the 10th. rib, and the inner and outer layers of backfat from over the first rib, last rib, and last lumbar vertebra. Methyl esters of the fatty acids from the samples were prepared and analyzed by gas-liquid chromatography. Dietary lipids were analyzed by the same method. Taste panel evaluations and Warner-Bratzler shear tests were also conducted on loin samples from each hog. Duane Elmer Koch Backfat and leaf fat from the safflower oil-fed hogs contained a lower % of total saturated fatty acids than that from controls. The levels of palmitic and oleic acids decreased, while the level of linoleic acid increased. The inner backfat layer of the controls was always more saturated than the outer layer. However, in some instances, the outer layer of backfat from the safflower oil-fed hogs was more saturated than the inner layer. Linoleic acid behaved in a reverse manner to the total saturated fatty acids. The fatty acid changes of the leaf fat were intermediate between the changes of the inner and outer backfat layers. Changing hogs from a safflower oil ration to a tallow ration increased the degree of saturation of their depot fats. The levels of palmitic and oleic acids increased, while the level of linoleic acid decreased. In all instances, the “/o of total saturated fatty acids of the intramuscular fat remained constant. While changes occurred in the linoleic and oleic acid composition of the intramuscular fat, the changes in composition were much less than those occurring in the leaf fat or backfat. The major changes in the fatty acid composition occurred within 4 - 5 weeks. There was essentially no difference in the fatty acid composition of the fat from the initial or final safflower oil groups. Duane Elmer Koch Most of the fatty acid changes due to the tallow ration had occurred by the end of the 4th week. The depot fat of barrows contained a higher level of total saturated fatty acids than that of the gilts. The fat from barrows contained more palmitic and stearic acids and less linoleic acid than the fat from gilts. There was no difference between barrows and gilts in the fatty acid composition of the intramuscular fat. There was no significant difference in consumer preference or Warner-Bratzler shear values of the loin samples from any of the slaughter groups. This suggests that none of the diets had any adverse effect upon palatability. EFFECTS OF DIET ON THE FATTY ACID COMPOSITION OF PORK FAT by Duane Elmer Koch A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Food Science 1966 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his deepest appreciation to Dr. A. M. Pearson for his guidance throughout this study and for his critical review of this manuscript. Special thanks are expressed to Dr. W. T. Magee and to Kenneth Kemp for their help with the statistical analysis of data presented in this thesis. The author is deeply indebted to his wife, Ruth Ann, and son, Tim, for their patience and encouragement throughout this study and to his parents, Mr. and Mrs. Elmer Koch, for providing him with an interest in agriculture. Sincerest appreciation is also expressed to Sonja Bolley for the typing of this manuscript. Acknowledgment is also extended to Dr. B. S. Schweigert, Dr. J. A. Hoefer, and Dr. R. W. Luecke for their encouragement and aid in this study. ii TA BLE OF CONTENTS INTR ODUCTION LITERATURE REVIEW Early Significance and Causes of Soft Pork Fatty Acid Composition Effect of Maturity Effect of Fat Location Effect of Diet Effect of Diet upon Serum Cholesterol Levels EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE Experimental Animals Treatments Slaughtering Procedure and Subsequent Carcass Evaluation Samples for Analysis Extraction of Lipids from Samples Preparation of Methyl Esters Gas Chromatography Taste Panel Statistical A nalys is iii Page 10 12 13 16 23 26 26 26 27 28 29 29 30 32 32 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 33 Fatty Acid Composition of the Rations 34 Carcass Firmness 36 Effect of Treatment upon Fatty Acid Composition 38 Rapidity of Fatty Acid Changes in Response to Diet 57 Differences in Fatty Acid Changes Due to Sample Sites 58 Effect of Sex upon the Fatty Acid Composition 62 Correlation Coefficients of the Individual Fatty Acids with Degree of Saturation 64 Effect of Diet upon Palatability 65 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 67 BIBLIOGRAPHY 70 APPENDIX 79 iv Table 10 ll 12 L18 T OF TA B LES Fatty acid content of the rations (‘70) Effect of treatment on carcass firmness Adjusted means of total saturated fatty acid contents by treatments and sample sites ("/0) Adjusted means of palmitic acid content by treatments and sample sites (‘70) Adjusted means of stearic acid content by treatments and sample sites (‘70) Adjusted means of myristic acid content by treatments and sample sites (‘70) Adjusted means of linoleic acid content by treatments and sample sites (‘70) Adjusted means of oleic acid content by treatments and sample sites (‘70) Adjusted means of palmitoleic acid content by treatments and sample sites (‘70) Averages of the adjusted means of the fatty acid content in backfat by treatments (‘70) Averages of the adjusted means for the fatty acid composition of the inner and outer layers of backfat by treatment (‘70) Adjusted means of the fatty acid composition in fat from barrows and gilts by sample sites (‘70) Page 34 35 37 41 43 46 48 50 52 54 59 63 Table 13 14 LIS T OF TA BLES Simple correlation coefficients between each of the fatty acids and the amount of total saturated fatty acids by sample sites Effect of treatment upon taste panel scores and Warner-Bratzler shear values vi Page 65 66 Appendix A B LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES Slaughter and carcass data Rate of gain and feed efficiency Fatty acid composition of leaf fat (‘70) Fatty acid composition of inner backfat from over first rib (‘70) Fatty acid composition of outer backfat from over first rib (‘70) Fatty acid composition of inner backfat from over last rib (‘70) Fatty acid composition of outer backfat from over last rib (‘70) Fatty acid composition of inner backfat from over last lumbar vertebra (‘70) Fatty acid composition of outer backfat from over last lumbar vertebra (‘70) Fatty acid composition of intramuscular fat from Longissimus dorsi muscle (‘70) Taste panel scores and Warner-Bratzler shear values Composition of diets Fatty acid composition of rations and of the safflower oil and tallow used in the rations (‘70) Page 79 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 INTR ODUC TION Soft pork was once a serious problem in the United States. The character of the depot fat was found to be the major factor affecting the firmness of the chilled carcass. It was also discovered that feed had a pronounced effect on the composition of the depot fat. More recently, the highly saturated fatty acid content of animal fats in the human diet has been shown to increase serum cholesterol levels. High serum cholesterol levels have been implicated as a possible cause of atherosclerosis. Incorporation of polyunsaturated fats, and especially linoleic acid, into the diet has been shown to reduce serum cholesterol levels. Since fat often comprises over 40% of the pork carcass and can be altered by dietary means, it is a potential source of unsaturated fat for human consumption. Thus, the present investigation was undertaken to study the effects of feeding a highly unsaturated diet upon the fatty acid composition of the fat produced. An additional facet of this study involved following the changes in the composition of the fat after the hogs were removed from the softening ration and placed on a more saturated diet. Because it was suspected that various fat locations might be affected in a different manner, the fatty acid composition of lipid samples from the leaf fat, the intra- muscular fat from the Longsimus dorsi muscle, and both the inner and outer layers of backfat from over the first rib, last rib, and last lumbar vertebra were studied. LITERA TUR E R EVIEW Early Significance and Causes of Soft Pork Burk (1922) listed the differences between oily, soft, and firm pork. In the fresh chilled condition, he noted that oily carcasses remained very soft, and the fat had a slightly yellowish tinge. Even after cooling, the carcasses and wholesale cuts were similar to those of a warm carcass. He stated that firm carcasses were solid and firm and the fat was pure white. In soft carcasses, the fat was white, although it was neither firm nor oily. He further indicated that the average melting point for leaf fat was 34.70C. for oily fat, 40.30C. for soft fat, and 43.40C. for firm fat. He also stated that hogs producing soft or oily carcasses could not be distinguished before slaughter from those yielding firm carcasses. Hankins and Ellis (1926) reported that products from soft and oily hogs were difficult to handle and oily in appearance. They indicated that fluid fat sometimes dripped from smoked products, and that soft bacon was difficult to slice. They also noted that lard from soft and oily hogs lacked body and was sometimes liquid at ordinary refrigerator temperatures. They further stated that these undesirable characteristics resulted in market discounts to producers of soft and oily hogs. Burk (1922) and Hankins and Ellis (1926) listed feed as the primary 4 cause of soft pork. Hankins and Ellis (1926), in summarizing the work of early Eur0pean investigators from Denmark, reported that barley, rye, root cr0ps, and palm nut meal produced firm pork, sunflowers produced soft pork, while corn and wheat bran produced carcasses (of intermediate firmness. When added to rations, linseed oil was noted to have a softening effect, whereas, coconut oil had a hardening effect. Hankins and Ellis (1926) further indicated that some German workers had reported that barley, potatoes, palm kernel meal, coconut meal, milk, and meat meal in various combinations produced hard pork. Corn produced a slightly softer fat, whereas, peanut, sesame, and linseed meals or oils resulted in still softer fat. Rations low in fat were noted to produce firm pork. These authors also stated that the German researchers reported that suckling pigs were soft in comparison to mature pigs fattened on grain or potatoes. Hankins and Ellis (1926) in summarizing English research, indicated that these workers laid great stress on the effects of rations rich in oil in producing soft bacon. They reported that Canadian investigators had found that most of the soft bacon in Canada came from immature or underfed pigs. Usually these pigs had been fed on poorly balanced rations, such as corn alone or beans alone. They further noted that the softness could be eliminated if rapid, satisfactory gains were obtained by the use of mixed feeds, including corn, barley, peas, and skimmilk. They reported that the Canadian researchers considered the amount of ”olein" to be the controlling factor in determining softness, i.e. , the quantity of unsaturated fatty acids was closely correlated with the softness of the fat. American investigators demonstrated that feeding peanuts as the major part of the ration for any significant time resulted in soft, oily pork (Bennett, 1898, 1900; Duggar, 1898, 1903; Burns, 1910; Gray, 1916; Burk, 1916, 1918a, 1919; Scott, 1918, 1922; Youngblood, 1920; Hankins and Ellis, 1926). Hostetler e_t.a_l. (1939) have shown that as little as 10 lbs. of peanut oil in the diet may produce soft pork. A number of-workers attempted to harden peanut-fed hogs with corn or corn supplemented with either cottonseed meal, milo ch0ps, meat meal, velvet beans, or shorts (Duggar, 1903; Gray, 1916; Burk, 1918a, 1919; Templeton, 1920; Scott, 1921, 1922; Hankins. and Ellis, 1926). These workers reported that if the subsequent hardening period was long enough (five weeks or more), a definite improvement in carcass firmness occurred. However, carcass firmness was still inferior to that from corn-fed hogs. Hostetler £11. (1939) reported that in order for peanut-fed hogs to grade firm, the weight gain from the hardening ration should be 3.5 times that from the peanut ration. They found that removal of part of the soft fat by starvation before hardening had a beneficial effect in producing firm carcasses. When peanut meal was fed in amounts up to one half of the ration, Burk (1916, 1918b), Scott (1918), and Hankins and Ellis (1926) produced acceptably firm pork. However, they observed that carcasses did not become firm upon chilling if peanut meal was the sole source of feed. A number of workers reported that if soybeans were fed to the extent of 20% or more of the ration for seven to eight weeks prior to slaughter, soft pork resulted (Gray, 1916; Hankins and Ellis, 1926; Bull EEE’l’ , 1931; Robison, 1931; Vestal and Shrewsbury, 1932, 1935; Helser Eta. , 1939; Hostetler and Halverson, 1940). Robison (1931) and Vestal and Shrew sbury (1932) found that cooking or roasting of soybeans did not alleviate the problem. To successfully harden soybean-fed pigs, Hostetler and Halverson (1940) stated that the ratio of weight gains from the hardening ration (corn and tankage with 13% cottonseed meal) to that from the soybean ration should be 3.4:1. They further noted that the ratio of total starch ingested from both rations to that of total oil (exclusive of cottonseed oil) was 8.9:1. Robison (1931) and Vestal and Shrewsbury (1935) indicated that soybean oil meal will produce firm pork if not used as the sole source of feed. Rice bran, when fed alone, and to some extent, rice polish can also produce soft pork (Burns, 1910; Dvorachek and Sandhouse, 1918; Burk, 1918a, 1918b; Hughes, 1922; Warren and Williams, 1923; Hankins and Ellis, 1926). Gray (1916) and Hankins and Ellis (1926) indicated that oak mast produced relatively soft pork. Lush _e_t_.a_l_. (1936) raised the iodine value of lard an average of 6. l by feeding a total of 2.5 to 3 lbs. of cod-liver oil over a period of 120 days. Sinclair (1936) reduced the iodine number of pork fat by decreasing the pr0portion of oats in the ration. Ellis and Isbell (1926a) stated that both corn and soybean oil resulted in greater softening of the fat than peanut or rice oil. Duggar (1898, 1903) stated that fat produced from sorghum or a mixture of cowpeas and corn was scarcely different from fat produced from corn alone. Burns (1910) noted no difference in carcass firmness on feeding corn alone or corn supplemented with molasses. Burk (1918b) produced firm pork by feeding milo chops and cottonseed meal (6:1). Scott (1918) noted that velvet beans produced hard pork. Hankins and Ellis (1926) reported that hogs fed brewer's rice and tankage produced firmer carcasses than h0g3 fed corn. Robison (1931) indicated that rations low in fat produce firm pork. Shorland 9.23.1: (1944) stated that pigs fed skimmilk or buttermilk generally yielded carcasses with firm fat. Henriques and Hansen (1901) found that the temperature of the body fat becomes successively higher from external to internal locations. They noted that this was directly related with the fat solidifying point, and indirectly related with iodine value. These workers also placed one pig at each of the following environmental temperatures for two months: (1) 30 - 35°C.; (2) 0°C.; and (3) 0°C. but covered with a sheepskin coat. Iodine values of the outermost layer of backfat were 69.4, 72.3, and 67.0, respectively. They concluded that the temperature at the site of fat deposition plays a role in determining hardness. Sinclair (1936) found that the average iodine number of fat samples from 150 pigs fed during the summer was 58.2, while the average of 72 samples taken during the winter was 63.2. Scott (1930) and Robison (1931) indicated that type may exert an influence on carcass firmness. Robison (1931) stated that intermediate or chuffy type h0g3 would be expected to be firmer than rangy hogs having the same fat thickness. Lush _e_t_il_. (1936), upon analyzing lard from 157 hogs belonging to 54 litters, reported that gilts had an iodine value of 1.7 units higher than that of litter mate barrows. Hankins and Ellis (1925) and Ellis (1926) noted that younger pigs have softer fat than older or heavier pigs. Scott (1930) found that young pigs had soft fat, which gradually hardened during the growing and fattening process. Several workers reported that hogs with a greater fat depth usually produced firmer carcasses, providing no softening feed was fed (Scott, 1930; Hankins, 1930; Robison, 1931, 1946). The amount of weight gain on a softening or hardening ration will influence fat firmness (Hankins and Ellis, 1926; Hankins £31. , (1928; Hostetler £33.13 , 1939; Hostetler and Halverson, 1940). A number of workers (Hankins and Ellis, 1926; Hankins 3531. ,‘1928; Robison, 1931, 1946; Sinclair, 1936) reported that as the rate of fat deposition increased, the fat became firmer. Duggar (1898) found that leaf fat was firmer (than backfat. Burk and Ewing (1919) demonstrated that the melting point of backfat was 6 - 8°C. lower than that of leaf fat. Henriques and Hansen (1901) indicated that the layer of backfat sampled must also be considered. Scott (1921) and Sinclair (1936) stated that there is a great difference in the firmness of fat between individual hogs treated alike. Lush gtal_J1936) reported that the variance in fat firmness between litters sired by, the same boar was actually a little larger than the variance between the progeny of different boars in the same year. 10 Fatty Acid Composition White SEE}: , (1964) stated that body lipids serve as a source of potential chemical energy. Since most of the body fat is located subcutaneously, they further indicated that it protects the more thermosensitive tissues against excessive heat loss to the environment and insulates the body against mechanical trauma. They reported that lipid exists in the depots of living animals mostly as triglycerides, which are in a liquid state. These authors also noted that the more nearly saturated a sample of lipid, the larger the energy yield upon oxidation. Thus, they concluded that mammals deposit that type of lipid richest in chemical potential energy, but still liquid at the ambient temperatures. Using isot0pic tracers, Schoenheimer (1942) concluded that body fats are in a state of rapid flux. He indicated that upon absorption of fats, the fatty acids of the diet merge with those from the depot, forming a mixture indistinguishable as to origin. He further noted that all of the complex reactions involved in the turnover of fatty acids are so balanced that the amount and structure of the fat mixture in the depots remains relatively constant. Jeanrenaud (1961) and Vaughan (1961) indicated that adipose tissue is an extremely active system primarily concerned with the synthesis, oxidation, storage, and release of fats, representing a 11 major site of metabolic interrelationships between carbohydrates and lipids. White eta—l. (1964) stated that adipose tissue exhibits two major metabolic features: (1) the assimilation of carbohydrates and lipids, and their intermediates for fat synthesis and storage, and (2) the mobilization of lipids as free fatty acids. Wakil (1964) and White 332.1. (1964) indicated that animal tissues contain three different metabolic pathways involved in the synthesis and interconversion of the various fatty acids: (1) $311223 synthesis of saturated acids; (2) elongation; and (3) desaturation. They stated that palmitic acid is synthesized £13 hovo from acetyl CoA, malonyl CoA, and NADPHZ. They further noted that palmitic acid can be elongated by the addition of one or more units of acetyl CoA to form longer chained saturated acids. They reported that palmitic and stearic acid can be desaturated to palmitoleic and oleic acids by microsomes in the presence of Oz and NADPHZ. They also stated that animal tissues have lost the ability to synthesize linoleic acid. The most recent and complete characterizations of pork fat include those by Magidman _e_tgl. (1963) using silicic acid and gas chromatography and Sink EEE’l‘ (1964) using gas chromatography. These workers reported that the composition of normal pork fat includes approximately 1. 0 - 1-7% myristic acid, 23 - 27% palmitic acid, 10 - 14% stearic acid, 12 2.0 - 4.5% palmitoleic acid, 44 - 47% oleic acid, 9 - 12% linoleic acid, 0.5 - 1.0% linolenic acid, and 0. l - 0.2% arachidonic acid. Also included in detectable amounts were the following fatty acids: 10:0, 11:0, 12:0, 13:0, 14:1, 15:0, 17:0, 17:1, 19:0, 19:1, 20:0, 20:1, 20:2, 20:3, 20:5, 22:0, 22:2, 22:4, and 22:5. Effect of MEEEEEXS" Ellis and Hankins (1925) reported that the fat of growing hogs becomes progressively harder on a ration containing a moderately low amount of softening fat, such as is found in corn. They further noted that this change was accompanied by an increased rate of fat deposition. These workers found that as the amount of total saturated acids increased, the pr0portion of linoleic acid decreased, while the per cent of oleic acid remained relatively constant. Ellis and Zeller (1930) noted that a gradual increase in saturation occurred up to a weight of 100 lbs. , above which extremely hard body fat was produced. These workers reported that from a maximum content in the suckling pig, linoleic acid steadily decreased up to a weight of 170 lbs. They concluded that the decrease in linoleic acid was re3ponsible for the increased saturation. McMeekan (1940) found that the iodine number of hog fat increased from birth up to eight weeks. A steady decrease in iodine value was Obs erved from eight weeks to twenty weeks, after which it remained 13 relatively constant. It was indicated by de la Mare and Shorland (1944) that the assimilation of linoleic acid from sow's milk by suckling pigs provided a reasonable explanation for the increase in iodine number from birth until weaning. Sink 3.2.32: (1964) reported the selective deposition of saturated fatty acids with increasing live weight. These workers found an increase in both palmitic and stearic acids. They also noted that linoleic acid definitely decreased. It was further shown that palmitoleic acid also decreased, while oleic acid remained fairly constant or increased slightly. Effect (if {it Lopg.£i2r3_.--Sink eta}, (1964) reported that the saturated fatty acids are preferentially deposited in perirenal rather than in subcutaneous fat, and in the inner backfat rather than the outer backfat layer. The results of Brown (1931), Bhattacharya and Hilditch (1931), Banks and Hilditch (1932), Hilditch _e_ta_l_. (1939), McMeekan (1940), and Ostrander and Dugan (1962) are in agreement. Sink gal. (1964) stated that the leaf fat contained approximately 4% more saturated fatty acids than the inner backfat, and about 7% more than the outer backfat. They noted that an increase in the amount of saturated fatty acids was accounted for by increases in both palmitic and stearic acids. Shorland and de la Mare (1945a) had previously rePorted similar results . 14 Sink Eta-l. (1964) further reported that the amounts of palmitoleic, oleic, and linoleic acids decreased as the degree of saturation increased. Shorland and de la Mare (1945b) stated that as saturation decreased, oleic acid increased, while stearic acid decreased. Dahl (1958) verified these results. Banks and Hilditch (1932) indicated that this relationship caused a decrease in the ratio of linoleic acid to oleic acid. These workers stated that this was so, even though the linoleic acid content increased slightly with decreasing saturation. However, Shorland and de la Mare (1945b) noted that the small differences in linoleic acid content had but little effect upon the degree of saturation. Dean and Hilditch (1933) divided the backfat of a sow into five layers, three inner layers and two outer layers. They found that the fatty acid content of the three inner layers was almost identical, but the outermost of these layers contained slightly less palmitic and more stearic acid. These workers also found that the innermost layer of the outer backfat was intermediate between the inner layers and the outermost layer, but more closely approximated the latter. Garton 31331. (1952) fed a diet of 50% crude whale oil. From the normal fatty acid composition of pig fat and whale oil, they calculated that about 60% of the leaf fat and inner backfat was true Pig fat, while 40% was derived from whale oil. They also calculated 15 that only 35% of the outer backfat was true pig fat, with the remaining 65% being derived from whale oil. However, Bhattacharya and Hilditch (1931) had previously concluded that diet has less effect on the outer layer of backfat than on the inner layer or the leaf fat. They found that when the diet contained arachis oil (peanut oil), the degree of saturation of leaf fat and inner backfat was almost reduced to that of the outer backfat. Callow (1935) stated that the faster the rate of fat deposition, the more saturated the fat. He indicated this was true because more fat would be synthesized from non-lipid sources. Shorland and de la Mare (1945b) stated that this theory broke down when referred to an individual hog. They noted that as pigs grow the outer layer of back- fat is deposited first and then the inner layer. However, they found that over the whole period of growth, the inner layer was always more saturated than the outer. Sink ital. (1964) noted no significant difference in saturation between backfat samples removed from over the shoulder, loin, or rump. How ever, Shorland 231' (1944) had previously found that back- fat from the front end of the carcass was more saturated than that at the rear. Greer _e_t_a_1. (1965) found no difference in the per cent of total saturated fatty acids between the outer layer of backfat and the intra- 16 muscular fat from the Loggiislmuidgisi muscle. They also reported no differences for each of the individual saturated fatty acids. These workers and Ostrander and Dugan (1962) reported that intramuscular fat contained more oleic acid and less linoleic acid than did the subcutaneous fat. Greer _e_t_a_l. (1965) further noted that intramuscular fat usually contained a higher level of palmitoleic acid. McMeekan (1940) had earlier found that up to eight weeks of age, muscle fats had higher iodine values than subcutaneous fat. After this age, he noted that the iodine value of muscle fat appeared to approximate the values of backfat and belly fat. Effect (if Di_e‘t_.--Ellis and Isbell (1926a) reported that the variation in percentages of oleic, linoleic, and total saturated fatty acids of lard from peanut and soybean-fed hogs was very similar to that of peanut and soybean oil, respectively. Ellis and Isbell (1926b) found that peanut oil and soybean oil contained around 23% and 52% linoleic acid, respectively, whereas, the resulting "peanut lard" and "soybean lard" contained about 19% and 33% linoleic acid. They also reported that the feeding of soybeans caused the deposition of small quantities of linolenic acid, while feeding peanuts led to the deposition of arachidic acid. These workers stated that the fat formed from a ration of brewer's rice and tankage, which contained 17 less than 1% fat, contained over 97% of the glycerides of oleic, palmitic, and stearic acids. Ellis and Isbell (1926a) reported that linoleic acid decreased from 30.6% in oily fat from soybean-fed hogs to 1.9% in hard fat from hogs fed brewer's rice. Ellis 3.53!) (1931) fed hogs a basal ration plus 0, 4, 8 or 12% cottonseed oil. As the level of cottonseed oil increased, they found a marked increase of linoleic and stearic acids at the expense of oleic and palmitic acids. Although the maximum content of total saturated acids occurred at the 4% level, they noted that stearic acid steadily increased up to the 12% level. These workers reported that the hardest carcasses were found at the 4% level, while larger quantities of cottonseed oil resulted in greater softness. Brown (1931) reported that 2.7% of highly unsaturated fatty acids was found in lard from pigs fed a 14% menhaden oil diet. He noted that these fatty acids had about the same molecular weight, but a lower iodine value than the mixture of acids isolated from the original menhaden oil. Bhattacharya and Hilditch (1931) indicated that pig fat tends to approximate a constant molar content of total 18 carbon acids, in Spite of variation in the total prOportion of saturated to unsaturated acids. They stated that the stearic acid content will vary indirectly 18 with the oleic acid content. These workers further noted that the constancy of total 18 carbon acids disappears when hogs are fed a diet containing over 5 - 8% fat. Banks and Hilditch (1932) reported that linoleic acid was readily assimilated in the fat of a sow fed 7% fish meal. Since unsaturated 20 and 22 carbon acids were found in fish oil, they were also detected in the depot fat. These workers indicated that the softness of the fat was due to an increase of the unsaturated fatty acids, with an unusually large amount of linoleic acid. Bhattacharya and Hilditch (1931) had found similar results by feeding arachis oil. By comparing the component fatty acids of the diet with those of the body fats, Hilditch £31. (1939) concluded that a substantial amount of palmitic, stearic, and oleic acids were synthesized by the animal body. They noted that these acids were synthesized in an average pr0portion of 1 mole of palmitic acid to 1.9 moles of stearic and oleic acids. They also stated that palmitoleic and myristic acids may be synthesized, but linoleic acid and the unsaturated 20 and 22 carbon acids are derived only from ingested fat. Shorland and de la Mare (1945a) found a constant palmitic acid content of 26 - 30 moles ‘70 from the depot fat of hogs fed skimmilk or buttermilk. They also reported 2 - 3 moles ‘70 less stearic acid and 19 2 - 3 moles ‘70 more palmitoleic acid from these diets than that from normal diets. A maize meal supplement was found to decrease the myristic acid content and to increase the unsaturated 20 and 22 carbon acids. They indicated that a c0pra supplement increased the lauric, myristic, and palmitoleic acid contents, but decreased the amount of oleic and stearic acids. These workers concluded that a decrease in oleic acid may compensate for increased lauric and myristic acids. They also stated that it was possible that unsaturated acids displaced palmitic acid, but that the saturated acids of lower molecular weight than myristic promoted the synthesis of palmitic acid. Garton ital. (1952) found palmitoleic acid and the unsaturated 20 and 22 carbon acids in greater amounts than normal from the depot fat of a hog fed on 50% crude whale oil for 198 days. Garton and Duncan (1954) reported that adding cod-liver oil to the diet resulted in depot fats that were dark brown in color and semi-solid at room temperature. The fats were found to have a green flourescence in daylight and an odor of cod-liver oil. These workers noted that some of the fatty acids of cod-liver oil were incorporated into the depot fats. Blumer 31:21. (1957) divided twenty 45 lb. pigs into five groups: 10% soybean oil throughout, 10% soybean oil followed by 10% coconut oil bi oil ti the t t'me effe and 20 oil beginning at 175, 150, and 125 lbs. live weight, and 10% coconut oil throughout. All hogs were slaughtered at 205 lbs. They found that the total saturated fatty acid contents of the backfat were 33.12, 38.68, 42.81, 45,21, and 51.60%, resPectively. Linoleic, linolenic, and arachidonic acids showed a progressive decrease as the length of time on coconut oil increased. Since the amount of oleic acid remained rather constant, they concluded that oleic acid had little effect on fat firmness. Since the oleic acid content of soybean oil and coconut oil was 32% and 18%, respectively, they further concluded that ingested oleic acid has little effect on the oleic acid content of depot fat. Elson (1964) fed a hog on a 20% corn oil diet for 17 days. He found that the backfat contained less palmitic, stearic, and oleic acids than normal. He further reported that the polyunsaturated acids, linoleic and linolenic, showed a marked increase accounting for 34% of the total fatty acids. Greer 2131’ (1965) reported that the outer layer of backfat from corn-fed hogs contained more linoleic acid than that from barley-fed hogs. However, they found no difference in the fatty acid content of the intramuscular fat from the Longgissimus dorsi muscle on either a corn or barley ration. 21 Dahl and Persson (1965) found that the content of linoleic acid in backfat and leaf fat ran parallel to the amount of oil in the feed. Because of the accumulation of dietary fat, they noted that even small quantities of oil will exert an influence on the properties of depot fat. However, they stated that the maintenance of a practically constant iodine value in cases of a variable, but low or moderate supply of oil in the diet, might be achieved in the body by regulation of the amount of synthesized oleic acids going to the fat depots. These workers also found evidence . for a preferential deposition of polyunsaturated fatty acids, indicating that this could give rise to a depot fat with a higher iodine value than the dietary fat. Hilditch-52:11... (1939) reported the deposition of fat from pigs fed on a restricted diet was not only slower, but the fat produced was softer than normal. They indicated that this was due to an increase in the amounts of linoleic and oleic acids. Shorland and de la Mare (1945a) found that fat from slower growing hogs contained more linoleic acid, because most of the deposited fat was derived from the diet. Greer 31:31. (1965) reported that linoleic acid increased as the feed level was restricted to 85% of full feed. However, they noted that further restriction of the feed intake to 70% caused a decrease of linoleic acid from that obtained on 85% full feed. 22 Greer .e_til_. (1965) further reported that the total saturated fatty acid content of the outer backfat layer decreased as feed intake was restricted to 85% of full feed on both corn and barley rations. By further restriction of feed intake to 70%, they noted a further decrease in the saturated acids from hogs on a corn ration, but a slight increase on a barley ration. They found that stearic acid behaved similar to the saturated acids. On both rations, they found that palmitic acid decreased as the feed level was restricted to 85%, but that it increased as feed level was further restricted to 70%. These workers found no change in the fatty acid composition from the intramuscular fat of the _I_..2n_gis_s_ir_r_ip_s_d21;s_i muscle as feed level was restricted. Merkel (1966) found a steady decrease of total saturated fatty acids from both the inner and outer layers of backfat as feed intake was restricted to 57%. He found that this change was due to a decrease of stearic acid and an increase of linoleic acid. Hilditch and Pedelty (1940) have reported that in the early stages of inanition, a preferential selection occurs from the reserves of the outer backfat. They noted that prolonged starvation caused the largest degree of mobilization from the inner backfat. They found no great evidence of selectivity in the mobilization of any one fatty acid. How- ever, the two most prominent effects they noted were the preferential 23 removal of oleic acid during the later stages of inanition, and a definite reluctance in the earlier stages of starvation to mobilize those acids derived from ingested fat (linoleic and the unsaturated 20 and 22 carbon acids). Effect of Diet upon Serum Cholesterol Levels Wilens and Plair (1965) reported that severe atherosclerosis is often associated with high values of cholesterol in blood. Weinhouse and Hirsch (1940) and Rabinowitz (1960) stated that cholesterol is present in high concentrations in the lipids of the atheromatous plaques. Their chemical nature resembled that of blood plasma. Swell £99.13 (1962) indicated that below a certain serum cholesterol level, atherosclerosis does not develop. They also stated that there is a relationship between the level of serum cholesterol and the time required for deve10pment of the disease. These workers further reported that the major part of the cholesterol in the plaques originated from serum cholesterol. Rabinowitz (1960), however, stated that cholesterol in the atheromatous plaques appeared to exchange with or accept circulatory cholesterol only with the greatest of difficulty. Ahrens_e_t_a_._l. (1959) and Goldsmith (1961) reported that there is no proof that high serum cholesterol levels cause atherosclerosis. 24 Swell_e_t_¢ll. (1962) stated that aortic cholesterol composition is dependent upon the fatty acids of the dietary fat. They indicated that certain cholesterol esters, and in particular, cholesterol oleate may be preferentially deposited in the aorta. Swell e_t_a_l. (1960a) reported that the major cholesterol esterfied fatty acid of media and serum was linoleic acid, while for the plaques and liver it was oleic acid. Swell 353.1. (1960b, 1961) concluded that there may be a distinct mechanism operating, so that cholesterol esters of a more saturated and monoenoic nature are laid down as atherogenesis progresses. Results reported by Evrard gal. (1962) are in agreement with these findings. Mead (1966) suggested that serum cholesterol levels can be lowered by increasing the ratio of polyunsaturated to saturated fatty acids from the usual 0.4 to 1.1 or more. Heindicated that this would occur even with a relatively high dietary fat content. Reiser _e_t_a_l_. (1963) stated that the increase in liver cholesterol from unsaturated fat diets suggests that the mechanism by which unsaturated fatty acids maintain lower serum cholesterol is by their influence on tran5port. He suggested that this could occur as a result of forming labile esters, or by forming unsaturated phosphatides, which may aid in the transport of cholesterol esters across cell membranes. Several workers have substantiated the fact that unsaturated fats lower serum cholesterol 25 (Ahrens 3531., 1954; Ahrens _<_e_t__a_l_., 1957; Okey and Lyman, 1957; Avigan and Steinberg, 1958; and Peifer, 1966). Jagannathan (1962a) believes that the polyunsaturated fatty acid, linoleic acid, is chiefly responsible for this effect. Keys ital. (1956) disagreed to some extent, explaining that the level of fat in the diet had greater effect on lowering serum cholesterol levels than did the degree of unsaturation. Pollak (1959) reported that Japanese on a highly unsaturated, low fat diet had a higher incidence of cardiovascular disease than natives of Thailand on a highly saturated, high fat diet. Aftergood _e_t_e_1_l. (1957) and Jagannathan (1962b) indicated that a lowering of serum cholesterol levels by unsaturated fats was apparent only when cholesterol was present in the diet. Elson (1964) found that soybean oil was more effective than lard in lowering the serum cholesterol level of rats, even though both the lard and oil contained 34% polyunsaturated fatty acids. Hilditch and Stainsby (1935) and Mattson 2231‘ (1964) indicated that lard triglycerides contain the saturated fatty acids primarily at the B-position. Mattson and Volpenheim (1963) found that the saturated fatty acids of vegetable oil are mainly located at theut- and d3- positions. EXPER IMENTA L PR OCEDUR E Experimental Animals A total of 21 Hampshire X Yorkshire hogs, including 9 barrows and 12 gilts, were used in this experiment. They were obtained from the Michigan State University Swine Farm and were fed at the University Swine Barn. At the start of the experiment, the hogs weighed an average of 97 lbs. They were randomly divided into two lots of six, each containing three barrows and three gilts, and one lot of nine, containing three barrows and six gilts. Treatments One lot of six hogs was designated as the control (Lot A) and was fed a basal corn-soybean oil meal finishing ration (Appendix L). The other lot of six (Lot B) was fed a basal barley- soybean oil meal ration containing 10% safflower oil (Appendix L). The lot of nine (Lot C) was fed the same ration as Lot B until all of the hogs reached an average weight of about 158 lbs. At this time, three hogs from both Lots A and B were slaughtered and were identified as the initial control and the initial safflower oil groups, respectively. The remaining hogs from Lots A and B were continued on their respective diets, while Lot C was changed to a basal barley-soybean oil meal ration containing 10% tallow 26 r\) (ID 27 (Appendix L). At each two week interval, three hogs were slaughtered from Lot C, and were identified as the 2 week, 4 week, and 6 week tallow groups, respectively. At the end of the sixth week, when the hogs had reached a market weight of about 240 lbs. , the remaining three hogs in both Lots A and B were also slaughtered. They were identified as the final control and the final safflower oil groups, reSpectively. The rations of Lots A, B, and C were found to contain about 2.8%, 8.5%, and 11.2% fat, respectively. The ration for Lot B contained less fat than exPected because some of the safflower oil of the ration was absorbed by the burlap bags containing the feed. Some of the safflower oil had also seeped through the bags and was found on the floor of the feed room. Rate of gain was calculated for the hogs by groups. Feed efficiency was calculated for the hogs by lots. Each of the treatment groups contained at least one barrow and one gilt. Slaughtering Procedure and Subsequent Carcass Evaluation The hogs were electrically stunned, shackled, stuck, and allowed to bleed. After bleeding they were scalded and dehaired. The carcasses were then singed, eviscerated, split into halves, and washed. The. carcasses were placed in a cooler at approximately 3°C. and allowed to chill. SL‘D: can 11 (‘0 fat 1 Sam Sam 9151c and and u‘ 28 After chilling for 24 hours, a subjective carcass firmness rating was placed on each of the carcasses by three graduate students well acquainted with pork carcass evaluation. A scale of 1 to 5 was used with 1 being very soft and 5 being very hard. After slaughter and during subsequent processing, the following carcass data were collected: carcass weight and length, backfat thickness, loin eye area, and weights of trimmed ham, loin, shouder, belly, lean cuts, primal cuts, fat trim, lean trim, and leaf fat and kidney. Samples for Analysis Fat samples were collected from the leaf fat and from the subcutaneous fat over the first rib, last rib, and last lumbar vertebra. At the time of analysis, the subcutaneous fat samples were separated into inner and outer layers, using the connective tissue septum as the point of separation. A section of Longissimus dorsi muscle was removed at the tenth rib for subsequent intramuscular fat analysis. Samples of the rations were also collected. All fat samples were placed in polyethylene bags, sealed under vacuum, and were frozen and stored at -30°C. until needed for analysis. A loin roast was removed, wrapped in freezer paper, frozen, and stored at -30°C. until needed for taste panel evaluation. A pork ch0p was also frozen and ultimately used for the Warner-Bratzler shear test for tenderness. Z9 Extraction of Lipids from Samples The lipids from the_L_ongissimus dorsi muscle and feed samples were extracted by a modification of the method suggested by Ostrander and Dugan (1962). Each sample was placed in a VirTis flask with 130 ml. absolute methanol and was macerated for five minutes at medium speed. The sample was transferred to a Waring Blender jar along with 130 ml. chloroform, part of which was used to rinse the VirTis flask. The sample was blended for five minutes. To precipitate the protein in the sample, 65 ml. distilled water containing 1.0 - 1.5 gm. Zn(C2H3Oz)2 was added and blended for 10 seconds. The sample was filtered by suction with a Buchner funnel using Whatman No. 1 filter paper. In order to avoid oxidation, nitrogen gas was directed over the sample during this process. The Waring Blender jar was rinsed with a small amount of chloroform and added to the Buchner funnel. The filtrate was transferred to a separatory funnel and the heavy chloroform layer was removed. The chloroform was removed from the lipid under reduced pressure by means of a rotating flask evaporator. Preparation of Methyl Esters Methyl esters of the lipid samples were made by utilizing a method develoPed by McGinnis and Dugan (1965) and Dugan _e£_a_l_. (1966). A 1.0 gm. fat sample was suspended in 20 ml. diethyl ether am; 30 and homogenized with a VirTis homogenizer. The homogenate was transferred to a 125 ml. Erlenmeyer flask mounted in an ice bath on a magnetic stirrer. Under a constant stream of nitrogen gas, 2.5 ml. of concentrated H2504 was added dr0pwise to the flask. The flask was st0ppered and stirred for ten minutes. Several dr0ps of alcoholic phenolphthalein were then added. The mixture was titrated with 3.6 N methanolic KOH. The neutral mixture was transferred to a separatory funnel. The reaction flask was rinsed with diethyl ether, which was also added to the funnel. The solvent was washed with cold distilled water. The aqueous layer was discarded and the diethyl ether layer was dried over anhydrous NaZSO4. The sample was filtered through Whatman No. 1 filter paper. The solvent was partially removed under a stream of nitrogen gas. The resulting solution of methyl esters of fatty acids was injected into the gas chromatograph for qualitative and quantitative analysis . Gas Chromatography A Barber-Coleman, Model 20, gas chromatograph equipped with a radium ionization detector and a Barber-Coleman recorder was used. For most of the analyses, the following adjustments were maintained: argon gas pressure, 27 lbs.; argon gas flow rate, 154 ml. per min.; injector port and detector temperature, 240°C.; column temperature, 1750C and s] tubing Azakl condi fora repo meas poss Spec 31 175°C.; cell voltage, 1250 V.; sensitivity, 1 x 10"7 amps. full scale; and split flow, 200 ml. per min. The column, 6 ft. by 1/4 in. c0pper tubing, was packed with 12% ethylene glycol succinate on 60/70 mesh Anakron A. The column was coiled to a diameter of 5 in. and pre- conditioned at 200°C. with an argon gas flow rate of 150 ml. per min. for a minimum of 24 hours. The detection system was checked for quantitative accuracy by injecting aliquots of a known mixture of methyl esters of myristic acid, palmitic acid, and stearic acid, and demonstrating that the peak area for each ester relative to the total area was approximately proportional to the relative amounts of the esters injected. The quantitative results reported were taken directly from the areas under the curves as measured by the triangulation method. No correction was made for possible variation in the reSponse of the detector to different molecular species. For qualitative analysis, the retention times of known methyl esters (99+ ‘70 pure) were compared to the retention times of the unknown methyl esters. When standards were not available, peaks were tentatively identified by semilogarithmic plots of retention volumes against carbon number. The analysis did not include long chain methyl esters with retention times greater than methyl arachidonate. 32 Taste Panel The loin roasts were cooked in a 1800C. oven to an internal temperature of 87°C. An 18 member consumer-type taste panel evaluated the samples according to a 9-point hedonic scale for tenderness, juiciness, flavor, and overall acceptability. The pork ch0ps were deep-fat fried at 210°C. to an internal temperature of 87°C. They were evaluated for tenderness by the Warner-Bratzler shear test using six cores 1/2 inch in diameter from each ch0p. Statistical Analysis The data collected from the gas chromatographic analysis were punched onto IBM cards. The data were analyzed for sex and treatment differences within each of the fat locations studied by a computer programmed for the least squares method. The following fatty acids were included in the analysis: total saturated acids, myristic acid, palmitic acid, stearic acid, palmitoleic acid, oleic acid, and linoleic acid. Where applicable, Duncan's new multiple-range test, as outlined by Steel and Torrie (1960), was employed to determine which treatment means were significantly different. The computer also ran simple correlations for all of the variables. The results of the taste panel evaluation and the Warner-Bratzler shear test were analyzed for treatment differences by analysis of variance. Toe RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Due to the experimental design with an unequal number of barrows and gilts in each treatment, this duscussion will be based on the adjusted means for the fatty acid composition rather than the actual means. Only those fatty acids which were statistically analyzed will be discussed. For a complete fatty acid characterization of the pork fat analyzed, see Appendices C through J. Although linolenic acid was present in substantial amounts, the data were not statistically analyzed due to difficulty in interpretation of the chromatograms. The peaks were broad and sometimes were partially masked by the peak for methyl linoleate. Thus, it was very difficult to get an accurate estimation of the area for methyl linolenate. The difficulty of interpreting the results for methyl linolenate was indicated by Magidman _e_t_a_l_.(l963), who reported that this peak may have included other esters. The present discussion will be concerned only with the relative fatty acid changes, since Longenecker (1939b) stated that the change in the total amount of fat must also be considered. Although information was obtained for carcass data, rate of gain, and feed efficiency, the data will not be discussed herein. The available information is included in Appendices A and B. 33 34 Fatty Acid Composition of the Rations Table 1 gives the fatty acid composition of the rations used in this experiment. The control ration contained a greater pr0portinn of total saturated fatty acids than did the 10% safflower oil ration. The greater amount of saturation was accounted for by higher levels of both palmitic and stearic acids. The 10% safflower oil diet contained a larger amount of linoleic acid than did the control ration, whereas the control ration contained higher levels of palmitoleic and oleic acids. TABLE 1 FATTY ACID CONTENT OF THE RATIONS(%)1’2 Rations Fatty Acid Control 10% Safflow er Oil 10% Tallow 14:0 + + 1.00 16:0 10.04 6.47 23.40 18:0 1.24 0.71 5.99 Total saturated 11.28 7.18 30.39 16:1 1.20 0.87 5.29 18:1 22.24 8.17 42.91 18:2 63.67 82.18 20.18 18:3 1.61 1.60 1.23 1See Appendix M for the fatty acid composition of the safflower oil and tallow used in the rations. zFor ration ingredients see Appendix L. +: traces, but the amount was too small to measure. 35 The 10% tallow ration contained a considerably larger amount of total saturated fatty acids than either of the other rations, with myristic, palmitic, and stearic acids all being present in greater pr0portions. The 10% tallow ration contained a low er level of linoleic acid and higher levels of oleic and palmitoleic acids than the other diets. TABLE 2 EFFECT OF TREATMENT ON CAR CASS FIRMNESSI’Z Treatment Carcass firmness score Control, initial 4.33 Control, final 5. 00 Safflower oil, initial 2.33 Safflower oil, final 2.78 Tallow, 2 weeks 3.44 Tallow, 4 weeks 2.783 Tallow, 6 weeks 4. 00 1See Appendix A for firmness scores of each carcass. 2Carcass firmness scores were as follows: 1! very soft, 2- soft, 38 slightly hard, 4! hard, 5: very hard. 3 . Leaf fat firmness scores were used because the carcasses were processed prior to scoring. 36 Carcass Firmness The average carcass firmness scores for each of the treatment groups are listed in Table 2. It can be seen that the safflower oil-fed hogs produced softer carcasses than the control hogs. This is in direct agreement with much of the early research summarized by Hankins and Ellis (1926), who reported that feeds high in oil produce soft carcasses. Further examination of Table 2 shows that although carcasses from the tallow-fed hogs were not as firm as the control carcasses, they were firmer than the carcasses produced from the safflower oil ration. This indicates that the tallow had a hardening effect upon the carcasses of hogs previously fed safflower oil. From Table 2, it can also be seen that the carcasses in the final control group are firmer than those in the initial control group. This is consistent with the findings of Ellis and Hankins (1925), who reported a hardening effect due to maturity. Apparently maturity has an effect, even when hogs are on a high fat ration, as the carcasses from the final safflower oil group were firmer than those in the initial safflower oil group. Thus, it is difficult to conclude whether the difference in carcass firmness between the 2 week tallow group and the 6 week tallow group is due to maturity or the increased time on the hardening ration. 37 m.c.moc.9Q £88363 3 80:98.33 acofiummfi. on c833 .mo.vm um unmoflmcmfim oocmnomflp acofiummuh * .Ho . v m an accowficmmm 828.83% unmeudouh ** .mo. Vnm Hm pmuospcoo was» ”:8”. .mcofldooH 8m 85 c333 “880me 828332me mo H8>8H we: 8 928.8.“me Eucdowflcmwm 8.8 magnumummdm .833 88.8 of m3>ms “on mags/N .Smc Hmcwwmuo MOM H smsonf O mmompcmmmc. 8meH 5.9m $.om omiom mm.om $.wm oném 2.0m 88p msfimmmmwcofl Scum umHsomSEman mmwém ammém .mwm.mm amamém no¢.w~ mwm.wm 83.5. 3.83 884 obmm>.mm onmwmém onmdwém onmo§~ oom.mm www.mm nimém *mnnmuno> Aeneas... 8.2 .8>o 839mb .830 bmmdém 836m onmfioém obnoém 001mm .mmpém www.mm **.man8:8> panacea “m3 8>o 8.0883 .89: bmmmmm mwodm nmocém nnmém nomém nowém nmwmdm vacuum—TH 8.3 .8>o 8.20.3 “3:0 onmww .3 seem .3. on: .wN on; .wm oom .om 82 .0». onmwbdm vocab: 88H .8>o 8.333 .825 ammo .wm hmmm .am ammv .wm new .oN n1: .3. wow. Hm beam .wm fin 8.3m .8>o 8.393 .830 onmmodm named». onmgdm onHm.oN ono.m~ .midm adoptmm .2.an 8.3.“ .8>o 8.333 .85: 3.883 c 3885 w 3883 N 8a....“ .30 831: .do 8ch H.333 83m .3388 . 30288 $5288 .8 grommdm .8 Sofimmm . Ho .3200 . Ho .3200 mumEmm “cofiummnh. ~43; mmflm mqmzcm ozc mezmze8H 8f “.8 88.8.3? Sundoflamflm 8.8 mumfluomn8mnm .838.“ 8588 85 magma ”.0: 88.3.9, >Go “3x93 .8950 2320.: «$8.8 083.3 83.3 «2 .2 «.«owéw «3.3 5.95029, «283 $2 .8>o 8388p .89: obmamém 28.3 .mm onoo.oH omwéh 83.3.2 Ammoém 8HN.NN news: “88H .8>o “mmxomn .888 838.8 82.8 82.8 «88.2 «8.2 «3.8 83.8 in: $2 .88 8388b .8an oncném 838mm.mm onmwo .NN 8mm .oH onowmfi mom .vm nmomém *nzn 82m .8>o . 8388b .8850 23%.: 088.8. 082.8 380.2 «men: «3.3. «.«emém in: 3.8 «.86 8388a. .89: 8883 0 «.2883 v 80883 N 8ch .flo H.332: .flo 8ch H.333 838 30288 . 30388 . Bofimh .8 Bofimmm .8 Bodmmm . HoflcoO . HoflcoO 8Hm58m “:8Eu88uh |l mBZHEBm .mumv 35020 no.“ H 0050.2: 0 mmowvcmmmmw 000 H 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 50.0 00.0 3.80 99533304 80.00 udHSUmschbcH 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.0H 00.5 00.00 00.0 0.3 0.84 N0.5 05.5 00.0 0*.5 0N4... “v0.5 00.0 0003.85 0008.3“ ”.de no>o ummxod0 .3050 00.0 50.0 00.5 00.0 N00 00.0 00.5 0003.3.) .5083 “mg no.5 unmxom0 .825 M000 000.0 0005.0 0m05.0 000.0 0000.0 0m5m.0 0: “mg 095 3.3000 .8050 00.0 50.0 00.5 00.5 $0.0 00.0 00.5 0: “mg pm>o 000x060 .823 05.0 H00 00.0 50.0 00.0“ 00.0 00.0 0: “mum.“ nm>o ummxom0 9350 0m00.5 000.0 0M05.0 0005.0 000.0. $00.0 0000.5 0: 5.30 um>o $me60 .89: mv—ooB 0 mxmmg w 3303 N ~05...” .50 H.335 .30 H65.“ H0303 03m $020.01 350208 . BoSmH umgodmmm HWBOUmdm £03000 £09200 ll onSmm “coaudoufi 0 HdmfiH $1.50 mmfim mqmzqm 072. 3sz54”... my wm 025.200 99.. 0533 no mzfimz 9:334 44 analysis detected no difference between treatments in any of the sample locations. Even though the stearic acid content of the intramuscular fat was quite constant between treatments, the remaining fat locations from control hogs tended to contain a greater preportion of stearic acid than the same sites from safflower‘oil-fed hogs. The difference was especially evident for the initial samples. This would be expected since the control ration contained a higher level of stearic acid than the safflower oil ration. As the control ration contained a lower level of fat, the control hogs probably synthesized more stearic acid than those fed safflower oil (White _e_t_a_l_. , 1964). Examination of the data in Table 5 also indicated the effect of maturity. The fat from the control hogs at the final sampling period contained a higher level of stearic acid than at the initial sampling period. The effect seemed even more evident when comparing the stearic acid content in fat from the initial and final groups of safflower oil-fed hogs. As the hogs matured, they appeared to selectively synthesize and deposit stearic acid. These findings are in agreement with those of Sinkflfl. (1964). The fat from hogs fed tallow for 2 weeks tended to contain more stearic acid than that from the initial safflower oil group. Fat from hogs fed tallow for 4 or 6 weeks tended to contain more stearic acid than that from the final safflower oil group. This indicates that feeding 45 tallow tended to increase the level of stearic acid in the fat from hogs previously fed safflower oil. This was expected because the tallow ration contained more stearic acid than the safflower oil ration. Even though the tallow ration contained more stearic acid than the control ration, there was essentially no difference in the stearic acid content between the fat from control hogs or tallow-fed hogs. Since the tallow ration also contained a higher level of fat than the control ration, this would indicate that fatty acids other than stearic are preferentially deposited. The adjusted means for the myristic acid content are listed in Table 6. The only fat location exhibiting a definite treatment effect from myristic acid was that of the intramuscular fat. In this location, the controls tended to have the lowest level of myristic acid. In. the remaining locations, fat from control hogs tended to contain a higher level of myristic acid than fat from hogs fed safflower oil. Since the myristic acid content of the two rations is about the same and the safflower oil ration contains more fat than the control, results suggest that either the control hogs synthesized myristic acid or that fatty acids other than myristic are preferentially deposited. Fat from hogs fed tallow tended to contain as much myristic acid as the fat from control animals. Since the tallow ration contained a 46 003000000 003 3003 0.0000000 .003000000 00 0000000000 30083003 00 0003 .00 .v n0 0 30000000000 0000000000 3008300083. .00.Vm0 30 .00030000 30.0 003 000303 003000000 000000000000 00 00>00 003 30 300000000 0030000000000 000 “200000000050 00300 08.00 003 mc0>00 000 m0d00>0 .0300 00000000 00.0 0 0000.003 0 0000000004 0000 000.0 000.0 00005.0 0000.0 00005.0 000.0 0000.0 3.3.80 380300510 800.0 000500580300 00.0 00.0 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0090 00.0 05.0 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0000300> 00008203000 H0>0 30.000000 0030 0000.0 0000 .0 0000.0 0000.0 000.0 000.0 0050.0 0.0003000» 000500 3000 n0>o 30.000000 00000 0000.0 000.0 0000.0 0000.0 005.0 000.0 000.0 00H 3000 00>0 30.3000 00350 00.0 00.0 00.0 05.0 05.0 00.0 00.0 00.H 3000 00>0 30.00000 00000 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.H 30.3.0 00>0 30.000000 003.00 00.0 55.0 00.0 05.0 50.0 00.0 00.0 0000000000>o 303000 00000 00003 0 00003 0 0x003 0 00:00 .000 003000 .000 0000.0 003000 0300 . 50000.0. . 30000.0. . 30000.0. .00 300.0000 0030G000 . 00 .3000 . 00.3000 000800 300830000. N .000 @030 0.402% 020 3,202.20 my >0 0.200.200 0000 03.02»: 00 £002 0050000 0 0.01000wa 47 higher level of fat and more myristic acid than the control ration, this indicates that dietary myristic acid is not selectively deposited. There seemed to be a slight effect due to maturity as the fat from the final control group contained more myristic acid than fat from the initial control group. This would indicate that a selective synthesis and deposition of myristic acid may occur as the hogs became older. Table 7 lists the adjusted means of the linoleic acid content by treatments and sample sites. There was a highly significant treatment difference in all of the fat locations studied. However, the effects were much less evident in the intramuscular fat than in the remaining locations. Except for the linoleic acid content in the leaf fat from both control groups, the level of linoleic acid in the intramuscular fat tended to be lower than for the remaining fat locations. These findings agree with those of Ostrander and Dugan (1962), and Greer ital. (1965), who reported that backfat contained more linoleic acid than intramuscular fat. Fat from hogs fed safflower oil contained significantly more linoleic acid than that from control or tallow-fed hogs. This was expected since the safflower oil ration contained more linoleic acid than either of the other rations. Since the level of linoleic acid is lower in samples from the final controls than the initial controls, this would indicate that maturity has an effect upon decreasing the linoleic acid content. These findings agree with those of Sinkgtfl. (1964). 48 .00 .v.n0 .0 30000000000 0000000000 300830000. 03.. .0030000 30.0 00”. 000303 003000000 0000000000000 .00 00>00 003 30 300000.000 0030000000000 000 3000000000000 00300 000000 003 000>00 300 00d00>0 .0300 00000000 000 0 00.0000”. 0 0000000000004 0000 5 M4m0 30.000000 00330 0000.00 000.00 005.00 000.50 000.00 000.00 0005.00 v000000003 000850 3000 036 30.000000 00000 000.2 02.2 03.00. 000.00 08.0... 000.2 08.2 in: .93 3.6 30.00000 0030 32.2 02.00 000.00 03.00 0.2.2 0.8.2 003...; £0 :2 .88 30.02000 00000 0.2.0.2 000.00 08.00 «2.0m 000.00 0.3.2 30.0.2 3...: .30 .88 30.00000 0030 000.00 0000.00 000.00 000.00 000.00 000.00 0000.00 .3000 30000 00>0 00.00000 00000 $62.. 0 38... 0 38... N 020 .00 00:0: .00 09.0. 02:3 8:. . 30000.0. . 30000.0. . 30000.0. 00 300.000 00 3000.00 .003000 .003000 00000000 3000030008 :00 00000 0.00200 02... 00202000 00 00 0.200.200 0000. 00010023 00 02302 000000.00. 49 Apparently the tallow exerted a significant effect upon lowering the linoleic acid content of the depot fat from the hogs previously fed safflower oil. Examination of Table 7 shows that, except for intramuscular fat, samples from hogs fed tallow for 2 weeks contained significantly less linoleic acid than those from the safflower oil groups. In most cases, there was significantly less linoleic acid in the fat from hogs fed tallow for 4 weeks as compared to those fed tallow for 2 weeks. After 6 weeks on tallow, the linoleic acid content tended to be lower than that from hogs fed tallow for 4 weeks, but greater than that from control hogs. Examination of the linoleic acid content of the rations (Table 1) and of the depot fats (Table 7), indicated that the linoleic acid content in depot fat tends to parallel the total amount in the ration. This would suggest a preferential deposition of linoleic acid. These results are in agreement with much of the earlier work (Ellis and Isbell, 1926a; Banks and Hilditch, 1932; Hilditch SEE}: , 1939; Shorland and de la Mare, 1945a; and Dahl and Persson, 1965). The adjusted means of the oleic acid content are listed in Table 8. There was a highly significant treatment difference at all of the fat locations studied. As with linoleic acid, differences in the oleic acid content were much less evident in the intramuscular fat than in the remaining fat locations. The levels of oleic acid tended to be slightly higher in the intramuscular fat than in the other fat locations. This is 50 .0o .Vn0 0 00000000000 0000000000 000800000. .3. .00000000 000 000 000003 0000000000 000000000000 00 00300 000 00 000000000 0000000000000 000 000000000000 00300 0800 000 00.300 ”.00 00000000 .0000 00000000 000 0. 0000000 0 00000000030 0000 0000.000 00 000.0000 0000 .0000 000.00 0000 .00 0000.00 0000.00 03000000 058000000010 8000 0000000800000 0000.000 0000 .00 0000 .00 00.0 .00 0000 .00 000.000 000.000 03..A 000 00010 000.000 000.000 000 .00 000.00 00.0.00 000.000 000.000 v“3000000000, 000800 0000 00>0 00000000 00000 0000.00V 0000 .00 0000 .00 000 .00 0000. 00 000 .000 000 .000 0300000000..“ 000800 0000 00>0 00000000 00000 00.0.2. 000.00 020.2” 000.00 02 .2. 0000.00 050.0 3.000 00.00 026 0.000000 000.00 0000.000 0000.000 000 .00 000.00 000.00 000.00.. 000.000 v0.0000 0000 00>0 0003000 00000 000.00. 03.00 00.0.00 000.3. 08.? 0:100 0233 in: 3.00 00.6 00000000 0030 0000.00» 0000.00 0000.00 000 .00 000.00 000.00 0000.00» v“30000 00000 00>0 000x000 00000 00003 0 00003 00 00003 0 00000 .000 0000000 .000 I00000 0000000 0000 . 30000.0. . 30000.0. . 30000.0. 00 3000000 00 3000000 .0000000 . 00 00000 0000800 000800000. 0.1.0.0 00000 040230 07:. 0 0.0100040. 0HZH§B0 0 08.2 .m «8.0 0000.0 02.0 08.2.0 068.0 303.0 .0. 010.80 008030084 8000 00000000000000 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.000010 0000 .m 000 .0 0000 .0 000 . 0 00cm .0 000.0 000 . m 00000003 000500 ”.000 0030 00.00000 0000 03.0 £00.». 008.0 08.... £09m 0000.0 0000.0 30809. .2383 $2 0030 00.000000 00000 0000.0 0000.0 0000.0 000.0 0000.0 000.0 0000.0 000 u.000 0030 00.000000 00000 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0 000.0 000.0 000 0000 0030 00 000 0000 0 00000 0 0.00.3000 00:00 0000.0 000.0 0000.0 000.0 0000.0 000.0 0000.0 000 0000.0 0030 00.000000 00000 0000.0 0000.0 0000.0 000.0 0000.0 000.0 0000.0 000 0000.0 0030 00.00000 00000 00003 0 00003 0 00003 0 0000.0 .000 0000000 .000 0000.0 0000000 0000 . 30000.0. . 30000.0. . 30000.0. 00 3000000 00 300.0000 .0000000 .0000000 0090000 000800000. 0.1.0 00000 0.00240 02¢. 0 HdmflH. 0.5/00000.0. <00 ~00. >00 .HZHBZOO Q0O< 00004080210000 .00 07001002 0000800005000 53 There was not much difference in the level of palmitoleic acid between the samples from the initial safflower oil group and that from the tallow group after 2 weeks. The pr0portion of palmitoleic acid in. the fat from hogs fed tallow for 6 weeks tended to be greater than that in fat from hogs fed safflower oil. This indicates that dietary tallow increased the palmitoleic acid content in the fat from hogs previously fed safflower oil. There is no apparent explanation as to why the level of palmitoleic acid was lower in the fat from hogs fed tallow for 4 weeks than it was in the fat from the 2 week or 6 week tallow group. It is noted that the amount of palmitoleic acid in the tallow ration was much greater than in either of the other rations (Table 1). Thus, it might be expected that fat from hogs fed tallow for 6 weeks would contain a higher level of palmitoleic acid than the fat produced from the control ration. Since this did not happen, it is possible that palmitoleic acid is not selectively deposited from dietary fat. Table 10 summarizes the fatty acid composition of backfat. The greatest changes due to diet occurred for linoleic and oleic acids. Changes in the amount of linoleic acid can be almost entirely explained by the amounts in the rations. The evidence presented indicates that hogs preferentially deposit dietary linoleic acid. However, the changes in the level of oleic acid can not be explained by diet nearly as well as those of linoleic acid. This would suggest that some other factor may control the level of oleic acid in depot fat. 54 .00000 0.3000 000 .00 0000 00 0000000 0000.00.00 000 m 0w50000 m 00000.0. 00m .0000 003300 000 .0. 0m50000 0 00000000000000 00m N 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 :00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 :00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00. 00.00 2.00 00.00 000 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 000 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.0 3.0 00.0 00.0 000 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 02: 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00000300 00000 0000... 0 00003 0 00003 0 0000 .00 000000 .00 0000 00:05 1 300 . 30000.0. . 30000.0. . 30000.0. 00 3000.00m 00 3000.00m .0000000 .0000000 >30h 00000000008 0.1.00 00.202.20.00 00 0.000000 20 0200200 0000 000.000 0.00 00 02402 00000000. 000. 00 00040034 00 Hdmsb 55 It is evident that there is a definite change in the total saturated fatty acid content of backfat, which can be attributed to diet. Much of the change is accounted for by the level of palmitic acid, but m yristic and stearic acids are also affected in a similar manner. Although much of the change in saturated fatty acid composition can be attributed to differences of the various saturated fatty acids in the diet, diet does not seem to explain all of the alterations. The preferential deposition of linoleic acid appeared to have an effect upon lowering the degree of saturation. These results agree with those of Ellis and Hankins (1925), Ellis and Zeller (1930), and Sink e_tal_. , (1964), but disagree with those of Shorland and de la Mare (1945b) and Dahl (1958), who indicated that as the oleic acid content increased, the degree of saturation decreased. Results suggest that the hog attempts to maintain a more constant level of total saturated fatty acids than can be explained by the level of linoleic acid. The hog appears to accomplish this by regulating the deposition of oleic acid. Dahl and Persson (1965) previously reported similar results. Palmitoleic acid seems to behave in much the same manner as oleic acid. By examining the fatty acid composition of the control groups (Table 10), the effects of maturity can be studied. As hogs mature, 56 the degree of saturation seems to increase about the same amount as the linoleic acid content decreases. The level of myristic, palmitic, and stearic acids all increase, but the increase in stearic acid is the greatest. The effects of maturity upon the levels of stearic acid are also evident in the backfat from safflower oil-fed hogs. Maturity seems to have little effect upon the levels of oleic and palmitoleic acids. A comparison of the fatty acid composition of backfat from control and safflower oil-fed hogs (Table 10) indicates that diet can have a pronounced effect upon increasing the unsaturated fatty acid content, particularly of linoleic acid, to an extent where it may compare favorably with vegetable oils. Thus, pork fat might be used to advantage in human diets to maintain a low serum cholesterol level. However, before making such a postulation, the work of Elson (1964), who reported that the triglyceride structure of lard did not adapt itself to reducing serum cholesterol levels, must be further investigated. The question arises as to the reason why the degree of saturation was less in the fat from the group on tallow for 6 weeks as compared to the group on the same ration for 4 weeks. Most of this change appears to be due to a decrease in palmitic acid. It was suspected that environmental temperature may have exerted an influence (Henriques and Hansen, 1901; Sinclair, 1936). However, in checking with the U. S. Weather Bureau, it was found that there was essentially no 57 difference in the average daily mean temperature for either the one or the two week period before the slaughter of the groups concerned. Carcass firmness scores (Table 2) appear to be directly related to the degree of saturation and inversely related to the linoleic acid content of backfat (Table 10). Bhattacharya and Hilditch (1931) and Banks and Hilditch (1932) indicated that soft fat was due to a high level of linoleic acid. Hilditch 353.1.“ (1939) disagreed slightly, stating that increases in the levels of both linoleic and oleic acids caused a soft fat. However, Blumer _e_ta_l. (1957) report ed that the oleic acid content has little effect on fat firmness . Rapidity of Fatty Acid Changes in ReSponse to Diet Results indicate that the major changes in fatty acid composition occur within 4 - 5 weeks on any given diet. The fatty acid composition of the fat from the final safflower oil group (as seen in Table 10 and as statistically analyzed in Tables 3 - 9) was not significantly different from that of the initial safflower oil group. Although the linoleic acid content was found to change markedly as a result of diet, the level of the initial and final safflower groups was practically identical. Examination of the changes in the fatty acid pattern of fat from pigs fed tallow showed that the major alterations occurred during the first 4 weeks. 58 Differences in Fatty Acid Changes due to Sample Sites The fatty acid composition of intramuscular fat was affected much less than that of leaf fat or backfat (Tables 3- 9). Table 3 indicates that the degree of saturation of the intramuscular fat remained fairly constant in the present study. This is consistent with the results of Greer flair (1965), who reported no change in the total saturated fatty acid content of intramuscular fat from hogs fed corn or barley rations at various levels of energy intake. There was no appreciable difference due to diet for palmitic or stearic acid contents of intramuscular fat (Tables 4 - 5). The myristic acid content of the intramuscular fat was affected more than that of backfat or leaf fat. The amount of linoleic and oleic acid in the intramuscular fat was affected by diet, but the changes were much less extensive than they were in the leaf fat or backfat (Tables 8 - 9). The changes of these two acids in the intramuscular fat also appeared to occur more slowly than at the other sample sites. Even though the linoleic acid content of the intra- muscular fat was altered, a constant degree of saturation was maintained because the level of oleic acid changed to compensate for the linoleic acid change. Table 11 compares the fatty acid composition between the inner and outer layers of backfat. The data presented indicate that the inner backfat layer undergoes more extensive changes than the outer layer. 59 .0030 00.3000 00: 00 0.0000 00 000090 000005.000 .000 0 03000.00: m 00000.0. 00mN .0000 00003.00 .000 0. 03.90.00: 0 000000000030 00m0 00.00 N030” mmé om.m 2.50.0 00.0 m¢.m H0050 00.m N00.m 000.». 0o.m ow.m wwé 000.00 00000 060 M00..V00 00.0000 000.0% 0o.Nm ”EUNM 60.000 mo.0.00 0000.00 0.0.000 Siam 000.0% Skom 0m.0m 00w.m00 om.m00 00000 00w0 0.000.000 w¢.om mm.w~ nwiwm oo.mm mo.m0 00060 000000 00.00 00.NN mo.om 000.03” w0.wm 0m.N0 000.000 00000 Nuw0 No.0 mw.o 0w.o owd owd A0.0.0 ow.o 000000 000.00 mw.o mw.o 90.0 00.0 00.0 No.00 000000 00000 00.0. wwd mw.m N000 omé. omé 0.03m 000.90 3.5 0.0.0 mN.~ 00mg. mw.m No.w 000.0 00000 ouw0 $0.0m o¢.NN m0.0N mm.w0 mw.m0 NMJVN 00 .MN .0035 ww.0m 000.60... 000.0N 00.00 oo.w0 000.mN oo.m~ 00000 ox: ON.0N ON.om owfim NNJN wo.mN 00 .Nm ohéom 000000 000000.300 0.00.00” m0.mm mméom om§m 00.0.00... mm.mm 000.mm 00000 0000.0. 03003 0 000003 0 0x003 N 00000 .000 0000000 .000 00000 0000000 00.000 1 l10000 . 30000.0. . 30000.0. . 30000.0. .00 300000m .00 300000m . 00 .3000 . 00.00000 000300m 300.00 0009000000. 0.0 0.00 BZHEHEMH. >m0 HQhMUflm .00 mmmwj ”0.100.000 QZ< mHZ700 ”00.0.0. .00 7000.0.0m0n00200 Q0O< 030.940 ”00.0.0. 0000 944.002 QHHmDhQ< ”00.0.0. .00 mHU< 00 HAQHH. 60 These results agree with those previously reported by Bhattacharya and Hilditch (1931), but are in contrast to the work of Garton gal. (1952). There is also some evidence (Tables 3, 4, and 7) that backfat from over the last rib is affected less extensively than that from over the first rib or last lumbar vertebra. The data in Table 11 reveal that the inner backfat layer from control hogs contained about 3.3% more total saturated fatty acids than the outer layer. In the safflower oil-fed hogs, the outer layer of backfat was nearly as saturated as the inner layer. The data shown in Table 3 indicate that the outer layer of backfat from safflower oil-fed hogs was sometimes more saturated than the inner layer at the sites of the first rib and last lumbar vertebra. However, the inner layer from over the last rib still contained about 2% more saturated fatty acids than the outer . In backfat from the tallow-fed hogs, the inner layers were more saturated than the outer layers at all of the backfat locations studied. This confirms the postulation that the inner backfat layer is affected more extensively by diet than the outer layer. The changes in the total saturated fatty acids of the two backfat layers were mainly accounted for by palmitic acid. Table 11 indicates ._ that in control hogs the inner backfat layer contained more palmitic acid than the outer. In the safflower oil-fed hogs, however, the outer layer of backfat contained just as much or more palmitic acid than the 61 inner layer. In the backfat from tallow-fed hogs, the inner layer again contains more palmitic acid than the outer layer. The differences in backfat from over the last rib as compared to that from over the first rib and last lumbar vertebra as noted for total saturated fatty acids, were also evident for palmitic acid (Table 4). Table 11 shows that the linoleic acid content in the outer backfat layer of the control hogs was just as great or greater than it was in the inner layer. However, the inner layer of backfat from pigs fed safflower oil contained more linoleic acid than the outer layer. This same relationship was apparent in the backfat from the tallow-fed hogs, but the difference became progressively less as the length of time on tallow was increased. Inspection of Table 7 shows that the effects just discussed were more evident in the backfat from over the first rib and last lumbar vertebra than they were in backfat from over the last rib. Apparently the inner backfat layer does not undergo greater changes than the outer layer for all of the fatty acids. The inner layer of backfat contained more stearic and less oleic acid than the outer layer in all of the treatment groups (Table 11). Except for the backfat from the initial control group, the outer layer contained just as much or more myristic acid than the inner layer. The outer backfat layer contained more palmitoleic acid'than the inner layer in all treatments except for the 6 week tallow group. 62 Examination of Tables 3- 9 indicate that the fatty acid changes occurring in leaf fat are intermediate in degree between those of the inner and outer layers of backfat. Bhattacharya and Hilditch (1931) had previously stated that the fatty acid changes in the leaf fat were very similar to those of the inner layer of backfat. Effect of Sex upon the Fatty Acid Composition The adjusted means for each of the fatty acids according to sex are listed in Table 12. These data show that significant sex differences occur for total saturated fatty acids, palmitic acid, stearic acid, and linoleic acid. There were no differences attributable to sex in any of the fat locations for myristic acid, oleic acid, and palmitoleic acid. There was essentially no difference due to sex for any of the fatty acids in the intramuscular fat. Barrows contained more total saturated fatty acids in the leaf fat and backfat than gilts. The levels of palmitic and stearic acid in the leaf fat and backfat of barrows were higher than those in the same sample sites of gilts. The difference in degree of saturation appeared to be accounted for by the level of linoleic acid, since the fat from gilts contained more linoleic acid than that from barrows. It might be eXpected that the reason fat from barrows was more saturated than that from gilts is because barrows tend to have a greater ADJUSTED MEANS OF THE FATTY ACID COMPOSITION IN TABLE 12 FAT FROM BARROWS AND GILTS BY SAMPLE SITES ((7.)1 Fatty acid _ Total saturated 16:0 18:0 Sampl_e site Barrow 93.1.1 Barrow Gilt Barrow Gilt Inner backfat over first rib 31.41 29.15 22.77 21.44 7.78 6.93 Outer backfat over first rib 29.75* 26.82 22.92W 20.52 5.89 5.41 Inner backfat over last rib 32.70* 29.37 22.97 21.38 8.88* 7.16 Outer backfat over last rib 29.59** 26.32 22.09* 20.24 6.53* 5.20 Inner backfat over last lumbar vertebra 32.96** 29.36 23.09 21.47 9.00* 7.08 Outer backfat over last lumbar vertebra 30.88* 28.42 22.58 21.07 7.37 6.40 Leaf fat 37.90** 32.70 26.00** 23.15 10.93* 8.72 Intramuscular from Longissimus dorsi 30.18 29.34 23.94 23.10 5.46 5.54 1See Appendices C through J for original data. ** Sex difference significant at P<.01.’ * Sex difference significant at P(.05. TABLE 12 - Continued 63 Fatty acid 14:0 18:2 18:1 16:1 Barrow Gilt Barrow Gilt Barrow Gilt Barrow Gilt 0.86 0.79 24.31* 27.30 38.62 38.02 4.11 4.28 0.96 0.88 22.45** 26.08 41.25 40.67 4.84 4.81 0.85 0.83 23.31* 26.15 38.79 38.57 3.69 4.40 0.96 0.85 22.78** 26.40 41.35 41.23 4.60 4.59 0.88 0.81 23.26** 26.91 37.78 38.14 4.35 4.15 0.93 0.95 22.76 25.08 40.26 40.19 4.50 4.55 0.98 0.84 20.10** 25.47 36.50 36.36 4.17 4.31 0.77 0.70 17.85 17.58 45.27 46.40 5.44 5.26 64 backfat thickness. Thus, a greater pr0portion of the depot fat from barrows would have been synthesized from non-lipid sources, tending to make it more saturated (Ellis and Hankins, 1925). On examining the backfat thickness of each hog (Appendix A) as Opposed to the degree of saturation of the various fat locations (Appendices C - J), it is found that the more highly saturated fat from barrows is not always explained by differences in backfat thickness. Thus, some other factor must be responsible for the sex difference, although the reason is not evident from this study. Correlation Coefficients of the Individual Fatty Acids with Degree of Saturation. Table 13 lists the simple correlation coefficients between the % of the various fatty acids and the % of total saturated fatty acids for each of the sample sites. A high positive correlation was evident between the palmitic acid content and the total saturated fatty acid content. In all of the fat locations, except for the intramuscular fat, there was a high negative correlation between the linoleic acid content and the degree of saturation. This would indicate that the levels of total saturated fatty acids in leaf fat and backfat are directly controlled by palmitic acid, and inversely controlled by linoleic acid. 65 TABLE 13 SIMPLE CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN EACH OF THE FATTY ACIDS AND THE AMOUNT OF TOTAL SATURATED FATTY ACIDS BY SAMPLE SITES Fatty acid Sample site 16:0 18:0 14:0 18:2 18:1 16:1 Inner backfat over first rib 0.93 0.77 0.67 -.86 0.61 0.44 Outer backfat over first rib 0.91 0.53 0.51 -.67 0.38 0.36 Inner backfat over last rib 0.91 0.72 0.63 4.83 0.64 0. 10 Outer backfat over last rib 0.94 0.72 0.55 -.81 0.59 0.27 Inner backfat over last lumbar vertebra 0.87 0.52 0.68 -.87 0.69 0.32 Outer backfat over last lumbar vertebra 0.74 0.68 0.60 -.80 0.60 0.18 Leaf fat 0.86 0.77 0.68 -.76 0.46 0.20 Intramuscular from Longissimus 1033i 0.96 0.33 0.29 -.03 -.28 0.11 Effect of Diet upon Palatability The taste panel scores and shear values of the samples by treatments are listed in Table 14. It can be seen that there was a tendency for the loin roast samples from both the safflower oil and tallow-fed hogs to be preferred over the control samples. However, analysis of variance showed that there was no significant difference due to treatment for 66 tenderness, juiciness, flavor, overall acceptability, and Warner- Bratzler shear values. This suggests that none of the rations used in this experiment had any deleterious effects upon the eating qualities of the pork produced. TABLE 14 EFFECT OF TREATMENT UPON TASTE PANEL SCORES AND WARNER-BRATZLER SHEAR VALUES1 Overall 2 Tendegness Treatment acceptabilitx2 Flavor Juicinessz Panel“ Shear Control, initial 5.87 6.09 5.22 6.39 10.48 Control, final 5.93 5.71 5.59 6.76 8.92 Safflower oil, initial 6.07 6.37 5.46 6.24 9.18 Safflower oil, final 6.19 6.35 5.80 6.04 10.80 Tallow, Zweeks 6.20 6.48 6.11 6.22 9.73 Tallow, 4weeks 5.98 6.11 5.80 6.59 9.91 Tallow, 6weeks 6.15 6.24 6.00 6.17 10.10 1See Appendix K for the data of each sample. 2Analysis of variance showed no treatment difference. SUMMA R Y A ND CONCLUSIONS A study was made to determine the effects of diet upon the fatty acid composition of leaf fat, intramuscular fat from the 1751331911232. darjimuscle, and both the inner and outer layers of backfat from over the first rib, last rib, and last lumbar vertebra. The effects of a 10% safflower oil ration were compared to a control ration. In addition, the effects of a 10% tallow ration upon the. fatty acid composition of hogs previously fed 10% safflower oil were also studied. Carcasses from the control hogs were definitely firmer than those from safflower oil-fed hogs. Feeding tallow to hogs previously fed safflower oil improved carcass firmness. How ever, the carcasses from hogs fed tallow for 6 weeks were still not as firm as the control carcasses. In both the control and safflower oil-fed hogs, the carcasses from the final groups were firmer than those from the respective initial groups. The leaf fat and backfat from hogs fed safflower oil contained less total saturated fatty acids than that from control hogs. This difference was mainly due to palmitic acid, but the levels of myristic and stearic acids were slightly lower in. the fat from the safflower oil-fed hogs than that from controls. There was an increase in all of the saturated fatty acids in the fat of tallow-fed hogs over those fed safflower oil. 67 68 Fat from safflower oil-fed hogs contained significantly more linoleic acid and significantly less oleic acid than the fat from control hogs. Feeding tallow tended to restore the levels of linoleic and oleic acids to the levels in. the fat of control animals. The major fatty acid changes due to diet occurred within 4 - 5 weeks. This became evident when comparing the fatty acid composition of the fat from the initial and final safflower oil groups, and again when comparing the composition of fat from hogs fed tallow for 2, 4, and 6 weeks. The fatty acid composition of the intramuscular fat was affected much less by diet than was the composition of the leaf fat or backfat. The inner layer of backfat underwent more extensive changes than the outer layer. The effect was less evident in backfat from over the last rib than it was over the first rib or last lumbar vertebra. Leaf fat was affected less than the inner backfat layer, but more than the outer layer of backfat. The palmitic acid content had a high positive correlation with the level of total saturated fatty acids, while the linoleic acid content had a high negative correlation with the degree of saturation. Linoleic acid in the diet appeared to be preferentially deposited in the depot fat of the hog, and thereby tended to lower the level of total saturated fatty acids. In an attempt to maintain. a constant degree of saturation, the hog apparently varies the level of oleic acid to compensate for the changes in linoleic acid. 69 The degree of saturation appeared to be responsible for carcass firmness. Since the level of linoleic acid influences the degree of saturation, it is possible that the linoleic acid content exerted a greater effect upon carcass firmness than the degree of saturation. It was found that ration could alter the fatty acid composition of pork fat to an extent where it may have a favorable effect upon lowering serum cholesterol levels of humans. However, the adverse effects of the triglyceride structure of lard upon this phenomena must be further investigated. There was a slight tendency for the loin samples of the safflower oil and tallow-fed hogs to be preferred over the control samples. How- ever, there was no significant difference in the consumer preference of loin roasts from any of the treatment groups. The depot fat from barrows contained a higher level of total saturated fatty acids than did that of gilts. The leaf fat and backfat of barrows contained more palmitic and stearic acids than did similar fat samples from gilts. Gilts deposited a higher level of linoleic acid in their depot fat than did barrows. There was no sex difference in the fatty acid composition of the intramuscular fat. BIB LIOGR A PHY Aftergood, L., H. J. Deuel, Jr., and R. B. Alfin - Slater. 1957. The comparative effects of cottonseed oil and lard on cholesterol levels in the tissues of rats. J. Nutr. 62:129. Ahrens, E. H., Jr., J. Hirsch, M. L. Peterson, W. Stoffel, and J. W. Farquhar. 1959. Symposium on significance of lowered cholesterol levels. J. Amer. Med. Assoc. 170:2198. Ahrens, E. H., Jr., W. Insull, Jr., R. Blomstrand, J. Hirsch, T. T. Tsaltas, and M. L. Peterson. 1957. The influence of dietary fats on serum-lipid levels in man. Lancet 272:943. Ahrens, E. H., Jr., C. H. Blankenhorn, and T. T. Tsaltas, 1954. Effect on human serum lipids of substituting plant for animal fat in diet. Proc. Soc. Expt. Biol. Med. 86:872. Avigan, J. and D. Steinberg. 1958. Effects of saturated and unsaturated fat on cholesterol metabolism in the rat. Proc. Soc. Expt. Biol. Med. 97:814. Banks, A. and T. P. Hilditch. 1932. The body fats of the pig. 11. Some aspects of the formation of animal depot fats suggested by the composition of their glycerides and fatty acids. Biochem. J. 26:298. Bennett, R. L. 1900. The fattening value of certain foods and feeding experiments to harden soft pork. Ark. Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 65. Bennett, R. L. 1898. Fattening value of certain foods gathered by pigs. Ark. Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 54. Bhattacharya, R. and T. P. Hilditch. 1931. The body fats of the pig. 1. Influence of ingested fat on the component fatty acids. Biochem. J. 25:1954. Blumer, T. N., E. R. Barrick, W. L. Brown, F. H. Smith, and W. W. G. Smart, Jr. 1957. Influence of changing the kind of fat in the diet at various weight intervals on carcass fat characteristics of swine. J. An. Sci. 16:68. 70 Brown, J. B. 1931. The nature of the highly unsaturated fatty acids stored in the lard from pigs fed on menhaden oil. J. Biol. Chem. 90:133. Bull, 5., W. E. Carroll, F. C. Olson, G. E. Hunt,, and J. H. Longwell. 1931. Effect of soybeans and soybean oil meal on quality of pork. 111. Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 366. Burk, L. B. 1922. Shrinkage of soft pork under commercial conditions. U. S. D. A. Bull. 1086. Burk,, L. B. and P. V. Ewing. 1919. Hardening peanut-fed hogs. Texas Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 242. Burk, L. B. 1918a. The influence of peanuts and rice bran on the quality of pork. Texas Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 224. Burk, L. B. 1918b. Influence of peanut meal on quality of pork. Texas Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 228. Burk, L. B. 1916. Peanut meal and ground whole processed peanuts for hogs. Texas Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 201. Burns, J. C. 1910. Hog feeding experiments. Texas Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 131. Callow, E. H. 1935. Rep. Food Invest. Bd., London. As cited by F. B. Shorland and P. B. D. de la Mare. 1945. Studies on the fats of the bacon pig with reference to carcass quality: The relation between growth rate and chemical composition of pig depot fat. J. Agric. Sci. 35:39. Dahl, O. and Kai-Ake Persson. 1965. Properties of animal depot fat in relation to dietary fat. J. Sci. Food Agric. 16:452. Dahl, O. 1958. The characteristics of slaughter animal depot fats and their interrelations. Acta Agric. Scand. Suppl. 3. Dean, H. K. and T. P. Hilditch. 1933. The body fats of the pig. III. The influence of body temperature on the composition of depot fats. Biochem. J. 27:1950. de la Mare, P. B. D. and F. B. Shorland. 1944. A detailed analysis of the back fat of the pig with special reference to the C20_22 unsaturated acids. Analyst 69:337. Dugan, L. R. Jr., G. W. McGinnis, and D. V. Vadehra. 1966. Low temperature direct methylation of lipids in biological materials. Lipids. In press. Duggar, J. F. 1903. Grazing and feeding experiments with pigs. Ala. Agric. Eth. Sta. Bull. 122. Duggar, J. F. 1898. Peanuts, cowpeas, and sweet potatoes as food for pigs. Ala. Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 93. Dvorachek, H. E. and H. A. Sandhouse. 1918. Soft pork from rice bran. Ark. Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 142. Ellis, N. R., C. S. Rothwell, and W. 0. Pool. 1931. The effect of ingested cottonseed oil on the composition of body fat. J. Biol. Chem. 92:385. Ellis, N. R. and J. H. Zeller. 1930. Soft pork studies. IV. The influence of a ration low in fat upon the composition of the body fat of hogs. J. Biol. Chem. 89:185. Ellis, N. R. 1926. Soft pork: A serious economic problem. J. Oil and Fat Ind. 3:437. Ellis, N. R. and H. S. Isbell. 1926a. Soft pork studies. II. The influence of the character of the ration upon the composition of the body fat of hogs. J. Biol. Chem. 69:219. Ellis, N. R. and H. S. Isbell. 1926b. Soft pork studies. III. The effect of food fat upon body fat as shown by the separation of the individual fatty acids of the body fat. J. Biol. Chem. 69:239. Ellis, N. R. and O. G. Hankins. 1925. Soft pork studies. 1. Formation ‘ of fat in the pig on a ration moderately low in fat. J. Biol. Chem. 66:101. Elson, C. E. 1964. Effects of the structural arrangement of dietary triglycerides on the lipid composition of rat tissues. Ph. D. Thesis. Mich. State Univ. Evrard, E., J. VanDen Bosch, P. De Somer, and J. V. Joossens. 1962. Cholesterol ester fatty acid patterns of plasma, atheromata and liver of cholesterol-fed rabbits. J. Nutr. 76:219. 73 Garton, G. A. and W. R. H. Duncan. 1954. Dietary fat and body fat: The composition of the back fats of pigs fed on a diet rich in cod-liver oil and lard. Biochem. J. 57:120. Garton, G. A., T. P. Hilditch, and M. L. Meara. 1952. The composition of the depot fats of a pig fed on a diet rich in whale oil. Biochem. J. 50:517. Goldsmith, G. A. 1961. Highlights on the cholesterol fats, diets, and atherosclerosis problem. J. Amer. Med. Assoc. 176:783. Gray, D. T. 1916. The cheapening effect of peanuts, soybeans, and mast upon the bodies of hogs. N. C. Agric. Expt. Sta. Ann. Rpt. p. 28. Greer, S. A. N., V. W. Hays, V. C. Speer, J. T. McCall, and E. G. Hammond. 1965. Effects of level of corn-and barley-base diets on performance and body composition of swine. J. An. Sci. 24:1008. Hankins, O. G. 1930. Pork firmness is modified by feed and other factors. U. S. D. A. Yearbook of Agriculture. p. 415. Hankins, O. G., N. R. Ellis, and J. H. Zeller. 1928. Some results of soft-pork investigations, II. U. S. D. A. Bull. 1492. Hankins, O. G. and N. R. Ellis, 1926. Some results of soft-pork inveStigationS. U. S. D. A. B1111. 14070 Helser, M. D., F. J. Beard, C. C. Culbertson, and B. H. Thomas. 1939. Influence of different amounts of soybeans and their products upon the quality of pork and the character and keeping qualities of lard. Ia. Agric. Expt. Sta. Ann. Rpt. p. 91. Henriques, V. and C. Hansen. 1901. Skand. Arch. Physiol. 11:151. As cited by H. K. Dean and T. P. Hilditch. 1933. The body fats of the pig. III. The influence of body temperature on the composition of depot fats. Biochem. J. 27:1950. Hilditch, T. P. and W. H. Pedelty. 1940. The influence of prolonged starvation on the composition of pig depot fats. Biochem. J. 34:40. Hilditch, T. P., C. H. Lea, and W. H. Pedelty. 1939. The influence of low and high planes of nutrition on the composition and synthesis of fat in the pig. Biochem. J. 33:493. 74 Hilditch, T. P. and W. J. Stainsby. 1935. XII. The body fats of the pig. IV. Progressive hydrogenation as an aid in the study of glyceride structure. Biochem. J. 29:90. Hostetler, E. H. and J. O. Halverson. 1940. Feeding soybeans to pigs: The effect on gains and a method of producing firm carcasses. N. C. Agric. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull. 63. Hostetler, E. H., J. O. Halverson, and F. W. Sherwood. 1939. Production of firm pork from peanut-fed pigs: An investigation of the factors concerned in the production of soft pork when peanuts are fed and of methods by which firm pork can be produced. N. C. Agric. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull. 61. Hughes, E. H. 1922. Study of rice and rice by-products for fattening swine. Proc. Amer. Soc. An. Prod. 15:59. Jagannathan, S. N. 1962a. Effect of feeding fat blends of hydrogenated groundnut (peanut) fat and cottonseed oil containing different levels of linoleic acid on serum cholesterol levels in monkeys (Macaca radiata) and liver cholesterol concentration in cholesterol-fed rats. J. Nutr. 77:317. Jagannathan, S. N. 1962b. Effect of feeding different dietary fat mixtures providing the same amount of linoleic acid, on serum cholesterol levels in monkeys and liver cholesterol concentration in cholesterol-fed rats. J. Nutr. 77:323. Jeanrenaud, B. 1961. Dynamic aspects of adipose tissue metabolism: A review. Metabolism 10:535. Keys, A., J. T. Anderson, M. Aresu, G. Biorck, J. F. Brock, B. Bronte-Stewart, F. Fidanza, M. H. Keys, H. Malmos, A. P0ppi, T. Postilli, B. Swahn, and A. del Vecchio. 1956. Physical activity and diet in p0pulations differing in serum cholesterol. J. Clin. Invest. 35:1173. Longenecker, H. 1939a. Deposition and utilization of fatty acids. I. Fat synthesis from high carbohydrate and high protein diets in fasted rats. J. Biol. Chem. 128:645. Longenecker, H. 1939b. Deposition and utilization of fatty acids. II. The non-preferential utilization and slow replacement of depot fat consisting mainly of oleic and linoleic acids; and a fatty acid analysis of corn oil. J. Biol. Chem. 129:13. 75 Lush, J. L., B. H. Thomas, C. C. Culbertson, and F. J. Beard. 1936. Variations in the softness of lard produced in the record of performance testing (abstract). Proc. Amer. Soc. An. Prod. 29:258. Magidman, P., S. F. Herb, F. E. Luddy, and R. W. Riemenschneider. 1963. Fatty acids of lard. B. Quantitative estimation by silic ic acid and gas-liquid chromatography. J. Amer. Oil Chem. Soc. 40:86. Mattson, F. H., R. A._Volpenheim, and E. S. Lutton. 1964. The distribution of fatty acids in the triglycerides of the artiodactyla. J. Lipid Res. 5:363.. Mattson, F. H. and R. A. Volpenheim. 1963. The specific distribution of unsaturated fatty acids in the triglycerides of plants. J. )Lipid Res. 4:392. McGinnis, G. W. and L. R. Dugan, Jr. 1965. A rapid low temperature method for preparation of methyl esters of fatty acids. J. Amer. Oil Chem. Soc. 42:305. McMeekan, C. P. 1940. Growth and deve10pment in the pig, with special reference to carcass quality characters. I. J. Agric. Sci. 30:276. Mead, J. F. 1966. Present knowledge of fat. Nutr. Rev. 24:33. Merkel, R. A. 1966. Personal communication. Okey, R. and M. M. Lyman. 1957. Dietary fat and cholesterol metabolism. I. Comparative effects of coconut and cottonseed oils at three levels of intake. J. Nutr. 61:523. Ostrander, J. and L. R. Dugan, Jr. 1962. Some differences in composition of covering fat, intermuscular fat, and intra- muscular fat of meat animals. J. Amer. Oil Chem. Soc. 39:178. ' Peifer, J. J. 1966. Hypocholesterolemic effects induced in the rat by specific types of fatty acid unsaturation. J. Nutr. 88:351. Pollak, O. J. 1959. Diet and atherosclerosis -- Variations on a theme. Amer. J. Clin. Nutr. 7:502. 76 Rabinowitz, J. L., R. M. Myerson, and G. T.Woh.l. 1960. Deposition of C14-labelled cholesterol in the atheromatous aorta. Proc. Soc. Expt. Biol. Med. 105:241. Reiser, R., M. C. Williams, M. F. Sorrels, and M. L. Murty. 1963. Biosynthesis of fatty acids and cholesterol as related to diet fat. Arch. Biochem. Bi0phys. 102:276. Robison, W. L. 1946. The influence of the rate of fat deposition on the firmness of the fat of hogs. Ohio Agric. EXpt. Sta. Bull. 664. Robison, W. L. 1931. The causes of soft pork. Ohio Agric. Expt. Sta. Bimonthly Bull. 152. p. 184. Schoenheimer, R. 1942. The Dynamic State of Body Constituents. Hafner Publishing Co. , New York. Scott, E. L. 1930. The influence of the growth and fattening process on the quantity and quality of meat yielded by swine. Ind. Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 340. Scott, J. M. 1922. Soft-pork investigations. Fla. Agric. Eth. Sta. Ann. Rpt. p. 26R. Scott, J. M. 1921. Soft pork studies, II. Fla. Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 160. Scott, J. M. 1918. Feeding experiments. Fla. Agric. Expt. Sta. Ann. Rpt. p. 21R. Shorland, F. B., and P. B. D. de la Mare. 1945a. Studies on the fats of the bacon pig with reference to carcass quality: The effect of ' diet on the component fatty acids of the back fat. J. Agric. Sci. 35:33. Shorland, F. B. and P. B. D. de la Mare. 1945b. Studies on the fats of the bacon pig with reference to carcass quality: The relation between growth rate and chemical Composition of pig depot fat. J. Agric. Sci. 35:39. Shorland, F. B., R. Hansen, and K. J. Hogan. 1944. Studies on the fats of the bacon pig with reference to carcass quality. I. Iodine value of the back fat under different conditions of feeding. Emp. J. Expt. Agric. 12:103. 77 Sinclair, R. D. 1936. Some studies on the causes of soft bacon. Sci. Agric. 17:31. Sink, J. D., J. L. Watkins, J. H. Ziegler, and R. C. Miller. 1964. Analysis of fat deposition in swine by gas-liquid chromatography. J. An. Sci. 23:121. Steel, R. G. D. and J. H. Torrie. 1960. Principles and Proceduresif Statistics. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York. Swell, L., M. D. Law, and C. R. Treadwell. 1962. Tissue cholesterol ester and triglyceride fatty acid composition of rabbits fed cholesterol diets high and low in linoleic acid. J. Nutr. 76:429. Swell, L., M. D. Law, P. E. Schools, Jr., and C. R. Treadwell. 1961. Tissue lipid fatty acid changes following the feeding of high- cholesterol, essential fatty acid-supplemented diets to rabbits. J. Nutr. 75:181. Swell, L., H. Field, Jr., P. E. Schools, Jr., and C. R. Treadwell. 1960a. Fatty acid composition of tissue cholesterol esters in elderly humans with atherosclerosis. Proc. Soc. Expt. Biol. Med. 103:651. Swell, L., H. Field, Jr., P. E. Schools, Jr., and C. R. Treadwell. 1960b. Lipid fatty acid composition of several areas of the aorta in subjects with atherosclerosis. Proc. Soc. Expt. Biol. Med. 105:662. Templeton, G. S. 1920. Improving the quality of peanut fed hogs by finishing in dry lot on corn and tankage; corn and cottonseed meal; corn and velvet beans. Ala. Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 213. Vaughan, M. 1961. The metabolism of adipose tissue in vitro. J. Lipid Res. 2:293. Vestal, C. M. and C. L. Shrewsbury. 1935. The effect of soybeans, soybean oil meal, and tankage on the quality of pork. Ind. Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 400. Vestal, C. M. and C. L. Shrewsbury. 1932. The nutritive value of soybeans with preliminary observations on the quality of pork produced. Proc. Amer. Soc. An. Prod. 25:127. 78 Wakil, S. J. 1964. The synthesis of fatty acids in animal tissues. Metabolism and Physiological Significance of Lipids. Edited by R. M. c. Dawson and D. N. Rhodes. John—Wiley and Sons Ltd., New York. p. 3. Warren, G. R. and D. W. Williams. 1923. Rice bran and rice polish for growing and fattening pigs. Texas Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 313. Weinhouse, S. and E. F. Hirsch. 1940. Chemistry of atherosclerosis. I. Lipid and calcium content of the intima and of the media of the aorta with and without atherosclerosis. Arch. Path. 29:31. White, A., P. Handler, and E. L. Smith. 1964. Principlesgi Biochemistry. 3rd. ed. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York. Wilens, S. L. and C. M. Plair. 1965. Blood cholesterol, nutrition, and atherosclerosis. A necr0psy study. Arch. Int. Med. 116:373. Youngblood, B. 1920. Peanuts and rice bran can be fed to hogs without producing soft pork. Texas Agric. Expt. Sta. Ann. Rpt. p. 17. APPENDIX 79 .800: QumDHN>O Ou QOCN£U 0 000 00308500 of 000.000 000000000 0.83 000000.000 0a.: 00 000000 00008500 00.0 .0000 000 0000.01. .000: >000, .- m 00.00: 1 06 “0000 00000900 .. m 3000 .. N 3.000 0.80, ... 0m .000m ... U “50.200 0 mm .366... 0 £609 .. 0.0 .3668 a .3308 .. E. ..sxoos N .833 .. E. :80 do 8.60066 .. 00 .333 .mo 836003 .. 00 :20 .0328 .. 00 33:3 .Hoteoo .. >00 mmé N.om 0s.m0. 0.000 owm U 0.0. 0N 00.0s 0.00m 0.000. m.0.00 0q- 0 0.0. on 0.0.m 0.0m N100. 0.000 wmm m 0.0. 00 *mm.m 0V.om $.00. 0600 00m O 0.0. 00 *0.0.N N.om w.m0. m.m0u0 N00 0 00.0. 0.0 *mm.m 0.0m 0..00. 0.000 0cm .0 00.0. 00 mm.m 0.0M 0.00. o.mN0 000.0 0 NH. m0 mm.m 0.0.0 0.2. 0.000 000 0 N0. 000 0.0.0.” 00.0.N 0..N0. o.mN0 N00 0 N0. m0 oo.m 0.0M 0.00. m.m00 ~0N O 00 N0 >0.N 0.00. 0.00. 0.0.00 o0N O OO .00 0.0.N N.om 0.000. 0.000 omN m 00 O0 oo.N 0V.>N $.00. m.wc0 N00 0 00.0 0 0.0.N 0s.0.N N200. 0.000 000 m 0.0 w mmd 0.0m m.00. o.N00 0.00 .0 >0 0 oo.m o.om 0.m0. m.N00 m0N O OO 0 oo.m 0.0m 00.0.0. 0.000 CNN m 00 m oo.m 0.0m 00.00. 0.000 ovm m 00 .v 05.0 0.0m 0.00 0.00 om0 O 000 m mmé 00.5w. 0.00 0.000 02 O 0.0 N 0.0.0. 0.0.»... 0.00 0.0000 0000 .0 >0 0 000005.000 0000005 0.000033 0.0000 .03 0000000 03000 0000000 60 wc0000nn0 0000900 003m000m Nxmm 00008000n0. .00 003 40.40 90.40040 0024 mHBmODEm «4 5070000000 80 .0: £0. 05 .805 Eoum 0.9.: ”1008.3 m050m> of 00m 00 came of 3 mmmcxodt 03.30.20 00.20300 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 N0 00 00 00 00 00.0 N0.0 00.0 0.00 00 N0 N0 00 on 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 N0 00 00 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 00 00 00 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 N0 00 0M 00 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 N0 00 00 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 00 0M 00 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 0M 00 00 00 0N.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 00 00 00 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 N0 00 00 N0 N0.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 00 N0 00 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 00 00 00 00 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 NM 00 00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 00 00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 NM 00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 00 00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 N0 00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 00 00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 00 00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 00 00 00 N 00.0 00.0 00.0 0.00 00 NN ON 00 0 a... $3 a: £3 :28: 0.880 3083 :3 a: :3 3.. £0 a: $0 .ochNm Amoco”: .03 0mmocxo0£ 0.850 mmocxoflt “myowm «6.3 000 5010 0330.20 00.9330 0.0.2000 <35 mm 0000.00“n .3003 0 $500000 .. 0.0. 000003 0 $500000 .. 0.0. 003003 N .300000 a N0. 000000 .000 00500000 u 00 00000000 .000 00300000 .- .wO 00.0000 .0000000 ... 00 “0000000 .0000000 a 0.00 om.m mmm 3.0 z: $.30 30 £005 £2-03 00. $6 2.0 A 00.0 00 09:6 0: .605 £010: 00 3.0 3 3.3... 0: £53 £05: 3. 2 .N 00 095. m: .02., £0..£m 00. 8.... *oi 2.0 m0 095. m: 002., £0..£m «0 8.0 .2. 0903 m: 085 £0..£m N0. 0...; 9: . 0908 ma £02., £0 .. o 00 0a.... 3.: 2.0 NM: 09:8 3 x83 £m .. o E. E; 0: 0930 3 085 £0 .. o E. 005 in 3.0 R. .930 w: x83 £2-03 00 005 mom 8 .0 E 1:08 w: 033 £010: 00 Sim .200 00.0 8 30% m: 085 £0-£m. 00 . A 8.... 20 $08 .5 £02., £0 .. o 00 mm ... 82 00.0 00.0 0.0% 03 08.... £0 - o 00 00.... $0 3.0 m0 0930 ...: £35 £2-03 00 3.0 0% 00.0 m0 093% w: 0003 £010: 00 ... 0...; m... 095. m: x83 £0-£m 00 . 8.0 02 090.0 mm. 083 £0 .. o 00 0.0. a 83 A 00.0 0.2 3.0% 03 083 £0 .. o 00 00000 .000 0.0000 AN00\.000V .0000 00000010500. 0000800000. 00000 .0000 00850000 0000 00 0000 000000 .03 0000000000 000.0 080 VUZHUHMhm 0000000000 00704 70040 .00 HB<~0 m 00000700000004 84 3000000000 003 0000 500.0 000.00 0000 .00 000000003 000800000 3 01003.30 003 00 000.: 0000000000 .. ,0. 0.050008 00 2050 000 003 0000000000 00.5 .0000: .. .H 0003003000000 0.300000000Ha0A .40 0000:0034 000 mos 00000 00 N00 0000 000085003 yohH 00.mm. B 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 a 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 a 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 H 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 a 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 a a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00000 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 H a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0I. 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0.50 .0050 0000 0000 0000 0000 .002: 0000 0000 9000 .000 .8 0000 Han—OH. HduOH. 0.030 5:00 000 0.000 000.010 .00 7000000000000 00000.. 00.050 0 NHQZHaniw $0000.20 003 0000 >300 000: 0000 .00 0000000003 00008000000 3 3503.000 005 0: 000.: 00000003 0.. 0.0000008 00 fi080 000 003 000.9080 005 .000000 .. .H. 530300000000 030000.000. .4 0000000034 000 mo: 0000 .00 0000000000000 0000 0000 00.0.: 0.000000 0.0000 0030 000 00 00.50000 00070700 00 7000000000200 0004 0.0.0.00 Q XHQZHnmnH< a 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00. 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 .00 0 a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 a 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 H a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 a 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 .00 0.0.00 000 0000 0000 0000 .008: 0000 0000 000.0 .000 .o: 000 H0008 HNuOH. 0000 0300M 500000.000 003 0000 300.0 000: 0000 .00 000000.03 000000000000 00 300000.000 005 00 000: 00000000: 0.» 0.0500080 on. 30900 000 005 000000000 0.05 .000000 .. .H 5000003000000 0300000080. .00 x00c0mm< 000 won 00000 00 0000 0000 00008000.: .000: 86 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 .0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 a 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 a 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 a 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 a 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0.50 .0050 0000 0000 0000 000 .0005 0000 0000 00000 .000 .oc mom 003.0. 0030. 0000100000 :00 000 0.0000 mm>o 20 00 0.400000 000.30 .00 70000000003000 00004 0.0.00.0 m KHQZanjw 3.000000% 003 0000 3000 000.: 000 .8 000.3003 0000800000 00 35000000 003 0: 00000. 0000000000 0.. 0.050005 00 3080 000. 005 00050800 005 .0000: n .H 50000030000000 030000.008 * .4 000000000904 000 won 0000 .00 0000 0000 0000500000 you: 87 a 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 a 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 H 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 H 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 H 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 B 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 a 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 a 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0.50 0.050 0000 0000 000 .002: 0000 0000 000.0 .000 .8 000.0 .0008 H0009 0000 >000h :00 0000 0.003 0006 000 0000 0.5000040 00.070700 .00 700000000200 0000. 0.0.0.50 .m XHQZHanH< 000000.000 003 0000 300.0 0000 0000 .00 000000.03 00008000000 00 010000.000 003 00 000.: 0000000000 0.. 0.0500080 3 5000.00 000 003 0.000580 0.90 .000000 I .H 5030000300000 0300000008 * .< 000000005000 000 mos 00000 .00 N00 0000 00000000000 HOMH 88 H 0m.o 0m.0 00.00 00.m¢ N0.m 00.wo 0N.0 mo.mm N0.0 om.0m 0N H 0m.o 0N.0 mw.mm om.m¢ om.m mo.N0 ow.0 mm.o~ 00.o 0m.0~ ON H m¢.o om.N mm.m0 0N.m¢ 0¢.m N0.N0 00.0 wo.o~ No.0 mN.0N 00 H wo.o m0.o wv.mm mw.m¢ o®.N m0.m0 ~@.w mm.0m 00.0 mw.om wH H 00.0 om.0 N0.w0 mm.¢¢ 0m.m ¢¢.o0 00.0 om.o~ oo.0 0m.®m 00 H om.o 00.0 00.00 wo.m¢ 00.m mm.mo m0.0 NM.0N ow.o 00.0m 00 H wN.o m¢.0 00.Nm mm.mm 00.0 0m.00 0m.m mm.w0 00.0 0¢.mm m0 H H om.0 mo.mm mw.o¢ w¢.m om.¢0 oo.m N@.wH mw.o ¢¢.mm 00 0 mm.o 00.0 wo.mm m0.o¢ mm.v 00.N0 mN.m 0N.0N mm.o o~.0~ mH 0 H N¢.0 0N.N¢ N0.Nm 0¢.m mm.00 om.m m0.00 ow.o mo.o~ N0 0 0 mm.0 m0.o¢ vo.mm 0m.m mm.00 00.0 0o.00 N0.o N¢.NN 00 0 0m.o 00.0 0N.mm 0o.Nm m0.~ 0o.00 00.0 mm.oH No.0 oo.wN 00 H om.o mm.0 N0.om mw.0m mm.m 0m.w0 ov.m 0N.00 m0.o 00.0N m H om.o OH.N mN.mm Nm.~m 00.m wo.m0 00.0 No.00 00.0 No.0N w H B 0N.0 mm.0m 00.mm om.m 0N.00 o0.m oo.NN wo.o $0.w~ 0 H H mo.0 mN.m0 mw.ww mw.m oo.mo HH.m 00.0N ow.o Hm.om o 0 ¢¢.o N0.N o0.N0 0m.mw w0.0 ow.00 ¢¢.m oo.om 00.0 om.mm m H mm.o mm.0 0m.N0 0w.mw 00.0 00.00 00.0 oo.¢~ m0.0 o~.mm w H H 00.0 00.00 0m.w¢ 00.0 0o.N0 0w.¢ 0N.NN mw.o 09.0N m H H ww.0 00.00 0w.o¢ 00.m ow.m0 0m.¢ ww.o~ m0.o 00.0N N H H 00.0 NN.00 mm.o¢ oe.m No.00 00.m om.NN m0.o wo.om H 0.0N *muom mum: N02 0000 0:: 30000000 onwa ox: 00000 000 .000 mom H0008 00008 0000 >30h 0.00 00000 0.03 00.06 020 000 0.00.00.00.00 0000.000 .00 7000000003000 0000 00.0.00 0 NHQZQnmnmfl .000000m 003 0000 300m 000: 0000 .3 000.3003 058000000 3 0300.030 003 00 000.: 00000000: 0.. 0.0500080 00 $000.00 000 005 0000000000 005 .000000 I .H. 00000000300000 0>000000H * .00 0000000030» 000 won 0000 .00 0000 0000 00005000.: norm: 89 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 a 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00eo 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 00.0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0 0 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 0 0.50 .0050 0000 0000 000 0000 .033 0000 0000 000.0 .000 HduOH. awn—OH. 0000 >000h :00 «00000.0. 00> 000000000010 .0003 mm>o 20 0.0 0.0000000 00070700 .00 700000000200 0000 0.0.0.50 E NHQZHanH< .ucmmmpm mm)? Bum >33 3f ”.0: no umfimfiB ocfiEnogmU 0» 353.3% mm)? 3 it: $36035 m. .935on 0» H385 03 mm)? ”.5585 “an 5033» I .H .coflmoflflcog mfiumucmfi * .4 chcvmmmw 00m mo: 50mm mo xmm was 3095.83 Hen: 9O H Nw.o Na.“ hw.©H m¢.m¢ Hm.m mm.w© om.h mm.NN Hm.H m¢.Hm Hm H Hm.o oo.H mH.NN ww.m¢ wo.¢ oN.NF mH.w ow.w~ o>.o H>.~N on H wv.o mN.~ mm.o~ hm.¢¢ ~m.m ON.~> vw.o wo.HN ww.o ow.m~ ma H mm.o 0H.H HH.¢N mm.mv ¢Q.N ©©.mn ¢>.¢ mm.ON No.0 ¢M.QN ma B mm.o wm.H mo.- ¢m.¢m wH.m mw.oo aw.HH 0H.ON No.H no.mm ha H H ho.H ww.c~ aw.m¢ hw.m mo.o© mH.© mm.mm ov.o hm.om 0H H wN.o 0N.H ah.om mv.©m ©~.w mm.N> NH.o HH.ON oh.o NO.>N mH H H no.d Nh.hN H¢.om m>.m M®.Hh ow.m >¢.~N ow.o >0.wm ¢H B >N.O mm.~ Nm.oN m¢.wm m¢.v ow.o> oo.o o>.HN wh.o ¢a.om mH m mm.o NN.H m~.om om.Hm N¢.¢ ow.©h oo.© ¢a.mH 00.0 ON.MN NH 8 .H m~.~ w>.©m 0N.~m wo.¢ mm.mv mN.¢ mm.~N mH.H m>.om HH w m>.o on.o ow.Hm mm.Nm Vm.a ~N.ho om.o~ oo.a~ mm.o ah.mm OH H o¢.o Hw.H Hw.©m wh.om NH.m wo.¢h >¢.m oo.om mo.o No.mm o H oo.o mH.N om.om w>.®m mm.m om.¢> oo.m HN.ON o>.o o~.mN w H H m¢.H No.mm Hm.mm Nh.m w¢.Hh Hm.m No.NN $0.0 Nm.wm h B H wH.H mn.oa wo.h¢ wN.¢ hw.m© ow.o ¢N.NN mo.~ mH.om o m NN.o wv.~ No.NH mw.m¢ mH.> wc.¢© mo.© ww.oN o¢.~ Mm.mm m B ©N.o m>.H H©.o oo.wv No.m om.mo w¢.o~ NH.MN mo.~ ow.¢m w H B FH.H mo.mH o¢.>¢ wv.m mo.m© mfi.m 0H.vm wm.o N®.om m m H NH.N oo.HH No.vv wm.© w~.wo Nw.© mo.¢~ No.0 Nw.am N H B NH.H mo.m~ om.m¢ oo.¢ mm.no v0.5 mo.mm co.“ mo.Nm H wnom *Nuom mum: Nuwa Hum.” H2: James oan o2: o3; “am .oc wom H.309 Han—OH. Bod KEN—drum 2E mcmzbq Hmj mm>o 20mm H3mucofi * a 91 Aémqompz Hmmon mDEHmmHozoq 20 mm 54h mjDOsz.m mw.m oo.o Hm hw.HH $®.¢ wN.© oo.© Ho.m ON co.” $0.0 wo.m $0.0 mw.o 0H o¢.o mw.o 00.0 om.© ©m.o wH mH.NH oo.m HH.m wN.o om.m NH NH.w wm.> NN.© om.m 00.0 0H ho.oH om.m ¢¢.m NN.© N>.m mH oN.oH om.© ¢¢.o Ho.o om.o wH mm.m wm.o ¢¢.o Ho.o om.© mH ©©.HH H©.m 00.0 wm.o oo.o NH No.0H fio.m Nh.m wN.o w~.o HH wo.oH om.@ H©.m om.o mN.o oH om.w mm.o H©.m NH.@ HH.© m mw.o 00.0 wN.m NN.© mw.m w mm.a am.o om.m N>.© mm.c w $0.0 HH.> wm.¢ mb.¢ mm.m o m©.h vo.o mm.o wN.© om.o m oo.oH NN.© om.m 00.0 ow.m w Hm.HH vo.m om.¢ mw.m mm.m m Nm.oH HH.b H©.m wN.© NN.© N Hv.® HH.o om.m NH.© 00.0 H awosm chmnH mmmclHoHSH. no>th EHHHnmunHmoom .ocfluom HHMM0>O H mmmcnovcmh mmbd<> m> QZ< WMMOUm ..HmHZHwnH mHHm4H. vH NHQZmHanHHw 93 APPENDIX L C OMPOSITION OF DIETS 10% safflower oil ration 1 0% tallow ration Ingredients Amount(lbs.) Ingredients Amount(lbs .) Barley 800. 0 Barley 800. 0 Safflow er oil 1 00. 0 Tallow 100. 0 Soybean oil mea1(44%) 100. 0 Soybean oil mea1(44%) 100. 0 Limestone 6. 0 Limestone 6. 0 Dicalcium phosphate 2. 0 Dicalcium phosphate 2. 0 Trace mineralized salt Trace mineralized salt (high zinc) 5 . 0 (high zinc) 5 . 0 VA TM (Vitamin premix) 5 . 0 VA TM (Vitamin premix) 5 . 0 Santoquin 0. 125 Santoquin 0. 125 1018.125 1018.125 Control ration Igredients Ground shell corn Soybean oil meal(50%) Meat scraps(50%) Alfalfa meal(17%) Limestone Dicalcium phosphate VATM (Vitamin premix) Trace mineralized salt (high zinc) Amount(lbs.) 868.0 65.0 94 APPENDIX M FATTY ACID COMPOSITION OF THE RATIONS AND OF THE SAFFLOWER OIL AND TALLOW USED IN THE RATIONS (‘70) Ration Fatty 10% 10% ac id Control safflower oil tallow Safflow er oil Tallow 14:0 T T 1.00 T 0.91 16:0 10.04 6.47 23.40 4.61 21.52 16:1 1.20 0.87 5.29 0.41 4.59 18:0 1.24 0.71 5.99 0.60 6.27 18:1 22.24 8.17 42.91 6.01 49.32 18:2 63.67 82.18 20.18 86.35 16.75 18:3 1.61 1.60 1.23 2.02 0.64 Saturated 11.28 7.18 30.39 5.21 28.70 Unsaturated 88. 72 92.82 69. 61 94. 79 71 . 30 T - traces but amount was too small to measure. RIES fl ifitflnfiifliflxju (WM 111(15qu 1N MIC 1