Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T16:47:12.161Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Video image analysis for on-line classification of lamb carcasses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

K. Stanford,
R. J. Richmond,
S. D. M. Jones,
W. M. Robertson,
M. A. Price and
A. J. Gordon
K. Stanford
Affiliation:
1Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Agriculture Centre, Bag 3014, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada T1J 4C7
R. J. Richmond
Affiliation:
2Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Bag Service 5000, Lacombe, Alberta, Canada T0C 0S0
S. D. M. Jones
Affiliation:
3Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, PO Box 3000, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada T1J 4B1
W. M. Robertson
Affiliation:
2Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Bag Service 5000, Lacombe, Alberta, Canada T0C 0S0
M. A. Price
Affiliation:
4Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutritional Science, 310 AgForestry Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada T6H 2P5
A. J. Gordon
Affiliation:
5Australian Meat Research Corporation, 26 College Street, Sydney, Australia 2001
Get access

Abstract

Video image analysis (VIA), carcass shape and colour data were collected for 1211 lambs of known gender, breed type and carcass weight over a 1-week period using the VIAscan® system developed by the Australian Meat Research Corporation. Classification data (thickness of soft tissue over the 12th rib (GR measurement) and subjective conformation scores on a five-point scale of the leg, loin and shoulder) were assessed by an Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada grader after carcasses had chilled at 5°C for 3 to 6 h. Dissections into saleable meat yield (no. = 58) were performed after carcasses had chilled an additional 24 h. The timing of this study, which was dependent on availability of the VIA equipment, influenced the age and type of lambs available for analysis. The majority of lambs evaluated were wool-breed wethers, age > 10 months, of average GR (15·7 (s.d. 0·2) mm) and muscle conformation (3·0, s.d. 0·1). VIA improved the prediction of saleable meat yield (R2 = 0·71, residual s.d. = 14g/kg) compared with the current classification system (R2 = 0·52, residual s.d. = 18 g/kg). Although prediction ofGR measurement by VIA resulted in a large residual error (residual s.d. = 2·4 mm), the proportion of waste fat (perirenal and subcutaneous) and bone dissected from the carcass was accurately predicted (R2 = 0·62, residual s.d. = 11 g/kg). Proportions of leg (R2 = 0·71, residual s.d. = 7 g/kg) and shoulder (R2 = 0·62, residual s.d. = 9 g/kg) primals were also accurately predicted by VIA, although there were no significant predictors for the proportion of the loin (P > 0·15). VIA improved the prediction of saleable meat yield compared with the current classification system. However collection of additional data including some from extremely lean or well muscled animals would be required before VIA could be recommended to classify lamb carcasses

Keywords

carcasslambsmeat yieldvideo image analysis

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 67 , Issue 2 , October 1998, pp. 311 - 316
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Arnold, A. M. and Meyer, H. H. 1988. Effects of gender, time of castration, genotype and feeding regimen on lamb growth and carcass fatness. Journal of Animal Science 66: 2468–2475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butterfield, R. M., Zamora, J., Thompson, J. M. and Reddacliff, K. J. 1984. Changes in body composition relative to weight and maturity of Australian Dorset Horn rams and wethers. 1. Carcass muscle, fat and bone and body organs. Animal Production 39:251–258.Google Scholar
Cross, H. R., Gilliland, D. A., Durland, P. R. and Seidman, S. 1983. Beef carcass evaluation by use of a video image analysis system. Journal of Animal Science 57:908–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eldridge, G. A. and Ball, C. I. 1992. Variation in butt shape of British-cross and Brahman-cross cattle slaughtered for domestic consumption. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Animal Production 19:61–64.Google Scholar
Fabbricante, T. and Sultan, W. J. 1974. Practical meat cutting and merchandising, vol. 2, pork, lamb, veal. AVI Publishing Co., West Port, CT.Google Scholar
Gregor, G. and Scholz, A. 1993. Video image analysis in the determination of intramuscular fat content in pigs, and a discussion of breeding aims. Archivfur Tierzucht 36:383–395.Google Scholar
Hopkins, D. L. 1996. The relationship between muscularity, muscle: bone ratio and cut dimensions in male and female lamb carcass and the measurement of muscularity using image analysis. Meat Science 44: 307–317.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horgan, G. W., Murphy, S. V. and Simm, G. 1995. Automatic assessment of sheep carcasses by image analysis. Animal Science 60:197–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, S. D. M., Lang, D., Tong, A. K. W. and Robertson, W. 1992. A commercial evaluation of video image analysis in the grading of beef carcasses. Proceedings of the 38th international congress on meat science and technology, August 23-28, Clermont-Ferrand, France, pp. 915–918.Google Scholar
Jones, S. D. M., Richmond, R. J. and Robertson, W. M. 1995. Instrument beef grading. Meat Focus International 4: 59–62.Google Scholar
Jones, S. D. M., Robertson, W. M. and Price, M. A. 1993. The assessment of saleable meat yield in lamb carcasses. International congress on meat science and technology, Calgary, Alberta, p. 190 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Jones, S. D. M., Tong, A. K. W. and Robertson, W. M. 1997. Technologies for objective grading /assessment. Reciprocal Meat Conference Proceedings 50:106–113.Google Scholar
Karnuah, A. B., Moriya, K., Mitani, K. and Sasaki, Y. 1995. Estimation of beef carcass composition from the cross section around the longissimus muscle area in Holstein steers by computer image analysis. Animal Science and Technology 66:323–329.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Jones, D. W. and Wolf, B. T. 1986. A comparison of alternative methods for predicting the carcass composition of crossbred lambs of different breeds and crosses. Meat Science 18:89–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kramer, C. Y. 1978. An overview of multivariate analysis. Journal of Dairy Science 61:848–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuchida, K., Yamagishi, T., Takeda, H. and Yamaki, K. 1995. Live body volume and density measuring for estimation of carcass traits in Japanese Black steers by computer image analysis. Animal Science and Technology 66: 1–6.Google Scholar
Lissiman, L. 1993. VIA sheep study, June 1993, New South Wales. Project M.334 for the Meat Research Corporation.Google Scholar
Meat Research Corporation. 1993. Image analysis for meat. International patent application number WO/93/21597.Google Scholar
Patterson, D. L., Farid, A. and Smith, C. 1994. Video image analysis of carcass conformation of Texel cross and Cheviot lambs. Proceedings of the fifth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Guelph, vol. 19, pp. 485–488.Google Scholar
Purchas, R. W. and Wilkin, G. H. 1995. Characteristics of lamb carcasses of contrasting subjective muscularity. Meat Science 41:357–368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richmond, R. J., Jones, S. D. M., Robertson, W. M. and Tong, A. K. W. 1995. Instrument beef grading (an evaluation of video image analysis). Technical report presented to the Canadian Meat Council, Marketing Services Branch.Google Scholar
Scholz, A., Paulke, T. and Eger, H. 1995. Determination of marbling grade in pigs. Use of computer-assisted video image analysis. Fleischwirtschaft 75:320–322.Google Scholar
Stanford, K., Clark, I. and Jones, S. D. M. 1995. Use of ultrasound in prediction of carcass characteristics in lambs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 75:185–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1993. SAS user's guide: statistics, version 6.10 edition. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Tatum, J. D., DeWalt, S., LeValley, S. B., Savell, J. W. and Williams, F. L. 1998. Relationship of feeder lamb frame size to feedlot gain and carcass yield and quality grades. Journal of Animal Science 76:435–440.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webb, A. J. 1995. Future challenges in pig genetics. Animal Breeding Abstracts 63: 731–736.Google Scholar
Wood, J. D., Newman, P. B., Miles, C. A. and Fisher, A. V. 1991. Video image analysis: comparisons with other novel techniques for carcass assessment. Proceedings of a symposium on the electronic evaluation of meat in support of value-based marketing, March 27-28, Purdue University, IN, pp. 145–169.Google Scholar