(2014) reported greater averages for hot carcass weight and hot carcass dressing in males.
(2010) reported a hot carcass dressing below 51% in Mestizo horses, without differences due to weight, age and gender.
(2010) reported an interaction between sex and age, in which males over 8 years were those with the largest hot carcass dressing. However, SALGUEIRO et al.
Hot carcass weight and
carcass dressings were similar (p > 0.05) between the two levels of fat thickness, with averages of 282 kg and 54.4%, respectively (Table 4).
The diets did not affect the hot weight, hot carcass dressing or carcass conformation (Table 6).
Item Diets CON (1) PRO (2) OIL (3) N 10 10 10 Hot carcass weight, kg 249c 252b 260a Hot carcass dressing, % 54.5 53.8 53.9 Conformation, points (4) 11.9 11.8 12.5 Muscle, % 59.4 58.3 59.7 Fat, % 25.1 27.2 25.6 Bone, % 15.5 14.5 14.7 Item Diets SEM (4) p < F N Hot carcass weight, kg 4.66 0.05 Hot carcass dressing, % 0.23 0.31 Conformation, points (4) 0.14 0.22 Muscle, % 0.86 0.70 Fat, % 0.76 0.34 Bone, % 0.55 0.45 (1) Control, (2) Propolis dry, (3) Essential oils.
Genetic groups that contain zebu genes in their composition present high hot
carcass dressing. However, the Longissimus muscle of genetic groups with zebu genes present low marbling.
Carcass characteristics of bulls and steers finished on pasture system Parameters Bulls Steers Final live weight (kg) 502.06 513.70 Hot carcass weight (kg) 251.47 249.40 Hot
carcass dressing (%) 50.07 (a) 48.50 (b) Fat thickness (mm) 1.90 (b) 3.47 (a) Longissimus area (c[m.sup.2]) 64.41 64.70 Color (points) 3.33 (b) 4.00 (a) Texture (points) 4.12 4.20 Marbling score (points) 3.80 (b) 5.77 (a) Parameters CV (1) p>f Final live weight (kg) 11.76 NS Hot carcass weight (kg) 12.67 NS Hot
carcass dressing (%) 2.98 0.02 Fat thickness (mm) 54.35 0.02 Longissimus area (c[m.sup.2]) 10.15 NS Color (points) 16.99 0.02 Texture (points) 13.08 NS Marbling score (points) 49.38 0.06 (1) Coefficient of variation; different letters in the same line are significantly different.
Hot
carcass dressing was greater (p<0.05) for PUB animals as compared to animals in the other two treatments, PUR and CHC.
Hot carcass dressing percentage was similar (p>0.10) between PUR1 (50.4%) and PUCA (53.8%), and higher (p<0.10) than PUR2 (48.6%).
The lower carcass weight for the PUR2 group was determined by the lower final weight and low carcass dressing in animals from this genetic group.