A study was conducted at Kongwa Ranch to examine the effects of three diets and two cattle strains of Tanzanian Short Horn Zebu (Iringa red and Singida White) and Boran breed as a control breed. A total of forty-five bulls (15 Boran, 15 Iringa red and 15 Singida white) were confined in a feedlot and supplied with three (3) diets (D1, D2 and D3) formulated for finishing cattle using energy based feedstuffs obtained from locally available feed materials. The diets were fed to the three that groups of bulls for 80 days, and thereafter slaughtered. After evisceration, the carcasss and non-carcass components, that are head, skin, tail, feet, tail and testis were weighed. A sample of longissimus dorsi muscle (LD muscle) was removed from the left side of each carcass along the 6-13th ribs and the 6th rib joint was removed from the right side of each carcass. The samples were taken to laboratory for assessments of carcass composition and meat quality. The results showed that the highest values of non-carcass components, such as weights (kg) of head (13.4), pluck (5.20), feet (5.73), testis (0.76) and penis (1.2) were observed on Boran bulls, though not different (P>0.05) from those of Irringa Red strain [head (12.85), pluck (4.64), eet (5.63), testis (0.780) and penis (1.12)]. The mean values of pH (5.24) and tenderness (64.7N/cm2) were lowest in the Boran followed by Iringa Red bulls [pH (5.26) and tenderness (74.05N/cm2)] compared to those of Singida White [pH (5.32) and tenderness (75.5N/cm2)], however these values were not different (P>0.05). Significant interaction effects between diets and strains were observed on the fat weight and proportion of fat, that the Iringa Red bulls when fed on diet D1 the fat increased above that of Boran and Singida White, while when fed with D3 the weight of fat decrease below that of Boran and Singida strains, The right proportion of fat observed when fed on diet D2. In conclusion, the Iringa Red cattle strain finished in feedlot using diet D2 produced heavy carcasses with right proportions of edible meat and quality attributes matched well with those of Boran. Stakeholders of beef cattle are advised to opt for Diet D2 for finishing the Iringa Red strain in feedlot for enhancing productivity and quality of beef in the sector. Further studies are needed in screening more locally available feed resources to develop formulations for finishing different strains of the TSHZ cattle to increase the demanded prime beef in the country.
Published in | International Journal of Animal Science and Technology (Volume 9, Issue 3) |
DOI | 10.11648/j.ijast.20250903.12 |
Page(s) | 140-148 |
Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Boran, Iringa Red, Singida White, Feedlot, Slaughter Characteristics, Carcass Composition, Meat Quality Attributes
1Parameter (kg) | Diet | Strain | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D1 | D2 | D3 | SEM | P value | BRN | IRR | SWT | SEM | P value | |
Head | 13.1 | 13.0 | 12.72 | 2.68 | 0.4358 | 13.4a | 12.86a | 12.56b | 0.56 | 0.025 |
Skin | 21.0 | 21.03 | 22.2 | 10.42 | 0.073 | 22 | 20 | 21 | 7.0 | 0.1663 |
Feet | 5.73 | 5.80 | 5.76 | 0.33 | 0.701 | 5.92 | 5.63 | 5.73 | 0.016 | 0.9821 |
Pluck | 4.68 | 4.76 | 4.56 | 3.31 | 0.006 | 5.20a | 4.40b | 4.64b | 1.768 | 0.0562 |
Testis | 0.76 | 0.80 | 0.66 | 0.03 | 0.573 | 0.69 | 0.78 | 0.76 | 0.078 | 0.2933 |
Penis | 1.10 | 1.17 | 1.16 | 0.052 | 0.620 | 1.10 | 1.12 | 1.21 | 0.024 | 0.7982 |
1Parameter (kg) | Diet | 2Strain | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D1 | D2 | D3 | 3SEM | P value | BRN | IRR | SWT | SEM | 4P value | |
Slaughter weight (kg) | 254.3b | 268.5a | 246.1b | 4.40 | 0.0063 | 264.5a | 259.1ab | 255.4b | 4.40 | 0.0036 |
HCW | 131.5ab | 140.8a | 125.7b | 2.43 | 0.0004 | 138.2a | 136.4ab | 129.3b | 2.43 | 0.0269 |
6TH Rib | 1.33 | 1.31 | 1.24 | 0.07 | 0.6649 | 1.57a | 1.20b | 1.11b | 0.07 | 0.0005 |
Lean | 0.870 | 0.81 | 0.73 | 2.43 | 0.5443 | 0.975a | 0.726b | 0.666c | 2.43 | 0.0014 |
Fat | 0.270 | 0.260 | 0.243 | 0.02 | 0.9500 | 0.35a | 0.25b | 0.18c | 0.02 | 0.0003 |
Bone | 0.25 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.013 | 0.9819 | 0.24 | 0.23 | 0.25 | 0.013 | 0.7354 |
As% carcass weight | ||||||||||
Lean | 0.870 | 0.81 | 0.73 | 0.04 | 0.8191 | 0.70a | 0.56b | 0.51b | 0.04 | 0.0167 |
Fat | 0.270 | 0.260 | 0.243 | 0.02 | 0.6984 | 0.26a | 0.19b | 0.14b | 0.02 | 0.0028 |
Bone | 0.25 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.02 | 0.7910 | 0.17c | 0.18b | 0.20a | 0.02 | 06309 |
Ratios of 6th rib | ||||||||||
Lean:: fat | 3.4 | 3.4 | 3.5 | 0.41 | 0.7379 | 3.4 | 3.3 | 3.7 | 0.41 | 0.9936 |
Lean: bone | 3.8 | 3.9 | 3.7 | 0.58 | 0.9836 | 5.4a | 3.3b | 2.8b | 0.58 | 0.0090 |
(Lean+fat): bone | 5.1 | 5.1 | 5.0 | 0..50 | 0.9673 | 4.1 | 4.3 | 5.2 | 0.50 | 0.2609 |
(Lean+bone): fat | 4.5 | 4.5 | 4.7 | 0.50 | 0.9925 | 3.7b | 4.2ab | 4.8a | 0.50 | 0.0041 |
Parameter | Diet | Strain | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D1 | D2 | D3 | SEM | P value | BRN | IRR | SWT | SEM | P value | |
Dry matter | 28.23 | 28.02 | 28.23 | 0.79 | 0.2432 | 28.72 | 28.85 | 28.52 | 0.79 | 0.9236 |
Crude Protein | 22.91b | 25.21a | 25.17a | 0.62 | 0.0476 | 24.37 | 24.05 | 23.87 | 0.62 | 0.8478 |
Ash | 4.74b | 4.8b | 5.71a | 0.24 | 0.0105 | 5.24 | 4.71 | 5.30 | 0.24 | 0.1707 |
Parameter | Diet | Strain | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D1 | D2 | D3 | SEM | P value | BRN | IRR | SWT | SEM | P value | |
Tenderness | 71.68 | 66.36 | 76.36 | 5.29 | 0.4190 | 64.7 | 74.05 | 75.5 | 5.29 | 0.3078 |
pH24 | 5.26 | 5.29 | 5.28 | 0.04 | 0.8887 | 5.24 | 5.26 | 5.32 | 0.04 | 0.4448 |
Cooking loss | 11.24 | 13.62 | 13.65 | 0.75 | 0.1602 | 11.81 | 13.98 | 12.72 | 0.75 | 0.1389 |
Drip loss | 3.39 | 3.44 | 3.42 | 0.68 | 0.8583 | 3.27b | 3.44ab | 3.54a | 0.68 | 0.0249 |
DI | Diet 1 |
D2 | Diet 2 |
D3 | Diet 3 |
BRN | Boran |
IRR | Iringa Red |
SWT | Singida White |
CL | Cooking Loss |
W1 | Weight 1 |
W2 | Weight 2 |
W3 | Weight 3 |
LD Muscle | Longissimus Dorsi Muscle |
TSHZ | Tanzania Short Horn Zebu |
CP | Crude Protein |
LS | Least Squares |
[1] | Muchakilla, M. B., Asimwe, L., Kimambo, A. E., Mtenga, L. A., & Laswai, G. H. (2014). Effect of diet and muscle type on meat quality characteristics of Tanzania Shorthorn Zebu. Livestock Res Rural Dev, 26(10). |
[2] | Msalya, G., Kim, E. S., Laisser, E. L., Kipanyula, M. J., Karimuribo, E. D., Kusiluka, L. J.,... & Rothschild, M. F. (2017). Determination of genetic structure and signatures of selection in three strains of Tanzania Shorthorn Zebu, Boran and Friesian cattle by genome-wide SNP analyses. PLoS One, 12(1), e0171088. |
[3] | Maltin, C. A., Lobley, G. E., Grant, C. M., Miller, L. A., Kyle, D. J., Horgan, G. W., & Sinclair, K. D. (2001). Factors influencing beef eating quality 2. Effects of nutritional regimen and genotype on muscle fibre characteristics. Animal Science, 72(2), 279-287. |
[4] | Mushi, D. E. (2020). Feedlot performance of Tanzanian Shorthorn Zebu finished on local feed resources. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 52(6), 3207-3216. |
[5] | Kurwijila, L. R., Ogutu, C., & Omore, A. O. (2014). Review of successes and failures of dairy value chain development interventions in Tanzania. |
[6] | Mwilawa, A. J. (2012). Effects of breed and diet on performance, carcass characteristics and meat quality of beef cattle. Ph. D. thesis, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania. |
[7] | Das, S. M., & Mkonyi, J. I. (2003). Important aspects of conservation of indigenous cattle in Tanzania: A review. In Tanzania Society of Animal Production Conference series, 30, 59-70. |
[8] | Dagne, T., & Ameha, N. (2017). Review on beef eating quality attributes (tenderness, juiciness and flavor) and quality standards in Ethiopia. |
[9] | Msanga, Y. N., Mwakilembe, P. L., & Sendalo, D. (2012). The indigenous cattle of the Southern Highlands of Tanzania: distinct phenotypic features, performance and uses. Livest. Res. Rural Dev, 24, 1-14. |
[10] | Mushi, D. E., & Baruani, J. M. (2021). Preliminary study on slaughter and meat quality characteristics of selected strains of Tanzania shorthorn Zebu. Tanzania Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 20(2), 278-294. |
[11] | Rege, J. E. O., & Tawah, C. L. (1999). The state of African cattle genetic resources II. Geographical distribution, characteristics and uses of present-day breeds and strains. Animal Genetic Resources/Resources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales, 26, 1-25. |
[12] | Haile, A. (2011). Breeding strategy to improve Ethiopian Boran cattle for meat and milk production (Vol. 26). ILRI (aka ILCA and ILRAD). |
[13] | Theron, H. (2020). Investigating the meat quality of Boran cattle. Stockfarm, 10(8), 44-45. |
[14] | Asimwe, L., Kimambo, A. E., Laswai, G. H., Mtenga, L. A., Weisbjerg, M. R. and Madsen, J. (2016). Economics of finishing Tanzania Shorthorn Zebu cattle in feedlot and optimum finishing period. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 28(11). |
[15] | Rangi, W. S. (2017). Commercial Viability of Beef Cattle Production: A Case of Traditional Feedlots in Lake Zone, Tanzania (Doctoral dissertation, The Open University of Tanzania). |
[16] | Kimirei, S. O. G., Chenyambuga, S. W., Mushi, D. E., Msalya, G. M., & Mpenda, Z. (2022). Feedlot performance and profitability of Tanzania Shorthorn Zebu finished on local feed resources in Kongwa District, Tanzaniaexture, and microstructure of meat from spent Pekin ducks. Poultry Science, 99(2), 1232-1240. |
[17] | Salum, K. A., Laswai, G. H., and Mushi, D. E. (2024). Performance of Boran and two strains of Tanzania Short Horn Zebu cattle fed on three different diets. International Journal of Animal Science and Technology, 8(2), 21-29. |
[18] | Ross, R. A. (2005). Evaluation of Techniques to Estimate Carcass Composition of Beef Cattle (Doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State University). |
[19] | Mayulu, H., Daru, T. P., & Tricahyadinata, I. (2024). In vitro evaluation of ruminal digestibility and fermentation characteristics of local feedstuff-based beef cattle ration. F 1000 Research, 11, 834. |
[20] | McCabe, S., McHugh, N., O’Connell, N. E., & Prendiville, R. (2020). Evaluation of production efficiencies at pasture of lactating suckler cows of diverse genetic merit and replacement strategy. Animal, 14(8), 1768-1776. |
[21] | Zakaria, A. (2010). Effects of nutrition and breed on body measurements and meat cut yields (Doctoral dissertation, Dissertation for award of Msc. Degree at Sokoine University of Agriculture Morogoro, Tanzania. |
[22] | Özdemir, V. F., & Yanar, M. (2021). Effects of age at feedlot entry on performance, carcass characteristics, and beef qualitytraits of Holstein Friesian bulls reared in high altitude of Eastern Turkey. Turkish Journal of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, 45(5), 936-943. |
[23] | Mohammed, A. M. (2004). Effect of slaughter weight on meat production potential of Western Sudan Baggara Cattle (Doctoral dissertation, PhD Thesis, University of Khartoum, Khartoum). |
[24] | Chenyambuga, S. W., Nalaila, S. M., &Mbaga, S. H. (2008). Assessment of uses, special qualities and management aspects of Iringa Red Zebu cattle in Tanzania. Age, 1(5), 3. |
[25] | Mwangi, F. W., Charmley, E., Gardiner, C. P., Malau-Aduli, B. S., Kinobe, R. T., & Malau-Aduli, A. E. (2019). Diet and genetics influence beef cattle performance and meat quality characteristics. Foods, 8(12), 648. |
[26] | Irshad, A., Kandeepan, G., Kumar, S., Ashish, K. A., Vishnuraj, M. R., & Shukla, V. (2013). Factors influencing carcass composition of livestock: A review. Journal of Animal Production Advance, 3(1), 1. |
[27] | Schumacher, M., DelCurto-Wyffels, H., Thomson, J., & Boles, J. (2022). Fat deposition and fat effects on meat quality. A review. Animals, 12(12), 1550. |
[28] | Wang, Y., & McAllister, T. A. (2002). Rumen microbes, enzymes and feed digestion-a review. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 15(11), 1659-1676. |
[29] | Strydom, P. E., Frylinck, L., Van der Westhuizen, J., & Burrow, H. M. (2008). Growth performance, feed efficiency and carcass and meat quality of tropically adapted breed types from different farming systems in South Africa. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 48(5), 599-607. |
[30] | Kokoszyński, D., Arpášová, H., Hrnčar, C., Żochowska-Kujawska, J., Kotowicz, M., & Sobczak, M. (2020). Carcass characteristics, chemical composition, physicochemical properties, texture, and microstructure of meat from spent Pekin ducks. Poultry Science, 99(2), 1232-1240. |
[31] | Cheng, Q., & Sun, D. W. (2008). Factors affecting the water holding capacity of red meat products: A review of recent research advances. Critical reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 48(2), 137-159. |
[32] | Boler, D. D., & Woerner, D. R. (2017). What is meat? A perspective from the American Meat Science Association. Animal Frontiers, 7(4), 8-11. |
APA Style
Salum, K. A., Laswai, G. H., Mushi, D. E. (2025). Assessments of the Slaughter Characteristics and Meat Quality of Different Cattle Strains Finished on Three Dietary Treatments. International Journal of Animal Science and Technology, 9(3), 140-148. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20250903.12
ACS Style
Salum, K. A.; Laswai, G. H.; Mushi, D. E. Assessments of the Slaughter Characteristics and Meat Quality of Different Cattle Strains Finished on Three Dietary Treatments. Int. J. Anim. Sci. Technol. 2025, 9(3), 140-148. doi: 10.11648/j.ijast.20250903.12
@article{10.11648/j.ijast.20250903.12, author = {Khatibu Abdallah Salum and Germana Henry Laswai and Daniel Elia Mushi}, title = {Assessments of the Slaughter Characteristics and Meat Quality of Different Cattle Strains Finished on Three Dietary Treatments }, journal = {International Journal of Animal Science and Technology}, volume = {9}, number = {3}, pages = {140-148}, doi = {10.11648/j.ijast.20250903.12}, url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20250903.12}, eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijast.20250903.12}, abstract = {A study was conducted at Kongwa Ranch to examine the effects of three diets and two cattle strains of Tanzanian Short Horn Zebu (Iringa red and Singida White) and Boran breed as a control breed. A total of forty-five bulls (15 Boran, 15 Iringa red and 15 Singida white) were confined in a feedlot and supplied with three (3) diets (D1, D2 and D3) formulated for finishing cattle using energy based feedstuffs obtained from locally available feed materials. The diets were fed to the three that groups of bulls for 80 days, and thereafter slaughtered. After evisceration, the carcasss and non-carcass components, that are head, skin, tail, feet, tail and testis were weighed. A sample of longissimus dorsi muscle (LD muscle) was removed from the left side of each carcass along the 6-13th ribs and the 6th rib joint was removed from the right side of each carcass. The samples were taken to laboratory for assessments of carcass composition and meat quality. The results showed that the highest values of non-carcass components, such as weights (kg) of head (13.4), pluck (5.20), feet (5.73), testis (0.76) and penis (1.2) were observed on Boran bulls, though not different (P>0.05) from those of Irringa Red strain [head (12.85), pluck (4.64), eet (5.63), testis (0.780) and penis (1.12)]. The mean values of pH (5.24) and tenderness (64.7N/cm2) were lowest in the Boran followed by Iringa Red bulls [pH (5.26) and tenderness (74.05N/cm2)] compared to those of Singida White [pH (5.32) and tenderness (75.5N/cm2)], however these values were not different (P>0.05). Significant interaction effects between diets and strains were observed on the fat weight and proportion of fat, that the Iringa Red bulls when fed on diet D1 the fat increased above that of Boran and Singida White, while when fed with D3 the weight of fat decrease below that of Boran and Singida strains, The right proportion of fat observed when fed on diet D2. In conclusion, the Iringa Red cattle strain finished in feedlot using diet D2 produced heavy carcasses with right proportions of edible meat and quality attributes matched well with those of Boran. Stakeholders of beef cattle are advised to opt for Diet D2 for finishing the Iringa Red strain in feedlot for enhancing productivity and quality of beef in the sector. Further studies are needed in screening more locally available feed resources to develop formulations for finishing different strains of the TSHZ cattle to increase the demanded prime beef in the country.}, year = {2025} }
TY - JOUR T1 - Assessments of the Slaughter Characteristics and Meat Quality of Different Cattle Strains Finished on Three Dietary Treatments AU - Khatibu Abdallah Salum AU - Germana Henry Laswai AU - Daniel Elia Mushi Y1 - 2025/07/15 PY - 2025 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20250903.12 DO - 10.11648/j.ijast.20250903.12 T2 - International Journal of Animal Science and Technology JF - International Journal of Animal Science and Technology JO - International Journal of Animal Science and Technology SP - 140 EP - 148 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2640-1312 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20250903.12 AB - A study was conducted at Kongwa Ranch to examine the effects of three diets and two cattle strains of Tanzanian Short Horn Zebu (Iringa red and Singida White) and Boran breed as a control breed. A total of forty-five bulls (15 Boran, 15 Iringa red and 15 Singida white) were confined in a feedlot and supplied with three (3) diets (D1, D2 and D3) formulated for finishing cattle using energy based feedstuffs obtained from locally available feed materials. The diets were fed to the three that groups of bulls for 80 days, and thereafter slaughtered. After evisceration, the carcasss and non-carcass components, that are head, skin, tail, feet, tail and testis were weighed. A sample of longissimus dorsi muscle (LD muscle) was removed from the left side of each carcass along the 6-13th ribs and the 6th rib joint was removed from the right side of each carcass. The samples were taken to laboratory for assessments of carcass composition and meat quality. The results showed that the highest values of non-carcass components, such as weights (kg) of head (13.4), pluck (5.20), feet (5.73), testis (0.76) and penis (1.2) were observed on Boran bulls, though not different (P>0.05) from those of Irringa Red strain [head (12.85), pluck (4.64), eet (5.63), testis (0.780) and penis (1.12)]. The mean values of pH (5.24) and tenderness (64.7N/cm2) were lowest in the Boran followed by Iringa Red bulls [pH (5.26) and tenderness (74.05N/cm2)] compared to those of Singida White [pH (5.32) and tenderness (75.5N/cm2)], however these values were not different (P>0.05). Significant interaction effects between diets and strains were observed on the fat weight and proportion of fat, that the Iringa Red bulls when fed on diet D1 the fat increased above that of Boran and Singida White, while when fed with D3 the weight of fat decrease below that of Boran and Singida strains, The right proportion of fat observed when fed on diet D2. In conclusion, the Iringa Red cattle strain finished in feedlot using diet D2 produced heavy carcasses with right proportions of edible meat and quality attributes matched well with those of Boran. Stakeholders of beef cattle are advised to opt for Diet D2 for finishing the Iringa Red strain in feedlot for enhancing productivity and quality of beef in the sector. Further studies are needed in screening more locally available feed resources to develop formulations for finishing different strains of the TSHZ cattle to increase the demanded prime beef in the country. VL - 9 IS - 3 ER -