Carcass Quality of Grower Pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus L.) Given Wet and Fermented Commercial Ration with Varying Levels of Wood Vinergar

Reader Impact Factor Score
[Total: 2 Average: 1.5]

Published on International Journal of Agriculture & Agribusiness
Publication Date: March, 2020

Dionesio R. Macasait JR. & Dinah M. Espina
Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture and Food Science
Visayas State University
Visca, Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines

Journal Full Text PDF: Carcass Quality of Grower Pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus L.) Given Wet and Fermented Commercial Ration with Varying Levels of Wood Vinergar.

A 60-days feeding trial assessed the carcass quality of crossbred grower-pigs given wet and fermented commercial hog ration with varying levels (0%, 2% and 5%) of wood vinegar. A total of nine carcass samples were from Longissimus dorsi part of the muscle from each of the treatments: T0 –Control (100% PW or 0% WV), T1 (PW+ 2%WV) and T2 (PW+ 5%WV). Using Completely Randomized Design layout, data were analyzed using ANOVA and LSD to compare treatment means using STAR version 2.0.1. Results revealed that varying levels of wood vinegar significantly (P<0.01) influenced drip loss and L* color after 45 minutes, but only slightly (P<0.05) influenced pH after 45 minutes and Crude Protein content of pork from grower-pigs. However, Hot Carcass Weight (HCW), Dressing Percentage (DP), Back fat Thickness (BFT), Carcass Length (CL), Loin Eye Area (LEA), Drip Loss and pH after 24 hours post mortem shows insignificant results. In addition, a* and b* values on meat color after 45 minutes, values of L*, a* and b* after 24 hours post mortem, Dry Matter, Moisture Content and Crude Fat were not significantly (p>0.05) affected by varying levels of wood vinegar. In this study, the overall pork quality was generally better on grower-pigs given wet and fermented commercial ration with 5% wood vinegar than 2% and 0% inclusion levels.

Keywords: Carcass quality, Longissimus dorsi, grower-pig, wet and fermented commercial ration & wood vinegar.

Nature and Importance of the Study
Pork is cheap and highly acceptable source of protein giving it an advantage over poultry or beef (Eyo, 2001). As a significant source of protein in the diets of a large proportion of people, it contains essential sulphur-containing amino acids like cysteine, methionine and lysine that are limiting in some legumes and most cereal-based diets (Borgstrom, 1962). Favorably, pork is a high-protein food with typically high levels of free amino acids that microbes metabolize thus producing ammonia, biogenic amines (putrescine, histamine, and cadaverine), organic acids, ketones, and sulphur compounds (Delgaard et al., 2006).
High-quality and safe pork has been a constant objective of the pig industry for many decades (Kauffman et al., 1992). The performance of pigs, carcass composition and quality of pork and pork products depend on multiple interactive effects of genotype, rearing conditions, pre-slaughter handling, and carcass and meat processing (Lebret, 2008). Moreover, the meat and carcass quality are complex traits influenced by many physical and biochemical factors that have been evaluated in an attempt to assess meat quality (Huff-Lonergan, 2010).
Currently, fermented liquid feed and organic acids as feed additives have shown improved pig performance. Specifically, wood vinegar can be added to feeds to serve as alternative for antibiotics (Wang et al., 2012). However, limited information has been reported on the carcass quality of grower pigs fed with wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels of wood vinegar. Hence, this study.

Objectives of the Study
This study evaluated the carcass quality of crossbred grower-pigs given wet and fermented commercial hog ration with varying levels of wood vinegar.

Time and Place of the Study
The 60-days feeding trial was conducted from July 20 to September 17, 2018 at the Piggery Project of the Department of Animal Science-College of Agriculture and Food Science, Visayas State University-Main Campus, Visca, Baybay, City, Leyte, Philippines.

Scope and Limitation of the Study
This study was limited to the assessment of carcass quality of pork from crossbred grower-pigs given wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels (0%, 2% and 5%) of wood vinegar.

History and Domestication of Pigs
Pig’s ancestors can be traced to the genus and species, Sus scrofa, which is commonly known today as pigs, hogs and swine that can be used interchangeably. As many as 6 genera and 31 species, archaeological evidences showed that swine first domesticated in the East Indies and Southern Asia (Ensminger and Parker, 1997). In around 4, 900 B.C, the Chinese people are the first people to tame pigs. Meanwhile, pigs in the United States where majority of the commercial breeds in the Philippines came from were brought by Columbus during his journey from Cuba. The breeds of pigs are Landrace, characterized with a large body and dropping ears and Large white which is almost similar to Landrace but with erect ears commonly intended for lard and meat production, respectively (Gillespie, 1998).

Status of the Swine Industry in the Philippines
According to the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA, 2017) in their inventory as of July 1, 2017, the total population of swine is 12.52 million heads. This number was 0.16 percent higher compared to the previous year’s inventory of 12.50 million heads. It may be due to the increase in the stocks of the backyard farms that increased by 0.62 percent. However, the number of stocks produced in the commercial farms reduces by 0.67 percent as compared to 2016. Overall, about 64.0 percent of the total stocks were raised in backyard farms and the rest were in commercial farms (PSA, 2017).
During the months of January to March 2017, the livestock subsector agriculture in the Philippines displayed a 3.22 percent growth in output during this period. It accounted for 16.85 percent of total agricultural output in which hog is the major contributor to this sector in which production increases 3.50 percent than the previous records. The subsector’s gross value of output amounted to P65.4 billion at current prices, representing an increase of 9.37 percent compared to the same period last year (Performance of Philippine Agriculture, 2017).

Fermentation of Animal Feeds
Fermentation is an enzymatically controlled anaerobic breakdown of an energy-rich compound (as carbohydrate to carbon dioxide and alcohol or to an organic acid as defined by Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2015). Broadly, it can be defined as an enzymatically controlled transformation of an organic compound just like drying and salting. By definition fermented liquid feed is a feed that has been mixed with water, at a ratio ranging from 1:1.5 to 1:4, for a period long enough to reach steady state conditions (Missotten et al., 2015). Fermentation was already practiced long time ago. It was developed through the years by women in order to preserve food in times of scarcity as well as to add flavor to the food and reduce its toxicity (Rolle and Satin, 2002). Historically, fermentation has already existed since the Neolithic age dating from 7000-6600 BCE in Jiaho, China (McGovern et al., 2004). In the present, fermentation is still widely practiced in most households in some countries but only few invested in an industrialized level (Holzapfel, 2002).
Fermentation often results in the production of nutritionally enriched, very stable food products from low-value carbohydrate and protein substrates according to Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization (FAO/WHO, 2002). In addition, according to Battcock (1992), fermentation also provides farmers a variety of products by selling different products with different flavors. It also adds value to the farmer’s products and its by-products to improve the flavor, aroma, texture and appearance of food as well as making food more palatable. While Holzapfel (2002) revealed that the importance of fermentation in the modern-day life was the preservation and safety as well as the enhancement of the sensory attributes of the foods being marketed in both developed and developing countries. He also added that fermented products are highly appreciated as major components of diets in some developing countries under normal conditions that contribute to food safety, nutritional quality and digestibility.

Description and Composition of Wood Vinegar
Wood vinegar also known as pyroligneous acid a liquid collected from burning wood. Also called wood acid, it is a dark liquid produced by the destructive distillation of wood and other plant materials. The wood vinegar contains more than 200 constituents, with principal components such as acetic acid, methanol, phenol, ester, acetals, ketone, formic acid and many others. It was once used as a commercial source for acetic acid. In addition, the vinegar often contains 80-90% water along with some 200 organic compounds. Other materials may also be used in making wood vinegar such as coconut shell, bamboo, grass and other plants. The term is synonymous and used to define the aqueous fraction obtained from carbonization or slow pyrolysis of wood and other lingo-cellulosic raw materials. Typically, carbonization of wood produces charcoal, non-condensable gases (NCGs), tar and PA. Yields can vary widely depending on the type of wood and the process conditions, such as final temperature and heating rate (Yoshimoto 1994; Santos et al., 2013). PA is recovered from carbonization process by trapping the pyrolysis gases through a proper condensing unit. After some time, which might vary from days to even a few months, wood tar, which is a heavier fraction, decants at the bottom of the container and separates from PA. Several research efforts have been made to better know the chemical composition of PA, and more than 200 major compounds have been identified in variable concentrations.
Wood vinegar is also known as natural organic acids (Sasaki et al., 1999) that can maintain a low pH of gastric contents and subsequently modify or decrease the intestinal microflora (Thomlison and Lawrence, 1981; Kirchegessner and Roth, 1982; Burnell et al., 1988). Kim (1996) reported that wood vinegar also shows strong acid activity at pH 3 and contains 280 different components, the major ones being acetic and propionic and antioxidant substances like phenolic compounds (Loo et al., 2008). Chemical composition and concentration of compounds intrinsically depend on which original material is charred (Pimenta et al., 2000; Nakai et al., 2007; Rakmai 2009; Souza et al., 2012). According to these authors, major compounds present in pyroligneous extract include formic, acetic, propionic and valeric acids; methanol, butanol and amylic alcohol; phenol and cresols besides guaiacol and syringol derivatives; neutral compounds such as formaldehyde, acetone, furfural and valerolactone; among several others, as maltol, cyclotene, etc.
Furthermore, another research about PA is focused on its usage as a supplement in ruminant and monogastric animals feeding, favouring ruminal and intestinal flora additionally improving digestibility and nutrient absorption (Li and Ryu 2001; Kook and Kim 2002; Kook et al., 2003). PA was successfully used to substitute a conventional antibiotic (apramycin) in weanling pig feeding, as reported by Choi et al. (2009). According to these authors, higher populations of Lactobacillus were noted in the intestines of pigs fed with PA and a concomitant reduction in the population of harmful coliforms was verified as well. Such research line is rather important because the addition of antibiotics on animal feed is considered a practice to be restrained in the forthcoming years. Nachman (2016) pointed out that the misuse of antibiotics in feeding of pigs is accredited to be responsible for a crescent spread of multi-antibiotic-resistant bacteria; some of them were able to hold out even with some of the last-resort antibiotics.

Uses of Wood Vinegar
Wood vinegar was reported to have an inhibiting effect on the growth of bad bacteria, reduction of alkaline carcinogen absorption, enhancement of calcium and magnesium absorption and increase blood circulation by promoting acidity in the large intestine (Rakmai, 2009). It has a variety benefits such as adjust bacterial levels in the digestive tract and improved meat quality when mixed with animal feed (Burnette, 2010). It was reported to have an inhibiting effect on the growth of bad bacteria, reduction of alkaline carcinogen absorption, enhancement of calcium and magnesium absorption and increase blood circulation by promoting acidity in the large intestine (Rakmai, 2009). The good point is, it is considered as probiotic added to the feeds and drinking water of livestock and poultry to enhance proper digestion for easy nutrient absorption and to remove pigpen odor (Sarian, 2017). There are a lot of microbial products supplemented to feeds that may exert beneficial effects to the animals (Lettat et al., 2012 and Chiquette 2009).
It also promotes digestion, nutrition adsorption and reduction of diarrhea. It reduces the number of Cryptosporidium parvumoocyst (Watarai and Tana, 2008). Currently, organic acids are considered as one of the attractive feed additives for weanling pigs (Jensen, 1998; Partanen and Mroz, 1999). In animal production, wood vinegar can be used as feed additive that served as an alternative for antibiotics (Wang et al., 2012): induction of increased production rate and efficiency of chicken (Yamauchi et al., 2010). It also improved growth performance of ducks (Ruttanavut et al., 2009) and pigs (Wang et al., 2012) and inhibits the action of harmful coiliforms in pigs (Choi et al., 2009). Watarai and Tana (2005) observed that wood vinegar has two major effects against intestinal bacteria. First, it inhibits the growth of pathogenic bacteria like S. enteriditis. Second, it stimulates the growth of normal bacterial flora which serves as probiotics such as E. faecium and B. thermophilum in the intestine. Watarai et al. (2008) found out that the use of bamboo vinegar combined with bamboo charcoal was an efficient treatment for cryptosporidiosis in calves. However, there are no reports about bamboo vinegar used as feed additive in animal production. The evaluation of toxicological safety by Sprague Dawley (SD) rats and mice has proven that the bamboo vinegar was safe to animals as oral medicine (Chen et al., 2007). Therefore, bamboo vinegar can be regarded as a secure feed additive as an alternative to antibiotics in food animal production. Pigs fed antibiotic showed higher (Pb0.001) ADG and better feed efficiency followed by pigs fed 0.2% wood vinegar and 0.2% organic acid diets while those fed the control diet had lowest ADG and poorest feed efficiency. Kim (1996), reported that wood vinegar also shows strong acid activity at pH 3 and contains 280 different components, the major ones being acetic and propionic and antioxidant substances like phenolic compounds (Loo et al., 2008).
According to Luo et al., (2004) reported that the used of bamboo vinegar had antimicrobial activity on E. coli even at dilution of 1:100. Previous works (Lin and Shiah, 2006; Lin et al., 2006; Shiah et al., 2006) had established a clear positive relationship between bamboo vinegar and fungi resistance. The variation of bacterial communities observed in the high concentration treatment of bamboo vinegar may be attributed to the inhibitory effect of the bamboo vinegar on the fecal bacteria. The acetic acid concentration in vinegar was 2% in the vinegar, this computes to a concentration of 0.004–0.016% acetic acid in the diets containing bamboo vinegar in the trial. Although, the acetic acid in the diets might influence pH of feed, the action on pH in the intestine was insignificant due to the buffering capacity of the body (our unpublished data), thus acetic acid from bamboo vinegar in diets may not affect the fecal bacterial communities of piglets. It is inferred that the effect of bamboo vinegar on bacterial communities attributes to the active components such as phenolic compounds in bamboo vinegar. Higher populations of lactobacillus were noted in the ileum of pigs fed the wood vinegar diet, while the population of coliforms in the ileum and cecum was higher (Pb0.001) in pigs fed the control diet when compared with pigs fed antibiotic, 0.2% organic acid or 0.2% wood vinegar diets (Choi et al., 2009). These results indicated that wood vinegar could reduce harmful intestinal coliforms, but increase the probiotics (Choi et al., 2009). It is inferred that the action mode of bamboo vinegar like wood vinegar most probably differs from antibiotic.
In addition, the study conducted by Choi et al., (2009), the overall ADFI was highest (Pb0.001) in pigs fed wood vinegar and lowest in pigs fed the control diet. In this study, adding 0.4% bamboo vinegar in feed was effective in improving the performance of piglets compared with the pigs fed diets containing antibiotics. Due to the higher feed intake of pigs in BV4 and antibiotics, the final weight and daily weight gain for pigs in both treatments were significantly higher than those in control, therefore feed to gain ratio was not significantly different among treatments. The physical condition was good for animals on bamboo vinegar, similar to animals treated with antibiotics during the whole experiment. The results manifested that the bamboo vinegar has the potential to replace antibiotics.
Many countries have been using wood vinegar as pesticides in where commercial pesticides are not available or too expensive especially for small scale farmers. The need to minimize the environmental impact caused by using pesticides that leached to the ground water and waterways has been encouraged across the globe through the use of wood vinegar as biocide and pesticide (Tiilikkala et al., 2010). It also showed potential biological activities as larvicidal, pupicidal and adult deformities against M. domestica by reducing the growth, development and metamorphosis as well as decreasing the life span of the adult insect (Pangnakorn et al., 2012).
According to De Guzman (2009), wood vinegar must be blended with water in a ratio of 1:50 (1 liter wood vinegar and 50 liters water), or up to a ratio of 1:800 (1 liter wood vinegar and 800 liters water). He also cited that as feed additive, it has the effect of adjusting the bacteria in the intestines and facilitating absorption of nutrients. In milk cows, wood vinegar helps prevent mastitis. Another study on the effect of wood vinegar on the performance, nutrient digestibility and intestinal microflora in weanling pigs revealed that wood vinegar could improve the performance of weanling pigs by improving the nutrient digestibility and reducing harmful intestinal coliforms (Choi et al., 2009). Generally, the performance of pigs fed with wood vinegar was superior to those fed with organic acid. In cattle, wood vinegar also improved meat quality, fertility rate, milk production, feed efficiency and prevented mastitis. In chicken egg production, farmers also claimed improved egg-laying performance in hens, better rearing characteristics, and better hatchability. Moreover, better taste of eggs, reduced cholesterol content, and thicker eggshells were also noted (De Guzman, 2009). In duck, growth performance tended to be improved with increasing SB from 0 to 1% supplemented in basal commercial diet (Ruttanavut et al., 2009).

Description of Prebiotics
Prebiotic is defined as a ‘non-digestible’ compound that, through its metabolization by microorganisms in the gut, modulates the composition and/or activity of the gut microbiota, thus, conferring a beneficial physiological effect on the host” as revealed by Bindels et al. (2015). Another definition of prebiotics is a non-digested food component that, through stimulation of growth and/or activity of a single type or a limited amount of microorganisms residing in the gastrointestinal tract, improve the health condition of a host” according also to Gibson and Roberfroid, (1995). Many different nutrients, such as pectins, cellulose and xylanes, favoured the development of various intestinal microorganisms. Prebiotics should not be extensively metabolized, but should induce targeted metabolic processes, thus bringing health benefits to the host’s ecosystem. The best documented benefits are associated with the use of indigestible oligosaccharides, such as fructans and galactans as revealed by Rastall and Gibson (2015).

Mode of Action of Prebiotics
When prebiotics reaches the large intestine, those substances become nutritional substrates for beneficial intestinal bacteria (Grajek, 2005). In terms of properties that determine a favorable effect on the host’s health, prebiotics may be divided into following groups: not digested (or only partially digested), not absorbed in the small intestine, poorly fermented by bacteria in the oral cavity, well fermented by seemingly beneficial intestinal bacteria and increase of Bifidobacterium count and of acetic acid level, with simultaneous reduction of intestinal pH, compared to the control group and the diet with an addition of inulin. That phenomenon is explained by, among others, easy degradability of bonds presents in the structure of fructo-oligosaccharides (FOS) and galactooligosaccharides (GOS) by certain enzymes, such as β-fructanosidase and β-galactosidase, commonly occurring in Bifidobacterium genus bacteria. Some types of nutritional fibre may be considered prebiotic. Prebiotics play a significant role in nutrition of both livestock and home pets. Some commonly used prebiotics are: FOS, oligofructose, trans-galacto-oligosaccharides (TOS), gluco-oligosaccharides, glico-oligosccharides, lactulose, lactitol, malto-oligosaccharides, xylo-oligosaccharides, stachyose and raffinose (Gajeck et al. 2005; Monsan and Paul, 1995; Orban et al., 1997; Patterson et al., 1997; Collins and Gibson, 1999). And according to Patterson and Burkholder (2005), when they reach the large intestine, those substances become nutritional substrates for beneficial intestinal bacteria
Meanwhile, Xu et al. (2003) checked effects of FOS used in doses: 0, 2, 4 and 8 g/kg feed on the activity of digestive enzymes and on intestinal morphology and microbiota. It was found that the administration of FOS at the dose of 4 g/ kg feed had a positive effect on the mean daily growth of studied animals, and on the growth of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus bacteria, with a simultaneous inhibition of growth of Escherichia coli in chickens’ gastrointestinal tract. On the other hand, in the study by Juśkiewicz et al. (2006) carried on turkeys for 8 weeks, no effect of FOS used at concentrations of 0.5, 1 and 2% was found on animal growth and productivity. However, reduction of the intestinal pH was noted in case of FOS administration at the concentration of 2%. Supplementation of broiler chickens’ diet with prebiotics results in reduction of gastrointestinal pH and increased Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium counts, caused by increased amount of volatile fatty acids (Ziggers, 2000).

Description of Probiotics
Probiotics can be defined as live microbial feed supplement, which beneficially affects the host animals by improving its intestinal balance as described by Fuller (1989). Probiotic comes from a Greek word means “for life” (Gibson and Fuller, 2000). Fermentation or nutrient digestion also influences some systemic functions such as lipid homeostasis (Clydesdale, 1997 and Roberfroid, 1996). Probiotic foods have been consumed as a part of food components for centuries. Functional foods usually targeted the gastrointestinal functions including those that control transit time, bowel habits, and mucosal motility as well as those that modulate epithelial cell proliferation. Bellisle et al., (1998) stated that foods can be functional if they contain components that affect certain functions in the body with positive effects on health or if it has a physiology or physiologic effects beyond the traditional nutritional effects (Clydesdale, 1997).

Mode of Action of Probiotics
Probiotics act as gut-beneficial bacteria that create a physical barrier against unfriendly bacteria, help offset the bacterial imbalance caused by taking antibiotics, and may help breakdown protein and fat in the digestive tract (www health harvard edu. The benefits of Probiotic Bacteria). Depending on the kind of feeds being fed to piglets, the ratio between the population of lactic acid bacteria and coliforms differs in the lower gut (Moran et al., 2006). When fed with fermented liquid feed, the ratio favors to the lactic acid bacteria while when fed dried feeds favors the coliforms. Using fermented liquid feeds; the composition of the microbial population in the gastrointestinal tract can be altered. It is usually due to the increase in the concentration of the lactic acid bacteria in the stomach and small intestine (Canibe and Jensen, 2003). The same authors also reviewed the value of fermented liquid feed in reducing enteric diseases in pigs, and a lot of studies support that fermented liquid feed can reduce the incidence of Salmonella spp. (Tielen et al., 1997; Lo Fo Wong et al., 2004; Vander Wolf et al., 1999; and Vander Wolf et al., 2001). Based on the study conducted by Canibe and Jensen (2003) the results showed there are changes in pH in the different parts of the G.I tract when the pigs are feed fermented liquid feed or dried feed. Lalles et al., (2007) added that the most significant change is a decrease in the pH of the stomach which serves as a barrier against pathogens and by lowering the pH may strengthen the stomach and prevent scouring due to coliforms. The low pH especially in newly weaned piglets is attributed to their incapacity of producing sufficient amounts of gastric acid (Easter et al., 1993 as cited by Partridge et al., 1993).
The significant change is affected also by the fermentation conditions. For example, in the study conducted by Canibe and Jensen (2003), they found out that there is no significant difference in the population of lactic acid bacteria in the distal small intestine of growing pigs when the GI content was 37 0 C. however, with an incubation temperature of 20 0 C, the population of the lactic acid bacteria in the same part of the intestine has significantly higher when pigs are fed with fermented liquid feed compare to fed with dried feed or liquid feed. Yeast cells also have significantly increased with the change in the population of microbes in the intestine. There are some studies shows that yeast has the ability to bind enterobacteria to their surface thus preventing them to bind in the gut epithelium (Mul and Perry, 1994). Increasing the number of lactic acid bacteria and yeasts can be a good method of reducing the enteropathogens such as Salmonella spp. and E. coli.

Uses of Probiotics
Different strains of probiotic bacteria has different effects based on their specific capabilities and enzymatic activities even they belong to single species (Ouwehand et al., 1999; Bernet et al., 2003) and also different microorganisms express preference in their habitat which may defer in various host species (Freter, 1992). Most of the bacterial colonies adhere to the intestinal wall and so does the probiotic. Thus, the colonies are not swept away due to the peristalses along the intestinal wall and prevent the pathogenic bacterial colonization along the intestinal wall and prevent disease development (Fuller, 2000). Among the indigenous flora colonizing the chicken’s crop, stomach of mice and rats, and the lower ileum in man are the Lactobacilli. Bacteria colonizing such high-transit-rate sites must adhere firmly to the mucosal epithelium (Savage, 1972). Proliferation of useful bacteria facilitates fermentation in all kinds of animals including humans and this fermentation has nutritional significance in most of the animals (Ahmad, 2004). Probiotics have effect on the main physiological functions of the gastrointestinal tract, which are digestion, absorption and propulsion (Fioramonti et al., 2003). Ahmad (2004) reported that there is an increase of crypt cells proliferation on small intestines with the use of probiotics as compared to control. This mechanism of useful bacteria is very important especially in the ruminants and to some non-ruminants because it gives substantial amount of energy to the host.
Probiotics has been commonly studied in poultry and livestock production. In poultry, chicks administered with probiotics shows reduction in colonization and invasions of Salmonella (Higgins et al., 2008; Vila et al., 2009), decreased mortality (Timmerman et al., 2006), and increased body weight (Mountzouris et al., 2007). In the study conducted by Vicente et al., (2007) on the effects of probiotics in the growth performance of broilers, there is a significant difference in the reduction of mortality rate among treatments. However, there is no significant difference in the feed conversion ratio and body weight.
In pigs, probiotics supplementation on swine ration has been demonstrated to decrease the pathogen load (Taras et al., 2006; Collado et al., 2007). Ameliorate gastrointestinal diseases symptoms (Zhang et al., 2010b) and improved weight gain (Konstantinov et al., 2008). There are some studies reveal that the microorganisms use in the probiotic products are the same in animal and humans. The most common species used is the lactobacillus species followed by the bifido bacteria. Since most of this species are lactic acid producing bacteria, they inhibits the growth of coliforms in the G.I tract in piglets through the reduction of pH of the said part since acidic environments are detrimental to some pathogens according by Fuller (1989) and as cited by Chiquette (2009).
Several studies show beneficial effects of probiotics in ruminant’s health as well to its milk production. That is why there are a lot of microbial products supplemented to feeds that may exert beneficial effects to the animals. In a recent study conducted by Lettat et al., (2012) and Chiquette (2009), their results showed that probiotic bacteria (propionic bacteria and lactobacilli) were ineffective in ameliorating lactic acidosis but some of the probiotics maybe effective in reducing occurrence of butyric and propionic SARA in sheep (Lettat et al., 2012). In adult ruminants, it is about 100 liters, and it harbors bacteria (1011 cells/ml), protozoa (105 cells/ml), fungi (103 cells/ml), and methanogens (109 cells/ml) in volume (Chiquette, 2009). These products are not attributed with specific nutritional roles and are given the term ‘probiotics” lactobacillus acidophilus, for example, appears to endowed with the ability to reduce scouring and increase live weight gain in calves, but the effects are not consistent between trials. Yeast cultures may also be used as Probiotic (Wallace and Newbold, 1992).

Pork Quality
Meat quality is a highly subjective topic which the industry and consumers agree on a number of important quality indicators like tenderness, juiciness, appearance (color and structure), fat and protein content, drip and cooking loss, fat quality, and off-odors (Borggaard and Andersen, 2004). As a major source of food, pork provides a significant portion of the protein intake in the diets of a large proportion of the people, particularly in developing countries. Pork is cheap and highly acceptable, which gives it an advantage over poultry or beef (Eyo, 2001). Pork has essential sulphur-containing amino acids such as cysteine, methionine and lysine which are limiting in some legumes and most cereal-based diets (Borgstrom, 1962). However, pork is highly perishable, being a high-protein food with typically high levels of free amino acids of which microbes metabolize, producing ammonia, biogenic amines (putrescine, histamine, and cadaverine), organic acids, ketones, and sulphur compounds (Delgaard et al., 2006).
Pork is the culinary name for meat from the domestic pig (Sus domesticus). The word pork often denotes specifically the fresh meat of the pig, but can be used as an all-inclusive term that includes cured, smoked, or processed meats (ham, bacon, prosciutto, etc.). Pigs are found throughout the world especially in areas where no religious edicts prevent their rearing. They are raised for various reasons ranging from social to economics, but the ultimate purpose of rearing pigs is to provide human food in the form of fresh or processed pork to satisfy the protein needs of human beings (Raloff, 2003).
The properties of fresh meat according Aberle and Forrest (2001) indicate its usefulness to the merchandiser, its appeal to the purchaser or consumer and its adaptability for further processing which particular importance are water-holding capacity, colour, structure, firmness and texture. Water-holding capacity (WHC) is the ability of meat to retain naturally occurring or added water during application of external forces such as cutting, heating, grinding or pressing (Aberle and Forrest, 2001). Many of the physical properties of meat, including colour, texture and firmness of raw meat and the juiciness and tenderness of cooked meat are partially dependent on water holding capacity (Aberle and John, 2001). In addition, the freshness of meat is generally indicated by its smell. The smell of fresh meat should be slightly acidic, increasing in relation to the duration of the ripening period because of the formation of acids such as lactic acid (Hui and Wai-Kit, 2001). On the other hand, meat in decomposition generates an increasingly unpleasant odor owing to substances originating from the bacterial degradation of the meat proteins, such as sulphur compounds, mercaptane, etc. (Hui and Wai-Kit, 2001).
The appearance of meat, either as a carcass or as boneless meat cuts, has an important impact on its objective or subjective evaluation. Although in modern grading procedures, more and more technical equipment has been incorporated, visual methods are still in use. They can be of special value in most developing countries where no extremely sophisticated methods are needed. The way the consumers or the processors check the appearance of meat is subjective. Differences will be registered in the relation of lean meat and fat including the degree of marbling or in the relation of bones and lean meat. Furthermore, unfavorable influences can be detected such as unclean meat surfaces, surfaces too wet or too dry, or unattractive blood splashes on muscle tissue. It was noted that evaluating the appearance, special product treatment (chilling, freezing, cooking, curing, smoking, drying) and quality of portioning and packaging (casings, plastic bags, and cans) would be recognized (FAO, 1999).
Under normal circumstances, the color of meat is in the range of red and may differ from dark red, bright red to slightly red; but also pink, grey and brown colors may occur. In many cases, the color indicates the type and stage of the treatment to which the meat has been subjected, as well as the stage of freshness. In judging meat color, some experience is needed to be able to distinguish between the colors which is typical for a specific treatment or which is typical for specific freshness. Furthermore, meat derived from different species of animals may have rather different colors, as can easily be seen when comparing beef, pork and poultry meat (FAO, 1999). Remarkable changes in the meat color occur when fresh meat has been boiled or cooked. It loses its red color almost entirely and turns to grey or brown (FAO, 1999). The reason for this is the destruction of the myoglobin through heat treatment. This is the typical color shown in sausages of all types, raw and cooked hams, corned beef, others (FAO, 1999). Cured products with a decreasing keeping quality can be recognized when the red color becomes pale or changes to grey or green. Meat color is mainly determined by the incident light reflectance that is dependent upon the concentration and chemical state of myoglobin pigments and the physical structure of meat. The first 30-60 minutes immediately after muscle tissue is exposed to air are critical to myoglobin oxygenation and “bloom” of muscle colour from the typical colour of reduced myoglobin (purple) to that typical oxymyoglobin (red) (Brewer et al., 2001). Myoglobin is the principal protein responsible for meat color, although other proteins such as hemoglobin and cytochrome C may also play a role in beef, lamb, pork and poultry color (Harold and Hedrick, 1994). Metmyoglobin (brown color) formation is associated with discoloration or color fading due to oxidation of both ferrous myoglobin derivatives to ferric iron (Harold and Hedrick, 1994). Metmyoglobin formation depends on numerous factors including oxygen, partial pressure, temperature, pH, meat reducing activity and in some cases, microbial growth (Harold and Hedrick, 1994).
Structure, firmness and texture are meat properties that are generally evaluated by consumers with visual, tactile and gustatory senses. Many factors within muscles such as rigor state and associated water-holding properties, intramuscular fat content, connective tissue content and bundle size contribute to these physical properties (Aberle and Forrest, 2001). The texture of meat can be defined as the composite of the structural elements of meat (Varnam and Sutherland, 1995). As the meats are consumed in the cooked state, the texture of cooked meat is interpreted as tenderization (Hui and Wai-Kit, 2001). The tenderization of meat occurs in two steps; a rapid phase that is mainly due to the structural weakening of myofibrils and a slow phase caused by the structural weakening of the intramuscular connective tissue (endomysium and perimysium) (Pearson and Gillet, 1999). Meat prepared for the consumer should be tender and juicy. Meat tenderness depends on the animal species from which the meat originates. Lamb, pork and poultry meat are sufficiently tender after slaughter, but beef requires a certain period of maturation to achieve optimal eating quality (FAO, 1999). Texture and consistency, including juiciness, are an important criterion, still neglected by many consumers, for the eating quality of meat. The meat should be cooked to become sufficiently tender, but cooking should not be too intense otherwise the meat becomes dry, hard and with no juiciness (FAO, 1999). The simple way to check the consistency of foods is by chewing. Although this test seems easy, in practice it is rather complicated. Taste panelists need experience, particularly when the different samples have to be ranked, for example, which sample is the toughest, the second toughest or the tenderers. On the other hand, inappropriate processing methods (too intensive cooking, curing, comminuting) may cause losses in the desired consistency and juiciness, and the best way to check this is by chewing (FAO, 1999).
The flavor of fresh meat can also be checked by putting small samples (approx. 10 pieces of 1 cm3 each) in preheated water of 80°C for about five minutes (boiling test). The odour of the cooking broth and the taste of the warm meat samples will indicate whether the meat was fresh or in deterioration or subject to undesired influences (FAO, 1999). When processing the meat, the smell and taste of the meat products can differ a great deal owing to heat treatment and the use of salt, spices and food additives. Every meat product has its typical smell and taste, and the test person should know about it (FAO, 1999). Panelists should not smoke or eat spicy meals before starting the test and should rinse their mouth frequently with water during the test (FAO, 1999).

Nutritive Value and Quality of Pork
Every serving (0.1 kg) of pork contains 242 kcal, 13.92 g fat (5.23 g saturated fat, 6.19 g monounsaturated fat, and 1.2 g polyunsaturated fat), and 27.32 g protein. It also contains 0.464 mg vitamin B6, 0.70 μg vitamin B12, 93.9 mg choline, 0.6 mg vitamin C, 53 IU vitamin D, and trace minerals such calcium (19 mg), iron (0.87 mg), magnesium (28 mg), phosphorus (246 mg), potassium (423 mg), sodium (62 mg), and zinc (2.39 mg) as found on the USDA Nutrient Database (USDA Handbook, 1989). Pork has up to 72.96% moisture, 21.52% crude protein, 3.42% crude fat, and 1.10% ash (USDA Handbook, 1989). Warris et al. (2003) approximated pork to have a chemical composition of 60% water, 4% minerals, 20% proteins, 15% fats (lipids), and 1% carbohydrates. There are several factors affecting the characteristics of meat. As for consumers to decide during purchase, eating and physical qualities are important considerations, and are relative across cultures and individual preferences (Sanudo et al., 1998). According to Hambrecht (2004), the key factors of most quality assurance schemes are food safety and ethical aspects. Warris et al. (1996) stated that the major factors affecting meat quality are: yield and gross composition; appearance and technological characteristics; palatability; wholesomeness, and ethical quality.
Meanwhile, the amount of marbling, fat texture, color, chemical composition, and Water Holding Capacity (WHC) of the lean describes the quality of meat in terms of appearance and technological characteristics (Monin, 1998; Warris, 2000). Moreover, palatability can be defined through tenderness, juiciness and flavor or odor whereas wholesomeness considers nutritional quality, chemical safety, and microbiological safety (Gunenc, 2006). Lastly, ethical quality is related to people’s belief that the animals where the meat come from should be of good animal husbandry, and should be bred, reared, handled and slaughtered in ways that are sympathetic to animal welfare (Forian, 2006).
Change in meat pH is one of the indicators of meat quality. The ultimate pH attained after the muscle has passed the stage of rigor mortis, is one of the identifiers of meat quality which has a significant relationship with water-holding capacity (WHC) and color after the onset of rigor. Rodriguez et al. (2011) stated that pH readings taken at 45 minutes post-slaughter do not guarantee the final behavior of pH, water-holding capacity and color unless equal to or less than pH 5.8. At 24-hour post-mortem, most of the aerobic biochemical processes have finalized, and so pH is determinant for final characteristics of pork.
Likewise, Du (2001) stated that variations in meat pH are a result of post-mortem metabolism or glycolysis and the conversion of glycogen into lactic acid. In addition, changes in physiological parameters affect meat quality. Increase in blood lactate concentration is associated with pre-slaughter stress, and has been shown to have a detrimental effect on pork quality (Hambrecht et al., 2005, Edwards et al., 2010a). Hambrecht et al. (2004) determined that pigs exposed to aggressive handling just prior to stunning had a higher blood lactate concentration at slaughter and exhibited pork with higher drip loss and thus proposed that lactate was a potential indicator of both physical and psychological stress associated with the handling of pigs immediately before slaughter. Furthermore, the level of cortisol is an individual characteristics of each animal (Miale, 1972), and it affects the amount of fat in the body, meatiness, and thus, carcass quality (Foury et al., 2007).

Technological Categories of Pork Quality
There are three important parameters to define pork quality: drip loss, ultimate pH and color (Lee et al., 2000), and using these parameters, meat can be classified into the five quality categories; PSE (pale, soft, exudative), normal or RFN (red, firm, non-exudative), DFD (dark, firm, dry), RSE (reddish-pink, soft, exudative) and PFN (pale, firm, non-exudative) meat (Kauffman et al., 1992). It is well known that changes in some meat quality traits can affect many other meat quality attributes and overall pork quality (Huff-Lonergan, 2010).
The pH declines and cell membranes are disrupted during postmortem (Fortin and Raymond, 1988), and the amount of intra and extracellular fluid changes. At low pH (<5.4) proteins in meat with poor WHC do not bind to free water tightly. On the other hand, water holding capacity or WHC is the ability of the meat to retain moisture or water determined by the amount of drip loss. Loss of meat water is a result of shrinkage of muscle proteins, such as actin and myosin because water holding capacity or WHC of the meat largely depends on the rate of glycogen conversion to lactic acid and its accumulation during the conversion of muscle to meat (Meat Evaluation Handbook, 2001). Several meat quality characteristics are correlated with pH value after 24 hours. In pigs with lower ultimate pH values, higher drip loss (Huff-Lonergan, 2010; Hambrecht et al., 2004; Edwards et al., 2010a) and lighter colour (Huff-Lonergan, 2010; Hambrecht et al., 2005; Boler et al., 2008; Edwards et al., 2010b) were measured. In carcasses with rapid development of rigor mortis, ultimate pH values were significantly lower (Warriss et al., 2003). Contrary to those findings, in this study, ultimate pH value was positively correlated only with marbling, as was also observed by other authors (Boler et al., 2008; Czarniecka-Skubiņa et al., 2010). This can be explained by the fact that energy reserves in muscle fibers are distributed among intramuscular fat and glycogen, and muscles with lower glycogen content have a higher intramuscular fat content. Sensory Evaluation Sensory evaluation has been defined as “a scientific method used to evoke, measure, analyze, and interpret those responses to products as perceived through the sense of sight, smell, touch, taste and hearing” (Stone and Sidel, 1993). Sensory analysis is a useful tool when evaluating the quality of foods frequently used both in the food industry and research. Sensory analysis can be used in quality control (of e.g. raw material, process and product), product development (copying competing products, product improvement) and shelf life evaluation (Sensorisk Studiegruppe, 1997). Borggaard and Andersen (2004) stated that the important meat traits include tenderness, juiciness, appearance (color and texture), fat and protein content, drip and cooking loss, fat quality, and off-odors. In addition, as regards meat quality, Risvik (1994) added that the main sensory descriptors for the perception of whole meat in relation to preferences are tenderness, juiciness and absence of off-flavor. 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS Preparation of Experimental Pigs A total of nine (9) newly weaned (30 days old) Landrace x Large White piglets with (3 females and 6 castrated males) from the same litter were used in the study. The males and females have been randomly and equally distributed to the different treatments to eliminate the effect of sex. All necessary deworming, iron supplementation and immunization was given as scheduled. Upon arrival at the experimental area, multi-vitamin/mineral supplement was given to prevent transport stress. The experimental piglets were given the usual commercial pre-starter feeds given at the farm, and was gradually shifted to the experimental diet after five days of feeding. Figure 1. Experimental pigs given wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels of wood vinegar Preparation of Experimental Diets The wood vinegar (WV) was acquired from the production area of the Department of Agriculture-Abuyog Experiment Station, Balinsasayaw, Abuyog, Leyte. The experimental rations were prepared based on the different treatments as follows: T0-Control (100% Plain Water or 0% WV), T1 – (PW+ 2%WV) and T2 – (PW+ 5%WV). Based on the specified plain water (PW) and wood vinegar (WV) ratio, the specific amount of WV was thoroughly mixed with the PW before adding and mixing into the commercial ration. A ratio of 3L of PW and WV solution for every kilogram of feeds was used in order to totally submerge the feeds to come-up to anaerobic condition requirement. Then, the feed-liquid mixture was placed in a properly labeled and tightly covered containers and stored inside a cool dry area at room temperature for about 8-12 hours. The daily experimental ration that was based on the requirement of the animal was prepared in the morning for afternoon feeding, and in the afternoon for the morning feeding of the next day to prevent rancidity. Preparation of Experimental Area Existing pigpens in the piggery of the Department of Animal Science-College of Agriculture and Food Science, Visayas State University Main Campus, Visca, Baybay City, Leyte was utilized. The three large concrete pigpens were equally divided into three partitions with 1.0 m height, 1.5 m length, and 1.0 m width. Two weeks before the conduct of the study, the pigpens, facilities and surrounding areas were thoroughly cleaned and disinfected. Feeding and Water Management The wet and fermented commercial ration was prepared on daily basis, and was provided based on the daily requirement for crossbred grower-pigs. The feeding schedule was at 7:00 AM and 4:00 PM, thereafter, the feed refuse was recorded to account for the daily feed consumption. Fresh drinking water was available at all times during the whole duration of the study. Health Management, Sanitation and Biosecurity Measures The standard procedure for health management as prescribed by the Philippine National Standard has been followed. Antibiotics were not used during the study period. Simultaneous with the bathing of the pigs, the daily and regular cleaning schedule of the pens and facilities were strictly implemented from 6:30 AM and 3:30 PM. For biosecurity reason, unauthorized persons and stray animals were strictly prohibited within the research vicinity. Experimental Treatments and Design The wood vinegar (WV) was incorporated into the Plain Water (PW) at different levels based on the treatments as follows: T0 (Control)-100% PW or 0% WV (3L PW) T1 –PW+ 2% WV (3L: 60 ml) T2 –PW+ 5% WV (3L: 150 ml) Using a Completely Randomized Design (CRD) set-up, a total of nine (9) piglets were randomly distributed to three (3) treatments and replicated three (3) times with one (1) animal per replication as shown in the lay-out: T0 R1 T1 R2 T0 R2 T2 R1 T1 R3 T1 R1 T2 R3 T0 R3 T2 R2 Management of Pigs Prior and During Slaughter After the 60-days feeding trial, the experimental pigs were weighed and fasted for 24 hours prior to slaughter, and during which any excitement was avoided. The standard ante-mortem techniques were strictly followed to minimize stress-related handling procedures. The animals were weighed and driven to the stunning area in a quiet and orderly manner without undue fuss and noise. Immediately after stunning, the animals were bled via jugular incision to drain out blood for 5 minutes. Thereafter, the standard procedure for scalding and evisceration followed. For assessment and sample collection, the whole carcass was halved based on the standard procedure. Preparation of the Whole Carcass and Carcass Samples A total of nine (9) whole carcasses were weighed in order to obtain the hot carcass weight. Each whole carcass was properly coded and placed on the table for data collection. The whole carcasses were sliced symmetrically into the left half and the right half. Carcass samples for each parameter that require further laboratory analyses were taken from Longissimus dorsi part of the muscle. The required quantity per sample was placed in pre-coded ziplock plastic, and was placed inside the chiller. Carcass Quality Evaluation Procedure At 45 minutes after slaughter, data on pH, temperature and water holding capacity of the left and right halves of the carcasses using the Longgissimus dorsi muscle were recorded. This procedure was repeated 24 hours post slaughter for determining extent of post-mortem changes. Proximate analysis was carried out using Kjeldahl procedure. Data Gathered A. Physical Characteristics of Pork: 1. Hot Carcass Weight (HCW) – the weight of the animals immediately after slaughter was recorded. 2. Dressing Percentage (DP) – the percent of the live animal that ends up as carcass. It was obtained using the formula: DP (%) = Hot Carcass Weight (kg) x 100 Live Weight (kg) 3. Backfat Thickness (BFT) – was computed by getting the mean of the three points: opposite of first rib, last rib and last lumbar vertebra. The backfat was measured using a ruler and values were rounded to the nearest 0.1 of an inch (Appendix Figure 3C). 4. Carcass Length (CL) – measured using a tape measure from the cranial edge of the 1st rib adjacent to the backbone and the cranial edge of the aitch bone (Appendix Figure 3A). 5. Loin Eye Area (LEA) – measured by obtaining the Longgisimus dorsi muscle between the 10th and 11th ribs on the pork carcasses (Appendix Figure 3B). B. Chemical Characteristics of Pork Carcass/Meat 1. pH – carcasses were measured and recorded 45 minutes after slaughter using pH meter, and was repeated 24 hours post mortem (Appendix Figure 4A). 2. % Drip Loss – 20g of steaks from Longgisimus dorsi were prepared and with the external fat removed, weighed in a semi-analytical balance, and cooked within 5 minutes until it reached up to 80°C without the addition of condiments (Appendix Figure 4B). The internal temperature of the samples was monitored during cooking using laboratory food thermometer. When internal temperature of samples reached up to 80°C, it was taken from the heater and cooled at room temperature, and then weighed. Weight loss by cooking was expressed in percentage of water lost in relation to the original sample weight (Gunenc, 2006). 3. Meat Color – each meat sample was left exposed to the air for 15 minutes in order to bloom. Thereafter, each meat sample was dried up with paper absorbent and the color was measured using a colorimeter (apps) Minolta Lovibond LC 100 which includes the components of the color system of Minolta L* values indicates darker colored, Minolta a* values represent red to green color with a higher value indicating more red colors and Minolta b* values represent yellow to blue color with a higher value indicating more yellow (Gentry et al., 2002). C. Proximate Analysis of Meat Samples: 1. % Dry Matter (DM) – this is calculated by taking the differences in weights of wet and dried meat samples using the formula below; % DM = 100 – % Moisture Content % Moisture (MC) = weight before drying – weight after drying x 100 Sample weight 2. Crude Protein (%CP) – determined by using Kjeldahl Procedure (Appendix Figure A,B,C) % CP = % N x 6.25 Where: % N = (a-b) x N x 0.014 x 100 s a = mL of standard H2SO4 for titration of sample b = mL of standard H2SO4 for titration of blank s = weight of sample in grams N = normality standard for H2SO4 3. Ether Extract Content (%EE) – calculated using the formula: % Ether Extract = ODW before extraction – ODW after extraction x 100 ADW of sample (g) Where: ODW = Oven Dried Weight of sample ADW = Air Dried Weight of sample Data Analysis Data gathered were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Least Significant Difference (LSD) Test was used to compare treatment means using the Statistical Tool for Agricultural Research (STAR version 2.0.1). 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Hot Carcass Weight and Dressing Percentage Hot Carcass Weight (HCW) is the weight of the animal after it has been dressed. Result revealed no significant difference (p>0.05) between treatments (Table 1) implying that grower pigs given wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels of wood vinegar did not affect the carcass weight of grower pigs. The result was supported with the study conducted by Christian et al. (1980) that carcasses were associated with heavy slaughter weights. Although not significant, it was observed that pigs given wet and fermented commercial ration with 5 % WV exhibited higher HCW (32.23 kg) compared with the treatment 2% (28.50 kg) and 0% WV (28.33 kg) respectively. These findings might be due to the higher live weight of grower pigs given 5 % WV in the diet as compared to 2% and 0% WV, respectively.
Meanwhile, the Dressing Percentage (DP) relates the weight of the carcass to the weight of the live animal, and can be affected by factors like gut fill, fatness, and others. Results reflected insignificant (p>0.05) dressing percentage among treatments (Table 1 and Appendix Table 2). However, DP was slightly higher on grower-pigs given wet and fermented commercial ration with 2% WV (73.14%) followed by 5 % WV (71.75%) and 0% WV (71.39%), respectively. In this study, it was partly noted that at 2% and 5% WV, the heavier HCW were translated into slightly higher dress yield. Nevertheless, Young et al. (2001) explained that significant DP on pigs could also be attributed to a number of factors not only nutrition, but also genetic, slaughter conditions, live weight and carcass yield.

Table 1. Hot Carcass Weight (HCW) and Dressing Percentage (DP) of grower-pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus L.) given wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels of wood vinegar
Treatment HCW (kg) DP (%)
T0 –100% PW) 28.33 71.39
T1 –PW+ 2% WV 28.50 73.14
T2 –PW+ 5% WV 32.23 71.75
p-value 0.1269 0.6083

Backfat Thickness, Carcass Length and Loin Eye Area
Varying levels of wood vinegar did not significantly affect the Backfat Thickness, Carcass Length and Loin Eye Area of grower-pigs (Table 2). Although not significant, thinner back fat were noted at 5% WV (0.50 in) followed 0% WV (0.54 in) and 2 % WV (0.59 in). It should be noted that the amount of backfat on a pig is a genuine measure of overall finish and should be used as a judging tool whenever available. Cameron et al. (1999) reported that backfat thickness is related to slaughter weight, and
In terms of carcass length, it should be noted that it is slightly longer in 5 % WV (27.36 in) followed by 0% WV (26.80 in) and 2% WV (26.28 in). The longer carcass length in 5% WV might be related to slaughter weight of pigs. It should be pointed out that minimum carcass length of 29.5 inches (adjusted to 220 pounds live weight) has been established for eligibility in most carcass contests. Nonetheless, carcass length has little or no relationship to lean yield or carcass merit; although longer hogs are usually considered to be more productive in the breeding herd and feedlot.
Meanwhile, different levels of wood vinegar did not influence the Loin Eye Area of grower pigs. Yet, grower-pigs at 5 % WV had bigger LEA (6.99 in) followed by 0% WV (6.78 in) and 2% WV (6.65 in), but the overall results were inconclusive due to the short-time duration of the study. The findings on loin eye area are also related with breed and slaughter weight as revealed by Cameron et al. (1999).

Table 2. Backfat Thickness, Carcass Length and Loin Eye Area of grower-pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus L.) given wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels of wood vinegar
Treatment Backfat
Thickness (in) Carcass
Length (in) Loin Eye
Area (in)
T0–Plain Water PW) 0.54 26.80 6.78
T1 –PW+ 2% WV 0.59 26.28 6.65
T2 –PW+ 5% WV 0.50 27.36 6.99
p-value 0.1868 0.0955 0.1272

Drip Loss and pH of Meat Samples 45 minutes after Slaughter
Table 3 presents a significant drip loss values (P<0.01) and pH values (P<0.05) at 45 minutes after slaughter and displayed the influence (Table 3). Results revealed highest (P<0.01) percent drip loss (44.14 %) of pork from pigs at 0% WV followed by 2% WV (37.38%) and 5% WV (33.23 %). The higher percent crude protein (CP) values (Table 7) may have influenced drip loss as supported by Lonergan et al. (2007) who concluded that proteins are responsible for water binding in pork, and the higher protein, the lower is the drip loss. It should be recorded that drip loss may represent a large reduction in the yield of meat leading to financial losses as well as affecting the appearance, nutritional value and palatability of the meat to the consumer. Likewise, pH values revealed significantly lower (P<0.05) pH of pork at 5% WV (5.67) followed by 2% (5.64) and 0% WV (5.78). Although results are still within the normal range of ultimate pH from 5.6 to 5.7 within approximately 3 to 5 hours after slaughter, and did not exceed pH 6.0 to 6.2 that often causes dark, firm and dry pork. The significant result of lower pH values at 5%WV and 2% WV might be due to the presence of wood vinegar that is a known natural organic acid that can maintain a low pH of gastric contents Sasaki et al. (1999). In meat, the rate and extent of postmortem pH decline are very important factors affecting meat quality (Bendal, 1973), and a higher pH level means less acidity that is the main culprit in meat deterioration, discoloration and watery consistency. Table 3. Drip loss and pH of meat samples 45 minutes after slaughter of grower-pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus L.) given wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels of wood vinegar Treatment pH % Drip Loss T0 –Plain Water (PW) 5.78a 44.14b T1 –PW+ 2% WV 5.64b 37.38a T2 –PW+ 5% WV 5.67b 33.23a p-value 0.0350 * 0.0070** ** Column means with no common superscripts are significantly different (P<0.01) * Column means with no common superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05) Drip Loss and pH of Meat Samples at 24 hours Post-mortem Results of the study showed a different trend on Drip Loss and pH of pork after 24 hours post-mortem, and were not significantly affected by varying levels of wood vinegar (Table 4). A slightly higher drip loss was noted on pork from grower-pigs at 5% WV (29.69%) followed by 2% WV (29.66%) and 0% WV (29.64%). In terms of pH values, comparably lower pH value (5.39) were noted on pork from grower pigs at 5% WV and 2% WV than 0 % WV (5.47). The pH decline from 45 minutes to 24 hour after slaughter, suggest that post mortem glycolysis happens and then lactic acid starts to build-up in the muscle thereby decline in pH among treatments. Lonergan et al. (2008) disclosed that it is primarily affected by amount of glycogen in muscles at the time of slaughter, the rate of post mortem glycolysis, pre-slaughter factors and post mortem carcass chilling. Table 4. Drip loss and pH of meat samples 24 hours after slaughter of grower-pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus L.) given wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels of wood vinegar Treatment pH % Drip Loss T0 –Plain Water (PW) 5.47 29.64 T1 –PW+ 2% WV 5.39 29.66 T2 –PW+ 5% WV 5.39 29.69 p-value 0.7522 1.0 Meat Color 45 Minutes Post Mortem Except for L* values (lighter color values), the red to green color and yellow to blue color of pork carcasses 45 minutes post mortem were not significantly affected by varying levels of wood vinegar (Table 5). The pork from grower-pigs given wet and fermented commercial ration with 0 % WV revealed lightest (p<0.01) meat color (66.23), followed 2% WV (61.10), and 5% WV (56.37). The L* value illustrates whether the meat is dark or pale. Solomon et al. (1998) mentioned that pH decline may induce protein denaturation resulting to pale muscle coloration. A combination of relatively low pH and high temperature results in proteins denaturation that reduces WHC and results in a pale color (Du, 2016). Meanwhile, a* values correspond to red to green color with higher values indicated more red colors. The insignificant results (Table 5) implied no variation among all treatments of grower-pigs given wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels WV. However, meat from grower-pigs given at 5% WV revealed slightly higher a* value (13.50) indicating more red colors, followed by 12.53 a* value at 0% WV, and the 7.90 a* value at 2% WV lowest showing least red color. The b* values illustrated yellow to blue color, and higher values indicated more yellow color. Although not significant, pork from the grower-pigs at 0% WV has a higher value (3.77) indicating more yellow color followed by grower 5% WV (2.37) and 2% (2.23) as reflected in Table 5. Table 5. Meat color of meat samples 45 minutes after slaughter of grower pigs given commercial ration fermented with varying levels of wood vinegar Treatment L* values a* values b* values T0 –Plain Water (PW) 66.23b 12.53 3.77 T1 –PW+ 2% WV 61.10a 7.90 2.23 T2 –PW+ 5% WV 56.37a 13.50 2.37 p-value 0.0085 ** 0.5044 0.2066 ** – Column means are highly significant (P<0.01) L* values indicates lighter color a* values represent red to green color with a higher value indicating more red colors b* values represent yellow to blue color with a higher value indicating more yellow Meat Color 24 Hours Post Mortem The overall results on meat color of pork carcasses 24 hours post mortem were insignificantly affected by varying levels of wood vinegar (Table 6). However, slightly darker meat was noted in 5% (58.57) followed by same L* values of (59.33) in 2% and 0% WV. Results probably imply darker meat due to wood vinegar inclusion. The a* values of pork color which correspond to red to green color with higher values indicating more red colors. Although not significant, meat from grower pigs given wet and fermented commercial ration with 2 % levels of wood vinegar revealed higher a* value (11.17) indicating more red colors followed 0% (10.67), and 5 % WV (9.57). On the other hand, b* values illustrate yellow to blue color with a higher value indicating more yellow color. Similarly, revealed insignificant effect of varying wood vinegar levels showing 0% WV having higher b* value (2.80) indicating more yellow color, and this was followed by 5% WV (5.77) and 2 % WV (1.83) as presented in Table 6. Table 6. Meat color of meat samples 24 hours after slaughter of grower-pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus L.) given wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels of wood vinegar Treatment L* values a* values b* values T0 –Plain Water (PW) 59.33 10.67 2.80 T1 –PW+ 2% WV 59.33 11.17 1.83 T2 –PW+ 5% WV 58.57 9.57 2.77 p-value 0.9641 0.5849 0.4759 L* values indicates lighter color a* values represent red to green color with a higher value indicating more red colors b* values represent yellow to blue color with a higher value indicating more yellow Dry Matter, Moisture, Crude Fat and Crude Protein Content of Pork Except Crude Protein, the Dry Matter (DM), Moisture (MC), and Crude Fat (CF) of meat samples from grower pigs were not affected by varying levels of wood vinegar (Table 7) A slightly higher percent DM on meat samples at 0% WV (21.91 %) followed by 2% (21.59 %), and 5% (21.47 %). Meanwhile, a different trend was noted on the MC showing slightly higher moisture at 5% WV (78.83) followed by 2% WV (78.41) and 0% WV (78.09). In terms of CF, results showed slightly higher at 2% WV (8.17%) followed by 0% WV (7.89%), and the least CF on 5% (7.57%). However, Crude Protein content of meat samples revealed a significant difference (p<0.05) implying the influence of varying levels of wood vinegar on this nutrient (Table 7). Results indicated significantly highest CP at 5% WV (65.99) followed by 0% WV (62.60) and 2% WV (61.56) with no significant difference. It was noted that results on CP correlated with CP content of the wet and fermented ration showing higher CP at 5% followed by 2% and 0% wood vinegar. During digestion, dietary protein is broken down into amino acids and peptides which are then absorbed into the body and are used to build new proteins, such as muscle, which is composed of about 21 different amino acids. Table 7. Nutrient composition of meat samples from grower-pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus L.) given wet and fermented commercial ration with varying levels of wood vinegar Treatment Dry Matter (%) Moisture Content (%) Crude Protein (%) Crude Fat (%) T0 –Plain Water (PW) 21.91 78.09 62.60 b 7.89 T1 –PW+ 2% WV 21.59 78.41 61.56 b 8.17 T2–PW+ 5% WV 21.47 78.83 65.99 a 7.57 p-value 0.7169 0.7169 0.0211* 0.5467 *-Column means with no common superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05) 5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusion Pork from grower-pigs given wet and fermented commercial ration with 5 % WV was best (P<0.01) in terms of lower drip loss at 45 minutes and L*value at 45 minutes, and better (P<0.05) Crude Protein content and pH at 45 minutes compared with 2% and 0% levels of WV. Recommendations Based on the findings of this study, it is recommended to: 1. Further assess the long-term effects of wet and fermented commercial ration on quality of carcass from pigs using wood vinegar at higher levels to establish an optimum level of WV inclusion, and the study should extend up to fattening/finishing stage of pigs. 2. Include a dry and non-fermented commercial ration as treatment. 6. LITERATURE CITED BENDALL, J. R. (1973). Postmortem changes in muscle. Pages 243– 309 in Structure and Function of Muscle. G. H. Bourne ed., Academic Press, New York. BORGGAARD, C., and J.R. ANDERSEN. (2004). Measurement of meat quality, instrumental.In: Jensen WK, Devine C, Dikeman M. Encyclopedia of Meat Science. Elsevier. 675-680. BORGSTORM, G. (1962). Fish in world nutrition, fish and food. Borgstorm, G. Ed. Academic Press, New York, pp.267 – 360. CAMERON N.D., G.R. NUTE, S.N. BROWN. M. ENSER., and WOOD, J.D. (1999) Meat quality of Large White pig genotypes selected for components of efficient lean growth rate, Anim. Sci. 68. 115–127. CHRISTIAN, L.L. K.L. STROCK, and CARLSON, I.P. . (1980). Effects of protein, breed cross, sex and slaughter weight on swine performance and carcass traits. J. of Anim. Sci. 51:51-58. CHIQUETTE, J. (2009). The Role of Probiotics in Promoting Dairy Production WCDS Advances in Dairy Technology. Volume 21: 143-157. DELGAARD, P., H.L. MADSON, N. SAMIEIA, and EMBORG, J. (2006). Biogenic Amine formation and microbial spoilage in chilled garfish. – Effect of modified atmosphere packaging and previous frozen storage. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 101: 80 – 95. EYO, A. A. (2001). Fish Processing Technology in the Tropics. In: Fawole, M. O., and Oso, B.A. (ed). Laboratory Manual of Microbiology, 1: pp. 71 – 81. GENTRY J.G., J.J. MCGLONE J.R. BLANTON Jr. and MILLER, M.F. (2002). Alternative housing systems for pigs: Influences on growth, composition, and pork quality. Journal of Animal Science, Vol. 80. P. 1781–1790. GUNENC, A. (2006). Evaluation of Pork Meat Quality by Using Water Holding Capacity and Vis-Spectroscopy (PDF). Proceedings in Water Holding Capacity of Pork Meat at NABEC Conference-2006, Montreal, McGill University. Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Retrieved 17 May 2015. HUFF-LONERGAN, E. (2010). Water-Holding Capacity of Fresh Meat. Proceedings for the National Pork Board/ American Meat Science Association Fact Sheet. IowaState University, US. JENSEN, B.B. (1998). The impact of feed additives on the microbial ecology of the gut in young pigs. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 7: 45-64. KAUFFMAN G, R.G. CASSENS, A. SCHERER and MEEKER, D.L. (1992). Variations in pork quality. National Pork Producers Council; Des Moines, IA, USA: 1992. KAUFFMAN, R. G., R. C. CASSENS, A. SCHERER, and MEEKER, D. L. (1992). Variations in pork quality. National Pork Producers Council publication, Des Moines, IA. KIM, P. G. (1996). Subacute toxicity study of refined wood vinegar. Bulletin of Natural Science. Youngin University 1:35-49 LEBRET, B. (2008). Effects of feeding and rearing systems on growth, carcass composition and meat quality in pigs. Animal Science. 2:1548-1558. LETTAT, A., P. NOZIERE, M. SILBERBERG, D.P. MORGAVI, C. BERGER, and MARTIN, C. (2012). Rumen microbial and fermentation characteristics are affected differently by bacterial probiotic supplementation during induced lactic subacute acidosis in sheep. BMC Microbial. 12: 142. LONERGAN, S. M., K. J. STALDER, T. J. KNIGHT, E. HUFF-LONERGAN, R. N. GOODWIN, K.J. PRUSA, and BEITZ D. C. (2007). Influence of lipid content on pork sensory quality within pH classification. J. Anim. Sci. 85:1074-1079. LOO, A. Y., K. JAIN and DARAH, I. (2008). Antioxidant activity of compounds isolated from the pyroligneous acid, Rhizophora apiculata. Food Chem. 107:1151-1160. PARTANEN, K. H. and MROZ, Z. (1999). Organic acids for performance enhancement in pig diets. Nutr. Res. Rev. 12:117-145. RAKMAI, J. (2009). Chemical determination, antimicrobial and antioxidant activities of Thai wood vinegars. MSc Thesis, Prince of Songkhla University, Songkhla, Thailand. SASAKI, K., M. TSUNEKAWA, S. TANAKA, M, FUDUSHIMA and KONNO, H. (1999). Effect of natural organic acids on microbially mediated dissolution of pyrite in acidic environments. J. MMIJ. 115(4):233-239. SOLOMON, M. B., R. L. J. M. VAN LAACK, and EASTRIDGE, J. S. (1998). Biophysical basis of pale, soft, exudative (PSE) pork and poultry muscle: A review. J. Muscle Foods 9:1–11.Van Hoof, J. 1979. Influence of ante- and peri-mortem factors on biochemical and physical characteristics of turkey breast muscle. Vet. Q. 1:29–36. YATAGAI, M., M. NISHIMOTO, K. HORI, T. OHIRA and SHIBATA, A. (2002). Termiticidal activity of wood vinegar, its components and their homologues. Journal of Wood Science. 48, 338–342. YOUNG, L.L.; NORTHCUTT, J.K.; BUHR, R. J. LYON, C.E. and WARE, G. O. (2001). Effects of age, sex, and duration of postmortem aging on percentage yield of parts from broiler chicken carcasses. Poultry Science. 80: 376-379. WANG, H.F., J.L. WANG, C. WANG, W.M. ZHANG, J.X. LIU, and DAI, B. (2012).Livestock Science. 144: 173–180. WANG JP, J.S. YOO, H.J. KIM, J.H. LEE and KIM, I.H. (2009) Nutrient digestibility, blood profiles and fecal microbiota are influenced by chitooligosaccharide supplementation of growing pigs. Livestock Science 125, 298–303. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2009.05.011.