COMPARISON OF SINGLE CROSS AND CRISS CROS S SOWS IN REPRODUCTION PERFORMANCE, AND IN FATTENING AND CARCASS QUALITY TRAITS OF THEIR PROGENY

Aim of this study was to compare single cross and criss cross sows of the same two dam breeds (LW, LR) in their litter performance and the f attening and carcass quality traits of their progeny from the same boa rs of a Pietrain-Hampshire boar rotation. Mean performance levels and variability within both crossbred groups were compared under typical G erman production and marketing conditions. The experiment started in 1 985 at the research station Relliehausen of the University Gottingen. The data collected between 1990-95 comprised litter records for 1406 l itters from 400 sows which were purebred Landrace, single cross Large WhiteLandrace or criss cross of these two breeds. Carcass quality and fattening performance was measured from 800 final products fattened i n groups of 6 male or female pigs from 25-110 (males) or 116 (females) kg liveweight. The statistical analysis was performed with SAS and th e models contained only fixed effects of sow group, parity, saison, bo ar category in litter traits and feeding regime, sex, slaughter house for carcass traits. The results can be summarized as follows: 1. Diffe rences in litter performance between criss cross and single cross sows are small. But some more rotation cycles will have to be awaited part iculary to judge the variability of both sow groups. 2. In fattening t raits progeny of criss cross sows had slightly smaller means but, part iculary in fattening days, markedly higher variance. 3. progeny of cri ss cross sows were also slightly poorer in their means of the main car cass traits (FOM-lean content, backfat thickness, fat area and carcass length). They were also less uniform in most of these traits, signifi cantly in loin eye area. 4. In meat quality characters no significant differences were found between progeny of both sow groups. But variabi lity was significantly greater for progeny of criss cross sows in pH1 (loin), waterbinding capacity and intramuscular fat content.