https://doi.org/10.4081/ijfs.2023.11618
Wild boar captured in a large corral-style trap or hunted: preliminary comparison of meat quality traits
Submitted: 28 July 2023
Accepted: 17 October 2023
Published: 8 November 2023
Accepted: 17 October 2023
Abstract Views: 816
PDF: 111
HTML: 11
HTML: 11
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Authors
The management and numerical control of wild boars mainly depend on hunting practices, even if other alternative strategies such as the use of traps and cages can be adopted. There is little information available on the quality of captured wild boar meat. The aim of this study was to evaluate the meat quality of wild boars captured with a large corral-style trap compared to still hunting and collective hunting methods. Longissimus dorsi samples were collected from 60 wild boars, 20 of which were obtained by trapping, 20 by still hunting, and 20 by collective hunting. The animals considered were 32 males and 28 females, weighing between 42 and 68 kg. Muscle pH has been recorded at 1, 24, and 48 hours post-mortem. Furthermore, after 24 hours, color, drip loss, cooking loss, and Warner-Bratzler shear force were also evaluated. Trapping with large enclosures such as corral-style traps, if properly managed, does not seem to adversely affect the quality traits of wild boar meat, which were found to be like those obtained by the still hunting method.
Altissimi C, Noé-Nordberg C, Ranucci D, Paulsen P, 2023. Presence of foodborne bacteria in wild boar and wild boar meat - a literature survey for the period 2012-2022. Foods 12:1689.
Boler DD, Dilger AC, Bidner BS, Carr SN, Eggert JM, Day JW, Ellis M, Mckeith FK, Killefer J, 2010. Ultimate pH explains variation in pork quality traits. J Muscle Foods 21:119-30.
Borilova G, Hulankova R, Svobodova I, Jezek F, Hutarova Z, Vecerek V, Steinhauserova I, 2016. The effect of storage conditions on the hygiene and sensory status of wild boar meat. Meat Sci 118:71-7.
CIE, 1986. Colorimetry 15.2. International Commission on Illumination, Wien, Austria.
Cifuni GF, Amici A, Contò M, Viola P, Failla S, 2014. Effects of the hunting method on meat quality from fallow deer and wild boar and preliminary studies for predicting lipid oxidation using visible reflectance spectra. Eur J Wildlife Res 60:519-26.
Croft S, Franzetti B, Gill R, Massei G, 2020. Too many wild boar? Modelling fertility control and culling to reduce wild boar numbers in isolated populations. PLoS One 15:e0238429.
Fabijanić N, Konjačić M, Luković Z, Prpić Z, Kelava Ugarković N, 2023. Physical parameters of wild boar meat quality: a review. J Cent Eur Agric 24:340-8.
Fahlman Å, Lindsjö J, Norling TA, Kjellander P, Ågren EO, Bergvall UA, 2020. Wild boar behaviour during live-trap capture in a corral-style trap: implications for animal welfare. Acta Vet Scand 62:59.
Faucitano L, Ielo MC, Ster C, Lo Fiego DP, Methot S, Saucier L, 2010. Shelf life of pork from five different quality classes. Meat Sci 84:466-9.
Fernández-López J, Pérez-Alvarez JA, Sayas-Barberá E, Aranda-Catalá V, 2000. Characterization of the different states of myoglobin in pork using color parameters and reflectance ratios. J Muscle Foods 11:157-67.
Florek M, Skałecki P, Domaradzki P, Wolan L, Ryszkowska-Siwko M, 2017. Nutritional value and physicochemical properties of red deer and wild boar meat after frozen storage under vacuum. J Cent Eur Agric 18:278-90.
Fredriksson-Ahomaa M, 2019. Wild boar: a reservoir of foodborne zoonoses. Foodborne Pathog Dis 16:153-65.
Johann F, Handschuh M, Linderoth P, Dormann CF, Arnold J, 2020. Adaptation of wild boar (Sus scrofa) activity in a human-dominated landscape. BMC Ecol 20:4.
Kasprzyk A, Stadnik J, Stasiak D, 2019. Technological and nutritional properties of meat from female wild boars (Sus scrofa scrofa L.) of different carcass weights. Arch Anim Breed 62:597-604.
Ladoşi I, Păpuc TA, Ladoşi D, 2023. The impact of African swine fever (ASF) on Romanian pig meat production: a review. Acta Vet 73:1-12.
Ludwiczak A, Składanowska-Baryza J, Stanisz M, 2020. Effect of age and sex on the quality of offal and meat of the wild boar (Sus scrofa). Animals 10:660.
Massei G, Kindberg J, Licoppe A, Gačić D, Šprem N, Kamler J, Baubet E, Hohmann U, Monaco A, Ozoliņš J, Cellina S, Podgórski T, Fonseca C, Markov N, Pokorny B, Rosell C, Náhlik A, 2015. Wild boar populations up, numbers of hunters down? A review of trends and implications for Europe: wild boar and hunter trends in Europe. Pest Manag Sci 71:492-500.
Palazzo M, Tavaniello S, Petrecca V, Zejnelhoxha S, Wu M, Mucci R, Maiorano G, 2021. Quality and safety of meat from wild boar hunted in Molise region. Ital J Anim Sci 20:1889-98.
Pedrazzoli M, Dal Bosco A, Castellini C, Ranucci D, Mattioli S, Pauselli M, Roscini V, 2017. Effect of age and feeding area on meat quality of wild boars. Ital J Anim Sci 16:353-62.
Ranucci D, Roila R, Onofri A, Cambiotti F, Primavilla S, Miraglia D, Andoni E, Di Cerbo A, Branciari R, 2021. Improving hunted wild boar carcass hygiene: roles of different factors involved in the harvest phase. Foods 10:1548.
Reichold A, Lange M, Thulke HH, 2022. Modelling the effectiveness of measures applied in zones dedicated to stop the spread of African swine fever in wild boar when bordering with a region of limited control. EFSA Supporting Publication 19:7320E.
Sauter-Louis C, Conraths FJ, Probst C, Blohm U, Schulz K, Sehl J, Fischer M, Forth JH, Zani L, Depner K, Mettenleiter TC, Beer M, Blome S, 2021. African swine fever in wild boar in Europe - a review. Viruses 13:1717.
Stanisz M, Ludwiczak A, Składanowska-Baryza J, Bykowska-Maciejewska M, 2019. The effect of age and ultimate pH value on selected quality traits of meat from wild boar. Can J Anim Sci 99:336-42.
Stella S, Tirloni E, Castelli E, Colombo F, Bernardi C, 2018. Microbiological evaluation of carcasses of wild boar hunted in a hill area of Northern Italy. J Food Prot 81:1519-25.
Suman SP, Joseph P, 2013. Myoglobin chemistry and meat color. Ann Rev Food Sci Technol 4:79-99.
Tomasevic I, Novakovic S, Solowiej B, Zdolec N, Skunca D, Krocko M, Nedomova S, Kolaj R, Aleksiev G, Djekic I, 2018. Consumers’ perceptions, attitudes and perceived quality of game meat in ten European countries. Meat Sci 142:5-13.
Tomljanović K, Grubešić M, Medić H, Potočnik H, Topolovčan T, Kelava Ugarković N, Marušić Radovčić N, 2022. The impact of premortality stress on some quality parameters of roe deer, wild boar, and red deer meat. Foods 11:1275.
Torres-Blas I, Mentaberre G, Castillo-Contreras R, Fernández-Aguilar X, Conejero C, Valldeperes M, González-Crespo C, Colom-Cadena A, Lavín S, López-Olvera JR, 2020. Assessing methods to live-capture wild boars (Sus scrofa) in urban and peri-urban environments. Vet Record 187:e85.
Viganò R, Demartini E, Riccardi F, Corradini A, Besozzi M, Lanfranchi P, Chiappini PL, Cottini A, Gaviglio A, 2019. Quality parameters of hunted game meat: sensory analysis and pH monitoring. Ital J Food Saf 8:7724.
Westhoff KM, Fetzer A, Büttner K, Schuler G, Lang J, Lierz M, 2022. Stress assessment of wild boar (Sus scrofa) in corral-style traps using serum cortisol levels. Animals 12:3008.
How to Cite
1.
Altissimi C, Torregiani E, Cambiotti F, Roila R, Branciari R, Giovannini S, Ranucci D. Wild boar captured in a large corral-style trap or hunted: preliminary comparison of meat quality traits. Ital J Food Safety [Internet]. 2023 Nov. 8 [cited 2024 Nov. 21];12(4). Available from: https://www.pagepressjournals.org/ijfs/article/view/11618
Copyright (c) 2023 the Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.