Submitted to: Theriogenology
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 9/21/2006
Publication Date: 1/20/2007
Citation: Walker, S.C., Christenson, R.K., Ruiz, R.P., Reeves, D.E., Pratt, S.L., Arenivas, F., Williams, N.E., Bruner, B.L., Polejaeva, I.A. 2007. Comparison of meat composition from offspring of cloned and conventionally produced boars. Theriogenology. 67(1):178-184.
Interpretive Summary: Cloning allows for the expansion of elite genetics, the propagation of lost genetics and the protection of genetics in the event of a catastrophe such as foot and mouth disease. For cloning to become commercially acceptable, it has to be economically feasible and the animals produced by cloning need to be reproductively sound. To date, the majority of cloning research has focused on improving somatic cell nuclear transfer efficiency rates and reproductive soundness of offspring produced by cloning with no published results on meat composition of the offspring from individuals produced by nuclear transfer and offspring of conventionally produced animals. In total, loin samples from 404 animals (242 from offspring of clones and 162 from offspring of controls) were analyzed for 58 different parameters (amino acid profile, metals, cholesterol., fatty acid profile, and 3 vitamins). In total, 14,036 and 9,396 data points from offspring of clones and controls were evaluated. Of the 14,036 data points from the offspring of clones, only 3 points were found outside the clinically irrelevant range, 2 of which were within the range established by the USDA National Nutrient Database. The data indicate that meat from the offspring of clones is not chemically different than meat from controls.
Technical Abstract: This study compares the meat composition of the offspring from boars produced by somatic cell nuclear transfer (n=4) to that of the offspring from conventionally produced boars (n=3). In total 89 commercial gilts were artificially inseminated and 61 progressed to term and farrowed. All of the resulting piglets were housed and raised identically under standard commercial settings and slaughtered upon reaching market weight. Loin samples were taken from each slaughtered animal and shipped offsite for meat composition analysis. In total loin samples from 404 animals (242 from offspring of clones and 162 from controls) were analyzed for 58 different parameters generating 14,036 and 9,396 data points from offspring of clones and the controls, respectively. Values for controls were used to establish a range for each parameter. Ten percent was then added to the maximum and subtracted from the minimum of the control range, and all results falling within this range were considered clinically irrelevant. Of the 14,036 data points from the offspring of clones only three points were found outside the clinically irrelevant range, two of which were within the range established by the USDA National Nutrient Database. The only outlier was the presence of Eicosadienoic acid (C20:2) in one sample which is typically present in minute quantities in pork; no reference data were found regarding this fatty acid in the USDA National Nutrient Database. In conclusion, these data indicate that meat from the offspring of clones is not chemically different than meat from controls and therefore support the case for the safety of meat from the offspring of clones.