Producers’ and Consumers’ Preferences and Perceptions

for Pig Breeding Traits and Quality of Pork Meat in Batangas

A Case Study
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Course ANSC 210
Advances in Swine Production

Alcantara, Edwin L.
Moneva, Carlo Stephen O.
Raz, Lennie D.
Reberta, Florencio G. Jr.
Vicenal, Joveth L.

May 19, 2017

 INTRODUCTION
Challenges on the relative fitness of domesticated pigs, the production efficiency per unit
area under intensified production systems, the increasing demand of pork associated with the
growing population and the shift in the pork quality standard prompted the breeders to make
alterations and manipulations of the genetics of pigs. New acumens in breeding and genetics have
accelerated pig breed improvement to meet these challenges. The development of new genetics in
swine is largely the domain of specialized breeding companies who base their breeding objectives
on market demand of developed countries.
The degree of improvements that could be possibly achieved in breeding pigs is dependent
on the genetic and phenotypic variability and the heritability of the traits. The heritability of the
traits identified in the breeding objectives dictates the type of breeding program for such
improvement. Variation and heritability are the two main considerations observed by the nucleus
breeding companies in developing a new purebred or composite breed through mixing of several
over many generations (Gibson, 1998).
Exploiting the genetic variation to breed superior animals is often misunderstood and
sometimes thought to be panacea to solve all problems associated with unfavorable environments
(Naskar et al., 2012). Focus is much given on the productive and reproductive performance rather
than the fitness of the animal to extreme conditions. Breeding goals in most cases not related to
environment (Rydhmer, 2012).
Commercial piggeries in the country practice crossbreeding to take advantage of heterosis
and produce high performing hybrids that are reared for the production of pork. Terminal cross
ensure maximum heterosis for growth and carcass quality traits and allows consistency in
performance. This type of breeding method on the other hand is not appropriate when the traits
being considered are less heritable such as reproductive performance so that selection within and
between breeds is necessary. Selection of animals is performed on the basis of a complex of traits,
which are characterized by breeding values and economic weights. Various methodologies are
used in choosing the most important traits in pig breeding programs. Using the subjective
approach, economic importance of pig traits was based on the required genetic gain and on
subjective decision of the breeders (Krupova et al., 2016). While it is true that the nucleus farms
independently decide for the types of pig that are used as commercial stocks, it is an undeniable
fact that consumers of the products from pigs influence on the type and quality of meat being sold
in the market. Understanding the purchase behavior of consumers for meat products is essential in
addressing inefficiency and market issues in the meat industry (Laorden and Bangcaya, 2013).
Because consumers are the final step in the production chain, it is useful to identify which factors
affect their behavioral patterns (Furnols and Guerrero, 2014). This would allow the meat sector to
better satisfy consumer expectations, demands and needs. Market for pork changes continuously
in response to changes in consumer’s preference, societal values and political decisions
(Wallenbeck et al., 2016). The quality of the product is seen on the consumer’s acceptance and
influence the price the producer receives from the product (Mabry, 1998). Quality of meat can
mean many things, but most importantly, it means costumer’s satisfaction.
In the consumer’s perspective the degree of leanness is the most among the economically
important traits of pigs. Other factors used as bases of consumers in buying pork are food safety,
taste price and animal welfare (Cummins et al., 2016). The quality perceived by consumers in meat
products comprises both sensory, health, convenience and process dimensions (Grunert et al.,
2004). This scenario provokes the producers, commercial and backyard, to produce pigs consistent
to consumer’s demand. The question therefore is that, are breeds parental stocks produced by the
nucleus breeding farms possesses the traits and qualities that the consumers demand? A thorough
evaluation on the preferences of consumers on pork quality and that of the producer’s choice of
breed that render them higher profitability is imperative to address this issue.
In the producers perspective, the goal is not only limited to the leanness and growth of hogs
but encompass the many facets contributing to optimum profitability. The economically important
traits in slaughter pigs are ADG, Back fat and carcass quality. Of course, the G x E interaction
always forms part of the objectives i. e., providing better feeding and management. Maternal traits
such as litter size, mothering ability and robustness are of equally important components of
breeding pigs. Animal breeders in an attempt to insure that the most preferred traits are given
emphasis in developing breeding objectives, design a selection model by quantifying the economic
values for each of the traits. Although a wider range of traits likely contribute to the breeding
objectives (Kanis, 2005), breeders and producers only consider some of them. Economic values of
breeding goals should be updated periodically to ensure proper weighing of traits, hence
maximization of economic return (Dube et al., 2010).
The breeding goals should not only be driven by the economic considerations but also by
societal trends and expectations (Merks et al., 2011). Other traits such as vitality, uniformity at
different levels of production, robustness, welfare and health and phenotypes to reduce carbon
footprints may be included in the breeding goals. Leg health, growth, sow longevity and feed
conversion are traits of importance to producers (Wallenbeck et al., 2014). These are some of the
traits that shape vitality and robustness.
The genetic improvement of pigs in tropical and developing countries has focused on
imported exotic populations which have been subjected to intensive selection (Akanno et al.,
2014). In the Philippines, there is no specific selection model for slaughter and maternal pigs. Most
pig breeds introduced in the country are developed by multinational breeding companies with
selection model being based on the demand of Europeans and Americans the primary goal of which
is production of ham and lean meats. Hence, it is imperative that a breed tailored fit to the choice
of Filipino consumers and at the same time provide the producers the optimum profitability should
be developed.
The objectives of the present study were (1) to assess salient productive and reproductive
traits that are considered by the hog producers were also identified; (2) to evaluate the consumer
preferences of the primal cuts of pork (PNS/BAFPS 41: 2008) and the food safety and health issues
associated in the consumer’s preference; and (3) to validate consumers’ preferences based on
vendors’ assessment on primal cuts of pork commonly bought by consumers in the market.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study Area
Majority of hogs produced in the Philippines are under the backyard management. Based
from the latest inventory (Countrystat, 2017), about 64% of the total hog population of 12.48
million comes from backyard piggeries. Although hog productions are dominated by backyard
raisers, breeding of whether commercial and/or backyard stock are done only by commercial
producers who have the resources to access for quality expensive breeder stock.
Calabarzon (Region 4A) is one of the top producers of hogs in the country producing
13.34% of the total national inventory. Out of this figure 44.09% are produced in the province of
Batangas which mainly under commercial production systems. The researchers have therefore
conveniently chosen this province as the site of the study since one of its target respondents are
the commercial producers. Batangas is strategically located in the island of Luzon inhabited by a
mixture of social and economic groups of people in which objective and reliable sampling can be
obtained.
Survey Approach
A survey was conducted in Ibaan, Lipa City, Malvar, Padre Garcia, Rosario, San Jose, and
Tanauan City in the province of Batangas on February – April of 2017 to assess preferences for
various aspects of swine production. The questionnaire employed in the study was designed to
characterize three general attributes: (1) pork producers’ most preferred economically important
traits of hogs; (2) consumer preferences for various qualities of meat (pork); and (3) vendors’
assessment on primal cuts of pork regularly bought by consumers in the market. A total of 43
commercial farm owners, 194 consumers, and 75 vendors were surveyed using a structured
questionnaire (Appendix A).
The respondents covered in this study were the pork consumers, pork vendors and swine
producers. The study samples were targeted to cover different categories: (1) the breeding
considerations by the swine producers; (2) economic profiles, the meat preferences based on the
standard cuts, and the quality and safety considerations by the consumers; and (3) the market outlet
(wet market, meat shop, and supermarket) and the rank of each standard cuts based on consumers
demand. Other important information such as respondents’ age, gender, educational attainment,
and employment status was also included in the survey (Appendix B). A convenient sampling
through telephone and personal interview were employed in the survey. Other responses were
retrieved through e-mail.
Data Entry and Statistical Analysis
Three sets of data from consumers, commercial farm owners and vendors were analyzed
in this study. Analysis of data was performed using GLM in SAS (version 9.2, SAS Institute Inc.,
Cary, NC). Tukey’s test was used in the pairwise comparison of the means of response parameters.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Pork producers’ most preferred economically important traits of hogs
In total, 43 pig farms participated in the survey with sow level ranges from 19-3900. They
have a range of 2.5-40 years of experience in the business. There is a significant difference

Table 1. Preferences of commercial farms in Batangas in choosing breeder stocks.

Score Distribution %
 Parameter 5 4 3 2 1 Mean* SD

Daily Gain 79.1 20.9 - - - 4.791a 0.41

Growth Fattening Pig 72.1 27.9 - - - 4.721a 0.45

Fertility 81.4 11.6 2.3 4.7 - 4.698a 0.73

Feed Conversion 67.4 30.2 2.3 - - 4.651a 0.52

Litter Size 74.4 14.0 9.3 2.3 - 4.605a 0.75

Disease Resistance 65.1 27.9 4.7 - 2.3 4.535ab 0.79

Piglet Survival 65.1 27.9 2.3 4.7 - 4.535ab 0.76

Body Length 60.5 30.2 9.3 - - 4.512ab 0.66

Growth Piglet 74.4 14.0 4.7 2.3 4.7 4.512ab 1.02

Number of Live Teats 55.8 39.5 4.7 - - 4.512ab 0.59

Sow Longevity 65.1 27.9 2.3 2.3 2.3 4.512ab 0.85

Leg Health 53.5 39.5 7.0 - - 4.465ab 0.62

Meat Percentage 55.8 32.6 9.3 2.3 - 4.419ab 0.75

Meat Quality 51.2 39.5 9.3 - - 4.419ab 0.66

Piglet Birth Weight 58.1 27.9 11.6 2.3 - 4.419ab 0.78

Parasite Resistance 46.5 27.9 11.6 7.0 7.0 4.000b 1.22

* Means with similar superscript are not significantly different by Tukey's test (p= 0.0025).
on the priority and preferences of farms in acquiring their breeder stocks (P < 0.05) as shown in
Table 1. Commercial farms appeared to select more for Daily gain, Growth of fattening pig,
fertility, feed conversion and litter size. They select least for Parasite resistance. It appears that the
primary traits that are given more emphasis by hog producers in choosing the breed to raise still
focus on the productive and reproductive performance of pigs. The result conform with the
biological model approach which favors the biological efficiency of production of lean tissues –
the selection objectives is the improvement of lean tissues and feed conversion (Fowler et al.,
2010).
As profit oriented entities, these traits are given priority since they define the financial
success of producers. It is important to note that ADG, growth, feed conversion and reproductive
performance did not significantly differ from traits concerning fitness and adaptation such as
longevity, survival and health. This implies that nowadays, hog producers have learnt importance
of secondary traits and therefore, they should be included in the breeding objectives to obtain a
balanced selection (Knap, 2005).
Producer’s considerations in choosing breeder farms
Results revealed key findings on the preferences of commercial farms in Batangas in
choosing the breeder farm where they acquire their stocks. The commercial farms’ top
consideration is the health status of the breeder farm where they purchase their animals. According
to these farms, maintaining a secured biosecurity is one of the factors they are very keen to ensure
in their herd so as to ensure that no introduction of certain disease will occur. The Pedigree of
stocks, breed warranty, customer service, awards in breed performance and technical
assistance/service runs on the next priorities while farm popularity, payment scheme ad low
interest are among the parameters on the bottom of considerations of commercial farms when
choosing their breeder farms (Table 2). This result does not agree with the previous research of
Alarcon et al., (2014) stating that pig farmers were more worried about their financial situation
than about health threats to their pigs. Those findings might be applicable in other aspects of the
production but not in the acquisition of breeder stocks.
For selecting breeding stock, selecting which pigs to buy can have a large influence on the
profitability of the enterprise. Purchasing healthy, high quality pigs is a great place to start and is
the top priority of commercial farms in Batangas.

Table 2. Preferences of commercial farms in Batangas in choosing breeder farms.

Score Distribution %
Parameter 5 4 3 2 1 Mean* SD
 Health Status 86.05 11.63 - 2.33 - 4.814a 0.54

Pedigree or Quality of Stocks 65.12 30.23 - - 4.65 4.512ab 0.90

Breed Warranty 60.47 23.26 13.95 - 2.33 4.395ab 0.89

Customer Service 60.47 18.60 16.28 2.33 2.33 4.326ab 0.98

Awards in Breed Performance
Testing 53.49 34.88 6.98 - 4.65 4.326ab 0.96

Technical Assistance/Service 55.81 23.26 9.30 6.98 4.65 4.186abc 1.15

Good Feeding Program 46.51 32.56 11.63 4.65 4.65 4.116abcd 1.08

Farm Location 37.21 41.86 13.95 4.65 2.33 4.070abcd 0.95

Technical Personnel 51.16 25.58 9.30 6.98 6.98 4.070abcd 1.23

Longevity 53.49 23.26 9.30 - 13.95 4.023abcd 1.37

New Genetics 44.19 32.56 2.33 4.65 16.28 3.837bcd 1.45

Acquaintance 37.21 34.88 11.63 4.65 11.63 3.814bcd 1.30

Farm Popularity 16.28 39.53 23.26 9.30 11.63 3.395cd 1.20

Payment Scheme 27.91 37.21 4.65 2.33 27.91 3.349cd 1.58

Low Interest Rate 27.91 30.23 11.63 2.33 27.91 3.279d 1.57

* Means with similar superscript are not significantly different by Tukey's test (p= .0001).

Consumer preferences for various quality of pork meat

The present study assessed the factors affecting the consumers’ decision to purchase pork
meat. 194 respondents grouped according to age, educational attainment and annual income were
asked regarding on their preferences for various quality of the pork meat. Results of the survey
were shown in Tables 3-5.
Table 3. Preferences of consumers in terms of meat quality.
Groupings Color Leaness Marbling Smell Texture Cuts
AGE
20 & BELOW 4.67 3.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 4.00
21 TO 30 4.35 4.38 3.76 4.38 3.76 3.59
31 TO 40 4.85 4.03 5.03 4.21 4.50 3.68
41 TO 50 4.83 4.43 3.94 4.34 4.11 4.37
51 TO 60 4.53 4.21 5.03 4.72 5.97 3.66
61 & ABOVE 4.57 4.26 4.22 4.52 3.87 4.43
EDUCATION
College 4.63 4.27 3.60 4.31 4.05 3.80
Elementary 5.00 3.00 3.56 4.33 2.56 3.33
Graduate Study 4.73 4.69 4.65 4.85 4.58 4.31
High School 4.58 4.05 3.24 3.74 3.18 3.11
ECONOMIC CLASS
Low income 4.70 4.44 3.89 4.93 4.52 4.07
Moderately low 4.87 4.55 4.19 4.74 4.58 4.47
Average income 3.78 3.44 3.67 4.00 3.56 3.89
Moderately high 4.67 4.50 4.17 4.25 3.75 4.08
High income 4.88 4.88 4.46 4.88 4.62 4.00
Grand Mean 4.59 4.25 3.65 4.11 3.76 3.64

Results indicate that age group varies in their perception of meat qualities. Age group of
20 years and below pays less attention on leanness while they are very particular in smell. Those
of older age groups are more particular in marbling and texture. The result suggests that younger
consumers of meat use only the basic sensory character of the meat. The more experienced older
pork buyers consider most marbling and texture. The perception of consumers on meat quality
however does not follow a linear trend which might have been affected by lesser number of
respondents on those age groups increasing the margin of error.
 Educational attainment of consumers affects their perception for meat quality. Elementary
level consumers primarily base their judgment on color. As the educational attainment increases
their bases for quality become wider encompassing most of the attributes for meat quality. Lesser
attention is however given to marbling quality of pork. The result suggests that more educated
people are wiser and more careful in buying pork products as they are more informed of the factors
affecting qualities (Verbeke and Ward, 2006).
Table 4. Perception of consumers on meat safety.

Groupings Feed Origi Antibiotic Cholestero Hormone Salmonell

s n s l s a
AGE
20 & BELOW 2.00 3.33 2.33 2.67 2.00 2.00
21 TO 30 3.24 3.35 3.65 3.59 2.91 3.12
31 TO 40 3.13 3.03 3.38 3.35 3.25 3.18
41 TO 50 3.20 3.23 3.43 3.46 2.97 3.26
51 TO 60 3.73 3.73 3.80 4.00 3.40 3.63
61 & ABOVE 3.91 3.39 2.61 3.22 2.96 3.39
EDUCATION
College 3.24 3.35 3.58 3.81 3.34 3.60
Elementary 1.67 3.11 1.89 2.33 1.67 1.67
Graduate Study 4.38 4.42 4.04 4.19 3.46 4.04
High School 2.05 2.05 2.13 2.08 1.92 1.89
ECONOMIC
CLASS
Low income 3.70 3.74 3.96 4.33 3.22 4.22
Moderately low 3.81 3.77 3.94 4.03 3.74 3.84
Average income 3.25 2.89 3.44 3.22 2.89 3.11
Moderately high 3.58 3.33 2.50 3.08 2.00 2.58
High income 4.08 3.85 4.08 4.08 4.00 4.15
Grand Mean 3.13 3.29 3.27 3.43 2.93 3.09
 In terms of income distribution, this study followed the classifications for income groups
based from Philippine Statistics Office (2015) namely, low income for respondents with estimated
annual income of PhP 40,000 and below; moderately low income for PhP 40,000-59,999; average
income, whose estimated annual income ranges from PhP 60,000-99,999; moderately high income
for respondents with an estimated annual income of PhP 100,000-249,999; and high income,
whose estimated annual income ranges from 250,000 and above. As shown in Table 3, low income
and moderately low income respondents were most concerned on color and least concerned on
marbling of the pork meat. On the other hand, respondents with average income were more
particular on the meat smell and least particular on leaness trait. Moderately high income and high
income respondents were most concerned on the color and least concerned on texture and pork
cuts respectively.
Overall bases for quality of meat used by consumers are color, leanness and texture. Visual
appearance characteristics are intrinsic quality cues highly related with consumers' expectations of
meat quality (Banović et al., 2009). Marbling and texture are qualities that require experience to
evaluate and quantify and therefore are not given more attention.
Data on meat safety considerations indicated that consumers are moderately concerned on
the food safety and health issues associated with meat products. Consumers belonging to age group
20 years old and below are less concerned about the health safety issues as evidenced by the low
mean values for each of the specified attributes. Among the variables evaluated, the origin or
traceability, cholesterol level, antibiotics use and feeds given to pigs were given much attention
compared to salmonella contaminations and hormones use by consumers in all age groups.
Educational attainment had also influenced responses of the respondents in meat safety
issues. Elementary and high school level consumers are less sensitive to food safety issues. While
college and those who have graduate education are particular to the different attributes of safe
quality pork products. Among the health issues that are given more emphasis are origin, antibiotics
use, feeds and fat contents.
Low income and moderately low income respondents were most concerned on the
cholesterol content of the pork and least concerned on hormones injected to the pig. Respondents
with average income were shown to be particular in antibiotic residues in meat and least concerned
on injected hormones and origin of the pig. On the other hand, moderately high income
respondents were concerned on the origin and least concerned on hormones injected to the animal.
 Lastly, the high income group was highly concerned on salmonella contamination of the pork meat
and least concerned on the origin of the meat.

Table 5. Consumer preferences on different cuts of pork meat.

Groupings Belly Ham Head Legs Kasim Porkchop Spareribs Ground

Pork
AGE
20 & BELOW 100% 33% 0% 67% 0% 33% 33% 33%
21 TO 30 79% 38% 29% 56% 44% 82% 44% 50%
31 TO 40 78% 40% 20% 43% 48% 70% 33% 30%
41 TO 50 86% 34% 29% 40% 57% 71% 57% 40%
51 TO 60 60% 43% 23% 27% 53% 67% 33% 33%
61 & ABOVE 61% 13% 13% 35% 30% 43% 39% 57%
EDUCATION
College 77% 33% 16% 40% 46% 72% 46% 43%
Elementary 56% 22% 11% 33% 33% 44% 33% 22%
Graduate Study 77% 35% 35% 62% 69% 73% 54% 65%
High School 84% 53% 37% 39% 45% 71% 29% 13%
ECONOMIC
CLASS
Low income 100% 44% 33% 52% 67% 67% 59% 52%
Moderately low 87% 61% 35% 58% 65% 77% 74% 71%
Average income 67% 22% 33% 44% 67% 67% 56% 44%
Moderately high 67% 8% 25% 42% 67% 67% 33% 25%
High income 81% 31% 15% 35% 46% 77% 58% 58%

Analysis of the data in Table 4 suggests that older, more educated and high income
consumers are more concerned not only in the traceability nutritional value of meat products but
also on the management and processes involved in producing the meat products. Grunert, Bredahl
and Brunso (2004) cited that the quality perceived by consumers in food products comprises both
sensory, health, convenience and process dimensions. The consumers’ attitudes and behavior are
not only affected by the appearance of the products but also of the psychological impacts of the
origin and processes involved to produce the product.
Meat cut preferences of different age group (Table 5) showed that 75% of the consumer
respondents prefer to buy belly. Ham and pork chop ranked second revealing equal percentage of
52. Head was the least preferred and the tendency to buy belly decreases with older consumers,
while the choice for ham and pork chop increases age of consumers. The result suggests that the
old buyers prefer lean meat than younger consumers. Older people are more conscious of their
health hence choose to buy leaner meat.
The choice of primal cuts of pork is also affected by the educational attainment of the
consumer. Belly is also the most preferred cuts of consumers with higher educational attainment
followed by spare ribs, kasim and legs which ranked second, third and fourth respectively. In terms
of income distribution, all income groups have high preference to belly and low preference to
either head or the ham. However, ham is highly preferred by high income respondents.
Comparisons of means from different variables and consumer groups revealed that belly and pork
chop are generally the most preferred cuts in the market.
Vendors’ assessment on primal cuts of pork commonly bought by consumers in the market
Seventy five meat vendors were asked to assess the most frequently sold primal cuts of
pork in meat shops, wet market, and supermarkets in selected areas of Batangas. The evaluation
was done using point scaling (1 – not frequently sold; 8 – most frequently sold) and results were
shown in Table 6.
Based from the results, belly was the most frequently sold in all three types of meat retail
outlet. Pork belly is popular in East Asian, European and North American cuisine (Nam et al.,
2010), with South Koreans as one of the top consumers through their famous dish “samgyeopsal”
(Choe et al., 2015). In Philippine cuisine, pork belly is grilled to make “inihaw” or deep-fried and
chopped into pieces as “lechon kawali”. It has been said that belly or liempo is good to use because
of the layers of fat that gives flavor. With such reasons, belly remained to be the best-seller in the
market place of Batangas.

Table 6. Point scale mean values of the primal cuts of pork frequently sold in the market.
 Primal cuts Meat shop Wet market Supermarket All
Belly 7.22a 6.07a 6.80a 6.31a
Ham 5.40ab 3.77b 3.88bc 3.92c
Head 2.14c 2.20d 1.83c 2.16d
Legs 2.78c 2.65cd 3.89bc 2.84d
Kasim 5.88ab 5.00a 4.73abc 5.06b
Pork chop 5.67ab 3.72bc 5.00ab 4.17bc
Spare ribs 4.00bc 3.62bc 5.00ab 3.91c
Ground pork 4.20bc 3.20bcd 6.25ab 3.92c
*Means of similar superscript are not significantly different by Tukey’s test (p= 0.0001).
Next to belly was the kasim. Kasim or the pork shoulder is usually used for cooking adobo
and pork nilaga. According to some respondents, pork shoulder has lower fat content but higher
muscle content that perceived to be low in cholesterol. Although pork shoulder is not considered
one of the leaner cuts it contains more monounsaturated fat and omega-3 fatty acids, which are
both considered healthy fats (McAdams, 2011). This might be the reason for the high consumer
preference to kasim that was observed in the study. However, results also showed that the ground
pork is the second most commonly bought pork parts in the supermarket and not the kasim. This
may be due to the fact that ground meats are usually sold in supermarkets, where majority of
consumers (in supermarkets) are buying ground meats, including the ground pork, to be used for
cooking pasta, meatballs, lumpia, etc.
Pork chop was ranked as the third frequently sold part except in the wet-market where it
ranked as fourth next to the ham. Pork chop, a cut taken perpendicularly to the spine of the pig and
usually containing a rib or part of a vertebra (Cook’s, 2014), is suitable for roasting, grilling, or
frying. One the other hand, ham or pigue is from the hind legs and is one of the leanest parts of a
pig. They can be used for stewed native dishes and native cuisines that need curing or smoking.
Spare ribs, cut from the lower portion of the pig specifically the belly and breastbone,
behind the shoulder including the long bones (Cook’s 2014), are sold moderately according to the
vendors. Pork spare ribs are popular in Chinese and American Chinese cuisine (Tuchman and
Levine, 1993). Lastly, the pork’s leg and head were the least primal cuts to be sold in the
market. Leg or pata is often used for famous Filipino dish crispy pata and patatim, while pork’s
head or “mascara” as popularly known in Philippines is used for cooking another favorite Filipino
dish “sisig”.
 In totality, the high fat parts such as belly, kasim or the pork shoulder, and pork-chop were
regularly bought by consumers in the market in contrast to the leg and head part based from the
observation of the meat vendors in Batangas.

CONCLUSION
Daily gain, growth, fertility, feed conversion efficiency and litter size were the most
important traits considered by the producers in their breeding objectives. The producers’ choice of
the source of breeding stocks are based on pedigree or breed performance record of the stocks
rather than personal relations and or discounted price. Meat quality and safety influence the
purchasing behavior and preference of consumers in Batangas. Belly, kasim and pork chop are the
most preferred primal cuts of consumers in Batangas.
There is a need to re-define the breeding objectives by the breeding farms in the country
taking into considerations of the producers’ choice of the breeding traits and the consumers’
preference on meat quality. Further investigation covering wider scope maybe conducted so that a
more realistic breeding approach will be tailored fit the needs of the stakeholders.

REFERENCES
Ahlman, T., Ljung, M., Rydhmer, L., Röcklinsberg, H., Strandberg, E., & Wallenbeck, A. (2014).
Differences in preferences for breeding traits between organic and conventional dairy
producers in Sweden. Livestock Science, 162, 5-14.
Akanno, E. C., Schenkel, F. S., Sargolzaei, M., Friendship, R. M., & Robinson, J. A. B. (2014).
Persistency of accuracy of genomic breeding values for different simulated pig breeding
programs in developing countries. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics, 131(5), 367-
378.
Alarcon, P., Wieland, B., Mateus, A.L.P., Dewberry, C. (2014). Pig farmers’ perceptions, attitudes,
influences and management of information in the decision-making process for disease
control. Prev. Vet. Med. 116,223–242.
Banović, M., Grunert, K. G., Barreira, M. M., & Aguiar Fontes, M. (2009). Beef perception at
the point of purchase: A study fromPortugal. Food Quality and Preference, 20, 335–342.
Brunsø, K., Fjord, T. A., & Grunert, K. G. (2002). Consumers' food choice and quality perception
(MAPP working paper No. 77). Aarhus: AaFowler, V. R., Bichard, M., & Pease, A. (1976).
Objectives in pig breeding. Animal Science, 23(3), 365-387.rhus School of Business.
Choe, J.H., Yang, H.S., Lee, H.S. and Go, G.W. (2015). Characteristics of pork belly consumption
in South Korea and their health implication. Journal of Animal Science and
Technology201557:22 DOI: 10.1186/s40781-015-0057-1
Countrystat. (2016). Philippine Statistics Authority. http//:www.countrystat.psa.gov.ph. Accessed:
5/12/2017.
Cummins, A. M., Widmar, N. J. O., Croney, C. C., & Fulton, J. R. (2016). Understanding
Consumer Pork Attribute Preferences. Theoretical Economics Letters, 6(02), 166.
Dekkers, J. C. M., & Gibson, J. P. (1998). Applying breeding objectives to dairy cattle
improvement. Journal of Dairy Science, 81, 19-35.
Dube, B., Mulugeta, S. D., & Dzama, K. (2013). Evaluating breeding objectives for sow
productivity and production traits in Large White Pigs. Livestock Science, 157(1), 9-19.
Font-i-Furnols, Maria, and Luis Guerrero. "Consumer preference, behavior and perception about
meat and meat products: An overview." Meat Science 98, no. 3 (2014): 361-371.
Fowler, V. R., Bichard, M., & Pease, A. (1976). Objectives in pig breeding. Animal
Science, 23(3), 365-387.
Gourdine, J. L., Sørensen, A. C., & Rydhmer, L. (2012). There is room for selection in a small
local pig breed when using optimum contribution selection: a simulation study. Journal of
animal science, 90(1), 76-84.
Grunert, K. G., Bredahl, L., & Brunsø, K. (2004). Consumer perception of meat quality and
implications for product development in the meat sector—A review. Meat Science, 66,
259–272.
Kanis, E., De Greef, K. H., Hiemstra, A., & Van Arendonk, J. A. M. (2005). Breeding for societally
important traits in pigs. Journal of animal science, 83(4), 948-957.
Knap, P. W. (2005). Breeding robust pigs. Animal Production Science, 45(8), 763-773.
Krupova, Z., Krupa, E., & Žáková, E. (2016). Methods for calculating economic weights of traits
in pigs. Acta Fytotechnica et Zootechnica, 19(5).
Laorden, N. L., & Bangcaya, A. M. P. (2013). Consumers’ Purchasing Behavior Towards Fresh
Meat in Davao City, Philippines. BANWA Archives (2004-2013), 10(1), 50-64.
Mabry, J. W., & Baas, T. J. (1998). The impact of genetics on pork quality (Revised). National
Pork Board, 4341, 1-12.
McAdams, M. 2011. Pork Shoulder Nutrition Information. Accessed online at
http://www.livestrong.com/article/92153-pork-shoulder-nutrition-information/
Merks, J. W. M., Mathur, P. K., & Knol, E. F. (2012). New phenotypes for new breeding goals in
pigs. Animal, 6(04), 535-543.
Nam, K.C., Jo,, C., Lee, M. 2010. Meat products and consumption culture in the East. Meat
Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.04.026
Naskar, S., Gowane, G. R., Chopra, A., Paswan, C., & Prince, L. L. L. (2012). Genetic adaptability
of livestock to environmental stresses. In Environmental Stress and Amelioration in
Livestock Production (pp. 317-378). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
The Cook's Illustrated Meat Cookbook. Accessed online at https://cimeatbook.com/pork-cuts-a-
visual-guide/
Tuchman, G and Levine, H.G. 1993. NEW YORK JEWS AND CHINESE FOOD: The Social
Construction of an Ethnic Pattern. Accessed online at
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/089124193022003005
Verbeke, W. (2006). Functional foods: Consumer willingness to compromise on taste for
health? Food Quality and Preference, 17, 126–131.
Wallenbeck, A., Rydhmer, L., Röcklinsberg, H., Ljung, M., Strandberg, E., & Ahlman, T. (2016).
Preferences for pig breeding goals among organic and conventional farmers in
Sweden. Organic Agriculture, 6(3), 171-182.