Figures (5)  Tables (2)
    • Figure 1. 

      Comparison of antioxidant capacity characterization value of four varieties of pork. (a) Iron ion reduction ability (FARP); (b) ABTS radical scavenging ability (ABTS); (c) Comparison of DPPH among four varieties of pork; (d) Comparison of OH•- among four varieties of pork. Different letters indicate significant differences between pork samples of different breeds (p < 0.05). n = 6.

    • Figure 2. 

      Comparison of antioxidant enzyme activities among four pork varieties.

    • Figure 3. 

      Comparison of total phenol content in four varieties of pork.

    • Figure 4. 

      Comparison of vitamin content in four varieties of pork. (a) Vitamin C, (b) Vitamin E.

    • Figure 5. 

      Correlation analysis between antioxidant capacity and antioxidant factors.

    • ItemDLYNXRCDW
      FAT (g/100 g)1.42 ± 0.32c3.17 ± 0.56b3.72 ± 0.30a3.15 ± 0.27b
      SFA (g/100 g)3.30 ± 0.34C4.99 ± 0.46b6.95 ± 0.50a5.53 ± 0.35b
      MUFA (g/100 g)3.69 ± 0.39a5.47 ± 0.51b6.30 ± 0.59b6.92 ± 0.53b
      PUFA (g/100 g)1.45 ± 0.09b1.76 ± 0.09a1.91 ± 0.08a1.48 ± 0.05b
      FAs (g/100 g)8.44 ± 0.80b12.23 ± 1.03a15.15 ± 1.11a13.94 ± 0.91b
      DLY (Duroc × Landrace × Yorkshire pig); NX (Yorkshire × Ningxiang pig); RC (Rongchang pig); DW (Duroc × Wujin pig). The values are presented by means ± standard deviations. a, b mean values with various superscripts in a row were significantly different (p < 0.05). n = 6.

      Table 1. 

      Differences of fat and fatty acid content in different varieties of pork.

    • ItemDLYNXRCDW
      TBRAS (mg MDA/kg)0.63 ± 0.03a0.56 ± 0.01b0.59 ± 0.05b0.57 ± 0.02b
      POV (meq/kg)0.16 ± 0.02a0.14 ± 0.01a0.14 ± 0.04a0.17 ± 0.02a
      CD (mol/g)1.52 ± 0.01a1.43 ± 0.08a1.50 ± 0.01a1.51 ± 0.01a
      LPO (μmol/g prot)0.14 ± 0.01a0.14 ± 0.01a0.17 ± 0.02a0.16 ± 0.02a
      The values are presented by means ± standard deviations. The lowercase letterings a and b mean values with various superscripts in a row were significant differences (p < 0.05). n = 6.

      Table 2. 

      Differences of lipid oxidation indices in different varieties of pork