carcass

(redirected from carcass dressing)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical.

carcass, carcase

1.The framework of a building before the addition of sheathing or other covering.
2. The frame or main parts of a structure unfinished and unornamented, lacking masonry, brickwork, floors, carpentry, plastering, inside trim, etc.
References in periodicals archive ?
(2003) reported that African donkeys had greater hot carcass dressing (59%) and cold carcass dressing (51%) than those observed in this study (lower than 50%).
The residence of these animals for an extended period on the feedlot with the aim of producing higher fat thickness (4.8 mm) did not have influence on final live weight, hot carcass weight or carcass dressing.
Slaughter weights HEAVY (1) MEDIUM (2) LIGTH (3) Initial body weigth, kg 338a 314ab 305b Final body weigth, kg 402a 360b 328c Average daily gain, kg [d.sup.-1] 0.63a 0.45b 0.22c Hot carcass weigth, kg 204a 189b 170c Carcass dressing, % 50.6 52.7 52.0 Muscle, % 62.1 61.9 61.6 Fat, % 14.7 15.8 15.4 Bone, % 17.8 17.2 16.4 Others, % 5.34 5.08 6.59 SEM p < Values Initial body weigth, kg 5.92 0.05 Final body weigth, kg 9.53 0.01 Average daily gain, kg [d.sup.-1] 0.05 0.01 Hot carcass weigth, kg 4.84 0.01 Carcass dressing, % 0.49 0.22 Muscle, % 0.59 0.94 Fat, % 0.58 0.78 Bone, % 0.75 0.76 Others, % 0.68 0.66 (1) Slaughter weight = 400 kg, (2) slaughter weight = 360 kg, (3) slaughter weight = 330 kg, SEM = standard error of mean.
However, (Costa et al., 2002; Gesualdi Junior et al., 2000), when evaluating the concentrate level effects on the carcass dressing, observed a linear increase, but when the carcass dressing was expressed in relation to the empty body weight, no difference among the concentrate levels was found.
Carcass dressing and carcass conformation were lower (p < 0.05) for CAR genetic group (49.6% and 9.25 points) when compared to CAN (54.5% and 12.4 points), CHC (52.7% and 11.6 points) and AAC (54.0% and 12.0 points) genetic groups.
Hot carcass weight (HCW), hot carcass dressing (HCD), conformation (CON), carcass length (CAL), leg length (LEL) and texture (TEX) present variation around 15% due to nutrition (Table 4).
Carcass dressing (CAD), carcass conformation (CAC), cushion thickness (CUT), Longissimus area (LMA) and texture (TEX) were similar (p>0.05) for all three breeds (Table 4).