Variation and Impact of Muscle Thickness

  • B. L. Dumont
Part of the Current Topics in Veterinary Medicine book series (CTVM, volume 2)


Muscles largely differ in thickness due to the variation of their weight during growth, which results mainly from an increase in the diameter of muscle fibres. With increasing thickness, the morphological aspects of the perimysium network is changed. The thickness each muscle may present depends on the dimensions of the skeleton. There is a close relationship between muscle thickness, conformation or fleshiness, meat/bone ratio and meat texture. The thicker the muscles, the better the conformation and the higher the meat/bone ratio and the more tender the meat. All these characteristics are at their maximum development in the hypertrophied type of cattle where muscles show considerable hypertrophy in weight and thickness.


Muscle Thickness Muscular Fibre Meat Texture Muscle Enlargement Skeletal Support 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bendall J.R. and Voyle C.A., 1967 A study of the histological changes in the growing muscles of beef animals. J. Fd. Tech. 2, 259–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boccard R., Dumont B.L. and Schmitt O., 1967 Note sur les relations entre la dureté de la viande et les principales caractéristiques du tissu conjonctif. 13 réun. eur. Cherch. en Viande, Rotterdam, 202–26 August, 1967. 22ppGoogle Scholar
  3. Boccard R., Dumont B.L. and Schmitt O., 1969 Relation entre la conformation des carcasses et les caractéristiques de la musculature (Observations préliminaires sur les vaches de réforme) Bull. Acad. vét. 42, 261–265.Google Scholar
  4. Boccard R. and Dumont B.L. 1974 Conséquences de l’hypertrophie musculaire héréditaire. Ann. Génét. Sel. anim. 6, (2), 177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de Boer, H., Dumont B.L., Pomeroy R.W. and Weniger J.H., 1974. Manual on EAAP reference methods for the assessment of carcass characteristics in cattle. Livestock Prod. Sci. 1, 151–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dumont B.L. and Boccard R., 1967 Le rapport muscle/os, critère de selection des bovins de boucherie. 2e Symp. Internl. Zootech. Milan, 14–16th April 1967, 149–155Google Scholar
  7. Dumont B.L. and Schmitt O., 1973 Conséquences de l’hypertrophie musculaire héréditaire sur la trame conjonctive du muscle de bovin. Ann. Genet. Sél. Anim. 5, 499–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dumont B.L. and Schmitt O., 1975. Etude de la variation de la trame de tissu conjonctif musculaire chez le bovin (Bos taurus). Commun. Réun. Groupe, “Développement et croissance” de l’INRA,-INA, Paris-Grignon, 17–18 April 1975. 4pp.Google Scholar
  9. Dumont B.L., Lefebvre J., Schmitt O. and Barbu S., 1977 Application de méthodes d’analyse multidimentionnelle à la différenciation des muscles sur la base de l’organisation de leur trame conjonctive. 10th Eur. Meet. Statist., Leuven, Belgium, 22–26 August 1977Google Scholar
  10. Dumont B.L., 1977a Variation du rapport poids/longueur des carcasses bovines. Ann. Zootech., 26(1), 119–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dumont B.L., 1977b Relations entre la conformation et la composition des carcasses de bovins. Ann. Zootech., 26(1), 125–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dumont B.L., 1977c Relation entre la charnure et la teneur en collagene (unpublished data).Google Scholar
  13. Dumont B.L., 1977d Relation entre la conformation et la dureté de la viande (unpublished data)Google Scholar
  14. Houdiniere A., 1957 L’examen des ‘profils musculaires’ dans l’appréciation de la qualité des viandes. Bull. Acad. vét., 30, 51–62Google Scholar
  15. Kauffman R.G., Smith R.E. and Long R.A., 1970 Bovine topography and its relationship to composition. Proc. 23rd Ann. Rec. Meat Conf. AMSA. 100–117Google Scholar
  16. Schmitt O. and Dumont B.L., 1972 Croissance du muscle et tissu conjonctif. Ann. Biol. Anim. Biochim. Biophys., 12(4), 667–672PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schmitt O. and DUmont B.L., 1969 Méthodes d’analyse de la structure musculaire. Ann. Biol. Anim. Biochim. Biophys., 9(1), 123–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Swatland H.J., 1976 Recent research on postnatal muscle development in swine. Proc. 29th Ann. Recip. Meat Conf. AMSA, 86–104Google Scholar
  19. Verbeke R., 1975 Dissection of the three rib-joint (7th, 8th and 9th) and carcass blockiness as estimates of carcass value. EEC Seminar on criteria and methods for assessment of carcass and meat characteristics in beef production experiments, Zeist, Netherlands, 1975Google Scholar
  20. Vognarova I., Dvorak Z. and Böhm R., 1968 Collagen and elastin in different cuts of veal and beef, J. Fd. Sci., 33, 339–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff - The Hague/Boston/London 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. L. Dumont
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire de Recherches sur la Viande INRACentre National de Recherches ZootechniquesJouy-en-JosasFrance

Personalised recommendations