Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Meat Quality of Indigenous Pig Breeds in Selected Countries of Central and Southwestern Europe – A Review Cover

Meat Quality of Indigenous Pig Breeds in Selected Countries of Central and Southwestern Europe – A Review

Annals of Animal Science
Volume 26 (2026): Issue 3 (August 2026)
By: ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,   and    
Open Access
|Sep 2026
Figures & tables

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

Methodology for literature search.

Table 1.

Native pig breeds in selected European countries: population data and number of breeding females (FAO, 2024)

CountryBreedTotal number of animalsNumber of breeding females
Southwestern Europe
ItalyCinta Senese1 992 (update 2023)692 (update 2023)
Apulo-Calabrese4 230 (update 2023)704 (update 2023)
Mora Romagnola1 233 (update 2023)259 (update 2023)
Nero Siciliano6 281 (update 2023)698 (update 2023)
SpainIberian3 613 123 (2024)564 749 (2024)
Negra Canaria2 276 (2024)614 (2024)
Porc Negre Mollorquí1 482 (2024)1 372 (2024)
Porco Celta4 173 (2024)433 (2024)
FranceGasconne1 760 (2024)1 591 (2024)
PortugalAlentejana27 953 (2024)3 639 (2024)
Bisaro38 772 (2024)5 028 (2024)
Malhado de Alcobaça3 301 (2024)429 (2024)
Central Europe
SloveniaKrškopolje2 006 (2024)296 (2024)
PolandPuławska3 404 (2024)2 488 (2024)
Złotnicka Spotted1 056 (2024)936 (2024)
Złotnicka White1 214 (2024)1 058 (2024)
Czech RepublicPrestice Black-Pied900 (2022)394 (2022)
BelarusBelorussian Large White2 958 300 (2006)No data
CroatiaBlack Slavonian pig3 200 (2023)2 143 (2023)
HungaryBlond Mangalica3 385 (2023)3 332 (2023)
Red Mangalica1 542 (2023)1 503 (2023)
SerbiaMangalica4000 (2023)1954 (2023)
UkraineMirgorod2 757 (2019)150 (2019)
Poltavian Meat1 392 (2023)130 (2023)
Ukrainian Steppe White1 513 (2023)174 (2023)
Table 2.

Fattening and slaughter parameters of European native pig breeds

CountryBreedSW, kgADG, gBF, mm last ribBF, mm gluteus mediusDY, %M, %LMY, %References
12345678910
ItalyCinta Senese127–147416–20–49.382–72–76Pugliese et al. (2005), Sirtori et al. (2014)
Apulo-Calabrese144–157359–413––83––Micari et al. (2009), Scerra et al. (2024)
Mora Romagnola19337657,162.180.4–39Fortina et al. (2005)
Nero Siciliano62–121162–60039,139–4979.1–82.5–40Pugliese et al. (2004), Liotta et al. (2005), Bozzi et al. (2019)
SpainIberian152–1905637.63–806577.9–81.2––Tejeda et al. (2020), Serrano et al. (2009), Ayuso et al. (2018)
Porc Negre158–
Mollorquí410726680.4–Tibau et al. (2019)
Porco Celta167.3–41.6–43.648.780.5––Franco et al. (2014)
FranceGasconne~175.3439–47244.7–4746.1–4978.7–80––Mercat et al. (2019), Lebret et al. (2021)
PortugalAlentejana100333–58338.1–55.639.473.3–80.9––Freitas et al. (2007), Charneca et al. (2019), Martins et al. (2021)
Bisaro7939617– 21.1–75.2–76.8––Álvarez-Rodríguez Teixeira (2019), Charneca et al. (2019)
SloveniaKrškopoljend-2935.4–36.479.6–81.1–43–46Čandek-Potokar et al. (2003), Tomažin et al. (2018), Lukač et al. (2019)
PolandPuławska~100638–8102312.73–28.8675.33–8049.4–56.11–Wojtysiak and Połtowicz (2014), Debrecéni et al. (2018), Babicz et al. (2020), Milczarek (2021)
Złotnicka Spotted10759041.328.9–34.9676.51–80.541.83–46.28–Kapelański et al. (2006), Grześkowiak et al. (2009), Bocian et al. (2012), Szulc et al. (2012)
Złotnicka White>70–27.734.746.3–Grześkowiak et al. (2009)
Czech RepublicPrestice Black-Pied Pig94.2–115.2~48036.07–43.2148.76–48.94Nevrkla et al. (2021)
CroatiaBlack Slavonian pig~135–5582–15–43Butko et al. (2007), Senčiæ et al. (2013), Kušec et al. (2019)
HungaryBlond Mangalica140–150369––––27Tomović et al. (2016), Nchama et al. (2023)
Mangalica in general term75–120268–299–50.5–5773–81.5––Parunović et al. (2012), Hoha et al. (2016), Radović et al. (2017), Debrecéni et al. (2018), Charlton et al. (2022)
UkraineMirgorod10063230.9–72.550.4–Tsereniuk et al. (2023)

SW – slaughter weight; CW – carcass weight; CCW – cold carcass weight; HCW – hot carcass weight; ADG – average daily gain; FBW – final body weight; BF – backfat; DY – dressing yield; M – meatiness; LMY – lean meat yield; nd – no data.

* measured at 5 points,

** dressing yield in the loin,

*** measured on the back,

**** from the age of 90 days to slaughter.

Table 3.

Physicochemical characteristics of meat from European native pig breeds

CountryBreedSW, kgpH45minpH24hL*a*b*Cooking loss, %WBSF, N, kg, kg/cm2Drip loss, %References
123456789101112
ItalyCinta Senese127–1476.2–6.45.82–5.7846–50.111–14.92.9–5.417.9–30.394.14–99.87 N, 1
0.17 kg		0.7–2.14Pugliese et al. (2005), Sirtori et al. (2014), Aquilani et al. (2019)
Apulo-Calabrese144.2––46.2–49.33.9–7.15.8–6.1–––Caparra et al. (2023), Scerra et al. (2024)
Nero Siciliano62–1216.18–6.29–46.7–50.114.7–15.34.9–5.823.59.99–10.11 kg–Pugliese et al. (2004)
Mora Romagnola1936.576.1542.38.72.2–––Fortina et al. (2005)
SpainIberian152–190-5.6239.8–41.78.7–11.36.4–13.624.14.33 kg/cm2–Serrano et al. (2008), Fernández-Barroso et al. (2020), Tejeda et al. (2020)
Porco Celta167.3–5.46–5.5547.3–50.710.4–13.110.7–11.719.7–21.93.64–3.8 kg/cm21.8–2.7Franco et al. (2014, 2016)
FranceGasconne~173.36.345.57–5.644–44.79.7–10.043.5–3.814.524.3 N1.7Mercat et al. (2019), Lebret et al. (2021)
PortugalAlentejano~100–5.57–5.749.4–50.810.3–15.23.6–8.717.7–26.926.6 N1.3Martins et al. (2020, 2021)
Bisaro79–5.4455.1–55.73.4–7.84–10.928.947.4 N3.8Martins et al. (2020), Teixeira et al. (2021)
SloveniaKrškopoljend6.335.6–5.7150.46.60.926.953.2 N4.2Čandek-Potokar et al. (2003), Lukač et al. (2019), Tomažin et al. (2018)
PolandPuławska~1006.10–6.785.58–5.6352.1–53.173.1–15.90.8–16.120.41–35.93.7–5.62 kg/cm21.7–24.89Wojtysiak and Połtowicz (2014), Bogucka and Kapelañski (2016), Debrecéni et al. (2018), Milczarek et al. (2019), Milczarek (2021)
Złotnicka Spotted1076.38–6.575.56–5.6747.9–49.34.77–17.22.5–5.0427.46–29.3643.61 N/cm22.36–3.4Grzeœkowiak et al. (2009), Bogucka and Kapelañski (2016), Bocian et al. (2012), Szulc et al. (2012)
Złotnicka White>706.385.53–5.7243.9–49.546.3–14.233.34–4.922.76–27.62–3.4Grzeœkowiak et al. (2009), Migdał et al. (2017)
Czech RepublicPrestice Black-Pied Pig94.2–115.26.295.6550.541.2810.632.95Nevrkla et al. (2021)
CroatiaBlack Slavonian pig~153.85.8249.9204.7–––Karolyi et al. (2004)
HungaryBlond Mangalica110– 1406.25–6.375.72–5.7440.3–544–11.765.3–11.418.4943.1 N5.9Tomoviæ et al. (2016), Imrich et al. (2019)
Mangalica in general75–1206.15.47–5.6439.1–50.12.7–38.210.4–14.62.7–26.942.6 N, 5.05 kg4.8–8.8Stanišiæ et al. (2015), Radoviæ et al. (2017), Debrecéni et al. (2018), Charlton et al. (2022), Nchama et al. (2023)

[i] SW – slaughter weight;

[ii] L* (lightness),

[iii] a* (redness),

[iv] b* (yellowness);

[v] WBSF – Warner–Bratzler shear force (values given in different units depending on the publication).

Table 4.

Protein, intramuscular fat content, total MUFA and PUFA fatty acids, and the n-6/n-3 ratio in LTL muscle in European native pig breeds

CountryBreedSW, kgRearing conditionsProtein, %IMF, %n-6/n-3 PUFATotal MUFA (% of total FA)Total PUFA (% of total FA)References
ItalyCinta Senese84outdoor23.096.6612.5––Aquilani et al. (2019)
130indoor23.032.3224.449.911.2Pugliese et al. (2013)
Apulo-Calabrese84.8outdoor20.661.868.2––Caparra et al. (2023)
144–157indoor221.91–2.0915.5*-248.812.4Aboagye et al. (2020), Scerra et al. (2024)
Nero Siciliano62–121outdoor22.245.7710.753.310.9Pugliese et al. (2004)
indoor23.426.2518.342.214.4
Mora Romagnola193indoor23.36.147.611Fortina et al. (2005)
SpainIberian152free range traditional system22.446.6–57.16.8Tejeda et al. (2020)
145indoor21.5–21.66.61–8.617.7526.5Pardo et al. (2021), Serrano et al. (2008)
Porco Celta167.3outdoor22.655.2217.949.67.6Franco et al. (2014)
FranceGasconne~175.3outdoor23.072.76.1–6.2653.76.6Mercat et al. (2019)
PortugalAlentejano~150outdoor23.66.9––Martins et al. (2020)
Bisaro~150outdoor236––
SloveniaKrškopoljendindoor23.22.8115.747.511.6Lukač et al. (2019), Tomažin et al. (2018)
PolandPuławska~100indoor22.72–23.31.9–5.58.89–29.456.53.4Debrecéni et al. (2018), Milczarek et al. (2021)
Złotnicka Spotted107indoor23.27–25.22.04–2.610.78–12.9449.411.1Grzeœkowiak et al. (2009), Debrecéni et al. (2018)
Złotnicka White>70indoor24.51.8710.7347.412.9Grzeœkowiak et al. (2009)
Czech RepublicPrestice Black-Pied94.2–115.2indoor20.122.296.744.0713.37Nevrkla et al. (2021); Belkova et al. 2023
CroatiaBlack Slavonian pig~135outdoor21.255.9Butko et al. (2007)
indoor21.34.95
HungaryBlond Mangalica110– 140indoor21.83–24.641.34–5.86Tomoviæ et al. (2016), Imrich et al. (2020)
Mangalica in general75–120outdoor21.45–21.77.579.2–12.9744.8–55.56.5–15.6Parunoviæ et al. (2012), Debrecéni et al. (2018)
75–120indoor19–24.11.917.92–37.357.25.9Parunoviæ et al. (2012), Nchama et al. (2023)

* Content of total PUFA in % of IMF.

SW – slaughter weight; nd – no data; FA – fatty acids, MUFA – monounsaturated fatty acids, PUFA – polyunsaturated fatty acids, IMF – intramuscular fat, LTL – m. longissimus thoracis et lumborum.

Long description: The diagram is organized into four main thematic areas connected by arrows. The central element represents the conservation and sustainable use of native European pig breeds. One branch focuses on breeding strategies, including selection for productivity, disease resistance, robustness, meat quality, and the use of crossbreeding with commercial lines to combine resilience with production efficiency. A second branch addresses conservation policies, emphasizing support through rural development programmes, financial incentives, maintenance of genetic diversity, and preservation of local breeds. A third branch concerns market development and consumer awareness, highlighting promotion of regional products, cultural heritage, sustainability, animal welfare, and the nutritional value of meat from native breeds. The final branch presents the long-term perspective, identifying native breeds as strategic genetic resources that contribute to biodiversity, climate resilience, sustainable livestock production, and future food security. All branches converge toward the overall objective of preserving native pig breeds while strengthening sustainable pork production and premium niche markets.
Figure 2.

Diagram summarizing recommendations for conserving native European pig breeds through breeding strategies, sustainable farming, policy support, and consumer awareness.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/aoas-2025-0122 | Journal eISSN: 2300-8733 (formerly 1642-3402) | Journal ISSN: 1642-3402
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 1157 - 1171
Submitted on: Jun 21, 2025
Accepted on: Oct 21, 2025
Published on: Sep 6, 2026
Published by: National Research Institute of Animal Production
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
pork,
native breeds,
genetic diversity,
extensive farming,
autochthonous breeds,
organic farming
Related subjects:
Medicine,
Veterinary medicine

© 2026 Dagmara Łodyga, Małgorzata Kasprowicz-Potocka, Anita Zaworska-Zakrzewska, Joanna Składanowska-Baryza, Vicente Rodriguez-Estevez, Santos Sanz-Fernandez, Carolina Reyes-Palomo, Paolo Ferrari, Ewa Sell-Kubiak, Karolina Szulc, Agnieszka Ludwiczak, published by National Research Institute of Animal Production
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 26 (2026): Issue 3 (August 2026)
Previous article
Next article