Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-21T01:18:44.930Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Associations of objective physical measurements of beef meat samples and tenderness assessed by a trained taste panel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 November 2017

D W Ross*
Affiliation:
SAC, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
R I Richardson
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, Langford, United Kingdom
E A Navajas
Affiliation:
SAC, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
N Prieto
Affiliation:
SAC, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
J J Hyslop
Affiliation:
SAC, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
D Marriott
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, Langford, United Kingdom
G Simm
Affiliation:
SAC, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
R Roehe
Affiliation:
SAC, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Get access

Extract

Meat tenderness is the single most important quality attribute in consumer acceptance studies of meat eating quality. Several mechanical-based techniques have been developed to provide an objective measure of meat tenderness that have good correlation with sensory tenderness, as assessed by trained taste panel. The classic Warner-Bratzler shear force technique (WBSF) has shown correlations with sensory tenderness in the range of -0.39 to -0.77 (Van Oeckel et al., 1999; Shackelford et al., 1999a), whilst the Volodkevitch bite test attempts to imitate the incisor biting action by a compression method. A rapid slice shear force (SSF) test, which uses only one steak and hot meat (significant benefits in a commercial environment), had a stronger correlation with taste panel tenderness scores than WBSF (Shackelford et al., 1999b). The Meat Industry Research Institute of New Zealand (MIRINZ) test results, transformed into categories, was highly correlated (-0.97) with sensory tenderness (Bickerstaffe et al., 2001). The objective of this study was to evaluate the associations between objective physical measures (SSF, MIRINZ and Volodkevitch) and taste panel tenderness scores in beef.

Type
Theatre Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bickerstaffe, R., Bekhit, A.E.D., Robertson, L.J., Roberts, N. and Geesink, G.H. 2001. Meat Science 59, 303–315.Google Scholar
Shackelford, S.D., Wheeler, T.L. and Koohmaraie, M. 1999a. Journal of Animal Science 77, 2693–2699.Google Scholar
Shackelford, S.D., Wheeler, T.L. and Koohmaraie, M. 1999b. Journal of Animal Science 77, 1474–1481.Google Scholar
Van Oeckel, M.J., Warnants, N. and Boucque, C.V. 1999. Meat Science 53, 259–267.Google Scholar
Russo, . 2003. Statistics for the Behavioural Sciences, Psychology Press Google Scholar