Literature DB >> 15542477

A comparison of consumer sensory acceptance and value of domestic beef steaks and steaks from a branded, Argentine beef program.

K M Killinger1, C R Calkins, W J Umberger, D M Feuz, K M Eskridge.   

Abstract

To determine consumer sensory acceptance and value of branded, Argentine (grass-finished, aged 30+ d) and domestic (U.S. grain-finished beef, aged 9 d) strip loins were paired based on similar Warner-Bratzler shear force values (P = 0.34) and similar marbling levels (P = 0.82). Consumers in Chicago, IL, and San Francisco, CA (n = 124 per city), evaluated one pair of Argentine and domestic steaks, and had the opportunity to participate in a silent, sealed-bid auction to purchase steaks matching the taste panel samples. Consumers were categorized into three groups based on overall acceptability ratings: 1) those who found Argentine steaks more acceptable, 2) those who found domestic steaks more acceptable, and 3) those who were indifferent. Consumers rated domestic steaks higher (P < 0.05) in juiciness, tenderness, flavor, and overall acceptability. Consumers in both Chicago and San Francisco were willing to pay more (P < 0.05) for domestic steaks (0.86 dollars and 0.52 dollars per 0.45 kg, respectively). In both cities, consumers who found Argentine samples more acceptable were willing to pay more (P < 0.05) for Argentine steaks (0.74 dollars per 0.45 kg in Chicago and 1.82 dollars per 0.45 kg in San Francisco), and consumers who found domestic samples more acceptable were willing to pay more (P < 0.05) for domestic steaks (1.66 dollars per 0.45 kg in Chicago and 1.34 dollars per 0.45 kg in San Francisco). Consumers who were indifferent were willing to pay similar (P = 0.99) amounts for Argentine and domestic steaks. Although some consumers found Argentine beef more acceptable than domestic beef (19.7 and 16.5% in Chicago and San Francisco, respectively) and were willing to pay more for it, most consumers found domestic beef to be more acceptable (59.0% in Chicago and 61.5% in San Francisco) and were willing to pay more to obtain a more acceptable product.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15542477     DOI: 10.2527/2004.82113302x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  7 in total

1.  Retail stability of three beef muscles from grass-, legume-, and feedlot-finished cattle.

Authors:  Jerrad F Legako; Traci Cramer; Krista Yardley; Talya J Murphy; ToniRae Gardner; Arkopriya Chail; Lance R Pitcher; Jennifer W MacAdam
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 2.  Consumer Perception of Beef Quality and How to Control, Improve and Predict It? Focus on Eating Quality.

Authors:  Jingjing Liu; Marie-Pierre Ellies-Oury; Todor Stoyanchev; Jean-François Hocquette
Journal:  Foods       Date:  2022-06-13

Review 3.  A review of fatty acid profiles and antioxidant content in grass-fed and grain-fed beef.

Authors:  Cynthia A Daley; Amber Abbott; Patrick S Doyle; Glenn A Nader; Stephanie Larson
Journal:  Nutr J       Date:  2010-03-10       Impact factor: 3.271

4.  Effects of Rice Bran, Flax Seed, and Sunflower Seed on Growth Performance, Carcass Characteristics, Fatty Acid Composition, Free Amino Acid and Peptide Contents, and Sensory Evaluations of Native Korean Cattle (Hanwoo).

Authors:  Chang Bon Choi; Hana Kwon; Sung Il Kim; Un Mok Yang; Ju Hwan Lee; Eun Kyu Park
Journal:  Asian-Australas J Anim Sci       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.509

5.  Preference evaluation of ground beef by untrained subjects with three levels of finely textured beef.

Authors:  Sandra Molly Depue; Morgan Marie Neilson; Jayson L Lusk; Gretchen Mafi; F Bailey Norwood; Ranjith Ramanathan; Deborah VanOverbeke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Drivers of Consumer Liking for Beef, Pork, and Lamb: A Review.

Authors:  Rhonda Miller
Journal:  Foods       Date:  2020-04-03

7.  Physicochemical and Sensory Assessments in Spain and United States of PGI-Certified Ternera de Navarra vs. Certified Angus Beef.

Authors:  María José Beriain; María T Murillo-Arbizu; Kizkitza Insausti; Francisco C Ibañez; Christine Leick Cord; Tom R Carr
Journal:  Foods       Date:  2021-06-25
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.