Literature DB >> 30004320

Review: Beef-eating quality: a European journey.

L J Farmer1, D T Farrell1.   

Abstract

This paper reviews recent research into predicting the eating qualities of beef. A range of instrumental and grading approaches have been discussed, highlighting implications for the European beef industry. Studies incorporating a number of instrumental and spectroscopic techniques illustrate the potential for online systems to non-destructively measure muscle pH, colour, fat and moisture content of beef with R 2 (coefficient of determination) values >0.90. Direct predictions of eating quality (tenderness, flavour, juiciness) and fatty acid content using these methods are also discussed though success is greatly variable. R 2 values for instrumental measures of tenderness have been quoted as high as 0.85 though R 2 values for sensory tenderness values can be as low as 0.01. Discriminant analysis models can improve prediction of variables such as pH and shear force, correctly classifying beef samples into categorical groups with >90% accuracy. Prediction of beef flavour continues to challenge researchers and the industry alike, with R 2 values rarely quoted above 0.50, regardless of instrumental or statistical analysis used. Beef grading systems such as EUROP and United States Department of Agriculture systems provide carcase classification and some indication of yield. Other systems attempt to classify the whole carcase according to expected eating quality. These are being supplemented by schemes such as Meat Standards Australia (MSA), based on consumer satisfaction for individual cuts. In Australia, MSA has grown steadily since its inception generating a 10% premium for the beef industry in 2015-16 of $187 million. There is evidence that European consumers would respond to an eating quality guarantee provided it is simple and independently controlled. A European beef quality assurance system might encompass environmental and nutritional measures as well as eating quality and would need to be profitable, simple, effective and sufficiently flexible to allow companies to develop their own brands.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bovine; grading; palatability; prediction; quality assurance

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30004320     DOI: 10.1017/S1751731118001672

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Animal        ISSN: 1751-7311            Impact factor:   3.240


  5 in total

Review 1.  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 2.  Predicting the Quality of Meat: Myth or Reality?

Authors:  Cécile Berri; Brigitte Picard; Bénédicte Lebret; Donato Andueza; Florence Lefèvre; Elisabeth Le Bihan-Duval; Stéphane Beauclercq; Pascal Chartrin; Antoine Vautier; Isabelle Legrand; Jean-François Hocquette
Journal:  Foods       Date:  2019-09-24

3.  FAM13A promotes proliferation of bovine preadipocytes by targeting Hypoxia-Inducible factor-1 signaling pathway.

Authors:  Chengcheng Liang; Guohua Wang; Sayed Haidar Abbas Raza; Xiaoyu Wang; Bingzhi Li; Wenzhen Zhang; Linsen Zan
Journal:  Adipocyte       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 4.534

4.  Effect of Myostatin Gene Mutation on Slaughtering Performance and Meat Quality in Marchigiana Bulls.

Authors:  Simone Ceccobelli; Francesco Perini; Maria Federica Trombetta; Stefano Tavoletti; Emiliano Lasagna; Marina Pasquini
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-19       Impact factor: 2.752

5.  Phenotypic and genetic variation of ultraviolet-visible-infrared spectral wavelengths of bovine meat.

Authors:  Giovanni Bittante; Simone Savoia; Alessio Cecchinato; Sara Pegolo; Andrea Albera
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 4.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.