| Literature DB >> 35741898 |
Antonio González Ariza1, Francisco Javier Navas González1,2, Ander Arando Arbulu1, José Manuel León Jurado3, Juan Vicente Delgado Bermejo1, María Esperanza Camacho Vallejo2.
Abstract
The present research aimed to determine the differential clustering patterns of carcass and meat quality traits in local chicken breeds from around the world and to develop a method to productively characterize minority bird populations. For this, a comprehensive meta-analysis of 91 research documents that dealt with the study of chicken local breeds through the last 20 years was performed. Thirty-nine traits were sorted into the following clusters: weight-related traits, histological properties, pH, color traits, water-holding capacity, texture-related traits, flavor content-related nucleotides, and gross nutrients. Multicollinearity problems reported for pH 72 h post mortem, L* meat 72 h post mortem, a* meat 72 h post mortem, sex, firmness, and chewiness, were thus discarded from further analyses (VIF < 5). Data-mining cross-validation and chi-squared automatic interaction detection (CHAID) decision tree development allowed us to detect similarities across genotypes. Easily collectable trait, such as shear force, muscle fiber diameter, carcass/pieces weight, and pH, presented high explanatory potential of breed variability. Hence, the aforementioned variables must be considered in the experimental methodology of characterization of carcass and meat from native genotypes. This research enables the characterization of local chicken populations to satisfy the needs of specific commercial niches for poultry meat consumers.Entities:
Keywords: biodiversity; chemical profile; data mining; genetic resources; local breeds; physical properties characterization
Year: 2022 PMID: 35741898 PMCID: PMC9223061 DOI: 10.3390/foods11121700
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Clusters, references, and units of the traits considered in the study.
| Cluster | References | Trait | Units |
|---|---|---|---|
| Weight-related traits | [ | Carcass/piece weight (g) | g |
| Carcass yield (%) | % | ||
| Cold weight | g | ||
| Histological properties | [ | Muscle fiber density | Fibers/mm2 |
| Muscle fiber diameter | μm | ||
| pH | [ | pH | |
| pH 24 h post mortem | |||
| pH 72 h post mortem | |||
| Color-related traits | [ | L* meat | |
| a* meat | |||
| b* meat | |||
| L* meat 72 h post mortem | |||
| a* meat 72 h post mortem | |||
| b* meat 72 h post mortem | |||
| L* skin | |||
| a* skin | |||
| b* skin | |||
| Water-holding | [ | Drip loss | % |
| Water-holding capacity | % | ||
| Cooking loss | % | ||
| Texture-related traits | [ | Firmness | kg s−1 |
| Total work | kg mm | ||
| Shear force | N | ||
| Hardness | N | ||
| Springiness | mm | ||
| Cohesiveness | N | ||
| Gumminess | N | ||
| Chewiness | kg mm | ||
| Content of flavor-related nucleotides | [ | IMP | mg/g |
| AMP | mg/100 g | ||
| Inosine | mg/100 g | ||
| Gross nutrients | [ | Moisture | % |
| Protein | % | ||
| Fat | % | ||
| Ash | % | ||
| Collagen | % | ||
| Cholesterol | mg/100 g |
Figure 1Territorial distribution and number of papers per country.
Multicollinearity analysis of meat- and carcass-quality-related traits.
| Statistics/Traits | Tolerance (1 − R2) | VIF 1 |
|---|---|---|
| Chewiness | 0.2468 | 4.0515 |
| Gumminess | 0.3126 | 3.1989 |
| Hardness | 0.4300 | 2.3258 |
| Shear force | 0.4867 | 2.0546 |
| a* meat | 0.5302 | 1.8862 |
| b* skin | 0.5635 | 1.7745 |
| a* skin | 0.5867 | 1.7044 |
| Muscle fiber diameter | 0.6164 | 1.6223 |
| Cooking loss | 0.6172 | 1.6202 |
| L* skin | 0.6191 | 1.6152 |
| L* meat | 0.6285 | 1.5910 |
| Water-holding capacity | 0.6418 | 1.5580 |
| pH | 0.7088 | 1.4108 |
| Drip loss | 0.7201 | 1.3886 |
| pH 24 h post mortem | 0.7415 | 1.3486 |
| Moisture | 0.7428 | 1.3462 |
| b* meat | 0.7458 | 1.3408 |
| Total work | 0.7875 | 1.2699 |
| IMP | 0.7978 | 1.2534 |
| Springiness | 0.8208 | 1.2183 |
| Cholesterol | 0.8264 | 1.2101 |
| Cohesiveness | 0.8981 | 1.1135 |
| Collagen | 0.8985 | 1.1130 |
| Inosine | 0.9044 | 1.1058 |
| Carcass/piece weight | 0.9133 | 1.0949 |
| Carcass yield | 0.9176 | 1.0898 |
| Protein | 0.9293 | 1.0761 |
| AMP | 0.9315 | 1.0735 |
| Ash | 0.9558 | 1.0463 |
| Muscle fiber density | 0.9692 | 1.0317 |
| Cold canal weight | 0.9732 | 1.0275 |
| Average age | 0.9740 | 1.0267 |
| Fat | 0.9792 | 1.0213 |
1 Interpretation thumb rule: VIF ≥ 5 (highly correlated); 1 < VIF < 5 (moderately correlated); VIF = 1 (not correlated).
Figure 2Graphic depiction of the most representative branches of the CHAID decision tree considering native breed genotypes as the clustering criterion.
Figure 3Graphical depiction of the prior and posterior classification of observations depending on their genotype.