Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T07:13:47.127Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors affecting eating quality of beef

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2017

D. J. Devlin ,
N. F. S. Gault ,
B. W. Moss ,
E. Tolland ,
J. Tollerton ,
L. J. Farmer  and
A. W. Gordon
D. J. Devlin*
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Food Research Branch, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT95P, UK
N. F. S. Gault
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Food Research Branch, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT95P, UK
B. W. Moss
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Food Research Branch, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT95P, UK
E. Tolland
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Food Research Branch, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT95P, UK
J. Tollerton
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Food Research Branch, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT95P, UK
L. J. Farmer
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Food Research Branch, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT95P, UK
A. W. Gordon
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Food Research Branch, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT95P, UK
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The most important factors known to influence the eating quality of beef are well established and include both pre- and post-slaughter events with many of the determinants interacting with each other. A substantial programme of work has been conducted by the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute in Northern Ireland aimed at quantifying those factors of most importance to the local beef industry. Post-slaughter effects such as carcase chilling and electrical stimulation, ageing, carcase hanging and cooking method have been shown to have a significant impact on eating quality when compared with pre-slaughter activities such as animal handling and lairage time in the Northern Ireland studies. However, the effect of animal breed, particularly the use of dairy breed animals, was shown to significantly improve eating quality. Many of these factors were found to interact with each other.

Keywords

beefeating qualitypre-slaughterpost-slaughterbreed
Type
Full Paper
Information
Advances in Animal Biosciences , Volume 8 , Supplement s1: Improving the quality and sustainability of beef production , October 2017 , pp. s2 - s5
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

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

Bonny, SPF, Hocquette, J-F, Pethick, DW, Farmer, LJ, Legrand, I, Wierzbicki, J, Allen, P, Polkinghorne, RJ and Gardner, GE 2016. The variation in the eating quality of beef from different sexes and breed classes cannot be completely explained by carcase measurements. Animal 10, 987–995.Google Scholar
Campo, MM, Nute, GR, Hughes, SI, Enser, MB, Wood, JD and Richardson, RI 2004. Flavour perception of oxidation in beef. In Proceedings of the 50th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, August, Helsinki, pp. 280.Google Scholar
Ferguson, DM, Bruce, HL, Thompson, JM, Egan, AF, Perry, D and Shorthose, WR 2001. Factors affecting beef palatability – farmgate to chilled carcass. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 41, 879–889.Google Scholar
Gullett, EA, Rowe, DL and Jones, SDM 1985. Quality of roasts from bulls and steers of early and late fattening types. Canadian Institute of Food Science and Technology Journal 18, 296–301.Google Scholar
Lizaso, G, Beriain, MJ, Horcada, A, Chasco, J and Purroy, A 2011. Effect of intended purpose (dairy/beef production) on beef quality. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 91, 97–102.Google Scholar
Mandell, IB, Gullett, EA, Wilton, JW, Kemp, RA and Allen, OB 1997. Effects of gender and breed on carcass traits, chemical composition, and palatability attributes in Hereford and Simmental bulls and steers. Livestock Production Science 49, 235–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, MF, Carr, MA, Ramsey, CB, Crockett, KL and Hoover, LC 2001. Consumer thresholds for establishing the value of beef tenderness. Journal of Animal Science 79, 3062–3068.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mohan Raj, AB, Moss, BW, McCaughey, J, McLaughlan, W, Kilpatrick, DJ and McCaughey, SJ 1991. Behavioural response to mixing of entire bulls, vasectomised bulls and steers. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 31, 157–168.Google Scholar
Monson, F, Sanudo, C and Sierra, I 2005. Influence of breed and ageing time on the sensory meat quality and consumer acceptability in intensively reared beef. Meat Science 71, 471–479.Google Scholar
Sinclair, KD, Lobley, GE, Horgan, GW, Kyle, DJ, Porter, AD, Mathhews, KR, Warkup, CC and Maltin, CA 2001. Effects of nutritional regime and genotype on organoleptic properties and instrumental texture. Animal Science 72, 269–277.Google Scholar
Warner, RD, Thompson, JM, Polkinghorne, R, Gutzke, D and Kearney, GA 2014. A consumer sensory study of the influence of rigor temperature on eating quality and ageing potential of beef striploin and rump. Animal Production Science 54, 396–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warriss, PD 1990. The handling of cattle pre-slaughter and its effects on carcase and meat quality. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 28, 171–186.Google Scholar
Watson, R, Gee, A, Polkinghorne, R and Porter, M 2008. Consumer assessment of eating quality – development of protocols for Meat Standards Australia (MSA) testing. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48, 1360–1367.Google Scholar