Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T03:13:01.876Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Consistency statistics and genetic parameters for taste panel assessed meat quality traits and their relationship with carcass quality traits in a commercial population of Angus-sired beef cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2009

J. L. Gill*
Affiliation:
The Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Roslin BioCentre, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS, UK
O. Matika
Affiliation:
The Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Roslin BioCentre, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS, UK
J. L. Williams
Affiliation:
Parco Tecnologico Padano, Via Einstein, Polo Universitario, Lodi 26900, Italy
H. Worton
Affiliation:
The Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Roslin BioCentre, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS, UK
P. Wiener
Affiliation:
The Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Roslin BioCentre, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS, UK
S. C. Bishop
Affiliation:
The Roslin Institute and Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The University of Edinburgh, Roslin BioCentre, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS, UK
*
Get access

Abstract

Sensory traits, such as juiciness and tenderness, are known to be important to the consumer and thus will influence their consumption of meat, specifically beef. These traits are difficult to measure and often require the use of taste panels to assess the complex parameters involved in the eating experience. Such panels are potentially a large source of measurement error, which may reduce the effectiveness of breeding programmes based on the data they generate. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of such taste panel-derived sensory traits as well as calculating genetic parameters and residual correlations for these traits along with a further set of traditional carcass quality traits. The study examined a sample of 443 Aberdeen Angus-cross animals collected from 14 breeder–finisher farms throughout Scotland. To assess the quality of the taste panel measurements, three consistency statistics were calculated: (i) panel-member consistency, i.e. the extent to which an individual panel member varied in their scoring for a given trait over the period of the experiment; (ii) repeatability, i.e. the consistency with which an individual panel member was able to score a trait on repeated samples from the same animal; and (iii) reproducibility, i.e. the extent to which taste panel members agreed with each other when scoring a trait. These consistency statistics were moderately high, particularly for panel-member consistency and reproducibility, with values ranging from 0.48 to 0.81 and 0.43 to 0.73 respectively. Estimated heritabilities were low for most of the sensory taste-panel-evaluated traits where the maximum value was 0.16 for overall liking. Residual correlations were high between many of the closely related sensory traits, although few significant correlations were found between the carcass quality data and meat quality traits.

Type
Full Paper
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 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

Blanchard, PJ, Willis, MB, Warkup, CC, Ellis, M 2000. The influence of carcass backfat and intramuscular fat level on pork eating quality. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 80, 145151.3.0.CO;2-M>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BSI-BS7667 1993. Assessors for sensory analysis. In BSI standards, pp. 1–10. BSI, Milton Keynes, UK.Google Scholar
Calkins, CR, Hodgen, JM 2007. A fresh look at meat flavor. Meat Science 77, 6380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekkers, JCM, Hospital, F 2002. The use of molecular genetics in the improvement of agricultural populations. Nature Reviews Genetics 3, 2232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dikeman, ME, Pollak, EJ, Zhang, Z, Moser, DW, Gill, CA, Dressler, EA 2005. Phenotypic ranges and relationships among carcass and meat palatability traits for fourteen cattle breeds, and heritabilities and expected progeny differences for Warner-Bratzler shear force in three beef cattle breeds. Journal of Animal Science 83, 24612467.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dodds, KG, Tate, ML, McEwan, JC, Crawford, AM 1996. Exclusion probabilities for pedigree testing farm animals. TAG Theoretical and Applied Genetics 92, 966975.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilmour, AR, Cullis, BR, Welham, SJ, Thompson, R 2000. ASREML reference manual. IACR-Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, UK.Google Scholar
Hickey, JM, Keane, MG, Kenny, DA, Cromie, AR, Veerkamp, RF 2007. Genetic parameters for EUROP carcass traits within different groups of cattle in Ireland. Journal of Animal Science 85, 314321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hovenier, R, Kanis, E, Verhoeven, JA 1993. Repeatability of taste panel tenderness scores and their relationships to objective pig meat quality traits. Journal of Animal Science 71, 20182025.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karamichou, E, Richardson, RI, Nute, GR, Gibson, KP, Bishop, SC 2006. Genetic analyses and quantitative trait loci detection, using a partial genome scan, for intramuscular fatty acid composition in Scottish Blackface sheep. Journal of Animal Science 84, 32283238.Google Scholar
Kempster, AJ, Cook, GL, Grantley-Smith, M 1986. National estimates of the body composition of British cattle, sheep and pigs with special reference to trends in fatness. A review. Meat Science 17, 107138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall, DM 1994. Breed differences and genetic parameters for body composition traits in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 72, 27452755.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall, TC, Slate, J, Kruuk, LEB, Pemberton, JM 1998. Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Molecular Ecology 7, 639655.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McRae, AF, Bishop, SC, Walling, GA, Wilson, AD, Visscher, PM 2005. Mapping of multiple quantitative trait loci for growth and carcass traits in a complex commercial sheep pedigree. Animal Science 80, 135141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meilgaard, M, Civille, GV, Carr, BT 1999. Sensory evaluation techniques, 3rd edition. CRC Press, London, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mottram, DS 1998. Flavour formation in meat and meat products: a review. Food Chemistry 62, 415424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Mahony, M 1988. Sensory differences and preference testing: the use of signal detection methods. In Applied sensory analysis of foods (ed. H Moskowitz), pp. 145176. CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
QMS 2007. The Scottish red meat industry profile. In quality meat Scotland, pp. 2–3. QMS, Newbridge, UK.Google Scholar
Riley, DG, Chase, CC Jr, Hammond, AC, West, RL, Johnson, DD, Olson, TA, Coleman, SW 2003. Estimated genetic parameters for palatability traits of steaks from Brahman cattle. Journal of Animal Science 81, 5460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shackelford, SD, Wheeler, TL, Koohmaraie, M 1997. Repeatability of tenderness measurements in beef round muscles. Journal of Animal Science 75, 24112416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shepherd, GM 2006. Smell images and the flavour system in the human brain. Nature 444, 316321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Splan, RK, Cundiff, LV, Van Vleck, LD 1998. Genetic parameters for sex-specific traits in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 76, 22722278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tarrant, PV 1998. Some recent advances and future priorities in research for the meat industry. Meat Science 49, S1S16.Google Scholar
Van Vleck, LD, Hakim, AF, Cundiff, LV, Koch, RM, Crouse, JD, Boldman, KG 1992. Estimated breeding values for meat characteristics of crossbred cattle with an animal model. Journal of Animal Science 70, 363371.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Villarroel, M, María, GA, Sañudo, C, Olleta, JL, Gebresenbet, G 2003. Effect of transport time on sensorial aspects of beef meat quality. Meat Science 63, 353357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warriss, PD 2000. Meat science: an introductory text. CABI Publishing, Oxon, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar