Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T18:15:36.823Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of fast-, medium- and slow-growing strains on meat quality of chickens reared under the organic farming method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 September 2010

F. Sirri*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze degli Alimenti, Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna, via del Florio, 2, 40064 Ozzano dell’Emilia, Italy
C. Castellini
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Biologia Applicata, Università degli Studi di Perugia, Borgo XX giugno, 74, 06121 Perugia, Italy
M. Bianchi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze degli Alimenti, Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna, via del Florio, 2, 40064 Ozzano dell’Emilia, Italy
M. Petracci
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze degli Alimenti, Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna, via del Florio, 2, 40064 Ozzano dell’Emilia, Italy
A. Meluzzi
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze degli Alimenti, Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna, via del Florio, 2, 40064 Ozzano dell’Emilia, Italy
A. Franchini
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Scienze degli Alimenti, Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna, via del Florio, 2, 40064 Ozzano dell’Emilia, Italy
*
Get access

Abstract

The characteristics of meat quality, chemical and fatty acid composition, from fast-growing (FG) and medium-growing (MG) meat-type and slow-growing (SG) egg-type chickens reared under organic conditions were compared. Three-hundred and sixty 1-day-old male chicks, equally divided into three experimental groups represented by strains (FG: Cobb 700, MG: Naked neck Kabir and SG: Brown Classic Lohman) were housed into three poultry houses with outdoor pasture availability of 10 m2/bird located in the same Research Centre of the University of Perugia. All the birds were fed ad libitum the same diets formulated according to the European Union (EU) Regulations by using organic raw materials. Birds from the FG and MG groups were raised until 81 days, whereas birds from the SG group were raised until 96 days in order to achieve an acceptable market live weight. SG birds showed significantly (P < 0.01) higher breast meat drip and cook losses, Allo-Kramer shear values and collagen content. In comparison with FG and SG, MG exhibited a higher breast meat pH (5.86% v. 5.79% and 5.78%, respectively; P < 0.01) and a lower lightness (54.88% v. 57.81% and 56.98%, respectively; P < 0.05). Genotype dramatically affected the lipid content as well as the fatty acid composition of both breast and thigh meat. SG exhibited the lowest content of lipid, both in breast and in thigh meat, the lowest proportions of monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA) and the highest proportions of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA). The total n-3 PUFA of SG breast meat was double that of FG meat and intermediate with respect to MG birds (8.07% v. 4.07% v. 5.14% total fatty acids; P < 0.01). The fatty acid composition of thigh meat is similar to that of breast meat, but the differences among genotypes are less pronounced. Total saturated fatty acids were not affected by the genotype. In conclusion, meat functional properties of FG and MG strains appeared much more attractive both for industry and consumer (lower drip and cook losses and higher tenderness), whereas from a nutritional point of view, meat from SG appeared healthier (less fat and higher content of n-3 PUFA) and thus might better fit with the consumer’s expectations of organic products.

Type
Full Paper
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2010

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

An, JY, Zheng, JX, Li, JY, Zeng, D, Qu, LJ, Xu, GY, Yang, N 2010. Effect of myofiber characteristics and thickness of perymisium and endomysium on meat tenderness of chickens. Poultry Science 89, 17501754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists 1990. Official methods of analysis of AOAC, 15th edition, AOAC, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Baeza, E, Dessay, C, Wacreinier, N, Marché, G, Listrata, A 2002. Effect of selection for improved body weight and composition on muscle and meat characteristics in Muscovy duck. British Poultry Science 43, 560568.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baeza, E, Salichon, MR, Marché, G, Wacrenier, N, Dominguez, B, Culioli, J 2000. Effects of age and sex on the structural, chemical and technological characteristics of Mule ducks meat. British Poultry Science 41, 300307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barton, L, Marounek, M, Kudrna, V, Bures, D, Zahradkova, R 2008. Growth, carcass traits, chemical composition and fatty acid profile in beef from Charolais and Simmental bulls fed different types of dietary lipids. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 88, 26222630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berri, C 2004. Breeding and quality of poultry. In Poultry meat processing and quality (ed. GC Mead), pp. 2137. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berri, C, Wacrenier, N, Millet, N, Le Bihan-Duval, E 2001. Effect of selection for improved body composition on muscle and meat characteristics of broilers from experimental and commercial lines. Poultry Science 80, 833838.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berri, C, Le Bihan-Duval, E, Baeza, E, Chartrin, P, Picgirard, L, Jehal, N, Quentin, M, Picard, M, Duclos, MJ 2005. Further processing characteristics of breast and leg meat from fast-, medium- and slow-growing commercial chickens. Animal Research 54, 123134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castellini, C, Mugnai, C, Dal Bosco, A 2002. Effect of organic production system on broiler carcass and meat quality. Meat Science 60, 219225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castellini, C, Berri, C, Le Bihan-Duval, E, Martino, G 2008. Qualitative attributes and consumer perception of organic and free-range poultry meat. World’s Poultry Science Journal 64, 500512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CIE 1978. International Commission on Illumination, recommendations on uniform colour spaces, colour difference equations, psychometric colour terms. Bureau Central de la C.I.E., Paris. C.I.E. Publication [No.15 (E-1.3.1) 1971/ (TO-1.3) ] suppl. 15.Google Scholar
Christopherson, SW, Glass, RL 1969. Preparation of milk methyl esters by alcoholysis in an essentially non-alcoholic solution. Journal of Dairy Science 52, 12891290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Debut, M, Berri, C, Baéza, E, Sellier, N, Arnould, C, Guémené, D, Jehal, N, Boutten, B, Jego, Y, Beaumont, C, Le Bihan-Duval, E 2003. Variation of chicken technological meat quality in relation to genotype and pre-slaughter stress condition. Poultry Science 82, 18291838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delpech, P, Dumont, BL, Nefzaoui, A 1983. Influence du rationnement et du patrimoine génétique de poulets sur les charactéristiques physico-chimiques et sensorielles de la viande à différents ages. In Proceedings of the 6th European Symposium on the Quality of Poultry Meat, pp. 2127, Ploufragan, France.Google Scholar
European Commission 1991. Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1538/91 of 5 June 1991. Introducing detailed rules for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1906/90 on certain marketing standards for poultry meat. Official Journal of European Union L 143, 138.Google Scholar
European Commission 1999. Council Regulation (EC) No. 1804/99 of July 1999 amending Regulation No 2092/91 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs to include livestock production. Official Journal of European Union L 222, 128.Google Scholar
European Commission 2007. Council Regulation (EC) No. 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) no 2092/91. Official Journal of European Union L 189, 123.Google Scholar
Fanatico, AC, Cavitt, LC, Pillai, PB, Emmert, JL, Owens, CM 2005a. Evaluation of slower growing broiler genotypes grown with and without outdoor access: meat quality. Poultry Science 84, 17851790.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fanatico, AC, Pillai, PB, Cavitt, LC, Owens, CM, Emmert, JL 2005b. Evaluation of slower growing broiler genotypes grown with and without outdoor access: growth performance and carcass yield. Poultry Science 84, 13211327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, DL 2002. Poultry meat quality. World’s Poultry Science Journal 58, 131145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folch, J, Lees, M, Sloane-Stanley, GH 1957. A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipids from animal tissues. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 22, 497509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, SH, Charles, DR 2002. Niche and organic chicken products. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK.Google Scholar
Grey, TC, Robinson, D, Jones, JM, Stock, SW, Thomas, NL 1983. Effect of age and sex on the composition of muscle and skin from commercial broiler strain. British Poultry Science 24, 219231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Havenstein, GB, Ferket, PR, Qureshi, MA 2003. Carcass composition and yield of 1957 vs 2001 broilers when fed representative 1957 and 2001 broiler diets. Poultry Science 82, 5091518.Google Scholar
Jeacocke, RE 1977. Continuous measurement of the pH of beef muscle in intact beef carcasses. Journal of Food Technology 12, 375386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolar, K 1990. Colorimetric determination of hydroxyproline as measure of collagen content in meat and meat products: NMKL collaborative study. Association of Official Analytical Chemists Journal 73, 5457.Google ScholarPubMed
Laszczyk-Legendre, A 1999. Label Rouge traditional free range poultry: a concept including quality, environment and welfare. In Proceedings of 14th European Symposium on the Quality of Poultry Meat. vol. 1, pp. 255–264. Bologna, Italy.Google Scholar
Le Bihan-Duval, E, Berri, C, Baeza, E, Millet, N, Beaumont, C 2001. Estimation of the genetic parameters of meat characteristics and of their genetic correlations with growth and body composition in an experimental broiler line. Poultry Science 80, 839843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lepetit, J 2008. Collagen contribution to meat toughness: theoretical aspects. Meat Science 80, 960967.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lonergan, SM, Deeb, N, Fedlet, CA, Lamont, SJ 2003. Breast meat quality and composition in unique chicken populations. Poultry Science 82, 19901994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Magdelaine, P, Spiess, MP, Valceschini, E 2008. Poultry meat consumption trends in Europe. World’s Poultry Science Journal 64, 5363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministero delle Politiche Agricole e Forestali 2001. Decreto 29 marzo 2001: Modificazione dell’allegato I del decreto ministeriale 4 agosto 2000, in materia di attuazione del regolamento CEE n. 1804/99 del 19 luglio 1999, sul metodo delle produzioni animali biologiche. Gazzetta Ufficiale 182 del 07-08-2001.Google Scholar
Papinaho, PA, Fletcher, DL 1996. The effect of stunning amperage and deboning time on early rigor development and breast meat quality of broilers. Poultry Science 75, 672676.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ponte, PIP, Alves, SP, Bessa, RJB, Ferriera, LMA, Gama, LT, Brás, JLA, Fontes, CMGA, Prates, JAM 2008. Influence of pasture intake on the fatty acid composition, and cholesterol, tocopherols, and tocotrienols content in meat from free-range broilers. Poultry Science 87, 8088.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quentin, M, Bouvarel, I, Berri, C, Le Bihan-Duval, E, Baeza, E, Jego, Y, Picard, M 2003. Growth, carcass composition and meat quality response to dietary concentrations in fast-, medium- and slow-growing commercial broilers. Animal Research 52, 6577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, C, Marangon, A, Chiericato, GM 2007. Effect of genotype on slaughtering performance and meat physical and sensory characteristics of organic laying hens. Poultry Science 86, 128135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rymer, C, Givens, DI 2006. Effect of species and genotype on the efficiency of enrichment of poultry meat with n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids. Lipids 41, 445451.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SAS 1988. SAS/STAT Guide for personal computers, Version 6.03 edition. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Touraille, C, Ricard, FP, Kopp, J, Valin, C, Leclerq, B 1981. Chicken meat quality. 2 Changes with age of some physical chemical and sensory characteristics of the meat. Archiv für Geflügelkunde 45, 97104.Google Scholar
World’s Poultry Science Association. Working Group No. 5 1984. Method of dissection of broiler carcases and description of parts (ed. J Fris Jensen), Frederiksberg Copenhagen, Denmark, Papworth Everard, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar