Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-05T03:05:00.186Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Palatability of cross-bred beef

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

V. J. Moore  and
J. J. Bass
V. J. Moore
Affiliation:
Meat Industry Research Institute of New Zealand (Inc.), P.O. Box 617, Hamilton, New Zealand
J. J. Bass
Affiliation:
Ruakura Agricultural Research Centre, Private Bag, Hamilton, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The effect on palatability of crossing Angus with other beef breeds has been studied. Purebred Angus and Jersey × Angus crosses were significantly more tender and of a higher general acceptability than the Simmental × Angus and Limousin × Angus crosses. The possible cause of tenderness differences amongst the cross-breeds is discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 90 , Issue 1 , February 1978 , pp. 93 - 95
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

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

REFERENCES

Bass, J. J., Colomer-Rocher, F., Baker, R. L., Carter, A. H., Jarnet, M. P. & Woods, H. G. (1976). Carcass composition of purebred and crossbred Angus steers. Proceedings New Zealand Society of Animal Production 36, 198–203.Google Scholar
Davey, C. L. (1973). Desirable qualities in meat. Industrial Development 3, 10–12.Google Scholar
Dean, S. (1966). Evaluation of the MIRINZ griller. Internal Memo., Meat Industry Research Institute of New Zealand.Google Scholar
Dikeman, M. E. & Crouse, J. D. (1975). Chemical composition of carcasses from Hereford, Limousin and Simmental crossbred cattle as related to growth and meat palatability. Journal of Animal Science 40, 463–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, R. B. (1955). Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11, 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, R. M., Dikeman, M. E., Allen, D. M., May, M., Crouse, J. D. & Campion, D. R. (1976). Characterization of biological types of cattle. III. Carcass composition, quality and palatability. Journal of Animal Science 43, 48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locker, R. H., Davey, C. L., Nottingham, P. M., Haughey, D. P. & Law, N. H. (1975). New concepts in meat processing. Advances in Food Research 21, 157–222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macfarlane, P. G. & Marer, J. M. (1966). An apparatus for determining the tenderness of meat. Food Technology 20, 134–5.Google Scholar
Parrish, F. C. Jr, Olson, D. G., Miner, B. E. & Rust, R. E. (1973). Effect of degree of marbling and internal temperature of doneness on beef rib steaks. Journal of Animal Science 37, 430–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savell, J. W., Jenkins, T. G., Arnold, J. L., Long, C. R., Riggs, J. K., Carpenter, F. J. & Smith, G. C. (1976). Growth and carcass characteristics of Limousin and British crossbred steers. Journal of Animal Science 43, 246.Google Scholar
Schmidt, G. R. & Gilbert, K. V. (1970). The effect of muscle excision before the onset of rigor mortis on the palatability of beef. Journal of Food Technology 5, 331–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urick, J. J., Knapp, B. W., Hiner, R. L., Pahnish, O. F., Brinks, J. S. & Blacksell, R. L. (1974). Results from crossing beef × beef × Brown Swiss: Carcass quantity and quality traits. Journal of Animal Science 39, 292–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodhams, P. R. & Mathews, S. (1965). The cooking of fresh lamb cuts. 2. The effects of pan-grilling, panfrying and braising small lamb cuts on cooking loss, cooking time, and palatability. MIRINZ report, no. 92.Google Scholar