Czech J. Food Sci., 2017, 35(5):392-400 | DOI: 10.17221/276/2016-CJFS

Assessment of sensory quality of calf chops with different fat cover using a specific sensory method by a trained panelFood Analysis, Food Quality and Nutrition

Iñaki Etaio1,2,*, Pilar F. Gil1, Mónica Ojeda1, Luis Javier R. Barron2, Francisco José Pérez Elortondo1,2
1 Laboratorio de Análisis Sensorial Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea, Centro de Investigación Lascaray Ikergunea, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain
2 Lactiker research team (Quality and safety of foods of animal origin), Department of Pharmacy and Food Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain

Carcass fat cover is used in many countries as a predictor of meat quality, although studies relating this parameter to sensor y quality of meat are scarce and are mainly based on acceptability or palatability evaluation. The samples of calf chops with three different degrees of carcass fat cover were analysed according to a specific method for sensor y quality assessment. A trained panel evaluated the samples and scored the sensor y quality related to odour, texture, flavour, and persistence. Samples with higher carcass fat cover presented significantly better scores for texture, flavour, and persistence, although not for odour. When calculating global sensor y quality by integrating the cited parameters, significant differences were found between the three fat cover groups. Texture, f lavour, and persistence were also correlated with fat cover and marbling degree. Specific sensor y characteristics (medium tenderness, slightly tough, rancid odour, cooked meat aroma, equal or higher than fat aroma, ver y low aroma intensity, dominance of fat aroma, obvious liver aroma and milky aroma) contributed to explaining the quality differences obser ved among the groups.

Keywords: beef meat; meat quality; quality categorisation; sensory description; meat texture

Published: October 31, 2017  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Etaio I, Gil PF, Ojeda M, Barron LJR, Pérez Elortondo FJ. Assessment of sensory quality of calf chops with different fat cover using a specific sensory method by a trained panel. Czech J. Food Sci. 2017;35(5):392-400. doi: 10.17221/276/2016-CJFS.
Download citation

Supplementary files:

Download file276-2016 Etaio supplement.pdf

File size: 182.61 kB

References

  1. Alder-Nissen J. (1986): Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Food Proteins. Barking, Elsevier Applied Science Publishers.
  2. Boleman S.J., Boleman S.L., Miller R.K., Taylor J.F., Cross H.R., Wheeler T.L., Koohmaraie M., Shackelford S.D., Miller M.F., West R.L., Johnson D.D., Savell J.W. (1997): Consumer evaluation of beef of known categories of tenderness. Journal of Animal Science, 75: 1521-1524. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  3. Brennand C.P., Ha J.K., Lindsay R.C. (1989): Aroma properties and thresholds of some branched-chain and other minor volatile fatty acids occurring in milkfat and meat lipids. Journal of Sensory Studies, 4: 105-120. Go to original source...
  4. Brewer M.S., Zhu L.G., McKeith F.K. (2001): Marbling effects on quality characteristics of pork loin chops: Consumer purchase intent, visual and sensory characteristics. Meat Science, 59: 153-163. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  5. Calkins C.R., Hogen J.R. (2007): A fresh look at meat flavor. Meat Science, 77: 63-80. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  6. Camfield P.K., Brown A.H., Jr. Lewis P.K., Rakes L.Y., Johnson Z.B. (1997): Effects of frame size and time-on-feed on carcass characteristics, sensory attributes, and fatty acid profiles of steers. Journal of Animal Science, 75: 1837-1844. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  7. Canadian Beef Grading Agency (1996): Beef carcass grading reference. Marbling requirements for Canada A, Canada AA, Canada AAA and Canada Prime. Canadian Beef Grading Agency, Calgary, Canada.
  8. Canadian Beef Grading Agency (2009): The Cannadian beef grading system. Available at http://beefgradingagency.ca/grades.html (accessed July 18, 2016).
  9. Commission of the European Communities (2008): Commission Regulation (EC) No 1249/2008 of 10 December 2008 laying down detailed rules on the implementation of the Community scales for the classification of beef, pig and sheep carcasses and the reporting of prices thereof (1612-2008). Official Journal of the European Union, L 337/3. Available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008R1249 (accessed July 18, 2016).
  10. Etaio I., Gil P.F., Ojeda M., Albisu M., Salmerón J., Pérez Elortondo F.J. (2013): Evaluation of sensory quality of calf chops: A new methodological approach. Meat Science, 94: 105-114. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  11. Fernandez X., Monin G., Talmant A., Mourot J., Lebret B. (1999a): Influence of intramuscular fat content on the quality of pig meat - 1. Composition of the lipid fraction and sensory characteristics of m. longissimus lumborum. Meat Science, 53: 59-65. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  12. Fernandez X., Monin G., Talmant A., Mourot J., Lebret B. (1999b): Influence of intramuscular fat content on the quality of pig meat - 2. Consumer acceptability of m. longissimus lumborum. Meat Science, 53: 67-72. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  13. Font-i-Furnols M., Tous N., Esteve-Garcia E., Gispert M. (2012): Do all the consumers accept marbling in the same way? The relationship between eating and visual acceptability of pork with different intramuscular fat content. Meat Science, 91: 448-453. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  14. Guerrero L. (2001): Marketing PDO (Products with Denominations of origin) and PGI (Products with Geographical Identities). In: Frewer L., Risvik E., Schifferstein H. (eds): Food, People and Society. A European Perspective of Consumer's Food Choices. Heidelberg, Springer Verlag: 281-296 Go to original source...
  15. Jeremiah L.E. (1996): The influence of subcutaneous fat thickness and marbling on beef. Palatability and consumer acceptability. Food Research International, 29: 513-520. Go to original source...
  16. Ladikos D., Lougovois V. (1990): Lipid oxidation in muscle foods: A review. Food Chemistry, 35: 295-314. Go to original source...
  17. Meat and Livestock Australia (2011): Meat Standards Australia (MSA). Grading. Availabe at http://www.mla.com.au/Marketing-beef-and-lamb/Meat-Standards-Australia/MSA-beef/Grading (accessed July 18, 2016).
  18. Miller M.F., Davis G.W., Seideman S.C., Ramsey C.B., Rolan T.L. (1988): Effects of papain, ficin and spleen enzymes on textural, visual, cooking and sensory properties of beef bullock restructured steaks. Journal of Food Quality, 11: 321-330. Go to original source...
  19. Miller M.F., Kerth C.R., Wise J.W., Lansdell J.L., Stowell J.E., Ramsey C.B. (1997): Slaughter plant location, USDA quality grade, external fat thickness, and aging time effects on sensory characteristics of beef loin strip steak. Journal of Animal Science, 75: 662-667. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  20. Miller M.F., Carr M.A., Ramsey C.B., Crockett K.L., Hoover L.C. (2001): Consumer thresholds for establishing the value of beef tenderness. Journal of Food Science, 79: 3062-3068. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  21. Mottram D.S. (1985): The effect of cooking conditions on the formation of volatile heterocyclic compounds in pork. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 36: 377-382. Go to original source...
  22. Mottram D.S. (1998): Flavour formation in meat and meat: A review. Food Chemistry, 62: 415-424. Go to original source...
  23. Pérez Elortondo F.J., Ojeda M., Albisu M., Salmerón J., Etayo I., Molina M. (2007): Food quality certification: An approach for the development of accredited sensory evaluation methods. Food Quality and Preference, 18: 425-439. Go to original source...
  24. Prescott J., Young O., O'Neill L. (2001): The impact of variations in flavour compounds on meat acceptability: a comparison of Japanese and New Zealand consumers. Food Quality and Preference, 12: 257-264. Go to original source...
  25. Priolo A., Micol D., Agabriel J. (2001): Effects of grass feeding systems on ruminant meat colour and flavor: A review. Animal Research, 50: 185-200. Go to original source...
  26. Shackelford S.D., Wheeler T.L., Meade M.K., Reagan J.O., Byrnes B.L., Koohmaraie M. (2001): Consumer impressions of Tender Select beef. Journal of Animal Science, 79: 2605-2614. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  27. Tatum J.D., Smith G.C., Carpenter Z.L. (1982): Interrelationships between marbling, subcutaneous fat thickness, and cooked beef palatability. Journal of Animal Science, 54: 777-784. Go to original source...
  28. United States Department of Agriculture (1997): United States Standards for grades of carcass beef. United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Services, Livestock and seed Division, Washington DC, USA. Available at http://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Carcass_Beef_Standard%5B1%5D.pdf (accessed July 18, 2016).
  29. Yancey E.J., Grobbel J.P., Dikeman M.E., Smith J.S., Hachmeister K.A., Chambers E.C. IV, Gadgil P., Milliken G.A., Dressler E.A. (2006): Effects of total iron, myoglobin, hemoglobin, and lipid oxidation of uncooked muscles on livery flavor development and volatiles of cooked beef steaks. Meat Science, 73: 680-686. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  30. Young O.A., Lane G.A., Priolo A., Fraser K. (2003): Pastoral and species flavour in lambs raised on pasture, lucerne or maize. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 83: 93-104. Go to original source...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.