Preference and acceptance of fresh rabbit, pork and chicken meat sausages among young consumers

IF 0.8 4区 农林科学 Q3 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE World Rabbit Science Pub Date : 2024-03-28 DOI:10.4995/wrs.2024.20236
P. González-Redondo, María Fierro-Raya
{"title":"Preference and acceptance of fresh rabbit, pork and chicken meat sausages among young consumers","authors":"P. González-Redondo, María Fierro-Raya","doi":"10.4995/wrs.2024.20236","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The rabbit sector has proposed sausages as a suitable presentation format to increase rabbit meat consumption among young people in a context in which it is declining in several traditionally-consuming countries. In order to confirm its suitability in this context, this work compares the acceptability and preference of commercial fresh rabbit sausages with those of chicken and pork meat, using an untrained panel of 70 young Spanish consumers (22.1 yr old on average; 57.1% male and 42.9% female). In the first part of the trial, cooked sausages were evaluated for: a) acceptability of organoleptic characteristics (odour, colour, appearance, texture, flavour, elasticity and juiciness) and the overall rating using a 9-point hedonic scale, and b) order of preference of sausages (first to third). Overall acceptance and sensory attributes were rated in the medium-high range (6.1-7.9 points) and differed among the cooked sausages, except for odour and appearance. Rabbit sausage was rated at the same level as chicken and pork sausages in terms of odour, appearance, texture, flavour and overall assessment, outperformed pork sausage in colour, elasticity and juiciness acceptance, and was only rated lower than chicken sausage in terms of juiciness. Cooked chicken sausage was preferred in first place, followed by rabbit sausage, while pork sausage came last. In the second part of the trial, raw sausages were evaluated visually for: a) acceptability of colour and visual appearance, and b) order of preference of the sausages. No difference was found between the raw sausages in terms of colour, while the appearance of the raw pork sausage was rated better than that of the rabbit and chicken sausages, with no difference between the latter two. The visual appearance of the raw pork sausage was ranked first, followed by the chicken sausage, while the raw rabbit sausage came last. Only 40% of the young panellists could identify the meat ingredient of the rabbit sausage in both cooked and raw sausages. No interaction was found between the type of sausage and the gender of the panellists in evaluation of either the cooked or raw sausages. Young women rated the texture, flavour, elasticity, juiciness and overall assessment of the cooked sausages lower than men, regardless of meat type, whereas no gender difference was found for the visual assessment of the raw sausages. In conclusion, cooked rabbit sausage was accepted as well as chicken sausage overall and better than pork sausage, while raw rabbit sausage was accepted as well as chicken sausage overall and worse than pork sausage in the visual assessment, showing its potential to promote rabbit meat consumption among young people.","PeriodicalId":23902,"journal":{"name":"World Rabbit Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Rabbit Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2024.20236","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rabbit sector has proposed sausages as a suitable presentation format to increase rabbit meat consumption among young people in a context in which it is declining in several traditionally-consuming countries. In order to confirm its suitability in this context, this work compares the acceptability and preference of commercial fresh rabbit sausages with those of chicken and pork meat, using an untrained panel of 70 young Spanish consumers (22.1 yr old on average; 57.1% male and 42.9% female). In the first part of the trial, cooked sausages were evaluated for: a) acceptability of organoleptic characteristics (odour, colour, appearance, texture, flavour, elasticity and juiciness) and the overall rating using a 9-point hedonic scale, and b) order of preference of sausages (first to third). Overall acceptance and sensory attributes were rated in the medium-high range (6.1-7.9 points) and differed among the cooked sausages, except for odour and appearance. Rabbit sausage was rated at the same level as chicken and pork sausages in terms of odour, appearance, texture, flavour and overall assessment, outperformed pork sausage in colour, elasticity and juiciness acceptance, and was only rated lower than chicken sausage in terms of juiciness. Cooked chicken sausage was preferred in first place, followed by rabbit sausage, while pork sausage came last. In the second part of the trial, raw sausages were evaluated visually for: a) acceptability of colour and visual appearance, and b) order of preference of the sausages. No difference was found between the raw sausages in terms of colour, while the appearance of the raw pork sausage was rated better than that of the rabbit and chicken sausages, with no difference between the latter two. The visual appearance of the raw pork sausage was ranked first, followed by the chicken sausage, while the raw rabbit sausage came last. Only 40% of the young panellists could identify the meat ingredient of the rabbit sausage in both cooked and raw sausages. No interaction was found between the type of sausage and the gender of the panellists in evaluation of either the cooked or raw sausages. Young women rated the texture, flavour, elasticity, juiciness and overall assessment of the cooked sausages lower than men, regardless of meat type, whereas no gender difference was found for the visual assessment of the raw sausages. In conclusion, cooked rabbit sausage was accepted as well as chicken sausage overall and better than pork sausage, while raw rabbit sausage was accepted as well as chicken sausage overall and worse than pork sausage in the visual assessment, showing its potential to promote rabbit meat consumption among young people.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
年轻消费者对新鲜兔肉、猪肉和鸡肉香肠的偏好和接受程度
在一些传统兔肉消费国兔肉消费量下降的背景下,兔肉行业提出了香肠这一合适的表现形式,以增加年轻人对兔肉的消费。为了证实兔肉香肠在这种情况下的适用性,这项研究利用一个由 70 名西班牙年轻消费者(平均 22.1 岁;57.1% 为男性,42.9% 为女性)组成的未经培训的小组,比较了商业新鲜兔肉香肠与鸡肉和猪肉香肠的可接受性和偏好。在试验的第一部分,对熟香肠进行了评估:a)感官特征(气味、颜色、外观、质地、味道、弹性和多汁性)的可接受性,以及使用 9 点享乐量表进行的总体评分;b)香肠的偏好顺序(第一到第三)。除气味和外观外,各款熟香肠的总体接受度和感官属性评分均为中高分(6.1-7.9 分),且各款香肠的接受度和感官属性评分不尽相同。在气味、外观、质地、风味和总体评价方面,兔肉香肠与鸡肉香肠和猪肉香肠处于同一水平,在颜色、弹性和多汁性方面优于猪肉香肠,仅在多汁性方面低于鸡肉香肠。人们对熟鸡肉香肠的接受度排在第一位,其次是兔肉香肠,而猪肉香肠排在最后。试验的第二部分是对生香肠进行肉眼评价:a)颜色和外观的可接受性;b)香肠的喜好顺序。生香肠在颜色方面没有差异,而生猪肉香肠的外观评分优于兔肉香肠和鸡肉香肠,后两者之间也没有差异。生猪肉肠的视觉外观排在第一位,其次是鸡肉肠,而生兔肉肠排在最后。只有 40% 的年轻小组成员能辨别出熟香肠和生香肠中兔肉的成分。在对熟香肠或生香肠的评价中,没有发现香肠种类与小组成员性别之间的相互作用。年轻女性对熟香肠的质地、味道、弹性、多汁性和总体评价的评分均低于男性,而对生香肠的视觉评价则没有发现性别差异。总之,熟兔肉香肠的总体接受度不亚于鸡肉香肠,优于猪肉香肠,而生兔肉香肠的总体接受度不亚于鸡肉香肠,但在视觉评价方面不如猪肉香肠,这表明熟兔肉香肠具有促进年轻人食用兔肉的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Rabbit Science
World Rabbit Science 农林科学-奶制品与动物科学
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
25.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: World Rabbit Science is the official journal of the World Rabbit Science Association (WRSA). One of the main objectives of the WRSA is to encourage communication and collaboration among individuals and organisations associated with rabbit production and rabbit science in general. Subject areas include breeding, genetics, production, management, environment, health, nutrition, physiology, reproduction, behaviour, welfare, immunology, molecular biology, metabolism, processing and products. World Rabbit Science is the only international peer-reviewed journal included in the ISI Thomson list dedicated to publish original research in the field of rabbit science. Papers or reviews of the literature submitted to World Rabbit Science must not have been published previously in an international refereed scientific journal. Previous presentations at a scientific meeting, field day reports or similar documents can be published in World Rabbit Science, but they will be also subjected to the peer-review process. World Rabbit Science will publish papers of international relevance including original research articles, descriptions of novel techniques, contemporaryreviews and meta-analyses. Short communications will only accepted in special cases where, in the Editor''s judgement, the contents are exceptionally exciting, novel or timely. Proceedings of rabbit scientific meetings and conference reports will be considered for special issues. World Rabbit Science is published in English four times a year in a single volume. Authors may publish in World Rabbit Science regardless of the membership in the World Rabbit Science Association, even if joining the WRSA is encouraged. Views expressed in papers published in World Rabbit Science represent the opinion of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the WRSA or the Editor-in-Chief.
期刊最新文献
Preference and acceptance of fresh rabbit, pork and chicken meat sausages among young consumers Growth performance and carcass characteristics of rabbits fed concentrate diets containing graded levels of Brassica oleracea outer leaves and Musa paradisiaca leaves Mange in farmed rabbits Potential, challenges and prospects of rabbit farming in urban and peri-urban areas of Dodoma city, Tanzania A method to estimate endogenous losses of nitrogen and amino acids at the ileal level in growing rabbits
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1