The Effects of Enhancement Strategies of Beef Flanks on Composition and Consumer Palatability Characteristics

S. Morrow, A. Garmyn, N. Hardcastle, J. Brooks, M. Miller
{"title":"The Effects of Enhancement Strategies of Beef Flanks on Composition and Consumer Palatability Characteristics","authors":"S. Morrow, A. Garmyn, N. Hardcastle, J. Brooks, M. Miller","doi":"10.22175/mmb2019.07.0030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Beef rectus abdominis muscles (n = 100; 20/treatment) were assigned randomly to 1 of 5 treatments: untreated control (Control, No Treatment; CNT), vacuum tumbled control without marinade (Tumbled Control, No Treatment; TCNT), vacuum tumbled with marinade (TUMB), injected with marinade (INJ), and injected with marinade plus vacuum tumbled (IPT) to determine how enhancement techniques influence consumer palatability. After processing, flank samples were cooked (72°C), cut into 1.3-cm strips, and served as fajita strips for consumer evaluation (n = 200). Treatment influenced (P < 0.01) the rating and acceptability of all palatability traits, overall liking, and willingness to pay (WTP). Consumers scored IPT and INJ more tender compared to all other treatments (P < 0.05). Samples processed using IPT and INJ were juicier (P < 0.05) than all other treatments, except INJ and TUMB were similar (P > 0.05). Samples processed using TUMB and INJ were similar (P > 0.05) for flavor and WTP, and INJ, IPT, and TUMB samples were similar (P > 0.05) for overall liking. Thus, consumers were willing to pay more for IPT than TUMB (P < 0.05). Consumers scored CNT and TCNT lower for all palatability traits which resulted in lower WTP (P < 0.05). Inclusion of a marinade improved the eating quality of samples compared to CNT and TCNT. The delivery method of the brine solution was less important to palatability as the presence of a marinade, as IPT, INJ, and TUMB were all similar (P > 0.05) for overall liking. Injection plus tumbling improved tenderness, juiciness, and flavor liking scores over tumbling alone, but not over injection alone. Injection influenced consumer tenderness more than tumbling, but tumbling had greater effects on cooked moisture than injection. While IPT did not surpass either TUMB or INJ in all sensory categories, IPT does excel when considering moisture retention along with palatability.","PeriodicalId":18316,"journal":{"name":"Meat and Muscle Biology","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Meat and Muscle Biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22175/mmb2019.07.0030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Beef rectus abdominis muscles (n = 100; 20/treatment) were assigned randomly to 1 of 5 treatments: untreated control (Control, No Treatment; CNT), vacuum tumbled control without marinade (Tumbled Control, No Treatment; TCNT), vacuum tumbled with marinade (TUMB), injected with marinade (INJ), and injected with marinade plus vacuum tumbled (IPT) to determine how enhancement techniques influence consumer palatability. After processing, flank samples were cooked (72°C), cut into 1.3-cm strips, and served as fajita strips for consumer evaluation (n = 200). Treatment influenced (P < 0.01) the rating and acceptability of all palatability traits, overall liking, and willingness to pay (WTP). Consumers scored IPT and INJ more tender compared to all other treatments (P < 0.05). Samples processed using IPT and INJ were juicier (P < 0.05) than all other treatments, except INJ and TUMB were similar (P > 0.05). Samples processed using TUMB and INJ were similar (P > 0.05) for flavor and WTP, and INJ, IPT, and TUMB samples were similar (P > 0.05) for overall liking. Thus, consumers were willing to pay more for IPT than TUMB (P < 0.05). Consumers scored CNT and TCNT lower for all palatability traits which resulted in lower WTP (P < 0.05). Inclusion of a marinade improved the eating quality of samples compared to CNT and TCNT. The delivery method of the brine solution was less important to palatability as the presence of a marinade, as IPT, INJ, and TUMB were all similar (P > 0.05) for overall liking. Injection plus tumbling improved tenderness, juiciness, and flavor liking scores over tumbling alone, but not over injection alone. Injection influenced consumer tenderness more than tumbling, but tumbling had greater effects on cooked moisture than injection. While IPT did not surpass either TUMB or INJ in all sensory categories, IPT does excel when considering moisture retention along with palatability.
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
肉牛侧翼强化策略对肉牛成分及消费者适口性的影响
牛腹直肌(n = 100;20名/治疗组)被随机分配到5个治疗组中的1个:未经治疗的对照组(对照组,无治疗;CNT),真空翻滚控制,没有腌制(翻滚控制,没有处理;TCNT,真空翻滚与腌料(TUMB),注入腌料(INJ),注入腌料加真空翻滚(IPT),以确定增强技术如何影响消费者的口味。加工后,将侧腹样品煮熟(72°C),切成1.3 cm长的条,作为fajita条供消费者评价(n = 200)。处理影响了所有适口性状的评分和可接受性、总体喜欢度和支付意愿(WTP) (P < 0.01)。与所有其他治疗相比,IPT和INJ的消费者评分更轻(P < 0.05)。IPT和INJ处理的样品多汁性显著高于其他处理(P < 0.05),但INJ和TUMB处理差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。用TUMB和INJ处理的样品风味和WTP相似(P > 0.05), INJ、IPT和TUMB处理的样品总体喜欢度相似(P > 0.05)。因此,消费者愿意为IPT支付比TUMB更多(P < 0.05)。消费者对CNT和TCNT的所有适口性性状评分较低,导致WTP较低(P < 0.05)。与碳纳米管和TCNT相比,加入卤汁改善了样品的食用质量。由于卤汁的存在,盐水溶液的输送方法对适口性的影响较小,因为IPT, INJ和TUMB在总体喜欢度上都相似(P > 0.05)。注射加翻滚改善了嫩度、多汁性和风味,得分高于单独翻滚,但没有超过单独注射。注射对消费者嫩度的影响大于翻滚,但翻滚对煮熟水分的影响大于注射。虽然IPT在所有感官类别中都没有超过TUMB或INJ,但在考虑保湿性和适口性时,IPT确实表现出色。
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
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Title Pending 17698 Characterization of Pork Loin Chop Color Stability Using Loin Quality Traits and Instrumental Discoloration Measures Supranutritional Supplementation of Vitamin E Influences Myoglobin Post-Translational Modifications in Postmortem Beef Longissimus Lumborum Muscle Determination of the impact of labeling terms on consumer sensory evaluation Product yield and color of fresh beef transported at different refrigerated temperatures
×
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