4.2 Article

Correlations of Sensory Quality Characteristics with Intramuscular Fat Content and Bundle Characteristics in Bovine Longissimus Thoracis Muscle

Journal

FOOD SCIENCE OF ANIMAL RESOURCES
Volume 39, Issue 2, Pages 197-208

Publisher

KOREAN SOC FOOD SCIENCE ANIMAL RESOURCES
DOI: 10.5851/kosfa.2019.e15

Keywords

sensory quality; meat quality; intramuscular fat content; muscle bundle; Hanwoo beef

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [NRF-2017R1D1A3B03029840]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to investigate the relation of sensory quality traits of cooked beef to fresh meat quality and histochemical characteristics, especially muscle bundle traits, in the longissimus thoracis muscle of Hanwoo steers. Cooking loss negatively correlated with softness, initial tenderness, chewiness, rate of breakdown (RB), and amount of perceptible residue (AR) after chewing (p< 0.05), and drip loss showed negative correlation with RB and AR (p< 0.05). All the attributes of tenderness exhibited negative correlation with the Warner-Bratzler shear force value (p< 0.05). Marbling score and the intramuscular fat (IMF) content showed positive correlation with all the organoleptic characteristics, including tenderness attributes, juiciness, and flavor (p< 0.05). Regarding histochemical characteristics, muscle fiber size did not have a significant correlation with all the sensory quality traits, although the area percentage of type I fiber was related with softness, initial tenderness, and chewiness (p< 0.05). On the contrary, the characteristics of muscle bundle were related to all the sensory tenderness attributes (p< 0.05), and the sensory tenderness increased with smaller muscle bundle size (p< 0.05). These results suggest that the IMF content and bundle characteristics can be used as indicators for explaining the variations in sensory tenderness in well-marbled beef.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available