4.7 Article

Benchmarking value in the pork supply chain: Processing characteristics and consumer evaluations of pork bellies of different thicknesses when manufactured into bacon

Journal

MEAT SCIENCE
Volume 70, Issue 1, Pages 121-131

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.12.012

Keywords

bacon; palatability; pork; pork bellies; consumer evaluation; yield

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Impact of belly thickness on processing yields and consumer evaluations of finished bacon products was measured. Before processing through a commercial facility, pork bellies (n = 96 per group) were sorted into three target thickness groups: thin (approximately 2.0 cm); average (approximately 2.5 cm); thick (approximately 3.0 cm). Processing yields at various production points were recorded and samples from each thickness group were evaluated by consumers for palatability characteristics and visual appearance. Bacon manufactured using thick bellies had the highest processing yields through the smoking and cooking phase. Thin bellies had the lowest slicing yields and generated the highest percentage of less valuable #2 slices (slice profile less than 1.9 cm at any point) and ends and pieces. Consumers found that bacon manufactured from average thickness bellies did not have deficiencies in palatability characteristics, but bacon manufactured from thin bellies lacked crispiness and bacon manufactured from thick bellies lacked flavor. Consumers found the lean-to-fat ratio and the visual appearance of bacon from thick bellies was less appealing than bacon from thin and thick bellies. Moreover, consumers showed much stronger purchase intent for bacon from thin and average bellies. Belly thickness impacted processing yield and consumer palatability evaluations of bacon. Producers need to minimize production of thin bellies because of reduced processing yields and thick bellies because of reduced consumer appeal. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available