Skip to main content
Reciprocal Meat Conference Abstracts

Determination of Objective Analysis of Juiciness among Multiple Beef Muscles and Quality Grades

Authors
  • M. F. Miller (Texas Tech University)
  • K. M. Nyquist (Texas Tech University)
  • L. N. Drey (Kansas State University)
  • L. W. Lucherk (Texas Tech University)
  • J. C. Brooks (Texas Tech University)
  • T. G. O’Quinn (Kansas State University)
  • J. F. Legako (Texas Tech University)

Abstract

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to use a developed objective juiciness analyses including corresponding tenderness measurements to determine the juiciness among multiple beef muscles of various quality grades.Materials and MethodsTreatments were obtained from 5 different beef sub-primals: Strip loins (IMPS #180), inside rounds (IMPS #169), bottom rounds (IMPS #171B), shoulder clods (IMPS #114), and chuck rolls (IMPS #116). Sub-primals were also represented by 3 different USDA quality grades: Prime, Low Choice and Select; (n = 10/quality grade). All sub-primals were vacuum packaged, aged for 21dthen fabricated into 2.5 cm thick steaks from respective cuts: Adductor (AD), Biceps femoris (BF), Chuck Eye (CE), Infraspinatus (IF), Semimembranosus (SM), Serratus ventralis (SV), Longissimus lumborum (LD), and Triceps brachii (TB). The steaks were frozen (–20°C) until subsequent analyses. Several objective measures of juiciness and tenderness were evaluated on raw and cooked samples. Analysis techniques measured on raw samples included: pH and percentage fat, moisture, protein and collagen. Cooked techniques evaluated included: Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBSF), slice shear force (SSF), cook loss, and pressed juice percentage (PJP). For cooked analysis, each steak was cooked on a clam-shell grill to a medium degree of doneness (71°C), and the fiber orientation (45 or 90°) was determined before sampling. Analysis of PJP was evaluated using a compression-based juiciness method. Following SSF, a 1cm thick PJP slice was removed parallel with predetermined muscle fiber orientation (45 or 90°) and compressed on filter paper at 8 g for 30s. Data were analyzed using the GLIMMIX procedure of SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC; ɑ = 0.05). Subprimal was experimental unit, and muscle, quality grade, muscle × quality grade were used as fixed effects. Carcass was used as a random effect.ResultsA muscle × quality grade interaction (P < 0.05) was detected for each chemical proximate measurement, as well as pH. Fat percentage for SV was greater (P < 0.05) than all other cuts in all quality grades, but similar (P > 0.05) to IF in the Select grade. Within Prime and Low Choice, moisture was greatest (P < 0.05) for TB and similar (P > 0.05) to AD. The pH was lowest (P < 0.05) for AD in all grades. The IF was highest (P < 0.05) in Choice and Select, but similar (P > 0.05) to Choice TB, LD and Select TB. A muscle × grade interaction (P < 0.05) was found for SSF. The BF across all quality grades was the toughest (P < 0.05). The SV was the most tender (P < 0.05) in Prime, however few differences were found in all other quality grades between muscles of AD, IF, LD, and SV. Quality grade and muscle affected (P < 0.05) WBSF and PJP. As quality grade increased, WBSF values decreased (P < 0.05). The SV and CE were more tender (P < 0.05) than AD, TB, and IF. The PJP was less (P < 0.05) for Prime and Choice than Select, while TB and SM were greater (P < 0.05) than IF and AD for the same trait.ConclusionObjective juiciness and tenderness measures among different beef cuts and quality grades cooked to the same degree of doneness indicated that there is a difference in the amount of juice that is released from various beef muscles.

Keywords: slice shear force, muscles, quality grade, juiciness, Beef, Warner-Bratzler

How to Cite:

Miller, M. F., Nyquist, K. M., Drey, L. N., Lucherk, L. W., Brooks, J. C., O’Quinn, T. G. & Legako, J. F., (2019) “Determination of Objective Analysis of Juiciness among Multiple Beef Muscles and Quality Grades”, Meat and Muscle Biology 1(3). doi: https://doi.org/10.221751/rmc2017.073

462 Views

325 Downloads

Published on
2018-12-31