Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5713/ajas.15.0482

Estimation of Sensory Pork Loin Tenderness Using Warner-Bratzler Shear Force and Texture Profile Analysis Measurements  

Choe, Jee-Hwan (Division of Food Bioscience and Technology, College of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Korea University)
Choi, Mi-Hee (Division of Food Bioscience and Technology, College of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Korea University)
Rhee, Min-Suk (Division of Food Bioscience and Technology, College of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Korea University)
Kim, Byoung-Chul (Division of Food Bioscience and Technology, College of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Korea University)
Publication Information
Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences / v.29, no.7, 2016 , pp. 1029-1036 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study investigated the degree to which instrumental measurements explain the variation in pork loin tenderness as assessed by the sensory evaluation of trained panelists. Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBS) had a significant relationship with the sensory tenderness variables, such as softness, initial tenderness, chewiness, and rate of breakdown. In a regression analysis, WBS could account variations in these sensory variables, though only to a limited proportion of variation. On the other hand, three parameters from texture profile analysis (TPA)-hardness, gumminess, and chewiness-were significantly correlated with all sensory evaluation variables. In particular, from the result of stepwise regression analysis, TPA hardness alone explained over 15% of variation in all sensory evaluation variables, with the exception of perceptible residue. Based on these results, TPA analysis was found to be better than WBS measurement, with the TPA parameter hardness likely to prove particularly useful, in terms of predicting pork loin tenderness as rated by trained panelists. However, sensory evaluation should be conducted to investigate practical pork tenderness perceived by consumer, because both instrumental measurements could explain only a small portion (less than 20%) of the variability in sensory evaluation.
Keywords
Warner-Bratzler Shear Force; Texture Profile Analysis; Sensory Evaluation; Pork Loin Tenderness;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Wood, J. D., G. R. Nute, R. I. Richardson, F. M. Whittington, O. Southwood, G. Plastow, R. Mansbridge, N. da Costa, and K. C. Chang. 2004. Effects of breed, diet and muscle on fat deposition and eating quality in pigs. Meat Sci. 67:651-667.   DOI
2 Aaslying, M. D., C. Bejerholm, P. Ertbjerg, H. C. Bertan, and H. J. Andersen. 2003. Cooking loss and juiciness of pork in relation to raw meat quality and cooking procedure. Food Qual. Prefer. 14:277-288.   DOI
3 Aberle, E. D. 2001. Principles of Meat Science. 4th edn. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, IA, USA.
4 AMSA. 1995. Research Guidelines for Cookery, Sensory Evaluation, and Instrumental Tenderness Measurements of Fresh Meat American Meat Science Association in cooperation with National Livestock and Meatboard. Chicago, IL, USA.
5 Becker, T. 2000. Consumer perception of fresh meat quality: a framework for analysis. Br. Food J. 102:158-176.   DOI
6 Bindon, B. M. and N. M. Jones. 2001. Cattle supply, production systems and markets for Australian beef. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 41:861-877.   DOI
7 Boleman, S. J., S. L. Boleman, R. K. Miller, J. F. Taylor, H. R. Cross, T. L. Wheeler, M. Koohmaraie, S. D. Shackelford, M. F. Miller, R. L. West, D. D. Johnson, and J. W. Savell. 1997. Consumer evaluation of beef of known categories of tenderness. J. Anim. Sci. 75:1521-1524.   DOI
8 Bourne, M. C. 1978. Texture profile analysis. Food Technol. 32:62-66.
9 Caine, W. R., J. L. Aalhus, D. R. Best, M. E. R. Dugan, and L. E. Jeremiah. 2003. Relationship of texture profile analysis and Warner-Bratzler shear force with sensory characteristics of beef rib steaks. Meat Sci. 64:333-339.   DOI
10 Combes, S., J. Lepetit, B. Darche, and F. Lebas. 2004. Effect of cooking temperature and cooking time on Warner-Bratzler tenderness measurement and collagen content in rabbit meat. Meat Sci. 66:91-96.   DOI
11 Culioli, J. 1995. Meat tenderness: mechanical assessment. In: Expression of Tissue Proteinases and Regulation of Protein Degradation as Related Meat Quality (Eds. A. Ouali, D. I. Demeyer, and F. J. M. Smulders). ECCEAMST, Utrecht, Netherlands.
12 de Huidobro, F. R., E. Miguel, B. Blazquez, and E. Onega. 2005. A comparison between two methods (Warner-Bratzler and texture profile analysis) for testing either raw meat or cooked meat. Meat Sci. 69:527-536.   DOI
13 Destefanis, G., A. Brugiapaglia, M. T. Barge, and E. Dal Molin. 2008. Relationship between beef consumer tenderness perception and Warner-Bratzler shear force. Meat Sci. 78:153-156.   DOI
14 Dzudie, T., R. Ndjouenkeu, and A. Okubanjo. 2000. Effect of cooking methods and rigor state on the composition, tenderness and eating quality of cured goat loins. J. Food Eng. 44:149-153.   DOI
15 Fortin, A., W. M. Robertson, and A. K. W. Tong. 2005. The eating quality of Canadian pork and its relationship with intramuscular fat. Meat Sci. 69:297-305.   DOI
16 Glitsch, K. 2000. Consumer perceptions of fresh meat quality: cross-national comparison. Br. Food J. 102:177-194.   DOI
17 Hansen, S., T. Hansen, M. D. Aaslying, and D. V. Byrne. 2004. Sensory and instrumental analysis of longitudinal and transverse textural variation in pork longissimus dorsi. Meat Sci. 68:611-629.   DOI
18 Huff-Lonergan, E., T. J. Baas, M. Malek, J. C. Dekkers, K. Prusa, and M. F. Rothschild. 2002. Correlations among selected pork quality traits. J. Anim. Sci. 80:617-627.   DOI
19 Jeremiah, L. E. 1982. A review of factors influencing consumption, selection and acceptability of meat purchases. J. Consum. Stud. Home Econ. 6:137-154.   DOI
20 Honikel, K. O. 1998. Reference methods for the assessment of physical characteristics of meat. Meat Sci. 49:447-457.   DOI
21 Larmond, E. 1976. Texture measurement in meat by sensory evalution. J. Texture Stud. 7:87-93.   DOI
22 Lawrie, R. A. and D. A. Ledward. 2006. Lawrie's Meat Science. 7th edn. Woodhead Publishing, Sawston, Cambridge, UK.
23 Lee, S. H., J. H. Choe, Y. M. Choi, K. C. Jung, M. S. Rhee, K. C. Hong, S. K. Lee, Y. C. Ryu, and B. C. Kim. 2012. The influence of pork quality traits and muscle fiber characteristics on the eating quality of pork from various breeds. Meat Sci. 90:284-291.   DOI
24 Maltin, C., D. Balcerzak, R. Tilley, and M. Delday. 2003. Determinants of meat quality: tenderness. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 62:337-347.   DOI
25 Maltin, C. A., C. C. Warkup, K. R. Matthews, C. M. Grant, A. D. Porter, and M. I. Delday. 1997. Pig muscle fibre characteristics as a source of variation in eating quality. Meat Sci. 47:237-248.   DOI
26 Obuz, E., M. E. Dikeman, and T. M. Loughin. 2003. Effects of cooking method, reheating, holding time, and holding temperature on beef longissimus lumborum and biceps femoris tenderness. Meat Sci. 65:841-851.   DOI
27 Peachey, B. M., R. W. Purchas, and L. M. Duizer. 2002. Relationships between sensory and objective measures of meat tenderness of beef m. longissimus thoracis from bulls and steers. Meat Sci. 60:211-218.   DOI
28 Shackelford, S. D., T. L. Wheeler, and M. Koohmaraie. 1995. Relationship between shear force and trained sensory panel tenderness ratings of 10 major muscles from Bos indicus and Bos taurus cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 73:3333-3340.   DOI
29 Platter, W. J., J. D. Tatum, K. E. Belk, P. L. Chapman, J. A. Scanga, and G. C. Smith. 2003. Relationships of consumer sensory ratings, marbling score, and shear force value to consumer acceptance of beef strip loin steaks. J. Anim. Sci. 81:2741-2750.   DOI
30 SAS. 2013. SAS 9.4 SQL Procedure User's Guide SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.
31 Shackelford, S. D., T. L. Wheeler, and M. Koohmaraie. 1999. Evaluation of slice shear force as an objective method of assessing beef longissimus tenderness. J. Anim. Sci. 77:2693-2699.   DOI
32 Tarrant, P. V. 1998. Some recent advances and future priorities in research for the meat industry. Meat Sci. 49:S1-S16.   DOI
33 van der Wal, P. G., B. Engel, and B. Hulsegge. 1997. Causes for variation in pork quality. Meat Sci. 46:319-327.   DOI
34 van Oeckel, M. J. and N. Warnants. 2003. Variation of the sensory quality within the m. longissimus thoracis et lumborum of PSE and normal pork. Meat Sci. 63:293-299.   DOI
35 Warner, R. D., P. L. Greenwood, D. W. Pethick, and D. M. Ferguson. 2010. Genetic and environmental effects on meat quality. Meat Sci. 86:171-183.   DOI
36 Warriss. 2010. Meat Science: An Intoroductory Text. 2nd edn. CABI, Wallingford, UK.
37 Wheeler, T. L., S. D. Shackelford, L. P. Johnson, M. F. Miller, R. K. Miller, and M. Koohmaraie. 1997. A comparison of Warner-Bratzler shear force assessment within and among institutions. J. Anim. Sci. 75:2423-2432.   DOI