Browse > Article

A Study on the Quality Characteristics of Brand and Non-brand Korean beefs  

Kim, Mi-Hyun (Korea Food Research Institute)
Song, Hyo-Nam (Oriental Medical Food & Nutrition, Semyung University)
Rho, Jeong-Hae (Korea Food Research Institute)
Publication Information
Korean journal of food and cookery science / v.23, no.2, 2007 , pp. 187-194 More about this Journal
Abstract
The quality characteristics of brand and non-brand Korean beefs, found in retail circulation, were studied via physicochemical and microbiological analysis and sensory tests. The average price of 100 g of brand Korean beef sirloin was 7.6 USD (1USD=950won), while the price of non-brand Korean beef was 3.1 USD. The fat content of the brand beef seemed to be higher, yet the difference was not significant. In both the brand and non-brand beefs, pH levels were approximately 5.27 We found that lightness (Hunter L value) tended to be higher in the brand beef, but again, this difference was not significant. For the cooked beef texture, the brand beef seemed to have lower gumminess, and had significantly less fracturability, than the non-brand beef. Significant differences could not be found with regards to microbiological stability between the two types of beef. In the raw beef sensory test, significant differences were identified for meat color, fat color, fat in muscle, flavor, and general preference. Also, the after cooking sensory test showed that brand beef had better characteristics for color, flavor, juiciness, softness, taste, chewiness, and preference.
Keywords
brand Korean beef; non-brand Korean beef; quality characteristics;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 김광옥, 이영춘. 1998. 식품의 관능검사. 학연사. 서울. pp 93-96
2 신현길, 이무하, 정구용, 임한종. 1997. 식육의 이론과 실제. 미트저널사. 서울. pp 81-83
3 Chae YC. 2002. Quality research of Korean beef Bong-Gye native meat in Ooijykun, Korean J Food Cookery Sci 7(3) : 57-67
4 Lee JM, Park BY, Cho SH, Kim JH, Yoo YM, Chae HS, Choi YI. 2004. Analysis of carcass quality grade components and chemico-physical and sensory traits of M. longissimus dorsi in hanwoo. J Anim Sci & Tech 46(5) : 833-840   DOI
5 AOAC. 2000. Official methods of analysis. Association of official analytical chemists. Washington DC, USA
6 이무하. 1995. 식육품질의 이해. 선진문화사. 서울. pp 45-50
7 노정해, 김영붕, 양승용, 이남혁, 김미현, 정나라. 2005a. 한우 도체 특성 시험 6차. 한식연보고서 I1662-0505. 성남 pp 3-40
8 최승철, 한성일, 신해식. 2003. 한우 브랜드 생산 및 유통단계 협동 통합 전략. 농업 경영․정책연구지 30(4): 617-639
9 노정해, 김영붕, 양승용, 김미현, 정나라. 2004. 국내산 고급 축산 자원의 등급화 요소 연구 개발. 한식연보고서. E043006-0358. 성남. pp 27-53
10 Van der Wal PG, Engel B, Hulsegge B. 1997. Causes for variation in pork quality. Meat Sci 46(4) : 319-320   DOI   ScienceOn
11 이혜수, 김미리, 김미정, 김영아, 김완수, 노정해, 조영, 윤혜현, 이숙영, 이영은, 장백경, 정해정, 주난영. 2001. 조리과학. 교문사. 서울. pp213-232
12 이상영. 2001. 브랜드 한우육의 소비촉진과 홍보전략. 농업경영․정책연구 28 : 35-61
13 이상철, 강태홍, 한인규. 1991. 한우수소 증체시 에너지 및 단백질 축적비율에 관한 연구. 한영사지. 15 : 121-125
14 노정해, 김성수, 이영철, 김영붕, 김미현. 2005b. 한우 도체 특성 시험 7차. 한식연보고 I1685-05052 성남. pp 3-42
15 Schon L, Stosiok M. 1958. Studium uber pH in rindfleisch adn schweinefleisch. Fleischwirtschaft 10 : 678-680
16 Mcloughlin JV. 1970. Muscle contraction and postmortem pH changes in pig skeletal muscle. J Food Sci 35(6) : 717-720   DOI
17 김영철, 한성일, 최승철, 연규영. 2003. 축산물 브랜드화 과제와 마케팅 전략-한우브랜드화 사례연구 토대. 농업 경영․정책연구지 29 : 36-54