Untrained consumer assessment of the eating quality of beef: 1. A single composite score can predict beef quality grades

Quantifying consumer responses to beef across a broad range of demographics, nationalities and cooking methods is vitally important for any system evaluating beef eating quality. On the basis of previous work, it was expected that consumer scores would be highly accurate in determining quality grades for beef, thereby providing evidence that such a technique could be used to form the basis of and eating quality grading system for beef. Following the Australian MSA (Meat Standards Australia) testing protocols, over 19 000 consumers from Northern Ireland, Poland, Ireland, France and Australia tasted cooked beef samples, then allocated them to a quality grade; unsatisfactory, good-every-day, better-than-every-day and premium. The consumers also scored beef samples for tenderness, juiciness, flavour-liking and overall-liking. The beef was sourced from all countries involved in the study and cooked by four different cooking methods and to three different degrees of doneness, with each experimental group in the study consisting of a single cooking doneness within a cooking method for each country. For each experimental group, and for the data set as a whole, a linear discriminant function was calculated, using the four sensory scores which were used to predict the quality grade. This process was repeated using two conglomerate scores which are derived from weighting and combining the consumer sensory scores for tenderness, juiciness, flavour-liking and overall-liking, the original meat quality 4 score (oMQ4) (0.4, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3) and current meat quality 4 score (cMQ4) (0.3, 0.1, 0.3, 0.3). From the results of these analyses, the optimal weightings of the sensory scores to generate an ‘ideal meat quality 4 score (MQ4)’ for each country were calculated, and the MQ4 values that reflected the boundaries between the four quality grades were determined. The oMQ4 weightings were far more accurate in categorising European meat samples than the cMQ4 weightings, highlighting that tenderness is more important than flavour to the consumer when determining quality. The accuracy of the discriminant analysis to predict the consumer scored quality grades was similar across all consumer groups, 68%, and similar to previously reported values. These results demonstrate that this technique, as used in the MSA system, could be used to predict consumer assessment of beef eating quality and therefore to underpin a commercial eating quality guarantee for all European consumers.     

Review: The variability of the eating quality of beef can be reduced by predicting consumer satisfaction

The Meat Standards Australia (MSA) grading scheme has the ability to predict beef eating quality for each ‘cut×cooking method combination’ from animal and carcass traits such as sex, age, breed, marbling, hot carcass weight and fatness, ageing time, etc. Following MSA testing protocols, a total of 22 different muscles, cooked by four different cooking methods and to three different degrees of doneness, were tasted by over 19 000 consumers from Northern Ireland, Poland, Ireland, France and Australia. Consumers scored the sensory characteristics (tenderness, flavor liking, juiciness and overall liking) and then allocated samples to one of four quality grades: unsatisfactory, good-every-day, better-than-every-day and premium. We observed that 26% of the beef was unsatisfactory. As previously reported, 68% of samples were allocated to the correct quality grades using the MSA grading scheme. Furthermore, only 7% of the beef unsatisfactory to consumers was misclassified as acceptable. Overall, we concluded that an MSA-like grading scheme could be used to predict beef eating quality and hence underpin commercial brands or labels in a number of European countries, and possibly the whole of Europe. In addition, such an eating quality guarantee system may allow the implementation of an MSA genetic index to improve eating quality through genetics as well as through management. Finally, such an eating quality guarantee system is likely to generate economic benefits to be shared along the beef supply chain from farmers to retailors, as consumers are willing to pay more for a better quality product.     

Biochemical measurements of beef are a good predictor of untrained consumer sensory scores across muscles

The ability of the biochemical measurements, haem iron, intramuscular fat (IMF%), moisture content, and total, soluble and insoluble collagen contents, to predict untrained consumer sensory scores both across different muscles and within the same muscle from different carcasses were investigated. Sensory scores from 540 untrained French consumers (tenderness, flavour liking, juiciness and overall liking) were obtained for six muscles; outside (m. biceps femoris), topside (m. semimembranosus), striploin (m. longissimus thoracis), rump (m. gluteus medius), oyster blade (m. infraspinatus) and tenderloin (m. psoas major) from each of 18 French and 18 Australian cattle. The four sensory scores were weighted and combined into a single score termed MQ4, which was also analysed. All sensory scores were highly correlated with each other and with MQ4. This in part reflects the fact that MQ4 is derived from the consumer scores for tenderness, juiciness, flavour and overall liking and also reflects an interrelationship between the sensory scores themselves and in turn validates the use of the MQ4 term to reflect the scope of the consumer eating experience. When evaluated across the six different muscles, all biochemical measurements, except soluble collagen, had a significant effect on all of the sensory scores and MQ4. The average magnitude of impact of IMF%, haem iron, moisture content, total and insoluble collagen contents across the four different sensory scores are 34.9, 5.1, 7.2, 36.3 and 41.3, respectively. When evaluated within the same muscle, only IMF% and moisture content had a significant effect on overall liking (5.9 and 6.2, respectively) and flavour liking (6.1 and 6.4, respectively). These results indicate that in a commercial eating quality prediction model including muscle type, only IMF% or moisture content has the capacity to add any precision. However, all tested biochemical measurements, particularly IMF% and insoluble collagen contents, are strong predictors of eating quality when muscle type is not known. This demonstrates their potential usefulness in extrapolating the sensory data derived from these six muscles to other muscles with no sensory data, but with similar biochemical parameters, and therefore reducing the amount of future sensory testing required.     

The variation in the eating quality of beef from different sexes and breed classes cannot be completely explained by carcass measurements

Delivering beef of consistent quality to the consumer is vital for consumer satisfaction and will help to ensure demand and therefore profitability within the beef industry. In Australia, this is being tackled with Meat Standards Australia (MSA), which uses carcass traits and processing factors to deliver an individual eating quality guarantee to the consumer for 135 different ‘cut by cooking methods’ from each carcass. The carcass traits used in the MSA model, such as ossification score, carcass weight and marbling explain the majority of the differences between breeds and sexes. Therefore, it was expected that the model would predict with eating quality of bulls and dairy breeds with good accuracy. In total, 8128 muscle samples from 482 carcasses from France, Poland, Ireland and Northern Ireland were MSA graded at slaughter then evaluated for tenderness, juiciness, flavour liking and overall liking by untrained consumers, according to MSA protocols. The scores were weighted (0.3, 0.1, 0.3, 0.3) and combined to form a global eating quality (meat quality (MQ4)) score. The carcasses were grouped into one of the three breed categories: beef breeds, dairy breeds and crosses. The difference between the actual and the MSA-predicted MQ4 scores were analysed using a linear mixed effects model including fixed effects for carcass hang method, cook type, muscle type, sex, country, breed category and postmortem ageing period, and random terms for animal identification, consumer country and kill group. Bulls had lower MQ4 scores than steers and females and were predicted less accurately by the MSA model. Beef breeds had lower eating quality scores than dairy breeds and crosses for five out of the 16 muscles tested. Beef breeds were also over predicted in comparison with the cross and dairy breeds for six out of the 16 muscles tested. Therefore, even after accounting for differences in carcass traits, bulls still differ in eating quality when compared with females and steers. Breed also influenced eating quality beyond differences in carcass traits. However, in this case, it was only for certain muscles. This should be taken into account when estimating the eating quality of meat. In addition, the coefficients used by the Australian MSA model for some muscles, marbling score and ultimate pH do not exactly reflect the influence of these factors on eating quality in this data set, and if this system was to be applied to Europe then the coefficients for these muscles and covariates would need further investigation.     

Consumer evaluation of meat quality from barrows,immunocastrates and boars in six countries

The practice of surgical castration of piglets and its alternatives is still under debate. Production of boars may impair meat quality due to boar taint and reduced tenderness compared to meat from surgically castrated male pigs, while immunocastration reduces boar taint and may improve meat quality but seems to be less accepted by the pig chain. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the consumer’s sensory appreciation of meat from barrows (BAs), immunocastrates (ICs) and boars (BOs) in six European countries, taking into account the selection of tainted carcass and consumers’ appreciation of boar taint. Loin chops of 30 BAs, 30 ICs and 30 BOs were evaluated by 752 consumers in six countries: Belgium, Czech Republic, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Spain. Consumers rated odour, flavour, tenderness, juiciness, overall liking and willingness to buy and sensitivity to and liking of androstenone (AND) and liking of skatole (SKA) was also tested. In each of the six countries, consumers liked the odour of the BO samples less than that of BA, and IC intermediate. For flavour, tenderness, juiciness, overall liking and willingness to buy, liking scores given by the Czech, Polish and Portuguese consumers significantly differed between the BA, BO and IC. Willingness to buy was highest for BA by Czech and Polish consumers and for BA and IC by Portuguese consumers. The frequency of the negative check all terms that apply terms also differed, with a higher frequency of disgusting for BO compared to BA and IC and of off-flavour, irritating, manure, sweat, disappointing compared to BA, and intermediate for IC. 31% of the consumers disliked the odour of AND (NEG_AND), and 36% of them were not sensitive; in contrast, 77% of the consumers disliked SKA (NEG_SKA). The decrease in flavour liking score for BO compared to BA and IC was more outspoken by the NEG_AND consumer, while NEG_SKA consumers gave an overall lower liking score independent of the type of male pig. The results of this study indicate that IC can be a valid alternative for surgical castration.     

Does a single adjustment in the meat standards Australia beef grading model cater for different hormonal growth promotant formulations?

This paper investigated whether a single Hormonal Growth Promotant (HGP) adjustment in the Meat Standards Australia (MSA) beef grading model adequately predicted consumer eating quality of beef from cattle treated with different HGP formulations. This paper used consumer sensory data from two experiments. In experiment one, a total of 300 steers were allocated to three treatments; control (CON-100-F), 100 day oestradiol only HGP (OES-100-F), or a combination of trenbolone acetate and oestradiol HGP (TBA+OES-100-F) and finished in a feedlot for 73 days. In experiment two, a total of 200 steers were allocated either control or 400 day oestradiol only HGP treatments and finished on pasture for 389 days. Steers were slaughtered by finishing regime and carcass traits recorded. The anterior and posterior portions of the m. longissimus lumborum (LL-A and LL-P, respectively) and m. gluteus medius (GM) were collected and aged for five or 35 days. Grilled meat samples were scored for tenderness, juiciness, liking of flavour and overall acceptability using untrained consumers. Sensory scores were weighted by 0.3. 0.1, 0.3 and 0.3, respectively and summed to calculate a meat quality (MQ4) score. Residual MQ4 scores were calculated (observed MQ4 minus the predicted MQ4 score). The MSA model accounts for varied impacts of different HGPs on eating quality through a single HGP adjustment, and indirect impacts on carcass traits. For the majority of the HGP treatment samples, the residual MQ4 scores were not different to zero (5/18), or were positive i.e. the MSA model under-predicted these samples (11/18). Under-prediction was predominately for 35 day aged (7/9) and GM HGP treatment samples (6/6) and was considered low, with the majority less than ±5 MQ4 units. Under-prediction could be considered as advantageous through providing an additional safeguard to protect the interests of the consumers, rather than if the model had over-predicted and resulted in a more negative eating quality experience than expected. Some over-prediction was observed in the CON-100-F and TBA+OES-100-F treatment samples, which may be due to factors such as genetic variation and/or production environment. Minimal bias was observed when residual MQ4 was regressed against predicted MQ4 for the range of feeding regimes, muscles, ageing periods and treatment groups. This study showed that a single HGP adjustment in the MSA beef grading model, combined with the indirect effects of the different HGP formulations on carcass traits, provided a reasonable prediction of meat eating quality for different HGP formulations.     

Prediction of beef eating quality in France using the Meat Standards Australia system

An experiment was set up for (i) comparing Australian and French consumer preferences to beef and to (ii) quantify how well the Meat Standards Australia (MSA) grading model could predict the eating quality of beef in France. Six muscles from 18 Australian and 18 French cattle were tested as paired samples. In France, steaks were grilled ‘medium’ or ‘rare’, whereas in Australia ‘medium’ cooking was used. In total, 360 French consumers took part in the ‘medium’ cooking test, with each eating half Australian beef and half French beef and 180 French consumers tested the ‘rare’ beef. Consumers scored steaks for tenderness (tn), juiciness (ju), flavour liking (fl) and overall liking (ov). They also assigned a quality rating to each sample: ‘unsatisfactory’, ‘satisfactory everyday quality’ (3*), ‘better than everyday quality’ (4*) or ‘premium quality’ (5*). The prediction of the final ratings (3*, 4*, 5*) by the French consumers using the MSA-weighted eating quality score (0.3 tn + 0.1 ju + 0.3 fl + 0.3 ov) was over 70%, which is at least similar to the Australian experience. The boundaries between ‘unsatisfactory’, 3*, 4* and 5* were found to be ca. 38, 61 and 80, respectively. The differences between extreme classes are therefore slightly more important in France than in Australia. On average, even though it does not have predictive equations for bull meat, the mean predicted scores calculated by the MSA model deviated from observed values by a maximum of 5 points on a 0 to 100 scale except for the Australian oyster blade and the French topside, rump and outside (deviating by <15). Overall, the data indicate that it would be possible to manage a grading system in France as there is high agreement and consistency across consumers. The ‘rare’ and ‘medium’ results are also very similar, indicating that a common set of weightings and cut-offs can be employed.     

COMPARISON OF ATTRIBUTE LIKING AND JAR SCALES TO EVALUATE THE ADEQUACY OF SENSORY ATTRIBUTES OF MILK DESSERTS

Just-about-right (JAR) scales and attribute liking questions are usually used to study consumer perception of the sensory characteristics of food products. The aim of the present work was to compare the performance of attribute liking and JAR scales to evaluate consumers' perceived adequacy of flavor and texture of milk puddings. Two groups of consumers were asked to evaluate eight milk desserts using (1) overall liking followed by attribute liking for texture and flavor and (2) overall liking followed by JAR scales for thickness, creaminess, sweetness and vanilla flavor. Overall liking scores were significantly different when JAR scales or attribute liking questions were considered. Texture, flavor and overall liking scores were highly correlated to each other, providing the same information. JAR scales correlated better with the intensity of sensory attributes evaluated by a trained sensory panel, being JAR percentages a reliable tool to study the adequacy of sensory attributes.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

Results from the present work showed that consumers might not be able to independently evaluate their liking of different sensory attributes of a product. For this reason, the use of attribute liking questions for studying the adequacy of sensory attributes in complex products would not be recommended. JAR scales were better indicators of the adequacy of sensory attributes. Consumers were able to independently evaluate texture and flavor attributes using JAR scales. However, the influence of JAR scales on overall liking scores should be taken into account when including these scales on consumer studies.     

WHAT SENSORY CHARACTERISTICS DRIVE PRODUCT QUALITY? AN ASSESSMENT OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

Consumers differ dramatically in their sensory preferences for products. This paper assesses the relative importance of appearance, taste/flavor and texture as characteristics that drive acceptance for a complex pie product. The paper classifies consumers as being driven by one or more sensory attributes in their judgment of product quality. To do so, each consumer's liking rating is regressed against each separate attribute liking. The coefficient (M) of the linear equation "Overall Liking = M (Attribute Liking) + B" measures the relative importance of the sensory attribute as a driver of overall quality.     

European conformation and fat scores have no relationship with eating quality

European conformation and fat grades are a major factor determining carcass value throughout Europe. The relationships between these scores and sensory scores were investigated. A total of 3786 French, Polish and Irish consumers evaluated steaks, grilled to a medium doneness, according to protocols of the ‘Meat Standards Australia’ system, from 18 muscles representing 455 local, commercial cattle from commercial abattoirs. A mixed linear effects model was used for the analysis. There was a negative relationship between juiciness and European conformation score. For the other sensory scores, a maximum of three muscles out of a possible 18 demonstrated negative effects of conformation score on sensory scores. There was a positive effect of European fat score on three individual muscles. However, this was accounted for by marbling score. Thus, while the European carcass classification system may indicate yield, it has no consistent relationship with sensory scores at a carcass level that is suitable for use in a commercial system. The industry should consider using an additional system related to eating quality to aid in the determination of the monetary value of carcasses, rewarding eating quality in addition to yield.     

EVALUATION OF RANGE-GRAZED AND CONCENTRATE-FEDBEEF BY A TRAINED SENSORY PANEL, A HOUSEHOLD PANEL AND A LABORATORY TEST MARKET GROUP

A trained sensory panel and a household panel evaluated leaner range-grazed and higher grading concentrate-fed beef for sensory characteristics. The findings were compared to those from a laboratory test market study designed to determine the consumer appeal of branded range-grazed beef when compared to concentrate-fed beef. Broiled steaks from concentrate-fed steers were scored more flavorful, more tender, more juicy and more desirable overall than those from range-grazed steers by the trained sensory panel and by the household panel. In the laboratory test market study steaks from range-grazed steers were nearly equal in acceptance to those from concentrate-fed steers because consumers, although accustomed to concentrate-fed beef in their marketplace, compromised palatability for meat they perceived to be leaner and more healthful.     

Sensory evaluation and its relationship to physical meat quality attributes of beef from Nguni and Bonsmara steers raised on natural pasture

The current study compared sensory characteristics and their relationships with physical meat characteristics of beef from Nguni and Bonsmara steers. Nguni beef was more (P < 0.05) tender than Bonsmara beef after ageing for 2 and 21 days, and had higher (P < 0.05) intramuscular fat (IMF; 1.12%) than Bonsmara beef (1.07%). Nguni beef had higher (P < 0.05) sensory scores than Bonsmara beef after ageing for 2 days. There were no (P > 0.05) relationships between IMF and sensory characteristics. Aroma intensity, impression on juiciness and tenderness-related scores were affected (P < 0.05) by pH. There were significant (P < 0.05) correlations between most physical meat characteristics and sensory characteristics. Nguni beef had better sensory scores than Bonsmara beef for beef aged for 2 days. While most physical meat characteristics were correlated to sensory scores, all sensory scores were not significantly correlated to IMF.     

EFFECT OF QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN AND THE NUMBER OF SAMPLES TASTED ON HEDONIC RATINGS1

A total of 450 consumers participated in a test to determine whether questionnaire length, presence of key diagnostic questions or serving position affected their hedonic discrimination among yellow cakes. Consumers evaluated four yellow cakes representing a 2 × 2 factorial design of texture and flavor flaws. They used one of the following six questionnaires: only a 9-point hedonic scale, a 9-point hedonic scale with open end questions, and four others comprising a 2 × 2 factorial design with two levels of questionnaire length and two levels of questionnaire completeness. Neither the presence of key attribute questions nor the length of the questionnaire affected the value or the sensitivity of the judges’ overall liking scores. Samples tasted first received higher hedonic scores than those same samples tasted second throughfifth. Judges could discriminate among the samples on the basis of overall liking best when samples were tasted fourth or fifth.     

Ossification score is a better indicator of maturity related changes in eating quality than animal age

Ossification score and animal age are both used as proxies for maturity-related collagen crosslinking and consequently decreases in beef tenderness. Ossification score is strongly influenced by the hormonal status of the animal and may therefore better reflect physiological maturity and consequently eating quality. As part of a broader cross-European study, local consumers scored 18 different muscle types cooked in three ways from 482 carcasses with ages ranging from 590 to 6135 days and ossification scores ranging from 110 to 590. The data were studied across three different maturity ranges; the complete range of maturities, a lesser range and a more mature range. The lesser maturity group consisted of carcasses having either an ossification score of 200 or less or an age of 987 days or less with the remainder in the greater maturity group. The three different maturity ranges were analysed separately with a linear mixed effects model. Across all the data, and for the greater maturity group, animal age had a greater magnitude of effect on eating quality than ossification score. This is likely due to a loss of sensitivity in mature carcasses where ossification approached and even reached the maximum value. In contrast, age had no relationship with eating quality for the lesser maturity group, leaving ossification score as the more appropriate measure. Therefore ossification score is more appropriate for most commercial beef carcasses, however it is inadequate for carcasses with greater maturity such as cull cows. Both measures may therefore be required in models to predict eating quality over populations with a wide range in maturity.     

CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE OF COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE FRANKFURTERS1

Consumers want meat products that are healthful and affordable. However, consumers will repurchase a product only if it tastes good. Consumers identified reasons for purchasing frankfurters and evaluated overall acceptability of 10 commercially available frankfurters. Consumers listed “taste” as the most important factor when purchasing frankfurters; only 16% of the consumers indicated that nutrition/health was the most important criterion. Nineteen consumer-perceived sensory and liking attributes were measured for the frankfurters in this study. The intensities of the attributes ranged from low to moderately high. All the frankfurters scored in the low to moderate range for overall acceptability. Most of the scores for liking of individual attributes correlated highly with overall liking, indicating that many of the questions relating to attribute liking could be eliminated.     

Consistency statistics and genetic parameters for taste panel assessed meat quality traits and their relationship with carcass quality traits in a commercial population of Angus-sired beef cattle

Sensory traits, such as juiciness and tenderness, are known to be important to the consumer and thus will influence their consumption of meat, specifically beef. These traits are difficult to measure and often require the use of taste panels to assess the complex parameters involved in the eating experience. Such panels are potentially a large source of measurement error, which may reduce the effectiveness of breeding programmes based on the data they generate. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of such taste panel-derived sensory traits as well as calculating genetic parameters and residual correlations for these traits along with a further set of traditional carcass quality traits. The study examined a sample of 443 Aberdeen Angus-cross animals collected from 14 breeder-finisher farms throughout Scotland. To assess the quality of the taste panel measurements, three consistency statistics were calculated: (i) panel-member consistency, i.e. the extent to which an individual panel member varied in their scoring for a given trait over the period of the experiment; (ii) repeatability, i.e. the consistency with which an individual panel member was able to score a trait on repeated samples from the same animal; and (iii) reproducibility, i.e. the extent to which taste panel members agreed with each other when scoring a trait. These consistency statistics were moderately high, particularly for panel-member consistency and reproducibility, with values ranging from 0.48 to 0.81 and 0.43 to 0.73 respectively. Estimated heritabilities were low for most of the sensory taste-panel-evaluated traits where the maximum value was 0.16 for overall liking. Residual correlations were high between many of the closely related sensory traits, although few significant correlations were found between the carcass quality data and meat quality traits.     

IMPORTANCE OF SENSORY FACTORS IN PROCESSED SEAFOOD: METHODS AND RESULTS1

This paper considers “importance” of sensory attributes from the consumer point of view, with emphasis on processed seafood. There are three key measures of importance. Attitudinal importance measures what consumers think to be important and refers to general opinions about the category. Sensory system importance measures how strongly different sensory inputs (e.g., appearance, aroma, taste, texture) “drive” overall liking, and show the key sensory inputs to which consumers attend. Attribute level importance measures the relation between sensory intensity and overall liking for each attribute. It shows which specific attributes drive liking, how liking varies with the specific sensory attribute, and whether (and at what sensory level) there exists an optimal level.     

SENSORY EVALUATION OF INDIAN-STYLE MARINATED CHICKEN BY MALAYSIAN AND EUROPEAN NAÏVE ASSESSORS

This study was carried out to determine the sensory acceptability of chicken breast fillets marinated with 13 different commercially available Indian-style marinades. Thirty-four naïve assessors (untrained panelists), 20 Malaysian and 14 European, were selected to assess the following sensory attributes: color, color uniformity, Tikka-Masala aroma, Tikka-Masala flavor, herblike flavor, hotness, authenticity, juiciness and overall acceptability. The color of the cooked samples and the pH, moisture and fat content of the marinades were analyzed instrumentally. Marinades were applied to the chicken fillets, which were then dry cooked at 170C for 15 min to an internal temperature of 73C. Sensory evaluation showed significant differences ( P <  0.05) in color uniformity, hotness and juiciness of the cooked marinated chicken perceived between groups. Samples marinated with marinades L and I received the highest score from the Malaysian panelists in terms of overall acceptability, whereas marinades A and F were chosen by the European group.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

The findings from this research will benefit manufacturers of marinade and marinated chicken products in developing or optimizing their products for the local and international markets. The optimal characteristics of an ideal marinade were identified for each assessor group. These results are also of interest to individuals undertaking cross-cultural consumer studies, even though the results presented here used naïve assessors.     

PERCEPTION OF PORK PATTIES WITH SHIITAKE (LENTINUS EDODE P.) MUSHROOM POWDER AND SODIUM TRIPOLYPHOSPHATE AS MEASURED BY KOREAN AND UNITED STATES CONSUMERS

This study explored consumer liking and perception of pork patties with an added functional health ingredient: shiitake (Lentinus edodes P.) mushroom powder. In addition, patties with and without sodium tripolyphosphate were tested. Both native Korean and U.S. consumers evaluated the products. Pork patties made with both phosphate and mushroom powder were found to be acceptable by Korean consumers, but increases in mushroom powder in patties with phosphate decreased acceptability for U.S. consumers. However, addition of mushroom powder to patties without phosphate increased acceptability for U.S. consumers, perhaps because it tended to increase texture acceptance and juiciness. Thus, addition of mushroom powder as a functional ingredient in pork patties, while possible, would require different formula modifications to appeal to consumers of differing nationalities.     

DEVELOPMENT OF A LEXICON FOR BEEF FLAVOR IN INTACT MUSCLE

ABSTRACT

A lexicon describing the flavor characteristics of beef across different cuts, grades, and cooking temperatures and methods was developed. Four major cuts of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) quality grade beef were cooked to five endpoint temperatures using braising, broiling (oven broiling and electric charbroiling), roasting and grilling (indoor and outdoor grilling). Six highly trained panelists identified and defined a total of 38 aroma and flavor characteristics in 176 beef samples. Beef identity, brown/roasted, bloody/serumy, metallic, fat‐like, overall sweet, sour aromatics and five tastes were present in practically all samples. Other attributes were present only in certain samples, depending on either the sample group or the cooking method/endpoint temperature combination used. This lexicon potentially offers the beef industry a standard tool to identify and quantify flavor attributes as impacted by temperature, cooking method, aging process, storage time, diet regime, packaging, USDA quality grades, etc.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

Until now, the beef industry's main focus has been to assess beef tenderness and juiciness, with an emphasis on ways to improve beef texture. Meat companies and academic institutions have been using the 1995 American Meat Science Association guidelines to assess the flavor of beef, which are not comprehensive. Recent work has focused on flavor, and the industry needs a standardized flavor lexicon that can be used for many projects. It is important for the industry to be able to systematically identify and quantify flavor attributes that drive consumer acceptance.