0884 High Energy Forage and Feedlot ....beef Consumer Acceptability..

• Journal List
• J Anim Sci
• v.96(6); 2018 Jun
• PMC6095342

J Anim Sci. 2018 Jun; 96(6): 2238–2248.

Retail stability of iii beef muscles from grass-, legume-, and feedlot-finished cattle¹

Jerrad F Legako

¹Department of Animal and Nutrient Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX

Traci Cramer

¹Department of Creature and Nutrient Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX

Krista Yardley

²Section of Nutrition, Dietetics, and Food Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT

Talya J Murphy

ⁱⁱSection of Diet, Dietetics, and Nutrient Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT

ToniRae Gardner

²Department of Diet, Dietetics, and Food Sciences, Utah State Academy, Logan, UT

Arkopriya Chail

²Department of Nutrition, Dietetics, and Food Sciences, Utah State Academy, Logan, UT

Lance R Pitcher

³Department of Plants, Soils, and Climate, Utah Country University, Logan, UT

Jennifer W MacAdam

³Department of Plants, Soils, and Climate, Utah State University, Logan, UT

Abstract

This report aimed to make up one's mind the influence of finishing diet on beef appearance and lipid oxidation of three beefiness muscles. A total of xviii Angus steers were selected from three diet treatments: grass-finished (USUGrass), legume-finished (USUBFT), and grain-finished (USUGrain). Afterwards processing, longissimus thoracis (LT), triceps brachii (TB), and gluteus medius (GM) steaks were evaluated over a seven-d brandish menstruum. A muscle × diet interaction was observed for instrumental lightness (L*) and redness (a*) (P ≤ 0.001). Within each combination, USUGrass was considered darker with lower (P < 0.05) L* compared with USUGrain. For USUBFT, Fifty* was similar to USUGrain for the TB and LT, while the Fifty* of USUBFT and USUGrain GM differed (P < 0.05). In terms of redness, LT a* values were elevated (P < 0.05) in USUGrass compared with USUBFT and USUGrain. For GM steaks, a* of USUBFT and USUGrass were each greater (P < 0.05) than USUGrain. Surface a* of TB steaks were greatest (P < 0.05) for USUGrass followed by USUBFT, and with USUGrain, being lowest (P < 0.05). An overall increase in Fifty* was observed throughout display dependent on diet (P = 0.013). During display, USUGrain steaks had the greatest (P < 0.05) L* followed by USUBFT and USUGrass. Additionally, a day × muscle interaction was observed for a* (P = 0.009). Initially, TB steaks had the greatest (P < 0.05) a* values. However, at day iii, a* values were like (P > 0.05) among muscles. Visual colour scores were in agreement with loss of redness (a*) during display, dependent on diet and musculus type (P < 0.001). Similarly, a 24-hour interval × diet × muscle interaction was observed for visual discoloration (P < 0.001). Twenty-four hours and diet interacted to influence thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) (P < 0.001). Initial values did not differ (P > 0.05) between USUGrain and USUBFT; however, USUGrass had lower initial (P < 0.05) TBARS than both USUGrain and USUBFT. At days 3 and vii, TBARS were greatest (P < 0.05) in USUGrain steaks, followed by USUBFT, which was greater (P < 0.05) than USUGrass. A diet × muscle interaction was observed for 10 volatile compounds originating from lipid degradation (P ≤ 0.013). These compounds were less (P < 0.05) abundant in USUGrass compared to TB or GM of USUGrain. This study determined grass-finished beef to have a darker more red colour and less lipid oxidation in multiple muscles. Possible mechanisms for this may include an increase in endogenous antioxidants in grass-finished beefiness.

Keywords: beef color, finishing diet, lipid oxidation, retail display, TBARS

INTRODUCTION

Consumers have expressed interest in nonconventionally finished beefiness due to perceived health benefits (McCluskey et al., 2005). Although forage finishing diets were previously explored for impacts on palatability, less is known about their impacts on beef advent and shelf life. Meat advent can greatly impact consumer purchasing decisions (Mancini and Chase, 2005). Visual entreatment decreases during retail display (Jeremiah and Gibson, 2001). Loss of suitable beef color during retail display may have significant economic impacts through price reductions or product loss.

Finishing nutrition of cattle can bear on the final fatty acid composition of beef (Chail et al., 2016). Forage-finished beef has a greater ratio of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) to saturated fatty acids (French et al., 2000). Previously, PUFA of beefiness were described to have swell susceptibility to oxidation (Woods et al., 2008), which may event in detrimental off-odors and off-flavors in concluding product (Calkins and Hodgen, 2007). Furthermore, oxidation of lipids has been related to beefiness color discoloration and accumulation of metmyoglobin (Greene and Price, 1975). Therefore, the greater proportion of PUFA in the fat of provender-finished beef could increment oxidation and color discoloration. Still, forage-finished beefiness has been cited to possess increased antioxidant capacity due to the accumulation of antioxidant species (Wu et al., 2008).

Recently, finishing with the legume birdsfoot trefoil was determined to improve perceived palatability compared with grass finishing and to ameliorate chemic composition in comparison with feedlot finishing (Chail et al., 2016) Furthermore, it was previously demonstrated that finishing diet and muscle type interacted to influence beef limerick and quality (Chail et al., 2017). These studies indicated that a legume-finishing diet could amend beef quality relative to grass finishing. They also indicated that this impact had some dependency on muscle type in forage-finished beefiness. However, it is unclear how these forage diets touch beefiness color and appearance during retail display. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the influence of finishing nutrition on beef advent and lipid oxidation of three beef muscles.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Animal Intendance and Use

All animate being procedures and protocols in this report were approved by the Utah State Academy (USU) Fauna Intendance and Utilise committee, IACUC #1493.

Cattle Finishing and Harvest

All cattle product and harvest procedures are described in detail past Chail et al. (2016). A total of xviii Angus steers were selected from the USU beefiness herd. Diet treatments are described equally follows: six Angus steers were finished on tall fescue [Schedonorus arundinaceus (Schreb.) Dumort] grass for 6 wk and then moved on to meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rehmann) (grass-finished; USUGrass); Vi steers were fed on birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus) (legume-finished; USUBFT); the remaining vi steers were feedlot-finished in a single pen on a concentrate diet of loftier-starch cereal (grain-finished; USUGrain). After 111 d on each finishing nutrition, animals were slaughtered at the USU Matthew Hillyard Beast Pedagogy and Research Centre (Wellsville, UT), at approximately eighteen mo of age and at 416–490 kg of weight. Carcasses were chilled for 24 h at 2–4 °C prior to fabrication.

Product Fabrication

Three unlike boneless subprimals; ribeye roll (IMPS # 112; NAMP, 2010), peak sirloin butt (IMPS # 184, NAMP, 2010), and shoulder clod (IMPS # 114, NAMP, 2010) were collected from each carcass (n = vi per diet). Subprimals were wet-aged under vacuum for 14 d at 2–4 °C prior to fabrication into retail steaks. Later removal of the trapezius, serratus dorsalis and longissimus costarum, and related intermuscular fat, ribeye steaks were produced by hand cutting two.five-cm-thick steaks, progressing anterior to posterior, and trimming external fatty to 0.32 cm thickness. The spinalis dorsi, complexus, and multifidus dorsi muscles remained intact with the longissimus thoracis (LT) of ribeye steaks throughout the trial. Even so, all analysis was collected but from the LT muscle. Top sirloin steaks of 2.5 cm thickness were prepared post-obit the removal of the biceps femoris, gluteus accessories, and gluteus profundus, leaving merely the gluteus medius (GM) musculus. Steaks were hand cut from the GM progressing anterior to posterior. The infraspinatus and teres major muscles were removed from the anile shoulder clod and beefiness arm steaks were produced from the triceps brachii (TB) musculus only. Prior to cutting steaks, the small elongated side muscle was removed from the center TB. Then the lateral head of the TB was removed at the natural seam between the lateral caput and the long head of the TB. After separation, the exposed internal connective tissue previously located between the heads was removed. Finally, 2.5-cm-thick steaks were cut from the long head of the TB by hand cutting perpendicular to the muscle fibers. Steaks intended for false retail display were individually packaged on foam trays with absorbent pads and overwrapped with a single layer of PVC film (O2 permeability = 8,400 cm³/(24 h × one thousand² × atm.) at 23 °C; h2o vapor transmission = 83 g/(24 h × m^two) at 23 °C and 50% relative humidity).

Simulated Retail Display, Instrumental, and Visual Assessment

Iii subsets of steaks were utilized to represent initial (0 d), mid (3 d), and late (seven d) stages of retail display. Steaks representing 0 d of retail display were initially packaged, as described above, evaluated for instrumental and visual color, as described below, before being individually vacuum packaged and frozen at −xx °C until further analysis.

Simulated retail display occurred for 7 d in a walk-in cooler (2–4 °C). Packaged steaks representing iii d and vii d of brandish were placed as a single layer on iv stainless-steel shelves nether continuous fluorescent lighting (iii,500 K/75 CRI) at a distance of 35.vi cm between steaks and light source. A completely randomized cake design was utilized where equal number of each steak blazon was randomly assigned to an initial location on each shelf. Within each shelf, steaks were rotated daily to eliminate location/lighting bias within a shelf. Columns of steaks (n = 3) were rotated every 24 h from left to right under the calorie-free source. The far correct column of packages was rotated to the far left position each time. Additionally, steaks within a row were rotated one position within a cavalcade every 24 h. As 3-d steak packages were removed for freezing, empty trays were placed in their positions in order to maintain the rotation scheme. Steaks representing 0 d were evaluated under the same lighting as described below within 2 h of packaging and freezing. Similarly, steaks representing iii d and 7 d were removed, vacuum packaged, and frozen at the designated interval.

Instrumental and visual attributes of steak surfaces were evaluated according to the AMSA guidelines (AMSA, 2012). Every 24 h, instrumental color (Fifty* = lightness, a* = redness, and b* = yellowness) was measured with a Hunter Colorimeter (Miniscan XE, Hunter Associates Laboratory, Inc., Reston, VA)-Trained panelists (northward ≥ eight) evaluated steaks for redness on an 8-point scale (1 = very bright red; 8 = tan to brown) and discoloration (6-point calibration, 1 = none, 0% metmyoglobin formation; vi = extensive discoloration, 81–100% metmyoglobin formation). Only the 7-d packages designated to exist inside the libation for the entire elapsing of display were evaluated for color; additionally, panelists were merely trained to evaluate the LT of ribeye steaks.

Sample Grooming for Chemical Cess

Chemic changes during display were assessed through measurement of thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) and volatile compounds on days 0, 3, and 7 of fake retail display (2–4 °C). Raw steaks were thawed for 24 h at ii–iv °C. External fat and muscle and residual connective tissue were removed, leaving only TB, GM, and LT muscles. Musculus samples were cubed, submerged in liquid nitrogen, placed in a blender (VITA-MIX Corp, Cleveland, OH; model #VM0100A), and pulverized to form a finely powdered homogenate. Powdered samples were packed in VWR sample bags (BPR-4590 VW1, Radnor, PA) and stored at −lxxx °C for subsequent assay (Martin et al., 2013).

Thiobarbituric Acid Reactive Substances

Procedures outlined by Buege and Aust (1978) with modifications from Luque et al. (2011) were used to determine TBARS values (mg malondialdehyde/kg meat homogenate). In cursory, 10 g of raw meat homogenate was blended with 30 mL of distilled water prior to centrifugation (1,850 × g; room temperature; x min). The resulting supernatant was combined with trichloroacetic acid, thiobarbituric acid, and butylated hydroxyanisole (antioxidant). Samples were and then heated in a water bath (100 °C) for 15 min before being submerged in an water ice h2o bath for x min. The chilled sample was again centrifuged (1,850 × g; room temperature; 10 min), and the absorbance of the final supernatant was determined at 531 nm.

Volatile Chemical compound Analysis

Volatile compound assay was carried out as outlined by Chail et al. (2016). Nevertheless, in this study, volatile compounds were evaluated from raw beef homogenates. Five grams of the raw homogenate was weighed into 20-mL glass vials (093640-036-00; Gerstel; Linthicum, Physician) and airtight with a polytetrafluoroethylene septa and screw cap (093640-092-00; Gerstel). Ten microliters of internal standard (i, 2-dicholorobenzene; 0.801mg/ mL) was added and the vial was loaded past a Gerstel automatic sampler (MPS, Linthicum, Medico) for a five-min incubation period at l °C in the Gerstel agitator (500 rotations per min) followed by 20 min of extraction where volatile compounds were collected from the headspace of raw samples by solid phase microextraction using an 85-µm film thickness carboxen polydimethylsiloxane fiber (Supelco, Bellefonte, PA). Extracted volatile compounds were injected on a VF-v ms capillary cavalcade (xxx m × 0.25 mm × 1.00 µm; Agilent J&Westward GC Columns, Santa Clara, CA). Accurate standards were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO) and used to validate compound identities through comparison of retention times and ion fragmentation patterns. Quantitation was carried out by an internal standard calibration with the same authentic standards.

Statistical Assay

Color attributes were analyzed as a 3 × 3 factorial arrangement (finishing diet × muscle) repeated measures (time) pattern with the SAS MIXED procedure (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC, version 9.4). The Satterthwaite approximation was used to make up one's mind denominator degrees of freedom. The Akaike Data Benchmark (AIC) was used equally the best model for repeated measures. The lowest AIC value among compound symmetry (CS), heterogeneous CS, autoregressive (AR[1]), and heterogeneous AR[1] was utilized.

Chemical attributes were evaluated at days 0, 3, and 7 using the MIXED procedure of SAS with finishing nutrition, muscle, and twenty-four hour period every bit fixed furnishings in a factorial arrangement. In all ANOVA analyses, subprimal was considered the experimental unit. Likewise, carcass and display shelf were considered random effects. Following all ANOVA analyses where F-tests were significant (P < 0.05), least squares ways were separated using the PDIFF selection of LSMEANS. All comparisons were considered pregnant at α = 0.05 or less.

RESULTS

Instrumental Color

A muscle × nutrition interaction was observed for instrumental lightness (L*), redness (a*), and yellowness (b*) (P ≤ 0.001), wherein each musculus performed differently relative to diet. For the LT, L* values for USUBFT and USUGrain were greater than USUGrass (P < 0.05) (Figure 1). In the GM, L* values for USUGrain were greater than (P < 0.05) USUBFT and USUGrass. In TB, beef 50* values did non differ for USUGrain and USUBFT (P > 0.05) but USUGrain had greater (P < 0.05) L* values than USUGrass. The LT a* values (Figure 2) were elevated (P < 0.05) in USUGrass compared with USUBFT and USUGrain, while a* values for USUBFT and USUGrain did not differ (P > 0.05). For GM steaks, the a* values of USUBFT and USUGrass were similar (P > 0.05) and greater (P < 0.05) than for USUGrain. Surface a* values of TB steaks were greater (P < 0.05) for USUGrass than for USUBFT, while the a* values for USUBFT were greater than USUGrain (P < 0.05). Diet and muscle also influenced b* values (P < 0.001; Figure 3). For the LT, b* did not differ (P > 0.05) among diets. However, b* of GM of USUBFT was greater (P < 0.05) than USUGrain, while b* of GM of USUGrass did not differ from USUBFT or USUGrain (P > 0.05). The TB b* values were greater (P < 0.05) for USUGrass than USUGrain, but b* values for USUBFT and USUGrass did not differ (P > 0.05).

Lightness (L*) values during retail display of iii beefiness muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii, pooled boilerplate) were observed from cattle finished with unlike diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). 2-way interaction (muscle × nutrition, P < 0.001) was observed. ^a,b,c,d,e,fTo the lowest degree squares ways lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05).

Redness (a*) values during retail display of three beef muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii, pooled average) were observed from cattle finished with different diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Ii-way interaction (muscle × diet, P < 0.001) was observed. ^a,b,c,dLeast squares means lacking a mutual superscript differ (P < 0.05).

Yellowness (b*) values during retail display of three beef muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii, pooled average) were observed from cattle finished with unlike diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Two-fashion interaction (muscle × diet, P < 0.001) was observed. ^a,b,c,d,eLeast squares means lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05).

An overall increase in L* was observed throughout display time dependent on diet (P = 0.013; Effigy 4). Throughout display fourth dimension, USUGrain steaks had the greatest (P < 0.05) L* values followed past USUBFT and then USUGrass, with the exception of day 5 measurements. At 24-hour interval five, the L* of USUGrain did non differ (P > 0.05) from USUBFT. Another day × diet interaction was observed for a*, which decreased overall within each musculus blazon throughout retail display time (P = 0.014; Effigy 5). At solar day 0, a* values did not differ (P > 0.05) for USUBFT and USUGrass, and the a* values for both USUBFT and USUGrass were greater (P < 0.05) than USUGrain. Still, by day six, a* of USUBFT and USUGrain were similar (P > 0.05) and less than the a* of USUGrass steaks (P < 0.05).

Lightness (L*) values during retail display of three beef muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii; pooled boilerplate) from cattle finished with different diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Two-way interaction (mean solar day × diet, P = 0.013) was observed.

Redness (a*) values for cattle finished with unlike diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass) during retail brandish for the pooled average of three beef muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii). Two-way interaction (day × nutrition, P = 0.014) was observed.

A day × muscle interaction was also observed in data for a* (P = 0.009; Figure 6). For each musculus a* values decreased throughout display time. At mean solar day 0, TB steaks had the greatest (P < 0.05) a* values, followed past GM and so LT which did not differ (P > 0.05). Withal, by solar day 3, a* values were similar (P > 0.05) for all 3 muscles. By mean solar day 6 of display, TB had the greatest (P < 0.05) a* values, while a* values of LT and GM did not differ (P > 0.05).

a* Redness (a*) values during retail display of three beef muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii) for the pooled average of cattle finished with different diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Two-way interaction (solar day × muscle, P = 0.009) was observed.

Visual Colour

Visual redness was evaluated as a score of lean color redness and a three-style solar day × diet × muscle interaction was observed (P < 0.001; Effigy seven). Visual redness scores increased throughout display time in diet and muscle treatments, with a steeper incline observed between 4 and 5 d of display. For all diets, the LT had consistently lower (P < 0.05) visual redness scores than the GM and TB, while the visual redness for GM and TB did non differ (P > 0.05). For the USUGrain diet, the LT had a consistently lower (P < 0.05) visual redness score than the GM and TB which did not differ (P > 0.05). For USUBFT, visual redness scores of the 3 muscle types did not differ (P > 0.05) during the brandish catamenia except for days ane and half dozen, when GM was greater (P < 0.05) than LT and TB. For USUGrass beefiness, the GM was greater (P < 0.05) than LT for the entire display period. The LT and TB visual redness scores were similar (P > 0.05) except for days iv and 5, where the TB was greater (P < 0.05) than the LT.

(a–c) Visual color scores (1 = very vivid carmine and viii = tan to brown, AMSA 2012) during retail display of gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii beef steaks from cattle finished with dissimilar diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Three-way interaction (day × diet × muscle, P < 0.001) was observed.

Similarly, a three-mode day × nutrition × muscle interaction was observed for visual discoloration (P < 0.001; Effigy 8). Overall, surface discoloration increased between days 0 and 7 inside all diets and muscle treatments, and GM discoloration was greater (P < 0.05) than LT, while TB was intermediate. For USUGrain, at day 0 GM had the well-nigh (P < 0.05) discoloration followed past LT being greater (P < 0.05) than TB, which was everyman (P < 0.05). At day iv, GM was still the most (P < 0.05) discolored, and discoloration of the TB was greater (P < 0.05) than that of the LT. From days 4 to vii, USUGrain LT had less surface discoloration (P < 0.05) than GM and TB, which did not differ from ane some other (P > 0.05). In USUBFT at day 0, TB had a lower (P < 0.05) discoloration score than LT and GM, but scores were similar (P > 0.05) amidst muscles from days ane to five. On day vi, USUBFT GM showed greater (P < 0.05) discoloration than TB and LT, which did not differ (P > 0.05). For USUGrass, GM had greater (P < 0.05) discoloration than LT on all dates. The TB of USUGrass was similar (P < 0.05) to LT from days 0 to 2 and on day 6. At mean solar day 3, discoloration scores were similar (P > 0.05) for GM and TB and greater (P < 0.05) than for LT. By solar day 7, GM had the greatest (P < 0.05) surface discoloration in USUGrass, followed by TB and so LT, which was lowest (P < 0.05).

(a–c) Visual discoloration (6-point scale, 1 = none, 0% metmyoglobin formation; half-dozen = extensive discoloration, 81–100% metmyoglobin formation) scores during retail brandish of gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii beef steaks from cattle finished with dissimilar diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Three-way interaction (day × diet × muscle, P < 0.001) was observed.

Chemical Assessment

There was a twenty-four hours × nutrition interaction for TBARS (P < 0.001; Figure 9). Initial values (day 0) did not differ (P > 0.05) for USUGrain and USUBFT; however, USUGrass had lower (P < 0.05) TBARS than both USUGrain and USUBFT on all dates. By day 3, TBARS were greater (P < 0.05) for USUGrain steaks than for USUBFT steaks, which were greater (P < 0.05) than USUGrass. The TBARS of USUBFT and USUGrass steaks were greater (P < 0.05) on twenty-four hour period seven than on day 0. However, for USUGrain, TBARS increased (P < 0.05) throughout the display period.

TBARS (mg malondialdehyde/kg wet tissue) values during retail display of three beefiness muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii; pooled average) from cattle finished with unlike diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Two-way interaction (twenty-four hours × diet, P < 0.001) was observed. ^a,b,c,d,e,fLeast squares means lacking a mutual superscript differ (P < 0.05).

There was also a nutrition × muscle interaction (P = 0.032) for TBARS values. Within each musculus blazon, the USUGrain diet resulted in greater (P < 0.05) lipid oxidation than other diets (Effigy 10). For the GM, TBAR values of USUBFT and USUGrass did not differ (P > 0.05). For the LT and TB, TBAR values of USUBFT were greater (P < 0.05) than USUGrass.

Lipid oxidation was TBARS values during retail display of three beefiness muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii; pooled average) from cattle finished with unlike diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Two-way interaction (muscle × nutrition, P = 0.032) was observed. ^a,b,c,d,e,fLeast squares means lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05).

10 volatile compounds had a diet × muscle interaction (P ≤ 0.013; Table 1). Octane concentration was elevated in TB across each diet, yet the magnitude of this difference was nutrition dependent (P = 0.006). Hexanal concentrations varied for muscle types within the USUGrain and USUBFT diets (P < 0.001), but for the USUGrass diet, values were similar for all three muscles types. Hexanal concentrations were elevated (P < 0.05) in the TB for USUGrain and USUBFT in comparison to LT and GM steaks. This design too occurred for heptanal (P < 0.001) and octanal (P < 0.001). Nonanal and 2-pentylfuran each showed elevated (P < 0.05) concentrations in TB within each diet handling compared with corresponding LT and GM. Still, between diets, nonanal and 2-pentylfuran of USUGrass TB were lower (P < 0.05) than TB of USUGrain or USUBFT. In USUGrain, hexanoic acid did not differ (P > 0.05) betwixt TB and GM, and both were greater (P < 0.05) than LT. In USUBFT, hexanoic acrid was greater (P < 0.05) in TB compared with GM and LT. For USUGrass, hexanoic acid did not differ (P < 0.05) between TB and GM while hexanoic acid content of the LT was less (P < 0.05). In USUGrain, 1-hexanol was elevated (P < 0.05) in GM compared with TB and LT. However, in both USUBFT and USUGrass ane-hexanol content did not differ (P > 0.05) amongst muscles. In each diet treatment, TB had the greatest (P < 0.05) concentrations of ane-heptanol. For USUBFT and USUGrass, ane-heptanol did not differ (P > 0.05) between GM and LT. However, for USUGrain, 1-heptanol content was greater (P < 0.05) in GM compared with LT. For each diet, 1-octen-3-ol content of TB was greater (P < 0.05) than GM and LT, which did not differ (P > 0.05). Across diets, i-octen-3-ol content of USUGrain TB was greater (P < 0.05) than USUBFT TB, while USUBFT TB was greater (P < 0.05) than USUGrass TB. For the LT, USUGrain 1-octen-3-ol content was greater (P < 0.05) than USUBFT and USUGrass, which did not differ (P > 0.05). Finally, 1-octen-3-ol content of the USUBFT GM did not differ (P > 0.05) from other diet treatments; however, USUGrain GM 1-octen-three-ol was greater (P < 0.05) than USUGrass GM.

Tabular array i.

Effects of beef finishing diet* and musculus^two† on concentrations (ng/1000 of sample) of volatile compounds from raw steaks during retail display^‡

Volatile compounds	Finishing diet and muscle
	USUGrain			USUBFT			USUGrass
	GM	LT	TB	GM	LT	TB	GM	LT	TB	SEM§	P value
Alkane
Octane	0.73bcd	0.93bc	2.00a	0.30d	0.22d	2.10a	0.27d	0.39cd	1.09b	0.28	0.006
Aldehydes
Hexanal	22.73cd	40.78bc	81.84a	2.15d	17.23cd	62.39ab	2.02d	i.04d	7.29d	12.97	<0.001
Heptanal	1.51c	ane.67c	5.24b	0.51c	ane.38c	vii.25a	0.24c	0.thirteenc	i.25c	0.93	<0.001
Octanal	two.94b	2.59b	7.57a	2.16bc	one.46bc	7.96a	i.17bc	0.55c	2.34b	0.77	<0.001
Nonanal	5.35b	iv.76b	12.87a	2.67bcd	2.lxcd	xi.29a	1.37d	1.13d	4.94bc	1.01	0.002
Furans
2-Pentyl furan	1.74bcd	1.97bc	3.33a	0.84de	one.28cde	2.61ab	0.72e	0.89de	one.30cd	0.33	0.012
Carboxylic acids
Hexanoic acid	four.10a	2.57c	3.78ab	1.43d	i.06de	2.98bc	0.72de	0.55east	one.17de	0.37	0.011
Alcohols
i-Hexanol	33.thirtya	10.97b	11.04b	xi.41b	4.03bc	iv.43bc	0.86c	0.38c	1.50c	iii.54	<0.001
1-Heptanol	i.57bc	1.13de	2.29a	0.69f	0.83ef	1.82b	0.60f	0.59f	one.25cd	0.13	0.013
1-Octen-3-ol	3.95cd	v.03c	11.52a	1.88de	one.79de	7.69b	0.74e	0.96eastward	2.91cd	1.03	<0.001

Concentrations of iii-hydroxy-2-butanone (Figure eleven) and 2-heptanone (Figure 12) did not change from days 0 to three, but increased betwixt 3 d and 7 d of storage (P < 0.0001). An additional display time effect was observed for hexanal (P < 0.001; Figure 13) and nonanal (P < 0.001; Effigy 14) wherein concentrations increased (P < 0.05) from twenty-four hour period 0 to 3 and then decreased (P < 0.05) from days 3 to 7 to day 0 concentrations (P > 0.05).

Content of 3-hydroxy-2-butanone (ng/g raw wet tissue) values during retail display of three beef muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii) from cattle finished with different diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Main effect of twenty-four hours (P < 0.001) is illustrated. ^a,bTo the lowest degree squares means lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05).

Content of 2-heptanone (ng/g raw wet tissue) values during retail display of 3 beef muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii) from cattle finished with different diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Primary effect of mean solar day (P < 0.001) is illustrated. ^a,bLeast squares means lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05).

Content of hexanal (ng/one thousand raw wet tissue) values during retail brandish of three beef muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii) from cattle finished with dissimilar diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Main consequence of twenty-four hour period (P < 0.001) is illustrated. ^a,bLeast squares means defective a common superscript differ (P < 0.05).

Content of nonanal (ng/g raw wet tissue) values during retail display of three beef muscles (gluteus medius, longissimus thoracis, and triceps brachii) from cattle finished with different diets (grain, USUGrain; birdsfoot trefoil, USUBFT; grass, USUGrass). Main effect of day (P < 0.001) is illustrated. ^a,bTo the lowest degree squares means lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05).

Discussion

The current investigation institute grass-finished beefiness to have a darker, more than ruby color, with less visual discoloration than grain-finished beef; birdsfoot trefoil (legume) finished beefiness was intermediate. Previous studies have indicated that grass-finishing produces darker beef with lower lightness (L*) and greater redness (a*) than grain finishing (Bidner et al., 1981; Schroeder et al., 1980; Realini et al., 2004). Schroeder et al. (1980) associated this with a dark cut defect; notwithstanding, consumer color preferences may have since evolved. Indeed, instrumental redness measurements have more than recently predicted consumer acceptance, with the threshold of a* ≤ xiv.5 (Holman et al., 2017). The current study as well found TB and GM to be more colour labile than LT. Loins are well-known for their color stability throughout postmortem aging and brandish, especially as compared with color-labile GM (Lanari et al., 1996). Nonetheless, GM and TB from USUGrass and USUBFT had increased a* compared with their counterparts of USUGrain. Therefore, it could exist surmised that both grass and legume forage finishing outcome in improved color in color-labile cuts compared with grain-finishing. It should be noted that Fifty* values of USUGrain were unexplainably low at solar day 5 of the trial. All experimental data was confirmed to be measured correctly. However, readers should accept care to evaluate the overall trend in L*, equally we take done with our interpretation, rather than the unexplained decrease at twenty-four hour period 5.

Previous studies take found a decrease in lipid oxidation of raw pasture-finished beefiness, possibly due to the higher level of endogenous antioxidants such as alpha-tocopherol or beta-carotene (Realini et al., 2004; Descalzo et al., 2007). Additionally, more oxidative muscle types (e.g., GM) are known to be more than susceptible to lipid oxidation (Woods et al., 2004; Faustman et al., 2010). The current investigation finds that both grass- and legume-finishing results in less lipid oxidation across muscle types and throughout postmortem display; together with the discoloration scores, this suggests that these diets, rich in antioxidants, may be utilized to improve color and oxidative stability in otherwise labile muscles.

A number of lipid-derived volatile compounds were identified as having differential concentrations between varying muscle blazon and nutrition, with LT and/or USUGrass treatments typically having lower concentrations. Although these results are substantiated past our color and TBARS findings, previous literature is inconclusive regarding diet effect on volatile compounds, especially aldehydes. Aldehydes have been identified every bit a major contributor to the volatile fraction of red meat, which occur due to lipid oxidation (Larick and Turner, 1990; Mottram et al., 1998). Descalzo et al. (2005) found concentrate-fed animals were more likely to have a higher concentration of aldehydes present in the meat, whereas Raes et al. (2003) institute pasture-fed animals had increased aldehydes. The volatiles observed in this report could be detrimental to flavor, causing grass-finished beef to have a more pronounced grassy flavor and therefore reduced palatability compared with grain-finished meat (Elmore et al., 2004; Killinger et al., 2004; Calkins and Hodgen, 2007). However, these data from raw beef may not reflect flavour development throughout cooking. A consumer panel reported past Chail et al. (2016) found USUGrain LT to have more preferable flavor compared to the LT of USUBFT or USUGrass. A follow-upwardly panel by Chail et al. (2017) found a trend toward an interaction among the diet treatments studied here (grass, legume, and grain finishing) and GM and TB muscles (P = 0.07), wherein consumers gave lower scores to grass- and BFT-finished TB compared with GM. Muscle variation has also been observed for volatile compounds associated with the Maillard reaction and flavour liking in cooked beef samples (Legako et al., 2015; Chase et al., 2016), corroborating our findings. However, the extent to which the backdrop of each muscle blazon would affect volatile compounds related to lipid oxidation is still unknown.

Of further interest, during storage a select number of volatile compounds changed in concentration over time. Among these, hexanal, a common indicator of lipid oxidation, peaked in concentration at day 3 and then declined. This nonlinear modify in concentration is in disagreement with lipid oxidation assessed by TBARS. Nevertheless, Shahidi and Pegg (1994) suggest that hexanal concentrations may peak at effectually 5 d of display earlier hexanal is degraded into smaller lipid oxidation byproducts. Unlike hexanal, the lipid oxidation product 2-heptanone increased with twenty-four hours of display. This finding aligns more than closely with the TBARS values of this study. This result may signal that volatile compounds other than hexanal, may be better utilized every bit indicators of lipid oxidation. Furthermore, iii-hydroxy-2-butanone, commonly known to originate from the breakdown of sugars during the Maillard reaction, increased with brandish duration. Every bit these steaks were non cooked, this finding may be an indicator of microbial contributions to the volatile profile of raw beef. Previously, bacterial growth was determined to promote the product of iii-hydroxy-2-butanone by the catabolism of carbohydrates (Joffraud et al., 2001).

CONCLUSIONS

In determination, the current investigation finds finishing diet can impact colour and oxidative stability of beef that varies across muscle types. Grass-finished produced a darker color than grain- and birdsfoot trefoil-finished beef, although less discoloration and lipid oxidation was observed within this diet. These findings may be in agreement with other studies wherein forage (grass or legume) diets produced beefiness that has a higher endogenous antioxidant capacity that would counteract oxidation throughout retail brandish; however, this antioxidative chapters was not directly measured in this study. Additionally, the degree of discoloration and oxidation were each musculus dependent.

Footnotes

This project was supported by the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, Utah Land Academy, and canonical equally periodical newspaper number 9058.

LITERATURE CITED

• AMSA 2012. Meat color measurement guidelines. American Meat Science Association, Champaign, IL. [Google Scholar]
• Bidner T. D., Schupp A. R., Montgomery R. E., and Carpenter J. C. Jr. 1981. Acceptability of beef finished on all-forage, forage-plus-grain or high energy diets. J. Anim. Sci. 53:1181–1187. [Google Scholar]
• Buege J. A., and Aust S. D.. 1978. Microsomal lipid peroxidation. Methods Enzymol. 52:302–310. doi:10.1016/S0076-6879(78)52032–6 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Calkins C. R., and Hodgen J. M.. 2007. A fresh look at meat season. Meat Sci. 77:63–fourscore. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2007.04.016 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Chail A., Legako J. F., Pitcher L. R., Griggs T. C., Ward R. Due east., Martini S., and MacAdam J. Due west.. 2016. Legume finishing provides beef with positive human being dietary fatty acid ratios and consumer preference comparable with grain-finished beefiness. J. Anim. Sci. 94:2184–2197. doi:10.2527/jas.2015-0241 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Chail A., Legako J. F., Bullpen 50. R., Ward R. E., Martini Southward., and MacAdam J. W.. 2017. Consumer sensory evaluation and chemical composition of beef gluteus medius and triceps brachii steaks from cattle finished on forage or concentrate diets. J. Anim. Sci. 95:1553–1564. doi:10.2527/jas.2016.1150 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Descalzo A. Yard., Insani Eastward. M., Biolatto A., Sancho A. M., García P. T., Pensel Northward. A., and Josifovich J. A.. 2005. Influence of pasture or grain-based diets supplemented with vitamin E on antioxidant/oxidative balance of argentine beefiness. Meat Sci. 70:35–44. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.11.018 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Descalzo A. M., Rossetti L., Grigioni G., Irurueta M., Sancho A. Yard., Carrete J., and Pensel Northward. A.. 2007. Antioxidant status and odour profile in fresh beef from pasture or grain-fed cattle. Meat Sci. 75:299–307. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.07.015 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Elmore J. S., Warren H. E., Mottram D. S., Scollan N. D., Enser Chiliad., Richardson R. I., and Woods J. D.. 2004. A comparison of the olfactory property volatiles and fatty acid compositions of grilled beefiness muscle from Aberdeen Angus and Holstein-Friesian steers fed diets based on silage or concentrates. Meat Sci. 68:27–33. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.01.010 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Faustman C., Sun Q., Mancini R., and Suman S. P.. 2010. Myoglobin and lipid oxidation interactions: mechanistic bases and control. Meat Sci. 86:86–94. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.04.025 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• French P., Stanton C., Lawless F., O'Riordan E. 1000., Monahan F. J., Caffrey P. J., and Moloney A. P.. 2000. Fatty acid composition, including conjugated linoleic acrid, of intramuscular fatty from steers offered grazed grass, grass silage, or concentrate-based diets. J. Anim. Sci. 78:2849–2855. doi:10.2527/2000.78112849x [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Greene B. Eastward., and Price L. G.. 1975. Oxidation-induced color and flavour changes in meat. J. Agric. Food Chem. 23:164–167. doi:10.1021/jf60198a014 [Google Scholar]
• Holman B. W. B., van de Ven R. J., Mao Y., Coombs C. E. O., and Hopkins D. Fifty.. 2017. Using instrumental (CIE and reflectance) measurements to predict consumers' acceptance of beef colour. Meat Sci. 127:57–62. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.01.005 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Hunt M. R., Legako J. F., Dinh T. T., Garmyn A. J., O'Quinn T. G., Corbin C. H., Rathmann R. J., Brooks J. C., and Miller Chiliad. F.. 2016. Assessment of volatile compounds, neutral and polar lipid fatty acids of four beef muscles from USDA selection and select graded carcasses and their relationships with consumer palatability scores and intramuscular fat content. Meat Sci. 116:91–101. doi:ten.1016/j.meatsci.2016.02.010 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Jeremiah L., and Gibson L.. 2001. The influence of storage temperature and storage fourth dimension on color stability, retail properties and case-life of retail-prepare beef. Food Res. Int. 34:815–826. doi:10.1016/S0963-9969(01)00104-1 [Google Scholar]
• Joffraud J. J., Leroi F., Roy C., and Berdagué J. 50.. 2001. Characterisation of volatile compounds produced by bacteria isolated from the spoilage flora of cold-smoked salmon. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 66:175–184. doi:10.1016/S0168-1605(00)00532-8 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Killinger G. 1000., Calkins C. R., Umberger W. J., Feuz D. K., and Eskridge Thou. M.. 2004. A comparing of consumer sensory acceptance and value of domestic beef steaks and steaks from a branded, argentine beef program. J. Anim. Sci. 82:3302–3307. doi:10.2527/2004.82113302x [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Lanari M. C., Schaefer D. Grand., Liu Q., and Cassens R. G.. 1996. Kinetics of pigments in beefiness from steers supplemented with vitamin Due east. J. Food Sci. 61:884–889. doi:10.1111/j.1365–2621.1996.tb10895.x [Google Scholar]
• Larick D. 1000., and Turner B. E.. 1990. Headspace volatiles and sensory characteristics of ground beef from forage- and grain-fed heifers. J. Food Sci. 54:649–654. doi:10.1111/j.1365–2621.1990.tb05198.ten [Google Scholar]
• Legako J. F., Brooks J. C., O'Quinn T. K., Hagan T. D., Polkinghorne R., Farmer L. J., and Miller M. F.. 2015. Consumer palatability scores and volatile beef season compounds of five USDA quality grades and 4 muscles. Meat Sci. 100:291–300. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.x.026 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Luque L. D., Johnson B. J., Martin J. N., Miller G. F., Hodgen J. M., Hutcheson J. P., Nichols W. T., Streeter M. N., Yates D. A., Allen D. M.,. et al. 2011. Zilpaterol hydrochloride supplementation has no event on the shelf life of ground beefiness. J. Anim. Sci. 89:817–825. doi:x.2527/jas.2010-3317 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Mancini R. A., and Hunt M. C.. 2005. Current inquiry in meat color. Meat Sci. 71:100–121. doi:ten.1016/j.meatsci.2005.03.003 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Martin J. N., Brooks J. C., Thompson Fifty. D., Savell J. Due west., Harris Thousand. B., May 50. L., Haneklaus A. N., Schultz J. L., Belk K. E., Engle T.,. et al. 2013. Food database improvement project: the influence of U.Due south.D.A. quality and yield form on the separable components and proximate composition of raw and cooked retail cuts from the beef rib and plate. Meat Sci. 95:486–494. doi:ten.1016/j.meatsci.2013.05.031 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• McCluskey J. J., Wahl T. I., Li Q., and Wandschneider P. R.. 2005. U.Due south. grass-fed beef: marketing wellness benefits. J. Food Distribution Res. 36:1–viii. [Google Scholar]
• Mottram D. S. 1998. Flavour formation in meat and meat products: a review. Nutrient Chem. 62:415–424. [Google Scholar]
• North American Meat Processors (NAMP) Clan 2010. The meat buyer's guide. 6th ed North American Processors Association, Reston VA. [Google Scholar]
• Raes 1000., Balcaen A., Dirinck P., De Winne A., Claeys E., Demeyer D., and De Smet Due south.. 2003. Meat quality, fat acid limerick and flavour analysis in Belgian retail beef. Meat Sci. 65:1237–1246. doi:10.1016/S0309-1740(03)00031-7 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Realini C. E., Duckett S. K., Brito Yard. Westward., Dalla Rizza M., and De Mattos D.. 2004. Effect of pasture vs. concentrate feeding with or without antioxidants on carcass characteristics, fat acid composition, and quality of Uruguayan beef. Meat Sci. 66:567–577. doi:ten.1016/S0309-1740(03)00160-8 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Schroeder J. Westward., Cramer D. A., Bowling R. A., and Melt C. W.. 1980. Palatability, shelflife and chemical differences between forage- and grain-finished beef. J. Anim. Sci. 50:852–859. [Google Scholar]
• Shahidi F., and Pegg R. B.. 1994. Hexanal as an indicator of meat flavor deterioration. J. Food Lipids 1:177–186. doi:10.1111/j.1745–4522.1994.tb00245.x [Google Scholar]
• Wood J. D., Enser M., Fisher A. V., Nute G. R., Sheard P. R., Richardson R. I., Hughes South. I., and Whittington F. One thousand.. 2008. Fat deposition, fatty acid limerick and meat quality: a review. Meat Sci. 78:343–358. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2007.07.019 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Wood J. D., Nute Thou. R., Richardson R. I., Whittington F. M., Southwood O., Plastow G., Mansbridge R., da Costa North., and Chang K. C.. 2004. Effects of breed, diet and muscle on fat deposition and eating quality in pigs. Meat Sci. 67:651–667. doi:10.1016/j. meatsci.2004.01.007 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Wu C., Duckett S. K., Neel J. P., Fontenot J. P., and Clapham W. M.. 2008. Influence of finishing systems on hydrophilic and lipophilic oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC) in beef. Meat Sci. lxxx:662–667. doi:x.1016/j.meatsci.2008.03.003 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

---

Articles from Journal of Animal Science are provided here courtesy of Oxford Academy Press

---

fordcluat1994.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6095342/

Share this post