Elsevier

Meat Science

Volume 64, Issue 4, August 2003, Pages 333-339
Meat Science

Relationship of texture profile analysis and Warner-Bratzler shear force with sensory characteristics of beef rib steaks

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(02)00110-9Get rights and content

Abstract

Cyclical texture profile analysis (TPA) parameters measured using a star-shaped probe with two cycles of 80% penetration and Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBS) were compared as predictors of objective tenderness and subjective sensory characteristics of rib steaks from 52 beef loins. The TPA parameters of hardness, cohesiveness and chewiness were negatively correlated (P<0.05) with trained panel sensory characteristics of initial tenderness (r=−0.64, −0.41, −0.62, respectively), amount of connective tissue (r=−0.57, −0.27, −0.55, respectively), overall tenderness (r=−0.68, −0.39, −0.64, respectively) and overall palatability (r=−0.56, −0.37, −0.53, respectively). These sensory characteristics were also negatively correlated (P<0.05) with WBS (r=−0.61, −0.49, −0.60, −0.56, respectively). Stepwise regression analysis generated prediction equations that included the TPA parameters of hardness and adhesiveness, which accounted for 47, 36, 51 and 38% of the variation in initial tenderness, amount of connective tissue, overall tenderness and overall palatability, respectively. Prediction equations using WBS accounted for 37, 24, 36 and 31% of the variation in initial tenderness, amount of connective tissue, overall tenderness and overall palatability, respectively. Hence, TPA explained more of the variation in subjective sensory tenderness of the rib steaks than WBS.

Introduction

Human perception of meat palatability is derived from a complex interaction of sensory and physical processes during chewing. Of the various subjective characteristics determining meat palatability, tenderness is the most important (Jeremiah, 1982).

Several objective methods of predicting meat tenderness have been developed, however these usually rely on measuring a single parameter and none fully imitate the complexity of the chewing motion (Bouton & Harris, 1972, Pearson, 1963, Szczesniak & Torgeson, 1965). Recognizing this limitation, the mechanical process of mastication has been simulated using texture profile analysis (TPA). This objective method measures the compression force of a probe and the related textural parameters of a test food during two cycles of deformation. The TPA of various foodstuffs including fruits, vegetables, bakery and meat products have been reported (Penfield & Campbell, 1990). The range in variation of subjective sensory characteristics of beef tenderness determined by sensory panels, explained by the objective textural parameters of TPA varies from 3 to 85% (Szczesniak, 1968). Rhodes, Jones, Chrystall, and Harries (1972) used stepwise regression to rank the relationship between various textural parameters of roast beef determined from the force-deformation curves of an instrumental compression device as compared to that of trained panelist ratings for tenderness and juiciness. All together the instrument textural parameters accounted for about 50 and 30% of the sensory-variability for tenderness and juiciness characteristics of warm roast beef, respectively.

Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBS) is an imprecise predictor of beef tenderness characteristics determined by trained panelists (Shackelford et al., 1995, Shackelford et al., 1997). Correlations of WBS with sensory assessment of beef tenderness have been variable, ranging from −0.60 to −0.85 (Pearson, 1963) and −0.32 to −0.94 (Szczesniak, 1968). In spite of the 10–89% range of variation reported in the aforementioned studies, mean values of −0.75 (Pearson, 1963) and −0.77 (Shackelford, Wheeler, & Koohmaraie, 1999) suggest that WBS explains a substantial proportion of variation in sensory assessment of beef tenderness. Consequently, WBS has become the most common objective method for evaluating beef tenderness (Boleman et al., 1997, Miller et al., 1995).

Previous reports indicate TPA and WBS have similar capabilities to predict sensory assessment of tenderness and subjective characteristics of beef, however there is limited information comparing these two instrumental methods under similar test conditions. Therefore, the present study was undertaken to correlate TPA parameters obtained using a star-shaped compression probe and WBS with trained-panel ratings of the sensory characteristics of cooked rib steaks.

Section snippets

Preparation of rib steaks

Three adjacent 25 mm steaks were cut from the left longissimus thoracis (LT) of 52 Canada 1 yield grade beef carcasses (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 1992). The steaks were collected 24 h post-mortem from the carcasses of steers that had been slaughtered and dressed in the normal commercial manner at the Lacombe Research Centre abattoir in accordance with the principals and guidelines established by the Canadian Council on Animal Care (1993). Steaks were vacuum-packaged, placed in a cooler

Textural and sensory characteristics of rib steaks

Of all the variables measured, WBS had the highest coefficient of variation (27.5%). For TPA parameters, adhesiveness (26.3%) and chewiness (20.7%) had the highest coefficient of variation while springiness (4.3%) and cohesiveness (7.3%) had the lowest coefficient of variation (Table 1). For subjective sensory characteristics the coefficient of variation ranged from 7.0% for flavour intensity to 19.0% for initial tenderness.

In addition to the TPA parameters reported in Table 1, further

Discussion

Consistent measurement of tenderness and other qualities of beef, traditionally determined by sensory panel evaluation, is complicated by the interaction of physical and sensory processes during mastication (Jeremiah, 1982). Sensory evaluations are labour intensive, time consuming and expensive. Given the current emphasis in the retail industry on providing beef products of consistent quality to consumers, a strong impetus exists to develop objective non-invasive instrumental methods, which

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by the Beef Industry Development Fund of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association and the Matching Investment Initiative Fund of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. The authors appreciate the assistance of Ivy Larsen and Fran Costello with laboratory analyses.

References (20)

  • J.A.M Janz et al.

    The influence of elevated temperature conditioning on bison (Bison bison bison) meat quality

    Meat Science

    (2000)
  • A.S Szczesniak et al.

    Methods of meat texture measurement viewed from the background of factors affecting tenderness

  • Livestock and poultry carcass grading regulations

    (1992)
  • Research guidelines for cookery, sensory evaluation and instrumental tenderness measurements of fresh meat

    (1995)
  • S.J Boleman et al.

    Consumer evaluation of beef of known categories of tenderness

    Journal of Animal Science

    (1997)
  • M.C Bourne

    Texture profile analysis

    Food Technology

    (1978)
  • P.E Bouton et al.

    A comparison of some objective methods used to assess meat tenderness

    Journal of Food Science

    (1972)
  • Guide to the care and use of experimental animals, vol. 1

    (1993)
  • L.E Jeremiah

    A review of factors influencing consumption, selection and acceptability of meat purchases

    Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics

    (1982)
  • L.E Jeremiah et al.

    The effects of grade, gender and postmortem treatment on beef. II. Cooking properties and palatability attributes

    Canadian Journal of Animal Science

    (1996)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (0)

View full text