MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013660498 · doi:10.22175/rmc2017.111

Effect of Residual Feed Intake Status, Breed and Post Mortem Aging on Consumer Perception of and Preference for Beef Ribeye Steaks

2017· article· en· W3013660498 on OpenAlexaff
Zhiqiang Jiu, Wendy V. Wismer, M. Juárez, Ha Nguyen, Carolyn Fitzsimmons, Chengdao Li, Heather L. Bruce

Bibliographic record

VenueMeat and Muscle Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTendernessBreedMathematicsFlavorAnalysis of varianceFactorial experimentFood scienceSensory analysisSensory systemAnimal scienceBiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ObjectivesThe effect of selection for efficient animals using residual feed intake (RFI) on meat sensory quality and consumer preference has had limited study. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of breed, RFI and aging on consumer sensory preference and attributes perception of beef rib-eye steaks.Materials and MethodsThirty-six steers were used in a 3 breed (Angus, Charolais, and Kinsella Composite) × 2 RFI level (high and low) factorial design experiment. Two aging times (4 and 18 d) were also included in the experiment. Perceived and ideal tenderness, juiciness, flavor intensity and overall acceptance of ribeye steaks were evaluated by 24 consumers prescreened to ensure that they regularly consumed high-quality steaks. Analysis of variance (ANOVA), Generalized Procrustes Analysis (GPA) and preference mapping were used to analyze consumer sensory data.ResultsResults from the ANOVA showed that consumers found no significant effect of any main factor on beef flavor intensity (P > 0.05). Breed significantly affected juiciness (P = 0.0070) and overall acceptance of steaks (P = 0.0149), with steaks from Angus and Charolais receiving similar juiciness and acceptance ratings. Steaks aged 18 d were slightly juicier (P = 0.0832) and more acceptable (P = 0.0075) than steaks aged 4 d. No RFI effect was observed for any sensory attribute and acceptance of steaks (P > 0.05). The comparison between consumers’ ideal ribeye steaks and assessed samples found that sensory attributes of steaks from some treatments were different from consumers’ ideal products (P < 0.05). About 80% of the total variation was explained by the first 2 dimensions of the GPA consensus configuration. GPA differentiated meat clearly by aging, with samples aged for 18 d and ideal ribeye steaks characterized as juicier, more tender and as having more intense beef flavor than samples aged for 4 d. Following GPA analysis, preference mapping was performed to correlate sensory attribute perception and consumer preference. Combined with the contour plot, results of preference mapping showed that steaks from carcasses of Angus and Kinsella Composite steers with high RFI received more appreciation from consumers than steaks from carcasses of steers with low RFI. This result suggested a negative influence of selection for efficient animals using RFI on consumer preference of ribeye steaks in some breeds.ConclusionTherefore, RFI can be a beneficial tool in selecting efficient animals because of its limited influence on meat sensory quality, but its possible adverse influence on consumer preference should be monitored during the selection process.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeat and Muscle BiologySame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207