83 Eating and Nutritional Quality of Meats from Water Buffalo Versus Cattle. a Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Worldwide, water buffalo [Bubalis bubalis (Buffalo)] is commonly raised as a dual-purpose animal (intentionally for dairy production because their meat quality has been generally perceived as poor). Breeding for milk production, hunting, exhibition, or novelty ownership has been the primary use of Buffalo in United States and Canada. A scientific review was conducted to examine the effect of species (Buffalo vs. cattle) on meat sensory and nutritional quality. Compilation of this type of comparative studies is a necessary exercise to inform all segments of the meat value chain, particularly, final consumers. According to a bibliometric analysis it can be estimated that in the last twenty years the Web of Science database has recorded over 500 publications about Buffalo breeding. Unfortunately, the vast majority of studies comparing quality- or chemical-related trails between these bovid species did not plan adequately in the experimental design to raise or fatten them under the same environmental conditions and (or) made comparisons at a given (fair) endpoint [e.g.., same average age or body weight). Furthermore, most literature reviews on the topic made inferences by making use of observational studies and (or) tabulated findings of different researchers that did not include both species in the same experiment or did not use exclusion criteria to minimize the bias of the interspecific alleged contrasts. This presentation will discuss results from selected controlled experiments reporting quality and nutrient composition of meats from cattle vs. Buffalo. Very few controlled studies could be retrieved on comparison of meat quality (n = 13) and nutrient composition (n = 8) between Buffalo versus indicine (Bos indicus) or European (Bos taurus) cattle. Results from four out of thirteen comparative studies reporting sensory and (or) textural quality traits favored beef; however, three of these experiments only considered textural variables; one of them only included 16 animals older than 50 months of age whereas in the second companion study one half of the experimental group (n = 8) consisted on animals aged 48 to 54 months. According to the survey on proximal/nutrient composition there are minor differences between meats from both species. The results presented herein reveal the potential of young buffaloes to produce comparable or higher-quality meat than cattle counterparts, even under free-range conditions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".