Can we improve the nutritional quality of meat?

Abstract

The nutritional value of meat is an increasingly important factor influencing consumer preferences for poultry, red meat and processed meat products. Intramuscular fat content and composition, in addition to high quality protein, trace minerals and vitamins are important determinants of nutritional value. Fat content of meat at retail has decreased substantially over the past 40 years through advances in animal genetics, nutrition and management and changes in processing techniques. Evidence of the association between diet and the incidence of human non-communicable diseases has driven an interest in developing production systems for lowering total SFA and trans fatty acid (TFA) content and enrichment of n-3 PUFA concentrations in meat and meat products. Typically, poultry and pork has a lower fat content, containing higher PUFA and lower TFA concentrations than lamb or beef. Animal genetics, nutrition and maturity, coupled with their rumen microbiome, are the main factors influencing tissue lipid content and relative proportions of SFA, MUFA and PUFA. Altering the fatty acid (FA) profile of lamb and beef is determined to a large extent by extensive plant and microbial lipolysis and subsequent microbial biohydrogenation of dietary lipid in the rumen, and one of the major reasons explaining the differences in lipid composition of meat from monogastrics and ruminants. Nutritional strategies can be used to align the fat content and FA composition of poultry, pork, lamb and beef with Public Health Guidelines for lowering the social and economic burden of chronic disease.

Phenotypic Variation and Relationships between Fatty Acid Concentrations and Feed Value of Perennial Ryegrass Genotypes from a Breeding Population

“…Overall mean concentration for these individual FAs was: 4.00, 0.397, 0.380, 0.591, 3.57 and 13.3 g kg −1 DM, respectively. Population averages differed for concentrations of C16:1∆ t3 (p < 0.001) and C18:3∆ c9, 12,15 (p = 0.023), with the average for the 'experimental' genotypes from the breeding population being 22.5% and 12.2% lower in these FAs, respectively, compared to the mapping population average. Differences for C16:0, C18:2∆ c9, 12 and TFA were approaching significance (p < 0.10) and no difference was observed for C18:0 (p = 0.497) and C18:1∆ c9 (p = 0.227).…”

“…Population averages differed for concentrations of C16:1∆ t3 (p < 0.001) and C18:3∆ c9, 12,15 (p = 0.023), with the average for the 'experimental' genotypes from the breeding population being 22.5% and 12.2% lower in these FAs, respectively, compared to the mapping population average. Differences for C16:0, C18:2∆ c9, 12 and TFA were approaching significance (p < 0.10) and no difference was observed for C18:0 (p = 0.497) and C18:1∆ c9 (p = 0.227). Within the mapping population, the 'benchmark' genotypes differed for C16:0 (p = 0.034), C18:0 (p < 0.001), C18:3∆ c9, 12,15 (p = 0.012) and TFA (p = 0.025) concentration with respective differences of: 20.9%, 38.4%, 42.7% and 31.3% observed between the lowest and highest concentration values.…”

“…Fatty acid results are presented in Table 2. Mean TFA concentration was 23.8 g kg −1 DM, ranging from 16.8 to 29.0 g kg −1 DM; between 89% and 95% of which was comprised of six individual FAs, namely palmitic acid (C16:0), trans-3-hexadecenoic acid (C16:1∆ t3 ), stearic acid (C18:0), oleic acid (C18:1∆ c9 ), linoleic acid (C18:2∆ c9,12 ) and α-linolenic acid (C18:3∆ c9, 12,15 ). Overall mean concentration for these individual FAs was: 4.00, 0.397, 0.380, 0.591, 3.57 and 13.3 g kg −1 DM, respectively.…”

Peer Review #3 of "The extent to which genetics and lean grade affect fatty acid profiles and volatile compounds in organic pork (v0.1)"

“…While most SFA and MUFA can be efficiently synthesized in vivo, the lack of differences in PUFAs C18:2n-6 and C18:3n-3 proportions, which may be attributed to dietary factors (Calkins and Hodgen, 2007;Juárez et al, 2017), proves that both genetic types adapted similarly to the feed composition supply. Indeed, the SFA content of meat is positively correlated with carcass fatness (Fiego et al, 2005;Latorre et al, 2009a), which contributes to decrease the MUFA/SFA ratio and reduces the nutritional quality of pork (Scollan et al, 2017). Nevertheless, the lean content hardly affected the fatty acid groups either, probably because the lowest lean class was not excessively fatty, and due to their similar levels of intramuscular fat.…”

Study on the Profile of Fatty Acids of Broiler Chicken Raised and Slaughtered in Industrial System

“…an ever evolving and industrialized world, consumer health [1] and quality of ending meat [2,3] and meat products [4,5] are the two highlighted issues debated from technological point of view in all stages of food chain, from farm to table, food production being in a continuous transition [6]. With vertically integrated raising, slaughtering and processing technologies, the poultry meat sector is the most widespread from the processing and consumer point of view [7,8], while the bird's welfare in the industrial exploitation is a commune active management practice for ensuring a positive image among the final consumers [9].…”