2007
DOI: 10.1590/s1516-89132007000400018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Chemical basis for beef charqui meat texture

Abstract: This work evaluated the relationship of charqui meat (CHM) chemical composition with the tenderness throughout its production. CHM was prepared from beef

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
11
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
4
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the latter samples, the result was 113 (±2) N for the control, whereas the JB-CAR (92±2N) was approximately 20% more tender and, in fact, it was the most tender among all the samples tested in this study. These results confirmed the previous study by Youssef et al (2007) that showed that the texture in intermediate moisture meat products was mostly influenced by the moisture and myofibrils proteins contents in comparison to the collagen concentration and its crosslinks.…”
Section: Jb-car Texture Measurementsupporting
confidence: 92%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…For the latter samples, the result was 113 (±2) N for the control, whereas the JB-CAR (92±2N) was approximately 20% more tender and, in fact, it was the most tender among all the samples tested in this study. These results confirmed the previous study by Youssef et al (2007) that showed that the texture in intermediate moisture meat products was mostly influenced by the moisture and myofibrils proteins contents in comparison to the collagen concentration and its crosslinks.…”
Section: Jb-car Texture Measurementsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Similar results were observed previously for the JB without CAR (Youssef et al 2007;Torres et al 1994). In charqui meat, the consequence of equilibrium established among the three components, salt:protein:water, was the final constant value of a w of approximately 0.75, regardless of whether more salting or processing time was added (Shimokomaki et al 1998).…”
Section: Monitoring Water Activity Moisture and Ash Values Throughosupporting
confidence: 88%
See 3 more Smart Citations