Comparison of organoleptic quality and composition of beef from suckler bulls from different production systems

Abstract

Bull beef production is traditionally based on high concentrate rations fed indoors. Inclusion of grazed grass, which is generally a cheaper feed, would decrease the cost of bull beef production, but may affect beef quality. Accordingly, the organoleptic quality and composition of beef from continental-sired suckler bulls (n=126) assigned to either ad libitum concentrates to slaughter (C), grass silage (GS) ad libitum for 120 days followed by C (GSC) or GS followed by 100 days at pasture and then C (GSPC) and slaughtered at target carcass weights (CW) of 360, 410 or 460 kg was examined. Tenderness, flavour liking and overall liking were lower (P<0.05) for GSPC than for C and GSC. Intramuscular fat content and soluble collagen proportion were lower (P<0.05) for GSPC than GSC which was lower (P<0.05) than C. Soluble collagen proportion was lower (P<0.05) for 460 kg than 410 kg CW, which was lower (P<0.05) than 360 kg CW. Inclusion of a grazing period decreased the ratings of tenderness, flavour liking and overall liking, but age of the bulls at slaughter had no clear influence on sensory characteristics.

Fatty acid, volatile and sensory characteristics of beef as affected by grass silage or pasture in the bovine diet

“…Sensory analysis was carried out using a 10-person trained taste panel, using panellists selected for their sensory acuity. The LT samples were thawed overnight at 4°C, cut into 20 mm thick steaks and grilled on pre-coded foil-lined grill pans under preheated, domestic low level grills, turning every 3 min until the desired centre temperature of 74°C (measured by a thermocouple probe at the geometrical centre of the sample) was reached; a detailed procedure is given in Mezgebo et al (2017).…”

Biochemical and organoleptic characteristics of muscle from early and late maturing bulls in different production systems

“…Post slaughter, carcasses were weighed and graded for conformation according to the 95 EU Beef Carcass Classification Scheme as described in Mezgebo et al (2016). At 1 h 96 post-slaughter, a sample (ca.…”

“…However, producing 51 beef from suckler bulls, which usually involves provision of a high concentrate ration for 52 a prolonged period, is usually less profitable because of the higher cost of concentrates 53 compared to grass silage or grazed grass diets (Finneran et al, 2011). Incorporating a 54 grazing period prior to finishing on a concentrate diet has been shown to reduce the 55 production costs of LM suckler bulls (O'Riordan et al, 2011) with little impact on eating 56 quality of the beef (Mezgebo et al, 2016). 57…”

“…However, while it is economically viable to incorporate a grazing period in the LM 58 suckler bull production system (PS), the bulls may not meet the market requirements in 59 terms of adequate carcass fat cover at a particular carcass weight (O'Riordan et al, 60 (Mezgebo et al, 2016). However, to our knowledge, little is known about the effect of 68 incorporating a grazing period in EM suckler bull PS on the quality of the beef.…”

Compositional, organoleptic, metabolic enzyme activity and fibre characteristics of muscle from bulls with different growth paths to a common carcass weight

“…O'Riordan et al (2012) described a modified sytem to improve the economics of bull beef production which incorporated a grass silage-based indoor winter feeding period followed by a grazing period prior to finishing indoors on a high concentrate ration. Mezgebo et al (2016) reported that compared to the traditional system, the modified grass-based system led to a decrease in intramuscular fat concentration and collagen solubility associated with a decrease in tenderness, flavour liking and overall liking of the beef. A feature of the modified grassbased bull production system is the exploitation of compensatory growth (Hornick et al 2000) at pasture subsequent to the winter feeding phase.…”