Effects of a unique application of electrical stimulation on tenderness, color, and quality attributes of the beef longissimus muscle.

Abstract

This study evaluated effects of four uniquely applied beef carcass electrical stimulation (ES) treatments on USDA grade factors, muscle color, subprimal purge loss, cooked steak weight loss, and cooked steak tenderness. One side of each (n = 284) beef carcass was subjected to ES using one of four treatments (medium voltage for medium duration, MVMD; medium voltage for long duration, MVLD; high voltage for medium duration, HVMD; or high voltage for long duration, HVLD) and was compared to its corresponding non-ES control side. Electrical stimulation of beef sides was applied focusing on middle meats while preventing severe contraction of the round and chuck. From matched (ES and control) sides of 120 carcasses (10 each of Select, low Choice, and upper two-thirds of Choice in each of the four ES treatments), longissimus steaks (2.5 cm thick) were cooked and used for Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBS) analysis. Mean marbling scores (n = 284) for stimulated sides did not differ (P = .923) from those for control sides within ES treatment classes. Mean values for CIE L*, a*, and b* of lean color (n = 284) were higher (P < .05) for MVMD, MVLD, HVMD, and HVLD treated sides than for the respective control sides. When WBS values for steaks were adjusted to an equal visual degree of doneness, WBS values (n = 120) were lower (P < .05) for ES treated sides than for control sides for all four types of ES application treatments. Treatment responses were not influenced by USDA Quality Grade group. For those carcasses for which the control sides had WBS values greater than 4.5 kg, matching sides treated with MVMD, MVLD, HVMD, or HVLD had WBS values less than 4.5 kg 50, 88, 60, and 75% of the time, respectively. Mean cooked steak weight loss (n = 120), adjusted to an equal visual degree of doneness, and mean purge loss (n = 24) did not differ with ES treatment.

Influence of high pre-rigor temperature and fast pH fall on muscle proteins and meat quality: a review

“…In fact, a transient colour improvement (more bright red) due to the PSE-like condition in beef has been reported by many researchers (Ledward 1985;Renerre 1990;Young et al 1999;Roeber et al 2000;Sammel et al 2002), which could be beneficial at times for carcass grading (Roeber et al 2000). However, decreased colour stability due to greater accumulation of metmyoglobin and rapid discoloration of muscle submitted to the rapid pH decline/high temperature condition has been also reported (Kim et al 2010;Ledward 1985;Sammel et al 2002).…”

“…No ageing effect on tenderness for 7 days storage Lee and Ashmore 1985 Excised sternomandibularis Pre-rigor excised muscle, +/À wrapped (or restrained) holding for 24 h at 15 C or for 7 h at 37 C Tenderness: 37 C, more tender meat than rigor at 15 C; Colour: 37 C, paler colour; Odour: sweaty smell observed Locker and Daines 1975 Excised longissimus Pre-rigor muscle holding for 2 h at 27À40 C Tenderness: most tender (sensory) if temp. at 2 h was 40 C Lochner et al 1980 Carcass longissimus Carcass +/ÀES Tenderness: ES lower WHC than non-ES counterpart; Colour: ES higher L*, a*, and b* than non-ES counterpart Roeber et al 2000 Excised longissimus +/ÀES, +/Àwrapped and 15/35 C pre-rigor muscle holding until rigor mortis Tenderness: 35 C, higher WBSF (tougher), but +ES and/or +wrapping offset negative impact of 35 C on meat tenderness; WHC: no impact Rosenvold et al 2008 Carcass longissimus Carcass, +/ÀES, 20 C Hz (no physical damage) and 37 C v. 2 C Tenderness: +ES higher toughness (sensory) and reduced juiciness (sensory), 1 day ageing Takahashi et al 1984 Excised longissimus Post-rigor excised muscle holding at 15 v. 37 C for 3h…”

Efficacy of Carcass Electrical Stimulation in Meat Quality Enhancement: A Review

“…In cattle, Nazli et al (2010) reported that when high voltage (500 to 800 V) electrical stimulation was applied to bovine carcasses, there was a rapid pH decrease coupled with brighter meat color compared to beef carcasses that were not stimulated. Roeber et al (2000) reported positive influence of ES on beef color, which resulted from decreased time for carcass ripening. The works of Sleper et al (1983) and Martin et al (1983) also showed improvements in colour of bovine muscles when subjected to ES.…”

“…Nevertheless, carcasses stimulated with 550 V had more tender, brightly colored, better flavored and leaner meat than those stimulated with 150 V. It was concluded that HVES (550 V) and short time (1 min) is ideal for improvement of meat palatability. The report of Roeber et al (2000) revealed that duration and voltage intensity of ES affected beef color and tenderness. The right halves of beef carcasses were stimulated while the left halves were non-stimulated.…”

Genome‐wide association analysis for quantitative trait loci influencing Warner–Bratzler shear force in five taurine cattle breeds

“…; Roeber et al . ; Shook et al . ) because consumers consider tenderness to be the single most important component of meat quality and will substitute protein sources motivated by their dissatisfaction from the purchase of a tough cut (Miller et al .…”