Review: Beef-eating quality: a European journey

Abstract

This paper reviews recent research into predicting the eating qualities of beef. A range of instrumental and grading approaches have been discussed, highlighting implications for the European beef industry. Studies incorporating a number of instrumental and spectroscopic techniques illustrate the potential for online systems to non-destructively measure muscle pH, colour, fat and moisture content of beef with R 2 (coefficient of determination) values >0.90. Direct predictions of eating quality (tenderness, flavour, juiciness) and fatty acid content using these methods are also discussed though success is greatly variable. R 2 values for instrumental measures of tenderness have been quoted as high as 0.85 though R 2 values for sensory tenderness values can be as low as 0.01. Discriminant analysis models can improve prediction of variables such as pH and shear force, correctly classifying beef samples into categorical groups with >90% accuracy. Prediction of beef flavour continues to challenge researchers and the industry alike, with R 2 values rarely quoted above 0.50, regardless of instrumental or statistical analysis used. Beef grading systems such as EUROP and United States Department of Agriculture systems provide carcase classification and some indication of yield. Other systems attempt to classify the whole carcase according to expected eating quality. These are being supplemented by schemes such as Meat Standards Australia (MSA), based on consumer satisfaction for individual cuts. In Australia, MSA has grown steadily since its inception generating a 10% premium for the beef industry in 2015-16 of $187 million. There is evidence that European consumers would respond to an eating quality guarantee provided it is simple and independently controlled. A European beef quality assurance system might encompass environmental and nutritional measures as well as eating quality and would need to be profitable, simple, effective and sufficiently flexible to allow companies to develop their own brands.

Non-Destructive Imaging and Spectroscopic Techniques for Assessment of Carcass and Meat Quality in Sheep and Goats: A Review

“…Generally, colour is used as an indicator of meat freshness, and an attractive and stable colour in meat is what the consumer values [ 86 ]. In general, HSI predicts meat colour very well [ 87 ]. Several studies used HSI as a technique for measuring meat colour, and it was found that HSI and multivariable models have good capacity to predict the colour component L* (R 2 from 0.77 to 0.97).…”

Predicting the Quality of Meat: Myth or Reality?

“…This is particularly important for an expensive product such as beef. A European beef quality assurance system similar to MSA would need to be simple, effective, and sufficiently flexible to allow companies to develop their own brands [112]. Furthermore, it was proposed to consider in the European model both the gender (female, castrated male, or entire male) and breed type (dairy or meat breed), because recent work has shown that their effects on the sensory quality of beef are not fully explained by animal age or carcass characteristics (weight, fatness, etc.).…”

Overcoming nature’s paradox in skeletal muscle to optimise animal production

“…However, different countries around the world have enacted total bans or restricted the use of specific growthpromoting/growth-partitioning drugs because of their potential toxicity and carcinogenic properties (Leporati et al 2014). Other countries still allow their use in animal production, reflecting changes in consumer preferences and international politics (Higgins 2004;Stephany 2010;Bonny et al 2018;Farmer and Farrell 2018).…”