Meat eating quality research update

Partly feedback on what SAC have been doing and to consider what SAC's research should be looking at.

35 attendees including SFMTA members Hamish Deans, Hugh Black and Jonathan Honeyman.

Various methods of measuring meat quality were explained. Live animals were measured by ultrasound to predict carcase and tissue conformation.

Instrumental texture tests involve using a Mirinz “bite” test that gives a measure.
A “Tenderstone” protype instrument has been funded by QMS to perform this “bite” test.

There are various different approaches to meat quality

• Technological quality
shelf life (lipid oxidation)
Colour (myogoblin oxidation)
Water holding capacity (pH values)

• Sensory quality (normally done by taste panel)
flavour
Juiciness
Tenderness

• Nutritional quality
Protein
Fatty acid profiles.

Near infrared spectroscopy measures Carbon Hydrogen brands in meat. These fatty acids, saturated and unsaturated have conflicting effects on nutrition.

Increases of Omega 3 and Omega 6 in polyunsaturated fatty acids reduce risk of cardiovascular heart disease and the risk of cancer.

X Ray Computed Tomography is
– non-invasive method that provides very accurate in vivo and post-mortem information on carcass composition in sheep and pigs.

CT scanning beef primal cuts
• Scanning of beef cattle is restricted by size of the scanner gantry. However, beef primal cuts are small enough to be scanned
• 1600 vacuum-packed primals were CT scanned.

Xray scanning does not destroy the product. In this research project the aim was to produce fast and accurate results. A CT image via spiral CT scan shows muscle, fat and bone similar to an x-ray image. Results can accurately predict the total carcase composition. This method of assessment is not suitable on the line in an abattoir but does provide an alternative assessment and a validation of other methods such as Video Image Analysis.

MEQ & cattle performance
• MEQ premiums may be part of the returns for future beef cattle

BUT:

• “Traditional” animal performance & carcass quality at a commercial farm level will still be important
– since they will remain an integral part of farmer returns & profit
– even within future payment regimes incorporating MEQ premiums
• Other “traditional” animal performance with an effect e.g. live weight gains, feed efficiency, cow performance

Conclusion:
• “Traditional” animal performance, carcass quality & carcass balance measures MUST not be forgotten when pursuing MEQ goals in future
– They have a big effect on returns & profit
for both farmer & processor

Impacts of variations in animal behaviour and stress on meat quality.

Why care about stress?
• Two main stresses (names are not important)
• Acute: Sympathetic-adrenal medulla axis (SAM)
-Adrenalin
• Acute and chronic: Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal axis (HPA)
-Cortisol/corticosterone

• Stress has both physical and psychological components
• Both initiate a cascade of behavioural and physiological responses
– Have consequences for muscle pH and sensory properties and shelf life of meat
– Minimising variation in stress reactivity should, in some contexts, have benefits for consistency of meat quality
SAC are working to understand these effects and to find solutions.

Professor Charlotte Malton from QMS tried to put the day into context.

Consumers have expectations, largely for tenderness. Consumers are prepared to pay more for better quality variation is a problem. In 2006 Scottish beef carcase 55% graded R4L against 46% in England. Scotland therefore is doing better.

We need to control variation by using all this R & D. Production and on farm factors. breed, feed, health etc.

Processing: Aitch bone hanging, ph testing imaging and computing.

All the science underpins technological developments.

Question is what really matters because we could measure everything! Doing that ends up with a system that looks like Meat Standards Australia's consumer testing program. This came up with 4 grades for quality but this was costly and then reckon that it will take 33 years to get a return!

Would MSA work here? – unlikely.

Tenderness measurement is gaining more acceptance in USA and New Zealand. In NZ they applied the Tenderometer and fed back information acceptability of samples increased from 70% to 95%. In USA measurement is being used by one major retailer to guarantee tenderness.

The future of measurement will depend on automation. Measuring will feedback to producers to optimise live animal and management.

Charlotte predicted that there are exciting times ahead!