Meat Texture Profile and Cutting Strength Analyses of Pork Depending on Breed and Age
Władysław Migdał , Maria Walczycka , Piotr Kulawik , Ewelina Węsierska , Marzena Zając , Joanna Tkaczewska , Łukasz Migdał , Katarzyna Krępa-Stefanik
AbstractThe chemical composition and culinary meat tenderness belong to the most important characteristics determining meat quality and value. The aim of this work was to compare texture profiles and shear force of pork loin (m. longissimus dorsi) and of pork ham (m. semimembranosus) from fatteners of Polish Landrace (PL), Polish Large White (PLW), Duroc, Pietrain and Puławska pig breeds slaughtered at 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 and 210 d of breeding. Meat was roasted at 180°C to inner temperature of 78°C. The intramuscular fat (IMF) content in loin was growing with fattener age (from 1.17% at 60 d to 1.84% at 180 d of life). Between breeds IMF ranged from 0.82% in PLW to 2.29% in Puławska breed. The shear force for loin muscle ranged from 3.42 kG/cm2 at 60 d to 6.54 kG/cm2 at 210 d of life while for and ham muscle 4.4 kG/cm2 at 60 d to 6.78 kG/cm2 at 210 d of life. The hardness (TPA ) ranged from 72.29 N at 90 d of life to 109.46 N at 210 d of life. The shear force of loin and ham meat was increasing with age of fatteners and some texture parameters – hardness and chewiness. Nevertheless it seems that the age of 150 days is the time when meat of fatteners is characterized by the highest technological properties. However, the final decision regarding slaughter age should be made taking into account the technological destination of the carcasses. No significant interactions between the animal breed and their age were found for the parameters analysed.
|Journal series||Annals of Animal Science, ISSN 1642-3402, e-ISSN 2300-8733, (N/A 100 pkt)|
|Publication size in sheets||33.85|
|Keywords in English||Pigs, meat parameters, texture profile, shear force|
|ASJC Classification||; ;|
|License||Journal (articles only); author's original; ; after publication|
|Publication indicators||= 0; : 2018 = 0.869; : 2018 = 1.515 (2) - 2018=1.246 (5)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.