Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:27:03.247Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of castration and time-on-feed on Mertolenga breed beef quality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2014

A. C. G. Monteiro ,
D. R. Navas  and
J. P. C. Lemos
A. C. G. Monteiro*
Affiliation:
CIISA, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, Avenida da Universidade Técnica, Pólo Universitário Alto da Ajuda, 1300-477 Lisboa, Portugal Unidade de Investigação de Produção Animal, INIAV–Quinta da Fonte Boa, 2005-048 Vale de Santarém, Portugal
D. R. Navas
Affiliation:
Unidade de Investigação de Produção Animal, INIAV–Quinta da Fonte Boa, 2005-048 Vale de Santarém, Portugal
J. P. C. Lemos
Affiliation:
CIISA, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, Avenida da Universidade Técnica, Pólo Universitário Alto da Ajuda, 1300-477 Lisboa, Portugal
*
† E-mail: amonteiro@fmv.utl.pt
Get access

Abstract

Physicochemical characteristics were determined in the longissimus lumborum muscle, after 8 days of ageing of steers (n=12) and bulls (n=12) from Mertolenga breed slaughtered directly from pasture (day 0) or after a finishing period of 50, 100 and 150 days in a feed-lot facility. Bulls and steers presented similar live weight (averaging 388 kg), carcass weight (CW; averaging 213 kg), dressing percentage (averaging 60%), carcass fatness (11.9% CW) and carcass fat thickness (averaging 3.03 mm). Live weight, CW, carcass fatness and fat thickness increased along time-on-feed. Gender only had a negligible effect on meat characteristics, with b* and h* being the only parameters of colour affected by gender, also presenting a significant interaction gender×time-on-feed. Nevertheless, both the genders presented a high-quality grade concerning tenderness (Warner–Bratzler shear force (WBSF)). L* increased until 50 days on feed and decreased afterwards, whereas a* and C* values increased along time-on-feed. Pigment content was also affected by time-on-feed and showed a gender×time-on-feed interaction. Beef colour became darker and redder along time-on-feed, but still in a colour range highly acceptable by Portuguese consumers. Despite the increase in intramuscular fat and myofibrillar fragmentation index, as well as the decrease in collagen content of steers and bulls along time-on-feed, it did not affect the tenderness/hardness, indicating a small effect of time-on-feed in meat characteristics. Despite only small differences in carcass characteristics and meat-quality parameters that have been noticed along time-on-feed, those differences were only significant after 100 days on feed. Principal component analysis (PCA) was performed. The first PC axis (39.6% of the total variance) included colour variables a*, b* and C*, and carcass fatness, fat thickness, CW and live weight, whereas the second one (12.7% of the total variance) included h*, cooking losses and dressing-out. The principal component (PC) analysis confirmed the lack of differences between bulls and steers and indicates a differentiation of the first two periods of feeding (0 and 50 days on feed) from the two latter (100 and 150 days on feed) periods of feeding.

Keywords

beefgendermeat qualityMertolengatime-on-feed
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , April 2014 , pp. 675 - 682
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Association of Official Analytical Chemists 2000. Official methods of analysis, vol. 2, 17th edition. AOAC, Gaithersburg, MA, USA.Google Scholar
Camfield, PK, Brown, AH, Lewis, PK, Rakes, LY and Johnson, ZB 1997. Effects of frame size and time-on-feed on carcass characteristics, sensory attributes and fatty acid profile of steers. Journal of Animal Science 75, 1837–1844.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cañeque, V, Pérez, C, Velasco, S, Díaz, MT, Lauzurica, S, Álvarez, I, Huidobro, FR, Onega, E and De la Fuente, J 2004. Carcass and meat quality of light lambs using principal component analysis. Meat Science 67, 595–605.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cerdeño, A, Vieira, C, Serrano, E, Lavín, P and Mantecón, AR 2006. Effects of feeding strategy during a short finishing period on performance, carcass and meat quality in previously grazed young bulls. Meat Science 72, 719–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, M, Ertbjerg, P, Failla, S, Sañudo, C, Richardson, RI, Nute, GR, Olleta, JL, Panea, B, Albertí, P, Juárez, M, Hocquette, JF and Williams, JL 2011. Relationship between collagen characteristics, lipid content and raw and cooked texture of meat from young bulls of fifteen European breeds. Meat Science 87, 61–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crouse, JD, Cross, HR and Seideman, SC 1985. Effects of sex condition, genotype, diet and carcass electrical stimulation on the collagen content and palatability of two bovine muscles. Journal of Animal Science 60, 1228–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Destefanis, G, Barge, MT, Brugiapaglia, A and Tassone, S 2000. The use of principal component analysis (PCA) to characterize beef. Meat Science 56, 255–259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dolezal, HG, Smith, GC, Savell, JW and Carpenter, ZL 1982. Comparison of subcutaneous fat thickness, marbling and quality grade of predicting palatability of beef. Journal of Food Science 37, 397–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eurostat 2011. Agriculture and fishery statistics. European Comission, Luxembourg. ISSN 1977-2262.Google Scholar
Field, RA 1971. Effect castration on meat quality and quantity. Journal of Animal Science 32, 849–858.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
French, P, O’Riordan, EG, Monahan, FJ, Caffrey, PJ, Vidal, M, Mooney, MT, Troy, DJ and Moloney, AP 2000. Meat quality of steers finished on autumn grass, grass silage or concentrate based diets. Meat Science 56, 173–180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hocquette, JF, Gondret, F, Baéza, E, Médale, F, Jurie, C and Pethick, DW 2010. Intramuscular fat content on meat-producing animals: development, genetic and nutritional control, and identification of putative markers. Animal 4, 303–319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hocquette, JF, Botreau, R, Picard, B, Jacquet, A, Pethick, DW and Scollan, ND 2012. Opportunities for predicting and manipulating beef qualtiy. Meat Science 92, 197–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunsley, RE, Vetter, RL, Kline, EA and Burroughs, W 1971. Effects of age and sex on quality, tenderness and collagen content of bovine longissimus muscle. Journal Animal Science 33, 933–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeremiah, LE, Dugan, MER, Aalhus, JL and Gibson, LL 2003. Assessment of the relationship between components and palatability of major beef muscles and muscles groups. Meat Science 63, 1013–1019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keane, MG and Allen, P 1998. Effects of production system intensity on performance, carcass composition and meat quality of beef cattle. Livestock Production Science 56, 203–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larraín, RE, Schaeffer, DM and Reed, JD 2008. Use of digital images to estimate CIE color coordinates of beef. Food Research International 41, 380–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mach, N, Bach, A, Realini, CE, Font, i, Furnols, M, Velarde, A and Devant, M 2009. Burdizzo pre-pubertal castration effects on performance, behaviour, carcass characteristics, and meat quality of Holstein bulls fed high concentrate diets. Meat Science 81, 329–334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKeith, FK, Savell, JW and Smith, GC 1985. Physical, chemical, histological and palatability characteristics of muscles from three breed-types of cattle at different times-on-feed. Meat Science 15, 37–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moloney, AP, Mooney, MT, Kerry, JP and Troy, DJ 2001. Producing tender and flavoursome beef with enhanced nutritional characteristics. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 60, 221–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monin, G 1991. Facteurs biologiques des qualités de la viande bovine. INRA Productions Animales 4, 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monsón, F, Sañudo, C and Sierra, I 2005. Influence of breed and ageing time on the sensory meat quality and consumer acceptability in intensively reared beef. Meat Science 71, 471–479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monteiro, ACG 2012. Relationship between Portuguese consumer preferences, textural properties, chemical composition and nutritional value of beef. PhD Thesis, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
Monteiro, ACG, Navas, D and Lemos, JPC 2005. Efeito da Castração e da Idade nas Características da Carne de Bovinos Produzidos em Sistema de Pastoreio. Revista Portuguesa de Engenharia Zootécnica Ano XII, 77–90.Google Scholar
Monteiro, ACG, Gomes, E, Barreto, AS, Silva, MF, Fontes, MA, Bessa, RJB and Lemos, JPC 2013. Eating quality of "Vitela Tradicional do Montado"-PGI veal and Mertolenga-PDO veal and beef. Meat Science 94, 63–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, JB, Wheeler, TL, Koohmaraie, M, Savell, JW and Crouse, JD 1993. Meat tenderness and the calpain system in Longissimus muscle of young bulls and steers. Journal of Animal Science 71, 1471–1476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ngapo, TM, Berge, P, Culioli, J, Dransfield, E, De Smet, S and Claeys, E 2002. Perimysial collagen crosslinking and meat tenderness in Belgian Blue double muscle cattle. Meat Science 61, 91–102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Polkinghorne, R, Thompson, JM, Watson, R, Gee, A and Porter, M 2008. Evolution of the Meat Standards Australia (MSA) beef grading system. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48, 1351–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sami, AS, Augustini, C and Schwartz, FJ 2004. Effects of feeding intensity and time on feed on performance carcass characteristics and meat quality of Simmental bulls. Meat Science 67, 195–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Santos-Silva, J, Bessa, RJB and Santos-Silva, F 2002. Effect of genotype, system and slaughter weight on the quality of light lambs. II. Fatty acid composition of meat. Livestock Production Science 77, 187–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savell, JW and Cross, HR 1988. The role of fat in the palatability of beef, pork, and lamb. In Designing foods: animal product options in the marketplace, pp. 345–355. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Schreurs, NM, Garcia, F, Jurie, C, Agabriel, J, Micol, D, Bauchart, D, Listrat, A and Picard, B 2008. Meta-analysis of the effect of animal maturity on muscle characteristics in different muscles, breeds, and sexes of cattle. Journal of Animal Science 86, 2872–2887.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shackelford, SD, Wheeler, T and Koohmaraie, M 1997. Tenderness classification of beef: I. Evaluation of beef longissimus shear force at 1 or 2 days post-mortem as a predictor of aged beef tenderness. Journal of Animal Science 75, 2417–2422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, JA, Patarata, L and Martins, C 1999. Influence of ultimate pH on bovine meat tenderness during ageing. Meat Science 52, 453–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simões, JA and Lemos, JPC 2005. Efeito do sexo, da idade e da escolaridade dos consumidores na avaliação da tenrura da carne de bovino. Proceedings of the 3° Congresso de Ciência Veterinárias, 13–15 October 2005, Estação Zootécnica Nacional, Vale de Santarém, Portugal, 182 pp.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis System 2004. SAS/STAT 9.1 user’s guide. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, USA.Google Scholar
Tarrant, PV 1989. Animal behaviour and environment in the dark cutting conditions in beef. Irish Journal of Food Science and Technology 13, 1–14.Google Scholar
Troy, DJ and Kerry, JP 2010. Consumer perception and the role of science in the meat industry. Meat Science 86, 214–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vestergaard, M, Oksbjerg, N and Henckel, P 2000. Influence of feeding intensity, grazing and finishing feeding on meat and eating quality of young bulls and the relationship between muscle fibre characteristics, fibre fragmentation and meat tenderness. Meat Science 54, 187–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wierbiki, E, Cahill, VR, Kunkle, LE, Klosterman, EW and Deatherage, FE 1955. Effect of castration on biochemistry and quality of beef. Journal of Agricultural Food and Chemistry 3, 244–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar