Meat cut and injection level affects the tenderness and cook yield of processed roast beef

Meat Science

Volumn 59, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 259-265

  Boles, J A ^a,b   Shand, P J ^a,b  

^a MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

Author keywords

Beef; Injection; Processing; Roast beef; Tenderness

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035621037     PISSN: 03091740     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0309-1740(01)00078-X     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Official methods of analysis. 15th ed:1990;Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA.
2. Bernthal P.H., Booren A.M., Gray J.I. Effect of reduced sodium chloride concentration and tetrasodium pyrophosphate on pH, water-holding capacity and extractable protein of prerigor and postrigor ground beef. Meat Science. 29:1991;69-82.
3. Boles, J. A. & McNinch, T. I. (1999). Final report on the demand for value-added beef products to the Saskatchewan agriculture development fund and the Saskatchewan beef development fund. Regina, Saskatchewan.
4. Boles J.A., Swan J.E. Effect of post-slaughter processing and freezing on the functionality of hot-boned meat from young bull. Meat Science. 44:1997;11-18.
5. Boles, J. A., & Mikkelsen, V. L. (1994). Functional properties of Australian beef: effect of chilled storage on purge, cook yield and colour of flats and insides. Meat Industry Research Institute of New Zealand Publication. Number CR 454.
6. Bouton P.E., Harris P.V., Shorthose W.R. The effect of temperature and ultimate pH on the increase in meat toughness resulting from restraint during cooking. Meat Science. 6:1982;235-241.
7. Carmack C.F., Kastner C.L., Dikeman M.E, Schwenke J.R., Garcia Zepeda C.M. Sensory evaluation of beef-flavor-intensity, tenderness and juiciness among major muscles. Meat Science. 39:1995;143-147.
8. Chow H.M., Ockermean H.W., Cahill V.R., Parrett N.A. Evaluation of cured, canned pork shoulder tissue produced by electrical stimulation, hot processing and tumbling. Journal of Food Science. 51:1986;288-291.
9. Dibble, W. H. (1994). Effect of sex on the functionality of beef. Meat Industry Research Institute of New Zealand. Publication Number CR 380.
10. Hamm R. Functional properties of the myofibrillar system and their measurements. Bechtel P.J. Muscle as food. 1986;135-199 Academic Press, New York.
11. Industry, Science and Technology Canada. 1993. Industry profile: hog processing. Government of Canada, Ottawa.
12. Murphy D. The inside story on R-T-E entrees. Meat Marketing and Technology. 8(9):2000;30-36.
13. Nguyen, Q., & Zarkadas, C. G. (1989). Comparison of the amino acid composition and connective tissue contents of selected bovine skeletal muscles. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 37, 1279-1286.
14. Offer G., Trinick J. On the mechanism of water holding in meat: the swelling and shrinking of myofibrils. Meat Science. 8:1983;245-281.
15. Paterson B.C., Parrish F.C. Jr. A sensory panel and chemical analysis of certain beef chuck muscles. Journal of Food Science. 51:1986;876-896.
16. Pepper F.H., Schmidt G.R. Effect of blending time, salt, phosphate and hot boned beef on binding strength and cook yield of beef rolls. Journal of Food Science. 40:1975;227-232.
17. ©user's guide: statistics. 1986;SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, NC.
18. Shand P.J. Textural, water holding, and sensory properties of low-fat pork bologna with normal or waxy starch hull-less barley. Journal of Food Science. 65:2000;101-107.
19. Shults G.W., Wierbicki E. Effect of condensed phosphates on pH, swelling and water holding capacity of beef. Journal of Food Science. 37:1972;860-864.