HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Savell, J. W. Articles by Carpenter, Z. L. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Savell, J. W. Articles by Carpenter, Z. L.

Effect of Electrical Stimulation on Quality and Palatability of Light-weight Beef Carcasses¹

Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, College Station, 77843

Abstract

Fifty light-weight (300 to 375 kg) heifers were slaughtered, split longitudinally and randomly selected sides were electrically stimulated (machine setting=100 volts, 5 amps, 50 to 60 cycles per second; producing a 440 volt potential difference between electrodes) within 1 hr post-exsanguination. Treatment groups for paired sides included 0 vs 25, 0 vs 50, 0 vs 75, 25 vs 50, and 50 vs 75 electrical impulses per side. When significant differences in carcass traits, tenderness and overall palatability were observed between control and treated sides, advantages were always in favor of electrically stimulated sides. The most consistent improvements elicited by electrical stimulation were in USDA lean maturity score (more youthful), muscle color (brighter), incidence of "heat-ring" (less frequent; less severe), shear force (more tender) and sensory panel ratings (more tender; less organoleptically-detectable connective tissue; more desirable overall palatability). Use of 75, rather than 25 or 50, impulses slightly reduced the incidence and severity of "heat-ring"; however, there was very little evidence that use of more than 25 impulses would materially enhance the response in palatability achieved via electrical stimulation.

¹ T. A. 13652, Meats and Meat Chemistry Section, Department of Animal Science, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. This study was partially supported by King Ranch, Inc., KingsviUe, TX, The Texas Cattle Feeders Association, Amarillo, and H and H Packing Co., Mercedes, TX.