|
|
||||||||
United States Department of Agriculture, Science and Education Administration, Agricultural Research, Richard B. Russell Agricultural Research Center, Athens, GA 30604 and and University of Georgia, Athens 30602
Abstract
Various chemical, physical, curing and sensory properties were evaluated on a limited number of cured hams from Yorkshire (Sus domesticus), wild (Sus scrofa) and crossbred (Yorkshire x wild) pork carcasses.
For stitch pumped hams, weight loss during processing, pH, percentages of moisture, protein, fat and salt were not affected by phenotype. For dry cured hams, weight loss during curing was greatest (P<.05) for Yorkshire, least for wild and intermediate for crossbred pigs. Fat content was highest and salt content was lowest in dry cured ham slices from Yorkshire pigs; the reverse was true for wild pigs and crossbred pigs were intermediate. Fatty acid composition showed few significant (P<.05) differences among phenotypes.
In general, color of hams was darker and red color was more intense for wild than for Yorkshire and crossbred pigs.
Cooking time was longer (P<.05) and shear values were higher (P<.05) for ham slices from dry cured than for stitch pumped hams. Within curing method, shear values did not differ among phenotypes. Total cooking loss was higher (P<.05) from stitch pumped than from dry cured hams; within curing methods, cooking loss was generally greater for Yorkshire than for wild pigs and was intermediate for crossbred pigs.
For wild and crossbred pigs, taste panelists rated dry cured hams more (P<.05) salty, less (P<.05) tender and less acceptable than stitch pumped hams. Within curing methods, panel scores for saltiness did not differ among phenotypes. Panel scores of stitch pumped hams for tenderness, juiciness and overall acceptability did not differ among phenotypes. No particular chemical, physical, curing or sensory benefits were achieved by crossing Yorkshire with wild swine.
1 Research data reported are from a portion of a thesis submitted by W. L. Brown to the graduate faculty of the University of Georgia in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science.
2 Animal Products Development Research Unit, USDA, SEA, RRC, Athens, GA.
3 Present address: Box 157, Trenton, FL 32693.
4 Dept. of Animal Science, Univ. of Georgia, Athens.
5 The authors acknowledge the advice of Ruel Wilson in the statistical analysis and Sue E. Mescher for statistical analysis assistance.
6 Reference to a company or product name does not imply approval or recommendation of the product by the USDA to the exclusion of others that may be suitable.
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |