J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Roeber, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, G. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Roeber, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, G. C.

Journal of Animal Science, Vol 78, Issue 6 1504-1509, Copyright © 2000 by American Society of Animal Science

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Effects of a unique application of electrical stimulation on tenderness, color, and quality attributes of the beef longissimus muscle

D. L. Roeber, R. C. Cannell, K. E. Belk, J. D. Tatum and G. C. Smith
Department of Animal Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins 80523-1171, USA.

This study evaluated effects of four uniquely applied beef carcass electrical stimulation (ES) treatments on USDA grade factors, muscle color, subprimal purge loss, cooked steak weight loss, and cooked steak tenderness. One side of each (n = 284) beef carcass was subjected to ES using one of four treatments (medium voltage for medium duration, MVMD; medium voltage for long duration, MVLD; high voltage for medium duration, HVMD; or high voltage for long duration, HVLD) and was compared to its corresponding non-ES control side. Electrical stimulation of beef sides was applied focusing on middle meats while preventing severe contraction of the round and chuck. From matched (ES and control) sides of 120 carcasses (10 each of Select, low Choice, and upper two-thirds of Choice in each of the four ES treatments), longissimus steaks (2.5 cm thick) were cooked and used for Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBS) analysis. Mean marbling scores (n = 284) for stimulated sides did not differ (P = .923) from those for control sides within ES treatment classes. Mean values for CIE L*, a*, and b* of lean color (n = 284) were higher (P < .05) for MVMD, MVLD, HVMD, and HVLD treated sides than for the respective control sides. When WBS values for steaks were adjusted to an equal visual degree of doneness, WBS values (n = 120) were lower (P < .05) for ES treated sides than for control sides for all four types of ES application treatments. Treatment responses were not influenced by USDA Quality Grade group. For those carcasses for which the control sides had WBS values greater than 4.5 kg, matching sides treated with MVMD, MVLD, HVMD, or HVLD had WBS values less than 4.5 kg 50, 88, 60, and 75% of the time, respectively. Mean cooked steak weight loss (n = 120), adjusted to an equal visual degree of doneness, and mean purge loss (n = 24) did not differ with ES treatment.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2000 by the American Society of Animal Science.