Influence of tannins on the physical and sensory attributes of meat from feedlot cattle

Ortiz-López, Briceida; Mariezcurrena-Berasaín, María Antonia; Barajas-Cruz, Rubén; López-Perea, Patricia; Escalona-Buendía, Héctor Bernardo; Borquez-Gastelum, José Luis; Mariezcurrena-Berasaín, María Dolores; Ortiz-López, Briceida; Mariezcurrena-Berasaín, María Antonia; Barajas-Cruz, Rubén; López-Perea, Patricia; Escalona-Buendía, Héctor Bernardo; Borquez-Gastelum, José Luis; Mariezcurrena-Berasaín, María Dolores

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Cited by SciELO
Access statistics

Revista mexicana de ciencias pecuarias

On-line version ISSN 2448-6698Print version ISSN 2007-1124

Rev. mex. de cienc. pecuarias vol.7 n.3 Mérida Jul./Sep. 2016

Articles

Influence of tannins on the physical and sensory attributes of meat from feedlot cattle

Briceida Ortiz-López^a

María Antonia Mariezcurrena-Berasaín^a

Rubén Barajas-Cruz^b

Patricia López-Perea^a

Héctor Bernardo Escalona-Buendía^c

José Luis Borquez-Gastelum^a

María Dolores Mariezcurrena-Berasaín^a

^{^a} Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México, Toluca, Estado de México, México. Correo electrónico: nekkane16@hotmail.com. Correspondencia al último autor.

^{^b} FMVZ-Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa. Culiacán, Sinaloa, México.

^{^c} Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana. México.

Abstract

The aim was to evaluate the addition of 0.3 % of tannins extract on physical and sensory characteristics of meat from cattle fattened intensively. Samples of Longissimus dorsi muscle from 16 bulls (Bos Taurus x Bos indicus), that for the last 70 d of fattening received a finishing diet (13.3 % CP and 2.0 Mcal NEm/kg DM), in groups of eight were randomized assigned to receive one of two treatments: 1) Finishing diet (CTRL); and 2) CTRL plus 0.3 % (DM basis) of tannins extract (TE). The tannins extract was from Bypro® (Silvafeed, Indunor, S.A., Argentina) containing 70 % of tannins. The bulls were slaughtered in a TIF plant No. 99. At 24 h post-slaughter four samples (2.5 cm thick) were taken at the level of the 12th and 13th rib of the left middle carcass. Physical characteristics and sensory profile, as well as, the perception and acceptance of the meat by consumers were evaluated. Tannins did not influence the physical characteristics of the meat (P>0.05). The sensory profile was not influenced by treatments (P>0.05). The perception and preference regarding juiciness and tenderness was similar for both treatments. Consumers showed a preference for the level “Like moderately”. It is concluded that the addition of 0.3 % of tannins extracts in the diet of cattle fattened intensively, did not modify the physical and sensory characteristics of meat.

Key words: Tannins; Beef; Physical characteristics; Sensory profile

Resumen

Para evaluar la adición de 0.3 % extracto de taninos en las características físicas y sensoriales de la carne de bovinos engordados de forma intensiva, se utilizaron muestras del músculo Longissimus dorsi de 16 toretes (Bos taurus x Bos indicus), los cuales durante los últimos 70 días de la engorda recibieron dieta de finalización (13.3% PC y 2.0 Mcal ENm/kg de MS), y en grupos de ocho se asignaron al azar para recibir uno de dos tratamientos: 1) dieta de finalización (testigo); 2) testigo más 0.3% (base seca) de extracto de taninos (ET). El extracto de taninos fue de Bypro® (SilvaFeed, Indunor, S.A., Argentina) que contiene 70 % de taninos. Los toretes se sacrificaron en la planta TIF No. 99. A las 24 h posteriores al sacrificio se tomaron cuatro muestras (2.5 cm de grosor) a la altura de la 12 ^a y 13 ^a costilla de la media canal izquierda. Se evaluaron las características físicas y el perfil sensorial, así como la percepción y aceptación de la carne por consumidores. Los taninos no influyeron en las características físicas de la carne (P>0.05). El perfil sensorial no fue influenciado por tratamientos (P>0.05). La percepción y preferencia del producto respecto a jugosidad y terneza fue similar para ambos tratamientos. Los consumidores mostraron preferencia por el nivel “Gusta moderadamente”, para testigo y tratamiento. Se concluye que la adición de 0.3 % de extracto de taninos en la dieta de bovinos en engorda intensiva, no afecta las características físicas y sensoriales de la carne.

Palabras clave: Taninos; Carne de bovino; Características físicas; Perfil sensorial

Introduction

The food quality is determined by various aspects such as amount and quality of nutrients and health security, among others. However, what also determines the acceptance or rejection of a food is related to the perception of the consumer, i.e., aspects linked to the preference of the color, taste, texture, consistency, presentation and other aspects of the product¹. In the evaluation of meat quality parameters most considered are: appearance, juiciness, tenderness and flavor². Texture, has two main components: tenderness and juiciness, explaining the 64.0 and the 19.0 % respectively, of the differences among the appetence of samples³; the evaluation of tenderness defined acceptance of meat by consumers⁴^,⁵.

Other factors directly influencing the tenderness and juiciness of meat are: the content of intramuscular fat⁶^,⁷; the density of the muscle fiber; number, type and arrangement of connective tissue (related to genetics, sex, weight and age to slaughter, feeding, use of additives, animal stress, work, management of cold chain conditions) and type of cut associated with the involved muscle³^,⁸.

Secondary metabolites of plants such as tannins (condensed and hydrolysable), are used extensively for its potential to modulate the rumen fermentation and increase nutrients utilization in ruminants⁹. These compounds added in low concentrations in the diet can produce beneficial effects, since they bind to proteins and protect them from immediate degradation, regulating the release rate of nitrogen in the rumen¹⁰^,¹¹, increasing the flow of essential amino acids to the small intestine⁽¹¹⁾, which is attributed to a better productive performance of the animal¹²^,¹³. However, the reports in the literature of the path of absorption or elimination of the tannins are not very clear and therefore it is unknown if there is tissue buildup, or if they cause any changes in the muscle structure that affect the sensory characteristics of the meat. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to evaluate the addition of 0.3 % tannins extract on the physical properties and sensory attributes in the meat of feedlot cattle.

Material and methods

Samples

Samples of Longissimus dorsi muscle from 16 steers fattened intensively in the Experimental unit for cattle of the Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia of the Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, with a gene load of approximately 75.0 % Brahman and remainder of Simmental, Brown Swiss, Charolais and Angus in variable proportion, with an average body weight of 422 ± 6.7 kg. The bulls were subjected to production management for a finishing phase, which consisted of subcutaneous application at the base of the ear, of a second trenbolone acetate implant and 17-β estradiol (Component TES with Tylan; ELANCO®). During the last 30 d, all animals received in addition, 0.15 mg/kg of zilpaterol hydrochloride; (Zilmax; Lab Intervet - MSD®), same that was suspended 3 d before slaughter. The cattle were assigned randomly to groups of eight animals and were housed in pens to receive one of two treatments: 1) Finishing diet (13.3 % crude protein and 2.0 Mcal ENm/kg dry matter) the last 70 d of fattening (Control); 2) Control diet plus 0.3 % of tannins extract (ET). Tannin extract was of condensed tannins from quebracho (Shinopsis ssp) containing 700 g/kg DM (Bypro® SilvaFeed, Indunor, SA; Buenos Aires, Argentina).

Slaughter was done at the abattoir TIF No. 99. The carcasses were placed in a cold room at 4 ^oC, and 24 h later held a cross section in the left side of the carcass between the 12th and 13th rib. In the area of the rib eye pH was measured in triplicate with a potentiometer (HI99163 membrane pH - meter, Hanna Instruments, USA), equipped with penetration electrode. Consecutively four 2.5 cm thick samples of the Longissimus dorsi muscle were taken; a portion of 2 cm², placed in airtight bag previously identified and immediately water retention capacity (WRC) was measured; the rest of the samples were vacuum packaged and frozen at -20 ^oC until be used for sensory and physical determinations.

Measurement of physical properties

The released fluid by applying external pressure, determined the WRC, weighting 0.3 ± 0.05 g of meat, standing inside a paper filter, between two glass plates, and subjected to compression with a weight of 2,250 kg for 5 min. The WRC was calculated by difference of initial weight and final weight, considering the percentage of juice released¹⁴. Prior to the sensory and physical determinations, meat was thawed under refrigeration at 4 ^oC for 24 h. The samples were prepared according to the protocol of “Research Guidelines for Cookery, Sensory Evaluation and Instrumental Tenderness Measurements of Fresh Meat”¹⁵; these were devoid of bone and weighted before cooking in an electric double grill (Mod. GRP4P-ar George Foreman® Grill, Miramar, FL, USA). It was used a thermocouple (Hanna Instrument®), to monitor the temperature at 70 ± 2 °C, this was inserted in the geometric center of the sample. Once cooked, it was left to cool for a period of 30 min, weighted to calculate loss by cooking, expressed as a percentage of weight loss with respect to the weight of the raw sample¹⁴. After weighting, from each meat sample 10 cylinders of 1.6 cm in diameter, were obtained by inserting a punch parallel to the direction of the muscle fibers; to determine the shear force¹⁶, each cylinder was placed perpendicular to the Warner-Bratzler blade equipment (Mod. KS 66502 Salter®, Manhattan, USA). The results of the physical characteristics of the meat, were analyzed through variance for a completely random design accepting differences with a level of probability <0.05¹⁷, through the use of the computer package Statistix®, version 9.0¹⁸.

Sensory profiles measurements

Two complementary experiments were carried out. Samples were prepared following the protocol described for shear force evaluation. After cooking the meat samples were cut into 1 cm³ pieces, were placed in No. 0 plastic cups, previously labeled with three random number key. To avoid drying out before being offered to the panelists, samples were kept in a container sealed to 40 °C. In all sensory tests panelist were offered water and crackers and asked they to eat a portion before and between samples with the aim of removing the flavors of the mouth¹⁹.

Experiment 1

It describes the sensory properties of the meat, and measured the intensity perceived by a panel previously coached, consisting of 14 volunteers (eight women and six men; 30 to 40 yr old), students and academics who worked in the Meat Science and Technology area. Slides, and oral explanation were used for training and previous tests with beef were carried out to ensure that the panelist identified the descriptors and the use of the scale¹⁹.

The panelists, after bibliographic review, elected by consensus the descriptors profile that provided information on the meat characteristics²⁰^-²³. A descriptive quantitative test²⁴^,²⁵ was performed, where panelist scored in a nine-point structured scale the intensity of the evaluated attribute, considering one as the value of less intensity. The results obtained were analyzed with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, accepting statistical difference of P<0.05²⁴^,²⁶. The results are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Descriptors of the characteristics of meat chosen by panelists

Experiment 2

Characteristics of the consumer panel. To perform the tests: Duo-trio, preference of pairs for juiciness and tenderness, as well as acceptance testing, 88 volunteers intervened, students from the faculties of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Hsbandry and Agricultural Sciences of the Universidad Autonoma del Estado de Mexico. The personal data collected indicated that 49 % were men and 51 % women, aged 19 to 27 yr; 43 % said consuming beef more than two times a week, 34 % once a week, 14 % once every 15 d, while 9 % once a month. They reported that their way of habitual meat consumption was: roast, burgers and stews.

Experimental development. Test Duo-trio²⁷ was conducted to determine if the meat under assessment was perceived similarly by the consumer. Two triads (A-REF AB and - REF BA) were used where A corresponded to the meat sample (control), which was used as a constant reference (REF) and (B) corresponded to the meat sample obtained from fed-tannins animal (ET). Three meat samples were offered to the panelists, one of them marked with the letter “R” reference sample, while the other two were encoded with a random three-digit number. The panelist identified which one of the samples was equal to R. The results obtained, were analyzed according to the standard BS ISO 10399:2004, “Sensory analysis-Methodology-Duo-trio test”²⁷

Preference pairs tests²⁴^,²⁵, were conducted to assess the juiciness and tenderness. Meat samples (control) and B (ET), were codified with three-digit numbers and were simultaneously presented to the panelist, in the form AB for some and BA for others. The panelist identified which one of the two samples was the softest and which the juiciest. The results were analyzed by the approximation test from the binomial distribution to the normal distribution (α/2= 0.025); Z= (X-np)-0.5/√ npq, where X= number of trials of the most favorite sample, n= total number of judgments, p= probability of selecting the most favorite sample at random and q= 1-p, for paired different test p=q=½²³.

Affective testing²⁴^,²⁵ was used to assess the acceptance of meat from fed-tannins cattle. Samples were presented in the same way as for the tests by paired test. The panelist assessed their preference on each sample according to a seven-point hedonic scale: 1) I dislike very much, 2) I dislike moderately 3) I dislike slightly, 4) Nor I like or I dislike, 5) I like slightly, 6) I like moderately, 7) I really like it. The results were transformed into numerical scale (1 to 7) in the same order. The frequencies were obtained and treatments were compared by level of acceptance using X² test, accepting statistical differences at P<0.05²⁴^,²⁵. Statistical analyses were developed with version 9.0 of the computational Statistix package¹⁸.

Results and discussion

The results of the physical characteristics are presented in Table 2. Addition of tannins had no effect on pH, WRC, cooking loss and shear force (P>0.05). pH influences many biochemical and sensory properties of fresh and cooked meat, such as flavor and tenderness²⁸; the decrease in pH allows activation of proteolytic enzymes, and also allows proteins to reach their isoelectric point and therefore inducing a decrease of muscle water holding capacity²^,²⁸. The analyzed data showed a pH of 5.42 for both treatments, which is in the range considered as normal²^,¹⁶.

Table 2 Influence of the addition of tannin extract in the physical characteristics of the meat of cattle fed intensively

	Treatments
Variable	Control	Tannins	SEM	P value
N	8	8
pH	5.42	5.42	0.023	0.88
Water retention, %	87.32	86.21	1.058	0.48
Cooking loss, %	32.47	30.04	1.589	0.30
Shear force, kgf	8.88	10.21	0.477	0.07

SEM= standard error of the mean.

Results indicated that the shear force was superior to 8 kgf. According to some researches²⁹^-³³, these values may be influenced by factors such as breed, feeding, age and animal handling. Others²⁹^,³⁰, have shown that meat from Bos indicus is less tender than the meat from Bos taurus. It is important to remember that the gene load of animals used in this study was mainly from the Brahman breed. Riley et al³⁰, reported values greater than 8 kgf from Brahman meat. It was also mentioned³²^,³³ that the use of technologies to improve growth in feedlots (anabolic implants and ß-adrenergic agonists) influence negatively the meat tenderness, so as the maturity of the animal, because the solubility of collagen decreases with increasing age and therefore favors the increase of meat shear force³¹^,³². The value of shear force obtained in the experiment we are discussing it, could be due to the use of zilpaterol hydrochloride implants, coupled with maturity of animals in the finishing fattening stage.

Exp 1 results obtained for the sensory profile are shown in Figure 1. Tannins did not influenced the intensity of the attributes evaluated (P>0.05). Taste and smell descriptors were perceived as soft, pleasing to the consumer, since they were located below the average scale. Another study³⁴, suggests that the flavor in beef can be influenced by heat, animal breed, aging time, type of muscle and the diet; the volatile components formed during meat cooking are those that produce the smell attribute, and contribute to the meat taste characteristics²⁸^,³⁴. When cattle are fed with high-grains diets, the meat has higher palatability and preference by consumers²⁸^,³⁴. Attributes as fat, fat feeling and juiciness were perceived as soft, while the firmness and stringiness had high values. According to some research²^,³^,⁵, water and fat affect the meat tenderness; less amount of water and fat, feels a meat with a less juicy and smaller feel fat, and therefore firmness and the woodiness (attributes of tenderness) are high.

Figure 1 Sensorial profile of the meat from bovine. O= odor; T= texture; S= flavor

The results of the Exp 2 obtained by the Duo-trio test, showed that more than the 75.0 % of consumers would consider a similar meat from cattle fed with and without addition of tannins in the diet. In the paired preference test, for meat juiciness, it was obtained a value of z=0.03, for α/2=0.025, and comparing with the z-value of tables (1.96), shows that consumers do not perceive differences between meat samples. Similarly, for assessing tenderness, the value obtained for z=1.17, for α/2= 0.025, showed that consumers do not perceive a change in the meat tenderness when animals were fed with addition of tannin extract in the diet.

Preference test results in Figure 2, show that the item of greater acceptance of consumers to beef fed with and without addition of tannins in the diet was for “I like moderately”, where the percentage of consumers who preferred this level was 31.8 % for meat without tannins and 35.2 % for meat with addition of tannins. The results of statistical analysis show that only in the item “I like it very much”, perceived differences between the meat samples (P= 0.02). More than 74.4 % of consumers stated that they liked the meat, 14.7 % it was indistinct, while 10.8 % showed some disappointment.

Figure 2 Consumer preference for meat from cattle fed with and without addition of tannins in the diet

Sensory tests results show that the addition of 0.3 % tannin extract in the diet do not influence the acceptance of meat by consumers; with physical characteristics that presented this meat (approximately 9.5 shear force kgf), has a good acceptability, because more than 74.0 % of consumers showed preference for it.

Conclusions and implications

Sensory analysis showed that by adding 0.3 % tannin extract in the diet of intensively fattened cattle, do not influence the acceptance of meat, nor cause any change that is detectable by the consumer. This suggests that low concentrations of tannins can be used as additives in diets, without the risk of modifying the physical and sensory meat characteristics causing unacceptable sensory attributes by the consumer. The presence of tannins in the meat was not evaluated in this study, however, it is considered prudent to perform this measurement, since it could help to discern the doubt if the tannins are accumulated or not in tissue, and if positive, to know the concentration.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Dra. Isadora Martínez Arellano (UAM-Iztapalapa) for support during the process of this investigation.

REFERENCES

1. Liria DMR. Guía para la evaluación sensorial de los alimentos http://www.slideshare.net/evytaguevara/gua-para-la-evaluacin-sensorial-de-alimentos. 2007. Consultado 15 abril, 2014. [ Links ]

2. Lawrie RA, Ledward DA. Lawrie's meat science. 7th ed. Cambridge, England: Woodhead Publishing; 2006. [ Links ]

3. Bianchi. Alternativas tecnológicas para la producción de carne ovina de calidad en sistemas pastoriles. Montevideo, Uruguay: Hemisferio Sur; 2007. [ Links ]

4. Miller MF, Carr MA, Ramsey CB, Crockett KL, Hoover LC. Consumer thresholds for establishing the value of beef tenderness. J Anim Sci 2001;(79):3062-3068. [ Links ]

5. Rodas-González A, Huerta-Leidenz N, Jerez-Timaure N, Miller MF. Establishing tenderness thresholds of Venezuelan beef steaks using consumer and trained sensory panels. Meat Sci 2009;(83):218-23. [ Links ]

6. Killinger KM, Calkins CR, Umberger WJ, Feuz DM, Eskridge KM. Consumer sensory acceptance and value for beef steaks of similar tenderness, but differing in marbling level. J Anim Sci 2004;(82):3288-3293. [ Links ]

7. Brewer PS, James JM, Calkins CR, Rasby RM, Klopfenstein TJ, Anderson RV. Carcass traits and M. Longissimus lumborum palatability attributes of calf- and yearling-finished steers J Anim Sci 2007;(85):1239-1246. [ Links ]

8. Muchenje V, Dzam K, Chimonyo M, Strydom PE, Hugo A, Raats JG. Some biochemical aspects pertaining to beef eating quality and consumer health: A review. Food Chemistry 2009;(112):279-289. [ Links ]

9. Benchaar C, McAllister TA, Chouinard PY. Digestion, ruminal fermentation, ciliate protozoal populations and milk production from dairy cows fed cinnamaldehyde, quebracho condensed tannin, or Yucca schidigera saponin extracts. J Dairy Sci 2008;91(12)4765-4777. [ Links ]

10. Frutos P, Raso M, Hervás G, Mantecón AR, Pérez V, Giráldez FJ. Is there any detrimental effect when a chestnut hydrolysable tannin extract is included in the diet of finishing lambs? Anim Res 2004;(53):127-136. [ Links ]

11. Makkar HP, Siddhuraju SP, Becker K. Plant secondary metabolites. Totowa, NJ: Human Press Inc; 2007. [ Links ]

12. Min BR, Pinchak WE, Anderson RC, Fulford JD, Puchala R. Effects of condensed tannins supplementation level on weight gain and in vitro and in vivo bloat precursors in steers grazing winter wheat. J Anim Sci 2006;(84):2546-2554. [ Links ]

13. Barajas R, Cervantes BJ, Camacho A, Velázquez EA, Espino MA, Juárez F, et al. Condensed tannins supplementation on feedlot performance of growing bulls [abstract]. J Anim Sci 2010:88(Suppl 2):711. [ Links ]

14. Cañeque V, Sañudo C. Estandarización de las metodologías para evaluar la calidad del producto (animal vivo, canal, carne y grasa) en los rumiantes. Madrid, España: Monografías INIA: serie ganadera N° 3. 2005. [ Links ]

15. AMSA. Research guidelines for cookery, sensory evaluation and instrumental tenderness measurements of fresh meat. Savoy IL American Meat Sci Ass. 1995. [ Links ]

16. González-Ríos H, Peña-Ramos A, Valenzuela M, Zamorano-García L, Cumplido-Barbeitia G, González-Méndez NF Huerta-Leidenz N. Comparison of physical, chemical, and sensorial characteristics between U.S.-Imported and Northwestern Mexico retail beef. J Food Sci 2010;(75):747-752. [ Links ]

17. Steel RGD, Torrie JH. Bioestadística: principios y procedimientos. 2da ed. México DF: McGraw-Hill/ interamericana de México; 1988. [ Links ]

18. Statistix. Statistic User´s Manual. Release 9.0 Analytical Software, Tallahassee, FL. 2007. [ Links ]

19. ISO 8586:2012. Sensory analysis - General guidelines for the selection, training and monitoring of selected assessors and expert sensory assessors. 2012. [ Links ]

20. Martínez AI, Severiano PP, Fernández FJ, Ponce AE. Changes in the physicochemical and sensory characteristics in raw and grilled ovine meat. J Sci Food Agric 2012;(93):1743-1750. [ Links ]

21. Adhikari K, Chambers IVE, Miller R, Vázquez-araújo L, Bhumiratana N, Philip C. Development of lexicon for beef flavor in intact muscle. J Sens Stud 2011;(26):413-420. [ Links ]

22. Escalona BHB, Domínguez GM, García RMI, Ponce AE. Indicadores sensoriales de calidad en la cadena de producción de carne fresca de res y cerdo de México. XIV Congreso Nacional de Biotecnología y Bioingeniería. http://www.smbb.com.mx/congresos%20smbb/queretaro11/TRABAJOS/trabajos/III/carteles/CIII-86.pdf. 2011. Consultado 20 abril, 2014. [ Links ]

23. Pérez ML, Escalona H, Guerrero I. Effect of calcium choride marination on calpain and quality characteristics of meat from chicken, horse, cattle and rabbit. Meat Sci 1998;(48):125-134. [ Links ]

24. O´Mahony M. Sensory evaluation of food statistical methods and procedures. New York, USA: Taylor & Francis; 1986. [ Links ]

25. Stone H, Sidel J. Sensory evaluation practices. 3^rd ed. San Diego California, USA: Elsevier Academic Press; 2004. [ Links ]

26. Wayne WD. Bioestadística base para el análisis de las ciencias de la salud. 4ta ed. México DF: Limusa, SA de CV; 2004. [ Links ]

27. BS ISO 10399:2004. Sensory analysis-Methodology-Duo-trio test. 2004. [ Links ]

28. Brewer MS. The chemistry of beef flavor -Executive summary. Centennial, CO. Illinois, USA. National Cattlemen's Beef Association. 2006. [ Links ]

29. Johnson MH, Calkins CR, Huffman RD, Johnson DD, Hargrove DD. Differences in cathepsin B + L and calcium dependent protease activities among breed type and their relationship to beef tenderness. J Anim Sci 1990;(68):2371-2379. [ Links ]

30. Riley DG, Chase CC, Jr, Pringle TD, West RL, Johnson DD, Olson TA, et al. Effect of sire on m- and m-calpain activity and rate of tenderization as indicated by myofibril fragmentation indices of steaks from Brahman cattle. J Anim Sci 2003;(81):2440-2447. [ Links ]

31. Schereus NM, García F, Jurie C, Agabriel J, Micol D, Bauchart D, et al. Meta-analysis of the effect of animal maturity on muscle characteristics in different muscles, breeds, and sexes of cattle. J Anim Sci 2008;(86):2872-2887. [ Links ]

32. Howard ST. Beef tenderness and the management of calf-fed Holstein steers to meet market standards [doctoral thesis]. Colorado, USA: Colorado State University; 2013. [ Links ]

33. Garmyn AJ, Miller MF. Meat science and muscle biology symposium-Implant and beta agonist impacts on beef palatability. J Anim Sci 2014;(92):10-20. [ Links ]

34. Tansawat R. Chemical characterization of meat related to animal diet. [ All Graduate Theses and Dissertations]. http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/1339. 2012. Accessed Dec 12, 2014. [ Links ]

Received: March 02, 2015; Accepted: April 23, 2015

Este es un artículo publicado en acceso abierto bajo una licencia Creative Commons