Boar taint detection: A comparison of three sensory protocols

被引:27
|
作者
Trautmann, Johanna [1 ]
Meier-Dinkel, Lisa [1 ]
Gertheiss, Jan [2 ]
Moerlein, Daniel [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Gottingen, Dept Anim Sci, Meat Sci Grp, D-37075 Gottingen, Germany
[2] Univ Gottingen, Dept Anim Sci, Biometr & Bioinformat Grp, D-37075 Gottingen, Germany
[3] Isi GmbH & Co KG, D-37124 Gottingen, Germany
关键词
Androstenone; Skatole; Meat quality; Pig; Castration; Animal welfare; Quality control; Pork; OLFACTORY ACUITY AFFECTS; CHEMICAL SENSES; HEATING METHODS; ANDROSTENONE; PERCEPTION; PERFORMANCE; SKATOLE; QUALITY; FAT;
D O I
10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.08.011
中图分类号
TS2 [食品工业];
学科分类号
0832 ;
摘要
While recent studies state an important role of human sensory methods for daily routine control of so-called boar taint, the evaluation of different heating methods is still incomplete. This study investigated three common heating methods (microwave (MW), hot-water (HW), hot-iron (HI)) for boar fat evaluation. The comparison was carried out on 72 samples with a 10-person sensory panel. The heating method significantly affected the probability of a deviant rating. Compared to an assumed 'gold standard' (chemical analysis), the performance was best for HI when both sensitivity and specificity were considered. The results show the superiority of the panel result compared to individual assessors. However, the consistency of the individual sensory ratings was not significantly different between MW, HW, and HI. The three protocols showed only fair to moderate agreement. Concluding from the present results, the hot-iron method appears to be advantageous for boar taint evaluation as compared to microwave and hot-water. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:92 / 100
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Boar taint: The sensory perspective - Olfactory perception, consumer acceptance and trained sensory panel evaluation of boar taint
    Moerlein, D.
    ZUCHTUNGSKUNDE, 2012, 84 (05): : 427 - 438
  • [2] Breed differences in boar taint: Relationship between tissue levels of boar taint compounds and sensory analysis of taint
    Xue, JL
    Dial, GD
    Holton, EE
    Vickers, Z
    Squires, EJ
    Loy, YP
    Godbout, D
    Morel, N
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 1996, 74 (09) : 2170 - 2177
  • [3] Limits to the Detection of Boar Taint
    Meinert, Lene
    Claudi-Magnussen, Chris
    Stoier, Susanne
    FLEISCHWIRTSCHAFT, 2013, 93 (02): : 24 - 27
  • [4] Sensory characterization of boar taint in entire male pigs
    Furnols, MFI
    Guerrero, L
    Serra, X
    Rius, MA
    Oliver, MA
    JOURNAL OF SENSORY STUDIES, 2000, 15 (04) : 393 - 409
  • [5] Consumer studies on sensory acceptability of boar taint: A review
    Font-i-Furnols, Maria
    MEAT SCIENCE, 2012, 92 (04) : 319 - 329
  • [6] PARTICULARITY OF SENSORY EVALUATION OF "BOAR TAINT" IN THE PORK BY CONSUMERS
    Povod, Mykola
    Bankovska, Irina
    Shpetnyi, Mykola
    Mykeialko, Olekasndr
    SCIENTIFIC PAPERS-SERIES MANAGEMENT ECONOMIC ENGINEERING IN AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, 2020, 20 (02) : 389 - 394
  • [7] Abnormal Flavour in the Boar Fattening Boar Taint Analytics in Comparison
    Nolte, Thomas
    Hoelscher, Maike
    Upmann, Matthias
    Zapp, Juergen
    DEUTSCHE LEBENSMITTEL-RUNDSCHAU, 2017, 113 (01) : 17 - 22
  • [8] The development of 'response classes' for boar taint based on sensory assessment
    Annor-Frempong, IE
    Nute, GR
    Wood, JD
    Whittington, FW
    BOAR TAINT IN ENTIRE MALE PIGS, 1997, (92): : 152 - 155
  • [9] 'Boar taint'
    Campbell, Bonnie Jo
    KENYON REVIEW, 2008, 30 (03): : 60 - 73
  • [10] Evaluation of various boar taint detection methods
    Aluwe, M.
    Tuyttens, F. A. M.
    Bekaert, K. M.
    De Smet, S.
    De Brabander, D. L.
    Millet, S.
    ANIMAL, 2012, 6 (11) : 1868 - 1877