scholarly journals Fragmentation, Tenderness, and Post-Mortem Metabolism of Early-Harvested Broiler Breast Fillets from Carcasses Treated with Electrical Stimulation and Muscle Tensioning

1993 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 577-582 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.G. BIRKHOLD ◽  
A.R. SAMS
1989 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 249-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.E. LYON ◽  
C.E. DAVIS ◽  
J.A. DICKENS ◽  
C.M. PAPA ◽  
J.O. REAGAN

1989 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.M. PAPA ◽  
C.E. LYON ◽  
D.L. FLETCHER

Meat Science ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 77 (3) ◽  
pp. 372-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristin Hollung ◽  
Eva Veiseth ◽  
Terje Frøystein ◽  
Laila Aass ◽  
Øyvind Langsrud ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
A.V. Fisher ◽  
G. Cook ◽  
G.A.J. Fursey ◽  
G.R. Nute

Purchasing specifications for beef carcasses have been aimed at reducing carcass variability and elevating the visual and keeping qualities of retail cuts. But more recently, the Meat and Livestock Commission's blueprint for improved consistent quality beef has incorporated a number of post-mortem treatments aimed at improving tenderness. Do these treatments which include electrical stimulation, pelvic bone suspension, slow chilling and prolonged ageing, exert an influence on quality which masks the intrinsic variation due to the primary production factors of feed, age, sex and possibly breed, or are the production and post-mortem effects additive? To what extent are the post-mortem treatments themselves additive?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document