- Email: [email protected]
Comparison of nix color sensor and nix color sensor pro to standard meat science research colorimeters
Abstracts
where Standard steaks were lower (P b 0.05) when compared to Prime and Low Choice. Conclusion: Overall, these findings indicate that QG has moderate effects on the thermal and physical properties of steaks at refrigerated temperatures (3-5 °C). It is recognized that a divergence in physical properties, such as shear force, occurs between quality grades after cooking. Therefore, further data at progressive cooked internal temperatures will be collected to elucidate the effects of quality grade on the thermal and physical properties of beef. Keywords: quality grade, strip steak, thermophysical doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.08.128
Meat and Poultry Quality and Composition - Measurement and Prediction 109 Comparison of nix color sensor and nix color sensor pro to standard meat science research colorimeters J. Hodgen⁎, Merck Animal Health, DeSoto, United States Objectives: Color is a key attribute in consumers buying fresh meat. Monitoring of color to maximize shelf life and consumer acceptability can be cumbersome due to restrictions of typical lab scale colorimeters such as the Minolta and Hunter systems. While these are high performance devices that deliver very precise measurements, their expense and portability may possibly limit the amount of data that could be collected in everyday application. Therefore, the objective of this research was to comparatively test a colorimeter with a smartphone app originally developed for the paint industry with the Minolta and Hunter systems to determine if a smaller, more affordable device would have application in the meat industry. Materials and methods: A Konica Minolta Chroma Meter CR-410 (MIN; Konica Minolta Sensing Americas, Inc, New Jersey, USA), a Hunter MiniScan EZ (HMS; Hunter Associates Laboratory, Reston, VA), Nix Color Sensor (NIX; Nix Sensor, Ltd, Burlington, Ontario, Canada) and Nix Color Sensor Pro (NPRO; Nix Sensor, Ltd, Burlington, Ontario, Canada) were tested by averaging 3 scans against colored paper (white, red, pink, grey, and brown) and multiple cuts of meat from chicken, pork, and beef with various stages of visually determined myoglobin development. Results: All of the sensors recorded similar results for the paper samples (P N 0.05). Deoxymyoglobin and oxymyoglobin samples had less than 2 units difference for each L*, a*, and b* between the 4 devices. The difference seen between the NIX and NPRO versus the MIN and HMS is in-part due to significant digits reported by each device. Metmyoglobin samples saw more color difference (P b 0.05) between the NIX and NPRO compared to the MIN and HMS. This difference may be due to the optic view size, so while each scan was in the same place on the sample for each device, the NIX and NPRO scanned a smaller area. The smaller area does allow for easier avoidance of connective tissue or fat bands, and two tone areas, but more research should be conducted as the optimal number of scans might be 4-6 rather than 3 as with the standard colorimeters. Conclusion: As the app continues to be updated and offer more features, ease and quickness of use has been improved for the NIX and NPRO. A feature of the NIX and NPRO that has the potential to increase consumer acceptability research is the instant generation of visual color panels.The affordability of the Nix Color Sensors might allow for more concurrent and timely research over various locations. Overall the NIX and the NPRO seem to be viable options for color research in meat science. Keywords: Color, Hunter Miniscan, Minolta CR-410, Nix Color Sensor doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.08.129
159
Meat and Poultry Quality and Composition - Measurement and Prediction 110 Effect of zilpaterol hydrochloride supplementation and dietary intake level on beef carcass fabrication yields A.N. Schmitza,⁎, L.-A.J. Waltera, W.T. Nicholsb, J.P. Hutchesonb, T.E. Lawrencea, aWest Texas A&M University, Canyon, bMerck Animal Health, Summit, United States Objectives: An experiment was performed to evaluate the fabrication yields of carcasses from over-finished beef steers supplemented zilpaterol hydrochloride (ZH) and fed at maintenance (M) or ad libitum (AL) intake levels. Materials and methods: Single-sired beef steers (n = 56) were blocked (n = 28 per block) by implant status and sorted into pairs by weight. A harvest d of 0, 28, or 56 and a M or AL diet level within d 28 and 56 was randomly assigned to each pair. Additionally, supplementation of ZH was randomly applied within a pair for each of M and AL diet levels. Steers were individually weighed on d 0, 1, 27, 28, 55, and 56 following feed and water withdrawal for a 9 h period. Adjustments for DMI on M diet level were performed accordingly by weighing steers on d 11 and 21 with AL bunk calls adjusted daily depending on feed refusal. ZH was fed continuously at 90 mg for 20 d followed by a withdrawal period of 4 d. Steers were finished to above typical slaughter weights (BW = 603.5 ± 48.1 kg) prior to harvest at a commercial processing facility. After a 24 h chill period, standard USDA grading procedures were used to derive a calculated yield grade (3.7 ± 0.3). Following grading procedures, the left side of each carcass was transported to the West Texas A&M University Meat Laboratory for fabrication processes. Each side was fabricated into subprimals to determine individual red meat yield (RMY), trimmable fat yield (TFY), and bone yield (BY). A mixed model was used for analysis; fixed effects included treatment combinations and random effects included block and pairs. Single df contrasts tested d 0 vs. 28, d 0 vs. 56, d 28 vs. 56, M vs. AL, and Control (CON) vs. ZH. Differences were considered significant at a P-value ≤ 0.05 and trends at a P-value ≥ 0.05 and ≤ 0.10. Results: Yield of chuck eye roll differed (P b 0.05) by harvest day (0 = 4.1, 28 = 4.1, 56 = 4.6 %), intake (M = 4.41, AL = 4.40 %), and treatment (CON = 4.6, ZH = 4.5 %). Similarly, eye of round yield was impacted (P b 0.05) by harvest day (0 = 1.5, 28 = 1.4, 56 = 1.4 %), intake (M = 1.4, AL = 1.3 %), and treatment (CON = 1.3, ZH = 1.4 %). Additionally, brisket yield was altered (P b 0.01) by harvest day (0 = 4.1, 28 = 3.6, 56 = 3.5 %), intake (M = 3.47, AL = 3.54 %), and treatment (CON = 3.4, ZH = 3.6 %). Days on feed, intake and treatment tended (P b 0.09) to alter shoulder clod yield (0 = 2.2, 28 = 2.0, 56 = 2.0 %; M = 2.0, AL = 1.9 %; CON = 1.9, ZH = 2.1 %). For remaining subprimals, no differences (P ≥ 0.15) were detected. Furthermore, results indicated that RMY tended (P b 0.07) to differ by harvest day (0 = 64.0, 28 = 63.3, 56 = 62.5 %), intake (M = 63.4, AL = 62.1 %), and treatment (CON = 61.4, ZH = 63.7 %). Comparatively, TFY was impacted (P b 0.04) by harvest day (0 = 20.9, 28 = 21.0, 56 = 22.4 %), intake (M = 20.5, AL = 23.3 %), and treatment (CON = 23.5, ZH = 21.3 %). No difference (P = 0.80) was detected for BY (15.7 ± 0.01 %). Conclusion: The results from this study indicate that intake level during the last 56 days of finishing and ZH supplementation affect subprimal yield of chuck eye roll, eye of round, brisket, and shoulder clod as well as carcass RMY and FY of beef steers. Keywords: Beef, carcass composition, Zilpaterol Hydrochloride doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.08.130
where Standard steaks were lower (P b 0.05) when compared to Prime and Low Choice. Conclusion: Overall, these findings indicate that QG has moderate effects on the thermal and physical properties of steaks at refrigerated temperatures (3-5 °C). It is recognized that a divergence in physical properties, such as shear force, occurs between quality grades after cooking. Therefore, further data at progressive cooked internal temperatures will be collected to elucidate the effects of quality grade on the thermal and physical properties of beef. Keywords: quality grade, strip steak, thermophysical doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.08.128
Meat and Poultry Quality and Composition - Measurement and Prediction 109 Comparison of nix color sensor and nix color sensor pro to standard meat science research colorimeters J. Hodgen⁎, Merck Animal Health, DeSoto, United States Objectives: Color is a key attribute in consumers buying fresh meat. Monitoring of color to maximize shelf life and consumer acceptability can be cumbersome due to restrictions of typical lab scale colorimeters such as the Minolta and Hunter systems. While these are high performance devices that deliver very precise measurements, their expense and portability may possibly limit the amount of data that could be collected in everyday application. Therefore, the objective of this research was to comparatively test a colorimeter with a smartphone app originally developed for the paint industry with the Minolta and Hunter systems to determine if a smaller, more affordable device would have application in the meat industry. Materials and methods: A Konica Minolta Chroma Meter CR-410 (MIN; Konica Minolta Sensing Americas, Inc, New Jersey, USA), a Hunter MiniScan EZ (HMS; Hunter Associates Laboratory, Reston, VA), Nix Color Sensor (NIX; Nix Sensor, Ltd, Burlington, Ontario, Canada) and Nix Color Sensor Pro (NPRO; Nix Sensor, Ltd, Burlington, Ontario, Canada) were tested by averaging 3 scans against colored paper (white, red, pink, grey, and brown) and multiple cuts of meat from chicken, pork, and beef with various stages of visually determined myoglobin development. Results: All of the sensors recorded similar results for the paper samples (P N 0.05). Deoxymyoglobin and oxymyoglobin samples had less than 2 units difference for each L*, a*, and b* between the 4 devices. The difference seen between the NIX and NPRO versus the MIN and HMS is in-part due to significant digits reported by each device. Metmyoglobin samples saw more color difference (P b 0.05) between the NIX and NPRO compared to the MIN and HMS. This difference may be due to the optic view size, so while each scan was in the same place on the sample for each device, the NIX and NPRO scanned a smaller area. The smaller area does allow for easier avoidance of connective tissue or fat bands, and two tone areas, but more research should be conducted as the optimal number of scans might be 4-6 rather than 3 as with the standard colorimeters. Conclusion: As the app continues to be updated and offer more features, ease and quickness of use has been improved for the NIX and NPRO. A feature of the NIX and NPRO that has the potential to increase consumer acceptability research is the instant generation of visual color panels.The affordability of the Nix Color Sensors might allow for more concurrent and timely research over various locations. Overall the NIX and the NPRO seem to be viable options for color research in meat science. Keywords: Color, Hunter Miniscan, Minolta CR-410, Nix Color Sensor doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.08.129
159
Meat and Poultry Quality and Composition - Measurement and Prediction 110 Effect of zilpaterol hydrochloride supplementation and dietary intake level on beef carcass fabrication yields A.N. Schmitza,⁎, L.-A.J. Waltera, W.T. Nicholsb, J.P. Hutchesonb, T.E. Lawrencea, aWest Texas A&M University, Canyon, bMerck Animal Health, Summit, United States Objectives: An experiment was performed to evaluate the fabrication yields of carcasses from over-finished beef steers supplemented zilpaterol hydrochloride (ZH) and fed at maintenance (M) or ad libitum (AL) intake levels. Materials and methods: Single-sired beef steers (n = 56) were blocked (n = 28 per block) by implant status and sorted into pairs by weight. A harvest d of 0, 28, or 56 and a M or AL diet level within d 28 and 56 was randomly assigned to each pair. Additionally, supplementation of ZH was randomly applied within a pair for each of M and AL diet levels. Steers were individually weighed on d 0, 1, 27, 28, 55, and 56 following feed and water withdrawal for a 9 h period. Adjustments for DMI on M diet level were performed accordingly by weighing steers on d 11 and 21 with AL bunk calls adjusted daily depending on feed refusal. ZH was fed continuously at 90 mg for 20 d followed by a withdrawal period of 4 d. Steers were finished to above typical slaughter weights (BW = 603.5 ± 48.1 kg) prior to harvest at a commercial processing facility. After a 24 h chill period, standard USDA grading procedures were used to derive a calculated yield grade (3.7 ± 0.3). Following grading procedures, the left side of each carcass was transported to the West Texas A&M University Meat Laboratory for fabrication processes. Each side was fabricated into subprimals to determine individual red meat yield (RMY), trimmable fat yield (TFY), and bone yield (BY). A mixed model was used for analysis; fixed effects included treatment combinations and random effects included block and pairs. Single df contrasts tested d 0 vs. 28, d 0 vs. 56, d 28 vs. 56, M vs. AL, and Control (CON) vs. ZH. Differences were considered significant at a P-value ≤ 0.05 and trends at a P-value ≥ 0.05 and ≤ 0.10. Results: Yield of chuck eye roll differed (P b 0.05) by harvest day (0 = 4.1, 28 = 4.1, 56 = 4.6 %), intake (M = 4.41, AL = 4.40 %), and treatment (CON = 4.6, ZH = 4.5 %). Similarly, eye of round yield was impacted (P b 0.05) by harvest day (0 = 1.5, 28 = 1.4, 56 = 1.4 %), intake (M = 1.4, AL = 1.3 %), and treatment (CON = 1.3, ZH = 1.4 %). Additionally, brisket yield was altered (P b 0.01) by harvest day (0 = 4.1, 28 = 3.6, 56 = 3.5 %), intake (M = 3.47, AL = 3.54 %), and treatment (CON = 3.4, ZH = 3.6 %). Days on feed, intake and treatment tended (P b 0.09) to alter shoulder clod yield (0 = 2.2, 28 = 2.0, 56 = 2.0 %; M = 2.0, AL = 1.9 %; CON = 1.9, ZH = 2.1 %). For remaining subprimals, no differences (P ≥ 0.15) were detected. Furthermore, results indicated that RMY tended (P b 0.07) to differ by harvest day (0 = 64.0, 28 = 63.3, 56 = 62.5 %), intake (M = 63.4, AL = 62.1 %), and treatment (CON = 61.4, ZH = 63.7 %). Comparatively, TFY was impacted (P b 0.04) by harvest day (0 = 20.9, 28 = 21.0, 56 = 22.4 %), intake (M = 20.5, AL = 23.3 %), and treatment (CON = 23.5, ZH = 21.3 %). No difference (P = 0.80) was detected for BY (15.7 ± 0.01 %). Conclusion: The results from this study indicate that intake level during the last 56 days of finishing and ZH supplementation affect subprimal yield of chuck eye roll, eye of round, brisket, and shoulder clod as well as carcass RMY and FY of beef steers. Keywords: Beef, carcass composition, Zilpaterol Hydrochloride doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.08.130