Comparison of two instruments (G2 Tenderometer and a Lloyd Texture analyser) for measuring the shear force of cooked meat
D. L. Hopkins A D , E. S. Toohey B , M. J. Kerr A and R. van de Ven CA Industry & Investment NSW (Primary Industries), Centre for Red Meat and Sheep Development, PO Box 129, Cowra, NSW 2794, Australia.
B Industry & Investment NSW (Primary Industries), PO Box 865 Dubbo, NSW 2830, Australia.
C Industry & Investment NSW (Primary Industries), Orange Agricultural Institute, Forest Road, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: david.hopkins@industry.nsw.gov.au
Animal Production Science 51(1) 71-76 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN10136
Submitted: 29 July 2010 Accepted: 20 October 2010 Published: 15 December 2010
Abstract
A comparison of the peak shear force results for a Lloyd texture analyser and a G2 Tenderometer was undertaken using both sheep and beef meat. The G2 is a new version of the Tenderometer developed originally by the Meat Industry Research Institute of New Zealand and uses an electric linear motor to compress the sample, but still retains the blunt wedge-shaped ‘tooth’. By comparison the Lloyd texture analyser can be used with a shearing head derived from the Warner–Bratzler type of head. Analysis of sheep samples (n = 148) and beef samples (n = 192) of the same size revealed that the average G2 Tenderometer shear force results were ~1.3 times those for the Lloyd when testing less tender samples. An examination of the repeatability within cook block samples for these less tender sub-samples revealed a coefficient of variation of ~12% for both the Lloyd and Tenderometer instruments. For the more tender samples, the average results for the two instruments did not differ significantly, but for less tender samples it was observed that the results for the Tenderometer were more variable than those for the Lloyd texture analyser. Data on shear force generated by the G2 are not equivalent to that generated by the Lloyd and use of the G2 requires more replicates to be tested per sample to achieve an equivalent level of precision to that of a Lloyd texture analyser. As a guide only, G2 Tenderometer values can by multiplied by 0.75–0.80 to give approximate Lloyd results if required for samples of average toughness, otherwise the following model can be used Lloyd = 2.49 Tenderometer0.72.
Additional keywords: beef, lamb.
References
Bourne M (2002) ‘Food texture and viscosity: concept and measurement.’ 2nd edn. (Academic Press: San Diego)Bouton PE, Harris PV (1972) A comparison of some objective methods to assess meat tenderness. Journal of Food Science 37, 218–221.
| A comparison of some objective methods to assess meat tenderness.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Chatfield C, Collins AJ (1980) ‘Introduction to multivariate analysis.’ (Chapman and Hall: London)
Cummings TL, Pitt AW, Simmons NJ, Johnson NV, McGurk JM, Daly CC (2008) A simple and portable electric device to measure cooked meat tenderness. In ‘Proceedings of the 54th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology’. Paper 22. Cape Town, South Africa.
Gilmour AR, Gogel BJ, Cullis BR, Thompson R (2006) ‘ASReml User Guide Release 2.0.’ (VSN International: Hemel Hempstead, UK)
Graafhuis AE, Honikel KO, Devine CE, Chrystall BB (1991) Meat tenderness of different muscles cooked to different temperatures and assessed by different methods. In ‘Proceedings of the 37th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology’. pp. 365–368. Kulmbach, Germany.
Hopkins DL, Thompson JM (2001) The relationship between tenderness, proteolysis, muscle contraction and dissociation of actomyosin. Meat Science 57, 1–12.
| The relationship between tenderness, proteolysis, muscle contraction and dissociation of actomyosin.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3cXmslKltrg%3D&md5=e01a7a157a755b80f862dace914670deCAS |
Hopkins DL, Hegarty RS, Walker PJ, Pethick DW (2006) Relationship between animal age, intramuscular fat, cooking loss, pH, shear force and eating quality of aged meat from young sheep. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46, 879–884.
| Relationship between animal age, intramuscular fat, cooking loss, pH, shear force and eating quality of aged meat from young sheep.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hopkins DL, Stanley DF, Martin LC, Toohey ES, Gilmour AR (2007) Genotype and age effects on sheep meat production. 3. Meat quality. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47, 1155–1164.
| Genotype and age effects on sheep meat production. 3. Meat quality.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
MacFarlane PG, Marer JM (1966) An apparatus for determining the tenderness of meat. Food Technology 6, 134–135.
Peachey BM, Purchas RW, Duzier LM (2002) Relationships between sensory and objective measures of meat tenderness of beef m. longissimus thoracis from bulls and steers. Meat Science 60, 211–218.
| Relationships between sensory and objective measures of meat tenderness of beef m. longissimus thoracis from bulls and steers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Perry D, Shorthose WR, Ferguson DM, Thompson JM (2001) Methods used in the CRC program for the determination of carcass yield and beef quality. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 41, 953–957.
| Methods used in the CRC program for the determination of carcass yield and beef quality.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Purchas RW (2004) Tenderness measurement. In ‘Encyclopedia of meat sciences’. (Eds W Jensen, C Devine, M Dikeman) pp. 1370–1376. (Elsevier: Oxford)
Rosenvold K, North M, Devine C, Micklander E, Hansen P, Dobbie P, Wells R (2009) The protective effect of electrical stimulation and wrapping on beef tenderness at high pre rigor temperatures. Meat Science 79, 299–306.
| The protective effect of electrical stimulation and wrapping on beef tenderness at high pre rigor temperatures.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Safari E, Hopkins DL, Munro BC, Hall DG, Thornberry KJ (2000) The meat quality of a Branded lamb product compared to generic lamb product. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 13, 358–361.
Thompson JM (2002) Managing meat tenderness. Meat Science 62, 295–308.
| Managing meat tenderness.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Toohey ES, Hopkins DL, Nielsen SG, Gutzke D (2009) Impact of a meat stretching device on sheep meat quality. In ‘Proceedings of the 55th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology’. pp. 78–82. Copenhagen, Denmark.
Wheeler TL, Shackelford SD, Johnson LP, Miller MF, Miller RK, Koohmaraie M (1997) A comparison of Warner–Bratzler shear force assessment within and among institutions. Journal of Animal Science 75, 2423–2432.
