Fatty Acid Characterization of Beef Longissimus from Steers Finished on Fodder Beet or Traditional Winter Forages in New Zealand Compared to US Grain-Fed Beef

J. T. Milopoulos, A. Garmyn, R. C. Wilkinson, Mark F Miller, J. T. Milopoulos, A. Garmyn, M. F. Miller
{"title":"Fatty Acid Characterization of Beef Longissimus from Steers Finished on Fodder Beet or Traditional Winter Forages in New Zealand Compared to US Grain-Fed Beef","authors":"J. T. Milopoulos, A. Garmyn, R. C. Wilkinson, Mark F Miller, J. T. Milopoulos, A. Garmyn, M. F. Miller","doi":"10.22175/mmb.10357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Fatty acids were evaluated to characterize lipid profiles of beef from 3 feeding programs: New Zealand (NZ) fodder beet (FB), NZ grass/non-FB (NFB), and United States grain. Strip loins were selected within each program based on expected eating quality focusing on marbling, ossification, and pH. Selection resulted in 6 treatments: FB high quality, FB low quality, NFB high quality, NFB low quality, US Top Choice, and US Select. Samples were aged 21 d or 35 d postmortem. A subset of 152 samples (12–13 per treatment combination) were used for fatty acid characterization. Within the polar lipid fraction, US treatments had lower monounsaturated fatty acid (MUFA) and greater polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) than NZ treatments (P < 0.05). Within the neutral lipid fraction, concentrations of total neutral lipids and proportions of saturated fatty acid, MUFA, and PUFA were affected by treatment (P < 0.05). Total neutral lipids were greatest in Top Choice (P < 0.05) and greater in FB high quality than all other treatments (P < 0.05). Proportions of satu- rated fatty acid in the neutral lipid fraction were greater in NFB treatments than US treatments (P < 0.05); FB treatments were intermediate. Proportions of MUFA were greatest in Top Choice (P < 0.05). Proportions of PUFA were greatest (P < 0.05) in Select, greater in Top Choice than all NZ treatments (P < 0.05), and greater in NFB treatments than FB treatments (P < 0.05). No interactions occurred for any groups of fatty acids in either fraction ( P > 0.05), and aging did not affect fatty acid composition. Lipid profiles were impacted by finishing diet; however, most differences were between US grain-fed beef and NZ treatments—with limited differences between FB and NFB samples—when product was selected based on quality descriptors. Therefore, FB could be substituted for grass forages to sustain the NZ beef industry through winter months and limit seasonality without detrimental effects on product quality.","PeriodicalId":18316,"journal":{"name":"Meat and Muscle Biology","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Meat and Muscle Biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22175/mmb.10357","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Fatty acids were evaluated to characterize lipid profiles of beef from 3 feeding programs: New Zealand (NZ) fodder beet (FB), NZ grass/non-FB (NFB), and United States grain. Strip loins were selected within each program based on expected eating quality focusing on marbling, ossification, and pH. Selection resulted in 6 treatments: FB high quality, FB low quality, NFB high quality, NFB low quality, US Top Choice, and US Select. Samples were aged 21 d or 35 d postmortem. A subset of 152 samples (12–13 per treatment combination) were used for fatty acid characterization. Within the polar lipid fraction, US treatments had lower monounsaturated fatty acid (MUFA) and greater polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) than NZ treatments (P < 0.05). Within the neutral lipid fraction, concentrations of total neutral lipids and proportions of saturated fatty acid, MUFA, and PUFA were affected by treatment (P < 0.05). Total neutral lipids were greatest in Top Choice (P < 0.05) and greater in FB high quality than all other treatments (P < 0.05). Proportions of satu- rated fatty acid in the neutral lipid fraction were greater in NFB treatments than US treatments (P < 0.05); FB treatments were intermediate. Proportions of MUFA were greatest in Top Choice (P < 0.05). Proportions of PUFA were greatest (P < 0.05) in Select, greater in Top Choice than all NZ treatments (P < 0.05), and greater in NFB treatments than FB treatments (P < 0.05). No interactions occurred for any groups of fatty acids in either fraction ( P > 0.05), and aging did not affect fatty acid composition. Lipid profiles were impacted by finishing diet; however, most differences were between US grain-fed beef and NZ treatments—with limited differences between FB and NFB samples—when product was selected based on quality descriptors. Therefore, FB could be substituted for grass forages to sustain the NZ beef industry through winter months and limit seasonality without detrimental effects on product quality.
与美国谷物饲养牛肉相比,新西兰饲用饲料甜菜或传统冬季饲料的阉牛最长肌的脂肪酸特征
脂肪酸被评估来表征3种饲养方案的牛肉的脂质特征:新西兰(NZ)饲料甜菜(FB),新西兰草/非FB (NFB)和美国谷物。在每个方案中,根据预期的食用质量,重点是大理石花纹、骨化和ph值,选择条状腰肉。选择产生6个处理:FB优质、FB低质量、NFB优质、NFB低质量、US Top Choice和US Select。标本在死后21 d或35 d采集。152个样本的子集(每个治疗组合12-13个)用于脂肪酸表征。在极性脂肪组分中,US处理的单不饱和脂肪酸(MUFA)低于NZ处理,多不饱和脂肪酸(PUFA)高于NZ处理(P < 0.05)。在中性脂部分,总中性脂浓度和饱和脂肪酸、多聚脂肪酸和多聚脂肪酸的比例受不同处理的影响(P < 0.05)。总中性脂在Top Choice组最高(P < 0.05),在FB优质组最高(P < 0.05)。中性脂肪部分中饱和脂肪酸的比例在NFB组高于US组(P < 0.05);FB处理为中间处理。MUFA比例以Top Choice最高(P < 0.05)。精选组PUFA含量最高(P < 0.05), Top Choice组高于所有NZ组(P < 0.05), NFB组高于FB组(P < 0.05)。各组脂肪酸之间均无相互作用(P < 0.05),老化对脂肪酸组成无影响。肥育日粮影响脂质谱;然而,当根据质量描述符选择产品时,大多数差异是在美国谷物饲养的牛肉和新西兰处理之间- FB和NFB样品之间的差异有限。因此,FB可以代替草料来维持新西兰牛肉产业度过冬季,并限制季节性,而不会对产品质量产生不利影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信