<%BANNER%>

Value Optimization of Muscles from the Veal Chuck

University of Florida Institutional Repository
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0022327/00001

Material Information

Title: Value Optimization of Muscles from the Veal Chuck
Physical Description: 1 online resource (101 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Sapp, Brian
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Animal Sciences -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Animal Sciences thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Objectives were to characterize muscles from the veal chuck and evaluate the performance and usefulness of these muscles. For Phase one, IMPS 308 and IMPS 309 were purchased from two separate veal packers, all were from USDA Choice or higher veal carcasses. The chucks were dissected to obtain the following muscles: Complexus (COM), Deep Pectoral (DEP), Infraspinatus (INF), Rhomboidus (RHM), Serratus Ventralis (SEV), Splenius (SPL), Supraspinatus (SUP), Triceps Brachii (TRB) and the Teres Major (TER). Each muscle was weighed to determine percent yield. The heaviest muscle and highest percentage of chuck was the TRB. The lightest muscle and lowest percentage of chuck was the TER. Muscles were vacuum packaged individually and aged fourteen days postmortem prior to freezing. For sensory evaluation, steaks were grilled on Hamilton Beach table top grills to an internal temperature of 71?C. Samples were evaluated by a trained panel that scored overall tenderness, juiciness, flavor, connective tissue and off-flavor. The INF was the tenderest muscle evaluated. The RHM was significantly lower (P > .05) in tenderness from all other muscles in the study. The COM had the highest juiciness score. The SUP was found to be not significantly different (P > .05) from the COM. The muscle with the lowest juiciness score was the TRB. The INF and the SPL did not differ significantly (P > .05) from the TRB juiciness score. The SUP was found to have the most intense beef flavor. The COM was not significantly different (P > .05) from the SUP. The muscle with the lowest flavor intensity score was the SPL with and was not significantly different (P > .05) from the INF or the SPL. The INF was found to have the least amount of detectable connective tissue present with the TER being not significantly different (P > .05) from the INF. The RHM had the highest connective tissue score which significantly differed (P < .05) from all other muscles in the study. Off-flavor scores were low for all muscles evaluated in this study. For phase two, IMPS 309 were purchased from two separate veal packers, all were from USDA choice or higher veal carcasses. Objective color scores were obtained for each carcass at the flank and tenth rib. The muscles extracted included the COM, DEP, INF, SEV, SUP, TRB. Color measurements were taken using a Minolta CR-310 Chroma meter after 15 minutes of bloom time. Muscles were randomly assigned to four aging periods to determine the effect of aging time on retail display attributes. Days of post-mortem aging had an overall effect on subjective evaluations for overall appearance (P < .05) with all muscles reacting similarly when placed in a retail display setting. Postmortem aging had a significant (P < .05) effect on each muscle for subjective color, discoloration and purge. Post-mortem aging significantly affected subjective and objective color scores, concluding longer periods of post-mortem aging caused the muscles to become lighter (P < .05). This study found that the veal chuck contains muscles that will provide a useful application for dry heat cookery when muscles are separated and fabricated into steaks and that retail display integrity is affected by postmortem aging time. When the effort is made to further fabricate and process these muscle cuts, the potential for adding value to this low priced primal cut is evident.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Brian Sapp.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2008.
Local: Adviser: Johnson, Dalton D.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2008
System ID: UFE0022327:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0022327/00001

Material Information

Title: Value Optimization of Muscles from the Veal Chuck
Physical Description: 1 online resource (101 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Sapp, Brian
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: Animal Sciences -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Animal Sciences thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Objectives were to characterize muscles from the veal chuck and evaluate the performance and usefulness of these muscles. For Phase one, IMPS 308 and IMPS 309 were purchased from two separate veal packers, all were from USDA Choice or higher veal carcasses. The chucks were dissected to obtain the following muscles: Complexus (COM), Deep Pectoral (DEP), Infraspinatus (INF), Rhomboidus (RHM), Serratus Ventralis (SEV), Splenius (SPL), Supraspinatus (SUP), Triceps Brachii (TRB) and the Teres Major (TER). Each muscle was weighed to determine percent yield. The heaviest muscle and highest percentage of chuck was the TRB. The lightest muscle and lowest percentage of chuck was the TER. Muscles were vacuum packaged individually and aged fourteen days postmortem prior to freezing. For sensory evaluation, steaks were grilled on Hamilton Beach table top grills to an internal temperature of 71?C. Samples were evaluated by a trained panel that scored overall tenderness, juiciness, flavor, connective tissue and off-flavor. The INF was the tenderest muscle evaluated. The RHM was significantly lower (P > .05) in tenderness from all other muscles in the study. The COM had the highest juiciness score. The SUP was found to be not significantly different (P > .05) from the COM. The muscle with the lowest juiciness score was the TRB. The INF and the SPL did not differ significantly (P > .05) from the TRB juiciness score. The SUP was found to have the most intense beef flavor. The COM was not significantly different (P > .05) from the SUP. The muscle with the lowest flavor intensity score was the SPL with and was not significantly different (P > .05) from the INF or the SPL. The INF was found to have the least amount of detectable connective tissue present with the TER being not significantly different (P > .05) from the INF. The RHM had the highest connective tissue score which significantly differed (P < .05) from all other muscles in the study. Off-flavor scores were low for all muscles evaluated in this study. For phase two, IMPS 309 were purchased from two separate veal packers, all were from USDA choice or higher veal carcasses. Objective color scores were obtained for each carcass at the flank and tenth rib. The muscles extracted included the COM, DEP, INF, SEV, SUP, TRB. Color measurements were taken using a Minolta CR-310 Chroma meter after 15 minutes of bloom time. Muscles were randomly assigned to four aging periods to determine the effect of aging time on retail display attributes. Days of post-mortem aging had an overall effect on subjective evaluations for overall appearance (P < .05) with all muscles reacting similarly when placed in a retail display setting. Postmortem aging had a significant (P < .05) effect on each muscle for subjective color, discoloration and purge. Post-mortem aging significantly affected subjective and objective color scores, concluding longer periods of post-mortem aging caused the muscles to become lighter (P < .05). This study found that the veal chuck contains muscles that will provide a useful application for dry heat cookery when muscles are separated and fabricated into steaks and that retail display integrity is affected by postmortem aging time. When the effort is made to further fabricate and process these muscle cuts, the potential for adding value to this low priced primal cut is evident.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Brian Sapp.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2008.
Local: Adviser: Johnson, Dalton D.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2008
System ID: UFE0022327:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20101212_AAAAAL INGEST_TIME 2010-12-12T08:35:18Z PACKAGE UFE0022327_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 2012 DFID F20101212_AAAKLG ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH sapp_b_Page_065.txt GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
bcfeb9e88db00350dcfe5a25f96bd679
SHA-1
4234940f92d914ee91b2e20ca861f99c3fb7cd2e
1859 F20101212_AAAKKR sapp_b_Page_050.txt
0d7f0508af011fccc9a303b5ad42f6a2
b3a99f253c6399e501e77e29c175c6cffac021fa
1879 F20101212_AAAKKS sapp_b_Page_051.txt
1c2229e0d6b4ad2921ac1cb828736470
8fa9601b4098616aec4e2eeee26cfdfd9e334bbf
1837 F20101212_AAAKLH sapp_b_Page_066.txt
20d05e6ec0c8df823af447bca63ccb43
3f77f67cc840888159ec47d85e87d2af078c8352
2117 F20101212_AAAKKT sapp_b_Page_052.txt
9ddb0ac328c466b0579ace96ae674fa6
d181abdea0b8ef53a13d8429b758822b4b57979b
1967 F20101212_AAAKLI sapp_b_Page_067.txt
3e27193ed1b2deed50b0526bf5d58cb9
b365a75a659f253c1af16c2c72842dd17aec3d3d
2140 F20101212_AAAKKU sapp_b_Page_053.txt
0eeb16f891467f91be4c2982738fa130
70ea9f618e776eedf083f270386858a2c59e77b0
1182 F20101212_AAAKLJ sapp_b_Page_068.txt
0e672f06cba4540c90402b311179d69a
d12e7a70fda4dd7d6d37b2d34fa21d8b5ed4ceea
1428 F20101212_AAAKKV sapp_b_Page_054.txt
c7c3671b54357d1d52ccdf0e89a4dba1
a76dea299cae9f21e07cb89e8979795e244f6490
972 F20101212_AAAKLK sapp_b_Page_069.txt
67d1ce4173e6856865db8c5b6741021a
d7bb411a7d9b06ae2d0911206e88b6f8610ac233
1776 F20101212_AAAKKW sapp_b_Page_055.txt
839f3803b24d69ab173befb8838a73fb
6dec41f19c66fb41a2d9e205eec3a52951e4a0e2
F20101212_AAAKLL sapp_b_Page_070.txt
9b1b4774e07906040728cedb795acd42
7bb27d17119892fabd2c3533a99bb4984cbe6ac1
1616 F20101212_AAAKKX sapp_b_Page_056.txt
934d961baf76f5e6adff1778203a2133
a5daf1be00b8d4376565d05b27c2315328ffebaf
2049 F20101212_AAAKMA sapp_b_Page_086.txt
8c4a1c886f0ce878d28c53f36bbc786b
33d2c42131e15e9475437ea4cbf3f1b9c633875b
1068 F20101212_AAAKLM sapp_b_Page_071.txt
837dc713012060c8c9d81e7ac830d083
418472c6bcb0d61edac4b758c7815b5b8f2b8871
2748 F20101212_AAAKKY sapp_b_Page_057.txt
8791b1137edd153044406c16870bb4e4
e09e31e306137472ca8acaa585605627caf591e3
1021 F20101212_AAAKMB sapp_b_Page_087.txt
d748f157e3efc00773f43c99f333945a
104ab6fe27a04c4a76d0c0809d40bb8f577d1009
1127 F20101212_AAAKLN sapp_b_Page_072.txt
148b93c472280a4ac7f9fd870226f9b4
ae78626d8b5ecc33703749cff026bf3bf13b3283
1868 F20101212_AAAKKZ sapp_b_Page_058.txt
180581dcfa36778f95f6746c05cd3561
57669c616dd83899a4454dfc2d02b81fbb211e28
1777 F20101212_AAAKMC sapp_b_Page_088.txt
702ce93479e84ed3aed2fe2dccbcf5ba
5f4c00a7869aa49ed83ef866ecb71fd7b57618db
1607 F20101212_AAAKLO sapp_b_Page_073.txt
7b538e83224240654c7c7b8e3013bfde
6ea21984da060f84932f03ab364db201079f5ccb
1951 F20101212_AAAKMD sapp_b_Page_089.txt
7c7784957013b231d8b4df9e1c81972c
d158cf23ac57b519da8263dfb25fe515cec4954d
1775 F20101212_AAAKLP sapp_b_Page_074.txt
670366c44e7b1a62e8e59d6b36c345c1
10170e0607a3c4c3e17c766143591e0e183aca86
1844 F20101212_AAAKME sapp_b_Page_091.txt
637935c5f326b48dc029b49238bfa941
00424c9fc67c953138dffbc7b01f04dd40200046
1801 F20101212_AAAKLQ sapp_b_Page_075.txt
9e57a59975443fd3b6c0250fedbb50ad
96c20c65b754efc3fca4fe0bcadae7d0b29f2429
1955 F20101212_AAAKMF sapp_b_Page_092.txt
029965a071213745981ad748cc0519b7
15c5e6f200b67c9847a0f6651f12d1c786a28d33
910 F20101212_AAAKLR sapp_b_Page_076.txt
7c3ea9cbfdca239cb1c45457999d4bf7
f653c159b44d0f8f1eef31d880679763edde1212
1869 F20101212_AAAKMG sapp_b_Page_094.txt
d1642af2f87827636c6b57075bf68b41
32607369a1dbd480ca8ece0a04b0c293654bc49e
667 F20101212_AAAKLS sapp_b_Page_077.txt
0e6311675cd1ce2ed5e6eb67e2cf8192
877870c5f1282af43a3bd6d5b4d8b7bbaf9bbba9
2120 F20101212_AAAKMH sapp_b_Page_095.txt
9c8c7e6cb8127b278e7da29ef583a8dd
6f4367b0c250b9ceee34b0d7c119826a7c44df4e
492 F20101212_AAAKLT sapp_b_Page_079.txt
5fafe888b2575822ba62b973a070a396
d0c28b7aa3394711f3fa4a00e6702799ed6cc656
628 F20101212_AAAKLU sapp_b_Page_080.txt
8004de65f96fa8440cc3419dc7223e02
a8e222b313012fa64c5e51b3c0bb3b9ccdb68615
2211 F20101212_AAAKMI sapp_b_Page_096.txt
5fd7c0d2a2a1b82a4068b115a2db218a
8e576250f212b103ff126082a8e79456bf0b814b
1987 F20101212_AAAKLV sapp_b_Page_081.txt
9601c1de0225e30cc466f59b5b8b2207
210434656cb081e2f69fcd792b47ab946498716c
2496 F20101212_AAAKMJ sapp_b_Page_097.txt
c3880069678fea7640441f5a8e84f7d7
e6e87403ab1bf8993b9532c0ac8436a1919e9832
1926 F20101212_AAAKLW sapp_b_Page_082.txt
b3c85f8bb5ff114dbdfb037c89d3873b
52f6caf8033694915640187d83f1f54c1ac0ee24
2639 F20101212_AAAKMK sapp_b_Page_098.txt
d6bee54f9b69d7e53f9ed172cfdda97c
5cd2739e7d4627758df831ad25bfc30536fc77d8
33487 F20101212_AAAKNA sapp_b_Page_026.QC.jpg
2a4442541e411113f42b84a44a452d00
fce82c74da61b750867bbddf5371925618cba110
1911 F20101212_AAAKML sapp_b_Page_099.txt
2335874752facf7e81c34eafcbb6ed45
fee7780023d7eddfca74fdbac0cd65c43ab3c8b9
2195 F20101212_AAAKLX sapp_b_Page_083.txt
2d2ff4484ba2221d354b847fab20ff67
083705e424e54a445c163e0c7862a445bfb51820
4905 F20101212_AAAKNB sapp_b_Page_073thm.jpg
32415611266d1dc10d599c427c91a7ec
d3bc86fbf955ace40c590499e0f8949fdee32b46
2063 F20101212_AAAKMM sapp_b_Page_100.txt
6970ce33a54977b33b5f5b08c0744daf
c48a4ba585aee8df371ea844ed4dc639bf6e8767
148 F20101212_AAAKLY sapp_b_Page_084.txt
b8ef92f8e13f28d007e8de5965d6255a
ed09ff4257093793b78cf532c3350569090835a3
5087 F20101212_AAAKNC sapp_b_Page_076thm.jpg
4d09c69406eee4eb359b87e6fa139664
e6560aafb182efa8abfd99e7edf1445f010b688e
F20101212_AAAKMN sapp_b_Page_101.txt
293936a24a8e79576e57c5329b7befcb
991eff7169d0a0674caad77b35853e4c1d7993db
2228 F20101212_AAAKLZ sapp_b_Page_085.txt
cfc4d80eeb677e08c98a82115eaba17b
6fde36cba169ba53dbde99ff8e4f8e5f1bdd5132
32437 F20101212_AAAKND sapp_b_Page_049.QC.jpg
7f2408498d4c264148c47494bbd4b87d
0915c40c040c52d2a274d91cb81c4ad7dfb0d198
2055640 F20101212_AAAKMO sapp_b.pdf
a363a9ea102f21bd0d4ced4fdcb168d7
458b4e2dad20204839040bad554af6f3b0e43e9a
24814 F20101212_AAAKNE sapp_b_Page_043.QC.jpg
f2e2125fed860595ee4fa9dd31051838
e77cf47f43b27441da6267e78ebb733934eb24be
4802 F20101212_AAAKMP sapp_b_Page_072thm.jpg
6c6a7cbc5d4a747e36f9729864c4e28a
97f8223ec717ca636d7329cf9b3e0d33ca7ded4d
8997 F20101212_AAAKNF sapp_b_Page_021thm.jpg
259cf9758c03aeaf66dcff38dc09f27e
dce48f0d0bec2661be377adbaf546005767196a8
8862 F20101212_AAAKMQ sapp_b_Page_053thm.jpg
f30f73d918062ad84d2b689e08df8ea1
e1b84ecf15b063a82dccb566c9b4554cd36ced90
8124 F20101212_AAAKNG sapp_b_Page_096thm.jpg
2f845605e4ece93df4a03d14be6aabdf
675246ba71a111507e618128360135eee467557a
4818 F20101212_AAAKMR sapp_b_Page_071thm.jpg
5b2ae4f485f113a91ef3db3b934abe20
872604e3400f01a5ea1106d2d56387cb9ba087e5
37066 F20101212_AAAKNH sapp_b_Page_034.QC.jpg
5d97a561e170485f12538591fe56d352
3945c0c7599e60e3dfccecda023d4d245cbd76d0
35331 F20101212_AAAKMS sapp_b_Page_031.QC.jpg
510d6e2b88511790dffb7dee3eca2616
f0b4176f7198632c3757c05910575c0f7fcd9ab3
30261 F20101212_AAAKNI sapp_b_Page_093.QC.jpg
95fe927ffc78e46a648825280692f385
39bd1c0b0672f9241ea0ee3df85ecfd1588f7f05
1594 F20101212_AAAKMT sapp_b_Page_003.QC.jpg
638104f88472d67c7c85fa2f5abf5a3d
68a9178ccf908951a3a2215b31f6969091fc08cf
29547 F20101212_AAAKMU sapp_b_Page_088.QC.jpg
017264b10e1426ccb4f1e351ccd86e48
acf8a0d323b8b028a36614e7ee1be9d33ee04fb6
36445 F20101212_AAAKNJ sapp_b_Page_017.QC.jpg
32ae03e2173991b998e6b81e81dc5eca
370357caddd7cd09cc06d50990c30cf85141872c
36293 F20101212_AAAKMV sapp_b_Page_033.QC.jpg
ff2f885d4beee61e1082e0f2c6a4222c
e630585bb8f02049d6658fdf822b316a83e3e114
7961 F20101212_AAAKNK sapp_b_Page_050thm.jpg
081f6d93a789c8322af4f55ec23f106f
120e9b85b224626f08143cc9ac01a1388316a962
33568 F20101212_AAAKMW sapp_b_Page_022.QC.jpg
242ef523bb5cfce01c9dfdda1c314c4f
866985658fbf94ddebe89289ec15606246cc75a4
13402 F20101212_AAAKNL sapp_b_Page_042.QC.jpg
71197767f677e4fcd0bc3cb79d9afcc2
0f0ba772a69de147f89fd233276f4dfc11cb6381
33726 F20101212_AAAKMX sapp_b_Page_098.QC.jpg
5de3686535500b48a196ec4e932b819b
74ba2e2206cccbc59f13cdcf6f8be969d1b7d332
7912 F20101212_AAAKOA sapp_b_Page_011thm.jpg
312707dbddec8380814081b7cd92d73d
cc3e203354e7ebefd045e283cc57404a352cac38
36835 F20101212_AAAKNM sapp_b_Page_016.QC.jpg
677fa1d91d521162d7468d19e1625489
32e6a0a979d2f66848e8e5d04030360eda077b3d
6687 F20101212_AAAKMY sapp_b_Page_005thm.jpg
d598654bc4e8634b06ba514b944e3f4e
2be5649fc7c03aea52a2128daab297383cbf2297
8927 F20101212_AAAKOB sapp_b_Page_033thm.jpg
cf14fa1dfcb4a48c10490ca82786fcd7
115babfe93aef7f29af528de82ac07131fd68df1
34465 F20101212_AAAKNN sapp_b_Page_062.QC.jpg
3a780d7a01a6833029ea2e4045351fa3
8a2ab673af11d1e6e89df3fe2e87966be21e3dee
20932 F20101212_AAAKMZ sapp_b_Page_044.QC.jpg
9458782197e354f7ee47102e0a6071de
8409f54ebd2b9e02b937b10c9e493891f27e8f76
8819 F20101212_AAAKOC sapp_b_Page_086thm.jpg
6de0a13ab4c7acbf997f871b559b2d1b
6e1238dfef780da324b350b9893ce5d9cbd5cced
32859 F20101212_AAAKNO sapp_b_Page_082.QC.jpg
aeda79bd5c41d1af0d98b1bf28baad6c
87d3e839d7b1cd5654fbeb1c1234fd5d16000cf3
8477 F20101212_AAAKOD sapp_b_Page_020thm.jpg
41e9e03faac9f59f6a563b3206f81b9c
90faafaac91fc69f9dc079456e343aafb57716fe
29726 F20101212_AAAKNP sapp_b_Page_095.QC.jpg
c958447fdbacdf14c0b8a6ab56b7f8c1
791f6c68873dbf7caeaed78eb54e3ab81f7c2ce2
32240 F20101212_AAAKOE sapp_b_Page_028.QC.jpg
f4b0c904fa18556dbe2415a55888005f
84f88642d464a763b5ccbc5719de1fdf90dcda23
7588 F20101212_AAAKNQ sapp_b_Page_093thm.jpg
4fa23664f59dff2378d30389e8ea13bc
24cd1629b76cf31415855a84ef5e102c8c8168eb
33023 F20101212_AAAKOF sapp_b_Page_065.QC.jpg
9d80cd575b1a658a00efeafc169697d2
5cee2cb908208f13d9a8c4f8ed90a8ffc0c5a2c5
6339 F20101212_AAAKNR sapp_b_Page_056thm.jpg
a0e032162e2bacfbdb7aeb20bca1a24d
a1cc20d39285474cbc7f416824079f9a062292e7
15691 F20101212_AAAKOG sapp_b_Page_045.QC.jpg
198c226a37354ae60b8cce6bd6a80524
344b28cf98db006439ae4a8b54140f64d0ee302f
7901 F20101212_AAAKNS sapp_b_Page_049thm.jpg
3dfaf4ac1d3fe6b12357a5868f2b401a
a02b7e3e1c1594bda8253daa5c1dc0070f7d3f7a
1064 F20101212_AAAKOH sapp_b_Page_101thm.jpg
73d4bb6542a45076d3ac954c29a0bc38
33cd9a1536146cadd5c2e2d3e6da95432a213d65
8852 F20101212_AAAKNT sapp_b_Page_060.QC.jpg
a4587d4d5df66e504a8c5b33b7df7bcb
33f189725f10f6965ac5271b16a20b4037216164
6245 F20101212_AAAKOI sapp_b_Page_054thm.jpg
1737a259ad880fa20e3ad66032cdf8f5
7561cbc4f71b4f9c8b4d94f79ba4749ac451737a
5171 F20101212_AAAKNU sapp_b_Page_077thm.jpg
2667ac103dfad68446ce8b786e6bb5d6
70baf7cd69ef444d40a4185e82b1cb34b66f17ba
25541 F20101212_AAAKOJ sapp_b_Page_099.QC.jpg
9a7d2cacf832b967c1a88e5f5b12b02b
c248bc307b328bf2146f0f119f2dee3576cc306a
35587 F20101212_AAAKNV sapp_b_Page_053.QC.jpg
a6d5d2dd37822c2e3995d822213d79d8
870fa3fe9742bc888f303189e8fff754fc12bb01
35718 F20101212_AAAKNW sapp_b_Page_052.QC.jpg
34132ea501d0ffa8e34fad81327675fc
595ce94ad1227b8f8c16c45166522419efb27c2f
5958 F20101212_AAAKOK sapp_b_Page_044thm.jpg
14c66db67603c9376616ee2f37086793
0d19f1c2e873c6cfde4dbb58925b6f858d4e1ea3
7990 F20101212_AAAKNX sapp_b_Page_082thm.jpg
f833cc8d2cda8b22e23757bdc69ce3c8
08858a56b7356c139db5ebaa14749a06cef7d75f
36153 F20101212_AAAKPA sapp_b_Page_029.QC.jpg
e388d072d93742739b2c9a8905dd3fc6
9f71c03d8266250d9fe2c2e52fee93a9e6b884e5
16263 F20101212_AAAKOL sapp_b_Page_048.QC.jpg
d272a6c4fd7c0b874f883ccccde42dae
a7ef71e2c570d6a88da22f83c9c1c16b54372f75
37646 F20101212_AAAKNY sapp_b_Page_036.QC.jpg
e7fc714e5945a2cc7fb7583d0e3bb026
5b90d7c74343b39ed6a9dbb6b066ec180f5c7c71
17077 F20101212_AAAKPB sapp_b_Page_076.QC.jpg
d194bcea7ca03d79ea7657cfa5fa5c9b
ae8985a238389e257f9c7d7576425761577caf22
5772 F20101212_AAAKOM sapp_b_Page_040thm.jpg
8f58d67f49d48e262a5bc54a2cf02247
9d0087d83cf3c1b2d9a506d15404794843de6c90
18475 F20101212_AAAKNZ sapp_b_Page_072.QC.jpg
2456dc3137959ecd2c06a307c6bfd76b
79e745ed99a09b1f684e03ad301d2a67d9e5d33e
37650 F20101212_AAAKPC sapp_b_Page_037.QC.jpg
74eda84eb3b333b0b3f868f581301c4d
34010d196e453084bd0d1958ff49fb883621cdf4
5155 F20101212_AAAKON sapp_b_Page_074thm.jpg
d69986e191211989a45ecb28809cdca1
d4964f321d27d2aae0968443cb621e81d99818df
36496 F20101212_AAAKPD sapp_b_Page_019.QC.jpg
ed28a8386362b593fe8f9fca957be315
f2f386319f5e89132b50d605c296d82a4bf1bc9c
34901 F20101212_AAAKOO sapp_b_Page_010.QC.jpg
eb6429e1f7ae381a7f038910f8be55de
9f2a73c217c7b2c1d4a0ea8d76dd91fe4f452d73
36955 F20101212_AAAKPE sapp_b_Page_023.QC.jpg
c1919dd385ee00e060adcc72041901df
1b8117272623a00b6f5c6c395e88f83b2b684a5d
37443 F20101212_AAAKOP sapp_b_Page_021.QC.jpg
94522185e9dabc8106edbfa423dcae96
a93c3921e5908cd4b8a9f5498e600340c140b2ee
36623 F20101212_AAAKPF sapp_b_Page_035.QC.jpg
08284ffac1aa3ec0798072aa183ef914
99790a9b7e375efb359f761b409f71f1a90c1d3f
36811 F20101212_AAAKOQ sapp_b_Page_025.QC.jpg
eb3ef0902c6814620d3235b8a18c852b
634c57f74a686aa4470dfecd3c1339f7242078e6
8166 F20101212_AAAKPG sapp_b_Page_090thm.jpg
96f843cb8b8716dfc66589c8156940fa
729f578d05f8ab704ead860de235abdf35f7b88d
F20101212_AAAKOR sapp_b_Page_012.QC.jpg
8f35218abc535a930d7b503f2edf1428
66f3e41522ebcc6f819e95bb6f95f474ab8979c1
31278 F20101212_AAAKPH sapp_b_Page_094.QC.jpg
4eced361fb3ab4a3c11dd9c0f0dc1903
76b81cf74c06e1420c4901ecbf2956ea23f95d8d
4915 F20101212_AAAKOS sapp_b_Page_079thm.jpg
6fc1c169e9dadf588b7edd2cf0081fcf
0304f1831b03d802395ee914063be958a9308531
30891 F20101212_AAAKPI sapp_b_Page_051.QC.jpg
1e147d2af18bf356b968d66cebd65be5
b78d1a64ff00424e06ef5c3164d821d4d15a4da3
22549 F20101212_AAAKOT sapp_b_Page_055.QC.jpg
97925f5651633380afb93fc2eb0a122d
765ef0c9bfff5488fcf73748dd66f8ff3d8bc54f
8488 F20101212_AAAKPJ sapp_b_Page_026thm.jpg
871608dac300485ddd5b66779a64dd80
2f6e11cd8f92077e29cb2bc25c5f6886a5c2cf5d
4836 F20101212_AAAKOU sapp_b_Page_068thm.jpg
caeef24c02444b086d64abf4496fd813
d9b8bade46327a29fe3e6ff03fc97a95c231d05c
3838 F20101212_AAAKPK sapp_b_Page_101.QC.jpg
f74dbb4e3cbe831706628d69518f234d
eb2673015f2954d7b707c39c21e09e709b87b7ad
4266 F20101212_AAAKOV sapp_b_Page_042thm.jpg
9d1745b54e0654f02496842b84e3445f
d8f9dbb031423ef68a2eae0fb2dba0990f9ecc69
31213 F20101212_AAAKOW sapp_b_Page_050.QC.jpg
dffc3bfb38f034eb310b2012de1f6c98
434cb84faae86a8ac175373303316b623e55a2c4
36209 F20101212_AAAKQA sapp_b_Page_030.QC.jpg
855b2465ca498fa6ce5e7ac11268e181
36f9d272669ce3282f2344d73593dc915bd7d72c
6253 F20101212_AAAKPL sapp_b_Page_006thm.jpg
cbd94b73d37c525677198fa96f80516a
6b1f0ed0cf99ca0ab9ce82b835997b663b8f56ca
8093 F20101212_AAAKOX sapp_b_Page_028thm.jpg
d4b0e887ff1429160b9abcc668fe8551
1bee7474124563e117f06aaa167e566e55ecc744
17028 F20101212_AAAKQB sapp_b_Page_073.QC.jpg
afbee8bdfca6ef873e9d8cbfb8fa0fe4
14aa34ca415054b3462a7a46d44a9cc8b8229ce3
15928 F20101212_AAAKPM sapp_b_Page_069.QC.jpg
232e18b8077b77beec241c8bd50c03d8
b085f31bb4f6b6395db1b6974b4175bd2697a6e2
8642 F20101212_AAAKOY sapp_b_Page_027thm.jpg
99451fc4d054a15af4a76c87039642d6
8dee6881ddbe083871197b069ad0a7769376b4dd
27726 F20101212_AAAKQC sapp_b_Page_005.QC.jpg
554ff38a89fbcaaf3e1a33c264f9d620
e87b415cf61356a35610038013ccab62edef82fb
7583 F20101212_AAAKPN sapp_b_Page_007thm.jpg
a2e91eea93f1267a3cecb51c195cec7e
9305a2b569c6ea331e3755cc2101778cfce5dbb7
34650 F20101212_AAAKOZ sapp_b_Page_083.QC.jpg
5a604d9b56a3f7bc6869ffae33595669
c0c5f0097fd394a3d557f818663b0d5a72505157
9056 F20101212_AAAKQD sapp_b_Page_038thm.jpg
615ff50067bca39364a1fbcb159da89f
e7537d89dc92538ec82a5cac3b97dc338152a2f0
F20101212_AAAKPO sapp_b_Page_065thm.jpg
8e7152f5b3f2b655f6da205749584f11
0549fe31332ba86bfafca50d1f3246fe8b6f4527
19570 F20101212_AAAKQE sapp_b_Page_068.QC.jpg
85aec1d06d3b4d44ab83b87ca42fa241
7f54371633cc449fb27e655a23a71f87a32d0dd3
4209 F20101212_AAAKPP sapp_b_Page_087thm.jpg
a2f3aefcd61e7b962ea8d42f65504795
30a742a5e9fccd62b75dc905542e7add95686512
6399 F20101212_AAAKQF sapp_b_Page_055thm.jpg
55afa1eb494a26d09a27ecad0edb1d4e
556816dc09a73e1be58c4aaf5e91cf661709d5fa
8772 F20101212_AAAKPQ sapp_b_Page_052thm.jpg
1a33f467d62b29c31a2aeb21a745ce7f
7076b1d8bb7dbd1345d1758bbde400542b651371
30090 F20101212_AAAKQG sapp_b_Page_066.QC.jpg
c7ed2f4e73f2bd5735d9b019eb7f6c88
dc17c9ebf00d027d26c9e6e2ef64b8a7c361e257
24561 F20101212_AAAKPR sapp_b_Page_057.QC.jpg
0dca33d432e0a4ec94f515374252e7f7
d28dc75ffa3b5f69a262672d1f118e1ca22d4028
35127 F20101212_AAAKQH sapp_b_Page_020.QC.jpg
28a03702b89ab73a7805fa7f0a197abf
e46bcf5dc152810c8d1a8f37b97ae33ddc083d2e
31058 F20101212_AAAKPS sapp_b_Page_007.QC.jpg
a10089c60e45066f44d2fb7778aaf4a2
16d6be7fc435d5ae8a95595fb4d5dd7435fbb64e
1833 F20101212_AAAKQI sapp_b_Page_001thm.jpg
0ec8017779ad39d3b0a9c18b402388ec
3f81f54355e3ffc4c48a87ee0feec3b1e172074a
7718 F20101212_AAAKPT sapp_b_Page_004thm.jpg
1d1f19ce79c0fd430065560f73bb75f5
8df0f0cf37314ea27c32928954646378bbfe2089
32102 F20101212_AAAKQJ sapp_b_Page_090.QC.jpg
03926472c0e3ac322e84e49e147ebf03
59a6df1f07be48599e3e1dd080695835be784ab9
19756 F20101212_AAAKPU sapp_b_Page_070.QC.jpg
1dd1c9bb58ee5bfe3c1bc3dbf6e0413d
ef1dba1a998cadfa21cc65edc878c038165942ec
31818 F20101212_AAAKQK sapp_b_Page_081.QC.jpg
3594d1d106e48745004a244d438aae40
f83ecfce3cfefb29a573608d8afab663aa008194
7001 F20101212_AAAKPV sapp_b_Page_001.QC.jpg
529d398418715bef43ccbad8d1fedc0d
55c3e1659f8366318f593e88df7588169723c8f5
9112 F20101212_AAAKQL sapp_b_Page_018thm.jpg
65348a7e05eda8bf360dec4da9aa227e
0cfd9c08d09641d5fcc84ac9833ba69c518386d8
4388 F20101212_AAAKPW sapp_b_Page_059thm.jpg
bacf1e3c67ed21ca5963f650b024e5d7
9d0453463fbe4dabf148eee08be620a140121ac4
25372 F20101212_AAAKPX sapp_b_Page_006.QC.jpg
b23f0a8819abde6cc106455239c49176
e66929e5360737b281997b769dec4211d8e356e8
24886 F20101212_AAAKRA sapp_b_Page_054.QC.jpg
b0ab7589aa8bb3ff3ca2c158fa2bb253
78c7ad4e884167c1a645aa3a387463e217d69f6f
30389 F20101212_AAAKQM sapp_b_Page_004.QC.jpg
5d6179a97b61803b0a661001da9f52f1
789e98cb81ca93fcdc062208f240d242fae38ec3
32837 F20101212_AAAKPY sapp_b_Page_089.QC.jpg
d3f8f1ac1a221791cec3998e127acdfe
934434c354d24cb80e76e3d23273b22e527290dc
9115 F20101212_AAAKRB sapp_b_Page_030thm.jpg
4b9e70d38d6e52af5d63cfb9720d8aac
3483f6dcad8f89f91e8a61cf4dfc1d9003648ed2
33006 F20101212_AAAKQN sapp_b_Page_067.QC.jpg
f7096b746356dbfa2f8f36b4697c99a4
89271a3711f905691f1adfb400a64047f60457d5
4451 F20101212_AAAKPZ sapp_b_Page_046thm.jpg
dfcff406327604d1fdd8e04456fccfe0
9ee5766602940f7b0bff68e3cc677ff2a342defb
8470 F20101212_AAAKRC sapp_b_Page_097thm.jpg
e077fc0a02fc2ac60e6007d8d9ec1118
9d6a72d0bccb33097eb28cc9ffaa08e42f08ceaa
8605 F20101212_AAAKQO sapp_b_Page_083thm.jpg
6a166bd2d4e138525836d14abe71fccc
98212d768104fc5eff3d58d1b17ff9c2f393fa7d
7658 F20101212_AAAKRD sapp_b_Page_051thm.jpg
a29a87397443304ad09cc49cf01f0643
d68728c105df37a2843adc27fe9134f944b448bd
8037 F20101212_AAAKQP sapp_b_Page_061thm.jpg
0f89b38b6d1215dcfad21f178e1da1be
7dc1439d34d6c8209308aefcb85297f51263a86b
8592 F20101212_AAAKRE sapp_b_Page_014thm.jpg
d806fa4ada08266eb3f110f742535333
a8083a93232bffc09ac02ae3c05d066bee1cdb6f
19147 F20101212_AAAKQQ sapp_b_Page_074.QC.jpg
749cf1cf20679678e91283f78f420a54
9ebdbaaeb3b39e61e52eb532f486edba7b153374
6492 F20101212_AAAKRF sapp_b_Page_099thm.jpg
14c0d0dead506f2e80ad0914707fcf98
561a0b010cfc843706c6a621b09a75f048ef991d
35951 F20101212_AAAKQR sapp_b_Page_085.QC.jpg
68ffe3d4ecbb6dc51c166aadde848b63
8c4ff175052866781d556a1cece40b0e627dfbb9
16751 F20101212_AAAKRG sapp_b_Page_080.QC.jpg
048ae3f814aef67b047806fc02630a8c
ec4145210cdf94cb0a29e0f8058bf7a65d2efad4
8159 F20101212_AAAKQS sapp_b_Page_095thm.jpg
c9452372efcb973467e85cec253f933a
2ccea2fd350806351311177d046f70d7736ba7af
13499 F20101212_AAAKRH sapp_b_Page_041.QC.jpg
c7c90d3006c579db666ec3d85e5c59df
08f5daefb361a587d77827d48d23a1207b4a3954
9053 F20101212_AAAKQT sapp_b_Page_024thm.jpg
171f97396bfbb1043743c0ef5abd5257
2199b8396bf58bcaa2ce140f9197619b92707ff5
31291 F20101212_AAAKRI sapp_b_Page_009.QC.jpg
679a8beba7ace569d121d19eb6636e21
93e1ccdbfef7b62a8a970065891f309a4ee512ab
1135 F20101212_AAAKRJ sapp_b_Page_002.QC.jpg
de3d071109d99d8cf42cfe9a62f50191
40f2f233fac59e100571862fa5967c9c4b1aa3cc
5680 F20101212_AAAKQU sapp_b_Page_047thm.jpg
722d37e742855adeebd1af152b0240a1
0d801e245da6ae80f4f5eb571255a3fc6c8bf6fb
506 F20101212_AAAKRK sapp_b_Page_002thm.jpg
aa3619c9270ea848ba246fd0529e0a6b
f452aa43fffa444390eaa08d87a717528edab75b
23823 F20101212_AAAKQV sapp_b_Page_056.QC.jpg
fb77f161dbbe3c6246536b4a53dc2416
93dead551fbfde41e5a03cec3bb0f088fff61eeb
645 F20101212_AAAKRL sapp_b_Page_003thm.jpg
1f7416124568089ea83ffc5946aac42a
f24cefeb9bc9dcb477352767376d199be688c06d
35470 F20101212_AAAKQW sapp_b_Page_027.QC.jpg
c2ab0d0cd0fe8bc8e482a650fa013b10
fafd54e73c2420d5a90660d42e53e7be24b8e07f
1046 F20101212_AAAKSA sapp_b_Page_084thm.jpg
6840aba467e656c024041b542f0104e7
a316a07219d942f1d669a765d87b51b1325fbac4
8557 F20101212_AAAKRM sapp_b_Page_100thm.jpg
23efdfcd723d5240671d2a2f9a039cc5
0fd73d0d71ab07f684c1da8c4ecbf38557fa767e
8896 F20101212_AAAKQX sapp_b_Page_032thm.jpg
ea3714ff1fb164443e698d9ae6fab417
eeb243272ac4039f16a4f30681f7a8e16730c01b
8533 F20101212_AAAKSB sapp_b_Page_010thm.jpg
243c9f0b668552aa7d040f15dd7f5854
0a8a48a21e3c0f886a4bfa5da7f18c1b11c0dbd2
5026 F20101212_AAAKQY sapp_b_Page_075thm.jpg
7d1820fdb59698dc0ce0ae59a65ab627
677db32589f8fc563cdf2ff3bf743f101450d244
8980 F20101212_AAAKSC sapp_b_Page_063thm.jpg
7ea9d023f04ac5cafb21410a07bb319d
1d9ddd2373799a25cb553ee3060bb16d0445b132
9167 F20101212_AAAKRN sapp_b_Page_016thm.jpg
83a37be61e19b5a5ef983f9392fbaf0a
9a8e75bed7ce9eb87f6b581f736f87f84dfbbce5
8637 F20101212_AAAKQZ sapp_b_Page_064thm.jpg
49adda4a4021dd98cf992b93a88cc0db
0cdbf538ef0603417c75c88bf3c99773b545ee07
17195 F20101212_AAAKSD sapp_b_Page_078.QC.jpg
a8e19f4bc23dd3869f44ec9b4c5c2a1e
49cfd7cb1f4527d12fd54c5c751b2a7b58bd5124
7564 F20101212_AAAKRO sapp_b_Page_088thm.jpg
6bd776ed51a8f888dddbf2df15ea3b3b
5e2144a53f7e2cc8e21f55e596189bd44000f89e
15274 F20101212_AAAKSE sapp_b_Page_058.QC.jpg
933d984365d7028d2f4cf7faf010fb89
f5c4cd8ef07b4c42338695703ab0b87ffe641caa
17197 F20101212_AAAKRP sapp_b_Page_071.QC.jpg
9e33e375df8ca9ac3b2d2dada0638dd0
50fa41ec0d89a6ca73b042b483d9be44f7791756
9176 F20101212_AAAKSF sapp_b_Page_035thm.jpg
5a0c0b6de62e93ebb06c9482f918035a
6463e69a92e30c2d00be417a5ba94f903f7f1b57
8629 F20101212_AAAKRQ sapp_b_Page_085thm.jpg
f223cf47a9c8412ccab65f1f3050a9b4
d4382533a1eda779041d9f37fa6561c4d520a2f4
4120 F20101212_AAAKSG sapp_b_Page_041thm.jpg
879c820d54a01c86739bab3f68bacc69
9cbebf5438bb1bf954343a500b20c64b51fc5f7c
9071 F20101212_AAAKRR sapp_b_Page_019thm.jpg
5aac64909b3989f0e6b9dc500a9d9e86
8e2465f6e1390a72e5dd89023ae06b9c0d31874e
3482 F20101212_AAAKSH sapp_b_Page_013thm.jpg
6d01af786abb90793513f872af6fc639
955f2f5d5e5721d1865d00e894ceb8fdd6f83df2
32493 F20101212_AAAKRS sapp_b_Page_061.QC.jpg
2e6ae28f40f9bebc60e3ca104db5f73b
253467106ce4067a0472362c27e4e53af38ec9de
31604 F20101212_AAAKSI sapp_b_Page_091.QC.jpg
a86e29e284c4938462ed5b150876e206
ac2782ed14a8b735be27b23c743648a49216d1aa
31367 F20101212_AAAKRT sapp_b_Page_011.QC.jpg
ed9d29e934f0ec9ce062659338d12a82
36c94efafb76202c48e962815deaa8a3644e751b
8066 F20101212_AAAKSJ sapp_b_Page_022thm.jpg
ffe4e4c63aaa564edfaf7e939fcf8dee
935a94a918b80b18d6422da65812ac0f0013a55e
34976 F20101212_AAAKRU sapp_b_Page_014.QC.jpg
76aa2238b3d903f8ba95b795607f0105
dfd97dfef5420e544fbbab12136e531faf5d3447
8775 F20101212_AAAKSK sapp_b_Page_012thm.jpg
76a0a20e5d2aa92e21aa63d7979852a8
ecff9d876378046d2c743e62c1a5e5284d4bdbd5
6569 F20101212_AAAKRV sapp_b_Page_008thm.jpg
afb647332cddccd7a29184ede2194a06
fd5859f8802b085419a5b21b18a1552ea83eca64
8671 F20101212_AAAKSL sapp_b_Page_098thm.jpg
77a0eaf78509b5fb8c40a170ca24e607
d5823d40c7c4166e4ee5e01c0e9d19cca086bdd9
37154 F20101212_AAAKRW sapp_b_Page_063.QC.jpg
19a839733e288aab2091f0c45ab66ce5
74e8c268f61f304d6b0314248160825d9c4d0a09
16811 F20101212_AAAKSM sapp_b_Page_087.QC.jpg
818da4266745d2ff97e91b23f76e75d7
d3a09426c0a0b23e712e8d677e937b1777d39c11
9309 F20101212_AAAKRX sapp_b_Page_015thm.jpg
50ee5c1f3517a701e820d3ec7f833390
58a1dffd613acf39b103b9b0d54526e977f27b3f
19016 F20101212_AAAKTA sapp_b_Page_040.QC.jpg
373e6bfb6ccb32f985c29b9754488096
c7e605c84c89cce00158385dc57ff29e7340e3cd
6441 F20101212_AAAKSN sapp_b_Page_057thm.jpg
ada42a3999b37a3e91b608475c49949f
d7c6d643af610c50a170ff33b42abca03c7dcc14
18334 F20101212_AAAKRY sapp_b_Page_075.QC.jpg
8dde0e694dce57b4e874cf7f9aa1a7ad
37c8ecb8fb6d2daa8beeb436f477891411fea9b4
5022 F20101212_AAAKTB sapp_b_Page_045thm.jpg
9431e702671f136cebffdc5077c4afab
997f5c8ddcb27630204e7bbf9188d9d20b8c382a
9029 F20101212_AAAKRZ sapp_b_Page_034thm.jpg
252039c44d56c6e470cb1dca200cfd48
a66447c54dd3d173ec182c469f37686d5f0ac8dd
19614 F20101212_AAAKTC sapp_b_Page_047.QC.jpg
1f60ad64fed59838b30ca36ccf7a02b7
bd6cdb3672ecc9e455e945b01778aabd50f73982
9153 F20101212_AAAKSO sapp_b_Page_036thm.jpg
7231f2a236ff6f756d9acdd1518d3850
cb3c8569592789647225fa301b7f6f5fd7f5ecc2
15199 F20101212_AAAKTD sapp_b_Page_059.QC.jpg
ff823389f86005de61d5ab5e61358c58
270129371e2be197a4a180cba8ec261a60689da7
6559 F20101212_AAAKSP sapp_b_Page_043thm.jpg
ef5c2c060e93c8876487ae991aba6859
c4462d2185efbef13293e0cc8dabacfe7a9b5c1d
2304 F20101212_AAAKTE sapp_b_Page_060thm.jpg
804cce9edbfdea0494a7bf09efa8ab44
860f9cb845ae9df25f200e230efff4b7590f7b15
150830 F20101212_AAAKSQ UFE0022327_00001.xml FULL
53ef1630478105138958040f5a667bd3
052862f1467f177ee8f4249c565ba240710d32fb
8306 F20101212_AAAKTF sapp_b_Page_062thm.jpg
0736b7295b33de6aca5a12d55a84fbb8
490fa7a3322680021632391ced9168de97c65daa
8606 F20101212_AAAKSR sapp_b_Page_017thm.jpg
ae1ed821395c18379cf6a36aea7e20fc
4f6924f710e8f8686733bcef67532b735a06210d
5019 F20101212_AAAKTG sapp_b_Page_069thm.jpg
45560f6c75399a4814970969d2c872ea
04aaf39151056818293de034981b98323c661cf6
9143 F20101212_AAAKSS sapp_b_Page_023thm.jpg
7d5a924d0c34b8dc121bf67f83d89c17
1f8cf0f2c1f27bc003857115d12a191e9396fbc0
5454 F20101212_AAAKTH sapp_b_Page_070thm.jpg
b348497f197b4ff9b5f3d20e05afefed
36d09896b63cc286f7f9eda5f203e825b1372ae1
8957 F20101212_AAAKST sapp_b_Page_029thm.jpg
9e3fb43f5acef416f023277468d51165
42ebb13276e1c10be975eb7017de922bae9b81ab
5397 F20101212_AAAKTI sapp_b_Page_078thm.jpg
3b66d735463d3063ebdfb5d6eb3df86a
5f9edcf732b5d48e44444bd6aa504f114c976244
8683 F20101212_AAAKSU sapp_b_Page_031thm.jpg
7f48cb3fd2b3327386ec0caf7c15c778
f2e2ccd64e4b262404f7512518b8e33c5ff45f70
14400 F20101212_AAAKTJ sapp_b_Page_079.QC.jpg
5f19d0f48c2528a1c735a001fbd29eb7
45e9761b26cb6c07dcd00256c66f2720495d5f57
35604 F20101212_AAAKSV sapp_b_Page_032.QC.jpg
cdd298d2a5b51fbce6c86ce9bb11db75
bf6732b04610420c410e016ee5b6a91c3c3e57f4
5576 F20101212_AAAKTK sapp_b_Page_080thm.jpg
7da4f1febf63205774a4d6a870b7963f
a19aaa0c1b068cd9ac34f7192befc9aee773c192
9058 F20101212_AAAKSW sapp_b_Page_037thm.jpg
39c3cc844c22a56bd92523d39ae9b01c
aa31d07ec49037df212d293f883e454ca26b581c
7876 F20101212_AAAKTL sapp_b_Page_081thm.jpg
4a851cd81e27781e48ce0848577c2579
a46bd56c052a9e58a895a5f37fe747995b99372f
35646 F20101212_AAAKSX sapp_b_Page_038.QC.jpg
6a3d366ddfe8f5bb6272e3f5e6c13896
99399c8ab6c7fedb6c7d0262569fc08d932adea9
3736 F20101212_AAAKTM sapp_b_Page_084.QC.jpg
b67b47f74b1f5b11ebf441a901dbd4e3
3b2306c85e596a58879d85b3313e85bce37d2145
4881 F20101212_AAAKSY sapp_b_Page_039thm.jpg
4b3d2941a86a76111379b9282c18b9c6
17020fac05900846bcc429e08300f9af669a268b
34871 F20101212_AAAKTN sapp_b_Page_086.QC.jpg
a99cf2b0161d1f5edb2762962ef3b13d
9e4e2f003b2b14b517df1ca12489e72c25185e39
20432 F20101212_AAAKSZ sapp_b_Page_039.QC.jpg
7e1b1b0150390e68dbbd1a3d45b1566b
cca504e760aba17b15f89046be2e5001443f8293
8529 F20101212_AAAKTO sapp_b_Page_089thm.jpg
f2d15259c476a809dd82ec4d20089b64
6d36637d963951e89eceb203119c7244e5c69d15
8110 F20101212_AAAKTP sapp_b_Page_091thm.jpg
3a16a82a9aaee57148b5434859afab08
394b496db26fb08cd67fb2471ae1587c61167b6a
8280 F20101212_AAAKTQ sapp_b_Page_092thm.jpg
b8f422891314296d823c319950aef7ae
f9c55eb7c6f31276c147e6598253454fd05e4fc0
32828 F20101212_AAAKTR sapp_b_Page_092.QC.jpg
bbbb58f8806d152a9594f79857b51ec3
40cb9b964d5e696f1b9e2d25fa60d6a3e52b7507
7738 F20101212_AAAKTS sapp_b_Page_094thm.jpg
e85c55aeda86aed8f796a07f585998e5
30d7806d6426826822d1d53f1c1458d8a68d1a84
31661 F20101212_AAAKTT sapp_b_Page_096.QC.jpg
5a8cb7a25bac0fc378adad2c88431dc2
e90f6e7b82daab90664adf0b23ae868e7fe7e7c7
33630 F20101212_AAAKTU sapp_b_Page_097.QC.jpg
0e7722fcd392966ddfff338a08ff16dc
f7cadad89f9f02bc10ee32bf35ff13ca49953034
35439 F20101212_AAAKTV sapp_b_Page_100.QC.jpg
23126216c9d1fc404aec011df86138d4
452a39fbc6c42bd76d6c9f86a765bd587b0a5e8d
1051966 F20101212_AAAJTA sapp_b_Page_012.jp2
67dac256e3ea0ce9dc27eec6699b7a5f
8b864a2152404e84325e1bac17511e4aada95abe
25271604 F20101212_AAAJSM sapp_b_Page_055.tif
cb842682a85371d054c712b27b6ec970
472f50a1d520c842a13b5ff4ee1cdca7f430bf79
33274 F20101212_AAAJTB sapp_b_Page_064.QC.jpg
299f78af3ce7c4c9c81630da3712b138
32cfb00d042982314637690eb6a0fb7fde883a7a
1051976 F20101212_AAAJSN sapp_b_Page_085.jp2
881646d8ec37936c8f43eea832b86ee3
247b479771c91263d6f0784faf9eaf143bccf77a
1051942 F20101212_AAAJTC sapp_b_Page_090.jp2
d79075a6b4a3b1f58c06eb1f9d272bd0
3f68c78bdf404c3d7449148c49c009f68e5b9c02
55347 F20101212_AAAJSO sapp_b_Page_019.pro
a3d656ada06871d94d7ec88e68451da1
f76d07b5496d98becbf3b20ab20fd45dc56d7f33
171 F20101212_AAAJTD sapp_b_Page_043.txt
ceedd3cc2fd2d0bc7969299a57c81afe
e869c94a85d530e2e76c0db3a89642b25b1f62a8
3837 F20101212_AAAJTE sapp_b_Page_002.jpg
47ca7c0f95cbc6210638d242028610e7
7ccb2fc2ea0d19c8a08799d84368e57e6de9f25d
111495 F20101212_AAAJSP sapp_b_Page_030.jpg
57a5c56245370f7dbdfc6689f0132c47
629237a762c7ceffc7059d4303998edb0f83d2de
10716 F20101212_AAAJTF sapp_b_Page_079.pro
01299e038867f85cb91b5712b0393995
50e616d6f8c27ffa0a846a5da83695da22344c29
3815 F20101212_AAAJSQ sapp_b_Page_005.txt
5e372e8b99906b86b40a71ae34f61ad0
60e8e866ad16335a051d8eb248e49dab3e1e6e4a
1051985 F20101212_AAAJTG sapp_b_Page_015.jp2
1dbc29dd19f318b79a1e35cd09043437
2811b20e7c40a6d6e42896c382b413ef39b9a917
1051960 F20101212_AAAJSR sapp_b_Page_063.jp2
c209018db1995f0ac72b779cfc31428d
d7852d058bfa3c61662cca9f1a16c3a78c7a73fa
8039 F20101212_AAAJTH sapp_b_Page_066thm.jpg
a8bf7e7c82776b047c5c6c62c443af93
91415a7743af1f3ccc6696357f160ffd99622359
222101 F20101212_AAAJSS sapp_b_Page_060.jp2
e4b13a55429f287f6f66afebe011e88f
a9c73c9938e30aa7cbe58f62d1bbb164c60c6df7
37045 F20101212_AAAJTI sapp_b_Page_018.QC.jpg
bed5d7f6b94dfc8b15b135ad3002bb65
92eb7d8d0a9a6d26b05a06079d4ebfe8459020e8
3795 F20101212_AAAJST sapp_b_Page_006.txt
3c0422058cf9cfd9a05d631616a542cf
5a290df8ec8f50a2763a51e3e2756ef4609eaa5b
48542 F20101212_AAAJTJ sapp_b_Page_058.jpg
a9bf1360725873f1b7a1d5a2a9b79145
c62d96d29e1cdaafbb150f4a3b252dc400e947d7
507588 F20101212_AAAJSU sapp_b_Page_072.jp2
12b27a3566bafac67711331f671f6a9a
cf6505e0b7124b09e47b58a6afb60cca6cf43a45
16360 F20101212_AAAJTK sapp_b_Page_077.QC.jpg
807b76bc87fd37bb11b11c0e011bbeff
2db27bcb8e1cc1c75cf7df9549e0553cee202766
F20101212_AAAJSV sapp_b_Page_065.tif
9491473e967918d8332541ed3edf81b1
042141ee9481b306ebffffe25b4fba9d03c260e3
31047 F20101212_AAAJTL sapp_b_Page_058.pro
65b08a210d6b0f151fd8f0056ee82be4
09f9c5434c44e28bfb2bb6688da98f87f049d19f
36333 F20101212_AAAJSW sapp_b_Page_024.QC.jpg
3489b0fde5ce4551abc36cf55caa99d0
39498d102f1a2709bf53f65d6db9fe946827a673
31273 F20101212_AAAJUA sapp_b_Page_075.pro
ad66dc015d2c65f9299f6cd40db59cca
e18f2aa21aa9d06f837f995cb59fc8ccc42baed6
38088 F20101212_AAAJTM sapp_b_Page_015.QC.jpg
f838a0d546f4c1784cb59ade18c667ba
715f2bfa080e0f1c7bc4c408180d9d96169dec40
12702 F20101212_AAAJSX sapp_b_Page_046.QC.jpg
b6a95590d7e663e68e8c1fa464c58645
a0c06d5c91ce48a812695b9e7fc35ac8965e0574
44388 F20101212_AAAJUB sapp_b_Page_079.jpg
4ee80d990a5d3a592fcec2f56686e7a3
84262473c75b67e29074c294c36c02df8426efe3
1051969 F20101212_AAAJTN sapp_b_Page_027.jp2
872ec9870dba3acafda21a9022aa6734
2b4ea7b6cfe843f3a371b75bb5300be8b255532a
1051971 F20101212_AAAJSY sapp_b_Page_098.jp2
8d8867795d36392f748d482b168de29d
efbf8338b6bfa6a5182ad5bbfebafd72f357c4d7
96504 F20101212_AAAJUC sapp_b_Page_081.jpg
76717484fd9db91cce253c5604038940
3299cc23df534607bbc25253f53e0b006cba5245
49402 F20101212_AAAJTO sapp_b_Page_089.pro
c1198778fa08d176a7a795b786049d12
8d6261f2c4f240f005b1d8bced6730568044b28d
1790 F20101212_AAAJSZ sapp_b_Page_093.txt
a6e5c9c362ee08a4a8dfb69b5dd7e2d6
59344f709625e6dbdc74b89501da91d0e8260d20
52840 F20101212_AAAJUD sapp_b_Page_072.jpg
db01bbb8d8eed0f90b3ea5aef746ead3
cc787a9efa7b8678565b42a0556a7f0524b62d62
448307 F20101212_AAAJTP sapp_b_Page_078.jp2
07509ca45f1fde80319a8d4a3a1effb5
8680caea59e4ab71c83e46cdd4874b8a2a12ef29
285010 F20101212_AAAJUE sapp_b_Page_046.jp2
c66cb631f6ccd39bd94044ff7a38ecad
a5b315a711a02f062c5bee9304d4cd48400697aa
7100 F20101212_AAAJUF sapp_b_Page_001.pro
d3d17e7671b0517f1fce579ea89fb9ca
f81716dc01bc33be3c753bb3a9ba919eec3c1c63
13801 F20101212_AAAJTQ sapp_b_Page_013.QC.jpg
f0cfa24b21fc88a5d434da1c5f565189
e6157c2d074e81b3b990f4eb74dec05e5e8d9bd3
2599 F20101212_AAAJUG sapp_b_Page_045.pro
0ceaad502cb4020869cd714375439038
b8e4f5a7ce49e02fcd6fe67fd9d7eab829aca894
50102 F20101212_AAAJTR sapp_b_Page_087.jpg
ea1ddadf57805e9ac53f47097fbebdd0
c6d495147e740465cda7fc782af0ba8b6c68a9e9
1051965 F20101212_AAAKAA sapp_b_Page_047.jp2
2bb33600765105376edd270c0fa70b75
82a28b08d62ba7e63fdeb034c09bf9ded6ecc083
772 F20101212_AAAJUH sapp_b_Page_078.txt
5da14814acd1e96b1d8e58929ccd4d1e
64bd0efe66958e4515aa88daa2b4edecfa689b8c
805803 F20101212_AAAJTS sapp_b_Page_054.jp2
b529832c4fcd139a09737a222a4928ea
fc9a1d903114b75282ca5e24c50b31e408e6ee14
738268 F20101212_AAAKAB sapp_b_Page_048.jp2
109ae907ce6eae97e2dd836d124cad4f
52f9eaaa2075ae88a1226609c17d30a6741d7701
9063 F20101212_AAAJUI sapp_b_Page_025thm.jpg
195fe166d6483d2f128a1a121751899a
21bc4f8500c165f21c4a778c7b3b8f01e75e6979
F20101212_AAAJTT sapp_b_Page_092.tif
ccc8cd053a89edd4c83799b9801a5a6a
6d58f43c48f3d36f229a375c0c19d936075137d8
1051457 F20101212_AAAKAC sapp_b_Page_049.jp2
1cc50c8950bf3fc819be851088fc0547
62c5e4fff98076b86c2d09ca77e8ad0e12ecf30b
F20101212_AAAJUJ sapp_b_Page_006.tif
31ea452895db133b396986115f13085f
b989f188ce3df954c11926ee9b336047d4fb1136
46458 F20101212_AAAJTU sapp_b_Page_050.pro
dd2900362c04317c3649f6d5105455cb
f919c3f7d71f614d9c6afc7432f825eb17f62afe
1051972 F20101212_AAAKAD sapp_b_Page_050.jp2
bc804820508da1399212dd2b8971db7b
17b14b340a70682656cf1cc7593baed867507997
4377 F20101212_AAAJUK sapp_b_Page_058thm.jpg
1d7e05fc8e5cdd78c06950023b658af6
5e015a82fcc0d9d19bacc4f572b958af258bf8fa
F20101212_AAAJTV sapp_b_Page_079.tif
0a4a23faaf66e7aebebe9537035e3126
128b850ce2051a72e327cd1392808568a591e027
1041181 F20101212_AAAKAE sapp_b_Page_051.jp2
ea821e6aaebdfae2f4f5016aff524261
76b130ddccb32adf409f9099f7fb86c9c304f278
54975 F20101212_AAAJUL sapp_b_Page_032.pro
5dfdcbcedb4014912165fa300b57014a
56304ec26d993db118291ddcd165076ae54a3409
7923 F20101212_AAAJTW sapp_b_Page_009thm.jpg
1db3209b13cb867bc9ea54c93d048379
b556553062d6fbe85cf57a956a081f817779383d
F20101212_AAAKAF sapp_b_Page_052.jp2
7c3067bd7ade7c453e9cfd314a585472
5f0378b36b23348afce0a0b568be52972729858e
1923 F20101212_AAAJUM sapp_b_Page_090.txt
b1514e8052cf8e930e64e67ee012627e
63d91d3463d5e2f30e7ccde296ece64e299d41b8
53980 F20101212_AAAJTX sapp_b_Page_083.pro
61b010555213b0c702ae7c8effc9dd96
c085ce4922d420020549bab9f25e29e592fb0bfa
1051970 F20101212_AAAKAG sapp_b_Page_053.jp2
8c4bd86e47fe6e23bed86d8ff3d9c4a8
87444ab52edc42789aecb4f6b6883d886de50607
90118 F20101212_AAAJVA sapp_b_Page_008.jpg
bc0cfc62acb3c19c699639b3a23239bc
24ba1e4b302ee38bea4be4b8d7c1941989c2a3d5
F20101212_AAAJUN sapp_b_Page_034.tif
eaa6d9a3ad3a73cadde1c4a02d6e4ac8
740784558a7f4b8205b436ad877becb4ade09b08
4776 F20101212_AAAJTY sapp_b_Page_048thm.jpg
b15e0234da75595ff47b719331ec8d10
c08517259bae0cb48195b7a1c3d4b0c3426c677c
715641 F20101212_AAAKAH sapp_b_Page_055.jp2
7ed09efd2e412f3d0089935d215fa7e4
4b6b3478084ea951d48595c557884c9ce9cfbfc8
99252 F20101212_AAAJVB sapp_b_Page_009.jpg
ac20247e55eeaea553b0c94ad68910b5
b0c8f12432f503c0b2f69aea19b3af1f66855ab4
F20101212_AAAJUO sapp_b_Page_089.tif
28ff7611e80e3a2ed1a11f257c66d673
37987ba79ebcb71d8f2523c4fb0e0a885abcb550
47275 F20101212_AAAJTZ sapp_b_Page_094.pro
f7418147a65e44e730383c22e7c964de
0b23acbd1973bdcfa2a04ddba993a0ee6b201e65
761693 F20101212_AAAKAI sapp_b_Page_056.jp2
6ba7ca71ea3e7e3e569e24c9aa4ed7c8
de2778a0162c088242656ff6c620373f8e7f55ad
104257 F20101212_AAAJVC sapp_b_Page_010.jpg
2ef17ea68d3af84fc59c555d1204d450
8bf85654f2fe4ecd80b2e4384b25cbce419481dc
8287 F20101212_AAAJUP sapp_b_Page_067thm.jpg
0bc34f7b6debe7752471b95141b9de97
99ff5d99daa32fa0c3b5a7ac4d0d4caed1465a36
869999 F20101212_AAAKAJ sapp_b_Page_057.jp2
132379834a5e452ed67ae5e8b8809702
833a4a4211686286c78f8129ab4dfae0b8d37f0d
97434 F20101212_AAAJVD sapp_b_Page_011.jpg
9dfb08b6edbdfd98267e1575b3be6e57
107464aa7da419b20c05ddd8f13a7723b383ac6e
25740 F20101212_AAAJUQ sapp_b_Page_008.QC.jpg
bab8a058af0a33c443e13a88f9e54c7c
e2d154dd2c950a48bfc4f6b69d864c8981e538f3
463425 F20101212_AAAKAK sapp_b_Page_058.jp2
082a30f4c66018023eabd8a1d4973856
27637cd0bc40c1b8d68bf0992052aaacfce35bab
111228 F20101212_AAAJVE sapp_b_Page_012.jpg
38a60a83c112d78de0e625f65d1f7ffe
152f1927c4e8c081cb14ac0b567924b74a49db54
438237 F20101212_AAAKAL sapp_b_Page_059.jp2
d92280adf5e0d29755a0012d7822d3f7
de41be0153f3c1e44f47e2f215be46de5cd338b1
41464 F20101212_AAAJVF sapp_b_Page_013.jpg
9169827cfa47b027050c2168a4eb7f51
f4afe4f76a8429a8af5413e769711b313e8007c6
116504 F20101212_AAAJUR UFE0022327_00001.mets
29db3412ff0249bf64a645dbe27e093f
7ed2ca143484854fdea2854f86412296248a5a8e
424706 F20101212_AAAKBA sapp_b_Page_077.jp2
0acd86eb7d92aebbf0db8bd0fc26b17d
f62ac00ce1ae27cf914c02390b16ca5612a5ef7b
1045662 F20101212_AAAKAM sapp_b_Page_061.jp2
5d880ee10ac8874785ab44f1aa4a757e
69ccf0e55d4ef7b520083a0052ecb956d1e61811
107012 F20101212_AAAJVG sapp_b_Page_014.jpg
1c57dd375d3d3d979f6f013b965ed87d
c10656a13452d6f02351d88b353f44dc4673561f
363969 F20101212_AAAKBB sapp_b_Page_079.jp2
90e9ac21c9f920a4b49f7087c19fa61f
746ff0a17ad89454dde966153ec6fb400f4d93cb
F20101212_AAAKAN sapp_b_Page_062.jp2
8375f4fd380d3513a7134c727a500daa
b8fbd807d7cc30137bdd2a3395e0e03f11b6a5cb
116109 F20101212_AAAJVH sapp_b_Page_015.jpg
1214e47a24517ab68cc426e2fd073305
697f815097b29060cc2db608a901c93e2e052caf
424109 F20101212_AAAKBC sapp_b_Page_080.jp2
05e1503aa8ab4b66124f63baf063cf84
b4fcdf3f3d6453005447701306664636e4edc86b
1051980 F20101212_AAAKAO sapp_b_Page_064.jp2
4d7aa9aa70c71e0b2b556661c6d19ffb
740db5b3ed7755a048285df4c1a510a7897ee8f5
114024 F20101212_AAAJVI sapp_b_Page_016.jpg
4ca569cdbab94b3a377243f6399c1979
5f6a575e82b571bc13c50597ac1291f3a5b4c662
21613 F20101212_AAAJUU sapp_b_Page_001.jpg
dffe9376c16623f0b62a7d650941125c
c372cec083a45c6af1c52520f3e48b0e54b9f151
F20101212_AAAKBD sapp_b_Page_081.jp2
a8a4fba5e1f930955316dc731229cffb
233ce2d2c67bd4d5373bc9f9e3351b28a2e11bbb
1051984 F20101212_AAAKAP sapp_b_Page_065.jp2
9efecda6b5fb4ebee6269f00a86043d4
b3f474f11a16709f3bb6d50c61675d9878dc20e9
111363 F20101212_AAAJVJ sapp_b_Page_017.jpg
5bcf8fb55679446c71c14bac5f21d2ce
e2e2a483ccf0161e439bc02b3da31a8ac869eace
4637 F20101212_AAAJUV sapp_b_Page_003.jpg
c364452a2599f027bf86d283e6ccf106
7405d668c47b5071ec41eb88cf7aaf9576087c16
1051940 F20101212_AAAKBE sapp_b_Page_082.jp2
f26a0016e7a83bcc117072ed840a19c3
0b2add1e1d5a38aeec3e284d6bee36cf9375ce80
1019022 F20101212_AAAKAQ sapp_b_Page_066.jp2
d384d8956e71487e61520b8a283b7ca1
29a5153deb7d94714d1e81df4370112ec79dd19f
111467 F20101212_AAAJVK sapp_b_Page_018.jpg
fcebfe455842c707bd5f02b807a6946f
d592db8e512cd195fb5c0b502c5ea2f386eb7a45
92343 F20101212_AAAJUW sapp_b_Page_004.jpg
a9129db585be86f92853ff3e6f6086ff
024ddca7c2085b505fe028a5365e750a9eaa4170
F20101212_AAAKBF sapp_b_Page_083.jp2
7bb2f307a360f91349432171add09b7a
c22a55832b32ac388536be6dc907e46a6bc6c2d3
1051983 F20101212_AAAKAR sapp_b_Page_067.jp2
71c5e2252617ac487b4c97f44697657d
a82c038f22bc7d4a1faf5e837039d2a60a1eae7b
110531 F20101212_AAAJVL sapp_b_Page_019.jpg
22d266e8d01da91cbc7051ccb7cd1658
827ec9afe3146dcacb5fc38c18386f7c09668a98
118702 F20101212_AAAJUX sapp_b_Page_005.jpg
34d17d0ab53eb53a3dae7c05ed09c851
d03ab1ed0574e99128e36f44e8b50a24cc25a66f
86109 F20101212_AAAKBG sapp_b_Page_084.jp2
0fb88c875c536d9961723168f484ba66
b1c344e9a119f77464e4fc44f534dc131a5c64eb
112698 F20101212_AAAJWA sapp_b_Page_035.jpg
03e8c4527c40514ba05d91d1707e9b12
14fbc9f95889e770d1e9689022e04727e8f41295
652375 F20101212_AAAKAS sapp_b_Page_068.jp2
e97c424b4b3aaa882da8401ee5538ebd
1d2311d19656f7320f63d84d5849261784204bbf
108109 F20101212_AAAJVM sapp_b_Page_020.jpg
dc7e5acf51b892118a7dfca0239c105f
473c6250f37c6756cc0a374b6079cf06eda6df21
114510 F20101212_AAAJUY sapp_b_Page_006.jpg
f61959115ea9fda4958489140f12916a
e200d43722d374fadf89479b3cd493e8c59b4d02
1051959 F20101212_AAAKBH sapp_b_Page_086.jp2
939cfe440f041ea1038de49d69127ce7
df0d191616b176dfa575bfffdd8465fa1ec193d9
114555 F20101212_AAAJWB sapp_b_Page_036.jpg
a0c60025cf6c5fe6ac61585265a1becc
5ba6b265f19daf5034342d49a39c5d5b1e7a940b
414513 F20101212_AAAKAT sapp_b_Page_069.jp2
37f8e37322da3d2fb30736ad03130f9b
69752b3605ac12ecdc2f33dc60686bb91382f791
111543 F20101212_AAAJVN sapp_b_Page_021.jpg
2a1f91d9050f7fd0d1cff306467eef9c
f71660c567bac5e5cd13cdd3ee5d4fd5faa22019
109420 F20101212_AAAJUZ sapp_b_Page_007.jpg
3837dbc45b044fa9469df92f13bf1e18
4495ce9173791f7434d31ba60c296d05ebb14864
547380 F20101212_AAAKBI sapp_b_Page_087.jp2
8c77de9bf7ddf7b0d071aaecf028f98e
db02e637eaa2d80193a737479971f11e649d7748
113406 F20101212_AAAJWC sapp_b_Page_037.jpg
ef1e8aed7e78743de3a9cddfe6058dec
6d7127acbc062ba8e65fd1f2fd2805c4dce3a419
643216 F20101212_AAAKAU sapp_b_Page_070.jp2
d15a8eaab05c9be74f3bd4ffec7aa217
e095469f71af3af934c73b85faf01441f8a7c540
101154 F20101212_AAAJVO sapp_b_Page_022.jpg
48df237097a64abc76d52a56fc40f08f
0a40f4ba7cfc5d1751d26d39e997f5b0eabb9fb9
981707 F20101212_AAAKBJ sapp_b_Page_088.jp2
c2aee3df24397c62cf06a8e797e64079
8d1d82aa16764949c4b4d10752c18d83e8ca4c40
110322 F20101212_AAAJWD sapp_b_Page_038.jpg
0968490ea1859f234997cc67f22f7853
d6daf2e53a21a2b248831614ef3acadaaba4cd88
490138 F20101212_AAAKAV sapp_b_Page_071.jp2
166a2b476fc81fe98aa2ad09f182dff7
7571babdfc9db0aa5e60b54a70f3084af8b0d8bc
113926 F20101212_AAAJVP sapp_b_Page_023.jpg
0990ae5fd68ec28562f4e35d07594177
fcbe6d09aa098abc668f1b037440bdd3e4b59f23
F20101212_AAAKBK sapp_b_Page_089.jp2
e7a5253a860df693d4c2d5c8fe5d8fca
64a2b165d9be5c41b623dd8c65a2fcbc0b1001c0
61668 F20101212_AAAJWE sapp_b_Page_039.jpg
174e30e5ffd4bc96faaf83a9b0fabb8c
c900ba2e595482daeea0521299eaec70ef782d44
509278 F20101212_AAAKAW sapp_b_Page_073.jp2
9ce7d3c1634c30fe5fac3b272bb304eb
332792f2bc77f347817dffb3e29a0761b708a96f
112564 F20101212_AAAJVQ sapp_b_Page_024.jpg
d54c66eac29fe66d045f6aed6601df37
e35ed125fb4c1c003566a9b94b733ed949d425a9
1022535 F20101212_AAAKBL sapp_b_Page_091.jp2
e1274e4c57f6bc6f7e89fcfdf2ab33c2
bff298cf038c750da488a618eef398d0017a048e
54055 F20101212_AAAJWF sapp_b_Page_040.jpg
cfffcafb299e986876eb7e8b456ec232
3756b06b361f380f13ddc530e9964879930f0d0c
568736 F20101212_AAAKAX sapp_b_Page_074.jp2
895bf9c4636847085a01fa16f7e5a0a1
9a0a2f53c94c9de1f1126abe7ec1c9dd56e0edff
112501 F20101212_AAAJVR sapp_b_Page_025.jpg
ae5aa3cddddc4f28edc2722cf6df596d
dfec577c6c809e43d2303bc096204eab21c64d29
1051986 F20101212_AAAKBM sapp_b_Page_092.jp2
c2140348705db5de9516e6870751c657
bef72a75d97c7bbd904dde122e455c76a81ba131
37002 F20101212_AAAJWG sapp_b_Page_041.jpg
ad4eb47f2008dc3a10042693e47b3d15
007204a9e96122bce1ec1947475fb2db4ddb37b6
547342 F20101212_AAAKAY sapp_b_Page_075.jp2
813c9ad2fb52d594f44663a39eafee5d
79a1fa5fe23c6969be5bfd62f77975f4a52e2c28
F20101212_AAAKCA sapp_b_Page_007.tif
8354897a2e1827d9a69167bdac1b3897
5291d76fd506ca5f4d19b2e96deb78989ade4adc
1001838 F20101212_AAAKBN sapp_b_Page_093.jp2
cf8952b71bb7401d4100d222f3e91113
cde0be35a8938d09aaf48bced50e9e479db2f781
35042 F20101212_AAAJWH sapp_b_Page_042.jpg
89f140bb7ad891e549ba92ba19443771
2bf0899b5c21a2853f4886a576d4e2909224ba30
478793 F20101212_AAAKAZ sapp_b_Page_076.jp2
f3dcbc017203b337693619942d1e85c6
08fd33b347d5b7d2179b9ecd8a880306bd23bcae
104789 F20101212_AAAJVS sapp_b_Page_026.jpg
8eab26621d33690464abe102650f5bc9
8d7608d95de7b141337781b38dbb3e7f90042e5a
F20101212_AAAKCB sapp_b_Page_008.tif
cbe27ca014028b7be7f5ab95f3a7cb28
cb6cd2194713c11c10abbb82789827a9797dfb19
1041408 F20101212_AAAKBO sapp_b_Page_094.jp2
500c51123dbafc0a5f6c7c5a8eb7e335
e1ba8dd48b70b3ed5346f72581e6144b38b3e152
91855 F20101212_AAAJWI sapp_b_Page_043.jpg
9a21b5b24d21f4593936f19543192903
1ca6a37c12958d500d20243c5aa8c2e7203ceb88
107659 F20101212_AAAJVT sapp_b_Page_027.jpg
74eac8d979668f07407ca9a1910da1a2
861d4bbc5873d57ee0ff10c40c3f53f41fd92f79
F20101212_AAAKCC sapp_b_Page_009.tif
4e7d13b6c827651db25e6ceea0b401db
5f21d35594c35a2e8217610b488ca972b69683f1
F20101212_AAAKBP sapp_b_Page_095.jp2
d9fd94e95eef7bde3127a10ea6356f1d
b8c189a360f3eb53413ee7b8a652bb5fd7f56f8f
62027 F20101212_AAAJWJ sapp_b_Page_044.jpg
5e15148d5d36795ac45b12429a6f4dcb
b24f7b1e49607b5afdd9fc28246e5add9f93924d
97988 F20101212_AAAJVU sapp_b_Page_028.jpg
2f449c6210bb3c2bc676ef9feb7223d7
1da866d0b67ffbd1ff83e65c02946ea798b06adf
F20101212_AAAKCD sapp_b_Page_010.tif
7606ce6a05415cc26732fc1b1f22b4ff
2e359dccc093fafff93d80c37d195ff0ce48c8dc
1051866 F20101212_AAAKBQ sapp_b_Page_096.jp2
72613e35e9d8c865093002c161568f2a
fa49d3cff0b5478bb8b13232a9dbb6702ec24cb0
53752 F20101212_AAAJWK sapp_b_Page_045.jpg
1ae34ee1da47b1a3e3c529e5d2d4b267
3f29d47b0fb2b654c60bb0867ca962103c45b092
110468 F20101212_AAAJVV sapp_b_Page_029.jpg
de6b9cc5f74681484727ec4997ff149b
8f4ad93778d52431cf940121e447ad081f9c7737
F20101212_AAAKCE sapp_b_Page_011.tif
507c34d4ccffa30567c59b9c5181a4e0
fd49b0288d3fce08a769469de0c8f1f759a71bd1
F20101212_AAAKBR sapp_b_Page_097.jp2
d424babd9d87601e902369459624522a
b33f9acffe0beb3ddcd25126608caf3002b0e19f
35114 F20101212_AAAJWL sapp_b_Page_046.jpg
d869b4b0be2c9b470dd6f895feb8eb27
5836a5adc4682962a4471f85d737933e2443eb2b
109130 F20101212_AAAJVW sapp_b_Page_031.jpg
c1a07564865364e12ba2c277d4b2b2be
e528b99c82d86da4c4abd5931073241bda131a37
F20101212_AAAKCF sapp_b_Page_012.tif
3633719f8e52097ac2c23a72ae394d58
83859af0986ba5543cd60b9b737bbcb576141319
106315 F20101212_AAAJXA sapp_b_Page_062.jpg
7c264eb84b35f7c33e5901a453c52575
41a9bd494dd856c2d716a03cb0bce284adbf22f1
987460 F20101212_AAAKBS sapp_b_Page_099.jp2
8192b7afb6e682a6a005b3c939e54bd4
777916a7d88c7dea3ff5cee5efbf51bda26ae1af
74164 F20101212_AAAJWM sapp_b_Page_047.jpg
cdc656a379ff22645d2dba74b54d6913
5bee9b0b76a233761c2cc5504bae6e9e2c1af6aa
108261 F20101212_AAAJVX sapp_b_Page_032.jpg
cb2d901d879ac7fd84b581eab6e4b4e9
4b4201e828f970e630424feff18f66b4d304389f
F20101212_AAAKCG sapp_b_Page_013.tif
95ac5f562b454056b39a114ac3cf44aa
6ebcbc3ee8241e49b738f6cc5e6eb61e80e43def
111894 F20101212_AAAJXB sapp_b_Page_063.jpg
5f0f402c20d0439822e864688a343ff0
a9a4b6431478732b181937e114b79b9b6b7a8043
1051957 F20101212_AAAKBT sapp_b_Page_100.jp2
fa8881822e5fe137d9961dfd8ba7811d
5959f41fdd36fe276f2a8b1cdbaa2af213be710d
50104 F20101212_AAAJWN sapp_b_Page_048.jpg
acabdde6af167ecd1bed096978e52035
984f285cb1d872736b1553227070bd71bf67fb81
108838 F20101212_AAAJVY sapp_b_Page_033.jpg
926bb7d52a780c961fd3c63ca29b046f
c2fd025e806f97aba124dd175634927e75f3ca96
F20101212_AAAKCH sapp_b_Page_014.tif
a7fec5575d93ae66ae4481292baee349
346491ba8a32a38fbddeab285d21f1b699a10637
102866 F20101212_AAAJXC sapp_b_Page_064.jpg
c2c272d1987e3a869e32370337392fe1
cf3a4eb145f68cb6b5359147e4f4cdc0040fa133
87876 F20101212_AAAKBU sapp_b_Page_101.jp2
ec26167c438cfdec68e0f5910878cc60
c81fd54767d5520d9af4dd131520e504b7fc1668
97606 F20101212_AAAJWO sapp_b_Page_049.jpg
2c0a785f1fc000f14649b04fad6a6096
57a121e57cb0099ee9008c4f6a7ee4ace2a25f53
113505 F20101212_AAAJVZ sapp_b_Page_034.jpg
79caf0693427b659976c2b1b8f36b795
44721578901c4565991bdefd6fa479e3df4be3e2
F20101212_AAAKCI sapp_b_Page_015.tif
53c9182c7e45c3739a0faddd8301ad66
d165f01fd1e127bac89ab1a76b30cfab84f17e1d
102591 F20101212_AAAJXD sapp_b_Page_065.jpg
1f28670c34076cca2bc34f4caa3e47f3
cb4c2245151a7a7d51b26aceb06b68c865a84f37
F20101212_AAAKBV sapp_b_Page_001.tif
f77aa27e9095288f697442f35f41026f
fcbf7ef145cef77037418f17cc2bca0ca8780c65
98203 F20101212_AAAJWP sapp_b_Page_050.jpg
2c0df27f269b618c80c0646742d3a5ec
d7215b2f56153e00cda36b12103d4221efa1dd04
F20101212_AAAKCJ sapp_b_Page_016.tif
667bbe067f613b66fb1893ba2e7df097
870d7cd13531aa9ea9b312b244905f6d723db3a8
F20101212_AAAKBW sapp_b_Page_002.tif
46f0fd52bf5c3cdfb08884780433d140
4d2f06f09ac1b95447da1679b9e7257a15896537
97500 F20101212_AAAJWQ sapp_b_Page_051.jpg
d6de161bad0a7cb0feed8378f591a4ca
99f72d6b716275859f07b266a91b674a22e89dc5
F20101212_AAAKCK sapp_b_Page_017.tif
ebb3888c86b327f2ef012542a08843e4
5b13ab084d9810e2ae398687ecc8b14dba9e36dd
93519 F20101212_AAAJXE sapp_b_Page_066.jpg
31aae46f88f8235736a721a970fc0b54
d65fcaa6c38999f95feb09c51377276c11449a91
F20101212_AAAKBX sapp_b_Page_003.tif
6a3ce70d14b6bb0fa1a0875fc2fc654e
ce4aed654cde2efde96df5827c0993930c7a2fcf
108606 F20101212_AAAJWR sapp_b_Page_052.jpg
975a34f2033dd8f31d2c581dbe3fdda8
dfecbc999abc00f55ccc75468ac5f27c25b86d65
F20101212_AAAKCL sapp_b_Page_018.tif
e98c31b67a4687d12c10923fc7ba479c
cf5feecfb0b2df8514007f03b1c2b47a8a465afb
99086 F20101212_AAAJXF sapp_b_Page_067.jpg
fb5455f371ed82e1483ae0ff2994de81
5009480100c4405f4526374717d2df7b419b6be2
F20101212_AAAKBY sapp_b_Page_004.tif
5ac574e50bb982b4bd934fc68fc6fc7b
f09f4970129413c3f2a49a5a2763a0d88113bd5f
110082 F20101212_AAAJWS sapp_b_Page_053.jpg
e37835f3abb344cdaf359321ebf05cf4
7c6db68a517bca9c7af7a53d329f5e3c8222323b
F20101212_AAAKDA sapp_b_Page_033.tif
65c87d2e29a713313439aba1835adab2
26f50057aa75b07682e3afe26d7c4214fde3ae7c
F20101212_AAAKCM sapp_b_Page_019.tif
212f0daa180a07f006146f42d091c989
7253429528c3bb8b5de2ec236d2b744eaa235332
61161 F20101212_AAAJXG sapp_b_Page_068.jpg
e48288b386c1aed030707bf33f246b7b
f17595c1da9171a95db1e7de80ef8c1663d59a3f
F20101212_AAAKBZ sapp_b_Page_005.tif
d68fcd0b7a974765530a46ecf2106239
8e611c94a8824e5b06060252ba88175bb900ef15
F20101212_AAAKDB sapp_b_Page_035.tif
1472ea3803ef691a44aa6a276430ac7d
ee65417c706e88298c41fe7e29ef6198a775e495
F20101212_AAAKCN sapp_b_Page_020.tif
18535f34dd79088dce8afc5bfd7cd210
e4fa16029488cd0c636b88279be27ffc12356dc5
43022 F20101212_AAAJXH sapp_b_Page_069.jpg
2d146b4cb5c2582d9865a6957eafb489
47472d53f8995e6a95a51827e99bf4c89f8476a1
74048 F20101212_AAAJWT sapp_b_Page_054.jpg
f5def76579142aea3d6723205e7ab8d8
c63358b010b49e8df4897cf2c7fafa32e74da971
F20101212_AAAKDC sapp_b_Page_036.tif
0f5ba44da2773ce7911973193fe2361f
29de4cbea1c3d436620286dbb6123fcc91477d11
F20101212_AAAKCO sapp_b_Page_021.tif
f6e3cda191a43d232cf0c452c41da405
fb0c79fe4b71ff1fa4822caa5a51fdf8b17e0c57
62893 F20101212_AAAJXI sapp_b_Page_070.jpg
b41ac2253741c3f418ee81ea3ce6b2cf
0c3e35fe76ce0a31fdf9284175847dbf0f05f02c
71945 F20101212_AAAJWU sapp_b_Page_055.jpg
de7b57e08e33054ab7aeb4bb715f5c19
ed3fd0ef44ab52669f7cb460a0f68ff53da9edae
F20101212_AAAKDD sapp_b_Page_037.tif
d63f7dbbd6eb8eebbb3b93f80799bed6
3d62e52cba609c23e9858c41db70433d92f78473
F20101212_AAAKCP sapp_b_Page_022.tif
50152d3324c966190b3814fd66bc52f1
ac0555ab56120074b81a3df001bf3a999750bcf1
49513 F20101212_AAAJXJ sapp_b_Page_071.jpg
3fa33d98eae17cef2e870f17c71ae97a
652ecd44af7417ae09892c40b1ff1d01568a9a03
75877 F20101212_AAAJWV sapp_b_Page_056.jpg
72cb6ec72303398af589e7382c135385
a7829c6b834817763ef3b581c614cdb0915c7c85
F20101212_AAAKDE sapp_b_Page_038.tif
c7b47cfdcffcf21b7727988f23475995
70e3a5e946245712098436d5401bb647e4cd66f4
F20101212_AAAKCQ sapp_b_Page_023.tif
c758845f2400fec8243486a0feb3d335
5ce482292b4ecdb7032afdb7c79ec37997304e62
51882 F20101212_AAAJXK sapp_b_Page_073.jpg
ce8a21210b828342815dbb0bd5fef0ae
30b62c2c0d3df482cd267892d27cbadc05dca1ef
80940 F20101212_AAAJWW sapp_b_Page_057.jpg
360f48ef6b9ebe7be20db69f7d6f65e2
77e200c2ce049a18adbf9e5d562d9e06c0dc7033
F20101212_AAAKDF sapp_b_Page_039.tif
0c9edb39e2480bdaff83e5af03e6b1a6
d100f2fb24d5cb82901d09699cb7531a993f9c1d
F20101212_AAAKCR sapp_b_Page_024.tif
f6906098332c57f92dd9ad2c6c7882e0
0cace672475225ec20af693d57a3f94389824422
57282 F20101212_AAAJXL sapp_b_Page_074.jpg
79ebaf867a680fcefd50e7a50bf58aa6
15d8371968a23994bd6e01eca86f569ea9df7873
45426 F20101212_AAAJWX sapp_b_Page_059.jpg
6062399a48c2d3e6f3a87a2baedb458e
f0440fe38821aebabcaa09e8ec4d8517f76956de
F20101212_AAAKDG sapp_b_Page_040.tif
744a63d71ec824b1b953b6b40c70569f
b00e48c805ec99d4b3780063468281dd337ea76e
101458 F20101212_AAAJYA sapp_b_Page_092.jpg
78ff6f90fe4850b34f57c48418dd8da7
d7557ca91472080e5454fd597ca030ad55ab9257
F20101212_AAAKCS sapp_b_Page_025.tif
f441e7ed76b0e4252c3e94b07a56cff7
06d2d5eb74702a1cbaddefb4b72633cba07fde00
55188 F20101212_AAAJXM sapp_b_Page_075.jpg
5c5f6c51a7ce469ed5589b3c61c70dfc
df43b2b7bdd67329e72a1aee0a2857cb455b60c8
25616 F20101212_AAAJWY sapp_b_Page_060.jpg
0240e8765f58a9c2aeb14e2f9d4ba02c
288006bce4d0ce37a2cac36abf956d4e4598af08
F20101212_AAAKDH sapp_b_Page_041.tif
005e113b9a40d86569aeea98d7ac28e9
2f4114ff6ae7b23ea29cf1a110e11976f9704088
90041 F20101212_AAAJYB sapp_b_Page_093.jpg
843ebda522d5d06b47f5b6e26c200bea
2412ee27069068369d9c8ad6d37184cf9536f4e8
F20101212_AAAKCT sapp_b_Page_026.tif
27815ecd1e9d6fe94d1066c7fa369897
81fb59ddb294f3a5ba775673959d74c0f4ee249a
52810 F20101212_AAAJXN sapp_b_Page_076.jpg
9db392b42eb5cc806390b9dde6395386
034a577e42e555133a9bbb977474336e4dcbf03e
97145 F20101212_AAAJWZ sapp_b_Page_061.jpg
800e45f7e87b3bac73882d2673db7200
191f879c8b5ac0404fe21bd4e3509260915b6529
F20101212_AAAKDI sapp_b_Page_042.tif
bc81d1ffda1bde9d3e06c742a05868ba
cd955b55be8aa9efb9b6804a5dd45ffc970cfd4c
96424 F20101212_AAAJYC sapp_b_Page_094.jpg
3e0f5da71a62d64406b624a2fb581b0d
3cc0375a4f0f003a41d71c66dfcbf4746a332073
F20101212_AAAKCU sapp_b_Page_027.tif
0dbe9c8cd2c25682cb3de53591b9df39
7e082eff31409e8d3bb7e1d15eb37be2ce0f805e
48217 F20101212_AAAJXO sapp_b_Page_077.jpg
4fc4af566bc1a9cd8fb4a431914b51b4
a6e75e37273dbc1d28f1ece00ff7b3206ec254ff
F20101212_AAAKDJ sapp_b_Page_043.tif
2c47993dbc2507c5a61aebb57e0bdabc
d9986609b6fa62be6e40ce1aa68bf70d3942ec7d
102154 F20101212_AAAJYD sapp_b_Page_095.jpg
d0f85f3aa63e5108f9e75251fd479b27
32ff06dca83bcbd286dc658d40e7a9334fa9df99
F20101212_AAAKCV sapp_b_Page_028.tif
c6f70c8154eaea6405bb2f947ec03254
9c2d1cd013c7d0522a3b99c002bb70b1b787fd49
52169 F20101212_AAAJXP sapp_b_Page_078.jpg
57f5d2b6f12106a72db53774432a123e
d695fdec728b2547e1fb7d2ceaa6ed7714ae917c
F20101212_AAAKDK sapp_b_Page_044.tif
b35469c94eac1e2b7f45c8c357a163fc
73e91b2505b365b2dbb866abee8ddf623aba799f
108187 F20101212_AAAJYE sapp_b_Page_096.jpg
d9227a697538804f50e58932a5299f4e
846b2668f1bd26b6834bcbe12a2b99d006f68488
F20101212_AAAKCW sapp_b_Page_029.tif
9a8ccc794788861c885bf6bd09ec09d4
ae9105a3fc7435e7f7993c3c8ad183ea40bf748b
50029 F20101212_AAAJXQ sapp_b_Page_080.jpg
8632cd455a25df4857ffde62735b3aa4
140f78883c13c9d0f6d4050fde5a2a06294806d3
F20101212_AAAKDL sapp_b_Page_045.tif
f2fc9ba0a65768a535d1df450ec95c38
e5965b5248f172f6000c2db63858c249f6f08215
120271 F20101212_AAAJYF sapp_b_Page_097.jpg
c3a4b5323e134e55c907773acd361e9c
3911a918669fbc1b6d65a6458ab2b558c024e928
F20101212_AAAKCX sapp_b_Page_030.tif
68f522fd52541dcaad8920d8c0ae2d58
a7c051d805eb260b63c34ad5fccaab85eaee071b
99674 F20101212_AAAJXR sapp_b_Page_082.jpg
ba77ce9e33e673983d9a819bd7a3b9cf
0b9f1af8f33fa8c619faf30a5b8f02a26f857695
F20101212_AAAKEA sapp_b_Page_061.tif
e792376feb2e7c11dfa5ae37aca91c1b
fc354868521455a9090b7e9278e6e4dac2289ba3
F20101212_AAAKDM sapp_b_Page_046.tif
36f2b7f497093d3b17e649d1eb6bdaaf
c2c011f7ba7ae7ced0f5bd4b6a89adc24bc4fc9e
122497 F20101212_AAAJYG sapp_b_Page_098.jpg
8ae3113dd84d5a4dfc3f1894deb33b0e
4545efc86e8830863cc1a8e9481a03b6efc2e29e
F20101212_AAAKCY sapp_b_Page_031.tif
7ca02964e69f1b0c9e1c021fe5e590dc
ea063654cc1d6d3065c2b34bc38f1b649e8f01c2
107690 F20101212_AAAJXS sapp_b_Page_083.jpg
44712b4d3bbfada4d513d64f734aa8a0
3a09dcb3da86f36bc1fec5547149f6ae4e7b3019
F20101212_AAAKDN sapp_b_Page_047.tif
98e95cebcd6cccc2557dcc3b5504a99d
f7ea181634790ca77a1645e62cd125cc7b39b8f8
92913 F20101212_AAAJYH sapp_b_Page_099.jpg
1a2fac9c5cb7c9ba44f938702f33467b
96b684cd6c9a8de7b8498b32c6fc46bee0359f87
F20101212_AAAKCZ sapp_b_Page_032.tif
4db19de5f7ac9b045148b66211de63fb
a761eb19f36e18164e4b4cc628205843789ad4ee
9833 F20101212_AAAJXT sapp_b_Page_084.jpg
8b5ed0b7ce65b432b479a9127900271b
147894156e2551ce9405393304dc5ae1bdda9316
F20101212_AAAKEB sapp_b_Page_062.tif
5bb96292a40851325b00198540bebff3
97443db03e640c71b420a98b8b7bc2989b19cb20
F20101212_AAAKDO sapp_b_Page_048.tif
fa53cde33914448871c6c1861ed02776
24d019ca3cd0ac696c3aa4e67c1f27f7237a40ad
108133 F20101212_AAAJYI sapp_b_Page_100.jpg
319361a03a1e8fcfd5b397afc644194b
57f71b23783cfaf2716444132412e6997cfa1499
F20101212_AAAKEC sapp_b_Page_063.tif
80bb05dd0e79b3ef4e36e36f97847643
73876b36b3919c1ebe6465975c812ba7e75e74d1
F20101212_AAAKDP sapp_b_Page_049.tif
627849a70c66645f948e719d0579904a
775c9ffdf8c8a30065f2249fc32c02ba1faace00
10265 F20101212_AAAJYJ sapp_b_Page_101.jpg
72025363789c02d4b3d51889a2528fd7
797f27df877763e063152ca41f939e39787c0647
108808 F20101212_AAAJXU sapp_b_Page_085.jpg
00df26146b91499b5f5fe526efb06965
0fca6e5ec3734ed3c8e2e811ad98cf54a5b8efd1
F20101212_AAAKED sapp_b_Page_064.tif
7ef260b814db1cfdaa0fca33d715c0c5
e77afd12c6761af76ebe93a59ba4ebe62eaa9005
F20101212_AAAKDQ sapp_b_Page_050.tif
c9e0c9fa1575d3d56de580bc2792a2e3
ee1c6b98bb04f864a79257f636d9c1418845507a
209564 F20101212_AAAJYK sapp_b_Page_001.jp2
8b4428266d8082e89b1f5330f46a74fb
56d5417fed0eee2ba8f98a3c405440215f6f79a8
104758 F20101212_AAAJXV sapp_b_Page_086.jpg
d3df8528f6e4b3cec9c25ed8f2ffa8c1
d92993a577d81a5d1e7f45e9e1b6ab487d70192f
F20101212_AAAKEE sapp_b_Page_066.tif
5c235c98b52ba4b0d378e10782f10cc6
fa7db42c8585968a5194b1b3945fac4621818fba
F20101212_AAAKDR sapp_b_Page_051.tif
5bc77252ddbd5b951019429d2e4044a0
e582a061ce021dc7eae1079037b6375522938987
23933 F20101212_AAAJYL sapp_b_Page_002.jp2
dc176b3b86d9873f3f0fe5f8c0da46e7
b2edd5c842594762679a6a0a4724b9d19f51544b
90474 F20101212_AAAJXW sapp_b_Page_088.jpg
bd5c9563891ed808ec1f421c4a663878
2ff39c25af217486e067f58172654e0dc37bdc87
F20101212_AAAKEF sapp_b_Page_067.tif
857bf04c1e357e41dd0e97ce31783a30
7081d4b59194498d9e05c94579af01d8a4eb40f0
F20101212_AAAJZA sapp_b_Page_019.jp2
46bebeb078dc38f7d63c48aa36095618
3fed077ca9c1309b48c5e96b844e33f7adb36fe9
F20101212_AAAKDS sapp_b_Page_052.tif
3cf5398602f0830ce5e251186c6e206e
e6d35d46d51366b43f00ffb91511ae4b4cb99db5
36073 F20101212_AAAJYM sapp_b_Page_003.jp2
2387c93f33d3fdabf58bd8dd781a12ee
7e66c4bcf3b1fb9a195325eb90960e5b2faf2a55
100383 F20101212_AAAJXX sapp_b_Page_089.jpg
cc7012a43a24837ab543dcc8a501de56
051d555f64e041215c7a8e66d929f2445462ceb0
F20101212_AAAKEG sapp_b_Page_068.tif
497fba918030d5787c3aaa99db1bdadc
23d6cc6e69d094f4e0568fc99de6ebea0191e531
1051968 F20101212_AAAJZB sapp_b_Page_020.jp2
41d006692499b0d00d49a00d2cf00d53
b27ff14dc500a3101167c3a3dbc16b1a299c8228
F20101212_AAAKDT sapp_b_Page_053.tif
37085c5420de67926972dece2531b714
1cf1e496d2fdbe6ba800076fb1414304beb2b4ec
1008250 F20101212_AAAJYN sapp_b_Page_004.jp2
32e98930560dcac762387a2438c31954
3fa282ec65d4405a093766822f96200e13d3eda7
98140 F20101212_AAAJXY sapp_b_Page_090.jpg
cd9b65b24ade46e8178da0a347c36a71
989944850ebe2004e6b79f302055430272630d9d
F20101212_AAAKEH sapp_b_Page_069.tif
8dd9c5ef5f4349cf05ebc6b87ee97b9c
cb5df8171c2ae45a97d0d248ad641477c2716ff0
F20101212_AAAJZC sapp_b_Page_021.jp2
79ead279aaea25049c83fd857bdf716e
061427bab4c3ad306dafe450e9066d702632f95b
F20101212_AAAKDU sapp_b_Page_054.tif
6f54623f81e499b0d07786711b0baa39
a2e57d0083ab1ae9a2986c977efcb6c8394d32c2
F20101212_AAAJYO sapp_b_Page_005.jp2
ace0f469d73d3c41069cee60f8f68447
150fe2d5a2528fcfbd6b5ad08ea8dbf0d021cfb8
95282 F20101212_AAAJXZ sapp_b_Page_091.jpg
95ff60e8fa611399f31feeeda7468053
d380d4415dc1d2a3d2ad124bd30f3b565bf59371
F20101212_AAAKEI sapp_b_Page_070.tif
60f72758af13f1c6a6a427d042100a3b
47e96eb5fc6df4f0ed9b691ae3ca386deb6d5c37
F20101212_AAAJZD sapp_b_Page_022.jp2
671b718425b048860a99348e6e751779
3eeefe143a71f68a38b83266ddfc5f71e0e3be2d
F20101212_AAAKDV sapp_b_Page_056.tif
87e6e6910fb0c07d69f25dcfa89a98b6
b46d0447dfca9f69d5a999c0308f9ac771a22930
F20101212_AAAJYP sapp_b_Page_006.jp2
82007c66d821812cd272fc6fe3ccd0f0
e107860ca8cfe681efdd20fd0d4297e1916785d2
F20101212_AAAKEJ sapp_b_Page_071.tif
c2be6afba6a85f20a8377b24099cd546
bbd22ecf045135252fc5db43cb21657c9184105f
1051952 F20101212_AAAJZE sapp_b_Page_023.jp2
8883d1a29226b53701e427ce8c8fb5e0
df5a52786c3e9bab75daf797bc622434a9c7c5f6
F20101212_AAAKDW sapp_b_Page_057.tif
b34ab621a0b0b4c5ff529f805b173f54
fb25d98c787d91d93240b5275baf77a7e474e566
1051955 F20101212_AAAJYQ sapp_b_Page_007.jp2
4e913c0bc33e651a8aa3acdbc2160f1e
da6f82548c89d8b07dd20d3d2bc0d68dadc052f0
F20101212_AAAKEK sapp_b_Page_072.tif
f101ee8559ef50ae65ff063f5914f31f
c0be1c1afef84a2ef2a5d398b6e3f95749ebf685
1051949 F20101212_AAAJZF sapp_b_Page_024.jp2
06a7dde9672233474c78263a930c8163
e5f5fa12cfc727bc25f34b66fe0fc9bc8b1181d0
F20101212_AAAKDX sapp_b_Page_058.tif
bccf68fda2cd1684542c797336782aef
1e5ff701c108023cad8d4cdcca371917e10cf07c
F20101212_AAAJYR sapp_b_Page_008.jp2
737dcf085b05c116b81a4cdb9f0209b9
b3d79f35030a937d516c83a0499a574676c323ff
F20101212_AAAKFA sapp_b_Page_090.tif
4590d7c882ebc5b3a9ea7bd5f2551b7a
4c4918d617a05965a044a016165f8f9d7404abcb
F20101212_AAAKEL sapp_b_Page_073.tif
7625b9b27d946796de08c31807ddca1d
b94b1d01a16dfec5e68ffcb72b717c95464f8cba
1051978 F20101212_AAAJZG sapp_b_Page_025.jp2
65309bc44033c9cd3d20afa9e3680919
0ffaa6fccd2d80d834ab08fe04a737f6e04b0f45
F20101212_AAAKDY sapp_b_Page_059.tif
171b501360b3280a3d59508a85dbccdc
f9b80e0e250f318a2d59329db2966d07ba343f43
F20101212_AAAJYS sapp_b_Page_009.jp2
19771bf51c799db46dcfcde869b11449
1e7017e5b858762abca4e2401eb94c1dc4bcf7cf
F20101212_AAAKEM sapp_b_Page_074.tif
abe3261825fe7955a5446201c540b764
b69d2fbe64afe70d82097d8cb72d5ffdf3e3fbd5
F20101212_AAAJZH sapp_b_Page_026.jp2
cd30f05fa893af30d46397ee7130e5c5
aa72cc4e6fb2d32e3990a7c7c219fda49cebf1eb
F20101212_AAAKDZ sapp_b_Page_060.tif
a6cc43632d1cadf281418670b839fe29
0ec137b6e102ce580ab0b943f49a1700885600a2
1051934 F20101212_AAAJYT sapp_b_Page_010.jp2
4d9b379541d2b762b1112004c090d09e
e222f28e951246e31b0f712ca59513e48f38ae4d
F20101212_AAAKFB sapp_b_Page_091.tif
550e21328891913e3907761464f1b302
110cf72f25b0eb950e133f7c8177b6aafc1c4d79
F20101212_AAAKEN sapp_b_Page_075.tif
e079b92a05c43658370367849377fef6
6b9294f05ab3ba5bf98c9fb098d69554c88d1c92
F20101212_AAAJZI sapp_b_Page_028.jp2
43bad476f0b8bde7aa83292df9f41a47
2e700eaec1fcee9f81e65bb1aff0b9ec9ebef47c
1051982 F20101212_AAAJYU sapp_b_Page_011.jp2
d5aade13cb8d18074a262051a1b18fdb
4095a3aa837001ce0ba4f2a6d0ee9ec71e744f8d
F20101212_AAAKFC sapp_b_Page_093.tif
14383a2b443b758ed54644f23e1081e7
194e33abe10b3c16aa9771f8209222033f1a316a
F20101212_AAAKEO sapp_b_Page_076.tif
bdf34112440496e96d0f65ef163a4325
890e44891b570bcbf93257376ecc557f487d8a0e
F20101212_AAAJZJ sapp_b_Page_029.jp2
f8f119fce2971b087eb5a454e88a4344
5519f41f49bd1f5e9e08e48cbbf2fd18f025b190
F20101212_AAAKFD sapp_b_Page_094.tif
3e1fbf918c8378f5db2608a04fe0f532
be0ba83e6323ee56d9b347027e28222ee0e20862
F20101212_AAAKEP sapp_b_Page_077.tif
0c209d9febdcebc38ff0c4b479c602d9
d1f35d9f9292defe21cf9fbc639b428694c64225
1051884 F20101212_AAAJZK sapp_b_Page_030.jp2
85c975fb43225637d83f1493a48f35fc
07722ff4d967729c993bc82b2b206c76525f1b8c
435598 F20101212_AAAJYV sapp_b_Page_013.jp2
55ac27cc60c808cd16011e9bb02b0395
292e9723cc9a1695bd76f98bec7419a33d1200d9
F20101212_AAAKFE sapp_b_Page_095.tif
a452154d08dffdaab282c3659957977a
708bfd18c4c13f10d8a35629c0b1ee4eab97e5aa
F20101212_AAAKEQ sapp_b_Page_078.tif
25d75ac1318861cbe7434f34740969b2
15920d2f9286380ba82cb84fc963bc0e097360c0
1051912 F20101212_AAAJZL sapp_b_Page_031.jp2
86f76a65758b1d831750c3bf5fdd07be
2361bc587af388fe16f5f15c5b30058de68e903c
1051964 F20101212_AAAJYW sapp_b_Page_014.jp2
46cc27db2bca3744897558714309c6e5
6f70d51c52090435ffc8392c3fbe65de0d96d3dc
F20101212_AAAKFF sapp_b_Page_096.tif
382551ce65c7812462bdaad13d3ded38
92a2dee39930afcc4a71a2dac9932bd0df9eeeb2
F20101212_AAAKER sapp_b_Page_080.tif
d2b46e60150097964f4c7d3fb41b75c0
7d6ad32d717a467678479fc3c151c1a7704cbe76
1051981 F20101212_AAAJZM sapp_b_Page_032.jp2
7561cad7518037950bd3c5dc058b9fd6
b8d919de2cc166b8efc67a2f25cd4575e985980c
F20101212_AAAJYX sapp_b_Page_016.jp2
05130427d2e7d63988f93747179ce5f6
c8ab0948b69a96ab542d2040b88b12d3f62d025f
F20101212_AAAKFG sapp_b_Page_097.tif
d54c1b85e2c8dc226ec9b4900e7294ec
8dfd95b28529e7a112862ea3d2a3d5525d8bbac0
F20101212_AAAKES sapp_b_Page_081.tif
e116607f2b2f495cef0feb0162a1a1c3
25b687ca97617351d9e9648b7b6a75893602eeac
1051929 F20101212_AAAJZN sapp_b_Page_033.jp2
9a58c3ece900e590017f968f07114a73
a42d03872b173672a4e3c5602f71267b9921c7a8
1051927 F20101212_AAAJYY sapp_b_Page_017.jp2
bda49778d5e2144eb7cccb90158ff1ec
e26e3b864a0bc915fc2b8a02d8d19fb3324e17da
F20101212_AAAKFH sapp_b_Page_098.tif
bc70a331682fb210ba02283c1d49039f
e4f0f88170f1d80179dbd388c220f8f8f7f87942
F20101212_AAAKET sapp_b_Page_082.tif
8e326fd2302b85730d2f5fc354a4d137
6008b0c8dcd1f140f77f47ffea4d1ad2237c12d6
F20101212_AAAJZO sapp_b_Page_034.jp2
1f3f0e72ea5a345ad52b0863193990c3
f29efc1a9fab5d00e904dde68563acfcc9d607b0
F20101212_AAAJYZ sapp_b_Page_018.jp2
af01d807f09059efd9f3a62712c09410
e80693efd5c8b1cd6dc009c6e5453b3e1a84b7b0
F20101212_AAAKFI sapp_b_Page_099.tif
81e7f79b0b3b8755ecf6e81622fd2b83
270aaf6b3df6093b1ae4c3c6e56cbb40e81be5ec
F20101212_AAAKEU sapp_b_Page_083.tif
62b8f0def9869123a74174503b1200af
d8059d3107d16720dd31758e77a03d15464071af
1051935 F20101212_AAAJZP sapp_b_Page_035.jp2
4029b9ab8e1ecd42fd7dc58437c5d750
a3b674d23d34e9701aef3aacf99645c49472a4a1
F20101212_AAAKFJ sapp_b_Page_100.tif
81250cadaf4eef03ec3e77814f5b36ac
dfe115543f20a58d146e7b1afb9e89f12475f27d
F20101212_AAAKEV sapp_b_Page_084.tif
9e8ef45aee3bb2f544fdd26d60ccd384
c9cf802ad98947b1c8dc531603f1522c57f23bc6
F20101212_AAAJZQ sapp_b_Page_036.jp2
bb4474b99223f93e0735e4e6ff7589cf
23acdc10ecbf32b724a8993e37edd032b42764c1
F20101212_AAAKFK sapp_b_Page_101.tif
9acbc74d81746038a3e9b07bca2b6342
b1bf5902f7f0775427d0e9f497dc9d46a99d382f
F20101212_AAAKEW sapp_b_Page_085.tif
955cadf06c7d77c57a9c3032789cfc86
92121a53854632f1c890e661bbd3820f7b241e7c
1051917 F20101212_AAAJZR sapp_b_Page_037.jp2
e9141e469fc1643e169ef9a8f1039574
f5ee9bee05c4fc7db3ba07b4754d6a4a95af79b1
54820 F20101212_AAAKGA sapp_b_Page_017.pro
9465463ff41251be6f125c059373ee40
b7edd6d8419595dbe1963facb0cc9c4fb28a35c3
807 F20101212_AAAKFL sapp_b_Page_002.pro
c961ed07822c5e5e5bdd00b764de8013
61c865d9c3d1cc57acebb7ca37e5b500d7e542bd
F20101212_AAAKEX sapp_b_Page_086.tif
fdd98b7028f17572d4df97a864738b18
44d40667c2bfd7d0af8f90fb43ae338c78929344
F20101212_AAAJZS sapp_b_Page_038.jp2
cc9a4c5c4086680932598ff0a737ff6e
c1416f1a5adec2eab31ea9f04d5d5d693606e9a3
55849 F20101212_AAAKGB sapp_b_Page_018.pro
c6c61ba844652e2c9afd6f6378f9e5b4
c42933f23b40e5e1fe447487a757881f4b513e64
1418 F20101212_AAAKFM sapp_b_Page_003.pro
9065baa089ae5e493a92959ebec19a36
2f9f10005f6dd7fe063df0527e45873535b95ddc
F20101212_AAAKEY sapp_b_Page_087.tif
b447e3ccd33e9cb0cdb8f824a89e9b10
0f5787b3a8666eca23a12e1207a02da1f1d83363
663283 F20101212_AAAJZT sapp_b_Page_039.jp2
6e6483666789ee40646f44e2895c67c3
7a3bdfcd702e69b242d3f765e5916e6b4a6886db
45401 F20101212_AAAKFN sapp_b_Page_004.pro
79a1f93d3f615ca1fe808f6055b4d7e0
fb842fe6c46aba7804665ac402f798dc82ffcaf8
F20101212_AAAKEZ sapp_b_Page_088.tif
c2eea1b8b57a9bbf070ff21c382237ce
8c9e816f9514a51af0185a77f0924cc12a069daf
461286 F20101212_AAAJZU sapp_b_Page_040.jp2
25f02669aa29f451d6ce271357e05d93
d68c23d2e9df8122362365f52de32543b9c725aa
53625 F20101212_AAAKGC sapp_b_Page_020.pro
9f8c5eb8b366107d92c2c41096ec9b9c
48e8aeb78ae93ea9d631a269ef7dde62b6447d69
92621 F20101212_AAAKFO sapp_b_Page_005.pro
c5017a98b6920632fba03ba75565b1f4
1a9689d1fc9e1194ff2cc99d52e4ff5c08d899b2
311564 F20101212_AAAJZV sapp_b_Page_041.jp2
323644b6bf0f040f14081e07fe82c683
715241f84a5e4cb6125b33eba96d875328828188
55651 F20101212_AAAKGD sapp_b_Page_021.pro
e8aa14ed285506b2cdbb1fdd76a83875
77f3ccdcc6e325fd53ab8a2c79973e98f9f7bee1
91982 F20101212_AAAKFP sapp_b_Page_006.pro
ae94fa19c9022de19969a8e0a6889503
f52262f0629271b13c91f4cd5076497f277a3c89
49549 F20101212_AAAKGE sapp_b_Page_022.pro
aa8201529c94a9fb2a6d7c99dd89fa7d
b157d81dcd68e7e41cfc161a0a4b6b601312b834
64418 F20101212_AAAKFQ sapp_b_Page_007.pro
765d939f08293e3cae21efa699afcf5b
774ac28c9c8776729dc67e0b4bab863863aee7c0
284313 F20101212_AAAJZW sapp_b_Page_042.jp2
95df9b917ef7d2815a2d5fd7ed175844
2b1de9e65ef4d95d88380fac47de214f3e720390
56324 F20101212_AAAKGF sapp_b_Page_023.pro
13731fdc198cbac88074df2d7ba876d0
6c9170acd52e1a6addc152b1a6711ae42053dce8
56420 F20101212_AAAKFR sapp_b_Page_008.pro
280c6c60a49befb360f05a0901c3589f
914504b716d2bb0b44e769b9fff10d7f8207a549
1051860 F20101212_AAAJZX sapp_b_Page_043.jp2
af487a42e6852421b16c246758049697
af58b3398823396b1c8dafa4d819d0bb20e5ac27
54864 F20101212_AAAKGG sapp_b_Page_024.pro
f0fe3c6db274cd463a18100373de5f41
7b2491c75b247b203d2409392d88f64a85978b58
46396 F20101212_AAAKFS sapp_b_Page_009.pro
b7f4a6518b22ba7de07316b0c5fae068
3cd93b87bb0c7d4402c3148b7a77035e87884248
808412 F20101212_AAAJZY sapp_b_Page_044.jp2
60766b8c82982e494287156c6eb0c9c3
c2986e43483467a6c11e4da1f040855106cadd6b
55604 F20101212_AAAKGH sapp_b_Page_025.pro
ecf7fd2a32f0a27844bc176e0ba02e1f
37cfbdcc7b895dd92d3c3295edbbe2ffd20b4549
50852 F20101212_AAAKFT sapp_b_Page_010.pro
d8cf2c688d3cc4493ecdf0d239a56db0
f1d177a6db696da447acca50677e6baa4429295f
F20101212_AAAJZZ sapp_b_Page_045.jp2
e6e4a800ff7346187463727db5687d74
a7590fd2872876ae042a880216a403418f932987
51525 F20101212_AAAKGI sapp_b_Page_026.pro
392866455e4365ae44aeac3bd7d91190
4decf534325c56864d05dc8238a442efb1ed3761
48228 F20101212_AAAKFU sapp_b_Page_011.pro
e5180af2cf421c56d8ee01476080c5c9
778b947edb53a6fcc9193f023c00d557e9642e20
53772 F20101212_AAAKGJ sapp_b_Page_027.pro
0e4fda65566837985decfa1e04e943ac
f4a7636f6d0d9c932355ab19faa55b6acd783026
55598 F20101212_AAAKFV sapp_b_Page_012.pro
5c6a37d94e9fbc5c8fcf41f5751daa99
cf1240c090fd0b2da86048ff0bc3551d3220fc62
48911 F20101212_AAAKGK sapp_b_Page_028.pro
ca9a2a7fa59d1b30cf394ac1c07eb3a7
d4367083c82fc2a995a4a6b260bbc1e917998f64
19177 F20101212_AAAKFW sapp_b_Page_013.pro
4f2aee8dceaa82bd8dce4f792c90834f
2ca9621e2b3b0f9decb17eebf01c83c24618f43e
55334 F20101212_AAAKGL sapp_b_Page_029.pro
9ade3d4ff0552c24493cb32deb001851
5bd85d03f7367e2ee9d6ff311d5acd793800f651
53304 F20101212_AAAKFX sapp_b_Page_014.pro
ae5f48ff2c6b9b1b783361071619ad01
feaa9e5148202554371976d47b71e4f78b5c3363
2910 F20101212_AAAKHA sapp_b_Page_046.pro
668c7b02700a466f4accf45262d918a6
732e614d0ce99c2526b98b6566d5410c2e244186
56459 F20101212_AAAKGM sapp_b_Page_030.pro
b1c70dd58b6eb7ce4a3e5b9dd63559c9
e76a1b8e9af7e1009e675b07d18626236e8791af
57912 F20101212_AAAKFY sapp_b_Page_015.pro
d072001b6f3f56ec7eeeff0e30393b67
1b6fd02b20c366a8310e96ed3f983914d355dcf8
2483 F20101212_AAAKHB sapp_b_Page_047.pro
b8288255631ea41a1387e1e1abd55772
7364ea266e99afbb6201588a652cd9b8ab084183
55183 F20101212_AAAKGN sapp_b_Page_031.pro
d4437747412a7a408b4babf4fb1933cc
dad83d96c2d6930c4a92a73f46952de8cbdefecb
57381 F20101212_AAAKFZ sapp_b_Page_016.pro
c6efa3e09807fa1b20a67541f0261527
d7821855f4b10717aad722fda00f117ba58b3f0a
10634 F20101212_AAAKHC sapp_b_Page_048.pro
345c7325f847b3c3719e2f1183c1c7f5
7a1214cd07635d339fcf65461bfc6d9f243fbb70
54072 F20101212_AAAKGO sapp_b_Page_033.pro
21fc7eccb65d7d90d030b7699dcd7cf9
3a7a4cfc4ad03e13d29e64bac762f62cbe482120
56912 F20101212_AAAKGP sapp_b_Page_034.pro
88be35698addda8d80b462aa9d746d09
0fcdf854a738644362c3088b1ca4bbd0eba34206
45321 F20101212_AAAKHD sapp_b_Page_049.pro
dae7d820712195092bec159933e19cd8
f32aecbf335a70c382b0da98a9ce2b04ce50d3a3
56140 F20101212_AAAKGQ sapp_b_Page_035.pro
c7d1394ad12599d3537847fe7766eec6
7c95308f96ad2e137f08fb835e1d7813daed5451
46549 F20101212_AAAKHE sapp_b_Page_051.pro
ba20c3bc408f6195bfa668fbd235a498
fb17be2ae5b085b42de8ce7e7883fac00ad15aaa
57710 F20101212_AAAKGR sapp_b_Page_036.pro
9d8a3ebe36baba0df9fff025286b711b
004907b20e71ace918bbcd7362dcc8f5d2b70377
53892 F20101212_AAAKHF sapp_b_Page_052.pro
8ba42d7d18d1884b566cbabf00ab6b6e
b77a57dcaa6470fdc954e73cc74138a9feaafc36
57128 F20101212_AAAKGS sapp_b_Page_037.pro
0bee46016c7ad4d63175e68dda827f97
fd3b5eed4353adda8a16f4e2d04bc5a2f5d84c63
54421 F20101212_AAAKHG sapp_b_Page_053.pro
23e96b134a99df2207348acae062a054
fe947b28fbe7c082476a2113ef660e415d3e0b62
55448 F20101212_AAAKGT sapp_b_Page_038.pro
733c6c63ca93e8b5d633695cf576885c
6bfb6b954e7a32ff96ae3a6adae330e390e61648
35715 F20101212_AAAKHH sapp_b_Page_054.pro
82df3328de735890dd9087a89410fce7
b607d832f39acfd519554abdc19d0596a94c2809
28791 F20101212_AAAKGU sapp_b_Page_039.pro
9e9791f226920e62cb1f65348d13b98e
270254edbc96b1a5eede0df02019345af815303a
37311 F20101212_AAAKHI sapp_b_Page_055.pro
6fe321fe8d69c94306595c82b5d56b50
262f5f9a6314472c90c582f3cfb5059bcf3eb5c0
4046 F20101212_AAAKGV sapp_b_Page_040.pro
4f7bbc28b8b38e569aa6f8956da4f53d
1a59aba83c7e6d4eb9b9af05fd4f170ab0e99c6a
38239 F20101212_AAAKHJ sapp_b_Page_056.pro
d8f1de00f5ec9adae0a94cb81a9bd475
a144b47cf977d49258a5942a4faf2ba931adf51c
2426 F20101212_AAAKGW sapp_b_Page_041.pro
aaed6d9fef6c10b725e2547bbe191696
3b27cfdc4c6063043c6d864e9656cad588c278b1
43200 F20101212_AAAKHK sapp_b_Page_057.pro
e923e11c2c49602debe605e774f10efe
bd6a7cda26c0470c04d5f4819e515cfc60fed72c
4465 F20101212_AAAKGX sapp_b_Page_042.pro
7d6af110eb08d6fd0c525b8be5472088
74c60bfe03c8b65246cdc366104bb8c9aad6cd95
32051 F20101212_AAAKIA sapp_b_Page_074.pro
e83a065bf39ec932e6d6fa1aa7fe0629
39f551e80f34845570666146791925d61855ac46
27565 F20101212_AAAKHL sapp_b_Page_059.pro
9598ee1f5bda511bb1a3a4f1ca3eb799
114874573b94c4ee5d05b0903978507bf35cc298
2330 F20101212_AAAKGY sapp_b_Page_043.pro
150bbfcf8128f9bd092a619679fe51e7
a7f300bca9b38517fda039343392a45c5cb9e5dd
21863 F20101212_AAAKIB sapp_b_Page_076.pro
bed194ba185da4109981ea2a13d39996
8d58d547fb71ccb1c147bee95125b27deeea3f93
15052 F20101212_AAAKHM sapp_b_Page_060.pro
1df3409a15c5bac642975024ca0628ca
f808496d54505e50cfa83347acd20128e4460757
8539 F20101212_AAAKGZ sapp_b_Page_044.pro
649a342e7c60b5b12a3d1296f1b2420c
6ed7c57790646bc231080da8e119a3c2a33c594b
14643 F20101212_AAAKIC sapp_b_Page_077.pro
1a2d423d48ecfce1456372c852434521
3448c57a84427cea0bf7a8e115d2847149f0405a
45156 F20101212_AAAKHN sapp_b_Page_061.pro
1a69b7076bb69a8ea1a1edb0020ad0e4
c1e70c64f88a21710e0b52d710bdb7f86c3a8785
14659 F20101212_AAAKID sapp_b_Page_078.pro
1da6e1f9c686f746248ec389b989a009
dd81fd2248566602bcdcab9f265a227fbee40930
51367 F20101212_AAAKHO sapp_b_Page_062.pro
3d18e5233a4aaed4cad34f1c1dd61b9c
c2907aa10bd53ecf06eda47abff9ee21331589da
55248 F20101212_AAAKHP sapp_b_Page_063.pro
5ac39de01601f5bebd7e1c20403c8ec9
a75b4e65346ae1a5a2cce4beebc71aab2645919c
12574 F20101212_AAAKIE sapp_b_Page_080.pro
eadfd9df36bac576b63920f73861af0d
74b086544e5f07eeaf504f8c4268542eea858b4e
51003 F20101212_AAAKHQ sapp_b_Page_064.pro
2326608ac466fe33ae7cc04beec02a71
2745da467cd3c63ff2d644081f7ea5f29be190f3
47084 F20101212_AAAKIF sapp_b_Page_081.pro
b50dbd96c5b3142bacc18533247086aa
deb8368cd807c40c34752032a2635cb4ace1e15b
50861 F20101212_AAAKHR sapp_b_Page_065.pro
aef87fd5086da0448f0a9e7660415d46
e69b953753bc25e861daa19a33b9658479bc3ebb
48601 F20101212_AAAKIG sapp_b_Page_082.pro
01970f334aa7029ef2cdd299e5eee6ac
de8779e56113db2649d55201410b8d75090bb0ed
45978 F20101212_AAAKHS sapp_b_Page_066.pro
84c3c2c2c2f237e7c5a8851bf595838f
7e8cef89b6d4edb9d5027dfda2b9143ec4d07113
3628 F20101212_AAAKIH sapp_b_Page_084.pro
fd085a78fcee55ffebd3782cd95a6d7d
2c618a6a42c37527a02336e6c17135487c358349
49393 F20101212_AAAKHT sapp_b_Page_067.pro
4b89c0d4ca963e038b45696e7c22df3a
ac933d973a8f8624a6d02c0c8ed51941a525eae3
53061 F20101212_AAAKII sapp_b_Page_085.pro
734b0f2cbd6ac4c3a0fab22cacc299c2
7de7c5bb758294d32eedb9a9b619aebd3ea48e1b
28650 F20101212_AAAKHU sapp_b_Page_068.pro
38672c955110a9dab5eb37c53acfdff5
d43f6c23747c1355e44a648c2d737f998b444353
51316 F20101212_AAAKIJ sapp_b_Page_086.pro
fa4aca477ef71489c5c11c85e3066903
2f32697c62f181d259a3829a04616b52a272d979
19376 F20101212_AAAKHV sapp_b_Page_069.pro
d56a4305664ec0eacb00cd66ed7fba9a
9c1e8cffd0fe95ac79e5c230604b4f09e9312ac1
24408 F20101212_AAAKIK sapp_b_Page_087.pro
3d4ea18c678d49b87a605037c7bd6bd1
e83a5824165461c9609aa6571fff99ac56b18b82
35425 F20101212_AAAKHW sapp_b_Page_070.pro
39b632330b6a82a9d47a72ebbdf80bba
af0d6fe3f21c0e9d67a6a1ed850c9e1ddb2da46c
43051 F20101212_AAAKIL sapp_b_Page_088.pro
53b5d262cabeaef988ce2bf3eb9c11fc
25a1c94cf233bc63e6b0dacceacffcfd09c5f9db
21724 F20101212_AAAKHX sapp_b_Page_071.pro
d35c1869b0392121ffc04a50b469d56a
4425d630377d3da17c19820fd5956af7f853929f
1842 F20101212_AAAKJA sapp_b_Page_004.txt
dc36dfb240ec02c7ab6d577e99e13c9b
3663218438d1b8a274c0c86f5e30b2aa216f0de5
48553 F20101212_AAAKIM sapp_b_Page_090.pro
a53dce816d403eeb445c3b99c13c4328
a76f9fe386c73118164d894f4c07234f63e8974f
22817 F20101212_AAAKHY sapp_b_Page_072.pro
47a498025acde308c87d58f7a35674f3
f720ded10ca25c9cf1a993bc642fd4c5524db169
2569 F20101212_AAAKJB sapp_b_Page_007.txt
c0e435ade6d6c4ebb4c69879fb745c81
08ef0fb3cc4b703bb65f279c97d8bfba6bfa6065
45945 F20101212_AAAKIN sapp_b_Page_091.pro
089d8f31b9e481fe8dcfd4943aea511d
9f6a5eecf27070a4688e5ddfd32306861a7d9a7e
28604 F20101212_AAAKHZ sapp_b_Page_073.pro
3dedf9d84aa034e402862b261e772865
906d954bad461c4716e1ff5ff12c7c215dab3fa1
2281 F20101212_AAAKJC sapp_b_Page_008.txt
e6bf45c39e539621032f7100cc1ab5d9
3684ca8ade0733f461df01599fe931e0105aeeb3
49715 F20101212_AAAKIO sapp_b_Page_092.pro
a88d8b0d6905c55c5abae8f77934e5a9
74d7218d18b8129d705241c0532ab06d6f0cf4fa
2008 F20101212_AAAKJD sapp_b_Page_009.txt
4719b916b1d24414d915cb67412f299e
6ab765fef089d099a447c9feaf591578fbb567b6
45136 F20101212_AAAKIP sapp_b_Page_093.pro
f70fb5f8ab72de70455858950433f45b
0042dca2503f61b487edc1b8e0d78fa791c6951c
2002 F20101212_AAAKJE sapp_b_Page_010.txt
a575739e9f4e9935772373b1e163b87d
7355a766c97d37325ccbb5e9324a3d647b3aa595
51236 F20101212_AAAKIQ sapp_b_Page_095.pro
f64986711b57bd668a760360730e82bd
f20ba0aa34d33e0b0b63253f18eb5f28794e9468
53368 F20101212_AAAKIR sapp_b_Page_096.pro
b58cb3d566722d4293193007fda78bee
cf7c30bbe25bd02755deaea2091cc701de144802
1997 F20101212_AAAKJF sapp_b_Page_011.txt
10ecc1252be26326387cd2d759b45d7b
7e48bca220a97117c144b7cf60bb93b5c7f6827f
60552 F20101212_AAAKIS sapp_b_Page_097.pro
ea07f11c401a8a602deca14ec3a1645b
0fded35a6d9258f8881f955da41465023b736eb0
F20101212_AAAKJG sapp_b_Page_012.txt
dc51b2c4d8090353064c3662949ac0ba
5f9340636523e7480d22b67fee1d76feedf4b90b
63858 F20101212_AAAKIT sapp_b_Page_098.pro
a9d13e21567e4eb3d9eec1c30f0626ee
44e5aeeb945d07879d00c43c6d43e9cea46ded89
769 F20101212_AAAKJH sapp_b_Page_013.txt
a3480f7061519bcafa9c3b1d0dd162a4
7adf70dfa6742f1357c5d77d34543d20561c1857
45693 F20101212_AAAKIU sapp_b_Page_099.pro
19a2076cd08de04a9053c8bc3c8f13e7
e3a2ba14afef663603607717c20165a0ef3e8365
2176 F20101212_AAAKJI sapp_b_Page_014.txt
02160072de95767c0c81d1190f6c7cf8
44796d9a577bd4017fd08316fb9730e907697920
51892 F20101212_AAAKIV sapp_b_Page_100.pro
a460c98b3d4cb4bfdf7269ae7c88f133
1e9de52f9aa9bad207313705fa23fe1ca89dcaba
2258 F20101212_AAAKJJ sapp_b_Page_015.txt
d706d589db7ced9896ea5875a900fc79
abc0e937affb96a4017837a4493e2961ce718527
F20101212_AAAKIW sapp_b_Page_101.pro
de2b26c94e4bf3c9419a0473dc93eb54
59360ad8c005cbfe16f73de077baf24840b6b618
2253 F20101212_AAAKJK sapp_b_Page_016.txt
429e371fe0bbe10db2d9f9d6e3d4c237
bbbd41ed8597fd8b71631d3a0270804b39699d8b
412 F20101212_AAAKIX sapp_b_Page_001.txt
c8bf573f7124dbebd13d6eebbb28dd1e
91be2a78e24efc00c03d8466dceb0aaa6c15a4a7
2159 F20101212_AAAKKA sapp_b_Page_032.txt
6d07a26fadac940a3c3b485cf1768db2
46753f156fd4388caea1f2d6100385c6720b70c9
2153 F20101212_AAAKJL sapp_b_Page_017.txt
325aa373a343431d277b8da31418f30a
0c49f69326df2a3108ec277c121296ec3600dd7b
87 F20101212_AAAKIY sapp_b_Page_002.txt
edb9c5a64eceded1cc571072619f9cb0
f69c89d7b401c979eece67e3506a4283579a0756
2122 F20101212_AAAKKB sapp_b_Page_033.txt
d96bb95c3428aed1d25ab261369e480e
a95f3c55ef37dc4fab3d856390099b3f06c1243f
2194 F20101212_AAAKJM sapp_b_Page_018.txt
bb66fcc0e06b8ceefdfefc3fef4ccace
42754feee11ccc55b0b2ddac0bebb3af29e7998b
106 F20101212_AAAKIZ sapp_b_Page_003.txt
5e61d1636411f2c0cfb71cd9b4f4cf03
2a1796ad30d1393783d713d945afedf5ba44efa5
2232 F20101212_AAAKKC sapp_b_Page_034.txt
763bc7c7b992fb3c5632b5172ff17a49
7286be791f3335be3cd1f7fb303e1b25c269f775
2174 F20101212_AAAKJN sapp_b_Page_019.txt
6d5b70ca66777b65a2d83d78c9108ca4
54b4a566a462374ad132f1e15df37d1a8f067710
2205 F20101212_AAAKKD sapp_b_Page_035.txt
4ee5e24a2e7f959760447a374ade5e55
8183e5edbb428430a8c0fd2c9319dec5a918ee95
2102 F20101212_AAAKJO sapp_b_Page_020.txt
4deefc18454cda5dacea5bf5c0f093a9
ade747c3c9cf72a9609f7b9eb20a274de5c7e36a
2257 F20101212_AAAKKE sapp_b_Page_036.txt
33a95b629d737fd476333f488877887b
c5ce604b7228ad825a2c71f11dace2893f922c49
2184 F20101212_AAAKJP sapp_b_Page_021.txt
a38447885d0e239870e8b847cfa02b2f
65539ab9a137c2a9486aa73a704fb77f58360ee4
2231 F20101212_AAAKKF sapp_b_Page_037.txt
c326b91b49fe1d8a50da12051bcb002f
006e02120b38138b3e07f515fb58f893cd4afb76
1954 F20101212_AAAKJQ sapp_b_Page_022.txt
13a4871a40c710b3e32a37a9a14cb506
29505f47677cec55177e41c7e1e3248620d95ad0
2210 F20101212_AAAKJR sapp_b_Page_023.txt
327358a34bc79d6e7b1a22b74a0cfe61
9d332d439bdb89fdff8e8de9ec83a0a2694c2ebc
F20101212_AAAKKG sapp_b_Page_038.txt
ebaea7d2ab9c0f386e1d0c1fb5a94aee
93572096e7e3e6ccd070b650034054c5cd44ab71
2152 F20101212_AAAKJS sapp_b_Page_024.txt
7c008d3cd5bf19021c8233ca1eafb80d
90efdadabeaa0d449e2737fe948e8a8d1460be93
1146 F20101212_AAAKKH sapp_b_Page_039.txt
fbf01987080e36dcbe0cfa5d414b1b98
a627131557421fd90cb37ae224db19214224d67c
2183 F20101212_AAAKJT sapp_b_Page_025.txt
16480a05b821b707a0297c483c5e8a3e
73be8290372768b16c2445239edc635ee766efa9
274 F20101212_AAAKKI sapp_b_Page_040.txt
1c337cb359a0a0ba21030e10af057853
36ec775df80c91e6817b1fbf60090b86519cd986
2030 F20101212_AAAKJU sapp_b_Page_026.txt
9da765e81fbd24b7707d3e4c332fcb64
d59442fdd821944b69239a97dff9e996f193bd10
163 F20101212_AAAKKJ sapp_b_Page_041.txt
2157b3d10c5ee0b4c54adda33a6a041c
1fd26b986c0a95fdd1aec1e54c5541d31142042b
F20101212_AAAKJV sapp_b_Page_027.txt
e6e5a18495e5055af9604364bff2dffd
b6e21ae653f49cfc798c448b25c455266fe7151f
551 F20101212_AAAKKK sapp_b_Page_042.txt
e82b22fc4b47daa6c17c00ad564819c8
90951d50d57d9d8e0506e1c5f7fcbf8ca6b959fe
1941 F20101212_AAAKJW sapp_b_Page_028.txt
1d8ea6c36d6106474ffdf9630a704f14
8af41336fb3678a959011736f0c41e70d4cadc20
1828 F20101212_AAAKLA sapp_b_Page_059.txt
e944af801964f5cedcefb35e70fab6fd
8b5c2da95a5e76cdcd0f7998cf7034fca3aa3264
371 F20101212_AAAKKL sapp_b_Page_044.txt
51df3195e262f49b4a3bb0479de89386
821b0bb67a5e78e42c5331c4f3b3b6f57d8642aa
F20101212_AAAKJX sapp_b_Page_029.txt
def853496eceb8dc394d8f62296998da
8eb958e86f16bda208c6f32615823b07e23120f5
975 F20101212_AAAKLB sapp_b_Page_060.txt
f9d66a004ede41f655a758788097caaa
73b4fdb1d0fd97d8fb84a83c8f1098fea9f7e18a
178 F20101212_AAAKKM sapp_b_Page_045.txt
61d807ebb6ca30e0bbe355c3e0cb22e3
353e9636fd35a916a410aa27781e9ea906054074
2217 F20101212_AAAKJY sapp_b_Page_030.txt
45437ea1ee565c0086ce6f4040bf5af2
5fd9be82012f64ce58a6b841afbe7f94285edf36
F20101212_AAAKLC sapp_b_Page_061.txt
77b1c913f0a61accebf91f2611b91d78
2cf69e7609fabcb61b11019eed3f51e49f09f632
133 F20101212_AAAKKN sapp_b_Page_046.txt
3016ef618ad3e9a1b09072ee528c5d0c
0a14c8480d53a65ce6da045b481c7d3adcc1f732
2165 F20101212_AAAKJZ sapp_b_Page_031.txt
63a00f7e12ec7644718e6c17e665b348
b8a57d87de89ea7b44e866faf12853d980c05278
2037 F20101212_AAAKLD sapp_b_Page_062.txt
a6ef4b79a02b41a7f7654bdde822dcdf
fc44cbd30ef5db4e77a6b1bf94ead87070af3c59
197 F20101212_AAAKKO sapp_b_Page_047.txt
54cc838a8d4d342995e7491e60c3a19f
e0191afdfb8a1531403522de120896ee0ac297ef
F20101212_AAAKLE sapp_b_Page_063.txt
7a14c6129b9691e82dd3d910005e2933
4ece763faa8a873df5fe733d3e02336f0dc2563e
627 F20101212_AAAKKP sapp_b_Page_048.txt
bb90063d3d963feb8d6fd58fcf79a84f
198eec7b6b12f12c5ef5cf3a33021f8a47355d76
2017 F20101212_AAAKLF sapp_b_Page_064.txt
7a495cd51035b14fe60904b83a32ec1d
5e5ed0962903300f2fe33b3484901215395c1bac
1928 F20101212_AAAKKQ sapp_b_Page_049.txt
f1af91b7e5df6646bb00c296845b53fa
ff0e2c63c1a049eadcb012e743488cff9963d3fd







VALUE OPTIMIZATION OF MUSCLES FROM THE VEAL CHUCK


By

BRIAN G. SAPP


















A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2008

































2008 Brian G. Sapp




























To my family,
For always being there for me









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It is evident and certain that many people have helped me in my endeavor to further my

education. Whether it be my first grade teacher or my senior year history teacher, I would like to

say thanks. The most important people I must thank are my family members. Without their

support and knowledge and wisdom I would be stuck in a world of boredom. Thanks Mom and

Dad, Jesse and Katie for always being there for me and helping me through the hard times and

joining me for the good. I would like to thank all of my cousins for keeping me on track and

giving me advice even when I didn't ask for it. Thanks to my friend Keri for urging me into this

educational endeavor and Rochelle for helping me complete it. I would like to thank my office

mates Ryan Dijkhuis and John Gonzalez for answering all the dumb questions and helping me

with anything in the world; without these two guys, life would be miserable. I would like to

extend the greatest thanks in the world to the meat lab guys, Tommy and Byron, for helping

make this all possible and lending a hand up when I needed a lift. Thanks go out to Larry

Eubanks as he was like a second dad to me throughout my entire college career here at the university.

He taught me many things, kept me humble, and supported me day in and day out, whether it was

through criticism or wisdom.

Finally, thank you to all the members of my committee. Dr. Williams for the insight to meat

processing, Dr. Fairchild for always having something for me to read (I tried to write like 800 pages

just to get you back), and to the best advisor anyone could ask for Dr. Johnson, who not only taught

me the importance of meat science, but gave me insight to life and the world to come.









TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

A CK N O W LED G M EN T S ................................................................. ........... ............. .....

L IST O F T A B L E S ...................................................................................................... . 7

LIST OF FIGURES .................................. .. ..... ..... ................. .8

A B S T R A C T ................................ .................. .......................... ................ .. 9

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION ............... ................. ........... ......................... .... 11

2 R E V IEW O F L ITER A TU R E .................................................................... ... ....................14

Determination of Sensory Attributes for Muscles from the Veal Chuck ............................14
Palatability of M eat ................... .................................. ............... .. .. ... .. 14
Defining Color Composition of M eat.................................................... .............. .. 17
V isu a l p a n e l .............................................................................................. ..... 1 8
Instrum ental color technologies ........................................ .......... ............... 21
D efining and M easuring Tenderness......................................... .......................... 27
Trained Sensory Panel .................. ............................ .. ...... .. ............ 27
W arner B ratzler Shear F orce........................................................................ .. .... 33
T otal P igm ent and H em e Iron ........................................ ...................... .....................37

3 CHARACTERIZING MUSCLES FROM THE VEAL CHUCK BY WEIGHT,
DIMENSIONS AND SENSORY ATTRIBUTES ...................................... ............... 49

Introduction ................... .......................................................... ................. 49
M materials and M methods ...................................... .. .......... ....... ...... 49
E xperim ental sam ples............ ... .............................................................. ........ .. ....... .. 49
W eights, D im tensions and A going ......................................................................... ... ... 50
Sensory Evaluation ..................................................... ............... .. ....... 50
F ood Service E valuation .......... ............................................................... ........ .. .... 5 1
Results and D discussion ..................................... .................. ............ ........ .... 51
W e ig h ts ................... ...................5...................1..........
Industry Evaluation .................................... ... .. ......... ....... ... ...51
Sensory Evaluation ..................................................... ............... .. ....... 52

4 EFFECTS OF AGING ON RETAIL DISPLAY ATTRIBUTES AND COLOR OF
MUSCLES FROM THE VEAL CHUCK ........................................ ......................... 61

Introduction ................... .......................................................... ................. 6 1
Materials and Methods: ........................................... .. 61
Experim mental Sam ples ........................................................... ........ .... 61









Aging of Muscles ................................................. ......... 62
Shelf-Life and Color Evaluation .................................. .....................................62
Statistical A n aly sis ..................... .... .... ............................ ...... ......... .. ........... 62
Sum m ary of R results and D discussion ......................................................................... ...... 63
C o n c lu sio n ................... .......................................................... ................ 6 8

5 EFFECTS OF TOTAL HEME PIGMENTS ON SHELF LIFE STABILITY.....................81

In tro d u ctio n ................... ................... ...................1..........
M materials and M methods ..................... .................................... .... .......... ............ .... 1
Experim mental Sam ples ..................................... ................... .. ........ .... 81
A going and D display ................................................................................. 8 1
Total Pigment and Hem e Iron Procedure ............................................. ............... 82
Statistical A n aly sis ...............................................................82
Sum m ary of R results and D discussion ......................................................................... ...... 83
C o n clu sio n ................... ...................8...................3..........

6 CORRELATION BETWEEN MUSCLE COLOR, CARCASS MEASURED COLOR
A N D TEN D E R N E SS ...................................................... ....................... ............... 85

In tro d u ctio n ................... ...................8...................5..........
M materials and M methods ...................................... .. .......... ....... ...... 85
Sum m ary of R results and D discussion ......................................................................... ...... 86
C o n c lu sio n ................... .......................................................... ................ 8 7

7 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS.................................... ...................88

Preliminary Evaluation of Nine Muscles............................ ......................... 88
W eights and D im tensions ....................................................................... ........ ........... 88
Industry E valuation ................. .................................... ...... ........ .. .............88
Sensory Evaluation ..................................................... ............... .. ....... 89
Further E valuation of Six M muscles .............................................................. .....................9 1
R detail D isp lay ................................................................9 1
T total P ig m en t ...............................................................9 1
C arcass C olor and T enderness.............................................................. .....................93
V alue O ptim ization ................................... .. .... ..... .. ............94

L IST O F R E F E R E N C E S ...................................................................................... ...................95

B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E T C H ......................................................................... .. ...................... 100











6









LIST OF TABLES


Table page

3-1 Average weights (standard deviations) of muscles from the veal chuck......................55

3-2 Average measurements (standard deviation) of muscles from the veal chuck. ................56

3-3 Industry evaluation.......... .................... .. ... .... ..................57

3-4 Overall tenderness of veal m uscles ....................................................... ............... 58

3-5 Juiciness of veal m muscles. ......................................................................................58

3-6 B eef flavor ......... ....................................................... ......... ....... ............... 59

3-7 Connective tissue ...................................... .. ........... .. ........... 59

3-8 O ff-flavor. .................................................................60

4-1 A going period assign ent. ........................................................................ ....................69

4-2 Average muscle weights (standard deviation) of muscle from the veal chuck ..............70

4-3 Days of post-mortem aging effects on subjective overall appearance ............................70

4-4 Days of post-mortem aging effects on subjective color evaluation.............................. 71

4-5 Effects of post-mortem aging on subjective color evaluations by days in the case. .........71

4-6 Effects of post-mortem aging on muscle discoloration. .................................................72

4-7 Days of post-mortem aging effects on subjective muscle purge scores. ..........................72

4-8 Effects of post-mortem aging on subjective purge evaluations by days in the case. ........73

4-9 Days of post-mortem aging effects on L* values. .................................. .................73

4-10 Days of Post-mortem aging effects on a* values (redness). ...........................................74

4-11 Effects of retail display on a* values (redness). .................................... ............... 74

4-12 Days of post-mortem aging effects on b* values yellownesss). ......................................75

4-13 Effects of retail display on b* values yellownesss). ................................. .................75

4-14 Interaction between days of aging and retail display on b* values yellownesss). ............76









LIST OF FIGURES


Figure page

2-1 The M unsell color solid. ..................................... .. .. ........ ........ ...... 40

2-2 The XYZ Triangle of the CIE System...................... ..........................................41

2-3 The CIE horseshoe-shaped spectrum locus showing percent Y.....................................42

2-4 1931 x, y, chrom aticity diagram ....................................................................... 43

2-5 Spectral sensitivity corresponding to the human eye and color matching functions of
the 1931 Standard O observer ............................................... .... .. .. ........ .. ........ ..

2-6 Three-dimensional representation of color solid for the L* a* b* color space. ................45

2-7 Hunter L, a, b solid. ............................... .. ... ..... ................. 46

2-8 a* b* chrom aticity diagram ..................................................................... ...................47

2-9 Steps in selecting a trained panel. ...... ........................... ....................................... 48

4-1 Effects of days in case on subjective overall appearance score ...................................76

4-2 Days of post-mortem aging effects on overall appearance score. ...............................77

4-3 Effects of days in the case on subjective color score ............. ..... ..................77

4-4 M uscle discoloration over retail display. ........................................ ...................... 78

4-5 Overall means for discoloration for each aging period ............. ..... .................78

4-6 Muscle purge over days of retail display. ............ ................................... .................79

4-7 Changes in L* due to days of retail display .................................................................... 79

4-8 L* values change over days of postmortem aging........................................ ...............80

4-9 a* value change over days of postm ortem aging. ................................. .....................80









Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science

VALUE OPTIMIZATION OF MUSCLES FROM THE VEAL CHUCK

By

Brian Sapp

August 2008

Chair: Dwain Johnson
Major: Animal Sciences

Objectives were to characterize muscles from the veal chuck and evaluate the performance

and usefulness of these muscles. For Phase one, IMPS 308 and IMPS 309 were purchased from

two separate veal packers, all were from USDA Choice or higher veal carcasses. The chucks

were dissected to obtain the following muscles: Complexus (COM), Deep Pectoral (DEP),

Infraspinatus (INF), Rhomboidus (RHM), Serratus Ventralis (SEV), Splenius (SPL),

Supraspinatus (SUP), Triceps Brachii (TRB) and the Teres Major (TER). Each muscle was

weighed to determine percent yield. The heaviest muscle and highest percentage of chuck was

the TRB. The lightest muscle and lowest percentage of chuck was the TER. Muscles were

vacuum packaged individually and aged fourteen days postmortem prior to freezing. For sensory

evaluation, steaks were grilled on Hamilton Beach table top grills to an internal temperature of

710C. Samples were evaluated by a trained panel that scored overall tenderness, juiciness, flavor,

connective tissue and off-flavor. The INF was the tenderest muscle evaluated. The RHM was

significantly lower (P>.05) in tenderness from all other muscles in the study. The COM had the

highest juiciness score. The SUP was found to be not significantly different (P>.05) from the

COM. The muscle with the lowest juiciness score was the TRB. The INF and the SPL did not

differ significantly (P>.05) from the TRB juiciness score. The SUP was found to have the most









intense beef flavor. The COM was not significantly different (P > .05) from the SUP. The muscle

with the lowest flavor intensity score was the SPL with and was not significantly different (P >

.05) from the INF or the SPL. The INF was found to have the least amount of detectable

connective tissue present with the TER being not significantly different (P > .05) from the INF.

The RHM had the highest connective tissue score which significantly differed (P < .05) from all

other muscles in the study. Off-flavor scores were low for all muscles evaluated in this study. For

phase two, IMPS 309 were purchased from two separate veal packers, all were from USDA

choice or higher veal carcasses. Objective color scores were obtained for each carcass at the

flank and tenth rib. The muscles extracted included the COM, DEP, INF, SEV, SUP, TRB. Color

measurements were taken using a Minolta CR-310 Chroma meter after 15 minutes of bloom

time. Muscles were randomly assigned to four aging periods to determine the effect of aging

time on retail display attributes. Days of post-mortem aging had an overall effect on subjective

evaluations for overall appearance (P < .05) with all muscles reacting similarly when placed in a

retail display setting. Postmortem aging had a significant (P < .05) effect on each muscle for

subjective color, discoloration and purge. Post-mortem aging significantly affected subjective

and objective color scores, concluding longer periods of post-mortem aging caused the muscles

to become lighter (P < .05).

This study found that the veal chuck contains muscles that will provide a useful application

for dry heat cookery when muscles are separated and fabricated into steaks and that retail display

integrity is affected by postmortem aging time. When the effort is made to further fabricate and

process these muscle cuts, the potential for adding value to this low priced primal cut is evident.









CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

In recent years veal production has been criticized by many people worldwide. With this

criticism have come decreased sales and profits for many veal producers and processors. Four

main reasons for this increased criticism by the public are 1) the slaughter of young animals

tends to stimulate emotional responses by the public, 2) techniques used in the industry are

usually objected to by some people (e.g., dietary practices and housing for the animals), 3) the

veal industry in the U.S. is smaller and newer than most other animal industries, and 4) the

results of research on the controversial techniques have been limited and in most cases

contradictory (Lowell et al., 2004)

Approximately 800,000 calves enter the U.S. special fed-veal systems annually (AMI

1995). About 33% of male dairy calves are used for bob veal production, and about 40% for

special fed veal production leaving about 25% for the other feeding systems including beef

production (Lowell et al., 2004). Calves that enter the veal production system are usually male

dairy calves for which dairy farmers have little use. Calves are usually separated from their

mothers one to four days after birth to allow the dairy producer to harvest milk. The earlier the

calf is taken from the cow, the less stressful it is to the cow (Lowell et al., 2004). Calves at this

age are extremely susceptible to disease and sicknesses. As veal producers this is a major

concern not only in an economical sense, but also for animal welfare reasons.

USDA (1995) defines veal as meat from immature bovine animals. This broad definition

encompasses four specific types of veal:

* Bob veal Live weight of less than 150 pounds.

* Special fed veal fed a special milk replacement diet and marketed at a live weight of 151
to 400 pounds.









* Non special fed veal fed a variety of diets and marketed at live weights of 151 to 400
pounds.

* Calves live weight of more than 400 pounds; fed no special diet.

Since special fed veal calves were used in the research presented in this thesis, a more in-

depth definition of this type of veal would be as follows.

Special fed veal calves (also referred to as fancy, formula fed or natural veal) are usually

fed a milk-based liquid replacement diet that usually follows a pattern of decreasing the iron

content of the diet over the life of the calf to help retain the lighter muscle color that is typical of

special fed veal. The calves are raised for 18 to 20 weeks in which they reach a market weight of

approximately 400 pounds; most special fed-veal calves are currently being raised to a market

weight greater than 400 pounds (Lowell et al., 2004).

As the veal industry continues its struggles with loss of consumer interest in its product,

the industry is looking for new ways to market veal to make it a more profitable commodity.

Most modern marketing of veal products is done using a farm to fork approach. Convincing and

proving to consumers that the animals are raised and slaughtered humanely and that the product

they are buying is wholesome and of expected quality has become the most common approach to

regaining the consumer's interest. To further profit from harvesting veal and utilizing carcasses,

processors have become interested in increasing the value of certain muscles that are usually of

lesser value. Recent studies conducted by scientists at the University of Florida in conjunction

with the University of Nebraska have characterized numerous muscles from the beef chuck and

round (Calkins and Sullivan, 2007). The studies conducted have revealed significant positive

palatability attributes of many of these muscles. A similar characterization of muscles was

performed in this study to characterize nine muscles from the veal chuck in search of ways to

better utilize these muscles and add value to the veal chuck. Conclusions from previous studies









have revealed that adding value can be achieved by cutting certain muscles into steaks rather

than selling them as part of a roast or grinding them into ground beef.

The objectives of the current research include 1) characterizing veal muscles by

determining average sizes and weights of individual muscles from the chuck, 2) determining

quality of these muscles and determining eating experiences for each of these muscles, 3)

examining the effects of post-mortem aging on shelf-life stability of chuck muscles while in a

retail display setting (including stability of color), and finally 4) examining the effects of aging

and retail-display on variations in total pigment and heme iron content of muscles from the

chuck.









CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Determination of Sensory Attributes for Muscles from the Veal Chuck

Palatability of Meat

There are three major palatability attributes that are often characterized to classify meat

and meat products. These three attributes include tenderness, juiciness and flavor. The ranking of

these attributes in terms of importance to the consumer's eating experience starts with tenderness

and concludes with juiciness, with flavor falling somewhere in the middle. According to Epley

(1992), although juiciness and flavor normally do not vary a great deal, tenderness can vary

considerably from one cut to another. Tenderness is a heritable trait with an estimate of

approximately 40%, which means that 40% of variation in tenderness of cooked beef is due to

genetics of the animal (Epley, 1992). Previous studies have documented a genetic basis for

differences in beef tenderness and intramuscular fat content (Shackelford et al., 1994; Wulf et al.

1996b). Although these differences become extremely important in the production of beef

animals, it is less of a factor in the production of veal because of the similar genetic background

of calves used in veal production. Other factors that can greatly affect tenderness are feeding

practices, animal disposition, handling practices as well as age of the animal. Epley (1992)

concludes that veal is the least variable in tenderness due to the young age of the animal at time

of harvest and the lack of natural collagen and connective tissue found in the meat.

There are many variables that constitute whether a piece of meat is classified as tender or

not. These include fragmentation, sarcomere length, percent moisture and collagen content

(Davis et al., 1979). There are several factors that influence tenderness after the animal is

harvested. The rate of chilling and its effects on muscle fibers play the greatest role in meat

tenderness postmortem. Certain practices that are currently used to improve tenderness include









electrical stimulation of carcasses, different hanging methods for carcasses as well as mechanical

and chemical tenderizers that disrupt tissue integrity (Epley, 1992). Postmortem aging after the

completion of rigor mortis also plays a major role in meat tenderization. Aging is a process that

utilizes endogenous enzymes to enhance tenderness of meat by breaking down some of the

myofibril structure (Epley, 1992). This holding of beef in a cooler, either in its whole carcass or

primal state, or under vacuum packaging, usually smaller sub-primal cuts, is known as aging.

Although it is often argued as to how long beef should be "aged", studies have shown that an

increase in beef tenderness continues approximately seven to ten days after slaughter when held

at 3 degrees C (Epley, 1992). These findings are in agreement with Smith et al. (1978) and

Mitchell et al. (1991a), who found no significant improvements in tenderness after ten and seven

days postmortem aging, respectively. A study conducted by Revilla et al. (2006) explored the

effect of breed, sex and aging time on carcass, meat and eating quality of 32 calves of the

"Ternera de Aliste" Spanish Quality Label (a Spanish Quality Label that encompasses a beef

production zone located in north-western Spain where the local breed Alistano Sanabresa and

Swiss Brown cross females are crossed with bulls of Limousin or Charolais breeds ( BOE,

1997)). In order to study the effect of breed, calves, bulls and heifers, were slaughtered when

they were six to seven months of age. Samples of the longissimus dorsi were aged for three, five

and seven days and chemical and sensory analyses were conducted. Results of this study show

that there were no differences due to sex, but that Charolais sires produced more tender meat that

was juicier and more intense in flavor than the Limousin sired animals while also producing a

muscle that was darker in color than that of the Limousin sired calves. Warner-Bratzler shear

force values at three and five days of ageing, was found not to be affected by either sex or breed.

Warner-Bratzler shear force values were similar to those described in other work for Limousines,









but lower than those reported for young Charolais bulls (Monson et al., 2004 and Ozluturk et al.,

2004). In a subsequent study conduct by Perez et al. (2006) it was found that the parameters

affecting the choice of veal meat of the "Terner de Aliste" quality appellation was lightness in

color of the raw product but in their general relative preferences for samples, tenderness,

juiciness and taste of the cooked meat had the greatest weight.

The sensory attribute "juiciness" has been related to the amount of moisture released

from the meat and the degree of salivation induced during mastication (Lawrie, 1979; Muir et al.,

1998a). This quality could have an important impact on overall palatability of steaks, even if the

steaks are thought to be tough. The degree of juiciness creates lubrication during mastication that

can give the presumption of a tenderer piece of meat. Epley (1992) reveals that the differences in

juiciness in meat may be attributed to the amount of bound/intermediate water and concentration

of intramuscular lipids. The consumer separates perceived juiciness into two classes, first

impression and sustained juiciness with the major factors being water holding capacity and

intramuscular lipid content. Perez et al. (2006) reported that samples with the highest juiciness

scores were also those samples that had the highest overall scores in sensory evaluation. Many

factors contribute to the juiciness of a steak when it is rated by a sensory panel. Moisture content,

ether extractable fat or total lipid, cooking time, temperature and pH play important roles

(Stelzleni, 2006). Kim and Lee (2003) concluded that marbling appears to be an important factor

in sensory panel ranking of juiciness but that animals finished on grain tended to have increased

marbling and ether extractable fat, but showed little difference in juiciness (Stelzleni, 2006).

Moody (1983) defines "flavor" as a result of sensations arising from taste, aroma and

pressure and heat sensitive areas of the mouth. Flavor is one of the most important quality

attributes of meat. Although meat flavors have attracted much attention, strong knowledge about









the flavor compounds causing strong character impacts for various species is limited (Shahidi,

1994). Mottram (1998) concluded that meat flavor and off-flavor is complex with over 1000

compounds combining to create different flavors between species and also creating off-flavors

within species. Thermal reactions by various chemical compounds give meat its flavor. Raw

meat has little aroma and only a blood-like taste, leading Mottram (1998) to conclude that the

compounds are reactive to cooking/heating of the product. Macleod (1998) breaks down taste

compounds into three categories 1) Sweetness which is primarily made up of sugars and L-amino

acids, 2) Sourness which is made up of amino acids combined with succinic, lactic and

carboxylic acids, 3) Saltiness which is due mainly to inorganic salts. Not only these factors

influence the flavor of cooked meat, there are also compounds formed during cooking that

determine the aroma attributes that directly influence the characteristic flavor of meat (Mottram,

1998). Macleod (1998) found that to release these aromas, meat undergoes three primary

reactions during cooking 1) lipid oxidation and thermal degradation, 2) thermal degradation of

proteins amino acids, sugars and peptides and 3) Thermal degradation of thiamine which in turn

creates the desired smell and aromas.

In a study by Revilla et al. (2006), it was reported that aging time of veal muscles created

more intense flavors and odors which was attributed to the nitrogen containing compounds that

may have been formed by the natural degradation that occurs during ageing in which Maga

(1976) reports to have a variety of meat flavors.

Defining Color Composition of Meat

Although tenderness, taste and juiciness of meat are extremely important, these

parameters are usually measured at consumption of the meat. Color becomes very important

when a consumer is making the decision to purchase the product. Color of the meat is often the

basis for product selection or rejection by the consumer (Aporta et al., 1996). In industry today,









color of veal meat is also important to producers and processors, because it contributes to the

carcass price (Denoyelle et al., 1999). The goal of recent research in color composition has been

to measure the meat color on-line and develop a relationship between instrumental color

assessment and visual color assessment to predict color score. In a study conducted by Denoyelle

et al. (1998), 2300 veal calves were used to standardize instrument color grading with visual

color scoring. Meat color was assessed subjectively by three trained judges and objectively by

two chromometers CR300 and CR310 at 45 minutes post mortem and prediction equations were

derived. The data concluded that these meters could be used in on-line objectivity to correctly

classify up to 87% of carcasses. The reason this is important is to reduce man hours in a large

scale harvest facility and to also standardize color measurements that are more precise and

provide less variability.

Color assessment by consumers is much more unscientific and relies more on preference

and environmental conditions. Consumers usually see muscle color in pinks and reds whereas

scientific evidence reveals that meats can range from white to dark cherry red. There is an

infinite amount of colors and combinations of colors that makes it difficult to describe meat color

and meat color changes. Not only are the consumers concerned with the actual color but also

discoloration of the muscle. When discoloration occurs, products become tan, brown, gray, green

or yellow, and consumers are less likely to buy these products. Two popular methods in

scientific research to asses these colors and changes in colors are the use of visual panels and the

use of instrumental technology such as the colorimeter and the spectrophotometer. Each method

can be used separately or together to express color changes in meat products (AMSA, 2003).

Visual panel

Visual panels have become useful in determining acceptability of meat products. A visual

panel is used to simulate consumer evaluation of meat that occurs in a retail setting as well as









benchmarking for instrumental grading. Visual panels assess consumers' likes and dislikes, but

are difficult to conduct due to unrepeatable measurements day to day. Inconsistencies have been

attributed to personal preferences, environmental differences such as lighting, visual

impairments, and product presentation methods.

Visual panel designs can vary in numerous ways from the number of panelists, to the

scale that is used to determine sensory values and the meaning of those scores. Many studies use

a scoring system where the averaging of perceived color over the entire cut is used, while others

break down each section of the product and scores for each of these sections are used. Yet some

use a worst point system where the single score is used to describe a 2 cm diameter section of the

product. Combinations of all scoring methods may also be used to better determine differences in

meat color or discoloration. Sanders et al. (1997), and Stubbs et al. (1999) used a design where

the product was evaluated twice daily by a 3-5 member panel for lean color (8=bright cherry red,

1=dark brown or green), fat color (8=creamy white, 1=dark brown or green), surface

discoloration (7=no discoloration, 4 = 26-50% discoloration, 1=highly discolored) and overall

appearance (8=highly desirable, 1= highly undesirable). A study by Roeber et al. (2001) had a

slight variation in design when they used an eight point scale for muscle color, overall

appearance and surface discoloration but did not measure fat color.

Not only do differences exist in scoring and evaluation of meat products but researchers

may also use different types of panelists. Generally there are three types of panelist used in

evaluation studies, they include trained, semi-trained and untrained. Trained sensory panelists are

trained to use their skills to describe their sensory experiences using words they generate in

previous training sessions. These words are more detailed than those used by consumers, and

more useful for research and development departments. Trained sensory panels are usually









comprised of less people due to more repeatability between members. Most trained panels use 3

to 10 members for evaluation. Semi-trained sensory panels are usually comprised of 8 to 25

members and the members are given some instruction on evaluating the product. Untrained

panels usually consist of more than 80 people who are given no instruction or guidance about

evaluating the product. These untrained panels are usually used to determine consumer taste and

preference without any type of distraction or encouragement. The reason behind using more

people for the less trained panel is to decrease the effects of extreme differences in tastes and

preferences as well as effects of non repeatability within a particular panelist. A study conducted

in 2002 by O'Sullivan et al. used pork patties formed from two different muscles to study the

differences between trained and untrained panelists. Results show that the distributions for

trained panel scores were normally distributed for both types of patties. For the untrained

panelists, the scores were skewed for the patties consisting of the Longissimus dorsi muscle but

were normal for the Psoas major. The whiter meat of the Longissimus dorsi muscle was better

evaluated by the trained group, while the untrained panelist were better at distinguishing between

the Psoas major patties because the meat is redder (contains more myoglobin). Researchers

concluded that the reason the untrained group of panelists had better results with the Psoas major

patties was because they were more familiar with the color of this type of product whereas the

trained group had better results with the Longissimus dorsi patties because they were better

trained to evaluate this product and had a reference product to compare it with. With the

conclusion of this study, O'Sullivan revealed that when familiar products are being evaluated,

untrained panels can be used. But when unfamiliar products are being evaluated that trained

panelists and reference samples should be utilized.









When visual panels are being conducted it is very important that all samples are handled in

exactly the same manner to prevent alterations, which is extremely important when studying

treatment effects on meat color (Gonzalez, 2005). These steps must also be repeatable by the

researcher and reproducible by other researchers. To ensure a representative sample is obtained

and that some factors are standardized, The American Meat Science Association (AMSA) has

identified some factors that are very important. Of those factors the most important include:

animal nutrition, carcass chill rate, location of muscle sample, fiber orientation, muscle pH, time

and temperature of postmortem storage, exposure to oxygen, packaging and display conditions.

Along with these factors, AMSA also identified 15 visual appraisal guidelines to follow when

conducting a sensory evaluation. Of the 15, the most important include: simulation of the

environment in which consumers make their decision (lighting, retail case, temperature), use of

samples 12 to 15 mm thick, over wrap material that is most common type of film used, rotate

packages in the case from front to back as well as side to side, and standardize the temperature

and lighting used (AMSA, 2003). These factors, plus many more, allow researchers to conduct

sensory analysis in ways that are comparable to other studies so comparisons between studies are

possible.

Instrumental color technologies

As stated earlier, the color of meat is often the main basis for product selection. Consumers

expect their beef to be red, pork to be pink and chicken to be white, so numerous research

projects have focused on meat colors and why they are different, both within and between

species. To make measurements and research projects more repeatable, many researchers have

used some type of instrumental color technology to measure actual color. Instrumental color

measurements can be expressed in many forms. In 1905 an American artist, A. H. Munsell,

expressed color using hue (Munsell Hue), lightness (Munsell Value), and saturation (Munsell









Chroma). These measurements were taken using paper color chips for comparison with an

observed color (Gonzalez, 2005). Later this system would be devised into the Munsell

Renotation System, which expressed color as a letter combination in terms of hue, value and

chroma. The Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage (CIE) has developed other numerical

color expression equations that deal with light and color and has been responsible for developing

the Yxy color space (1931) and the L*a*b* color space (1976). These methods of color

expression use a notation to define a light source or object color, and such numbers are widely

used throughout the world (Minolta, 1998).

The color parameters discussed above are obtained through reflectance measurements. In

most cases, these measurements closely mirror what the eye and the brain see, and are the most

popular for fresh meat color evaluation. The instruments used are useful in estimating

deoxymyoglobin, oxymyoglobin, and metmyoglobin. These instruments are useful because

numerous individual measurements can be repeated without destroying the product. The tool of

choice when taking reflectance measurements is the colorimeter. According to Minolta,

manufacturer of colorimeters, white light, from a source being shone on a sample, being

reflected at a 45 degree angle, is measured by a photocell after it penetrates an X, Y or Z filter

(How does a colorimeter work?, 2003). Once passed through the filter, the energy output of the

light source creates a response by the photocell similar to what is seen by the human eye

(AMSA, 2003). Most readings are taken in the L*a*b* color space developed by the CIE. The

major advantage of using a colorimeter is that it is able to detect minute color differences and

express those differences numerically, allowing for easier interpretation of the data (Minolta,

1998).









Researchers also use spectrophotometers to quantify color of meat. This method uses

pigment extraction for quantification of myoglobin and hemoglobin. These extraction techniques

tend to better separate color differences than reflectance measures but ultimately destroy the

sample product. Extraction techniques also tend to over estimate oxymyoglobin and

metmyoglobin, and under estimate deoxymyoglobin while destroying the representative sample

which makes repeatability impossible (AMSA, 2003). According to Minolta, also manufacturer

of spectrophotometers, the measurement of color is taken by illumination of the sample with

white light and the amount of light that the sample reflects back at each wavelength interval is

used to calculate a color value (How does a reflectance spectrophotometer work?, 2003). Using

multiple sensors to measure the spectral reflectance of the observed object at each wavelength or

in a narrow range, the microcomputer in the instrument calculates values similar to those of the

colorimeter by performing integration. Unlike the colorimeter, the spectrophotometer can

describe color numerically and provide higher accuracy due to its high precision sensor and

inclusion of data for a variety of illuminant conditions (Minolta, 1998). Both techniques are

widely used depending on availability of samples and types of measurements needed, but the

problem comes in the interpretation and reporting of the color measurements.

Researchers have numerous ways of interpreting the data collected by the two previously

discussed color devices. After a method of instrumental color evaluation is decided, the system

in which to use to report the collected data must be determined. A system that is sometimes used

in meat color evaluation is the Munsell Color solid shown in Figure 2-1 (HunterLab, 1983). This

method reports the data collected as a point within a three dimensional space that describes the

color in terms of hue (H), value (V) and chroma (C). H values are expressed in the three

dimensional color solid as red, yellow, green, blue, and purple which are equally spaced in a









circle around the base of the color solid. On a vertical axis, V measurements are spaced out from

zero, which represents absolute black, to ten, representing absolute white. The C values describe

the color intensity when compared to a neutral gray of the same value. Due to the fact that most

instruments do not directly measure color in Munsell Color Solid values, it is not the most

popular color reporting system (AMSA, 2003).

Another system available to report color values is the XYZ primary system of the CIE's

Color Solid System. This system is based on the theory that colors can be matched by mixing the

light primary colors of green, red, and blue which is graphically shown in Figure 2-2 (Frances &

Clydsdale, 1975). In some cases, some of the colors can be matched with the subtraction of red

light (Gonzalez, 2005). In order to resolve such problems, the CIE developed the XYZ system

that allows researchers to describe colors without the use of negative numbers. In Figure 2-2, the

relationship between the XYZ triangle and the tristimulus primary RGB system is presented. The

shaded area along the B-G axis represents negative values of red needed to match certain colors.

In the larger XYZ triangle, all positive values can be used to match all colors. The second part of

this system is the consideration of lightness when matching a color. The lightness of a sample is

calculated by summing the luminosity of the matching green, red and blue colors. Because the

human eye is more sensitive to green light than the other primary colors, the CIE horseshoe

shaped spectrum as presented by Francis and Clydesdale (1975) is used when calculating

lightness with Y% corresponding to the lightness value (Figure 2-3). The CIE XYZ system can

also be calculated using spectrophotometers equipped with a reflectance attachment. The

problem with this type of system is that time consuming calculations must be made to make

adjustments to the data and therefore this system is not widely used in industry, but is popular in

research applications (AMSA, 2003).









The most common method of color evaluation used in research today is Tristimulus

Colorimetry, which uses filters to simulate the human eye. Once the data is received by the

reflectance colorimeter, it can be expressed by a series of systems including: XYZ tristimulus

values, Yxy color space, L*a*b* color space, L*C*h color space and Hunter Lab color space.

The XYZ tristimulus values are similar to Yxy color space and are used as the foundation for the

present CIE color space (Gonzalez, 2005). Even though XYZ tristimulus values were useful in

defining color, they were not easily visualized. In 1931 the Yxy color space was developed by

the CIE by using color-matching functions ofx(k), y(k) and z(k), shown in Figure 2-5, to

determine XYZ values and determining the chromaticity coordinates corresponding to the Yxy

values (Minolta, 1998). The Y value is the indicator of lightness with x and y coordinates

indicating achromatic colors toward the center, and chromaticity increasing toward the edges

(Figure 2-4). When measurements are taken with a colorimeter, the x and y values can be used as

coordinates to plot a point on the chromaticity diagram and the Y value indicates the percentage

of reflectance ranging from 0-100% (Minolta, 1998).

The L*a*b* color space is the most popular form of measuring color in all fields of

research and is very popular when measuring color in fresh meat. The L*a*b* color space is a

uniform color space that was developed to remedy the problems with the Yxy color space which

was that the equal distances on the x y chromaticity chart does not correspond with the equal

differences perceived by the eye. Figure 2-6 is a three dimensional representation of the L*a*b*

color space where L* indicates lightness and a* and b* values are the chromaticity coordinates

(Minolta, 1998). To better understand this system, Figure 2-7 shows the a* and b* chromaticity

values (HunterLab, 1983). The a* values become more positive as color becomes more red and

as the value becomes negative, the color becomes more green. A similar relationship exists for









the b* value, except as the value becomes more positive, the color is more yellow and as it

becomes negative, the color becomes more blue. At the center of the diagram, the achromatic

colors are indicated and as the values move away from the center, the saturation of a given color

becomes greater. Positive L* values indicate the color is becoming lighter or more white, while

negative values indicate the color is becoming darker or approaching absolute black. It is the

systems simplicity that has made it the most commonly used color space available to researchers

(Minolta, 1998).

A similar system that is still in use today is the Hunter Color Solid system. Shown in

Figure 2-7, this system is very similar in type to the L*a*b* system in that positive a values are

red and negative a values are green and the positive b values are yellow and negative b values are

blue (HunterLab, 1983). The difference in the two systems lies in the lightness measurement,

where in the Hunter Color Solid, L values range from 0-100 where 100 is lighter or absolute

white and 0 is darker or absolute black. The Hunter Color Solid system does not use positive and

negative values to determine lightness measurements. Just like the CIE L*a*b* system, the

Hunter Color Solid system has a major advantage over the Yxy system in that it is more uniform

in its measurements (AMSA, 2003).

The final color system available to researchers is the L*C*h color space. This system is

also similar to the L*a*b* system but instead of using rectangular coordinates, the L*C*h system

uses cylindrical coordinates. In the color space, shown in Figure 2-8, L* indicates lightness, C*

indicates chroma, and h indicates hue angle (Minolta, 1998). As shown in Figure 2-8, values for

chroma are 0 at the center and increases as points move away from the center. Hue angle is

determined by starting at the +a* axis and is expressed in degrees moved from this point on the









figure with +a* being 0 (red), +b* being 900 (yellow), -a* being 1800 (green) and -b* being

2700 (blue) (Minolta, 1998).

Problems with color measurements exist in all applications of the process. Especially in

sample preparation for meats, many factors can affect the end results. It is critical that guidelines

from the AMSA are followed to ensure a representative sample of the actual color. The ability to

measure each color parameter separate is crucial and proper sample preparation is mandatory.

Samples should be thick enough to be opaque (12-15 mm), backings should be white, orientation

of muscle fibers should be considered, and type of film used as over-wrap should be standardized

as well as preventing frost from accumulating on the sample. When preparing the instrument for

measurement, researchers must consider: aperture size and the area of illumination that is being

scanned, the number of scans that must be taken to ensure representative color evaluation as well

as minimizing pressure being applied to the sample. When taking measurements on lower

temperature products, the accumulation of fog on the instrument is possible, so researchers must

assure that this does not occur during repeated measurements. If all guidelines set by AMSA are

followed, a representative sample can be obtained via instrumental technologies (AMSA, 2003).

Defining and Measuring Tenderness

The two prevalent ways of measuring tenderness of meat products is trained sensory panel

and Warner Bratzler shear force Analysis.

Trained Sensory Panel

Trained sensory panels are used when considering sensory characteristics of cooked meat

products. Such attributes as flavor and juiciness are difficult to measure by other means other

than subjective human evaluation. Panels are used to predict what the population might judge the

quality of the product to be. More popular than single person evaluations, sensory panels must be

conducted in such a manor as to create conditions to get independent responses from each









individual evaluator. Kramer and Twigg (1970) identified five different types of taste panels

available for use by a researcher.

The first is a Consumer Preference panel, which is used to differentiate products by

personal preferences or reaction between samples. In order to achieve a reliable conclusion using

a Consumer Preference panel, 100 to 1000 panelists must participate in the evaluation of the

product. As discussed earlier, the more trained a panel becomes, the less participants are needed.

For Consumer Preference panels, two to three samples are served per participant and the

participant is asked to select the best sample or indicate if a sample is acceptable or

unacceptable.

The second type of panel is a Detection of a Difference panel. This panel uses fewer

participants that are highly trained. The panelists serve as laboratory instruments to detect

differences between samples and usually consist of a three to five member panel. The

participants are asked to identify differences among samples or rank and score samples when

given some type of parameters or instruction on how to differentiate the samples.

The third type of panel is Difference Preference. This type of panel is used for product

research when many samples must be compared. The Difference Preference panel consists of

eight to twenty participants that have some experience in sensory evaluation, and are used to

provide an estimate of consumer response to certain products.

The fourth type of panel is The Selection by Best Sample or Process panel. It is used to

compare one product to those of similar products. The Selection by Best Sample or Process panel

is similar in size to the Difference Preference panel, but samples are ranked in terms of

acceptability or preference or the intensity in which each product differs from the set product.









The final type of panel is a Determination of Grade or Quality Level panel. Being one of

the most difficult panels to conduct, this type of panel uses panelists that are trained in evaluation

of samples in terms of quality or grade standards. Not only does this type of panel compare

samples, but it also compares where samples stand in reference to a certain standard or grade.

Although there are more than five types of panels, these five discussed are the most common

types of used. Many combinations of these panels as well as different types of panels exist,

therefore, in order obtain the desired information during a sensory panel, it is important to adapt

these base panel types to the research in progress (Kramer and Twigg, 1970).

In an effort to further evaluate meat products the AMSA (1995) has produced four sensory

evaluation techniques that are similar to those of Kramer and Twigg (1970). These methods

include a Ranking system, Scaling system, Magnitude estimation and Descriptive Sensory

Analysis. The Ranking system involves the arrangement of samples by intensity or degree for a

selected attribute. The Scaling system can be collected using graphic or line scales, verbal scales

or numerical scales that describe the intensity of certain attributes. Verbal scales involve written

statements that describe a dimension with appropriate modifiers that are written out in an order.

Numerical scales are series of numbers that represent, from low to high, which represent a

certain degree of an attribute. The Magnitude estimation method involves the assignment of

numbers to establish the relationship of one sample to another reference sample. The final

method, Descriptive Sensory Analysis is used to describe quantitative and qualitative properties

and is divided into four methods.

The four methods used in Descriptive Sensory Analysis include Flavor Profiling, Texture

Profiling, Qualitative Descriptive Analysis and Spectrum method. Flavor Profiling characterizes

various aromas, flavors and after-tastes. Most of these flavor profiles involve a four to six









member panel and results are discussed among the panel to arrive at a general consensus on the

flavor of the product. Texture Profiling is similar to flavor profiling in that the texture is

determined by a number of different texture attributes. The Mechanical characteristics relate to

how the sample reacts to stress, such as chewing. Geometrical characteristics involve the size

and shape of the sample before and during breakdown and finally, fat and moisture are

determined through mouth feel during break down. This is usually the lubrication effect that

occurs during the chewing process. The third method referred to as Qualitative Descriptive

Analysis has been used to provide a stronger statistical treatment of data. This process allows

data to be reported as a "spider web" where each attribute is represented by a strand. And finally,

the Spectrum method is used to provide detailed information on the intensity of aroma, flavor

and texture using a universal scale (AMSA, 1995).

As mentioned earlier, it is important to adapt the type of panel needed to the type of

information needed. The first step is to determine if a sample is only to be identified or if

products should be scored on a predetermined scale. Attribute results provide no information on

the differences between the samples when a significant difference is found. Attribute tests do

however appear to be successful when measuring homogeneity of the products. For example, it

would not be feasible to score each attribute of each sample if the purpose of the study is to only

pick one sample over another or determine if a sample is acceptable or not. Actual values are not

necessary for this type of research and an attribute test is probably sufficient to answer the

questions. Kramer and Twigg (1970) suggest that an advantage of a scored test is that the power

of the test, over an attribute test, increases as the number of samples evaluated increases.

Selection of panel participants is also important for researchers to assure that proper

evaluation of the product is obtained. AMSA (1995) sets forth guidelines for panel participant









recruitment, interviews and selection process. In order for sensory panel evaluation studies to be

effective, following the panel selection process and training methods is key. The success or

failure of sensory panel depends on the criteria and procedures followed when selecting and

training a panel (Meilgaard et al. 1987). The project objectives determine the criteria and

procedures followed in selection of the panel. In a laboratory setting, selection procedures are

different from consumer panel selection procedures. Figure 2-9 presents a step by step process

in which panel members are selected (AMSA, 1995). Step 1 involves the recruitment and

personal interview of participants. This recruitment process is usually conducted via

advertisements, posted announcements or verbal contact of potential members. Personal

interviews of these applicants are then utilized to eliminate unqualified candidates, identify

candidates personal interests, availability, dependability, health, sex age, smoking status and

food likes and dislikes. These interviews are helpful in deciding which candidates have the most

potential of becoming a panel member. AMSA (1995) proposes these interviews be used as a

basis for disqualification of a candidate who is either not interested or available as well as

classifying candidates as potential participants. Step 2 (Figure 2-9) of the process is screening of

a potential panel participant. The purpose of screening individuals is to select candidates with:

normal sensory acuity, interest in sensory evaluation, ability to discriminate and reproduce

results and show appropriate behavior such as cooperation, motivation and promptness. After

each candidate is tested and interviewed, a decision to accept, reject or continue testing must be

reached.

After individuals have been selected for panel participation, the panelists must be trained

(Figure 2-9, Step 3). AMSA (1995) identifies objectives to be reached in the training process.

First is to familiarize each individual with the test procedures, next is to improve an individuals









ability to identify sensory attributes, and finally, memory to allow consistent and accurate

evaluation. Training sessions are conducted on an individual or group basis. In these sessions,

various samples are presented to the evaluator to allow the evaluator to detect differences. After

each evaluation session, results are discussed and panelists are calibrated to identify certain

attributes. Each attribute should be discussed in detail and different levels of these attributes

should be presented in subsequent training sessions. The goal of these training sessions is to

stress the importance of concentration and accuracy but should be performed in a manner that

will not influence future decisions made by the panelist (AMSA, 1995).

The fourth step (Figure 2-9, Step 4) in panel selection is Performance Evaluation. This

step of the process should be carried out during training and during the study. The Performance

Evaluation allows the researcher to identify problems among individual panelists and allow for

further training of these individuals. This evaluation also allows the researcher to determine if

the individual in question was correctly selected for the study. These Performance Evaluations

cover a four day period with three sessions per day and three samples per session and cover the

full range of attributes being tested (Gonzalez, 2005). Records of each individual's performance

should be kept and reviewed frequently. A member who constantly fails the evaluations or has

sub-par performance should not be included in the study to achieve a predetermined panel size

(AMSA, 1995).

Trained sensory evaluation of products is a great way to determine many attributes of a

sample. Human determination of tenderness, juiciness, flavor, amount of connective tissue, and

off-flavors helps researchers in obtaining information that is not attainable by machine

technology. Although sensory evaluation is sometimes down graded due to effects of human

error and non-repeatability, it is the only way to obtain the degree of some attributes such as









flavor. Although trained sensory panelist provides some insight to acceptability of meat products,

many argue that a mechanical component must be implemented to determine a true value for

such attributes as tenderness.

Warner Bratzler Shear Force

A majority of consumers in other studies (Huffman et al., 1996) indicated that tenderness

is the single most important palatability trait for determining overall steak acceptance. Warner-

Bratzler shear force (WBSF) is routinely used by scientists as an objective measurement of meat

tenderness and, despite criticism, has remained the most popular and accurate instrumental

measurement of meat tenderness (Wheeler et al., 1997). Otremba et al. (1999) and Wheeler et al.

(1996) reported WBSF value correlations (r) of -0.68 and -0.85, respectively, with trained

panelist overall tenderness ratings for longissimus steaks. Shackelford et al. (1994) reported that

a single variable regression equation using WBSF values explained 73% of the variation in

trained panelist overall tenderness ratings for longissimus muscle steaks. Because tenderness is

an important driver of overall steak acceptability and WBSF is used as an objective measure of

tenderness, it is reasonable to assume that WBSF values could be used to predict overall

acceptability of steaks (Platter et al., 2003).

Warner Bratzler shear force machines are used to objectively measure tenderness by

measuring the maximum amount of force needed to shear through a given meat core. The

machine is composed of a blade with a triangular hole that is used to hold the sample. Once the

core is obtained it is placed on the blade of the machine and is pulled through two stationary

bars. A dynamometer is used to measure the force required to shear through the sample core. The

greater the force needed to shear through the sample core, the tougher the muscle fibers are in

that sample core. According to Vargas et al. (1999) meat core samples with WBSF values less

than 3.85 kilograms are considered to be very tender.









When conducting research that consists of obtaining Warner Bratzler shear force

measurements, many factors play a role in getting accurate and repeatable measurements. Factors

such as cooking method, cooling method, storage temperature, and coring procedure can have

effects on WBSF values. A study by Wheeler et al. (1999) concluded that endpoint cooking

temperature of steaks has an effect on WBSF values. In the study, shear force measurements

were taken on Longissimus thoracis steaks cooked to endpoint internal temperatures of 60, 70, or

800C. Steaks that were cooked to 700C were used to create five different tenderness classes in

order to test the effect of tenderness classification and end point temperature on shear force

values. Data showed that steaks in the most tender class had increased shear values of 1.31 kg

when they were cooked to 800C instead of 600C. Also the steaks in the least tender class had

elevated shear force values by 3.38 kg when cooked to 800C rather than 600C. The conclusion of

the study was that endpoint temperature and tenderness class interaction resulted in greater shear

force value. It was also concluded that higher endpoint cooking temperatures had a greater

impact on less tender longissimus than more tender longissimus steaks.

The cooking of meat results in changes in tenderness due to alterations in connective tissue

and myofibrillar proteins. In a study conducted to evaluate the effect of collagen content, the

major component of muscle connective tissue; fourteen different raw muscles from Swiss Brown

bull carcasses were measured physically for shear force and chemically for collagen content. In

the study, Torrescano et al. (2003) used correlation analysis that indicated there is a high positive

correlation (r = .723; p < .01) between total collagen content and WBSF values for raw meat

samples. Using this information, it is possible to conclude that higher collagen contents result in

tougher meat. During the cooking process, collagen is solubilized by heat, which results in

tenderization. The heat also denatures myofibrillar proteins that cause meat to become tougher.









The changes to connective tissue and myofibrillar proteins during the cooking process are time

and temperature dependent. In a study that sought to determine the effects of cooking method on

measured shear force values, researchers studied the effect of reheating, holding time and

holding temperature on WBSF values. The conclusions made by Obuz et al. (2003) showed that

the optimal reduction in peak shear force values (4.71 kg to 3.57 kg) can be obtained by cooking

steaks to 540C on a belt grill, holding the samples at 570C in a water bath for 15 minutes, and

reheating the sample to 700C. The study showed a decrease in connective tissue shear force of

37% and a 12% reduction in myofibril shear force. Therefore selecting the proper protocol can

increase tenderness, and selecting the proper protocol for a specific muscle can add value and

reduce tenderness variation (Obuz et al., 2003).

Cooking, reheating and holding are not the only factors that can affect shear force values;

storage conditions are also known to effect shear force values. In a study conducted by Shanks et

al. (2002) a comparison was conducted of steaks that were measured for shear force on the exact

day that the aging period ended to steaks that were frozen for two months after the aging period

ended. The results concluded that frozen steaks had lower shear force values than fresh steaks for

steaks that were aged for 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 14, or 35 days postmortem. It was hypothesized that

this increase in tenderness occurred due to the formation of intracellular ice in the muscle.

Correlation analysis indicated that frozen steak's shear force values were not indicative of fresh

steak's shear force value at the same period of aging. The data also indicated that shear force

values of frozen steaks at short aging periods are useful in predicting the shear force values of

fresh steaks aged at a longer time period (Shanks et al., 2002).

Sample core extraction can also have an effect on shear force values. Core samples are

usually taken perpendicular or parallel to the muscle fiber direction. A study conducted by









Otremba et al. (1999) concentrated on comparing Warner-Bratzler Shear force values with panel

evaluation scores by using a descriptive texture profile sensory panel and a descriptive attribute

sensory panel. The objective of the study was to evaluate how shear force values, descriptive

texture profile sensory panel and descriptive attribute sensory panel were affected by muscle

fiber orientation and the type of blade used for the Warner Bratzler shear force analysis. The

correlation coefficient between firmness score and shear force values using the flat blade was .56

(P < .05) when the samples were taken parallel to the muscle fibers and evaluated by the

descriptive texture profile sensory panel. Correlations were also detected between shear force

scores and myofibrillar tenderness, connective tissue amount, and over all tenderness scores

when samples were taken parallel to the muscle fiber and sheared with the flat blade. Similar

correlations were also found in the same categories when samples were evaluated by the

descriptive attribute sensory panel and cores were taken perpendicular to the steak surface and

sheared with the V blade. Conclusions of the study resulted in suggestions that will help to

correlate sensory panel evaluations with WBSF values. Otremba et al. (1999) suggested that

when the meat cores are taken perpendicular to the muscle fiber orientation, the V-blade should

be used and that when cores are taken parallel to the muscle fibers, the flat blade should be used.

It was also suggested that descriptive attribute sensory panel should be used to evaluate cores

removed parallel to the muscle fibers and that descriptive sensory panel will most likely be

correlated closer with shear force values than those evaluated by the descriptive texture profile

sensory panel, regardless of muscle fiber orientation. It is also suggested that in order to obtain

correlated data, selection of the appropriate sensory panel is important (Gonzalez, 2005).

As demonstrated in the previous studies discussed, there are many different protocols that

may be used to obtain Warner-Bratzler shear force data. In an effort to evaluate different









protocols used by different institutions a study conducted by Wheeler et al. (1997) used four

different institutions who used their own WBSF protocol, and also used a standard protocol

provided to them for the study. The different protocols for each institution had some effect on

shear force values. Differences in protocol included cooking method, blade thickness and angle,

cutting edge, shape and size of cores, coring method and number of times each individual core

was sheared. The differences in these protocols resulted in significant differences between

institutions. For example, lower endpoint temperatures were used by some institutions which

resulted in lower shear force values. When the standardized protocol was used, means, standard

deviations, and maximum shear force values were slightly higher for all institutions. Also,

differences in mean shear force values among institutions were smaller than when they utilized

their own protocol. Researchers also identified differences due to instrumental variations. Older

Shear force machines are some times less likely to yield the correct shear force value due to

spring tension differences than those in newer machines. Wheeler et al. (1997) suggested that it

is possible for different institutions to have the same mean shear values if protocol is

standardized and properly calibrated machines are used.

Total Pigment and Heme Iron

As mentioned earlier, most consumers' first impression of meat quality is color. In most

cases, consumers prefer red beef, pink pork and white veal. In the veal industry, producers and

processors realize a slight premium for producing white veal products. In an effort to capture this

premium, production methods of veal have changed in an effort to produce more of the white

product. However, animal welfare activists have criticized these production practices that are

used to produce such products due to housing methods used and feeding of milk replacers with

sub-optimal iron levels. Van Puttens (1982) has shown that these conditions have shown

abnormal behavior patterns in animals and was not conducive to the welfare of the animal.









Pigment content of veal has been well documented to be correlated closely with muscle

color. Blood hemoglobin concentration of calves is related to the muscle myoglobin content and

hence correlates to veal color score at carcass classification. Studies have shown that carcass

color of veal in general is not related to postmortem pH and temperature, but associated more

with the blood haemoglobin content. In a study by Klont et al. (2000) it was shown that

haemoglobin content of the blood was closely related to the visually assessed carcass color at 45

minutes post mortem and it was also related to the instrumentally determined L* value with

significant correlation coefficients of .61 and -.61 respectively. Most recent studies have

correlated ante mortem haemoglobin content with color scores of certain muscles and have been

successful in proving the relationship.

Methods of changing veal quality and color have been explored in various European

countries through electrical stimulation. In a study conducted by Eikelenboom (1989), a total of

eighty-eight veal calves were raised in groups with access to straw, which is thought to decrease

veal quality, to determine if electrical stimulation has an effect on meat quality. One week ante

mortem, hemoglobin levels were obtained and animals with similar hemoglobin levels were

paired. At slaughter, one animal of each pair was stimulated electrically whereas the other

remained non-stimulated. In the study, electrical stimulation resulted in brighter color, lower

sarcomere length and lower protein solubility, but no significant difference in total heme

pigments were observed for the longissimus muscle at 24 hours post mortem. After six days of

aging under vacuum at 30C, samples from electrically stimulated carcasses showed brighter

color, higher drip and cooking loss and lower shear force values, as well as a better taste panel

preference score than non stimulated carcasses. Data also indicated that a denaturation of

sarcoplasmic proteins may have been responsible for the effects on water retention and muscle









color while the improvement of tenderness was due to the prevention of cold shortening by the

treatments. In the end, electrical stimulation was identified by as a possible alternative method of

increasing veal quality while also improving animal welfare (Eikelenboom 1989).

Eikelenboom (1989), analyzed samples for the determination of total hematin using a

method developed by H.C. Hornsey (1956). Hornsey extracted pigment of cooked meats by

using a rapid extraction method using an acetone-acid mixture and filtering the extraction for

analysis with a spectrophotometer. The absorbance reading was then plugged into an equation to

determine total pigment in parts per million. Hornsey's method is simple and accurate and has

been adopted for studying the distribution and fading of color in meat products. Conclusions

made by Hornsey (1956) proposes a method for measuring total pigments as parts per million of

haematin and is very suitable for following the sequence of events in fading experiments,

allowing samples of exposed meat to be withdrawn for analysis at short time interval











WHITE



PURPLE
RED


i -- ~~GRAY 5


BLUE



GREEN


BLACK


Figure 2-1. The Munsell color solid.


i YELLOW

> .
t/


4CE


i


































Itatin fa


zero lminance
K -


Figure 2-2. The XYZ Triangle of the CIE System.









.100
to
S90
80
70

6o y,%
so

40



.7 -0


.4

*V 3


0
Figure 2-3. The CIE horseshoe-shaped spectrum locus showing percent Y.


.3


X





















0.7



0.6



0.5



0.4



0.3



0.2



0.1



0


Figure 2-4. 1931 x, y, chromaticity diagram.









Spectral sensitivity corresponding to the human eye
(Color-matching functions of the 1931 Standard Observer)


2.0



1.5



1.0



0.5


400 500 600


700 Wavelength
I (nm)


Figure 2-5. Spectral sensitivity corresponding to the human eye and color matching functions of
the 1931 Standard Observer.













































Figure 2-6. Three-dimensional representation of color solid for the L* a* b* color space.










L= tOO


WHITE


GREEN


YELLOW


BLUE


BLACK


LI-
L w


Figure 2-7. Hunter L, a, b solid.































(Green)


















Figure 2-8. a* b* chromaticity diagram.


(Re-dl


(Blue)


(Yellow)
+b*












I PERSONAL INTERVIEW


ACCEPT


SCRLLN NG


4,

ACCEPT
< FOR

llkc


TRAINING
4'
| PERFORMANCE EVALUATION


DOES
PANEL PROVIDE -
RELIABLE TEST?

yes

BEGIN STUDY


GO TO STEP 1-
NEW CANDIDATE
NO OR
STEP 3-
CONTINUE TRAINING



Adapted from Cross et al. (1978)


Figure 2-9. Steps in selecting a trained panel.


STEP
1


NO (reject)


STEP
2


NO (reject)


STEP
3
STEP
4









CHAPTER 3
CHARACTERIZING MUSCLES FROM THE VEAL CHUCK BY WEIGHT, DIMENSIONS
AND SENSORY ATTRIBUTES

Introduction

Recent studies conducted by scientists at the University of Florida in conjunction with the

University of Nebraska have characterized numerous muscles from the beef chuck and round.

The studies conducted have revealed significant positive palatability attributes of many of these

muscles. A similar characterization of muscles was performed in this study to characterize nine

muscles from the veal chuck in search of ways to better utilize these muscles and add value to

the veal chuck. Conclusions from previous studies have revealed that adding value can be

achieved by cutting certain muscles into steaks rather than selling them as part of a roast or

grinding them into ground beef.

Materials and Methods

Experimental samples

IMPS (Institutional Meat Purchase Specifications) 308 four rib whole chucks and IMPS

309 four rib square cut chucks were purchased from two separate veal packers with known grade

and slaughter date. All were from special fed, USDA Choice or higher veal carcasses. Veal

chucks were immediately shipped to the University of Florida Meat Processing facility for

muscle separation. Whole chucks were squared prior to measurement and dissection. The IMPS

308 and IMPS 309 were weighed whole, and then dissected to obtain the following muscles of

interest: Complexus, Deep Pectoral, Infraspinatus, Rhomboideus, Serratus Ventralis, Splenius,

Supraspinatus, Triceps Brachii and the Teres Major. The selection of muscles was based on the

potential of using these muscles as steak cuts where tenderness is most important; especially

when a dry cookery method is used.









Weights, Dimensions and Aging

After dissection a commodity weight was taken of each individual muscle. Each muscle

was then denuded using a 7600 Series Townsend Skinner and any additional hand carving to

remove membranous material. After denuded weights were taken, measurements of each

individual muscle were taken to obtain length, width, minimum depth and maximum depth. Each

muscle was vacuum packaged in separate bags and wet aged fourteen days post mortem at 3.8 +

2 C. At fourteen days post mortem, bags were checked for any leakage, and muscles were

frozen at -400C until sensory evaluation was conducted.

Sensory Evaluation

Prior to sensory evaluation, the two largest muscles were cut into 1 inch steaks with a

band saw while frozen which included the Serratus Ventralis and the Triceps Brachii. These

muscles were cut across the grain to ensure maximum degree of tenderness would be observed.

Before thawing, steaks were removed from vacuum sealed bags and frozen weights were

taken to determine thaw loss. Steaks were thawed for approximately 18 hours at 3.8 2 C,

weighed, then grilled on Hamilton Beach Health Smart Indoor/Outdoor table top grills to an

internal temperature of 710 C (AMSA, 1995). To assure equal endpoint cooking temperatures,

Copper-constantan thermocouples were inserted into the approximate geometric center of each

steak. Steaks were turned at 350C and removed from grill when temperature reached 71C

(medium degree of doneness). Samples were then weighed for determination of cooking loss

then wrapped as a whole muscle in tin foil and kept under heat lamps until sensory evaluation

was conducted. Upon sensory evaluation, muscles were removed from tin foil and sliced into

one-half inch cubes for evaluation.









Food Service Evaluation

For further evaluation of the muscles from the veal chuck, two food-service industry chefs

along with two veal industry representatives were contacted to evaluate the quality and possible

application of the nine muscles. After evaluating these nine muscles by using multiple cooking

methods, the chefs and industry representatives agreed that there were truly some application for

these value-added veal cuts.

Results and Discussion

Weights

The heaviest muscle found in the study was the Triceps Brachii which also represents the

greatest yield of both the chuck and the whole carcass (Table 3-1). The lightest muscle in the

study was found to be the Teres Major which represents the lowest yield percentage for chuck

and hot carcass weight. The muscle with the most variation in weight was the Serratus Ventralis;

the muscle with the least variation in weight was the Teres Major (variation in denuded weights).

Dimensions

The longest muscle was determined to be the Complexus and the shortest being the Teres

major which was also found to be the narrowest muscle in the study (Table 3-2). The widest

muscle was the Serratus ventralis. The thinnest muscle over all was the Splenius, and the thickest

overall was the Triceps brachii.

Industry Evaluation

Table 3-3 gives some applicable cooking methods that worked well for each muscle and

also gives some insight on the types of further processing that was suggested by the chefs to

further enhance the products. It should be noted that the sensory data that was obtained supports

the amount of further processing needed for each individual muscle. The most tender muscles

(Infraspinatus, Teres major, Complexus) will require minimal processing while the toughest









muscles ( Splenius, Serratus ventralis, Rhomboideus) will require a more aggressive

tenderization method to increase there tenderness to a more acceptable level. One of the major

concerns among these industry representatives was the cost of producing these value-added cuts.

A cost analysis should be considered to reveal the true applicability of these muscles in the food-

service industry.

Sensory Evaluation

Sensory evaluation revealed the most-tender muscle of the veal chuck was the

Infraspinatus. On a scale of 1-8 with 1 being extremely tough and 8 being extremely tender, the

Infraspinatus was evaluated at 6.9. The Teres Major was found to be not significantly different

(P > .05) from the Infraspinatus with a tenderness score of 6.8. The toughest muscle in the study

was found to be the Rhomboideus which was evaluated at 5.8 on the same 1-8 scale. The

Rhomboideus was significantly lower (P < .05) in tenderness from all other muscles in the study

(Table 3-4). When comparing tenderness levels of these muscles from the veal chuck with the

same muscles from the beef chuck, it was found that the muscles were identical in ranking from

the most tender to the least tender when compared to a compilation of studies conducted by the

University of Nebraska. (Calkins and Sullivan, 2007). The muscles from the veal chuck fell in

the same tenderness categories as the same muscles from the beef chuck, with the Infraspinatus

and Teres Major being tender, and the Rhomboideus and Serratus Ventralis being less tender

than the rest of the muscles presented. Although these muscles are similar in tenderness to those

in the beef chuck, the veal muscles are less variable in tenderness, with only the Rhomboideus

being of concern for tenderness.

Table 3-5 depicts the sensory evaluation data for the juiciness of veal muscles. On a scale

from 1-8 with 8 being extremely juicy and 1 being extremely dry, it was determined that the

Complexus had the highest juiciness scores with a sensory evaluation score of 6.5. The









Supraspinatus was found to be similar to the Complexus (P > .05) with ajuiciness score of 6.3.

The muscle with the lowest juiciness scores in the study was found to be the Triceps Brachii with

an evaluation score of 5.8. The Infraspinatus and the Splenius were not significantly different (P

> .05) from the Triceps brachii with scores of 5.9 and 5.8 respectively. When comparing

juiciness scores with those reported by Calkins and Sullivan (2007) the veal muscles from the

chuck are less variable and tend to be more juicy than those from the beef chuck. The

Infraspinatus was recognized as being the juiciest muscle in both the veal and beef chucks, but

the Triceps Brachii from the veal chuck was recognized as being the least juicy whereas the same

muscle from the beef carcass was recognized to be of intermediate juciness.

On a scale from 1-8 with 1 being extremely bland and 8 being extremely intense, the

Supraspinatus was found to have the most intense beef flavor with a sensory score of 5.1. The

Complexus was not significantly different (P > .05) with a score of 5.0. The blandest muscle of

the study was the Splenius with a score of 4.0 with no significant difference (P > .05) from the

Infraspinatus or the Splenius with evaluation scores of 4.5 and 4.3, respectively. Most of these

muscles were found to be slightly bland when evaluated for beef flavor (Table 3-6).

Table 3-7 depicts the amount of connective tissue evaluated in each muscle of the study. It

should be noted that large visible seams of insoluble connective tissue were removed from the

Infraspinatus after dissection and from the Triceps brachii after cooking. On a scale of 1-8 with 8

being no connective tissue detected and 1 being an abundant amount of connective tissue

present, the Infraspinatus was found to have the least amount of connective tissue present with a

sensory score of 7.3. Of the muscles evaluated, the Teres major was not significantly different (P

> .05) from the Infraspinatus or the Triceps brachii with an evaluation score of 7.2. The muscle









with the highest connective tissue score was the Rhomboideus with a score of 5.8, which was

significantly different (P > .05) from all other muscles in the study.

Upon completion of sensory evaluation of muscles, no extreme off-flavors were found in

any muscle. The off-flavors that appeared most frequently included milky, metallic and grassy.

The muscle with the least amount of off-flavor detected on a scale of 1-6 with 1 being extreme

off-flavor and 6 being no off-flavor detected was the Triceps Brachii with a sensory score of 5.8.

Off-flavor scores were similar (P > .05) for the Rhomboideus, Complexus, Splenius,

Supraspinatus, Deep pectoral and Serratus ventralis. The muscle with the most extreme off-

flavor was the Teres major with a score of 5.5, which was not significantly different from the

Deep pectoral, Serratus ventralis or the Infraspinatus (Table 3-8).

Overall, when comparing the muscles from the veal chuck to a compilation of six decades

and 58 papers of beef chuck data (Calkins and Sullivan, 2007), the data and rankings of the

muscles from the veal chuck are comparable and often times mimic those of muscles from the

beef chuck. Although some differences do exist, it can be concluded that muscles from the veal

chuck are comparable and can be ranked in accordance with many years of research on muscles

from the beef chuck.











Table 3-1. Average weights (standard deviations) of muscles from the veal chuck.e


Muscle


Complexus
(COM)

Deep pectoral
(DEP)

Infraspinatus
(INF)

Rhomboideus
(RHM)

Serratus ventralis
(SEV)

Splenius
(SPL)

Supraspinatus
(SUP)

Triceps brachii
(TRB)


Comm. Wt. a
(Min., Max)


.58 (.12)
(.39, .80)

.33 (.09)
(.15, .49)

.69 (.08)
(.52, .91)

.23 (.05)
(.15, .32)

1.03 (.11)
(.81, 1.32)


.24 (.03)
(.20, .32)

.65 (.08)
(.55, .91)

1.13 (.17)
(.82, 1.5)


Denuded Wt. b
(Min., Max)


.37 (.09)
(.20, 58)

.23 (.07)
(.11, .36)

.53 (.06)
(.43, .68)

.16(.04)
(.09, .23)

.74 (.12)
(.56, 1.00)

.15(.04)
(.05, .22)

.47 (.08)
(.39, .64)

.87 (.10)
(.68, 1.00)


% Chuck c
(Min., Max)


2.33
(1.41, 4.03)

1.43
(.76,2.17)

3.39
(2.39, 4.66)

1.01
(.58, 1.52)

4.69
(3.16, 5.96)

.97
(.39, 1.56)

3.00
(1.71, 4.09)

5.49
(3.82, 6.85)


% HCW d
(Min., Max)


.28
(.15, .46)

.17
(.09, .24)

.41
(.31, .54)

.12
(.06, .17)

.57
(.43, .68)

.12
(.04, .18)

.36
(.31, .43)

.67
(.48, .81)


Teres major .15 (.03) .11 (.02) .67 .08
(TER) (.11, .21) (.08, .16) (.52, 1.02) (.06, .13)
a b c
Commodity weight of muscle, Denuded weight of muscle, (Denuded muscle weight /
Chuck weight), d muscle weight Hot carcass w eight), e All weights are in Kilograms
Chuck weight), (Denuded muscle weight / Hot carcass weight), All weights are in Kilograms









Table 3-2. Average measurements (standard deviation) of muscles from the veal chuck. a


Muscle


Complexus


Deep pectoral


Infraspinatus


Rhomboideus


Serratus ventralis


Splenius


Supraspinatus


Triceps brachii

Teres major


Lengthb
(Min, Max)

33.50 (3.05)
(28.0, 39.0)

25.56 (4.82)
(18.0, 35.0)
27.14 (2.51)
(20.5, 31.0)

26.09 (5.54)
(4.5, 30.5)
32.89 (4.20)
(26.0, 42.5)

27.54 (3.95)
(20.0, 33.0)
28.36 (1.96)
(23.0, 31.8)

26.65 (2.30)
(23.6, 31.5)
19.21 (3.18)
(8.8, 23.2)


Widthc
(Min, Max)

11.55 (2.71)
(7.0, 17.2)

10.22 (1.39)
(7.5, 13.0)
10.13 (.80)
(8.5, 11.0)

6.37 (.87)
(5.0, 9.0)
18.33 (1.80)
(15.3, 22.0)

7.72 (2.34)
(5.0, 16.5)
10.10 (1.00)
(9.0, 13.0)

13.93 (1.17)
(12.0, 16.0)
5.38 (.99)
(4.3, 8.5)


Min. Depthd
(Min, Max)


0.92 (.29)
(.5, 1.5)
0.93 (.31)
(.5, 1.5)
1.73 (.42)
(.6, 2.5)

0.84 (.25)
(.5, 1.4)
0.94 (.23)
(.3, 1.5)

0.68 (.25)
(.2, 1.1)
1.03 (.24)
(.5, 1.6)

1.38 (.27)
(.8, 1.9)
0.78 (.31)
(.4, 1.5)


Max Depthe
(Min, Max)


1.84 (.42)
(1.2, 2.5)

1.63 (.29)
(1.0,2.2)
2.99 (.32)
(2.6,3.9)

1.59(.24)
(1.2, 2.1)
2.91 (.74)
(1.0,4.7)

1.36(.41)
(.9, 2.5)
3.12(.40)
(2.3, 3.9)

5.13 (.52)
(4.0, 6.0)
1.73 (.25)
(1.3,2.2)


aAll measurements are denuded measurements, bLength of the muscle in cm, C Width of the
muscle in cm, d Minimum depth of the muscle in cm, e Maximum depth of the muscle in cm
muscle in cm, Minimum depth of the muscle in cm, Maximum depth of the muscle in cm.









Table 3-3. Industry evaluation.
Suggested Processing Needs
Muscle Suggested Cooking Methods and Applications (eel o tenderizion
(lMechanivel ofenderization

Complexus Flat top grilling, Pan sear, Open grilling (mild)
Mechanical Tenderization
Deep Pectoral Pan sear, Wet braise, Corned veal application intermediatee
(intermediate)
Infra s Flat top grilling, Pan sear, Braise, Open Connective tissue removal
Infraspinatus
grilling (none required)
Mechanical Tenderization
Rhomboideus Pan searing, Cutlets, K-bobs e
(aggressive)
Serratus Mechanical Tenderization
Veras Pan fry, Open grilling, Braise, Cutlets aggresss
Ventralis (aggressive)
Mechanical Tenderization
Splenius Pan sear, Flat top grilling (aggressive)
(aggressive)
Mechanical Tenderization
Supraspinatus Pan searing, Braised, Cutlets, Medallions i eei
(intermediate)
Teres Major Grilling, Pan sear, Skewer application, Open N
Teres Major i None required
grilling
Mechanical Tenderization
Triceps Brachii Pan searing, Braised with fat based liquid intermediatee
(intermediate)
Table 3-3 is a compilation of information from two industry chefs and two industry
representatives from two different dates. September 18, 2006: Steve Afflixio, C.E.C., A.A.C.,
Training Manager/Division Chef; US Foodservice. Paul McNally, District Territory Manager,
US Foodservice. September 27, 2006: Mark P. Wachawiak, Chef- Mythos Restaurant,
Universal Orlando Resort. Tom Houlton, Thomas Marketing Group, Marketing of Specialty
Proteins.









Table 3-4. Overall tenderness of veal muscles.

Muscle 1 Mean2 Standard Error
INF 6.9a 0.08
TER 6.8 a 0.08
COM 6.6b 0.08
SUP 6.5b 0.08
TRB 6.5b 0.08
DEP 6.2 bc 0.08
SPL 6.2 0.08
SEV 6.0 0.08
RHM 5.8d 0.08
1 2 a-d
Refer to Table 3-1; 8 = extremely tender to 1= extremely tough; Means with common
superscripts are not significantly different (P > .05).

Table 3-5. Juiciness of veal muscles.
Muscle 1 Mean 2 Standard Error
COM 6.5 a 0.08
SUP 6.3 ab 0.08
TER 6.1 b 0.08
SEV 6.0 b 0.08
DEP 5.9 bc 0.08
RHM 5.9 bcd 0.08
INF 5.9 cde 0.08
SPL 5.8 de 0.08
TRB 5.8 e 0.08

Refer to Table 3-1; 8 = extremely juicy to 1 = extremely dry; a-e Means with common
superscripts are not significantly different (P > .05).









Table 3-6. Beef flavor

Muscle Mean
SUP 5.1 a
COM 5.0 ab

TRB 4.8 b

SEV 4.8b

DEP 4.8bc

TER 4.6bcd

INF 4.5 cde
RHM 4.3 de

SPL 4.0e
1 2
Refer to Table 3-1; 8 = extremely intense to 1 =
superscripts are not significantly different (P > .05).


Standard Error

0.12

0.12

0.12

0.12

0.12

0.12

0.12

0.12

0.12

extremely bland; a-Means with common


Table 3-7. Connective tissue
Muscle 1 Mean 2 Standard Error
INF 7.3 a 0.09

TER 7.2 a 0.09

TRB 7.1 ab 0.09

SUP 6.9bc 0.09
DEP 6.7 c 0.09

COM 6.6 cd 0.09

SPL 6.4d 0.09

SEV 6.4d 0.09

RHM 5.8e 0.09

Refer to Table 3-1; 28 = none detected to 1 = abundant amount; a-e Means with common
superscripts are not significantly different (P > .05)









Table 3-8. Off-flavor.
Muscle1 Mean2 Standard Error

TRB 5.8a 0.06

RHM 5.8a 0.06

COM 5.7ab 0.06

SPL 5.7ab 0.06

SUP 5.7ab 0.06

DEP 5.7ab 0.06

SEV 5.7abc 0.06

INF 5.6bc 0.06

TER 5.5C 0.06

1Refer to Table 3-1; 2 6 = None detected to 1 = extreme off-flavor; a-c Means with common
superscripts are not significantly different (P > .05).









CHAPTER 4
EFFECTS OF AGING ON RETAIL DISPLAY ATTRIBUTES AND COLOR OF MUSCLES
FROM THE VEAL CHUCK

Introduction

Phase one of the study, presented in Chapter 3, characterized numerous muscles from the

veal chuck and identified six muscles that were desirable in tenderness, juiciness and flavor. To

further characterize these six muscles, a study that evaluated the shelf-life stability and color

attributes was conducted. A shelf-life stability and color evaluation of the veal muscles further

characterized the promising muscles identified in phase one of the veal optimization study and

will allow veal processors and merchandisers to determine the value of these muscles.

Materials and Methods:

Experimental Samples

IMPS 309 four rib square-cut chucks with USDA Choice quality grade and known

slaughter date were randomly selected at two separate veal processors (Strauss Veal and Lamb,

Hales Corers, WI and Catelli Brothers Inc., Collingswood, NJ). Veal chucks were taken directly

from the fabrication lines at the processing plant and then dissected by a professional de-boner to

obtain the following muscles: Complexus (COM), Deep Pectoral (DEP), Infraspinatus (INF),

Serratus Ventralis (SEV), Supraspinatus (SUP), and Triceps Brachii (TRB). The muscles were

then weighed to determine yields. After weights were taken, the muscles were allowed to bloom

for 15 minutes and color measurements were taken using a Minolta CR-310 Chroma meter.

After color measurements were obtained, each muscle was cut in half to be divided between the

University of Florida and the University of Nebraska for further evaluation. Each muscle was

vacuum packaged using a roll stock packager and boxed for shipment.









Aging of Muscles

Upon arrival to the University of Florida Meat Processing facility, the muscles were held

at 3.8 + 2 C for their pre-determined aging periods in cardboard boxes with no light penetration.

Aging periods were set at five, twelve, nineteen and twenty-six days postmortem. Animals and

sides were randomly assigned to these aging periods, all muscles from a particular animal and

side was represented in that same aging period (Table 4-1)

Shelf-life and Color Evaluation

After each respective aging period, muscles were removed from package and weighed to

determine packaging purge. After weights were taken, the muscles were completely denuded and

a beginning retail weight was taken to later determine retail display purge. Muscles were placed

in foam trays with a single Cryovac Dry-loc ac 40 meat and poultry pad, and then covered with a

single layer of polyvinyl chloride over-wrap (oxygen transmission rate of 23,250 ml/m2/24hr.).

Color measurements were taken of each muscle using a Minolta CR-310 Chroma meter each day

of retail display. The muscles were also evaluated by a trained, five member panel, to visually

assess each muscle. Each muscle was scored for overall appearance (8= extremely desirable, 1=

extremely undesirable), Color (USDA pork color scale, 1= very light pink, 5= extremely dark

red), Discoloration (8= no discoloration, 1= 100% discolored) and purge (6= none detected, 1=

abundant). All muscles were presented in the retail case for three days with color measurements

and objective evaluation on each day of the study (day 0, 1, 2, 3). After the third day, muscles

were removed from the foam trays and a final weight was taken from each muscle to determine

retail display purge.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was conducted using SAS proc mixed data. Day of aging was the main

effect being explored for all analysis. Interactions were assessed for muscle, days in retail case









and days in case by days of aging to determine the effects of post-mortem aging on each muscles

retail case stability. Although the goal of the study was not to determine a difference in supplier,

supplier differences were explored and no significant difference was found. .

Summary of Results and Discussion

Table 4-2 presents the weights of each muscle after shipping and after retail display.

Packaging purge was determined for each portion of muscle by subtracting the blotted muscle

weight and the dry package weight from the overall meat and package weight. Percent packaging

purge was then calculated. Retail purge was calculated by subtracting the out of case weight

from the in case weight and dividing by the in case weight to determine percent retail display

purge. The muscle with the most purge in the study was the Deep Pectoral with an overall purge

of .05% from packaging through retail display.

Table 4-3 represents mean subjective evaluations for overall appearance which were

obtained for each muscle within each aging period. It was determined that days of post-mortem

aging had a significant effect on subjective evaluations for overall appearance of the muscles

(P < .05). The three muscles that showed no effect due to days of aging were the Deep Pectoral,

Infraspinatus, and the Triceps Brachii. These three muscles are most likely to retain their overall

appearance when aged in vacuum sealed packaging at 3.8 + 2 C for up to 26 days post-mortem.

Figure 4-1 gives a representation of the overall muscle appearance over the three day retail

period. Means for all muscles in each retail display day are represented in the graph. All muscles

behaved similarly for during retail display.

All six muscles in the study reacted similarly for each of the four aging periods for

subjective overall appearance scores. The most desirable overall appearance scores were

observed in the five, nineteen and twenty-six day aging periods, with no aging periods being

statistically different (P > .05) (Figure 4-2). The differences in all four aging periods for









subjective overall appearance was minimal and no conclusion could be reached to determine if

one aging period had more effect on subjective appearance of the muscles when placed in a retail

display.

Table 4-4 represents subjective color evaluation means for each muscle during postmortem

aging. Post-mortem aging did significantly affect subjective color scores for all muscles

represented in the study (P < .05). The three muscles that are most likely to retain their

acceptable color over the four aging periods include the Deep pectoral, Serratus Ventralis, and

the Triceps Brachii. The Supraspinatus had a decline in color between five and twelve days of

aging but retained this color value through 26 days of aging.

Table 4-5 represents the effects of post-mortem aging on subjective color scores. Means

for each aging period were taken at each day in the case to determine the day in case*days of

aging interaction. It was determined that post-mortem aging had significant effects on the color

evaluation for each day in the case (P < .05). Muscles with more post-mortem age were lighter in

color for all but day zero of retail display. On day zero of retail display, muscles with 26 days of

age had the darkest subjective color scores.

All muscles in the study were found to react similarly for color evaluation over the retail

display period (Figure 4-3). The largest decline in color was observed between the first and

second day of retail display, but none of the days were significantly different from each other (P

> .05).

Post-mortem aging had a significant effect on muscle discoloration during retail display (P

< .05). As presented in Table 4-6, the three muscles that did not show a postmortem age effect on

discoloration were the Deep pectoral, Infraspinatus and Supraspinatus. The other three muscles

discolorations were effected by the different aging periods (Table 4-6). The Complexus and









Serratus ventralis muscles with greater than five days of postmortem age had more discoloration.

The discoloration of the Triceps brachii was not consistently influenced by days of post-mortem

age.

All muscles in the study were found to react similarly for discoloration over the retail

display period (Figure 4-4). As expected, an increase in discoloration was noted for all days of

retail display with the largest increase coming after day 1 of retail display. The mean

discoloration score for three days of retail display time was comparable to 10% discoloration

when averaged across all six muscles, the muscles became 10% more discolored each day of

retail display. Table 4-6 gives a valid representation for muscle discoloration scores for the four

aging periods.

All muscles in the study were found to react similarly for discoloration over the four aging

periods (P > .05). Muscles aged for twelve days were found to have the most discoloration when

averaged over the retail display days. Five days of post-mortem aging had the most desirable

scores and day twelve had the most discoloration when averaged across all three days of retail

display (Figure 4-5)

Days of post-mortem aging had a significant effect on subjective muscle purge scores (P <

.05). The aging period that most commonly represented the highest amount of purge was the 26

day aging period. The only muscle that did not show the most purge for this aging period was the

Deep pectoral, although from a practical perspective all differences were small (Table 4-7).

Days of post-mortem aging had a significant effect on subjective purge evaluations over

the retail display period (P < .05). Interaction was detected between aging periods as well as

between days in the retail display (Table 4-8). The aging period with that showed the most

abundant purge was the 26 day aging period. It must be noted that no aging period or retail









display period was undesirable in subjective purge (all values between barely detected and none

detected).

All muscles were found to react similarly for purge over the retail display period. A slight

increase in purge was noted for each day in the retail case with no day being different (P > .05)

(Figure 4-6).

Days of postmortem aging had a significant effect on L* values (P < .05). L* values

remain constant for the five and twelve day aging periods but an increase in these values was

noted between the twelve and nineteen day post-mortem aging periods (become more white).

The only muscle that showed no significant change in L* values across aging periods was the

Infraspinatus (Table 4-9).

L* values reacted to retail display day similarly for all muscles (P > .05). A slight increase

in L* values occurred between days zero and one of retail display and a decrease in these values

was found between day one and two of display (Figure 4-7). The data revealed that these

muscles become darker after day one of retail display.

All muscles in the study were found to react similarly for L* values over the four aging

periods. An average was taken for all days of retail display at each aging period to determine the

effects of aging on retail display. Post-mortem aging increased L* values between twelve and

nineteen days of aging over the three days of retail display (Figure 4-8).

Days of postmortem aging had a significant effect on a* values (P < .05). The greatest

change in these values was from the 5 day aging period to the 12 day aging period (Table 4-10).

Over this 7 day period the muscles become darker red (increasing a* values). The muscles then

remain relatively constant for the other three aging periods.









Days of retail display had a significant effect on a* values (P < .05). a* values represent

the redness or greenness of muscle color. As values increase, redness of the muscle increases.

Shown in Table 4-11, the Complexus and Serratus Ventralis became less red in color during

retail display. Other muscles were not consistent in change of a* values (redness) and differences

were small during three days of retail display.

Means were taken over retail display for all muscles, it was determined all muscles reacted

similarly to days of postmortem aging for a* values (P > .05). Figure 4-9 shows there was an

increase in a* values between the five and twelve day aging period, with a similar a* value

through out the rest of the aging periods (Table 4-12).

Days of post-mortem aging had a statistically significant effect on b* values (P < .05).

Similar to the a* values the largest increase in b* values yellownesss) was between the five and

twelve day aging period. After this increase in b* values the muscles remain fairly consistent

over the other three aging periods (Table 4-13).

Days of retail display had a statistically significant effect on b* values (P < .05). The most

apparent difference in the muscles was between day zero and day one of retail display. All

muscles increased in b* values after being displayed for one day. This reveals that the muscles

became more yellow after the first day of retail display, but retained their b* value throughout

the remaining retail display days.

Days of aging and retail display interaction had a statistically significant effect on b*

values (P < .05). As apparent in the days of postmortem aging effects (Table 4-12), there was a

significant increase in b* values yellownesss) between the five and twelve day aging periods,

with all other aging periods being not statistically different (Table 4-14).









Conclusion

When placed in a three day retail setting the six muscles in this study behaved the same for

overall appearance, subjective color and muscle purge. Post-mortem aging had no significant

effect on overall appearance or subjective color evaluation for the six muscles. Muscle

discoloration of the Deep Pectoral, Infraspinatus, and Triceps brachii was not effected by post-

mortem aging, nor did post-mortem aging have an effect on overall appearance for the three day

retail display period for these muscles. However post-mortem aging had a significant effect on

objective color values (L*, a*, b*). The greatest impact of post-mortem aging on objective color

(L*, a*, b*) values was observed between the five and twelve day post-mortem aging periods.

Between these two aging periods the muscles became darker, redder and more yellow. The

muscles then retained this color throughout the remaining aging periods (up to 26 days of age).

Although there was a significant effect of post-mortem aging on objective color, the overall

impact on veal muscle characteristics was small.









Table 4-1. Aging period assignment.


Day 5

In out


Day 12

in out


Day 19


Day 26


In out in out


1 3/17

2 3/17


5 3/17


8 3/17

9 3/17

10

11


3/20

3/20


3/20


3/20

3/20


3/24


3/24


3/24


3/24


3/26

3/26


12 3/19 3/22

13 3/19 3/22

14

15 3/19 3/22


3/26

3/26


3/27


3/27


3/27


3/27


3/29

3/29


3/31


3/31


3/31

3/31


4/3 4/7


4/3 4/7


4/5 4/9


4/2 4/5


3/29

3/29


4/10

4/10

4/10


4/10


4/10


4/12


4/12

4/12


4/12


18 3/19 3/22 3/26 3/29
1 Left sides were assigned to lower aging period for carcasses with odd numbers.
2. Right sides were assigned to lower aging periods for carcasses with even numbers.


Carcass









Table 4-2. Average muscle weights (standard deviation) of muscle from the veal chuck.1
Muscle In Case Wt.2 Out of Case Packaging Retail Display
Wt.3 Purge % 4 Purge % 5
COM .39 (.09) .38 (.08) 0.01 0.03
DEP .23 (.05) .22 (.05) 0.02 0.03
INF .85 (.11) .83 (.11) 0.01 0.02
SEV .82 (.14) .81 (.14) 0.01 0.02
SUP .52 (.09) .51 (.09) 0.01 0.02
TRB .81 (.12) .80 (.12) 0.01 0.02
1 Average weight for portion of muscle; 2Denude weight of muscle in lbs;3 Weight of muscle
after four days of retail display; 4 Loss due to vacuum packaging for post-mortem aging;5
Percent of beginning weight lost due to retail display

Table 4-3. Days of post-mortem aging effects on subjective overall appearance.
Days of post-mortem aging

Muscle 5 12 19 26

COM 6.6a 5.7c 6.2ab 5.8bc

DEP 6.7 6.7 6.8 6.9
INF 6.7 6.3 6.3 6.4
SEV 6.7a 6.0b 6.5a 6.2ab
SUP 6.6ab 6.5b 7.0a 6.8ab
TRB 6.8c 6.5 6.5 6.9
Scale of 1-8 with 8 =extremely desirable, 1= Extremely undesirable; 2Means within same rows
with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).










Table 4-4. Days of post-mortem aging effects on subjective color evaluation. 1
Days of post-mortem aging


Muscle

COM

DEP


INF

SEV

SUP


3.2

3.4a


3.7a

3.4

3.3a

3.2

3.2b


2.9c

3.2

3.1b


3.4c

3.3

3.1ab

3.3

3.1b


TRB 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.4
1 Color evaluation using USDA pork color scale (1-5).
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).

Table 4-5. Effects of post-mortem aging on subjective color evaluations by days in the case.
Days of post-mortem aging


Days in Case

0

1

2


5

3.2bc

3.5a

3.3ab

3.4a


19

3.2c

3.2b


12

3.4b

3.4a

3.4a

3.3ab


26

3.7a

3.1b

3.1c

3.1c


1 Color evaluation using USDA pork color scale (1-5).
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).










Table 4-6. Effects of post-mortem aging on muscle discoloration. 1
Days of post-mortem aging


Muscle

COM

DEP

INF

SEV

SUP

TRB


5

7.5a

7.6

7.5

7.4a

7.3

7.5ab


12

6.5b

7.3

7.0

6.8b

7.3

7.1ab


6.9b


7.1ab

7.5

7.0b


6.8b


1 Scale of 1-8 with 8 = No discoloration, 1 = 100% discoloration
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).

Table 4-7. Days of post-mortem aging effects on subjective muscle purge scores.
Days of post-mortem aging


Muscle

COM

DEP

INF

SEV

SUP


5

5.9b

5.9 b

6.0a

5.8 b

6.0a


12

5.9ab

5.9ab

5.9a

6.0a

5.9a


5.9a

6.0a

6.0a

5.9a

5.9a


5.7c

6.0a

5.7b

5.7b

5.5b


TRB 5.9a 5.9a 6.0a 5.8b
1Scale 1-6 with 6 = none detected, 1 = abundant.
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).









Table 4-8. Effects of post-mortem aging on subjective purge evaluations by days in the case. 1
Days of post-mortem aging

Days in Case 5 12 19 26

0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0

1 6.0a 5.9a 6.0a 5.7b

2 5.8b 5.8ab 5.9a 5.8b

3 5.8a 5.9a 5.9a 5.5b
1 Scale 1-6 with 1 = abundant purge, 6 = none detected.
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).

Table 4-9. Days of post-mortem aging effects on L* values. 1
Days of post-mortem aging

Muscle 5 12 19 26

COM 52.8b 50.8b 55.0a 54.7a

DEP 52.7b 52.8b 53.9a 54.2

INF 53.1 53.0 53.6 53.4

SEV 52.9b 53.6ab 53.6a 54.1a

SUP 55.4a 53.9b 55.9a 56.0a

TRB 52.6c 53.0bc 54.2a 53.7ab
1Range of 0 to 100 where 0 is absolute black and 100 is absolute white.
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).









Table 4-10. Days of Post-mortem aging effects on a* values (redness). 1
Days of post-mortem aging

Muscle 5 12 19 26

COM 16.3c 20.9a 19.6b 19.3b

DEP 15.0b 21.5a 21.8a 22.6a

INF 15.0b 21.2a 21.4a 22.0a

SEV 16.1b 20.9a 20.8a 21.2a

SUP 14.8c 21.3b 21.2b 22.6a

TRB 16.4b 21.3a 20.8a 22.0a
SRange -60 to 60, with positive numbers being red and negative numbers being green.
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).

Table 4-11. Effects of retail display on a* values (redness). 1
Days of Retail Display

Muscle 0 1 2 3

COM 20.1a 19.8a 19.0a 17.1b

DEP 19.4c 21.1a 20.7ab 19.7bc

INF 19.2b 20.5a 20.5a 19.3ab

SEV 20.4a 20.4a 19.8a 18.3b

SUP 19.0b 20.6a 20.3a 20.0ab

TRB 19.8c 21.1a 20.7ab 19.1bc
SRange -60 to 60, with positive numbers being red and negative numbers being green.
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).









Table 4-12. Days of post-mortem aging effects on b* values yellownesss). 1
Days of post-mortem aging

Muscle 5 12 19 26

COM 8.1 9.3a 8.9ab 8.5bc

DEP 6.0b 8.8a 8.5a 8.9a

INF 7.3b 9.2a 9.2a 9.7a

SEV 8.0b 9.5a 9.9a 9.6a

SUP 7.7c 9.2b 9.2b 10.0a

TRB 8.0b 9.5a 9.5a 9.7a
1Range -60 to 60 with positive b* values being yellow and negative values being blue.
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).

Table 4-13. Effects of retail display on b* values yellownesss). 1
Days of Retail Display

Muscle 0 1 2 3

COM 8.2b 9.0a 9.0a 8.7ab

DEP 6.6b 8.6a 8.6a 8.4a

INF 7.6b 9.4a 9.5a 8.9a

SEV 8.7b 9.7a 9.7a 9.0a

SUP 7.6b 9.6a 9.6a 9.4a

TRB 8.1b 9.7a 9.7a 9.2a
1Range -60 to 60 with positive b* values being yellow and negative b* values being blue.
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).









Table 4-14. Interaction between days of aging and retail display on b* values yellownesss). 1
Days of post-mortem aging

Days in Case 5 12 19 26


7.8b
8.6 b


8.7a
9.8a
9.4a


8.7a
9.6a
9.5a


8.5a
9.9a
9.9a


3 8.4b 9.1a 9.0a 9.3a
1 Range -60 to 60 with positive b* values being yellow and negative b* values being blue.
2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).


8
7.5
7
6.5
6
5.5
5
4.5
4


Days in Case (DIC)


Figure 4-1. Effects of days in case on subjective overall appearance score.
Note: Scale of 1-8 with 8 =extremely desirable, 5=Slightly desirable 1= Extremely
undesirable.


I I IL














(D

CL
CL
t~ 6;.5

6

o 5.5
o 55


12 19
Days of Aging (DOA)


Figure 4-2. Days of post-mortem aging effects on overall appearance score.
Note:1 Means for each aging period over three days of retail display. 2 Scale of 1-8 with
8 =extremely desirable, 5=Slightly desirable 1= Extremely undesirable.





4


0 3.75
o
CO
* 3.5
0
o
O 3.25

S3

S2.75
O
2.5


1 2
Days In Case (DIC)


Figure 4-3. Effects of days in the case on subjective color score.
Note: Color evaluation using USDA pork color scale (1-5).


i~I--i


T
T














9
8.5
8
7.5
7
6.5
6
5.5
5


0 1 2 3
Days in Case (DIC)


Figure 4-4. Muscle discoloration over retail display.
Note: Scale of 1-8 with 8 =No discoloration, 1 = 100% discoloration.





7.8
o
7o 7.6
.2 7.4
0 7.2
S7
o 6.8
6.6
6.4
0 5 12 19 26

Days of Aging (DOA)

Figure 4-5. Overall means for discoloration for each aging period. 1
Note: 1 Scale of 1-8 with 8 = No discoloration, 1 = 100% discoloration
2 Means for each aging period over three days of retail display










. 6.25

a)


0 5.5
E
45
I-
S5.5
IL


Days in Case (DIC)


Figure 4-6. Muscle purge over days of retail display.'
Note: 1 Scale 1-6 with 1 = abundant purge, 6 =


55
54.5
54
m 53.5
-i 53
52.5


none detected.


Days in Case (DIC)
Figure 4-7. Changes in L* due to days of retail display. 1
Note: 1 Range of 0 to 100 where 0 is absolute black and 100 is absolute white.


--H












54.5

54

(z 53.5
-I
53

52.5

52


12 19
Days of Age (DOA)


Figure 4-8. L* values change over days of postmortem aging. 1
Note: 1 Range of 0 to 100 where 0 is absolute black and 100 is absolute white.


21.5
21
20.5
20
19.5
19
18.5
18
17.5
17


Days in Case (DIC)

Figure 4-9. a* value change over days in retail case. 1
Note: 1 Range -60 to 60, with positive numbers being red and negative numbers being
green.


M e0,^

I- -L


T









CHAPTER 5
EFFECTS OF TOTAL HEME PIGMENTS ON SHELF LIFE STABILITY

Introduction

The concentration and stability of meat pigments are of great importance to all concerned

with shelf-life stability. Not only does color become important to retail outlets, but also to

merchandisers of meat products. Color stability and acceptability is not only important in the

retail sector, but also for food service and institutional industries. According to Hornsey (1956),

the assessment of the depth and stability of color which is determined visually and comparisons

made at the same time by an expert can provide useful information. However, in order to

determine the factors affecting the cause of fading, an objective measurement becomes

necessary. The rate of fading meat pigments can only be studied if a fairly rapid estimation is

used, in which no further oxidative changes take place during the determination. Although

Hornsey conducted experiments using cooked meat products, the methodology he developed can

also determine the change in total heme pigment in raw meat products (Hornsey 1956).

Materials and Methods

Experimental Samples

Three of the nine muscles that were identified in the previous chapters as being the most

promising from the veal chuck were further evaluated to determine how aging and total pigment

content affect shelf life stability. The three muscles include the Infraspinatus, Supraspinatus and

the Triceps brachii. These three muscles were selected due to their adequate performance in the

sensory and shelf life stability portion of the study.

Aging and Display

Each muscle was randomly assigned to one of four aging periods based on the carcass in

which they originated (Table 4-1). After completion of the predetermined aging period, samples









were collected from each of the three muscles to be used as a pre-display hematin sample. The

remaining portion of the muscle was placed in a retail display case for three days of display

(single tiered flat cases at 7 20 C, with fluorescent lighting of 85 foot candles). After three

days of display, muscles were removed from the retail display case and a sample was taken to be

used as an ending hematin sample. The samples were packaged in individual sample bags and

frozen at -40 20C until pigment extraction was conducted.

Total Pigment and Heme Iron Procedure

The procedure used was developed by Hornsey (1956) to rapidly extract pigments from

cooked cured pork. Due to small samples taken, the procedure was adapted to fit the needs of our

project where sample sizes were smaller and less of each reagent was used. The extraction

method uses an acetone-acid mixture that is filtered then analyzed with a spectrophotometer. The

absorbance reading is then plugged into an equation to determine total pigment (ppm). Aliquots

of 2.52 grams of ground sample, free of fat and connective tissue, were placed in a 20 ml

homogenizing flask. 5 ml of acetone-acid mixture was added and each sample was homogenized

for 30 seconds. After homogenization an additional 5 ml of the acetone-acid mixture was added

and samples were placed in a centrifuge for 10 minutes at 2200g. Samples were then filtered and

absorbance measurements were taken at 640 nm against reagent blank. To calculate total

pigment (Hematin ppm) the absorbance was multiplied by 680 and divided by the sample

weight.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was conducted using the SAS proc mixed procedure. Hematin content

for each muscle was the dependent variable explored, with muscle, retail display period and

aging period used as independent variables.









Summary of Results and Discussion

Muscle type had an overall effect on total pigments (P < .05). Comparing each muscle, the

heme pigment content of the Supraspinatus was statistically higher than that of the Infraspinatus

and the Triceps brachii (P<.05), but the Infraspinatus and the Triceps brachii were similar in

hematin content (P>.05).

When analyzed by muscle type, the total pigments within each muscle were not

significantly different (P>.05) after three days of retail display. The amount of total pigments in

the samples remained the same after three days of retail display which leads to the conclusion

that three days of retail display has no effect on pigment concentration (pigment not purged out).

The only muscle affected by days of post-mortem aging on hematin content was the

Infraspinatus. Hematin content was affected between the five and twelve day aging periods with

a significant increase (P<.05) in total pigments between the first two aging periods. The hematin

content of the other two muscles was not affected by days of post-mortem aging.

Conclusion

Although this study did not present a technique useful in determining shelf life stability of

muscles from the veal chuck, the Hematin content extracted from these muscles lead to

conclusions that are important to the entire study. The first conclusion that can be made is that

the carcasses in the study were from a group of calves that were fed a similar diet. According to

Miltenburg et al (1992), different levels of dietary iron can affect the amount of total muscle

heme pigment. The similarities found among the hematin content of thes muscles from each

animal show that the animals were fed similar levels of dietary iron. The total pigment content

measured also leads to the conclusion that decreases or increases in hematin have no effect on

shelf life stability of the three muscles presented. Although no other research was found that

compared hematin content with shelf life stability of fresh veal, the research presented above









concludes that no definitive determination of shelf life stability can be obtained by measuring of

total pigments in fresh veal.









CHAPTER 6
CORRELATION BETWEEN MUSCLE COLOR, CARCASS MEASURED COLOR AND
TENDERNESS

Introduction

Veal is offered for sale to consumers at generally higher prices than other protein sources.

Boleman et al. (1995) demonstrated that consumers are willing to pay for tenderness, and there is

a strong correlation between price and tenderness among cuts of beef. The veal industry is

similar in a way that prices usually reflect product tenderness as well as consumer acceptability

of color. In the beef industry, marbling score is currently used to segregate and price beef

carcasses, and has been shown to be related to beef palatability when examined across a wide

range of marbling levels (Smith et al., 1984). However, in the veal industry, two different factors

are used to grade carcasses. Lean color and degree of feathering and flank fat streaking, instead

of marbling scores and maturity scores are used to complete the grading standard for veal

carcasses. For beef, there seems to be a relationship between ultimate muscle pH and(or) muscle

color and meat tenderness (Purchas, 1990; Jeremiah et al., 1991; Watanabe et al., 1996). This

portion of the study was conducted to determine whether objective measures of flank color and

Longissimus dorsi color could be used to segregate veal carcasses into merchandising groups

(USDA grades), as well as correlating individual muscle color to expected eating satisfaction.

Materials and Methods

Eighteen veal carcasses with USDA Choice quality grade and known slaughter date were

randomly selected at two separate commercial veal processors. Before chucks were removed,

objective color measurements were taken from the carcass Rectus abdominus (flank area) and

longissimus dorsi muscle at the tenth rib from each carcass using using a Minolta CR-310

Chroma meter at 48 hours post-mortem. Veal chucks were taken directly from the fabrication

lines at the respective processing plant and then dissected by a professional de-boner to obtain









the following muscles: Complexus (COM), Deep Pectoral (DEP), Infraspinatus (INF), Serratus

Ventralis (SEV), Supraspinatus (SUP), and Triceps Brachii (TRB). The muscles were allowed to

bloom for 15 minutes and color measurements were taken using a Minolta CR-310 Chroma

meter. After color measurements were obtained, each muscle was cut in half to be divided

between the University of Florida and the University of Nebraska for further evaluation. Each

muscle was vacuum packaged using a roll stock packager and boxed for shipment.

The portion of muscle that was shipped to the University of Nebraska was assigned to an

aging regimen where it was stored for one of five aging periods at 3.8 + 20 C. The aging periods

were three, five, ten, seventeen and twenty four days postmortem. After the aging period, the

muscles were cooked, cored and sheared according to AMSA (1995) guidelines, and Warner-

Bratzler shear force values for each muscle were obtained.

After the data was gathered, shear force values were correlated with flank and longissimus

color scores using Pearsons square method to find the relationship between objective color

measurements and Warner-Bratzler shear force values. The comparisons were made based upon

carcass color measurements as well as color measurements for each individual muscle used in

the study.

Summary of Results and Discussion

For individual muscles from the veal chuck, it was found that objective color

measurements alone were not sufficient to predict tenderness. For all muscles, excluding the

Infraspintaus, b* values had the highest correlation to Warner Bratzler shear force values but the

correlation coefficients were low (r values range from -.05 to -.48). Supported by a similar study

conducted by Wulf et. al. (1996) where color measurements were used in beef to predict

tenderness, it was also found that b* values had the highest correlation with tenderness (R2

-.38).









Correlation of carcass color measurements to Warner Bratzler Shear Force values, L* a*

b* values showed higher correlation to tenderness than color measurements from individual

muscles, but it is not possible to identify one value that correlates color and tenderness. These

objective color measurements were more often closely related to muscles from the three and five

day aging periods than those of the other three longer aging periods.

Conclusion

This data identified no one color attribute that significantly related to shear values of the

muscles from the veal chuck evaluated in this study. Color measurement from the carcass was

not related to shear force values of the veal chuck. Although identifying a certain attribute that

affects tenderness would be a huge advancement, the measurements obtained in this study were

not statistically strong enough to make a definite decision in relating color to tenderness.









CHAPTER 7
OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Preliminary Evaluation of Nine Muscles

Weights and Dimensions

Upon proposal of this study, the chance of finding muscles too small for

evaluation was of concern because of the carcass sizes and weights. After dissection of

the nine muscles presented in chapter three, it was determined that eight out of the nine

muscles removed were of useable size and weight. The only muscle of concern was the

Teres major, which was small and did not represent a substantial percentage of carcass

weight. The concerns that this muscle would not be feasible to remove grew because

dissection of the muscle is tedious and the room for error was small. Although small and

difficult to dissect, the positive palatability attributes of this muscle may create value that

out weighs the cost of extraction (Table 3-2).

Industry Evaluation

Table 3-3 gives some applicable cooking methods that worked well for each

muscle and also gives some insight on the types of further processing that was suggested

by the chefs to further enhance the products. It should be noted that the sensory data that

was obtained supports the amount of further processing needed for each individual

muscle. The most tender muscles (Infraspinatus, Teres major, Complexus) will require

minimal processing while the toughest muscles ( Splenius, Serratus ventralis,

Rhomboideus) will require a more aggressive tenderization method to improve

tenderness to a level more acceptable to foodservice. Similar to studies completed on

muscles from the beef chuck, some muscles may require more time and expense to create









acceptable palatability attributes, while some can be used in their original form. To fully

optimize the value of the less tender muscles, further processing may be needed.

Sensory Evaluation

Sensory evaluation revealed the most-tender muscle of the veal chuck was the

Infraspinatus. On a scale of 1-8 with 1 being extremely tough and 8 being extremely

tender, the Infraspinatus was evaluated at 6.9 or moderately tender. The Teres Major was

found to be not significantly different (P > .05) from the Infraspinatus with a tenderness

score of 6.8. The toughest muscle in the study was found to be the Rhomboideus which

was evaluated at 5.8 on the same 1-8 scale. The Rhomboideus was significantly lower (P

> .05) in tenderness from all other muscles in the study (Table 3-4).

Table 3-5 depicts the sensory evaluation data for the juiciness of veal muscles. On a

scale from 1-8 with 8 being extremely juicy and 1 being extremely dry, it was determined

that the Complexus was the juiciest muscle with a sensory evaluation score of 6.5 or

moderately juicy. The Supraspinatus was found to be not significantly different (P > .05)

with a score of 6.3. The driest muscle in the study was found to be the Triceps Brachii

with an evaluation score of 5.8. It was discovered that the Infraspinatus and the Splenius

were not significantly different (P > .05) from the Triceps brachii with scores of 5.9 and

5.8, respectively.

On a scale from 1-8 with 1 being extremely bland and 8 being extremely intense,

the Supraspinatus had the most intense beef flavor with a sensory score of 5.1. The

Complexus was not significantly different (P > .05) with a score of 5.0 or slightly intense.

The blandest muscle of the study was the Splenius with a score of 4.0 with no significant

difference (P > .05) from the Infraspinatus or the Splenius with evaluation scores of 4.5









and 4.3, respectively. Most of these muscles were found to be slightly bland when

evaluated for beef flavor (Table 3-6).

Table 3-7 depicts the amount of connective tissue evaluated in each muscle of the

study. It should be noted that large visible seams of insoluble connective tissue were

removed from the Infraspinatus after dissection and from the Triceps brachii after

cooking. On a scale of 1-8 with 8 being no connective tissue detected and 1 being an

abundant amount of connective tissue present, the Infraspinatus was found to have the

least amount of connective tissue present with a sensory score of 7.3. The Teres major

was not significantly different (P > .05) from the Infraspinatus or the Triceps brachii with

an evaluation score of 7.2. The muscle with the most connective tissue present was the

Rhomboideus with a score of 5.8 which was significantly different (P > .05) from all

other muscles in the study.

Upon completion of sensory evaluation of muscles, no extreme off-flavors were

found in any muscle. The off-flavors that appeared most frequently included milky,

metallic and grassy. The muscle with the least amount of off-flavor detected on a scale of

1-6 with 1 being extreme off-flavor and 6 being no off-flavor detected was the Triceps

Brachii with a sensory score of 5.8. This score was found to be not significantly different

(P > .05) from the Rhomboideus, Complexus, Splenius, Supraspinatus, Deep pectoral and

Serratus ventralis. The muscle with the most extreme off-flavor was the Teres major with

a score of 5.5, which was not significantly different from the Deep pectoral, Serratus

ventralis or the Infraspinatus (Table 3-8).

After completion of the first phase of the study, it was determined that further

evaluation of the muscles was needed. To reduce costs and fully explore the most









promising muscles, six of the nine muscles were selected for the second phase of the

study. These muscles were determined to be the most desirable for palatability attributes

and tenderness.

Further Evaluation of Six Muscles

Retail Display

For further evaluation, a retail display of the six muscles identified by phase one of

the study was conducted. It was found that when placed in a three day retail trial the six

muscles in this study behaved the same for overall appearance, subjective color and

muscle purge. Post-mortem aging had no significant effect on overall appearance or

subjective color evaluation for the six muscles. Muscle discoloration of the Deep

Pectoral, Infraspinatus, and Triceps brachii was not effected by post-mortem aging, nor

did post-mortem aging have an effect on overall appearance for the three day retail

display period for these muscles. However post-mortem aging had a significant effect on

objective color values (L*, a*, b*). The greatest impact of post-mortem aging on

objective color (L*, a*, b*) values was observed between the five and twelve day post-

mortem aging periods. Between these two aging periods the muscles became darker,

redder and more yellow. The muscles then retained this color throughout the remaining

aging periods (up to 26 days of age). Although there was a significant effect of post-

mortem aging on objective color, the overall impact on veal muscle characteristics was

small.

Total Pigment

In hopes of finding a way of determining the integrity of muscle color during retail

display, three muscles were sampled to determine if the change in color pigments had an

effect on retail display acceptability. It was found that muscle type had an overall effect









on total pigments (P<.05). Comparing each muscle, the heme pigment content of the

Supraspinatus was statistically different from the Infraspinatus and the Triceps brachii

(P<.05), but the Infraspinatus and the Triceps brachii were similar in hematin content

(P>.05). When broken down individually, the total pigments within each muscle were not

significantly different (P>.05) after three days of retail display. The amount of total

pigments in the samples remained the same after three days of retail display which leads

to the conclusion that total pigment change during retail display has no effect on shelf-life

stability for these three muscles. The only muscle affected by days of post-mortem aging

was the Infraspinatus. Hematin content was affected between the five and twelve day

aging periods with a significant increase (P<.05) in total pigments between the first two

aging periods. The hematin content of the other two muscles was not affected by days of

post-mortem aging.

Although this study did not produce conclusions useful for determining retail shelf

life stability, the Hematin content extracted from these muscles lead to conclusions that

are important to the entire study. The first conclusion that can be made is that the

carcasses in the study were from a group of calves that were fed a similar diet. According

to Miltenburg et al (1992), different levels of dietary iron can affect the amount of total

muscle heme pigment. The similarities found among the hematin content of thes muscles

from each animal show that the animals were fed similar levels of dietary iron. The total

pigment content measured also leads to the conclusion that decreases or increases in

hematin have no effect on shelf life stability of the three muscles presented. Although no

other research was found that compared hematin content with shelf life stability of fresh









veal, the research presented above concludes that no definitive determination of shelf life

stability can be obtained by measuring of total pigments in fresh veal.

Carcass Color and Tenderness

In industry today, the cost of labor is sky rocketing. To reduce the amount of man

hours used in production of meat products, industry is continuously looking for ways to

use instruments for grading and carcass selection. In this section of the study, the process

of using instrumental color measurements for carcass grading was explored. It was found

that carcass color measurements and tenderness were not highly correlated, L* a* b*

values were more closely related to tenderness than color measurements from individual

muscles, but it was not possible to identify one value that that was highly correlated to

tenderness. The objective color measurements were more often closely related to muscles

from the three and five day aging periods than those of the other three longer aging

periods.

When analyzing the data, no one color attribute was determined to have

relationship to tenderness of the muscles from the veal chuck. The data showed that the

color measurement that correlates carcass color to tenderness differed for each muscle. In

some cases the L* value taken from the flank area was the most correlated with

tenderness and other times the a* value taken from the Longissimus muscle was most

correlated. Although identifying a certain attribute that affects tenderness would be a

huge advancement, the measurements obtained in this study are not statistically strong

enough to make a definite decision in relating carcass color measurements in the flank or

Longissimus muscle to tenderness.









Value Optimization

Upon completing an evaluation of six muscles from the veal chuck it is evident that

the chance for adding value to the veal chuck is prominent. Although complete dissection

of these muscles is tedious and somewhat time consuming, industry leaders can take this

information and use it as a way to further add value to their product. The main purpose of

this project was achieved as the research found muscles that were acceptable and useable

and could be a great starting point to merchandising the veal chuck in a way that would

be more profitable to the veal industry. Recent work, identical to the work presented here,

has been conducted by the University of Florida and the University of Nebraska for over

a decade. In an effort to add value to the beef carcass, it was found that to bring attention

to the potential use of under-utilized muscles, it must be presented to leaders in the

industry both on the supply and retail sides of the business. Evaluation of 39 muscles

from the beef chuck and round found a few muscles that offered a more acceptable

product at a value price. One of the most impressive and successful steaks found in prior

research is the "Flat Iron Steak", in which over 92 million pounds were sold in the U.S. in

2006 (Calkins and Sullivan, 2007). These numbers show that the muscle profiling and

value optimization research is useful and successful (Calkins and Sullivan, 2007). For the

veal industry to be successful in using this information, industry leaders must take the

initiative to further process and de-bone their product. The recent success in the beef

industry can be paralleled in the veal industry by simply using more innovative

fabrication methods and producing products that consumers demand and are willing to

pay for.









LIST OF REFERENCES


AMI. 1995. Meat facts. Am. Meat. Instit., Washington, DC.

AMSA. 1995. Research guidelines for cookery, sensory evaluation and instrumental
tenderness measurements of fresh meat. National Live Stock and Meat Board,
Chicago, IL.

AMSA. 2003. AMSA guidelines for meat color evaluation. Savoy, II. American Meat
Science Association.

Aporta, J., B. Hernandez, and C. Sanudo. 1996. Veal coulour assessment with three
wavelengths. Meat Sci. 44:113-123.

BOE. 1997. 1997 BOE (Boletin Oficial del Estado). Actualizacion del catalog
official de razas de Ganado de Espana, BOE 21/11/97, Real Decreto
1682/1998 de 7 de Noviembre.

Boleman, S. J., S. L. Boleman, R. K. Miller, J. F. Taylor, H. R. Cross, T. L. Wheeler,
M. Koohmaraie, S. D. Shackelford, M. F. Miller, R. L. West, D. D. Johnson,
and J. W. Savell. 1997. Consumer evaluation of beef of known categories of
tenderness. J Anim Sci. 75: 1521-1524.

Calkins, C. R. and Sullivan. 2007. Ranking of beef muscles for tenderness. National
Cattlemen's Beef Association, Centennial, CO.

Davis G.W., G. C. Smith, Z. L. Carpenter, T. R. Dutson, and H. R. Cross. 1979.
Tenderness variations among beef steaks from carcasses of the same USDA
quality grade. J.Anim. Sci. 49: 103-114.

Denoyelle, C., F. Berny. 1999. Objective measurement of veal color for classification
purposes. Meat Sci. 53:203-209.

Eikelenboom, G. 1989. The assessment of veal colour for classification purposes.
Proceedings of the 43rd International Congress of Meat Science and
Technology, Copenhagen.

Epley, R. J. Meat tenderness. 1992. Pages 1-9. University of Minnesota Extension
Service, FO-00856.

Gonzalez, J. M. 2005. Effects of vitamin D3 on goat meat tenderness and color
stability. Master's Thesis, Sul Ross State University, Agricultural and Natural
Resource Sciences.

Hornsey, H. C. 1956. The color of cooked cured pork. Journal of the Science of Food
and Agriculture 7:534-540.










How does a colorimeter work?. Minolta frequently asked questions web site.
Available at:
http://www.colourware.co.uk/cqfaq/q3-12.htm. Accessed Jan 4, 2008.

How does a reflectance spectrophotometer work? Minolta frequently asked questions
web site. Available at: http://www.colourware.co.uk/cqfaq/q3-10.htm.
Accessed Jan 4, 2008.

Huffman, K. L. M. F. Miller, L. C. Hoover, C. K. Wu, H. C. Brittin, and C. B. Ramsey.
1996. Effect of beef tenderness on consumer satisfaction with steaks consumed in
the home and restaurant. J Anim Sci. 74: 91-97.

Jeremiah L. E., A.K.W. Tongand, and L. L. Gibson. 1991. The usefulness of muscle
color and pH for segregating beef carcasses into tenderness groups. Meat Sci. 30:
97-114.

Kim, C. J., and E. S. Lee. 2003. Effects of quality grade on the chemical, physical and
sensory characteristics of Hanwoo (Korean native cattle) beef. Meat Sci.
63:397-405.

Klont R. E., V. M. Barnier, A. van Dijk, F. J. Smulders, A. H. Hoving-Bolink, B.
Hulsegge, and G. Eikelenboom. 2000. Effects of rate of pH fall, time of deboning,
aging period, and their interaction on veal quality characteristics. J Anim Sci.
78:1845-1851.

Kramer, H., and B. H. Twigg. 1970. Taste testing. In: Fundamentals of Quality
Control for the Food Industry. Westport: AVI Publishing Co. p. 120.

Lawrie, R. A. 1979. Meat science (3rd Ed.). Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.

Macleod, G. 1998. The flavour of beef. Pages 27-60 in Flavor of Meat, Meat Products
and Seafoods. F. Shahidi, ed. 2nd ed. Blackie Academic and professional,
London, UK.

Maga, J. A. 1976. The role of sulphur compounds in foods. Part 3; Thiols, CRC
Critical Reviews in Food Sci and Nutri. 7:147-158.

Meilgaard, Morten, Gail Vance Civille, and B. Thomas Carr. 1987. Sensory
evaluation techniques. 2 v. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fl.

Miltenburg, A., T. Wensing, F. J. Smulders, and H. J. Breukink. 1992. Relationship
between blood hemoglobin, plasma and tissue iron, muscle heme pigment,
and carcass color of veal. J Anim Sci. 70: 2766-2772.









Minolta. 1998. Precise color communication: Color control from perception to
instrumentation. Minolta Co., Ltd. Ramsey, NJ.

Mitchell, G. E., J. E. Giles, S. A. Rogers, L. T. Tan, R. J. Naidoo, and D. M.
Ferguson. 1991a. Tenderizing, aging, and thawing effect on sensory,
chemical, and physical properties of beef steaks. J. Food Sci. 56:1125-1129.

Monson, F., C. Sanudo, and I. Sierra. 2004. Influence of cattle breed and ageing time
on textural meat quality. Meat Sci. 68:595-602.

Moody, W. G. 1983. Beef flavor- A review. Food Technol. 37:227-232, 238.

Mottram, D. S. 1998. Flavour formation in meat and meat products: a review. Food
Chem. 62:415-424.

Muir, P. D., J. M. Deaker, and M. D. Bown. 1998a. Effects fo forage and grain based
feeding systems on beef quality: A review. N. Z. J. Agric. Res. 41:623-635.

Obuz, E., M. E. Dikeman, and T. M. Loughin. 2003. Effects of cooking method,
reheating, holding time, and holding temperature on beef longissimus
lumborum and biceps femoris tenderness. Meat Sci 65:841-851.

O'Sullivan, M.G., D.V. Byrne, M. Martens. 2003. Evaluation of pork colour: sensory
colour assessment using trained and untrained sensory panelists. Meat Sci.
63:119-129.

Otremba, M. M., M. E. Dikeman, G. A. Milliken, S. L. Stroda, J. A. Unruh, and E.
Chambers IV. 1999. Interrelationships among evaluations of beef
longissimus and semitendinosus muscle tenderness by Warner Bratzler shear
force, a descriptive texture profile sensory panel, and a descriptive attribute
sensory panel. J. Anim. Sci. 77:865-873.

Ozluturk, A., N. Tuzemen, M. Yanar, N. Esenbuga, and E. Dursun. 2004. Fattening
performance, carcass traits and meat quality characteristics of calves sired by
Charolais, Simmental and Eastern Anatolian Red sires mated to Eastern
Anatolian Red dams. Meat Sci. 67:463-470.

Perez-Severiano, P., A. M. Vivar-Quintana, and I. Revilla. 2006. Determination and
evaluation of the parameters affecting the choice of veal meat of the "Ternera
de Aliste" quality appellation. Meat Sci. 73:491-497.

Platter, W. J., J. D. Tatum, K. E. Belk, P. L. Chapman, J. A. Scanga, and G. C. Smith.
2003. Relationships of consumer sensory ratings, marbling score, and shear
force value to consumer acceptance of beef strip loin steaks. J. Anim. Sci.
81:2741-2750.









Purchas, R. W., X. Yan, and D. G. Hartley. 1999. The influence of a period of ageing on
the relationship between ultimate pH and shear values of beef m. longissimus
thoracis. Meat Sci. 51:135-141.

Revilla, I., A. M. Vivar-Quintana. 2006. Effect of breed and ageing time on meat
quality and sensory attributes of veal calves of the "Ternera de Aliste" Quality
Label. Meat Sci. 73:189-195.

Roeber, D. L., K. E. Belk, J. D. Tatum, J. W. Wilson and G. C. Smith. 2001. Effects
of three levels of a-tocopheryl acetate supplementation to feedlot cattle on
performance of beef cuts during retail display. J. Anim. Sci. 79:1814-1820.

Sanders, S. K., J. B. Morgan, D. M. Wulf, J. D. Tatum, S. N. Williams, and G. C.
Smith. 1997. Vitamin E supplementation of cattle and shelf life of beef for the
Japenese Market. J. Anim. Sci. 75:2634-2640.

Shackelford, S. D., M. Koohmaraie, L. V. Cundiff, K. E. Gregory, G. A. Rohrer, and J.
W. Savell. 1994. Heritabilities and phenotypic and genetic correlations for
bovine post-rigor calpastatin activity, intramuscular fat content, Warner-
Bratzler shear force, retail product yield, and growth rate. J. Anim Sci. 72: 857-
863.

Shahidi, F., (ed). 1994. Flavor of meat and meat products. Pages 1-298, Blackie
Academic and Professional, London, UK.

Shanks, B. C., D. M. Wulf, and R. J. Maddock. 2002. Technical note: The effect of
freezing on Warner Bratzler shear force values of beef longissimus steaks across
several postmortem aging periods. J. Anim. Sci. 80:2122-2125.

Smith, G. C., G. R. Culp, and Z. L. Carpenter. 1978. Postmortem aging of beef
carcasses. J. Food Sci. 43:823-826.

Stelzleni, A. M. 2006. Feeding and aging effects on carcass composition, fatty acid
profiles and sensory attributes of muscles from cull cow carcasses.
Dissertation, University of Florida.

Stubbs, R. L., J. B. Morgan, P. K. Bates, and H. G. Dolezal. 1999. Effect of
supplemental vitamin E on the color and case life of top loin steaks and
ground chuck patties in Modified Atmosphere Case Ready Retail Packaging
Systems. Oklahoma State Univeristy web site. Available at:
http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/research/1999rr/09htm. Accessed Jan 3, 2008.

Torrescano, Gaston, Armida Sanchez Escalante, Begona Gimenez, Pedro Roncales,
and Jose Antonio Beltrain. 2003. Shear values of raw samples of 14 bovine
muscles and their relation to muscle collagen characteristics. Meat Sci. 64:85-
91.










USDA. 1995. Milk production, dispositions and income/Livestock Statistics. U.S.
Dept. of Agri., Wash., DC.

Van Putten, G. 1982. Welfare in veal calf units. Vet. Rec. 111:437.

Vargas, D. N., A. E. Down, D. S. Webb, H. Han, J. B. Morgan, And H. G. Dolezal.
1999. Effects of dietary supplementation of feedlot steers with vitamins E
and D3 on live performance, carcass traits, shelf life attributes and longissimus
muscle tenderness. Oklahoma State University web site. Available at:
http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/research/1999rr/11htm. Accessed Jan 6, 2008.

Watanabe A., C. C. Daly, and C. E. Devine. 1996. The effects of the ultimate pH of
meat on tenderness changes during ageing. Meat Sci. 42: 67-78.

Wheeler, T. L., S. D. Shackelford, and M. Koohmaraie. 1996. Sampling, cooking, and
coring effects on Warner Bratzler shear force vales in beef. J. Anim. Sci.
74:1553-1562.

Wheeler, T. L., S. D. Shackelford, L. P. Johnson, M. F. Miller, R. K. Miller, and M.
Koohmaraie. 1997. A comparison of Warner Bratzler shear force assessment
within and among institutions. J. Anim. Sci. 75:2423-2432.

Wheeler, T. L., S. D. Shackelford, and M. Koohmaraie. 1999. Tenderness
classification of beef: III. Effect of the interaction between end point
temperature and tenderness on Warner Bratzler shear force of beef
longissimus. J. Anim. Sci. 77:400-407.

Wilson, L. L., C. L. Stull, R. G. Warner. 2004. Special fed veal. Pages 1-9. South
Dakota State University Extension and Research Department of Animal and
Range Sciences.

Wulf, D. M., J. D. Tatum, R. D. Green, J. B. Morgan, B. L. Golden, and G. C. Smith.
1996. Genetic influences on beef longissimus palatability in charolais- and
limousin-sired steers and heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 74: 2394-2405.









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Brian Sapp was born in the small town of Avon Park, Florida in 1983. Growing up

in the small town of Lake Placid, Florida, Brian learned many things about hard work and

life. Working through the years on a flower bulb farm, Brian learned the importance of

hard work and dedication, as well as the importance of an education. While attending

Lake Placid High School, Brian worked his summers as a welder, fiberglass repairer,

caladium bulb farmer and mechanic. Upon graduating in May of 2001, Brian continued

his education by attending South Florida Community College, where he would earn his

AA degree in May of 2004. Growing up a Gators fan, Brian's ultimate dream was to

attend the University of Florida which he achieved in August of 2004. Moving to

Gainesville, Florida was a huge change of pace for Brian, but the big city was not too

much to keep him from achieving Cum Laude Status upon graduating with his B.S.

degree in food and resource economics in May of 2006.

While attending the University of Florida, Brian was a member of the 2005 2006

Meat Animal Evaluation Team as well as an active member in the University of Florida

Block and Bridle Club where he served as Treasurer for the 2005 2006 school years. To

spend some free time wisely, Brian took a part time job at the University of Florida

Meats Processing Facility, where he would find his passion for processing animals and

cutting meat. Upon graduating in 2006, Brian was offered a position as a graduate student

in the animal science department at the University of Florida. Knowing that his education

was important, Brian took the position in hopes of learning more about meats and meat

processing. While attending graduate school, Brian served as a teaching assistant for

various meat processing and evaluation classes and also helped coach the 2007 and 2008

meat animal evaluation teams. Upon graduation in August of 2008, Brian will move to









Southwest Georgia to take a position as a meat processing plant manager, in hopes of

furthering his education in the real world.





PAGE 1

1 VALUE OPTIMIZATION OF MUSCLES FROM THE VEAL CHUCK By BRIAN G. SAPP A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2008

PAGE 2

2 2008 Brian G. Sapp

PAGE 3

3 To my family, For always being there for me

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It is evident and certain that m any people have helped me in my endeavor to further my education. Whether it be my first grade teacher or my senior year history teacher, I would like to say thanks. The most important people I must thank are my family members. Without their support and knowledge and wisdom I would be st uck in a world of boredom. Thanks Mom and Dad, Jesse and Katie for always being there for me and helping me through the hard times and joining me for the good. I would like to thank a ll of my cousins for keeping me on track and giving me advice even when I didnt ask for it. Tha nks to my friend Keri for urging me into this educational endeavor and Rochelle for helping me complete it. I would like to thank my office mates Ryan Dijkhuis and John Gonzalez for answ ering all the dumb questions and helping me with anything in the world; without these two guys, life would be miserable. I would like to extend the greatest thanks in the world to the meat lab guys, Tommy and Byron, for helping make this all possible and lending a hand up when I needed a lift. Thanks go out to Larry Eubanks as he was like a second dad to me throughout my entire college career here at the university. He taught me many things, kept me humble, and supported me day in and day out, whether it was through criticism or wisdom. Finally, thank you to all the members of my committee. Dr. Williams for the insight to meat processing, Dr. Fairchild for always having something for me to read (I tried to write like 800 pages just to get you back), and to the best advisor anyone could ask for Dr. Johnson, who not only taught me the importance of meat science, but gave me insight to life and the world to come.

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...............................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................. ..........7 LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................................................................................8 ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................................9 CHAP TER 1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................11 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE.................................................................................................14 Determination of Sensory Attributes for Muscles from the Veal Chuck............................... 14 Palatability of Meat......................................................................................................... 14 Defining Color Composition of Meat.............................................................................. 17 Visual panel..............................................................................................................18 Instrumental color technologies............................................................................... 21 Defining and Measuring Tenderness...............................................................................27 Trained Sensory Panel..............................................................................................27 Warner Bratzler Shear Force.................................................................................... 33 Total Pigment and Heme Iron......................................................................................... 37 3 CHARACTERIZING MUSCLES FROM THE VEAL CHUCK BY WEIGHT, DIMENSIONS AND SENSORY ATTRIBUTES................................................................. 49 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........49 Materials and Methods...........................................................................................................49 Experimental samples...................................................................................................... 49 Weights, Dimensions and Aging.....................................................................................50 Sensory Evaluation..........................................................................................................50 Food Service Evaluation..................................................................................................51 Results and Discussion......................................................................................................... ..51 Weights............................................................................................................................51 Industry Evaluation.........................................................................................................51 Sensory Evaluation..........................................................................................................52 4 EFFECTS OF AGING ON RETAIL DI SPLAY ATTRIBUTES AND COLOR OF MUSCLES FROM THE VEAL CHUCK .............................................................................. 61 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........61 Materials and Methods:..........................................................................................................61 Experimental Samples..................................................................................................... 61

PAGE 6

6 Aging of Muscles............................................................................................................62 Shelf-Life and Color Evaluation..................................................................................... 62 Statistical Analysis.......................................................................................................... 62 Summary of Results and Discussion......................................................................................63 Conclusion..............................................................................................................................68 5 EFFECTS OF TOTAL HEME PIGMENTS ON SHELF LIFE STABILI TY.......................81 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........81 Materials and Methods...........................................................................................................81 Experimental Samples..................................................................................................... 81 Aging and Display...........................................................................................................81 Total Pigment and Heme Iron Procedure........................................................................ 82 Statistical Analysis.......................................................................................................... 82 Summary of Results and Discussion......................................................................................83 Conclusion..............................................................................................................................83 6 CORRELATION BETWEEN MUSCLE COLO R, CARCASS MEAS URED COLOR AND TENDERNESS............................................................................................................. 85 Introduction................................................................................................................... ..........85 Materials and Methods...........................................................................................................85 Summary of Results and Discussion......................................................................................86 Conclusion..............................................................................................................................87 7 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND I MPLICATIONS.......................................................... 88 Preliminary Evaluation of Nine Muscles................................................................................88 Weights and Dimensions.................................................................................................88 Industry Evaluation.........................................................................................................88 Sensory Evaluation..........................................................................................................89 Further Evaluation of Six Muscles.........................................................................................91 Retail Display..................................................................................................................91 Total Pigment.................................................................................................................. 91 Carcass Color and Tenderness......................................................................................... 93 Value Optimization......................................................................................................... 94 LIST OF REFERENCES...............................................................................................................95 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.......................................................................................................100

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Average weights (standard deviations ) of m uscles from the veal chuck........................... 553-2 Average measurements (standard deviat ion) of muscles from the veal chuck. ................ 563-3 Industry evaluation........................................................................................................ .....573-4 Overall tenderness of veal muscles.................................................................................... 583-5 Juiciness of veal muscles...................................................................................................583-6 Beef flavor................................................................................................................ .........593-7 Connective tissue.......................................................................................................... .....593-8 Off-flavor................................................................................................................. ..........604-1 Aging period assignment................................................................................................... 694-2 Average muscle weights (standard deviat ion) of muscle from the veal chuck.................. 704-3 Days of post-mortem aging eff ects on subjective overall appearance............................... 704-4 Days of post-mortem aging eff ects on subjective color evaluation................................... 714-5 Effects of post-mortem aging on subjectiv e color evaluations by days in the case. ......... 714-6 Effects of post-mortem ag ing on muscle discoloration..................................................... 724-7 Days of post-mortem aging effect s on subjective muscle purge scores. .......................... 724-8 Effects of post-mortem aging on subjectiv e purge evaluations by days in the case. ........734-9 Days of post-mortem aging effects on L* values. .............................................................734-10 Days of Post-mortem aging e ffects on a* values (redness). ............................................. 744-11 Effects of retail displa y on a* values (redness). ............................................................... 744-12 Days of post-mortem aging effects on b* values (yellowness)......................................... 754-13 Effects of retail displa y on b* values (yellowness). .........................................................754-14 Interaction between days of aging and retail display on b* values (yellowness). ............ 76

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2-1 The Munsell color solid.....................................................................................................40 2-2 The XYZ Triangle of the CIE System...............................................................................41 2-3 The CIE horseshoe-shaped spect rum locus showing percent Y........................................ 42 2-4 1931 x, y, chromaticity diagram........................................................................................ 43 2-5 Spectral sensitivity corresponding to the hum an eye and colo r matching functions of the 1931 Standard Observer.................................................................................................1 2-6 Three-dimensional representation of co lor solid for the L* a* b* color space. ................ 45 2-7 Hunter L, a, b solid....................................................................................................... .....46 2-8 a* b* chromaticity diagram............................................................................................... 47 2-9 Steps in selecting a trained panel....................................................................................... 48 4-1 Effects of days in case on s ubjective overall appearance score. ........................................ 76 4-2 Days of post-mortem aging effects on overall appearance score. ..................................... 77 4-3 Effects of days in the cas e on subjective color score. ........................................................ 77 4-4 Muscle discoloration over retail display. ..........................................................................78 4-5 Overall means for discoloration for each aging period...................................................... 78 4-6 Muscle purge over days of retail display. .......................................................................... 79 4-7 Changes in L* due to days of retail display....................................................................... 79 4-8 L* values change over days of postmortem aging............................................................. 80 4-9 a* value change over days of postmortem aging............................................................... 80

PAGE 9

9 Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science VALUE OPTIMIZATION OF MUSCLES FROM THE VEAL CHUCK By Brian Sapp August 2008 Chair: Dwain Johnson Major: Animal Sciences Objectives were to characterize muscles from the veal chuck and evaluate the performance and usefulness of these muscles. For Phase one, IMPS 308 and IMPS 309 were purchased from two separate veal packers, all were from USDA Choice or higher veal carcasses. The chucks were dissected to obtain the following muscle s: Complexus (COM), Deep Pectoral (DEP), Infraspinatus (INF), Rhomboidus (RHM), Serra tus Ventralis (SEV), Splenius (SPL), Supraspinatus (SUP), Triceps Brachii (TRB) a nd the Teres Major (TER). Each muscle was weighed to determine percent yield. The heaviest muscle and highest percentage of chuck was the TRB. The lightest muscle and lowest perc entage of chuck was the TER. Muscles were vacuum packaged individually and aged fourteen days postmortem prior to freezing. For sensory evaluation, steaks were grilled on Hamilton Beach tabl e top grills to an internal temperature of 71C. Samples were evaluated by a trained panel that scor ed overall tenderness, juiciness, flavor, connective tissue and off-flavor. The INF was the tenderest muscle evaluated. The RHM was significantly lower (P>.05) in tenderness from a ll other muscles in the study. The COM had the highest juiciness score. The SUP was found to be not significantly different (P>.05) from the COM. The muscle with the lowest juiciness sc ore was the TRB. The INF and the SPL did not differ significantly (P>.05) from the TRB juicine ss score. The SUP was found to have the most

PAGE 10

10 intense beef flavor. The COM was not significantly different (P > .05) from the SUP. The muscle with the lowest flavor intensity score was the SPL with and was not significantly different (P > .05) from the INF or the SPL. The INF was found to have the least amount of detectable connective tissue present with th e TER being not significantly different (P > .05) from the INF. The RHM had the highest connectiv e tissue score which significantl y differed (P < .05) from all other muscles in the study. Off-flavor scores were low for all muscles evaluated in this study. For phase two, IMPS 309 were purchased from two separate veal packers, all were from USDA choice or higher veal carcasses. Objective colo r scores were obtained for each carcass at the flank and tenth rib. The muscles ex tracted included the COM, DEP, INF, SEV, SUP, TRB. Color measurements were taken using a Minolta CR310 Chroma meter afte r 15 minutes of bloom time. Muscles were randomly assigned to four aging periods to determine the effect of aging time on retail display attributes. Days of post-mortem aging had an overall effect on subjective evaluations for overall appearance (P < .05) with all muscles reacting similarly when placed in a retail display setting. Postmortem aging had a si gnificant (P < .05) effect on each muscle for subjective color, discoloration and purge. Post -mortem aging significantly affected subjective and objective color scores, concluding longer pe riods of post-mortem aging caused the muscles to become lighter (P < .05). This study found that the veal ch uck contains muscles that will provide a useful application for dry heat cookery when muscles are separated a nd fabricated into steaks and that retail display integrity is affected by postmortem aging time. When the effort is made to further fabricate and process these muscle cuts, the potential for adding value to this low priced primal cut is evident.

PAGE 11

11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION In recent years veal production has been cr iticized by m any people worldwide. With this criticism have come decreased sales and profits for many veal producers and processors. Four main reasons for this increased criticism by the public are 1) the slaughter of young animals tends to stimulate emotional re sponses by the public, 2) techni ques used in the industry are usually objected to by some pe ople (e.g., dietary practices and hous ing for the animals), 3) the veal industry in the U.S. is smaller and newer than most other animal industries, and 4) the results of research on the c ontroversial techniques have b een limited and in most cases contradictory (Lowell et al., 2004) Approximately 800,000 calves enter the U.S. sp ecial fed-veal systems annually (AMI 1995). About 33% of male dairy calves are us ed for bob veal production, and about 40% for special fed veal production l eaving about 25% for the other feeding systems including beef production (Lowell et al., 2004). Calves that ente r the veal production system are usually male dairy calves for which dairy farmers have little use. Calves are usually separated from their mothers one to four days after birth to allow th e dairy producer to harves t milk. The earlier the calf is taken from the cow, the less stressful it is to the cow (Lowell et al., 2004). Calves at this age are extremely susceptible to disease and si cknesses. As veal producers this is a major concern not only in an economical sense, but also for animal welfare reasons. USDA (1995) defines veal as meat from imma ture bovine animals. This broad definition encompasses four specific types of veal: Bob veal Live weight of less than 150 pounds. Special fed veal fed a special milk replacemen t diet and marketed at a live weight of 151 to 400 pounds.

PAGE 12

12 Non special fed veal fed a variety of diet s and marketed at live weights of 151 to 400 pounds. Calves live weight of more than 400 pounds; fed no special diet. Since special fed veal calves were used in the research presented in this thesis, a more indepth definition of this type of veal would be as follows. Special fed veal calves (also referred to as fancy, formula fed or natural veal) are usually fed a milk-based liquid replacement diet that us ually follows a pattern of decreasing the iron content of the diet over the life of the calf to help retain the lighter muscle color that is typical of special fed veal. The calves are raised for 18 to 20 weeks in which they reach a market weight of approximately 400 pounds; most special fed-veal cal ves are currently being raised to a market weight greater than 400 pounds (Lowell et al., 2004). As the veal industry continues its struggles with loss of cons umer interest in its product, the industry is looking for new ways to market veal to make it a more profitable commodity. Most modern marketing of veal products is don e using a farm to fork approach. Convincing and proving to consumers that the an imals are raised and slaughtered humanely and that the product they are buying is wholesome and of expected quality has become the most common approach to regaining the consumers interest. To further pr ofit from harvesting veal and utilizing carcasses, processors have become interested in increasing the value of certain muscles that are usually of lesser value. Recent studies conduc ted by scientists at the University of Florida in conjunction with the University of Nebraska have characte rized numerous muscles from the beef chuck and round (Calkins and Sullivan, 2007). The studies conducted have revealed significant positive palatability attributes of many of these musc les. A similar characterization of muscles was performed in this study to characterize nine muscle s from the veal chuck in search of ways to better utilize these muscles and add value to the veal chuck. Conclusions from previous studies

PAGE 13

13 have revealed that adding value can be achieve d by cutting certain muscles into steaks rather than selling them as part of a roas t or grinding them into ground beef. The objectives of the current research in clude 1) characterizing veal muscles by determining average sizes and weights of indivi dual muscles from the chuck, 2) determining quality of these muscles and determining eati ng experiences for each of these muscles, 3) examining the effects of post-mortem aging on shel f-life stability of chuck muscles while in a retail display setting (including stability of color) and finally 4) examining the effects of aging and retail-display on variations in total pigmen t and heme iron content of muscles from the chuck.

PAGE 14

14 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Determination of Sensory Attributes for Musc les from the Veal Chuck Palatability of Meat There ar e three major palatability attributes th at are often characterized to classify meat and meat products. These three attr ibutes include tenderness, juic iness and flavor. The ranking of these attributes in terms of importance to the co nsumers eating experience starts with tenderness and concludes with juiciness, with flavor fall ing somewhere in the middle. According to Epley (1992), although juiciness and flavor normally do not vary a great deal, tenderness can vary considerably from one cut to another. Tendern ess is a heritable trait with an estimate of approximately 40%, which means that 40% of variation in tenderness of cooked beef is due to genetics of the animal (Epley, 1992). Previous studies have documented a genetic basis for differences in beef tenderness and intramuscular fat content (Shackelford et al., 1994; Wulf et al. 1996b). Although these differences become extrem ely important in the production of beef animals, it is less of a factor in the production of veal because of the similar genetic background of calves used in veal production. Other factors that can greatly affect tenderness are feeding practices, animal disposition, ha ndling practices as well as ag e of the animal. Epley (1992) concludes that veal is the leas t variable in tenderness due to the young age of the animal at time of harvest and the lack of natural collagen and connectiv e tissue found in the meat. There are many variables that constitute whet her a piece of meat is classified as tender or not. These include fragmentation, sarcomere le ngth, percent moisture and collagen content (Davis et al., 1979). There are several factors that influence tenderness after the animal is harvested. The rate of chilling and its effects on muscle fibers play the greatest role in meat tenderness postmortem. Certain practices that ar e currently used to improve tenderness include

PAGE 15

15 electrical stimulation of carcasses, different ha nging methods for carcasses as well as mechanical and chemical tenderizers that di srupt tissue integrity (Epley, 1 992). Postmortem aging after the completion of rigor mortis also plays a major role in meat tenderization. Ag ing is a process that utilizes endogenous enzymes to enhance tenderness of meat by breaking down some of the myofibril structure (Epley, 1992). This holding of beef in a cooler, either in its whole carcass or primal state, or under vacuum packaging, usually smaller sub-primal cuts, is known as aging. Although it is often argued as to how long beef should be aged, studies have shown that an increase in beef tenderness continues approximately seven to ten days after slaughter when held at 3 degrees C (Epley, 1992). These findings ar e in agreement with Smith et al. (1978) and Mitchell et al. (1991a), who f ound no significant improvements in tenderness after ten and seven days postmortem aging, respectively. A study conducted by Revilla et al. (2006) explored the effect of breed, sex and aging time on carcass, meat and eating quality of 32 calves of the Ternera de Aliste Spanish Quality Label (a Spanish Quality Label that encompasses a beef production zone located in north-western Spain where the local breed Alistano Sanabresa and Swiss Brown cross females are crossed with bu lls of Limousin or Charolais breeds ( BOE, 1997)). In order to study the effect of breed, calv es, bulls and heifers, were slaughtered when they were six to seven months of age. Samples of the longissimus dorsi were aged for three, five and seven days and chemical and sensory analys es were conducted. Results of this study show that there were no differences due to sex, but that Charolais sires produced more tender meat that was juicier and more intense in flavor than th e Limousin sired animals while also producing a muscle that was darker in color than that of the Limousin sired calves. Warner-Bratzler shear force values at three and five da ys of ageing, was found not to be affected by either sex or breed. Warner-Bratzler shear force values were similar to those described in other work for Limousines,

PAGE 16

16 but lower than those reported for young Charolais bulls (Monson et al., 2004 and Ozluturk et al., 2004). In a subsequent study conduct by Perez et al. (2006) it was found that the parameters affecting the choice of veal meat of the Terner de Aliste quality appellation was lightness in color of the raw product but in their general relative preferences for samples, tenderness, juiciness and taste of the cooked meat had the greatest weight. The sensory attribute juicine ss has been related to the amount of moisture released from the meat and the degree of salivation induced during mastication (Law rie, 1979; Muir et al., 1998a). This quality could have an important impact on overall palatability of steaks, even if the steaks are thought to be tough. The degree of juiciness creates lubr ication during mastication that can give the presumption of a te nderer piece of meat. Ep ley (1992) reveals that the differences in juiciness in meat may be attri buted to the amount of bound/interm ediate water and concentration of intramuscular lipids. The c onsumer separates perceived juic iness into two classes, first impression and sustained juiciness with the major factors being wa ter holding capacity and intramuscular lipid content. Perez et al. (2006) reported that samples with the highest juiciness scores were also those samples that had the highest overall scores in sensory evaluation. Many factors contribute to the juiciness of a steak when it is rated by a sensory panel. Moisture content, ether extractable fat or total lipid, cooking tim e, temperature and pH play important roles (Stelzleni, 2006). Kim and Lee (2003) concluded th at marbling appears to be an important factor in sensory panel ranking of juiciness but that an imals finished on grain tended to have increased marbling and ether extractable fat, but showed little difference in juic iness (Stelzleni, 2006). Moody (1983) defines flavor as a result of sensations arising from taste, aroma and pressure and heat sensitive areas of the mouth. Flavor is one of the most important quality attributes of meat. Although meat flavors have attracted much attention, strong knowledge about

PAGE 17

17 the flavor compounds causing strong character impacts for various species is limited (Shahidi, 1994). Mottram (1998) concluded that meat flavor and off-flavor is complex with over 1000 compounds combining to create different flavors between species and also creating off-flavors within species. Thermal reactions by various chemical compounds give meat its flavor. Raw meat has little aroma and only a blood-like taste, leading Mottram (1998) to conclude that the compounds are reactive to cooking/heating of the product. Macleod (1998) breaks down taste compounds into three categories 1) Sweetness which is primarily made up of sugars and L-amino acids, 2) Sourness which is made up of amino acids combined with succinic, lactic and carboxylic acids, 3) Saltiness which is due main ly to inorganic salts. Not only these factors influence the flavor of cooked meat, there are also compounds formed during cooking that determine the aroma attributes that directly infl uence the characteristic fl avor of meat (Mottram, 1998). Macleod (1998) found that to release these aromas, meat undergoes three primary reactions during cooking 1) lipid oxidation and thermal degradati on, 2) thermal degradation of proteins amino acids, sugars and peptides and 3) Thermal degradat ion of thiamine which in turn creates the desired smell and aromas. In a study by Revilla et al. ( 2006), it was reported that aging time of veal muscles created more intense flavors and odors which was attribut ed to the nitrogen containing compounds that may have been formed by the natural degradatio n that occurs during ag eing in which Maga (1976) reports to have a va riety of meat flavors. Defining Color Composition of Meat Although tenderness, taste a nd juiciness of m eat are extremely important, these parameters are usually measured at consumpti on of the meat. Color becomes very important when a consumer is making the decision to purchas e the product. Color of the meat is often the basis for product selection or re jection by the consumer (Aporta et al., 1996). In industry today,

PAGE 18

18 color of veal meat is also important to produ cers and processors, because it contributes to the carcass price (Denoyelle et al., 199 9). The goal of recent research in color composition has been to measure the meat color on-line and devel op a relationship between instrumental color assessment and visual color assessment to predic t color score. In a study conducted by Denoyelle et al. (1998), 2300 veal calves were used to standardize instrument color grading with visual color scoring. Meat color was assessed subjectiv ely by three trained j udges and objectively by two chromometers CR300 and CR310 at 45 minutes post mortem and prediction equations were derived. The data concluded that these meters c ould be used in on-line objectivity to correctly classify up to 87% of carcasses. The reason this is important is to reduce man hours in a large scale harvest facility and to also standardize color measurements that are more precise and provide less variability. Color assessment by consumers is much more unscientific and relies more on preference and environmental conditions. Consumers usually see muscle color in pinks and reds whereas scientific evidence reveals that meats can range from white to dark cherry red. There is an infinite amount of colors and comb inations of colors that makes it difficult to describe meat color and meat color changes. Not only are the consum ers concerned with the actual color but also discoloration of the muscle. When discoloration occurs, products become tan, brown, gray, green or yellow, and consumers are less likely to buy these products. Two popular methods in scientific research to asses these colors and changes in colors are the use of visual panels and the use of instrumental technology su ch as the colorimeter and the spectrophotometer. Each method can be used separately or toge ther to express color changes in meat products (AMSA, 2003). Visual panel Visual panels have become useful in dete rmining acceptability of meat products. A visual panel is used to simulate consumer evaluation of meat that occurs in a retail setting as well as

PAGE 19

19 benchmarking for instrumental grading. Visual pa nels assess consumers likes and dislikes, but are difficult to conduct due to unrepeatable measur ements day to day. Inconsistencies have been attributed to personal preferences, environm ental differences such as lighting, visual impairments, and product presentation methods. Visual panel designs can vary in numerous wa ys from the number of panelists, to the scale that is used to determine sensory values and the meaning of those scores. Many studies use a scoring system where the averaging of perceived color over the entire cut is used, while others break down each section of the product and scores for each of these sections are used. Yet some use a worst point system where the single score is us ed to describe a 2 cm diameter section of the product. Combinations of all scor ing methods may also be used to better determine differences in meat color or discoloration. Sande rs et al. (1997), and Stubbs et al. (1999) us ed a design where the product was evaluated twice da ily by a 3-5 member panel for lean color (8=bright cherry red, 1=dark brown or green), fat color (8=cr eamy white, 1=dark brown or green), surface discoloration (7=no discolora tion, 4 = 26-50% discoloration, 1= highly discolored) and overall appearance (8=highly desirable, 1= highly undesi rable). A study by Roeber et al. (2001) had a slight variation in design when they used an eight point scale for muscle color, overall appearance and surface discoloration but did not measure fat color. Not only do differences exist in scoring and evaluation of meat products but researchers may also use different types of panelists. Genera lly there are three types of panelist used in evaluation studies, they include trained, semi-train ed and untrained. Trained sensory panelists are trained to use their skills to describe their sensory experience s using words they generate in previous training sessions. These words are more detailed than those used by consumers, and more useful for research and development depa rtments. Trained sensory panels are usually

PAGE 20

20 comprised of less people due to more repeatability between members. Most trained panels use 3 to 10 members for evaluation. Semi-trained sens ory panels are usually comprised of 8 to 25 members and the members are given some inst ruction on evaluating the product. Untrained panels usually consist of more than 80 peopl e who are given no instru ction or guidance about evaluating the product. These untrain ed panels are usually used to determine consumer taste and preference without any type of distraction or encouragement. The reason behind using more people for the less trained panel is to decrease the effects of ex treme differences in tastes and preferences as well as effects of non repeatability within a par ticular panelist. A study conducted in 2002 by OSullivan et al. used pork patties fo rmed from two different muscles to study the differences between trained and untrained paneli sts. Results show that the distributions for trained panel scores were normally distributed for both types of patties. For the untrained panelists, the scores were skewed for the pat ties consisting of the Longi ssimus dorsi muscle but were normal for the Psoas major. The whiter meat of the Longissimus dorsi muscle was better evaluated by the trained group, while the untrained panelist were better at disti nguishing between the Psoas major patties because the meat is redder (contains more myoglobin). Researchers concluded that the reason the unt rained group of panelists had bette r results with the Psoas major patties was because they were more familiar with the color of this type of product whereas the trained group had better results with the Longi ssimus dorsi patties becau se they were better trained to evaluate this product and had a reference product to compare it with. With the conclusion of this study, OSullivan revealed th at when familiar products are being evaluated, untrained panels can be used. But when unfamili ar products are being ev aluated that trained panelists and reference sa mples should be utilized.

PAGE 21

21 When visual panels are being conducted it is ve ry important that all samples are handled in exactly the same manner to prevent alterations which is extremely important when studying treatment effects on meat color (Gonzalez, 2005). These steps must also be repeatable by the researcher and reproducible by othe r researchers. To ensure a repr esentative sample is obtained and that some factors are standardized, The Am erican Meat Science Association (AMSA) has identified some factors that are very important Of those factors the most important include: animal nutrition, carcass chill rate, location of muscle sample, fiber orientation, muscle pH, time and temperature of postmortem storage, exposur e to oxygen, packaging and display conditions. Along with these factors, AMSA also identified 15 visual appraisal guide lines to follow when conducting a sensory evaluation. Of the 15, the most important include: simulation of the environment in which consumers make their deci sion (lighting, retail case temperature), use of samples 12 to 15 mm thick, over wrap material that is most common type of film used, rotate packages in the case from front to back as well as side to side, and st andardize the temperature and lighting used (AMSA, 2003). These factors, plus many more, allow researchers to conduct sensory analysis in ways that are comparable to other studies so compar isons between studies are possible. Instrumental color technologies As stated earlier, the color of m eat is often the main basis for product selection. Consumers expect their beef to be red, por k to be pink and chicken to be white, so numerous research projects have focused on meat colors and why they are different, both within and between species. To make measurements and research projects more repeatable, many researchers have used some type of instrumental color technol ogy to measure actual color. Instrumental color measurements can be expressed in many forms. In 1905 an American artist, A. H. Munsell, expressed color using hue (Munsell Hue), light ness (Munsell Value), and saturation (Munsell

PAGE 22

22 Chroma). These measurements were taken usi ng paper color chips fo r comparison with an observed color (Gonzalez, 2005). Later this sy stem would be devised into the Munsell Renotation System, which expressed color as a letter combination in te rms of hue, value and chroma. The Commission Internationale de lEc lairage (CIE) has developed other numerical color expression equations that d eal with light and color and has been responsible for developing the Yxy color space (1931) and the L*a*b* co lor space (1976). These methods of color expression use a notation to define a light source or object color, and such numbers are widely used throughout the world (Minolta, 1998). The color parameters discussed above are ob tained through reflectance measurements. In most cases, these measurements closely mirror what the eye and the brain see, and are the most popular for fresh meat color evaluation. The instruments used are useful in estimating deoxymyoglobin, oxymyoglobin, and metmyoglobin. These instruments are useful because numerous individual measurements can be repeat ed without destroying the product. The tool of choice when taking reflectance measurements is the colorimeter. According to Minolta, manufacturer of colorimeters, white light, from a source being shone on a sample, being reflected at a 45 degree angle, is measured by a photocell after it penetrates an X, Y or Z filter (How does a colorimeter work?, 2003). Once pass ed through the filter, th e energy output of the light source creates a response by the photocell similar to what is seen by the human eye (AMSA, 2003). Most readings ar e taken in the L*a*b* color sp ace developed by the CIE. The major advantage of using a colorimeter is that it is able to detect minute color differences and express those differences numeri cally, allowing for easier interpretation of the data (Minolta, 1998).

PAGE 23

23 Researchers also use spectrophotometers to quantify color of meat. This method uses pigment extraction for quantific ation of myoglobin and hemoglobi n. These extraction techniques tend to better separate color di fferences than reflectance measures but ultimately destroy the sample product. Extraction techniques al so tend to over estimate oxymyoglobin and metmyoglobin, and under estimate deoxymyoglobin wh ile destroying the repr esentative sample which makes repeatability impossible (AMSA, 2003). According to Minolta, also manufacturer of spectrophotometers, the measurement of color is taken by illumination of the sample with white light and the amount of light that the sample reflects back at each wavelength interval is used to calculate a color valu e (How does a reflectance spectr ophotometer work?, 2003). Using multiple sensors to measure the spectral reflectan ce of the observed object at each wavelength or in a narrow range, the microcomputer in the instru ment calculates values similar to those of the colorimeter by performing integrations. Unlike the colorimeter, the spectrophotometer can describe color numerically and provide higher accuracy due to its hi gh precision sensor and inclusion of data for a variety of illuminant conditions (Minolta, 1998). Both techniques are widely used depending on availa bility of samples and types of measurements needed, but the problem comes in the interpretation and reporting of the colo r measurements. Researchers have numerous ways of interpreti ng the data collected by the two previously discussed color devices. After a method of instrumental color ev aluation is decided, the system in which to use to report the collected data must be determined. A system that is sometimes used in meat color evaluation is the Munsell Color solid shown in Figure 2-1 (HunterLab, 1983). This method reports the data collected as a point with in a three dimensional sp ace that describes the color in terms of hue (H), value (V) and chroma (C). H values are expressed in the three dimensional color solid as red, yellow, green, blue, and purple which are equally spaced in a

PAGE 24

24 circle around the base of the colo r solid. On a vertical axis, V m easurements are spaced out from zero, which represents absolute bl ack, to ten, representing absolute white. The C values describe the color intensity when compared to a neutral gray of the same value. Due to the fact that most instruments do not directly measure color in Mu nsell Color Solid values, it is not the most popular color reporting system (AMSA, 2003). Another system available to report color values is the XYZ primary system of the CIEs Color Solid System. This system is based on the theory that colors can be matched by mixing the light primary colors of green, red, and blue whic h is graphically shown in Figure 2-2 (Frances & Clydsdale, 1975). In some cases, some of the colo rs can be matched with the subtraction of red light (Gonzalez, 2005). In order to resolve such problems, the CIE developed the XYZ system that allows researchers to describe colors wit hout the use of negative nu mbers. In Figure 2-2, the relationship between the XYZ triangle and the tris timulus primary RGB system is presented. The shaded area along the B-G axis repr esents negative values of red needed to match certain colors. In the larger XYZ triangle, all positive values can be used to match all colors. The second part of this system is the consideration of lightness when matching a color. The lightness of a sample is calculated by summing the luminosity of the matc hing green, red and blue colors. Because the human eye is more sensitive to green light than the other primary colors, the CIE horseshoe shaped spectrum as presented by Francis and Clydesdale (1975) is us ed when calculating lightness with Y% corresponding to the lightness value (Figure 2-3). The CIE XYZ system can also be calculated using sp ectrophotometers equipped with a reflectance attachment. The problem with this type of system is that time consuming calculations must be made to make adjustments to the data and theref ore this system is not widely us ed in industry, but is popular in research applications (AMSA, 2003).

PAGE 25

25 The most common method of color evaluation used in research today is Tristimulus Colorimetry, which uses filters to simulate the human eye. Once the data is received by the reflectance colorimeter, it can be expressed by a series of systems including: XYZ tristimulus values, Yxy color space, L*a*b* color space, L* C*h color space and Hunter Lab color space. The XYZ tristimulus values are similar to Yxy co lor space and are used as the foundation for the present CIE color space (Gonzalez, 2005). Even though XYZ tristimulus values were useful in defining color, they were not easily visuali zed. In 1931 the Yxy color space was developed by the CIE by using color-matching functions of x( ), y( ) and z( ), shown in Figure 2-5, to determine XYZ values and determining the ch romaticity coordinates corresponding to the Yxy values (Minolta, 1998). The Y value is the i ndicator of lightness with x and y coordinates indicating achromatic colors toward the center, and chromaticity increasing toward the edges (Figure 2-4). When measurements are taken with a colorimeter, the x and y values can be used as coordinates to plot a point on th e chromaticity diagram and the Y value indicates the percentage of reflectance ranging from 0-100% (Minolta, 1998). The L*a*b* color space is the most popular fo rm of measuring color in all fields of research and is very popular when measuring color in fresh meat. The L*a*b* color space is a uniform color space that was developed to remedy the problems with the Yxy color space which was that the equal distances on the x y chromaticity chart does not correspond with the equal differences perceived by the eye. Figure 2-6 is a three dimensional representation of the L*a*b* color space where L* indicates lightness and a* and b* values are the chromaticity coordinates (Minolta, 1998). To better understand this syst em, Figure 2-7 shows the a* and b* chromaticity values (HunterLab, 1983). The a* values become more positive as colo r becomes more red and as the value becomes negative, the color become s more green. A similar relationship exists for

PAGE 26

26 the b* value, except as the value becomes more positive, the color is more yellow and as it becomes negative, the color becomes more blue. At the center of the diagram, the achromatic colors are indicated and as the va lues move away from the center, the saturation of a given color becomes greater. Positive L* valu es indicate the color is becomi ng lighter or more white, while negative values indicate the color is becoming dark er or approaching absolute black. It is the systems simplicity that has made it the most comm only used color space available to researchers (Minolta, 1998). A similar system that is still in use today is the Hunter Color So lid system. Shown in Figure 2-7, this system is very similar in type to the L*a*b* system in that positive a values are red and negative a values are green and the positiv e b values are yellow a nd negative b values are blue (HunterLab, 1983). The difference in the two systems lies in the lightness measurement, where in the Hunter Color Solid, L values range from 0-100 where 100 is lighter or absolute white and 0 is darker or absolute black. The Hunter Color Solid system does not use positive and negative values to determine lightness measurem ents. Just like the CIE L*a*b* system, the Hunter Color Solid system has a major advantage over the Yxy system in that it is more uniform in its measurements (AMSA, 2003). The final color system available to researcher s is the L*C*h color space. This system is also similar to the L*a*b* system but instead of using rectangular coordinates, the L*C*h system uses cylindrical coordinates. In the color space, shown in Figur e 2-8, L* indicates lightness, C* indicates chroma, and h indicates hue angle (Minolta, 1998). As shown in Figure 2-8, values for chroma are 0 at the center and increases as poin ts move away from the center. Hue angle is determined by starting at the +a* axis and is ex pressed in degrees moved from this point on the

PAGE 27

27 figure with +a* being 0 (red), +b* being 90 (yellow), -a* be ing 180 (green) and b* being 270 (blue) (Minolta, 1998). Problems with color measurements exist in all applications of the process. Especially in sample preparation for meats, many factors can affect the end results. It is critical that guidelines from the AMSA are followed to ensure a representati ve sample of the actual color. The ability to measure each color parameter sepa rate is crucial and proper samp le preparation is mandatory. Samples should be thick enough to be opaque (12-15 mm), backings should be white, orientation of muscle fibers should be consid ered, and type of film used as over-wrap should be standardized as well as preventing frost from accumulating on th e sample. When preparing the instrument for measurement, researchers must consider: aperture size and the area of illu mination that is being scanned, the number of scans that must be taken to ensure representative color evaluation as well as minimizing pressure being applied to the sample. When taking measurements on lower temperature products, the accumulation of fog on the instrument is possible, so researchers must assure that this does not occur during repeated measurements. If all guidelines set by AMSA are followed, a representative sample can be obtaine d via instrumental tech nologies (AMSA, 2003). Defining and Measuring Tenderness The two prevalent ways of m easuring tendernes s of meat products is trained sensory panel and Warner Bratzler shear force Analysis. Trained Sensory Panel Trained sensory panels are used when considering sensory characteri stics of cooked meat products. Such attributes as flavor and juicine ss are difficult to measure by other means other than subjective human evaluation. Panels are used to predict what the po pulation might judge the quality of the product to be. More popular than single person evalua tions, sensory panels must be conducted in such a manor as to create cond itions to get independent responses from each

PAGE 28

28 individual evaluator. Kramer and Twigg (1970) identified five di fferent types of taste panels available for use by a researcher. The first is a Consumer Preference panel, which is used to differentiate products by personal preferences or reaction between samples. In order to achieve a reliable conclusion using a Consumer Preference panel, 100 to 1000 panelist s must participate in the evaluation of the product. As discussed earlier, th e more trained a panel becomes, the less participants are needed. For Consumer Preference panels two to three samples are served per participant and the participant is asked to select the best samp le or indicate if a sample is acceptable or unacceptable. The second type of panel is a Detection of a Difference panel. This panel uses fewer participants that are highly tr ained. The panelists serve as labo ratory instruments to detect differences between samples a nd usually consist of a three to five member panel. The participants are asked to identify difference s among samples or rank and score samples when given some type of parameters or instruc tion on how to differentiate the samples. The third type of panel is Difference Preferen ce. This type of panel is used for product research when many samples must be compare d. The Difference Preference panel consists of eight to twenty participants that have some experience in sensory evaluation, and are used to provide an estimate of consumer response to certain products. The fourth type of panel is The Selection by Best Sample or Process panel. It is used to compare one product to those of similar products. The Selection by Best Sample or Process panel is similar in size to the Difference Preference panel, but samp les are ranked in terms of acceptability or preference or the intensity in which each product differs from the set product.

PAGE 29

29 The final type of panel is a Determination of Grade or Quality Level panel. Being one of the most difficult panels to conduct, this type of panel uses panelists that are trained in evaluation of samples in terms of quality or grade standa rds. Not only does this type of panel compare samples, but it also compares where samples stand in reference to a certain standard or grade. Although there are more than five types of pane ls, these five discusse d are the most common types of used. Many combinations of these panels as well as different types of panels exist, therefore, in order obtain the desi red information during a sensory panel, it is important to adapt these base panel types to the research in progress (Kramer and Twigg, 1970). In an effort to further evaluate meat produc ts the AMSA (1995) has produced four sensory evaluation techniques that are similar to those of Kramer and Twigg (1970). These methods include a Ranking system, Scaling system, Ma gnitude estimation and Descriptive Sensory Analysis. The Ranking system involves the arrangement of samples by intensity or degree for a selected attribute. The Scaling system can be coll ected using graphic or line scales, verbal scales or numerical scales that describe the intensity of certain attr ibutes. Verbal scales involve written statements that describe a dimens ion with appropriate modifiers that are written out in an order. Numerical scales are series of numbers that represent, from low to high, which represent a certain degree of an attribute. The Magnitude estimation method invol ves the assignment of numbers to establish the relati onship of one sample to anothe r reference sample. The final method, Descriptive Sensory Analysis is used to describe quantitative an d qualitative properties and is divided into four methods. The four methods used in Descriptive Sens ory Analysis include Flavor Profiling, Texture Profiling, Qualitative Descriptive Analysis and Spectrum method. Flavor Profiling characterizes various aromas, flavors and aftertastes. Most of these flavor profiles involve a four to six

PAGE 30

30 member panel and results are discussed among the panel to arrive at a general consensus on the flavor of the product. Texture Profiling is sim ilar to flavor profiling in that the texture is determined by a number of different texture attri butes. The Mechanical characteristics relate to how the sample reacts to stress, such as chew ing. Geometrical characte ristics involve the size and shape of the sample before and during breakdown and finally, fat and moisture are determined through mouth feel during break down. Th is is usually the lubrication effect that occurs during the chewing process. The third method referred to as Qualitative Descriptive Analysis has been used to provide a stronger statistical treatment of data. This process allows data to be reported as a spider web where each attribute is represented by a strand. And finally, the Spectrum method is used to provide detailed information on the intensity of aroma, flavor and texture using a univers al scale (AMSA, 1995). As mentioned earlier, it is important to adap t the type of panel needed to the type of information needed. The first step is to determin e if a sample is only to be identified or if products should be scored on a predetermined scale. Attribute results provide no information on the differences between the samples when a si gnificant difference is found. Attribute tests do however appear to be successful when measuri ng homogeneity of the products. For example, it would not be feasible to score e ach attribute of each sample if the purpose of the study is to only pick one sample over another or determine if a samp le is acceptable or not. Actual values are not necessary for this type of research and an attr ibute test is probably sufficient to answer the questions. Kramer and Twigg (1970) suggest that an advantage of a scored te st is that the power of the test, over an attribute test, increases as the number of samples evaluated increases. Selection of panel participants is also im portant for researchers to assure that proper evaluation of the product is obtai ned. AMSA (1995) sets forth gui delines for panel participant

PAGE 31

31 recruitment, interviews and selection process. In order for sensory panel evaluation studies to be effective, following the panel selection proce ss and training methods is key. The success or failure of sensory panel depends on the criteria and procedures followed when selecting and training a panel (Meilgaard et al. 1987). The project objectiv es determine the criteria and procedures followed in selection of the panel. In a laboratory setting, se lection procedures are different from consumer panel selection procedur es. Figure 2-9 presents a step by step process in which panel members are selected (AMSA, 1995). Step 1 involves the recruitment and personal interview of participants. This re cruitment process is usually conducted via advertisements, posted announcements or verbal contact of potential members. Personal interviews of these applicants are then utili zed to eliminate unqualified candidates, identify candidates personal interests, av ailability, dependability, healt h, sex age, smoking status and food likes and dislikes. These inte rviews are helpful in deciding which candidates have the most potential of becoming a panel member. AMSA ( 1995) proposes these interviews be used as a basis for disqualification of a candidate who is ei ther not interested or available as well as classifying candidates as pot ential participants. Step 2 (Figure 29) of the process is screening of a potential panel participant. The purpose of scre ening individuals is to select candidates with: normal sensory acuity, interest in sensory eval uation, ability to disc riminate and reproduce results and show appropriate behavior such as cooperation, motivation and promptness. After each candidate is tested and interviewed, a decision to accept, reject or continue testing must be reached. After individuals have been selected for pane l participation, the pane lists must be trained (Figure 2-9, Step 3). AMSA (1995) identifies objec tives to be reached in the training process. First is to familiarize each individual with the test procedures, next is to improve an individuals

PAGE 32

32 ability to identify sensory attributes, and fina lly, memory to allow consistent and accurate evaluation. Training sessions are conducted on an individual or group basis. In these sessions, various samples are presented to the evaluator to allow the evaluator to detect differences. After each evaluation session, results are discussed and panelists are calibrated to identify certain attributes. Each attribute should be discussed in detail and differe nt levels of these attributes should be presented in subseque nt training sessions. The goal of these training sessions is to stress the importance of concentration and accura cy but should be performed in a manner that will not influence future decisions made by the panelist (AMSA, 1995). The fourth step (Figure 2-9, Step 4) in pa nel selection is Performance Evaluation. This step of the process should be carried out dur ing training and during th e study. The Performance Evaluation allows the researcher to identify problems among indi vidual panelists and allow for further training of these individua ls. This evaluation also allows the researcher to determine if the individual in question was correctly selected for the study. These Performance Evaluations cover a four day period with th ree sessions per day and three sa mples per session and cover the full range of attributes being tested (Gonzalez, 2005). Records of each individuals performance should be kept and reviewed frequently. A member who constantly fails the evaluations or has sub-par performance should not be included in the study to achieve a predetermined panel size (AMSA, 1995). Trained sensory evaluation of products is a gr eat way to determine many attributes of a sample. Human determination of tenderness, juic iness, flavor, amount of connective tissue, and off-flavors helps researchers in obtaining in formation that is not attainable by machine technology. Although sensory evaluation is sometim es down graded due to effects of human error and non-repeatabilit y, it is the only way to obtain the degree of some attributes such as

PAGE 33

33 flavor. Although trained sensory panelist provides so me insight to acceptability of meat products, many argue that a mechanical component must be implemented to determine a true value for such attributes as tenderness. Warner Bratzler Shear Force A m ajority of consumers in ot her studies (Huffman et al., 199 6) indicated that tenderness is the single most important palatability trait for determining overall steak acceptance. WarnerBratzler shear force (WBSF) is routinely used by scientists as an objective measurement of meat tenderness and, despite criticism, has remained the most popular and accurate instrumental measurement of meat tenderness (Wheeler et al., 1997). Otremba et al. (1999) and Wheeler et al. (1996) reported WBSF value correlations (r) of 0.68 and 0.85, respectively, with trained panelist overall tenderness ratings for longissimus steaks. Shackelford et al (1994) reported that a single variable regression equation using WBSF values explained 73% of the variation in trained panelist overall tenderne ss ratings for longissimus muscle steaks. Because tenderness is an important driver of overall steak acceptability and WBSF is used as an objective measure of tenderness, it is reasonable to assume that WBSF values could be used to predict overall acceptability of steaks (Platter et al., 2003). Warner Bratzler shear force machines ar e used to objectively measure tenderness by measuring the maximum amount of force needed to shear through a given meat core. The machine is composed of a blade with a triangular hole that is us ed to hold the sample. Once the core is obtained it is placed on the blade of the machine and is pulled through two stationary bars. A dynamometer is used to measure the force required to shear throu gh the sample core. The greater the force needed to shear through the sample core, the t ougher the muscle fibers are in that sample core. According to Vargas et al. (1999) meat core samples with WBSF values less than 3.85 kilograms are considered to be very tender.

PAGE 34

34 When conducting research that consists of obtaining Warner Bratzler shear force measurements, many factors play a role in gettin g accurate and repeatable measurements. Factors such as cooking method, cooling method, storage temperature, and coring procedure can have effects on WBSF values. A study by Wheeler et al. (1999) concluded that endpoint cooking temperature of steaks has an effect on WBSF va lues. In the study, shear force measurements were taken on Longissimus thoracis steaks cooked to endpoint internal te mperatures of 60, 70, or 80C. Steaks that were cooked to 70C were used to create five different tenderness classes in order to test the effect of tenderness classification and end point temperature on shear force values. Data showed that steaks in the most tender class had increased shear values of 1.31 kg when they were cooked to 80C instead of 60C. Also the steaks in the least tender class had elevated shear force values by 3.38 kg when cooked to 80C rather than 60C. The conclusion of the study was that endpoint temperature and tendern ess class interaction re sulted in greater shear force value. It was also concluded that highe r endpoint cooking temperatures had a greater impact on less tender longissimus than more tender longissimus steaks. The cooking of meat results in changes in tenderness due to alterati ons in connective tissue and myofibrillar proteins. In a study conducted to evaluate the e ffect of collagen content, the major component of muscle connective tissue; fourteen different raw muscles from Swiss Brown bull carcasses were measured physically for shear force and chemically for collagen content. In the study, Torrescano et al. (2003) used correlation analysis that indicated there is a high positive correlation (r = .723; p < .01) between total coll agen content and WBSF values for raw meat samples. Using this information, it is possible to conclude that higher colla gen contents result in tougher meat. During the cooking process, collagen is solubilized by heat, which results in tenderization. The heat also denatures myofibrillar proteins that cause meat to become tougher.

PAGE 35

35 The changes to connective tissue and myofibrill ar proteins during the cooking process are time and temperature dependent. In a study that soug ht to determine the effects of cooking method on measured shear force values, researchers studied the effect of reheating, holding time and holding temperature on WBSF values. The conclusi ons made by Obuz et al. (2003) showed that the optimal reduction in peak sh ear force values (4.71 kg to 3.57 kg) can be obtained by cooking steaks to 54C on a belt grill, holding the samples at 57C in a water bath for 15 minutes, and reheating the sample to 70C. The study showed a decrease in connective tissue shear force of 37% and a 12% reduction in myofibril shear force. Therefore selecting th e proper protocol can increase tenderness, and selec ting the proper protocol for a sp ecific muscle can add value and reduce tenderness variati on (Obuz et al., 2003). Cooking, reheating and holding are not the only factors that can affect shear force values; storage conditions are also known to effect shear force values. In a study conducted by Shanks et al. (2002) a comparison was conducte d of steaks that were measured for shear force on the exact day that the aging period ended to steaks that were frozen for two months after the aging period ended. The results concluded that frozen steaks had lower shear force values than fresh steaks for steaks that were aged for 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 14, or 35 days postmortem. It was hypothesized that this increase in tenderness occurred due to the formation of intracellular ice in the muscle. Correlation analysis indicated that frozen steaks sh ear force values were not indicative of fresh steaks shear force value at the same period of aging. The data also indicated that shear force values of frozen steaks at short aging periods are useful in predicting the shear force values of fresh steaks aged at a longer ti me period (Shanks et al., 2002). Sample core extraction can also have an e ffect on shear force values. Core samples are usually taken perpendicular or parallel to the muscle fiber direction. A study conducted by

PAGE 36

36 Otremba et al. (1999) concentrated on comparing Warner-Bratzler Shear fo rce values with panel evaluation scores by using a descriptive texture pr ofile sensory panel and a descriptive attribute sensory panel. The objective of the study was to evaluate how shear force values, descriptive texture profile sensory panel a nd descriptive attribute sensory panel were affected by muscle fiber orientation and the type of blade used for the Warner Bratzler shear force analysis. The correlation coefficient between fi rmness score and shear force valu es using the flat blade was .56 (P < .05) when the samples were taken parallel to the muscle fibers and evaluated by the descriptive texture profile sensor y panel. Correlations were also detected between shear force scores and myofibrillar tendern ess, connective tissue amount, and over all tenderness scores when samples were taken parallel to the muscle fiber and sheared with th e flat blade. Similar correlations were also found in the same cat egories when samples were evaluated by the descriptive attribute sensory panel and cores we re taken perpendicular to the steak surface and sheared with the V blade. Conclu sions of the study resulted in suggestions that will help to correlate sensory panel evaluations with WBSF va lues. Otremba et al. (1999) suggested that when the meat cores are taken perpendicular to the muscle fiber orientation, the V-blade should be used and that when cores are taken parallel to the muscle fibers, the flat blade should be used. It was also suggested that desc riptive attribute sensory panel s hould be used to evaluate cores removed parallel to the muscle fibers and that descriptive sensory panel will most likely be correlated closer with shear force values than those evaluated by the descriptive texture profile sensory panel, regardless of musc le fiber orientation. It is also suggested that in order to obtain correlated data, selection of the appropriate sensory panel is important (Gonzalez, 2005). As demonstrated in the previous studies disc ussed, there are many diff erent protocols that may be used to obtain Warner-Bratzler shear forc e data. In an effort to evaluate different

PAGE 37

37 protocols used by different institutions a study conducted by Wheeler et al. (1997) used four different institutions who used their own WBSF pr otocol, and also used a standard protocol provided to them for the study. The different prot ocols for each institution had some effect on shear force values. Differences in protocol included cooking method, blade thickness and angle, cutting edge, shape and size of cores, coring me thod and number of times each individual core was sheared. The differences in these protocol s resulted in significan t differences between institutions. For example, lower endpoint temper atures were used by some institutions which resulted in lower shear force values. When the st andardized protocol was used, means, standard deviations, and maximum shear force values were slightly higher for all institutions. Also, differences in mean shear force values among institutions were smaller than when they utilized their own protocol. Researchers also identified di fferences due to instrumental variations. Older Shear force machines are some times less likely to yield the correct shear force value due to spring tension differences than those in newer m achines. Wheeler et al. ( 1997) suggested that it is possible for different institutions to have the same mean shear values if protocol is standardized and properly calib rated machines are used. Total Pigment and Heme Iron As m entioned earlier, most consumers first im pression of meat quality is color. In most cases, consumers prefer red beef, pink pork and white veal. In the veal industry, producers and processors realize a slig ht premium for producing white veal produc ts. In an effort to capture this premium, production methods of veal have change d in an effort to produce more of the white product. However, animal welfare activists have criticized these produc tion practices that are used to produce such products due to housing me thods used and feeding of milk replacers with sub-optimal iron levels. Van Pu ttens (1982) has shown that these conditions have shown abnormal behavior patterns in animals and was not conducive to the welf are of the animal.

PAGE 38

38 Pigment content of veal has been well documen ted to be correlated closely with muscle color. Blood hemoglobin concentration of calves is related to the muscle myoglobin content and hence correlates to veal color score at carcass classification. Studies have shown that carcass color of veal in general is not related to postm ortem pH and temperature, but associated more with the blood haemoglobin content. In a st udy by Klont et al. (2000) it was shown that haemoglobin content of the blood was closely relate d to the visually asse ssed carcass color at 45 minutes post mortem and it was also related to the instrumentally determined L* value with significant correlation coefficients of .61 and -.61 respectively. Most recent studies have correlated ante mortem haemoglobin content with co lor scores of certain muscles and have been successful in proving the relationship. Methods of changing veal quality and color have been explored in various European countries through electrical stim ulation. In a study conducted by Eikelenboom (1989), a total of eighty-eight veal calves were raised in groups wi th access to straw, which is thought to decrease veal quality, to determine if electrical stimulation has an effect on meat quality. One week ante mortem, hemoglobin levels were obtained and animals with similar hemoglobin levels were paired. At slaughter, one animal of each pair was stimulated electrically whereas the other remained non-stimulated. In the study, electrical stimulation resulted in brighter color, lower sarcomere length and lower protein solubility, but no significant difference in total heme pigments were observed for the longissimus muscle at 24 hours post mortem. After six days of aging under vacuum at 3C, samples from electri cally stimulated carcasses showed brighter color, higher drip and cooking loss and lower shear force values, as well as a better taste panel preference score than non stimulated carcasses. Data also indicated th at a denaturation of sarcoplasmic proteins may have been responsible for the effects on water retention and muscle

PAGE 39

39 color while the improvement of tenderness was du e to the prevention of cold shortening by the treatments. In the end, electrical stimulation was identified by as a possible alternative method of increasing veal quality while also improving animal welfare (Eikelenboom 1989). Eikelenboom (1989), analyzed samples for the determination of total hematin using a method developed by H.C. Hornsey (1956). Horn sey extracted pigment of cooked meats by using a rapid extraction method using an acetoneacid mixture and filtering the extraction for analysis with a spectrophotometer. The absorbance reading was then plugged into an equation to determine total pigment in parts per million. Hornseys method is simple and accurate and has been adopted for studying the distribution and fading of color in meat products. Conclusions made by Hornsey (1956) proposes a method for measuring total pigments as parts per million of haematin and is very suitable for following the sequence of events in fading experiments, allowing samples of exposed meat to be withdrawn for analysis at short time interval

PAGE 40

40 Figure 2-1. The Munsell color solid.

PAGE 41

41 Figure 2-2. The XYZ Triangle of the CIE System.

PAGE 42

42 Figure 2-3. The CIE horseshoe-shaped spectrum locus showing percent Y.

PAGE 43

43 Figure 2-4. 1931 x, y, chromaticity diagram.

PAGE 44

44 Figure 2-5. Spectral sensitivity corresponding to th e human eye and color matching functions of the 1931 Standard Observer.

PAGE 45

45 Figure 2-6. Three-dimensional re presentation of color solid for the L* a* b* color space.

PAGE 46

46 Figure 2-7. Hunter L, a, b solid.

PAGE 47

47 Figure 2-8. a* b* chromaticity diagram.

PAGE 48

48 Figure 2-9. Steps in sele cting a trained panel.

PAGE 49

49 CHAPTER 3 CHARACTERIZING MUSCLES FROM THE VE AL CHUCK BY WEIGHT, DI MENSIONS AND SENSORY ATTRIBUTES Introduction Recent stud ies conducted by scientists at the University of Florida in conjunction with the University of Nebraska have characterized numerous muscles from the beef chuck and round. The studies conducted have revealed significant pos itive palatability attribut es of many of these muscles. A similar characterization of muscles was performed in this study to characterize nine muscles from the veal chuck in search of ways to better utilize these muscles and add value to the veal chuck. Conclusions from previous stud ies have revealed that adding value can be achieved by cutting certain muscles into steaks rather than selli ng them as part of a roast or grinding them into ground beef. Materials and Methods Experimental samples IMPS (Institutional Meat Purchase S pecifications) 308 four rib whole chucks and IMPS 309 four rib square cut chucks were purchased from two separate veal packers with known grade and slaughter date. All were from special fe d, USDA Choice or higher veal carcasses. Veal chucks were immediately shipped to the Univer sity of Florida Meat Processing facility for muscle separation. Whole chucks were squared prior to measurement and dissection. The IMPS 308 and IMPS 309 were weighed whole, and then dissected to obtain the following muscles of interest: Complexus, Deep Pector al, Infraspinatus, Rhomboideus, Serratus Ventralis, Splenius, Supraspinatus, Triceps Brachii a nd the Teres Major. The selecti on of muscles was based on the potential of using these muscles as steak cuts where tenderness is most important; especially when a dry cookery method is used.

PAGE 50

50 Weights, Dimensions and Aging After dissection a commodity weight was taken of each individual muscle. Each muscle was then denuded using a 7600 Series Townsend Sk inner and any additional hand carving to remove membranous material. After denuded we ights were taken, measurements of each individual muscle were taken to obtain lengt h, width, minimum depth and maximum depth. Each muscle was vacuum packaged in separate bags and wet aged fourteen days post mortem at 3.8 2 C. At fourteen days post mortem, bags were checked for any leakage, and muscles were frozen at -40C until sensory evaluation was conducted. Sensory Evaluation Prior to sensory evaluation, the two largest muscles were cut into 1 inch steaks with a band saw while frozen which included the Serra tus Ventralis and the Triceps Brachii. These muscles were cut across the grain to ensure ma ximum degree of tenderne ss would be observed. Before thawing, steaks were removed from v acuum sealed bags and frozen weights were taken to determine thaw loss. Steaks were th awed for approximately 18 hours at 3.8 2 C, weighed, then grilled on Hamilton Beach Health Smart Indoor/Outdoor table top grills to an internal temperature of 71 C (AMSA, 1995). To assure equal endpoint cooking temperatures, Copper-constantan thermocouples we re inserted into the approximate geometric center of each steak. Steaks were turned at 35C and removed from grill when temperature reached 71C (medium degree of doneness). Samples were then weighed for determination of cooking loss then wrapped as a whole muscle in tin foil a nd kept under heat lamps until sensory evaluation was conducted. Upon sensory evaluation, muscles were removed from tin foil and sliced into one-half inch cubes for evaluation.

PAGE 51

51 Food Service Evaluation For further evaluation of the m uscles from th e veal chuck, two food-service industry chefs along with two veal industry representatives were contacted to evaluate the quality and possible application of the nine muscles. After evalua ting these nine muscles by using multiple cooking methods, the chefs and industry representatives agreed that there were truly some application for these value-added veal cuts. Results and Discussion Weights The heaviest m uscle found in the study was th e Triceps Brachii which also represents the greatest yield of both the chuck and the whole car cass (Table 3-1). The lightest muscle in the study was found to be the Teres Major which repres ents the lowest yield percentage for chuck and hot carcass weight. The muscle with the most variation in weight was the Serratus Ventralis; the muscle with the least variation in weight wa s the Teres Major (variati on in denuded weights). Dimensions The longest muscle was determ ined to be the Complexus and the shortest being the Teres major which was also found to be the narrowest muscle in the study (Tab le 3-2). The widest muscle was the Serratus ventralis The thinnest muscle over all wa s the Splenius, and the thickest overall was the Triceps brachii. Industry Evaluation Table 3-3 gives som e applicable cooking methods that worked well for each muscle and also gives some insight on the types of furthe r processing that was s uggested by the chefs to further enhance the products. It should be noted that the sensory data th at was obtained supports the amount of further processing needed for each individual muscle. Th e most tender muscles (Infraspinatus, Teres major, Complexus) will require minimal processing while the toughest

PAGE 52

52 muscles ( Splenius, Serratus ventralis, Rhomboideus) will require a more aggressive tenderization method to increase there tenderness to a more acceptable level. One of the major concerns among these industry representatives was the cost of producing these value-added cuts. A cost analysis should be considered to reveal th e true applicability of these muscles in the foodservice industry. Sensory Evaluation Sensory evaluation revealed the m ost-te nder muscle of the veal chuck was the Infraspinatus. On a scale of 1-8 with 1 being extremely tough and 8 being extremely tender, the Infraspinatus was evaluated at 6.9. The Teres Ma jor was found to be not significantly different (P > .05) from the Infraspinatus with a tenderness scor e of 6.8. The toughest muscle in the study was found to be the Rhomboideus which was ev aluated at 5.8 on the same 1-8 scale. The Rhomboideus was significantly lower (P < .05) in tenderness from all other muscles in the study (Table 3-4). When comparing tenderness levels of these muscles from the veal chuck with the same muscles from the beef chuck, it was found th at the muscles were id entical in ranking from the most tender to the least tender when compar ed to a compilation of studies conducted by the University of Nebraska. (Calkins and Sullivan, 2007). The muscles from the veal chuck fell in the same tenderness categories as the same muscle s from the beef chuck, with the Infraspinatus and Teres Major being tender, and the Rhomboide us and Serratus Ventralis being less tender than the rest of the muscles presented. Although th ese muscles are similar in tenderness to those in the beef chuck, the veal muscles are less variable in tenderness, with only the Rhomboideus being of concern for tenderness. Table 3-5 depicts the sensory ev aluation data for the juiciness of veal muscles. On a scale from 1-8 with 8 being extremely juicy and 1 be ing extremely dry, it was determined that the Complexus had the highest juic iness scores with a sensor y evaluation score of 6.5. The

PAGE 53

53 Supraspinatus was found to be similar to the Complexus (P > .05) with a juiciness score of 6.3. The muscle with the lowest juic iness scores in the study was found to be the Triceps Brachii with an evaluation score of 5.8. The Infraspinatus and th e Splenius were not si gnificantly different (P > .05) from the Triceps brachii with scores of 5.9 and 5.8 respectively. When comparing juiciness scores with those reported by Calkin s and Sullivan (2007) the veal muscles from the chuck are less variable and tend to be more juicy than those from the beef chuck. The Infraspinatus was recognized as being the juiciest muscle in both the veal and beef chucks, but the Triceps Brachii from the veal chuck was recognized as being th e least juicy whereas the same muscle from the beef carcass was recognized to be of intermediate juciness. On a scale from 1-8 with 1 being extremely bland and 8 being extremely intense, the Supraspinatus was found to have the most intens e beef flavor with a sensory score of 5.1. The Complexus was not significantly different (P > .05) with a score of 5.0. The blandest muscle of the study was the Splenius with a score of 4.0 w ith no significant differe nce (P > .05) from the Infraspinatus or the Splenius with evaluation scores of 4.5 a nd 4.3, respectively. Most of these muscles were found to be slightly bland when evaluated for beef flavor (Table 3-6). Table 3-7 depicts the amount of connective tissu e evaluated in each muscle of the study. It should be noted that large visible seams of in soluble connective tissue were removed from the Infraspinatus after dissection and from the Tricep s brachii after cooking. On a scale of 1-8 with 8 being no connective tissue dete cted and 1 being an abundant amount of connective tissue present, the Infraspinatus was found to have the least amount of connective tissue present with a sensory score of 7.3. Of the muscles evaluated, the Teres major was not significantly different (P > .05) from the Infraspinatus or the Triceps br achii with an evaluation score of 7.2. The muscle

PAGE 54

54 with the highest connective tissue score was th e Rhomboideus with a score of 5.8, which was significantly different (P > .05) from all other muscles in the study. Upon completion of sensory eval uation of muscles, no extreme off-flavors were found in any muscle. The off-flavors that appeared most frequently included milky, metallic and grassy. The muscle with the least amount of off-flavor detected on a scale of 1-6 with 1 being extreme off-flavor and 6 being no off-fl avor detected was the Triceps Br achii with a sensory score of 5.8. Off-flavor scores were similar (P > .05) for the Rhomboideus, Complexus, Splenius, Supraspinatus, Deep pectoral and Serratus vent ralis. The muscle with the most extreme offflavor was the Teres major with a score of 5.5, which was not significantly different from the Deep pectoral, Serratus ventralis or the Infraspinatus (Table 3-8). Overall, when comparing the muscles from th e veal chuck to a comp ilation of six decades and 58 papers of beef chuck data (Calkins and Sullivan, 2007), the data and rankings of the muscles from the veal chuck are comparable an d often times mimic those of muscles from the beef chuck. Although some differences do exist, it can be concluded that muscles from the veal chuck are comparable and can be ranked in accordance with many years of research on muscles from the beef chuck.

PAGE 55

55 Table 3-1. Average weights (standard deviat ions) of muscles from the veal chuck.e Muscle Comm. Wt. a (Min., Max) Denuded Wt. b (Min., Max) % Chuck c (Min., Max) % HCW d (Min., Max) Complexus (COM) .58 (.12) (.39, .80) .37 (.09) (.20, 58) 2.33 (1.41, 4.03) .28 (.15, .46) Deep pectoral (DEP) .33 (.09) (.15, .49) .23 (.07) (.11, .36) 1.43 (.76, 2.17) .17 (.09, .24) Infraspinatus (INF) .69 (.08) (.52, .91) .53 (.06) (.43, .68) 3.39 (2.39, 4.66) .41 (.31, .54) Rhomboideus (RHM) .23 (.05) (.15, .32) .16 (.04) (.09, .23) 1.01 (.58, 1.52) .12 (.06, .17) Serratus ventralis (SEV) 1.03 (.11) (.81, 1.32) .74 (.12) (.56, 1.00) 4.69 (3.16, 5.96) .57 (.43, .68) Splenius (SPL) .24 (.03) (.20, .32) .15 (.04) (.05, .22) .97 (.39, 1.56) .12 (.04, .18) Supraspinatus (SUP) .65 (.08) (.55, .91) .47 (.08) (.39, .64) 3.00 (1.71, 4.09) .36 (.31, .43) Triceps brachii (TRB) 1.13 (.17) (.82, 1.5) .87 (.10) (.68, 1.00) 5.49 (3.82, 6.85) .67 (.48, .81) Teres major (TER) .15 (.03) (.11, .21) .11 (.02) (.08, .16) .67 (.52, 1.02) .08 (.06, .13) a Commodity weight of muscle, b Denuded weight of muscle, c (Denuded muscle weight / Chuck weight), d (Denuded muscle weight / Hot carcass weight), e All weights are in Kilograms

PAGE 56

56 Table 3-2. Average measurements (standard deviation) of muscles from the veal chuck. a Muscle Lengthb (Min, Max) Widthc (Min, Max) Min. Depthd (Min, Max) Max Depthe (Min, Max) Complexus 33.50 (3.05) (28.0, 39.0) 11.55 (2.71) (7.0, 17.2) 0.92 (.29) (.5, 1.5) 1.84 (.42) (1.2, 2.5) Deep pectoral 25.56 (4.82) (18.0, 35.0) 10.22 (1.39) (7.5, 13.0) 0.93 (.31) (.5, 1.5) 1.63 (.29) (1.0, 2.2) Infraspinatus 27.14 (2.51) (20.5, 31.0) 10.13 (.80) (8.5, 11.0) 1.73 (.42) (.6, 2.5) 2.99 (.32) (2.6, 3.9) Rhomboideus 26.09 (5.54) (4.5, 30.5) 6.37 (.87) (5.0, 9.0) 0.84 (.25) (.5, 1.4) 1.59 (.24) (1.2, 2.1) Serratus ventralis 32.89 (4.20) (26.0, 42.5) 18.33 (1.80) (15.3, 22.0) 0.94 (.23) (.3, 1.5) 2.91 (.74) (1.0, 4.7) Splenius 27.54 (3.95) (20.0, 33.0) 7.72 (2.34) (5.0, 16.5) 0.68 (.25) (.2, 1.1) 1.36 (.41) (.9, 2.5) Supraspinatus 28.36 (1.96) (23.0, 31.8) 10.10 (1.00) (9.0, 13.0) 1.03 (.24) (.5, 1.6) 3.12 (.40) (2.3, 3.9) Triceps brachii 26.65 (2.30) (23.6, 31.5) 13.93 (1.17) (12.0, 16.0) 1.38 (.27) (.8, 1.9) 5.13 (.52) (4.0, 6.0) Teres major 19.21 (3.18) (8.8, 23.2) 5.38 (.99) (4.3, 8.5) 0.78 (.31) (.4, 1.5) 1.73 (.25) (1.3, 2.2) a All measurements are denuded measurements, b Length of the muscle in cm, c Width of the muscle in cm, d Minimum depth of the muscle in cm, e Maximum depth of the muscle in cm.

PAGE 57

57 Table 3-3. Industry evaluation. Muscle Suggested Cooking Methods and Applications Suggested Processing Needs (level of tenderization) Complexus Flat top grilli ng, Pan sear, Open grilling Mechanical Tenderization (mild) Deep Pectoral Pan sear, Wet br aise, Corned veal application Mechanical Tenderization (intermediate) Infraspinatus Flat top grilling, Pan sear, Braise, Open grilling Connective tissue removal (none required) Rhomboideus Pan searing, Cutlets, K-bobs Mechanical Tenderization (aggressive) Serratus Ventralis Pan fry, Open grilling, Braise, Cutlets Mechanical Tenderization (aggressive) Splenius Pan sear, Flat top grilling Mechanical Tenderization (aggressive) Supraspinatus Pan searing, Braised, Cutlets, Medallions Mechanical Tenderization (intermediate) Teres Major Grilling, Pan sear, Skewer application, Open grilling None required Triceps Brachii Pan searing, Braised with fat based liquid Mechanical Tenderization (intermediate) Table 3-3 is a compilation of information from two industry chefs and two industry representatives from two different dates. September 18, 2006: Steve Afflixio, C.E.C., A.A.C., Training Manager/Division Chef; US Foodservice. Paul McNally, District Territory Manager, US Foodservice. September 27, 2006: Mark P. Wachawiak, Chef Mythos Restaurant, Universal Orlando Resort. Tom Houlton, Thomas Marketing Group, Marketing of Specialty Proteins.

PAGE 58

58 Table 3-4. Overall tender ness of veal muscles. 1 Refer to Table 3-1; 2 8 = extremely tender to 1= extremely tough; a-d Means with common superscripts are not signifi cantly different (P > .05). Table 3-5. Juiciness of veal muscles. Muscle 1 Mean 2 Standard Error COM 6.5 a 0.08 SUP 6.3 ab 0.08 TER 6.1 b 0.08 SEV 6.0 b 0.08 DEP 5.9 bc 0.08 RHM 5.9 bcd 0.08 INF 5.9 cde 0.08 SPL 5.8 de 0.08 TRB 5.8 e 0.08 1 Refer to Table 3-1; 2 8 = extremely juicy to 1 = extremely dry; a-e Means with common superscripts are not signifi cantly different (P > .05). Muscle 1 Mean2 Standard Error INF 6.9 a 0.08 TER 6.8 a 0.08 COM 6.6 b 0.08 SUP 6.5 b 0.08 TRB 6.5 b 0.08 DEP 6.2 bc 0.08 SPL 6.2 c 0.08 SEV 6.0 c 0.08 RHM 5.8 d 0.08

PAGE 59

59 Table 3-6. Beef flavor 1 Refer to Table 3-1; 2 8 = extremely intense to 1 = extremely bland; a-e Means with common superscripts are not significan tly different (P > .05). Table 3-7. Connective tissue Muscle 1 Mean 2 Standard Error INF 7.3 a 0.09 TER 7.2 a 0.09 TRB 7.1 ab 0.09 SUP 6.9 bc 0.09 DEP 6.7 c 0.09 COM 6.6 cd 0.09 SPL 6.4 d 0.09 SEV 6.4 d 0.09 RHM 5.8 e 0.09 1 Refer to Table 3-1; 2 8 = none detected to 1 = abundant amount; a-e Means with common superscripts are not signifi cantly different (P > .05) Muscle 1 Mean 2 Standard Error SUP 5.1 a 0.12 COM 5.0 ab 0.12 TRB 4.8 b 0.12 SEV 4.8 b 0.12 DEP 4.8 bc 0.12 TER 4.6 bcd 0.12 INF 4.5 cde 0.12 RHM 4.3 de 0.12 SPL 4.0 e 0.12

PAGE 60

60 Table 3-8. Off-flavor. Muscle1 Mean2 Standard Error TRB 5.8a 0.06 RHM 5.8a 0.06 COM 5.7ab 0.06 SPL 5.7ab 0.06 SUP 5.7ab 0.06 DEP 5.7abc 0.06 SEV 5.7abc 0.06 INF 5.6bc 0.06 TER 5.5c 0.06 1 Refer to Table 3-1; 2 6 = None detected to 1 = extreme off-flavor; a-c Means with common superscripts are not signifi cantly different (P > .05).

PAGE 61

61 CHAPTER 4 EFFECTS OF AGING ON RETAIL DISPLAY ATTRIBUTES AND COLOR OF MUSCLES FROM THE VEAL CHUCK Introduction Phase one of the study, presented in Chapter 3, characterized numerous muscles from the veal chuck and identified six muscles that were desirable in tenderness, juiciness and flavor. To further characterize these six muscles, a study th at evaluated the shelf-life stability and color attributes was conducted. A shelf-life stability a nd color evaluation of the veal muscles further characterized the promising muscles identified in phase one of the veal optimization study and will allow veal processors and merchandisers to determine the value of these muscles. Materials and Methods: Experimental Samples IMPS 309 four rib square-cut chucks w ith USDA Choice quality grade and known slaughter date were random ly se lected at two separate veal pr ocessors (Strauss Veal and Lamb, Hales Corners, WI and Catelli Brothers Inc., Coll ingswood, NJ). Veal chucks were taken directly from the fabrication lines at th e processing plant and then dissect ed by a professional de-boner to obtain the following muscles: Complexus (COM), Deep Pectoral (DEP), Infraspinatus (INF), Serratus Ventralis (SEV), Supraspinatus (SUP), and Triceps Brachii (TRB). The muscles were then weighed to determine yields. After weights were taken, the muscles were allowed to bloom for 15 minutes and color measurements were taken using a Minolta CR-310 Chroma meter. After color measurements were obtained, each muscle was cut in half to be divided between the University of Florida and the University of Ne braska for further evaluation. Each muscle was vacuum packaged using a roll stoc k packager and boxed for shipment.

PAGE 62

62 Aging of Muscles Upon arrival to the University of Florida Meat Processing facility, the muscles were held at 3.8 2 C for their pre-determined aging peri ods in cardboard boxes with no light penetration. Aging periods were set at five, twelve, nineteen and twenty-six days postmortem. Animals and sides were randomly assigned to these aging periods, all muscles from a particular animal and side was represented in that same aging period (Table 4-1) Shelf-life and Color Evaluation After each respective ag ing period, muscles were removed from package and weighed to determine packaging purge. After weights were taken, the muscles were completely denuded and a beginning retail weight was taken to later determ ine retail display purge. Muscles were placed in foam trays with a single Cryovac Dry-loc ac 40 meat and poultry pad, and then covered with a single layer of polyvinyl chlo ride over-wrap (oxygen tr ansmission rate of 23,250 ml/m2/24hr.). Color measurements were taken of each muscle using a Minolta CR-310 Chroma meter each day of retail display. The muscles were also evaluate d by a trained, five memb er panel, to visually assess each muscle. Each muscle was scored for overall appearance (8= extremely desirable, 1= extremely undesirable), Color (USDA pork color scal e, 1= very light pink, 5= extremely dark red), Discoloration (8= no discol oration, 1= 100% discolored) and purge (6= none detected, 1= abundant). All muscles were presented in the reta il case for three days with color measurements and objective evaluation on each da y of the study (day 0, 1, 2, 3). After the third day, muscles were removed from the foam trays and a final weight was taken from each muscle to determine retail display purge. Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis was conducted using SAS pr oc m ixed data. Day of aging was the main effect being explored for all analysis. Interacti ons were assessed for muscle, days in retail case

PAGE 63

63 and days in case by days of aging to determine the effects of post-mortem aging on each muscles retail case stability. Although the go al of the study was not to determine a difference in supplier, supplier differences were explored a nd no significant difference was found. Summary of Results and Discussion Table 4-2 presents the weights of each m uscle after shipping and after retail display. Packaging purge was determined for each portion of muscle by subtracting the blotted muscle weight and the dry package weight from the overa ll meat and package weight. Percent packaging purge was then calculated. Retail purge was calcu lated by subtracting the out of case weight from the in case weight and dividing by the in case weight to determine percent retail display purge. The muscle with the most purge in the stu dy was the Deep Pectoral with an overall purge of .05% from packaging through retail display. Table 4-3 represents mean subjective eval uations for overall appearance which were obtained for each muscle within each aging perio d. It was determined that days of post-mortem aging had a significant effect on subjective evaluati ons for overall appearance of the muscles (P < .05). The three muscles that showed no effect due to days of aging were the Deep Pectoral, Infraspinatus, and the Triceps Brachii. These thre e muscles are most likely to retain their overall appearance when aged in vacuum sealed packagi ng at 3.8 2 C for up to 26 days post-mortem. Figure 4-1 gives a representation of the overall muscle appearance over the three day retail period. Means for all muscles in each retail displa y day are represented in the graph. All muscles behaved similarly for during retail display. All six muscles in the study reacted simila rly for each of the four aging periods for subjective overall appearance scores. The most desirable overall appearance scores were observed in the five, nineteen and twenty-six day aging periods, with no aging periods being statistically different (P > .05) (Figure 4-2). The differences in all four aging periods for

PAGE 64

64 subjective overall appearance was minimal and no c onclusion could be reached to determine if one aging period had more effect on subjective appearance of the mu scles when placed in a retail display. Table 4-4 represents subjective color evalua tion means for each muscle during postmortem aging. Post-mortem aging did significantly aff ect subjective color scores for all muscles represented in the study (P < .05) The three muscles that are most likely to retain their acceptable color over the four aging periods include the Deep pectoral, Serratus Ventralis, and the Triceps Brachii. The Supraspinatus had a declin e in color between five and twelve days of aging but retained this color value through 26 days of aging. Table 4-5 represents the effects of post-mo rtem aging on subjective color scores. Means for each aging period were taken at each day in the case to determine the day in case*days of aging interaction. It was determined that post-mo rtem aging had significant effects on the color evaluation for each day in the case (P < .05). Musc les with more post-mortem age were lighter in color for all but day zero of retail display. On day zero of retail display, muscles with 26 days of age had the darkest subjective color scores. All muscles in the study were found to react similarly for color ev aluation over the retail display period (Figure 4-3). The largest declin e in color was observed between the first and second day of retail display, but none of the days were significantly different from each other (P > .05). Post-mortem aging had a significant effect on muscle discoloration during retail display (P < .05). As presented in Table 4-6, the three muscle s that did not show a postmortem age effect on discoloration were the Deep pectoral, Infraspina tus and Supraspinatus. The other three muscles discolorations were effected by the different aging periods (T able 4-6). The Complexus and

PAGE 65

65 Serratus ventralis muscles with greater than five days of postmortem age had more discoloration. The discoloration of the Triceps brachii was not consistently infl uenced by days of post-mortem age. All muscles in the study were found to react similarly for discoloration over the retail display period (Figure 4-4). As expected, an increase in discolora tion was noted for all days of retail display with the largest increase coming after day 1 of retail display. The mean discoloration score for three days of retail di splay time was comparable to 10% discoloration when averaged across all six muscles, the musc les became 10% more discolored each day of retail display. Table 4-6 gives a va lid representation for muscle disc oloration scores for the four aging periods. All muscles in the study were found to react sim ilarly for discoloration over the four aging periods (P > .05). Muscles aged for twelve days were found to have the most discoloration when averaged over the retail display days. Five days of post-mortem aging had the most desirable scores and day twelve had the most discoloration when averaged across all three days of retail display (Figure 4-5) Days of post-mortem aging had a significant e ffect on subjective muscle purge scores (P < .05). The aging period that most commonly represented the highe st amount of purge was the 26 day aging period. The only muscle that did not show the most purge for this aging period was the Deep pectoral, although from a pr actical perspective all differen ces were small (Table 4-7). Days of post-mortem aging had a significant effect on subjective pur ge evaluations over the retail display period (P < .05). Interaction was detected between ag ing periods as well as between days in the retail display (Table 4-8) The aging period with that showed the most abundant purge was the 26 day aging period. It mu st be noted that no aging period or retail

PAGE 66

66 display period was undesirable in subjective purge (all values between barely detected and none detected). All muscles were found to react similarly for purge over the retail di splay period. A slight increase in purge was noted for each day in the retail case with no day being different (P > .05) (Figure 4-6). Days of postmortem aging had a significant effect on L* values (P < .05). L* values remain constant for the five and twelve day ag ing periods but an increase in these values was noted between the twelve and nineteen day pos t-mortem aging periods (become more white). The only muscle that showed no significant change in L* values across aging periods was the Infraspinatus (Table 4-9). L* values reacted to retail disp lay day similarly for all muscles (P > .05). A slight increase in L* values occurred between da ys zero and one of retail display and a decrease in these values was found between day one and two of display (F igure 4-7). The data revealed that these muscles become darker after day one of retail display. All muscles in the study were found to react si milarly for L* values over the four aging periods. An average was taken for all days of reta il display at each aging period to determine the effects of aging on retail display. Post-mortem aging increased L* values between twelve and nineteen days of aging over the three da ys of retail displa y (Figure 4-8). Days of postmortem aging had a significant e ffect on a* values (P < .05). The greatest change in these values was from the 5 day aging period to the 12 day aging period (Table 4-10). Over this 7 day period the muscles become darker red (increasing a* values). The muscles then remain relatively constant for the other three aging periods.

PAGE 67

67 Days of retail display had a significant effect on a* values (P < .05). a* values represent the redness or greenness of musc le color. As values increase, redness of the muscle increases. Shown in Table 4-11, the Complexus and Serratus Ventralis became less red in color during retail display. Other muscles were not consistent in change of a* values (redness) and differences were small during three days of retail display. Means were taken over retail display for all muscles, it was determined all muscles reacted similarly to days of postmortem aging for a* values (P > .05). Figure 4-9 shows there was an increase in a* values between the five and tw elve day aging period, with a similar a* value through out the rest of the ag ing periods (Table 4-12). Days of post-mortem aging had a statistically significant effect on b* values (P < .05). Similar to the a* values the largest increase in b* values (yellowness) was between the five and twelve day aging period. After this increase in b* values the musc les remain fairly consistent over the other three aging periods (Table 4-13). Days of retail display had a st atistically significan t effect on b* values (P < .05). The most apparent difference in the muscles was between day zero and day one of retail display. All muscles increased in b* values af ter being displayed for one day. This reveals that the muscles became more yellow after the first day of retail display, but retained their b* value throughout the remaining retail display days. Days of aging and retail display interacti on had a statistically significant effect on b* values (P < .05). As apparent in the days of postmortem aging effects (Table 4-12), there was a significant increase in b* values (yellowness) between the five and twelve day aging periods, with all other aging periods being not statistically different (Table 4-14).

PAGE 68

68 Conclusion When placed in a three day retail setting the six muscles in th is study behaved the sam e for overall appearance, subjective color and muscle purge. Post-mortem aging had no significant effect on overall appearance or subjective co lor evaluation for the six muscles. Muscle discoloration of the Deep Pectoral, Infraspinatu s, and Triceps brachii was not effected by postmortem aging, nor did post-mortem aging have an effect on overall appearance for the three day retail display period for these muscles. However post-mortem aging had a significant effect on objective color values (L*, a*, b*). The greatest impact of post-mortem aging on objective color (L*, a*, b*) values was observed between the fi ve and twelve day post-mortem aging periods. Between these two aging periods the muscles became darker, redder and more yellow. The muscles then retained this colo r throughout the remaining aging pe riods (up to 26 days of age). Although there was a significant effect of postmortem aging on objective color, the overall impact on veal muscle characteristics was small.

PAGE 69

69 Table 4-1. Aging period assignment. Carcass Day 5 Day 12 Day 19 Day 26 In out in out In out in out 1 3/17 3/20 3/31 4/3 2 3/17 3/20 3/24 3/27 3 3/31 4/3 4/7 4/10 4 3/24 3/27 4/7 4/10 5 3/17 3/20 4/7 4/10 6 3/24 3/27 3/31 4/3 7 3/31 4/3 4/7 4/10 8 3/17 3/20 3/24 3/27 9 3/17 3/20 4/7 4/10 10 3/26 3/29 4/2 4/5 11 3/26 3/29 4/9 4/12 12 3/19 3/22 4/2 4/5 13 3/19 3/22 4/9 4/12 14 4/2 4/5 4/9 4/12 15 3/19 3/22 4/2 4/5 16 3/26 3/29 4/2 4/5 17 3/26 3/29 4/9 4/12 18 3/19 3/22 3/26 3/29 1. Left sides were assigned to lower agi ng period for carcasses with odd numbers. 2. Right sides were assigned to lower aging periods for carcasses with even numbers.

PAGE 70

70 Table 4-2. Average muscle weights (standard de viation) of muscle from the veal chuck.1 Muscle In Case Wt.2 Out of Case Wt.3 Packaging Purge % 4 Retail Display Purge % 5 COM .39 (.09) .38 (.08) 0.01 0.03 DEP .23 (.05) .22 (.05) 0.02 0.03 INF .85 (.11) .83 (.11) 0.01 0.02 SEV .82 (.14) .81 (.14) 0.01 0.02 SUP .52 (.09) .51 (.09) 0.01 0.02 TRB .81 (.12) .80 (.12) 0.01 0.02 1 Average weight for portion of muscle; 2 Denude weight of muscle in lbs;3 Weight of muscle after four days of retail display; 4 Loss due to vacuum packaging for post-mortem aging; 5 Percent of beginning weight lo st due to retail display Table 4-3. Days of post-mortem aging effects on subjective overall appearance. 1 Days of post-mortem aging Muscle 5 12 19 26 COM 6.6a 5.7c 6.2ab 5.8bc DEP 6.7 6.7 6.8 6.9 INF 6.7 6.3 6.3 6.4 SEV 6.7a 6.0b 6.5a 6.2ab SUP 6.6ab 6.5b 7.0a 6.8ab TRB 6.8c 6.5 6.5 6.9 1 Scale of 1-8 with 8 =extremely desirable, 1= Extremely undesirable; 2 Means within same rows with different superscripts were significantly different (P < .05).

PAGE 71

71 Table 4-4. Days of post-mortem aging effects on subjective color evaluation. 1 Days of post-mortem aging Muscle 5 12 19 26 COM 3.4bc 3.7a 3.2d 3.4c DEP 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.3 INF 3.0bc 3.3a 2.9c 3.1ab SEV 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 SUP 3.4a 3.2b 3.1b 3.1b TRB 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.4 1 Color evaluation using USDA pork color scale (1-5). 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05). Table 4-5. Effects of post-mortem aging on subjec tive color evaluations by days in the case. 1 1 Color evaluation using USDA pork color scale (1-5). 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05). Days of post-mortem aging Days in Case 5 12 19 26 0 3.2bc 3.4b 3.2c 3.7a 1 3.5a 3.4a 3.2b 3.1b 2 3.3ab 3.4a 3.2bc 3.1c 3 3.4a 3.3ab 3.2bc 3.1c

PAGE 72

72 Table 4-6. Effects of post-mortem aging on muscle discoloration. 1 Days of post-mortem aging Muscle 5 12 19 26 COM 7.5a 6.5b 6.9b 6.4b DEP 7.6 7.3 7.4 7.6 INF 7.5 7.0 7.2 7.2 SEV 7.4a 6.8b 7.1ab 6.8b SUP 7.3 7.3 7.5 7.7 TRB 7.5ab 7.1ab 7.0b 7.5a 1 Scale of 1-8 with 8 = No disc oloration, 1 = 100% discoloration 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05). Table 4-7. Days of post-mortem aging e ffects on subjective muscle purge scores. 1 Days of post-mortem aging Muscle 5 12 19 26 COM 5.9b 5.9ab 5.9a 5.7c DEP 5.9b 5.9ab 6.0a 6.0a INF 6.0a 5.9a 6.0a 5.7b SEV 5.8b 6.0a 5.9a 5.7b SUP 6.0a 5.9a 5.9a 5.5b TRB 5.9a 5.9a 6.0a 5.8b 1 Scale 1-6 with 6 = none detected, 1 = abundant. 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05).

PAGE 73

73 Table 4-8. Effects of post-mortem aging on subjective purge evaluations by days in the case. 1 Days of post-mortem aging Days in Case 5 12 19 26 0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 1 6.0a 5.9a 6.0a 5.7b 2 5.8b 5.8ab 5.9a 5.8b 3 5.8a 5.9a 5.9a 5.5b 1 Scale 1-6 with 1 = abundant purge, 6 = none detected. 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05). Table 4-9. Days of post-mortem aging effects on L* values. 1 Days of post-mortem aging Muscle 5 12 19 26 COM 52.8b 50.8b 55.0a 54.7a DEP 52.7b 52.8b 53.9a 54.2 INF 53.1 53.0 53.6 53.4 SEV 52.9b 53.6ab 53.6a 54.1a SUP 55.4a 53.9b 55.9a 56.0a TRB 52.6c 53.0bc 54.2a 53.7ab 1 Range of 0 to 100 where 0 is absolu te black and 100 is absolute white. 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05).

PAGE 74

74 Table 4-10. Days of Post-mortem agi ng effects on a* values (redness). 1 Days of post-mortem aging Muscle 5 12 19 26 COM 16.3c 20.9a 19.6b 19.3b DEP 15.0b 21.5a 21.8a 22.6a INF 15.0b 21.2a 21.4a 22.0a SEV 16.1b 20.9a 20.8a 21.2a SUP 14.8c 21.3b 21.2b 22.6a TRB 16.4b 21.3a 20.8a 22.0a 1 Range -60 to 60, with positive numbers bei ng red and negative numbers being green. 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05). Table 4-11. Effects of retail di splay on a* values (redness). 1 Days of Retail Display Muscle 0 1 2 3 COM 20.1a 19.8a 19.0a 17.1b DEP 19.4c 21.1a 20.7ab 19.7bc INF 19.2b 20.5a 20.5a 19.3ab SEV 20.4a 20.4a 19.8a 18.3b SUP 19.0b 20.6a 20.3a 20.0ab TRB 19.8c 21.1a 20.7ab 19.1bc 1 Range -60 to 60, with positive numbers bei ng red and negative numbers being green. 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05).

PAGE 75

75 Table 4-12. Days of post-mortem aging effects on b* values (yellowness). 1 Days of post-mortem aging Muscle 5 12 19 26 COM 8.1c 9.3a 8.9ab 8.5bc DEP 6.0b 8.8a 8.5a 8.9a INF 7.3b 9.2a 9.2a 9.7a SEV 8.0b 9.5a 9.9a 9.6a SUP 7.7c 9.2b 9.2b 10.0a TRB 8.0b 9.5a 9.5a 9.7a 1 Range -60 to 60 with positive b* values being yellow and negative values being blue. 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05). Table 4-13. Effects of retail di splay on b* values (yellowness). 1 Days of Retail Display Muscle 0 1 2 3 COM 8.2b 9.0a 9.0a 8.7ab DEP 6.6b 8.6a 8.6a 8.4a INF 7.6b 9.4a 9.5a 8.9a SEV 8.7b 9.7a 9.7a 9.0a SUP 7.6b 9.6a 9.6a 9.4a TRB 8.1b 9.7a 9.7a 9.2a 1 Range -60 to 60 with positive b* values being yellow and negative b* values being blue. 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05).

PAGE 76

76 Table 4-14. Interaction between days of aging and retail display on b* values (yellowness). 1 Days of post-mortem aging Days in Case 5 12 19 26 0 5.4b 8.7a 8.7a 8.5a 1 7.8b 9.8a 9.6a 9.9a 2 8.6b 9.4a 9.5a 9.9a 3 8.4b 9.1a 9.0a 9.3a 1 Range -60 to 60 with positive b* values being yellow and negative b* values being blue. 2 Means within same rows with different supers cripts were significantly different (P < .05). Figure 4-1. Effects of days in case on subjective overall appearance score. Note: Scale of 1-8 with 8 =extremely desi rable, 5=Slightly de sirable 1= Extremely undesirable.

PAGE 77

77 Figure 4-2. Days of post-mortem aging effects on overall appearance score. Note:1 Means for each aging period over three days of retail display. 2 Scale of 1-8 with 8 =extremely desirable, 5=Slightly desirable 1= Extremely undesirable. Figure 4-3. Effects of days in th e case on subjective color score. Note: Color evaluation usi ng USDA pork color scale (1-5).

PAGE 78

78 Figure 4-4. Muscle discolora tion over retail display. Note: Scale of 1-8 with 8 = No discoloration, 1 = 100% discoloration. Figure 4-5. Overall means for disc oloration for each aging period. 1 Note: 1 Scale of 1-8 with 8 = No disc oloration, 1 = 100% discoloration 2 Means for each aging period over three days of retail display

PAGE 79

79 Figure 4-6. Muscle purge over days of retail display.1 Note: 1 Scale 1-6 with 1 = abundant purge, 6 = none detected. Figure 4-7. Changes in L* due to days of retail display. 1 Note: 1 Range of 0 to 100 where 0 is absolute black and 100 is absolute white.

PAGE 80

80 Figure 4-8. L* values change over days of postmortem aging. 1 Note: 1 Range of 0 to 100 where 0 is absolute black and 100 is absolute white. Figure 4-9. a* value change over days in retail case. 1 Note: 1 Range -60 to 60, with positive numbers being red and negative numbers being green.

PAGE 81

81 CHAPTER 5 EFFECTS OF TOTAL HEME PIGMEN TS ON SHELF LIFE STABILI TY Introduction The concentration and stability of m eat pigmen ts are of great importance to all concerned with shelf-life stability. Not only does color become important to retail outlets, but also to merchandisers of meat products. Color stability and acceptability is not only important in the retail sector, but also for food service and inst itutional industries. According to Hornsey (1956), the assessment of the depth and stability of colo r which is determined visually and comparisons made at the same time by an expert can provi de useful information. However, in order to determine the factors affecti ng the cause of fading, an obj ective measurement becomes necessary. The rate of fading meat pigments can only be studied if a fairly rapid estimation is used, in which no further oxidative changes take place during the determination. Although Hornsey conducted experiments using cooked me at products, the methodology he developed can also determine the change in total heme pi gment in raw meat products (Hornsey 1956). Materials and Methods Experimental Samples Three of the nine m uscles that were identified in the previous chapters as being the most promising from the veal chuck were further eval uated to determine how aging and total pigment content affect shelf life stability. The three muscles include the Infraspina tus, Supraspinatus and the Triceps brachii. These three muscles were sel ected due to their adequa te performance in the sensory and shelf life stabili ty portion of the study. Aging and Display Each m uscle was randomly assigned to one of four aging periods based on the carcass in which they originated (Table 4-1). After comp letion of the predetermined aging period, samples

PAGE 82

82 were collected from each of the three muscles to be used as a pre-display hematin sample. The remaining portion of the muscle was placed in a retail display case for three days of display (single tiered flat cases at 7 2 C, with fluorescent lighting of 85 foot candles). After three days of display, muscles were removed from the retail display case and a sample was taken to be used as an ending hematin sample. The samples were packaged in individual sample bags and frozen at -40 2C until pigment extraction was conducted. Total Pigment and Heme Iron Procedure The procedure used was developed by Hornsey (1956) to rapidly extract pigm ents from cooked cured pork. Due to small samples taken, the procedure was adapted to fit the needs of our project where sample sizes were smaller and less of each reagent was used. The extraction method uses an acetone-acid mixture that is filtered then analyzed with a spectrophotometer. The absorbance reading is then plugged into an equa tion to determine total pigment (ppm). Aliquots of 2.52 grams of ground sample, free of fat and connective tissue, were placed in a 20 ml homogenizing flask. 5 ml of acetone-acid mixture was added and each sample was homogenized for 30 seconds. After homogenization an additional 5 ml of the acetone-acid mixture was added and samples were placed in a centrifuge for 10 minutes at 2200g. Samples were then filtered and absorbance measurements were taken at 640 nm against reagent bla nk. To calculate total pigment (Hematin ppm) the absorbance was multiplied by 680 and divided by the sample weight. Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis was conducted using the SA S proc mixed procedure. Hematin content for each muscle was the dependent variable ex plored, with muscle, retail display period and aging period used as independent variables.

PAGE 83

83 Summary of Results and Discussion Muscle type had an overall eff ect on total pigm ents (P < .05) Comparing each muscle, the heme pigment content of the Supraspinatus was sta tistically higher than that of the Infraspinatus and the Triceps brachii (P<.05), but the Infraspina tus and the Triceps brac hii were similar in hematin content (P>.05). When analyzed by muscle type, the total pigments within each muscle were not significantly different (P>.05) afte r three days of retail display. Th e amount of total pigments in the samples remained the same after three days of retail display which leads to the conclusion that three days of retail displa y has no effect on pigment concentr ation (pigment not purged out). The only muscle affected by days of postmortem aging on hematin content was the Infraspinatus. Hematin content was affected between the five and twelve day aging periods with a significant increase (P<.05) in total pigments between the first two aging periods. The hematin content of the other two muscles was not affected by days of post-mortem aging. Conclusion Although this study did not present a technique us eful in determ ining sh elf life stability of muscles from the veal chuck, the Hematin cont ent extracted from these muscles lead to conclusions that are important to the entire study. The first conclusion that can be made is that the carcasses in the study were from a group of cal ves that were fed a similar diet. According to Miltenburg et al (1992), different levels of dietary iron can aff ect the amount of total muscle heme pigment. The similarities found among the hematin content of thes muscles from each animal show that the animals were fed similar levels of dietary iron. The total pigment content measured also leads to the conclusion that decr eases or increases in hematin have no effect on shelf life stability of the th ree muscles presented. Although no other research was found that compared hematin content with sh elf life stability of fresh veal the research presented above

PAGE 84

84 concludes that no definitive dete rmination of shelf life stability can be obtained by measuring of total pigments in fresh veal.

PAGE 85

85 CHAPTER 6 CORRELATION BETWEEN MUSCLE COLOR, CARCASS MEAS URED COLOR AND TENDERNESS Introduction Veal is offered for sale to consum ers at generally higher prices than ot her protein sources. Boleman et al. (1995) demonstrated that consumers are willing to pay for tenderness, and there is a strong correlation between price and tenderness among cuts of beef. The veal industry is similar in a way that prices usually reflect produ ct tenderness as well as consumer acceptability of color. In the beef industry, marbling score is currently used to se gregate and price beef carcasses, and has been shown to be related to beef palatability when examined across a wide range of marbling levels (Smith et al., 1984). Howe ver, in the veal industr y, two different factors are used to grade carcasses. Lean color and degr ee of feathering and flank fat streaking, instead of marbling scores and maturity scores are used to complete the grading standard for veal carcasses. For beef, there seems to be a relationship between ultimate muscle pH and(or) muscle color and meat tenderness (Purchas, 1990; Jeremiah et al., 1991; Watanabe et al., 1996). This portion of the study was conducted to determine wh ether objective measures of flank color and Longissimus dorsi color could be used to segregate veal carcasses into merchandising groups (USDA grades), as well as corr elating individual musc le color to expected eating satisfaction. Materials and Methods Eighteen veal carcasses with USDA Choice qua lity grade and known slaughter date w ere randomly selected at two separate commercial ve al processors. Before chucks were removed, objective color measurements were taken from the carcass Rectus abdominus (flank area) and longissimus dorsi muscle at the tenth rib from each carcass using using a Minolta CR-310 Chroma meter at 48 hours post-mortem. Veal chuc ks were taken directly from the fabrication lines at the respective processing plant and then dissected by a profession al de-boner to obtain

PAGE 86

86 the following muscles: Complexus (COM), Deep Pectoral (DEP), Infraspinatus (INF), Serratus Ventralis (SEV), Supraspinatus (SUP), and Tric eps Brachii (TRB). The muscles were allowed to bloom for 15 minutes and color measurements were taken using a Minolta CR-310 Chroma meter. After color measurements were obtaine d, each muscle was cut in half to be divided between the University of Florid a and the University of Nebras ka for further evaluation. Each muscle was vacuum packaged using a roll stock packager and boxed for shipment. The portion of muscle that was shipped to the University of Nebraska was assigned to an aging regimen where it was stored for one of five aging periods at 3.8 2 C. The aging periods were three, five, ten, seventeen and twenty f our days postmortem. After the aging period, the muscles were cooked, cored and sheared accord ing to AMSA (1995) guidelines, and WarnerBratzler shear force values for each muscle were obtained. After the data was gathered, shear force values were correlated with flank and longissimus color scores using Pearsons square method to find the relationship between objective color measurements and Warner-Bratzler shear force values. The comparisons were made based upon carcass color measurements as well as color m easurements for each individual muscle used in the study. Summary of Results and Discussion For individual m uscles from the veal chuck, it was found that objective color measurements alone were not sufficient to predict tenderness. For all muscles, excluding the Infraspintaus, b* values had the highest correlati on to Warner Bratzler shear force values but the correlation coefficients were low (r values range from -.05 to -.48). Supported by a similar study conducted by Wulf et. al. (1996) where color m easurements were used in beef to predict tenderness, it was also found that b* values had the highest correlation with tenderness (R2 = -.38).

PAGE 87

87 Correlation of carcass color measurements to Wa rner Bratzler Shear Force values, L* a* b* values showed higher correlation to tendernes s than color measurements from individual muscles, but it is not possible to identify one value that correlates color and tenderness. These objective color measurements were more often clos ely related to muscles from the three and five day aging periods than those of the other three longer aging periods. Conclusion This data id entified no one color attribute that significantly related to shear values of the muscles from the veal chuck evaluated in this study. Color measurement from the carcass was not related to shear force values of the veal chuck. Although identifying a certain attribute that affects tenderness would be a huge advancement, the measurements obtained in this study were not statistically strong enough to make a definite decision in re lating color to tenderness.

PAGE 88

88 CHAPTER 7 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS Preliminary Evaluation of Nine Muscles Weights and Dimensions Upon proposal of this study, the chan ce of finding muscles too small for evaluation was of concern becau se of the carcass sizes and weights. After dissection of the nine muscles presented in chapter three, it was determined that eight out of the nine muscles removed were of useable size and weight. The only muscle of concern was the Teres major, which was small and did not represent a substantial percentage of carcass weight. The concerns that this muscle woul d not be feasible to remove grew because dissection of the muscle is tedious and the room for error was small. Although small and difficult to dissect, the positive palatability attr ibutes of this muscle may create value that out weighs the cost of ex traction (Table 3-2). Industry Evaluation Table 3-3 gives som e applicable cooking methods that worked well for each muscle and also gives some insight on the t ypes of further processi ng that was suggested by the chefs to further enhance the products. It should be noted that the sensory data that was obtained supports the amount of furthe r processing needed for each individual muscle. The most tender muscles (Infraspina tus, Teres major, Complexus) will require minimal processing while the toughest mu scles ( Splenius, Serratus ventralis, Rhomboideus) will require a more aggre ssive tenderization method to improve tenderness to a level more acceptable to f oodservice. Similar to studies completed on muscles from the beef chuck, some muscles ma y require more time and expense to create

PAGE 89

89 acceptable palatability attributes, while some can be used in their original form. To fully optimize the value of the less tender muscles, further processing may be needed. Sensory Evaluation Sensory evaluation revealed the m ost-te nder muscle of the veal chuck was the Infraspinatus. On a scale of 1-8 with 1 being extremely tough and 8 being extremely tender, the Infraspinatus was evaluated at 6.9 or moderately tender. The Teres Major was found to be not significantly different (P > .05) from the Infraspinatus with a tenderness score of 6.8. The toughest muscle in the st udy was found to be the Rhomboideus which was evaluated at 5.8 on the same 1-8 scale. The Rhomboideus was significantly lower (P > .05) in tenderness from all other muscles in the study (Table 3-4). Table 3-5 depicts the sensory evaluation data for the juiciness of veal muscles. On a scale from 1-8 with 8 being extremely juicy and 1 being extremely dry, it was determined that the Complexus was the juiciest muscle with a sensory evaluation score of 6.5 or moderately juicy. The Supraspina tus was found to be not signif icantly different (P > .05) with a score of 6.3. The driest muscle in th e study was found to be the Triceps Brachii with an evaluation score of 5.8. It was discove red that the Infraspinatus and the Splenius were not significantly different (P > .05) fr om the Triceps brachii with scores of 5.9 and 5.8, respectively. On a scale from 1-8 with 1 being extremely bland and 8 being extremely intense, the Supraspinatus had the most intense beef flavor with a sensory score of 5.1. The Complexus was not significantly different (P > .05) with a scor e of 5.0 or slightly intense. The blandest muscle of the study was the Sple nius with a score of 4.0 with no significant difference (P > .05) from the Infraspinatus or the Splenius with evaluation scores of 4.5

PAGE 90

90 and 4.3, respectively. Most of these muscles were found to be slightly bland when evaluated for beef flavor (Table 3-6). Table 3-7 depicts the amount of connective tissue evaluated in each muscle of the study. It should be noted that large visibl e seams of insoluble connective tissue were removed from the Infraspinatus after dissection and from the Triceps brachii after cooking. On a scale of 1-8 with 8 being no connective tissue detected and 1 being an abundant amount of connective ti ssue present, the Infraspinatus was found to have the least amount of connective tissue present w ith a sensory score of 7.3. The Teres major was not significantly different (P > .05) from the Infraspinatus or the Triceps brachii with an evaluation score of 7.2. The muscle with the most connective ti ssue present was the Rhomboideus with a score of 5.8 which was si gnificantly different (P > .05) from all other muscles in the study. Upon completion of sensory evaluation of muscles, no extreme off-flavors were found in any muscle. The off-flavors that appeared most frequently included milky, metallic and grassy. The muscle with the least amount of off-flavor detected on a scale of 1-6 with 1 being extreme off-flavor and 6 be ing no off-flavor detected was the Triceps Brachii with a sensory score of 5.8. This score was found to be not significantly different (P > .05) from the Rhomboideus, Complexus, Splenius, Supraspinatus, Deep pectoral and Serratus ventralis. The muscle with the most extreme off-flavor was the Teres major with a score of 5.5, which was not significantly di fferent from the Deep pectoral, Serratus ventralis or the Infraspinatus (Table 3-8). After completion of the first phase of th e study, it was determined that further evaluation of the muscles was needed. To reduce costs and fully explore the most

PAGE 91

91 promising muscles, six of the nine muscles were selected for the second phase of the study. These muscles were determined to be the most desirable for palatability attributes and tenderness. Further Evaluation of Six Muscles Retail Display For further evaluation, a retail display of the six muscles identified by phase one of the study was conducted. It was found that when placed in a three day retail trial the six muscles in this study behaved the same fo r overall appearance, subjective color and muscle purge. Post-mortem aging had no signifi cant effect on overall appearance or subjective color evaluation for the six musc les. Muscle discoloration of the Deep Pectoral, Infraspinatus, and Triceps brachii was not effected by post-mortem aging, nor did post-mortem aging have an effect on ove rall appearance for the three day retail display period for these muscles. However pos t-mortem aging had a significant effect on objective color values (L*, a*, b*). The gr eatest impact of post-mortem aging on objective color (L*, a*, b*) values was observed between the five and twelve day postmortem aging periods. Between these two ag ing periods the muscles became darker, redder and more yellow. The muscles then retained this color throughout the remaining aging periods (up to 26 days of age). A lthough there was a significant effect of postmortem aging on objective color, the overall impact on veal muscle characteristics was small. Total Pigment In hopes of finding a way of determ ining the integrity of muscle color during retail display, three muscles were sampled to determin e if the change in color pigments had an effect on retail display acceptability. It was f ound that muscle type had an overall effect

PAGE 92

92 on total pigments (P<.05). Comparing each muscle, the heme pigment content of the Supraspinatus was statistically different from the Infraspinatus and the Triceps brachii (P<.05), but the Infraspinatus and the Triceps brachii were similar in hematin content (P>.05). When broken down individually, the to tal pigments within each muscle were not significantly different (P>.05) after three da ys of retail display. The amount of total pigments in the samples remained the same after three days of retail display which leads to the conclusion that total pigment change during retail display has no effect on shelf-life stability for these three muscles. The only mu scle affected by days of post-mortem aging was the Infraspinatus. Hematin content was a ffected between the five and twelve day aging periods with a significan t increase (P<.05) in total pi gments between the first two aging periods. The hematin content of the ot her two muscles was not affected by days of post-mortem aging. Although this study did not produce conclusions useful for determining retail shelf life stability, the Hematin content extracted fr om these muscles lead to conclusions that are important to the entire study. The first conclusion that can be made is that the carcasses in the study were from a group of calve s that were fed a similar diet. According to Miltenburg et al (1992), di fferent levels of dietary iron can affect the amount of total muscle heme pigment. The similarities f ound among the hematin content of thes muscles from each animal show that the animals were fed similar levels of dietary iron. The total pigment content measured also leads to the conclusion that decreases or increases in hematin have no effect on shelf life stability of the three muscles presented. Although no other research was found that compared hematin content with shelf life stability of fresh

PAGE 93

93 veal, the research presented above concludes th at no definitive determination of shelf life stability can be obtained by measuring of total pigments in fresh veal. Carcass Color and Tenderness In industry today, the cost of labor is sky rocketing. To reduce the am ount of man hours used in production of meat products, indus try is continuously looking for ways to use instruments for grading and carcass selecti on. In this section of the study, the process of using instrumental color measurements for carcass grading was explored. It was found that carcass color measurements and tendern ess were not highly correlated, L* a* b* values were more closely related to tendern ess than color measurements from individual muscles, but it was not possible to identify one value that that was highly correlated to tenderness. The objective color measurements we re more often closely related to muscles from the three and five day aging periods th an those of the other three longer aging periods. When analyzing the data, no one color attribute was determined to have relationship to tenderness of th e muscles from the veal chuck. The data showed that the color measurement that correlates carcass colo r to tenderness differed for each muscle. In some cases the L* value taken from the flank area was the most correlated with tenderness and other times the a* value ta ken from the Longissimus muscle was most correlated. Although identifying a certain attribute that aff ects tenderness would be a huge advancement, the measurements obtained in this study are not statistically strong enough to make a definite decision in relating carcass color measuremen ts in the flank or Longissimus muscle to tenderness.

PAGE 94

94 Value Optimization Upon com pleting an evaluation of six muscles from the veal chuck it is evident that the chance for adding value to the veal chuc k is prominent. Although complete dissection of these muscles is tedious and somewhat tim e consuming, industry leaders can take this information and use it as a way to further a dd value to their product. The main purpose of this project was achieved as the research found muscles that were acceptable and useable and could be a great starting point to merchandising the veal chuck in a way that would be more profitable to the veal industry. Recent work, identical to the work presented here, has been conducted by the University of Florid a and the University of Nebraska for over a decade. In an effort to add value to the b eef carcass, it was found th at to bring attention to the potential use of under-uti lized muscles, it must be presented to leaders in the industry both on the supply and retail side s of the business. Evaluation of 39 muscles from the beef chuck and round found a few muscles that offered a more acceptable product at a value price. One of the most impr essive and successful steaks found in prior research is the Flat Iron Steak, in which ove r 92 million pounds were sold in the U.S. in 2006 (Calkins and Sullivan, 2007). These numbe rs show that the muscle profiling and value optimization research is useful and successful (Calkins and Sullivan, 2007). For the veal industry to be successful in using th is information, industry leaders must take the initiative to further process and de-bone their product. Th e recent success in the beef industry can be para lleled in the veal industry by simply using more innovative fabrication methods and produc ing products that consumers demand and are willing to pay for.

PAGE 95

95 LIST OF REFERENCES AMI. 1995. Meat facts. Am Meat. Instit., Washington, DC. AMSA. 1995. Research guidelines for cooker y, sensory evaluation and instrumental tenderness measurements of fresh meat National Live Stock and Meat Board, Chicago, IL. AMSA. 2003. AMSA guidelines for meat co lor evaluation. Savoy, Il. American Meat Science Association. Aporta, J., B. Hernandez, and C. Sanudo. 1996. Veal coulour assessment with three wavelengths. Meat Sci. 44:113-123. BOE. 1997. 1997 BOE (Boletin Oficial de l Estado). Actualizacion del catalogo official de razas de Ganado de Espana, BOE 21/11/97, Real Decreto 1682/1998 de 7 de Noviembre. Boleman, S. J., S. L. Boleman, R. K. Miller, J. F. Taylor, H. R. Cross, T. L. Wheeler, M. Koohmaraie, S. D. Shackelford, M. F. Miller, R. L. West, D. D. Johnson, and J. W. Savell. 1997. Consumer eval uation of beef of known categories of tenderness. J Anim Sci. 75: 1521-1524. Calkins, C. R. and Sullivan. 2007. Ranking of beef muscles for tenderness. National Cattlemens Beef Associ ation, Centennial, CO. Davis G.W., G. C. Smith, Z. L. Carpenter, T. R. Dutson, and H. R. Cross. 1979. Tenderness variations among beef st eaks from carcasses of the same USDA quality grade. J.Anim. Sci. 49: 103-114. Denoyelle, C., F. Berny. 1999. Objective measur ement of veal colo r for classification purposes. Meat Sci. 53:203-209. Eikelenboom, G. 1989. The assessment of veal colour for classification purposes. Proceedings of the 43rd International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, Copenhagen. Epley, R. J. Meat tenderness. 1992. Pages 1-9. University of Minnesota Extension Service, FO-00856. Gonzalez, J. M. 2005. Ef fects of vitamin D3 on goat meat tenderness and color stability. Masters Thesis, Sul Ross State University, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences. Hornsey, H. C. 1956. The color of cooked cu red pork. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 7:534-540.

PAGE 96

96 How does a colorimeter work?. Minolta frequently asked questions web site. Available at: http://www.colourware.co.uk/cqfa q/q3-12.htm. Accessed Jan 4, 2008. How does a reflectance spectrophotometer work? Minolta frequently asked questions web site. Available at: http:// www.colourware.co.uk/cqfaq/q3-10.htm. Accessed Jan 4, 2008. Huffman, K. L. M. F. Miller, L. C. Hoover, C. K. Wu, H. C. Brittin, and C. B. Ramsey. 1996. Effect of beef tenderness on consumer satisfaction with steaks consumed in the home and restaurant. J Anim Sci. 74: 91-97. Jeremiah L. E., A.K.W. Tongand, and L. L. Gibson. 1991. The usefulness of muscle color and pH for segregating beef carca sses into tenderness groups. Meat Sci. 30: 97-114. Kim, C. J., and E. S. Lee. 2003. Effects of quality grade on the chemical, physical and sensory characteristics of Hanwoo (Kor ean native cattle) beef. Meat Sci. 63:397-405. Klont R. E., V. M. Barnier, A. van Dijk, F. J. Smulders, A. H. Hoving-Bolink, B. Hulsegge, and G. Eikelenboom. 2000. Effect s of rate of pH fall, time of deboning, aging period, and their interaction on veal quality characteristics. J Anim Sci. 78:1845-1851. Kramer, H., and B. H. Twigg. 1970. Taste testing. In: Fundamentals of Quality Control for the Food Industry. Westport: AVI Publishing Co. p. 120. Lawrie, R. A. 1979. Meat science (3rd Ed.). Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK. Macleod, G. 1998. The flavour of beef. Pages 27-60 in Flavor of Meat, Meat Products and Seafoods. F. Shahidi, ed. 2nd ed. Blackie Academic and professional, London, UK. Maga, J. A. 1976. The role of sulphur compounds in foods. Part 3; Thiols, CRC Critical Reviews in Food Sci and Nutri. 7:147-158. Meilgaard, Morten, Gail Vance Civille, and B. Thomas Carr. 1987. Sensory evaluation techniques. 2 v. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fl. Miltenburg, A., T. Wensing, F. J. Smulde rs, and H. J. Breukink 1992. Relationship between blood hemoglobin, plasma and tissue iron, muscle heme pigment, and carcass color of veal. J Anim Sci. 70: 2766-2772.

PAGE 97

97 Minolta. 1998. Precise color communicati on: Color control from perception to instrumentation. Minolta Co., Ltd. Ramsey, NJ. Mitchell, G. E., J. E. Giles, S. A. Rogers, L. T. Tan, R. J. Naidoo, and D. M. Ferguson. 1991a. Tenderizing, aging, and thawing effect on sensory, chemical, and physical properties of beef steaks. J. Food Sci. 56:1125-1129. Monson, F., C. Sanudo, and I. Sierra. 2004. Infl uence of cattle breed and ageing time on textural meat quality. Meat Sci. 68:595-602. Moody, W. G. 1983. Beef flavorA revi ew. Food Technol. 37:227-232, 238. Mottram, D. S. 1998. Flavour formation in meat and meat products: a review. Food Chem. 62:415-424. Muir, P. D., J. M. Deaker, and M. D. Bow n. 1998a. Effects fo forage and grain based feeding systems on beef quality: A review. N. Z. J. Agric. Res. 41:623-635. Obuz, E., M. E. Dikeman, and T. M. Loughin. 2003. Effects of cooking method, reheating, holding time, and holdi ng temperature on beef longissimus lumborum and biceps femoris te nderness. Meat Sci 65:841-851. OSullivan, M.G., D.V. Byrne, M. Martens. 2003. Evaluation of pork colour: sensory colour assessment using trained and untrained sensory paneli sts. Meat Sci. 63:119-129. Otremba, M. M., M. E. Dikeman, G. A. Milliken, S. L. Stroda, J. A. Unruh, and E. Chambers IV. 1999. Interrelationships among evaluations of beef longissimus and semitendinosus muscle tenderness by Warner Bratzler shear force, a descriptive texture profile se nsory panel, and a descriptive attribute sensory panel. J. Anim. Sci. 77:865-873. Ozluturk, A., N. Tuzemen, M. Yanar, N. Esenbuga, and E. Dursun. 2004. Fattening performance, carcass traits and meat quality characteristics of calves sired by Charolais, Simmental and Eastern An atolian Red sires mated to Eastern Anatolian Red dams. Meat Sci. 67:463-470. Perez-Severiano, P., A. M. Vivar-Quintana, and I. Revilla. 2006. Determination and evaluation of the parameters affecting th e choice of veal meat of the Ternera de Aliste quality appe llation. Meat Sci. 73:491-497. Platter, W. J., J. D. Tatum, K. E. Belk, P. L. Chapman, J. A. Scanga, and G. C. Smith. 2003. Relationships of consumer sensor y ratings, marbling score, and shear force value to consumer acceptance of beef strip loin steaks. J. Anim. Sci. 81:2741-2750.

PAGE 98

98 Purchas, R. W., X. Yan, and D. G. Hartley. 1999. The influence of a period of ageing on the relationship between ultimate pH a nd shear values of beef m. longissimus thoracis. Meat Sci. 51:135-141. Revilla, I., A. M. Vivar-Quintana. 2006. E ffect of breed and ageing time on meat quality and sensory attributes of veal calves of the Ternera de Aliste Quality Label. Meat Sci. 73:189-195. Roeber, D. L., K. E. Belk, J. D. Tatum, J. W. Wilson and G. C. Smith. 2001. Effects of three levels of -tocopheryl acetate supplemen tation to feedlot cattle on performance of beef cuts during reta il display. J. Anim. Sci. 79:1814-1820. Sanders, S. K., J. B. Morgan, D. M. Wulf, J. D. Tatum, S. N. Williams, and G. C. Smith. 1997. Vitamin E supplementation of cattle and shelf life of beef for the Japenese Market. J. Anim. Sci. 75:2634-2640. Shackelford, S. D., M. Koohmaraie, L. V. C undiff, K. E. Gregory, G. A. Rohrer, and J. W. Savell. 1994. Heritabilities and phenotypic and genetic correlations for bovine post-rigor calpastatin activity, intramuscular fat content, WarnerBratzler shear force, retail product yiel d, and growth rate. J. Anim Sci. 72: 857863. Shahidi, F., (ed). 1994. Flavor of meat and meat products. Pages 1-298, Blackie Academic and Professional, London, UK. Shanks, B. C., D. M. Wulf, and R. J. Maddock. 2002. Technical not e: The effect of freezing on Warner Bratzler shear force values of beef longissimus steaks across several postmortem aging periods. J. Anim. Sci. 80:2122-2125. Smith, G. C., G. R. Culp, and Z. L. Ca rpenter. 1978. Postmortem aging of beef carcasses. J. Food Sci. 43:823-826. Stelzleni, A. M. 2006. Feeding and aging effects on carcass composition, fatty acid profiles and sensory attributes of muscles from cull cow carcasses. Dissertation, University of Florida. Stubbs, R. L., J. B. Morgan, P. K. Bates, and H. G. Dolezal. 1999. Effect of supplemental vitamin E on the color and case life of top loin steaks and ground chuck patties in Modified Atmo sphere Case Ready Retail Packaging Systems. Oklahoma State Univeristy web site. Available at: http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/resear ch/1999rr/09htm. Accessed Jan 3, 2008. Torrescano, Gaston, Armida Sanchez Escalan te, Begona Gimenez, Pedro Roncales, and Jose Antonio Beltrain. 2003. Shear values of raw samples of 14 bovine muscles and their relation to muscle collagen characteristics. Meat Sci. 64:8591.

PAGE 99

99 USDA. 1995. Milk production, dispositions and income/Livestock Statistics. U.S. Dept. of Agri., Wash., DC. Van Putten, G. 1982. Welfare in ve al calf units. Vet. Rec. 111:437. Vargas, D. N., A. E. Down, D. S. Webb, H. Han, J. B. Morgan, And H. G. Dolezal. 1999. Effects of dietary supplementati on of feedlot steers with vitamins E and D3 on live performance, carcass traits, sh elf life attributes and longissimus muscle tenderness. Oklahoma State University web site. Available at: http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/resear ch/1999rr/11htm. Accessed Jan 6, 2008. Watanabe A., C. C. Daly, and C. E. Devine. 1996. The effects of the ultimate pH of meat on tenderness changes duri ng ageing. Meat Sci. 42: 67-78. Wheeler, T. L., S. D. Shackelford, a nd M. Koohmaraie. 1996. Sampling, cooking, and coring effects on Warner Bratzler shea r force vales in beef. J. Anim. Sci. 74:1553-1562. Wheeler, T. L., S. D. Shackelford, L. P. J ohnson, M. F. Miller, R. K. Miller, and M. Koohmaraie. 1997. A comparison of Warn er Bratzler shear force assessment within and among institiutions. J. Anim. Sci. 75:2423-2432. Wheeler, T. L., S. D. Shackelfor d, and M. Koohmaraie. 1999. Tenderness classification of beef: III. Effect of the interaction between end point temperature and tenderness on Warner Bratzler shear force of beef longissimus. J. Anim. Sci. 77:400-407. Wilson, L. L., C. L. Stull, R. G. Warn er. 2004. Special fed veal. Pages 1-9. South Dakota State University Extension and Research Department of Animal and Range Sciences. Wulf, D. M., J. D. Tatum, R. D. Green, J. B. Morgan, B. L. Golden, and G. C. Smith. 1996. Genetic influences on beef longissimus palatability in charolaisand limousin-sired steers and heif ers. J. Anim. Sci. 74: 2394-2405.

PAGE 100

100 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Brian Sapp was born in the sm all town of Avon Park, Florida in 1983. Growing up in the small town of Lake Placid, Florida, Br ian learned many things about hard work and life. Working through the years on a flower bulb farm, Bria n learned the importance of hard work and dedication, as well as the im portance of an education. While attending Lake Placid High School, Brian worked his summers as a welder, fiberglass repairer, caladium bulb farmer and mechanic. Upon graduating in May of 2001, Brian continued his education by attending South Florida Comm unity College, where he would earn his AA degree in May of 2004. Growing up a Gato rs fan, Brians ultimate dream was to attend the University of Florida which he achieved in August of 2004. Moving to Gainesville, Florida was a huge change of p ace for Brian, but the big city was not too much to keep him from achieving Cum La ude Status upon graduating with his B.S. degree in food and resource economics in May of 2006. While attending the University of Florid a, Brian was a member of the 2005 2006 Meat Animal Evaluation Team as well as an active member in the University of Florida Block and Bridle Club where he served as Treasurer for the 2005 2006 school years. To spend some free time wisely, Brian took a part time job at the University of Florida Meats Processing Facility, where he would find his passion for processing animals and cutting meat. Upon graduating in 2006, Brian was offered a position as a graduate student in the animal science department at the Univer sity of Florida. Know ing that his education was important, Brian took the position in hope s of learning more about meats and meat processing. While attending graduate school, Brian served as a t eaching assistant for various meat processing and evaluation cla sses and also helped coach the 2007 and 2008 meat animal evaluation teams. Upon gradua tion in August of 2008, Brian will move to

PAGE 101

101 Southwest Georgia to take a position as a meat processing plant manager, in hopes of furthering his education in the real world.