Article Navigation
May 2011
- < Previous
- Next >
Journal Article
Get access
C. L. Bratcher, C. L. Bratcher *Department of Animal Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849 1Corresponding author: cbratcher@auburn.edu Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic N. L. Dawkins †Department of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, AL 36088 Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic S. Solaiman ‡Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, AL 36088 Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic C. R. Kerth *Department of Animal Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849 Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic J. R. Bartlett ‡Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, AL 36088 Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic
Journal of Animal Science, Volume 89, Issue 5, May 2011, Pages 1429–1433, https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3398
Published:
01 May 2011
Article history
Received:
05 August 2010
Accepted:
21 December 2010
Published:
01 May 2011
- Views
- Article contents
- Figures & tables
- Video
- Audio
- Supplementary Data
-
Cite
Cite
C. L. Bratcher, N. L. Dawkins, S. Solaiman, C. R. Kerth, J. R. Bartlett, Texture and acceptability of goat meat frankfurters processed with 3 different sources of fat, Journal of Animal Science, Volume 89, Issue 5, May 2011, Pages 1429–1433, https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3398
Close
Search
Close
Search
Advanced Search
Search Menu
ABSTRACT
The objective of this research was to evaluate the texture and consumer acceptability of goat meat frankfurter formulations with no added fat (NAF), beef fat (BF), or canola oil (CO). Consumer sensory evaluation, fat, and moisture and texture profile analyses were performed on goat meat frankfurters produced with the fat sources BF, CO, and NAF. For sensory evaluations, NAF was less tender (P = 0.007; 4.90 vs. 4.11 and 4.35 for BF and CO, respectively) and the flavor was liked less (P = 0.004; 4.59 vs. 3.83 and 4.30 for BF and CO, respectively); BF was scored as the juiciest (P = 0.003; 3.86 vs. 4.49 and 4.58 for CO and NAF, respectively); and CO had the least amount of flavor (P = 0.029; 3.65 vs. 3.12 and 3.10 for BF and NAF, respectively). Moisture was least (P < 0.001) in CO (46.59%), followed by BF (48.57%) and NAF (55.80%). The amount of fat was not different (P = 0.761) in BF (24.36%) or CO (24.43%) but was less (P < 0.001) in NAF (9.06%), as expected. The NAF had the most protein (P < 0.001; 34.14%), followed by CO (27.98%) and BF (26.07%). For texture profile analyses, NAF had the least hardness value (P = 0.008; 3.92 vs. 4.48 and 4.40 for BF and CO, respectively) and least chewiness value (P = 0.026; 2.89 vs. 3.39 and 3.29 for BF and CO, respectively). Beef fat and CO were not different for hardness (P = 0.596) or chewiness (P = 0.530). No differences were observed in springiness (P = 0.954) or resilience (P = 0.561). The sensory panelists tended to prefer BF for overall acceptability. Results from these data revealed that value-added goat meat products received acceptable sensory scores; therefore, continued research and development will greatly expand the knowledge of goat meat and increase the acceptance of value-added products.
© American Society of Animal Science 2011
Issue Section:
Meat Science and Muscle Biology
You do not currently have access to this article.
Download all slides
Sign in
Get help with access
-
American Society of Animal Science members
Personal account
- Get email alerts
- Save searches
- Purchase content
- Activate purchases and trials
Sign in Register
Institutional access
- Sign in through your institution
- Sign in with a library card Sign in with username / password Recommend to your librarian
Institutional account management
Sign in as administrator
Get help with access
Institutional access
Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:
IP based access
Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.
Sign in through your institution
Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth / Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.
- Click Sign in through your institution.
- Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
- When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
- Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.
If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.
Sign in with a library card
Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.
Society Members
Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:
Sign in through society site
Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:
- Click Sign in through society site.
- When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
- Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.
If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.
Sign in using a personal account
Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.
Personal account
A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.
Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.
Viewing your signed in accounts
Click the account icon in the top right to:
- View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
- View the institutional accounts that are providing access.
Signed in but can't access content
Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.
Institutional account management
For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.
Purchase
Subscription prices and ordering for this journal
Purchasing options for books and journals across Oxford Academic
Short-term Access
To purchase short-term access, please sign in to your personal account above.
Don't already have a personal account? Register
Texture and acceptability of goat meat frankfurters processed with 3 different sources of fat - 24 Hours access
EUR €36.00
GBP £32.00
USD $39.00
Rental
This article is also available for rental through DeepDyve.
Advertisement
Citations
Views
97
Altmetric
More metrics information
Email alerts
Article activity alert
Advance article alerts
New issue alert
Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic
Citing articles via
Google Scholar
-
Latest
-
Most Read
-
Most Cited
More from Oxford Academic
Biological Sciences
Science and Mathematics
Books
Journals
Advertisement