Consumer Acceptability of Intramuscular Fat

Abstract

Fat in meat greatly improves eating quality, yet many consumers avoid visible fat, mainly because of health concerns. Generations of consumers, especially in the English-speaking world, have been convinced by health authorities that animal fat, particularly saturated or solid fat, should be reduced or avoided to maintain a healthy diet. Decades of negative messages regarding animal fats has resulted in general avoidance of fatty cuts of meat. Paradoxically, low fat or lean meat tends to have poor eating quality and flavor and low consumer acceptability. The failure of low-fat high-carbohydrate diets to curb "globesity" has prompted many experts to re-evaluate of the place of fat in human diets, including animal fat. Attitudes towards fat vary dramatically between and within cultures. Previous generations of humans sought out fatty cuts of meat for their superior sensory properties. Many consumers in East and Southeast Asia have traditionally valued more fatty meat cuts. As nutritional messages around dietary fat change, there is evidence that attitudes towards animal fat are changing and many consumers are rediscovering and embracing fattier cuts of meat, including marbled beef. The present work provides a short overview of the unique sensory characteristics of marbled beef and changing consumer preferences for fat in meat in general.

Keywords: animal fat; fatty meat cuts; intramuscular fat; marbled beef; marbling; meat quality.

Fig. 1.. Effect of increasing intramuscular fat (IMF) on trained panel sensory scores for various attributes for various attributes (Damian Frank, unpublished results).

Fig. 2.. In vivo measurement, using PTR-MS, of grilled beef volatiles during eating and swallowing of beef from two breeds (Angus, A; Wagyu, W), two feeding systems (Grass, G; Grain, GRN) and from two levels of marbling (High, H; L Low) respectively, for the acronyms in the legend. Each line is the average of 30 replicates. The black bars indicate the least significant difference at a time point. B = background breath, C1 = chew 1, etc. Extracted from Frank et al. (2014), Final report to MLA.

Fig. 3.. Effect of muscle intramuscular fat (%) on predicted consumer scores for (a) flavor and (b) juiciness of grilled striploins, adjusted to a standard peak shear force (5.0 kg) and standard animal age (716 d). Vertical bars indicate standard error. From Thompson (2004).

Fig. 4.. Effect of consumer (Korea vs Australia) and muscle (BB, Biceps brachii; LL, Longissimus lumborum; SM, semimembranosus) on the consumer scores for tenderness, juiciness and flavor (scale; 0 = lowest liking to 100 = highest liking). Standard error = 1.4, 1.1, 1.0 for tenderness, juiciness and flavor respectively. From Park et al., 2008.