Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Apr 15;11(8):1154.
doi: 10.3390/foods11081154.

Quality Multiverse of Beef and Pork Meat in a Single Score

Affiliations
Review

Quality Multiverse of Beef and Pork Meat in a Single Score

Sara Rajic et al. Foods. .

Abstract

The rationale behind this review is the potential of developing a single score tool for meat quality evaluation based on visual and sensorial assessments of fresh meat. Based on the known sensory wheel concept, the first step was to create quality wheels capturing most common intrinsic and extrinsic quality cues of pork and beef outlined in the latest scientific papers. This resulted in identifying meat color, sensory characteristics and fat content as the most important intrinsic quality cues of fresh beef and pork. Furthermore, the highest number of studies showed the importance of price, certification logos and brand for beef quality evaluation. According to recent articles, price, breed, animal welfare and a veterinary certificate are the most important extrinsic attributes for pork consumers. The second step was to develop a single-score tool named the "Meat quality index". It has been developed in line with published approaches of different total quality index concepts used in the food sector, providing insights into its application in the meat sector. As a result, this review proposes a unique approach in using quality index application, through the consumer's preferences aspect of fresh meat.

Keywords: extrinsic attributes; intrinsic attributes; meat quality; quality wheel; total quality index.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sankey chart showing the distribution of the types of methods per analyzed intrinsic characteristics of beef quality.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Sankey chart showing the corresponding groups of methods for each extrinsic characteristic of beef quality.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Sankey chart showing the distribution of the types of methods per analyzed intrinsic characteristics of pork quality.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Sankey chart showing the corresponding groups of methods for each extrinsic characteristic of pork quality.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Quality wheel for evaluating beef quality at the point of meat purchase.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Quality wheel for evaluating pork quality at the point of meat purchase.

References

    1. Bredahl L. Cue utilisation and quality perception with regard to branded beef. Food Qual. Prefer. 2004;15:65–75. doi: 10.1016/S0950-3293(03)00024-7. - DOI
    1. Henchion M., McCarthy M., Resconi V.C., Troy D. Meat consumption: Trends and quality matters. Meat Sci. 2014;98:561–568. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.06.007. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Acebrón L.B., Dopico D.C. The importance of intrinsic and extrinsic cues to expected and experienced quality: An empirical application for beef. Food Qual. Prefer. 2000;11:229–238. doi: 10.1016/S0950-3293(99)00059-2. - DOI
    1. Banović M., Grunert K.G., Barreira M.M., Fontes M.A. Beef quality perception at the point of purchase: A study from Portugal. Food Qual. Prefer. 2009;20:335–342. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.02.009. - DOI
    1. Bernués A., Olaizola A., Corcoran K. Labelling information demanded by European consumers and relationships with purchasing motives, quality and safety of meat. Meat Sci. 2003;65:1095–1106. doi: 10.1016/S0309-1740(02)00327-3. - DOI - PubMed