Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Every Thing Else Board
Taste test.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="S.R.R." data-source="post: 212409" data-attributes="member: 1442"><p>Here is the e-mail I recieved back.</p><p></p><p>The article is as stated a reprint from the Australian Highland Cattle</p><p>Society Newsletter. Our website is designed to publish articles of interest</p><p>to the Highland breeder which I believe we do. We present the articles as</p><p>they are and are not really in a position to defend or explain others points</p><p>of view.</p><p></p><p>However, your question is valid, but I think if you read the article you</p><p>will glean a number of points which may help ...</p><p></p><p>Firstly ...</p><p></p><p>"Samples from champion steers are sent to the CSIRO Meat Research Laboratory</p><p>in Brisbane for assessment by the taste test panel." The CSIRO is a top</p><p>research laboratory here in Australia see <a href="http://www.csiro.au/" target="_blank">http://www.csiro.au/</a> and gives a</p><p>certain credibility to the testing. I thought it was worth mentioning just</p><p>in case you thought CSIRO was some fly by night panel.</p><p></p><p>Secondly, this was a competition ...</p><p></p><p>"The Highland carcass had the lowest cooking loss, and was ranked most</p><p>tender and most acceptable by the taste test panel." </p><p></p><p>You will note from the article that ranking from only certain traits (not</p><p>all) were used for the competition points ranking. Those used are "marked</p><p>with a BOLD/Shaded R" in the table and it is noted as such above and below</p><p>the table. </p><p></p><p>If you count the points in these columns only, then the Highland totals 18.</p><p>The "taste panel" obviously ranked the Highland most Tender, scoring it at</p><p>1, Juicy, scoring it at 2, Flavour scoring it at 4 and Acceptable 1. On a</p><p>points basis this brought the score down despite the high score of 10 for</p><p>PF, a mechanical measurement. </p><p></p><p>Overall the Highland had the lowest total points out of all the breeds</p><p>represented. Perhaps this is where you are "reading it wrong" ... Are you</p><p>adding all the ranking scores along the table instead of just the ones in</p><p>Bold/Shaded?</p><p></p><p>It appears that pH is not used in the competition points ranking and</p><p>therefore the high score was irrelevant in this "competition". You will</p><p>note the explanation in the article ... "There are two pH peaks for maximum</p><p>tenderness, 5.4 & 6.4. CSIRO prefer the lower value." so that explains the</p><p>poor pH scoring.</p><p></p><p>In summary, this was a "Royal Agricultural Society and Meat Industry</p><p>Authority Taste Test Competition" and on the day the Highland won it on</p><p>points. Just like any competition it is open to conjecture. When cattle are</p><p>paraded in a ring a human judge makes their pick on what they see. In this</p><p>case it was the human "senses" (or organoleptic acceptability as stated in</p><p>the article) that gave the good scores ... The closest to consumer</p><p>preferences ... Just like wine or whisky tasting!!</p><p></p><p>My own thoughts ... As a Highland breeder I know the meat is good ... Don't</p><p>you agree. PF and IY mechanically measure "across & with the grain" and it</p><p>would be fair to expect that a high score would equal toughness. However,</p><p>the panel had no idea of which meat was which and ranked as they found ...</p><p>Which just goes to show that the human taste buds and perception of</p><p>tenderness outweigh any mechanical tests. So, not scientific but</p><p>impressive none the less! ... And hopefully of interest to other Highland</p><p>breeders.</p><p></p><p>Regards,</p><p>Bill.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="S.R.R., post: 212409, member: 1442"] Here is the e-mail I recieved back. The article is as stated a reprint from the Australian Highland Cattle Society Newsletter. Our website is designed to publish articles of interest to the Highland breeder which I believe we do. We present the articles as they are and are not really in a position to defend or explain others points of view. However, your question is valid, but I think if you read the article you will glean a number of points which may help ... Firstly ... "Samples from champion steers are sent to the CSIRO Meat Research Laboratory in Brisbane for assessment by the taste test panel." The CSIRO is a top research laboratory here in Australia see [url=http://www.csiro.au/]http://www.csiro.au/[/url] and gives a certain credibility to the testing. I thought it was worth mentioning just in case you thought CSIRO was some fly by night panel. Secondly, this was a competition ... "The Highland carcass had the lowest cooking loss, and was ranked most tender and most acceptable by the taste test panel." You will note from the article that ranking from only certain traits (not all) were used for the competition points ranking. Those used are "marked with a BOLD/Shaded R" in the table and it is noted as such above and below the table. If you count the points in these columns only, then the Highland totals 18. The "taste panel" obviously ranked the Highland most Tender, scoring it at 1, Juicy, scoring it at 2, Flavour scoring it at 4 and Acceptable 1. On a points basis this brought the score down despite the high score of 10 for PF, a mechanical measurement. Overall the Highland had the lowest total points out of all the breeds represented. Perhaps this is where you are "reading it wrong" ... Are you adding all the ranking scores along the table instead of just the ones in Bold/Shaded? It appears that pH is not used in the competition points ranking and therefore the high score was irrelevant in this "competition". You will note the explanation in the article ... "There are two pH peaks for maximum tenderness, 5.4 & 6.4. CSIRO prefer the lower value." so that explains the poor pH scoring. In summary, this was a "Royal Agricultural Society and Meat Industry Authority Taste Test Competition" and on the day the Highland won it on points. Just like any competition it is open to conjecture. When cattle are paraded in a ring a human judge makes their pick on what they see. In this case it was the human "senses" (or organoleptic acceptability as stated in the article) that gave the good scores ... The closest to consumer preferences ... Just like wine or whisky tasting!! My own thoughts ... As a Highland breeder I know the meat is good ... Don't you agree. PF and IY mechanically measure "across & with the grain" and it would be fair to expect that a high score would equal toughness. However, the panel had no idea of which meat was which and ranked as they found ... Which just goes to show that the human taste buds and perception of tenderness outweigh any mechanical tests. So, not scientific but impressive none the less! ... And hopefully of interest to other Highland breeders. Regards, Bill. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Every Thing Else Board
Taste test.
Top