Meat quality and sensory attributes of a conventional and a Label Rouge-type broiler strain obtained at retail.

ABSTRACT

Some consumers have reported preferences for meat from alternative broiler strains as compared with meat from conventional broiler strains relative to taste and texture, but relatively few objective measurements have been conducted on these particular strains. To directly compare meat quality from a Label Rouge-type alternative and a conventional broiler strain available at retail, 4 ready-to-cook conventional and 6 alternative strain carcasses were obtained from retail or a processing plant on each of 6 d. Boneless skinless breast fillets and boneless thighs were taken from each carcass and weighed. Raw meat was then assigned to different testing lots for cooking to evaluate yield, objective texture, meat color, sensory profile, and proximate composition (percentage protein, moisture, fat, and ash). Analyses of data revealed no significant difference (P < 0.05) due to broiler strain for percentage protein, moisture, fat, and ash, for either breast or thigh meat. Conventional breast (raw and cooked) weights were significantly higher than the alternative strain, but there was no difference in cooked yield. There were no differences between strain for thigh weights or yield. Both thigh and breast meat from the conventional broilers was more tender than meat from alternative broilers. Cooked conventional breast meat was darker and yellower, whereas cooked thigh was lighter, less red, and more yellow than alternative meat. Sensory analysis found no difference between strains for breast meat attributes. Conventional thigh meat scored higher than alternative for appearance, tenderness, juiciness, and how well the panelist liked the appearance, but there was no difference in aftertaste or overall liking. Although minimal differences were observed for cooked breast meat due to strain, conventional cooked thigh meat scored higher than the thigh meat from the Label Rouge-type alternative for most of the sensory attributes.