Bison meat: Characteristics, challenges, and opportunities

Galbraith, J. K.; Rodas‐González, Argenis; López-Campos, Ó.; Juárez, M.; Aalhus, J. L.

doi:10.2527/af.2014-0036

Cited by 16 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Koch et al [ 30 ] reported bison averaged 2.21 cm of backfat thickness, which is similar to the backfat thickness of the grain finished heifers (2.16 cm) in the present study. In Canada, bison carcasses exhibiting greater than 1.2 cm of backfat are classified as over-finished, and the desirable backfat thickness range for the Canadian bison grading system is 0.2 to 1.2 cm [ 37 ]. Therefore, the backfat thickness of heifers in the grass-finished treatment (0.89 cm) would be more ideal than the grain-finished heifers if evaluated according to the Canadian system.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Grain- and Grass-Finishing Systems on Carcass Characteristics, Meat Quality, Nutritional Composition, and Consumer Sensory Attributes of Bison

Janssen

Cammack

Legako

et al. 2021

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to determine the influence of two finishing systems (grain- or grass-finishing) on carcass characteristics, meat quality, nutritional composition, and sensory attributes of bison. Bison heifers were assigned to either a grain- or grass-finishing treatment for 130 days prior to slaughter. Carcass measurements, lean color and fat color were recorded. Striploins (M. longissimus lumborum) were collected for analysis of pH, fatty acid profile, cholesterol, proximate analysis, Warner-Bratzler shear force, cook loss, and consumer sensory evaluation. Grain-finished bison heifers had greater (p < 0.01) hot carcass weights, dressing percentage, ribeye area, backfat, and marbling scores compared to grass-finished heifers. Instrumental color values (L*, a*, b*) of the ribeye and a* value of backfat opposite the ribeye were greater (p < 0.01) for grain-finished heifers. Steaks from grain-finished heifers had increased (p < 0.05) crude protein and fat content and decreased (p < 0.01) moisture compared to grass-finished heifers. The grain-finishing system produced steaks with increased (p < 0.01) cholesterol and total fatty acids (mg/g of wet tissue). The grain-finished system produced more tender (p < 0.05) steaks, but consumer sensory ratings did not differ (p > 0.10) between treatments. These data indicate that finishing systems influence bison carcass characteristics, nutritional composition, and meat quality, but do not translate to differences in consumer preferences.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Grain- and Grass-Finishing Systems on Carcass Characteristics, Meat Quality, Nutritional Composition, and Consumer Sensory Attributes of Bison

Janssen

Cammack

Legako

et al. 2021

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The combination of firearm and ammunition selected must achieve a muzzle energy of at least 300 ft-lb (407J) for animals (calves) weighing up to 400 lb (180 kg), and for animals larger than 400 lb, 1,000 ft-lb (1356J) is required (AVMA, 2013). According to Galbraith et al (2014), rifles (calibres from 0.22 magnum to 0.223 and larger) are used (see also Table 33).…”

Section: Slaughtering Of Bisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Galbraith et al. (2014), rifles (calibres from 0.22 magnum to 0.223 and larger) are used (see also Table 33).…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare of cattle at slaughter

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The killing of cattle for human consumption (slaughtering) can take place in a slaughterhouse or on farm. The processes of slaughtering that were assessed for welfare, from the arrival of cattle until their death (including slaughtering without stunning), were grouped into three main phases: pre-stunning (including arrival, unloading from the truck, lairage, handling and moving of cattle); stunning (including restraint); and bleeding. Stunning methods were grouped into two categories: mechanical and electrical. Twelve welfare consequences that cattle may be exposed to during slaughter were identified: heat stress, cold stress, fatigue, prolonged thirst, prolonged hunger, impeded movement, restriction of movements, resting problems (inability to rest or discomfort during resting), social stress, pain, fear and distress. Welfare consequences and their relevant animal-based measures are described. In total, 40 welfare hazards that could occur during slaughter were identified and characterised, most of them related to stunning and bleeding. Staff were identified as the origin of 39 hazards, which were attributed to the lack of appropriate skill sets needed to perform tasks or to fatigue. Measures to prevent and correct hazards were identified, and structural and managerial measures were identified as those with a crucial role in prevention. Outcome tables linking hazards, welfare consequences, animal-based measures, origin of hazards, and preventive and corrective measures were developed for each process. Mitigation measures to minimise welfare consequences are proposed.

show abstract

“…Bison are flightier and more fearful of humans compared with cattle. They show a larger flight zone, strong herd instincts and have a more aggressive nature (Grandin, 2007;Galbraith et al, 2014;Rioja-Lang et al, 2019). When animals are handled, alleyways should have limited side visibility and bison should be moved in small groups, as they become stressed and agitated when they have to wait in single files.…”

Section: Bisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare of cattle during killing for purposes other than slaughter

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cattle of different ages may have to be killed on farm for purposes other than slaughter (the latter being defined as killing for human consumption) either individually or on a large scale, e.g. for economic reasons or for disease control. The purpose of this scientific opinion is to assess the risks associated with the on-farm killing of cattle. The processes during on-farm killing that were assessed included handling and moving, stunning and/or killing methods (including restraint). The killing methods were grouped into mechanical and electrical methods as well as lethal injection. In total, 21 hazards compromising animal welfare were identified and characterised, most of these related to stunning and/or killing. Staff was identified as an origin for all hazards, either due to lack of appropriate skills needed to perform tasks or due to fatigue. Possible preventive and corrective measures were assessed: measures to correct hazards were identified for 19 hazards, and the staff was shown to have a crucial role in prevention. Three welfare consequences of hazards to which cattle can be exposed during on-farm killing were identified: impeded movement, pain and fear. The welfare consequences and relevant animal-based measures related to these were described. Outcome tables linking hazards, welfare consequences, animal-based measures, origins of the hazards, preventive and corrective measures were developed for each process. Mitigation measures to minimise the welfare consequences are proposed.

show abstract

Bison meat: Characteristics, challenges, and opportunities

Cited by 16 publications

References 23 publications

Influence of Grain- and Grass-Finishing Systems on Carcass Characteristics, Meat Quality, Nutritional Composition, and Consumer Sensory Attributes of Bison

Influence of Grain- and Grass-Finishing Systems on Carcass Characteristics, Meat Quality, Nutritional Composition, and Consumer Sensory Attributes of Bison

Welfare of cattle at slaughter

Welfare of cattle during killing for purposes other than slaughter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About