The importance of the recruitment method for androstenone sensitivity with respect to accurate sensory evaluation of androstenone tainted meat

Lunde, Kathrine; Skuterud, Ellen; Egelandsdal, Bjørg; Font-i-Furnols, Maria; Nute, GR; Bejerholm, Camilla; Nilsen, Asgeir; Stenstrøm, Yngve; Hersleth, Margrethe

doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2010.04.002

Cited by 22 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Boar taint is described as a penetrating 'animal', 'urine', 'faecal' or 'sweat' like unpleasant odour which becomes especially intense when pork is cooked (Mathur et al, 2012), and is mainly associated with the presence of skatole and androstenone, but animal tissues contain varying levels of other compounds, such as indole and other steroids, that can influence the perceptions of the main contributors of boar taint (AnnorFrempong, Nute, Whittington, & Wood, 1997;Morlein et al, 2016). Skatole (3-methylindole) is a metabolite derived from the amino acid tryptophan produced in the lower gut by intestinal bacterial flora, and androstenone (5α androst-16-en-3-one) is a steroid produced in the testis (Aldal et al, 2005;Chen, Zamaratskaia, Andersson, & Lundstrom, 2007;Lunde et al, 2010). Levels of skatole are lower in castrates and gilts than in entire male pigs and the reason has not been fully elucidated (Aldal et al, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensory evaluation of meat from entire male pigs raised with different feeding and housing conditions

Pinto

Reis

Barbosa

et al. 2018

mill

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensory evaluation of meat from entire male pigs raised with different feeding and housing conditions

Pinto

Reis

Barbosa

et al. 2018

mill

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Liking or disliking of androstenone odour was found to be even more important than androstenone sensitivity in consumers' acceptance (Furnols et al, 2003). Another important aspect of expert panels is the standardisation of the selection method of panel members on the basis of their androstenone sensitivity (Lunde et al, 2010) and the method used to train the experts. Differences in these characteristics may lead to variation between expert and consumer panels (Annor-Frempong et al, 1997a andDijksterhuis et al, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of various boar taint detection methods

Aluwé¹,

Tuyttens²,

Bekaert

et al. 2012

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of various boar taint detection methods, measure the relationship between them and identify possible points of improvement for boar taint detection. The methods used to evaluate boar taint in the carcasses of 448 entire male pigs and 17 barrows were the hot iron method (n 5 442), a standardised (n 5 323) and home (n 5 58) consumer meat-evaluation panel, an expert panel assessment of meat and fat (n 5 464) and laboratory analysis of skatole, androstenone and indole in fat (n 5 464). The axillary odour of a number of slaughtered entire male pigs was also investigated (n 5 231). As correlation coefficients were generally weak, a positive result for one of these detection methods did not per se result in a positive result for all other methods. Results of one detection method could not be generalised. The choice to use one or more detection methods deserves consideration depending on the aim of the study. In this paper, we suggest some possible improvements for evaluating boar taint with a consumer panel based on our results and experience. The home consumer evaluation was correlated with the concentration of indole (r 5 0.27) but not with skatole or androstenone. We therefore recommend that lab analyses include indole testing. The hot iron method seems to be an easy and fast detection method, which yields comparable or better correlation coefficients with the other detection methods than an expert panel evaluating fat samples. However, the reliability of the hot iron method depends on the training and reliability of one or two assessors. Efforts should be made to further optimise this method by evaluating the effect of testing conditions. The axillary odour score was moderately correlated with the other detection methods (up to 0.32). More research is needed to evaluate the possibilities of axillary odour as a boar taint detection method.

show abstract

“…Differences in ability to detect AND and SKA have been shown for trained panels from different countries using different training protocols [23]. This stresses the importance of selecting for high AND sensitivity when constructing a trained panel [24]. There was a numerical but non-significant difference between the odds of having an OLF-tainted sample when AND alone was high and SKA alone was high (for both stage I and II).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing and Understanding Olfactory Evaluation of Boar Taint

Heyrman

Janssens

Buys

et al. 2020

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trained expert panels are used routinely in boar taint research, with varying protocols for training of panelists and scoring methods. We describe a standardized process for training and scoring, to contribute to standardize the olfactory detection of boar taint. Three experiments are described in which we (1) evaluate the importance of training and the effect of the previous sample, (2) determine detection thresholds on strips and in fat for our panel, and (3) test priming panelists before boar taint evaluation. For the final evaluation of boar taint, we propose a consistent three-person evaluation scoring on a 0–4 scale using a final mean score of 0.5 as the cut-off for boar taint. This gave an optimal sensitivity of 0.81 and a specificity of 0.56 compared to chemical cut-offs. Even limited training proved useful, but priming assessors with strips did not improve the evaluation of fat samples. Detection thresholds were higher in fat compared to strips, except for indole. We recommend panelists to always smell a non-tainted control sample after a tainted one as a ‘reset’ mechanism, before continuing. For longitudinal studies, we additionally advise to set up an expert panel with a fixed number of assessors performing each evaluation in duplicate.

show abstract

The importance of the recruitment method for androstenone sensitivity with respect to accurate sensory evaluation of androstenone tainted meat

Cited by 22 publications

References 14 publications

Sensory evaluation of meat from entire male pigs raised with different feeding and housing conditions

Sensory evaluation of meat from entire male pigs raised with different feeding and housing conditions

Evaluation of various boar taint detection methods

Developing and Understanding Olfactory Evaluation of Boar Taint

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About