Submitted to: American Meat Science Association Conference Reciprocal Proceedings
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: May 20, 2004
Publication Date: June 20, 2004
Citation: Callahan, J.A., Berry, B.W., Solomon, M.B. 2004. Evaluation of a steel reflector bowl on hydrodynamic pressure processed semitendinosus beef muscles [abstract]. American Meat Science Association 57th Reciprocal Meat Conference. 57:23.
The Hydrodynamic Pressure Process (HDP) is a newly emerging technology that uses an explosive charge to create shockwaves which tenderize meat. HDP has been conducted in both stationary steel tanks (1060 L and 54 L) as well as plastic explosive containers (98 L). The stationary steel tank was built to withstand numerous explosive reactions. The bottom of the steel tank has curved walls similar to a hemisphere shape. The plastic explosive container is disposable and a flat metal reflector plate has been used most often. It was hypothesized that the shape of the bottom of the container may affect the HDP tenderization process. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the HDP treatment of semitendinosus (ST) muscles using a steel reflector bowl. A 40.6 cm diameter steel (weld cap) reflector bowl was constructed to fit inside the bottom of the plastic explosive container. Fourteen fresh ST muscles (Canadian Grade A) were purchased from a commercial processor. At 6d postmortem, each ST muscle was divided into two sections, distal and proximal, which were randomly assigned to HDP treatment or control (C). Sections designated for HDP were packaged and placed inside the reflector bowl (2 sections/shot) which was seated inside a 98-L plastic explosive container filled with water. A 150 g binary explosive was suspended 31 cm above the meat and detonated to create the HDP shockwave treatment. Immediately after HDP treatment, one 3.2 cm thick steak was removed from each treated and control section and steaks were cooked to 71°C for shear force testing with a Warner-Bratzler Shear attachment. ST muscles treated with HDP were statistically (P<0.05) more tender than their controls (5.4 vs. 5.7 kg) resulting in a 5.3 percent tenderness improvement. The magnitude of tenderization response to HDP was highly variable (-8.6 to 24.5 percent). Five out of fourteen (35.7 percent) of the HDP-treated ST muscles improved in tenderness (>10 percent) and four (28.6 percent) were non-responders (<0 percent) to the HDP treatment. Arbitrarily, we define the success of HDP as a treatment having >10 percent tenderness improvement. Although there was statistical significance found in this study, using the steel reflector bowl was not an efficient method to tenderize ST muscles.