Skip to main content
ARS Home » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #180975
Title: A RESEARCH NOTE: HYDRODYNAMIC PRESSURE PROCESSED BEEF SEMITENDINOSUS MUSCLE USING A STEEL REFLECTOR BOWL

Author
item BOARMAN, JANICE
item BERRY, BRADFORD - 1265-70-00 (RETIRED)
item Solomon, Morse
item Liu, Martha

Submitted to: Journal of Muscle Foods
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 9/16/2005
Publication Date: 1/10/2006
Citation: Callahan, J.A., Berry, B.W., Solomon, M.B., Liu, M. 2006. A research note: hydrodynamic pressure processed beef semitendinosus muscle using a steel reflector bowl. Journal of Muscle Foods. 17:105-113.

Interpretive Summary: Inconsistent beef tenderness is a concern to both consumers as well as the beef industry. Hydrodynamic pressure processing (HDP) is used to tenderize meat and a variety of HDP vessels has been evaluated. Based on previous research, it was hypothesized that the shape of the HDP vessel may be related to meat tenderness improvements. A plastic explosive container fitted with a hemisphere shaped metal reflector bowl was used to tenderize beef semitendinosus (ST) muscles. Overall, ST treated with HDP slightly improved in tenderness but individual ST improvements were highly variable. The metal reflector bowl was not found to be an efficient method to tenderize ST muscle.

Technical Abstract: Hydrodynamic pressure (HDP) technology, used to tenderize meat, has been previously conducted in both stationary steel hemisphere shaped tanks (1060-L CSU and 54-L LSU) as well as plastic explosive containers (PEC) fitted with a flat metal reflector plate. It was hypothesized that the bottom surface of the container may affect the magnitude of tenderness improvement during the HDP process. A steel reflector bowl was constructed to fit inside the PEC to mimic the shape of the bottom of the stationary steel vessel. Beef semitendinosus (ST) muscles treated with HDP (150 g binary explosive detonated inside a water-filled 98-L PEC) were more tender (P<0.05) than controls (5.37 vs. 5.74 kgf). ST response to HDP was highly variable (-8.6 to 24.5 percent). Although the improvement in ST tenderness was significant (P<0.05), using the steel reflector bowl in the PEC was not an efficient method to tenderize ST muscles.