Impact of Kosher Slaughter Methods of Heifers and Young Bulls on Physical and Chemical Properties of Their Meat

Abstract

This work aimed to comprehensively analyze the factors (slaughter method, gender, and muscle type) that determine the kosher status of beef and assess their influence on the selected quality characteristics of raw meat. The muscles were obtained from 40 carcasses of heifers and 40 carcasses of young bulls. In the first stage of the experiment, pH values were measured. The water, protein, fat, minerals, and collagen contents were determined. Then, the shear force, forced drip, and thermal drip were measured. The experimental results indicated that all the investigated parameters have an impact on the final quality of beef. Statistically significantly lower pH1 values were noticed in the longissimus thoracic muscle of young bulls obtained through kosher slaughter methods. However, 24 and 48 h after slaughter, higher pH values were observed in the meat of young bulls obtained by the kosher slaughter method, where the meat samples were subjected to kosher treatment. The koshering process (salting and washing) resulted in a significant reduction in both forced and thermal drip values of the meat sample, but this decrease was not affected by gender.

Full text



Citation: ˙
Zurek, J.; Rudy, M.;
Duma-Kocan, P.; Stanisławczyk, R.;
Gil, M. Impact of Kosher Slaughter
Methods of Heifers and Young Bulls
on Physical and Chemical Properties
of Their Meat. Foods 2022,11, 622.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
foods11040622
Academic Editors: Mohammed
Gagaoua and Claudia Terlouw
Received: 6 January 2022
Accepted: 17 February 2022
Published: 21 February 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
foods
Article
Impact of Kosher Slaughter Methods of Heifers and Young
Bulls on Physical and Chemical Properties of Their Meat
Jagoda ˙
Zurek, Mariusz Rudy * , Paulina Duma-Kocan, Renata Stanisławczyk and Marian Gil
Department of Agricultural Processing and Commodity Science, Institute of Food and Nutrition Technology,
College of Natural Sciences, University of Rzeszow, Zelwerowicza 4, 35-601 Rzeszów, Poland;
jzurek@ur.edu.pl (J. ˙
Z.); pduma@ur.edu.pl (P.D.-K.); rstanislawczyk@ur.edu.pl (R.S.); mgil@ur.edu.pl (M.G.)
*Correspondence: mrudy@ur.edu.pl
Abstract:
This work aimed to comprehensively analyze the factors (slaughter method, gender, and
muscle type) that determine the kosher status of beef and assess their influence on the selected quality
characteristics of raw meat. The muscles were obtained from 40 carcasses of heifers and 40 carcasses
of young bulls. In the first stage of the experiment, pH values were measured. The water, protein, fat,
minerals, and collagen contents were determined. Then, the shear force, forced drip, and thermal
drip were measured. The experimental results indicated that all the investigated parameters have an
impact on the final quality of beef. Statistically significantly lower pH
1
values were noticed in the
longissimus thoracic muscle of young bulls obtained through kosher slaughter methods. However, 24
and 48 h after slaughter, higher pH values were observed in the meat of young bulls obtained by the
kosher slaughter method, where the meat samples were subjected to kosher treatment. The koshering
process (salting and washing) resulted in a significant reduction in both forced and thermal drip
values of the meat sample, but this decrease was not affected by gender.
Keywords: beef; ritual slaughter; young bulls; heifers; meat quality
1. Introduction
Stress is the most frequently identified factor in the handling of animals prior to
slaughter, which negatively affects the quality of meat. Pre-slaughter stress and energy
inputs deplete muscle glycogen reserves and, as a result, cause insufficient post-mortem
production of hydrogen ions. The end products of ATP hydrolysis and post-mortem
glycolysis, hydrogen ions and lactate, accumulate in the muscle due to the lack of an
effective elimination mechanism. This accumulation of hydrogen ions acidifies the muscles
and consequently causes drop of pH [
1
]. Low acidity during maturation changes the color,
taste, and tenderness of meat [
2
–
4
]. Significant pre-slaughter stress also affects the firmness
and ability to retain water, but also reduces the tenderness of meat [5].
The weather conditions in the pre-slaughter period may increase additional stress for
the animals. Seasonal temperature changes can affect muscle glycogen levels after slaughter
and the final pH. The increase in glycolysis results from excessive excitement, hunger, and
stress caused by the ambient temperature, leading to high post-mortem pH values [
4
,
6
,
7
].
The conditions for keeping cattle in livestock warehouses also have a great influence on
meat quality [8].
The concentration of glycogen in the muscles at the time of slaughter is one of the most
important factors determining the quality of beef. Insufficient glycogen reserves during
slaughter lead to pH values higher than 5.5 [
3
]. Meat characterized by high pH values is
dark and more susceptible to bacterial spoilage, and it is less durable [
2
]. The problem of
reduced meat quality caused by pre-slaughter procedure occurs more often in the meat of
young bulls than heifers [8].
The scientific literature provides detailed information regarding the specifications of
various types of ritual slaughter methods that are commonly practiced for the slaughtering
Foods 2022,11, 622. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11040622 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/foods

Foods 2022,11, 622 2 of 14
of cattle and other animal species [
9
,
10
]. Kosher slaughter is performed by a qualified
butcher (known as a shochet) and involves continuous cutting of the esophagus and blood
vessels using a special sharp chalef knife, with the length of the straight blade being at least
twice the diameter of the animal’s neck [
11
–
13
]. The shochet slaughters the fully conscious
animal and examines the cut on the animal’s neck after each slaughter to make sure that the
cut is carried out “perfectly” [
13
]. If the blade has a nick or is otherwise damaged, the animal
is considered to be “tref” or not kosher, and the meat obtained from this process is sold in
the regular market [
14
]. Additionally, the shochet performs a post-mortem examination
of the carcasses to detect any changes, especially in the chest, lungs, and liver. If disease
symptoms are observed, the meat of such an animal may not be considered suitable for
consumption [
9
,
15
,
16
]. In addition, inappropriate cutting may produce non-kosher meat,
which is not suitable for consumption by consumers who specifically eat kosher meat [
16
].
After slaughtering is completed, the meat is further processed by efficiently removing
certain veins and arteries, forbidden fat, and blood. In the United States and most of the
Western countries, only the front quarters of beef are used [
13
]. Koshering is the final step
in the process of making the meat suitable for consumption [
17
]. The term “koshering
meat” refers to the meat that is obtained from the animals that are subjected to certain
rituals before slaughtering and is followed by the rabbi’s inspection of the carcass to detect
the presence of any irregularities. If the carcass passes the inspection, then it is classified as
“kosher.” The meat from the certified carcasses is soaked in water for half an hour, salted
with coarse salt for 1 h, and finally rinsed with water three times [18,19].
A significant reduction in pH values has been observed for meat slaughtered by
the kosher method when compared with non-kosher meat samples [
20
]. In addition,
cold water soaking of the raw meat (30 min) and subsequently salting its surface with
coarse salt (approximately 1 h) [
19
] have been shown to help in the removal of myoglobin
and other sarcoplasmic proteins during the koshering process [
21
]. Partially removing the
myoglobin affects the color, taste, and overall quality of the finished product; however, from
a health perspective, it is its influence on the oxidation processes that is the most important
effect [
22
]. In addition, a reduction in the concentration of heme proteins influences the final
product color. It has been shown that kosher meat has a low color intensity [
20
]. Moreover,
an important factor that contributes to the enhanced kosher meat nutritional quality in
comparison with the meat from standard slaughter methods is its high salt content [
23
].
Previous have studies investigated the influence of breed [
24
], gender [
25
], age [
26
], muscle
type [
27
], and various environmental and genetic factors [
28
] on the final quality of meat.
Furthermore, the quality of beef is determined by the procedures that are followed at
all stages of meat production, starting from the appropriate selection of the breed, safety
measures adopted during rearing, transport to the slaughterhouse, humane slaughter,
cooling of the carcasses, and finally maintaining optimal conditions for tenderization and
distribution of the end product [8].
However, few studies in the literature exclusively describe the impact of factors on
the quality characteristics of beef obtained by kosher slaughter method. Owing to the
fact that meat is a product that shows high variability in its characteristics, which can be
attributed to the interactions between numerous genetic and environmental factors, the
previously conducted studies in different environments and for variable periods of time do
not provide a clear solution for the problem posed at this time [
29
]. The present study may
show new outcomes or confirm the results obtained by previous studies.
Taking into account the above-mentioned information, research was carried out to
comprehensively analyze the factors (slaughter method, gender, and muscle type) that
influence the kosher status and nutritional quality of beef and assess their impact on the
selected quality characteristics of raw meat. This knowledge will enable us to explore
novel and effective methods to obtain a finished product with selected characteristics and
nutritional quality.

Foods 2022,11, 622 3 of 14
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Raw Material
The study sample consisted of two types of muscles: the longissimus thoracic muscle
(musculus longissimus thoracis, MLT) and supraspinatus muscle (musculus supraspinatus,
MS). The muscles were obtained from 40 carcasses of heifers (the average live weight of
20 heifers
selected for traditional slaughtering was 520
±
58 kg, and the average live weight
of
20 heifers
selected for kosher slaughtering was 531
±
60 kg) and 40 carcasses of young
bulls (the average live weight of 20 young bulls selected for traditional slaughtering was
591 ±52 kg
, and the average live weight of 20 young bulls selected for kosher slaughtering
was 571
±
59 kg). The age of the cattle was 20–24 months, and the experimental animals
were obtained by crossing the Polish Holstein–Friesian breed cows with the Limousine
breed bulls. All the animals came from one breeder, were bred and raised on a single
farm, and were enclosed in a semi-intensive system. In the summer, the basic animal feed
comprised green matter of grasses and maize silage, and in the winter, it was predominantly
maize silage. The animals were given additional supplements in the form of meadow hay
and ground grain. Detailed information about the animals was obtained from the purchase
documents of the slaughterhouse. The cattle were transported to a meat processing plant
in south-eastern Poland, and were kept in a livestock warehouse in single pens for 20 h.
After weighing, the animals were slaughtered according to the meat industry protocol.
Two types of slaughter techniques were used to obtain the muscle samples:
1.
Standard procedure, which involves stunning the animals mechanically using a
pneumatic captive bolt pistol (40 heads);
2.
Ritual procedure, in which slaughtering is performed in specially designed boxes
(without stunning), and after 24 h of cooling down the carcasses, the muscle samples
are subjected to kosher treatment, which involves the preliminary rinsing of quarters
in water under specific conditions, salting, and rewashing three times (40 heads).
Kosher slaughter and standard slaughter were performed on different days. Beef
obtained from carcasses of both genders, killed by standard slaughter protocol, were not
subjected to koshering.
The animal remains obtained from both traditional and kosher slaughtering methods
were subjected to electrical stimulation for 15 min under the following conditions: voltage,
21 V; current, 18 mA; and impulse duration comprising 3.5-s impulse, 1-s pause, 3.5-s
impulse, 1-s pause, and 3.5-s impulse. The carcasses were evaluated according to the
EUROP classification system. Based on the conformation of the carcass, 50% of the samples
were graded as R (good) and the remaining 50% as O (fair) in both traditional and kosher
slaughter, and in terms of fatness, all the samples (100%) were graded as Class 3 (average).
2.2. Analytical Methods
In the first stage of the experiment, pH values were measured in the selected beef half
carcasses (left side) obtained from both traditional and ritual slaughter methods. Measure-
ments were performed in the MLT and MS. The first measurement was taken on a warm
half carcass about 1 h after slaughter. The subsequent measurements were obtained after 24
(after kosher treatment in the case of muscles obtained from carcasses of cattle from kosher
slaughter) and 48 h of cooling at 0
◦
C–2
◦
C. After 72 h, the quarters were cut into different
sections. During post-slaughter chilling, half carcasses obtained from ritual and standard
slaughter methods were stored in separate cooling rooms built for this purpose. All exper-
iments and measurements were carried out in rooms under a controlled temperature by
maintaining the temperature in the range of 0
◦
C–2
◦
C. After 48 h of slaughtering, about
0.5 kg of sample was collected from individual muscles for analysis by laboratory tests
(2 slaughter types ×2 sex groups ×2 muscle groups ×20 carcasses = 160 samples).
The pH of the meat was measured using a pH meter pH-K21 (NWK-Technology
GmbH, Aichach, DE, Germany) equipped with a LoT406-M6-DXK-S7/25 electrode from
Mettler Toledo GmbH, Greifensee, CH, Switzerland. The electrode was driven into the

Foods 2022,11, 622 4 of 14
muscles up to a depth of 25 mm. The probe was calibrated against buffers with pH values
of 6.88 and 4.00. The measurement was carried out with an accuracy of 0.01.
Water content was determined according to PN-ISO 1442:2000 standard [30].
Protein content was determined using the Kjeldahl method, and the calculated amount
of nitrogen was converted into crude protein according to PN-A-04018 [31].
Fat content was determined using the Soxhlet method in accordance with PN-ISO
1444: 2000 [
32
], and the salt content was determined by the Mohr method according to
PN-A-82112 [
33
]. The amount of collagen protein was determined based on the content
of hydroxyproline (conversion factor 8) according to PN-ISO 3496: 2000 [
34
], using the
ultraviolet–visible Spekol 2000 spectrophotometer (Analytik Jena AG, Jena, DE, Germany).
The mineral content was expressed as total ash and determined according to the
guidelines mentioned in PN-ISO 936: 2000 [
35
] using the LECO TGA701 thermogravimetric
analyzer (Leco, St. Joseph, MI, USA).
To further determine the effect of physicochemical characteristics, that is, thermal
drip and forced drip, the meat samples were minced twice in a laboratory mincer (Zelmer,
Rzeszów, PL, Poland) and filtered using sieves of 4-mm mesh size. The obtained meat mass
was mixed thoroughly to homogenize the sample.
The size of thermal drip (meat samples were cooked in a water bath at water tempera-
ture 85
◦
C for 10 min) was calculated from the difference in weights before processing and
after cooling according to the formula:
Wc (%) = MI −MII
MI ×100%, (1)
where Wc is the size of thermal drip (%), MI is the weight of the sample before thermal
processing (g), and MII is the weight of the sample after cooling (g).
The forced drip of meat was determined using Grau and Hamm’s method [
36
] by
placing a minced sample (about 300 mg) on Whatman paper No. 1. Both the paper and
sample were placed between two glass plates and subjected to 5 kg of pressure for 5 min.
On completion of the required squeezing time, the boundaries of the surface occupied
by the sample of meat and the drip of meat juice were outlined on the paper and were
subsequently planimeterized by using a digital planimeter. The measure of the size of
forced drip of meat juice was the difference between both surfaces, which indicates water
absorption capacity (cm
2
) of the meat sample (higher value corresponds to lower water
absorption by the meat sample).
The shear force was measured using a TA.XT plus texturometer (Stable Micro Systems
Ltd., Surrey, UK) equipped with a Warner–Bratzler shear blade with a triangular cut. The
samples of raw meat were cut using a cylinder-shaped cork borer (with a diameter of
12.7 mm
) along the muscle fibers. The samples prepared in this way were cut into sections,
and the shear force (N/cm
2
) applied during the cutting process was recorded. Three
technical repetitions were carried out per sample.
2.3. Statistical Analysis
All the experiments were performed in triplicate. The obtained results were assessed
using statistical methods. Data were analyzed with the use of a three-way analysis of
variance (ANOVA) in order to determine the differences in the selected physical and
chemical properties of beef, which were found to be influenced by the slaughter method,
gender, and type of muscle. For determining the effects of these parameters on the quality of
the final product, the GLM (General Linear Model) procedure was used (ANOVA, STATIST
ICA v. 13.1; StatSoft, Krakow, Poland) for a fixed-effect model with two types of slaughter,
two groups of gender, and two groups of muscle. In the case of significant effects (p< 0.05),
the average values were compared with Tukey’s post-hoc HSD test (ANOVA, STATISTICA
v. 13.1; StatSoft, Krakow, Poland). Tables 1–4summarize the average values and standard
error of the mean values of selected physical and chemical parameters of beef samples.

Foods 2022,11, 622 5 of 14
Table 1.
Changes in the pH values of beef depending on the type of slaughter, muscle type, and
gender of cattle.
Specification Muscle
Type
Standard Slaughter Kosher Slaughter
SEM
ANOVA
Young
Bulls
¯
x
Heifers
¯
x
Young
Bulls
¯
x
Heifers
¯
xS M G S ×G
pH1MLT 6.99 a6.98 a6.42 Ab 6.73 A0.268 * *
MS 6.98 6.96 6.31 B6.65 B0.315 * *
pH24 MLT 5.58 a5.55 a5.83 b5.57 a0.132 * * *
MS 5.51 5.50 5.81 5.61 0.144 * * *
pH48 MLT 5.68 a5.64 a5.99 b5.77 a0.156 * * *
MS 5.61 5.60 5.95 5.73 0.163 * * *
pH72 MLT 5.70 5.71 5.80 5.61 0.078
MS 5.68 5.69 5.75 5.62 0.053
Notes:
a,b
Differences marked in the rows with statistically significant values at the level p< 0.05 according to
Tukey’s HSD test.
A,B
Differences marked in the columns only between the muscles with statistically significant
values at the level p< 0.05 according to Tukey’s HSD test. No letters or the same letters mean no statistically
significant differences. ANOVA: three-factor analysis of variance between the type of slaughter (S), gender (G),
and muscle (M). * p< 0.05. MLT: longissimus thoracis muscle; MS: supraspinatus muscle.
Table 2.
Basic chemical composition (% fresh muscle tissue) of beef depending on the type of
slaughter, muscle type, and gender of cattle.
Specification Muscle
Type
Standard Slaughter Kosher Slaughter
SEM
ANOVA
Young
Bulls
¯
x
Heifers
¯
x
Young
Bulls
¯
x
Heifers
¯
xS M G S ×G
Water (%) MLT 70.37 a67.01 Aa 70.82 a61.81 Ab 4.158 * * *
MS 74.93 a74.48 Ba 74.63 a69.27 Bb 2.711 * * *
Protein (%) MLT 20.48 a19.20 a19.65 a17.79 b1.126 * *
MS 20.00 a19.60 19.17 b18.92 b0.477 * *
Fat (%) MLT 7.46 Aa 11.77 A7.29 Aa 17.71 Ab 4.896 * *
MS 2.75 Ba 3.60 B2.92 Ba 8.35 Bb 2.656 * *
Notes:
a,b
Differences marked in the rows with statistically significant values at the level p< 0.05 according to
Tukey’s HSD test.
A,B
Differences marked in the columns only between the muscles with statistically significant
values at the level p< 0.05 according to Tukey’s HSD test. No letters or the same letters mean no statistically
significant differences. ANOVA: three-factor analysis of variance between the type of slaughter (S), gender (G),
and muscle (M) * p< 0.05. MLT: longissimus thoracis muscle; MS: supraspinatus muscle.
Table 3.
Content of minerals, collagen, and salt (% fresh muscle tissue) in beef depending on the type
of slaughter, muscle type, and gender of cattle.
Specification Muscle
Type
Standard Slaughter Kosher Slaughter
SEM
ANOVA
Young
Bulls
¯
x
Heifers
¯
x
Young
Bulls
¯
x
Heifers
¯
xS M G S ×G
Minerals (%) MLT 0.98 A0.90 a1.49 Ab 1.15 0.262 * *
MS 0.81 B0.85 a0.99 B1.45 b0.294 * *
Collagen (%) MLT 1.92 1.82 2.05 1.90 0.095
MS 2.06 2.05 1.97 1.95 0.056
Salt (%) MLT 0.25 a0.40 b0.49 b0.46 b0.107 * * *
MS 0.35 a0.56 b0.61 b0.59 b0.120 * * *
Notes:
a,b
Differences marked in the rows with statistically significant values at the level p< 0.05 according to
Tukey’s HSD test.
A,B
Differences marked in the columns only between the muscles with statistically significant
values at the level p< 0.05 according to Tukey’s HSD test. No letters or the same letters mean no statistically
significant differences. ANOVA: three-factor analysis of variance between the type of slaughter (S), gender (G),
and muscle (M) * p< 0.05. MLT: longissimus thoracis muscle; MS: supraspinatus muscle.

Foods 2022,11, 622 6 of 14
Table 4.
Water-holding capacity related properties and shear force of beef depending on the type of
slaughter, muscle type, and gender of cattle.
Specification Muscle
Type
Standard Slaughter Kosher Slaughter
SEM
ANOVA
Young
Bulls
¯
x
Heifers
¯
x
Young
Bulls
¯
x
Heifers
¯
xS M G S ×G
Shear force
(N/cm2)
MLT 59.92 Aa 48.05 Ab 48.54 Ab 44.62 b6.657 * * * *
MS 74.92 Ba 62.86 B64.23 Bb 49.84 b10.276 * * * *
Forced drip
(cm2)
MLT 7.21 a6.50 ac 4.98 b5.54 bc 0.992 * *
MS 7.96 a7.81 a5.05 b4.67 b1.754 * *
Thermal drip
(%)
MLT 28.93 a25.11 b23.58 b23.81 b2.475 * *
MS 31.56 a27.27 b24.51 b25.33 b3.149 * *
Notes:
a,b,c
Differences marked in the rows with statistically significant values at the level p< 0.05 according to
Tukey’s HSD test.
A,B
Differences marked in the columns only between the muscles with statistically significant
values at the level p< 0.05 according to Tukey’s HSD test. No letters or the same letters mean no statistically
significant differences. ANOVA: three-factor analysis of variance between the type of slaughter (S), gender (G),
and muscle (M). * p< 0.05. MLT: longissimus thoracis muscle; MS: supraspinatus muscle.
3. Results and Discussion
The type of slaughter technique and the muscle type showed a statistically significant
effect on the pH
1
value (Table 1). In addition, the type of slaughter method and gender, as
well as the effect of interaction between these factors, demonstrated a statistically significant
influence on features such as pH
24
and pH
48
. Higher values of pH
1
(p< 0.05) were observed
in the meat samples of heifers and young bulls processed by the standard slaughter method.
However, as early as 24 and 48 h after slaughter, higher pH values (p< 0.05) were observed
in the meat sample of young bulls subjected to kosher treatment when compared to the
raw sample obtained from carcasses of both genders prepared by the standard slaughter
method. When analyzing the changes in the acidity of the meat of heifers, slightly higher
values of pH
24
and pH
48
were observed in the raw material of the animals killed by kosher
slaughter. However, these differences were found to be statistically insignificant. In the MS
of cattle, lower pH
1
values (p< 0.05) were noticed in comparison to the MLT of heifers and
young bulls. The obtained range of pH values correspond to the range of values suggested
for normal quality of meat. The pH
1
value for RFN (red, firm, normal, and nonexudative)
meat was found to be >6.3 (value above 5.8 is permissible), while the pH
24
value was in the
range of 5.5–5.7 (value up to 6.0 is permissible) [37].
Some authors [
38
,
39
] have shown that meat obtained from ritual slaughter is char-
acterized by a high pH value after a longer storage period. D’Agata et al. [
38
] suggested
that the pH values measured at 2 and 48 h after slaughter were similar (about 5.60) for
the meat of cattle killed by Islamic ritual and conventional slaughter methods. In contrast,
Holzer et al. [
20
] reported a lower pH for kosher meat compared to non-kosher meat. These
authors, when analyzing the pH of the longissimus lumborum muscle of steers, concluded
that the pH
24
value of the meat subjected to the kosher process was 5.53, which was close
to the average pH
24
values obtained in their own studies on beef muscles (except for MLT
and MS of kosher slaughter young bulls). Barrasso et al. [
40
], while examining the effect
of religious slaughter on the pH and temperature of cattle carcasses, presume that higher
pH
24
values in animals subjected to ritual slaughter are associated with prolonged state
of consciousness of the animal, which may be related to increased (i.e., longer-lasting)
psychological stress and/or physical reactions, resulting in faster metabolism and increased
glycogen consumption. Three hours after slaughter, the pH was at a comparable level
(approx. 6.0) for traditional and kosher slaughter. The authors suggest that the animals
slaughtered without stunning had a greater use of glycogen during bleeding, while pre-
stunning the cattle reduced the risk of obtaining meat with a high ultimate pH. The stunned
animals were probably less stressed and consumed less glycogen at the same time. More-
over, Nied´zwied´z et al. [
41
] showed that the acidity value of longissimus thoracis etlumborum

Foods 2022,11, 622 7 of 14
muscle in bull after 45 min of slaughter was 6.51, after 24 h (pH
24
) was 5.53, after 48 h
(pH
48
) was 5.47, and after 72 h (pH
72
) was 5.47. The pH
48
and pH
72
values were lower in
this study when compared to those obtained in their own research in the meat of cattle
obtained from standard and kosher slaughter (Table 1). Moreover, the pH
24
values were
similar to the values obtained in our own research for the muscles of standard slaughter
cattle and kosher slaughter heifers. Janiszewski et al. [
42
] showed that the pH
24
values
in bull’s longissimus dorsi muscle were in the range of 5.90–6.0. Pipek et al. [
43
] reported
higher pH
24
(6.02–6.08) values for the longissimus lumborum et thoracis muscle of heifers.
Litwi´nczuk et al. [44] showed that the average pH48 value was 5.57.
Many authors [
42
,
45
] showed that the pH
48
values ranged from 5.58 to 5.79, which was
comparable to the pH in the meat of cattle from standard slaughter and some of the muscles
of heifers from kosher slaughter. Other authors [
43
,
46
,
47
] showed higher pH
48
values
(5.71–5.99) in the meat of cattle. These values were similar to those obtained in the authors’
own research (Table 1) in the muscles of kosher bulls. According to Marenˇci´c [
25
] and
W˛eglarz [
48
], young bull’s meat in comparison to this raw material obtained from heifers
carcasses is characterized, among others, by higher pH
u
and pH
48
values, respectively.
Different results were reported by Mici´nski et al. [
49
], who found higher mean pH values
than in their own studies in the longissimus muscle of Hereford and Limousine young bulls
(6.25 and 6.58, respectively). The high pH values found in the present study indicated
the presence of a DFD (Dark, Firm, Dry) defect in the tested raw meat [
49
]. Katsaras
and Peetz [
50
], who studied morphological changes in dark cutting heated beef, found
that fragmentation of myofibrils was greater in DFD meat and cooking losses were much
smaller than in normal meat. These differences showed a greater tenderness of DFD meat
compared to normal meat. However, it should be noted that DFD meat is characterized by a
dark color at the muscle cut surface, and is drier compared to normal meat. Dark meat has
limited durability because is more likely to be susceptible to microbial deterioration [47].
The interaction between the type of slaughter method and gender exhibited a statis-
tically significant effect on the content of water of the beef sample (Table 2). Moreover,
gender and muscle type influenced both the water and fat content of the carcass. On the
other hand, gender and type of slaughter demonstrated a statistically significant influence
on the protein content in the MLT and MS of cattle. Higher fat content and lower water
content were noticed (p< 0.05) in both the MLT and MS of heifers, in comparison to the
concentration of these compounds in the same muscles obtained from young bull carcasses
regardless of the type of slaughter. However, the muscles of young bulls had a higher
content of protein (p< 0.05) than the muscle tissue obtained from carcasses of heifers,
regardless of slaughter type. Higher protein content was observed (p< 0.05) in both the
MLT and MS of cattle killed by standard slaughter, when compared to the raw beef sample
killed by ritual slaughter. This could be, for example, due to the greater amount of blood
remaining in blood vessels of the muscles of standard slaughter cattle.
Considering the chemical composition of beef, higher water content and lower fat
content were demonstrated in the MS of young bulls and heifers than in the MLT of
cattle regardless of slaughter type. In the meat of kosher heifers, the water content was
statistically significantly (p< 0.05) correlated with the fat content (r =
−
0.99) and protein
content (r = 0.83).
Sakowski et al. [
51
] found the protein content (20.1%) in the longissimus dorsi muscle
of Hereford young bulls to be similar to the average protein content obtained in the present
study in both the MLT and MS of young bull carcasses obtained from standard slaughter.
These authors reported a higher water content (73.5%) and lower fat content (5.2%) than
the amounts obtained in their own research studies in the MLT of cattle killed by both
types of slaughter methods and in the MS of heifers from kosher slaughter. In the same
muscles of young bulls classified as post-slaughter class R, Wajda et al. [
52
] showed a
higher average protein (23.67%) and lower fat content (1.35%) than that determined in the
beef muscles in their own research. Choroszy et al. [
53
] reported higher protein (22.43%)
and lower fat content (1.48%) in the MLT of Limousine bulls than the amounts obtained

Foods 2022,11, 622 8 of 14
in the beef muscles in their own research. Nowak et al. [
54
] suggested higher protein
content (20.67%) in the biceps femoris muscle of heifers than that obtained in their own
research in the muscles of cattle obtained from both types of slaughter methods. Moreover,
the authors demonstrated lower fat content (2.23%) and higher water content (75.38%)
than that observed in their own research study in the muscles of cattle from both types
of slaughter. Florek et al. [
55
] showed that the protein content in longissimus lumborum
muscle of young bulls (21.94%) and heifers (21.12%) was higher than in the beef sample
in their own research. Moreover, these authors found a higher water content (74.81%) in
the bull muscle than in their own research studies in MLT obtained from the carcasses
of same-gender animals killed by both types of slaughter methods. Moreover, the water
content in the muscle of heifers was higher (73.91%) than that obtained in the authors’ own
research on the muscles of heifers, except for the MS of the same-gender animals killed by
standard slaughter. The fat content in the meat of young bulls (1.07%) and heifers (2.85%)
was lower than that obtained in their own study on the muscles of animals of the same
gender.
Gender has a significant influence on the quality characteristics of the carcass. The
influence of sex (female, male, castrated) of ruminants is mainly related to the amount of
fat deposited and its location, growth rate, and carcass efficiency [
56
]. Testosterone—an
androgenic hormone produced by male testicular interstitial cells—has a positive effect on
muscle development in this sex. Pre-pubertal castration interrupts the androgen formation
process and the animal’s growth rate is delayed. On the other hand, heifers, compared
to young bulls, get fat earlier and more often, have less developed valuable body parts,
and are less muscular. Their meat, however, shows better marbling, fine-grained muscle
structure, lower shear force, and thus is juicier, tender, and aromatic. Female hormones
cause slower formation of connective tissue, which has a positive effect on the tenderness
of the meat of heifers. The lower tenderness of meat of young bulls is caused by both a
higher share of collagen and an increased level of calpastatin (protease inhibitor inhibiting
the post-mortem tenderizing process) [8].
The type of slaughter method and muscle type were the major factors that influenced
the composition of minerals (Table 3). In addition, gender, type of slaughter, and the effect
of interaction between these two factors had a statistically significant influence on the salt
content. A higher content of minerals and salt (p< 0.05) was observed in the muscles of
cattle obtained through kosher slaughter than in the raw material obtained from carcasses
of animals subjected to standard slaughter. Moreover, in the MS of heifers from ritual
slaughter, the content of minerals (p< 0.05) was found to be twice the amount determined
in the raw material obtained from animals of the same gender from standard slaughter.
Furthermore, higher mineral content was observed in the MLT of cattle than that obtained
for the MS (except for heifers from ritual slaughter) (p< 0.05). The salt concentration in the
muscles of young bulls from kosher slaughter was almost double (p< 0.05) in comparison
to the carcasses of animals of the same gender killed by the standard slaughter method.
This finding is most likely due to a 10-fold increase in the sodium content after processing
of the meat by koshering method, which was found to be consistent with other studies.
Domaradzki et al. [
57
] showed ash content of 1.03% and 1.05%, respectively, in the
longissimus lumborum and semitendinosus muscles of young slaughter cattle. ´
Smieci´nska
and Wajda [
58
] reported that the ash content in the longissimus dorsi muscle of cows was
in the range of 1.19–1.28%, and Florek et al. [
55
] showed the values to be 1.24% and 1.22%
in the longissimus lumborum muscle of young bulls and heifers, respectively. The values
obtained by these authors were higher than in their own research studies in the muscles
of cattle, with the exception of the MLT of young bulls and the MS of heifers from kosher
slaughter. Zaj ˛ac et al. [
59
] found that the content of total collagen in raw beef meat of heifers
ranged from 0.29% to 0.96%. The values obtained by the cited authors were lower than
the amounts observed in the beef muscles in their own research. Domaradzki et al. [
60
]
showed that the mean values of total collagen in the longissimus muscle of the lumbar spine
of heifers and young bulls were 8.91 and 10.55 mg/g, respectively, and in the semitendinous

Foods 2022,11, 622 9 of 14
muscle were 12.13 and 16.58 mg/g, respectively. Chriki et al. [
61
] indicated that the total
average collagen content in the MLT of young bulls and cows was 3.3 and 2.8 mg/g dry
weight, respectively. However, the insoluble collagen fractions were found to be 2.9 and
2.3 mg/g dry weight, respectively.
Collagen is the main component of intramuscular connective tissue, and its compo-
sition and content are responsible for the hardness of cooked meat [
62
]. The researchers
found that the collagen content was higher in dairy cattle and early-maturing meat breeds
compared to late-maturing breeds [
63
,
64
]. The type of slaughter method and the effect of
interaction between the type of slaughter and gender had a statistically significant effect on
forced drip, thermal drip, and shear force values of the beef sample (Table 4). Moreover,
gender and muscle type affected the variations in shear force. Statistically significant
differences in the shear force values were observed between the MS and MLT of cattle
obtained by standard slaughter and that of young bulls obtained by kosher slaughter.
Higher values of the shear force (p< 0.05) were demonstrated in the MS of cattle than in the
MLT of animals. Higher values of shear force (p< 0.05) were demonstrated in both MLT
and MS of young bulls compared to the meat of heifers, regardless of the type of slaughter.
Moreover, higher values of the shear force (p< 0.05) were found in the muscles of animals
from standard slaughter in comparison with the values obtained in the muscles of cattle
from kosher slaughter.
The tenderness of meat is influenced by the physical and chemical properties of mus-
cles. Many factors of the muscle structure itself significantly affect the texture characteristics
of meat, the most important of which are the amount and degree of cross-linking of connec-
tive tissue, the length of the sarcomeres, the speed and degree of post-mortem proteolysis,
and the content and proportions of the types of muscle proteins—myofibrils and sarcoplas-
mic proteins. Individual muscles within one carcass differ in terms of tenderness, which
results from the intensity of their work performed during life, affecting the thickness of
the fibers and the collagen content. Muscles that did not perform substantial work during
the life of animals are characterized by a lower content of collagen. Very active muscles
contain relatively large amounts of this protein [
65
,
66
]. The tenderness of the meat is greater
when the cross-section of the muscle fibers is smaller, and the smaller the bundles of these
fibers, the greater the length of the sarcomeres. The shortening of sarcomeres may be a
consequence of improperly carried out meat conditioning and maturation process [
67
].
Heifers, compared to young bulls shows better marbling, fine-grained muscle structure,
lower shear force and thus, their meat is juicier and more tender [8].
Agbeniga et al. [
68
] showed statistically significant higher values of cooking losses
in cattle from conventional slaughter compared to the muscles of animals obtained from
kosher slaughter. Moreover, the authors found no effect of the slaughter method on meat
drip (drip loss). Vergara and Gallego [
69
] also showed no statistically significant differences
in the case of driploss between unstunned and electrically stunned lambs.
pH plays a key role in shaping meat drip [
68
]. Agbeniga et al. [
68
] found that a similar
pH profile of meat obtained from cattle carcasses from kosher and standard slaughter may
be the reason for the lack of statistically significant differences in driploss. In addition,
stress during stunning can cause physiological changes, including redistribution of visceral
blood towards the brain and skeletal muscles, thereby causing greater cooking loss [70].
Nowak et al. [
54
] found the value of the shear force in the biceps femoris muscle of
heifers to be 41.8 N/cm
2
. The lowest values of the shear force were found in the infraspina-
tus muscle (32.1 N/cm
2
) and the highest in the semimembranosus muscle (
49.1 N/cm2
).
´
Smieci´nska et al. [
71
] reported the shear force value of 33.68 N/cm
2
in the longissimus lumbo-
rum muscle of young bulls. Domaradzki et al. [
72
] calculated the mean values of the shear
force to be 117.9 N/cm
2
in the longissimus lumborum muscle of Polish Red bulls, while the
value was 125.6 N/cm
2
in the meat of the white-backed young bulls. Nied ´zwied´z et al. [
41
]
determined the values of the shear force 48 h after slaughter in the bull’s longissimus thoracis
et lumborum muscles to be 81.6 N/cm
2
. Similar values of shear force (78.65 N/cm
2
) were
reported by Nied´zwied ´z et al. [
73
] in the same muscles of young slaughter cattle. On the

Foods 2022,11, 622 10 of 14
other hand, Bureš and Bartoˇn [
64
] showed that the average value of force was 58.6 N/cm
2
in the longissimus lumborum muscle of Holstein bulls, which was similar to that obtained
in our research in the longissimus thoracic muscle of young bulls from standard slaughter.
However, the values of this parameter in the meat of Fleckvieh bulls (49.8 N/cm
2
) were
slightly higher than those observed in the authors’ own research in the MLT of heifers from
standard slaughter and young bulls from kosher slaughter. Rudy et al. [
74
] obtained a
lower shear force value (57.11 N/cm
2
) in the longest back muscle of young bulls compared
with the authors’ own research in the meat of same-gender animals killed by standard
slaughter. On the other hand, the authors determined the value to be 48.53 N/cm
2
in the
muscle of heifers, which is lower than in the MLT of heifers and higher than in the MS of
animals of the same gender from both types of slaughter.
Agbeniga et al. [
68
] report that there are many reasons responsible for the difference
in shear force between meat samples obtained from the two methods of slaughter. First,
the amount of water bound in the fibers of the meat can affect tenderness. Higher values of
cooking loss of meat from conventional slaughter animals may contribute to higher values
of shear force. In addition, carcass temperature 24 h after slaughter and a faster rate of its
decrease in cattle from conventional slaughter may play a role in sarcomeres shortening
and cause cold shortening, which may therefore lead to higher shear force values in the
muscles of animals obtained from this type of slaughter.
When the hydration properties of beef were analyzed, young bulls and heifers from
kosher slaughter presented lower values (p< 0.05) than the raw material obtained from
cattle carcasses from standard slaughter. More favorable hydration properties of kosher
beef can be attributed to the higher pH
48
values. The pH has a very strong influence on
the water-holding capacity and tenderness of meat [
75
]. In other studies, which are not yet
published, no statistically significant correlation coefficients were found between pH and
water content, protein content, and hydration properties of the MLT muscle obtained from
carcasses of young bulls from standard slaughter. On the other hand, in the same muscle
obtained from young bull carcasses from kosher slaughter, statistically significant (p< 0.05)
correlation coefficients were found between pH
24
and forced drip (r =
−
0.91) and pH
48
and
thermal drip (r = −0.83).
Rudy et al. [
74
] determined the mean value of forced drip during refrigerated storage
after 48 h of slaughter in the longest back muscle of heifers, which was found to be 6.10%,
but in the case of bull meat, the value was 4.40%. Wajda et al. [
52
] determined the average
water absorbability values to be 5.77 cm
2
. These values were higher than those obtained
in the meat of cattle from kosher slaughter, but lower than those found in the muscles of
cattle from standard slaughter. Chávez et al. [
76
] obtained higher values of thermal drip
in the meat of cattle Bos taurus and Bos indicus, that is, 34.32% and 36.27%, respectively,
than in their own research. Similar results were obtained by Nied´zwied ´z et al. [
53
], who
determined that the value of thermal drip in longissimus thoracis et lumborum muscles after
48 h of slaughter was 33.13%. On the other hand, Rudy et al. [
74
] determined the mean
values of thermal drip in the muscles of heifers after 48 h of slaughter to be similar (23.90%)
to the results obtained in their own research in the MLT of same-gender animals from ritual
slaughter. Moreover, in the muscles of young bulls, these authors obtained lower values for
this parameter (22.80%) than in beef in their own research. Domaradzki et al. [
72
] showed
similar results for this parameter in the longissimus lumborum muscle of young Polish Red
bulls (28.82%).
4. Conclusions
The results indicate that all the investigated factors play a role in differentiating the
quality of beef. Lower early post-mortem pH values and higher pH values after 24 and
48 h
following slaughter were observed in the meat of kosher young bulls, which was most
likely caused by the prolonged state of consciousness of the animal (in ritual slaughter),
which may be related to increased (i.e., longer-lasting) psychological stress and/or physical
reactions, resulting in faster metabolism and increased glycogen consumption during

Foods 2022,11, 622 11 of 14
bleeding. Kosher slaughter, and the closely related koshering process, resulted in a decrease
in the forced and thermal drip values of beef, but the values did not show gender-based
differences. More favorable water-holding capacity related properties of kosher beef can
be attributed to the higher pH values, which may result in lower microbiological stability
of such raw material. Considering the chemical composition of beef, higher fat and lower
water contents were obtained in the muscles of heifers compared to young bull. This may
be because heifers, compared to young bulls, likely become fatter and stronger earlier
on, and female hormones also cause a slower formation of connective tissue, which has a
positive effect on the tenderness of their meat, resulting in better marbling, fine-grained
muscle structure, and a lower cutting force in the meat of heifers. Moreover, higher fat
and lower water content was obtained in the longest thoracic muscle in comparison to the
amounts of these components determined in the supraspinatus muscle. It was also found
that the shear force was higher in MS, which could be due to the lower fat content and
slightly higher collagen content in this muscle. Muscles that do not perform much work
during the life of the animals (e.g., MLT) are usually characterized by a lower collagen
content and a fine fiber structure.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, methodology, writing, resources, J. ˙
Z.; data curation,
editing, supervision, M.R.; writing, visualization, P.D.-K.; data curation, R.S.; editing, M.G. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the reported manuscript.
Funding:
Research was funded from Ministry of Science and Higher Education program named:
“Regional Initiative of Excellence” for years 2019–2022, project number 026/RID/2018/19, the amount
of financing PLN 9 542 500.00.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement:
This study did not involve any testing on humans or on live animals.
Data Availability Statement:
The authors declare that data or models are not deposited in an official
repository.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest in this work.
References
1.
Chauhana, S.S.; England, E.M. Postmortem glycolysis and glycogenolysis: Insights from species comparisons. Meat Sci.
2018
,144,
118–126. [CrossRef]
2.
Silva, J.A.; Patarata, L.; Martins, C. Influence of ultimate pH on bovine meat tenderness during ageing. Meat Sci.
1999
,52, 453–459.
[CrossRef]
3.
Immonen, K.; Ruusunen, M.; Hissa, K.; Puolanne, E. Bovine muscle glycogen concentration in relation to finishing diet, slaughter
and ultimate pH. Meat Sci. 2000,55, 25–31. [CrossRef]
4.
Honkavaara, M.; Rintasalo, E.; Ylonen, J.; Pudas, T. Meat quality and transport stress of cattle. Dtsch. Tierarztl. Wochenschr.
2003
,
110, 125–128.
5.
Viljoen, H.F.; De Kock, H.L.; Webb, E.C. Consumer acceptability of dark, firm and dry (DFD) and normal pH beef steaks. Meat Sci.
2002,61, 181–185. [CrossRef]
6.
Kreikemeier, K.K.; Unruh, J.A.; Eck, T.P. Factors affecting the occurrence of dark-cutting beef and selected carcass traits in finished
beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 1998,76, 388–395. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7.
Abril, M.; Campo, M.M.; Önenç, A.; Sañudo, C.; Albertí, P.; Negueruela, A.I. Beef colour evolution as a function of ultimate pH.
Meat Sci. 2001,58, 69–78. [CrossRef]
8.
Domaradzki, P.; Florek, M.; Litwi ´nczuk, A. Czynniki kształtuj ˛ace jako´s´c miesa wołowego. Wiadomo´sci Zootechniczne
2016
,2,
160–170.
9.
Farouk, M.M.; Al-Mazeedi, H.M.; Sabow, A.B.; Bekhit, A.E.D.; Adeyemi, K.D.; Sazili, A.Q.; Ghani, A. Halal and Kosher slaughter
methods and meat quality: A review. Meat Sci. 2014,98, 505–519. [CrossRef]
10.
Velarde, A.; Rodriguez, P.; Dalmau, A.; Fuentes, C.; Llonch, P.; Holleben, K.V.; Cenci-Goga, B.T. Religious slaughter: Evaluation of
current practices in selected countries. Meat Sci. 2014,96, 278–287. [CrossRef]
11. Frieske, A.; Kowaliszyn, B.; Mroczkowski, S. Legalne u´smiercanie zwierzat. Przegl ˛ad Hod. 2013,5, 30–32.
12.
Mroczek, R. Ubój rytualny w Polsce—Wybrane aspekty. Zeszyty Naukowe SGGW w Warszawie—Problemy Rolnictwa ´
Swiatowego
2017,17, 106–115. [CrossRef]
13.
Regenstein, J.M.; Chaudry, M.M.; Regenstein, C.E. The Kosher and Halal Food Laws. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf.
2003
,2,
111–127. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Foods 2022,11, 622 12 of 14
14. Grandin, T. Problems with kosher slaughter. Int. J. Study Anim. Probl. 1980,1, 375–390.
15.
Bozzo, G.; Di Pinto, A.; Bonerba, E.; Ceci, E.; Mottola, A.; Roma, R.; Celano, G.V. Kosher slaughter paradigms: Evaluation of
slaughterhouse inspection procedures. Meat Sci. 2017,128, 30–33. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16.
Hayes, N.S.; Schwartz, C.A.; Phelps, K.J.; Borowicz, K.R.; Maddock-Carlin, K.R.; Maddock, R.J. The relationship between
pre-harvest stress and the carcass characteristics of beef heifers that qualified for kosher designation. Meat Sci.
2015
,100, 134–138.
[CrossRef]
17. Anil, M.H. Religious slaughter: A current controversial animal welfare issue. Anim. Front. 2012,2, 64–67. [CrossRef]
18. Jay, M.J. Modern Food Microbiology, 4th ed.; Chapman and Hall: New York, NY, USA, 1992.
19.
Regenstein, J.M.; Regenstein, C.E. The kosher dietary laws and their implementation in the food industry. Food Technol.
1988
,42,
86–94.
20.
Holzer, Z.; Berry, B.W.; Campbell, A.M.; Spanier, A.M.; Solomon, M.B. Effect of koshering and hydrodynamic pressure on beef
colour, odor, and microbial loads. J. Muscle Foods 2004,15, 69–82. [CrossRef]
21.
Asghar, A.; Torres, E.; Gray, J.I.; Pearson, A.M. Effect of salt on myoglobin derivatives in the sarcoplasmic extract from pre-and
post-rigor beef in the presence or absence of mitochondria and microsomes. Meat Sci. 1990,27, 197–209. [CrossRef]
22.
Lapidot, T.; Granit, R.; Kanner, J. Lipid peroxidation by “free” iron ions and myoglobin as affected by dietary antioxidants in
simulated gastric fluids. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005,53, 3383–3390. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23.
Mast, M.; Macneil, J. Effect of kosher vs conventional processing on yield quality, and acceptability of broiler chickens. J. Food Sci.
1983,48, 1013–1015. [CrossRef]
24.
Cafferky, J.; Hamill, R.M.; Allen, P.; O’Doherty, J.V.; Cromie, A.; Sweeney, T. Effect of Breed and Gender on Meat Quality of M.
longissimus thoracis et lumborum Muscle from Crossbred Beef Bulls and Steers. Foods 2019,8, 173. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
25.
Marenˇci´c, D.; Ivankovi´c, A.; Kozaˇcinski, L.; Popovi´c, M.; Cvrtila, Ž. The effect of sex and age at slaughter on the physicochemical
properties of baby-beef meat. Vet. Arh. 2018,88, 101–110. [CrossRef]
26.
Nogalski, Z.; Pogorzelska-Przybyłek, P.; Sobczuk-Szul, M.; Nogalska, A.; Modzelewska-Kapituła, M.; Purwin, C. Carcass
characteristics and meat quality of bulls and steers slaughtered at two different ages. Ital. J. Anim. Sci.
2018
,17, 279–288.
[CrossRef]
27.
Wicks, J.; Beline, M.; Gomez, J.F.M.; Luzardo, S.; Silva, S.L.; Gerrard, D. Muscle Energy Metabolism, Growth, and Meat Quality in
Beef Cattle. Agriculture 2019,9, 195. [CrossRef]
28.
Filipˇcík, R.; Falta, D.; Kopec, T.; Chládek, G.; Veˇceˇra, M.; Reˇcková, Z. Environmental Factors and Genetic Parameters of Beef Traits
in Fleckvieh Cattle Using Field and Station Testing. Animals 2020,10, 2159. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29.
Bonny, S.P.F.; O’Reilly, R.A.; Pethick, D.W.; Gardner, G.E.; Hocquette, J.-F.; Pannier, L. Update of Meat Standards Australia and the
cuts based grading scheme for beef and sheepmeat. J. Integr. Agric. 2018,17, 1641–1654. [CrossRef]
30.
PN-ISO 1442; Meat and Meat Products—Determination of Moisture Content (Reference Method). Polish Committee for Standard-
ization: Warsaw, Poland, 2000.
31.
PN-A-04018: 1975/Az3; Agricultural Food Products. Determination of Nitrogen by the Kjeldahl Method and Expressing as Protein.
Polish Committee for Standardization: Warsaw, Poland, 2002.
32.
PN-ISO 1444; Meat and Meat Products—Determination of Free Fat Content. Polish Committee for Standardization: Warsaw,
Poland, 2000.
33.
PN-A-82112:1973/Az1; Meat and Meat Products—Determination of Chloride Content. Polish Committee for Standardization:
Warsaw, Poland, 2002.
34.
PN-ISO 3496; Meat and Meat Products—Determination of Hydroxyproline Content. Polish Committee for Standardization:
Warsaw, Poland, 2000.
35.
PN-ISO 936; Meat and Meat Products—Determination of Total Ash. Polish Committee for Standardization: Warsaw, Poland, 2000.
36.
Van Oeckel, M.J.; Warnants, N.; Boucqueé, C.V. Comparison of different methods for measuring water holding capacity and
juiciness of pork versus online screening methods. Meat Sci. 1999,51, 313–320. [CrossRef]
37. Pospiech, E. Diagnozowanie odchyle´n jako´sciowych mi˛esa. Gospodarka Mi˛esna 2000,4, 68–71.
38.
D’Agata, M.; Russo, C.; Preziuso, G. Effect of Islamic ritual slaughter on beef quality. Ital. J. Anim. Sci.
2009
,8, 489–491. [CrossRef]
39.
Zuckerman, H.; Mannheim, C.H. Color improvement of kosher beef using sodium ascorbate and erythorbate. J. Muscle Foods
2001,12, 137–151. [CrossRef]
40.
Barrasso, R.; Ceci, E.; Tufarelli, V.; Casalino, G.; Luposella, F.; Fustinoni, F.; Dimuccio, M.M.; Bozzo, G. Religious slaughtering:
Implications on pH and temperature of bovine carcasses. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2021,in press. [CrossRef]
41.
Nied´zwied´z, J.; Ostoja, H.; Cierach, M. Instrumentalny pomiar parametrów tekstury i ocena organoleptyczna krucho´sci wołowego
miesa kulinarnego. In ˙
zynieria i Aparatura Chemiczna 2013,52, 62–64.
42.
Janiszewski, P.; Borzuta, K.; Lisiak, D.; Powałowski, K.; Samardakiewicz, Ł. Wpływ klas uformowania i otłuszczenia tusz na pH
mi˛esa wołowego oraz charakterystyka struktury skupu bydła krajowego. Roczniki Naukowe Polskiego Towarzystwa Zootechnicznego
2015,4, 65–74.
43.
Pipek, P.; Haberl, A.; Jeleniková, J. Influence of slaughterhouse handling on the quality of beef carcasses. Czech J. Anim. Sci.
2003
,
48, 371–378.

Foods 2022,11, 622 13 of 14
44.
Litwi´nczuk, Z.; Florek, M.; Domaradzki, P.; ˙
Zółkiewski, P. Wła´sciwo´sci fizykochemiczne mi˛esa buhajków trzech rodzimych ras-
polskiej czerwonej, białogrzbietej i polskiej czarno-białej oraz simentalskiej i polskiej holszty´nsko-fryzyjskiej. ˙
Zywno´s´c Nauka
Technologia Jako´s´c 2014,5, 53–62. [CrossRef]
45.
Nied´zwied´z, J.; Zimijewski, T.; Ostoja, H.; Cierach, M. Porównanie warto´sci maksymalnej siły ci ˛ecia wybranych miesni z tylnej
´cwier´ctuszy wołowej. In˙
zynieria i Aparatura Chemiczna 2011,50, 57–58.
46.
Grze´skowiak, E.; Strzelecki, J.; Borzuta, K. Jako´s´c mi ˛esa podstawowych elementów kulinarnych tusz młodego bydła rasy
czarno-białej. ˙
Zywno´s´c Nauka Technologia Jako´s´c Supl. 2003,4, 122–128.
47.
W˛eglarz, A. Meat quality defined based on pH and colour depending on cattle category and slaughter season. Czech J. Anim. Sci.
2010,55, 548–556. [CrossRef]
48. W˛eglarz, A. Quality of beef from semi-intensively fattened heifers and bulls. Anim. Sci. Paper. Rep. 2010,28, 207–218.
49.
Mici´nski, J.; Klupczy´nski, J.; Ostoja, H.; Cierach, M.; Dymnicka, M.; Łozicki, A.; Daszkiewicz, T. Wpływ rasy i ˙
zywienia buhajków
na wyniki klasyfikacji ich tusz w systemie EUROP oraz na ocen˛e tekstury mi˛esa. ˙
Zywno´s´c Nauka Technologia Jako´s´c Supl.
2005
,3,
149–156.
50. Katsaras, K.; Peetz, P. Morphological changes in dark cutting beef when heated. Fleischwirtschaft 1990,70, 68–70.
51.
Sakowski, T.; Dasiewicz, K.; Słowi´nski, M.; Oporz ˛adek, J.; Dymnicki, E.; Wi´snioch, A.; Słoniewski, K. Jako´s´c mi˛esa buhajków ras
mi˛esnych. Med. Weter. 2001,57, 748–752.
52.
Wajda, S.; Kondratowicz, J.; Burczyk, E.; Winarski, R. Wydajno´s´c rze ´zna i jako´s´c mi˛esa tusz buhajków zakwalifikowanych w
systemie EUROP do ró˙
znych klas uformowania. ˙
Zywno´s´c Nauka Technologia Jako´s´c 2014,4, 136–147. [CrossRef]
53.
Choroszy, Z.; Bilik, K.; Choroszy, B.; Łopusza´nska-Rusek, M. Effect of breed of fattened bulls on the composition and functional
properties of beef. Anim. Sci. Pap. Rep. 2006,24, 61–69.
54.
Nowak, M.; Palka, K.; Troy, D. Skład chemiczny i jako´s´c wybranych mie´sni bydlecych. Zywno´s´c Nauka Technologia Jako´s´c
2005
,44,
176–185.
55.
Florek, M.; Litwi´nczuk, Z.; K˛edzierska-Matysek, M.; Grodzicki, T.; Skałecki, P. Warto´s´c od˙
zywcza mi˛esa z l˛ed ´zwiowej cz ˛e´sci
mi˛e´snia najdłu ˙
zszego i pół´sci˛egnistego uda młodego bydła rze´znego. Med. Weter. 2007,63, 242–246.
56.
Guerrero, A.; Valero, M.V.; Campo, M.M.; Sanudo, C. Some factors that affect ruminant meat quality: From the farm to the fork.
Review. Acta Sci. Anim. Sci. 2013,35, 335–347. [CrossRef]
57.
Domaradzki, P.; Litwi´nczuk, Z.; Litwi´nczuk, A.; Florek, M. Zmiany tekstury i wła´sciwo´sci sensorycznych wybranych mi˛e´sni
szkieletowych ró˙
znych kategorii bydła rze´znego w okresie 12-dniowego dojrzewania pró˙
zniowego. ˙
Zywno´s´c Nauka Technologia
Jakos´s´c 2016,4, 37–52. [CrossRef]
58.
´
Smieci´nska, K.; Wajda, S. Jako´s´c mi˛esa krów zaliczonych w klasyfikacji poubojowej EUROP do ró˙
znych klas. ˙
Zywno´s´c Nauka
Technologia Jako´s´c 2008,3, 57–66.
59.
Zaj ˛ac, M.; Midura, A.; Palka, K.; W˛esierska, E.; Krzysztoforski, K. Skład chemiczny, rozpuszczalno´s´c kolagenu ´sródmi˛e´sniowego i
tekstura wybranych mi˛e´sni wołowych. ˙
Zywno´s´c Nauka Technologia Jako´s´c 2011,4, 103–116.
60.
Domaradzki, P.; Florek, M.; Litwi´nczuk, A. Zawarto´s´c kolagenu ogólnego i rozpuszczalnego w mie´sniach szkieletowych róznych
kategorii bydła rasy polskiej holszty´nsko-fryzyjskiej. EPISTEME Czasopismo Naukowo-Kulturalne 2013,21, 177–185.
61.
Chriki, S.; Renand, G.; Picard, B.; Micol, D.; Journaux, L.; Hocquette, J.F. Meta-analysis of the relationships between beef
tenderness and muscle characteristics. Livest. Sci. 2013,155, 424–434. [CrossRef]
62.
Purslow, P.P. The structure and functional significance of variations in the connective tissue within muscle. Comp. Biochem. Physiol.
A Mol. Integr. Physiol. 2020,133, 947–966. [CrossRef]
63.
Christensen, M.; Ertbjerg, E.; Failla, S.; Sánudo, C.; Richardson, R.I.; Nute, G.R.; Olleta, J.L.; Panea, B.; Albertí, P.; Juárez, M.; et al.
Relationship between collagen characteristics, lipid content and raw and cooked texture of meat from young bulls of fifteen
European breeds. Meat Sci. 2011,87, 61–65. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
64.
Bureš, D.; Bartoˇn, L. Performance, carcass traits and meat quality of Aberdeen Angus, Gascon, Holstein and Fleckvieh finishing
bulls. Livest. Sci. 2018,214, 231–237. [CrossRef]
65.
Nuernberg, K.; Ender, B.; Papstein, H.J.; Wegner, J.; Ender, K.; Nuernberg, G. Effects of growth and breed on the fatty acid
composition of the muscle lipids in cattle. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 1999,208, 332–335. [CrossRef]
66.
Purslow, P.; Archile-Contreras, A.; Cha, M. Manipulating meat tenderness by increasing the turnover of intramuscular connective
tissue. J. Anim. Sci. 2012,90, 950–959. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
67.
Farouk, M.M.; Wiklund, E.; Rosenvold, K. Fresh meat texture and tenderness. In Improving the Sensory and Nutritional Quality of
Fresh Meat; Kerry, J., Ledward, D., Eds.; Woodhead: Cambridge, UK, 2009; pp. 61–88.
68.
Agbeniga, B.; Webb, E.C.; O’Neill, H.A. Influence of Kosher (Shechita) and conventional slaughter techniques on shear force, drip
and cooking loss of beef. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 2013,43, 98–102. [CrossRef]
69. Vergara, H.; Gallego, L. Effect of electrical stunning on meat quality of lamb. Meat Sci. 2000,55, 345–349. [CrossRef]
70.
Ferguson, D.M.; Warner, R.D. Have we underestimated the impact of pre-slaughter stress on meat quality in ruminants. Meat Sci.
2008,80, 12–19. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
71.
´
Smieci´nska, K.; Kubiak, D.; Daszkiewicz, T.; Osowiec, P. Zmiany barwy i wła´sciwo´sci sensorycznych miesa wołowego zam-
razanego po 7 dniach dojrzewania w modyfikowanej atmosferze. Roczniki Naukowe Polskiego Towarzystwa Zootechnicznego
2018
,
14, 47–59.

Foods 2022,11, 622 14 of 14
72.
Domaradzki, P.; Litwi´nczuk, Z.; Florek, M.; ˙
Zółkiewski, P. Wpływ okresu dojrzewania na wła´sciwo´sci fizykochemiczne mie´snia
longissimus lumborum buhajków pi˛eciu ras. Med. Weter. 2017,73, 802–810. [CrossRef]
73.
Nied´zwiedz´z, J.; Ostoja, H.; Cierach, M. Tekstura mi˛e´snia longissimus thoracis et lumborum miesza´nców bydła ras mi˛esnych,
poddawanego dojrzewaniu metod ˛a mokr ˛a. Acta Agrophysica 2012,19, 631–640.
74.
Rudy, M.; Gil, M.; Zurek, J.; Angrys, P. Zmiany wybranych wła´sciwo´sci fizykochemicznych mi˛e´snia najdłu ˙
zszego grzbietu
podczas przechowywania chłodniczego w zale˙
zno´sci od płci. Post˛epy Nauki i Technologii Przemysłu Rolno-Spo˙
zywczego
2018
,73,
17–30.
75.
Ahmad, R.S.; Imran, A.; Hussain, M.B. Nutritional Composition of Meat. In Meat Science and Nutrition; Arshad, M.S., Ed.; InTech:
London, UK, 2018; p. 64. [CrossRef]
76.
Chávez, A.; Pérez, E.; Rubio, M.S.; Méndez, R.D.; Delgado, E.J.; Díaz, D. Chemical composition and cooking properties of beef
forequarter muscles of Mexican cattle from different genotypes. Meat Sci. 2012,91, 160–164. [CrossRef]