Identifying muscle and processing combinations suitable for use as beef for fajitas

Exploring Consumer Palatability of Australian Beef Fajita Meat Enhanced with Phosphate or Sodium Bicarbonate

The objective of this study was to determine the consumer eating quality of five Australian beef muscles (outside skirt/diaphragm, inside skirt/transversus abdominis, inside round cap/gracilis, bottom sirloin flap/obliquus abdominis internus, and flank steak/rectus abdominis) served as fajita strips. All the muscles were divided in half and enhanced (12%) with a brine solution containing either phosphate, a “clean label” ingredient sodium bicarbonate, or not enhanced. Muscle and enhancement independently influenced (P < 0.01) tenderness, juiciness, flavor, and overall liking. Overall, the bottom sirloin flap was liked the most (P < 0.05) when compared with all the other muscles, while the inside round cap was liked less but did not differ (P > 0.05) from the inside skirt or flank steak. Samples enhanced with sodium bicarbonate were the most (P < 0.05) tender and juicy; samples enhanced with phosphate were intermediate, and the control samples were the least tender and juicy, regardless of the muscle. Flavor and overall liking were similar (P > 0.05) between clean and phosphate-enhanced samples, and both were liked more than the control samples. Enhancement was necessary for acceptable eating quality of all the muscles evaluated in this study; however, the inside round cap was the least suitable. These results indicate that a “clean label” enhanced fajita product is possible without compromising cooking yield or consumer satisfaction.

The Effects of Enhancement Strategies of Beef Flanks on Composition and Consumer Palatability Characteristics

Beef rectus abdominis muscles (n = 100; 20/treatment) were assigned randomly to 1 of 5 treatments: untreated control (Control, No Treatment; CNT), vacuum tumbled control without marinade (Tumbled Control, No Treatment; TCNT), vacuum tumbled with marinade (TUMB), injected with marinade (INJ), and injected with marinade plus vacuum tumbled (IPT) to determine how enhancement techniques influence consumer palatability. After processing, flank samples were cooked (72°C), cut into 1.3-cm strips, and served as fajita strips for consumer evaluation (n = 200). Treatment influenced (P &lt; 0.01) the rating and acceptability of all palatability traits, overall liking, and willingness to pay (WTP). Consumers scored IPT and INJ more tender compared to all other treatments (P &lt; 0.05). Samples processed using IPT and INJ were juicier (P &lt; 0.05) than all other treatments, except INJ and TUMB were similar (P &gt; 0.05). Samples processed using TUMB and INJ were similar (P &gt; 0.05) for flavor and WTP, and INJ, IPT, and TUMB samples were similar (P &gt; 0.05) for overall liking. Thus, consumers were willing to pay more for IPT than TUMB (P &lt; 0.05). Consumers scored CNT and TCNT lower for all palatability traits which resulted in lower WTP (P &lt; 0.05). Inclusion of a marinade improved the eating quality of samples compared to CNT and TCNT. The delivery method of the brine solution was less important to palatability as the presence of a marinade, as IPT, INJ, and TUMB were all similar (P &gt; 0.05) for overall liking. Injection plus tumbling improved tenderness, juiciness, and flavor liking scores over tumbling alone, but not over injection alone. Injection influenced consumer tenderness more than tumbling, but tumbling had greater effects on cooked moisture than injection. While IPT did not surpass either TUMB or INJ in all sensory categories, IPT does excel when considering moisture retention along with palatability.