Three cuts of steak (strip, chuck-eye and top blade) of two United States Department of Agriculture grades (choice and select) underwent seasoning and tenderization treatments to study whether flavor and texture quality could be enhanced within cut and grade of steak. Treatments included: 1) seasoning alone, 2) a combination of seasoning + bromelain (enzymatic tenderizer), or 3) control (no seasoning and/or bromelain). The seasoning included: kosher salt, black pepper, onion powder, garlic powder, cumin, and ground oregano. A 20 mg/mL bromelain solution was used for tenderizing the steaks. All of the steaks were cooked to an internal temperature of 71°C (medium doneness). Six highly trained descriptive panelists evaluated the samples. The results of this study indicate that it may be possible to improve eating quality of choice and select chuck-eye and choice top blade to be more similar to strip steaks of the same USDA grade. Both treatments increased flavor and texture attributes in these samples that have been shown to have an impact on liking scores. Choice chuck-eye samples had decreased bloody/serumy and metallic scores and increased umami and initial flavor impact with both treatments. Both treatments increased brown/roasted flavor in select chuck-eyes. Tenderness, fat-like and umami were increased with the seasoning + bromelain treatment in select chuck-eyes. Choice top blade steaks with seasoning alone had increased umami flavor. Both treatments impacted attributes (fat-like, umami and sour) of the select strip steak that differed from choice strip steaks. The next step to this research is to investigate whether consumer liking scores are consistent with conclusions made from descriptive analysis results. Overall, these treatments could be a valuable tool for beef retailers.

•    Descriptive analysis
•    Beef steaks
•    Choice
•    Select
•    Seasoning
•    Bromelain

Whetstone S, Adhikari K, Chamber E IV (2014) Impact of Seasoning and Bromelain on Sensory Attributes of Beef Steaks. J Hum Nutr Food Sci 2(1): 1023.

There are three main factors that drive beef liking and palatability: tenderness, juiciness and flavor. There is some controversy over the order of importance of these palatability attributes in determining consumer liking and acceptability. Huffman et al. [1] reported that when asked, 51% of consumers considered tenderness to be the attribute they desired most in a steak, followed by flavor (39%) and juiciness (10%). Other studies have shown that flavor liking may be equally or even more important [2-5].

Until recently there had been little insight into how added seasonings affects beef flavor characteristics. Some research had been done concerning herbs that might work as antioxidants, enhance shelf life or the nutritive value of beef products. However, these studies did not focus on the changing of flavor within the beef other than to detect the presence of off-flavors. In a recent study on descriptive analysis of seasoned beef samples, Vázquez-Araújo et al. [6] found that the addition of herbs and spices did alter some main beef flavor attributes, but the change was dependent on the cooking method. Attributes most affected were beef identity, brown/roasted and bloody/serumy. Salt and pepper were found to have a significant effect when using an outdoor grill, by increasing the brown/roasted, fat like, sourness, saltiness, bitterness and initial flavor impact of the samples. Other seasonings were found only to slightly increase these same attributes over the control samples. The use of olive oil and salt on samples cooked on an indoor electric grill was found to increase bloody/serumy and salty flavors. Seasonings used in this study were determined through consumer surveys in Spain, the US, and Argentina. Salt, black pepper, fresh parsley, cayenne pepper, oregano, rosemary, chili powder, fresh garlic, garlic powder, onion flakes, beef bouillon, powdered steak seasoning and mixed seasoning rub were the herbs and spices chosen by at least 30% of US survey respondents.

Papain, bromelain, ficin, Aspergillus oryzae protease and Bacillus subtilis protease enzymes, commonly used for meat tenderization, have earned Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) status in the US. Steaks treated with these enzymes through needle injection have shown improvements in both WarnerBratzler Shear Force (WBSF) and sensory tenderness ratings. Papain often proves to be the most effective in improving tenderness but can negatively affect juiciness and other textural qualities. Bromelain has been shown to be active at 0° C, although this activity is low and does increase dramatically in the range of 50- 70 °C [7,8]. Ketnawa and Rawdkuen [9] showed that bromelain from pineapple peel was an effective tenderizer for beef, chicken and squid.

Choice and select steaks are widely available for retail sale and choice steaks are more expensive than select steaks. Choice steaks have a higher degree of marbling which is thought to result in more flavorful, juicy and tender meat [10]. Select steaks are priced lower and have a lower degree of marbling. Strip steaks are considered to be a high quality steak and top blade and chuckeye steaks are viewed as lower quality cuts. Today’s consumers are very price conscious, and grocery prices are on the rise. Beef is more expensive per kilogram than chicken or pork [11]. However, consumers may be more willing to pay a higher price for beef if they see it as a good value [12]. If consumers knew they could get flavor similar to a choice cut of beef by simply seasoning a select cut they would be more likely to increase their purchases of select cuts of beef. This same principal could apply to top blade and chuck-eye steaks.

There has been little insight into how added seasonings might affect beef flavor characteristics in economical cuts of choice and select USDA grades. Most consumers do not consume unseasoned beef in their homes or at restaurants. Consumers may increase their purchases of these economical cuts or lower grade beef such as select (USDA grade) if the quality in terms of tenderness and flavor could be enhanced by addition of seasoning and/or an enzymatic tenderizer. As mentioned earlier beef is more expensive than pork and chicken and beef consumers are always looking for economical options where they do not have to sacrifice the flavor of beef. The objective of the study was to investigate whether adding seasonings to chuck-eye and top blade steaks would impact flavor attributes and increase flavor quality, and determine if USDA select steaks could be enhanced with the addition of seasoning and bromelain.

Samples

Steak samples used in the study were strip (Longissimus dorsi), chuck-eye (Complexus) and top blade (Infraspinatus). These cuts were selected to represent a range of quality (strip = high quality, top blade = mid-range and chuck = low). For all the three cuts USDA grade choice (Ch) and select (Sl) were used in the study. Strip (Str) and chuck-eye (C-E) samples had a similar weight, approximately 340 g per steak. Top blade (TB) steaks were smaller and were grouped together in twos or threes to achieve a weight of approximately 340 g per sample. All samples were individually vacuum sealed and frozen at ?23 °C prior to testing. According to a randomized test design samples were removed from frozen storage 24 h prior to cooking and allowed to thaw in a refrigerator at 3.5 °C.

Sample preparation

Samples were assigned to control (C), seasoning (S) or seasoning + bromelain (B) treatment groups. Many of the seasonings were chosen based on what is commonly used by consumers in the U.S. as reported by Vázquez- Araújo et al. [6]. The seasoning contained: 13.5 g kosher salt, 4.6 g ground black pepper, 4.8 g onion powder, 6.2 g garlic powder, 3.6 g ground oregano, and 1.8 g ground cumin. One teaspoon of the seasoning was evenly distributed over the sample.

For the B treatment, steaks were submerged into a solution (20 mg/L) of bromelain (Enzeco Bromelain 240; Enzyme Development Corporation, New York, NY). Samples were submerged for 10 s, drained and refrigerated for 10 min. Samples were then seasoned according to the method described previously.

Immediately after seasoning (except for the control samples) samples were cooked on an electric grill (George Foreman model GPR 100, Miramar, FL). The grill was pre-heated on “high” for 10 min. The samples were placed in the center of the grill, the top of the grill was closed and samples were cooked until they reached an internal temperature of 71 °C corresponding to a medium doneness. Internal temperatures (read from the approximate geometric center) of all samples were monitored during cooking using a probe thermometer (Mainstays ™ Black Acu-Rite meat thermometer with probe, Model 00993STW1, Lake Geneva, WI). The samples were cut into approximately 1.25 cm cubes. Any excess fat or cartilage on the edge of the steak was removed prior to cubing. Glass jelly jars (Ball Corporation, Daleville, IN) of approximately 120 mL labeled with random three digit codes were placed on a warming tray (The Maxim Co. model WT48, Newark, NJ) prior to serving the sample to warm them up. The jars were covered with screw top lids (Ball Corporation, Daleville, IN) and each jar was placed into a tin tray on a heated clay brick to keep the sample warm (bricks had been heated for at least 2 h in an oven at 127°C). Three cubes of each sample were placed into the warmed glass jelly jars. Samples were then served to the panel. Samples were served about 15 min apart in a sequential monadic order.

Descriptive analysis

Six highly-trained panelists from the Sensory Analysis Center at Kansas State University (Manhattan, KS) evaluated the samples for this project. Each panelist had completed a general training in descriptive sensory testing (120 h) and had about 2,000 h of testing experience with a variety of products. Panelists also had experience testing beef and using the beef lexicon developed by Adhikari et al. [13].

During two 1.5 h orientation sessions the panel checked the seasoning amount to determine if it was appropriate. Panelists were asked to taste the seasoned samples to determine if any of the spices were overwhelming (masking the natural flavor of the sample, or standing out among the rest of the seasoning ingredients). A range of samples was served during orientation to allow the panel to ensure all of the appropriate attributes were included on the testing ballot. Panelists used the beef flavor lexicon developed by Adhikari et al. [13], selecting only attributes which applied to this sample set and adding in attributes representative of flavors perceived due to the seasoning mix. Also, two texture attributes (overall tenderness and juiciness) were added by investigators as texture has been shown to be important in beef quality perception.

The panel evaluated four to six samples per day in 90 min sessions. A total of 72 samples (3 cuts × 2 grades × 3 treatments × 4 replications) were evaluated over 16 days. Strip and chuck-eye samples were served according to a randomized complete block design with samples being randomized within each replication. All samples were served monadic sequentially. Twenty-one flavor and texture attributes (Table 1) were evaluated by the panel. The panel rated the intensity of each attribute on a 0 to 15-point scale with 0.5 point increments (with 0 representing “none” and 15 representing “high”). Evaluation took place under red lighting to minimize visual differences between samples and prevent bias. Panelists were provided with reverse osmosis, deionized, carbon filtered water and unsalted-top saltine crackers for palate cleansing and to reduce any build-up of flavors that could occur from one sample to the next.

Table 1: Terms and definitions used in evaluating seasoned beef samples for flavor and texture.

Data analysis

Data was analyzed using PROC GLIMMIX in SAS ® version 9.1 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) to obtain the analysis of variance (ANOVA). The panelists were treated as a random effect. Posthoc means separation was done using Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) at 5% level of significance. Principal components analysis (PCA) in the covariance matrix was conducted (The Unscrambler® X, 2011, version 10.1; Camo A/S. Oslo, Norway) to show relationships between the samples and the sensory attributes.

Table 2 shows the mean scores of the samples for all the attributes and also the post-hoc mean separation.

Table 2: Mean scores of selected texture and flavor attributes for seasoned beef steak samples.

The PCA biplot (Figure 1) illustrates the relationships between the attributes and steak samples.

Figure 1: Principal components analysis biplot of the first two principal components for flavor and texture attributes for the beef steak samples.

Legend: USDA grade is denoted with ‘Ch’ for Choice ‘Sl’ for Select; C-E B= Chuck-eye seasoning +; romelain; C-E C= Chuck-eye control; C-E S= Chuck-eye seasoning; TB B= Top blade seasoning + bromelain; TB C= Top blade control; TB S= Top blade seasoning; Str B= Strip seasoning + bromelain; Str C= Strip control; Str S= Strip seasoning

Strip steaks

As shown in Table 2 the mean intensity rating for fat-like was lower in the select strip control samples than in the choice strip control samples. The application of either treatment increased the mean fat-like score to be comparable to the fat-like score for any of the choice strip samples. This same trend was seen with the mean umami rating also. ANOVA results showed significant differences (P < 0.05) in overall sweet score between choice and select strips but this difference had little impact on the samples because the absolute value of the ratings is very similar. Select strip control samples had more sourness than the choice strip control samples. Both treatments lowered sourness in the select strip samples to a level comparable to the choice samples. This same trend was seen for the intensity rating for sour aromatics. This decrease in sourness and sour aromatics would likely be an improvement to the steak because sourness has been shown to be negatively correlated to liking [14]. The results of the PCA for all samples (Figure 1) show that select strip samples with either treatment applied were more correlated with fat-like, umami and overall sweet flavors than were control select strip samples. Select and choice strip samples with either treatment are positioned near one another on the PCA indicating that these samples are correlated with the same attributes.

These results differ from a study on Longissimus dorsi (source of the strip steak) of Hanwoo cattle from Korea where investigators found no significant flavor differences between samples of different quality grades [15]. This could be because samples in the study were graded according to the Korean grading system and not the USDA grading system. Also differences in experimental methodologies might have been another reason. Adhikari et al. [16] found that grilled longissimus dorsi (source of the strip steak) had brown/roasted flavor and high juiciness. The strip samples in the present study had high ratings for brown/ roasted flavor and these ratings were among the highest for all samples tested in the study. The juiciness was not as high for the strip samples in this study, but this difference could be due to a difference in degree of doneness.

A similar study [6] found that the addition of herbs and spices altered some main beef flavor attributes, but the change was dependent on cooking method. Attributes most affected were beef identity, brown/roasted and bloody/serumy. These findings are consistent with the results of the current study, as many samples had changes in these same attributes with seasoning (S) or seasoning + bromelain (B). Vázquez-Araújo et al. [6] found that samples cooked on an outdoor grill with salt and pepper had increased brown/roasted, fat like, sourness, saltiness, bitterness and initial flavor impact of the samples. Although samples were cooked in the present study on an electric grill, many of the attributes affected by the treatment remained the same.

Chuck-eye steaks

The treatments applied in this study impacted several important flavor and texture attributes in the chuck-eye steaks. Treatment caused some attributes in the select chuckeye samples to become more similar to attributes of the choice chuck-eye samples. Results of the ANOVA show that there were two significant differences (P < 0.05) between choice chuck-eye control steaks and select chuck-eye control steaks. Choice chuckeye steaks had higher intensities of juiciness and bloody/serumy. Overall tenderness ratings were not shown to be significantly different (P < 0.05) between grades for chuck-eye samples. Juiciness was significantly increased (P < 0.05) in select chuckeye samples when treated with seasonings and was increased a greater amount when treated with seasoning + bromelain. Mean juiciness intensity for treated (either S or B) select chuckeye steaks was not different from mean juiciness intensity for any of the choice chuck-eye samples. Control samples of select chuck-eye steaks had a lower mean intensity rating for bloody/ serumy than control samples of choice chuck-eye. However, both treatments lowered the mean bloody/serumy score for choice chuck-eyes to a level comparable with select chuck-eyes. Between choice chuck-eye treated samples and select chuck-eye treated samples, there was no significant difference (P ≥ 0.05) in mean bloody/serumy intensity. Seasoned select chuck-eye samples were more sour than the seasoned choice chuck-eyes. Treatment B lowered sourness in the select chuck-eye samples to a level comparable to the choice samples. The PCA for all samples (Figure 1) shows that control chuck-eye steaks were related to the bloody/serumy attribute. It also shows that chuck-eye samples treated with B are more correlated with juiciness than were control select chuck-eye samples. These results support the findings of the ANOVA (Table 2).

Adhikari et al. [16] recommended that grilling USDA select and low choice complexus (source of the chuck-eye steak) to a medium-rare doneness. They found that this cooking method and temperature produced high juiciness and roasted flavor. Roasted flavor of the control chuck-eye samples in the current study was low, but was increased with either treatment. Juiciness was found to be lower in select chuck-eye but again was improved by either treatment. One reason for the variation in these attributes between studies could be the difference in degree of doneness.

Top blade steaks

Overall there were no significant differences between choice top blade control samples and select top blade control samples. Select top blade samples had the lowest ratings for beef flavor identity of any of the samples tested, and this was not improved by the treatments. Top blade samples had the highest ratings for sour and sour aromatics with the mean intensity scores for these attributes being significantly higher (P < 0.05) than for most other samples tested. Treatment did not affect mean ratings for these attributes. Results of the PCA (Figure 1) support ANOVA (Table 2) findings for top blade steaks. Control choice and select top blade steaks are positioned near one another indicating that they are correlated with the same attributes (metallic, sour and sour aromatics).

Yancey et al. [17] studied the effect of pH, maturity and marbling on flavors in top-blade, top-sirloin and tenderloin steaks. Steaks in the study were from A or B-maturity carcasses with slight or small amounts of marbling. These characteristics are consistent with the USDA grades of choice and select. The study found that top blade steaks had higher bloody/serumy flavor than the top-sirloin and tenderloin steaks. Steaks from B-maturity carcasses or with high pH had more intense bloody/ serumy ratings. In the present study control choice chuck-eye steaks were found to have the highest rating for bloody/serumy and top blade steaks ratings for bloody/serumy were comparable to those of strip steaks. Yancey et al. [17] also reported that the effect of marbling on brown/roasted flavor ratings in top blade, top sirloin and tenderloin steaks was inconsistent. The present study did not find any significant differences (P ≥ 0.05) in brown/ roasted flavor ratings between grades for the top blade steaks. Top blade steaks had less intense beef flavor than the other cuts in the same study. Our study also found that the beef flavor identity was less intense for the top blade steaks, in general, compared to the chuck-eye and strip steaks but the differences were not significant. Other researchers [18,19] also reported that top blade steaks were less intense in beef flavor compared to top-sirloin and tenderloin steaks. Top blade steaks in the current study were found to have significantly higher (P < 0.05) ratings for sourness and sour aromatics than chuck-eye or strip steaks. Yancey et al. [17] also observed lower pH for top blade steaks compared to top-sirloin and tenderloin steaks.

Effects of bromelain treatment

Treatment with Seasoning + Bromelain increased overall tenderness and juiciness in select chuck-eye steaks.

Other samples’ tenderness ratings were slightly but not significantly (P ≥ 0.05) improved with the B treatment. However within each cut there were no significant differences found in overall tenderness ratings between choice and select steaks. This may indicate that higher USDA grade does not necessarily mean increased tenderness in beef steaks. Voges et al. [20] and Brooks et al. [21] report a similar finding, with no significant differences found in tenderness among steaks of top choice, low choice and select.

One reason that bromelain did not significantly (P ≥ 0.05) impact the tenderness of most of the samples in this study may be because of the application method. McKeith et al. [22] showed that dipping or tumbling a sample in brine was less effective than injecting the enzyme solution into the sample. A crude extract of bromelain in powder form, extracted from pineapple peels showed optimal proteolysis and muscle breakdown. Raw beef cubes (3 × 3 × 3 cm) were sprinkled with the crude extract powder and left at room temperature for 60 min [9].

The results of this study indicate that it is possible to improve eating quality of choice chuck-eye, select chuck-eye and choice top blade steaks to be more similar in flavor characteristics to strip steaks of the same USDA grade. Addition of seasoning led to a significant improvement in flavor characteristics of select chuck-eye and select strip steaks. There was no improvement in the select top blade steaks. The treatments employed in this investigation could be applied to other low quality cuts to determine if flavor and texture attributes could be improved by adding seasoning and tenderizing enzymes. Overall, results from this study could be valuable for consumers who would be able to purchase a better tasting and flavorful steak at a lower price, and also for beef retailers who would be able to sell more select grade beef.

The authors are grateful to the College of Human Ecology for partial funding for this study.

1. Huffman KL, Miller MF, Hoover LC, Wu CK, Brittin HC . Effect of beef tenderness on consumer satisfaction with steaks consumed in the home and restaurant. J Anim Sci. 1996; 74: 91-97.

2. Miller MF, Huffman KL, Gilbert SY, Hamman LL, Ramsey CB . Retail consumer acceptance of beef tenderized with calcium chloride. J Anim Sci. 1995; 73: 2308-2314.

3. Goodson KJ, Morgan WW, Reagan JO, Gwartney BL, Courington SM, Wise JW, et al. Beef customer satisfaction: factors affecting consumer evaluations of clod steaks. J Anim Sci. 2002; 80: 401-408.

4. Lorenzen CL, Davuluri VK, Adhikari K, Grün IU. Effect of end-point temperature and degree of doneness on sensory and instrumental flavor profile of beefsteaks. J Food Sci. 2005; 70: S113-S118.

5. Rodas-González A, Huerta-Leidenz N, Jerez-Timaure N, Miller MF . Establishing tenderness thresholds of Venezuelan beef steaks using consumer and trained sensory panels. Meat Sci. 2009; 83: 218-223.

6. Vázquez-Araújo L, Chambers E 4th, Adhikari K, Hough G, CarbonellBarrachina AA . Influence of various traditional seasonings on beef flavor: United States, Spanish, and Argentinian practices. Meat Sci. 2013; 93: 61-66.

7. Sullivan GA, Calkins CR . Application of exogenous enzymes to beef muscle of high and low-connective tissue. Meat Sci. 2010; 85: 730-734.

8. Calkins CR, Sullivan G. 2007. Ranking of beef muscles for tenderness. 2007.

9. Ketnawa S, Rawdkuen S. Application of bromelain extract for muscle food tenderization. Food Nutr Sci. 2011; 2: 393-401.

10. Tatum D. 2007. Beef grading. Available

11. National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. 2010. Cattle numbers and beef production.

12. Shackelford SD, Wheeler TL, Meade MK, Reagan JO, Byrnes BL . Consumer impressions of Tender Select beef. J Anim Sci. 2001; 79: 2605-2614.

13. Adhikari K, Chambers E IV, Miller R, Vázquez-Araújo L, Bhumiratana N, Philip C, et al. Development of a lexicon for beef flavor in intact muscle. J Sensory Studies. 2011; 26: 413-420. 

14. Maughan C, Tansawat R, Cornforth D, Ward R, Martini S . Development of a beef flavor lexicon and its application to compare the flavor profile and consumer acceptance of rib steaks from grass- or grain-fed cattle. Meat Sci. 2012; 90: 116-121.

15. Kim CJ, Lee ES . Effects of quality grade on the chemical, physical and sensory characteristics of Hanwoo (Korean native cattle) beef. Meat Sci. 2003; 63: 397-405.

16. Adhikari K, Keene MP, Heymann H, Lorenzen CL. Optimizing beef chuck flavor and texture through cookery methods. J Food Sci. 2004; 69: SNQ174-SNQ180.

17. Yancey EJ, Dikeman ME, Hachmeister KA, Chambers E 4th, Milliken GA . Flavor characterization of top-blade, top-sirloin, and tenderloin steaks as affected by pH, maturity, and marbling. J Anim Sci. 2005; 83: 2618-2623.

18. Carmack CF, Kastner CL, Dikeman ME, Schwenke JR, García Zepeda CM. Sensory evaluation of beef-flavor-intensity, tenderness, and juiciness among major muscles. Meat Sci. 1995; 39: 143-147.

19. Shackelford SD, Wheeler TL, Koohmaraie M . Relationship between shear force and trained sensory panel tenderness ratings of 10 major muscles from Bos indicus and Bos taurus cattle. J Anim Sci. 1995; 73: 3333-3340.

20. Voges KL, Mason CL, Brooks JC, Delmore RJ, Griffin DB . National beef tenderness survey - 2006: Assessment of Warner-Bratzler shear and sensory panel ratings for beef from US retail and foodservice establishments. Meat Sci. 2007; 77: 357-364.

21. Brooks JC, Belew JB, Griffin DB, Gwartney BL, Hale DS . National Beef Tenderness Survey-1998. J Anim Sci. 2000; 78: 1852-1860.

22. McKeith FK, Brewer MS, Bruggen KA. Effects of enzyme application on sensory, chemical, and processing characteristics of beef steaks and roasts. J. Muscle Foods. 1994; 5: 149-164.