ライフサイエンスコーパス: beef

1 mination levels of meat peaked by July 2011 (beef).

2 iked cattle feces, and culture-spiked ground beef.

3 ethods for classifying quality attributes in beef.

4 le the specific impact per kg is largest for beef.

5 s isolated from soy, fish, chicken, pork and beef.

6 cuum or high O2, to extend the shelf life of beef.

7 le and other Sanga cattle breeds for quality beef.

8 S. typhimurium in ground chicken and ground beef.

9 on or marbling is essential for high quality beef.

10 long-term frozen storage compared to unaged beef.

11 ndergoing changes towards naturally produced beef.

12 chicken (4.9%), however it was unaffected by beef.

13 d varied environmental burdens, dominated by beef.

14 respectively, of test meals with cod or lean beef.

15 al for improved quality during dry-ageing of beef.

16 imming losses were minimal in the wet-ageing beef.

17 model systems, soybean oil and cooked ground beef.

18 was used to measure the oxidation of cooked beef.

19 s of interest by (1)H NMR spectroscopy using beef.

20 2), but strikingly lower than the impacts of beef.

21 based on plant foods only than of meals with beef.

22 beef, but resulted in a discoloration of the beef.

23 d to quantify 30 volatile compounds in fresh beef.

24 kin prick test was positive for raw pork and beef.

25 western countries is from dairy products and beef.

26 assay targeting two different DNA regions in beef (106 and 120-bp) and buffalo (90 and 138-bp) mitoch

27 ed by cocoa and coffee (16% of total) and by beef (12%).

28 onyl content determined in chicken, pork and beef (2.8, 3.6 and 3.1 nmol/mg of protein, respectively)

29 RBCC (25.0%) and RBCC+beef (21.3%) were found to be increased 2- and 1.6-fold,

30 ostexercise period tended to be higher after beef (64% +/- 3%) ingestion than after milk ingestion (5

31 sufficient to differentiate samples of fresh beef (76 extractions) and horse (62 extractions) using N

32 The haem iron content in beef (A-age), lamb, pork and chicken are 77%, 81%, 88% a

33 le portion on fresh weight basis in raw lean beef (A-age), lamb, pork and chicken average 1.58, 1.64,

34 assess its capabilities of detecting minced beef adulteration with beef brain, heart, kidney, large

35 was developed for the rapid determination of beef adulteration with horsemeat.

36 In cooked beef, all three antioxidants significantly lowered oxida

37 Seven of the 18 beef allergens identified using meat-allergic patient se

38 ls were incubated with lipids extracted from beef, alpha-Gal was detected in the basolateral medium.

39 th 0.5-3% MCC/CMC were prepared using 90% of beef and 10% of an aqueous fiber dispersion and were det

40 also allowed discrimination between 100% raw beef and beef meat samples spiked with only 0.5% (w/w) h

41 138-bp) mitochondrial genes to discriminate beef and buffalo in processed foods.

42 and chicken liver juice (CLJ) as compared to beef and chicken juices (BJ and CJ) or Mueller Hinton br

43 In conclusion, beef and chicken liver juices enhanced the survival of C

44 anine (G), adenine (A), and thymine (T) in a beef and chicken livers samples to measure the quality o

45 d reliable detection of pork adulteration in beef and chicken products, two of the most widely consum

46 context of authentication of raw meat (pork, beef and chicken) and processed meat products.

47 RD) is the most common infectious disease of beef and dairy cattle and is characterized by a complex

48 rious and significant health concern for the beef and dairy industries in many parts of the world.

49 and over-feeding are both commonplace in the beef and dairy industry; leading to welfare issues, nega

50 ysine (CML) levels, in cooked chicken, pork, beef and fish (salmon and tilapia) prepared by three com

51 fat samples, extracted from forty-nine meat beef and horsemeat samples, were analysed using the Rama

52 d showed ability to discriminate between raw beef and horsemeat using just 50 ng of total extracted m

53 ation of meat adulteration by discriminating beef and horsemeat with high accuracy, a short analysis

54 Both beef and milk ingestion were followed by an increase in

55 y, safety, and sensory perception of grilled beef and moose meat is examined.

56 (ten specific peptides), simultaneously with beef and pork (seven peptides), in the presence of turke

57 With the method, beef and pork fractions are quantified employing primer

58 oza refers to a traditional way of preparing beef and pork in Madagascar.

59 storage and subsequent in vitro digestion of beef and pork patties.

60 Meat binding experiments with beef and pork were performed using a technical TG mixtur

61 er ingestion of mammalian food products (eg, beef and pork).

62 In inoculated minced beef and river water samples, the limits of detection we

63 dots for determination of E. coli O157:H7 in beef and river water.

64 ication of four animal species: horse, pork, beef and sheep.

65 ion of this AuNPs based technology in minced beef and tap water indicates the possibility of its usin

66 /mL were obtained in buffer solution, minced beef and tap water samples respectively, with a broad de

67 piking of 5 different samples of both minced beef and tap water with 10(3) and 10(4) CFU/mL were 94.7

68 Minced beef and water samples inoculated with different concent

69 is minced meat, traditionally prepared from beef and/or pork fractions.

70 igestions using test meals made either of i) beef and/or semolina and/or chickpeas, or of ii) potatoe

71 or iron, p <= 0.05) compared with meals with beef and/or semolina only.

72 0(3) and 10(4) CFU/mL were 94.7 and 90.4 (in beef) and 91.3 and 94.8% (in water), respectively.

73 s from meats (chicken, duck, goose, pork and beef) and common protein allergenic additives (soy, milk

74 0, which is obtained from dairy products and beef, and also endogenously synthesized.

75 contracted via a wound while butchering raw beef, and successfully treated with suramin.

76 iated perpendicular to the surface of ground beef, and the scatter signals at various angles were eva

77 entative compound for each studied family of beef, and two internal standards.

78 Flash Profile's results showed that beef- and pork-based Kitoza products investigated differ

79 at; study 2 on heme, heme+fish, chicken, and beef; and study 3 on heme and heme+purified animal prote

80 This study aims to assess the changes in beef aroma over time when steaks from pre-aged knuckles

81 e in selective culture enrichments of ground beef as a representative food matrix.

82 + fat ratios over 12 consecutive days, with beef as a source of protein.

83 reased the shelf-life (by 21 days) of minced beef, as well as inhibited the growth of major spoilage

84 same decreasing order of CML concentration: beef, bacon>chicken > fish>dairy products>grain products

85 er overall liking ratings for pork- than for beef-based Kitoza, although the Portuguese sausage remai

86 s of detecting minced beef adulteration with beef brain, heart, kidney, large intestine and liver tis

87 population (Hereford and Kazakh Whiteheaded beef breeds) bred in Siberia.

88 rams and authentication of the three Spanish beef breeds.

89 e to thiamine degradation, while thiamine in beef brisket was less stable.

90 light foods (brown rice, split pea soup, BBQ beef brisket) during storage was determined for the firs

91 ocessing, 42% for split pea soup, and 3% for beef brisket.

92 Beef briskets were subjected to shockwave (11 kJ/pulse)

93 Similarly, 52% and 36% of beef luncheon and beef burger samples exceeded the FAO OTA permissible lim

94 otential for application in the cake and the beef burger was evaluated.

95 meat products (25 each of beef luncheon and beef burger) purchased from different supermarkets in Ma

96 The formulated food models (cake and beef burger) with partial substitution CW2%/AA4% oleogel

97 22 mug/kg and 4.55 mug/kg, respectively, for beef burger.

98 ntification of offal cuts within adulterated beef burgers and could provide a paradigm shift across m

99 ssible limits set by FDA for AFT, but 40% of beef burgers exceeded the FAO AFT permissible limit.

100 MS technology when analysing raw adulterated beef burgers were; brain (5%); heart (1-10%); kidney (1-

101 ontained buffalo but there was no buffalo in beef burgers.

102 tool for improving the tenderness of Nellore beef, but resulted in a discoloration of the beef.

103 bition of red meat-allergic patients' IgE to beef by alpha-Gal was demonstrated.

104 Replacement of beef by buffalo and vice versa is frequent in global mar

105 se bacteria in the nasal passages of healthy beef calves (N = 60) housed over winter in an experiment

106 association with serum IgG concentration in beef calves.

107 7 serogroup-positive cattle feces and ground beef can also contain nonadulterant E. coli strains, reg

108 ed loci implicated in body size in worldwide beef cattle breeds also affect birth weight in PO cattle

109 ell-known loci underlying body size in other beef cattle breeds, such as the PLAG1 region on chromoso

110 llected at the peak of clinical disease from beef cattle experimentally challenged with either bovine

111 the Russian agricultural sector is dairy and beef cattle farming contributing about $11 billion to th

112 evaluate changes in the rumen metabolites of beef cattle fed with three different diet types: forage-

113 in particulate matter samples collected from beef cattle feed yards, permethrin was detected most fre

114 PM was collected downwind and upwind of 10 beef cattle feed yards.

115 iculate matter (PM) derived from large-scale beef cattle feed yards.

116 total suspended particulates emanating from beef cattle feed yards.

117 potentially toxic levels of pesticides from beef cattle feed yards.

118 ins, a constructed wetland, and feces from a beef cattle feedlot were compared over a two-year period

119 Two dairies, a beef cattle feedlot, and a sheep feedlot were chosen for

120 al persistence of plasmid-associated ARGs in beef cattle feedlots.

121 Studies of steroid growth promoters from beef cattle feedyards have previously focused on effluen

122 This in turn may lead to selection for beef cattle herds that may have lower incidence rate of

123 he most important sources of loss within the beef cattle industry in the USA.

124 applied the bin model to a Chinese Simmental beef cattle population for bone weight association study

125 The vulnerability of rangeland beef cattle production to increasing climate variability

126 important role in the economic efficiency of beef cattle production.

127 ng the impact of liver fluke infection on UK beef cattle productivity and investigating the use of di

128 In the first study, sixteen beef cattle were implanted with trenbolone acetate and e

129 Fasciolosis is common in UK beef cattle, but it is unclear at what levels liver fluk

130 s a common health problem for both dairy and beef cattle, resulting in significant economic loses.

131 ts, i.e. units with quite the same number of beef cattle.

132 implanted (40 mg TBA, 8 mg 17beta-estradiol) beef cattle.

133 aughtering traits and meat quality traits in beef cattle.

134 hane emissions from North American dairy and beef cattle.

135 technologies to detect early pregnancies in beef cattle.

136 with the variation in CH(4) production from beef cattle.

137 ed panel (Illumina and Affymetrix) in Nelore beef cattle.

138 ation constraints required a shift away from beef, cheese, butter, and snacks toward plant-based food

139 ssed meat that could differentiate pork from beef, chevon and chicken meat.

140 different types of restructured meat (pork, beef, chicken, and turkey) was developed using six trypt

141 Thirty meat mixtures containing beef, chicken, camel, rabbit, goat and sheep with varyin

142 mine total arsenic in selected food samples (beef, chicken, fish, milk, cheese, egg, rice, rice-based

143 the total and haem iron contents in raw lean beef, chicken, lamb and pork meat samples.

144 ion during ageing in the chitosan dry-ageing beef compared to the traditional dry-ageing meat.

145 nificantly increased upon the consumption of beef (compared to chicken) and/or lard supplemented beef

146 y reduce the risk of transmission of ARDs to beef consumers.

147 Beef consumption and production is the major contributor

148 We estimate that if 10% of the protein from beef consumption in the United States was replaced with

149 ased deforestation associated with increased beef consumption under the subsidy and reduced deforesta

150 educed deforestation associated with reduced beef consumption under the tax.

151 e produced higher levels of CML, and broiled beef contained the highest CML content (21.8mug/g).

152 metabolites in dry-aged and ten in wet-aged beef correlate with the aging time (r > 0.7, <-0.7), whi

153 ers of drops in the number of calvings among beef cows during the Bluetongue epizootic of 2007 and 20

154 be the leading cause of stress in dairy and beef cows, which negatively affects various reproductive

155 A survey in Malaysian markets revealed 71% beef curries contained buffalo but there was no buffalo

156 orm contents of Mb markers were found in raw beef cuts, and for My markers in raw chicken cuts.

157 nitrogen (Nr) compared to what the replaced beef diet requires.

158 se after the ingestion of milk compared with beef during recovery from resistance-type exercise.

159 ences (p < 0.0001) were observed between the beef elemental content from the different biomes for all

160 in the control sample to 0.046N/mm(2) in 45% beef emulsion (45EM) sample.

161 r study, semolina flour was substituted with beef emulsion (EM) at three different levels of 15, 30 a

162 Brazil is the world's largest beef exporter, exporting approximately one-fifth of its

163 e country to the first position in the world beef exports and second in beef production and consumpti

164 Real sample tests with chicken and beef extract were conducted, which showed good recovery

165 to traditional dry-ageing and wet-ageing of beef for up to 21 days.

166 volatile compounds and sensory attributes of beef from bulls fed concentrates to slaughter (C), grass

167 ne the composition of South African Bonsmara beef from four age groups from different production syst

168 candidate screening protocol to distinguish beef from horse meat based upon comparison of triglyceri

169 ys) on quality attributes of vacuum-packaged beef from Nellore cattle were evaluated.

170 f has decreased notably since the 1930s, and beef from the South African Bonsmara breed contains less

171 Cold cuts of cold-smoked beef, grilled turkey, and smoked chicken (a single batch

172 e, eggs, french fries, fried chicken, ground beef, ground pork, hamburger, hot dog, ice cream, liver,

173 Fat content of marketable beef has decreased notably since the 1930s, and beef fro

174 Beef heifers were artificially inseminated on D0 and pre

175 early-pregnancy induced genes discovered in beef heifers will allow both the understanding of the ro

176 is a leading cause of lameness in dairy and beef herds worldwide.

177 cific melting peaks that differentiate pork, beef, horsemeat, duck meat, ostrich meat, and chicken.

178 In-bag dry-ageing of beef improved its lipids and protein oxidative stability

179 sible for major economic losses in dairy and beef industries throughout the world.

180 Both milk and beef ingestion augment the postexercise myofibrillar pro

181 synthesis rates to a greater extent than did beef ingestion during the 0- to 2-h postexercise phase (

182 thesis rates did not differ between milk and beef ingestion during the entire 0- to 5-h postexercise

183 Higher amounts of alpha-Gal in pork and beef innards compared to muscle meat as indicated by a h

184 nsidering the total and dialyzable fraction, beef is an important source of Cu, Fe, Mg, and Zn to the

185 The tenderness and taste of beef is improved by either dry- or wet-aging or a combin

186 While beef is the more expensive of the two meat fractions, th

187 demonstrates that the nutritional profile of beef jerky can be improved through the incorporation of

188 nalysis demonstrated a significant effect of beef jerky processing conditions on physicochemical prop

189 Beef jerky was used as a model and prepared using differ

190 xture and colour) of cultured and uncultured beef jerky were evaluated.

191 three chemometric techniques to discriminate beef, lamb and venison meat samples.

192 omparative study was carried out between two beef-like flavourings prepared by conventional and micro

193 regime had no effect (P > 0.05) on dry-aged beef lipid and protein oxidative stabilities and proteol

194 enhance nutritional quality, but to decrease beef lipid stability.

195 pylobacter strains showed higher survival in beef liver juice (BLJ) and chicken liver juice (CLJ) as

196 cals during high pressure (HP) processing of beef loin and chicken breast was studied by spin trappin

197 Similarly, 52% and 36% of beef luncheon and beef burger samples exceeded the FAO O

198 d in a total of 50 meat products (25 each of beef luncheon and beef burger) purchased from different

199 None of the beef luncheon and burger samples analyzed exceeded the p

200 .1 mug/kg and 5.23 mug/kg, respectively, for beef luncheon and mean values of 3.22 mug/kg and 4.55 mu

201 operties of HAAs and the fatty nature of the beef matrix.

202 conditions can be found to maintain a roast beef meat aspect while dramatically reducing HAs content

203 the highest number of peptides identified in beef meat digests and provides a comprehensive database

204 ageing and cooking, each one applied to the beef meat most suitable (pan-fried or grilled ribeye ste

205 pment of a colored crust on the surface of a beef meat piece.

206 wed discrimination between 100% raw beef and beef meat samples spiked with only 0.5% (w/w) horse meat

207 ethodology an extremely interesting tool for beef meat screening, and it can be easily adapted to the

208 fferent composition percentages of horse and beef meat.

209 ll concentrate (RBCC), hemoglobin (Hb), RBCC+beef meat; study 2 on heme, heme+fish, chicken, and beef

210 k, eggs, fat, liver, kidney, and chicken and beef muscle were in the range 71-112%) and removed prote

211 The separation of both horse and beef myoglobins was achieved in only seven minutes.

212 ompared to chicken) and/or lard supplemented beef or chicken.

213 ork could be easily detected when mixed with beef or chicken.

214 trinsically l-[1-(13)C]phenylalanine-labeled beef or milk.

215 ction of metabolome in dry-aged and wet-aged beef over the aging time and quantifying the metabolites

216 0 dietary biomarkers analyzed, beta-alanine (beef) (P-raw < 0.001), alkylresorcinols C17 and C19 (who

217 ibility of CoQ10 in processed meat products, beef patties and pork breakfast sausages, fortified with

218 rect incorporation of lipopeptides in ground beef patties at a concentration of 0.5% (w/w of meat) wa

219 In this study, beef patties incorporated with extracts of ulam raja (UR

220 corporation of UREX or GTE at 500 mg/kg into beef patties reduced the extent of lipid oxidation signi

221 However, incorporation of UREX and GTE into beef patties showed no significant influence (P>0.05) on

222 Protein oxidation of beef patties stored in high oxygen modified atmosphere p

223 approved antioxidants were tested in ground beef patties to assess their inhibitory properties again

224 mposition and sensory characteristics of the beef patties were compared between those incorporated wi

225 m wine pomace, to inhibit spoilage growth in beef patties with different salt levels (2%, 1.5% and 1%

226 The observed effects were more abundant in beef patties.

227 porated with UREX, GTE and the control (pure beef patty).

228 saginata, Taenia solium and Taenia asiatica (beef, pork and Asian tapeworms, respectively) are parasi

229 crude protein was evaluated after submitting beef, pork, and chicken to five different thermal treatm

230 (<33% of baseline values) in consumption of beef, pork, cheese, snacks, and butter and increased con

231 roduced by use of myoglobin from four meats: beef, pork, horse and lamb.

232 ected in processed samples manufactured from beef, pork, horse, chicken and turkey meat.

233 ticarial reactions 3 to 6 hours after eating beef, pork, or lamb, as well as in 13 control subjects.

234 mpares the results with published impacts of beef, pork, poultry, and another speculative analysis of

235 anaphylaxis after the ingestion of sukiyaki (beef, pork, tofu, vegetables, enokitake, etc.).

236 n-equivalent plant based alternatives to the beef portion of the mean American diet are readily devis

237 racterize the proteomic profile of different beef preparations and to investigate their alpha-Gal rea

238 ding proteins were detected in the different beef preparations, many of which were also recognized by

239 oxidative stability of long-term frozen lean beef produced using stepwise in-bag ageing process sugge

240 ay surpass the existing adaptive capacity of beef producers and adversely impact the economic viabili

241 s of greenhouse gases (GHGs), with dairy and beef production accounting for nearly two-thirds of emis

242 tion in the world beef exports and second in beef production and consumption.

243 of the resistome of North American dairy and beef production effluents, and identify factors that sig

244 cattle as they moved through the process of beef production from feedlot entry through slaughter.

245 Beef production requires 28, 11, 5, and 6 times more lan

246 It is extremely important to beef production systems due to its impact on the allocat

247 the potential of Sanga breeds for commercial beef production with better meat quality as compared to

248 in cattle that reduces the sustainability of beef production worldwide.

249 re ecosystem, and whole lifecycle of milk or beef production.

250 f undeclared horse meat in various processed beef products across the Europe, several researches have

251 ns (10(1)-10(8) CFU/mL) were added to ground beef products to simulate microbial spoilage.

252 ARDs were not identified in beef products, suggesting that slaughter interventions m

253 Improvement in beef protein digestibility was observed through increase

254 er Grx1 levels than the casein group and the beef protein group showed the highest GSH, Grx1 and Trx1

255 er were determined and compared with that of beef protein, soy protein and cow whey protein.

256 Beef protein-derived phenylalanine appeared more rapidly

257 meat of three species, as well as 0.8%(w/w) beef proteins in commercial poultry frankfurters.

258 epitope is commonly present in IgE-reactive beef proteins recognized by meat-allergic patients.

259 After addition of beef proteins to the apical side of Caco-2 cells, alpha-

260 edictive models using REIMS data to classify beef quality attributes based on the United States Depar

261 s an objective measure for the assessment of beef quality attributes.

262 ing of the biological mechanisms controlling beef quality characteristics in African Ankole cattle.

263 analysis gave a two-dimensional "authentic" beef region (p=0.001) against which further spectra coul

264 Beef represents a major dietary component and source of

265 les) and sulfadiazine (109.8 mug kg(-1) in a beef sample) exceeding the European Union-based maximum

266 m guidelines and was successfully applied to beef samples of various cooking degrees, showing HAA lev

267 Beef samples were analyzed for their elemental content b

268 1h and 3h from both pure culture and ground beef samples, respectively.

269 r the detection of E. coli O157:H7 in ground beef samples.

270 eration with various percentages in homemade beef sausage, as a real sample.

271 tion of donkey genetic element in consumable beef sausages preparations, as a real sample.

272 Beef slices were wrapped in special three-layer sheets o

273 ulture has less than 0.5% of the GHG-cost of beef, small ruminants, pork, and poultry in terms of CO(

274 ctions from previously unseen samples, 90/91 beef spectra were classified as authentic, and 16/16 hor

275 impact on inflammatory responses from cooked beef steak are poorly characterised.

276 d polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in beef steak were investigated.

277 d biphenyl (PCB) congeners in 26 food items: beef steak, butter, canned tuna, catfish, cheese, eggs,

278 Genotyping was performed on DNA samples from beef-suckler (n = 698) and dairy (n = 1178) calves, usin

279 a, crude illness) traits in Irish commercial beef-suckler and dairy calves through genome wide associ

280 of 0.5-5% in the mixture systems containing beef tallow (BT) and chicken fat (CF) separately.

281 With an increasing demand for beef, the industry is currently undergoing changes towar

282 The morphological transformation of beef tissues after various processing treatments facilit

283 Applied to 320 million Americans, the beef-to-plant shift can save 91 million cropland acres (

284 achine learning approaches for the Brazilian beef traceability.

285 turkey meat and 5% (w/w) of chicken meat in beef, using the developed LESA-MS/MS analysis.

286 al adsorbate-adsorbate interactions, and the BEEF-vdW error estimation ensemble is used to propagate

287 model is based on DFT calculations using the BEEF-vdW functional.

288 Based on microbiological data, shelf life of beef was 5-6days for AP samples packaged under aerobic c

289 ation of Maillard reaction products (MRP) in beef was investigated.

290 fibres as a wrapping material for dry-ageing beef was studied and compared to traditional dry-ageing

291 raw, boiled, fried, and medium rare prepared beef were assessed by 2D PAGE for the comparison of prot

292 (PF) and sous-vide (SV) thermally processed beef were determined with UHPLC-ESI/MS.

293 ned from semimembranous muscle of Piemontese beef were packaged in PLA trays closed with a lid made o

294 Extracts of proteins and lipids from beef were prepared, subjected to in vitro digestions, an

295 pple juice, mashed potato, almond powder and beef were selected to evaluate the HBS's performance by

296 sh and long-term frozen-stored dry-aged lean beef were studied.

297 d fatty acids are enriched in grass finished beef, while higher levels of n6 PUFAs in grain finished

298 urthermore, grass-fed animals produce tender beef with lower total fat and a higher omega3/omega6 rat

299 Replacing beef with resource efficient alternatives is thus potent

300 d for detecting microbial spoilage on ground beef, without using antibodies, microbeads or any other