Sensory Acceptability of Buffalo Meat and Beef in Young Consumers

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the sensory acceptability of buffalo meat compared to beef, as well as to evaluate the perception of buffalo meat. Methods: The study was conducted with young meat consumers, who responded to a questionnaire with four sections: 1) sociodemographic aspects, 2) consumer preferences, 3) hedonic acceptability, and 4) perception of buffalo meat consumption. Three 2.5 cm thick steaks (Longissimus thoracis et lumborum) were compared: 1) select beef (slight marbling); 2) select buffalo meat (slight marbling); 3) prime beef (abundant marbling). The samples were evaluated by 76 young meat consumers (non-trained panelists). A seven-point hedonic scale was used to assess appearance, odor, flavor, tenderness, juiciness, and overall acceptability. Results: The results indicated that prime beef presented a better appearance (P=0.0042) and tenderness (P<0.0001) compared to select buffalo and select beef, respectively. Similarly, a higher score was observed in juiciness for prime beef (5.52±0.19 points), but a better score for buffalo meat compared to beef select was identified (4.52±0.18 points vs. 3.86±0.19 points, respectively; P<0.001). Most of the panelists indicated that prior to the study, they had not consumed buffalo meat (89.00%/n=68). However, they noted that buffalo meat was like select beef (71.00%/n=54). The panelist highlighted various reasons why buffalo meat is not commonly consumed, such as there is no information on the buffalo meat (93.42%/n=71), limited availability of buffalo meat products (60.52%/n =46), and unavailability at supermarkets (73.69%/n=56). Conclusions: Buffalo meat can be a good option for young consumers. However, more information about buffalo meat characteristics (chemical, nutritional, sensory properties, and technological quality) and improved marketing channels that ensure the availability of buffalo products are important.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Buffalo Science
Published
2025-03-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.6000/1927-520x.2025.14.05
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Meat and Animal Product Quality
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.19
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Sensory Acceptability of Buffalo Meat and Beef in Young Consumers

René Rodríguez-Florentino, Cristian Larrondo, P. Roldán-Santiago, Luis Alberto de la Cruz-Cruz
1 citations
Journal of Buffalo Science
Meat and Animal Product Quality
1.19
article

Sensory Acceptability of Buffalo Meat and Beef in Young Consumers

René Rodríguez-Florentino, Cristian Larrondo, P. Roldán-Santiago, Luis Alberto de la Cruz-Cruz
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the sensory acceptability of buffalo meat compared to beef, as well as to evaluate the perception of buffalo meat. Methods: The study was conducted with young meat consumers, who responded to a questionnaire with four sections: 1) sociodemographic aspects, 2) consumer preferences, 3) hedonic acceptability, and 4) perception of buffalo meat consumption. Three 2.5 cm thick steaks (Longissimus thoracis et lumborum) were compared: 1) select beef (slight marbling); 2) select buffalo meat (slight marbling); 3) prime beef (abundant marbling). The samples were evaluated by 76 young meat consumers (non-trained panelists). A seven-point hedonic scale was used to assess appearance, odor, flavor, tenderness, juiciness, and overall acceptability. Results: The results indicated that prime beef presented a better appearance (P=0.0042) and tenderness (P<0.0001) compared to select buffalo and select beef, respectively. Similarly, a higher score was observed in juiciness for prime beef (5.52±0.19 points), but a better score for buffalo meat compared to beef select was identified (4.52±0.18 points vs. 3.86±0.19 points, respectively; P<0.001). Most of the panelists indicated that prior to the study, they had not consumed buffalo meat (89.00%/n=68). However, they noted that buffalo meat was like select beef (71.00%/n=54). The panelist highlighted various reasons why buffalo meat is not commonly consumed, such as there is no information on the buffalo meat (93.42%/n=71), limited availability of buffalo meat products (60.52%/n =46), and unavailability at supermarkets (73.69%/n=56). Conclusions: Buffalo meat can be a good option for young consumers. However, more information about buffalo meat characteristics (chemical, nutritional, sensory properties, and technological quality) and improved marketing channels that ensure the availability of buffalo products are important.

Journal of Buffalo ScienceVol. 14
Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (MX), Viña del Mar University (CL), Universidad de las Américas (NI), Colegio de Postgraduados (MX), Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX)
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Meat and Animal Product Quality
1.19
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.