|
The meat of the Damara has a fine texture,
full of flavour and can be marketed as a gourmet meat. The fat
on the carcass is generally a thin layer of 1 to 2 millimetres, which makes it ideally
suited to the preferences of the modern consumer. The tail fat of the Damara
is of the highest quality with a fine white texture and is an ideal ingredient in sausage.
DAMARA LEG OF LAMB WITH ROSEMARY
Damara meat is arguably the best sheep meat to
be found in South Africa. In this regard we can refer to the scientific
report by Strydom & Tshabala.:
CARCASS AND MEAT QUALITY
CHARACTERISTICS OF TWO SHEEP AND TWO GOAT BREEDS PRODUCED UNDER EXTENSIVE
FEEDING CONDITIONS.
P E Stydom (PhD) & P Tshabala
Animal Nutrition and Animal
Products Institute, ARC, Private Bag X2, Irene, 0062
(This is an abridged version of
the original article)
Materials and Methods
Twelve animals of two indigenous
sheep breeds were purchased from commercial producers and slaughtered from
extensive feeding conditions. Carcasses were
processed into five wholesale cuts and these cuts were processed into
subcutaneous fat, meat and bone. Meat is defined as muscle,
intermuscular fat (seam fat or fat between muscles excluding fat on the carcass
surface - subcutaneous fat) and intramuscular fat composition of the soft
tissue of the carcass.
In the processing of the carcass,
the meat of the one side was minced and frozen for meat quality evaluation and
fatty acid profile. The meat of 10 of the 12 animals per breed
was used for sensory test. A 12 member trained sensory
panel scored the samples on an eight point hedonic scale for overall flavour and
aroma intensity, goaty flavour and aroma intensity, mutton flavour and aroma
intensity, tenderness, juiciness and chewiness (amount of connective tissue
after mastication).
Adjusted means of carcass
characteristics of two goat and two sheep breeds are presented in Table
1. For the purpose of this report, only the results of
the two sheep breeds will discussed. The abbreviation,
SCF will be used for subcutaneous fat.
The carcass weight of the Damara was
20% lower than that of the Dorper in this study. This is
not necessarily a reflection of the typical carcass weight of the two breeds at
this common fatness level (9.2% SCF), since final weight of the carcass is a
function of a number of factors, including feeding regime.
However, it can be accepted that the Damara is an earlier maturing breed than
the Dorper.
As expected, the Damara had a
heavier tale than the Dorper. Dorper carcasses had a 4
percentage-age-units advantage for meat and bone yield over the
Damara. This means that the Dorper carcass produces 1.2 units
of meat per unit of bone more than the Damara in this trial.
It has to be remembered that carcass development could highly depend on feeding
regime, and although the two breeds came from the same are (habitat), different
feeding practices (not exactly known in this trial) could partly have
contributed to these differences. The kidney fat tended to
higher in Dorper carcasses than in the Damara carcasses.
Significantly more (P<0.05)
carcass weight was distributed in the shoulder, dorsal trunk and less in the
ventral trunk of the Damara, compared to the Dorper. No
significant differences were found for the neck and leg cuts and there were also
no significant differences in distribution of meat and bone in the leg cuts of
the two breeds.
Broadly speaking more fat was
distributed to the leg cut of the Damara carcass and less to the other cuts
compared to the Dorper: a difference of about 9 percentage
units. It is possible that this difference could be the
result of the amount of fat trimmed off the leg cut of the Damara when the tail
is removed. Since the workers were not specifically
skilled in working with the fat-tailed carcass, it is possible that some the fat
from the tail was left on the carcass, accounting for some of the difference in
fat distribution in the leg cut.
Table 1: Adjusted1means
(s.e) for carcass characteristics of two goat and two sheep breeds (n=12 animals
per breed)
| TRAIT |
DAMARA |
DORPER |
BOER |
INDIGENOUS |
| Carcass weight (tail fat excluded; kg) |
17.3*+-0.69 |
21.5+-0.72 |
13.4+-0.58 |
11.6+-0.47 |
| Tail weight (kg) |
1.2* |
0.2 |
0.05* |
0.03 |
| Tail yield (%) |
6.2*+-0.33 |
0.87+-0.34 |
0.36*+-0.04 |
0.22+-0.03 |
| Carcass Composition:2 |
. |
. |
.. |
. |
| Meat (%) |
70.7*+-0.40 |
74.8+-0.41 |
77.0*+-0.54 |
73.9+-0.44 |
| Bone(%) |
20.0*+-0.40 |
15.9+-0.41 |
20.8*+-0.54 |
23.9+-0.44 |
| Kidney fat (%) |
1.9+-0.33 |
2.6+-0.34 |
1.5+-0.23 |
1.5+-23 |
Yields of
different
carcass cuts2 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
| Neck (%) |
9.8+-0.28 |
10.1+-0.29 |
9.8+-0.44 |
10.6+-0.44 |
| Shoulder (%) |
16.6*+-0.22 |
15.4+-0.23 |
19.8+-0.31 |
19.7+-0.25 |
| Dorsal cut (%) |
24.0*+-0.49 |
21.9+-0.51 |
20.6*+-0.45 |
17.0+-0.37 |
| Ventral cut (%) |
16.7*+-0.62 |
20.8+-0.64 |
19.6*+-0.45 |
21.4+-0.36 |
| Leg (%) |
32.8+-0.41 |
32.0+-0.42 |
30.1*+-0.34 |
31.3+-0.27 |
Yields
within the leg:3 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
| Meat (%) |
33.0+-0.12 |
32.7+-0.09 |
30.7*+-0.03 |
32.3+-0.05 |
| Bone (%) |
31.5+-0.34 |
32.3+-0.23 |
29.5+-0.16 |
29.2+-0.21 |
Subcutaneous
fat distribution3 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
| Neck (%) |
8.4+-1.10 |
10.1+-1.14 |
3.0*+-1.77 |
10.0+-1.43 |
| Shoulder (%) |
11.0+-0.42 |
11.2+-1.03 |
23.4+-4.59 |
24.3+-3.71 |
| Dorsal cut (%) |
26.2+-0.69 |
28.8+-3.81 |
29.5+-7.87 |
26.0+-6.63 |
| Ventral cut (%) |
20.7+-1.68 |
25.6+-4.12 |
30.6+-4.85 |
17.6+-3.92 |
| Leg (%) |
33.7*+-1.87 |
24.4+-4.9 |
13.5+-5.99 |
21.0+-4.85 |
1
Means for sheep breeds and goat breeds adjusted to common subcutaneous fat
levels of 9% and 2.3%, respectively, to compare breeds within each specie at a
common fatness level Actual subcutaneous fat %:
Damara = 10.3%, Dorper=8.0%, Boer
goat=2.9%, Indigenous goat=1.6%
2
Meat
and bone yield expressed as % of carcass weight at a constant subcutaneous level
(or carcass fat code). Weights of neck, shoulder, dorsal, ventral
and leg cuts expressed relative to carcass weight.
3
Yields of these tissues expressed relative to total weights of the specific
tissue in the carcass (e.g. 33% of all the meat in the Damara carcass was
distributed in the leg cut)
* Means for two breeds within the
specie (goat or sheep) differ significantly (P<0.05). Means
were not compared statistically between species (goat and sheep)
While there were relatively large
differences in certain meat quality characteristics between the goat and sheep
breeds, differences within the two sheep breeds were small and statistically
non-significant. For most of the attributes, mutton had
significantly more favourable scores than goat meat (i.e. if high intensity of
goaty flavour is regarded as less favourable). As expected
mutton aroma and flavour intensity scores were higher and goaty flavour and
aroma intensity scores lower for sheep meat than for goat meat in
general. In addition, overall tenderness, chewiness,
juiciness and greasiness scored significantly lower for goat meat than for sheep
meat. Differences in carcass fatness could have
contributed to these differences. Regarding goat meat, Boer
goat meat had significantly higher scores for overall aroma intensity than meat
from both sheep breeds and the Indigenous goat and was also more greasy and had
a higher flavour intensity than the Indigenous goat meat.
Table 2: Means and
standard error of means (SEM)
for sensory meat quality characteristics of two goat and two sheep breeds (n=10
animals per breed)
| Trait |
Damara |
Dorper |
Boer |
Indigenous |
SEM |
Overall
aroma intensity |
7.1b |
6.9b |
7.6a |
7.0b |
0.32 |
Goaty
aroma intensity |
1.3a |
1.6a |
6.4b |
5.6b |
0.26 |
Mutton
Aroma intensity |
6.1a |
5.7a |
1.3b |
1.3b |
0.22 |
| Overall tenderness |
6.8c |
6.5c |
4.0b |
3.3a |
0.16 |
| Chewiness |
6.4a |
6.0a |
3.7b |
2.7b |
0.22 |
| Juiciness |
6.7c |
6.4c |
4.2b |
3.7a |
0.23 |
| Greasiness |
6.2c |
5.8c |
3.7b |
2.6a |
0.17 |
| Overall flavour intensity |
6.9c |
6.8bc |
6.5b |
6.0a |
0.10 |
Goaty
flavour intensity |
1.5a |
1.5a |
5.8b |
5.2b |
0.23 |
Mutton
flavour intensity |
5.9a |
5.5a |
1.3b |
1.3b |
0.22 |
abc Means on the same row with different superscripts differ
significantly (P<0.05) Scores were
between 1 and 8 where 1 indicates meat with an extremely low aroma and flavour
intensity (also goat and mutton aroma), extremely low in tenderness,
extremely dry, extremely abundant in connective tissue (chewiness), extremely
low in perception of fat release in the mouth during mastication. A
score of 8 indicates meat with an extremely high aroma and flavour intensity
(also goat and mutton aroma), extremely high in tenderness, extremely juicy,
devoid of residual connective tissue (chewiness), extremely high in perception
of fat release in the mouth during mastication.
Although the fatty acid profile is
incomplete, the saturated fatty acid content of all species is slightly higher
than the unsaturated fatty acid content, which was expected of meat (Table
3). Recently it has become clear that Western diets have an
imbalance between n-6 and n-3 poly-unsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), with n-6:n-3
averaging around 10 instead of below 5. Grass fed ruminant meat
has a beneficially low n-6:n-3 according to Sanudo et al.
(2000). Damara meat had the highest level of
unsaturated fatty acid (UFA) of all three species, which was also reflected in a
higher C18: PUFA(n-3) content which is favourable. It
has to be kept in mind that this is only a tendency and it can not be stated
with certainty that this is to the advantage of the Damara because the n-6 fatty
acids (C18:2) were not determined to confirm a favourable n-6/n-3
ratio. There was a slight difference in mutton flavour
between the Dorper and the Damara, which coincide with the difference in n-3
fatty acids, but due to the magnitude of the differences, this relationship is
inconclusive.
Table
3: Limited fatty acid profile of meat (muscle and fat combined) of two
goat and two sheep breeds (n=12 animals per breed)
| Trait |
Damara |
Dorper |
Boer |
Indigenous |
| C13:0 |
2.74 |
2.97 |
3.93 |
4.89 |
| C14:0 |
7.45 |
8.38 |
6.34 |
5.96 |
| C15:0 |
0.63 |
0.59 |
0.66 |
0.77 |
| C16:0 |
22.95 |
24.31 |
21.22 |
19.66 |
| C16.1 |
3.50 |
3.98 |
3.34 |
3.17 |
| C17.0 |
2.15 |
2.09 |
2.24 |
2.34 |
| C18:0 |
16.10 |
14.41 |
20.42 |
19.99 |
| C18:1 |
38.55 |
37.55 |
36.57 |
37.75 |
| C18:3 |
3.92 |
3.25 |
3.44 |
3.85 |
| C20:1 |
2.04 |
2.24 |
1.85 |
1.67 |
| SFA |
51.94 |
52.82 |
54.80 |
53.59 |
| UFA |
48.06 |
47.18 |
45.20 |
46.41 |
| MUFA |
44.13 |
43.92 |
41.76 |
42.57 |
| PUFA |
3.93 |
3.26 |
3.44 |
3.85 |
SFA: Saturated fatty acid - C13:0, C14:0, C15:0, C16:0, C17:0, C18:O
MUFA: Monounsaturated fatty acids - C16:1, C18:1, C20:1
PUFA: Poly-unsaturated fatty acid - C18:3
CONCLUSION
Under the conditions of this trial and within the
limitations of the protocol (i.e. feeding regime was not controlled although
animals came from the same region), the two sheep breeds and the two goat breeds
were very similar in carcass and meat quality, while differences between species
were quite significant.
Within both species the breeds
with larger carcasses (Dorper and Boer goat) also had higher proportions of meat
relative to bone. Statistically significant differences
in carcass proportion were found between breeds (within species) although the
magnitude of the differences may or may not have commercial impact depending on
the processing of the carcass.
|