Sensory characteristics of country ham from hogs of different genetic groups

Country ham has been a staple of southern food for centuries. Recently, other regions of the country have discovered this breakfast food. With this, there came a desire to perfect the production of the ham, a process that has long been more of an art than a science. Also, there is the desire to market a higher quality, premium product. Many factors could potentially influence the end product. The focus of this research was the relationship of the genetic group of the animals to the sensory quality of country ham. The impact of two genetic groups, Duroc and an undefined mix typical of market hogs (Market Mix), on the sensory, chemical, and physical attributes of the product was examined. The objectives of this study were to compare the hams from two genetic groups that were processed on two days in terms of their influence on sensory, chemical, and physical attributes and to determine the perception of sensory characteristics in an ideal country ham. No differences in sensory attributes between the two genetic groups were found (p=0.2688). However, the first processing day did yield values that were significantly higher for saltiness (p=0.0304) and dry texture (p=0.0475). Neither genetic group had deviation values for any sensory attribute different from consumer perception of the ideal country ham (p>0.05). Significant interactions between genetic group and processing day caused differences in hardness (texture) (p=0.0069). Consumers liked the Market Mix samples better than Duroc samples (p=0.0260). The scores for overall likeability (p<0.0001), aroma (p=0.0023), appearance (p<0.0001), flavor (p<0.0001), and texture (p<0.0001) were higher for processing day 1 than for day 2. There were also several trends in the results of just right scale evaluations of the products. Most of the attributes were just right. For salt intensity and flavor intensity, the responses other than just right were mainly too much. Some panelists felt that the samples were too dry and too tough. There were no differences for thiobarbituric acid (TBA) oxidation values for the genetic groups (p=0.1802). The second processing day had TBA values for oxidation that were higher than those for the first processing day (p<0.001). No differences in cooking loss (p=0.9695) and shear values between the two genetic groups were found (p=0.7097). The mean shear value for processing day 1 was significantly higher than for processing day 2 (p<0.0001). Forty-one compounds were tentatively identified and 20 positively identified in the volatiles of the hams. Quantity of the volatiles between both genetic groups and processing days differed. In this study, the genetic group Duroc was not better than the mixed genetic group for production of country hams. Processing day differences were noted and may reflect difficulty in standardization of processing conditions. Further research is needed on the impact of the genetic groups on country ham quality.