Claire E. Payne
Research Subjects
Research Interests
Claire E. Payne has a total of 8 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
D.W. Pethick
Australian Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation, Australia
1 shared publication- David W. Pethick
School of Agricultural Sciences, Centre for Animal Production and Health, Food Futures Institute, Murdoch University
1 shared publication F. Anderson
Murdoch University, College of Science, Health, Engineering and Education, Western Australia 6150, Australia
1 shared publication- Fiona Anderson
Australian Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia; School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia
1 shared publication G.E. Gardner
Australian Cooperative Research Centre for Sheep Industry Innovation, Australia
1 shared publication- Graham E. Gardner
College of Environmental and Life Sciences Murdoch University Murdoch WA 6150 Australia
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- 20 December 2021
- Published by Elsevier in Meat Science
- Vol. 186, 108725
Bone mineral concentration predicted by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry and its relationship with lamb eating quality
- 20 December 2021
- Published by Elsevier in Meat Science
- Vol. 186, 108725
Bone mineral concentration predicted by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry and its relationship with lamb eating quality
- Open Access
Lamb Age has Little Impact on Eating Quality
There is an industry wide perception that new season lamb has better eating quality than old season lamb. This study aims to identify differences in consumer eating quality scores between two age classes in lamb. Consumer eating quality scores from eight cuts across the carcass were evaluated from new season (NS; n = 120; average age = 240 days) and old season lambs (OS; n = 121; average age = 328 days), sourced from four different flocks. Cuts were grilled (loin, topside, outside, knuckle and rump) or roasted (leg, shoulder, rack) and scored by untrained consumers for tenderness, juiciness, liking of flavour and overall liking. There was no difference in eating quality scores between the two age classes for the loin, leg, shoulder and rack. This was similarly shown in the topside with the exception of juiciness scores where NS lambs were higher than OS lambs. There was also a lack of age difference in the outside with the exception of flock 3 where NS lambs scored higher than OS lambs for all sensory traits. Across all sensory traits, OS lambs received on average 2.8 scores lower for the knuckle and 3.1 scores lower for the rump compared to NS lambs. These results show little difference in eating quality between NS and OS lamb, and highlight the potential to develop high quality OS or “autumn lamb” products, with a similar premium price at retail as NS lambs.
Open AccessLamb Age has Little Impact on Eating Quality
There is an industry wide perception that new season lamb has better eating quality than old season lamb. This study aims to identify differences in consumer eating quality scores between two age classes in lamb. Consumer eating quality scores from eight cuts across the carcass were evaluated from new season (NS; n = 120; average age = 240 days) and old season lambs (OS; n = 121; average age = 328 days), sourced from four different flocks. Cuts were grilled (loin, topside, outside, knuckle and rump) or roasted (leg, shoulder, rack) and scored by untrained consumers for tenderness, juiciness, liking of flavour and overall liking. There was no difference in eating quality scores between the two age classes for the loin, leg, shoulder and rack. This was similarly shown in the topside with the exception of juiciness scores where NS lambs were higher than OS lambs. There was also a lack of age difference in the outside with the exception of flock 3 where NS lambs scored higher than OS lambs for all sensory traits. Across all sensory traits, OS lambs received on average 2.8 scores lower for the knuckle and 3.1 scores lower for the rump compared to NS lambs. These results show little difference in eating quality between NS and OS lamb, and highlight the potential to develop high quality OS or “autumn lamb” products, with a similar premium price at retail as NS lambs.