Next Article in Journal
Screening, Identification, and Quantification of Nutritional Components and Phytochemicals in Foodstuffs
Next Article in Special Issue
Antimicrobial Polyamide-Alginate Casing Incorporated with Nisin and ε-Polylysine Nanoparticles Combined with Plant Extract for Inactivation of Selected Bacteria in Nitrite-Free Frankfurter-Type Sausage
Previous Article in Journal
Functionality of Food Components and Emerging Technologies
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Foods
Volume 10
Issue 1
10.3390/foods10010129
foods-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Edit a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Sensory Attributes, Microbial Activity, Fatty Acid Composition and Meat Quality Traits of Hanwoo Cattle Fed a Diet Supplemented with Stevioside and Organic Selenium

by
Yong Geum Shin
,
Dhanushka Rathnayake
,
Hong Seok Mun
,
Muhammad Ammar Dilawar
,
Sreynak Pov
and
Chul Ju Yang
*
Animal Nutrition and Feed Science Laboratory, Department of Animal Science and Technology, Sunchon National University, Suncheon 57922, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2021, 10(1), 129; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10010129
Received: 25 December 2020 / Revised: 5 January 2021 / Accepted: 7 January 2021 / Published: 8 January 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Improving the Sensory, Nutritional and Physicochemical Quality of Fresh Meat)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study examined the effects of stevioside (S) and organic selenium (O-Se) supplementation on the sensory attributes, microbial activity, fatty acid composition, and meat quality traits of Hanwoo cattle (Korean native cattle). Twenty-four Hanwoo cattle (663 ± 22 kg body weight) were assigned to two dietary treatments for 8 months: control diet and 1% stevioside with 0.08% organic selenium supplemented diet. S and O-Se inclusion in the diet enhanced the final body weight, weight gain, and carcass crude protein (p < 0.05). Moreover, supplementation with S and O-Se had a significant effect on lowering the drip loss and shear force and enhanced the a* (redness) of the longissimus dorsi muscle (p < 0.05). The inclusion of dietary S and O-Se improved the sum of the polyunsaturated fatty acid (ΣPUFAs) content of the meat, and the oxidative status (TBARS) values during second week of storage decreased by 42% (p < 0.05). On the other hand, the microbial count tended to decrease (7.62 vs. 7.41 log10 CFU), but it was not significant (p > 0.05), and all sensory attributes were enhanced in the S and O-Se supplemented diet. Overall, these results suggest that supplementation of the ruminant diet with stevioside and organic selenium improves the growth performance, carcass traits, and meat quality with enriched PUFAs profile and retards the lipid oxidation during the storage period in beef.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

High meat quality characteristics of Hanwoo beef enhanced the consumer’s preference compared to the other imported beef, such as Holstein steer and Australian Angus [1]. Moreover, lower subcutaneous fat contents and higher ossification scores, marbling scores, and loin protein content were also observed in the Hanwoo carcasses compared to Australian Angus carcasses [2]. Since dietary management has an important role in the beef industry, the implementation of promising feeding strategies and supplementation with additives is an essential factor that can determine the physiochemical qualities of the meat. Natural and healthy feed additives have gained particular interest in the global livestock sector since the ban on antibiotic growth promoters (AGP) in animal feed [3].
Many beneficial organic bioactive molecules are derived from plants because of their normal metabolic reactions [4]. The mode of action of plant-based feed additives is increasing the digestibility and absorption by modulating the beneficial intestinal microbiota [5]. The Stevia genus comprises approximately 200 species of various herbs and shrubs [6]. Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni is an herbaceous perennial plant belonging to the Asteraceae family that is native to Paraguay but has also been cultivated in China, Taiwan, Korea, Malaysia, Canada, the United States, and some European countries. Stevioside (13-[2-O-beta-d-glucoprransyl-alpha-d-glucopy-ranosyl)oxy]kaur-16-en-18-oic acid-beta-D-glucopyranosyl) is the prominent steviol glycoside obtained from the leaves of S. rebaudiana; it is noncaloric and is stable at high temperatures over a wide range of pH [7]. Previous studies [8,9] reported that the stevioside exhibits numerous immunoregulation activities and has antibacterial properties, anti-inflammation properties, and maintenance of the blood lipid content. Previous studies showed that the stevia extract contains amino acids, polyphenols, and flavonoids and has antioxidant properties [10,11,12,13]. A few studies have been conducted on nonruminants, including pigs and poultry [14,15]. S. rebaudiana has been used as a sweetener and a feed additive because of the presence of various bioactive compounds.
A selenium deficiency has negative impacts on the health of animals and humans. Therefore, selenium is considered a vital component in diets. [16]. Selenium acts as an antioxidant against reactive oxygen species (ROS) through the glutathione peroxidase activity, a vital enzyme in the detoxification process [17,18]. Organic selenium is absorbed in the GI tract through active transmission and during the protein synthesis process and is deposited in tissues to fulfill the selenium requirements in organs and tissues [19]. In contrast, the utilization of organic selenium is more beneficial than inorganic selenium because of lower excretion via feces and urines. The antioxidant activity of selenium has been investigated in cattle [20,21], pigs [22,23], and poultry [24]. Nevertheless, no study has evaluated the combination of both stevioside (S) and organic selenium (O-Se) in the livestock sector.
This study examined the effects of S and O-Se as feed additives on the sensory attributes, fatty acid profiles, microbial activity, and meat quality traits of Hanwoo cattle.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Animal Ethics

The experimental protocol was approved by the Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery in Korea, 2008 (SCNU-2017-1102).

2.2. Management of the Animals, Diets, and Experimental Design

A feeding trial was conducted for 8 months at the Animal Experimental Station, Sunchon National University, Suncheon, Korea. Briefly, 24 Korean native cattle (Hanwoo), aged 26 months and weighing approximately 663 ± 22 kg initial body weight, were enrolled in a completely randomized design. All animals were housed individually in raised cages maintained under environmentally controlled conditions, with an ambient temperature of 30 °C and average relative humidity of 70%. The cages were designed to enable the separate collection of feces and urine. At the end of the experimental period, all animals were slaughtered at the local abattoir to assess the carcass traits and meat quality parameters.
The animals were allotted randomly to two dietary treatments, with 12 animals per treatment group: control (basal diet) and treatment diet (basal diet + 1% stevioside, 0.08% organic selenium). A commercially available total mixed ration was used as the basal diet, and each Hanwoo animal was fed 12 kg per day. The treatment diet was prepared separately by incorporating 1% stevioside and 0.08% organic selenium on a weight: weight ratio basis. Table 1 lists the ingredients and chemical composition of the basal diets. The cattle were fed twice daily, divided into two feeding times (9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.). The animals were given access to water ad libitum, and ventilation, lighting, and other management practices were implemented according to general practices. The CTC Bio Tech. Co. Ltd. Company, Seoul, Korea, provided the white-colored stevioside powder extracted from the Stevia rebaudiana leaves and organic Se. The purity of the extract was evaluated by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis of the stevioside sample and was determined to be 97%.

2.3. Growth Performances and Slaughtering

The body-weight gain was measured as the difference between the initial and final body weights. The initial body weight was measured at study commencement. The subsequent average weight gain (AWG) of Hanwoo cattle during the experimental period was determined using the live weight obtained monthly. The feed intake was measured daily. At the end of the experiment (8 months), all animals were slaughtered after 24 h of starvation. The animals were stunned, and the carcasses were exsanguinated and immediately eviscerated. Approximately 2.5 cm steaks of Longissimus dorsi muscle were obtained from the 13th rib. For each subsequent analysis, triplicate samples were obtained from each carcass after being stored at 4 °C for 24 h in a chilling room, as reported by Bostami et al. [25].

2.4. Proximate Composition, Carcass Traits, and Cholesterol Analysis

The proximate compositions of the muscles, fat, and connective tissues were determined by removing them manually and ground. An Ultra-Turrax homogenizer (IKA Werke, GMBH & Co. KG, Staufen, Germany) was used for the homogenization process. The moisture (930.15), crude protein (990.03), crude fat (991.36), and crude ash (942.05) compositions were evaluated according to the guidelines set up of AOAC [26].
The meat quality grade was scored as 1++, 1+, 1, 2, and 3, according to the Korean beef quality grading system [27]. The main evaluated parameters were the marbling score, meat color, fat color, texture, and maturity. The marbling score was determined on a 7-point scale (7 = abundant and 1 = trace). A 7-point scale was used for scoring meat color (7 = dark red and 1 = bright red), and fat color (7 = yellowish and 1 = creamy white). A scale of 1 to 3 was used to score the texture (1 = firm and 3 = soft) and maturity (3 = mature and 1 = youthful).
The cholesterol content of the Longissimus dorsi muscle was determined using the method described by King et al. [28]. Briefly, 5 g of the meat sample was saponified using a chloroform and methanol mixture (2:1 vol:vol) [29]. The saponified samples were analyzed by gas chromatography (GC, DS 6200, Donam Co., Seongnam, Gyeonggi-do, Korea) with a flame ionization detector and a Hewlett Packard HP-5 capillary column (J and W Scientific, Folsom, CA, USA) with a 0.32 internal diameter, 30 m length, and 0.25 µm polyethylene glycol-film thickness. The initial temperature of the setup was 250 °C for 2 min and was increased gradually to 290 °C at a rate of 15 °C/min. The final temperature was increased to 310 °C at 10 °C/min, and held at that temperature for 10 min. The other chromatographic conditions were as follows: injector and detector temperatures of 280 °C, split ratio of 50:1, and injected sample volume of 2 µL.

2.5. Meat Quality Analysis (Meat Color, Drip Loss, Cooking Loss, Water Holding Capacity (WHC), and Shear Force)

The meat color of the meat samples (in triplicate) was measured using a Chroma meter (Model CR-410, Konica Minolta Sensing Inc., Osaka, Japan). According to the Commission International de I’Eclairage (CIE) system, the color was classified by the CIE L* (lightness), CIE a* (redness), and CIE b* (yellowness) values. Cooking loss (in triplicate) is expressed as the percentage of weight loss and was evaluated by placing 1.5 cm-thick steaks of about 80 g in a polythene zipper bag, heating them in a water bath at 75 °C for 30 min, cooling them to room temperature, and holding them for 30 min. The cooked samples were cut (0.5 cm × 4.0 cm). The shear force was determined in each cooked meat sample using a Warner-Bratzler shear blade set (Lloyd Instruments Ltd., Hampshire, UK) by applying the following operating parameters: load cell of 50 kg, cross-head speed of 200 mm/min, and trigger force of 0.01 kgf. The drip loss (in triplicate) was determined as the weight loss during the suspension of a standardized sample (2 × 2 × 1 cm) sealed in a polythene bag at 4 °C after 7 days of storage. The water holding capacity (WHC) was determined using the method described by Grau et al. [30]. Briefly, 300 mg of the Longissimus dorsi muscle was placed in a filter-press device and compressed for approximately 2 min. The WHC was then calculated from triplicate meat samples, as a ratio of the meat film area to the total area using an area-line meter (Super PLANIX-a, Tamaya Technics Inc., Tokyo, Japan).

2.6. pH Value and Oxidative Stability of Meat

To determine the pH, approximately 5 g of Longissimus dorsi muscle (in triplicate) was cut into small pieces and homogenized with 45 mL distilled water for 60 s in an Ultra-Turrax (Janke and Kunkel, T25, Staufen Germany). Immediately after homogenization, the pH was measured using a digital pH meter (Docu-pH + meter, Sartorius, Columbus, OH, USA).
The thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) were evaluated (in triplicate) using the procedure described by Witte et al. [31]. Briefly, 5 g of meat samples were mixed with 25 mL of 20% trichloroacetic acid (TCA) and homogenized for 30 s. Distilled water was added to prepare 50 mL of homogenate samples for centrifugation (3000× g, 4 °C, and 10 min). The supernatant was filtered through filter paper (Hyundai Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea). Then, 5 mL of the filtrate was kept at room temperature for 15 h, and the absorbance was determined using a UV/VIS spectrophotometer (M2e, Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA, USA). The TBARS value is expressed as micromoles of MDA/kg of meat.

2.7. Fatty Acid Analysis

The fatty acid composition of longissimus dorsi muscle samples (in triplicate) was evaluated using a direct method for the fatty acid methyl ester (FAME), as suggested by O’Fallon et al. [32] with a slight modification. Briefly, 1 g of minced meat sample was placed into a 15 mL Falcon tube and 0.7 mL of 10 N KOH in water and 6.3 mL of methanol were added. The tube was kept in a water bath (55 °C; 1.5 h), allowing proper permeation, hydrolyzation, and dissolution by vigorous shaking for 10 s every 30 min. After placing in a cold tap water bath, 0.58 mL of 24 N H2SO4 was added to precipitate K2SO4. The precipitated sample was placed again in a water bath (55 °C; 1.5 h) with strong shaking for 10 s every 30 min. After FAME synthesis, 3 mL of hexane was added and subjected to centrifugation for 5 min at 3000 rpm (Hanil, Combi-514R, Gimpo, Korea). The top hexane layer, which contained FAME, was dehydrated by passing through the anhydrous Na2SO4. The extracted and dehydrated hexane was placed into a GC vial and concentrated to 1.5 mL for analysis.
The fatty acid composition of the FAME was determined using an Agilent gas chromatography system (6890 N, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Briefly, fat was extracted from minced meat using a chloroform-methanol (2:1 v/v) solution [28]. According to the AOAC [26] procedure, the prepared fatty acid methyl esters were dissolved in hexane before injection; 1 µL of the prepared sample was injected into the GC; the set-up injector temperature was maintained at 250 °C with a 100:1 split ratio, using a WCOT-fused silica capillary column (100 m × 0.25 m i.d., 0.20 µm film thickness; Varian Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA) with helium flow. The oven conditions were 150 °C/1 min, 150–200 °C at 7 °C/min, 200 °C/5 min, 200–250 °C at 5 °C/min, and 250 °C/10 min. The setup detector temperature was 275 °C. Fatty acid peaks were evaluated using the retention time of fatty acid standards (47015-U, Sigma-Aldrich Corp., LLC., St. Lois, MO, USA). The proportion (%) against the total peak area was calculated from the peak area of each fatty acid identified.

2.8. Meat Microbial Analysis and Sensory Evaluation

Triplicates of longissimus dorsi muscle from each group were taken for the meat microbial analysis. A 25 g sample of meat was homogenized using 225 mL of a NaCl solution (0.85% W/V). Subsequently, 20 µL was obtained from 10-fold diluted solution and transferred into tryptic soy agar plates (Becton, Dickinson, and Company, Sparks, MD 21152, USA) using a sterilized triangle spreader for microbial enumeration. The colonies were counted immediately after incubation. The microbial number was determined as follows: number of colonies × 10 dilution value × (100/20) = multiplied value = log (multiplied value). The ultimate count was expressed as log10 CFU/g.
Ten samples from both treatment groups were examined by 10 members, all well-trained experts of the sensory panel at the Department of Animal Science and Technology, Sunchon National University, Suncheon, Korea. Moreover, individual testing booths and a controlled lighting facility were provided during the sensory evaluation process [33]. Each steak was cooked at approximately 150 °C and until the internal temperature reached 70 °C, which was determined by inserting a digital thermometer in the steak. Before evaluation by the panelists, the steaks were wrapped in an aluminum foil and kept under 65 °C in an oven. The flavor, tenderness, and juiciness were then evaluated by the panelists. A 7-point hedonic scale was used to express the value of each characteristic: 7 indicated desirable flavor, extremely tender, reddish color, high palatability, and good juiciness, while 1 was indicative of undesirable favor, extremely tough, pale color, low palatability, and extremely dry. The average value of the 10 panelists determined the color, flavor, tenderness, juiciness, and palatability of the cut.

2.9. Statistical Analysis

The data were analyzed using the General Linear Model (GLM) method of the Statistics Package Program (SAS, 2003, Version 9.1, SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). For the growth performance parameters, a group of two cattle served as the experimental unit. Individual animals served as the experimental unit for the carcass traits, the meat quality parameters, cholesterol content, fatty acid profile, pH, TBARS, microbial analysis, and sensory evaluation.
Yij = μ + αi + eij.
where Yij is the response variable, μ is the general mean value, αi is the effect of dietary supplementation, and eij is the random error. The mean values were compared using a student’s t-test. The level of significance considered for the tests was p < 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Growth Performance, Proximate Analysis, and Cholesterol Content

Over the entire experimental period, the final body weight and body weight gain were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in the S and O-Se supplemented diet. On the other hand, the feed intake did not have a significant effect but was higher in the S- and O-Se-supplemented diet (Table 2).
Proximate analysis revealed a significantly higher crude protein content, lower crude fat (p < 0.05), and a numerically lower meat cholesterol amount due to S and O-Se supplementation even if it is not significantly different (Table 3).

3.2. Carcass Traits

Although the S- and O-Se-supplemented diet increases the carcass yield, back-fat thickness, and loin area, the changes were not significant (p > 0.05). Moreover, the changes in the meat quality were also not significant, including the marbling score, meat color, fat color, texture, and maturity (Table 4).

3.3. Meat Quality Analysis (Meat Color, Drip Loss, Cooking Loss, WHC, and Shear Force)

Considering the changes in the meat color, the redness (a*) was enhanced significantly in the S- and O-Se-supplemented diet (p < 0.05). On the other hand, no significant difference in surface lightness (L*) and yellowness (y*) was observed between the two treatments. Although S and O-Se addition did not affect the cooking loss and water holding capacity (WHC) (p > 0.05), the drip loss and shear force decreased significantly (p < 0.05) (Table 5).

3.4. pH Value and Oxidative Stability of Meat

The pH in both treatments decreased gradually up to the second week of storage, with a subsequent increase at the end of the third week. On the other hand, no significant difference was observed between the control and S- and O-Se-added diet (Figure 1). The addition of S and O-Se resulted in significantly lower TBARS values during second week of storage (p < 0.05) (Figure 2).

3.5. Fatty Acid Analysis

Monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA) had the highest proportion. They constituted more than 50% of the total fatty acid composition, followed by saturated fatty acids (SFA) and polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), accounting for 37–39% and 0.6–0.9%, respectively. Oleic acid (C8:1, 47%) was the predominant fatty acid among MUFA, followed by palmitoleic acid (C16:1, 5%), while palmitic acid (C16:0, 24–26%, stearic acid (C18:0, 8%) and myristic acid (C14:0, 3%) were predominant among SFA. On the other hand, the decrease in SFAs content was not significant in the S- and O-Se-supplemented diet. Moreover, the nervonic monounsaturated fatty acid content and linoleic, di homo-gamma linolenic, and arachidonic PUFAs contents were also higher in the animals fed the S- and O-Se-supplemented diet (p < 0.05) (Table 6).

3.6. Microbial Analysis and Sensory Evaluation

The average meat microbial content was numerically lower, but not significant (7.62 vs. 7.41 log10 CFU) in the S- and O-Se-supplemented diet compared to the control treatment after the 3-week refrigerated storage period (Figure 3).
Although no significant impact (p > 0.05) was observed for color, flavor, tenderness, juiciness, and palatability, the S- and O-Se-supplemented diet had a positive tendency on the sensory parameters (Figure 4).

4. Discussion

The incorporation of feed additives has gained popularity because of their benefits to human and animal health [34,35]. In particular, phytochemicals have biochemical properties, including antioxidant, antimicrobial, antistress, and nutrigenomic influences on the development of immunity and improved productivity [36,37]. Moreover, the incorporation of organic selenium can improve nutrient utilization by preventing the pro-oxidant effects on the gut system and has an antioxidant defense role against oxidative stress [38].
In the present study, 1% stevioside and 0.08% organic selenium supplementation significantly increased the weight gain and final body weight and enhanced the feed intake (FI). The palatability of the feed was enhanced because of the sweetness of the stevioside, and the animals increased their voluntary feed intake, resulting in increased body weight. In contrast, stevioside derivatives can stimulate the taste receptors (TASIR2/TASIR3) [39,40] and K+ channels in pancreatic β-cells [41], which can increase the stimulation of appetite and voluntary FI. Similar to the present findings, Han et al. 2019 [42] reported a linear increase in FI in goats given diets supplemented with 270 and 541 mg/kg stevioside. In contrast, Cho et al. [43] reported that the dietary intake of Hanwoo steers is not influenced by the inclusion of 65 mg/kg stevioside as an essential oil to the feed with 0.1% of diet supplemented rate. Furthermore, previous studies reported improved production parameters in pigs [44], layers [45], broilers [46], and cattle [47] owing to O-Se supplementation. The enhanced production performance may be associated with the developed antioxidant capacity and decrease in microbial pathogen colonization in the gut system because of the synergistic action of S and O-Se supplementation.
No studies have evaluated the effects of the dietary inclusion of S and O-Se on the carcass traits, meat quality, and sensory evaluation of cattle. A Se deficiency increases the susceptibility to various degenerative diseases in humans [48]. The incorporation of Se into animal feed has great potential to obtain Se-enriched meat that can alleviate Se deficiencies [49]. Dietary S and O-Se supplementation increased the moisture and crude protein content with a concomitant reduction in the crude fat content in meat taken from Hanwoo cattle. The lower crude fat content in meat might be associated with the lipolytic mechanism owing to the presence of polyphenols and flavonoids compounds in S. rebaudiana [50]. The increase in moisture content is caused by the inverse relationship between the meat fat and moisture content, which affects the meat tenderness and juiciness [51]. The cholesterol content was lower in the S and O-Se-included treatment, probably due to the cooperative mechanism of flavonoids in stevioside and glutathione peroxidase activity in organic Se [52], which can convert cholesterol to bile acids through the induced stimulation of enzymes activity. Consequently, it is catabolized and eliminated from the body.
Genetics and environmental factors, including the feeding strategies, affect the carcass quality traits directly [53]. Although no significant difference was observed in back-fat thickness of both treatments, Zhang et al. [54] stated that O-Se can provide some vitamins, amino acids, protein, and other nutrients for the body and can cause subsequent increase in fat accumulation. Similar to that, Choi et al. [55] also reported significant differences in the carcass length and back-fat thickness of pork meat obtained from animals fed stevia and charcoal-supplemented diets. Nevertheless, 0.3% stevia and charcoal inclusion did not significantly enhance the marbling, firmness, and color scores in pigs compared to the control treatment. Therefore, further investigations will be needed to determine the impact on the carcass traits based on different concentrations of stevioside and organic Se application.
The meat color and brightness are considered important visual factors that affect the consumer’s preference and purchasing decisions [56]. In the current study, the redness (a*) value was enhanced by the inclusion of S and O-Se in the cattle diet. The increase in meat redness may be associated with the reduced metmyoglobin (MMG) formation by antioxidants in both S and O-Se by delaying meat oxymyoglobin (OMG) oxidation. Choi et al. [55] also reported higher L*, a*, and b* values in pork meat supplemented with 0.3% stevioside and charcoal. The WHC was not significant in the two treatments, but the drip loss and shear force values were significantly lower in the S- and O-Se-supplemented group. The meat pH and lipid peroxidation affected meat drip loss [57]. Therefore, in the current study, the reduced lipid oxidation caused by S and O-Se supplementation may affect the lower drip loss value. Moreover, the S and O-Se supplemented diet had no adverse effect on the meat quality parameters.
High accumulated lactic acid content due to the metabolism of the glycogen reserves and releasing of H+ from ATP hydrolysis will lead lower muscle pH. Therefore, the carcass pH has a significant influence on the meat quality traits. During the 3 weeks in the S- and O-Se-included diet, the high pH of the meat probably affected the glutathione peroxidase enzyme activity, which can break down H2O2 to H2O and O2 [58] and facilitate an increase in meat pH. Moreover, in the current study, the TBARS value during the second week of the storage periods was 42% lower in the S- and O-Se-supplemented diet group than the control group. In addition to acting as a sweetener, previous studies reported the antioxidant properties of stevioside [59,60,61]. Moreover, plant polyphenolic compounds can prevent the oxidation activities in unsaturated fatty acids by scavenging free radicals [62] or singlet-oxygen quenching ability [63]. The glutathione peroxidase family (GPx) in organic Se can also delay the lipid oxidation reactions [64]. Overall, the synergistic effects of both S and O-Se reduced the average TBARS value owing to the presence of antioxidants.
The meat fatty acids composition depends on the lipogenesis activities in adipose tissues and the ruminal biohydrogenation process [65]. The dietary SFA has a direct correlation with cholesterol level and subsequent cardiovascular diseases. Nevertheless, PUFA positively exerts a lower cholesterol content and a significant reduction in human health risks [66]. In the present study, the PUFA content was significantly higher in the S- and O-Se-supplemented diet. This contrasts with a previous study [67], which noted a higher linoleic content in fattening steers fed a diet containing O-Se, possibly because of a reduction in biohydrogenation process and subsequent increase in the intestinal absorption of PUFA. A previous study [24] reported a lower MUFA and a higher PUFA proportion in the O-Se-supplemented group owing to the presence of antioxidants. Moreover, phytochemicals in plants indirectly performed their antioxidants activities against the depletion of PUFA from microbial biohydrogenation and enhanced the UFA concentration in the muscles [68]. Therefore, the combination of S and O-Se has a positive impact on the PUFA content in the meat.
A combination of microbes and endogenous enzymes leads to the deterioration of meat protein and consequently accelerates meat spoilage [69]. Synthetic preservatives are the main approach to inhibit microbial growth. On the other hand, preservatives need to be replaced by harmless natural compounds to avoid harmful effects on human health [70]. In the present study, the average microbial count tended to decrease in S and O-Se treatment during the refrigerated storage period, possibly because the GSH-Px enzymatic activity can eradicate harmful lipid peroxide and H2O2 from organisms, resulting in less favorable reproductive conditions for microbes. Hence, the microbial population tends to decrease gradually [54]. Moreover, antioxidant molecules in stevioside can scavenge free radicals that influence the retarded muscle oxidation process and reduce the microbial flora content in meat. In our study, the supplementation of S and O-Se did not modify the meat microbial count significantly. Hence, the incorporation of different concentrations of S and O-Se in cattle diets requires further study.
The sensory evaluation helps determine the consumer preference or acceptability of meat through an evaluation via sight, aroma, taste, and touch. In the present study, the supplementation of S and O-Se tend to positively influence color, flavor, tenderness, juiciness, and palatability of meat. Lipid peroxidation influences the deterioration of the above sensory properties of meat and the optimal quality of meat products [54,71]. Therefore, the antioxidant properties of S [72] and O-Se probably helps reduce the lipid oxidation process of meat and helps enhance the sensory properties. Interestingly, Zou et al. [70] reported that O-Se could retard the oxidation of OMG and lipids, resulting in a higher meat color score and meat stability. Furthermore, previous studies confirmed that the O-Se-incorporated diet in the animal feed improves the meat quality by preventing excessive dehydration and protects the meat sensory attributes [73]. Consistently, this study indicated that the synergism of S and O-Se in the cattle diet led to an improvement in the meat sensory attributes.

5. Conclusions

The addition of S and O-Se in the cattle diet enhanced the final body weight (FBW) and weight gain (WG). In addition, the carcass protein and moisture contents were improved, and the cholesterol content was reduced. Both S and O-Se inclusion improved the meat redness (a*) and reduced the meat drip loss and shear force value. The average TBARS value in S and O-Se supplemented diet during the second week was decreased by 42% and showed a higher meat ΣPUFA content than the control group. In this study, all sensory attributes tended to increase numerically and microbial flora contents also tended to decrease due to the S- and O-Se-incorporated diet. These results indicated that the supplementation of natural stevioside and organic selenium could be carried out to enhance the productive performance and the quality of meat in the livestock sector. Nevertheless, further studies will be needed to determine if different concentrations could provide more benefit in ruminant diets.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.J.Y. and H.S.M.; methodology, Y.G.S. and D.R.; software, M.A.D. and S.P.; validation, C.J.Y. and H.S.M.; formal analysis, C.J.Y.; investigation, H.S.M.; resources, Y.G.S.; data curation, D.R. and S.P.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.G.S., D.R., and M.A.D.; writing—review and editing, D.R. and Y.G.S.; supervision, C.J.Y.; project administration, H.S.M.; funding acquisition, H.S.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the CTC Bio Tech. Co. Ltd. Company, Seoul, Korea (Grant No. 2016-0301).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The experimental protocol was approved by the Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery in Korea, 2008 (SCNU-2017-1102).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Hwang, Y.H.; Kim, G.-D.; Jeong, J.Y.; Hur, S.J.; Joo, S.T. The relationship between muscle fiber characteristics and meat quality traits of highly marbled Hanwoo (Korean native cattle) steers. Meat Sci. 2010, 86, 456–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Jo, C.; Cho, S.H.; Chang, J.; Nam, K.C. Keys to production and processing of Hanwoo beef: A perspective of tradition and science. Anim. Front. 2012, 2, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kamel, C. Natural Plant Extracts: Classical Medies Bring Modern Animal Production Solutions. Available online: https://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=QC2001600008 (accessed on 28 November 2008).
  4. Suresh, G.; Das, R.K.; Brar, S.K.; Rouissi, T.; Ramirez, A.; Chorfi, Y.; Godbout, S. Alternatives to antibiotics in poultry feed: Molecular perspectives. Crit. Rev. Microbiol. 2017, 44, 318–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ahmed, S.T.; Hossain, M.E.; Kim, G.M.; Hwang, J.A.; Ji, H.; Yang, C.J. Effects of Resveratrol and Essential Oils on Growth Performance, Immunity, Digestibility and Fecal Microbial Shedding in Challenged Piglets. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2013, 26, 683–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  6. Yadav, A.K.; Singh, S.; Dhyani, D.; Ahuja, P.S. A review on the improvement of stevia [ Stevia rebaudiana (Bertoni)]. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2011, 91, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Puri, M.; Sharma, D.; Tiwari, A.K. Downstream processing of stevioside and its potential applications. Biotechnol. Adv. 2011, 29, 781–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Takasaki, M.; Konoshima, T.; Kozuka, M.; Tokuda, H.; Takayasu, J.; Nishino, H.; Miyakoshi, M.; Mizutani, K.; Lee, K.-H. Cancer preventive agents. Part 8: Chemopreventive effects of stevioside and related compounds. Bioorganic Med. Chem. 2009, 17, 600–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Pariwat, P.; Homvisasevongsa, S.; Muanprasat, C.; Chatsudthipong, V. A Natural Plant-Derived Dihydroisosteviol Prevents Cholera Toxin-Induced Intestinal Fluid Secretion. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2008, 324, 798–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  10. Abou-Arab, A.E.; Abou-Arab, A.A.; Abu-Salem, M.F. Physico-chemical assessment of natural sweeteners steviosides produced from Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni plant. Afr. J. Food Sci. 2010, 4, 269–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Muanda, F.N.; Soulimani, R.; Diop, B.; Dicko, A. Study on chemical composition and biological activities of essential oil and extracts from Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni leaves. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2011, 44, 1865–1872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Shukla, S.; Mehta, A.; Bajpai, V.K.; Shukla, S. In vitro antioxidant activity and total phenolic content of ethanolic leaf extract of Stevia rebaudiana Bert. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2009, 47, 2338–2343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Tadhani, M.B.; Patel, V.H.; Subhash, R. In vitro antioxidant activities of Stevia rebaudiana leaves and callus. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2007, 20, 323–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Munro, P.J.; Lirette, A.; Anderson, D.M.; Ju, H.Y. Effects of a new sweetener, Stevia, on performance of newly weaned pigs. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 2000, 80, 529–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Paredes-López, D.; Robles-Huaynate, R.; Carrión-Molina, M. Effect of Stevia rebaudiana Bertonni Leaves powder on Lipid Profiles and Productive Parameters of Laying Hens. Sci. Agropecu 2019, 10, 275–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Alfthan, G.; Eurola, M.; Ekholm, P.; Venäläinen, E.-R.; Root, T.; Korkalainen, K.; Hartikainen, H.; Salminen, P.; Hietaniemi, V.; Aspila, P.; et al. Effects of nationwide addition of selenium to fertilizers on foods, and animal and human health in Finland: From deficiency to optimal selenium status of the population. J. Trace Elem. Med. Biol. 2015, 31, 142–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Albanes, D.; Till, C.; Klein, E.A.; Goodman, P.J.; Mondul, A.M.; Weinstein, S.J.; Taylor, P.R.; Parnes, H.L.; Gaziano, J.M.; Song, X.; et al. Plasma Tocopherols and Risk of Prostate Cancer in the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT). Cancer Prev. Res. 2014, 7, 886–895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  18. Speckmann, B.; Grune, T. Epigenetic effects of selenium and their implications for health. Epigenetics 2015, 10, 179–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Schrauzer, G.N. The nutritional significance, metabolism and toxicology of selenomethionine. Adv. Food Nutr. Res. 2003, 47, 73–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Taylor, J.B.; Marchello, M.J.; Finley, J.W.; Neville, T.L.; Combs, G.F.; Caton, J.S. Nutritive value and display-life attributes of selenium-enriched beef-muscle foods. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2008, 21, 183–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Cozzi, G.; Prevedello, P.; Stefani, A.L.; Piron, A.; Contiero, B.; Lante, A.; Gottardo, F.; Chevaux, E. Effect of dietary supplementation with different sources of selenium on growth response, selenium blood levels and meat quality of intensively finished Charolais young bulls. Animal 2011, 5, 1531–1538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  22. Svoboda, M.; Saláková, A.; Fajt, Z.; Ficek, R.; Buchtová, H.; Drábek, J. Selenium from Se-enriched lactic acid bacteria as a new Se source for growing-finishing pigs. Pol. J. Vet. Sci. 2009, 12, 355–361. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  23. Zhan, X.; Wang, M.; Zhao, R.; Li, W.; Xu, Z. Effects of different selenium source on selenium distribution, loin quality and antioxidant status in finishing pigs. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2007, 132, 202–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Biazik, E.; Straková, E.; Suchý, P. Effects of Organic Selenium in Broiler Feed on the Content of Selenium and Fatty Acid Profile in Lipids of Thigh Muscle Tissue. Acta Vet. Brno 2013, 82, 277–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  25. Rubayet Bostami, A.B.M.; Mun, H.S.; Yang, C.J. Loin eye muscle physico-chemical attributes, sensory evaluation and proximate composition in Korean Hanwoo cattle subjected to slaughtering along with stunning with or without pithing. Meat Sci. 2018, 145, 220–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC). Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International, 17th ed.; AOAC International: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  27. KAPE 2012. ‘The beef carcass grading.’ (Korea Institute for Animal Products Quality Evaluation, Gunposi, Gyungki-do, South Korea). Available online: http://www.ekape.or.kr/view/eng/system/beef.asp (accessed on 15 May 2012).
  28. King, A.J.; Paniangvait, P.; Jones, A.D.; German, J.B. Rapid Method for Quantification of Cholesterol in Turkey Meat and Products. J. Food Sci. 1998, 63, 382–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Folch, J.; Lees, M.; Stanley, G.S. A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipids from animal tissues. J. Biol. Chem. 1957, 226, 497–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Grau, R.; Hamm, G. A simple method for determining water binding in muscles. Diet Nat. 1953, 40, 29–30. [Google Scholar]
  31. Witte, V.C.; Krause, G.F.; Bailey, M.E. A new extraction method for determining 2-thiobarbituric acid values of pork and beef during storage. J. Food Sci. 1970, 35, 582–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. O’Fallon, J.V.; Busboom, J.R.; Nelson, M.L.; Gaskins, C.T. A direct method for fatty acid methyl ester synthesis: Application to wet meat tissues, oils, and feedstuffs. J. Anim. Sci. 2007, 85, 1511–1521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  33. Meilgaard, M.C.; Carr, B.T.; Civille, G.V. Sensory Evaluation Techniques; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2006; pp. 25–28. ISBN 978-1-00-304072-9. [Google Scholar]
  34. Geetha, V.; Chakravarthula, S.N. Chemical composition and anti-inflammatory activity of Boswellia ovalifoliolata essential oils from leaf and bark. J. For. Res. 2018, 29, 373–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Dhama, K.; Karthik, K.; Khandia, R.; Munjal, A.; Tiwari, R.; Rana, R.; Khurana, S.K.; Sana Ullah, K.R.; Alagawany, M.; Farag, M.R.; et al. Medicinal and therapeutic potential of herbs and plant metabolites/extracts countering viral pathogens-Current knowledge and future prospects. Curr. Drug Metab. 2018, 19, 236–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Golestan, I. Phytogenics as new class of feed additive in poultry industry. J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 2010, 9, 2295–2304. [Google Scholar]
  37. Krause, D.O.; House, J.D.; Nyachoti, C.M. Alternatives to antibiotics in swine diets: A molecular approach. Proc. Manit. Swine Sem. 2005, 19, 57–66. [Google Scholar]
  38. Surai, P.F.; Kochish, I.I.; Fisinin, V.I.; Velichko, O.A. Selenium in Poultry Nutrition: From Sodium Selenite to Organic Selenium Sources. Jpn. Poult. Sci. 2018, 55, 79–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  39. Hellfritsch, C.; Brockhoff, A.; Stähler, F.; Meyerhof, W.; Hofmann, T. Human Psychometric and Taste Receptor Responses to Steviol Glycosides. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2012, 60, 6782–6793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ahmed, J.; Preissner, S.; Dunkel, M.; Worth, C.L.; Eckert, A.; Preissner, R. Super Sweet—A resource on natural and artificial sweetening agents. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010, 14, 39. [Google Scholar]
  41. Abudula, R.; Matchkov, V.V.; Jeppesen, P.B.; Nilsson, H.; Aalkjaer, C.; Hermansen, K. Rebaudioside A directly stimulates insulin secretion from pancreatic beta cells: A glucose-dependent action via inhibition of ATP-sensitive K + -channels*. Diabetes Obes. Metab. 2008, 10, 1074–1085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Han, X.; Chen, C.; Zhang, X.; Wei, Y.; Tang, S.; Wang, J.; Tan, Z.; Xu, L. Effects of Dietary Stevioside Supplementation on Feed Intake, Digestion, Ruminal Fermentation, and Blood Metabolites of Goats. Animals 2019, 9, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  43. Cho, S.; Mbiriri, D.T.; Shim, K.; Lee, A.L.; Oh, S.J.; Yang, J.; Ryu, C.; Kim, Y.H.; Seo, K.S.; Chae, J.I.; et al. The influence of feed energy density and a formulated additive on rumen and rectal temperature in hanwoo steers. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2014, 27, 1652–1662. [Google Scholar]
  44. Quesnel, H.; Renaudin, A.; Le Floc’h, N.; Jondreville, C.; Père, M.C.; Taylor-Pickard, J.A.; Le Dividich, J. Effect of organic and inorganic selenium sources in sow diets on colostrum production and piglet response to a poor sanitary environment after weaning. ANM 2008, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  45. Tufarelli, V.; Ceci, E.; Laudadio, V. 2-Hydroxy-4-Methylselenobutanoic Acid as New Organic Selenium Dietary Supplement to Produce Selenium-Enriched Eggs. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 2016, 171, 453–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Surai, P.F.; Fisinin, V.I. Selenium in poultry breeder nutrition: An update. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2014, 191, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Khalili, M.; Chamani, M.; Amanlou, H.; Nikkhah, A.; Sadeghi, A. The effect of feeding inorganic and organic selenium sources on the performance and content of selenium in milk of transition dairy cows. Acta Sci. Anim. Sci. 2019, 41, 44691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Gromadzińska, J.; Reszka, E.; Bruzelius, K.; Wąsowicz, W.; Åkesson, B. Selenium and cancer: Biomarkers of selenium status and molecular action of selenium supplements. Eur. J. Nutr. 2008, 47, 29–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhang, W.; Xiao, S.; Samaraweera, H.; Lee, E.J.; Ahn, D.U. Improving functional value of meat products. Meat Sci. 2010, 86, 15–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Gaweł-Bęben, K.; Bujak, T.; Nizioł-Łukaszewska, Z.; Antosiewicz, B.; Jakubczyk, A.; Karaś, M.; Rybczyńska, K. Stevia Rebaudiana Bert. Leaf Extracts as a Multifunctional Source of Natural Antioxidants. Molecules 2015, 20, 5468–5486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  51. Callow, E.H. Comparative studies of meat. II. The changes in the carcass during growth and fattening, and their relation to the chemical composition of the fatty and muscular tissues. J. Agric. Sci. 1948, 38, 174–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Mehdi, Y.; Clinquart, A.; Hornick, J.-L.; Cabaraux, J.-F.; Istasse, L.; Dufrasne, I. Meat composition and quality of young growing Belgian Blue bulls offered a fattening diet with selenium enriched cereals. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 95, 465–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Waldenstedt, L. Nutritional factors of importance for optimal leg health in broilers: A review. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2006, 126, 291–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Zhang, S.; Xie, Y.; Li, M.; Yang, H.; Li, S.; Li, J.; Xu, Q.; Yang, W.; Jiang, S. Effects of Different Selenium Sources on Meat Quality and Shelf Life of Fattening Pigs. Animals 2020, 10, 615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  55. Choi, J.S.; Lee, J.H.; Lee, H.J.; Jang, S.S.; Lee, J.J.; Choi, Y.I. Effect of stevia and charcoal as an alternative to antibiotics on carcass characteristics and meat quality in finishing pigs. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 2012, 32, 835–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  56. Smith, G.C.; Belk, K.E.; Sofos, J.N.; Tatum, J.D.; Williams, S.N. Economic implications of improved color stability in beef. In Antioxidants in Muscle Foods: Nutritional Strategies to Improve Quality; Decker, E.A., Faustman, C., Lopez-Bote, C.J., Eds.; Wiley Interscience: New York, NY, USA, 2000; pp. 397–426. [Google Scholar]
  57. Macit, M.; Aksakal, V.; Emsen, E.; Aksu, M.I.; Karaoglu, M.; Esenbuga, N. Effects of vitamin E supplementation on performance and meat quality traits of Morkaraman male lambs. Meat Sci. 2003, 63, 51–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Boiago, M.M.; Borba, H.; Leonel, F.R.; Giampietro-Ganeco, A.; Ferrari, F.B.; Stefani, L.M.; Souza, P.A. de Sources and levels of selenium on breast meat quality of broilers. Cienc. Rural 2014, 44, 1692–1698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  59. Boonkaewwan, C.; Burodom, A. Anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory activities of stevioside and steviol on colonic epithelial cells: Anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory activities of stevia compounds. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2013, 93, 3820–3825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Chatsudthipong, V.; Muanprasat, C. Stevioside and related compounds: Therapeutic benefits beyond sweetness. Pharmacol. Ther. 2009, 121, 41–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Ruiz, J.C.R.; Ordoñez, Y.B.M.; Basto, Á.M.; Campos, M.R.S. Antioxidant capacity of leaf extracts from two Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni varieties adapted to cultivation in Mexico. Nutr. Hosp. 2015, 31, 1163–1170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  62. Zheng, G.; Xu, L.; Wu, P.; Xie, H.; Jiang, Y.; Chen, F.; Wei, X. Polyphenols from longan seeds and their radical-scavenging activity. Food Chem. 2009, 116, 433–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Mukai, K.; Nagai, S.; Ohara, K. Kinetic study of the quenching reaction of singlet oxygen by tea catechins in ethanol solution. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2005, 39, 752–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Brigelius-Flohé, R.; Maiorino, M. Glutathione peroxidases. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2013, 1830, 3289–3303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Berchielli, T.T.; Vaz Pires, A.; Oliveira, S.G. Nutrição de Ruminantes. Jaboticabal Funep 2006, 1, 200–583. [Google Scholar]
  66. Richard, D.; Bausero, P.; Schneider, C.; Visioli, F. Polyunsaturated fatty acids and cardiovascular disease. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2009, 66, 3277–3288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Netto, A.S.; Zanetti, M.A.; Claro, G.R.D.; de Melo, M.P.; Vilela, F.G.; Correa, L.B. Effects of Copper and Selenium Supplementation on Performance and Lipid Metabolism in Confined Brangus Bulls. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2014, 27, 488–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  68. Lourenço, M.; Cardozo, P.W.; Calsamiglia, S.; Fievez, V. Effects of saponins, quercetin, eugenol, and cinnamaldehyde on fatty acid biohydrogenation of forage polyunsaturated fatty acids in dual-flow continuous culture fermenters1. J. Anim. Sci. 2008, 86, 3045–3053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Li, Z.T.; Lin, T.; Shen, J.X.; Chen, W.Y.; Sun, C. Effect of rosemary on antibacterial and freshness of cold meat. Food Res. Dev. 2017, 38, 181–186. [Google Scholar]
  70. Zhou, G.H.; Xu, X.L.; Liu, Y. Preservation technologies for fresh meat—A review. Meat Sci. 2010, 86, 119–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Kostadinović, L.; Lević, J.; Popović, S.T.; Čabarkapa, I.; Puvača, N.; Djuragic, O.; Kormanjoš, S. Dietary inclusion of Artemisia absinthium for management of growth performance, antioxidative status and quality of chicken meat. Eur. Poult. Sci. 2015, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hęś, M. Protein-lipid interactions in different meat systems in the presence of natural antioxidants—A review. Polish J. Food Nutr. Sci. 2017, 67, 5–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  73. Mikulski, D.; Jankowski, J.; Zdun Czyk, Z.; Wróblewska, M.; Sartowska, K.; Majewska, T. The effect of selenium source on performance, carcass traits, oxidative status of the organism, and meat quality of turkeys. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 2009, 18, 518–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
Foods 10 00129 g001 550
Figure 1. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on the pH values in meats of Hanwoo cattle.
Figure 1. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on the pH values in meats of Hanwoo cattle.
Foods 10 00129 g001
Foods 10 00129 g002 550
Figure 2. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on the TBARS values in meats of Hanwoo cattle. Data presented as the mean ± s.e. bars at a specific time point with different letters show a significant difference (p < 0.05).
Figure 2. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on the TBARS values in meats of Hanwoo cattle. Data presented as the mean ± s.e. bars at a specific time point with different letters show a significant difference (p < 0.05).
Foods 10 00129 g002
Foods 10 00129 g003 550
Figure 3. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on the microbial content in meats of Hanwoo cattle.
Figure 3. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on the microbial content in meats of Hanwoo cattle.
Foods 10 00129 g003
Foods 10 00129 g004 550
Figure 4. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on meat sensory attributes of Hanwoo cattle.
Figure 4. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on meat sensory attributes of Hanwoo cattle.
Foods 10 00129 g004
Table
Table 1. Feed ingredients and chemical composition of experimental diet for Hanwoo cattle.
Table 1. Feed ingredients and chemical composition of experimental diet for Hanwoo cattle.
CompositionAmount
Ingredient (%, as-fed basis)
Corn grain43.28
Corn gluten feed11.81
Wheat10.47
Palm kernel expeller9.03
Coconut meal8.29
Lupin5.91
Tapioca3.41
Molasses3.05
Rapeseed meal2.06
Wheat flour1.97
Soybean meal0.50
Vitamin mineral premix A0.22
Chemical composition (%DM)
Total digestible nutrients (TDN)74.12
Crude protein12.50
Crude fat3.61
Crude fiber6.70
Crude ash5.48
Calcium0.84
Phosphorus0.36
Neutral detergent fiber (NDF)21.70
Acid detergent fiber (ADF)10.70
A Premix providing following nutrients per kg of diet: vitamin (Vit.) A, 9,000,000 IU; Vit. D3, 2,100,000 IU; Vit. E, 15,000 IU; Vit. K, 2000 mg; Vit. B1, 1500 mg; Vit. B2, 4000 mg; Vit. B6, 3000 mg; Vit. B12, 15 mg; Pan acid-Ca, 8500 mg; niacin, 20,000 mg; biotin, 110 mg; folic acid, 600 mg; Co, 300 mg; Cu, 3500 mg; Mn, 55,000 mg; Zn, 40,000 mg; I, 600 mg; Se, 130 mg.
Table
Table 2. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on growth performances of Hanwoo cattle (experimental period: 243 days).
Table 2. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on growth performances of Hanwoo cattle (experimental period: 243 days).
ItemCON (1)TRT (2)SEMp-Value
Initial BW647.00652.0022.010.32
Final BW717.79 b751.93 a31.470.04
Weight gain (kg)0.30 b0.42 a0.140.03
Feed intake (kg/Day)11.3211.430.220.51
a,b Means in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different; SEM = standard error of mean. (1) CON: control diet with no added stevioside and organic selenium; (2) TRT: treatment (basal diet + 1% stevioside + 0.08% organic selenium).
Table
Table 3. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on proximate analysis and cholesterol contents in the meats of Hanwoo cattle.
Table 3. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on proximate analysis and cholesterol contents in the meats of Hanwoo cattle.
ItemCON (1)TRT (2)SEMp-Value
Moisture (%)56.83 b63.89 a1.230.01
Crude protein (%)22.48 b25.26 a0.800.03
Crude fat (%)16.62 a12.45 b0.950.01
Crude ash (%)1.181.290.050.14
Cholesterol (mg/100 g)50.2749.740.040.92
a,b Means in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different; SEM = standard error of mean; (1) CON: control diet with no added stevioside and organic selenium; (2) TRT: treatment (basal diet + 1% stevioside + 0.08% organic selenium).
Table
Table 4. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium supplementation on carcass traits of Hanwoo cattle.
Table 4. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium supplementation on carcass traits of Hanwoo cattle.
ItemsCON (1)TRT (2)SEMp-Value
Yield traits
Carcass weight (kg)446.68449.5720.460.87
Loin area (cm2)100.50103.334.420.67
Back fat thickness (mm)16.6718.332.810.68
Quality traits
Marbling score (3)4.836.330.780.20
Meat color (4)4.834.830.171.00
Fat color (5)3.172.830.190.18
Texture (6)1.171.000.080.34
Maturity (7)2.001.890.160.21
Quality grade0:3:1:2:02:1:3:0:0––
Meat point (8)3.173.830.400.26
SEM = standard error of mean; (1) CON: control diet with no added stevioside and organic selenium; (2) TRT: treatment (basal diet + 1% stevioside + 0.08% organic selenium); (3) Marbling score: 7 = abundant, 1 = trace; (4) meat color: 1 = bright red and 7 = dark red; (5) fat color: 1 = creamy white and 7 = yellowish.; (6) texture: 1 = firm and 3 = soft.; (7) maturity: 1 = young and 3 = youthful; (8) meat point: 1++: 5 point, 1+: 4 Point, 1: 3 Point, 2: 2 Point, and 3: 1 Point.
Table
Table 5. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on meat quality of Longissimus dorsi muscle from Hanwoo cattle.
Table 5. Effect of stevioside and organic selenium on meat quality of Longissimus dorsi muscle from Hanwoo cattle.
ItemCON (1)TRT (2)SEMp-Value
Meat color
CIE L*29.0429.210.730.87
CIE a*14.94 b18.45 a0.810.03
CIE b*3.585.870.700.07
Drip loss (%)21.14 a16.48 b0.750.00
Cooking loss (%)15.8116.300.710.70
WHC (%)12.8113.301.260.78
Shear force (kg)5.38 a3.93 b0.350.01
a,b Means in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different; SEM = standard error of mean; (1) CON: control diet with no added stevioside and organic selenium; (2) TRT: treatment (basal diet + 1% stevioside + 0.08% organic selenium).
Table
Table 6. Fatty acid profile of Longissimus dorsi muscle from Hanwoo cattle fed diets containing stevioside and organic selenium.
Table 6. Fatty acid profile of Longissimus dorsi muscle from Hanwoo cattle fed diets containing stevioside and organic selenium.
ItemsCON (1)TRT (2)SEMp-Value
C10:00.030.040.000.08
C12:00.080.080.000.69
C14:03.353.390.110.80
C15:00.20 b0.25 a0.010.008
C16:026.65 a24.05 b0.600.04
C17:00.92 a0.15 b0.03<0.0001
C18:08.338.670.150.13
C20:00.08 a0.07 b0.000.004
C14:10.30 a0.25 b0.020.04
C16:15.92 a5.62 b0.060.007
C18:147.1946.090.580.24
C24:10.06 b0.08 a0.000.01
C18:20.06 b0.10 a0.010.004
C18:30.22 b0.36 a0.040.008
C20:30.13 b0.16 a0.010.04
C20:40.20 b0.26 a0.010.03
ΣSFA (3)39.6936.750.720.16
ΣMUFA (4)53.4652.040.580.13
ΣPUFA (5)0.63 b0.88 a0.050.04
ΣPUFA/SFA0.0150.0240.040.14
a,b Means in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different; SEM = standard error of mean; (1) CON: control diet with no added stevioside and organic selenium; (2) TRT: treatment (basal diet + 1% stevioside supplementation + 0.08% organic selenium); (3) SFA: saturated fatty acid; (4) MUFA: monounsaturated fatty acid; (5) PUFA: polyunsaturated fatty acid.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shin, Y.G.; Rathnayake, D.; Mun, H.S.; Dilawar, M.A.; Pov, S.; Yang, C.J. Sensory Attributes, Microbial Activity, Fatty Acid Composition and Meat Quality Traits of Hanwoo Cattle Fed a Diet Supplemented with Stevioside and Organic Selenium. Foods 2021, 10, 129. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10010129

AMA Style

Shin YG, Rathnayake D, Mun HS, Dilawar MA, Pov S, Yang CJ. Sensory Attributes, Microbial Activity, Fatty Acid Composition and Meat Quality Traits of Hanwoo Cattle Fed a Diet Supplemented with Stevioside and Organic Selenium. Foods. 2021; 10(1):129. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10010129

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shin, Yong Geum, Dhanushka Rathnayake, Hong Seok Mun, Muhammad Ammar Dilawar, Sreynak Pov, and Chul Ju Yang. 2021. "Sensory Attributes, Microbial Activity, Fatty Acid Composition and Meat Quality Traits of Hanwoo Cattle Fed a Diet Supplemented with Stevioside and Organic Selenium" Foods 10, no. 1: 129. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10010129

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop