  <eprint id="http://orgprints.org/id/eprint/6939" xmlns="http://eprints.org/ep2/data/2.0">
    <eprintid>6939</eprintid>
    <rev_number>1</rev_number>
    <eprint_status>archive</eprint_status>
    <userid>4153</userid>
    <dir>disk0/00/00/69/39</dir>
    <datestamp>2006-01-18</datestamp>
    <lastmod>2009-08-20 14:29:49</lastmod>
    <status_changed>2009-08-20 14:29:49</status_changed>
    <type>proceedings</type>
    <metadata_visibility>show</metadata_visibility>
    <item_issues_count>0</item_issues_count>
    <engabstract>Abstract – Comparison between organic and standard rabbit breeding system : sensory analysis and mechanical toughness of meat. Conventional (n=15) and organic rabbits (15 males: Bio_M and 15 females: Bio_F) were compared for the sensory characteristics and mechanical toughness of meat. When triangle tests were performed, trained panel members were able to distinguish organic rabbit meat from theconventional one (83.3 % good determination). The quantification of the sensory attributes of intermediate part meat by trained assessors, indicated that organic rabbit meat was more tender than conventional one (+0.74 point on a 10 points scale). In raw leg, muscles from the male organic rabbits, energy, maximum shear force and rigidity values were 19 to 69 % higher than in the 2 other groups.</engabstract>
    <doclang>fr</doclang>
    <projects>
      <item>fr-inra</item>
    </projects>
    <fundingpart>main</fundingpart>
    <confdates>19-20 novembre 2003</confdates>
    <conference>10èmes Journées de la Recherche Cunicole</conference>
    <confloc>Paris (France)</confloc>
    <refereed>never</refereed>
    <budget>0</budget>
    <addtitle>Comparison between organic and standard rabbit breeding system : sensory analysis and mechanical toughness of meat.</addtitle>
    <altloc>
      <item>http://www.cuniculture.info/Docs/Magazine/mag30-056.htm</item>
    </altloc>
    <publicfulltext>TRUE</publicfulltext>
    <title>Comparaison lapin « Bio » - lapin standard : Analyses sensorielles et tendreté mécanique de la viande</title>
    <ispublished>pub</ispublished>
    <subjects>
      <item>2security</item>
    </subjects>
    <keywords>rabbit&#13;
meat quality&#13;
meat tenderness&#13;
sensory analysis</keywords>
    <abstract>laboratoire de tendreté mécanique sur 6 muscles crus et cuits de la cuisse d’autre part, de lapins produits en élevage conventionnel (lot Standard n=15) et selon le cahier des charges de l’Agriculture Biologique (n=15 mâles : Bio_M, et n=15 femelles Bio_F) sont comparées. Le jury distingue (83,3 % de bonnes réponses aux tests de choix triangulaires) des râbles de lapins Bio de ceux de lapins Standard. Les tests de profil sensoriel indiquent que les râbles des lapins Bio sont jugés plus tendre que ceux des lapins standard (+ 0,74 point sur une échelle de 10 ; P&lt; 0,001). Pour les muscles crus de la cuisse, les lapins du groupe Bio_M présentent les valeurs d’énergie totale, de force maximum de cisaillement et de rigidité supérieures de 19 à 69 % aux deux autres lots.</abstract>
    <date>2003</date>
    <date_type>published</date_type>
    <publication>10èmes 10èmes Journées de la Recherche Cunicole</publication>
    <publisher>ITAVI</publisher>
    <editors>
      <item>
        <name>
          <family>Bolet</family>
          <given>G.</given>
          <honourific>Dr</honourific>
        </name>
        <id></id>
      </item>
    </editors>
    <full_text_status>public</full_text_status>
    <documents>
      <document id="http://orgprints.org/id/document/5373" xmlns="http://eprints.org/ep2/data/2.0">
        <docid>5373</docid>
        <rev_number>1</rev_number>
        <eprintid>6939</eprintid>
        <pos>1</pos>
        <format>application/pdf</format>
        <language>en</language>
        <security>public</security>
        <main>JRC2003_bio2_T23.pdf</main>
        <files>
          <file>
            <filename>JRC2003_bio2_T23.pdf</filename>
            <filesize>116404</filesize>
            <url>http://orgprints.org/6939/1/JRC2003_bio2_T23.pdf</url>
          </file>
        </files>
      </document>
    </documents>
  </eprint>
