↓ Skip to main content
What is this page? Embed badge

Bleeding Efficiency, Microbiological Quality and Oxidative Stability of Meat from Goats Subjected to Slaughter without Stunning in Comparison with Different Methods of Pre-Slaughter Electrical…

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Summary Twitter Dimensions citations
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Bleeding Efficiency, Microbiological Quality and Oxidative Stability of Meat from Goats Subjected to Slaughter without Stunning in Comparison with Different Methods of Pre-Slaughter Electrical Stunning
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0152661
Pubmed ID
27035716
Authors

Azad Behnan Sabow, Idrus Zulkifli, Yong Meng Goh, Mohd Zainal Abidin Ab Kadir, Ubedullah Kaka, Jurhamid Columbres Imlan, Ahmed Abubakar Abubakar, Kazeem Dauda Adeyemi, Awis Qurni Sazili

Abstract

The influence of pre-slaughter electrical stunning techniques and slaughter without stunning on bleeding efficiency and shelf life of chevon during a 14 d postmortem aging were assessed. Thirty two Boer crossbred bucks were randomly assigned to four slaughtering techniques viz slaughter without stunning (SWS), low frequency head-only electrical stunning (LFHO; 1 A for 3 s at a frequency of 50 Hz), low frequency head-to-back electrical stunning (LFHB; 1 A for 3 s at a frequency of 50 Hz) and high frequency head-to-back electrical stunning (HFHB; 1 A for 3 s at a frequency of 850 Hz). The SWS, LFHO and HFHB goats had higher (p<0.05) blood loss and lower residual hemoglobin in muscle compared to LFHB. The LFHB meat had higher (p<0.05) TBARS value than other treatments on d 7 and 14 d postmortem. Slaughtering methods had no effect on protein oxidation. Higher bacterial counts were observed in LFHB meat compared to those from SWS, LFHO and HFHB after 3 d postmortem. Results indicate that the low bleed-out in LFHB lowered the lipid oxidative stability and microbiological quality of chevon during aging.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Master 7 12%
Lecturer 3 5%
Other 17 30%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 40%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Other 13 23%
Unknown 8 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2016.
All research outputs
#17,795,140
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#147,610
of 194,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,825
of 300,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,975
of 5,280 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,990 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,229 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,280 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.

This page is provided by Altmetric.