| |
|
|
 | Acceso al texto completo restringido a Biblioteca INIA Tacuarembó. Por información adicional contacte bibliotb@tb.inia.org.uy. |
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Tacuarembó. |
|
Fecha : |
21/02/2014 |
|
Actualizado : |
11/05/2020 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Artículos en Revistas Indexadas Internacionales |
|
Autor : |
OLIVER, M.A.; NUTE, G.R.; FONT I FURNOLS, M.; SAN JULIÁN, R.; CAMPO, M.M.; SAÑUDO, C.; CAÑEQUE, V.; GUERRERO, L.; ALVAREZ, I.; DIAZ, M.T.; BRANSCHEID, W.; WICKE, M.; MONTOSSI, F. |
|
Afiliación : |
MARIA ANGELS OLIVER, IRTA-Centre de Tecnologia de la Carn, Monells (Girona), Spain; GEOFFREY R. NUTE, Division of Farm Animal Science, University of Bristol, Langford, United Kingdom; M. FONT I FURNOLS, IRTA-Centre de Tecnologia de la Carn, Monells (Girona), Spain; ROBERTO SAN JULIAN SANCHEZ, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; M. M. CAMPO, Facultad de Veterinaria, Zaragoza, Spain; CARLOS SAÑUDO, Facultad de Veterinaria, Zaragoza, Spain; VICENTE CAÑEQUE, SGIT-INIA Madrid, Spain; LUIS GUERRERO ASOREY, IRTA-Centre de Tecnologia de la Carn, Monells (Girona), Spain; INMACULADA ALVAREZ, SGIT-INIA Madrid, Spain; MARÍA TERESA DÍAZ, SGIT-INIA Madrid, Spain; WOLFGANG BRANSCHEID, Institut for Meat Production and Market Research, Kulmbach, Germany; MICHAEL WICKE, Forschungs- und Studienzentrum fur Veredelungswirtschaft der Universitat Gottingen, Vechta, Germany; FABIO MARCELO MONTOSSI PORCHILE, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay. |
|
Título : |
Eating quality of beef, from different production systems, assessed by German, Spanish and British consumers. |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2006 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Meat Science, November 2006, Volume 74, Issue 3, Pages 435-442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.03.010 |
|
DOI : |
10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.03.010 |
|
Idioma : |
Inglés |
|
Notas : |
Article history: Received 3 November 2005 // Received in revised form 10 March 2006 // Accepted 10 March 2006. Acknowledgements: This authors thank the Agencia Espan?ola de Cooperacio´n Internacional (AECI), the Instituto Nacional de Investigacio´n Agraria y Alimentaria (INIA) de Espan?a and the Intituto Nacional de Investigacio´n Agraria (INIA)
from Uruguay for the financial support to the project. We thank the technicians from the different teams as well as Nigel Scollan at the Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research (Wales, UK) for his help in recruiting consumers in Wales. |
|
Contenido : |
The acceptability of beef from Uruguay (UY), based on eating quality, was compared with beef produced in different European countries (Germany, DE, Spain, ES and United Kingdom, UK). Consumer tests were conducted in DE, ES and UK (each comprising 200 consumers) using ?Hall Tests?. In each country four samples were evaluated, two from Hereford steers from UY (finished at 2 and 3 years) and two from local meat (the same meat sample aged 7 or 20 d). Consumers evaluated tenderness, flavour and overall acceptability using 8-point category scales. Hierarchical cluster analysis, highlighted the existence of different clusters of consumers. Two main clusters were identified in DE and UK. The main cluster identified in DE, was labelled as Prefer foreign-imported beef (n = 128). These consumers preferred (P < 0.05) the samples from UY_2y in terms of tenderness and overall acceptability. The other cluster was labelled as Prefer local beef in terms of flavour and overall acceptability (P < 0.05) and comprised the majority of consumers from ES (n = 176) and UK
(n = 153) and the cluster 2 from DE (n = 69). UK, cluster 2 (n = 33) that did not discriminate between origin and ageing time of beef. These results indicate that consumers did not prefer the same type of meat within the same country and it is possible that there are individual preferences that could lead to the concept of market segmentation being based on taste preferences. It would appear that Uruguayan beef would be very acceptable in Germany and to a lesser extent in Britain and Spain, although further studies are required that include labelling information. MenosThe acceptability of beef from Uruguay (UY), based on eating quality, was compared with beef produced in different European countries (Germany, DE, Spain, ES and United Kingdom, UK). Consumer tests were conducted in DE, ES and UK (each comprising 200 consumers) using ?Hall Tests?. In each country four samples were evaluated, two from Hereford steers from UY (finished at 2 and 3 years) and two from local meat (the same meat sample aged 7 or 20 d). Consumers evaluated tenderness, flavour and overall acceptability using 8-point category scales. Hierarchical cluster analysis, highlighted the existence of different clusters of consumers. Two main clusters were identified in DE and UK. The main cluster identified in DE, was labelled as Prefer foreign-imported beef (n = 128). These consumers preferred (P < 0.05) the samples from UY_2y in terms of tenderness and overall acceptability. The other cluster was labelled as Prefer local beef in terms of flavour and overall acceptability (P < 0.05) and comprised the majority of consumers from ES (n = 176) and UK
(n = 153) and the cluster 2 from DE (n = 69). UK, cluster 2 (n = 33) that did not discriminate between origin and ageing time of beef. These results indicate that consumers did not prefer the same type of meat within the same country and it is possible that there are individual preferences that could lead to the concept of market segmentation being based on taste preferences. It would appear that Uruguayan beef would be very accept... Presentar Todo |
|
Palabras claves : |
BEEF; CONSUMERS; OVERALL ACCEPTABILITY; PRODUCTION SYSTEM. |
|
Thesagro : |
CARNE. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
L01 Ganadería |
|
Marc : |
LEADER 03256naa a2200349 a 4500
001 1027449
005 2020-05-11
008 2006 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $a10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.03.010$2DOI
100 1 $aOLIVER, M.A.
245 $aEating quality of beef, from different production systems, assessed by German, Spanish and British consumers.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2006
500 $aArticle history: Received 3 November 2005 // Received in revised form 10 March 2006 // Accepted 10 March 2006. Acknowledgements: This authors thank the Agencia Espan?ola de Cooperacio´n Internacional (AECI), the Instituto Nacional de Investigacio´n Agraria y Alimentaria (INIA) de Espan?a and the Intituto Nacional de Investigacio´n Agraria (INIA) from Uruguay for the financial support to the project. We thank the technicians from the different teams as well as Nigel Scollan at the Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research (Wales, UK) for his help in recruiting consumers in Wales.
520 $aThe acceptability of beef from Uruguay (UY), based on eating quality, was compared with beef produced in different European countries (Germany, DE, Spain, ES and United Kingdom, UK). Consumer tests were conducted in DE, ES and UK (each comprising 200 consumers) using ?Hall Tests?. In each country four samples were evaluated, two from Hereford steers from UY (finished at 2 and 3 years) and two from local meat (the same meat sample aged 7 or 20 d). Consumers evaluated tenderness, flavour and overall acceptability using 8-point category scales. Hierarchical cluster analysis, highlighted the existence of different clusters of consumers. Two main clusters were identified in DE and UK. The main cluster identified in DE, was labelled as Prefer foreign-imported beef (n = 128). These consumers preferred (P < 0.05) the samples from UY_2y in terms of tenderness and overall acceptability. The other cluster was labelled as Prefer local beef in terms of flavour and overall acceptability (P < 0.05) and comprised the majority of consumers from ES (n = 176) and UK (n = 153) and the cluster 2 from DE (n = 69). UK, cluster 2 (n = 33) that did not discriminate between origin and ageing time of beef. These results indicate that consumers did not prefer the same type of meat within the same country and it is possible that there are individual preferences that could lead to the concept of market segmentation being based on taste preferences. It would appear that Uruguayan beef would be very acceptable in Germany and to a lesser extent in Britain and Spain, although further studies are required that include labelling information.
650 $aCARNE
653 $aBEEF
653 $aCONSUMERS
653 $aOVERALL ACCEPTABILITY
653 $aPRODUCTION SYSTEM
700 1 $aNUTE, G.R.
700 1 $aFONT I FURNOLS, M.
700 1 $aSAN JULIÁN, R.
700 1 $aCAMPO, M.M.
700 1 $aSAÑUDO, C.
700 1 $aCAÑEQUE, V.
700 1 $aGUERRERO, L.
700 1 $aALVAREZ, I.
700 1 $aDIAZ, M.T.
700 1 $aBRANSCHEID, W.
700 1 $aWICKE, M.
700 1 $aMONTOSSI, F.
773 $tMeat Science, November 2006, Volume 74, Issue 3, Pages 435-442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.03.010
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA Tacuarembó (TBO) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
|
|
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Las Brujas. |
|
Fecha actual : |
08/05/2023 |
|
Actualizado : |
10/05/2023 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Capítulo en Libro Técnico-Científico |
|
Autor : |
RUBIO, L.; BERNAL, R.; ARBOLEYA, J.; MAESO, D. |
|
Afiliación : |
LETICIA PAOLA RUBIO CATTANI, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; ROBERTO FRANCISCO BERNAL PIACENTINI; JORGE EDUARDO ARBOLEYA DUFOUR, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; DIEGO CESAR MAESO TOZZI, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay. |
|
Título : |
Alternativas para el manejo de patógenos de suelos en los sistemas hortícolas. (Capítulo 5) |
|
Complemento del título : |
Primera sección: Transitando hacia la protección agroecológica de los cultivos. Editora: Carolina Leoni. |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2023 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
In: Georgina Paula García-Inza; José María Paruelo; Roberto Zoppolo. (eds). Aportes científicos y tecnológicos del Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria (INIA) del Uruguay a las trayectorias agroecológicas. Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires : Fundación CICCUS, 2023. p.95-105. |
|
Páginas : |
p.95-105. |
|
ISBN : |
978-987-693-926-3 |
|
Idioma : |
Español |
|
Contenido : |
La horticultura es una actividad intensiva en el uso de recursos y especializada. En general, se realiza más de un cultivo por año, o un cultivo de ciclo largo en un mismo cuadro o invernáculo, lo que implica varias labores de preparación del suelo, una alta extracción de nutrientes y pérdida de materia orgánica, necesidad de riego, entre otras medidas de manejo. Este manejo conduce al deterioro del recurso suelo y consecuentemente, al aumento de patógenos que limitan la productividad de los cultivos. ---- 1. Introducción. -- 2. Métodos de desinfección de suelos. -- 3. Alternativas físicas y biológicas utilizadas para la desinfección de suelos hortícolas en Uruguay. -- 3.1. Solarización. -- ¿Cómo se realiza la solarización?. -- 3.1. Biosolarización y biofumigación. -- Experiencias de solarización y biosolarización para la desinfección de
suelos hortícolas en Uruguay. -- 4. Consideraciones finales. -- |
|
Palabras claves : |
PATÓGENOS DEL SUELO. |
|
Thesagro : |
HORTICULTURA; MANEJO DE SUELOS; PATOGENOS. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
P30 Ciencia del suelo y manejo del suelo |
|
URL : |
http://www.ainfo.inia.uy/digital/bitstream/item/17102/1/Rubio-L.-et.al-Capitulo-5.pdf
|
|
Marc : |
LEADER 01836naa a2200229 a 4500
001 1064090
005 2023-05-10
008 2023 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
020 $a978-987-693-926-3
100 1 $aRUBIO, L.
245 $aAlternativas para el manejo de patógenos de suelos en los sistemas hortícolas. (Capítulo 5)$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2023
300 $ap.95-105.
520 $aLa horticultura es una actividad intensiva en el uso de recursos y especializada. En general, se realiza más de un cultivo por año, o un cultivo de ciclo largo en un mismo cuadro o invernáculo, lo que implica varias labores de preparación del suelo, una alta extracción de nutrientes y pérdida de materia orgánica, necesidad de riego, entre otras medidas de manejo. Este manejo conduce al deterioro del recurso suelo y consecuentemente, al aumento de patógenos que limitan la productividad de los cultivos. ---- 1. Introducción. -- 2. Métodos de desinfección de suelos. -- 3. Alternativas físicas y biológicas utilizadas para la desinfección de suelos hortícolas en Uruguay. -- 3.1. Solarización. -- ¿Cómo se realiza la solarización?. -- 3.1. Biosolarización y biofumigación. -- Experiencias de solarización y biosolarización para la desinfección de suelos hortícolas en Uruguay. -- 4. Consideraciones finales. --
650 $aHORTICULTURA
650 $aMANEJO DE SUELOS
650 $aPATOGENOS
653 $aPATÓGENOS DEL SUELO
700 1 $aBERNAL, R.
700 1 $aARBOLEYA, J.
700 1 $aMAESO, D.
773 $tIn: Georgina Paula García-Inza; José María Paruelo; Roberto Zoppolo. (eds). Aportes científicos y tecnológicos del Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria (INIA) del Uruguay a las trayectorias agroecológicas. Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires : Fundación CICCUS, 2023. p.95-105.
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA Las Brujas (LB) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
| Expresión de búsqueda válido. Check! |
|
|
