ArticleJournal of animal science2023
Characterizing the sarcoplasmic proteome of aged pork chops classified by purge loss.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postmortem energy metabolism and meat quality development: Advances in basic pathways, endogenous regulatory factors, and exogenous management strategies.Journal of advanced research · 2026Review
- Early postmortem beef muscle proteome and metabolome variations due to supranutritional zinc and ractopamine hydrochloride supplementation.Journal of animal science · 2024Article
- Proteomic and metabolomic profiling of aged pork loin chops reveals molecular phenotypes linked to pork tenderness.Journal of animal science · 2024Article
- Extended Storage of Beef Steaks Using Thermoforming Vacuum Packaging.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Distinct myofibrillar sub-proteomic profiles are associated with the instrumental texture of aged pork loin.Journal of animal science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Unpredictable variation in quality, including fresh pork water-holding capacity, remains challenging to pork processors and customers. Defining the diverse factors that influence fresh pork water-holding capacity is necessary to make progress in refining pork quality prediction methods. The objective was to utilize liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry coupled with tandem mass tag (TMT) multiplexing to evaluate the sarcoplasmic proteome of aged pork loins classified by purge loss. Fresh commercial pork loins were collected, aged 12 or 14 d postmortem, and pork quality and sensory attributes were evaluated. Chops were classified into Low (N = 27, average purge = 0.33%), Intermediate (N = 27, average purge = 0.72%), or High (N = 27, average purge = 1.19%) chop purge groups. Proteins soluble in a low-ionic strength buffer were extracted, digested with trypsin, labeled with 11-plex isobaric TMT reagents, and detected using a Q-Exactive Mass Spectrometer. Between the Low and High purge groups, 40 proteins were differentially (P < 0.05) abundant. The Low purge group had a greater abundance of proteins classified as structural and contractile, sarcoplasmic reticulum and calcium regulating, chaperone, and citric acid cycle enzymes than the High purge group. The presence of myofibrillar proteins in the aged sarcoplasmic proteome is likely due to postmortem degradation. These observations support our hypothesis that pork chops with low purge have a greater abundance of structural proteins in the soluble protein fraction. Together, these and other proteins in the aged sarcoplasmic proteome may be biomarkers of pork water-holding capacity. Additional research should establish the utility of these proteins as biomarkers early postmortem and over subsequent aging periods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.