<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>meat color &#8211; Science</title>
	<atom:link href="https://scienmag.com/tag/meat-color/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://scienmag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2026 20:54:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.3</generator>

 
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">73899611</site>	<item>
		<title>Pig Genes and Gut Microbes Team Up to Shape the Flavor of Your Pork</title>
		<link>https://scienmag.com/pig-genes-and-gut-microbes-team-up-to-shape-the-flavor-of-your-pork/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Juliet Wilcox]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2026 20:54:08 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Biology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BMC Genomics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breed-specific traits in commercial pigs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[co-regulatory networks in pig muscle development]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crossbreed pig genetics and microbiota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genetic and microbial factors affecting pork production]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genome-microbiome interactions in pigs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gut microbiome influence on pork quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gut microbiota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GWAS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GWAS and microbiome-wide association studies in livestock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[heritability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[host-microbiome interaction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impact of gut bacteria on meat flavor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intramuscular fat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lipid metabolism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meat color]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbiability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbiome contribution to meat moisture content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbiome-wide association study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbiome's role in meat color and juiciness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pig breeding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pig genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pork marbling and meat tenderness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pork quality]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://scienmag.com/?p=231930</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A large integrated genomic and microbiome study of 257 commercial pigs reveals how host genes and gut bacteria jointly shape intramuscular fat, meat color, and moisture, opening new routes for precision breeding.]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What makes a slice of pork tender, juicy, and beautifully marbled? For decades, breeders have chased the answer in the pig&#8217;s DNA, while microbiologists have pointed to the trillions of bacteria lining the animal&#8217;s gut. A new study published in BMC Genomics brings these two worlds together, mapping for the first time in such detail how host genetics and gut microbes jointly influence the traits that determine pork quality. Working with 257 commercial pigs, a research team led by scientists at Guangxi University and Foshan University has produced one of the most comprehensive pictures yet of the co-regulatory network linking genome, microbiome, and meat.</p>
<p>The animals in the study were Duroc crossed with Landrace-Yorkshire hybrids, the three-way crossbreed that dominates commercial pork production worldwide. Each pig was genotyped across the whole genome and had its gut microbiome sequenced, while a panel of meat quality traits was measured after slaughter. These traits included intramuscular fat, the fat deposited within the muscle that chefs prize as marbling; meat color, which shapes consumer perception of freshness; marbling score; and moisture content, which governs juiciness and cooking loss. By combining genome-wide association studies, or GWAS, with microbiome-wide association studies, the researchers could ask how much of the variation in each trait comes from the pig&#8217;s own genes and how much from its resident bacteria.</p>
<p>The first major finding concerns heritability, the fraction of trait variation attributable to genetics. Meat quality traits showed moderate heritability estimates ranging from 0.13 to 0.60, meaning that selective breeding can meaningfully move these traits over generations. The corresponding microbiability, the fraction of variation explained by the gut microbiota, was strikingly low, between 0.00 and 0.07. In other words, while microbes do contribute, their direct quantitative influence on pork quality in these commercial pigs is modest. This is a technically important result: it tempers the enthusiasm of studies that have suggested microbes could be manipulated to dramatically reshape meat quality, while still leaving room for microbiome-informed management as a complementary tool rather than a replacement for genetics.</p>
<p>But the story does not end with those small numbers. When the team looked for host genetic variants that influence microbial abundance, they found thirty single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs, associated with the levels of specific gut bacteria. This is where the study becomes genuinely exciting, because several of these loci sit near genes with well-established roles in fat metabolism. Among them are CDH13, a cadherin gene previously linked to lipid profiles in humans; APOB, the apolipoprotein gene central to transporting fats in the blood; LDAH, involved in lipid droplet metabolism; and ACSL1, an enzyme that activates long-chain fatty acids for use in energy storage and membrane synthesis. The presence of these genes in the network suggests a plausible biological route by which a pig&#8217;s genome could shape its gut ecosystem, and the gut ecosystem in turn could feed back into how fat is deposited in muscle.</p>
<p>On the microbial side, seven bacterial taxa showed associations with meat quality traits, and the pattern was consistent enough to be informative. Better meat quality was linked to reduced abundance of Anaerobiospirillum, Parvimonas, Anaerovibrio, and Oscillospira, and to enrichment of Anaeroplasma, WAL_1855D, and Prevotella. Some of these associations make physiological sense. Anaerovibrio, for example, is known for its role in lipolysis, the breakdown of fats, so a gut environment with less of this bacterium could plausibly alter the flux of fatty acids available to the host. Prevotella, meanwhile, is a common and often dominant member of the porcine gut, frequently associated with fiber fermentation and the production of short-chain fatty acids, metabolites that can influence host energy balance and inflammation. The authors are careful to frame these as candidate components of a network rather than proven causal agents, but the directionality of the associations gives researchers concrete targets for follow-up experiments.</p>
<p>The overall architecture that emerges is what the researchers describe as a tripartite interaction: porcine genotypes, microbial consortia, and meat phenotypes form a coordinated, though quantitatively modest, system of mutual influence. The host genome does not simply dictate meat quality on its own, nor do microbes act as an independent lever. Instead, genetic loci involved in lipid metabolism appear to shape which bacteria thrive in the gut, and the resulting microbial community correlates with how fat, moisture, and color manifest in the final muscle tissue. Disentangling correlation from causation in such systems is notoriously difficult, and the authors explicitly position their findings as a foundation for mechanistic and validation studies rather than a finished prescription for the industry.</p>
<p>Even so, the practical implications are considerable. Precision breeding programs could eventually incorporate the thirty SNPs identified here as markers in genomic selection indices, alongside existing markers for growth and reproduction. Because the heritability estimates are moderate, stacking favorable alleles at these loci could produce incremental but cumulative gains in marbling and meat color across breeding generations. At the same time, the seven bacterial taxa offer a potential route for microbiome-informed management: if feeding strategies, probiotics, or prebiotics could nudge the gut community toward the favorable profile, producers might add a complementary layer of quality control on top of genetics. The low microbiability suggests such interventions would yield small effects individually, but in an industry operating at enormous scale, even marginal improvements in meat quality translate into substantial economic value.</p>
<p>The study also carries a broader scientific message about how complex traits should be studied. Meat quality is a classic example of a phenotype shaped by an extended phenotype concept, in which the host and its microbiota function as an integrated biological unit. By running GWAS and microbiome-wide association studies on the same cohort and then intersecting the results, the researchers demonstrated a template that could be applied to other livestock species and other traits, from disease resistance to feed efficiency. The identification of host loci controlling microbial abundance, sometimes called host control of the microbiome, is a growing field in human and animal biology, and this pig dataset provides an unusually clean agricultural context in which to study it, with controlled diets, known pedigrees, and directly measurable production outcomes.</p>
<p>For consumers, the research may seem distant from the dinner plate, but its trajectory is clear. Marbling, juiciness, and color are precisely the attributes that determine whether pork commands a premium at the butcher&#8217;s counter, and the study offers a molecular map of where those attributes come from. The work was conducted with approval from the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Guangxi University and supported by Chinese research funding programs, including the Guangxi Key Research and Development Project and the Sci-Tech Innovation 2030 Agenda. Published open access, the study invites replication by other groups, which will be essential before any of the candidate loci or bacterial taxa enter commercial use. The authors themselves emphasize that the associations identified represent a starting point for deeper investigation into the mechanisms of lipid deposition and muscle biology.</p>
<p>What the study ultimately delivers is a sober but genuinely new view of pork quality as a product of dialogue between a pig and its microbes, moderated by its genes. The genetic contribution is real and breedable; the microbial contribution is small but structured, with specific taxa and specific host loci forming a network that touches the very pathways governing fat metabolism. As sequencing costs continue to fall and multi-omics datasets accumulate across livestock populations, the kind of integrated analysis performed here is likely to become standard practice in animal breeding. The pork chop on your plate, it turns out, is not just the product of a pig&#8217;s genes or of its diet, but of an intricate co-regulatory conversation between the two, one that scientists are only now beginning to transcribe.</p>
<p><strong>Subject of Research:</strong> Host genetic and gut microbiota co-regulation of pork quality traits in commercial pigs</p>
<p><strong>Article Title:</strong> Comprehensive analysis of host genetics and gut microbiota co-regulatory network provides new insights into improving pork quality in pigs</p>
<p><strong>Article References:</strong> Lu, Z., Yang, X., Xia, P., Bui, T. T. M., Wei, C., Nie, J., Cen, Y., Deng, F., Li, X., Li, Z., Zhuang, Z., &amp; Zhao, Y. (2026). Comprehensive analysis of host genetics and gut microbiota co-regulatory network provides new insights into improving pork quality in pigs. <em>BMC Genomics</em>. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-026-13349-8" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-026-13349-8</a></p>
<p><strong>Image Credits:</strong> AI Generated</p>
<p><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-026-13349-8" rel="noopener noreferrer">10.1186/s12864-026-13349-8</a></p>
<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> pork quality, gut microbiota, GWAS, microbiome-wide association study, intramuscular fat, heritability, microbiability, lipid metabolism, pig breeding, BMC Genomics, host-microbiome interaction, meat color</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">231930</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supercooling Beats Freezing for Keeping Beef Fresh During E-Commerce Delivery</title>
		<link>https://scienmag.com/supercooling-beats-freezing-for-keeping-beef-fresh-during-e-commerce-delivery/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alan Morgan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2026 23:14:17 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Agriculture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beef]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beef packaging and temperature control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cold chain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deep-freezing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-commerce distribution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-commerce meat delivery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[effects of passive cooling systems on fresh meat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[effects of supercooling on microbial activity and oxidation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impact of pre-cooling temperatures on meat quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[last mile delivery challenges for perishable foods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meat color]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbial growth in shipped beef]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[molecular analysis of meat freshness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[myofibrillar proteins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oxidation and drip loss in beef during transportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pre-cooling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[protein oxidation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sensory quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shear force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sub-freezing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supercooling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supercooling in beef preservation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supercooling vs traditional freezing for meat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yanbian Yellow Cattle meat quality study]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://scienmag.com/?p=208667</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A new study shows that supercooling beef at minus 0.5 degrees Celsius preserves color, texture, and myofibrillar protein structure better than sub-freezing or deep-freezing during simulated e-commerce distribution.]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fresh beef sold online often travels a surprisingly rough road. In the booming world of e-commerce, steaks are typically shipped in expanded polystyrene boxes packed with gel ice packs, a passive cooling system that must survive 24 to 48 hours of the so-called last mile. During summer, temperatures inside these parcels can climb to 20 to 30 degrees Celsius as the ice melts, exposing the meat to a thermal shock that accelerates oxidation, drip loss, and microbial growth. A new study published in Food Science of Animal Resources has now traced, molecule by molecule, how the choice of pre-cooling temperature before shipment determines whether that beef arrives appetizing or already in decline, and the answer challenges the intuition that colder is always better.</p>
<p>Researchers at Yanbian University in China worked with rump steaks from 36-month-old Yanbian Yellow Cattle, cut from the biceps femoris muscle within 24 hours of slaughter. The steaks, vacuum-packed and weighing roughly 250 grams each, were divided into four treatment groups drawn from the same carcass. One control group was held at 4 degrees Celsius. The others were rapidly frozen in a minus 30 degrees Celsius freezer until their core temperatures reached minus 0.5 degrees Celsius, representing supercooling with little or no ice formation; minus 5 degrees Celsius, representing sub-freezing with partial ice formation; or minus 18 degrees Celsius, representing deep-freezing with complete freezing. Each group was then packed with six pre-frozen gel ice packs in alternating layers, wrapped in an insulating bag, sealed inside an EPS box, and placed in an incubator at 25 degrees Celsius for 48 hours to simulate a realistic summer delivery.</p>
<p>Temperature logging confirmed the scenario the team wanted to reproduce. During the first 15 hours, while the ice packs melted, the core temperature of all pre-cooled groups stayed below zero. Thereafter, temperatures gradually rose, reaching between minus 1.7 and 3.3 degrees Celsius at the delivery stage depending on the treatment. Sampling continued through five days of subsequent refrigerated storage at 4 degrees Celsius, but only while total volatile basic nitrogen, a spoilage marker, remained below the strict threshold of 20 milligrams per 100 grams. The deep-frozen and sub-frozen groups crossed that limit prematurely, a first hint that their quality was deteriorating faster than the others.</p>
<p>Color told the most visible part of the story. Surface color is the attribute consumers weigh most heavily when buying meat, and it depends on the balance between bright red oxymyoglobin and brown metmyoglobin. At the frozen stage, the deep-frozen steaks actually looked best, showing the highest redness values and the highest lightness, the latter reflecting ice-crystal damage that pushed free water to the surface and increased light scattering. But appearances deceived. Once the parcels warmed during simulated distribution, redness in the deep-frozen group fell fastest, and its metmyoglobin content climbed to the highest level of any group during refrigerated storage. The supercooled group, by contrast, showed the slowest decline in redness, the smallest rise in lightness and yellowness, and consistently low metmyoglobin accumulation, indicating that avoiding ice formation preserved both pigment stability and the endogenous antioxidant environment that protects it.</p>
<p>Texture measurements reinforced the pattern. Deep-frozen steaks were initially the most tender, with a shear force of about 82.65 newtons compared with 123.56 newtons for the refrigerated control, because ice crystals physically disrupted the muscle fibers. Yet after the temperature rise of distribution, shear force in the deep-frozen and sub-frozen groups spiked sharply to 142.37 and 132.36 newtons respectively, a hardening attributed to drip loss, fiber shrinkage, and protein denaturation. Later, both groups softened excessively as structural degradation took over, with the deep-frozen group falling to roughly 53 newtons by 72 hours after delivery. The myofibril fragmentation index, a measure of proteolytic breakdown, surged in the frozen groups after distribution, consistent with freeze-thaw damage releasing lysosomal enzymes such as cathepsins, while the supercooled group showed a gradual, orderly increase reflecting normal aging.</p>
<p>The molecular core of the study lay in the myofibrillar proteins, the structural scaffold that governs water-holding capacity and tenderness. These proteins are acutely sensitive to reactive oxygen species: oxidation converts amino acid side chains to carbonyls, unfolds the native alpha-helical structure, exposes hydrophobic groups buried inside the molecule, and drives cross-linking and aggregation. Carbonyl content rose in all pre-cooled groups during pre-cooling itself, showing that even the phase transition imposes oxidative stress. But after distribution the groups diverged dramatically. By 72 hours after delivery, carbonyl content in the deep-frozen group had reached 2.610 nanomoles per milligram and the sub-frozen group 2.287, while the supercooled group sat at only 1.357, close to the refrigerated control.</p>
<p>Surface hydrophobicity, measured by bromophenol blue binding, painted the same picture of unfolding and aggregation. Deep-frozen and sub-frozen samples already showed markedly elevated hydrophobicity before shipping, and values climbed steeply for every group once distribution began. Protein solubility, meanwhile, fell fastest in the deep-frozen group, dropping from 14.043 to 8.791 over 72 hours after delivery, a rate of decline roughly 80 percent faster than the supercooled group&#8217;s. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy of the amide I band added a structural dimension: after distribution, alpha-helix content in the deep-frozen group collapsed from 56.21 percent to 11.25 percent while beta-sheet, a conformation associated with intermolecular aggregation, jumped to 50.19 percent. The supercooled group retained far more ordered structure, with 23.34 percent alpha-helix and only 18.55 percent beta-sheet at the same stage.</p>
<p>Sensory panels of ten trained assessors, evaluated against ISO 8586 standards, confirmed what the instruments recorded. Scores for meat color, fat color, wetness, and firmness declined most rapidly in the deep-frozen and sub-frozen groups after distribution, and by 72 hours after delivery those groups offered little remaining quality. The supercooled steaks maintained relatively high appearance scores, stable wetness, and acceptable firmness for the longest period, translating the molecular advantages into a longer window of consumer acceptability. The pH trajectory mirrored the biochemical sequence: stable and mildly acidic early on, rising near 6.8 as endogenous proteases released alkaline nitrogen compounds, then falling again as psychrotrophic spoilage bacteria presumably produced organic acids in the later stages.</p>
<p>The study&#8217;s central insight is the causal chain it draws from pre-cooling state to protein stability to final quality. Deep-freezing buys a larger thermal reserve and a briefly better initial appearance, but the ice crystals it creates, followed by melting and recrystallization during the warm ride, rupture cell membranes, release pro-oxidants and proteolytic enzymes, and set off a cascade of moisture exudation, pigment oxidation, carbonylation, unfolding, and aggregation. Supercooling at minus 0.5 degrees Celsius threads a needle: it supplies enough cold reserve to blunt the thermal shock of passive distribution while sidestepping the phase transition and its physical damage entirely. For the EPS box and ice pack systems that dominate fresh meat e-commerce, the authors conclude, supercooled pre-cooling is the strategy most likely to deliver beef that still looks, feels, and tastes the way the shopper expects, and the findings offer cold-chain planners a molecularly grounded rationale for rethinking how far down the thermometer a shipment should go before it leaves the warehouse.</p>
<p><strong>Subject of Research:</strong> Effects of supercooling, sub-freezing, and deep-freezing pre-cooling on beef quality and myofibrillar protein stability during EPS-based e-commerce distribution</p>
<p><strong>Article Title:</strong> Effects of supercooling, sub−freezing, and deep−freezing pre−cooling on color, pH, shear force, sensory quality, and myofibrillar protein properties of beef during expanded polystyrene−based distribution</p>
<p><strong>Article References:</strong> Effects of supercooling, sub−freezing, and deep−freezing pre−cooling on color, pH, shear force, sensory quality, and myofibrillar protein properties of beef during expanded polystyrene−based distribution. (n.d.). <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00083-8" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00083-8</a></p>
<p><strong>Image Credits:</strong> AI Generated</p>
<p><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00083-8" rel="noopener noreferrer">10.1007/s44463-026-00083-8</a></p>
<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> beef, supercooling, sub-freezing, deep-freezing, pre-cooling, cold chain, e-commerce distribution, myofibrillar proteins, protein oxidation, meat color, shear force, sensory quality</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">208667</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
