Meat Science 82 (2009) 450–455
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Meat Science
journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/ locate/meatsc i
Nutrient composition and technological quality of meat from alpacas reared in Peru
Bettit K. Salvá a, José M. Zumalacárregui b, Ana C. Figueira c, María T. Osorio b, Javier Mateo b,*
a Departamento de Tecnología de Alimentos y Productos Agropecuarios, Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina – UNALM, Av. La Molina s/n, Lima 12, Perub Department of Food Hygiene and Technology, University of León, Campus Vegazana s/n, 24071 León, Spainc School of Technology, University of the Algarve, Campus da Penha, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history:Received 9 December 2008Received in revised form 18 February 2009Accepted 20 February 2009
Keywords:Meat qualitySouth American camelidsLama pacos
0309-1740/$ - see front matter � 2009 Elsevier Ltd. Adoi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.02.015
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 987291247; fax:E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Mateo).
The aim of this study was to increase the knowledge on alpaca meat quality characteristics. Twenty Hua-caya breed alpacas, reared under a traditional unspecialized production system at the Andean region ofPeru, were slaughtered at ages between 18 and 24 months. Analyses were carried out on Longissimus tho-racis and lumborum muscle (LTLM), unless otherwise specified. These included composition parameters:moisture, fat, protein, ash, minerals, amino acids, fatty acid profile (of both LTLM and perirenal fat), ret-inol and tocopherol concentrations and myoglobin and collagen contents. Other meat quality parameterswere evaluated: pH, colour, water holding capacity and Warner–Bratzler shear-force. Alpaca LTLM wascharacterized by a low intramuscular fat content and mineral and amino acid compositions, polyunsat-urated to saturated fatty acids ratio and conjugated linoleic acid content comparable to those found forbeef and sheep meat. However, specifically, alpaca meat showed a relatively high n�6 to n�3 (3.7) ratioand low vitamin E concentration. Values of alpaca meat technological quality parameters were in theranges reported for more conventional red meats, the exception being a lower b* value.
� 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Alpaca (Lama pacos) is one of the domesticated South Americancamelids who’s natural habitat is localized in the Altiplano, thehigh Andean zone extending through Bolivia, Peru, Argentina andChile. Alpacas are reared for their fibre and meat using unspecial-ized production systems (Aréstegui, 2005), in which alpacas arebred to thrive on the tough vegetation of that zone at altitudes over4000 m above sea level (Neely, Taylor, Prosser, & Hamlyn, 2001).
Alpacas represent an important meat resource for rural Andeanfamilies (Fairfield, 2006). In Peru, the number of alpacas annuallyslaughtered is around half a million producing more than11,000,000 kg of meat (Hack, 2001) – the alpaca-carcass dressingpercentage expected is at least 50%, with carcass weight averagingaround 23 kg.
The main acceptability problems of alpaca meat appear to be re-lated to prejudices on the supply and demand sides, involving hy-giene and safety issues (poor meat hygiene and the presence ofSarcocystis aucheniae), eating quality and socio-cultural aspects(Fairfield, 2006). According to Hack (2001), not only is alpaca meatconsumed locally in Andean rural sectors, but the meat of healthyand young alpacas is demanded by consumers from upper-incomesectors. The preferred animals are those up to two years of age,which is partially explained as, at this early age, meat is tender
ll rights reserved.
+34 987291284.
and a much lower number of alpacas are affected by Sarcocystis.However, most alpacas in Peru are slaughtered at 7–8 years ofage, due to the small producers’ reluctance to sacrifice young ani-mals (Fairfield, 2006).
In recent publications the quality of alpaca meat for human con-sumption was evaluated. Steele, Cox, Hope, Robinson, and Haw-kins, (2006) studied the effect of age (between 3 and 5 years)and castration on proximate composition of male alpaca meatand found a positive effect of both factors on fat content. In addi-tion, Cristofanelli, Antonini, Torres, Polidori, and Renieri (2004,2005) studied and compared several carcass and meat qualitycharacteristics of alpacas and llamas (Lama glama) slaughtered at25 months of age. These authors stated that llamas were morefavourable than alpacas for meat production. Thus, carcasses of lla-mas showed both higher carcass weights and higher proportion ofmuscle than those of alpacas, although the dressing percentagewas more favourable for alpaca. These studies also revealed that al-paca and llama meat showed remarkably low intramuscular fatand cholesterol contents. Moreover, mineral contents and shear-force values of alpaca and llama meats were studied recently (Pol-idori, Antonini, Torres, Beghelli, & Renieri, 2007a).
Cristofanelli et al. (2004), based on the quality characteristics ofalpaca carcass and meat, and considering both the socio-economicconditions of local populations in the Andean regions and the highadded-value obtained in richer countries for the alpaca natural fi-bre, suggested that alpaca should be bred as a fibre animal ratherthan a meat animal. On the other hand, in spite of the good reasons
B.K. Salvá et al. / Meat Science 82 (2009) 450–455 451
for promotion of fibre sector, Fairfield (2006) stated that alpacameat production should also be promoted, since small producersneed to be able to benefit from their animals in a variety of comple-mentary ways.
Apart from the above-mentioned studies, no further informa-tion could be found on the physico-chemical quality of alpacameat, as stated by Saadoun and Cabrera (2008). Therefore, theaim of this study was to contribute to the knowledge of the com-position and technological quality characteristics of alpaca meat.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Sample collection
The study involved 20 Huacaya breed alpacas 18–24 monthsold, reared under extensive conditions on pasture characteristicof the Peruvian Andean highlands – these animals can be classifiedas young males and females produced on pasture, exclusively for-age fed, according to the United Nations Economic Commission forEurope (UNECE) standard for Alpaca and Llama meat (2006). Aftertwo weeks of forage and grain feeding in feedlot in Lima, animalswere conventionally slaughtered in conformity with Peruvian reg-ulation. The carcasses were obtained by eliminating the head (cutat the occipital–atlantoidal articulation), feet (cut at tarsal–meta-tarsal and carpal–metacarpal articulations), skin, and viscera (ex-cept for the kidney and perirenal fat); macroscopical sarcocystswere not found in muscles by visual inspection. Carcasses werestored for 24 h in a cold room (4 �C) and then split into two sides.Longissimus thoracis and lumborum muscle (LTLM) was dissectedand collected from the left-hand side of each carcass. The muscleportion between the 6th and the 10th thoracic vertebrae washomogenized. A part was lyophilised, and then, vacuum-packedand frozen (�40 �C) until further chemical analysis (2 months).The other part was used immediately after muscle dissection forexpressible juice determination. The portion from the 10th to thelast thoracic vertebrae was used immediately for pH and colourstudies and, after maturation at 4 �C for 3 days, for cooking lossand texture. In addition, fat around the kidney from each left-handcarcass was sampled and frozen at �40 �C for 2 months until fattyacid (FA) analysis.
2.2. Chemical composition analysis
Moisture, fat, protein and ash contents were estimated accord-ing to methods recommended by the AOAC (AOAC, 1999, chp. 39) –Official methods nos. 950.46, 991.36, 981.10 and 920.153, respec-tively. For mineral content, aliquots of approximately 0.25 g(±0.01) of lyophilised muscle sample were accurately weighed,and digested with concentrated HNO3 in tightly closed screw-capglass tubes and mineral contents were determined by inductivelycoupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES) accordingas described previously (Osorio et al., 2007a).
Amino acid contents were assessed by reverse-phase high pres-sure liquid chromatography. Firstly, the hydrolysis of proteins ofmeat samples (0.1 g) was carried out in screw-capped tubes, using6 M HCl acid (5 ml) at 110 �C for 24 h. Afterwards, 1-ml aliquots ofa standard of free amino acids (Alltech Grom, Rottenburg–Hailfin-gen, Germany) or the hydrolyzed samples were derivatized withphenylisothiocyanate (PITC) as described by Bidlingmeyer, Cohen,and Tarvin (1984). The chromatographic system was composedof a 2690-model separation module (Waters Corporation, Milford,MA, USA), equipped with a Waters 996 Photodiode Array detectorand a C18 Symmetry� (Waters) column (250 mm long � 4.6 mmi.d. and 5 lm pore size). The column temperature was maintainedat 50 �C with a SP8792 column heater (Spectra-Physics, San Jose,
CA, USA). Samples were injected in a volume of 20 ll. The solventsystem consisted of two eluents: (A) 0.14 M pH 6.5 sodium acetatebuffer and (B) 60% (v/v) acetonitrile in water. The solvent gradientwas as follows: 0 min, 100%A; 20 min, 78%A–22%B; 40 min, 54%A–46%B; 42 min, 100%B; 44 min, 100%A. Elutions were followed at254 nm, spectra were taken between 205 and 400 nm.
For analysis of retinol, tocopherols and FA of LTLM samples,intramuscular fat (IMF) was first extracted from 10 g of lyophi-lised sample previously re-hydrated with 30 ml of water for12 h, as described by Bligh and Dyer (1959). Vitamins were thenextracted from the IMF after saponification and their contentswere determined by reverse-phase high pressure liquid chroma-tography (Osorio, Zumalacárregui, Cabeza, Figueira, & Mateo,2008). Haem pigment content was estimated as described byHornsey (1956) and hydroxyproline (collagen) content was mea-sured colorimetrically according to AOAC (1999, Chp. 39) – Offi-cial method 990.26.
Finally, for FA determination, 30–50 mg aliquots of the previ-ously extracted IMF or the homogenized PRF samples were usedfor the methylation of the FA with 5% methanolic HCl (Carrapiso,Timón, Petrón, Tejeda, & García, 2000). Gas chromatographic anal-ysis of FAME was performed as described previously (Osorio,Zumalacárregui, Figueira, & Mateo, 2007b). The individual fattyacid contents were expressed as g 100 g�1 total fatty acids.
2.3. Analysis of meat quality parameters
The pH, meat colour and expressible juice were measured 24 hafter slaughter. For pH measurement, a pH meter probe was in-serted into the LTLM (at the level of the 13th thoracic vertebraeand 2.5 cm below the dorsal surface). Colour was determined onthe transversal surface of the LTLM, just after the last thoracic ver-tebra with a Minolta (CR-400) chromameter (Konica–Minolta, Osa-ka, Japan). Colour measures were taken in the CIE L*a*b* colourspace (illuminant: D65; visual angle: 10�; SCI mode; 11-mm aper-ture for illumination and 8 mm for measurement; chromometerwas calibrated with the white calibration tile provided with theequipment), as described by Honikel (1997).
Expressible juice was determined according to a modification ofthe Grau and Hamm (1957) method. Before homogenization,duplicate 300-mg samples of each LTLM sample were weighed,placed over a previously weighed Whatman no. 1 filter paper(Whatman International Ltd., Kent, UK) and pressed between tworigid plastic plates, using a 1.000 kg weight, for 5 min. Afterwards,the muscle samples were removed, filters were reweighed and theincrease in weight, which corresponds to the juice loss, was ex-pressed in terms of percentage of the initial meat weight.
For cooking loss and shear-force determinations, the above-mentioned muscle portions, maturated (at 4 �C for 3 days), werecooked in a water bath at 75 �C, to a core temperature of 70 �C;afterwards, cooking loss was obtained (Honikel, 1997). Then, twoto three rectangular prisms (1 cm2 � 3 cm long), parallel to musclefibre orientation, were obtained from each cooked sample andshear-force was evaluated using a QTS-25 texture analyzer (Brook-field Engineering Laboratories, Inc., Middleboro, Massachusetts,USA) equipped with a Warner-Bratzler device, with a50 mm min�1 cross head speed, using a 25-kg load cell, with thesample prisms being sheared at right angles to the fibre axis (Honi-kel, 1997).
2.4. Statistical analysis
Statistical analyses were performed using STATISTICA for Win-dows (StatSoft Inc., 2001). Effects of fat deposit (two groups) onFA contents were studied by one-way analysis of variance.
452 B.K. Salvá et al. / Meat Science 82 (2009) 450–455
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Chemical composition parameters
Chemical composition of the alpaca LTLM samples, which wereobtained from carcasses with a mean cold carcass weight of27.4 ± 6.3 kg, is shown in Table 1 – carcass weight was slightlyhigher than the 23.3 ± 1.5 kg found by Cristofanelli et al. (2004)for carcasses of 25-month old male Peruvian alpacas.
LTLM of alpaca showed mean moisture, protein, IMF and ashcontents of 74.1, 22.7, 2.2 and 1.1%, respectively. Moisture and pro-tein values were very similar to those listed by Cristofanelli et al.(2004) for both alpaca and llama LTLM. However, discrepanciesin IMF percentage were observed. The IMF content of alpaca LTLMwas higher than the 0.50 ± 0.01% reported by Cristofanelli et al.(2004) for both llama and alpaca LTLM. On the other hand, it waslower than the 3.5 ± 1.1% reported the same group (Polidori,Renieri, Antonini, Passamonti, & Pucciarelli, 2007b) for Peruvianllama LTLM. In addition, the ash content found was lower thanthe 2.5% reported by Cristofanelli et al. (2004) for alpaca and llamaLTLM. Furthermore, the proximate composition of alpaca meat inthe present study was very similar to that described for LTLM ofArabian camel (Hoffman, 2008; Kadim et al., 2006).
The mineral composition of LTLM of alpaca is shown in Table 1.Potassium, phosphorous, sodium and magnesium were the majorminerals found. Mineral contents were in general agreement withthose reported by Polidori et al. (2007a) for the LTLM of Peruvianmale alpacas; the only notable discrepancies being for magnesium
Table 1Composition of alpaca muscle Longissimus thoracis and lumborum.
Parameter Mean ± SD (n = 20)
Proximate composition (%)Moisture 74.07 ± 1.57Protein 22.69 ± 1.70Intramuscular fat 2.05 ± 0.85Ash 1.10 ± 0.11
Minerals (mg 100 g�1)Potassium 419 ± 48Phosphorus 295 ± 30Sodium 88.4 ± 15.2Magnesium 33.8 ± 4.11Calcium 10.7 ± 4.0Zinc 4.44 ± 2.14Iron 2.69 ± 0.96Copper 0.101 ± 0.058Manganese 0.015 ± 0.004
Amino acids (% on total amino acids)Glutamic acid 16.61 ± 1.80Aspartic acid 12.06 ± 1.82Isoleucine + leucine 11.40 ± 1.08Lysine 11.05 ± 2.76Histidine + threonine 7.63 ± 0.52Alanine 7.30 ± 0.48Arginine 6.90 ± 1.46Glycine 5.97 ± 0.48Phenylalanine + tryptophane 5.17 ± 2.93Serine 4.76 ± 0.29Valine 3.33 ± 0.26Proline 3.27 ± 0.28Tyrosine 2.36 ± 0.32Methionine 2.19 ± 0.84
Vitamins (lg g�1 of meat)a-Tocopherol 0.31 ± 0.21d-Tocopherol <0.02c-Tocopherol <0.02Retinol 0.17 ± 0.16
Other composition parameters (mg g�1)Myoglobin 4.99 ± 0.76Collagen 4.92 ± 1.61
and iron contents, which were, respectively, approximately 30%higher and 30% lower than in the results reported by these authors.Mineral contents in alpaca LTLM were within the ranges found forcamel meat (E1-Faer, Rawdah, Attar, & Dawson, 1991; Kadim et al.,2006).
Table 1 also shows the amino acid concentrations of alpacaLTLM. To our knowledge, no data on amino acid composition ofthe meat of South American camelids have been reported, althoughit has been studied in camel meat (Dawood & Alkanhal, 1995). Ingeneral, amino acid composition of alpaca meat was comparableto that of the meat from other species (Kadim, Mahgoub, &Purchas, 2008; USDA, 2008).
The tocopherol content of meat is a relevant parameter, sinceincreased levels of it improves overall meat quality, primarily byinhibiting fatty acid oxidation and the loss of desirable colour dur-ing storage (Wood et al., 2008). Mean a-tocopherol and retinolconcentrations in alpaca meat were respectively, 0.31 ± 0.21 lg g�1
and 0.17 ± 0.16 lg g�1; d- and c-tocopherol were not detectable.Values for tocopherol concentration in alpaca meat as well as inthe meat of other camelids could not be found in the literature.Values found in alpaca meat were far lower than the critical levelof 3.5 lg g�1 suggested for optimum lipid stability in beef (Arnold,Scheller, Arp, Williams, & Schaefer, 1993), which is usually reachedin beef derived from pasture feeding (Descalzo & Sancho, 2008).However, tocopherol values found in sheep meat are usually lower(Demirel et al., 2004; Kasapidou, Wood, Sinclair, Wilkinson, &Enser, 2001).
Total myoglobin concentration in alpaca LTLM was4.99 ± 0.76 mg g�1. No data on the content of haem pigments ofcamelid meat was found in the literature. However, values foundin alpaca meat were similar to those obtained in other studiesfor beef (Krzywicki, 1982) and for the meat of approximately 2-year old ovine animals (Ledward & Shorthose, 1971).
Collagen contents of camelid meat, to our knowledge, have notbeen determined until now. Mean collagen content of alpaca LTLMwas 0.49 ± 0.16%. Similar amounts have been detected in Longissi-mus muscle of young (1–2 years old) bulls (Rhee, Wheeler,Shackelford, & Koohmaraie, 2004; Serra et al., 2008; Torrescano,Sánchez-Escalante, Giménez, Roncalés, & Beltrán, 2003) and loweramounts (0.26–0.29%) in that muscle of 8–10-month old lambs(Tschirhart-Hoelscher, Baird, King, McKenna, & Savell, 2006).
FA profiles of alpaca IMF and PRF are shown in Table 2. In IMF,the major FA was C18:1 n�9 (with 24.2% of total FA), followed byC16:0 (22.0%) and C18:0 (19.8%). In PRF, the major FA was C18:0(with 33.4% of total FA), followed by C16:0 (19.1%), and C18:1n�9 (14.1%). Significant differences (P < 0.05) were found for al-most all individual FA between IMF and PRF.
Saturated FA (SFA) represented, for IMF and PRF samples 51.2%and 63.9% of total FA, respectively, monounsaturated FA (MUFA),37.1% and 30.3%, and polyunsaturated FA (PUFA) 11.7% and 5.8%.Significant differences between both fat deposits were observedfor all the three sums. Alpaca IMF had a PUFA:SFA ratio of 0.26,which is intermediate between those reported for ruminant meat;meanwhile, the n�6:n�3 ratio of alpaca IMF (3.74) was highercompared to the ratios (2–3) reported for beef and sheep meat(USDA, 2008). PUFA:SFA and n�6:n�3 ratios of alpaca IMF werenear to the minimum and maximum recommended dietary ratiosof 0.4 and 4, respectively (British Department of Health, 1994).Additionally, the contents of conjugated linolenic acid (CLA), were1.2% and 1.0% of total fatty acids for the alpaca IMF and PRF,respectively. These values were between the ranges reported forbeef, 0.12–1.0%, and lamb, 0.43–1.9 (Schmid, Collomb, Sieber, &Bee, 2006). Finally, some peculiar polymethyl-branched FA(PMBFA), presumably resulting from dietary phytol intake by thegrazing animals (Hansen, 1968), were detected in alpaca IMF andPRF at amounts up to 0.5%.
Table 2Fatty acid contents, expressed as weight percentage of total fatty acids, of alpacaintramuscular and perirenal fat.
Intramuscular fat Perirenal fat
Mean ± SD (n = 20) Mean ± SD (n = 20)
Individual fatty acidsC8:0 0.06 ± 0.04a 0.02 ± 0.01b
C10:0 0.20 ± 0.08a 0.07 ± 0.03b
C12:0 0.18 ± 0.05a 0.17 ± 0.05b
C13:0 monomethyl-br undiff (2,2) 0.06 ± 0.03a 0.08 ± 0.03b
C13:0 0.06 ± 0.03a 0.09 ± 0.03b
C14:0 monomethyl-br 0.17 ± 0.05a 0.27 ± 0.05b
C14:0 2.67 ± 0.42a 2.24 ± 0.40b
C16:0 trimethyl-brA 0.05 ± 0.05a 0.05 ± 0.02a
C14:1 undiff 0.04 ± 0.02a 0.01 ± 0.01b
C14:1 n�5 0.07 ± 0.04a 0.04 ± 0.02b
RC15:0 monomethyl-br undiff (2,2) 1.19 ± 0.35a 1.84 ± 0.38b
C15:0 1.03 ± 0.22a 1.33 ± 0.25b
C15:1 n�5 0.07 ± 0.04a 0.10 ± 0.04b
C16:0 monomethyl-br 0.41 ± 0.10a 0.59 ± 0.13b
C19:0 tetramethyl-brA 0.02 ± 0.02a 0.06 ± 0.03b
C16:0 22.01 ± 1.05a 19.06 ± 2.29b
C16:1 n�7 3.15 ± 1.13a 1.64 ± 0.57b
RC16:1 undiff (3,5) 0.75 ± 0.88a 1.36 ± 0.19b
RC17:0 monomethyl-br undiff (2,2) 1.23 ± 0.16a 0.91 ± 0.12b
C20:0 tetramethyl-brA 0.29 ± 0.11a 0.31 ± 0.12a
C17:0 0.86 ± 0.18a 1.22 ± 0.22b
C17:1 undiff 0.25 ± 0.21a 0.09 ± 0.04b
C17:1 n�7 0.41 ± 0.21a 0.37 ± 0.09a
C18:0 monomethyl-br 0.14 ± 0.04a 0.19 ± 0.04b
C18:0 19.82 ± 1.78a 33.44 ± 4.14b
C18:1 n�9 24.24 ± 5.04a 14.12 ± 2.77b
RC18:1 undiff (5,8) 7.63 ± 1.41a 11.99 ± 1.23b
C18:2 n-6 6.02 ± 2.52a 2.58 ± 0.65b
RC18:2 undiff (2,3) 0.71 ± 0.13a 0.74 ± 0.12a
C19:0 0.29 ± 0.04a 0.54 ± 0.08b
C19:1 n�9 0.19 ± 0.06a 0.25 ± 0.08b
C18:3 n�3 1.75 ± 0.61a 1.10 ± 0.37b
CLA 0.79 ± 0.11a 0.41 ± 0.14b
RCLA undiff (3,3) 0.41 ± 0.10a 0.59 ± 0.07b
C20:0 0.36 ± 0.10a 0.96 ± 0.23b
C20:1 n�9 0.26 ± 0.15a 0.26 ± 0.14a
C20:2 n�6 0.16 ± 0.06a 0.07 ± 0.03b
C20:3 n�6 0.22 ± 0.13 NDC20:3 n�3 0.30 ± 0.16a 0.08 ± 0.04b
C20:3 undiff 0.07 ± 0.06a 0.06 ± 0.03b
C20:4 n�6 1.28 ± 0.51a 0.13 ± 0.05b
C21:0 ND 0.16 ± 0.03C22:0 0.10 ± 0.08a 0.33 ± 0.10b
Sums and ratiosSFA 51.23 ± 1.60a 63.92 ± 2.49b
MUFA 37.06 ± 3.63a 30.33 ± 2.29b
PUFA 11.71 ± 3.68a 5.75 ± 1.11b
BCFA 3.57 ± 0.70a 4.29 ± 0.71b
OFA 5.67 ± 0.75a 7.09 ± 0.72b
PUFA/SFA 0.26 ± 0.08a 0.19 ± 0.04b
n�3 2.05 ± 0.69a 1.18 ± 0.38b
n�6 7.69 ± 3.02a 2.78 ± 0.68b
n�6/n�3 3.74 ± 1.01a 2.44 ± 0.33b
CLA: conjugated linoleic acid; SFA: saturated fatty acids; MUFA: monounsaturatedfatty acids; PUFA: polyunsaturated fatty acids; BCFA: branched chain fatty acids;OFA: odd fatty acids; ND: not detectable.br: branched.undiff (n,n0): undifferentiated isomers (number of detected undifferentiated iso-mers in intramuscular fat and perirenal fat, respectively).a,bMean values in the same row with different letter presented significant differ-ences (P < 0.05) by the post hoc Newman–Keuls’ analysis.
A C16:0 trimethyl-br: 4,8,12-triymethyltridecanoic acid; C19:0 tetramethyl-br:2,6,10,14-tetramethyl-pentadecanoic acid (pristanic acid); C20:0 tetramethyl-br:3,7,11,15-tetramethyl-hexadecanoic acid (phytanic acid).
Table 3Technological meat quality characteristics of alpaca Longissimus dorsi muscle.
Characteristic Mean ± SD (n = 20)
pH 5.63 ± 0.22Lightness (L*) 36.17 ± 2.12Redness (a*) 15.05 ± 1.44Yellowness (b*) 1.16 ± 2.30Cooking loss (%) 23.73 ± 3.98Expressible juice (%) 26.41 ± 4.22WBSF (N) 45.81 ± 0.84
WBSF: Warner–Bratzler shear-force.
B.K. Salvá et al. / Meat Science 82 (2009) 450–455 453
No data on the FA composition of alpaca meat were found(Saadoun & Cabrera, 2008), although FA composition of IMF hasbeen studied in meat of other South American camelids, i.e. llamasreared on pasture under extensive conditions (Polidori et al.,
2007b) and free-range guanacos (González, Smulders, Paulsen,Skewes, & König, 2004). In contrast to the present study, wheremore than thirty FA were quantified, in those studies only the 8–10 major FA were determined. Total SFA percentage observed in al-paca IMF where within the range reported for llama IMF. However,average MUFA and PUFA percentages were lower (37.1% vs 42%)and higher (11.7% vs 7%), respectively, in alpaca IMF than in llamaIMF. For individual FA contents, the most noticeable differences be-tween both species were that C18:2 and C18:3 contents wereapproximately two times higher in alpaca IMF. In contrast, com-pared to alpaca, guanaco IMF showed higher amount of PUFA(16% vs 11.7%) and lower of MUFA (32% vs 37.1%). Specie and die-tary (differences in the vegetation of the grazing lands) effectscould be responsible for these differences. Furthermore, FA compo-sition of llama, alpaca and even guanaco meat appears to differfrom those of camel meat as reported by Rawdah, El-Faer, andKoreish (1994), with the latter containing substantially more PUFAand less MUFA – mean differences for PUFA and MUFA percentagesbetween camel and alpaca and llama equalled or exceeded 7%.
3.2. Technological meat quality characteristics
Results on technological quality characteristics of alpaca meatobtained from the LTLM samples are shown in Table 3. Alpacashowed a mean pH value of 5.63 ± 0.22; a similar pH (5.6) wasfound by Cristofanelli et al. (2004) in alpaca and llama LTLM at48 h post-mortem, which was considered normal for meat afterthat time.
LTLM samples from alpaca showed mean L*, a* and b* values of36.17 ± 2.12, 15.05 ± 1.44 and 1.16 ± 2.30, respectively. Althoughno information was available in the literature for alpaca meat, itwas found that both L* and a* fell within the values reported for ca-mel meat (32.23–37.74 for L* and 13.37–17.13 for a*) by Babikerand Yousif (1990) and Kadim et al. (2006), and were intermediatebetween the ranges observed for lamb meat (Tschirhart-Hoelscheret al., 2006) and beef (Muchenje et al., 2009). However, consider-ably lower b* (yellowness) values were found for alpaca with re-spect to those (between 4 and 11) found in the above studies.We have no explanation for these differences, which might resultin alpaca meat having a characteristic colour.
Water holding capacity (WHC) has been related with nutritionalvalue, appearance and juiciness of meat. Values for alpaca meatwere 26.41% as expressible juice and 23.73% as cooking loss. Previ-ously, Cristofanelli et al. (2004) determined the WHC of alpaca andllama meat but using a different methodology (an imbibing meth-od) and found that WHC was not very different compared withmeat from other species. Cooking loss percentage in the presentstudy was comparable with those reported for the meat of 2-yearscamels (Kadim et al., 2006) or young bulls (Rhee et al., 2004; Serraet al., 2008).
Tenderness of meat is one of the most important meat eatingquality attributes. Mean shear-force values obtained for the cookedsamples of alpaca LTLM were 4.67 ± 0.84 kg cm�2. These values
454 B.K. Salvá et al. / Meat Science 82 (2009) 450–455
were not significantly correlated with collagen content – the linearcorrelation coefficient r was 0.32 (data not shown). In agreement,although collagen content has seemed to be highly correlated withraw meat shear-force, low correlations have been frequently ob-served in cooked meat (Lepetit, 2007). Shear-force values in thepresent study were approximately 20% lower than those reportedby Polidori et al. (2007a) for oven-roasted LTLM samples of Peru-vian 25-months-old male alpacas after two days post-mortemstorage. This variation could be attributed, at least partially, to dif-ferences in methodology, i.e. sample size and heating process, aswell as differences in sexes, since Polidori et al. (2007a) used onlymale animals whereas in this study both sexes were included.Shear-force values of alpaca meat were similar to those obtainedfor Longissimus dorsi muscle of camel (Babiker & Yousif, 1990).
4. Conclusions
The present study provides data on the composition and tech-nological quality of meat from young alpacas (18–24 months;which is considered an optimum slaughtering age range for alpacameat quality). Since there is very limited information available inthe literature on this subject, the data obtained might be usefulfor the development of quality standards to promote commercial-ization of alpaca meat in different markets.
Alpaca meat appears to be not only suitable but also attractivefor human consumption, from both chemical composition andtechnological meat quality points of view. More specifically, (1)proximate composition of alpaca muscle was characterized by arelatively low intramuscular fat content (2%) and a high ratio ofprotein to fat, (2) mineral and amino acid compositions, PUFA:SFAratio and CLA content were similar to those of beef and sheep meat(3), alpaca intramuscular fat seems to have an interesting n�6:n�3ratio of 3.7 (higher in comparison with available data on beef andsheep meat). Moreover, values obtained for the technological alpa-ca meat characteristics, in general, were comparable to those re-ported for conventional red meats; the only notable differencebeing a low b* value. In addition, in spite of alpacas being rearedin extensive conditions on pasture, the vitamin E content in theirmeat was relatively low. In this sense, the need for further studiesto assess the patterns of lipid oxidation and colour stability of alpa-ca meat during storage and the effect on them of tocopherol con-centration and fatty acid profile would be desirable.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank to the ‘‘Universidad NacionalAgraria La Molina” (Peru), the ‘‘Fundación Carolina” (Spain) andthe University of León (Spain) for funding this study, to the ‘‘Labor-atorio de Técnicas Instrumentales” at the University of Leon wherethe analysis of minerals were realized and to Jorge Espino Salazarfor his valuable help with the experimental work carried out inPeru.
References
AOAC (1999). Official method 950.46 moisture in meat; official method 991.36 fat(crude) in meat and meat products; official method 981.10 crude protein inmeat. Block digestion method; official method 920.153 ash in meat. Blockdigestion method. Official method 990.26 hydroxyproline in meat and meatproducts. Meat and meat products. In P. Cunniff (Ed.), Official methods of analysisof the AOAC international (Vol. II. 16th ed.) (pp. 1–15). Gaithersburg, Maryland,USA.
Aréstegui, D. (2005). Alpaca and vicuña: General perspectives. In Proceedings of theICAR/FAO seminar, ICAR technical series no. 11 (pp. 31–36), Sousse, Tunisia.
Arnold, R. N., Scheller, K. K., Arp, S. C., Williams, S. N., & Schaefer, D. M. (1993).Dietary a-tocopheryl acetate enhances beef quality in Holstein and Beef breedsteers. Journal of Food Science, 58, 28–33.
Babiker, S. A., & Yousif, K. H. (1990). Chemical composition and quality of Camelmeat. Meat Science, 27, 283–287.
Bidlingmeyer, B., Cohen, S., & Tarvin, T. (1984). Rapid analysis of amino acids usingpre-column derivatization. Journal of Chromatography B: Biomedical Sciences andApplications, 336, 93–104.
Bligh, E. G., & Dyer, W. J. (1959). A rapid method of total lipid extraction andpurification. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology, 37, 911–917.
British Department of Health (1994). Nutritional aspects of cardiovascular disease.Report on health and social subjects No. 46. London: Her Majesty’s StationeryOffice.
Carrapiso, A. I., Timón, M. L., Petrón, M. J., Tejeda, J. F., & García, C. (2000). In situtransesterification of fatty acids from Iberian pig subcutaneous adipose tissue.Meat Science, 56, 159–164.
Cristofanelli, S., Antonini, M., Torres, D., Polidori, P., & Renieri, C. (2004). Meat andcarcass quality from Peruvian llama (Lama glama) and alpaca (Lama pacos). MeatScience, 66, 589–593.
Cristofanelli, S., Antonini, M., Torres, D., Polidori, P., & Renieri, C. (2005). Carcasscharacteristics of Peruvian llama (Lama glama) and alpaca (Lama pacos) rearedin the Andean highlands. Small Ruminant Research, 58, 219–222.
Dawood, A., & Alkanhal, M. A. (1995). Nutrient composition of Najdi-Camel meat.Meat Science, 39, 71–78.
Demirel, G., Wachira, A. M., Sinclair, L. A., Wilkinson, R. G., Wood, J. D., & Enser, M.(2004). Effects of dietary n�3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, breed and dietaryvitamin E on the fatty acids of lamb muscle, liver and adipose tissue. BritishJournal of Nutrition, 91, 551–565.
Descalzo, A. M., & Sancho, A. M. (2008). A review of natural antioxidants and theireffects on oxidative status, odor and quality of fresh beef produced in Argentina.Meat Science, 79, 423–436.
E1-Faer, M. Z., Rawdah, T. N., Attar, K. M., & Dawson, M. V. (1991). Mineral andproximate composition of the meat of the One-Humped Camel (Camelusdromedarius). Food Chemistry, 42, 139–143.
Fairfield, T. (2006). The politics of livestock sector policy and the rural poor in Peru.In D. K. Leonard (Ed.), (Research director), Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative(PPLPI), Working Paper No. 32 (70 pp.). Rome, Italy: Food and AgricultureOrganization – Animal Production and Health Division.
González, F., Smulders, F. J. M., Paulsen, P., Skewes, O., & König, H. E. (2004).Anatomical investigations on meat cuts of guanacos (Lama guanicoe, Müller,1776) and chemical composition of selected muscles. Wiener TierarztlicheMonatsschrift, 91, 77–84.
Grau, R., & Hamm, R. (1957). Über das Wasserbindungsvermögen desSäugetiermuskels II Mitt. Über die Bestimmung der Wasserbindung desMuskels. Zeitschrift für Lebensmitteluntersuchung und -Forschung, 105, 446–460.
Hack, W. (2001). The Peruvian alpaca meat and hide industries – A travel report,Publication No. 01/19 (11 pp.). Barton, Australia: Rural Industries Research &Development Corporation (RIRDC).
Hansen, P. (1968). 4,8,12-trimethyltridecanoic acid: its isolation and identificationfrom sheep perinephric fat. Biochimica and Biophysica Acta, 164, 550–557.
Hoffman, L. (2008). The yield and nutritional value of meat from African ungulates,camelidae, rodents, ratites and reptiles. Meat Science, 80, 94–100.
Honikel, K. (1997). Reference methods supported by OECD and their use inMediterranean meat products. Food Chemistry, 59, 573–582.
Hornsey, H. C. (1956). The colour of cooked cured pork. 1 – Estimation of the nitric-oxide haem pigments. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 7, 534–540.
Kadim, I. T., Mahgoub, O., Al-Marzooqi, W., Al-Zadjali, S., Annamalai, K., & Mansour,M. H. (2006). Effects of age on composition and quality of muscle Longissimusthoracis of the Omani Arabian camel (Camelus dromedaries). Meat Science, 73,619–625.
Kadim, I. T., Mahgoub, O., & Purchas, R. W. (2008). A review of the growth, and of thecarcass and meat quality characteristics of the one-humped camel (Camelusdromedaries). Meat Science, 80, 555–569.
Kasapidou, E., Wood, J. D., Sinclair, L. D., Wilkinson, R. G., & Enser, M. (2001). Dietand vitamin E metabolism in lambs: Effects of dietary supplementation on meatquality. In Proceedings of the 47th congress of meat science and technology (Vol. 1)(pp. 42–43), 26–31 August 2001, Kraków, Poland.
Krzywicki, K. (1982). The determination of haem pigments in meat. Meat Science, 7,29.
Ledward, D. A., & Shorthose, W. R. (1971). A note on the haem pigmentconcentration of lamb as influenced by age and sex. Animal Production, 13, 193.
Lepetit, J. (2007). A theoretical approach of the relationships between collagencontent, collagen cross-links and meat tenderness. Meat Science, 76, 147–159.
Muchenje, V., Dzama, K., Chimonyo, M., Strydom, P., Hugo, A., & Raats, J. (2009).Some biochemical aspects pertaining to beef eating quality and consumerhealth: A review. Food Chemistry, 112, 279–289.
Neely, K., Taylor, C., Prosser, O., & Hamlyn, F. (2001). Assessment of cooked alpacaand llama meats from the statistical analysis of data collected using an‘electronic nose’. Meat Science, 58, 53–58.
Osorio, M. T., Zumalacárregui, J. M., Bermejo, B., Lozano, A., Figueira, A., & Mateo, J.(2007a). Effect of ewe’s milk versus milk-replacer rearing on mineralcomposition of suckling lamb meat and liver. Small Ruminant Research, 68,296–302.
Osorio, M. T., Zumalacárregui, J. M., Cabeza, E., Figueira, A., & Mateo, J. (2008). Effectof rearing system on some meat quality traits and volatile compounds ofsuckling lamb meat. Small Ruminant Research, 78, 1–12.
Osorio, M. T., Zumalacárregui, J. M., Figueira, A., & Mateo, J. (2007b). Fatty acidcomposition in subcutaneous, intermuscular and intramuscular fat deposits ofsuckling lamb meat: Effect of milk source. Small Ruminant Research, 73,127–134.
B.K. Salvá et al. / Meat Science 82 (2009) 450–455 455
Polidori, P., Antonini, M., Torres, D., Beghelli, D., & Renieri, C. (2007a). Tendernessevaluation and mineral levels of llama (Lama glama) and alpaca (Lama pacos)meat. Meat Science, 77, 599–601.
Polidori, P., Renieri, C., Antonini, M., Passamonti, P., & Pucciarelli, F. (2007b). Meatfatty acid composition of llama (Lama glama) reared in the Andean highlands.Meat Science, 75, 356–358.
Rawdah, T. N., El-Faer, Z., & Koreish, S. A. (1994). Fatty acid composition of the meatand fat of the One-Humped Camel (Camelus dromedarius). Meat Science, 37,149–155.
Rhee, M. S., Wheeler, T. L., Shackelford, S. D., & Koohmaraie, M. (2004). Variation inpalatability and biochemical traits within and among eleven beef muscles.Journal of Animal Science, 82, 534–550.
Saadoun, A., & Cabrera, M. C. (2008). A review of the nutritional content andtechnological parameters of indigenous sources of meat in South America. MeatScience, 80, 570–581.
Schmid, A., Collomb, M., Sieber, R., & Bee, G. (2006). Conjugated linoleic acid in meatand meat products: A review. Meat Science, 73, 29–41.
Serra, X., Guerrero, L., Guardia, M., Gil, M., Sañudo, C., Panea, B., et al. (2008). Eatingquality of young bulls from three Spanish beef breed-production systems andits relationships with chemical and instrumental meat quality. Meat Science, 79,98–104.
StatSoft Inc. (2001). Statistica 6.0 software. Tucksa, USA: StatSoft. <http://www.statsoft.com>.
Steele, F. M., Cox, A., Hope, B. J., Robinson, T. F., & Hawkins, E. W. (2003). Proximateanalysis of meat from intact and castrate alpacas (Lama pacos) of varying ageand feed regimen. In Annual meeting of the institute of food technologists (45H-8)(p. 79), 12–16 July 2006, Chicago, IL, USA.
Torrescano, G., Sánchez-Escalante, A., Giménez, B., Roncalés, P., & Beltrán, J. (2003).Shear values of raw samples of 14 bovine muscles and their relation to musclecollagen characteristics. Meat Science, 64, 85–91.
Tschirhart-Hoelscher, T. E., Baird, B. E., King, D. A., McKenna, D. R., & Savell, J. W.(2006). Physical, chemical, and histological characteristics of 18 lamb muscles.Meat Science, 73, 48–54.
UNECE (2006). Standard for Llama/Alpaca Meat Carcases and Cuts. In Working partyon agricultural quality standards, economic and social council, ECE/TRADE/368 (36pp.). Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Economic Commission for EuropeStandards, Committee for Trade, Industry and Enterprise Development. <http://www.unece.org/trade/agr/standard/meat/e/Llama_2008_e_Publication.pdf>.
USDA (2008). National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 21,<http://www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/ndl>.
Wood, J. D., Enser, M., Fisher, A. V., Nute, G. R., Sheard, P. R., Richardson, R. I., et al.(2008). Fat deposition, fatty acid composition and meat quality: A review. MeatScience, 78, 343–358.
