TY - JOUR
AU - Sañudo, C.
AB - Abstract Fattening units have transformed the traditional husbandry management in Mediterranean areas. Lambs are reared with their mothers until weaning, between 40 and 60 d old, when they are transported to the fattening unit, mixed together in batches according to their weight, and fed concentrates and cereal straw. Lambs are slaughtered when they are approximately 70 to 90 d old to get a homogenous product. Preservation strategies are being developed to maintain lamb supply throughout the year to avoid a reduction in production and fluctuation of prices to both producers and consumers. Husbandry System Sheep farming is widespread worldwide. Its characteristics can adapt to areas and resources where other farming sectors could not; therefore, its economic impact should be considered (de Rancourt, 2007). Also, it aids populations in disadvantaged areas and plays an important role preventing soil desertification and maintaining the biological balance. Although in recent years, both census and consumption setbacks in developed countries have been observed, it is necessary to continue studies on lamb production to offer products of recognized quality. In Spain, as in most Mediterranean countries, evolution of the sheep sector has led to a decline in profitability of farms, high generational uncertainty, and concern following the abandonment of farming in some areas (Bernués et al., 2011a). In the Mediterranean area, more than anywhere else, consumers value the type of light lamb fed on concentrates (Beriain et al., 2000), which is considered a high quality product (Boyazoglu and Mohrand-Ferh, 2001). Any deviation in the expected weight has a negative impact on the acceptability, even if there are intraregional variations in preferences (Sañudo et al., 1996). In fact, 76% of the lambs slaughtered in Aragon, a region in northeastern Spain, have carcass weights of less than 13 kg (68% in the whole country) and, therefore, are under the light lamb designation (MAGRAMA, 2016). The traditional pastoral sheep husbandry system (Figure 1) has shifted toward a more intensive one with large herds and high productivity (de Rancourt et al., 2006; Pardos et al., 2008; Miranda de la Lama et al., 2009, 2010a, 2010b; Bernués et al., 2011b) due to market requirements to reduce costs and maintain homogeneous product quality throughout the year. These changes and lack of specialized labor in the sheep sector have moved farmers to join together. Despite the lack of industrialization that the sheep sector has experienced compared with other sectors, the association between farmers has led to the formation of cooperatives that are focusing their efforts on obtaining a homogeneous product, with a differentiated quality and aligned with consumer preferences (Miranda de la Lama et al., 2009; Teixeira et al., 2015). To achieve such homogeneity and quality, a system of intermediary feedlots or fattening units has developed in recent decades (Figure 2) between the initial flocks, which keeps sheep and lambs where they are born, and abattoirs where lambs are slaughtered. In these feedlots, animals are mixed according to their initial weight and maturity characteristics, which usually results in animals from different farms and different previous management practices (Figure 3) being mixed together, which may affect the final characteristics of the produced lamb. This change has not only improved the homogeneity and quality of the product that reaches consumers (Miranda de la Lama et al., 2009) but has simplified the work of farmers, who are now engaged only in breeding and caring for lambs in their younger stages. However, the emergence of this new link in the production chain makes the national meat markets and their associated logistics more dynamic and complex. Figure 1. View largeDownload slide Shepherd guiding ewes in the surrounding of the sheepfold grazing the stubble field. Figure 1. View largeDownload slide Shepherd guiding ewes in the surrounding of the sheepfold grazing the stubble field. Figure 2. View largeDownload slide Fattening units with animals homogenous in size within batch. Figure 2. View largeDownload slide Fattening units with animals homogenous in size within batch. Figure 3. View largeDownload slide Classification system to homogenize each batch of animals from lambs of different origins. Figure 3. View largeDownload slide Classification system to homogenize each batch of animals from lambs of different origins. Management Factors Two management issues have great variation between farms: weaning and feeding. There are different weaning ages and even farmers who do not wean their animals before slaughtering, and so those animals that are not weaned spend very little time in the communal feedlot before slaughter. With feeding, there are differences in raw material included in the ration for ewes and lambs and in the intensification level. All of this implies a large variability in the time that animals remain in the communal fattening units. On the other hand, increasing the slaughter age involves increasing fatness, not only intramuscular, but also subcutaneous, and depending on the feed, varying in its quality, i.e., increasing the percentage of monounsaturated fatty acids (Díaz et al., 2005). In this sense, although there are numerous pre- and post-mortem factors that can modify the sensory characteristics of the meat, feeding is one of the main factors (Table 1), modifying growth rates and fat cover or modifying the fatty acid profile (Sañudo et al., 1998). These effects have been widely investigated in ruminants since the organoleptic quality (texture, aroma, and flavor) remains one of the main factors that satisfy consumers (Grunert et al., 2004). These aspects are largely determined by the fatty acid composition of the fat. During the fattening period in the communal feedlot, animals from different farms, according to their body weight and general status, are mixed, males and females are reared together, animals are weaned at a different ages, and age at slaughter can be different even in the same batch of animals. This could be a problem when it is not controlled since most quality brands, such as Protected Geographical Indications in the European Union, have the age of the animals as one of their requirements. Table 1. Factors that affect lamb quality (Sañudo et al., 1998). Stage  Factors  Animal related  - Species  - Breed  - Individual  - Age or dairy capacity  - Sire size  - Type of birth  - Sex  - Age and slaughter weight  - Specific genes  Joint or muscle  - Joint  - Muscle and location within muscle  Animal management  - Exercise  - Environmental conditions  - Stressors  - Type and bedding quality  Diet  - Lactation type  - Age and weaning  - Ingredients  - Physical characteristics of the ration  - Chemical characteristics of the ration  - Water quality and availability  - Additives  Multi-causal factors  - Time of birth  - Flock  - Husbandry system  Pre-slaughter conditions  - Stunning method  - Rigor mortis and chilling condition  - Ageing: duration and conditions  - Preservation type: atmosphere, vacuum, freezing  - Technological agents: calcium, zinc, etc.  Marketing and consumption  - Joint and preparation  - Packaging and presentation  - Cooking: temperature, length and method  - Consumption: environment, temperature, presentation  - Consumption: custom and fashion  Stage  Factors  Animal related  - Species  - Breed  - Individual  - Age or dairy capacity  - Sire size  - Type of birth  - Sex  - Age and slaughter weight  - Specific genes  Joint or muscle  - Joint  - Muscle and location within muscle  Animal management  - Exercise  - Environmental conditions  - Stressors  - Type and bedding quality  Diet  - Lactation type  - Age and weaning  - Ingredients  - Physical characteristics of the ration  - Chemical characteristics of the ration  - Water quality and availability  - Additives  Multi-causal factors  - Time of birth  - Flock  - Husbandry system  Pre-slaughter conditions  - Stunning method  - Rigor mortis and chilling condition  - Ageing: duration and conditions  - Preservation type: atmosphere, vacuum, freezing  - Technological agents: calcium, zinc, etc.  Marketing and consumption  - Joint and preparation  - Packaging and presentation  - Cooking: temperature, length and method  - Consumption: environment, temperature, presentation  - Consumption: custom and fashion  View Large Table 1. Factors that affect lamb quality (Sañudo et al., 1998). Stage  Factors  Animal related  - Species  - Breed  - Individual  - Age or dairy capacity  - Sire size  - Type of birth  - Sex  - Age and slaughter weight  - Specific genes  Joint or muscle  - Joint  - Muscle and location within muscle  Animal management  - Exercise  - Environmental conditions  - Stressors  - Type and bedding quality  Diet  - Lactation type  - Age and weaning  - Ingredients  - Physical characteristics of the ration  - Chemical characteristics of the ration  - Water quality and availability  - Additives  Multi-causal factors  - Time of birth  - Flock  - Husbandry system  Pre-slaughter conditions  - Stunning method  - Rigor mortis and chilling condition  - Ageing: duration and conditions  - Preservation type: atmosphere, vacuum, freezing  - Technological agents: calcium, zinc, etc.  Marketing and consumption  - Joint and preparation  - Packaging and presentation  - Cooking: temperature, length and method  - Consumption: environment, temperature, presentation  - Consumption: custom and fashion  Stage  Factors  Animal related  - Species  - Breed  - Individual  - Age or dairy capacity  - Sire size  - Type of birth  - Sex  - Age and slaughter weight  - Specific genes  Joint or muscle  - Joint  - Muscle and location within muscle  Animal management  - Exercise  - Environmental conditions  - Stressors  - Type and bedding quality  Diet  - Lactation type  - Age and weaning  - Ingredients  - Physical characteristics of the ration  - Chemical characteristics of the ration  - Water quality and availability  - Additives  Multi-causal factors  - Time of birth  - Flock  - Husbandry system  Pre-slaughter conditions  - Stunning method  - Rigor mortis and chilling condition  - Ageing: duration and conditions  - Preservation type: atmosphere, vacuum, freezing  - Technological agents: calcium, zinc, etc.  Marketing and consumption  - Joint and preparation  - Packaging and presentation  - Cooking: temperature, length and method  - Consumption: environment, temperature, presentation  - Consumption: custom and fashion  View Large Several studies have assessed the effect of different management aspects on lamb meat—keeping a homogenous product in enhanced husbandry practices without compromising its quality. As an example, 40 male and female lambs of Rasa Aragonesa—a local Spanish medium-wool breed, unimproved type—that remained with their mothers (unweaned) or were taken to the feedlot at 40 d old (weaned) were slaughtered at either 70 or 100 d old (Table 2). All animals were provided ad libitum access to the same feed based on concentrates (barley, maize, soya meal; 17.0% crude protein, 3.0% ether extract; 22.5% C16:0; 27.1% C18:1; 42.3% C18:2 n-6; 2.5% C18:3 n-3) and cereal straw. As expected, males, older, and unweaned animals (probably due to the higher energetic diet of the dam's milk) had the heaviest carcasses with higher conformation (Mur, 2013). However, the increased fatness of unweaned and older carcasses has to be taken into account because it can reduce their price in the market if an established limit is exceeded. Meat from females would be lighter in color than that from males, but older animals would show meat less yellow than younger ones. In this case, animals were not grazing; therefore, the intake of previous carotenoids, mainly through the ewe's milk, would be diluted into the acquired fatness during the fattening period because the diet based on cereals and cereal straw is very low in carotenoids (Mur, 2013; della Malva et al., 2016). The age at slaughter clearly affects the intramuscular fat composition, increasing its global content and monounsaturated composition as the animal gets older (Díaz et al., 2005; Mur, 2013). Table 2. Effect of sex (S), weaning (W), and age at slaughter (A) and their interactions on carcass characteristics and meat quality in light lambs (Mur, 2013).† Carcass characteristics and meat quality‡  Sex   Weaning   Age at slaughter   MSE  P value   Male  Female  40d  No  70d  100d  S  W  A  S×W  S×A  W×A  CCW, kg  12.21  11.00  10.86  12.35  9.03  14.18  1.311  0.002  0.000  < 0.001  0.165  0.671  0.089  Conformation§  6.40  6.15  5.75  7.40  4.95  8.20  1.825  0.055  0.001  < 0.001  0.300  0.908  0.419  Fatness§  6.50  6.10  5.80  6.80  4.60  8.00  1.263  0.269  0.008  < 0.001  0.577  0.577  0.577  Carcass length, cm  54.42  52.65  53.85  53.22  49.47  57.60  3.375  0.005  0.290  < 0.001  0.831  0.290  0.765  Rump perimeter cm  48.84  47.21  47.53  48.51  45.11  50.94  3.034  0.006  0.085  < 0.001  0.371  0.420  0.829  CCW/Carcass length  0.22  0.21  0.20  0.23  0.18  0.25  0.000  0.012  < 0.001  < 0.001  0.115  0.217  0.070  L  34.03  32.42  33.97  32.48  33.48  32.96  5.929  0.045  0.062  0.505  0.069  0.016  0.159  a  8.46  9.15  8.52  9.09  8.94  8.66  2.691  0.196  0.286  0.595  0.592  0.231  0.027  b  10.72  10.53  10.99  10.26  11.55  9.70  1.235  0.579  0.046  < 0.001  0.642  0.946  < 0.001  IMF %  3.05  3.49  3.21  3.33  2.88  3.66  0.721  0.175  0.698  0.020  0.619  0.290  0.375  SFA %  42.61  42.31  42.95  42.97  42.68  42.24  4.194  0.641  0.121  0.501  0.559  0.601  0.571  MUFA %  43.02  44.39  43.85  43.55  41.52  45.89  4.854  0.058  0.672  < 0.001  0.872  0.409  0.688  PUFA %  11.22  10.30  11.27  10.25  12.38  9.14  3.931  0.151  0.116  < 0.001  0.553  0.097  0.709  Carcass characteristics and meat quality‡  Sex   Weaning   Age at slaughter   MSE  P value   Male  Female  40d  No  70d  100d  S  W  A  S×W  S×A  W×A  CCW, kg  12.21  11.00  10.86  12.35  9.03  14.18  1.311  0.002  0.000  < 0.001  0.165  0.671  0.089  Conformation§  6.40  6.15  5.75  7.40  4.95  8.20  1.825  0.055  0.001  < 0.001  0.300  0.908  0.419  Fatness§  6.50  6.10  5.80  6.80  4.60  8.00  1.263  0.269  0.008  < 0.001  0.577  0.577  0.577  Carcass length, cm  54.42  52.65  53.85  53.22  49.47  57.60  3.375  0.005  0.290  < 0.001  0.831  0.290  0.765  Rump perimeter cm  48.84  47.21  47.53  48.51  45.11  50.94  3.034  0.006  0.085  < 0.001  0.371  0.420  0.829  CCW/Carcass length  0.22  0.21  0.20  0.23  0.18  0.25  0.000  0.012  < 0.001  < 0.001  0.115  0.217  0.070  L  34.03  32.42  33.97  32.48  33.48  32.96  5.929  0.045  0.062  0.505  0.069  0.016  0.159  a  8.46  9.15  8.52  9.09  8.94  8.66  2.691  0.196  0.286  0.595  0.592  0.231  0.027  b  10.72  10.53  10.99  10.26  11.55  9.70  1.235  0.579  0.046  < 0.001  0.642  0.946  < 0.001  IMF %  3.05  3.49  3.21  3.33  2.88  3.66  0.721  0.175  0.698  0.020  0.619  0.290  0.375  SFA %  42.61  42.31  42.95  42.97  42.68  42.24  4.194  0.641  0.121  0.501  0.559  0.601  0.571  MUFA %  43.02  44.39  43.85  43.55  41.52  45.89  4.854  0.058  0.672  < 0.001  0.872  0.409  0.688  PUFA %  11.22  10.30  11.27  10.25  12.38  9.14  3.931  0.151  0.116  < 0.001  0.553  0.097  0.709  † No significant S×W×A interactions were found. ‡ CCW: cold carcass weight; IMF: intramuscular fat; SFA: saturated fatty acids; MUFA: monounsaturated fatty acids; PUFA: polyunsaturated fatty acids; L: lightness; a: redness; b: yellowness; MSE: mean squared error. § 1, very low; 15, very high. View Large Table 2. Effect of sex (S), weaning (W), and age at slaughter (A) and their interactions on carcass characteristics and meat quality in light lambs (Mur, 2013).† Carcass characteristics and meat quality‡  Sex   Weaning   Age at slaughter   MSE  P value   Male  Female  40d  No  70d  100d  S  W  A  S×W  S×A  W×A  CCW, kg  12.21  11.00  10.86  12.35  9.03  14.18  1.311  0.002  0.000  < 0.001  0.165  0.671  0.089  Conformation§  6.40  6.15  5.75  7.40  4.95  8.20  1.825  0.055  0.001  < 0.001  0.300  0.908  0.419  Fatness§  6.50  6.10  5.80  6.80  4.60  8.00  1.263  0.269  0.008  < 0.001  0.577  0.577  0.577  Carcass length, cm  54.42  52.65  53.85  53.22  49.47  57.60  3.375  0.005  0.290  < 0.001  0.831  0.290  0.765  Rump perimeter cm  48.84  47.21  47.53  48.51  45.11  50.94  3.034  0.006  0.085  < 0.001  0.371  0.420  0.829  CCW/Carcass length  0.22  0.21  0.20  0.23  0.18  0.25  0.000  0.012  < 0.001  < 0.001  0.115  0.217  0.070  L  34.03  32.42  33.97  32.48  33.48  32.96  5.929  0.045  0.062  0.505  0.069  0.016  0.159  a  8.46  9.15  8.52  9.09  8.94  8.66  2.691  0.196  0.286  0.595  0.592  0.231  0.027  b  10.72  10.53  10.99  10.26  11.55  9.70  1.235  0.579  0.046  < 0.001  0.642  0.946  < 0.001  IMF %  3.05  3.49  3.21  3.33  2.88  3.66  0.721  0.175  0.698  0.020  0.619  0.290  0.375  SFA %  42.61  42.31  42.95  42.97  42.68  42.24  4.194  0.641  0.121  0.501  0.559  0.601  0.571  MUFA %  43.02  44.39  43.85  43.55  41.52  45.89  4.854  0.058  0.672  < 0.001  0.872  0.409  0.688  PUFA %  11.22  10.30  11.27  10.25  12.38  9.14  3.931  0.151  0.116  < 0.001  0.553  0.097  0.709  Carcass characteristics and meat quality‡  Sex   Weaning   Age at slaughter   MSE  P value   Male  Female  40d  No  70d  100d  S  W  A  S×W  S×A  W×A  CCW, kg  12.21  11.00  10.86  12.35  9.03  14.18  1.311  0.002  0.000  < 0.001  0.165  0.671  0.089  Conformation§  6.40  6.15  5.75  7.40  4.95  8.20  1.825  0.055  0.001  < 0.001  0.300  0.908  0.419  Fatness§  6.50  6.10  5.80  6.80  4.60  8.00  1.263  0.269  0.008  < 0.001  0.577  0.577  0.577  Carcass length, cm  54.42  52.65  53.85  53.22  49.47  57.60  3.375  0.005  0.290  < 0.001  0.831  0.290  0.765  Rump perimeter cm  48.84  47.21  47.53  48.51  45.11  50.94  3.034  0.006  0.085  < 0.001  0.371  0.420  0.829  CCW/Carcass length  0.22  0.21  0.20  0.23  0.18  0.25  0.000  0.012  < 0.001  < 0.001  0.115  0.217  0.070  L  34.03  32.42  33.97  32.48  33.48  32.96  5.929  0.045  0.062  0.505  0.069  0.016  0.159  a  8.46  9.15  8.52  9.09  8.94  8.66  2.691  0.196  0.286  0.595  0.592  0.231  0.027  b  10.72  10.53  10.99  10.26  11.55  9.70  1.235  0.579  0.046  < 0.001  0.642  0.946  < 0.001  IMF %  3.05  3.49  3.21  3.33  2.88  3.66  0.721  0.175  0.698  0.020  0.619  0.290  0.375  SFA %  42.61  42.31  42.95  42.97  42.68  42.24  4.194  0.641  0.121  0.501  0.559  0.601  0.571  MUFA %  43.02  44.39  43.85  43.55  41.52  45.89  4.854  0.058  0.672  < 0.001  0.872  0.409  0.688  PUFA %  11.22  10.30  11.27  10.25  12.38  9.14  3.931  0.151  0.116  < 0.001  0.553  0.097  0.709  † No significant S×W×A interactions were found. ‡ CCW: cold carcass weight; IMF: intramuscular fat; SFA: saturated fatty acids; MUFA: monounsaturated fatty acids; PUFA: polyunsaturated fatty acids; L: lightness; a: redness; b: yellowness; MSE: mean squared error. § 1, very low; 15, very high. View Large Technological Aspects A fundamental feature of the production of lamb is its seasonality, the main cause of the sharp fluctuations in prices, avoiding the increase in lamb meat supply during high retail prices. This seasonality is linked to the anestrus period of the ewes and to the seasonal availability of cheap ingredients in the diet. Perhaps the steady decline in the consumption of lamb is its link to traditional cuisine, which requires a high processing time, techniques not used in the usual culinary practices in today's society (Resurreccion, 2004), and little knowledge about cooking of meat by the younger population. In fact, consumption of lamb meat increases with older housewife age and larger family size (MAGRAMA, 2016). View largeDownload slide View largeDownload slide View largeDownload slide View largeDownload slide In that sense, the development of systems of conservation to ensure the constant presence of product in the market would be essential to reduce and adjust their price as well as to increase the available quantity and distribution. In fact, only since the mid-1990s have modern and innovative processes been detected in the sheep meat sector, and these are due to classification centers and the subsequent supply agreements with large retailers. Another fundamental aspect to consider is that meat is a highly perishable product, and any method to increase its shelf life is well received by dealers and consumers. Actually, increasing the shelf life of lamb is one of the factors that most worries the sector (Wulf et al., 1995). As a method of preservation, the effect of low temperature has been known since ancient times. Both cooling and freezing allow the effective preservation of meat quality (Sañudo et al., 2013) because microbial growth and most of the tissue degradation enzymatic reactions are inhibited or reduced. Although there are various methods of cooling, carcass chilling is usually performed by forced air. The parameters to control are the temperature, relative humidity and air velocity, all dependent on the refrigeration equipment used. The current trend to reduce costs is to cool the carcass in less than 24 h with rapid cooling rates. Small variations of temperature during chilling conditions after slaughtering seem to have a larger effect on the final quality of the product (Muela et al., 2010a). The lower the cooling temperature between 0 and 6°C, the greater the water losses after 90 h in storage (0.25% lost each 2°C decrease) because heat and mass transfer (carcass-air) increases linearly with cooling temperature (McGeehin et al., 2002). Also the pH and color of meat can be affected by the cooling temperature where the lower temperature; the higher final pH, hue, and, chroma; and the lower lightness of the meat produce a darker meat cut. If the objective is to prolong the shelf life time for more than 2 wk (Pietrasik and Janz, 2009), the cooling effect is not sufficient, and freezing is the most effective. Freezing has an added advantage over cooling in that the consumer chooses the moment of consumption while in other conservation systems, the quality or safety is indicated by the expiration date. The main deterioration of frozen meat is due to the processes of lipid oxidation and protein degradation, and it can determine the end point of the display life of frozen products (Jiménez and Carballo, 2000). Lipid oxidation is the result of free radical chain reactions modulated by pro- and anti-oxidants, the oxygen partial pressure, the muscle structure and retained water, and the conditions in which meat is stored (Resconi et al., 2013). The resulting products depend on the substrates, which are generally unsaturated fatty acids and include aromatic compounds that negatively affect the meat's taste and odor (Calkins and Hodgen, 2007). Aldehydes are key compounds because they react readily with proteins, leading to modifications of their organoleptic and nutritional properties (Guyon et al., 2016). Protein degradation leads not only to the deterioration of the color and the texture, but also to the loss of nutrients such as essential amino acids and decrease in the digestibility of proteins. The reaction can be initiated by myoglobin, oxidizing lipids, or metal catalysts (Guyon et al., 2016). The influence of the freezing method (air blast freezer, freezing tunnel, or nitrogen chamber) and frozen storage duration (up 15 mo) on lamb quality has been evaluated by Muela et al. (2010b, 2012). Although some differences could be observed at the instrumental level (fresh meat showed lower lipid oxidation and water losses that were not always significantly different from frozen meat), if the conditions of industrial freezing and home thawing are adequate, no changes in sensory quality are strong enough to produce rejection by consumers (Paseto Fernandes et al., 2013; Muela et al., 2012, 2016). Conclusions Some Mediterranean areas have initiated new husbandry practices where lambs coming from different farms are weaned and mixed according to their characteristics prior to the fattening period, which is performed in central units. This new management structure and the fattening of the lambs from different origins together result in animals taken to slaughter with a homogenous live weight and carcass characteristics. This reduces production costs at the original farms and increases the benefits in the product due to the continuous offering of a homogeneous and high quality animal type. In any case, in that production scheme, new welfare issues are raised, and enrichment of environments is necessary for these young animals. The higher and more constant offer of meat throughout the year implies new marketing strategies to increase consumption, which remains fairly seasonal and different preservation methods in a product that is normally purchased fresh to maintain the high quality standards that consumers expect from lamb. María del Mar Campo has been a Professor in the Department of Animal Production at the University of Zaragoza since 2008. Her research has mainly been conducted on the influence of various production factors on the quality of the final product of animal origin. The quality of the meat has been valued from many points of view, including consumer's acceptability. As a result of this work, numerous communications at national and international levels and papers in scientific journals indexed or disclosure for professionals in the meat sector have been published; projects at national and international levels or in collaboration with various companies have been developed; and several M.Sc. and Ph.D. theses have been managed. Leticia Mur Palús is currently responsible for the Animal Nutrition Department at UVESA Group, one of the leaders in the food industry in poultry, pigs, and feed manufacturing in Spain. She received her master of science degree in Animal Nutrition from the Mediterranean Agronomic Institute of Zaragoza (IAMZ-CIHEAM) (2013) and her bachelor's degree in Veterinary Science, specialist in Animal Production and Economy, from the University of Zaragoza (2005). Carlos Sañudo is full Professor of Animal Production and Ethnology in the Veterinary Faculty of the University of Zaragoza (Spain). He has supervised 24 Ph.D. theses and has been financially supported from different international institutions in order to work abroad: Spanish National Board for Science and Technology (INRA-Theix- France), Spanish Ministry of Education and Science (University of Bristol- UK). Since 1977, he has been working in carcass and meat quality, especially related to lamb and cattle, with more than 100 papers in peer-reviewed journals and with an H index of 30 (2015). Also he has collaborated in several EU projects and with local, national, and private funding. Carlos Fugita received a Ph.D. in Animal Production from Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Brazil and Universidad de Zaragoza, Spain. Fugita has been an Associate Professor at the Instituto Federal Goiano, Brazil. His main areas of interest are animal nutrition and behavior, improvement of meat quality, and consumer studies. Literature Cited Beriain M.J., Horcada A., Purroy A., Lizaso G., Chasco J., Mendizabal J.A. 2000. Characteristics of Lacha and Rasa Aragonesa lambs slaughtered at three live weights. J. Anim. Sci.  78: 3070– 3077. doi:10.2527/2000.78123070x. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Bernués A., Boutonnet J.P., Casasús I., Chentouf M., Gabiña D., Joy M., López-Francos A., Morand-Fehr P., Pacheco F. 2011a. Economic, social and environmental sustainability in sheep and goat production systems. Zaragoza: CIHEAM / FAO / CITA-DGA. 379 p. (Options Méditerranéennes: Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens; n. 100). Bernués A., Ruiz R., Olaizola A., Villalba D., Casasús I. 2011b. Sustainability of pasture-based livestock farming systems in the European Mediterranean context: Synergies and trade-offs. Livest. Sci.  139: 44– 57. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2011.03.018. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Boyazoglu J., Mohrand-Ferh P. 2001. Mediterranean dairy sheep and goat products and their quality. A review. Small Rumin. Res.  40: 1– 11. doi:10.1016/S0921-4488(00)00203-0. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Calkins C.R., Hodgen J.M. 2007. A fresh look at meat flavor. Meat Sci.  77: 63– 80. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2007.04.016. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  della Malvaa A., Albenzioa M., Annicchiaricob G., Caropresea M., Muscioa A., Santilloa A., Marino R. 2016. Relationship between slaughtering age, nutritional and organoleptic properties of Altamurana lamb meat. Small Rumin. Res.  135: 39– 45. doi:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2015.12.020 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   de Rancourt M. 2007. El futuro de la producción ovina y caprina en la Unión Europea. Pequenos Rumiantes  8: 13– 17. de Rancourt M., Fois N., Lavín M.P., Tchakérian E., Vallenand F. 2006. Mediterranean sheep and goat production: An uncertain future. Small Rumin. Res.  62: 167– 179. doi:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2005.08.012. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Díaz M.T., Álvarez I., De la Fuente J., Sañudo C., Campo M.M., Oliver M.A., Font i Furnols M., Motossi F., San Julián R., Nute G.R., Cañeque V. 2005. Fatty acid composition of meat from typical lamb production systems of Spain, United Kingdom, Germany and Uruguay. Meat Sci.  71: 256– 263. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.03.020. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Grunert K.G., Bredahl L., Brunsø K. 2004. Consumer perception of meat quality and implications for product development in the meat sector: A review. Meat Sci.  66: 259– 272. doi:10.1016/S0309-1740(03)00130-X. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Guyon C., Meynier A., de Lamballerie M. 2016. Protein and lipid oxidation in meat: A review with emphasis on high pressure treatments. Trends Food Sci. Technol.  50: 131– 143. doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2016.01.026. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Jiménez F., Carballo J. 2000. Aplicaciones del frío a la carne y productos cárnicos. In: Madrid Vicente A. editor, Aplicación del Frío a los Alimentos.  Ediciones Mundi Prensa, Madrid. p. 293– 313. MAGRAMA 2016. Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente. www.magrama.es. (Accessed 27 Apr. 2016.) McGeehin B., Sheridan J.J., Butler F. 2002. Optimizing a rapid chilling system for lamb carcasses. J. Food Eng.  52: 75– 81. doi:10.1016/S0260-8774(01)00088-7. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Miranda de la Lama G.C., Rivero L., Chacón G., García Belenguer S., Villarroel M., María G.A. 2010a. Effect of the pre-slaughter logistic chain on some indicators of welfare in lambs. Livest. Sci.  128: 52– 59. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2009.10.013 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Miranda de la Lama G.C., Villarroel M., Liste G., Escós J., María G.A. 2010b. Critical points in the pre-slaughter logistic chain of lambs in Spain that may compromise the animal's welfare. Small Rumin. Res.  90: 174– 178. doi:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2010.02.011. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Miranda de la Lama G.C., Villarroel M., Olleta J.L., Alierta S., Sañudo C., María G. 2009. Effect of pre-slaughter logistic chain on meat quality of lambs. Meat Sci.  83: 604– 609. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.07.009. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Muela E., Monge P., Sañudo C., Campo M.M., Beltrán J.A. 2016. Sensory quality of lamb following long-term frozen storage. Meat Sci.  114: 32– 37. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2015.12.001. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Muela E., Sañudo C., Campo M.M., Medel I., Beltrán J.A. 2010a. Effects of cooling temperature and hot carcass weight on the quality of lamb. Meat Sci.  84: 101– 107. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.08.020. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Muela E., Sañudo C., Campo M.M., Medel I., Beltrán J.A. 2010b. Effect of freezing method and frozen storage duration on instrumental quality of lamb throughout display. Meat Sci.  84: 662– 669. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.10.028. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Muela E., Sañudo C., Campo M.M., Medel I., Beltrán J.A. 2012. Effect of freezing method and frozen storage duration on lamb sensory quality. Meat Sci.  90: 209– 215. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2011.07.003 Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Mur L. 2013. Efecto del sexo, destete, tipo de pienso de acabado y edad de sacrificio sobre la calidad de la carne en corderos ligeros tipo ternasco. M.Sc. thesis, International Centre for Advanced Mediterranean Agronomic Studies, CIHEAM, Zaragoza. Pardos L., Maza M.T., Fantova E., Sepúlveda W. 2008. The diversity of sheep production in Aragón (Spain): Characterisation and typification of meat sheep farms. Span. J. Agric. Res.  6: 497– 507. doi:10.5424/sjar/2008064-344. Paseto Fernandes R.P., de Alvarenga Freire M.T., da Costa Carrer C., Trindade M.A. 2013. Evaluation of physicochemical, microbiological and sensory stability of frozen stored vacuum-packed lamb meat. J. Integr. Agric.  12: 1946– 1952. doi:10.1016/S2095-3119(13)60632-2. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Pietrasik Z., Janz J.A.M. 2009. Influence of freezing and thawing on the hydration characteristics, quality, and consumer acceptance of whole muscle beef injected with solutions of salt and phosphate. Meat Sci.  81: 523– 532. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.10.006. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Resconi V.C., Escudero A., Campo M.M. 2013. The development of aromas in ruminant meat. Molecules  18: 6748– 6781. doi:10.3390/molecules18066748. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Resurreccion A.V.A. 2004. Sensory aspects of consumer choices for meat and meat products. Meat Sci.  66: 11– 20. doi:10.1016/S0309-1740(03)00021-4. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Sañudo C., Muela E., Campo M.M. 2013. Key factors involved in lamb quality from farm to fork in Europe. J. Integr. Agric.  12: 1919– 1930. doi:10.1016/S2095-3119(13)60629-2. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Sañudo C., Sánchez A., Alfonso M. 1998. Small ruminant production systems and factors affecting lamb meat quality. Meat Sci.  49: S29– S64. doi:10.1016/S0309-1740(98)00073-4. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Sañudo C., Santolaria P., María G.A., Osorio M., Sierra I. 1996. Influence of carcass weight on instrumental and sensory lamb meat quality in intensive production systems. Meat Sci.  42: 195– 202. doi:10.1016/0309-1740(95)00026-7. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  Teixeira D.L., Resconi V.C., Campo M.M., Miranda-de la Lama G.C., Olleta J.L., María G.A. 2015. Straw for bedding and forage in fattening lambs: Effects on fatty acid composition and sensory characteristics of the longissimus muscle. Small Rumin. Res.  130: 117– 121. doi:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2015.07.030. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   Wulf D.M., Morgan J.B., Sanders S.K., Tatum J.D., Smith G.C., Williams S. 1995. Effects of dietary supplementation of vitamin E on storage and case life properties of lamb retail cuts. J. Anim. Sci.  73: 399– 405. doi:10.2527/1995.732399x. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  © 2016 Campo, Mur, Fugita and Sañudo This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
TI - Current strategies in lamb production in Mediterranean areas
JO - Animal Frontiers
DO - 10.2527/af.2016-0041
DA - 2016-10-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/current-strategies-in-lamb-production-in-mediterranean-areas-liuHzq91Vg
SP - 31
EP - 36
VL - 6
IS - 4
DP - DeepDyve
ER -