Serveur d'exploration sur les relations entre la France et l'Australie

Attention, ce site est en cours de développement !
Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts.
Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Untrained consumer assessment of the eating quality of beef: 1. A single composite score can predict beef quality grades.

Identifieur interne : 000853 ( PubMed/Corpus ); précédent : 000852; suivant : 000854

Untrained consumer assessment of the eating quality of beef: 1. A single composite score can predict beef quality grades.

Auteurs : S P F. Bonny ; J-F Hocquette ; D W Pethick ; I. Legrand ; J. Wierzbicki ; P. Allen ; L J Farmer ; R J Polkinghorne ; G E Gardner

Source :

RBID : pubmed:27829474

English descriptors

Abstract

Quantifying consumer responses to beef across a broad range of demographics, nationalities and cooking methods is vitally important for any system evaluating beef eating quality. On the basis of previous work, it was expected that consumer scores would be highly accurate in determining quality grades for beef, thereby providing evidence that such a technique could be used to form the basis of and eating quality grading system for beef. Following the Australian MSA (Meat Standards Australia) testing protocols, over 19 000 consumers from Northern Ireland, Poland, Ireland, France and Australia tasted cooked beef samples, then allocated them to a quality grade; unsatisfactory, good-every-day, better-than-every-day and premium. The consumers also scored beef samples for tenderness, juiciness, flavour-liking and overall-liking. The beef was sourced from all countries involved in the study and cooked by four different cooking methods and to three different degrees of doneness, with each experimental group in the study consisting of a single cooking doneness within a cooking method for each country. For each experimental group, and for the data set as a whole, a linear discriminant function was calculated, using the four sensory scores which were used to predict the quality grade. This process was repeated using two conglomerate scores which are derived from weighting and combining the consumer sensory scores for tenderness, juiciness, flavour-liking and overall-liking, the original meat quality 4 score (oMQ4) (0.4, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3) and current meat quality 4 score (cMQ4) (0.3, 0.1, 0.3, 0.3). From the results of these analyses, the optimal weightings of the sensory scores to generate an 'ideal meat quality 4 score (MQ4)' for each country were calculated, and the MQ4 values that reflected the boundaries between the four quality grades were determined. The oMQ4 weightings were far more accurate in categorising European meat samples than the cMQ4 weightings, highlighting that tenderness is more important than flavour to the consumer when determining quality. The accuracy of the discriminant analysis to predict the consumer scored quality grades was similar across all consumer groups, 68%, and similar to previously reported values. These results demonstrate that this technique, as used in the MSA system, could be used to predict consumer assessment of beef eating quality and therefore to underpin a commercial eating quality guarantee for all European consumers.

DOI: 10.1017/S1751731116002305
PubMed: 27829474

Links to Exploration step

pubmed:27829474

Le document en format XML

<record>
<TEI>
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title xml:lang="en">Untrained consumer assessment of the eating quality of beef: 1. A single composite score can predict beef quality grades.</title>
<author>
<name sortKey="Bonny, S P F" sort="Bonny, S P F" uniqKey="Bonny S" first="S P F" last="Bonny">S P F. Bonny</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>1School of Veterinary and Life Sciences,Murdoch University,Murdoch,WA 6150,Australia.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Hocquette, J F" sort="Hocquette, J F" uniqKey="Hocquette J" first="J-F" last="Hocquette">J-F Hocquette</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>2INRA,UMR1213,Recherches sur les Herbivores,F-63122 Saint Genès Champanelle,France.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Pethick, D W" sort="Pethick, D W" uniqKey="Pethick D" first="D W" last="Pethick">D W Pethick</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>1School of Veterinary and Life Sciences,Murdoch University,Murdoch,WA 6150,Australia.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Legrand, I" sort="Legrand, I" uniqKey="Legrand I" first="I" last="Legrand">I. Legrand</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>4Institut de l'Elevage,Service Qualite' des Viandes,MRAL,87060 Limoges Cedex 2,France.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Wierzbicki, J" sort="Wierzbicki, J" uniqKey="Wierzbicki J" first="J" last="Wierzbicki">J. Wierzbicki</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>5Polish Beef Association Ul,Kruczkowskiego 3,00-380 Warszawa,Poland.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Allen, P" sort="Allen, P" uniqKey="Allen P" first="P" last="Allen">P. Allen</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>6Teagasac Food Research Centre,Ashtown,Dublin 15,Ireland.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Farmer, L J" sort="Farmer, L J" uniqKey="Farmer L" first="L J" last="Farmer">L J Farmer</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>7Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute,Newforge Lane,Belfast BT9 5PX,UK.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Polkinghorne, R J" sort="Polkinghorne, R J" uniqKey="Polkinghorne R" first="R J" last="Polkinghorne">R J Polkinghorne</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>8431 Timor Road,Murrurundi,NSW 2338,Australia.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Gardner, G E" sort="Gardner, G E" uniqKey="Gardner G" first="G E" last="Gardner">G E Gardner</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>1School of Veterinary and Life Sciences,Murdoch University,Murdoch,WA 6150,Australia.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno>
<date when="2017">2017</date>
<idno type="RBID">pubmed:27829474</idno>
<idno type="pmid">27829474</idno>
<idno type="doi">10.1017/S1751731116002305</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">000853</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">000853</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc>
<biblStruct>
<analytic>
<title xml:lang="en">Untrained consumer assessment of the eating quality of beef: 1. A single composite score can predict beef quality grades.</title>
<author>
<name sortKey="Bonny, S P F" sort="Bonny, S P F" uniqKey="Bonny S" first="S P F" last="Bonny">S P F. Bonny</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>1School of Veterinary and Life Sciences,Murdoch University,Murdoch,WA 6150,Australia.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Hocquette, J F" sort="Hocquette, J F" uniqKey="Hocquette J" first="J-F" last="Hocquette">J-F Hocquette</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>2INRA,UMR1213,Recherches sur les Herbivores,F-63122 Saint Genès Champanelle,France.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Pethick, D W" sort="Pethick, D W" uniqKey="Pethick D" first="D W" last="Pethick">D W Pethick</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>1School of Veterinary and Life Sciences,Murdoch University,Murdoch,WA 6150,Australia.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Legrand, I" sort="Legrand, I" uniqKey="Legrand I" first="I" last="Legrand">I. Legrand</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>4Institut de l'Elevage,Service Qualite' des Viandes,MRAL,87060 Limoges Cedex 2,France.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Wierzbicki, J" sort="Wierzbicki, J" uniqKey="Wierzbicki J" first="J" last="Wierzbicki">J. Wierzbicki</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>5Polish Beef Association Ul,Kruczkowskiego 3,00-380 Warszawa,Poland.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Allen, P" sort="Allen, P" uniqKey="Allen P" first="P" last="Allen">P. Allen</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>6Teagasac Food Research Centre,Ashtown,Dublin 15,Ireland.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Farmer, L J" sort="Farmer, L J" uniqKey="Farmer L" first="L J" last="Farmer">L J Farmer</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>7Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute,Newforge Lane,Belfast BT9 5PX,UK.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Polkinghorne, R J" sort="Polkinghorne, R J" uniqKey="Polkinghorne R" first="R J" last="Polkinghorne">R J Polkinghorne</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>8431 Timor Road,Murrurundi,NSW 2338,Australia.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author>
<name sortKey="Gardner, G E" sort="Gardner, G E" uniqKey="Gardner G" first="G E" last="Gardner">G E Gardner</name>
<affiliation>
<nlm:affiliation>1School of Veterinary and Life Sciences,Murdoch University,Murdoch,WA 6150,Australia.</nlm:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<series>
<title level="j">Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience</title>
<idno type="eISSN">1751-732X</idno>
<imprint>
<date when="2017" type="published">2017</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc>
<textClass>
<keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en">
<term>Adult</term>
<term>Animals</term>
<term>Australia</term>
<term>Cattle (physiology)</term>
<term>Consumer Behavior (statistics & numerical data)</term>
<term>Cooking (methods)</term>
<term>Female</term>
<term>Food Quality</term>
<term>France</term>
<term>Humans</term>
<term>Ireland</term>
<term>Male</term>
<term>Middle Aged</term>
<term>Poland</term>
<term>Red Meat (standards)</term>
<term>Taste</term>
<term>Young Adult</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="methods" xml:lang="en">
<term>Cooking</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="physiology" xml:lang="en">
<term>Cattle</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="standards" xml:lang="en">
<term>Red Meat</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="statistics & numerical data" xml:lang="en">
<term>Consumer Behavior</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en">
<term>Adult</term>
<term>Animals</term>
<term>Australia</term>
<term>Female</term>
<term>Food Quality</term>
<term>France</term>
<term>Humans</term>
<term>Ireland</term>
<term>Male</term>
<term>Middle Aged</term>
<term>Poland</term>
<term>Taste</term>
<term>Young Adult</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front>
<div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Quantifying consumer responses to beef across a broad range of demographics, nationalities and cooking methods is vitally important for any system evaluating beef eating quality. On the basis of previous work, it was expected that consumer scores would be highly accurate in determining quality grades for beef, thereby providing evidence that such a technique could be used to form the basis of and eating quality grading system for beef. Following the Australian MSA (Meat Standards Australia) testing protocols, over 19 000 consumers from Northern Ireland, Poland, Ireland, France and Australia tasted cooked beef samples, then allocated them to a quality grade; unsatisfactory, good-every-day, better-than-every-day and premium. The consumers also scored beef samples for tenderness, juiciness, flavour-liking and overall-liking. The beef was sourced from all countries involved in the study and cooked by four different cooking methods and to three different degrees of doneness, with each experimental group in the study consisting of a single cooking doneness within a cooking method for each country. For each experimental group, and for the data set as a whole, a linear discriminant function was calculated, using the four sensory scores which were used to predict the quality grade. This process was repeated using two conglomerate scores which are derived from weighting and combining the consumer sensory scores for tenderness, juiciness, flavour-liking and overall-liking, the original meat quality 4 score (oMQ4) (0.4, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3) and current meat quality 4 score (cMQ4) (0.3, 0.1, 0.3, 0.3). From the results of these analyses, the optimal weightings of the sensory scores to generate an 'ideal meat quality 4 score (MQ4)' for each country were calculated, and the MQ4 values that reflected the boundaries between the four quality grades were determined. The oMQ4 weightings were far more accurate in categorising European meat samples than the cMQ4 weightings, highlighting that tenderness is more important than flavour to the consumer when determining quality. The accuracy of the discriminant analysis to predict the consumer scored quality grades was similar across all consumer groups, 68%, and similar to previously reported values. These results demonstrate that this technique, as used in the MSA system, could be used to predict consumer assessment of beef eating quality and therefore to underpin a commercial eating quality guarantee for all European consumers.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<pubmed>
<MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM">
<PMID Version="1">27829474</PMID>
<DateCreated>
<Year>2016</Year>
<Month>11</Month>
<Day>10</Day>
</DateCreated>
<DateCompleted>
<Year>2017</Year>
<Month>10</Month>
<Day>30</Day>
</DateCompleted>
<DateRevised>
<Year>2017</Year>
<Month>10</Month>
<Day>30</Day>
</DateRevised>
<Article PubModel="Print-Electronic">
<Journal>
<ISSN IssnType="Electronic">1751-732X</ISSN>
<JournalIssue CitedMedium="Internet">
<Volume>11</Volume>
<Issue>8</Issue>
<PubDate>
<Year>2017</Year>
<Month>Aug</Month>
</PubDate>
</JournalIssue>
<Title>Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience</Title>
<ISOAbbreviation>Animal</ISOAbbreviation>
</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Untrained consumer assessment of the eating quality of beef: 1. A single composite score can predict beef quality grades.</ArticleTitle>
<Pagination>
<MedlinePgn>1389-1398</MedlinePgn>
</Pagination>
<ELocationID EIdType="doi" ValidYN="Y">10.1017/S1751731116002305</ELocationID>
<Abstract>
<AbstractText>Quantifying consumer responses to beef across a broad range of demographics, nationalities and cooking methods is vitally important for any system evaluating beef eating quality. On the basis of previous work, it was expected that consumer scores would be highly accurate in determining quality grades for beef, thereby providing evidence that such a technique could be used to form the basis of and eating quality grading system for beef. Following the Australian MSA (Meat Standards Australia) testing protocols, over 19 000 consumers from Northern Ireland, Poland, Ireland, France and Australia tasted cooked beef samples, then allocated them to a quality grade; unsatisfactory, good-every-day, better-than-every-day and premium. The consumers also scored beef samples for tenderness, juiciness, flavour-liking and overall-liking. The beef was sourced from all countries involved in the study and cooked by four different cooking methods and to three different degrees of doneness, with each experimental group in the study consisting of a single cooking doneness within a cooking method for each country. For each experimental group, and for the data set as a whole, a linear discriminant function was calculated, using the four sensory scores which were used to predict the quality grade. This process was repeated using two conglomerate scores which are derived from weighting and combining the consumer sensory scores for tenderness, juiciness, flavour-liking and overall-liking, the original meat quality 4 score (oMQ4) (0.4, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3) and current meat quality 4 score (cMQ4) (0.3, 0.1, 0.3, 0.3). From the results of these analyses, the optimal weightings of the sensory scores to generate an 'ideal meat quality 4 score (MQ4)' for each country were calculated, and the MQ4 values that reflected the boundaries between the four quality grades were determined. The oMQ4 weightings were far more accurate in categorising European meat samples than the cMQ4 weightings, highlighting that tenderness is more important than flavour to the consumer when determining quality. The accuracy of the discriminant analysis to predict the consumer scored quality grades was similar across all consumer groups, 68%, and similar to previously reported values. These results demonstrate that this technique, as used in the MSA system, could be used to predict consumer assessment of beef eating quality and therefore to underpin a commercial eating quality guarantee for all European consumers.</AbstractText>
</Abstract>
<AuthorList CompleteYN="Y">
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Bonny</LastName>
<ForeName>S P F</ForeName>
<Initials>SPF</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo>
<Affiliation>1School of Veterinary and Life Sciences,Murdoch University,Murdoch,WA 6150,Australia.</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Hocquette</LastName>
<ForeName>J-F</ForeName>
<Initials>JF</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo>
<Affiliation>2INRA,UMR1213,Recherches sur les Herbivores,F-63122 Saint Genès Champanelle,France.</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Pethick</LastName>
<ForeName>D W</ForeName>
<Initials>DW</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo>
<Affiliation>1School of Veterinary and Life Sciences,Murdoch University,Murdoch,WA 6150,Australia.</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Legrand</LastName>
<ForeName>I</ForeName>
<Initials>I</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo>
<Affiliation>4Institut de l'Elevage,Service Qualite' des Viandes,MRAL,87060 Limoges Cedex 2,France.</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Wierzbicki</LastName>
<ForeName>J</ForeName>
<Initials>J</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo>
<Affiliation>5Polish Beef Association Ul,Kruczkowskiego 3,00-380 Warszawa,Poland.</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Allen</LastName>
<ForeName>P</ForeName>
<Initials>P</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo>
<Affiliation>6Teagasac Food Research Centre,Ashtown,Dublin 15,Ireland.</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Farmer</LastName>
<ForeName>L J</ForeName>
<Initials>LJ</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo>
<Affiliation>7Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute,Newforge Lane,Belfast BT9 5PX,UK.</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Polkinghorne</LastName>
<ForeName>R J</ForeName>
<Initials>RJ</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo>
<Affiliation>8431 Timor Road,Murrurundi,NSW 2338,Australia.</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
<Author ValidYN="Y">
<LastName>Gardner</LastName>
<ForeName>G E</ForeName>
<Initials>GE</Initials>
<AffiliationInfo>
<Affiliation>1School of Veterinary and Life Sciences,Murdoch University,Murdoch,WA 6150,Australia.</Affiliation>
</AffiliationInfo>
</Author>
</AuthorList>
<Language>eng</Language>
<PublicationTypeList>
<PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType>
</PublicationTypeList>
<ArticleDate DateType="Electronic">
<Year>2016</Year>
<Month>11</Month>
<Day>10</Day>
</ArticleDate>
</Article>
<MedlineJournalInfo>
<Country>England</Country>
<MedlineTA>Animal</MedlineTA>
<NlmUniqueID>101303270</NlmUniqueID>
<ISSNLinking>1751-7311</ISSNLinking>
</MedlineJournalInfo>
<CitationSubset>IM</CitationSubset>
<MeshHeadingList>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D000328" MajorTopicYN="N">Adult</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D000818" MajorTopicYN="N">Animals</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D001315" MajorTopicYN="N">Australia</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D002417" MajorTopicYN="N">Cattle</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000502" MajorTopicYN="Y">physiology</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D003258" MajorTopicYN="N">Consumer Behavior</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000706" MajorTopicYN="Y">statistics & numerical data</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D003296" MajorTopicYN="N">Cooking</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000379" MajorTopicYN="Y">methods</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D005260" MajorTopicYN="N">Female</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D063427" MajorTopicYN="Y">Food Quality</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D005602" MajorTopicYN="N">France</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D006801" MajorTopicYN="N">Humans</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D007494" MajorTopicYN="N">Ireland</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D008297" MajorTopicYN="N">Male</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D008875" MajorTopicYN="N">Middle Aged</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D011044" MajorTopicYN="N">Poland</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D000069466" MajorTopicYN="N">Red Meat</DescriptorName>
<QualifierName UI="Q000592" MajorTopicYN="Y">standards</QualifierName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D013649" MajorTopicYN="N">Taste</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
<MeshHeading>
<DescriptorName UI="D055815" MajorTopicYN="N">Young Adult</DescriptorName>
</MeshHeading>
</MeshHeadingList>
<KeywordList Owner="NOTNLM">
<Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">Europe</Keyword>
<Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">beef</Keyword>
<Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">consumer testing</Keyword>
<Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">grading</Keyword>
<Keyword MajorTopicYN="N">quality</Keyword>
</KeywordList>
</MedlineCitation>
<PubmedData>
<History>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed">
<Year>2016</Year>
<Month>11</Month>
<Day>11</Day>
<Hour>6</Hour>
<Minute>0</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline">
<Year>2017</Year>
<Month>10</Month>
<Day>31</Day>
<Hour>6</Hour>
<Minute>0</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
<PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez">
<Year>2016</Year>
<Month>11</Month>
<Day>11</Day>
<Hour>6</Hour>
<Minute>0</Minute>
</PubMedPubDate>
</History>
<PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus>
<ArticleIdList>
<ArticleId IdType="pubmed">27829474</ArticleId>
<ArticleId IdType="pii">S1751731116002305</ArticleId>
<ArticleId IdType="doi">10.1017/S1751731116002305</ArticleId>
</ArticleIdList>
</PubmedData>
</pubmed>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Asie/explor/AustralieFrV1/Data/PubMed/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000853 | SxmlIndent | more

Ou

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000853 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Wicri/Asie
   |area=    AustralieFrV1
   |flux=    PubMed
   |étape=   Corpus
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     pubmed:27829474
   |texte=   Untrained consumer assessment of the eating quality of beef: 1. A single composite score can predict beef quality grades.
}}

Pour générer des pages wiki

HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/RBID.i   -Sk "pubmed:27829474" \
       | HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Corpus/biblio.hfd   \
       | NlmPubMed2Wicri -a AustralieFrV1 

Wicri

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.33.
Data generation: Tue Dec 5 10:43:12 2017. Site generation: Tue Mar 5 14:07:20 2024