www.elsevier.com/locate/meatsci

Meat Science 72 (2006) 773–777

MEATSCIENCE

Effects of transport time and season on aspects of rabbit meat quality q

G.A. Marıa *, T. Buil, G. Liste, M. Villarroel, C. Sanudo, J.L. Olleta

Department of Animal Production and Food Science, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zaragoza, Miguel Servet 177, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain

Received 24 March 2005; received in revised form 18 May 2005; accepted 10 October 2005

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine whether transport times of up to 7 h can have a significant effect on instrumental meat qualitytraits in rabbits. Spain has very hot summers and cold winters; therefore, we performed replicates in two seasons. To evaluate the effect oftransport time and season on rabbit meat quality, we assessed four meat quality parameters: pH, water holding capacity (WHC), texture(compression and Warner–Bratzler analyses), and colour (CIEL*a*b*). We also considered the effect of the position of the animals onthe transport vehicle. After slaughter, we analysed steaks of Longissimus dorsi from all transported animals (n = 216). Average pH at24 h and WHC did not differ significantly between transport time treatments. Position on the vehicle did not influence the measuresof meat quality. Transport time had a significant effect on all the meat texture parameters measured by compression, but did not affectshear force or toughness. Transport time influenced a* but not L* or b*. Transport time had much less of an effect on meat quality thantime of year; therefore the effect of season appeared to be independent of transport time. Position on the vehicle had no effect on meatquality. Based on our results, we conclude that the transport process can affect instrumental meat quality.� 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Rabbit; Meat quality; Transport time; pH; Colour; Texture

1. Introduction

The chain of events involved in transport can inducestress in rabbits, and affect some aspects of meat quality(Jolley, 1990). Little is known about the effect of transporton the texture and colour of rabbit meat. In studies thatconsider ante-mortem effects on meat quality, one of themost commonly measured parameters is ultimate meatpH. Even travelling short distances can reduce live weight(shrinkage), decrease glycogen reserves, and increase meattemperature (Jolley, 1990), although changes in ultimatepH do not invariably reflect these effects. The relationshipbetween initial muscle glycogen content and ultimate pH islinear only at very low levels of glycogen (Purchas & Aun-gsupakorn, 1993). Thus, glycogen concentrations may not

0309-1740/$ - see front matter � 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.10.012

q Funded by CICYT Ministry of Science and Technology of Spain.Project AGL 2002-01346 COTRANS.* Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 976 762490; fax: +34 976 761612.E-mail address: levrino@posta.unizar.es (G.A. Marıa).URL: http://www.unizar.es (G.A. Marıa).

decrease enough to have a substantial effect on ultimatepH, especially when the animals can recover during lairage.There are changes in meat texture and colour in response toante-mortem stress (Gregory, 1998). Transport time hasbeen considered one of the critical points affecting animalwelfare during transport from the farm to the abattoir(Buil, Maria, Villarroel, Liste, & Lopez, 2004). It is unclearwhether journey duration affects meat quality, particularlyin commercial rabbits, for which little information is avail-able. Transportation can increase the ultimate pH anddarkness of meat (Masoero, Riccioni, Bergoglio, & Napo-litano, 1992), but can improve meat tenderness (Xiccato,Paragini-Bini, & Carazzolo, 1994) and enhance the sensoryqualities of rabbit meat by making it more tender and juicy(Dalle Zotte, 2002). The manner in which transport caninfluence meat quality warrants further investigation. Inthis study, we determined whether transport times (either1 or 7 h) and position on the transport vehicle have a sig-nificant effect on instrumental meat pH, texture, and colourin two seasons (summer and winter).

774 G.A. Marıa et al. / Meat Science 72 (2006) 773–777

2. Materials and methods

The instrumental meat quality of 216 commercial rab-bits was assessed (36 animals per treatment). The animalswere transported by road (along with non-target animals),for 1 or 7 h in either winter or summer. The transportationstudy was performed on three days in January–February(average outside temperature, AOT = 11 �C) and inJune–July (AOT = 28 �C) over three consecutive weeks(i.e., three replicates for each treatment). Every 5 min, aver-age temperature during transport was measured using aTesto� thermometer located at the level of the subjects.Three main effects were considered: transport time, season,and position on the truck (top, middle or bottom) in amulti-floor cage rolling stand (MFRS). The stocking rateduring transport was 360 cm2 per animal (cagesize = 57 · 57 · 25 cm). The overall capacity of the truckwas 2400 rabbits. At midday, following 3 h of lairage timehoused in MFRS, the rabbits were slaughtered. Averagecarcass weight (means ± SD) was 1192.50 ± 121 g. Car-casses were chilled under commercial conditions for 24 h(average weight after chilling = 1175.26 ± 120 g). The meatpH was measured at 24 h post-mortem (next day) in thelumbar region (M. Longissimus dorsi lumborum) using aCrison 507 electrode. Meat colour was measured using aMINOLTA portable chromameter (model CR-200b) usingthe Commission Internationale de L�Eclairage system.Measurements were taken from the surface of a slice ofLongissimus dorsi from each animal. Slices were freshlycut at 24 h post-mortem and measured after 24 h blooming.Without touching the sample, we placed each slice on indi-vidual plastic foam trays and wrapped them with an O2-permeable film at 4 �C. The colour was expressed as colourcoordinates L* (lightness), a* (redness), and b* (yellow-ness). Chroma (C*) and hue-angle (h*) values were calcu-lated as C* = (a*2 + b*2)1/2 and h* = tan�1 (b*/a*),respectively. To determine the proportion of muscle, bone,and fat in the carcasses by dissection in the lab, we ran-domly selected 16 additional rabbits. The Longissimus dorsi

was removed from both sides and the right side was slicedinto three steaks for instrumental analyses. Water holdingcapacity (WHC), which we measured 72 h after slaughter,is expressed as percentage (%) of expelled juice after com-pression, using the Grau and Hamm Method (Boakye &Mittal, 2004; Caneque & Sanudo, 2001). For the analysesof meat texture, Longissimus dorsi muscles were vacuum-packaged and frozen at �18 �C. Thawed steaks (internaltemperature 17–19 �C) were cut transversely, and analysedas either raw (compression) or cooked meat (Warner–Brat-zler), following the reference methods described by Honikel(1998). We performed compression and Warner–Bratzler(WB) analyses on sample slices using an Instron 4301 (fol-lowing Campo et al., 2000). The texture of the raw meatwas determined using a modified compression device thatavoids transversal elongation of the sample (Lepetit & Cul-ioli, 1994). The stress was assessed at 20% (K20), 40%(K40), 60% (K60) and 80% (K80) of the maximum com-

pression (MS, N/cm2). The K20 reflected a progressive ten-derization of the meat as ageing progressed. Lepetit andCulioli (1994) observed that low compression values wererelated to the resistance of myofibrils to deformation (com-pression). Higher stress compression values are mainlyrelated to the connective tissue components (Lepetit & Cul-ioli, 1994). Vacuum packaged meat was cooked in a waterbath at 75 �C until the internal temperature reached 70 �C.We cut samples (1 cm2 cross-section) in a rectangular shapeand with the muscle fibres parallel to the longitudinal axisof the sample. To assess shear force and toughness, sampleswere sheared until they broke. The sample was 10 mmwide, 10 mm thick and 30 mm long. Load cell was 100 kg(minimum load level = 0.001 kg), crosshead speed was150 mm/min (high extension limit = 30 mm) and samplingrate was 20 points/s. The data were analysed using the leastsquare method of the GLM procedure in SAS SAS (1988),fitting the data in a three-way model that included the fixedeffects of transport time (2), season (2) and position of thecages within the vehicle (3), and the interaction effects.

3. Results

Among the rabbits in our study, the average composi-tion of the left middle carcass was 71.58 ± 2.7% muscle,5.80 ± 1.09% fat, and 16.53 ± 1.8% bone (n = 16 animals)and did not differ significantly between transport times.Average pH 24 (least square means LSM ± S.E. = 5.86 ±0.02 for 1 h and 5.83 ± 0.02 for 7 h) and water-holdingcapacity (WHC: 13.77 ± 0.45 for 1 h and 13.57 ± 0.43 for7 h) did not differ significantly between animals transportedfor 1 h compared to 7 h.

For both transport times and seasons, position on thetruck did not influence meat quality measurements (Table1). Transport time had a significant effect (p 6 0.05) onall of the meat texture parameters measured by compres-sion, but did not affect shear force or toughness. Seasonhad a significant effect (p 6 0.05) on pH 24, WHC and allcolour parameters. For meat texture, only shear force,toughness and K20 were affected. In general, transporttime had much less of an effect on meat quality than timeof year.

Rabbits subjected to the short (1 h) journey had higherK20, K40, and K60 values in summer and winter (Table2). Yield point values were also significantly (p 6 0.001)higher after a 1 h journey in both seasons. Shear force,toughness, 20% compression, and maximum stress valueswere higher in winter than in summer. For the shear forceand toughness, the interaction between transport time andseason was significant (p 6 0.05). For short journeys, themeat seemed to be more tender in summer, while meatwas more tender after long journeys in winter.

Season had a significant affect on all the colour co-ordi-nates (L*, a*, b*, C* and h*) but transport time only had asignificant effect on a* and C* values (Table 1). The effectof transport time on a* values was statistically significant(p 6 0.01) in winter, with the highest values after long jour-

Table 1Summary of significance levels of the main effects and their interactions for instrumental meat quality parameters of commercial rabbits

Response variable Main effects in the full model Interactions

Season Time Position S*T S*P P*S S*T*P

pH 24 *** NS NS NS NS NS NSWater holding capacity *** NS NS NS NS NS NS

Warner–BratzlerShear force (Kgf) *** NS NS *** NS NS NSYield point (Kg) NS *** NS NS NS NS NSToughness (Kgf/cm2) *** NS NS *** NS NS NS

CompressionK20 (20%) *** *** NS NS NS NS NSK40 (40%) NS *** NS NS NS NS NSK60 (60%) NS *** NS NS NS NS NSK80 (80%) NS * NS NS NS NS NSMaximum stress (N/cm2) NS *** NS NS NS NS NS

Colour - CIEL*a*b*L* * NS NS * NS NS NSa* *** * NS NS NS NS NSb* *** NS NS NS NS NS NSC* (Chroma) *** ** NS NS NS NS NSh* (hue) *** NS NS NS NS NS NS

The levels of significance were *p < 0.05**p < 0.01***p < 0.001. Season refers to summer or winter. Time: journey time (1 or 7 h). Position: position in themulti-floor cage rolling stand (top, middle or bottom cages) during transport.

Table 2Least square means (±SE) of instrumental meat quality parameters of rabbit in summer and winter at two transport times (1 or 7 h)

Response variable Summer (1) Winter (2)

1 (h) 7 (h) 1 (h) 7 (h)

pH 24 5.75 ± 0.02a 5.77 ± 0.01a 5.97 ± 0.03b 5.90 ± 0.02bWater holding capacity 12.61 ± 0.45a 12.12 ± 0.44a 14.93 ± 0.45b 14.57 ± 0.42b

Warner–BratzlerShear force (Kgf) 0.61 ± 0.04a 0.72 ± 0.04a 1.04 ± 0.03b 0.91 ± 0.04cYield point (Kg) 0.18 ± 0.02a 0.06 ± 0.01b 0.17 ± 0.02a 0.09 ± 0.02bToughness (Kgf/cm2) 0.25 ± 0.01a 0.31 ± 0.02b 0.42 ± 0.02c 0.31 ± 0.02b

CompressionK20 (20%) 10.65 ± 0.34a 9.69 ± 0.33b 12.32 ± 0.34c 11.39 ± 0.35aK40 (40%) 19.45 ± 0.48a 17.89 ± 0.47b 20.88 ± 0.49c 17.73 ± 0.47bK60 (60%) 16.20 ± 0.57a 15.33 ± 0.56a 18.02 ± 0.57b 15.44 ± 0.56aK80 (80%) 16.66 ± 0.56a 17.01 ± 0.57a 17.36 ± 0.52a 14.92 ± 0.51bMaximum stress (N/cm2) 21.90 ± 0.62a 20.61 ± 0.0.61a 24.02 ± 0.63b 20.74 ± 0.60a

ColourL* 58.46 ± 0.34ab 59.36 ± 0.36b 58.44 ± 0.33ab 57.95 ± 0.31aa* 2.34 ± 0.21a 2.49 ± 0.20a 3.45 ± 0.22b 4.19 ± 0.26cb* 4.09 ± 0.25a 4.18 ± 0.27a 2.92 ± 0.20b 3.18 ± 0.22bC* (Chroma) 4.75 ± 0.18a 4.92 ± 0.18a 5.01 ± 0.19b 5.71 ± 0.18ch* (hue) 60.25 ± 3.01a 59.42 ± 3.02a 40.68 ± 3.01b 37.94 ± 3.00b

Different letters in the same row indicate significant differences, p 6 0.05.

G.A. Marıa et al. / Meat Science 72 (2006) 773–777 775

neys. The a* values were higher in winter, while b* washigher in summer (Table 2). Lightness values varied morethan the other colour parameters, and values were signifi-cantly (p 6 0.05) higher in summer than in winter, beinghighest on long summer journeys. For L*, the interactionbetween transport time and season was statistically signifi-cant (p 6 0.05). Transport time did not affect hue, butchroma values were significantly (p 6 0.01) higher in meatfrom rabbits exposed to a long (7 h) journey. Hue values

and chroma values were significantly (p 6 0.001) higherin summer and winter, respectively.

4. Discussion

Even under optimum conditions, the multiple potentialstressors involved in the transport process might affectthe quality of commercial rabbit meat. We performed ourstudy under controlled commercial conditions that

776 G.A. Marıa et al. / Meat Science 72 (2006) 773–777

included the same type of animal, same age, same produc-tion system and same vehicle and driver.

The meat quality parameter values fell within the rangeof what is considered good quality meat and similar to Tro-cino, Xiccato, Queaque, and Sartori (2002) and Xiccatoet al. (1994). Season had a significant effect on meat colour,pH, WHC and a modest influence on WB-derived meattexture parameters. Position on the transport vehicle didnot affect meat quality.

At the industrial level, ultimate pH is the main parame-ter used to measure meat quality. In our study, pH 24 val-ues were significantly higher in winter than in summer, buttransport time did not appear to influence pH 24. In longand short journeys, pH 24 values were always below 6.0(hence, within the quality range), which means that trans-port procedures were appropriate and minimized the riskof DFD or PSE meat. Our findings agree with Trocinoet al. (2002). Other studies (Dalle Zotte, 2002; Jolley,1990; Masoero et al., 1992) found that transport raisespH 24, and Dal Bosco, Castellini, and Berbnardini (1997)reported that pH was higher after long journeys. The samesituation (values within the quality range), was observedfor WHC, although some studies found that transportaffects WHC indirectly, as an increase in ultimate pH pro-duces a rise in the WHC (Jolley, 1990; Trocino et al., 2002).Nevertheless, ultimate pH might be affected by the treat-ment applied (Ouhayoun & Dalle Zotte, 1996).

Solving the problem of inconsistent tenderness is a toppriority for the meat industry (Burns, 2005). Eating satis-faction results from the interaction of this quality charac-teristic with other factors like juiciness and flavour(Koohmaraie, 1996). Texture is a complex concept thatincludes many different factors, including fibrosity, cohe-siveness, chewiness and tenderness. Meat tenderness andtexture are important factors for consumers because theydetermine the commercial value of the meat and the wayit will be cooked (tenderized or processed; Lepetit & Culi-oli, 1994).

Texture can be assessed by taste panels or by instrumen-tal analysis (Sanudo et al., 2003) and is influenced by threemain factors; sarcomere length, the amount of connectivetissue and its degree of cross-linking, and the extent of pro-teolytic changes that occur during conditioning post-mor-

tem. Large amounts of intramuscular fat, which is scarcein rabbits, will also increase tenderness.

The mechanical properties of meat depend on manytypes of fibres. In order to analyze the role played by eachstructure in the overall mechanical behaviour of meat,numerous devices and working conditions are used. Thesemethods have been established by correlating a mechanicalproperty with some characteristics of structure analyzed(Lepetit, 1991). Connective and myofibrillar characteristicscan be quantified mechanically by testing stress at low andhigh compression rates in raw meat (Lepetit, 1991). Alter-natively, Warner–Bratzler shear force, which has beenwidely used to evaluate cooked meat, can be consideredto reflect both myofibrillar and connective tissue tough-

ness. Warner–Bratzler shear force is accepted as a goodpredictor of tenderness observed sensorially and could beused as a criterion to determine meat acceptability (Sanudoet al., 2003), at least in species more widely studied thanrabbit.

The leanness of rabbit meat increases the relative impor-tance of tenderness measurements of rabbit meat quality.This is especially important in the Spanish market sinceconsumers prefer low weight carcasses. In any case, rabbitmeat is more tender than meat from other species (Lawrie,1991). The effect of transport on rabbit meat quality, asmeasured by a modified compression device (even underoptimal transport conditions, as in our study), will have asignificant influence on overall appreciation of the meat.It is foreseeable that under sub-optimal conditions, theeffect of transport stress on rabbit meat quality should bemuch higher.

In our study, the 7 h journey had a significant effect onthe instrumental quality of rabbit meat, as measured by amodified compression device, which reflects the mechanicalresistance of the myofibril structure (K20) and connectivetissue strength (K80) (Lepetit & Culioli, 1994). Both seasonand transport time had a significant effect on K20, whichwas lowest after long journeys in summer. Thus, tendernessis highly related to primary toughness due to myofibrilstructure resistance.

Unlike Dal Bosco et al. (1997), who found a ‘‘greatershear force in animals subjected to long transportation’’,shear force values did not differ with respect to transporttimes. Our findings agree with other authors (Masoeroet al., 1992; Trocino et al., 2002). Season had a significanteffect on meat texture parameters measured using a War-ner–Bratzler shear device, shear force and toughness. Fur-thermore, the effect of the transport time on tenderness didnot appear to be independent of environmental tempera-ture, as reflected by the significant interaction betweentransport time and season, with opposite effects of journeylength on tenderness evaluated by Warner–Bratzler in sum-mer than winter. This interaction between transport timeand season could be related to the seasonal variation ofthe energy metabolism. Nevertheless, it is a speculationand, clearly, the seasonal effect and its interaction withtransport time require further investigation.

One of the most important aspects in terms of meatappearance is colour, which the consumer uses as an indi-cator of quality and freshness (Faustman & Cassens, 1990;Naumann, Rhodes, Brady, & Kiehl, 1957). The quantity ofmyoglobin in muscle determines colour. The proportion ofreduced and oxygenated myoglobin provides a subjectiveidea of freshness and oxidized myoglobin (grey-brown) ormetmyoglobin is undesirable. Colour stability can be asso-ciated with pre-slaughter treatment (Renerre, 1990).

The potential effects of transportation on the colour ofrabbit meat are not well known. Dal Bosco et al. (1997)evaluated the effect of 400 and 15 km transportation onmeat from 12-week-old rabbits. In the muscles of animalstransported 400 km, L* decreased, and a* and b* increased

G.A. Marıa et al. / Meat Science 72 (2006) 773–777 777

significantly. Dal Bosco et al. (1997) suggested that a* val-ues might be a consequence of high pH values. Other stud-ies (Ouhayoun & Lebas, 1994) found that lightness valueswere lower in meat from animals subjected to long trans-portation. Jolley (1990) reported that transport timedecreases lightness and colour saturation, which makesmeat look darker, but with no detrimental effect on quality.

In our study, colour values were similar to thosereported by Trocino et al. (2002), but higher than in Jolley(1990). Transport time increased a* and C* values, whichcould be related with higher pigment content (Renerre,1990). However, transport time did not significantly influ-ence other colour parameters. Time of year affected allmeat colour parameters, but the effects were not enoughto have a negative effect on meat quality, as colour CIE-LAB differences (DE*) were small and difficult to distin-guish with the naked eye (Abril et al., 2001).

Transport and season had significant effects on chroma.Hue did not change with transport time but in terms of sea-son, meat was slightly more red in winter and orange insummer.

In general, transport time affected several measures ofmeat quality and this effect depended on the time of yearthe rabbits were transported. The effect was higher in sum-mer than in winter, therefore time of year might be a med-ium stressor that acts independently of transport time.Based on our results, the multifactor stressors involved inthe transport process can affect rabbit meat quality evenunder optimal transport conditions.

References

Abril, M., Campo, M. M., Onenc, A., Sanudo, C., Albertı, P., &Negueruela, A. I. (2001). Beef colour evolution as a function ofultimate pH. Meat Science, 58, 69–78.

Boakye, K., & Mittal, G. (2004). Changes in pH and water holdingproperties of Longissimus dorsi muscle during beef ageing. Meat

Science, 12, 269–279.Buil, T., Maria, G. A., Villarroel, M., Liste, G., & Lopez, M. (2004).

Critical points in the transport of commercial rabbits to slaughter inSpain that could compromise animals�welfare. World Rabbit Science,

12, 269–279.Burns, R. (2005). The fibrous microstructure of meat. Available from:

<http://www.aps.uoguelph.ca/~swatland/ch5_0.htm>.Campo, M. M., Santolaria, P., Sanudo, C., Lepetit, J., Olleta, J. L., Panea,

B., et al. (2000). Assessment of breed and ageing effects on beef meatquality using different texture devices. Meat Science, 55, 371–378.

Caneque, V. & Sanudo, C. (2001). Metodologıa para el estudio de lacalidad de la canal y de la carne en rumiantes. Monografıas INIA,

Ganadera No. 1. Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnologıa.

Dal Bosco, A., Castellini, C., & Berbnardini, M. (1997). Effect oftransportation and stunning method on some characteristics of rabbitcarcasses and meat. World Rabbit Science, 5(3), 115–119.

Dalle Zotte, A. (2002). Perception of rabbit meat quality and majorfactors influencing the rabbit carcass and meat quality. Livestock

Production Science, 75(2002), 11–32.Faustman, C., & Cassens, R. G. (1990). The biochemical basis for

discoloration in fresh meat: a review. Journal of Muscle Foods, 1,217–243.

Gregory, N. G. (1998). Animal Welfare and Meat Quality. 085199296X.UK: CABI Publishing.

Honikel, K. O. (1998). Reference methods for the assessment of physicalcharacteristics of meat. Meat Science, 49(4), 447–457.

Jolley, P. D. (1990). Rabbit transport and its effects on meat quality.Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 28, 119–134.

Koohmaraie, M. (1996). Biochemical factors regulating the toughen-ing and tenderization processes of meat. Meat Science, 43,S193–S201.

Lawrie, R. A. (1991). Meat Science (5th ed.). Oxford, UK: PermagonPress.

Lepetit, J., & Culioli, J. (1994). Mechanical properties of meat. Meat

Science, 36, 203–207.Lepetit, J. (1991). Theoretical strain range in raw meat. Meat Science, 29,

271–283.Masoero, G., Riccioni, L., Bergoglio, G., & Napolitano, F. (1992).

Implications of fasting and the transportation for a high quality rabbitmeat product. Journal of Applied Rabbit Research, 15, 841–847.

Naumann, H. D., Rhodes, V. J., Brady, D. E., & Kiehl, E. R. (1957).Discrimination techniques in meat acceptance studies. Food Technol-

ogy, 2, 123.Ouhayoun, J. & Lebas, F. (1994). Effets de la diete hydrique, du transport

et de l�attente avan l�abattage sur les composantes du rendement et surles caracteristiques physicochimiques. In: 6e mes Journeees de la

Rechcerche Cunicole. La Rochelle, France (Vol. 2, pp. 443–448).Ouhayoun, J. & Dalle Zotte, A. (1996). Harmonization in rabbit meat

research muscle and meat criteria. In: Proceedings of the sixth World

Rabbit Congress, Toulouse (Vol. 3, pp. 217–224).Purchas, R. W., & Aungsupakorn, R. (1993). Further investigation into

the relationship between ultimate pH and tenderness for beef samplesfrom bulls and steers. Meat Science, 34, 163–178.

Renerre, M. (1990). Review: factors involved in the discoloration of beefmeat. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 25,613–630.

Sanudo, C., Alfonso, M., Sanchez, A., Berge, P., Dransfield, E.,Zygoyiannis, D., et al. (2003). Meat texture of lambs from differentEuropean production systems. Australian Journal of Agricultural

Research, 54, 551–560.SAS. (1988). User�s guide: statistics. Release 6.03. Cary, NC.Trocino, A., Xiccato, G., Queaque, P. I., & Sartori, A. (2002). Effect of

transport duration and sex on carcass and meat quality of growingrabbits. In: Proceedings of the second rabbit congress of the America

(pp. 232–235). La Habana, Cuba.Xiccato, G., Paragini-Bini, R., Dalle Zotte a. & Carazzolo, A. (1994).

Effect of age, sex and transportation on the composition and sensoryproperties of rabbit meat. In: Proceedings of the 40th international

congress meat science and technology (ICoMST) (pp. W-2.02). TheHague, Netherlands.