These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23501257)

  • 1. Variables affecting the propensity to buy branded beef among groups of Australian beef buyers.
    Morales LE; Griffith G; Wright V; Fleming E; Umberger W; Hoang N
    Meat Sci; 2013 Jun; 94(2):239-46. PubMed ID: 23501257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Consumers' quality perception of national branded, national store branded, and imported store branded beef.
    Banović M; Grunert KG; Barreira MM; Fontes MA
    Meat Sci; 2010 Jan; 84(1):54-65. PubMed ID: 20374754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Prediction of beef eating quality in France using the Meat Standards Australia system.
    Legrand I; Hocquette JF; Polkinghorne RJ; Pethick DW
    Animal; 2013 Mar; 7(3):524-9. PubMed ID: 23031268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. European consumer response to packaging technologies for improved beef safety.
    Van Wezemael L; Ueland Ø; Verbeke W
    Meat Sci; 2011 Sep; 89(1):45-51. PubMed ID: 21543160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. European beef consumers' interest in a beef eating-quality guarantee Insights from a qualitative study in four EU countries.
    Verbeke W; Van Wezemael L; de Barcellos MD; Kügler JO; Hocquette JF; Ueland Ø; Grunert KG
    Appetite; 2010 Apr; 54(2):289-96. PubMed ID: 19961887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparison of consumer sensory acceptance, purchase intention, and willingness to pay for high quality United States and Spanish beef under different information scenarios.
    Beriain MJ; Sánchez M; Carr TR
    J Anim Sci; 2009 Oct; 87(10):3392-402. PubMed ID: 19542506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of technology information on consumer expectations and liking of beef.
    Van Wezemael L; Ueland Ø; Rødbotten R; De Smet S; Scholderer J; Verbeke W
    Meat Sci; 2012 Feb; 90(2):444-50. PubMed ID: 21981934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Consumers' expected quality and intention to purchase high quality pork meat.
    Papanagiotou P; Tzimitra-Kalogianni I; Melfou K
    Meat Sci; 2013 Mar; 93(3):449-54. PubMed ID: 23273449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Untrained consumer assessment of the eating quality of beef: 1. A single composite score can predict beef quality grades.
    Bonny SPF; Hocquette JF; Pethick DW; Legrand I; Wierzbicki J; Allen P; Farmer LJ; Polkinghorne RJ; Gardner GE
    Animal; 2017 Aug; 11(8):1389-1398. PubMed ID: 27829474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. European citizen and consumer attitudes and preferences regarding beef and pork.
    Verbeke W; Pérez-Cueto FJ; Barcellos MD; Krystallis A; Grunert KG
    Meat Sci; 2010 Feb; 84(2):284-92. PubMed ID: 20374787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Factors associated with the purchase of designation of origin lamb meat.
    Sepúlveda WS; Maza MT; Mantecón AR
    Meat Sci; 2010 May; 85(1):167-73. PubMed ID: 20374881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Classification and characterization of Japanese consumers' beef preferences by external preference mapping.
    Sasaki K; Ooi M; Nagura N; Motoyama M; Narita T; Oe M; Nakajima I; Hagi T; Ojima K; Kobayashi M; Nomura M; Muroya S; Hayashi T; Akama K; Fujikawa A; Hokiyama H; Kobayashi K; Nishimura T
    J Sci Food Agric; 2017 Aug; 97(10):3453-3462. PubMed ID: 28071797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Modelling of beef sensory quality for a better prediction of palatability.
    Hocquette JF; Van Wezemael L; Chriki S; Legrand I; Verbeke W; Farmer L; Scollan ND; Polkinghorne R; Rødbotten R; Allen P; Pethick DW
    Meat Sci; 2014 Jul; 97(3):316-22. PubMed ID: 24035246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for value-added chicken product attributes.
    Martínez Michel L; Anders S; Wismer WV
    J Food Sci; 2011 Oct; 76(8):S469-77. PubMed ID: 22417604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of Japanese and Australian consumers' sensory perceptions of beef.
    Polkinghorne RJ; Nishimura T; Neath KE; Watson R
    Anim Sci J; 2014 Jan; 85(1):69-74. PubMed ID: 23773578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Demographics and beef preferences affect consumer motivation for purchasing fresh beef steaks and roasts.
    Reicks AL; Brooks JC; Garmyn AJ; Thompson LD; Lyford CL; Miller MF
    Meat Sci; 2011 Apr; 87(4):403-11. PubMed ID: 21159449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Meat standards and grading: a world view.
    Polkinghorne RJ; Thompson JM
    Meat Sci; 2010 Sep; 86(1):227-35. PubMed ID: 20541325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Factors that affect and motivate the purchase of quality-labelled beef in Spain.
    Sepúlveda W; Maza MT; Mantecón AR
    Meat Sci; 2008 Dec; 80(4):1282-9. PubMed ID: 22063869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Consumers' willingness to pay for beef direct sales. A regional comparison across the Pyrenees.
    Sanjuán AI; Resano H; Zeballos G; Sans P; Panella-Riera N; Campo MM; Khliji S; Guerrero A; Oliver MA; Sañudo C; Santolaria P
    Appetite; 2012 Jun; 58(3):1118-27. PubMed ID: 22406841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Using the animal to the last bit: Consumer preferences for different beef cuts.
    Scozzafava G; Corsi AM; Casini L; Contini C; Loose SM
    Appetite; 2016 Jan; 96():70-79. PubMed ID: 26363423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.