Autumn Luana Armaly

Autumn Luana Armaly

Department of Animal Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, USA
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

1Year (2026-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
19 October 2026 in Foods
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SDSavannah Laree Douglas
Savannah Laree Douglas
AAAutumn Luana Armaly
Autumn Luana Armaly
RBRilee A Bennett
Rilee A Bennett
XMXenia M. Murillo-Contreras
Xenia M. Murillo-Contreras
DMDonald R. Mulvaney
Donald R. Mulvaney
Jason T SawyerJason T Sawyer
Jason T Sawyer
Edible beef heart may improve whole-animal utilization while enhancing the nutritional value of ground beef; however, its effects on refrigerated storage stability remain unclear. This study evaluated the influence of beef heart on the shelf-life characteristics of vacuum-packaged ground beef. Ground beef was produced in three batches per treatment from beef trimmings (80% lean and 20% fat). Treatments consisted of control (0% heart), 6% heart, or 12% heart. Samples were vacuum packaged and evaluated on days 0, 5, 10, and 15 for instrumental surface color, myoglobin forms, thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), and pH. Treatment × storage day interactions were observed for pH (p < 0.05), TBARS (p < 0.05), instrumental color (p < 0.05), and calculated myoglobin forms (p < 0.05). Including beef heart in ground beef altered surface color characteristics, resulting in lower a* values (p < 0.05) and greater hue angle (p < 0.05) on day 0. TBARS values increased with heart addition throughout storage, with the 12% heart treatment exhibiting the greatest TBARS values (p < 0.05). Beef heart inclusion altered some physicochemical characteristics, but these changes did not compromise product stability during 15 days of refrigerated vacuum storage.

29 August 2026 in Foods
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SDSavannah Laree Douglas
Savannah Laree Douglas
XMXenia M. Murillo-Contreras
Xenia M. Murillo-Contreras
RBRilee A Bennett
Rilee A Bennett
AAAutumn Luana Armaly
Autumn Luana Armaly
SCSungeun Cho
Sungeun Cho
Jason T SawyerJason T Sawyer
Jason T Sawyer
Edible beef organs are nutrient-dense ingredients that may improve whole-animal utilization while enhancing the nutritional value of ground beef. This study evaluated the effects of organ type and inclusion level on the quality characteristics and consumer acceptability of ground beef patties. Patties were manufactured from three independent batches and formulated as a control (0% organ), 6% beef heart, 12% beef heart, 6% beef kidney, or 12% beef kidney. Nutritional composition, cooking characteristics, instrumental color, texture, and consumer acceptance were evaluated. Organ-containing patties had higher moisture content than the control (p = 0.0082), while 12% beef kidney resulted in the greatest cholesterol and sodium concentrations (p < 0.0001). Patties containing 12% beef kidney exhibited the lowest cooking loss (p = 0.0004) and Allo–Kramer shear force values (p < 0.0001), corresponding to the greatest consumer-perceived tenderness (p < 0.0001). However, this treatment received the lowest ratings for overall liking, flavor, texture, purchase intent, and willingness to pay (p < 0.0001). In contrast, 6% and 12% beef heart retained consumer acceptability comparable to the control while reducing formulation cost. These findings identify beef heart as a promising ingredient for increasing edible organ utilization in ground beef without compromising consumer acceptance.

2 July 2026 in Foods
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NGNina E. Gilmore
Nina E. Gilmore
AAAutumn Luana Armaly
Autumn Luana Armaly
GBGabriela M. Bernardez-Morales
Gabriela M. Bernardez-Morales
SDSavannah Laree Douglas
Savannah Laree Douglas
RBRicardo J. Barrazueta-Cordero
Ricardo J. Barrazueta-Cordero
Jason T SawyerJason T Sawyer
Jason T Sawyer
Consumer acceptability of whole-muscle and ground beef can largely be dictated by organoleptic properties. The objectives of the current study were to evaluate the organoleptic characteristics of ground beef patties manufactured using different forming attachments. Ground beef patties (n = 333/treatment) were randomly allotted to one of four treatments (Cavity, Nozzle, Manual, Guillotine) and subjected to analysis of cooking loss, cooking time, cooked patty shrinkage, internal cooked color, texture profile analysis, Allo–Kramer shear force, and consumer sensory panel. The forming method altered cooking time (p < 0.0001) and cooked patty shrinkage (p < 0.0001) but did not alter cooking loss (p = 0.8116). Instrumental hardness was greatest for beef patties formed using the Cavity method compared to all other forming treatments (p = 0.0002). The forming method did not alter internal cooked color redness (p > 0.5408), yellowness (p > 0.1053) nor red-to-brown (p > 0.4386). Lastly, consumer ratings for tenderness were altered by the forming method (p < 0.0020), but patty forming did not alter (p > 0.05) any other sensory characteristics. Categorizing the changes to the cooked characteristics of ground beef patties altered by forming and manufacturing techniques is important when determining consumer acceptance and quantifying textural differences. Current results indicate that ground beef patties formed using the nozzle method imparted the fewest detrimental changes to physiochemical and sensory traits when compared to all other forming methods. Nozzle-formed patties required the least amount of cooking time, the least instrumental resilience, the least instrumental force to shear, and the greatest perceived tenderness by consumer panelists.

27 August 2026 in Foods
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SDSavannah Laree Douglas
Savannah Laree Douglas
AAAutumn Luana Armaly
Autumn Luana Armaly
RBRilee A Bennett
Rilee A Bennett
DMDonald R. Mulvaney
Donald R. Mulvaney
JBJase Joseph Ball
Jase Joseph Ball
Jason T SawyerJason T Sawyer
Jason T Sawyer
Consumer acceptance remains a primary barrier to incorporating organ meats into value-added beef products, despite their nutritional profile. This study evaluated the effectiveness of educational infographics emphasizing either nutritional benefits or economic value on consumer perceptions of organ-enhanced ground beef. A total of 1939 U.S. consumers served as the experimental unit and completed an online survey administered through Qualtrics. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two educational infographic treatments (nutrition or economics and resource utilization). Consumer perception indices were calculated before and after infographic exposure. Changes in perception (Δ) were analyzed with infographic treatment, food familiarity level and their interaction. Educational infographics produced small numerical improvements in consumer perception, although responses did not differ between infographic types. No differences were observed among nutrition- or economic-focused infographics for any perception index (p = 0.1570). Likewise, no interaction between infographic type and Food Familiarity Index were detected (p = 0.4849). However, food familiarity significantly influenced acceptance (p < 0.0001), label transparency (p < 0.0001), and willingness-to-pay (p < 0.0001). Consumers with greater food familiarity reported more favorable perceptions than those with lower familiarity. However, FFI level did not impact economic perception. Current results demonstrate that concise educational messaging can influence consumer perceptions of organ-enhanced ground beef. Furthermore, improving consumer food familiarity may enhance acceptance and marketability of nutrient-dense beef products containing edible organ meats.