National Beef Tenderness Survey-1998.

Abstract

Fifty-six retail stores representing 15 retail chains and 14 foodservice facilities in eight U.S. cities were sampled to determine the tenderness of beef steaks at retail and foodservice levels based on Warner-Bratzler shear (WBS) values and consumer evaluation panels. Retail consumer panels were conducted at five universities. Each retail and foodservice steak was evaluated using 10-point scales. Steaks were divided into the following quality groups for statistical analysis: Prime, Top Choice, Choice, Select, and Lean or No Roll. Quality group had no effect on WBS values of retail clod, chuck roll, top round, bottom round, eye of round, top loin, top sirloin, or ribeye steaks but did (P < .05) affect values for the T-bone/porterhouse. The percentages of retail top round, eye of round, and bottom round steaks with a WBS force > 3.9 kg were 39.6, 55.9, and 68.0, respectively. Foodservice ribeye, top loin, and top sirloin steaks had WBS values less than 3.4 kg for all quality groups, with Prime ribeye steaks having lower (P < .05) WBS values than ribeyes from the other quality groups. With the exception of the retail ribeye steak, quality group did not affect consumer sensory ratings of retail and foodservice steaks. Average postfabrication aging times were 32 d for foodservice subprimals and 19 d for retail cut subprimals. These data indicate that improvements in the tenderness of retail cuts from the round are needed. Finally, quality group had little or no effect on consumer sensory evaluations and WBS values of retail and foodservice steaks used in this study.

National beef tenderness survey – 2006: Assessment of Warner–Bratzler shear and sensory panel ratings for beef from US retail and foodservice establishments

“…Postfabrication aging times for foodservice subprimals (Table 2) showed that the mean aging time was 30.1 d. This is very similar to the times reported by Brooks et al (2000) with the mean aging time being 32 d. The shortest aging time, 7 d, was found for some ribeyes, whereas the longest aging time, 136 d, was observed for some strip loins. These data show a much wider range in aging time than did Brooks et al (2000).…”

“…Subprimal postfabrication times at the retail level aver aged 22.6 d (Table 1) and the range was 3-83 d. These data are similar to those found by Morgan et al (1991) with a range of 3-90 d and are greater than those reported by Brooks et al (2000) with the range of 2-61 d. Bone-in ribeyes possessed the lowest percentage of boxes aged under 14 d, whereas top rounds had the largest percentage. The mean percentage of subprimals aged under 14 d was 19.6, which was considerably lower than the 34.1% in the NBTS-1998 (Brooks et al, 2000).…”

“…Morgan et al (1991) focused solely on the retail sector; but with the increasing prevalence of foodservice, the 1998 Tenderness Survey (NBTS-1998) included a foodservice portion (Brooks et al, 2000). The NBTS-1998 found that retail cuts from the round still required more attention in processing and preparation to ensure acceptable tenderness; however, chuck cuts improved in tenderness.…”

Effect of carcass fat and conformation class on consumer perception of various grilled beef muscles

“…In Poland, the above-mentioned trend is associated with an increase in beef export and a rise in beef prices, which may have contributed to the price's greater role as a determinant of attitude (McCarthy et al 2003). Moreover, unpopular beef quality (Węglarz 2010) and lack of knowledge regarding the influence of the thermal treatment method on beef quality (Brooks et al 2000) may be factors inducing the low demand for beef in Poland.…”

Visible/near-infrared hyperspectral imaging for beef tenderness prediction

“…The National Beef Quality Audits (Lorenzen et al, 1993), 1995 (Boleman et al, 1998), and 2000(McKenna et al, 2002 and National Beef Tenderness Surveys conducted in 1991 (Morgan et al, 1991) and 1998 (Brooks et al, 2000) identified the lack of tenderness as a major concern for the beef industry. Currently, the USDA grading system does not include a direct measure of tenderness.…”