National Consumer Retail Beef Study: Palatability Evaluations of Beef Loin Steaks that Differed in Marbling

Savell, J. W.; Branson, Robert E.; Cross, H. R.; Stiffler, D. M.; Wise, J W; Griffin, D. B.; Smith, G. C.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.1987.tb06664.x

Cited by 233 publications

(128 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

113

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(3) The household panel in Houston, TX, which ranked loin steaks as low prime = high choice = average choice > low choice = upper half select = lower half select = upper half standard > bullocks full width of select = steers full width of select (P < 0.05). Savell et al (1987) reported that:…”

Section: Palatability Prediction Using Usda Quality Gradesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Smith (2005) composited data from the studies of Smith et al (1980Smith et al ( , 1983Smith et al ( , 1984Smith et al ( , 1987, Branson et al (1984Branson et al ( , 1986, Savell et al (1987), Jones and Tatum (1991a, 1991b, Huffhines et al (1992aHuffhines et al ( , 1992bHuffhines et al ( , 1993 and George et al (1999) and concluded that the odds of having an unpleasant eating experience are 1 in 33 (3%) if a middle-meat steak comes from a prime carcass, as compared with 1 in 10 (10%), 1 in 6 (16%), 1 in 4 (27%) or 1 in 2 (50%) if a middle-meat steak comes from a carcass of upper two-thirds choice, lower one-third choice, select or standard grades, respectively. Platter et al (2003b) reported that: (i) marbling score displayed a significant relationship to acceptance of steaks by consumers; and (ii) the shape of the predicted probability curve for steak acceptance was approximately linear over the entire range of marbling scores (TR 67 to SA 97 ), suggesting that the likelihood of consumer acceptance of steaks increases~10% for each full marbling score increase between SL and SA.…”

Section: Palatability Prediction Using Usda Quality Gradesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of factors considered of primary importance in determining tenderness and overall palatability of cooked beef in the MSA grading system, there is ample US research-study support for use of marbling (Smith et al 1969(Smith et al , 2007Savell et al 1987Savell et al , 1989George et al 1999;Wyle 2000;Platter et al 2003bPlatter et al , 2005Gruber et al 2006), maturity (Berry et al 1974a(Berry et al , 1974bSmith et al 1982Smith et al , 1988Smith et al , 2008Hilton et al 1998), amount of B. indicus genetics (McKeith et al 1985a(McKeith et al , 1985bSherbeck et al 1995Sherbeck et al , 1996O'Connor et al 1997), sex (Choat et al 2006;Tatum et al 2007), tenderstretch carcass suspension (Smith et al , 1979(Smith et al , 2007Orts et al 1971;Hostetler et al 1975), ultimate pH (Smulders et al 1990;Tatum 1991a, 1994;Eilers et al 1996;Wulf et al 1997), meat colour (Jeremiah et al 1972;Wulf et al 1997;Cannell et al 2000;Wyle et al 2003;Vote et al 2003), fat colour (Hilton et al 1998;Wyle et al 1998Wyle et al , 2003Wyle 2000;Vote et al 2003) and subcu...…”

Section: Advantages Of the Tqm Approach To Assessing Beef Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

International perspective: characterisation of United States Department of Agriculture and Meat Standards Australia systems for assessing beef quality

Smith

Tatum

Belk

2008

Aust. J. Exp. Agric.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The intent, in this manuscript, is to characterise the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Meat Standards Australia (MSA) systems for assessing beef quality and to describe the research evidence that supports the principles involved in grade application. USDA beef quality grading standards rely on carcass-trait-only assessments of approximate age of the animal at harvest and amount of intramuscular fat (as marbling) inside the muscles. USDA beef quality grading started 82 years ago. Then, as now, because no traceability system was in place, each animal's history (exact age, feeding regimen, management practices, etc.) was incomplete; those who assigned quality grades used indicators of age (physiological maturity) and plane of nutrition (amount of marbling), and they do so still. Since 1926, research studies have identified a multitude of palatability-determining live-animal factors (e.g. genetics, use of hormonal growth promotants, high-energy diet finishing) and carcass-treatment factors (e.g. electrical stimulation, tenderstretch carcass suspension, postmortem aging) that cannot be incorporated into a carcass-trait-only quality assessment system. The USA beef industry has depended on development of more than 100 beef brands -some using palatability assurance critical control point plans, total quality management (TQM) philosophies, USDA certification and process verification programs, or combinations of live-animal factors, carcass-treatment factors and carcass-trait constraints -to further differentiate fresh beef products. The MSA grading system is a TQM grading approach that incorporates animal-specific traits (e.g. genetics, sex, age), control of certain pre-harvest and post-harvest processes in the beef chain, cut-specific quality differences and consumer preferences, into a beef pricing system. A unique aspect of the MSA grading system is that the grades are assigned to cuts or muscles, not carcasses; cuts or muscles from the same carcass are assigned individual (and in many cases, different) grades that reflect differences in expected eating quality performance among the various cuts of beef further adjusted to reflect the influence of cut or muscle aging and alternative cooking methods. The MSA grading system is still being modified and refined (using results of an extensive, ongoing consumer testing program), but it represents the best existing example of a TQM grading approach for improving beef quality and palatability. Research studies have shown that the accuracy of palatability-level prediction by use of the two systems -USDA quality grades for US customers and consumers and MSA grades for Australian customers and consumers -is sufficient to justify their continued use for beef quality assessment.

show abstract

Section: Palatability Prediction Using Usda Quality Gradesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Palatability Prediction Using Usda Quality Gradesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Advantages Of the Tqm Approach To Assessing Beef Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

International perspective: characterisation of United States Department of Agriculture and Meat Standards Australia systems for assessing beef quality

Smith

Tatum

Belk

2008

Aust. J. Exp. Agric.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although Aberle et al (1981) indicated that feeding a high-energy diet for a shor-t period ( -70 d) All unstimulated sides were broken into primal cuts that were then separated into fat, lean and bone according to the procedure described by Rahnef'eld et al (1983) to improved consumer ratings (Savell et al 1987). However.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The combined effects of time on feed, electrical stimulation and aging on beef quality

Aalhus¹,

Jones²,

Tong³

et al. 1992

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 1992. Thecombinedeffectsof timeonfeed, electricalstimulationandagingonbeef quality.Can. J. Anim. . Two experiments were conducted to determine the combined effects of time on feed, high-voltage electrical stimulation (HVES) and postmortem aging on beef quality and palatability. Increasing time on feed resulted in an increase in carcass fat thickness, dressed carcass weight and marbling and a decrease in carcass lean content, carcass shrinkage and shear values in both experiments. Steaks from longer-fed animals were rated more highly forjuiciness, tenderness and overall palatabiltty by the consumers polled. HVES lowered muscle pH (3 ,24 and 1il4 h), increased subjectively appraised marbling fat, gave brighter, redder muscle colour up to 6 d postmortem, and improved consumer ratings for flavour, juiciness, tenderness and overail palatability. HVES also resulted in a significant improvement in shear values (shear values were decreased by 27 and35% in experiments I and 2, respectively). Aging for 6 d improved meat colour, decreased the amount of expressible juice and lowered the shear value of steaks bv I 1 and 9 % resoectivelv. in exoeriments I and 2. A consumer survev indicated that more than2O% of iteaks were rate^d ur rnu.."ptuble for tenderness when time on feei and postmortem aging were similar to Canadian beef-production practices. Incorporation of HVES as a means ofquality control would reduce the proportion ofunacceptable steaks to approximately l0%. 19'72, 1990) and the advent of rapid methods of carcass chilling may also be contributing factors.Research by Aberle et al. (1981), Rompala and Jones (1984) and Miller et al. (1987) indicated that time on feed and growth rate prior to slaughter can influence beef tenderness.Faster growth rates prior to slaughter have been associated with a higher collagen solubility, which leads to increased tenderness (Miller et al. 1987). Although Aberle et al. (1981) All unstimulated sides were broken into primal cuts that were then separated into fat, lean and bone according to the procedure described by Rahnef'eld et al. (1983). A portion of the LT, from the 4th thoracic vertebra to the 12th rib, was collecred from both carcass sides and divided into two samoles (anterior and posterior locations). These samples were then vacuum packaged and heat shrunk prior to storage at 2'C for either 3 or 6 d. Once

show abstract

“…Despite previous results showing differences in flavor liking between TC and SE top loins steaks (Corbin et al, 2015;Hunt et al, 2014;Tedford et al, 2014), TC and Select were rated similarly (P > 0.05) for flavor liking in our current study. However, differences in beef production systems, such as those in the U.S. compared to those in Central America, can affect flavor (Smith et al, 1985;Savell et al, 1987). Beef from animals raised on a finishing diet with grains tend to deposit more fat (Duckett et al, 2007;Duckett et al, 2013), positively affecting flavor (Umberger et al, 2000).…”

Section: Consumer Flavor Likingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Honduran and U.S. Consumer Assessment of Beef from Various Production Systems with or Without Marinating

Gomez

Garmyn

O’Quinn

et al. 2018

Meat and Muscle Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Our objective was to evaluate the effects of different Honduran cattle production systems, enhancement, and country of origin on palatability of the longissimus muscle aged 21 d postmortem as determined by U.S. and Honduran consumers (n = 240/country). U.S.-sourced strip loins (n = 10/treatment) were selected: USDA Select (SE) and Top (upper 2/3) Choice (TC). Honduran-sourced strip loins (n = 10/treatment) included: 1) dual-purpose bulls, raised on native pasture (HDP), 2) F1 crossbred Brahman bulls finished on a corn-based grain diet for 180 d (HCF), and 3) purebred Brahman bulls finished on a sugarcane-based diet for 180 d (HSC). Ten additional strip loins from each Honduran treatment were selected and enhanced (E; 112% ± 3.5%) with water, salt, and tripolyphosphate, resulting in EHDP, EHCF, and EHSC. Steaks were cooked to 77°C prior to consumer evaluation of tenderness, juiciness, and flavor and overall liking, with classification of each trait as acceptable or unacceptable. Consumers indicated if they were willing to pay 0, 3, 6, or 10 USD/0.45 kg. Consumer data were analyzed using the GLIMMIX procedure of SAS as a split plot design, with treatment as the whole plot factor and country and the country × treatment interaction as the subplot factors, including panel as a random effect. The EHCF had greater (P < 0.05) scores for tenderness, juiciness, flavor and overall liking. No differences (P > 0.05) were found between TC and SE when scoring palatability traits, but more (P < 0.05) consumers found TC acceptable for juiciness compared to SE. Honduran consumers ranked all palatability traits greater than U.S consumers and found a greater percentage of samples acceptable for tenderness (P < 0.05). Enhancement of Honduran treatments had a positive effect on palatability traits, as well as the acceptability of those traits. Regardless of the differences in breeds, using high-energy diets and enhancement resulted in greater palatability scores.

show abstract

National Consumer Retail Beef Study: Palatability Evaluations of Beef Loin Steaks that Differed in Marbling

Cited by 233 publications

References 2 publications

International perspective: characterisation of United States Department of Agriculture and Meat Standards Australia systems for assessing beef quality

International perspective: characterisation of United States Department of Agriculture and Meat Standards Australia systems for assessing beef quality

The combined effects of time on feed, electrical stimulation and aging on beef quality

Honduran and U.S. Consumer Assessment of Beef from Various Production Systems with or Without Marinating

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About