Beef Tenderness
- Thread starter MikeC
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
Look under the Tenderness sub title. But the whole paper is good.
http://www.stockmangrassfarmer.net/cgi- ... cgi?id=456
http://www.stockmangrassfarmer.net/cgi- ... cgi?id=456
MikeC
Well-known member
Grade Meat Tender, Grade Meat True... References
By J. Raloff
MARC analysis
MARC scientist runs a rib eye through the image-analysis program. Green in right image shows the largest area of lean tissue, a step in estimating the retail yield of a carcass. (Keith Weller)
Having trouble selecting meat that will practically melt in your mouth? You're not alone. Restaurants and butchers, too, encounter the same frustration. Even cuts labeled prime, the top grade, sometimes offer diners a tough chew.
The problem, explains Mohammad Koohmaraie, is that the current carcass-grading procedures—designed to distinguish the tough from the tender—rely heavily on marbling, the presence of intramuscular fat. Yet only about 10 percent of the variation in a steak's tenderness correlates with marbling, according to research by his team at the Agriculture Department's Meat Animal Research Center (MARC) in Clay Center, Neb.
The MARC scientists have now cobbled together an alternative tenderness-rating system. In tests, it has offered an unprecedented 94 percent accuracy.
Today, meat graders slice open a carcass 1 to 3 days after slaughter and estimate its tenderness by rating its appearance—muscle maturity and color as well as marbling. The system that Koohmaraie's group has developed requires slicing off a 1-inch rib-eye steak, cooking it for 4 minutes, then cutting it with a miniature guillotine that measures shear force.
To make the system even more attractive to meat packers, the scientists have just added an image-analysis program. From a glance at the uncooked rib eye, a computer calculates the pounds of retail cuts that the rest of the carcass will yield when butchered.
Although not automated, the system "is ready for prime time," Koohmaraie says. It adds $4.50 per carcass, or 15 cents per pound retail, he calculates.
Meat producers should be able to easily recover these costs, according to in-store studies led by Ted C. Schroeder at Kansas State University in Manhattan. His team grilled two rib-eye steaks from different carcasses and offered shoppers a taste test. Their reward: a free steak from the tougher carcass.
The vast majority not only preferred the tender steak but offered hard cash to swap the tough freebie for the more tender meat. Most anted up at least $1.23—and some paid over $3—per pound.
This suggests that by marketing the tender cuts under a new, brand-name label that guarantees tenderness, savvy packers could quickly "corner the market" for high-value meats, says Gary C. Smith of Colorado State University in Fort Collins. Though large-scale packers might initially balk at adopting this new grading system, he says they'll soon realize that without it they risk losing the most lucrative part of the market.
Indeed, they're already losing big time, argues Wayne D. Purcell of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg. Every year for the past 20, U.S. consumers have purchased less beef than they did the year before. They've been turned off in part, he maintains, by the industry's "25 percent product-failure rate"—unexpectedly tough meat.
"Would you buy John Deere tractors if 25 percent of the new ones wouldn't start?" he chides producers.
Now that the MARC group has unveiled a solution, Purcell says, "I think the general consensus in the industry is that we need to move forward on it."
In the long term, he and Smith argue, the ability to identify—and charge a premium for—guaranteed-tender carcasses should give producers an economic incentive for breeding animals with more tender muscle.
By J. Raloff
MARC analysis
MARC scientist runs a rib eye through the image-analysis program. Green in right image shows the largest area of lean tissue, a step in estimating the retail yield of a carcass. (Keith Weller)
Having trouble selecting meat that will practically melt in your mouth? You're not alone. Restaurants and butchers, too, encounter the same frustration. Even cuts labeled prime, the top grade, sometimes offer diners a tough chew.
The problem, explains Mohammad Koohmaraie, is that the current carcass-grading procedures—designed to distinguish the tough from the tender—rely heavily on marbling, the presence of intramuscular fat. Yet only about 10 percent of the variation in a steak's tenderness correlates with marbling, according to research by his team at the Agriculture Department's Meat Animal Research Center (MARC) in Clay Center, Neb.
The MARC scientists have now cobbled together an alternative tenderness-rating system. In tests, it has offered an unprecedented 94 percent accuracy.
Today, meat graders slice open a carcass 1 to 3 days after slaughter and estimate its tenderness by rating its appearance—muscle maturity and color as well as marbling. The system that Koohmaraie's group has developed requires slicing off a 1-inch rib-eye steak, cooking it for 4 minutes, then cutting it with a miniature guillotine that measures shear force.
To make the system even more attractive to meat packers, the scientists have just added an image-analysis program. From a glance at the uncooked rib eye, a computer calculates the pounds of retail cuts that the rest of the carcass will yield when butchered.
Although not automated, the system "is ready for prime time," Koohmaraie says. It adds $4.50 per carcass, or 15 cents per pound retail, he calculates.
Meat producers should be able to easily recover these costs, according to in-store studies led by Ted C. Schroeder at Kansas State University in Manhattan. His team grilled two rib-eye steaks from different carcasses and offered shoppers a taste test. Their reward: a free steak from the tougher carcass.
The vast majority not only preferred the tender steak but offered hard cash to swap the tough freebie for the more tender meat. Most anted up at least $1.23—and some paid over $3—per pound.
This suggests that by marketing the tender cuts under a new, brand-name label that guarantees tenderness, savvy packers could quickly "corner the market" for high-value meats, says Gary C. Smith of Colorado State University in Fort Collins. Though large-scale packers might initially balk at adopting this new grading system, he says they'll soon realize that without it they risk losing the most lucrative part of the market.
Indeed, they're already losing big time, argues Wayne D. Purcell of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg. Every year for the past 20, U.S. consumers have purchased less beef than they did the year before. They've been turned off in part, he maintains, by the industry's "25 percent product-failure rate"—unexpectedly tough meat.
"Would you buy John Deere tractors if 25 percent of the new ones wouldn't start?" he chides producers.
Now that the MARC group has unveiled a solution, Purcell says, "I think the general consensus in the industry is that we need to move forward on it."
In the long term, he and Smith argue, the ability to identify—and charge a premium for—guaranteed-tender carcasses should give producers an economic incentive for breeding animals with more tender muscle.
SPRINGER FARMS MURRAY GRE
Well-known member
Murray Greys have a larger ribeye section,will marble on grass,and are known for their tenderness (they have a preponderance of the tenderness gene). Just another reason to raise murray grey and murray grey cross cattle. ;-) 
:cboy:
:cboy:SPRINGER FARMS MURRAY GRE":3ofhdkk8 said:Murray Greys have a larger ribeye section,will marble on grass,and are known for their tenderness (they have a preponderance of the tenderness gene). Just another reason to raise murray grey and murray grey cross cattle. ;-)
Could I hire you to sell my cattle? :lol: :lol:
dun":iun5mwtn said:
If I remember right, that's an old article, late '90s? No packer has picked up the idea up of cutting a steak off the carcass, cooking it, testing it for tenderness, then cutting the carcass up and selling it based on tenderness. I wonder why?
An increase in beef demand is when consumers buy more of a product at the same or higher prices. Using that definition, beef demand has been up for several years.
MikeC
Well-known member
Coming soon to a packer near you:
Predicting Beef Tenderness with Computer Vision
Published by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, St. Joseph, Michigan http://www.asabe.org
Citation: Paper number 013063,
Authors: S. Jeyamkondan, G. A. Kranzler, A. Lakshmikanth
Keywords: Computer vision, beef tenderness, Warner-Bratzler shear force, textural features, image processing
A computer vision system was developed to predict cooked-beef tenderness. Our objective was to predict Warner-Bratzler shear force on 14-day aged beef using textural features extracted from 110 fresh beef color images. After ribeye segmentation, images were converted from RGB to CIELAB color space. Gray-level difference histograms were constructed from each L*, a*, and b* color bands and textural features were extracted. The system predicted shear force with an R 2 value of 0.50 and correctly classified 79% of samples into two tenderness categories.
Detailed close-up images were also acquired from the final 48 samples. Textural features extracted from these close-up images captured more textural information and predicted shear force with a higher R 2 value of 0.72. Correct classification rate was 92%.
Predicting Beef Tenderness with Computer Vision
Published by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, St. Joseph, Michigan http://www.asabe.org
Citation: Paper number 013063,
Authors: S. Jeyamkondan, G. A. Kranzler, A. Lakshmikanth
Keywords: Computer vision, beef tenderness, Warner-Bratzler shear force, textural features, image processing
A computer vision system was developed to predict cooked-beef tenderness. Our objective was to predict Warner-Bratzler shear force on 14-day aged beef using textural features extracted from 110 fresh beef color images. After ribeye segmentation, images were converted from RGB to CIELAB color space. Gray-level difference histograms were constructed from each L*, a*, and b* color bands and textural features were extracted. The system predicted shear force with an R 2 value of 0.50 and correctly classified 79% of samples into two tenderness categories.
Detailed close-up images were also acquired from the final 48 samples. Textural features extracted from these close-up images captured more textural information and predicted shear force with a higher R 2 value of 0.72. Correct classification rate was 92%.
MikeC
Well-known member
Better Beef
Assessing the Economic Impacts of Improved Beef Cutability and Palatability
Cattle and calves in the United States were valued at $2.6 billion in 2001, and the beef industry is the largest component of Colorado agriculture. But Stephen Koontz, associate professor of agricultural and resource economics at Colorado State University, wants to make the industry better, not simply bigger. "Many agricultural experiments are aimed at producing more of a product, which ultimately lowers prices," Koontz explains. "My research is intended to improve a product in order to enhance demand."
Koontz's research was inspired by the declining demand for beef that has occurred over the last 30 years. This trend is due to a number of factors, but a significant part of the decline can be attributed to palatability problems. Tenderness is probably the most important quality that contributes to palatability of beef, and Koontz claims that consumers rate between one-out-of-four and one-out-of-five beef eating experiences as unsatisfactory.
Koontz and his colleague R. Mark Enns, who is an assistant professor of animal science and a geneticist, are using funds from the Agriculture Experiment Station along with checkoff dollars from the National Cattleman's Beef Association to measure the benefits and costs of developing tenderness EPDs (Expected Progeny Differences) for beef cattle breeds and to assess the economic benefits of making beef more palatable.
EPDs are how seedstock producers improve different characteristics of beef animals. For example, there have long been EPDs on animal weight and growth performance. As a result, producers are able to look across the pool of breeding stock and and select animals that will produce offspring that are larger and will grow faster. In a national project to investigate EPDs, Colorado State University worked with Kansas State University, Texas A&M University, Cornell University, and the USDA Agricultural Research Service Meat Animal Research Center. Partial funding for the project was provided by the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and the participating beef cattle breed associations. The research conducted on EPDs allows producers to select carcass characteristics, including tenderness. This EPD research also fits well with other research conducted at Colorado State. Specifically, the BeefCam Tenderness Evaluation System, a video-imaging technology developed by Keith Belk and Gary Smith, allows producers to get a picture of carcass tenderness and use that information to adjust their management practices.
What makes for a quality piece of beef? Koontz says tender beef is a result of good genetics, good management, good harvest and fabrication, slight aging, and knowledgeable preparation.
Would consumers be willing to pay more for a more tender product? Koontz was unwilling to rely on consumer surveys to answer this question. "Surveys are somewhat unreliable; people may not do exactly what they say they will do when it comes to spending their own money." Instead, Koontz and former Colorado State graduate student Megan Bruch looked at grocery store data – specifically the National Beef Tenderness Survey conducted by the National Cattleman's Beef Association – to discover how much more consumers will pay for a more tender product. Through the data, they determined that more tender cuts are priced at a premium.
Koontz found that a 10 percent improvement in tenderness would result in a 3.5 to 4 percent increase in retail beef prices. If the resulting product improvements would cause consumers to bring new money to the beef industry, the potential benefit to the industry could be huge. The short-term cost of improving beef palatability would be more than offset by permanent increased industry revenue.
Citing the fact that producers have not yet set up a system for making sure that high-quality producers get paid more and tough beef gets discounted, Koontz claims, "There needs to be a way to track beef tenderness through the marketing system and across different producers. There need to be changes in the beef pricing, marketing, and grading system." Koontz says, "In the short-term, it likely will be niche and high-end marketers who adopt this new technology and develop a system to make it work. Then if changes can be made in the industry grading system, the technology has the potential to be very successful across the industry as a whole."
It is research like this that has the potential to help farmers and ranchers improve their income," Koontz says of his findings. "Declining beef demand has hurt this industry." Koontz feels that the findings and technology offered by the Colorado State University research stands to improve the end product and increase demand.
CSU Develops a New Tool for Evaluating Beef
Colorado State University researcher, Keith Belk and his colleagues have created a revolutionary tool called BeefCam®, which helps the beef industry attract new customers and be more profitable. Based on color vision technologies, BeefCam® is becoming the technological foundation for improving beef grading and marketing around the world.
BeefCam® is a video-imaging technology that scans beef carcasses into color-differentiated images from which the subsequent eating quality can be determined with a high degree of predictability. For instance, BeefCam® can measure lean color as it relates to the pH of the lean tissue, which can be an indicator of beef tenderness. BeefCam® helps beef processors channel the most palatable carcasses toward value-added marketing programs. The result is a higher-quality, more consistent product that keeps customers coming back for more.
BeefCam® research began with Colorado State University and Hunter Labs of Virginia in 1997. SmartMV, a Hunter Labs subsidiary and Research Management Systems (RMS) worked with Colorado State University to commercialize the system. BeefCam® was incorporated into the RMS Computer Vision System (CVS) technology. The commercial BeefCam® System, first operational May 2000, continues to operate for the Nolan Ryan Tender Aged Beef program.
Assessing the Economic Impacts of Improved Beef Cutability and Palatability
Cattle and calves in the United States were valued at $2.6 billion in 2001, and the beef industry is the largest component of Colorado agriculture. But Stephen Koontz, associate professor of agricultural and resource economics at Colorado State University, wants to make the industry better, not simply bigger. "Many agricultural experiments are aimed at producing more of a product, which ultimately lowers prices," Koontz explains. "My research is intended to improve a product in order to enhance demand."
Koontz's research was inspired by the declining demand for beef that has occurred over the last 30 years. This trend is due to a number of factors, but a significant part of the decline can be attributed to palatability problems. Tenderness is probably the most important quality that contributes to palatability of beef, and Koontz claims that consumers rate between one-out-of-four and one-out-of-five beef eating experiences as unsatisfactory.
Koontz and his colleague R. Mark Enns, who is an assistant professor of animal science and a geneticist, are using funds from the Agriculture Experiment Station along with checkoff dollars from the National Cattleman's Beef Association to measure the benefits and costs of developing tenderness EPDs (Expected Progeny Differences) for beef cattle breeds and to assess the economic benefits of making beef more palatable.
EPDs are how seedstock producers improve different characteristics of beef animals. For example, there have long been EPDs on animal weight and growth performance. As a result, producers are able to look across the pool of breeding stock and and select animals that will produce offspring that are larger and will grow faster. In a national project to investigate EPDs, Colorado State University worked with Kansas State University, Texas A&M University, Cornell University, and the USDA Agricultural Research Service Meat Animal Research Center. Partial funding for the project was provided by the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and the participating beef cattle breed associations. The research conducted on EPDs allows producers to select carcass characteristics, including tenderness. This EPD research also fits well with other research conducted at Colorado State. Specifically, the BeefCam Tenderness Evaluation System, a video-imaging technology developed by Keith Belk and Gary Smith, allows producers to get a picture of carcass tenderness and use that information to adjust their management practices.
What makes for a quality piece of beef? Koontz says tender beef is a result of good genetics, good management, good harvest and fabrication, slight aging, and knowledgeable preparation.
Would consumers be willing to pay more for a more tender product? Koontz was unwilling to rely on consumer surveys to answer this question. "Surveys are somewhat unreliable; people may not do exactly what they say they will do when it comes to spending their own money." Instead, Koontz and former Colorado State graduate student Megan Bruch looked at grocery store data – specifically the National Beef Tenderness Survey conducted by the National Cattleman's Beef Association – to discover how much more consumers will pay for a more tender product. Through the data, they determined that more tender cuts are priced at a premium.
Koontz found that a 10 percent improvement in tenderness would result in a 3.5 to 4 percent increase in retail beef prices. If the resulting product improvements would cause consumers to bring new money to the beef industry, the potential benefit to the industry could be huge. The short-term cost of improving beef palatability would be more than offset by permanent increased industry revenue.
Citing the fact that producers have not yet set up a system for making sure that high-quality producers get paid more and tough beef gets discounted, Koontz claims, "There needs to be a way to track beef tenderness through the marketing system and across different producers. There need to be changes in the beef pricing, marketing, and grading system." Koontz says, "In the short-term, it likely will be niche and high-end marketers who adopt this new technology and develop a system to make it work. Then if changes can be made in the industry grading system, the technology has the potential to be very successful across the industry as a whole."
It is research like this that has the potential to help farmers and ranchers improve their income," Koontz says of his findings. "Declining beef demand has hurt this industry." Koontz feels that the findings and technology offered by the Colorado State University research stands to improve the end product and increase demand.
CSU Develops a New Tool for Evaluating Beef
Colorado State University researcher, Keith Belk and his colleagues have created a revolutionary tool called BeefCam®, which helps the beef industry attract new customers and be more profitable. Based on color vision technologies, BeefCam® is becoming the technological foundation for improving beef grading and marketing around the world.
BeefCam® is a video-imaging technology that scans beef carcasses into color-differentiated images from which the subsequent eating quality can be determined with a high degree of predictability. For instance, BeefCam® can measure lean color as it relates to the pH of the lean tissue, which can be an indicator of beef tenderness. BeefCam® helps beef processors channel the most palatable carcasses toward value-added marketing programs. The result is a higher-quality, more consistent product that keeps customers coming back for more.
BeefCam® research began with Colorado State University and Hunter Labs of Virginia in 1997. SmartMV, a Hunter Labs subsidiary and Research Management Systems (RMS) worked with Colorado State University to commercialize the system. BeefCam® was incorporated into the RMS Computer Vision System (CVS) technology. The commercial BeefCam® System, first operational May 2000, continues to operate for the Nolan Ryan Tender Aged Beef program.
SPRINGER FARMS MURRAY GRE":85gqfhed said:Murray Greys have a larger ribeye section,will marble on grass,and are known for their tenderness (they have a preponderance of the tenderness gene). Just another reason to raise murray grey and murray grey cross cattle. ;-)
I heard that too that a Murray Grey will bring flowers to the cow before mating, that is one tender Bull.
myself I like a good Angus bull that jumps from cow to cow, without the wine and Candles 8)MoGal
Well-known member
I need to dig out my copy the OK steer feedout results they sent me from fall 04 and spring 05 but the red poll were at the top for the Warner-Schatzler shear force test.
I think it cost them an extra $15 for the test and I guess some of the breeders weren't interested as not all of them tested for it, but I think its a good wake up call.... its aggravating to pay $7.00 lb for a steak and it not be tender. But then I guess it can be said, its the way its cooked.
Would be interesting to know all the breeds (and even more so the bloodlines) that have the most tender meat. I would imagine the consumer could overlook a hatchett butt if it was good and tender....
I think it cost them an extra $15 for the test and I guess some of the breeders weren't interested as not all of them tested for it, but I think its a good wake up call.... its aggravating to pay $7.00 lb for a steak and it not be tender. But then I guess it can be said, its the way its cooked.
Would be interesting to know all the breeds (and even more so the bloodlines) that have the most tender meat. I would imagine the consumer could overlook a hatchett butt if it was good and tender....
sillco
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2003
- Messages
- 186
- Reaction score
- 0
MikeC":2lf17i3n said:
Maybe there is a place other than health of animals for the National Animal ID program. If we can trace a steak back to a cow and bull we might be able to adjust our breeding program with some since of accurcy. Harvest the cattle that produce a tough steak.
Mike:
The University of Missouri is also trying to produce a scan that will predict tenderness. The other part of the equation is to select bulls that are proven to produce tender meat. That will quickly not be a problem at all due to gene testing. Tenderness is the next trait your cattle will have to have in order to get the best prices, or in other words avoid deductions. I am with Dun on the consumption deal though. I thought we were eating more red meat per capita than we had in some time.
The University of Missouri is also trying to produce a scan that will predict tenderness. The other part of the equation is to select bulls that are proven to produce tender meat. That will quickly not be a problem at all due to gene testing. Tenderness is the next trait your cattle will have to have in order to get the best prices, or in other words avoid deductions. I am with Dun on the consumption deal though. I thought we were eating more red meat per capita than we had in some time.
