Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
Breeds Board
EPD's
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MikeC" data-source="post: 363977" data-attributes="member: 1604"><p>"USDA quality grades have been recognized as not differentiating appropriately</p><p>the tenderness of steaks taken from the longissimus muscle of USDA Select</p><p>or Low Choice fed-beef carcasses (Wulf et al. 1997).11 Further, Shackelford et al. (2001)</p><p>argued that consumers can detect differences in tenderness within Select strip loins after</p><p>14 days of postmortem aging. <strong>This is significant, since Choice and Select account for</strong></p><p><strong>over 90 percent of the graded carcasses </strong>(Boleman et al. 1998). <strong>More broadly, Wheeler</strong></p><p><strong>Cundiff, and Koch (1994) found that marbling explained at most just 5 percent of the</strong></p><p><strong>variation in beef palatability.</strong> Comparing the USDA grading system with MSA and the</p><p>Japanese Meat Grading Association System, Strong (2001) concluded that the wide variation</p><p>of eating quality within each USDA quality grade is not surprising, since the system</p><p>does not consider many factors proven to affect quality.</p><p>It is well established that to increase the probability of obtaining satisfactory tenderness,</p><p>the best genetics should be used, and appropriate management practices should be</p><p>followed during growth, slaughter, and processing of carcasses. However, Koohmaraie et</p><p>al. (1996) cautioned that the relation between breed and tenderness is not strong, since</p><p>variation of tenderness within breeds is larger than variation across breeds.12 Hence, as</p><p>Schroeder et al. (1998, p. 10) concluded, "…producer alliances with the goal of targeting</p><p>beef to specific markets demanding particular quality attributes will likely find success</p><p>elusive if they rely predominantly on current beef quality grades, cattle breeds, and genetics</p><p>to ensure tenderness and consistency of their products. Producers may also need to</p><p>employ some type of tenderness testing." This claim is significant, since only one of the</p><p>40 certified beef programs registered with the USDA rely on such measurements.13</p><p>Broadly speaking, all these programs require is some distinctive genotypic and/or phenotypic</p><p>characteristics combined with eligible USDA quality and yield grades (with variable</p><p>stringency) and the absence of visible defects such as hemorrhages or dark cuts.14</p><p>All these requirements are conducive to more tender meat, but there are still significant</p><p>amounts of unexplained variation in consumers' perceptions. <strong>Scientists have concluded</strong></p><p><strong>that "the beef industry must identify more precise methods [than USDA quality grades]</strong></p><p><strong>of distinguishing palatable from unpalatable beef" </strong>(Wulf and Page 2000, p. 2595), and,</p><p>along the same line, <strong>"a direct measure of meat tenderness is needed to supplement quality</strong></p><p><strong>grade" </strong>(Wheeler, Cundiff, and Koch 1994, p. 3150)."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MikeC, post: 363977, member: 1604"] "USDA quality grades have been recognized as not differentiating appropriately the tenderness of steaks taken from the longissimus muscle of USDA Select or Low Choice fed-beef carcasses (Wulf et al. 1997).11 Further, Shackelford et al. (2001) argued that consumers can detect differences in tenderness within Select strip loins after 14 days of postmortem aging. [b]This is significant, since Choice and Select account for over 90 percent of the graded carcasses [/b](Boleman et al. 1998). [b]More broadly, Wheeler Cundiff, and Koch (1994) found that marbling explained at most just 5 percent of the variation in beef palatability.[/b] Comparing the USDA grading system with MSA and the Japanese Meat Grading Association System, Strong (2001) concluded that the wide variation of eating quality within each USDA quality grade is not surprising, since the system does not consider many factors proven to affect quality. It is well established that to increase the probability of obtaining satisfactory tenderness, the best genetics should be used, and appropriate management practices should be followed during growth, slaughter, and processing of carcasses. However, Koohmaraie et al. (1996) cautioned that the relation between breed and tenderness is not strong, since variation of tenderness within breeds is larger than variation across breeds.12 Hence, as Schroeder et al. (1998, p. 10) concluded, “…producer alliances with the goal of targeting beef to specific markets demanding particular quality attributes will likely find success elusive if they rely predominantly on current beef quality grades, cattle breeds, and genetics to ensure tenderness and consistency of their products. Producers may also need to employ some type of tenderness testing.” This claim is significant, since only one of the 40 certified beef programs registered with the USDA rely on such measurements.13 Broadly speaking, all these programs require is some distinctive genotypic and/or phenotypic characteristics combined with eligible USDA quality and yield grades (with variable stringency) and the absence of visible defects such as hemorrhages or dark cuts.14 All these requirements are conducive to more tender meat, but there are still significant amounts of unexplained variation in consumers’ perceptions. [b]Scientists have concluded that “the beef industry must identify more precise methods [than USDA quality grades] of distinguishing palatable from unpalatable beef” [/b](Wulf and Page 2000, p. 2595), and, along the same line, [b]“a direct measure of meat tenderness is needed to supplement quality grade” [/b](Wheeler, Cundiff, and Koch 1994, p. 3150)." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Breeds Board
EPD's
Top