HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kropf, D. H. Articles by Graf, R. L. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Kropf, D. H. Articles by Graf, R. L.

The Effect of Carcass Grade, Weight and Classification upon Boneless Beef Yield¹

Quartermaster Food and Container Institute for the Armed Forces, Chicago, Illinois

Abstract

Boneless beef yield and percentage of bone decreased and fat percentage increased as grade increased when Commercial, Good and Choice beef carcasses were compared. Boneless beef to bone ratio also increased in the higher grades, primarily since bone decreased markedly in higher grades. The increased boneless beef yield in lower grades cannot be attributed to a higher total yield of moist and dry heat steaks and roasts.

Steers, cows and heifers, in that order, showed decreasing boneless beef and bone percentages and increasing fat percentages. The greater boneless beef yield in steers was not attributable to total of moist and dry heat steaks and roasts. Boneless beef to bone ratio was lower in steers, but similar in cows and heifers.

Boneless beef yield was decreased in 800–900 lb. carcasses. Percentage fat was increased and percentage bone decreased as carcass weight increased. Light weight carcasses (400–500 lb.) showed a lower boneless beef to bone ratio; whereas the other two weight groups were similar.

¹ This paper reports research undertaken by the Quartermaster Food and Container Institute for the Armed Forces, QM Research and Engineering Command, U. S. Army, and has been assigned number 829 in the series of papers approved for publication. The views or conclusions contained in this paper are those of the authors. They are not to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views or indorsement of the Department of Defense.

² The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of R. A. Merkel, J. F. Price, F. K. Freitag, R. Lenaerts, E. V. Kwiat, T. W. M. Wilson and C. D. Harral in planning, collection and tabulation of data, and of M. M. VanZandt for grading and subjective evaluations.