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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cross, H. R. Articles by Smith, G. C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Cross, H. R. Articles by Smith, G. C.

Equations for Estimating Boneless Retail Cut Yields from Beef Carcasses

Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Texas A&M University^{2, 3,}, College Station 77843

Abstract

Eighty-two carcasses from steers representing various breeds and crosses provided data which were used to develop 16 prediction equations and to compare the accuracy of seven previously reported equations for predicting boneless retail cut yields. The new equation which explained the highest proportion of the variability in percent closely-trimmed (all fat in excess of 6 mm was removed) chuck, rib, loin and round for carcasses from the combined population was composed of the same independent variables that are included in the U.S.D.A. and Murphey Equations. Among previously reported indices, the Murphey Equation most accurately predicted actual percentages of boneless retail cuts from the carcasses studied. The U.S.D.A. and Wisconsin Trimmed Round Equations were of similar accuracy in explaining the observed variation in cutability; while the Tennessee Simplified Equation No. 4 provided the least reliable prediction of retail cut yields. Regardless of the genetic background, identification of carcasses which have a high ratio of valuable cuts is facilitated by the use of prediction equations which include longissimus muscle area (rather than wholesale round weight, trimmed or untrimmed) as the index of muscling in the carcass.

¹ Present address: Standardization Branch, Livestock Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.

² T. A. 10555, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station.

³ Meats and Meat Chemistry Section, Department of Animal Science.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. E. Belk Rebuttal of the consideration of fat thickness in models to predict beef carcass cutability J Anim Sci, August 1, 2003; 81(8): 2104 - 2105. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. P. Greiner, G. H. Rouse, D. E. Wilson, L. V. Cundiff, and T. L. Wheeler Prediction of retail product weight and percentage using ultrasound and carcass measurements in beef cattle J Anim Sci, July 1, 2003; 81(7): 1736 - 1742. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. P. Greiner, G. H. Rouse, D. E. Wilson, L. V. Cundiff, and T. L. Wheeler The relationship between ultrasound measurements and carcass fat thickness and longissimus muscle area in beef cattle J Anim Sci, March 1, 2003; 81(3): 676 - 682. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. P. Greiner, G. H. Rouse, D. E. Wilson, L. V. Cundiff, and T. L. Wheeler Accuracy of predicting weight and percentage of beef carcass retail product using ultrasound and live animal measures J Anim Sci, February 1, 2003; 81(2): 466 - 473. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]