J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shackelford, S. D.
Right arrow Articles by Koohmaraie, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shackelford, S. D.
Right arrow Articles by Koohmaraie, M.
J. Anim. Sci. 2003. 81:150-155
© 2003 American Society of Animal Science

On-line prediction of yield grade, longissimus muscle area, preliminary yield grade, adjusted preliminary yield grade, and marbling score using the MARC beef carcass image analysis system1

S. D. Shackelford2, T. L. Wheeler and M. Koohmaraie

Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, USDA, ARS, Clay Center, NE 68933-0166

2 Correspondence:
phone: 402-762-4223; fax: 402-762-4149; E-mail:
shackelford{at}email.marc.usda.gov.

The present experiment was conducted to evaluate the ability of the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center’s beef carcass image analysis system to predict calculated yield grade, longissimus muscle area, preliminary yield grade, adjusted preliminary yield grade, and marbling score under commercial beef processing conditions. In two commercial beef-processing facilities, image analysis was conducted on 800 carcasses on the beef-grading chain immediately after the conventional USDA beef quality and yield grades were applied. Carcasses were blocked by plant and observed calculated yield grade. The carcasses were then separated, with 400 carcasses assigned to a calibration data set that was used to develop regression equations, and the remaining 400 carcasses assigned to a prediction data set used to validate the regression equations. Prediction equations, which included image analysis variables and hot carcass weight, accounted for 90, 88, 90, 88, and 76% of the variation in calculated yield grade, longissimus muscle area, preliminary yield grade, adjusted preliminary yield grade, and marbling score, respectively, in the prediction data set. In comparison, the official USDA yield grade as applied by online graders accounted for 73% of the variation in calculated yield grade. The technology described herein could be used by the beef industry to more accurately determine beef yield grades; however, this system does not provide an accurate enough prediction of marbling score to be used without USDA grader interaction for USDA quality grading.

Key Words: Beef • Carcasses • Instrumentation • Processing






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Society of Animal Science.