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 McKenna, D. R.
Right arrow Articles by Savell, J. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McKenna, D. R.
Right arrow Articles by Savell, J. W.
J. Anim. Sci. 2003. 81:1482-1487
© 2003 American Society of Animal Science

Retail yields from beef chuck and round subprimals from two grade groups when merchandised as single muscle cuts

D. R. McKenna, D. B. Griffin, H. K. Johnson, B. R. Covington and J. W. Savell1

Department of Animal Science, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas A&M University, College Station 77843-2471

1 Correspondence:
2471 TAMU (phone: 979-845-3935; fax: 979-845-9454; E-mail:
j-savell{at}tamu.edu).

Beef subprimals from two different grade groups were obtained from two beef processors to assist in updating the Beef Computer Assisted Retail Decision Support (CARDS) program with new fabrication styles. The grade groups consisted of Top Choice (containing subprimals from carcasses with a Modest or Moderate degree of marbling) and Select (containing subprimals from carcasses with a Slight degree of marbling). Subprimals (shoulder clod; top blade, roast; arm roast; knuckle, peeled; outside round, flat) were separated into individual muscles and fabricated into retail cuts by professional retail meat cutters. Mean retail cutting yields and labor requirements were calculated from observed weights (kilograms) and processing times (seconds). Data were analyzed to determine means and standard errors of percentage yield and processing times for subprimals in each grade group, and comparisons were made between grade groups. Generally, there were few differences in processing times between Top Choice and Select subprimals, and the trimming phase required the most time to complete for each subprimal. Differences (P < 0.05) were observed in saleable yield between Top Choice and Select subprimals for the shoulder clod (Top Choice = 73.89%; Select = 78.49%), top blade, roast (Top Choice = 84.36%; Select = 86.70%), and outside round, flat (Top Choice = 85.99%; Select = 91.34%). Trimmable fat differed (P < 0.05) between Top Choice and Select subprimals: shoulder clod (Top Choice = 25.30%; Select = 20.85%), top blade, roast (Top Choice = 14.88%; Select = 12.59%), arm roast (Top Choice = 8.35%; Select = 7.47%), knuckle (Top Choice = 5.72%; Select = 2.73%), and outside round, flat (Top Choice = 13.82%; Select = 7.26%). Most of the differences in saleable yields were related to less trimmable fat for Select subprimals, which also required less trimming time than Top Choice subprimals. These data will serve to update the Beef CARDS program and will provide retailers and foodservice operators with third-party cutting yield and time allocation information.

Key Words: Beef • Retail Marketing • Time Allocation • Yields






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