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

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed 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 Lorenzen, C. L. Articles by Savell, J. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lorenzen, C. L. Articles by Savell, J. W.

Beef Customer Satisfaction: Trained sensory panel ratings and Warner-Bratzler shear force values¹

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

⁹ Correspondence:
Phone: 979-845-3935; fax: 979-845-9454; E-mail:
j-savell{at}tamu.edu.

	Abstract

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion Implications Literature Cited

 
Trained sensory panel ratings and Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBS) values from the Beef Customer Satisfaction study are reported. Carcasses were chosen to fit into USDA quality grades of Top Choice (upper two-thirds of USDA Choice), Low Choice, High Select, and Low Select. A trained, descriptive attribute panel evaluated top loin, top sirloin, and top round steaks for muscle fiber tenderness, connective tissue amount, overall tenderness, juiciness, flavor intensity, cooked beef flavor intensity, and cooked beef fat flavor intensity. Four steaks from each of the three cuts from each carcass were assigned randomly to one of four cooking endpoint temperature treatments (60, 65, 70, or 75°C) for WBS determination. For all trained panel measures of tenderness and WBS, regardless of USDA quality grade, top loin steaks were rated higher than top sirloin steaks, which were rated higher than top round steaks (P < 0.05). There were significant interactions between USDA quality grade and cut for most of the trained sensory panel traits: USDA quality grade influenced ratings for top loin steaks more than ratings for top round steaks or top sirloin steaks. Three interactions were significant for WBS values: USDA quality grade x endpoint temperature (P = 0.02), USDA quality grade x cut (P = 0.0007), and cut x endpoint temperature (P = 0.0001). With the exception of High Select, WBS values increased (P < 0.05) for each grade with increasing endpoint temperature. Choice top loin and top round steaks had lower (P < 0.05) WBS values than Select steaks of the same cut; however, only Top Choice top sirloin steaks differed (P < 0.05) from the other USDA grades. As endpoint temperatures increased, WBS values for top sirloin steaks increased substantially compared to the other cuts. When cooked to 60°C, top sirloin steaks were closer to top loin steaks in WBS values, when cooked to 75°C, top sirloin steaks were closer to top round steaks in WBS values. Simple correlation coefficients between consumer ratings and trained sensory muscle fiber tenderness, connective tissue amount, overall tenderness, juiciness, flavor intensity, and cooked beef fat flavor were significant (P < 0.05), but values were low. While relationships exist between consumer and trained sensory measures, it is difficult to predict from objective data how consumers will rate meat at home.

Key Words: Beef • Grading • Market Research • Tenderness

	Introduction

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion Implications Literature Cited

 
Meat science research has long used objective laboratory methods such as trained sensory panel and Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBS) to analyze the palatability attributes of meat. Measuring consumers’ reactions to meat palatability is difficult because consumer acceptance often is influenced by additional factors, such as price and nutrition (Savell et al., 1989; Savell and Shackelford, 1992; Chambers and Bowers, 1993). Additionally, the sensory descriptors used in trained panels may not always have the same meaning to consumers, which can make interpretation of results difficult (Chambers and Bowers, 1993).

Because of the expense of performing in-home consumer research, it would be beneficial if trained sensory panels and objective measures of tenderness, such as Warner-Bratzler shear force, could be used to predict consumer responses for palatability. Shackelford et al. (1991), using two different datasets on top loin steaks, identified minimal shear force threshold levels related to consumer ratings that were important to the retail and foodservice markets. These thresholds have been used in the livestock and meat industry as targets to show that cooked steaks most likely would be acceptable to consumers. There is no large-scale research showing trained sensory panel and consumer evaluations for beef.

In our previous papers (Neely et al., 1998, 1999; Lorenzen et al., 1999; Savell et al., 1999), we reported the consumer responses from the Beef Customer Satisfaction Study. This paper (1) presents the trained sensory panel and Warner-Bratzler shear force information from this study and (2) discusses the relationships between the findings from the controlled laboratory phase and the trends from the consumer in-home evaluation phase.

	Materials and Methods

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion Implications Literature Cited

 
This study is an extension of the Beef Customer Satisfaction Study; therefore, carcass selection, steak processing, and consumer recruitment followed procedures described by Neely et al. (1998). Briefly, Top Choice (upper two-thirds of USDA Choice), Low Choice, High Select, and Low Select carcasses (n = 150 each) were selected from three packing facilities in Colorado, Texas, and Nebraska, and the strip loin, top sirloin, and top (inside) round subprimals from each side were obtained and stored for an aging period of 14 to 21 d at 1°C. Steaks from each subprimal were cut, packaged, frozen, and shipped to consumer households (n = 300 in each city) in Houston, Chicago, Philadelphia, and San Francisco. Each household had two respondents who evaluated steaks for a total of 600 consumers in each city and 2,400 consumers in the study (2,212 consumers completed the study). Steak samples also were taken from each top loin, top sirloin, and top round for trained sensory evaluation and Warner-Bratzler shear force determination. Consumer data from this study have been published by Neely et al. (1998, 1999), Lorenzen et al. (1999), and Savell et al. (1999).

Sensory Evaluation.

An eight-member trained descriptive attribute panel (AMSA, 1995) evaluated each cooked steak for muscle fiber tenderness (MFT), connective tissue amount (CTA), overall tenderness (OTEND), juiciness (TJUIC), flavor intensity (FLAV), cooked beef flavor intensity (BEEFY), and cooked beef fat flavor intensity (FAT) using 8-point scales (8 = extremely tender, none, extremely tender, extremely juicy, extremely intense, extremely intense, and extremely intense; 1 = extremely tough, abundant, extremely tough, extremely dry, extremely bland, extremely bland, and extremely bland).

Steaks were cooked on a Farberware Open Hearth broiler (Farberware Company, Bronx, NY). Internal temperatures were monitored with a copper constantan thermocouple inserted into the geometric center of each steak, and temperatures were recorded on an Omega hand-held thermometer model HH-72T (Omega Engineering Inc., Stanford, CT). Steaks were cooked to an internal temperature of 35°C, flipped, and cooked to a final internal temperature of 70°C.

Evaluations were performed at Texas A&M University in the Meat Science Sensory Testing facility according to AMSA (1995) procedures. Six samples were evaluated per session, and two sessions per day were held. Sensory evaluations were conducted 3 d/wk. Samples were randomized by quality grade level and cut within sensory day to minimize first or last order bias. Thus, panelists evaluated a complete set (12 samples) of treatments each day. Samples were presented at 4-min intervals with a 20-min break between sessions to further minimize taste fatigue. Panelists were secluded in partitioned booths with controlled levels of incandescent light, which were separated from the meat preparation area.

Warner-Bratzler Shear Force Determination.

Warner-Bratzler shear force values were determined according to AMSA (1995) guidelines. One of four steaks from each animal was assigned randomly to one of four cooking endpoint temperature treatment groups, rare = 60°C, medium rare = 65°C, medium = 70°C, or well done = 75°C, and cooked accordingly. Forty-eight steaks, representing all cuts and quality grades equally, then were assigned randomly to each of 150 d for shear force assessments. Steaks were cooked on a Farberware Open Hearth broiler (Farberware Company, Bronx, NY) to the appropriate internal temperature for the assigned treatment. Internal temperatures were monitored with a copper constantan thermocouple inserted into the geometric center of each steak, and temperatures were recorded on a hand-held thermometer (Omega Engineering Inc., Stanford, CT). Steaks were flipped when the internal temperature reached half the value of the endpoint temperature.

After allowing steaks to cool to room temperature for approximately 4 to 6 h, 1.3-cm-diameter cores were taken from each steak parallel to the muscle fiber. Shear force values were obtained using a Warner-Bratzler shear device (G-R Electrical Manufacturing Co., Manhattan, KS). A mean shear force value was the average of a minimum of ten cores sheared perpendicular to the orientation of the muscle fibers.

Data Analysis.

For analysis, an attribute rating for each sample was based on the average of all trained panelists for an individual attribute. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC). Dependent variables were tested for significance by analysis of variance (ANOVA) using the general linear models procedure. Least squares means were generated and separated (P < 0.05) using the PDIFF procedure of SAS.

The statistical model for trained sensory panel ratings included main effects of USDA quality grade and cut and their two-way interaction. In addition, packing plant, cut x packing plant, and animal nested within USDA quality grade x plant were included in the model. The statistical model for Warner-Bratzler shear included main effects of USDA quality grade, cut, and endpoint temperature along with their two-way interactions. In addition, packing plant, day, cut x packing plant, and animal nested within USDA quality grade x plant were included in the model.

In order to determine the relationship between objective measures, trained sensory panel ratings, Warner-Bratzler shear force values, consumer ratings, and correlation coefficients for each cut were generated using the PROC CORR procedure of SAS. Consumer ratings were averaged for each cut and for each carcass before the correlations were performed. (Warner-Bratzler shear force values obtained from cuts cooked to 70°C were used because the correlation coefficients were the highest for this endpoint.)

	Results and Discussion

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion Implications Literature Cited

 
Trained Sensory Panel.

USDA quality grade x cut was significant for two trained panel measures of tenderness (MFT, P = 0.04; CTA, P = 0.03) but not for OTEND (P = 0.06). For all measures of tenderness (Tables 1 and 2), regardless of USDA quality grade, top loin steaks were rated higher than top sirloin steaks, which were rated higher than top round steaks (P < 0.05). Shackelford et al. (1995) reported similar findings for overall tenderness and amount of connective tissue determined by a trained sensory panel; they reported longissimus was more tender than gluteus medius, which was more tender than semimembranosus. This ranking also agrees with Neely et al. (1998) for the in-home consumer evaluations. In addition, no effects of USDA quality grade (P > 0.05) were found for the top sirloin for any of the tenderness attributes. Within top round steaks, High Select rated the lowest (P < 0.05) of the USDA quality grades for MFT and CTA; however, the tenderness ratings for the top round across USDA quality grades were all similar. Little variation in beef round muscles in Warner-Bratzler shear force and trained sensory panel ratings was found by Shackelford et al. (1997) who hypothesized that connective tissue associated with these muscles influenced these results. For MFT (Table 1), trained panelists gave higher ratings (P < 0.05) for Top Choice top loin steaks than both categories of Select steaks. However, panelists gave similar CTA ratings (P > 0.05, Table 1) for top loin steaks across all USDA quality grades. Panel results for top loin MFT and CTA from this study follow the results of Smith et al. (1984) who reported trained panel scores by marbling groupings.

The USDA quality grade x cut interaction was significant for FAT (P = 0.0008, Table 1). For each USDA quality grade, top round steaks were rated lowest (P < 0.05) of the three cuts. No differences (P > 0.05) were noted between top loin and top sirloin steaks for the Select grade. Top loin steaks had higher FAT scores (P < 0.05) than top sirloin steaks within the Low Choice and Top Choice grades. Additionally, for both top loin and top round steaks, Top Choice steaks were rated higher (P < 0.05) than Low Choice steaks. Smith et al. (1984) reported top loin steaks with Moderate marbling were more flavorful than Modest, Small, or Slight marbling. However, none of the steaks in this study had intense beef fat flavor.

Of the flavor attributes, interactions were not significant for FLAV and BEEFY. Trained panelists rated top sirloin steaks higher than top loin steaks and top loin steaks higher than top round steaks for FLAV (P < 0.05, Table 2). This does not agree with Shackelford et al. (1995) who reported the muscle from the top loin to have more beef flavor than muscles from the top sirloin or top round. However, trained panelists rated top loin steaks higher than top sirloin steaks and top sirloin steaks higher than top round steaks for BEEFY (P < 0.05, Table 2). Top Choice steaks had more intense beef flavor (P < 0.05) than Low Choice steaks (Table 3). Additionally, for both FLAV and BEEFY (Table 3), panelists rated Choice steaks higher (P < 0.05) than Select steaks.

Three interactions were significant for Warner-Bratzler shear values: USDA quality grade x endpoint temperature (P = 0.02), USDA quality grade x cut (P = 0.0007), and cut x endpoint temperature (P = 0.0001). Least squares means for USDA quality grade x endpoint temperature are presented in Figure 1. Above 65°C, Choice steaks had lower shear values (P < 0.05) than Select steaks. With each quality grade (except high Select), shear values increased (P < 0.05) with increased endpoint temperature. Neely et al. (1999) reported consumer ratings for tenderness that followed the same trend for a quality grade by degree of doneness interaction.

View larger version (18K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Endpoint temperature x USDA quality grade effect (P = 0.02) on Warner-Bratzler shear force (kilograms) values (SEM = 0.07).

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. Cut x endpoint temperature (P = 0.0001) on Warner-Bratzler shear force (kilograms) values (SEM = 0.06).

Consumer panel scores were autocorrelated (data not presented in tabular format) for all cuts. The trend for all correlations between objective measures (trained panel attributes and WBS) and consumer panel scores in these data is to have similar numbers within a given objective measure for all consumer ratings (Tables 5 to 7), which may be explained by the autocorrelation. All of the correlations between objective measures and consumer panel scores were low (Tables 5 to 7). However, the strongest correlations exist for measures of tenderness (MFT, OTEND, and WBS) and consumer panel ratings.

Although consumer attributes appear to be correlated and trained sensory panel attributes are also related to one another, trained sensory panel evaluations were not highly correlated to consumer panel evaluations. Although we were disappointed with these low correlations, many of the same cut or USDA quality grade effects reported by Neely et al. (1998, 1999), Lorenzen et al. (1999), and Savell et al. (1999) were supported with trained sensory panel or WBS findings. There will continue to be important future uses in research for trained sensory panel, WBS determinations, and in-home or other consumer evaluations of meat. How they can be used to predict each other is a question that will be asked by meat science researchers for years to come.

	Implications

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion Implications Literature Cited

 
There is an inherent difficulty in predicting consumer responses from objective laboratory procedures, such as trained sensory panels and Warner-Bratzler shear force. Far too many factors occur in households when preparing meat, such as cooking method, degree of doneness, seasonings added before, during, and after cooking, and person-to-person differences in preferences and thresholds for tenderness, juiciness, and flavor. This makes it difficult to predict from objective data how consumers will rate meat at home.

	Footnotes

² Present address: Department of Food Science, University of Missouri, Columbia 65211.

³ Present address: Research Triangle Institute, P.O. Box 12194, 3040 Cornwallis Rd., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.

⁴ Present address: 261 Hudson Trace, Augusta, GA 30907.

⁵ Department of Animal Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins 80523.

⁶ Standardization Branch, Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA, 8116 Lake Dr., Mounds, OK 74047.

⁷ Present address: 7643 Sunshine Peak, Littleton, CO 80127.

⁸ National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, 9110 East Nichols Ave., Centennial, CO 80112.

Received for publication May 31, 2002. Accepted for publication August 20, 2002.

	Literature Cited

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion Implications Literature Cited

 


AMSA. 1995. Research Guidelines for Cookery, Sensory Evaluation and Instrumental Tenderness Measurements of Fresh Meat. National Live Stock and Meat Board, Chicago, IL.

Cox, R. J., J. M. Thompson, C. M. Cunial, S. Winter, and A. J. Gordon. 1997. The effect of degree of doneness of beef steaks on consumer acceptability of meals in restaurants. Meat Sci. 45:75–85.

Chambers, E., and J. R. Bowers. 1993. Consumer perception of sensory qualities in muscle foods. Food Technol. 47:116,118–120.

Lorenzen, C. L., T. R. Neely, R. K. Miller, J. D. Tatum, J. W. Wise, J. F. Taylor, M. J. Buyck, J. O. Reagan, and J. W. Savell. 1999. Beef Customer Satisfaction: Cooking method and degree of doneness effects on the top loin steak. J. Anim. Sci. 77:637–644.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Neely, T. R., C. L. Lorenzen, R. K. Miller, J. D. Tatum, J. W. Wise, J. F. Taylor, M. J. Buyck, J. O. Reagan, and J. W. Savell. 1998. Beef Customer Satisfaction: Role of cut, USDA quality grade, and city on in-home consumer ratings. J. Anim. Sci. 76:1027–1033.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Neely, T. R., C. L. Lorenzen, R. K. Miller, J. D. Tatum, J. W. Wise, J. F. Taylor, M. J. Buyck, J. O. Reagan, and J. W. Savell. 1999. Beef Customer Satisfaction: Cooking method and degree of doneness effects on the top round steak. J. Anim. Sci. 77:653–660.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Savell, J. W., H. R. Cross, J. J. Francis, J. W. Wise, D. S. Hale, D. L. Wilkes, and G. C. Smith. 1989. National Consumer Retail Beef Study: Interaction of trim level, price and grade on consumer acceptance of beef steaks and roasts. J. Food Qual. 12:251–274.

Savell, J. W., C. L. Lorenzen, T. R. Neely, R. K. Miller, J. D. Tatum, J. W. Wise, J. F. Taylor, M. J. Buyck, and J. O. Reagan. 1999. Beef Customer Satisfaction: Cooking method and degree of doneness effects on the top sirloin steak. J. Anim. Sci. 77:645–653.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Savell, J. W., and S. D. Shackelford. 1992. The significance of tenderness to the meat industry. Proc. Recip. Meat Conf. Ft. Collins, CO. 45:43–46.

Shackelford, S. D., J. B. Morgan, H. R. Cross, and J. W. Savell. 1991. Identification of threshold levels for Warner-Bratzler shear force in beef top loin steaks. J. Muscle Foods 2:289–296.

Shackelford, S. D., T. L. Wheeler, and M. Koohmaraie. 1995. Relationship between shear force and trained sensory panel tenderness ratings of 10 major muscles from Bos indicus and Bos taurus cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 73:3333–3340.[Abstract]

Shackelford, S. D., T. L. Wheeler, and M. Koohmaraie. 1997. Repeatability of tenderness measurements in beef round muscles. J. Anim. Sci. 75:2411–2416.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Smith, G. C., Z. L. Carpenter, H. R. Cross, C. E. Murphey, H. C. Abraham, J. W. Savell, G. W. Davis, B. W. Berry, and F. C. Parrish, Jr. 1984. Relationship of USDA marbling groups to palatability of cooked beef. J. Food Qual. 7:289–308.

Smith, G. C., J. W. Savell, H. R. Cross, Z. L. Carpenter, C. E. Murphey, G. W. Davis, H. C. Abraham, F. C. Parrish, Jr., and B. W. Berry. 1987. Relationship of USDA quality grades to palatability of cooked beef. J. Food Qual. 10:269–286.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. Faucitano, P. Y. Chouinard, J. Fortin, I. B. Mandell, C. Lafreniere, C. L. Girard, and R. Berthiaume Comparison of alternative beef production systems based on forage finishing or grain-forage diets with or without growth promotants: 2. Meat quality, fatty acid composition, and overall palatability J Anim Sci, July 1, 2008; 86(7): 1678 - 1689. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. M. Behrends, K. J. Goodson, M. Koohmaraie, S. D. Shackelford, T. L. Wheeler, W. W. Morgan, J. O. Reagan, B. L. Gwartney, J. W. Wise, and J. W. Savell Beef customer satisfaction: USDA quality grade and marination effects on consumer evaluations of top round steaks J Anim Sci, March 1, 2005; 83(3): 662 - 670. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. J. Platter, J. D. Tatum, K. E. Belk, P. L. Chapman, J. A. Scanga, and G. C. Smith Relationships of consumer sensory ratings, marbling score, and shear force value to consumer acceptance of beef strip loin steaks J Anim Sci, November 1, 2003; 81(11): 2741 - 2750. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed 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 Lorenzen, C. L. Articles by Savell, J. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lorenzen, C. L. Articles by Savell, J. W.