Producing Quality Beef Producing Quality Beef Customers Seek Customers Seek

Lynn A Bliven Lynn A Bliven

Association Team Coordinator Association Team Coordinator

Cornell Cooperative Extension Cornell Cooperative Extension Allegany/Cattaraugus CountyAllegany/Cattaraugus County

What factors affect eating quality?What factors affect eating quality?

With rising demand and shrinking beef supply, consumers may facehigher prices at the meat case.

How will you provide the product consumers How will you provide the product consumers desire at a price they are willing to pay? desire at a price they are willing to pay?

““The greatest agricultural resource The greatest agricultural resource of New York is its exceptional of New York is its exceptional

adaptation for the growth of grass. adaptation for the growth of grass. Yet the hay crop has received little Yet the hay crop has received little attention and pastures have rarely attention and pastures have rarely

received any care… It would received any care… It would certainly seem good policy to certainly seem good policy to

consider means of increasing the consider means of increasing the efficiency of our pastures”.efficiency of our pastures”.

--Dr. G. F. Warren. 1910

Traditional Production

At any given time, about 15-20% of all beef cattle in the US are housed in feedlots. They account for about 10% of all corn use in the US.

80-85% of the life cycle of traditionally-raised beef cattle in the US depends on grass and forages as the sole nutritional source.

Source: 2008 http://snipurl.com/methanecartoon, Last accessed May 7, 2010

If you do the calculations based on the YAN prediction equation and account for the time, manure production, and total meat production from 20% forage to 100% forage in the diet, the methane production increases by

500%

Per pound of beef produced.

Canadian, US, and Australian studies have confirmed these results.

The bigger picture is more than methane.

Beef Cattle OptionsBeef Cattle Options

Cow/calfCow/calf

StockerStocker

FinishingFinishing

ProfitabilityProfitability 20% of variation 20% of variation

due to due to productivityproductivity

80% of variation 80% of variation due to costsdue to costs

60% of variation 60% of variation in costs due to in costs due to feed costsfeed costs

Difference between profitable Difference between profitable and unprofitable cow/calf and unprofitable cow/calf

operationsoperations Lower feed cost,Lower feed cost, less debt and less debt and lower lower

operating expenseoperating expense Productivity: Productivity: higher sale weights,higher sale weights, conception conception

rate and pounds weaned/cow exposedrate and pounds weaned/cow exposed Better management of genetics, herd health and Better management of genetics, herd health and

pasturespastures Measuring performance, benchmarking and Measuring performance, benchmarking and

choosing the right replacement stockchoosing the right replacement stock Matching genetics to marketMatching genetics to market Correct use of technologyCorrect use of technology

Cost reductionCost reduction

Shift in costs occurred through:Shift in costs occurred through:

1.1. Adding grazing days (extended grazing)Adding grazing days (extended grazing)

2.2. Shift in grazing systemsShift in grazing systems

3.3. Adjustments in feeding systemsAdjustments in feeding systems

Nutrient Requirements of a Beef Cow

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

JAN

FEB

MARCH

APRM

AYJU

NJU

LAUG

SEPOCT

NOV

DEC

Month

TD

N l

b/d

ay

Post Calving Pregnant and lactating

Mid-gesta

tion

Mid

-ges

tatio

n Pre-ca

lving

52% TDN8% CP

52% TDN8% CP

52% TDN10% CP

52% TDN10% CP

Stocking Method Comparison

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1

Ani

mal

Uni

t G

razi

ng D

ays/

Ac

16-Paddock

4-Paddock

Continuous

Stocking Method

Adapted from Emmick, Fox, and Seaney, 1990

1.7

1.1

.76

7410

4498

3250

285285

173173

125125

Grass Fed Beef is an important part of the Grass Fed Beef is an important part of the Beef industry because:Beef industry because:

1.It engages customers that may not eat any other beef.2.It meets the criteria for customers that desire information about how their food is produced3.It meets the needs of customers that do not wish to have animals confined.4.It is usually produced and marketed locally so customers are face-to-face with farmers.5.It is an important lifestyle for many farmers.

•Reduced cost of gainReduced cost of gain

•Potential world grain shortage Potential world grain shortage

•Energy conservationEnergy conservation

•Consumer desire for leaner meatConsumer desire for leaner meat

•Philosophical predisposition to no grain Philosophical predisposition to no grain

feedingfeeding

•Health benefitsHealth benefits

Increased interest in beef finished on forage

Forage finished beef is more variable:Forage finished beef is more variable:

• flavorflavor

• tenderness tenderness

•lean colorlean color

•retail shelf liferetail shelf life

Can cattle be finished on all Can cattle be finished on all forage?forage?

Discriminated by packers:Discriminated by packers:

• lower Dressing Percentagelower Dressing Percentage

• increased Cooler Shrinkincreased Cooler Shrink

• lower Quality Gradelower Quality Grade

Can cattle be finished on all Can cattle be finished on all forage?forage?

Assumptions:Assumptions:•BW 85 lbBW 85 lb•Calving date May 1Calving date May 1•WW 578 lb (2.5 WDA)WW 578 lb (2.5 WDA)•Harvest weight 1100 lb.Harvest weight 1100 lb.

To finish on grass:To finish on grass:

Cattle must gain 1.5 -2.0 lb/day Cattle must gain 1.5 -2.0 lb/day during winter feeding period.during winter feeding period.

If WDA through weaning is only 2.0 If WDA through weaning is only 2.0 lb, then winter gain must be lb, then winter gain must be 2.0/day2.0/day

Winter Performance RequirementsWinter Performance Requirements

Performance of cattle fed hay crop silage and dry hay during winter

feeding period

Baker & Buchanan, Baker Baker & Buchanan, Baker & Ketchen& Ketchen

1.3 – 1.3 – 2.12.1

HCSHCS

Gallagher, et al., Baker & Gallagher, et al., Baker & Buchanan, Baker & Buchanan, Baker & KetchenKetchen

0.3-2.00.3-2.0HayHay

SourceSourceADG, lbADG, lbFeedFeed

Performance of cattle grazing BMR Sorghum Sudan Grass

Weight, lb ADG, lb Source1156 2.7 Cornell453-566 2.4 - 2.8 Texas

A&M

Growth RateGrowth Rate

Faster is better for palatabilityFaster is better for palatability Strive for 2.0 lb/day for at least the last Strive for 2.0 lb/day for at least the last

100 days100 days Improves calpain/calpastatinImproves calpain/calpastatin Animals will be ready for market at younger Animals will be ready for market at younger

ageage

External FatExternal Fat

A target of 0.3 - 0.4 inches is goodA target of 0.3 - 0.4 inches is good Allows slower chilling and prevents strong Allows slower chilling and prevents strong

cross bonds between muscle filaments.cross bonds between muscle filaments. Also demonstrates animal has adequate Also demonstrates animal has adequate

energy for rapid growth and that muscle energy for rapid growth and that muscle tissue growth is stoppingtissue growth is stopping

MaturityMaturity(animal age)(animal age)

Strive for < 24 monthsStrive for < 24 months Less connective tissue cross linkingLess connective tissue cross linking Older animals are less tenderOlder animals are less tender Fewer problems with BSE regulations (cattle Fewer problems with BSE regulations (cattle

are aged by dentition which is not always are aged by dentition which is not always precise)precise)

MaturityMaturity(animal age)(animal age)

Strive for < 24 monthsStrive for < 24 months Less connective tissue cross linkingLess connective tissue cross linking Older animals are less tenderOlder animals are less tender Fewer problems with BSE regulations (cattle Fewer problems with BSE regulations (cattle

are aged by dentition which is not always are aged by dentition which is not always precise)precise)

Key PointsKey Points

Multiple and varied benefits of grazingMultiple and varied benefits of grazing Economic benefits varyEconomic benefits vary Forage can meet nutrient requirements of Forage can meet nutrient requirements of

cattle of all agescattle of all ages Research needed to manage meat qualityResearch needed to manage meat quality Consistent market requiredConsistent market required

Frame ScoreFrame Score

What is it?What is it? Measurement based on observation and Measurement based on observation and

height measurements when claves are height measurements when claves are evaluated at 205 days of ageevaluated at 205 days of age

Uses?Uses? To estimate expected size of animal when it To estimate expected size of animal when it

reaches maturityreaches maturity Sire selectionSire selection

Carcass Value vs. Meat QualityCarcass Value vs. Meat Quality

Commodity marketCommodity market1.1. Carcass valueCarcass value

2.2. Meat qualityMeat quality

Specialty marketSpecialty market1.1. Meat qualityMeat quality

2.2. Carcass valueCarcass value

Major characteristics important in beef production include:

• mature body size,

• milk production,

• age at puberty,

• environmental adaptability,

• rate and efficiency of gain,

• muscle expression,

• cutability, and

• marbling.

Younger cattle produce beef with:Superior ColorFiner TextureSuperior Firmness

Carcass Physiological Carcass Physiological Age/MaturityAge/Maturity

Maturity ScoreAge In

Months

B 30-42

C 42-72

D 72-96

E 96+

A 9-30

Beef Quality GradesBeef Quality Grades

Click to add textClick to add text A B C EDAbundantAbundant

Mod. Abund.Mod. Abund.

Sl. Abund.Sl. Abund.

ModerateModerate

ModestModest

SmallSmall

SlightSlight

TracesTraces

Pract. Dev.Pract. Dev.

Marbling

Maturity

Prime

Choice

Select

Standard

Commercial

Utility

Pricing Grid, Value Discovery, 2012Pricing Grid, Value Discovery, 2012FactorFactor Premium, $/cwtPremium, $/cwt

Quality gradeQuality grade PrimePrime +$0.08+$0.08

ChoiceChoice $0.00$0.00

SelectSelect -$0.08-$0.08

SexSex HeiferHeifer -$0.01-$0.01

Yield gradeYield grade YG2YG2 +$0.02+$0.02

Weight, lbWeight, lb <550<550 -$0.15-$0.15

>949>949 -$0.15-$0.15

DefectDefect Dark,NRDark,NR -$0.18-$0.18

Slight Small Modest

Moderate Slightly abundant Moderately abundant

USDA Beef Quality GradesUSDA Beef Quality Grades

USDA PrimeUSDA Prime USDA ChoiceUSDA Choice USDA SelectUSDA Select USDA StandardUSDA Standard USDA CommercialUSDA Commercial USDA UtilityUSDA Utility USDA CutterUSDA Cutter USDA CannerUSDA Canner

Beef quality refers Beef quality refers to the expected to the expected palatability of the palatability of the final cooked productfinal cooked product

USDA Quality USDA Quality Grades are used to Grades are used to reflect differences in reflect differences in expected eating expected eating quality among quality among slaughter cattle and slaughter cattle and their carcassestheir carcasses

Most Desirable

Least Desirable

MARBLING

Percent of Loin Steaks Receiving Desirable andPercent of Loin Steaks Receiving Desirable andUndesirable Overall Palatability RatingsUndesirable Overall Palatability Ratings

Smith et al. (1987)Smith et al. (1987)

Percent of Loin Steaks Receiving Desirable andPercent of Loin Steaks Receiving Desirable andUndesirable Overall Palatability RatingsUndesirable Overall Palatability Ratings

Smith et al. (1987)Smith et al. (1987)

8 2 145 37 6

Prime

Select

Choice

Standard

5.6%

10.8%

26.4%

59.1%

Extremely UndesirableExtremely Desirable

How Do Quality Grades Work?How Do Quality Grades Work?

Meat Quality- Sensory CharacteristicsMeat Quality- Sensory Characteristics

Tenderness factorsTenderness factorsa.a. Sarcomere shorteningSarcomere shorteningb.b. AgingAgingc.c. Animal ageAnimal aged.d. GenotypeGenotypee.e. Time on feedTime on feedf.f. GenderGenderg.g. Degree of donenessDegree of doneness

Sensory Tenderness

3

4

5

6

7

0.04 0.09 0.16 0.23 0.30 0.37

Fat thickness, in.

Shear Force, kg

5

6

7

8

9

10

0.04 0.09 0.16 0.23 0.30 0.37

Fat thickness, in.

Sarcomere Length, mm

1.7

1.8

1.9

2

0.04 0.09 0.16 0.23 0.30 0.37

Fat thickness, in.

Meat Quality - Days On FeedMeat Quality - Days On Feed

DOF Flavor TendernessOverall

Palatability0 64 59 5130 93 48 5960 90 90 7090 79 68 63100 95 100 93130 100 93 91160 100 100 93200 100 95 95230 100 100 97

% of Panel Ratings Higher than 5.00

Source: Dolezal et al., (1982)

Meat Quality- Sensory CharacteristicsMeat Quality- Sensory Characteristics

Tenderness factorsTenderness factorsa.a. Sarcomere shortening Sarcomere shortening b.b. AgingAgingc.c. Animal ageAnimal aged.d. GenotypeGenotypee.e. Time on feedTime on feedf.f. GenderGenderg.g. Degree of donenessDegree of doneness

Relationship between body condition score and body fat

Body Condition ScorePercent Total Body

Fat Subcutaneous Fat Cover (inches)

1 0.7 0

2 5.0 0.004

3 9.3 0.005

4 13.7 0.11

5 18.0 0.19

6 22.3 0.29

7 26.7 0.41

8 31.0 0.54

9 35.3 0.68

Rick Hardin. Using Body Condition Scoring In Beef Cattle Management. The University of Georgia College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences Cooperative Extension Service Circular 817/December, 1990. http://www.ces.uga.edu/pubcd/c762-w.html

Effect of Rates of gain vs. Fat in gain

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

200 300 400 500

Shrunk Body Weight, kg

Fat

in

gai

n,

%

0.6 kg/d

1.0 kg/d

1.3 kg/d

Suggested window of acceptabilityfor strategic alliances

Minimum 100 days in a high energy diet Carcass weight 650-800 lb. Low Choice QG Yield grade 3 or better Manage for tenderness

– maximum age of 18 months– fat depth .3-.5 in. for insulation– electric stimulation of carcass– min. aging in box of 14-21 days

JuicinessJuiciness Marbling stimulates the Marbling stimulates the

salivary glands and salivary glands and influences the perceived influences the perceived juiciness of beefjuiciness of beef

Insulatory effect during Insulatory effect during cookingcooking Fat slows down the Fat slows down the

migration of heat and migration of heat and decreases the shock effect decreases the shock effect of heat on protein of heat on protein degradation and moisture degradation and moisture loss.loss.

The amount of water and fat The amount of water and fat lost during cooking is lost during cooking is reducedreduced

Marbling

Juiciness

The #1 Reason ConsumersThe #1 Reason ConsumersPurchase BeefPurchase Beef

TASTE!

TASTE!

Beef Flavor Beef Flavor Intensity/Desirability/OverallIntensity/Desirability/Overall

1)1) Nutritional regimeNutritional regime2)2) Feeding durationFeeding duration3)3) Flavor increases as marbling/fat Flavor increases as marbling/fat

increasesincreases

Species-specific carbonyl compounds locatedin the intramuscular fat determine flavor

Primary determinants of beef flavor desirability are:

Factors affecting meat quality: Factors affecting meat quality: Live animal/production factorsLive animal/production factors

1.1. Weight (initial & final)Weight (initial & final)

2.2. BreedBreed

3.3. ADGADG

4.4. AgeAge

5.5. Weight/DOAWeight/DOA

6.6. GenderGender

7.7. Pasture daysPasture days

8.8. Feedlot daysFeedlot days

9.9. Total daysTotal days

10.10. Dietary fatDietary fat

Sensory panelSire WBS, lb. Tend. Flavor JuicinessBreed score score score

Hereford 9.1 5.6 4.9 5.3

Angus 8.9 5.8 4.9 5.4

Red Angus 9.2 5.7 4.9 5.4

Simmental 9.5 5.6 4.9 5.3

Gelbvieh 10.0 5.3 4.8 5.2

Limousin 9.5 5.6 4.9 5.3

Charolais 9.6 5.5 4.9 5.2

LSD<.05 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.1

Tenderness and sensory characteristics by Tenderness and sensory characteristics by sire breedsire breed

Meat Quality-Physical Meat Quality-Physical FactorsFactors

#1-Total fat = 135 lb.

#2 – Total fat = 207 lb.

Regression equationsRegression equations

Marbling impactsMarbling impacts TendernessTenderness JuicinessJuiciness Flavor intensityFlavor intensity Overall desirabilityOverall desirability

Regressions of meat quality indices Regressions of meat quality indices on carcass measurementson carcass measurements

FactorFactor Prediction equationPrediction equation RR22

TendernessTenderness 4.95 4.95 –– 0.002 x marbling 0.002 x marbling 0.040.04

Flavor desirabilityFlavor desirability 6.476.47++.02 x HCW .02 x HCW -- .0836 x REA .0836 x REA 0.300.30

Flavor intensityFlavor intensity 0.005 x marbling 0.005 x marbling 0.440.44

Overall desirabilityOverall desirability 3.81 3.81 ++ .0063 x Mrb .0063 x Mrb –– .0267 fat .0267 fat 0.240.24

Owens and Gardner, 1999

““For overall maximum meat For overall maximum meat

quality, these equations indicate quality, these equations indicate

that the preferred animal is one that the preferred animal is one

with a high degree of marbling but with a high degree of marbling but

minimal fat cover.”minimal fat cover.”

Owens and Gardner, Owens and Gardner,

19991999

Regressions of meat quality indices Regressions of meat quality indices on beef production factorson beef production factors

FactorFactor Prediction equationPrediction equation RR22

TendernessTenderness 7.86 7.86 -- .0027 x FW .0027 x FW ++.643 x ADG – 1.39 .643 x ADG – 1.39 x Wt/DOAx Wt/DOA

0.490.49

Flavor Flavor desirabilitydesirability

8.26 8.26 ++ .0063 dietE .0063 dietE –– 2.62 x Wt/DOA 2.62 x Wt/DOA 0.550.55

Flavor Flavor intensityintensity

15.04 15.04 -- .0029 x FW .0029 x FW –– .0031 x DOF .0031 x DOF

–– 6.43 x Wt/DOA6.43 x Wt/DOA

0.950.95

Overall Overall desirabilitydesirability

8.92 8.92 –– 3.115 x Wt/DOA 3.115 x Wt/DOA 0.710.71

Owens and Gardner, 1999

External Fat Thickness andExternal Fat Thickness andBeef PalatabilityBeef Palatability

<.20 .20 - .40 >.40Tenderness, % Very Desirable 24 33 49 Desirable 43 44 47 Undesirable 33 24 4

Overall Palatability, % Very Desirable 6 17 38 Desirable 50 61 52 Undesirable 44 22 10

Fat Thickness (3/4 measure)

Source: Dolezal et al., 1982

““For optimum overall meat quality, For optimum overall meat quality,

the ideal animal appears to be one the ideal animal appears to be one

that is older (but still under 30 that is older (but still under 30

months) and that has gained months) and that has gained

rapidly, but not excessively heavy rapidly, but not excessively heavy

at harvest.”at harvest.”

Owens and Gardner, 1999Owens and Gardner, 1999

““No Better Bull” Profit TipsNo Better Bull” Profit Tips

1.1. Smaller cowsSmaller cows

2.2. Later calvingLater calving

3.3. Hybrid vigor-wean Hybrid vigor-wean 23% more23% more

4.4. Use composite bullsUse composite bulls

5.5. Develop heifers to Develop heifers to 55% of mature 55% of mature weightweight

6.6. Avoid scoursAvoid scours

7.7. Fenceline weaningFenceline weaning

8.8. Pre-conditionPre-condition

9.9. Select for feed Select for feed efficiencyefficiency

10.10. Capitalize asset Capitalize asset basebase

PricingPricing

On the hoofOn the hoof

On the railOn the rail

By the pieceBy the piece

PricingPricing

Know your CostsKnow your CostsPrice for ProfitPrice for Profit

1) Start with the input costs = 1) Start with the input costs = Variable Variable Costs Costs

2) Add in ownership costs = 2) Add in ownership costs = Fixed CostsFixed Costs

3) Add in a return to you = 3) Add in a return to you = Profitable Profitable Price Price

Value vs. PriceValue vs. Price

Value = Quality + Value = Quality + Service + PriceService + Price Your buyers want Your buyers want

qualityquality Your buyers want to Your buyers want to

know how their food know how their food was raisedwas raised

Your buyers are wiling Your buyers are wiling to pay for educationto pay for education

Calculations for Determining PriceCalculations for Determining Price

Cost and Profit MethodCost and Profit Method

Gross Margin MethodGross Margin Method

Plan for Profit – Don’t Drop PricesPlan for Profit – Don’t Drop Prices

Going Rate for Market AreaGoing Rate for Market Area

Questions??

Credit for contribution of content: Michael J. Baker, Cornell University Beef Extension Specialist