Suitability of Beef × Dairy Crosses as Moderate-Sized Subprimal Alternatives for the Foodservice Industry

Abstract

The 2016 National Beef Quality Audit (NBQA) data showed heavier carcass weights and larger ribeye sizes than ever before. This presents a challenge for the foodservice sector of the beef industry. This study aimed to determine if beef × dairy carcasses could serve as a potential answer for the challenge of portioning steaks from larger cut sizes. Additionally, steaks from beef × dairy subprimals were evaluated to determine objective tenderness levels and consumer acceptability. Thirty USDA Choice beef × dairy carcasses and 30 USDA Choice native beef carcasses were selected from lots of each breed-type at a commercial beef harvesting facility. The 60 carcasses were fabricated and each ribeye rolls (IMPS 112A), bone-in strip loins (IMPS 175), top sirloin butts (IMPS 184B), and tenderloins (IMPS 189A) were procured from one side of the pre-selected carcasses, and subsequently portioned into steaks at a collaborating meat purveyor. Carcass-to-subprimal yield, subprimal-to-steak yield, pre-trimming weights, steak weights, steak trimming weights, and steak numbers were determined for each subprimal. Designated steaks were transported to Texas A&M University for subsequent WBS force measurements and consumer sensory panel evaluations. While there were no differences in ribeye size, beef × dairy carcasses possessed on average 0.27 cm less (P < 0.05) adjusted fat thickness. There were no differences in carcass-to-subprimal yield or subprimal-to-steak yield for any of the subprimal types. Beef × dairy tenderloins produced approximately 1.6 fewer (P < 0.05) steaks than native beef tenderloins and resulted in less pre-trim lean and fat weights (P < 0.05). None of the other subprimals evaluated showed differences in steak number or pre-trim weight between the two treatments. Consumer sensory ratings were similar for beef × dairy and native beef steaks for tenderness liking, flavor liking, juiciness liking, and overall liking. Similarly, WBS force measurements were similar between beef × dairy and native beef steaks for all subprimals. Beef × dairy carcasses did not prove to generate more moderately sized subprimals compared to native carcasses. However, they could provide dairy producers economic benefit, as they do not differ from native beef in objective tenderness or consumer palatability ratings. Further studies of beef × dairy crossbreds and their potential benefits for both dairy producers and beef packers are necessary in order to identify and determine the severity of disadvantages inherited from maternal genetics.