Consumer selection of constant-weight ribeye, top loin, and sirloin steaks

Leick, C.M.; Behrends, J.M.; Schmidt, Ty B; Schilling, M. Wes

doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.09.004

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This greater surface area as preference/selection criteria was mentioned by both Leick et al (2012) and Sweeter et al (2005) . Leick et al (2011) stated that there are challenges in setting thickness/size parameters because of differences in demographics, which helps support our use of multiple portion thickness/portion weight combinations. Conversely, in an economic study designed to evaluate the consequences of larger/heavier beef in the marketplace, Maples et al (2018) found that consumers tended to value thickness slightly more than surface area and that the majority of steak consumers disliked thin-cut steaks.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Past work on optimum steak size and thickness is conflicted. Leick et al (2011) found that consumers ranked steak thickness as the first or second most important selection criteria for ribeye, top loin, and top sirloin steaks. However, at least for ribeye steaks, when all were portioned to the same weight, although from different LM area/carcass weight combinations, consumers preferred steaks from the largest LM area, possibly due to the greater surface area.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sorting beef subprimals by ribeye area size at the packer level to optimize utility and product uniformity in foodservice and retail

Steele

Arnold

Gehring

et al. 2020

Translational Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract The objectives of the study were to evaluate if sorting beef carcasses at the packer level by LM area, using instrument grading technology, would increase consistency of three boxed beef products for the foodservice and retail sectors of the industry. USDA Choice beef sides (n = 100) and USDA Select sides (n = 100) were selected and stratified into five LM area categories (± 2.9 cm2): (1) 77.4 cm2, (2) 83.9 cm2, (3) 90.3 cm2, (4) 96.8 cm2, and (5) 103.2 cm2. Beef lip-on ribeyes and boneless strip loins were obtained from USDA Choice sides, and full, partially defatted tenderloins were obtained from USDA Select sides. Subprimals were scanned with a portioner that captured visual images and dimensional analyses of each subprimal, and data were analyzed by the software to determine multiple portioning outcomes for each subprimal. Portioning data were generated for each subprimal based on a variety of targeted portion weights (ribeye and strip loin steaks = 340.2 g; tenderloin steak = 170.1 g), as well as various portion thicknesses (ribeye and strip loin steaks = 31.8 mm; tenderloin steak = 44.5 and 50.8 mm). Subprimal utility varied across targeted portion weights and thicknesses within each LM area category. For the ribeyes and strip loins, optimal portion weight and thickness combinations were observed more frequently in LM area categories 1 and 2 than for the three larger LM area categories. Analysis of data for tenderloins revealed LM area categories played a lesser role in identifying optimization of steak portion weight and thickness combinations. Findings demonstrate that creating categories of beef subprimals based on LM area as opposed to subprimal weight might provide a unique sorting method that would improve boxed beef product consistency and uniformity for foodservice and retail sectors.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sorting beef subprimals by ribeye area size at the packer level to optimize utility and product uniformity in foodservice and retail

Steele

Arnold

Gehring

et al. 2020

Translational Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Acceptability was influenced by the polyphosphate concentration but not by thickness. Leick et al. (2011) presented consumers with beef steaks of different thicknesses and they found that the thinner samples had higher acceptability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How thick do consumers’ want their meat and how thick do they get it? The case of deep-fried breaded beef

Ferraris

Libertino

Rodríguez

et al. 2013

Food sci. technol. int.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main objective was to estimate the optimum thickness of meat from a consumers' perspective. Breaded beef (known as "milanesa" in Spanish speaking countries and as "schnitzels" in Austria) is a food product prepared with a slice of meat that is dipped in beaten egg to then be covered in bread crumbs; thus prepared it is fried. This product was used as a case study. Breaded beef was evaluated in three different stages: raw slice of meat, appearance of meat after frying, and during mastication. Breaded beef prepared with meat of varying thicknesses were presented to consumers who evaluated if the thicknesses were too thin, ok or too thick. Survival analysis statistics were used to estimate the optimum thicknesses. Results for each stage were: raw slice of meat = 6.7 ± 0.2 mm, appearance of the cut fried breaded beef = 8.4 ± 0.3 mm and during mastication = 7.6 ± 0.3 mm. The average thickness of the meat cut by butchers for breaded beef was 5.9 mm, not too far from the optimum. However, the average thickness of the meat in the breaded beef ready for frying sold by the same butchers 3.7 mm, clearly thinner than the optimum.

show abstract

Innovative retail merchandising strategies to accommodate for the growing trend of heavier carcass weights in the United States

West¹,

Nicholson²,

Nicholson³

et al. 2011

Meat Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Consumer selection of constant-weight ribeye, top loin, and sirloin steaks

Cited by 11 publications

References 12 publications

Sorting beef subprimals by ribeye area size at the packer level to optimize utility and product uniformity in foodservice and retail

Sorting beef subprimals by ribeye area size at the packer level to optimize utility and product uniformity in foodservice and retail

How thick do consumers’ want their meat and how thick do they get it? The case of deep-fried breaded beef

Innovative retail merchandising strategies to accommodate for the growing trend of heavier carcass weights in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About