Identification of optimal ranges in ribeye area for portion cutting of beef steaks.

Dunn, James L; Williams, Scott; Tatum, J. D.; Bertrand, J. K.; Pringle, T. D.

doi:10.2527/2000.784966x

Cited by 19 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Results revealed that the thickness of steaks was a significant factor (P = 0.01) influencing ESCT of a particular steak cut. These results are similar to those obtained by Gill et al (2013) and Dunn et al (2000), where the cooking times for different steak cuts were dependent on the thickness of the steak. However, in the current study, certain steak cuts (strip loin and flap) with the same thickness, but varying weights, showed significant differences (P < 0.01) in their ESCT (Table 2d).…”

Section: Experimental Safe Cooking Timessupporting

confidence: 90%

Modeling Techniques for Prediction of Safe Cooking Times of Mechanically Tenderized Beef Steaks

Saha

Jadeja

Mafi

et al. 2018

Meat and Muscle Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microbial safety issues related to mechanically tenderized beef have become prevalent, resulting in new labeling regulations for mechanically tenderized raw or partially cooked beef products. These products must bear labels to include validated cooking instructions, with specifications for minimum internal temperatures, to ensure that they are fully cooked. However, validation of cooking instructions for individual steak cuts of different sizes and weights is costly and time consuming. The objective of this study was to utilize predictive modeling techniques to determine safe cooking times for various mechanically tenderized steaks, cooked to an internal temperature of 70 to 71°C. A total of 162 steaks of various types (top round, knuckle, strip loin, top sirloin, sirloin cap, tri-tip, ribeye, flap, and flank), thicknesses (1.27, 2.54, and 3.81 cm), and weights (113 to 567 g) were used. Prior to cooking, samples were needle-tenderized, cut, vacuum-packaged, and refrigerated. Steak dimensions (width, thickness, and length) were measured prior to each cooking experiment. Samples were cooked on a flat-top-grill until they reached an internal temperature of 70 to 71°C, and the time taken to reach that temperature was defined as the Experimental Safe Cooking Time (ESCT). A thermocouple, attached to a data logger, recorded the steak-center temperature every 10 s. The time-temperature profiles obtained were used to determine the rate of temperature increase (RTI). Data generated through the experiments was used for model development and determination of predicted safe cooking time (PSCT) for steaks. The thickness, weight, and RTI of the steaks were identified as factors that had a 60% or higher correlation with the ESCT. Prediction accuracy of the regression model was 79%, with no significant differences (P < 0.01) between the ESCT and PSCT. This approach could help the meat industry formulate safe cooking times of various steak cuts, without repeating costly validation studies.

show abstract

Section: Experimental Safe Cooking Timessupporting

confidence: 90%

Modeling Techniques for Prediction of Safe Cooking Times of Mechanically Tenderized Beef Steaks

Saha

Jadeja

Mafi

et al. 2018

Meat and Muscle Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As hot carcass weight (HCW) and ribeye area (REA) increase, steak thickness decrease in order to maintain portion size of rib and loin steaks (Dunn et al, 2000;. Bass et al (2009) found that ribeye area does not accurately predict the size and dimensions (and ultimately portion size) of many muscles in the beef carcass.…”

Section: Beef Alternative Merchandising Cutsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Beef Alternative Merchandising Cutsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dunn et al (2000) investigated optimum ribeye area for portion cutting of beef steaks for foodservice. This study found that thicker steaks required increased cooking times and ranked more tender (sensory panel and shear force values) with a more intense beef flavor (sensory panel) (Dunn et al, 2000). Dunn et al (2000) concluded that carcasses with ribeye areas ranging between 77.4 to 96.6 cm 2 had optimal tenderness and cooking times for foodservice-portioned steaks.…”

Section: Beef Alternative Merchandising Cutsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nutrient analysis of the Beef Alternative Merchandising cuts

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

NUTRIENT ANALYSIS OF THE BEEF ALTERNATIVE MERCHANDISING CUTSSix carcasses were selected from each of four different beef packing plants.Carcasses were a combination of USDA Yield Grade 2 (n = 12) and USDA Yield Grade 3 (n = 12), US Quality Grade Premium Choice (n = 8), Low Choice (n = 8), and Select (n = 8), and two genders (steer n = 16, heifer n = 8). The four beef packing plants were located in the Midwestern part of the United States: two in Colorado, one in Kansas, and one in Nebraska. Beef Ribeye, Beef Loin, Strip Loin, and Beef Loin, Top Sirloin Butt subprimals were collected from both sides of these carcasses. Subprimals were vacuum packaged and aged for 14 to 21 days at 0 to 4°C. Subprimals were fabricated into the Beef Alternative Merchandising (BAM) cuts, as described by the Beef Innovations Group of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA), at Colorado State University Meat Laboratory. Cuts from both sides of the carcass were randomly designated for use in obtaining cooked and raw nutrient data. All cuts were vacuum packaged and stored at -18°C for subsequent cooking and/ or dissection. Raw cuts were thawed at 0 to 4°C for 24 to 48 h and then dissected into separable lean, separable fat, and refuse (connective tissue). Cuts to be cooked were thawed for 24 to 48 h at 0 to 4°C, roasted or grilled, tempered for 24 to 48 h at 0 to 4°C, then dissected into separable lean, separable fat, and refuse. Following dissection, iii both raw and cooked samples were homogenized and then stored at -80°C for subsequent nutrient analysis. The BAM cuts were analyzed for moisture, crude protein, percent lipid, and ash. Of the muscles that comprise the BAM cuts, the Spinalis dorsi contained the highest percent fat and lowest percent moisture. As fat content increased, moisture content subsequently decreased. The muscles from the Top Sirloin Butt were the leanest of the muscles comprising the BAM cuts. Fatty acid composition and cholesterol content was determined using gas liquid chromatography. Of the fatty acids identified, saturated-, monounsaturated-, and polyunsaturated fatty acids represented 44.92, 46.04, and 3.04%, respectively. The Gluteus medius contained the highest percentage of polyunsaturated fats regardless of Quality Grade. Of the fatty acids detected, oleic, palmitic, and stearic acids represented 74.56% of the fatty acid profile of all BAM cuts. Trans fats totaled 6.4% of the fatty acids identified for all the BAM cuts.This study identified seven cuts from three Quality Grades that qualify for USDA Lean and one cut from two Quality Grades that qualify for USDA Extra Lean.iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

show abstract

“…Higher-priced steaks are processed from this area of the carcass. For satisfactory cooking and eating, steaks need to have at least a minimum thickness; 12 to 15 square inches is the recommended area if the ribeye is to yield 8-to 12-ounce steaks 1 inch thick (Dunn et al 2000). If the ribeye area is too large, steaks cut to the desired thickness will be too large and too expensive, and steaks cut to the desired weight will be too thin.…”

Section: Ribeye Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and Improving Beef Cattle Carcass Quality

Drake¹

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interest and questions about the quality of beef are on the rise due to heightened awareness about the marketing of beef, from procurement and processing to consumer acceptance. Belatedly, producers are now beginning to receive information about the quality of the beef they produce. Consolidations among beef marketers have resulted in better communication between marketers and producers on carcass quality. Other changes have resulted in monetary incentives for improving beef quality. New marketing structures such as vertical integration and value-based marketing provide direct financial rewards to cow-calf producers who offer more desirable carcasses. With more emphasis on the beef product and carcass information more readily available, carcass attributes are figuring more and more into the cow-calf manager' s decision-making process and yielding financial rewards. The goals of this publication are to help producers understand carcass information: what it means and how producers can use it to improve beef quality.Herd genetics and management can be manipulated to produce highergrade beef carcasses. The surface of the ribeye between the 12th and 13th ribs is used for obtaining carcass data (see cross-section at left). Fat thickness is measured as indicated (white arrow). The area of the ribeye (outlined in black) is measured in square inches. Flecks of fat, known as marbling (black arrow), are subjectively evaluated and assigned a marbling grade (in this case "modest"), which is categorized here as Choice quality grade. MarblingFat thickness ➚ ➚

show abstract

Identification of optimal ranges in ribeye area for portion cutting of beef steaks.

Cited by 19 publications

References 11 publications

Modeling Techniques for Prediction of Safe Cooking Times of Mechanically Tenderized Beef Steaks

Modeling Techniques for Prediction of Safe Cooking Times of Mechanically Tenderized Beef Steaks

Nutrient analysis of the Beef Alternative Merchandising cuts

Understanding and Improving Beef Cattle Carcass Quality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About