W. Y. Vaxney.) Van Stavern, B. D Personal communication. Service, Ohio S t a t e University.

Transcription

1 67 S a f f l e, R. L. and L. J. Bratzler The e f f e c t of f a t n e s s on some processing and p a l a t a b i l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of pork carcasses, Food Technol 13: Van Stavern, B. D Personal communication. Service, Ohio S t a t e University. Agricultural Extension Volk, J. D, Consumer acceptance of pork l o i n s as affected by marbling and firmness, Master's t h e s i s, University of Missouri. (Applause ) DR, HIM: Thank you D r. S d f l e. Now if t h e members who have presented reports, and other members of t h e Pork Evaluation Committee, w i l l come up t o t h e p l a t form, we w i l l e n t e r t a i n questions from t h e f l o o r. (The following named persons went up t o j o i n D r s. Hiner and Saffle: W. H. Bruner, L. Feinstein, B. Haasl, R. Ingram, and W. Y. Vaxney.) DR. HIIlER: Does anybody have a question they would l i k e t o propose t o any one of t h e member9 seated here? PROFESSOR BRATUER: (Michigan S t a t e ) F i r s t of a l l, Wilbur, I will make an observation, then I w i l l have a question. I got t o t a l k a l i t t l e b i t. (Laughter ) I have noticed i n listening; and t a l k i n g with some of t h e carcass f o l k, and so f o r t h, t h e tendency i s f o r t h e emphasis on ham and l o i n percentage of a.95 "rtlvalue, ham and l o i n as against l e a n cuts. You keep i n m i n d t h a t you may have over twot h i r d s of the waste i n t h e two c u t s and, of course, we automatic a l l y expect a very high correlation. I don't think ham and l o i n replaces g e t t i n g cut-out data.

2 68. Question f o r Wilbur: When you are t a l k i n g t o your production men, how do you j u s t i f y selection f o r length? What production f a c t o r s do you feel are associated with length, and a l s o I would l i k e your personal comment on t h e cellrtification standard for length, p a r t i c u l a r l y by t h e breed association? MR. BRUNER: I think we all heard t h e question and a r e p r e t t y much interested i n t h i s matter of length of carcass as it a f f e c t s production and a l s o from the standpoint of the breed c e r t i f i c a t i o n standards. I came here today as J u s t kind of a, oh, you know, a producer on the side. I do a few other things, b u t I do supervise t h i s feeaing program and I have t h e man along with me t h a t r e a l l y does the work, and I would l i k e t o have you meet him at t h i s time. Nr. James Gillen, standing at the back of t h e room over on my right. I also had another man come i n today. I have a product i o n man here, a man makes a l i v i n g r a i s i n g corn and hogs. He s e l l s, I would s q as a guess, maybe ninety percent desirable animals as breeding stock. He is a man t h a t is interested i n breed hogs, I should say Durocs. He has been one of the men t h a t has been i n the Ohio program from t h e beginning. I am t a l k i n g about Bob Owens from down below town here, Jeffersonville, Fayette County, one of our good corn producing areas, and I Would l i k e t o have Bob Owens answer that question as a production man. MR. OWENS: Your production? I think it i s matter of discussion as we Eow short i s t o o short and question i s how does length a f f e c t very much, in my own experience, a breeders g e t i n t o the length problem. how long i s too long? You a r e thinking about production s o far as l i t t e r size, brood sow a b i l i t y, feed capacity and t h a t area? MR. BRATZLER: Yes. I am p a r t i c u l a r l y interested i n how you can or how you sell, or what research data you have t o back up your statement f o r example t h a t a longer hog i s wre meaty, b e t t e r gaining, b e t t e r pigs, and some of these other things. -- MR. M N S : I n my p a r t i c u l a r herd we have found that i f we have an average length t h a t - - l e t ' s dwell on the twenty-nine, twenty-nine and half inch carcass that we have s u f f i c i e n t length t o give us good production as brood sows, rate of gain, and a l s o some of our best carcasses, from the standpoint of meatiness, have come out of the more o r l e s e medium length hogs. Now, our breed, of course, has not been quite as long as t h e more extreme breeds, speaking of t h e York i n p a r t i c u l a r, and some of the more Bnglish breeds. I don't think I quite h i t your question on the head there, b u t I am trying t o give you how we look at it.

3 69. a lot, MR. BRATZLER: Well, Wilbur ducked t h e question. I appreciate your reaction. I have known Wilbur. Thanks How do you sell t h e program t o farmers? Do you say t h a t a t h i r t y - i n c h hog produces more pigs, more e f f i c i e n t gainer, and what data do you have t o back up t h e statement? MR. BRUNNER: If we can go back t o about t h e second s l i d e we showed, we give you an indication t h a t we had c e r t i f i c a t i o n carcass standards. It is on t h e basis of' two inches t o t h e pound of lean meat i n r e l a t i o n t o c h i l l e d carcass weight. W e do have minimum standards on length of twenty-eight and one-half inches. W e think of twenty-eight and one-half inches f o r the barrows as being comparable t o twenty-nine inches f o r the g i l t s. And t h a t p r e t t y well t i e s i n with breed c e r t i f i c a t i o n. Now i n t h a t barrow twenty-eight and one-half, he w i l l not c e r t i f y i f he hasn't t h e l e a n meat i n him. We don't have the nerve t o t e l l the breeder t o thraw it away, s o we work a t the r e l a t i o n s h i p t o pound. Twenty-eight and one-half, we think, is equivalent t o the twenty-nine from t h e standpoint of breed c e r t i f i c a t i o n where they do not d e f i n i t e l y check t h i s matter of sex. I don't know as we go out and t e l l breeders that they w i l l g e t more pigs f o r sale out of a l i t t e r where the l i t t e r mate i s thirty-one inches. I e think t h i s twenty-nine inch i s don't believe we do t h a t, Bob. W somewhat ideal and I believe Bob brought out it does indicate a l i t t l e more capacity f o r feed, somethiq we think i s ideal.. I don't know t h a t we don't s t r e s s it and I w i l l come back t o a question I raised with you. I questioned from the standpoint of t h i s dressing percent, and t h i s i s j u s t an observation I am making and think i s a study we want t o make. W i l l these thirty-one inch carcasses dress as w e l l as a twenty-eight? Now, j u s t from my observation I kind of question it, but I might be wrong. MR. WEBB: (Eckert Packing Co., Defiance, Ohio) I wonder who set the standards of t h i s length? Was t h i s t e s t e d on research work? Who s e t up the standards of twenty-nine inches? MR. BRUIWEB: L e t ' s give c r e d i t where c r e d i t is due. I think t h e present c e r t i f i c a t i o n i s sound. I think it has done a l o t f o r industry, I would be the last one who would w a n t t o stand up here and be c r i t i c a l of it. It i s something they f e e l they can g e t down r a t h e r uniformly i n a number of slaughter s t a t i o n s. We f e e l here where we have use of t h e meat laboratory when w e weigh the pounds of lean meat we have g o t a very good answer and we accept it w i t h measurements. This matter of who a c t u d l y established t h e standards, I am not i n a position t o sw. I think maybe Prof e s s o r Kunkle was i n t h a t first group t h a t sat around the table and worked on it a l i t t l e b i t. See, I tun an extension man. I l i k e t o pass these t h i n g s around. MR. KUNKLE: I don't know who set those standards. I was on the pork r i b measurement p r o j e c t. Carrol Plager and Bernard Ebbing were on t h e Committee t h a t decided how long t h e hog should

4 70. Bob Shannon i n s i s t e d they shouldn't be too long and Hollie Pemberton i n s i s t e d they shouldn't be t o o short. be. (Laughter) Does t h a t answer your question? 143. "N: (University of Missouri) One of the comments t h a t was made i n t h i s paper was regarding the amount of f a t on t h e carcass and raised the question of should we throw out t h i s hog or t h i s carcass at 1.63 inches of f a t and they suggested i n the papers perhaps we should go t o millimeters, I would l i k e t o rise t o the defense of t h i s inches system. It i s quite d i f f i c u l t t o present millimeters t o most of our producers. They don't comprehend millimeters. In l i n e with lengths t h a t Lyman was t a l k i n g about--in l i n e with consideration of lengths of carcasses, I would say i n t h e shows we have had, we stuck p r e t t y c l o s e l y t o length, backfat thickness and l o i n eye area as set up on the c e r t i f i c a t i o n standards. We have had our tongue stuck i n our cheek when we have not given as much consideration t o a hog t h a t was too short as we might have wanted t o because it was r e a l l y a meaty hog, but by t h e same token I would hope we would not d e f i n i t e l y relax our standards on fat because there is a strong c o r r e l a t i o n between meatiness and fattiness i n converse t o t h e c o r r e l a t i o n between length and meatiness. MR. BACKUS: (Mississippi S t a t e ) I would l i k e someone t o answer Mr. Bruner's question on t h i s t h i n g of whether o r not we are J u s t i f i e d i n throwing out these carcasses which may be s o f t and watery o r don't have as much q u a l i t y maybe as we think they ought t o. I am not addressing t h a t question i n p a r t i c u l a r ; j u s t someone who has the answer. MR, SAFFLE: (University of Georgia) I n t h e r e v i e w of the l i t e r a t u r e, not only i n the recent time but going on back even farther, we have consistently, and I have done it and I imagine j u s t about everybody i n t h i s room have, thrown out carcasses because they are s o f t, watery, so f o r t h. I know of no good study i n which s u f f i c i e n t numbers are used, that would i n d i c a t e consumers can t e l l t h e difference between a s o f t and a firm l o i n. As a matter of fact, t h e opposite i s t r u e. There are a number of s t u d i e s i n which it showed t h a t they could not t e l l a difference. Now, there is one other t h i n g t h a t I t h i n k you might use i n t h e defense of firm and b r i g h t pork and t h a t i s t h e eye appeal. You have got t o s e l l t h i s product on eye appeal. I think you have a strong standpoint f o r a comeback. I would hate t o get ourselves i n t h e position where all s o f t and watery l o i n s t h a t were not sold had t o be sold t o a h o t e l or restaurant, t h e way we do a dark c u t t e r beef. I think it must be done on eye appeal and not from t h e standpoint of p a l a t a b i l i t y.

5 71. MR. HINER: I believe D r. Briskey had h i s hand LIP t o answer t h i s question. MR. BRISCEY: (University of Wisconsin) Not t o answer, j u s t t o comment. I would l i k e t o comment i n t h i s way: "hat I think any problem c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a t i s s u e t h a t i s a problem t o a processor i s of equal importance t o a producer and consumer; I think t h a t we can show a specific problem t o a processor, and we have d a t a t o show s o l u b i l i t y, of t h e water solub i l i t y of proteins, and t h a t all of t h e proteins a r e reduced, i n some cases as much as f i f t y percent; I think we can show a l o s s of tenderness i n t h i s watery pork; I think some of the more complete s t u d i e s pertain t o cooking l o s s during yield is i n some of t h e work by Kauffman and Carpenter. I would l i k e t o hear t h e i r comments on it. on t h a t? MR. HIIER: Does D r. Kauffman wish t o make any comment MR. KALE": (University of I l l i n o i s ) Yes, I was j u s t getting ready t o stand up when D r. Briskey put h i s hand up. We are r a t h e r biased i n our studies concerning t h i s problem. However, I have a d e f i n i t e feeling both marbling and color should be included i n c e r t i f i c a t i o n s t a n d a d s. It i s r a t h e r d i f f i c u l t t o regard more variables. On the basis of color, there i s no question color is important i n pork, maybe not from t h e consumer standpoint as much as it is a t t h e processor, b u t from the processor's standpoint, which we must guard against, as well a s the consumer. We must remember it i s a darker, drier, firmer muscle t i s s u e t h a t has a higher water binding capacity. Ilplis cert a i n l y i s important from the standpoint of processing techniques. Also, w e did, I thought r a t h e r conclusively, show you had a more desirable product as the end r e s u l t a f t e r cooking from t h e standpoint of p a l a t a b i l i t y and from cooking losses i t s e l f. These, i n themselves, I think, would lend support t o the idea of color importance from the standpoint of marbling. I would l i k e t o say one point on t h i s. Even though the correlation, as Bob indicated, was r a t h e r low i n f a t thickness and marbling, I don't think we can discount t h i s f a t deception i n correlating such a hog, s t e e r, or whatever have you. I don't think i t ' s quite 8s low and, as we might say, non-existent as Bob maybe indicated. I think you have taken some r e a l i s o l a t e d results, Bob, t o indicate t h i s because I feel t h e fattening process generally goes hand i n hand with marbling, subcutaneous f a t, intramuscular f a t possibly, and abdominal f a t probably. Maybe we can f i n d extreme examples of which we have high quantity of marbling i n muscle tissue and low amounts of subcutaneous f a t. However, I do t h i n k t h a t marbling does have some influence on juiciness, maybe not f o r tenderness and flavor.

6 72. thing. MR. SAJ?F'LE: I vould like to comment back on that one I think that on this question of relationship of backfat and/or marbling as such there are many, many cases, and not isolated cases but may cases, in which a correlation is not slgnificant. I think that you can come back to these data and if you look at the means, the mean differences, or look at those which are different, you will find the mean difference is such that as you put on more backfat you are getting a little more marbling in the lean. But the point being made is simply this: The relationship, and not an isolated case, but the practical relationship between marblirg, between backfat and marbling is extremely low; and I know of no study at all in which they found a correlation between backfat thickness and any of the palatabilitjr factors which had a correlation of any magnitude. Now, you may find some which are significant. I don't think this is surprising when you look at the correlation coefficient between marbling itself and palatability. So, I am saying the matter of backfat thickness and palatability, if you are putting palatability and marbling the same, are, from a practical standpoint, very low and I will say non-existent. And again, I am saying this from a practical standpoint. MR. CARPENTER: (Texas A. & M.) I might mention one more thing in regard to this study we did in Wisconsin in cooperation with the U.S.D.A., and they gave you films of this last year, but we did have a loin color study in this project to try to detect differences in palatability due to differences in color. We certainly did find a great advantage in palatability for those darker colored, firmer type of loins. Bob mentioned to you the results in regards to the cured ham, these soft and light colored hams. Of course, this is a guide to some of these biochemical characteristics, but we did find an increase in tenderness in these darker colored hams and especially an increase in juiciness. These dark colored hams were probably little different in flavor between these groups. I think in these correlations too on the marbling work, marbling and backfat thickness is still sort of confusing to me and I think possibly some of the others here as what is really significant when we staxt talking about these correlations. I know Professor Bratzler brought this up one other instance last fall. I still don't know the answer to this. I think this may be confusing to some of our members. MR. 21": (Texas Technological College) I w ill address this to the Wisconsin boys.

7 73. What was t h e correlation between backf at thiclrne ss marbling, color and tenderness? Was there any relationship here? I n other words, is t h i s dark colored a drier ham from a more highly marbled hog o r i s there any relationship t o it at a l l? MR. CARPENTER: I might mention i n t h i s study we did cont o 1 t h i s. In other words, we d i d s e l e c t l o i n s of a dark color which had s l i g h t e r t r a c e s of marbling and also those abundant i n amount of marbling, and the s o f t l i g h t color, a l s o with t h e two extremes OS marbling so w e could a t least subjectively attempt t o control t h i s. Bob Kauffman might have some more on t h i s. MR. ZINN: This ipdicates m a r b l i q is not related t o firmness or color? MR. CARPENTER: No, I am not saying t h a t, we controlled t h a t i n t h i s study. m. ZI": I n other words, By color. MR. SAFFLE: Do you know offhand the specific correlation coefficient i n your work between backfat thickness and marbling or backfat thickness and p a l a t a b i l i t y? MR. CARPENTER: I am not sure between backfat thickness and marbling. I believe our correlations were s i g n i f i c a n t i n magnitude, point three t o point four. Is t h a t correct, four? MR. SAFF'LE: You mean you would be counting from nine t o fourteen percent i n t o t a l v a r i a t i o n i n marbling? br. CARPENTER: Yes. DR. HINER: We have about time f o r one more question; then we w i l l be able t o conclude t h i s session on schedule. MR, TOPEL: (Kansas S t a t e ) D r. Kauffman here has suggested marbling and color in our c e r t i f i c a t i o n standards. Bob, you know a l o t more about t h i s than I do, what do you suggest as a cut-off point f o r both color and marbling i n these standards, standards f o r pork? MR. K A U F " : I wouldn't know. r e a l l y prepared t o answer t h i s question. I am afraid I am not I would l i k e t o do a l i t t l e r e b u t t a l w i t h Bob Saffle, b u t time doesn't permit, on the basis of s t a t i s t i c s because I think we have t o look a t it with s t a t i s t i c s, Whether a nine percent v a r i able i s important o r not, I won't argue with him. As far as color and marbling i s concerned, I f e e l where marbling i s concerned we can have too much. There is no question i n my m i n d both beef and pork, and lamb as far as t h i s goes, we f e e l if f i v e percent i s important, t e n percent i s n ' t twice as i m portant. But I do f e e l we do need some.

8 74. I n our studies we did attempt t o answer t h i s question, p a r t i a l l y a t least, with the f o u r hundred and some animals t h a t we studied. W e established acceptance-rejection l i n e s of merit from the standpoint of p a l a t a b i l i t y. We found t h a t twenty t o twenty-five percent on a moisture present b a s i s vas about as much marbling as you would need t o s a t i s f y consumers of a r e l a t i v e l y firm product, acceptance in j u i c i n e s s and flavor. This would mean, from the standpoint of subjective evaluation, a modest t o mcjderate amount of marbling i n muscle t i s s u e, i f you can visualize what t h i s means. This is on beef standards. As far as color is concerned, I f i n d the dark muscle better, which means beack would be excellent and white would be t e r r i b l e. I am also cognizant of t h e f a c t we have consumers who don't p a r t i c u l a r l y care f o r t h e blue meat or black meat, so we can't go t o these extremes, But I do f e e l a dark color i n pork is more important than a, l i g h t e r color and the grayish-pink color that we so t r a d i t i o n a l l y hold up as being the acceptable, desirable color of pork, which i s not, necessarily, in t h a t category. In pork, the darker, more purplish colored meat i s the more d e s i r able. I probably didn't answer you objectively, b u t I c e r t a i n l y did subjectively. (Laughter) t o an end. MR. HINER; I believe with t h a t we w i l l have t o bring t h i s I surely appreciate t h e help of t h e members of the Pork Evaluation Committee and a l l t h e i r e f f o r t s and especially we are indebted t o Professor Bmmer. Thank you. T E CIzAI[RMAtJ: Thank you, Dick, f o r t h a t very i n t e r e s t i n g session, and you closed r i g h t on time. The next item on the program is the report of your Carcass Contest Committee. Bob Bray of Wisconsin i s Chairman, and he has on h i s Committee : Dr. Breidenstein, Dr. Kline, D r. Pierce, and w. Murphey. e hope he w i l l be here I believe D r. Bray i s unable t o be here today. W tomorrow. The report w i l l be given and dlscussed by Mr. Kline. x###########