Improving Meat Quality, Marketability, and Safety for Todays Consumer - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Improving Meat Quality, Marketability, and Safety for Todays Consumer PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 8770-NzEyM



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Improving Meat Quality, Marketability, and Safety for Todays Consumer

Description:

Grass-finished beef acceptability. Future research. Food and ... Grass-finished beef may be an alternative if the market (consumer) will accept the product. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:221
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 52
Provided by: chris4
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Improving Meat Quality, Marketability, and Safety for Todays Consumer


1
Improving Meat Quality, Marketability, and Safety
for Todays Consumer
  • Chris Kerth, Ph.D.
  • Assistant Professor
  • Meat Science

2
Outline
  • Research
  • Pork quality
  • Grass-finished beef acceptability
  • Future research
  • Food and Agricultural Products Center
  • Muscle Food industry in the U.S.
  • Importance of preparing young people for a career
    in the Muscle Food industry

3
Outline
  • Research
  • Pork quality
  • Grass-finished beef acceptability
  • Future research
  • Food and Agricultural Products Center
  • Muscle Food industry in the U.S.
  • Importance of preparing young people for a career
    in the Muscle Food industry

4
Research Pork quality
  • Most pig breeding programs have focused on
    selection for rapid production of lean meat.
  • Selection for lean growth has generally been
    antagonistic to meat quality.
  • Fast-twitch, glycolytic (FG) muscle fibers are
    large in diameter, so selecting for muscle growth
    may select for FG fibers.
  • The ratio of muscle fiber types in a muscle can
    be influenced by
  • Physical activity (Andersen and Henriksson, 1977)
  • Nutrition (Karlsson et al., 1994)
  • Selection (Brocks et al., 2000)

5
Correlations (Kerth et al., 2001)
P Fiber type Other factors
The relative proportion of muscle fiber types
accounted for up to 20 - 25 of the variation in
pork quality traits.
Pork Quality traits
6
Pork quality (Wilborn et al., 2002)
  • Distribution of muscle fiber type can be
    regulated by calcineurin (Chin et al., 1998).
  • A calcium-dependent enzyme.
  • Calcineurin inhibition increased the relative
    proportion of Type II (FG) fibers from 14 to 31
    in mice.
  • Increasing the activity of calcineurin by
    increasing cellular calcium should promote SO
    fiber types and slow pH decline.
  • Feeding supplemental vitamin D3 to beef cattle
    has shown to increase cellular serum calcium to
    improve tenderness (Montgomery et al., 2002).

7
Pork quality - Methods
  • Duroc-cross pigs (n 25) were assigned to one of
    three experimental finishing diets containing
  • 0 IU/kg supplemental vitamin D3
  • 40,000 IU/kg supplemental vitamin D3
  • 80,000 IU/kg supplemental vitamin D3
  • Pigs were on test diets for 44 or 51 days.

8
Pork quality Plasma
Vitamin D3
Calcium
25Hydroxy-Vit D3
9
Pork quality - pH
Gluteus medius
DietHour Diet P 0.98 P 0.006 SEM
0.080 SEM 0.033
Longissimus
DietHour Diet P 0.64 P 0.04 SEM
0.093 SEM 0.038
10
Pork quality L values
SEM 0.82 0.99
0.80 0.90
0.66 NS
Bars connected by a common line do not differ
(P 0.05).
11
Pork quality Drip loss
SEM 0.70 Treatment P0.06 Day x
Treatment P0.98
Bars connected by a common line do not differ (P
0.05).
12
Outline
  • Research
  • Pork quality
  • Grass-finished beef acceptability
  • Future research
  • Food and Agricultural Products Center
  • Muscle Food industry in the U.S.
  • Importance of preparing young people for a career
    in the Muscle Food industry

13
Grass-finished Beef
  • One of the best resources in the beef industry is
    the cow-calf and stocker operations in the
    Southeast
  • Mild climate makes calving easier
  • Forage is available year round
  • Most of these calves are shipped to KS, OK, TX,
    and CO to be finished in feedlots.
  • Alternative marketing systems for producers in
    the southeast are needed.
  • Grass-finished beef may be an alternative if the
    market (consumer) will accept the product.

14
Grass-finished beef
  • 30 Angus-cross steers
  • 10 finished on rye grass
  • 10 finished on concentrate
  • 10 on rye grass last 90 days on concentrate
  • Test
  • Carcass
  • Trained sensory WBS
  • Fat color (before/after trim)
  • Retail display
  • Consumer acceptability
  • FA profile
  • Vitamin E carotenoids

15
Grass-finished beef
16
Grass-finished beef Loin/rib fat color
Trim differences existed among all color
measurements
c b a
17
Grass-finished beef - WBS
Loin
Rib
18
Grass-finished beef
  • Consumers (n150)
  • Blind taste test
  • Grass,Grain,Grass/grain
  • Score
  • Price
  • Visual perception
  • Preference
  • Price

19
Grass-finished Beef Price
Taste test
Visual perception
20
Research Program Results
  • PI or co-PI on 12 grants totaling 757,714 since
    1999.
  • Publications
  • Refereed papers 13
  • Abstracts 25
  • Invited articles 2
  • Technical reports 8

21
Outline
  • Research
  • Pork quality
  • Grass-finished beef acceptability
  • Future research
  • Food and Agricultural Products Center
  • Muscle Food industry in the U.S.
  • Importance of preparing young people for a career
    in the Muscle Food industry

?
22
Future research - Philosophy
  • My training is in muscle biology
  • My research focus has tended to be much more
    applied
  • Solving problems presented
  • Helping industry
  • Training students

23
Other research projects
  • Reducing airborne/aerosolized bacteria in meat
    processing facilities (Kerth et al. 2002a, b).
  • Use of electrostatically polarized, low-density
    media
  • Scanning ultraviolet light
  • Relationship between aerosolized contaminants and
    food product contamination (Helm et al. 2002).
  • Commercial processing facility producing fully
    cooked products.
  • No significant correlation between air and
    product contamination.
  • Repeatability (r 0.88) of small clam-shell
    grills for research cookery (Kerth et al., 2002).

24
Color
  • One of the primary methods consumers used to
    select fresh meat
  • Lighting is commonly used to promote the
    appearance of high quality products
  • CAB

25
Color
  • Utilizing methods to reduce oxidation (UV light)
    reduces formation of metMb
  • Cuts stay fresh longer
  • Longer shelf life
  • Less throw-away, More

26
Future Research
  • Producing and marketing grass-finished beef.
  • Joint project with
  • Auburn University
  • Mississippi State
  • University of Kentucky
  • Louisiana State University
  • A new cow-processing plant is under construction
    in Grenada, MS
  • Develop marketing alternatives for producers

27
Future Research
  • Production and carcass characteristics of meat
    goats browsing mimosa.
  • Joint project with Tuskegee University
  • SARE grant
  • Developing carcass grading formulations and
    composition analysis
  • 9-10-11 rib cut

28
Research Ambitions
  • Regardless of species
  • Regardless of fresh or processed
  • Regardless of basic or applied research
  • We should be in the business of adding value
  • The Definition of Value-added. The additions of
    time, place, and or form utility to a commodity
    in order to meet the preferences or tastes of the
    consumer. The true test of value added is
    achieved when the after tax return on invested
    capital used to generate time, place, and or form
    utility exceeds the overall cost of capital.
    OSU FAPC website

29
Outline
  • Research
  • Pork quality
  • Grass-finished beef acceptability
  • Future research
  • Food and Agricultural Products Center
  • Muscle Food industry in the U.S.
  • Importance of preparing young people for a career
    in the Muscle Food industry

?
?
30
Food Ag Products Center
  • My role at the FAPC
  • Short-term
  • Mid-term
  • Long-term
  • To generate and disseminate technical and
    business information that will stimulate and
    support the growth of value-added food and
    agricultural products processing in Oklahoma.

31
Meat Industry
  • We are in the business of selling protein.
  • Who are the competitors?

32
U.S. Meat Industry
OK U.S. 1st 5th 2nd 8th 3rd
14th 9th/18th 7th/11th 15th 27th
Beef Pork Poultry Peanuts/Pecans Soybeans
  • In Oklahoma…
  • Beef cattle generate 1.9 billion (2001)
  • More than 3 times 2nd or 3rd
  • Clearly, demand for these commodities are
    essential to OK agriculture
  • How do we ensure that consumers continue to
    demand these products?????

33
Introduction
  • Consumers are very fickle
  • What they bought today is not necessarily what
    they will buy tomorrow.
  • They assume no responsibility for the quality of
    food that they buy.
  • They assume no responsibility for the safety of
    the food that they eat.

??? ???
34
Consumer Demand
35
Oklahoma Agriculture
  • How can this model be applied to Oklahoma ag
    products?
  • Create new and exciting products that consumers
    want
  • Convenient
  • Taste
  • Safe

36
FAPC
  • Short-term
  • Identify collaborators
  • Scientists at OSU
  • Industry contacts
  • Identify opportunities for research
  • At OSU
  • With processors
  • National opportunities

37
FAPC
  • Mid-term
  • Establish funding to allow any/all research to be
    carried out
  • Industry contracts
  • Extramural grant-writing
  • Establish programs that enable needed research to
    be done as needed.
  • Graduate program goals
  • Extension program goals
  • Research program goals

38
FAPC
  • Long-term
  • Enhance value-added business in Oklahoma
  • Attract businesses
  • Enhance current business
  • Enhance value-added education in Oklahoma
  • Extension activities
  • Graduate and undergraduate programs

39
Outline
  • Research
  • Pork quality
  • Grass-finished beef acceptability
  • Future research
  • Food and Agricultural Products Center
  • Muscle Food industry in the U.S.
  • Importance of preparing young people for a career
    in the Muscle Food industry

?
?
?
40
Muscle Foods in the U.S.
  • Food safety issues
  • Pasteurization techniques
  • Identification of points of contamination
  • Pre-harvest
  • Aerosolized and airborne
  • Point-of-sale
  • Consumer

41
Muscle Foods in the U.S.
  • Nutrition in meat products
  • Reducing fat
  • Changing the fat
  • In foods
  • Naturally
  • Marketing meats good points
  • Protein
  • Zinc
  • Iron
  • B-vitamins

42
Muscle Foods in the U.S.
  • Point-of-purchase changes
  • Case-ready
  • Micro issues
  • Branded products
  • Shelf life (MAP)
  • Increase profits (reduce labor)
  • Disappearance of the meat case?
  • Less full-service
  • Fewer answers to consumers questions

43
Muscle Foods in the U.S.
  • Mergers, buyouts, and restructuring
  • Companies continually try to position themselves
    to improve profits
  • More diverse
  • More specialized
  • Big getting bigger?
  • Economies of size or
  • Monopolizing

44
Muscle Foods in the U.S.
  • Branded products
  • Companies trying to differentiate themselves
  • Justification for higher prices?
  • Dont blend in
  • USDA Certification program
  • Ever increasing number of branded products
  • How much is enough?

45
Muscle Foods in the U.S.
  • Improving the products that we have
  • Muscle profiling
  • Convenience
  • Fully cooked
  • Ready-to-eat
  • Meals-ready-to-eat
  • Storage
  • Frozen meals
  • Packaging

46
Muscle Foods in the U.S.
  • Opportunities are nearly endless
  • Employment opportunities for students
  • Research
  • Product development
  • The industry is in constant need of people who
    are knowledgeable about muscle foods
  • Food safety is not a fad!!

47
Outline
  • Research
  • Pork quality
  • Grass-finished beef acceptability
  • Future research
  • Food and Agricultural Products Center
  • Muscle Food industry in the U.S.
  • Importance of preparing young people for a career
    in the Muscle Food industry

?
?
?
?
48
Teaching
  • B.S. Muscle Foods Option in Animal Science
  • M.Ag. in Muscle Food Technology Safety
  • Developed and currently chair this joint program
    with Poultry Science
  • 30 hours course work
  • 6 month internship with a special problem
  • On-line M.Ag. degree program

49
Students
  • Educating students
  • Preparing meat products
  • Interacting with meat consumers
  • Students teaching students
  • Our future!!

50
Teaching
  • Graduate Students since 1999
  • Graduated Masters Ph.D.
  • Chair 2 0
  • Committee 1 0
  • Current
  • Chair 6 1
  • Committee 0 1 

4 graduate in December 02
51
Improving Meat Quality, Marketability, and Safety
for Todays Consumer
  • Chris Kerth, Ph.D.
  • Assistant Professor
  • Meat Science
About PowerShow.com