Search

Pork branding is a common tool used to differentiate products based on quality to assist consumers in making purchasing decisions. Most pork processers have premium pork programs with different parameters related to color, mar-bling, and other quality factors, though many differences in specific criteria exist among programs. The objective of this study was to assess differences in pork quality and the associated eating experience of different premium and commodity pork loin programs available in the retail market. Loins (n=30/brand) from 7 branded (PRE A, B, C, D, and E) and commodity (COM A and B) programs were acquired and fabricated at 14–15 d post-box date into 2.54-cm chops for visual color, marbling, pH, intramuscular fat, drip loss, purge loss, shear force, and trained sensory panels. Overall, few differences were found among products for most of the quality traits evaluated. One commodity brand, COM B, had higher (P0.05) in initial juiciness, sustained juiciness, or any tenderness measurement. The only quality measurement that was associated with changes in eating experience was shear force value, with the PRE C product having the highest (P0.05) among any treatment for initial juiciness, sustained juiciness, and pork flavor intensity. The results from this study indicate that the range of pork quality differences sold domestically among the evaluated premium and commodity programs is minimal and does not result in associated differences in eating experience.

The objective of this study was to identify the threshold for color and discoloration for consumers to purchase ground beef and to determine the best objective measurement to predict consumer purchase intent. This study was designed in 2 phases, with Phase 1 requiring consumers to evaluate ground beef samples of multiple days of display simultaneously, and Phase 2 having consumers evaluate samples of only a single day of display. Ground beef packages (80% lean) were evaluated for overall appearance liking and purchase intent (yes/no) by consumers (n=216 and 318). Additionally, packages were evaluated for L*, a*, b*, calculated percentage of metmyoglobin, oxymyoglobin, chroma, hue angle, and trained sensory panel redness and discoloration scores. Models showed that each of the objective measures evaluated were predictors (P

The objective of this study was to assess consumer and chef perceptions and knowledge of beef degrees of doneness (DOD) as well as to measure the changes in cooked color over time related to DOD. Steaks from strip loins (M. longissimus lumborum) from each of 5 quality treatments were used for this study. Steaks were cooked to an endpoint temperature of either very-rare (54°C), rare (60°C), medium-rare (63°C), medium (71°C), well-done (77°C), or very well-done (82°C). L*, a*, and b* were evaluated at 0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12 min post-cutting and digital pictures were taken immediately on an internal surface of the steak. Digital surveys for the evaluation of the images of the cooked steaks were created for consumers and chefs. There were time × DOD interactions (P < 0.05) for L*, a*, and b* values. For very-rare, rare, medium-rare, and medium, a* values increased (P < 0.05) over time. For L*, well-done and very well-done steaks became darker (P < 0.05) and very-rare, rare, and medium-rare steaks became lighter (P < 0.05) over time. Surveys indicated consumers determine DOD when cooking beef in their home primarily by using color, whereas chefs primarily use touch to determine DOD. There were no quality grade effects (P > 0.05) for DOD responses for steak pictures evaluated by consumers or chefs. Consumers identified the DOD of cooked steaks as the DOD that corresponds to published end-point temperatures 27 to 35% of the time. Chefs typically identified the DOD as 1 DOD higher than which the steaks were cooked for steaks cooked to medium or less and 1 DOD lower for steaks cooked to well-done and higher. This indicates differences exist in the perceptions of DOD between culinary professionals and consumers, and may contribute to decreased consumer satisfaction when ordering steaks in a restaurant.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of increased pork hot carcass weights on consumer visual acceptability and purchase intent ratings of top loin chops cut to various thicknesses in a price labeled versus unlabeled retail display scenario. Pork loins (N = 200) were collected from 4 different hot carcass weight groups: light weight (LT; less than 111.8 kg), medium-light weight (MLT; 111.8 to 119. kg), medium-heavy weight (MHVY; 119.1 to 124.4 kg), and a heavy weight group (HVY; 124.4 kg and greater). Loins were fabricated into 4 pairs of chops of specified thicknesses (1.27, 1.91, 2.54, and 3.18 cm). One chop from each pair was assigned to be packaged with or without a label. Consumers assessed chops for appearance, desirability, and purchase intent. For both appearance and purchase intent ratings, chops from HVY carcasses were given more desirable (P < 0.05) ratings compared to LT chops. Consumers gave greater (P < 0.05) appearance ratings to thicker cut chops. There was a hot carcass weight × chop thickness interaction (P < 0.05) for the percentage of consumers that indicated the chop was desirable overall. Regardless of hot carcass weight group, chops with a thickness of 1.27 cm had the lowest (P < 0.05) percentage of consumers indicate they were desirable overall. A greater (P < 0.05) percentage of consumers indicated “yes” they would purchase chops cut to a thickness of 2.54 cm compared to all other thicknesses. Additionally, there was a greater (P < 0.05) percentage of consumers who indicated they would purchase unlabeled chops compared to labeled chops. These results, within the population sampled, indicate that carcass weight and chop thickness can affect consumer preference and thus should be considered by retailers when marketing fresh pork loin chops.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of increased pork hot carcass weight on loin quality and palatability of top loin chops. Pork loins (N = 200) were collected from 4 different hot carcass weight groups: A light weight (LT; less than 111.8 kg), medium-light weight (MLT; 111.8 to 119.1 kg), medium-heavy weight (MHVY; 119.1 to 124.4), and a heavyweight group (HVY; 124.4 and greater). Following fabrication, chops were assigned to fat and moisture analysis, Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBSF), consumer sensory panels, or trained sensory panels. Chops from the HVY group were rated as more (P < 0.05) tender compared to chops from the LT carcasses. Additionally, chops from the HVY weight group had greater (P < 0.05) consumer overall like ratings compared to chops from both the LT and MLT groups. Carcass weight did not affect (P > 0.05) consumer flavor liking ratings. Hot carcass weight treatment did not contribute (P > 0.05) to the percentage of chops rated acceptable for flavor and overall liking. The greatest (P < 0.05) percentage of samples were rated acceptable for juiciness for chops from the HVY weight group, and the lowest (P < 0.05) percentage of acceptable ratings for tenderness were for chops from the LT weight group. Both initial and sustained juiciness from MHVY carcasses were rated as more (P < 0.05) juicy compared to chops from both MLT and LT carcasses by trained sensory panelists. Additionally, chops from the LT carcasses had the lowest (P < 0.05) myofibrillar tenderness ratings. Chops from MHVY and HVY carcasses were similar (P > 0.05), with greater (P < 0.05) overall tenderness ratings compared to chops from LT carcasses. These results indicate chops from heavier weight carcasses may have improved tenderness and juiciness compared to chops from lighter carcasses.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of USDA quality grade on beef eating quality of top sirloin steaks when cooked to multiple degrees of doneness (DOD). Beef top sirloin butts (N = 60; 15/quality grade) were collected to equally represent 4 quality grades [Prime, Top Choice (modest00 to moderate100), Low Choice, and Select]. Steaks were assigned to 1 of 3 DOD: rare (60°C), medium (71°C), and well-done (77°C). Steaks were allocated to either consumer sensory analysis, trained sensory analysis, fat and moisture analysis, or Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBSF). There were no interactions (P > 0.05) for all consumer ratings of palatability traits, indicating increases in DOD had the same impact across all quality grades. Prime steaks had greater (P < 0.05) juiciness ratings than all other quality grades, except for Top Choice. As DOD increased, consumer ratings and the percentage of steaks rated acceptable for each palatability trait decreased (P < 0.05; rare > medium > well-done). There was a quality grade × DOD interaction (P < 0.05) for trained sensory panel juiciness scores. When cooked to medium, Prime and Top Choice steaks were rated higher (P < 0.05) for juiciness than Low Choice and Select steaks, while there were no differences at all other DOD. Similar to consumer ratings, trained panel ratings of tenderness decreased (P < 0.05) as DOD increased (rare > medium > well-done). Lastly, there was no quality grade by DOD interaction (P > 0.05) for Warner-Bratzler shear force. These results indicate that regardless of the DOD top sirloin steaks are cooked to, quality grade had minimal impact on palatability. Therefore, it is unnecessary for consumers, retailers, and foodservice to pay premium prices for higher quality top sirloin steaks, as the same eating experience will be provided.

The objective of this study was to determine the impact on beef palatability perceptions when consumers with varying degree of doneness (DOD) preferences are served steaks cooked to multiple DOD. Paired Low Choice strip loin steaks were randomly assigned to a DOD of either rare (60°C), medium-rare (63°C), medium (71°C), medium-well (74°C), or well-done (77°C). Consumer panelists were prescreened for DOD preference (rare, medium, or well-done) prior to sensory panels and were assigned to panels based on their DOD preference. In the first round of testing, consumers were served 1 sample from each of the 5 DOD under low-intensity red incandescent light to mask any DOD differences among samples. In round 2 of testing, consumers were fed the paired samples cooked to the same DOD under white incandescent lights. There were no (P > 0.05) consumer DOD preference × steak DOD interactions or consumer DOD preference effects for tenderness, juiciness, and flavor ratings when steaks were evaluated under both lighting types. Within the white-lighting testing, there was a consumer DOD preference × steak DOD interaction (P < 0.05) for overall acceptability. Consumers who preferred steaks cooked to well-done reported no differences (P > 0.05) in overall palatability among DOD under white-lighting, whereas consumers who preferred steaks cooked to rare and medium rated steaks lower (P < 0.05) for overall palatability as DOD increased. Regardless of DOD preference, consumer sensory ratings decreased (P < 0.05) when steaks were cooked above the consumer’s preferred DOD; whereas sensory ratings improved (P < 0.05) when steaks were served below the consumers’ preferences. These results indicate that overcooking steaks has the greatest negative impact on beef palatability perception and thus, foodservice should err on the side of undercooking steaks to preserve, and potentially improve, eating satisfaction.