Product Collection for Future MSA Eating Quality

Summary

MSA consumer sensory testing and the resulting ability to predict consumer satisfaction for individual beef meal portions has been a major driver of industry change. This change being to a consumer focus with measurable revenue improvement to all sectors through the delivery of superior value.

Accurate prediction however, can only be built on substantial data and as MSA has expanded to support branding of a greater number of cuts to new markets, requests have grown for MSA prediction of further muscles or cuts coupled with alternative cooking methods. This research project provides a major pillar from which to deliver expanded outcomes and improved prediction across the carcase in a new MSA model.

To avoid the risk of confounding new cut x cook results with cattle type or environmental effects it is important that any testing be spread across a sufficiently diverse range of cattle. Further benefit is gained by testing a large array of muscles and treatments “within animal” as any environmental or genetic effect is common to all samples removing prediction variation.

The project objective was to collect a large number of samples from each carcase over a number of diverse cattle types and sources. The utilisation of progeny from three Beef Information Nucleus (BIN) programs provided an ideal base for the research. Eighteen head, in turn subdivided into three subgroups of 6 head with differing criteria, were utilised from each of the Northern BIN (Brahman, Droughtmaster and Santa Gertrudis), the Hereford crossbred BIN (black baldy Hereford over Angus, Angus over black baldy) and an Angus BIN (Low and High growth and myostatin). The Hereford BIN were grass-fed in Tasmania whereas the 

Northern BIN were 100 day grain-fed in Queensland and the Angus BIN 168 days on feed in NSW. The project was designed to sample cuts across a diverse cattle range with known genomic information: it was not designed to compare breeds.
Cuts were collected from both sides of the 54 head, all MSA compliant, selected from much larger groups. The cuts were processed down to individual muscles from 55 to 64 muscles collected from each carcase resulting in sampling of 67 different muscles, 26 of which had no prior MSA testing. Many of these were selected to enable MSA grading of the majority of product codes listed in the Handbook of Australian Meat. Fabrication of the muscles produced 7,261 consumer samples each to be evaluated by 10 consumers.

Further data value was delivered by the use of 8 alternative cooking methods, including sous-vide and osso bucco, to compare to the existing slow cook protocol, moist heat roasting relative to the standard dry roasting protocol and comparison of chuck and short rib cuts cooked on the bone to the component muscles from the other carcase side cooked boneless. In addition, the new samples provided current data for cuts that had either very low existing data or which had not been tested for many years. An ageing comparison was made to strengthen or establish estimates for cuts and to evaluate potential cooking interaction with ageing.

The consumer test results combined with the extensive data available through BIN records, MSA grading inputs and fabrication of the extensive muscle range and cooking methods have been a major source of data addition to the AUSBlue database and provided critical input to the development of a new generation of MSA prediction model.
This is expected to deliver increased value to the Australian beef industry through superior consumer prediction and an increased range of alternative muscle and cook alternatives that can be adopted to meet specific branding and market requirements.