Beef Primals Price Trends

Similar documents
Improving the Value of Fresh Meat

The U.S. Beef Industry Status Update and New Developments. Chris R. Calkins, Ph.D. Professor of Animal Science University of Nebraska Lincoln

Introduction and cutting specifications

Beef Muscle Guide. A useful guide for NPD staff, chefs, ready meal producers, meat buyers, meat traders and anybody working with beef.

Economic and Social Council

BeefCuts. Primal & Subprimal Weights and Yields 1300-pound Steer Choice, YG3 Dressing Percentage: 62% Chuck Rib Loin. Round. Brisket. Plate.

RETAIL YIELDS AND FABRICATION TIMES FOR BEEF SUBPRIMALS FROM TWO GRADE GROUPS. A Thesis KRISTIN LEIGH VOGES

Product Information, General MODULE 6 // Processing and Selecting Beef for Foodservice Applications. Composition of Meat. Fabrication of Primals

The first checkoff-funded National Beef Tenderness

CHARACTERIZATION OF BEEF AT RETAIL: OKLAHOMA MARKET STUDY. C. L. NickI, H. G. Dolezal2, F. K. Ray3 and L. W. Hand4. Story in Brief

BEEF FACTS: PRODUCT QUALITY BEEF RESEARCH. Quality Impacts When Changing the Forequarter Break Point. Chicago New York Philadelphia Boston

Feeder Cattle Grades, Carcass Grades, & Meat Palatability. Shelby Filley Regional Livestock & Forages Specialist. Purpose

Beef Forequarter: Fabrication & Retail ID Supplement for CEV Video #298

PRELIMINARY REPORT FOR YIELD AND TIME DATA ON IBP USER FRIENDLY PRODUCTS. Andrew M. Martin, Carol L. Lorenzen, Davey B. Griffin, John P.

Today s Topics & Presenters. Session Overview. Session Objectives. Terminology. Communication is Key 2/13/2013

National Beef Tenderness Survey

ROASTS Where Oven Roasts Come From Oven Roasts Where Pot Roasts Come From Pot Roasts Briskets

FFA Meat Judging CDE

Canadian Beef Centre of Excellence on the road

RELATIONSHIP OF TOTAL IRON CONTENT IN BEEF TO FLAVOR ATTRIBUTES 1. J. P. Grobbel, M. E. Dikeman, G. A. Milliken 2, E. J. Yancey 3

FIELD PEAS IN LIVESTOCK DIETS. Karla Jenkins Cow/calf range management specialist, Panhandle Research and Extension Center

Project Summary. Extending Shelf-Life of Beef Cuts Utilizing Low Level Carbon Monoxide in Modified Atmosphere Packaging Systems

Evaluating the point of separation, during carcass fabrication, between the beef wholesale rib and the beef wholesale chuck 1

Department of Animal Sciences and Industry, Kansas State University, Manhattan Key Words: Aging, Beef, Meat Quality, Tenderness

Lamb and Mutton Quality Audit

Uniform Retail Meat Identity Standards

Idaho Meats Evaluation and Technology Handbook

TENDERNESS ASSESMENT OF BEEF STEAKS FROM US FOODSERVICE AND RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS USING WARNER-BRATZLER SHEAR AND CONSUMER SENSORY PANEL RATINGS

Economic and Social Council

Working with your processor. Objectives. Meat Processor 11/15/2010. Josh Elmore, PAS Advisor III, Natural Resource Program

MIDDLE SCHOOL QUESTIONS

SECTION 2. The BAM intiative

Quality Premium Range Cutting Specifications

A Guide to Beef Cuts. American Beef Cuts. Front Quarter. Hind Quarter. Other Cuts. Most common sources for roasts and hamburgers

Meats are such a large area of study that we have divided the subject matter into two

2014 Wyoming State 4-H Meats Judging Contest April 2014 University of Wyoming. Created by: Dawn Sanchez, UW Extension Educator

COOKED YIELDS, COOKED COLOR, TENDERNESS, AND SENSORY

MEATS EVALUATION AND TECHNOLOGY Updated 3/7/2018

Meat Evaluation & Technology

Na onal Beef Tenderness Survey 2015

EFFECTS OF CONVENTIONAL AND MICROWAVE COOKING METHODS ON CHARACTERISTICS OF REFORMED BEEF ROASTS

5th 6 weeks project due next week.

7 BEEF SPECIAL REFERENCE

Illinois Association of Vocational Agriculture Teachers Meats Evaluation and Technology Career Development Event

Comparison of three methods of packaging for the ageing/maturation of beef

Forestry, Leduc, AB, T9E 7C5, Canada. Agriculture/Forestry Centre, Edmonton, AB T6G 2P5, Canada. *

MEATS BEEF. Lamb. Pork 5/3/2011. Beef: Cherry Red color, white fat, larger size. Pork: Pale pink color and white fat

Meats for Consumers STATE FAIR 4-H MEATS CONTEST (Revised June 14)

Meat quality of Merino lamb and yearlings how does it stack up?

Curriculamb. ACF Members Test For Continuing Education Credit

The Gold Standard in Pork

Beef. Multiple Choice. 1. About 75% of muscle tissue, or meat is (a) protein. (b) water. (c) fat. (d) collagen.

OUR PRODUCT. RANGE Lamb Beef

Cattle Summary. Million Pound /19 11/21 10/24 12/5 11/7 1/ USD per CWT

Economic and Social Council

Effect of Breed on Palatability of Dry-Cured Ham. S.J. Wells, S.J. Moeller, H.N. Zerby, K.M. Irvin

NFEC Culinary Arts Beef Preparation Chapter 19

Supplementation of Beverages, Salad Dressing and Yogurt with Pulse Ingredients. Summary of Report

TAJIMA AUSTRALIAN CROSS-BRED WAGYU BEEF PROUDLY DISTRIBUTED BY:

A TASTE OF TRUE REFINEMENT

Canadian Society of Club Managers January 25, 2010

Composition and Value of Loin Primals

Animal Science Department, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

EFFECTS OF MICROWAVE COOKING RATE ON PALATABILITY OF PORK LOIN CHOPS

OVEN ROAST. Funded by The Beef Checkoff

MEATS EVALUATION CDE EVENT PRACTICUMS

1 st builds & repairs 2 nd energy provides 4 calories per gram. Other Nutrient Contributions:

From the Ranch to the Dinner Plate. Inspecting Beef Grading Beef Branding Beef Enhancing Beef Color of Beef

SECTION 7. BAM Certification

National Pork Board Report on Pork Cut Nomenclature. National Pork Producers Council 9/4/2009 1

F&N 453 Project Written Report. TITLE: Effect of wheat germ substituted for 10%, 20%, and 30% of all purpose flour by

Determining the optimum beef longissimus muscle size for retail consumers 1

Development of Value Added Products From Home-Grown Lychee

Project Summary. Principal Investigator: C. R. Kerth Texas A&M University

CapitalizinG On your cuts. An easy guide to upscaling value cuts of meat

FRESH PROTEIN RIP WINGS SIRLOIN T-BONE SHANKS RIBS SHOULDER TENDER

Quality Standard beef Roasting Joints

Project Summary. Identifying consumer preferences for specific beef flavor characteristics

Brand Definition. All Mishima Reserve cattle are at least 50% Wagyu or higher

Sales Meeting Friday, March 3, 2017

CALIFORNIA DRIED PLUM BOARD Technical Bulletin August 2009

Relationships Between Descriptive Beef Flavor Attributes and Consumer Liking

THE MEAT PRODUCTS REGULATIONS 2003 SUMMARY GUIDANCE NOTES

Background andobjectives

WELCOME TO THE LAMB COMPANY

FCS Lesson. Beef Basics. Lesson Developed by Megan (Aden) Ferguson Family & Consumer Science Teacher Courtesy of Iowa & Wisconsin Beef Councils

FRESH NEW ZEALAND VENISON SUMMIT BRAND SPECIFICATIONS

Thunder View Farms LLC Genuine Black Angus Beef The Coombe Family Grahamsville, NY

DEVELOPMENT AND STANDARDISATION OF FORMULATED BAKED PRODUCTS USING MILLETS

Beef Customer Satisfaction: Cooking Method and Degree of Doneness Effects on the Top Loin Steak 1

The Effect of Variation in Oven Temperature and Internal Temperature on Cooking Losses, Tenderness and Visual Acceptability of Pork Roasts

Cutting Specification Manual

cent/lb

Perceptual Mapping and Opportunity Identification. Dr. Chris Findlay Compusense Inc.

Check us out at thunderviewfarms.com


of Beef Top Sirloin Steaks

Heritage Hog Carcass Yields: Hereford Hog

SWEET DOUGH APPLICATION RESEARCH COMPARING THE FUNCTIONALITY OF EGGS TO EGG REPLACERS IN SWEET DOUGH FORMULATIONS RESEARCH SUMMARY

NEXT BEEF IDENTIFICATION

Transcription:

Muscle Profiling

% C H A N G E 10% 5% 0% -5% -10% -15% Beef Primals Price Trends LOIN +4% RIB +3% 26% of carcass by weight -20% -25% -30% *1998 vs. 1993 values Source: Cattle-Fax CHUCK -24% ROUND -25% TRIMMINGS -28% 69% of carcass by weight

Percent of Total Carcass Weight Ch/Rd/Tr 69% Rb/Ln 26% Total 568.0 Source: Cattle-Fax 123.8 Round 89.2 Loin 87.3 Trimmings 57.3 Rib 178.1 Chuck

The Ultimate Goal of Muscle Profiling: Add value to the chuck & round

HURDLES TO OVERCOME Tenderness Tenderness variation Connective tissue (internal and external) Seam fat Convenience factor/cooking method Fabrication style

OPPORTUNITIES Upgrade lower value muscles Capture best use for tender muscles Increase menu variety Increase raw material options Remove obstacles

Profiling Muscles of the Chuck and Round Upper 2/3 Choice Low Choice Select YG 1 YG 2 YG 3 YG 4&5 YG 1 YG 2 YG 3 YG4&5 YG 1 YG 2 YG 3 YG 4&5 Carcass Weight 550-650 lbs. 700-800 lbs. 850-950 lbs.

Profiling Muscles of the Chuck and Round University of Nebraska University of Florida 144 chucks and rounds 39 muscles per carcass 5,616 muscles

University of Florida Animal Science, Meats Section Boning Yields Physical Characterization Warner-Bratzler Shear Force (37 muscles) Sensory Panel (22 muscles)

University of Nebraska-Lincoln Animal Science, Meats Section Proximate analysis (fat & moisture) Color Pigment concentration Collagen (connective tissue) ph Water holding capacity Bind Muscle fiber type

Chuck Summary Data Fat % ph WHC Bind, ml Myoglobin Collagen mg/g mg/g Moist, WBS Dry, WBS Biceps brachii Brachiocephalicus omot. Brachialis Cutaneous omo brachialis ----- ----- Complexus Deep pectoral Deltoideus Dorsalis oblique Infraspinatus Intertransversales Latissmus dorsi Longissimus cap. et Atlantis Longissimus costarum Longissimus dorsi Levatores costarum Multifidus & spinalis dorsi Rhomboidus Scalenius dorsalis Serratus ventralis Splenius Superficial pectoral Subscapularis Supraspinatus Tensor fascia antibrachii Teres major Trapezius ----- ----- Triceps brachii Shear G = <8.5 Force Y = 8.5-11.0 Value R = >11.0 Fat G = < 5% Y = 5-10 % R = > 10% ph G = > 5.8 Y = 5.8-5.7 R = < 5.7 PressibleG = < 36% Moisture Y = 36-38% (WHC) R = > 38% Bind G = >175 ml Y = 170-175 ml R = <170 ml Myoglobin G = >25 mg/g Y = 20-25 mg/g R = <20 mg/g Collagen G = <10 mg/g Y = 10-15 mg/g R = >15 mg/g

Adductor Biceps femoris Gluteus medius Gracilus Pectineus Rectus femoris Sartorius Semimembranosus Semitendinosus Vastus intermedius Vastus lateralis Vastus medialis Round Summary Data Fat % ph WHC Bind, ml Myoglobin mg/g Collagen mg/g Moist,WBS Dry, WBS Shear G = <8.5 Force Y = 8.5-11.0 Value R = >11.0 Fat G = < 5% Y = 5-10 % R = > 10% ph G = > 5.8 Y = 5.8-5.7 R = < 5.7 Expressible G = < 36% Moisture y = 36-38% (WHC) R = > 38% Bind G = >175 ml Y = 170-175 ml R = <170 ml Myoglobin G = >25 mg/g Y = 20-25 mg/g R = <20 mg/g Collagen G = <10 mg/g Y = 10-15 mg/g R = >15 mg/g

Cow Muscle Profiling D. D. Johnson University of Florida B.L. Gwartney NCBA C. R. Calkins University of Nebraska

Objective:! To determine the physical, chemical, and sensory properties of the primary muscles of the cow carcass.! To explore differences between beef and diary cow carcasses.! To study the effects of carcass weight, maturity, fat thickness, and muscling on the characteristics of beef and dairy cow muscles.

Goal:!To establish a data base of information that could be used to upgrade the value of market cow carcasses.

Motivation for the Project! Success with steer and heifer muscle profiling! 43% of cow beef sold as boxed beef (in primal/subprimal form)! Opportunities to upgrade specific muscles (enhance value)! A significant part of our industry that has not been carefully studied! Establish a baseline for cow carcasses

The Planning Process! Planning committee (including packers) - identified needs, reviewed selection criteria! Identified a cooperating packer - Packerland Packing Co.! A cooperative effort - University of Nebraska and University of Florida

The Design:! Identification of selection criteria - cow carcass grading systems - not all are ribbed! Definition of carcass weight -1 st by cow audit - by plant numbers (more current0! The selection grid! How dairy vs beef were identified! Collection of carcass data

Selection Grid For Beef Carcass wt, lbs Carcass wt, lbs Fat thickness, in Muscling Maturity 350-549 550-749 < 0.1 Heavy & Medium C/D Heavy & Medium E Light C/D Light E > 0.1 Heavy & Medium C/D Heavy & Medium E Light C/D Light E

Selection Grid For Dairy Carcass wt, lbs Carcass wt, lbs Fat thickness, in Muscling Maturity 550-749 750-949 < 0.1 Heavy & Medium C/D Heavy & Medium E Light C/D Light E > 0.1 Heavy & Medium C/D Heavy & Medium E Light C/D Light E

Sampling sites B B,D D B

Muscling Score Heavy Mediu m Light

Muscles Studied Muscle Lab analyses* Shear Force Sensory Panel Adductor Biceps femoris Complexus Deep pectoral Gluteus medius Infraspinatus Latissimus dorsi Longissimus dorsi Multifidus/Spinalis dorsi Psoas major

Muscles studied (continued) Muscle Lab analyses* Shear Force Sensory Panel Rectus femoris Semimembranosus Semitendinosus Serratus ventralis Supraspinatus Teres major Tensor fascia latae Triceps brachii Vastus intermedius Vastus lateralis Vastus medialis

University of Florida -Boning yields -Physical attributes -Warner-Bratzler shear force -Sensory panel evaluation *Juiciness *Flavor intensity *Tenderness *Connective tissue *Off-flavor University of Nebraska -Color -Water holding capacity -Emulsion capacity -Collagen content -Proximate analysis -ph

Results

Descriptive statistics for carcass data from all animals sampled for cow muscle profiling Variable N Mean SD Minimum Maximum Hot carcass weight, lb 145 652.0 132.9 350.0 948.0 Skeletal maturity 145 D 82 93.4 B 80 E 99 Lean maturity 97 D 66 73.3 C 0 E 80 Overall maturity 139 D 79 82.4 C 0 E 99 Actual fat, in. 145.17.14 0.8 Adjusted fat, in. 145.17.15 0.8 Muscling a 145 3.6 1.25 1.0 7.0 Ribeye area, sq. in. 89 10.1 1.86 5.6 18.0 a Muscling: 1 = light -, 3 = light +, 7 = heavy -.

Beef Cow Muscles ph Heme-iron Expressible moisture Total collagen Fat L* Shear force Adductor Biceps femoris Complexus Deep pectoral Gluteus medius Infraspinatus Latissimus dorsi Longissimus dorsi, loin Multifidus/Spinalis dorsi Psoas major Rectus femoris Semimbranosis Semitendinosis Serratus ventralis Supraspinatus Tensor fascia latae Teres major Triceps brachii Vastus intermedius Vastus lateralis Vastus medialis

Dairy Cow Muscles ph Heme-iron Expressible moisture Total collagen Fat L* Shear force Adductor Biceps femoris Complexus Deep pectoral Gluteus medius Infraspinatus Latissimus dorsi Longissimus dorsi, loin Multifidus/Spinalis dorsi Psoas major Rectus femoris Semimbranosis Semitendinosis Serratus ventralis Supraspinatus Tensor fascia latae Teres major Triceps brachii Vastus intermedius Vastus lateralis Vastus medialis

Number of Muscles with Significant Main Effects for Shear Force (from 21 possible) and Sensory Traits (from 10 possible) -- BEEF Trait Fat Class Weight Maturity Muscling Warner Bratlzer Shear Force 1 1 1, 2 Sensory Tenderness 1 Sensory Connective Tissue 1 Sensory Beef Flavor Intensity 1 1 Off Flavor 2 1 Juiciness 1, 1 1

Number of Muscles with Significant Main Effects for Shear Force (from 21 possible) and Sensory Traits (from 10 possible) -- DAIRY Trait Fat Class Weight Maturity Muscling Warner Bratlzer Shear Force 1 2 1 Sensory Tenderness 1 1 2 2 Sensory Connective Tissue 1 1 2 1 Sensory Beef Flavor Intensity 1 Off Flavor 1 1 Juiciness 1 2

Number of Muscles (from 21 possible) with Significant Main Effects -- BEEF Trait Fat Class Weight Maturity Muscling ph 4 0 0 5 Expressible Moisture 1 1 0 4 Collagen NA 0 1 NA Fat 13 2 0 2 Moisture 20 0 0 0 Ash 0 1 0 0

Number of Muscles (from 21 possible) with Significant Main Effects -- BEEF Trait Fat Class Weight Maturity Muscling L* (lightness) 0 0 1 1 A* (redness) 6, 1 7, 1 4 7 B* (yellowness) 4, 2 3, 1 2 7, 1 Heme Iron 4 0 2 0

Number of Muscles (from 21 possible) with Significant Main Effects -- DAIRY Trait Fat Class Weight Maturity Muscling ph 0 0 0 0 Expressible Moisture 1 0 0 0 Collagen NA 6 2 NA Fat 13 8 3 1 Moisture 17 13 2 1 Ash 1 0 0 0

Number of Muscles (from 21 possible) with Significant Main Effects -- DAIRY Trait Fat Class Weight Maturity Muscling L* (lightness) 3 1, 1 1 0 A* (redness) 3 3 1 0 B* (yellowness) 1 0 0 0 Heme Iron 1 0 1 1

BEEF vs. DAIRY Number of Muscles with Significantly Higher Means Trait Beef Dairy WBS (21) 4 Sensory tenderness 2

BEEF vs. DAIRY Number of Muscles from (21 possible) with significantly higher means Trait ph L* (lightness) A* (redness) B* (yellowness) Heme Iron Expressible Moisture Collagen Fat Moisture Ash Beef 1 1 12 1 Dairy 6 3 1 3 1

BEEF vs. DAIRY Number of Muscles from (21 possible) with significantly higher means Trait ph Expressible Moisture Collagen Beef Dairy 1 3 Fat Moisture Ash 1 12 1 1

BEEF vs. DAIRY Number of Muscles from (21 possible) with significantly higher means Trait Beef Dairy L* (lightness) 6 A* (redness) B* (yellowness) Heme Iron 1 3

Breed comparisons for Warner-Bratzler shear force and sensory panel tenderness scores (continued) Sensory Tenderness a Muscle Beef Dairy P Value Longissimus dorsi, loin 4.7 4.9 NS Multifidus/Spinalis dorsi Psoas major 6.6 6.9 NS Rectus femoris Semimembranosus Semitendinosus Serratus ventralis 4.2 4.1 NS 3.9 4.3 P <.05 4.2 5.1 P <.05 a 3 = moderately tough, 4 = slightly tough, 5 = slightly tender, 6 = moderately tender

Bovine Myology Muscle Profiling Web Site Univ. of NE http://deal.unl.edu/bovine

National Cattlemen s Beef Association Customer Service Center 1-800-368-3138 Muscle Profiling Manual Item 12-800 $40.00 Muscle Profiling/Bovine Myology CD-ROM Item 12-801 $15.00

Beef Value Cuts New Cuts for the New Consumer

Changes in the Industry To Boxed Beef From Whole Sides

Changes in the Industry To Case Ready Beef To Closer Trimmed Beef

Chuck & Round The Impact of Muscle Profiling Muscle profiling provides the basis for single muscle, value added beef merchandising. Multi-muscle cuts will be phased out over time.

167A Beef Round Knuckle, Peeled

167A Beef Round Knuckle, Peeled Value Added

Value-Added Merchandising Tip Side Tip Center Tip Soft

Value-added Merchandising At Retail Tip Side Steak Tip Center Roast Center Steak

Beef Value Cuts Creating steaks out more of the carcass Discovering value in the chuck and round subprimals through muscle separation Moderately priced beef fills the void between premium steak and ground beef 14 cuts, including 9 exciting new steaks and roasts More options for consumers and foodservice operators great taste, moderately priced

Beef s T-Rex Cuts Chuck Arm Roast Chuck Blade Roast Soon to be extinct!

Top Blade Flat Iron Steak

Shoulder Center Steak Ranch Cut Steak

Tender Medallions Shoulder Tender

Round Tip Center Sirloin Tip Steak Round Tip Side Sirloin Tip Steak

Bottom Round Western Griller Steak

Shoulder Clod, 114 A

Shoulder Clod, separated Shoulder Top Blade Shoulder Tender

Shoulder - Value Added Cuts Shoulder Center Steak Top Blade Steak Tender Medallions

Value Cuts 114 Shoulder Clod CAB/Choice UPC Retail Cut Weight % Yield 1162 Shoulder Center Steaks 30.91 10.78 1163 Shoulder Top Steaks 11.88 4.14 1164 Shoulder Tender 6.83 2.38 1166 Shoulder Top Blade Steak 26.50 9.24 1653 Ground Beef No. 1 90 30.04 10.48 1659 Ground Beef No. 2 80 69.72 24.31 1724 Beef Cubes for Kabobs 35.50 12.38 9990 Fat 72.26 25.20 9992 Cutting Loss 3.10 1.08 Totals 286.74 73.7%

Value Cuts Yield & Cutting Times 114 Shoulder Clod Select CAB Choice % Yield 78.65% 73.7% Labor Time 57.00 55.40 Labor Costs.14.14 % Margin 54.31% 51.94% Net Retail $1.94 $1.86

Value Cuts 114E Shoulder Clod CAB/Choice UPC Retail Cut Weight % Yield 1162 Shoulder Center Steaks 32.71 37.61 1163 Shoulder Top Steaks 10.85 12.48 1653 Ground Beef No. 1 90 9.20 10.58 1659 Ground Beef No. 2 80 10.76 12.37 1724 Beef Cubes for Kabobs 14.63 16.82 9990 Fat 7.43 8.54 9992 Cutting Loss 1.39 1.60 Totals 86.97 89.9%

Value Cuts Yield & Cutting Times 114E Shoulder Clod, Arm Roast Select CAB Choice % Yield 91.0% 89.0% Labor Time 48.66 46.19 Labor Costs.12.12 % Margin 51.06% 52.38% Net Retail $2.04 $2.10

Value Cuts 114D Top Blade CAB/Choice UPC Retail Cut Weight % Yield 1166 Shoulder Top Blade Steaks 27.21 43.90 1659 Ground Beef No. 2 80 25.09 40.48 9990 Fat 9.24 14.91 9992 Cutting Loss 0.44 0.71 Totals 61.98 84.4%

Value Cuts Yield & Cutting Times 114D Shoulder Clod, Top Blade Select CAB Choice % Yield 86.6% 84.4% Labor Time 62.95 70.25 Labor Costs.16.18 % Margin 41.9% 39.35% Net Retail $1.47 $1.37

Beef Value Cuts Yield and Labor Procedures Provide accurate and unbiased cutting yields and labor times 5 Subprimals Shoulder Clod 114; 2 Piece Clod - Top Blade 114D & Shoulder Clod 114E; Round Knuckle 167A; Round Outside Flat 171B

Beef Value Cuts Yield and Labor Procedures Quality Grade Select and CAB Choice Yield Grade YG 3 or better Database 120 Cutting Tests Acknowledgements Texas A&M Lone Star, Foodservice

URMIS Names Beef Shoulder Top Blade (Flat Iron) Steak Beef Shoulder Center Steak Beef Shoulder Tender Petite Roast Beef Round Sirloin Tip Center Steak Beef Round Sirloin Tip Side Steak Beef Bottom Round (Western Griller) Steak

Consumer Benefits Greater variety of steaks & roasts Better overall beef value More satisfying eating experience Single muscle means no connective tissue Consistent tenderness throughout steak Convenient, smaller portions Nutritious, most are lean or extra lean

Named Flat Iron Steak On Trend for 2002

Beef Value Cuts Foodservice

National Provisioner Names Value Cuts Program one of the most innovative new product ideas for 2001

Beef Value Cuts Retail/Warehouse

Checkoff Dollars at work!