as a producer, how do i hit that target?
DESCRIPTION
As a Producer, How Do I Hit that Target?. Twig Marston Extension Beef Specialist K-State Research & Extension. To Hit a Target (Complete a Project) You Need a Blueprint. “Ideal” Carcass Specifications. Hot Carcass Weight 700 to 800 lb External fat 0.3” to 0.4” - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
As a Producer,How Do I Hit that Target?
Twig MarstonExtension Beef
Specialist
K-State Research & Extension
To Hit a Target (Complete a Project) You Need a Blueprint
“Ideal” Carcass Specifications
Hot Carcass Weight 700 to 800 lb External fat 0.3” to 0.4” Loin Eye Area 12.0 to 14.0 sq. in. Marbling Small 00 minimum – Modest 00
preferred Genetically “Guaranteed Tender”
Goals Set for 2005 from National Beef Quality Audit - 2000
Eliminate USDA Standard grade carcasses. Eliminate Yield Grade 4’s and 5’s. Eliminate side-branded hides. Accompany all seedstock animals with meaningful
genetic data for production and end-product traits. Continually improve the eating quality of beef.
Defining Quality
Consumer – Affordable, lean, tasty, and tender Retailer – Trim, tasty, uniform in size and tender Packer – Finished cattle of the proper weight,
quality grade and yield Feeder – “Good Doing” cattle w/ growth potential,
the right weight, quality and yield Producer – Genetically correct cattle, efficient in
reproduction, growth, and adequate marbling
Producers’ Tool Box
Genetics Nutrition Management Advertisement/Education
Heritability Estimates
Fat thickness 0.19 Marbling Score 0.68 WBSF 0.40 Taste Sensory Panel
Tenderness 0.37 Juiciness 0.46 Flavor 0.07
Dikeman et al., submitted
Marbling, Favor, Juiciness, and Tenderness
Breed composition Diet energy
concentration Length of the finishing
phase
Breed Differences Exist
Black is nota CarcassGene, It is a Dominant Coat ColorGene.
Why Do We Need Marbling?
Flavor Insurance for
Ignorance in Cooking
Marbling(Producers’ Insurance Policy)
About a 10% linear increase in consumer acceptance for each full marble score between Slight and Slightly Abundant.
WBSF between 6.6 and 12.1 correlated to a steep decline in predicted acceptance.
Platter et al., 2003 CSU
USDA Grade and Endpoint Temperature
202530354045
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
Temperature (C)
WBSF (N)
Choice Select
Obuz et al., 2004, KSU
Relationship between Cow Production & Carcass Traits
Weight Height Condition Score
HCWt 0.81 0.69 0.23
Retail Prod. -0.05 0.03 -0.12
LMA 0.34 0.32 0.24
Marbling -0.15 -0.17 -0.03
WBSF 0.15 0.22 0.08
Nephawe et al., 2004 MARC
A positive correlation exists between Marbling and Milk EPDs. Marston , 2004
Tenderness
Injection Site (up to 6” of injection) Castration Over Aggressive Implant Programs
Beef Palatability & Genetics
Breed/Sire WBSF Marbling
Simmental -0.90 to +0.79 -0.22 to +0.48
Shorthorn -0.90 to +0.79 -0.42 to 0.00
Herefords -0.1.06 to +0..44 -0.16 to +0.47
WBSF and Marbling: Lowly correlated –0.19
Carcass Merit Traits Project
DNA Marker Assisted Selection
Eating Quality Test Disease Resistance Marker–Assisted Expected Progeny Differences Global Efforts – Australia, Brazil, Canada Calpain (good guy) propagate
and Calpastatin (bad guy) eliminate
Nutrition
Grain vs. Grass-fed vs. Forage-fed Weaning Age/Young Age Positive Energy
Balance Propionate vs. Acetate VFA Rumen
Production Creep feeding
Management
Implant and Implant Programs Feed Additives (Beta agonists) Calf vs. Aged Cattle Feeding Days on Feed
Effects of Days Fed
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 28 56 84 112 140 168 196
Days on Feed
Marbling YG Fat
May et al., OSU
Sickness Robs Quality Grade
Treating for Sickness Can Influence Quality Grade
No. of treatments0 1 2 or more
No. calves 5,490 574 540Quality score 6.45 6.65* 6.87**
Prime, % 1.86 1.05 0.93Prem. Choice, %27.1* 24.28*† 18.7†Total Choice, % 70.7 62.9 58.0Standard, % 2.6 5.9 10.6
Busby et al., 2004 ISU
Promotion, Development, and Education
Using the Tools in the BoxMeasure Twice – Cut Once
Three Paradigms of Beef Producers
Cattle Producer Labor user, task-driven, no effective use of information
Red Meat Producer Record keeper, cost efficient, focused on red meat
Food Producer Complex, targeting product characteristics which are
multi-dimensional and directly related to known tastes and preferences of consumers
The Future of the Paradigms
Cattle Producer – will be around because of the love and romance of the business, will stay in business if not over leveraged.
Red Meat Producer – will survive with the commodity side of the business.
Food Producer – will be rewarded by those that know the value of quality. Driven by the cost and quality controlled production of food made from beef.
Quality Thoughts
We can now make more mistakes faster than ever before.
Those who refuse to use data will make greater and more frequent mistakes.
Those who refuse to make data will be compensated with a smaller piece of the pie.
Those who control the data control the destiny of the industry.