27 Quality Variation in Beef Chuck Eye Rolls Sourced from a Commercial Processor

Abstract The objective of this study was to evaluate quality variation in beef Chuck Eye rolls (IMPS 116D). Beef Chuck Rolls (IMPS 116A) were purchased from a commercial meat packer and fabricated to obtain beef Chuck Eye Rolls (IMPS 116D). Cases were transported to the Illinois State University Meat Lab and hand-sliced into 2.54 cm boneless beef Chuck Eye steaks (IMPS 1116D) (n = 161). Each roll contained between 7 to 10 steaks for use in further meat quality analyses in accordance with in-plant procedures. Upon slicing, steaks were allowed to bloom for 15 minutes and then used in subsequent quality analysis including color, cook loss, and tenderness evaluation. Instrumental color measurements [L* (lightness), a* (redness), b* (yellowness)] were taken for each steak in duplicate with a HunterLab Miniscan XE Plus Spectrophotometer using a D65 illuminant, 100 observer, and 35-mm aperture. All steaks were cooked to a final internal temperature of 71° C. Steaks then underwent cook loss evaluation as well as tenderness analysis via Warner-Bratzler shear force (WBSF). Statistical analysis was performed using the Proc MIXED procedure of SAS to estimate variance components of steak quality in a nested design (steak within roll within case). For all response variables, the standard error was large for the case term. Ranges of observed response values were: L* 28.03-52.15, a* 14.55-27.82, b* 12.78-25.32, cook loss 17.58-61.11, shearforce 2.10-5.86. Variance components in L* and a* values followed similar patterns in which the greatest amount of variance was contributed by steak, followed by case, followed by roll (L* 13.541 (P < 0.001) vs. 9.035 (P = 0.1790) vs. 1.958 (P = 0.1839) and a* 4.055 (P < 0.0001) vs. 1.605 ( P= 0.2124) vs. 0.632 (P = 0.1746). Case, roll, and steak contributed variance almost equally for b* though two variance components were statistically different from zero σ2case =2.133 (P = 0.2344) σ2roll = 1.627 (P = 0.0335) σ2steak = 2.37 (P < 0.0001). Case contributed approximately 1.5 times the variance in cook loss when compared with steak (σ2case = 43.687 (P = 0.1387) vs. σ2steak=29.471 (P < 0.0001)) and approximately 3.5 times more than roll ( σ2case = 43.687 vs. σ2roll = 12.077 (P = 0.0565)). The largest impact on variance in shearforce values came from steak whereas case and roll contributed almost equally (shearforce σ2case = 0.0256 (P = 0.3894)σ2roll = 0.0333 (P = 0.2040) σ2steak = 0.2454 (P < 0.0001)). Some correlations were observed: L*:a*