Investigation of Smoked Beef Brisket Palatability from Three USDA Quality Grades

The objective of this study was to investigate differences in smoked beef brisket palatability from 3 USDA quality grades (USDA Prime, average [middle 1/3] Choice, and Select). Briskets (n = 54; 18 per quality grade) were seasoned with a blend of 1:1 coarse salt/black pepper, and then cooked in a smoker to a final internal temperature of 93°C for approximately 6 to 7 h. For sensory analysis, briskets were separated into point (pectoralis superficialis) and flat (pectoralis profundus) portions and then sliced perpendicular to the muscle fibers. Consumer panelists (N = 360) evaluated palatability traits, acceptability of each trait, and willingness to pay (WTP). An interaction between quality grade and muscle was observed (P ≤ 0.03) for all palatability traits, proportion of acceptable samples, and WTP. Consumers could not distinguish among quality grades of the point portions for tenderness, juiciness, flavor liking, and overall liking (P > 0.05). Point samples, regardless of quality grade, were scored greater (P < 0.05) than Prime flat samples for all palatability traits. Choice and Select flat samples were scored lesser (P < 0.05) than all other treatment combinations for tenderness, flavor liking, and overall liking. In alignment with palatability traits, consumers’ WTP was greatest for point portions, regardless of quality grade (P < 0.05), followed by Prime flat portions. Choice and Select flat portions had the lowest WTP (P < 0.05). Consumer acceptability of cooked beef brisket generally followed similar trends as palatability scores. Quality grade had no effect on the eating quality of the point portions of smoked briskets, and point portions received superior palatability scores to flat portions. Prime flat portions had greater eating quality compared to that of Choice and Select flat portions, and consumers had greater WTP for what they perceived as superior eating quality.

[1]  Jaime E. Malaga,et al.  Beef Quality Preferences: Factors Driving Consumer Satisfaction , 2020, Foods.

[2]  R. Polkinghorne,et al.  Exploring Consumer Palatability of Australian Beef Fajita Meat Enhanced with Phosphate or Sodium Bicarbonate , 2020, Foods.

[3]  T. O’Quinn,et al.  Palatability of beef chuck, loin, and round muscles from three USDA quality grades. , 2018, Journal of animal science.

[4]  T. O’Quinn,et al.  Evaluation of the contribution of tenderness, juiciness, and flavor to the overall consumer beef eating experience1 , 2018, Translational animal science.

[5]  C. Calkins,et al.  Evaluation of palatability and muscle composition of novel value-added beef cuts. , 2018, Meat science.

[6]  M. Miller,et al.  The Effects of Hot vs. Cold Boning on Eating Quality of New Zealand Grass Fed Beef , 2017 .

[7]  J. Savell,et al.  Assessment of Postmortem Aging Effects on Texas-style Barbecue Beef Briskets , 2017 .

[8]  S. Joo,et al.  Muscle profiling to improve the value of retail meat cuts. , 2016, Meat science.

[9]  M. Miller,et al.  Sensory evaluation of tender beef strip loin steaks of varying marbling levels and quality treatments. , 2015, Meat science.

[10]  M. Miller,et al.  Consumer assessment of beef palatability from four beef muscles from USDA Choice and Select graded carcasses. , 2014, Meat science.

[11]  D. S. Buchanan,et al.  Consumer evaluation of palatability characteristics of a beef value-added cut compared to common retail cuts. , 2014, Meat science.

[12]  J. D. Tatum,et al.  Effectiveness of USDA instrument-based marbling measurements for categorizing beef carcasses according to differences in longissimus muscle sensory attributes. , 2013, Journal of animal science.

[13]  B. Johnson,et al.  Consumer assessment of beef strip loin steaks of varying fat levels. , 2012, Journal of animal science.

[14]  J. B. Morgan,et al.  Estimation of relationships between mineral concentration and fatty acid composition of longissimus muscle and beef palatability traits. , 2011, Journal of animal science.

[15]  J. D. Tatum,et al.  Effects of postmortem aging and USDA quality grade on Warner-Bratzler shear force values of seventeen individual beef muscles. , 2006, Journal of animal science.

[16]  D. Wulf,et al.  Evaluating consumer acceptability and willingness to pay for various beef chuck muscles. , 2005, Journal of animal science.

[17]  C. Calkins,et al.  Muscle profiling: Characterizing the muscles of the beef chuck and round. , 2005, Meat science.

[18]  J. B. Morgan,et al.  Characterization of certified Angus beef steaks from the round, loin, and chuck. , 2004, Journal of animal science.

[19]  D. Wulf,et al.  Evaluating consumer acceptability of various muscles from the beef chuck and rib. , 2004, Journal of animal science.

[20]  L. E. Jeremiah,et al.  Assessment of palatability attributes of the major beef muscles. , 2003, Meat science.

[21]  J. D. Tatum,et al.  Relationships of consumer sensory ratings, marbling score, and shear force value to consumer acceptance of beef strip loin steaks. , 2003, Journal of animal science.

[22]  J. Savell,et al.  Warner-Bratzler shear evaluations of 40 bovine muscles. , 2003, Meat science.

[23]  M. Miller,et al.  Consumer thresholds for establishing the value of beef tenderness. , 2001, Journal of animal science.

[24]  K. B. Harris,et al.  Beef Retail Cut Composition: 2. Proximate Analysis , 2000 .

[25]  M. Dikeman,et al.  Sensory evaluation of beef-flavor-intensity, tenderness, and juiciness among major muscles. , 1995, Meat science.

[26]  R. Johnson,et al.  Characterization of the Muscles within the Beef Forequarter , 1988 .

[27]  T. R. Carr,et al.  Chemical and Sensory Properties of Thirteen Major Beef Muscles , 1985 .

[28]  G. W. Davis,et al.  RELATIONSHIP OF USDA MARBLING GROUPS TO PALATABILITY OF COOKED BEEF , 1985 .