Register      Login
Animal Production Science Animal Production Science Society
Food, fibre and pharmaceuticals from animals
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Meat yield and subjective muscle scores in medium weight steers

D Perry, AP Yeates and WA McKiernan

Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 33(7) 825 - 831
Published: 1993

Abstract

The association between visually assessed muscle scores on live steers and their carcasses, eye muscle area, and the yield of saleable and lean meat was determined on 156 steers of mixed breeds (mean carcass weight 282 kg, mean P8 fat depth 13 mm). The contribution of subcutaneous and intermuscular fat to differences in saleable meat yield was also investigated. There was a negative correlation between P8 fat depth and both live ( r = -0.21) and carcass muscle score (r. = -0.31); therefore, the assessors were not scoring fatter steers as having better shape. The correlation between live and carcass muscle scores was 0.79. The correlation between carcass muscle score and eye muscle area was 0.58. When live muscle score, carcass muscle score, or eye muscle area was included in regression models already containing weight and fat depth, there was a significant (P<0.001) increase in the amount of variation in saleable and lean meat yield explained by the models. At the same liveweight and fat depth, a change in live muscle score from C (moderately muscled) to B (well muscled) was accompanied by an increase of 1.7% in saleable meat and 2.2% in lean meat, when these were expressed as a percentage of carcass weight. The equivalent change in carcass muscle score in carcasses of the same weight and f a t depth was accompanied by an increase of 1.9% in saleable meat and 2.4% in lean meat. The increased weight of saleable meat was not due to an increase in the dissected fat content of the meat. Weight of subcutaneous fat decreased as muscle score increased (P<0.01). There was no significant association between the amount of intermuscular fat and either live or carcass muscle score (r. = -0.075 and -0.18, respectively).

https://doi.org/10.1071/EA9930825

© CSIRO 1993

Committee on Publication Ethics


Export Citation Get Permission

View Dimensions