Erin S. Beyer

Although studies evaluating freezing are prevalent, most have used varied postmortem aging times to facilitate study design. The lack of a comprehensive study evaluating equally aged fresh and frozen steaks prevents a true under-standing of the impact of freezing. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the eating quality and consumer perception differences between fresh and frozen beef steaks of 3 equal aging periods. Beef carcasses were selected from a processing plant on 2 kill dates 1 wk apart to allow for a 1-wk freezing period, fabricated, and aged for 21, 28, or 35 d. On the same day, all samples of equal aging periods were fed to consumer and trained sensory panelists, sheared for shear force, and powdered for lab assays. For consumer panels, the first 4 steaks were given with no additional information, whereas the last 4 steaks were served with the labels “previously frozen” or “fresh, never frozen.” The consumer panelists rated the frozen samples as more tender (P0.05). Even when given additional information, the perception of quality was not impacted (P>0.05). Similarly, the trained panelists rated the frozen samples higher (P<0.05) than the fresh counterparts for overall tenderness, but the fresh samples scored higher (P<0.05) for initial and sustained juiciness. Supporting the sensory data, the frozen steaks had lower (P<0.05) shear force values regardless of the aging period. However, the fresh samples resulted in lower (P<0.05) purge and cook loss. Although some meat quality factors were impacted by freezing, the overall eating quality and perception of quality were not negatively impacted. Therefore, frozen meat should not be discounted due to the eating quality or perception of the quality of beef steaks.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the palatability of 3 plant-based ground beef alternatives (GBA) in comparison to ground beef under real-world hamburger and taco scenarios. The 3 plant-based GBA alternatives used represented a modern GBA sold at retail (RGBA), a modern GBA sold in foodservice (FGBA), and a traditional soy-based GBA (TGBA). Additionally, 80% lean ground beef was evaluated. Consumers (N=240; n=120 per panel type) evaluated samples for juiciness, tenderness, texture, beef flavor, overall flavor, overall liking, purchase intent,and purchase price and rated traits as either acceptable or unacceptable. For hamburger panels, consumers were served samples on buns and were given the option to add cheese, lettuce, pickles, ketchup, and/or mustard. For taco panels, samples were seasoned with a taco seasoning blend and served on flour tortillas, with consumers given the option to add cheese, lettuce, and/or tomatoes. In both scenarios, ground beef was rated higher (P0.05) for tenderness to FGBA and RGBA. Additionally, a higher (P<0.05) percentage of ground beef samples were rated acceptable overall and for flavor characteristics than all 3 GBA. Few differences were found between FGBA and RGBA for any palatability characteristics evaluated. TGBA was rated lower (P0.05) to only RGBA for beef flavor and overall flavor liking within hamburger panels. These results indicate that GBA currently available to consumers do not have improved palatability characteristics when used as an ingredient in a taco or hamburger scenario.

The objective of this study was to identify the threshold for color and discoloration for consumers to purchase ground beef and to determine the best objective measurement to predict consumer purchase intent. This study was designed in 2 phases, with Phase 1 requiring consumers to evaluate ground beef samples of multiple days of display simultaneously, and Phase 2 having consumers evaluate samples of only a single day of display. Ground beef packages (80% lean) were evaluated for overall appearance liking and purchase intent (yes/no) by consumers (n=216 and 318). Additionally, packages were evaluated for L*, a*, b*, calculated percentage of metmyoglobin, oxymyoglobin, chroma, hue angle, and trained sensory panel redness and discoloration scores. Models showed that each of the objective measures evaluated were predictors (P<0.05) of consumer purchasing intent. All logistic regression equations (P<0.01) had high R2 values of 0.48 to 0.86 (Phase 1) and 0.26 to 0.65 (Phase 2) and correctly classified 78.1% to 90.1% (Phase 1) and 70.5% to 84.0% (Phase 2) of samples as would/would not purchase. Linear regression equations predicting consumer overall appearance ratings with objective measures also resulted in significant (P<0.01) models, with R2 values of 0.57 to 0.93 and 0.35 to 0.54. The a* values of 21.6, 24.6, 28.3, and 30.5 (Phase 1) and 20.7, 26.2, 31.7, and 35.4 (Phase 2) correspond with consumers being 50%, 75%, 90%, and 95% likely to purchase the product at full price. However, if the product was discounted, the a* values were reduced to 17.9, 21.4, 25.0, and 27.4 (Phase 1) and 17.7, 22.7, 27.7, and 31.1 (Phase 2). The models generated from this study provide the ability to predict consumer willingness to purchase ground beef and provide ground beef processors an indication of potential consumer purchasing behaviors based upon objective values that are easy to measure.

Objective: The objective of this study was to determine the changes in myoglobin denaturation through cooking three different muscles to medium rare, medium, or well-done degrees of doneness. Study Description: Strip loins (n = 12) and top butts (n = 12) were used to evaluate the physiochemical properties of the longissimus dorsi, biceps femoris, and gluteus medius for three degrees of doneness (DOD; medium rare, medium, and well-done). The Bottom Line: As expected, the myoglobin denaturation percentage increased with increasing DOD and behaved similarly to changes in the a* values. This research gives more insight into the impacts of cooking and the changes that proteins, especially myoglobin, undergo between different DOD.

Objective: This study utilized a simulated retail display to investigate the impact of ground beef color and discoloration on consumer purchase intent, while identifying the best objective measurements to predict consumer preferences of ground beef on the same day of retail display. Study Description: For this study, 180 1-lb 80% lean/20% fat ground beef loaves were assigned to a specific day of retail display (day 0–9). Consumers (n = 318) and trained descriptive panelists assessed ground beef samples, with a single day of display evaluated per consumer group. Spectral data and L* (lightness), a* (redness), and b* (yellowness) values were collected. Simple linear and logistic regressions were calculated for consumer ratings. Lastly, Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated for sensory and objective measurements. The Bottom Line: Consumer intent to purchase ground beef at varying days of retail display can be predicted by the objective measures used in this study. Moving forward, these models can provide ground beef producers and retailers with an indication of potential consumer purchasing behaviors for ground beef at varying levels of discoloration to prevent waste and maximize profits.

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the palatability traits and consumer acceptance of three plant-based ground beef alternatives in comparison to ground beef in a foodservice-like hamburger application. Study Description: Three popular plant-based ground beef alternatives (GBA) and 80% lean, 20% fat composition ground beef chubs (n = 20) were selected for consumer analysis. Samples were cooked to an internal temperature of 160°F, plated on a bun and served to consumers with the opportunity to apply ketchup, mustard, cheese, lettuce, and pickles. Consumers evaluated the differences in palatability traits and purchase intent for the samples identified as: Ground Beef, Foodservice GBA, Retail GBA, and Traditional GBA. The Bottom Line: This research indicates the use of ground beef and ground beef alternatives provide different eating experiences when consumed as a complete hamburger and should be marketed as such by the foodservice and retail sectors.

Objective: The objective of this study was to determine palatability traits of beef cuts of differing bone status and quality grade. Study Description: Paired (n = 12 pairs; 24 total/cut/grade) boneless and bone-in ribeye rolls, and short loins were procured. Short loins were fabricated into boneless strip loins with corresponding bone-in tenderloins or bone-in strip loins with boneless tenderloins. Post aging, subprimal cuts were fabricated into steaks that were randomly selected for further analysis. Consumer sensory panelists (n = 144) were recruited from Manhattan, KS, and the surrounding area and paid for their participation in the study. Panels were conducted in a lecture-style classroom at Kansas State University. Results: In totality, bone status had a minimal impact on palatability traits. Bone state had no impact (P > 0.05) on consumer juiciness and overall liking for tenderloins and ribeyes, but in the strip loin, bone-in steaks were rated juicier (P < 0.05) and higher (P < 0.05) for overall liking when compared to boneless steaks. Moreover, bone state had no impact (P > 0.05) on consumer tenderness and flavor ratings for any of the three cuts. Bone state had no impact (P > 0.05) on the percentage of consumers that rated juiciness as acceptable for tenderloins and ribeyes, but in strip loins, bone-in steaks had a higher (P < 0.05) percentage of acceptable consumer responses than boneless cuts. The percentage of acceptable samples for tenderness and overall acceptability were not (P > 0.05) impacted by bone state in tenderloins and strip loins; however, in ribeyes, the percentage of acceptable consumer ratings was higher (P < 0.05) for bone-in cuts for both traits. Bone state also did not (P > 0.05) impact premium, better than everyday, and everyday quality perceptions among ribeyes; but the percentage of consumers rating ribeye samples unsatisfactory was higher (P < 0.05) for boneless ribeye steaks. The Bottom Line: A similar overall eating experience could be derived from a boneless or bone-in steak from the same cut and quality grade.

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate consumer preferences for palatability traits and consumer acceptability of three plant-based protein alternatives and ground beef in a taco application. Study Description: Three commercially available plant-based ground beef alternative (GBA) treatments (n = 20) were selected based upon industry prevalence. The GBAs’ were identified as the most popular in the marketing sectors of foodservice (FGBA), retail (RGBA), and traditional (TGBA). One ground beef (80% lean; 20% fat) treatment (n = 20) was selected. Samples were crumbled into a skillet and cooked to a surface temperature of 180°F. Following cooking, a generic taco seasoning was added following manufacturer’s instruction. Samples were served on a flour tortilla with the opportunity to add cheese, lettuce, and tomatoes. The Bottom Line: This research indicates consumers preferred ground beef to ground beef alternatives when used as a crumbled protein ingredient in tacos. Ground beef should be marketed as a distinct eating experience to consumers at foodservice and retail when plant-based ground beef alternatives are available in similar crumbled products.