The objectives of this study were to evaluate the contribution of tenderness, juiciness, and flavor to the overall consumer beef eating experience and to evaluate the risk of overall palatability failure due to the unacceptable level of one or more of these traits. Data from 11 previously conducted studies representing a wide range of treatments and levels of eating quality that included more than 1,500 beef samples and 1,800 consumers were compiled and analyzed for this study. Results of a multivariate regression indicated that tenderness, flavor, and juiciness accounted for 43.4%, 49.4%, and 7.4%, respectively, of overall palatability (P < 0.05; R² > 0.99). Additionally, the odds of a steak being rated unacceptable overall when tenderness, juiciness, or flavor were rated unacceptable were 2.2 to 1 (69%), 1.9 to 1 (66%), and 3.3 to 1 (77%), respectively. This indicated overall palatability was 7.2, 6.5, and 12.3 times more likely to be rated unacceptable if tenderness, juiciness, or flavor, respectively, was also rated unacceptable. Additionally, the percentage of samples rated acceptable for each palatability trait increased (P < 0.05) as quality grade increased. More than 88% of USDA Prime samples were rated acceptable for each palatability trait, whereas only 74.8–77.3% of USDA Select samples were rated acceptable for each palatability trait. Marbling score accounted for 14–16% of the variation (P < 0.01) in consumer palatability scores for each trait and intramuscular fat percentage accounted for 17–21% of the variation in each trait (P < 0.01). Logistic equation models for the predicted probability of an acceptable rating for each palatability trait based on intramuscular fat percentage accounted for only a minimal amount of variation (P < 0.01; R² ≤ 0.09). Results of this study indicate the relative contribution of tenderness, juiciness, and flavor to overall beef palatability. They provide evidence that the failure of even a single palatability trait dramatically increases the likelihood of overall palatability failure, indicating that no single palatability trait is most important, as beef palatability is dependent upon the acceptance of all three traits: tenderness, juiciness, and flavor.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of marbling texture on consumer and trained sensory panel ratings of beef strip loin steaks from 3 USDA quality grades. Beef strip loins (n = 117) were selected from 3 quality grades [Top Choice (Modest⁰⁰ – Moderate¹⁰⁰ marbling), Low Choice (Small⁰⁰ – Small¹⁰⁰ marbling), and Select (Slight⁰⁰ – Slight¹⁰⁰ marbling)] to equally represent three different marbling texture groups: fine, medium, and coarse, via visual appraisal. There were no quality grade × texture interactions (P > 0.05) for all of the traits evaluated. Consumers (n = 104) rated all marbling texture groups similar (P > 0.05) for tenderness, juiciness, flavor, and overall liking, as well as rated a similar (P > 0.05) percentage of samples from each marbling texture group acceptable for each palatability trait. Moreover, consumers indicated no preference (P > 0.05) among marbling texture groups for visual desirability or likelihood to purchase. However, trained sensory panelists rated coarse marbled steaks higher (P < 0.05) than fine or medium marbled steaks for both beef flavor intensity and sustained juiciness, as well as higher (P < 0.05) for initial juiciness than medium textured steaks. There were no differences (P > 0.05) among marbling texture groups for Warner-Bratzler shear force, slice shear force, and pressed juice percentage. Low Choice steaks were rated higher (P < 0.05) than Select steaks by consumers for tenderness, flavor liking, and overall liking, but similar (P > 0.05) to Top Choice. Results from this study indicate marbling texture had no impact on consumer evaluations of eating quality and only minimal effects on trained sensory panel palatability ratings and therefore provides no palatability-based evidence for the exclusion of coarse marbled carcasses from current and future branded beef programs. Copyright © 2018. American Society of Animal Science .

The objective of this study was to evaluate multiple instrumental measures of beef juiciness and determine their relationships with sensory panel juiciness ratings. Treatments were selected to maximize variation in juiciness and included 5 USDA quality grades (Prime, upper two-thirds Choice, lower one-third Choice, Select, and Standard) as well as 2 enhanced Select treatments (112 and 107% of the initial raw weight) and were prepared to 3 degrees of doneness (DOD; rare [66°C], medium [71°C], and well done [77°C]). A total of 21 objective measures of raw samples were evaluated and included marbling level, CIE color values, pH, water activity, proximate composition, and multiple measures of water-holding capacity. Also, 17 objective measures were evaluated for cooked beef samples and included cooking loss, drip loss, and compression-based methods used to quantify expressible moisture. These measures were compared with results from a previous sensory study to evaluate the relationship between the various objective measures and sensory panel juiciness ratings. Differences (P < 0.05) were found among quality treatments for many of the measures evaluated, with the greatest differences occurring for many of the measures among samples cooked to different DOD. Of all the objective measures evaluated, protein percentage, cooking loss, and pressed juice percentage (PJP) were most closely associated (P < 0.05) with consumer juiciness ratings (r = −0.55, r = −0.51, and r = 0.45, respectively). Additionally, cooking loss and PJP were more closely associated (P < 0.05) with trained sensory panel initial and sustained juiciness ratings than all other measures evaluated. Regression analysis revealed that PJP explained (P < 0.05) 20, 48, and 45% of the variation in consumer, trained panel initial, and trained panel sustained juiciness scores, respectively. This was a greater percentage of the variation than slice shear force explained (P < 0.05) in trained sensory panel initial (39%) and sustained tenderness ratings (40%) and similar to the amount explained (26%) in consumer tenderness ratings. These results indicate PJP was a better predictor of sensory panel juiciness scores than all traits evaluated other than the cooking loss of steaks evaluated by sensory panelists. Pressed juice percentage explained a similar or greater amount of variation in sensory panel scores as slice shear force, indicating PJP as a potential industry standard for objective juiciness evaluation.