As highlighted in last week’ s edition (31 October), Professor Nigel Scollan from Queen’s University Belfast has suggested that the local beef industry should re-evaluate how it pays for cattle, with a new focus on eating quality.

He advocates using the principles set out in the Meat Standards Australia (MSA) model, and refining it to suit local needs.

To do that would require a significant body of work, and it would be a fundamental change for farmers if the industry moved from the EUROP grading system, to one based on a meat yield measurement, and eating quality assessment, of individual cuts.

But with VIA grading in the major slaughterhouses in NI, it is possible to also use this technology to assess meat yield. And when it comes to ensuring excellent eating quality beef, much of it is about following good practice on both farms and in abattoirs – it would not require a wholesale change of breeding bulls on farms.

Falling consumption

Over the years the MSA model for predicting meat eating quality has been evaluated in a number of countries around Europe, including an initial assessment in NI in the late 2000s.

The model was developed in the late 1990s in response to falling beef consumption in Australia, thought to be due to a wide variability in eating quality of home-produced beef.

MSA research has shown that tropical breeds such as the Brahman have a negative impact on the eating quality of many cuts

That variability was linked to a large range in production systems, from those operating in hot tropical climates in the north (with Bos indicus cattle), to grass-based production in the south, where British and European breeds are common.

MSA research has shown that tropical breeds such as the Brahman have a negative impact on the eating quality of many cuts, particularly in the likes of the striploin and cube roll, but it is less of a factor with other cuts such as topside and brisket.

However, because the MSA system assigns an eating quality prediction to individual cuts of beef, it is still possible for some meat from Brahman and Brahman crosses to fall into the top grades.

The system assigns three quality grades:

  • Three star – good every day.
  • Four star – better than every day.
  • Five star – premium quality.
  • Any beef outside of this is classed as “unsatisfactory”. On retail packs there is also a recommended cooking method for each cut.

    Developed

    The prediction model has been developed over many years and relies on data compiled from taste panels involving more than 100,000 consumers across nine countries, testing more than 800,000 samples of beef.

    These scores are then linked back to product information around the animal’s breed, sex and age, as well as what happened in the factory, and the cooking method.

    In the current model there are understood to be 12 different attributes used to predict the eating quality of beef. Some of these are in the farmers’ control (eg breed, sex, marbling and growth rate), while others are down to the factory such as hanging method and ageing.

    The ossification score is essentially a measure of the physiological maturity of the animal

    In the factory, a trained MSA grader assesses each carcase, recording weight, sex, tropical breed content (by measuring the hump height), hanging method, marbling, rib fat (a minimum of 3mm), pH and ossification.

    The ossification score is essentially a measure of the physiological maturity of the animal. As cattle mature, the fibres in the meat become stronger, resulting in tougher meat. In general, animals under 20 months show no ossification.

    pH is crucial

    Of the issues within the farmers’ control, the pH is crucial. Carcases that have a high pH (above 5.7) are rejected as they are likely to produce dark-cutting, tough beef.

    To keep pH below 5.7, it is important to minimise stress pre-slaughter, and also ensure that cattle are well fed.

    Every animal has energy contained in the muscles in the form of glycogen. Once dead this glycogen is converted to lactic acid, which causes pH to fall. Cattle that are stressed pre-slaughter (mixed batches; long journey times, etc) or have been eating low-energy diets in the run-up to slaughter, are more likely to have depleted glycogen and end up as dark-cutters.

    Around 5% of cattle in Australia are rejected from MSA because the pH is too high.

    Information going back to farmers

    The MSA scheme is voluntary, with processors licensed and inspected to ensure they continue to implement good practice.

    Farmers can register as an MSA supplier, and must then follow a set of guidelines around management of cattle pre-slaughter.

    In 2019/2020, a total of 3.8m cattle were graded through the scheme

    Cattle should be on farm at least 30 days before slaughter, be fed a diet in the last 30 days to ensure growth, and should not be mixed in the last 14 days. They must be processed within 48 hours of leaving the farm (long journey times are common).

    In 2019/2020, a total of 3.8m cattle were graded through the scheme, which represents just under half of Australia’s cattle kill. Analysis of kill data shows that these farmers received 27c/kg (15p/kg) more for MSA graded cattle than farmers outside of the scheme.

    There is also a sheep scheme equivalent, with around 22% of the national kill put through the MSA system in 2019/20.

    Feedback

    While beef farmers can access MSA information on individual carcass traits, it can be difficult to relate that detailed data to management changes on farm. Instead, MSA provide farmers with an overall Index for each carcase, which combines the impact of factors such as tropical breed influence, marbling score and ossification score into a number between 30 and 80.

    This index is useful in setting a benchmark for the farm, and helps monitor how future changes to management might impact on beef eating quality.

    Read more

    USDA forecasts growth in meat trade next year

    Is there a quality issue with beef?