| Literature DB >> 31480131 |
Do-Gyun Kim1, Joon-Yong Shim1,2, Byoung-Kwan Cho1, Collins Wakholi1, Youngwook Seo3, Soohyun Cho4, Wang-Hee Lee1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify a distribution pattern of meat quality grade (MQG) as a function of carcass yield index (CYI) and the gender of Hanwoo (bull, cow, and steer) to determine the optimum point between both yield and quality. We also attempted to identify how pre- and post-deboning variables affect the gender-specific beef quality of Hanwoo.Entities:
Keywords: Carcass Grade; Carcass Yield; Discriminant Function Analysis; Hanwoo; Meat Quality
Year: 2019 PMID: 31480131 PMCID: PMC7322650 DOI: 10.5713/ajas.19.0472
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian-Australas J Anim Sci ISSN: 1011-2367 Impact factor: 2.509
Basic statistics of each carcass yield index in Hanwoo
| Carcass yield index | N | Mean | Standard deviation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1+ | 34 | 68.84 | 2.02 |
| 1 | 66 | 68.85 | 1.94 |
| 2 | 124 | 68.62 | 5.88 |
| 3 | 137 | 70.99 | 3.32 |
| Total | 361 | 69.58 | 4.27 |
Figure 1Comparison of the means of the carcass yield index grouping by the meat quality grade. Different alphabets on the bar indicate that the group mean is different, suggesting the grade 3 is significantly different from grade 1+, 1, and 2, while grade 1+, 1, and 2 are not different with each other.
Figure 2Pie chart showing the distribution of the meat quality grade according to the gender. Numbers in the pie chart indicate the number of 1+, 1, 2, and 3 grades in bulls, cows, and steers with their portions in percentage.
Discriminant analysis of meat quality using pre-deboning variables
| Items | Meat quality | Group prediction (frequency, %) | Total | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||
| 1+ | 1 | 2 | 3 | |||||||
| Total (n = 361) | 1+ | 20 | 58.9 | 10 | 29.4 | 4 | 11.8 | 0 | 0 | 34 |
| 1 | 13 | 19.7 | 39 | 59.1 | 14 | 21.2 | 0 | 0 | 66 | |
| 2 | 5 | 4.0 | 24 | 19.4 | 71 | 57.3 | 24 | 19.4 | 124 | |
| 3 | 0 | 10.5 | 2 | 1.5 | 21 | 15.3 | 114 | 88.2 | 137 | |
| Bulls (n = 139) | 1+ | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 50.0 | 2 | 50.0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 20.9 | 27 | 62.8 | 7 | 16.3 | 43 | |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2.2 | 7 | 7.6 | 83 | 90.2 | 92 | |
| Cows (n = 69) | 1+ | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 75.0 | 2 | 25.0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 17.9 | 18 | 64.3 | 5 | 17.9 | 28 | |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6.5 | 6 | 19.4 | 23 | 74.2 | 31 | |
| Steers (n = 153) | 1+ | 22 | 68.8 | 8 | 25.0 | 1 | 3.1 | 1 | 3.1 | 32 |
| 1 | 10 | 18.5 | 34 | 63.0 | 8 | 14.8 | 2 | 3.7 | 54 | |
| 2 | 4 | 7.5 | 9 | 17.0 | 21 | 39.6 | 19 | 35.8 | 53 | |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 28.6 | 10 | 71.4 | 14 | |
Discriminant analysis of meat quality using post-deboning variables
| Items | Meat quality | Group prediction (frequency, %) | Total | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||
| 1+ | 1 | 2 | 3 | |||||||
| Total (n = 361) | 1+ | 25 | 70.6 | 5 | 14.7 | 5 | 14.7 | 0 | 0 | 34 |
| 1 | 17 | 25.8 | 35 | 53.0 | 11 | 16.7 | 3 | 4.6 | 66 | |
| 2 | 17 | 13.7 | 26 | 21.0 | 54 | 43.6 | 27 | 21.8 | 124 | |
| 3 | 8 | 5.8 | 7 | 5.1 | 24 | 17.5 | 98 | 71.5 | 137 | |
| Bulls (n = 139) | 1+ | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 75.0 | 1 | 25.0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4.7 | 31 | 72.1 | 10 | 23.3 | 43 | |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3.3 | 20 | 12.7 | 36 | 75.0 | 92 | |
| Cows (n = 69) | 1+ | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 87.5 | 1 | 12.5 | 0 | 0 | 8 | |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 14.3 | 20 | 71.4 | 4 | 14.3 | 28 | |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6.5 | 7 | 22.6 | 22 | 71.0 | 31 | |
| Steers (n = 153) | 1+ | 19 | 59.4 | 6 | 18.8 | 3 | 9.4 | 4 | 12.5 | 32 |
| 1 | 14 | 25.9 | 29 | 53.7 | 11 | 20.4 | 0 | 0 | 54 | |
| 2 | 4 | 7.5 | 8 | 15.1 | 29 | 54.7 | 12 | 22.6 | 53 | |
| 3 | 1 | 7.1 | 1 | 7.1 | 2 | 14.3 | 10 | 71.4 | 14 | |