Phase I of The National Beef Quality Audit-2011: Quantifying willingness-to-pay, best-worst scaling, and current status of quality characteristics in different beef industry marketing sectors1

2013 ◽  
Vol 91 (4) ◽  
pp. 1907-1919 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. L. Igo ◽  
D. L. VanOverbeke ◽  
D. R. Woerner ◽  
J. D. Tatum ◽  
D. L. Pendell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Quality Characteristics ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Beef Quality ◽  
Beef Industry ◽  
Quality Audit ◽  
Best Worst Scaling

The National Beef Quality Audit-2005, Phase I: Views of Producers,Packers, and Merchandisers on Current Quality Characteristics of the Beef Industry1

2008 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 189-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.N. Shook ◽  
D.L. Vanoverbeke ◽  
J.A. Scanga ◽  
K.E. Belk ◽  
J.W. Savell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
Quality Characteristics ◽  
Beef Quality ◽  
Quality Audit

scholarly journals National Beef Quality Audit-2016: Transportation, mobility, and harvest-floor assessments of targeted characteristics that affect quality and value of cattle, carcasses, and by-products1

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. C. Eastwood ◽  
C. A. Boykin ◽  
M. K. Harris ◽  
A. N. Arnold ◽  
D. S. Hale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Characteristics ◽  
Beef Quality ◽  
Beef Industry ◽  
Tail Region ◽  
Quality Audit ◽  
Beef Processing ◽  
Strategic Plans ◽  
In Transit ◽  
Electronic Tags ◽  
Mobility Score

Abstract The National Beef Quality Audit-2016 (NBQA-2016) was conducted to assess current transportation, mobility, and quality characteristics of U.S. fed steers and heifers. Data were collected at 17 beef processing facilities between March and November 2016. About 8,000 live cattle were evaluated for transportation and mobility, and about 25,000 carcasses were evaluated on the slaughter floor. Cattle were in transit to the slaughter facility for a mean duration of 2.7 h from a mean distance of 218.5 km using trailers with dimensions ranging from 17.84 m2 to 59.09 m2. Area allotted per animal averaged 1.13 m2 and ranged from 0.85 m2 to 2.28 m2. A total of 96.8% of cattle received a mobility score of 1 (walks easily, no apparent lameness). Identification types (35.1% had multiple) were lot visual tags (61.5%), individual tags (55.0%), electronic tags (16.9%), metal-clip tags (9.2%), bar-coded tags (0.05%), wattles (0.01%), and other (2.6%). Cattle were black-hided (57.8%), Holstein (20.4%), red-hided (10.5%), yellow-hided (4.8%), gray-hided (2.9%), brown-hided (1.3%), and white-hided (1.1%). Unbranded hides were observed on 74.3% of cattle; 18.6% had brands located on the butt, 6.3% on the side, and 1.3% on the shoulder (values exceed 100% due to multiple brands). For hide-on carcasses, 37.7% displayed no mud or manure; specific locations for mud or manure were legs (40.8%), belly (33.0%), tail region (15.5%), side (6.8%), and top-line (3.9%). Cattle without horns represented 83.3% of the sample, and cattle that did have horns measured: < 2.54 cm (5.5%), 2.54 to 12.7 cm (8.3%), and > 12.7 cm (2.9%). Carcasses without bruises represented 61.1% of those sampled, whereas 28.2% had 1, 8.2% had 2, 2.1% had 3, and 0.3% had 4 bruises. Of those carcasses with a bruise, the bruise was located on the loin (29.7%), round (27.8%), chuck (16.4%), rib (14.4%), and brisket/plate/flank (11.6%). Frequencies of offal condemnations were livers (30.8%), lungs (18.2%), viscera (16.3%), hearts (11.1%), heads (2.7%), and tongues (2.0%). Compared to NBQA-2011, fewer cattle were identified for traceability, fewer were black-hided, a greater number were Holstein cattle, more with no brand and no horns, fewer without bruises, more liver, lung, and viscera condemnations, and fewer heads and tongues were condemned. The NBQA remains an influential survey for the U.S. beef industry to provide benchmarks and strategic plans for continued improvement of beef quality and consistency.

scholarly journals National Beef Quality Audit-2016: Phase 1, Face-to-face interviews

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 320-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. D. Hasty ◽  
M. M. Pfeifer ◽  
L. C. Eastwood ◽  
D. A. Gredell ◽  
C. L. Gifford ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Food Service ◽  
Quality Attributes ◽  
Quality Factors ◽  
Beef Quality ◽  
Beef Industry ◽  
Quality Audit ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Important Quality

Abstract The National Beef Quality Audit (NBQA) is conducted every 5 yr and was most recently again conducted in 2016. Face-to-face interviews gauged progress in quality associated with live cattle production using procedures first utilized in NBQA 2011. The 2016 NBQA was the first in which interviews concerning fed steers and heifers were combined with an audit of market cow and bull beef. Face-to-face interviews were designed to illicit definitions for beef quality, estimate willingness to pay (WTP) for quality attributes, establish relative importance rankings for important quality factors, and assess images, strengths, weaknesses, potential threats, and shifting trends in the beef industry since the 2011 audit. Individuals making purchasing decisions in 5 market sectors of the steer/heifer and cow/bull beef supply chain were interviewed, including packers (n = 36), retailers (including large and small supermarket companies and warehouse food sales companies; n = 35), food service operators (including quick-serve, full-service, and institutional establishments; n = 29), further processors (n = 64), and peripherally-related government and trade organizations (GTO; n = 30). Face-to-face interviews were conducted between January and November of 2016 using a designed dynamic routing system. Definitions (as described by interviewees) for 7 pre-determined quality factors, including: (1) How and where the cattle were raised, (2) Lean, fat, and bone, (3) Weight and size, (4) Visual characteristics, (5) Food safety, (6) Eating satisfaction, and (7) Cattle genetics were recorded verbatim and categorized into similar responses for analysis. Compared to NBQA-2011, a higher percentage of companies were willing to pay premiums for guaranteed quality attributes, but overall were willing to pay lower average premiums than the companies interviewed in 2011. Food safety had the highest share of preference among all interviewees, generating a double-digit advantage over any other quality factor. The 2 beef industries have an overall positive image among interviewees, and despite lingering weaknesses, product quality continued to be at the forefront of the strengths category for both steer and heifer beef and market cow and bull beef.

scholarly journals National Beef Quality Audit–2016: assessment of cattle hide characteristics, offal condemnations, and carcass traits to determine the quality status of the market cow and bull beef industry

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-49
Author(s):  
McKensie K Harris ◽  
L Clay Eastwood ◽  
Courtney A Boykin ◽  
Ashley N Arnold ◽  
Kerri B Gehring ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Beef Cows ◽  
The United States ◽  
Beef Quality ◽  
Beef Industry ◽  
Predominantly Black ◽  
Muscle Area ◽  
Quality Audit ◽  
Predominant Type ◽  
Value Loss ◽  
Quality Status

Abstract To continue the series that began in 1994, the National Beef Quality Audit (NBQA) – 2016 was conducted to quantify the quality status of the market cow and bull beef sector, as well as determine improvements made in the beef and dairy industry since 2007. The NBQA-2016 was conducted from March through December of 2016, and assessed hide-on carcasses (n = 5,278), chilled carcasses (n = 4,285), heads (n = 5,720), and offal items (n = 4,800) in 18 commercial processing facilities throughout the United States. Beef cattle were predominantly black-hided; 68.0% of beef cows and 67.2% of beef bulls possessed a black hide. Holstein was the predominant type of dairy animal observed. Just over half (56.0%) of the cattle surveyed had no mud contamination on the hide, and when mud was present, 34.1% of cattle only had small amounts. Harvest floor assessments found 44.6% of livers, 23.1% of lungs, 22.3% of hearts, 20.0% of viscera, 8.2% of heads, and 5.9% of tongues were condemned. Liver condemnations were most frequently due to abscess presence. In contrast, contamination was the primary reason for condemnation of all other offal items. Of the cow carcasses surveyed, 17.4% carried a fetus at the time of harvest. As expected, mean carcass weight and loin muscle area values observed for bulls were heavier and larger than cows. The marbling scores represented by cull animal carcasses were most frequently slight and traces amounts. Cow carcasses manifested a greater amount of marbling on average than bull carcasses. The predominant fat color score showed all carcasses surveyed had some level of yellow fat. Only 1.3% of carcasses exhibited signs of arthritic joints. Results of the NBQA-2016 indicate there are areas in which the beef and dairy industries have improved and areas that still need attention to prevent value loss in market cows and bulls.

scholarly journals International significance of Australian research on beef quality - a view from the periphery

2001 ◽  
Vol 41 (7) ◽  
pp. 1089 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. E. Devine
Keyword(s):  
Research Effort ◽  
Agricultural Products ◽  
Beef Quality ◽  
Beef Industry ◽  
Significant Component ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Current Thinking ◽  
Australian Climate ◽  
The World ◽  
Production Practices

Australia produces agricultural products, including meat, as major items for export as well as being consumed locally. It is no accident that Australia is one of the major exporters of meat to distant markets and the success is predicated on adapting animal production practices and processing to produce a highly desirable product that is safe to eat. Research plays a large part in this strategy, but one would have to say that for some time the view that ‘a prophet hath no honour in his own country’ has predominated. The Cattle and Beef CRC is designed to improve the profitability of the Australian beef industry by bringing in partners, some of whom were prominent in previous research endeavours to coordinate a research effort in order to benefit the whole industry — it is a unique and effective approach. It has taken some time to demonstrate that a ‘nice’ looking animal is not a predictor of meat quality — rather it needs to be processed correctly in order for it to meet the most critical consumer requirements. The researchers in Australia have in fact been the world leaders in advocating procedures such as electrical stimulation that have been taken up by the industry. There are still areas where the research results from Australia differ from that in other countries. CRC-based research in Australia in controlled studies using large numbers of animals with a wide genetic base, has shown that both cattle with a significant component from tropical genotypes and non-tropical genotypes, processed correctly, produce highly acceptable meat. To get further improvements, we merely need to identify the causes of outliers and this should not be difficult. This concept is of course important in the context of the relatively dry Australian climate that results in different problems from other countries. One important outcome of the CRC has been to show that sectors of the industry need to work together to use research and, if necessary, challenge current thinking imposed from outside. In other words, Australians should believe in themselves.

National Beef Quality Audit-1995: survey of producer-related defects and carcass quality and quantity attributes.

1998 ◽  
Vol 76 (1) ◽  
pp. 96 ◽  
Author(s):  
S L Boleman ◽  
S J Boleman ◽  
W W Morgan ◽  
D S Hale ◽  
D B Griffin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carcass Quality ◽  
Beef Quality ◽  
Quality Audit

scholarly journals National Beef Quality Audit–2016: Transportation, mobility, live cattle, and carcass assessments of targeted producer-related characteristics that affect value of market cows and bulls, their carcasses, and associated by-products1

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 570-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. K. Harris ◽  
L. C. Eastwood ◽  
C. A. Boykin ◽  
A. N. Arnold ◽  
K. B. Gehring ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dairy Cattle ◽  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Body Condition Score ◽  
Beef Cows ◽  
The United States ◽  
Beef Quality ◽  
Live Animal ◽  
Quality Audit ◽  
Condition Score ◽  
Space Requirements

Abstract The National Beef Quality Audit–2016 marks the fourth iteration in a series assessing the quality of live beef and dairy cows and bulls and their carcass counterparts. The objective was to determine the incidence of producer-related defects, and report cattle and carcass traits associated with producer management. Conducted from March through December of 2016, trailers (n = 154), live animals (n = 5,470), hide-on carcasses (n = 5,278), and hide-off hot carcasses (n = 5,510) were surveyed in 18 commercial packing facilities throughout the United States. Cattle were allowed 2.3 m2 of trailer space on average during transit indicating some haulers are adhering to industry handling guidelines for trailer space requirements. Of the mixed gender loads arriving at processing facilities, cows and bulls were not segregated on 64.4% of the trailers surveyed. When assessed for mobility, the greatest majority of cattle surveyed were sound. Since the inception of the quality audit series, beef cows have shown substantial improvements in muscle. Today over 90.0% of dairy cows are too light muscled. The mean body condition score for beef animals was 4.7 and for dairy cows and bulls was 2.6 and 3.3, respectively. Dairy cattle were lighter muscled, yet fatter than the dairy cattle surveyed in 2007. Of cattle surveyed, most did not have horns, nor any visible live animal defects. Unbranded hides were observed on 77.3% of cattle. Carcass bruising was seen on 64.1% of cow carcasses and 42.9% of bull carcasses. However, over half of all bruises were identified to only be minor in severity. Nearly all cattle (98.4%) were free of visible injection-site lesions. Current results suggest improvements have been made in cattle and meat quality in the cow and bull sector. Furthermore, the results provide guidance for continued educational and research efforts for improving market cow and bull beef quality.

Long-term consequences of birth weight and growth to weaning on carcass, yield and beef quality characteristics of Piedmontese- and Wagyu-sired cattle

2006 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 257 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. L. Greenwood ◽  
L. M. Cafe ◽  
H. Hearnshaw ◽  
D. W. Hennessy ◽  
J. M. Thompson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Quality Characteristics ◽  
Carcass Weight ◽  
High Birth Weight ◽  
Fetal Life ◽  
Beef Quality ◽  
Carcass Yield

Cattle sired by Piedmontese or Wagyu bulls were bred and grown within pasture-based nutritional systems followed by feedlot finishing. Effects of low (mean 28.6 kg, n = 120) and high (38.8 kg, n = 120) birth weight followed by slow (mean 554 g/day, n = 119) or rapid (875 g/day, n = 121) growth to weaning on carcass, yield and beef quality characteristics at about 30 months of age were examined. Low birth weight calves weighed 56 kg less at 30 months of age, had 32 kg lighter carcasses, and yielded 18 kg less retail beef compared with high birth weight calves. Composition of carcasses differed little due to birth weight when adjusted to an equivalent carcass weight (380 kg). Calves grown slowly to weaning were 40 kg lighter at 30 months of age compared with those grown rapidly to weaning. They had 25 kg smaller carcasses which yielded 12 kg less retail beef than their counterparts at 30 months of age, although at an equivalent carcass weight yielded 5 kg more retail beef and had 5 kg less fat trim. Neither low birth weight nor slow growth to weaning had adverse effects on beef quality measurements. No interactions between sire-genotype and birth weight, or growth to weaning, were evident for carcass, yield and beef quality traits. Although restricted growth during fetal life or from birth to weaning resulted in smaller animals that yield less meat at about 30 months of age, adverse effects on composition due to increased fatness, or on indices of beef quality, were not evident at this age or when data were adjusted to an equivalent carcass weight.

A single-arm, open-label, multicenter phase I/II study of the combination of panobinostat (pan) and carfilzomib (cfz) in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RR MM).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8115-TPS8115
Author(s):  
Jesus G. Berdeja ◽  
Joseph Mace ◽  
Ruth E. Lamar ◽  
Victor Gian ◽  
Patrick Brian Murphy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Starting Dose

TPS8115 Background: Despite novel therapies, MM remains an incurable disease. Changes in histone modification are commonly found in human cancers including MM. Preclinical studies demonstrate synergistic anti-MM activity with histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) and proteasome inhibitors (PI) through the dual inhibition of the proteasome and aggresome pathways. Pan is an oral pan-HDACi which has shown synergy with bortezomib in clinical studies. Cfz is a 2nd generation PI which has shown marked anti-MM activity with an improved safety profile. In this trial we evaluate the safety and efficacy of the combination of pan and cfz in pts with RR MM. Methods: This multi-center US study plans to enroll up to 52 adults with RR MM. The phase I study will determine the MTD of the combination of cfz and pan and follow a standard dose escalation design. Pan will be administered orally three times weekly during weeks 1 and 3 of each 28-day cycle (Days 1, 3, 5, 15, 17, 19) at a starting dose of 20 mg. Cfz will be administered intravenously on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of each 28-day cycle. Cfz starting dose will be 20mg on days 1,2 of cycle 1 with escalation to the corresponding dose level beginning at 27 mg , if well tolerated. Dose modifications will not be permitted during cycle 1 unless a pt experiences a DLT. A maximum of four dose levels will be evaluated. Approximately 24 pts will be enrolled during the phase I portion to establish the MTD. In the phase II portion of this study, pts with RR MM will receive treatment with the optimal dose of pan and cfz established during phase I. Pts will be assessed for response to treatment after each cycle (4 weeks). Pts with objective response or stable disease will continue treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurs. The primary endpoint is to establish the optimal doses of cfz and pan that can be administered to pts with RR MM (phase I) and to evaluate the overall response rate (phase II). Secondary endpoints include time-to-progression, progression-free survival, overall survival and safety. Approximately 25 pts are planned for the phase II portion. Current status: As of 1/27/12 3 patients have been enrolled.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document