Protein, fat, moisture, and cooking yields from a nationwide study of retail beef cuts.

Authors: Roseland, Janet; NGUYEN, QUYNHANH - University Of Maryland; Williams, Juhi; DOUGLASS, LARRY - University Of Maryland; PATTERSON, KRISTINE - Retired ARS Employee; HOWE, JULIETTE - Retired ARS Employee; BROOKS, CHANCE - Texas Tech University; THOMPSON, LESLIE - Texas Tech University; WOERNER, DALE - Colorado State University; ENGLE, TERRY - Colorado State University; SAVEL, JEFFREY - Texas A&M University; HARRIS, KERRI - Texas A&M University; CIFELLI, AMY - National Cattlemen'S Beef Association (NCBA); MCNEILL, SHALENE - National Cattlemen'S Beef Association (NCBA)

Submitted to: Journal of Food Composition and Analysis
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 7/4/2015
Publication Date: 7/4/2015
Citation: Roseland, J.M., Nguyen, Q.V., Williams, J.R., Douglass, L.W., Patterson, K.Y., Howe, J.C., Brooks, C.J., Thompson, L.D., Woerner, D.R., Engle, T.E., Savel, J.W., Harris, K.B., Cifelli, A., Mcneill, S. 2015. Protein, fat, moisture, and cooking yields from a nationwide study of retail beef cuts.. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis. 43:131–139.

Interpretive Summary: Up-to-date nutrient data for beef cuts available in the United States are essential to enable researchers to accurately evaluate beef’s role in health and to inform consumers for making healthy decisions from among today’s retail choices. Nutrient data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are an important resource for U.S. and international databases. To ensure data for retail beef cuts in USDA’s National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference (SR) are current, a comprehensive, nationwide, multiyear study was conducted through collaboration among scientists at NDL, Colorado State University, Texas A & M University, Texas Tech University, and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA). This research, entitled the Nutrient Database Improvement (NDI) study, was funded largely by the Beef Checkoff program. Samples were collected and analyzed in three phases based on primal category. Using a statistically based sampling plan, 72 beef carcasses per phase were obtained with nationally representative quality and yield grades, genders, and genetic types. Retail cuts were fabricated, cooked, and dissected to obtain component weights. Nutrient values were determined by validated laboratories using quality assurance procedures. Full nutrient SR profiles and cooking yield data were made available (http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata). Results for 16 beef retail cuts were compared for cooking yield; and protein, fat and moisture concentrations. For example, cooked fat levels differed among three roasted cuts and among three grilled cuts from chuck, rib, and loin (p<0.01). Cooking yield for roasted ribeye (76%) was lower (p<0.001) than for grilled ribeye (83%), and for chuck eye grilled (80%) or roasted (84%). Among all cuts studied, grilled top loin steak with 1/8” fat trim had the highest cooking yield (86%) and the highest percent fat gain (3%), while most other cuts had a fat loss (on a percentage basis). Braised cuts had the lowest cooking yields (65 to 67%). This study demonstrates the importance of maintaining data for a variety of retail beef cuts, due to their unique properties and different cooking methods.

Technical Abstract: Nutrient data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are an important resource for U.S. and international databases. To ensure the data for retail beef cuts in USDA’s National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference (SR) are current, a comprehensive, nationwide, multiyear study was conducted. Samples were collected and analyzed in three phases based on primal category. Using a statistically based sampling plan, 72 beef carcasses per phase were obtained with nationally representative quality and yield grades, genders, and genetic types. Retail cuts were fabricated, cooked, and dissected to obtain component weights. Nutrient values were determined by validated laboratories using quality assurance procedures. Full nutrient SR profiles and cooking yield data were made available (http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata). Results for 16 beef retail cuts were compared for cooking yield; and protein, fat and moisture concentrations. For example, cooked fat levels differed among three roasted cuts and among three grilled cuts from chuck, rib, and loin (p<0.01). Cooking yield for roasted ribeye (76%) was lower (p<0.001) than for grilled ribeye (83%), and for chuck eye grilled (80%) or roasted (84%). This study demonstrates the importance of maintaining data for a variety of retail beef cuts, due to their unique properties and different cooking methods.