|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 45
A. M. PEARSON
The Consumer's Desire
for Animal Products
INTRODUCTION
By inference the title of this paper suggests that the desires of the con-
sumer are known, which may not be a correct assumption. Consumption
data may express consumer preferences within certain limitations, but
they can be misleading in that consumption of any product is the result
of supply and demand; thus, many factors enter into the balance that
determines actual consumption. There are two major approaches to
ascertaining consumer desires: ~ 1 ~ consumption data and patterns and
(2) consumer-acceptance studies. The former offer a history of past
happenings, but overall reflect general consumer desires under certain
specific conditions that may never occur again. Consumer-acceptance
studies are also limited and often conflicting within different segments
of the consuming public. Even more confusing is the fact that the con-
sumer may indicate a preference for a certain product but under actual
market conditions purchase a different one. A large number of sources
discussing the shortcomings and results of such studies on animal
products are available (Rhodes et al., 1955; Brady, 1957; King, 1959;
Klasing, 1957; Naumann et al., 1957; Lane and Walters, 1958; Rhodes,
1958a, 1958b, 1962; Mountney et al., 1959; Naumann, 1959; Kiehl and
Rhodes, 1960; Doty and Pierce, 1961; Courtenay and Branson, 1962;
Swope, 19701. The purpose of this chapter is not to discuss the diffi-
culties of conducting and interpreting consumer-acceptance studies;
rather, it is to indicate consumer desires as rehected in consumption,
trends and in consumer studies.
45
OCR for page 46
46
THE PROBLEM OF FATNESS OF ANIMAL PRODUCTS
A. M. PEARSON
Although it is frequently assumed that the problem of excessive fat
content in animal products is of recent origin, Moulton (1928) stated
more than 45 years ago:
But the average consumer does know when meat is too fat for him, for there is a
very marked tendency for him to select the leaner meats and cuts from the lighter
carcasses.... Generally those animals which rate high on the hoof rate low on
the hook. But a more serious indictment must be made against-the present prac-
tice of unduly emphasizing fatness. This is the indictment that the consumer makes.
He is not so greatly interested in fat meats. When served such meats, all but the
connoisseur will trim off and refuse to eat the fat. In fact many consumers show a
deplorable preference for all-lean meats, ignoring the better flavor and tenderness
of meats with more fat on them. The customer may even demand that his butcher
trim off the extra fat and not charge him for it. It would appear justifiable to state
that undue emphasis has been placed upon fat; that the turning of corn into lard
and beef fat is a process that may become less and less desirable. This is partly on
account of lowered consumer demand and partly on account of the poor economy
of the process.... The most unique and characteristic product of the livestock
industry is protein and not fat.
A few years later Watkins ~ 1936 ~ concluded:
come persons think that the fatter the beef iS9 the more desirable' but that is
erroneous.... Some consumers will not buy well finished beef even though they
have the money. They do not like fat in meat.... The consumer does not want
beef fat in itself. In fact' he generally wants the smallest amount that will produce
the most palatable beef. Fat is not an end in itself. It is a means to an end.
These two quotations clearly show that there has been marked con-
cern for over-fat beef for nearly 50 years. It is interesting to note that
30-40 years ahead of the practice of using the large, so-called exotic
beef breeds to produce leaner meat, Moulton (1928) concluded:
This problem of producing tenderness and flavor in meat without excess fatness has
been met in a fairly good fashion by the French animal husbandman. They use a
very rapidly growing, big framed type of animal resembling but little our typical
beef breeds.... The Charolais is a good representative of this type, while the
Limousin, Fribourgeois and Contentin breeds are also good beef producers....
These French cattle are not fattened as we fatten cattle. The French are not so
interested in well fattened cattle.
The problem of excess fatness has been more realistically attacked
by the pork industry, where consumer studies have shown a definite
preference for lean pork (Birmingham et al., 1954; Gaarder and Kline,
1956; Kline 1956; Hendrix et al., 19631. The swine industry responded
by greatly reducing the backfat thickness of the average market-weight
Pig.
OCR for page 47
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
47
Excess fatness does not appear to be a major consideration in the
broiler and turkey industries (Mountney et al., 1959; Courtenay and
Branson, 1962), since they are marketed at a relatively early age.
Milk producers have responded rapidly to changing demands by
placing a number of partially defatted milk products on the market.
These will be discussed in greater detail later in this chapter. It should
be mentioned, however, that butterfat content has long been the basis
for selling and buying whole milk. In recent years, some purchasing
schemes have rewarded producers for nonfat milk solids. The retail
prices of butter and margarine are about the same today, and it will
be interesting to observe how this situation affects the demand for butter.
CONSUMPTION DATA AND TRENDS
Changes in per capita food consumption, 1960-1974, are shown in
Figure 1. Values indicate that apparent consumption of all foods re-
mained unchanged until 1963 but increased steadily thereafter. Major
differences between consumption of animal products and crop products
occurred in 1964 and again in 1973, with animal products being propor-
tionally greater in 1964 and crop products in 1973. The change in 1973
was probably due to high prices for animal products and resulted in
greater consumption of crop products.
~ OF1960
110
105
100
Animal products
1 ~ _
_ at_ %~`
~..~l2=~
- - ~-rig
__
1 1 1
95 L
1960 1963 1966 1969 1972 1975
11 1 1 1 1 1
QUANTITIES VALUED AT 1957 - 59 RETAIL PRICES PRELIMINARY
' 1
FIGURE 1 Changes in per capita food consumption by produce classes. (From
USDA, 1974 )
OCR for page 48
48
A. M. PEARSON
Figure 2 shows the costs (calculated for June 1974) of various meats
and meat alternatives in amounts needed to supply one third of the
daily protein requirement of a 20-year-old man. The wide differences in
costs show that consumers have the opportunity to adjust consumption
to their budgets.
Epect of Income on Consumption
Figure 3 shows the effect of income elasticity on the demand for food.
It depicts the impact of a 1% change in income on the consumption of
animal protein foods all foods on a farm value basis, all foods on a
calorie basis, and cereals. The chart is best explained by an illustration.
If income per capita is $500 (see horizontal scale), an increase of 1%
in income would lead to an increase in consumption of about 0.9% in
animal protein foods and to a decrease of about 0.1% in cereals. This
chart portrays the desire of consumers for animal protein foods, which
has been emphasized by recent purchases of feed grains by the USSR
and China.
Figure 4 shows the increases in food prices in 17 countries during the
period 1963-1973. Only if real wages increased at an equal rate would
we expect consumption to be unchanged, because elasticity of income
affects patterns of purchasing foods. Even if the aveage increase in price
and the average increase in real wages should coincide, many inequities
Meats anal Meat Alternates, June 7974
PEANUT BUTTER
EGGS, LARGE
CHICKEN, FRYER
DRY BEANS
BEEF LIVER
HAMBURGER
TURKEY
TUNA FISH
HAM, WHOLE
AMERICAN CH EESE
PORK ROAST
RO UN D STEAK
BEEF CHUCK ROAST
FRANKFURTERS
SIRLOIN STEAK
BEEF RIB ROAST
HADDOCK, FILLET
BOLOGNA
BACON, SLICED
344
38c
3sc
5sc
FIGURE 2 Costs of various meats and meat alternatives for amount needed to
supply one-third of daily protein of a 20-year-old man. (From USDA, 1974)
OCR for page 49
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
49
1.5 _
1.4 -
1.2 _
1.0-
0.8-
0.6-
0.4-
0.2-
0.0
-0.2-
-0.4-
-0.5-
ALL FOOD 5
\:MAL PROTE I NS
ALL FOOD S
WARM VALUE
\
ALL FOR _
_ rAl n~TFc
-
ALL FOOD:
AN ~ CAL PROM I NS
ALL FOOD:
~ FARM VALUE
-
ALL FOOD:
CALOR I ES
CEREALS
1 1 1 1
1 1 1
1 50 250 500 750 1 ,000 1 ,500 2,000
INCOME ($) PER CAPITA-1955 PRICES
FIGURE 3 Effect of income elasticity on demand for food in relation to income
levels. Data represent a composite value for available world statistics and are based
on 1955 prices. (Source: FAG, 1970)
would result; some would lose real purchasing power and others would
gain. As inflation occurs, the inequities would generally become greater.
Nevertheless, Figure 4 suggests that we are relatively well off in the
United States, with only Switzerland and the Federal Republic of Ger-
many showing smaller percentage increases in food prices.
Trends in Selected Livestock Products
Figure 5 shows changes in per capita consumption of selected animal
products during 1960-1974. Consumption of poultry increased by
about 45% and consumption of beef and veal by about 22%. Except
for sporadic cycles, pork consumption remained essentially the same.
Consumption of dairy products, including butter, declined 6%-7%, and
egg consumption dropped about 17%. These data suggest that con-
sumers prefer poultry and beef, but are using less dairy products and
eggs.
OCR for page 50
so
DENMARK
IRELAND
ISRAEL · - -............
SPAIN ................
JAPAN · ~ ~ ~ ~ · .. .......
UNITED KINGDOM
SWEDEN
NETHERLANDS ·
FRANcE ..............
GREECE...............
AUSTRALIA- - - - - - - - -
UNITED STALEST
CANADA..............
ITALy ...............
BELGIUM - - - - - - - - - - - - -
GERMANY, F.R.
SWITZERLAND ·
A. M. P EARSON
. 105%
95%
.. ~__~93%
. ~93%
88%
86%
. ~ 74%
. ~ 65%
. ~61~.
. ~ 597:
. en 567:
54%
~53%
~53%
35%
~255:
FIGURE 4 Percentage increases in food prices in 17 countries during the period
1963 - 1973. (From USDA, 1974)
Poultry and Eggs Figure 6 depicts changes in per capita consumption
of poultry and eggs during the period 1965-1974. Consumption of
broilers increased from about 29 lb per capita to 37 lb, accounting for
most of the increase in consumption of poultry meat.
OF1960 1
60
140
120
00
~ ~Beef and veal
.... . Poric
Poultry
· Eggs
~~~~ Dairy *
-
1 ...
80 I I I I 1
960
965
1970
ITEMS COMBINED IN TERMS Of 1957 - 59 RETAIL PRICES. *INCLUDESBUTTfR. ~PRELIMINARY.
1975
FIGURE 5 Changes in per capita consumption of selected livestock products,
1960-1974. Changes are percentages of 1960 base. (From USDA, 1974)
OCR for page 51
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
50
40
30
20
0
n
POt I N DS. l
- POULTRY MEAT
,,,~
~ ~ a,,, - ,,
an, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
~, ~ In,,,, ~ ~ ', ,,,,
- _~'!URKEYS:,,',
~,,,,,,,,,,,~ ~ ~ ~ at, ~ ~ a,, art,/'
~7,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,_,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, me: :.~
~\~i~=
-
1965 1970
51
NUMBER
500
400
300
200
100
- EGGS
_
~HELL)..
I, O- ~ \\\\\ 1
1975 1965 1970 1975
*READY TO COOK WEIGHT. ~ FORECAST. OCONVERTED TO SHELL EO(/I VALENT.
FIGURE 6 Changes in per capita consumption of poultry and eggs, 1965-1974.
( From USDA, 1974 )
Figure 6 also reveals that yearly per capita egg consumption has
dropped to a new low of about 290 eggs. The number of processed eggs
has remained at about the same level per capita. This suggests
that the renumber of shell eggs consumed at home or in public eating
places has dropped, perhaps because of the emphasis on reducing the
dietary intake of cholesterol. On the other hand, there has been little
change in consumption of processed eggs, which are used in products
such as baked goods and which most consumers do not think of as
containing an appreciable number of eggs.
Figure 7 depicts the changes in production of broilers, turkeys, and
eggs in relation to changes in the population. Broiler and turkey pro-
duction has gained in relation to growth of the population and egg pro-
duction has decreased.
Red Meats Figure 8 presents data on per capita meat consumption
during the period from 1950 to 1974. In 1950, beef consumption was
about 70 lb per capita, which was about the same as pork consumption;
but since 1952, beef consumption has steadily increased with 1975
projections of about 1 14 lb per capita. Pork consumption has fluctuated
downward, with 1975 projections of about 65 lb per capita. Lamb and
OCR for page 52
52
ID
A. M. PEARSON
130r
120
110
100
90
80 _
Broilers
,~'
Population
I\ ~Eggs
Turkeys
70 I I
1965 1967 1969
I ~ I I I I I I 1 1
1971 1973 ~ 1975 1977
/` FORECAST
FIGURE 7 Changes in production of broilers, turkeys, and eggs in relation to
changes in population, 1965-1974. The year 1967 was used as the base year and
was assigned a value of 100%. (From USDA, 1974)
mutton consumption is low and now comprises less than 3 lb per capita.
Thus, consumers prefer beef but do eat considerable amounts of pork.
Dairy Products Table l shows long-range trends in consumption of
dairy products expressed in milk equivalents. The data reflect a steady
decline in per capita consumption of dairy products. In 1940, con
POUNDS *
1
100
75
50
25
1
Beef and veal
~/% ! , ! \ ~
1
%, , ~ ~ ~
i 1
lamb and mutton
.! 1
0~ ""'!""!'U'!""""~"""""!""""""", ; . """"".""'!""'!""!""!"""""~""~"''teest
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975
*CANCASSWflONJBAS/S. ~ 1974 fORECASr.
FIGURE 8 Meat consumption per capita, 19501974. (From USDA, 1974)
OCR for page 53
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
TABLE 1 Per Capita Consumption of Dairy Products a
53
Year
Pounds ( Milk Equivalents )
1940
1945
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1973
818
788
740
706
653
620
561
556
a SOURCE: Milk Industry Foundation (1974) .
gumption amounted to 818 lb per capita, but by 1973 had declined to
556 lb a decline of about 32% or 0.72% per year. Since dairy
products are high in calcium, this decline may be of great importance
nutritionally.
Figure 9 shows percentage changes in per capita sales of dairy
products during the period 196~1974. Note that sales of low-fat milk
increased about 439% and that sales of cheese increased by about 55%.
There were also substantial increases in sales of sour cream and dips,
ice milk, flavored milks and drinks, and skim milk. Fluid whole milk
and butter declined by about 25%, cream and mixtures by slightly less.
Evaporated and condensed milk declined by about 50%. In general,
the data reflect an increase in demand for products containing little or
no fat and a decrease in demand for products containing full fat milk
and those made from cream (i.e., butter).
Table 2 summarizes the results of a consumer milk-evaluation survey
conducted in 14 Michigan cities. Some 2,227 panelists were asked to
indicate the percentage of fat that they believed to be present in whole
milk, 2% low-fat milk, skim milk, and nonfat dry milk. They were
offered the following choices: none, lYo, 2%, 3%-4%, 5~o-19%,
20%-49%, and 50%-100%. As the table shows, many of the panelists
had mistaken ideas about the percentage of fat in milk. The dairy
industry could help correct these false concepts by more descriptive
labeling, which would help to correct the idea that milk is extremely
high in fat.
Fat Intake from Animal Products
Figure 10 shows the sources of nutrient fat consumed in the United
States from 1909-1913 to 1973. During the period of 1909-1913,
total consumption amounted to 125 g per capita per day but in 1972
OCR for page 54
54
A. M. PEARSON
Yogurt
Fluid low-fat milk
Eggnog
Cheese
Sour cream and dips
Ice milk
Flavored milk and drinks
Fluid skim milk
Sherbet
I:,.:.:::.::::
, ..
I.:.::.::. .~
t -. :. ..
Em:. :.:.:..-:: :*
lo: ::::::::.
r..:.::-:::::::.
[:::::::::::::::::::::::.
I.... :.:.:.:.:.: .:: ...:...:.:.:.: . :..
l
-80 - 0 0
PE RCENT
+448
[.::::. :. ::.:::'.:::-.::-.-.-.-.-::.-.:-::.-.-.-.-.-.-.- .-.:-:.-.-.:-:.-.::-.' 1
::: ::: ::: ::::::: ::: ::: : : : ::. :.: ::: .
, .... ..... ....... ................... ; .
+439
. ~:,: ,: ::.:::.:: :.: :.: :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. ~ ]
....;;; ..;; .;;;; ;....;;;;;;; ....; ..; ....;;;;; ; -. ;...;.
......... _ _ :: :
a. . ..... ;; .; .; .
.- . - . .- .- .
:...::.:.. :::.:: A: :: :: ·.
. _-_:::-.-_-_- _:-_-_:-::_-:_-:_::-:_-.::-:.-,
, ..................
.::: :..
F_
,... .
, .:: .: :.:
......
Cottage cheese
Ice cream
Buttermilk
Nonfat dry milk
Cream and mixtures
Butter
Fluid whole milk
Evaporated and condensed milk
1 1 1
+40 +80 +120
FIGURE 9 Percentage changes in per capita sales of dairy
products, 1 964-l 974. ( From Milk Industry Foundation, l 974)
and 1973 had increased to 156 g. Thus, the increase amounted to 31 g
per day. Only 21 g of vegetable fat were used per capita during the
1909-1913 base period, or 16.8% of the total fat came from vegetable
sources. By 1973, the amount of vegetable fat had increased to 63 g
per capita per day, or comprised 40.4% of the total fat intake. Thus,
the amount of vegetable fat consumed increased threefold, whereas the
consumption of animal fat had declined by 11 g per day.
Even though animal fats have frequently been blamed for the in-
creased incidence of heart disease, it is obvious that consumption of
animal fats has declined. However, there has been a concurrent in-
crease in consumption of vegetable fats and heart disease, which would
OCR for page 55
OCR for page 70
OCR for page 72
OCR for page 73
OCR for page 74
OCR for page 75
OCR for page 76
OCR for page 77
OCR for page 78
OCR for page 79
Representative terms from entire chapter:
ground beef
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
55
TABLE 2 Panelists' Responses to Question about Percentage of Fat
in Milk a,b
Panelists' Responses ( % )
Choices Nonfat
Offered to Whole No Low- Low-Fat Dry
Panelists Milk Fat Milk Milk Skim Milk Milk
(% Fat) (3.5%) (2%) (0.5-2.0%) (~0.5%) (<0.5%)
None 1 c 3 30 43
1 1 1 24 30 18
2 2 85 35 13 16
3-4 29 2 12 5 5
5-19 35 3 13 10 8
20-49 12 3 5 3 2
50-100 1 1 2 2 2 1
No response 9 4 6 7 7
Mean 17.8 4.4 5.2 3.7 3
a SOURCE: Zehner (1974).
b Number of panelists: 2,227. Panelists were offered the choices listed in Column 1. They were
asked to assign one of the percentage figures to each of the five products. The data in the other
columns show the percentage of panelists who responded with each of the choices. Thus, the
data in the Whole Milk column show that 1% of the panelists believed that whole milk contains
no fat, 1% believed that it contains 1% of fat, 2% believed that it contains 2% of fat, and so
on. The correct percentages are given in parentheses under the names of the products. For
example, whole milk contains 3.5% of fat.
c
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
10.0
9.C
8.C
z
a
~ 6.C
fir:
o
IL
In S.C
o
cow
at
7.C
-
~ 3.0
Is
4.C
2.0
1.0 ; ,
0 17 16
i
~ .
69
o
o
O O
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0A8
oo
08D
ooQ
° 8 °oo~§
oo
°o
o
° 8§o 8
oo8
o 8
0 0
0
0
0
oo0 0
°R
too o o
oo0 8
°8o o
o8°° 8
0
so0 0
°0 °
0
0 0
0 0
g
o
o
o
1 1
15 1 14 13 12
8
o
o
l
11 10 9 8
Prime Choice
Good Standard
QUALITY GRADE
FIGURE 15 Tenderness as judged by taste panel plotted against quality grades
assigned to beef carcasses. (From Huffman, 1974 )
Figure 17 shows marbling plotted against taste panel scores. A total
of 88% of the carcasses were acceptable, which is in close agreement
with the 87% acceptable shown in Figure 15 (tenderness scores plotted
against quality grades ~ . Marbling scores were correct that is, in
harmony with taste panel scores- for 64% of the carcasses. Thus,
marbling scores were only 5% higher than those provided by quality
grades (Figure 15 ~ . Even marbling failed to classify 36% of the
carcasses correctly, and this fact supports the view that fat thickness
slows cooling rates in the fatter cattle. Corroborative data are seen in
Figure 18, in which marbling is plotted against Warner-Bratzler shear
values. In this case, marbling correctly identified 60% of the carcasses
but was unsuccessful for 40%.
Table 6 shows the relation between grades of beef and tenderness
scores. Taste panel tenderness scores were not significantly different
for the Prime, Choice, and Good grades. However, the Standard grade
carcasses were significantly less tender. Warner-Bratzler shear values
70
A. M. PEARSON
17.2
15.4
13.6
11.8
100
8.
6.3
4.5
0 17 16
o
o
o
o
1 ~
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
O O
o
o
o
~O
A
o
o
O O
8
8
-8 ~ ~
00
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
8
O a
00
. . . . .
15 ~14 13 12
o
._ , .
v O
o
O O
9 0
80 8
o
1 1
9 8 7 6
11 10
Prime | Choice
QUALITY GRADES
Good Standard
FIGURE 16 Tenderness as measured with Warner-Bratzler shear plotted against
quality grades assigned to beef carcasses. (From Huffman, 1974)
followed the same trend, but only the Choice grade differed significantly
from the Standard grade in shear values. These results show that the
three top grades were about the same in tenderness, but Standard was
significantly less tender.
Table 7 shows taste panel tenderness scores and Warner-Bratzler
shear values by marbling categories. No significant differences between
marbling categories are shown until one reaches the "traces" and
TABLE 6 Effect of Grade on Tenderness of Beef a
Mean Tenderness
Quality Grade No. Carcasses Panel Shear (kg)
Prime 17 6.88 b 17.08 b, C
Choice 100 6.71 b 15.08 b
Good 66 6.18 b 16.42
Standard 10 4.15 19.79 c
a SOURCE: Huffman (1974).
b,C Scores having the same superscript in the same column were not statistically significant
(P
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
10.0
8
O
9.0 . O 00
8.0
7.0
A
it:
~ 6.0
cr
o
,,, 5.0
al
o
In
~ 4.0
z
~ 3.0
o
Go 0
O 0 00
o 0°oo ~oO OoOO ooOo 0
oo to oO° o$0 1 80t ~
P-- o 0 Oo° o~e ~Oo° 0
o oo
o
Oo 8
00
2.0
00
° O
1 0 10,9,8 7 6 5
0 0
4 3,2,1
MARBLING SCORES
FIGURE 17 Tenderness as judged by taste panel plotted
against marbling scores assigned to beef carcasses. (From Huff-
man, 1974)
71
"practically devoid" categories. Thus, marbling alone does not ac-
curately indicate tenderness.
Table 8 shows the effect of marbling and internal cooking tempera-
tures on palatability. These data show that degree of marbling had
virtually no effect on flavor, tenderness, juiciness, overall acceptability,
or Warner-Bratzler shear values. As might have been expected, the
degree of marbling did influence cooking losses, with greater losses oc-
curring with larger degrees of marbling. Final internal cooking tempera-
ture had a marked effect on all palatability measurements, with poorer
palatability in all cases for higher internal cooking temperatures. In
addition, cooking losses were also higher at the higher temperatures
of cooking. These results indicate that marbling did not influence meat
palatability within the limits of this study, although cooking temperature
had a marked effect on acceptability.
72
A. M. PEARSON
17.2
15.4
13.6
11.8
10.0
8.'
6.3
4.5
o
o
o
o
o
St cL
o
o
oo
o
oo
o
o
c,O
o ~880
8 ~
~o
a~
o
o
o
ooo
o
-
~B
~0
8 ~
o
g
o
8
co
oo
oo
go
~o
g
o
o
o
oo
o
0 0
8
o
o
co
0 - 8
~o
o
8°
o
o
o
o
0
. I · · r · · ·
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
o
MARBLING SCORES
FIGURE 18 Tenderness as measured with Warner-Bratzler shear plotted against
marbling scores assigned to beef carcasses. (From Huffman, 1974)
TABLE 7 Effect of Marbling Levels on Tenderness a
Mean Tenderness
Marbling No. Carcasses Panel Shear (kg)
Abundant 5 7.3 b 16.6 b, c
Moderately abundant 6 6.6 b 18.8 b, c
Slightly abundant 6 6.8 b 15.8 b
Moderate 19 6.8 b 15.3 b
Modest 42 6.6 b 16.3 b, C
Small 39 6.7 b 15.3 b
Slight 51 6.1 b, C 16.1 b, C
Traces 15 5.8 b, C 17.6
Practically devoid 8 4.0 c 21.7 c
Devoid 2 5.6 15.7 b
a SOURCE: Huffman (1974).
b,c Scores having the same superscript in the same column were not significantly different
(P < 0 05)
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
73
TABLE 8 Effect of Marbling and Internal Cooking Temperatures on
Palatability a
Marbling Degree
Broiling Temperature
Moderately
Slight Modest Abundant 60° C 70° C 80° C
Flavor 6.0 6.1 6.1 6.3 6.1 5.8
Tenderness 5.2 5.3 5.3 5.9 5.2 4.7
Juiciness 5.2 5.3 5.3 6.3 5.3 4.1
Overall acceptance 5.5 5.5 5.6 6.1 5.5 5.0
Warner-Bratzler
shear (lb) 7.63 7.65 7.70 7.42 7.41 8.15
% Cookingloss 19.78 19.94 21.38 15.87 19.66 25.56
a SOURCE: Parrish et al. (1973).
These studies clearly suggest that the primary advantage of marbling
may be its association with increased carcass fat covering, which may in
turn slow chilling rates and produce more tender meat indirectly rather
than directly. Thus, the use of higher temperatures (about 15° C)
immediately after slaughter until rigor is completed may be useful in
producing more tender meat, especially from the leaner, more thinly
covered carcasses. This could be even more important if leaner carcasses
become more common in market channels.
SUMMARY
The desires of consumers for animal products were followed by use
of consumption trends and consumer preference studies. Examination
of the literature reveals that the demand for reduced fatness of animal
products is not new but has existed for at least 50 years. Both con-
sumption trends and consumer studies indicate a definite desire on the
part of most consumers for lower fat levels in most animal products.
This was shown to be the case for not only the red meats but also for
poultry and dairy products.
In general, results suggest that fat levels in a range of 20%-30%
are necessary for the acceptability of ground beef, frankfurters, and
restructured pork products. Although consumers prefer leaner beef
cuts, the reduction in fat content has been complicated by a desire for
tenderness. Data are presented indicating that young, lean beef may
be acceptable in tenderness if cold-shortening is avoided by chilling
the carcasses at about 15° C until the onset of rigor mortis. This may
offer a method for reducing the fat content of beef carcasses without
adversely affecting tenderness.
74
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
A. M. P EARSON
The author acknowledges the assistance of R. A. Merkel, A. E. Reynolds, Jr., L.
E. Dawson, and A. L. Rippen of the Department of Food Science and Human
Nutrition, Michigan State University, for assisting him in locating certain material
on red meats, poultry, and dairy products. He also expresses appreciation to Mary
Zehner and J. Roy Black of the Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan
State University, for aiding him in locating much of the data and many of the
charts used in this presentation. He is grateful to C. C. Melton, Department of
Food Science, University of Tennessee, for lending him the M.S. thesis of J. R.
Ford, and to the following for providing information: W. J. Aunan, Meat Industry
Technical Services, Chicago; F. W. Tauber, Union Carbide Corp., Chicago; O. E.
Kolari, Armour Food Laboratory, Oak Brook, Illinois; A. F. Anglemier, Depart-
ment of Food Technology, Oregon State University; R. W. Mandigo, Department
of Animal Science, University of Nebraska; J. C. Pierce, U.S. Department of Agri-
culture, Washington, D.C.; G. T. King, Department of Animal Science, Texas
A & M University; and W. E. Kramlich, Hillshire Farm Company, New London,
Wisconsin.
REFERENCES
American Dairy Association. 1970. The Household Market for Sour Cream. A
Study of Usage and Attitudes. American Dairy Association, Chicago, Ill.
Anglemier, A. F. 1974. Letter dated Oct. 17, 1974. Oregon State University, Cor-
vallis.
Ashby, R. C., R. J. Webb, E. C. Hedlund, and S. Bull. 1941. Retailer and con-
sumer reaction to graded and branded beef. Ill. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 479.
Barton, R. A. 1968. The future of the lamb industry: the world outlook. Proc.
Recip. Meat Conf. 21: 152.
Birmingham, E. 1956. Pork quality as related to consumer acceptability. Proc.
Recip. Meat Conf. 9:89.
Birmingham, E. 1957. Projects and results of consumer preference for meat and
meat products. Proc. Recip. Meat Conf. 10:86.
Birmingham, E., D. E. Brady, S. M. Hunter, J. C. Grady, and E. R. Kiehl. 1954.
Fatness of pork in relation to consumer preference. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res.
Bull. 549.
Blumer, T. N. 1963. Relationship of marbling to the palatability of beef. J. Anim.
Sci. 22:771.
Brady, D. E. 1957. Results of consumer preference studies. J. Anim. Sci. 16:233.
Branson. R. E. 1957. The consumer market for beef. Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull.
856.
Bull, S., and H. P. Rusk. 1942. Effect of exercise on quality of beef. Ill. Agric.
Exp. Stn. Bull. 488.
Carpenter, J. A., R. L. Saffle, and J. A. Christian. 1966. The effect of type of meat
and levels of fat on organoleptic and other qualities of frankfurters. Food Tech-
nol. 20:693.
Cole, J. W., and M. B. Badenhop. 1958. What do consumers prefer in steaks?
Tenn. Farm Home Sci. Prog. Rep. 25.
Cole, J. W., C. B. Ramsey, and L. O. Odom. 1960. What effect does fat content
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
75
have on palatability of broiled ground beef? Tenn. Farm Home Sci. Prog.
Rep. 36.
Courtenay, H. V., and R. E. Branson. 1962. Consumers' image of broilers. Tex.
Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 989.
Cover, S., G. T. King, and O. D. Butler. 1958. Effect of carcass grade and fatness
on tenderness of meat from steers of known history. Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn.
Bull. 889.
Cramer, D. An and J. A. Marchello. 1964. Seasonal and sex patterns in fat com-
position of growing lambs. J. Anim. Sci. 26:683.
DeGraff, H. 1973. USDA says evidence is lacking to support allegation that hot
dogs have declined nutritionally since 1930's. Am. Meat. Inst. Spec. Bull. No. 78.
Doty, D. M., and J. C. Pierce. 1961. Beef muscle characteristics as related to car-
cass grade, carcass weight and degree of aging. USDA Tech. Bull. 1231.
Dunham, D. F. 1968. Market possibilities for foam spray-dried whole milk. Univ.
Ill. Dep. Agric. Econ. Bull. 17:20.
Dunsing, M. 1959a. Visual and eating preferences of consumer household panel
for beef of different grades. Food Res. 24:434.
Dunsing, M. 1959b. Visual and eating preferences of consumer household panel
for beef from graham-Hereford crossbreds and from Herefords. Food Technol.
13:451.
Dunsing, M. 1959c. Consumer preferences for beef of different breeds related to
carcass and to quality grades. Food Technol. 13:516.
Eccles, W. C. 1968. New uses for nonfat dry milk. Univ. Ill. Dep. Agric. Econ.
Bull. 17:15.
FAO. 1970. Agricultural Commodities Projections for 1970. FAO Commodity Re-
view 1962. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
Fielder, M. M., A. M. Mullins, M. M. Skellenger, R. Whitehead, and D. S.
Moschette. 1963. Subjective and objective evaluations of prefabricated cuts of
beef. Food Technol. 17:213.
Ford, J. R. 1974. The relationship of fat content to the palatability of ground beef.
M.S. Thesis. University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
Gaarder, R. O., and E. A. Kline. 1956. What do consumers want from pork? Iowa
FarmSci.11(6):6.
Gardner, K., and L. Adams. 1926. Consumer habits and preference in the purchase
and consumption of meat. USDA Bull. 1443.
Glover, R. S. 1968. Consumer acceptance of ground beef. Proc. Recip. Meat Conf.
21:353.
Hedrick, H. B., J. B. Boillot, D. E. Brady, and H. D. Naumann. 1959. Etiology of
dark-cutting beef. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 717.
Hendrix, J., R. Baldwin, V. J. Rhodes, W. C. Stringer, and H. D. Naumann. 1963.
Consumer acceptance of pork chops. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 834.
Hillman, J. S., J. W. Stull, and R. C. Angus. 1962. Consumer preference and
acceptance for milk varying in fat and in solids-not-fat. Ariz. Agric. Exp. Stn.
Tech. Bull. 153.
Hoagland, R. 1932. Chemical composition of certain kinds of sausage and other
meat foods products. USDA Circ. 230.
Hofstrand, J., and M. Jacobson. 1960. The role of fat in the flavor of lamb and
mutton as tested with broths and depot fats. Food Res. 25:706.
Hostetler, E. H., J. E. Foster, and O. G. Hankins. 1936. Production and quality
of meat from native and grade yearling cattle. N.C. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 307.
76
A. M. PEARSON
Huffman, D. L. 1974. An evaluation of the tenderometer for measuring beef
tenderness. J. Anim. Sci. 38:287.
Huffman, D. L., and W. E. Powell. 1970. Fat content and soya level effect on
tenderness of ground beef patties. Food Technol. 24: 1418.
Hutchinson, T. Q. 1970. Consumers' knowledge and use of government grades
for selected food items. USDA Econ. Res. Serv. Mark. Res. Rep. 876.
Jacobson, M., and F. Fenton. 1956a. Effects of three levels of nutrition and age of
animal on the quality of beef. I. Palatability, cooking data, moisture, fat and
nitrogen. Food Res. 21 :415.
Jacobson, M., and F. Fenton. 1956b. Effects of three levels of nutrition and age of
animal on the quality of beef. II. Color, total iron content and pH. Food Res.
21:427.
Jacobson, M., and F. Fenton. 1956c. Effect of three levels of nutrition and age of
animal on the quality of beef. III. Vitamin BE content. Food Res. 21 :436.
Judge, M. D., C. G. Haugh, G. L. Zachariah, and C. E. Parmelee. 1974. Soya
additives in beef patties. J. Food Sci. 39:137.
Juillerat, M. E., R. F. Kelly, D. L. Harris, C. Y. Kramer, and P. P. Graham. 1972.
Consumer preference for beef as associated with selected characteristics of the
meat. Va. Polytech. Inst. State Univ. Res. Div. Bull. 72.
Kaitz, E. F. 1970. Household consumers' acceptance of an experimental dry whole
milk. USDA Mark. Res. Rep. 880.
Kauffman, R. G. 1959. Special techniques in sales preference studies. Proc. Recip.
Meat Conf.. 12:4.
Kauffman, R. G. 1960. Pork marbling. Proc. Recip. Meat Conf. 13:31.
Kendall, P. A., D. L. Harrison, and A. D. Dayton. 1974. Quality attributes of
ground beef on the retail market. J. Food Sci. 39:610.
Kidwell, J. F., J. E. Hunter, P. R. Ternan, J. E. Harper, C. E. Shelby, and R. T.
Clark. 1959. Relation of production factors to conformation scores and body
measurements, associations among production factors and the relation of carcass
grade and fatness to consumer preferences in yearling steers. J. Anim. Sci.
18:894.
Kiehl, E. R., and V. J. Rhodes. 1960. Historical development of beef quality and
grading standards. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 728.
Kiehl, E. R., V. J. Rhodes, D. E. Brady, and H. D. Naumann. 1958. St. Louis
consumers' eating preferences for beef loin steaks. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res.
Bull. 652.
King, G. T. 1959. Recent findings and current investigations in consumer research
of meats. Proc. Recip. Meat Conf. 12: 13.
King, G. T., and O. D. Butler. 1956. Methodology and results of consumer prefer-
ence studies of steaks and roasts from cattle of known history in Texas. Proc.
Recip. Meat Conf. 9:72.
Klasing, F. C. 1957. Means of strengthening consumer preference studies. Proc.
Recip. Meat Conf. 10:92.
Kline, E. A. 1956. Consumer work at Iowa State University. Proc. Recip. Meat
Conf. 9:75.
Kramlich, W. E. 1974. Telephone conversation in October, 1974. Hillshire Farm
Co., New London, Wis.
Lane, J. P., and L. E. Walters. 1958. Acceptability studies in beef. Okla. Agric.
Exp. Stn. Processed Ser. P-305.
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
77
Larzelere, H. E., and R. D. Gibbs. 1956. Consumers opinions of quality in pork
chops. Mich. State Univ. Quart. Bull. 39(2) :25.
Lasley, F. G., E. R. Kiehl, and D. E. Brady. 1955. Consumer preference for beef
in relation to finish. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 580.
Law, H. M., M. S. Beeson, A. B. Clark, A. M. Mullins, and G. E. Murra. 1965.
Consumer acceptance studies. II. Ground beef of varying fat composition. La.
Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 597.
Levine, D. B., and J. S. Hunter. 1956. Homemakers' preference for selected cuts
of lamb in Cleveland, Ohio. USDA Mark. Res. Rep. 113.
Locker, R. H. 1960. Degree of muscular contraction as a factor in tenderness of
beef. Food Res. 25:304.
Locker, R. H., and C. J. Hagyard. 1963. A cold shortening effect in beef muscles.
J. Sci. Food Agric. 14:787.
Magleby, R. S., C. W. Pierce, and P. D. Hummer. 1967. Two-per-cent milk. Its
image and use among Pittsburgh households. Pa. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 738.
Malphrus, L. D. 1957. Effect of color of beef fat on flavor of steaks and roasts.
Food Res. 22:342.
Manchester, A. C. 1967. Milk concentrates and dairy substitutes. Dairy Mark.
Facts, Univ. Ill., Dep. Agric. Econ., p. 13.
Mandigo, R. W. 1974. Letter dated Nov. 21, 1974. University of Nebraska,
Lincoln.
Marchello, J. A., D. A. Cramer, and L. J. Miller. 1967. Effects of ambient tem-
perature on certain ovine fat characteristics. J. Anim. Sci. 26:294.
Marsh, B. B., and N. G. Leet. 1966. Studies in meat tenderness. III. The effects of
cold shortening on tenderness. J. Food Sci. 3 1 :450.
Marsh, B. B., P. R. Woodhams, and N. G. Leet. 1966. Studies in meat tenderness.
I. Sensory and objective assessments of tenderness. J. Food Sci. 31:262.
Marsh, B. B., P. R. Woodhams, and N. G. Leet. 1968. Studies in meat tenderness.
V. Effects of carcass cooling and freezing before the completion of rigor mortis.
J. Food Sci. 33:12.
McCrae, S. E., C. G. Seccombe, B. B. Marsh, and W. A. Carse. 1971. Studies in
meat tenderness. IX. The tenderness of various lamb muscles in relation to
their skeletal restraint and delay before freezing. J. Food Sci. 36:566.
Merkel, R. A., and A. M. Pearson. 1973. Unpublished data on effect of fat thick-
ness on chilling rates and tenderness of beef. Michigan State University, East
.
Lansing.
Meyer, T. O., and M. E. Ensminger. 1952. Consumer preference and knowledge
of quality in retail beef cuts. Wash. Agric. Exp. Stn. Circ. 1681.
Milk Industry Foundation. 1974. Milk Facts. Milk Industry Foundation, Wash-
ington, D.C.
Mize, J. J. 1972. Factors affecting meat purchases and consumer acceptance of
ground beef at three fat levels with and without soya-bits. South. Coop. Ser.
Bull. 173.
Moulton, C. R. 1928. The show ring, the prize carcass contest, and the butchers
block as measures of quality in meats. Proc. Am. Soc. Anim. Prod. 21:122.
Mountney, G. L., R. E. Branson, and H. V. Courtney. 1959. References of chain
food store shoppers in buying chicken. Tex. Agric. Exp. Stn. Misc. Publ. 348.
Naumann, H. D. 1959. Special techniques in preference studies-composite
meat samples. Proc. Recip. Meat Conf. 12:1 1.
78
A. M. PEARSON
Naumann, H. D., V. J. Rhodes, D. E. Brady, and E. R. Kiehl. 1957. Discrimina-
tion techniques in meat acceptance studies. Food Technol. 11: 123.
Naumann, H. D., E. A. Jaenke, V. J. Rhodes, E. R. Kiehl, and D. E. Brady. 1959.
A large merchandising experiment with selected pork cuts. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn.
Res. Bull. 711.
Naumann, H. D., C. Braschler, M. Mangel, and V. J. Rhodes. 1961. Consumer
and laboratory panel evaluation of Good and Choice beef loins. Mo. Agric.
Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 777.
Parrish, F. C., Jr., D. G. Olson, B. E. Miner, and R. E. Rust. 1973. Effect of degree
of marbling and internal temperature of doneness on beef rib steaks. J. Anim.
Sci. 37:430.
Pearson, A. M. 1966. Desirability of beef its characteristics and their measure-
ment. J. Anim. Sci. 25:843.
Pearson, A. M., L. M. Wenham, W. A. Carse, K. McLeod, C. L. Davey, and A. H.
Kirton. 1973. Observations on the contribution of fat and lean to the aroma of
cooked beef and lamb. J. Anim. Sci. 36:511.
Pierce, J. C. 1974. Personal communication with author. Letter dated Oct. 9, 1974.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Ramsbottom, J. M., E. J. Czarnetsky, H. R. Kraybill, B. M. Shinn, A. I. Cuombes,
and D. H. LaVoi. 1949. Dark Cutting Beef. Factors Affecting the Color of
Beef. National Live Stock and Meat Board, Chicago, Ill.
Ramsey, C. B., J. W. Cole, B. H. Meyer, and R. S. Temple. i963. Effects of type
and breed of British, Zebu and Dairy cattle on production, palatability and com-
position. II. Palatability differences and cooking losses as determined by labora-
tory and family panels. J. Anim. Sci. 22: 1001.
Rhodes, V. J. 1958a. Predicting consumer acceptance of beef loin steaks. Mo.
Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 651.
Rhodes, V. J. 1958b. The Missouri conference on consumer studies and meat
quality: the economists viewpoint. Proc. Recip. Meat Conf. 11: 141.
Rhodes, V. J. 1962. The interpretation and implications of consumer research.
Proc. Recip. Meat Conf. 15: 163.
Rhodes, V. J., E. R. Kiehl, and D. E. Brady. 1955. Visual preferences for grades
of retail beef cuts. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 583.
Rhodes, V. J., E. R. Kiehl, D. E. Brady, and H. D. Naumann. 1958a. Predicting
consumer acceptance of beef loin steaks. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 651.
Rhodes, V. J., M. F. Jordan, H. D. Naumann, E. R. Kiehl, and M. Mangel. 1958b.
The effect of continued testing upon consumer evaluation of beef loin steaks.
Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 676.
Roubicek, C. B., R. T. Clark, and O. F. Pahnish. 1956. Range cattle production.
5. Carcass and meat studies. Ariz. Agric. Exp. Stn. Rep. 143.
Seltzer, R. E. 1955. Consumer preferences for beef. Ariz. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull.
267.
Sills, M. W. 1970. Market test of dry whole milk: nine supermarkets, Lansdale,
Pa., area. USDA Econ. Res. Serv. 433.
Simone, M., F. Carroll, and M. T. Clegg. 1958. Effect of degree of finish on dif-
ferences in quality factors of beef. Food Res. 23:32.
Smith, G. C., T. R. Dutson, R. L. Hostetler, and Z. L. Carpenter. 1974. Subcu-
taneous fat thickness and tenderness of lamb. J. Anim. Sci. 39: 174. (A)
Stadelman, W. J. 1973. Quality identification of shell eggs. Page 26 in W. J. Stadel
The Consumer's Desire for Animal Products
79
man and O. J. Cotterill, eds. Egg Science and Technology. Avi Publishing Co.,
Westport, Conn.
Stadelman, W. J., and O. J. Cotterill. 1973. Egg Science and Technology. Avi Publ.
Co., Westport, Conn.
Stevens, I. M., F. O. Sargent, E. J. Thiessen, C. Schoonover, and I. Payne. 1956.
Beef-consumer use and preferences. Cola. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 495-S.
Swope, D. A. 1970. Trends in food consumption and their nutritional significance.
Proc. Recip. Meat Conf. 23: 154.
Tauber, F. W. 1974. Letter dated Nov. 14, 1974. Union Carbide Corp., Chicago,
Ill.
Tauber, F. W., and J. H. Lloyd. 1946. Variation in the composition of frankfurters
with special reference to cooking changes. Food Res. 11: 158.
USDA. 1974. Handbook of Agricultural Charts. Agriculture Handbook No. 477.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
VanSyckle, C., and O. L. Brough. 1958. Customer acceptance of fat characteristics
of beef. Wash. Agric. Exp. Stn. Tech. Bull. 27.
Wasserman, A. E., and F. Talley. 1968. Organoleptic identification of roasted beef,
veal, lamb and pork as affected by fat. J. Food Sci. 33 :219.
Watkins, R. 1936. Finish in beef cattle from the standpoint of the consumer. Proc.
Am. Soc. Anim. Prod. 29:67.
Weidenhamer, M., E. M. Knott, and L. R. Sherman. 1969. Homemakers' opinions
about selected meats: a nationwide survey. USDA Mark. Res. Rep. 854.
Weller, M., M. W. Galgan, and M. Jacobson. 1962. Flavor and tenderness of lamb
as influenced by age. J. Anim. Sci. 21:927.
Wellington, G. H., and J. R. Stouffer. 1959. Beef marbling. Its estimation and
influence on tenderness and juiciness. Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 941.
Yea, V., and G. H. Wellington. 1974. Effects of soy curd on the acceptability and
characteristics of beef patties. J. Food Sci. 39:288.
Zehner, M. 1974. Milk evaluation. 1974 consumer preference panel. Mimeo.
Rep., Dep. Agric. Econ., Mich. State Univ.
Zobrisky, S. E., H. Leach, V. J. Rhodes, and H. D. Naumann. 1960. Carcass char-
acteristics and consumer acceptance of light weight hogs. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn.
Res. Bull. 739.
