Consumer Topics 1 ALTERNATIVE MERCHANDISING STRATEGY of the BEEF TOP ROUND
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Consumer Topics 1 ALTERNATIVE MERCHANDISING STRATEGY OF THE BEEF TOP ROUND B. Epperson 1,*, J. Van Buren 1, J. Nasados 1, J. Lancaster 1, P. Bass 1, K. Smith 1, M. Colle 1, K. Puga 1, B. Buseman 1, K. Insausti Barrenetxea 2 1Animal, Veterinary, and Food Science, University of Idaho, Moscow, United States, 2Agricultural Engineering School-IS Food, Public University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain [email protected] Objectives: Alternative Merchandising Strategy of the Beef Top Round B.S. Epperson, K.J. Puga, J.B. Van Buren, J.A. Nasados, B.J. Buseman, J. Lancaster, K. Smith, P.D. Bass, K. Insausti, and M.J. Colle University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, United States. Whole top rounds can lack color uniformity causing discounts at the retail counter and profit loss due to color having a large influence on consumers’ willingness to purchase. The primary objective of this study was to compare the deep portion, superficial portion, and whole beef top round steaks (semimembranosus (SM) muscle) for consumer willingness to purchase based upon visual appraisal of steak pictures. Materials and Methods: USDA Choice top rounds (IMPS 168; n = 12) were purchased from a commercial food distributer and aged between 21 to 24 days from their pack date before removing the SM. Five steaks were cut from each SM proximally to distally and systematically assigned to D0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 days of retail display. Steaks were displayed in a glass-fronted retail display case at 3°C. On the assigned day of retail display, whole steaks were pictured 15 inches above the steak. This was then followed by separation of the deep/superficial portions approximately five cm from the steak’s superficial edge. Individual pictures of the deep and superficial portions were then taken as described above. The survey was distributed online though Qualtrics. Pictures were randomized and each participant evaluated 18 images. After evaluating each picture, participants were asked if they would purchase the steak. If yes, they were asked how much they would be willing to pay per pound ($2.58, $3.58, $4.58, $5.58, and >$6.58). If no, they were asked why not, with options including: amount of trim, toughness, color, and amounts of marbling. Data was analyzed using the glimmix procedure Statistical Analysis System (SAS). Results: Significance was determined at (P < 0.05). A total of 265 consumers completed the survey and 3,507 purchase decisions were made. For willingness to purchase there was not an interaction (P = 0.1761) between day of retail display and steak portion. However, there was a difference (P < 0.001) between steak portions. Consumers preferred the superficial portion over the whole steak and the whole steak over the deep portion. There was also a difference (P < 0.001) between days of retail display. Interestingly, in general, consumers preferred steaks on days 1, 2, and 3 over steaks on days 0 and 4 of retail display. Conclusion: In conclusion, consumers were more willing to purchase the superficial portion of the semimembranosus over the whole steak. This could allow for an alternative merchandising strategy of the top round which potentially would add value to the beef round. Keywords: Alternative fabrication, Consumer survey, Top Round Consumer Topics 3 NUTRIENT PROFILE COMPARISON OF PLANT-BASED MEAT ALTERNATIVES AND GROUND PORK C. J. Swing 1, M. J. Hernandez 1,*, T. W. Thompson 1, O. B. Guimaraes 1, I. Geornaras 1, T. E. Engle 1, K. E. Belk 1, C. L. Gifford 2, M. N. Nair 1 1Animal Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 2Animal Science, University of Wyoming, Laramie, United States [email protected] Objectives: Animal-based meat products are an important source of nutrients in human diets; although plant-based meat alternatives (PBMA) have been gaining popularity in recent years, and it could be an important source of nutrients for some consumers. However, a substantial knowledge gap exists about the full nutrient profile of PBMAs and ABMs. Therefore, nutrient profiles of original and current formulations of popular PBMAs such as the Beyond Meat Burger (BMB1 and BMB2), Impossible Food Burger (IFB1 and IFB2), and Morning Star’s Black Bean Burger (BBB) were assessed in comparison to 80/20 ground pork (GP) for proximate, mineral, vitamin, fatty acid, and amino acid profiles. Materials and Methods: The BMB1, BMB2, IFB1, IFB2, BBB, and GP products were purchased at foodservice companies and supermarkets from six randomly selected cities throughout the United States. Six replicates (n = 6) of each food product (i.e., one replicated per city) were formed into 113 g patties and either left raw or cooked on pre-heated aluminum skillets to an internal temperature of 71°C. Both raw and cooked products were frozen in liquid nitrogen and immediately homogenized until a uniform powder was obtained. Homogenized samples of raw and cooked products were then analyzed for proximate, mineral, vitamin, fatty acid, and amino acid profiles according to official procedures put forth by the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (AOAC). Simple means and standard deviations of each nutrient in each product were calculated, and statistical differences were determined at an alpha level of 0.05 using an Anova with Tukey adjusted p-values. Results: Crude protein and fat content did not differ (P > 0.05) between the PBMAs and GP after cooking. Sodium, calcium, and iron content were considerably greater (P < 0.05) in all PBMAs than GP. Magnesium content in BMB2 and IFB2 were also greater (P < 0.05) than in GP, as was vitamin E content in all PBMAs, when compared to GP. IFB1 and IFB2 products were either numerically comparable to or statistically greater (P < 0.05) than GP in each B-vitamin assessed, except pantothenic acid (B5) for which GP was greater (P < 0.05). Total saturated and mono-unsaturated fatty acid content was numerically greater in BMB2 and IFB2 than GP. Total essential amino acid content was numerically greater in BMB2 than in GP, although anabolically important essential amino acids, such as methionine and lysine, were substantially greater (P < 0.05) in GP than in all the PBMAs evaluated. Conclusion: High sodium and saturated fatty acid content in PBMAs may be a health concern for some consumers. The high concentrations of calcium, magnesium, and thiamin (B1) and the presence of other nutrients found in PBMAs could have implications on bioavailability. Therefore, the integration of dietary nutrients into the food matrix of PBMAs and bioavailability of nutrients should be further investigated. Keywords: plant-based meat alternatives, animal-based meats, amino acid profile, fatty acid profile Consumer Topics 4 CHANGES IN THE PERCEPTION OF GROUND BEEF QUALITY AS A RESULT OF PRICE PER POUND LABELING E. S. Beyer 1,*, K. M. Harr 1, S. G. Davis 1, K. J. Farmer 1, M. D. Chao 1, J. L. Vipham 1, M. R. Zumbaugh 1, T. G. O'Quinn 1 1Animal Sciences and Industry, Kansas State University, Manhattan, United States [email protected] Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the effect of perceived palatability on ground beef patties by providing consumers with differing price per pound labels. Materials and Methods: Ground beef chubs (n=15) of 80% lean, 20% fat composition were procured from a beef processor from the same lot. Patties were formed 11 days after processing into 151.2g patties using a commercial patty former. Every two patties were packaged together with a four-digit identification code with one of the following price labels: Ultra-High, High, Medium, Low, Ultra-Low and no information (NONE). For all panels, samples were thawed 24 h in advance, cooked to an end-point temperature of 71°C on Cuisinart Clamshell Grill. The consumers (n=105) were asked to evaluate each sample independently with the following information provided prior to sampling: $13.78/kg Ultra High; $11.02/kg High; $8.27/kg Medium; $5.51/kg Low; $2.75/kg Ultra-Low or no information provided. Each round, all consumers were given the same information about the price per pound for each sample. The consumers were asked to evaluate each sample for tenderness, juiciness, texture liking, flavor liking and overall liking. Additionally, the consumers were asked to list if the sample was acceptable for all traits. The consumers reported their likelihood to purchase each sample. Data were analyzed using SAS Proc GLIMMIX as a completely randomized design. Results: There were no differences (P > 0.05) among any of the various price labels for tenderness, texture liking, and overall liking. Consumers were equally as likely (P > 0.05) to purchase all samples regardless of the price label. However, the consumers listed price as one of the top purchasing motivators, similar (P > 0.05) to fat content, and appearance. Consumers found the ultra-high, medium, and ultra-low price label to be more juicy (P < 0.05) than the low price or NONE label. Also, consumers gave a higher (P < 0.05) flavor liking score to the ultra-high, high, medium, and ultra-low price labels in comparison to the NONE label. The ultra-high and medium price labels had a greater (P < 0.05) change in ratings for overall liking than the ultra-low and low price labels when compared to the NONE label. Furthermore, almost every price label for every trait resulted in increased (P < 0.05) palatability ratings, aside from the low price label for juiciness, tenderness, and overall liking. A greater (P < 0.05) percentage of samples with the ultra-high and medium price level were rated as acceptable for juiciness in comparison to the low price and NONE label. A greater (P < 0.05) percentage of samples labeled with the ultra-high and medium price labels were considered acceptable for flavor in comparison to all other price labels.