Meat+Poultry - December 2018 - 51

USDA
GRADER-ASSESSED
AVERAGES

INSTRUMENTASSESSMENT
AVERAGES

(n = 9,106)

(n = 4,544,635)

3.1

the two. Having the confidence in instrument
grading verified through this extensive thirdparty activity provides the beef industry solid
support for using this technology to evaluate
these important value-determining traits.

USDA yield grade

SEASONALITY OF BEEF GRADES

Average fat thickness, inches

0.56

0.54

Hot carcass weight, pounds

860.5

867.7

Ribeye area, square inches

13.9

13.8

This was the first audit that we reported
monthly grade information and evaluated how
the Prime and Choice grading percentages
changed over the year. The grading
percentages for most months were relatively
similar with the exception of February, which
was the highest numerically, and August, which
was the lowest numerically. How carcasses
grade during the year is always a topic of
discussion among cattle feeders and beef
packers. Time on feed, corn prices, calves
versus yearlings, type of cattle being fed and
weather conditions are some of the factors
that seem to affect how well carcasses grade.
However, there is never an easy answer when
actual grading of beef carcasses falls short of
the expected grading of cattle purchased.
The percentages of carcasses that grade
Choice or higher impact the marketability of
beef and often drive the Choice/Select spread,
the price/cwt difference between the Choice
and Select carcass cutouts. When there is a
strong demand for Choice-or-higher beef for
the domestic and export markets, beef packers
have greater flexibility in filling customer
orders. When the Choice-or-higher grade
percentages go down even slightly, the inability
of beef packers to meet the demand creates
some shortages for customer orders and often
drive the Choice/Select spread to greater
differences than the seasonal ones we most
often observe.
With respect to Prime, carcasses graded
around the 4.5 percent range. This number
was higher than in previous audits. Strong
demand for rib, loin, and briskets from Prime
carcasses enhances the cutout value and
potential profitability of these carcasses for the
beef packer. One problem area, though, with
the percentage of carcasses that grade Prime
is the variability from the low to high months.
The summer months were among the lowest
months numerically (June: 3.3 percent; July: 3.3
percent; August: 3.0 percent), at a time when
the summer grilling season is in full swing.
Additionally, the difference between the low (3

TRAIT

USDA marbling score

Small

percent) and high (5 percent) months in Prime
shows how availability and market demands
can influence price volatility of Prime beef.

DAYS OF THE WEEK MATTER
One very interesting factor this dataset allowed
us to evaluate was to see how the day of the
week impacted carcass grading. The length
of time that beef carcasses are chilled before
grading plays a role in how the ribeyes will
look when ribbed for evaluation. Packers know
that beef carcasses from cattle slaughtered on
Fridays or Saturdays and graded on Mondays
have the best grading performance when all
other factors (cattle types, time on feed, etc.)
are held constant. These carcasses often are
referred to as "weekend cattle" because of
their unique grading ability. We are aware
of one packer who always harvests cattle
for its highly marbled branded program on
Fridays to allow carcasses the benefit of the
weekend chill time. We do not know if other
programs are designed to benefit from this
extended chilling, but the information from
the instrument-assessment phase of the audit
clearly shows that the day of the week when
carcasses are graded impacts the percentages
of Prime and Choice carcasses. As would be
expected, the greatest percentage of Prime
and Choice carcasses were from Monday's
grading. The percentage of Prime carcasses
(6.4 percent) was much greater than the other
days. Beef packing plants typically run five to
six days a week, and there is only one Monday.
However, emulating the weekend chill process
for certain programs might be financially
worthwhile for some packers.
These are just some of the highlights from
the instrument-grading data. More complete
details and data are reported in Boykin et
al., J. Anim. Sci., 95:2993-3002 doi: 10.2527/
jas2017.1543.

Small 75
Processors often ask
how instrument grading
compares to the traditional
information determined
by USDA graders. These
results show that the results
are similar using the two
methods of assessment.

www.meatpoultry.com | 12.18 | MEAT+ POULTRY

http://www.meatpoultry.com

Meat+Poultry - December 2018

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Meat+Poultry - December 2018