How Much Time Does It Take for Beef Cattle to Reach Finished Market Weight

Finishing Beef Cattle On The Farm

Past Paul Beck, David Lalman

Jump To:
• Option
• General Facility Considerations
• Finishing Options
• Provender Finishing
• Grain Finishing in Confinement
• Grain Finishing On Pasture
• Live Weight to Retail Cuts
• Postmortem Crumbling Effects on Beef Tenderness

Rural landowners often are interested in raising livestock to slaughter for personal consumption, local marketing or for normal commodity markets. Advantages to raising your own beef include having control over calf quality and choice of how the calf is finished out. Calves tin can be finished on grass, grain and grass, or loftier concentrate diets. There are disadvantages to consider when fattening your own beefiness. Disadvantages may include the need to buy a dogie, actress labor for feeding, sufficient land set up bated for forage-finishing, purchasing and storage of expensive feedstuffs for grain-finishing, or purchasing freezers to shop the beef after slaughter. Calves also can get sick and may require veterinarian attention, and owners must realize the longer the ownership, the more than chance of expiry losses due to injury or illness. This fact sheet covers facility and calf pick, feeding options and slaughter considerations for finishing calves on the farm. For more in-depth information on nutrition, health and growth promoting compounds come across AFS-3302 An Introduction to Finishing Beef.

Option

Calves selected for farm-raised beef vary in type. Budget, marketing niches and stop product goals will determine the type of dogie that works best. Modest-framed dairy calves, similar Jersey calves, can accept infrequent meat quality; however, percent retail product and size of cuts, like ribeye steaks, will be adequately small. A Large-framed, heavy-muscled beef breed will have very good cutability (high percentage retail product) only calves of this type can accept longer to reach maturity, will probable be slaughtered prematurely and freezer space may exist inadequate to store all the cuts. Calves of beef breeds that are moderate-framed and early maturing with good muscling are ideal for nigh subcontract raised beef programs. Producers that desire greater lean may desire calves of traditional Continental breeds like Charolais and Limousin; whereas, producers that desire the flavour and juiciness of steaks with more marbling (intramuscular fat that determines USDA Quality Grade) may adopt calves of predominately English breeding such as Hereford, Cerise Angus, Black Angus or Shorthorn. Finishing calves with more than 25% Brahman influence tin can tend to reduce cutability and tenderness.

Bulls should exist castrated early in life, preferably at birth or by three months of historic period. Steaks from intact bulls can exist leaner and tougher than steaks from steers. Ambitious activity of group-fed bulls tin can become a handling issue every bit well as increased chances for animal injury and bruising. Heifers brand good farm-raised beef candidates. Heifers often are kept for breeding, and at the stop of the convenance season, any heifer that did non get pregnant can be easily finished for slaughter. Because they are earlier-maturing, heifers generally fatten quicker at a lighter bodyweight and have a slightly poorer feed conversion ratio than males.

General Facility Considerations

Shade and wind breaks. Finishing (forage- or grainfinishing) and marketing goals (personal use or sale) will make up one's mind the land and facilities needed. Whether finishing calves on pasture or in dry lot solitude, calves will exist more comfortable if they have admission to shade during summertime and a current of air interruption during wintertime. Calves may grow adequately without shade or a current of air break during part of the year, only shelter from the elements is necessary when weather condition exceed the fauna's thermo-neutral zone. The necessity for access to shade and air current suspension may exist a personal preference to the level of animal condolement desired and marketing or may be a necessity depending on the environment. If the goal is to market place beef locally, buyers may be interested in farm tours to see where the beef was produced. Buyers of locally grown beef are making their buying decision based in role on their perception of how calves should be reared and if calves don't accept access to summer shade or winter shelter, someone will eventually brand it a point to inquire.

Handling facilities. Cattle handling facilities at a minimum should include a catch pen with a lane and headgate to be able to vaccinate, treat illness, castrate and dehorn. Poorly maintained working facilities tin can be a source of injury and bruising that may cause product loss. Walk through working facilities and expect for possible points of injury, such every bit protruding confined, bolts or nails.

Feed storage and treatment. Wasted feed due to poor storage and treatment techniques increases the price of producing beef. Feeds should exist stored in a dry location to reduce the chances of molding. Feed storage facilities need to be kept clean to go on pests (rodents and insects) at a minimum. Information technology is essential feeding rates be managed to limit build upwardly of uneaten feed. Feed troughs also should exist kept make clean to minimize leftover feed spoilage and buildup of uneaten portions due to mixing fresh feed with spoiled feed in troughs.

Hay used in provender-finished beef programs should be high in quality. Storing hay nether UV-protective tarps or in barns will reduce storage waste. Feeding circular bales in protected rings that either proceed the bale centered or have a metal sail effectually the lesser minimize feeding waste product (see the fact sheets BAE-1716 Round Bale Hay Storage for more in depth information on hay storage losses and PSS-2570 Reducing Wintertime Feed Costs for more information on improved hay utilization)

Finishing Options

Provender- versus Grain-finishing. The objective hither isn't to start a grass- or grain-finished debate; there is room for both in a local farm-raised beef market. It is important to empathize common characteristics of forage- versus grain-finished beef when deciding which selection is best for beef produced on-farm for personal employ or marketing. In general, the typical beef consumer of the U.S. prefers the flavor of grain-fed beef. By comparison, basis beef from cattle finished on forage has been characterized as having a 'grassy' flavour. Grass-fed ground beef also tin have a cooking odor that differs from grain-fed beef. The visual appearance of the fat of grass-fed beef tin can be more yellow in color due to carotenoids in comparison to grain-fed beef fat, which appears white.

An overview of 23 published studies from 1978 to 2013 showed that cattle finished on pasture gained i pound less per day than cattle fed loftier-concentrate diets in confinement (i.55 vs 2.54 pounds per day.) Forage-finished cattle were finished at a lighter weight (~950 lb pounds) than grain-finished cattle (~1,100 pounds) and dressed at a lower percentage (56% vs 60%). Forage-finished cattle had 0.2 inches of back fat vs 0.five inches for feedlot finished and every bit a result are leaner when delivered for slaughter compared to grain-finished cattle. Bacteria beef is generally scored past gustation panelists as being less tender and less juicy compared to fatter beef. So, the health-conscientious consumer seeking provender-raised beef is usually willing to accept merchandise-offs of flavour, tenderness and juiciness for a bacteria beef that may contain a greater proportion of heart-salubrious fats. Whereas, other consumers may go on to seek the grain-finished beef characteristics, but desire to back up local sources of grain-fed beef.

Forage Finishing

Forage finishing capitalizes on the beef beast's ability to convert provender into muscle protein through the aid of microbial breakup of forage celluloses in the rumen. Since cattle are naturally grazing animals, some consumers seek out beefiness from cattle reared in their "natural surroundings". The first challenge to fodder-finishing is having a sufficient surface area of grazeable country. Forage dry matter intake is thought to be maximized when forage allowance is kept to a higher place ane,000 pounds per acre. Provender-based systems may crave 1 acre or up to 10 acres per calf depending on fertilization, weed command, seasonal forage productivity, forage species and management. Even with practiced forage management, hay is often needed for two months to four months during winter. To sustain skilful calf growth rates and reduce the number of days required to terminate calves on a fodder-based system, high-quality hay should be offered when pasture grasses are limiting. Supplementation with concentrate feeds such every bit soybean hulls may exist needed to boost gains and allow for fat deposition when hay or pasture is moderate to low quality. Soybean hulls are recognized by the American Association of Feed Control Officials as a roughage source and is approved for grass-fed beefiness claims past the USDA. Other organizations set differing standards for definition of 'grass-fed' these organizations offer marketing alliances and certification, if you are (or want to be) a member, yous can refer to their guidelines for animal intendance and approved management and nutrition.

The 2nd limitation to provender-finishing is dogie growth response. As provender quality, provender quantity and environmental temperatures fluctuate throughout the twelvemonth, boilerplate daily gain may range from seasonal highs of greater than ii.0 pounds per day to seasonal lows of 0.5 pound per 24-hour interval or less. As a result, calves grown in forage-finishing systems often are slaughtered earlier they reach the same degree of fatness of grain-finished cattle. Forage-finished calves oftentimes will be slaughtered near 1,000 pounds live weight. Information technology will accept over a year (367 days) to abound a 500-pound dogie to i,000 pounds if its boilerplate daily weight gain is 1.v pounds per twenty-four hour period. Some all-encompassing forage-finishing systems may require a longer duration for calves to attain slaughter weight if forage quality and quantity restrict growth to no more than 1 pound per twenty-four hour period.

Intensive spring and summer provender-finishing systems tin be achieved with mixtures of forages like legumes, perennial grasses, annual grasses and brassicas. Research at Clemson Academy compared provender species for finishing calves on pasture during late-spring and summer months. Calves used in the study were grown the previous winter on rye/ryegrass and fescue. Finishing forages studied included alfalfa, bermudagrass, chicory, cowpea, or pearl millet. Pastures in this report were stocked at ane.7 acres per calf with the exception of pearl millet which was stocked at 0.eight acres per calf. The corporeality of pasture provender maintained during the study ranged from one,300 pounds to two,500 pounds per acre. Table 1 is a summary of the written report results.

Steers grazing bermudagrass pastures gained 1.vii pounds per mean solar day, while steers grazing alfalfa (2.viii pounds per ), chicory (2.v pounds per twenty-four hours) and cowpea (one.ix pounds per ) gained more rapidly and had greater backfat thickness at slaughter. Steers grazing pearl millet merely gained 1.ii pounds per solar day and had the least backfat at slaughter. Among the finishing systems, fatty acid limerick tended to be like and the ratio of the polyunsaturated fats to saturated fats was similar. In this study, all treatments had shear force values that would be considered at or below the threshold for consumer accepted tenderness.

Research in Georgia (Table 2) compared provender-finishing on toxic fescue and non-toxic, endophyte-infected tall fescue starting in the fall and catastrophe in the spring for a 176-day grazing catamenia. The stocking rate of the toxic fescue was one.5 steers per acre and the stocking rate of the non-toxic fescue was one steer per acre. When fescue became limited during wintertime months (January and February), calves were grouped into a single pasture and were fed bermudagrass hay. In general, toxic fescue reduced growth rate which resulted in lighter carcass weights, just tenderness and consumer console attributes were non enhanced past not-toxic fescue. WarnerBratzler shear force for the steaks from is trial were much higher than the threshold level of acceptable tenderness (x pounds) and would be considered tough by industry standards. When carcasses were aged for 14 days, shear force values decreased to 10 pounds, a level that would exist on the upper limit of threshold WBSF values considered adequate for tenderness by consumers (Realini et al., 2005).

Tabular array 1. Growth and carcass attributes of calves finished on different forages during tardily-spring and summer (adjusted from Schmidt et al., 2013).

Finishing System

	Alfalfa	Bermudagrass	Chicory	Cowpea	Pearl Millet
Grazing days per acre	68	89	55	46	112
Start weight, lbs	893	one,047	931	one,058	ane,052
End weight, lbs	1,184	one,274	1,137	1,221	1,155
Average daily proceeds, lb/day	2.8	1.7	ii.5	1.9	1.ii
Carcass weight, lbs	711	719	675	752	664
Backfat thickness, inches	0.xxx	0.2	0.xxx	0.27	0.18
Dressing, %	sixty.0	56.4	59.4	61.6	57.5
Quality grade	3.5	iii.8	iii.two	4.iv	3.8
Warner-Bratzler shear force, lbs	8.8	ten.half dozen	9.9	8.8	nine.9
Consumer preference, %	twoscore%	5%	10%	twenty%	25%

Quality course lawmaking: 3 = Low Select, four = High Select, v = Low Choice (college is associated with greater fat and less lean) Warner-Bratzler shear forcefulness (lower is associated with greater tenderness, all treatments were at or below the threshold of 10 more often than not recognized every bit tender past consumers)

Table 2. Growth and carcass attributes of calves finished on toxic and non-toxic, endophyte-infected fescue from autumn through spring (adapted from Realini et al., 2005).

Finishing Arrangement

	Toxic Fescue	Non-toxic Fescue
End weight, lbs	906	992
Carcass weight, lbs	491	541
Backfat thickness, inches	0.17	0.21
Dressing, %	54.2	54.five
Quality course	3.0	2.8
Warner-Bratzler shear force, lbs	13.2	fifteen.4
Consumer panel – Chewiness score	two.8	3.7
Consumer panel – Juiciness score	two.vii	ii.4

Quality grade code: 3 = Low Select, four = High Select, 5 = Low Choice (higher is associated with greater fat and less lean) Chewiness score: 1-to-5 scale with 1 beingness well-nigh desirable and 5 beingness least desirable. Juiciness score: 1-to-five calibration with 1 being least desirable and 5 being well-nigh desirable.

A written report at the University of Missouri examined the effect of calculation either red clover or alfalfa to a fescue based foragefinishing system for a three-month finishing menses from tardily March through July. The amount of legume in these systems was 38% in the alfalfa system and 16% in the red clover arrangement. Final weight of calves did not differ between the fescue and combined legume response and averaged 1,035 pounds. Calves in the alfalfa system were 50 pounds heavier at the cease of the study compared to the ruby clover system, which could had been influenced by divergence in legume provender availability. The fat acid limerick of fat taken from the loin muscle did not differ among forage types.

Another study at Clemson (Table 3) compared a legume system to a grass system with or without supplemental corn fed at 0.75% body weight. The legume systems utilized alfalfa and soybeans while the grass system utilized non-toxic fescue and sorghum-sudangrass. While corn supplementation provided some beneficial responses, these responses were independent of provender system; therefore, the difference in forage system is summarized in Table 3. Provender type had little influence on fatty acrid composition; however, greater fat soluble vitamin content was detected in the loin muscle of grass finished beefiness in this study.

As a general summary, the provender arrangement chosen will showtime exist dictated by forage species that are already present. Replacing forages with alternative species or interseeding with complementary forages will be dictated by soil type, topography, and soil fertility. Calves can be fodder-finished on grasses, legumes or combination thereof. Current research results practice not suggest any single system is ideal based on carcass quality and consumer sensory comparisons.

Grain Finishing in Solitude

While ruminants take the singled-out ability to convert cellulose into muscle poly peptide through ruminal microbial fermentation, at that place remains a history of fattening cattle on feedstuffs other than forage long earlier the establishment of the modern solitude feedlot industry. Early fattening in America included root crops, "Indian corn", tree fruits and brewing and distillery mash. Solitude feeding in early on America as well was a mechanism to concentrate manure for fertilizer. Unlike fodder-finishing, grain-finishing requires less land. Depending on soil type and topography, as lilliputian as 150 square anxiety per calf of pen space with a feed and water trough is sufficient. Sometimes, locally grown beefiness producers may allow a much larger area to keep grass cover in the lot instead of allowing the pen to become a clay lot.

Table iii. Growth and carcass attributes of calves finished for 98 to 105 days in a grass system or a legume organisation (adjusted from Wright et al., 2015).

	Grass System	Legume Arrangement
End weight, lbs	1,142	1,166
Carcass weight, lbs	669	697
Backfat thickness, inches	0.33	0.37
Quality course	4.5	4.7
Consumer panel – Tenderness score	2.8	2.8
Consumer console – Juiciness score	2.0	i.ix

Quality course lawmaking: 3 = Low Select, 4 = High Select, five = Depression Selection (higher is associated with greater fat and less lean) Consumer panel scores converted to 1-to-5 scale with 1 being to the lowest degree desirable and five existence most desirable.

When finishing calves in groups, 22 inches to 26 inches of linear trough infinite per calf is needed when all calves will be eating at once on the aforementioned side of the trough. Grain diets are much drier than pasture diets and when calves are fed in solitude, they are usually watered from a trough. Keeping the water trough make clean is extremely important. A depression in water intake tin cause a reduction in feed intake and boring growth rate. During hot weather condition, a calf near finishing weighing 1,000 pounds or more can eat more than 20 gallons per solar day (for more than on water requirements of finishing calves come across AFS-3302 An Introduction to Finishing Beef.)

Many associate grain-fed beef with corn-fed beef. From 2005 through 2011, corn use for ethanol grew to the point the total use for ethanol reached that of feed and remainder employ. A feedlot finishing diet today may contain 6% to 12% roughage, up to 50% byproduct feeds such every bit distiller's grains and corn gluten feed and cereal grains (more often than not corn) representing 50% or more of the finishing diet.

Mimicking feedlot diets may not exist applied when finishing calves on-subcontract; however, like steps used in the commercial feeding industry should be adopted including:

• Calves should be transitioned from a roughage diet to the final high concentrate diet over a 3-week menses. This is chosen a footstep-upwardly programme.
• Feed calves at least twice per twenty-four hour period when the concluding diet does non comprise built in roughage or is non formulated to be self-fed or self-limiting.
• Include 10% to 15% roughage in the final nutrition for increased rumen health and reduced acidosis.
• Feed calves a balanced diet (poly peptide, minerals, mineral ratios and vitamins).
• Arrange feed amount as calves abound.

Consult with a nutritionist to develop a ration based on locally available ingredients or apply a commercial finishing ration. Some feed mills offering "bull development rations" that can besides exist used every bit a decent finishing ration. These "bull development rations" sometimes include enough cottonseed hulls and byproduct feeds that boosted roughage is not needed.

In improver to distiller's grains and corn gluten feed, other byproducts such as soybean hulls may be used in finishing diets. Soybean hulls has an estimated feed value of 74% to lxxx% of corn; whereas, dried distiller's grains has demonstrated a 124% feed value of corn. At that place is footling indication that feeding byproduct feeds changes the marbling of cattle as long as free energy density requirements are met for fat deposition. Research results indicate less intensively candy grains (ie feeding whole corn or rolled corn) may event in college marbling than intense processing methods usually used in commercial finishing operations (ie high moisture corn or steam flaking). This is idea to be due to the site of starch digestion existence shifted to the small intestine with less intensive grain processing supplying more than glucose to drive marbling.

Feeding Concentrate and Roughage Separately. Feed milling, mixing and delivery take up much of the daily activities in commercial scale feedyards. This is an equipment-intensive operation with large majuscule outlays necessary for the feed mill and equipment for feed delivery. On a smaller scale, big investments in feeding systems may not be warranted. Delivery of total mixed diets balanced to encounter nutritional needs of finishing cattle adds efficiency to large commercial operations that cannot exist matched by smaller-calibration finishing operations. Diets formulated for on-farm finishing also can exist based on limit feeding the concentrate portion in the trough while allowing calves to have free pick admission to pasture or hay for roughage. Research (Atwood et al., 2001) comparison intake and performance by fattening calves offered either a 65% concentrate (rolled barley and rolled corn) total mixed ration with alfalfa hay and corn silage providing the roughage or providing all dietary ingredients offered free-choice for self-selection constitute that no two animals offered free-choice consumed similar diets or selected diets similar to the TMR. The authors concluded costless-pick diet selection was adequate for each private brute to 'run into its needs'. Operation of cattle fed TMR or offered free-choice choice of diets and feed efficiency were similar between feeding systems.

More than contempo research from Canada (Moya et al., 2011 and 2014) was conducted to compare performance, efficiency and rumen pH of cattle finished on a TMR based on barley grain (85%), corn silage (10%) and poly peptide/mineral supplement (5%) vs offered concentrate and roughage separately for free-choice choice. All cattle were adapted to the TMR nutrition and the free-choice diets were available over the 52-day experiment. During the 52 days, cattle selected diets with increasing barley, reaching 70% to fourscore% of their self-selected diet, just even with the increasing barley in the diet, ruminal pH was similar to calves fed the TMR in the first experiment (Moya et al., 2011). In the commencement two-week period calves consumed approximately 75% barley grain, increasing to 80% in weeks three and 4, and to 85% in weeks five through 7; the average selected nutrition for cattle offered barley and corn silage was lxxx% barley grain and 20% corn silage. While in the second experiment, calves offered costless- pick access to corn silage and barley grain cocky-selected diets that were 86% barley and 14% corn silage without altering ruminal fermentation characteristics and claret profiles (Moya et al., 2014). As with previous experiments, cattle given free-choice access to self-select diet ingredients in both experiments performed similarly to cattle fed TMR. These inquiry concluded cattle tin effectively self-select diets without increasing the risk of acidosis and maintain product levels for growth and feed efficiency.

If a producer wants to use a free-selection, self-option feeding organization where roughage and concentrate are fed separately, a few management steps should exist taken.

1. A step-up period of increasing grain availability is a must, cattle should be acclimated to the high concentrate diets during at least 20 days;
2. Apply palatable, high-quality hay, silage or roughage source;
3. Limit-feed concentrate and exercise good feed bunk management;
4. If limit-feeding hay – feed hay beginning, then provide the concentrate portion of the nutrition;
5. Concentrate blends of grains and byproduct feeds are safer than providing grain only;
6. Think about safer concentrate feeding alternatives—feeding whole corn is safer than finely ground corn and can be an option for growing and finishing calves

Grain Finishing On Pasture

Hybrid systems have been studied as an alternative to high-concentrate total mixed rations fed in confinement. These systems employ the roughage supplied by pasture forth with boosted energy from supplemental concentrates. They may not meet the requirements to run into 'grass-fed beef' claims by the USDA, but do provide free-selection access to pasture.

Self-fed supplements on pasture can exist some other arroyo to finishing cattle. Research at Iowa State Academy (Table 4) examined cocky-fed dried distillers' grains with solubles mixed 1:1 with either soybean hulls or ground corn. In addition, a mineral that helped balance the calcium-to-phosphorus ratio and contained monensin to improve rate of gain was added at 4% of the mix. The calves were stocked at approximately 2.25 calves per acre of predominately tall fescue pasture. Estimated contributions of self-fed concentrate and pasture to the total dry matter feed intake in this study was 80% and twenty%, respectively. The written report did not written report whatever issues with digestive upset with self-feeding.

Ii studies were conducted at the University of Arkansas (Apple and Beck, unpublished data). In the first trial, calves from spring or autumn calving herds were either sent to a Texas Panhandle feedyard for finishing equally yearlings following a stocker programme or kept at the habitation operation and supplemented with 1% of bodyweight per caput per 24-hour interval with a grain/grain byproduct supplement until slaughter. Steers finished conventionally in confinement gained 4.four pounds per day, while steers fed concentrate supplement on pasture gained 2.5 pounds per day. Although the finishing catamenia on pasture was 30 days longer on the average, steers finished in the conventional feedlot were 128 pounds heavier at slaughter and dressing percentage was higher 62.5% vs 60.six% for Conventional and pasture, respectively). Conventionally finished cattle were 86% Pick while pasture finished were 78% Select quality grade.

Table iv. Growth and carcass attributes of calves finished on self-fed concentrates (adjusted from Kiesling, D.D. 2013).

Finishing System

	Distillers' grains plus solubles:corn [fifty:l]	Distillers' grains plus solubles:soybean hulls [50:fifty]
Average daily gain, lbs	3.iv	3.3
Cease weight, lbs	ane,302	1,291
Carcass weight, lbs	816	807
Dressing, %	62.6	62.v
Backfat thickness, inches	0.53	0.55
Quality Grade	5.0	5.0

Estimated concentrate intake was 80% and pasture intake 20%. Quality course code: 3 = Low Select, 4 = High Select, five = Low Pick

Effigy 1. Event of finishing on pasture (Provender) with 1% of bodyweight concentrate supplement daily or conventional finishing (Grain) on bodyweight of steers.

In the next trial, threescore calves were either finished in conventional Texas Panhandle feedyard or were kept on pasture with a grain/grain byproduct concentrate supplement fed at i.5% of bodyweight daily. Steers finished on pasture with supplement gained 3.6 pounds per twenty-four hour period (vs 4 pounds per mean solar day for conventional) and were fed forty days longer than conventional steers, but were yet xl pounds lighter at slaughter. But, hot carcass weights (836 for pasture vs 854 for conventional) were not every bit impacted as in the previous report, fat thickness was similar for the two treatments (0.62 inches for pasture vs 0.52 inches for conventionally finished) and dressing percent was likewise like (63% for pasture and 62.five% for conventional). In this experiment, the cattle finished on pasture with supplement were 100% Choice, with 73% being Premium Choice; while the Conventional steers were 93% Choice, with 45% beingness Premium Pick. This research indicates acceptable carcass performance can be obtained with limited free energy supplementation on pasture.

Figure 2. Effect of finishing on pasture (Forage) with 1.5% of bodyweight concentrate supplement daily or conventional finishing (Grain) on carcass quality grade.

Live Weight to Retail Cuts

The last amount of retail cuts produced from a live calf will exist afflicted by frame, muscle, os, fatty comprehend and gut capacity/fill. The first measure out of yield is dressing percentage which is the percentage of carcass weight relative to alive weight. Dressing percentage can range from 58% to 66%. A 1,300-pound steer that yields a carcass weighing 806 pounds would accept a 62% dressing percentage. A second measure of yield is retail product. The USDA Yield Form is a numerical score that is indicative of retail product. A calculated Yield Grade is adamant from hot carcass weight, fat thickness at the 12th rib, ribeye area and the combined percent of kidney, pelvic and heart fat. Percentage of retail products can exist calculated from these same measurements. Percent retail product may range from 45% to 55%. A 1,300-pound steer at Yield Form iii would have a retail product percentage of 50% which would yield about 650 pounds of retail product. If two individuals purchase a side of beef each, they each tin await 325 pounds of retail product. The yield of retail production will consist of approximately 62% roasts and steaks and 38% ground beef and stew meats. Then, a single side of beef that yields 325 pounds of retail production as well would yield approximately 201 pounds of roasts and steaks and 124 pounds of ground beef and stew meat.

Postmortem Crumbling Furnishings on Beef Tenderness

Figure three illustrates the benign effects of crumbling on tenderness every bit measured in a laboratory every bit Warner-Bratzler shear strength. This naturally tenderizing process ceases once meat is frozen. When possible, postmortem aging should exist at least seven to 15 days to reach threshold shear force values for consumer acceptable tenderness of 8.three pounds to ten pounds (3.8 kg to 4.vi kg). Aging beyond this timeframe is frequently restricted due to the processor's cooler space, only could result in farther improvements in tenderness.

Figure three. Event of aging on forage-finished beef tenderness as adamant by Warner-Brazler shear force (adapted from Schmidt et al., 2013).

Was this information helpful?

YESNO

hickgovers.blogspot.com

Source: https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/finishing-beef-cattle-on-the-farm.html