National Lamb Quality Audit and SSQA Update Prepared for The American Lamb Board January 29, 2016
Preferences & Complaints Associated with American Lamb Quality in Retail & Foodservice Markets Travis W. Hoffman, Karissa A. Maneotis, Dale R. Woerner, J. Daryl Tatum, Robert J. Delmore, R. Kraig Peel, Stephen B. LeValley, Henry N. Zerby, Steven J. Moeller, Francis L. Fluharty and Keith E. Belk, Conducted by: Colorado State University & The Ohio State University Funded by: American Lamb Board & The National Sheep Industry Improvement Center
The Take Away Message Eating Satisfaction Flavor, Taste, Aroma The reason consumers purchase lamb Origin Local Sheep Raising Practices Branded Programs
Moving Forward Consistency of product Volatility of price is not a concern when compared to quality. A continuous improvement mentality is essential to maintain and increase market share and demand of American Lamb.
National Lamb Quality Audit Strategy Workshop Mission Improve the consistency of quality, cutability, and marketability of American Lamb with a consumer driven focus.
Strategic Goals 1) Understand factors contributing to lamb flavor, their impact on consumer satisfaction, and align flavor characteristics with target markets. 2) Improve lamb management to hit market-ready targets for product size, composition, and eating satisfaction while reducing production costs. 3) Identify and capitalize on market opportunities for American Lamb.
Lamb Flavor Study Karissa A. Maneotis, Dale R. Woerner, J. Daryl Tatum, J. N. Martin, Terry E. Engle, Robert J. Delmore, S. B. LeValley and Keith E. Belk Conducted by: Colorado State University Funded by: The American Lamb Board
Objectives Establish a proof of concept for differentiating flavor on an individual lamb basis using volatile flavor compound analysis and olfactometry. Identify and characterize compounds associated with specific lamb flavors for both negative and positive eating experiences by consumers. Evaluate the opportunity for developing an online technology and/or instrumentation to segregate lambs into expected eating quality groups.
Research Timeline 1/3 of samples have been collected. All legs are stored in a -40 C freezer until the remainder of the samples are collected. The tissue samples from the outer layer of the legs have been homogenized and are being stored at -80 C. The remainder of the samples will be collected in the next two months. Legs will be portioned into lean and fat portions and 80/20 ground lamb will be formed into patties for trained sensory panels. Trained Sensory Panels, Fatty Acid Analysis, Volatile Flavor Compound Analysis and Olfactometry will be conducted.
Sample Collection 75 legs will be collected from various breed types, production systems and sex classifications. Selection is primarily based on age verified through dentition. 25 sheep from 3 groups will be collected: 0 permanent incisors 2 permanent incisors >2 permanent incisors. Samples will be collected from three commercial lamb processing facilities.
Sheep Safety & Quality Assurance Manual Revision Karissa Maneotis, Dale R. Woerner, J. Daryl Tatum, J. N. Martin, Robert J. Delmore and Keith E. Belk Conducted by: Colorado State University
Major Revisions The importance of Lamb Quality. Addition of Global Food Safety Initiative. Antimicrobial interventions in lamb processing facilities.
USDA Lamb Nutrient Database for Standard Reference Update Cody L. Gifford, Dale R. Woerner, J. Daryl Tatum, Robert J. Delmore and Keith E. Belk Conducted by: Colorado State University Funded by: American Lamb Board & The National Sheep Industry Improvement Center
Projected Labeling Claims for Conventionally-Fed Lamb Cuts (separable lean only) trimmed to a maximum of 1/8 External Fat. Conventionally- Fed Cuts Total Fat (g) SFA (g) Trans Fat (g) Cholesterol (mg) Sodium (mg) Foreshank 3.14 1.35 0.14 75.4 81.3 Shoulder Arm Chop Shoulder Blade Chop 3.84 1.63 0.18 67.5 61.6 7.22 3.15 0.33 78.9 72.2 Shoulder, Whole 7.21 3.1 0.33 75.7 61.4 Rib Chop 6.99 3.04 0.32 844 65.5 Frenched Rib Chop 6.32 2.82 0.28 93.2 61.1 Loin, Whole 5.45 2.36 0.25 71.9 66.9 Sirloin Chop 4.41 1.88 0.2 79.7 57.9 Leg, Whole 4.36 1.87 0.2 74.9 53.6 Stew Meat 4.81 2.14 0.23 71.8 49.5 Ground Lamb 14.77 6.59 0.68 65.6 52.6
Projected Labeling Claims for Conventionally-Fed Lamb Cuts Cont. Conventionally-Fed Cuts Projected USDA Lean Qualification Projected USDA Extra Lean Qualification Projected AHA Certification Foreshank Shoulder Arm Chop Shoulder Blade Chop X X Shoulder, Whole X X Rib Chop X X Frenched Rib Chop X X Loin, Whole X X Sirloin Chop Leg, Whole Stew Meat X X Ground Lamb X X X
Projected Labeling Claims for Grass-Finished Lamb Cuts (separable lean only) trimmed to a maximum of 1/8 External Fat. Grass-Finished Total Fat Trans Fat Cholestero Sodium SFA (g) Cuts (g) (g) l (mg) (mg) Foreshank 2.41 1.13 0.12 78.1 88.4 Shoulder Arm Chop 4.51 2.09 0.05 75 63.8 Shoulder Blade Chop 6.52 3 0.33 71.3 67.7 Shoulder, Whole 7.56 3.54 0.41 69.6 65.2 Rib Chop 7.73 3.7 0.42 70.2 62.5 Frenched Rib Chop 5.64 2.74 0.3 72.1 57.8 Loin, Whole 4.7 2.36 0.26 68.7 68.9 Sirloin Chop 4.52 2.22 0.26 70.5 57.3 Leg, Whole 4.19 2.02 0.21 72.8 53 Stew Meat 3.99 1.92 0.22 63.8 45.3 Ground Lamb 14.67 6.96 0.81 69.6 57.5
Projected Labeling Claims for Grass-Finished Lamb Cuts Cont. Grass-Finished Cuts Foreshank Projected USDA Lean Qualification Projected USDA Extra Lean Qualification Projected AHA Certification Shoulder Arm Chop X X Shoulder Blade Chop X X Shoulder, Whole X X Rib Chop X X Frenched Rib Chop X X Loin, Whole X X Sirloin Chop X X Leg, Whole X X Stew Meat Ground Lamb X X X
Saturated and total fat content (g/100 g of separable lean) from conventionally-finished and grassfinished cooked separable lean from six lamb cuts trimmed to a maximum of 1/8 external fat. Shoulder Blade Chop, Conventionally-fed Shoulder Blade Chop, Grass-finished Rib, Whole, Conventionally-fed Rib, Whole, Grass-finished Loin Chop, Conventionally-fed Loin Chop, Grass-finished 5.74 5.88 5.04 4.85 4.68 4.50 13.47 12.86 11.89 10.21 10.57 9.22 Frenched Rib, Whole, Conventionally-fed 3.36 7.76 Frenched Rib, Whole, Grass-finished 3.54 7.57 Leg, Whole, Conventionally-fed 3.21 7.62 Leg, Whole, Grass-finished 2.98 6.44 Ground lamb, Conventionally-fed 2.56 6.09 g of Saturated Fat Ground Lamb, Grass-finished 2.71 5.78 g of Total Fat
Status of implementing New Lamb Data into Standard Reference 29 All data has been under review by USDA-NDL since November 1, 2015. Data from this study is on schedule to be included in the National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference 29 which is expected to be released in September 2016.
Questions?