Flavor of Ground Beef II

Project Summary

Collaborator II ‐ Flavor of Ground Beef

Principle Investigator(s):: E. Chambers IV and T. Terry
Institution(s):: Kansas State University
Completion Date:: June 2016

BACKGROUND

Ground beef comprises between 50 and 60% of the beef consumed in the United States and is manufactured from beef trimmings from either commodity, grain‐fed beef or lean trimmings from older, mature cows and bulls. Source of raw material is used to affect final lipid content and the subsequent flavor of the final product.

Additionally, ground beef is commonly consumed at home and in the foodservice industry and cooking and preparation varies. Emerging restaurant concepts that focus on ground beef (Five Guys, Smash Burger, etc.) vary in ground beef formulation, grinding procedures and cooking methods. Formulation, grinding procedures and cooking methods expectantly impact beef flavor through how heat transfers through ground beef as beef flavor is comprised principally from aromas generated from either thermal lipid degradation or Maillard browning reactions. Flavor is incredibly important to the long‐term success of beef products and serves as the “guard rails” to beef quality. Sitz and others (2005) found that flavor was the most important factor affecting consumers’ buying habits and preferences when tenderness was held constant. Additionally, Huffman et al. (1996) reported that flavor had the strongest relationship (r = 0.67) to overall steak palatability ratings when consumers prepared steaks at home. Recent research conducted at Kansas State University has shown that beef flavor is more closely related to overall consumer liking than beef tenderness and juiciness. While it is well understood that as marbling increases in steaks, flavor and overall acceptability increases (Berry and Leddy, 1990; Kerth and Miller, 2015), it is fat content in ground beef that affects flavor (Blackmon et al., 2015).

It is apparent that multiple factors impact flavor in ground beef. This research concentrated the effects of final grind (chopped, 3/8 and 1/4 inch final grind), forming (hand and machine), fat/source content (20% and 5% lipid from commodity and mature beef), patty thickness (1/4 inch and 1 inch), cooking (steam and dry heat), and holding (steam table holding for 0, 1 and 3 hours) on beef flavor as measured by trained descriptive attribute panels using the Beef Lexicon (Adhikari et al., 2011). Two panels were used, one at Kansas State University and one at Texas A&M University, to adequately test flavor differences due to the aforementioned treatments.

The hypothesis was that flavor and consumer acceptability of ground beef can be improved by optimizing grind method, patty forming, lean source, fat level, cooking method and hold time and by understanding how these factors influence heat transfer and subsequent chemical reactions related to beef flavor.

The objectives were to determine the impact of thickness (1/4 inch and 1 inch), cooking method (home‐style clamshell grill vs food service grill), and holding (steam table holding for 0, 1 and 3 hours) on ground beef patty descriptive flavor and texture attributes.

METHODOLOGY

Patty preparation
All ground beef for this study was provided by Texas A&M University (TAMU). In short patties were prepared by TAMU, frozen at ‐80°F on individual patty paper, individually vacuum‐packaged and stored at ‐10°F until testing. Testing occurred within 2 months of manufacture. Frozen patties were transported to Kansas State University where they were used for trained descriptive flavor and texture attribute evaluation using expert sensory panels using the Beef Flavor Lexicon (Adhikari) developed previously and AMSA guidelines (2015).

Phase at Kansas State University
For sensory evaluation, patties were cooked using a dry‐heat cooking method (a flat solid surface heated to 350°F) and a steam cooking method (clam‐shell grill with a surface heat of 350°F) to an internal cook temperature endpoint of 70°F. Internal temperature was monitored and raw weight and cooked weight were obtained. Total cooking time was also determined. Patties (n=216; 2 thickness x 3 grinds x 2 sources x 2 cook methods x 3 replicates; 21 sensory days) were held for 0, 1 and 3 hours in a steam table set so that the internal environment of the steam table was 140°F and were served to a highly trained flavor and texture descriptive sensory panel at the Sensory Analysis Center trained to evaluate beef flavor using the Beef Flavor Lexicon and texture attributes (initial juiciness, sustained juiciness, hardness, springiness, cohesiveness of mass, and particle size). The trained descriptive attributes and their definitions and references are presented in Table 1. Flavor and texture attributes were measured using a 16‐point scale with 0.5 increments. Panelists evaluated up to 12 samples per day for 21 evaluation days. Samples were identified with random three-digit codes and panelists were provided with palate cleansers of saltless saltine crackers and reverse osmosis‐treated, flavorless water between samples. Patties were cut into 6‐wedges as deﬁned by AMSA (2015) and panelists received 3 wedges per sample for evaluation.

Volatile Aromatic Compounds
Samples for volatile aroma analysis were frozen at a low temperature and sent to TAMU for testing.

Data Analysis
Data were analyzed using Analysis of Variance for treatment effects in a factorial arrangement using the Generalized Linear Model procedure of SAS (v9.3, SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC) with an alpha <0.05. The main effects of four meat sources (grain‐fed 20%, grain‐fed 5%, mature 20% and mature 5%) by two thickness (1/4 inch and 1 inch) x 3 grinds (bowl chop, 3/8 inch and 1/4 inch) by two cooking methods (grill and clam shell) and their interactions were included in the model. Three- and four-way interactions were not included in the model. Replicate was included as a fixed effect in the model and sensory data was included as a random model effect. Least squares means were calculated for main effects and significant two‐way interactions. Two‐way interactions that were not significant (P>0.05) were not included in the final model. For main or two-way interaction effects that were significant (P<0.05), differences in least squares means were determined using the pdiff function in SAS.

FINDINGS

KSU Phase
Ground beef patties from two meat sources that differed in flavor attributes, patty thickness, final grind size or method, cooking method and holding time in a steam table were evaluated for ground beef flavor and texture attributes (Table 2). Ground beef patties manufactured with commodity lean and 20% lipid had higher levels of brown/roasted, fat‐ like, overall sweet, burnt, and warmed over flavor attributes and lower levels of bloody/serumy, metallic, liver‐like, sour, and barnyard flavor attributes. Additionally, these patties were juicier, more cohesive, and higher fat mouthcoating. The effect of patty thickness, final grind size and method, and cooking method were similar to those reported by collaborator I, TAMU.

Holding time affected flavor of ground beef patties. Ground beef patties held for 1 hour differed in some flavor attributes. The major effect of holding was increased cardboard flavor as would be expected as increased levels of cardboardy flavor are due to increased lipid oxidation. Holding time on a steam table definitely impacts flavor, likely degrading product quality.

The effect of cooking methods by patty thickness on sensory descriptive attributes and volatile aromatic compounds is presented in Figure 1. Thinner patties were more closely associated with negative flavor attributes, especially refrigerator/stale, cardboardy and warmed over flavor attributes. Thicker patties were related to more positive beef flavor attributes. Ground beef patties that were one inch thick and cooked on the flat commercial‐style grill were juicier, had more burnt, brown/roasted, fat‐like and chemical flavors, and were more bitter and sour. Patties cooked on the clam‐style (i.e. often called a George Foreman style) grill had more liver‐like, overall sweet and bloody/serumy ﬂavors. This “steam-like” cooking typical of the way many consumers might cook a ground beef patty produces a product that likely is lower in quality than a foodservice product cooked on a high‐heat foodservice grill and served immediately.

IMPLICATIONS

Ground beef constitutes approximately 50 to 60% of the beef consumed in the U.S. Ground beef is sold extensively at retail and in the foodservice industry. One of the most recent trends in the foodservice industry is “premium ground beef concepts.” The industry has not examined the multiple factors that impact ground beef flavor although the industry knows that flavor is a key driver of consumer acceptability. This project was intended to extensively evaluate the effect of meat source (mature versus commodity grain fed), fat level (20 versus 5%), grind or chop method (chopping versus 2 grind sizes), patty thickness (1 versus 1/4 inch), formation (hand versus machine), cooking method (dry heat versus steam cooking), and holding time in a steam table (0, 1 or 3 hours) on the flavor and texture of ground beef. Additional studies will determine how consumers prepare ground beef in home and will determine the influence of key factors from this study on consumer acceptance.

Patty thickness impacted flavor attributes with thicker patties having more positive flavor and texture attributes than thinner patties. In addition, holding time not surprisingly increased the perception of cardboard and other negative attributes probably related to lipid oxidation during holding. Lastly, cooking at high temperature on direct high heat produced a product that had brown, cooked beef flavor notes as compared to cooking on a clamshell type grill, which resulted in more liver‐like and higher bloody serumy notes. This suggests that high beef flavor notes are produced with thicker patties cooked using direct high, dry‐heat methods and with immediate serving with little to no holding time. This suggests that the “upscale” food service “burger concept” establishments that are using these types of methods are producing product with high impact positive ﬂavor and textural properties. Unfortunately, it also suggests that consumers who may be using home style clamshell grills to cook beef patties may not be getting an optimal product, using current cooking procedures, especially if they are cooking thinner pre‐made frozen patties. Additional research with consumers is needed to conﬁrm these findings, but these will help to narrow focus and deﬁne strategies for optimizing patty formulation for varying markets.

Figure 1. Partial least squares bi-plot for descriptive flavor and texture attributes and volatile aromatic compounds for patty thickness by cooking method for Phase II.

Table 1. Definition and reference standards for meat descriptive flavor aromatics and basic taste sensory attributes and their intensities where 1 = none; 16 = extremely intense adapted from Adhikari et al. (2011) for Phases I and II.

Attributes	Definition	Reference
Apricot	Fruity aromatics that can be described as specifically apricot.	Sun sweet dried apricot = 7.5 (F)
Asparagus	The slightly brown, slightly earthy green aromatics associated with cooked green asparagus.	Asparagus water = 6.5 (F); 7.5 (A)
Animal Hair	The aromatics perceived when raw wool is saturated with water.	Caproic acid = 12.0
Barnyard	Combination of pungent, slightly sour, hay-like aromatics. Associated with farm animals and the inside of a barn.	White pepper in water = 4.0 (F); 4.5 (A) Tinure of civet = 6.0 (A)
Beef identity	Amount of beef flavor identity in the sample.	Swanson's beef broth = 5.0 80% lean ground beef = 7.0 Beef brisket = 11.0
Beet	A dark damp-musty-earthy note.	Food club sliced beet juice with 1 part juice from canned red beets to 2 parts water = 4.0 (F)
Bitter	The fundamental taste factor associated with a caffeine solution.	0.01% caffeine solution = 2.0 0.02% caffeine solution = 3.5
Bloody/serumy	The aromatics associated with blood on cooked meat products. Closely related to metallic aromatic.	USDA Choice Strip Steak = 5.5 Beef Brisket = 6.0
Brown/roasted	A round, full aromatic generally associated with beef suet that has been broiled.	Beef suet = 8.0
Buttery	Sweet, dairy-like aromatic associated with natural butter.	80% lean ground beef = 10.0
Burnt	The sharp/acrid flavor note associated with over-roasted beef muscle, something over-baked or excessively browned in oil.	Land O' Lakes unsalted butter = 7.0 (F)
Chemical	The aromatics associated with garden hose, hot Teflon pan, plastic packaging and petroleum-based product such as charcoal lighter fluid	Ziploc sandwich bag = 13.0 Clorox in water = 6.5
Chocolate/cocoa	The aromatics associated with cocoa beans and powdered cocoa and chocolate bars. Brown, sweet, dusty, often bitter aromatics.	Hershey's cocoa powder in water = 3.0 Hershey's chocolate kiss = 8.5 (F)
Cooked milk	A combination of sweet, brown flavor notes and aromatics associated with heated milk.	Mini Babybel original Swiss cheese = 2.5 Dillon's whole milk = 4.5
Cumin	The aromatics commonly associated with cumin and characterized as dry, pungent, woody, and slightly floral.	McCormick or Shilling ground cumin = 7.0 (F); 10.0 (A)
Dairy	The aromatics associated with products made from cows milk such as cream, milk, sour cream or butter.	Dillon's reduced fat milk (2%) = 8.0
Fat-like	The aromatics associated with cooked animal fat.	Hillshire Farms Lil' Beef Smokies = 7.0 Beef suet = 12.0
Floral	Sweet light, slightly perfume impression associated with flowers.	Welch's white grape juice, diluted 1:1 with water = 5.0 (F); Geraniol = 7.5 (A)
Green	Sharp, slightly pungent aromatics associated with green/plant/vegetable matters such as parsley, spinach, pea pod, fresh cut grass, etc.	Hexanal in propylene glycol (5,000 ppm) = 6.5 (aroma) Fresh parsley water = 9.0
Green-hay like	Brown/green dusty aromatics associated with dry grasses, hay, dry parsley and tea leaves.	Dry parsley in medium snifter = 5.0 (A) Dry parsley in ~30-mL cup = 6.0
Heated oil	The aromatics associated with oil heated to a high temperature.	Wesson oil, microwaved 3 minutes = 7.0 (F&A) Lay's potato chips = 4.0 (A)
Leather	Musty, old leather (like old book bindings)	2, 3, 4-Trimethoxybenzaldehyde = 3.0 (A)
Liver-like	The aromatics associated with cooked organ meat/liver.	Beef liver = 7.5 Oscar Mayer Braunschweiger liver sausage = 10.0
Medicinal	A clean sterile aromatic characteristic of antiseptic like products such as Band-Aids, alcohol and iodine.	Band-Aid = 6.0 (A)
Metallic	The impression of slightly oxidized metal, such as iron, copper and silver spoons.	0.10% potassium chloride solution = 1.5 USDA Choice Strip Steak = 4.0 Dole canned pineapple juice = 6.0
Musty/earthy/Humus	Musty, sweet, decaying vegetation.	Sliced button mushrooms = 3.0 (F); 3.0 (A) 1000 ppm of 2.6-dimethylcyclohexanol in propylene glycol = 9.0 (A)
Overall sweet	A combination of sweet taste and sweet aromatics. The aromatics associated with the impression of sweet.	Post shredded wheat spoon size = 1.5 (F) Hillshire Farms Lil Beef Smokies = 3.0 SAFC ethyl maltol 99% = 4.5 (aroma)
Petroleum-like	A specific chemical aromatic associated with crude oil and it's refined products that have heavy oil characteristics.	Vaseline petroleum jelly = 3.0 (A)
Rancid	The aromatics commonly associated with oxidized fat and oils. These aromatics may include cardboard, painty, varnish and fishy.	Microwaved Wesson vegetable oil (3 mins on high) = 7.0 Microwaved Wesson vegetable oil (5 mins on high) = 9.0
Refrigerator stale	Aromatics associated with products left in the refrigerator for an extended period of time and absorbing a combination of odors (lack of freshness/flat).	Ground beef cooked over medium-high heat to 165° F, grease drained, stored overnight in covered glass container at room temperature = 4.5 (F); 5.5 (A)
Salty	The fundamental taste factor of which sodium chloride is typical.	0.15% sodium chloride solution = 1.5 0.25% sodium chloride solution = 3.5
Smoky charcoal	An aromatic associated with meat juices and fat drippings on hot coals which can be acid, sour, burned, etc.	Wright's natural hickory seasonings in water = 9.0 (A)
Smoky wood	Dry, dusty, aromatic reminiscent of burning wood.	Wright's natural hickory seasonings in water = 7.5 (A)
Soapy	An aromatic commonly found in unscented hand soap.	Ivory bar soap in 100 ml water = 6.5 (A)
Sour aromatics	The aromatics associated with sour substances.	Dillon's buttermilk = 5.0
Sour milk/dairy	Sour, fermented aromatics associated with dairy products such as buttermilk and sour cream.	Laughing cow light Swiss cheese = 7.0 Dillon's buttermilk = 9.0
Sour	The fundamental taste factor associated with citric acid.	0.015% citric acid solution = 1.5 0.050% citric acid solution = 3.5
Spoiled-putrid	The presence of inappropriate aromatics and flavors that are commonly associated with the products. It is a foul taste and/or smell that indicates the product is starting to decay and putrefy.	Dimethyl disulfide in propylene glycol 10,000 ppm = 12.0 (aroma)
Sweet	The fundamental taste factor associated with sucrose.	2.0 sucrose solution = 2.0
Umami	Flat, salty, somewhat brothy. The taste of glutamate, salts of amino acids and other molecules called nucleotides.	0.035% accent flavor enhancer solution = 7.5
Warmed-over	Perception of a product that has been previously cooked and reheated.	80% lean ground beef (reheated) = 6.0
Initial juiciness	The amount of perceived juice that is released from the product during mastication.	Carrot = 8.5; Mushroom = 10.0; Cucumber = 12.0; Apple = 13.5; Watermelon = 15.0; Choice Top Loin Steak cooked to 58°C = 11.0; Choice Top Loin Steak cooked to 80°C = 9.0; tenderness is the average of connective tissue amount and muscle fiber tenderness.

Table 2. Flavor, basic tastes and texture attributesb least squares means for machine formed ground beef patties segmented by main effects of meat source, patty thickness, cooking method and holding time where 0 = none and 15 = extremely intense for KSU phase.

									Basic Tastes
Treatment	Beef identity	Brown/ roasted	Bloody/ serumy	Fat-like	Metallic	Liver-like	Chemical	Overall sweet	Umami	Sour	Salty	Bitter
Meat Sourceª	0.73	0.005	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001	0.91	0.01	0.31	0.0003	0.71	0.62
Commodity lean, 20% lipid	2.2	1.1c	0.8b	2.6c	1.6b	0.7b	0.4	0.7c	0.5	1.5b	0.7	2.6
Mature lean, 5% lipid	2.2	0.8b	1.3c	1.0b	1.8c	1.6c	0.4	0.6b	0.4	1.6c	0.8	2.6
Patty Thicknessª	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001	0.99	0.22	<0.0001	0.95	0.0005	<0.0001	0.78	<0.0001	0.007
0.25 inches	1.8b	0.5b	0.6b	1.8	1.7	1.0b	0.4	0.6b	0.3b	1.6	0.6b	2.6b
1.0 inches	2.5c	1.4c	1.5c	1.8	1.7	1.3c	0.4	0.7c	0.6c	1.6	0.9c	2.7c
Final Grind Size or Methodª	0.84	0.75	0.005	0.37	0.59	0.08	0.86	0.88	0.53	0.45	0.22	0.99
0.25 inches	2.2	0.9	1.1c	1.9	1.7	1.0	0.4	0.7	0.5	1.6	0.8	2.6
0.38 inches	2.2	0.9	1.2c	1.7	1.6	1.2	0.4	0.7	0.5	1.6	0.7	2.6
Bowl chop	2.2	1.0	0.8b	1.8	1.7	1.2	0.4	0.7	0.4	1.5	0.7	2.6
Cooking Methodª	0.0004	0.01	0.19	<0.0001	0.1	0.67	0.09	0.74	0.01	0.3	0.67	0.24
Grill	3.1c	1.6c	1.4	3.5c	1.5	1.0	0.2	0.7	0.9c	1.7	0.8	2.7
George Foreman	1.3b	0.3b	0.7	0.1b	1.8	1.2	0.6	0.6	0.1b	1.5	0.7	2.5
Holding Timeª	0.31	0.47	0.98	<0.0001	0.14	0.91	0.5	0.08	0.05	0.04	0.95	0.81
0 hours	2.3	1.1	1.0	2.3c	1.6	1.2	0.5	0.7	0.7	1.6c	0.7	2.6
1 hour	2.0	0.8	1.0	0.7b	1.6	1.2	0.5	0.5	0.3	1.4b	0.8	2.6
3 hours	2.3	0.9	1.1	2.4c	1.9	1.0	0.3	0.8	0.4	1.8c	0.8	2.7

RMSE	0.5	0.54	0.65	0.58	0.22	0.53	0.27	0.26	0.37	0.21	0.24	0.23

^aP-value from Analysis of Variance table.

Table 2. Cont'd

									Basic Tastes
Treatment	Beef identity	Brown/ roasted	Bloody/ serumy	Fat-like	Metallic	Liver-like	Chemical	Overall sweet	Umami	Sour	Salty	Bitter
Meat Sourceª	0.73	0.005	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001	0.91	0.01	0.31	0.0003	0.71	0.62
Commodity lean, 20% lipid	2.2	1.1c	0.8b	2.6c	1.6b	0.7b	0.4	0.7c	0.5	1.5b	0.7	2.6
Mature lean, 5% lipid	2.2	0.8b	1.3c	1.0b	1.8c	1.6c	0.4	0.6b	0.4	1.6c	0.8	2.6
Patty Thicknessª	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001	0.99	0.22	<0.0001	0.95	0.0005	<0.0001	0.78	<0.0001	0.007
0.25 inches	1.8b	0.5b	0.6b	1.8	1.7	1.0b	0.4	0.6b	0.3b	1.6	0.6b	2.6b
1.0 inches	2.5c	1.4c	1.5c	1.8	1.7	1.3c	0.4	0.7c	0.6c	1.6	0.9c	2.7c
Final Grind Size or Methodª	0.84	0.75	0.005	0.37	0.59	0.08	0.86	0.88	0.53	0.45	0.22	0.99
0.25 inches	2.2	0.9	1.1c	1.9	1.7	1.0	0.4	0.7	0.5	1.6	0.8	2.6
0.38 inches	2.2	0.9	1.2c	1.7	1.6	1.2	0.4	0.7	0.5	1.6	0.7	2.6
Bowl chop	2.2	1.0	0.8b	1.8	1.7	1.2	0.4	0.7	0.4	1.5	0.7	2.6
Cooking Methodª	0.0004	0.01	0.19	<0.0001	0.1	0.67	0.09	0.74	0.01	0.3	0.67	0.24
Grill	3.1c	1.6c	1.4	3.5c	1.5	1.0	0.2	0.7	0.9c	1.7	0.8	2.7
George Foreman	1.3b	0.3b	0.7	0.1b	1.8	1.2	0.6	0.6	0.1b	1.5	0.7	2.5
Holding Timeª	0.31	0.47	0.98	<0.0001	0.14	0.91	0.5	0.08	0.05	0.04	0.95	0.81
0 hours	2.3	1.1	1.0	2.3c	1.6	1.2	0.5	0.7	0.7	1.6c	0.7	2.6
1 hour	2.0	0.8	1.0	0.7b	1.6	1.2	0.5	0.5	0.3	1.4b	0.8	2.6
3 hours	2.3	0.9	1.1	2.4c	1.9	1.0	0.3	0.8	0.4	1.8c	0.8	2.7

RMSE	0.5	0.54	0.65	0.58	0.22	0.53	0.27	0.26	0.37	0.21	0.24	0.23

^aP-value from Analysis of Variance table.

Table 2. Cont'd

Treatment	Burnt	Barnyard	Refrigerator/ stale	Card- boardy	Warmed over
Meat Sourceª	<0.0001	<0.0001	0.98	0.6	0.01
Commodity lean, 20% lipid	0.6c	1.7b	1.4	3.3	1.8c
Mature lean, 5% lipid	0.1b	2.0c	1.4	3.4	1.6b
Patty Thicknessª	<0.0001	0.42	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001
0.25 inches	0.1b	1.9	1.7c	3.5c	2.0c
1.0 inches	0.6c	1.8	1.2b	3.1b	1.4b
Final Grind Size or Methodª	0.73	0.15	0.66	0.45	0.97
0.25 inches	0.4	1.8	1.5	3.3	1.7
0.38 inches	0.3	1.9	1.4	3.3	1.7
Bowl chop	0.4	1.8	1.4	3.4	1.7
Cooking Methodª	0.6	0.02	0.25	0.94	0.21
Grill	0.5	1.5b	1.2	3.3	1.4
George Foreman	0.2	2.2c	1.7	3.3	2.0
Holding Timeª	0.73	0.54	0.8	0.03	0.54
0 hours	0.4	1.8	1.5	3.1b	1.5
1 hour	0.2	2	1.4	3.1b	1.7
3 hours	0.5	1.7	1.4	3.8c	1.8

RMSE	0.54	0.35	0.51	0.36	0.49

^aP-value from Analysis of Variance table.

Table 2. Cont'd

Treatment	Particle size	Initial Juiciness	Cohesiveness of mass	Fat mouth coating	Springiness	Hardness
Meat Sourceª	0.72	<0.0001	0.001	<0.0001	0.23	0.07
Commodity lean, 20% lipid	5.3	2.4c	5.4c	3.5c	1.9	6.3
Mature lean, 5% lipid	5.2	1.6b	5.0b	1.9b	1.8	6.6
Patty Thicknessª	<0.0001	0.0007	0.0003	0.66	<0.0001	0.07
0.25 inches	5.0b	1.9b	5.4c	2.6	1.6b	6.3
1.0 inches	5.5c	2.2c	5.0b	2.5	2.1c	6.5
Final Grind Size or Methodª	<0.0001	0.01	0.01	0.11	0.14	<0.0001
0.25 inches	5.2c	2.2c	5.3c	2.7	1.8	6.1b
0.38 inches	5.5d	2.1bc	5.3c	2.5	1.9	6.6c
Bowl chop	5.0b	1.9b	5.0b	2.5	1.9	6.6c
Cooking Methodª	0.67	<0.0001	0.58	0.0002	0.53	0.31
Grill	5.1	3.0c	5.4	3.5c	1.7	6.1
George Foreman	5.4	1.0b	5.0	1.6b	2.0	6.8
Holding Timeª	0.69	<0.0001	0.08	0.0006	0.001	0.15
0 hours	5.1	2.5c	4.9	2.8c	2.2c	6.0
1 hour	5.3	1.4b	4.7	1.8b	1.3b	6.3
3 hours	5.4	2.2bc	6.0	3.0	2.1	7.0

RMSE	0.68	0.51	0.78	0.56	0.51	0.8

^aP-value from Analysis of Variance table.

Table 2. Cont'd

Treatment	Particle size	Initial Juiciness	Cohesiveness of mass	Fat mouth coating	Springiness	Hardness
Meat Sourceª	0.72	<0.0001	0.001	<0.0001	0.23	0.07
Commodity lean, 20% lipid	5.3	2.4c	5.4c	3.5c	1.9	6.3
Mature lean, 5% lipid	5.2	1.6b	5.0b	1.9b	1.8	6.6
Patty Thicknessª	<0.0001	0.0007	0.0003	0.66	<0.0001	0.07
0.25 inches	5.0b	1.9b	5.4c	2.6	1.6b	6.3
1.0 inches	5.5c	2.2c	5.0b	2.5	2.1c	6.5
Final Grind Size or Methodª	<0.0001	0.01	0.01	0.11	0.14	<0.0001
0.25 inches	5.2c	2.2c	5.3c	2.7	1.8	6.1b
0.38 inches	5.5d	2.1bc	5.3c	2.5	1.9	6.6c
Bowl chop	5.0b	1.9b	5.0b	2.5	1.9	6.6c
Cooking Methodª	0.67	<0.0001	0.58	0.0002	0.53	0.31
Grill	5.1	3.0c	5.4	3.5c	1.7	6.1
George Foreman	5.4	1.0b	5.0	1.6b	2.0	6.8
Holding Timeª	0.69	<0.0001	0.08	0.0006	0.001	0.15
0 hours	5.1	2.5c	4.9	2.8c	2.2c	6.0
1 hour	5.3	1.4b	4.7	1.8b	1.3b	6.3
3 hours	5.4	2.2bc	6.0	3.0	2.1	7.0

RMSE	0.68	0.51	0.78	0.56	0.51	0.8

^aP-value from Analysis of Variance table.

References

Adhikari, K. Chambers, IV, E., Miller, R., Vazques‐Araujo, L., Bhumiratana, N. and Philip, C. (2011). Development of a lexicon for beef ﬂavor in intact muscle. J. Sens. Stud. 26:413–20. American Meat Science Association (AMSA) (2016). Research Guideline for Cookery, Sensory Evaluation and Instrumental Tenderness Measurements of Meat. 2nd Ed. AMSA, Champaign, Ill, USA.
Berry BW, Leddy KF. 1990. Comparison of restaurant vs research‐type broiling with beef loin steaks diﬀering in marbling. J Anim Sci 68:666–72. Blackmon, T.L., R.K. Miller, C.R. Kerth, and S.B. Smith. 2015. Ground beef patties prepared from brisket, ﬂank and plate have unique fatty acid and sensory characteristics. Meat Sci 103:46‐53.
Huﬀman, K. L., Miller, M. F., Hoover, L. C., Wu, C. K., Brittin, H. C., & Ramsey, C. B. 1996. Eﬀect of beef tenderness on consumer satisfaction with steaks consumed in the home and restaurant. J Anim Sci 74:91–97
Kerth, C.R. and Miller, R.K. 2015. Beef ﬂavor: A review from chemistry to consumer. J Sci Food and Agri. 95:2783‐98 Sitz, B. M., Calkins, C. R., Feuz, D. M., Umberger, W. J., and Eskridge, K. M. 2005. Consumer sensory acceptance and value of domestic, Canadian, and Australian grass‐fed beef steaks. J Anim Sci 83:2863–2868.