1. Pork Quality National Retail Benchmarking Study
Dr. David Newman
World Pork Expo 2015

2. Objectives -Gather pork quality attributes nationwide
-Provide benchmarking data to producers, processors, and retailers
Provide a baseline for current quality variation
Identify areas of improvement
Benchmark future industry improvement

4. COLOR STANDARDS
Minolta L*-Value

5. MARBLING STANDARDS

6. In Store Data Collection
Full and self-serve cases
Pork Blade Steaks
Pork Center-Cut-Loin Chops (En & Non-En)
Pork Sirloin Chops
Location
117 Retail Supermarkets
15 Club Stores
67 Cities
25 States
32 Markets
51 Store Brands

7. Pork Loin Chop Assessment
Ten packages of each brand assessed in store Ten packages of each brand purchased Color-Marbling-Defects-Package Info-Tenderness-pH-cook loss

8. Results 65 Brands of Pork (L S B)
117 stores carried center-cut-loin chops
5 temp recommendations ranging from ⁰F
Meat Cut
Total Number of Pkg
Percent of Pkg Bone-in
Percent of Packages Enhanced
Percent of Packages Over-wrapped
Percent of Packages MAP
Percent of Packages Vacuumed
Blades
863
95.25
40.44
80.07
0.35
19.58
Sirloins
706
22.10
59.21
88.95
2.41
8.64
Loins
6237
47.49
50.87
91.07
4.95
3.98

9. Figure 1. Frequency distribution of subjective color scores for enhanced and non-enhanced center-cut loin chops.

10. Frequency distribution of Minolta L*

11. Figure 3. Frequency distribution of subjective marbling scores for enhanced and non-enhanced center-cut loin chops.

12. Figure 4. Shear force frequency distribution of enhanced and non-enhanced center-cut loin chops.
24.5

13. Implications
A significant amount of US pork fails to meet standards associated with good eating quality
Any attempt to use quality measures to develop grading or certification standards will depend on benchmarking the mean and SD

14. Discussion
Benchmarking is needed. No consistent dataset to compare against. However:
Subjective color in store over the past 7 years is fairly consistent (NPPC 3.12 – 3.52)
Objective color has decreased (L* – 55.39) over the same time period
L. I. Wright, J. A. Scanga, K. E. Belk, T. E. Engle, J. D. Tatum, R. C. Person, D. R. McKenna, D. B. Griffin, F. K. McKeith, J. W. Savell, G. C. Smith Benchmarking value in the pork supply chain: Characterization of US pork in the retail marketplace. Meat Science, 71:
S. J. Moeller, R. K. Miller, K. K. Edwards, H. N. Zerby, K. E. Logan, T. L. Aldredge, C. A. Stahl, M. Boggess, J. M. Box-Steffensmeir Consumer perceptions of pork eating quality as affected by pork quality attributes and end-point cooked temperature. Meat Science, 84:
L. I. Wright et. al Benchmarking value in the pork supply chain: Characterization of US pork in the retail marketplace.
S. J. Moeller et. al Consumer perceptions of pork eating quality as affected by pork quality attributes and end-point cooked temperature.

15. Discussion
Some research suggests that pork is bought on visual acceptance (R. C. Person et. al; M. S. Brewer et. al) and prior eating satisfaction (M. S. Brewer et. al)
Intercept data
Research also suggests that pork with greater pH and higher marbling equates to a better eating experience (S. J. Moeller et. al)

16. Discussion
Marbling has remained fairly consistent (NPPC 2.37 – 2.52) since 2005.
Goal = consumer acceptance of higher marbled pork ?
Research suggests consumers eating experience is better when pork is higher in marbling (S. J. Moeller et. al)
Education of consumers and meat case managers
L. I. Wright et. al Benchmarking value in the pork supply chain: Characterization of US pork in the retail marketplace.
S. J. Moeller et. al Consumer perceptions of pork eating quality as affected by pork quality attributes and end-point cooked temperature.

17. Comparison to existing data
Taste of Preference Study (Moeller et al., 2010)
Consumer responses favor pork with:
Lower WBS
Greater pH
Higher IMF
Pork cooked to a lower temperature