Maximum force (Kg) Figure 1: Average shear force results for beef sirloin steaks and roasting joints, 2011, 2015 and 2016.

Transcription

1 Abattoir and Meat Processor Bulletin Compiled by the AHDB Beef & Lamb Supply Chain Development Team Autumn 2016 Welcome to the autumn issue of the AHDB Beef & Lamb bulletin produced specifically for those working in the abattoir and meat processing sectors. The AHDB Beef & Lamb Supply Chain Development Team supports businesses throughout the beef and lamb supply chains helping to raise product quality and consumer satisfaction, while focusing on cost reduction, managing waste and improving carcase utilisation. This edition contains the results of the 2016 AHDB Beef & Lamb retail survey, a snapshot of what antimicrobial resistance may mean for the livestock sector, a review of meat quality from animals with varied growth patterns and updates on the Collection and Communication of Inspection Results system and Product Environmental Footprint projects. Dr Phil Hadley Head of Global Supply Chain Development, AHDB Beef & Lamb Meat Quality Masterclass In October, AHDB Beef & Lamb ran its fifth Meat Quality Masterclass, drawing in professionals from a variety of companies across the supply chain. The two day course, titled Meat Quality getting to grips with the complexities of the beef and lamb supply chain has been successfully running since 2015 and has a growing interest within the industry. The course aims to give an in-depth look into carcase and meat quality, issues that can occur and how to overcome them. It is aimed to be interactive, allowing delegates to carry out tests for measuring meat quality as well as discussion groups throughout. A delegate from the October course said, I found the Masterclass very informative, covering a broad range of topics in a simple yet comprehensive way, and another added, Whether you have been in the industry for four weeks or 40 years, you will leave having learnt from the experience, giving the course a 5-star review. The next course is due to be run in March For more information, Retail survey shows beef is more consistent In 2011, AHDB Beef & Lamb carried out a survey of the quality of beef available to consumers, following concerns raised by the Board that there was an undesirable variation in the toughness of English beef. Samples of two popular cuts of beef (sirloin steak and topside roasting joint) were collected from the six major retailers at the time. Tenderness was measured objectively using Warner-Bratzler shear force which assesses the amount of force needed to shear a piece of meat. This was repeated in 2015 and expanded to include the prominent discount retailers. The 2015 survey showed that the tenderness of British / English sirloin steaks and roasting joints available in England had significantly increased since The survey has been redone this year in order to identify if the trend in tenderness is ongoing. A total of 80 sirloin steaks and 40 beef roasting joints were collected over a five week period. The results show that since 2011 both English / British beef sirloin steaks and roasting joints continue to increase in tenderness, which can be seen in Figure 1. Maximum force (Kg) Roasting Joints Sirloin Steaks Figure 1: Average shear force results for beef sirloin steaks and roasting joints, 2011, 2015 and The most tender steak from the 2016 survey had a shear force measurement of 1.5kg, whereas in 2011 and 2015, the most tender samples were at 2.5kg and 1.9kg, respectively. The most noticeable difference is the reduction in variability found within steaks. The toughest steak from this year s survey measured at 5.0kg giving a difference of 3.5kg between the most tender and most tough; in 2011, this was at 7.5kg. In addition to beef, the 2016 survey has also looked at the tenderness of lamb chops / loin and leg joints (specifically the topside muscle). As anticipated, lamb loin was more tender than the leg samples, as seen in Table 1. The survey highlighted that there is also some variation in the tenderness of English / British lamb as shown through the minimum and maximum results in Table 1. When comparing this variation to beef, however, it was relatively low. Table 1: The average, minimum and maximum shear force measurements from lamb loin and lamb leg samples Maximum force (kg) Lamb loin Lamb leg Overall average Overall minimum (most tender) Overall maximum (most tough) Overall, the retail survey has shown positive results, with a reduction in the variation of beef tenderness. The survey is likely to be repeated again next year to monitor the trend of beef and lamb tenderness.

2 Overview of post mortem data in 2012 vs 2015 What does antimicrobial resistance mean to the livestock sector? Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has been hitting the headlines over the last few months. For those who aren t familiar with the term, AMR refers to bacteria and organisms in the environment which develop resistance to our current armoury of antibiotics used to fight infections in humans and animals. AMR is recognised as a major social issue and the Government has taken a multilevel approach to its response. It is looking at actions across health, environment and agriculture to address the key issue, which is the impact of resistance to antibiotics in the treatment of disease in humans. Looking ahead, AMR has the potential to impact on red meat supply chains in a variety of ways. There is still much we need to understand about the development of resistance in bacteria, the wider environment and the varied factors which are likely to influence the situation. However, given the potential reputational challenge to the livestock sector, it is critical to ensure everything possible is being done to increase awareness and understanding by all those involved. By improving its knowledge, the UK livestock industry will be better placed to protect its excellent reputation and maintain public confidence in our products and systems of production. In 2014, Lord O Neill was commissioned by the Prime Minister to head a review for Government into antimicrobial resistance. The O Neill report was published May 2016, setting out 10 key actions, including a significant steer for reducing antibiotic use in agriculture. Specifically, the report suggested adoption of country-level reduction targets for antibiotic use in livestock, suggesting an initial usage target of 50mg/kg (milligrams of antibiotic used annually for every kilogram of animal in the treated population). This would represent a reduction for the UK, where the most recent usage is thought to be 62mg/kg, although the government is confident this target will be reached by There are three basic steps for each of the sectors to consider: 1. Establish how best to measure antibiotic use at farm level with minimum impact on the sector concerned 2. Set realistic reduction targets for each sector, which demonstrate a commitment to encourage responsible use of medicines, without impacting on animal welfare or performance 3. Engage with producers and supply chains, to provide information and work towards a culture of best practice where medicine interventions are avoided where possible and they are used responsibly when they do become necessary. The Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) is the Government agency charged with reporting on the UK performance across all livestock sectors. AHDB has been working with them at different levels to ensure its sectors are fairly represented in any resulting activity. For instance, AHDB Pork has worked with the VMD to develop an online electronic medicine book (emb Pork) which is aimed at capturing on-farm use of antibiotics in pig systems in order to build a national picture of use in the industry. More information can be found on pighub.org.uk In the cattle sector, the Cattle Health and Welfare Group (CHAWG) carried out a review of antibiotic use in the beef and dairy sectors. The resulting report highlighted the lack of available data sources with information on antibiotic use in the cattle sectors. It outlined the need for a mechanism to capture more accurate information with minimal disruption, which could be used to monitor the ongoing performance of the sector and identify areas where there is potential to reduce antibiotic use over time without affecting animal performance or welfare. AHDB is now working with CHAWG and the VMD to explore the potential options. The next step is to raise awareness in each sector of the fact that we have a challenge facing us and that it will take a collective effort across human and animal health disciplines to ensure we protect the use of antibiotics for generations in the future. In the context of the livestock industry, it is beholden on us all to raise the issue. Working with all elements of our supply chain to ensure responsible and appropriate use of medicines and, where possible, by building up the picture of use on the ground, we can identify those areas where we can have most impact through improved practices.

3 Lifetime growth pattern in beef cattle Improving growth rate and reducing the time taken to get beef cattle ready for slaughter is an important component of profitability. It is also one of the means by which producers can reduce their greenhouse gas emissions per kg of beef produced. Nevertheless, a considerable proportion of prime cattle are slaughtered over 30 months of age and there is concern that these animals produce tougher meat. The Quality Standard Mark standards include restrictions on animal age at slaughter. A project has been undertaken by AHDB Beef & Lamb to establish the validity of the age threshold of 30 months for quality beef specifications. The project finished steers and heifers at a wide range of ages between 12 and 36 months, according to alternative lifetime growth patterns, which included a period of growth check for the older animals, using typical production systems used on farm in England. The growth patterns were determined as: Short duration growth path animals finished indoors on an intensive concentrate-based finishing system, slaughtered at months of age Medium duration growth path animals turned out to graze a high quality grass from months and finished during the subsequent winter on a mixed forage and concentrate finishing diet, slaughtered at months of age Long duration growth path animals grazed for two summer periods on poor quality, unimproved grassland and fed a forage based diet in the intervening winter. These cattle were finished on a mixed forage and concentrate diet during the second winter period and slaughtered at months. The sensory panel results suggest that the animals on the short finishing treatment were significantly less tough than the animals from the other treatments. However, there was also slightly lower beef flavour and higher abnormal flavour values. From this project, it could be concluded that finishing commercial beef efficiently, using short to medium duration (12-20 months) finishing systems, can deliver higher quality beef. The outcomes of this project will inform the future development of specifications for meat quality, including within AHDB Beef & Lamb s Quality Standard Mark scheme, and will be incorporated into advice for producers on finishing beef cattle. Table 2: The results for the gristle parameters, shear force and sensory panel results for the three different groups. Growth path Long Medium Short Gristle weight (g) Gristle (% of joint) Gristle (% of loin) Shear force toughness (kg) Sensory panel results Toughness Juiciness Beef flavour Abnormal flavour Data was gathered on the overall productive output and carcase quality and meat eating quality assessments were carried out. The gristle from the loin (between the Longissimus dorsi and the Spinalis dorsi muscles Figure 2) was also removed for measurements. The results showed that the animals produced through the long duration growth path had increased gristle as a proportion of the loin joint weight. As well as this, slice shear force results have shown that these animals also produced tougher muscle (shown by higher shear force) as can be seen in Table 2. Figure 2: Gristle removed from loin samples between Longissimus dorsi and Spinalis dorsi. Send clean stock to slaughter As winter approaches, the need to send clean stock to slaughter becomes increasingly relevant. We acknowledge this can be a challenge when animals are housed and fields and yards are muddy. Dirty stock not only poses a risk to consumers of contracting food borne illnesses, but can also impact on the financial return to producers. To help inform producers, AHDB Beef & Lamb has produced two short videos that outline this in more detail available on AHDB Beef & Lamb s YouTube channel as The importance of sending clean sheep to slaughter and The importance of sending clean cattle to slaughter.

4 An update on the improved CCIR system Following the launch in May of the revised post-mortem conditions for sheep and cattle, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) carried out a consultation on their meat inspectors conditions cards. The harmonised cards give a description of the conditions and their lesions to ensure FSA staff interpret them in a consistent way, which ultimately will improve accurate recording. The consultation is now closed and FSA is reflecting on the comments received. In parallel with this work, AHDB has been working on developing a sheep and cattle abattoir disease guide, targeted at producers. The guide aims to give an overview of the conditions recorded at post mortem together with interventions available to producers, ultimately helping producers to use post-mortem data to improve their returns. The guide, which has been developed with input from Sheep Health and Welfare Group (SHAWG) and Cattle Health and Welfare Group (CHAWG), is expected to be finalised by December To ensure that conditions are recorded against the correct animal, the FSA is investigating how traceability could be improved. It is also in discussion with abattoirs to identify an IT solution to avoid activity being duplicated by the FSA manually entering post-mortem data. During a FSA stakeholder meeting in November 2016, it was discussed that CCIR information should be fed back to the producers via the processors, while the FSA retains overall responsibility. In line with this, AHDB is pursuing the objective of using a standardised CCIR report template, which will enable producers to use post-mortem data to identify trends and compare their data with that of their peers, as well as monitoring the information flow. An example of this template for cattle can be seen below, with sheep having a similar template. Summary Communication of cattle post mortem inspection results Date: xx/xx/16 Total submitted: xxx cattle Farm: ABC Farm xxxx Abattoir: ABCD Conditions This batch Farm average (last 12 months) National Average (last 12 months) Conditions This batch Farm average (last 12 months) National Average (last 12 months) Pneumonia Joint lesions Pleurisy Bruising Lungworm Other Liver abscesses Generalised Oedema / Fluke immature emaciation Fluke mature Generalised TB (suspect) Hepatic scarring Pyaemia / Multiple abscesses (suspect) Cysticercus Bovis Septicaemia / fever (suspect) Hydatid Cysts Jaundice Traumatic Pericarditis Abnormal odour suspect uraemia Abscesses neck Navel ill / joint ill Abscesses forequarters Immaturity / Less than 7 days old Abscesses hindquarters Hydatidosis % Affected Liver Fluke (all) This batch Last batch National average % Affected Pneumonia This batch Last batch National average AHDB provides useful material on conditions and controls measure which are available at beefandlamb.ahdb.org.uk, or brp@ahdb.org.uk to request free hard copies. Alternatively please contact your vet.

5 Product Environmental Footprint Red Meat update Since 2015, AHDB has been part of the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) red meat project, coordinated by the European Livestock and Meat Trading Union (UECBV). This project goes beyond the already complex issues involved with measuring the carbon footprint of each industry sector, by looking at the many other ways that the activities involved with farming and food processing affect the wider environment. To date, environmental consultants Blonk have produced an overview of PEF issues in each meat sector. For the purposes of the study, the lifecycle boundaries for the products under consideration were based around the core process (slaughter, cutting, packing and storage of meat), upstream (farm processes that provide product to the core) and downstream (the retailing of the product). This analysis identified and measured 15 critical environmental footprint impact categories for fresh beef, pork and lamb and has been written up in a draft report, Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR). The analysis has so far shown that for most of the impact categories, it is the upstream sectors that account for the majority of the impacts being measured. Additional supporting studies have also been carried out in association with a processor in the beef, sheep and pig sectors. A major issue identified from these concerned the amount of (or lack of) data that was required to calculate metrics on each impact category, particularly in the sheep and beef sectors and, to a lesser extent, the pig sector. The project has tried to establish metric benchmarks that can be quoted in relation to a functional unit. In the meat sector, this unit is equal to 100g of fresh meat, defined as fresh meat and edible offal as sold at retail for consumption at home, including inedible animal parts (such as bone) presented to the consumer in retail packaging. There has been an ongoing debate about the nature of the functional unit, with the EU arguing that it should be based on a definition of actual meat consumed, rather than meat moving into consumption, with which to date the industry did not agree, particularly with regard to any B2B measure. In addition, the problem of how to allocate impacts was also controversial. The three proposed solutions of them either being based on an economic allocation (i.e. based for the core process on the value of the carcase), as opposed to a mass allocation (i.e. based on the relative weights of parts) or the even more complex bio-physical allocation (i.e. based on the energy requirements to produce each part), each have issues on which there is currently no general agreement. The project is currently in the communication phase, for which a Danish based market research company InVirke, has been commissioned to undertake concise B2C and B2B surveys, with the principal objective of evaluating if: 1. PEF measures would be a useful addition to the information available to businesses and consumers in the meat sector 2. The PEF factors identified would be understandable to consumers and businesses 3. A simple label could be devised to convey the PEF facts about a fresh meat product. InVirke will contact 400 consumers in each of Denmark, the Republic of Ireland and the UK, as well as undertaking short telephone interviews with 15 large retail and food service companies throughout the EU.

6 For these surveys, three trial PEF labels have been designed, which are similar in style to the nutritional labels that are available, but which carry PEF impact category information. The EU has requested that for meat, the impact categories be limited to three, which are metrics that measure: 1. Climate change the result of greenhouse gas emissions 2. Acidification the result of a buildup of acid in soil and water 3. Soil eutrophication the result of the addition of excess nutrients to the soil. Following the completion of these communication surveys, the overall study will be subject to independent verification by environmental specialists, yet to be appointed. It is hoped that results from the surveys will be officially submitted to the EU during 2017, together with the results of the work in the other food sectors. Given recent events, the relevance of this work for the UK industry is open to question. It is clearly a topic that the EU wishes to develop and, given the importance being increasingly attached to environmental issues, it is possible that some form of PEF statement will eventually be required on product being traded within the EU and if this is the case, most likely on product being exported to it. For further information about the PEF project, please contact Martin Palmer martin.palmer@ahdb.org.uk Harper Adams University: serving the UK s red meat industry Harper Adams is one of the UK s leading agriculture and food universities and is intimately involved with the meat industry from farm to fork. Education is an essential component of business growth and profitability today, whether operating solely within the UK or engaging with export markets on the world stage. Whether staff are time-served and experienced or new, their ability to contribute to the achievement of business objectives will depend on their capacity to analyse issues, assemble facts, think critically, and use reason and good judgement. The best way to develop such skills is through education, which is why Harper Adams University has developed its postgraduate programme in Meat Business Management. The university created the programme because meat businesses said they needed help to educate and retain good staff. In response to their request, Harper Adams developed a part-time, postgraduate certificate (PgC) course in Meat Business Management, which is accessible to experienced staff and newly employed graduates. The course consists of four modules covering Meat Science, Operations Management, Supply Chain Management and People Management. The first cohort passed through the university in 2012/13 and since then almost 70 employees from the industry have undertaken the course. Satisfyingly, it has proven to be very successful in developing the thinking and problem solving skills of meat business employees, as well as increasing confidence in their academic abilities. Discussions are now underway about making the course a standard part of meat company graduate development programmes. For those who wish to progress, the university has developed the Meat Business Management programme to provide a pathway from PgC to MSc, passing through the postgraduate diploma (PgD) stage. In September 2016, the first two students graduated MSc in Meat Business Management and, in this instance, both were grateful recipients of scholarships for their PgD and dissertation stages from the Worshipful Company of Butchers, with which Harper Adams enjoys a close relationship. The university is also privileged to receive scholarship funding from the Butchers and Drovers Charitable Institution, to support selected students accessing the PgC Meat Business Management course. AHDB Beef & Lamb are also active supporters of this course and provide technical information to support training. For information about the postgraduate Meat Business Management programme, please contact Zoey Sermon (Professional Short Course Administrator) zsermon@harper-adams.ac.uk,