MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388539306 · doi:10.1093/jas/skad281.701

PSXII-16 Evaluation of a Grade Ruler Approach for Yield Grading of Veal Carcasses

2023· article· en· W4388539306 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ó. López-Campos, N. Prieto, M. Marcoux, C. Thibault, Sophie Zawadski, Haley Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrading (engineering)Carcass weightMathematicsLean meatAnimal scienceBody weightBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: yield estimations in carcass grading systems are important for the meat industry to assign value and sort carcasses for different market specifications. Previous studies in different species have reported yield estimations performed using anatomical linear measurements that segregate carcasses into grades or classes. However, veal carcasses are not currently segregated in terms of carcass yield performance and the Canadian veal industry is now discussing the option of implementing yield assessments for veal carcass grading purposes. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility of a grade ruler approach to predict yield performance of veal carcasses for grading purposes. A total of ~300 (males and females) veal carcass sides representative of the current Canadian veal population (body weight: 127.5 to 189.2 kg; backfat: 0.5 to 20.7 mm) were use in the present study. Carcass sides were scanned using a Lunar iDXA unit to evaluate the content of total fat, lean and bone. Results and discussion: total carcass lean was mainly correlated with the hot carcass weight (r = 0.65), ¼ backfat thickness (r = -0.33) and rib eye area (REA: r = 0.58) at the 11th – 12th rib-eye location (P < 0.05). Because the time to grade veal carcasses at the grading stand is limited and the efficiency of the grading tools (e.g., ruler) has to be maximized, the ¼ backfat thickness and the width and length of the ribeye were the main factors considered to develop a prediction equation. These continues variables (backfat thickness and REA) were then categorized assigning fat classes (1-10) in 2 mm increments and 4 muscle scores (small-large). The new equation developed for the estimation of lean yield incorporating the anatomical traits of muscle score and fat class showed a R2 of 0.62 and a root mean square error of 2.14 %. Based on this equation, a matrix of estimated lean meat yield percentage using the fat class and muscle score descriptors (Table 1) was developed for the implementation in a yield ruler. The results of the present study suggest that lean yield percentage from veal carcasses might be objectively and accurately predicted applying a yield ruler approach. This tool will facilitate the veal yield grading by just determining the fat class (at ¼ backfat thickness) and muscle score at the 11th – 12th rib location.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.277
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.090 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207