Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Market Hog Evaluation. History 1910’s History 1910’s.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Market Hog Evaluation. History 1910’s History 1910’s."— Presentation transcript:

1 Market Hog Evaluation

2 History 1910’s

3 History 1910’s

4 History 1920’s Bacon Type: Lighter & Leaner 1924 Champion Chester White Barrow 1924 Champion Pen Three Yorkshrires

5 History 1940’s

6 History 1950’s

7 History ’s

8

9 History ’s

10 History ’s

11 History 1990’s

12 History 1998 Late 1990’s

13 History 2000’s

14 History 2000’s

15 History 2000’s.4 BF 8.9 LEA, 62.61% Lean

16 History 2000’s

17 History 2000’s

18 History 2003

19 History 1990’s

20

21 History 1960’s 35 years of change

22 Future Trend to Heavier constructed Bigger boned & Heavier muscled hogs Complete With Muscle

23 Average Market Hog Weight280 lbs Back fat1.1” LEA5.5 Muscle 2 USDA Grade# NPPC lean growth modeling Project: 1550 head of hogs

24 Ideal Market Hog Weight275 lbs Back fat.8” LEA6.0 + Muscle 2+ USDA Grade#1

25 Ideal Market Hog Packers response: lbs - White Hogs prefered - Hogs that can walk - Minimum fat depth of.6” - Swift/Hormel.8” export market higher - Loin eye 7” - Minimum 54% lean - Stress Free

26 Ideal Market Hog Quality (Packer response 1) Water holding capacity 2) Color 3) Tenderness 4) IMF (intramuscular fat)

27 Ideal Market Hog Quality (Packer response 1) Water holding capacity - Greatest economic loss to the industry - Dries excessively during cooking

28 Ideal Market Hog Quality (Packer response 2) Color - Important to consumers and japenesse market - Cannot be measured on kill floor ~ fab floor - Id becomes a problem

29 Quality Color Standards Unacceptable

30 Ideal Market Hog Quality (Packer response 3) Tenderness - Many packers enhance product up to 30% to insure tenderness and juiciness

31 Ideal Market Hog Quality (Packer response 4) IMF (intramuscular fat) - Provides juiciness and flavor - Not as much of an issue with (enhanced pork) - Evaluated on a scale of 1-10

32 Marbling Scores Unacceptable

33 RFN Ham Red, Firm, and Normal (RFN)

34 PSE Pale, Soft, and Exudative (PSE)

35 DFD Ham Dark, Firm, and Dry (DFD)

36 Market Hog Evaluation Two methods to quantify Lean to fat 1) USDA Grade - Oldest used only to classify markets by some reporters 2) Percent Lean

37 Market Hog Evaluation USDA Yield Grade –Last rib back fat –Muscle score (1, 2, 3) (4 x last rib fat) – muscle score

38 Market Hog Evaluation Percent Lean 1) Weight - 2) Fat measurement 10 th rib Best indicator of total fat – Why? 3) Loin eye measurement - 10 th rib - best indicator of total muscle Base Hog is 250 lbs,.80 BF, 5.0 LEA

39 Visual Indicators of Muscle/Lean

40

41

42

43

44

45

46 Practice Comparisons 235 lbs

47 Practice Comparisons 285 lbs

48 Practice Comparisons 235 lbs285 lbs DP.74 Last rib BF.3 Muscle score2+ USDA Grade #1 10 th rib BF.40 LEA7.2 % Lean 58.5 DP.73 Last rib BF1.9 Muscle score2- USDA Grade # th rib BF 1.8 LEA3.8 % Lean 37.6

49 Practice Comparisons 245 lbs

50 Practice Comparisons 245 lbs DP.72 HCW 180 Last rib BF 1.25 Muscle score2- USDA Grade #3 10 th Rib BF1.20 LEA4.2 % Lean 43.7

51 Practice Comparisons 270 lbs

52 Practice Comparisons 270 lbs DP.70 HCW 195 Last rib BF 1.00 Muscle score2 USDA Grade #3 10 th Rib BF.95 LEA7.1 % Lean 50.6

53 Practice Comparisons 245 lbs

54 Practice Comparisons 245 lbs DP.74 HCW 181 Last rib BF.45 Muscle score2+ USDA Grade #0 10 th Rib BF.45 LEA7.4 % Lean 58.0

55 # 4 Wt. 287

56 Percent Muscle Wt.287 DP,% 74 HCW th rib.45 LEA9.2 % Lean58.9 USDA Grade Last rib.9 Muscle Score 3 USDA Grade.6

57 Market Hog Pricing Hogs purchased on a Percent Lean Basis –Most accurate method to calculate value If procedure is done correctly 1) Fat - O – Meater - Uses backfat and loin depth - John Morrell 2) Ultrasound - Most accurate method to asses lean - Uses actual image of LEA, and 10 th rib fat - Thorn Apple Valley, Some IBP

58 IOWA/MINNESOTA DAILY DIRECT NEGOTIATED HOG PURCHASES MATRIX 185 lb Carcass Basis (Defined by Muscle and Fat) LOIN AREA/DEPTH (INCHES) BACK-FAT Back fat 4.0/ / / /2.38.0/ *Base Market Hog 185 lb Carcass Basis, Plant Delivered ( inch back-fat, 6 square inch loin/2.0 depth) Base Price Range $ $54.05, weighted average 51.64

59 IOWA/MINNESOTA DAILY DIRECT NEGOTIATED HOG PURCHASES MATRIX 185 lb Carcass Basis (Defined by Muscle and Fat) LOIN AREA/DEPTH (INCHES) BACK-FAT Back fat 4.0/ / / /2.38.0/ *Base Market Hog 185 lb Carcass Basis, Plant Delivered ( inch back-fat, 6 square inch loin/2.0 depth) Base Price Range $ $54.05, weighted average 51.64

60 IOWA/MINNESOTA DAILY DIRECT NEGOTIATED HOG PURCHASES MATRIX 185 lb Carcass Basis (Defined by Muscle and Fat) LOIN AREA/DEPTH (INCHES) BACK-FAT Back fat 4.0/ / / /2.38.0/ *Base Market Hog 185 lb Carcass Basis, Plant Delivered ( inch back-fat, 6 square inch loin/2.0 depth) Base Price Range $ $54.05, weighted average 51.64

61 IOWA/MINNESOTA DAILY DIRECT NEGOTIATED HOG PURCHASES MATRIX 185 lb Carcass Basis (Defined by Muscle and Fat) LOIN AREA/DEPTH (INCHES) BACK-FAT Back fat 4.0/ / / /2.38.0/ *Base Market Hog 185 lb Carcass Basis, Plant Delivered ( inch back-fat, 6 square inch loin/2.0 depth) Base Price Range $ $54.05, weighted average 51.64/cwt HCW or 37.18/cwt live Difference 10.8 Live Basis


Download ppt "Market Hog Evaluation. History 1910’s History 1910’s."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google