ABSTRACTA COMPARISON OF BEEF TRACEABILITY MODELS DURING SERIAL AND PARALLEL PROCESSINGByTristan Parker FosterTraceability of beef attributes through supply chains is a market barrier. Automatic identification and data capture technologies offer the feasibility of maintaining animal and product data through carcass fabrication. Individual animal identity of fifty-four (54) beef carcasses were maintained through the supply chain. Carcasses were fabricated into wholesale cuts using a serial processing method (SPM) or a parallel processing method (PPM). The goal of this study was to identify labeling techniques for two different processing methods, SPM and PPM, in tracking wholesale meat cuts back to the original animal in mid-sized processing facilities. The objectives of the study were 1) to determine the cost of additional labor required for traceability; 2) determine both consumable and fixed costs of traceability; 3) test traceability accuracy utilizing DNA matching.The mean number of in-process labels generated per carcass for SPM was 3.7 and for PPM was 30.9 (P < 0.01). The amount of time required for generating in-process labels for SPM (2 min 16 sec) was less than PPM (8 min 45 sec) (P = 0.01). The amount of time required to label each carcass was less (P < 0.01) for SPM (18 sec) than for PPM (3 min 10 sec) which required in-process labels. Total cost of traceability, including fixed and consumable cost per carcass, was nearly twice as much for PPM ($17.98) than SPM ($9.02). Traceability, for both processing methods, was found to have 100% fidelity, as verified using DNA marker genotyping.
Read
