Oct.
9, 2009
FOR
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
For more information contact:
Miranda Reiman,
Industry Information Specialist, at 308-784-2294 or mreiman@certifiedangusbeef.com
Keys
May Unlock Cellular Doors to Marbling Mysteries
Knowing
more about marbling helps cattlemen produce the best beef. All four National
Beef Quality Audits (NBQA) said consumers want more of it, yet many producers
manage so as to inhibit rather than enhance marbling.
Scientists
offered new insights at the Reciprocal Meats Conference this summer.
“Three
major things affect the beef eating experience: flavor, juiciness and
tenderness,” Brad Johnson, of Texas Tech University said. “In some direct or
indirect way, marbling affects all three of those.”
Johnson,
the university’s Gordon W. Davis Regent’s Chair in Meat and Muscle Biology,
said marbling is a key to feedlot profits, too. Although the USDA Choice
premium over Select fell off in the last year, he said beef industry
sustainability hinges on its ability to produce more marbling with fewer inputs
and lower carcass weights.
Matt
Doumit, meat scientist at the University of Idaho, and Jean-Francois Hocquette,
director of the National Institute of Agronomic Research at the Herbivore
Research Institute in France, also shared research.
Doumit
referenced the 2005 NBQA in noting too little marbling and too much back fat
costs the beef industry more than $1.3 billion a year in lost profit.
Getting
down to the test-tube level, Johnson and his team isolated bovine muscle cells
and then used different steroids, fatty acids and other compounds to manipulate
the individual cells. In the beginning these cells are all the same, he said,
but then they differentiate into muscle or adipocytes — fat cells.
“The
hallmark of an adipocyte is its ability to fill with lipids — triglycerides —
as a storage mechanism,” Johnson explained. “We’ve seen that some of these
compounds may be having profound effects, from a gene expression standpoint, at
pushing cells to become adipocytes.”
That’s
not an easy task, he added: “Working with muscle cells, I truly believe we have
to go out of our way to make them become something else. A muscle cell wants to
be a muscle cell.”
The use
of growth implants directs a cell to become muscle and therefore decreases
marbling, Johnson said. On the other hand, feeding melengestrol acetate (MGA)
actually improved marbling, but also increased back fat.
Three
compounds assist in marbling activation and alter the key genes when cells are being
allocated as either muscle or fat.
“We were
able to get multi-nucleated cells,” Johnson said, “which makes you believe they
still have muscle characteristics, but also some mono-nucleated cells that
could fill with lipids.”
Doumit’s
team is looking at ways to increase both number and size of fat cells, to
affect marbling independent of back fat.
“There’s
some evidence that fat cells are not just fat cells and preadipocytes are not
just preadipocytes,” Doumit said. “They respond to things in a different
manner.”
Ibuprofen
is just one example of a compound that has been shown to increase intramuscular
fat formation.
“It’s
probably not ibuprofen we’re looking for, but it points to the opportunity to
preferentially affect fat depots,” he said. “It’s possible we can find other
naturally-occurring compounds that will preferentially stimulate intramuscular
fat over subcutaneous fat.”
Hocquette
reminded the audience that genetic potential plays a major role in an animal’s
ability to marble, but nutrition is a key to that potential.
“The
increase in intramuscular fat is higher when animals are in the feedlot
finishing system compared to grass finishing,” he said. “This can be explained
by the higher level of glucose in the feedlot diet, and more secretion of insulin,
which is known to promote adipogenesis.”
That’s
good news for all who hope to increase the good fat while holding the waste fat
at bay.
“If we understand the biological differences better, there will be opportunities to develop effective strategies to manipulate these different fat depots,” Doumit said. “That will improve the efficiency of livestock production as well as increase the quality of the product.”
###