IN BRIEF Getting over the hump U eatingsing hump height as a direct‑quality predictor is afeature of the upgradedkey“With TBC content unknown, the MSAmodel increasingly needed to rely onhump height to estimate it. The model“We asked ourselves: if we run a modelthat only looks at hump height, do wedisadvantage every Angus in Tasmania MSA beef model. was conservative in this calculation but,with no Bos indicus, but heavy muscle thanks to recent research, we no longer and, therefore, some hump? Will they MSA Pathways Committee chair Dr Rod need to rely on it.” be graded less accurately?” he said. Polkinghorne, who has played a critical Data delivers new method role in developing and overseeing “The answer was there could be a very MSA, said hump height was included in In an effort to find a solution, Pathwaysslight risk, so we included the ability the original MSA beef model simply as Committee member and statistician to declare genuine zero TBC on the a ‘check’. Ray Watson analysed data to examine MSA declaration, to ensure no one was the relationship between hump height, worse off.” “When we created the first MSA model, Bos indicus content and eating quality. we thought producers would be able to Rod said the hump height change will enter the tropical breed content (TBC) “Ray found hump height (relative to not ‘widen the goal posts’ for MSA, of their cattle, and we could grade them carcase weight and sex) was at least but add to its precision in predicting based on that information,” Rod said. as good as TBC in determining the eating experiences. eating‑quality adjustment,” Rod said. “Every cut is still graded individually, “We built a check into the model – hump height relative to carcase weight – but “This meant we could simplify the so even though all hump height it wasn’t part of the calculation. It wassystem and use hump height as a direct measurements are eligible for MSA, the just there to catch something way out predictor of eating quality.” individual carcase cuts will still face the of range if the producer had made same consumer grading standards as No breed worse off previously,” he said. ■ a mistake. In accepting hump height as the “What we’ve found is that, on many preferred eating‑quality prediction mla.com.au/msa large properties in the north, extensive input, Rod said it then became crossbreeding results in Bos indicus incumbent on the committee to content varying widely; for a single mob ensure non‑tropical breeds weren’t of steers it may vary considerably. disadvantaged. 7