Click on each of the 10 different beef practices below to do practice evaluations.
Make estimates for the following:
- Dressing Percent
- Hot Carcass Weight
- Back Fat
- Ribeye Area
- KPH
- Yield Grade
- Maturity
- Marbling Score
- Quality Grade
Answers:
- Dressing Percent - 59.7
- Hot Carcass Weight - 958
- Back Fat - .50
- Ribeye Area - 13
- KPH - 2
- Yield Grade - 3.9
- Maturity - A70
- Marbling Score - MdAb10
- Quality Grade - Prime Average
Comments: This was a very large Holstein heifer that was three years of age. She was well finished which, combined with her age, aided in her high marbling score. She certainly wasn't a typical Holstein.
Make Estimates for the following:
- Dressing Percent
- Hot Carcass Weight
- Back Fat
- Ribeye Area
- KPH
- Yield Grade
- Maturity
- Marbling Score
- Quality Score
Answers:
- Dressing Percent - 61.5
- Hot Carcass Weight - 757
- Back Fat - .70
- Ribeye Area - 11.7
- KPH - 2
- Yield Grade - 3.9
- Maturity - C10/B80/C0
- Marbling Score - Sm10
- Quality Score - Commercial
Comments: This heifer appeared to be younger than she really was. We called her bone a C10, her lean a B80, with a final maturity call of C0 which puts her at Low Commercial.
Make an estimate for the following:
- Dressing Percent
- Hot Carcass Weight
- Back Fat
- Ribeye Area
- KPH
- Yield Grade
- Maturity
- Marbling Score
- Quality Grade
Answers:
- Dressing Percent - 59
- Hot Carcass Weight - 680
- Back Fat - .20
- Ribeye Area - 12.7
- KPH - 1.5
- Yield Grade - 1.9
- Maturity - A50
- Marbling Score - Small40
- Quality Grade - Choice
Comments: This steer graded extremely well for looking as though he needed more days on feed. He also had more muscle than you would assume he had after analyzing him from the rear view.
Make an estimate for the following:
- Dressing Percent
- Hot Carcass Weight
- Back Fat
- Ribeye Area
- KPH
- Yield Grade
- Maturity
- Marbling Score
- Quality Grade
Answers:
- Dressing Percent - 62
- Hot Carcass Weight - 850
- Back Fat - .35
- Ribeye Area - 14.7
- KPH - 1.5
- Yield Grade - 2.3
- Maturity - A40
- Marbling Score - Slight80
- Quality Grade - Select
Comments: This was a stout steer that was very trim and probably could have used some more days on feed.
Make an estimate of the following:
- Dressing Percent
- Hot Carcass Weight
- Back Fat
- Ribeye Area
- KPH
- Yield Grade
- Maturity
- Marbling Score
- Quality Grade
Answers:
- Dressing Percent - 61
- Hot Carcass Weight - 828
- Back Fat - .90
- Ribeye Area - 10.8
- KPH - 2.5
- Yield Grade - 5.2
- Maturity - A80
- Marbling Score - Moderate30
- Quality Grade - Choice
Comments: This was an old heifer that was with calf which would explain her lower dressing percent. As you can tel by her live pictures, she is extremely over-conditioned.
Make an estimate for the following:
- Dressing Percent
- Hot Carcass Weight
- Back Fat
- Ribeye Area
- KPH
- Yield Grade
- Maturity
- Marbling Score
- Quality Grade
Answers:
- Dressing Percent - 59.3
- Hot Carcass Weight - 620
- Back Fat - .45
- Ribeye Area - 10.1
- KPH - 2.5
- Yield Grade - 3.3
- Maturity - A60
- Marbling Score - Moderately Abundant20
- Quality Grade - Prime Average
Comments: This steer graded extremely well.
Make an estimate for the following:
- Dressing Percent
- Hot Carcass Weight
- Back Fat
- Ribeye Area
- KPH
- Yield Grade
- Maturity
- Marbling Score
- Quality Grade
Answers:
- Dressing Percent - 58.1
- Hot Carcass Weight - 703
- Back Fat - 22
- Ribeye Area - 9.5
- KPH - 2
- Yield Grade - 3.1
- Maturity - A50
- Marbling Score - Modest20
- Quality Grade - Choice Average
Comments: This Holstein steer was very trim and was not very muscular. He did still have a good quality grade.
Make an estimate for the following:
- Dressing Percent
- Hot Carcass Weight
- Back Fat
- Ribeye Area
- KPH
- Yield Grade
- Maturity
- Marbling Score
- Quality Grade
Answers:
- Dressing Percent - 61.8
- Hot Carcass Weight - 745
- Back Fat - 40
- Ribeye Area - 13.1
- KPH - 1.5
- Yield Grade - 2.5
- Maturity - A50
- Marbling Score - Slight60
- Quality Grade - Select
Comments: This steer was very trim looking and appeared to need more days on feed to meet the Choice Grade.
Make an estimate for the following:
- Dressing Percent
- Hot Carcass Weight
- Back Fat
- Ribeye Area
- KPH
- Yield Grade
- Maturity
- Marbling Score
- Quality Grade
Answers:
- Dressing Percent - 58.2
- Hot Carcass Weight - 760
- Back Fat - .43
- Ribeye Area - 12.9
- KPH - 2
- Yield Grade - 2.9
- Maturity - B60/A80/B10
- Marbling Score - Small20
- Quality Grade - Standard
Comments: This was an interesting heifer. She was with calf which explains her low dressing percentage. She also had less back fat and was older than she appeared. Under the grading rules (1997), she would be considered Standard because she had a B maturity
Make an estimate for the following:
- Dressing Percent
- Hot Carcass Weight
- Back Fat
- Ribeye Area
- KPH
- Yield Grade
- Maturity
- Marbling Score
- Quality Grade
Answers:
- Dressing Percent - 57.4
- Hot Carcass Weight - 804
- Back Fat - .50
- Ribeye Area - 12.5
- KPH - 2.5
- Yield Grade - 3.5
- Maturity - A70
- Marbling Score - Small40
- Quality Grade - Choice
Comments: This heifer was obviously with calf as evidenced by her udder and midsection, which explains her abnormally low dressing percentage.