## 3 Results  
Estimated marbling scores and results from the assessment of main carcass traits are given in Table 1. In total, yield grade traits and marbling scores of 170 carcasses were assessed. The marbling scores ranged from 228 to 803 at the US position and from 200.2 to 942 at the 10 th/11 th rib position. Average marbling scores at the 12 th/13 th rib position (392) were comparable to those at the 10 th/11 th rib position (385). The differences between the marbling scores at both positions ranged between \(-\)139 and \(-\)118 marbling points. 107 of the carcasses had higher marbling scores at the 12 th/13 th rib eye section. Only four carcasses were categorized in the different trade classes Prime, Choice or Select, at the two different positions. All in all, the calculated yield grades showed similar results at both positions. Subcutaneous fat was slightly higher at the 10 th/11 th rib position than at the12 th/13 th rib position. Pearson correlation coefficients of all carcass traits are shown in Table 2. Close and significant relations were calculated between marbling scores at the 10 th/11 th and the 12 th/13 th rib position of _longissimus thoracis_ (r = 0.82 ** and R = 0.64). The correlation of marbling scores at both positions is highly significant. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Marbling** & **Marbling** & **YG** & **YG** & **Subcutaneous Fat** & **Subcutaneous Fat** & **12 th/13 th** \\  & **10 th/11 th rib** & **12 th/13 th rib** & **10 th/11 th rib** & **12 th/13 th rib** & **10 th/11 th rib (cm)** & **rib Position (cm)** \\ \hline Mean & 385 & 392 & 2.0 & 2.0 & 1.12 & 0.98 \\ \hline Min & 200 & 228 & 1 & 1 & 0.27 & 0.27 \\ \hline Max & 943 & 803 & 3.8 & 3.9 & 2.57 & 1.92 \\ \hline SD & 76.6 & 76.8 & **0.7** & **0.4** & **0.52** & 0.41 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Assessed marbling scores and measured carcass traits. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Marbling** & **Marbling** & **Age** & **YG** & **YG** & **Rib Fat** & **Rib Fat** & **Weight** & **EUROP** & **EUROP** \\  & **10./11.** & **12./13.** & **Age** & **10./11.** & **12./13.** & **10./11.** & **12./13.** & **Weight** & **Trade** & **Fat** \\ \hline Marbling 10./11. & 1.00 & 0.831 ** & 0.09 & 0.15 & 0.04 & 0.12 & 0.04 & \(-\)0.04 & \(-\)0.48 & \(-\)0.04 \\ Marbling 12./13. & & 1.00 & 0.09 & 0.16 & 0.10 & 0.07 & 0.07 & 0.03 & \(-\)0.36 & \(-\)0.21 \\ Age & & & 1.00 & \(-\)0.09 & \(-\)0.12 * & 0.04 & 0.15 & \(-\)0.14 & 0.27 & \(-\)0.27 \\ YG 10./11. & & & & 1.00 & 00.65 ** & 0.33 ** & 0.46 ** & 0.27 ** & 0.03 & \(-\)0.41 \\ YG 12./13. & & & & & 1.00 & 0.37 ** & 0.41 ** & 0.41 ** & \(-\)0.04 & \(-\)0.52 \\ Rib fat 10./11. & & & & & & 1.00 & 0.37 ** & 0.40 ** & 0.75 & \(-\)0.52 \\ Rib fat 12./13. & & & & & & & 1.00 & 0.17 * & 0.43 & \(-\)0.41 \\ weight & & & & & & & & 1.00 & 0.64 & \(-\)0.28 \\ EUROP trade & & & & & & & & 1.00 & \(-\)0.36 \\ EUROP fat & & & & & & & & & 1.00 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} (*) statistical significance \(p<0.01\). (**) statistical significance \(p<0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Pearson correlation coefficients of the assessed carcass traits. The distribution of marbling scores at both positions is visualized in Figure 2. The mean difference of marbling scores at both positions was 5 marbling points (SD: 46). The differences between both positions varied between \(-93\) and 193 marbling points. With higher marbling scores (>800), the differences between marbling scores at the two positions increased. In general, the distribution of grading categories Select, Choice and Prime were only slightly influenced by the different positions. In total, 8 carcasses were categorized into different categories according to the rib-eye position. Marbling scores and EUROP fat classes showed no relationship at the German position (r = 0.1) and slightly negative relationships at the US position (r = \(-0.2\)).