quality characteristics of broiler chicken meat on salt at different temperatures

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

This article was downloaded by: [Mothershaw, Ann S.]On: 2 May 2009Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 910911792]Publisher Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Food PropertiesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713597259

Quality Characteristics of Broiler Chicken Meat on Salt at DifferentTemperaturesAnn S. Mothershaw a; Taghreed Gaffer b; Isam Kadim c; Nejib Guizani a; Issa Al-Amri d; Osman Mahgoub c;Saif Al-Bahry e

a Department of Food Science & Nutrition, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman b Department of HealthAffairs, Food Analysis Laboratory, Muscat Municipality, Muscat, Oman c Department Animal and VeterinarySciences, College of Agricultural and Marine Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman d

Department of Pathology, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat,Oman e Department of Biology, College of Science Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman

Online Publication Date: 01 July 2009

To cite this Article Mothershaw, Ann S., Gaffer, Taghreed, Kadim, Isam, Guizani, Nejib, Al-Amri, Issa, Mahgoub, Osman and Al-Bahry,Saif(2009)'Quality Characteristics of Broiler Chicken Meat on Salt at Different Temperatures',International Journal of FoodProperties,12:3,681 — 690

To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/10942910801993858

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10942910801993858

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contentswill be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug dosesshould be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directlyor indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713597259

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10942910801993858

http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

International Journal of Food Properties, 12: 681–690, 2009Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1094-2912 print / 1532-2386 onlineDOI: 10.1080/10942910801993858

681

QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS OF BROILER CHICKEN MEAT ON SALT AT DIFFERENT TEMPERATURES

Ann S. Mothershaw1, Taghreed Gaffer2, Isam Kadim3, Nejib Guizani1, Issa Al-Amri4, Osman Mahgoub3, and Saif Al-Bahry5

1Department of Food Science & Nutrition, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman2Department of Health Affairs, Food Analysis Laboratory, Muscat Municipality,Muscat, Oman3Department Animal and Veterinary Sciences, College of Agricultural and MarineSciences, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman4Department of Pathology, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Sultan QaboosUniversity, Muscat, Oman5Department of Biology, College of Science Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman

The aim of this investigation was to compare the quality characteristics and muscle structureof broiler chicken meat stored at different temperatures in the retail market in Oman. Themeat quality characteristics of broiler breast meat were analysed. Ten samples were ran-domly selected from each group of fresh, frozen, and chilled chicken meat. Colour L*, a*,b*, pH, expressed juice, cooking loss, sarcomere length, W-B-shear force and muscle structure(using scanning electron microscopy) were determined. Fresh meat samples had signifi-cantly (P < 0.05) lower pH values and lightness L* than those of chilled and frozen sam-ples. The chilled meat samples were significantly (P < 0.05) lighter and had lower shear forcevalues than fresh and frozen samples. Frozen samples had significantly (P < 0.05) higherexpressed juice and cooking loss values than either fresh or chilled samples. The pH valuesof fresh, chilled, and frozen breast samples were related to colour and expressed juice.Electron microscopy demonstrated that the changes in the physical properties of the chilledmeat were related to breakdown of the muscle fiber bundles. The quality characteristics ofbroiler meat from different storage temperatures varied significantly.

Keywords: Broiler, Meat quality, Storage temperature, Electron microscope, Colour, Shearforce, Expressed juice, Ultimate pH, Muscle bundle.

INTRODUCTION

The poultry industry constitutes an integral part of the Sultanate of Oman’s growingeconomy, and it is an important supplier of protein to its population. During the pastdecade, spectacular growth has been observed in the poultry industry in the Sultanate.Poultry meat and its products have a vast consumer market and are making a significant

Received 25 August 2007; accepted 18 February 2008.Address correspondence to Ann S. Mothershaw, Department of Food Science & Nutrition, College of

Agricultural & Marine Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, PO Box 34, Al Khoud 123, Sultanate of Oman.E-mail: [email protected]

Downloaded By: [Mothershaw, Ann S.] At: 10:54 2 May 2009

682 MOTHERSHAW ET AL.

contribution to the requirement for quality protein. The increased consumption of broilerchicken meat is related to a variety of factors including poultry meat being promoted as ahealthier meat option. Recommendations to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease havebeen based on diet and lifestyle changes and include suggestions to reduce red meat con-sumption by increasing poultry and fish intake.[1] Studies have indicated that the con-sumption of poultry meat rather than red meat poses a lower risk for coronary heartdisease[2,3] and for various cancers.[4] Also, outbreaks of bovine spongiform encephalopathy(BSE) in cattle have reduced consumer confidence in beef products resulting in a lowerconsumer demand for beef.[5]

Meat quality and safety have become important issues due to the increased aware-ness of consumers. A range of measures can be used to improve the safety of food butmany of these are compromised if they are stored at unsafe temperatures, especially intropical regions.[6] Appearance is the major criterion for purchase selection and initialevaluation of broiler meat quality.[7] Other quality attributes, such as tenderness, juiciness,cooking loss, ultimate pH and shelf-life are important to the consumer after purchasing theproduct, as well as to the processor when producing value-added meat products. Consumersusually prefer fresh poultry meat rather than frozen. Physical defects associated with theappearance of the product or quality problems may originate from a variety of factors atany stage along the production line, from the livestock on the farm through to the endproduct.[8] Such factors mainly affect consumer acceptance and product prices rather thanhealth issues. As the functional muscle of the live animal changes to edible meat uponslaughtering, a number of complex metabolic, chemical and physical changes take place inthe tissue.[9] Meat quality is influenced by a number of factors including stress conditions atdeath, rate of glycolysis in the muscle after slaughtering, simultaneous fall of ATP andpH, time, and temperature at the onset of “rigor,” and the level of muscle shortening.[10]

The quality characteristics of broiler chicken meat depend not only on the inherentproperties of the birds, but are also influenced by the handling, processing, and storageconditions of the meat. Temperature has been shown to be a key factor in determining theshelf life of poultry.[11] Frequently, low-temperature methods such as freezing and chillingare used to extend the shelf life of poultry products. In addition to inhibiting microbialgrowth, low-temperature storage can also influence the physicochemical and biochemicalproperties of the meat, which will affect the meat quality characteristics.[12] Freezing andfrozen storage induces various changes to the proteins, and these are reflected in a decreaseof functional property. The functional and physicochemical properties of proteins areinfluenced by changes in macro structure of mince. The changes in the structure of minceon its proteins can be monitored by scanning electron microscopy.[13] Consequently, theaim of this investigation was to examine the effects of the storage temperature on meatstructure and quality characteristics of broiler chicken meat.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Meat Samples

Physical parameters related to meat quality were determined using 30 poultry samplescollected from food retailers. For each broiler chicken sample the shop storage tempera-ture and the physical status of the sample in terms of the presence of any physical defectswere recorded. The 30 samples consisted of ten fresh broiler chicken carcasses randomlyobtained from on-site slaughtering shops; in addition, 10 frozen carcasses and 10 chilled


QUALITY OF CHICKEN MEAT AT DIFFERENT TEMPERATURES 683

samples that were also randomly collected from food retail outlets on the fourth day afterchilling. In the region where the study took place, it is common practice to purchase poultryfrom small shops that deal with live birds only. They are kept in the shop until selected bya customer and then slaughtered, defeathered, washed, and placed into plastic bags ondemand. Therefore, these samples have had no low-temperature exposure prior to receiptby the customer. The customer can select whether the skin is removed or not. Immediatelyafter purchase, samples were transferred to the laboratory in a cool box and analyzedimmediately. Frozen samples were maintained frozen at –18oC until analyzed. Prior toanalysis, frozen samples were allowed to thaw for about 2 hours, so that ice crystals didnot interfere with parameters determined.

Meat Quality Evaluation

The breast muscle (M. pectoralis) was dissected from each broiler chicken sampleand evaluated for meat quality characteristics. M. pectoralis was selected for the currentstudy due to its greater size, as the major muscle in broiler chicken carcasses it enabledsufficient muscle material for quality measurements. Meat quality measurements includingultimate pH, expressed juice, cooking loss, Warner-Bratzler shear force, sarcomere length,and colour L*, a* b* were determined.

Ultimate pH

The ultimate pH (pHu) was assessed in homogenates (prepared using an UltraTurrax T25 homogeniser at ¼ speed with 3 × 5 second bursts) of duplicate samplescontaining 1.5–2.0 g muscle tissue in 10 ml of neutralized 5-mM sodium iodoacetate(pH 7.0, 150 mM KCl). The pH of the slurry was measured using a Metrohm pH meter(Model No. 744) with a glass electrode.[14]

Sarcomere Length

A small bundle of fibres was dissected from the centre of each breast muscle sampleand laid out on a glass slide prior to covering with a drop of buffered (0.05M Tris, pH 7.6)0.25 M sucrose solution.[15] Care was taken to ensure that single bundles were teased outand covered with a coverslip. Sarcomere length was determined using a laser diffractionmethod (Spectra-physics helium-neon laser, 2 mW 0.49 mm diameter beam, with a wave-length of 632.8 nm), described by Cross et al.[16] A ruler was used to make 12 measure-ments for each sample and the average was calculated. Sarcomere length was calculatedbased on the following formula [17]:

where n is the diffraction band; l is the wavelength of 632.8 nm; S is sarcomere length;and θ is the diffraction angle.

Warner-Bratzler Shear Values

Triplicate 25 mm-thick slices were cut from each muscle at the time of breast musclepreparation. The slices were weighed and stored at chiller temperature (2–4°C) in plastic

n Ssinλ = θ, (1)



bags until cooked by immersing the bags in a water bath at 70°C for 90 min. The cookedmeat was kept at 2-3°C overnight in the cooler.[14] After cooling, 12 cores (13 mm × 13mm in cross-section) were cut from the centre of each muscle sample. Cores were pre-pared to ensure that shears were made parallel to the fibres rather than across them. Eachcore was then sheared perpendicularly to the fibres in 2 places, using a digital DillonWarner-Bratzler (WB) shear device. This machine measured the maximum force requiredto cut across the muscle fibres. The Warner-Bratzler shear values are expressed as kilo-grams of shear force (kg) required.

Cooking Loss

Cooking loss was determined in meat samples (about 150 g in weight and 25 mmthick) placed inside polyethylene bags in a water bath at 70°C. Samples were cooked for90 min and then cooled overnight in cooler. They were carefully dried with tissues toremove excess surface moisture and re-weighed to determine cooking losses. The cookingloss (%) was calculated as follows:

Expressed Juice

Determinations of the water-holding capacity (in terms of expressed juice values)were based on measuring the water liberated when pressure was applied to the muscle tis-sue. Expressed juice was assessed, using a filter paper method, as the total wetted area lessthe meat area (cm2) relative to the weight of the sample (g).[18] A cube of 500 ± 20 mg ofmeat from the inside of each muscle was placed on a tarred filter paper (Whatman Nº 1,11.0 cm diameter, Qualitative), stored previously in a desiccator over saturated KClbetween screw tightened Perspex plates for exactly 5 min. The wet and meat areas weremeasured with a planmeter. Expressed juice values were calculated based on the followingformula:

Duplicate measures of expressed juice were made for each sample.

Colour CIE L*, a*, b*

Approximately 60 min after exposing the fresh surface of M. pectoralis CIE L*, a*,b* light reflectance coordinates of the muscle surface were measured at room temperature(25 ± 2°C) using a Minolta Chroma Meter CR-300 (Minolta Co., Ltd., Japan), with acolour measuring area 1.1 cm in diameter.[14] The L* value relates to Lightness; the a*value to Red-Green hue where a positive value relates to the red intensity; and the b*value to the Yellow-Blue where a positive value relates to yellow. The average of twomeasurements from each sample was recorded as the colour coordinate value of the sample.

Cooking loss% = (Weight loss/Original meat weight) × 100%. (2)

Expressed juice (cm /g) = (Wet area (cm ) meat area (cm ) / meat w2 2 2− eeight (g). (3)



Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)

Meat sections of M. pectoralis cut into small pieces were frozen at −80°C, and thenfreeze dried using a JEOL-JFD-310 freeze drier for three days. Muscle specimens werethen fragmented under a stereomicroscope to yield longitudinal and cross section orientations.Fragments of muscle specimens were orientated and adhered onto 10 mm silver stubs andcoated with carbon discs under a stereomicroscope to expose the different sides of thespecimens for examination. Stubs of specimens were then sputter coated with gold particlesusing Bio-Rad SEM Coating System for 135 seconds. Samples were examined using aJeol JSM-5600LV scanning electron microscope operated at 10 kV. Secondary electronimages of muscle fiber ultrastructures were recorded.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was carried out using analysis of variance procedures[19] to eval-uate the effect of storage temperature on the quality of broiler chicken breast meat fillets.Significant differences between treatment means were assessed using Tukey least-significant-difference test applied by SPSS (Ver. 10).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Meat Quality

The physical parameters that are used as indicators of the meat quality were studiedfor broiler chicken meat samples from different storage temperatures. These included ulti-mate pH, expressed juice, cooking loss, shear force value, sarcomere length and colour L*,a*, b* (Table 1). The ultimate pH of muscle is a major determinant of meat quality[20] andis related to the depletion of glycogen and liberation of lactic acid pre- and post-slaughter.The ultimate pH of the M pectoralis in fresh carcasses was significantly (P < 0.05) lower(5.91) than that of either chilled (6.13) or frozen samples (6.17). The lower ultimate pH infresh samples indicated that slaughtering birds in the local market at high ambient temper-atures (30–35oC) accelerated the process of rigor mortis, possibly by the metabolic chan-neling mechanism.[21] Glycolytic enzymes are bound to the myofibrillar protein actin

Table 1 Standard devision for meat quality characteristics of broiler chicken breast musclesstored at different temperarures.

Parameter

Treatment (10 samples each)

Fresh Chilled Frozen

Ultimate pH 5.91 ± 0.12b 6.13 ± 0.17a 6.17 ± 0.19a

Colour L* (lightness) 42.43 ± 3.49 a 52.12 ± 2.51c 46.93 ± 4.63b

Colour a* (redness) 10.12 ± 1.2a 11.55 ± 1.24b 12.29 ± 1.08b

Colour b* (yellowness) 8.11 ± 1.10 a 9.39 ± 2.11a 12.50 ± 1.70b

Sarcomere length (μm) 1.89 ± 0.11a 1.84 ± 0.20 a 1.52 ± 0.10b

Expressed juice1 19.68 ± 6.87a 20.02 ± 5.24a 27.52 ± 5.72b

Cooking loss % 17.56 ± 1.30 a 17.41 ± 2.66a 24.52 ± 3.99b

W-B share force (kg) 7.22 ± 1.94a 2.83 ± 0.94b 7.70 ± 2.79 a

a,b,cValues in the same row followed by different letters are significantly different (P < 0.05). 1Expressed juice = moist area (cm2)/sample weight (g).



in vivo and the proportion of each glycolytic enzyme that is bound into the correct spatialarrangement may increase on stimulation of glycolysis (e.g., with high temperature) anddecrease when such stimulation ceases or is absent.[21]

Colour is an important quality attribute that influences consumer acceptanceof poultry meat. Several researchers have demonstrated a significant relationshipbetween raw breast meat colour and ultimate pH.[22,23,24,25,26] The relationship betweenpoultry meat colour and pH has been demonstrated in the present study (Fig. 1). Bothchilled and frozen breast fillets had higher ultimate pH values than fresh breast fillets(Table 1). The correlation between L* and ultimate pH was negative (Fig. 1), which is inagreement with the findings of studies by Barbut,[27] Yang and Chen,[28] and Allenet al.[24]

The fresh breast fillets averaged L* = 42.43, a* = 10.12 and b* = 8.11, chilled breastfillets L* = 52.12, a* = 11.55 and b* = 9.39 and frozen breast fillets L* = 46.93, a* = 12.29and b* = 12.50. Fresh, chilled, and frozen samples demonstrated significantly different (P < 0.05)colour values (Table 1). Muscle colour is affected by several factors the most important ofwhich are; age, sex, intramuscular fat, moisture content, pre-slaughtering conditions,processing, presence of muscle pigments, [29] and storage time.[30] Redness (a*) values, ofchilled and frozen samples were very similar to one another but were significantly higher(P < 0.05), than for fresh samples. The frozen samples had the highest yellowness inten-sity with mean b* value significantly higher than that of fresh and chilled samples. The lat-ter values did not significantly differ from each other. These results are in agreement withprevious reports for poultry meat.[26,31]

The shear values for the chilled breast fillets were significantly (P < 0.05) lower(2.83 kg) than those for the fresh (7.22 kg) and frozen (7.70 kg) breast fillets, which were

Figure 1 Relationships between ultimate pH and color (A) (l*), (B) a* b*, and(C) expressed juice of the broilerbreast muscle treated as fresh, chilled or frozen.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Fresh Chilled Frozen Fresh Chilled Frozen

Fresh Chilled Frozen

Ligh

tnes

s L*

5.6

5.8

6

6.2

pH

Lightness pH

A 0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Clo

ur a

*, b

*

5.6

5.8

6

6.2

pH

Redness Yellowness pH

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Exp

ress

ed ju

ice

(cm

2 /g)

5.6

5.8

6

6.2

pH

Expressed juice pH

B

C



not statistically different from each other. Similarly, Lyon et al.[32] reported that shearforce values of broiler breast meat decreased as chill time increased. Increasing post-chilldeboning time to 1 hr resulted in more tender cooked meat. However, the shear valueswere still too high to be acceptable based on research that established the relationshipbetween shear values and sensory tenderness.[33] According to the sensory studies of Lyonand Lyon[33] chilled meat falls into the moderately tender range.

Sarcomere is the contractile unit of the myofibril.[34] In the present study the longestsarcomeres (mean = 1.89μm) were observed in fresh meat followed by chilled sampleswith an average value of 1.84 μm. Frozen samples had significantly (P < 0.05) shortersarcomeres, with a mean length of 1.52 μm (Table 1). This large difference in sarcomerelength indicates that there was probably still sufficient muscle ATP to induce contractionof the sarcomeres and subsequent lower shear force values.

Expressed juice and cooking loss collectively provide an indication of meattenderness[35] and are measured to obtain an overall assessment of the water bindingproperties of meat. Expressed juice is a measure of the ability of meat to hold all or partof its own or added water,[18] which is a critical factor in differing meat texture, tenderness,and juiciness.[36] A variety of methods are available for determination of expressed juicesome require the application of external forces such as drip loss and thawing loss, othersinvolve external mechanical forces such as expressible juice, whilst others need theapplication of heat such as cooking loss.[36] The mean volume of expressed juice for thefrozen samples (27.5 cm2/mg) was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than for the fresh(19.68 cm2/mg) and chilled samples (17.4 cm2/mg). These findings are similar to thosereported by Barbut,[27] who found that breast muscle samples with low lightness valueshad lower expressed juice values. In the present study, there was a negative correlationbetween sarcomere length and expressed juice (Fig. 1C). In the same samples, cookingloss values of frozen carcasses were significantly (P < 0.05) higher (24.5%) than chilled(17.4%) and fresh (17.6%) carcasses.

Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)

Scanning electron micrographs of the fresh samples show muscle fibres are intactwithout any disturbance on the surface (Fig. 2B), whereas chilled samples were distorted,ruptured and fractured (Fig. 2C). Comparing SEM micrographs of fibers of fresh and frozenbreast muscle samples, slight differences were observed (Figures 2A,B). The predominantmechanism by which chilling temperature is able to irreversibly alter skeletal tissue ispresumed to involve proteolytic enzymes such as calpain.[37] The rupture of the biologicaltissues at cellular level (nuclear and plasma membranes) had been attributed to shear stressassociated with microstreaming around the microbubbles.[38] The findings of the presentstudy indicated that chilling temperature may negatively affect meat texture and firmness,and could demonstrate structural alterations.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the results showed that chilled broiler samples were the most tender. Freezingmeat, on the other hand, generally resulted in toughness with a high percentage cookingloss. Fresh meat could be placed in between these two groups. Overall, chill storage is auseful practice for good quality broiler chicken meat.



ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The technical assistance provided by Mr. S.A Al-Lawati is acknowledged with gratitude.

REFERENCES

1. Higgins, M; Thom, T. Trends in CHD in the United States. International Journal of Epidemiology1989, 18, (Suppl. 1): S58–66.

2. Gorder, D.D.; Dolecek, T.A.; Coleman, G.G.; Tillotson, J.L.; Brown, H.B.; Lenz-Litzow, K.;Bartsch, G.E.; Grandits, G. Dietary intake in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial(MRFIT): nutrient and food group changes over 6 years. The Journal of the American DieteticAssociation 1986, 86, 744–751.

3. Hu, F.B.; Stampfer, M.J.; Manson, J.E.; Ascherio, A.; Colditz, G.A.; Speizer, F.E.; Hennekens, C.H.;Willett, W.C. Dietary saturated fats and their food sources in relation to the risk of coronaryheart disease in women. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1999, 70, 1001–1008.

4. Munoz de Chavez M.; Chavez A. Diet that prevents cancer: recommendations from the AmericanInstitute for Cancer Research. International. Journal of Cancer Suppl. 1998, 11, 85–89.

5. Meslin, F.X. Surveillance and control of emerging zoonoses. World Health Statistics Quarterly1992, 45, 200–207.

6. Mothershaw, Ann. S. Taghreed Jaffer. Antimicrobial activity of foods with different physico-chemical characteristics. International Journal of Food Properties. 2004, 7, 629–638.

7. Kennedy, O.B.; Stewart-Knox, B.J.; Mitchell, P.C.; Thurnham, D.I. Flesh colour dominatesconsumer preference for chicken. Appetite 2005, 44, 181–186.

8. Raj, A.B.M. Effects of stunning and slaughter methods on carcass and meat quality. In PoultryMeat Science. Poultry Science Symposium Series; Richardson, R.I.; Mead, G.C.; Eds.; CABIPublishing: Wallingford, UK. 1999; 25, 231–254.

9. Greaser, M.L. Conversion of muscle to meat. In Muscle as Food; Bechtel, B.J.; Ed.; AcademicPress Inc.: Orlando, FL, 1986.

Figure 2 Scanning electron micrographs of longitudinal sections of breast skeletal muscle from (A) frozen, (B)fresh and (C) five day chilling at 4oC, extensive damage is evident in the muscle fibre bundles, with rupture andexposure of individual muscle fibres. m: fibre bundle; mf: myofibrils.

M M

MF

A B

M

MF

C



10. Lyon, C.E.; Buhr, R.G. Biochemical basis of meat texture. In Poultry Meat Science. PoultryScience Symposium Series; Richardson, R.I.; Mead, G.C.; Eds.; CABI Publishing: UK. 1999;25, 99–126.

11. Mielnik, M.B.; Dainty, R.H.; Lundby, F.; Mielnik, J. The effect of evaporative air chilling and stor-age temperature on quality and shelf life of fresh chicken carcasses. Science 1999, 78, 1065–1073.

12. Rathgeber B.M; Boles J.A; Shand P.; Rapid, J. Postmortem pH decline and delayed chillingreduce quality of turkey breast meat. Poultry Science 1999, 78, 477–484.

13. Mathew, S.; Prakash, V. Changes in structural and functional attributes of fish mince proteins inpresence of cosolvent during frozen storage. International Journal of Food Properties 2007, 10,47–59.

14. Kadim, I.T., Mahgoub, O., Al-Ajmi, D.S., Al-Maqbaly, R.S., Al-Saqri, N.M. and Ritchie, A. Anevaluation of the growth, carcass and meat quality characteristics of Omani goat breeds. MeatScience 2004, 66, 203–210.

15. Stromer, M.H., Gol, D.E. Studies on purified a-actinin: II. Electron microscopic studies on thecompetitive binding of a-actinin and tropomyosin to Z-line extracted myofibrils. Journal ofMolecular Biology 1972, 67, 489–492.

16. Cross, H.R.; West, R.L.; Dutson, T.R. Comparisons of methods for measuring sarcomere lengthin beef semitendinosus muscle. Meat Science 1980/1981, 5, 261–266.

17. Bouton, P.E.; Fisher, A.L.; Harris, P.V.; Baxter, R.I. A comparison of the effects of some post-slaughter treatments on the tenderness of beef. Journal of Food Technology 1973, 8, 39–49.

18. Hamm, R. Functional properties of the myofibril system and their measurement. In Muscle asFood; Bechtel, P.J.; Ed.;. Academic Press Inc: Orlando, FL, 1986; 135–199.

19. Ott, R.L. Analysis of variance in some standard experimental designs. In: Introduction to statisticalmethods and data analysis; Ott, R.L.; Longnecker, M.T.; Eds; Wadsworth Publishing Company:Florence, KY, USA, 1993; 842–928.

20. Watanabe, A.; Daly, C.C; Devine, C.E. The effects of the ultimate pH of meat on tendernesschanges during aging. Meat Science 1996, 42, 67–78.

21. Lawrie, R.A. Meat Science. In: Chemical and Biochemical Constitution of muscle; Lawrie,R.A.; Ed.; Pergamon Press: New York, NY. 1999; 48.

22. Boulianne, M.; King, A.J. Biochemical and color characteristics of skinless boneless palechicken breast. Poultry Science 1995, 74, 1693–1698.

23. Boulianne, M.; King, A.J. Meat color and biochemical characteristics of in acceptable dark-coloredbroiler chicken carcasses. Journal of Food Science 1998, 63, 759–762.

24. Allen, C.D.; Russell, S.M.; Fletcher, D.L. The relationship of broiler breast colour and pH toshelf-life and odor development. Poultry Science 1997, 76, 1042–1046.

25. Fletcher, D.L. Color variation commercially packaged broiler breast fillets. Journal of AppliedPoultry Research 1999, 8, 67–69.

26. Qiao, M., Fletcher, D.L.; Smith, D.P; Northcutt, J.K. The effect of broiler breast meat color onpH, moisture, water-holding capacity and emulsification capacity. Poultry Science 2001, 80,676–680.

27. Barbut, S. Estimate and detection of the PSE problem in broiler chicken. British Poultry Science1997, 38, 355–358.

28. Yang, C.C.; Chen, T.C. Effects of refrigerated storage, pH adjustment and marinade on color ofraw and microwave cooked chicken meat. Poultry Science 1993, 72, 355–362.

29. Northcutt, J.K. Preslaughter factors effecting poultry meat quality. In Poultry Meat Processing;Sams, A.R.; Ed.; University of Georgia College of Agricultural & Environmental sciences: Athens,GA, 2001.

30. Karaoglu, M.; Esenbuga, N.; Macit, M.; Aksu, M.I.; Kaya, M.; Kurbanoglu, E.B. Effect ofdietary ram horn hydrolysate (RHH) on the pH and color characteristics of carcasses, breastfillets and drumsticks of broilers.. International Journal of Food Properties 2005, 8, 423–438.

31. Fletcher, D.L. Relationship of breast meat color variation to muscle pH and texture. PoultryScience 1995, 74 (Suppl. 1), 120 (Abstract).



32. Lyon, C.E.; Bilgili; S.F.;Dickens, J.A. Effects of chilling time and belt flattening on physicalcharacteristics, yield and tenderness of broiler breasts. Journal of Applied Poultry Research1997, 6, 39–47.

33. Lyon, B.G.; Lyon, C.E. Research Note: shear value ranges by Instron Warner-Braezler and sin-gle-blade Allo-Kramer devices that correspond to sensory tenderness. Poultry Science 1991, 70,188–191.

34. McCornick, R.J. Structure and properties of tissues. In Muscle Foods; Kinsman, D.M.;Anthony, W.K.; Burdette, C.B.; Eds.; Chapman & Hall: New York, 1994; 25–62.

35. El Rammouz R; Babile R; Fermandez X. Effect of ultimate pH on the physicochemical andbiochemical characteristics of turkey breast muscle showing normal rate of postmortem pH fall.Poultry Science 2004, 83, 1750–1757.

36. Mallikarjunan, P.; Hung, Y.C. Physical and ultrasound measurements. In Quality in Frozen Foods;Erikson M.C.; Hung, Y.C.; Eds.;. Chapman & Hall: New York, 1997; 313–339.

37. Schreurs, F.; Van der heide, D.; Leenstra, F.R.; De Wit, W. Endogenous proteolytic enzymes inchicken muscles. Differences among strains with different growth rates and protein efficiencies.Poultry Science 1995, 74, 523–537.

38. Church, C.C.; Miller, M.W. The kinetics and mechanisms of ultrasonically induced cell lysesproduced by non-trapped bubbles in a rotating culture tube. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology1983, 9,385–393.


quality characteristics of broiler chicken meat on salt at different temperatures

Documents