4.7 Article

Characterization of moisture migration of beef during refrigeration storage by low-field NMR and its relationship to beef quality

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE SCIENCE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE
Volume 100, Issue 5, Pages 1940-1948

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.10206

Keywords

low-field nuclear magnetic resonance; moisture migration; beef quality; rapid and non-destructive determination

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Project of China [2017YFD0400103]
  2. Dalian Youth Science and Technology Star Project [2017RQ059]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND In this study, low-field nuclear magnetic resonance (LF-NMR) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were used to investigated the moisture migration of beef during refrigeration storage, and its relationships to some physicochemical quality indicators were analyzed using partial least squares regression. RESULTS Three water components ascribed to bound water, immobilized water and free water in beef matrix were revealed by LF-NMR relaxation results. The transverse relaxation time and peak area of immobilized water declined as storage proceeded, as a result of disruption to the microstructure revealed by scanning electron microscope images. MRI images found obvious water migration of beef during refrigeration storage, and scanning electron microscopy images revealed that the integrity of the muscle fiber bundle was destroyed. In addition, increased storage time also led to increases in pH, total volatile basic nitrogen, TBARS (thiobarbituric acid reactive substances) value, weight loss, cooking loss and b* value, and to decreases in water holding capacity (WHC), L* and a* values, and textural properties. CONCLUSION The strong correlations between water migration and the physicochemical quality changes suggested the possibility of LF-NMR as a rapid and non-invasive method to evaluate beef quality. (c) 2019 Society of Chemical Industry

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available