4.7 Article

Descriptive texture analyses of broiler breast fillets with the wooden breast condition stored at 4 degrees C and-20 degrees C

Journal

POULTRY SCIENCE
Volume 97, Issue 5, Pages 1762-1767

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.3382/ps/pew327

Keywords

Woody breast; Sensory; refrigerator and freezer storage; Chicken; Shear force

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of the wooden breast (WB) condition on the texture of cooked broiler breast fillets (Pectoralis major) after fresh and frozen storage. Texture characteristics of normal (NORM) and severe WB fillets were studied by both sensory descriptive analyses and Warner-Bratzler shear force. Broiler breast fillets were collected over 3 separate trial days from a commercial deboning line at 3 h postmortem, classified according to the wooden breast condition, and then stored at either 4 degrees C or -20 degrees C prior to cooking and texture evaluation. Fillets were cooked to an endpoint temperature of 76 degrees C and then evaluated by an 8-member trained sensory panel for springiness, cohesiveness, hardness, juiciness, cohesiveness of mass, bolus size, wetness of mass, fibrous texture, rate of breakdown, and chewiness. The fillets with the WB condition showed higher cook loss than those with NORM condition regardless of storage temperature. The mean value of shear force of WB fillets was lower than NORM fillets when cooked after 4 degrees C storage. Sensory evaluation showed that WB fillets were higher in springiness and cohesiveness than NORM fillets and that the sensory attributes springiness, hardness and fibrousness were perceived differently between ventral and dorsal sections of cooked WB fillets. This work indicates that human perception of cooked WB meat has texture irregularities. The cooked breast meat with the WB condition is perceived with more springiness and cohesiveness than that with no WB condition.

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