4.7 Article

Descriptive texture analyses of cooked patties made of chicken breast with the woody breast condition

期刊

POULTRY SCIENCE
卷 96, 期 9, 页码 3489-3494

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.3382/ps/pex118

关键词

Broiler; sensory evaluation; Allo-Kramer shear; Warner-Bratzler shear; poultry; fillets

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The woody breast (WB) condition negatively influences the texture characteristics and quality of intact broiler breast fillets (Pectoralis major). But the impact of WB on ground meat is unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of WB on the texture and cook loss of ground meat made of broiler breast fillets. Broiler breasts (deboned 3 h postmortem) were collected on 3 separate trial d from the commercial deboning line and classified into normal and severe WB fillet categories. Individual fillets were either ground and formed into patties or left intact prior to being stored for 7 d at -20 degrees C. Samples were then cooked directly from the frozen state to an endpoint temperature of 76 degrees C for cook loss, instrumental (patties: Allo-Kramer shear; fillets: Warner-Bratzler shear), and descriptive sensory analysis of texture. Cook loss was greater (P < 0.05) in intact WB fillets compared to that in intact normal fillets, but there was no difference (P > 0.05) between WB and normal patties. There was no difference (P > 0.05) in shear force between normal and WB samples regardless of meat type. Sensory analysis showed that average scores of springiness and hardness of intact WB fillets were greater than those of normal fillets (P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences (P > 0.05) in average scores for sensory attributes cohesiveness, hardness, juiciness, fibrous, and rate of breakdown between WB and normal patties. WB patties exhibited lower springiness and chewiness scores (P < 0.05) than normal patties. Data suggest that undesirable differences in sensory texture characteristics between cooked intact WB and normal breast meat can be minimized in a ground product.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据