- Email: [email protected]
Tenderness, moistness, and flavor of pre- and postrigor marinated broiler breast fillets evaluated by consumer sensory panel
PROCESSING, PRODUCTS, AND FOOD SAFETY Tenderness, moistness, and flavor of pre- and postrigor marinated broiler breast fillets evaluated by consumer sensory panel A. Saha,* A. V. S. Perumalla,* Y. Lee,† J. F. Meullenet,† and C. M. Owens*1 *Department of Poultry Science, and †Department of Food Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville 72701 on all treatments using hedonic and just-about-right (JAR) scales. Although there were slight differences in hedonic ratings for overall impression, texture, and flavor of marinated breast fillets, all treatments could be categorized as “like slightly” to “like moderately.” Using a JAR scale, only a small percentage of consumers (<18%) considered any of the treatments as “too tough.” The scores for overall flavor or moistness were not affected by the deboning times because the majority of the people considered them to be JAR. Most the consumers reported the potential for purchase of the product as “probably would buy” to “may or may not buy.” The results of this study indicate that marination of prerigor deboned meat (with 1% salt) is effective in producing product similar to marinated postrigor deboned meat, suggesting its effectiveness in improving meat quality attributes of early deboned meat.
Key words: marination, sensory, consumer, broiler breast, tenderness 2009 Poultry Science 88:1250–1256 doi:10.3382/ps.2008-00236
INTRODUCTION In recent years, the poultry industry has experienced an unrivalled rate of growth. This can be attributed to poultry having relatively low production costs, high nutritional values, rapid growth rates, and a great number of further-processed products (Barbut, 2002). Boneless breast meat is the most popular meat in the American household (Leidahl, 2006). Increasing demand by consumers has led the industry to find methods for increasing production of boneless meat without negatively affecting overall consumer acceptance and ensuring product uniformity. Changing consumer demand in the United States has influenced the markets for all types of meat. The increase in per capita broiler consumption over the last decade can be attributed to increased health concerns, the need for convenience, and product pricing (Resur©2009 Poultry Science Association Inc. Received June 12, 2008. Accepted January 31, 2009. 1 Corresponding author: [email protected]
reccion, 2003). Therefore, knowledge of consumer acceptance of any product and foresight into future consumer trends is integral for the success of any company. Texture properties like tenderness are of great importance in boneless poultry breast meat when it comes to consumer acceptance. Tenderness is a major quality determinant and also an important sensory characteristic of meat (Deatherage, 1963; Smith and Fletcher, 1988; Morgan et al., 1991). Robbins et al. (2003) concluded that tenderness, juiciness, and flavor were the most important factors with respect to consumer eating satisfaction. Many factors can affect meat tenderness; especially, postmortem (PM) deboning time can have a large influence (Lyon et al., 1983; Stewart et al., 1984; Lyon and Wilson, 1986; Cavitt et al., 2004, 2005; Mehaffey et al., 2006). Lyon et al. (1985) concluded that consumers found prerigor deboned breasts to be unacceptably tough. This conclusion was in agreement with deFremery and Pool (1960), who found that meat that is deboned before the development of rigor mortis is objectionably toughened. Lyon et al. (1973) and Dawson et al. (1987) reported that broiler carcasses must be aged for a minimum of
1250
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
ABSTRACT Prerigor deboning and marination of broiler breast fillets are growing trends in the poultry industry. Marination can often enhance product attributes such as flavor, juiciness, and texture. The purpose of this study was to evaluate consumer acceptance of marinated broiler breast fillets deboned pre- (<4 h postmortem) and postrigor (≥4 h postmortem). A total of 400 broiler carcasses were processed using an inline system and deboned at various times: 0.25, 1.25, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 6, and 24 h postmortem. A 2-stage chilling system was used for all treatments with the exception of the 0.25 h treatment, which was deboned before chilling. After chilling, carcasses or fillets, or both, were aged on ice. Breast fillets were marinated with a 1% salt and 0.45% phosphate final concentration. Consumer sensory evaluations for moistness, tenderness, saltiness, flavor, and overall impression were obtained
MEAT TENDERNESS OF MARINATED BROILER FILLETS
MATERIALS AND METHODS Processing At 56 d of age, 400 commercial male broilers were processed in 2 replications at the university poultry processing pilot plant. Feed was withdrawn 10 h before processing; however, broilers had free access to water before processing. Broilers were transported in coops to the processing plant 15 min before slaughter. The broilers were electrically stunned (11 mV, 10 s), manually cut (severed left carotid artery and jugular vein), bled out (1.5 min), scalded (55°C, 2 min), and picked inline using commercial defeathering equipment. Broilers were eviscerated and a 2-stage chilling system was used for all treatments with the exception of the 0.25h treatment, which was deboned before chilling. Carcasses were placed in a prechill tank for 15 min (12°C) and a chill tank (ice slush) for 75 min (1°C); carcasses were manually agitated frequently throughout the chilling process to reduce thermal layering around the carcass and improve chilling efficiency. The carcasses were
deboned at various times: 1.25, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 6, and 24 h PM using the method described by Hamm (1981). These deboning times have been shown to produce a wide range of tenderness in broiler breast fillets (Cavitt et al., 2004).
Marination After chilling, carcasses or fillets, or both, were aged on ice for 24 h. After aging, fillets were marinated in 2 replications (20 fillets per replication per treatment) in a vacuum tumbler (20 in Hg) at 20 rpm for 30 min in a cooler at 4°C in a 15% marinade solution (based on meat weight) consisting of 1.0% NaCl [granulated NaCl (CAS 7647-14-5), food-grade salt; North American Salt Co., Overland Park, KS] and 0.45% phosphate (Carnal 822, combination of sodium diphosphate and sodium tripolyphosphate, pH 9.5; Budenheim USA Inc., Plainview, NY). After tumbling, fillets were allowed to rest for a period of 5 min and then vacuum-packed, frozen, and stored at −20°C until further analysis.
Cooking Before cooking, the frozen fillets were thawed overnight in a cooler (4°C). The fillets were cooked in pans covered with aluminum foil, to an internal temperature of 76°C in a convection oven according to the method of Sams (1990). Eight fillets were cooked in each pan and to minimize pan effects; 2 treatments (4 fillets for each treatment) chosen at random were represented in each pan. All fillets for each 30-min sensory session were cooked at the same time; thus, all treatments were represented in each cook.
Consumer Sensory Analysis The 9 treatments were evaluated on 2 consecutive days by a 63-member consumer panel. A total of 360 fillets were used (n = 40 fillets per treatment) in the 2-d consumer test. On the first day, 5 meat samples (0.25, 2, 3, 4, and 24 h PM) were evaluated and 4 samples (1.25, 2.5, 3.5, and 6 h PM) on the second day by the same panel members. This randomization was conducted to minimize any potential variation that could have resulted within day effects between each panel session. The 9 samples were given a random 3-digit code and serving order was randomized and balanced across consumers (Meilgaard et al., 1999). The consumer test was conducted at the University of Arkansas Sensory Laboratory. The sensory testing facility consisted of 6 individual testing booths with controlled lighting and positive airflow. The panelists were presented with 1 treatment at a time, which consisted of three 0.4 to 0.5in. (1.0 to 1.2 cm) cubes of breast meat identified by a random 3-digit code (Meilgaard et al., 1999). Room temperature water and unsalted saltine crackers were also served. Once the consumer received the sample, they were asked to enter the code into the computer
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
4 h PM before deboning to avoid toughening of meat. However, delayed boning time results in higher cost for the processing plant in terms of extra storage space and added refrigeration (Lyon et al., 1989). Hirschler and Sams (1998) found that by deboning breast fillets at 2 h PM, the meat yield could be increased by 3.4% as compared with deboning at 9 h PM. Therefore, aging of broiler breast meat is not only very important for consumer acceptance of the product but is also costly for the processor. Currently, many plants are deboning immediately out of the chiller as early as 1.5 to 2.0 h, regardless of recommended aging times (Owens, 2007), and tenderness may be an issue with this type of product. However, the poultry industry is interested in deboning early while also providing tender breast meat. Marination can be successfully used to reduce aging time required for meat tenderization (Goodwin and Maness, 1984). The use of marination has increased drastically in the past few years in the poultry industry. Most commonly used marinades contain salt, phosphate, and water as their primary ingredients (Barbut et al., 1988; Lyon et al., 2005) and these ingredients, salt and phosphates, help in improving water-holding capacity (WHC; Farr and May, 1970; Young and Lyon, 1986; Woelfel and Sams 2001) and tenderness (Palladino and Ball, 1979; Goodwin and Maness, 1984). A few studies have evaluated the effects of marination on prerigor deboned meat but a simple question regarding consumer acceptance of prerigor marinated meat in comparison with postrigor deboned marinated meat still needs to be answered. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the consumer acceptance scores for tenderness, juiciness, and flavor of marinated pre- (<4 h PM) and postrigor (≥4 h PM) deboned (including multiple deboning times of each category) broiler breast fillets.
1251
1252
Saha et al.
and evaluate the product for overall impression, flavor, and texture on a 9-point hedonic scale with 1 = “dislike extremely” and 9 = “like extremely.” The 5-point justabout-right (JAR) scale was used on questions about tenderness, moistness, overall flavor, and saltiness. In this case, 1 = “much too low,” 3 = JAR, and 5 = “much too high.”
Statistical Analysis
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Texture and flavor are important sensory characteristics of meat, which can strongly influence overall consumer acceptance and choice of meat. Means of hedonic liking are presented in Table 1. Deboning time did not have a significant effect on the overall impression as indicated by no significant differences (P > 0.05) among treatments. However, there was a narrow range of the mean responses (6.56 to 7.11) in which all of the 9 treatments were categorized as “like slightly” to “like moderately.” Similar to overall impression, there were no significant differences in hedonic ratings for flavor of marinated breast fillets. Because all fillets were marinated with the same marinade formulation, it was expected that flavor would be similar across treatments. Flavor acceptance scores in the current study were similar to those reported by Saha et al. (2006) and Saha (2007). Texture acceptance of marinated fillets was also assessed in this study and results indicated no significant differences (P > 0.05) among treatments. In this ex-
Table 1. Summary table for hedonic scale1 means2 for marinated broiler breast fillets evaluated by consumer sensory panel Deboning time (h) Sensory attribute
0.25
1.25
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
6
24
Pooled SEM
Overall impression3 Flavor3 Texture3
6.76 6.55 6.68
6.56 6.67 6.30
6.87 6.71 6.74
6.83 6.54 6.52
7.01 7.03 7.06
6.71 6.54 6.49
6.93 6.69 6.71
6.62 6.40 6.57
7.11 6.71 6.93
0.05 0.05 0.05
1
Hedonic scale: 1 = “dislike extremely” and 9 = “like extremely.” n = 63. 3 No significant differences (P > 0.05) within the row were noted. 2
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
All data were subjected to ANOVA conducted using JMP (version 5.1, SAS Institute, 2004). Means from sensory analysis were separated using least squares means at a significance level of P < 0.05. Deboning times (0.25, 1.25, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 6, and 24 h) were defined as the main effect to determine the influence of deboning time on meat tenderness. The 9-point hedonic and 5-point JAR frequency distributions were compared using Fisher’s exact test for equality of distributions. The χ2 test was not utilized in this instance because more than 20% of the expected values were below 5 (Fleiss, 2003). Significant differences for the frequency distribution were determined at P < 0.05.
periment, consumer panelists rated the overall texture acceptance of marinated pre- and postrigor deboned breast fillets as “like slightly” to “like moderately.” Previous research has shown that deboning time can significantly affect product quality, specifically texture or tenderness. Sams and Janky (1986) reported that prerigor deboning of broiler breast meat resulted in unacceptable tenderness. Xiong et al. (2006) reported that for nonmarinated pre- and postrigor deboned breast fillets, consumer panelists rated the overall texture acceptance as “dislike slightly” to “like moderately,” with higher acceptance associated with the postrigor deboned fillets. Although deboning time can affect product quality like tenderness, marination can improve meat tenderness (Palladino and Ball, 1979; Goodwin and Maness, 1984; Lyon et al., 1998). Lyon et al. (1998) studied the effects of marination on broiler breast meat and concluded that marinated whole breast products can eliminate postchill aging due to the tenderness resulting from marination. In the process of marination, salts and phosphates dissociate actomyosin into actin and myosin, thus improving the texture of the meat (Smith, 2001). In addition to a lack of differences among treatments in the present study for texture acceptance, the range of the mean responses for hedonic texture in this experiment was more narrow (6.30 to 7.06) in comparison to the wide range of means reported by Cavitt et al. (2005) and Xiong et al. (2006) (4.3 to 7.4 and 4.8 to 7.0, respectively) for consumer responses on nonmarinated fillets deboned at similar times PM. Similar results of lower variability among treatments were observed by Saha (2007) for marinated fillets assessed using instrumental texture tests. Furthermore, instead of having noticeable differences in sensory characteristics between prerigor and postrigor fillets, marination resulted in tender product and more uniform consumer acceptance despite the deboning time. Frequency distribution (%) of overall impression, texture, and flavor are presented in Table 2. No significant differences (P > 0.05) were observed in the frequency distributions for all the 9 marinated treatments, indicating higher product uniformity among all treatments. Furthermore, the data indicate less than 21% of the consumer panelists disliked product attributes (overall impression, texture, and flavor). The percentages of consumers rating the texture acceptance for 1.25,
1253
MEAT TENDERNESS OF MARINATED BROILER FILLETS 1
Table 2. Frequency (%) of consumer responses for overall impression, flavor, and texture of marinated breast fillets Deboning time (h) 2
Attribute (scale )
0.25
1.25
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
6
24
0.00 0.00 0.00 10.1 5.80 14.4 36.2 27.5 5.80
0.00 0.00 3.13 7.81 2.50 17.19 31.25 21.88 6.25
0.00 0.00 0.00 11.59 0.00 17.39 30.43 34.78 5.80
0.00 1.59 0.00 6.35 6.35 11.11 42.86 26.98 4.76
0.00 1.45 4.35 1.45 5.80 15.94 24.64 37.68 8.70
0.00 0.00 4.69 9.38 7.81 15.63 21.88 31.25 9.38
0.00 0.00 2.90 8.70 4.35 11.59 31.88 33.33 7.25
1.56 0.00 1.56 4.69 9.38 21.88 28.13 31.25 1.56
0.00 1.45 0.00 2.90 4.35 13.04 31.88 36.23 10.14
0.00 0.00 5.80 8.70 2.90 18.8 34.7 23.1 5.80
0.00 0.00 0.00 9.38 7.81 23.44 31.25 21.88 6.25
0.00 0.00 1.45 10.14 8.70 23.19 20.29 23.19 13.04
0.00 0.00 1.59 7.94 9.52 22.22 31.75 25.40 1.59
0.00 0.00 4.35 2.90 7.25 18.84 18.84 43.48 4.35
0.00 1.56 3.13 9.38 12.50 15.63 26.56 20.31 10.94
0.00 1.45 7.25 2.90 8.70 15.94 30.43 24.64 8.70
0.00 1.56 1.56 4.69 15.63 23.44 28.13 25.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 2.90 5.80 4.35 20.29 37.68 23.19 5.80
0.00 1.45 2.90 5.80 5.80 11.5 39.1 26.0 7.25
0.00 3.13 4.69 12.50 9.38 14.06 25.00 25.00 6.25
0.00 0.00 1.45 14.49 5.80 10.14 21.74 42.03 4.35
0.00 1.59 1.59 7.94 12.70 17.46 26.98 26.98 4.76
0.00 0.00 1.45 5.80 1.45 10.14 33.33 43.48 4.35
0.00 1.56 1.56 17.19 9.38 10.94 21.88 28.13 9.38
0.00 1.45 2.90 10.14 2.90 20.29 20.29 31.88 10.14
1.56 0.00 0.00 10.94 4.69 20.31 34.38 25.00 3.13
0.00 1.45 0.00 7.25 5.80 18.84 20.29 36.23 10.14
3
1
n = 63. A 9-point hedonic scale used for overall impression, flavor, and texture. 3 No significant differences (P > 0.05) within the row were noted. 2
2, and 2.5 h PM as “dislike extremely” and “dislike very much” were low for marinated fillets (3.13, 0.0. and 1.59%, respectively). However, Xiong et al. (2006) reported percentages of 20.3, 17.6, and 10.9% (1.25, 2, and 2.5 h PM, respectively) for similar rating categories for nonmarinated fillets. Vacuum-tumbling and marination in the present study not only resulted in low variability in texture across deboning times but also led to very low percentages of consumers disliking the texture of the product. In addition to hedonic sensory scales, JAR sensory scales were used to determine appropriateness of given attributes (Table 3). Tenderness, moistness, overall flavor, saltiness, and purchase were evaluated using a JAR scale. Gacula et al. (2006) described the JAR scale as a bipolar scale, with both ends denoting opposite sensory description and the middle category anchored as JAR with the phrase “just about right” or score of 3, denoting the most acceptable. The JAR tenderness mean scores for all the samples in this experiment were 2.92 or higher, indicating that the majority of consumers rated the samples as JAR or “too tender” rather than “too tough.” Cavitt et al. (2005) and Xiong et al. (2006) reported JAR mean scores of 1.8 to 3.0 and 2.0 to 2.9, respectively, for nonmarinated pre- and postrigor deboned fillets, indicating that more consumers rated the samples as “too tough” rather than “too
tender.” The differences in these results among these studies suggest that marination does improve consumer acceptability. Significant differences (P < 0.05) were observed in percentage of consumers rating the samples as “too tough,” JAR, and “too tender.” The majority of consumers (81 to 93%) considered the marinated breast fillets as JAR, “too tender,” or “much too tender,” whereas only a small percentage (<18%) considered the fillets as “too tough,” despite the wide range of deboning times used (Table 4). The percentage of consumers rating meat tenderness as “too tough” for 2and 4-h treatments was significantly higher in comparison to 6-h deboning. All of the other treatments were not significantly different (P > 0.05) from each other. The percentage of consumers rating meat tenderness as JAR ranged from 59.3 to 81.1% for marinated fillets in this experiment, suggesting high consumer acceptance. In other studies with nonmarinated fillets, the percentage of consumers rating meat tenderness as JAR was as low as 21 to 25% for some early deboned treatments (Cavitt et al., 2005; Xiong et al., 2006) The small differences in JAR mean scores among deboning times and frequency distribution percentages for marinated pre- and postrigor fillets in the present study indicate high product uniformity (despite deboning time) and suggest that marinating broiler breast meat can result in tender product even when meat is deboned early.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
Overall impression Dislike extremely (1) Dislike very much (2) Dislike moderately (3) Dislike slightly (4) Neither like nor dislike (5) Like slightly (6) Like moderately (7) Like very much (8) Like extremely (9) Flavor3 Dislike extremely (1) Dislike very much (2) Dislike moderately (3) Dislike slightly (4) Neither like nor dislike (5) Like slightly (6) Like moderately (7) Like very much (8) Like extremely (9) Texture3 Dislike extremely (1) Dislike very much (2) Dislike moderately (3) Dislike slightly (4) Neither like nor dislike (5) Like slightly (6) Like moderately (7) Like very much (8) Like extremely (9)
1254
Saha et al.
Table 3. Summary table for the just-about-right (JAR) scale1 means2 for marinated broiler breast fillets evaluated by consumer sensory panel Deboning time (h) Sensory attribute Tenderness Moistness Overall flavor Saltiness Purchase3
0.25 ab
3.06 2.99ab 2.80 2.87 3.34
1.25 ab
3.02 2.90ab 2.89 2.86 3.17
2
2.5 b
2.93 2.83ab 2.79 2.99 3.33
3 ab
2.99 2.82ab 2.59 2.78 3.39
3.5 ab
4 ab
3.00 2.86ab 2.83 3.05 3.60
6 b
3.08 3.02a 2.78 2.83 3.46
24 a
2.92 2.69b 2.75 2.86 3.41
Pooled SEM ab
3.24 3.02a 2.71 2.79 3.25
3.11 2.82ab 2.78 2.91 3.44
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04
a,b
Means within a row lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05). JAR scale: 1 = “much too low,” 3 = JAR, and 5 = “much too high.” 2 n = 63. 3 JAR scale: 1 = “definitely would not buy,” 3 = JAR, and 5 = “definitely would buy.” 1
ported by Saha et al. (2006), who reported that over 70% of consumer panelists considered marinated fillets as JAR. These data suggest that marination with salt and phosphate can result in acceptable WHC. The addition of salt reduces electrostatic interactions between protein molecules to increase protein extractability, solubility, and water-binding (Offer and Knight, 1988; Matthews and Strong, 2005). Salt also increases WHC by increasing the space between the thick and thin filaments (Matthews and Strong, 2005). The anions bind to positively charged amino groups of proteins. As a
Table 4. Frequency (%) of consumer responses1 for acceptance for tenderness, juiciness, overall flavor, saltiness, and purchase for marinated breast fillets Deboning time (h) Attribute (scale2) Tenderness Much too tough (1) Too tough (2) Just about right (3) Too tender (4) Much too tender (5) Moistness Much too dry (1) Too dry (2) Just about right (3) Too moist (4) Much too moist (5) Overall flavor Much too weak (1) Too weak (2) Just about right (3) Too strong (4) Much too strong (5) Saltiness Not nearly salty enough (1) Not salty enough (2) Just about right (3) Too salty (4) Much too salty (5) Purchase Definitely would not buy (1) Probably would not buy (2) Maybe/maybe not (3) Probably would buy (4) Definitely would buy (5) a,b
0.25
1.25
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
6
24
0.00 15.94ab 65.22b 17.39a 1.45
3.13 15.63ab 59.38b 20.31a 1.56
0.00 16.18a 76.47ab 7.35b 0.00
1.59 14.29ab 69.84ab 11.11ab 3.17
0.00 11.59ab 81.16a 5.80b 1.45
0.00 9.38ab 76.56ab 10.94ab 3.13
0.00 17.39a 69.57ab 13.04ab 0.00
1.56 4.69b 65.63b 25.00a 3.13
1.45 8.70ab 68.12ab 18.84a 2.90
1.45 13.04 71.01 14.49 0.00
0.00 21.88 68.75 7.81 1.56
0.00 23.19 66.67 10.14 0.00
4.76 19.05 66.67 9.52 0.00
2.90 15.94 73.91 7.25 0.00
3.13 10.94 68.75 15.63 1.56
2.90 28.99 59.42 8.70 0.00
1.56 14.06 64.06 20.31 0.00
0.00 24.64 66.67 8.70 0.00
1.45 28.99 59.42 10.14 0.00
0.00 21.88 70.31 6.25 1.56
1.45 27.54 59.42 10.14 1.45
6.35 31.75 57.14 4.76 0.00
0.00 26.09 63.77 10.14 0.00
3.13 28.13 60.94 4.69 3.13
1.45 28.99 60.87 7.25 1.45
4.69 31.25 51.56 12.50 0.00
0.00 28.99 62.32 7.25 1.45
4.35 20.29 60.87 14.49 0.00
1.56 23.44 62.50 12.50 0.00
1.45 23.19 50.72 21.74 2.90
3.17 22.22 68.25 6.35 0.00
1.45 18.84 55.07 23.19 1.45
4.69 21.88 60.94 10.94 1.56
0.00 28.99 52.17 18.84 0.00
1.56 26.56 62.50 9.38 0.00
0.00 23.19 63.77 13.04 0.00
1.45 20.29 23.19 44.93 10.14
3.13 25.00 34.38 26.56 10.94
2.90 18.84 27.54 42.03 8.70
1.59 19.05 28.57 38.10 12.70
1.45 14.49 21.74 49.28 13.04
3.13 20.31 21.88 39.06 15.63
4.35 15.94 27.54 39.13 13.04
3.13 15.63 35.94 42.19 3.13
1.45 17.39 20.29 49.28 11.59
Means within a row lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05). n = 63. 2 A 5-point just-about-right scale was used for tenderness, juiciness, overall flavor, saltiness, and purchase. 1
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
Moistness was assessed in this study as an indicator of juiciness. The scores for moistness were not affected (P > 0.05) by the deboning times. All JAR moistness means ranged from 2.69 to 3.02, indicating that consumers perceived the samples to be “too dry” or JAR (Table 3). Furthermore, the majority of the consumers (59.42 to 73.91%) considered the fillets to be JAR for moistness (Table 4). In comparison, Cavitt et al. (2005) and Xiong et al. (2006) reported slightly lower JAR values for juiciness, indicating nonmarinated fillets were closer to “too dry.” The present data are sup-
MEAT TENDERNESS OF MARINATED BROILER FILLETS
similar to marinated postrigor deboned meat, suggesting its effectiveness in improving meat quality attributes of early deboned meat. However, using 1% salt concentration may potentially lead to consumers disliking the product, especially if other ingredients or salt, or both, are added in final product preparation. Therefore, further research is needed to evaluate and compare consumer acceptance (texture, flavor, WHC, etc.) of marinated poultry breast meat containing different salt levels.
REFERENCES Barbut, S. 2002. Poultry meat processing and product technology. Pages 1–29 in Poultry Products Processing: An Industry Guide. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Barbut, S., A. J. Maurer, and R. C. Lindsay. 1988. Effects of reduced sodium-chloride and added phosphates on physical and sensory properties of turkey frankfurters. J. Food Sci. 53:62–66. Cavitt, L. C., J. F. C. Meullenet, R. Xiong, and C. M. Owens. 2005. The relationship of razor blade shear, Allo-Kramer shear, Warner-Bratzler shear, and sensory tests to changes in tenderness of broiler breast fillets. J. Muscle Foods 16:223–242. Cavitt, L. C., G. W. Youm, J. F. Meullenet, C. M. Owens, and R. Xiong. 2004. Prediction of poultry meat tenderness using razor blade shear, Allo-Kramer shear, and sarcomere length. J. Food Sci. 69:SNQ11–SNQ15. Dawson, P. L., D. M. Janky, M. G. Dukes, L. D. Thompson, and S. A. Woodward. 1987. Effect of postmortem boning time during simulated commercial processing on the tenderness of broiler breast meat. Poult. Sci. 66:1331–1333. Deatherage, F. E. 1963. The effects of water and inorganic salts on tenderness. Pages 45–68 in Proc. Meat Tenderness Symposium. Campbell Soup Co., Camden NJ. deFremery, R., and M. F. Pool. 1960. Biochemistry of chicken muscle as related to rigor mortis and tenderisation. Food Res. 25:73– 87. Farr, A. J., and K. M. May. 1970. The effect of polyphosphates and sodium chloride on cooking yields and oxidation stability of chicken. Poult. Sci. 49:268–275. Fleiss, J. 2003. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. J. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. Froning, G. W., and B. Sackett. 1985. Effect of salt and phosphates during tumbling of turkey breast muscle on meat characteristics. Poult. Sci. 64:1328–1333. Gacula, M., S. Rutenbeck, L. Pollack, A. V. A. Resurreccion, and H. Moskowitz. 2006. The just-about-right intensity scale: Functional analysis and relation to hedonics. J. Sens. Stud. 22:194–211. Goodwin, T. L., and J. B. Maness. 1984. The influence of marination, weight, and cooking technique on tenderness of broilers. Poult. Sci. 63:1925–1929. Hamm, D. 1981. Unconventional meat harvesting. Poult. Sci. 60(Suppl. 1):1666. (Abstr.) Hirschler, E. M., and A. R. Sams. 1998. Commercial-scale electrical stimulation of poultry: The effects on tenderness, breast meat yield and production costs. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 7:99–103. Leidahl, R. 2006. Consumers speak about chicken: Market survey results. http://www.nationalchickencouncil.com Accessed Jan. 2007. Lyon, C. E., C. E. Davis, J. A. Dickens, C. M. Papa, and J. O. Reagan. 1989. Effects of electrical stimulation on the postmortem biochemical changes and texture of broiler pectoralis muscle. Poult. Sci. 68:249–257. Lyon, C. E., D. Hamm, J. P. Hudspeth, and F. H. Benoff. 1983. Effects of age and sex of the bird on thaw and cook losses and texture of broiler breast meat. Poult. Sci. 62:1459. (Abstr.) Lyon, C. E., D. Hamm, and J. E. Thomson. 1985. pH and tenderness of broiler breast meat deboned various times after chilling. Poult. Sci. 64:307–310.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
result, the isoelectric point moves to a lower pH without changing the meat pH, resulting in subsequent improvements in purge loss and cook yields (Miller, 1998). Phosphates used for marination help in improving the WHC of meat by increasing the pH and ionic strength of the muscle (Miller, 1998). Froning and Sackett (1985) marinated turkey breast muscle and the results indicated that sensory properties like binding, flavor, and WHC were significantly improved by the presence of phosphates and NaCl. Regenstein and Stamm (1979) studied the WHC of pre- and postrigor chicken in the presence of polyphosphates. They reported that phosphates caused a large increase in WHC of prerigor and postrigor muscle. Therefore, marination not only helps in improving the tenderness but also improves the WHC (Young and Lyon, 1986; Woelfel and Sams, 2001), which explains the high percentage of consumer panelists who considered moistness as JAR for all 9 marinated treatments in this experiment. Flavor was also assessed using a JAR sensory scale. Consumers considered the overall flavor as “too weak” to JAR and there was no consistent trend due to deboning time, which is to be expected because of the similar marinade formulation used in all treatments. In many cases, approximately 30% of consumers considered the flavor as “too weak” (Table 4). This is likely due to the fact the breast fillets were marinated with salt and phosphate without additional spices or seasonings. Most the consumers (>60%) considered the saltiness to be JAR, but saltiness was considered as “too weak” by 20 to 29% of consumers. However, in household settings, it is likely that chicken breasts would be prepared with additional ingredients (seasonings, spices, etc.), leading to increased levels of appropriateness for flavor or saltiness, or both. In this study, approximately 14 to 15%, on average, of consumers found the treatments to be “too salty.” However, previous research has indicated that marinating chicken with 1% or greater salt can lead to high percentages of consumers considering the meat as “too salty” (Saha et al., 2006). Therefore, although there was a small percentage of consumers who considered the product as “too salty” in this study, there may be potential for lower acceptability of a product marinated with 1% salt if other ingredients (salt, spices, seasonings, etc.) are added in final preparation of a product (i.e., household or foodservice settings). Finally, consumer panelists were asked about their purchasing preferences for the treatments used in this study. The results indicated that most consumers would buy marinated broiler breasts, regardless of deboning times presented in this study. Results indicated that approximately 52% of consumers (on average across debone times) were in the “probably would buy” and “definitely would buy” categories. Therefore, deboning time did not affect consumer preferences to buy or not to buy the product. In conclusion, consumer acceptability scores from this study indicate that marination of prerigor deboned meat (with 1% salt) is effective in producing product
1255
1256
Saha et al. Resurreccion, A. V. A. 2003. Sensory aspects of consumer choices for meat and meat products. Meat Sci. 66:11–20. Robbins, K., J. Jensen, K. J. Ryan, C. Homco-Ryan, F. K. McKeith, and M. S. Brewer. 2003. Consumer attitudes towards beef and acceptability of enhanced beef. Meat Sci. 65:721–729. Saha, A. 2007. The effects of salt concentration, deboning time and extended aging on consumer perception and texture of marinated poultry breast meat. PhD Diss. University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. Saha, A., A. V. Perumalla, Y. Lee, J. F. Meullenet, and C. M. Owens. 2006. Optimizing meat tenderness, juiciness and flavor of marinated broiler breast fillets using varying levels of salt. Poult. Sci. 85(Suppl. 1):59. (Abstr.) Sams, A. R. 1990. Electrical stimulation and high temperature conditioning of broiler carcasses. Poult. Sci. 69:1781–1786. Sams, A. R., and D. M. Janky. 1986. The influence of brine chilling on tenderness of hot-boned, chill-boned, and aged-boned broiler breast fillets. Poult. Sci. 65:1316–1321. SAS Institute. 2004. JMP. Version 5.1. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC. Smith, D. M. 2001. Functional properties of muscle proteins in processed poultry products. Pages 181–195 in Poultry Meat Processing. A. Sams, ed. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL. Smith, D. P., and D. L. Fletcher. 1988. Compositional and biochemistry variations within broiler breast muscle subjected to different processing methods. Poult. Sci. 67:1702–1707. Stewart, M. K., D. L. Fletcher, D. Hamm, and J. E. Thomson. 1984. The influence of hot boning broiler breast meat muscle on pH decline and toughening. Poult. Sci. 63:1935–1939. Woelfel, R. L., and A. R. Sams. 2001. Marination performance of pale broiler breast meat. Poult. Sci. 80:1519–1522. Xiong, R., L. C. Cavitt, J. F. Meullenet, and C. M. Owens. 2006. Comparison of Allo-Kramer, Warner-Bratzler and razor blade shears for predicting sensory tenderness of broiler breast meat. J. Texture Stud. 37:179–199. Young, L. L., and L. E. Lyon. 1986. Effect of sodium tripolyphosphate in the presence and absence of calcium chloride and sodium chloride on water retention properties and shear resistance of chicken breast meat. Poult. Sci. 65:898–902.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
Lyon, C. E., B. G. Lyon, and J. A. Dikens. 1998. Effects of carcass stimulation, deboning time, and marination on color and texture of broiler breast meat. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 7:53–60. Lyon, C. E., B. G. Lyon, and J. P. Hudspeth. 1973. The effect of different cutting procedures on the cooked yield and tenderness of broiler cut-up parts. Poult. Sci. 52:1103–1111. Lyon, B. G., D. P. Smith, and E. M. Savage. 2005. Descriptive sensory analysis of broiler breast fillets marinated in phosphate, salt, and acid solutions. Poult. Sci. 84:345–349. Lyon, C. E., and R. L. Wilson. 1986. Effects of sex, rigor condition, and heating method on yield and objective texture of broiler breast meat. Poult. Sci. 65:907–914. Matthews, K., and K. Strong. 2005. Salt–Its role in meat products and the industry’s action plan to reduce it. Nutr. Bull. 30:55–61. Mehaffey, J. M., S. P. Pradhan, J. F. Meullenet, J. L. Emmert, S. R. McKee, and C. M. Owens. 2006. Meat quality evaluation of minimally aged broiler breast fillets from five commercial genetic strains. Poult. Sci. 85:902–908. Meilgaard, M., G. V. Civille, and B. T. Carr. 1999. Sensory Evaluation Techniques. 3rd ed. CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, FL. Miller, R. 1998. Subject: Functionality of non-meat ingredients used in enhanced pork. http://www.meatscience.org/Pubs/factsheets/ functionalitynonmeat.pdf Accessed Dec. 2006. Morgan, J. B., J. W. Savell, D. S. Hale, R. K. Miller, D. B. Griffin, H. R. Cross, and S. D. Shackelford. 1991. National beef tenderness survey. J. Anim. Sci. 69:3274–3283. Offer, G., and P. Knight. 1988. The structural basis of water holding in meat. Pages 173–243 in Developments in Meat Science-4. R. A. Lawrie, ed. Elsevier Applied Science, London, UK. Owens, C. M. 2007. Portioning breast fillets: Try a little tenderness. WATT Poultry USA (June 2007):26–29. Palladino, D. K., and H. R. Ball. 1979. Effects of selected inorganic salts on certain tenderness characteristics of spent hen muscle. J. Food Sci. 44:322–326. Regenstein, J. M., and J. R. Stamm. 1979. A comparison of the water holding capacity of pre- and post-rigor chicken, trout, and lobster muscle in the presence of polyphosphates and divalent cations. J. Food Biochem. 3:223–228.
Key words: marination, sensory, consumer, broiler breast, tenderness 2009 Poultry Science 88:1250–1256 doi:10.3382/ps.2008-00236
INTRODUCTION In recent years, the poultry industry has experienced an unrivalled rate of growth. This can be attributed to poultry having relatively low production costs, high nutritional values, rapid growth rates, and a great number of further-processed products (Barbut, 2002). Boneless breast meat is the most popular meat in the American household (Leidahl, 2006). Increasing demand by consumers has led the industry to find methods for increasing production of boneless meat without negatively affecting overall consumer acceptance and ensuring product uniformity. Changing consumer demand in the United States has influenced the markets for all types of meat. The increase in per capita broiler consumption over the last decade can be attributed to increased health concerns, the need for convenience, and product pricing (Resur©2009 Poultry Science Association Inc. Received June 12, 2008. Accepted January 31, 2009. 1 Corresponding author: [email protected]
reccion, 2003). Therefore, knowledge of consumer acceptance of any product and foresight into future consumer trends is integral for the success of any company. Texture properties like tenderness are of great importance in boneless poultry breast meat when it comes to consumer acceptance. Tenderness is a major quality determinant and also an important sensory characteristic of meat (Deatherage, 1963; Smith and Fletcher, 1988; Morgan et al., 1991). Robbins et al. (2003) concluded that tenderness, juiciness, and flavor were the most important factors with respect to consumer eating satisfaction. Many factors can affect meat tenderness; especially, postmortem (PM) deboning time can have a large influence (Lyon et al., 1983; Stewart et al., 1984; Lyon and Wilson, 1986; Cavitt et al., 2004, 2005; Mehaffey et al., 2006). Lyon et al. (1985) concluded that consumers found prerigor deboned breasts to be unacceptably tough. This conclusion was in agreement with deFremery and Pool (1960), who found that meat that is deboned before the development of rigor mortis is objectionably toughened. Lyon et al. (1973) and Dawson et al. (1987) reported that broiler carcasses must be aged for a minimum of
1250
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
ABSTRACT Prerigor deboning and marination of broiler breast fillets are growing trends in the poultry industry. Marination can often enhance product attributes such as flavor, juiciness, and texture. The purpose of this study was to evaluate consumer acceptance of marinated broiler breast fillets deboned pre- (<4 h postmortem) and postrigor (≥4 h postmortem). A total of 400 broiler carcasses were processed using an inline system and deboned at various times: 0.25, 1.25, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 6, and 24 h postmortem. A 2-stage chilling system was used for all treatments with the exception of the 0.25 h treatment, which was deboned before chilling. After chilling, carcasses or fillets, or both, were aged on ice. Breast fillets were marinated with a 1% salt and 0.45% phosphate final concentration. Consumer sensory evaluations for moistness, tenderness, saltiness, flavor, and overall impression were obtained
MEAT TENDERNESS OF MARINATED BROILER FILLETS
MATERIALS AND METHODS Processing At 56 d of age, 400 commercial male broilers were processed in 2 replications at the university poultry processing pilot plant. Feed was withdrawn 10 h before processing; however, broilers had free access to water before processing. Broilers were transported in coops to the processing plant 15 min before slaughter. The broilers were electrically stunned (11 mV, 10 s), manually cut (severed left carotid artery and jugular vein), bled out (1.5 min), scalded (55°C, 2 min), and picked inline using commercial defeathering equipment. Broilers were eviscerated and a 2-stage chilling system was used for all treatments with the exception of the 0.25h treatment, which was deboned before chilling. Carcasses were placed in a prechill tank for 15 min (12°C) and a chill tank (ice slush) for 75 min (1°C); carcasses were manually agitated frequently throughout the chilling process to reduce thermal layering around the carcass and improve chilling efficiency. The carcasses were
deboned at various times: 1.25, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 6, and 24 h PM using the method described by Hamm (1981). These deboning times have been shown to produce a wide range of tenderness in broiler breast fillets (Cavitt et al., 2004).
Marination After chilling, carcasses or fillets, or both, were aged on ice for 24 h. After aging, fillets were marinated in 2 replications (20 fillets per replication per treatment) in a vacuum tumbler (20 in Hg) at 20 rpm for 30 min in a cooler at 4°C in a 15% marinade solution (based on meat weight) consisting of 1.0% NaCl [granulated NaCl (CAS 7647-14-5), food-grade salt; North American Salt Co., Overland Park, KS] and 0.45% phosphate (Carnal 822, combination of sodium diphosphate and sodium tripolyphosphate, pH 9.5; Budenheim USA Inc., Plainview, NY). After tumbling, fillets were allowed to rest for a period of 5 min and then vacuum-packed, frozen, and stored at −20°C until further analysis.
Cooking Before cooking, the frozen fillets were thawed overnight in a cooler (4°C). The fillets were cooked in pans covered with aluminum foil, to an internal temperature of 76°C in a convection oven according to the method of Sams (1990). Eight fillets were cooked in each pan and to minimize pan effects; 2 treatments (4 fillets for each treatment) chosen at random were represented in each pan. All fillets for each 30-min sensory session were cooked at the same time; thus, all treatments were represented in each cook.
Consumer Sensory Analysis The 9 treatments were evaluated on 2 consecutive days by a 63-member consumer panel. A total of 360 fillets were used (n = 40 fillets per treatment) in the 2-d consumer test. On the first day, 5 meat samples (0.25, 2, 3, 4, and 24 h PM) were evaluated and 4 samples (1.25, 2.5, 3.5, and 6 h PM) on the second day by the same panel members. This randomization was conducted to minimize any potential variation that could have resulted within day effects between each panel session. The 9 samples were given a random 3-digit code and serving order was randomized and balanced across consumers (Meilgaard et al., 1999). The consumer test was conducted at the University of Arkansas Sensory Laboratory. The sensory testing facility consisted of 6 individual testing booths with controlled lighting and positive airflow. The panelists were presented with 1 treatment at a time, which consisted of three 0.4 to 0.5in. (1.0 to 1.2 cm) cubes of breast meat identified by a random 3-digit code (Meilgaard et al., 1999). Room temperature water and unsalted saltine crackers were also served. Once the consumer received the sample, they were asked to enter the code into the computer
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
4 h PM before deboning to avoid toughening of meat. However, delayed boning time results in higher cost for the processing plant in terms of extra storage space and added refrigeration (Lyon et al., 1989). Hirschler and Sams (1998) found that by deboning breast fillets at 2 h PM, the meat yield could be increased by 3.4% as compared with deboning at 9 h PM. Therefore, aging of broiler breast meat is not only very important for consumer acceptance of the product but is also costly for the processor. Currently, many plants are deboning immediately out of the chiller as early as 1.5 to 2.0 h, regardless of recommended aging times (Owens, 2007), and tenderness may be an issue with this type of product. However, the poultry industry is interested in deboning early while also providing tender breast meat. Marination can be successfully used to reduce aging time required for meat tenderization (Goodwin and Maness, 1984). The use of marination has increased drastically in the past few years in the poultry industry. Most commonly used marinades contain salt, phosphate, and water as their primary ingredients (Barbut et al., 1988; Lyon et al., 2005) and these ingredients, salt and phosphates, help in improving water-holding capacity (WHC; Farr and May, 1970; Young and Lyon, 1986; Woelfel and Sams 2001) and tenderness (Palladino and Ball, 1979; Goodwin and Maness, 1984). A few studies have evaluated the effects of marination on prerigor deboned meat but a simple question regarding consumer acceptance of prerigor marinated meat in comparison with postrigor deboned marinated meat still needs to be answered. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the consumer acceptance scores for tenderness, juiciness, and flavor of marinated pre- (<4 h PM) and postrigor (≥4 h PM) deboned (including multiple deboning times of each category) broiler breast fillets.
1251
1252
Saha et al.
and evaluate the product for overall impression, flavor, and texture on a 9-point hedonic scale with 1 = “dislike extremely” and 9 = “like extremely.” The 5-point justabout-right (JAR) scale was used on questions about tenderness, moistness, overall flavor, and saltiness. In this case, 1 = “much too low,” 3 = JAR, and 5 = “much too high.”
Statistical Analysis
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Texture and flavor are important sensory characteristics of meat, which can strongly influence overall consumer acceptance and choice of meat. Means of hedonic liking are presented in Table 1. Deboning time did not have a significant effect on the overall impression as indicated by no significant differences (P > 0.05) among treatments. However, there was a narrow range of the mean responses (6.56 to 7.11) in which all of the 9 treatments were categorized as “like slightly” to “like moderately.” Similar to overall impression, there were no significant differences in hedonic ratings for flavor of marinated breast fillets. Because all fillets were marinated with the same marinade formulation, it was expected that flavor would be similar across treatments. Flavor acceptance scores in the current study were similar to those reported by Saha et al. (2006) and Saha (2007). Texture acceptance of marinated fillets was also assessed in this study and results indicated no significant differences (P > 0.05) among treatments. In this ex-
Table 1. Summary table for hedonic scale1 means2 for marinated broiler breast fillets evaluated by consumer sensory panel Deboning time (h) Sensory attribute
0.25
1.25
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
6
24
Pooled SEM
Overall impression3 Flavor3 Texture3
6.76 6.55 6.68
6.56 6.67 6.30
6.87 6.71 6.74
6.83 6.54 6.52
7.01 7.03 7.06
6.71 6.54 6.49
6.93 6.69 6.71
6.62 6.40 6.57
7.11 6.71 6.93
0.05 0.05 0.05
1
Hedonic scale: 1 = “dislike extremely” and 9 = “like extremely.” n = 63. 3 No significant differences (P > 0.05) within the row were noted. 2
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
All data were subjected to ANOVA conducted using JMP (version 5.1, SAS Institute, 2004). Means from sensory analysis were separated using least squares means at a significance level of P < 0.05. Deboning times (0.25, 1.25, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 6, and 24 h) were defined as the main effect to determine the influence of deboning time on meat tenderness. The 9-point hedonic and 5-point JAR frequency distributions were compared using Fisher’s exact test for equality of distributions. The χ2 test was not utilized in this instance because more than 20% of the expected values were below 5 (Fleiss, 2003). Significant differences for the frequency distribution were determined at P < 0.05.
periment, consumer panelists rated the overall texture acceptance of marinated pre- and postrigor deboned breast fillets as “like slightly” to “like moderately.” Previous research has shown that deboning time can significantly affect product quality, specifically texture or tenderness. Sams and Janky (1986) reported that prerigor deboning of broiler breast meat resulted in unacceptable tenderness. Xiong et al. (2006) reported that for nonmarinated pre- and postrigor deboned breast fillets, consumer panelists rated the overall texture acceptance as “dislike slightly” to “like moderately,” with higher acceptance associated with the postrigor deboned fillets. Although deboning time can affect product quality like tenderness, marination can improve meat tenderness (Palladino and Ball, 1979; Goodwin and Maness, 1984; Lyon et al., 1998). Lyon et al. (1998) studied the effects of marination on broiler breast meat and concluded that marinated whole breast products can eliminate postchill aging due to the tenderness resulting from marination. In the process of marination, salts and phosphates dissociate actomyosin into actin and myosin, thus improving the texture of the meat (Smith, 2001). In addition to a lack of differences among treatments in the present study for texture acceptance, the range of the mean responses for hedonic texture in this experiment was more narrow (6.30 to 7.06) in comparison to the wide range of means reported by Cavitt et al. (2005) and Xiong et al. (2006) (4.3 to 7.4 and 4.8 to 7.0, respectively) for consumer responses on nonmarinated fillets deboned at similar times PM. Similar results of lower variability among treatments were observed by Saha (2007) for marinated fillets assessed using instrumental texture tests. Furthermore, instead of having noticeable differences in sensory characteristics between prerigor and postrigor fillets, marination resulted in tender product and more uniform consumer acceptance despite the deboning time. Frequency distribution (%) of overall impression, texture, and flavor are presented in Table 2. No significant differences (P > 0.05) were observed in the frequency distributions for all the 9 marinated treatments, indicating higher product uniformity among all treatments. Furthermore, the data indicate less than 21% of the consumer panelists disliked product attributes (overall impression, texture, and flavor). The percentages of consumers rating the texture acceptance for 1.25,
1253
MEAT TENDERNESS OF MARINATED BROILER FILLETS 1
Table 2. Frequency (%) of consumer responses for overall impression, flavor, and texture of marinated breast fillets Deboning time (h) 2
Attribute (scale )
0.25
1.25
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
6
24
0.00 0.00 0.00 10.1 5.80 14.4 36.2 27.5 5.80
0.00 0.00 3.13 7.81 2.50 17.19 31.25 21.88 6.25
0.00 0.00 0.00 11.59 0.00 17.39 30.43 34.78 5.80
0.00 1.59 0.00 6.35 6.35 11.11 42.86 26.98 4.76
0.00 1.45 4.35 1.45 5.80 15.94 24.64 37.68 8.70
0.00 0.00 4.69 9.38 7.81 15.63 21.88 31.25 9.38
0.00 0.00 2.90 8.70 4.35 11.59 31.88 33.33 7.25
1.56 0.00 1.56 4.69 9.38 21.88 28.13 31.25 1.56
0.00 1.45 0.00 2.90 4.35 13.04 31.88 36.23 10.14
0.00 0.00 5.80 8.70 2.90 18.8 34.7 23.1 5.80
0.00 0.00 0.00 9.38 7.81 23.44 31.25 21.88 6.25
0.00 0.00 1.45 10.14 8.70 23.19 20.29 23.19 13.04
0.00 0.00 1.59 7.94 9.52 22.22 31.75 25.40 1.59
0.00 0.00 4.35 2.90 7.25 18.84 18.84 43.48 4.35
0.00 1.56 3.13 9.38 12.50 15.63 26.56 20.31 10.94
0.00 1.45 7.25 2.90 8.70 15.94 30.43 24.64 8.70
0.00 1.56 1.56 4.69 15.63 23.44 28.13 25.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 2.90 5.80 4.35 20.29 37.68 23.19 5.80
0.00 1.45 2.90 5.80 5.80 11.5 39.1 26.0 7.25
0.00 3.13 4.69 12.50 9.38 14.06 25.00 25.00 6.25
0.00 0.00 1.45 14.49 5.80 10.14 21.74 42.03 4.35
0.00 1.59 1.59 7.94 12.70 17.46 26.98 26.98 4.76
0.00 0.00 1.45 5.80 1.45 10.14 33.33 43.48 4.35
0.00 1.56 1.56 17.19 9.38 10.94 21.88 28.13 9.38
0.00 1.45 2.90 10.14 2.90 20.29 20.29 31.88 10.14
1.56 0.00 0.00 10.94 4.69 20.31 34.38 25.00 3.13
0.00 1.45 0.00 7.25 5.80 18.84 20.29 36.23 10.14
3
1
n = 63. A 9-point hedonic scale used for overall impression, flavor, and texture. 3 No significant differences (P > 0.05) within the row were noted. 2
2, and 2.5 h PM as “dislike extremely” and “dislike very much” were low for marinated fillets (3.13, 0.0. and 1.59%, respectively). However, Xiong et al. (2006) reported percentages of 20.3, 17.6, and 10.9% (1.25, 2, and 2.5 h PM, respectively) for similar rating categories for nonmarinated fillets. Vacuum-tumbling and marination in the present study not only resulted in low variability in texture across deboning times but also led to very low percentages of consumers disliking the texture of the product. In addition to hedonic sensory scales, JAR sensory scales were used to determine appropriateness of given attributes (Table 3). Tenderness, moistness, overall flavor, saltiness, and purchase were evaluated using a JAR scale. Gacula et al. (2006) described the JAR scale as a bipolar scale, with both ends denoting opposite sensory description and the middle category anchored as JAR with the phrase “just about right” or score of 3, denoting the most acceptable. The JAR tenderness mean scores for all the samples in this experiment were 2.92 or higher, indicating that the majority of consumers rated the samples as JAR or “too tender” rather than “too tough.” Cavitt et al. (2005) and Xiong et al. (2006) reported JAR mean scores of 1.8 to 3.0 and 2.0 to 2.9, respectively, for nonmarinated pre- and postrigor deboned fillets, indicating that more consumers rated the samples as “too tough” rather than “too
tender.” The differences in these results among these studies suggest that marination does improve consumer acceptability. Significant differences (P < 0.05) were observed in percentage of consumers rating the samples as “too tough,” JAR, and “too tender.” The majority of consumers (81 to 93%) considered the marinated breast fillets as JAR, “too tender,” or “much too tender,” whereas only a small percentage (<18%) considered the fillets as “too tough,” despite the wide range of deboning times used (Table 4). The percentage of consumers rating meat tenderness as “too tough” for 2and 4-h treatments was significantly higher in comparison to 6-h deboning. All of the other treatments were not significantly different (P > 0.05) from each other. The percentage of consumers rating meat tenderness as JAR ranged from 59.3 to 81.1% for marinated fillets in this experiment, suggesting high consumer acceptance. In other studies with nonmarinated fillets, the percentage of consumers rating meat tenderness as JAR was as low as 21 to 25% for some early deboned treatments (Cavitt et al., 2005; Xiong et al., 2006) The small differences in JAR mean scores among deboning times and frequency distribution percentages for marinated pre- and postrigor fillets in the present study indicate high product uniformity (despite deboning time) and suggest that marinating broiler breast meat can result in tender product even when meat is deboned early.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
Overall impression Dislike extremely (1) Dislike very much (2) Dislike moderately (3) Dislike slightly (4) Neither like nor dislike (5) Like slightly (6) Like moderately (7) Like very much (8) Like extremely (9) Flavor3 Dislike extremely (1) Dislike very much (2) Dislike moderately (3) Dislike slightly (4) Neither like nor dislike (5) Like slightly (6) Like moderately (7) Like very much (8) Like extremely (9) Texture3 Dislike extremely (1) Dislike very much (2) Dislike moderately (3) Dislike slightly (4) Neither like nor dislike (5) Like slightly (6) Like moderately (7) Like very much (8) Like extremely (9)
1254
Saha et al.
Table 3. Summary table for the just-about-right (JAR) scale1 means2 for marinated broiler breast fillets evaluated by consumer sensory panel Deboning time (h) Sensory attribute Tenderness Moistness Overall flavor Saltiness Purchase3
0.25 ab
3.06 2.99ab 2.80 2.87 3.34
1.25 ab
3.02 2.90ab 2.89 2.86 3.17
2
2.5 b
2.93 2.83ab 2.79 2.99 3.33
3 ab
2.99 2.82ab 2.59 2.78 3.39
3.5 ab
4 ab
3.00 2.86ab 2.83 3.05 3.60
6 b
3.08 3.02a 2.78 2.83 3.46
24 a
2.92 2.69b 2.75 2.86 3.41
Pooled SEM ab
3.24 3.02a 2.71 2.79 3.25
3.11 2.82ab 2.78 2.91 3.44
0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04
a,b
Means within a row lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05). JAR scale: 1 = “much too low,” 3 = JAR, and 5 = “much too high.” 2 n = 63. 3 JAR scale: 1 = “definitely would not buy,” 3 = JAR, and 5 = “definitely would buy.” 1
ported by Saha et al. (2006), who reported that over 70% of consumer panelists considered marinated fillets as JAR. These data suggest that marination with salt and phosphate can result in acceptable WHC. The addition of salt reduces electrostatic interactions between protein molecules to increase protein extractability, solubility, and water-binding (Offer and Knight, 1988; Matthews and Strong, 2005). Salt also increases WHC by increasing the space between the thick and thin filaments (Matthews and Strong, 2005). The anions bind to positively charged amino groups of proteins. As a
Table 4. Frequency (%) of consumer responses1 for acceptance for tenderness, juiciness, overall flavor, saltiness, and purchase for marinated breast fillets Deboning time (h) Attribute (scale2) Tenderness Much too tough (1) Too tough (2) Just about right (3) Too tender (4) Much too tender (5) Moistness Much too dry (1) Too dry (2) Just about right (3) Too moist (4) Much too moist (5) Overall flavor Much too weak (1) Too weak (2) Just about right (3) Too strong (4) Much too strong (5) Saltiness Not nearly salty enough (1) Not salty enough (2) Just about right (3) Too salty (4) Much too salty (5) Purchase Definitely would not buy (1) Probably would not buy (2) Maybe/maybe not (3) Probably would buy (4) Definitely would buy (5) a,b
0.25
1.25
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
6
24
0.00 15.94ab 65.22b 17.39a 1.45
3.13 15.63ab 59.38b 20.31a 1.56
0.00 16.18a 76.47ab 7.35b 0.00
1.59 14.29ab 69.84ab 11.11ab 3.17
0.00 11.59ab 81.16a 5.80b 1.45
0.00 9.38ab 76.56ab 10.94ab 3.13
0.00 17.39a 69.57ab 13.04ab 0.00
1.56 4.69b 65.63b 25.00a 3.13
1.45 8.70ab 68.12ab 18.84a 2.90
1.45 13.04 71.01 14.49 0.00
0.00 21.88 68.75 7.81 1.56
0.00 23.19 66.67 10.14 0.00
4.76 19.05 66.67 9.52 0.00
2.90 15.94 73.91 7.25 0.00
3.13 10.94 68.75 15.63 1.56
2.90 28.99 59.42 8.70 0.00
1.56 14.06 64.06 20.31 0.00
0.00 24.64 66.67 8.70 0.00
1.45 28.99 59.42 10.14 0.00
0.00 21.88 70.31 6.25 1.56
1.45 27.54 59.42 10.14 1.45
6.35 31.75 57.14 4.76 0.00
0.00 26.09 63.77 10.14 0.00
3.13 28.13 60.94 4.69 3.13
1.45 28.99 60.87 7.25 1.45
4.69 31.25 51.56 12.50 0.00
0.00 28.99 62.32 7.25 1.45
4.35 20.29 60.87 14.49 0.00
1.56 23.44 62.50 12.50 0.00
1.45 23.19 50.72 21.74 2.90
3.17 22.22 68.25 6.35 0.00
1.45 18.84 55.07 23.19 1.45
4.69 21.88 60.94 10.94 1.56
0.00 28.99 52.17 18.84 0.00
1.56 26.56 62.50 9.38 0.00
0.00 23.19 63.77 13.04 0.00
1.45 20.29 23.19 44.93 10.14
3.13 25.00 34.38 26.56 10.94
2.90 18.84 27.54 42.03 8.70
1.59 19.05 28.57 38.10 12.70
1.45 14.49 21.74 49.28 13.04
3.13 20.31 21.88 39.06 15.63
4.35 15.94 27.54 39.13 13.04
3.13 15.63 35.94 42.19 3.13
1.45 17.39 20.29 49.28 11.59
Means within a row lacking a common superscript differ (P < 0.05). n = 63. 2 A 5-point just-about-right scale was used for tenderness, juiciness, overall flavor, saltiness, and purchase. 1
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
Moistness was assessed in this study as an indicator of juiciness. The scores for moistness were not affected (P > 0.05) by the deboning times. All JAR moistness means ranged from 2.69 to 3.02, indicating that consumers perceived the samples to be “too dry” or JAR (Table 3). Furthermore, the majority of the consumers (59.42 to 73.91%) considered the fillets to be JAR for moistness (Table 4). In comparison, Cavitt et al. (2005) and Xiong et al. (2006) reported slightly lower JAR values for juiciness, indicating nonmarinated fillets were closer to “too dry.” The present data are sup-
MEAT TENDERNESS OF MARINATED BROILER FILLETS
similar to marinated postrigor deboned meat, suggesting its effectiveness in improving meat quality attributes of early deboned meat. However, using 1% salt concentration may potentially lead to consumers disliking the product, especially if other ingredients or salt, or both, are added in final product preparation. Therefore, further research is needed to evaluate and compare consumer acceptance (texture, flavor, WHC, etc.) of marinated poultry breast meat containing different salt levels.
REFERENCES Barbut, S. 2002. Poultry meat processing and product technology. Pages 1–29 in Poultry Products Processing: An Industry Guide. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Barbut, S., A. J. Maurer, and R. C. Lindsay. 1988. Effects of reduced sodium-chloride and added phosphates on physical and sensory properties of turkey frankfurters. J. Food Sci. 53:62–66. Cavitt, L. C., J. F. C. Meullenet, R. Xiong, and C. M. Owens. 2005. The relationship of razor blade shear, Allo-Kramer shear, Warner-Bratzler shear, and sensory tests to changes in tenderness of broiler breast fillets. J. Muscle Foods 16:223–242. Cavitt, L. C., G. W. Youm, J. F. Meullenet, C. M. Owens, and R. Xiong. 2004. Prediction of poultry meat tenderness using razor blade shear, Allo-Kramer shear, and sarcomere length. J. Food Sci. 69:SNQ11–SNQ15. Dawson, P. L., D. M. Janky, M. G. Dukes, L. D. Thompson, and S. A. Woodward. 1987. Effect of postmortem boning time during simulated commercial processing on the tenderness of broiler breast meat. Poult. Sci. 66:1331–1333. Deatherage, F. E. 1963. The effects of water and inorganic salts on tenderness. Pages 45–68 in Proc. Meat Tenderness Symposium. Campbell Soup Co., Camden NJ. deFremery, R., and M. F. Pool. 1960. Biochemistry of chicken muscle as related to rigor mortis and tenderisation. Food Res. 25:73– 87. Farr, A. J., and K. M. May. 1970. The effect of polyphosphates and sodium chloride on cooking yields and oxidation stability of chicken. Poult. Sci. 49:268–275. Fleiss, J. 2003. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. J. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. Froning, G. W., and B. Sackett. 1985. Effect of salt and phosphates during tumbling of turkey breast muscle on meat characteristics. Poult. Sci. 64:1328–1333. Gacula, M., S. Rutenbeck, L. Pollack, A. V. A. Resurreccion, and H. Moskowitz. 2006. The just-about-right intensity scale: Functional analysis and relation to hedonics. J. Sens. Stud. 22:194–211. Goodwin, T. L., and J. B. Maness. 1984. The influence of marination, weight, and cooking technique on tenderness of broilers. Poult. Sci. 63:1925–1929. Hamm, D. 1981. Unconventional meat harvesting. Poult. Sci. 60(Suppl. 1):1666. (Abstr.) Hirschler, E. M., and A. R. Sams. 1998. Commercial-scale electrical stimulation of poultry: The effects on tenderness, breast meat yield and production costs. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 7:99–103. Leidahl, R. 2006. Consumers speak about chicken: Market survey results. http://www.nationalchickencouncil.com Accessed Jan. 2007. Lyon, C. E., C. E. Davis, J. A. Dickens, C. M. Papa, and J. O. Reagan. 1989. Effects of electrical stimulation on the postmortem biochemical changes and texture of broiler pectoralis muscle. Poult. Sci. 68:249–257. Lyon, C. E., D. Hamm, J. P. Hudspeth, and F. H. Benoff. 1983. Effects of age and sex of the bird on thaw and cook losses and texture of broiler breast meat. Poult. Sci. 62:1459. (Abstr.) Lyon, C. E., D. Hamm, and J. E. Thomson. 1985. pH and tenderness of broiler breast meat deboned various times after chilling. Poult. Sci. 64:307–310.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
result, the isoelectric point moves to a lower pH without changing the meat pH, resulting in subsequent improvements in purge loss and cook yields (Miller, 1998). Phosphates used for marination help in improving the WHC of meat by increasing the pH and ionic strength of the muscle (Miller, 1998). Froning and Sackett (1985) marinated turkey breast muscle and the results indicated that sensory properties like binding, flavor, and WHC were significantly improved by the presence of phosphates and NaCl. Regenstein and Stamm (1979) studied the WHC of pre- and postrigor chicken in the presence of polyphosphates. They reported that phosphates caused a large increase in WHC of prerigor and postrigor muscle. Therefore, marination not only helps in improving the tenderness but also improves the WHC (Young and Lyon, 1986; Woelfel and Sams, 2001), which explains the high percentage of consumer panelists who considered moistness as JAR for all 9 marinated treatments in this experiment. Flavor was also assessed using a JAR sensory scale. Consumers considered the overall flavor as “too weak” to JAR and there was no consistent trend due to deboning time, which is to be expected because of the similar marinade formulation used in all treatments. In many cases, approximately 30% of consumers considered the flavor as “too weak” (Table 4). This is likely due to the fact the breast fillets were marinated with salt and phosphate without additional spices or seasonings. Most the consumers (>60%) considered the saltiness to be JAR, but saltiness was considered as “too weak” by 20 to 29% of consumers. However, in household settings, it is likely that chicken breasts would be prepared with additional ingredients (seasonings, spices, etc.), leading to increased levels of appropriateness for flavor or saltiness, or both. In this study, approximately 14 to 15%, on average, of consumers found the treatments to be “too salty.” However, previous research has indicated that marinating chicken with 1% or greater salt can lead to high percentages of consumers considering the meat as “too salty” (Saha et al., 2006). Therefore, although there was a small percentage of consumers who considered the product as “too salty” in this study, there may be potential for lower acceptability of a product marinated with 1% salt if other ingredients (salt, spices, seasonings, etc.) are added in final preparation of a product (i.e., household or foodservice settings). Finally, consumer panelists were asked about their purchasing preferences for the treatments used in this study. The results indicated that most consumers would buy marinated broiler breasts, regardless of deboning times presented in this study. Results indicated that approximately 52% of consumers (on average across debone times) were in the “probably would buy” and “definitely would buy” categories. Therefore, deboning time did not affect consumer preferences to buy or not to buy the product. In conclusion, consumer acceptability scores from this study indicate that marination of prerigor deboned meat (with 1% salt) is effective in producing product
1255
1256
Saha et al. Resurreccion, A. V. A. 2003. Sensory aspects of consumer choices for meat and meat products. Meat Sci. 66:11–20. Robbins, K., J. Jensen, K. J. Ryan, C. Homco-Ryan, F. K. McKeith, and M. S. Brewer. 2003. Consumer attitudes towards beef and acceptability of enhanced beef. Meat Sci. 65:721–729. Saha, A. 2007. The effects of salt concentration, deboning time and extended aging on consumer perception and texture of marinated poultry breast meat. PhD Diss. University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. Saha, A., A. V. Perumalla, Y. Lee, J. F. Meullenet, and C. M. Owens. 2006. Optimizing meat tenderness, juiciness and flavor of marinated broiler breast fillets using varying levels of salt. Poult. Sci. 85(Suppl. 1):59. (Abstr.) Sams, A. R. 1990. Electrical stimulation and high temperature conditioning of broiler carcasses. Poult. Sci. 69:1781–1786. Sams, A. R., and D. M. Janky. 1986. The influence of brine chilling on tenderness of hot-boned, chill-boned, and aged-boned broiler breast fillets. Poult. Sci. 65:1316–1321. SAS Institute. 2004. JMP. Version 5.1. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC. Smith, D. M. 2001. Functional properties of muscle proteins in processed poultry products. Pages 181–195 in Poultry Meat Processing. A. Sams, ed. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL. Smith, D. P., and D. L. Fletcher. 1988. Compositional and biochemistry variations within broiler breast muscle subjected to different processing methods. Poult. Sci. 67:1702–1707. Stewart, M. K., D. L. Fletcher, D. Hamm, and J. E. Thomson. 1984. The influence of hot boning broiler breast meat muscle on pH decline and toughening. Poult. Sci. 63:1935–1939. Woelfel, R. L., and A. R. Sams. 2001. Marination performance of pale broiler breast meat. Poult. Sci. 80:1519–1522. Xiong, R., L. C. Cavitt, J. F. Meullenet, and C. M. Owens. 2006. Comparison of Allo-Kramer, Warner-Bratzler and razor blade shears for predicting sensory tenderness of broiler breast meat. J. Texture Stud. 37:179–199. Young, L. L., and L. E. Lyon. 1986. Effect of sodium tripolyphosphate in the presence and absence of calcium chloride and sodium chloride on water retention properties and shear resistance of chicken breast meat. Poult. Sci. 65:898–902.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Mount Allison University on June 16, 2015
Lyon, C. E., B. G. Lyon, and J. A. Dikens. 1998. Effects of carcass stimulation, deboning time, and marination on color and texture of broiler breast meat. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 7:53–60. Lyon, C. E., B. G. Lyon, and J. P. Hudspeth. 1973. The effect of different cutting procedures on the cooked yield and tenderness of broiler cut-up parts. Poult. Sci. 52:1103–1111. Lyon, B. G., D. P. Smith, and E. M. Savage. 2005. Descriptive sensory analysis of broiler breast fillets marinated in phosphate, salt, and acid solutions. Poult. Sci. 84:345–349. Lyon, C. E., and R. L. Wilson. 1986. Effects of sex, rigor condition, and heating method on yield and objective texture of broiler breast meat. Poult. Sci. 65:907–914. Matthews, K., and K. Strong. 2005. Salt–Its role in meat products and the industry’s action plan to reduce it. Nutr. Bull. 30:55–61. Mehaffey, J. M., S. P. Pradhan, J. F. Meullenet, J. L. Emmert, S. R. McKee, and C. M. Owens. 2006. Meat quality evaluation of minimally aged broiler breast fillets from five commercial genetic strains. Poult. Sci. 85:902–908. Meilgaard, M., G. V. Civille, and B. T. Carr. 1999. Sensory Evaluation Techniques. 3rd ed. CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, FL. Miller, R. 1998. Subject: Functionality of non-meat ingredients used in enhanced pork. http://www.meatscience.org/Pubs/factsheets/ functionalitynonmeat.pdf Accessed Dec. 2006. Morgan, J. B., J. W. Savell, D. S. Hale, R. K. Miller, D. B. Griffin, H. R. Cross, and S. D. Shackelford. 1991. National beef tenderness survey. J. Anim. Sci. 69:3274–3283. Offer, G., and P. Knight. 1988. The structural basis of water holding in meat. Pages 173–243 in Developments in Meat Science-4. R. A. Lawrie, ed. Elsevier Applied Science, London, UK. Owens, C. M. 2007. Portioning breast fillets: Try a little tenderness. WATT Poultry USA (June 2007):26–29. Palladino, D. K., and H. R. Ball. 1979. Effects of selected inorganic salts on certain tenderness characteristics of spent hen muscle. J. Food Sci. 44:322–326. Regenstein, J. M., and J. R. Stamm. 1979. A comparison of the water holding capacity of pre- and post-rigor chicken, trout, and lobster muscle in the presence of polyphosphates and divalent cations. J. Food Biochem. 3:223–228.