Battula V, Schilling M W, Vizzier-Thaxton Y, Behrends J M, Williams J B, Schmidt T B
Department of Food Science, Nutrition, and Health Promotion, Mississippi State University, 39762, USA.
Poult Sci. 2008 Jun;87(6):1202-10. doi: 10.3382/ps.2007-00454.
A randomized complete block design with 3 replications (n = 432, 72 broilers per treatment) was used to evaluate the effects of electrical (ES) and vacuum stunning (VS) on broiler breast meat quality. Electrical stunning was performed by applying 11.5 V, <0.05 mA, AC to DC current for 3 s for each broiler. Vacuum stunning was accomplished by exposing the birds to a low atmospheric pressure of 597 to 632 mmHg in an airtight decompression chamber. Breast removal was then performed at 0.75, 2, and 4 h postmortem for each stunning method. Color, pH, cook loss, and shear force values were measured on breasts that were removed from the right side of the carcass. Breasts removed from the left side of the carcass were used for consumer acceptability testing. The L* values were lower (P < 0.05) for VS than ES at 4-and 2-h deboning times. On average, 15-min and 24-h postmortem pH values were not different (P > 0.05) for both stunning method and deboning time. Shear force did not differ (P > 0.05) between stunning methods but decreased (P < 0.05) as deboning time increased. On average, no differences (P > 0.05) existed in consumer acceptability (appearance, texture, flavor, overall) among breast meat from ES or VS birds that were deboned at 2 or 4 h. However, consumers could be clustered into 8 groups based on preference and liking of samples regarding overall and texture acceptability. Sixty-five percent of consumers (3 clusters) liked all broiler breast treatments. Within these 3 clusters, some consumers preferred (P < 0.05) 4-h deboned samples over those deboned at 2 h (cluster 7), and other consumers preferred (P < 0.05) those deboned at 2 h over 4-h samples (cluster 6). Data revealed that both stunning methods provided high-quality breast meat with minimal product differences.
采用随机完全区组设计,重复3次(n = 432,每种处理72只肉鸡),以评估电击昏(ES)和真空致昏(VS)对肉鸡胸脯肉品质的影响。对每只肉鸡施加11.5 V、<0.05 mA的交流电转直流电,电击3 s进行电击昏处理。在密闭减压室中使鸡暴露于597至632 mmHg的低气压下进行真空致昏。然后,对每种致昏方法在宰后0.75、2和4 h进行去胸肉操作。对从胴体右侧取下的胸脯肉测量颜色、pH值、蒸煮损失和剪切力值。从胴体左侧取下的胸脯肉用于消费者可接受性测试。在4 h和2 h去骨时,VS处理的L*值低于ES处理(P < 0.05)。平均而言,两种致昏方法和去骨时间的宰后15 min和24 h的pH值无差异(P > 0.05)。两种致昏方法之间的剪切力无差异(P > 0.05),但随着去骨时间的增加而降低(P < 0.05)。平均而言,在2 h或4 h去骨的ES或VS处理的鸡胸肉之间,消费者可接受性(外观、质地、风味、总体)无差异(P > 0.05)。然而,根据消费者对样品总体和质地可接受性的偏好和喜好,可将消费者分为8组。65%的消费者(3个组)喜欢所有的肉鸡胸脯肉处理方式。在这3个组中,一些消费者更喜欢(P < 0.05)4 h去骨的样品而不是2 h去骨的样品(第7组),而其他消费者更喜欢(P < 0.05)2 h去骨的样品而不是4 h去骨的样品(第6组)。数据表明,两种致昏方法都能提供高质量的胸脯肉,产品差异最小。