Department of Food Technology, University of Campinas, Rua Monteiro Lobato, 80, 13083-862 Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Rua Expedicionários do Brazil, 1621, 14801-902 Araraquara, São Paulo, Brazil.
Meat Sci. 2020 Mar;161:108003. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2019.108003. Epub 2019 Nov 8.
This study evaluated the effects of freezing, prior to and after dry aging, on the microbiological and physical-chemical quality of beef. Strip loins (n = 24) from 12 carcasses were assigned to four treatments: non-frozen dry aging (Dry); dry aging, steak fabrication, freezing and slow thawing (Dry + ST); freezing, fast thawing (FT; 20 °C/15 h) and dry aging (FT + Dry); freezing, slow thawing (ST; 4 °C/48 h) and dry aging (ST + Dry). Freezing conditions were - 20 °C/28 days and dry aging conditions were 2 °C/70% relative humidity, for 28 days. Freezing prior to dry aging did not affect the microbial counts compared to Dry. However, FT + Dry and ST + Dry increased (16%) total process loss (P < .05) compared to Dry and Dry+ST. Moreover, freezing changed volatile compounds profile. Thus, freezing prior to dry aging was not a feasible process due to increased process loss, while freezing after dry aging was considered a viable alternative to preserve the steaks without compromising beef physical-chemical traits.
本研究评估了在干制老化前后冷冻对牛肉微生物学和理化质量的影响。从 12 个胴体中取出 24 个带骨牛里脊肉,分为 4 种处理方式:未经冷冻的干制老化(Dry);干制老化、牛排制作、冷冻和缓慢解冻(Dry+ST);冷冻、快速解冻(FT;20°C/15 h)和干制老化(FT+Dry);冷冻、缓慢解冻(ST;4°C/48 h)和干制老化(ST+Dry)。冷冻条件为-20°C/28 天,干制老化条件为 2°C/70%相对湿度,持续 28 天。与 Dry 相比,在干制老化前冷冻对微生物计数没有影响。然而,FT+Dry 和 ST+Dry 与 Dry 和 Dry+ST 相比,总加工损失增加了(16%)(P<.05)。此外,冷冻改变了挥发性化合物的图谱。因此,由于加工损失增加,在干制老化前冷冻不是可行的工艺,而在干制老化后冷冻被认为是一种可行的替代方法,可以在不影响牛肉理化特性的情况下保存牛排。