15.01.2015 Views

Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...

Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...

Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

The Impact <strong>of</strong> Multiple Antimicrobial Intervention Agents on<br />

Ground Beef Sensory Properties<br />

F. W. Pohlman, 1 M. R. Stivarius, 2 K. S. McElyea, 1 Z. B. Johnson, 1<br />

and M.G. Johnson 3<br />

Story in Brief<br />

The effectiveness <strong>of</strong> multiple antimicrobial interventions on ground beef sensory characteristics through display<br />

was studied. Beef trimmings were inoculated with Escherichia coli (EC) and Salmonella typhimurium (ST), then treated<br />

with either 1) 5% acetic acid followed by 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride (AC), 2) 200 ppm chlorine dioxide followed<br />

by 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride (CC), 3) 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride followed by 10% trisodium phosphate (CT);<br />

or 4) control (C). Trimmings were ground, packaged and sampled through display for sensory color and odor characteristics.<br />

The CT treatment had less (P < 0.05) overall, worst point and percentage discoloration than C by day 7 <strong>of</strong> display.<br />

Ground beef from the CC treated trimmings was similar (P > 0.05) in worst point color and percentage discoloration<br />

to C through 3 days <strong>of</strong> display. Although minor differences existed initially, sensory panelists were unable to<br />

detect (P > 0.05) beef odor or <strong>of</strong>f odor differences between C, CC and CT treatments throughout display. Therefore,<br />

treatment <strong>of</strong> beef trimmings with CC or CT before grinding did not impact sensory evaluated color or aroma <strong>of</strong> ground<br />

beef during simulated retail display.<br />

Introduction<br />

In the wake <strong>of</strong> ground beef recalls, the safety <strong>of</strong> this<br />

product remains <strong>of</strong> vital concern; therefore, considerable<br />

research continues to be conducted for improving the safety<br />

<strong>of</strong> meat products. It has been reviewed, that the use <strong>of</strong> single<br />

decontamination interventions are effective for reducing<br />

pathogens on carcass (Dickson and Anderson 1992; Siragusa,<br />

1995). However, contamination resulting from carcass fabrication<br />

can be carried through grinding operations, ultimately<br />

contaminating the ground beef product. Therefore, it would<br />

be advantageous to develop meat decontamination procedures<br />

immediately prior to, or during, ground beef production.<br />

The use <strong>of</strong> single intervention techniques during ground<br />

beef manufacture has been relatively effective for reducing<br />

microorganisms compared to carcass decontamination (Gill<br />

and Bandoni, 1997; Dorsa et al., 1998). However, the use <strong>of</strong><br />

multiple antimicrobial treatments to decontaminate meat<br />

before grinding might provide a greater barrier to microbial<br />

survival in ground beef by taking advantage <strong>of</strong> different<br />

weaknesses <strong>of</strong> differing microbial strains.<br />

In addition to antimicrobial effectiveness another concern<br />

is the impact <strong>of</strong> these treatments on meat color and odor.<br />

Therefore, the objective <strong>of</strong> this research was to determine the<br />

effects <strong>of</strong> an organic acid and other novel decontamination<br />

compounds, used in combination, on sensory characteristics<br />

<strong>of</strong> ground beef.<br />

Experimental Procedures<br />

Bacterial preparation and inoculation. Inoculums were<br />

prepared from frozen (-80oC) stock cultures <strong>of</strong> Escherichia<br />

coli (ATCC #11775; EC) and a nalidixic acid resistant strain<br />

<strong>of</strong> Salmonella typhimurium (ATTC 1769NR; ST). E. coli was<br />

maintained by brain heart infusion (BHI; Difco Laboratories,<br />

Detroit, MI) broth with glycerol (20%), and Salmonella<br />

typhimurium was maintained by BHI broth containing<br />

nalidixic acid (Fisher Scientific, Fairlawn, NJ) with glycerol<br />

(20%). Frozen cultures <strong>of</strong> E. coli and Salmonella typhimurium<br />

were thawed, and 0.1 ml <strong>of</strong> E. coli suspension was inoculated<br />

into separate 40 ml aliquots <strong>of</strong> BHI, and 0.1 ml <strong>of</strong><br />

Salmonella typhimurium suspension was inoculated into separate<br />

40 ml aliquots <strong>of</strong> BHI with nalidixic acid. After 18<br />

hours <strong>of</strong> incubation at 98.6°F, bacteria were harvested by centrifugation<br />

(3649 x g for 20 min @ 98.6°F; Beckman GS-6<br />

series, Fullerton, CA), re-suspended in the same volume <strong>of</strong><br />

0.1% buffered peptone water (BPW; Difco Laboratories,<br />

Detroit, MI) and then pooled together (1600 ml <strong>of</strong> E. coli and<br />

1600 ml <strong>of</strong> Salmonella typhimurium) to make a bacterial<br />

cocktail. The cocktail (3200 ml; log 10 7 colony forming units<br />

[CFU]/ml E. coli and log 10 7 CFU/ml Salmonella typhimurium)<br />

was cooled to 39.2°F and combined with boneless beef<br />

trimmings (28.2 lb) and allowed to attach for 1 hour. The<br />

meat was then drained, separated into 7.8 lb batches, and<br />

placed in a 39.2°F cooler for 12 to 14 hours to allow further<br />

microbial attachment.<br />

1 Department <strong>of</strong> Animal Science, Fayetteville.<br />

2 Griffith Laboratories, Griffith Center, Alsip, IL 60658<br />

3 Department <strong>of</strong> Food Science, Fayetteville.<br />

160

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!