Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Arkansas Animal Science Department Report 2001 the reduction in redness (a*) values for the AC treatment caused a corresponding shift in the hue angle value. Ground beef from the CC treatment also possessed a larger (P < 0.05) hue angle than C with the exception of day 3 of display. However, ground beef color (hue angle) did not differ (P > 0.05) between CT and C treatments until day 7 of display, when CT had a smaller (P < 0.05) hue angle. The difference in hue angle between CT and C treatments on day 7 of display was due to the superior redness value (a*) for the CT treatment. Ground beef from the AC treatment was less (P < 0.05) vivid in color (saturation index) than all other treatments throughout display (Fig. 2, panel D). However, CC ground beef was not different (P > 0.05) in vividness of color (saturation index) when compared to C through display. On day 0 of display, ground beef from the CT treatment was slightly less (P < 0.05) vivid in color than C, however, was not different (P > 0.05) on days 1 through 3 of display. Conversely, by day 7 of display, ground beef from the CT treatment had a brighter, more vivid color (P < 0.05) than C. Therefore, treatment of beef trimmings before grinding with CT caused ground beef to maintain higher levels of oxymyoglobin (630 nm/580 nm) through display, which caused stability enhancement of ground beef color. Advantages in ground beef color for the CT treatment over C were most likely due to the elevated pH of this treatment (6.91) compared with C (5.72), due to the buffering capacity of the trisodium phosphate portion of the CT treatment. The elevated pH for the CT treatment had a stabilizing effect on oxymyoglobin (630 nm/580 nm; Fig. 2, panel B), which in turn extended ground beef vividness (saturation index) and redness (a* and hue angle) of color through display. Acknowledgments Appreciation is expressed to the Arkansas Beef Council for funding this research. The authors would like to thank J. Davis, L. Rakes, A. Ivey, L. McBeth, R. Story and E. Kroger for their assistance in conducting these trials. Literature Cited Bell, M.F., et al. 1986. J. Food Protection. 49(3):207. Ellebracht, E.A., et al. 1999. J. Food Science, 64(6):1094. Phebus, R.K., et al. 1997. J. Food Protection 60(5): 476. Pohlman, F.W., et al. 2001. Ark. Agri. Expt. Sta. Res. Series. (In Press). Strange, E.D., et al. 1974. J. Food Science, 39:988. Unda, J.R., et al. 1989. J. Food Science, 54(1):7. Implications Results from this study show that the use multiple antimicrobial interventions in the production of ground beef has the potential to extend retail shelf life and could increase meat yield and profitability when used as a food safety intervention under the new retained water rule of the USDA. Table 1. Effect of multiple antimicrobial treatments a applied to beef trimmings prior to grinding on least-squares means (± SE) CIE L* b and b* b values of ground beef through simulated retail display. Treatment C AC CC CT SE CIE L* 48.35yc 47.42x 51.33z 45.73w .28 CIE b* 19.61z 16.75x 20.11z 18.84y .23 a C = Control; AC = 5% acetic acid and 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride; CC = 200 ppm chlorine dioxide and 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride; CT = 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride and 10% trisodium phosphate. b L*: 0 = black and 100 = white; b*: -60 = blue and +60 = yellow. c Least-squares means within a row without a common letter differ (P < 0.05). 166
AAES Research Series 488 Table 2. Effect of duration of display on least-squares means (±SE) CIE L* a and b* a values of ground beef. Day of display 0 1 2 3 7 Instrumental color CIE L* 47.55 ± .32x b 47.85 ± .32xy 48.17 ± .32xyz 48.63 ± .32yz 48.84 ± .32z CIE b* 19.98 ± .16z 20.25 ± .26z 18.32 ± .26y 18.02 ± .26xy 17.57 ± .26x a L*: 0 = black and 100 = white; b*: -60 = blue and +60 = yellow. b Least-squares means within a row without a common letter differ (P < 0.05). Figure 1. Day of display by antimicrobial treatment interaction effect on the least-squares mean (± SE) (A) CIE a* value, (B) 630 nm reflectance/580 nm reflectance, (C) hue angle and (D) saturation index of ground beef through simulated display. abc Least-squares means within a day without a common superscript differ (P < 0.05). d C = control, e AC = 5% acetic acid and 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride, f CC = 200 ppm chlorine dioxide and 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride, g CT = 0.5% cetylpyridinium chloride and 10% trisodium phosphate. h -60 = green and +60 = red. i Calculated as 630 nm reflectance/580 nm reflectance. j Calculated as tan-1(b*/a*). k Calculated as (a*2+b*2) .5 . 167
Page 1 and 2:
Arkansas Animal Science Department
Page 3:
spine copy ARKANSAS ANIMAL SCIENCE
Page 6 and 7:
INTRODUCTION The faculty and staff
Page 8 and 9:
COMMON ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviation T
Page 10 and 11:
The Effects of Nitrogen Fertilizati
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Demographics and Academic Success o
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Efficacy of Mannan Oligosaccharide
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Effects of Dietary Magnesium and Ha
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Effect of Feather Meal on Live Anim
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Maternal Effects for Performance Te
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Supplementation of Beef Cows and He
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Influence of Supplementing Cobalt i
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Long-Term Immune Response of Beef H
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Small Grain Forage for Stocker Catt
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Economics of Production Systems Inv
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Influence of Moisture Concentration
Page 120 and 121: Arkansas Animal Science Department
Page 126 and 127: Impact of Spontaneous Heating Durin
Page 134 and 135: Effects of Tall Fescue Inoculated w
Page 142 and 143: Yield and Nutritive Value of Easter
Page 154 and 155: 2000 Dairy Herd Improvement Herds i
Page 164 and 165: The Impact of Multiple Antimicrobia
Page 168 and 169: The Impact of Multiple Antimicrobia
Page 172 and 173: The Use of Hurdle Technology to Red
Page 176 and 177: Consumer Acceptability of Forage Fe
Page 180: Arkansas Animal Science Department
show all

Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?