2008 Savremena poljoprivreda 57 1-2.indd - Poljoprivredni fakultet ...

112
0.81% when plants were fed and increase by 0.02% when the mixture of plants
and oils was fed. The crude fat content was 4.87% higher in LEP group chicken
and 1.75% lower in LEUP group chicken. Regarding the chemical composition of
the drumstick it was obtained similar results. Thus, the water content increased
by 0.52% in plants fed broilers and decreased by 0.29% in broilers fed a mixture
of plants and oils. The crude protein content decreased by 0.65% in LEP group
and increased by 0.25% in LEUP group. The crude fat content of the drumstick
increased by 1.13% in plants fed chicken and decreased by 2.53% in broilers fed
a mixture of plants and oils.
Key words: phyto aditives, broiler, meat, quality
INTRODUCTION
On the whole, meat technological features are determined by the morpho-structural
features, and also by the physical-chemical ones.
The technological features are the features that must characterize meat in order to
correspond to the requirements of the processing technology of various products.
Meat technological features are: water retaining capacity, meat hydration capacity, juice
retaining or transference capacity, loss rate through maturation or keeping, loss rate
through boiling or roasting, meat resistance, all of them being infl uenced by the physicalchemical
or morpho-structural features.
Water retaining capacity is represented by the force with which meat proteins retain a
part of the own water and a part of the added water under the action exerted by some external
forces (pressure, cutting, etc.).
Water retaining capacity infl uences meat quality and its effi ciency at processing.
Within meat, the biggest water quantity in muscles is comprised by myofi brils (up to
70%), sarcolemma (20%) and in the interstitial area (10%). From a physical pointo f view,
water may be met in two forms:
– bound water (50% of the total water within the muscular tissue, being bound by
myofi brilar proteins though hydrogen bonds; it is not infl uenced by the variations
of the water retaining capacity);
– free water (it is partially immobilized through steric effect within the myofi brilar
structure, the rest being free water, retained by capillary forces which affect the
water retaining capacity).
Consequently, the chemical base of retaining the “hydration water” and of immobilizing
the “free water” is represented by the myofi brilar protein structure (myosin, with the
main role, actine, with a stabilizing role and the actinomiosinic complex).
Water retaining capacity is infl uenced by: species, sex, age, weight, meat freshness,
meat processing technologies, protein structure.
According to Banu et al. (1972) water retaining capacity has many means:
– it infl uences some sensitive meat features, like color, consistence;
– it infl uences meat`s preservation period;
–
it determines directly weight losses through freezing-preservation;