Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cbps20
British Poultry Science
ISSN: 0007-1668 (Print) 1466-1799 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cbps20
Technological and textural properties of spent
chicken breast, drumstick and thigh meats as
affected by marinating with pineapple fruit juice
P. Kadıoğlu, M. Karakaya, K. Unal & A. S. Babaoğlu
To cite this article: P. Kadıoğlu, M. Karakaya, K. Unal & A. S. Babaoğlu (2019) Technological and textural properties of spent chicken breast, drumstick and thigh meats as affected
by marinating with pineapple fruit juice, British Poultry Science, 60:4, 381-387, DOI: 10.1080/00071668.2019.1621990
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2019.1621990
Published online: 05 Jun 2019.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 357
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Technological and textural properties of spent chicken breast, drumstick and
thigh meats as a
ffected by marinating with pineapple fruit juice
P. Kadıoğlu, M. Karakaya, K. Unal and A. S. Babaoğlu
Department of Food Engineering, Agriculture Faculty, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey
ABSTRACT
1. This study was conducted to determine the effects of pineapple fruit juice at different marination times (0, 40, 80, 120 and 160 min) on pH, water holding capacity (WHC), cooking loss (CL) and colour (L*, a*, b*, hue angle and chroma) properties of breast, drumstick and thigh meats from spent hens. Textural properties (razor shear force and shear energy) and sensory analyses of the samples were tested. 2. With increasing marination time, there was a decrease in pH and WHC values, and an increase in CL values. However, marination treatment with pineapple fruit juice significantly affected the textural measurement of all the meat muscles compared with the control group.
3. Razor shear force and shear energy were lower when marination was performed for 160 min. Colour analyses showed that marination for 80 min resulted in significantly increased L*, a* and b* values. The samples marinated for longer times were most preferable, according to the tenderness scores assigned by the panellists.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 31 October 2018 Accepted 12 March 2019
KEYWORDS
Colour; pineapple fruit juice; razor shear; spent hen meat; texture
Introduction
The poultry industry produces spent hens that are marketed at a lower price than broiler chickens (Navid et al.2010). There are about 2.6 billion spent hens worldwide that are not for human consumption and are commonly used as animal feed (Navid et al.2011). Hens lay eggs for 72 weeks, followed by a laying yield decrease (Wang et al.2013) resulting in‘spent’ hens that have tough meat with a high amount of collagen (Bhaskar et al.2017). However, it is a good source of protein (Lee et al.2003) and omega-3 fatty acids, and the breast meat has low cholesterol content (Ajuyah et al.,1992). Qualitative differences in colour, taste, odour and toughness between broiler chicken and spent hen meat show that spent hens are not desirable (Naveena and Mendiratta2001). The toughness is caused by the increase in cross-linking in the connective tissue (Archile-Contreras et al.2010). The structural integrity of these connective tissues and myofibrils generally affects meat tenderness (Calkins and Sullivan2007). Tenderness is accepted as the most important sensory quality of meat (Lawrie1991; Abdalla et al.2013). Different methods of pro-cessing affect meat tenderness, such as the use of blade tender-isation or vacuum mixing (Booren et al.1981), plant-based enzymes (Doneva et al. 2015) and marinades (Gault 1985). Either acidic or basic marination can be applied (Parks et al.
2000). Organic acid solutions, vinegar, wine and fruit juices are the most common ingredients in an acidic marinade (Burke and Monahan2003).
Żochowska-Kujawska et al. (2010) marinated meat samples in pineapple juice, kefir, wine and calcium chlor-ide and reported that pineapple juice had the greatest impact on meat tenderness. Another study by Zochowska-Kujawska et al. (2012) using pineapple, kefir, lemon and dry red wine marinades and demonstrated that the pineapple marinade caused the most dramatic structural and textural alterations but gave the worst general attractiveness regarding meat quality.
Pineapple (Ananas comosus) contains bromelain, which is a proteolytic enzyme (Smith-Marshall and Golden2012). Fruit bromelain obtained from pineapple is used to tender-ise meat in many parts of the world (Naveena et al.2004). In this study, pineapple juice was used to examine the influence of marinating time on the various muscles (breast, drumstick and thigh) from spent hens. The resultant changes in the textural and sensory properties, pH, water holding capacity (WHC), cooking loss (CL) and colour properties of the marinated meat samples were recorded.
Materials and methods Sample preparation
Spent hens were provided from a local farmer in Konya, Turkey. A total of 25 egg-laying chickens that had com-pleted economic egg production (approximately 72 weeks old) were slaughtered. The carcasses were transported to the laboratory within a maximum of 30 min and then cut up, according to commercial standards. The breast, drumstick and thigh parts of each chicken were manually separated from the chicken carcasses and were packed separately. Each chicken’s breast, drumstick and thigh pieces were refrigerated at 4°C for 18 h. At 18 h, post-mortem samples were subjected to analyses performed.
The pineapples to be used for marination were procured from a local market. On the day of the analysis, the pine-apples were manually peeled, separated into pieces and pressed to liberate the juice.
Marination
Existing skin and excess fatty parts were removed from the chicken pieces before marination. Containers with a depth of 10 cm and a width of 40 cm were filled with pineapple juice, for marination processing. The meat samples were
CONTACTKubra Unal [email protected] Food Engineering Department, Agriculture Faculty, Selcuk University, Konya 42050, Turkey
https://doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2019.1621990
kept in the marination solution for different time intervals (0, 40, 80, 120 and 160 min) in an oven adjusted to 45°C, removed, covered with aluminium foil and prepared for cooking. The temperature for marination was based on the knowledge that the bromelain enzyme is active at tem-peratures of 35.5–70.0°C (Manzoor et al.2016).
Colour properties
Colour measurements were performed using a CR-400 chromameter (Konica Minolta, Inc., Osaka, Japan) with illuminant D65, 2° observer angle, diffuse/O mode, 8 mm aperture for illumination and 8 mm for measurement. The instrument was pre-calibrated against a white reference tile (L* = 97.10, a* = 4.88, b* = 7.04). The American Meat Science Association (AMSA) guidelines for colour measure-ments were followed (Hunt et al.1991).
pH values
The pH values of the samples were measured with a pH meter (WTW 315i set model, Weilheim, Germany) follow-ing the instructions as outlined (AOAC2000).
Cooking loss
The CL of marinated meat samples were measured as outlined by Kondaiah et al. (1985). Meat samples weigh-ing 20 g were placed in a polyethylene bag and heated in a water bath at 80°C to achieve an internal temperature of 72°C.
Texture measurement
Chicken meat samples were cooked in a convection oven at 150°C for 30 min, according to the method described by Sams (1990) until an internal temperature of 76°C was reached (Saha et al.2009). The temperature was measured using a thermometer (Digitale Bratengabel-TCM). Once cooked, the samples were cooled down to about 25°C before analysis.
The textural properties of the samples were determined using a texture analyser (TA-HD Plus texture analyser, Stable Micro Systems, UK) equipped with a Meullenet–Owens razor shear and a 50 kg load cell. A certain number of readings were made from specific regions of the samples using the software program for the texture measuring device (Cavitt et al.2004). Texture analysis is usually performed on samples with a height of at least 16 mm according to the MORS blade locations for testing as shownFigure 1.
Water holding capacity (WHC)
Tubes containing an aliquot of the marinated meat sample (8 g) and 12 ml of 0.6 M NaCl solution were placed into a 5° C water bath for 15 min and then centrifuged (4ºC) at 10.000 rpm for 15 min. The supernatant was recovered, to determine the WHC (%) of the meat batches.
Sensory evaluation
The meat samples underwent sensory evaluation by nine experienced panellists for meat tenderness, colour, texture, flavour and overall attributes, using a 9-point scale (1 = ‘the clearest colour, the toughest, the lowestflavour and the lowest overall acceptability; 9 =‘the darkest colour, the most tender-ness and the highest overall acceptability’; Deniz2009).
Statistical analysis
All data were analysed by two-ways analysis of variance (ANOVA) using MINITAB for Windows, Release 16.0. Factors included the time of marination (0, 40, 80, 120 and 160 m), the type of meat (breast, drumstick and thigh) and their interaction on the studied parameters such as pH, WHC, CL, colour, texture and sensory analysis. Each parameter was tested in triplicate samples with two replications. Significance was confirmed at P < 0.05.
Results and discussion
Technological properties of meat types
Table 1shows that the pH values were lower in breast meat samples than in thigh and drumstick meat samples.Figure 2
shows the effects of interaction of marination time and meat types on pH and cooking loss values. The pH values of meat samples were close to the results reported by Fletcher et al. (2000) andŠulcerová et al. (2014), who recorded pH values in the range of 5.76–6.22. Similarly, Ünal and Karakaya (2015) found the pH values of chicken breast and thigh meat were 5.79 and 6.17, respectively. In another study, the thigh and breast meat samples had a pH of 6.16 and 6.02, respectively (Karakaya et al. 2010). In comparison to the control, the pH of all pineapple fruit juice-treated meat samples decreased (P < 0.01), with pH values ranging from pH 5.76 to 6.24, whereas, there was no significance for the
Figure 1.MORS blade locations of breast, drumstick and thigh meats.
Table 1.pH, water holding capacity (WHC) and cooking loss (CL) of treatment with pineapple juice on spent hen meat types.
Treatments pH WHC (%)
Cooking loss (%) Meat type (A)
Breast 5.77 ± 0.174b 20.01 ± 4.41b 12.93 ± 1.61c Drumstick 6.09 ± 0.242a 24.55 ± 4.18a 15.58 ± 1.28b Thigh 6.181 ± 0.299a 22.18 ± 5.16ab 20.07 ± 3.07a Significance ** ** ** Marination time (B) 0 6.24 ± 0.24a 24.46 ± 0.71a 14.27 ± 3.15b 40 6.03 ± 0.31ab 25.88 ± 1.46a 15.68 ± 3.18ab 80 6.13 ± 0.27ab 24.61 ± 5.83a 16.25 ± 2.87ab 120 5.92 ± 0.18bc 16.67 ± 2.59b 17.17 ± 4.94a 160 5.76 ± 0.21c 19.63 ± 4.22b 17.60 ± 3.49a Significance ** ** **
Interaction significance
AxB ns ns *
Means within a column with different letters are significantly different **(P < 0.01), *(P < 0.05), ns: not significant
interaction of meat type and marination time (Table 1). It is thought that this reduction is probably due to the low pH value of pineapple juice (pH 3.36). As the treatment time of marination with pineapple juice increased, the pH values of the treated meat samples decreased. Consequently, the low-est pH was observed in chicken meat marinated for 160 min. Manohar et al. (2016) reported pH values in the range 5.47–6.93 for meat samples treated with bromelain from pineapple extract. The pH values of the samples decreased (i.e., acidity increased) as the concentration of bromelain increased, resulting in a significant pH decrease in meat marinated in 40% bromelain (Gök and Bor2016). Similarly, the pH values of turkey meat samples decreased as a result of treatment with acidic fruit juices, whereby the control sample presented the highest pH while those treated with pomegranate juice had the lowest pH (Gök and Bor
2016). Obuz and Cesur (2009) demonstrated that marina-tion with pomegranate juice decreased the pH levels of chicken breast meat. In contrast, Nadzirah et al. (2016) showed a higher pH value for bromelain-treated beef com-pared to untreated meat, due to the increased loss of free acidic groups. Similar increases in pH have been reported by some other researchers (Sheard and Tali 2004; Baublits et al.2005; Ergezer and Gökçe2011) because of marination using alkaline phosphates.
Table 1 shows the WHC and CL values of samples at different marination times. The WHC of meat products is one of the most important quality characteristics for the sensory aspects, but also economic benefits. The decrease in pH of the meat samples affected the WHC. Similarly, Manohar et al. (2016) reported that the decreased pH of beef altered its WHC and tenderness.
The WHC of the breast meat samples was lower than that of the thigh and drumstick meat samples (Table 1) because the breast meat had a lower pH than the thigh and drumstick meat. An examination of the marination time on the WHC of the chicken meat samples (Table 1) revealed that meat marinated with pineapple juice for 120 or 160 min had lower WHC than the other groups. Northcutt et al. (1994) and Lesiak et al. (1996) reported that WHC of thigh muscle was less than that breast meat. Ketnawa and Rawdkuen (2011) showed bromelain reduced the WHC by hydrolysing tissue fibres. The reduction of WHC depended on the effect of bromelain on the denatura-tion of myofibrillar proteins (Murphy and Marks2000).
The WHC and CL influence the quality and yield of pro-cessed meat and meat products. CL, which is of important industry concern, leads to a significant weight loss in carcass meat parts. The increase in the CL of pineapple juice-marinated samples increased with marination time. The chicken meats marinated with pineapple juice for 120 and 160 min showed the highest CL and the lowest WHC. Nadzirah et al. (2016) found that bromelain powder produced from pineapple increased the CL of meat. Klinhom et al. (2011), Serdaroğlu et al. (2007), and Yusop et al. (2010) reported that marinated samples had higher CL values than untreated samples. The results from the current experiment were consistent with these findings. Some researchers found that the changes in CL from meat depend on several factors, including the removal of water with increasing cooking temperature and shrinkage of myo fi-brillar proteins at increased temperature during heating (Del Pulgar et al.2012; Nadzirah et al.2016).
Table 2 indicates that breast meat from spent hens was lighter in colour than thigh and drumstick meat. Figure 3
shows the effects of interaction of marination time and meat types on L*, a* and b* values.
The redness (+a*) values of drumsticks were higher than other meat types. Chicken leg meat contains a higher con-centration of redfibres than breast meat, which has a higher proportion of whitefibres (Yu et al.2005). Von Lengerken et al. (2002) reported that breast meat contains more than 90% white fibres. In the current study, marination with pineapple juice had a significant (P < 0.01) effect on the L*, a* and b* parameters of chicken meat after cooking at 160°C for 30 min. Some researchers have reported that changes in meat colour are a result of the heat treatment (Fletcher et al.2000; Chueachuaychoo et al.2011). Heating
25,00
pH values Cooking Loss (%)
20,00 15,00 10,00 5,00 0,00 Bx0 Bx40 BX80 Bx120 Bx160 DSx0 DSx40 DSx80 DSx120 DSx160 Tx0 Tx40 Tx80 Tx120 Tx160 Figure 2.The effects of interaction of marination time and meat types on pH and cooking loss (%) values
Table 2.Colour properties of treatment with pineapple juice on spent hen meat types.
Treatments L* a* b* Hue-angle Chroma
Meat type (A)
Breast 67.28 ± 2.64a 3.72 ± 0.48c 17.64 ± 2.32a 79.22 ± 3.98a 18.03 ± 2.09a Drumstick 51.96 ± 3.19c 6.95 ± 1.67a 12.52 ± 3.21c 62.03 ± 7.43c 16.14 ± 2.70b Thigh 58.24 ± 2.67b 5.34 ± 0.77b 16.56 ± 2.87b 73.04 ± 4.94b 18.03 ± 1.96a Significance ** ** ** ** ** Marination time (B) 0 57.92 ± 6.94bc 5.63 ± 1.17a 15.85 ± 4.61b 64.27 ± 9.76c 15.75 ± 2.91c 40 59.66 ± 9.76b 5.72 ± 2.77a 15.32 ± 1.96b 69.70 ± 10.14b 17.70 ± 1.10b 80 61.93 ± 4.58a 5.81 ± 1.64a 17.20 ± 2.16a 74.29 ± 8.70a 19.63 ± 1.13a 120 59.23 ± 6.85b 5.06 ± 1.44b 17.28 ± 2.53a 73.92 ± 7.55a 18.53 ± 1.82ab 160 57.4 ± 6.15c 4.45 ± 0.92c 12.23 ± 3.76c 74.97 ± 5.39a 15.39 ± 1.59c Significance ** ** ** ** **
Interaction significance AxB ** ** ** * **
Means within a column with different letters are significantly different **(P < 0.01)
meat intensifies the L* value (darker) and decreases the a* (decreased redness/increased greenness) value of meat (Sen et al. 2014). Table 2 showed that the effect of marination time on colour properties is inconsistent.
The lowest L* and chroma (C*) values were found in the samples marinated for 160 min. However, the highest L* and C* values were seen at 80 min and then decreased with marination time. The results were probably associated with the cooking process applied after marination. Similarly, Serdaroğlu et al. (2007) stated that cooking after marination increased the L* and b* values in meat. The increased L* and yellowness (+b*) values for spent hens meat samples mari-nated in pineapple juice agreed with resulted reported by Nadzirah et al. (2016), who reported an increase from L* 41.19 to 42.75 and b* 11.86 to 13.15 when meat samples were treated with bromelain powder. Ergezer and Gökçe (2011) observed that L* and b* values for turkey breast meat mari-nated with lactic acid increased from 44.90 to 58.45 and 8.38 to 18.64, respectively. Serdaroğlu et al. (2007) found similar colour results, showing marinated samples had higher L* values than the control group. The lighter colour of muscle depends on the swelling of the muscle proteins and changes in the light reflection with ionic strength and lowering pH.
Texture properties of spent hen meats
Table 3 shows that the shear force (N) of breast meat samples was significantly different from thigh and drum-stick meat samples (P < 0.01). While breast meat had the lowest resistance to shear (7.28), drumstick meat samples exhibited the highest resistance.
The control meat samples were found to have the highest shear force value. It was observed that shear force and shear energy values continuously decreased for all of the treated samples when marination time increased (Figure 4). The control group (non-marinated) and the meat marinated for 40 min had the highest shear force and shear energy values. Textural parameters were influenced (P < 0.01) by marina-tion time. The results showed that marinamarina-tion for more than 40 min increased the tenderness of spent hen meat. The increase in tenderness of samples marinated for 80, 120 and 160 min may be due to the influence of pH on WHC. A pH decline below the isoelectric point of muscle proteins gives rise to hydrogen binding to– COO−molecules on the protein structure, and the disruption of some electrostatic bonds of NH3+groups (Serdaroğlu et al.2007). Accordingly to Burke
and Monahan (2003), an increment in positive charge leads to repulsion forces between proteins of some charges. In acidic marinades, meat structure weakens, depending on the proteo-lytic enzyme activity and enhanced transformation of collagen to gelatine during the cooking process (Önenç et al.2004).
Ketnawa and Rawdkuen (2011) used bromelain powder produced from pineapple peel to decrease meat samples hard-ness by the proteolytic action of the enzyme on myofibrillar proteins. Myofibrillar proteins are disrupted, and small pep-tides or low molecular weight proteins are formed (Ketnawa and Rawdkuen2011). It is known that free amino acid groups and hydroxyproline dissolution increase the enzymatic hydro-lysis of meat proteins. In this way, the muscle structure is deteriorated, so the shear force values are reduced, and meat tenderness is increased (Fogle et al.1982). Buyukyavuz (2014) noticed a significant decrease in shear force in all bromelain-treated duck breast samples. Likewise, Whetstone et al. (2014) and Manohar et al. (2016) observed that bromelain improved the tenderness of meat samples. Consistent with these find-ings, Nadzirah et al. (2016) claimed that the incremental changes in tenderness of meat treated with bromelain depended on the proteolysis of meat protein by bromelain. It has been reported that bromelain splits the myosin chain, denatures the protein complex and degrades collagen struc-ture. Such changes in the structure of meat are thought to increase meat tenderness (Bille and Taapopi2008).
Sensory analysis
Figure 5 illustrates the colour, texture, tenderness, taste, odour, flavour and overall attributes of the marinated chicken breast, thigh and drumstick meat samples. Breast meat received generally lower scores than other meat types, while thigh meat received the best ratings for taste, odour, flavour and general acceptance.
Marination time significantly affected all sensory ana-lyses of marinated samples, except for overall attributes. There was no interaction of meat type with marination time (P > 0.05). Colour, texture, taste, odour and flavour scores of the samples decreased with increased marina-tion time, as tenderness increased. Similarly, marinamarina-tion with basic and acidic marinates, the acidic marination was not preferable (Ergezer 2005). Serdaroğlu et al. (2007) found the appearance scores of breast meat sam-ples decreased when treated with acidic marinades. In another study, there was no difference in control beef steaks compared with those exposed to 1.2% acetic acid (Kotula and Thelappurate 1994). Conversely, marination
80,00 L* a* b* 70,00 60,00 50,00 40,00 30,00 20,00 10,00 0,00 Bx0 Bx40 BX80 Bx120 Bx160 DSx0 DSx40 DSx80 DSx120 DSx160 Tx0 Tx40 Tx80 Tx120 Tx160 Figure 3.The effects of interaction of marination time and meat types on L*, a* and b* values.
Table 3. The effects of marination with pineapple fruit juice on textural properties.
Treatments
Razor Blade Shear Force (N)
Razor Blade Shear Energy (N.mm) Meat type (A)
Breast 7.28 2.07c 38.62 ± 16.62c Drumstick 11.62 1.66a 69.19 ± 13.30a Thigh 10.55 ± 2.34b 60.17 ± 24.58b Significance ** ** Marination time (B) 0 11.03 ± 2.12a 73.10 ± 15.16a 40 11.31 2.53a 71.68 ± 22.80a 80 9.33 1.85b 51.05 ± 14.84b 120 9.55 2.79b 46.96 ± 16.22b 160 7.88 3.02c 37.18 ± 19.59c Significance ** ** Interaction significance AxB
** **
Means within a column with different letters are significantly different **(P < 0.01)
increased the juiciness and flavour scores (Ergezer and Gökçe 2011) and improved the sensory properties of meat (Gök and Bor 2016). As seen in Figure 5, marina-tion time increased tenderness scores. Whiting and Strange (1990) stated the improvement in tenderness depended on the pH drop below the isoelectric point.
Conclusions
Treatment with pineapple fruit juice improved the tenderness of spent hen meat types. Marination for 160 min increased the tenderness scores. Marination can therefore be recommended to increase consumer acceptability of spent chicken meats. Marination could be an alternative tenderisation technique to increase the economic value of spent hen meat.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Scientific Research Projects (SU-BAP-Konya, Turkey) of Selcuk University Coordinating Office for the financial support.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Funding
This work was supported by Selcuk University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit (SU-BAP) [18201018].
References
ABDALLA, H., N. ALI, F. SIDDIG, AND S. ALI. 2013. “Improving Tenderness of Spent Layer Hens Meat Using Papaya Leaves (Carica papaya).” Pakistan Veterinary Journal 33 (1): 73–76. doi:10.29261/pakvetj.
AJUYAH, A., R. HARDIN, K. CHEUNG, AND J. SIM. 1992. “Yield, Lipid, Cholesterol and Fatty Acid Composition of Spent Hens Fed Full-Fat Oil Seeds and Fish Meal Diets.” Journal of Food Science 57 (2): 338–341. doi:10.1111/jfds.1992.57.issue-2.
AOAC.2000. Official Methods of Analysis. Washington, D.C: Assn. of Official Analytical Chemists.
ARCHILE-CONTRERAS, A. C., M. C. CHA, I. B. MANDELL, S. P. MILLER,AND P. P. PURSLOW. 2010. “Vitamins E and C May Increase Collagen Turnover by Intramuscular Fibroblasts. Potential for Improved Meat Quality.” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 59 (2): 608–614. doi:10.1021/jf103696t.
BAUBLITS, R., F. POHLMAN, J. A. BROWN,ANDZ. JOHNSON.2005.“Effects of Sodium Chloride, Phosphate Type and Concentration, and Pump Rate on Beef Biceps Femoris Quality and Sensory Characteristics.” Meat Science 70 (2): 205–214. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.12.011. BHASKAR, K., R. J. ABRAHAM, V. A. RAO, R. N. BABU, AND
A. S. S. PANDIAN.2017.“Functional Properties of Spent Hen Meat Injected with Ultra Refined Papain Powder.” Journal of Meat Science and Technology 5 (1): 16–19.
BILLE, P.,AND M. TAAPOPI. 2008.“Effects of Two Commercial Meat Tenderizers on Different Cuts of Goat\’S Meat in Namibia.” African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development 8 (4): 417–426.
BOOREN, A., K. JONES, R. MANDIGO, AND D. OLSON. 1981. “Effects of Blade Tenderization, Vacuum Mixing, Salt Addition and Mixing Time on Binding of Meat Pieces into Sectioned and Formed Beef Steaks.” Journal of Food Science 46 (6): 1678–1680. doi:10.1111/ jfds.1981.46.issue-6.
BURKE, R., AND F. MONAHAN.2003.“The Tenderisation of Shin Beef Using a Citrus Juice Marinade.” Meat Science 63 (2): 161–168. BUYUKYAVUZ, A., 2014. “Effect of Bromelain on Duck Breast Meat
Tenderization.” Master Thesis, Clemson University, Tiger Prints, 60. CALKINS, C. R.,ANDG. SULLIVAN.2007.“Adding Enzymes to Improve
Beef Tenderness.” In Beef Facts Product Enhancement, National Cattleman’s Beef Association. Centennial Colorado: Cattlemen’s Beef Board. https://www.beefresearch.org/CMDocs/BeefResearch/ PE_Fact_Sheets/Adding_Enzymes_to_Improve_Beef_Tenderness. pdf.
CAVITT, L., G. YOUM, J. MEULLENET, C. OWENS,AND R. XIONG.2004. “Prediction of Poultry Meat Tenderness Using Razor Blade Shear, Allo-Kramer Shear, and Sarcomere Length.” Journal of Food Science 69 (1): 11–15. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.2004.tb17879.x.
CHUEACHUAYCHOO, A., S. WATTANACHANT, AND S. BENJAKUL. 2011. “Quality Characteristics of Raw and Cooked Spent Hen Pectoralis Major Muscles during Chilled Storage: Effect of Salt and Phosphate.” International Food Research Journal 18 (2): 601–613. DELPULGAR, J. S., A. GÁZQUEZ,ANDJ. RUIZ-CARRASCAL.2012.
“Physico-Chemical, Textural and Structural Characteristics of Sous-Vide
Cooked Pork Cheeks as Affected by Vacuum, Cooking
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
Razor Blade Shear Max (N) Razor Blade Shear Energy (N.mm) Figure 4.The effects of marination with pineapple fruit juice on textural properties.
Figure 5. The effects of marination with pineapple fruit juice on sensory quality.
Temperature, and Cooking Time.” Meat Science 90 (3): 828–835. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2011.11.024.
DENIZ, E. E.,2009.“Kesim Sonrasında Farklı Sürelerde Enjekte Edilen Marinat Çözeltilerinin Et Kalitesi Üzerine Etkileri (Effects of Marinade Solutions Injected at Different Times on Meat Quality after Slaughter).” PhD, Ege University, Graduate School of Natural Sciences, 178.
DONEVA, M., D. MITEVA, S. DYANKOVA, I. NACHEVA, P. METODIEVA,AND K. DIMOV. 2015. “Efficiency of Plant Proteases Bromelain and Papain on Turkey Meat Tenderness.” Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry 31 (3): 407–413. doi:10.2298/BAH1503407D.
ERGEZER, H., 2005. “Değişik Yöntemlerle Marine Edilmiş Kanatlı Etlerinin Kimyasal, Mikrobiyolojik, Tekstürel Ve Duyusal Özellikleri (Chemical, Microbiological, Textural and Sensory Properties of Marinated Poultry Meats with Different Methods).” Master Thesis, Pamukkale University, Graduate School of Natural Sciences, 100.
ERGEZER, H., AND R. GÖKÇE. 2011. “Comparison of Marinating with Two Different Types of Marinade on Some Quality and Sensory Characteristics of Turkey Breast Meat.” Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 10 (1): 60–67. doi:10.3923/javaa.2011.60.67. FLETCHER, D., M. QIAO,ANDD. SMITH.2000.“The Relationship of Raw
Broiler Breast Meat Color and pH to Cooked Meat Color and pH.” Poultry Science 79 (5): 784–788. doi:10.1093/ps/79.5.784.
FOGLE, D., R. PLIMPTON, H. OCKERMAN, L. JARENBACK,AND T. PERSSON.
1982.“Tenderization of Beef: Effect of Enzyme, Enzyme Level, and Cooking Method.” Journal of Food Science 47 (4): 1113–1118. doi:10.1111/jfds.1982.47.issue-4.
GAULT, N.1985.“The Relationship between Water-Holding Capacity and Cooked Meat Tenderness in Some Beef Muscles as Influenced by Acidic Conditions below the Ultimate pH.” Meat Science 15 (1): 15–30. doi:10.1016/0309-1740(85)90071-3.
GÖK, V., AND Y. BOR. 2016. “Effect of Marination with Fruit and Vegetable Juice on the Some Quality Characteristics of Turkey Breast Meat.” Revista Brasileira De Ciência Avícola 18 (3): 481–488. doi:10.1590/1806-9061-2016-0225.
HUNT, M., J. ACTON, R. BENEDICT, C. CALKINS, D. CORNFORTH, L. JEREMIAH, D. OLSON, C. SALM, J. SAVELL, AND S. SHIVAS. 1991. Guidelines for Meat Color Evaluation, American Meat Science Association, 1–17. Manhattan, KS: Kansas State University. KARAKAYA, M., R. YETIŞIR, A. AYGÜN, M. T. YILMAZ, AND S. S. TISKE.
2010. “Ikinci Verim Yılını Tamamlamış, Beyaz Ve Kahverengi Yumurtacı Tavuk Karkaslarına, Bitkisel Orijinli Proteolitik Enzim Uygulamalarının, Bazı Et Kalite Özelliklerine Etkisi.” Hayvansal Üretim 51 (2): 44–49.
KETNAWA, S., AND S. RAWDKUEN. 2011. “Application of Bromelain Extract for Muscle Foods Tenderization.” Food and Nutrition Sciences 02 (05): 393–401. doi:10.4236/fns.2011.25055.
KLINHOM, P., J. KLINHOM, J. SENAPA, AND S. METHAWIWAT, 2011. “Influence of Citric Acid, Lemon and Porcupine Fruit Juice on the Tenderness and Sensory Properties of Bovine Meat.” Proceedings of the 49th Kasetsart University Annual Conference, Kasetsart University, Kasetsart, Thailand, 1-4 February, 2011. Volume 4. Subject: Agricultural Extension and Home Economics, 1–10.
KONDAIAH, N., A. ANJANEYULU, V. K. RAO, N. SHARMA,AND H. JOSHI.
1985.“Effect of Salt and Phosphate on the Quality of Buffalo and Goat Meats.” Meat Science 15 (3): 183–192. doi: 10.1016/0309-1740(85)90036-1.
KOTULA, K. L., AND R. THELAPPURATE. 1994. “Microbiological and Sensory Attributes of Retail Cuts of Beef Treated with Acetic and Lactic Acid Solutions.” Journal of Food Protection 57 (8): 665–670. doi:10.4315/0362-028X-57.8.665.
LAWRIE, R.1991. Meat Science. 5th ed. Oxford. UK: Pergamum Press. LEE, S., J. MIN, I. KIM, AND M. LEE. 2003. “Physical Evaluation of
Popped Cereal Snacks with Spent Hen Meat.” Meat Science 64 (4): 383–390. doi:10.1016/S0309-1740(02)00199-7.
LESIAK, M., D. OLSON, C. LESIAK, AND D. AHN. 1996. “Effects of Postmortem Temperature and Time on the Water-Holding Capacity of Hot-Boned Turkey Breast and Thigh Muscle.” Meat Science 43 (1): 51–60.
MANOHAR, J., R. GAYATRHI,ANDV. VISHNUPRIYA.2016.“Temderisation of Meat Using Bromelain from Pineapple Extract.” International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Review and Research 39 (1): 81–85.
MANZOOR, Z., A. NAWAZ, H. MUKHTAR,ANDI. HAQ.2016.“Bromelain: Methods of Extraction, Purification and Therapeutic Applications.” Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology 59: 1–16. doi:10.1590/ 1678-4324-2016150010.
MURPHY, R., AND B. MARKS. 2000. “Effect of Meat Temperature on Proteins, Texture, and Cook Loss for Ground Chicken Breast Patties.” Poultry Science 79 (1): 99–104. doi:10.1093/ps/79.1.99. NADZIRAH, K., S. ZAINAL, A. NORIHAM, AND I. NORMAH. 2016.
“Application of Bromelain Powder Produced from Pineapple Crowns in Tenderising Beef Round Cuts.” International Food Research Journal 23 (4): 1590–1599.
NAVEENA, B., S. MENDIRATTA,ANDA. ANJANEYULU.2004.“Tenderization of Buffalo Meat Using Plant Proteases from Cucumis Trigonus Roxb (Kachri) and Zingiber Officinale Roscoe (Ginger Rhizome).” Meat Science 68 (3): 363–369. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.04.004. NAVEENA, B. M.,ANDS. K. MENDIRATTA.2001.“Tenderisation of Spent
Hen Meat Using Ginger Extract.” British Poultry Science 42 (3): 344–349. doi:10.1080/00071660120055313.
NAVID, S., A. SHEIKHLAR, AND K. KAVEH. 2011. “Influence of the Combination of Vitamin D3 and Papaya Leaf on Meat Quality of Spent Layer Hen.” Agricultural Journal 6: 197–200. doi:10.3923/ aj.2011.197.200.
NAVID, S., M. HILMI, A. Q. SAZILI,ANDA. SHEIKHLAR.2010.“Effects of Papaya Leaf Meal, Pineapple Skin Meal and Vitamin D3 Supplementation on Meat Quality of Spent Layer Chicken.” Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 9 (22): 2873–2876. doi:10.3923/javaa.2010.2873.2876.
NORTHCUTT, J., E. FOEGEDING, AND F. EDENS. 1994. “Water-Holding Properties of Thermally Preconditioned Chicken Breast and Leg Meat.” Poultry Science 73 (2): 308–316. doi:10.3382/ps.0730308. OBUZ, E., AND E. CESUR. 2009. “Effects of Marinating on Different
Properties of Chicken Breast Meat: Treatment of Samples with Sour Cherry, Pomegranate, Orange, Grape or Apple Juice.” Fleischwirtschaft 89 (3): 95–99.
ÖNENÇ, A., M. SERDAROĞLU,ANDK. ABDRAIMOV.2004.“Effect of Various Additives to Marinating Baths on Some Properties of Cattle Meat.” European Food Research and Technology 218 (2): 114–117. doi:10.1007/s00217-003-0828-7.
PARKS, S., A. REYNOLDS, AND L. WICKER. 2000. “Aqueous Apple Flavoring in Breast Muscle Has Physical, Chemical, and Sensory Properties Similar to Those of Phosphate-Marinated Controls.” Poultry Science 79 (8): 1183–1188. doi:10.1093/ps/79.8.1183. SAHA, A., Y. LEE, J. MEULLENET, AND C. OWENS. 2009. “Consumer
Acceptance of Broiler Breast Fillets Marinated with Varying Levels of Salt.” Poultry Science 88 (2): 415–423. doi:10.3382/ps.2008-00230. SAMS, A. 1990. “Electrical Stimulation and High Temperature Conditioning of Broiler Carcasses.” Poultry Science 69 (10): 1781–1786. doi:10.3382/ps.0691781.
SEN, A., B. NAVEENA, M. MUTHUKUMAR,AND S. VAITHIYANATHAN.2014. “Colour, Myoglobin Denaturation and Storage Stability of Raw and
Cooked Mutton Chops at Different End Point Cooking
Temperature.” Journal of Food Science and Technology 51 (5): 970–975. doi:10.1007/s13197-011-0557-z.
SERDAROĞLU, M., K. ABDRAIMOV,ANDA. ONENC.2007.“The Effects of Marinating with Citric Acid Solutions and Grapefruit Juice on Cooking and Eating Quality of Turkey Breast.” Journal of Muscle Foods 18 (2): 162–172. doi:10.1111/j.1745-4573.2007.00074.x. SHEARD, P.,ANDA. TALI.2004.“Injection of Salt, Tripolyphosphate and
Bicarbonate Marinade Solutions to Improve the Yield and Tenderness of Cooked Pork Loin.” Meat Science 68 (2): 305–311. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.03.012.
SMITH-MARSHALL, J., AND K. GOLDEN. 2012. “Characterization of Bromelain from Morinda Citrifolia (Noni).” Journal of Scientific Research 4 (2): 445. doi:10.3329/jsr.v4i2.8125.
ŠULCEROVÁ, H., M. MIHOK, M. JŮZL, AND P. HAŠČÍK. 2014.“Effect of Addition of Pollen and Propolis to Feeding Mixtures during the Production of Broiler Chickens ROSS 308 to the Colour of Thigh and Breast Muscle and pH Determination.” Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis 59 (6): 359–366. doi:10.11118/actaun201159060359.
ÜNAL, K., ANDM. KARAKAYA.2015. “Effect of Sonication Time on Technological and Emulsification Properties of Spent Chicken Breast and Thigh Meat.” Fleischwirtschaft International 1: 86–90.
VON LENGERKEN, G., S. MAAK, AND M. WICKE. 2002. “Muscle Metabolism and Meat Quality of Pigs and Poultry.” Veterinarija Ir Zootechnika 20 (42): 82–86.
WANG, H., J. WU, AND M. BETTI. 2013.“Chemical, Rheological and Surface Morphologic Characterisation of Spent Hen Proteins Extracted by pH-shift Processing with or without the Presence of Cryoprotectants.” Food Chemistry 139 (1–4): 710–719. doi:10.1016/ j.foodchem.2013.01.123.
WHETSTONE, S., K. ADHIKARI, AND E. CHAMBER. 2014. “Impact of Seasoning and Bromelain on Sensory Attributes of Beef Steaks.” Journal of Human Nutrition and Food Science 2: 1023.
WHITING, R.,ANDE. STRANGE.1990.“Effects of Lactic Acid on Epimysial Connective Tissues of Muscles Used for Restructured Beef Steaks.” Journal of Food Science 55 (3): 859–860. doi:10.1111/jfds.1990.55. issue-3.
YU, L., E. LEE, J. JEONG, H. PAIK, J. CHOI,ANDC. KIM.2005.“Effects of Thawing Temperature on the Physicochemical Properties of Pre-Rigor Frozen Chicken Breast and Leg Muscles.” Meat Science 71 (2): 375–382. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.04.020.
YUSOP, S. M., M. G. O’SULLIVAN, J. F. KERRY,AND J. P. KERRY. 2010. “Effect of Marinating Time and Low pH on Marinade Performance and Sensory Acceptability of Poultry Meat.” Meat Science 85 (4): 657–663. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.03.020.
ZOCHOWSKA-KUJAWSKA, J., K. LACHOWICZ,ANDM. SOBCZAK.2012.“Effects of Fibre Type and Kefir, Wine Lemon, and Pineapple Marinades on Texture and Sensory Properties of Wild Boar and Deer Longissimus Muscle.” Meat Science 92 (4): 675–680. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.06.020. ŻOCHOWSKA-KUJAWSKA, J., K. LACHOWICZ,ANDM. SOBCZAK.2010.“The
Tenderisation of Wild Boar Meat Using a Calcium Chloride, Kefir, Wine and Pineapple Marinade.” Electronic Journal of Polish Agricultural Universities 13 (4): 1–7.
