Shelf-life extension of chicken patties with the application of multiple hurdles and modified atmospheres packaging

A K BISWAS; M K CHATLI; J SAHOO

doi:10.56093/ijans.v84i10.44319

Authors

A K BISWAS Central Avian Research Institute, Izatnagar, Uttar Pradesh 243122 India
M K CHATLI Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Ludhiana, Punjab 141 004 India
J SAHOO Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Ludhiana, Punjab 141 004 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v84i10.44319

Keywords:

Broiler chicken, Chitosan, Hurdle technology, Packaging, Patties

Abstract

The present study was undertaken to know the effect of hurdle treatments on the quality of chicken meat patties (CMP) during storage at 27±2 °C under modified atmospheres packaging (MAP) condition. A total three samples were prepared viz. (i) control (T₀), (ii) smoke treated (T₁) and (iii) chitosan coating + smoke treated (T₂). The products were drawn at 3 days interval and evaluated for various physico-chemical parameters, sensory attributes and microbiological quality. Results indicated that both smoking alone and chitosan coating in combination with smoking had significant effect on pH of chicken patties. Lipid stability study indicates control samples showed higher TBARS values as compared to treatment groups. This sample exhibited TBARS value of 1.69 mg malonaldehyde (MDA) per kg of sample which is near to threshold value of lipid oxidation (2.0 mg MDA/kg). T₁ samples showed lower TBARS value, FFA content, moisture % and water activity (aw) than their counter part control and T₂. Lovibond tintometer colour value suggested that treated products were darker (lower L- value) and shown to have higher redness (a-value) and yellowness (b) values as compared to control. However, both the ‘a’ and ‘b’ values decrease with the increased storage period. Texture profile analysis revealed that hardness value was more for T₁ products. Both the treated products exhibited comparable sensory scores while control showed least. Standard plate count was higher for T₂ samples as compared to T₁. The control patties were spoiled on the day 3 while T₁ and T₂ samples can be well stored up to day 12 and 9, respectively. In general, the use of hurdles could substantially improve the shelf life of chicken meat patties during room temperature storage.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

AOAC. 2007. Official Method of Analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists International, Washington, DC.

APHA. 1984. Compendium of Methods for Microbiological Examination of Foods. 2nd edn. American Public Health Association. Washington, DC.

Bourne, M C. 1978. Texture profile analysis. Food Technology 32: 62–66.

Dutta, P K, Tripathi, S, Mehrotra, G K and Dutta J. 2009. Perspectives for chitosan based antimicrobial films in food applications. Food Chemistry 114: 1173–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2008.11.047

Gulcin, I, Elmastas, M and Aboul-Enein, H Y. 2010. Antioxidant activity of clove oil – A powerful antioxidant source. Arabian Journal of Chemistry DOI: 10.1016/j.arabjc. 2010.09.016.

Hunt, M C, Sorheim, O and Slinde, E. 1999. Colour and heat denaturation of myoglobin forms in ground beef. Journal of Food Science 64: 847–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1999.tb15925.x

Jay, M, Kittaka, R S and Ordal, Z J. 1962. The effect of temperature and packaging material on the storage-life and bacterial flora of ground beef. Food Technology 16: 95–97.

Keeton, J T. 1983. Effect of fat and sodium chloride and phosphate levels on the chemical and sensory properties of pork patties. Journal of Food Science 48: 878–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1983.tb14921.x

Koniecko, E S. 1979. Handbook for Meat Chemists. 3rd edn. Avery Publishing Group Inc., Wayne, New Jersey.

Leistner L. 1999. Principals and application of hurdle technology. New methods of food preservation. pp.1–21. (Ed.) Gould G W. Aspen Publishers, Inc., Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2105-1_1

Modi, V K, Sachindra, N M, Nagegowda, P, Mahendrakar, N S and Rao, D N. 2007. Quality changes during the storage of dehydrated chicken kabab mix. International Journal of Food Science and Technology 42: 827–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2007.01291.x

Paula, R., Colet, R, Oliveira, D, Valduga, E and Treicheln, H. 2010. Assessment of different packaging structures in the stability of frozen fresh Brazilian Toscana sausage. Food Bioprocess Technology 4: 481–85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-010-0350-4

Rao D N and Sachindra N M. 2002. Modified atmosphere and vacuum packaging of meat and poultry products. Food Review International 18(4): 263–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1081/FRI-120016206

Snedecor, G W and Cochran, W G. 1994. Statistical Methods. 8th edn. The Iowa State University Press Ames, Iowa.

Trout E S, Hunt M C, Johson D E, Clans J R, Castner C L and Kroff D H. 1992. Characteristics of low fat ground beef containing texture modifying ingredients. Journal of Food Science 57: 19–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1992.tb05415.x

Viuda-Martos, M, Ruiz – Navajas, Y, Fernandez – Lopez, J and Perez – Alvarez, J A. 2010. Effect of orange dietary fiber, oregano oil and packaging conditions on shelf-life of bologna sausages. Food Control 21: 436–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2009.07.004

Witte, V C, Krause, G F and Bailey, M E. 1970. A new extraction method for determining 2-thiobarbituric acid values of pork and beef during storage. Journal of Food Science 35: 582– 85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1970.tb04815.x