Journals / Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences / 2020 / Cilt: 44 - Sayı: 3

Effect of in-bag carcass decontamination method on shelf life of whole chicken carcasses packaged in plastic bags

Pages
688–694
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results showed that there wasa limited antimicrobial effect on microbial flora in the treatment groups within the first 3 days of storage compared to the control group.However, the difference between the groups completely disappeared on days 7 and 10.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study was undertaken to investigate the changes in the microbiological and sensorial attributes of fresh chicken carcassesimmersed in decontamination solutions, followed by packaging in plastic bags in which decontamination solution was added duringstorage at 4 °C.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The samples were taken on days 0, 3, 7, and 10 for microbiological and sensory attributes.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results showed that there wasa limited antimicrobial effect on microbial flora in the treatment groups within the first 3 days of storage compared to the control group.However, the difference between the groups completely disappeared on days 7 and 10.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study was undertaken to investigate the changes in the microbiological and sensorial attributes of fresh chicken carcassesimmersed in decontamination solutions, followed by packaging in plastic bags in which decontamination solution was added duringstorage at 4 °C. The samples were taken on days 0, 3, 7, and 10 for microbiological and sensory attributes. Results showed that there wasa limited antimicrobial effect on microbial flora in the treatment groups within the first 3 days of storage compared to the control group.However, the difference between the groups completely disappeared on days 7 and 10. The changes in the numbers of the microflorabetween days 0 and 10 varied between 4.5–7.9 $log_{10}$ CFU/mL for total aerobic mesophiles, 3.6–8.58 $log_{10}$ CFU/mL for psychrotrophicbacteria, 2.7–6.7 $log_{10}$ CFU/mL for coliforms, and 2.2–5.9 $log_{10}$ CFU/mL for yeast and molds. Sensory evaluation of the cooked breastmeat of the carcasses indicated that there was no appreciable difference between the groups between days 0 and 7. It was concluded thatthe in-pack decontamination method described here should be improved for antimicrobial effect and has potential to be used withoutaffecting sensory attributes of the carcasses in poultry.

🔖

Cite This Article

UYSAL, İ. A., ÇAKMAK, Ö., İNCİLİ, G. K., ÇALICIOĞLU, M. (2022). Effect of in-bag carcass decontamination method on shelf life of whole chicken carcasses packaged in plastic bags. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Cilt: 44 - Sayı: 3, 688–694. https://ajindex.com/articles/614676

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Del Río E, Panio-Morán M, Prieto M, Alonso-Calleja C, Capita R. Effect of various chemical decontamination treatments on natural microflora and sensory characteristics of poultry. International Journal of Food Microbiology 2007; 115 (3): 268- 280. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2006.10.048 2. Roels TH, Frazak PA, Kazmierczak JJ, Mackenzie WR, Proctor ME et al. Incomplete sanitation of meat grinder and ingestion of raw ground beef: contributing factors to a large outbreak of Salmonella Typhimurium infection. Epidemiology & Infections 1997; 119 (2): 127-134. 3. Stern NJ, Fedorka-Cray P, Bailey JS, Cox NA, Craven SE et al. Distribution of Campylobacter spp. in selected U.S. poultry production and processing operations. Journal of Food Protection 2001; 64 (11): 1705-1710. doi: 10.4315/0362-028X64.11.1705 4. Lucianez A, Holmes MA, Tucker AW. Relationships between processing delay and microbial load of broiler neck skin samples. Journal of Food Protection 2010; 73 (1): 26-31. doi: 10.4315/0362-028X-73.1.26 5. İncili GK, Çalıcıoğlu M. Change in scalding fluids by time in poultry slaughterhouse and its effect on microbiological quality of carcasses. Journal of Food Safety 2018; 38: e12485. doi: 10.1111/jfs.12485 6. Nychas GJE, Marshall DL, Sofos JN. Microbial spoilage and public health concerns; meat, poultry, and seafood. In: Doyle MP, Beuchat LR (editors). Food Microbiology: Fundamentals and Frontiers. 3rd ed. Washington DC, USA: American Society for Microbiology Press; 2007. pp. 105-140. 7. Bolder NM. Decontamination of meat and poultry carcasses. Trends in Food Science & Technology 1997; 8 (7): 221-227. doi: 10.1016/S0924-2244(97)01040-6 8. Dinçer AH, Baysal T. Decontamination techniques of pathogen in meat and poultry. Critical Reviews in Microbiology 2004; 30 (3): 197-204. doi: 10.1080/10408410490468803 9. Northcutt J, Smith D, Ingram KD, Hinton AJ, Musgrove M. Recovery of bacteria from broiler carcasses after spray washing with acidified electrolyzed water or sodium hypochlorite solutions. Poultry Science 2007; 86: 2239-2244. doi: 10.1093/ ps/86.10.2239 10. Smulders FJ, Greer GG. Integrating microbial decontamination with organic acids in HACCP programs for muscle foods: prospects and controversies. International Journal of Food Microbiology 1998; 44 (3): 149-169. doi: 10.1016/S0168- 1605(98)00123-8 11. Loretz M, Stephan R, Zweifel C. Antimicrobial activity of decontamination treatments for poultry carcasses: a literature survey. Food Control 2010; 21: 791-8