2017
DOI: 10.20546/ijcmas.2017.605.272
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of Different Packaging Conditions on Shelf Life of Chicken Samosa Stored at Refrigeration Temperature

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 4 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Among the other treatments (T3 to T9) there was a difference between them, except for the T6 and T7 that were similar between them. For the parameter of oiliness, there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) between all the treatments, with the exception of T1 and T2, who in turn were the best score in this characteristic and, finally, the appearance had a statistically significant difference ( p < 0.05), being the T1 and T2 treatments the ones with the highest qualification by the panelists, and finally the general acceptance had a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) between T1 and T2 (they were the ones that obtained better score) and the other samples, the highest score obtained for this parameter was higher than that obtained by Kanchi et al, [18], Sakhale et al, [16] and Ata-Ur-Rehman et al, [17]. These three parameters had something in common, as the time and temperature increased the evaluation by the panelists was decreasing.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…Among the other treatments (T3 to T9) there was a difference between them, except for the T6 and T7 that were similar between them. For the parameter of oiliness, there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) between all the treatments, with the exception of T1 and T2, who in turn were the best score in this characteristic and, finally, the appearance had a statistically significant difference ( p < 0.05), being the T1 and T2 treatments the ones with the highest qualification by the panelists, and finally the general acceptance had a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) between T1 and T2 (they were the ones that obtained better score) and the other samples, the highest score obtained for this parameter was higher than that obtained by Kanchi et al, [18], Sakhale et al, [16] and Ata-Ur-Rehman et al, [17]. These three parameters had something in common, as the time and temperature increased the evaluation by the panelists was decreasing.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 67%