Evaluation of effects of ultrasound-assisted saucing on the quality of chicken gizzards

The combined effects of ultrasound and plasma-activated water on microbial inactivation and quality attributes of crayfish during refrigerated storage

“…This indicated that the first two PCs were sufficient to explain the total variances of the dataset [62] , [63] . On day 0, the volatile profiles of crayfish samples were close to each other and even overlapped, indicating that the effects of different decontamination treatments were not obvious at the initial of storage [64] . On day 6, the volatile profiles of untreated and US groups were relatively far from the CK group, while the volatile profiles of PAW and UP groups were close to the CK group.…”

Ultrasound improves the low-sodium salt curing of sea bass: Insights into the effects of ultrasound on texture, microstructure, and flavor characteristics

“…In a previous study, the gel structure of chicken breast exhibited a more uniform and regular order under low-frequency ultrasound treatment; furthermore, this intricately ordered network structure increased the corresponding water-holding capacity of the gel [27] . Li et al [28] also demonstrated that the springiness of ultrasound-treated chicken gizzards was significantly higher than that of the non-ultrasound-treated group, which was attributed to the cavitation effect of ultrasound that disrupts the integrity of the muscle, increases the interstices of the muscle fibers, and further improves the water-holding capacity of the fibers. However, higher-power ultrasonic treatment for an extended duration reduced the adhesiveness and springiness of the gizzards, which could be attributed to this treatment leading to the denaturation of proteins and deterioration of gelation properties, thus reducing the springiness.…”

Tri‐frequency simultaneous ultrasound pickling for the acceleration of the NaCl content and quality improvement of pork (longissimus dorsi)

“…In detail, the cooking loss was lower than that of the CK when the ultrasonic intensities were 101.3, 117.5, 133.8, and 150 W L −1 , particularly the sample with 101.3 W L −1 , which had the lowest cooking loss (33.33%). During the processing of meat products, cooking loss reflected to a certain extent the water‐holding capacity of meat products subjected to high‐temperature treatment 32 . The result indicated that the cavitation effect of ultrasound can penetrate the interior of the tissue and destroy the tissue structure, leading to the release and accumulation of more salt‐soluble proteins on the surface of the pork, thereby enhancing the prevention of moisture diffusion on the meat surface.…”

“…During the processing of meat products, cooking loss reflected to a certain extent the water-holding capacity of meat products subjected to high-temperature treatment. 32 The result indicated that the cavitation effect of ultrasound can penetrate the interior of the tissue and destroy the tissue structure, leading to the release and accumulation of more salt-soluble proteins on the surface of the pork, thereby enhancing the prevention of moisture diffusion on the meat surface. Besides, the damage to muscle structure caused by ultrasound altered the regulatory mechanisms of water migration in meat.…”