1998
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0010(199812)78:4<522::aid-jsfa150>3.0.co;2-f
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of storage temperature on drip loss from fresh beef

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

3
12
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
3
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar disproportion in the value of the drip loss for pork packed in MAP and in vacuum was found by Cayuela et al (), who explained this difference partly by the influence of the pressure change during Vac. In this study, the increase in the amount of drip loss with storage time was also observed, which was consistent with previous findings (Den Hertog‐Meischke et al, ; Kameník et al, ).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Similar disproportion in the value of the drip loss for pork packed in MAP and in vacuum was found by Cayuela et al (), who explained this difference partly by the influence of the pressure change during Vac. In this study, the increase in the amount of drip loss with storage time was also observed, which was consistent with previous findings (Den Hertog‐Meischke et al, ; Kameník et al, ).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…The amount of water captured and retained in meat before and after cooking influences its juiciness and therefore palatability, as well as the saleable weight of the product. Water is lost from the meat in the form of purge during storage and in thawing of frozen meat, and during cooking through evaporation and drip loss (stock) (Den Hertog-Meischke et al, 1998;Aaslyng et al, 2003). Water exists in muscle in three forms, namely water bound to proteins (this fraction is small, is not affected by freezing and is not lost during conventional cooking); entrapped water (held by steric effects and/or by attraction to bound water), and free water (HuffLonergan & Lonergan, 2005).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…In this study, the sample protein concentration was determined to be 78.9 ± 5.71 mg/mL, calculated as the average of four replicates. These results are consistent with those reported previously for dripping beef samples (prepared from beef stored under various conditions), i.e., 89.3 ± 7.28 mg/mL (Anon and Calvelo, 1980) and 81.9 mg/mL (Den Hertog-Meischke et al, 1998). Figure 1 presents the changes in complex viscosity corresponding to the change in temperature (over the range 20 _ 80℃) at a heating rate of 1.0℃/min.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%