Andréa Maria de Araújo Gabriel

Incidence and physical properties of PSE chicken meat in a commercial processing plant

It is known that PSE meat present important functional defects, such as low water holding capacity and ultimate pH, which may compromise the quality of further-processed meat products. In this study, L* (lightness), a* (redness), and b* (yellowness) values of 500 chicken breast fillets were determined using a portable colorimeter (Minolta, model CR-400) in a commercial processing plant. Fillets were considered pale when their L* was ≥49. Out of those samples, 30 fillets with normal color and 30 pale fillets were evaluated as to pH, drip loss, cooking loss, water holding capacity, shear force, and submitted to sensorial analysis. An incidence of 10.20% PSE meat was determined. Pale and normal fillets presented significantly different (p≤0.05) pH values, L* and a* values, water holding capacity, drip loss, and cooking loss, demonstrating changes in the physical properties of PSE meat. Shear force and sensorial characteristics were not different (p>0.05) between pale and normal fillets. Despite the significant differences in meat physical properties, these were not perceived by consumers in terms of tenderness, aspect, and flavor. The observed incidence of PSE may cause losses due to its low water retention capacity.

Métodos de amostragem e caracterização química do Capim marandu, consumido por bovinos

The main objective of this study the Marandu grass using total dry matter (CS), hand-plucking sample (PS) and extrusa (EXT) in a completely randomized design. The samples were analyzed for dry matter (DM), crude protein, ether extract, neutral (NDF) and acid-detergent fiber (ADF), hemicellulose, cellulose, lignin, ash, in vitro dry matter digestibility, total, and non fiber carbohydrates. The samples for PS presented DM, NDF and ADF values of 25.19, 65.31, and 28.91 %. The EXT values for NDF and ADF were 73.21 and 33.46 %, respectively, reflecting the selectivity of the animal. The ADF value for CS was 36.01 %, due to the high proportion of senescent material in the forage. The CS and hand plucked samples obtained did not represent the diet consumed by the animals. The chemical composition of the forage is influenced by the different sampling methods.