DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Quality of Commercial Broiler Breast Meat Retailed in Korea

국내산 시판 닭 가슴살의 품질 특성

  • Yang, Inyong (Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Dankook University) ;
  • Im, Pureum (Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Dankook University) ;
  • Kang, Jinsu (Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Dankook University) ;
  • Kwak, Hansub (Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Dankook University) ;
  • Jeong, Yoonhwa (Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Dankook University) ;
  • Kim, Misook (Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Dankook University) ;
  • Lee, Youngseung (Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Dankook University)
  • 양인용 (단국대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 임푸름 (단국대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 강진수 (단국대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 곽한섭 (단국대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 정윤화 (단국대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 김미숙 (단국대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 이영승 (단국대학교 식품영양학과)
  • Received : 2015.07.27
  • Accepted : 2015.09.21
  • Published : 2015.11.30

Abstract

Overall quality of six kinds of commercial broiler breast fillets (A~F) retailed in Korea were examined, including proximate composition analysis, shape profile analysis, pH, color, tenderness, cooking loss, descriptive analysis, and consumer testing. A total of 120 breast meat fillets were purchased at a local market. Overall quality of broiler breast meat commercially available in Korea was found to vary significantly, indicating a broad range of product quality in the marketplace. Moisture content of meat ranged from 74.4 to 76.4%, whereas protein, fat, and ash contents were 21.8~25.2, 0.2~0.8, and 1.07~1.16%, respectively. The pH ranged from 6.2 to 6.4, whereas color values ($L^*$, $a^*$, and $b^*$) were 52.2~57.2, -3.5~0.5, and 8.3~13.6, respectively, among all products tested. Approximately 9% variation in cooking loss was detected depending on the products evaluated, whereas shapes (height, width, and length) of meat were also significantly different (15% variation on average). Product F was proven to be the least tender and least liked by consumers, implying that tenderness is a key attribute determining consumer acceptability of broiler breast meat.

본 연구에서는 국내에서 유통되는 각기 다른 브랜드 6종의 닭 가슴살 제품에 대해 이화학 검사, 조직감 검사 및 관능평가를 통하여 품질 비교 평가를 수행하였다. 평가 결과 일반 성분에서는 큰 차이가 없었으나, pH, 색상, 조리손실률에서 제품 간 큰 편차가 나타났다. 특히 연도 측정에서는 연도가 높은 제품군(A, B, C, D)과 연도가 낮은 제품군(E, F)으로 구분이 되어 제품의 숙성기간 또는 제품군별 냉동 방식에 따라 연도가 영향을 받음을 알 수 있었다. 묘사분석 결과 저작경도와 저작응집성에서 제품 간 유의적인 차이가 나타났고 두 특성 모두 F 제품에서 가장 높은 강도를 보였다. 소비자 기호도 조사 결과 연도 및 수분감이 가장 낮은 제품에서 기호도가 가장 낮게 나타나 연도 특성이 닭 가슴살의 품질을 결정하는 가장 중요한 지표 중 하나라는 것이 밝혀졌다. 본 연구에 사용된 닭 가슴살 제품은 제품별 사육부터 가공, 유통과정에 있어서 여러 가지 다양한 변수가 존재하고 이에 대한 정보가 공개되지 않았으므로 제품 품질 차이에 영향을 주는 인자들을 정확하게 독립적으로 구분하기는 불가능하나 현재 국내에 시판 유통되는 닭 가슴살 제품의 품질 간 큰 차이가 존재하고 소비자들의 기호도에 영향을 미치는 요인들을 밝혀냄으로써 국내 가금육 제조업체들이 소비자들의 기호도가 최적화된 닭 가슴살 제품을 생산 및 관리하는 데 본 연구 결과를 유용하게 사용할 수 있을 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. FAO. 2014. FAOSTAT; food balance sheets. Available from: http://faostat3.fao.org/compare/E (accessed Jul 2015).
  2. Kim SJ, Choi WS, You SG, Min YS. 2007. Effect of glucomannan on quality and shelf-life of low-fat chicken patty. Korean J Food Sci Technol 39: 55-60.
  3. eKAPEPIA. 2013. Chicken consumption. Available from: http://www.ekapepia.com/707.su (accessed Jul 2015).
  4. Chae HS, Choi HC, Na JC, Kim MJ, Kang HK, Kim DW, Kim JH, Jo SH, Kang GH, Seo OS. 2012. Effect of raising periods on amino acids and fatty acids properties of chicken meat. Korean J Poult Sci 39: 77-85. https://doi.org/10.5536/KJPS.2012.39.2.077
  5. KMTA. 2010. KMTA statics room; import status. Available from: http://www.kmta.or.kr/html/sub6-1.html?scode=233&kej= (accessed Jun 2015).
  6. Jaturasitha S, Srikanchai T, Kreuzer M, Wicke M. 2008. Differences in carcass and meat characteristics between chicken indigenous to northern Thailand (Black-boned and Thai native) and imported extensive breeds (Bresse and Rhode Island Red). Poultry Sci 87: 160-169. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2006-00398
  7. Jeon HJ, Choe JH, Jung Y, Kruk ZA, Lim DG, Jo C. 2010. Comparison of the chemical composition, textural characteristics, and sensory properties of North and South Korean native chickens and commercial broilers. Korean J Food Sci Ani Resour 30: 171-178. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2010.30.2.171
  8. Barbanti D, Pasquini M. 2005. Influence of cooking conditions on cooking loss and tenderness of raw and marinated chicken breast meat. LWT-Food Sci Technol 38: 895-901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2004.08.017
  9. Jung MO, Choi JS, Lee JH, Lee HJ, Kang M, Choi YI. 2013. Quality characteristics of breast meats among broiler, Korean native chicken and old layer. Bulletin of the Animal Biotechnology 5: 69-73.
  10. Wood JD, Nute GR, Fursey GAJ, Cuthbertson A. 1995. The effect of cooking conditions on the eating quality of pork. Meat Sci 40: 127-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/0309-1740(94)00051-8
  11. Cavitt LC. 2004. Development of a novel instrumental shearing method utilizing razor blade shear to evaluate tenderness and predict consumer acceptability of broiler breast fillets. PhD Dissertation. University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA. p 130.
  12. Schilling MA, Vidal P, Ployhart RE, Marangoni A. 2003. Learning by doing something else: Variation, relatedness, and the learning curve. Manage Sci 49: 39-56. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.49.1.39.12750
  13. Thielke S, Lhafi SK, Kuhne M. 2005. Effects of aging prior to freezing on poultry meat tenderness. Poult Sci 84: 607-612. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/84.4.607
  14. Kong F, Tang J, Lin M, Rasco B. 2008. Thermal effects on chicken and salmon muscles: Tenderness, cook loss, area shrinkage, collagen solubility and microstructure. LWT-Food Sci Technol 41: 1210-1222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2007.07.020
  15. Lee YS, Saha A, Xiong R, Owens CM, Meullenet JF. 2008. Changes in broiler breast fillet tenderness, water-holding capacity, and color attributes during long-term frozen storage. J Food Sci 73: E162-E168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2008.00734.x
  16. Warkup CC. 1993. Improving meat quality: the blueprint approach. BSAP Occas Publ 17: 63-67. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0263967X00001312
  17. Debut M, Berri C, Baeza E, Sellier N, Arnould C, Guemene D, Jehl N, Boutten B, Jego Y, Beaumont C, Le Bihan-Duval E. 2003. Variation of chicken technological meat quality in relation to genotype and preslaughter stress conditions. Poult Sci 82: 1829-1838. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/82.12.1829
  18. Huang H, Williams SK, Sims CA, Simmone A. 2011. Sodium metasilicate affects antimicrobial, sensory, physical, and chemical characteristics of fresh commercial chicken breast meat stored at $4^{\circ}C$ for 9 days. Poult Sci 90: 1124-1133. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2010-01227
  19. Jeon KH, Kwon KH, Kim EM, Kim YB, Sohn DI, Choi JY. 2014. Effect of cooking methods with various heating apparatus on the quality characteristics of chicken. Korean J Culinary Res 20: 201-213.
  20. Cha JS, Kim SH, Jung S, Kang HJ, Jo C, Nam KC. 2014. Comparison of meat quality and sensory characteristics of different native chickens in Korean market. Korean J Poult Sci 41: 53-59. https://doi.org/10.5536/KJPS.2014.41.1.53
  21. AOAC. 1990. Official method of analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA, USA. No 934.06.
  22. Meullenet JF, Jonville E, Grezes D, Owens CM. 2004. Prediction of the texture of cooked poultry pectoralis major muscles by near-infrared reflectance analysis of raw meat. J Texture Stud 35: 573-585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4603.2004.35510.x
  23. Cavitt LC, Meullenet JF, Gandhapuneni RK, Youm GW, Owens CM. 2005. Rigor development and meat quality of large and small broilers and the use of Allo-Kramer shear, needle puncture, and razor blade shear to measure texture. Poultry Sci 84: 113-118. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/84.1.113
  24. Chae HS, Cho SH, Park BY, Yoo YM, Kim JH, Ahn CN, Lee JM, Kim YK, Yun SG, Choi YI. 2002. Comparison of chemical composition in different portions of domestic broiler meat. Korean J Poult Sci 29: 51-57.
  25. Cavitt LC, Sams AR. 2003. Evaluation of physical dimension changes as nondestructive measurements for monitoring rigor mortis development in broiler muscles. Poult Sci 82: 1198-1204. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/82.7.1198
  26. Allen CD, Russell SM, Fletcher DL. 1997. The relationship of broiler breast meat color and pH to shelf-life and odor development. Poult Sci 76: 1042-1046. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/76.7.1042
  27. Barbut S, Sosnicki AA, Lonergan SM, Knapp T, Ciobanu DC, Gatcliffe LJ, Huff-Lonergan E, Wilson EW. 2008. Progress in reducing the pale, soft and exudative (PSE) problem in pork and poultry meat. Meat Sci 79: 46-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2007.07.031
  28. Park BS. 2009. The shelf life and meat quality of broilers fed pine bark extract (pitamin). Korean J Food Sci Ani Resour 29: 430-436. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2009.29.4.430
  29. Dugan MER, Aalhus JL, Jeremiah LE, Kramer JKG, Schaefer AL. 1999. The effects of feeding conjugated linoleic acid on subsequent pork quality. Can J Anim Sci 79: 45-51. https://doi.org/10.4141/A98-070
  30. Moon YH. 2009. Effects of citrus byproduct diet on meat color, rancidity and freshness in Korean native chickens during cold storage. J East Asian Soc Dietary Life 19: 551-557.
  31. Van Laack RLJM, Liu CH, Smith MO, Loveday HD. 2000. Characteristics of pale, soft, exudative broiler breast meat. Poult Sci 79: 1057-1061. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/79.7.1057
  32. Young JF, Stagsted J, Jensen SK, Karlsson AH, Henckel P. 2003. Ascorbic acid, ${\alpha}$-tocopherol, and oregano supplements reduce stress-induced deterioration of chicken meat quality. Poult Sci 82: 1343-1351. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/82.8.1343
  33. Barbut S. 2010. Texture analysis. In Sensory Analysis of Foods of Animal Origin. Nollet LML, Toldra F, eds. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA. p 121-129.
  34. Lee YS, Owens CM, Meullenet JF. 2009. Tenderness perception of poultry major pectoralis muscle during mastication. J Food Sci 74: S413-S422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2009.01339.x

Cited by

  1. 당침지 처리된 닭 가슴살 육포의 이화학적 특성 및 산화안정성 vol.24, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.11002/kjfp.2017.24.1.84
  2. 십전대보탕 부산물과 발효홍국 홍삼박의 혼합제재를 여러 가지 제형에 따라 오리사료에 첨가 시 오리 가슴육의 변화 vol.29, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.5322/jesi.2020.29.3.319