Poult. Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sams, A.
Right arrow Articles by Dzuik, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sams, A.
Right arrow Articles by Dzuik, C.
Poultry Science, Vol 78, Issue 10, 1472-1476
Copyright © 1999 by Poultry Science Association


Articles

Meat quality and rigor mortis development in broiler chickens with gas-induced anoxia and postmortem electrical stimulation

AR Sams and CS Dzuik

Department of Poultry Science, Texas A&M University System, College Station 77843-2472, USA. asams@poultry.tamu.edu

This study was conducted to evaluate the combined rigor-accelerating effects of postmortem electrical stimulation (ES) and argon-induced anoxia (Ar) of broiler chickens. One hundred broilers were processed in the following treatments: untreated controls, ES, Ar, or Ar with ES (Ar + ES). Breast fillets were harvested at 1 h postmortem for all treatments or at 1 and 6 h postmortem for the control carcasses. Fillets were sampled for pH and ratio of inosine to adenosine (R-value) and were then individually quick frozen (IQF) or aged on ice (AOI) until 24 h postmortem. Color was measured in the AOI fillets at 24 h postmortem. All fillets were then cooked and evaluated for Allo-Kramer shear value. The Ar treatment accelerated the normal pH decline, whereas the ES and AR + ES treatments yielded even lower pH values at 1 h postmortem. The Ar + ES treatment had a greater R-value than the ES treatment, which was greater than either the Ar or 1-h controls, which, in turn, were not different from each other. The ES treatment had the lowest L* value, and ES, Ar, and Ar + ES produced significantly higher a* values than the 1-h controls. For the IQF fillets, the ES and Ar + ES treatments were not different in shear value but were lower than Ar, which was lower than the 1-h controls. The same was true for the AOI fillets except that the ES and the Ar treatments were not different. These results indicated that although ES and Ar had rigor-accelerating and tenderizing effects, ES seemed to be more effective than Ar; there was little enhancement when Ar was added to the ES treatment and fillets were deboned at 1 h postmortem.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1999 by the Poultry Science Association.