Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/30350
metadata.artigo.dc.title: Drip loss assessment by different analytical methods and their relationships with pork quality classification
metadata.artigo.dc.creator: Torres Filho, Robledo de Almeida
Cazedey, Henrique Pereira
Fontes, Paulo Rogério
Ramos, Alcinéia de Lemos Souza
Ramos, Eduardo Mendes
metadata.artigo.dc.publisher: Hindawi
metadata.artigo.dc.date.issued: 2017
metadata.artigo.dc.identifier.citation: TORRES FILHO, R. de A. et al. Drip loss assessment by different analytical methods and their relationships with pork quality classification. Journal of Food Quality, [S.l.], 2017.
metadata.artigo.dc.description.abstract: We analyzed drip loss in pork by comparing the standard bag (DL), filter-paper wetness (FPW), and EZ-DripLoss methods by weighing the meat juice container and dabbed sample after 24 h and 48 h. Samples were classified into quality categories based on pH, color, and drip loss. The relationship between DL and FPW revealed the cut-off of 5% DL as corresponding to FPW of 139 mg; 1.89% when analyzed by weighing meat juice container or dabbed sample after 24 h; and 3.18% and 3.74% for those analyzed by weighing both meat juice container and dabbed sample after 48 h, respectively. Highest correlations were observed between DL and EZ when the meat juice container was weighed after 48 h (). The EZ-DripLoss method in which the meat juice container was weighed after 24 h was able to distinguish drip loss into meat-quality categories in accordance with the bag method. Therefore, this method is recommended for meat categorization because of its greater standardization and ease of application.
metadata.artigo.dc.identifier.uri: http://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/30350
metadata.artigo.dc.language: pt_BR
Appears in Collections:DCA - Artigos publicados em periódicos



This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons