No abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of packaging method on physicochemical and microbiological properties of roast chicken meat. The samples were stored under normal atmosphere (A) and four different proportions of CO2 and N2 modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) conditions: N (N2, 100%), M2 (CO2/N2, 20%/80%), M3 (CO2/N2, 30%/70%), and M4 (CO2/N2, 40%/60%). Microbiological quality, pH, headspace gas composition, color, and lipid oxidation of roast chicken meat were measured. The time to reach the acceptable total viable counts (TVC, 4 log cfu/g) was 8, 16, 18, 21, and 22 days in A, N, M2, M3, and M4 samples, respectively. The thiobarbituric acid values under MAP packaging were lower than those in normal packaging. In addition, the growth rate of TVC, molds, and yeasts in roast chicken was slower with the increase of carbon dioxide content in MAP. The present findings demonstrate that packaging with CO2/N2, 40%/60% could extend the longer shelf life of roast chicken at 4°C. Practical applications The results showed that CO2/N2 modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) could effectively extend the shelf life of roast chicken products. The effects of different gas compositions in MAP on the pH, color, and fat oxidation of roasted chicken were not significant. The results of this study have guided significance for the storage and consumption of products in the roast poultry processing industry, and provide the references for the storage of other barbecue products.

The lactic acid bacteria grown in vacuum-packaged raw beef under 7, 10, 15, and 20 °C has been studied in this paper. Four primary models, the modified Gompertz, logistic, Baranyi, and Huang model were used for data fitting. Statistical criteria such as the bias factor and accuracy factor, mean square error, Akaike's information criterion, and the residual distribution were used for comparing the models. The result showed that all of the 4 models can fit the data well and they were not significantly different in the performance. They were equally capable of describing bacterial growth, but the growth rate and lag time estimated from the modified Gompertz model were a little higher than other models. The estimate for the lag time was not accurate as the growth rate.

No abstract