Comparison of moderate electric field and conventional marination methods applied to chicken breast muscles

Abstract

This research aimed to compare the effect of the brine‐salting process when applying a moderate electric field (MEF) and during conventional treatment of chicken breast muscles. Chicken breasts were cut into cylindrical shapes, either longitudinally or cross‐section according to muscle fibers, with dimensions of 2 × 3 cm2. Samples were submerged in marinade solutions (salt and polyphosphate‐PO40.4em3−) at concentrations of 3, 5, and 7% at 4°C for 300 min of processing. The results showed that the mass transfer of chloride and polyphosphate ions was best with the 5% marinade in combination with an MEF, obtaining 0.20 Xcl + PO40.4em3− by the end of the processing time; for the conventional treatment, the 7% concentration improved the mass transfer of ions in the treated samples compared to that of the other conventionally marinated samples. In terms of the longitudinal cut, the 3% concentration combined with an MEF presented better results than those of the same concentration using the conventional method. However, the 7% and 5% concentrations using conventional treatment exhibited mass transfer values of 0.17Xcl + PO40.4em3− and 0.08Xcl + PO40.4em3−, respectively, in the final samples. Practical applications In the meat industry, marination is a primary process. As an alternative to reduce marinating time, moderate electric fields (MEFs) may be applied in chicken breasts without affecting the product quality. Likewise, the cut of muscle fibers will influence the marination process. The utilization of an MEF at 5 V during the marinating process presented greater efficiency in chicken breast marination than a cross‐sectional cut with polyphosphate chloride solution at 7%, reaching a 120 min reduction in the process compared to conventional methods.

Mass transfer kinetics study for improving the uniform quality of lactic acid marinated pork (longissimus dorsi muscle)

“…Mass of the solvent, the solute, and the marinated material are the basic factors in the marination process (Moreno et al ., 2020). Figure 1 showed the variations of total mass, water content, and lactic acid content of pork during the marination process with different mass fractions of lactic acid, respectively.…”

Effect of pulsed vacuum and laser microperforations on the potential acceleration of chicken meat marination

“…In their study, they found relatively steep slopes by directly relating the concentration of salt in the salmon samples to the salting time and achieving high final concentrations of salt in the salmon since a directly proportional relationship was observed between the equilibrium concentration and the concentration of the solution; that is, a higher brine concentration resulted in a higher salt concentration in the samples. Moreno et al (2020) studied marination applied to chicken breasts at concentrations of 3, 5, and 7% (salt and polyphosphate), and the results showed that the 7% concentration improved the mass transfer of ions in the treated samples.…”

Improving water retention of chicken breast meats by CaCl2 combined with pulsed electric fields

“…This phenomenon might be attributed to the selective binding of negatively charged chloride ions to MP, which led to increased repulsion force, thereby enhancing protein affinity towards water (Zheng et al, 2017). Moreno et al (2020) supposed that the decrease in cooking loss could be attributed to changes in meat protein due to the induction of brine and PEF, which could reduce protein interaction and increase WHC. In a previous report, beef soaked in calcium chloride had reduced cooking loss, which was responsible for the formation of three-dimensional reticular structures with strong contractility, and increased binding force between protein and free water (Klinhom et al, 2015).…”