Conventional and Microwave Heating of Beef: Use of Plastic Wrap¹

Abstract

Until recently, heat has been the usual direct energy source for cooking. Microwave energy has become available through the use of electronic ovens. The development of plastic wraps that can be used in oven cookery led to a study of the effects of these on cooking losses and other characteristics of beef roasts cooked by microwave and by heat energy. Twenty‐four choice semitendinosus muscles were divided into anterior and posterior sections, and each was allocated to one of four cooking methods: conventional electric oven, meat uncovered; conventional oven, meat tied in modified polyester sleeve; microwave oven, meat uncovered; microwave oven, meat tied in polyester sleeve. A randomized incomplete block design was used and replicated 12 times. Cooking times were significantly less and cooking losses greater for roasts cooked by microwave than by conventional heating. Use of polyester wrap increased the cooking losses for both heating methods. The change in percent total solids with cooking was greater for roasts cooked electronically than for roasts cooked conventionally. Shear force was not affected by any of the four cooking methods. Penetrometer readings ranged from highest for uncovered roasts to lowest for covered roasts in the conventional oven. Of taste panel scores, only the scores for external color differed significantly.

Thiamin and Riboflavin Retention in Meats Cooked Uncovered and in Oven Film

“…However, losses from meats cooked by electronic heat, unwrapped, were shown to be the highest of all treatments (Table 2). Similar results have been reported (Ferger et al, 1972;Headley and Jacobson, 1960) as well as in research in which meats were cooked electronically with polyester wrap, and compared to conventional methods (Ruyack and Paul, 1972).…”

Effect of cooking methods on chemical composition, quality and cook loss of camel muscle (Longissimus dorsi) in comparison with veal

“…However, insoluble mineral materials like iron and zinc Figure 4 showed that cooking loss in microwaved veal and camel L.d muscle had the highest mean and showed significant difference (p < 0.01) with other treatments. The overall percentage loss due to cooking for meat cooked by microwave is more than conventional methods, so results were in agreement with previous studies (El-Shimi, 1992;Cipra et al, 1970;Ruyack and Paul, 1972;Janicki and Appledorf, 1974;Yarmand and Homayouni, 2008).…”

Effect of microwave cooking on quality attributes of shelf stable chicken meat pickle

“…As per Girard (1992) [9] , the increased pH values in cooked meat from microwave cooking could be due to the cleavage of bonds involving sulfhydryl, hydroxyl groups, and imidazole. Ruyack and Paul (1972) [14] also reported more cooking loss during the heating of beef by microwave cooking than other conventional methods due to less moisture retention and a higher percentage of moisture loss. There was no significant (p<0.05) difference in fat, protein content and a w values among the treatments.…”