Drip loss assessment by EZ and bag methods and their relationship with pH value and color in mutton

Abstract

Abstract. Drip loss, pH value, and color are among the important traits that determine meat quality. Contrary to pH and color, the method associated with drip loss is not yet standardized, and literature data are difficult to compare. Besides, to our knowledge, there is no research comparing drip loss methods and their relation with pH and color in mutton. This study aimed to assess drip loss measurements in mutton taken by different methods (EZ and bag – BM) and their relationship with pH values and color. Mutton samples (Musculus longissimus thoracis et lumborum) originating from 20 ewes of Istrian sheep were used to examine the effect of the method on drip loss after 24 h (EZ24 vs. BM24) and 48 h (EZ48 vs. BM48). Furthermore, correlations between drip loss, pH value, and color were analyzed. The statistical analysis was conducted in R programming environment by using different packages. Within the EZ method there was no significant difference (p>0.05) between ventral and dorsal sample cores used for the assessment of EZ drip loss. Drip loss measured with the same method at two different points of time (24 and 48 h) differed significantly (p<0.001). There was also a significant difference in drip loss determined by different methods (EZ vs. BM) at the same point of time. There were significant (p<0.05) correlations between pH45 min and all color parameters (L*4, a*, b*). The L*, a*, and b* parameters were highly correlated (p<0.001). The strongest correlation occurred between a* and b* parameter (r=0.93). Correlations between drip loss by EZ method and other meat quality attributes were low and not significant. The b* parameter correlated with BM24 (r=0.46) and BM48 (r=0.58), while a* correlated only with BM48 (r=0.50). The correlations between the EZ24 and BM24 as well as between the EZ48 and BM48 were both non-significant (p>0.05). Drip loss cannot be predicted with sufficient accuracy by using pH and color. EZ and BM method in mutton do not provide equivalent results for measuring drip loss. Comparisons of the results obtained with different methods should be avoided or at least performed with great precaution.

EZ-DripLoss Assessment in Chicken Breast Meat Using Different Sample Areas, Fiber Orientation, and Measurement Intervals

“…As already mentioned, an increase in drip loss over time is expected, as exudation is known to be a slow process that lasts for days, during which water expelled from the myofibrils accumulates in the muscle [ 14 ]. The results of the present study ( Table 1 and Table 2 ) are in accordance with previous studies using the EZ-DripLoss method [ 2 , 11 , 15 , 16 , 17 ].…”

“…With chicken breast meat, Graberec et al [ 16 ] also reported lower average drip losses within 24 h (2.38%) than within 48 h (2.74%). In a study on pork meat, Filho et al [ 2 ] found average drip losses of 3.13% within 24 h and 5.19% within 48 h. With mutton, Kaić et al [ 17 ] reported average drip losses of 0.65% within 24 h and 0.93% within 48 h. With lamb meat, Holman et al [ 11 ] also reported that drip losses increased with the measurement interval (0.41% = 24 h; 0.67% = 48 h; 0.96% = 72 h; and 1.49% = 96 h).…”

Comparison between Standardized and Modified EZ-DripLoss Determination Methods in Chicken Breast Meat

“…On the contrary, lower average drip loss values of weighed samples were found with lamb [ 13 ], mutton [ 14 ], and meat from adult horses [ 16 ] than the ones of the present report. Namely, Kaić et al [ 14 ] aimed to assess drip loss measurements in mutton that were taken by EZ-DripLoss and bag methods, and reported average drip losses of 0.65% within 24 h and 0.93% within 48 h. Holman et al [ 13 ] investigated the effect of muscle fiber orientation and measurement interval on lamb meat drip losses using the EZ-DripLoss method, and found average drip losses of 0.41% within 24 h, 0.67% within 48 h, 0.96% within 72 h, and 1.49% within 96 h. Razmaitė et al [ 16 ] aimed to assess the influence of gender, age, and carcass weight on the properties of meat from adult obsolescent horses.…”

“…On the contrary, lower average drip loss values of weighed samples were found with lamb [ 13 ], mutton [ 14 ], and meat from adult horses [ 16 ] than the ones of the present report. Namely, Kaić et al [ 14 ] aimed to assess drip loss measurements in mutton that were taken by EZ-DripLoss and bag methods, and reported average drip losses of 0.65% within 24 h and 0.93% within 48 h. Holman et al [ 13 ] investigated the effect of muscle fiber orientation and measurement interval on lamb meat drip losses using the EZ-DripLoss method, and found average drip losses of 0.41% within 24 h, 0.67% within 48 h, 0.96% within 72 h, and 1.49% within 96 h. Razmaitė et al [ 16 ] aimed to assess the influence of gender, age, and carcass weight on the properties of meat from adult obsolescent horses. They found that the average drip losses for mares was 1.22%, for stallions was 0.77%, and for geldings was 0.43% within 24 h Compared to our results, lower drip loss values of weighed samples that were found in mutton, lamb, and horse meat could be related to the numerous properties that affect WHC and depend on many interrelated factors, so it is difficult to explain when considering each of them independently.…”

“…However, the literature reports that EZ-DripLoss assessment in numerous studies is based on the weighing of the meat samples before storage, and drip loss is calculated as change in the sample weight. This methodology, where the EZ-DripLoss is evaluated by weighing samples, was investigated in pork [ 3 , 10 ], lamb [ 13 ], mutton [ 14 ], poultry [ 15 ], alpaca [ 9 ], and horse meat [ 16 ].…”