Effects of different thawing methods on physicochemical properties and structure of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides)

Abstract

To evaluate the physicochemical properties and structure of thawed fillets, following six treatments were used: conventional thawing, microwave thawing, microwave or ultrasound combined with vacuum thawing, magnetic nanoparticles combined with microwave or far‐infrared thawing. The thawing loss, cooking loss, pH, color, texture change, water‐holding capacity, and water migration of fish fillets were determined. The total volatile base nitrogen and thiobarbituric acid were used to determine the degree of protein degradation and lipid oxidation. Microscope observations and scanning electron microscope (SEM) were used to observe fiber microstructure. Results indicated that both microwave combined with vacuum thawing and far‐infrared combined with magnetic nanoparticles thawing had desirable physicochemical properties as compared to other thawing methods. The lower total volatile base nitrogen and thiobarbituric acid values had less effect on protein degradation and lipid oxidation of thawing process. Besides, both microwaves combined with vacuum thawing and far‐infrared combined with magnetic nanoparticles thawing samples had no significant difference in immobilized and bond water compared with fresh sample. SEM and microscopic observation showed that the myofibril bundles were arranged regularly and smoothly in microwave combined with vacuum thawing and far‐infrared combined with magnetic nanoparticles thawing samples compared with other thawed methods. Thus, the microwave combined with vacuum thawing and far‐infrared combined with magnetic nanoparticles thawing as potential thawing methods could be used to maintain the quality of thawed fish fillets. Practical Application Largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) is a good source of animal protein. The fish needs to be frozen for circulation because of geographical and seasonal factors, so thawing methods can directly affect the quality of thawed fish. The results showed that the microwave combined with vacuum and the magnetic nanoparticles combined with far‐infrared thawing could better maintain the quality of thawed fish.

Effect of different thawing methods on the quality of mackerel (Pneumatophorus japonicus)

“…2(A), the hardness value of the MT group was significantly higher than that of fresh samples and other groups (P \ 0.05), and there was no significant difference in the hardness value of the other groups, which may be caused by overheating in the microwave caused the oxidation and aggregation of fish protein (Wang et al, 2020a). Cai et al (2020) also found a similar phenomenon after thawing frozen largemouth bass. The hardness of microwave thawed fillets is harder than other thawing methods.…”

Effect of multi-frequency ultrasound assisted thawing on the quality of large yellow croaker (Larimichthys crocea)

“…All samples had higher TVB-N values after freezing and thawing due to a mass of basic volatile compounds produced by the degradation of protein and nonprotein nitrogen compounds including ammonia, trimethylamine, methylamine, and dimethylamine [25] . The lower the TVB-N value is, the less tyrosine and methionine are destroyed in the protein, which means that the nutrients are better protected [29] . Therefore, these results indicated that the UAT samples showed less protein degradation and less nutritional loss than the AT and FWT samples.…”

Effects of different thawing methods on the physicochemical changes, water migration and protein characteristic of frozen pompano ( Trachinotus ovatus )

“…Among the different thawing methods, microwave thawing required the shortest time, which can produce high thawing temperature and inhibit the growth of bacteria. However, it could cause local overheating and reach protein denaturation temperature easily (Cai et al, 2020). For ultrasound thawing, one could select the frequency to avoid the local high temperature and decrease the possibility of water loss (Li et al., 2018), but, the poor penetration, localized heating, and high consumption of power are the shortcomings of ultrasound thawing (Cai et al., 2018).…”