Effects of high intensity ultrasound treatment, storage time and cooking method on shear, sensory, instrumental color and cooking properties of packaged and unpackaged beef pectoralis muscle

Comparison of thawing assisted by low-intensity ultrasound on technological properties of pork Longissimus dorsi muscle

“…3) regardless of thawing methods -ultrasound or conventionally (p >0.05). Such results are consistent with others in the literature pertaining to absence of texture improvement even though the meat was ultrasonicated in a bath at 20 kHz, and 1.55 W/cm 2 (Pohlman et al 1997a), or even though ultrasound (22 W/cm 2, 20 kHz) was applied in cooled sonic environment (Pohlman et al 1997b). Along with Pohlman et al (1997a) we might consider such results as deriving from the low intensities applied, unable to cause significant cell damage due to sample thickness (3.5 cm) blocking low intensity waves from penetrating to the core.…”

“…Consequently, as a result of such studies we can assert that, if ultrasound had induced this ageing acceleration, cooking loss in ultrasound thawed samples would have been higher than in samples thawed conventionally which never occurred with our survey. On the other hand, our results are consistent with Pohlman et al (1997a) noticing no significant effect (caused by ultrasound treatment at low intensities of 1.55 W/cm 2 ) on cooking losses, and with Pohlman et al (1997b) evidencing that neither higher intensities applied (22 W/cm 2 ), nor the length of ultrasound treatment bear upon cooking losses. On the other hand, Jayasooriya et al (2007) indicate that cooking losses are only modified by ageing time rather than ultrasound treatment.…”

“…On the other hand, in point of using ultrasound, these results are similar to those of Pohlman et al (1997a), Pohlman et al (1997b) and Jayasooriya et al (2007) who detect no drip loss differences in sonicated versus nonsonicated samples. These results are however different from those of Dolatowski et al (2000) who, by sonicating samples (2 W/cm 2 ) before freezing, obtains significantly lower drip loss in sonicated as against control samples both in refrigeration 48 h after sonication and after storing frozen samples for 1 month.…”

“…Along with Pohlman et al (1997a) we might consider such results as deriving from the low intensities applied, unable to cause significant cell damage due to sample thickness (3.5 cm) blocking low intensity waves from penetrating to the core. As to ultrasound exposing time length, we noticed it was ineffectual on meat tenderizing which is consistent with Pohlman et al (1997b).…”

Influence of ultrasound and proteolytic enzyme inhibitors on muscle degradation, tenderness, and cooking loss of hens during aging

“…This suggests that the damaged muscle structure caused by ultrasound did not affect the mechanism of moisture migration in meat, and our results are consistent with this finding. In contrast, Pohlman et al (1997) concluded that ultrasound treatment of meat could reduce drip loss. However, in their study the samples were vacuum packaged and exposed to high-intensity ultrasound, whereas in our work meat was stored at 4°C post mortem, which may account for the differences.…”