Relationships between Descriptive Sensory Attributes and Physicochemical Analysis of Broiler and Taiwan Native Chicken Breast Meat

Abstract

Unique organoleptic characteristics such as rich flavors and chewy texture contribute to the higher popularity of native chicken in many Asian areas, while the commercial broilers are well-accepted due to their fast-growing and higher yields of meat. Sensory attributes of foods are often used to evaluate food eating quality and serve as references during the selection of foods. In this study, a three-phase descriptive sensory study was conducted to evaluate the sensory attributes of commercial broiler (BR) and Taiwan native chicken (TNC) breast meat, and investigate correlations between these sensory attributes and instrumental measurements. The results showed that for the first bite (phase 1), TNC meat had significantly higher moisture release, hardness, springiness, and cohesiveness than BR meat. After chewing for 10 to 12 bites (phase 2), TNC meat presented significantly higher chewdown hardness and meat particle size, whereas BR meat had significantly higher cohesiveness of mass. After swallowing (phase 3), TNC meat had higher chewiness and oily mouthcoat and lower residual loose particles than BR meat. TNC meat also provided more intense chicken flavors. This study clearly demonstrates that descriptive sensory analysis provides more detailed and more objectively information about the sensory attributes of meats from various chicken breeds. Additionally, sensory textural attributes vary between BR and TNC meat, and are highly correlated to the shear force value and collagen content which influence meat eating qualities greatly. The poultry industry and scientists should be able to recognize the sensory characteristics of different chicken meats more clearly. Accordingly, based on the meat’s unique sensory and physicochemical characteristics, future work might address how meat from various breeds could best satisfy consumer needs using various cooking methods.

Effects of moist‐ and dry‐heat cooking on the meat quality, microstructure and sensory characteristics of native chicken meat

“…In our previous study, we demonstrated high negative correlations between the moisture release evaluated by the panelists and percentage of cooking loss of Taiwan native chicken breast meat probably because of the higher water retention of cooked meat (Chumngoen & Tan 2015). In our previous study, we demonstrated high negative correlations between the moisture release evaluated by the panelists and percentage of cooking loss of Taiwan native chicken breast meat probably because of the higher water retention of cooked meat (Chumngoen & Tan 2015).…”

“…The parameters including cooking time, cooking loss, color and shear force value were determined using 10 breast fillets (n = 10) per time for each cooking method. Shear force was applied perpendicularly to the muscle fiber axis and determined with the operating parameters of a cross-head speed of 4 mm/s and a 10 kg load cell (Chumngoen & Tan 2015) with 40 determinations (40 pieces of samples) per treatment. Meat temperature was monitored at the center of the sample via the thermometer.…”

“…A descriptive sensory evaluation was conducted, and the definitions of sensory characteristics were devised by using our previously described methods (Chumngoen & Tan 2015). The conditions of testing room were as according to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM 1986).…”

“…The slow-growing Taiwan native chicken requires approximately 15-16 weeks for achieving a live weight of 2-2.5 kg; by contrast, the commercial broiler has a rearing time of only 5-6 weeks for achieving a live weight of approximately 1.5 kg (Huang et al 2007;Chang et al 2011). In our previous study, we clearly demonstrated that significant differences existed in certain physicochemical, textural and sensorial attributes between Taiwan native chicken and commercial broiler meat (Chumngoen & Tan 2015). In addition to the genetic background and feeding management, chicken meat quality is affected considerably by the cooking method, and sample preparation frequently influences consumers' purchase decisions (Kirmaci & Singh 2012).…”

“…Previous studies on the effects of various cooking methods have focused mainly on beef and pork (Bejerholm & Aaslyng 2004). However, studies have shown that certain quality parameters, particularly cooking loss, collagen content, shear force value, and descriptive sensory attributes that include moisture release, hardness, springiness and cohesiveness of broiler and native chicken meat, might differ after cooking, probably because of the meat composition and characteristics of broiler and native chicken meat (Chumngoen & Tan 2015). However, studies have shown that certain quality parameters, particularly cooking loss, collagen content, shear force value, and descriptive sensory attributes that include moisture release, hardness, springiness and cohesiveness of broiler and native chicken meat, might differ after cooking, probably because of the meat composition and characteristics of broiler and native chicken meat (Chumngoen & Tan 2015).…”