| Literature DB >> 30018506 |
Na Liu1,2, Qiujin Zhu1,2, Xuefeng Zeng1,2, Bowen Yang1,2, Meilian Liang1,2, Li Deng1,2, Laping He1,2, Cai Liang3, Ruping Zhang3, Juan Zhou3.
Abstract
The study aims to determine the optimum sterilization rate and water activity of Chinese traditional smoke-cured bacon product (Larou) in the preservation with natural coating solution. With the response surface methodology (RSM), we analyzed 3 factors of processing conditions (the concentration of lysozyme, concentration of sodium alginate, and concentration of chitosan) and 2 response factors (sterilization rate and water activity). Sterilization rate and water activity of Larou were largely affected by the concentration of lysozyme, concentration of sodium alginate, and concentration of chitosan. The final optimum concentrations of lysozyme, sodium alginate, and chitosan were 0.09, 1.40, and 1.60% and realized the high sterilization rate. Water activity of sliced Larou was significantly correlated with the sterilization rate. Low-field nuclear magnetic resonance analysis verified the optimum processing conditions. The coating resulted in 99.69% rate of reducing bacteria after 30-day storage. The data of the total number of colony, peroxidation value, moisture content, pH, and sensory evaluation provided the theoretical basis for extending the shelf life of Chinese traditional smoke-cured bacon product (Larou) with natural coating solution.Entities:
Keywords: Larou; low-field nuclear magnetic; natural coating solution; quality; storage
Year: 2018 PMID: 30018506 PMCID: PMC6048367 DOI: 10.5851/kosfa.2018.38.3.636
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Korean J Food Sci Anim Resour ISSN: 1225-8563 Impact factor: 2.622
Single factor test design
| Single factor experiment | Fixed factor | Influence factor |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | The concentration of chitosan:
1.5%; | The concentration of
lysozyme: |
| 2 | The concentration of chitosan:
1.5%; | The concentration of sodium
alginate: |
| 3 | The concentration of sodium
alginate: 1.5%; | The concentration of
chitosan: |
Box-Behnken test design factor level and coding
| Level | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| –1 | 0.06 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| 0 | 0.08 | 1.5 | 1.5 |
| 1 | 0.10 | 2.0 | 2.0 |
Sensory scores of dry-cured meat products
| Iindex | Scoring standard | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Color and
lustre | The muscle is the rose red or dark red, the fat is transparent and white; no mucus, no mildew. | 8–10 |
| The muscle is dark red or brown color, the fat color is transparent milky white; no mucus, no mildew. | 4–7.9 | |
| The muscle is dark reddish brown or black, fat is yellow mucus, no mildew. | 0–3.9 | |
| Smell | Cured has a strong flavor, no odor, no rancid flavor. | 8–10 |
| Cured has a good flavor, no odor, no rancid flavor. | 4–7.9 | |
| Cured is light, it had a bad smell. | 0–3.9 | |
| State | The tissue is tight and dense, moderate hardness and without foreign body. | 8–10 |
| The tissue is tight and dense, the section is slightly fractured, and there is no foreign body. | 4–7.9 | |
| The tissue is loose and loose and has foreign bodies. | 0–3.9 |
Fig. 1Effects of the concentration of lysozyme on sterilization rate and water activity.
Fig. 2Effects of the concentration of sodium alginate on sterilization rate and water activity.
Fig. 3Effects of the concentration of chitosan on sterilization rate and water activity.
Results of Box-Behnken test design
| Test number | Factors and coding | Sterilization rate
( | Water activity
( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 99.67±0.22 | 0.893±0.003 |
| 2 | 0 | –1 | 1 | 96.57±2.33 | 0.903±0.004 |
| 3 | –1 | 0 | –1 | 90.11±5.01 | 0.924±0.003 |
| 4 | 1 | 0 | –1 | 95.47±2.32 | 0.899±0.006 |
| 5 | 0 | 1 | –1 | 97.19±1.15 | 0.911±0.005 |
| 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 99.63±0.17 | 0.889±0.003 |
| 7 | 1 | –1 | 0 | 97.13±2.11 | 0.910±0.003 |
| 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 99.54±0.21 | 0.882±0.002 |
| 9 | –1 | –1 | 0 | 89.39±2.22 | 0.919±0.003 |
| 10 | –1 | 1 | 0 | 87.01±1.84 | 0.941±0.005 |
| 11 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 92.17±2.09 | 0.925±0.005 |
| 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 99.61±0.32 | 0.879±0.002 |
| 13 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 90.01±1.33 | 0.926±0.005 |
| 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 99.46±0.46 | 0.875±0.003 |
| 15 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 99.04±0.33 | 0.898±0.001 |
| 16 | –1 | 0 | 1 | 92.14±4.11 | 0.906±0.005 |
| 17 | 0 | –1 | –1 | 91.67±0.87 | 0.920±0.003 |
Values are mean±standard deviation.
Variance analysis of sterilization rate of response surface
| Variation source | Sum of squares | Freedom | Mean square deviation | Significance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 291.9 | 9 | 32.43 | 17.73 | 0.0005 | |
| 79.13 | 1 | 79.13 | 43.27 | 0.0003 | ||
| 8.78 | 1 | 8.78 | 4.8 | 0.0646 | ||
| 1.38 | 1 | 1.38 | 0.75 | 0.4142 | ||
| 1.66 | 1 | 1.66 | 0.91 | 0.3719 | ||
| 0.59 | 1 | 0.59 | 0.32 | 0.5869 | ||
| 36.48 | 1 | 36.48 | 19.95 | 0.0029 | ||
| 64.49 | 1 | 64.49 | 35.26 | 0.0006 | ||
| 75.82 | 1 | 75.82 | 41.46 | 0.0004 | ||
| 9.2 | 1 | 9.2 | 5.03 | 0.0598 | ||
| Residual | 12.8 | 7 | 1.83 | |||
| Missing item | 12.77 | 3 | 4.26 | 619.81 | 0.091 | |
| Pure error | 0.027 | 4 | 6.87E-03 | |||
| All items | 304.7 | 16 | ||||
| r2 | 0.9580 | |||||
| Adj r2 | 0.9040 | |||||
* p<0.05
** p<0.01.
Variance analysis of water activity of response surface
| Variation source | Sum of squares | Freedom | Mean square deviation | Significance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 5.24E-03 | 9 | 5.82E-04 | 12.51 | 0.0015 | |
| 4.21E-04 | 1 | 4.21E-04 | 9.04 | 0.0197 | ||
| 3.25E-04 | 1 | 3.25E-04 | 6.99 | 0.0332 | ||
| 5.51E-05 | 1 | 5.51E-05 | 1.19 | 0.3123 | ||
| 1.23E-05 | 1 | 1.23E-05 | 0.26 | 0.6235 | ||
| 7.23E-05 | 1 | 7.23E-05 | 1.55 | 0.2526 | ||
| 2.56E-04 | 1 | 2.56E-04 | 5.51 | 0.0413 | ||
| 1.07E-03 | 1 | 1.07E-03 | 23.04 | 0.002 | ||
| 2.47E-03 | 1 | 2.47E-03 | 53.04 | 0.0002 | ||
| 2.18E-04 | 1 | 2.18E-04 | 4.69 | 0.0669 | ||
| Residual | 3.26E-04 | 7 | 4.65E-05 | |||
| Missing item | 1.10E-04 | 3 | 3.68E-05 | 0.68 | 0.6073 | |
| Pure error | 2.15E-04 | 4 | 5.38E-05 | |||
| All items | 5.56E-03 | 16 | ||||
| r2 | 0.9415 | |||||
| Adj r2 | 0.9209 | |||||
* p<0.05
** p<0.01.
Fig. 4Response surface of sodium alginate concentration (B) and chitosan concentration (C) to the sterilization rate of Larou.
Fig. 5Contour map of sodium alginate concentration (B) and chitosan concentration (C) to the sterilization rate of Larou.
Fig. 6Response surface of sodium alginate concentration (B) and chitosan concentration (C) to the water activity of Larou.
Fig. 7Contour map of sodium alginate concentration (B) and chitosan concentration (C) to the water activity of Larou.
Fig. 8Sterilization rate: the normal probability plot of residuals.
Fig. 9Sterilization rate: plot of internal residuals versus and experimental runs.
Fig. 10Water activity: the normal probability plot of residuals.
Fig. 11Water activity: plot of internal residuals versus and experimental runs.
Fig. 12T2 Relaxation characteristics after transverse magne-tization decay signal inversion.
Fig. 13Correlation between sterilization rate and water activity.
Changes of some indicators of sliced Larou in 0–30d
| Items | Larou sample | Storage | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 d | 10 d | 15 d | 20 d | 25 d | 30 d | ||
| The total numbers of colony (Log CFU/g) | Untreated | 7.18±0.09[ | 7.23±0.10[ | 7.32±0.15[ | 7.41±0.20[ | 7.58±0.15[ | 7.93±0.11[ |
| Treated | 4.84±0.08[ | 4.97±0.15[ | 5.28±0.20[ | 5.51±0.13[ | 5.78±0.18[ | 5.96±0.14[ | |
| POV | Untreated | 6.2±0.10[ | 6.3±0.09[ | 6.4±0.09[ | 6.6±0.12[ | 7.7±0.09[ | 7.9±0.11[ |
| Treated | 5.1±0.10[ | 5.0±0.09[ | 5.2±0.09[ | 5.4±0.10[ | 5.5±0.05[ | 6.3±0.10[ | |
| Moisture content (%) | Untreated | 31.01±0.71[ | 30.57±0.72[ | 29.99±0.43[ | 29.76±0.72[ | 29.37±0.75[ | 29.29±0.58[ |
| Treated | 46.18±0.65[ | 45.56±0.81[ | 45.03±0.76[ | 44.67±0.43[ | 43.81±0.85[ | 42.95±0.72[ | |
| pH | Untreated | 6.12±0.01[ | 6.15±0.02[ | 6.25±0.02[ | 6.27±0.03[ | 6.33±0.02[ | 6.32±0.02[ |
| Treated | 5.57±0.01[ | 5.69±0.02[ | 5.78±0.03[ | 5.86±0.02[ | 5.91±0.01[ | 5.94±0.02[ | |
| Sensory evaluation | Untreated | 81.64±4.11[ | 79.77±6.01[ | 78.05±3.32[ | 76.57±4.02[ | 75.02±6.09[ | 73.33±3.11[ |
| Treated | 82.57±4.11[ | 82.46±4.69[ | 82.34±3.88[ | 82.23±4.73[ | 82.14±6.14[ | 82.03±3.46[ | |
All values are mean±standard deviation of three replicates (n=9).
a-d Means within a row with different letters are significantly different (p<0.05).