| Literature DB >> 35327315 |
Rong Han1,2, Jialing He1,2, Yixuan Chen1,2, Feng Li1,2, Hu Shi1,2, Yang Jiao1,2.
Abstract
Salmon (Salmo salar) is a precious fish with high nutritional value, which is perishable when subjected to improper tempering processes before consumption. In traditional air and water tempering, the medium temperature of 10 °C is commonly used to guarantee a reasonable tempering time and product quality. Radio frequency tempering (RT) is a dielectric heating method, which has the advantage of uniform heating to ensure meat quality. The effects of radio frequency tempering (RT, 40.68 MHz, 400 W), water tempering (WT + 10 °C, 10 ± 0.5 °C), and air tempering (AT + 10 °C, 10 ± 1 °C) on the physiochemical properties of salmon fillets were investigated in this study. The quality of salmon fillets was evaluated in terms of drip loss, cooking loss, color, water migration and texture properties. Results showed that all tempering methods affected salmon fillet quality. The tempering times of WT + 10 °C and AT + 10 °C were 3.0 and 12.8 times longer than that of RT, respectively. AT + 10 °C produced the most uniform temperature distribution, followed by WT + 10 °C and RT. The amount of immobile water shifting to free water after WT + 10 °C was higher than that of RT and AT + 10 °C, which was in consistent with the drip and cooking loss. The spaces between the intercellular fibers increased significantly after WT + 10 °C compared to those of RT and AT + 10 °C. The results demonstrated that RT was an alternative novel salmon tempering method, which was fast and relatively uniform with a high quality retention rate. It could be applied to frozen salmon fillets after receiving from overseas catches, which need temperature elevation for further cutting or consumption.Entities:
Keywords: fish; quality; radio frequency; salmon (Salmo salar); tempering
Year: 2022 PMID: 35327315 PMCID: PMC8953369 DOI: 10.3390/foods11060893
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Layout of RF system and placement of salmon fillet sample and fiber optic sensor.
Dielectric properties and penetration depth (dp) of salmon at 13.56, 27.12, and 40.68 MHz and temperatures between −20 and 20 °C.
| T (°C) | Parameters | 13.56 MHz | 27.12 MHz | 40.68 MHz |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| −20 | ε′ | 11.25 ± 0.31 Ad | 7.54 ± 0.02 Bb | 2.64 ± 0.03 Cc |
| ε″ | 6.10 ± 0.17 Af | 2.82 ± 0.09 Bh | 1.65 ± 0.04 Ch | |
| dp/cm | 200.41 Aa | 174.53 Ba | 120.56 Ca | |
| −15 | ε′ | 15.39 ± 0.06 Ad | 10.16 ± 0.02 Bb | 4.79 ± 0.11 Cbc |
| ε″ | 14.17 ± 0.26 Af | 6.81 ± 0.12 Bh | 3.24 ± 0.56 Ch | |
| dp/cm | 105.97 Ab | 86.56 Bb | 83.45 Bb | |
| −10 | ε′ | 24.13 ± 0.08 Ad | 13.76 ± 3.23 Bb | 11.41 ± 3.45 Bb |
| ε” | 45.05 ± 4.37 Af | 15.74 ± 6.78 Bg | 9.93 ± 5.09 Bg | |
| dp/cm | 47.96 Ac | 46.58 ABc | 43.09 Bc | |
| −5 | ε′ | 97.36 ± 5.99 Ac | 71.42 ± 4.88 Ba | 63.91 ± 4.04 Ba |
| ε″ | 432.35 ± 23.38 Ae | 203.89 ± 8.03 Bf | 140.43 ± 4.94 Cf | |
| dp/cm | 13.40 Ad | 10.36 ABd | 8.73 Bd | |
| 0 | ε′ | 101.15 ± 8.35 Abc | 72.07 ± 5.54 Ba | 64.55 ± 4.52 Ba |
| ε″ | 498.56 ± 27.76 Ade | 233.50 ± 8.69 Be | 159.66 ± 5.30 Ce | |
| dp/cm | 12.34 Ad | 9.49 ABd | 8.00 Bd | |
| 5 | ε′ | 104.74 ± 9.50 Abc | 73.43 ± 6.08 Ba | 65.69 ± 4.72 Ba |
| ε″ | 572.69 ± 45.01 Acd | 266.26 ± 5.47 Bd | 182.33 ± 2.95 Cd | |
| dp/cm | 11.40 Ad | 8.75 Ad | 7.34 Ad | |
| 10 | ε′ | 111.48 ± 9.21 Aabc | 75.22 ± 6.37 Ba | 66.91 ± 4.57 Ba |
| ε″ | 648.70 ± 53.84 Abc | 300.79 ± 5.09 Bc | 205.87 ± 2.40 Cc | |
| dp/cm | 10.65 Ad | 8.13 Ad | 6.79 Ad | |
| 15 | ε′ | 115.91 ± 11.57 Aab | 77.10 ± 7.08 Ba | 68.21 ± 4.92 Ba |
| ε″ | 722.13 ± 61.82 Aab | 335.76 ± 3.99 Bb | 229.94 ± 1.74 Cb | |
| dp/cm | 10.04 Ad | 7.62 Ad | 6.34 Ad | |
| 20 | ε′ | 122.97 ± 13.03 Aa | 79.27 ± 8.01 Ba | 69.65 ± 5.44 Ba |
| ε″ | 804.56 ± 74.99 Aa | 373.25 ± 2.63 Ba | 256.32 ± 0.80 Ca | |
| dp/cm | 9.48 Ad | 7.16 Ad | 5.93 Ad |
Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). Different uppercase letters in the same row indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). ε′: dielectric constant, ε″: dielectric loss factor, dp: penetration depth.
Figure 2Dielectric constant (ε′) and dielectric loss factor (ε″) of salmon as a function of temperature at 27.12 MHz.
Figure 3Temperature–time histories of salmon samples during different tempering treatments. (RT: Radio frequency tempering; WT + 10 °C: Water tempering at 10 ± 0.5 °C; AT + 10 °C: Air tempering at 10 ± 1 °C).
Figure 4Surface temperature distribution of salmon fillets after different tempering treatments when the sample center reached −4 °C. (RT: Radio frequency tempering; WT + 10 °C: Water tempering at 10 ± 0.5 °C; AT + 10 °C: Air tempering at 10 ± 1 °C).
Top and bottom surface temperature of salmon after different tempering treatments. (RT: Radio frequency tempering; WT + 10 °C: Water tempering at 10 ± 0.5 °C; AT + 10 °C: Air tempering at 10 ± 1 °C).
| Treatments | Views | Maximum Temperature/(°C) | Minimum Temperature/(°C) | Standard Deviation/(°C) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RT | top | 7.3 | −5.2 | ±1.1 |
| bottom | 13.4 | −0.6 | ±2.2 | |
| WT + 10 °C | top | 11.8 | 3.7 | ±0.9 |
| bottom | 8.4 | −0.5 | ±1.1 | |
| AT + 10 °C | top | 7.2 | 3.3 | ±0.5 |
| bottom | 2.2 | −3.9 | ±0.6 |
Effects of different tempering methods on drip loss and cooking loss of salmon. (RT: Radio frequency tempering; WT + 10 °C: Water tempering at 10 ± 0.5 °C; AT + 10 °C: Air tempering at 10 ± 1 °C).
| Treatments | Drip Loss/(%) | Cooking Loss/(%) |
|---|---|---|
| Control | - | 11.34 ± 0.02 b |
| RT | 0.66 ± 0.052 b | 13.58 ± 0.63 ab |
| WT + 10 °C | 1.029 ± 0.050 a | 15.75 ± 0.06 a |
| AT + 10 °C | 0.43 ± 0.021 b | 12.26 ± 0.48 b |
The superscript of the numbers (a,b) indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) between samples treated with different methods.
Effects of different tempering methods on the color of salmon flesh. (RT: Radio frequency tempering; WT + 10 °C: Water tempering at 10 ± 0.5 °C; AT + 10 °C: Air tempering at 10 ± 1 °C; L*: lightness; a*: redness-greenness; b*: yellowness-blueness; ΔE: the total color difference).
| Treatments |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 42.27 ± 0.48 b | 14.29 ± 0.33 a | 13.88 ± 0.32 a | - |
| RT | 44.46 ± 0.94 a | 13.57 ± 0.83 a | 12.14 ± 0.85 b | 2.89 |
| WT + 10 °C | 44.74 ± 0.32 a | 13.35 ± 0.73 a | 12.80 ± 0.52 ab | 2.85 |
| AT + 10 °C | 43.34 ± 1.00 a | 14.41 ± 0.23 a | 12.10 ± 0.60 b | 2.08 |
The superscript of the numbers (a,b) indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) between samples treated with different methods.
Figure 5Effects of different tempering methods on TBARS of salmon. (RT: Radio frequency tempering; WT + 10 °C: Water tempering at 10 ± 0.5 °C; AT + 10 °C: Air tempering at 10 ± 1 °C). Different letters on the bar (a,b,c) indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) among samples treated with different methods.
Effects of different tempering methods on T and ΔH (the denaturation temperature and enthalpy of myofibrillar protein, respectively) of salmon. (RT: Radio frequency tempering; WT + 10 °C: Water tempering at 10 ± 0.5 °C; AT + 10 °C: Air tempering at 10 ± 1 °C).
| Treatment | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 58.18 ± 0.82 a | 0.0779 ± 0.002 a | 67.88 ± 0.38 a | 0.0962 ± 0.001 a | 77.27 ± 0.06 a | 0.2315 ± 0.003 a |
| RT | 57.24 ± 0.36 b | 0.0662 ± 0.004 b | 67.51 ± 0.23 a | 0.0928 ± 0.001 ab | 76.56 ± 0.12 a | 0.2309 ± 0.002 a |
| WT + 10 °C | 56.93 ± 0.14 b | 0.0623 ± 0.005 b | 67.04 ± 0.19 a | 0.0890 ± 0.003 b | 76.55 ± 0.23 a | 0.2200 ± 0.006 a |
| AT + 10 °C | 57.88 ± 0.17 a | 0.0718 ± 0.003 a | 67.75 ± 0.21 a | 0.0941 ± 0.002 ab | 77.10 ± 0.24 a | 0.2307 ± 0.004 a |
The superscripts on the numbers (a,b) indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) between samples treated with different methods.
Figure 6Transverse relaxation time (T2) curves of salmon samples after tempering, evaluated by LF-MNR. (RT: Radio frequency tempering; WT + 10 °C: Water tempering at 10 ± 0.5 °C; AT + 10 °C: Air tempering at 10 ± 1 °C).
Figure 7The relaxation time (T2) corresponding to relative peak areas (P21, P22 and P23) of salmon fillets after different tempering treatments. (RT: Radio frequency tempering; WT + 10 °C: Water tempering at 10 ± 0.5 °C; AT + 10 °C: Air tempering at 10 ± 1 °C).
Figure 8Microstructure of salmon fillet tissues after different tempering methods under light microscope (magnification ×400). (RT: Radio frequency tempering; WT + 10 °C: Water tempering at 10 ± 0.5 °C; AT + 10 °C: Air tempering at 10 ± 1 °C).