| Literature DB >> 35804755 |
Xiaofan Zhang1,2,3, Chuang Pan3, Shengjun Chen2,4, Yong Xue1, Yueqi Wang2,3, Yanyan Wu3.
Abstract
The quality changes of golden pompano fillets in air packaging (AP) and modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) with 30% CO2/70% N2, 50% CO2/50% N2, and 70% CO2/30% N2 were evaluated under superchilling (-3 °C). The results showed that the whiteness of fillets decreased during storage. The rate of pH increase of MAP was significantly slower than in AP groups, in which MAP with 70% CO2/30% N2 effectively suppressed the PH. Interestingly, the hardness decreased on day five following the treatments, followed by a relatively stationary trend. MAP could greatly suppress the increase of total volatile basic nitrogen (TVB-N) contents of fillets compared to fillets packed in AP. All MAP groups of fillets maintained first-grade freshness throughout storage, while the AP samples decreased to second-grade freshness on about the 25th day. MAP with 70% CO2/30% N2 and MAP with 50% CO2/50% N2 had the best results in inhibiting protein degeneration and explanation. Unexpectedly, drip loss of fillets in MAP far exceeded the AP group during storage, which causes sensory discomfort. Anaerobic plate count (APC) of fillets in AP exceeded the consumption limit of 6.7 log CFU/g on day 26 (6.75 log CFU/g on the 26th day), whereas the MAP was still microbiologically acceptable after 30 days of storage (6.43, 6.41, 6.22 log CFU/g, respectively). Considering physicochemical and microbiological parameters, the shelf life of fillets packed in AP was 25 days. MAP treatments could prolong the shelf life of fillets by ~4-5 days compared to AP. Overall, MAP with 70% CO2/30% N2 gas ratio was best for inhibiting the quality deterioration of fillets. Furthermore, principal component analysis (PCA) was performed to evaluate the critical indicators of quality deterioration of the fillets. Two principal components were determined by dimensionality reduction, in which the contribution of the first principal component was centrifugal loss > hardness > TVB-N > APC > CO2 solubility > TBARs > drip loss > pH, which mainly reflected the degree of microbial proliferation, protein hydrolysis, and oxidation. The contribution of the second principal component was pH > TBRAs > drip loss > APC > CO2 solubility > TVB-N > hardness > centrifugal loss, indicating a high correlation between lipid oxidation and microbial proliferation index.Entities:
Keywords: Trachinotus ovatus; golden pompano; modified atmosphere packaging; physicochemical properties; principal component analysis; superchilling storage
Year: 2022 PMID: 35804755 PMCID: PMC9265761 DOI: 10.3390/foods11131943
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Images of golden pompano (A), fillet sample (B) and packaging method (C).
Figure 2Effect of different gas components packaging on drip loss (A), centrifugal loss (B), cooking loss (C), hardness (D) and elasticity (E) of golden pompano fillets during storage (−3 °C). Packaging system: AP (control group), MAP1 (30% CO2/70% N2), MAP2 (50% CO2/50% N2), MAP3 (70% CO2/30% N2). Bars indicate the standard error. Different uppercase letters (A–F) indicate significant difference (p < 0.05) in means (n = 3) between display times within the same packaging system; different lowercase letters (a–d) indicate significant difference (p < 0.05) in means (n = 3) between packaging systems on the same day.
Figure 3Effect of different gas components packaging on whiteness (A), CO2 solubility (B) and pH value (C), APC (D), TVB-N value (E) and TBARs value (F) of golden pompano fillets during storage (−3 °C). Packaging system: AP (control group), MAP1 (30% CO2/70% N2), MAP2 (50% CO2/50% N2), MAP3 (70% CO2/30% N2). Bars indicate the standard error. Different uppercase letters (A–G) indicate significant difference (p < 0.05) in means (n = 3) between display times within the same packaging system; different lowercase letters (a–d) indicate significant difference (p < 0.05) of means (n = 3) between packaging systems on the same day.
Pearson correlation analysis of quality indicators in golden pompano fillets during storage.
| Quality Indicator | CO2 Solubility | pH | Drip Loss | Centrifugal Loss | Hardness | APC | TVB-N | TBARs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CO2 solubility | 1.000 | |||||||
| pH | −0.611 ** | 1.000 | ||||||
| Drip loss 1 | 0.369 ** | −0.435 ** | 1.000 | |||||
| Centrifugal loss 2 | 0.649 ** | −0.370 ** | 0.555 ** | 1.000 | ||||
| Hardness 3 | −0.663 ** | 0.617 ** | −0.513 ** | −0.795 ** | 1.000 | |||
| APC 4 | 0.266 * | 0.082 | 0.407 ** | 0.745 ** | −0.495 ** | 1.000 | ||
| TVB-N 5 | 0.404 ** | −0.063 | 0.150 | 0.720 ** | −0.644 ** | 0.817 ** | 1.000 | |
| TBARs 6 | 0.251 * | 0.227 * | −0.068 | 0.579 ** | −0.373 ** | 0.813 ** | 0.858 ** | 1.000 |
* indicates highly significant correlation at the p < 0.05 level. ** indicates highly significant correlation at the p < 0.01 level. 1 Defreeze lost water after storage. 2 Water holding of muscles. 3 Force necessary to obtain a given deformation.4 Anaerobic plate count. 5 Total volatile basic nitrogen. 6 Thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances.
Principal component analysis of quality indicator in golden pompano fillets during storage.
| Component 1 | Initial Eigenvalueinitial Eigenvalue | Extract Square and Load | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Latent Root | Variance Contribution/% | Accumulative Variance Contribution/% | Latent Root | Variance Contribution/% | Accumulative Variance Contribution/% | |
| 1 | 4.388 | 54.847 | 54.847 | 4.388 | 54.847 | 54.847 |
| 2 | 2.031 | 25.384 | 80.231 | 2.031 | 25.384 | 80.231 |
| 3 | 0.808 | 10.101 | 90.332 | |||
| 4 | 0.350 | 4.381 | 94.713 | |||
| 5 | 0.168 | 2.102 | 96.815 | |||
| 6 | 0.132 | 1.652 | 98.467 | |||
| 7 | 0.076 | 0.950 | 99.417 | |||
| 8 | 0.047 | 0.583 | 100.00 | |||
1 Comprehensive indicators formed by data conversion and dimensionality reduction for eight quality indicators.
Loading matrix for principal component analysis of quality indicator in golden pompano fillets during storage.
| Quality Indicator | Component 1 Coefficient | Coefficient of Component 1 Score | Component 2 Coefficient | Coefficient of Component 2 Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CO2 solubility | 0.941 | 0.448 | −0.046 | −0.022 |
| pH | −0.864 | −0.412 | 0.305 | 0.214 |
| Drip loss 1 | 0.845 | 0.403 | 0.422 | 0.296 |
| Centrifugal loss 2 | 0.808 | 0.386 | 0.459 | 0.322 |
| Hardness 3 | 0.695 | 0.332 | −0.429 | −0.301 |
| APC 4 | 0.534 | 0.255 | −0.478 | −0.335 |
| TVB-N 5 | −0.405 | −0.193 | 0.816 | 0.573 |
| TBARs 6 | 0.677 | 0.323 | 0.684 | 0.480 |
1 Defreeze lost water after storage. 2 Water holding of muscles. 3 Force necessary to obtain a given deformation. 4 Anaerobic plate count. 5 Total volatile basic nitrogen. 6 Thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances.