Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Storage conditions
A 3 X 3 factorial, completely randomized design, with two replica-
tions (18 beef samples) was conducted to study time dependent head-
space CO, changes-(absorption/evolution)with three temperatures(3, 8,
and 13°C) and 3 initial oremixed eas comnositions (1OO%CO,:O%N~.
SO%CO,:5O%N~,and 2i%CO,:8Oo;bN,). during this‘ experiment, ai1
packaging/productparametersfor beef samples were held constant (V,,
= 2.5, V, = 0.34L, and S, = 400 cm*).
During the experiment, each beef sample was placed in the chamber
120 - and maintained at the desired temperature. The atmosphere in the cham-
ber was adjusted to that of premixed gasesusing the vacuum/back-flush
115’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ procedure. The initial gas concentration was measured to verify the
012 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 composition of commercially obtained premix gases. Final CO, and 0,
Time (hr) concentrations were analyzed and each beef sample was weighed after
12 hr inside the chamber. For each treatment combination, the CO,
Fig. I-Observed (symbols) and predicted (lines) time dependent change in headspacewas determined by monitoring the time dependent
pressure change for fresh beef stored at different temperatures pressure change within the apparatus.
with 100% CO2 atmosphere.
chamber was determined by monitoring pressure change in nitrogen (in- Statistical procedures
itial gas pressure 207 kPa) during 24 hr. In order to achieve isothermal Experimental data from packaging/product con&rations and storage
conditions, the test apparatuswas located inside a temperature controlled conditions were analyzed by statistical regressions (SAS Institute Inc.,
chamber (Master-Bilt, Standex Company, Model D34LCD82) that was 1989). Data for time dependent headspacegas pressure changes were
adjusted to the desired temperature 12 hr before the start of each exper- used to develop pressure drop equations by least square regression using
iment. the SAS REG procedure. The statistical modeling technique of backward
elimination was used to identify significant (p < 0.05) packaging/prod-
Preparation of meat samples uct and storage parameters that affected CO, absorption. Polynomial
equations including significant parameters-headspace-to-meat volume
Semimembranosus muscles were obtained 72 hr postmortem either ratio, surface area and volume of meat samples, as well as storage tem-
from the LSU Agricultural Center, Dept. of Animal Science (for pack- perature and initial CO, concentration-were generated for CO, absorp-
aging/product configurations) or a local commercial slaughter house (for tion values using the SAS general linear model REG procedure.
storage conditions). Primal cuts were trimmed free of external fat and
cut into rectangular pieces (samples) ranging from 260-86Og, as required
to adjust meat volume and surface area. All samples were initially vac- RESULTS & DISCUSSION
uum packaged using a chamber-type, heat-seal vacuum packaging ma- Pressure drop associated with CO, absorption
chine (Westglen Corp., Model VM 200H). Sample bags were numbered
and stored at 4 + 05°C for <7 days prior to beginning each experiment. A function describing the time dependent pressure drop for
Vacuum storage of samples prior to treatment exposure allowed for ex- CO, and N, packaged fresh beef was established using linear
perimental control of variability anticipated due to differences in muscles regression (SAS Institute Inc., 1989.) A logarithmic function
between animals and within muscle variation for each animal. For each described time dependent pressure:
experiment, one beef sample was selected according to a previously as-
signed random order. P=ki - b ln(t+l) (3)
Proximate compositions of all samples were determined after testing
using rapid analytical microwave procedures (CEM AVC-80 and Au- where t is the time (hr), Pi is initial absolute pressure of head-
tomatic Extraction System). The pH of each sample was measured with space gas as predicted by regression, and b is the initial pressure
a glass body combination pH surface electrode attached to a digital pH drop rate coefficient. The time dependent pressure drop fitted
meter (Oyster, Economy pH Meter, Model 301013-03-B). Various bio- with Eq. (3) for beef muscle stored at 3, 8, and 13°C was com-
logical factors that could influence CO, absorption could not be con- pared under 100% CO, atmosphere (Fig. 1). The pressure drop
trolled and were assumed constant for our experimental trials. All for beef stored with 20%, 50%, and 100% CO, (balance of NJ
samples within an experiment were obtained from cattle with the same atmosphere at 3°C was also compared at 3°C (Fig. 2). Pressure
age and degree of finish, and were processedby a uniform procedure of
slaughtering, chilling, and fabrication. drop model, Eq. (3), could be widely used to describe headspace
pressure changes caused by CO, absorption under various stor-
age temperatures and gas atmospheres (R* values for each re-
Packaging/product configuration gression line were 0.98 to 0.99). Since the initial pressure was
Beef samples (20) were tested to estimate the effect of headspace-to: constant for all experimental trials, the pressure drop rate co-
meat volume ratio and surface area on CO, absorption. Headspace-to- efficient b was related to different packaging conditions and
meat volume ratios from 1.8 to 5.9 were established by varying chamber intrinsic characteristics of the meat.
volume with addition of gas impermeable inserts and/or different meat Therefore, CO, absorption coefficient could be related to in-
sample volumes. Rectangular beef samples were chosen for ease of sam- itial pressure drop rate coefficient b by:
ple preparation and surface area measurement,with variations in surface
area from 200 to 800 cm2 and volume from 0.22 to 0.75L.
For each trial, a beef sample was placed in the test chamber main- R co2 =--44VA b
tained at 13 2 0.5”C. We chose 13°C as a representativeabusive storage VP, (t+ 1)
condition for MAP meat. The chamber was sealed and connected to a Eq. (4) indicates that CO, absorption coefficient is inversely
vacuum pump and back-flushed using 100% CO,. The vacuum/back- proportional to time by the pressure drop rate coefficient (b) for
flush cycle was repeated three to four times until 99.0 f 1.O% CO, had
been reached. The initial headspaceabsolute gas pressure was adjusted conditions of Pi = Pi. The larger the observed initial pressure
to 155 + 14 kPa by bleeding excessheadspacegas through the metering drop rate, the more CO, absorbed by the meat tissue. Note that
valve. Initial CO, concentration was verified by gas analysis. the CO, absorption would not continue unbounded, as the drop
Each beef sample remained inside the chamber for a 12-hr monitoring in CO, partial pressure within the headspacelikely would reach
period. Preliminary research indicated this 124~ period was appropriate some limiting threshold such that CO, would not diffuse across
s * ,-. A 3
a.155 A A x $225
~~154.53~3.1335’ln(t+l) R’=0.98
2 I P=226.815-3.1429’ln(t+l) FE0.98
;220
PI \ P=153.285-13.4391’ln(t+l) lE0.99
I’ ifi
'n
,,,215
5
B
$210
a
125
205
120
115""""""' 200
0 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO I1 I2 012 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
tissue membranes. This characteristic is reflected in the deriva-space pressure change caused by CO, absorption was related
tive of Eq. (3), dP/dt = b/(t + l), indicating that dP/dt = 0 directly to the package/product configuration by the headspace
after long time intervals. Figures 1 and 2 support the hypothesisvolume (V,,) and mass of meat sample (M,), and to package
that the rate of headspacegas pressuredrop decreaseswith stor- storage conditions by storage temperature (T). Other factors in-
age time. High pressure differential is the primary driving forcefluencing CO, absorption could be indirectly related through
for CO, absorption in beef tissue (Gill, 1988). As CO, is ab- functional correlation with the pressuredrop rate coefficient (b).
sorbed, the partial pressure(concentration) difference decreases,For beef the average initial moisture was 72.00 +- 2.05%, fat
and the rate of headspacepressure drop would also decrease. content 2.5 * 2.0%, and pH was 5.5 ? 0.2%.
The CO, absorption during the first 12 hr of storage could be The pressuredrop rate coefficient (b) values for 20 packaging/
calculated: product configurations were compared (Table 1). Since head-
space-to-meatvolume ratio (V,,M), surface area (S,) and volume
(V,) of beef sampleswere assumedto be related to the pressure
A,,@= 12)= s R,, dt= - 2 b In(t+ l)/,=,, (5) drop rate’coefficient (b), a backwards elimination regression
z m modeling technique was used to identify significant parameters.
Where A&t = 12) is the accumulated amount of CO, absorbed F-values observed with these packaging/product parameters
(g/kg,,,,3 during 12 hr storage. Longer observation would likely were compared (Table 2). They indicate that the rate of head-
reveal pressure changes associated with chemical conversions space gas pressure changes caused by CO, absorption in fresh
and microbial metabolic processesand not CO, absorption alone beef was related to headspace-to-meatvolume ratio, surface
(Zhao et al., 1994). area, and volume of beef sample, as well as interactions of those
parameters.
Pressure drop with different meats Assuming S, and V, are constant, b could be approximated
by the inverse of V,,,:
The general form of Eq. (3) was validated on studies with
chicken, beef, and pork (unreported data). Examples of resulting
pressure change data fitted by Eq. (3) were compared (Fig. 3). b-b,,++ (6)
” H/M
Results indicated that CO, absorption was related to type of
muscle (i.e. different pressure curves reflect different CO, ab- Equation (6) indicates that the initial pressure drop rate coeffi-
sorption of different muscles.) For example, a l&kg whole cient decreasedwith V,,, when V,,, was relatively small, but
chicken absorbed about 1.8 g of CO, in about 12 hr from an the effect of V,, on b became small with increasing V,, (Fig.
initial gas mixture of 50% CO, and 50% N,. A 1.5-kg portion 4). We hypothesized that there may be a critical point of V,,
of ground beef and chopped pork absorbed about 4.5g and 5.3g such that a package would contain the minimum CO, in the
of CO,, respectively, at an initial 100% CO, gas atmosphere. headspacefor meat to reach CO, absorption equilibrium. Em-
Gill (1988) reported that CO, absorption in muscle tissue of pH pirically this could be further explained since a smaller V,,,
5.5 at 0°C was = 960 mL (about 1.89 g/kg of tissue at STP) would contain a smaller absolute amount of CO, within the
and that CO, absorption increased with increased tissue pH by headspace.When CO, in headspaceis less than the minimum
360 mL/kg for each pH unit, and decreasedwith increasedtem- required to reach CO, absorption equilibrium (i.e. V,,, is rela-
perature by 19 mL/kg for each 1°C rise. Bush (1991) reported tively small), headspacegas pressure would decreaserapidly as
that a whole chicken weighing 0.8-kg would absorb about 1.lg meat tissue absorbed CO,.
of CO, in 8 hr at equilibrium mixture of 50% CO, and 50% N,, Since a critical V,,, value may reflect the minimum CO,
a 0.25-kg beef slice absorbed 0.4g of CO, in about 6 hr, and available in the headspaceto reach equilibrium, an increase in
thin ham slices required only about 30 min under the same con- V,,, would representexcessCO, within the headspacesuch that
ditions to absorb the same amount of CO,. the initial pressure drop rate would increase because of an in-
creased concentration gradient. Thus, V,,, may be a critical
Effects of packaging/product parameters on CO, package design parameter to achieve CO, absorption equilib-
absorption rium for beef in 100% CO, microenvironment. Packagecollapse
caused by CO, absorption in 100% CO, packaged meat may be
Equation (5) indicates that changes in headspacegas pressure avoided or minimized by increasing V,, above a critical thresh-
directly reflect the amount of CO, absorbed by meat. The head- old (-3.3 for the conditions observed).