IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlcjf/v30y2012i5id408-2011-cjfs.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Volatile organic compounds as biomarkers of the freshness of poultry meat packaged in a modified atmosphere

Author

Listed:
  • Jana Tománková

    (Department of Meat Hygiene and Technology, Faculty of Veterinary Hygiene and Ecology, University of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Gabriela Bořilová

    (Department of Meat Hygiene and Technology, Faculty of Veterinary Hygiene and Ecology, University of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Iva Steinhauserová

    (Department of Meat Hygiene and Technology, Faculty of Veterinary Hygiene and Ecology, University of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Leo Gallas

    (Department of Meat Hygiene and Technology, Faculty of Veterinary Hygiene and Ecology, University of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

The volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the packing of chicken meat in a modified atmosphere was qualitatively and quantitatively evaluated. The total number of 72 samples of chicken hindquarters were stored under two different modified atmospheres (70% O2, 30% CO2, and 70% argon, 30% CO2) for 20 days. Analyses were performed on Days 0, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20. VOCs in the headspace samples were detected and quantified by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) every fourth day of storage. Pentamethylheptane, dimethylsulphide, dimethyl disulphide, dimethyl trisulphide, dimethyl tetrasulphide, hydrogen sulphide and ammonia were detected. Pentamethylheptane and ammonia had similar values for both modified atmospheres (MA). The other compounds were found only in argon MA from the Day 16 of storage with a subsequent increase of values. The measured values for dimethylsulphide were 10.7 and 13.8 mg/l, for dimethyl disulphide they were 1.9 and 10.7 mg/l, dimethyl trisulphide levels were 15.7 and 19.3 mg/l and dimethyl tetrasulphide levels were 93.2 and 418.3 mg/l for Day 16 and 20. The hydrogen sulphide level was detected from 80 to 370 mg/l after the 8th day of storage. We showed that the argon MA is less suitable for packaging raw chicken parts than the oxygen MA in view of the increased amount of microflora and unpleasant odour as assessed by sensory analysis. Oxygen prolonged the shelf life by about four days in comparison with argon. Sensory evaluation was similar for both atmospheres after air exhaustion. The argon MA did not extend the shelf life as compared to the oxygen MA.

Suggested Citation

  • Jana Tománková & Gabriela Bořilová & Iva Steinhauserová & Leo Gallas, 2012. "Volatile organic compounds as biomarkers of the freshness of poultry meat packaged in a modified atmosphere," Czech Journal of Food Sciences, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 30(5), pages 395-403.
  • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlcjf:v:30:y:2012:i:5:id:408-2011-cjfs
    DOI: 10.17221/408/2011-CJFS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cjfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/408/2011-CJFS.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: http://cjfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/408/2011-CJFS.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/408/2011-CJFS?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Edita RAUDIENÉ & Darius GAILIUS & Rimanté VINAUSKIENÉ & Viktorija EISINAITÉ & Gintautas BALČINAS & Justina DOBILIENÉ & Laura TAMKUTÉ, 2018. "Rapid evaluation of fresh chicken meat quality by electronic nose," Czech Journal of Food Sciences, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 36(5), pages 420-426.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlcjf:v:30:y:2012:i:5:id:408-2011-cjfs. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.