English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Simple Summary  Drip loss is one of the most important parameters of meat quality evaluation. A new method for the determination of drip loss in poultry meat is the EZ-DripLoss method. The results of the drip loss method used are highly dependent on the surface area, its weight, the fiber direction of the sample, and the storage period. From the literature reports it is obvious that there is a deficiency in our knowledge of the EZ-DripLoss method’s suitability for poultry meat analysis. Therefore, this study aimed to research the effect of different sample core diameters (10, 20, and 30 mm), and fiber orientations (vertical vs. horizontal) on the EZ-DripLoss in chicken breast meat measured across a period of five days. The results indicate that the EZ-DripLoss for chicken breast meat is highly dependent on the sample area, fiber orientation, and measurement interval. Although the EZ-DripLoss method is considered to be simple and reproducible, it is still insufficiently researched and standardized. Comparison of the EZ-DripLoss results obtained with different sampling procedures should be performed with great precaution.    Abstract  Although the EZ-DripLoss method has been performed in numerous studies, there is a deficiency in our knowledge of the EZ-DripLoss method’s suitability for poultry meat analysis. This study aimed to research the effect of different sample areas (10, 20, and 30 mm;  n  = 240), and fiber orientations (vertical vs. horizontal) on the EZ-DripLoss in chicken breast meat measured across a period of five days. The influence of sample area on the EZ-DripLoss of chicken breast meat with respect to the fiber orientation and across the five-day measurement interval was significant between 10 and 30 mm samples, and between 20 and 30 mm samples ( p  < 0.001). The estimated regression coefficient showed that EZ-DripLoss for the samples with horizontal and vertical fiber direction of 10 and 20 mm, significantly increased by 0.04% per hour, while for the samples with vertical fiber direction whose diameter was 30 mm, it significantly increased by 0.06% per hour, and for the horizontal fiber direction, it significantly increased by 0.07% per hour. The samples with vertical fiber orientation had 0.50% greater EZ-DripLoss compared to the samples with horizontal fiber orientation. EZ-DripLoss evaluation in chicken breast should be performed with a sample core diameter of 20 mm, a vertical fiber orientation, and over the course of longer measurement intervals.

EZ-DripLoss Assessment in Chicken Breast Meat Using Different Sample Areas, Fiber Orientation, and Measurement Intervals