Reciprocal Meat Conference Abstracts

Modified Atmosphere Packaging Systems Influence Myoglobin Oxidation of Ground Beef in Led and Fluorescent Lighting

Authors
  • D. R. Reynolds (University of Missouri)
  • Z. D. Callahan (University of Missouri)
  • C. L. Lorenzen (University of Missouri)
  • J. V. Cooper (University of Missouri)
  • B. R. Wiegand (University of Missouri)

Abstract

ObjectivesColor is the most important factor in decision making for the consumer in the retail setting. The objective of this study was to determine the color stability of ground beef patties under three different retail lighting conditions in three different packaging types.Materials and MethodsUSDA Choice chuck rolls were first ground through a coarse 10 mm plate and then reground through a fine 4.5 mm plate and then formed into 27 patties (113.4 g). Patties were then assigned into one of three packaging treatments: HO2–MAP (80% O2: 20% CO2), LO2–MAP (20% O2: 20% CO2: 60% N2), or overwrap with polyvinyl chloride (PVC). Then each packaging type was then assigned to deli cases (5°C) with one of three retail lighting conditions: low-UV fluorescent bulbs (FLO) with an average lux of 244, light emitting diode (LED) with an average lux of 732, and no light (DRK). Patties were removed on storage d 1, 3, 7, 10, and 14 for analysis of L* a* b*, lipid oxidation by thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), and percentage of myoglobin states. The entire experiment was replicated three times. Data was ran using the GLIMMIX fuction of SAS and significance was determined at P < 0.05.ResultsThere was an interaction between package type and storage day for L* (P < 0.0001). Patties packaged in HO2–MAP had an increase (P < 0.05) in L* through storage day but were similar to each subsequent day. L* increased (P < 0.05) on storage d 3, 7, and 10 for patties packaged in LO2–MAP. PVC patties had increase (P < 0.05) in L* from storage d 7 to 10. Patties packaged in HO2–MAP and LO2–MAP had higher (P < 0.05) L* values on storage d 3, 7, 10, and 14 than PVC. Package type had an affect (P < 0.0001) on a* where HO2–MAP > LO2–MAP > PVC, with averages on 15.88, 14.34, and 12.63, respectively. Lighting type also had an affect (P = 0.0005) on a* where DRK = FLO > LED, with averages of 15.32, 14.31, and 13.22, respectively. There was a decrease (P < 0.0001) in a* throughout storage day, 1 > 3 > 7 > 10 > 14, with averages of 23.56, 19.56, 12.98, 8.70, and 6.70, respectively. Lighting type did not affect (P = 0.1045) TBARS. TBARS decreased (P < 0.0001) throughout storage day where 1 < 3 < 7 < 10 < 14, with averages of 0.58, 0.98, 1.67, 2.60, and 4.07, respectively. Packaging had an effect on oxymyoglobin (OMb; P = 0.0012) where HO2–MAP = PVC > LO2–MAP (51.61, 50.84, and 49.45, respectively) and metmyoglobin (MMb; P = 0.0025) where LO2–MAP > HO2–MAP = PVC (47.21, 43.92, and 45.16, respectively). Oxymyoglobin values were impacted by storage day where storage d 1 = 3 > 7 > 10 = 14, with averages of 55.68, 54.6, 50.45, 46.48, and 45.95, respectively. Deoxymyoglobin (DMb) followed the same trend with storage d 1 = 3 > 7 > 10 = 14, with averages of 6.45, 6.33, 3.87, 1.63, and 1.42, respectively. Inversely, MMb increased over time with storage d 1 = 3 < 7 < 10 = 14, with averages of 37.87, 39.07, 45.68, 51.89, and 52.65, respectively. There were no differences between lighting type on OMb (P = 0.2410), DMb (P = 0.5229), or MMb (P = 0.2736) percentages.ConclusionThe use of HO2–MAP in retail settings will increase redness in ground beef patties regardless of lighting source, indicating that a movement toward LED lights in the retail setting will not be detrimental to discoloration in products packaged in HO2–MAP.

Keywords: lighting, myoglobin, oxidation, modified atmosphere packaging, ground beef

How to Cite:

Reynolds, D. R., Callahan, Z. D., Lorenzen, C. L., Cooper, J. V. & Wiegand, B. R., (2018) “Modified Atmosphere Packaging Systems Influence Myoglobin Oxidation of Ground Beef in Led and Fluorescent Lighting”, Meat and Muscle Biology 1(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.221751/rmc2016.023

323 Views

237 Downloads

Published on
31 Aug 2018
Peer Reviewed