Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 Apr 4;20(4):e0319043. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319043

Experimental evidence demonstrating how freeze-thaw patterns affect spoilage of perishable cached food

Karen Ong 1,*, D Ryan Norris 1
Editor: Ayman A Swelum2
PMCID: PMC11970643  PMID: 40184381

Abstract

For the small number of temperate and boreal species that cache perishable food, previous research suggests that increasing freeze-thaw events can have a negative impact on fitness by degrading the quality of cached food. However, there is no experimental evidence that directly links freeze-thaw events to cache quality. To examine how the timing, frequency, duration, and intensity of freeze-thaw events influenced cached food mass loss, a proxy for caloric content, we conducted a series of month-long laboratory experiments by placing simulated caches (raw chicken placed between two pieces of black spruce Picea mariana bark) in programmable freezers. Freeze-thaw treatments were modelled after weather data from Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario, where a population of Canada jays (Perisoreus canadensis), a species that caches perishable food for overwinter survival and to support late-winter breeding, has declined by >  70% since the 1980s. First, we found no evidence that an increased frequency of freeze-thaw events influenced mass loss, suggesting that microstructural damage caused by crystal reformation does not significantly influence cache quality. Instead, our experimental results demonstrated that mass loss was positively influenced by longer individual thaws, which likely reflects increased microbial growth, oxidation, and progressive drip loss. We also found that caches lost more weight when subjected to early freeze-thaw events compared to late freeze-thaw events. Finally, we show that milder freezes led to less mass loss and, unexpectedly, warmer than average thaws post-freeze also led to less mass loss. Our results suggest that longer thaw periods post-freezing and milder freezes cause or lead to significantly increased spoilage of perishable cached food. All of these temperature-related conditions are closely associated with long-term changes in climate and, thus, the effects on cache degradation reported in these experiments should be applicable to species caching perishable food in the wild.

Introduction

Food caching, the storage of food for later consumption, is used predominantly by mammals and birds to overcome periods of food scarcity [1,2]. Whether species store food over the short-term (hours to days) or the long-term (weeks to months), their caches are exposed to environmental conditions that result in progressive deterioration through spoilage [1,2]. Spoilage is defined as the change in a food’s sensory attributes (i.e., flavour, odour, colour) that results from physical and biochemical processes such as damage to the cellular membrane, autooxidation, and microbial proliferation [3,4]. The spoilage rate of food is directly related to the free water available for biochemical reactions which is quantified as water activity, aw [3,5]. Food with a lower aw can remain stable for longer periods (typically called ‘non-perishables’; e.g., seeds, nuts, dried vegetation) compared to food with a higher free water content (‘perishables’; e.g., fruits, meat). Food-caching species employ a variety of solutions to reduce the aw of their caches. For example, American pikas (Ochontona princeps) and red squirrels (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) dry vegetation and fungi on rocks and bare tree branches, respectively [68]. Other species, like the Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), favour drier or shaded (cooler) microhabitats for food storage that slow the spoilage of their cache compared to hot and humid conditions [3,911]. Despite these innovative species-specific strategies, shifts in temperature and precipitation patterns associated with climate change are creating additional challenges for the prevention of cache spoilage.

Climate change is expected to affect food-storing species, especially those that store perishable foods, because unstable foods are sensitive to increased ambient temperatures and fluctuating weather conditions. Range retractions in wolverines (Gulo gulo L.) [12], for example, have been attributed to decreased spring snow cover that is critical for proper insulation of overwintering food stores [1315]. Stable subfreezing temperatures prevent freeze-thawing which destroys the tissues in food, releasing precursor compounds that expedite several pathways of spoilage. As food freezes, ice crystals form within protein and connective tissue, initiating denaturation while also setting the stage for accelerated secondary lipid oxidation post-thaw through the release of pro-oxidants [16,17], altering the bioavailability and digestibility of amino acid residues and proteins [18]. For meat, the destruction of these proteins decreases its water holding capacity, which leads to increased drip loss when the meat is thawed [19,20]. For example, frozen-thawed ostrich meat has a lower pH and water holding capacity but higher drip loss than its fresh counterpart [21]. Similar results have been found in frozen-thawed versus fresh pork meat [22]. The exudate that drips from the damaged cells contains valuable water, vitamins, minerals, and amino acids [17,23,24]. Along with the loss of nutrients, the holes left from ice crystals melting provide access by microbes. Unlike fungi, bacteria are incapable of invasive action into tissues, making them dependent on extrinsic forces, such as freeze-thaw events, to mechanically disrupt tissue [24]. Early fall freeze-thaw events have already been associated with reduced survival of pygmy owls (Glaucidium passerinum) and the mechanistic link in this relationship is suspected to be a decrease in cache quality needed for overwinter survival [25].

The Canada jay (Perisoreus canadensis) is another long-term perishable food-caching species experiencing population decline [26,27]. This passerine is a year-round resident of boreal and subalpine forests in North America that stores vertebrate flesh, berries, arthropods, and fungi for overwinter survival and late-winter breeding [2830]. At the southern edge of their range in central Ontario, a population of Canada jays in Algonquin Provincial Park (45°84’N, 78°38’W; hereafter ‘Algonquin Park’) has declined by over 70% in the last three decades [27]. To explain this decline, Waite & Strickland [28] presented the ‘hoard-rot hypothesis’, which proposes that warmer fall temperatures were exacerbating spoilage of perishable food caches that Canada jays depend on for rearing young in their late-winter nesting season. Sutton et al. [26,27] later showed a negative correlation between the number of fall and winter freeze-thaw events and late-winter reproductive performance, suggesting that conditions during the fall influence the quality or quantity of cached food that is used for reproduction 5–7 months later. Two food supplementation experiments have provided evidence that the late-winter reproduction of Canada jays is limited by food availability [31,32]. An overall warming trend associated with climate change in Algonquin Park and the declining Canada jay population provide indirect evidence for the negative effects of freeze-thaw events on fitness and population abundance [27,33]. However, there is no direct evidence linking freeze-thaw events to the quality of cached food in Canada jays or any other food-caching species. Moreover, previous studies on food for human consumption suggest that there may be multiple ways in which freeze-thaw events act to degrade cached food that is independent of simply the frequency at which they occur [3439].

In this study, our goal was to examine whether the timing, frequency, thaw duration, and intensity of freeze-thaw events affected cache quality. In doing so, we experimentally examined the following hypotheses:

(H1) The ‘exacerbation hypothesis’ proposes that the presence of an early freeze-thaw event, such as one associated with an early-season cold spell, increases the total duration of thaw post-freeze, thereby increasing spoilage rates compared to a later freeze-thaw event. Spoilage rates are higher post-freeze because freezing inflicts microstructural damage to the food that facilitates microbial spoilage and accelerates oxidation. An earlier freeze-thaw event simply initiates the process of accelerated spoilage sooner, reducing cache quality earlier than a late freeze-thaw.

(H2) The ‘frequency hypothesis’ proposes that, up to a point, subsequent freezing events inflict additional microstructural damage, leading to greater post-freezing spoilage rates with each subsequent event. Repeated freeze-thaw cycles are associated with larger ice crystal diameter following recrystallization, a greater volume of ice, and increased porosity of the food item causing greater structural damage that facilitates other processes that decrease food quality [40].

(H3) The ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’ proposes that for the same total thaw hours post-freeze, longer individual thaw periods allow spoilage to increase whereas short bursts of thawing temperatures do not allow the metabolic activity of spoilage microbes to increase to impactful levels.

(H4) The ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’ proposes that a more intense thaw subjects food to higher above-freezing temperatures which are better tolerated by microbes, resulting in higher rates of microbial growth and lipid oxidation [4143].

(H5) The ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’ proposes that a faster decrease in temperature, or more intense freeze, results in a colder minimum temperature which would create smaller ice crystals that are more uniformly distributed inside and outside the cell, inflicting less physical damage to the tissue, thereby minimizing drip loss and other characteristics associated with food quality [4446]. Additionally, a more intense freeze can kill, injure, and arrest microbes, reducing the viable microbial population for growth when thawing temperatures are restored [4749].

We tested predictions from each of these hypotheses by conducting a series of month-long simulated freeze-thaw experiments on commercial raw chicken in programmable freezers using weight as a proxy for cache quality [50].

Methods

We conducted a series of freeze-thaw simulations to examine the effect of freeze-thaw events on cache quality using chest freezers programmed by Titan 900 (v 9.0.12.2; Argus System Controls, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada) at the University of Guelph (Guelph, Ontario, Canada). To test all predictions (see Introduction) with ecological validity, laboratory simulations were based on values of maximum temperatures, minimum temperatures, and durations of freeze and thaw phases extracted from hourly climate data of the Environment Canada Algonquin Park East Gate weather station, Algonquin Park, Ontario (45°32’N, 78°54’W; https://weather.gc.ca/city/pages/on-29_metric_e.html) between 2004 − 2019. The freezing point we used to separate freeze and thaw phases was −1.9 °C because this is the lower range for the freezing point of meat [51]. From weather station data, we initially extracted freeze-thaw events from October, when caching behaviour of Canada jays is prominent, to December, the month of fall-to-winter transition. Using a one-way ANOVA, we found that month was a significant predictor of freeze-thaw events (F2, 45 =  18.17, p <  0.0001). A post hoc Tukey test revealed that November had significantly more freeze-thaw events than both October (p <  0.0001) and December (p =  0.0002). As a result, freeze-thaw simulations were modelled after the month of November because this is the month that likely accounts for much or most of the spoilage in caches (Tables S1, S2).

In nature, a single freeze-thaw event consists of a period of sub-freezing temperatures (the ‘freeze phase’) followed by a period of above-freezing temperatures (the ‘thaw phase’). To simplify our laboratory experiments, we defined average freeze and thaw temperatures using the mean minimum and mean maximum temperatures of the observed minima and maxima for each freeze and thaw event in Algonquin Park between 2004−2019 (Table S2). Three separate 720-hr long experiments were designed to examine whether the timing (experiment 1; H1exacerbation hypothesis’), number (experiment 2; H2frequency hypothesis’), duration (experiment 2; H3continuous thaw hypothesis’), and the intensity (experiment 3; H4 ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’ and H5 ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’) of freeze-thaw events influenced the quality of simulated caches (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Schematic diagrams of freeze-thaw manipulations conducted in a programmable freezer.

Fig 1

Blue lines denote freeze phases and red lines denote thaw phases with −1.9 °C as the initial freezing point (lower freezing point of meats). (A) Experiment 1 examined the ‘exacerbation hypothesis’: held at a constant temperature introducing the first freeze-thaw event at the beginning or part way through the experimental period. (B) Experiment 2 examined the ‘frequency hypothesis’ and ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’: the number of freeze-thaw events was increased by shortening the duration of individual thaw phases (indicated by the black horizontal arrows) to maintain a consistent total number of hours above and below freezing across treatments. (C) Experiment 3 examined the ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’ and the ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’: the ‘mild thaw’ treatment had the maximum temperature lowered and the ‘mild freeze’ treatment had the minimum temperature raised by halving the freezing and thawing rates from 0.8 °C/hr to 0.4 °C/hr. The black vertical arrows represent the amplitude that was manipulated.

For all experiments described below, we simulated Canada jay caches by placing a piece of organic raw chicken that weighed 1.20 g (Rowe Farms, Guelph, Ontario, Canada) between two pieces of black spruce (Picea mariana) bark collected from the Guelph Arboretum (43°54’N, 80°21’W). The combined ranges of black and white (P. glauca) spruce define the range of the boreal morphotype of the Canada jay [52,53] and have been experimentally shown to be the most effective of nine tree species sampled in Algonquin Park at preserving caches of perishable food [54]. The black spruce bark presumably contributed environmental microbes and volatile resins to the chicken, creating a more realistic simulated cache [55]. Nine replicates were included in each treatment and the weight of each replicate was taken to the nearest 0.01g ±  0.03 immediately before and after the experiment was finished using a Fuzion digital pocket scale (model TU-200-RED, 2021). Proportional weight loss was calculated by modifying the equation to calculate drip loss (proportional weight loss =  weight lost [g]/starting weight [g]) to assess changes in cache quality. Drip loss (drip loss (%) =  proportional weight loss x 100%; [56,57] is directly related to meat pH and oxidation [21,58].

To examine H1, the ‘exacerbation hypothesis’, we implemented two treatments: an ‘early freeze-thaw’ treatment where eight consecutive freeze-thaw events (41-hr freeze; 16-hr thaw; last thaw was 209 hrs) began at the 6th hr of the 720-hr period (337 hrs of post-freeze thaw conditions) and a ‘late freeze-thaw’ treatment where eight freeze-thaw events occurred at the 211th hr (132 hrs of post-freeze thaw conditions; Fig 1A, Table S3).

To examine H2, the ‘frequency hypothesis’ and H3, the ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’, we conducted three treatments that started with a freeze and had an identical total duration below freezing (368 hrs total) and above-freezing (352 hrs total) post-freeze (Table S4). The first treatment level was the ‘low frequency freeze-thaw’ that had 8 freeze-thaw events (46.5-hr freeze; 44-hr thaw), a ‘medium frequency freeze-thaw’ that had 15 freeze-thaw events (24.5-hr freeze; 24-hr thaw; Table S2), and a ‘high frequency freeze-thaw’ (16.5-hr freeze, 16-hr thaw). All freeze-thaw events reached a maximum of 4.5 °C and minimum of −7.5 °C (Fig 1B). H2 would be supported if greater weight loss was seen in the high frequency freeze-thaw treatment, indicating repeated microstructural damage significantly decreases cache quality. H3 would be supported if greater weight loss was seen in the low frequency freeze-thaw treatment, indicating that longer durations of higher spoilage rates post-freeze would be more detrimental to cache quality than repeated microstructural damage.

To examine H4, the ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’, and H5, the ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’, we manipulated the intensity of freeze-thaw events to create three treatments, all of which consisted of eight 73-hr freezes and eight 16-hr thaws across treatments: an ‘average freeze-thaw’ with a minimum temperature of −6.7 °C and maximum temperature of 4.5 °C (thawing and freezing rate of 0.8 °C/hr), a ‘mild freeze’ with a minimum temperature of −4.3 °C (freezing rate of 0.4 °C/hr) and maximum of 4.5 °C (thawing rate of 0.8 °C/hr), and a ‘mild thaw’ treatment with a minimum temperature of −6.7 °C (freezing rate of 0.8 °C/hr) and a maximum temperature of 1.3 °C (thawing rate of 0.4 °C/hr; Fig 1C, Table S5). H4 would be supported if the average freeze-thaw treatment (max. temp.: 4.5 °C) resulted in greater weight loss than the mild thaw treatment (max. temp.: 1.3 °C) given that freeze conditions were the same between these two treatments (min. temp.: −6.7 °C in both). H5 would be supported if the mild freeze treatment (min. temp.: −4.3 °C) resulted in greater weight loss than the average freeze-thaw treatment (min. temp.: −6.7 °C) given that thaw conditions were the same between these two (max. temp.: 4.5 °C in both).

For all experiments, we also included controls that lacked freeze-thaw events for the entire 720 hrs. Experiment 1 and 3 included a high temperature control where temperature was held at 1.1 °C (3 °C above the average freezing point of meat) for the duration of the 720-hr period and a low temperature control where temperature was held at −4.9 °C (3 °C below the average freezing point of meat). Experiment 2 included a mild freeze control held at −1.6 °C, the mean temperature of all three freeze-thaw treatments. We chose to use different controls in Experiment 2 to experimentally test the effect of freeze-thaw events against average ambient temperatures, because Sutton et al. [27] found support that they may contribute more to cache spoilage.

Processes such as oxidation and microbial spoilage are highly dependent on free water available (unbonded). A high aw would indicate that favourable conditions were provided by the caches for microbial growth, which would not be measured with weight loss, our main metric for spoilage. In attempt to address this, we used an AquaLab Vapor Sorption Analyzer (Decagon Devices, Inc., Pullman, WA, USA) provided by the University of Guelph Food Science department. However, the accuracy of the equipment decreases significantly once the aw is below 0.8 so we could not rely on the readings that ranged between 0.6 to 0.7. As the aw could not be reliably measured, we relied on the fresh weights only. We chose not to use freeze-dried weights because we were interested in the state of the cache prior to it being consumed.

Statistical analyses

To analyze how different freeze-thaw treatments affected cache weight loss, we used generalized linear models (GLMs) implemented in the stats package in R Studio 4.3.1 [59]. In all models, proportional weight loss was the response variable (quasibinomial distribution) with treatment as the predictor variable. After models were run, the β coefficient was calculated using beta function from R’s reghelper package [60] to quantify the effect size of each level of a given treatment on proportional weight loss relative to a base treatment level. Following this, we performed pairwise comparisons of the estimated marginal means (EMMs) at the treatment level using the emmeans R package with a 95% confidence interval and p-values that were adjusted using the Tukey method [61].

Results

Experiment 1: Exacerbation hypothesis (H1)

Consistent with predictions from H1, caches subjected to the early freeze-thaw treatment lost significantly more weight than caches in the late freeze-thaw treatment (β =  0.11 ±  0.02, p <  0.0001) and also lost more weight than caches in both controls (Fig 2A, Tables 1 and S6). The late freeze-thaw caches did not differ significantly in weight loss from either the low (z(inf) =  0.5, p =  0.9; Fig 2A) or high (z(inf) =  −1.5, p =  0.5; Fig 2A) temperature controls.

Fig 2. Proportional mass loss of organic raw chicken breast with a starting mass of 1.20 grams.

Fig 2

(A) Simulated freeze-thaw experiment 1, examining the ‘exacerbation hypothesis’. Mean proportional mass loss was as follows: “Low temperature” (−5 °C, no freeze-thaw events) =  0.65 ±  0.005, “High temperature” (1 °C, no freeze-thaw events) =  0.67 ±  0.01, “Late freeze-thaw” =  0.66 ±  0.03, and “Early freeze-thaw” =  0.71 ±  0.004. (B) Simulated freeze-thaw experiment 2, examining the ‘frequency hypothesis’ and the ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’. Mean proportional mass loss was as follows: “Control” (−1.62 °C, no freeze-thaw events) =  0.73 ±  0.006, “Low frequency freeze-thaw” (8 freeze-thaw events, 44-hour thaws) =  0.73 ±  0.008, “Med frequency freeze-thaw” (15 freeze-thaw events; 24-hour thaws) =  0.70 ±  0.009, “High frequency freeze-thaw” (22 freeze-thaw events; 16-hour thaws) =  0.70 ±  0.01. (C) Simulated freeze-thaw experiment 3 examining the ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’ and ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’. Mean proportional mass loss was as follows: “Low temperature” (−4.9 °C, no freeze-thaw events) =  0.72 ±  0.004, “High temp” (1.1 °C, no freeze-thaw events) =  0.74 ±  0.003, “Mild thaw” (freezing rate of 0.8 °C/hr, thawing rate of 0.4 °C/hr) =  0.72 ±  0.006, “Mild freeze” (freezing rate of 0.4 °C/hr, thawing rate of 0.8 °C/hr) =  0.72 ±  0.004, and “Average freeze-thaw” (freezing and thawing rate of 0.8 °C/hr) =  0.69 ±  0.005.

Table 1. Generalized linear model output of freeze-thaw treatments on cache weight loss to examine the ‘exacerbation hypothesis’. Treatment was used as the predictor variable and proportional weight loss was used as the dependent variable with a quasibinomial distribution.

Fixed effect β Estimate Std. Error t-value p-value
Intercept (late freeze-thaw) 0.731 0.012918 56.59  < 0.0001
Early freeze-thaw 0.114 0.016219 7.00  < 0.0001
Low temp. control −0.008 0.015801 −0.48 0.633
High temp. control 0.023 0.015892 1.46 0.153

Experiment 2: Frequency (H2) & continuous thaw (H3) hypotheses

Contrary to predictions from H2 but consistent with predictions from H3, there was greater weight loss in the low frequency freeze-thaw treatment compared to both the medium and high frequency freeze-thaw treatments (Tables 2 and S7). Weight loss of caches in the high frequency freeze-thaw treatment did not differ significantly from weight loss in the medium frequency freeze-thaw treatment (z(inf) =  2.009, p =  0.2; Fig 2B). Caches in the low frequency freeze-thaw treatment did not differ significantly in weight loss from the control, which had the same average temperature (z(inf) =  −0.23, p =  1.0; Fig 2B).

Table 2. Generalized linear model output of freeze-thaw treatments on cache weight loss to examine the ‘frequency hypothesis’ and ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’. Treatment was used as the predictor variable and proportional weight loss was used as the dependent variable with a quasibinomial distribution.

Fixed effect β Estimate Std. error t-value p-value
Intercept (low freq. freeze-thaw) 0.918 0.007 129.48  < 0.0001
Med freq. freeze-thaw −0.054 0.009 −6.13 <0.0001
High freq. freeze-thaw −0.071 0.009 −8.13  < 0.001
Control 0.002 0.009 0.23 0.819

Experiment 3: Thaw intensity (H4) & freeze intensity (H5) hypotheses

Contrary to predictions from H4, caches lost significant more weight in the mild thaw treatment compared to the average freeze-thaw treatment but, consistent with predictions from H5, caches lost significantly more weight the mild freeze treatment compared to the average freeze-thaw treatment (Fig 2C, Table S8). There was no significant difference in weight loss between caches in the mild thaw treatment and mild freeze treatment (z(inf) =  0.2, p =  1.0; Table 3). Caches in the high temperature control lost significantly more weight than caches in the low temperature control (z(inf) =  −11.0; p <  0.0001; Table 3).

Table 3. Generalized linear model output of freeze-thaw treatments on cache weight loss to examine the ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’ and ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’. Treatment was used as the predictor variable and proportional weight loss was used as the dependent variable with a quasibinomial distribution.

Fixed effect β Estimate Std. Error t-value p-value
Intercept (ave. freeze-thaw) 0.933 0.003 274.13  < 0.0001
Mild freeze 0.059 0.004 13.8  < 0.0001
Mild thaw 0.060 0.004 14.01  < 0.0001
Low temp. control 0.068 0.004 15.92  < 0.0001
High temp. control 0.117 0.004 26.91  < 0.0001

Discussion

Our experiments provide evidence that, at parameters representative of conditions experienced by Canada jays in Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario, Canada, freeze-thaw events accelerate the spoilage of caches, as approximated by weight loss over time. Specifically, we found support for the ‘exacerbation hypothesis’, ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’, and ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’ but, as results from experiments 2 and 3 demonstrated, not the ‘frequency hypothesis’ or ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’. The lack of support for the ‘frequency hypothesis’ could be because the positive effect of a shorter individual thaw was greater than the negative effect of an additional seven freeze-thaw events (i.e., the value that the two treatments differed by). Proportional weight loss was positively related to the duration of a continuous thaw, corroborating findings in food science literature [34]. Unexpectedly, increasing the maximum temperature of the thaw (i.e., increasing intensity) reduced, not increased, weight loss relative to the other treatments, providing no support for the ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’. The mixed support of how maximum temperatures and frequencies of freeze-thaws influenced spoilage suggest that there are other factors that affect cache quality, such as the intrinsic properties of the meat or microbial communities [62,63]. We discuss these possibilities below.

From the results from experiment 1, which showed that earlier freeze-thaw events resulted in greater weight loss of caches, we can conclude that, for the same above-freezing temperature, spoilage rates are higher post-freeze thaw than pre-freeze. We speculate that the higher rate of spoilage could be attributed to physical destruction that results from the freeze-thaw event, which exacerbates microbial spoilage and autooxidation [4]. Based on studies in food science examining the reproductive nature of bacteria [64,65], we suspect that microbial proliferation was the predominant contributor to the spoilage documented in our experiments. Our results align with previous research but are unique because the month-long durations used in our experiments extended past the typical 10-day durations used in prior food science studies on uncured meats [21,66]. The early freeze-thaw treatment we employed was designed to represent early cold spells that, based on weather data, have occurred in Algonquin Park. These early-season freeze-thaws tend to be followed by longer-than-average thaw periods.

Contrary to previous studies that provided evidence that the number of freeze-thaw events had a negative effect on Canada jay reproductive success [27] and population growth rate [26], we found no support for the ‘frequency hypothesis’, where cache spoilage was hypothesized to be positively related to the number of freeze-thaw events. Instead, our experimental results provide support for the ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’, suggesting that the duration of individual thaws has more of an impact on cache spoilage than the number of freeze-thaw events. Freezing events destroy the cell membranes, giving microbes access to nutrients in the following thaw. However, the low frequency treatment should have killed fewer bacteria because there were fewer freezing events that would lyse bacterial cells, leaving a larger population of microbes at the start of each thaw [36]. The individual thaw periods were the longest in the low frequency treatment, which would have given more time for the bacteria to proliferate, resulting in greater spoilage compared to the medium and high frequency freeze-thaw treatments. Sutton et al. [27] may have come to the conclusion that the number of freeze-thaw events had a stronger negative effect on Algonquin Park Canada jay population dynamics than mean temperature because the number of freeze-thaw events is strongly correlated with both the duration of individual freeze and thaw phases whereas mean temperature correlates with several climate metrics that may associate in different ways with cache spoilage (Fig S1).

The lack of difference in weight loss between the medium frequency freeze-thaw treatment and the high frequency freeze-thaw treatment may be because a significant proportion of the bacteria were killed after fifteen freeze-thaw events or that there was insufficient time for increased bacterial activity of the surviving population to contribute significantly to spoilage when individual thaw phases were 16 versus 23.5 hours. When temperatures enter hospitable conditions for microbial growth, there is a time lag before bacterial metabolism speeds up [67]. Depending on the bacterial species, food type, and temperature, bacteria have different lag phase durations (LPD) and changes in abundance [4]. Kataoka et al. [67] found that at thawing conditions of 4 °C, the LPD for Listeria monocytogenes, a gram-positive bacteria responsible for listeriosis that can lead to hospitalization for humans, was 24 – 48 hrs depending on food type, with bacteria on crabmeat and shrimp having a longer LPD than those on green peas and corn. Another plausible explanation could be that the rate of lipid peroxidation changed over time. Along with several other studies [3638], Soyer et al. [39] found that peroxidation rates were not linear, with storage duration and temperature having significant effects on the extent of oxidation. These results are significant given that winter minimum temperatures in Algonquin have shifted 8 °C higher, with less intense freezes and longer thaws [33,68]. This shift could have strong negative consequences for cachers of perishable food that rely on persistent subfreezing conditions to maintain cache quality.

We found that, compared to a freeze that reached −6.7 °C, a milder freeze to −4.3 °C resulted in less proportional weight loss, providing support for the ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’. A milder freeze may have led to increased spoilage because freezing rate determines the size of ice crystals formed, which is a critical determinant of food quality [69,70]. The more rapidly temperatures drop below freezing, the smaller the ice crystals that are formed because there is less time for water molecules to migrate extracellularly to the cell membrane before they crystallize [71]. When a food item thaws and ice crystals melt, this leaves smaller holes in cell membranes and consequently less drip loss and more restricted access to nutrients by microbes [5,58,63,71]. Most bacterial growth is inhibited at temperatures of −5 °C or lower, suggesting that the mild freeze treatment did not reach low enough temperatures to fully arrest growth [72]. In contrast, each freeze in the average freeze-thaw treatment likely killed a larger proportion of microbes, reducing the population size that would have resumed activity in the following thaw [48]. The increased average winter temperatures in Canada’s boreal ecozones are trending towards milder freezes that are less effective at halting cache spoilage [68].

Unexpectedly, the cold temperature controls that lacked freeze-thaw events lost more weight than all treatment groups except the early freeze-thaw treatment in experiment 1, which had a 211-hour post-freeze thaw. Sublimation from ice to water vapour occurs at temperatures below freezing as unbound water molecules are still available for chemical reactions above −40 °C [5]. Despite the stable, subfreezing environment of the low temperature control, the vapour pressure of the food is greater than in the surrounding air and sublimation can occur to equilibrate the pressure, causing water loss in the cache [73]. In addition, the common aerobic meat microbe, Pseudomonas, can become cold-adapted through increased production of exozymes to elevate metabolic activity [74]. The stable and relatively warm conditions of the cold temperature treatment may have also enabled bacterial activity to continue in addition to constant sublimation, resulting in greater proportional weight loss of cold temperature controls relative to freeze-thaw treatment replicates.

A second unexpected result was evidence that refuted the ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’. Caches in the mild thaw treatment lost significantly less weight than those in the average freeze-thaw treatment, despite the maximum temperature being 3.2 °C lower than the average freeze-thaw treatment. Food science literature has shown inconsistent effects of thawing methods on food weight, with some rapid thaw treatments resulting in less drip loss [34] while others increase drip loss [35]. The treatments here had identical thaw durations, so it is unlikely that the lower proportional weight loss was because the average freeze-thaw treatment was less facilitative of spoilage given its higher maximum temperature [41]. Instead, the more rapidly increasing temperature in the average freeze-thaw treatment may have caused condensation to form on the surface of the chicken possibly because of accelerated denaturation of myofibrillar proteins [75,76]. Partial denaturation and aggregation of myosin can create a 3-dimensional structure that traps water at the surface [77]. In addition, water molecules are naturally attracted to one another because hydrogen bonds confer a cohesive property. Increased water retention due to structural changes of the food itself and the cohesive property of water may have resulted in myosin gelation that facilitates incomplete evaporation of water at the surface of the cache [76,78]. The gel formation concentrates protein at the surface of the cache, which could make it readily available for microbes to use in thawing conditions. In addition, depending on the species, the palatability of the cache may decrease as a result of this gel formation.

Our series of experiments suggest that the timing, but not the frequency, of freeze-thaw events and the duration of individual thaw periods post-freeze are the strongest contributors to hoard rot for high-latitude food cachers. Post-thaw spoilage rates following a freeze are higher, but it appears that the spoilage rates only increase after a minimum duration of above-freezing temperatures has been maintained, likely allowing autooxidation and microbial rates to increase to significant rates. Our results contribute towards understanding the impact warming conditions may have on species that cache perishable food, especially those that rely on stored food for over-winter survival. The negative effects of warming fall conditions [27,28] could nevertheless be mitigated by earlier frost-free periods in the spring [68] if there is a temporal advancement of emergent spring resources that provide a valuable alternative food source to highly degraded caches. Canada jays in Algonquin Park [79] and Denali National Park, Alaska (63°44’ N, 148°54’ W) have been observed to divert their foraging away from arboreal caches to emergent resources on the ground as soon as snow cover disappears [80]. The future distribution and success of perishable food cachers will depend on how rising temperatures affect the quality of critical perishable food stores, the flexibility of food-caching species to switch food sources, and the availability of suitable habitat at higher latitudes.

Supporting information

S1 Table. The number of freeze-thaw events in Oct., Nov. and Dec. from 2004 – 2019.

Historical climate data were obtained from Environment Canada at the Algonquin Provincial Park East Gate weather station (45°32’N, 78°54’W; https://weather.gc.ca/city/pages/on-29_metric_e.html).

(PDF)

pone.0319043.s001.pdf (107.3KB, pdf)
S2 Table. The summary of freeze and thaw phases in the month of Nov. from Algonquin Provincial Park East Gate weather station (45°32’N, 78°54’W; 2004 − 2019).

The number indicates the number of individual freeze-thaw events. Duration indicates the average duration (hrs) of a freeze or thaw in a given year. The average minimum and maximum temperatures provide the average lowest temperature reached in freezes and highest temperature in thaw events in a given year.

(PDF)

pone.0319043.s002.pdf (70.3KB, pdf)
S3 Table. Hourly programming schedule for the four freezers used in experiment 1 to test the predictions of the ‘exacerbation hypothesis’.

Each freezer was dedicated to simulating either the early freeze-thaw treatment, late-freeze-thaw treatment, low temperature control (held at −4.9 °C, no freeze-thaw events), or high temperature control (held at 1.1 °C, no freeze-thaw events). All simulations were 720 hours long and both treatments had eight freeze-thaw events each.

(PDF)

pone.0319043.s003.pdf (454.7KB, pdf)
S4 Table. Hourly programming schedule for all freezers used in experiment 2 to test the predictions of the ‘frequency hypothesis’ and the ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’.

Each freezer was dedicated to simulating either the low frequency freeze-thaw treatment (8 freeze-thaw events), medium frequency freeze-thaw treatment (15 freeze-thaw events), high frequency freeze-thaw treatment (22 freeze-thaw events), or the control (held at −1.6 °C, no freeze-thaw events). All simulations were 720 hours long and all treatment groups had an identical total duration below freezing (368 hrs) and above-freezing (352 hrs) post-freeze.

(PDF)

pone.0319043.s004.pdf (460.1KB, pdf)
S5 Table. Hourly programming schedule for all freezers used in experiment 3 to test the predictions of the ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’ and ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’.

Each freezer was dedicated to simulating either the average freeze-thaw treatment (freezing and thawing rate of 0.8 °C/hr), mild freeze treatment (freezing rate of 0.4 °C/hr; thawing rate of 0.8 °C/hr), mild thaw treatment (freezing rate of 0.8 °C/hr; thawing rate of 0.4 °C/hr), low temperature control (held at −4.9 °C, no freeze-thaw events), or high temperature control (held at 1.1 °C, no freeze-thaw events). All simulations were 720 hours long and each treatment group had eight freeze-thaw events.

(PDF)

pone.0319043.s005.pdf (505.6KB, pdf)
S6 Table. Weight loss of caches in experiment 1 that tested the predictions of the ‘exacerbation hypothesis’.

Caches consisted of 1.20g of raw chicken breast placed between two pieces of black spruce (Picea mariana) bark.

(PDF)

pone.0319043.s006.pdf (63KB, pdf)
S7 Table. Weight loss of caches in experiment 2 that tested the predictions of the ‘frequency hypothesis’ and the ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’.

Caches consisted of 1.20g of raw chicken breast placed between two pieces of black spruce (Picea mariana) bark.

(PDF)

pone.0319043.s007.pdf (91.5KB, pdf)
S8 Table. Weight loss of caches in experiment 3 that tested the predictions of the ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’ and ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’.

Caches consisted of 1.20g of raw chicken breast placed between two pieces of black spruce (Picea mariana) bark.

(PDF)

pone.0319043.s008.pdf (67.8KB, pdf)
S1 Fig. Correlation coefficients between November climate variables calculated based on the angular order of eigenvectors.

*  indicates p < 0.05, ** indicates p <  0.01, and *** indicates p <  0.001. ‘Total freeze duration (hrs)’ is total hours below freezing point for a given year, ‘number of freeze-thaws’ is total number of freeze-thaw events that occurred in Nov. for a given year, ‘mean min. temp. (freeze)’ is mean of the lowest temperatures reached across individual freeze phases for a given year, ‘mean hourly temp.’ is mean temperature of the 720 hrs for each year, ‘total thaw duration (hrs)’ is total hours above freezing point for a given year following the first freeze, ‘mean max. temp. (thaw)’ is mean of the maximum temperatures reach across individual thaw phases for a given year, ‘mean thaw duration (hrs)’ is mean duration in hours for an individual thaw for a given year, and ‘mean freeze duration (hrs)’ is mean duration in hours of individual freeze phases for a given year. Calculations were based on hourly climate data for the month of Nov. from Algonquin Provincial Park East Gate (45°32’N, 78°54’W; 2004 − 2019).

(TIF)

pone.0319043.s009.tif (180.2KB, tif)

Acknowledgments

We thank Dan Strickland for his important contributions to the development of this manuscript, Sue Couling from the University of Guelph Crop Science Department for allowing us access to, and for aiding with, programmable freezers, and the Guelph Arboretum for allowing us to sample bark from black spruce trees.

Data Availability

All data are contained within the manuscript and supporting information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Smith C, Reichman O. The evolution of food caching by birds and mammals. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 1984;15(1):329–51. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Vander Wall SB. Food hoarding in animals. Chicago, Ill.: Univ. of Chicago Pr; 1990. 445 p. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Rawat S. Food spoilage: microorganisms and their prevention. Asian J Plant Sci Res. 2015;5(4):47–56. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Mohammed HHH, He L, Nawaz A, Jin G, Huang X, Ma M, et al. Effect of frozen and refrozen storage of beef and chicken meats on inoculated microorganisms and meat quality. Meat Sci. 2021;175:108453. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2021.108453 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Leygonie C, Britz TJ, Hoffman LC. Impact of freezing and thawing on the quality of meat: review. Meat Sci. 2012;91(2):93–8. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.01.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Jakopak RP, Hall LE, Chalfoun AD. Organizing the pantry: cache management improves quality of overwinter food stores in a montane mammal. J Mammal. 2017;98(6):1674–81. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Hatt RT. The red squirrel: its life history and habits, with special reference to the Adirondacks of New York and the Harvard Forest. Vol. 2. Roosevelt Wild Life Forest Experiment Station; 1929. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Hendricks P, Hendricks L. Use of conifers by red squirrels (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) in Montana for drying and caching mushrooms. Northwest Nat. 2015;96(3):240–2. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kulahci IG, Bowman R. Recaching decisions of Florida scrub-jays are sensitive to ecological conditions: decisions after cache-recovery in Florida scrub-jays. Ethology. 2011;117(8):700–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2011.01924.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Fuirst M, Greer J, Bowman R. Ontogeny of food‐caching site preferences in young Florida scrub-jays: evidence of learning or changing social status? J Field Ornithol. 2020;91(3):241–53. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Bock CE. The ecology and behavior of the Lewis woodpecker (Asyndesmus lewis). Berkeley: University of California Press; 1970. p. 100. (University of California publications in zoology). [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Laliberte AS, Ripple WJ. Range contractions of North American carnivores and ungulates. BioScience. 2004;54(2):123. doi: 10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0123:rconac]2.0.co;2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Inman R, Packila M, Inman K, Mccue A, White G, Persson J, et al. Spatial ecology of wolverines at the southern periphery of distribution. J Wildlife Manag. 2012;76(4):778–92. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Aubry KB, Mckelvey KS, Copeland JP. Distribution and broadscale habitat relations of the wolverine in the contiguous United States. J Wildl Manag. 2007;71(7):2147–58. doi: 10.2193/2006-548 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Heim N, Fisher JT, Clevenger A, Paczkowski J, Volpe J. Cumulative effects of climate and landscape change drive spatial distribution of Rocky Mountain wolverine (Gulo gulo L.). Ecol Evol. 2017;7(21):8903–14. doi: 10.1002/ece3.3337 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Owen JE, Lawrie RA. The effect of an artificially induced high pH on the susceptibility of minced porcine muscle to undergo oxidative rancidity under frozen storage. Int J Food Sci Technol. 1975;10(2):169–80. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Benjakul S, Bauer F. Biochemical and physicochemical changes in catfish (Silurus glanis Linne) muscle as influenced by different freeze–thaw cycles. Food Chem. 2001;72(2):207–17. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Dalle Zotte A, Gleeson E, Franco D, Cullere M, Lorenzo J. Proximate composition, amino acid profile, and oxidative stability of slow-growing indigenous chickens compared with commercial broiler chickens. Foods. 2020;9(5):546. doi: 10.3390/foods9050546 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Traore S, Aubry L, Gatellier P, Przybylski W, Jaworska D, Kajak-Siemaszko K, et al. Higher drip loss is associated with protein oxidation. Meat Sci. 2012;90(4):917–24. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2011.11.033 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Ali S, Zhang W, Rajput N, Khan MA, Li C, Zhou G. Effect of multiple freeze-thaw cycles on the quality of chicken breast meat. Food Chem. 2015;173:808–14. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.09.095 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Leygonie C, Britz T, Hoffman L. Oxidative stability of previously frozen ostrich Muscularis iliofibularis packaged under different modified atmospheric conditions. Int J Food Sci Technol. 2011;46(6):1171–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Teuteberg V, Kluth I-K, Ploetz M, Krischek C. Effects of duration and temperature of frozen storage on the quality and food safety characteristics of pork after thawing and after storage under modified atmosphere. Meat Sci. 2021;174:108419. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2020.108419 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Xia X, Kong B, Liu Q, Liu J. Physicochemical change and protein oxidation in porcine longissimus dorsi as influenced by different freeze-thaw cycles. Meat Sci. 2009;83(2):239–45. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.05.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Dao T, Dantigny P. Control of food spoilage fungi by ethanol. Food Control. 2011;22(3–4):360–8. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2010.09.019 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Masoero G, Laaksonen T, Morosinotto C, Korpimäki E. Climate change and perishable food hoards of an avian predator: is the freezer still working? Glob Chang Biol. 2020;26(10):5414–30. doi: 10.1111/gcb.15250 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Sutton A, Strickland D, Freeman N, Norris D. Climate‐driven carry‐over effects negatively influence population growth rate in a food‐caching boreal passerine. Glob Change Biol. 2021;27(5):983–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Sutton AO, Strickland D, Freeman NE, Newman AEM, Norris DR. Autumn freeze-thaw events carry over to depress late-winter reproductive performance in Canada jays. R Soc Open Sci. 2019;6(4):181754. doi: 10.1098/rsos.181754 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Waite TA, Strickland D. Climate change and the demographic demise of a hoarding bird living on the edge. Proc Biol Sci. 2006;273(1603):2809–13. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2006.3667 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Strickland D, Ouellet HR. Canada jay (Perisoreus canadensis). In: Billerman SM, Keeney BK, Rodewald PG, Schulenberg TS, editors. Birds of the World [Internet]. Cornell Lab of Ornithology; 2020. [cited 2024 Jul 24]. Available from: https://birdsoftheworld.org/bow/species/gryjay/1.0/introduction [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Sutton AO, Strickland D, Lachapelle J, Young RG, Hanner R, Brunton DF, et al. Fecal DNA metabarcoding helps characterize the Canada jay’s diet and confirms its reliance on stored food for winter survival and breeding. PLoS One. 2024;19(4):e0300583. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300583 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Derbyshire R, Strickland D, Norris DR. Experimental evidence and 43 years of monitoring data show that food limits reproduction in a food-caching passerine. Ecology. 2015;96(11):3005–15. doi: 10.1890/15-0191.1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Freeman NE, Norris DR, Sutton AO, Newman AEM. Raising young with limited resources: supplementation improves body condition and advances fledging of Canada Jays. Ecology. 2020;101(1):e02909. doi: 10.1002/ecy.2909 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Ridgway M, Smith D, Middel T. Climate warming projections for Algonquin Provincial Park [Internet]. Peterborough, Ontario: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry; 2018. p. 23. Report No.: IR-14. Available from: chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.algonquinpark.on.ca/pdf/harkness_IR14.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Eastridge JS, Bowker BC. Effect of rapid thawing on the meat quality attributes of USDA select beef strip loin steaks. J Food Sci. 2011;76(2):S156–62. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2010.02037.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Oliveira M, Gubert G, Roman S, Kempka A, Prestes R. Meat quality of chicken breast subjected to different thawing methods. Rev Bras Cienc Avic. 2015;17(2):165–71. doi: 10.1590/1516-635x1702165-172 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Rahman MH, Hossain MM, Rahman SME, Amin MR, Oh D-H. Evaluation of physicochemical deterioration and lipid oxidation of beef muscle affected by freeze-thaw cycles. Korean J Food Sci Anim Resour. 2015;35(6):772–82. doi: 10.5851/kosfa.2015.35.6.772 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Wazir H, Chay S, Zarei M, Hussin F, Mustapha N, Wan Ibadullah W, et al. Effects of storage time and temperature on lipid oxidation and protein co-oxidation of low-moisture shredded meat products. Antioxidants. 2019;8(10):486. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Al-Dalali S, Li C, Xu B. Effect of frozen storage on the lipid oxidation, protein oxidation, and flavor profile of marinated raw beef meat. Food Chem. 2022;376:131881. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Soyer A, Özalp B, Dalmış Ü, Bilgin V. Effects of freezing temperature and duration of frozen storage on lipid and protein oxidation in chicken meat. Food Chem. 2010;120(4):1025–30. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.11.042 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Hu C, Xie J. The effect of multiple freeze-thaw cycles on the microstructure and quality of Trachurus murphyi. Foods. 2021;10(6):1350. doi: 10.3390/foods10061350 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Nedwell D. Effect of low temperature on microbial growth: lowered affinity for substrates limits growth at low temperature. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 1999;30(2):101–11. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.1999.tb00639.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Wenjiao F, Yongkui Z, Yunchuan C, Junxiu S, Yuwen Y. TBARS predictive models of pork sausages stored at different temperatures. Meat Sci. 2014;96(1):1–4. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.06.025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Wang Z, He Z, Zhang D, Li H, Wang Z. Using oxidation kinetic models to predict the quality indices of rabbit meat under different storage temperatures. Meat Sci. 2020;162:108042. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2019.108042 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.You Y, Kang T, Jun S. Control of ice nucleation for subzero food preservation. Food Eng Rev. 2020;13(1):15–35. doi: 10.1007/s12393-020-09211-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Zhang M, Li F, Diao X, Kong B, Xia X. Moisture migration, microstructure damage and protein structure changes in porcine longissimus muscle as influenced by multiple freeze-thaw cycles. Meat Sci. 2017;133:10–8. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.05.019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Dang D, Bastarrachea L, Martini S, Matarneh S. Crystallization behavior and quality of frozen meat. Foods. 2021;10(11):2707. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Penfold WJ. On the nature of bacterial lag. J Hyg (Lond). 1914;14(2):215–41. doi: 10.1017/s0022172400005817 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Dave D, Ghaly A, . Meat spoilage mechanisms and preservation techniques: a critical review. Am J Agric Biol Sci. 2011;6(4):486–510. [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Medić H, Djurkin Kušec I, Pleadin J, Kozačinski L, Njari B, Hengl B, et al. The impact of frozen storage duration on physical, chemical and microbiological properties of pork. Meat Sci. 2018;140:119–27. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.03.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Sechley TH, Strickland D, Norris DR. Linking the availability of cached food to climate change: an experimental test of the hoard-rot hypothesis. Can J Zool. 2015;93(6):411–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Succar J, Hayakawa K. A method to determine initial freezing point of foods. J Food Sci. 1990;55(6):1711–3. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1990.tb03606.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.van Els P, Cicero C, Klicka J. High latitudes and high genetic diversity: phylogeography of a widespread boreal bird, the gray jay (Perisoreus canadensis). Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2012;63(2):456–65. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2012.01.019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Graham BA, Szabo I, Cicero C, Strickland D, Woods J, Coneybeare H, et al. Habitat and climate influence hybridization among three genetically distinct Canada jay (Perisoreus canadensis) morphotypes in an avian hybrid zone complex. Heredity (Edinb). 2023;131(5–6):361–73. doi: 10.1038/s41437-023-00652-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Strickland D, Kielstra B, Ryan Norris D. Experimental evidence for a novel mechanism driving variation in habitat quality in a food-caching bird. Oecologia. 2011;167(4):943–50. doi: 10.1007/s00442-011-2040-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Salehi B, Upadhyay S, Erdogan Orhan I, Kumar Jugran A, Jayaweera LD, Dias A, et al. Therapeutic potential of α- and β-Pinene: a miracle gift of nature. Biomolecules. 2019;9(11):738. doi: 10.3390/biom9110738 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Zhu S, Ramaswamy H, Simpson B. Effect of high-pressure versus conventional thawing on color, drip loss and texture of Atlantic salmon frozen by different methods. LWT - Food Sci Technol. 2004;37(3):291–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Rahman MH, Hossain MM, Rahman SME, Hashem MA, Oh D-H. Effect of repeated freeze-thaw cycles on beef quality and safety. Korean J Food Sci Anim Resour. 2014;34(4):482–95. doi: 10.5851/kosfa.2014.34.4.482 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Lv Y, Xie J. Effects of freeze–thaw cycles on water migration, microstructure and protein oxidation in cuttlefish. Foods. 2021;10(11):2576. doi: 10.3390/foods10112576 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing [Internet]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2024. Available from: https://www.R-project.org/. [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Hughes J, Beiner D. reghelper: Helper functions of regression analysis [Internet]. 2023. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=reghelper [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Lenth RV. emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means [Internet]. 2024. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Coates KJ, Beattie JC, Morgan IR, Widders PR. The contribution of carcass contamination and the boning process to microbial spoilage of aerobically stored pork. Food Microbiol. 1995;12:49–54. doi: 10.1016/s0740-0020(95)80078-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Devi R, Rasane P, Kaur S, Singh J. Meat and meat losses: influence on meat quality. Int J Res Anal Rev. 2019;6:762–86. [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Pham Q, Lowry P, Fleming A, Willix J, Fitzgerald C. Temperatures and microbial growth in meat blocks undergoing air thawing. Int J Refrig. 1994;17(4):281–7. [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Ben Abdallah M, Marchello J, Ahmad H. Effect of freezing and microbial growth on myoglobin derivatives of beef. J Agric Food Chem. 1999;47(10):4093–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Damdam AN, Alzahrani A, Salah L, Salama KN. Effects of UV-C irradiation and vacuum sealing on the shelf-life of beef, chicken and salmon fillets. Foods. 2023;12(3):606. doi: 10.3390/foods12030606 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Kataoka A, Wang H, Elliott PH, Whiting RC, Hayman MM. Growth of (Listeria monocytogenes) in thawed frozen foods. J Food Prot. 2017;80(3):447–53. doi: 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-16-397R [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Price DT, Alfaro RI, Brown KJ, Flannigan MD, Fleming RA, Hogg EH, et al. Anticipating the consequences of climate change for Canada’s boreal forest ecosystems. Environ Rev. 2013;21(4):322–65. [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Akhtar S, Khan M, Faiz F. Effect of thawing on frozen meat quality: a comprehensive review. Pak J Food Sci. 2013;23(4):198–211. [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Ottestad S, Enersen G, Wold JP. Effect of freezing temperature on the color of frozen salmon. J Food Sci. 2011;76(7):S423–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2011.02313.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Szymonska J, Wodnicka K. Effect of multiple freezing and thawing on the surface and functional properties of granular potato starch. Food Hydrocoll. 2005;19(4):753–60. [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Coombs CEO, Holman BWB, Friend MA, Hopkins DL. Long-term red meat preservation using chilled and frozen storage combinations: a review. Meat Sci. 2017;125:84–94. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.11.025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Ashby B, James G, Kramer A. Effects of freezing and packaging methods on shrinkage of hams in frozen storage. J Food Sci. 1973;38(2):254–7. [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Lin M, Al-Holy M, Mousavi-Hesary M, Al-Qadiri H, Cavinato A, Rasco B. Rapid and quantitative detection of the microbial spoilage in chicken meat by diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (600-1100 nm). Lett Appl Microbiol. 2004;39(2):148–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Yasui T, Ishioroshi M, Nakano H, Samejima K. Changes in shear modulus, ultrastructure and spin-spin relaxation times of water associated with heat-induced gelation of myosin. J Food Sci. 1979;44(4):1201–4. [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Rao W, Li X, Wang Z, Yang Y, Qu Y, Gao Y, et al. Dense phase carbon dioxide combined with mild heating induced myosin denaturation, texture improvement and gel properties of sausage. J Food Process Eng. 2017;40(2):e12404. [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Samejima K, Ishioroshi M, Yasui T. Relative roles of the head and tail portions of the molecule in heat‐induced gelation of myosin. J Food Sci. 1981;46(5):1412–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Wei L, Cao L, Xiong S, You J, Hu Y, Liu R. Effects of pH on self-assembly of silver carp myosin at low temperature. Food Biosci. 2019;30:100420. doi: 10.1016/j.fbio.2019.100420 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Derbyshire R, Norris DR, Hobson KA, Strickland D. Isotopic spiking and food dye experiments provide evidence that nestling Canada Jays (Perisoreus canadensis) receive cached food from their parents. Can J Zool. 2019;97(4):368–75. [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Swift KN, Williams EJ, Marzluff JM. An observational analysis of Canada Jay (Perisoreus canadensis) foraging and caching ecology in Denali National Park and Preserve, Alaska, USA. Can J Zool. 2022;100(2):133–46. doi: 10.1139/cjz-2021-0053 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Ayman Swelum

25 Nov 2024

PONE-D-24-39177Experimental evidence demonstrating how freeze-thaw patterns affect spoilage of perishable cached foodPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Karen Ong,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

ACADEMIC EDITOR: Please reply for all reviewers questions and follow all their suggestions. 

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 09 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ayman A. Swelum

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section: [The authors have declared that there are no competing interests.]. Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: [All data are contained within the manuscript and supporting information files.] Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition). For example, authors should submit the following data: - The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported; - The values used to build graphs; - The points extracted from images for analysis. Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study. If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories. If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access.

4. Please include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well.

5. We notice that your supplementary [Figure S1] are included in the manuscript file. Please remove them and upload them with the file type 'Supporting Information'. Please ensure that each Supporting Information file has a legend listed in the manuscript after the references list.

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: 1. Abstract has to be written in a manner that encompass why, how and what obtained from the current research.

2. Methods has to be written clearly to be replicable

3. The findings have to be presented up to the standard.

4. Discussion is good but need improvement.

5. Conclusion must be based on the findings of the current study.

Reviewer #2: 1. The title is ok and related to the manuscript.

2. Abstract is quite good. Maybe can include some method.

3. Introduction is ok.

4. Methods are well explained.

5. Results are ok. The graphs and diagrams can be view publicly.

6. The discussion is quite good.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Reviewer comment.docx

pone.0319043.s010.docx (11.6KB, docx)
PLoS One. 2025 Apr 4;20(4):e0319043. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319043.r003

Author response to Decision Letter 0


6 Jan 2025

Thank you for these comments. Please see below for our responses (text following "Author response:") to each of the comments provided by the two reviewers. We think the manuscript has been improved considerably.

Thank you,

Karen Ong, Ryan Norris

Reviewer #1:

1. Abstract has to be written in a manner that encompass why, how and what obtained from the current research.

Author response: We have extensively revised the abstract to make sure all of these elements are properly communicated. Specifically, we have added more information on the rationale for the experiment, as well as additional methodological details.

2. Methods has to be written clearly to be replicable

Author response: We have also made extensive revisions the methods to improve clarity. We have also added tables in the supplementary material that show hourly programming schedules for all experiments.

3. The findings have to be presented up to the standard.

Author response: Our apologies. We are not sure what the reviewer means here. We have edited the results to improve clarity, but the presentation of the results includes all necessarily statistical moments and output from the models.

4. Discussion is good but need improvement.

Author response: Given the reviewer has not been specific here, we have carefully gone through the discussion to improve clarity in several places. As a result, we think the discussion has improved considerably.

5. Conclusion must be based on the findings of the current study.

Author response: All our conclusions are based on the results of the experiments presented in this paper.

Reviewer #2:

1. The title is ok and related to the manuscript.

Author response: Thank you.

2. Abstract is quite good. Maybe can include some method.

Author response: Thank you. As suggested, we have included additional information in the abstract about the methods used in our experiments.

3. Introduction is ok.

Author response: Thank you.

4. Methods are well explained.

Author response: Thank you.

5. Results are ok. The graphs and diagrams can be view publicly.

Author response: Thank you.

6. The discussion is quite good.

Author response: Thank you. We appreciate the positive comments.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Ong_Norris_Response_Letter.docx

pone.0319043.s012.docx (15.8KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Ayman Swelum

26 Jan 2025

Experimental evidence demonstrating how freeze-thaw patterns affect spoilage of perishable cached food

PONE-D-24-39177R1

Dear Dr. Ong,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Ayman A Swelum

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Ayman Swelum

PONE-D-24-39177R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ong,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Professor Ayman A Swelum

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. The number of freeze-thaw events in Oct., Nov. and Dec. from 2004 – 2019.

    Historical climate data were obtained from Environment Canada at the Algonquin Provincial Park East Gate weather station (45°32’N, 78°54’W; https://weather.gc.ca/city/pages/on-29_metric_e.html).

    (PDF)

    pone.0319043.s001.pdf (107.3KB, pdf)
    S2 Table. The summary of freeze and thaw phases in the month of Nov. from Algonquin Provincial Park East Gate weather station (45°32’N, 78°54’W; 2004 − 2019).

    The number indicates the number of individual freeze-thaw events. Duration indicates the average duration (hrs) of a freeze or thaw in a given year. The average minimum and maximum temperatures provide the average lowest temperature reached in freezes and highest temperature in thaw events in a given year.

    (PDF)

    pone.0319043.s002.pdf (70.3KB, pdf)
    S3 Table. Hourly programming schedule for the four freezers used in experiment 1 to test the predictions of the ‘exacerbation hypothesis’.

    Each freezer was dedicated to simulating either the early freeze-thaw treatment, late-freeze-thaw treatment, low temperature control (held at −4.9 °C, no freeze-thaw events), or high temperature control (held at 1.1 °C, no freeze-thaw events). All simulations were 720 hours long and both treatments had eight freeze-thaw events each.

    (PDF)

    pone.0319043.s003.pdf (454.7KB, pdf)
    S4 Table. Hourly programming schedule for all freezers used in experiment 2 to test the predictions of the ‘frequency hypothesis’ and the ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’.

    Each freezer was dedicated to simulating either the low frequency freeze-thaw treatment (8 freeze-thaw events), medium frequency freeze-thaw treatment (15 freeze-thaw events), high frequency freeze-thaw treatment (22 freeze-thaw events), or the control (held at −1.6 °C, no freeze-thaw events). All simulations were 720 hours long and all treatment groups had an identical total duration below freezing (368 hrs) and above-freezing (352 hrs) post-freeze.

    (PDF)

    pone.0319043.s004.pdf (460.1KB, pdf)
    S5 Table. Hourly programming schedule for all freezers used in experiment 3 to test the predictions of the ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’ and ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’.

    Each freezer was dedicated to simulating either the average freeze-thaw treatment (freezing and thawing rate of 0.8 °C/hr), mild freeze treatment (freezing rate of 0.4 °C/hr; thawing rate of 0.8 °C/hr), mild thaw treatment (freezing rate of 0.8 °C/hr; thawing rate of 0.4 °C/hr), low temperature control (held at −4.9 °C, no freeze-thaw events), or high temperature control (held at 1.1 °C, no freeze-thaw events). All simulations were 720 hours long and each treatment group had eight freeze-thaw events.

    (PDF)

    pone.0319043.s005.pdf (505.6KB, pdf)
    S6 Table. Weight loss of caches in experiment 1 that tested the predictions of the ‘exacerbation hypothesis’.

    Caches consisted of 1.20g of raw chicken breast placed between two pieces of black spruce (Picea mariana) bark.

    (PDF)

    pone.0319043.s006.pdf (63KB, pdf)
    S7 Table. Weight loss of caches in experiment 2 that tested the predictions of the ‘frequency hypothesis’ and the ‘continuous thaw hypothesis’.

    Caches consisted of 1.20g of raw chicken breast placed between two pieces of black spruce (Picea mariana) bark.

    (PDF)

    pone.0319043.s007.pdf (91.5KB, pdf)
    S8 Table. Weight loss of caches in experiment 3 that tested the predictions of the ‘freeze intensity hypothesis’ and ‘thaw intensity hypothesis’.

    Caches consisted of 1.20g of raw chicken breast placed between two pieces of black spruce (Picea mariana) bark.

    (PDF)

    pone.0319043.s008.pdf (67.8KB, pdf)
    S1 Fig. Correlation coefficients between November climate variables calculated based on the angular order of eigenvectors.

    *  indicates p < 0.05, ** indicates p <  0.01, and *** indicates p <  0.001. ‘Total freeze duration (hrs)’ is total hours below freezing point for a given year, ‘number of freeze-thaws’ is total number of freeze-thaw events that occurred in Nov. for a given year, ‘mean min. temp. (freeze)’ is mean of the lowest temperatures reached across individual freeze phases for a given year, ‘mean hourly temp.’ is mean temperature of the 720 hrs for each year, ‘total thaw duration (hrs)’ is total hours above freezing point for a given year following the first freeze, ‘mean max. temp. (thaw)’ is mean of the maximum temperatures reach across individual thaw phases for a given year, ‘mean thaw duration (hrs)’ is mean duration in hours for an individual thaw for a given year, and ‘mean freeze duration (hrs)’ is mean duration in hours of individual freeze phases for a given year. Calculations were based on hourly climate data for the month of Nov. from Algonquin Provincial Park East Gate (45°32’N, 78°54’W; 2004 − 2019).

    (TIF)

    pone.0319043.s009.tif (180.2KB, tif)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Reviewer comment.docx

    pone.0319043.s010.docx (11.6KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Ong_Norris_Response_Letter.docx

    pone.0319043.s012.docx (15.8KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All data are contained within the manuscript and supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES