Table 1.
Effect of different tumbling marination treatments on the product yield, pH, meat colour, pressing loss, cooking loss and shear force value of prepared pork chops
| Items | CG | SM | CT | IT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product yield (%) | 72.40±0.32d | 77.73±0.09c | 81.88±0.34a | 79.55±0.09b |
| pH | 5.50±0.07c | 5.52±0.02bc | 5.94±0.08a | 5.67±0.02b |
| L* | 41.73±0.27c | 45.94±0.31b | 45.59±0.49b | 47.29±0.44a |
| a* | 5.85±0.17c | 7.60±0.40b | 6.38±0.16c | 8.88±0.12a |
| b* | 0.47±0.01c | 1.00±0.08b | 2.27±0.04a | 0.36±0.04c |
| Pressing loss (%) | 43.36±0.43a | 41.21±0.31b | 37.67±0.30c | 38.84±0.48c |
| Cooking loss (%) | 27.33±0.57a | 23.78±0.36b | 14.14±0.53c | 22.73±0.14b |
| Shear force value (N) | 27.75±0.21a | 21.07±0.42b | 12.41±0.56d | 14.93±0.24c |
CG, control group; SM, conventional static marination; CT, vacuum continuous tumbling marination; IT, vacuum intermittent tumbling marination.
a,b,c,d
Means within the same row with no common superscript differ significantly (p<0.05). Values are reported as means±standard error of three replicates.