. 2021 Sep 20;79:105759. doi: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2021.105759

Table 3.

Effect of different tumbling methods on tumbling yield (%), cooking loss (%) of pork and protein content (mg/mL).

	Treat time (min)		Ultrasound power (W)				SE	P-Values
		ST	UAT-100	UAT-300	UAT-500	UAT-700		Power	Time	Power × Time
Tumbling Yield (%)	60	9.28^by	10.17^bx	13.39^ax	13.22^ay	9.25^by	0.77	<0.001	<0.001	0.0044
Tumbling Yield (%)	120	12.79^cx	11.88^dcx	14.24^bx	17.55^ax	11.20^dx	0.77	<0.001	<0.001	0.0044
Cooking loss (%)	60	22.04^ax	20.95^abx	19.71^bcx	18.93^cx	15.05^dx	1.21	<0.001	0.0027	0.0018
Cooking loss (%)	120	18.93^ay	18.15^aby	17.68^abx	16.55^by	17.65^abx	1.21	<0.001	0.0027	0.0018
Protein Content (mg/mL)	60	7.91^aby	9.36^ax	8.20^aby	8.92^ay	6.50^by	0.62	0.013	<0.001	0.073
Protein Content (mg/mL)	120	9.84^bx	10.04^bx	10.92^ax	11.38^ax	10.08^bx	0.62	0.013	<0.001	0.073

¹P-Values indicate the level of significance including high-intensity ultrasound power, treatment time and their interaction.

²SE: standard error.

³a-d in the same row indicate a significant difference between ultrasound power (P < 0.05).

⁴x-z in the same column indicate significant difference between treatment time (P < 0.05).