Table 2.
Effect of different PEF treatments on pH and color content of chicken meat samples.
| Treatment | Code | Electric Field Strength (kV/cm) | Pulse Number | pH | L* | a* | b* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Control | – | – | 5.98 ± 0.12 | 42.51 ± 0.36 ab | 1.58 ± 0.08 | 6.12 ± 0.71 |
| Low-PEF | LPEF-25 | 1.5 ± 0.13 | 25 | 5.96 ± 0.01 | 45.17 ± 0.85 ab | 1.29 ± 0.17 | 6.75 ± 0.46 |
| LPEF-50 | 1.5 ± 0.17 | 50 | 5.93 ± 0.02 | 45.78 ± 0.94 a | 0.93 ± 0.24 | 5.78 ± 0.31 | |
| LPEF-100 | 1.5 ± 0.12 | 100 | 5.95 ± 0.03 | 43.12 ± 1.04 ab | 1.22 ± 0.22 | 5.98 ± 0.6 | |
| High-PEF | HPEF-25 | 3.3 ± 0.15 | 25 | 5.91 ± 0.02 | 43.04 ± 0.56 ab | 1.17 ± 0.2 | 6.59 ± 0.51 |
| HPEF-50 | 3.3 ± 0.16 | 50 | 5.93 ± 0.03 | 42.26 ± 0.55 b | 1.38 ± 0.11 | 6.82 ± 0.41 | |
| HPEF-100 | 3.3 ± 0.10 | 100 | 5.90 ± 0.03 | 43.38 ± 0.71 ab | 1.04 ± 0.18 | 6.19 ± 0.22 |
The values are the predicted means ± SD. Within each column, the means have different pulsed electric field treatments. Superscripts are significantly different at p < 0.05.