An investigation of the effect of rapid slurry chilling on blown pack spoilage of vacuum-packaged beef primals
Letters in Applied Microbiology, ISSN: 1472-765X, Vol: 64, Issue: 2, Page: 177-181
2017
- 3Citations
- 8Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations3
- Citation Indexes2
- CrossRef2
- Policy Citations1
- Policy Citation1
- Captures8
- Readers8
Article Description
The aim of this study was to investigate if rapid slurry chilling would retard or prevent blown pack spoilage (BPS) of vacuum-packaged beef primals. Beef primals were inoculated with Clostridium estertheticum subspp. estertheticum (DSMZ 8809), C. estertheticum subspp. laramenise (DSMZ 14864) and C. gasigenes (DSMZ 12272), and vacuum-packaged with and without heat shrinkage (90°C for 3 s). These packs were then subjected to immediate chilling in an ice slurry or using conventional blast chilling systems and stored at 2°C for up to 100 days. The onset and progress of BPS was monitored using the following scale; 0‑no gas bubbles in drip; 1‑gas bubbles in drip; 2‑loss of vacuum; 3‑‘blown’; 4‑presence of sufficient gas inside the packs to produce pack distension and 5‑tightly stretched, ‘overblown’ packs/packs leaking. Rapid slurry chilling (as compared to conventional chilling) did not significantly affect (P > 0.05) the time to the onset or progress of BPS. It was therefore concluded that rapid chilling of vacuum-packaged beef primals, using an ice slurry system, may not be used as a control intervention to prevent or retard blown pack spoilage. Significance and Impact of the Study: This study adds to our growing understanding of blown pack spoilage of vacuum-packaged beef primals and suggests that rapid chilling of vacuum-packaged beef primals is not a control option for the beef industry. The results suggest that neither eliminating the heat shrinkage step nor rapid chilling of vacuum-packaged beef retard the time to blown pack spoilage.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85010382993&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/lam.12703; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27981595; https://academic.oup.com/lambio/article/64/2/177/6699036; https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/lam.12703; https://academic.oup.com/lambio/article-abstract/64/2/177/6699036?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know