JFS C: Food Chemistry
C: Food Chemistry
Effect of Antioxidant Application Methods
on the Color, Lipid Oxidation, and Volatiles
of Irradiated Ground Beef
H.A. ISMAIL, E.J. LEE, K.Y. KO, H.D. PAIK, AND D.U. AHN
ABSTRACT: Four antioxidant treatments (none, 0.05% ascorbic acid, 0.01% α-tocopherol + 0.01% sesamol, and
0.05% ascorbic acid + 0.01% α-tocopherol + 0.01% sesamol) were applied to ground beef using either mixing or
spraying method. The meat samples were placed on Styrofoam trays, irradiated at 0 or 2.5 kGy, and then stored
for 7 d at 4 ◦ C. Color, lipid oxidation, volatiles, oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), and carbon monoxide (CO)
production were determined at 0, 3, and 7 d of storage. Irradiation increased lipid oxidation of ground beef with
control and ascorbic acid treatments after 3 d of storage. α-Tocopherol + sesamol and ascorbic acid + α-tocopherol
+ sesamol treatments were effective in slowing down lipid oxidation in ground beef during storage regardless of
application methods, but mixing was better than the spraying method. Irradiation lowered L*-value and a*-value
of ground beef. Storage had no effect on lightness but redness decreased with storage. Ascorbic acid was the most
effective in maintaining redness of ground beef followed by ascorbic acid + α-tocopherol + sesamol. Irradiation
and storage reduced the b*-value of ground beef. Irradiation lowered ORP of ground beef regardless of antioxidants
application methods, but ORP was lower in beef with mixing than spraying method. Beef sprayed with antioxidants
produced more hydrocarbons and alcohols than the mixing application, but ascorbic acid + α-tocopherol + sesamol
treatment was effective in reducing the amount of volatiles produced by irradiation. Therefore, mixing was better
than the spraying method in preventing lipid oxidation and maintaining color of irradiated ground beef.
Keywords: antioxidants, application methods, ground beef, irradiation, quality parameters
Introduction
G
round beef products represent about 44% of total fresh beef
available for consumption in the U.S. (Breidenstein and
Williams 1986). Meat color is one of the most important parameters
that determine and affect consumer purchasing decisions. In retail
cases, displaying meat under high-intensity lights accelerates the
formation of metmyoglobin, which produces unattractive brown
color (Faustman and Cassens 1990). Because of meat discoloration,
retailers lose more than a billion dollars every year (Hermel 1993).
Irradiation negatively impacts ground beef color by developing undesirable greenish or brownish gray color (Nanke and others 1998;
Kim and others 2002a; Nam and Ahn 2003a).
Unlike popular belief, ground beef oxidizes faster than ground
pork or poultry (Nam and others 2001; Kim and others 2002a).
Under aerobic conditions, irradiation accelerates lipid oxidation
in fresh raw pork and beef patties despite their intrinsic antioxidant activities (Ahn and others 1998a,b; Kim and others 2002b).
Oxidative rancidity in food products are commonly measured by
the 2-thiobarbituric acid (TBA) test, and sensory analysis of rancid odor shows strong correlations with TBA values in fresh and
cooked ground beef (Tarladgis and others 1960; Poste and others
1986; Brewer and Harbers 1992).
MS 20080185 Submitted 3/12/2008, Accepted 9/25/2008. Author Ismail, Lee,
Ko, and Ahn are with Dept. of Animal Science, Iowa State Univ., Ames, Iowa
50011-3150, U.S.A. Author Paik is with Div. of Animal Life Science, Konkuk
Univ., Seoul, Korea, 143-701. Direct inquiries to author Ahn (E-mail:
duahn@iastate.edu).
R
Institute of Food Technologists
doi: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2008.00991.x
C 2008
Further reproduction without permission is prohibited
Food antioxidants are used in fresh and further processed meat
to prevent oxidative rancidity and improve color stability (Xiong
and others 1993; Sanchez-Escalante and others 2001). Some phenolic antioxidants such as vitamin E have free-radical-scavenging
properties and stop free-radical reactions in meat during storage
(Gray and others 1996; Morrissey and others 1998). Therefore, the
combinations of phenolic antioxidants such as gallate, sesamol,
and tocopherol were effective in reducing the oxidative reactions
in irradiated pork by scavenging free radicals produced by irradiation (Nam and Ahn 2003a). Ascorbic acid is a reducing agent, which
prevents color changes in irradiated and nonirradiated ground beef
during storage (Wheeler and others 1996; Lee and others 1999;
Giroux and others 2001; Nam and Ahn 2003a).
In addition to color changes and accelerated lipid oxidation,
irradiation produces off-odor volatiles in meat. Sulfur compounds
are the major volatile compounds responsible for irradiation offodor, and are produced mainly by radiolysis of sulfur-containing
amino acids and are different from those of lipid oxidation (Ahn
and others 1999a, 2000, 2001). Under aerobic conditions, the sulfur
compounds were highly volatile and evaporated easily. However,
under vacuum conditions, these compounds remained in meat
(Ahn and others 2001). Although aerobic packaging was very effective in eliminating the sulfur volatiles produced by irradiation,
the amounts of volatile aldehydes in irradiated ground beef significantly increased during storage unless antioxidant additives were
added. Therefore, when irradiated beef is aerobically stored, the
generation of lipid oxidation products is more concern than the
S-volatiles (Ahn and Nam 2004). The objective of this study was
to determine the effect of antioxidant application methods on the
color, lipid oxidation, and off-odor volatiles of ground beef.
Vol. 74, Nr. 1, 2009—JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE
C25
Antioxidant application methods on irradiated beef quality . . .
Materials and Methods
sis, ORP, and CO production were determined at 0, 3, and 7 d of
storage.
Sample preparation
C: Food Chemistry
Four blocks of beef chuck from 4 different animals were purchased from different grocery stores. Each meat block was trimmed
off any visible fat, ground separately through a 6-mm plate and
a 3-mm plate, and used as a replication. Eight batches of 4 antioxidant treatments were prepared. Four batches of them were
used for mixing and the other 4 batches for spraying method.
The antioxidant treatments were: (1) control, (2) 0.05% L-ascorbic
acid (Fisher Scientific, Fair Lawn, N.J., U.S.A.), (3) 0.01% dl-αtocopherol (Aldrich Chemical Co., Milwaukee, Wis., U.S.A.) + 0.01%
sesamol (3,4-methylenedioxyphenol, final conc.; Sigma, St. Louis,
Mo., U.S.A.), (4) 0.05% L-ascorbic acid + 0.01% dl-α-tocopherol +
0.01% sesamol. All the antioxidant treatments were on w/w basis
and final concentrations. For the mixing application, each additive
was added to the ground meat and then mixed for 2 min in a bowl
mixer (Model KSM 90; Kitchen Aid Inc., St. Joseph, Mich., U.S.A.).
Ground beef patties (approximately 50 g) were prepared by hand,
placed individually on Styrofoam trays, and wrapped with clear
stretch, oxygen-permeable meat film RMF-61 Hy (Borden Div., Borden Packaging and Industrial Products Inc., North Andover, Mass.,
U.S.A.), using a single-roll overwrapper (Model 600A, Heat Sealing Equipment Manufacturing Co., Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A.). A dlα-tocopherol was dissolve in corn oil first, and then oil emulsion
(water-in-oil) was prepared using water or the aqueous solutions of
ascorbate and/or sesamol before use.
For spraying method, ground beef patties were placed on large
metal trays, and sprayed with antioxidant treatments on both sides
using an electrostatic spraying device (Electrostatic Spraying System, Inc., Watkinsville, Ga., U.S.A.). After spraying, beef patties were
placed individually on Styrofoam trays and wrapped as in mixing
application. Prepared patties were stored overnight at 4 ◦ C, and irradiated the next day morning. The additive treatments were applied as solution form: ascorbic acid and sesamol were dissolved
in distilled water, while tocopherol was dissolved first in corn oil,
and then oil emulsion was prepared using the aqueous solutions
of ascorbic acid and/or sesamol. The same amounts of water and
corn oil were added to all other treatments. For both application
methods, 3 sets of samples were prepared and each set was used
for color and chemical analyses at each storage time. For both mixing and spray applications, half of the patties from each antioxidant
treatment was used for nonirradiated and the other half was used
for irradiated meat.
Ionizing radiation
For irradiation treatment, ground beef patties from each antioxidant application was irradiated at 2.5 kGy using a linear accelerator facility (Circe IIIR; Thomson CSF Linac, St. Aubin, France) with
10 MeV of energy and 5.6 KW of power level. The average dose rate
was 68.7 kGy/min. Alanine dosimeter were placed on the top and
bottom surfaces of a sample and were read using a 104 Electron
Paramagnetic Resonance Instrument (Bruker Instruments Inc., Billerica, Mass., U.S.A.) to check the absorbed dose. The dose range
absorbed by meat samples was 2.45 to 2.95 kGy (max/min ratio was
1.20). The nonirradiated control samples were exposed to ambient
temperature of linear acceleration facility while other samples were
being irradiated. After irradiation, the irradiated and nonirradiated meat samples were immediately returned to a 4 ◦ C cold room
where they were displayed in a single layer on illuminated racks under standard fluorescent light (1000 lux, Philips, fluorescent light
40 W Cool White) for 7 d. Incident light reaching the sample surface
had an intensity of 2018 lux. Color, lipid oxidation, volatile analyC26
JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE—Vol. 74, Nr. 1, 2009
Thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances
(TBARS) measurement
Lipid oxidation was determined using a TBARS method (Ahn
and others 1999a). Five grams of ground beef were weighed into
a 50-mL test tube and homogenized with 50 μL butylated hydroxytoluene (7.2% in ethanol) and 15 mL deionized distilled water
(DDW) using a Polytron homogenizer (Type PT 10/35, Brinkman
Instruments Inc., Westbury N.Y., U.S.A.) for 15 s at high speed. One
milliliter of the meat homogenate was transferred to a disposable
test tube (13 × 100 mm) and thiobarbituric acid/trichloroacetic
acid (15 mM TBA/15% TCA, 2 mL) was added. The mixture was
vortex mixed and incubated in a boiling water bath for 15 min to
develop color. Then samples were cooled in ice-water for 10 min,
mixed again, and centrifuged for 15 min at 2500 × g at 4 ◦ C. The absorbance of the resulting supernatant solution was determined at
531 nm against a blank containing 1 mL DDW and 2 mL TBA/TCA
solution. The amounts of TBARS were expressed as milligrams of
malonaldehyde (MDA) per kilogram of meat.
Table 1 --- TBARS values of beef mixed or sprayed with
different additives during storage at 4 ◦ C.
Mixing
Non-IR
Spraying
IR
SEM
Non-IR
IR
SEM
(mg MDA/kg meat)
Day 0
Control
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 3
Control
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 7
Control
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
0.87
0.33y
0.29
0.30
0.14
0.91a
0.50bx
0.34b
0.35b
0.12
0.26
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.97a
0.53by
0.42b
0.47b
0.12
0.75a
0.83ax
0.47b
0.55b
0.05
0.16
0.06
0.05
0.04
1.27a
0.45by
0.26b
0.31b
0.20
2.00a
1.06bx
0.30c
0.33c
0.20
0.38
0.11
0.03
0.03
0.89ay
0.76aby
0.37b
0.37b
0.11
1.94ax
2.29ax
0.45b
0.46b
0.19
0.25
0.17
0.04
0.03
1.55
0.51y
0.31
0.30z
0.30
3.06a
1.68bx
0.36b
0.36b
0.37
0.66
0.15
0.03
0.03
1.06ay
0.85aby
0.42b
0.46b
0.14
3.01ax
3.85ax
0.45b
0.51b
0.35
0.31
0.43
0.05
0.04
Application (A)
Irradiation (IR)
Additives (AD)
Storage (S)
A × IR
A × AD
A×S
IR × AD
IR × S
AD × S
A × IR × AD
A × IR × S
A × AD × S
IR × AD × S
A × IR × AD × S
DF
F -value
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
3
2
6
3
2
6
6
6
11.88
71.35
85.12
33.26
5.58
10.19
0.71
19.94
18.31
11.32
3.37
1.92
1.70
6.28
0.94
P
0.0007
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0195
0.0001
0.4948
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0203
0.1510
0.1242
0.0001
0.4698
a –c
Values with different letters within a column of each storage period are
significantly different (P < 0.05).
x –y
Values with different letters within a row of each application are significantly
different (P < 0.05).
Non-IR = nonirradiated samples (0 kGy); IR = irradiated samples (2.5 kGy);
Cont. = control; A = ascorbic acid; E = vitamin E; S = sesamol; and
SEM = standard error of the means (n = 4).
Antioxidant application methods on irradiated beef quality . . .
A purge-and-trap apparatus (Solatek 72 and Concentrator 3100;
Tekmar-Dohrmann, Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S.A.) connected to a gas
chromatograph/mass spectrometer (HP 6890/HP 5973; HewlettPackard Co., Wilmington, Del., U.S.A.) was used to analyze volatiles
produced. The ground beef sample (3 g) was placed in a 40-mL
sample vial, and the vial was flushed with helium gas (40 psi) for
5 s. The maximum waiting time of a sample in a refrigerated (4 ◦ C)
holding tray was less than 4 h to minimize oxidative changes before
analysis (Ahn and others 2001). The meat sample was purged with
helium gas (40 mL/min) for 14 min at 40 ◦ C. Volatiles were trapped
using a Tenax-charcoal-silica column (Tekmar-Dohrmann) and
desorbed for 2 min at 225 ◦ C, focused in a cryofocusing module
(−80 ◦ C), and then thermally desorbed into a capillary column for
60 s at 225 ◦ C.
An HP-624 column (8.5 m × 0.25 mm i.d., 1.4 μm nominal), an
HP-1 column (60 m × 0.25 mm i.d., 0.25 μm nominal; HewlettPackard Co.), and an HP-Wax column (6.5 m × 0.25 mm i.d.,
0.25 μm nominal) were connected using zero dead-volume column
connectors (J &W Scientific, Folsom, Calif., U.S.A.). Ramped oven
temperature was used to improve volatile separation. The initial
oven temperature of 30 ◦ C was held for 6 min. After that, the oven
temperature was increased to 60 ◦ C at 5 ◦ C/min, increased to 180 ◦ C
at 20 ◦ C/min, increased to 210 ◦ C at 15 ◦ C/min, and then was held
for 5 min at the temperature. Constant column pressure at 22.5 psi
was maintained. The ionization potential of the mass selective detector (Model 5973; Hewlett-Packard Co.) was 70 eV, and the scan
range was 19.1 to 400 m/z. Identification of volatiles was achieved
by comparing mass spectral data of samples with those of the Wiley
Library (Hewlett-Packard Co.). Standards were used to confirm the
identification by the mass-selective detector. The area of each peak
was integrated using the ChemStation (Hewlett-Packard Co.), and
the total peak area (pA∗ seconds × 104) was reported as an indicator of volatiles generated from the sample.
Color measurement
The color of meat was measured on the upper and the bottom
surfaces of meat samples using a Labscan spectrophotometer
(Hunter Assoc. Labs Inc., Reston, Va., U.S.A.) that had been
calibrated against white and black reference tiles covered with the
same film as those used for meat samples. CIE L∗ - (lightness),
a∗ - (redness), and b∗ - (yellowness) values were obtained (AMSA
1991) using an illuminant A (light source). Area view and port size
were 0.64 and 1.02 cm, respectively. An average value from 2 random locations on each side, upper and lower, of sample surface was
used for statistical analysis.
Oxidation-reduction potential (ORP)
The method of Moiseeve and Cornforth (1999) was used in determining the change of ORP in meat. A pH/ion meter (Accumet
25, Fisher Scientific) connected to a platinum electrode filled with
a 4 M-KCl solution saturated with AgCl was tightly inserted in the
center of meat sample. To minimize the effect of air, the smallest
possible pore was made before inserting the electrode and recording the ORP readings (microvolts).
Carbon monoxide
To measure carbon monoxide (CO) produced by irradiation,
CO gas was purchased from Aldrich (Milwaukee, Wis., U.S.A.).
The standard gas was analyzed using a gas chromatograph (GC,
Table 2 --- CIE color L∗ -values of beef mixed or sprayed with different additives during storage at 4 ◦ C.
Mixing
Spraying
Non-IR
Day 0
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 3
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 7
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Application (A)
Irradiation (IR)
Additives (AD)
Storage (S)
A × IR
A × AD
A×S
IR × AD
IR
Non-IR
IR
Upper
Lower
Upper
Lower
SEM
Upper
Lower
Upper
Lower
46.00w
45.87w
44.81w
45.3w
0.47
44.93abw
45.75aw
43.5bx
44.64abw
0.42
42.67x
41.87x
40.95y
42.09x
0.49
41.02y
41.05x
40.82y
41.28x
0.56
0.45
0.51
0.43
0.55
45.25w
45.59w
45.35w
45.79w
0.38
44.62w
44.61w
44.62w
44.81w
0.52
41.90x
40.48x
40.35x
40.60x
0.45
38.86y
40.26x
39.66x
41.67x
0.76
0.41
0.57
0.54
0.64
45.49bc
47.46aw
44.48c
46.31abw
0.49
44.63
46.34w
44.60
44.75w
0.68
45.23
45.35wx
43.56
44.91w
0.60
43.85
43.84x
43.09
43.21x
0.52
0.51
0.62
0.70
0.47
43.33b
45.9aw
43.34b
44.71abw
0.46
42.84
44.8w
43.01
44.16wx
0.58
42.09
43.44x
42.56
43.00wx
0.50
42.00
41.23y
41.83
42.47x
0.55
0.56
0.45
0.55
0.53
46.07cwx
45.80a
44.71c
44.11b
0.66
45.47abwx
45.97a
44.08b
43.89b
0.47
46.95aw
46.15a
43.93b
43.40b
0.56
44.66x
45.32
43.61
43.01
0.61
0.58
0.63
0.53
0.57
43.80wx
43.14
41.56
41.81
0.64
42.92abx
44.37a
41.94b
42.86ab
0.51
44.29w
43.48
42.36
42.47
0.55
42.56x
43.57
42.33
42.95
0.48
0.39
0.60
0.55
0.75
DF
F -value
P
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
3
109.83
159.53
5.56
26.64
2.76
1.23
12.62
4.02
0.0001
0.0001
0.0010
0.0001
0.0974
0.2988
0.0001
0.0078
IR × S
AD × S
A × IR × AD
A × IR × S
A × AD × S
IR × AD × S
A × IR × AD × S
DF
F -value
2
6
3
2
6
6
6
66.66
7.38
0.15
1.08
0.81
0.48
0.40
SEM
P
0.0001
0.0001
0.9321
0.3400
0.5623
0.8251
0.8779
a–c
Values
w–y
with different letters within a column of each storage period are significantly different (P < 0.05).
Values with different letters within a row of each application are significantly different (P < 0.05).
Non-IR = nonirradiated samples (0 kGy); IR = irradiated samples (2.5 kGy); Cont = control; A = ascorbic acid; E = vitamin E; S = sesamol; and SEM = standard
error of the means (n = 4).
Vol. 74, Nr. 1, 2009—JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE
C27
C: Food Chemistry
Volatile compounds
Antioxidant application methods on irradiated beef quality . . .
C: Food Chemistry
Model 6890; Hewlett Packard Co., Wilmington, Del., U.S.A.) with a
flame ionization detector (FID). Meat sample (10 g) was placed in a
24-mL glass vial, and the vials were flushed with helium gas (40 psi)
for 5 s to minimize experimental errors due to air incorporation,
then samples were microwaved for 10 s at full power. Ten minutes
after microwave heating, the headspace gas of each sample (200 μL)
was withdrawn using an airtight syringe and injected into a splitless
inlet of a GC (Model 6890; Hewlett Packard Co.). A Carboxen-1006
Plot column (30 m × 0.32 mm id; Supelco, Bellefonte, Pa., U.S.A.)
was used. Helium was used as a carrier gas at a constant flow of
1.8 mL/min and oven conditions were set at 120 ◦ C. A FID equipped
with a nickel catalyst (Hewlett Packard Co.) was used for the methanization of CO, and the temperatures of inlet, detector, and nickel
catalyst were 250, 280, and 375 ◦ C, respectively. Detector (FID) air,
H2, and make-up gas (He) flows were 350, 35, and 40 mL/min, respectively. The identification of CO was achieved using standard
gas, and the area of each peak was integrated by using the Chemstation software (Hewlett Packard Co.). To quantify the amount of gas
released, peak areas (pA × seconds) were converted to the concentration (parts per million) of gas in the sample headspace (14 mL)
using CO 2 concentration (330 ppm) in air.
Statistical analysis
The experiment was an incomplete randomized design with 4
replications. Data were analyzed by the procedures of generalized linear model of SAS (SAS Inst. 1995). Student–Newman–Keuls’
multiple-range test was used to compare the mean values of the
treatments. Mean values and standard error of the means (SEM)
were reported. Significance was defined at P < 0.05. Analysis of
variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the effects of application methods, irradiation, additives and storage period on lipid oxidation, color, CO production, and oxidation-reduction potential of
ground beef.
Results and Discussion
Lipid oxidation
Application method, irradiation, additives, and storage influenced the TBARS values of ground beef (Table 1). In control
samples, irradiation had no effect on lipid oxidation of ground
beef at 0 d regardless of application method. In ascorbate-added
samples, however, irradiation accelerated lipid oxidation during
storage. Ascorbate was effective antioxidant only in nonirradiated ground beef, and addition of ascorbate by mixing was better than spraying method. Spraying of ascorbate was effective
only in nonirradiated ground beef. The effectiveness of ascorbic acid in lowering TBARS values decreased as storage period
increased. Antioxidant combinations (α-tocopherol + sesamol
and ascorbic acid + α-tocopherol + sesamol) were effective
in preventing oxidative changes in irradiated and nonirradiated
ground beef during storage regardless of application methods.
Nam and Ahn (2003b) reported that sesamol + α-tocopherol and
gallate + α-tocopherol were effective in preventing lipid oxidation
in turkey breast meat during storage. The addition of ascorbic acid
to ground meat in combination with such antioxidants as rosemary or α-tocopherol exerted a synergistic effect (Mitsumoto and
others 1991; Sanchez-Escalante and others 2001). Liu and others
(1994) found that the antioxidant effect of α-tocopherol in cooked
Table 3 --- CIE color a∗ -values of beef mixed or sprayed with different additives during storage at 4 ◦ C.
Mixing
Spraying
Non-IR
Day 0
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 3
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 7
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Non-IR
IR
Upper
Lower
Upper
Lower
SEM
Upper
Lower
Upper
Lower
27.23cw
30.43aw
26.90cw
28.57bw
0.45
26.49cw
29.3ax
26.08cw
28.02bw
0.39
15.87cx
17.23by
16.95bx
18.90ax
0.26
16.97bx
16.70by
17.12bx
18.61ax
0.37
0.53
0.22
0.32
0.35
30.58aw
30.27aw
28.55bw
28.96bw
0.33
30.18abw
30.79aw
29.02bcw
28.75cw
0.41
15.72cy
16.91bx
16.91bx
18.26ax
0.31
16.95x
16.3x
17.14x
17.57x
0.41
0.33
0.49
0.36
0.24
21.66cw
30.55aw
19.60dw
25.32bw
0.41
20.51cw
29.53aw
18.86dx
25.16bw
0.52
16.05cx
22.94ax
16.37cy
21.24bx
0.31
16.06cx
22.36ax
16.29cy
21.12bx
0.43
0.59
0.45
0.22
0.33
24.73cw
30.24aw
22.60dw
26.76bw
0.41
25.27cw
30.61aw
23.35dw
27.16bw
0.51
17.00bx
21.77ax
17.37bx
21.32ax
0.27
16.80bx
21.77ax
17.19bx
20.91ax
0.37
0.32
0.46
0.40
0.40
13.71c
21.76a
13.01cx
17.03bx
0.73
13.59b
19.87a
14.41bwx
17.75awx
1.00
14.39b
22.89a
13.85cx
19.53bw
0.57
15.83c
22.99a
15.55cw
19.80bw
0.39
0.75
0.97
0.43
0.59
16.21cwx
22.92aw
13.51dy
18.15bx
0.59
16.93cw
22.64aw
15.04cx
19.25buwx
0.74
13.85bx
16.60ay
16.19awx
17.16ax
0.67
15.58cwx
19.50ax
17.12bw
20.36aw
0.50
0.68
0.73
0.50
0.61
DF
Application (A)
Irradiation (IR)
Additives (AD)
Storage (S)
A × IR
A × AD
A×S
IR × AD
IR
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
3
F -value
9.22
1582.86
118.26
389.31
78.81
5.18
4.28
9.04
P
0.0026
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0016
0.0146
0.0001
a –c
Values
w –y
DF
IR × S
AD × S
A × IR × AD
A × IR × S
A × AD × S
IR × AD × S
A × IR × AD × S
2
6
3
2
6
6
6
F -value
426.54
114.66
2.11
14.11
7.43
8.27
1.89
SEM
P
0.0001
0.0001
0.0987
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0823
with different letters within a column of each storage period are significantly different (P < 0.05).
Values with different letters within a row of each application are significantly different (P < 0.05).
Non-IR = nonirradiated samples (0 kGy); IR = irradiated samples (2.5 kGy); Cont = control; A = ascorbic acid; E = vitamin E; S = sesamol; and SEM = standard
error of the means (n = 4).
C28
JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE—Vol. 74, Nr. 1, 2009
meat was lower than that in raw meat. Pearson and others (1977)
explained that the difference in α-tocopherol effect between raw
and cooked meat could be due to protein denaturation, release of
heme and noneheme iron, which resulted in the catalysis of lipid
oxidation during and after cooking. Overall, adding antioxidants to
ground beef by mixing was better than that by spraying method in
preventing oxidative changes during storage.
Color values
Irradiation decreased the lightness (L∗ -value) of ground beef regardless of antioxidant application methods (Table 2). Similar results were reported by Zhu and others (2003) who found significant
decrease in lightness values in irradiated turkey ham. Application
methods influenced the lightness of beef at 0 d, but the differences
were small. There were no differences in the L∗ -values between the
upper and lower surfaces of beef patties and none of the antioxidant treatments affected the L∗ -value of ground beef. However,
storage increased the L∗ -values of irradiated ground beef. Changes
in L∗ -value itself may not have that much impact on beef color,
but are important for light meat color. Especially, high L∗ -values in
combination with increased a∗ -value intensify the redness of meat.
Houser and others (2003) found that storage had no significant effects on the L∗ -value for irradiated cured ham. Also, Nam and Ahn
(2002a) reported that packaging, irradiation and storage had no effect on the L∗ -value of precooked turkey breast.
Irradiation, antioxidant treatments, and storage influenced the
redness (a∗ -value) of ground beef (Table 3). Irradiated ground beef
had significantly lower redness values than nonirradiated ones.
Adding antioxidants by spraying maintained higher a∗ -values than
those by mixing method in nonirradiated meat for 3 d, but the
difference was not consistent after 7 d. Antioxidant application
methods had no effects on the a∗ -values of irradiated meat. No
consistent difference in a∗ -value was observed between the upper
and lower surfaces of ground beef. Among the antioxidant treatments, ascorbic acid was the most effective in maintaining red
color in both irradiated and nonirradiated ground beef. Addition of
tocopherol + sesamol had negative effect on the a∗ -value of ground
beef. Nam and Ahn (2003b) showed that addition of sesamol significantly reduced the redness of turkey breast meat after storage. In
all antioxidant treatments, a∗ -values started to decrease with storage time regardless of application method. At 3 d, only ascorbic acid
maintained the same level of redness values as 0 d. At day 7, the redness of ground beef was not acceptable regardless of antioxidant
treatments and application methods. Luchsinger and others (1997)
reported that beef patties irradiated at 2.0 kGy were less red than
nonirradiated controls.
The yellowness (b∗ -values) of beef was dramatically decreased
by irradiation in both application methods at day 0 (Table 4). While
the b∗ -values of nonirradiated beef decreased over the storage time,
those of the irradiated ones increased after 3 d of storage. Nanke
and others (1999) reported that the yellowness values decreased in
beef and pork because of irradiation. Ascorbic acid increased the
yellowness of nonirradiated meat, but as storage period increased,
the yellowness decreased. Overall, spraying of antioxidants was better than mixing in maintaining the color of ground beef for short
term (<3 d). Significant increases in yellowness (b∗ -value) are frequently seen in irradiated meat, but its impact to overall color of
meat because a∗ -value mainly determines the color of meat color.
Table 4 --- CIE color b∗ -values of beef mixed or sprayed with different additives during storage at 4 ◦ C.
Mixing
Non-IR
Day 0
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 3
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 7
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Application (A)
Irradiation (IR)
Additives (AD)
Storage (S)
A × IR
A × AD
A×S
IR × AD
Spraying
IR
Non-IR
IR
Upper
Lower
Upper
Lower
SEM
Upper
Lower
Upper
Lower
23.70bw
26.20aw
24.08bw
24.96bw
0.38
23.70bw
25.30ax
23.99bw
25.10aw
0.32
15.36cy
17.30by
17.65abx
18.60ax
0.35
17.34x
17.38y
18.30x
18.75x
0.42
0.50
0.28
0.32
0.36
25.44w
25.19w
24.55w
25.04w
0.36
26.35aw
26.44aw
24.96bw
24.94bw
0.35
15.46cy
16.99bx
17.88abx
18.33ax
0.35
17.83x
17.51x
18.65x
17.67x
0.45
0.36
0.44
0.40
0.31
21.07cw
26.25aw
20.00c
23.13bw
0.43
21.42cw
25.13aw
19.90d
22.93bw
0.45
17.71cx
20.81ax
19.00b
20.15ax
0.33
18.34bx
20.42ax
18.90a
20.23ax
0.44
0.37
0.48
0.40
0.40
22.27bx
25.21aw
20.74cx
23.38bw
0.41
23.73bw
26.29aw
22.56bw
24.33bw
0.58
18.34by
20.53ax
19.28aby
20.04ax
0.39
19.15by
20.72ax
19.16by
19.85abx
0.38
0.35
0.55
0.43
0.41
17.20b
19.72a
18.26abwx
18.56ab
0.57
18.52
20.23
19.15w
19.95
0.56
17.43b
20.84a
17.63bx
19.53a
0.47
18.39c
20.81a
18.82bcwx
19.65b
0.33
0.43
0.65
0.34
0.48
18.22bwx
20.29aw
17.26by
18.44bx
0.37
19.58w
21.04w
19.54w
20.38w
0.43
17.13x
17.50x
18.23x
17.41x
0.35
18.68w
20.00w
19.08wx
19.70w
0.46
0.42
0.45
0.33
0.42
DF
F -value
P
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
3
0.47
994.56
70.29
118.71
11.29
3.31
0.53
12.99
0.4920
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0009
0.0204
0.5865
0.0001
DF
IR × S
AD × S
A × IR × AD
A × IR × S
A × AD × S
IR × AD × S
A × IR × AD × S
2
6
3
2
6
6
6
F -value
298.57
20.60
2.47
5.12
3.25
5.99
1.04
SEM
P
0.0001
0.0001
0.0615
0.0064
0.0040
0.0001
0.3978
a–c
Values
w–y
with different letters within a column of each storage period are significantly different (P < 0.05).
Values with different letters within a row of each application are significantly different (P < 0.05).
Non-IR = nonirradiated samples (0 kGy); IR = irradiated samples (2.5 kGy); Cont = control; A = ascorbic acid; E = vitamin E; S = sesamol; and SEM = standard
error of the means (n = 4).
Vol. 74, Nr. 1, 2009—JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE
C29
C: Food Chemistry
Antioxidant application methods on irradiated beef quality . . .
Antioxidant application methods on irradiated beef quality . . .
Oxidation-reduction potential
C: Food Chemistry
For both mixing and spraying applications of antioxidants, the
ORP values of ground beef decreased after irradiation at 0 d
(Table 5). The decrease of ORP by irradiation in ground beef was
greater (lower ORP values) with mixing than spraying method. Lowered ORP in irradiated meat rapidly increased during storage under aerobic conditions as previously reported (Hannah and Simic
1985; Nam and Ahn 2002b). Addition of ascorbic acid lowered ORP
values in both irradiated and nonirradiated beef regardless of application methods, but the decrease was greater by mixing than
spraying. The other 2 antioxidant treatments (E + S, A + E + S) had
a higher ORP values than ascorbic acid alone in both application
methods, but mixing method was better than spraying in maintaining reducing conditions (low ORP) for short-term storage (3 d). After 3 d storage, the ORP values of all ground beef increased significantly.
sistent. CO was produced by radiolysis of meat components in
meat by irradiation (Lee and Ahn 2004). E + S treatment produced
smaller amounts of CO in irradiated ground beef after 3 and 7 d of
storage, but other treatments had no effect. As storage period increased, the amount of CO in ground beef decreased regardless of
application methods or antioxidant treatments.
Volatiles production
Irradiation, antioxidants, and storage time influenced volatile
production in both application methods (Table 7 and 8). Irradiation increased the production of total volatiles from beef at days
0 and 3. However, the amounts of total volatiles in nonirradiated
ground beef were higher than those of irradiated ones regardless
of antioxidant treatments or application methods due to great increase in alcohol content at day 7. Ethanol was the major alcohol
and the content increased greatly in nonirradiated ground beef after 7 d of storage probably due to microbial growth. However, total
CO production
plate count of microorganisms in the samples was not conducted.
Irradiation increased CO production from ground beef (Table 6).
There was no clear trend in the production of all volatiles between
The amount of CO produced in irradiated ground beef was higher
mixing and spraying method.
with mixing than spraying application in general, but was not conTable 6 --- Carbon monoxide (CO) gas formation from beef
Table 5 --- ORP values of beef mixed or sprayed with dif- mixed or sprayed with different additives during storage
ferent additives during storage at 4 ◦ C.
at 4 ◦ C.
Mixing
Non-IR
Spraying
IR
SEM
Non-IR
Mixing
IR
SEM
Spraying
Non-IR
IR
(Unit: mVolt)
Day 0
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 3
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 7
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
cy
30.13 −87.75
−6.13b −17.38b
46.19a
22.20a
8.53a
7.58b
5.62
7.86
7.01
6.11
9.12
4.12
69.58a
95.05a
42.78b
27.70b
80.15ay 102.23ax
37.53by 55.38bx
8.13
5.95
9.66
7.00
6.10
4.83
44.38a
92.33
−6.95by 88.10x
72.23ay 132.50x
55.03ay 90.75x
15.71
10.74
16.14
15.12
11.35
10.30
ax
Application (A)
Irradiation (IR)
Additives (AD)
Storage (S)
A × IR
A × AD
A×S
IR × AD
IR × S
AD × S
A × IR × AD
A × IR × S
A × AD × S
IR × AD × S
A × IR × AD × S
Non-IR
IR
SEM
(Unit: mVolt)
ax
cy
2.85
35.83b
73.63ax
14.83c
6.41
8.02
3.06
4.70
4.96
113.58a 116.90a
72.93b
74.93b
117.55ay 120.88ax
74.95b
84.45b
3.25
5.23
5.43
4.97
0.83
4.58
56.75
30.50b
49.73ay
12.80c
4.36
68.38
38.13y
46.23y
38.35y
DF
F -value
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
3
2
6
3
2
6
6
6
94.20
42.43
52.52
256.99
0.81
9.78
14.93
11.24
86.85
9.17
1.15
8.38
2.76
8.35
1.75
113.33 15.80
98.55x 9.57
111.65x 7.74
93.15x 8.16
10.21 11.39
JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE—Vol. 74, Nr. 1, 2009
Day 0
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 3
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
Day 7
Cont.
A
E+S
A+E+S
SEM
38.86
18.34y
22.43y
18.50y
13.83
135.72
85.65x
91.70x
87.33x
27.23
29.51ay
22.09ay
5.50by
30.03ay
4.20
100.56ax 15.18
87.67abx 7.91
47.85bx
5.01
69.23abx 5.00
12.40
0.00y
0.00y
0.00y
0.00y
0.00
P
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.3685
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.3309
0.0004
0.0143
0.0001
0.1135
a –c
Values with different letters within a column of each storage period are
significantly different (P < 0.05).
x –y
Values with different letters within a row of each application are significantly
different (P < 0.05).
Non-IR = non-irradiated samples (0 kGy); IR = irradiated samples (2.5 kGy);
Cont = control; A = ascorbic acid; E = vitamin E; S = sesamol; and SEM =
standard error of the means (n = 4).
C30
SEM
Application (A)
Irradiation (IR)
Additives (AD)
Storage (S)
A × IR
A × AD
A×S
IR × AD
IR × S
AD × S
A × IR × AD
A × IR × S
A × AD × S
IR × AD × S
A × IR × AD × S
85.09x
61.19ax
27.26bx
61.04ax
7.65
35.65
16.18
14.18
11.48
7.14
7.61
2.31
1.71
18.11y
11.50y
10.00y
10.84y
6.05
83.49x 8.53
91.68x 8.99
82.01x 8.93
97.23x 12.87
12.77
23.97y
16.01aby
5.76by
28.10ay
4.52
74.27x
82.90ax
49.68bx
57.06abx
7.64
4.33
7.62
7.13
5.47
0.00y
3.60y
0.00y
0.00y
1.80
49.94x
64.77ax
30.65bx
47.88abx
5.36
4.01
3.87
1.89
5.42
DF
F -value
1
1
3
2
1
3
2
3
2
6
3
2
6
6
6
6.53
356.14
8.97
27.94
0.64
2.56
0.60
2.29
6.82
0.88
1.64
0.43
0.54
0.97
0.15
P
0.0117
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.4255
0.0571
0.5517
0.0804
0.0015
0.5105
0.1833
0.6511
0.7745
0.4461
0.9891
a –c
Values with different letters within a column of each storage period are
significantly different (P < 0.05).
x –y
Values with different letters within a row of each application are significantly
different (P < 0.05).
Non-IR = nonirradiated samples (0 kGy); IR = irradiated samples (2.5 kGy);
Cont = control; A = ascorbic acid; E = vitamin E; S = sesamol; and SEM =
standard error of the means. n = 4.
Antioxidant application methods on irradiated beef quality . . .
increased the most after 3 and 7 d of storage, especially in irradiated meat with control and ascorbic acid treatments. Addition of
α-tocopherol + sesamol or ascorbic acid + α-tocopherol + sesamol
was more effective than ascorbic acid in lowering the amounts of
aldehydes in irradiated beef. Aromatic compounds, mainly tolune,
were produced only in irradiated ground beef. Similar trends were
detected in meat with spraying application (Table 8). Nam and
Table 7 --- Volatile compounds of beef mixed with different additives during storage at 4 ◦ C.
Cont
Compound
Non-IR
E+S
A
IR
Non-IR
IR
A+E+S
Non-IR
IR
Non-IR
IR
SEM
(Total ion counts × 10 )
4
Day 0
Hydrocarbons
Ketones
Alcohols
Aldehydes
Aromatics
Total volatiles
Day 3
Hydrocarbons
Ketones
Alcohols
Aldehydes
Aromatics
Total volatiles
Day 7
Hydrocarbons
Ketones
Alcohols
Aldehydes
Aromatics
Total volatiles
9847bc
9027
6589
2092a
0c
27556c
13059b
12870
8601
2480a
383b
37392ab
1047d
10199
5859
706b
0c
17811d
8661c
14712
7852
1246b
666a
33136c
24038a
10102
4990
952b
0c
40082ab
25045a
11558
7283
1118b
608a
45612a
4642cd
9380
4969
969b
0c
19960d
9592bc
14137
8352
1044b
626a
33750bc
1681
1597
1010
206
23
2485
6615cd
5359b
7601abc
3325ab
0c
22900bc
13914b
7407ab
8965a
4646a
508b
35440a
1823d
6384ab
5289abc
653b
0c
14149c
10441bc
8807ab
8123ab
1360b
586a
29316ab
20160a
9342a
4037bc
537b
0c
34076a
19542a
9603a
6578abc
746b
501b
36970a
4415d
6965ab
3752c
579b
0c
15710c
7213cd
8490ab
5381abc
599b
477b
22161bc
1435
835
941
668
20
2763
7736cd
18085
40494a
3420b
0c
69735a
17160b
12378
10511b
9138a
553a
49740ab
3717d
13056
52917a
3156b
0c
72846a
10430c
11727
7536b
1970b
506a
32169b
20390b
13262
12671b
1301b
146b
47770ab
27688a
12769
4434b
833b
564a
46288ab
8318cd
12634
17452b
1632b
189b
40225ab
8922c
11763
3706b
559b
488a
25439b
1329
1878
6854
1240
21
8582
a–c
Values with different superscripts within a row are significantly different (P < 0.05). n = 4.
Non-IR = non-irradiated (0 kGy); IR = irradiated (2.5 kGy); A = ascorbic acid; E = vitamin E; S = sesamol; and SEM = standard error of the means.
Hydrocarbons: 2-Methyl butane, propane, 1-pentene, pentane, 1-hexene, hexane, 1-heptene, heptane, octane, nonane; Ketones: 2-Propanone, 2,3-butanedione,
2-butanone, 2-pentanone, 2-heptanone; Alcohols: Ethanol, 1-propanol, 2-butanol, 1-pentanol, 2-methyl-1-propanol, 3-methyl-1-butanol, hexanol;
Aldehydes: Acetaldehyde, propanal, 3-methyl butanal, hexanal, heptanal; Aromatics: Toluene.
Table 8 --- Volatile compounds of irradiated and nonirradiated ground beef with antioxidants added by spraying during
storage at 4 ◦ C.
Cont
Compound
Non-IR
E+S
A
IR
Non-IR
IR
Non-IR
A+E+S
IR
Non-IR
IR
SEM
(Total ion counts × 10 )
4
Day 0
Hydrocarbons
Ketones
Alcohols
Aldehydes
Aromatics
Total volatiles
Day 3
Hydrocarbons
Ketones
Alcohols
Aldehydes
Aromatics
Total volatiles
Day 7
Hydrocarbons
Ketones
Alcohols
Aldehydes
Aromatics
Total volatiles
12499bc
10603
12843ab
1474ab
0c
37419abc
17180a
11553
13912a
1927a
594ab
45166a
3617e
9389
11521ab
705c
0c
25231d
8066de
13762
14107a
1454ab
591ab
37980abc
7248de
10518
10919ab
1257abc
0c
29942cd
14884ab
11681
11703ab
1822ab
715a
40805ab
6416de
10044
9572b
1108bc
0c
27140cd
8933cd
12564
10740ab
1688ab
553b
34479bcd
1235
1737
815
172
38
2398
7721b
5218
10123bc
1645b
0b
24707bc
14966a
7080
13135ab
5575a
500a
40256a
3544b
5517
10263bc
1311b
0b
20634c
9315ab
8057
14101a
4824a
495a
35802a
6139b
5340
8252c
553b
0b
20284c
15827a
6393
10264bc
1483b
445a
33523ab
3372b
5312
7064c
407b
0b
16156c
7211b
7235
9803bc
1493b
502a
25240bc
1921
773
829
621
27
2615
10212ab
13542a
30612a
2409b
0c
56776a
16112a
11063abc
11136b
7085a
512ab
45909ab
5046c
10193bc
23866ab
1396b
0c
40501abc
13245a
9800bc
9858b
9343a
558a
42804abc
11310a
12689ab
30657a
2231b
0c
56887a
9537bc
9073c
7179b
896b
479b
27163c
3790c
11973abc
29487a
1558b
0c
46809ab
7311c
9643bc
6172b
640b
472b
24238c
1461
710
4357
945
17
4981
a–d
Values with different superscripts within a row are significantly different (P < 0.05). n = 4.
Non-IR = nonirradiated (0 kGy); IR = irradiated (2.5 kGy); A = ascorbic acid; E = vitamin E; S = sesamol; SEM = standard error of the means.
Hydrocarbons: 2-Methyl butane, 1-pentene, pentane, 1-hexene, hexane, 1-heptene, heptane, octane, nonane; Ketones: 2-Propanone, 2,3-butanedione,
2-butanone, 2-pentanone, 3-hexanone, 2-heptanone; Alcohols: Ethanol, 1-propanol, 1-butanol, 2-butanol, 1-pentanol, 1-hexanol, 2-methyl-1-propanol,
3-methyl-1-butanol; Aldehydes: Acetaldehyde, propanal, 3-methyl butanal, hexanal, heptanal; Aromatics: Toluene.
Vol. 74, Nr. 1, 2009—JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE
C31
C: Food Chemistry
With mixing method (Table 7), the amounts of hydrocarbons
were the highest in irradiated meat with E + S treatment and the
lowest in nonirradiated meat with ascorbic acid treatment. Aldehydes were produced the most in control beef regardless of irradiation
treatment and increased as storage time increased. Acetaldehyde,
propanal, 3-methyl-butanal, hexanal, and heptanal were the
aldehydes detected in ground beef, but the amount of hexanal
Antioxidant application methods on irradiated beef quality . . .
C: Food Chemistry
others (2006) reported that the combination of rosemarytocopherol reduced the amount of hexanal in irradiated pork
loin by 30%. Hexanal is a common indicator of lipid oxidation in
meat (Ahn and others 1999b). Sulfur compounds were detected
only in irradiated meat but the amounts were very small. The
reason for the low sulfur volatiles in irradiated ground beef, especially at day 0, in this study is not clear, but could be related to
the somewhat lengthy exposure of samples to aerobic conditions
before analysis at day 0.
A
Conclusions
ntioxidant combinations E + S and A + E + S were highly effective in preventing oxidative changes in irradiated and nonirradiated ground beef. However, ascorbate alone was effective only
in nonirradiated ground beef. Adding antioxidants in beef patties
by spraying produced more volatiles, hydrocarbons, and alcohols,
and had higher ORP values than those with mixing. This indicated
that patties with tested antioxidants applied on the surfaces would
be more susceptible to oxidative changes than those spread antioxidants throughout by mixing. Therefore, mixing method is recommended for applying ascorbic acid and antioxidants to avoid any
quality changes in irradiated ground beef.
References
Ahn DU, Nam KC. 2004. Effects of ascorbic acid and antioxidants on color, lipid
oxidation and volatiles of irradiated ground beef. Rad Phys Chem 71(1/2):151–
6.
Ahn DU, Olson DG, Lee JI, Jo C, Chen X, Wu C. 1998a. Packaging and irradiation effects
on lipid oxidation and volatiles in pork patties. J Food Sci 63:15–9.
Ahn DU, Olson DG, Jo C, Chen X, Wu C, Lee JI. 1998b. Effect of muscle type, packaging,
and irradiation on lipid oxidation, volatile production and color in raw pork patties.
Meat Sci 49:27–39.
Ahn DU, Jo C, Olson DG. 1999a. Headspace oxygen in sample vials affects volatiles
production of meat during the automated purge-and-trap/GC analysis. J Agric
Food Chem 47(7):2776–81.
Ahn DU, Olson DG, Jo C, Love J, Jin SK. 1999b. Volatiles production and lipid oxidation
of irradiated cooked sausage with different packaging during storage. J Food Sci
64:226–9.
Ahn DU, Jo C, Du M, Olson DG, Nam KC. 2000. Quality characteristics of pork patties irradiated and stored in different packaging and storage conditions. Meat Sci
56:203–9.
Ahn DU, Nam KC, Du M, Jo C. 2001. Volatile production in irradiated normal, pale
soft exudative (PSE) and dark firm dry (DFD) pork under different packaging and
storage conditions. Meat Sci 57(4):419–26.
[AMSA] American Meat Science Association. 1991. Guidelines for meat color evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 4th reciprocal meat conference. Chicago, Ill.: Natl. Live
Stock and Meat Board 1–17.
Breidenstein BC, Williams JC. 1986. The consumer climate for red meat. Special Issue. Washington, D.C.: American Meat Inst. Chicago, Ill.: Natl. Livestock and Meat
Board.
Brewer MS, Harbers CAZ. 1992. Effect of packaging on physical and sensory characteristics of ground pork in long-term frozen storage. J Food Sci 56:627–31.
Faustman C, Cassens RG. 1990. The biochemical basis for discoloration in fresh meat:
a review. J Muscle Foods 1:217–43.
Giroux M, Ouattara B, Yefsah R, Smoragiewicz W, Saucier L, Lacroix M. 2001. Combined effect of ascorbic acid and gamma irradiation on microbial and senso-
C32
JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE—Vol. 74, Nr. 1, 2009
rial characteristics of beef patties during refrigerated storage. J Agric Food Chem
49(2):919–25.
Gray JI, Gomaa EA, Buckley DJ. 1996. Oxidative quality and shelf life of meats. Meat
Sci 43(Suppl):111–23.
Hannah KW, Simic MG. 1985. Long-term preservation of bacon by high energy electrons. Rad Phys Chem 25:167–71.
Hermel SR. 1993. Extending the bloom. Beef (May):8–12.
Houser TA, Sebranek JG, Lonergan SM. 2003. Effects of irradiation on properties of
cured ham. J Food Sci 68(7):2362–5.
Kim YH, Nam KC, Ahn DU. 2002a. Color, oxidation-reduction potential, and gas production of irradiated meats from different animal species. J Food Sci 67(5):1692–5.
Kim YH, Nam KC, Ahn DU. 2002b. Volatile profiles, lipid oxidation and sensory characteristics of irradiated meat from different animal species. Meat Sci 61(3):257–65.
Lee EJ, Ahn DU. 2004. Sources and mechanisms of carbon monoxide production by
irradiation. J Food Sci 69(6):C485–90.
Lee BJ, Hendricks DG, Cornforth DP. 1999. A comparison of carnosine and ascorbic
acid on color and lipid stability in a ground beef patties model system. Meat Sci
51(3):245–53.
Liu Q, Scheller KK, Schaefer DM, Arp SC, Williams SN. 1994. Dietary α-tocopheryl
acetate contributes to lipid stability in cooked beef. J Food Sci 59(2):288–90.
Luchsinger SE, Kropf DH, Garcia-Zepeda CM, Hunt MC, Stroda SL, Marsden JL,
Kastne CL. 1997. Color and oxidative properties of irradiated ground beef patties.
J Muscle Foods 8:445–64.
Mitsumoto M, Faustman C, Cassens G, Arnold DM, Schaefer DM, Scheller KK. 1991.
Vitamins E and C improve pigment and lipid stability in ground beef. J Food Sci
56(1):194–7.
Moiseeve IV, Cornforth DP. 1999. Treatments for prevention of persistent pinking in
dark-cutting beef patties. J Food Sci 64:738–43.
Morrissey PA, Sheehy PJA, Galvin K, Kerry JP, Buckley DJ. 1998. Lipid stability in meat
and meat products. Meat Sci 49(S):73–86.
Nam KC, Ahn DU. 2002a. Mechanism of pink color formation in irradiated precooked
turkey breast meat. J Food Sci 67(2):600–7.
Nam KC, Ahn DU. 2002b. Carbon monoxide-heme pigment is responsible for the pink
color in irradiated raw turkey breast meat. Meat Sci 60:25–33.
Nam KC, Ahn DU. 2003a. Effects of ascorbic acid and antioxidants on the color of
irradiated ground beef. J Food Sci 68(5):1686–90.
Nam KC, Ahn DU. 2003b. Use of double packaging and antioxidant combinations to
improve color, lipid oxidation, and volatiles of irradiated raw and cooked turkey
breast patties. Poultry Sci 82:850–7.
Nam KC, Ahn DU, Du M, Jo C. 2001. Cholesterol oxides in irradiated raw meat with
different packaging and storage time. Meat Sci 58(4):431–5.
Nam KC, Ko KY, Min BR, Ismail H, Lee EJ, Cordary J, Ahn DU. 2006. Influence of
rosemary-tochopherol/packaging combination on meat quality and the survival of
pathogens in restructured irradiated pork loins. Meat Sci 74:380–7.
Nanke KE, Sebranek JG, Olson DG. 1998. Color characteristics of irradiated vacuumpackaged pork, beef, and turkey. J Food Sci 63(6):1001–6.
Nanke KE, Sebranek JG, Olson DG. 1999. Color characteristics of irradiated aerobically
packaged pork, beef, and turkey. J Food Sci 64(2):272–8.
Pearson AM, Love LD, Shorland FB. 1977. Warmed-over flavor in meat, poultry and
fish. Adv Food Res 23:1–74.
Poste LM, Willment G, Butler G, Patterson C. 1986. Sensory aroma scores and TBA
values as indices of warmed-over flavor in pork. J Food Sci 51:886–8.
Sanchez-Escalante A, Djenane D, Torrescano G, Beltran JA, Roncales P. 2001. The effects of ascorbic acid, taurine, carnosine and rosemary powder on colour and lipid
stability of beef patties packaged in modified atmosphere. Meat Sci 58(4):421–9.
SAS Inst. 1995. SAS/STAT user’s guide. Cary, N.C.: SAS Inst. Inc.
Tarladgis BG, Watts BM, Younathan MT, Dugan L. 1960. A distillation method for the
quantitative determination of malonaldehyde in rancid foods. J Am Oil Chem Soc
37:44–8.
Wheeler TL, Koohmaraie M, Shackelford SD. 1996. Effect of vitamin C concentration and co-injection with calcium chloride on beef retail display color. J Anim Sci
74(8):1846–53.
Xiong YL, Decker EA, Robe GH, Moody WG. 1993. Gelation of crude myofibrillar protein isolated from beef heart under antioxidant conditions. J Food Sci 58(6):1241–4.
Zhu MJ, Lee EJ, Mendonca A, Ahn DU. 2003. Effect of irradiation on the quality of
turkey ham during storage. Meat Sci 66:63–8.