The Effect of Bacon Pump Retention Levels Following Thermal Processing on Bacon Slice Composition and Sensory Characteristics
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ObjectivesThe amount of curing solution permitted to be retained in bellies during bacon production varies from country to country. In the United States, according to 9 CFR 319.107, “the weight of cured pork bellies ready for slicing and labeling as “bacon” shall not exceed the weight of the fresh uncured pork bellies.” While in Canada, according to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), “side bacon, Wiltshire bacon, salt beef, and pork jowls are exempted from the minimum protein standard and the percent (%) meat protein label declaration.” Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of belly pump uptake and cook yield during thermal processing on bacon slice composition and sensory attributes.Materials and MethodsForty-four fresh pork rind-on bellies were sourced and obtained from a commercial pork processor. Each belly was skinned and cut into 2 halves at the medial point of the belly. Twenty-two of the paired belly halves were randomly assigned to experiment 1 and the remaining 22 paired belly halves were assigned to experiment 2. The 2 experiments addressed different cooking techniques used by bacon processors– bacon in experiment 1 was cooked to an internal meat temperature of approximately 55°C, and bacon in experiment 2 was cooked to an internal meat temperature of approximately 62°C. Belly halves were assigned to treatment within each experiment so that an equal number of anterior halves (blade ends) and posterior halves (flank ends) would be represented in each treatment. Treatment consisted of target levels of pump uptake. Belly halves targeted at a pump uptake of 15% were assigned to the normal pump uptake treatment (NORM) and belly halves targeted at a pump uptake of 30% were assigned to the high pump uptake treatment (HIGH). Cure ingredients were formulated in accordance with manufacturer instructions (15% pump target = 313 g cure/1 kg water; 30% pump target = 156 g cure/1 kg water). Processing characteristics, bacon slice composition, and trained sensory attributes were evaluated. Treatment means for processing characteristics and bacon slice proximate composition were compared using PROC MIXED of SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC) with a fixed effect of treatment. Treatment means for sensory characteristics were compared using PROC GLIMMIX of SAS with a fixed effect of treatment and a random effect of panelist, day, and their interaction.ResultsIn experiment 1, cook yields were 107.8% for the HIGH bellies and 101.5% for the NORM bellies. Bacon from the HIGH treatment in experiment 1 had lesser (P = 0.04) protein percentage and tended to have greater saltiness (P = 0.07) when compared with bacon from the NORM treatment in experiment 1. In experiment 2, cook yields were 97.4% for the HIGH bellies and 94.7% for the NORM bellies. Bacon from the HIGH treatment in experiment 2 had greater (P = 0.02) moisture percentage and greater gumminess (P < 0.0001) when compared with bacon from the NORM treatment in experiment 2. All other bacon slice composition and sensory attributes were not different (P > 0.10).ConclusionOverall, bacon slice composition and sensory attributes of bacon from bellies with greater pump retention were largely unaffected, accordingly it was concluded that cook yields ranging in level of pump retention does not affect most attributes of bacon.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».