Comparison of the quality characteristics of chicken breast meat from conventional and animal welfare farms under refrigerated storage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we aimed to investigate the meat quality characteristics, bioactive compound content, and antioxidant activity during refrigerated storage of breast meat of Arbor Acres broilers (carcass weight: 1.1 kg, raised for 35 D) obtained from a conventional farm (BCF, n = 30) and an animal welfare farm (BAF, n = 30) in Korea. The BCF and BAF did not differ in their proximate composition, color, water-holding capacity, creatine, creatinine, and carnosine contents. However, the shear force value was significantly higher in BAF than in BCF (P < 0.05). The 2-thiobarbituric acid reactive substance (TBARS) levels in BCF on days 7 and 9 were significantly higher than those in BAF (P < 0.001). During storage, the total volatile basic nitrogen (VBN) content of BAF was significantly lower, except on day 1. The fatty acid composition of samples was not affected by the storage period, however, saturated fatty acid and unsaturated fatty acid contents did differ among the types of farm systems (P < 0.05). Although the creatine, creatinine, and carnosine contents in BAF and BCF did not differ significantly, the carnosine and creatinine contents decreased with the increase in storage period (P < 0.05). The anserine content of BAF was significantly higher than that of BCF throughout storage. Superoxide dismutase activity was not affected by the type of farm system but was affected by storage period. Overall, BAF showed lower pH, microorganism, TBARS, and VBN values, and higher anserine contents than BCF. These findings can serve as reference data for the evaluation of chicken meat quality of broilers raised in animal welfare farm and conventional farm.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".