American Journal of 'Det-embt-r 2 0 1 4 UNIV ERSIT Y O F IB ADAN L IB RARY A m erican Jo u rn a l of Food. S c ien ce a n d N u tritio n 2014; 1(5): S3-S7 Published online November 30, 2014 (hltp:/Avww.aascit.org/journal/njrsn) ISSN: 2375-3935 Omrneon Awenaoor 0; Sdcvvw ;ve4 fvdwWog-- ,, i,vv:j ‘7 'V o k ! ;N:(t t h :n and Nutrition k e y w o r d s Attributes, Beef, Clay Pot, Preservation, Quality Received: October 09, 20i4 Revised: November 24, 2014 Accepted: November 25, 2014 Effects of local, clay pot and freezer preservation m ethods on beef quality attributes Elmiioluwa Stanley Aparin1, Francis Adeiuola Adio1, Oiuwakemi Comfort Apsda2, Abosede FadekemiOdio'*, Gbcmisola Aderele5 'Meat Science Laboratory, Department o f Animat Production Olabisi Onabanjo University Yewa Campus P.M.B. 0012 Ayetoro, Ogun State, Nigeria "Department of Wildlife and Ecotxmrism Management, University o f Ibadan. Ibadan Oyo State. Nigeria "Department o f Home and Hotel Management, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Yewa Campus P.M.B 0012 Ayetoro, Ogun State, Nigeria Email address ebunoluapata200S@yahoo.com (E, S. Apata) Citation * • Ebuuoluwa Stanley Apata, Francis Ademola Adio, Oiuwakemi Comfort Apata, Abosede Fadekemi Odio, Gbemisola Aderele. Effects of Local Clay Pot and Freezer Preservation Methods oil Beef Quality Attributes. American Journal of Food Science and Nutrition. Vol. 1, No. 5, 2014, pp. 83-87. Abstract This study was carried out to investigate the iiiflue'nce of local clay pot and freexer preservation on quality properties of fresh beef. 30 clay pots were moulded. 6kg of beef was purchased from Ayetoro abattoir and divided into two portions of 3kg wrapped’in banana leaves and each portion constituted a treatment; T1 = Freezer, T2 = Clay pot. The day pots were sealed containing lOOg of beef each and heated on charcoal lire for 1 hour daily, while beef preserved in freezer was divided into 30 parts of lOOg and frozen at -18"C. Physicochemical, microbiological and sensory properties of preserved beef were determined at 0, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days. Data collected were analysed with ANQVA at ,p = 0.05. Beef in T1 had higher colour score and lower (p<0.05) shear force values, while beef in T2 had higher yield and lower thermal shortening, protein, ash and TBA were higher in beef preserved with T2 while moisture and fat were higher in T1 beef. Microbial load were higher in Ti as well as colour, tenderness- and texture. However, flavour, odour and acceptability were higher in T2. All properties of preserved beef with the exception of cooking loss, thermal shortening, ash, Thiobarbituric Acid (TBA.,, Total Colifomi Count (TCC) and Total Anaerobic Count (TAG) increased as the time of preservation increased. It is suggested that local clay pot be used by those in developing countries where power supply is still epileptic especially in rural areas, and that beef may not be preserved beyond 14 days since beef properties decreased after that period in this study. m 1„ Introduction Meat, is a high energy type of food considered to be the food of choice, largely due to its nutritional value. It is however has short shelf life due to microbial and oxidative spoilage (Houben el al.,2000, Banani et al., 2006). Meat quality is a measure of its payability and acceptability to consumers and depends on several factors such as pH and microbial load (Apata, 201.1). In order to extend meat shelf life there is need to reduce initial microbial load during processing which aids in producing varieties of meat UNIV ERSIT Y O F IB ADAN L IB RARY mailto:ebunoluapata200S@yahoo.com American Journal ofFood Science and Nutrition 2014; 1(5): 83-87 84 products as well as preserve the meat (Omojola, 2008). Various modem methods have been used in meat preservation such as irradiation, chilling, freezing and refrigeration among others, but they are not always at the reach of rural dwellers who are • sometimes distant from electricity supply in developing countries (George et al. 2009). Therefore, the need to develop and use effective, cheap simple and appropriate preservation technology that is well adapted to the climatic, social and economic conditions of these countries becomes a sine-qua-non (Mohammed 2005). Among these local preservation methods are salting, smoking, drying and frying and use of clay pot. Reports are available on effects of sailing, smoking, drying and frying on meat quality (FAQ 2007). But there are scanty information on the use of clay pot for meat preservation and its influence on the meat quality characteristics, hence the need to carry out this study to investigate the consequences of clay pot preservation method on meal quality attributes to fill the gap in the literature. 2 . Ila te ria ls and M ethods 2.1. Preparation of T e s t Materials 2.1.1. C lay Pots 30 clay puls were moulded using clay soil which was obtained from the bank of a river near the college of Agricultural Sciences Teaching and Research Farm, Ayetoro The clay soil was moulded into pots with the aid of dome- shaped plastic bowl until desired shape was attained following the procedures of Mohammed (2005). 2.1.2. Meat (Beef) 6kg of beef was purchased from Ayetoro abattoir arid was divided into 2 portions of 3kg. The meat was wrapped in buutma leaves and enclosed in the moulded clay pots, except the control treatment that was placed into a freezer at -18°C thus, the beef in the freezer constituted treatment 1 (Tl) and beef enclosed in the moulded clay pots constituted treatment (T2), 2.1.3. Cha rcoal Heating Beef enclosed in the clay pots were heated on charcoal fire for 1 liouf daily with frequent turning at 20 min interval done to ensure even heating of the beef as described by FAO (1990). 2.1,4, Preservations of Beef The beef in Tl and T3 were preserved for 28 days during which time data were collected. 2.2. Data Colle ction Data collected included Physical properties of beef which included cooking loss, drip loss, thermal shortening, shear force, water holding capacity and beef colour following the procedures of AM'SA (1991), Suzuki (1991), Honikel (1998) and Qioafen Da-Wen (2005). 2 .3 . C h e m ica l A n a lysis This included moisture crude protein, ether extract (fat), ash, thiobarbiturie acid (TBA) and pH of beef as described by Hansen et al. (2004) and AOAC (2000). 2.4. M icrobio logica l A n a lys is This analysis was carried out following the procedures of ICMSF (1986), APHA (1992) arid AOAC (2000). 2.5. S e n s o ry Eva lua tion 10-member panel was used to rate the meat samples for colour, flavour, odour tenderness, juiciness, texture and overall acceptability and wrote analysed based on 9-point hedonic scale on which 1= dislike completely and 9= like completely according to AMSA(!995). 2.6. E x p e rim e n ta l Design and Statistical Analysis Completely randomized design with 2 x 5 factorial arrangement was employed in this study. Data collected were analysed with analysis of variance (A.NOVA) using (SAS, 2002). Significant means were separated with Duncan multiple range test of the same so ftware. 3. Results Table 1. Physical properties o f beef preserved freezer and clay pots V a r i a b l e • P a r a m e t e r R a w M e a l C o l t u i r C o o k i n g loss ( % ) T h e r m a l s h o r t e i i i n u ( % ) S h e a r F o r c e ( N ) W H C ( % ) C o o k i n g Y i e l d ( % ) T r e a l m e n l Tl . 6 .5 A O .S 13,80223.45 1 0 .0 0 A 0 .4 6 : 2 .9 7 M 0 .0 6 . 60 .50*4.0.04 8 6 2 0 4 0 .0 1 . T 2 4 .2 0 b± 0 .8 1 3 .0 0 4 0 .0 1 8 .5 0 A 6 .4 2 4 .1 6 A 1 .0 0 58iO O A 0.04 8 7 .0 0 4 0 .0 3 Time 0 6 .2 5 “:t:0.52 1 0 .0 0 f f0 .4 4 13 .3 3 * 4 2 .2 9 <*• 1 ,8 6 h 0.4 ■ 6 5 .2 5 A O .3 6 9 0 ,0 0 * 4 1 .4 4 7 4 .8 5 A 1 .0 3 12,00*48 .77 1 5 .0 0 A 9 .3 2 2 .1 5 M 0 .4 4 6 0 .1 5 A 1.28 ■ 8 8 .0 0 'A S 77 14 4.5 O i l .01 I5 .0 0 b b 6 .4 3 1 5 ,5 0 A 4 .4 0 ; 2 .4 5 A .6 2 5 8 .2 6 5 t4 .6 8 8 5 .0 0 * 4 6 ,4 2 21 4 .3 8 A .0 .5 2 I8 .4 5 A 8 .5 3 I7 .0 0 A 1 .1 S 3.76*4:0.92 ■ 5 0 .1 0 A 4 .6 6 8 1 .5 5 A o .5 2 28 3.3 2 A 0 ,8 4 18.60*4:8.82 1 7 .3 0 A 2 .2 3 3 .8 7 A 1 .2 6 4 7 .1 5 A 5 - .2 f 8 I .4 0 A 0 .4 4 a b e (1: Means on the same column v/ith diffeienl superscripts are statistically significant (p<0.()5). WHO water holding capacity UNIV ERSIT Y O F IB ADAN L IB RARY Elnmoiuwa Stanley Apata el al.: Effects of Local Clay Pol and Freezer Preservation Methods on Beef Quality Attributes The results of physical characteristics of beef preserved in freezer and clay pot are presented on Table 1. Treatment 1 (Tl) showed higher (p<0.05) raw meat colour, water holding capacity (WUC) and thermal shortening values than T2 while shear force was higher (p<0.0d) difference between Tl and T2. in cooking loss and yield. Raw meat colour, 'WHC arid cooking yield decreased (P<0.05) as the time of preservation increased while cooking loss and shear force values increased. Table 2 shows the results of chemical composition of beef preserved with freezer and clay pot. Tl furnished higher (p<0.05) moisture and ether extract (fat) while T2 elicited higher (p<0.05) protein and ash values as well as lower (p<0.05) fat. There was no significant (p>0.05) difference in the pH of the beef in the two treatment thiobarbituric acid (TBA) values was higher (p<0.05) in T2, The results revealed further that moisture values decreased (p<0,05) unabated till 28"' while (TBA) value increased. Crude protein decreased 14lb and 21st day and decreased further to 2811,»day. Fat also decreased up to 7lb and 14lh day then decreased further-to 28lh day. Ash content increased to 71'1 and 14th day the same (p>0.05) and further increased (p<0.05) to 21s' and 28"' day the same (p>0.05) but no significant (p>0.05) difference was observed in the pH of the preserved meat. Table 2. Chemical composition o f beefpreserved with freezer clay pots Variable Para fueler MC (% ) CP(%) EE(fat)(%) Asli (% ) TBA pH Treatments Tl 68.60'VQ.ll 18.30Vo.05 8.30V0.05 2.50l'±0.08 0.35V0.02 6.2Q±0.05 T2 66.8QV0.33 20.70V0.03 6.20V0.06 3.80V0.05 • 0.37.V0.04 6.3 0±0.03 Time 0 68.55V0.16 20.25V0.05 8,38±0.04 3.43±0.05 0.1.1±0,01 6.43±0.08 7 67.3K±0.I1 20.2I±0.0S 8.38b±0.04 3.43V0.08 0.11V0.01 6.43±0.08 14 66.26V0.34 19.15V0.06 8.22V0.06 2.45V0.03 0.25V0.10 6.35±00.05 21 63.2lVti.30 19.10V0.04 7.18V0.07 : 4.55V0.05 0.29V0.01 6.25±0.04 28 62.50V00.26 18.03V0.05 6.15d±0.05 : 4.66°±0.05 , 0.32" ±0.01 6,28±0.05 abed: Means on the same column with different superscripts are statistically significant (p<0.05). MC= Moisture Content, CP= Crude Protein, EE- Ether Extract, TBA= Thiobarbituric acid Table 3. Microbial load o f beef preserved with freezer and clay pots (efu/g) Variable Parameter TVC TCC s TAG TFC Treatments Tl 7.5xl0Vfcl,56. 6.5x10® ±0.05 : 6.7x10® ±1 .32 1,6x)0V0.55 T2 5.6x10® ± i.21 4.3V 1051’±0.72 3.6x10® ±1.59 1.2 x 10s ±0.33 Time « - 5.70x106"±0.52 4.53x10® ±0.59 4.63x10® ±0.62 130.HlOVl.O3 7 5.75x 10s* ±2.39 4.55x 10® ±0.55 :4.69x10® a=1.03 I.50xl0V.4.29 . U 4.61>: 10®±6.79 5.65x10® ±0.62 : 5.73x10® ±1.59 1.65xl0s±l.91 21 4.37xlO®±1.28 ' 6.68x10® ±0.48 , 6,75x10® ±1.70 2 . 0 0 x 1 0 5 ± 1 .2 2 - :s - . 4.25x10® ±1.59 6.71xl0®±1.18 (6.79x10® ±1,71 2.30x10s ±1.33 abc: Means on the same column with different superscripts are statistically significant (p<0.05) JVC ~ Total viable count, TCC = Total coliform count, TAC - Total anaerobic count, TFC= Total fungal count. Table 4. Sensory characteristics o f b ee f preserved with freezer and clay pot ■ Variable Parameter Col.' ITv. Odour Tdn. Jen . 'lex OA Treatments $ - Tl ' 6.75V-0.10 ' - 5.60lVl.4Q 3.20V1.40 6.60VL3! ’ 6.52V006 ' 5.80V0.10 6,10Vt.30 T2 |4.'56’’±0.05 6.80V030 4.70 V 1.20 • 4.70V0.60. 4.62V0.60 3.72V0.66 7.50V0.07 Time 0 6.S5V0.45 7.42V0.93 3.70V0.79 O.79.4.OOVO.49 3.3.5V0.58 6.85V0.50 ' 7.60V1.1S 7 . 6.72VU8 6.87V1.20 3.78+T1.30 ■4.20V0.91 5.92V0.34 5.60b±0.h5 6.40"±0.74 H 5.65V 0.83 5.83V0.84 4.82V1.23 5.50V1.54 3.70VF28 5.50V0.93 ' --6.30V0.93 21 5.52V.070 5.78V1.33 . 5.84V1.38 ; 4.75"Vl.91 4.S5"Vl.65 4.4 2 VO. 8 4 5.2x3:0.44 28 284.37V 1.49 4.65V0.62 : : 6.90V0.47 5.89V1.13 5.75V0.70 4.25V0.49 4.17V0.49 abed: Means on the same column with different superscripts are statistically significant (p<0.05) Col. = Colour, Flv. = flavour, Tdn. = Tenderness, Jen. = Juiciness, Tex. - Texture, O h - Overall acceptability UNIV ERSIT Y O F IB ADAN L IB RARY American Journal of Food Science and Nutrition 2014; 1(5): 83-87 The microbial load results of beef preserved with freezer and clay pot are shown on Table 3. There were significant (p>0.05) differences in the microbial load of beef with freezer (I t) furnishing higher (p<0.05) microbial values than clay pot (T2) with the exception of total fungal count (TFC) that was not significant (p>0.05) in die two treatments. The results further showed that total viable count (TVC) decreased (p<0.05) while total colifornr (TCC) and anaerobic (TAC) counts increased (p<0.()5) but no significant (p>0.05) difference in TFC as the time of preservation increased. Beef preserved in Freezer (Tl) was more tender with high texture and colour than that in the day pot (T2) whereas, beef preserved in the clay pot had higher (p<0.05) flavour and was accepted more (p<0.05) than that of freezer even though it had higher (p<0.05) odour value Table 4. 4. Discussion The decrease observed in meat colour in T2 could be due to reduced YV.HC as a result of. heat treatment which increased the toughness of the meat. The beef in the claypot did not have high thermal shortening and cooking loss probably the water from the meat could not escape and was reabsorbed into the mat thereby increase the yield. As time increased colour, WMC and yield decreased while cooking loss thermal shortening and shear force values increased to a tolerable levels on 14th day beyond which the values were higher. These results agreed with the report of Apata (2009) and Apata (2011).Crude protein and ash were higher in T2 probably because of lower moisture which increased the concentration of the nutrients in the meat, however fat decreased which could be due to melting of fat as a result of healing. Since there was break down of fat, that might be responsible for increase in the value of TBA in T2 and as the time of preservation increase;!. These results were in agreement with the findings of Apata (2009) who reported that most of the chemical components of meat break down even in the freezer over a prolonged preservation. The decrease observed in TVC could be due to the fact that the environment was becoming uuconducive to these microbes as the oxygen might have been used up gradually and anaerobic condition, was developing thereby aiding the increase of both TCC and TAC which proliferate none in anaerobic environment, however there was no significant (p>0.05) increase in TFC as the lime increased. The microbial loads; TVC, TCC and TAC decreased at 14th day of preservation, TVC decreased while TCC and TAC increased further to 28th day similar report: was made by Apata (20)0) that in the environment where both, TVC and either TCC or TAC coexist TVC decreased with time while either of the latter two increased due to change in environmental condition that would be detrimental to TVC due to reduction in oxygen concentration blit favours either TCC or TAC as the environment would be rich in carbon dioxide. These results might be clue to the fact that protein content was higher and microbial was of beef in T2 was lower which could have increased the flavour of the meat thereby increasing its acceptability. These results is in agreement with the findings of Omojola (2008). The results however showed that cooked beef colour, flavour, texture' and overall acceptability decreased as from 14th day of preservation clown to 28th day while odour started to increase from the same day, the same day, however, tenderness and juiciness values did not have a particular pattern of increase. The decrease in colour, texture, flavour and overall acceptability could be due to activities of microbes and breakdown of protein as well ns fat and increase of lipid oxidation (TBA) which are higher beyond 14lh day of preservation. 5. Conclusion The results obtained from this study showed can be preserved in the local clay pot and still compared well with die conventional preservation method which is freezer. Clay pot preservation can be used in developing countries like Nigeria yshere power supply in still epileptic especially in the rural areas. It is howe ver recommended that beef may not be preserved beyond 14th days as most of the beef properties tested in this study started to disintegrate beyond that period of preservation. References [1] AMS A (1991) guideline for meat colour evaluation American meat science association: committee on guidelines for meat colour evaluation proceedings o f the reciprocal meat conference voi. 44 [2] AMSA (1995). Research Guidelines for Cookery, Sensory evaluation and instrumental measurements o f fresh merit:. National Livestock and Meal: Bor^d, Chicago, IL., USA. [3] AOAC (2000) official methods of analysis, 19,h edition AO AG international inc. Washington D.C pp. 1219. [4] Apala E.S. (2009) Effects o f Post-Mortem Processing Methods and Cold Preservation on Physical Attributes of Goat Meat. Inter J.sci repls. And devptal. Issues 2(l):75-83. [5] Apata, E.S. (2009) Effect: o f Post Mortem Processing and Cold Storage on Stiya Quality - an immediate moisture meat product. J Home & Hotelmanagemenl 2(l):95-99, [6] Apata, E.S. (2010) Evaluation of Lipid Oxidation and Microbial Load in Suya as Affected by Post Mortem Processing and Preservation Time. J. agric. Foresting & Soc. Sei. 8(2): 195-202. [7] Apata, E.S. (2011) quality evaluation of red solcoto buck mat as influenced by post slaughter processing methods. Ph D thesis in the department of animal science, university o f Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. [8] APHA (1992) compendium of methods for the microbiological examinStion of foods (3ri Ed.) American public health association (eds) vnnderzant C and D.F. split/stoesser. Ann Arbor,-Michigan, USA. UNIV ERSIT Y O F IB ADAN L IB RARY 87 Ebunohnva Stanley Apala el a l : Effects of Local Clay Pot and Freezer Preservation Methods on Beef Quality Attributes [9] Bamani, R.C; Rabi, S.M. Runn, C. and Uptal, R.C. (2006) effect o f combination prelreatment on physicochemical, sensory and microbial characteristics of fresh aerobically stored minced goat. (Black bengal) meat organs Air. J. Biotech. 5 (12): 1274-1283. [10] FAO (1990) manual of simple methods of meat preservation. FAC) animal production and health paper N79 Rome FAO. [11] FAO (2007) manual on meal cold store operations and management: agriculture and consumer protection FAO corporate document repository; FAO Rome. [12] George F. Jonathan, D; Itenoyer, M and Alcock, A, (2009). The advent of mechanical refrigeration alters daily life and national economies. Meal sci. 59:75 1-756. [13] JInnse, E. iimeher, D. Henkel, P; Karlsson, A; Bertelsen, G and skibted, L.l-I. (2004) Oxidative stability o f chilled pork drops following long term freeze storage. Meat sci. 68:470- 484. [14] Honikel, J.L, (2008) reference methods for the assessment of physical characteristics o f meat. Meat sci. 49:447-457. [15] IJouben, J.H. Vandijk, A; eikelonboom, G and Hoving-Bolink, A.H (2000) effect o f dietary vitamin E supplementation, fat level and packaging on colour stability anc! lipid oxidation m minced beef. Meat sci 55: 331-336 [16] ICMSF (1986) Microorganism in food 2. Sampling for microbiological analysis. Principles and specific application (2"d Ed.) Canada, university o f Toronto press. [17] Mohammed, B.A. (2005). Ancient technology preserves food supply an innovative food cooling system to poor Nigerians. Rolex awards pp 5-10. [18] Omojola, A.B. (2008) yield and organoleptic characteristics of suya an intermediate moisture meat bull, Afr J. Biot, (200) the advent, of mechanical refrigeration alters daily life and national economic. Meat sci 59: 751-756. [19] Qiaofen, C and Da-wen, S. (2(705) application of PLSR in correlation physical and chemical properties of pork harm with different cooking methods. Meat sci. 70:691 -698. [20] SAS (2002). Statistical Analysis System. SAS Slat. Version 9 SAS Inc, Garry, NC, USA. [21] Suzuki, A kaima, N and Jkeuchi, Y (1991) ’ carcass composition and meat quality o f Chinese purebred and European Chinese crossbored pigs. Meat sci 29:31 -41. UNIV ERSIT Y O F IB ADAN L IB RARY