Fried Chicken Quality As Affected By Probiotic Feeding Supplementation

Transcription

1 Fried Chicken Quality As Affected By Probiotic Feeding Supplementation Vol. 3: (2015) Abstract Probiotics had been found promising in controlling food spoilage and pathogenic microorganisms thus maintaining the integrity of meat during processing. The study meant to determine the effect of locally-prepared probiotics from different growth media as feed supplement on the fried chicken s sensory characteristics in terms of color, flavor, juiciness, tenderness, and general acceptability. Results showed that sensory acceptability of fried chicken flavor was significantly influenced by the probiotic from milk substrate (T1) with the highest mean acceptability rating of 8.17 and is characterized as moist, soft and light to brown color. Fried chicken flavor from other probiotic substrates, except from fish and from commercial probiotic, likewise exhibited significantly high mean acceptability on flavor. The Color, juiciness, tenderness, and overall mean acceptability rating had no significant difference throughout treatments. Highest gross margin was realized in T4 (probiotic from fish) and the least was from the commercial probiotics due to its high cost. This suggests that the sensory quality of the fried chicken using probiotics from different growth media was at par with the sensory quality of fried chicken from commercial probiotic but offers lower cost. Keywords: fried chicken color, flavor, juiciness, tenderness, gross margin 1.0 Introduction The reported bacterial antibiotic resistance due to subtherapeutic inclusion of antibiotics in the production of food animals brought a substantial concern to consumers due to its possibility of spreading resistant bacteria to humans (Jensen et al. 1998) and becoming a source of infection (Pope et al. 2007, Vandeplas et al. 2007, Doyle and Erickson 2006). Despite the claim that ample cooking destroys these bacteria (Phillips et al. 2003), and bacterial population in humans is dynamic thus cross-infection has a great possibility (Walton 1986), many consumers shifted preference to organically grown food products with zero use of synthetic

2 antimicrobials. This heightened the search for alternatives to antimicrobials (Apata 2009) in which probiotics is one. Lactic acid bacteria are the common probiotics used today. They produce natural bacteriocin lactic acid as a product of fermentation (Aymerich et al. 1998). Lactic acid had been found promising in controlling food spoilage and pathogenic microorganisms (Van der Marel et al. 1988, Sawaya et al. 1995, Smulders et al. 1986, Netten et al. 1994, Hwang and Beuchat 1995, Mulder et al. 1987). Contrary to the positive effects of probiotics to the quality of carcass, Cason et al. (2005) disclosed that when lacticacid-producing bacterial cultures were applied to the skin of live broilers 24 hours before slaughter, it appears to have no effect on numbers of bacteria that are present on the skin after defeathering. The best opportunity to reduce and prevent/ control of pathogenic organisms such as Salmonella in the processed broiler carcass is at the earliest part of poultry production (Stern et al. 2001). Currently, commercially available probiotics cost even higher than synthetic antibiotics. The locally-prepared probiotics from different growth media posed as a potential growth-boosting alternative to antibiotic-free production of food 98 Vol. 3: (2015) animals. However, the sensory properties and acceptability of the meat after processing still need to be assessed. The study compared the effects of locally-prepared probiotics from different growth media as feed supplements on the sensory characteristics of fried chicken. The study compared the effects of locally-prepared probiotics from different growth media as feed supplements on the sensory characteristics of fried chicken. 2.0 Methodology Research Design and Experimental Treatment Six treatment diets with three replications per treatment arranged in Completely Randomized Design (CRD) were considered. Five (5) experimental animals were randomly assigned in each replication after the brooding period. Table 1 shows the feed supplements given during the whole duration of the study. Sensory Evaluation of Fried Chicken Following the standard protocol of raising broilers (within 45 days), randomly chosen chicken meats from different treatments,

3 99 Vol. 3 :97-105(2015) Table 1. Treatment diets used in the study of broiler supplemented with probiotics from different growth media. were sliced in one (1) inch square with uniform thickness. The sliced breast part of the meat was cooked randomly in boiled oil with a constant temperature of C for three to five minutes throughout all treatments. The cooking was done per treatment. Every after frying, the oil was changed to minimize variation of the results. Once cooked, the fried sample was placed on the tissue paper to absorb the oil. Shortly after draining the excess oil, they were subjected to sensory evaluation. A total of 30 samples from each treatment were used. The products were subjected to sensory evaluation following the standard procedure of Mabesa (1986). The sensory panel was composed of 30 trained judges who provided 30 observations per treatment. The samples were presented following the Incomplete Block Design as laid out by Cochran and Cox (1957) using the set plan t=6, k=3, r=10, b=20, lambda=4 and E=0.8 Type 1. The sensory attributes considered include color, flavor, juiciness, tenderness and general acceptability. Quality scoring in combination with nine (9) -point hedonic scale was used with the criteria as follows:

4 Data Gathered The data gathered on sensory characteristics of the fried chicken were color and color acceptability, flavor and flavor acceptability, juiciness and juiciness acceptability, tenderness and tenderness acceptability, juiciness and juiciness acceptability, and general acceptability. Data Analysis Descriptive statistics was employed in the sensory evaluation of fried chicken. Analysis of variance following the Incomplete Block Design (IBD) was used to determine the significant difference on the mean general acceptability of fried chicken color, flavor, juiciness and tenderness, while Tukey HSD was employed for the ANOVA results with significant differences among treatment means. The costbenefit analysis was realized by accounting the total variable cost (chicks, feeds, LAB, antibiotic, water, electricity and labor), the gross revenue/income (sales from broilers), and the gross margin. 3.0 Results and Discussion Sensory Characteristics of 100 Fried Chicken. The sensory characteristics considered were color, flavor, juiciness, and tenderness. Equal sizes of lean meat from breasts and thighs from all treatments were fried at C for three to five (3-5) minutes. The fried chicken color of the control treatment (T0) was described by the sensory panelists as dark brown. The same color was perceived by the panelists for T3 and T5. Brown was the color description of T2, brown and light brown were the descriptions identified for T1 while light brown was for T4 (Table 2). In terms of flavor, the sensory panelists perceived all treatments as having pronounced chicken flavor. In view of juiciness, the sensory panelists described T0 and T4 as dry while T2 and T3 as slightly dry. Moist description was the attribute given to T1, and T5. In terms of tenderness, tough/crunchy description was given to T3, T5 and T4 while firm description was given to T2 by the sensory panelists (Table 2). The sensory attributes of the fried chicken provides information for the producers and consumers on the eating quality that can be expected if a certain probiotic is used in the production of broiler meat. Based on this data, a consumer/

5 101 Table 2. Sensory attributes of fried chicken as influenced by the supplementation of probiotics from different growth media. Table 3. Mean 1 general acceptability rating2 of fried chicken as influenced by the supplementation of probiotics from different growth media. producer can decide depending on his/her personal preference. Sensory Acceptability of Fried Chicken. The ANOVA on the mean sensory acceptability of color, juiciness and tenderness show no significant difference among treatment means (Table 3). In terms of flavor, T1 has significantly higher mean acceptability rating than T0 and T4 but not significantly different from the rest of the treatments. Overall mean acceptability rating of the fried chicken is not significantly different from each other. The mean general acceptability rating ranged from 7.33 to 7.93 and falls between like moderately to like very much of the 9-point Hedonic scale. The sensory quality of the fried chicken is enhanced with the

6 102 supplementation of locally-prepared probiotics from different growth media at par with the quality of fried chicken from broilers supplemented with commercially available probiotics. The products were highly acceptable to consumers. Gross Margin Analysis. The highest variable cost as well as the highest gross receipt were exhibited by the control treatment (T0) (PhP and PhP , respectively). However due to the high cost of commercial probiotic, it translated as the least profitable treatment (Table 4). The experimental groups had more or less the same variable costs while T5 registered the lowest gross receipt (PhP ). The highest gross margin was realized in T4 (PhP ) followed by T3 (PhP ) and T2 (PhP ), respectively. 4.0 Conclusion Locally-prepared probiotics from different growth media as feed Table 4. Gross margin analysis (per bird) of raising broilers as influenced by the supplementation of probiotics from different growth media. supplements via drinking water translated to the overall quality and acceptability of the fried chicken at par with the fried chicken from broilers supplemented with commercial probiotics at lower cost. 5.0 Acknowledgment This work was realized through the support of the Department of Science and Technology - Science Education

7 103 Institute - Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development (DOST-SEI- PCARRD). 6.0 References Cited ed. New York. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Doyle MP, Erickson M.C Reducing the Carriage of Foodborne Pathogens in Livestock and Poultry. Poultry Science. 85: Apata DF Antibiotic Resistance in Poultry. International Journal of Poultry Science. 8(4): Aymerich M, Hugas M, Monfort J Review: Bacteriocinogenic lactic acid bacteria associated with meat products / Revision: Bacterias lacticas productoras de bacteriocinas asociadas a productos carnicos. Food Science and Technology International. 4 (3): Cason J, Buhr R, Hinton A, Berrang M, Cox N External Treatment of Broiler Chickens with Lactic Acid Bacteria Before Slaughter. International Journal of Poultry Science. 4: Cochran WG, Cox GM Experimental Designs 2nd Hwang C, Beuchat LR Efficacy of a lactic acid/ sodium benzoate wash solution in reducing bacterial contamination of raw chicken. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 27 (1): Jensen BB The impact of feed additives on the microbial ecology of the gut in young pigs. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 7: Mabesa LB Sensory evaluation of foods : principles and methods. College, Laguna: College of Agriculture, University of the Philippines at Los Banos. Mulder RW, Van der Hulst MC, Bolder NM Salmonella decontamination of broiler carcasses with lactic acid, L-cysteine, and hydrogen peroxide. Poultry

8 104 Sci. 66(9): Netten PV, Veld JH, Mossel DAA The immediate bactericidal effect of lactic acid on meat-borne pathogens. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 77(5), Phillips I, Casewell M, Cox T, Groot BD, Friis C, Jones R Does the use of antibiotics in food animals pose a risk to human health? A critical review of published data. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemo-therapy. 53: Pope C, Wilson J, Taboada EN, Mackinnon J, Alves CAF, Nash JHE, Rahn K, Tannock GW Epidemiology, Relative Invasive Ability, Molecular Characterization, and Competitive Performance of Campylobacter jejuni Strains in the Chicken Gut. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 73(2): Sawaya WN, Elnawawy AS, Alzenki S, Al-otaibi J, Alomirah H, Al-amiri H Storage stability of chicken as affected by MAP and lactic acid treatment. J Food Sci. 60(3): Smulders FJM, Barendsen P, Van Logtestijn JG, Mossel DAA, Van Der Marel GM Review: Lactic acid: considerations in favour of its acceptance as a meat decontamininant. Intl J Food Sci Technol. 21(4): Stern NJ, Cox NA, Bailey JS, Berrang ME, Musgrove MT Comparison of Mucosal Competitive Exclusion and Competitive Exclusion Treatment to Reduce Salmonella and Campylobacter spp. Colonization in Broiler Chickens. Poult Sc. 80: Stern NJ, Svetoch EA, Eruslanov BV, Perelygin VV, Mitsevich EV, Mitsevich IP, Pokhilenko VD, Levchuk VP. Svetoch OE, Seal BS Isolation of a Lactobacillus salivarius Strain and Purification of Its Bacteriocin. Which Is Inhibitory to Campylobacter jejuni in the Chicken Gastrointestinal System.

9 105 Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 50(9): Vandeplas S, Marcq C, Dauphin RD, Beckers Y, Thonart P, Thewis A Contamination of poultry flocks by the human pathogen Campylobacter spp. and strategies to reduce its prevalence at the farm level. Biotechnologie, Agronomie, Société et Environnement. 12:3. Van Der Marel GM, Van Logtestijn JG, Mossel DA Bacteriological quality of broiler carcasses as affected by in-plant lactic acid decontamination. Intl J Food Microbiol. 6(1):31. Walton JR Impact of Antibiotic Restrictions in Animal Production on Public Health. J Anim Sci. 62:74-84.