National Agricultural Library

Comparisons of sensory descriptive flavor and texture profiles of cooked broiler breast fillets categorized by raw meat color lightness values

Three replicate trials were conducted to compare sensory descriptive profiles of cooked broiler breast fillets categorized by raw meat color lightness or CIE L* values. In each trial, 20 light, 20 dark, and 30 random fillets (42-d-old birds and deboned at 6 to 8 h postmortem) were obtained from a commercial processing plant. On return to the laboratory, CIE L* a* b* (medial side), pH, and weights were measured. Ten fillets for each of 3 lightness categories were chosen based on the L* values as follows: light, L* > 60; medium (middle of random group), 55 < L* < 59; and, dark, L* < 55. Cook yield, Warner-Bratzler shear force, and descriptive sensory attributes were measured on the chosen fillets after 7 d of frozen storage followed by cooking to an endpoint temperature of 78 to 80°C. Sensory evaluations were performed by trained descriptive panelists using universal intensity scales of 0 to 15 for 9 flavor and 8 texture attributes. Our results show that there were significant differences among the 3 lightness categories for pH, thaw loss, cook yield, and shear force. There were no significant differences in average flavor intensity scores between the 3 lightness categories. However, the average intensity scores of the texture attributes cohesiveness, hardness, rate of breakdown, and chewiness of the light fillets were significantly higher than either the dark or the medium fillets (P < 0.01), which did not differ from each other. These results indicate that sensory flavor profiles of cooked broiler breast fillets are similar regardless of raw meat color lightness (or L* values). There is no difference in the texture profiles between the cooked medium and dark fillets. But the sensory texture profile of fillets categorized as light based on CIE L* values is different from those of the fillets categorized as either medium or dark.

Poultry Science

Volume 89, Number 5

pp. 1049-1055