4.5 Article

Sensory, Microbiological and Chemical Changes in Vacuum-Packaged Blue Spotted Emperor (Lethrinus sp), Saddletail Snapper (Lutjanus malabaricus), Crimson Snapper (Lutjanus erythropterus), Barramundi (Lates calcarifer) and Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) Fillets Stored at 4°C

期刊

FOOD SCIENCE & NUTRITION
卷 4, 期 3, 页码 479-489

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.309

关键词

Finfish; quality assessment; specific spoilage organisms; spoilage; total viable count

资金

  1. Australian Seafood CRC Project [2009/709]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Quality assessment of finfish fillets during storage is important to be able to predict the shelf life of the fresh product during distribution. Microbial, chemical (pH, TMA, and TVB-N), and sensory (Quality index assessment QIA, Torry scheme) changes in vacuum-packaged blue-spotted emperor (Lethrinus sp), saddletail (Lutjanus malabaricus), crimson snapper (Lutjanus erythropterus), barramundi (Lates calcarifer), and Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) fillets stored at 4 degrees C were evaluated for 5 days. Microbiological study included evaluation of TVC (total viable counts), total psychrotrophic organisms, and H2S-producing bacteria. Numbers increased during storage time and reached an average of 8.5, 8.5, and 9.2 log(10) cfu/g, respectively, for the five different fish species. These levels were above accepted microbiological limits for fish fillets. Although the sensory analyses showed a decrease in quality, none of the finfish fillets were considered unacceptable at the end of the storage trial. Chemically, there was a slight pH increase, but trimethylamine (TMA) levels remained low. However, total volatile basic nitrogen (TVB-N) levels increased over time, reaching levels above 35 mg/100 g for blue spotted emperor, saddletail snapper, and crimson snapper by the end of the storage period. Results show that the deterioration of finfish fillet quality is a complex event of biochemical, sensory, and microbial factors, and multiple analyses may be required to define acceptability.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据