Comparison of hot versus cold boning of beef carcasses on bacterial growth and the risk of blown pack spoilage

Rachael Reid; Séamus Fanning; Paul Whyte; Joe Kerry; Declan Bolton

doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.11.012

Comparison of hot versus cold boning of beef carcasses on bacterial growth and the risk of blown pack spoilage

Rachael Reid, Séamus Fanning, Paul Whyte, Joe Kerry, Declan Bolton^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Primals were prepared from beef Longissimus thoracis et lumborum (LTL), psoas major (PM), quadriceps femoris (QF) and semitendinosus (S) muscles from cold and hot boned carcasses, vacuum-packaged and stored for 42 or 100 days at 2 °C and 7 °C. Storage temperature, carcass or primal surface temperature, pH and a_w were monitored. Samples were taken periodically and tested for total viable count mesophilic (TVCm), TVC psychrophilic (TVCp), total Enterobacteriaceae count (TEC), presumptive Pseudomonas spp., lactic acid bacteria (LAB), Clostridium spp. and Brochothrix thermosphacta. A fifth muscle, biceps femoris (BF), was used to examine the impact of hot boning on blown pack spoilage (BPS). Primal counts increased to 6–7 log₁₀ cfu cm^{− 2} after 6 weeks. Significantly (P < 0.05) higher TEC, Pseudomonas spp. and Br. thermosphacta counts were observed on cold versus hot boned primals. In contrast, significantly (P < 0.05) higher TVC, LAB and Clostridium spp. concentrations were obtained on hot boned beef. Moreover, BPS pack distension/bursting occurred considerably sooner in hot boned product.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	46-52
Number of pages	7
Journal	Meat Science
Volume	125
Early online date	23 Nov 2016
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.11.012
Publication status	Published - 01 Mar 2017
Externally published	Yes

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The funding for this research was provided by the Food Institutional Research Measure (FIRM), (Grant number 11F033 ), administered by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and by Teagasc core funding. The authors thank Mrs. Paula Reid for her assistance with statistical analysis.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd

Keywords

Beef
Blown pack spoilage
Hot boning
Spoilage

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Food Science

Access to Document

10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.11.012Licence: Unspecified

Cite this

@article{5730e29773744118893902cf2e9c07f3,

title = "Comparison of hot versus cold boning of beef carcasses on bacterial growth and the risk of blown pack spoilage",

abstract = "Primals were prepared from beef Longissimus thoracis et lumborum (LTL), psoas major (PM), quadriceps femoris (QF) and semitendinosus (S) muscles from cold and hot boned carcasses, vacuum-packaged and stored for 42 or 100 days at 2 °C and 7 °C. Storage temperature, carcass or primal surface temperature, pH and aw were monitored. Samples were taken periodically and tested for total viable count mesophilic (TVCm), TVC psychrophilic (TVCp), total Enterobacteriaceae count (TEC), presumptive Pseudomonas spp., lactic acid bacteria (LAB), Clostridium spp. and Brochothrix thermosphacta. A fifth muscle, biceps femoris (BF), was used to examine the impact of hot boning on blown pack spoilage (BPS). Primal counts increased to 6–7 log10 cfu cm− 2 after 6 weeks. Significantly (P < 0.05) higher TEC, Pseudomonas spp. and Br. thermosphacta counts were observed on cold versus hot boned primals. In contrast, significantly (P < 0.05) higher TVC, LAB and Clostridium spp. concentrations were obtained on hot boned beef. Moreover, BPS pack distension/bursting occurred considerably sooner in hot boned product.",

keywords = "Beef, Blown pack spoilage, Hot boning, Spoilage",

author = "Rachael Reid and S{\'e}amus Fanning and Paul Whyte and Joe Kerry and Declan Bolton",

note = "Funding Information: The funding for this research was provided by the Food Institutional Research Measure (FIRM), (Grant number 11F033 ), administered by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and by Teagasc core funding. The authors thank Mrs. Paula Reid for her assistance with statistical analysis. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2016 Elsevier Ltd",

year = "2017",

month = mar,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.11.012",

language = "English",

volume = "125",

pages = "46--52",

journal = "Meat Science",

issn = "0309-1740",

publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of hot versus cold boning of beef carcasses on bacterial growth and the risk of blown pack spoilage

AU - Reid, Rachael

AU - Fanning, Séamus

AU - Whyte, Paul

AU - Kerry, Joe

AU - Bolton, Declan

N1 - Funding Information: The funding for this research was provided by the Food Institutional Research Measure (FIRM), (Grant number 11F033 ), administered by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and by Teagasc core funding. The authors thank Mrs. Paula Reid for her assistance with statistical analysis. Publisher Copyright: © 2016 Elsevier Ltd

PY - 2017/3/1

Y1 - 2017/3/1

N2 - Primals were prepared from beef Longissimus thoracis et lumborum (LTL), psoas major (PM), quadriceps femoris (QF) and semitendinosus (S) muscles from cold and hot boned carcasses, vacuum-packaged and stored for 42 or 100 days at 2 °C and 7 °C. Storage temperature, carcass or primal surface temperature, pH and aw were monitored. Samples were taken periodically and tested for total viable count mesophilic (TVCm), TVC psychrophilic (TVCp), total Enterobacteriaceae count (TEC), presumptive Pseudomonas spp., lactic acid bacteria (LAB), Clostridium spp. and Brochothrix thermosphacta. A fifth muscle, biceps femoris (BF), was used to examine the impact of hot boning on blown pack spoilage (BPS). Primal counts increased to 6–7 log10 cfu cm− 2 after 6 weeks. Significantly (P < 0.05) higher TEC, Pseudomonas spp. and Br. thermosphacta counts were observed on cold versus hot boned primals. In contrast, significantly (P < 0.05) higher TVC, LAB and Clostridium spp. concentrations were obtained on hot boned beef. Moreover, BPS pack distension/bursting occurred considerably sooner in hot boned product.

AB - Primals were prepared from beef Longissimus thoracis et lumborum (LTL), psoas major (PM), quadriceps femoris (QF) and semitendinosus (S) muscles from cold and hot boned carcasses, vacuum-packaged and stored for 42 or 100 days at 2 °C and 7 °C. Storage temperature, carcass or primal surface temperature, pH and aw were monitored. Samples were taken periodically and tested for total viable count mesophilic (TVCm), TVC psychrophilic (TVCp), total Enterobacteriaceae count (TEC), presumptive Pseudomonas spp., lactic acid bacteria (LAB), Clostridium spp. and Brochothrix thermosphacta. A fifth muscle, biceps femoris (BF), was used to examine the impact of hot boning on blown pack spoilage (BPS). Primal counts increased to 6–7 log10 cfu cm− 2 after 6 weeks. Significantly (P < 0.05) higher TEC, Pseudomonas spp. and Br. thermosphacta counts were observed on cold versus hot boned primals. In contrast, significantly (P < 0.05) higher TVC, LAB and Clostridium spp. concentrations were obtained on hot boned beef. Moreover, BPS pack distension/bursting occurred considerably sooner in hot boned product.

KW - Beef

KW - Blown pack spoilage

KW - Hot boning

KW - Spoilage

U2 - 10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.11.012

DO - 10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.11.012

M3 - Article

C2 - 27886641

AN - SCOPUS:84997523900

VL - 125

SP - 46

EP - 52

JO - Meat Science

JF - Meat Science

SN - 0309-1740

ER -

Comparison of hot versus cold boning of beef carcasses on bacterial growth and the risk of blown pack spoilage

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this