DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Differences in Physicochemical and Nutritional Properties of Breast and Thigh Meat from Crossbred Chickens, Commercial Broilers, and Spent Hens

  • Chen, Yulian (Key Laboratory of Meat Processing and Quality Control, Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Animal Products Processing, Ministry of Agriculture, Synergetic Innovative Center of Food Safety and Nutrition, College of Food Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University) ;
  • Qiao, Yan (Key Laboratory of Meat Processing and Quality Control, Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Animal Products Processing, Ministry of Agriculture, Synergetic Innovative Center of Food Safety and Nutrition, College of Food Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University) ;
  • Xiao, Yu (College of Food Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University) ;
  • Chen, Haochun (Key Laboratory of Meat Processing and Quality Control, Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Animal Products Processing, Ministry of Agriculture, Synergetic Innovative Center of Food Safety and Nutrition, College of Food Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University) ;
  • Zhao, Liang (Key Laboratory of Meat Processing and Quality Control, Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Animal Products Processing, Ministry of Agriculture, Synergetic Innovative Center of Food Safety and Nutrition, College of Food Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University) ;
  • Huang, Ming (Key Laboratory of Meat Processing and Quality Control, Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Animal Products Processing, Ministry of Agriculture, Synergetic Innovative Center of Food Safety and Nutrition, College of Food Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University) ;
  • Zhou, Guanghong (Key Laboratory of Meat Processing and Quality Control, Ministry of Education, Key Laboratory of Animal Products Processing, Ministry of Agriculture, Synergetic Innovative Center of Food Safety and Nutrition, College of Food Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University)
  • Received : 2015.10.12
  • Accepted : 2015.12.23
  • Published : 2016.06.01

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the physicochemical and nutritional properties of breast and thigh meat from commercial Chinese crossbred chickens (817 Crossbred chicken, 817C), imported commercial broilers (Arbor Acres broiler, AAB), and commercial spent hens (Hyline Brown, HLB). The crossbred chickens, commercial broilers and spent hens were slaughtered at their typical market ages of 45 d, 40 d, and 560 d, respectively. The results revealed that several different characteristic features for the three breeds. The meat of the 817C was darker than that of the other two genotypes. The 817C were also characterized by higher protein, lower intramuscular fat, and better texture attributes (cooking loss, pressing loss and Warner-Bratzler shear force [WBSF]) compared with AAB and HLB. The meat of the spent hens (i.e. HLB) was higher in WBSF and total collagen content than meat of the crossbred chickens and imported broilers. Furthermore, correlation analysis and principal component analysis revealed that there was a clear relationship among physicochemical properties of chicken meats. With regard to nutritional properties, it was found that 817C and HLB exhibited higher contents of essential amino acids and essential/non-essential amino acid ratios. In addition, 817C were noted to have highest content of microelements whereas AAB have highest content of potassium. Besides, 817C birds had particularly higher proportions of desirable fatty acids, essential fatty acids, polyunsaturated/saturated and (18:0+18:1)/16:0 ratios. The present study also revealed that there were significant differences on breast meat and thigh meat for the physicochemical and nutritional properties, regardless of chicken breeds. In conclusion, meat of crossbred chickens has some unique features and exhibited more advantages over commercial broilers and spent hens. Therefore, the current investigation would provide valuable information for the chicken meat product processing, and influence the consumption of different chicken meat.

Keywords

Crossbred Chicken;Commercial Broiler;Spent Hen;Physicochemical Properties;Nutritional Composition

References

  1. Abid, M., S. Jabbar, T. Wu, M. M. Hashim, B. Hu, S. Lei, and X. Zeng. 2014. Sonication enhances polyphenolic compounds, sugars, carotenoids and mineral elements of apple juice. Ultraso. Sonochem. 21: 93-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2013.06.002
  2. AOAC. 2003. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 17th ed. Association of the Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) International, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.
  3. Banskalieva, V., T. Sahlu, and A. Goetsch. 2000. Fatty acid composition of goat muscles and fat depots: a review. Small Rumin. Res. 37:255-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-4488(00)00128-0
  4. Barton, L., D. Bures, R. Kotrba, and J. Sales. 2014. Comparison of meat quality between eland (Taurotragus oryx) and cattle (Bos taurus) raised under similar conditions. Meat Sci. 96:346-352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.07.016
  5. Chauton, M. S., K. I. Reitan, N. H. Norsker, R. Tveteras, and H. T. Kleivdal. 2015. A techno-economic analysis of industrial production of marine microalgae as a source of EPA and DHArich raw material for aquafeed: Research challenges and possibilities. Aquaculture 436:95-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2014.10.038
  6. Contreras-Castillo, C., M. Trindade, and P. Felicio. 2008. Physical and chemical characterisation of spent hens mechanically separated meat (MSHM) from the Brazilian production. Acta Aliment. 37:283-291. https://doi.org/10.1556/AAlim.37.2008.2.13
  7. Foegeding, E., T. Lanier, and H. Hultin. 1996. Characteristics of edible muscle tissues. Food Chem. 3:879-942.
  8. Franco, D., D. Rois, J. A. Vazquez, L. Purrinos, R. Gonzalez, and J. M. Lorenzo. 2012. Breed effect between Mos rooster (Galician indigenous breed) and Sasso T-44 line and finishing feed effect of commercial fodder or corn. Poult. Sci. 91:487-498. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01546
  9. Geldenhuys, G., L. C. Hoffman, and N. Muller. 2015. The fatty acid, amino acid, and mineral composition of Egyptian goose meat as affected by season, gender, and portion. Poult. Sci. 94:1075-1087. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pev083
  10. Hoffman, L., A. Mostert, M. Kidd, and L. Laubscher. 2009. Meat quality of kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) and impala (Aepyceros melampus): Carcass yield, physical quality and chemical composition of kudu and impala Longissimus dorsi muscle as affected by gender and age. Meat Sci. 83:788-795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.08.022
  11. Huda, N., A. Putra, and R. Ahmad. 2011. Proximate and physicochemical properties of Peking and Muscovy duck breasts and thighs for further processing. J. Food Agric. Environ. 9:82-88.
  12. Jaturasitha, S., T. Srikanchai, M. Kreuzer, and M. Wicke. 2008. Differences in carcass and meat characteristics between chicken indigenous to northern Thailand (Black-boned and Thai native) and imported extensive breeds (Bresse and Rhode Island Red). Poult. Sci. 87:160-169. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2006-00398
  13. Jayasena, D. D., S. Jung, H. J. Kim, Y. S. Bae, H. I. Yong, J. H. Lee, J. G. Kim, and C. Jo. 2013. Comparison of quality traits of meat from Korean native chickens and broilers used in two different traditional Korean cuisines. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 26:1038-1046. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2012.12684
  14. Jung, S., J. H. Choe, B. Kim, H. Yun, Z. A. Kruk, and C. Jo. 2010. Effect of dietary mixture of gallic acid and linoleic acid on antioxidative potential and quality of breast meat from broilers. Meat Sci. 86:520-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.06.007
  15. Jung, Y.-K., H.-J. Jeon, S. Jung, J-H. Choe, J.-H. Lee, K.-N. Heo, B.-S. Kang, and C.-R. Jo. 2011. Comparison of quality traits of thigh meat from Korean native chickens and broilers. Korean J. Anim. Sci. 31:684-692. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2011.31.5.684
  16. Kamboh, A. and W.-Y. Zhu. 2013. Effect of increasing levels of bioflavonoids in broiler feed on plasma anti-oxidative potential, lipid metabolites, and fatty acid composition of meat. Poult. Sci. 92:454-461. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02584
  17. Kang, G., S. Kim, J. Kim, H. Kang, D. Kim, J. Na, J. Yu, H. Suh, and Y. Choi. 2009. Effects of washing methods on gel properties of chicken surimi prepared from spent hen breast muscle. Poult. Sci. 88:1438-1443. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00212
  18. Kong, F., J. Tang, M. Lin, and B. Rasco. 2008. Thermal effects on chicken and salmon muscles: Tenderness, cook loss, area shrinkage, collagen solubility and microstructure. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 41:1210-1222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2007.07.020
  19. Li, C., D. Liu, G. Zhou, X. Xu, J. Qi, P. Shi, and T. Xia. 2012. Meat quality and cooking attributes of thawed pork with different low field NMR T 21. Meat Sci. 92:79-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2011.11.015
  20. Li, X., R. Rezaei, P. Li, and G. Wu. 2011. Composition of amino acids in feed ingredients for animal diets. Amino Acids 40: 1159-1168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00726-010-0740-y
  21. Liu, X., D. D. Jayasena, Y. Jung, S. Jung, B. S. Kang, K. N. Heo, J. H. Lee, and C. Jo. 2012. Differential proteome analysis of breast and thigh muscles between Korean native chickens and commercial broilers. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 25:895-902. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2011.11374
  22. Lombardi-Boccia, G., S. Lanzi, and A. Aguzzi. 2005. Aspects of meat quality: Trace elements and B vitamins in raw and cooked meats. J. Food Compost. Anal. 18:39-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2003.10.007
  23. Majewska, D., M. Jakubowska, M. Ligocki, Z. Tarasewicz, D. Szczerbińska, T. Karamucki, and J. Sales. 2009. Physicochemical characteristics, proximate analysis and mineral composition of ostrich meat as influenced by muscle. Food Chem. 117:207-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.03.100
  24. Matitaputty, P. R., C. H. Wijaya, H. Bansi, V. Laudadio, and V. Tufarelli. 2015. Influence of duck species and cross-breeding on sensory and quality characteristics of Alabio and Cihateup duck meat. CyTA-J. Food 13:522-526.
  25. Rikimaru, K. and H. Takahashi. 2010. Evaluation of the meat from Hinai-jidori chickens and broilers: Analysis of general biochemical components, free amino acids, inosine 5′- monophosphate, and fatty acids. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 19:327-333. https://doi.org/10.3382/japr.2010-00157
  26. Tang, H., Y. Gong, C. Wu, J. Jiang, Y. Wang, and K. Li. 2009. Variation of meat quality traits among five genotypes of chicken. Poult. Sci. 88: 2212-2218. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00036
  27. Watanabe, A., Y. Ueda, and M. Higuchi. 2004. Effects of slaughter age on the levels of free amino acids and dipeptides in fattening cattle. Anim. Sci. J. 75:361-367. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-0929.2004.00198.x
  28. Wattanachant, S., S. Benjakul, and D. Ledward. 2004. Composition, colour, and texture of Thai indigenous and broiler chicken muscles. Poult. Sci. 83:123-128. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/83.1.123
  29. WHO (World Health Organization). 2007. Protein and amino acid requirements in human nutrition: World Health Organization Report, Geneva, Switzerland.
  30. Xiao, Y., G. Xing, X. Rui, W. Li, X. Chen, M. Jiang, and M. Dong. 2014. Enhancement of the antioxidant capacity of chickpeas by solid state fermentation with Cordyceps militaris SN-18. J. Funct. Foods 10:210-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2014.06.008
  31. Yousefi, A. R., H. Kohram, A. Z. Shahneh, A. Nik-Khah, and A. W. Campbell. 2012. Comparison of the meat quality and fatty acid composition of traditional fat-tailed (Chall) and tailed (Zel) Iranian sheep breeds. Meat Sci. 92:417-422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.05.004
  32. Zhao, G., H. Cui, R. Liu, M. Zheng, J. Chen, and J. Wen. 2011. Comparison of breast muscle meat quality in 2 broiler breeds. Poult. Sci. 90:2355-2359. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01432

Cited by

  1. Prevalence and Antibiotic Resistance of Non-typhoidal Salmonella Isolated from Raw Chicken Carcasses of Commercial Broilers and Spent Hens in Tai’an, China vol.8, pp.1664-302X, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.02106
  2. Investigation of the Chemical Composition and Functional Proteins of Chicken Gizzard Inner Lining vol.24, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3136/fstr.24.893
  3. Comparative study of growth performance and meat quality of three-line crossbred commercial group from Shanzhongxian and W-line chicken pp.1828-051X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2018.1482797
  4. A comparison of physicochemical characteristics, texture, and structure of meat analogue and meats pp.00225142, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.9438
  5. Sensory evaluation of poultry meat: A comparative survey of results from normal sighted and blind people vol.14, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0210722
  6. Eating for 3.8 × 1013: Examining the Impact of Diet and Nutrition on the Microbiota-Gut-Brain Axis Through the Lens of Microbial Endocrinology vol.9, pp.1664-2392, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2018.00796