Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Determination of the quality of stripe-marked and cracked eggs during storage

  • Liu, Yu Chi (Department of Animal Science, National Chung Hsing University) ;
  • Chen, Ter Hsin (Graduate Institute of Veterinary Pathobiology, National Chung Hsing University) ;
  • Wu, Ying Chen (Graduate Institute of Veterinary Pathobiology, National Chung Hsing University) ;
  • Tan, Fa Jui (Department of Animal Science, National Chung Hsing University)
  • Received : 2016.06.09
  • Accepted : 2016.12.05
  • Published : 2017.07.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: Stripe marks, which occasionally occur on the shell, do not cause breakage to the shell and shell membranes of eggs. This study investigated the quality of intact eggs (IEs), minor stripe-marked eggs (MEs), severe stripe-marked eggs (SEs), and cracked eggs (CEs) during 3-week storage at $25^{\circ}C$. Methods: Shell eggs were collected the day after being laid and were washed. Among them, eggs without any visual cracks or stripe marks on the shells were evaluated as IEs by the plant employees using candling in a darkened egg storage room; the remaining eggs exhibited some eggshell defects. At day 3, the eggs were further categorized into IEs, MEs, SEs, CEs, and broken eggs (BEs) on the basis of the description given. Except BEs, which were discarded, the remaining eggs were stored at $25^{\circ}C$ (approximate relative humidity 50%) and then analyzed. Results: Stripe marks were observed primarily within the first 3 days after washing. At day 3, CEs had significantly (p<0.05) lower Haugh unit values, but all eggs had grades AA or A, according to the United States Department of Agriculture standard. As storage time increased, differences in egg quality between groups were more obvious. IEs had the highest eggshell breaking strength. During storage, the total plate counts and pathogens, namely Escherichia coli, Campylobacter spp., Staphylococcus aureus, and Salmonella spp., were not detectable in the internal content of IEs and SEs. Conclusion: In conclusion, cracks degraded egg quality severely and minor stripe marks only slightly influenced the egg quality.

Keywords

References

  1. Yuceer M, Caner C. Antimicrobial lysozyme-chitosan coatings affect functional properties and shelf life of chicken eggs during storage. J Sci Food Agr 2014;94:153-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.6322
  2. Chukwuka OK, Okoli IC, Okeudo NJ, et al. Egg quality defects in poultry management and food safety. Asian J Agric Res 2011;5:1-16. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajar.2011.1.16
  3. King'ori AM. Egg quality deffects: Types, causes and occurrence: a review. J Anim Prod Adv 2012;2:350-7.
  4. Roberts JR. Factors affecting egg internal quality and egg shell quality in laying hens. J Poult Sci 2004;41:161-77. https://doi.org/10.2141/jpsa.41.161
  5. Wellman-Labadie O, Picman J, Hincke MT. Antimicrobial activity of the Anseriform outer eggshell and cuticle. Comp Biochem Physiol B: Biochem Mol Biol 2008;149:640-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpb.2008.01.001
  6. Hamilton RMG. Methods and factors that affect the measurement of egg shell quality. Poult Sci 1982;61:2022-39. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0612022
  7. Barnett DM, Kumpula BL, Petryk RL, Robinson NA. Hatchability and early chick growth potential of broiler breeder eggs with hairline cracks. J Appl Poult Res 2004;13:65-70. https://doi.org/10.1093/japr/13.1.65
  8. Khabisi MM, Salahi A, Mousavi SN. The influence of egg shell crack types on hatchability and chick quality. Turk J Vet Anim Sci 2012;36: 289-95.
  9. Todd ECD. Risk assessment of use of cracked eggs in Canada. Int J Food Microbiol 1996;30:125-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1605(96)00995-6
  10. De Ketelaere B, Coucke P, De Baerdemaeker J. Eggshell crack detection based on acoustic resonance frequency analysis. J Agr Eng Res 2000; 76:157-63. https://doi.org/10.1006/jaer.2000.0542
  11. Samli HE, Agma A, Senkoylu N. Effects of storage time and temperature on egg quality in old laying hens. J Appl Poult Res 2005;14: 548-53. https://doi.org/10.1093/japr/14.3.548
  12. Huang Q, Qiu N, Ma MH, et al. Estimation of egg freshness using S-ovalbumin as an indicator. Poult Sci 2012;91:739-43. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01639
  13. Ragni L, Al-Shami A, Mikhaylenko G, Tang J. Dielectric characterization of hen eggs during storage. J Food Eng 2007;82:450-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2007.02.063
  14. AOAC International. Official methods of analysis of AOAC International. 15th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists: Arlington VA: AOAC International; 1990.
  15. Sun CJ, Chen SR, Xu GY, Liu XM, Yang N. Global variation and uniformity of eggshell thickness for chicken eggs. Poult Sci 2012;91: 2718-21. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02220
  16. Torrico DD, No HK, Prinyawiwatkul W, et al. Mineral oil-chitosan emulsion coatings affect quality and shelf-life of coated eggs during refrigerated and room temperature storage. J Food Sci 2011;76:S262-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2011.02125.x
  17. Cader S, Goburdhun D, Neetoo H. Assessment of the microbial safety and quality of eggs from small and large-scale hen breeders. J World's Poult Res 2014;4:75-81.
  18. Statistical Analysis System (SAS) Institute Inc. Version 9.4. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.; 2014.
  19. USDA. U.S. Department of Agriculture. United States standards, grades, and weight classes for shell eggs. AMS 56.210. AMS. Washington, DC: USA; 2000.
  20. Monira KN, Salahuddin M, Miah G. Effect of breed and holding period on egg quality characteristics of chicken. Int J Poult Sci 2003;2:261-3. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2003.261.263
  21. Messens W, Grijspeerdt K, Herman L. Eggshell penetration by Salmonella: a review. Worlds Poult Sci J 2005;61:71-86. https://doi.org/10.1079/WPS200443
  22. Ricke SC, Birkhold SG, Gast RK. Eggs and egg products. In: Downes FP, Ito K, editors. Compendium of methods for the microbiological examination of foods. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association; 2001. p. 473-81.
  23. Theron H, Venter P, Lues JFR. Bacterial growth on chicken eggs in various storage environments. Food Res Int 2003;36:969-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0963-9969(03)00117-0
  24. De Reu K, Grijspeerdt K, Messens W, et al. Eggshell factors influencing eggshell penetration and whole egg contamination by different bacteria, including Salmonella enteritidis. Int J Food Microbiol 2006;112: 253-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2006.04.011
  25. Rose-Martel M, Du J, Hincke MT. Proteomic analysis provides new insight into the chicken eggshell cuticle. J Proteomics 2012;75:2697-706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprot.2012.03.019
  26. Wang J, Jiang R. Eggshell crack detection by dynamic frequency analysis. Eur Food Res Technol 2005;221:214-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-005-1149-9
  27. Lawrence KC, Yoon SC, Heitschmidt GW, Jones DR, Park B. Imaging system with modified-pressure chamber for crack detection in shell eggs. Sens Instrum Food Qual Saf 2008;2:116-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-008-9039-z
  28. Arivazhagan S, Shebiah RN, Sudharsan H, Kannan RR, Ramesh R. External and internal defect detection of egg using machine vision. J Emerg Trends Comput Inform Sci 2013;4:257-62.

Cited by

  1. Effects of Dietary Lycopene or Tomato Paste on Laying Performance and Serum Lipids in Laying Hens and on Malondialdehyde Content in Egg Yolk upon Storage vol.56, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.2141/jpsa.0170118
  2. Classification of inhomogeneous eggshell-mottling patterns using a pretrained convolutional neural network vol.29, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1117/1.jei.29.1.013013
  3. A novel eco-friendly green approach to produce particalized eggshell membrane (PEM) for skin health applications vol.8, pp.19, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1039/d0bm01110j
  4. Duck Eggshell Crack Detection by Nondestructive Sonic Measurement and Analysis vol.21, pp.21, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/s21217299