ABSTRACT

CENTRALIZED PROCESSING OF FROZEN

PRECOOKED CHICKEN

BY

Eduardo Cruz Sison

The feasibility of centralized processing of frozen
precooked chicken and the influence of processing variables
on the eating quality of microwave reheated products were
evaluated. Cut-up chicken pieces were coated with breadings
or batters; cooked by pressure frying (PF) or by microwave-
steam (MWS) precooking in combination with pressure frying
or deep-fat-frying (DFF); frozen by air blast, liquid ni-
trogen, or liquid freon; packaged in polyethylene bags,
laminated pouches, or aluminum foil trays with or without
acetylated monoglyceride coating; stored at constant -18°C
or under simulated distribution condition; and then reheated
in a microwave oven and evaluated by taste panels.

It was demonstrated that chicken can be breaded,
fried, and frozen at a central place, and distributed in a

frozen condition or stored up to 3 months at constant -18°C

Eduardo Cruz Sison

and then reheated in a microwave oven and still have an
eating quality comparable to that of newly cooked controls.
The eating quality of microwave reheated fried chicken was
influenced by coating procedure, cooking method, packaging
and storage conditions, microwave reheating time, and re-
heating methods, but not by soaking in polyphosphate solu-
tion nor by freezing methods.

Soaking raw chicken pieces overnight in polyphos-
phate solution resulted in more juicy and tender products
than untreated pieces when served soon after cooking, but
not after freezing and microwave reheating. Polyphosphate
treatment also resulted in higher cooked and reheated
yields due to absorption of moisture during soaking and to
adhesion of more coating.

It was found that breadings have better adhesion
and are therefore more suitable for coating fried chicken
than batters. However, more studies are needed to develop
coatings which are more suitable for frozen fried chicken
meant to be reheated in microwave ovens.

Among the cooking methods, pressure frying was
found to produce the most tender freshly cooked products,
but the combination of microwave and steam precooking and
deep-fat-frying is recommended for the centralized prepara-
tion of frozen fried chicken. MWS-DFF yielded microwave
reheated frozen products which have comparable eating
quality and yield as those of pressure frying, but with

lower reheating losses.

Eduardo Cruz Sison

The packaging requirement for frozen fried chicken
was shown to be dependent upon the storage conditions.
Under constant -18°C, most commercially practical packaging
materials may be used. However, under normal distribution
condition (fluctuating temperature), packaging materials
with good oxygen and water vapor barrier properties are
necessary to retard flavor deterioration. The results~also
indicated the need for constant low temperature distribution»
condition to prolong the eating quality of the fried chicken.
The potential use of suitable edible coating for minimizing
moisture losses during frozen storage and microwave re-
heating was demonstrated.

Taste panel members did not differentiate the ac-
ceptability of chicken reheated by different methods. How-
ever, microwave reheating was the most rapid method and
could be used satisfactorily, provided the chicken pieces
are heated for only the minimum time needed to bring them
to serving temperature, and that reheating time be based on
weight rather than on the number of pieces. Prolonged
heating in a microwave oven resulted in excessive loss of
weight and in decrease in juiciness and tenderness scores.

It was generally observed that chicken pieces vary
widely in sizes and shapes, and thus require different
processing times. As such, it is recommended that the size
and cutting procedure should be made more uniform and that

different pieces should be processed separately. A

Eduardo Cruz Sison

commercial process consisting of soaking raw cut-up chicken
pieces overnight in polyphosphate solution; precooking by
microwave and steam; coating with breading; browning by
deep-fat-frying; freezing with any economical but reasonably
fast method; and packaging in any commercially practical
package with good protective properties, can be used in

the centralized preparation of frozen precooked chicken.

CENTRALIZED PROCESSING OF FROZEN

PRECOOKED CHICKEN

BY

Eduardo Cruz Sison

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Food Science
and Human Nutrition

1971

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to express my profound gratitude to the
Rockefeller Foundation for granting me a scholarship to pur-
sue graduate studies in the United States, and to the Uni-
versity of the Philippines for granting me a leave of ab-
sence for the duration of my studies.

I would also like to express my sincerest apprecia-
tion to Dr. Lawrence E. Dawson for his guidance and help
throughout my studies and for his valuable suggestions in
preparing this thesis. Appreciation is also extended to the
members of my guidance committee, Drs. John W. Allen, LeRoy
Dugan, Jr., Dennis R. Heldman and Theodore Wishnetsky, for
all the help which they have given me.

My thanks also to the staff members and graduate
students of the Department of Food Science and Human Nutri-
tion who participated in my taste panels for their criti-
cisms, suggestions, and encouragement in the conduct of my
experiments.

Lastly, I would like to express my deep gratitude to
my wife, Jo, for her patience and moral support during the
course of my studies, and for typing and editing the drafts

of this thesis.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE
LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Vi

LIST OF FIGURES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 ix

LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . x
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
A. Microwave Heating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

. . . . . . . . . . 6

1. Principles . . . . . . . .
2. Application of microwave heating in
poultry processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

B. Factors Affecting the Eating Quality
of Fried Chicken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

1. Appearance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2. Flavor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
a. Nature of chicken flavor . . . . . . . . . . l4
1. Sulfur compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2. Carbonyl compounds . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3. Amines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l9
4. Other compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5. Non-volatiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
b. Precursors of chicken flavor . . . . . . . . 22
l. Sulfur compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2. Carbonyl compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3. Non-volatiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

c. Fadtors affecting characteristic
chicken flavor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
1. Component parts of chicken . . . . . . . . 24
2. Production variables . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3. Processing variables . . . . . . . . . . . 27

iii

PAGE

d. Factors affecting flavor deterioration

in fried chicken . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

3. Tenderness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
a. Production variables . . . . . . . . . . 34
b. Post-mortem physico-chemical changes . . . 34
c. Processing variables . . . . . . . . . . . 38

C. Packaging Requirements for Frozen
Fried Chicken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

1. Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2. Convenience and/or utility . . . . . . . . . 41
3. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
4. Profitability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

D. Measurement of Acceptability and
Eating Quality 0 I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 42

MATERIALS AND METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
A. General procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
B. Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

l. Acceptability of microwave reheated

chicken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
2. Effect of freezing treatments on

eating quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3. Effect of microwave reheating time

on eating quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4. Effect of packaging and storage

conditions on eating quality . . . . . . . 57
5. Comparison of reheating methods . . . . . . . 57
6. Evaluation of breading materials . . . . . . 58
7. Comparison of cooking methods . . . . . . . . 59

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Experiment 1. Acceptability of microwave
reheated chicken . . . . . . . . . 60
Experiment 2. Effect of freezing treatments

on eating qualify . . . . . . . . . 62
Experiment 3. Effect of microwave reheating
time on eating quality . . . . . . 68

iv

Experiment 4.

Experiment 5.
Experiment 6.

Experiment 7.

Effect of packaging and
storage conditions on
eating quality . . .

Comparison of

methods

Evaluation of

materials

Comparison of

methods

Miscellaneous Discussion .

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .

LITERATURE CITED

APPENDICES

reheating
breading

cooking

I O O O 0

PAGE

74
82
88
100
114
117
121

136

Table

2a.

2b.

7a.

7b.

8a.

LIST OF TABLES

Page
Quantity of H23 in cooked chicken . . . . . . 18
Taste panel scores of microwave reheated
fried chicken frozen by different
methOds O O O I O O O O O O O O O O I O I I O 6 3

Analysis of variance of taste panel scores
of microwave reheated fried chicken frozen
by different methods . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Time required to lower the temperature of
chicken pieces from approximately 50°C to
-l8°C internal temperature . . . . . . . . . 65

Mathematical x-intercept and slope of weight
loss curves of various chicken parts . . . . 70

Regression analysis of the relationship of
juiciness and tenderness scores and shear

press values with microwave reheating

time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

Correlation coefficients for breast muscle
measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

Summary of taste panel scores of microwave
reheated fried chicken subjected to

various freezing, packaging, and storage
treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

Analysis of variance of taste panel scores

of microwave reheated fried chicken sub-

jected to various freezing, packaging, and

storage treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Taste panel scores of microwave reheated

frozen fried chicken subjected to various
packaging and storage treatments . . . . . . 80

vi

Table

8b.

10a.

10b.

11.

12a.

12b.

12c.

13a.

13b.

14.

15a.

Page

Analysis of variance of taste panel scores

of microwave reheated frozen chicken sub-

jected to various packaging and storage

treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

Percentage change in weight at selected

stages of processing of chicken subjected

to different packaging and storage treat-

ments (Experiment 4, Trial 2) . . . . . . . . 83

Taste panel scores of frozen fried chicken
reheated by different methods . . . . . . . . 85

Analysis of variance of taste panel scores
of frozen fried chicken reheated by dif-
ferent methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Percentage weight loss of chicken pieces
during reheating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Taste panel scores of freshly cooked and
microwave reheated frozen fried chicken
subjected to various coating treatments . . . 90

Summary of the taste panel scores of
chicken subjected to various coating
treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

Analysis of variance of the taste panel
scores of fried chicken subjected to
various coating treatments . . . . . . . . . 92

Percentage change in weight during pro-
cessing of fried chicken subjected to
various coating treatments . . . . . . . . . 95

Analysis of variance of breading content,
percentage change in weight and yield
data (Experiment 6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Coating content of fried chicken subjected
to various coating treatments . . . . . . . . 98

Taste panel scores and shear press values

of freshly cooked and microwave reheated
chicken subjected to various treatments . . . 102

vii

Table Page

15b. Analysis of variance of taste panel scores
of chicken subjected to various
treaments O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 104

16a. Proximate composition of meat and skin-
breading complex from chicken subjected
to various treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

16b. Analysis of variance of shear press values
and proximate composition data for
chicken meat (Experiment 7) . . . . . . . . . 109

17a. Percentage change in weight during process-
ing of chicken cooked by different
methOds O O O O O I O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O 1'11

17b. Analysis of variance of percentage change
in weight and yield data (Experiment 7) . . . 112

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE

PAGE
1. DuPont Laboratory freon freezer . . . . . . . . . 51
2a. Flavor and general acceptability scores
of microwave reheated frozen precooked
chicken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
2b. Juiciness and tenderness scores of
microwave reheated frozen chicken
and freshly cooked controls . . . . . . . . . . 61

3. Average weight loss of chicken pieces
during reheating in microwave oven
after 3 months under simulated
disgribution condition or constant
-18 C storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

4. Influence of microwave reheating time on
juiciness and tenderness of Pectoralis
major muscle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

 

ix

APPENDIX

LIST OF APPENDICES

I Reported cooking yield values for
fried chicken . . . . . . . . . . . .

II

III

IV

VIa

VIb

VIIa

VIIb

VIII

Factors affecting consumers' acceptance
of food products . . . . . . . . . .

Taste

Taste

Taste

Taste

panel
panel
panel

panel

score card I . . . . . . .
score card II . . . . . . .
score card III . . . . . .

scores of microwave reheated

frozen precooked chicken and newly
cooked controls, 0 to 24 weeks of
storage .

Analysis of
scores of
precooked
controls,

Taste

air-
precooked

panel
blast

variance of taste panel
microwave reheated frozen
chicken and newly cooked

0 to 24 weeks of storage .

scores of microwave reheated
or liquid nitrogen frozen
chicken, and newly cooked

unfrozen and frozen-thawed controls,
0 to 4 weeks of storage . . . . . . .

Analysis of variance of taste panel
scores of microwave reheated air-
blast or liquid nitrogen frozen
precooked chicken, and newly cooked
frozen and unfrozen controls . . . .

Percentage change in weight of various
cooked chicken pieces at different
stages of processing (Experiment 2) .

PAGE

136

138
139
140

142

143

144

145

146

147

APPENDIX PAGE

IX Composition of cooked flesh of
different chicken pieces at selected
stages of processing following
air-blast or liquid nitrogen freezing . . . . 148

X Taste panel scores of microwave
reheated fried chicken subjected
to various freezing, packaging
and storage treatments . . . . . . . . . . . 149

XI Proximate composition of skin-breading

complex of chicken subjected to
various treatments . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

xi

INTRODUCTION

The integration of nearly all phases of production
and the concentration of operation in areas where labor and
other production costs are lower have enabled the broiler
industry to attain remarkable efficiency in the production
of meat. However, over production and obsolete practices
of marketing unbranded perishable commodities have resulted
in very low and variable earnings in the industry. In the
face of ever-increasing costs of production coupled with
consumer resistance to rising food prices, the broiler in-
dustry must find means of realizing more profits from its
products. One important approach is to add more value to
the product by centralized processing of branded items and
distributing them through retail outlets.

The National Commission on Food Marketing (1966)
showed that margins or profits increase as value is added
to the product or as the product is brought closer to ulti-
mate consumption. Processing into more stable products
would minimize the problem of perishability and branding
could create product differentiation or brand-loyalty which
could command higher prices. A less perishable product and

a recognized brand name can stabilize prices against

fluctuation in supply or demand. Centralized processing
near or at the chicken dressing plants would allow more
efficient and economical operation.

Other factors favor centralized processing for in-
creasing the profitability of the broiler industry. Broiler
meat is a widely acceptable and very economical source of
high quality protein for the diet. In a consumer survey
in 1956 (Weidenhamer 1958), the USDA found that broilers
were being consumed by nearly all families in all regions,
and most of the families ate chicken once a week or more
regardless of the season of the year. Frying was the most
predominant method of cooking by 94% of the families. The
major reasons cited for the popularity of chicken were
taste, preference, economy and ease of preparation. How-
ever, the general deterrent to the greater use of chicken
was the lack of variety in its preparation. These results
indicate that processing into a variety of products may en-
hance greater consumption of chicken. Centralized opera-
tions could justify expenditure for consumer research to
determine which forms or manner of preparation would be
acceptable.

The growing affluence of American society has
brought about a change in the eating patterns of the people,
which in turn leads to greater demand for convenience foods.
There is a definite trend towards kitchen-ready, oven-ready,

table-ready, quick-service, and carry out types of food

items (Atkins 1965). This trend is responsible for the
phenomenal growth of the fast food stores or take-out
restaurants. In 1970, the fast food business accounted for
20 to 25% of the total broiler production (Loberg 1971),
whereas in a large eastern chain of food stores, the fried
chicken variety alone accounted for 27% of the total move-
ment of all products from its grocery frozen food cases
(Gavries 1971). A prediction was made that many food stores
will add new departments to handle increasing lines of con-
venience food items (Progressive Grocers 1971). With the
continued growth of the convenience food or fast food busi-
ness, greater demand for further-processed broiler products
may very well follow.

Centralized processing may improve efficiency in
the distribution of broiler products as well as in the
Operation of the chicken take-out restaurants. The distri-
bution of packaged retail broiler products would eliminate
the cutting up and packaging operations in retail stores
and the cooking operations in the chicken restaurants.
These operations, when conducted in a small scale, are in-
efficient in the use of labor and equipment, are space-
consuming, and sometimes cause sanitation problems. Elimi-
nation of these inefficient operations could result in
savings which may accrue as an additional profit to the

industry.

Since frying is the most popular method of chicken
preparation, frozen fried chicken would be a very important
product for centralized processing. Consumer acceptance of
frozen fried chicken would be influenced, among other things,
by price, desirable eating qualities, and convenience in
preparation for serving. A reheating method which is simple,
rapid, and which will result in a highly acceptable product
is essential. The commercially available oven units which
utilize microwave energy to heat foods rapidly and uniformly
may satisfy such reheating requirements for both store and
home use.

The lack of technical publications on the central-
ized preparation of frozen fried chicken and on the use of
microwave ovens for its reheating has hampered the develop-
ment of centralized processing of this product. Hence, this
project was initiated to study the problems associated with
the large scale preparation of frozen fried chicken and to

establish possible solutions.

Objectives

 

1. To evaluate the feasibility of utilizing microwave
energy to thaw and heat frozen fried chicken for
immediate consumption.

2. To study the factors which may affect the eating
quality of microwave reheated frozen fried chicken

in order to develop a better system of preparation.

3. To compare three methods of cooking to determine
which one would be most suitable for centralized

operation.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A. Microwave Heating

 

1. Principles

Microwaves are portions of the electromagnetic
spectrum with wavelengths from 1 to 100 cm or frequencies
in the hundreds or thousands of megahertz (MHz). Since
this frequency range is used in radar communication, the
Federal Communication Commission has allocated certain fre-
quencies for industrial, scientific, and medical (ISM) uses.
The two commonly used ISM frequencies for microwave heat-
ing are 915 and 2450 MHz with wavelengths of 32.8 and
12.25 cm respectively.

Microwaves are generated by special oscillator
electron tubes such as magnetron and klystron, and are ra-
diated by an antenna through a waveguide to the load in the
oven chamber. Metals and insulators are not affected by
microwaves because metals reflect microwaves like mirrors
reflect light, and insulators are transparent to microwaves
the way glasses are to light. However, dielectric substances
such as foodstuffs are translu cent to and are therefore
affected by microwaves.

Microwave heating is a radiation phenomenon (Copson

1962, Badger 1970) which is accomplished in a microwave

oven. According to Copson and Decareau (1966), a complete
microwave oven consists of eight major components: 1) the
power supply which adapts line power to the generator re-
quirement and to ancillary components; 2) the generator or
power tube which converts the power supplied into microwave
energy; 3) the transmission section for energy propagation
to the oven proper; 4) coupling devices which permit the
transfer of the energy to the load; 5) distributing devices
which deliver the energy in a uniform interaction pattern;
6) the cavity or the oven itself which provides resonant
structure for efficient energy transfer; 7) energy sealing
and trapping structure to prevent stray radiation; and 8)
operating controls and safety devices for selection of cook-
ing condition and the protection of the operator. When
microwaves are directed to or are reflected from the metal
walls back and forth through a dielectric substance (load),
the material absorbs energy from the electromagnetic field
of the waves in proportion to its loss characteristics.

The "loss" refers to the absorption of radiation within the
dielectric material.

According to Goldblith (1966), the energy is ab-
sorbed by the charged assymetric molecules which compose
the dielectric materials and store it as potential energy
as they align themselves with the rapidly changing alter-
nating current field. In this field, the molecules act as

miniature dipoles, and while oscillating around their axis

in an attempt to go to the pr0per positive and negative
poles, intermolecular collision occurs and the stored po-
tential energy is converted to heat. The materials that
exhibit this intermolecular motion are considered "lossy".
The greater the lossiness of the material, the greater the
absorption of microwave energy and the greater the produc-
tion of heat.
The rate of increase in temperature of the load is
given in Equation 1:
A T = 14.4 P/Cd (oc/min) (1)
where C is the specific heat of the material (cal/OC-gm), d
is density (gm/cm3), and P is the amount of power generated
in the dielectric material by the electromagnetic field.
Goldblith (1966) expressed P in Equation 2:
2 ' -14

P = 55.61 E f e x 10

r (watts/cm3) (2)

where E is the electric field strength (volts/cm), f is the

frequency in hertz, and er is the dielectric loss factor.
Substituting Equation 2 into Equation 1,

2 " -12
A T = 8E f Sr x 10 (CC/min) (3)

CH

 

The dielectric loss factor Er is the overall measure
of the ability of the material to respond when placed in an

electromagnetic field:

er = er x tan 6 (4)
I

where 8r is the dielectric constant and tan 6 is the dissi-

pation factor or tangent loss. The dielectric constant

relates the value of the electric field within the material
to the value of the electric field externally applied to
the material (Tinga 1970).

The literature is scant on the dielectric loss
factor (8;) properties of foods or on the factors affecting
it. However, a number of authors (Bengstsson §E_al. 1963,
Copson 1962, Decareau 1966a, Goldblith 1966, Van Dyke gt_al.
1969, and Tinga 1970) have reported that a; varies irregu—
larly with frequency, temperature, and nature of the
material. In studying the effects of frequency and temper-
ature on the dielectric properties of different kinds of
meat and fish, Bengtsson gt_al. (1963) found that: a)
values for dielectric constant and loss tangent decreased
at decreasing rates with increase in frequency; b) values
for dielectric constant and loss tangent showed a sharp
increase upon defrosting; and c) variation in dielectric
properties were influenced by the proportion of moisture
and fat in the material. In a related study on ground beef,
Van Dyke e£_31. (1969) reported the following findings:

a) below the critical moisture content (20%), water concen-
tration had little effect on the dielectric loss factor;
between 20 and 45%, 6; increased dramatically with the in-
crease in water concentration, the increase being greater

at higher temperatures; and above 45%, the effect was neg-

ligible; b) the addition of salt to the sample caused an

10

increase in the/er values; and c) at constant protein to
ash ratios and at water contents above 45%, increasing the
fat content resulted in a decrease in the a; values._

In general, microwave heating has some potential
advantages over conventional methods of heating foodstuffs.
These advantages include: a) rapid heating, b) uniform
heating, c) degree of selectivity, and d) ease of control.
An examination of Equation 3 would show that the rate of
heating a foodstuff in a microwave oven is influenced by
E, f, 8;,C, and d. Since 8;, C, and d are inherent charac-
teristics of foodstuffs and f is restricted to the ISM fre-
quencies, one can increase the rate of heating by increasing
E.

The uniformity of heating is influenced by the
distribution of assymetric molecules in the material and
the penetration of microwave energy into the material. The
penetration is described by half power depth or that thick-
ness of the material which reduces the power at the surface
to one half. Goldblith (1966) expressed HPD in Equation 5:

HPD = .693

 

-14 (5)
55.61 x 10 f tan 6 VS'
r

The greater the dielectric loss factor of the material, the
lesser the penetration and the faster the heating near the
surface as against the interior of the material. Thus,
uniformity of heating can be achieved by heating thinner
dimensions of materials in relation to its dielectric loss

factor.

11

2. Application of Microwave Heating
in Poultry Processing

Microwave heating has been used with varying measures
of success in the precooking of broilers prior to freezing,
and in the thawing and heating of frozen fried chicken
dinners. Earlier attempts to precook chicken in continuous
microwave ovens have resulted in dried-up products due to
the tendency of the moisture at the surface to distill and
condense over to the walls of the equipment. However, when
steam was connected to the oven chamber, excessive dehydra-
tion was eliminated and better products were obtained. A
number of authors (Anon.l966a,b, Decareau 1966b, May 1969
and Thamer gt_al. 1971) have reported that the combination
microwave-steam cooking, in comparison with other systems,
shortens cooking time, reduces moisture loss, eliminates
bone darkening, and is more economical in the long run.
These benefits have prompted one firm to install a microwave-
steam unit which cooks 1.5 tons of chicken per hour (Anon.
1970).

However, limited studies on the use of microwave
ovens for the reheating of frozen fried chicken have shown
discouraging results (Anon.l969b, Co and Livingston 1969,
and Goldblith 1966). The limitations on the use of micro-
wave ovens for such a purpose can be summarized as follows:
1) the speed of heating depends upon the quantity of the

load; 2) microwave heating causes excessive steaming which

12

results in sogginess of the breading; 3) the uneven distri-
bution of energy in the chamber results in non-uniform
heating; 4) the preferential absorption of microwave energy
by thawed portions, raising them to increasingly higher
temperatures while the center cores remain frozen; and 5)
microwave energy does not penetrate metals, which means
that the frozen food must be in a special container when
being heated. To solve these problems, a company developed
a two-step process for reheating frozen precooked broilers
(Anon.1969a). The process consists of placing 95% precooked
broilers in boxes into a microwave oven for 1.15 minutes,
and then transferring the products (with the boxes open) to

an infrared heater for surface crisping.

B. Factors Affecting the Eating
Quality of Fried Chicken

 

 

1. Appearance

This visual property provides the initial appeal
which induces consumers to sample the product for the first
time. The appearance of fried chicken is influenced by the
coating characteristics. Hanson and Fletcher (1963) studied
the effect of cooking method, batter composition and formu-
lation, and method of coating application on the character-
istics of the coating. They reported that color is in-
fluenced by the composition of the batter: waxy rice flour

and waxy cornstarch produced glossy brown coatings, wheat

13

flour a grayish brown color, waxy cornstarch and cornstarch
a very light brown color, potato flour a golden brown, and
yellow cornflour a greenish yellow cast. Addition of egg
yolk to the batter produced a darker color. They also re-
ported that precooking to shrink the tissues before batter
was applied resulted in better adhesion of the coating.
Increasing the proportion of thickening agents and the num-
ber of coating layers resulted in thicker coatings. The
thick coatings peeled off more readily than the thin ones.
In another study, Hale and Goodwin (1968) found that pre-
cooking either in steam or with microwave before coating
and deep-fat-frying improved batter adhesion as well as
texture and hardness. Addition of skin was found to have
no significant effects on the coating characteristics.
However, Spencer and George (1962) showed that incorpora—
ting acetylated monoglyceride into the flour coating improved
the appearance and durability of the coating.

In eating fried chicken, the presence of dark spots
near or around the bones may detract from acceptability.
These spots are coagulated blood pigments which oozed out
of the bone marrow after freezing and slow thawing (Brant
and Stewart 1949, Koonz and Ramsbottom (1947), Woodroof
and Shelor 1948). Apparently, freezing and thawing alters
the permeability of the bones of young chicken, thus allow-

ing the leaching out of hemoglobin during thawing and

14

subsequent cooking. 'Bone darkening can be prevented by
cooking the birds immediately after rapid thawing, or by
preheating the chicken pieces to 82°C before freezing

(Brant and Stewart 1949, Ellis and Woodroof 1959, and Essary

1959).

2. Flavor

Once consumers taste a product, the satisfaction
they derive from eating the product becomes the dominant
factor which would influence their repeated purchase of
that product. The eating experience can only be satisfying
if the product has a desirable flavor. According to Moncrief
(1967), flavor perception is the synchronous sensation of
taste and odor, and can be modified by the simultaneous tac-
tile responses in the mouth. Since this perception involves
the interaction between the complex flavor characteristics
(stimuli) and the response of the individual, a desirable
flavor characteristic to one individual may not be considered
as desirable by another individual. Hence, it is important
for food processors to understand what constitutes a desir-

able flavor and what factors may influence it.

a. Nature of chicken flavor

 

Since flavor involves taste and odor stimuli, a
typical chicken flavor must consist of volatiles, which can

get into the olfactory chamber, and of smaller molecular

15

weight non-volatiles, which can dissolve in the saliva in
order to react with the taste buds. Bouthilet (1950) argued
that chicken flavor is produced during cooking because raw
chicken has no recognizable flavor. He suggested that the
flavor components are reaction products of heat upon the
tissues.

To date, over two hundred components have already
been detected in cooked chicken volatiles and approximately
50 compounds have been identified (Crocker 1948, Bouthilet
1949, 1950, 1951a, b. Pippen gt_31. 1954, 1958, 1960,
Pippen and Eyring 1957, Pippen and Nonaka 1963, Minor gt_§1.
1965a, b, Shrimpton and Gray 1965, and Nonaka gt_§1. 1967).
The components already identified include: sulfur compounds,
carbonyls, amines, aromatic benzene compounds, furans, es-
ters, hydrocarbons, alcohols, and terpenes. However, infor-
mation on the contribution or significance of these compounds
to chicken flavor is still limited. While it is possible
that all of these compounds blend or interact to produce the
characteristic chicken flavor, Pippen (1967) suggested that
the compounds which occur at significant concentrations at
the time the poultry is eaten or smelled could have flavor

significance.

1. Sulfur compounds
The sulfur compounds in cooked chicken flavor which

have been isolated and identified include: hydrogen sulfide,

16

carbonyl sulfide, methyl and ethyl mercaptans, carbon and
methyl disulfides, 1,2-ethane dithiol and 2-methyl thiophene
(Crocker 1948, Bouthilet 1949, 1950, Minor et_al. 1965a,
Shrimpton and Gray 1965, and Nonaka §t_31. 1967).

The presence of sulfur compounds in chicken flavor
was first demonstrated by Crocker (1948). He distilled tis—
sue from chicken, beef, and pork, and found hydrogen sulfide,
ammonia and acetaldehyde in each of the three distillates.
Crocker concluded that all meats possess identical funda-
mental flavor factors, and that differences in species may
be due to low concentrations of compounds characteristic of
the particular species.

During fractionation of chicken broth distillates,
Bouthilet (1950, 1951a) observed separation of the extract
into two flavor fractions: one was a sulfur-containing
fraction which he considered "meaty" because it was not a
typical flavor, and the other contributed the characteristic
chicken flavor. Later, Minor gt_§1. (1965a) demonstrated
that removal of sulfur compounds caused nearly complete loss
of "meaty" odor, indicating that the sulfur compounds con-
tribute "meaty" character to the cooked chicken flavor.

Pippen and Eyring (1957) showed that nearly all the
sulfur in the freshly cooked chicken volatile existed as
hydrogen sulfide, and an insignificant amount as mercaptan.
They also confirmed Bouthilet's (1951a) observation that

desulfuration (hydrogen sulfide production) in broth

17

continued as long as true chicken flavor existed. These
results indicate that hydrogen sulfide is a direct contribu-
tor to the "meaty" flavor of chicken.

The role of hydrogen sulfide in the characteristic
chicken broth aroma was also~demonstrated by Klose §E_§1.
(1966) as follows: 1) when essentially all aroma constit—
uents except hydrogen sulfide was removed by anhydrous cal-

cium sulfate (or CaCl or CaCO3), the residual aroma was

2

easily recognized as H S; 2) when H28 was removed by any of

2
a variety of heavy metal salts, a completely disagreeable

aroma remained that indicated the blending or masking effect
of the H28; and 3) when H2

by magnesium oxide, an ammonical odor characteristic of am-

S and other compounds were removed

monia and aliphalic amines was exposed.

Another evidence of the contribution of H28 to

chicken flavor was reported by Pippen and Mecchi (1969).

Table 1 shows that 180-730 ppb H S in the meat of freshly

2
simmered, roasted, and fried chicken are 18 to 73 times more

than the 10 ppb H S odor threshold in water, which further

2
proves that H28 contributes directly to the aroma of these
products.

Pippen and Mecchi (1969) also showed that hydrogen
sulfide may contribute indirectly to cooked chicken flavor

by forming secondary products when combined with carbonyl

compounds. Results indicate the possibility of the formation

18

of hydrogen sulfide-carbonyl esters with intense food-like

odors, similar to those described by Barch (1952).

Table 1. Quantity of H28 in cooked chicken1

 

 

H25 foundz, ppb

Leg Meat Breast Meat

Cooking Method

 

Boiled (1 hr at 100°C) 730 320
Roasted (to 85°C internal temp.) 596 180
Fried (to 85°C internal temp.) 580 180

 

1Pippen and Mecchi (1969)
2Analysis was started about 5 minutes after cooking.

2. Carbonyl compounds

The fraction which Bouthilet (1950) found to contri-
bute the characteristic Chicken flavor must have been com-
posed of carbonyl compounds.l Minor g£_al. (1965b) also
demonstrated that removal of carbonyls from cooked Chicken
volatiles caused a loss of "chickeny flavor" and an intensi-
fication of "meaty" or "beefy" odor.

There are over 20 carbonyls identified in cooked
Chicken volatiles, but the major compounds are acetaldehyde,
acetoin, diacetyl, decadienal and hexanal (Pippen g£_al.
1958, 1960, Minor gt_al. 1965b, Shrimpton and Gray 1965,
and Nonaka et_al. 1967). Pippen.e£;21, (1960) conducted
limited tests to ascertain whether diacetyl and acetoin

contribute to the flavor of Chicken broth. They found that

19

normal concentrations of acetoin and diacetyl in chicken
broth cannot be detected. However, if substantial amount

of acetoin was oxidized to diacetyl, its presence was easily
detected. They postulated that diacetyl contributes to the
transient buttery-oily type aroma in freshly cooked Chicken,
and this was confirmed by Minor gt_al. (1966). Pippen and
Nonaka (1960) obtained authentic samples of all the carbonyls
which they have identified from cooked chicken volatiles and
observed that none of the carbonyls had flavor characteris-
tics like that of cooked chicken. However, they estimated
that the average concentration in the chicken broth samples

was 14 x 10'5

moles/liter which exceeded the reported
threshold levels for these compounds in similar media (Lea
and Swoboda 1958, and Patton gt_al. 1959). These results
suggest that a blending of the carbonyl compounds is neces-
sary to produce the distinctive "Chicken" flavor.

Pippen and Nonaka (1963) showed that the carbonyl
compounds in the volatiles of freshly cooked and rancid
chicken are qualitatively the same, but the quantity is
greater in rancid Chicken. They also found that there is a

narrow line between the characteristic freshly cooked Chicken

flavor and rancid chicken.

3. Amines
The presence of ammonia or amines in cooked chicken
volatiles has been reported by Crocker (1948), Bouthilet

(1951a), Pippen and Eyring (1957), Minor et al. (1965a) and

20

Klose gt_§1. (1966). Pippen and Eyring (1957) found that
ammonia accounts for nearly all the volatile nitrogen.
MDreover, they showed that removal of ammonia resulted in
more intense flavor, which explained the findings of
Bouthilet (1950) that the lowering of pH, which minimizes

the production of ammonia, raises the flavor level in chicken
broth distillate. These results demonstrate that ammonia
does not contribute directly to the characteristic chicken
flavor but could exert a masking or suppressing effect on

the other flavor components, and that the volatile chicken

flavor is associated with the neutral or acid components.

4. Other compounds

The other compounds identified in cooked chicken
volatiles have not yet been reported to be present in sig-
nificant amounts nor shown to contribute directly to chicken
flavor. However, the possibility that they could blend and
interact with the other flavor components to give a distinc-

tive desirable chicken flavor deserves further investigation.

5. Non-volatiles

A comprehensive study of the role of non-volatiles
in chicken flavor was made by Kazeniac (1961). He proposed
a possible flavor relation of various compounds in chicken
broth, which indicates that non-volatiles are responsible
for the taste, body, and mouth satisfaction characteristics

of chicken broth flavor. Taste in chicken broth was

21

attributed to several Classes of compounds, including a mix-
ture of amino acids, peptides, carbohydrates, inorganic
salts, sulfides, carbonyls and non-amino nitrogen compounds,
such as creatine/creatinine, carnitine, hypoxanthine,
inosine, and inosinic acid. Kazeniac (1961), found that of
the 17 or 18 amino acids in chicken broth, none had the taste
Characteristic of chicken. However, when certain amino
acids, including lysine, arginine, alpha alanine, glutamic
or aspartic acid, were added to chicken broth, the overall
flavor was improved. Glutamic acid at levels between 0.02%
and 0.05%, and lysine between 0.05% and 0.08%, gave chicken
broth the highest amounts of mouth satisfaction and best
overall flavor, and alanine imparted a sweet tasting broth
and gave some mouth satisfaction. Lactic acid contributed
to the sour, astringent taste in the broth, and improved
mouth satisfaction at levels of 0.02-0.04% when combined
with 0.06-0.08% lysine or arginine.

Kazeniac (1961) also reported that glucose, fructose,
and ribose are the principal sugars present in chicken broth,
and that inositol is suspected. These sugars are very low
in concentration to make any substantial contribution to the
sweet taste but might show increased taste intensity in com-
bination with other compounds.

Kazeniac (1961) further found that inorganic salts
and salts of amino acids contribute to the salty taste in

chicken broth. Addition of inorganic phosphates led to some

22

flavor improvements. Carnitine-enriched broth developed<i
strong fishy aroma. Hypoxanthine and inosine imparted a
bitter taste, whereas inosinic acid made a major contribu-
tion to mouth satisfaction and intensified the effects of
other compounds. Collagen and lipids gave more body to the
flavor of the chicken broth. Kazeniac (1961) concluded that
chicken flavor is a complex blend of different compounds,
and that addition of precursors seem to hold more promise
for improvement of the Chicken flavor than the use of the

flavorful compounds themselves.

b. Precursors of chicken flavor

 

1. Sulfur compounds

Mecchi gt_§1. (1964) studied the origin of hydrogen
sulfide in heated chicken muscle and found that about 90% of
the hydrogen sulfide came from cystine and cysteine residues
of the muscle proteins, and the rest came from glutathione
of the non-protein fraction. Their findings nullified
Bouthilet's (1951b) earlier conclusion that the true pre-

cursor of hydrogen sulfide is glutathione.

2. Carbonyl compounds

The presence of carbonyls in raw Chicken meat was
reported by Koehler and Jacobson (1967). However, studies
by many researchers, including Crocker (1948), Bouthilet

(1951b), Pippen et a1. (1958, 1960), Pippen and Nonaka

23

(1963), Minor 33431. (1965b, 1966), and Nonaka and Pippen
(1965), showed that carbonyls were produced during heating.
Pippen et_al. (1958) observed that oxidative cooking, in
which air stream was passed through simmering Chicken,
evolved four times as much carbonyls than did normal cooking
when chicken was simmered with no air passing through, in-
dicating that carbonyls were products of oxidative reactions.
Pippen and Nonaka (1963) obtained more carbonyls, partic-
ularly n-hexanal and decadienal, from the skin and skin fat
rather than from the leg and breast muscles, indicating that
meat lipids were the source of carbonyls. Unsaturated C-18
fatty acids produced alkanals, alk-2-enals and alk-2-4-
dienals upon oxidation (Ellis et_al. 1961). Hence, it was
concluded that carbonyls were formed from lipids (Lineweaver
and Pippen 1961, Pippen and Nonaka 1963), particularly
linoleic and arachidonic acids (Pippen 1967, Dimick and
MacNeil 1970 and Thomas et_al. 1971) by a lipid oxidation
mechanism as discussed by Patton gt_al. (1959). Apparently,
decadienal can also be formed merely by moist heating of

linoleate (Patton et a1. 1959).

3. Non-volatiles

Most of the significant non-volatiles in cooked
chicken flavor are natural components of raw meat. Koehler
and Jacobson (1967) reported that the chicken flavor-

forming fractions extracted from raw muscle contained

24

glucose, fructose, ribose, an unidentified sugar, lactic
acid, amino acids, amines, inosine monophosphate, guanosine
monophosphate, inosine, and sulfhydryls. The amino acids
identified include: alanine, arginine, aspartic acid, cys—
teine, glutamic acid, glycine, histidine, isoleucine—leucine,
lysine, methionine, serine, threonine, taurine, tryptophan,
tyrosine, and valine. Other researchers (Minor gt_al. 1966,
Miller and Dawson 1965, and Lillyblade and Peterson 1962)
have likewise shown the presence of these compounds in raw

chicken muscle.

c. Factors affecting characteristic chicken flavor

 

Flavor has been considered an elusive factor that
may be influenced by production variables such as breed,
sex, age, and diet, or by processing steps such as chilling,
freezing, and cooking. This section summarizes the litera-
ture on the factors affecting the flavor of freshly cooked

Chicken.

1. Component parts of chicken

The "meaty" flavor in chicken has been reported to
originate from the lean of the meat and not from the fat
(Crocker 1948, Bouthilet 1950, Pippen et_al. 1954, Pippen

and Nonaka 1963, Pippen and Mecchi 1969, and Mecchi et a1.

 

1964). In characterizing the chicken flavor-forming muscle
extracts, Koehler and Jacobson (1967) found that the white

meat extract had arginine, leucine-isoleucine, threonine,

25

tyrosine, valine, two other amino compounds, and an unidenti-
fied sugar not found in the dark meat extract. They also
found that heated white meat extract had a stronger Chicken
flavor than that of dark meat which had stronger meaty
Character.

On the other hand, Mecchi gt_al. (1964) observed
faster liberation of H28 from dark meat than from white
meat under identical heating conditions. Pippen and Mecchi
(1969) found greater amounts of H28 in leg meat cooked by
three different methods than breast meat cooked by those
same methods (Table 1, page 18). Minor gt_al. (1965b) ob-
tained 30 chromotogram peaks from leg meat but only 25
peaks from breast meat in the gas chromatography of cooked
volatiles. They observed flavor differences between breast
and leg meat similar to those noted by Koehler and Jacobson
(1967). These results indicate that different flavor

characteristics may arise from different parts of the

chicken.

2. Production variables

There seems to be conflicting reports in the lit-
erature concerning the effects of production variables on
flavor. Many authors, including Lineweaver and Pippen
(1961), Morrison gt_al. (1954), Fry et_al. (1958), Leong
3E_21. (1958), and Kahlenberg g£_al. (1960), have concluded

that chicken flavor is essentially independent of age, sex,

26

genetics, and production conditions. However, Peterson
§E_al. (1959) and Baker and Darfler (1968) found that older
hens were more flavorful than 3-month-old pullets. While
the volatile components were the same qualitatively between
20-month-old and lZ-week—old hens, some of the volatiles

were of higher concentration in the older birds (Minor
et al. 1965b).

A notable difference in flavor between sexes was
demonstrated by Gilpen g£_al. (1960) and MacNeil and Dimick
(1970). Gilpen g£_al. (1960) showed that males yielded
more meat and were tastier, while females had more fat and
yielded a higher percentage of breast meat. MacNeil and
Dimick (1970) observed differences in the production of
carbonyls in the skin between sexes of turkeys. They
found that the male birds had higher concentrations of total
carbonyls than did the females (78 vs 50 umoles per 10 gm
lipid). Furthermore, the male birds had lower methylketone
concentrations than the females but had 3 to 8 times more
unsaturated aldehydes.

Lewis §E_al. (1956) demonstrated that birds raised
on standard diets had more intense flavor than those raised
on low-fat purified diets. When levels of 8% animal fat
were fed to broilers for 10 weeks by Essary (1961), the
tissue contained more fat than birds raised on a standard
commercial diet. Marion and Woodroof (1963) reported that

dietary fat alters the composition of lipids in chicken

27

muscle.’ The feeding of fish meal or fish oil had also been
reported to impart fishy flavor to chicken meat and acceler-
ated deterioration during storage (Carlson gt_al. 1957,
Darrow and Essary 1955, Carrick and Hauge 1926, Asmundson

et a1. 1938, and Edwards and May 1965).

3. Processing variables

The effect of chilling methods on flavor was studied
by Pippen gt_gl. (1954). They found that broth prepared
from half carcasses immersed in ice water for as short as
3 hours had significantly less flavor than the broth from
halves cooled in air. Leaching out of neutral ash or mineral
content accounted partly for the loss of flavor during chil-
ling in ice water (Pippen and Klose 1955). Hurly gt_al.
(1958) also reported greater losses in flavor of poultry
chilled in liquid than those chilled in air. Davidek and
Khan (1967) indicated greater losses of inosine monophos-
phate during aging in slush ice as compared to drained
crushed ice. Koehler and Jacobson (1967) showed that the
flavor-containing fraction of chicken muscle was readily
dialyzable in water. These results indicate that prolonged
immersion of chicken in water may result in leaching out of
flavor precursors/components and a loss of flavor.

Holding or aging of raw Chicken at temperatures
above freezing results in a number of biochemical changes.

During a 6-day storage at 0°C, Lillyblade and Peterson

28

(1962) observed that glucose levels increased in white meat
from l3-week-old pullets and also in both red and white
meat from old hens, but decreased in red meat of pullets.
Inositol, fructose, and ribose increased in the two muscles
from both young and old birds. The changes in proteins
during aging were studied by van den Berg gt_al. (1963).
They observed appreciable proteolysis in both breast and
leg muscles resulting in increase in extractable proteins,
free amino acids and other breakdown products increased
with storage time and temperature. However, the effects of
the biochemical changes on the flavor after cooking have
not yet been studied.

Stewart gt_al. (1945) reported that quick frozen
broilers lost flavor during 51 days at -23°C. Mountney
EE_E£° (1960) served cooked meat from fresh and frozen
fryers to visitors at the Texas State Fair and found that
more tasters preferred the fresh than the frozen ones.

They concluded that there was enough flavor difference to
create a slight resistance to frozen chicken stores for

3 to 9 months. To understand the causes of flavor deteri-
oration during frozen storage, a series of studies were
conducted at the National Research Council of Canada.
Quantitative examination of chicken muscle proteins con-
ducted by Khan et_§l. (1963) showed a decrease in protein
extractability in both breast and leg muscles during frozen

storage due to loss of solubility of actomyosin content.

29

They also observed an increase in free amino acids and other
protein breakdown products which indicated continued proteo-
lysis. They reported that the rate of these changes were
directly related to the storage temperature and time. On
further analysis of the non-protein fraction, Khan (1964)
found a noticeable increase in acidic, aromatic, and sulfur-
containing amino acids during storage for 45 weeks at
temperatures between -5 and -40°C. Creatine/creatinine in-
creased slightly while nuéleic acid derivatives decreased.
Davidkova and Khan (1967) studied the changes on lipid com-
ponents and found that during storage at -10°C, the phos-
pholipid content of muscles decreased owing to loss of
lecithins and cephalins, while the fatty acids, triglycerides
and lysolecithin content increased. These results suggest
that lipolysis also occurs during frozen storage.

Khan and van den Berg (1967) found that freezing
caused small but detectable Changes in eating quality and
that changes in muscle protein during freezing depended on
the freezing rate. Slow freezing, on the other hand, caused
larger loss of drip on thawing. Earlier, Khan and Lentz
(1965) showed that loss of nitrogeneous constituents and
ribose increased proportionately with the amount of drip.

The influence of cooking methods on Chicken flavor
has been mentioned earlier. Pippen gt_§l. (1958) observed

the production of larger quantities of carbonyls during

3O

oxidative cooking, which indicates that oxidative cooking
conditions accelerates the production of volatiles. In

studying the contribution of H S to cooked Chicken aroma,

2
Pippen and Mecchi (1969) found greater amounts of H28 in
meat of simmered chicken than in meat of roasted and fried
birds (Table 1, page 18), indicating that water may be
necessary in the production of hydrogen sulfide.

The influence of cooking temperature on Chicken
flavor was discussed by Kazeniac (1961). He showed that

the amount of diacetyl, H S, and ammonia released from

2
chicken meat increased as the cooking temperature was in-
creased from 65°C to 100°C. Volatiles collected at 65°C

had strong raw chicken aroma, but very little cooked Chicken
aroma; those collected at 85°C had detectable cooked chicken
aroma; and those collected at 100°C had the cleanest overall
chicken flavor.

In general, cooking treatment is the most important
single factor which influences the flavor of cooked chicken.
The addition of seasoning, spices, and flavor enhancers
enable the modification and enhancement of the flavor to
provide the particular taste and/or aroma desired by con-
sumers. Also, the pH of the meat can be altered by pre-
cooking or cooking treatments such as marination. Pippen

and Eyring (1957) showed that pH differences during cooking,

as little as 0.14 to 0.48 pH units, influenced chicken broth

31

flavor. Higher pH values during cooking favored the pro-
duction of ammonia, diacetyl and H25 (Kazeniac 1961, Mecchi
gE_gl. 1964). However, broth cooked at lower pH had more
intense flavor (Pippen and Eyring (1957).

d. Factors affecting flavor deterioration
in fried chicken '

 

 

Hanson gt_al. (1959) reported that flavor Changes
in fried chicken involve first the loss of "freshly cooked"
chicken flavor, followed by a slight staleness or a "warmed-
over" flavor, and eventually, an objectionable flavor.
Apparently, flavor deterioration in chicken involves ces-
sation of desulfuration and progressive lipid oxidation.
Hence, any factors which influence these reactions can af-
fect the rate of flavor deterioration.

Pippen and Mecchi (1969) reported that freezing,
thawing, and reheating reduced the H23 in broth to sub—
threshold levels, indicating that freezing interfered with
the mechanism of hydrogen sulfide production.

The stability of fried chicken flavor against oxi-
dation during storage is affected by certain pre-cooking
treatments, freezing, packaging, and storage conditions.
Thompson (1964) showed that soaking carcasses in a phosphate
solution (sodium tripolyphosphate + sodium pyrophosphate

mixture) was effective in inhibiting oxidative deterioration

during commercial production of frozen cooked Chicken.

32

Throughout 1 week at 5°C, phosphate-treated chicken showed
none or very slight off-flavor and a 2—thiobarbituric acid
(TBA) value of about 1, whereas untreated control chicken
had a slightly strong to strong off-odor and a TBA value of
about 6. A similar protective effect of phosphate on frozen
pre-fried chicken was reported by Farr and May (1970).

Carlin et_§l. (1959) studied the effects of pre-
cooking and packaging treatments, and noted faster develop-
ment of off-flavor in partially and fully cooked broiler
pieces than in similarly packaged uncooked pieces during
storage at -18°C for 15 weeks. Flavor deterioration was
faster in the partially cooked pieces than in the fully
cooked ones. Flavor changes occured to approximately the
same extent whether the precooked broilers were packaged
in cryovac bags, polyethylene bags, or aluminum freezer foil.

Berry and Cunningham (1970) reported that tempera-
ture and freezing rates influence the quality of cooked
chicken. Sensory evaluation and TBA values indicated that
liquid nitrogen freezing produced a better product than did
blast freezing; however, a taste panel scored the flavor of
products frozen in a household freezer better than those
frozen by the two faster methods.

Studies on the stability of frozen fried chicken
stored for periods from 2 weeks to one year at temperatures
ranging from -23 to -66°C were conducted by Hanson gt_al.

(1959). The flavor stability was approximately the same

33

for two commercial lots and one lot prepared in the labora-
tory. Off-flavor development was affected by temperature:
at -18°C, staleness developed in 4 months and rancid flavor
in 9 months; at -12°C, staleness developed in 2 months and
rancidity in 6 months. Off-flavor occurred in the meat as
well as in the skin, as also observed by Carlin gt_al.
(1959). Fried chicken hermetically sealed in nitrogen in
cans showed no detectable rancid flavor. Because the shape
of chicken pieces prevents a "solid pack" and allows ex-
posure of large surface areas of chicken to the atmosphere
within the package, Palmer (1968) recommended the storage
of fried chicken at low temperatures for a relatively short

period of time.

3. Tenderness

Tenderness is another factor which could enhance the
acceptability of poultry products. The sensation of tender-
ness is a complicated process, since chewing involves not
only cutting and grinding, but also includes squeezing,
sheering, and tearing (Pearson 1963). Like flavor, tender-
ness is considered by producers and processors as an elusive
factor which may be influenced by production variables,
certain post-mortem physico-chemical changes, and proces-

sing variables.

34

a. Production variables

Stadelman (1963) reviewed the influence of production
variables on tenderness of poultry meat. On the basis of the
studies of Morrison gt_al. (1954), Wesley et_§l. (1958),
Gilpen gt_§l. (1960) and Shrimpton and Miller (1960),
Stadelman concluded that breed and sex have no significant
effect on tenderness. However, he indicated that age and
certain feeding practices definitely influence tenderness.

Peterson gt_§l. (1959), observed that tenderness de-
creases with age. They also found that breast muscles of
young birds were significantly tougher than the dark muscles,
but in older birds, the dark muscles were slightly tougher
than the breast muscles. May gt_§l. (1962) observed that
breast meat from 72-week-old chickens were less tender than
those from lO-week-old birds, both initially and throughout
aging. A contradictory finding was reported by Baker and
Darfler (1968), who showed both by shear press and sensory
evaluations that breast meat from fowl was more tender than
the breast meat from fryers.

Shrimpton and Miller (1960) observed that when birds
were kept on full feed, the meat was more tender than when

birds were on a restricted diet.

b. Post-mortem physico-chemical changes
Within one to two hours after slaughter, chicken

normally passes into a state of "rigor mortis" or muscle

35

stiffening. Resolution of rigor takes place later and the
muscles become pliable again and normal aging proceeds
(Dawson gt_al. 1958). Chicken when cooked rapidly before
the onset of "rigor mortis" gave tender meat (de Fremery
1966). However, Chicken cooked at the state of rigor gave
tough, rubbery or stringy meat (Lowe and Stewart 1946,
Carlin gt_§l. 1949), whereas chicken cooked after resolution
of rigor gave meat which became progressively more tender
with aging (Dawson §£;213 1958, May gt_§l. 1962, Khan and
van den Berg 1964 and van den Berg 2E_al. 1964).

The phenomenon of "rigor mortis" is normally ac-
companied by breakdown of ATP, glycolysis and a decrease in
muscle pH (de Fremery and Pool, 1958, 1959, and de Fremery
1963). Klose g£_al. (1959), Pool gt_al. (1959), and de
Femery and Pool (1958, 1959, 1960) observed that accelerated
development of rigor mortis was accompanied by rapid loss
of ATP and glycogen and an increased drop of pH, which in-
duced toughness in cooked meat. De Fremery and Pool (1960,
1963, and De Fremery (1966) showed that minimization of
post-mortem glycolysis by 1) subcutaneous injection of
adrenalin (epinephrine) 16 hours ante-mortem; 2) intravenous
injection of sodium bromocetate or iodoacetate 3-6 minutes
before slaughter; or 3) rapid cooking, resulted in poultry
meat that was tender without being aged. However, acceler-
ated post-mortem glycolysis as a result of death struggle

or epinephrine administration 1-2 hr before slaughter caused

36

toughness (Khan and Nakamura 1970). De Fremery (1966) con-
cluded that it is the acceleration of post-mortem glycolysis,
not the acceleration of rigor mortis, which induces tough-
ness, whereas Khan and Nakamura (1970) considered the rapid
drop in pH, which may affect the activity of enzyme systems
of solubility of proteins, as the cause of muscle toughness.
Since post-mortem glycolysis and drop in pH are interrelated,
factors which accelerate these changes during early post-
mortem such as excessive scalding, beating, higher aging
temperatures and freezing, can cause toughness in cooked
Chicken.

The adverse effect of overscalding due to high
scalding temperature or longer scalding periods has been
observed by Klose gt_al. (1956), Shannon 2E_al. (1957),

Pool g£_al. (l959)and Wise and Stadelman (1959, 1961).

Wise and Stadelman (1961) showed variations in toughening
effect depending upon the depth of the muscles and concluded
that the toughening effect was a direct function of the
tissue temperature during early post-mortem.

Klose gE_al. (1956) and Pool et_al. (1959) observed
that excessive beating action applied during feather removal
caused muscle toughening, and the effect was greatest when
applied immediately after slaughter. Klose gt_al. (1956)
showed that toughness induced by excessive beating could not

be resolved completely even by prolonged aging.

37

Investigations on the effect of post-mortem tempera-
ture on muscle toughness were reported by Dodge and Stadelman
(1959), de Fremery (1963) and Khan (1971). De Fremery and
his co-workers found that cooked breast muscles became in-
creasingly tough as the post-mortem temperature was increased
from 10 to 40°C, which is similar to the finding of Dodge
and Stadelman (1959). In studying the effect of temperature
during post-mortem glycolysis and dephosphorylation of high
energy phosphates on poultry tenderness, Khan (1971) found
that holding poultry meat at 30 and 37°C during the onset of
rigor mortis caused toughness. He also found that the
toughening effect of high temperature occurred when pH
dropped from 6.3 to its ultimate level. Moreover, holding
poultry at 10, 15, and 25°C during onset of rigor, or cool-
ing it to 15°C before pH dropped to about 6.3 produced more
tender meat. He concluded that after post-mortem glycolysis
and dephosphorylation of high energy phosphates, holding at
high temperatures has no deleterious effect.

De Fremery (1963) reported that freezing and thawing
pre-rigor muscle induced very rapid "thaw rigor" and faster
disappearance of glycogen, and also caused a highly signifi-
cant increase in toughness of cooked meat. Freezing chicken
while in the state of rigor arrests the aging process and
requires longer holding to complete tenderization (Koonz
gt_al. 1954, Klose et_al. 1956, and Dawson gt_al. 1958).

Hence, it is desirable to age the birds at least 6 to 12

38

hours before freezing to prevent toughening and to permit
immediate cooking after freezing (Klose et a1. 1956 and

Dawson et a1. 1958).

C. Processing variables

Lowe and Stewart (1946) found that cutting chicken
breast muscle one hour after slaughter induced toughening
which persisted even after 24 hours of aging and subsequent
cooking, while cutting after rigor had no toughening effect
(Lowe 1948). Koonz et_al. (1954) cut into warm excised
chicken breast muscle, subsequently aged for successive
times up to 24 hours before cooking, and observed that the
cut muscle was always tougher than the uncut control. Pool
g£_al. (1959) found that fryers sawed hot into 10 pieces and
aged for 21 hours were twice as tough in the breast muscle
as controls similarly sawed cold after 21 hours aging.
Klose 2E_al. (1971) showed that knife cutting the wings at
the shoulder joints and flattening the breast at 20 minutes,
60 minutes, and 2 hours post-mortem gave shear values for
the outer breast muscle about twice that for muscles from
birds after the same operation carried out 22 hours post-
mortem. Sawing the wing off at the point beyond the breast
muscle insertion eliminated the pre-rigor toughening effect.
Holding the parts in chilled state for as long as 5 days
before cooking did not eliminate tenderness differences due

to hot cutting and flattening. These studies indicated

39

that the post-mortem time of cutting and manner of cutting
influenced the tenderness of cooked chicken.

The freezing of raw chicken, per se, has been re-
ported to cause small losses of tenderness and juiciness
(Khan and van den Berg 1967). However, different freezing
rates appear to have similar effects on tenderness (Marion
and Stadelman 1958, Stewart gt_al. 1945 and Miller and May
1965).

Certain processing variables which affect the over-
all cooking losses also influence the tenderness and juici-
ness in chicken meat. These factors include soaking birds
in phosphate solution, precooking, and cooking methods.
Mountney and Arganosa (1962), May et_al. (1963) and Katz
and Dawson (1964) showed that adding food grade phosphate
in the chilling water for carcasses reduced moisture losses
during refrigerated storage and cooking of broilers. Similar
effects of polyphosphates on the reduction of cooking losses
were reported for leghorns and heavy hens by Schermerhorn
and Stadelman (1964) and Baker and Darfler (1968), and for
young poultry meats by Monk g£_al. (1964). Spencer and
Smith (1962), May e£_al. (1963) and Baker and Darfler (1968)
also showed that phosphate treatment resulted in greater
tenderness and juiciness of chicken meat.

Carlin et_al. (1959) reported that precooking treat-

ments increased total weight losses of broilers from raw to

4O

ready-to-eat stage, and indicated that there was a correla-
tion between weight losses and juiciness. Mickelberry and

Stadelman (1962) also reported that cooking chicken before

freezing resulted in significantly less tender products and
greater total loss than freezing raw and cooking after slow
thawing.

Mostert and Stadelman (1964) found that frying
methods affected shrinkage, moisture, and fat content of
cooked broilers, indicating possible effects of cooking
methods on juiciness and perhaps on tenderness. Pressurized
deep-fat-frying resulted in minimum cooking losses and maxi-
mum moisture retention. They also found that breading mini-
mized weight loss in every frying method. In a related
study, Hale and Goodwin (1968) observed that cooking methods
significantly affected the moisture and fat content and
shear press values of breast and thigh muscles.

Cooking yield values in the literature are sum-
marized in Appendix I.

Butts and Cunningham (1971) reported that methods
of freezing, but not methods of reheating significantly
altered the shear press values of meat. Shear press values
were: 1.85 kgm/gm for chicken frozen in liquid nitrogen;
2.28 kgm/gm for chicken frozen in air blast; and 2.81 kgm/gm

for chicken frozen in household freezer.

41

C. Packaging Requirements for
frozen fried ChiEken

 

 

The package for frozen fried chicken for retail sale
should have the properties of a typical consumer product
package. The package must satisfy one or more of the follow-
ing basic needs: protection, convenience or utility, moti-
vation, and profitability (Modern Packaging Encyclopedia

1971).

1. Protection

The package must protect its contents from the ex-
pected environment for the expected period of use. Likewise,
it must protect the environment from its contents. A pack-
age for frozen fried chicken should protect against: 1)
loss of moisture; 2) atmospheric oxygen; 3) flavor contam-
ination; 4) entry of microorganisms; 5) exposure to light;

6) mechanical damage; and 7) oil seepage to the surround-
ings. It should also 8) withstand very low temperatures,
and preferably be 9) flexible enough to fit the contours of

the chicken in order to exclude air spaces.

2. Convenience and/ or utility

The package must identify its contents and should
indicate quantity. It should provide instructions for pro-
per handling of its contents. It must facilitate distri-

bution and be convenient to use. Hence, the package should

42

have the following properties: 1) collapsibility or stack-
ability for ease in transport and storage; 2) ease in fillr
ing; 3) ease of Closure; 4) legibility of information; 5)

Suitability to various heating methods; 6) ease in getting

out the contents; and 7) disposability.

3. Motivation

The package should contribute to the selling ef-
ficiency by attracting customers to buy the product the first
time and must be convenient enough to induce repeat purchase.
A properly designed package could open new markets or new
avenues of transportation and may even lower distribution
cost. Hence, the package should have good printability so
that it could be attractively designed, should permit view-

ing of its contents, and should be acceptable to the trade.

4. Profitability

Finally, the package must promote profitability of
the product. This means that the package should be designed
to produce the greatest number of sales at an acceptable
level of production and selling costs.

D. Measurement of acceptability
and eating quality

Many complex factors, such as those listed in Ap-
pendix II, combine to influence public acceptance of food

(Harries 1953 and Amerine et a1. 1965). Evidently, sensory

43

properties are just a few of the factors which influence
the selection and utilization of a certain kind of food.
While consumer reactions are difficult to measure, the need
for such studies continue to grow as competition for the
consumer food dollar increases. In-depth study of consumer
behavior might be the only way a food company can survive
and grow as society enters the period of "over-choice"
(Packard 1958 and Toffler 1971).

Consumer studies are conducted for at least one of
the following purposes: 1) determination of market poten-
tial; 2) introduction of new products; 3) quality control
of existing products; 4) establishment of specific factors
of importance to the consumers; and 5) coordination of pro-
duction and supply with consumption (Morse 1951 and Amerine
gt_al. 1965). The objectives dictate the nature and pro—
cedure of the study, and for evaluation of eating quality,
sensory measurements are necessary.

Preferably, consumer evaluation of eating quality
should involve a large number of participants to represent
the cross section of the population (Kotler 1967). However,
high costs due to the amount of samples needed and the
amount of time and assistance required in collecting and
analyzing the data have limited the use of consumer panels
and favored the use of laboratory-type panels (Pearson 1963).

The many factors interacting to influence individual

food preference render the measurement of food preference

44

very complicated. The need for a simplified but accurate
method prompted the Quartermaster Corps to develop a scale
with accompanying descriptive phrases (called the hedonic
scale) for rating soldiers' food preferences (Jones gt_gl.
1955 and Sheppard 1955, Peryam and Pilgrim 1957). Pilgrim
and Wood (1955) compared the rating scale with paired
comparison methods for measuring differences in consumer
preferences for 12 pairs of food items and found that both
methods were equally sensitive whether the difference in
preference was small or large. Raffensperger §t_al. (1956)
demonstrated that the hedonic scale was an appropriate and
a logical approach for grading beef tenderness. In general,
these workers agreed on the following features of the rating
scale: 1) increasing the length of the scale up to 9 inter-
vals marginally increases the time required for test com-
pletion; 2) test-retest reliability, within the range from

5 to 9 intervals, is constant; 3) longer scales, up to 9
intervals, tend to be more sensitive to differences among
foods; 4) elimination of the "neutral" category is benefi-
cial; and 5) a balance scale (equal number of positive and
negative intervals) is not an essential feature of the rat-
ing scale. They are also agreed as to the following ad-
vantages: 1) judgment can be made on a number of samples;
2) a given item is rated in the light of a person's past

experience, both immediate and remote, which enables

45

comparison of data from one test to another; and 3) the de-
scriptive categories of scales can be quantified or assigned
numerical values.

Carlin gt_§l. (1956) reported that the results ob-
tained using 0-5, 0-10, 0-100 scales for sensory evaluation
were linearly correlated, but 0-10 had the smallest standard
deviation and coefficient of variation values.

Calvin and Sather (1959) compared student panels
with household consumer panels in the determination of
preferences for several types of food. They reported good
agreement in the mean hedonic score and percentage prefer-
ence from both panels, indicating that either method may be
used to measure food preference. In an earlier study, Miller
g£_gl. (1955) reported a general agreement in the preference
between household and laboratory-type panels. A consumer's
bias for samples tasted first was noted.

While measuring preferences for various food com-
binations, Eindhoven and Peryam (1959) observed the occur-
rence of the following psychological errors of judgment:

1) position effect, similar to those observed by Miller
gt_al. (1955), wherein the later samples tested are rated
lower; 2) contrast effect in which serving good samples
first lowered the rating for "poor samples"; and 3) conver-
gence effect in which serving poor samples first lowered
the rating for good samples. The latter two effects are

independent of position effect.

46

Dawson (1963) and Petit (1958) reported that panel
members tend to use all information available particularly
that which has meaning to them in making their judgment.
Dawson (1963) recommended that samples should be prepared
and served as uniformly as possible, preferably in the con-
ditions in which the food is normally consumed. Pearson
(1963) also recommended that laboratory-type panels should
consist of about 18 randomly selected members, the score
card should be made simple, and the number of factors evalu-
ated should be limited.

Tarver and Shenck (1958) and Pearson (1963) reported
that the subjective nature of sensory measurements has a
tendency to drift or to change in meaning with time, so
they recommended that such measurements be anchored to a
reproducible objective scale.

Peroxide values, carbonyl values, thiobarbituric
acid values, and other chemical methods are used to follow
the extent of oxidative flavor deterioration. However,
Gaddis gt_al. (1959), Jacobson (1961) and Pippen (1967)
have reported that these tests correlate only inconsistently
with subjective estimates of staleness and rancidity.

Nonaka and Pippen (1965) suggested the measurement of
hexanal to indicate oxidative flavor deterioration in fried
chicken, whereas Khan (1965) advocated the determination of
the SH to tyrosine ratio to indicate the sensory quality

of the product.

47

The difficulty of getting a good sample has made the
Kramer shear press the only practical machine for the objec-
tive measurement of tenderness (Wells gt_al. 1962). This
device measures the maximum pressure required to force a
plunger through the material (Dodge and Stadelman 1960 and
Pearson 1963). Shannon gt_al. (1957) reported a correlation
of .86 between tenderness measurement of chicken meat by
Kramer shear press and taste panel. Wise (1959) reported
a .89 correlation between a chew panel and the Kramer shear
press. These results indicate that the Kramer shear press
can be used to estimate accurately the tenderness of Chicken

meat.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A. (General Procedures

 

The materials and cooking procedures in these experi-
ments were similar to those used in commercial operation by
a local chain of chicken take-out restaurants.
Chicken.--Ice—packed, cut-up chicken weighing from
900 to 1050 grams were obtained from commercial sources
within one day before cooking. Each bird was cut into 9
pieces (2 drumsticks, 2 thighs, 2 wings, 2 breast-backs,
.and 1 breast tip).

Egg-milk dip.--Fresh mixture consisting of 8 large

 

eggs blended for 1 minute in a Waring blender, two 14.5-oz
cans evaporated milk, and 2 quarts cold water was prepared
immediately before use.

Breading.—-A basic mixture of 25 pounds all-purpose
wheat flour (WF), 3.25 pounds salt, and 26 ounces commercial
seasoning was used in most of these experiments. For com-
parison of breading materials, a 2:1 mixture of wheat flour
and waxy corn (WF-WC) and a 2:1:1 mixture of wheat flour,
corn meal and potato flour (WF-CM-PF) were also used in lieu

of the all-purpose flour in the basic mixture.

48

49

Batter.--The different kinds of batter were prepared
by mixing thoroughly equal weights of egg-milk dip and
breading mixture in a Kitchen-Aid Model K5-A mixer immedi-
ately before use.

Phosphate treatment.--Cut-up chicken pieces were

 

soaked overnight in 5% Kena*. a mixture of tripolyphosphate
and pyrophosphate . *(Kena is a trademark of Calgon Corp.,
Pittsburgh, Pa.)

Pressure-frying (PF).--Chicken pieces were dipped

 

in the egg-milk mixture for 10 seconds, drained, and
breaded. The pieces were browned in oil preheated to 190-
205°C in a pressure cooker for approximately 1 minute, and
then cooked at 15 psi for 9.5 minutes. Immediately after
cooking, the pressure was released and the pieces removed,
placed on a wire rack, and then transferred to a warming
oven set at 700C to drain and darken in color. The pieces
were held in the warming oven approximately 15 minutes. A
Mies Commercial Pressure Fryer, Model C, was used in some
trials and 4 Presto Model 7-B cooker-canners were used in
other trials. The former cooked 4 birds per batch while
the latter cooked only 2 birds per batch.

Microwave-steam (MWS) cooking.--Chicken pieces were
precooked in a tunnel microwave cooker (Cryodry, 915 MHz,
25 kw maximum power) which was connected to a potable steam

source. The pieces were placed in a single layer on the

50

continuous belt, and cooked at 5 kw power for 10 minutes to
approximately 85°C internal temperature. The pieces were
coated and then browned for approximately 3 minutes either
by pressure frying or by deep—fat-frying (DFF) at 177°C.

Freezing methods.--The fried chicken pieces were

 

frozen to -18°C internal temperature, as recorded by a Honey-
well Electronic multipoint potentiometer, by one of the
following methods:

1. Blast freezing.--Chicken pieces arranged on wire

 

I I O O
racks were frozen in a walk-1n convect1on freezer at -37 C.

2. Nitrogen-freezing.--Samples were frozen in an

 

Air Product Cryogenic Freezer Model No. CT-1818-12F at
-57°C. Nitrogen was forced by air at 5-8 psi pressure into
the freezing chamber where the nitrogen vapor was circulated
by a variable speed fan. Chamber temperature was controlled
by varying the rate at which liquid nitrogen was forced into
the chamber.

3. Freon freezing.--Products were frozen in a

 

DuPont Laboratory type freezer (Figure l) by dipping baskets
of chicken pieces in Freon 12 for 8-10 minutes. The Freon
12 (Food grade, dichlorodiflouromethane) was maintained at
-43°C by Freon ll (trichloromonoflouromethane) and dry ice
placed in the outer jacket.

Packaging.--The following packaging treatments were

used in this study:

 

 

51

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

I
l I
«I he}
’33:?" I‘KF?:.\
: :
555‘ I I
. 0 ‘ I
:3: 1~~1 —-"’r(
O.
:.| I |
0" ‘ r
..o' I , \

 

Fig. 1: Du Pont Laboratory Freon Freezer

 

 

/ Freon 12
Freezing
Chamber
T
Co r
. / upging
Outer
/ Jacket

 

___/Freon 11+ Dry Ice

 

 

   

Freezer
basket

   
  

 

 

 

52

l. Bulk-pack.--Individually quick frozen (IQF)

 

chicken pieces were packaged in partially evacuated heat-
sealed polyethylene (PE) bags, 4 birds per bag.

2. Vacuum-pack.--Pieces were individually vacuum-

 

packed, using Kenfield vacuum sealer Model C-l4, in saran-
mylar-PE laminated pouches before or after freezing.

3. Air pack.--IQF pieces were packed in paperboard-
covered aluminum foil trays, 4 to 6 similar pieces per tray.

4. AMG-coated.--IQF pieces were dipped for 30

 

seconds in the acetylated monoglyceride (AMG, Myvacet Type
7-00, Distillery Products, Inc., Rochester, N.Y.) which was
heated to 93°C, and then air-packed as in No. 3.

Storage conditions.--All packages were placed in

 

corrugated boxes, and stored in a freezer maintained at

—18°C or subjected to a simulated distribution condition.

In the simulated distribution condition, the boxes of chicken
were transferred from the holding freezer to a walk-in

cooler at 3-50C for 16-24 hours every week during the stor-
age period.

Reheating methods.--Frozen pieces at -180C were

 

thawed and heated to serving temperatures (GS-70°C) by one
of the following procedures:

1. Microwave (MW).--3 to 5 chicken pieces were

 

placed on a paper plate, covered with a paper towel, and
heated in a microwave oven (Litton Model 550, approximately
1 kw, 2450 MHz) for 1.5 to 2 minutes per piece or for 1

minute per 100 grams.

53

2. MW-DFF.--Frozen pieces were reheated in the
microwave oven for half the usual time (30 seconds per 100
grams) and then placed in a deep—fat—fryer for 1 minute at
177°C to crisp.

3. ngn.--Frozen pieces were wrapped in heavy—duty
aluminum foil and heated in an ordinary household oven at
205°C for 1 hour. In the last 15 minutes, the wrap was
Opened to allow the pieces to crisp.

4. Boil-in-bag.--Vacuum-packed pieces were placed

 

in boiling water for 15 minutes.

Sensory Evaluation.--The chicken pieces were evalu-

 

ated by taste panels consisting of 15 to 30 randomly selected
graduate students and staff members of the Department of
Food Science and Human Nutrition. Three pieces were served
to each panel member each time for evaluation of appearance,
flavor, juiciness, tenderness, and general acceptability ac-
cording to an appropriate hedonic scale (Appendix III, IV
and V). Thirty samples (6 pieces/part; 5 parts/bird) from
each treatment were evaluated during each tasting. The
samples were presented in a manner that the pieces from each
treatment were equally served in the three positions and
similar pieces from the different treatments were uniformly
compared with each other. Panel evaluations were conducted
from 9:30 to 11:00 a.m. or from 2:00 to 3:30 p.m. Data
obtained were evaluated for each criterion by analysis of
variance, and the Duncan's multiple range test was used

whenever significant differences were detected.

54

Physical and Chemical Determinations

l. Shear press measurement.--An Allo-Kramer shear

 

press, equipped with 1363.1 kgm ring and adjusted to 15
seconds downstroke, was used to measure objectively the
maximum force required to shear 20-gram samples from the

Pectoralis major muscle. Shear press values were calculated

 

as follows:

Shear press = 1363.1 x range x_peak height ’ (kgm/gm)

weight of sample (gm)

 

2. Moisture.--About 500-gm samples of meat and skin

 

were ground twice through a 3/16 inch grinder plate, then
lO-gm samples were removed into tared aluminum drying pans
and weighed to four significant places on a Mettler balance.
The samples were dried to a constant weight in a convection
oven at 106°C, and the average of the percentage loss in
weight of duplicate samples were reported as the moisture
content (AOAC, 1965).

3. Ether extract.--Moisture-free samples were

 

weighed in tared extraction thimbles and extracted with pe-
troleum ether for 24 hours in Soxhlet apparatus or 6 hours
in Goldfisch apparatus. The loss in weight was reported as
fat (AOAC, 1965).

4. Per cent breading.--The amount of breading on

 

the fried chicken pieces was determined according to the
procedure of May et a1. (1969). Fried chicken pieces were

tumbled for 45 minutes in a bucket of water in which

55

compressed air was bubbled through. The loss in weight

after the pieces were blotted dry was reported as coating.

B. Experiments

 

This study consisted of seven experiments designed
to evaluate the factors that may be relevant to the central-
ized processing of frozen fried chicken for retail distri-
bution.

l. Acceptability of microwave reheated chicken.--

 

Cut-up chicken pieces were breaded, pressure-fried, bulk-
packed, and stored at -18°C for periods up to 24 weeks. At
certain intervals during storage, products in one bag were
reheated in the microwave oven at 1.5 min/piece for the
wings and 2 min/piece for the larger pieces, and were com-
pared with newly cooked controls by a 20-member taste panel
using the hedonic score card (Appendix III). The experiment
was terminated after significant differences were detected
between the controls and reheated Chicken in two successive
tastings.

2. Effect of freezing treatments on eating

 

quality.--This experiment consisted of two trials. Trial 1
was similar to Experiment 1 but modified slightly to allow
an evaluation of two methods of freezing fried chicken and
to evaluate the eating quality of frozen uncooked chicken

after subsequent pressure frying. Hence, the trial had two

56

control treatments (Treatment 1, newly cooked unfrozen con-
trol; Treatment 2, newly cooked frozen-thawed control) and
two freezing treatments on fried chicken prior to storage
and reheating (Treatment 3, blast freezing; Treatment 4,
liquid nitrogen freezing). Evaluations were made using the
hedonic score card in Appendix IV.

In Trial 2, chicken frozen by air-blast and liquid
freon were evaluated. The frozen pieces were separately
bulk-packed, stored at -18°C for 3 months, and then reheated
in microwave oven and evaluated by a 20-member panel using
the hedonic score card in Appendix IV.

In this experiment, the freezing rates of individual
pieces frozen by the three methods were recorded. In addi-
tion, eight pieces of each part were labeled and weighed at
various times during processing, and 8-16 representative
samples were analyzed for moisture and fat content.

3. Effect of microwave reheating time on eating
quality.-Chicken pieces were breaded, pressure-fried, bulk-
packed and divided into two lots. Lot 1 was stored at con-
stant -18°C while Lot 2 was subjected to a simulated distri-
bution condition. After 3 months of storage, representative
pieces of the same kind were reheated in a microwave oven
until practically burned. The pieces were weighed at regu-
lar intervals during heating. Additional breast pieces from
Lot 1 were heated for pre-determined times ranging from 1.0

to 2.25 min/100 gms, and 20-gm samples of the Pectoralis

 

57

major muscle were taken from each piece and served to a 15-
member panel for tenderness and juiciness evaluation using
a 9-point scale. Representative samples from each heating
time were subjected to Allo-Kramer shear press determina-
tions.

4. Effect of packaging and storage conditions on

 

eating quality.--This experiment consisted of two trials.

 

In Trial 1, a 3-way factorial experimental design was used
to compare 2 freezing methods (blast and liquid freon); 3
packaging treatments (bulk-packed, vacuum-packed after IQF,
vacuum-packed before IQF); and 2 storage conditions (constant
-18°C and simulated distribution condition). The pieces of
chicken were stored for 3 months, reheated in the microwave
oven for l min/100 gms, and evaluated by a 30-member panel
according to the hedonic scale shown in Appendix IV.

In Trial 2, a 2-way factorial experimental design
was used to compare 3 packaging treatments (vacuum-packed
after IQF, AMG-coated, and air-packed) and 2 storage con-
ditions. The rest of the procedure was the same as in
Trial 1.

5. Comparison of reheating methods.--In Trial 1,

 

microwave oven, microwave oven and deep-fat-fryer and house-
hold ovens were used to reheat chicken pieces which had been
stored for 6 months after they were processed as in Experi-
ment 1. Evaluation was made by a 30-member panel using the

hedonic score card shown in Appendix IV.

58

In Trial 2, individually vacuum-packed blast-frozen
pressure fried pieces which had been stored for 3 months at
-18°C were reheated in microwave oven or by boiling-in-
bag, and compared with newly cooked controls by a 30-member
panel using the hedonic score card shown in Appendix IV.

6. Evaluation of breading materials.--Chicken
pieces were microwave-steam-cooked using the tunnel micro-
wave oven, divided into 6 lots and coated according to the

following schedule:

 

Coating Treatment

LOT NO' Material Method

 

WF Dry breading (DB)
WF-WC "

WF-CM-PF "

WF Wet batter (WB)
WF-WC "

WF-CM-PF "

ONU'Inh-UJNH

 

Those pieces coated with dry breading were browned by pres-
sure frying while those coated with wet batter were deep—
fat-fried. One half of the pieces in each lot were evalu-
ated immediately after browning by a 30-member panel using
the hedonic score card shown in Appendix V. The other half
of the pieces were blast-frozen, air-packed, stored under

a simulated distribution condition for 3 months and then re-

heated in microwave oven and evaluated. Similar Chicken

59

pieces in each lot were bulk weighed after each stage of
processing. The percentage breading was also determined for
different pieces after browning.

7. Comparison of cooking methods.--Chicken pieces

were randomly divided into 6 lots and treated as follows:

 

 

 

Treatment
LOT NO° P04 treatment cooking method

1 _ PF

2 - MWS-PF

3 _ MWS-DFF

4 + PF

5 + MWS-PF

6 + MWS-DFF

 

Immediately after cooking, one half of the pieces were
evaluated by a 30-member panel using the hedonic score card
shown in Appendix IV. The other one half of the pieces were
also blast-frozen, air-packed, stored under simulated dis-
tribution condition, and then reheated in microwave oven and
evaluated. Changes in weight of the different pieces during
processing were recorded, and samples were taken for moisture,

ether extract, and shear press determinations.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Experiment 1. Acceptability of microwave reheated
chicken. The taste panel scores for microwave reheated.
chicken pieces after frozen storage up to 6 months at
-18°C are shown in Figure 2 (see Appendix VI for tabu-
lated data). After 18 weeks of storage, the flavor of
the frozen chicken pieces was less desirable (P < .05)
than the flavor of freshly cooked pieces. The significant
difference in flavor between the reheated pieces and the
controls was detected after 4.5 months, which was about
the same length of time that staleness was observed by
Hanson gt_al. (1959) in fried chicken stored at the same
temperature. The panel members did not indicate off-
flavor, so the difference in flavor could be attributed
simply to the loss of characteristic "freshly cooked"
chicken flavor in the reheated frozen pieces possibly
due to the reduction of H25 to subthreshold levels
(Pippen and Mecchi, 1969). After 6 months of storage,
the frozen pieces were significantly less acceptable
(P < .05) because of less desirable flavor. There were
no significant differences in tenderness and juiciness

between the reheated frozen chicken and the newly cooked

controls. The results indicate that breaded fried

60

Panel Scores (9-point scale)

Fig .

Panel Scores (S-point 2-sided scale)

Fig. 2b.

2a.

 

6].

Legend: .——__._. Flavor
‘____.‘ Gen. Acceptability

 

 

 

 

4 8 12 16 20 24
Storage Time (weeks)
Flavor and general acceptability scores of microwave reheated frozen

precooked chicken. (Arrows indicate the time at which significant
differences from the controls were detected.)

legend: .—-—— -. Control, Juiciness
Ar- - — 4 Control, Tenderness

.____. Reheated, Juiciness
b—t Reheated, Tenderness

avtz§-

 

 

 

 

Mu-" -_._.........
*--—-——- --"-----.
\r K‘

A A ‘A

4 8 12 16 20 24
Storage Time (weeks)
Juiciness and tenderness scores for microwave reheated frozen

chicken and freshly cooked controls. (Points represent average
of 30 samples.)

62

Chicken can be stored up to 3 months at constant low
temperature and then reheated in a microwave oven without
substantial loss in eating quality.

Experiment 2. Effect of freezing_treatments on

 

eating quality. The taste panel scores of fried chicken-

 

subjected to different freezing treatments are summarized
in Table 2a. In Trial 1, sensory evaluations after 0, 2,
and 4 weeks storage periods (Appendix VII) all showed

that the eating quality of frozen pieces was significantly
lower (P < .01) than the controls. Hence, the trial was
terminated after 1 month and only the aggregate scores of
the 3 tastings are shown. Although these results do not
agree with the results in Experiment 1, they are in.gen-
eral agreement with earlier findings of Hanson gt_al.
(1959), Carlin §E_§l. (1959) and Mickelberry and Stadelman
(1962), which indicated that eating quality is at a maxi-
mum just after cooking and gradually declines after freez-
ing and subsequent storage.

Apparently, the chicken pieces lost weight exces-
sively and unevenly_during microwave reheating. The
fryers used in this experiment weighed about 150 gms less
than those used in a preliminary trial upon which the
reheating times were based. The different pieces varied
widely in sizes (Table 3) and since most were reheated
for the same length of time, the smaller pieces were in

effect subjected to more microwave energy than the larger

63

.umou omcmu mamwuasa m.cmocso ou mcflpuooom “Ho. u my advancemwcmflm
Hmmmwp mnmuuoa uconommwo an oo3oaaom mouoom .CEdHoo m cacuflzm

.monEmm
ow How ommno>m on“ ma N downs CH ouoom some oHH£3 mmHmEMm om MOM mmmuo>m
on» ma a HCHHB.CH whoom comm .oamom Osgood: ucflomlm m,co pommmH

 

o.e m.m m.m e.m .ewuouu some“ weaves .N
9H.o m.m m.e e.m emuoum bananuuaa .H

Aommuoum cmuoum mcucoa m Hoummv N Hmaua

N

am.o ne.m n~.m am.m z wesvea .omommamm .e
am.m no.0 ne.m am.m omaenunem .emommemm .m
no.5 we.e as.» we.e amenabueouonm .Houoeoo .m
ov.h om.h om.h «no.5 . Conoumcs .aouucoo .H

Aommuoum cmuoum mxoo3 v can .m .0 means mmcflummu mo mummmnmmdv H downs

 

.umooom .cmw Ho>mam mmmcumpcoe mmocfloflsb

 

 

 

ucoaumoua
Hmouoom Hmcmm mums» oomuo>d

H II‘ I‘ I I
1" I 1|All| I I

 

.muonoos oeoummmao
an cououm cognaco pmaum pmumosou.m>m3ouofla mo mouoom Hocmm ounce .mm manna

64

.Ho>oa ad um benchmacmfimee

 

 

me.~ m.H me.~ mo.m mHH nouns
m.o m.o m.m N.H a ucofibmoua
m Hesse
mo.~ H.~ m.~ ~e.~ emm uounm
eeem.em «ee~.HH «em.am eem.~e m bemeumuue
H ensue
.umoood meow Ho>mam mmocuopcoa mmCGAOHSH Eopooum mocmfium>

 

moumswm coo: mo mooummo mo oonsom

 

 

.mpocuoe acoummwflp an cououm.cox0Hco pofium
pmumocmn o>m3onoHE mo mouoom Hocmm mummy mo moccaum> mo mammamcd .bm manna

65

.mcowumofiamou N CH mCOHum>uomno mumoaamsp mo ommuo>¢

 

 

 

m
.moooflm mHIm mo ommuo>4a
e m mm e.~ H H.em one;
o ea mm a.ma H a.mm saga
m ma em e.oa H m.eHH amaze
e m em m.ea H «.mm xomenbmmmum
a me «am e.eH H ~.eoa ma» bmmmum
CNS mam
come- ooem- uoemu
soduma>oo
combo .aeq Nz .eeq bananuuaa ammuemow one mouse emxoeeo

 

unmwoz mmmno>m
mpocuoz mcauoonm

 

 

 

 

 

 

'1 ii

.ousumuomfiou Hmcuoucw coma: ou Doom maoumeflxoummm
Eoum mooowm sexuaso mo ousumuomfiou on» Hm3oH ou pmuwswmu mafia .m manna

66

pieces and therefore lost relatively more weight. During
reheating, each piece lost about 20 to 25% of the cooked
weight (Appendix VIII). The loss in weight was accom-
panied by a decrease in moisture content since the meat in
the reheated pieces had about 13% less moisture than that
of cooked meat before freezing (Appendix IX). The exces-
sive loss in moisture lowered the juiciness and tenderness
scores and could have also affected the flavor and general
acceptability ratings. Baker and Darfler (1968) reported,
using subjective evaluation of chicken breast meat, that
flavor and preference were significantly correlated with
tenderness and juiciness.

No significant difference in the eating quality
(flavor, juiciness, tenderness and general acceptability)
of newly cooked unfrozen and frozen-thawed chickens was
found, which was in agreement with the findings of Mostert
and Stadelman (1964) and Baker and Darfler (1968), who
reported that cut-up fryers can be frozen, stored for a
limited time, thawed, and cooked without lowering the
eating quality. However, frozen fryers should be stored
at constant low temperature and cooked immediately after
rapid thawing to prevent bone darkening (Brant and Stewart
1949).

No differences in the eating quality were found
between products frozen by air-blast and liquid nitrogen,

and between those frozen by air—blast and liquid freon

67

(Trial 2), which showed that reasonably fast freezing
methods would have comparable effects on the eating quality
of fried chicken. However, it was observed that products
frozen in freon were paler in color even after reheating
and that a layer of oil remained at the bottom of the freon
freezing chamber after the Freon 12 had evaporated, indi-
cating that the freezant was leaching out oil and perhaps
other fat soluble components from the chicken pieces. It
was thought necessary to investigate further the effect

of freon freezing on fried chicken under more rigorous
storage conditions.

The average times required to freeze various
chicken pieces, starting at approximately 50°C to an in-
ternal temperature of -18°C by three freezing methods are
shown in Table 3. The freezing rate of Chicken pieces in
liquid freon was twice as fast as those in liquid nitrogen
and about 10 times as fast as those in air-blast under the
conditions studied. The data also show great differences
in the freezing rates between different pieces. The freez-
ing rates for wings, for example, were twice as rapid as
those for thighs and breasts. These results indicate that
it may be advisable to feeeze chicken by individual cuts
rather than all pieces of each bird together. There was
also a difference in the freezing rates of the same piece
from batch to batch arising mainly from the variations in

the sizes of the chickens and in the manner in which they

68

were out. It is considered necessary that size of chicken
and the_manner of cutting must be more uniform when pro-
cessed under commercial conditions. The loss in weight

of chicken pieces during freezing was only 1 to 2% of the
cooked weight (Appendix VIII), and this was mainly due

to the flaking off of the coating. Carlin et;al, (1959)
reported no changes in weight in precooked broilers dur-
ing 15 weeks storage at -18°C.

Experiment 3. Effect of microwave reheating time

 

on eating quality. This experiment was conducted to investi-

 

gate more fully the effect of microwave reheating time on

the quality of frozen fried chicken. The average weight
losses of chicken pieces during reheating in microwave oven
after 3 months under two storage conditions are shown in Fig-
ure 3, and the mathematical slope and x-intercept of the
curve for each piece are shown in Table 4. The data indicate
that it took 0.6 min (x-intercept) to reheat 100 gms of
chicken pieces in the microwave oven to the boiling point

of water and beyond that time, the excess microwave energy
was utilized to vaporize the moisture content. However,

the moisture near the surface started to steam off before

the inside of the piece was thawed so that considerable
moisture was lost even with the minimum heating time to

bring the interior of the pieces to serving temperature.

Although the average slopes of the weight loss curves of

69

 

 

30’}
25’
Simulated distribution
condition
20’
g Constant temperature
,3 storage
4.:
,1:
no
0H
4’ 15»
o
an
m
4..)
c
o
o
a
3'3
10%
5v
0 - 1 1, eex
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

Heating Time (min/100 gm)

Fig. 3. Average weight loss of chicken pieces during reheating in
microwave oven after 3 months under simulated distribution
condition or constant -1800 storage.

7O

.mmomflm mum mo wmmuw>¢

 

 

 

 

H
m.m~ . ow. e.~m we. when been:
m.em em. a.mm mm. mesa
e.Hm we. H.H~ em. seen
e.m~ mm. m.o~ me. amaze
m.m~ om. m.o~ om. xomnuummoom
N.H~ we. m.H~ me. man ammonm
omoam umoououcfllx macaw ummoumucfllx
:ofiuflpcoo munmm

coausnwuumwp woumHSEHm mmmuoum UONHI ucmumcoo

 

 

a.muumm coxofino
mooflum> mo mm>uoo mmoH unmfio3 mo omoam can unmououcalx Hmowbmfiosumz .v magma

71

the pieces subjected to a simulated distribution condition
and those under constant temperature storage were the
same, those under simulated distribution condition lost
about 1% more weight at any given time due to a small
difference in the x-intercepts. This may indicate that
there was a slight moisture migration towards the surface
of the piece during the fluctuating temperature storage.
Variations in the x-intercepts and slopes of the weight
loss curves of the different chicken pieces could have
been due to differences in shape, surface area and/or
moisture content. Beyond the x-intercept, the loss in
weight was linearly related to the microwave reheating
time. These results suggest that the loss in weight
during reheating in a microwave oven is directly propor—
tional to the heating time, which could be interpreted to
mean that the weight loss is also a function of the power
output of the microwave oven and the weight of the load.
The changes in juiciness and tenderness of breast
meat with the increase in microwave reheating time per
unit weight are shown in Figure 4. The data show that in
the particular oven used in this study, increasing the re-
heating time of chicken breast beyond 1 min/100 gms resulted
in highly significant (P < .01) decreases in juiciness and
tenderness scores and increase in shear press values. Re-
gression analysis (Table 5) showed a highly significant

linear decrease in juiciness and tenderness scores

72

 

81) . . (£30
legend: I———I Ju1c1ness
.___.. Tenderness
5.-----5 Shear Press
7 r 1 25
A
i
:0) 6 > < 20
.p
c
w-l
o
‘f"
0\
an) 5 r t 15
a
o
O
(I)
~+
8
:5.“
Q) 4 D 1 10
1.:
U)
m
E4
3 , , 5
2 ‘ ‘ - o

 

 

 

1.0 1.25 1.5 1.75 2.0

Heating Time in Microwave Oven (min/100 gm)

Fig. 4. Influence of microwave reheating time on juiciness and
tenderness of Pectoralis major muscle.

(mS/mfix) ssaxd xeaqs Jamel)

73

.ucoflofimmmoo cowumamuuoo mw H

.m>uso new
wumovm ammoa on» mo mocmfium> on“ ma b can macaw on“ ma 3

.Ho>oa.ma. om unmoemaemem
«as

.Ho>oH ma um HGMOHMHcmflm
as

 

«aamm.o eesvmm.0I eaaomm.0I H

wm.va+ . om.o+ mmm.o+ o

o.mH mB.MI. mm.mt Q
monam>

mmmcuo no mmocaoa:
mmoum umosm p a . . h

 

 

.oEwu mcfiumosou m>m3ouowe
suw3 mosam> mmoum “moan pom mouoom mmocuoocou can
mmocflowofl mo QHEmGOHumHoH on» no mHmMHmcm cowmmoumom .m magma

74

with the increase in reheating time, which indicates that
excessive heating with microwave progressively decreases
the eating quality of the fried Chicken. There were also
highly significant correlations between sensory tenderness
scores and shear press values, and between juiciness scores
and weight loss (Table 6). These results agree with ear-
lier findings of Baker and Darfler (1968) on the relation-
ship between tenderness and shear press values, and of
Carlin gE_al. (1959) on juiciness and weight loss. These
results further indicate that, in order to maintain the
eating quality, Chicken pieces should be reheated for only
the minimum time required to bring them to serving tem-
perature and that the time should be based accurately on
weight rather than on the number of pieces. Since dif-
ferent models of microwave ovens vary in power output and
the power output decreases with usage, individual oven
units should be calibrated periodically to establish opti—
mum heating time for the particular product.

Experiment 4. Effect of packaging and storage

 

conditions on eating quality. The summary of the taste
panel scores of microwave reheated Chicken subjected to
various freezing, packaging, and storage treatments (Trial
1) are shown in Table 7a, but the detailed scores are
reported in Appendix X. Statistical analysis of the

taste panel scores (Table 7b) showed that the freezing,

75

.Ho>me we. on benchmaememeee

.Ho>oa ma um ucmoHMNcmHm
t.

k

 

 

 

 

 

 

suamm. «esomm. ssvwm.l esaomm.l OEHH Ucflummnmm
«gnaw. aeNmm.I mmmum Hmmnm
«emem.- eeeemm.- mmoa bashes
uo>fiuomnbo
«samba. mmOGHOUGOE
uo>fluomflb5m
MMMMM ummmwg mmmcumocoa mmocHOHsh
o>auomflno m>fluooflnsm
.mucoE

Insommoe maomsfi unmonb How mucmHOHumooo cowumaouuou .o magma

76

.mmamamm ONH How ommuo>m map mfl.ucosummuu mcflmmxomm ecu Hopes
whoom comm mass: moflmamm omH Hom ommno>m on» ma mucmaummuu mmmuoum 0cm
mcHNomum on» moons onoom comm .oamom panacea ucflomlm C so pommm.

 

 

H
m.m H.h m.m m.m coausbfluumfip poumasefim
m.m H.h H.> ¢.o coma: ucmumcou
mmmuoum
o.» H.e 0.5 m.m moH booms coxommasssom>
m.m m.> m.m N.m mOH CHOMCQ poxommnassom>
m.m o.n H.h m.m Essom> usocuflz mob mm
mafimmxomm
m.m H.h H.h v.m cooum pwswwq
m.m H.h m.m m.m unmablufld

 

oocuoe mafiumoum

 

.umoood .cow Ho>mam mmocuopcme mmocflowsn

 

mnouomm

Hmouoom dogma ouwmu mmmuo><

.mucoeumouu ommuoum new .mcwmmxomm .mcwnmmnm m50fium> ou pmuoonn5m
soxowso pmflum omumonou m>mon0HE mo monoom Hmcmm mummu mo mumeasm .Mn manna

77

 

«h.a mm.a mh.H m¢.N vmm HOHHm

 

 

H.o H.o o~.m e.o H mmmuoum
me.o m.H mm.H mm.m m meammxoma
m.o H.o m.H e.o H .meeummum

.umooom
. G00 HO>MHm mmwdummucwfi mmOGHOHflh. EOUOGHM OOCMHHM>
mo mooumon mo mousom

moumsvm.cmoz

 

tllr rll I‘
'l I 1'

.mucmsumouu ommuoum can emcwmmxomm
.mafluooum msoaum> ou nonconQSm coxOHno.poflum pouconou
w>m30H0HE.uo monoom Henna mummy mo mocmflnm> mo mamhamcd .nh manna

78

packaging, and storage treatments did not significantly
affect the eating quality of the product.

The results of the panel evaluation of chicken*
pieces receiving different freezing treatments are simi-
lar to the findings in Experiment 2, indicating that the
freezing methods used in this study have comparable ef-
fects on the eating quality of fried chicken. Although
Cunningham §£_al- (1971) reported differences in shear
press and TBA values in fried Chicken frozen by different
methods, the differences were probably not significant
to the_consumers because they were with the so-called
"just-not-noticeable-difference" (Baker and Darfler, 1968
and Palmer gt_al. 1965). The leaChing out of fat when the
pieces were immersed in Freon 12 appeared not to be a
significant factor. It should be noted that the panel
scores in this Trial were higher than those in Experiment
2, possibly because most of the pieces were vacuum-packed
and because all of them were reheated for exactly 1
min/100 gms.

Since the polyethylene bag and the laminated
pouch used in this Trial have both good oxygen and water
vapor barrier properties, it can be inferred from the data
that packaging materials which have good barrier proper-
ties would offer comparable protection with or without
vacuum and under constant or fluctuating temperature

storage. No significant differences were found in the

79

panel scores of pieces vacuum-packed before and after
freezing. The data also show that packaging in poly-
ethylene bags in bulk offers adequate protection to the
product during simulated distribution conditions.

Trial 2 was conducted to evaluate the effects on
eating quality of 3 packaging treatments. The taste panel
scores of the reheated chicken pieces after different
packaging and storage treatments are reported in Table 8a.
The results show that the panel scores of the frozen~
pieces which had been placed under constant temperature
are significantly better (P < .01) than those subjected
to a simulated distribution condition.

No differences were found in flavor, tenderness
and general acceptability of products subjected to dif-
ferent packaging treatments and held under constant tem-
perature storage. The results were similar to those of
Carlin g£_31. (1959) indicating that packaging has a
minor effect on the deterioration of eating quality under
constant low temperature storage. The vacuum-packed
pieces had lower juiciness scores; however, they were re-
heated first before serving.

Under simulated distribution condition, the
vacuum-packed pieces had flavor scores comparable to
those under constant temperature, and significantly
higher (P < .01) than the flavor scores of the AMG-

coated and the unprotected pieces. These results indicate

80

.Ho>oa we on unmoamaememee

.umou omens mamfluasa m.cmocso on mcwpuooom Ame. w my mauCMOHm
Iflcmwm sonnet muouuma ucouommap an po3oHH0m mouoom .cEsHoo m canusz

.mmHmEMm

on How mmmuo>m may ma muoom comm .mamom Osgood: ucflomlm u so pommma

 

 

m.m o.m m.» m.m coauauaoo coausneuumeo

eem.m eem.m «em.m «em.m ousuauomsou uemomcoo
mmmmmwm

ne.m am.m wa.m om.e nmxomauuea .u

no.m ne.m me.m an.m couscouoza .m

nae.m mfl.s mm.o o~.m wmxommnesaom> .4
cowummaoo

 

cowusnenumau nonmassem

we.m mm.m mm.m nom.m umxommnnaa .o
am.m m5.m am.m no.5 couscouoza .m
ma.e mm.e no.5 monm.m .eoxomeusssom> .a

 

ousumuwmfiou ucmumcoo

 

.umoood .cmo uo>mam mmocnmpcoa mmocHOHsb

 

Hmouoom Hocmm ovum» oomuo>¢ usefiumoua

 

.mucosumouu oomuoum cam mcflmmxomm.msowum> op oouomnbsm
coxoflco pownm couonm pmumocmu o>m3ou0NE mo mouoom dogma mamas .Mm manna

81

.Hm>ma we on benchmaememee

.Hoema am on bemoameemame

 

 

 

N.N mm.N no.N mv.a vba Honum
h.m mN.v m.H «em¢.m N m x m
«so.mm aeom.~m «em.ma .«e.em H Ame mmmuoom
«mm.e eemo.m~ e.H eee.~m N has mmmxoma
.umooo¢ .cow uo>mam mmocuopcma macawoflsb Soomoum oocmflum>
mo mooumoo mo monsom

moumsum coo:

 

 

.mucosumouu
omnuoum can mcflmmxomm msowum> on pouomnndm coxowco pmwuu cowouw
censuses o>m30HONE mo mmuoom dogma mummy mo mocmwnm> mo mammamc¢ .bm manna

82

r111.‘

that materials with good oxygenQproperties should be used
in packaging fried chicken in order to prevent flavor
deterioration under adverse storage conditions. The AMG-
coated pieces had the highest juiciness scores possibly ‘
because of higher yields (Table 9), suggesting the poten-
tial use of a suitable coating to prevent excessive
moisture loss during storage and subsequent microwave re-
heating. Due to a strong vinegar flavor, the flavor and
acceptability scores of the AMG-coated chicken pieces
were similar to those of the controls. Apparently, acetic
acid residues were released from the AMG during the fluc-
tuating temperature storage. No significant differences
were observed in tenderness and acceptability among the
treatments.

This experiment demonstrated the need for a good
protective package and constant low temperature in the
distribution of frozen fried chicken to prolong its eat-
ing quality. It also showed that an edible coating which
does not impart an undesirable flavor may be used to pre-
serve the juiciness of the product even after microwave
reheating.

Experiment 5. Comparison of reheating_methods.

 

Observations made in previous experiments indicated that
microwave reheated pieces had soggy breading and were
less juicy than newly cooked controls. Hence, this ex-

periment was conducted to determine whether other

83

.moomflm om mo ommum>¢

 

 

 

 

 

H
m.mm a.ma nu- oeH a.mHH emxomeuuHa .u
e.om «.meH a.mOH eeH e.eHH connectors .m
e.mm o.oeH -1- OOH e.eHH vmxommuesaoa> .a
coauflpcoo
coHuanuumHe coHMHssHm
H.om «.mm -u- eoH H.eeH cornmeunHa .o
m.Hm m.HHH m.oHH oOH o.eoH ooumouuoza .m
e.Hm c.00H It: oOH «.moH eoxommusssom> .a
omnnoum
ousumnomfiou unnumcoo
mcauooum Houmm unmflo3 mo w mam
mca
lumonou oomuoum mcHumoo madame“
, . u
o>m3 conoum 02¢ Hmumm
IOHOHE Houmm Houmm mcwumonm
Houmm nouns ucosumoua
uanoz

 

mcwmmoooum mo mommum

 

.AN Hmaua .v ucoawuomxmv

mucosumouu ommuoum can mcammxomm ucoHCMMHU ou pouoonbsm coxoflno
mo mcammoooum mo mommum wouooamm um ucmfloz CH omcmno ommucmouom .m magma

84

reheating methods could produce better products than
those reheated by microwave. In Trial 1, chicken pieces
reheated by microwave energy were compared with those re-
ceiving a combination of microwave energy and deep-fat-
frying, which gave crispier products, and with those
reheated in a household oven. Sensory evaluations (Table
10) showed that chicken pieces reheated in the household
oven were significantly more juicy than products reheated
by either methods using microwave energy. Since the
juicier pieces did not lose as much weight during reheat-
ing (Table 11), it can be concluded that moisture loss
was directly responsible for the decrease in juiciness

of thggmicrowave reheated pieces. There were no differ-
ences-among treatments in flavor, tenderness, and general
acceptability, which confirmed earlier conclusions of:
Cunningham-gt_al. (1971) that the manner of reheating
does not materially affect the flavor and tenderness of
frozen fried chicken.

During the evaluations, each panel member was
asked to indicate which sample was preferred most, and
the reason for this preference. Chicken samples reheated
by each method were preferred by an equal number of panel
members. No consistent reasons were given for their
preferences, which was similar to the observations of
Baker gt_al. (1960) that in consumer acceptance testing,

the direction of preference was not specific, and many

85

.umou omcou oamwuaoe m.coocso on mcflpuoooo Ame. u my waucoowmwcmwm Hommwp
muouuoa ucououwflo an coonHom cesaoo o cwcuwa monoom .Hoauu nooo CH

 

 

 

N
.moamfiom
om Mom omouo>o one ma ouoom cooo .oHoom oacooos ucHomIm o co pooomH
am.m om.w boH.h boh.m mmoQ|CH|HHom
om.o oh.m am.m bo.m o>o30H0Hz
o¢.h om.h no.5 om.n Houucoo poxooo >H3oz
N amass
om.m no.0 ov.h na.h co>o huocwpno
om.m oo.> om.m om.m among:
oo.n om.n om.m Noo.m o>ozouowz
H HoHHB
.umooom .cow uo>on moocnopcoa mooCHOHsb
ucoauooue

Hmouoom Hocom oumou omouo><

 

 

.mponuos
ucoHoMMHp an pouoosou coxowno oowum cosoum mo mouoom Hocom oumoa .oOH oaboa

86

.HmeoH eH um bemoHHHemHme.

.Hm>oH mm on beeonHamHme

 

 

 

m.H vo.N N.N mm.N hm uouum
sm.v ov.~ smm.w sN.HH N usofinoona
N HoHHB
v.H N.N mm.H HN.N hm Hounm
mN. m.H e.m «em.MH N ucofiuooua
H HoHHB
.umoood
.cow Ho>on omocuopcoe moocHOHab Eowwoum oocoHuo>
mouosvm Coos mooumoa mo oousom

 

 

.moonvoa ucoHoMMHo an oouoonou

.coMOHco poHHw cououm mo mouoom Hocom ouoou wo.oocoHHo>.mo mHmmHond .QOH pooB

87

.mooon on no omouo>¢H

 

 

NH H H.... 685305 :96

ON“ ~.m means:

m.N H m.m o>o30Hon
coHuoH>oo puopcoum oocuoe
Ugo mooH uanoz w mcHuoonom

 

 

H.mcHuoo£ou mcHHsp
mooon coonco mo mooH ucmHo3 omoucoouom .HH oHnoB

88

consumers were indifferent to the characteristics being
tested.

In Trial 2, vacuum-packed frozen chicken pieces
reheated by microwave or by boiling-in-bag-were compared
with newly cooked controls. The taste panel evaluation
showed that juiciness and tenderness scores were highest
for the controls, intermediate for those boiled-in-bags,
and lowest for the microwave reheated pieces. The dif-
ferences in panel scores between the controls and micro-
wave reheated pieces were significant at 5% level. These
data show that freezing-per se caused a slight decrease.
in juiciness and tenderness scores, and results were con-1
founded by microwave reheating. No differences in flavor
were observed among the treatments. However, the con-
trols were significantly more acceptable (P < .05) than
the reheated pieces. The low acceptability scores for
the boiled-in-bag pieces were caused mainly by their
greasy appearance.

The results of this experiment showed that a
method which minimizes weight loss can be used to reheat.
frozen fried chicken without lowering the eatinquuality.

Experiment.6. Evaluation of breading materials.
Preliminary trials were conducted to select satisfactory
breading mixtures. Several combinations of flour from
wheat, rice, potato, barley, oat and rye, and corn meal,

cracker meal, and waxy cornstarches were applied to

89

chicken pieces as dry breadings and as wet batters before.
deep-fat-frying. Fried chicken pieces were evaluated for
color, adhesion, and texture after frying, and after
freezing and microwave reheating. The all-purpose wheat,
flour, which was used in the preceding experiments, was.
found satisfactory for the batter, and was selected as“
the control. The wheat flour-corn meal-potato flour
combination, which is the basic formula for some comercial
breading mixtures, was found to be an excellent ingredient
for the Coating both as breading and as batter. The wheat
flour-waxy cornstarch combination was also selected be-'
cause it had good adhesion before and after freezing and
microwave‘reheating.

The panel scores of the coating characteristics
and eating quality of freshly cooked and microwave re-
heated chicken pieces subjected to various coating treat-
ments are reported in Table 12a and summarized in Table
12b. The dry breaded coatings on the freshly cooked or
microwave reheated chicken pieces had significantly
better adhesion (P s .01) than those of the pieces coated
with batter. Perhaps the breading may have shrunk with
the tissues during processing and left a porous coating
which allowed the gradual escape of volatiles during the
cooking and microwave reheating processes, whereas the
batter set at its original shape and formed a continuous

crust which erupted or flaked off during cooking to allow

.HCon ououom H mm “HooE CHOU u 20¢

m
.pooHHmopCC
uoHoom OHCOCoC uCHomIm o Co oomomN

"oHoom poonIN uCHom m o C0 pouoCHo>MH

.mouoom om mo omono>o on» mH HonECC Comm

mHoEoHuxo .H HpoouHmoo MHoEoHuxo .m

.HmmeH meHmn m

 

 

 

90

 

 

 

NauHHoCo mCHuom

 

 

H

 

1"
L

1|"

oOHumHuouoouoCU mCHuooo

m.m H.m m.m n.m e.~ ~.m am.H H.m Cmuzoumz .m
v.m m.m m.m ¢.m m.N v.m om.N o.m U3Ih3 .N
o.o N.o m.m m.m v.N m.m no.N H.m hz .H
Coupon no: .m
H.m m.m v.w m.m m.N m.N N.N am.N hmIZUImS .m
m.o v.9 o.m m.m m.N H.m o.m oo.m USIWB .N
h.@ h.@ N.@ N.m h.N N.N m.N oo.m m3 .H
mCHpooum Nun .C
”Homououm Cououm mCuCoE m Houmov Co>o o>o3onon CH pouooCom
m.m 0.5 H.m h.m Qm.~ Q¢.m N.N Om.N mmlzolmz .m
m.h m.h m.m m.m am.N om.N H.N nm.N UBIhS .N
H.h H.h m.m N.m ov.m oo.m m.N om.m m3 .H
uouumm nos .m
m.h m.h m.m m.m N.m ¢.N m.N m.N vmmISUImZ .m
H.h m.h m.m v.m m.N m.N m.N m.N AU3V CHOU mxoZImz .N
m.h N.N m.m N.m o.m m.N m.N MH.m Hazy HCOHM uoos3 .H
wCHpoonm who .«
upoxooo hHCmon
. “@000“ mmmfi mmmg mmmfl 0H5“. GOflm
.eoo CoemHm unmcema -HOHsu umnmm nxme tones uoHoo

muCoEuooHB

 

lt'|‘
l

.ouCoEuoouu mCHuooo mCOHHo> ou pouoonnsm CoEOHCo

powum Couonm pouooCoH o>o3oH0HE UCo poxooo hHCoonm mo mouooo HoCom ouooa

.mmH mHnms

91

.Ho>oH em on HHuemonHemHm umooHe
muouuoH uCouommHo an poonH0m CECHoo oEoo on CH monoom .xooHC o CHCquH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CH.m m.m H.o m.m m.N om.m CH.N oH.m Coupon uoz
we.o m.» ~.m m.m e.~ am.~ am.~ am.~ mcHnmmun Hun
pouoocom
0.5 N.n m.m N.o o.m oH.m CN.N o.m Coupon uoz
N.> N.N m.o H.m o.m C>.N oh.N m.N mCHoooub mun
ooxoou MHCmoum
CN.m be.m CN.m m.m Cm.N bH.m v.N m.N oouoonom
oH.> om.h o>.m oH.m oo.m om.N m.N m.N .poxooo mHCmon
omoum
m.m >.m m.o m.m m.N H.m q.N Ch.N mmIZOImS
m.m m.m ¢.m H.m m.N H.m m.N nom.N Uzlmz
m.m m.o m.m o.m m.N o.m e.N oH.m In?
HoHHouoz mCHuooU
m.o n.m ¢.m m.m w.N CN.m CN.N oH.m Coupon uoz
m.e m.m e.m m.m m.~ mm.~ mm.~ am.~ meHmmmue sun
H poauoz mCHuooo
.umo004 mmoC omoC mmoC one» Con
Ho>on. . . uoHou
. I I I no I I
Coo HooCoa HOHsb o m woe occd muCoauoouB
NCHHoCO mCHuom moHumHHouooHoCo OCHuoou

 

 

.muCoEuoouu mCHuooo
msoHHo> ou oouoonbso CoHOHCo mo mouoom HoCom ouoou on» no mHoEECm .CNH oHCoa

92

.Hm>mH HH.um nemonHcmHmee
.Ho>mH mm on unmoHoHamHme

 

 

 

 

 

o.H m.H o.N o.m mm. m. no. r. mmm Houum
«sm.NH «em.bm «sm.hN «sh.mN «sm.mH o.v m. o H omoum
em.e e.H m.~ H. e. ««~.mH «eo.m~ em.e H eoHomOHHCmC
o.N N.N m.m m.m m. N. h. «sm.s N mHoHHouoz
poCHQEoo
N.H o.N N.N m.m mm. mm. mm. mp. th Houum
«h.m N.H o.H o m.H sem.m «sm.m «m.m H COHuooHHmmd
H.m o.H N.H v. mH. m. «N.N «v.N N mHoHHouoz
pouoosom
m.H H.H N.H m.N as. so. mm. no. th Houum
N.N H. o.N N. o «m.m ssh.HH H.H H COHDCOHHCQC
o.H H.H H.v v.5 eH.m N. h. «sm.m N mHoHHouoz
poxooo NHCmon
.umo004 mmoC mooC mooC
.Cow Ho>on Iuomcoa IHoHCh Ipuom ousuxoe Conond uoHou
So ooh
muHHosO mCHuom oOHumHnouooHoso mCHuooo ouo m oOCoHHo>
mooumoo mo oousom

mouosvm Coos

 

 

.mUCoEuooHu mCHbooo mCOHHo> on
oouoombsm coxOHCo poHHm mo mouoom HoCom oumou on» no oOCoHHo> mo mHmmHoCd .oNH pooB

93

the escape of volatiles (Hale and Goodwin 1968, Hanson

and Fletcher 1963). These results indicate that dry
breading is more desirable than wet batter for fried
chicken. The significantly coarser texture (P < .01) of
the dry breading can easily be altered by using finer
ground ingredients, while the significantly lighter color
(P < .05) can be made darker by increasing the time and/or
temperature of frying.

No differences in the coating characteristics,
except for color, were observed among the chicken pieces
coated with different mixtures. The color was darkest in
those coated with wheat flour, intermediate in those with
wheat flour-waxy cornstarch, and lightest in those with
wheat flour—corn meal-potato flour mixture. The differ-
ence in the color scores between wheat flour and wheat
flour-corn meal-potato flour mixtures was significant at
1% level.

There were no differences in the eating quality of
the chicken pieces regardless of the coating treatments,
which was similar to the findings of Hale and Goodwin
(1968), indicating that the coating only affects the ap-
pearance but not the eating quality of fried chicken.

The coatings on the reheated chicken pieces were
significantly softer (P e .01) than those of the freshly
cooked pieces, possibly due to the effect of moisture es-

caping as steam from the chicken tissues during microwave

94

reheating (Anon.1968), Co and Livingston 1969). The soft
or "soggy" coatings and lower juiciness, tenderness, and
flavor scores, combined to produce significantly less ac-
ceptable (P < .01) reheated products as compared with
freshly cooked ones, which coincide with findings in
Experiment 2. The coatings on the freshly cooked chicken
pieces were significantly coarser (P < 01) than those on
the reheated pieces, although the texture scores were
almost ideal. No differences were observed in the color
and adhesion of the coating on the freshly cooked and
microwave reheated frozen chickens.

In spite of precooking the chicken pieces prior
to coating application, as recommended by Hanson and
Fletcher (1963) to insure better adhesion, the coating
on the chicken pieces had generally poor adhesion with an
overall average score of 2.5. More studies are needed to
develop suitable coating methods and/or ingredients which
would yield coatings with good adhesion for fried chicken,
especially for those to be frozen and reheated in micro-
wave ovens.

The percentage change in weight of breaded or
battered chicken pieces at various stages of procesSing,
based on the original raw weights, are shown in Table 13a.
During the coating application, the pieces coated with
batter increased 14% in weight, which was significantly

higher (P < .01) than the 10% increase in weight of those

95

Mom Como mooon oNV mooon cm «0 omouo>o ooucmHoz oCH mH ousmHm Comm

.AmHu umooub How mooon OH onoblumooun pCo .mCH3 .ECHU .CmHCu

.uCoEuooHu you come mpan OH HO uano3 omouo>¢

N
H

 

 

 

 

 

m.om H.mm m.wm m.mm N.moH H.Hm a.mmm mmIzoImz .m
¢.mn n.mm m.¢m w.mm m.moH H.Nm m.omm OBImz .N
m.om m.mm p.mm p.mm p.mOH m.Nm v.mmm m3 .H
Houuom uoz
H.mh N.Nm n.5m m.mm m.moH N.Na m.Hmm mmIZUImz .m
o.Nh o.Hm «.mm a.mm N.HoH v.Hm m.mhm OzImz .N
e.v> o.mh m.vm N.mm o.HoH o.mm a.mbm m3 .H
mMHpoonINHo
uano3 3mm HoCHmHuo mo omoucoouom mam
mCHuooCoH omououm mCHuoon mCHmum mCHuooo mConoo
Hound Houmm nouns Hound Hound m3: Houmm ucmHoz
H son mucoauoous
mCHomoooum mo momoum HoCHmHHo

N

 

 

.oucofiuoouu mCHuooo msoHHo> on pouoon
Inna CoonCo ooHum mo mCHmmoooum mCHHCC ucmHoz CH omCoCo omoucoouom .omH pooB

96

.Ho>mH eH on bemoHuHemHmee

.Ho>oH wm no uCoOHMHcmHms

 

 

 

o.HH m.mH a.mN m.o o.NH o.NH m.m «N Houum
m.o H.o o.m H.o o.mH o.mH N.@ N . 4 x z
H.o m.o «a.meH N.H «4H.HMH e.o.mHH N.HH H 141 coHumoHHaea
m.m v.NH m.m h.N «N.Hm m.N cam.mm N sz HoHuouoz
oHoHa pHoHa pHon moomoH mommoH , mCHom uCouCoo Coo
pouoocom poxoou pouooo mCHuooCom mCHmHm mCHuooo mCHUooum Ioowm oOCoHHo>
N no oonsom

mohoavm Coo: mooumoo
”fig

 

 

 

 

.Am ucoEHHomxmv oboe pHon pCo
uanoz CH omCoCo omoucoouom .ucouCoo mCHpooHn mo ooCoHHo> mo mHmmHoCC .an oHnoB

97

pieces coated with dry breading. However, during frying,
the pieces coated with batter lost an average of 15% in
weight which was also significantly higher (P < .01) than
the 11% weight loss of the breaded pieces. Hence, the
cooking yields for the pieces coated by both methods were
the same (88%). Carlin gt_al. (1959) reported an average
of 7% increase in weight of chicken pieces after breading~
with milk and flour, while Hanson and Fletcher (1963) and
Hale and Goodwin (1968) reported gains ranging from 15 to
30% for pieces coated with batter depending upon the mois—
turezsolid ratio of the batter and the number of applica-
tions. Carlin gt;gl, (1959) and Hale and Goodwin (1968)
also reported similar cooked yield values after deep-fat-
frying of apprOximately 84%.

Analysis of variance (Table 13b) showed no dif-
ferences in the yields, after coating and after cooking,
among the pieces coated with different mixtures but by
the same procedure, which was similar to the findings of
Hale and Goodwin (1968). These results indicate that the
amount of coating applied on the chicken pieces was affect-
ed more by the manner of application than by variation
in-the ingredients of the coating. However, the percent-
age of coating (Table 14) on fried chicken pieces coated
with wheat flour-waxy cornstarch and wheat flour-corn
meal—potato flour combinations were significantly greater

(P < .01) than on those coated with wheat flour alone.

98

.uwmu mmomu
mamwuasfi m.cmocso on mcwonooom Amo. w my Maucmowmwcmwm
mommao mumuuma accumMMfio an Uo30HH0m mousmwmm
.mmomwm coxowno
ucmummmwo m may now mmmum>m may ma musmflm commH

 

 

H.HH m.m mmmum>¢
pm.HH a.ma m.oa mmlzolmz
no.HH q.HH k.oa ozumz
m C O I

m o n o m Ha m m:
m a w
mmmum>¢ nmuumn umz , mcwommun mun
mHmHnmumz

 

conumouamda «0 conumz

 

.mucmEummHu mcflumoo mooflum>
ou Umuomnaom.cmxowno omflum mo ucmucoo mcflumoo .vH magma

99

These differences were partly due to differences in cook-
ing losses (see Table 10a) which in-turn may have been
influenced by the differences in the proportion of starch
in the coating. Perhaps the increased proportion of
starch in the combination breadings may have increased
fat absorption during frying which offset some of the
moisture lost and therefore resulted in an apparently
higher cooking yield. Hanson and Fletcher (1963) observed
differences in both fat content in coating and in the
amount of coating among fried chicken pieces coated with
various materials. Mostert and Stadelman (1964) reported
that breading increased fat absorption or retention.
Further studies are needed to explain the differences in
the percentage coating in fried products arising from

the differences in the ingredients of the coating.

It can be concluded from the findings in this ex-
periment, and in conjunction with the findings of Hanson
and Fletcher (1963), Mostert and Stadelman (1964), and
Hale and Goodwin (1968), that the coating of fried chicken
is very important because of its influence on the yield,
appearance, and on the distribution of the seasoning. A
desirable coating should have a uniform golden-brown,
color, good adhesion, and optimum texture at the time the
chicken is served. While these coating characteristics
have been shown to be influenced by coating methods, in-

gredients, and microwave reheating, a great deal of art

100

is still involved in producing fried chicken with a uni-
form and consistent color.

Experiment 7. Comparison of cooking methods. It
was experienced in earlier experiments that pressure fry-
ing is essentially a batch operation and the data had
shown that microwave reheated frozen chicken pieces were
less tender or juicy than freshly cooked ones. Hence,
this experiment was conducted to evaluate the suitability
of three cooking methods for centralized processing and
to investigate the efficacy of polyphosphates in improv-
ing the quality of reheated products. Pressure frying
(PF) was selected as the control because it produces ex-
cellent products especially when served soon after cooking,
whereas microwave-steam (MWS) precooking was selected for
its speed and high yields. Although deep-fat-frying was
the most convenient method, pressure frying was also con-
sidered for browning because it had not been used in com-
bination with microwave-steam precooking before. A
preliminary trial has shown that 5 kw was about the maxi-
mum microwave power output which could be used without
causing bursting in the chicken pieces, and that a 10-
minute processing at this power with the belt loaded was
adequate to heat the pieces to 85°C internal temperature
with an average shrinkage of 7-8%.

The panel scores and shear press values of freshly

cooked and microwave reheated frozen chickens which have

101

been cooked by different methods are shown in Table 15a.
In the freshly cooked chicken, those soaked in phosphate
were significantly more juicy and tender (P < .01) and
therefore more acceptable than the untreated pieces.
Shear press values were also significantly lower in the
phosphate-soaked samples. These differences may be due
to the significantly higher moisture content of the
phosphate-treated pieces. Baker and Darfler (1968) ob-
served differences in juiciness, tenderness, and prefer-
ence between untreated and phosphate-soaked chicken
pieces, but observed no differences in shear press values.
Flavor was not affected by the phosphate treatment.

The chicken pieces cooked by MWS-DFF were signifi-
cantly juicier (P < .01) than those cooked under pressure.
However, there were no differences in flavor and general
acceptability among the cooking methods, which was similar
to the findings of Hale and Goodwin (1968). Conflicting
results were obtained on the effect of cooking methods on
tenderness. The sensory evaluation detected no signifi-
cant differences whereas the shear press determination
showed that the controls (PF) were significantly more
tender (P < .01) than the precooked pieces. Anon.(1966)
reported that chickens precooked in microwave-steam were
as tender, if not more tender than, those cooked by DFF.
Mickelberry and Stadelman (1962) observed no significant

differences in the shear press values of pieces cooked by

102

 

 

 

 

 

m.m m.m q.m m.m ¢.m mmaumzz .m.
«.0H m.m 5.m o.5 m.m mmlmzz .«
m.oa o.5 m.w «.5 5.m mm .H
mumcmmonm ca omxwom .m
5.«a m.m 5.0 m.m m.m mmolmzz .m
o.HH «.m ¢.m m.m m.m mmlmzz ,.«
v.HH m.m m.m m.m o.m mm .H
omummuuco .¢
“momuoum amuoum usages m umumdv zm>o m>¢zomoaz zH omammmmm
m.5 .m.5 m.5 «.m.> «.m.o «om ca omxmom
««5.m m.m H.5 5.m «.m omnmouucs
am.m «.5 0.5 m.5 om.5 muonmzz .m
am.m m.5 m.5 m.5 am.m mmlmzz .«
M¢.m «.5 «.5 m.5 n5.o mm .H
mumnmwosm CH Umxmom .m
0¢.HH «.5 «.5 m.m am.m mmnlmzz .m
oo.oa m.m «.5 ¢.m om.m mmnmzz .«
Q5.5 m.m m.m m.m «mm.m mm .H
ooumouucp .¢
QmMOOU mammHMh
Em\8mx mamom oesoomn ucHomum
.umooo¢ mum: mmmc
mosam> . Ho>mam
mmmum cow lumocma Iflowob unmeumoua
ummnm Hmouoom aocmm mummu mmmum>¢

 

 

 

.mucmaummnu moowum> ou omuoanSm cmeHno cmummsmu o>o3ouow8
can omxooo manmmum mo mosam> mmmum woman can monoom Hmcmm mamas .MmH manna

.Hm>ma 8H um_ucmoamaamam««
.Hm>mH 88 um ucmuamacmam.

.Hm>mH 88 um «Hucmoamficmam “woman muouuoa
ucouomuwc an Um30aa0m :EsHoo mean on» c« monoom .xooan m cwnuflBN

.mmamEMm on How mmmum>o on» ma mnoom nomad

 

103

H.HH 8.8 5.8 5.8 8.8 emummnmm .N
8.5.8 88H.5 «85.5 «H.5 5.8 cmxooo H mm“ .H
mmmum .o
8.8.8 8.8 8.5 «85.5 8.5.8 8on c8 umxmom .5
8.8H 5.8 8.8 5.8 8.8 omumouucp .H
ouocfiuuz .m
n8.oa 8.8 8.8 8.8 88.8 mmaumzz ..m
88.8H 5.8 8.5 8.8 88.8 88-832 .~
88.8 8.5 8.5 8.5 am.8 mm .H
oonums mcwxooo .¢
nmzumzoo
8.8H 8.8 5.8 8.8 8.8 8om ca 883808
8.HH 8.8 5.8 8.8 8.8 cmuuouuco

\r

 

,104

 

 

 

.Hm>oa 88 um unmoamacmamg
v.H 5.H m5.H H.« mmm Momma
«am.ma ««m.v« ao.m «.m H mmmum
m.m om. ««H.m« «am.m« a muocwumz
8.H 88. 8. «8.8 m nonums ocaxooo
omcwnsoo
o.H o.H H.« m.« 85H uouum
o o m.« m. a wuocwumz
H.v m.« o. o.H « panama mcflxooo
vmummnmm
N.H 88nd -8.H o8.H 85H uouum
«8.8 _;m.H .«m.am ««88.8 H unashamz
mm. mm.« m5. «amm.m « panama mcwxooo
Umxooo manmmum
.umooom .coo Ho>mam mmmcuoocoa nmmcwoflob Eowwmum mocmaum>
mooummn mo mousom

moumsvm cum:

.mucmaumouu mooflum> ou
omuomflnsm cmxowno mo monoom «mama mummy mo oucmwum> mo mamaamsfl

 

 

.nma manna

105

different methods. Hale and Goodwin (1968) inconsistently
observed significant differences in sensory evaluation and
in shear press determination of chicken samples cooked by
different methods. These findings seem to substantiate
the conclusion of Szczesniak (1968) that correlation be-
tween sensory evaluation and objective tenderness measure-
ments is highly dependent upon the range of values covered.
Apparently, the tenderness values observed in this experi-
ment were within the range where shear press determination
was more sensitive and could detect more differences below
the threshold level for the panel tasters.

No significant differences in juiciness, tender-
ness, flavor and general acceptability scores were observed
in the microwave reheated chicken, between the untreated
and phosphate-soaked samples, and among those cooked by
different methods. However, the reheated chicken pieces
were less tender (P < .05) and had less desirable flavor
(P < .01) and were therefore significantly less acceptable
(P < .01) than the freshly cooked chicken pieces. The
data show that the combined effect of freezing, storage,
and microwave reheating on the eating quality of fried
chicken is more pronounced than the effect of phosphate
and/or cooking treatments. Soaking in phosphate improved
juiciness and tenderness scores only in the freshly cooked

chicken but not in the microwave reheated ones. The data

106

also show that the 3 cooking methods produce products of
comparable quality after frozen storage and microwave re—
heating.

The composition of meat and skin-coating complex
of freshly cooked and reheated chicken pieces are presented
in Table 16a. The moisture analysis concurred very well
with the taste panel evaluation for juiciness. The mois-
ture content was significantly higher in the flesh of the
phosphate-soaked pieces which were found to be juicier
than the untreated samples. Among the cooking methods,
the MWS-DFF produced products which had significantly
higher moisture than the products from the two other cook-
ing methods. The flesh of the freshly cooked chicken had
significantly higher (P < .01) moisture content than the
reheated chicken, although no difference in juiciness was
detected by sensory evaluation. The fat content of the
meat was not affected by the phosphate treatment nor by
cooking methods, so that the differences in solid content
were due to the differences in moisture content.

The chemical composition of the skin-coating com-
plex was affected by the cooking methods but not by the
phosphate treatment (see Table 16b). Hence, only the
summary of the composition for each cooking method are
shown in Table 16a. The moisture content was signifi-
cantly higher in the precooked pieces than in the controls,

while the reverse was true for the fat content.

107

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.88 8.88 8.8 8.8 8.88 8.88 888888088 :8 888808
8.88 8.88 8.5 8.5 8.88 8.88 888888888
8.88 8.88 8.8 8.5 8.88 8.88 888.832 .8
8.88 8.58 8.8 8.88 8.88 8.88 88:83: .8
8.88 8.88 8.8 8.8 8.88 8.88 88 .8
oumnmmonmwcw poxmom .m
8.88 8.88 8.5 8.5 8.58 8.88 888-832 .8
8.88 8.88 8.5 8.8 8.88 8.88 88.83: .8
8.88 8.88 5.8 8.8 8.88 8.88 88 .8
888888888 .8
88888
8 8 8 8 8 8
Umumwnmm Smwhm anvmmgmm Smwhh Umummflmm Smwhh
mufimfiflmeB
mvwaom muomuuxm Hmaum wusumfloz
.mucwfiummuu mooflum> on vmuomnnsm
cmxowso 808m memEoo OSHUmeQIcflxm cam name mo coauwmomfioo mumEonum .888 08989

108

.ucmfiummuu Mom Oman mso mew
nuouwumcoo mmomwm Eoum coxmu mmHmEmm co mmumoflamsc c8 $088 0803 mommamcd “muoz

 

m.5m
m.mm
«.ov
0.5m

5.mm
m.«m
a.mm
o.Nm

a.mm
a.mm
5.wm
o.NM

m.m«
m.m«
0.0m
m.om

m.¢m
m.mm
m.«m
«.5m

5.mm
a.mm
m.om
5.5m

m.5«
0.0m
o.5«

m.m«

m.wm
a.mm
m.5m
m.mm

«.Hm
«.«m
m.«m

5.m«

mmmnm>¢
wholmzz
mmlmzz

mm

NMAMZOU UZHQflfimmIZHMm

m.Hm
a.mm
m.om
¢.Hm

mmmum>¢

mhalmzz
mmlmzz
hm

109

.8m>88 88 88 8880888cm8888

.Hm>mH 8m 88 uc8oflwwcm8mu

 

 

 

 

5.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.88 8. 8.8 88 80888
«ao.m¢ 5.N ««m.¢h a«w.~m o.v «8H.om ««m.~m H mmmum
888.88 888.85 888.88 88.8 8.8 888.88 888.8 8 8888000
8. 8.88 8.8 8.88 8.8 885.88 888.88 8 88888882
88808 888 88888802 88808 888 88888802 88888
mcflc8munnc8xm ammam H8m£m Eowwmum mocmwn8>.

 

J

mmu8nwm c882

8088me mouaom

 

 

.85 ucmswnmmxmv 8808 cme8no How 8888
80888809600 08858xoum oc8 mmsH8> mmmnm 888nm mo 8088888> no 88888888 .388 88389

110

Table 17a shows the percentage change in weight
of chicken pieces, based on the original weights, at
various stages of processing. The chicken pieces soaked
overnight in 5% phosphate solution increased 7% in weight.
During precooking in microwave and steam (MWS), the
phosphate-soaked pieces lost about 13% weight which was
significantly greater (P < .01) than the 7.5% weight loss
of the untreated pieces. A comparison was made on the
percentage total cooking losses from the original weight
for the untreated pieces and from the weight after soak-
ing for the phosphate-treated pieces. The untreated
pieces lost significantly more weight mainly due to the
difference in gain during breading. The precooked
phosphate-treated pieces gained twice as much breading
as the untreated pieces, indicating that the phosphate
treatment increased the affinity of the chicken pieces
to breading materials. Probably, the surface of the
phosphate-soaked pieces was more moist, which allowed
better adhesion of the breading. The gain in weight of
the phosphated pieces during soaking and the greater
losses of the untreated pieces combined to give a signi-
ficantly higher (P s .01) cooking yield for the treated
pieces. Baker and Darfler (1968) reported that chicken
pieces soaked in phosphate had significantly higher

(P < .05) yields than pieces soaked only in water.

111

.8088 888wun 808 880880 08 «8083:888889 8:8 .0c83 .5588 .8083»
How 3080 880080 0«v mmomflm 00 Mom 80880>8 888:0803 may 88 885088 £08m«

.88888 08 80 8:0883 m08um>¢

 

 

 

 

 

an cmxoou cmxo8no mo 0cwmmmooum 0:8858 880803

«0c8mmmoonm no 880888

.mcosuma usuuwmm88
s8 80:830 8088:80888

8
8.50 8.m0 a.mm «.80 8.508 m.m0 8.508 8.005 mmnlmzz .m
m.mm 8.00 8.80 8.m0 0.888 8.80 5.008 8.885 881832 .«
m.m5 0.mm 5.mm 0.80 8.888 «.808 «.505 mm .8
“mumcmmonmmcw 888808
0.m5 8.00 8.08 m.«0 8.0m 8.«0 8.885 8891832 .m
8.85 8.00 0.08 0.«0 8.008 m.«0 8.m85 mmlmzz .«
0.05 0.05 8.05 5.«0 0.888 0.0«5 mm .8
88:8588888 mu8£mmosmnoz
880883 88880880 80 m08ucmoumm 850
8888
088 808 0:8 088888 0c8 0c8xooo 188088
Iu8mnmu nuoum Ismmum 80888 I88mnn 83: 80 880803
80888 88888 80884 88888 Hound Hmumd M8c808uo 88:0588889

.858 88088

112

.80>08 88 08 08808888088««

.8m>m8 8m 08 8880888cm8my

 

 

8.88 8.88 8.8 8.88 8.88 «N 80888
0.8 5.08 0.8 5.8 8.88 N _, 0 x 2
8.088 m.88 «m.m~ 8.58 8.8 .. N - 800 0888000
8«8.8008 «88.588 8.0 888.888 «00.888 8 sz 08888802
8808» 88088 808808 808808 8880
80080808 808000 088080808 0888000 08888088 5080088 0088888>

 

80 8008008
8088008 8802

.85 88088808888
8088 8808» 888 080803 88 008880 0080800808 80 0088888> 80 88888888

80 008808

.358 08Q89

113

No differences in total cooking losses nor in
yields were observed among the cooking methods. Hale
and Goodwin (1968) obtained comparable percentage yields
among deep-fat-frying (DFF), microwave—DEF, and retort-
DFF batches; however, Mostert and Stadelman (1964) showed
that deep-fat-frying with pressure had significantly
lesser percentage weight losses than ordinary deep-fat-
frying, pan frying, or oven frying. These results indi-
cate that pressure frying and microwave-steam precooking
in combination with pressure frying or deep-fat-frying
give the highest cooking yield among the probable com-
mercial cooking methods.

There were no differences in weight losses during
freezing and storage among the treatments. The losses
were also small as was observed in Experiment 2.

The losses in weight during microwave reheating
was affected more by the cocking methods than by the
phosphate treatment. The chicken pieces which were sub-
jected to pressure frying lost significantly more weight
(P < .05) than those cooked by MWS-DFF. Apparently, pres-
sure frying caused physical alterations in the chicken
tissues which permitted faster escape of moisture during
microwave reheating.

Because the phosphate-treated chicken had higher-

cooking yields, they also had higher yields after micro-

wave reheating compared to the untreated pieces.

114

The fact that the pressure-fried chicken pieces
were less juicy and had lower moisture contents than
those cooked by MWS-DFF indicates that excessive mois—
ture was being released from the tissues in the form of
steam which produced the pressure during pressure fry-
ing. However, more fat was being absorbed by the skin—
coating complex during pressure frying (see Table 15a),
which compensated for the excessive moisture loss, so
that the three cooking methods appeared to have compar-
able yields. Since MWS-DFF has been shown to produce
products of comparable yield and eating quality as the
pressure-fried ones but with lower reheating losses, it
can be concluded that MWS-DFF is the best procedure for
centralized processing of frozen fried chicken. It can
be used in combination with phosphate treatment to ob-

tain higher processing yields.

Miscellaneous Discussion

 

In spite of the identification and quantification
of the influences of many processing variables on the
quality of fried chicken, certain qualitative observa-
tions made during the conduct of this study indicate.
that a great deal of art is still involved in the produc-
tion~of appealing pressure fried products of consistent
quality. In addition to the effects of coating ingredi—

ents and method of application, the appearance of the

115

fried chicken pieces is also influenced by the length of
time between the application of breading and frying, the
age and number of times the oil has been used, and the
frying temperature. Prolonged holding of chicken pieces
between breading and frying resulted in darker and uneven-
ly colored products, mainly due to the wetting of the
breading. Cooking oil being used for the first time
yielded products which were pale in color, whereas con-
tinued usage of the same oil resulted in progressively
darker products. Breaded chicken pieces browned in oil
preheated to 190-204°C were darker in color, crispier-
looking and less greasy than those browned at 160-175°C.
The operator's judgment determines how soon the pressure
cooker could be sealed after the chicken pieces have been
put in. Sealing the cooker sooner than optimum resulted
in products which were greasy and very fragile to handle.
It appeared that the pressure cookers were de-
signed to handle fixed capacities. Variations in loads
due to variations in the sizes of chicken or the number
of pieces being cooked may have caused some of the varia-
tions in cooking yields and juiciness scores from batch
to batch. Cooking less than the desired load may have
resulted in greater losses of moisture which produced
the same amount of steam necessary to build the pressure.
Perhaps some of the art involved in the prepara-

tion of fried chicken may be minimized by using a

116

continuous operation consisting of microwave-steam pre-
cooking, breading, and deep-fat-frying. In a continuous
operation, processing variables such as time and tempera-
ture for each process, time interval between different
processing steps, and oil turnover rate, can easily be
controlled to insure products of uniform quality. Con—
tinuous operations can also be adapted for the separate
processing of different chicken pieces, necessary because
of size variations.

Although this study has not provided all the
pertinent information necessary for the success of pen-
tralized processing of fried chicken, it has demonstrated
that the approach is technically feasible and worthy of
further consideration by broiler processors.

Studies on the economics of the whole operation
should be conducted to demonstrate that such an approach
could be profitable. Furthermore, the results of this
study should be used in conjunction with the findings of
consumer studies on the preferences of target markets for
specific seasoning, coating characteristics, and packag-
ing systems in order to provide the products desired by

the consumers.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In an effort to develOp a suitable process for
centralized preparation of broiler products, the accept-
ability of microwave reheated frozen fried chicken and
the influence of various processing variables on its
eating quality were evaluated.

Taste panel comparisons of microwave reheated
chicken after frozen storage up to 6 months at -18°C and
newly cooked controls, showed that breaded fried chicken
can be frozen and stored at -18°C for 3 months and then
reheated in a microwave oven without substantial loss in
eating quality. However, prolonged storage or storage
under fluctuating temperature results in less acceptable
products due to undesirable flavor.

Soaking chicken pieces overnight in 5% polyphos-
phate solution resulted in about 7% gain in weight and in
adhesion of more breading after microwave-steam precook-
ing, which accounted for greater cooked and reheated
yields as compared to untreated chicken pieces. Poly-
phosphate treatment produced products which were more
juicy and tender when served immediately after frying,

but not after freezing, storage, and microwave reheating.

117

118

It was shown that breadings have better adhesion
and are therefore more suitable for coating fried chicken
than batters. However, more studies are needed to develop
coatings which are more suitable for frozen fried chicken
meant to be reheated in microwave ovens.

Pressure frying was found to produce the most
tender products when served immediately after cooking.
However, a combination of microwave-steam precooking and
deep-fat-frying was considered more practical for commer-
cial processing of fried chicken because it is a rapid
and continuous operation, and has processing yields and
products as good as, and lower reheating losses than,
pressure frying.

Freezing methods influenced the freezing rates
but not the eating quality of fried chicken. The rate
of freezing fried chicken from about 55°C to -18°C in-
ternal temperature in liquid freon (-42°C) was twice as
fast as in liquid nitrogen (-57°C) and about ten times
as fast as in air-blast (-37°C). Freezing raw chicken
and cooking them immediately after rapid thawing resulted
in products of comparable quality as the newly cooked
controls.

Packaging materials with good barrier properties
were found to offer the same protection to fried chicken
under constant -18°C storage or under simulated distribu-

tion condition with or without vacuum. No differences

119

were observed in the panel scores after storage and micro-
wave reheating of chicken vacuum-packed before or after
freon freezing. Packaging chicken pieces in aluminum foil
trays, which did not offer good protection, resulted in
significantly lower panel scores when subjected to simu-
lated distribution condition than when stored under con-
stant -18°C. The potential of using edible coating for
minimizing moisture losses during frozen storage and micro-
wave reheating was also demonstrated.

The taste panel members were divided on their
preferences for products reheated by specific reheating
methods. Reheating in a microwave oven was the most
rapid among the methods used, but it resulted in sub-
stantial loss of moisture and less juicy products. How-
ever, microwave reheated products were still acceptable
provided the reheating time was kept at the minimum time
necessary to bring the frozen products to serving tem-
perature. It was found desirable to base the reheating
time on the weight of the load rather than on the number
of pieces.

Chicken pieces vary widely in sizes and shapes
and may require different processing times. As such, it
is recommended that the size and the cutting procedure
be made more uniform, and that different pieces be pro-
cessed separately. A commercial process consisting of

soaking raw cut-up chicken pieces overnight in

120

polyphosphate solution; precooking by microwave and steam;
coating with breading; browning by deep-fat-frying; freez-
ing with any economical but reasonably fast method; and
packaging in a commercially practical package with good
barrier properties, can be used in the centralized pre-
paration of frozen precooked chicken for distribution to

the institutional or retail markets.

\

LITERATURE CITED

LITERATURE CITED

Amerine, M. A.; R. M. Pangborn, and E. B. Roessler.
1965. Principles of sensory evaluation of food.
Academic Press, New York.

Anon. 1966a. Microwave oven with steam atmosphere pro-
duces higher quality, more profitable precooked
chicken. Food Processing and Marketing 27(4):92-
96.

Anon. 1966b. Microwave cooking cuts labor cost in half.
Broiler Industry 29(l)58-62.

Anon. 1969a. Pillsbury precooked sells at $1.41 when
"oven-fried" in the store. Broiler Industry
32(6):l7-18.

Anon. 1969b. 20-second chicken backfires in test.
Broiler Industry 32(6):18.

Anon. 1970. Cooks 1 1/2 tons of chicken per hour. Food
processing 31(1):33.

AOAC. 1965. Methods of Analysis. Tenth ed. Association
of Agricultural Chemists. Washington D.C.

Asmundson, V. S., F. H. Jukes, H. M. Fyler and m. L. Maxwell.
1938. The effect of certain fish meals and fish
oils in the ration on the flavor of turkey.

Poultry Sci. 17:147-156.

Atkins, O. M. 1965. The importance of new products to
food companies. Food Technol. l9(lO):50-54.

Badger, G. B. 1970. Principles of microwave heating.
Proc. IMPI Short Course for Users of Microwave
Power, IMPI, Alberta, Canada.

Baker, R. C. and J. Darfler. 1968. A comparison of leg-

horn fowl and fryers for precooked battered fried
chicken. Poultry Sci. 47:1590.

121

122

Baker, G. A., M. A. Amerine, E. B. Roessler, and F.
Filippo. 1960. Differences in taste testing
for preference. Food Res. 25:810-816.

Barch, W. E. 1952. Flavoring materials and method of
preparing the same. U. S. Patent 2,594,379.
Cited by Pippen and Nonaka (1963).

Bengtsson, N. E., J. Melin, K. Reine, and S. Soderling.
1963. Measurement of the dielectric properties
of frozen and defrosted meat and fish in the
frequency range 10-200 MHz. J. Sci. Food and
Agri. 14:593-609.

Berry, J. G. and F. E. Cunningham. 1970. Factors af—
fecting the flavor of frozen fried chicken.
Poultry Sci. 49:1236-1242.

Bouthilet, R. J. 1949. A note on the nature of a flavor
constituent from poultry meat. Food Technol.
3:118-119.

Bouthilet, R. J. 1950. Chicken flavor: separation and
concentration of its volatile component from
broths. Food Res. 15:322-325.

Bouthilet, R. J. 1951a. Chicken flavor: the fractiona-
tion of the volatile components. Food Research
16:137-141.

Bouthilet, R. J. 1951b. Chicken flavor: the source of
meat flavor component. Food Res. 16:201-204.

Brant, A. W., and G. F. Stewart. 1949. Bone darkening in
frozen poultry. Food Technol. 4:168-174.

Butts, J. N. and F. E. Cunningham. 1971. The effect of
freezing and reheating on shear press values of
precooked chicken. Poultry Sci. 50:281-283.

Calvin, L. D., and L. A. Sather. 1959. A comparison of
student preference panels with a household con-
sumer panel. Food Technol. 13:469-472.

Carlin, A. F., O. Kempthorne and J. Gordon. 1956. Some
aspects of the numerical scoring in subjective
evaluation of foods. Food Res. 21:273-281.

Carlin, A. F., B. Lowe and G. F. Stewart. 1949. The ef-
fect of aging versus freezing and thawing on the
palatability of eviscerated poultry. Food Tech-
nol. 3:156-157.

123

Carlin, A. F., R. M. V. Pangborn, 0. J. Cotterill, and
P. G. Homeyer. 1959. Effect of pretreatment on
quality of frozen fried chicken. Food Technol.
13:557-560.

Carlson, D., L. M. Porter, L. D. Malterson, E. P. Singsen,
G. L. Gilpen, R. A. Redstrom, and E. H. Dawson.
1957. Palatability of chicken feed diets contain-
ing different levels of fish oils or tallow. I.
Evaluation by consumer-type panel. II. Evalua-
tion by a trained panel. Food Technol. 11:615-620.

Carrick, C. W. and S. M. Hauge. 1926. The effect of cod
liver oil upon flavor in poultry meat. Poultry
Sci. 5:213.

Co, D. Y. 0. L. and G. E. Livingston. 1969. Heat recon-
stitution equipment for prepared frozen food.
Food Technol. 23(12):72-76, 78, 80, 82.

Copson, D. A. 1962. Microwave heating. AVI Publishing
Co., Westport, Conn.

Copson, D. A. and R. V. Decareau. 1966. Oven. In E.
Okress (ed.) Microwave Power Engineering. Aca-
demic Press, New York.

Crocker, E. C. 1948. Flavor of meat. Food Research
13:179-183. ‘

Cunningham, F. E., J. N. Butts and J. G. Berry. 1971.
Fried chicken flavor, tenderness influenced by
freezing, reheating. Poultry Meat. 22(7):18-22.

Darrow, M. I. and E. D. Essary. 1955. Influence of fats
in rations on storage quality of poultry.
Poultry Sci. 34:427-431.

Davidek, J, and A. W. Khan. 1967. Estimation of inosinic
acid in chicken muscle and its formation and
degradation during post-mortem aging. J. Food
Sci. 32:155—157.

Davidkova, E. and A. W. Khan. 1967. Changes in lipid
composition of chicken muscle during frozen
storage. J. Food Sci. 32:35-37.

Dawson, L. E. 1963. Turkey quality, as revealed by
consumers. Turkey World 38:14, 17-19.

124

Dawson, L. E.; J. A. Davidson; M. Frang and 3. Walters.
1958. The effects of time interval between
slaughter and freezing on toughness of fryers.
Poultry Sci. 37:231-235.

Decareau, R. V. 1966a. Microwave application in the

‘ food field. In E. Okress (ed.) Microwave Power
Engineering and its Application. Academic
Press, New York.

Decareau, R. V. 1966b. Cooking and baking of food. In
E. Okress (ed.) Microwave Power Engineering.
Vol. 2. Academic Press, New York.

de Fremery, D. 1963. Relation between biochemical pro-
perties and tenderness of poultry. In Proc.
Meat Tenderness Symposium. Campbell Soup Co.,
Camden, N. J.

de Fremery, D. 1966. Relationship between chemical
prOperties and tenderness of poultry muscle. J.
Agr. Food Chem. 14:214-217.

de Fremery, D. and M. J. Pool. 1958- Biochemical studies
with chicken muscle as related to rigor mortis
and tenderization. Poultry Sci. 37:1198.

de Fremery, D. and M. F. Pool. 1959. Role of rigor mortis
development in relation to tenderness of chicken
muscle. Poultry Sci. 38:1180.‘

de Fremery, D. and M. F. Pool. 1960. Biochemistry of chicken
muscle as related to rigor mortis and tenderiza-
tion. Food Res. 25:73-87.

deFremery, D. and M.F. Pool. 1963. The influence of

post-mortem glycolysis on poultry tenderness.
J. Food Sci. 28:173-176.

Dimick, P. S. and D.H. MacNeil. 1970. Poultry product
quality. 2. Storage time temperature effects
on carbonyl composition of cooked turkey and
chicken skin fractions. J. Food Sci. 35:186-
190.

Dodge. J. w. and W.J. Stadelman. 1960. Post-mortem aging
of poultry meat and its effects on the tenderness
of breast muscle. Food Technol. 13:81-84.

125

Dodge, J. W. and W. J. Stadelman. 1960. Variability in
tenderness due to struggling. Poultry Sci. 39:
672-677.

Edwards, H. H. and K. N. May. 1965. Studies with Men-
haden oil in practical type broiler rations.
Poultry Sci. 44:685-689.

Eindhoven, J. and D. R. Peryam. 1959. Measurement of
preferences for food combinations. Food Tech-
nol. 13:379-382.

Ellis, R., A. M. Gaddis and G. T. Currie. 1961. Car-
bonyls in oxidizing fat. 4. The role of various
fatty acids in carbonyl generation. J. Food Sci.
26:131-138.

Ellis, C. and J. G. Woodroof. 1959. Prevention of dar-
kenin on bone in frozen broilers. Food Technol.
13:53 -538.

Essary, E. O. 1959. Influence of microwave heat in
bone discoloration. Poultry Sci. 37:527-529.

Essary, E. O. 1961. The influence of added fat and
protein in broiler rations on growth rate,
dressing percentages and other carcass charac-
teristics. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan
State University, East Lansing, Mi.

Farr, A. J. and K. N. May. 1970. The effect of poly-
phosphates and NaCl on cooking yields and oxida-
tive stability of chicken. Poultry Sci. 49(1):
268.

Fry, J. L., G. Bennett and W. J. Stadelman. 1958. The
effect of age, sex, and hormonization on flavor
of chicken meat. Poultry Sci. 37:331-335.

Gaddis, A. M., R. Ellis, and G. T. Curries. 1959. Car-
bonyls in oxidized fat. I. Separation of steam

volatile monocarbonyls into classes. Food Res.
24:283-297.

Gavris, S. 1971. "Can do" marketer tells us his needs.
Broiler Industry. (March):l7-22.

Gilpen, G. L., A. M. Harken, R. A. Redstrom and E. H.
Dawson. 1960. Quality and yield of modern and
old-type chickens. Poultry Sci. 29:924.

126

Goldblith, S. A. 1966. Basic principles of microwaves
and recent developments. Adv. Food Res. 15:277-
301.

Hale, K. K., Jr. and T. L. Goodwin. 1968. Breaded fried
chicken: effects of precooking, batter composi-
tion, and temperature of parts before breading.
Poultry Sci. 47(3):739.

Hanson, H. L. and L. R. Fletcher. 1963. Adhesion of
coatings on frozen fried chicken. Food Technol.
17(6):115.

Hanson, H. L., L. R. Fletcher and H. Lineweaver. 1959.
Time-temperature tolerance comparison of frozen
foods. XVII. Frozen fried chicken. Food Tech-
nol. 13:221-225.

Harries, J. M. 1953. Sensory tests and consumer accept-
ance. J. Sci. Food Agr. 10:477-482.

Hurly, W. C., O. J. Kahlenberg, E. M. Funk, L. G. Mahaig
and W. L. Webb. 1958. Factors affecting poultry
flavor. Poultry Sci. 37:1436.

Jacobson, G. A. 1961. Some aspects of chemical assess-
ment of fat and oil flavors. Proc. Flavor
Chemistry Symposium: 37-56, Campbell Soup Co.,
Camden, N. J.

Jones, L. V., D. R. Peryam and L. L. Thurstone. 1955.
Development of a scale for measuring soldiers'
food preferences. Food Res. 20:512.

Kahlenberg, O. J., E. M. Funk, L. A. Voss, L. G. Mahaig
and N. L. Webb. 1960. Factors affecting poultry
flavor. The effect of mechanical quick-chill
cooling unit. Poultry Sci. 39:350-355.

Katz, M. and L. E. Dawson. 1964. Water absorption and
retention by cut-up broiler parts chilled in
polyphosphate solutions. Poultry Sci. 43:1541.

Kazeniac, S. J. 1961. Chicken flavor. Proc. Flavor
Chemistry Symposium. Campbell Soup Co., Camden,
N. J.

Khan, A. W. 1963. Changes in chicken muscle protein
during storage at above-freezing temperatures.
J. Food Sci. 29:49-52.

127

Khan, A. W. 1964. Quality deterioration in frozen
poultry. I. Changes in non-protein nitrogenous
constituents of chicken breast muscle stored at
below freezing temperatures. J. Agr. Food
Chem. 12:378.

Khan, A. W. 1965. Objective evaluation of quality in
poultry meat. Nature (London):204, 208.

Khan, A. W. 1971. Effect of temperature during post-
mortem glycolysis and dephosphorylation of high
energy phosphates on poultry meat tenderness.
J. Food Sci. 36(1):120.

Khan, A. W. and C. P. Lentz. 1965. Influence of pre-
rigor, rigor, and post-rigor freezing on drip
losses and protein changes in chicken meat.

J. Food Sci. 30:791-794.

Khan, A. W. and R. Nakamura. 1970. Effects of pre- and
post-mortem glycolysis on poultry tenderness.
J. Food Sci. 35:266-267.

Khan, A. W. and L. van den Berg. 1964. Some protein
changes during post-mortem tenderization in
poultry meat. J. Food Sci. 29:597-601.

Khan, A. W. and L. van den Berg. 1967. Biochemical and
quality changes occurring during freezing of
poultry meat. J. Food Sci. 32:149-150.

Khan, A. W., L. van den Berg and C. P. Lentz. 1963.
Effects of frozen storage on chicken muscle
proteins. J. Food Sci. 28:425-430.

Klose, A. A., H. L. Hanson, M. F. Pool and H. Lineweaver.
1956. Poultry tenderness improved by holding
before freezing. Quick Frozen Foods. 18(10):
95.

Klose, A. A., H. A. Palmer, H. Lineweaver and A. A.
Campbell. 1966. Direct olfactory demonstration
of fractions of chicken aroma. J. Food Sci. 31:
638-642.

Klose, A. A., M. F. Pool, A. A. Campbell and H. L. Hanson.
1959. B. Time-temperature tolerance of frozen
foods. XIX. Ready-to-cook cut-up chicken. Food
Technol. 13:477-484.

128

Klose, A. A., M. F. Pool, M. B. Wiele and D. de Fremery.
1956. Effect of processing factors on the ten-
derization of poultry. Poultry Sci. 35:1152.

Klose, A. A., R. N. Sayre and M. F. Pool. 1971. Tender-
ness changes associated with cutting up poultry

shortly after warm evisceration. Poultry Sci.
50:585-591.

Koehler, H. H. and M. Jacobson. 1967. Characteristics
of chicken flavor-containing fraction extracted
from raw muscle. J. Agr. Food Chem. 15(4):407-
412.

Koonz, C. H., M. I. Darrow and E. O. Essary. 1954.
Factors influencing tenderness of principal mus-
cles composing poultry carcass. Food Technol.
8:970100.

Koonz, C. H. and J. M. Ramsbottom. 1947. Influence of
freezing on color of bones and adjacent tissues.
Food Res. 12:393-399.

Kotler, P. 1967. Marketing management. Prentice-Hall,
Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N. J.

Lea, E. H. and P. A. T. Swoboda. 1958. The flavor of
aliphatic a1dehydes.- Chem. & Ind.: 1289-1290.

Leong, K. C., M. L. Sunde, H. R. Bird and K. G. Weckel.
1958. Taste panel evaluation of the effects of

added fat on the flavor of chicken meat. Poultry

Lewis, R. W., P. E. Sanford, A. F. Ericson, D. L. Harri-
son and R. E. Clegg. 1956. Flavor and aroma of
birds fed with purified and standard diets.
Poultry Sci. 35:251.

Lillyblade, A. N. and D. W. Peterson. 1962. Inositol
and free sugars in chicken muscle post-mortem.
J. Food Sci. 27:243-249.

Lineweaver, H. and E. L. Pippen. 1961. Chicken flavor.
In Proc. of Flavor Chemistry Symposium, pp. 21-
36. Campbell Soup Co., Camden, N. J.

Loberg, A. E. 1971. State of the broiler industry:
1970's. Canadian Poultry Review. 95(3):45-49.

Lowe ' B o

Lowe, B.

MacNeil,

Marion,

Marion,

May, K.

May, K.

May, K.

May, K.

Mecchi,

129

1948. Factors affecting palatability of poul-
try with emphasis on histological post-mortem
changes. Adv. Food Res. 1:232.

and G. F. Stewart. 1946. The cutting of the
breast muscles of poultry soon after killing and
its effects on tenderness after subsequent stor-
age and cooking. Cited by: B. Lowe. 1948.
Adv. Food Res. 1:332.

J. H. and P. S. Dimick. 1970. Poultry product
quality. 3. Organoleptic evaluation of cooked
chicken and turkey skin fractions as affected
by storage time and temperature. J. Food Sci.
35:191.

W. W. and W. J. Stadelman. 1958. Effects of
various freezing methods on quality of poultry
meat. Food Technol. 12:367-369.

J. E. and J. G. Woodroof. 1963. The fatty com-
position of breast, thigh, and skin tissues of
chicken broilers as influenced by dietary fats.
Poultry Sci. 42:1202-1207.

N. 1969. Application of microwave energy in
preparation of poultry convenience foods. J.
Microwave Power. 4(2):52-57, 59.

N., A. J. Farr and J. P. Hudspeck. 1969. Esti-
mating breading content of battered and breaded
poultry products. Food Technol. 23:1087-1090.

N., R. L. Hilmer and R. L. Saffle. 1963. Effect
of phosphate treatment on carcass weight changes
and organoleptic quality of cut-up chicken.
Poultry Sci. 42:24-31.

N., R. L. Saffle, D. L. Downing and J. J. Powers.
1962. Interrelationships of post-mortem changes
with tenderness of chicken and pork. Food Tech-
nol. 16:72-78.

E. P, E. L. Pippen and H. Lineweaver. 1964.'
Origin of hydrogen sulfide in heated chicken
muscle. J. Food Sci. 29:393-399.

Mickelberry, W. C. and W. J. Stadelman. 1962. Effect

of cooking method on shear press values and weight
changes of frozen chicken meat. Food Technol.
16:94-97.

130

Miller, J. H., L. E. Dawson and D. H. Bauer. 1965. Free
amino acid content of chicken muscle from broilers
and hens. J. Food Sci. 30:406-411.

Miller, P. G., J. H. Nair and A. J. Harriman. 1955. A
comparison between household and a laboratory-type
of anel for testing consumer preference. Food
Tec nol. 9:445-449.

Miller, W. O. and K. N. May. 1965. Tenderness of chicken‘
as affected by rate of freezing, storage time and
temperature, and freeze-drying. Food Technol. 19:
1171-1174.

Minor, L. J., A. M. Pearson, L. E. Dawson and B. S.
Schweigert. 1965a. Chicken flavor: the iden-
tification of some chemical components and the
importance of sulfur compounds in the cooked
volatile fraction. J. Food Sci. 30:686-696.

Minor, L. J., A. M. Pearson, L. E. Dawson and B. S.
Schweigert. 1965b. Gas chromatographic analysis
of volative constituents from cooked carcasses
of old and and young chickens. Poultry Sci.
44:535-543.

Minor, L. J., A. M. Pearson, L. E. Dawson and B. S.
Schweigert. 1966. Separation and identification
of carbonyl and sulfur compounds in the volatile
fraction of cooked chicken. J. Agr. Food Chem.
13:298-300.

Modern Packaging Encyclopedia. 1971. McGraw-Hill Pub.
Co., New York, N. Y.

Moncrief, R. W. 1967. Introduction to the Symposium
on the Chemistry and Physiology of Flavors.
Edited by Schultz, Day, and Libby. AVI Pub.
Co., Westport, Conn.

Monk, J. A., G. J. Mountney and E. Prudent. 1964. Ef-
fect of phosphate treatment and cooking method
on moisture losses of poultry meat. Food Tech-
nol. 18:226-229.

Morrison, M. A., E. A. Sauter, B. A. McLaren and W. J.
Stadelman. 1954. Some factors affecting yield
and acceptability of chicken broilers. Poultry
Sci. 33:1122-1125.

Morse, R. L. D. 1951. Rationale for studies on consumer
food preferences. Adv. Food Res. 3:385-427.

131

Mostert, G. C. and W. J. Stadelman. 1964. Effect of
method of cooking on shrinkage, moisture, and
other extractable content of broiler legs and
thighs. Poultry Sci. 43:896-902.

Mountney, G. L. and F. C. Arganosa. 1962. The effect
of phosphates on moisture absorption, reten-

tion, and cooking losses of broilers' carcasses.
Poultry Sci. 42:384-388.

Mountney, G. J., R. E. Branson and W. C. Hurly. 1960.
The effect on flavor of holding frozen chicken
for selected periods. Poultry Sci. 39:287-289.

National Commission on Food Marketing. 1966. Organiza-
tion and competition in the poultry and egg
industries. Tech. Study No. 27. Washington,

D. C.

Nonaka, M., D. R. Black and E. L. Pippen. 1967. Gas
chromatography and mass spectral analysis of
cooked chicken volatiles. J. Agr. Food Chem.
15:713.

Nonaka, M. and E. L. Pippen. 1965. Volatiles and oxi-
dative deterioration in fried chicken. In Press.
Cited by Pippen, E. L., 1967.

Packard, V. 1958. The hidden persuaders. Pocket Book
Co., New York, N. Y. "

Palmer, H. H. 1968. Prepared and precooked poultry
products. In Tressler, Van Arsdel and Copley
(eds.). Freezing preservation of food. Vol.
3, 4th ed. AVI Pub. Co., Westport, Conn.

Palmer, H. H., A. A. Klose, S. Smith and A. A. Campbell.
1965. Evaluation of toughness differences in

chickens in terms of consumer reaction. J.

Patton, S., F. S. Barnes and L. E. Evans. 1959. n-Deca-
2,4-dienal, its origin from linoleate and flavor

significance in fat. J. Am. Oil Chemists' Soc.
36:280-283.

Pearson, A. M. 1963. Objective and subjective measure-
ments of tenderness of meats. In Proc. of Meat
Tenderness Symposium. Campbell Soup Co., Camden,
New Jersey.

132

Peryam, D. R. and F. S. Pilgrim. 1957. Hedonic scale
method for measuring food preferences. Food
Technol. 11(11):9-15.

Peterson, D. W., M. Simone, A. L. Lillyblade and R. Martin.
1959. Some factors affecting intensity of
flavor and toughness of chicken muscles. Food
Technol. 13:204-207.

Petit, L. A. 1958. Informational bias in flavor pre-
ference testing. Food Technol. 12:12-14.

Pilgrim, F. S. and K. R. Wood. 1955. Comparative sensi-
tivity of rating scale and paired comparison
methods for measuring consumer preference. Food
Technol. 9(8):385-387.

Pippen, E. L. 1967. Poultry Flavor. In Shultz, Day
and Libbey (eds.). The Chemistry and Physiology
of Flavors. AVI Pub. Co., Westport, Conn.

Pippen, E. L., A. A. Campbell and I. V. Streeter. 1954.
Flavor studies: origin of chicken flavor. J.
Agr. Food Chem. 2:364-367.

Pippen, E. L. and E. J. Eyring. 1957. Characterization
of volatile nitrogen and volatile sulfur frac-
tions of cooked chicken and their relation to
flavor. Food Technol. 11:53-56.

Pippen, E. L, E. J. Eyring and M. Nonaka. 1960. The
occurrence and flavor significance of acetoin
in aqueous extracts of chicken. Poultry Sci.
39:922-924.

Pippen, E. L. and A. A. Klose. 1955. Effects of ice

water chilling on flavor of chicken. Poultry
Sci. 34:1139-1146.

Pippen, E. L. and E. P. Mecchi. 1969. Hydrogen sulfide,
a direct and potentially indirect contributor
to cooked chicken aroma. J. Food Sci. 34:443-
446.

Pippen, E. L., M. Nonaka, F. T. Jones and F. Still. 1958.
Volatile carbonyl compounds of cooked chicken:
1. Compounds obtained by air entrainment. Food
Research 23:103-113.

133

Pippen, E. L. and M. Nonaka. 1963. Gas chromatography
of chicken and turkey volatiles. The effect of
temperature, oxygen, and type of tissue composition

321the volatile fraction. J. Food Sci. 28:334-

Pool, M. F., D. de Fremery, A. A. Campbell and A. A. Klose.
1959. Poultry tenderness. II. Influence of
processing on tenderness of chicken. Food Tech-
nol. 13:25-29.

Progressive Grocers. 1971. April Issue.

Raffensberger, E. L., D. R. Peryam and K. R. Wood. 1956.
DevelOpment of a scale for grading toughness-
tenderness in beef. Food Technol. 12:27-30.

Schermerhorn, E. P., R. L. Adams and W. J. Stadelman.
1963. Effect of polyphosphates on water uptake,
moisture retention, and cooking losses in broilers.
Poultry Sci. 42:107-110.

Schermerhorn, E. P. and W. J. Stadelman. 1964. Treating
hen carcasses with polyphosphates to control
hydration and cooking losses. Food Technol. 18:
101-102.

Shannon, W. G., W. W. Marion and W. J. Stadelman. 1957.
Effect of temperature and time of scalding on
the tenderness of breast meat of chicken. Food
Technol. 11:284-286.

Sheppard, D. 1955. Descriptive terms and points system
for rating food qualities. Food Research 20:
114-117.

Shrimpton, D. H. and T. C. Gray. 1965. Speculation on
the origin and nature of flavor precursors in
chicken muscle. World's Poultry Sci. J. 21:
180-185.

Shrimpton, D. H. and W. 0. Miller. 1960. Some causes
of toughness in broilers. II. Effects of breed,
management and sex. British Poultry Sci. 1:
111-115.

Spencer, J. V. and M. H. George. 1962. The effect of dis-
tilled acetylated monoglyceride coatings upon
weight changes, microbial numbers, and flavor of
chicken fryer parts. Poultry Sci. 41:1685.

134

Spencer, J. V. and L. E. Smith. 1962. The effect of
chilling chicken fryers in a solution of poly-
phosphates (Kena) upon moisture uptake, microbial
spoilage, tenderness, juiciness, and flavor.
Poultry Sci. 41:1685.

Stadelman, W. J. 1963. Relation of age, breed, sex,
and feeding practices on poultry meat tender-
ness. In Proc. of Meat Tenderness Symposium.
Campbell Soup Co., Camden, New Jersey.

Steward, G. F., H. L. Hanson, B. Lowe and J. J. Austin.
1945. Effects of aging, freezing rate, and
storage period on palatability of broilers.
Food Res. 10:16-27.

Szczesniak, A. S. 1968. Correlation between objective
and sensory texture measurements. Food Technol.
22:981-986.

Tarver, M. and A. M. Shenck. 1958. Statistical develop-
ment of objective quality scores for evaluating
the quality of food products. I. Development
of the scoring scales. Food Technol. 12(3):127-
137.

Thamer, D. H., R. M. Town and K. Rowe. 1971. Rapid
cook-and-freeze increases fried chicken yield.
Food Processing. 42(1):l4-15.

Thomas, C. P., P. S. Dimick and J. H. McNeil. 1971.
Sources of flavor in poultry skin. Food Tech-
nol. 25:407-412.

Thomson, J. E. 1964. Effect of phosphates on oxidative
deterioration of commercially cooked fryer chick-
ens. Food Technol. 18:1805-1806. '

Tinga, W. R. 1970. Interactions of microwaves with
materials. In Proc. of IMPI Short Course for
Users of Microwave Power. IMPI. Alberta, Canada.

Toffler, A. 1971. Future shock. Random House Publ.,
Inc., New York, N. Y.

van den Berg, L, A. W. Khan and C. P. Lentz. 1963. Bio-
chemical and quality changes in chicken meat dur-

ing storage at above-freezing temperatures.
Food Technol. 17:91-94.

 

135

van den Berg, L, C. P. Lentz and A. W. Khan. 1964.
Changes in quality and water holding and ion
binding properties of chicken meat during
above-freezing storage under aseptic condi-
tions. Food Technol. 18:729-739.

Van Dyke, D., D. I. C. Wang and S. A. Goldblith. 1969.
Dielectric loss factor of reconstituted ground

beef: the effect of chemical composition.
Food Technol. 23:944-946.

Weidenhamer, M. 1958. Consumer preference, usage, and
buying practices for poultry and poultry pro-
ducts. U.S.D.A. Marketing Research Report No.
252.

Wells, G. H., K. M. May and J. J. Powers. 1962. Taste
panel and shear press evaluation of tenderness
of freeze-dried chicken as affected by age and
pre-slaughter feeding of ions. Food Technol.
16(9):137-139.

Wesley, R. L., H. J. Korslund, Jr. and W. J. Stadelman.
1958. The effect of hormonization on juiciness

and tenderness of chicken meat. Poultry Sci.
37:1443.

Wise, R. G. and W. J. Stadelman. 1959. Tenderness at
Various depths associated with poultry process-
ing technique. Food Technol. 13:689-690.

Wise, R. G. and W. J. Stadelman. 1961. Tenderness of
poultry meat. 2. Effect of scalding procedures.
Poultry Sci. 40:1731-1736.

Woodroof, J. G. and E. Shelor. 1948. Prevention of
bone darkening in frozen packed chickens. Food
Indus. 20(1):48.

. . . .
El! .1... «infill ”tank”. I «fight-5L“

APPENDICES

136

 

 

 

 

~.>h mmo .cws m umoomm um .cfls om muonsmmum Am
«.mm mommm um .GHE ova cm>o amen Av
m.mn 32 .cws m Nmmo .cws m zzummo no
m.oa Hno cuoo mommm as .cas oa Amino measumuumLuammn in
AmmmHv use cm>o
Iamcmum w muumnmxoflz m.m> mmmulvaonmmoon GH .cwE ma fizzy m>m30uoafi Am .H
posume mcwxoou .o
_ e.vm Hmocmu Hausa Umumafiwm omxmomlmumsmmonm an
Ammmav Hmamuma a memm «.mm Hmccmu Hausa Umumfifiam Houucoo as .H
ucmfiummnu mumnmmonm .U
Aemmav m.~m moonume mcwxooo m mo .m>m pmommunuso: An
cmEHmpmuw a unmumoz a.mh moonumfi mcwxooo m mo .m>m cocoons Am .H
mcflpmwum .m
Avmmav ~.on moonumfi mcflxooo m «o .m>m amnoum An
cmEHmvmum a pneumoz m.a> moosuma mcflxooo m mo .m>m cmuoHMIcoc Am .H
pmxooocs cmuoum .4
m
mocmummmm onHM ucmEummHB uouomm

 

 

H xHQmem4

zmMUHmU QmHMh mom mmDA¢> GAflHM UZHMOOU Dmamommm

137

 

 

Ammmav
cmfiawvmum a muuonamxoflz

Ammmav .Hm #0 GHHHMU

Ammmav :H3UOOU a mama

Ammmav.coc<

Avmmav
cmaamcuum a uumumoz

0.0m
m.bh
o.vb
0.0m

o.vm

a.mm
m.Hm
m.bm
o.Nm
m.~m
o.Nm
o.Nm
N.Nh
a.mm
N.mb
N.mh

p.mm

moonumfi maflxooo m mo mmmum>m
moocume mcfixooo m mo mmmum>m

woummnmu can .sHE ca

omummnmu was .sfia m

mca3wnu

“mums Ema momhm @ .cas «a

mowed
um .cae m + ems m um .caa on

Uohha w .GHE v + 32
Comma um

.GHE v
.GHE ea

..~x m.~
..3x o.m
..3x ma.m
..3x ma.m

.cws ca
.sHE m
.cHE m
.GHE ma
momme w
.cfis OH + human @ .cHs oH

hoowu w
.nwE om + hoomm 9 .GH8 0H

.cse m ..amm om
.cfls m .Hmm m

moomm um .cwE «a

pmxooolom3mnunsmuoum An
omzmnuucwuonmuomxooo an .m
pmflnmmum A0

omnummum in

omflummumlcos Am .H

 

mcwxooo nouns cmuonm .m

mmouuuoumm no
among: An
men an .e

was as

mg: in
Amaze smmumuzz An

32 Am .m

mcwmnm cm>o Am

mcflmum can AU

mm no
Ammv mcwmnm musmmoum an

men an .m

APPENDIX II

138

FACTORS AFFECTING CONSUMERS' ACCEPTANCE OF

FOOD PRODUCTS

1

 

Attributes of the food product Attributes of the consumers

 

. Availability
. Utility

1

2

3. Convenience
4. Price

5

. Uniformity and
dependability

6. Stability, storage
requirements

7. Safety and nutritional
values

8. Sensory properties
a. appearance

b. aroma and taste
(flavor)

c. texture (juiciness,
tenderness, etc.)

d. temperature

Regional preference
Nationality, race
Age and sex
Religion

Education, socio-
economics

Psychological motivation
a. symbolism of food
b. advertising

Physiological motivation
a. thirst
b. hunger

c. deficiencies

 

lAmerine et a1. (1965).

139

APPENDIX III
TABLE PANEL SCORE CARD 1
CHICKEN EVALUATION

Name: Date:

 

 

Plate No.

INSTRUCTIONS: Evaluate appearance, flavor, juiciness, ten-
derness, and general acceptability of each sample according
to the appropriate hedonic rating scale. Record results in
the table below.

Appearance, flavor and

 

 

 

 

 

General acceptability Juiciness Tenderness
9 Like extremely 5 Too juicy 5 Too tender
8 Like very much 4 Slightly too 4 Slightly too
juicy tender
7 Like moderately 3 Acceptably 3 Acceptably
juicy (Ideal) tender
(Ideal)
6 Like slightly 2 Slightly too 2 Slightly too
dry tough
5 Neigher like nor dislike
1 Too dry 1 Too tough
4 Dislike slightly
3 Dislike moderately
2 Dislike very much
1 Dislike extremely
RESULTS:
Sample Appearance Flavor Juiciness Tenderness 2:22:32
score score score score ability
score
X
Y
Z

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please provide additional comments about any or all samples.
LED:mmr 1/7/69

140

APPENDIX IV
TASTE PANEL SCORE CARD II
CHICKEN EVALUATION

Name: Date:

 

 

Plate No:

 

INSTRUCTIONS: Evaluate appearance, flavor, juiciness, tender-
ness, and general acceptability of each sample according to
the appropriate hedonic rating scale. Record results in the
table below.

 

 

 

 

Appearance’ flavor, and Juiciness . Tenderness

General acceptability

9 Like extremely 9 Extremely juicy 9 Extremely tender

8 Like very much 8 Very juicy 8 Very tender

7 Like moderately 7 Moderately juicy 7 Moderately tender

6 Like slightly 6 Slightly juicy 6 Slightly tender

5 Neither like nor 5 Neither juicy 5 Neither tender
dislike nor dry nor tough

4 Dislike slightly 4 Slightly dry 4 Slightly tough

3 Dislike moderately 3 Moderately dry 3 Moderately tough

2 Dislike very much 2 Too dry 2 Very tough

l Dislike extremely 1 Extremely dry 1 Extremely tough

RESULTS: General

sample Apizzizn°e F::::: Juiziszss Tezzzizess 3§§§§§y

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please provide additional comments about any or all samples.

LED:mmr
7/28/69

Plate No.

INSTRUCTIONS:

Name:

Please

the eating quality of

Record results in

the

TASTE PANEL SCORE CARD III

FRIED CHICKEN EVALUATION

141

APPENDIX V

Date:

 

evaluate the characteristics of the coating and
each sample according to the appropriate scale.
table below.

COATING CHARACTERISTICS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CRITERIA\\¥SCORES 1 2 4 5
Color Too light Slightly Just right Slightly Too dark
light dark
Adhesion of coat- Too loose Slightly Just right Slightly Too
lng loose light light
Texture of Too coarse Slightly Just right Slightly Smooth
breading- coarse smooth
Hardness Too soft Slightly Just right Slightly Hard
soft hard
EATING QUALITY
JUICINESS TENDERNESS FLigggpéggIggggaAL
9 Extremely juicy 9 Extremely tender 9 Like extremely
8 Very juicy 8 Very tender 8 Like very much
7 MOderately juicy 7 Moderately tender 7 Like moderately
6 Slightly juicy 6 Slightly tender 6 Like slightly
5 Neither juicy nor dry 5 Neither tender nor 5 Neither like nor
tough dislike
4 Slightly dry 4 Slightly tough 4 Dislike slightly
3 Moderately dry 3 Moderately tough 3 Dislike moderately
2 Too dry 2 Very tough 2 Dislike very much
1 Extremely dry 1 Extremely tough l Dislike extremely

 

 

 

APPENDIX V,
RESULTS:

Cont.

142

COATING CHARACTERISTICS:

 

SAMPLE

Color

Adhesion

Texture

Hardness

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EATING QUALITY:

 

SAMPLE

Juiciness

Tenderness

Flavor

Gen. Accept.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please provide additional

ECS:mmr
5/18/71

comments about any or all samples:

143

APPENDIX VIa

Taste panel scores of microwave reheated frozen precooked
chicken and newly cooked controls, 0 to 24 weeks storage.

 

 

 

 

Storage Taste panel scores
Period-
. . Tender- Gen.
Juic1ness ness Flavor Accept.
No storage
Reheated 2.7 3.0 6.7 6.5
Control 2.7 3.1 6.5 6.1
4 weeks
Reheated 2.6 2.8 6.9 6.6
Control 3.3** 3.1 7.3 7.3
8 weeks
Reheated 3.1 2.9 6.9 6.8
Control 3.4 3.3 7.2 7.2
12 weeks
Reheated 2.7 2.8 6.9 6.6
Control 3.0 3.0 7.2 7.2
18 weeks
Reheated 2.9 3.0 6.7 6.8
Control 3.0 3.1 7.4* 6.8
24 weeks
Reheated 2.7 2.8 6.3 5.9
Control 3.0 3.2 7.4** 6.9*
1

Each score is the average for 30 samples. Evalua-
tions for juiciness and tenderness were based on the 5-point
2-sided scale, 3 = ideal; while evaluations for flavor and
general acceptability were based on the 9-point scale,

9 = like extremely; l = dislike extremely.

*Significant at 5% level.

**Significant at 1% level.

144

APPENDIX VIb

Analysis of variance of the taste panel score of microwave
reheated frozen precooked chicken and newly cooked controls,
0 to 24 weeks storage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source of Deggges Mean squares
variance
freedom . . Tender- Gen.
Juic1ness ness Flavor Accept.
No storage
Treatments 1 0 .2 .6 2.8
Error 58 .52 .29 1.63 2.30
4 weeks of storage
Treatments 1 8.8** 1.4 2.4 6.6
Error 58 .59 .64 2.03 2.12
8 weeks of storage
Treatments 1 1.4 2.0 1.4 2.0
Error 58 .91 .63 1.68 2.52
12 weeks of storage
Treatments 1 .8 .5 3.7 4.2
Error 58 .43 .47 2.5 1.42
18 weeks of storage
Treatments 1 .2 .2 8.0* 0
Error 58 .68 .88 1.75 2.10
24 weeks of storage
Treatments 1 1.4 2.4 l9.2** l4.0*
Error 58 .85 .68 1.82 3.05

 

*Significant at 5% level.

**Significant at 1% level.

145

GA mumupma ucmHOMMHU an Um3oHHom mmuoom .powumm mmmuoum m cwnuw3

.Hm>ma mm um mHDGmOHmwcmfim Acumen :EdHoo menu on»

.mmHmEMm on How monum>m may ma muoom zoom

N
H

 

 

 

 

 

nh.a ha.a am.a no.5 omsmzuncmuoum .Houucoo .e
oa.a n~.a nq.a no.5 qmuoumcs .Houucoo .m
mm.m m¢.m so.m mm.¢ Nz .eHH .umummnmm .m
nm.m am.m m~.m hm.m umman “Hm .omummnmm .H
mmmuoum mo mxwmz e
av.n no.» hm.a ne.a emzmnuucmnoum .Houucoo .w
hm.a hm.» hm.» n¢.a mmnoumcs .Houucoo .m
nma.a nm~.a am.m ««.o z .efla .omummsmm .m
wa.o mm.m mm.o am.m umman nan .omummnmm .H
mmmuoum mo mxmm3 N
na.a he.» he.» n~.e swamnuncmuouu .Houunoo .e
na.~ as.» ha.a ha.n sameness .Houuaoo .m
we.m am.o mm.o am.m Nz .efla .smummnmm .N
mm.m no.m ma.m am.q ummanuuwm .cmummsmm .H
,wmsuoum oz

.ummwm¢ Ho>mam mmmsnmosme mumsfloflsh

 

Hmmuoom Hmcmm mumma

 

.mmmnoum m0 mme3 v
on o .maonucoo 003mnulcwnonm was cmnoumcs omxooo >H3mc can .smeHno cmxooomum
smuoum cmmouuflc Ufiswwa Ho unmanluflm cwummnmu m>m3ouowfi mo mmHoom Hmcwm ounce

MHH> XHQmemd

146

.Hm>ma as an unmoflmfinmflm44

.Hm>ma mm um ucmoamscmflm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

me.a mm.a mm.a o.H mHH Houum
«cm.hm ««o.om «ao.mm ««~.oo~ H mucmEummuulnsm
««o.n~ ««m.aa ««m.am ««m.~b m madmaummua
amououm mo mxmm3 v
mH.H oH.H Hm.H Hm.H maa Houum
«co.va ah.m ««m.mH ««H.mm H munmfiummuulnflm
««n.¢ m.~ «m.m ««m.aa m mucmEumeB
mmwuoum mo mxmm3 m
vb.a m~.H m~.H mm.~ mHH Houum
««¢.mm «am.mH ««M.Nm ««H.¢m H mOCOEummHulnfim
«am.m «am.m «so.HH ««h.HN m mucmEummufi
uwmnoum oz
.umwoo« .cmo uo>mHm mmmcumpcma mmmGHOHsb Eoowwnw mocmflnm>
mmumsvm com: mmmnmma mo monsom

 

 

.mHonucoo omsmnuncmnoum

Ho cmuoumcs omxooo mazes cam .cmxoflso omxooomnm cmuoum cmmouuflc Uwsqfla Ho

QHH> xHQmem¢

unmanruwm cmummsmu m>m3ouoHE mo mmuoom Hosea mummy mnu mo mocmflum> mo mHmMHmc<

147

.mmomfim m mom mmmumbm on» ma madman zoom "maoz

 

‘1

 

 

 

a.mm m.mm m.mm a.mm ooa «.mm mews
a.mb m.hm m.>m m.>m ooa m.>HH umpasonm
¢.¢h a.mm m.mm a.mm ooa a.mHH ummmum
m.aa m.mm m.mm «.5m ooa a.mma amaze
a.mh m.hm m.mm a.mm ooa m.a> Edna
count as cmmouufiz owswwq CH cmuoum
m.hm p.mm m.mm a.mm ooa m.mm mafia
o.Nm a.mm «.mm «.mm OOH o.NmH Hmoasocm
a.mh a.mm «.mm ~.mm ooa v.ooa ummmum
H.om a.ma m.mm «.mm ooa «.4ma amass
p.mm m.mm «.mm «.mm ooa o.mm Essa
Down: as was ca cmuoum ummam
msanmmum muommn usmfim3 mo momucmonmm Em
msfiummnmu mmmuoum mmmuoum
m>m3ouowe smuouu cmuoum omwwmwum mwwwmme MMWMMW£ momwm cmeHsO
umuma xzue xsnm m m

 

.AN ucmfiflummxmv mcfimmmooum mo
mommum “communao um mmomwm cwxoflno pmxooo m50flhm> mo unmflm3 cw wmcmno wmmusmoumm

HHH> NHDZMQQd

148

.uumm mom mmomwm m Eoum cmxwu mmHmEmm co muse muwz mmmaamsd "maoz

 

 

 

 

 

o.m¢ m.mm m.m~ ¢.m v.5 m.m m.wv p.mm o.Hm cmmz
Mum Nam a «a.m. .3 3.". .3.” mm... a 95.
v.em H.om «.mm o.m v.¢ m.¢ o.Nm «.mm m.om Hmoasonm
m.Hm e.m~ m.Hm m.v m.m m.¢ a.mm m.¢o o.hb ummmum
~.mm m.m~ a.mm ¢.m m.m m.m m.mm m.om ~.mm amaze
o.mm m.m~ m.m~ m.m a.> ¢.v «.mm m.~m a.mm Edna
Uobml zmuomm zmuomBHz QHDOHA
v.Hv m.m~ m.m~ m.oa m.> m.m b.5v a.mm o.Hm com:
um ml... 3 3m .3 3|. mm a a.m. 9:3
w.mv m.~m m.mm >.m m.¢ m.e p.me N.Nm m.om umoasonm
«.mm «.mm m.H~ N.m m.m m.H p.mm m.vm o.h> ummmum
¢.om ~.h~ a.mm H.> o.> m.m m~.m p.mo m.mm amass
p.mm ¢.m~ m.mm o.m n.m v.e m.~m m.am a.mm Edna
UobMI zmsomm Bmdqm
ucmoumm
Dawson mom Dawson mom ummnwn mom
m>m3 nuoum luwwwm m>mz Inoum Iuwwwm m>m3 Inoum uuwwwm uumm
Iouowa cmuonw IOHUHE cmuoum IonowE ammonm
Houmfi memm snowmm umMm¢ mound encumm Hmumd umum< muoumm cmxoanu
Accumuummv moflaom umm onsumwoz

 

 

.msflnmmum cmmouufic pflsqfla no ummahluflm mcfl3oHHom one
Immwooum mo momwum Uwuomamm um mmomam :0x0flco ucmHOMMHw mo ammam Umxooo mo cowuflmomfiou

NH anzmmmfl

149

mmmum>m mnu ma muoom zoom .mHmom Osgood: unwomtm no woman monoom

.mmamsmm on How
H

 

 

 

 

moH “mums owxommlessom>
moH muommn omxommlasaom>
Essom> 0\3 mun mm

mOH Hmumm omxomm18590m>
moH muommn omxommuEdsos>
Essom> 0\3 man mm

moH Hmumm vmxomm|25som>
mOH muommn Umxomm|25som>
Essom> 0\3 man mm

hOH nouns omxommIEdsom>
moH snowmn pmxommlsdsom>
Essom> 0\3 mun mm

 

H.h H.> H.> h.m
b.m m.m m.m o.h
0.5 m.m o.» m.m
.Nmuaflnmummoofl Hmumcmw
H.h «.5 «.5 H.n
o.h o.b H.h H.b
H.b H.h m.m 0.5
Ho>mam
o.> h.m H.b b.m
m.m m.m o.b «.5
H.h m.m «.5 v.5
mmmcuwocma
v.m H.m v.m m.m
v.m «.0 H.m m.m
h.m o.m m.m 0.5
mmmswowsh
somum ummHn comum umman
.63 L2 . 83 L2

 

 

.eqoo .nfluumfls

wmumaafiam UomHI unnumcoo

mswmmxomm

.mucmaummuu mmmuoum can .mswmmxomm .mcflnmmum
msowum> ou pmuomnnsm cmxoflno pmwum Umummsmu m>m30uowfi mo mmuoom Hmcmm ounce

N xHflzmmmd

150

.onflh H mcwusuwumsoo mmomfim Scum cmxwu mum3 mmamemm umaoz

 

m.hm m.mm a.mm a.mm N.mN m.om mmnlmzz .m
o.H¢ N.hm ¢.Hm a.mm m.hN h.om mmlmzz .N
«.mm m.om ¢.mm a.mv «.mm m.hN mm .H

 

mumnmmwnm CH Umxmom

 

 

 

 

 

a.¢m «.mm «.mm N.Nm m.am v.¢m mmalmzz .m
m.mm a.mm ~.¢m m.m~ m.m~ e.¢m mines: .m
h.mm v.0m a.mm v.mm m.m~ ~.om mm .H
omummnucp
w w w w w m
omummnmm ammum Umummnwm nmmum Omummnmm ammum
usefiumwua
mnaaom uomuuxm Hmnum musumfloz

 

.mposums mcflxooo
msoflum> on Uwuomnnom coxOHno mo memEoo OCADMOOIcme mo coauflmomfioo mumsflxoum

Hx xHozmmma,

    

   
    

   

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

(MIMIHLIIMMHJILIIIIMHLMIUWIH

694 6