”"4

   
   
  

U" I .33.- I
k‘fi?’l’ ' a).

,Ig.‘
.

 
 
 
 

4-: ‘1
‘- ._

Il’

 
      

;. 1} J‘. ‘ _ '.
m1! :8" (.3. ' .3
l | . .

CL? x1154. ‘\':\\

        
    
   
  
     

- w . . .. . ,' l _ f: . fl». ..,. a).
‘ . .' ) ' . . . x‘ . s - . ' ‘ ‘
, . .. .,. .. Ag“.- v . , - - m4-

. '0‘ ' ' ‘ . u ' ‘ - '. . " .- ,' -" v ""‘J. "I ' P. I
\. _,_ ‘ '

I
a

  
  

.1.
l’-" g}. ..
.(‘x'vbtfin‘ IQ:

€43“

1-3

: “‘3” .-

3.

s u
in"

    
   
 
 
   

I . 51-.“ At: " .‘z ‘3 ,1 '

£3323 'g.:‘.-sg§3£3

. .- v‘f‘fi‘w}. ..'.?1'1. _
' ' 3 4.

. :r;

l‘ ‘ l
‘.. '.'\\
. ‘-

‘fiml
(-

J b'.‘
,—

?

 
     
  

‘9
I.
.;

   
  
  

 
  
    
   
    

   

A
n

7.... -f~. \f-.
'2} ...'.:\]'1"""3£.m,}

   

    

  
  

 

     
 
     

 
   
  
  
    
 
  

 
 
 
  

' ‘I _ .
~ . ‘I? . 'N - \n ... '-! ‘ ' . ‘
.. ' 4 . ,- . - .- .HI. 1-.- I .c - - I -. ‘- . ‘ ‘ '|' J.’ '
7.’ _ - n“ . ._.. w _'\.. ._ _. V5.2, a. ”a. 7» J; Lu . .1--_. who.» - $305. \ 2.3":2. ”3‘va
- , ¢ .. . . ‘. . ‘\ u.:_ ‘0 .t . uh ‘» , u a,» - .4. I \‘r 7’ ”A ‘u. I’M 'fl‘ (.5 . . ? , YI‘AJ‘ w
a ,. o . . . \ ...- .. .., m, .. n . -..\ \- A. we”,
» ~‘ wn-w .-; , ‘ ' '.‘ ..\1. pm: 3‘11; ‘1")? - $1 - ‘k ‘ fins; J‘ "*3” L" .. 3,1“
1' u'.‘\.‘ ~' I ‘ :9. - ' ' ‘ " ‘o‘aqu’w‘vu-{fleji'fil ‘3: I: ' r v!" s I ".' 4“ ‘ 3&4}
ul ' . . \' "~‘- ‘w '0‘.-. ' - ;. »,. " '5' ‘ol. " '.
s: . a I ' T" 'g . ’4. .5, I it? 4 J. k i . {1%}. 3. 3‘. ,._ ' .
m . .. $5 ' a.'-' 3 ’-‘ ~‘_ L: . n' 31“." .\,-;'l-. I. . ' > I ‘V V. . I f.-
S -. ¢ ‘, 1,.v I -. 53;; \ .'~ . . \ . .‘v ‘ ‘(d_. a. t' . ~
‘1‘ ' ~ ‘. v . r a; \. . ’ ’ ~‘ ~ v‘ «- . - ‘ ‘ :. . x'
.5 n ‘. n v x t l .. n I _ 7-0" fl» 3hr. (.u.‘ . , . . .
_: ‘ ‘3" .k ' . u" | .. a {1 ‘ ‘ 1.1} hair: N I, ‘H A ‘ 's" '9'; '- ‘ _.& ‘- ‘o‘h 02" '“W‘ 'I ‘5“. H ‘ . '
Q , ' , ‘ . - 'rJ .). . D. (.c (. . .. ..$ 5‘I’P;.$m§.u._.v .. - ;" ,5, 4“ vr'tlk-P‘;
. ,.'.. Ila . . ‘ ..'.,- 'n ,. . '3'.‘ "I v . 514-“ ‘i....4.-w ‘\ - . - - Va: ".
‘ ‘ .J‘ I“ ‘. , . A
u" L .

. ‘ .' , . .I ’ 1 -"‘. ‘ ‘ ‘1- . . . ' ,--. . '5 up.

. . .. I .. . L‘ .. . .f' 1' 4" ‘~ .. - . V .‘I I > . ‘\ ‘ C 5" I“. - . . . ‘ ' l ‘H ‘- ‘- 3 V. .A - .'. u 0"“ ‘0

. ' - .1 - - '- ' ' ' '-.~: ~ - - w: - ‘ , ‘ " '4 - ' v x - 5‘ VIN "~ ‘ -‘ ‘ ‘ ' - ' L wws‘l‘fi 13‘
. . ' - .. . ‘ - " ‘. ' ' . . . “ ‘ -‘ . ‘ " . " -" ‘ ' . ‘ .v . - 3 a ~ 0. ,' - . ' ". '..-. - .
.5 .. If ' ‘ _ __ i 5. ‘ .. v . _. ‘. ' Vs, f .' 5 ...V" ('5. . v .. '5' ‘. ". . g‘p?‘!. ‘1‘ ‘ .5, g. ‘0‘,“ q, € q~

_ ‘ . . . . W . . _ ‘ ..‘ ‘. ‘ .- 3.. ‘ fl 4 . [‘9' ‘va’ gm
. ' -. . . ., - ~ ' . ' ‘ ‘ ~ . ‘ - .- . . . '. - : . U a .5, ,_ , _i . ,3 c 4'"- , . -‘ an“ _ 'T-t “
I". »’ p. . _ - .. . n . ‘ ' .'I fv' -. 'n‘ . v.5“. \. my '5‘," ’- 3:9}. .2, ”A“ 11“». . “f." w ‘ . Vs_ . . ._ ‘ ~' . . ~. ,, - -"‘ - ‘

,. f

o. - _
T.

 

.-~v
-.
n

,. '7
...‘m
r‘. t

  
  
 

 

        
     
 
   

.
. §
,3,

r .

. ’fi- . . 1.“. '3’- - . . , -.
‘,‘.._ _’ . ‘ ‘_. j \ ."" 1.: .>- .. 4 ‘ ‘. . - . ~,'

 
  
  

.' r, ‘-
0‘7““
‘LJ - '

  
   
  

   
   
   
   
  

; .21

 
 
  
 
          

.‘~‘." .J 'n '1‘." ‘ .. o , V.'.";\'“
k". ‘ n; 'k‘“”‘ ... [a t“ '
‘ 0")"""I" ”my“ I N .
TQM"; .
I'V‘.."‘ ‘\_ \' . “C

.4.
".

lip}:-

 

- u
.4

  

U
u
r
p
v

   

1»

t‘
. a

  

H.
I
:wa-
S.
I.-'c
’5."
.\
“It
,.
- S
'u '44' .
M if
' l
I .
L .p. .
er»
.__
O;
o I

Jtn.
.Uf" -

  
    
   
   
   
    

.5-

.r.
U

:s'

  
   

“ ‘. ‘ ,1 3‘ . g \I .50
§ ' ‘ .
.2 ”lug“ ‘f”.

I , ‘
.‘Vqr
yf
1’; ‘
'4;
.
I

    

‘v‘I
t le‘ '-.-
O . v
. . .
pfi. .
.r-«" ‘ -
r“
4):
o"\‘.

‘31,, - 1 ‘

‘v. ‘
.n “ v
I' ‘0

‘
a

,.

1553.

Ed

't'i

. A? ‘-"<
1’5 “9.

i
;

\ '.~V"'
7:09;".

I
.

f3?

“'f» :93

 

.. . ‘ '
o ._ . I g: n .

. , . I I I
- ‘ V . ' . ‘ ‘A ' '. V ' ' ‘ Q’w‘gn1C-h" '~'I
' ' . . ' ' ‘ 7 v

.n..-‘.‘ l‘

   

TH EEEE

IIIIIIHIIIIIIIIHIJHIHIHIIIHIIIHIIIIIHIIIHIIIIHN

3 1293 01591 4124

INFIUI'NCE OF PACKAGING MATERIAL AND FREEZING TRIPERATURES

0N CONSULER PREFEREVCE FCR TURKEY PIEDES

By

Jo eeph Herman MacNeil

An Abstract

Submitted to the College of Agriculture, Michigan State
University of Agriculture and Applied Science in Partial

Fulfillmmt of the Requirements for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE
Department of Poultry Husbandry
1958

Year
Approved Z X 8W

Joseph Hermn MacNeil
Page 1.

The practice of merchandising readybto-cook turkeys instead
of the traditional dressed bird has become a standard procedure.
Associated with this trend have been changes in methods of freezing
and'uype of protective overwrap in which turkeys are merchandised.

Although much has been accomplished in the improvement
of processing techniques, there are still a number of problems that
have to be solved.

Immersion freezing of poultry is becoming more popular.

This process not only increases rate of freezing but also results
in a light colored appearance in the product.

The primary use of a protective overwrap is to maintain
the initial quality and appearance of the product, however many
processors and retailers have gone beyond this to use‘the package
as a powerful selling tool.

Materials used in this study were (1) heat shrinkable
cryovac sheets (2) HEAT cellophane sheets (3) polyethylene sheets
(A) saran sheets.

Products packaged in each one of the above materials were
presented to a Consumer Preference Panel in Detroit. Panel meetings
were held in November'and December, 1957, and February and April, 1958.
Polyethylene packaged products were preferred by more panel members
than any of the other packaged products.

Significant differences were found in the preferences of the
panel members between afternoon and evening as well as among different
panels.

Joseph Herman MacNeil
Page 2.

0
Turkey quarters and pieces were frozen at 00?, -20 1":
40°F, and in a salt brine solution at 43°F prior to storage at

00F. After storage periods of l, 2, h, and 6 months, products were
presented to the Consumer Preference Panel in Detroit.

Turkey quarters partially frozen in a brine solution and
stored for a period of one and two months were preferred by a
majority of the panel members. After a storage period of four
months, the number of members selecting brine frozen quarters as their
number one choice had declined considerably. After six months
of storage, only five of the afternoon panel members (9%) selected
brine frozen quarters as their first choice and in the evening only
7 members (3%) preferred brine frozen quarters.

Preference for turkey pieces frozen in brine did not follow
the same pattern as turkey quarters, being preferred by the least
number of members in each panel with the exception of the first
Panel.

After storage of four and six months, the majority of

panel members preferred the products frozen at 40°F.

INFLUENCE OF PACKAGING MATERIAL AND FREEZING
MEERATURES ON CONSUMER PREFERENCE

FOR TURKEY PIECES

by

Joseph Herman MacNeil

A THESIS

Submitted to the College of Agriculture
Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied
Science in partial fulfillmmt of the requirements
for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIEWC!
Department of Poultry Husbandry
Year 1958

ACKNO‘NIEDGMEN '1'

The author wishes to express his sincere thanks
and appreciation to Dr. L. E. Ihwson of the Departmmt of
Poultry Husbandry for his guidance, assistance and «1-
couragment during the course of this study, and to
Dr. H. E. Larzelsre of the Department of Agricultural
Rona-ice who directed the preference panel meetings.

An expression of thanks is extended to
Mrs. M. J. Bostick and Mrs. D. Place of Wayne State university
for their help in planning panel meetirgs and to Edward H. Farmer
and Daniel G. Bigbee of the Poultry Department for their
assistance and cooperation in preparing products used in this
study.

The author also wishes to thank Dr. H. C. Zindel
of the Department of Poultry Husbandry for his cooperation in
making facilities available for this study.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION
REVIEN OF LITERATURE
PROCEDURE
A. heezing Procedure
B. Packaging Procedure
C. Panel Procedure
RMTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Consumer Preference for Turkey
Pieces Frozen at Different

Temperatures

B. Influence of Packaging Materials
on Preference for Turkey Pieces

CONCLUSIONS
APPENDIX

BIBLIOGRAPHY

-oOo-

PAGE

I8

3h

#7

8‘

FIGURE

gar OF FIGURES

Turkey Quarters (white) Frozen at Four
Different Temperatures

Turkey Quarters (Dark) Frozen at Four
Different Temperatures

Turkey Breasts Frozen at Four Different
Temperatures

Turkey Thighs Frozen at Four Different
Temperatures

Turkey Drumsticks Frozen at Four Different
Temperatures

Turkey Quarters (white) Frozen at Four
Different Temperatures with Frost Removed
Before Photographing

Turkey Quarters (white) Packaged with
Four Types of Packaging Material

Turkey Quarters (dark) Packaged with Four
Types of Packaging Material

Turkey Thighs Packaged with Four Types of
Packaging Material

Turkey Drumsticks Packaged with Four Types
of Paclmging Material

-000-

PAGE

l6

l7

19

20

26

27

28

29

TABLE

III

VII

VIII

LIST OF TABLES

Turkey Products and Their Identifications
Evaluated by Panel 0, Detroit, 1958.

Characteristics of Consumer Preference
Panel Members.

Influence of Freezing Temperatures on
Consuner Preference for Turkey Quarters
and Pieces (afternoon).

Influence of Freezing Temperatures on
Consumer Preference for Turkey Quarters
and Pieces (evening).

Chi-square Analysis of Preferences for
Products Frozen at Different Temperatm-es.

Influence of Air Freezing Temperature on
Preference for Turkey Products (ranked
according to 1st choice).

Summary of Chi-square Analysis of Pre-
ferences for Products From at Different
Temperatures.

Consumer Preference for Turkey Pieces
Wrapped with Various Packaging laterials.

Summary of Chi-square Analysis on Prefer-

ence for Products Packaged with Different
Packaging Materials.

-oOo-

PAGE

31

33

36

37

39

TABLE

VI

VII

VIII

APPENDIX TABLES

Consumer Preference for Turkey Quarters
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel A,
Series Ie

Consumer Preference for Turkey Quarters
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel A,
Series He

Consumer Preference for Turkey Breasts
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel A,
Series III.

Consular Preference for Turkey Quarters
Frozen at Various Temperatures, Panel A,
581.188 N.

Consumr Praference for Turkey Quarters
Frozen at Various Temperatures, Panel A,
Series V.

Consumer Preference for Turkq Breasts
Frozen at Various Temperatures, Panel A,
Series VI.

Consuner Preference for Turkey Quarters
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel B,
Series 1.

Consumer Preference for Turkey Quarters
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel B,
561.108 IIe

Consumer Preference for Turkey Drumsticks
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel B,
Series III.

Consumer Preference for Turkey Quarters
Frozen at Various Temperatures, Panel B,
361.198 Ne

PAGE

L9

L9

51

52

TABLE

XIII

XIV

XV

XVI

XVIII

APPENDIX TABLES C(NT 'D

Consumer Preference for Turkey Quarters
Frozen at Various Temperatures, Panel B,
Series V.

Consumer Preference for Turkey Drmticks
Frozen at Various Temperatures, Panel B,
Series VI.

Consumer Preference for Turkey Quarters
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel C,
Series I.

Consular Preference for Turkey Quarters
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel C,
Series II.

Constmer Preference for Turkey Thighs

Packaged with Various Over-wraps, Panel C,
Series III.

Consumer Preference for Turksy Quarters
Frozen at Various Tenperatures, Panel C,
Series IV.

Consuner Preference for Turkey mariners
Frozen at Various Tunperatures, Panel C,
Series V.

Consumer Preference for Turkey Thighs
Frozen at Various Temperatures, Panel C,
Series VI.

Consumer Preference for Turkey Quarters
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel D,
Series I.

Consumer Preference for Turkqr Quarters
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel D,
Series II.

PAGE

53

53

5h

55

55

56

57

57

TABLE

III

XXII

XXIII

XXIV

APPEVDIX TABLES CONT 'D

Conmmer Preference for Turkey Wings
Packaged with Various Overwraps, Panel
D, Series III.

Consumer Preference for Turkey Quarters

Frozen at Various Temperatures, Panel D,
Series IV.

Consumer Preference for Turkey Quarters
Frozen at Various Temperatures, Panel D,
Series V.

Consumer Preference for Turkey Breasts
Frozen at Various Temperatures, Panel D,
Series VI.

-000-

PAGE

58

59

59‘

INTFDWCTIGV

Consuner preferences have usually been determined by actual
purchase of a particular product under normal retail situations.
Opportunity for adequate selection by the consumer has usually not
been possible because of the limited number of items displayed. This has
been particularly true in most retail stores.

The practice of merchandising ready-to-cook turkeys instead
of the traditional dressed birdl has recently become a standard
procedure. Associated with this trend has been changes in methods of
freezing, type of protective overwrap and form in which turkeys are
merchandised.

Since most turkeys are raised in the smer and ready for
market in the fall it is necessary to store them in the frozen state
for varying lengths of time before they are merchandissd. A protective
amp is thus required to maintain the initial quality and
appearance of the product. At present, many processors and retailers
are utilizing the package not only to protect the product but also as a
powerful selling tool.

The practice of using liquid coolants to quick freeze poultry

 

l
R__e_ady-to-cook poultry means any dressed poultry from which the
protruding piEfeatBrs,'v'estigial feathers, head, shanks, trachea,
esophagus, entrails ,. kidneys, reproductive organs and lungs have been
removed. Dressed poultry means poultry which has been slaughtered for
human food with head, feet, and viscera intact and from which the
blood and feathers have been removed.

2.

is becoming more popular. This process not only increases rate
of freezing but it also results in a light colord appearance
of the product.

One of the objectives in this stumr was the evaluation
of consumer preference for a number of different turkey pieces
which had been fmzen at different temperatures, including brine
frozen products.

Few studies have been conducted to determine the consumer
preference for various types of packaging materials although the
protective values have received more consideration. With these
factors in mind another part of this stucb' was designed to gain
additional info nation on consumer preferences for various packaging
materials.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Packaging laterials

me

The development of pacinging materials has expanded
tremendously since World War II. Woodroof, Atkinson, and Shelor
(19h?) reported that until 1936 there were no wrapping materials on the
market especially made for frozen foods such as mats, fish, and
chicken. The use of special packaging materials for fresh products has
also gone through a period of prolonged inactivity until recently.
During the past fifty years marketing problems have chmged being influenced
by growth and geographical distribution of population, and by technological
changes in production, processing and merchandising.

The introduction of self-service comters in large super-
markets has resulted in a need for better packaging materials.
Carpenter, [<li and Guun (1955) discussed self-service and its
effect on poultry sales. They concluded that self-service would
increase volume of sales which in turn results in lower costs.

Shockley (1955) ”ported that in addition to proper protective
qualities, a package should be of proper size, style, and construction.
With the introduction of mechanical packaging machines, the size

h.

and weight of the product became a limiting factor. These

materials which could be adapted to machine application were given

closer study and materials which could be heat sealed tended to have some
advantages, other properties being equal. The standardized weight
package and packaging at the processor level would be more efficient

in that special equipment and trained labor could be used to perform the
tasks involved (Ramsay, 1951.).

The use of transparent films for packaging poultry has been
increasing, but the preference for these films has not been sub-
stantiated by basic research. A number of the packages on the market
today have been developed by chance rather than by market research
(Anonymous 1956), which again points out the lack of pertinent
information on packaging. Ferguson (1955) stated that a consular
survey on packages showed a preference for meat packages with a
transparent top well labeled with weight and price.

Protective Performance

Winter (191.7) reported, that other factors being equal, the better
the wrapping material the longer frozen meat, poultry, and fish will
retain their original flavor and color during storage at 0°P. He based
his conclusions regarding packaging materials on the theory that the
best packaging materials appear to be those which are most effective in
excluding ongsn. This, in addition, mould result in better patron

satisfaction.

5.

Woodroof, Atkinson; md Shelor (19h?) found that aluminum foil
adequately protected frozen poultry from desiccation and loss of aroma
and flavor for at least one year. By using cellophane as a wrapper
the desirability was lowored approximately twenty-five percent . lbrgelf
et al (1956) in their stuw of type of scald and wrap on market
quality of frozen poultry thawed that weight losses were greatest for
carcasses wrapped with cellophane, less for those wrapped with
pliofilm, and least for those wrapped with polyethylene. They also
found that full scalding was a satisfactory practice when stored car-
casses were wrapped with polyethylene or pliofilm. Kish (1953)
showed that the overball pretective performnce was similar for
cellophane, polyethylene, cam, and pliofilm, throughout a forty-
eight hour packaged period. Although carcass color changes of meat were
slightly greater in cellophane packages after seventy-two hours, the
presence of off odors and slime development was not as great as with
meats packaged in the other test films. Cellophane was superior to all
films tested in minimizing moisture condensation, in package appear-
ance and brilliance and in ease of handling during packaging operation.
Dose and Lineweaver (1951) stated that microbial growth is one of the
most seriOus problems in the deterioration of chilled packaged poultry,
however controlling dehydration and color changes and using a tight

fitting packaging film are also very important from the standpoint

of consumer acceptance and satisfaction.

Consular Acceptance

Very little has been reported on consumer preferences for a
large number of packaging materials that are on the market at the
present time. This is a relatively new field and there are new
materifls being developed continuously while existing ones are being
improved. Fryers packaged with unprinted polyethylene, printed
polyethylene, unprinted cellophane, printed cellophane, and a box
type with a cellophane window were presented to a Detroit consular
preference panel (MacNeil, Larzelere and Dawson, 1958). Plain samples
of each material were ranked above the corresponding print sample,
indicating a consumer preference for the plain transparent material.

Jasper (1955) reported on actual purchases by consulars of
fresh fryers that were offered in a retail market. Some of these
fryers were unpackaged m1. otherswere packaged with unprinted
cellophane, unprinted polyethylene and unprinted cryovac. In two
separate tests conducted more cellophane pacbged products were
purchased than were products packaged in any of the other materials.
Polyethylene packaged products were the second choice in the two
tests.

7.

The importance of the package and its acceptance or rejection
by retailers was emphasized since 1.7 percent of the retail organizations
interviewed either refused to sell or threatened to step selling products
solely because of poor packaging (Anonymous 1957). This also points
out that there is a great deal yet to be done in the field of
packaging. Finding out what type of package is preferred by the
consumr is one of the major questions which must be satisfactorily

”nerds

Freezing

Artificial refrigeration was first used to freeze food,
counsrcially in the United States about 1865 (Tressler and Evers, 1957).
At, that time meats and fish were frozen in crude rooms insulated with
sawdust and cooled by ice and salt mixtures.

Birdseye (191.6) reported his theories on the changes which
take place during the freezing Operation. He states that bth plant and
animal tissues are composed of a multitude of individual cells, in and
around which is a comlex liquid containing numberous minerals, salts,
vitamins, proteins and other substances. As the temperature of this
liquid is brought below 32°F. there are a number of physical and
chmnical changes which take place in it. One of the most imortant
changes is the formation of ice crystals.

8.

The size of the crystals formed, in the tomerature range of
32°F.to 25%., is determined to a large extent by the speed with which
the predict 800' fro. 32°}, to 25°F. The faster the rate of freeze
the mealler the ice crystals and the slower the rate of mess the
larger the ice crystals. ‘nie temperature range mentioned above is
referred to by Pennington (191.1) as the "zone of maximum crystalization".
Keane and Ran-bottom (1939) fomd that rate of freezing affects
the size, number, and location'of ice formations. Nearly instantaneous
freezing produced minute , evenly distributed ice cola-is within the
fibers. With a somewhat slower rate of freezing the ice colums within
the fibers were larger in diameter and fewer in number. ‘lhe importance
of the size of the ice crystals was emphasized by Birdseye (191.6)
in his discussion on the theory of freezing. He stated that large ice
crystalls, as a result of slow freezing, could result in physical damage
to the cell (cell rupture), or a physiochemieal change which he temd
salt dehydration. Sair and Cook (1938) in studies with fish and beef,
found tmt when these two products had Men frozen slowly in air, they
ends a certain amount of fluid or drip vim thawing, indicating physical
dange to the cell and consequent loss of liquids.

DuBois, Tressler and Fenton (l9h2) reported that it was
difficult to note by casual examination the difference between chickens

frozen rapidly and those frozmi more slowly. However they could be

9.

differentiated by a nicroscopic appearance of cross sections of the
muscle tissue.

Willis, Lowe and Stewart (191.3) showed that birds frozen at
10°F. showed a considerable ammt of desiccation and darkening
while birds frozen at -lO°F. were in much better condition but even
at this te-perature they did begin to darken after nine maths
of storage.

The consumer selects poultry on the basis of appearance so
the factor of color my be a very important factor for industry
consideration. Apparently, although such research had been dune on
freezing procedures, poultry is still subjected to freezing in a
haphazard fashion. Baker (1953) reported that almost half of the frozen
turkeys in New York State became discolored airing the freezing
operation. The effect of freezing rate on color of meat was discussed
by Rambottom et al (191.9). They reported ttat steaks frozen by
contact with dry ice (410%.) were when lighter than steaks frozen at
20°F. , while steaks frozen at -20°F. were internediate between the two
latter temperatures and approached the fresh steaks in color. Baker
(1953) used freezing temperatures for turkeys of 40°?" 0°P. and 5"?"
reported results similar to those obtained by Ralsbotto- with mat.
Baksr's results mowed that the turkeys frozen at -20°!. were the lost
pleasing while those frozen at 50?. were very dark in color. After
thawing all birds the original color was restomd. H refreezing the

10.

birds in a reversed order, that is, the birds originally frozen at
5°F. were frozen at -20°F., similar results were obtained, the birds
frozen at -20°F. being the most pleasing. in color.

Similar results on color were obtained by Easelsn et a1
(1955)e A further point brought out by this study was that sabscalded
poultry (us-11.0%.) was particularly susceptible to discoloration
when frozen. ’

Baker (1955) in repeating his tests on the effect of rate
of freezing on poultry reported that the discoloration involved in
slow freezing took place in the flesh rather than the dcin. The
procedure used in his stuw was to skin the birds and freeze skinless
birds and skin separately at two temperatures, ~20°P. in air blast
and 20°F. in still air. At 40°F. the flesh and skin were both white
while at 20°F. the flesh was dark while the skin was light. Studies
conducted by Klose and Pool (1956) were in general agreement with Baker
on the need and importance for fast freezing, however they differed in
respect to processes involved in the color change. nose and Pool
stated that appreciable and easily detectable Optical changes tales
place in the sldn in addition to those in the flesh surface layer.

While temperature is the main factor in rates of freezing and

color of resulting product, Baker (1953) and Iantz and van den Berg

(1957 ) pointed out the importance of the movement of the surrounding

atmsphere. van den Berg and Lentz (1958) showed that lightness and
uniformity of appearance in air blast increased markedly when air
velocity at -20°!'. was increased from 0 to 700 ft. per minute.
Baker (1953) suggested that swarm layer of air surromds the bird
in still air and acts as insulation.

Cook (1939) reported that humidity also affected the
surface drying of frozen poultry; he recommended a humidity of
about 98% or higher to lininize freezer burn for a one year holding
period at 13°C.

The principles of freezing by direct innersion and
spraying with a liquid have“ been blown for some tine. A brine spray
freezing process was used in the poultry industry several years ago.
However the use of direct contact liquid in its present ibrn is new.

There are indications that the consumer has a preference for a
light colored turkey, capon or chicken (Pflug, 1957) and consequently
poultry processors are beconirg more interested in i-nersion freezing.
Freezing methods giving a lighter colored bird have increased in
importance with the trend toward higher scald temperatures. lhe
inersion nettnd, besides giving a liglt colored product, makes use
of the fact that the higher coefficient of heat transfer obtained in
liquid as compared to air makes more efficient use of refrigeration

capac iiw .

12.

Sodium and calcium chloride brines and propylene glycol
solutions are at present being used as the liquid coolsnts. The
heat transfer characteristics of sodium chloride brines are slightly
higher than those for propylene glycol solutions. Sodium chloride is
also more economical in first cost. The low initial cost of sodium
chloride my be off-set by its corrosive effects.

Lentz et a1 (19 57) reported on the factors affecting
appearance of frozen birds. It was their observation that the
moat important factors affecting the appearance of the frozen bird
were its initial smearance and temperature, and the imperature of
the coolant. The color of the skin itself did not change during
freezing at an temperature, but its opacity did depend on freezing
conditions, and gave white skinned birds a white, uniform chalky appear-
ance. Yellow-skinned birds had the sans characteristics of opacity and
uniformity but the color depeuied on the amount of yellow pigment
in the skin. The work of Clayton (1957) and Pflug (1957) showed similar
results in using insersion freezing.

K Ientz and van den Berg (1957) reconmaended a mini-um inersion
tins of twenty minutes at 40°F. to insure retention of optima
appearance after storage. his time and temperature holds true for
both chickens and turkeys however the time would be increased to forty

minutes for turkeys for optima results. Esselen et a1 (195A) in his

13.

studies gave a time range for imersion of from 20 to 30 minutes
per pound for a complete freeze. For a quick dip in 40°F. brine,
followed by holding in cold storage, they recommded times in brine
of 6, 35, and AS minutes for broilers, twelve pound turkeys and
twenty-two to twenty-seven pounds ready to cook turkeys,

Davis (1954) reported tint innersion freezing is twelve times
faster than some of the methods used in freezing poultry with cold
air after chilling in slush ice, however he reconended that the
ill-torsion process at present he used only for ready-to-cook poultry
packaged in moisture proof and vapor proof bags prior to chilling or
freezing.

Brine cooling of birds has also been reported by several
workers including Sweet and Stewart (191.2) ,Connolly et a1 (1954),
Esselen et al (1951.), and Davis (1951;). The use of brine for cooling
is referred to as the "cold shock" method by Sweet and Stewart (NM).
The procedure reported by these workers was to inserse or spray birds
with a salt hm. (200-32°r.) from ten to sixty minutes and then
store than at 32°-35°P. and allow tron to cool to an internal
temperature of BAP-36°F. The theory of using stored up refrigeration
in the birds for cooling purposes is employed here.

Very little is known concerning the interaction of packaging
and innersion on freezing since both are relatively new fields.

PROCEDUM
A. Freezing Procedure

Twenty-four Bread Breasted Bronze tom turkeys were selected
for uniformity of size and quality. The turkeys were slaughtered us-
ing an electric shock for inobilization, bled by an outside cut,
scalded at 1k2°F. for one minute and fifteen seconds, picked by
machine, placed in a slush ice tank and allowed to cool for four
hours. After this period of cooling the turkeys were eviscerated and
replaced in a slush ice tank and held for further cooling.

After overniglt cooling, eight turkeys were cut into quarters,
using a cosmercial meat band saw, inediately tray packaged using heat
shrinkable eryovac sheets as an overwrap and held at 35°F. until the
entire processing Operation was completed. The remaining sixteen
turkeys were cut up into breasts, thighs and drumsticks and
packaged as described above.

All birds were removed from the 35°F. room and sorted into
uniform groups of four similar pieces (four uniform white or front
quarters, four miform dark or hind quarters ,-four uniform breasts,
four uniform packages of thighs, four uniform packages of drumsticks.

One of each of the above four pieces in each group was blast frozen
at 4,001,, one at .zo°F., one at o°P., and one held in a brine

15.

solution at 43°F. for 30 minutes prior to 1.8 hours in an air blast at
4500?. After the products were held at these various freezing
temperatures for forty eight hairs they were placed in a 0°r. room
for storage.

The brine frozen pieces were first packaged in cryovac bags to
eliminate any chance of the brine seeping into the package diring
immersion. After the pieces were completely frozen in the 40°F.
box the cryovac bags were removed and the cryovac ovenrap was applied.

Figures 1, 2, 3, 1., and 5 show photographs of each group as
they would appear to the preference panel. These photographs were
taken soon after the packages were removed from the freezers but there
was considerable frosting in the packages making it difficult to
see the characteristic differences among packages.

Figure 6 shows a series of pieces after water was applied
to the package to remove the frost, however visual characteristic differ-
ences were not too apparut. The main distinction noted in these
photographs is the distinct whiteness of the brine frozen product.

 

16.

 

 

Figure 1. Turkey quarters (white) frozen at four
different temperatures.

 

17.

 

 

Figure 2. Turkey quarters (dark) frozen at four
different temperatures.

18.

 

 

Figure 3. Turkey breasts frozen at feur different
temperatures.

F—_._... —— .

 

Figure 4. Turkey thighs frozen at four different
temperatures.

19;

 

 

20.

.. ‘n..— .- ._m| - .

 

Figure 5. Turkey drumsticks frozen at four
different temperatures.

21.

 

Figure 6. Turkey quarters (white) frozen at four
different temperatures, with frost removed before
pho tographi ng .

22.

B. Packaging Procedure

The day preceding each consumer preference panel meeting in
Detroit, a number of Broad Breasted Bronze turkeys were slaughtered
and processed to pmvide the required products for one panel
meeting. The slaughtering and processing was similar to that out-
lined previously.

Four packaging materials were tested in this study
(1) Saran (2) Cryovac (3) Polyethylme and (h) Cellophane.

I

Description of Materials1

Polletmlege (Manufactured by various companies) The inherent
properties of polyettwlsns make it an excellent packaging medium.

It has low levels of taste and odor, low water absorbency and a good
level of moistureproofness. It is tough, durable and chemically inert.
It has inherent flexibility even at extremely low temperatures, much
has led to its use in fmzen food packaging.

In general the film is characterized by extreme toughness and
rubberiness and by excellent electrical properties. Films from
different producers show transparency variations, but the film can be
made with only slight haziness in the thin gauges.

 

1 lbdern Packaging Encyclopedia (1956).

23.

Polyethylene film is insensitive to voter 81d many common
solvents and chemicals; however, it is penetrated and softened by many
types of fats and oils. Its resistance to the transmission of water
vapor is good but it readily transmits oxygen, solvent vapors and
many aromatic materials.

Collagen: Cellophane manufactured by E. I. du Pont de Nemours 8: Co.
(Inc.) is'indeed the most versatile and popular transparent film, com-
bining functional protection with the advantages of transparency and
attractiveness at low cost. Its comparative ease of handling and
application has contributed to its wide use.

Three-fourths of all domestic cellophane is used in food
packaging, the remainder finding packaging application in fields like
the tobacco, textile, drug and paper-products indletries as
well as in fabricated items and inlustrial uses.

CellOphane consists of a plasticized base sheet (regenerated
cellulose) of essential greaseproofnsss, which can be nude water-
vaporproof. Cellophane isuquite gasproof as long as the film is dry.
Gas-transmission rates will increase as the film becomes wet.

The cellophane used in this study was an BAT typel.

Vinylideng-chlorige fil_m_ (Saran, 0mm) Vinylidene-ehloride

film is produced by the extrusion process. It has some outstanding

 

——

lfloistureproof, heat sealin g, water resistant.

21..

properties and some very significant limitations. It has the

lowest water permeability of any of the packaging films. Its gas
permeability is also very low making it an excellent film for vacuu
or gas packaging. It has exceptionally high tensile strength and
together with its other properties, this permits the use of thin
gauges. It is highly flexible and completely transparent.

Vinylidene-chloride despite its remarkable combinations of
properties is not used in high volume in packaging. The major reason
apparently is its inortness and static. Saran ,mamufactured by Dow
Chemical Company, is a good example of this type of film. Its
clinging properties, so much admired by the housewife, make it
difficult to handle on conventional nehinery. Also special
problems may be encount ersd in heat sealing, although these are
not insurmountable.

Vinylidene-chloride resins have been combined with certain
other materials to make a highly oriented thin film Cryovec
(Manufactured by the Cryovac Co.) which is particularly useful
as a protective covering for irregular Shaped objects in frozen
food applications. The film is available in tubular form to be
shrunk aromd an inserted product, poultry, picnic hams, etc.,
by the application of heat. This is known as the 'Cryovac" process.

Four uniform white or Rent quarters, four uniform dark or

hind quarters and four uniform breasts were selected from the

25.

processed turkeys. One of each product was packaged with each

of the four materials listed above. Every series (four white quarters,
etc.) contained a product packaged with each of the four materials to
be tested. Pulp type trays were used as a backing material, the size
varying'according to the size and shape of the products used.

Since Polyethylene used in this study was not heat scalable
masking tape was used to seal the package. The Cellophane packages
were sealed on the bottom of the package with an electric heat sealer.
The temperature required to heat seal Cryovac was very critical
but with care the job was satisfactorily completed. Saran did not
Maire special sealing since the material was simply folded across
the bottom of the package and pressed together, its inherent clinging
properties making a satisfactory seal.

The above packaging procedure was followed prior to each
panel meeting with the following exceptions. I The breasts in Panel
A were replaced by drumsticks in Panel B, by thighs in Panel C, and
by wings in Panel D.

Figures 7, 8, 9, and 10 show photographs of the turkey pieces
packaged with the various overwraps used in the stuw. Possibly
the only difference that can be seen in these photographs is the
slight milkiness of the polyetMlene overwrap. Cellophane has a
tendency to reflect light at certain angles, however the photographs

did not show this phenomenon.

' , CELLOPHANE

I'_

CRYOVAL

2.1 . ‘-

.r.
I .3 ’

 

 

 

Figure 7. Turkey quarters (white) packaged with
four types of packaging material.

27.

SARAN POLYETHYLENE CRYOVAC

p-

   

" '~ .431". W
«mg—- ~ 4-. kw . .
r. I "
g. . , ,
..- ‘ -- I

I!
o

-‘_
e

0.
4-

;

 

1
i
l
1

° Figure 8. Turkey quarter: (dark) packaged with four
types of packaging material.

28.

CRYOVM

 

Figure 9. Turkey thighs packaged with four types
of packaging material.

CELLOPHANE ' gULVETVYL NE

Figure 10. Turkey drumsticks packaged withi’our
types of packaging materials.

 

29,

CRYOM',

__.____- _ _ - _

C. A Panel Procedure

Genegl

The Consumer Preference Panel met in the Home Economics
Laboratory at Wayne State University in Non/57 (Panel A), Dec./57
(Panel a), Feb./53 (Panel c), April/58 (Panel D). Consumer preferences
for several agricultural prodmts such as apples, potatoes, pork
chops, eggs, poultry and flowers were obtained.

Samples of the turkey products frozen at different
temperatures were displayed along with the fresh. packaged takey products
on a large table in the Hon Economics room. Table I gives the treat-
ments, predicts and coding used in Panel C which is typical of the
four panel meetings.

Panel meetings were conducted from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and
from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. After a briefing on the general purpose
of the project panel members were asked to rank the samples in each
series independently of other series. The ranking was to be
based on the order in which they would select the various samples if
they were buying them, regardless of price.

Symbols were used to identify the actual samples so that
numerical or alphabetical order would not influence selection. The
symbols were assigned at random to the items so that a particular symbol

would not indicate a certain quality or ranking. The positions of

#31.

£115;

 

 

 

3 £35» .93 H .53 e new?» .93 H oEHaepoaHoa
u new?» .33 H moo? 3 new?» .93 H .SeaOHHoo
a 33s» .33 H H econ. a new?» .wa H HHH ofiobo
* 235 .wa H moo a new?» .33 H gm
u scenes”. muss H scum C 393% 3.36 H. 0963.333
a cage and H s mac? n “33% fine H HH 23338
* aeoamsu muse H meow. § uoauesu asap H oe>ohuo
Av seepage game H moo * nepuesv mass A cream
a. postage 32.. H .58 u page 32.. H .fiHafiuaHoa
* hostess 33.. H H moo? a. notes 3ng H H ogaqHHoo
av hounded ovdcs_a meow: * accused sauna H eepohuo
u 3...."ch 33.. H mac 3 notes 32.. H 38
Hoefim steam Siam negates 43-3 3 Beam Bram agate“.
unneeehm ummunxoem

emaH .3893 .o qmzfi E
EEHEH 2893:2753 Emma 924 2.0893 g

Hag

32.

the products on display were also varied in order that a product

of one treatmmt would not be placed in a standard position. The
symbols as given in Table I were 5‘, i, *, and 0. Dry ice was used to
refrigerate the frozen products during each panel meeting.

Cognition and Se;e_ction of the Consumer Panell

Panel members were recruited as follows: Mail questionnaires
were sent to about. 11,700 names obtained at random from the latest
Detroit telephone directory. About 1.92% of these were returned bytthe
post-office for non-delivery. About 20% of the reminder were filled
out and returned either from the first or the follow-up questionnaire.

The basic questions asked concerned age group, education
group, income group, and willingness to come to a display rec:
in Detroit to rank the samples of the different products displayed.
As can be seen in Table 11 most of the panel members who were
invited to attend the sessions in November, December, and February,
had incomes from 81.,000 to $10,000, had received a high school
education and were in the 31-45 age group.

Most of the panel was selected with these characteristics
because more of the returned questionnaires came from peOple in these

brackets than from any of the others.

 

l
Greig and Larselere.1957.

33.

TABLE II

CHARACTERISTICS OF CONSUMER PREFERENCE PANEL MEMBERS

 

Ass. M 22127. £9123. £25213: Mal. 1....
Number of Persons

Under 30 0 0 0 2 2 .h

31eh5 91 108 89 91 379 81.3

h6—60 31 19 27 5 82 17.6

Over 60 l l 0 l 3 .6

Formal

Education

0-8 years 7 5 6 3 21 h.5

9-11 years 26 27 26 29 108 23.2

12-13 years 63 71 61 57 252 5h.1

1h or more ‘ 27 25 23 10 85 18.2

Annual

Income

5200045000 11. 11. 3.0

ShOOl-‘Shoo h3 50 Al 28 162 3h.8

$5h01-37000 AS #8 L9 39 181 38.8

$7001—810,000 35 3O 26 18 109 23.h

31..

Panel members were not invited to participate continually
to minim“ monotony in evaluations, and because continuous
attendance at the panel meetings might make the members non~typica1
consumers since some of them would acquire knowledge of present standards
of quality stimulated by these matings.

The diatribution of the panel members with regard to age,
education, and income is not intended to reflect the characteristics
of all consumers in the Detroit area. However the panel youp can
be considered representative of the Detroit families who have the
characteristics outlined above. These in turn are typical of a
sisable portion of Detroit families as indicated by the following
figures from the United States Census (1950): (1) the age
group 30-“. in Detroit in 191.9 represented 1.0% of the individuals
over 25 in that city; (2) those having completed four years of
high school with no additional edmation in Detroit were 23% of
total persms over 25 and (3) 38% of the Detroit families had
incomes ranging from 8h,000 to $9,999 and it can be estimted
that these families had about 55% of the total consunmr purchasing
power in the city.

RESULTS AND DISCU$IONS

A. Consumer Preference for Turkey Pieces Frozen at
Differegt Tmragures

Consumer preferences for products frozen at 0°P. , 720°?”

 

4.0%. and in brine and held for different lengths of time were

35.

detemined by the number of persons selecting that product as
their first choice. A sunmary of the first choices is sham in
Tables III and IV. Panel members were asked to rank the
products 14. according to their preference. A weighted average was
then calculated and given as a preference scorel. Complete
ranking and preference scores are included in the Appendix.

Turkey quarters partially frozen in a brine solution
(43011.) and stored for periods of one and two months at 0°!.
were preferred by a majority of the panel members. After a
storage period ofbur months the nuclear of panel members
selecting brine frozen quarters as their first choice had
declined considerably. After six months of storage only five of
the afternoon panel members (9%) selected brine frozen quarters
as their first choice and in the evening, only seven members (3%)
preferred brine frozen quarters. _

Preference for turkey pieces (breasts, drumsticks, thighs)
did not follow this same pattern. Turkey pieces frozen in brine
were preferred by the least number of members of each panel with the
exception of Panel A (afternoon) in which the preference was well

distributed among the four pieces displayed.

 

 

1The percentage of total first rankings, second rankings, etc. ,
in each test or series was determined for each sample. The
percentage for first ranking was multiplied by five for each sample.
The percentage for second ranking was multiplied by four, and so on
in descending order. These adjusted percentages were added to give a
single preference score for that sample.

The highest score in each series indicates the sample that was pre-
ferred by the largest number of panel members. The anount of differences
between the scores shows the degree of preference for sanples.

TABLE III

INFLUENCE OF FREEZING TEMPERATURES AND STORAGE
ON CONSUMER PREFERRICES FOR
TURKEY QUARTERS AND PIECES

#Qéa

 

AFTERNOON
Temperatures

Panel Products 0°? .2o°r -L0°F Brine

 

Number of first choice selections

A Quarters 21 13 13 61.
A Pieces 1h 16 12 15

B Quarters 25 22 7 L1
Pieces 1. 20 16 8

C Quarters 19 16 1.0 10
Pieces 16 16 12 h

D Quarters 23 8 17 5
Pieces h 3 15 3

TOTAL Quarters 88 59 77 120

TOTAL Pieces 38 55 55 30

GRAND TOTAL 126 11!. 132 150

 

 

37.

TABLE IV

INFLUE‘ICE OF FREEZING TEMPERATURES AND STORAGE
ON CONSUMER PREFERENCES FOR
TURKEY WARTERS AND PIEDES

 

EVENING
Thmperatures

Panel , Products 0°17 .200! 4.0% Brine

 

Number’of first choice selections

A Quarters 26 32 22 59
Pieces 35 17 11 7

B Quarters 33 22 12 10h
Pieces 1h L6 17 8

C Quarters 27 16 66 59
Pieces 26 A3 12 9

D Quarters 69 AZ 50 7
Pieces 3O 17 25 12

TOTAL Quarters 155 112 150 229
TOTAL Pieces 105 123 65 36

GRAND TOTAL 260 235 215 26 5

 

3‘.

Initially the brine frozen products had an unnatural white
appearance, which might be described as frosty-white. However, after
four and six months of storage, they appeared dehydrated and chalky.
There were also indications of darkening and some severe dis-
colorations around the edges of the product. The author's observations
were that these products were not very appealing after the longer
storage time.

The procedure followed in packaging the brine frozen products
differs somewhat from the methods used in the other packaged
products. The brine frozen products being frozen before
packaging made it impossible in heat shrink the package. Difficulties
were involved in getting a satisfactory seal with the film used and in
some cases it was found that during handling the poor seal on the
package became more apparent. Refrigeration of the products with
dry ice was inadequate and consequently midway through the
evening session the products appeared partially thawed. This did
not appear to seriously influence the preferences of the panel
members. A Chi-square amlysis (Table V) showed that there was
no significant difference in preferences for turkey quarters between
the afternoon and evening panel meetings (all. panels combined).
Highly significant differences were found in preferences for turkey
pieces between afternoon and evening panel meetings, (all panels
combined).

TABLE V

39.

CHI-SQUARE ANALYSIS OF THE PREFEREJCES FOR PRODUCTS
FROZEN AT DIFFERENT TEMPERATURES

 

 

Panel Test ' Product 12

A Afternocn vs Evening Quarters 8.05%
Afternoon vs Evenixg Breasts 10.7254“

B Afternoon vs Evening Quarters 8.9a.“
Afternoon vs Evening Drumsticks 5.970'

C Afternoon vs Evening Quarters 17.175“
Afternoon vs Evening Thighs h.227

D Afternoon vs Evening Quarters 3.821
Afternoon vs Evening Breasts 7380*

TOTAL Afternoon vs Evening Quarters .327
Afternoon vs Evening Pieces 15.139"

 

1' Significant difference
** Highly significant difference

There was a definite preference pattern for turkey pieces
(including quarters) frozen at different temperatures in a blast
air freezer (Table VI). The products frozen at 40°F. were ranked
last by panels A and B but first by Panels C and D. This indicates
tht the lower freezing temperatures may be more advisable for
turkey which may be held for several months. Products frozen at
001’. and at -20°F. received higher preference scores than those
frozen at 40°F. by Panels A and B and lower scores by Panels c
and D. This pointed out the possibility of a relation betwem
the brine frozen products and selection of products fmzen at 4.0%..
Those panel members who preferred a light colored product selected tb
brine frozen products as their first choice in Panel A and Panel
D. However, the brine frozen prodmts used in Panel C and D
appeared less desirable, therefore, the products frozen at 40°F”
being the next lightest in color, were selected.

Statistical analysis (Table VII) was completed on
the first choice selections of the panel members. The differences
shown in Tables III and IV among temperatures and among panels
was proven to be significant.

B. Influence of Fee in Materials on Preferences for
Turkg Pieces

Preferences for turkey pieces packaged with various

TABLE VI

INFLUEQCE OF AIR. FREEZING TMERATURE 0N
PREFERENCE FOR TURKEY PRODIETS
(RANKED ACCORDING TO 1st CHOICE SELECTIONS)

 

 

Panel
Freezing A . 1.3. 9. 2
Temperature Aft. Eve. Aft. Eve. Aft. Eve. Aft. Eve.
mnk
0°? 1 1 2 2 2 3 2
40°? 2, 2 1 1 3 2 3 3

4901" 3 3 3 3 l l 1 2

 

 

TABLE VII.

SUMMARY OF CHI-MUARE ANALYSIS OF PREFERENCES FOR PRODJCTS
FFDZEN AT DIFFERENT TEMPERATURES

 

 

Test ' 12

Afternoon vs Evening (Quarters) ' .327

Afternoon vs Evening (Pieces) 15.139“
Between temperatures (Quarters) afternoon 22.907“
Between temperatures (Pieces) afternoon 10.635"
Between temperatures (Quarters) evening until.“
Between temperatures (Pisces) evening 56.073“
Between panels (Quarters) afternoon 95.211.”
Between panels (Pieces) afternoon 30.126“
Between panels (Quarters) evening 168.1.M.“
Betwem panels (Pieces) evu'xing 1.7.033”

 

 

* Significant difference
«a High significant difference

1.3.

packaging materials were determined by panel members and
evaluated by a comparison of first place choices. The results of
this preference study are shown in Table VIII. A more detailed
summary of the panel members preferences are included in the
Appendix.

Products packaged in polyethylene were ranked first
by more panel members than were the products packaged in
any one of the other materials. In the combined afternoon
panel meetings , 207 members (1.0.1.1) selected the polyethylene
packaged product as their first choice. Saran and Cellophane
packaged prodmts ranked next since 111. (23.3%) and 113 (22.1%)
members respectively selected these as their number one choice.
Polyettwlene packaged products were preferred by a majority
of panel members in all meetings except in the evenings in Panel A
and Panel B. In the latter two meetings, it was ranked third
and second, respectively. In the combined evening meetings, 37!.
persons (37.8%) selected Polyethylue as their first choice. The
number of first place choices for Cellophane packaged products
changed from m (22.3%) in the afternoon to 151. (15.6%) in the
evening, while the number of persons selecting products packaged
in Cryovac increased from 78 (15.2%) to 183 (18.5%) respectively.

TABLE VIII

CONSUMER PREFEREVCES FOR TURUIY PIECES WRAPPED
WITH VARIOUS PACKAGING MATERIALS

 

Panel Materials
Saran Cryovac Cellophane Polyethylene
Number of First Choice Selections

Afternoon
A 57 13 2h 71
B 28 19 1.3 55
C 23 25 32 #6
D 6 21 ll. 35
TOTAL 111., 78 113 207
Evening
A 60 31 80 38
B 38 1.8 108 68
C 35 59 36 136
D 21 A5 51+ 132

TOTAL 151» 183 278 37h

 

 

1.5.

A Chi-square analysis (Table 121) showed that there were
significant differences in pmduct preferences between afternoon
and evening panel groups, with the exception of Panel D.
Significant differences in nunbers of first choice selection
were also found among panels both in the afternoon and in the
evening.

The number of first place choices for the polyethylene
packaged products was found to be significantly larger than
for products packaged in other materials.

There were indications from the data and from the author's
observations that in some cases changes in the appearance of the
product occurnd between the afternoon and evening panel meetings.
These changes were primarily in color and apparent dryness aid were
not considered to be severe changes. more was a possibility that
these changes could have affected the preferences of the panel
members from afternoon to evening.

Since panel meetings were held both in the afternoon and even-
ing, the use of artificial ligm. as compared to some natural ligit
could have also influmced the selection of products by the preference
panel members. .

There was considerable difficulty involved in selecting

products for uniformity for this study. However, since both the
products and people were selected at random, any slight product

differences present would not have affected the total results.

TABLE II

SUWARY OF CHI-SQUARE ANALYSIS ON PREFERENCE FOR
PRODUCTS PACKAGED WITH DIFFEREJT PACKAGING

 

 

MATERIALS

12

Test Value
(1 Between afternoon and evuiing grgupsl 15.870"
2 Among panel meetings afternoog) 16.1.38“
3 Among panel meetings evening) 1.1.1.596“
1. Among packaged products (afternoon)“ 71,576“-

(5) Among packaged products (evening)5 120.78!"

 

“Highly significant differences

lAfternoon panel members did not agree with evening panel members
in their preference. The rank in preference for first choice
was reversed by two panels.

2Afternoon panels did not always agree with each other in their
preference for a particular packaging material.

3 Evening panels did not always agree with each other in their

preference for a particular packaging material.

hPolyethylene was significantly higher than all others.
5Polyethylene was significantly higher than all others.

l.

2.

3.

1..

5.

1.7.

CONCLUSIONS

Turkey quarters partially frozen in a brine solution were preferred
over quarters frozen in an air blast freezer at 0°1’, -20°F. and
40°F. after storage periods of one and two months at 0°F. After
longer storage periods (four and six months) the preference for
brine frozen quarters was significantly lower and the products
frozen at 40°F. in air were preferred.

Preference for turkey pieces (breasts, drumsticks, thighs) did not
follow the same pattern as for turkey quarters This difference
may have been influenced by the package shape, since a larger
surface area of the turkey quarters was in close contact with the
brine during freezing and a more uniform color in the frozen product
resulted. Pieces frozen in air at -20°F'. and 4.00?- ‘91‘0 equally
preferred by the 1. panels combined, followed by those frozen at
001’. and in brine respectively. A

The temperature of the brine solution (43°F) gave the product-

an unnatural white appearance which was accentuated by long (1.
months) periods of storage.

Turkey products which are to be stored for long periods of time
(six months or over) should be frozen at temperatures below -20°1".
for maximum cmsunsr preference.

Turkey quarters and pieces packaged with polyethylene were preferred
by a majority of consumer preference panel members. Reasons for
this preference were not determined in this study. Cellophane
packaged products were ranked second in number of first choice

selections.

APPENDIX
TABLE I
CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR TURKEY QUARTERS PACKAGED

WITH VARIOUS OVERNRAPS
PANEL A, SERIES 1

 

 

 

 

Placings % First Preference
Treatnnntr l 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTERNOON
Number of Selections
Saran 29 12 11 1 51.8 A13.8
Cryovac 0 A A AA 0 239.1
Cellophane 18 20 1h 1 32.2 390.0
Polyethylene 9 18 23 3 16.1 356.1
ENINING
Number'of Selections
Saran 20 29 15 A . 27.0 387.1
Cryovac 5 A. 7 52 6.9 251e0
cellophane 31 25 13 l L3.l h22.3
Polyethylene 16 10 3h 7 22.2 339.5
TABLE II

comm PREFERmcs FOR TURKEY QIARTERS PACKAGED
WITH VARIOUS ovmmAPs
PANEL A, SERES 2

 

 

Placiggs Z First Preference
Treatment 1 2 3 A Choice Score
.AFTEHNOON
Number of Selections
Saran 2 20 10 21 3.8 296.8
Cryovac 2 22 18 11 3.8 313.1
Cellophane 3 20 17 13 5.7 313.6
Polyethylene A6 3 h 0 86.8 h77.0
ENTNING
Number'of Selections
Saran l 12 18 3h 17.6 268.2
Cryovac A 18 23 21 26.5 306.2
Cellophane 7 3h 21 h 50.0 358.h
Polyethylene 56 I. 5 3 5.9 1.67.7

 

 

1+9.

TABLE III

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR TURKEY BREASTS PACKAGED
WITH VARIOUS OVERWRAPS
PANEL A, SERIES 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

Placi_ngs % First Preference
ffrestmart 1 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTERNOCN
Nunber of Selections
Saran 26 16 9 2 A6.A A11.8
Cryovac 11 19 18 5 19.6 363.2
Cellophane 3 5 12 33 Sch 26100“
Polyethylene 16 13 1A 10 28. 6 360.0
EVENING
Number of Selections
Saran 27 28 7 5 10.6 102.6
Cryovac 8 8 33 18 11.6 308.8
Cellophane 3 15 12 37 21.7 276.7
Polyethylene 32 18 1A 5 26.1 1.11.9
TABLE 17
CONSJMER PREFEFENCE FOR. TUME'I QUARTERS mm
AT VARIOUS TMERATURES
' PANEL A, SERIES 10.
Placin Z First Preference
Treatment 1 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTEMOG
Number of Selections
0°? 13 26 11 2 23.6 377.6
.20°F 10 1A 9 20 13.2 325.0
-AO°F o A 10 23 16 7.3 310.1
31‘1” (4.3 F) 28 6 7 ' 12 50.9 387.3
EVENING
Nunber of Selections
0°? 18 22 9 18 25.7 351.1
.2031? 21 16 20 11 30.0 36A.8
460 F 13 12 28 15 18.6 332.A
Brine (-A3°F) 18 19 11 21 25.7 351.7

 

 

50.

TABLE V

c0NSUMER PREFEREVCE FOR TURKEY mARTERS
FROZEN AT VARIOUS TEMPERATURES
PANEL A, SERIES 5

 

 

 

 

Placings % First Preference
Treatmmt 1 2 3 A Choice Score
APTEmom
Number of Selections
0°? 8 25 16 I. 11.3 361.1
.20°F 3 17 12 10 5.A 303.6
40°? 9 8 23 13 16.07 32A.1
Brine (43°F) 36 5 2 10 I . 6A.28 1.11.9
Emma
Number of Selections
0°P 8 25 25 9 11.6 31.1.3
.200? 11 19 16 21 15.9 326.1.
-AO°P 9 1A 1A 30 13.1. , 301.1
Brine (40°F) A1 10 12 6 59.1. 1.27.7
TABLE VI

CONSUMER PREFEREWE FOR TURKEY BREASTS
szm AT VARIOUS TEMPERA’NREB
PANEL A, SERIES 6

 

 

 

380mg % First Preference
Treatmmt 31: 2 3 A Choice Score
Armour
Nunber of Selections
031? 1A 20 11 8 2A.6 370.0
-20 1" 16 12 16 9 28.1 360.1
-AO°F 12 15 19 7 21.1 356.0
Brine (43°F) 15 6 6 25 26.3 313.2
WING
Number of Selections
0312 35 15 12 5 50.0 1.07.5
-20 F 17 19 17 1A 2A.3 352.3
-A0°F O 11 17 21 20 15.7 33A.0
Brine (4.3 F) 7 17 17 26 10.0 306.2

TABEE VII

PAIEL B, SERIES 1

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR TIRKEY QUARTEIS
PACKAGE!) WITH VARIOUS OVEEUFRAPS

51.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plsc s % First Preference
Treatment I 2 3 1: Choice Score
— AFTERNOON
Number of Selections
Saran 10 13 11 13 20.8 337.7
Cryovsc 9 13 1A 12 18.8 3162.2
Cellophane 19 17 7 A 39.6 A00.8
Polyethylene 1O 5 16 17 20.8 319. 5
EVENING
Nunber of Selections
Saren 10 1A 25 31 11.5 308.16
Cryovac 1A 27 25 1A 16.1 368.0
Cellophane 50 1 5 11 3 57 . 5 1.11.8
Polyethylene 13 26 16 25 15.0 332.1
TABLE VIII
CONSUMER IREF'ERE‘ICE FOR TURKEY QUARTERS
PACKAGED WITH VARIOUS OVEWIRAPS
PANEL B, SERIES 2
Placiggs % First Preference
Treatment 1 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTERNOCN
Number of Selections
Saran 13 8 12 ‘ 15 27. 1 3A0.9
Cryovac 7 1h 13 1A 1A.6 329.5
Cellophane 1A 15 12 6 29.2 369.1.
Polyethylene 1A 12 11 11 29.2 360.5
EVENING
Number of Selections
Saran 1A 16 20 27 15.7 318.9
Cryovac 29 13 2A 12 32.6 360.0
Cellophane 18 29 19 12 20.2 36A.1
Polyetl'wlme 28 17 1A 19 31. 5 357.1

 

 

TABII IX

CONSUMER PREFEREVCE FOR TURKEY ORJAASTICKS
PACKAGED WITH VARIOUS OVERNRAPS
PANEL B, SERIES 3

 

 

Placings % First Preference

Treatment 1 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTERNOCN

Nunber of Selections
Saran 5 10 10 23 10.2 298.8
Cryovac 3 3 27 15 6.1 285.9
Cellophane 23 23 11 3 20.A 373.2
Polyethylene 12 12 2 3 63.3 10162.1

EVENING

Number of Selections
Cryovac 5 ll 28 3 5 5 . 8 289 . 2
Cellophane A0 3'; l6 6 A: . 5 32: . 5

Polyethylene

   

 

TABLE I

CONSUMER PREFEREVCE FOR TURKET QUARTERS
FROZEN AT VARIOUS TEMPERATURES
PANEL B, SERIES A

 

 

 

P180 gas % First Preference
Treatmmt 1 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTEMOCI
Number of Selections
0°17 10 20 13 A 20.8 367.7
.2001? 20 12 10 6 1.1.7 39 5.7
4,091? o 3 s 17 20 6.3 289.1.
Brine (4.3 F) 15 8 9 16 31.3 368.1
EVENING
Huber of Selections
0°F 11 2 1 13 12.8 .2
4.0 P o 6 8 18 A8 7.0 271.0
Brine {-1.3 F) 51 12 12 A 59.3 ma

_

53.

TABLE XI

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR TURKEI QUARTERS
FROZEN AT VARIOUS TEMPERATURES
PANEL B, SERIES 5 '

 

 

 

Placings E First Preference
Treatmeit l 2 3 A' Choice Score
AFTERNOCN
Number of Selections
09F 15 23 6 3 31.9 LOB-1
-2ogF 2 9 13 23 A.3 281.6
-A0 F A 10 2A 8 8.5 317.1
Brine (43°F) 26 6 3 12 55.3 398.2
EVENING
Number of Selections ’
o°F 22 A2 13 3 25.9 396.1.
40°F A 11 16 A9 A.7 269.3 '
°F 6 15 A3 16 7.1 311»?
Brine (.A39F) 53 12 8 7 62.A A20.6

 

TABLEIII

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR TURKEY DRUMSTICIS
FROZEV AT VARIOUS TEMPERATURES
PANEL B, SERIES 6

 

 

Placing % First Preference
Treatment 1 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTERVOON
Number of Selections
o°F A 13 22 8 8.3 327.5
-20°F 20 11 9 7 1.1.7 396.2
-AO°F 16 19 9 3 33.3 36A.0
Brine (43°F) 8 A 7 28 16.7 263.5
EVENING
Nunber of Selections
0°? 1A Al 21 2 16.5 377.3
.20°F A6 11 10 11 54.1 396.2
17 21 39 1 20.0 36A.0

490
Brine (43°F) 8 7 5 58 9 .h 263. 5

   

TABLE XIII

CONSUMER PREFERENICE PCR TURKEY OUARTERS
PACKAGED WITH VARIOUS OVEPENRAPS
PANEL C, SERIES 1

 

 

Plac s % First Preference
Treatmt 1 2 1. Choice Score
AFTERNOO‘
Nunber of Selections
Saran 8 15 7 6 19.0h 368.h
Cryovac 10 9 7 10 23 . 80 31.5.6
Cellophane 8 6 9 13 19.01. . 321.3
Polyethylene 16 A 11 5 38.09 361.3
EVENING
Nunber of Selections
Saran 1h 27 29 11 15.90 350 . 5
Cryovac 21 13 18 29 23.86 329.0
Collaphane 10 18 25 28 11.36 3115.7
Polyethylene 1.3 25 6 7 1.8.86 1.06.6

“Mm
mm

CONSUMER PWCE FOR TURKEY QUARTERS
PACKAGED WITH VARIOUS OVEEVRAPS
PANEL 0 , SERIES 2

 

 

Placing % First Preference
Treatment 1 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTMOON
Number of Selections
Sarah 9 6 5 . 15 21.1.2 317.7
Cryovac 3 l. 16 11 7.11. 2911.0
Cell-Optima 19 5 8 h 1.5.23 382.3
Polyethylene 11 18 5 2 26.19 1.05.7
EVENDIG
Number of Selections
Saran 11 16 27 27 12.35 315.1.
Cryovac 15 30 26 10 16.85 358.6
Cellophane 17 12 18 31. 19.10 313.6

Polyethylme 1.6 22 9 A 51.68 1.13.0

 

TABLE IV

CONSUMER PREFERENCE Fm. TURKEY THIGHS

PACKAGED WITH VARIOUS OVERWRAPS

55.

 

 

PANEL C, SERIES 3

Placing S First Preference
Treatmmt l 2 3 A Choice Score
__ APTERNOQ:

Nunber of Selections .
Saran 6 5 h 21 14.28 289.3
Cryovac 12 15 8 1 28.57. 395.7
0e110phane 5 6 15 10 11.90 321.0
Polyethylene 19 8 7 2 h5.23 393.6

' EVENING

Number of Selections
Saran 10 26 20 25 11.23 327 .3
Cryovac 23 27 22 8 25.81. 363.6
Collaphene 9 17 2h 31 10.11 311.1
Polyethylene A7 11. 13 6 52. 80 397. 5

“

TABLE XVI

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR TIRKEI QUARTERS

FmZEN AT VARIOUS TMPERATURES

 

 

 

PANEL C, SERIES h
Placings % First Preference
Treatmmt l 2 3 1. Choice Score
AFTERNOCN
Nmnber of Selections
O _

0 F 9 It. 10 2 20. 5 370.8
.20°F 6 10 16 l. 13.63 356.1
.1001? 21. 8 A 0 51.51. 1.02.8
Brine (-A3°F) 5 2 3 26 11.36 270.5

EVENING
Number of Selections

0°? 9 1.3 18 11 10.97 355.0
420"! 9 12 33 27 10.97 30A.5
4.09:» o 1.9 15 11 6 59.75 127.0
Brine (4.3 F) 15 1A 19 33 18.29 311.6

 

TABLE XVII

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR TURKEY QUARTERS
FHDZEN AT VARIOUS TEMPERATURES

56.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PANEL 0, SERIES 5
Placing; % First Preference
Treatment 1 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTERNOON
Number of Selections

0°F 10 7 17 2 2A.39 363.8
- 0:1? 10 13 8 5 2A.39 370.3
4.0 F o 16 9 9 2 39.02 389.1
Brine (-A3 F) 5 6 O 25 12.19 276.1.

EVENING
Nunber of Selections ,

0% 18 3A 20 9 20.93 - 365.3
-20°F 7 18 28 28 8.13 307.6
-Ao°F 17 19 19 26 19.76 331.2
Brine (-A3°F) AA 1A 11 12 51.16 396.3

TABLE XVIII
CONSUMER PREFERENCE FCR TURKEY THIGHS
FROZEN AT VARIOUS TEMPERATURES
PANEL 0, SERIES 6
Placiflgs 1 First Preference
Treatmmt 1 2 3 A Choice Score

AFTERNOON

Number of Selections

02F 16 8 10 2 33.33 382.9
4.0"? o 12 h 16 3 25.83 [322.1
Brine (4.3 F) A 1 A 27 8.33 262.1

EVENING
Nunber of Selections

0°!» 26 19 31 A 28.88 367.5
.2021? A3 21 10 7 A7 .77 1.01.7
+0 F o 12 35 28 A 13.33 358.1
Brine (4.3 F) 9 5 11 55 10.00 273.8

 

 

57.
TABLE III

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FCR TURKEY QUARTERS
PACKAGED WITH VARIOUS OVEWRAPS
PANEL D, SERIES 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

____lj_l_gc_iggs % First Preference
Treatmt 1 2 3 I. Choiee Score
AFTERNOON
Number of Selections
Saran 3 A 7 11 11.5 298.3
Cryonc 6 9 5 5 23.1 357.9
Cellophane 6 7 6 6 23.1 3A8.1
Polyethylene 11 6 6 2 52 . 3 39 5. 5
EVENIM}
Number of Selections
Saran 12 22 25 25 111.3 325.3
CellOphans 33 17 13 21 39.3 373.8
Polyethylene 21 15 23 25 25.0 338.1.
TABLE 11
CONSJHER PREFERENCE FOR TURKEY QUARTERS
PACKAGE WITH VARIOUS OVEHTRAPS
PANEL D, SERIES 2
mcge a: First Preference
Treatmt l 2 3 A Choice Score
moo}!
Number of Selections
Saran 2 2 11 10 8.0 28h.0
Cryovec l 5 10 9 I..0 292.0
Polyethylene 1A 9 2 56.0 11160.0
EVENING
Nunber of Selections
Sam 9 19 32 21. 10.7 315.1.
Cryovac 3 2A 29 28 3.6 302.5
Cellophane 17 21. 17 26 20.2 338.0
Polyettwlene 55 17 6 6 65 . 5 141.3 . 8

 

 

TABLEXII

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR TURKEY WINGS
PACKAGED WITH VARIOUS OVERWRAPS
PANEL D, SERIES 3

58.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pleangs S First Preference
Trestmt l 2 3 1. Choice Score
AFTERNOON
Nunber of Selections
Saran 1 3 ll 10 l..0 280.0
Cellophane 3 9 13 0 260.0
Polyethylene 10 ll 3 1 1.0.0 1.20.0
~ EVENING
Number of Selections
Saran ' 5 25, 55 0 21.0.8
Cryovac 2A 1.8 9 3 28.6 1.10.7
Cellophane A 10 1.7 23 l..8 291M.
Polyettwlene 56 21 A 3 66.7 1.55.1
TABLE nII
CONSUMER PREFMCE FOR TURKEY QUARTERS
FROZEN AT VARIOUS TEMPERATURES
PANEL D, SERIES 1..
Placiggs ‘ S First Preference
heatmt 1 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTEEVOCN
Number of Selections
0°F 18 3 3 1 6A.3 mm
2200!? 7 9 6 3 25.0 375.0
40°F 0 2 10 12 l 7.1 360.7
Brine (4+3 1") 1 2 3 19 3.6 21.7.1
EVENING
Nutter of Selections
0°? 1.5 27 12 53.6 1.39.3
«20°F 28 32 17 7 33.3 396.3
40°F 0 10 22 51 1 11.9 3A8.8
Brine (4.3 F) 1 3 A 75 1.2 215.6

59.
TABLE XXIII

CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR TURKEY QUARTERS

FROZEN AT VARIOUS TEMPERATURES
PANEL D, SERIES 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Placings Z First Preferhnce
Treatmmt 1 2 3 A Choice Score
AFTERNOON
Number of Selections
o°F 5 11 ' 7 2 20.0 371.1
-20°F 1 2 17 5 A.0 28A.A
-AO°F O 15 8 2 60.0 1.50.2
Brine (.13 F) A A 1 16 16.0 29A.3
EVENING
Number of Selections _
03? 2A 29 2A 7 28.6 380.6
-20 1" 1A 13 32 25 16.7 319.2
410°? o 1.0 33 8 3 137.6 1627.5
Brine (-A3 F) 6 11 20 A7 7.1 272.7
——————_.____._.___________
TABLE XXIV
CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR TIRKEY BREASTS
FROZDJ AT VARIOUS TEMPERATUES
PANEL D, SERIES 6
____Pl_gc_in_g_____ $ First Preference
Treatment 1 2 3 A Choice Score
— AFTERNOON
Number of Selections
021? A 9 5 7 16.0 33A.0
-20 F 3 7 12 3 12.0 338.6
-AD 15 7 3 ‘ 60.0 AA1.1
Brine (40°F) 3 I. A 111 12.0 28509
EVENING
Nunber of Selections
02F 30 15 31 8 35.7 378.8
-20 F 17 27 27 13 20.2 356.2
4.0 A 25 32 21 6 29.8 389.9
Brine (-A3°E) 12 10 6 56 1A.3 275.A

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anonymous, 1957. 7 Ways to Increase Sales Through
Better Packaging. Food Business, 5:(11), pp. 13,32.

Anonymous, 1956. Modern Packaging icyclopedia, 30:(3A),
pp. 120-1101.

Anonymous, 1956. Today's Poultry Packages. Poultry
Processing and Marketing, 62:(8), pp. 15.

Baker, R.C., 1953. To Prevent Discoloration of Dressed
Turkeys FReez 'Fm Fast. Turkey World, 283(8), p. 18.

Baker, R. C.', 1955. To Keep Good Color, Freeze Poultry
Fast. Poultry Processing and Marketing, 61:(3), p. 11..

Birdseye, C., 191.6. The Preservation'of Foods by -
Freezing. Refrigeration Engineering Vol. 51 (Application
Data 22). .

Bones, C. G., 1956. What Type Package Sells Best.
Poultry Processing and Marketing, 62: (7), pp. 13, 18.

Carport .14, x. 3., T. I. Gunn, 1955. Use Pmper Packaging
to Increase Poultry Sales. Poultry Processing and Marketing,
6l:(7)’ p. 160

Clayton, P.C., 1957. Liquid Freezing is Faster.
Poultry Processing and Marketing, 63:(2), p. 19.

Connolly, J.J., R. L. Miller, Jr., and G. F. Stewart,
1954. Chilling Eviscerated Poultry in Flowing Liquid.
Refrigeration Elgineering, 62:(10), p. 51..

Cook, W. H., 1939. Surface Drying of Frozen Poultry
During Storage. Food research, 1,:(h), pp. 1.07-1.17.

Davis, L. I., 19511. Quick Fraezing Through Brine
Innersion. Marketing Activities l7:(9).

DuBois, C.W., D.K. Tressler, and F. Fenton, 191.2. The
Effect of the Rate of Freezing and Temperature of Storage
on the Quality of Frozen Poultry. Refrigeration Engineering,
“6(2), PP. 93-99- ‘

61.

' BIBLIOGRAPHYCONT'D

Esselen, W.B., A.S.Levine, and I.J.Pflug, 1955. Fast
Freeze, Tight Pack Guard Poultry Surface Color. Food Engineering,
273(7), p. 99- .

Esselen, W.B., A.S.Levine, I.J.Pflug, and L.L.Davis, 1951..
Brine Immersion Cooling and Freezing of Ready-to-cook Poultry.
Refrigeration Engineering, 62:(7), p. 61.

Ferguson, B., 1956. The Consuner Speaks. Poultry Processing
and Marketing, 62:(10), p.16.

Graig, S. and H. Larzelere, 1957. Consumer Taste Preferences
Among Dehydrated Mashed Potato Products. National Potato Council
News, August and September.

Jasper, W. A., 1955. Step Up Fryer Sales with Attractive
Packages. Poultry Processing and Marketing, 613(7), p.11...

Kish, A.F., 1953. Films for Prepsckaged Poultry. Modern
Packaging, 26:(11), pp. 130-133.

floss, £1.11. and H. Lineweaver, 1957. Protection Performance
of Poultry Packaging Materials. Poultry Processing and Marketing,
63:(7), p. 26.

Boss, A.A. and M.F. Pool, 1956. Effect of Freezing
Conditions on Appearance of Frozen Turkeys. Food Technology,
103(1), ppe 316.380

Komz, C.I-I., and J.H. Rambottom, 1939- A Method for Studying
the Histological Structure of Frozen Products. Poultry Food
11089811311, h:(2)’ pe 1170

Iantz, C.P. and L. van den Berg. 1957. Liquid I-nersion
Freezing of Poultry. Food Technology, 113(2h7), p.50.

MacNeil, J.H., H. Larzelere, and L.E. Dawson, 1958. The
Influence of Certain Packaging Materials and Processing
Tags on the Consumer Preference of Chicken Fryers. Michigan
Agriculture Experiment Station Bulletin, h0:(3),pp. 589-591..

62.

BIBLIOGRAPHY CONT 'D

Margolf, P.H., E.W.Callenbach, R.C.Miller, J.E.Nicholas,
J.S.Perry, J.F.Cone, J.F.Murphy, and M.L.Dodds, 1956. The
Effect of Type of Scald and Wrap on the Market Quality of
Frozen Poultry. Poultry Science, 35:(37),p.1.6.

Pennington, M.E., 191.1. Fifty Years of Refrigeration in our
Industry. U.S.Egg and Poultry Magazine, 1.7,(9) pp. SSA-556,
566, 568, 570.571 e

Pflug, I.J., 1957. Imersion Freezing of Poultry. Frosted
Food Field, 21.:(6),p.17.

Ramay, T.H., 195k. Standardized Weight Paolages Promote Better
Merchandising. Poultry Processing and Marketing, 60:(10), pp.1k,31..

Ramsbottom, J.M., P.A.Goeser, E.J. Strandine, 19h9. The
Effect of Different Factors on Freezing Rate of Meats.
Refrigeration Ehgineering, 57:(12), p. 1188.

Sair, L. and W.H. Cook, 1938. The Effect of Precooling
and Rate of Freezing on the Quality of Dressed Poultry.
Canadian Journal of Research, 16:(1)pp.139-l52.

Shockley, R.T., 1955. Quality Packaging, Package Design
Advertising Equals Frozen Poultry. Poultry Processing and
Marketing, 61:(7), pp.20,32.

Sweet, M.H. and G.F. Stewart, 191.2. Refrigerated Brine for
Cooling Dressed Poultry. U.S. Egg and Poultry Magazine, 1.8:(5),
pp. 261-265; BOB-313.

Sweet, 11.0., 1955. Packaging Clinic Urges United Action.
Poultry PrOceesing and Marketing, 61:(7), p. 10.

Tressler, D.K. and C.P. Evers, 191.7. The Freezing Preservation
of Foods, 2nd. Edition, Avi Publishing Company, New York.

van den Berg, L. and C. P. Lentz, 1958. Factors Affecting
Freezing Rate and Appearance of Eviscerated Poultry Fro zal in
Air. Food Technology, 1:(1.), pp.183-185.

63.

BIBLIOGRAPHY CONT ' D

Willis, R. , B. Lowe and G. F. Stewart, 191.8. Poultry
Storage at Sub Freezing Temperatures. Refrigeration Engineering,
56:0), Po 23?.

Winters, J.D., 19W. Effect of Good Packaging on Retention
of Quality. Discussion at Convention of National Food Locker
Association, Kansas City, Mo.

Woodroof, J.G., I. Atkinson, and E. Shelor, 19h7. Wrapping
Materials for Frozen Meats and Chickens. Reprint from
Food Freezing 1:(1), pp. 1-6.

 

L .
c: 5)
Us. '

MAR-1448