ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Impact of Ultrasound Pre-Treatment on the Drying Kinetics and Quality of Chicken Breast-A Comparative Study of Convective and Freeze-Drying Methods.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fresh meat has a limited shelf life and is prone to spoilage. Drying serves as a common method for food preservation. Non-thermal techniques such as ultrasound treatment (US) can positively affect the drying processes and alter the final product. The study aimed to evaluate the impact of US pre-treatment on the hot air (HA) and freeze-drying (FD) of chicken breast meat and the quality of the dried products. US pre-treatment had a varied impact depending on the drying method used. The contact US method extended the HA drying time (about 50%) but improved water removal during FD (about 30%) compared to the untreated samples. Both methods resulted in low water content (<8.3%) and low water activity (<0.44). While rehydration properties (RR) and hygroscopicity (H) were not significantly affected by US pre-treatment in HA drying (about 1.35% and about 1.1, respectively), FD noticed differences due to shrinkage and porosity variations (RR: 2.4-3.2%, H: 1.19-1.25). The HA-dried samples exhibited notably greater tissue shrinkage and a darker surface color than the FD meat. Ultrasonic processing holds substantial potential in creating dried meat products with tailored characteristics. Hence, meticulous consideration of processing methods and parameters is of utmost importance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.