Next Article in Journal
Physicochemical Characteristics and Flavor Properties of Texturized Dual-Proteins Extrudates: Effect of Surimi to Soybean Flour Ratio
Next Article in Special Issue
The Effect of the Improvement Technology on the Quality of Midu Pork Roll
Previous Article in Journal
Simultaneous Determination of Pyrethroid Insecticides in Foods of Animal Origins Using the Modified QuEChERS Method and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry
Previous Article in Special Issue
Changes in the Physical–Chemical Properties and Volatile Flavor Components of Dry-Cured Donkey Leg during Processing
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Foods
Volume 11
Issue 22
10.3390/foods11223638
foods-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effects of Chitosan/Collagen Peptides/Cinnamon Bark Essential Oil Composite Coating on the Quality of Dry-Aged Beef

by
Songshan Zhang
,
Xiaobin Sun
,
Yuanhua Lei
,
Baozhong Sun
,
Peng Xie
and
Xiaochang Liu
*
Institute of Animal Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100093, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2022, 11(22), 3638; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11223638
Submission received: 18 October 2022 / Revised: 8 November 2022 / Accepted: 11 November 2022 / Published: 14 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Green Processing Technology of Meat and Meat Products)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of the chitosan/collagen peptides/cinnamon bark essential oil composite coating on dry-aged beef. Chitosan (2%, w/v), collagen peptides (1%, w/v), and cinnamon bark essential oil (1%, v/v) were homogenized to obtain the coating. Beef samples were divided into three groups (traditional dry-ageing, in-bag dry-ageing, and coating and then dry-ageing) and dry-aged for 42 days. Physiochemical, microbial, and sensorial parameters of samples were determined during the dry-ageing process. There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in pH values, shear force values, cooking loss, color, juiciness, tenderness, and flavor across groups. The total volatile base nitrogen value of the coating group was lower than those of the other two groups. Compared to traditional dry-ageing, in-bag and coating dry-ageing reduced (p < 0.05) many volatile compounds such as alcohols, aldehydes, ketones, and acetate. In-bag and coating dry-ageing had no impact on the fungal community, but changed the bacterial community by inhibiting Pseudomonas. This study demonstrates that the chitosan/collagen peptides/cinnamon bark essential oil coating reduces microbial spoilage during dry-ageing, and has a small influence on product quality.

1. Introduction

Dry-ageing is a known way to enhance the eating quality of meat, especially tenderness and flavor. It is a process where unpackaged carcasses/sub-primal cuts are aged under strictly controlled conditions of refrigerated temperature, relative humidity, and air velocity for a period of time [1]. During the process, water evaporation, proteolysis, and lipolysis occur to allow changes in flavor-related compounds (e.g., free amino acids, peptides, fatty acids, and sugars), resulting in a characteristic dry-aged flavor [1,2]. The production of dry-aged beef is costly, due to weight loss, trimmings of dehydrated surface, and microbial contamination. To overcome these problems, a high moisture-permeable package, which is made of polyamide mix, was used to produce dry-aged beef. In-bag dry-ageing reduces losses and microbial load, resulting in equivalent palatability attributes compared to traditional dry-ageing [3,4].
Recently, as the interest for green packages has increased, exploring natural package materials to improve the dry-ageing process is needed. Chitosan film is an alternative to the dry-ageing bag, due to its biodegradability, high water-vapor permeability, and antimicrobial property. Chitosan wrapping has been proved to reduce microbial counts and total loss compared to traditional dry-ageing [5]. Recently, studies have focused on incorporating plant essential oils [6,7,8] and peptides [9,10,11] into chitosan to improve the antimicrobial property of the chitosan film. These composite films showed better antimicrobial and antioxidant activities than pure chitosan film.
Cinnamon is a commonly used spice in meat products. Cinnamon bark essential oil, mainly containing cinnamaldehyde, exhibited antibacterial activity in meat products [12,13,14]. Collagen is the main structural protein of by-products (e.g., connective tissues, bones, skins, and scales). Collagen peptides, the products of collagen hydrolysis, can be used as antimicrobial and antioxidant ingredients in food [15,16]. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a chitosan coating incorporated with cinnamon bark essential oil and collagen peptides in optimizing the dry-ageing process of beef, compared to the traditional dry-ageing and in-bag dry-ageing. pH value, shear force value, cooking loss, total volatile base nitrogen value, color, volatile compounds, microbial community, yield, and sensory evaluation were determined during the dry-ageing period of 42 days.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Preparation of Coating Solution

Chitosan solution (2%, w/v) was prepared by dissolving chitosan (deacetylation degree > 90%; Macklin, Shanghai, China) in 2% (v/v) acetic acid. Collagen peptides from bovine skin (<10 kDa; Gelita, Eberbach, Germany) were dissolved in distilled water to obtain a concentration of 2% (w/v). Chitosan and collagen peptides solutions were mixed in equal volumes and glycerol (10% of chitosan, w/w) was added to the mixture as the plasticizer. The mixture was stirred for 1 h to obtain a uniform solution. Then, Tween 80 (emulsifier) and cinnamon bark essential oil (1%, v/v; Xinsen, Ji’an, China) were incorporated, and the mixture was homogenized at 18,000 rpm for 2 min.

2.2. Sample Preparation and Treatments

Striploins (left and right sides) from six Xinjiang Brown steer (24 months old) were purchased from a commercial beef plant (Chuangjin, Xinjing, China) at 72 h post-mortem. Each striploin was cut into six equal sections. All sections were randomly divided into three groups: coating group, in-bag group, and traditional group. For the coating group, samples were immersed in the coating solution for 30 s. The immersion operation was repeated three times at an interval of 10 s. For the in-bag group, samples were packed in commercial dry-ageing bags (UMAi Dry®®, Minneapolis, MN, USA) and vacuum-sealed. For the traditional group, samples were not treated. All samples were placed on the shelves in a dry-ageing room (2.5 ± 0.5 °C, relative humidity of 80 ± 5%, 0.5 m/s air velocity). Samples were obtained on days 0, 7, 14, 28, and 42. The dehydrated surfaces were trimmed and used for microbial community analysis. The remaining parts were used for analyses of other parameters. Samples used for volatile compounds and microbial community were stored at −80 °C until analysis.

2.3. pH Value

pH values of beef samples were determined using a pH meter (Hanna, Woonsocket, RI, USA) equipped with a penetration probe. The pH meter was calibrated using two standard buffers (pH 4.01 and 7.01).

2.4. Cooking Loss and Shear Force Value

Beef samples (5 cm × 4 cm × 3 cm) were placed in plastic bags and cooked in a water bath (80 °C) until the core temperature reached 72 °C. Weight before cooking and weight after cooking were recoded. Cooking loss was calculated as the following:
Cooking loss (%) = (weight before cooking − weight after cooking)/weight before cooking × 100%
After being weighed, cooked beef samples were sent for shear force analysis. Six subsamples (the cross-section of 1 cm × 1 cm, 3 cm parallel to the fiber axis) were taken. The shear force value was determined perpendicular to the fiber orientation using a TA-XT Plus texture analyzer equipped with an HDP/BSW probe. The pre-test speed was 1.0 mm/s, the test speed was 1.0 mm/s, and the post-test speed was 10.0 mm/s. The trigger force was 5 g. The time interval was 5 s. For each sample, shear force values of six subsamples were averaged.

2.5. Total Volatile Base Nitrogen (TVB-N) Value

Ground beef samples (10 g) were homogenized with 100 mL of distilled water. After being shaken for 30 min, the mixture was centrifuged to obtain the supernatant. The supernatant was used for TVB-N determination using the semi-microtitration method. The TVB-N value was expressed as mg N/100 g flesh.

2.6. Color

The surface color of the sample was determined after blooming for 40 min at room temperature. For each sample, the CIE L* value, a* value, and b* value of three different locations on the surface were determined using a CR-400 colorimeter (Konica Minolta, Osaka, Japan). The colorimeter was calibrated using a white tile (Y = 93.4, x = 0.3157, y = 0.3322).

2.7. Volatile Compounds

Volatile compounds were determined by a FlavorSpec®® gas chromatograph-ion mobility spectrometer (GC-IMS) (G.A.S. Instrument, Germany) equipped with an MXT-5 column (15 m × 0.53 mm × 1 μm) (Restek; Bellefonte, PA, USA). Beef samples were cooked on the pan until the core temperature reached 70 °C. The cooked samples were frozen with liquid nitrogen, and grinded. Two grams of the sample was weighed, sealed in a glass vial (20 mL), and incubated at 60 °C for 20 min. Then, 500 μL of gas was injected with a syringe at 85 °C. The column temperature was 60 °C and the IMS temperature was 45 °C. The carrier gas and drift gas were high-purity nitrogen. The flow rate of carrier gas was set as the following gradient: 0 min, 2 mL/min; 2 min, 2 mL/min; 10 min, 10 mL/min; 20 min, 100 mL/min; 30 min, 150 mL/min. The flow rate of carrier gas was 150 mL/min. Volatile compounds were identified by GC-IMS library search software.

2.8. Bacterial Community and Fungal Community

Microbial communities of samples (day 0 and 42) were analyzed. The total DNA was extracted using the FastDNA®® Spin Kit for Soil (MP Biomedicals, Solon, OH, USA). The purity and concentration of DNA were examined using a NanoDrop 2000 (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). The integrity of DNA was tested on 1% agarose gel. The V3–V4 region of the 16S rDNA was amplified using primer 338F/806R. The PCR reaction mixture (20 μL) contained 10 ng of DNA template, 4 μL of 5 × FastPfu Buffer, 2 μL of dNTPs (2.5 mM), 0.4 μL of FastPfu Polymerase, 0.2 μL of BSA, 0.8 μL of each primer (5 μM), and ddH2O. The ITS1 region of fungal genes was amplified using primer ITS1F/ITS2R. The PCR reaction mixture (20 μL) contained 10 ng of DNA template, 2 μL of 10× Buffer, 2 μL of dNTPs (2.5 mM), 0.2 μL of rTaq Polymerase, 0.2 μL of BSA, 0.8 μL of each primer (5 μM), and ddH2O. The amplification condition was 95 °C for 3 min; 35 cycles of 95 °C for 30 s, 55 °C for 30 s and 72 °C for 45 s; 72 °C for 10 min. PCR products were sent to Majorbio Bio-Pharm Technology Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China) for sequencing using an Illumina MiSeq PE300 platform.

2.9. Yield

On day 42, weight after ageing and weight after trimming were recorded. Ageing loss, trimming loss, and total loss were calculated as follows:
ageing loss (%) = (weight before ageing − weight after ageing)/weight before ageing × 100%
trimming loss (%) = (weight before trimming − weight after trimming)/weight before trimming × 100%
total loss (%) = (weight before ageing − weight after trimming)/weight before ageing × 100%

2.10. Sensory Evaluation

Sensory evaluation was conducted by ten experienced assessors (six females and four males). Assessors were also screened and trained according to AMSA (2016) [17] guidelines, and had more than two years’ experience in sensory evaluation of meat. In addition, dry-aged beef of different ageing times and quality grades were served to assessors before this study so they could familiarize themselves with the attributes of dry-aged beef. Samples were heated on a preheated pan at 200 °C until the core temperature reached 70 °C. Heated samples were cut into cubes (2 cm × 2 cm × 1.5 cm) and kept in an incubator (70 °C) prior to sensory analysis. Assessors rated tenderness, juiciness, and flavor using an 8-point scale (1 = extremely tough, dry, and bland aged-beef flavor; 8 = extremely tender, juicy, and intense aged-beef flavor).

2.11. Data Analysis

Differences among means were assessed by analysis of variance and Duncan’s multiple range test at the level of 5% using SPSS 17.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Data of microbial communities were analyzed on the online platform of Majorbio Cloud Platform (https://cloud.majorbio.com, accessed on 14 April 2022).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. pH Value, Shear Force Value, and Cooking Loss

The initial pH value of beef was 5.49 ± 0.03 (Table 1). Differences in pH values were not evident among three groups during ageing, indicating that pH values were not influenced by coating and in-bag treatments.
The shear force value before ageing was 44.0 ± 4.3 N (Table 1). Shear force values of all groups declined remarkably (p < 0.05) on day 14, and afterward, no significant decrease was observed for all groups. Previous studies also reported that the effect of ageing on tenderness occurred mainly during the first three weeks [18,19]. It may be attributed to the decreased activity of the calpain system, which is primarily responsible for postmortem tenderization [20]. No significant differences in shear force values were found among groups. It demonstrated that in-bag and coating treatments did not influence beef tenderization during dry-ageing.
Cooking losses of all groups decreased by 7.9–8.4% after 42 days of dry-ageing (Table 1). Likewise, Gudjónsdóttir et al. [5] reported that traditional and chitosan wrapping dry-ageing for 21 days decreased cooking losses by 9.0% and 10.8%. Macharáčková et al. [21] also found lower cooking losses of beef dry-aged for 21 days than those dry-aged for 5 days. Cooking loss of meat is caused by water expelling when muscle fibers and myofibrils shrink. The reason for the decreased cooking loss during ageing may be that the degradation of cytoskeletal proteins (vinculin, desmin, and talin) destructs linkages related to the shrinkage of muscle fibers and myofibrils, weakening the force expelling intracellular water [22]. Cooking losses of three groups were similar throughout the ageing period. Ahnström et al. [3] similarly reported no differences in cooking loss between in-bag dry-ageing and traditional dry-ageing.

3.2. TVB-N Value

TVB-N values increased during the ageing process (Table 1), in accordance with the result of Kang et al. [23]. No significant difference in TVB-N value was observed among treatments, except the value of day 42. On day 42, the TVB-N value of the coating group (16.69 ± 0.83 mg/100 g) was lower than those of the traditional group (18.62 ± 0.55 mg/100 g) and the in-bag group (18.01 ± 1.01 mg/100 g). As TVB-N is mainly produced by microorganisms, the lower TVB-N value in the coating group can be due to the control of microbial spoilage. Ojagh et al. [24] reported that the chitosan coating enriched with cinnamon oil delayed TVB-N production in rainbow trout by inhibiting bacterial growth or decreasing bacterial deamination of nonprotein nitrogen compounds.

3.3. Color

The CIE L*a*b* system was used to evaluate beef color through lightness (L*), redness (a*), and yellowness (b*). For all three groups, L* and a* values did not change significantly after 42 days of dry-ageing, while b* values increased slightly (Figure 1). Hulánkováa et al. [25] detected no changes in L*, a*, and b* values after 13–36 days of dry ageing. Vossen et al. [19] found that a* and b* values increased after six weeks of dry ageing, and decreased after nine weeks of dry ageing. Meat color changes during ageing due to many factors, such as myoglobin concentration and stability [26], light reflection related to the amount of free water [27], and proteins conformation [28]. No differences in L*, a*, and b* values were detected between ageing treatments, indicating that the in-bag and coating had no adverse effects on meat color.

3.4. Volatile Compounds

Volatile compounds of beef change during the dry-ageing process and subsequent cooking. As shown in Figure 2, after 42 days of traditional dry-ageing, dramatic increasing trends were detected in aldehydes (3-methylbutanal, 2-methylbutanal, benzene acetaldehyde, E-2-heptenal, nonanal, octanal, heptanal, and pentanal), ketones (2-heptanone), alcohols (1-octene-3-ol, pentanol, 2-methylpropanol, and ethanol), furans (2-pentylfuran), and esters (butyl acetate and butyl propanoate). Similarly, Lee et al. [29] and Li et al. [30] reported that dry-ageing increased concentrations of aldehydes, ketones, and alcohols. 3-methylbutanal (malty odor), 2-methylbutanal (chocolate odor), and benzene acetaldehyde (rosy odor) come from the Strecker degradation of leucine, isoleucine, and phenylalanine, respectively [31,32]. The increase in Strecker aldehydes may be attributed to the release of their respective precursors during proteolysis. Straight aldehydes of C5–C9 carbons (green, oily, and fatty odor), 2-heptanone (fruity, floral, and cheese odor), 1-octene-3-ol (mushroom odor), and 2-pentylfuran (green bean and butter) are mostly oxidized from fatty acid [31,32,33]. Esters from C1–C10 contribute to the fruity flavor and are produced through the esterification of alcohols and carboxylic acids by microorganisms [31].
Compared to the traditional group, the in-bag group had lower concentrations of nonanal, octanal, heptanal, pentanal, 2-heptanone, 1-octene-3-ol, 2-pentylfuran, butyl propanoate, and butyl acetate, and higher concentrations of limonene, β-pinene, isopentyl alcohol, 2-methylpropanol, ethanol, ethyl acetate, and butanal. Barragán-Hernández et al. [34] also reported that in-bag dry-ageing impacted only a few volatile compounds. Setyabrata et al. [35] studied the volatile profiles of traditional dry-aged beef and in-bag dry-aged beef, and detected differences in n-aldehyde, ketones, esters, alcohols, and heterocyclic compounds. The reason may be that in-bag dry-ageing limited the moisture evaporation and oxygen transmission, thus affecting the concentration and oxidation of flavor precursors.
Compared to the traditional group, some compounds accumulated less in the coating group, including 1-octene-3-ol, 2-pentylfuran, 2-heptanone, benzene acetaldehyde, pentanol, nonanal, octanal, heptanal, pentanal, methional, butyl propanoate, and butyl acetate. Benzaldehyde, ethyl acetate, and butanal in the coating group were higher than the traditional group. Most components of cinnamon bark oil were not detected in the coating group. The reason may lie in three aspects: (ⅰ) the coating solution existed in the outer part of beef and did not permeate into the inner part during ageing; (ⅱ) the dehydrated outer part was trimmed; (ⅲ) components of cinnamon bark oil degraded at the high temperature of pan-frying. For example, cinnamaldehyde, the main component of cinnamon bark oil, could degrade to benzaldehyde above 60 °C [36].

3.5. Microbial Community

The V3–V4 region of bacterial 16S rDNA was sequenced. A total of 107,166 sequences (average length 424 bp) were obtained from fresh beef, 170,324 sequences (average length 425 bp) from the coating group, 162,779 sequences (average length 424 bp) from the in-bag group, and 168556 sequences (average length 425 bp) from the traditional group. As shown in Figure 3A, the initial bacterial community was dominant by Pseudomonas (37.05%), Acinetobacter (8.40%), Leuconostoc (7.45%), Staphylococcus (6.13%), and Enterobacter (5.83%). After 42 days of dry-ageing, the dominant genera in the traditional group were Pseudomonas (46.68%), Delftia (23.31%), and Rhodococcus (14.20%). The dominant genera in the in-bag group were Leuconostoc (30.46%), Delftia (22.15%), Rhodococcus (20.03%), Pseudomonas (11.05%), and Lactobacillus (7.05%). Similarly, the dominant genera in the coating group contained Leuconostoc (31.05%), Delftia (21.70%), Rhodococcus (10.81%), and Pseudomonas (9.59%). The proportions of Pseudomonas were lower (p < 0.05) in the in-bag group and coating group than the traditional group. This indicated that in-bag dry-ageing and coating dry-ageing inhibited the growth of Pseudomonas. Pseudomonas is commonly detected in dry-aged beef [37,38,39]. Pseudomonas could partly out-compete lactic acid bacteria [40]. The lower proportion of Pseudomonas may lead to the higher proportion of Leuconostoc in the in-bag group and coating group.
The relative abundance of Pseudomonas (r2 = 0.8786, p = 0.0018) and Brochothrix (r2 = 0.7731, p = 0.0145) were significantly correlated with TVB-N value. Similar to Pseudomonas, the proportion of Brochothrix was lower (p < 0.05) in the coating group (0.08%) than the traditional group (2.99%). Many Pseudomonas species and Brochothrix species are associated with food spoilage, such as P. fragi, P. psychrophila, and B. thermosphacta. These species could produce large amounts of TVB-N [41,42,43]. The lower TVB-N value of the coating group on day 42 may be explained by the inhibition effect of coating treatment on Pseudomonas and Brochothrix. Chitosan [44,45] and cinnamon essential oil [46,47] were effective in preventing the growth of Pseudomonas and Brochothrix in meat.
The ITS1 region of fungi was sequenced. A total of 143,518 sequences (average length 208 bp) were obtained from fresh beef, 219,573 sequences (average length 184 bp) from the coating group, 226,556 sequences (average length 190 bp) from the in-bag group, and 200,034 sequences (average length 187 bp) from the traditional group. As shown in Figure 3B, the initial fungal community was dominant by Candida (46.41%), Mrakia (38.70%), and Tausonia (7.59%). After 42 days dry-ageing, the dominant genera in the traditional group were Candida (74.11%) and Mrakia (21.65%). The dominant genera in the in-bag group were Candida (69.78%), Mrakia (11.23%), Tausonia (7.61%), and Debaryomyces (6.63%). The dominant genera in the coating group were Candida (71.84%), Mrakia (9.74%), and unclassified_f_Nectriaceae (14.76%). In-bag dry-ageing and coating dry-ageing showed little effect on the fungal community. Candida and Debaryomyces have been commonly detected in dry-aged beef [37,48]. A Debaryomyces species, Debaryomyces hansenii, isolated from dry-aged beef could produce free amino acids and fatty acids through proteolysis and lipolysis [49].

3.6. Yield (Ageing Loss, Trimming Loss, and Total Loss)

Dry-ageing resulted in losses due to water evaporation (ageing loss) and trimming of the dried surface (trimming loss). The ageing loss, trimming loss, and total loss of beef after 42 days of dry-ageing are shown in Figure 4A. Ageing loss was higher in the traditional group (16.15 ± 1.00%) and coating group (14.71 ± 1.52%) than the in-bag group (11.92 ± 1.18%). Trimming loss (22.33–25.74%) showed no significant differences among three groups. Total losses of the traditional group (35.17 ± 2.47%) and coating group (33.61 ± 1.05%) were higher than the in-bag group (30.19 ± 1.45%). Compared to traditional dry-ageing, in-bag ageing decreased ageing loss by 3.23% and total loss by 4.98%. Shi et al. [50] found that in-bag dry-ageing controlled the level of weight loss and total loss during dry-ageing, depending on the moisture permeability of bags. The inhibition effects of the coating on yield were not significant compared to traditional dry-ageing. A contrary result was reported by Gudjónsdóttir et al. [5], who found that electrospun chitosan fiber wrapping reduced ageing loss, trimming loss, and total loss compared to traditional dry-ageing. The reason for different results may be that the chitosan wrapping material prepared by electrospinning has a smaller pore size, and, thus, is more resistant to water evaporation than the chitosan film produced by the coating.

3.7. Sensory Evaluation

Scores of juiciness, tenderness, and flavor showed no significant difference across all groups (Figure 4B). Ahnström et al. [3] and DeGeer et al. [51] also reported no significant differences in sensory attributes between traditional dry-aged beef and in-bag dry-aged beef. Cinnamon bark essential oil exhibited an intense odor. However, the coating group showed only a slight flavor of cinnamon bark and its effect on dry-aged beef flavor was little. The reason may be that the outer parts of beef, which directly contacted the coating solutions, were trimmed. In addition, the cooperation of cinnamon bark essential oil with chitosan could control the release of essential oil, avoiding the negative organoleptic effects caused by the direct addition of essential oil [52].

4. Conclusions

Compared to traditional dry-ageing and in-bag dry-ageing, the chitosan/collagen peptides/cinnamon bark essential oil composite coating inhibited Pseudomonas growth and TVB-N production, without affecting the fungal community, pH value, cooking loss, color, and shear force. The composite coating had no significant effects on flavor, although it changed the volatile profile of dry-aged beef. These results suggest that the chitosan/collagen peptides/cinnamon bark essential oil coating can be developed as a low-cost, natural, and anti-microbial package when producing dry-aged beef. Future work should focus on regulating the release of functional compounds to maximize the efficiency of the coating. Additionally, the efficiency of the coating in other meat products can be explored.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, X.L.; methodology, X.S. and S.Z.; software, Y.L.; validation, X.S.; formal analysis, S.Z.; investigation, S.Z. and X.S.; resources, S.Z.; data curation, X.S.; writing—original draft preparation, S.Z.; writing—review and editing, X.L. and P.X.; visualization, Y.L.; supervision, X.L.; project administration, B.S. and X.L.; funding acquisition, S.Z., X.L. and B.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by the Special Basic Research Fund for Central Public Research Institutes (No. 2021-YWF-ZYSQ-07), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 32072143), and the Program of National Beef Cattle and Yak Industrial Technology System (CARS-37).

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zhang, R.; Yoo, M.J.Y.; Ross, A.B.; Farouk, M.M. Mechanisms and Strategies to Tailor Dry-Aged Meat Flavour. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 119, 400–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Xu, L.; Liu, S.; Cheng, Y.; Qian, H. The Effect of Aging on Beef Taste, Aroma and Texture, and the Role of Microorganisms: A Review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Ahnström, M.L.; Seyfert, M.; Hunt, M.C.; Johnson, D.E. Dry Aging of Beef in a Bag Highly Permeable to Water Vapour. Meat Sci. 2006, 73, 674–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Li, X.; Babol, J.; Bredie, W.L.P.; Nielsen, B.; Tománková, J.; Lundström, K. A Comparative Study of Beef Quality after Ageing Longissimus Muscle Using a Dry Ageing Bag, Traditional Dry Ageing or Vacuum Package Ageing. Meat Sci. 2014, 97, 433–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Gudjónsdóttir, M.; Gacutan, M.D.; Mendes, A.C.; Chronakis, I.S.; Jespersen, L.; Karlsson, A.H. Effects of Electrospun Chitosan Wrapping for Dry-Ageing of Beef, as Studied by Microbiological, Physicochemical and Low-Field Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Analysis. Food Chem. 2015, 184, 167–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Alparslan, Y.; Baygar, T. Effect of Chitosan Film Coating Combined with Orange Peel Essential Oil on the Shelf Life of Deepwater Pink Shrimp. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2017, 10, 842–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Shahbazi, Y. The Properties of Chitosan and Gelatin Films Incorporated with Ethanolic Red Grape Seed Extract and Ziziphora Clinopodioides Essential Oil as Biodegradable Materials for Active Food Packaging. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2017, 99, 746–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Khorshidi, S.; Mehdizadeh, T.; Ghorbani, M. The Effect of Chitosan Coatings Enriched with the Extracts and Essential Oils of Elettaria Cardamomum on the Shelf-Life of Chicken Drumsticks Vacuum-Packaged at 4 °C. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 58, 2924–2935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Li, C.; Pei, J.; Zhu, S.; Song, Y.; Xiong, X.; Xue, F. Development of Chitosan/Peptide Films: Physical, Antibacterial and Antioxidant Properties. Coatings 2020, 10, 1193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yan, Q.; Wang, L.; Sun, X.; Fan, F.; Ding, J.; Li, P.; Zhu, Y.; Xu, T.; Fang, Y. Improvement in the Storage Quality of Fresh Salmon (Salmo Salar) Using a Powerful Composite Film of Rice Protein Hydrolysates and Chitosan. Food Control 2022, 142, 109211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ranjith, F.H.; Adhikari, B.; Muhialdin, B.J.; Yusof, N.L.; Mohammed, N.K.; Ariffin, S.H.; Meor Hussin, A.S. Peptide-Based Edible Coatings to Control Postharvest Fungal Spoilage of Mango (Mangifera indica L.) Fruit. Food Control 2022, 135, 108789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ghabraie, M.; Vu, K.D.; Tata, L.; Salmieri, S.; Lacroix, M. Antimicrobial Effect of Essential Oils in Combinations against Five Bacteria and Their Effect on Sensorial Quality of Ground Meat. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 66, 332–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Van Haute, S.; Raes, K.; Devlieghere, F.; Sampers, I. Combined Use of Cinnamon Essential Oil and MAP/Vacuum Packaging to Increase the Microbial and Sensorial Shelf Life of Lean Pork and Salmon. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2017, 12, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ji, H.; Kim, H.; Beuchat, L.R.; Ryu, J.H. Synergistic Antimicrobial Activities of Essential Oil Vapours against Penicillium Corylophilum on a Laboratory Medium and Beef Jerky. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2019, 291, 104–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Gómez-Guillén, M.C.; Giménez, B.; López-Caballero, M.E.; Montero, M.P. Functional and Bioactive Properties of Collagen and Gelatin from Alternative Sources: A Review. Food Hydrocoll. 2011, 25, 1813–1827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. León-López, A.; Morales-Peñaloza, A.; Martínez-Juárez, V.M.; Vargas-Torres, A.; Zeugolis, D.I.; Aguirre-Álvarez, G. Hydrolyzed Collagen—Sources and Applications. Molecules 2019, 24, 4031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. AMSA. Research Guidelines for Cookery, Sensory Evaluation and Instrumental Tenderness Measurements of Meat; American Meat Science Association: Champaign, IL, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  18. Lepper-Blilie, A.N.; Berg, E.P.; Buchanan, D.S.; Berg, P.T. Effects of Post-Mortem Aging Time and Type of Aging on Palatability of Low Marbled Beef Loins. Meat Sci. 2016, 112, 63–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Vossen, E.; Dewulf, L.; Van Royen, G.; Van Damme, I.; De Zutter, L.; Fraeye, I.; De Smet, S. Influence of Aging Time, Temperature and Relative Humidity on the Sensory Quality of Dry-Aged Belgian Blue Beef. Meat Sci. 2022, 183, 108659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Colle, M.J.; Doumit, M.E. Effect of Extended Aging on Calpain-1 and -2 Activity in Beef Longissimus Lumborum and Semimembranosus Muscles. Meat Sci. 2017, 131, 142–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Macharáčková, B.; Bogdanovičová, K.; Ježek, F.; Bednář, J.; Haruštiaková, D.; Kameník, J. Cooking Loss in Retail Beef Cuts: The Effect of Muscle Type, Sex, Ageing, PH, Salt and Cooking Method. Meat Sci. 2021, 171, 108270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kristensen, L.; Purslow, P.P. The Effect of Ageing on the Water-Holding Capacity of Pork: Role of Cytoskeletal Proteins. Meat Sci. 2001, 58, 17–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kang, K.; Lee, S.; Kim, H. Changes in Physico-Chemical and Storage Properties of Dry-Aged Beef Loin Using Electric Field Refrigeration System. Foods 2022, 11, 1539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Ojagh, S.M.; Rezaei, M.; Razavi, S.H.; Hosseini, S.M.H. Effect of Chitosan Coatings Enriched with Cinnamon Oil on the Quality of Refrigerated Rainbow Trout. Food Chem. 2010, 120, 193–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hulánková, R.; Kameník, J.; Saláková, A.; Závodský, D.; Borilova, G. The Effect of Dry Aging on Instrumental, Chemical and Microbiological Parameters of Organic Beef Loin Muscle. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 89, 559–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Faustman, C.; Suman, S.P. The Eating Quality of Meat: I-Color. In Lawrie’s Meat Science; Fidel Toldrá, Ed.; Woodhead: Cambridge, UK, 2017; pp. 329–343. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ribeiro, F.A.; Lau, S.K.; Furbeck, R.A.; Herrera, N.J.; Henriott, M.L.; Bland, N.A.; Fernando, S.C.; Subbiah, J.; Sullivan, G.A.; Calkins, C.R. Ultimate PH Effects on Dry-Aged Beef Quality. Meat Sci. 2021, 172, 108365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Hector, D.A.; Brew-Graves, C.; Hassen, N.; Ledward, D.A. Relationship between Myosin Denaturation and the Colour of Low-Voltage-Electrically-Stimulated Beef. Meat Sci. 1992, 31, 299–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lee, D.; Lee, H.J.; Yoon, J.W.; Kim, M.; Jo, C. Effect of Different Aging Methods on the Formation of Aroma Volatiles in Beef Strip Loins. Foods 2021, 10, 146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Li, Z.; Ha, M.; Frank, D.; McGilchrist, P.; Warner, R.D. Volatile Profile of Dry and Wet Aged Beef Loin and Its Relationship with Consumer Flavour Liking. Foods 2021, 10, 3113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Flores, M. Understanding the Implications of Current Health Trends on the Aroma of Wet and Dry Cured Meat Products. Meat Sci. 2018, 144, 53–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Sohail, A.; Al-Dalali, S.; Wang, J.; Xie, J.; Shakoor, A.; Asimi, S.; Shah, H.; Patil, P. Aroma Compounds Identified in Cooked Meat: A Review. Food Res. Int. 2022, 157, 111385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bassam, S.M.; Noleto-Dias, C.; Farag, M.A. Dissecting Grilled Red and White Meat Flavor: Its Characteristics, Production Mechanisms, Influencing Factors and Chemical Hazards. Food Chem. 2022, 371, 131139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Barragán-Hernández, W.; Leighton, P.L.A.; López-Campos, O.; Segura, J.; Aalhus, J.L.; Prieto, N. Effect of In-the-Bag Dry-Ageing on Meat Palatability and Volatile Compounds of Cull Cows and Youthful Steers. Meat Sci. 2022, 188, 108800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Setyabrata, D.; Cooper, B.R.; Sobreira, T.J.P.; Legako, J.F.; Martini, S.; Kim, Y.H.B. Elucidating Mechanisms Involved in Flavor Generation of Dry-Aged Beef Loins Using Metabolomics Approach. Food Res. Int. 2021, 139, 109969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Friedman, M.; Kozukue, N.; Harden, L.A. Cinnamaldehyde Content in Foods Determined by Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000, 48, 5702–5709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Capouya, R.; Mitchell, T.; Clark, D.I.; Clark, D.L.; Bass, P. A Survey of Microbial Communities on Dry-Aged Beef in Commercial Meat Processing Facilities. Meat Muscle Biol. 2020, 4, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ryu, S.; Shin, M.; Cho, S.; Hwang, I.; Kim, Y.; Oh, S. Molecular Characterization of Microbial and Fungal Communities on Dry-Aged Beef of Hanwoo Using Metagenomic Analysis. Foods 2020, 9, 1571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Gowda, T.K.G.M.; De Zutter, L.; Van Royen, G.; Van Damme, I. Exploring the Microbiological Quality and Safety of Dry-Aged Beef: A Cross-Sectional Study of Loin Surfaces during Ripening and Dry-Aged Beef Steaks from Commercial Meat Companies in Belgium. Food Microbiol. 2022, 102, 103919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Huis In’t Veld, J.H.J. Microbial and Biochemical Spoilage of Foods: An Overview. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 1996, 33, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wang, G.; Wang, H.; Han, Y.; Xing, T.; Ye, K.; Xu, X.; Zhou, G. Evaluation of the Spoilage Potential of Bacteria Isolated from Chilled Chicken In Vitro and In Situ. Food Microbiol. 2017, 63, 139–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Jia, S.; Li, Y.; Zhuang, S.; Sun, X.; Zhang, L.; Shi, J.; Hong, H.; Luo, Y. Biochemical Changes Induced by Dominant Bacteria in Chill-Stored Silver Carp (Hypophthalmichthys Molitrix) and GC-IMS Identification of Volatile Organic Compounds. Food Microbiol. 2019, 84, 103248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Fang, J.; Feng, L.; Lu, H.; Zhu, J. Metabolomics Reveals Spoilage Characteristics and Interaction of Pseudomonas Lundensis and Brochothrix Thermosphacta in Refrigerated Beef. Food Res. Int. 2022, 156, 111139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Soultos, N.; Tzikas, Z.; Abrahim, A.; Georgantelis, D.; Ambrosiadis, I. Chitosan Effects on Quality Properties of Greek Style Fresh Pork Sausages. Meat Sci. 2008, 80, 1150–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Paparella, A.; Mazzarrino, G.; Chaves-López, C.; Rossi, C.; Sacchetti, G.; Guerrieri, O.; Serio, A. Chitosan Boosts the Antimicrobial Activity of Origanum Vulgare Essential Oil in Modified Atmosphere Packaged Pork. Food Microbiol. 2016, 59, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Ouattara, B.; Simard, R.E.; Holley, R.A.; Piette, G.J.P.; Bégin, A. Antibacterial Activity of Selected Fatty Acids and Essential Oils against Six Meat Spoilage Organisms. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 1997, 37, 155–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Agrimonti, C.; White, J.C.; Tonetti, S.; Marmiroli, N. Antimicrobial Activity of Cellulosic Pads Amended with Emulsions of Essential Oils of Oregano, Thyme and Cinnamon against Microorganisms in Minced Beef Meat. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2019, 305, 108246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Lee, H.J.; Yoon, J.W.; Kim, M.; Oh, H.; Yoon, Y.; Jo, C. Changes in Microbial Composition on the Crust by Different Air Flow Velocities and Their Effect on Sensory Properties of Dry-Aged Beef. Meat Sci. 2019, 153, 152–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Oh, H.; Lee, H.J.; Lee, J.; Jo, C.; Yoon, Y. Identification of Microorganisms Associated with the Quality Improvement of Dry-Aged Beef Through Microbiome Analysis and DNA Sequencing, and Evaluation of Their Effects on Beef Quality. J. Food Sci. 2019, 84, 2944–2954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Shi, Y.; Zhang, W.; Zhou, G. Effects of Different Moisture-Permeable Packaging on the Quality of Aging Beef Compared with Wet Aging and Dry Aging. Foods 2020, 9, 649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. DeGeer, S.L.; Hunt, M.C.; Bratcher, C.L.; Crozier-Dodson, B.A.; Johnson, D.E.; Stika, J.F. Effects of Dry Aging of Bone-in and Boneless Strip Loins Using Two Aging Processes for Two Aging Times. Meat Sci. 2009, 83, 768–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Yuan, G.; Chen, X.; Li, D. Chitosan Films and Coatings Containing Essential Oils: The Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Activity, and Application in Food Systems. Food Res. Int. 2016, 89, 117–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Foods 11 03638 g001 550
Figure 1. Effects of different treatments on L* (A), a* (B), and b* (C) values of dry-aged beef. a–c Means having same lowercase letters indicate no significant differences between ageing times for the same group, p > 0.05.
Figure 1. Effects of different treatments on L* (A), a* (B), and b* (C) values of dry-aged beef. a–c Means having same lowercase letters indicate no significant differences between ageing times for the same group, p > 0.05.
Foods 11 03638 g001
Foods 11 03638 g002 550
Figure 2. Effects of different treatments on volatile compounds of dry-aged beef.
Figure 2. Effects of different treatments on volatile compounds of dry-aged beef.
Foods 11 03638 g002
Foods 11 03638 g003 550
Figure 3. Effects of different treatments on bacterial community (A) and fungal community (B) of dry-aged beef at genus level.
Figure 3. Effects of different treatments on bacterial community (A) and fungal community (B) of dry-aged beef at genus level.
Foods 11 03638 g003
Foods 11 03638 g004 550
Figure 4. Effects of different treatments on yield (A) and sensory score (B) of beef dry-aged for 42 days. A,B Means having same capital letters indicate no significant differences between groups, p > 0.05.
Figure 4. Effects of different treatments on yield (A) and sensory score (B) of beef dry-aged for 42 days. A,B Means having same capital letters indicate no significant differences between groups, p > 0.05.
Foods 11 03638 g004
Table
Table 1. Effects of different treatments on pH value, cooking loss, shear force value, and TVB-N value of beef during dry-ageing.
Table 1. Effects of different treatments on pH value, cooking loss, shear force value, and TVB-N value of beef during dry-ageing.
TreatmentAgeing Time (Day)
0142842
pH valueTraditional5.49 ± 0.03 a5.50 ± 0.02 a5.60 ± 0.02 b5.56 ± 0.04 b
In-bag5.49 ± 0.03 a5.55 ± 0.04 ab5.61 ± 0.06 b5.53 ± 0.06 ab
Coating5.49 ± 0.03 a5.59 ± 0.09 a5.60 ± 0.07 a5.57 ± 0.07 a
Cooking loss, %Traditional18.8 ± 1.6 b15.9 ± 4.7 b11.1 ± 2.4 a10.4 ± 1.1 a
In-bag18.8 ± 1.6 c13.9 ± 2.5 b10.5 ± 1.7 a10.5 ± 1.2 a
Coating18.8 ± 1.6 b14.1 ± 3.5 a12.1 ± 3.3 a10.9 ± 3.4 a
Shear force value, NTraditional44.0 ± 4.3 b24.6 ± 3.6 a27.8 ± 5.7 a29.8 ± 2.9 a
In-bag44.0 ± 4.3 c29.1 ± 4.9 ab22.9 ± 5.3 a33.4 ± 5.2 b
Coating44.0 ± 4.3 b28.5 ± 7.9 a29.8 ± 8.3 a28.4 ± 7.0 a
TVB-N value, mg/100 gTraditional10.06 ± 0.58 a12.86 ± 0.94 b18.60 ± 1.11 c18.62 ± 0.55 cB
In-bag10.06 ± 0.58 a12.92 ± 1.18 b19.06 ± 3.19 c18.01 ± 1.01 cB
Coating10.06 ± 0.58 a13.18 ± 0.53 b18.08 ± 0.21 d16.69 ± 0.83 cA
Mean ± standard deviation; a–d Means having the same superscript lowercase letters within a row indicate no significant differences, p > 0.05; A,B Means having the same superscript capital letters within a column indicate no significant differences, p > 0.05.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, S.; Sun, X.; Lei, Y.; Sun, B.; Xie, P.; Liu, X. Effects of Chitosan/Collagen Peptides/Cinnamon Bark Essential Oil Composite Coating on the Quality of Dry-Aged Beef. Foods 2022, 11, 3638. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11223638

AMA Style

Zhang S, Sun X, Lei Y, Sun B, Xie P, Liu X. Effects of Chitosan/Collagen Peptides/Cinnamon Bark Essential Oil Composite Coating on the Quality of Dry-Aged Beef. Foods. 2022; 11(22):3638. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11223638

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Songshan, Xiaobin Sun, Yuanhua Lei, Baozhong Sun, Peng Xie, and Xiaochang Liu. 2022. "Effects of Chitosan/Collagen Peptides/Cinnamon Bark Essential Oil Composite Coating on the Quality of Dry-Aged Beef" Foods 11, no. 22: 3638. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11223638

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop