Plasticizer types and whey protein coatings on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Pires, Paula Gabriela da Silva
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: Franceschi, Carolina Haubert, Bavaresco, Caroline, Leuven, Aline Fernanda Rodrigues, Andretta, Ines
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Scientia Agrícola (Online)
Texto Completo: https://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/184215
Resumo: Effects of plasticizer types and whey protein concentrate (WPC) as coatings were evaluated on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days. Eggs were coated with WPC at 8 % solution combined with the plasticizers glycerol (GLY), sorbitol (SOR), and propylene glycol (PRO). The eggs were stored at 20 °C. Weight loss, Haugh Unit (HU), albumen and yolk pH, and yolk index (YI) were evaluated weekly from day 0 to 42 days. After, electron microscopy of the eggshell structure was performed. The data was submitted to the analysis of variance and the effects of treatment, storage time, and the interaction between these factors were evaluated. There was significant interaction between factors (treatment and periods) for weight loss (p < 0.0001), HU (p < 0.0001), albumen (p < 0.0001), and yolk pH (p < 0.0001), and YI (p < 0.0001). After 42 days, uncoated eggs showed greater weight loss (5.4 %), compared to WPC+GLY, (3.8 %), WPC+SOR (3.3 %) and WPC+PRO (3.9 %). Similar results were verified for HU at 42 days of storage. Uncoated eggs showed HU of 58.46 (B), while coated eggs showed higher values: WPC+GLY – 66.58 (A), WPC+SOR – 68.79 (A), and WPC + PRO – 71.53 (A). The plasticizers GLY, SOR and PRO, associated with WPC, demonstrated effectiveness in maintaining the quality of eggs throughout the 42 days of storage. However, WPC+SOR showed superiority in preserving quality integrity of eggs. This result can be related to the chemical structure of SOR, making the combination more efficient for storage.
id USP-18_263078196dbd448844966070b32ded30
oai_identifier_str oai:revistas.usp.br:article/184215
network_acronym_str USP-18
network_name_str Scientia Agrícola (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Plasticizer types and whey protein coatings on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 daysegg qualityglycerolpropylene glycolsorbitolEffects of plasticizer types and whey protein concentrate (WPC) as coatings were evaluated on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days. Eggs were coated with WPC at 8 % solution combined with the plasticizers glycerol (GLY), sorbitol (SOR), and propylene glycol (PRO). The eggs were stored at 20 °C. Weight loss, Haugh Unit (HU), albumen and yolk pH, and yolk index (YI) were evaluated weekly from day 0 to 42 days. After, electron microscopy of the eggshell structure was performed. The data was submitted to the analysis of variance and the effects of treatment, storage time, and the interaction between these factors were evaluated. There was significant interaction between factors (treatment and periods) for weight loss (p < 0.0001), HU (p < 0.0001), albumen (p < 0.0001), and yolk pH (p < 0.0001), and YI (p < 0.0001). After 42 days, uncoated eggs showed greater weight loss (5.4 %), compared to WPC+GLY, (3.8 %), WPC+SOR (3.3 %) and WPC+PRO (3.9 %). Similar results were verified for HU at 42 days of storage. Uncoated eggs showed HU of 58.46 (B), while coated eggs showed higher values: WPC+GLY – 66.58 (A), WPC+SOR – 68.79 (A), and WPC + PRO – 71.53 (A). The plasticizers GLY, SOR and PRO, associated with WPC, demonstrated effectiveness in maintaining the quality of eggs throughout the 42 days of storage. However, WPC+SOR showed superiority in preserving quality integrity of eggs. This result can be related to the chemical structure of SOR, making the combination more efficient for storage.Universidade de São Paulo. Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz2021-03-23info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/18421510.1590/1678-992X-2020-0271Scientia Agricola; v. 78 n. Supl. 1 (2021); e20200271Scientia Agricola; Vol. 78 Núm. Supl. 1 (2021); e20200271Scientia Agricola; Vol. 78 No. Supl. 1 (2021); e202002711678-992X0103-9016reponame:Scientia Agrícola (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/184215/170580Copyright (c) 2021 Scientia Agricolahttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPires, Paula Gabriela da Silva Franceschi, Carolina Haubert Bavaresco, Caroline Leuven, Aline Fernanda Rodrigues Andretta, Ines 2021-04-22T15:04:09Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/184215Revistahttp://revistas.usp.br/sa/indexPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpscientia@usp.br||alleoni@usp.br1678-992X0103-9016opendoar:2021-04-22T15:04:09Scientia Agrícola (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Plasticizer types and whey protein coatings on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days
title Plasticizer types and whey protein coatings on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days
spellingShingle Plasticizer types and whey protein coatings on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days
Pires, Paula Gabriela da Silva
egg quality
glycerol
propylene glycol
sorbitol
title_short Plasticizer types and whey protein coatings on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days
title_full Plasticizer types and whey protein coatings on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days
title_fullStr Plasticizer types and whey protein coatings on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days
title_full_unstemmed Plasticizer types and whey protein coatings on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days
title_sort Plasticizer types and whey protein coatings on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days
author Pires, Paula Gabriela da Silva
author_facet Pires, Paula Gabriela da Silva
Franceschi, Carolina Haubert
Bavaresco, Caroline
Leuven, Aline Fernanda Rodrigues
Andretta, Ines
author_role author
author2 Franceschi, Carolina Haubert
Bavaresco, Caroline
Leuven, Aline Fernanda Rodrigues
Andretta, Ines
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Pires, Paula Gabriela da Silva
Franceschi, Carolina Haubert
Bavaresco, Caroline
Leuven, Aline Fernanda Rodrigues
Andretta, Ines
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv egg quality
glycerol
propylene glycol
sorbitol
topic egg quality
glycerol
propylene glycol
sorbitol
description Effects of plasticizer types and whey protein concentrate (WPC) as coatings were evaluated on internal quality and shelf life of eggs stored for 42 days. Eggs were coated with WPC at 8 % solution combined with the plasticizers glycerol (GLY), sorbitol (SOR), and propylene glycol (PRO). The eggs were stored at 20 °C. Weight loss, Haugh Unit (HU), albumen and yolk pH, and yolk index (YI) were evaluated weekly from day 0 to 42 days. After, electron microscopy of the eggshell structure was performed. The data was submitted to the analysis of variance and the effects of treatment, storage time, and the interaction between these factors were evaluated. There was significant interaction between factors (treatment and periods) for weight loss (p < 0.0001), HU (p < 0.0001), albumen (p < 0.0001), and yolk pH (p < 0.0001), and YI (p < 0.0001). After 42 days, uncoated eggs showed greater weight loss (5.4 %), compared to WPC+GLY, (3.8 %), WPC+SOR (3.3 %) and WPC+PRO (3.9 %). Similar results were verified for HU at 42 days of storage. Uncoated eggs showed HU of 58.46 (B), while coated eggs showed higher values: WPC+GLY – 66.58 (A), WPC+SOR – 68.79 (A), and WPC + PRO – 71.53 (A). The plasticizers GLY, SOR and PRO, associated with WPC, demonstrated effectiveness in maintaining the quality of eggs throughout the 42 days of storage. However, WPC+SOR showed superiority in preserving quality integrity of eggs. This result can be related to the chemical structure of SOR, making the combination more efficient for storage.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-03-23
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/184215
10.1590/1678-992X-2020-0271
url https://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/184215
identifier_str_mv 10.1590/1678-992X-2020-0271
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/sa/article/view/184215/170580
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Scientia Agricola
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Scientia Agricola
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo. Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo. Escola Superior de Agricultura Luiz de Queiroz
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Scientia Agricola; v. 78 n. Supl. 1 (2021); e20200271
Scientia Agricola; Vol. 78 Núm. Supl. 1 (2021); e20200271
Scientia Agricola; Vol. 78 No. Supl. 1 (2021); e20200271
1678-992X
0103-9016
reponame:Scientia Agrícola (Online)
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Scientia Agrícola (Online)
collection Scientia Agrícola (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Scientia Agrícola (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv scientia@usp.br||alleoni@usp.br
_version_ 1800222794624008192