On evaluation and comparison of measurement methods with special reference to the meat and meat products. A review

The authors discuss the main systematizing principles, not generally used in the field of meat science, regarding critical appreciation and comparison of measurement methods. The presentation of some basic considerations is followed by the discussion of interfering factors. Besides the random error, the role and importance of the constant, proportional and random biases are also treated. The random error is related to the method, while the random bias is related to the test material. A clear distinction is necessary between deterministic and stochastic relations when various methods are compared, emphasizing a possible instability of the regression constants in the latter case. A number of examples are listed for both types of relation. The use of the correlation coefficient may be erroneous in comparing two methods. However, Mandel's sensitivity ratio often furnishes an appropriate basis of comparison. For better understanding, the considerations on biases are illustrated by a simplified example. Thereafter, the authors deal with the most important view-points in developing and revising a method of measurement: simplicity, robustness and instability. The handling of extreme observations or outliers and the concentration dependence of the relative standard deviation (coefficient of variation) of measurement are also discussed

Problems relating to the calculation of meat equivalent and ‘meat content’ with particular reference to the QUID (Quantitative Ingredient Declaration) regulation

The aim of this study was a survey of relationships used for calculating ‘meat content’ with respect to the QUID regulation Commission Directive, 2001). The recommended equations are presented in a concise form. The advantages of a possible introduction of the meat equivalent concept are also treated [assessment of lean content of the meat ingredient(s)]. A non-negligible condition for applying the QUID equations is, in principle, the equality of the fat-free protein concentrations of the various tissue types in the raw meat materials. This needs an adjustment of the protein concentrations of the recipes to a reference value (PFFref), which can be achieved by effective or virtual addition of water to the formulation or ‘removal’ of water from it. The influence of moisture loss during meat processing on QUID is also discussed. The results of various calculation methods are presented with examples

Effect of headspace CO2 concentration on shelf-life of cooked meat products

The shelf-lives of major commercial cooked meat products (i.e., Bologna sausage, Italian-type cooked sausage, and cooked ham) packaged under vacuum or modified atmospheres were tested in this study. Samples were taken from commercial meat processing lines, sliced to 1.2 mm thickness and placed overlapped into polypropylene trays sealed with plastic films. The headspace of modified atmosphere packaged formulations consisted of 30% CO2 and 70% N2 or 60% CO2 and 40% N2. The samples thus produced were stored under refrigerated conditions. The values of microbiological, chemical, physical or sensory properties were plotted against storage time, and Gompertz curves were fitted to all time series that changed from an initial to a final value during any period of storage. The influence of headspace CO2 concentration on the properties of sliced cooked meat products varied considerably and, therefore, it was not possible to specify general rules. However, the presence of CO2 in the packaging atmosphere slowed down the rate of microbial growth, thereby delaying the spoilage of meat products. A CO2 level of 60% had beneficial effects on both the microbiological and sensory properties of sliced sausages and cooked ham. It was concluded that cooked meat products packaged under modified atmospheres had a shelf-life of 20 days