Food Science of Animal Resources (한국축산식품학회지)

Korean Society for Food Science of Animal Resources (한국축산식품학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Oxidative Stability of Vacuum-Packed Chicken Wings Marinated with Fruit Juices during Frozen Storage

  • Rupasinghe, Rashmi A. (Department of Animal Science, Uva Wellassa University) ;
  • Alahakoon, Amali U. (Department of Biosystems Technology, Faculty of Technology, University of Sri Jayewardenepura) ;
  • Alakolanga, Achala W. (Department of Export Agriculture, Uva Wellassa University) ;
  • Jayasena, Dinesh D. (Department of Animal Science, Uva Wellassa University) ;
  • Jo, Cheorun (Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, Center for Food and Bioconvergence, and Research Institute of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2021.08.25
  • Accepted : 2021.10.23
  • Published : 2022.01.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Antioxidants present in fruits and vegetables have a potential to reduce disease risk, and increase the shelf life of food products by reducing lipid oxidation. The effect of marination with antioxidants-rich fruit juices on quality characteristics of vacuum-packed chicken wings were examined during frozen storage. Chicken wings were mixed separately with marinades containing pineapple juice, June plum juice, and mango juice and kept for 12 h and 24 h. Three best marination conditions were selected based on a sensory evaluation. Antioxidant activity and total phenolic content of fruit juices, and marinade uptake, and marinade loss of marinated chicken wings were determined. In addition, vacuum packed marinated chicken wings were tested for pH, water holding capacity (WHC), 2-thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) value and antioxidant activity over a 4-wk frozen storage. The best sensory properties were reported from chicken wings marinated with pineapple juice for 24 h, mango juice for 24 h, and June plum juice for 12 h (p<0.05) compared to other marinade-time combinations. Mango juice showed the highest antioxidant activity (92.2%) and total phenolic content (38.45 ㎍/mL; p<0.05) compared to other fruit juices. The pH and WHC of vacuumpacked chicken wings were slightly decreased over the frozen storage (p<0.05). Moreover, chicken wings marinated with mango juice had the lowest TBARS values and the highest 2,2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl-hydrate free radical scavenging activity. In conclusion, mango juice was selected among tested as the most effective marinade for enhancing the oxidative stability of lipid while maintaining the other meat quality traits of vacuum-packed chicken wings.

Keywords

Introduction

Consumers are now more concerned on their daily eating habits and health benefits of foods they consume. Therefore, consumption of health promoting foods has become a trend worldwide particularly when they are economically affordable (Gök and Bor, 2016). Chicken wings are excellent sources of both macro- and micro-nutrients; chicken wings with skin contain 17.6% protein, 14.9% fat, and 0.7% ash (Koh and Yu, 2015). However, owing to its appearance and bony structure consumers are less likely to consume chicken wings making those low valued cuts.

Marination can be considered as one of the most suitable and popular methods to increase the consumption of chicken wings as it can enhance the aroma, flavor, juiciness, and tenderness of meat (Alvarado and McKee, 2007; Barbanti and Pasquini, 2005), and enhance the appearance, quality, yield, and shelf life of meat (Khan et al., 2016). In general, different marinade solutions are prepared using different levels of salt, spices, organic acids, antioxidants, tenderizers, flavor enhancers, and herbs for soaking meat (Gök and Bor, 2016). However, overall quality of marinated products is influenced by method of marination, type of marinade, and marination conditions (Alvarado and McKee, 2007; Fenton et al., 1993).

Antioxidants are substances which can prevent or delay oxidation of a substrate at low concentrations (Santos-Sánchez et al., 2019). According to Shahidi (2015), many of the plant based natural antioxidants with high demand belong to the phenolic and polyphenolic class of compounds, carotenoids, and antioxidant vitamins. Antioxidants that naturally occur in fruits and vegetables can reduce the risk of the development of chronic human diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and cancers and protect consumers’ health (Jideani et al., 2021; Kikusato, 2021; Pokorny et al., 2001; Virgili et al., 2001; Weisburger, 1999). In addition, natural antioxidants from fruits, vegetables, herbs and spices, either in the form of extracts or as direct incorporation, have been used to increase the shelf life of meat and meat products by decreasing the lipid oxidation (Kadıoğlu et al., 2019; Karre et al., 2013; Shan et al., 2009).

A large variety of tropical fruits such as mango, pineapple, passion fruit, june plum, guava, wood apple, banana, and papaya are abundantly available in Asian countries at affordable rates (Weerahewa et al., 2013). In addition, June plum, a highly nutritious and antioxidant rich fruit variety, is considered as a commonly found, but underutilized fruit variety (Ratnayake et al., 2020). Therefore, there is an ample potential to use juices of these fruits in marinades to improve the quality characteristics of meat.

Number of researchers have investigated the effect of different marinades on the physicochemical and organoleptic attributes of different meat types such as chicken (Alvarado and McKee, 2007), pork (Cho et al., 2021; Sheard and Tali, 2004), beef (Hinkle, 2010), and horse meat (Vlahova-Vangelova et al., 2014). However, the studies conducted to optimize the type of marinades in particular fruit juices, and the holding time for marinated chicken wings are scant, especially after frozen storage with vacuum packaging to prolong the shelf-life. Therefore, the present study was mainly designed to determine the effective utilization of natural antioxidants-rich fruit juices as marinades for chicken wings without negatively affecting the physicochemical and sensory attributes of vacuum packed chicken wings under frozen storage.

Materials and Methods

Sample preparation

The fresh skin-on chicken wings (Cobb 500) were obtained from a local market in Badulla, Sri Lanka. The chicken wings were immediately transported to the laboratory in a polystyrene box containing ice, washed with tap water, drained and stored at –18℃ until further use.

Marination

Moderately ripened mangoes (Mangifera indica; Willard variety), pineapples (Ananas comosus; Mauritius variety), and June plums (Spondias dulcis; Tall variety) were obtained from local farmers in Sri Lanka for the preparation of marinades. On the day of the analysis, each type of fruit was manually peeled, washed with tap water, cut into pieces, chopped and strained to obtain fruit juices. Marinades were then prepared separately by mixing 60% of fruit juice, 37% of water and 3% of salt and filled into food grade plastic bottles. Chicken wings were tumbled separately in the marinades at 1:1 ratio for 30 min, subdivided into marination holding times (12 and 24 h) and finally kept at 4℃. Raw chicken wings were used as the control. After each marination period, chicken wings from different marinades were vacuum-packed separately and stored under frozen storage (–18℃). Three best marinade-time combinations were selected based on the results of a sensory evaluation and wings marinated with such combinations were used for weekly determination of pH, water holding capacity (WHC), 2- thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) and 2, 2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl-hydrate (DPPH) values (Choe et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2021). Before analyses, the frozen marinated chicken wings were thawed overnight at 4℃.

Antioxidant activity of fruit juices

Fruit juices were analyzed for antioxidant activity using DPPH free radical scavenging assay according to the method described by Choe et al. (2020) with slight modifications. Methanolic DPPH stock solution (0.1 mM) was prepared by dissolving 10 mg of DPPH powder in 125 mL of methanol. After that, 5 mL of fruit juice was mixed with 80% methanol and kept in a shaker for 30 min at room temperature. The mixture was then centrifuged (ST 40R, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Osterode, Germany) at 1, 409×g for 10 min at 4℃ and 200 µL of the supernatant was mixed with 1 mL of DPPH solution. The mixture was shaken well and kept to stand in a dark place for 30 min at room temperature. The absorbance of mixtures was read at 517 nm using a spectrophotometer (UV-2005, J.P. Selecta, Barcelona, Spain). The readings were compared with the control prepared with 200 µL of 80% methanol and 1 mL of DPPH. The scavenging activity was calculated using the following equation.

Scavenging activity (%)=[1−(Absorbance of sample/Absorbance of control)] × 100

Total phenolic content of fruit juices

Fruit juices were analyzed for total phenolic content using Folin-Ciocalteu method as described by Singleton et al. (1999) with slight modifications. First, 5 mL of each fruit juice was mixed with 80% methanol and kept in a shaker for 30 min at room temperature. The mixture was then centrifuged (ST 40R, Thermo Fisher Scientific) at 1, 409×g for 10 min at 4℃. Supernatant (1 mL) and standard solution of gallic acid (10, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100 µg/mL) were mixed separately with 1 mL of Folin- Ciocalteu reagent. After 5 min, the mixture was added with 10 mL of 7% Na2CO3 and incubated for 90 min at room temperature. The absorbance was measured at 750 nm using a spectrophotometer (UV-2005, J.P. Selecta). Total phenolic content of each fruit juice was reported as µg gallic acid equivalent (GAE)/mL.

Sensory evaluation

The design of the sensory evaluation for marinated chicken wings was reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Review Committee of Uva Wellassa University (No. UWU/REC/2021/002). Marinated chicken wings thawed overnight at 4℃ were first cooked at 150℃ for 30 min in an electrical oven. Cooked wing samples were then prepared to uniform size (1.5 cm×2 cm), wrapped in aluminum foil to preserve the aroma and prevent moisture loss, and kept in a drying oven (DHG- 9145A, Zenith Lab, Changzhou, China) at 60℃ until sensory evaluation. Thirty untrained panelists participated in the sensory evaluation in individual booths. The sensory properties such as color, odor, flavor, taste, juiciness, tenderness and overall acceptability were evaluated using a 7-point hedonic scale. Drinking water at room temperature was provided to the panelists to cleanse their mouth prior to and between sample evaluations. Three best marinade-time combinations were selected based on the results of this sensory evaluation for further analysis.

Marinade uptake and marinade loss

Uptake of marinade by chicken wings was determined as described by Fenton et al. (1993) and Klinhom et al. (2015) with slight modifications. The weights of the chicken wings before marination, immediately after tumbling and after each marination holding time were recorded. Excess marinades were removed from the chicken wing surfaces before weighing. The uptake of marinades was calculated using the following equation.

\(\text { Uptake of marinade }(\%)=\left[\frac{\left(\begin{array}{c} \text { Weight of chicken wings immediately after tumbling } \\ \text {-Initial weight of chicken wings } \end{array}\right) \times 100}{\text { Initial weight of chicken wings }}\right]\)

Marinade loss of chicken wings was calculated according to the protocol of Fenton et al. (1993) using the following equation.

\(\text { WHC }(\%)=100-\left[\frac{(\text { Initial weight of chicken wings }-\text { Final weight of chicken wings }) \times 100}{\text { Initial weight of chicken wings }}\right]\)

Water holding capacity (WHC)

WHC of chicken wing was determined based on the technique of Hamm (1961), as described by Wilhelm et al. (2010). Marinated chicken wing samples (2 g) were carefully placed between two pieces of filter papers (No. 4; Whatman International, Maidstone, UK) on acrylic plates and left under a 10-kg weight for 5 min separately. After recording the final weight of each sample, WHC was calculated using the following equation.

\(\mathrm{WHC}(\%)=100-\left[\frac{(\text { Initial weight of chicken wings }-\text { Final weight of chicken wings }) \times 100}{\text { Initial weight of chicken wings }}\right]\)

pH value

Chicken wing samples (1 g) from each marinade were homogenized separately with 9 mL of distilled water for 60 s by using a homogenizer (T 10 basic Ultra-Turrax, Ika Laboratory Equipment, Korea) and filtered through a filter paper (No. 4, Whatman International). The pH value of each filtrate was determined with a pH meter (pH 700, Eutech Instruments Pte,Singapore) after calibration using buffers (pH 4.01, 7.00, and 10.01) at room temperature.

2-Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) value

TBARS values of marinated chicken wings were analyzed using the method described by Lee et al. (2021) with some modifications. Chicken wing samples (5 g) were homogenized in 15 mL of deionized water using homogenizer (D-500, Velp Scientifica, Usmate, Italy) at 14, 000 rpm for 30 s. Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT; 50-μL) (7.2% w/v in ethanol) and thiobarbituric acid/trichloroacetic acid solution (20 mM TBA and 15% [w/v] TCA; 2 mL) were added to the homogenate (1 mL) and vortexed for 30 s. The mixture was then incubated in a water bath (YCW-010E, Gemmy Industrial, Taipei, Taiwan) at 90℃ for 30 min, and subsequently cooled for 10 min in an ice-water bath. After centrifuging the samples at 1, 409×g for 15 min (5℃) using a ST 40R centrifuge (Thermo Fisher Scientific), the absorbance of was measured at 532 nm with a UV-2005 spectrophotometer (J.P. Selecta) against a blank prepared with 1 mL deionized water and 2 mL TBA/TCA solution. The malondialdehyde (MDA) concentration of each sample was determined against an external standard curve constructed using tetraethoxypropane. The results were expressed as mg MDA per kg of marinated chicken wings.

DPPH free radical scavenging activity

DPPH free radical scavenging activity of the marinated chicken wings was measured using methods described by Choe et al. (2020) with slight modifications. Chicken wing samples (1 g) were mixed with 80% methanol and homogenized Mixtures were then kept in a shaker for 30 min at room temperature and centrifuged (ST 40R, Thermo Fisher Scientific) at 1, 409×g for 10 min at 4℃. The same analytic procedure was followed as described in antioxidant activity of fruit juice section.

Statistical analysis

The complete experiment was repeated three times in a completely randomized design and duplicate samples were drawn for each parameter. The data were subjected to one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s comparison of the means test (p≤0.05) using Minitab 17 software. Data obtained from sensory analysis was analyzed using the Friedman test.

Results and Discussion

Antioxidant activity and total phenolic content of fruit juices

The antioxidant activity and total phenolic content of fruit juices used in marinades are shown in Fig. 1. The highest antioxidant activity in terms of DPPH free radical scavenging activity was shown by mango and pineapple juices (p<0.05) while the total phenolic content of mango juice was significantly higher than that of other fruit juices tested in the present study. Antioxidant activity of mango varieties has previously been proven by various researchers. According to Umamahesh et al. (2016), mango contains high amount of antioxidants compared to other fruits. Both mango peel and kernel have been shown to be rich sources of antioxidant constituents such as gallates, flavonols, carotenoids, ascorbic acids, and xanthone glucosides (Ajila et al., 2007) which are considered as natural radical terminators. Furthermore, Arogba and Omede (2012) found that mango possesses high radical scavenging activity due to the presence of high levels of flavonoids and phenolic acids. Different cultivars of pineapple have exhibited different levels of antioxidant activity owing to the presence of carotenoids, vitamin C and phenolic compounds (Ferreira et al., 2016).

Fig. 1. Antioxidant activity (AOA) and total phenolic content (TPC) of fruit juices used in marinades. a, b Values with different letters differ significantly (p<0.05).

Sensory evaluation

Sensory analysis results of marinated chicken wings are presented in Table 1. Marination affected the flavor, taste and overall acceptability of the samples as judged by the sensory panel (p<0.05). Accordingly, chicken wings marinated for 24 h in pineapple juice received the highest scores for overall acceptability, taste and flavor attributes followed by those marinated for 12 h in June plum, and 24 h in mango juice compared to control samples (p<0.05). Considering these results, aforementioned three marinade-time combinations were selected for further analysis.

Table 1. Sensory attributes of chicken wings marinated with different fruit juices for different time periods

Marinade uptake and marinade loss

Uptake of marinade and marinade loss in chicken wings assessed under selected marinade-time combinations are shown in Fig. 2. Accordingly chicken wings marinated for 24 h in mango juice had the highest uptake of marinade compared to other marinade-time combinations (p<0.05). In addition, the highest marinade loss was reported in chicken wings marinated for 12 h in June plum juice. The observed results might be attributed to the fact that high fiber content of mango could support to increase WHC of marinated meat (Roidoung et al., 2020).

Fig. 2. Marinade loss and marinade uptake of chicken wings after marinating with different fruit juices. a–c Different letters between treatments are statistically different (p<0.05).

Meat quality attributes of chicken wings over the storage period

The changes in pH values of vacuum-packed marinated chicken wings over frozen storage are depicted in Table 2. Chicken wings marinated with June plum for 12 h showed the lowest pH values throughout the storage period (p<0.05) while the highest pH values were observed in control chicken wings. Decreases in pH values of all marinated chicken wings were reported over the storage period and it could be attributed to the acidity of fruit juices (Emanuel et al., 2012).

Table 2. pH values of chicken wings marinated with different fruit juices during storage period

Table 3 shows the changes in WHC of vacuum-packed marinated chicken wings over frozen storage. WHC of the marinated chicken wings from all treatments was significantly decreased over the storage period. Barbut (1993) reported that lower muscle pH was associated with lower WHC. Hence, the decreased WHC over frozen storage can be attributed to the lower muscle pH reported during the storage which results in denaturation of myofibrilar and sarcoplasmic proteins (Olivo et al., 2001). The lowest WHC throughout the storage was observed in chicken wings marinated with mango juice for 24 h (p<0.05) whereas the highest WHC throughout the storage was reported in the chicken wings marinated with pineapple juice for 24 h (p<0.05). In previous studies, a reduction in WHC has been reported in enzymatically tenderized meat such as bromelain treated meat due to the changes occur in myofibrillar protein structure (Istrati et al., 2012). However, Manohar et al. (2016) observed a gradual increase in WHC of the meat as the bromelain concentration increased.

Table 3. Water holding capacity values of the vacuum-packed chicken wings marinated with different fruit juices during storage period

Control, unmarinated chicken wings.

1) Pooled standard error of means (n=24).

2) Pooled standard error of means (n=30).

A–E Values in the same column with different superscripts differ significantly (p<0.05).

a–c Values in the same row with different superscripts differ significantly (p<0.05).

Lipid oxidation is considered as the primary process responsible for quality deterioration during storage mainly due to its negative impact on flavor, color, texture, and nutritional value (Kim et al., 2013). To investigate the effect of marinades containing different fruit juices on the lipid oxidation of chicken wings, TBARS values of vacuum-packed marinated chicken wings were measured over a 4-wk frozen storage (Table 4). Over the storage period, the lowest TBARS values were reported in chicken wings marinated with mango juice for 24 h followed by those marinated with pineapple juice for 24 h and June plum juice for 12 h, respectively (p<0.05). This finding is supported by the highest antioxidant activity and total phenolic contents detected in mango juice during this study (Fig. 1). TBARS values of the marinated chicken wings were significantly increased over the storage period irrespective of the marinade used, however within the acceptable limits. Domínguez et al. (2019) stated that lipid oxidation in meat and meat products are influenced by storage time; with increasing time the possibility of radicals to cause damage to lipids increases. In addition, the release of iron from heme-proteins gets accelerated with long storage periods and it catalyzes multiple reactions in the initiation and propagation phases of lipid oxidation.

Table 4. TBARS values of the vacuum-packed chicken wings marinated with different fruit juices during storage period

Control, unmarinated chicken wings.

1) Pooled standard error of means (n=24).

2) Pooled standard error of means (n=30).

A–E Values in the same column with different superscripts differ significantly (p<0.05).

a–d Values in the same row with different superscripts differ significantly (p<0.05). TBARS, 2-thiobarbituric acid reactive substances.

DPPH free radical scavenging activity of marinated chicken wings over the frozen storage period is shown in Table 5. Vacuum packed chicken wings marinated with mango juice for 24 h had a significantly higher DPPH free radical scavenging activity throughout the storage period compared to those marinated with other two marinades and control. DPPH free radical scavenging activity of marinated chicken wings was significantly decreased with the storage, irrespective of the fruit juice used in marinades. Interestingly, DPPH free radical scavenging activity of all the marinated chicken wings was more than 2 folds higher than that of the control. Both mango and pineapple are considered as rich sources of dietary antioxidants such as amino acids, carotenoids, and phenolic compounds (Arampath and Dekker, 2021) while June plums are good sources of ascorbic acids, and phenolic compounds (Jayarathna et al., 2020). The findings of the present study on DPPH free radical scavenging activity of marinated chicken wings can also be confirmed by the highest antioxidant activity and total phenolic contents detected in mango juice during this study (Fig. 1).

Table 5. DPPH values of vacuum-packed chicken wings marinated with different fruit juices during storage period

Control, unmarinated chicken wings.

1) Pooled standard error of means (n=24).

2) Pooled standard error of means (n=30).

A–E Values in the same column with different superscripts differ significantly (p<0.05).

a–d Values in the same row with different superscripts differ significantly (p<0.05).

DPPH, 2,2-diphenyl-1-picryl-hydrazyl-hydrate

Conclusion

Due to higher natural antioxidant activity and total phenolic content reported in mango juice, it can be effectively used in marination of chicken wings by improving the lipid oxidative stability. Although pineapple and June plum juices also showed some improvements in meat quality attributes of marinated chicken wings throughout the storage period, mango juice would be a better choice as a marinades when considering its antioxidant activity. As per the results of the current study, marinades enriched with mango juice can be successfully used to increase the yield and sensory attributes of chicken wings without compromising other meat quality attributes over frozen storage.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge, Ms. Sarangi Karunarathna and Mr. Thilina Jayasinghe from the Meat Science and Research Laboratory, Uva Wellassa University, Sri Lanka. This manuscript was partially supported by Rural Development Administration (RDA) (PJ016205).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: Rupasinghe RA, Jayasena DD, Jo C. Data curation: Rupasinghe RA, Jayasena DD, Jo C. Formal analysis: Rupasinghe RA, Jayasena DD. Methodology: Rupasinghe RA, Alakolanga AW, Jayasena DD. Validation: Alahakoon AU, Jayasena DD, Jo C. Investigation: Rupasinghe RA. Writing - original draft: Rupasinghe RA, Alahakoon AU, Jayasena DD. Writing - review & editing: Rupasinghe RA, Alahakoon AU, Alakolanga AW, Jayasena DD, Jo C.

Ethics Approval

The design of the sensory evaluation conducted in this study was reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Review Committee of Uva Wellassa University (No. UWU/REC/2021/002).

References

  1. Ajila CM, Naidu KA, Bhat SG, Prasada Rao UJS. 2007. Bioactive compounds and antioxidant potential of mango peel extract. Food Chem 105:982-988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.04.052
  2. Alvarado C, McKee S. 2007. Marination to improve functional properties and safety of poultry meat. J Appl Poult Res 16:113-120. https://doi.org/10.1093/japr/16.1.113
  3. Arampath PC, Dekker M. 2021. Thermal effect, diffusion, and leaching of health-promoting phytochemicals in commercial canning process of mango (Mangifera indica L.) and pineapple (Ananas comosus L.). Foods 10:46. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10010046
  4. Arogba SS, Omede A. 2012. Comparative antioxidant activity of processed mango (Mangifera indica) and bush mango (Irvingia gabonensis) kernels. Niger Food J 30:17-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0189-7241(15)30029-1
  5. Barbanti D, Pasquini M. 2005. Influence of cooking conditions on cooking loss and tenderness of raw and marinated chicken breast meat. LWT-Food Sci Technol 38:895-901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2004.08.017
  6. Barbut S. 1993. Colour measurements for evaluating the pale soft exudative (PSE) occurrence in turkey meat. Food Res Int 26:39-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0963-9969(93)90103-P
  7. Cho J, Kim HJ, Kwon JS, Kim HJ, Jang A. 2021. Effect of marination with black currant juice on the formation of biogenic amines in pork belly during refrigerated storage. Food Sci Anim Resour 41:763-778. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2021.e34
  8. Choe J, Park B, Lee HJ, Jo C. 2020. Potential antioxidant and angiotensin I-converting enzyme inhibitory activity in crust of dry-aged beef. Sci Rep 10:7883. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-64861-0
  9. Dominguez R, Pateiro M, Gagaoua M, Barba FJ, Zhang W, Lorenzo JM. 2019. A comprehensive review on lipid oxidation in meat and meat products. Antioxidants 8:429. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox8100429
  10. Emanuel MA, Benkeblia N, Lopez MG. 2013. Variation of saccharides and fructo-oligosaccharides (FOS) in carambola (Averrhoa carambola) and june plum (Spondias dulcis) during ripening stages. VII Int Postharvest Symp 1012:77-82.
  11. Fenton LF, Hand LW, Berry JG. 1993. Effects of marination holding time and temperature on chicken breast halves. Anim Sci Res Rep :89-94.
  12. Ferreira EA, Siqueira HE, Boas EVV, Hermes VS, Rios ADO. 2016. Bioactive compounds and antioxidant activity of pineapple fruit of different cultivars. Rev Bras Frutic 38:146.
  13. Gok V, Bor Y. 2016. Effect of marination with fruit and vegetable juice on the some quality characteristics of turkey breast meat. Braz J Poult Sci 18:481-488. https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9061-2016-0225
  14. Hamm R. 1961. Biochemistry of meat hydration. In Advances in food research. Chichester CO, Mrak EM (ed). Academic Press, New York, NY, USA. pp 355-463.
  15. Hinkle JB. 2010. Acid marination for tenderness enhancement of beef bottom round. Theses and Dissertations in Animal Science, University of Nebraska at Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA.
  16. Istrati D, Vizireanu C, Dima F, Dinica R. 2012. Effect of marination with proteolytic enzymes on quality of beef muscle. Sci Study Res Chem Chem Eng Biotechnol Food Ind 13:81-89.
  17. Jayarathna PLI, Jayawardena JAEC, Vanniarachchy MPG. 2020. Identification of physical, chemical properties and flavor profile of Spondias dulcis in three maturity stages. Int Res J Adv Eng Sci 5:208-211.
  18. Jideani AIO, Silungwe H, Takalani T, Omolola AO, Udeh HO, Anyasi TA. 2021. Antioxidant-rich natural fruit and vegetable products and human health. Int J Food Prop 24:41-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2020.1866597
  19. Kadioglu P, Karakaya M, Unal K, Babaoglu AS. 2019. Technological and textural properties of spent chicken breast, drumstick and thigh meats as affected by marinating with pineapple fruit juice. Br Poult Sci 60:381-387. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2019.1621990
  20. Karre L, Lopez K, Getty KJK. 2013. Natural antioxidants in meat and poultry products. Meat Sci 94:220-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.01.007
  21. Khan MI, Lee HJ, Kim HJ, Young HI, Lee H, Jo C. 2016. Marination and physicochemical characteristics of vacuum-aged duck breast meat. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 29:1639-1645. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.15.1053
  22. Kikusato M. 2021. Phytobiotics to improve health and production of broiler chickens: Functions beyond the antioxidant activity. Anim Biosci 31:345-353. https://doi.org/10.5713/ab.20.0842
  23. Kim HJ, Kang M, Yong HI, Bae YS, Jung S, Jo C. 2013. Synergistic effects of electron-beam irradiation and leek extract on the quality of pork jerky during ambient storage. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 26:596-602. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2012.12580
  24. Klinhom P, Klinhom J, Senapa J, Methawiwat S. 2015. Improving the quality of citric acid and calcium chloride marinated culled cow meat. Int Food Res J 22:1410-1416.
  25. Koh HY, Yu IJ. 2015. Nutritional analysis of chicken parts. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 44:1028-1034. https://doi.org/10.3746/JKFN.2015.44.7.1028
  26. Lee D, Lee HJ, Yoon JW, Ryu M, Jo C. 2021. Effects of cooking conditions on the physicochemical and sensory characteristics of dry- and wet-aged beef. Anim Biosci 34:1705-1716. https://doi.org/10.5713/ab.20.0852
  27. Manohar J, Gayathri R, Vishnupriya V. 2016. Tenderisation of meat using bromelain from pineapple extract. Int J Pharm Sci Rev Res 39:81-85.
  28. Olivo R, Scares AL, Ida EI, Shimokomaki M. 2001. Dietary vitamin E inhibits poultry PSE and improves meat functional properties. J Food Biochem 25:271-283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4514.2001.tb00740.x
  29. Pokorny J, Yanishlieva N, Gordon M. 2001. Antioxidants in food: Practical applications. Woodhead, Cambridge, UK.
  30. Ratnayake SS, Kumar L, Kariyawasam CS. 2020. Neglected and underutilized fruit species in Sri Lanka: Prioritisation and understanding the potential distribution under climate change. Agronomy 10:34. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10010034
  31. Roidoung S, Ponta N, Intisan R. 2020. Mango peel ingredient as salt and phosphate replacement in chicken breast marinade. Int J Food Stud 9:193-202.
  32. Santos-Sanchez NF, Salas-Coronado R, Villanueva-Canongo C, Hernandez-Carlos B. 2019. Antioxidant compounds and their antioxidant mechanism. IntechOpen, London, UK.
  33. Shahidi F. 2015. 1 - Antioxidants: Principles and applications. In Handbook of antioxidants for food preservation. Shahidi F (ed). Woodhead, Cambridge, UK. pp 1-14.
  34. Shan B, Cai YZ, Brooks JD, Corke H. 2009. Antibacterial and antioxidant effects of five spice and herb extracts as natural preservatives of raw pork. J Sci Food Agric 89:1879-1885. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.3667
  35. Sheard PR, Tali A. 2004. Injection of salt, tripolyphosphate and bicarbonate marinade solutions to improve the yield and tenderness of cooked pork loin. Meat Sci 68:305-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.03.012
  36. Singleton VL, Orthofer R, Lamuela-Raventos RM. 1999. Analysis of total phenols and other oxidation substrates and antioxidants by means of Folin-Ciocalteu reagent. Methods Enzymol 299:152-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(99)99017-1
  37. Umamahesh K, Sivudu SN, Reddy OVS. 2016. Evaluation of antioxidant activity, total phenolics and total flavonoids in peels of five cultivars of mango (Mangifera indica) fruit. J Med Plants Stud 4:200-203.
  38. Virgili F, Scaccini C, Packer L, Rimbach G. 2001. 5 - Cardiovascular disease and nutritional phenolics. In Antioxidants in food: Practical applications. Pokorny J, Yanishlieva N, Gordon M (ed). Woodhead, Cambridge, UK. pp 87-99.
  39. Vlahova-Vangelova DB, Abjanova S, Dragoev SG. 2014. Influence of the marinating type on the morphological and sensory properties of horse meat. Acta Sci Pol Technol Aliment 13:403-411. https://doi.org/10.17306/J.AFS.2014.4.7
  40. Weerahewa J, Rajapakse C, Pushpakumara G. 2013. An analysis of consumer demand for fruits in Sri Lanka. 1981-2010. Appetite 60:252-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.09.017
  41. Weisburger JH. 1999. Mechanisms of action of antioxidants as exemplified in vegetables, tomatoes and tea. Food Chem Toxicol 37:943-948. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-6915(99)00086-1
  42. Wilhelm AE, Maganhini MB, Hernandez-Blazquez FJ, Ida EI, Shimokomaki M. 2010. Protease activity and the ultrastructure of broiler chicken PSE (pale, soft, exudative) meat. Food Chem 119:1201-1204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.08.034