CN112200446A - Method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality - Google Patents

Method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality Download PDF

Info

Publication number
CN112200446A
CN112200446A CN202011066068.1A CN202011066068A CN112200446A CN 112200446 A CN112200446 A CN 112200446A CN 202011066068 A CN202011066068 A CN 202011066068A CN 112200446 A CN112200446 A CN 112200446A
Authority
CN
China
Prior art keywords
score
indexes
evaluation
quality
pork
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Pending
Application number
CN202011066068.1A
Other languages
Chinese (zh)
Inventor
汤晓艳
战俊良
吴维达
李亭
涂婷
葛倩倩
汤舒越
李蔚然
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Institute of Agricultural Quality Standards and Testing Technology for Agro Products of CAAS
Original Assignee
Institute of Agricultural Quality Standards and Testing Technology for Agro Products of CAAS
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Institute of Agricultural Quality Standards and Testing Technology for Agro Products of CAAS filed Critical Institute of Agricultural Quality Standards and Testing Technology for Agro Products of CAAS
Priority to CN202011066068.1A priority Critical patent/CN112200446A/en
Publication of CN112200446A publication Critical patent/CN112200446A/en
Pending legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
    • G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
    • G06Q10/06393—Score-carding, benchmarking or key performance indicator [KPI] analysis
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q50/00—Systems or methods specially adapted for specific business sectors, e.g. utilities or tourism
    • G06Q50/02—Agriculture; Fishing; Mining

Abstract

The invention discloses a method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality, and belongs to the technical field of food. The method comprises the following steps: and obtaining the sensory score, the eating quality score and the nutrition score of the pork to be evaluated. Calculating according to the comprehensive score of X multiplied by sensory score, Y multiplied by food quality score and Z multiplied by nutrition score, wherein X is 47-53 percent, Y is 32-38 percent, Z is 100-X-Y, the full scores of sensory score, food quality score and nutrition score are all 10 points, and the quality of the pork is determined according to the obtained comprehensive score. Compared with the traditional experience grading, the method has the advantages of objective basis, unified standard and systematic synthesis in statistics by establishing a multi-index comprehensive evaluation system, can provide objective and comprehensive judgment standard for the quality of pork, provides technical reference for consumers to rationally select high-quality pork, and provides scientific evaluation basis for development of local pig variety resources in China.

Description

Method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of food, in particular to a method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality.
Background
At present, the economy of China is shifted from a high-speed growth stage to a high-quality development stage, agriculture is used as the basis of the economy of China, and the method is also suitable for and follows the trend and is advanced to the high-quality development stage. The "national quality of agriculture strategic planning (2018 and 2022) published in 2018 also explicitly proposes the requirement of" high product quality ". The supply quantity of high-quality agricultural products is greatly increased, and better taste, better quality and more balanced nutrition are required. Pork is an important component in vegetable baskets of residents and plays an important role in the consumption of urban residents, particularly under the current large background, the attention of the consumers is changed from the prior existence of pork to the current high quality pork, and the pork with good flavor and quality is the primary choice of the consumers, particularly the high-income people. Therefore, how to evaluate the high-quality pork becomes a problem to be solved at present.
In view of this, the invention is particularly proposed.
Disclosure of Invention
The application mainly aims to provide a method for comprehensively evaluating the pork quality, so as to provide objective, scientific and comprehensive evaluation criteria for the pork quality.
The application can be realized as follows:
the application provides a method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality, which comprises the following steps: and obtaining the sensory score, the eating quality score and the nutrition score of the pork to be evaluated.
Calculating the comprehensive score of the pork to be evaluated according to the following formula:
the comprehensive score is X multiplied by sensory score, Y multiplied by food quality score and Z multiplied by nutrition score, wherein X is 47-53 percent, Y is 32-38 percent, Z is 100-X-Y, and the full scores of sensory score, food quality score and nutrition score are all 10 points.
And determining the quality of the pork according to the obtained comprehensive score.
In an alternative embodiment, X is 50%, Y is 35%, and Z is 15%.
In an alternative embodiment, the obtaining of the sensory score comprises: and multiplying the scores of the indexes of the sensory evaluation by the weights corresponding to the indexes to obtain the weight scores corresponding to the indexes respectively, and then adding the weight scores corresponding to the indexes of the sensory evaluation.
The sensory evaluation criteria included flesh color, marbling, elasticity, tenderness, aroma, flavor, juiciness, and chewiness. Wherein, the meat color, marbling and elasticity are indexes for sensory evaluation of the meat state, and the tenderness, the fragrance, the taste, the juiciness and the chewiness are indexes for sensory evaluation of the cooked meat state.
The weights of the indexes of the sensory evaluation are as follows, and the sum of the weights corresponding to the indexes of the sensory evaluation is 1:
Figure BDA0002713790690000021
in a preferred embodiment, the weight of each index of sensory evaluation is as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000022
Figure BDA0002713790690000031
in an alternative embodiment, the scoring of each index of the sensory evaluation is performed as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000032
in an alternative embodiment, the obtaining of the eating quality score comprises: and multiplying the scores of all the indexes of the food quality evaluation by the weights corresponding to all the indexes to respectively obtain the weight scores corresponding to all the indexes, and then adding the weight scores corresponding to all the indexes of the food quality evaluation.
The index for evaluating the food quality comprises L value, a value, shearing force value, cooking loss rate, drip loss rate, thawing loss rate, storage loss rate, intramuscular fat content, inosinic acid content and umami amino acid content.
Wherein, the weight of each index of the food quality evaluation is as the following table, and the sum of the weights corresponding to each index of the food quality evaluation is 1:
Figure BDA0002713790690000033
Figure BDA0002713790690000041
in alternative embodiments, the umami amino acids include glutamic acid, aspartic acid, phenylalanine, alanine, glycine, and tyrosine.
In a preferred embodiment, the weight of each index of the food quality evaluation is as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000042
in an alternative embodiment, the scoring of each index of the food quality assessment is performed as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000043
Figure BDA0002713790690000051
in an alternative embodiment, the obtaining of the nutritional score comprises: and multiplying the scores of all indexes of the nutrition evaluation by the weights corresponding to all indexes to respectively obtain the weight scores corresponding to all indexes, and then adding the weight scores corresponding to all indexes of the nutrition evaluation.
The indices for nutritional assessment include protein content, moisture content, crude fat content, total amino acid content, essential amino acid content, unsaturated fatty acid content, polyunsaturated fatty acid content, and iron content.
Wherein the weight of each index of the nutrition evaluation is as follows, and the sum of the weights corresponding to each index of the nutrition evaluation is 1:
Figure BDA0002713790690000052
in a preferred embodiment, the weight of each index of nutritional assessment is as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000053
Figure BDA0002713790690000061
in an alternative embodiment, the scoring of each index of nutritional assessment is performed as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000062
the beneficial effect of this application includes:
compared with the traditional experience grading, the pork quality evaluation method has the advantages of objective basis, unified standard and systematic synthesis in statistics by establishing the multi-index comprehensive evaluation system, can provide objective and comprehensive judgment standard for the quality of pork, further provides technical reference for consumers to rationally select high-quality pork, and provides scientific basis for development of local pig variety resources in China.
Drawings
In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the drawings needed to be used in the embodiments are briefly described below, it should be understood that the following drawings should not be construed as limiting the scope, and for those skilled in the art, other related drawings can be obtained according to the drawings without inventive labor.
FIG. 1 is a reference diagram of pork color scoring criteria;
fig. 2 is a reference diagram of pork marbling standard.
Detailed Description
In order to make the objects, technical solutions and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below. The examples, in which specific conditions are not specified, were conducted under conventional conditions or conditions recommended by the manufacturer. The reagents or instruments used are not indicated by the manufacturer, and are all conventional products available commercially.
The method for comprehensively evaluating the pork quality provided by the present application will be specifically described below.
The application provides a method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality, which comprises the following steps: and obtaining the sensory score, the eating quality score and the nutrition score of the pork to be evaluated.
Calculating the comprehensive score of the pork to be evaluated according to the following formula:
the comprehensive score is X multiplied by sensory score, Y multiplied by food quality score and Z multiplied by nutrition score, wherein X is 47-53 percent, Y is 32-38 percent, Z is 100-X-Y, and the full scores of sensory score, food quality score and nutrition score are all 10 points.
And determining the quality of the pork according to the obtained comprehensive score, and specifically performing sequencing judgment according to the comprehensive score.
In alternative embodiments, X may be 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, etc., and Y may be 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, etc.
In a preferred embodiment, X is 50%, Y is 35%, and Z is 15%. Correspondingly, the overall score is 50% sensory score + 35% food quality score + 15% nutritional score.
It should be noted that the weight coefficients referred to in this application are obtained by an analytic hierarchy process, and specifically, the following may be referred to:
1) building a hierarchical model
The hierarchical structure model is a model that divides various factors affecting pork quality into different levels according to their properties. In the present application, the hierarchical structure is divided into 3 layers according to the quality evaluation of the properties of each index: the first layer is a target layer (A) for pork quality evaluation; the layer 2 is a criterion layer (B) marked as B ═ B1, B2, B3, B1 is a sensory index, B2 is an edible quality index, and B3 is a nutritional quality index; the layer 3 is an index layer (x) and is a factor affecting pork quality, and is denoted as x ═ x1, x2, … x26 }.
2) Structure of judgment matrix
And after the hierarchical structure model is obtained, comparing every two indexes in the same hierarchy, and assigning according to the relative importance degree to obtain a judgment matrix. The specific meanings of each scale in the present application are shown in the following table.
Table judgment matrix scoring scale and its meaning
Figure BDA0002713790690000081
3) Calculation of weight vectors
Calculating the product of elements of each row of the judgment matrix A:
Figure BDA0002713790690000091
calculating MiThe n-th square root:
Figure BDA0002713790690000092
will be provided with
Figure BDA0002713790690000093
And (3) standardization:
Figure BDA0002713790690000094
then W isiIs the weight vector sought.
Calculating the maximum characteristic value:
Figure BDA0002713790690000095
4) consistency check
Due to the complexity of the actual situation, the judgment thinking of a decision maker sometimes generates inconsistent conditions, consistency check is carried out on each judgment matrix so as to ensure the effectiveness of each judgment matrix, and the inconsistent judgment matrices are adjusted until consistency is achieved. To check the consistency of the decision matrix, a random consistency ratio CR (CR) is introduced, which is calculated as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000096
wherein CI (consistency index, CI) is a consistency index, and CI is calculated as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000097
wherein λmaxTo determine the maximum eigenvalue of the matrix, n is the order of the matrix.
RI (random index, RI) is an average random consistency index, and RI of a matrix of 1-10 orders is shown in the following table.
TABLE 1-10 order matrix average Random Index (RI) table
Figure BDA0002713790690000098
The method uses Yaahp 12.4 software to calculate the maximum eigenvalue of each judgment matrix and the corresponding eigenvector and CI value, further calculates the CR value, and performs consistency check. When CR is less than or equal to 0.1, the consistency of the matrix is judged to be acceptable.
5) Setting of expert weights
In the group decision, the difference of the expert weights has great influence on the final weight of each index. In the application, authoritative experts in the field are selected for hierarchical analysis and scoring, and the weight of each expert is averaged by adopting a direct weighting method. And aggregating the sorting weights of the experts in a weighted arithmetic mean method mode to serve as a final cluster decision result.
Further, in the present application, the obtaining of the sensory score includes: and multiplying the scores of the indexes of the sensory evaluation by the weights corresponding to the indexes to obtain the weight scores corresponding to the indexes respectively, and then adding the weight scores corresponding to the indexes of the sensory evaluation.
Wherein the sensory evaluation index includes flesh color, marbling, elasticity, tenderness, flavor, taste, juiciness and chewiness.
The weights of the indexes of the sensory evaluation are as follows, and the sum of the weights corresponding to the indexes of the sensory evaluation is 1:
Figure BDA0002713790690000101
in a preferred embodiment, the weight of each index of sensory evaluation is as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000102
Figure BDA0002713790690000111
as a reference, the scoring of each index of sensory evaluation is performed in the following manner:
Figure BDA0002713790690000112
the sensory evaluation is evaluated through multiple angles of vision, smell, touch, taste organs and the like, and specifically, 8 sensory indexes of pork are evaluated by 10 scores according to a designed sensory evaluation scoring standard, wherein the meat color, marbling and elasticity are the sensory indexes of the raw meat state, and the rest are the sensory indexes of the cooked meat state.
In the sensory evaluation, the evaluator is required to pay attention to the following: maintaining a good evaluation state (such as not in a diseased state, a hungry state, or an overly full state); firstly, carefully familiarizing the scoring standard and the standard sample, and then tasting the experimental sample; rinsing with purified water before or after tasting each experimental sample; a slight rest before tasting the next sample; preferably, a sample is tasted only once, and the sample is swallowed after tasting. Before sensory evaluation, evaluators were uniformly trained to conform to the criteria.
The obtaining of the food quality score comprises: and multiplying the scores of all the indexes of the food quality evaluation by the weights corresponding to all the indexes to respectively obtain the weight scores corresponding to all the indexes, and then adding the weight scores corresponding to all the indexes of the food quality evaluation.
Wherein the index for evaluating the food quality comprises L value (brightness value), a value (red value), shear force value, cooking loss rate, drip loss rate, thawing loss rate, storage loss rate, intramuscular fat content, inosinic acid content and umami amino acid content.
The weight of each index of the food quality evaluation is shown in the following table, and the sum of the weights corresponding to each index of the food quality evaluation is 1:
Figure BDA0002713790690000121
the above umami amino acids include glutamic acid, aspartic acid, phenylalanine, alanine, glycine and tyrosine.
In a preferred embodiment, the weight of each index of the food quality evaluation is as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000122
in the present application, the measurement of each index of the food quality evaluation can be performed by referring to the following manner:
(a) values of L, and a
And cutting a pork block to be measured with the thickness of not less than 2.0cm along the direction vertical to the muscle fiber, horizontally placing the pork block on a plastic tray, placing the pork block on a 4 ℃ environment in a dark place for 30 minutes, recording the L and a values of any 3 points on the surface of the pork sample by using a portable color difference meter, and calculating the average value of the L and a values.
(b) Shear force value
And (3) putting the packaged pork sample to be tested into a 72 ℃ water bath, heating until the central temperature reaches 70 ℃, taking out, putting into running water, cooling for 30min, and putting into a 4 ℃ refrigerator overnight.
The meat sample was cut into a 1cm wide and 1cm thick strip along the direction of muscle fiber, and measured using a tenderometer, and the result was expressed in kilograms (kg).
(c) And loss rate of cooking
And (4) cooking the meat blocks according to the method in the shear force value measuring process, wherein the weight loss of the meat blocks before and after cooking accounts for the original weight percent of the weight loss, namely the cooking loss.
(d) Water drop loss rate
Cutting the pork sample to be measured into 2cm by 3cm by 5cm meat strips along the muscle fiber direction, weighing, suspending the pork sample in a food preservation box, placing the pork sample in a refrigerator at 4 ℃ for 24 hours, then sucking the surface water by qualitative filter paper, and weighing again. The weight loss of the meat strips before and after hanging accounts for the original weight, namely the drip loss.
(e) And thawing loss rate
And (3) freezing the pork to be detected at-18 ℃ for 24 hours, then unfreezing the pork in a refrigerator at 4 ℃ for 24 hours, wherein the weight loss before and after unfreezing accounts for the original weight, and the weight loss is the unfreezing loss.
(f) Storage loss ratio
Weighing pork pieces to be detected with the thickness of 2.5cm, putting the pork pieces into a vacuum packaging bag, vacuumizing the vacuum packaging bag, placing the vacuum packaging bag in a refrigerator at 4 ℃ in a dark place for 48 hours, opening the package, taking out the pork pieces, sucking dry surface moisture by using qualitative filter paper, weighing the pork pieces again, and taking the weight loss of the pork pieces before and after storage as the percentage of the original weight.
(g) Intramuscular fat content
And (3) putting the clean flat weighing bottle in an oven at 105 ℃ for drying for 1 hour, taking out, putting in a dryer for cooling for 0.5 hour, and weighing. Weighing about 5g of the pork sample to be measured in a weighing bottle, and recording the total weight. Drying in a 105 ℃ oven to constant weight, transferring the sample in the weighing bottle to a mortar for grinding, transferring all the samples to a filter paper bag, wiping the weighing bottle and the pestle with the sample by absorbent cotton with petroleum ether, and putting the cotton into a filter paper cylinder.
Intramuscular fat content was determined using soxhlet extraction. Putting the filter paper cylinder into an extraction cylinder of a Soxhlet extractor, connecting a receiving bottle dried to constant weight, adding petroleum ether into the receiving bottle in advance to two thirds of the inner volume of the bottle, and heating and continuously refluxing for extraction. And (3) taking down the receiving bottle after extraction is finished, recovering petroleum ether, drying the receiving bottle in an oven at 105 ℃ for 1 hour, cooling in a dryer for 0.5 hour, and weighing.
The fat content is calculated as follows: fat content ═ m1-m0)/m2. Wherein m is1Receiving the content (g) of bottle and fat after constant weight, m0To receive the mass (g) of the bottle, m2The mass (g) of the sample.
(h) Inosinic acid content
Weighing 2.0g (accurate to 0.001g) of unfrozen minced pork sample to be detected into a centrifuge tube, adding 10mL of 6% perchloric acid solution, uniformly mixing in a vortex manner, standing and extracting for 1 hour at 4 ℃, centrifuging for 10min at 5000r/min, and taking supernatant. Extracting the precipitate with 6% perchloric acid solution again, mixing the two supernatants, placing in a 50mL centrifuge tube, adjusting pH to 6.5 with 3mol/L sodium hydroxide solution, adding water to a constant volume of 50mL, shaking, passing through 0.22 μm water system filter membrane, and measuring with high performance liquid chromatography.
And (3) computer-loading conditions:
a chromatographic column: SB-C18, 250 mm. times.4.6 mm, 5 μm.
Detection wavelength: 250 nm.
Sample introduction volume: 10 μ L.
Mobile phase: organic phase: methanol; water phase: 1% triethylamine solution (pH 3.0 adjusted with phosphoric acid) 2: 98, V/V
Flow rate: 1.0 mL/min.
And (4) calculating a result: the content of inosinic acid in meat (mg/g) ═ Ci*Vi/(mi*1000). Wherein, CiThe concentration of inosinic acid in the sample solution (mg/L), ViVolume of sample solution (mL), miThe mass (g) was weighed out.
(i) Content of amino acids with delicate flavor
200mg of pork paste to be tested (to the accuracy of 0.0001g) is accurately weighed by an electronic balance and placed in a 20mL Agilent headspace bottle. Slowly adding 10mL of 6mol/L CL solution per hour, immediately adding four drops of pure phenol solution, sealing with an experimental aluminum foil after the dropping is finished, filling nitrogen, immediately sealing with a special sealer, and after the temperature of the sample reaches room temperature, placing the headspace bottle in a 110 ℃ oven for hydrolysis for 22 hours. Cooling to room temperature after hydrolysis, filtering the hydrolysate with 0.45 μm filter membrane into 50ml volumetric flask, flushing the headspace flask with small amount of water for three times, mixing the above solutions, accurately metering volume with distilled water, shaking and mixing. After the mixture was evaporated to dryness by nitrogen blowing, 1mL of distilled water was added and the mixture was evaporated to dryness again and again three times. Then 3mL of sodium citrate buffer solution (prepared in situ) with the pH value of 2.2 is transferred and dissolved, the dissolved liquid is filtered into a 2mL sample injection bottle by a 0.22 mu m filter membrane, and the bottle cap is closed and the detection is carried out by an amino acid analyzer.
The measured umami amino acid content is the sum of the contents of 6 amino acids of glutamic acid, aspartic acid, phenylalanine, glycine, tyrosine and alanine.
Further, the values obtained by the measurement are converted into corresponding score values with reference to the following manner:
Figure BDA0002713790690000151
Figure BDA0002713790690000161
the obtaining of the nutritional score includes: and multiplying the scores of all indexes of the nutrition evaluation by the weights corresponding to all indexes to respectively obtain the weight scores corresponding to all indexes, and then adding the weight scores corresponding to all indexes of the nutrition evaluation.
Wherein the index of nutrition evaluation comprises protein content, water content, crude fat content, total amino acid content, essential amino acid content, unsaturated fatty acid content, polyunsaturated fatty acid content and iron content.
The weights of the indexes of the nutrition evaluation are as follows, and the sum of the weights corresponding to the indexes of the nutrition evaluation is 1:
Figure BDA0002713790690000162
in a preferred embodiment, the weight of each index of nutritional assessment is as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000163
Figure BDA0002713790690000171
in the present application, the measurement of each index of nutritional assessment is performed in the following manner:
(A) protein content
Weighing 1g of pork sample to be detected in a sample digestion tube, adding 10mL of concentrated sulfuric acid, and adding 1 Kjeldahl type nitrogen digestion piece. Digesting in a 420 deg.c digesting furnace, maintaining the digestion at 420 deg.c for 1 hr until the solution is green, cooling in room temperature environment, and automatic liquid adding, distilling, titrating and data recording in a full-automatic Kjeldahl nitrogen analyzer.
(B) Moisture content of
And (3) putting the clean flat weighing bottle in an oven at 105 ℃ for drying for 1 hour, taking out, putting in a dryer for cooling for 0.5 hour, and weighing. Weighing about 5g of the pork sample to be measured in a weighing bottle, and recording the total weight. Drying in a 105 deg.C oven to constant weight. And weighed again.
And (4) calculating a result: water content in the sample (m)1-m2)/(m1-m3)*100. Wherein m is1The mass (g) of the vial and the sample is weighed; m is2In order to weigh the bottle and the dried mass (g) of the sample, m3The mass (g) of the bottle was weighed.
(C) Crude fat content
Weighing 5g of pork sample to be detected, putting the pork sample into a beaker, adding 50mL of 2mol/L hydrochloric acid solution and a plurality of glass beads, covering a watch glass, heating the beaker on an electric hot plate until the pork sample is slightly boiled, and keeping the beaker for 1 hour. Taking down the beaker, adding 150mL of hot water, mixing uniformly and filtering. The precipitate was washed with hot water to neutrality. The precipitate and filter paper were placed on a large surface dish, dried in a drying oven at 105 ℃ for 1 hour, and cooled.
Crude fat content was determined using soxhlet extraction. Putting the filter paper cylinder into an extraction cylinder of a Soxhlet extractor, connecting a receiving bottle dried to constant weight, adding petroleum ether into the receiving bottle in advance to two thirds of the inner volume of the bottle, and heating and continuously refluxing for extraction. And (3) taking down the receiving bottle after extraction is finished, recovering petroleum ether, drying the receiving bottle in an oven at 105 ℃ for 1 hour, cooling in a dryer for 0.5 hour, and weighing.
The fat content is calculated as follows: fat content ═ m1-m0)/m2. Wherein m is1Receiving the content (g) of bottle and fat after constant weight, m0To receive the mass (g) of the bottle, m2The mass (g) of the sample.
(D) Total amino acid and essential amino acid contents
200mg of pork paste to be tested (to the accuracy of 0.0001g) is accurately weighed by an electronic balance and placed in a 20mL Agilent headspace bottle. Slowly adding 10mL of 6mol/L CL solution per hour, immediately adding four drops of pure phenol solution, sealing with an experimental aluminum foil after the dropping is finished, filling nitrogen, immediately sealing with a special sealer, and after the temperature of the sample reaches room temperature, placing the headspace bottle in a 110 ℃ oven for hydrolysis for 22 hours. Cooling to room temperature after hydrolysis, filtering the hydrolysate with 0.45 μm filter membrane into 50ml volumetric flask, flushing the headspace flask with small amount of water for three times, mixing the above solutions, accurately metering volume with distilled water, shaking and mixing. After the mixture was evaporated to dryness by nitrogen blowing, 1mL of distilled water was added and the mixture was evaporated to dryness again and again three times. Then transferring 3mL of sodium citrate buffer solution (prepared in situ) with the pH value of 2.2 for dissolving, filtering the dissolved liquid by using a 0.22 mu m filter membrane into a 2mL sample injection bottle, closing the bottle cap and detecting by using an amino acid analyzer.
(E) Unsaturated fatty acid content and polyunsaturated fatty acid content
Weighing 2g of a homogeneous sample (accurate to 0.1mg, containing about 100 mg-200 mg of fat) and transferring into a 20mL glass bottle, adding 100mg of pyrogallic acid, adding several grains of zeolite, adding 2mL of 95% ethanol and 4mL of water, and mixing. Adding 10mL of hydrochloric acid solution and mixing uniformly. Putting the glass bottle into a water bath at 70-80 ℃ for hydrolysis for 40 min. The glass bottle was shaken every 10min to mix the particles adhering to the wall of the flask into the solution. After hydrolysis was complete, the glass bottle was removed and cooled to room temperature. The hydrolyzed sample was mixed with 10mL of 95% ethanol and mixed well. The hydrolysate in the flask was transferred to a centrifuge tube, the flask and stopper were rinsed with 50mL of ether petroleum ether mixture, the rinse was incorporated into the centrifuge tube, and the tube was capped. Shaking for 5min, and standing for 10 min. The ether layer extract was collected into a 50mL centrifuge tube. Extracting the hydrolysate for 3 times repeatedly according to the steps, finally washing the centrifuge tube with ether petroleum ether mixed solution, collecting the filtrate in a 50mL centrifuge tube, and blowing nitrogen to dry.
To the lipid sample prepared in the above experiment, 2mL of n-hexane and 4mL of a 2mol/L potassium hydroxide-methanol solution were sequentially added, vortexed at room temperature for 2min, and allowed to stand. The n-hexane layer was filtered through a 0.22 μm pore size organic phase filter and analyzed by Gas Chromatography (GC), and the amount of the sample was 1 μ L.
Gas chromatography conditions:
a chromatographic column: agilent Select Fame chromatography column (100m 0.25mm 0.2 μm).
A sample inlet: 270 ℃; sample introduction amount: 1 mu L of the solution; the split ratio is as follows: 10: 1; FID detector: 280 ℃; carrier gas: nitrogen gas
Temperature rising procedure: 1mL/min constant flow mode. The initial temperature was 140 deg.C (5min),4 deg.C/min to 240 deg.C (15 min).
(F) Iron content
Weighing 1g of pork sample to be detected, placing the pork sample in a microwave digestion inner tank, adding 5mL of nitric acid and 2mL of hydrogen peroxide, screwing a tank cover, and digesting according to the standard steps of a microwave digestion instrument. Cooling, taking out, slowly opening the tank cover, exhausting, placing on a temperature-controlled electric heating plate, heating at 160 ℃ to drive acid until the residual liquid is 1 mL. Transferring, adding water to a constant volume of 50mL, mixing uniformly for later use, and injecting the mixture and the standard solution into an inductively coupled plasma emission spectrometer.
Drawing a standard curve: diluting the standard stock solution of the iron element of 1000mg/L into 0.1, 0.5, 1, 5, 10 and 20mg/L series of standard working solutions. And injecting the standard series working solution into an inductively coupled plasma emission spectrometer, measuring the intensity signal response value of the analysis spectral line of the element to be measured, and drawing a standard curve by taking the concentration of the element to be measured as an abscissa and the intensity response value of the analysis spectral line as an ordinate.
The iron content in the sample is calculated as follows: iron element content ═ Ci*Vi/mi. Wherein, CiThe concentration of iron element (mg/kg), V, in the sample solutioniVolume of sample solution (ml), miThe sample mass (g).
Further, the values obtained by the measurement are converted into corresponding score values with reference to the following manner:
Figure BDA0002713790690000191
Figure BDA0002713790690000201
it is to be understood that the determination of the objective indices of nutritional quality and food quality in the present application can be determined by similar methods and conditions as are conventional in the art, and are within the scope of the present application.
The features and properties of the present invention are described in further detail below with reference to examples.
Example 1
The quality of longissimus dorsi meat of five brands of common duroc x (Changbai x Dabai) pigs in the market is comprehensively evaluated.
The evaluation is carried out from three aspects of sensory evaluation, nutritional quality and edible quality, and the total number of the evaluation relates to 26 indexes.
Wherein the sensory evaluation index includes flesh color, marbling, elasticity, tenderness, fragrance, taste, juiciness and chewiness; the indexes for evaluating the food quality comprise L value, a shearing force value, cooking loss rate, drip loss rate, thawing loss rate, storage loss rate, intramuscular fat content, inosinic acid content and umami amino acid content; the indices for nutritional assessment include protein content, moisture content, crude fat content, total amino acid content, essential amino acid content, unsaturated fatty acid content, polyunsaturated fatty acid content, and iron content.
Sensory evaluation indices were scored by a 15-person panel according to the index for sensory evaluation provided herein. The various indices for food quality evaluation and nutritional evaluation were performed under the specific measurement conditions provided in the present application.
The results are as follows:
Figure BDA0002713790690000211
the Delis (DLS) brand pork scores were as follows:
sensory scoring:
5.68 × 0.187+4.62 × 0.112+3.69 × 0.066+5.28 × 0.185+5.22 × 0.141+5.53 × 0.117+4.75 × 0.112+5.44 × 0.08 ═ 5.15 minutes.
And (3) scoring the edible quality:
8 × 0.083+9 × 0.141+7 × 0.171+6 × 0.105+1 × 0.091+8 × 0.086 × 0.089+5 × 0.063+8 × 0.083+8 × 0.088 ═ 6.75 min.
And (3) scoring the nutritional quality:
8 × 0.179+8 × 0.055+4 × 0.075+10 × 0.102+7 × 0.157+10 × 0.119+7 × 0.158+5 × 0.155 ═ 7.29.
The quality system comprises the following comprehensive components: 5.15 × 0.5+6.75 × 0.35+7.29 × 0.15 ═ 6.03 minutes.
(II) Pengcheng (PC) brand pork scores were as follows:
sensory scoring:
5.64 × 0.187+4.42 × 0.112+4.12 × 0.066+6.00 × 0.185+5.43 × 0.141+5.54 × 0.117+5.14 × 0.112+6.36 × 0.08 — 5.43 points.
And (3) scoring the edible quality:
8 × 0.083+5 × 0.141+8 × 0.171+5 × 0.105+5 × 0.091+8 × 0.086 × 0.089+6 × 0.063+10 × 0.083+7 × 0.088 ═ 6.77.
And (3) scoring the nutritional quality:
7 × 0.179+8 × 0.055+4 × 0.075+9.5 × 0.102+7 × 0.157+10 × 0.119+8 × 0.158+5 × 0.155 ═ 7.24 minutes.
The quality system comprises the following comprehensive components: 5.43 × 0.5+6.77 × 0.35+7.24 × 0.15 ═ 6.17 points.
(iii) thousand wedding crane (QXH) brand pork scores were as follows:
sensory scoring:
7.4 × 0.187+5.44 × 0.112+4.06 × 0.066+6.6 × 0.185+5.73 × 0.141+6.03 × 0.117+6.03 × 0.112+6.7 × 0.08 ═ 6.21.
And (3) scoring the edible quality:
1 0.083+5 0.141+8 0.171+8 0.105+5 0.091+8 0.086+ 6.089 +5 0.063+7 0.083+8 0.088 ═ 6.27.
And (3) scoring the nutritional quality:
7 × 0.179+10 × 0.055+4 × 0.075+10 × 0.102+7 × 0.157+10 × 0.119+6 × 0.158+5 × 0.155 ═ 7.14 min.
The quality system comprises the following comprehensive components: 6.21 × 0.5+6.27 × 0.35+7.14 × 0.15 ═ 6.37 minutes.
(IV), Wenshi (WS) brand pork scores were as follows:
sensory scoring:
6.28 × 0.187+6.7 × 0.112+4.35 × 0.066+5.68 × 0.185+5.43 × 0.141+5.8 × 0.117+5.33 × 0.112+5.84 × 0.08-5.77 min.
And (3) scoring the edible quality:
8 × 0.083+7 × 0.141+6 × 0.171+6 × 0.105+3 × 0.091+8 × 0.086 × 0.089+5 × 0.063+9 × 0.083+8 × 0.088 ═ 6.56.
And (3) scoring the nutritional quality:
7 × 0.179+7 × 0.055+4 × 0.075+10 × 0.102+7 × 0.157+10 × 0.119+7 × 0.158+5 × 0.155 ═ 7.13.
The quality system comprises the following comprehensive components: 5.77 × 0.5+6.56 × 0.35+7.13 × 0.15 ═ 6.25 minutes.
The evaluation system is named QXH > WS > PC > DLS. Whereas in a blinded taste test of a professionally trained sensory evaluator on the same pork sample, the brand DLS scored 5.15, the brand PC scored 5.43, the brand QXH scored 6.21, the brand WS scored 5.77, ranked QXH > WS > PC > DLS. The ranking of the two is completely consistent, and the objectivity and the accuracy of the evaluation system in evaluating the quality of the external ternary pork are proved.
Example 2
The method is characterized in that the longissimus dorsi meat quality of five local black pigs in China is evaluated, and the longissimus mountain black pigs, Luchuan black pigs, Taihu black pigs, northeast China black pigs, Songliao black pigs, Bake summer pigs, Taihu black pigs and Changbai black pigs, northeast China black pigs and Songliao black pigs are specifically evaluated.
The evaluation method was the same as in example 1, and the results were as follows.
Figure BDA0002713790690000241
The scores of Changbai mountain black pigs are as follows:
sensory evaluation score values were:
6.76 × 0.187+5.3 × 0.112+4.43 × 0.066+5.47 × 0.185+5.39 × 0.141+5.4 × 0.117+5.12 × 0.112+5.72 × 0.08 ═ 5.58 minutes.
The food quality score value is:
9 × 0.083+7 × 0.141+7 × 0.171+5 × 0.105+3 × 0.091+8 × 0.086 × 0.089+7 × 0.063+9 × 0.083+7 × 0.088 ═ 6.76.
The nutritional quality scores were:
6 × 0.179+8 × 0.055+5 × 0.075+10 × 0.102+7 × 0.157+10 × 0.119+7 × 0.158+5 × 0.155 ═ 7.08 min.
The quality system comprises the following comprehensive components: 5.58 × 0.5+6.76 × 0.35+7.08 × 0.15 ═ 6.22 minutes.
(II) the Luchuan pig X Taihu black pig was scored as follows:
sensory evaluation score values were:
6.36 × 0.187+6.56 × 0.112+5.07 × 0.066+6.15 × 0.185+5.96 × 0.141+5.84 × 0.117+5.54 × 0.112+6.3 × 0.08 ═ 6.04 minutes.
The food quality score value is:
5 0.083+9 0.141+7 0.171+5 0.105+5 0.091+8 0.086+ 6.089 +7 0.063+ 6.083 +7 0.088 ═ 6.64.
The nutritional quality scores were:
6 × 0.179+8 × 0.055+5 × 0.075+7 × 0.102+6 × 0.157+10 × 0.119+6 × 0.158+4 × 0.155 ═ 6.31.
The quality system comprises the following comprehensive components: 6.04 × 0.5+6.64 × 0.35+6.31 × 0.15 ═ 6.29 minutes.
(III) the scores of the northeast China boar, the Songliao black pig and the Barkha pig are as follows:
sensory evaluation score values were:
8.94 × 0.187+4.9 × 0.112+4 × 0.066+7.43 × 0.185+6.12 × 0.141+6.37 × 0.117+6.21 × 0.112+7.13 × 0.08-6.73 min.
The food quality score value is:
1 0.083+9 0.141+7 0.171+5 0.105+6 0.091+8 0.086+ 6.089 +3 0.063+6 0.083+7 0.088 ═ 6.15.
The nutritional quality scores were:
6 × 0.179+6 × 0.055+3 × 0.075+8 × 0.102+7 × 0.157+10 × 0.119+7 × 0.158+5 × 0.155 ═ 6.62 minutes.
The quality system comprises the following comprehensive components: 6.73 × 0.5+6.15 × 0.35+6.62 × 0.15 ═ 6.51 points.
(IV), Taihu lake black pigs were scored as follows:
sensory evaluation score values were:
6.48 × 0.187+5.58 × 0.112+3.97 × 0.066+6.26 × 0.185+5.2 × 0.141+5.08 × 0.117+5.45 × 0.112+5.82 × 0.08 ═ 5.66 minutes.
The food quality score value is:
9 × 0.083+7 × 0.141+6 × 0.171+5 × 0.105+6 × 0.091+8 × 0.086 × 0.089+5.5 × 0.063+ 9.083 +8 × 0.088 ═ 6.85.
The nutritional quality scores were:
7 × 0.179+10 × 0.055+4 × 0.075+10 × 0.102+7 × 0.157+10 × 0.119+6 × 0.158+5 × 0.155 ═ 7.14 min.
The quality system comprises the following comprehensive components: 5.66 × 0.5+6.85 × 0.35+7.14 × 0.15 ═ 6.30 minutes.
(V), Changbai black pig X northeast folk pig X Songliao black pig as follows:
sensory evaluation score values were:
5.92 × 0.187+4.06 × 0.112+4.22 × 0.066+5.58 × 0.185+5.54 × 0.141+5.1 × 0.117+4.68 × 0.112+5.79 × 0.08, 5.24 points.
The food quality score value is:
9 × 0.083+5 × 0.141+7 × 0.171+5 × 0.105+6 × 0.091+8 × 0.086 × 0.089+2 × 0.063+6 × 0.083+8 × 0.088 ═ 6.27.
The nutritional quality scores were:
7 × 0.179+9 × 0.055+3 × 0.075+10 × 0.102+7 × 0.157+10 × 0.119+10 × 0.158+5 × 0.155 ═ 7.64.
The quality system comprises the following comprehensive components: 5.24 × 0.5+6.27 × 0.35+7.64 × 0.15 ═ 5.96 minutes.
The ranking in the evaluation system is northeast China folk pig, Songliao black pig, Barker summer pig, Taihu black pig, Luchuan pig, Taihu black pig, Changbai mountain black pig, Changbai black pig, northeast folk pig and Songliao black pig. In the blind test of the same pork sample by a professional trained sensory evaluator, the Changbai mountain black pig scores 5.58, the Luchuan pig multiplied by Taihu black pig scores 6.04, the northeast China civil pig multiplied by Songliao black pig multiplied by Baker summer pig scores 6.73, the Taihu black pig scores 5.66, the Changbai black pig multiplied by the northeast civil pig multiplied by Songliao black pig multiplies by Songliao black pig scores 5.24, and the Changbai black pig multiplied by the northeast China civil pig multiplied by Songliao black pig multiplied by the Luxiao black pig multiplied by Taihu black pig multiplied by Changliao black pig multiplied by Songliao black pig. The ranking of the two is completely consistent, and the objectivity and the accuracy of the evaluation system in the local pig variety pork quality evaluation are proved.
Example 3
Specific data are shown in example 1 and example 2 for a comparison between Deleis and Pengcheng in example 1 and the northeast China pig X Songliao black pig X Barkha pig, Taihu black pig and Luchuan pig X Taihu black pig in example 2, which are not repeated herein. The results show that:
the quality system comprises the following comprehensive components: northeast China civil pig, Songliao black pig, Barkha pig (6.51 min), Taihu black pig (6.30 min), Luchuan pig, Taihu black pig (6.29 min), Pengcheng (6.17 min), Deleis (6.03 min). The blind evaluation test of a specially trained sensory evaluator ranks northeast China pigs, Songliao black pigs, Barkha pigs (6.73 points), Luchuan pigs, Taihu black pigs (6.04 points), Taihu black pigs (5.66 points), Pengcheng (5.43 points) and Delist (5.15 points). The method is basically consistent with the system, and proves the objectivity, fairness and accuracy of the evaluation system in the mixed evaluation of the external ternary pigs and the local pork.
In summary, the pork quality evaluation method provided by the application has the advantages of objective basis, unified standard and systematic synthesis in statistics by establishing a multi-index comprehensive evaluation system compared with the traditional experience classification, can provide objective and comprehensive judgment standard for the quality of pork, further provides technical reference for consumers to rationally select high-quality pork, and provides scientific evaluation basis for development of local pig variety resources in China.
The above is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention, and is not intended to limit the present invention, and various modifications and changes will occur to those skilled in the art. Any modification, equivalent replacement, or improvement made within the spirit and principle of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims (10)

1. A method for comprehensively evaluating the quality of pork is characterized by comprising the following steps: obtaining sensory score, eating quality score and nutrition score of the pork to be evaluated;
calculating the comprehensive score of the pork to be evaluated according to the following formula:
the comprehensive score is X multiplied by sensory score, Y multiplied by food quality score and Z multiplied by nutrition score, wherein X is 47-53 percent, Y is 32-38 percent, Z is 100-X-Y, and the full scores of sensory score, food quality score and nutrition score are all 10 points;
determining the quality of pork according to the obtained comprehensive score;
preferably, X is 50%, Y is 35%, and Z is 15%.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein said obtaining of a sensory score comprises: multiplying the scores of all the indexes of the sensory evaluation by the weights corresponding to all the indexes to respectively obtain the weight scores corresponding to all the indexes, and then adding the weight scores corresponding to all the indexes of the sensory evaluation;
the sensory evaluation indexes include flesh color, marbling, elasticity, tenderness, fragrance, taste, juiciness and chewiness; wherein, the meat color, marbling and elasticity are indexes for sensory evaluation of the meat state, and the tenderness, the fragrance, the taste, the juiciness and the chewiness are indexes for sensory evaluation of the cooked meat state;
the weights of the indexes of the sensory evaluation are as follows, and the sum of the weights corresponding to the indexes of the sensory evaluation is 1:
Figure FDA0002713790680000011
3. the method according to claim 2, wherein the sensory evaluation is weighted according to the following table:
Figure FDA0002713790680000021
4. the method of claim 1, wherein the obtaining of the eating quality score comprises: multiplying the scores of all the indexes of the food quality evaluation by the weights corresponding to all the indexes to respectively obtain the weight scores corresponding to all the indexes, and then adding the weight scores corresponding to all the indexes of the food quality evaluation;
the indexes of the food quality evaluation comprise L value, a shearing force value, cooking loss rate, drip loss rate, thawing loss rate, storage loss rate, intramuscular fat content, inosinic acid content and umami amino acid content;
wherein, the weight of each index of the food quality evaluation is as the following table, and the sum of the weights corresponding to each index of the food quality evaluation is 1:
Figure FDA0002713790680000022
5. the method of claim 4, wherein the umami amino acids comprise glutamic acid, aspartic acid, phenylalanine, alanine, glycine, and tyrosine.
6. The method according to claim 5, wherein the weight of each index of the food quality evaluation is as follows:
Figure FDA0002713790680000031
7. the method according to any one of claims 4 to 6, wherein the scoring of each index of the eating quality assessment is performed as follows:
Figure FDA0002713790680000032
Figure FDA0002713790680000041
8. the method of claim 1, wherein the obtaining of the nutritional score comprises: multiplying the scores of all indexes of the nutrition evaluation by the weights corresponding to all indexes to respectively obtain the weight scores corresponding to all indexes, and then adding the weight scores corresponding to all indexes of the nutrition evaluation;
the index of the nutrition evaluation comprises protein content, moisture content, crude fat content, total amino acid content, essential amino acid content, unsaturated fatty acid content, polyunsaturated fatty acid content and iron content;
wherein, the weight of each index of the nutrition evaluation is as the following table, and the sum of the weights corresponding to each index of the nutrition evaluation is 1:
Figure FDA0002713790680000042
9. the method of claim 8, wherein the indices of nutritional assessment are weighted as follows:
Figure FDA0002713790680000051
10. the method according to claim 8 or 9, wherein the scoring of each index of the nutritional assessment is performed in the following manner:
Figure FDA0002713790680000052
Figure FDA0002713790680000061
CN202011066068.1A 2020-09-30 2020-09-30 Method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality Pending CN112200446A (en)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CN202011066068.1A CN112200446A (en) 2020-09-30 2020-09-30 Method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CN202011066068.1A CN112200446A (en) 2020-09-30 2020-09-30 Method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
CN112200446A true CN112200446A (en) 2021-01-08

Family

ID=74012948

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
CN202011066068.1A Pending CN112200446A (en) 2020-09-30 2020-09-30 Method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality

Country Status (1)

Country Link
CN (1) CN112200446A (en)

Cited By (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN112946211A (en) * 2021-02-02 2021-06-11 湖南省作物研究所 Fuzzy mathematics-based sweet potato eating quality sensory evaluation method
CN116298147A (en) * 2023-03-24 2023-06-23 三只松鼠股份有限公司 Quality detection method and hot air drying process optimization method for dried pork slices

Citations (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
KR20180097265A (en) * 2017-02-23 2018-08-31 경상대학교산학협력단 Method for preparing Pork Palatability Index and uses thereof
CN109187893A (en) * 2018-08-17 2019-01-11 扬州大学 A kind of new method of the white plumage meat quality overall merit of crow mouth
CN111260245A (en) * 2020-02-11 2020-06-09 江苏省家禽科学研究所 Chicken quality evaluation method and device, electronic equipment and storage medium
CN111626481A (en) * 2020-05-07 2020-09-04 中国农业大学 Animal meat quality evaluation method and system based on dynamic transportation monitoring

Patent Citations (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
KR20180097265A (en) * 2017-02-23 2018-08-31 경상대학교산학협력단 Method for preparing Pork Palatability Index and uses thereof
CN109187893A (en) * 2018-08-17 2019-01-11 扬州大学 A kind of new method of the white plumage meat quality overall merit of crow mouth
CN111260245A (en) * 2020-02-11 2020-06-09 江苏省家禽科学研究所 Chicken quality evaluation method and device, electronic equipment and storage medium
CN111626481A (en) * 2020-05-07 2020-09-04 中国农业大学 Animal meat quality evaluation method and system based on dynamic transportation monitoring

Non-Patent Citations (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
陈艳珍: "猪肉品质的评定及影响因素", 《中国畜牧兽医》 *
马从国 等: "基于组合权重的物元分析模型及在猪肉品质评价中应用", 《食品工业科技》 *

Cited By (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN112946211A (en) * 2021-02-02 2021-06-11 湖南省作物研究所 Fuzzy mathematics-based sweet potato eating quality sensory evaluation method
CN112946211B (en) * 2021-02-02 2023-05-09 湖南省作物研究所 Fuzzy mathematics-based sweet potato eating quality sensory evaluation method
CN116298147A (en) * 2023-03-24 2023-06-23 三只松鼠股份有限公司 Quality detection method and hot air drying process optimization method for dried pork slices
CN116298147B (en) * 2023-03-24 2024-04-12 三只松鼠股份有限公司 Quality detection method and hot air drying process optimization method for dried pork slices

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
Kim et al. Effects of aging and aging method on physicochemical and sensory traits of different beef cuts
CN112200446A (en) Method for comprehensively evaluating pork quality
Grant et al. Comparative models of mussel bioenergetics and their validation at field culture sites
Liu et al. Rapid and non-destructive identification of water-injected beef samples using multispectral imaging analysis
Lu et al. Prediction of sweetpotato starch physiochemical quality and pasting properties using near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy
CN107478736B (en) Method for judging freshness of hops based on volatile component composition
US20100086655A1 (en) Process of selecting a preparation method, a packaging and shipping method, or other dispostion of a foodstuff, and process of determining if a foodstuff is fresh or has previously been frozen
CN110487746A (en) A method of baby cabbage quality is detected based near infrared spectrum
CN102273602B (en) Preparation method of thermal-reaction shrimp and crab essence
CN109063783A (en) A kind of salted water goose quality integrated evaluating method and the quality evaluation model using this method building
CN102692488A (en) Jinhua ham grading and identifying method based on electronic nose technology
CN104964963B (en) Quick determination method based on delicate flavour material inosinicacid in Raman spectrum live fresh pork
Oh et al. Electrical resistance and mold distribution on beef surface as indicators of dry aging
CN107389884B (en) Method for comprehensively evaluating quality of snow mountain chicken
CN107356488B (en) Simple and rapid determination method for amylose in grain
CN112285031A (en) Method for rapidly representing umami intensity of salmon based on hyperspectral imaging technology
CN110403145A (en) A kind of processing method improving water holding capacity for beef
CN111898920A (en) Composite method for evaluating key quality grade of broth seasoning
CN104914068B (en) The spectrum rapid detection method of content of trans fatty acids in a kind of grease
Clawson et al. Chemical changes during cooking of wheat
CN108982283B (en) Improved method for detecting water in jelly
Gilbert et al. Migration from plastics into foodstuffs under realistic conditions of use
CN107860746A (en) A kind of Yunnan local chicken muscle freeze-dried powder lysine content near infrared detection method
CN112505169B (en) Flavor evaluation method of fermented large yellow croaker
Mayasti et al. Selection of plantain cultivars as raw material for ripe plantain flour

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
PB01 Publication
PB01 Publication
SE01 Entry into force of request for substantive examination
SE01 Entry into force of request for substantive examination