Filiz AKSU, Sema SANDIKÇI ALTUNATMAZ, Deniz AKTARAN BALA, Cansu ÇELİK, İbrahim AKYAZI

Farklı Sıcaklıklarda Depolanan Tavuk Yumurtalarının Kalite Parametrelerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Bu araştırma oda ve buzdolabı sıcaklığında 28 gün depolanan tavuk yumurtalarında sıcaklık ve sürenin yumurtaların iç ve dış kalitesine etkisini değerlendirmek amacıyla yapıldı. Araştırma için Lohmann Brown (LSL) cinsi yumurtacı tavuklara ait toplam 176 adet yumurta kullanıldı. Aynı partiden alınan yumurtalar buzdolabı (5°C) ve oda sıcaklığında (25°C) muhafaza edildi. 0, 1, 8, 18, 21 ve 28. günlerde, yumurtaların iç ve dış kalite parametreleri ile mikrobiyolojik analizleri değerlendirildi. Örneklerin hiçbirinde koliform bakteri, E. coli ve Salmonella spp. tespit edilmedi. Değerlendirme sonucunda, oda sıcaklığında muhafaza edilen yumurtalar 8. günden itibaren yumurta akı indeksi ve Haugh ünitesi parametreleri açısından belirgin düzeyde olumsuz etkilendi. Oda ve buzdolabı sıcaklığında muhafaza edilen yumurtalar arasında kıyaslama yapıldığında; albumen indeksi, Haugh ünitesi, yumurta sarısı indeksi ve yumurta sarısı yüksekliği parametreleri açısından anlamlı farklar olduğu belirlendi (P

Evaluation of Quality Parameters of Chicken Eggs Stored at Different Temperatures

This study was carried out to evaluate the effect of temperature and time on the internal and external quality of chicken eggs stored at room and fridge temperature for 28 days. A total of 176 eggs of Lohmann Brown (LSL) laying hens were used for the study. The eggs from the same batch were stored at fridge (5°C) and room temperature (25°C), internal and external quality parameters and microbiological analyzes of eggs were evaluated on days 0, 1, 8, 18, 21 and 28. No coliform bacteria, E. coli and Salmonella spp. were detected. At the end of the evaluation, the eggs stored at room temperature were found to have been negatively affected in terms of albumen index and Haugh unit parameters from day 8 onwards. When a comparison was made between the eggs kept in the room and the fridge temperature, significant differences were found in terms of albumen index, Haugh unit, egg yolk index and egg yolk height parameters (P

PDF

___

1. Çelebi Ş, Karaca H: Egg nutritional value, cholesterol content and studies on the nutritionally enriched Egg with n-3 PUFAS. Atatürk Üniv Ziraat Fak Derg, 37 (2): 257-265, 2006.
2. Ruxton CHS, Derbyshire E, Gibson S: The nutritional properties and health benefit of eggs. Nutr Food Sci, 40 (3): 263-279, 2010. DOI: 10.1108/00346651011043961
3. De Menezes PC, de Lima ER, de Mederios JP, de Oliveira WNK, Evêncio-Neto J: Egg quality of laying hens in different conditions of storage, ages and housing densities. Rev Bras Zootec, 41 (9): 2064-2069, 2012. DOI: 10.1590/S1516-35982012000900014
4. Akyürek H, Okur AA: Effect of storage time, temperature and hen age on egg quality in free-range layer hens. J Anim Vet Adv, 8 (10): 1953-1958, 2009.
5. Akter Y, Kasim A, Omar H, Sazili AO: Effect of storage time and temperature on the quality characteristics of chicken eggs. J Food Agric Environ, 12 (3-4): 87-92, 2014.
6. Park YS, Yoo IJ, Jeon KH, Kim HK, Chang EJ, Oh HI: Effects of various eggshell treatments on the egg quality during storage. Asian Australas J Anim Sci, 16 (8): 1224-1229, 2003. DOI: 10.5713/ajas.2003.1224
7. Caner C, Yüceer M: Efficacy of various protein-based coating on enhancing the shelf life of fresh eggs during storage. Poult Sci, 94 (7): 1665-1677, 2015. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pev102
8. Anar Ş: Yumurta ve Yumurta Ürünleri. Yumurtanın Fiziksel Özellikleri. 30-35, Dora Yayınları, Bursa, 2016.
9. Yenilmez F, Uruk E, Serbester U, Çelik L: Farklı mevsimlerde toptancı ve tüketici koşullarında saklamanın yumurta kalitesi üzerine etkisi. Çukurova J Agric Food Sci, 32 (2): 61-68, 2017.
10. Al-Hajo NNA, Whaeep AAM, Rashid RS, Azeez AI, Al-Janab LFA, Musa TN, Al-Khalani FMHA: Effect of different coating material on egg quality. Acad J Sci, 1 (2): 257-264, 2012.
11. Turkish Food Codex Regulation on Egg Notification: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Official Gazette Issue and Date: 29211 and 20 December 2014, Ankara, Turkey.
12. Tabidi MH: Impact of storage period and quality on composition of table egg. Adv Environ Biol, 5 (5): 856-861, 2011.
13. Reddy PM, Reddy VR, Reddy CV, Rao SP: Egg weight. shape index and hatchability in khaki Campbell duck egg. Ind J Poult Sci, 14, 26-31, 1979.
14. Doyon G, Bernier-Cardou M, Hamilton RMG, Castalgne F, Randall CJ: Egg quality 2. albumen quality of eggs from five commercial strains of white leghorn hens during one year of lay. Poult Sci, 65, 63-66, 1986. DOI: 10.3382/ps.0650063
15. Anderson KE, Tharrington JB, Curtis PA, Jones FT: Shell characteristics of eggs from historic strains of single comb white leghorn chickens and relationship of egg shape to shell strength. Int J Poult Sci, 3, 17-19, 2004. DOI: 10.3923/ijps.2004.17.19
16. Haugh RR: The Haugh unit for measuring egg quality. US Egg Poult Mag, 43, 572-573, 1937.
17. Chowdhury SD: Shell membrane system in relation to lathyrogen toxicity and copper deficiency. World’s Poult Sci J, 46, 153-169, 1990. DOI: 10.1079/WPS19900018
18. Cayan H, Erener G: Effect of olive leaf (Olea europaea) Powder on laying hens performance, egg quality and egg yolk cholesterol levels. Asian Australas J Anim Sci, 28 (4): 538-543, 2015. DOI: 10.5713/ajas.14.0369
19. Maturin L, Peeler JT: Aerobic Plate Count. Bacteriological Analytical Manual, Chapter 3,2001.https://www.fda.gov/food/foodscienceresearch/ laboratorymethods/ucm063346.htm.; Accessed date: 27/11/2019
20. ISO 6579: Microbiology of food and animal feeding stuffs-horizontal method for the detection of Salmonella spp. International Standard, 2002.
21. Erkan ME, Vural A, Güran HŞ: Diyarbakır ili’nde satışa sunulan köy ve market yumurtalarının hijyenik kalitesi üzerine bir araştırma. Dicle Univ Vet Fak Derg, 1 (1): 11-16, 2008.
22. ISO 16649-2: Microbiology of food and animal feeding stuffs - horizontal method for the enumeration of beta-glucuronidase-positive Escherichia coli - Part 2: Colony-count technique at 44 degrees C using 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl beta-D-glucuronide. 2001.
23. ISO 21527-1: Microbiology of food and animal feeding stuffs - horizontal method for the enumeration of yeasts and moulds - Part 1: Colony count technique in products with water activity greater than 0.95. ISO21527-1. 2008.
24. Eke MO, Olaitan NI, Ochefu JH: Effect of storage conditions on the quality attributes of shell (table) eggs. Niger Food J, 31 (2): 18-24, 2013. DOI: 10.1016/S0189-7241(15)30072-2
25. Bozkurt Z, Tekerli M: The effects of hen age, genotype, period and temperature of storage on egg quality. Kafkas Unıv Vet Fak Derg, 15 (4): 517-524, 2009. DOI: 10.9775/kvfd.2009.041A/Err
26. Şamlı HE, Ağma A, Şenköylü N: Effects of storage time and temperature on egg quality in old laying hens. J Appl Poult Res, 14 (3): 548553, 2005. DOI: 10.1093/japr/14.3.548
27. Scott TA, Silversides FG: The effect of storage and strain of hen on egg quality. Poult Sci, 79 (12): 1725-1729, 2000. DOI: 10.1093/ps/79.12.1725
28. Jones DR, Musgrove MT: Effects of extended storage on egg quality factors. Poult Sci, 84 (11): 1774-1777, 2005. DOI: 10.1093/ps/84.11.1774
29. Jones DR, Karcher DM, Abdo Z: Effect of a commercial housing system on egg quality during extended storage. Poult Sci, 93 (5): 1282-1288, 2014. DOI: 10.3382/ps.2013-03631
30. Feddern V, de Prá MC, Mores R, da Silveira Nicoloso R, Coldebella A, de Abreu PG: Egg quality assessment at different storage conditions, seasons and laying hen strains. Cienc Agrotec, 41 (3): 322-333, 2017. DOI: 10.1590/1413-70542017413002317
31. Artan S, Durmuş I: Köy, serbest ve kafes sistemlerinde üretilen yumurtaların kalite özellikleri bakımından karşılaştırılması. Akad Ziraat Derg, 4 (2): 89-97, 2015.
32. Giampietro-Ganeco A, Scatolini-Silva AM, Borba H, Boiago MM, Lima TMA, Souza PA: Comparative study of quality characteristics of egg stored in domestic refrigerators. Ars Vet, 28 (2): 100-104, 2012.
33. Lee MH, Cho EJ, Choi ES, Sohn SH: The effect of storage period and temperature on egg quality in commercial eggs. Korean J Poult Sci, 43 (1): 31-38, 2016.