Effects of Different Viol Types on Egg Shell Microbiology in Table Eggs at Different Storage Temperatures

The purpose of this research was to examine the impact of storing table hen eggs in egg cardboard box viol, plastic box viol, and cardboard viols at various temperatures on the microbiology of the egg shell. A total of 150 table chicken eggs were used in the study. The eggs were randomly distributed into three groups: standard cardboard viol, plastic box viol, and cardboard box viol. The eggs were stored at room temperature and in the refrigerator for 28 days. On the 0, 7, 14, 21, and 28 days of the experiment, five eggs from each group were analyzed for total bacteria (TAMB), mold-yeast, and coliform. The Viol type x storage temperature interaction effect was significant (P<0.05) only on egg shell mold-yeast, but its effect on the TAMB and coliforms was insignificant. The effect of viol types on shell coliforms was insignificant. Egg TAMB and mold-yeast counts were found to be lower in plastic box viols than in other groups (P <0.05). TAMB and mold-yeast count were found to be higher in eggs that were stored in refrigerator conditions than in room conditions (P <0.05). From a microbial perspective, it can be said that storing eggs in plastic box viols is more suitable in terms of hygiene during storage.

Keywords:

viol; eggshell, total aerobic mesophilic bacteria, mold-yeast coliform, storage,

PDF

___

Aygun A, Sert D (2013). Effects of vacuum packing on eggshell microbial activity and egg quality in table eggs under different storage temperatures. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 93: 1626-1632. 10.1002/jsfa.5936
Aygun A (2017). The Eggshell Microbial Activity. In Hester P (Editor), Egg Innovation and Strategies for Improvement. Academic Press, Elsevier, Oxford, United Kingdom, pp. 135-144
Aygün A, Narinç D (2017): Factors affecting the table egg quality, 2nd International Conference on Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences, Antalya, Turkey, pp. 177
Board R, Tranter H (1995). The microbiology of eggs. Egg science and technology, 4: 81-104.
Brasil R, Cruz F, Rufino J, Oliveira P, Freitas B, Viana G (2019). Physical-Chemical and Sensorial Quality of Eggs Coated With Copaiba Oil Biofilm and Stored At Room Temperature for Different Periods. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 21.
Huneau-Salaün A, Michel V, Huonnic D, Balaine L, Le Bouquin S (2010). Factors influencing bacterial eggshell contamination in conventional cages, furnished cages and free-range systems for laying hens under commercial conditions. British Poultry Science, 51: 163-169.
Jones D, Musgrove M, Northcutt J (2004). Variations in external and internal microbial populations in shell eggs during extended storage. Journal of Food Protection, 67: 2657-2660.
North MO, Bell DD (1990). Commercial chicken production manual. Van Nostrand Reinhold Puglisi MJ, Fernandez ML (2022). The Health Benefits of Egg Protein. Nutrients, 14: 2904.
Sarıca M, Erensayın C (2014). Tavukçuluk Ürünleri. In Türkoğlu M , Sarıca M (Editors), Tavukçuluk Bilimi Yetiştirme, Besleme ve Hastalıklar. Bey Ofset Matbaacılık, pp. 110-139.
Sariyel V, Aygun A, Coklar H, Narinc D, Akbulut M (2022). Effects of prestorage application of gum arabic coating on the quality of table eggs during storage. Kafkas Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, 28 (3): 363-370.
Aygun A, Sert D (2013). Effects of vacuum packing on eggshell microbial activity and egg quality in table eggs under different storage temperatures. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 93: 1626-1632. Şenköylü N (2001). Modern tavuk üretimi. Anadolu Matbaası, İstanbul, pp.171-180.
Tian Y, Zhu H, Zhang L, Chen H (2022). Consumer preference for nutritionally fortified eggs and impact of health benefit information. Foods, 11: 1145.
Uysal A, Elibol O, İlhan Z, Aktan S, Akan M (2002). Kuluçkalık yumurtalarda karton veya pilastik viyol kullanımının yumurta hijyeni ve kuluçka özellikleri üzerine etkileri. Tavukçuluk Araştırma Dergisi, 3: 13-16.
Yenilmez F, Bulancak A (2020). Microbiological quality of table eggs sold at different sales location. Çukurova Tarım ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi, 35: 115-124.