Accepted Manuscript

Effect of drying air temperature and slice thickness on the physical and
microbiological quality of dried beef

Eunice A. Mewa, Michael W. Okoth, Catherine N. Kunyanga, Musa N. Rugiri

PII: S0023-6438(18)30207-X
DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2018.02.068
Reference: YFSTL 6923

To appear in: LWT - Food Science and Technology

Received Date: 18 August 2017

Revised Date: 4 January 2018
Accepted Date: 27 February 2018

Please cite this article as: Mewa, E.A., Okoth, M.W., Kunyanga, C.N., Rugiri, M.N., Effect of drying air
temperature and slice thickness on the physical and microbiological quality of dried beef, LWT - Food
Science and Technology (2018), doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2018.02.068.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Effect of Drying Air Temperature and Slice Thickness on the

2 Physical and Microbiological Quality of Dried Beef
3
4 Eunice A. Mewa1*, Michael W. Okoth1, Catherine N. Kunyanga1, Musa N. Rugiri2

PT
1
5 Department of Food Science, Nutrition and Technology, University of Nairobi, P.O. Box
6 29053-00625, Nairobi, Kenya.
2

RI
7 Department of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, Egerton University, P.O. Box
8 536-20115, Egerton, Kenya.
*

SC
9 Corresponding author. E-mail: eunicemewa@yahoo.com
10
11 Abstract

12
U
The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of cabinet drying air temperature (30-60
AN
13 °C) and sample thickness (2.5-10 mm) on the quality attributes of dried beef. The physical

14 (colour, rehydration ratio/RR and texture) and microbial quality of beef samples were evaluated
M

15 using standard procedures. There was a significant decrease (P ≤ 0.05) in L*, a*, b*and
D

16 chroma/C* colour values with increasing temperature and beef thickness, while change in
TE

17 thickness had no effect (P > 0.05) on the hue/H* colour attribute. The RR was higher at 60 °C for

18 5-10 mm thick samples and decreased (P ≤ 0.05) with increase in beef thickness. The firmness
EP

19 values increased with increase in temperature from 30 to 50 °C, decreased at 60 °C and were

20 significantly lower (P ≤ 0.05) at 2.5 mm beef thickness. The total viable counts (TVC) and
C

21 Staphylococcus aureus numbers in beef dried at 30 and 40 °C were higher than that of fresh beef,
AC

22 whereas drying at 60 °C significantly (P ≤ 0.05) reduced the microbial numbers.

23

24 Key words: Dried beef quality; Physical properties; Microbial quality; Temperature; Beef
25 thickness.

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

26 1. Introduction

27 Meat is the edible part of the skeletal muscle of an animal that was healthy before slaughter

28 (CFDAR, 1990). It is preferred as protein source by most people throughout the world due to its

29 distinct flavor and rich nutrient matrix. However, meat is highly perishable, and the lack of

PT
30 proper preservation techniques in the tropics has led to post-slaughter losses; excess meat gets

RI
31 wasted and cannot be stored for use in times of shortage. Sun drying has been practiced for many

32 years and has been used by nomads and pastoralists to preserve meat during excess supply (FAO,

SC
33 1995). However, it is no longer recommended due to lack of a steady heat source thus difficulty

34 in controlling the drying process. It could also be very time-consuming, with a high risk of

35
U
contamination from animals, insects, dust, and bacteria (Park, Lee & Jeong, 2002).
AN
36

Convective hot-air dryers are commonly employed for the industrial processing of various
M

37

38 agricultural products in most developing countries. These drying systems reduce food spoilage
D

39 by sufficiently reducing water activity of products, thus inhibiting microbial growth. However,
TE

40 hot-air drying may result in changes to the physico-chemical quality of meat (FAO, 1995) with

41 temperature being the most influencing factor. Most changes in meat during drying result from
EP

42 protein denaturation. Especially, denaturation of heme proteins and oxidation of myoglobin

43 pigments which cause darkening of products (Haard, 1992). Protein denaturation also leads to
C

44 decreased water holding capacity and shrunken muscle fibers, creating a harder and more
AC

45 compact tissue texture (Harris & Shorthose, 1988). These changes in physical structure as well as

46 the chemical properties of meat, as a result determine its ability to rehydrate, or return to its

47 original weight when immersed in water (Farkas & Singh, 1991).

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

48 Muscles of healthy animals are regarded as sterile, but the slaughtering and butchering process

49 creates an opportunity for bacteria to colonize meat surfaces (Olaoye, 2011). The initial

50 microbial load on surfaces of meat to be dried is determined by the hygiene of the abattoir and

51 the handling practices of the meat during butchery and preparation of strips for drying

PT
52 (Mothershaw, Rahman, Mohammed & Guizani, 2003). Subsequently, the presence of

RI
53 microorganisms in the product determines both its shelf-life and safety. The pathogens of interest

54 in fresh and frozen meat and meat products are; Salmonella spp., Staphylococcus aureus, Listeria

SC
55 monocytogenes, Escherichia coli, Yersinia enterocolitica, Campylobacter spp. and Clostridium

56 perfringens (Mor-Mur & Yuste, 2010).

57
U
AN
58 With an increasing demand for high quality dried products that retain their natural characteristics

(Fernandes, Rodrigues, Law & Mujumdar, 2011) and consumer expectation for minimally
M

59

60 processed, convenient and safe food products, solar drying is gaining a lot of interest. However,
D

61 in order to optimize the drying process in tropical solar drying conditions, information on dried
TE

62 beef quality in conditions close to that of the real process is needed. The process of beef

63 dehydration during salting and drying at low temperature conditions and its effect on quality has
EP

64 been examined (Chabbouh et al., 2011). Whereas pre-treatment by salting is a common practice

65 for traditional dried meat products in Kenya (Gichure, Kunyanga, Mathi & Imungi, 2014),
C

66 consumers increasingly require low salt or unsalted foods. Furthermore, dried unsalted meat is
AC

67 more suitable for use as an ingredient in new product development. The present study was

68 therefore undertaken to compare the effects of cabinet air drying temperatures and unsalted beef

69 slice thickness on the color (L*, a*, b*, H* and C*), texture, rehydration ratio and

70 microbiological quality of the dried product.

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

71 2. Materials and methods

72 2.1. Sample collection and preparation

73 Meat (beef) of high microbial quality from the round of the hind quarter of an inspected male

74 carcass was purchased from Dagoretti slaughter house, Nairobi, Kenya. Excess fat was trimmed

PT
75 off to prevent rancidity while drying. It was then cleaned and stored in a cold room at 5 °C for 48

RI
76 h prior to experiments so that the storage conditions would be the same for all samples before

77 drying. The meat was frozen overnight to obtain enough consistency for cuting and cut along the

SC
78 direction of its fibers into thin strips of 100 mm long, 30 mm wide and varying thicknesses of

79 2.5, 5.0, 7.5 or 10 mm. The average moisture content of fresh beef was 76.67%.

80
U
AN
81 2.2. Experimental design

Drying experiments were carried out using a bench top cabinet dryer “Hohenheim HT mini”
M

82

83 (Innotech-ingenieursgesellschaft mbH, Altdorf, Germany) at 30, 40, 50, and 60 °C air

D

84 temperatures and airflow generated by a fan which was set at a constant voltage of 24 V. For
TE

85 each drying run, about 220 g of the meat pieces with varying slice thicknesses were spread out in

86 a single layer on perforated trays. The drying experiments were repeated 3 times at each
EP

87 temperature and slice thickness and dried to 10 to 20% moisture content (dry basis), representing

88 the moisture content of traditional dried meats of tropical countries (Kalilou, Collignan &
C

89 Zakhia, 1998). This corresponds to a water activity less than 0.6 in the experimental temperature
AC

90 range (Ahmat, Bruneau, Kuitche & Aregba, 2014).

91

92 2.3. Colour determination

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

93 Colour measurements were performed at room temperature (25 °C) using a hand held tri-

94 stimulus colorimeter (Minolta Chroma Meter CR-200, Minolta Co., Osaka, Japan) with an 8 mm

95 diameter measuring area. The instrument was calibrated on the Hunterlab colour space system

96 using a white reference tile (“L*” = 97.50, “a*” = - 0.60 and “b*” = 2.30) and a D65 illuminant

PT
97 source before the measurements. For each sample three dried strips from each replicate were

RI
98 placed as a single layer on a flat plate, and the tip of the colorimeter measuring head pointed at

99 the sample surface, eight consecutive measurements were taken on different areas of the surface.

SC
100 The L*, a* and b* colour coordinates were determined according to the ISO/CIE standard color

101 space system proposed by Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage (Joint ISO/CIE Standard,

102 2008).
U
AN
103 where: L* is the lightness or darkness (black, L*=0; white, L*=100), +a* is the redness, -a* is

the greenness, +b* is yellowness, and -b* is the blueness.

M

104

105
D

106 In addition, the hue-angle (h°) and saturation index or chroma (C*), which describe the hue
TE

107 colour (H*) and brightness or vividness of color, respectively, were calculated using Equations 1

108 and 2 according to AMSA (2012) guidelines:

EP

∗
(1)
ℎ = tan ( ∗ )
C

∗ ∗ ∗ . (2)
=( + )
AC

109

110 2.4. Rehydration ratio assessment

111 To calculate the rehydration ratio, the dried sample was weighed, immersed in a hot water bath at

112 100 °C for 10 minutes, drained and reweighed. The rehydration ratio was then calculated as

113 shown in Equation 3. The procedure was conducted in triplicate for each sample.

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

= (3)

114 where; RR is the rehydration ratio, and M and M0 are the sample weights after and before placing

115 in the hot water bath, respectively.

PT
116

117 2.5. Texture measurement

RI
118 Texture measurements were done for dried beef using a TA.XT.plus Texture Analyzer (Stable

119 Microsystems, Surrey, UK) with the Volodkevich bite jaws (HDP/VB*) fixture. This fixture

SC
120 performs an imitative test by simulating the action of an incisor tooth biting through food. It

U
121 comprises upper and lower jaws which are fitted to the load cell and Heavy Duty Platform. A
AN
122 sample is positioned in the lower jaw and the biting action is provided by the compressive

123 movement of the upper jaw shearing into the meat (Hansen, Hansen, Aaslyng & Byrne, 2004).
M

124 The Volodkevich test was carried out at a deformation rate of 100mm/min to give the maximum

125 shear force (N). The pre-test-speed, test speed, and post-speed were set at 5.0 mm/s, 5.0 mm/s
D

126 and 2.0 mm/s respectively, and the compression distance was set at 25%. Height calibration was
TE

127 10 mm above the sample. A 50 kg load cell was used to compress the samples. Pieces of dried

128 beef samples measuring 1 cm2 (square cross-section), were placed parallel to the compression
EP

129 plate surface and compressed.

C

130
AC

131 2.6. Microbial analysis

132 Meat samples (25 g) were mixed in sterile glass jars containing 225 ml of sterile 0.85% saline

133 solution for 2 min. Decimal serial dilutions were prepared. Subsequently, 0.1 ml aliquots of each

134 dilution were spread over the surface of plates in triplicates. Culture media and incubation

135 conditions used for the different microbial groups were as follows: total viable count on pour

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

136 plates of plate count agar (PCA) at 35 °C for 48 h-AOAC official method 966.23 (AOAC, 2000);

137 Staphylococcus aureus on Baird-Parker agar at 35 °C for 48 hours (Baird-Parker, 1962);

138 Salmonella on Xylose-Lysine-desoxycholate (XLD) agar at 35 °C for 24 h (Taylor, 1965);

139 Enterobacteriaceae on Violet Red Bile Glucose (VRBG) agar at 35 °C for 24 h (Mossel,

PT
140 Elederink, Koopmans & Van Rossem, 1978) and Listeria monocytogenes on Listeria selective

RI
141 medium at 35 °C for 24 h (Curtis, Mitchel, King & Griffin, 1989). The results were expressed as

142 Log10 colony-forming units per gram (Log10 cfu/g) of dried meat. All media were purchased

SC
143 from Oxoid (Basingstoke, Hampshire, England, UK).

144

145 2.7. Statistical analysis

U
AN
146 In order determine the effects of experimental variables (drying air temperature and beef slice

thickness) on beef quality parameters; a 4 x 4 factorial design was used. The data were analysed
M

147

148 using MINITAB version 16 software (Minitab Inc, Pennsylvania, USA). Analysis of variance
D

149 was carried out and the P-value used to determine significance of main effects and interaction
TE

150 between variables at α ≤ 0.05, α ≤ 0.01 or α ≤ 0.001. To establish differences between means, the

151 experiments were designed as a single factor completely randomized design. The results were
EP

152 subjected to one-way analysis of variance and differences in treatment means identified at P ≤

153 0.05 by Duncan’s Multiple-range Test using GenStat Edition 13 software (VSN International
C

154 Ltd, UK). All the experiments were replicated three times.
AC

155

156 3. Results and discussion

157 3.1. Colour

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

158 Mean colour parameter values of fresh beef and samples dried at different experimental

159 conditions are given in Table 1. The temperature and slice thickness effects on colour parameters

160 are also given. Fresh beef had values of 32.70±2.10, 14.70±1.19, 7.74±0.64, 27.90±3.80 and

161 16.60±0.77 for L*, a*, b*, hue (H*) and saturation index/chroma (C*) respectively (Table 1).

PT
162 Meat color is one of the most important quality traits, affected by a number of factors including;

RI
163 pH, protein denaturation, and water content (Feiner, 2006). Drying temperature had a significant

164 effect (P ≤ 0.001) on all the colour variables increasing H* and decreasing L*, a*, b* and C*

SC
165 (Table 1). Similar results were reported by Teixeira, Pereira and Rodrigues, (2011) for air dried

166 goat meat. Increasing beef thickness during drying significantly decreased the L*, a*, b* and C*

167
U
colour parameters but had no effect (P > 0.05) on the H* colour attribute.
AN
168

The lightness (L*) values of dried beef at all experimental conditions ranged from 22.40±2.02 to
M

169

170 26.20±3.50. The L* value indicates the extent of browning of dried samples; a higher L* value
D

171 showing less brown color of the product (Rahman, Al-Amri & Al-Bulushi, 2002). The reduction
TE

172 of L* values showed that drying at a higher temperature caused significant protein structural

173 changes of meat samples (Lawrie, 1998). This could have been caused by the Maillard browning
EP

174 reactions resulting from the reaction between amine groups of muscle proteins and available

175 reducing sugars in connective tissues during heat processing of meat products (Forrest, Aberle,
C

176 Hedrick, Judge & Merkel, 1975). The decrease in L* values with meat thickness was due to the
AC

177 longer drying time and the longer exposure of the beef to the drying medium resulting in more

178 browning of sugar-amine.

179

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

180 The redness (a*) values of dried beef ranged from 1.66±0.77 to 8.88±2.00. The decrease in

181 redness (a*) values with temperature was more significant (P ≤ 0.05) at a lower meat thickness

182 (2.5 mm). A significant interaction (P ≤ 0.001) between drying air temperature and beef

183 thickness on reduction of redness (a*) and red intensity as noted by saturation index (C*) was

PT
184 also observed (Table 1). The redness of meat is due to the presence of myoglobin, which is the

RI
185 most important meat pigment (Hedrick, Aberle, Forrest, Judge & Merkel, 1994). Surface

186 discoloration in fresh meat is mostly as a result of metmyoglobin formation (Renerre, 1990),

SC
187 which is an oxidised form of myoglobin. The rate of myoglobin oxidation is greatly accelerated

188 by temperature increase (Yin & Fautsman, 1993), causing a reduction in redness of meat.

189
U
AN
190 The L*, a* and b* values, indicate the degree of browning during drying as well as a source of

variation in light scattering from the surface of meat (van Oeckel, Warnants & Boucque, 1999).
M

191

192 However, the H* and C* values, calculated from the CIE a* and b* values provide greater
D

193 sensitivity than L* a* and b* values alone (Little, 1975). The hue colour of beef dried at 60 °C
TE

194 was significantly higher (P ≤ 0.05) than samples dried at lower temperatures (Table 1). Hue (H*)

195 is the colour description as communicated in language (red, yellow, green, blue) (AMSA, 2012).
EP

196 Larger H* values in meat indicate less red, more metmyoglobin formation and a more well-done

197 cooked color (Howe, Gullet & Usborne, 1982).

C

198
AC

199 3.2. Rehydration ratio

200 Both temperature and sample thickness had highly significant (P ≤ 0.001) effects on the

201 rehydration ratio of beef whereas the interaction effect was not significant (P > 0.05) (Table 2).

202 Rehydration refers to the process of moistening a dried product and is an indicator of cellular and

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

203 structural disintegration that occurs during dehydration (Rastogi, Angersbach, Niranjan & Knorr,

204 2000). Changes in rehydration ratios of beef when dried under different temperature conditions

205 and sample thicknesses are shown in Figure 1. The rehydration ratio was significantly higher (P

206 ≤ 0.05) at 60 °C for dried beef with thicknesses of 5.0, 7.5 and 10 mm, while there was no

PT
207 significant difference (P > 0.05) in rehydration ratios for samples with 2.5 mm thickness at all

RI
208 the drying temperatures.

209

SC
210 The rate and extent of water uptake during rehydration of meat is greatly influenced by the

211 cellular and structural arrangements in the food matrix since this provides the channels for

212
U
transporting water to muscle fibers (Niamnuy, Devahastin & Soponronnarit, 2014). During
AN
213 heating, the different meat proteins denature and cause meat structural changes, such as the

destruction of cell membranes, transverse and longitudinal shrinkage of muscle fibres,

M

214

215 aggregation and gel formation of sarcoplasmic proteins and shrinkage and solubilization of
D

216 connective tissue fibres (Tornberg, 2005). The transverse shrinkage of muscle fibres occurs
TE

217 mostly at 40 to 60 °C, while the connective tissue fibres and the muscle fibres cooperatively

218 shrink longitudinally at 60 to 70 °C, leading to larger extracellular voids (Tornberg, 2005). This,
EP

219 together with solubilization of connective tissues could explain the increased water uptake during

220 rehydration of dried beef at 60 °C.

C

221
AC

222 There was a significant decrease (P ≤ 0.05) in rehydration ratio with increase in meat thickness at

223 all drying temperatures (Figure 1). This may have been due to the fact that the rate of moisture

224 removal from meat with a higher thickness value was slower, thus increasing the drying time and

225 exposure to high temperature. This enhanced denaturation of myofibrilar and collagenous

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

226 connective tissue proteins, making them lose their water holding ability (Nathakaranakule,

227 Kraiwanichkul & Soponronnarit, 2007) and resulting in loss of ability to reconstitute faster.

228

229 3.3. Texture

PT
230 Figure 2 shows beef firmness (N) values as affected by slice thickness and drying temperature.

RI
231 Both temperature and slice thickness had a significant effect (P ≤ 0.001) on the texture of beef.

232 The interaction effect was also highly significant (P ≤ 0.001) (Table 2). However, there was no

SC
233 significant effect (P > 0.05) of temperature on firmness values at higher beef thicknesses (5 to 10

234 mm) and the effect of drying temperature was more pronounced at beef thickness of 2.5 mm.

235
U
Texture is the sensory and functional manifestation of the structural, mechanical and surface
AN
236 properties of foods detected through the senses of vision, hearing, touch and kinesthetic. Its

components include; hardness, firmness/softness, crispness, juiciness, mealiness/grittiness and

M

237

238 toughness/fibrousness (Szczesniak, 2002).

D

239
TE

240 The firmness values of dried beef increased with an increase in temperature from 30 to 50 °C

241 then decreased at 60 °C (Figure 2). Texture changes during processing are caused by complex
EP

242 chemical changes on the muscle fibers and connective tissue fibers. The variation of texture

243 within a temperature range of 40 to 75 °C and the effect of heat-induced denaturation of meat
C

244 proteins at varying temperatures was reported by Davey & Gilbert, (1974). Heating meat to
AC

245 around 50 °C yields an increased toughness, which has been attributed to myofibrillar

246 denaturation (Bouton & Harris, 1972). The improved tenderness of meat at 60 °C is related to

247 collagen denaturation (Bouton & Harris, 1981), although there has been speculations of effect of

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

248 increased protolytic activity in beef muscles (Davey & Niederer, 1977) resulting in meat

249 tenderization.

250

251 The Volodkevich firmness values were significantly lower (P ≤ 0.05) at meat thickness of 2.5

PT
252 mm. This could be because the longer drying time caused the thicker meat slices to be exposed to

RI
253 heat for longer; as a result, the muscle fibers were more shortened (Sa-adchom, Swasdiseri,

254 Nathakaranakule & Soponronnarit, 2011) giving a much denser material and tougher meat. The

SC
255 size of the meat could also have influenced the firmness values due to the higher compression

256 force required to deform thicker meat

257
U
AN
258 3.4. Microbial quality

Table 3 shows the results obtained from the quantification of bacteria in the fresh and dried beef
M

259

260 samples evaluated immediately after drying. No significant growth (< 2.00±0.00 log10 cfu/g) of
D

261 Enterobacteriacea was observed, while Salmonella spp and Listeria monocytogenes were not
TE

262 detected in any of the samples. Generally Enterobacteriaceae and Listeria species are mostly

263 good indicators of hygiene and post-process contamination of heat processed foods (FSA, 2001;
EP

264 Wang & Murianna, 1994).

C

265
AC

266 Fresh beef had an aerobic plate count of 4.89±0.01 log10 cfu/g (Table 3). The beef samples used

267 for drying were taken from chilled and frozen cuts, which could have enhanced microbial

268 growth. Good hygiene and handling practices are usually more important for meat that is frozen

269 and thawed than unrefrigerated meat (Pham, 2004), owing to the fact that thawing is a slower

270 and less uniform process than freezing, creating more favourable temperature conditions for

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

271 microbial growth. The structural disarray caused by the freezing process, results in exudate

272 formation during thawing. This nutrient dense moisture also provides an excellent medium for

273 microbial growth (Leygonie, Britz & Hoffman, 2012). The numbers of Staphylococci present in

274 the fresh meat were high, 4.65±0.05 log10 cfu/g of beef (Table 3). These species are naturally

PT
275 found in humans and the high levels found in fresh meat was attributed to the excessive handling

RI
276 of the meat samples during preparation for drying, to ensure uniform strips were prepared to

277 reduce experimental error (Mothershaw et al., 2003).

SC
278

279 The effect of temperature, beef slice thickness and the interaction between the variables on the

280
U
TVC and numbers of Staphylococci on dried beef samples was highly significant (P ≤ 0.001)
AN
281 (Table 3). The TVC counts in beef dried at 30, 40 and 50 °C (at 2.5 and 5.0 mm meat

thicknesses) were significantly higher (P ≤ 0.05) than that of fresh beef. The increase in bacterial
M

282

283 counts could be explained by the effect of low temperature drying for a longer time. The
D

284 thickness of meat determines the duration of drying and therefore the length of exposure of
TE

285 microorganisms to the drying medium. The Staphylococci were also resistant to drying at these

286 low temperatures (30-50 °C); their numbers were highest (7.08±0.03 log10 cfu/g) for beef
EP

287 samples with 10 mm slice thickness, dried at 30 °C (Table 1).

288
C

289 This suggests that during the initial stages of low temperature drying, the Staphylococci
AC

290 continued to increase in numbers until water activity (aw) was reduced to below about 0.86 (Dave

291 & Ghaly, 2011). Staphylococcus aureus is one of the most common food borne pathogens

292 causing food poisoning and the minimum number of cells required to produce sufficient

293 enterotoxin and cause food poisoning is about 7.00 log10 cfu/g (Mossel & van Netten, 1990).

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

294 Consequently the high numbers detected are a potential health risk. Staphylococci can grow at a

295 temperature range of 6.70 to 45.40 °C with the optimum being 37 °C. This temperature is also

296 optimal for staphylococcal enterotoxin (SE) production (Baird-Parker, 1971). In general, drying

297 at the lowest temperature significantly increased (P ≤ 0.05) the microbial flora approximately 2–

PT
298 3 log cycles and drying at 60 °C was the most effective drying process for reducing microbial

RI
299 numbers.

300

SC
301 4. Conclusion

302 Increasing the drying temperature has a significant effect on all the colour parameters, increasing

303
U
H* and decreasing L*, a*, b* and C*. Increasing the meat thickness decreases L*, a* and b*
AN
304 values and therefore decreases the acceptability of dried beef. Drying of beef at 60 °C produces a

product with the highest rehydration ratio compared to drying at lower temperatures.
M

305

306 Rehydration ratio of dried beef decreases with increase in meat thickness at all drying
D

307 temperatures. Firmness of dried beef increases with increase in temperature from 30 to 50 °C
TE

308 then decreases at 60 °C at a thickness below 5.0 mm but is not affected by temperature at higher

309 thicknesses. The lowest firmness of dried beef occurs at a slice thickness of 2.5 mm. Drying at
EP

310 60 °C is most effective in reducing bacterial numbers when compared to lower drying

311 temperatures.
C

312
AC

313 Acknowledgement

314 Funding from the German Ministry of Education and Research through the University of Kassel

315 under the RELOAD project is gratefully acknowledged.

316

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

317 References

318 Ahmat, T., Bruneau, D., Kuitche, A. & Aregba, A. W. (2014). Desorption isotherms of fresh

319 beef: An experimental and modeling approach. Meat Science, 96, 1417-1424.

320 AMSA (2012). Meat color measurement guidelines. Illinois USA: American Meat Science

PT
321 Association.
322 A.O.A.C (2000). AOAC official method 966.23. Microbiological methods. Association of

RI
323 Official Analytical Chemists International. Maryland, USA.
324 Baird‐Parker, A. C. (1962). An improved diagnostic and selective medium for isolating

SC
325 coagulase positive staphylococci. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 25, 12-19.
326 Baird‐Parker, A. C. (1971). Factors affecting the production of bacterial food poisoning toxins.

U
327 Journal of Applied Microbiology, 34, 181-197.
328 Bouton, P. E. & Harris, P. V. (1972). The effects of cooking temperatures and time on some
AN
329 mechanical properties of meat. Journal of Food Science, 37, 140-144.
330 Bouton, P. E. & Harris, P. V. (1981). Changes in the tenderness of meat cooked at 50-65 °C.
M

331 Journal of Food Science, 46, 475-478.

332 CFDAR, Canadian Food and Drugs Act and Regulations (1990). With amendments to May 3,
D

333 B.14.002. [S], Ottawa: The Queen’s Printer, p. 64.

334 Chabbouh, M., Hajji, W., Ahmed, S. B. H., Farhat, A., Bellagha, S. & Sahli, A. (2011).
TE

335 Combined effects of Osmotic Dehydration and Convective Air Drying on Kaddid Meats:
336 Kinetics and Quality, Drying Technology, 29, 1571-1579.
EP

337 Curtis, G. D. W., Mitchell, R. G., King, A. F. & Griffin, E. J. (1989) A selective differential
338 medium for the isolation of Listeria monocytogenes. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 8, 95-98.
C

339 Dave, D. & Ghaly, A. E. (2011). Meat spoilage mechanisms and preservation techniques: a
340 critical review. American Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences, 6, 486-510.
AC

341 Davey, C. L. & Gilbert, K. V. (1994). Temperature-dependent cooking toughness of meat.

342 Journal of the Science of Food & Agriculture, 25, 931-938.
343 Davey, C. L. & Niederer, A. F. (1977). Cooking tenderizing in beef. Meat science, 1, 271-276.
344 FAO. (1995). Development and Promotion of value added products. Project Document, FAO,
345 Rome.

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

346 Farkas, B. E. & Singh, R. P. (1991). Physical properties of air‐dried and freeze‐dried chicken
347 white meat. Journal of Food Science, 56, 611-615.
348 Feiner, G. (2006). Colour in fresh meat and in cured meat products. Meat products handbook:
349 Practical science and technology, pp. 142-156. Cambridge, England, Woodhead Publishing
350 Limited.

PT
351 Fernandes, F. A., Rodrigues, S., Law, C. L. & Mujumdar, A. S. (2011). Drying of exotic tropical
352 fruits: a comprehensive review. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 4, 163-185.

RI
353 Food Standards Australia (FSA) New Zealand (2001). Guidelines for the microbiological
354 examination of ready-to-eat foods. Retrieved June 10 2009 from, http://www.foodstandards.

SC
355 gov.au/_srcfiles/Guidelines%20for%20Micro%20exam.pdf
356 Forrest, J. C., Aberle, E. D., Hedrick, H. B., Judge, M. D. & Merkel, R. A. (1975). Principles of

U
357 meat science. San Fransisco, Freeman and company.
358 Gichure, J. N., Kunyanga, C. N., Mathi, P. M. & Imungi, J. K. (2014). The present status of meat
AN
359 processing and preservation in the pastoral regions of Kenya. Food Science & Quality
360 Management, 32, 42-50.
M

361 Haard, N. F. (1992). Control of chemical composition and food quality attributes of cultured fish.
362 Food research international, 25, 289-307.
D

363 Hansen, S., Hansen, T., Aaslyng, M. D. & Byrne, D. V. (2004). Sensory and instrumental
364 analysis of longitudinal and transverse textural variation in pork longissimus dorsi. Meat Science,
TE

365 68, 611-629.

366 Harris, P. V. & Shorthose, W. R. (1988). Meat texture. In R Lawrie (Ed). Developments in meat
EP

367 science, pp. 245–296. London, Elsevier Applied Science.

368 Hedrick, H. B., Aberle, E. D., Forrest, J. C., Judge, M. D. & Merkel, R. A. (1994). Principles of
Meat Science. (3rd Ed.). Iowa, Kendall & Hunt.
C

369
370 Howe, J. L., Gullett, E. A. & Usborne, W. R. (1982). Development of pink color in cooked pork.
AC

371 Canadian Institute of Food Science and Technology, 15, 19.

372 Joint ISO/CIE Standard: Colorimetry-part 4: CIE 1976 L*a*b* colour space. ISO 11664-4:
373 2008(E)/CIE S 014-4/E: 2007:
374 Kalilou, S., Collignan, A. & Zakhia, N. (1998). Optimizing the traditional processing of beef into
375 Kilishi. Meat science, 50, 21-32.

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

376 Lawrie, R. A. (1998) The storage and preservation of meat. II. Moisture control. In Lawrie’s
377 Meat Science. (6th Ed.), pp. 178-199. England, Woodhead Publishing,.
378 Leygonie, C., Britz, T. J., & Hoffman, L. C. (2012). Impact of freezing and thawing on the
379 quality of meat. Meat science, 91, 93-98.
380 Little, A. C. (1975). Off on a tangent. Journal of Food Science, 40, 410.

PT
381 Mackey, B. M., Pritchel, C. & Mead, G. C. (1990). Heat resistance of Listeria: Strain differences
382 and effects on meat type and curing salts. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 10, 251-255.

RI
383 Mor-Mur, M. & Yuste, J. (2010). Emerging Bacterial Pathogens in Meat and Poultry: An
384 Overview. Food Bioprocess & Technology, 3, 24–35.

SC
385 Mossel, D. A. A., Elederink, I., Koopmans, M. & Van Rossem, F. V. (1978). Optimalisation of a
386 MacConkey-type medium for the enumeration of Enterobacteriaceae. Laboratory practice, 27,

U
387 1049-1050.
388 Mossel, D. A. & van Netten, P. (1990). Staphylococcus aureus and related staphylococci in
AN
389 foods. In D. Jones, R. G. Board, M. Sussman (Eds) Staphylococi, pp. 1235-1455., Blackwell,
390 Oxford, UK.
M

391 Mothershaw, A., Rahman, M. S., Mohammed, Z. & Guizani, N. (2003) Current perspectives of
392 traditional dried meat products and their safety. Proceeding of Asian-Oceania Drying Conference
D

393 (ADC) in Bangkok, Thailand, 1-3 September 2003.

394 Nathakaranakule, A., Kraiwanichkul, W. & Soponronnarit, S. (2007). Comparative study of
TE

395 different combined superheated-steam drying techniques for chicken meat. Journal of Food
396 Engineering, 80, 1023-1030.
EP

397 Niamnuy, C., Devahastin, S. & Soponronnarit, S. (2014). Some recent advances in
398 microstructural modification and monitoring of foods during drying: A review. Journal of Food
C

399 Engineering, 123, 148-156.

400 Olaoye, O. A. (2011). Meat: An overview of its composition, biochemical changes and
AC

401 associated microbial agents. International Food Research Journal, 18, 877-885
402 Park, G. S., Lee, S. J. & Jeong, E. S. (2002). The quality characteristics of beef jerky according
403 to the kinds of saccharides and the concentrations of green tea powder. Journal-Korean Society
404 of Food Science and Nutrition, 31, 230-235.
405 Pham, Q. T. (2004). Thawing. In Jensen (Ed.). Encyclopaedia of meat science, vol. 3, pp. 1150–
406 1156. Oxford, Elsevier Academic Press.

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

407 Rahman, M. S., Al-Amri, O. S. & Al-Bulushi, I. (2002) Pores and physico-chemical
408 characteristics of dried tuna produced by different methods of drying. Journal of Food
409 Engineering. 53: 301-313.
410 Rastogi, N. K., Angersbach, A., Niranjan, K. & Knorr, D. (2000). Rehydration kinetics of high-
411 pressure pre-treated and osmotically dehydrated pineapple. Journal of Food Science, 65, 838–

PT
412 841.
413 Renerre, M. T. (1990). Factors involved in the discoloration of beef meat. International Journal

RI
414 of Food Science & Technology, 25, 613-630.
415 Sa-Adchom, P., Swasdisevi, T., Nathakaranakule, A. & Soponronnarit, S. (2011). Drying

SC
416 kinetics using superheated steam and quality attributes of dried pork slices for different
417 thickness, seasoning and fibers distribution. Journal of Food Engineering, 104, 105-113.

U
418 Szczesniak, A. S. (2002). Texture is a sensory property. Food quality and preference, 13, 215-
419 225.
AN
420 Taylor, W. L. (1965). Xylose lysine agars; new media for isolation of enteric pathogens.
421 American Journal of Clinical Pathology, 44, 471-475.
M

422 Teixeira, A. Pereira, E. & Rodrigues. E. S. (2011) Goat meat quality. Effects of salting, air-
423 drying and ageing processes. Small Ruminant Research, 98, 55-58.
D

424 Tornberg, E. (2005). Effects of heat on meat proteins–Implications on structure and quality of
425 meat products. Meat science, 70, 493-508.
TE

426 Van Oeckel, M. J., Warnants, U. & Boucque, V. (1999). Measurement and prediction of pork
427 color. Meat Science, 52, 347-354.
EP

428 Wang, C. & Muriana, P. M. (1994). Incidence of Listeria monocytogenes in packages of retail
429 franks. Journal of Food Protection, 57, 382–386.
C

430 Yin, M. C. & Faustman, C. (1993). Influence of temperature, pH, and phospholipid composition
431 upon the stability of myoglobin and phospholipid: a liposome model. Journal of Agricultural and
AC

432 Food Chemistry, 41, 853-857.

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 1. Effect of drying temperature and sample thickness on beef colour parameters

L* a* b* H* C*
Fresh beef 32.70±2.10g 14.70±1.19h 7.74±0.64j 27.90±3.80ab 16.60±0.77h
Dried beef
temp thickness
(°C) (cm)

PT
0.25 26.20±3.50f 8.88±2.00g 4.10±2.08i 25.00±6.56ab 9.83±2.63g
30 0.50 25.70±1.78def 5.78±1.52e 2.85±1.48efg 25.10±6.14ab 6.47±1.99e
cdef d
0.75 25.30±2.73 4.70±0.39 2.75±0.94ef 30.00±8.36abc 5.49±0.60d

RI
bcdef c ef
1.00 23.60±0.68 2.90±0.53 2.60±1.74 38.60±12.47cd 3.96±1.58b
0.25 25.90±1.41ef 7.69±1.56f 3.72±1.38hi 25.30±5.20ab 8.58±1.91f
bcdef d de
40 0.50 24.90±1.80 4.56±1.17 2.37±0.75 28.00±9.82ab 5.20±1.09cd

SC
0.75 24.00±3.71abcde 2.66±0.67bc 1.08±0.30a 22.20±4.25a 2.87±0.70a
abcd bc abc bc
1.00 23.60±2.70 2.53±1.48 1.54±0.74 32.50±17.68 3.05±1.47a
ef e ghi abc
0.25 25.90±2.31 5.63±0.89 3.51±1.19 31.10±5.54 6.66±1.35e
50 0.50 23.90±1.99abcde 4.43±0.61d 2.30±0.40cde 27.60±5.02ab 5.01±0.58cd

U
abc abc
0.75 23.40±2.63 2.50±0.52 1.00±0.36a 22.20±8.97a 2.72±0.48a
1.00 22.40±1.91a 2.25±0.82abc 1.46±0.67ab 33.30±13.32bc 2.74±0.86a
AN
cdef c fgh
0.25 25.50±2.52 2.98±0.44 3.28±0.96 47.00±5.66de 4.45±0.95bc
ab ab bcde
60 0.50 23.00±2.08 1.79±0.74 2.22±0.66 51.20±15.73e 2.95±0.59a
0.75 22.70±3.08a 2.01±0.71ab 2.08±0.56bcde 46.60±12.03de 2.95±0.64a
M

a
1.00 22.40±2.02 1.66±0.77a 1.76±0.64abcd 46.50±14.97de 2.49±0.79a
temp *** *** *** *** ***
Effect thickness *** *** *** NS ***
D

temp x
thickness NS *** NS * ***
TE

Means in the same column with the same superscripts are not significantly different at P> 0.05.
Treatment effects significant at *P ≤ 0.05; ** P ≤ 0.01; *** P ≤ 0.001; NS not significant at P >
0.05
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 2. Temperature and thickness effects on rehydration ratio and beef firmness

Effects Rehydration Ratio Beef Firmness

Temperature *** ***
Thickness *** ***
Temperature x Thickness NS ***
r2 0.86 0.93

PT
*P ≤ 0.05; ** P ≤ 0.01; *** P ≤ 0.001; NS not significant at P > 0.05

RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 3. Mean bacterial counts for fresh and dried beef samples

Entero- Salmonella Listeria mono TVC Staphyloco

bacteriaceae Cytogenes ccus aureus
Fresh meat <2.00±0.00 ND ND 4.89±0.01e 4.65±0.05d
Dried Meat
Meat Drying

PT
thickness temp (0 C)
(cm)
0.25 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 6.04±0.01i 5.99±0.01i

RI
30 0.50 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 6.24±0.01j 6.17±0.01j
0.75 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 6.98±0.02k 6.76±0.03k
1.00 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 7.12±0.05l 7.08±0.03l

SC
0.25 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 5.28±0.01f 5.13±0.08f
40 0.50 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 5.37±0.10g 5.23±0.01f
0.75 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 5.69±0.01h 5.37±0.01g
1.00 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 5.74±0.03h 5.55±0.05h

U
0.25 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 5.27±0.01f 5.01±0.06e
50 0.50 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 5.21±0.01f 4.92±0.04e
AN
0.75 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 4.19±0.02c 4.00±0.06b
1.00 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 4.10±0.02b 3.98±0.03ab
0.25 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 4.55±0.03d 4.46±0.00a
M

60 0.50 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 4.15±0.04bc 3.89±0.02a

0.75 <2.00±0.00 ND ND 3.48±0.01a <2.00±0.00
1.00 <2.00±0.00 ND ND <2.00±0.00 <2.00±0.00
D

Temp. *** ***

Effects Thickness *** ***
TE

Temp. x
Thickness *** ***
Microbial counts expressed as log10 cfu/g. ND not detected. Means in the same column with the
same superscripts are not significantly different at P> 0.05. Treatment effects significant at *P ≤
EP

0.05; ** P ≤ 0.01; *** P ≤ 0.001; NS not significant at P > 0.05.

C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights

• Effects of air temperature and slice thickness on beef quality are evaluated.
• Physical quality changes due to temperature effects on meat proteins is explained.
• Effect of thickness due to extent of exposure of beef to drying air is established
• Microbiological quality of dried beef is determined.

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC