Moisture Retention by Water- and Air-Chilled Chicken Broilers
During Processing and Cutup Operations
L. L. Young1 and D. P. Smith
Richard B. Russell Agricultural Research Center, P.O. Box 5677, Athens, Georgia 30604-5677
ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to evalu-
ate effects of storage and cutting on moisture retention
by air- and water-chilled broiler chickens. Sixty-four
broilers were slaughtered, chilled by cold air or immer-
sion in water, stored over night, cut into fore- and hind-
quarters, and then stored an additional 24 h. Air chilling
conditions were 4°C with air velocity of 2.2 m3/min.
Water chilling conditions were 1°C with mechanical agi-
tation. Moisture absorption and retention were ob-
served as weight changes throughout the process.
(Key words: air, chill, moisture, poultry, water)
INTRODUCTION
In January of 2001, the Food Safety Inspection Service
of the USDA promulgated revised rules restricting the
amount of moisture that water-chilled broiler chickens
may retain in commerce (USDA, 2001). Rules were to
take effect on January 1, 2002, but because of difficulties
encountered in compliance and enforcement, imple-
mentation was subsequently postponed until January
1, 2003. Under these regulations, carcasses may retain
only the minimum of chiller water necessary to meet
safety objectives. Moreover, the maximum water re-
tained must be explicitly stated on package labels as
added water. Even though the regulations specify mois-
ture retention maximums, they do not specify how pro-
cessing companies are to assess added water or how
enforcement is to be carried out. Consequently 3 areas
of concern have been expressed: (1) Because of variation
in processing arrangements, all companies will not be
allowed the same level of added water in their products;
(2) because of bird-to-bird variation in moisture absorp-
tion, labels stating an average added moisture content
may not be accurate for much of the product on the
U.S. market; and (3) according to the National Chicken
Council (2001, National Chicken Council, Washington,
2004 Poultry Science Association, Inc.
Received for publication January 24, 2003.
Accepted for publication August 20, 2003.
1
To whom correspondence should be addressed: lyoung@saa.
ars.usda.gov.
119
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/article-abstract/83/1/119/1563950
by guest
on 04 March 2018
Air-chilled carcasses lost an average of 0.68% of their
postslaughter weight in storage prior to cutting but lost
no more during cutting or postcutting storage. The wa-
ter-chilled carcasses absorbed 11.7% moisture in chilling
but retained 6.98% through precutting storage, 6.00%
through cutting and 3.90% through postcutting storage.
These data offer baseline values for use in complying
with new USDA processing standards.
2004 Poultry Science 83:119–122
DC, personal communication), less than 6% of U. S.
poultry is sold as whole ready-to-cook carcasses, so
moisture retention data on intact carcasses may not be
applicable to 94% of raw chicken sold on the U.S. mar-
ket. Because of these concerns, baseline data are needed
on moisture retention by broiler chickens through all
stages of poultry processing, chilling, and storage for
use in establishing normal levels of moisture in various
products and for identifying important determinants of
variation in moisture content.
Beginning in the late 1960s, European concerns about
food safety resulted in changes in European Union (EU)
poultry chilling regulations. Under the new regulations,
immersion chilling of poultry was banned for products
marketed in the EU. That ban resulted in extensive stud-
ies of the chilling process from food safety and economic
perspectives. These studies were thoroughly reviewed
at a 1974 symposium and subsequently published
(Brandt, 1974; Furnish, 1974; May, 1974; Stadleman,
1974; Thomson, et al., 1974; Traylor, 1974). Studies by
Bigbee and Dawson (1963) indicated that processing
variables most closely associated with moisture reten-
tion were duration of immersion chill and chilling me-
dium. Storage and shipping temperatures were also re-
ported to be important determinants of moisture reten-
tion (McKee et al., 1959; Bigbee and Dawson. 1963; May
et al., 1966; Thomson et al., 1966). Moisture absorption
by smaller carcasses exceeds that of larger carcasses
Abbreviation Key: EU = European Union.
 120 YOUNG AND SMITH
TABLE 1. Least squares means of moisture retention by air- and water-chilled broiler carcasses

Immediately 24 h
1 h postmortem 24 h storage postcutting postcutting
(intact carcasses) (intact carcasses) (24 h postmortem) (48 h postmortem)
Method n (%) (%) (%) (%)
Air chill 32 0.01y −0.68*y −0.44*y −0.54*y
Water chill 32 11.7*ax 6.98*bx 6.00*cx 3.90*dx
SEM 64 0.41 0.23 0.29 0.26

Means in the same row with differing superscripts differ significantly; P < 0.05.
a-d

Means in the same column with differing superscripts differ significantly; P < 0.05.
x-y

*Means are significantly greater than 0.00; P < 0.05.

on a percentage basis according to Essary and Dawson
(1965). Katz and Dawson (1964) reported that if car-
casses are cut up prior to chilling, moisture retention
by parts is as follows: neck > back > thigh > wing > breast
> drumstick. Moisture absorption for various parts of
intact carcasses was not determined in that study.
Clearly, moisture retention by water-chilled broilers is
highly variable and not easily predicted, especially if
the carcasses are cut up and further processed after
chilling. Data are needed on effects of processing vari-
ables on retained moisture. The objective of this study
was to evaluate the amount of moisture retained by
air- and immersion-chilled broilers throughout chilling,
cutup, and storage operations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Birds
Sixty-four commercially reared, mixed-sex, 43-d-old
broilers (2 replicates of 32 birds each) were procured
from the live-holding area of a local processing plant.
They had been deprived of feed for 8 h in accordance
with conventional commercial practice. After being
cooped in plastic cages, they were transported by truck
to the USDA pilot poultry processing facility (about
16 km).
Stunning and Slaughter
Upon arrival at the facility, birds were immediately
weighed (live weight) and then electrically stunned (10
sec, 50 V AC with variable current averaging 33 mA).
After stunning, the birds were manually transferred to
restraining cones, and both carotid arteries and one jug-
ular vein were manually severed with a knife. After 90
s bleeding, they were scalded in water at 54.4°C for
120 s and mechanically defeathered for 30 s. Feet were
removed by severing the tibiotarsal joint. The birds were
then manually eviscerated, and after a 10 min drip (20
min postmortem), each carcass was weighed (prechill
weight).
Chilling Treatments and Observations
Sixteen carcasses in each of 2 replicates were chilled
in cold water (initially1 to 2°C), and 16 were chilled in
air (2°C), 32 in all for each treatment. Overall mean
carcass weight ± SEM was 1,328 ± 27 g. The water-
treated birds were mechanically tumbled at 4 rpm for
30 min in a pilot-scale chiller containing 50:50 ice and
water, after which the carcasses were removed, and
surface water was allowed to drain for 10 min. Each
carcass was then weighed again (1 h postmortem
weight). Sample internal breast temperatures observed
with a manual probe on 2 additional carcasses in each
batch upon removal from the chillers was 2 to 4°C. The
additional carcasses were not included in the moisture
retention study. The water-chilled carcasses were
placed in individual plastic bags and stored for 24 h at
1°C. The air-chilled carcasses were placed in individual
plastic bags immediately after evisceration, weighed at
1 h postmortem (1 h postmortem weight), and then
stored in a cold room for 24 h. Air temperature was
2°C, and air velocity was 2.2 m3/min. After 24 h of
storage, internal breast temperature averaged 3°C when
measured with a manual probe on 2 extra carcasses
in each water- and air-chilled batch. Each carcass was

TABLE 2. Percentage of fore- and hindquarters of air- and water-chilled broiler chickens
immediately postcutting and 24 h postcutting

Forequarter Hindquarter
Immediately 24 h Immediately 24 h
postcutting postcutting postcutting postcutting
Method n (%) (%) (%) (%)

Air chill 32 55.7a 44.3b 55.9a 44.1b

Water chill 32 55.1a 44.9b 55.3a 44.7b
SEM 64 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.49

Means within cuts in the same row which share no common superscript differ significantly;P < 0.05.
a,b

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/article-abstract/83/1/119/1563950

by guest
on 04 March 2018
 CHILLER WATER ABSORPTION
TABLE 3. Effects of air- and water-chilling of chicken broiler carcasses on purge
from fore- and hindquarters and total purge
Forequarter
purge
Method n (%)
Air chill 32 −0.01by
Water chill 32 1.54*bx
SEM 64 0.16
Means in the same row with differing superscripts differ significantly; P < 0.05.
a,b
Means in the same column with differing superscripts differ significantly; P < 0.05.
x,y
*Significantly greater than 0.00; P < 0.05.
weighed again (24 h stored weight) and then cut into
fore- and hindquarters as described by Hudspeth et al.
(1973). Total fore- and hindquarter weights for each
carcass were observed immediately after cutting (post-
cutting weights). All parts from each carcass were
placed in individual plastic bags and stored at 1°C for
24 h, and total fore- and hindquarters for each carcass
were weighed again (24 h postcutting weights, 48 h post-
mortem).
Calculations and Statistical Analysis
Moisture retention at 1 h postmortem for each intact
carcass was calculated as a percentage of prechilled
weight. Percentages of fore- and hindquarters immedi-
ately postcutting and after 24 h storage (48 h postmor-
tem) were calculated as a percentage of prechilled
weight for each carcass. Percentage purge (postcutting
moisture loss) was calculated as the change in weight
of fore- and hindquarters and overall weight of parts
during 24 h postcutting storage.
All data were analyzed by ANOVA using replicates
and chilling treatments as main effects, and main effects
and interactions were tested for statistical significance
(P < 0.05) using the residual MS. Because the interactions
were not significant, data were pooled over replicates.
Least squares means were calculated for treatments and
tested for statistical significance with Student’s t-test.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1 shows mean percentage of moisture retention
immediately postchill (1 h postmortem), after 24 h of
intact carcass storage, immediately postcutting (24 h
postmortem), and after 24 h of parts storage (48 h post-
mortem) of the air- and water-chilled carcasses. Intact
air-chilled carcasses lost no moisture during the first
hour of storage under the conditions of this study but
within the first 24 h lost an average of 0.68%. Nonsig-
nificant changes in moisture retention after 24 h post-
mortem by the air-chilled birds indicate that no further
losses occurred during cutting or parts storage. Water-
chilled carcasses absorbed an average of 11.7% moisture
in the chillers, of which 4.72% was lost within 24 h of
intact carcass storage, 0.98% was lost in cutting, and
2.10% was lost in parts storage and resulted in 3.9% net
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/article-abstract/83/1/119/1563950
by guest
on 04 March 2018
121
Hindquarter
purge Total purge
(%) (%)
0.20*ay 0.10*y
2.27*ax 1.96*x
0.19 0.08
retention. All of the absorbed moisture will not be lost
from water-chilled broilers even after extended parts
storage. Thus the new labeling regulations will apply;
however, the amount of retained chiller water will vary.
Meeting new labeling regulations will therefore require
a precise definition of the product, including time and
conditions of storage. Moreover, when even minor
changes are made in the process such as cutting tech-
nique or storage conditions, moisture retention must
be reverified.
Table 2 shows percentage distribution of fore- and
hindquarters of the air- and water-chilled carcasses.
Chilling method had no effect on percentage of each
class of part. Moreover, parts storage had no effect on
percentage yield of parts regardless of chilling method,
in contrast to the study by Katz and Dawson (1964),
who reported that moisture retention by water-chilled
breasts and legs was less than by other parts. In that
study, however, carcasses were cut up prior to chilling
instead of after. In a report by Young and Northcutt
(2001) larger water-chilled carcasses, particularly those
of birds older than 44 d at slaughter, absorbed more
chiller water than smaller carcasses and retained that
moisture at least through cutup and parts storage up
to 6 h; however, birds in the present study were all the
same age and therefore of relatively uniform size. When
processors are producing products for markets requir-
ing specific parts sizes from a narrow range of carcass
sizes, absorption and retention will likely be unaffected
by small variations in carcass size, but when markets
require a diversity of sizes, retention properties may
need to be verified for each product class.
Table 3 shows effects of chilling method on moisture
loss (purge) of fore- and hindquarters during 24 h stor-
age after cutup. Water-chilled carcasses exhibited
greater purge than did those chilled in air. Furthermore,
hindquarters exhibited greater purge than forequarters,
regardless of chilling method. This latter observation is
consistent with those of a previous study by Young et
al. (2001). Because raw parts are marketed at retail in
many different product mixes, processors and market-
ers must evaluate moisture retention for each combina-
tion in their product lines or develop mathematical
models for estimating retention by different combina-
tions of parts if label claims are to reflect true moisture
retention levels.
 122 YOUNG AND SMITH
Data in this study clearly indicate that chiller water
absorption and retention is affected by multiple vari-
ables. For that reason, compliance with and enforcement
of recently enacted regulations may be a challenge for
poultry processors, marketers, and government enforce-
ment agencies. Results of the present study may be use-
ful in formulating approaches to meeting those chal-
lenges.
REFERENCES
Bigbee, D. G., and L. E. Dawson. 1963. Some factors that affect
change in weight of fresh chilled poultry. 1. Length of chill
period, chilling medium and holding temperature. Poult.
Sci. 42:457–462.
Brandt, A. W. 1974. The current status of chilling poultry in
Europe. Poult. Sci. 53:1291–1295.
Essary, E. O., and L. E. Dawson. 1965. Quality of fryer carcasses
as related to protein and fat levels in the diet. 1. Fat deposi-
tion and moisture pick-up during chilling. Poult. Sci.
44:7–15.
Furnish, K. 1974. An equipment suppliers viewpoint. Poult.
Sci. 53:1286–1287.
Hudspeth, J. P., C. E. Lyon, B. G. Lyon, and A. J. Mercuri.
1973. Weights of broiler parts as related to carcass weights
and type of cut. J. Food Sci. 38:145–150.
Katz, M., and L. E. Dawson. 1964. Water absorption and reten-
tion by cut up broiler parts chilled in polyphosphate solu-
tion. Poult. Sci. 43:1541–1546.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/article-abstract/83/1/119/1563950
by guest
on 04 March 2018
May, K. N. 1974. Changes in microbial numbers during final
washing and chilling of commercially slaughtered broilers.
Poult. Sci. 53:1282–1285.
May, K. N., W. R. Powell, and J. P. Hudspeth. 1966. A compari-
son of quality of fresh chicken packed in various containers.
Georgia Agric. Exp. Sta. Bull. N.S. 168. University of Geor-
gia, Athens, GA.
McKee, R. C., C. J. Conkey, and J. A. Carlson. 1959. A study
of comparative shelf life of wet- and dry-packed poultry.
Poult. Sci. 38:260–271.
Stadleman, W. J. 1974. Chilling poultry meat - Why the spurge
of interest. Poult. Sci. 53:1267–1268.
Thomson, J. E., A. J. Mercuri, J. A. Kinner, and D. H. Sanders.
1966. Effect of time and temperature of commercial continu-
ous chilling of fryer chickens on carcass temperatures,
weight and bacterial counts. Poult. Sci. 45:363–369.
Thomson, J. E., W. K. Whitehead, and A. J. Mercuri. 1974.
Chilling poultry meat-A literature review. Poult. Sci.
53:1268-1291.
Traylor, S. 1974. The federal inspector’s viewpoint on poultry
chilling. Poult. Sci. 53:1288–1290.
USDA. 2001. 98-062E, Performance standards for on-line anti-
microbial reprocessing of pre-chill poultry carcasses. Fed.
Regist. 66:8178.
Young, L. L., and J. K. Northcutt. 2001. Effect of age, sex and
aging duration on absorption and retention of chill water
by slaughtered broilers. Pages 200–201 in Proceedings of
the 47th International Congress of Meat Science and Tech-
nology, Kraków, Poland.
Young, L. L., J. K. Northcutt, R. J. Buhr, C. E. Lyon, and G. O.
Ware. 2001. Effects of age, sex, and duration of postmortem
aging on percentage yield of parts from broiler chicken
carcasses. Poult. Sci. 80:376–379.