The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of relative humidity (RH) and different dry aging methods on the quality of beef. Sixteen loins, from eight carcasses, were used in this experiment. Each pair of loin was cut into eight sections with equal size, which were evenly assigned to eight treatments, by the combination of two dry aging methods (traditional and highly moisture-permeable special bag), two relative humidity (65 and 85% RH) and two aging times (21 and 42 days). At 85% RH, neither special bag nor the traditional dry aging methods were viable, since samples presented high microbiological counts, mucus and bad odor. At 65% RH, Enterobacteriaceae and lactic acid bacteria were not detected in any treatment. The highest aerobic plate count and psychrotrophic count were observed in the samples of the traditional dry-aged process whereas the special bag showed the greatest mold and yeast count. Regarding dry aging in special bag, there was a reduction in the weight loss (P < 0.05) and no change in the physical-chemical characteristics (P > 0.05) compared to traditional dry aging. The values of pH, moisture and Warner-Bratzler shear force were not affected (P > 0.05) by aging method and relative humidity. Thus, the results indicate that high RH should be avoided for both dry aging methods. Furthermore, the special bag dry aging can be considered an alternative to produce dry-aged beef, as it reduces weight losses even at conditions of lower relative humidity.
AhnströmMLSeyfertMHuntMCJohnsonDE. (2006).
Dry aging of beef in a bag highly permeable to water vapour. Meat Science73(4): 674–679.
2.
AMSA. (2015). Research Guidelines for Cookery, Sensory Evaluation, and Instrumental Tenderness Measurements of Meat.
Champaign:
American Meat Science Association.
3.
AOAC. (1990). Official methods of analysis. 15th ed.Washington, DC:
Association of Official Analytical Chemists, pp.99–101.
4.
BergerJKimYHBLegakoJFMartiniSLeeJEbnerP, et al. (2018).
Dry-aging improves meat quality attributes of grass-fed beef loins. Meat Science145: 285–291.
5.
BernardoAPSda SilvaACMFranciscoVCRibeiroFANassuRTCalkinsCR, et al. (2020).
Effects of freezing and thawing on microbiological and physical-chemical properties of dry-aged beef. Meat Science161: 108003.
6.
BlighEGDyerWJ. (1959).
A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology37(8): 911–917.
CampbellREHuntMCLevisPChambersE. (2001).
Dry-aging effects on palatability of beef longissimus muscle. Journal of Food Science66(2): 196–199.
9.
CarvalhoMEGasparinGPoletiMDRosaAFBalieiroJCCLabateCA, et al. (2014).
Heat shock and structural proteins associated with meat tenderness in Nellore beef cattle, a Bos indicus breed. Meat Science96(3): 1318–1324.
da SilvaACMPenaPOPflanzerSBdo NascimentoMS. (2019).
Effect of different dry aging temperatures on Listeria innocua as surrogate for Listeria monocytogenes. Meat Science157: 107884.
12.
DashdorjDTripathiVKChoSKimYHwangI. (2016).
Dry aging of beef; Review. Journal of Animal Science and Technology58: 28.
13.
DeGeerSLHuntMCBratcherCLCrozier-DodsonBAJohnsonDEStikaJF. (2009).
Effects of dry aging of bone-in and boneless strip loins using two aging processes for two aging times. Meat Science83(4): 768–774.
14.
DikemanMEObuzEGökVAkkayaLStrodaS. (2013).
Effects of dry, vacuum, and special bag aging; USDA quality grade; and end-point temperature on yields and eating quality of beef longissimus lumborum steaks. Meat Science94(2): 228–233.
15.
FerrazJBSFelícioPE. (2010).
Production systems – An example from Brazil. Meat Science84(2): 238–243.
16.
GudjónsdóttirMGacutanMDMendesACChronakisISJespersenLKarlssonAH. (2015).
Effects of electrospun chitosan wrapping for dry-ageing of beef, as studied by microbiological, physicochemical and low-field nuclear magnetic resonance analysis. Food Chemistry184: 167–175.
17.
HulánkováRKameníkJSalákováAZávodskýDBorilovaG. (2018).
The effect of dry aging on instrumental, chemical and microbiological parameters of organic beef loin muscle. Lwt – Food Science and Technology89: 559–565.
18.
KarelM. (1980). Lipid oxidation, secondary reactions, and water activity of foods. In: SimicMGKarelM (eds) Autoxidation in Food and Biological Systems, pp. 191–206.
Boston, MA:
Springer.
19.
KimYHBKempRSamuelssonLM. (2016).
Effects of dry-aging on meat quality attributes and metabolite profiles of beef loins. Meat Science111: 168–176.
20.
KhanMIJungSNamKCJoC. (2016).
Postmortem aging of beef with a special reference to the dry aging. Korean Journal for Food Science of Animal Resources36(2): 159–169.
21.
KimYHBKempRSamuelssonLM. (2016).
Effects of dry-aging on meat quality attributes and metabolite profiles of beef loins. Meat Science111: 168–176.
22.
KimYHBMeyersBKimHWLiceagaAMLemenagerRP. (2017).
Effects of stepwise dry/wet-aging and freezing on meat quality of beef loins. Meat Science123: 57–63.
23.
KimSLeeHJKimMYoonJWShinDJJoC. (2019).
Storage stability of vacuum-packaged dry-aged beef during refrigeration at 4°C. Food Science of Animal Resources39(2): 266–275.
24.
KoohmaraieM. (1994).
Muscle proteinases and meat aging. Meat Science36(1–2): 93–104.
25.
KornackiJLGurtlerJBStawickBA. (2015). Enterobacteriaceae, coliforms, and Escherichia coli as quality and safety indicators. In: SalfingerYTortorelloML (eds) Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of Foods. 5th ed.Washington, DC:
American Public Health Association, pp.103–120.
26.
LeeHJChoeJKimKTOhJLeeDGKwonKM, et al. (2017).
Analysis of low-marbled Hanwoo cow meat aged with different dry-aging methods. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences30(12): 1733–1738.
27.
Lepper-BlilieANBergEPBuchananDSBergPT. (2016).
Effects of post-mortem aging time and type of aging on palatability of low marbled beef loins. Meat Science112: 63–68.
LiXBabolJBredieWLPNielsenBTománkováJLundströmK. (2014).
A comparative study of beef quality after ageing longissimus muscle using a dry ageing bag, traditional dry ageing or vacuum package ageing. Meat Science97(4): 433–442.
30.
LiXBabolJWallbyALundströmK. (2013).
Meat quality, microbiological status and consumer preference of beef gluteus medius aged in a dry ageing bag or vacuum. Meat Science95(2): 229–234.
31.
MillerMFCarrMARamseyCBCrockettKLHooverLC. (2001).
Consumer thresholds for establishing the value of beef tenderness. Journal of Animal Science79(12): 3062–3068.
32.
MillerMFDavisGWRamseyCB. (1985).
Effect of subprimal fabrication and packaging methods on palatability and retail caselife of loin steaks from lean beef. Journal of Food Science50(6): 1544–1546.
33.
NjongmetaNAHall Pa LedenbachLFlowersRS. (2015). Acid-Producing microorganisms. In: SalfingerYTortorelloML (eds) Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of Foods. 5th ed.Washington, DC:
American Public Health Association, pp.229–236.
34.
OreskovichDCMcKeithFKCarrTRNovakofskiJBechetelPJ. (1988).
Effects of different aging procedures on the palatability of beef. Journal of Food Quality11(2): 151–158.
35.
ParrishFCBolesJARustREOlsonDG. (1991).
Dry and wet aging effects on palatability attributes of beef loin and rib steaks from three quality grades. Journal of Food Science56(3): 601–603.
36.
PittJIHockingAD. (1997). Fungi and Food Spoilage. 2nd ed.London:
Blackie Academic and Professional.
37.
PittJIHockingAD. (2009). Fungi and Food Spoilage. 3rd ed.New York:
Springer.
38.
RyserETSchumanJD. (2015). Mesophilic aerobic plate count. In: SalfingerYTortorelloML (eds) Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of Foods. 5th ed.Washington, DC:
American Public Health Association, pp.96–101.
39.
RyuD and Wolf-Hall C. (2015). Yeasts and molds. In: SalfingerYTortorelloML (eds) Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of Foods. 5th ed.Washington, DC:
American Public Health Association, pp.277–286.
40.
RyuSParkMRMaburutseBELeeWJParkD-JChoS, et al. (2018).
Diversity and characteristics of the meat microbiological community on dry aged beef. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology28(1): 105–108.
41.
SavellJW. (2008). Dry-Aging of Beef, Executive Summary.
USA:
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.
ShorthoseWRHarrisPV. (1990).
Effect of animal age on the tenderness of selected beef muscles. Journal of Food Science55(1): 1–8.
44.
SitzBMCalkinsCRFeuzDMUmbergerWJEskridgeKM. (2006).
Consumer sensory acceptance and value of wet-aged and dry-aged beef steaks. Journal of Animal Science84(5): 1221–1226.
45.
SmithRDNicholsonKLNicholsonJDWHarrisKBMillerRKGriffinDB, et al. (2008).
Dry versus wet aging of beef: Retail cutting yields and consumer palatability evaluations of steaks from US choice and US select short loins. Meat Science79(4): 631–639.
46.
StenströmHLiXHuntMCLundströmK. (2014).
Consumer preference and effect of correct or misleading information after ageing beef longissimus muscle using vacuum, dry ageing, or a dry ageing bag. Meat Science96(2 Pt A): 661–666.
47.
VasavadaPCCritzerFJ. (2015). Psychrotrophic microorganisms. In: SalfingerYTortorelloML (eds) Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of Foods. 5th ed.Washington, DC:
American Public Health Association, pp.175–189.
48.
VilellaGFGomesCLBattagliaCTPachecoMTBda SilvaVSNRodas-GonzálezA, et al. (2019).
Effects of combined wet- and dry-aging techniques on the physicochemical and sensory attributes of beef ribeye steaks from grain-fed crossbred zebu steers. Canadian Journal of Animal Science2019(99): 497–504.
49.
WarrenKEKastnerCL. (1992).
A comparison of dry-aged and vacuum-aged beef strip loins. Journal of Muscle Foods3(2): 151–157.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
