Drip production in meat refrigeration 33 Table 2.6 Drip loss from wholesale groups of joints, after 2 days at 0C Joint weight of carcass Drip los g drip/100g rom joint 5.608 48 43.4 Fore-end 7.044 31.1 21.8 0.31 Side total 22.634 1493 Source: Taylor, 1972. The joints with the greatest drip loss were the commercially valuable chops, chump and leg joints. Table 2.6 shows that 84% of the gross drip loss came from these joints which made up only 54% of the total weight of mea on the carcass. In beef the topside and rump regions are particularly bad in respect rip, in comparison with the l. dorsi(Taylor, 1972). However, the difference between muscles may not apply to all animal species. Dawood(1995) found that average drip losses after thawing Najdi Camel steaks from chuck ribeye and leg were all in a similar range, 9.77-12.34%, and unaffected by he age(8-26 months)of the animal 2.3.2 Refrigeration factors The rate of change of temperature during chilling and the temperature at which meat is stored during the cold chain influence drip loss. Freezing and subsequent thawing substantially increase drip loss from meat 2.3.2.1 Chillin Rapid cooling of meat immediately after slaughter will reduce drip loss after subsequent cutting operations. The potential for drip loss is established n the first period of cooling, the temperature range conducive to drip is down to about 30C or perhaps a little lower There are a number of publications showing that rapid cooling can reduce drip production. Taylor(1972)compared two cooling treatments for pig carcasses(Table 2.7) In 38 out of 40 paired legs, the drip loss was less after the quicker cooling The difference varied between breed(Table 2.4)and ranged from ap- proximately 1.6-to two-fold. In other studies the two cooling rates again gave highly significant differences in drip loss from four muscles (Table 2.5) Similar experiments were also carried out on beef using four cooling 123hato°C( air at1-2ms-)+24hato°C( still air 247hato°C( still airThe joints with the greatest drip loss were the commercially valuable chops, chump and leg joints. Table 2.6 shows that 84% of the gross drip loss came from these joints which made up only 54% of the total weight of meat on the carcass. In beef the topside and rump regions are particularly bad in respect to drip, in comparison with the l. dorsi (Taylor, 1972). However, the difference between muscles may not apply to all animal species. Dawood (1995) found that average drip losses after thawing Najdi Camel steaks from chuck, ribeye and leg were all in a similar range, 9.77–12.34%, and unaffected by the age (8–26 months) of the animal. 2.3.2 Refrigeration factors The rate of change of temperature during chilling and the temperature at which meat is stored during the cold chain influence drip loss. Freezing and subsequent thawing substantially increase drip loss from meat. 2.3.2.1 Chilling Rapid cooling of meat immediately after slaughter will reduce drip loss after subsequent cutting operations.The potential for drip loss is established in the first period of cooling, the temperature range conducive to drip is down to about 30 °C or perhaps a little lower. There are a number of publications showing that rapid cooling can reduce drip production. Taylor (1972) compared two cooling treatments for pig carcasses (Table 2.7). In 38 out of 40 paired legs, the drip loss was less after the quicker cooling. The difference varied between breed (Table 2.4) and ranged from ap￾proximately 1.6- to two-fold. In other studies the two cooling rates again gave highly significant differences in drip loss from four muscles (Table 2.5). Similar experiments were also carried out on beef using four cooling procedures: 1 23 h at 0 °C (air at 1–2 m s-1 ) + 24 h at 0 °C (still air) 2 47 h at 0 °C (still air) Drip production in meat refrigeration 33 Table 2.6 Drip loss from wholesale groups of joints, after 2 days at 0 °C Joint Joint weight % of carcass Drip loss g drip/100 g (kg) weight from joint (g) Leg 5.608 24.8 43.4 0.77 Loin 6.500 28.7 82.0 1.26 Fore-end 7.044 31.1 21.8 0.31 Belly 3.482 15.4 2.1 0.06 Side total 22.634 – 149.3 0.66 Source: Taylor, 1972