Journal of Food Science and Technology

, Volume 56, Issue 4, pp 2224–2232 | Cite as

Optimization of the shelf life of lamb forelegs packed in different multilayer polymeric materials and modified atmospheres

  • Ramiro Sánchez Baltasar
  • Montaña López Parra
  • Ana Isabel Andrés NietoEmail author
Original Article


Lamb forelegs were packed in three different gas mixtures (Treatment N2: 70% N2–30% CO2; Treatment O2: 70% O2–30% CO2; Treatment Ar: 70% Ar–30% CO2) and two types of polymeric materials (B1, a polyamide-polypropylene bag and B2, a bag made of bio-oriented polyamide, aluminium and polyethylene). Physical, chemical and microbiological parameters were determined, initially and after 7, 14 and 21 days of storage (3 ± 1 °C). Colour and oxidative stability decreased and the number of microorganisms increased significantly during the storage period. Treatment O2 increased a* and TBARs. Despite the different permeability to O2, shown by the polymeric material (< 6.0 vs. < 0.5 cm3/m2/24 h bar), the different types of packaging did not significantly affect any of the studied parameters. Regarding the atmosphere treatment or type of packaging, these factors did not significantly affect mesophile or Enterobacteriaceae counts either.


Lamb forelegs Shelf life Modified atmosphere Polymeric material 



EA group S.C is acknowledged for the supply of the meat.


  1. AMSA (2011) Guidelines: instrumental meat color measurement. Section VIII-V8Google Scholar
  2. Andrés AI, Petrón MJ, Delgado Adámez J, López M, Timón M (2017) Effect of tomato pomace extracts on the shelf life of modified atmosphere packaged lamb meat. J Food Process Pres 41(4):e13018. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Horwitz W, Latimer G (eds) (2000) Official methods of analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 18th ed. AOAC, GaithersburgGoogle Scholar
  4. Bañón S, Méndez L, Almela E (2012) Effects of dietary rosemary extract on lamb spoilage under retail display conditions. Meat Sci 90:579–583. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bellés M, Alonso V, Roncalés P, Beltrán JA (2017) The combined effects of superchilling and packaging on the shelf life of lamb. Meat Sci 133:126–132. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Comission Regulation (EC) (2007) Reglamento (CE) No 1441/2007 de la Comisión de 5 de diciembre que modifica el Reglamento (CE) No 2073/2005 relativo a los criterios microbiológicos aplicables a los productos alimenticios. Diario Oficial de La Unión Europa L 322/12Google Scholar
  7. Estévez M (2011) Protein carbonyls in meat systems: a review. Meat Sci 89(3):259–279. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fernandes RDPP, de Alvarenga Freire MT, de Paula ESM, Kanashiro ALS, Catunda FAP, Rosa AF, Trindade MA (2014) Stability of lamb loin stored under refrigeration and packed in different modified atmosphere packaging systems. Meat Sci 96(1):554–561. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grau R, Hamm R (1953) Eine einfache methode zur bestimmung der wasserbindung im muskel. Naturwissenschaften 40(1):29–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gutiérrez JI, Tejeda JF, Carrapiso AI, Petrón, MJ, Lara MS, Andrés AI (2011) Shelf life of Merino lamb meat retail packaged under atmospheres of various compositions. Int J Food Sci Technol 46(3):492–499. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hornsey HC (1956) The colour of cooked cured pork. estimation of the nitric oxide-haem pigments. J Sci Food Agric 7(8):534–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Huff-Lonergan E, Lonergan SM (2005) Mechanisms of water-holding capacity of meat: the role of postmortem biochemical and structural changes. Meat Sci 71(1):194–204. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ICMSF (International Commission for Microbial Specifications in Food) (2004). Microorganismos indicadores. Microorganismos de los alimentos 1. Técnicas de análisis microbiológico. Acribia. Zaragoza, Spain p 3–5Google Scholar
  14. Insausti K, Beriain MJ, Purroy A, Alberti P, Gorraiz C, Alzueta MJ (2001) Shelf life of beef from local Spanish cattle breeds stored under modified atmosphere. Meat Sci 57(3):273–281. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jeremiah LE (2001) Packaging alternatives to deliver fresh meats using short-or long-term distribution. Food Res Int 34(9):749–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jorgensen SS, Sorensen G (1996) A combined sampling and delay unit for flow injection analysis. The automated determination of 2-thiobarbituric acid reactive substances in foods. Anal Chim Acta 322(1–2):69–76. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Karabagias I, Badeka A, Kontominas MG (2011) Shelf life extension of lamb meat using thyme or oregano essential oils and modified atmosphere packaging. Meat Sci 88(1):109–116. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kennedy C, Buckley DJ, Kerry JP (2005) Influence of different gas compositions on the short-term storage stability of mother-packaged retail-ready lamb packs. Meat Sci 69(1):27–33. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lambertini L, Vignola G, Badiani A, Zaghini G, Formigoni A (2006) The effect of journey time and stocking density during transport on carcass and meat quality in rabbits. Meat Sci 72:641–646. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Linares MB, Vergara H (2009) Light lamb meat quality packed under modified atmospheres: effect of stunning systems (electrically vs. gas). Animal 3(12):1763. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Linares MB, Vergara H (2012) Effect of gas stunning and modified-atmosphere packaging on the quality of meat from Spanish Manchego light lamb. Small Ruminant Res 108(1):87–94. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mancini RA, Hunt M (2005) Current research in meat color. Meat Sci 71(1):100–121. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. MAPAMA (2017). El sector del Ovino y Caprino en Cifras.
  24. McMillin KW (2008) Where is MAP Going? A review and future potential of modified atmosphere packaging for meat. Meat Sci 80:43–65. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McMillin KW (2017) Advancements in meat packaging. Meat Sci 132:153–162. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Oliver CN, Ahn BW, Moerman EJ, Goldstein S, Stadtman ER (1987) Age-related changes in oxidized proteins. J Biol Chem 262(12):5488–5491Google Scholar
  27. Osés SM, Diez AM, Melero B, Luning PA, Jaime I, Rovira J (2013) Characterization by culture-dependent and culture-independent methods of the bacterial population of suckling-lamb packaged in different atmospheres. Food Microbiol 36(2):216–222. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Raheem D (2013) Application of plastics and paper as food packaging materials-An overview. Emir J Food Agric 25(3):177. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rubio B, Vieira C, Martínez B (2016) Effect of post mortem temperatures and modified atmospheres packaging on shelf life of suckling lamb meat. Lwt-Food Sci Technol 69:563–569. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ščetar M, Kurek M, Galić K (2010) Trends in meat and meat products packaging–a review. Croat J Food Sci Technol 2(1):32–48Google Scholar
  31. Soldatou N, Nerantzaki A, Kontominas MG, Savvaidis IN (2009) Physicochemical and microbiological changes of “Souvlaki”. A Greek delicacy lamb meat product: evaluation of shelf-life using microbial, colour and lipid oxidation parameters. Food Chem 113(1):36–42. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vergara H, Gallego L (2001) Effects of gas composition in modified atmosphere packaging on the meat quality of Spanish Manchega lamb. J Sci Food Agric 81(14):1353–1357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zakrys PI, Hogan SA, O’sullivan MG, Allen P, Kerry JP (2008) Effects of oxygen concentration on the sensory evaluation and quality indicators of beef muscle packed under modified atmosphere. Meat Sci 79(4):648–655. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Food Scientists & Technologists (India) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ramiro Sánchez Baltasar
    • 1
  • Montaña López Parra
    • 1
  • Ana Isabel Andrés Nieto
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.CICYTEXBadajozSpain
  2. 2.Food Technology Department, School of Agricultural EngineeringUniversity of ExtremaduraBadajozSpain

Personalised recommendations