{"id":103399,"date":"2022-09-01T07:13:50","date_gmt":"2022-09-01T05:13:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ew-nutrition.com\/antioxidants-phytomolecules-mitigate-quality-degradation-broiler-breasts\/"},"modified":"2023-08-01T13:35:08","modified_gmt":"2023-08-01T11:35:08","slug":"antioxidants-phytomolecules-mitigate-quality-degradation-broiler-breasts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ew-nutrition.com\/us\/antioxidants-phytomolecules-mitigate-quality-degradation-broiler-breasts\/","title":{"rendered":"Antioxidants and phytomolecules mitigate quality degradation in broiler breasts"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Inge Heinzl and Ajay Bhoyar, EW Nutrition<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

Genetic selection for faster growth of breast muscle in broilers may lead to increased incidences of different types of muscle degeneration. Downgrading the affected breast fillets results in high economic losses for the poultry meat industry.<\/p>\n

The article discusses the three important myopathies impairing the breast muscles, their impact on the meat industry, influencing factors, and how to cope with these challenges.<\/p>\n

Muscle degeneration heaps up with faster broiler growth<\/span><\/h2>\n

According to Sirri and co-workers (2016), breast fillets from broilers with 3.9 kg live weight carry a higher risk for myopathic lesions. Studies in different countries revealed that myopathies in broilers are not neglectable:<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Country<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\nMyopathy<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\nNumber of breasts examined<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\nConditions<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\nOccurrence<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\nReference<\/strong><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Italy<\/span><\/td>\nWS<\/span><\/td>\n28,000 broilers<\/span><\/td>\ncommercial<\/span><\/td>\n12 %<\/span><\/td>\nPetracci et al., 2013<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Italy<\/span><\/td>\nWS<\/span><\/td>\n70 flocks; always 500 of 35,000 breasts randomly examined<\/span><\/td>\ncommercial<\/span><\/td>\n43%, with 6.2% considered severe<\/span><\/td>\nLorenzi et al., 2014<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Italy<\/span><\/td>\nWS<\/span><\/td>\n57 flocks<\/span><\/td>\ncommercial<\/span><\/td>\n70.2 % (medium)-82.5 % (heavy-weight)<\/span><\/td>\nRusso et al., 2015<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Italy<\/span><\/td>\nWS<\/span><\/td>\n16,000 samples<\/span><\/td>\ncommercial<\/span><\/td>\n9 % moderate22 % severe<\/span><\/td>\nPetracci in Baldi et al., 2020<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Brazil<\/span><\/td>\nWS<\/span><\/td>\n25,520<\/span><\/td>\ncommercial<\/span><\/td>\n10 %<\/span><\/td>\nFerreira et al., 2014<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
USA<\/span><\/td>\nWS<\/span><\/td>\n960 (week 6)+ 960 (week 9)<\/span><\/td>\nexperimental<\/span><\/td>\nScore 1: 78.4 % (wk 6)<\/span>
\n29.9 % (wk 9)<\/span>
\nScore 2: 14.0 % (wk 6)<\/span>
\n53.9 % (wk 9)<\/span>
\nScore 3:0 % (wk 6)<\/span>
\n15.1 % (wk 9)<\/span><\/td>\n		Kuttapan et al., 2017<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Brazil<\/span><\/td>\nWB<\/span><\/td>\n<\/td>\ncommercial<\/span><\/td>\n10-20 %<\/span><\/td>\nCarvalho, in Petracci et al., 2019<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Italy<\/span><\/td>\nWB<\/span><\/td>\n16,000 samples<\/span><\/td>\ncommercial<\/span><\/td>\n42 % moderate<\/span>
\n18 % severe<\/span><\/td>\n		Petracci, in Baldi et al., 2020<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
China<\/span><\/td>\nWB<\/span><\/td>\n1,135 breast fillets<\/span><\/td>\ncommercial<\/span><\/td>\n61.9%<\/span><\/td>\nXing et al., 2020<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
USA<\/span><\/td>\nWB<\/span><\/td>\n960 (week 6)+ 960 (week 9)<\/span><\/td>\nexperimental<\/span><\/td>\nScore 1: 32.5 % (wk 6)<\/span>
\n33.2 % (wk 9)<\/span>
\nScore 2: 7.9 % (wk 6)<\/span>
\n36 % (wk 9)<\/span>
\nScore 3: 1.96 % (wk 6)<\/span>
\n15.6 % (wk 9)<\/span><\/td>\n		Kuttapan et al., 2017<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Italy<\/span><\/td>\nSM<\/span><\/td>\n16,000 samples<\/span><\/td>\ncommercial<\/span><\/td>\n4 % moderate<\/span>
\n17 % severe<\/span><\/td>\n		Petracci in Baldi et al., 2020<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Brazil<\/span><\/td>\nSM<\/span><\/td>\n5,580 samples<\/span><\/td>\ncommercial<\/span><\/td>\n10 %<\/span><\/td>\nMontagna et al., 2019<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"Figure 1: Different myopathies in broilers (R. Baileys)<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

As the appearance of products is one of the most important arguments for the purchase decision, these myopathies are serious issues; the downgrading of the breast quality results in a lower reward for the producer. Kuttapan et al. (2016) estimated that 90 % of the broilers are affected by wooden breast and white striping (see below), causing about $200 million to $1 billion of economic losses to the U.S. poultry industry per year.<\/p>\n

Wooden Breast (WB), a result of the proliferation of connective tissues<\/span><\/h2>\n

The muscle affected by the wooden breast is bulging and hard, is covered with clear, viscous fluid, and shows petechiae (see figure 2). The myopathy of the pectoralis major is \u201cpale expansive areas of substantial hardness accompanied by white striation\u201d (Kuttapan, 2016; Huang and Ahn, 2018; Sihvo et al., 2013). It is characterized by microscopically visible polyphasic myodegenerations with fibrosis in the chronic phase. At approximately two weeks of age, it appears as a focal lesion but then develops as a widespread fibrotic injury (Papah et al., 2017). WB can be detected by palpating the breast of the live bird.<\/p>\n

\"\"Figure 2: Comparison of a severe wooden breast (on the left) and a healthy breast fillet (on the right)<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Source: Kuttapan et al., 2016<\/span><\/p>\n

According to Kuttapan et al. (2016), the anomaly is caused by circulatory insufficiency and increased oxidative stress resulting in damage and degeneration. Its occurrence rose with increasing growth and slaughter weights of the birds. Wooden breast is more common in male than female broilers as they show an increased expression of genes related to the proliferation of connective tissues (Baldi et al., 2021).<\/p>\n

The hardness of the meat, a 1.2 \u2013 1.3 % higher fat content (Soglia et al., 2016, Tasoniero et al., 2016), and the worse appearance lead to a degradation of the fillet quality (Kuttappan et al., 2012). The reduction in the water holding capacity of muscle results in toughness before and after cooking.<\/p>\n

White Striping (WS), a result of fiber degeneration<\/span><\/h2>\n

The characteristics of WS are white striations parallel to the muscle fibers. A microscopic examination of these white stripes reveals an accumulation of lipids and a proliferation of connective tissue occurring in breast fillets and thighs (Kuttappan et al., 2013a; Huang and Ahn, 2018). Kuttapan et al. (2016) adapted a scoring system for the evaluation of the severity of WS, which he had established earlier (Kuttapan et al., 2012)(see picture 1). It was concluded that broilers fed a diet with high energy content led to higher and more efficient growth (improved feed conversion, higher live and fillet weights) but also to a higher percentage of fillets showing a severe degree of white striping.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
<\/div>\n

Figure 3: Different degrees of white striping<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n