Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:8737849rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0229961lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:8737849lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0000925lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:8737849lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1709694lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:8737849lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1554183lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:8737849lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0521116lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:8737849lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1517945lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:issue6lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:dateCreated1996-10-28lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:abstractTextSix-week-old broilers were compared in yield and weep loss when stunned using either 25 or 125 mA current followed by slush-ice chilling where resultant carcasses were either held static for 4 h or subjected to 45 m of tumbling. Treatments were factorially arranged among the populations of 32 pens (24 birds per pen) that had been reared under common conditions. Tumbling increased chill water uptake, abdominal fat content, and yield of whole carcasses, whereas no differences occurred as a result of the stunning treatments. Carcasses were separated into a nine-piece cut immediately after chilling. All parts lost weight from weepage during the subsequent 24 h, and weep from total parts was greater when carcasses had been tumbled than held static. Keel portion breasts and drumsticks continued a weight advantage from water uptake with tumble chilling, but wings, thighs, and split breast lost this additional water and were similar to those respective parts static chilled. High stunning current led to an increased amount of keel portion breast, regardless of chilling treatment, with subsequent weep not being affected. Alterations in yield that occur because of chilling procedure are substantial and not equivalent among parts, whereas stunning has little impact and is focused on the breast.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:monthJunlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:issn0032-5791lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:authorpubmed-author:MoranE TETJrlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:authorpubmed-author:BilgiliS FSFlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:volume75lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:pagination809-12lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:dateRevised2006-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8737849-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8737849-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8737849-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8737849-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8737849-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8737849-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8737849-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8737849-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:year1996lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:articleTitleCarcass yield and weep loss from fast-food cuts after processing broilers using extremes in stunning current and slush-ice chilling.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:affiliationPoultry Science Department, Auburn University, Alabama 36849-5416, USA.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8737849pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed