Effects of sous-vide and searing treatments on cooked meat and organoleptic quality attributes in pork loins derived from PSE and normal conditions

Effects of sous-vide and searing treatments on cooked meat and organoleptic quality attributes in pork loins derived from PSE and normal conditions | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Effects of sous-vide and searing treatments on cooked meat and organoleptic quality attributes in pork loins derived from PSE and normal conditions Boin Lee, Seunghyun Lee, Young Min Choi This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8860322/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 9 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study investigated the effects of sous-vide (SV) alone and in combination with searing (SVS) on meat quality traits, visual attributes, and sensory characteristics of porcine longissimus dorsi muscles from reddish-pink, firm, and non-exudative (RFN) and pale, soft, and exudative (PSE) conditions. PSE loins showed a lighter surface color and lower water-holding capacity compared to RFN loins ( p < 0.001). The PSE-SV group exhibited lower treatment loss and Warner-Bratzler shear force values compared to the PSE-Pan group, and PSE-SVS samples did not differ from RFN-SV or RFN-SVS samples ( p < 0.001). For visual attributes, the Pan- and SVS-treated groups received higher color acceptability scores than the SV-treated group ( p 0.05). Overall visual acceptability was higher in the PSE-SVS group compared to the RFN-SV group ( p < 0.001). Notably, PSE-SV loins were perceived as more tender and juicier than RFN-Pan and RFN-SVS loins ( p < 0.001). Flavor intensity was higher in Pan- and SVS-treated samples than in SV-treated samples in both quality classes ( p < 0.05). PSE-SV loins achieved higher overall acceptability scores than RFN-Pan and RFN-SVS loins ( p 0.05). Overall, the findings suggest that SV as well as SVS can effectively enhance the overall quality and utilization of low-grade PSE pork in the context of value-added meat products. PSE Sous-vide cooking Searing treatment Quality characteristics Sensory quality Pork loin Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Introduction Pork had the highest per capita consumption in Korea, and the production of pork-based products has been steadily increasing due to growing consumer demand worldwide (Ko et al., 2023). Consequently, the pork industry primarily focused on increasing ultimate muscle mass and growth rate through intensive genetic selection and advanced feeding systems (Choi et al., 2009), leading to projected gains in carcass weight of up to 27% globally from 2025 to 2034 (OECD/FAO, 2025). The excessive muscle growth in modern pigs has altered fiber characteristics, especially an increased size of fast-twitch glycolytic fibers (Lee & Choi, 2025). These changes have led to increased physiological susceptibility to various stressors, thereby accelerating glycolytic rates at the early postmortem period and leading to an increased incidence of pale, soft, and exudative (PSE) condition pork (Scheffler & Gerrard, 2007). Due to its paler muscle surface and lower water-holding capacity (WHC) compared to reddish-pink, firm, and non-exudative (RFN) pork, PSE pork can negatively influence consumer purchase decision and the quality attributes of processed products, ultimately resulting in substantial economic losses for the meat industry (Brewer et al., 1998; Scheffler & Gerrard, 2007). The quality of the meat products is also influenced by the cooking treatments, which govern heat-induced physicochemical changes that ultimately determine the overall quality (Park et al., 2020). Traditional cooking treatments, such as pan-frying and grilling, often involve high and uneven heat, which can cause excessive moisture loss and undesirable textural changes (Becker et al., 2016). Accordingly, cooking strategies that employ mild heating conditions have received increasing attention as potential approaches to minimize thermal damage and stabilize meat quality (Gill et al., 2025). Among the cooking treatments, sous-vide (SV) cooking ensures adequate heat transfer in raw materials due to precisely controlled low temperatures for extended durations, thereby enhancing product consistency, palatability, and consumer acceptance (Baldwin, 2012; Lee et al., 2025). However, an inherent limitation of SV processing is that the relatively low cooking temperatures restrict the development of Maillard reactions, resulting in limited formation of roasted flavor compounds and insufficient surface browning (Ruiz-Carrascal et al., 2019). These drawbacks can be overcome by additional processing steps, such as high-temperature searing or marination treatments applied before or after SV cooking, to improve surface color and flavor intensity (Cho et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2021). However, there are a limited number of studies on the application of SV combined with additional treatments to improve the overall quality of pork derived from PSE muscle. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to investigate the effects of SV and SV combined with searing treatments (SVS) on cooked meat quality traits, visual attributes, and eating quality traits of pork loins from the normal and PSE conditions. Materials and methods Muscle samples and cooking treatments A total of 42 porcine longissimus dorsi (LD) muscles at 24 h postmortem was purchased from a local market. Fresh meat quality was assessed by determining muscle pH, meat color, and WHC. The samples were categorized into quality groups based on their lightness (L*) and drip loss (Ryu et al., 2005). The RFN group (n = 34) was defined by a L * ≤ 50 and a drip loss ≤ 6.0%, whereas the PSE group (n = 8) was characterized by a L * > 50 and a drip loss > 6.0%. Following quality measurements, the remaining chunks were cut into a total of 252 sections (six cuts per loin) and allocated for cooked meat quality analysis (2 cm thickness; three cuts per loin) and for visual attributes and sensory evaluation (1.5 cm thickness; three cuts per loin). The samples were immediately stored at 4℃ until subjected to three cooking treatments: pan-frying (Pan), SV, and SVS. The cooking treatments were performed as described previously (Baldwin, 2012; Lee et al., 2025). For the Pan treatment, samples were pan-fried on a preheated stainless-steel pan (28 cm in diameter) at 180℃ using an electric induction range (NZ31R3707AK, Samsung Electronics, Gyeonggi-do, Korea) at the third heating level. Samples were cooked until the core temperature had reached at 71℃. For the SV treatments, samples were placed in nylon-polyethylene bags (thickness, 90 µm; oxygen transmission rate, 50 cm 3 /m 2 /24 h) and vacuum-packed (2.5 kPa vacuum level) using a vacuum sealer (GVM-F500D, Grand Woosung, Seoul, Korea). The vacuum-packed samples were cooked in a precisely controlled-temperature water bath (WSB-30, Daihan Scientific, Gangwon-do, Korea) set at 60℃ for 3 h. For the SVS treatment, SV-cooked samples were subsequently pan-seared on both sides at 180℃ for 60 s (fifth heating level). After the three cooking treatments, a total of 126 samples was used to determine cooked meat quality. Forty-two samples per cooking treatment were frozen at − 20℃ for the evaluation of visual attributes and sensory quality. Fresh and cooked meat quality measurements Muscle pH 24 h was measured using a spear-type portable pH meter equipped with an automatic temperature compensation probe (Testo 206-pH2, Testo, Lenzkirch, Germany). After allowing the freshly cut surface to bloom at 4℃, color was evaluated following the Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage (CIE). Lightness ( L * ), redness ( a * ), and yellowness ( b * ) of muscle surface were measured using a chroma meter (CR-410, Minolta Camera Co., Osaka, Japan) under a closed-cone setup using illuminant C, a 0° viewing angle, and an 8 mm aperture. WHC was assessed by measuring filter-paper fluid uptake (FFU) and dip loss in accordance with the procedures of Honikel (l998) and Kauffman et al. (1986), respectively. For the cooked quality measurement of Pan-, SV-, and SVS-treated samples, their surface color, treatment loss, and WBS were assessed following standard procedures (Honikel, 1998; Park et al., 2020; Cho et al., 2021). The color of cooked meat was measured using the same chroma meter under identical CIE conditions. Cooking treatment loss was calculated from weight differences before and after cooking. After measuring treatment loss, at least six cylindrical cores (1.27 cm diameter) were obtained parallel to the muscle fiber orientation for WBS measurement. The WBS value was collected using an Intron Universal Testing Machine (Model 1011, Instron Corp., Canton, MA, USA) equipped with a Warner–Bratzler blade (crosshead speed, 200 mm/min). Visual attributes and sensory quality evaluation Visual attributes and eating quality characteristics were evaluated using a total of 126 samples randomly coded with three-digit numbers and assessed across 21 sessions (six samples per session). Eleven trained panelists (six women and five men, aged 25 to 48 years) evaluated the visual attributes and sensory quality characteristics. Ethical approval for the panel was obtained from the Kyungpook National University Bioethics Committee (protocol number: 2019-0027; renewed every year). The overall procedure was previously referenced by Meilgaard et al. (1991) and the American Meat Science Association (1995). Before each session, frozen cooked samples were thawed overnight at 4℃ and reheated in a water bath to a core temperature of 54℃, followed by the evaluation of visual attributes and eating quality. Visual attributes included color, moisture, appearance, and overall acceptability. Eating quality was assessed using six tenderness attributes, juiciness, flavor intensity, off-flavor intensity, and overall acceptability. All the visual and sensory attributes were evaluated on a nine-point scale. Statistical analysis The general linear model procedure (SAS software, SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) was employed to analyze differences in fresh quality, cooked meat quality, visual attributes, and sensory quality characteristics across pork quality classes and cooking treatments. Fresh and cooked meat quality traits were conducted using a linear mixed-effects model, in which pork quality and cooking treatment were treated as fixed effects and replicate was included as a random effect. For the assessment of visual and sensory quality characteristics of cooked pork, a linear mixed model was applied, incorporating pork quality and cooking treatment as fixed effects, and both panelist and session as random effects. Significant differences among groups were identified using the probability difference option at p < 0.05. All data were presented as least-squares means accompanied by their standard errors. Results Comparison of fresh meat quality characteristics between pork quality classes Table 1 showed a comparison of fresh meat quality characteristics between RFN and PSE quality classes of porcine LD muscles. Muscle pH measured at 24 h postmortem did not differ between the RFN and PSE groups (5.70 vs. 5.60, p > 0.05). For muscle color, the PSE group exhibited significantly higher lightness (53.0 vs. 47.0, p < 0.001) and yellowness (1.99 vs. 1.08, p 0.05). LD samples from the PSE group showed a greater drip loss compared to those from the RFN group (7.25% vs. 2.76%, p < 0.001). Consistent with the drip loss results, higher FFU values were observed in PSE samples compared to RFN samples (118.7 vs. 72.4 mg, p < 0.001). Table 1 Comparison of fresh meat quality characteristics between RFN and PSE pork loins RFN (N = 34) PSE (N = 8) Level of significance Muscle pH 24 h 5.70 (0.02) 1 5.60 (0.05) NS Muscle color Lightness ( L * ) 47.0 b (0.27) 53.0 a (0.46) *** Redness ( a * ) 8.64 (0.28) 8.63 (0.41) NS Yellowness ( b * ) 1.08 b (0.24) 1.99 a (0.36) * Water-holding capacity Drip loss (%) 2.76 b (0.23) 7.25 a (0.56) *** FFU (mg) 72.4 b (2.95) 118.7 a (6.08) *** Levels of significance: NS, not significant; * p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001. a−b Different superscripts in the same row represent significant differences ( p < 0.05). 1 Standard error of least square means. Abbreviations: RFN, reddish-pink, firm, and non-exudative; PSE, pale, soft, and exudative; FFU, filter-paper fluid uptake. Combined effects of pork quality conditions and cooking treatments on cooked meat quality characteristics No significant differences in cooked meat color were observed between RFN and PSE samples within each cooking treatment (Table 2 ) ( p > 0.05). Across both quality classes, samples subjected to SV cooking displayed significantly higher lightness values than those subjected to Pan and SVS treatments ( p 0.05). In contrast, redness and yellowness values were consistently higher in the Pan and SVS groups than in the SV group, regardless of pork quality classes ( p < 0.001). Treatment loss statistically increased in the order of Pan, SV, and SVS treatments within the RFN (20.6, 23.1, and 26.8%, respectively, p < 0.001) and PSE (23.8, 25.8, and 29.5%, respectively, p < 0.001) groups. PSE-cooked pork exhibited significantly greater treatment loss than RFN-cooked pork in each treatment ( p < 0.001). PSE loins cooked by Pan (PSE-Pan) had greater treatment loss (24.9%) compared to PSE loins cooked by SV (PSE-SV; 20.3%) and SVS (PSE-SVS; 22.8%) ( p 0.05). The treatment loss of the PSE-SV group did not differ compared to all the RFN groups ( p > 0.05). For WBS values, Pan-treated samples exhibited higher values than SV- and SVS-treated samples in both the RFN and PSE groups ( p < 0.05). Additionally, PSE-Pan pork showed a higher WBS value than RFN pork cooked by the Pan method (RFN-Pan; p 0.05). Table 2 Effect of pork quality class and cooking method on cooked meat quality traits Quality (Q) RFN PSE Level of significance Cooking (C) Pan (N = 34) SV (N = 34) SVS (N = 34) Pan (N = 8) SV (N = 8) SVS (N = 8) Q C Q × C Meat color Lightness ( L * ) 44.2 b (1.04) 1 66.9 a (1.04) 44.7 b (1.04) 43.2 b (2.11) 70.7 a (2.11) 42.8 b (2.11) NS *** NS Redness ( a * ) 13.5 a (0.40) 9.43 b (0.40) 13.0 a (0.40) 13.3 a (0.83) 8.52 b (0.83) 14.5 a (0.83) NS *** NS Yellowness ( b * ) 18.0 a (0.37) 8.50 b (0.37) 16.6 a (0.37) 18.9 a (0.75) 7.38 b (0.75) 17.3 a (0.75) NS *** NS Treatment loss (%) 20.6 c (0.29) 21.1 c (0.29) 20.4 c (0.29) 24.9 a (0.58) 20.3 c (0.58) 22.8 b (0.58) *** *** *** WBS (N) 37.9 b (0.87) 30.5 c (0.87) 30.7 c (0.87) 42.5 a (1.76) 33.4 c (1.76) 31.8 c (1.76) * *** NS Levels of significance: NS, not significant; * p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001. a−d Different superscripts in the same row represent significant differences ( p < 0.05). 1 Standard error of least square means. Abbreviations: RFN, reddish-pink, firm, non-exudative; PSE, pale, soft, exudative; Pan, pork loin cooked with pan-frying; SV, pork loin treated by sous-vide; SVS, pork loin treated by SV and followed by searing using pan-frying; WBS, Warner-Bratzler shear force. Combined effects of pork quality conditions and cooking treatments on visual attributes The visual attributes of RFN and PSE pork loins were compared among the three cooking treatments (Fig. 1 ). Significant differences in color and moisture acceptability were observed among cooking treatments within both RFN and PSE quality classes ( p < 0.001). The RFN-Pan group exhibited a significantly higher color acceptability than the PSE-Pan group (8.08 vs. 7.29, p 0.05). The RFN groups cooked by SV (RFN-SV) showed the highest scores of moisture (7.28, p 0.05). SV-treated samples exhibited lower appearance scores than Pan- and SVS-treated samples in both quality classes ( p < 0.001), with loins from the RFN-Pan group receiving the highest score (7.94, p 0.05). For overall visual acceptability, the RFN-Pan and treatment achieved the highest score among all treatments (7.38, p < 0.001). Conversely, the PSE-SV loins received the lowest overall acceptability score (4.57, p 0.05). Combined effects of pork quality conditions and cooking treatments on sensory quality characteristics Quality class and cooking treatment were found to significantly affect all sensory attributes (Fig. 2 ) ( p < 0.05). Among the tenderness attributes, scores for softness, initial tenderness, and chewiness were higher in the order SV, SVS, and Pan treatments, irrespective of pork quality classes ( p 0.05). Similarly, scores for rate of breakdown and amount of perceptible residue did not differ between RFN-SV and PSE-SV loins ( p > 0.05) or between RFN-SVS and PSE-SVS loins ( p > 0.05). Within the Pan treatment, PSE samples exhibited significantly lower scores for these attributes than RFN samples (4.27 vs. 4.73 and 4.64 vs. 4.22, respectively; p < 0.05). Juiciness scores differed significantly among pork quality and cooking treatment groups ( p 0.05). Flavor intensity did not differ between RFN and PSE samples within the Pan ( p > 0.05) and SV ( p > 0.05) treatments; however, PSE-SVS pork exhibited lower flavor intensity scores than RFN-SVS pork (6.27 vs. 6.68, p < 0.05). In terms of off-flavor intensity, RFN samples received higher scores than PSE samples across all cooking treatments ( p 0.05). Overall eating acceptability scores were lower in the order of Pan, SVS, and SV within both RFN (4.93 vs. 5.95 vs. 6.80, p < 0.05) and PSE (4.47 vs. 5.84 vs. 6.33, p < 0.05) groups. Consistent with the tenderness attributes, RFN-SV samples exhibited higher overall acceptability than PSE-SV samples ( p 0.05). Discussion Meat quality is closely linked to consumer acceptance and preference; thus, improving the quality of low-grade meat products continues to be a major priority in the meat industry. During the early postmortem period, high glycolytic potential in PSE pork can cause a rapid pH decline and increased metabolic heat production in skeletal muscle, leading to excessive protein denaturation in both the sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar fractions (Trevisan & Brum, 2020). Lee and Choi (2021) reported that PSE chicken breasts with greater apoptotic and glycolytic potentials at the early postmortem period exhibited impaired meat and sensory quality traits compared to normal chicken. In addition, porcine muscles exhibiting a rapid glycolytic rate showed higher lightness and drip loss values compared to muscles showing a normal glycolytic rate (Choi & Kim, 2009). In the present study, as expected, loins from the PSE group displayed a paler and more exudative muscle surface than those from the RFN group ( p 0.05). Previous studies have demonstrated that appropriate SV cooking conditions for pork vary depending on product-specific characteristics, such as cut type, shape, and size, as these factors influence palatability and hygiene safety (Jeong et al., 2018; Kurp et al., 2022; Lee et al., 2025). For instance, Kurp et al. (2022) reported that pork loin slices (2.5 cm thickness) achieved optimal quality following SV at 60℃ for 3 or 4 h, and Jeong et al. (2018) suggested that SV processing at 61℃ for 45 or 90 min was suitable for pork ham with a thickness of 2 cm. However, SV cooking may induce pink or pale surface color, which consumers may perceive as undercooked or bloody; thereby necessitating an additional cooking treatment to ensure an acceptable surface color (Jeong et al., 2018). In this regard, Cho et al. (2020) reported that SV pork patties seared for 60 or 90 s in a preheated pan at 180℃ showed greater appearance acceptability than those seared for 0, 30, and 120 s. Based on these findings, the SV and searing conditions in the present study were set at 60℃ for 3 h and at 180℃ for 60 s, respectively, to ensure adequate cooking while maintaining product quality. As expected, in this study, pork loins treated with SV along exhibited a paler surface color than those exposed to severe heat treatments, which showed darker and redder surface color regardless of quality classes ( p < 0.001). Exposing low-grade meat to higher temperatures or prolonged heat during conventional cooking can exacerbate moisture loss due to its inherently unstable muscle structural integrity, leading to increased toughness in the final products (Aaslyng et al., 2003). For example, increasing core temperature from 60 to 80℃ during pan-frying has been reported to progressively increase cooking loss across various pork quality classes, with PSE pork exhibiting significantly higher loss than normal pork at core temperature of 60 and 70℃ (Aaslyng et al., 2003). Park et al. (2020) reported that cooking loss in SV-cooked chicken breast increased with increasing treatment temperature and time, a trend associated with higher WBS values. Corroborating these observations, the PSE-Pan group, which was subjected to higher temperatures and longer heating durations, exhibited the greatest treatment loss among the groups, accompanied by the highest WBS values ( p < 0.001). The PSE-SVS group, which was subjected to similar severe heating for a shorter time than pan-frying, showed higher treatment loss than the RFN group across all three cooking methods ( p < 0.001), primarily due to additional moisture loss induced by the searing process. Interestingly, the application of SV cooking to PSE pork, either alone or in combination with searing, resulted in WBS values comparable to those of normal quality pork treated with any of the cooking treatments ( p > 0.05). These results suggest that applying SV-based treatments to low-quality PSE pork can improve cooked meat quality traits, particularly treatment loss and objective tenderness. Visual attributes of meat products play a pivotal role at the initial stage of the purchasing process by providing visual cues that guide consumers’ early evaluations and subsequent choice decisions (Malheiros et al., 2025). In the present study, pork loins subjected to high temperature treatments exhibited superior color acceptability compared with those processed by SV alone, with the RFN-Pan group receiving the highest score ( p < 0.001). Although SV treatment alone resulted in lower color acceptability, the application of searing following SV cooking effectively improved color perception, leading to comparable color acceptability between PSE-SVS and RFN-SVS loins ( p > 0.05). These are consistent with previous findings indicating that surface browning formed through Maillard reactions at relatively high temperatures, accompanied by surface dehydration, was perceived as a favorable color attribute by trained panelists and consumers (Ruiz-Carrascal et al., 2019; Cho et al., 2020). In contrast, appearance acceptability was significantly lower for PSE pork than for RFN pork within each cooking treatment ( p < 0.001). This outcome is likely associated with the disrupted structure of the PSE muscle, which may limit protein functionality and negatively influence visual appearance by impairing uniform structure formation during heating (Suliga et al., 2024). Consequently, the overall visual acceptability was the lowest for the SV group ( p < 0.001), with a significant difference observed between the RFN-SV and PSE-SV groups. Trained panelists assigned higher scores for PSE loins treated with SVS compared to both RFN and PSE loins treated with SV ( p < 0.001). From a sensory quality perspective, SV-treated products show improved eating quality, as the vacuum sealing and precise temperature control used in SV cooking minimize moisture evaporation, facilitate collagen dissolution into gelation, and reduce inter-fiber adhesion (Baldwin, 2012). Because of these advantages, SV pork loins, regardless of the pork quality class, required less force during the initial bite and left less perceptible residue after chewing compared to loins from the other groups ( p 0.05), except in chewiness ( p < 0.001). Meanwhile, SV-treated loins in both quality classes exhibited higher juiciness scores than those treated with the other cooking treatments ( p < 0.001), although the PSE group showed lower juiciness scores than the RFN group within each treatment ( p < 0.001), which might be attributed to the lower WHC of raw PSE loins. Flavor intensity was greater in samples exposed to severe heat treatments compared with SV-treated samples ( p < 0.05), caused by the production of aromatic compounds increasing at relatively high temperatures (Calkins & Hodgan, 2007). Despite the relatively lower flavor intensity under SV conditions, PSE loins cooked using the SV method showed higher overall acceptability compared to RFN loins treated with the conventional cooking method ( p < 0.01). In addition, under the searing method after SV processing, the overall acceptability of PSE loins did not differ from that of RFN loins ( p < 0.01). Taken together, SV processing improved consumer-relevant palatability of PSE loins, mainly by enhancing moisture retention and tenderness. Additionally, the searing process effectively compensated for the visual and flavor-related limitations of SV cooking by providing meat products with a more desirable surface appearance and flavor perception. Collectively, these findings demonstrate the potential of SV-based cooking strategies, applied either alone or in combination with searing, to enhance the value of PSE pork by enabling targeted optimization of sensory and technological properties. Declarations Funding statement This research was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (RS-2024-00346933). Ethic approval (IRB/IACUC) This study was approved by Bioethics Committee of Kyungpook National University (protocol number 2019-0027; renewed every year). References Aaslyng, M. D., Bejerholm, C., Ertbjerg, P., Bertram, H. C., & Andersen, H. J. (2003). Cooking loss and juiciness of pork in relation to raw meat quality and cooking procedure. Food Quality and Preference , 14 , 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00086-1 American Meat Science Association. (1995). Research guidelines for cookery, sensory evaluation, and instrumental tenderness measurements of fresh meats. National Livestock and Meat Board. Chicago, IL, USA:1995. Baldwin, D. E. (2012). Sous vide cooking: A review. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science , 1 , 15–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2011.11.002 Becker, A., Boulaaba, A., Pingen, S., Krischek, C., & Klein, G. (2016). Low temperature cooking pork meat – Physicochemical and sensory aspects. Meat Science , 118 , 82–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.03.026 Brewer, M. S., Lan, H. Y., & Mckeith, F. K. (1998). Consumer evaluation of pork appearance with differing physiological and packaging conditions. Journal of Muscle Foods , 9 , 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4573.1998.tb00652.x Calkins, C. R., & Hodgan, J. M. (2007). A fresh look at meat flavor. Meat Science , 77 , 63–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2007.04.016 Cho, D. K., Lee, B., Kim, S. K., O, H., Kim, Y. S., & Choi, Y. M. (2021). Comparison of quality characteristics and palatability between sous-vide cooked pork loin patties with different searing treatments. Food Science of Animal Resources , 41 , 214–223. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2020.e90 Cho, D. K., Lee, B., Oh, H., Lee, J. S., Kim, Y. S., & Choi, Y. M. (2020). Effects of searing process on quality characteristics and storage stability of sous-vide cooked pork patties. Foods , 9 , 1011. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9081011 Choi, Y. M., & Kim, B. C. (2009). Muscle fiber characteristics, myofibrillar protein isoforms, and meat quality. Livestock Science , 122 , 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2008.08.015 Gill, M., Rudy, M., Kuma-Kocan, P., Stanisławczyk, R., Wolińska, A., Krajewska, A., & Dziki, D. (2025). Effect of marinating on selected quality characteristics of pork tenderloin cooked by sous vide method. Foods , 14 , 1958. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14111958 Honikel, K. O. (1998). Reference methods for the assessment of physical characteristics of meat. Meat Science , 49 , 447–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(98)00034-5 Jeong, K., O, H., Shin, S. Y., & Kim, Y. S. (2018). Effects of sous-vide method at different temperatures, times and vacuum degrees on the quality, structural, and microbiological properties of pork ham. Meat Science , 143 , 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.04.010 Kathuria, D., Dhiman, A. K., & Attri, S. (2022). Sous vide, a culinary technique for improving quality of food products: A review. Trends in Food Science and Technology , 119 , 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.11.031 Kauffman, R. G., Eikelenboom, G., van der Wal, P. G., Merkus, G., & Zaar, M. (1986). The use of filter paper to estimate drip loss of porcine musculature. Meat Science , 18 , 191–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/0309-1740(86)90033-1 Ko, E., Jeong, K., Oh, H., Park, Y., Choi, J., & Lee, E. (2023). A deep learning-based framework for predicting pork preference. Current Research in Food Science , 6 , 100495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crfs.2023.100495 Kurp, L., Danowska-Oziewicz, M., & Kłębukowska, L. (2022). Sous vide cooking effects on physicochemical, microbiological and sensory characteristics of pork loin. Applied Science , 12 , 2365. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12052365 Lee, B., & Choi, Y. M. (2025). A new perspective on apoptosis: Its impact on meat and organoleptic quality in different animals. Food Chemistry: X , 25 , 102120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fochx.2024.102120 Lee, B., & Choi, Y. M. (2021). Expression level of heat shock protein 27 in PSE-like and fast-glycolyzing conditions of chicken pectoralis major muscle. Poultry Science , 100 , 101424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2021.101424 Lee, B., Kim, J. Y., & Choi, Y. M. (2025). Sous-vide treatment strategies for enhancing quality traits in various meat products: physicochemical, organoleptic, and microbiological perspectives. Applied Food Research , 5 , 101089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afres.2025.101089 Lee, B., Park, C. H., Kim, J. Y., O, H., Kim, D., Cho, D. K., Kim, Y. S., & Choi, Y. M. (2021). Effects of Astragalus membranaceus , Adenophora triphylla , and Ulmus pumila extracts on quality characteristics and storage stability of sous-vide cooked chicken breasts. Food Science of Animal Resources , 41 , 664–673. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2021.e24 Malheiros, B. A., Spers, E. E., Contreras Castillo, C. J., Aroeira, C. N., & de Lima, L. M. (2025). The role of visual attention and quality cues in consumer purchase decisions for fresh and cooked beef: An eye-tracking study. Applied Science , 15 , 7360. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15137360 Meilgaard, M., Civille, G. V., & Carr, B. T. (1991). Sensory evaluation techniques. FL: CRC Press. OECD/FAO. (2025). OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2025–2034, Paris and Rome, https://doi.org/10.1787/601276cd-en. Park, C. H., Lee, B., Oh, E., Kim, Y. S., & Choi, Y. M. (2020). Combined effects of sous-vide cooking conditions on meat and sensory quality characteristics of chicken breast meat. Poultry Science , 99 , 3286–3291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.03.004 Ruiz-Carrascal, J., Roldan, M., Refolio, F., Perez-Palacios, T., & Antequera, T. (2019). Sous-vide cooking of meat: A Maillarized approach. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science , 16 , 100138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2019.100138 Ryu, Y. C., Choi, Y. M., & Kim, B. C. (2005). Variations in metabolite contents and protein denaturation of the longissimus dorsi muscle in various porcine quality classifications and metabolic rates. Meat Science , 71 , 522–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.04.034 Scheffler, T. L., & Gerrard, D. E. (2007). Mechanisms controlling pork quality development: The biochemistry controlling postmortem energy metabolism. Meat Science , 77 , 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2007.04.024 Suliga, P., Schneider, S., Gonzalez, J., Egelandsdal, B., Alvseike, O., Abie, S. M., & Münch, D. (2024). A new histopathology scoring protocol reveals myopathy features in PSE-like pork. Meat Science , 216 , 109558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2024.109558 Trevisan, L., & Brum, J. S. (2020). Incidence of pale, soft and exudative (PSE) pork meat in reason of extrinsic stress factors. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências , 92 , e20190086. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765202020190086 Yang, L., Yuan, F., Zhou, M., Zhou, X., Ahmmed, M. K., & Wu, H. (2025). Insights into low-temperature strategies for preserving cooked pork quality in ready-to-eat meat products through processing and reheating studies. Food Chemistry , 487 , 144696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2025.144696 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 11 Mar, 2026 Reviews received at journal 06 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 05 Mar, 2026 Reviews received at journal 04 Mar, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 25 Feb, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 25 Feb, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 19 Feb, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 19 Feb, 2026 First submitted to journal 12 Feb, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8860322","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":597289033,"identity":"424f6ba6-2c96-4957-8f77-2a27e51e676d","order_by":0,"name":"Boin Lee","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sunmoon University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Boin","middleName":"","lastName":"Lee","suffix":""},{"id":597289034,"identity":"f76dbb34-f763-4c20-8af4-473b5c5311c1","order_by":1,"name":"Seunghyun Lee","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sunmoon University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Seunghyun","middleName":"","lastName":"Lee","suffix":""},{"id":597289035,"identity":"2179554a-2f68-4cc3-9c32-f6abdf4dba74","order_by":2,"name":"Young Min Choi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Sunmoon University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Young","middleName":"Min","lastName":"Choi","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-02-12 09:39:08","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8860322/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8860322/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":103616106,"identity":"3a5cdecc-cc13-4535-b976-161bfee7c4dd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-27 16:43:44","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":540866,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eComparison of visual attributes of RFN and PSE pork subjected to different cooking methods.\u003csup\u003e \u003c/sup\u003eBars indicate standard errors of least square means. Different letters denote significant differences (\u003cem\u003ep \u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; 0.05). Abbreviations: RFN, reddish-pink, firm, and non-exudative; PSE, pale, soft, and exudative; Pan, pork loin cooked with pan-frying; SV, pork loin treated by sous-vide; SVS, pork loin treated by SV and followed by searing using pan-frying. Score distribution (1–9): very unacceptable to very acceptable\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8860322/v1/99a88f97c438f5991ff409e4.png"},{"id":103616107,"identity":"fc168c2b-41a7-488d-bd6e-b2583321d465","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-27 16:43:44","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":654361,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eComparison of sensory quality characteristics of RFN and PSE pork subjected to different cooking methods.\u003csup\u003e \u003c/sup\u003eBars indicate standard errors of least square means. Different letters denote significant differences (\u003cem\u003ep \u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; 0.05). Abbreviations: RFN, reddish-pink, firm, and non-exudative; PSE, pale, soft, and exudative; Pan, pork loin cooked with pan-frying; SV, pork loin treated by sous-vide; SVS, pork loin treated by SV and followed by searing using pan-frying. Score distribution (1–9): softness (very hard to very soft), initial tenderness (very tough to very tender), chewiness (very chewy to very tender), rate of breakdown (very slow to very fast), amount of perceptible residue (very abundant to none), juiciness (not juicy to very juicy), flavor intensity (very week to very strong), off-flavor intensity (very strong to very weak), and overall acceptability (very unacceptable to very acceptable)\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8860322/v1/d3e1af4fcd8edc38e3cfdd4c.png"},{"id":104399571,"identity":"6fa43001-4b9a-4ba6-8e8e-e02abcea8f38","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-11 12:06:40","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2005102,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8860322/v1/40243901-f5e7-40c8-b2ab-d6922715319d.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Effects of sous-vide and searing treatments on cooked meat and organoleptic quality attributes in pork loins derived from PSE and normal conditions","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003ePork had the highest per capita consumption in Korea, and the production of pork-based products has been steadily increasing due to growing consumer demand worldwide (Ko et al., 2023). Consequently, the pork industry primarily focused on increasing ultimate muscle mass and growth rate through intensive genetic selection and advanced feeding systems (Choi et al., 2009), leading to projected gains in carcass weight of up to 27% globally from 2025 to 2034 (OECD/FAO, 2025). The excessive muscle growth in modern pigs has altered fiber characteristics, especially an increased size of fast-twitch glycolytic fibers (Lee \u0026amp; Choi, 2025). These changes have led to increased physiological susceptibility to various stressors, thereby accelerating glycolytic rates at the early postmortem period and leading to an increased incidence of pale, soft, and exudative (PSE) condition pork (Scheffler \u0026amp; Gerrard, 2007). Due to its paler muscle surface and lower water-holding capacity (WHC) compared to reddish-pink, firm, and non-exudative (RFN) pork, PSE pork can negatively influence consumer purchase decision and the quality attributes of processed products, ultimately resulting in substantial economic losses for the meat industry (Brewer et al., 1998; Scheffler \u0026amp; Gerrard, 2007).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe quality of the meat products is also influenced by the cooking treatments, which govern heat-induced physicochemical changes that ultimately determine the overall quality (Park et al., 2020). Traditional cooking treatments, such as pan-frying and grilling, often involve high and uneven heat, which can cause excessive moisture loss and undesirable textural changes (Becker et al., 2016). Accordingly, cooking strategies that employ mild heating conditions have received increasing attention as potential approaches to minimize thermal damage and stabilize meat quality (Gill et al., 2025). Among the cooking treatments, sous-vide (SV) cooking ensures adequate heat transfer in raw materials due to precisely controlled low temperatures for extended durations, thereby enhancing product consistency, palatability, and consumer acceptance (Baldwin, 2012; Lee et al., 2025). However, an inherent limitation of SV processing is that the relatively low cooking temperatures restrict the development of Maillard reactions, resulting in limited formation of roasted flavor compounds and insufficient surface browning (Ruiz-Carrascal et al., 2019). These drawbacks can be overcome by additional processing steps, such as high-temperature searing or marination treatments applied before or after SV cooking, to improve surface color and flavor intensity (Cho et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2021). However, there are a limited number of studies on the application of SV combined with additional treatments to improve the overall quality of pork derived from PSE muscle. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to investigate the effects of SV and SV combined with searing treatments (SVS) on cooked meat quality traits, visual attributes, and eating quality traits of pork loins from the normal and PSE conditions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eMuscle samples and cooking treatments\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 42 porcine \u003cem\u003elongissimus dorsi\u003c/em\u003e (LD) muscles at 24 h postmortem was purchased from a local market. Fresh meat quality was assessed by determining muscle pH, meat color, and WHC. The samples were categorized into quality groups based on their lightness (L*) and drip loss (Ryu et al., 2005). The RFN group (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;34) was defined by a \u003cem\u003eL\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026le; 50 and a drip loss\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;6.0%, whereas the PSE group (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8) was characterized by a \u003cem\u003eL\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026gt; 50 and a drip loss\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;6.0%. Following quality measurements, the remaining chunks were cut into a total of 252 sections (six cuts per loin) and allocated for cooked meat quality analysis (2 cm thickness; three cuts per loin) and for visual attributes and sensory evaluation (1.5 cm thickness; three cuts per loin). The samples were immediately stored at 4℃ until subjected to three cooking treatments: pan-frying (Pan), SV, and SVS. The cooking treatments were performed as described previously (Baldwin, 2012; Lee et al., 2025).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor the Pan treatment, samples were pan-fried on a preheated stainless-steel pan (28 cm in diameter) at 180℃ using an electric induction range (NZ31R3707AK, Samsung Electronics, Gyeonggi-do, Korea) at the third heating level. Samples were cooked until the core temperature had reached at 71℃. For the SV treatments, samples were placed in nylon-polyethylene bags (thickness, 90 \u0026micro;m; oxygen transmission rate, 50 cm\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e/m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e/24 h) and vacuum-packed (2.5 kPa vacuum level) using a vacuum sealer (GVM-F500D, Grand Woosung, Seoul, Korea). The vacuum-packed samples were cooked in a precisely controlled-temperature water bath (WSB-30, Daihan Scientific, Gangwon-do, Korea) set at 60℃ for 3 h. For the SVS treatment, SV-cooked samples were subsequently pan-seared on both sides at 180℃ for 60 s (fifth heating level). After the three cooking treatments, a total of 126 samples was used to determine cooked meat quality. Forty-two samples per cooking treatment were frozen at \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;20℃ for the evaluation of visual attributes and sensory quality.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eFresh and cooked meat quality measurements\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMuscle pH\u003csub\u003e24 h\u003c/sub\u003e was measured using a spear-type portable pH meter equipped with an automatic temperature compensation probe (Testo 206-pH2, Testo, Lenzkirch, Germany). After allowing the freshly cut surface to bloom at 4℃, color was evaluated following the Commission Internationale de l\u0026rsquo;Eclairage (CIE). Lightness (\u003cem\u003eL\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e), redness (\u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e), and yellowness (\u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e) of muscle surface were measured using a chroma meter (CR-410, Minolta Camera Co., Osaka, Japan) under a closed-cone setup using illuminant C, a 0\u0026deg; viewing angle, and an 8 mm aperture. WHC was assessed by measuring filter-paper fluid uptake (FFU) and dip loss in accordance with the procedures of Honikel (l998) and Kauffman et al. (1986), respectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor the cooked quality measurement of Pan-, SV-, and SVS-treated samples, their surface color, treatment loss, and WBS were assessed following standard procedures (Honikel, 1998; Park et al., 2020; Cho et al., 2021). The color of cooked meat was measured using the same chroma meter under identical CIE conditions. Cooking treatment loss was calculated from weight differences before and after cooking. After measuring treatment loss, at least six cylindrical cores (1.27 cm diameter) were obtained parallel to the muscle fiber orientation for WBS measurement. The WBS value was collected using an Intron Universal Testing Machine (Model 1011, Instron Corp., Canton, MA, USA) equipped with a Warner\u0026ndash;Bratzler blade (crosshead speed, 200 mm/min).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eVisual attributes and sensory quality evaluation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVisual attributes and eating quality characteristics were evaluated using a total of 126 samples randomly coded with three-digit numbers and assessed across 21 sessions (six samples per session). Eleven trained panelists (six women and five men, aged 25 to 48 years) evaluated the visual attributes and sensory quality characteristics. Ethical approval for the panel was obtained from the Kyungpook National University Bioethics Committee (protocol number: 2019-0027; renewed every year). The overall procedure was previously referenced by Meilgaard et al. (1991) and the American Meat Science Association (1995). Before each session, frozen cooked samples were thawed overnight at 4℃ and reheated in a water bath to a core temperature of 54℃, followed by the evaluation of visual attributes and eating quality. Visual attributes included color, moisture, appearance, and overall acceptability. Eating quality was assessed using six tenderness attributes, juiciness, flavor intensity, off-flavor intensity, and overall acceptability. All the visual and sensory attributes were evaluated on a nine-point scale.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStatistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe general linear model procedure (SAS software, SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) was employed to analyze differences in fresh quality, cooked meat quality, visual attributes, and sensory quality characteristics across pork quality classes and cooking treatments. Fresh and cooked meat quality traits were conducted using a linear mixed-effects model, in which pork quality and cooking treatment were treated as fixed effects and replicate was included as a random effect. For the assessment of visual and sensory quality characteristics of cooked pork, a linear mixed model was applied, incorporating pork quality and cooking treatment as fixed effects, and both panelist and session as random effects. Significant differences among groups were identified using the probability difference option at \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05. All data were presented as least-squares means accompanied by their standard errors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eComparison of fresh meat quality characteristics between pork quality classes\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e showed a comparison of fresh meat quality characteristics between RFN and PSE quality classes of porcine LD muscles. Muscle pH measured at 24 h postmortem did not differ between the RFN and PSE groups (5.70 vs. 5.60, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). For muscle color, the PSE group exhibited significantly higher lightness (53.0 vs. 47.0, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and yellowness (1.99 vs. 1.08, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) values than the RFN group, whereas the redness values were comparable between the quality groups (8.63 vs. 8.64, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). LD samples from the PSE group showed a greater drip loss compared to those from the RFN group (7.25% vs. 2.76%, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Consistent with the drip loss results, higher FFU values were observed in PSE samples compared to RFN samples (118.7 vs. 72.4 mg, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eComparison of fresh meat quality characteristics between RFN and PSE pork loins\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRFN (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;34)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePSE (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel of significance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMuscle pH\u003csub\u003e24 h\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.70\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.02)\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.60\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.05)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"6\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMuscle color\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLightness (\u003cem\u003eL\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47.0\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.27)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53.0\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.46)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRedness (\u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.28)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.41)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYellowness (\u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.08\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.24)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.99\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.36)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"6\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWater-holding capacity\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDrip loss (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.76\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.23)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.25\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.56)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFFU (mg)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e72.4\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(2.95)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e118.7\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(6.08)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003eLevels of significance: NS, not significant; * \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05; *** \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003e\u003csup\u003ea\u0026minus;b\u003c/sup\u003e Different superscripts in the same row represent significant differences (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e Standard error of least square means.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003eAbbreviations: RFN, reddish-pink, firm, and non-exudative; PSE, pale, soft, and exudative; FFU, filter-paper fluid uptake.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eCombined effects of pork quality conditions and cooking treatments on cooked meat quality characteristics\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo significant differences in cooked meat color were observed between RFN and PSE samples within each cooking treatment (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Across both quality classes, samples subjected to SV cooking displayed significantly higher lightness values than those subjected to Pan and SVS treatments (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), whereas lightness did not differ between samples subjected to Pan and SVS treatments (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). In contrast, redness and yellowness values were consistently higher in the Pan and SVS groups than in the SV group, regardless of pork quality classes (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Treatment loss statistically increased in the order of Pan, SV, and SVS treatments within the RFN (20.6, 23.1, and 26.8%, respectively, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and PSE (23.8, 25.8, and 29.5%, respectively, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) groups. PSE-cooked pork exhibited significantly greater treatment loss than RFN-cooked pork in each treatment (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). PSE loins cooked by Pan (PSE-Pan) had greater treatment loss (24.9%) compared to PSE loins cooked by SV (PSE-SV; 20.3%) and SVS (PSE-SVS; 22.8%) (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001); however, PSE-SV and -SVS samples exhibited similar treatment loss (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). The treatment loss of the PSE-SV group did not differ compared to all the RFN groups (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). For WBS values, Pan-treated samples exhibited higher values than SV- and SVS-treated samples in both the RFN and PSE groups (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Additionally, PSE-Pan pork showed a higher WBS value than RFN pork cooked by the Pan method (RFN-Pan; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). No significant difference in WBS was detected between the SV and SVS groups for either quality class (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEffect of pork quality class and cooking method on cooked meat quality traits\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"13\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c12\" colnum=\"12\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c13\" colnum=\"13\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuality (Q)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRFN\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePSE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c13\" namest=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel of significance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCooking (C)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePan (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;34)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSV (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;34)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSVS (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;34)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePan (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSV (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSVS (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eQ\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eQ \u0026times; C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeat color\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLightness (\u003cem\u003eL\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.2\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(1.04)\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66.9\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(1.04)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.7\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(1.04)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43.2\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(2.11)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e70.7\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(2.11)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42.8\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(2.11)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRedness (\u003cem\u003ea\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.5\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.40)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.43\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.40)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.0\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.40)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.3\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.83)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.52\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.83)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.5\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.83)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYellowness (\u003cem\u003eb\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e*\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.0\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.37)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.50\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.37)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.6\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.37)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.9\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.75)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.38\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.75)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17.3\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.75)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment loss (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20.6\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.29)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.1\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.29)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20.4\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.29)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.9\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.58)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20.3\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.58)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22.8\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.58)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWBS (N)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37.9\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.87)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30.5\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.87)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30.7\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(0.87)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42.5\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(1.76)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.4\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(1.76)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31.8\u003csup\u003ec\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(1.76)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e***\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"13\"\u003eLevels of significance: NS, not significant; * \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05; *** \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"13\"\u003e\u003csup\u003ea\u0026minus;d\u003c/sup\u003e Different superscripts in the same row represent significant differences (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"13\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e Standard error of least square means.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"13\"\u003eAbbreviations: RFN, reddish-pink, firm, non-exudative; PSE, pale, soft, exudative; Pan, pork loin cooked with pan-frying; SV, pork loin treated by sous-vide; SVS, pork loin treated by SV and followed by searing using pan-frying; WBS, Warner-Bratzler shear force.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eCombined effects of pork quality conditions and cooking treatments on visual attributes\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe visual attributes of RFN and PSE pork loins were compared among the three cooking treatments (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Significant differences in color and moisture acceptability were observed among cooking treatments within both RFN and PSE quality classes (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). The RFN-Pan group exhibited a significantly higher color acceptability than the PSE-Pan group (8.08 vs. 7.29, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), whereas no difference was detected between RFN samples subjected to SVS (RFN-SVS) and PSE-SVS treatments (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). The RFN groups cooked by SV (RFN-SV) showed the highest scores of moisture (7.28, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), and there were no significant differences between the RFN-SVS and PSE-SVS groups (5.92 vs. 5.79, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). SV-treated samples exhibited lower appearance scores than Pan- and SVS-treated samples in both quality classes (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), with loins from the RFN-Pan group receiving the highest score (7.94, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). The appearance scores of the PSE-Pan and RFN-SVS groups were comparable (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). For overall visual acceptability, the RFN-Pan and treatment achieved the highest score among all treatments (7.38, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Conversely, the PSE-SV loins received the lowest overall acceptability score (4.57, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). No significant differences in overall acceptability were observed between PSE-Pan and RFN-SVS loins (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCombined effects of pork quality conditions and cooking treatments on sensory quality characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuality class and cooking treatment were found to significantly affect all sensory attributes (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Among the tenderness attributes, scores for softness, initial tenderness, and chewiness were higher in the order SV, SVS, and Pan treatments, irrespective of pork quality classes (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). No significant differences in these attributes were detected between RFN and PSE samples within the same cooking treatment (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Similarly, scores for rate of breakdown and amount of perceptible residue did not differ between RFN-SV and PSE-SV loins (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) or between RFN-SVS and PSE-SVS loins (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Within the Pan treatment, PSE samples exhibited significantly lower scores for these attributes than RFN samples (4.27 vs. 4.73 and 4.64 vs. 4.22, respectively; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Juiciness scores differed significantly among pork quality and cooking treatment groups (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), except between RFN-Pan and PSE-SVS loins, which showed comparable scores (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Flavor intensity did not differ between RFN and PSE samples within the Pan (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) and SV (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) treatments; however, PSE-SVS pork exhibited lower flavor intensity scores than RFN-SVS pork (6.27 vs. 6.68, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). In terms of off-flavor intensity, RFN samples received higher scores than PSE samples across all cooking treatments (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05); however, RFN-SV and PSE-SVS samples showed similar scores (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Overall eating acceptability scores were lower in the order of Pan, SVS, and SV within both RFN (4.93 vs. 5.95 vs. 6.80, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) and PSE (4.47 vs. 5.84 vs. 6.33, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) groups. Consistent with the tenderness attributes, RFN-SV samples exhibited higher overall acceptability than PSE-SV samples (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), whereas no significant difference was observed between RFN-SVS and PSE-SVS samples (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eMeat quality is closely linked to consumer acceptance and preference; thus, improving the quality of low-grade meat products continues to be a major priority in the meat industry. During the early postmortem period, high glycolytic potential in PSE pork can cause a rapid pH decline and increased metabolic heat production in skeletal muscle, leading to excessive protein denaturation in both the sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar fractions (Trevisan \u0026amp; Brum, 2020). Lee and Choi (2021) reported that PSE chicken breasts with greater apoptotic and glycolytic potentials at the early postmortem period exhibited impaired meat and sensory quality traits compared to normal chicken. In addition, porcine muscles exhibiting a rapid glycolytic rate showed higher lightness and drip loss values compared to muscles showing a normal glycolytic rate (Choi \u0026amp; Kim, 2009). In the present study, as expected, loins from the PSE group displayed a paler and more exudative muscle surface than those from the RFN group (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), even though no difference in ultimate muscle pH was observed between the groups (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrevious studies have demonstrated that appropriate SV cooking conditions for pork vary depending on product-specific characteristics, such as cut type, shape, and size, as these factors influence palatability and hygiene safety (Jeong et al., 2018; Kurp et al., 2022; Lee et al., 2025). For instance, Kurp et al. (2022) reported that pork loin slices (2.5 cm thickness) achieved optimal quality following SV at 60℃ for 3 or 4 h, and Jeong et al. (2018) suggested that SV processing at 61℃ for 45 or 90 min was suitable for pork ham with a thickness of 2 cm. However, SV cooking may induce pink or pale surface color, which consumers may perceive as undercooked or bloody; thereby necessitating an additional cooking treatment to ensure an acceptable surface color (Jeong et al., 2018). In this regard, Cho et al. (2020) reported that SV pork patties seared for 60 or 90 s in a preheated pan at 180℃ showed greater appearance acceptability than those seared for 0, 30, and 120 s. Based on these findings, the SV and searing conditions in the present study were set at 60℃ for 3 h and at 180℃ for 60 s, respectively, to ensure adequate cooking while maintaining product quality. As expected, in this study, pork loins treated with SV along exhibited a paler surface color than those exposed to severe heat treatments, which showed darker and redder surface color regardless of quality classes (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eExposing low-grade meat to higher temperatures or prolonged heat during conventional cooking can exacerbate moisture loss due to its inherently unstable muscle structural integrity, leading to increased toughness in the final products (Aaslyng et al., 2003). For example, increasing core temperature from 60 to 80℃ during pan-frying has been reported to progressively increase cooking loss across various pork quality classes, with PSE pork exhibiting significantly higher loss than normal pork at core temperature of 60 and 70℃ (Aaslyng et al., 2003). Park et al. (2020) reported that cooking loss in SV-cooked chicken breast increased with increasing treatment temperature and time, a trend associated with higher WBS values. Corroborating these observations, the PSE-Pan group, which was subjected to higher temperatures and longer heating durations, exhibited the greatest treatment loss among the groups, accompanied by the highest WBS values (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). The PSE-SVS group, which was subjected to similar severe heating for a shorter time than pan-frying, showed higher treatment loss than the RFN group across all three cooking methods (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), primarily due to additional moisture loss induced by the searing process. Interestingly, the application of SV cooking to PSE pork, either alone or in combination with searing, resulted in WBS values comparable to those of normal quality pork treated with any of the cooking treatments (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). These results suggest that applying SV-based treatments to low-quality PSE pork can improve cooked meat quality traits, particularly treatment loss and objective tenderness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eVisual attributes of meat products play a pivotal role at the initial stage of the purchasing process by providing visual cues that guide consumers\u0026rsquo; early evaluations and subsequent choice decisions (Malheiros et al., 2025). In the present study, pork loins subjected to high temperature treatments exhibited superior color acceptability compared with those processed by SV alone, with the RFN-Pan group receiving the highest score (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Although SV treatment alone resulted in lower color acceptability, the application of searing following SV cooking effectively improved color perception, leading to comparable color acceptability between PSE-SVS and RFN-SVS loins (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). These are consistent with previous findings indicating that surface browning formed through Maillard reactions at relatively high temperatures, accompanied by surface dehydration, was perceived as a favorable color attribute by trained panelists and consumers (Ruiz-Carrascal et al., 2019; Cho et al., 2020). In contrast, appearance acceptability was significantly lower for PSE pork than for RFN pork within each cooking treatment (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). This outcome is likely associated with the disrupted structure of the PSE muscle, which may limit protein functionality and negatively influence visual appearance by impairing uniform structure formation during heating (Suliga et al., 2024). Consequently, the overall visual acceptability was the lowest for the SV group (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), with a significant difference observed between the RFN-SV and PSE-SV groups. Trained panelists assigned higher scores for PSE loins treated with SVS compared to both RFN and PSE loins treated with SV (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom a sensory quality perspective, SV-treated products show improved eating quality, as the vacuum sealing and precise temperature control used in SV cooking minimize moisture evaporation, facilitate collagen dissolution into gelation, and reduce inter-fiber adhesion (Baldwin, 2012). Because of these advantages, SV pork loins, regardless of the pork quality class, required less force during the initial bite and left less perceptible residue after chewing compared to loins from the other groups (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Trained panelists could not distinguish the differences in tenderness attributes between loins from the RFN-SV and PSE-SV groups, nor between loins from the RFN-SVS and PSE-SVS groups (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), except in chewiness (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Meanwhile, SV-treated loins in both quality classes exhibited higher juiciness scores than those treated with the other cooking treatments (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), although the PSE group showed lower juiciness scores than the RFN group within each treatment (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), which might be attributed to the lower WHC of raw PSE loins. Flavor intensity was greater in samples exposed to severe heat treatments compared with SV-treated samples (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05), caused by the production of aromatic compounds increasing at relatively high temperatures (Calkins \u0026amp; Hodgan, 2007). Despite the relatively lower flavor intensity under SV conditions, PSE loins cooked using the SV method showed higher overall acceptability compared to RFN loins treated with the conventional cooking method (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01). In addition, under the searing method after SV processing, the overall acceptability of PSE loins did not differ from that of RFN loins (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTaken together, SV processing improved consumer-relevant palatability of PSE loins, mainly by enhancing moisture retention and tenderness. Additionally, the searing process effectively compensated for the visual and flavor-related limitations of SV cooking by providing meat products with a more desirable surface appearance and flavor perception. Collectively, these findings demonstrate the potential of SV-based cooking strategies, applied either alone or in combination with searing, to enhance the value of PSE pork by enabling targeted optimization of sensory and technological properties.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding statement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (RS-2024-00346933).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eEthic approval (IRB/IACUC)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was approved by Bioethics Committee of Kyungpook National University (protocol number 2019-0027; renewed every year).\u003c/p\u003e\n"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAaslyng, M. D., Bejerholm, C., Ertbjerg, P., Bertram, H. C., \u0026amp; Andersen, H. J. (2003). Cooking loss and juiciness of pork in relation to raw meat quality and cooking procedure. \u003cem\u003eFood Quality and Preference\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e, 277\u0026ndash;288. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00086-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAmerican Meat Science Association. (1995). Research guidelines for cookery, sensory evaluation, and instrumental tenderness measurements of fresh meats. National Livestock and Meat Board. Chicago, IL, USA:1995.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBaldwin, D. E. (2012). Sous vide cooking: A review. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e, 15\u0026ndash;30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2011.11.002\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBecker, A., Boulaaba, A., Pingen, S., Krischek, C., \u0026amp; Klein, G. (2016). Low temperature cooking pork meat \u0026ndash; Physicochemical and sensory aspects. \u003cem\u003eMeat Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e118\u003c/em\u003e, 82\u0026ndash;88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.03.026\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrewer, M. S., Lan, H. Y., \u0026amp; Mckeith, F. K. (1998). Consumer evaluation of pork appearance with differing physiological and packaging conditions. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Muscle Foods\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e, 173\u0026ndash;183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4573.1998.tb00652.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCalkins, C. R., \u0026amp; Hodgan, J. M. (2007). A fresh look at meat flavor. \u003cem\u003eMeat Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e77\u003c/em\u003e, 63\u0026ndash;80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2007.04.016\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCho, D. K., Lee, B., Kim, S. K., O, H., Kim, Y. S., \u0026amp; Choi, Y. M. (2021). Comparison of quality characteristics and palatability between sous-vide cooked pork loin patties with different searing treatments. \u003cem\u003eFood Science of Animal Resources\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e, 214\u0026ndash;223. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2020.e90\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCho, D. K., Lee, B., Oh, H., Lee, J. S., Kim, Y. S., \u0026amp; Choi, Y. M. (2020). Effects of searing process on quality characteristics and storage stability of sous-vide cooked pork patties. \u003cem\u003eFoods\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e, 1011. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9081011\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChoi, Y. M., \u0026amp; Kim, B. C. (2009). Muscle fiber characteristics, myofibrillar protein isoforms, and meat quality. \u003cem\u003eLivestock Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e122\u003c/em\u003e, 105\u0026ndash;118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2008.08.015\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGill, M., Rudy, M., Kuma-Kocan, P., Stanisławczyk, R., Wolińska, A., Krajewska, A., \u0026amp; Dziki, D. (2025). Effect of marinating on selected quality characteristics of pork tenderloin cooked by sous vide method. \u003cem\u003eFoods\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e, 1958. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14111958\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHonikel, K. O. (1998). Reference methods for the assessment of physical characteristics of meat. \u003cem\u003eMeat Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e49\u003c/em\u003e, 447\u0026ndash;457. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(98)00034-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJeong, K., O, H., Shin, S. Y., \u0026amp; Kim, Y. S. (2018). Effects of sous-vide method at different temperatures, times and vacuum degrees on the quality, structural, and microbiological properties of pork ham. \u003cem\u003eMeat Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e143\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.04.010\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKathuria, D., Dhiman, A. K., \u0026amp; Attri, S. (2022). Sous vide, a culinary technique for improving quality of food products: A review. \u003cem\u003eTrends in Food Science and Technology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e119\u003c/em\u003e, 57\u0026ndash;68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.11.031\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKauffman, R. G., Eikelenboom, G., van der Wal, P. G., Merkus, G., \u0026amp; Zaar, M. (1986). The use of filter paper to estimate drip loss of porcine musculature. \u003cem\u003eMeat Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e, 191\u0026ndash;200. https://doi.org/10.1016/0309-1740(86)90033-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKo, E., Jeong, K., Oh, H., Park, Y., Choi, J., \u0026amp; Lee, E. (2023). A deep learning-based framework for predicting pork preference. \u003cem\u003eCurrent Research in Food Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e, 100495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crfs.2023.100495\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKurp, L., Danowska-Oziewicz, M., \u0026amp; Kłębukowska, L. (2022). Sous vide cooking effects on physicochemical, microbiological and sensory characteristics of pork loin. \u003cem\u003eApplied Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e, 2365. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12052365\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLee, B., \u0026amp; Choi, Y. M. (2025). A new perspective on apoptosis: Its impact on meat and organoleptic quality in different animals. \u003cem\u003eFood Chemistry: X\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e, 102120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fochx.2024.102120\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLee, B., \u0026amp; Choi, Y. M. (2021). Expression level of heat shock protein 27 in PSE-like and fast-glycolyzing conditions of chicken pectoralis major muscle. \u003cem\u003ePoultry Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e100\u003c/em\u003e, 101424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2021.101424\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLee, B., Kim, J. Y., \u0026amp; Choi, Y. M. (2025). Sous-vide treatment strategies for enhancing quality traits in various meat products: physicochemical, organoleptic, and microbiological perspectives. \u003cem\u003eApplied Food Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e, 101089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afres.2025.101089\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLee, B., Park, C. H., Kim, J. Y., O, H., Kim, D., Cho, D. K., Kim, Y. S., \u0026amp; Choi, Y. M. (2021). Effects of \u003cem\u003eAstragalus membranaceus\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eAdenophora triphylla\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eUlmus pumila\u003c/em\u003e extracts on quality characteristics and storage stability of sous-vide cooked chicken breasts. \u003cem\u003eFood Science of Animal Resources\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e, 664\u0026ndash;673. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2021.e24\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMalheiros, B. A., Spers, E. E., Contreras Castillo, C. J., Aroeira, C. N., \u0026amp; de Lima, L. M. (2025). The role of visual attention and quality cues in consumer purchase decisions for fresh and cooked beef: An eye-tracking study. \u003cem\u003eApplied Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e, 7360. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15137360\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeilgaard, M., Civille, G. V., \u0026amp; Carr, B. T. (1991). Sensory evaluation techniques. FL: CRC Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOECD/FAO. (2025). OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2025\u0026ndash;2034, Paris and Rome, https://doi.org/10.1787/601276cd-en.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePark, C. H., Lee, B., Oh, E., Kim, Y. S., \u0026amp; Choi, Y. M. (2020). Combined effects of sous-vide cooking conditions on meat and sensory quality characteristics of chicken breast meat. \u003cem\u003ePoultry Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e99\u003c/em\u003e, 3286\u0026ndash;3291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.03.004\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRuiz-Carrascal, J., Roldan, M., Refolio, F., Perez-Palacios, T., \u0026amp; Antequera, T. (2019). Sous-vide cooking of meat: A Maillarized approach. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e, 100138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2019.100138\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRyu, Y. C., Choi, Y. M., \u0026amp; Kim, B. C. (2005). Variations in metabolite contents and protein denaturation of the \u003cem\u003elongissimus dorsi\u003c/em\u003e muscle in various porcine quality classifications and metabolic rates. \u003cem\u003eMeat Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e71\u003c/em\u003e, 522\u0026ndash;529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.04.034\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eScheffler, T. L., \u0026amp; Gerrard, D. E. (2007). Mechanisms controlling pork quality development: The biochemistry controlling postmortem energy metabolism. \u003cem\u003eMeat Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e77\u003c/em\u003e, 7\u0026ndash;16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2007.04.024\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSuliga, P., Schneider, S., Gonzalez, J., Egelandsdal, B., Alvseike, O., Abie, S. M., \u0026amp; M\u0026uuml;nch, D. (2024). A new histopathology scoring protocol reveals myopathy features in PSE-like pork. \u003cem\u003eMeat Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e216\u003c/em\u003e, 109558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2024.109558\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTrevisan, L., \u0026amp; Brum, J. S. (2020). Incidence of pale, soft and exudative (PSE) pork meat in reason of extrinsic stress factors. \u003cem\u003eAnais da Academia Brasileira de Ci\u0026ecirc;ncias\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e92\u003c/em\u003e, e20190086. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765202020190086\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYang, L., Yuan, F., Zhou, M., Zhou, X., Ahmmed, M. K., \u0026amp; Wu, H. (2025). Insights into low-temperature strategies for preserving cooked pork quality in ready-to-eat meat products through processing and reheating studies. \u003cem\u003eFood Chemistry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e487\u003c/em\u003e, 144696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2025.144696\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"food-science-of-animal-resources","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"Learn more about [Food Science of Animal Resources](https://link.springer.com/journal/44463)","snPcode":"44463","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/44463/3?","title":"Food Science of Animal Resources","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Open","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"PSE, Sous-vide cooking, Searing treatment, Quality characteristics, Sensory quality, Pork loin","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8860322/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8860322/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study investigated the effects of sous-vide (SV) alone and in combination with searing (SVS) on meat quality traits, visual attributes, and sensory characteristics of porcine \u003cem\u003elongissimus dorsi\u003c/em\u003e muscles from reddish-pink, firm, and non-exudative (RFN) and pale, soft, and exudative (PSE) conditions. PSE loins showed a lighter surface color and lower water-holding capacity compared to RFN loins (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). The PSE-SV group exhibited lower treatment loss and Warner-Bratzler shear force values compared to the PSE-Pan group, and PSE-SVS samples did not differ from RFN-SV or RFN-SVS samples (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). For visual attributes, the Pan- and SVS-treated groups received higher color acceptability scores than the SV-treated group (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) due to surface browning formed by Maillard reactions. SVS treatment on PSE and RFN loins showed comparable color acceptability scores (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Overall visual acceptability was higher in the PSE-SVS group compared to the RFN-SV group (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Notably, PSE-SV loins were perceived as more tender and juicier than RFN-Pan and RFN-SVS loins (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Flavor intensity was higher in Pan- and SVS-treated samples than in SV-treated samples in both quality classes (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). PSE-SV loins achieved higher overall acceptability scores than RFN-Pan and RFN-SVS loins (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01), and SVS applied to RFN or PSE exhibited comparable scores (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Overall, the findings suggest that SV as well as SVS can effectively enhance the overall quality and utilization of low-grade PSE pork in the context of value-added meat products.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Effects of sous-vide and searing treatments on cooked meat and organoleptic quality attributes in pork loins derived from PSE and normal conditions","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-02-27 16:43:35","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8860322/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-03-11T09:43:38+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-03-06T11:40:17+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"268010404270168631303505233669888929981","date":"2026-03-05T05:03:22+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-03-04T23:52:32+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"110770702998803309346245233810199206157","date":"2026-02-26T04:37:06+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-02-25T13:00:32+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-02-19T17:27:56+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-02-19T10:50:29+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Food Science of Animal Resources","date":"2026-02-12T09:29:30+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"food-science-of-animal-resources","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"Learn more about [Food Science of Animal Resources](https://link.springer.com/journal/44463)","snPcode":"44463","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/44463/3?","title":"Food Science of Animal Resources","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Open","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"432fa456-0f05-48fd-908a-bf9a92cde1d5","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 27th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-07T18:09:19+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-02-27 16:43:35","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8860322","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8860322","identity":"rs-8860322","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}