46 3, (2019) Korean J. Poult. Sci. Vol.46, No.3, (2019) Dicky Tri Utama 1 1 Barido Fa

46 3, 137 154 (2019) Korean J. Poult. Sci. Vol.46, No.3, 137 154 (2019) https://doi.org/10.5536/kjps.2019.46.3.137 137 1 Dicky Tri Utama 1 1 Barido Farouq Heidar 1 2 2 3 2 Development of Samgyetang Broth from Air-dried and Oven-roasted Chicken Feet Juntae Kim 1, Dicky Tri Utama 1, Hae Seong Jeong 1, Barido Farouq Heidar 1, Aera Jang 2, Jae In Pak 2, Yeong Jong Kim 3 and Sung Ki Lee 2 1 Student, Department of Applied Animal Science, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon 24341, Republic of Korea 2 Professor, Department of Applied Animal Science, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon 24341, Republic of Korea 3 Senior Researcher, Nutritional Resource Research Institute, Seoul 06747, Republic of Korea ABSTRACT This study was conducted to develop and compare Samgyetang broth from extract of pre-treated chicken feet. Chicken feet were subjected to non-heating (control), heating at 70 for 12 h in a hot air dryer, and heating at 180 for 1 h in an oven. The heat-treated chicken feet were extracted at 121 for 1 h and 2 h, respectively. The extract was placed in a pouch with whole chicken carcass (470±10 g). The sealed Samgyetang retort was made according to the industrial method. The ph of the extract from preheated chicken feet was lower than that extracted from fresh chicken feet. The Thiobarbituric Acid Reactive Substances (TBARS) value of the preheated chicken feet extract was significantly lower (P<0.05) than that of fresh chicken feet extract, but there were no significant differences among the broths. As the extraction time increased, the ph and TBARS value decreased in the extract (P<0.05) but increased in the broth (P<0.05). According to the sensory evaluation test, the extract from 1 h hot air heating and drying was significantly better in appearance, aroma, and overall preference than the other treatments (P<0.05). The GC-MS results showed that benzaldehyde and benzothiazole, which are widely known to give meat and nuts flavor, were detected in those treatments (P<0.05). The Samgyetang broths prepared from 1 h hot air heating and drying extract were significantly higher in the overall acceptability according to the sensory test (P<0.05). In summary, the quality of retort Samgyetang broth can be improved by adding chicken feet extract which is subjected to heating and drying for 1 h. (Key words: Samgyetang, Samgyetang broth, chicken feet, volatile compound, flavor),, (Yoo et al., 1998; Park, 2004).,. 1990 (home meal replacement; HMR) (Lee et al., 2014).,,,, (Lee and Lee, 2009), 2017 1,102 4 (Korea Customs Service, 2017, Samgyetang HS CODE: 1602321010).,,,. To whom correspondence should be addressed : skilee@kangwon.ac.kr

138 :.., Han et al.(2016) 2.,,,., (Guimares et al., 2012), glycosaminoglycan, glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate (Widyaningsih et al., 2015; DGL, 2016). 23.3%, 13.1%, 5.9% (Lee, 2014), (Almeida and Lannes, 2013)., (Maillard reaction) (lipid degradation), (Thiamine degradation) (Xie et al., 2008).,, (Van, 2006).,, ph, (Cambero et al., 2000; Jousse et al, 2002; Monica, 2018).. (Hernández et al., 1999)., (off-flavor), (Song et al., 2011). Utama et al. (2018) (brisket),, (beef-like) pyrazines.,.,,, (Speckhahn et al., 2010).,, (Tian et al., 2016). Fu et al.(2015) (silver carp), (meat-like flavor),.,. (,, ) (1, 2 ),.. 55 (550 g), 20 (15 ). 2±2 12 5 30.,,.. 70 (LD-918BT, Liquip, Korea) 12. (HS-XC365APB, Samsung, Korea) 180 1, 20 1. 8, 121, 0.2 MPA kgf/cm 2 (AC-13, Jeio Tech, Korea) 1, 2. (18 cm 28 cm, polyethylene, polypropylene,, Cleanwrap, Korea),.

Kim et al. : Samgyetang Broth Treated with Air-dried and Oven-roasted Chicken Feet 139 Triyannanto and Lee(2015). 0.5%, 0.15%, 0.1%, monosodium glutamate(msg) 0.2%. (,,, MSG). Fig. 1 (550 g). (470±10 g),, (Bich Chi Food Company, Vietnam), (polypropylene, 19 cm 25 cm) 5. 50±2, 300 ml, sealing machine(wb- 1150VP, WB. Tech, Korea)., 250. (PRS-40-1, Kyunghan, Korea). F 0. 65, 1 121.0, 1.5 kgf/cm 2 20. 1 2, 122.0, 1.7 kgf/cm 2 95. 1.7 kgf/cm 2 20, 1. 5.. (Chroma meter, CR-400, Konica Minolta Sensing, Inc., Osaka, Japan) (brightness, CIE L*), (redness, CIE a*), (yellowness, CIE b*) Commission Internationale de 1 Eclairage(CIE). 100 ml 90 ml, 2 cm Fig. 1. Manufacturing process of Samgyetang.

140 :. 5 A4, (L*=27.83, a*=0.41, b*=0.45). Calibrate plate illuminant C Y=93.6, X=0.3134, y=0.3194. Triyannanto and Lee(2015). (600 μm mesh), 50 ml 30 ml 3,000 g 5. (Spectrophotometer, UV-mini-1240, Shimadzu Corp., Japan) 600 nm, %. Transmittance(%) = 10 A 100 A 600 nm. ph meter(senveneasy ph, Mettler-Toledo GmbH, Switzerland) ph. ph meter (calibration) 20 (ph 4.00), (ph 7.02), (ph 9.26). Sinnhuber and Yu(1977) 2-thiobarbituric acid reactive substances(tbars). 0.5 g 1% TBA 3 ml, 25% TCA 17 ml, 98 (Water bath, BW-20G, Jeio Tech, Korea) 30 10. 5 ml chloroform 3 ml 3,500 rpm 30, (Spectrophotometer, UVmini-1240, Shimadzu Corp., Japan) 532 nm. TBARS 1 kg mg MA(malonaldehyde). GC-MS., 50 ml headspace vial 10 ml 60 10, 75 μm / (Sigma-Aldrich Corp., LLC., USA) vial 30. 250 GC, 1:5 5. GC(7890A Agilent Technologies; USA) DB5 (30 μm 0.25 mm i.d., 0.25 μm film thickness, J & W Scientific, Folcom, CA, USA). GC 40 2 5 /min 40 160, 6 /min 160 180. 180 5, 180 200 10, 200 5. interface quadruple 280 150., 1 ml/min. (MS; mass spectrophotometer, 5975C, Agilent Technologies, USA). MS ion source 280, electron impact 70 ev. MS 50 450 m/z, 1 scan/sec. National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST)., n-alkanes(c 8 -C 20 ) retention indices(ris). Ris http://www.flavornet.org/ http://foodb.ca/, (area unit; AU) 10 5 /g( )., 0.5% MSG 0.2%. 10. 1 9 3 3. 5, 70 ml 50 ml. (HS-XC365APB, Samsung Hauzen, Korea, : 800W) 1 30. (appearance), (taste),

Kim et al. : Samgyetang Broth Treated with Air-dried and Oven-roasted Chicken Feet 141 (saltiness), (aroma), (overall acceptability) 5. 7, (like very much, 7 ), (like moderately, 6 ), (like slightly, 5 ), (neither like nor dislike, 4 ), (dislike slightly, 3 ), (dislike moderately, 2 ), (dislike very much, 1 ). 10 ( 5, 5 )., 70 ml 50 ml (800W, HS-XC365APB, Samsung, Korea) 1 30 50±5,., 1 1 1 3, 2 6. (color), (, umami), (bitterness), (saltiness), (nutty flavor), (roasted flavor), (chicken flavor), (rancid flavor) 8. Adhikari et al. (2011) (Table 1), 7 (1 -, 7 - )., 1 1/100(v/v), 7 1/10(v/v). MSG 0.2% 4. 1/8(v/v), 5. 0.5% (w/v) 3. 30 4. 1 180, 5. 12 70 (thigh), 6. 5, 5. 100 ml. R (Version 3.4.3). Cran mirror USA(CA 1), Agricolae. One way ANOVA, (P<0.05) Duncan s Multiple range test. Table 2. Table 1. Description language and reference samples used in the descriptive analysis of the checken feet extract and samgyetang broth Characteristic Reference Score Description Appearance Color Soy sauce in water (1/100 (v/v)) (1) Light (1) Soysauce in water (1/10 (v/v)) (7) Dark (7) Umami Monosodium glutamate 0.2% (w/v) (4) Umami taste Taste Bitterness Espresso in water (1:8 (v/v)) (5) Bitter taste Saltiness Salt in water 0.5% (w/v) (3) Salty taste Nutty Ground roast almond (microwave for 30 s) (4) Nutty flavor Flavor Roasted Roasted chicken feet (180 oven for 1 h) (5) Burnt flavor Chicken Dried chicken thigh in air drier (70 /12 h) (6) Meaty flavor Rancid Canola oil (microwave for 5 min) (5) Rancid flavor

142 : Table 2. Instrumental color and transmittance value of chicken feet extract and Samgyetang broth prepared with different pretreatment and extraction time L* a* b* Transmittance (% at 600 nm) a f Con SEM P-value Extract - 29.56 f 32.25 d 35.82 c 30.68 e 63.45 a 51.18 b 1.64 <0.001 Broth 31.05 d 32.29 b 41.16 a 28.42 f 31.59 c 28.99 e 20.20 g 0.69 <0.001 Extract - 0.91 a 1.16 b 1.51 c 1.49 c 2.60 e 2.04 d 0.07 <0.001 Broth 2.01 b 2.84 e 2.67 d 2.61 c 2.99 f 2.83 e 0.71 a 0.09 <0.001 Extract - 1.92 e 1.23 d 1.93 c 1.25 d 12.09 a 7.75 b 0.61 <0.001 Broth 4.12 f 4.52 e 10.08 a 6.24 d 8.70 b 6.46 c 3.44 g 0.27 <0.001 Extract - 41.66 a 40.27 a 30.16 b 39.22 a 25.33 bc 23.87 c 1.87 <0.001 Broth 47.23 46.83 51.20 46.32 47.92 36.04 47.37 1.43 0.306 Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). SEM, standard error of the mean. (L* ),,, 1. Liu et al.(2001) 9%, acetic acid, citric acid, L*. L*,., L*, L*,. (a* ),,, (P<0.05).. Liu et al.(2001),.,,. (b* ), 1 (P<0.05).. Table 2.. (L* ) ( ). L*. 1 ( 1 ) L* (P<0.05). (a*), 2. (b*), (P<0.05).,, (P<0.05). Triyannanto and Lee(2015),

Kim et al. : Samgyetang Broth Treated with Air-dried and Oven-roasted Chicken Feet 143,. (P>0.05), 1. ph TBARS Table 3. ph. 2 ph, 1 ph (P<0.05), ph (P<0.05). ph. Liu et al.(2008), ph. Triyannanto & Lee(2015), ph, ph. ph, ph., ph(6.68 6.81) ph(7.11 7.64), 1 2 (P<0.05)., ph. TBARS (P<0.05). (P<0.05). TBARS, (1 hour) (12 hour). Domínguez et al.(2014), TBARS. TBARS (0.294 0.417 mg/kg) TBARS (0.125 0.304 mg/kg). TBARS, (P<0.05). TBARS 1 2.. Ahn and Min(2005),. Shah et al.(2017), F 0 (121 ) TBARS. GC-MS. Table 4, 21, aldehydes, alkane, benzene, Table 3. ph and TBARS value of chicken feet extract and Samgyetang broth prepared with different pretreatment and extraction time a f ph TBARS (mg/kg) Con SEM P-value Extract - 7.64 a 7.46 b 7.33 d 7.11 f 7.42 c 7.24 e 0.04 <0.001 Broth 6.81 a 6.72 cd 6.79 ab 6.69 d 6.74 bc 6.68 d 6.80 a 0.01 <0.001 Extract - 0.134 cd 0.125 d 0.207 b 0.161 c 0.304 a 0.226 b 0.013 <0.001 Broth 0.319 bc 0.294 c 0.343 abc 0.399 ab 0.307 c 0.337 bc 0.417 a 0.012 0.027 Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). SEM, standard error of the mean.

144 : Table 4. Aroma volatiles ( 10 5 area unit) of chicken feet extract made with different chicken feet pretreatment and extraction time Group Chem Propanal 0.00 d 1.14 c 0.00 d 1.82 b 1.93 ab 2.02 a 0.180 <0.001 SEM P-value Aroma description References Cocoa, pungent, nutty, alcoholic, wine A, B, C Hexanal 18.58 cd 8.68 e 13.31 de 19.31 c 67.24 a 36.17 b 0.418 <0.001 Grass, tallow, fat A, B, C Heptanal 3.22 d 1.60 e 2.47 de 5.89 c 11.88 a 7.60 b 0.745 <0.001 Benzaldehyde 0.00 d 0.00 d 1.69 c 3.13 b 4.36 a 4.03 a 0.380 <0.001 Octanal 4.42 d 3.10 e 4.28 d 8.75 c 16.67 a 12.88 b 1.046 <0.001 Nonanal 8.36 d 7.05 e 6.16 e 11.33 c 19.93 a 15.27 b 1.025 <0.001 Total aldehydes compounds Alkane 34.58 d (20.3%) 21.57 f (15.8%) 27.91 e (16.8%) 50.23 c (19.4%) 122.01 a 77.97 b (32.6%) (25.5%) Heptane 3.93 d 2.58 e 4.02 d 5.66 c 10.73 a 7.87 b 0.586 <0.001 Oily, fatty, citrus, rancid A, B, C Burnt sugar, gravy, stewed, almond, A, B, C, D roasted, burning Oily, fatty, green, honey Fatty, citrus, grassy, green A, B, C A, B, C 7.310 <0.001 - - Alkane, ethereal, sweet Octane 3.11 d 2.24 e 7.26 c 7.17 c 13.88 a 10.94 b 0.855 <0.001 Alkane, gasoline A, B Cyclotrisiloxane 2.86 2.13 1.77 1.91 2.39 2.59 0.154 0.309 - - 4-Methyl octane 0.00 c 0.00 c 2.90 ab 3.38 a 1.86 b 3.03 ab 0.336 <0.001 - - Dodecane 3.35 c 2.81 c 11.36 a 7.87 b 9.82 ab 8.88 ab 0.781 <0.001 Alkane A 2,5-Dimethylundecane 0.00 c 0.00 c 0.00 c 1.96 ab 1.85 b 2.14 a 0.210 <0.001 - - Total alkane compounds Aldehydes Benzene 13.25 d (7.80%) 9.76 e (7.15%) 27.31 c (16.4%) 27.95 c (10.8%) 40.53 a 35.45 b (10.8%) (11.6%) Toluene 2.58 ab 2.56 ab 3.27 ab 3.38 a 3.23 ab 3.38 a 0.119 0.089 A, B 2.719 <0.001 - - Sweet, paint, solvent-like 1,4-Dimethylbenzene 1.75 b 0.52 c 2.18 b 4.45 a 4.84 a 4.58 a 0.356 <0.001 - - Total benzene compounds Furan 4.33 bc (2.55%) 3.08 c (2.26%) 5.45 b (3.27%) 7.83 a (3.02%) 8.07 a 7.96 a (2.16%) (2.60%) A, B, E 0.438 <0.001 - - 2-Methylfuran 57.76 64.13 53.81 72.71 85.75 81.73 4.259 0.163 Acetone, chocolate B 2,5-Dimethylfuran 3.08 b 2.43 b 2.63 b 6.20 a 2.38 b 3.41 b 0.317 <0.001 Bacon, meaty, gravy, roasted 2-Pentylfuran 2.14 d 1.82 d 3.72 c 4.11 c 10.99 a 9.20 b 0.747 <0.001 Beany, butter, green B, C Total furan compounds Ketone 62.98 b (37.05%) 68.38 ab (50.1%) 60.16 b (36.1%) 83.02 ab (32.0%) 99.12 a 94.34 a (26.5%) (30.8%) 2-Heptanone 2.01 d 1.39 e 2.26 d 5.09 c 6.74 a 6.22 b 0.447 <0.001 4.717 0.042 - - Woody, coconut, sweet Ethanone 1.50 c 1.08 d 1.17 d 2.25 a 1.77 b 1.74 b 0.086 <0.001 - - Total ketone compounds 3.51 d (2.07%) 2.47 e (1.81%) 3.43 d (2.06%) 7.34 c (2.83%) 8.51 a 7.96 b (2.27%) (2.60%) B B, C 0.520 <0.001 - -

Kim et al. : Samgyetang Broth Treated with Air-dried and Oven-roasted Chicken Feet 145 Table 4. Continued Group VSC Chem Benzothiazole 51.32 b 31.22 b 37.67 b 78.61 a 89.44 a 76.88 a 5.220 <0.001 Carbon disulfide 0.00 d 0.00 d 4.57 c 4.54 c 6.43 a 5.50 b 0.054 <0.001 Total VSC compounds 51.32 b (30.2%) 31.22 b (22.88%) 42.24 b (25.4%) 83.15 a (32.04%) 95.87 a (25.6%) 82.37 a (26.9%) SEM P-value Aroma description References Gasoline, coffee, cooked, meat, nutty, sulfury Pleasant, sweet, ether like 5.252 <0.001 - - Total volatile compounds 169.97 c 136.48 c 166.50 c 259.52 b 374.11 a 306.06 b 18.34 <0.001 - - A, http://flavornet.org/flavornet.html; B, http://foodb.ca; C, Calkins and Hodgen(2007); D, Machiels et al.,(2003); E, Migita et al., (2017); F, Holleman et al.,(2001); SEM, standard error of the mean; VSC, volatile sulfur compounds. a f Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). A, B F furan, ketone, volatile sulfur compounds(vsc) 6. 1 total volatile aldehydes, alkane, benzene, furan, ketone volatile sulfur compounds, 1 total volatile (P<0.05). aldehydes propanal, hexanal 6. Aldehydes. 1 aldehydes 32.6%. aldehydes (green), (tallow), (fat) hexanal. (lipid reaction) 90%, hexanal 2-hexanal, pentanal, heptanal, benzaldehyde, ocatanal, nonanal (Chen et al., 2002; Domínguez et al., 2014). Hexanal TBARS (Brunton et al., 2000; Beltran et al., 2003; Domínguez et al., 2014), hexanal TBARS 1 (P<0.05). 1 hexanal, hexanal 1 aldehyde. benzaldehyde octanal. Calkins and Hodgen (2007) Champagne (2008) benzaldehyde, octanal, Aldehyde. Alkane octane 6, 1 (16.4%). alkane. (dairy), (fruit), (herb), (spice) octane 1 (P<0.05). benzene,, (P<0.05). Benzene toluene 1,4-dimethylbenzene. Toluene 2 (P<0.10). Moio et al. (1993) toluene (chemical), (solvent). Furan Ser, Cys, Ala, Thr, Asp, (Rowe, 1998; Varanova and Ciesarova, 2009). furan,. Vranova and Ciesarova(2009) furan. furan 3, 26.5 50.1%

146 :. (roasted flavor) 2,5- dimethylfuran 2, (butter flavor) 2-pentylfuran 1 (P<0.05). Ketone (Insausti et al., 2002), 2-heptanone, ethanone 2. ketone, aldehyde, alcohol, (rancid), (cardboard), (pungent) (Chang and Peterson, 1977). ketone 1, 1 (P<0.05). Ketone 2-heptanone (burnt), (malty), 2 (P<0.05). Volatile sulfur compounds(, VSC) benzothiazole carbon sulfide. Benzothiazole,, 2 benzothiazole (P<0.05). Machiels et al. (2003) benzothiazole (stewed), (gravy), (roasted), Xie et al.(2008), benzothiazole,. Table 5. aldehydes, alkane, benzene, furans, volatile sulfur compounds (VSC), alcohol 6. (P<0.05). furan 29.36%, VSC 31.9%, alcohol 21.8%. aldehydes 1, 24.4%. Aldehyde 8. hexanal, octanal, nonanal 1. Hexanal linoleic acid, (Larick et al., 1992). Hexanal (grass), (tallow), (fat), hexanal (Calkin and Hodgen, 2007; Pomponio and Ruiz-Carrascal, 2017). Octanal, nonanal oleic acid (Chen et al., 2002; Damanik and Murkovic, 2018), octanal (oil), (fat), (honey), nonanal (fat), (citrus), (grassy), (green flavor). Ruben et al. (2014),,, hexanal, octanal nonanal (P<0.05). Benzaldehyde (gravy), (roasted), (almond flavor), 2 (P<0.05). alkane 2 (P<0.05). alkane. Alkane decane, tetradecane, tetradecane. Decane tetradecane alkane, decane 2 (5.88 AU 10 5 /g dry matter) 2 (5.61 AU 10 5 /g dry matter), tetradecane (2.07 2.71 AU 10 5 /g dry matter) (P<0.05). alkane. benzene, toluene. toluene 2 2 (7.57 AU 10 5 /g dry matter), 1 (5.33 AU 10 5 /g dry matter). furan,. Furan 2,5-dimethylfuran, 2-methylfuran, 2-pentylfuran. 2-methylfuran (53.34 ~63.83 AU 10 5 /g dry matter) 2 (102.99 AU 10 5 /g dry matter).,. (Bacon), (gravy), (roasted)

Kim et al. : Samgyetang Broth Treated with Air-dried and Oven-roasted Chicken Feet 147 Table 5. Aroma volatiles ( 10 5 area unit) of Samgyetang broth made with chicken feet extract prepared with different pretreatment and extraction time Group Compound name Control Total aldehydes compounds Alkane SEM P-value 2-Methylbutanal 4.68 a 2.14 b 2.15 b 2.22 b 1.64 b 1.88 b 1.57 b 0.214 <0.001 Propanal 7.27 a 4.73 bc 4.82 b 4.70 bc 4.01 cd 3.85 d 4.50 bcd 0.220 <0.001 Hexanal 26.83 bc 23.83 bc 20.59 c 34.68 a 21.45 c 26.87 bc 31.32 ab 1.229 0.005 Octanal 6.88 b 3.47 b 3.09 b 12.23 a 3.47 b 4.44 b 5.63 b 0.781 0.007 Heptanal 4.79 b 3.68 b 2.66 b 8.63 a 3.67 b 4.34 b 5.05 b 0.432 0.001 Pentanal 1.93 a 1.57 b 1.38 bc 1.55 b 1.61 ab 1.07 c 1.37 bc 0.057 <0.001 Benzaldehyde 1.16 b 1.66 b 1.60 a 1.53 a 1.28 b 1.57 a 1.70 a 0.044 <0.001 Nonanal 3.81 b 4.08 abc 3.08 b 12.52 a 3.98 b 6.14 b 6.68 b 0.765 0.003 57.35 bc (15.0%) 45.16 bcd (19.3%) 39.37 d (14.4%) 78.06 a (24.4%) 41.11 cd (16.5%) 50.16 bcd (19.4%) 57.82 b (20.8%) Aroma description Almond, cocoa, coffee, nutty B Cocoa, pungent, nutty, alcoholic, A, B, C wine Grass, tallow, fat Oily, fatty, green, honey Oily, fatty, citrus, rancid Almond, malt, pungent, fermented, bready Burnt sugar, gravy, stewed, almond, roasted, burning Fatty, citrus, grassy, green A, B, C A, B, C A, B, C A, B A, B, C, D A, B, C 2.925 <0.001 - - Decane 0 d 4.52 ab 2.38 c 4.72 ab 5.61 a 2.78 bc 5.88 a 0.434 <0.001 Alkane A, B Tetradecane 0 d 0 d 0 d 2.71 a 2.07 b 1.05 c 1.12 c 0.195 <0.001 Total alkane compounds References Aldehydes Benzene 0.00 d (0%) 4.52 b (1.93%) 2.38 c (0.87%) 7.43 a (2.32%) 7.68 a (3.08%) 3.83 bc (1.48%) 7.00 a (2.52%) Toluene 7.50 5.33 5.87 5.75 7.24 5.91 7.57 0.345 0.401 Total benzene compounds Furan 7.50 (0%) 5.33 (2.28%) 5.87 (2.15%) 5.75 (1.80%) 7.24 (2.90%) 5.91 (2.29%) 7.57 (2.72%) 2,5-Dimethylfuran 4.31 a 3.09 b 3.02 b 3.13 b 2.83 b 2.04 c 1.75 c 0.160 <0.001 2-Methylfuran 102.99 a 53.34 b 59.77 b 62.21 b 63.13 b 57.53 b 63.83 b 4.326 0.024 2-Pentylfuran 5.29 3.81 3.69 6.72 4.29 7.89 8.96 0.573 0.051 Total furan compounds 112.59 a 60.24 b (29.36%) (25.7%) 66.48 b (24.4%) 72.06 b (22.5%) 70.25 b (28.2%) 67.46 b (26.1%) 74.54 b (26.8%) Alkane, mild, waxy A, B 0.552 <0.001 - - Sweet, paint, solvent-like A, B, E 0.345 0.401 - - Bacon, meaty, gravy, roasted Acetone, chocolate Beany, butter, green B B B, C 4.538 0.029 - -

148 : Table 5. Continued Group Compound name Control SEM P-value Aroma description References 2-Methylthiophene 3.03 2.39 2.01 1.69 2.49 3.10 2.64 0.151 0.11 Roasted, sulfur, onion, alliaceous, green B VSC Allyl methyl sulfide 54.7 a 23.28 b 34.69 b 31.36 b 27.56 b 32.92 b 32.08 b 2.358 0.004 Benzothiazole 49.87 b 48.2 b 54.07 ab 67.06 a 51.01 b 44.40 b 46.33 b 1.915 0.018 Dimethyl sulfide 3.78 a 1.69 c 2.37 b 1.97 bc 1.39 c 1.81 bc 1.89 bc 0.157 <0.001 Dimethyl disulfide Methyl-2- propenyl disulfide 3,3'-Thiobis-1- propene Total VSC compounds 3.44 a 1.46 b 1.83 b 1.86 b 1.18 b 1.56 b 1.15 b 0.177 0.001 2.66 ab 3.04 a 2.15 bc 2.10 bc 1.27 d 2.88 ab 1.39 cd 0.154 <0.001 5.02 3.99 8.04 6.58 7.86 5.81 8.36 0.551 0.25 122.50 (31.9%) 84.05 (35.9%) 105.16 (38.5%) 112.62 (35.2%) 92.76 (37.2%) 92.48 (35.8%) 93.84 (33.8%) Alcohol 2-Propen-1-ol 83.54 a 34.82 cd 53.7 b 43.87 bc 30.32 d 38.7 cd 37.25 cd 3.473 <0.001 Total alcohol compounds 83.54 a (21.9%) 34.82 cd (14.9%) 53.7 b (19.7%) 43.87 bc (13.7%) 30.32 d (12.2%) 38.7 cd (15.0%) 37.25 cd (13.4%) Alliaceous, garlic, onion Gasoline, coffee, cooked, meat, nutty, sulfury Onion, radish, green, gasoline, sulfur Meaty, nutty, fatty, green, onion, cabbage Alliaceous, garlic, onion, green Garlic, horseradish, onion, sulfurous B A, B A, B A, B 3.773 0.057 - - Mustard, pungent 3.473 <0.001 - - Total volatile compounds 383.48 a 234.12 c 272.96 bc 319.79 ab 249.36 c 258.54 bc 278.02 bc 11.62 0.001 - - A, http://flavornet.org/flavornet.html; B, http://foodb.ca; C, Calkins and Hodgen(2007); D, Machiels et al.,(2003); E, Migita et al., (2017); a d Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). SEM, standard error of the mean. B B B 2,5-dimethylfuran, (P<0.05). Volatile sulfur compound(vsc), 700 (Nijssen et al., 1996). VSC,. VSC allyl methyl sulfide, dimethyl sulfide, dimethyl disulfide. Allyl methyl sulfide, dimethyl sulfide, dimethyl disulfide (onion), (radish), (green), (gasoline), (sulfur). Benzothiazole (cooked meat), (nutty flavor), 1 (67.06 AU 10 5 /g dry

Kim et al. : Samgyetang Broth Treated with Air-dried and Oven-roasted Chicken Feet 149 matter). Wang et al.(2016) benzothizole,. alcohol, 21.8% (P<0.05). alcohol 2-propen-1-ol, allyl alcohol. 2-Propen-1-ol (Kim et al., 1995; Shin et al., 2000), (mustard), (pungent). 2-Propen-1-ol 83.54 AU 10 5 /g dry matter, 2 (53.7 AU 10 5 /g dry matter), 1 (43.87 AU 10 5 /g dry matter)..,. furan.,. (QDA) Table 6 Table 7., (appearance) (P<0.05). 1 ( : =1:100 v/v) 7 ( : =1:10 v/v), (P<0.05).,. (taste) (saltiness). (umami), (bitterness),. MSG. (aroma) 1, 2 (P<0.05). (nutty flavor), (roasted flavor), (chicken flavor), (rancid flavor) (P<0.05).,, 30 4. 1 (P<0.05), (GC-MS) Table 6. Hedonic score of chicken feet extract prepared with different pretreatment and extraction time Appearance 3.8 b 5.0 ab 5.7 a 5.2 a 5.3 a 5.4 a 0.18 0.047 SEM P-value Taste 4.7 5.0 4.6 4.3 5.2 5.2 0.15 0.208 Saltiness 4.0 4.5 3.8 4.1 4.7 4.7 0.14 0.240 Aroma 4.2 b 5.0 ab 4.3 b 4.4 b 5.4 a 5.3 a 0.13 0.015 Overall acceptance 4.1 b 4.8 ab 4.8 ab 4.5 b 5.7 a 5.2 ab 0.15 0.037 Hedonic scale: 1 (dislike very much), 2 (dislike moderately), 3 (dislike slightly), 4 (neither like nor dislike), 5 (like slightly), 6 (like moderately), 7 (like very much). a,b Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). SEM, standard error of the mean.

150 : Table 7. Quantitative descriptive score of chicken feet extract prepared with different pretreatment and extraction time Characteristics SEM P-value Color 2.7 d 3.3 d 4.3 c 6.0 a 5.1 b 5.7 ab 0.19 <0.001 Umami 3.6 4.3 4.1 4.3 4.9 5.1 0.17 0.112 Taste Bitterness 2.1 1.8 2.4 2.5 2.7 2.3 0.12 0.377 Saltiness 3.9 4.2 4.5 4.0 4.9 4.2 0.20 0.745 Nutty 2.5 c 2.7 bc 3.7 abc 3.6 abc 4.2 a 4.0 ab 0.19 0.049 Flavor Roasted 2.4 b 2.3 b 3.3 ab 3.3 ab 4.2 a 4.2 a 0.18 0.001 Chicken 3.6 c 3.5 c 3.9 bc 4.1 abc 5.2 a 4.9 ab 0.17 0.007 Rancid 2.0 c 2.3 bc 3.1 abc 3.4 ab 3.6 ab 3.8 a 0.20 0.043 Descriptive scale: Color, 1: dark soy sauce(1/100 v/v) in water, 7: dark soy sauce(1/10 v/v) in water; Umami, 4: monosodium glutamate 0.2% (w/v) in water; Bitterness, 5: espresso in water (1/8 v/v); saltiness, 3: salt (0.5% w/v) in water; nutty, 4: ground roast almond (microwave for 30 s); roasted, 5: roasted chicken feet (oven for 1 h); chicken, 6: dried chicken thigh in air drier (70 /12 h); rancid, 5: canola oil (microwave for 5 min). a d Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). SEM, standard error of the mean. propanal, octanal (P<0.05). (roasted flavor), 5., (P<0.05). GC-MS (burnt sugar) benzaldehyde, toluene, 2,5-dimethylfuran, 2-heptanone 1, 2., benzaldehyde, (P<0.05). 1 (P<0.05). 70 12. (rancid flavor) 5 5, 2,,. GC-MS heptanal, octanal, nonanal (P<0.05). Heptanal, octanal, nonanal oleic acid (Belitz et al., 2004),, (fatty),,, (Brewer, 2009). (overall acceptance), 1 (P<0.05).. Table 8., (taste), (saltiness), (aroma),., (overall acceptability) 1 (P<0.05).,,, 1,. Table 9. 1/100 1, 1/10

Kim et al. : Samgyetang Broth Treated with Air-dried and Oven-roasted Chicken Feet 151 Table 8. Hedonic score of Samgyetang broth made with chicken feet extract prepared with different pretreatment and extraction time Con Appearance 5.3 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.0 5.1 5.3 0.17 0.99 Taste 4.0 4.1 4.9 4.4 4.9 5.6 4.9 0.16 0.08 Saltiness 4.1 3.8 4.6 4.1 5.0 5.0 4.6 0.16 0.28 Aroma 4.1 4.4 4.4 4.5 5.2 5.2 5.0 0.14 0.19 Overall acceptance 4.0 d 4.3 cd 4.4 bcd 4.5 bcd 5.4 ab 5.7 a 5.1 abc 0.15 0.01 SEM P-value Hedonic scale: 1 (dislike very much), 2 (dislike moderately), 3 (dislike slightly), 4 (neither like nor dislike), 5 (like slightly), 6 (like moderately), 7 (like very much). a d Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). SEM, standard error of the mean. Table 9. Quantitative descriptive score of Samgyetang broth made with chicken feet extract prepared with different pretreatment and extraction time Taste Flavor Con SEM P value Color 3.6 d 3.8 cd 4.3 bcd 4.7 abc 5.6 a 5.3 ab 5.4 a 0.15 <0.001 Umami 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.9 5.3 5.4 5.0 0.17 0.497 Bitterness 2.0 2.4 2.0 2.4 2.8 2.4 2.6 0.13 0.636 Saltiness 3.2 3.8 3.3 3.8 4.4 4.5 3.9 0.19 0.481 Nutty 3.4 3.3 3.9 3.4 4.1 4.1 4.1 0.16 0.566 Roasted 2.4 b 3.0 ab 3.3 ab 3.2 ab 3.8 a 3.9 a 4.1 a 0.16 0.048 Chicken 3.4 cd 3.2 d 4.5 abc 3.7 bcd 5.0 a 4.7 ab 3.7 bcd 0.17 0.014 Rancid 2.4 2.6 2.7 2.7 3.0 2.9 2.9 0.21 0.992 Descriptive scale: Color, 1: dark soy sauce (1/100 v/v) in water, 7: dark soy sauce (1/10 v/v) in water; Umami, 4: monosodium glutamate 0.2% (w/v) in water; Bitterness, 5: espresso in water (1/8 v/v); saltiness, 3: salt (0.5% w/v) in water; nutty, 4: ground roast almond (microwave for 30 s); roasted, 5: roasted chicken feet (oven for 1 h); chicken, 6: dried chicken thigh in air drier (70 /12 h); rancid, 5: canola oil (microwave for 5 min). a d Means within each row with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). SEM, standard error of the mean. 7., (P<0.05). (umami),,.,.,, 1, 2 (P<0.05). (chicken flavor) 2, 1, 2 (P<0.05).,.

152 :. 1. (rancid flavor),., Chang et al.(1977) TBARS 0.5 1.0 mg MDA/kg. TBARS Table 3 2 0.417 mg MDA/kg (P<0.05),.,. GC-MS, allyl methyl sulfide, dimethyl sulfide, methyl-2-propenyl disulfide VSC(Volatile sulfur compounds).., 70 12, 180 1 121 1, 2. (470±10 g) (pouch) (121.0, 1.5 kgf/cm 2 20 122.0, 1.7 kgf/cm 2 95 ). ph, ph ( ) (P<0.05). TBARS (P<0.05), 1. 1 2 ph TBARS (P<0.05). 1,, (P<0.05). 1,, (P<0.05), GC-MS benzaldehyde benzothiazole, total volatile compound (P<0.05). 1. ( ),. 1. 2018 (617074-05-2- HD220). Juntae Kim Dicky Tri Utama Hae Seong Jeong Barido Farouq Heidar Aera Jang Jae In Pak Yeong Jong Kim Sung Ki Lee https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5398-8839 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2344-8548 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4929-5714 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3171-5426 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1789-8956 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2563-0642 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6721-5223 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2989-4787 Adhikari K, Ch160r M 2003 Lipid oxidation of pressurized and cooked chicken: role of sodium chloride and mechanical processing on TBARS and hexanal values. Meat Sci 64(1):19-25. Brewer MS 2009 Irradiation effects on meat flavor: a review. Meat Sci 81(1):1-14. Brunton NP, Cronin DA, Monahan FJ, Durcan R 2000 A comparison of solid-phase microextraction (SPME) fibres for measurement of hexanal and pentanal in cooked

Kim et al. : Samgyetang Broth Treated with Air-dried and Oven-roasted Chicken Feet 153 turkey. Food Chem 68(3): 339-345. Calkins CR, Hodgen JM 2007 A fresh look at meat flavor. Meat Sci 77(1): 63-80. Cambero MI, Pereira-Lima CI, Ordonez JA, Garcia de Fernando GD 2000 Beef broth flavor: relation of components with the flavor developed at different cooking temperatures. J Sci Food Agric 80(10):1519-1528. Champagne ET 2008 Rice aroma and flavor: a literature review. Cereal Chem 85(4):445-454. Chang P, Younathan MT, Watts BM 1977 Lipid oxidation in precooked beef preserved by refrigeration, freezing and irradiation. Food Technol 15:168-171. Chen WS, Liu DC, Chen MT 2002 The effect of roasting temperature on the formation of volatile compounds in Chinese-style pork jerky. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 15(3):427-431. Damanik M, Murkovic M 2018 The stability of palm oils during heating in a rancimat. Eur Food Res Technol 244(7):1293-1299. Directorate General of Livestock (DGL) 2016 Broiler Chicken Production According to Province. Domínguez R, Gómez M, Fonseca S, Lorenzo JM 2014 Effect of different cooking methods on lipid oxidation and formation of volatile compounds in foal meat. Meat Sci 97(2):223-230. Domínguez R, Gómez M, Fonseca S, Lorenzo JM 2014 Influence of thermal treatment on formation of volatile compounds, cooking loss and lipid oxidation in foal meat. Lebenson Wiss Technol 58(2):439-445. Flavornet: http://flavornet.org/flavornet.html. Accessed June. 15, 2018. Foodb: http:// Foodb.ca; Accessed June. 15, 2018. Fu X, Lin Q, Xu S, Wang Z 2015 Effect of drying methods and antioxidants on the flavor and lupid oxidation of silver carp slices. LWT-Food Sci Technol 61(1):251-257. Guimaraes M, Jose C, Curvelo S, Pollana AF 2012 Collagen extraction from chicken feet for jelly production. J Acta Sci Maringa 34(3):345-351. Han G, Kwon S, Choi J 2016 Awareness and sensory properties of Samgyetang for Chinese. Korean J Food Nutr 29(3):420-430. Hernández P, Navarro JL, Toldrá F 1999 Lipids of pork meat as affected by various cooking techniques. Food Sci Technol Int 5(6):501-508. Holleman AF, Wiberg E, Wiberg N 2001 Inorganic Chemistry. Academic Press, Cambridge, MA, USA. Insausti K, Beriain MJ, Gorraiz C, Purroy A 2002 Volatile compounds of raw beef from 5 local Spanish cattle breeds stored under modified atmosphere. J Food Sci 67(4): 1580-1589. Jousse F, Jongen W, Agterof W, Russell S, Braat P 2002 Simplified kinetic scheme of flavor formation by the Maillard reaction. J Food Sci 67(7):2534-2542. Kim SM, Wu CM, Kobayashi A, Kubota K, Okumura J 1995 Volatile compounds in stir-fried garlic. J Agric Food Chem 43(11):2951-2955. Korea Customs Service. Trade Statistics for Export/import by HS CODE. Available from: https://unipass.customs.go.kr: 38030/ets/index.do?menuId=ETS_MNU_00000103. HS code: 1602321010. Accessed June. 29, 2018. Larick DK, Turner BE, Schoenherr WD, Coffey MT, Pilkington DH 1992 Volatile compound content and fatty acid composition of pork as influenced by linoleic acid content of the diet. J Anim Sci 70(5):1397-1403. Lee JH, Lee JH, Lee KT 2014 Physicochemical and sensory characteristics of Samgyetang retorted at different F 0 values during storage at room temperature. Korean J Food Preserv 21(4):491-499. Lee JH, Lee KT 2009 Studies on the improvement of packaging of retorted Samgyetang. J Korea Soc Packag Sci Tech 15(2):49-54. Liu DC, Lin YK, Chen MT 2001 Optimum condition of extracting collagen from chicken feet and its characteristics. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 14(11):1638-1644. Liu SC, Yang DJ, Jin SY, Hsu CH, Chen SL 2008 Kinetics of color development, ph decreasing, and anti-oxidative activity reduction of Maillard reaction in galactose/glycine model systems. Food Chem 108(2):533-541. Machiels D, Van Ruth SM, Posthumus AM, Istasse L 2003 Gas chromatography-olfactometry analysis of the volatile compounds of two commercial Irish beef meat. Talanta 60(4):755-764. Migita K, liduka T, Tsukamoto K, Sugiura S, Tanaka G, Sakamaki G, Nakatake T 2017 Retort beef aroma that

154 : gives preferable properties to canned beef products and its aroma components. Anim Sci J 88(12): 2050-2056. Moio L, Dekimpe J, Etievant P, Addeo F 1993 Neutral volatile compounds in the raw milks from different species. J Dairy Res 60(2):199-213. Monica F 2018 Understanding the implications of current health trends on the aroma of wet and dry cured meat products. Meat Sci 144:53-61. Nijssen LM, Visscher CA, Maarse H, Willemsens LC, Boelens MH 1996 Volatile compounds in food: qualitative and quantitative data. Central Institute for Nutrition and Food Research, TNO: Zeist, The Netherlands. Park YH 2004 The effects of serum lipids and blood glucose on retort Samgyetang intake in rats. J Korean Home Econ Assoc 42(10):143-152. Pomponio L, Ruiz-Carraascal J 2017 Oxidative deterioration of pork during superchilling storage. J Sci Food Agric 97(15):5211-5215. Rowe D 1998 Aroma chemicals for savory flavors. Perfumer and Flavorist 23:9-18. Ruben D, Maria G, Sonia F, Jose ML 2014 Influence of thermal treatment on formation of volatile compounds, cooking loss and lipid oxidation in foal meat. LWT-Food Sci Technol 58(2):439-445. Shah MA, Bang YJ, Lordick F, Alsina M, Chen M, Hack SP, Bruey JM, Smith D, McCaffery L, Shames DS, Phan S, Chunningham D 2017 Effect of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with or without onartuzumab in HER2- negative, MET-positive gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: the METGastric randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 3(5):620-627. Shin DB, Lee YC, Kim JH 2000 Changes in quality of garlic during frozen storage. Korean J Food Sci Technol 32(1): 102-110. Sinnhuber RO, Yu TC 1977 The 2-thiobarbituric acid reaction, an objective measure of the oxidative deterioration occurring in fats and oils. J Jap Soc Fish Sci 26(5):259-267. Song S, Zhang X, Havat K, Liu P, Jia C, Xia S, Siao Z, Tian H, Niu Y 2011 Formation of the beef flavour precursors and their correlation with chemical parameters during the controlled thermal oxidation of tallow. Food Chem 124(1): 203-209. Speckhahn A, Srzednicki G, Desai DK 2010 Drying of beef in superheated steam. Drying Technology 28(9):1072-1082. Tian Y, Zhao Y, Huang J, Zeng H, Zheng B 2016 Effects of different drying methods on the product quality and volatile compounds of whole shiitake mushrooms. Food Chem 197:714-722. Triyannanto E, Lee KT 2015 Effect of pre-cooking conditions on the quality characteristics of ready-to-eat Samgyetang. Korean J Food Sci Ani Resour 35(4):494-501. Triyannanto E, Lee KT 2015 Effects of emulsifiers, precooking and washing treatments on the quality of retorted ginseng chicken soup. J Food Process Preserv 39(6): 1770-1777. Utama DT, Baek KH, Jeong HS, Yoon SK, Joo ST, Lee SK 2018 Effects of cooking method and final core temperature on cooking loss, lipid oxidation, nucleotide-related compounds and aroma volatiles of Hanwoo brisket. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 31(2):293-300. Van Boekel MAJS 2006 Formation of flavor compounds in the Maillard reaction. Biotechnol Adv 24(2):230-233. Varanova J, Ciesarova Z 2009 Furan in food a review. Czech J Food Sci 27(1):1-10. Wang Y, Song H, Zhang Y, Tang J, Yu D 2016 Determination of aroma compounds in pork broth produced by different processing methods: aroma compounds in pork. Flavour Fragr J 31(4):319-328. Widyaningsih TD, Hapsari D, Wijayanti N, Dita S, Dhayantri O, Mailala CT 2015 Conference on Processing of Agroindustry and National Workshop FKPT-TPI. Universitas Brawijaya Malang. Indonesia. Xie J, Sun B, Zheng F, Wang S 2008 Volatile flavor constituents in roasted pork of mini-pig. Food Chem 109(3): 506-514. Yoo IJ, Jeon KH, Park WM, Choi SY 1998 Effect of heating conditions and additives on bone crumble and shelf-life of retorted Samgyetang. Korean J Food Sci Ani Resour 19(1):19-26. Received May 16, 2019, Revised Jul. 30, 2019, Accepted Aug. 10, 2019