Edible quality of soft‐boiled chicken processing with chilled carcass was better than that of hot‐fresh carcass.

Soft‐boiled chicken is widely popular with its flavor and texture. In a traditional view, the edible quality of soft‐boiled chicken producing with hot‐fresh carcass (without any chilled procedure after evisceration) was better than that of chilled carcass. Hot‐fresh groups with 1, 2, or 4 hr and chilled groups with 24, 48, or 60 hr were used to clarify the view in this study. The results indicated that no significant difference in hardness, springiness, cohesiveness of texture profiles and b* value of skin color was observed between each group, although the highest L* value was obtained in hot‐fresh 4 hr group. Higher contents of succinic acid were found in chilled groups when compared to that of hot‐fresh groups, but there was no difference in lactic acid and pH values. Lower contents of adenosine 5′‐monophosphate (AMP), guanosine 5′‐monophosphate (GMP), inosine and hypoxanthine, and higher inosine‐5′‐monophosphate (IMP) (especially for hot‐fresh 1 hr) were observed in hot‐fresh groups. In addition, although no difference in umami amino acids and bitter amino acid was observed between each tested group, higher amounts of Asp, Met, Ile, Leu, Tyr, and Arg were observed in chilled groups, especially for chilled 60 hr. The finding indicated that the traditional view was lack of scientific evidence, and chilled carcass was suitable for soft‐boiled chicken, substituting for the hot‐fresh carcass. The finding indicated that the traditional view was a lack of scientific evidence, and chilled carcass was suitable for soft‐boiled chicken rather than hot‐fresh carcass. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]