## 3 Results and Discussion
### Shelf Life Evaluation of Chicken Thighs  
Based on the evaluation of various quality parameters during the storage of chicken at different temperatures, the shelf life was estimated for each type of packaging condition. Sensory rejection (scoring 5 for overall impression) of chicken coincided with a TVC level of 7 logCFU/g for all tested storage conditions [47; 48; 56]. It has been reported in the literature that chicken meat stored at 4 \({}^{\circ}\)C for longer than 7 days has been characterised by negative sensory attributes and total viable counts higher than 8 log CFU/g [5]. Shelf life based on the sensory evaluation of chicken was calculated based on Equation (2):  
\[t_{SL}=\frac{s_{o}-s_{l}}{k_{ref,sens}exp\left[-\frac{E_{o}}{K}\left(\frac{1}{ T}-\frac{1}{T_{ref}}\right)\right]} \tag{2}\]  
where \(t_{SL}\) is the shelf life of chicken (in d), \(s_{o}\) and \(s_{l}\) are the sensory scoring initially and the rejection time (\(s_{l}=5\)), \(k_{ref-sens}\) is the sensory scoring reduction rate at the reference temperature \(T_{ref}=4\)\({}^{\circ}\)C, \(E_{a}\) is the activation energy (J/mol), and R is the universal gas constant. Shelf life based on microbial load was calculated by using Equation (3):  
\[t_{SL}=\frac{s_{o}-s_{l}}{k_{ref}exp\left[-\frac{E_{o}}{K}\left(\frac{1}{T}- \frac{1}{T_{ref}}\right)\right]} \tag{3}\]  
where \(t_{SL}\) is the shelf life of chicken (in d), \(N_{o}\) and \(N_{l}\) are the TVC load initially and at the rejection time (\(N_{l}=7\) for TVC), \(k_{\text{ref}}\) is the microbial growth rate at the reference temperature \(T_{ref}=4\)\({}^{\circ}\)C, \(E_{a}\) is the activation energy (J/mol), and \(R\) is the universal gas constant. Based on the abovementioned calculations, the shelf life of untreated (control) chicken at 0 \({}^{\circ}\)C was 8 days based on both Equations (2) and (3), i.e., by using the sensory and microbiological-based criteria. MAP samples exhibited a shelf life of 15 days at 0 \({}^{\circ}\)C. EC-flav chicken stored at 0 \({}^{\circ}\)C had a shelf life of 19 days by both sensory and microbiological approaches, while the EC-glu samples had a shelf life of 12 days at 0 \({}^{\circ}\)C. No significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) were observed between the shelf life values obtained based on the sensory scoring and the microbial growth, i.e., Equations (2) and (3). Under this context, the shelf life of chicken at 5 \({}^{\circ}\)C was 6-7 days for the control, 11 days for MAP, 13 days for EC-flav, and 7 days for EC-glu samples, respectively. Finally, at 10 \({}^{\circ}\)C, the respective shelf life values were 2, 2, 3 and 2 days, indicating that storage temperature plays a crucial role in the preservation of perishable food, such as raw chicken cuts. The obtained shelf life values for refrigerated chicken cuts packed under MA or using edible coatings were in agreement with [PERSON] et al. [44], [PERSON] at al. [12], and [PERSON] et al. [57]. [PERSON] et al. [56] reported a strong correlation between the results of the microbiological and sensory analysis, as in the present study. Chicken breast samples stored at 4 \({}^{\circ}\)C reached a value of 7 logcfu/g and the score of acceptability of the sensory parameters, after 4-5 days for the aerobically stored samples and after 8 days for the MA packed samples, which was in agreement with the results of the present study, as far as the effect of MAP is concerned. The shelf life of the chicken cuts in the present work was longer as compared to the respective shelf life of chicken samples in the abovementioned study [56]. Finally, the results revealed that TVCs showed a higher relationship to the sensory deterioration of the packaged chicken cuts and, therefore, could be used as an important indicator for the quality of packaged chicken meat freshness and shelf life, which was also shown by other scientists [50].