## 3 Results and Discussion
### Effect of CSS on the Shelf Life of Cooked Chicken Burger Samples
#### 3.2.2 Volatile Compounds (VOCs) and Warmed Off-Flavours (WOF) in Chicken Burgers  
Among analyses used in this work, GC-MS analysis was used to trace markers of oxidation as a more reliable method than TBARS or any other faster, but less accurate, method. Results show a complex profile of compounds emerging from oxidative phenomena, Maillard reaction occurrence, and by-products addition. Table 4 contains all the volatile compounds found in CSS-containing samples. Data depicted refer to T\({}_{0}\) and T\({}_{72}\) samples. Chromatograms are shown as Supplementary Material (Figures S1-S3). Figure 3: Results of Thiobarbituric acid reacting substances (TBARS) test, expressed as malondialdehydedehyde (mg MDA kg\({}^{-1}\)) in control (CTRL) and burgers formulated with CSS (1.5% and 3%, respectively), immediately after cooking (T\({}_{0}\)) and after refrigerated storage (at 4 \({}^{\circ}\)C, for 72 and 120 h, T\({}_{72}\) and T\({}_{120}\) respectively). Results are expressed as means \(\pm\) standard deviations. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) among storage time of each batch; different uppercase letters indicate significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) among different batches, at same storage time. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**VOCCs from Burgers’ Samples**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Burgens T\({}_{0}\)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Burgens T\({}_{2}\)**} \\ \cline{2-9}  & **CTRL. T\({}_{0}\)** & **CSS 1.5\% T\({}_{0}\)** & **CSS 3\% T\({}_{0}\)** & **CTRL. T\({}_{12}\)** & **CSS 1.5\% T\({}_{12}\)** & **CSS 3\% T\({}_{2}\)** & **Sign.** \\ \hline \multicolumn{9}{c}{Aldehydes} \\ \hline
2-Deconal, (Z)- & nd & nd & 1.25 & nd & nd & nd & * \\
2-Nomai, (E)- & nd & nd & nd & 2.82 & nd & * \\
10-Undencal & nd & nd & 4.06 & nd & nd & * \\ Benzaldehyde & nd & 6.27 \({}^{\circ}\) & 4.46 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & 3.62 \({}^{\circ}\) & 7.42 \({}^{\circ}\) & * \\ Benzaldehyde & 2.5-bits(trimethylsilyl(box)) & 0.86 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & nd & 0.72 \({}^{\circ}\) & 1.73 \({}^{\circ}\) & * \\ Buttanal-2 methyl- & nd & nd & 5.48 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & nd & 4.66 \({}^{\circ}\) & ** \\ Buttanal-3 methyl & nd & nd & 5.67 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & 4.11 \({}^{\circ}\) & 7.00 \({}^{\circ}\) & * \\ Heptanal & 55.1 \({}^{\circ}\) & 11.7 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & 7.2\({}^{\circ}\) & nd & * \\ Octanal & 41.2 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & nd & 7.94 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & nd & * \\ Pentanal & 2.09 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & nd & nd & nd & nd & * \\ Propanal, 2-methyl- & nd & nd & 3.34 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & nd & 1.98 \({}^{\circ}\) & * \\ \hline \multicolumn{9}{c}{Alcohols} \\ \hline
1.5-Pentanediol, 3-methyl- & nd & nd & 8.96 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & nd & 3.90 \({}^{\circ}\) & * \\
1-Methylcyclopropementhanol & nd & nd & nd & nd & nd & 3.71 \({}^{\circ}\) & * \\
2-Hexon-1-ol, (Z)- & nd & nd & nd & nd & 10.52 & nd & * \\
3-Desroy-2-ol & nd & nd & nd & nd & 5.76 & nd & * \\
2-Nomai-1-ol, (E)- & 0.58 \({}^{\circ}\) & 10.76 \({}^{\circ}\) & 8.38 \({}^{\circ}\) & 8.80 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & nd & * \\
2-Octan-1-ol, (E)- & nd & nd & 2.03 & nd & nd & nd & * \\ \hline \multicolumn{9}{c}{Ketones} \\ \hline
2-Octanediene & nd & nd & nd & 5.14 & nd & nd & * \\
7-9-D-tert-butyl-1-cosaprio (4.5) & nd & nd & 3.78 \({}^{\circ}\) & 0.20 \({}^{\circ}\) & nd & nd & * \\ deca-6-9-diene-2-8-dione & & & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Qualitative profile of main volatile compounds (area %) in cooked samples (control, addition of coffee silver skin 1.5 and 3%), immediately after cooking process (T\({}_{0}\)) and after 72 h of storage at \({}^{\circ}\) C (T\({}_{72}\)).