# Quality of Pork Loin Subjected to Different Temperature-Time Combinations of Sous Video Cooking
## 3 Results and Discussion
### Texture Profile Analysis
[80], in which three different methods of heat treatment of pork ham (sous vide, cooking, grilling) were compared, it was shown that the  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Sample**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Shear Force**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Hardness**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Springiness**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Cohesiveness**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Chewiness**} \\  & & **(N)** & **(N)** & **(cm)** & **(c)** & **(N \(\times\) cm)** \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{57 \({}^{\circ}\)C} & 3 h & 20.60 \(\pm\) 0.62 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 102.87 \(\pm\) 2.63 \({}^{\text{h}}\) & 0.39 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.45 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 19.51 \(\pm\) 1.60 \({}^{\text{fbi}}\) \\  & 3.5 h & 20.25 \(\pm\) 0.68 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 88.35 \(\pm\) 1.65 \({}^{\text{fbi}}\) & 0.48 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) & 0.55 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{acd}}\) & 21.33 \(\pm\) 2.08 \({}^{\text{fbi}}\) \\  & 4 h & 18.54 \(\pm\) 0.84 \({}^{\text{bcd}}\) & 50.20 \(\pm\) 1.19 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 0.49 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\text{bc}}\) & 0.55 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{cd}}\) & 15.05 \(\pm\) 1.14 \({}^{\text{cdef}}\) \\  & 4.5 h & 18.34 \(\pm\) 0.89 \({}^{\text{bcd}}\) & 52.08 \(\pm\) 1.53 \({}^{\text{bod}}\) & 0.45 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 0.55 \(\pm\) 0.00 \({}^{\text{cd}}\) & 12.67 \(\pm\) 0.42 \({}^{\text{abcdg}}\) \\  & 5 h & 18.20 \(\pm\) 0.78 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 58.90 \(\pm\) 2.14 \({}^{\text{ddef}}\) & 0.47 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) & 0.54 \(\pm\) 0.00 \({}^{\text{bcd}}\) & 13.44 \(\pm\) 1.21 \({}^{\text{hedg}}\) \\  & 5.5 h & 17.42 \(\pm\) 1.16 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 55.46 \(\pm\) 2.11 \({}^{\text{bod}}\) & 0.44 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 0.51 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 118.88 \(\pm\) 0.83 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{59 \({}^{\circ}\)C} & 3 h & 14.17 \(\pm\) 0.60 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 58.15 \(\pm\) 3.94 \({}^{\text{ddef}}\) & 0.47 \(\pm\) 0.41 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 0.51 \(\pm\) 0.00 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 14.21 \(\pm\) 1.04 \({}^{\text{bodg}}\) \\  & 3.5 h & 16.84 \(\pm\) 1.07 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 57.42 \(\pm\) 4.05 \({}^{\text{ddef}}\) & 0.49 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{bc}}\) & 0.54 \(\pm\) 0.00 \({}^{\text{bcd}}\) & 14.21 \(\pm\) 1.04 \({}^{\text{bodg}}\) \\  & 3.5 h & 16.84 \(\pm\) 1.07 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 57.42 \(\pm\) 4.05 \({}^{\text{ddef}}\) & 0.49 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{bc}}\) & 0.54 \(\pm\) 0.00 \({}^{\text{bcd}}\) & 15.58 \(\pm\) 1.11 \({}^{\text{ddef}}\) \\  & 4 h & 16.12 \(\pm\) 1.00 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 56.19 \(\pm\) 4.10 \({}^{\text{bod}}\) & 0.48 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{bc}}\) & 0.53 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 14.15 \(\pm\) 0.91 \({}^{\text{bodg}}\) \\  & 4.5 h & 17.49 \(\pm\) 1.23 \({}^{\text{bod}}\) & 38.66 \(\pm\) 2.54 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.50 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{bc}}\) & 0.55 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{bod}}\) & 10.43 \(\pm\) 0.70 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) \\  & 5 h & 21.76 \(\pm\) 0.59 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 47.46 \(\pm\) 1.57 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 0.47 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) & 0.53 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 11.63 \(\pm\) 0.33 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{60 \({}^{\circ}\)C} & 3 h & 16.38 \(\pm\) 1.11 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 54.23 \(\pm\) 2.14 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 0.48 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) & 0.53 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 13.47 \(\pm\) 0.39 \({}^{\text{abcdg}}\) \\  & 3.5 h & 14.35 \(\pm\) 0.61 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) & 50.72 \(\pm\) 3.41 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) & 0.49 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\text{bc}}\) & 0.54 \(\pm\) 0.00 \({}^{\text{bod}}\) & 13.30 \(\pm\) 0.80 \({}^{\text{abcdg}}\) \\  & 4 h & 14.03 \(\pm\) 0.55 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 39.68 \(\pm\) 2.28 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) & 0.47 \(\pm\)sous vide-heated sample was characterised by the lowest values of texture characteristics--hardness, springiness, gumminess, and chewiness.