## 3 Results and Discussion
### Lipid Oxidation
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l c c c c} \hline \hline
**Parameters** & **Group 2.3** & **1 Day** & **3 Day** & **5 Day** & **7 Day** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{L* [–]} & NC & 62.30\({}^{\text{\,CA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.13 & 64.06\({}^{\text{\,BB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.32 & 64.01\({}^{\text{\,BB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.28 & 64.73\({}^{\text{\,BB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.28 \\  & PC1 & 60.91\({}^{\text{\,BA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.16 & 61.89\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.27 & 62.32\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.27 & 62.57\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.25 \\  & PTEW1 & 60.63\({}^{\text{\,BA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.28 & 61.68\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.29 & 62.56\({}^{\text{\,BB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.14 & 62.04\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.28 \\  & PC2 & 59.15\({}^{\text{\,AA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.26 & 61.86\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.22 & 62.52\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.19 & 63.20\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.34 \\  & PTEW2 & 60.00\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.39 & 61.57\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.26 & 63.09\({}^{\text{\,AC}}\)\(\pm\) 0.19 & 63.32\({}^{\text{\,AC}}\)\(\pm\) 0.18 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{a* [–]} & NC & 5.90\({}^{\text{\,AC}}\)\(\pm\) 0.10 & 5.52\({}^{\text{\,BC}}\)\(\pm\) 0.29 & 4.83\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.18 & 4.66\({}^{\text{\,AA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.14 \\  & PC1 & 12.69\({}^{\text{\,BB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.12 & 11.90\({}^{\text{\,BA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.16 & 11.97\({}^{\text{\,BA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.09 & 11.90\({}^{\text{\,BA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.11 \\  & PTEW1 & 13.10\({}^{\text{\,BB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.12 & 12.45\({}^{\text{\,bcAB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.16 & 12.28\({}^{\text{\,BA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.14 & 12.32\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.13 \\  & PC2 & 13.92\({}^{\text{\,AB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.16 & 12.59\({}^{\text{\,BA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.13 & 12.16\({}^{\text{\,BA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.11 & 11.24\({}^{\text{\,BA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.14 \\  & PTEW2 & 13.41\({}^{\text{\,bc}}\)\(\pm\) 0.14 & 13.06\({}^{\text{\,BC}}\)\(\pm\) 0.07 & 11.90\({}^{\text{\,BA}}\)\(\pm\) 0.11 & 12.46\({}^{\text{\,BB}}\)\(\pm\) 0.12 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{b* [–]} & NC & 13.34\({}^{\text{\,b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.12 & 13.48\({}^{\text{\,b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.15 & 13.85\({}^{\text{\,b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.11 & 13.71\({}^{\text{\,b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.15 \\  & PC1 & 11.76\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.11 & 11.35\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.13 & 11.87\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.16 & 11.40\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.18 \\  & PTEW1 & 11.66\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.12 & 11.39\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.15 & 11.42\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.15 & 11.69\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.15 \\  & PC2 & 12.15\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.12 & 11.75\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.12 & 11.45\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.15 & 11.72\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.10 \\  & PTEW2 & 12.06\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.14 & 11.47\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.06 & 11.99\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.17 & 11.99\({}^{\text{\,a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.10 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* SE—standard error: \({}^{\text{\,BC}}\)—negative control (liver pates without a nitrite source); PC1—positive control (liver patés with 60 ppm of sodium nitrite); PTEW1—liver patés with plasma-treated egg white containing 40 ppm \(\text{NO}_{2}\)\({}^{\text{\,--}}\); PC2—positive control (liver patés with 120 ppm of sodium nitrite); PTEW2—liver patés with plasma-treated egg white containing 80 ppm \(\text{NO}_{2}\)\({}^{\text{\,--}}\); 33 different superscript lowercase letters within columns (a–e) and within rows (A–D) indicate statistical differences (\(p<0.05\)).  
\end{table} 
Table 4: The effect of plasma-treated egg whites on color parameters (mean \(\pm\) SE \({}^{\text{\,1}}\)) of liver patés during storage. on the dose used, as well as processing and storage conditions. In our study, compared to uncured liver pates (NC group), groups with nitrite ions (PC1, PTEW1, PC2, PTEW2) were characterized by significantly lower lipid oxidation (\(p<0.05\)) starting from the third day of storage. In addition, on day 7, the PC2 and PTEW2 groups had significantly lower TBARS values than the PC1 and PTEW1 groups. Additionally, [PERSON] et al.