This study was conducted to investigate the effect of duck skin on cooking loss, emulsion stability, pH, color, protein solubility, texture profile analysis (TPA), apparent viscosity, and sensory characteristics of press type duck ham with different ratio of duck breast meat and duck skin. Five duck...
This study was conducted to investigate the effect of duck skin on cooking loss, emulsion stability, pH, color, protein solubility, texture profile analysis (TPA), apparent viscosity, and sensory characteristics of press type duck ham with different ratio of duck breast meat and duck skin. Five duck ham formulations were produced with the following compositions: T1 (duck breast 70% + duck skin 30%), T2 (duck breast 60% + duck skin 40%), T3 (duck breast 50% + duck skin 50%), T4 (duck breast 40% + duck skin 60%), and T5 (duck breast 30% + duck skin 70%). The cooking loss and fat separation were lower in T1, and the total expressible fluid separations were lower in T1 and T2 than others. The pH ranged from 6.48 to 6.59, with the highest values in T4 and T5. T5 had the highest CIE $L^*$-value, and T1 and T2 had the highest CIE $a^*$-values; however, CIE $b^*$-values did not differ significantly between the duck ham samples. The protein solubility and TPA (hardness, springiness, cohesiveness, gumminess, and chewiness) were the highest in T1. T1 and T2 had higher scores for color, tenderness, and overall acceptability. T1, T2, and T3 showed significantly higher values, but there were no significant differences for flavor and juiciness. Regarding apparent viscosity properties, T1 and T2 had higher viscosity values than the other formulations. In conclusion, the T1 (duck breast 70% + duck skin 30%) and T2 (duck breast 60% + duck skin 40%) duck hams show the highest quality characteristics.
This study was conducted to investigate the effect of duck skin on cooking loss, emulsion stability, pH, color, protein solubility, texture profile analysis (TPA), apparent viscosity, and sensory characteristics of press type duck ham with different ratio of duck breast meat and duck skin. Five duck ham formulations were produced with the following compositions: T1 (duck breast 70% + duck skin 30%), T2 (duck breast 60% + duck skin 40%), T3 (duck breast 50% + duck skin 50%), T4 (duck breast 40% + duck skin 60%), and T5 (duck breast 30% + duck skin 70%). The cooking loss and fat separation were lower in T1, and the total expressible fluid separations were lower in T1 and T2 than others. The pH ranged from 6.48 to 6.59, with the highest values in T4 and T5. T5 had the highest CIE $L^*$-value, and T1 and T2 had the highest CIE $a^*$-values; however, CIE $b^*$-values did not differ significantly between the duck ham samples. The protein solubility and TPA (hardness, springiness, cohesiveness, gumminess, and chewiness) were the highest in T1. T1 and T2 had higher scores for color, tenderness, and overall acceptability. T1, T2, and T3 showed significantly higher values, but there were no significant differences for flavor and juiciness. Regarding apparent viscosity properties, T1 and T2 had higher viscosity values than the other formulations. In conclusion, the T1 (duck breast 70% + duck skin 30%) and T2 (duck breast 60% + duck skin 40%) duck hams show the highest quality characteristics.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
제안 방법
This study evaluated the physicochemical and sensory characteristics of duck hams containing the different ratio of duck breast meat and duck skin (30-70%). As the ratio of duck breast meat and duck skin decreased, cooking loss, fat separation, and fluid separation of duck hams significantly increased.
대상 데이터
A trained thirty-member panel from the Food Processing Research Center at Korea Food Research Institute in Korea was used to evaluate the duck hams. Each duck ham was evaluated for color, flavor, tenderness, juiciness, and overall acceptability.
데이터처리
All tests were done at least three times for each experimental condition and mean values were reported. Statistical analysis was performed by using Statistical Analysis System (version 8.0, SAS Institute, USA) to calculate the average and standard deviation. When using Duncan’s multiple range test method, the significance test (p<0.
이론/모형
Color, flavor, tenderness, juiciness, and overall acceptability of the samples were evaluated using a 9-point descriptive scale (1 = extremely undesirable, 9 = extremely desirable).
Fat content (960.69) was determined by the Soxhlet method using a solvent extraction system (Soxtec® Avanti 2050 Auto System, Foss Tecator AB, Sweden) and protein content (981.10) was determined by the Kjeldahl method (Kjeltec® 2300Analyzer Unit, Foss Tecator AB, Sweden).
The compositional properties of the duck hams were determined using standard AOAC methods (2000). Moisture content (950.
The protein solubility was determined using the method of Joo et al. (1999). Sarcoplasmic protein solubility and total protein solubility were determined, and myofibrillar protein solubility was obtained by determining the difference between the total and sarcoplasmic protein solubilities.
Panelists were instructed to cleanse their palates between samples using warm water. The qualities of the cooked samples were evaluated using a 9-point descriptive scale (1 = very undesirable, 9 = very desirable). This analysis was conducted using the Hedonic test described by Choi et al.
The samples of duck ham batters were analyzed for emulsion stability using the method of Blouka and Honikel (1992) with the following modifications: total expressible fluid and fat separated at the bottom of each graduated glass tube were measured and calculated (Choi et al., 2007).
성능/효과
Comparison of sarcoplasmic proteins between formulations revealed the highest value in T1 (p<0.05), and the sarcoplasmic protein contents significantly decreased as the ratio of duck breast meat to duck skin decreased (p<0.05).
In contrast, duck hams had significantly higher values in protein solubility, hardness, springiness, cohesiveness, gumminess, and chewiness as the levels of duck skin decreased and duck breast meat increased. Comparison of sensory characteristics showed that formulations with high duck breast meat content had higher scores for color, texture, and overall taste than those with high levels of duck skin. However, no significant differences were observed in flavor and juiciness of the formulations.
However, no significant differences were observed in flavor and juiciness of the formulations. Duck hams with proportions of 70% and 60% of duck breast meat had the highest viscosity values and viscosity decreased as duck skin content increased. In conclusion, duck hams containing 30% or 40% duck skin exhibited superior quality characteristics, which positively improved sensory palatability compared to hams with higher levels of duck skin.
05). For overall acceptability, T1, T2, and T3 had significantly the highest scores, while T4 and T5 had the lowest scores. Biswas et al.
Duck hams with proportions of 70% and 60% of duck breast meat had the highest viscosity values and viscosity decreased as duck skin content increased. In conclusion, duck hams containing 30% or 40% duck skin exhibited superior quality characteristics, which positively improved sensory palatability compared to hams with higher levels of duck skin.
참고문헌 (34)
1. AOAC Official methods of analysis of AOAC 17th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists Washington DC 2000 41
2. Bhat Z. F. Kumar P. Kumar S. Effect of skin, enrobing and refrigerated storage on the quality characteristics of chicken meat balls J. Food Sci. Technol. 2013 50 890 899 10.1007/s13197-011-0414-0 24425995
3. Biswas S. Chakraborty A. Sarkar S. Barpuzari R. N. Barpuzari T. Effect of incorporation of chicken fat and skin on the quality of chicken sausages J. Poult. Sci. 2007 44 111 115 10.2141/jpsa.44.111
4. Bloukas I. Honikel K. O. The influence of additives on the oxidation of pork back fat and its effect on water and fat binding in finely comminuted batters Meat Sci. 1992 32 31 43 10.1016/0309-1740(92)90015-V 22059721
5. Bonifer L. J. Froning G. W. Mandigo R. W. Cuppett S. L. Meagher M. M. Textural, color, and sensory properties of bologna containing various levels of washed chicken skin Poult. Sci. 1996 75 1047 1055 10.3382/ps.0751047 8829239
6. Bourne M. C. Texture profile analysis Food Technol. 1978 32 62 66
7. Cengiz E. Gokoglu N. Effects of fat reduction and fat replacer addition on some quality characteristics of frankfurter-type sausages Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2007 42 366 372 10.1111/j.1365-2621.2006.01357.x
8. Chin K. B. Keeton J. T. Longnecker M. T. Lamkey J. W. Functional, textural and microstructural properties of low-fat bologna (model system) with a konjac blend J. Food Sci. 1998 63 801 807 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1998.tb17904.x
9. Choe J. H. Kim H. Y. Lee J. M. Kim Y. J. Kim C. J. Quality of frankfurter-type sausages with added pig skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacers Meat Sci. 2013 93 849 854 10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.11.054 23313971
10. Choi Y. S. Han D. J. Choi J. H. Hwang K. E. Song D. H. Kim H. W. Kim Y. B. Kim C. J. Effect of chicken skin on the quality characteristics of semi-dried restructured jerky Poult. Sci. 2016 95 1198 1204 10.3382/ps/pew015 26944980
11. Choi Y. S. Jeong J. Y. Choi J. H. Han D. J. Kim H. Y. Lee M. A. Kim H. W. Paik H. D. Kim C. J. Effects of dietary fiber from rice bran on the quality characteristics of emulsion-type sausages Korean J. Food Sci. An. 2008 28 14 20 10.5851/kosfa.2008.28.1.14
12. Choi Y. S. Jeong T. J. Hwang K. E. Kim H. W. Kim C. J. Sung J. M. Oh N. S. Kim Y. B. Effects of emulsion mapping in different parts of pork and beef Korean J. Food Cook. Sci. 2015 31 241 247 10.9724/kfcs.2015.31.3.241
13. Choi Y. S. Lee M. A. Jeong J. Y. Choi J. H. Han D. J. Kim H. Y. Lee E. S. Kim C. J. Effects of wheat fiber on the quality of meat batter Korean J. Food Sci. An. 2007 27 22 28 10.5851/kosfa.2007.27.1.22
14. Crehan C. M. Hughes E. Troy D. J. Buckley D. J. Effects of fat level and maltodextrin on the functional properties of frankfurters formulated with 5, 12 and 30% fat Meat Sci. 2000 55 463 469 10.1016/S0309-1740(00)00006-1 22061579
15. Fenger M. H. Aschemann-Witzel J. Hansen F. Grunert K. G. Delicious words-assessing the impact of short storytelling messages on consumer preferences for variations of a new processed meat product Food Qual. Prefer. 2015 41 237 244 10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.11.016
16. Fotjik T. Mandigo R. W. Utilization of raw pork skins in reduced fat fresh pork Sausage. Nebraska Swine Reports University of Nebraska 1998 42 44
17. Garcıa M. L. Dominguez R. Galvez M. D. Casas C. Selgas M. D. Utilization of cereal and fruit fibres in low fat dry fermented sausages Meat Sci. 2002 60 227 236 10.1016/S0309-1740(01)00125-5 22063393
18. Gomez M. Lorenzo J. M. Effect of fat level on physicochemical, volatile compounds and sensory characteristics of dry-ripened “chorizo” from Celta pig breed Meat Sci. 2013 95 658 666 10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.06.005 23811106
19. Grigelmo-Miguel N. Abadias-Seros M. I. Martin-Belloso O. Characterisation of low-fat high-dietary fibre frankfurters Meat Sci. 1999 52 247 256 10.1016/S0309-1740(98)00173-9 22062572
20. Hamm R. Cole N. A. Lawire R. A. Meat Butterworth London 1975 321 337 Water holding capacity of meat
21. Hefnawy H. T. M. Ramadan M. F. Physicochemical characteristics of soy protein isolate and fenugreek gum dispersed systems J. Food Sci. Technol. 2011 48 371 377 10.1007/s13197-010-0203-1 23572761
22. Joo S. T. Kauffman R. G. Kim B. C. Park G. B. The relationship of sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar protein solubility to colour and water-holding capacity in porcine longissimus muscle Meat Sci. 1999 52 291 297 10.1016/S0309-1740(99)00005-4 22062578
23. Kang G. H. Seong P. N. Cho S. H. Moon S. S. Park K. M. Kang S. M. Park B. Y. Effect of addition duck skin on quality characteristics of duck meat sausages Korean J. Poult. Sci. 2014 41 45 52 10.5536/KJPS.2014.41.1.45
24. Kim H. W. Choi J. H. Choi Y. S. Han D. J. Kim H. Y. Lee M. A. Shim S. Y. Kim C. J. Effects of wheat fiber and isolated soy protein on the quality characteristics of frankfurter-type sausages Korean J. Food Sci. An. 2009 29 475 481 10.5851/kosfa.2009.29.4.475
25. Kim H. Y. Lee J. W. Kim J. H. Kim G. W. Quality properties of chicken nugget with various levels of chicken skin Korean J. Poult. Sci. 2016 43 105 109 10.5536/KJPS.2016.43.2.105
26. Lee S. J. Kim K. H. Kim Y. S. Kim E. K. Hwang J. W. Lim B. O. Moon S. H. Jeon Y. J. Ahn C. B. Park P. J. Biological activity from the gelatin hydrolysates of duck skin by-products Process. Biochem. 2012 47 1150 1154 10.1016/j.procbio.2012.04.009
27. Lorenzo J. M. Temperan S. Bermudez R. Purrinos L. Franco D. Effect of fat level on physicochemical and sensory properties of dry-cured duck sausages Poult. Sci. 2011 90 1334 1339 10.3382/ps.2010-01140 21597076
28. Muhlisin M. Kim D. S. Song Y. R. Kim H. R. Kwon H. J. An B. K. Kang C. W. Kim H. K. Lee S. K. Comparison of meat characteristics between Korean native duck and imported commercial duck raised under identical rearing and feeding condition Korean J. Food Sci. An. 2013 33 89 95 10.5851/kosfa.2013.33.1.89
29. Nuernberg K. Slamecka J. Mojto J. Gasparik J. Nuernberg G. Muscle fat composition of pheasants (Phasianus colchicus), wild ducks (Anas platyrhynchos) and black coots (Fulica atra) Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 2011 57 795 803 10.1007/s10344-010-0489-3
30. Park J. H. Choe J. H. Kim H. W. Hwang K. E. Song D. H. Yeo E. J. Kim H. Y. Choi Y. S. Lee S. H. Kim C. J. Effects of various extraction methods on quality characteristics of duck feet gelatin Korean J. Food Sci. An. 2013 33 162 169 10.5851/kosfa.2013.33.2.162
31. Prieto N. Roehe R. Lavin P. Batten G. Andres S. Application of near infrared reflectance spectroscopy to predict meat and meat products quality: A review Meat Sci. 2009 83 175 186 10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.04.016 20416766
32. Song N. B. Song H. Y. Jo W. S. Song K. B. Physical properties of a composite film containing sunflower seed meal protein and its application in packaging smoked duck meat J. Food Eng. 2013 116 789 795 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2013.02.002
33. Song Y. R. Kim D. S. Muhlisin M. Seo T. S. Jang A. Pak J. I. Lee S. K. Effect of chicken skin and pork backfat on quality of dakgalbi-taste chicken sausage Korean J. Poult. Sci. 2014 41 181 189 10.5536/KJPS.2014.41.3.181
34. Weiss J. Gibis M. Schuh V. Salminen H. Advances in ingredient and processing systems for meat and meat products Meat Sci. 2010 86 196 213 10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.05.008 20619800
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.