The effect of selected phosphate salts on the textural properties of deboned poultry meat batters

Transcription

1 The effect of selected phosphate salts on the textural properties of deboned poultry meat batters NGUYEN HUYNH BACH SON LONG, ROBERT GÁL, and FRANTIŠEK BUŇKA Department of Food Technology and Microbiology, Faculty of Technology Tomas Bata University in Zlin Nam. T.G.Masaryka 5555, Zlin CZECH REPUBLIC Abstract: - The use of phosphate in meat processing industry has been studied for long time, but few studies focused on the deboned poultry meat (DPM). The effect of selected phosphate salts [monosodium phosphate (MSP), disodium phosphate (DSP), trisodium phosphate (TSP), tetrasodium diphosphate (TSPP), disodium diphosphate (SAPP), sodium triphosphate (STPP), sodium hexametaphosphate (SHMP), tripotassium phosphate (TKP), tetrapotassium diphosphate (TKPP) and potassium triphosphate (KTPP); in concentration of 0.25% w/w] on the texture properties of DPM and ph-values was observed. Control samples without addition of phosphate were also manufactured. The added phosphates influenced the ph-values of the batters tested. Values of ph of the batters with selected phosphates increased as follows: TSP, DSP, TSPP, STPP, TKP, TKPP and KTPP. In addition, TSP, TSPP, SHMP, STPP, TKP and TKPP changed hardness value of batters while DSP, STPP and TKP changed cohesiveness value of batters, compared with control sample (p<0.05). Overall, the study demonstrated the beneficial effect of using phosphate in influencing the texture of DPM batters. Key-Words: phosphate, texture, hardness, cohesiveness, ph, deboned poultry meat 1 Introduction Deboned poultry meat (DPM) is mechanically separated meat in the poultry processing industry which is produced from the deboning and cutting of parts with lower commercial value, such as back, neck, feet, and head skins and bones [6,25]. The use of protein sources replacing raw meat in processing meat products has been used by economic factors, that is, will raise the profit of the manufacturer. In fact, DPM has good nutritional and functional properties and is suitable for using as an ingredient for different meat products [18,25]. DPM is currently used in the manufacture of meat products such as sausages, bolognas, or salamis [14,19,25]. In manufacturing meat products, the sensory quality is an important factor which is directly related to the textural parameters of meat products. Thermal processing is applied to DPM-products. After thermal processing, sensory value, textural properties and/or water holding capacity (WHC) could be negative changed which could lead to losses. To improve the texture of meat products, salt, phosphates and/or alkaline (NaOH or NH 4 OH) have been used [21,28,31]. Salt enhances water binding but can not be used in high amounts because of the effects it has on taste and risk of diseases [1,5,27]. Phosphates used in meat and meat products have several functions, especially functions such as the adjustment of ph, buffer properties, sequestion of selected cations (especially calcium and magnesium), charging the ionic charges distributions, changing the ionic strength of environment and /or bacteriostatic effects [9,10,12,13,14,17,21,30]. Although alkaline has also been used to adjust ph leading to increased WHC, its contribution is not so significant compared with phosphates [2,15]. Therefore, many types of phosphates and their mixtures at different concentrations and in combinations with other substances were examined in meat and meat products. The results of these studies showed that the use of phosphates increased WHC [2,4,16,20,23], and improved textural properties [3,7,11,24,26,29]. In general, the researches have tended to focus only on pork and beef rather than on poultry meat, especially DPM. Practically, no systematic information about the effect of phosphates addition on texture of DPM is available. This present study is a part of the project aiming at the improvement of textural parameters of meat products made from DPM. The main purpose of the experiment reported here is to investigate the effects of selected phosphates on hardness, cohesiveness and ph-values in meat batters. Overall, the better understanding of the interactions between ISBN:

2 phosphates and DPM is important in any new product development. 2. Materials and methods In order to obtain samples, DPM (525 grams), ice water (161 grams), salt (mixture of NaCl and NaNO 2 in ratio of 500:1; 14 grams) and selected phosphates were used. For the purpose of this study, we added the following phosphates: monosodium phosphate (MSP), disodium phosphate (DSP), trisodium phosphate (TSP), tetrasodium diphosphate (TSPP), disodium diphosphate (SAPP), sodium triphosphate (STPP), sodium hexametaphosphate (SHMP), tripotassium phosphate (TKP), tetrapotassium diphosphate (TKPP) and potassium triphosphate (KTPP) with the level of 0.25% (w/w), respectively. Control samples without phosphates were also manufactured. All the above raw materials were mixed by the mixer Vorwek Thermomix TM31-1 instrument (Vorwerk & Co., GmbH, Wuppertal, Germany) at a low speed (approx rpm) for 3 minutes at temperature lower than 12 o C to form homogeneously emulsified mixtures. These mixtures were stuffed into glass cans (diameter 8.0 cm, height 7.0 cm), closed with screw lids and heated in the hot water bath to 70 o C, remained heating for 20 minutes, then cooled in an ice water tub for 30 minutes to achieve the endpoint product temperature of 25 o C; after that, these samples were stored at 5±1 o C in the fridge for 7 days. The samples were removed after seven days of storage to analyze their textural parameters and ph measurement. Each type of samples (10 phosphates and a control sample; 11 types in total) were manufactured three times for statistical purpose. The ph values of meat batters were measured directly by the ph instrument (ph Spear Eutech Instrument) with a glass-electrode. The ph value of raw DPM was 6.35 ± The texture parameters of DPM batters were determined using a texture analyzer TA.XTplus (Stable Micro Systems Ltd., Godalming, UK) with a load cell 30 kg. The cylindrical cores of the samples with and without phosphates (diameter 3.5 cm, height 1.5 cm) were compressed twice to 75% of their original height. Hardness (N; the maximium force during the first compression) and cohesiveness (no unit; the ratio of the positive force area during the second compression to that during the first compression) were obtained from the software attached to the texture analyzer [22]. Parameters for measurement were as follows: pre-test speed 2.0 mm s -1 ; test speed 0.5 mm s -1 ; and time between two compressions 5.0 s. The hardness and cohesiveness values were expressed in relation to control samples (relative values obtained by dividing using values for control samples). Data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance with Unistat 5.5 software (Unistat, London, UK). Means comparisons of different treatments were performed by Median and Mann-Whitney tests to determine significant differences between mean values of the different results. The significance level used in tests was Results 3.1. ph values The ph values of DPM batters prepared with different levels of selected phosphates are shown in Figure 1. Samples with TSP and TKP significantly increased ph, whereas samples with MSP, SAPP and SHMP had lower ph values than the control samples and the other products tested. Figure 1. ph values of DPM batters prepared with and without selected phosphates. The ph of samples had the highest value (6.74 ± 0.01) when adding 0.25% TSP, and the lowest value (6.02 ± 0.01) when adding 0.25% MSP. In all cases, the ph values of samples with TSP, DSP, TSPP, STPP, TKP, and KTPP increased, compared to the sample with MSP, SAPP, SHMP and controls (p<0.05) Textural parameters of batters The effect of selected phosphates level on hardness and cohesiveness of a DPM batter was shown in Table 1. As can be seen, the adding selected phosphates as TSP, TSPP, SHMP, STPP, TKP and TKPP in the level of 0.25% (w/w) in ISBN:

3 batters resulted in changed hardness of batter compared to the batter without any phosphates (p<0.05). The batters cohesiveness was only significantly decreased in the samples with TSP, STPP, TKP and KTPP compared to the control sample (p<0.05). These showed that samples with phosphates with one, two and three phosphorus atoms in the molecule have lower relative hardness and relative cohesiveness in comparison with control samples. Products with SAPP were only exception which could be the cause of low phvalues (nearer to isoelectric point of proteins). Similar trend was obtained which MSP and SHMP. Table 1. Effects of selected phosphates on textural properties of the DPM batters * Phosphate Relative hardness** Relative cohesiveness** None 100 a 100 a MSP 97.47± 8.83 a,d,g,h 98.61± 3.53 a TSP 75.07± 7.18 b,c,d,e 81.24± b DSP 96.90± 4.83 a,d,e,g,h 92.25± 4.41 b SAPP ± 9.12 a,h 96.10± 4.45 a,b TSPP 80.80± d,e,f,g,h 93.67± a,b SHMP 93.69± 4.16 h 95.75± 7.61 a,b STPP 85.48± 7.54 f,g 90.36± 3.42 b TKP 79.06± 5.83 c,d,e,g 91.63± 3.15 b TKPP 84.07± e,f,g 97.44± 5.64 a,b KTPP 87.95± 7.38 g,h 90.80± 3.84 b * Values are means± SD of triplicate analyses, calculated as percentage when compared to control sample. a-h Within the same column, means having different superscripts are significantly different by Median and Mann-Whitney tests. 4. Dicussion The main purpose of this paper was to study the effects of phosphates on the textural properties through the hardness and cohesiveness values of the DPM batters. It is clear that phosphates have adjusting abilities of ph in meat products, and that hardness and cohesiveness of DPM also change, compared with the control sample, and thirdly those they have different values for different phosphates. The ph values in the DPM batters is significantly different (p<0.05) and can be explained by chemical properties of the added phosphates. The ph values of TSPP, TKP, TSP, KTPP and STPP, respectively, in 1% solution are higher than 7, while the ph of MSP, SHMP and SAPP are lower than 7 [17]. This fact can explain why the adding level of 0.25% of TSP, DSP, TSPP, STPP, TKP, TKPP and KTPP increased the ph of DPM batter, but MSP, SHMP and SAPP decreased the ph. In previous studies, Fernandez-Lopez et al. noted that the increasing level of STPP increased the ph value [8]. Puolanne et al. also showed that the increase in WHC is related to the increase of ph value [20]. In addition, the reports of Anjaneyulu et al. and Moiseev and Cornforth showed that phosphates are more effective than NaOH comparing their functional properties [2,16]. These studies published in 1990s can confirm that the phosphates affect more than the ph only. The texture of meat products could be influenced by many factors. Firstly, phosphates form a complex with Ca 2+, Mg 2+ to separate actin and myosin in meat protein. Combining with salt, phosphates increase the extractability of muscle protein leading to the formation of the gel matrix [1]. Thus, the gel matrix with these ingredients is more and stronger in DPM batter. In addition, because of the different chemical and functional properties of phosphates, the hardness and cohesiveness of DPM batters was different in this study. According to Molins, the most functional phosphates are diphospahtes, especially TSPP, because they act on the actomyosin complex of the meat protein right away and have a high ph value [17]. On the other hand, when using phosphate, the ph of meat product increased leading to their WHC increased, but with a limitation. Puolanne et al. reported that the ph value of raw meat materials for the maximum water holding was 6.3 [20]. Hence, the binding water and the gel matrix, formed in meat products, are different and depend on the concentration and type of phosphates. And the textural properties of meat batter such as hardness, cohesiveness, tenderness, juiciness, chewiness, and springiness must be changed when adding phosphates. Baulblits et al. showed that STPP, TSPP in 0.4% improve sensory tenderness perceptions of beef without decreasing product yields [3]. Bartbut and Somboonpanyakul also reported that the hardness value of the using 0.5% STPP in DPM batter was lower than that without phosphate batter but the chewiness, springiness and cohesiveness values were higher [29]. However, the results also indicated that the texture parameters in the different levels should be examined in further studies which will give the full evaluations of the effect of phosphates in DPM batter. ISBN:

4 5. Conclusions In this paper, the textural properties and ph-values of MDP batters were studied with selected phosphates as MSP, TSP, DSP, SAPP, TSPP, SHMP, STPP, TKP, TKPP, and KTPP. The results indicated that adding phosphates changed of ph and textural properties in DPM batter with the level of 0.25%, compared to without phosphate batter. The ph-values of the samples with TSP, DSP, TSPP, STPP, TKP, and KTPP increased whereas that with MSP, SAPP and SHMP decreased. Hardness of the samples with TSP, TSPP, SHMP, STPP, TKP and TKPP decreased, while only cohesiveness of the samples with TSP, STPP, TKP and TKPP decreased. Overall, the results point to a potential use of phosphates by the poultry meat processing industry. ACKNOWLEGMENTS This study was supported by internal grants of UTB of the Czech Republic: IGA/FT/2012/026. References: [1]. Alvarado, C., & McKee, S., Marination to improve functional properties and safety of poultry meat, Journal of Applied Poultry Resaerch, Vol.16, No.1, , 2007 [2]. Anjaneyulu, A. S. R., Sharma, N., & Kondaiah, N., Specific effect of phosphate on the functional properties and yield of buffalo meat patties, Food Chemistry, Vol.36, No.2, , [3]. Baublits, R. T., Pohlman, F. W., Brown, J. A. H., & Johnson, Z. B., Effects of sodium chloride, phosphate type and concentration, and pump rate on beef biceps femoris quality and sensory characteristics, Meat Science, Vol.70, No.2, , [4]. Bendall, J. R., The swelling effect of polyphosphates on lean meat, Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, Vol.5, No.10, , [5]. Bianchi, M., Petracci, M., & Cavani, C., The use of marination to improve poultry meat quality, Italian Journal of Animal Science, Vol. 8, No.2s, , [6]. EC, R. No 853/2004, Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for on the hygiene of foodstuffs, Availble in =OJ:L:2004:139:0055:0205:EN:PDF. [7]. Erdogdu, S. B., Erdogdu, F., & Ekiz, H. I., Influence of sodium tripolyphosphate (STP) treatment and cooking time on cook losses and textural properties of red meats, Journal of Food Process Engineering, Vol.30, No.6, , [8]. Feiner, G., Meat products handbook - Practical science and technology, Woodhead Publishing Limited, [9]. Fernández-López J., Sayas-Barberá E., Pérez-Alvarez J. A., Aranda-Catalá V., Effect of sodium chloride, sodium tripolyphosphate and ph on color properties of pork meat, Color Research & Application, Vol. 29, No.1, 67-74, [10]. Hourant, P., General properties of the alkaline phosphates: Major food and technical applications, Phosphorus Research Bulletin, Vol.15, 85-94, [11]. Hsu, S. Y., & Chung, H.-Y., Effects of [kappa]-carrageenan, salt, phosphates and fat on qualities of low fat emulsified meatballs, Journal of Food Engineering, Vol.47, No.2, , [12]. Knipe, L., Emulsifiers Phosphates as meat emulsion stabilizers. In C. Benjamin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition (pp ), Academic Press, [13]. Lampila, L. E., & Godber, J. P., Food Phosphates. In A. L. Branen, P. M. Davidson, S. Salminen & J. H. Thorngate III (Eds.), Food Additives - 2nd edition (Chapter 25), Marcel Dekker, Inc, [14]. Long, N. H. B. S., Gál, R., & Buňka, F., Review: Use of phosphates in meat products, African Journal of Biotechnology, Vol. 10, No.86, , [15]. Mielnik, M. B., Aaby, K., Rolfsen, K., Ellekjær, M. R., & Nilsson, A., Quality of comminuted sausages formulated from mechanically deboned poultry meat, Meat Science, Vol.61, No.1, 73-84, [16]. Moiseev, I. V., & Cornforth, D. P., Sodium hydroxide and sodium tripolyphosphate effects on bind strength and sensory characteristics of restructured beef rolls, Meat Science, Vol.45, No.1, 53-60, [17]. Molins, R. A., Phosphates in Food, CRC Press, Inc., [18]. Negrão, C. C., Mizubuti, I. Y., Morita, M. C., Colli, C., Ida, E. I., & Shimokomaki, M., Biological evaluation of mechanically ISBN:

5 deboned chicken meat protein quality, Food Chemistry, Vol.90, No.4, , [19]. Pereira, A. G. T., Ramos, E. M., Teixeira, J. T., Cardoso, G. P., Ramos, A. d. L. S., & Fontes, P. R., Effects of the addition of mechanically deboned poultry meat and collagen fibers on quality characteristics of frankfurter-type sausages, Meat Science, Vol.89, No.4, , [20]. Puolanne, E. J., Ruusunen, M. H., & Vainionpää, J. I., Combined effects of NaCl and raw meat ph on water-holding in cooked sausage with and without added phosphate, Meat Science, Vol.58, No.1, 1-7, [21]. Ranken, M. D., Handbook of meat product technology, Blackwell Science Ltd., [22]. Rosenthal, A. J., Food Texture: Measurement and Perception, Aspen Publisher, Inc., [23]. Schwartz, W. C., & Mandigo, R. W., Effect of salt, sodium tripolyphosphate and storage on restructured pork Journal of Food Science, Vol.41, No.6, , [24]. Sheard, P. R., Nute, G. R., Richardson, R. I., Perry, A., & Taylor, A. A., Injection of water and polyphosphate into pork to improve juiciness and tenderness after cooking, Meat Science, Vol.51, No.4, [25]. Shelly, M., & Glenn, F., Mechanical separation of poultry meat and its use in products, Poultry Meat Processing, CRC Press, [26]. Shu Qin, X. U., Guang Hong, Z., Zeng Qi, P., Li Yan, Z., & Rui, Y. A. O., The influence of polyphosphate marination on simmental beef shear value and ultrastructure, Journal of Muscle Foods, Vol.20, No.1, , [27]. Shults, G. W., & Wierbicki, E., Effects of sodium chloride and condensed phosphates on the water-holding capacity, ph and swelling of chicken muscle, Journal of Food Science, Vol.38, No.6, , [28]. Skrökki, A., Additives in finnish sausges and other meat products, Meat Science, Vol.39, No.2, , [29]. Barbut, S.& Somboonpanyakul, P.,Effect of Crude Malva Nut Gum and Phosphate on Yeild, Texture, Color and Microstructure of Emulsified Chicken Meat Batter, Poultry Science, Vol.86, , [30]. Tompkin, R. B., Indirect antimicrobial effects in foods: Phosphates, Journal of Food Safety, Vol.6, No.1, 13-27, [31]. USDA, Additives in meat and poultry products, Food Safety Information, Available in Meat_and_Poultry_Products.pdf. ISBN: