Consumer demands for convenient home meal replacements, such as instant foods have
been increased rapidly with an increase in the number of smaller household sizes in
recent years [1]. In addition, as food culture
has become more westernized, consumers have greater demand for processed meat
products, such as, ham, fish cake bar, and sausage. These products account for a
larger percentage of the home meal replacement market than the other instant foods
[2].Sausages are one of the most popular processed meat products, usually made from pork
or chicken. Most consumers prefer chicken based sausages over beef or pork due to
the nutritional values of the former, which includes high protein, low fat and
cholesterol contents as well as low calories [3]. In 2007, the annual chicken consumption per capita was 13.3 kg. This
number increased by 11% over the last two years and reached 14.8 kg in 2019,
potentially due to the availability of a greater variety of products containing
chicken [4]. Several studies have been
conducted out to improve the quality of chicken sausages [5,6]. For example, studies
have shown that during production, the emulsifying capacity is improved with higher
protein content. Thus, sausage production companies use additional heterologous
proteins, such as isolated soy protein, concentrated soy protein and milk powder
[7,8].Milk powder is an animal protein and is classified into four types: whole milk powder
(WMP), skimmed milk powder, sweetened milk powder, and mixed milk powder. Among
these, WMP has high protein and fat contents, as it is a powdered form of raw milk
produced through a drying process that removes water to a moisture content below
5.0%; this preserves the composition of the raw milk and to increases its shelf life
[9]. Kamizake et al. [10] reported that cream, mayonnaise, imitation
milk, and sausage containing WMP were rich in casein protein that enhances their
emulsifying capacity. Similarly, there are many studies that have explored the use
of WMP as the main food additive in semi-solid products such as cheese, yogurt and
soup [11-13]. However, only a few studies have used WMP as a
heterologous protein and evaluated its use as a functional additive, such as an
emulsifier.Therefore, this study has examined the effect of using WMP as a heterologous protein
in chicken breast emulsion-type sausages. Furthermore, the quality properties were
compared and analyzed to determine the optimal additive ratio.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Preparation of whole milk powder on chicken emulsion sausage
Chicken breast (12 h after slaughter from, Maniker, Seoul, Korea) was used for
chicken emulsion-type sausage for this study. The chicken breast and pork back
fat were ground using grinder (PA-82, Mainca, Barcelona, Spain) with 3 mm plate;
the primary materials as chicken breast (60%), pork back fat (20%), and ice
(20%), were then emulsified using a bowl cutter (K-30, Talsa, Valencia, Spain).
After the emulsification, nitrite pickling salt (1.2%), sugar (1%), mixed spices
(1%) were added. Then three samples were prepared by adding 5%, 10%, and 15%
WMP. The prepared samples emulsion was filled in a natural pork intestine casing
using a stuffer (EM-12, Mainca), and cooked for 40 min at 80°C chamber
(10.10ESI/SK, Alto Shaam, Menomonee Falls, WI, USA). After cooking, it was
cooled at 10°C for 20 min.
pH
Each sample (4 g) was mixed with distilled water (16 mL) using Ultra Turrax
homogenizer (HMZ-20DN, Pooglim Tech, Seongnam, Korea) for 1 min at
6,991×g, and was measured using a glass electrode pH meter (Model S220,
Mettler-Toledo, Schwerzenbach, Switzerland).
Color
The color of chicken emulsion-type sausages were measured before and after
cooking, using a colorimeter (CR-10, Minolta, Tokyo, Japan, calibrated with a
white plate, CIE L*: +97.83, CIE a*: −0.43, and CIE b*: +1.98). The
measured color value was recorded as CIE L*, CIE a*, and CIE b*.
Proximate composition
Proximate composition of the samples was determined following the AOAC guidelines
[14]. The moisture content, crude
protein, crude fat, and crude ash content were determined by drying oven method
at 105°C, Kjeldahal method, Soxhlet method, and dry ashing method at
550°C, respectively.
Sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE)
Relevant protein levels were assessed with SDS-PAGE analysis, using 8% separating
gel and 4% stacking gel, following the method described by Lee et al. [15]. The supernatants of the samples were
mixed with 3 mM phosphate buffer and 5X sample buffer. Each sample (15
µL) was added to the gel and processed for 120 min. After the process,
gel was 12 h overnight in a fixing solution using a rocker, and stained with
Coomassie brilliant blue for 20 min with gentle agitation. The dye was removed
by incubation in a de-staining solution for 1 h, and the gel was stored in a
storage solution and scanned.
Protein solubility
Protein solubility of samples was determined using the method from Kang et al.
[6]. The total protein solubility was
determined with mixing 2 g of sample with 20 mL of buffer (1.1 M potassium
iodide in 0.1 M potassium phosphate buffer). However, the sarcoplasmic protein
solubility was determined by mixing 2 g of the sample with 20 mL buffer (0.025 M
potassium phosphate). Each sample were homogenized using homogenizer (AM-5,
Nihonseiki, Tokyo, Japan) at 3,932×g for 2 min. After homogenized, the
samples were kept at 4°C for 16 h and filtered filter paper. The sample
supernatant was measured at absorbance of 540 nm on the multi-mode microplate
reader (Spectra Max iD3, Molecular devices, San Jose, CA, USA). Myofibrillar
protein solubility was calculated by the difference between total and
sarcoplasmic protein solubility.
Scanning microphotograph
The samples were stored at −80°C for 24 h deep freezer (TSE320GPD,
Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), and sliced into 10 µm
sections using a cryostat (CM3050S, Leica Biosystems, Wetzlar, Germany). The
sliced samples were observed and scanned using upright clinical microscope
(Eclipse Ci-L, Nikon, Tokyo, Japan).
Cooking yield
The samples were weighed before and after cooking. The cooking yield was
determined from their weights and calculated (1).
Texture profile analysis (TPA)
The cooked samples were cut into ф2.5 × 2.0 cm (diameter ×
height) sections. The texture was measured using a texture analyzer (TA 1,
Lloyd, Largo, FL, USA), and the analyzing conditions were: cylinder probe of 100
mm diameter with a pre-test speed of 2.0 mm/s, a post-test speed of 5.0 mm/s, a
maximum load of 2 kg, a head speed of 2.0 mm/s, a distance of 8.0 mm, and a
force of 5 g. Hardness (kg), springiness, and cohesiveness were measured and
recorded, which were used for calculating gumminess (kg) and chewiness (kg).
Aroma characterization
Aroma profiling of the cooked chicken emulsion-type sausage samples were
performed using a Heracles Ⅱ electronic nose (Alpha MOS, Toulouse,
France); the conditions for analysis were: 5 g of sample was weighed in a 20 mL
vial; flow rate of 250 mL/min; acquisition time of 120 s; headspace temperature
of 60°C; an injection of 2.5 mL of sample. The measured sensitivity
values were used in the Alpha soft program (Alpha MOS), used for the PCA
procedure. The classified aroma pattern was recorded as the primary component
value (PC1) and the secondary component value (PC2).
Statistical analysis
Experimental results were assessed after at least three repeated trials.
Statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.3 for window (SAS
Institute, Cary, NC, USA), and the results were indicated as mean ± and
standard deviation. ANOVA and Duncan’s multiple range test were performed
for verifying the significance of differences among the averages of each
characteristic.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
pH and color
Table 1 shows the results of pH and color
analysis for uncooked and cooked sausages containing different amounts of WMP.
pH is a measurement that determines the quality of meat and meat products; a
high pH value of an emulsified sausages enhance its water-holding capacity
[16]. The pH analysis results
revealed that, before cooking, the pH significantly increased with an increase
in the total WMP (p < 0.05). Akhtar et al. [17] noted that WMP has a high pH value of
6.73, and this suggested that the observed increase in pH, which was higher than
the control samples, was due to adding WMP. Similarly, a study by Eswarapragada
et al. [18] on pork sausage containing
milk co-precipitate reported that the pH of sausage increased with an increase
in the amount of milk co-precipitate added.
Table 1.
pH and color of chicken-breast emulsion-type sausage formulated with
various levels of whole milk powder
Traits
Control
Whole milk powder
(%)
5
10
15
pH
Uncooked
5.86 ± 0.03[d]
5.97 ± 0.02[c]
6.07 ± 0.02[b]
6.11 ± 0.01[a]
Cooked
6.07 ± 0.01[c]
6.11 ± 0.02[b]
6.16 ± 0.01[a]
6.17 ± 0.01[a]
Color
Uncooked
CIE L*
66.12 ± 0.29[b]
72.67 ± 2.09[ab]
75.15 ± 0.15[a]
75.05 ± 0.12[a]
CIE a*
7.86 ± 0.12[a]
6.76 ± 0.27[b]
7.20 ± 0.30[ab]
7.70 ± 0.10[a]
CIE b*
19.95 ± 0.65
19.90 ± 0.60
21.35 ± 0.45
21.80 ± 0.50
Cooked
CIE L*
73.14 ± 0.15[b]
76.70 ± 0.12[a]
77.40 ± 0.10[a]
78.47 ± 0.62[a]
CIE a*
6.00 ± 0.12[d]
6.73 ± 0.03[c]
7.13 ± 0.03[b]
7.60 ± 0.16[a]
CIE b*
17.90 ± 0.18[c]
18.63 ± 0.32[bc]
19.40 ± 0.50[ab]
19.77 ± 0.07[a]
All values are mean ± SD.
Mean in the same row with different letters are significantly
different (p < 0.05).
All values are mean ± SD.Mean in the same row with different letters are significantly
different (p < 0.05).Color measurement results revealed that the lightness before cooking increased
with an increase in WMP added; the lightness of after cooking also showed
significantly higher values in sausages containing WMP than in the control
sample (p < 0.05). A previous study reported that WMP
has a lightness range of 75–85, which is higher than the lightness of
typical emulsified sausages without added WMP [19]. Andrès et al. [20] demonstrated that chicken sausages containing whey protein,
extracted from milk, also showed an increase in lightness as the added amount of
whey protein increased. The redness of uncooked sausages was significantly lower
in the 5% WMP-treated sample compared to the control sample and the 15%
WMP-treated sample (p < 0.05), but a consistent trend
regarding WMP added was not observed. However, the CIE a* value in cooked
samples significantly increased with an increase in WMP added
(p < 0.05). Such difference in redness in the
WMP-treated samples after cooking is due to the oxidation of lactose and casein
protein in the WMP during its freezing process of sausages [21], as these substances undergo the
Maillard reaction when they are in contact with oxygen [22]. Therefore, a consistent change in redness regarding
the addition of WMP was not observed in uncooked samples, whereas an increase in
redness was seen in cooked samples. Before cooking, the CIE b* value did not
show significant difference between the control and WMP-treated samples;
however, in cooked samples, it was significantly higher in 10% and 15%
WMP-treated samples than in the control sample (p <
0.05). In a study on the browning of casein protein, Morales and Boekel [23] reported that application of heat to
casein protein led to an increase in yellowness due to the Maillard reaction,
and it is believed that the results followed this phenomenon.
Proximate composition and sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE)
The proximate composition of chickenbreast emulsion-type sausage containing WMP
is presented in Table 2. The moisture
content showed a decreasing trend with adding an increasing amount of WMP.
However, the crude fat and protein contents tended to increased, especially the
crude ash content showed a significant increase as WMP added increased
(p < 0.05). The proximate composition of WMP is 3.3%
moisture, 26.8% crude fat, 41.7% protein, and 4.1% crude ash [24], and it was understood that a
difference in the proximate compositions among the WMP-treated samples occurred
because of the varying amounts of WMP added. Further, whey protein concentrate
indicated that the protein content increased with an increase in the added
amount of milk-derived protein, similar to reports by Hung and Zayas [25] on meat products containing skimmed
milk and whey protein, and by Abdolghafour and Saghir [26] on buffalo meat emulsion sausage containing.
Table 2.
Proximate composition of chicken-breast emulsion-type sausage
formulated with various levels of whole milk powder
Traits
Control
Whole milk powder
(%)
5
10
15
Moisture
58.36 ± 1.08[a]
57.35 ± 0.49[ab]
55.56 ± 0.32[b]
52.24 ± 0.17[c]
Crude fat
19.97 ± 0.05[c]
19.80 ± 0.09[c]
20.24 ± 0.07[b]
20.56 ± 0.05[a]
Crude protein
17.86 ± 0.21[c]
18.85 ± 0.09[b]
19.30 ± 0.24[ab]
19.69 ± 0.24[a]
Crude ash
2.35 ± 0.02[d]
2.57 ± 0.01[c]
2.71 ± 0.02[b]
2.82 ± 0.04[a]
All values are mean ± SD.
Mean in the same row with different letters are significantly
different (p < 0.05).
All values are mean ± SD.Mean in the same row with different letters are significantly
different (p < 0.05).The SDS-PAGE analysis of chicken breast sausage with added WMP is shown in Fig. 1. The content of proteins, such as C
protein, actin, sarcoplasmic protein, and tropomyosin, increased with an
increase in the amount of added WMP. Radoslav and Danica [27] stated that the molecular weight of enolase belonging
to the sarcoplasmic protein is 53.82 ± 1.42 kDa. This experiment also
showed similar results in which the sarcoplasmic protein content increased,
which resulted from an increase in the protein solubility the increased due to
the increased addition of WMP. Furthermore, tropomyosin plays the role of
improving protein solubility, and this experiment also showed that the
tropomyosin content increased with an increase in the WMP content; which is one
of the reasons for the increase in protein solubility observed in this study
[28]. In addition, considering that C
protein known as a blood coagulation inhibitor that prevents vascular diseases
[29], and its content increases with
an increase in the amounts of WMP additive, adding WMP may aid in creating
products with added functionalities and benefits. From the SDS-PAGE results, it
was concluded that adding WMP increased the protein content, which had a
beneficial effect on the processing quality and improved the protein solubility
and physical properties, not only facilitating a stable sausage production but
also a high protein product.
Fig. 1.
SDS-PAGE of chicken-breast emulsion-type sausage formulated with
various levels of whole milk powder.
STD, standard; Con, control; M5, sausage added 5% of whole milk powder;
M10, sausage added 10% of whole milk powder; M15, sausage added 15% of
whole milk powder; SDS-PAGE, sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis.
SDS-PAGE of chicken-breast emulsion-type sausage formulated with
various levels of whole milk powder.
STD, standard; Con, control; M5, sausage added 5% of whole milk powder;
M10, sausage added 10% of whole milk powder; M15, sausage added 15% of
whole milk powder; SDS-PAGE, sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis.
Protein solubility, scanning microphotograph, and cooking yields
Protein solubility is greatly affected by its molecular weight as well as the
structure and function of the added protein [30]. As such, the results of protein solubility of chicken breast
sausage containing WMP are summarized in Table
3. The total protein content in WMP-treated samples showed
significantly higher values than that of the control sample (p
< 0.05). The sarcoplasmic protein content was significantly higher in the
15% WMP-treated sample than in the control sample (p <
0.05), and the myofibrillar protein content was significantly higher in the 10%
and 15% WMP-treated samples than in the control sample (p
< 0.05). All experimental groups showed an overall increase in protein
solubility with an increasing amount of WMP added. A study by Agarwal et al.
[31] reported that the protein
solubility of milk protein also increases with an increasing pH. Similar results
were obtained in this study, where an increasing added amount of WMP in the
WMP-treated samples resulted in an increase of pH increasing the solubility.
Table 3.
Protein Solubility of chicken-breast emulsion-type sausage formulated
with various levels of whole milk powder
Traits (mg/g)
Control
Whole milk powder
(%)
5
10
15
Total protein solubility
114.3 ± 2.45[c]
137.6 ± 2.45[b]
140.2 ± 12.24[ab]
157.1 ± 0.61[a]
Sarcoplasmic protein solubility
103.0 ± 6.12[b]
108.2 ± 2.45[ab]
109.5 ± 3.06[ab]
122.5 ± 7.96[a]
Myofibrillar protein solubility
11.3 ± 3.67[b]
29.4 ± 4.90[ab]
30.7 ± 11.02[a]
34.6 ± 8.57[a]
All values are mean ± SD.
Mean in the same row with different letters are significantly
different (p < 0.05).
All values are mean ± SD.Mean in the same row with different letters are significantly
different (p < 0.05).Fig. 2 shows the cross-sectional
microphotographs of the chicken breast sausage with WMP additives. Generally, in
emulsified meat products, the reticular structure of myosin becomes more notable
as the extracted amount of salt-soluble protein increases due to the enhanced
binding force between the meat proteins and fat globules, which are the main
ingredients of emulsified sausages [32];
therefore, the size of fat globules decreases as the emulsification degree of
emulsion-type meat products increases. This was confirmed in this study, where
an increase in the WMP helped to the uniformly distribute of small fat
particles. A study by Muguruma et al. [33] on chicken sausages containing soybean and casein protein
demonstrated that adding casein protein improved the formation of network
structures that enhanced the gel strength between tissues. This occurs as an
increase in the L-lysine in casein protein induces the formation of a more
compact network structure of myosin that decreases the size of fat globules and
the gap within emulsified sausages [34].
Therefore, it was concluded that the emulsifying capacity increased as the milk
powder added increased, since WMP can easily extract sarcoplasmic proteins by
reacting with meat proteins, by performing the same function as sodium
caseinate.
Fig. 2.
Cross-sectional microphotographs of chicken-breast emulsion-type
sausage formulated with various levels of whole milk powder.
The magnification of all the microphotographs is ×40. Con,
control; M, sausage added 5% of whole milk powder; M10, sausage added
10% of whole milk powder; M15, sausage added 15% of whole milk
powder.
Cross-sectional microphotographs of chicken-breast emulsion-type
sausage formulated with various levels of whole milk powder.
The magnification of all the microphotographs is ×40. Con,
control; M, sausage added 5% of whole milk powder; M10, sausage added
10% of whole milk powder; M15, sausage added 15% of whole milk
powder.To achieve a high cooking yield, which is critical for emulsified products, it is
important to minimize the loss of moisture and fat by enhancing the binding
strength between protein and water [15].
The cooking yield of chicken breast sausage containing WMP is shown in Fig. 3. WMP-treated samples showed
significantly higher values of cooking yield than the control
(p < 0.05). Barbut [35] reported that the cooking loss in a meat product made from
chicken breast added with WMP was lower than in a similar meat product without
WMP; this was comparable with the experimental results demonstrated in this
study. Regarding the increase in cooking yield with adding WMP, the protein has
an excellent ability for retention and absorption of fat and moisture [36]; thus the cooking yield increased in
this study, as the separation of moisture and fat was minimized during the
cooking process. Therefore, the output of adding WMP to chicken breast sausage
is believed to be products with economically superior properties.
Fig. 3.
Cooking yield of chicken-breast emulsion-type sausage formulated with
various levels of whole milk powder.
a,bMean in the same bars with different letters are
significantly different (p < 0.05).
Cooking yield of chicken-breast emulsion-type sausage formulated with
various levels of whole milk powder.
a,bMean in the same bars with different letters are
significantly different (p < 0.05).
Texture profile analysis (TPA) and electronic nose
The TPA measurement results of chicken breast sausage formulated with different
blending ratios of WMP are shown in Table
4. WMP-treated samples showed significantly higher hardness,
gumminess, and chewiness values than those of the control sample
(p < 0.05), whereas no significant difference in
springiness and cohesiveness between the control group and treated samples was
observed. A study by Marchetti et al. [37] showed similar results, in which addition of milk protein to low-fat
sausages resulted in an increase in its hardness, gumminess, and chewiness as
compared to the control sample that had no milk protein additives. This is
because the WMP added during production undergoes hot air drying and remains in
powder form; powders prepared under such conditions exhibit a high rehydration
and emulsifying capacity [38]. Therefore,
it is concluded that the increased hardness, gumminess, and chewiness can be
attributed to the WMP additive that not only act as an emulsifier to improve the
water retention capacity and cooking yield, but also enhances the binding
strength between main and minor ingredients.
Table 4.
Texture profile analysis of chicken-breast emulsion-type sausage
formulated with various levels of whole milk powder
Traits
Control
Whole milk powder
(%)
5
10
15
Hardness (kg)
2.14 ± 0.37[c]
3.29 ± 0.21[b]
3.56 ± 0.41[ab]
3.89 ± 0.31[a]
Springiness
0.86 ± 0.08
0.85 ± 0.06
0.90 ± 0.01
0.89 ± 0.04
Gumminess (kg)
1.51 ± 0.17[c]
2.36 ± 0.13[b]
2.62 ± 0.25[a]
2.81 ± 0.18[a]
Chewiness (kg)
1.30 ± 0.15[c]
2.00 ± 0.21[b]
2.37 ± 0.24[a]
2.49 ± 0.14[a]
Cohesiveness
0.71 ± 0.04
0.72 ± 0.01
0.74 ± 0.02
0.72 ± 0.01
All values are mean±SD.
Mean in the same row with different letters are significantly
different (p < 0.05).
All values are mean±SD.Mean in the same row with different letters are significantly
different (p < 0.05).Fig. 4 shows the results of electronic nose
analysis of the chicken breast sausage with added WMP. The overall flavor of the
protein is determined by the composition of substances that make up the protein
structure, temperature, pH, and ionic strength [39,40]. The PCA plot obtained
in this study showed a PC1 of 93.611% and PC2 of 6.312%, indicating that PC1
contributed more to enhancing the flavor [41]. Based on PC1 (x-axis), the PCA plot of treated samples revealed
that the control and WMP-treated samples showed a difference for the major
flavor component; however, there was no significant difference in the major
flavor component among the WMP-treated samples. Christiansen et al. [42] reported that different flavor arises
from different proteins, depending on the heat treatment and hydrolysis of the
protein hydrolysates. Similarly, this study showed a difference in flavor
between WMP and raw meat material, as they are different proteins.
Fig. 4.
Principal component analysis plot of chicken-breast emulsion-type
sausage formulated with various levels of whole milk powder.
Con, control; M5, sausage added 5% of whole milk powder; M10, sausage
added 10% of whole milk powder; M15, sausage added 15% of whole milk
powder.
Principal component analysis plot of chicken-breast emulsion-type
sausage formulated with various levels of whole milk powder.
Con, control; M5, sausage added 5% of whole milk powder; M10, sausage
added 10% of whole milk powder; M15, sausage added 15% of whole milk
powder.
CONCLUSION
In this study crude protein, crude fat, and crude ash contents of a 15% WMP treated
sample was significantly higher than the control sample (p <
0.05). In TPA, the hardness, chewiness, and gumminess of WMP containing samples were
significantly higher than the control sample (p < 0.05). The
sarcoplasmic and myofibrillar proteins of the 15% WMP-treated sample was
significantly higher than the control sample (p < 0.05). The
cooking yield of WMP-treated samples was significantly higher than the control
sample (p < 0.05). From the results of microphotographs and
SDS-PAGE, WMP was effective at increasing the cooking yield and protein solubility.
Thus, less than 15% WMP can be used as heterologous protein for developing protein
enriched meat product.
Authors: M Muguruma; K Tsuruoka; K Katayama; Y Erwanto; S Kawahara; K Yamauchi; S K Sathe; T Soeda Journal: Meat Sci Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 5.209