| Literature DB >> 35010178 |
Xinyue Yuan1, Wei Jiang1, Dianwei Zhang1, Huilin Liu1, Baoguo Sun1.
Abstract
In this study, edible mushroom and soybean protein isolate (SPI) were used to prepare a fibrous meat analogue using thermos-extrusion and the extruded mushroom-based meat analogue as meat replacer was further developed with different formulations in fabricating sausage analogues. The effect of water content (35%, 70% and 100%), three types of edible mushroom (Lentinus edodes, Pleurotus ostreatus, Coprinus comatus and a mixture of equal proportions) and their amounts (from 15% to 100%) on the physicochemical and structural profiles were studied. The results showed that the extruded mushroom-based meat analogue prepared from Coprinus comatus (15% addition) and SPI with a water content of 35% exhibited close textural profiles to real beef. Furthermore, a texture profile analysis (TPA) combined with a principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted to compare and assess the textural traits of the sausage analogues with similar commercial products. The characterization and comparison of the flavor profile of post-processing mushroom-based meat sausage analogues (MMSA) were performed using headspace-phase microextraction (HS-SPME), coupled with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). A total of 64 volatile compounds were identified, and the content in dried-processing treatment was significantly higher than for steamed-processing, which indicated that the natural fermentation process contributed to the increase in aroma substances in the non-animal sourced sausage. This study developed a feasible method to fabricate a meat replacement and to create high added-value products, which offer an opportunity for developing non-animal products with satisfactory sensory properties and flavor profiles.Entities:
Keywords: GC-MS; flavor; meat analogue; mushroom; sausages; texture
Year: 2021 PMID: 35010178 PMCID: PMC8750815 DOI: 10.3390/foods11010052
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Key factorial design for mushroom-based meat sausage analogues formulation.
| Treatments | Egg White Powder (%) | Meat Flavour Powder (%) | Oil (%) | Red Yeast Rice (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| G1 | 3 | 0.1 | 17 | 0.01 |
| G2 | 3 | 0.2 | 19 | 0.02 |
| G3 | 3 | 0.3 | 21 | 0.03 |
| G4 | 4 | 0.1 | 19 | 0.03 |
| G5 | 4 | 0.2 | 21 | 0.01 |
| G6 | 4 | 0.3 | 17 | 0.02 |
| G7 | 5 | 0.1 | 21 | 0.02 |
| G8 | 5 | 0.2 | 17 | 0.03 |
| G9 | 5 | 0.3 | 19 | 0.01 |
| MMSA | 3 | 0.1 | 19 | 0.02 |
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the preparation of mushroom-based meat sausage analogue (MMSA).
Figure 2(A) The a of mushroom-based meat analogues with water contents from 35% to 100%; (B) The hardness of mushroom-based meat analogues with different rehydration times; (C) The a and (D) hardness of mushroom-based meat analogues with contents of edible mushroom from 15% to 100% compared with beef.
The a, hardness, springiness, fracture property and viscous force of MMSA with different species of edible mushroom and compared with beef.
| Species |
| Hardness (g) | Springiness (mm) | Fracture Property (g) | Viscous Force (g) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LE | 0.80 ± 0.01 a | 83.17 ± 3.75 a | 61.54 ± 0.29 a | 66.50 ± 3.75 bc | 3.17 ± 0.29 a |
| PO | 0.80 ± 0.00 a | 322.00 ± 4.33 a | 59.90 ± 2.30 a | 124.85 ± 2.03 d | 3.00 ± 0.50 a |
| CC | 0.85 ± 0.00 b | 84.17 ± 6.11 c | 61.31 ± 0.30 a | 55.53 ± 3.71 b | 3.33 ± 0.29 a |
| Mixed | 0.83 ± 0.00 b | 268.00 ± 20.39 b | 60.49 ± 1.25 a | 84.75 ± 3.71 c | 2.67 ± 0.29 a |
| Beef | 0.99 ± 0.00 c | 43.17 ± 7.77 d | 61.95 ± 0.69 a | 19.77 ± 2.40 a | 3.33 ± 0.29 a |
a–d Means within the same row with s differ significantly among the treatments (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 3The texture information obtained from photographs of meat analogues containing edible mushroom from LE (blue), PO (orange), CC (yellow) and the mushroom mixture (grey) and corresponding inner microstructure information obtained from SEM.
Figure 4(A) Principal component analysis plot and (B) cluster analysis of mushroom-based meat sausage analogues comparing different formulations and commercial products.
Figure 5(A) The number of different types of volatiles in MMSA and DMMSA; (B) The content of different types of in MMSA and DMMSA.
Volatile compounds extracted from MMSA (µg g−1) and DMMSA and analyzed using HS-SPME combined with GC-MS.
| No. | Volatile Compounds | RI (s) | CAS3 | Content (µg·g−1) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Acetic acid | 4.4785 | 64-19-7 | 8.626 | |
| 2 | Isovaleraldehyde | 4.978 | 590-86-3 | 0.145 | 2.01 |
| 3 | Heptane | 5.5244 | 142-82-5 | 1.892 | |
| 4 | 2-Ethylfuran | 5.5833 | 3208-16-0 | 0.628 | |
| 5 | trans-2-Pentene | 6.0708 | 646-04-8 | 1.948 | |
| 6 | Toluene | 6.7994 | 108-88-3 | 7.316 | |
| 7 | 2,3-Butanediol | 7.0226 | 513-85-9 | 1.954 | |
| 8 | Hexanal | 7.393 | 66-25-1 | 1.931 | |
| 9 | 5-Hexenenitrile | 8.9322 | 5048-19-1 | 3.006 | |
| 10 | 1-Hexanol | 9.07035 | 111-27-3 | 0.207 | 6.493 |
| 11 | 2-Heptanone | 9.6962 | 110-43-0 | 0.943 | |
| 12 | 1,3,5,7-Cyclooctatetraene | 9.8372 | 629-20-9 | 1.084 | |
| 13 | Heptaldehyde | 10.0076 | 111-71-7 | 0.307 | |
| 14 | 2,5-Dimethyl pyrazine | 10.32775 | 123-32-0 | 0.345 | 2.031 |
| 15 | Methyl hexanoate | 10.6596 | 106-70-7 | 1.615 | |
| 16 | alpha-Pinene | 11.11505 | 80-56-8 | 0.091 | 2.413 |
| 17 | Benzaldehyde | 11.9112 | 100-52-7 | 0.29 | 5.803 |
| 18 | 1-Octen-3-ol | 12.3637 | 3391-86-4 | 0.17 | |
| 19 | beta-Pinene | 12.5281 | 127-91-3 | 2.427 | |
| 20 | 3-Octanone | 12.6399 | 106-68-3 | 0.148 | |
| 21 | 2(5H)-Furanone | 13.2098 | 497-23-4 | 0.729 | |
| 22 | alpha-Phellandrene | 13.4623 | 99-83-2 | 2.310 | |
| 23 | 3-Carene | 13.6914 | 13466-78-9 | 9.185 | |
| 24 | alpha-Terpinene | 13.9029 | 99-86-5 | 1.395 | |
| 25 | p-Cymene | 14.1967 | 99-87-6 | 6.791 | |
| 26 | Limonene | 14.3613 | 138-86-3 | 1.553 | 50.853 |
| 27 | 1,8-Cineole | 14.4905 | 470-82-6 | 10.458 | |
| 28 | gamma-Terpinene | 15.4834 | 99-85-4 | 2.684 | |
| 29 | 4-Thujanol | 15.8184 | 546-79-2 | 2.229 | |
| 30 | 2-Ethyl-3,5-dimethylpyrazine | 16.1711 | 55031-15-7 | 0.199 | |
| 31 | 1-Adamantanol | 16.3004 | 768-95-6 | 0.153 | |
| 32 | 2-Nonanone | 16.6059 | 821-55-6 | 0.057 | |
| 33 | (−)-Fenchone | 16.6938 | 7787-20-4 | 4.263 | |
| 34 | Linalool | 16.9465 | 78-70-6 | 17.138 | |
| 35 | 1-Nonanal | 17.0964 | 124-19-6 | 0.269 | 2.174 |
| 36 | Maltol | 17.4813 | 118-71-8 | 0.392 | |
| 37 | Caprylic acid methyl ester | 17.8337 | 111-11-5 | 1.357 | |
| 38 | Terpinolene | 20.1134 | 586-62-9 | 1.944 | |
| 39 | (−)-alpha-Terpineol | 20.5834 | 10482-56-1 | 1.897 | |
| 40 | Dodecane | 20.7364 | 112-40-3 | 0.078 | |
| 41 | 4-Allylanisole | 20.8302 | 140-67-0 | 24.840 | |
| 42 | Decyl aldehyde | 20.9714 | 112-31-2 | 0.059 | |
| 43 | Cuminaldehyde | 22.4578 | 122-03-2 | 0.628 | |
| 44 | L(−)-Carvone | 22.5635 | 6485-40-1 | 1.055 | |
| 45 | Linalyl acetate | 22.8162 | 115-95-7 | 4.215 | |
| 46 | p-Anisaldehyde | 22.9396 | 123-11-5 | 5.507 | |
| 47 | Cinnamaldehyde | 23.5447 | 104-55-2 | 4.093 | |
| 48 | Tridecane | 24.391 | 629-50-5 | 0.176 | |
| 49 | Cinnamyl alcohol | 24.7375 | 104-54-1 | 5.638 | |
| 50 | Terpinen-4-ol | 25.9831 | 562-74-3 | 0.876 | |
| 51 | Terpinyl propionate | 26.2769 | 80-27-3 | 1.378 | |
| 52 | 2,6,11-Trimethyldodecane | 27.0468 | 31295-56-4 | 0.036 | |
| 53 | Tetradecane | 27.8224 | 629-59-4 | 0.155 | |
| 54 | beta-Caryophyllene | 28.9209 | 87-44-5 | 24.365 | |
| 55 | alpha-Caryophyllene | 30.0255 | 6753-98-6 | 1.622 | |
| 56 | alpha-Curcumene | 30.7188 | 644-30-4 | 5.028 | |
| 57 | alpha-Zingiberene | 31.089 | 495-60-3 | 2.916 | |
| 58 | beta-Bisabolene | 31.5296 | 29837-09-0 | 1.883 | |
| 59 | Butylated hydroxytoluene | 31.6473 | 128-37-0 | 0.032 | |
| 60 | 1-Hexadecene | 34.121 | 629-73-2 | 0.056 | |
| 61 | Homosalate | 43.4571 | 118-56-9 | 0.479 | |
| 62 | Methyl palmitate | 44.13575 | 112-39-0 | 0.139 | 1.025 |
| 63 | Dibutyl phthalate | 45.1492 | 84-74-2 | 3.431 | |
| 64 | N-Eicosane | 45.8954 | 112-95-8 | 0.572 | |