| Literature DB >> 35240023 |
S Moirangthem1, S K Laskar1, A Das1, S Upadhyay1, R A Hazarika2, J D Mahanta3, H M Sangtam1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Low fat duck meat sausages were prepared by replacing the fat in the formulations with soy protein isolate (SPI) and inulin to find the best formulation having superior shelflife without affecting its quality attributes.Entities:
Keywords: Duck Meat; Inulin; Sausage; Soy Protein Isolate
Year: 2022 PMID: 35240023 PMCID: PMC9262725 DOI: 10.5713/ab.21.0530
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anim Biosci ISSN: 2765-0189
Basic recipe of low-fat duck meat sausages with soy protein isolate and inulin
| Name of ingredients | Control (%) | Treatment[ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| T1 | T2 | T3 | ||
| Lean meat | 70 | 70 | 70 | 70 |
| Duck fat (recovered from skin+visceral organs) | 10 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 5.0 |
| Soy protein isolate | 0 | - | 2.5 | 2.5 |
| Inulin | 0 | 2.5 | - | 2.5 |
| Spices | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.5 |
| Condiments | 3.45 | 3.45 | 3.45 | 3.45 |
| Binder (Corn flour) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Ice cubes | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Salt | 1.75 | 1.75 | 1.75 | 1.75 |
| Sugar | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 |
| Sodium nitrite (ppm) | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 |
| Total | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
ppm, parts per million.
T1, 2.5% inulin; T2, 2.5% SPI; T3, 2.5% inulin+2.5% SPI.
Proximate composition of low-fat duck meat sausages incorporated with soy protein isolate and inulin (mean±standard error)
| Parameter | Control | Treatment[ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| T1 | T2 | T3 | ||
| Moisture | 60.09[ | 61.37[ | 62.24[ | 63.42[ |
| Protein | 21.07[ | 21.35[ | 23.39[ | 22.32[ |
| Fat | 11.60[ | 8.28[ | 8.39[ | 6.50[ |
| Ash | 3.05±0.04 | 3.03±0.02 | 3.00±0.05 | 2.90±0.06 |
| Calorie value | 205.87[ | 180.64[ | 180.99[ | 165.94[ |
SPI, soy protein isolate.
T1, 2.5% inulin; T2, 2.5% SPI; T3, 2.5% inulin+2.5% SPI.
N = 5.
Mean with superscript bearing different alphabet row-wise differ significantly (p<0.01).
Effect of incorporation of soy protein isolate and inulin on colour and texture profile of low-fat duck meat sausages (mean±standard error)
| Parameter | Control | Treatment[ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| T1 | T2 | T3 | ||
| Colour profile | ||||
| L | 59.18±1.48 | 59.57±1.96 | 57.85±2.42 | 58.60±1.39 |
| a | 9.12±1.48 | 8.93±1.42 | 8.62±1.45 | 8.67±1.41 |
| b | 15.92±0.91 | 16.35±0.84 | 16.82±0.82 | 16.56±0.54 |
| Texture profile | ||||
| Hardness | 886.15[ | 992.34[ | 1,300.91[ | 1,425.52[ |
| Springiness | 0.581±0.10 | 0.427±0.02 | 0.555±0.08 | 0.599±0.07 |
| Cohesiveness | 0.236±0.04 | 0.256±0.05 | 0.268±0.06 | 0.275±0.07 |
| Chewiness | 151.80±78.53 | 192.50±124.19 | 291.76±177.52 | 316.86±178.88 |
| Resilience | 0.071±0.01 | 0.171±0.08 | 0.087±0.02 | 0.097±0.03 |
SPI, soy protein isolate.
T1, 2.5% inulin; T2, 2.5% SPI; T3, 2.5% inulin+2.5% SPI.
N = 5.
Mean with superscript bearing different alphabet row-wise differ significantly (p<0.01).
Microbiological qualities low-fat duck meat sausages incorporated with soy protein isolate and inulin (mean±standard error)
| Storage days | Control | Treatment[ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| T1 | T2 | T3 | ||
| Total viable count (log cfu/g) | ||||
| Day 1 | 2.32[ | 2.24[ | 2.25[ | 2.14[ |
| Day 5 | 3.46[ | 3.34[ | 3.34[ | 3.23[ |
| Day 10 | 4.65[ | 4.55[ | 4.54[ | 4.46[ |
| Day 15 | 5.35[ | 5.24[ | 5.24[ | 5.16[ |
| Yeast and mould count (log cfu/g) | ||||
| Day 1 | - | - | - | - |
| Day 5 | - | - | - | - |
| Day 10 | 1.86[ | 1.84[ | 1.85[ | 1.79[ |
| Day 15 | 2.16[ | 2.14[ | 2.15[ | 2.13[ |
| Total viable psychrophilic bacterial count (log cfu/g) | ||||
| Day 1 | - | - | - | - |
| Day 5 | 2.59[ | 2.47[ | 2.48[ | 2.37[ |
| Day 10 | 3.28[ | 3.20[ | 3.20[ | 3.14[ |
| Day 15 | 3.84[ | 3.78[ | 3.79[ | 3.72[ |
SPI, soy protein isolate.
T1, 2.5% inulin; T2, 2.5% SPI; T3, 2.5% inulin+2.5% SPI.
N = 5.
Mean with superscript bearing different alphabet (small) row-wise differ significantly (p<0.05).
Mean with superscript bearing different alphabet (capital) column-wise differ significantly (p<0.01).