- Email: [email protected]
Quality characteristics of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer
Quality characteristics of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer
Department of Animal Resources Science, Kongju National University, Yesan, Chungnam 32439, Korea replacer type and addition level, the panel did not detect the same. Hardness increased significantly with increasing addition levels. The panel detected decreased tenderness at 20% and 10 to 20% CSFM-1 and CSFM2, respectively (P < 0.05). Twenty percent CSFM-1 and >10% CSFM-2 additions induced significant decrease in overall acceptability compared to the control. Thus, CSFM can be used as a fat replacer in reduced fat emulsion-type sausages at addition levels of 15% CSFM-1 (7.5% chicken skin, 4.5% water, and 3% wheat fiber based on total weight of meat batter) or 5% CSFM-2 (1.5% chicken skin, 2.5% water, and 1% wheat fiber based on total weight of meat batter).
ABSTRACT This study identified the suitability of chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture (CSFM) as an optimal fat replacer and its addition levels in reduced fat emulsion-type sausages, also paying heed to quality characteristics. Two CSFM types [CSFM-1 and CSFM2 (chicken skin:ice:wheat fiber = 5:3:2 or 3:5:2, respectively)] were added at 0, 5, 10, 15, and 20% (w/w) as fat replacer. As the addition level increased, higher moisture and lower fat content were observed in the sausage samples without protein content loss (P < 0.05). Emulsion stability and pH were not significantly affected. Replacement with CSFM-2 at levels exceeding 15% significantly reduced cooking yield. While partial change in instrumental color was observed depending on
Key words: chicken skin, dietary fiber, fat replacer, reduced fat sausage, quality characteristic 2019 Poultry Science 0:1–8 http://dx.doi.org/10.3382/ps/pez016
INTRODUCTION
Dietary fiber is typically derived from the edible portion of plants or agricultural products (Mehta et al., 2015). Incorporation of dietary fiber in meat products results in desirable physicochemical properties such as enhancement in water binding capacity and texture (Schmiele et al., 2015; Henning et al., 2016; Pintado et al., 2018). In other words, dietary fiber can supplement the deficient portion of reduced fat meat products in terms of technical functions. Chicken skin containing 3% collagen (Cliche et al., 2003) possesses functionality in terms of water binding and texture-modifying ability due to the characteristic of collagen. For this reason, chicken skin is often used in fat-reduced meat products (Nath et al., 2016). Similarly, a mixture consisting of dietary fiber, water, and pork skin serves as a source of collagen (like chicken skin) and is used in fat-reduced sausages due to its economic and technical advantages (Choe et al., 2013; Choe and Kim, 2016; Santos Alves et al., 2016). Moreover, Choe and Kim (2018) observed functional properties of gel with chicken feet gelatin and wheat fiber as fat replacer. However, to our knowledge, studies on the use of chicken skin, dietary fiber, and water mixture as a fat replacer in meat products are limited despite its potential. Therefore, this study analyzed the suitability and quality characteristics of reduced fat emulsion-type
Chicken sausage is one of the most popular meat products in the world (Barbut, 2001). A chicken sausage generally contains 20 to 35% fat, which plays a major role in eating quality (texture, juiciness, and flavor) of the meat products (Feiner, 2006; Cierach et al., 2009). In recent years, consumers’ interest in reduced fat meat products has been growing due to risks, such as coronary heart disease and obesity, posed by consuming animal fat, which contains large amounts of saturated fatty acids and cholesterol (Dransfield, 2008). Hence, a number of studies have attempted identifying ways to reduce the fat content of these meat products by using fat substitutes or a mixture of water and functional ingredients, and simultaneously minimizing changes in their sensory and textural properties. Examples of such substitutes include collagen, dietary fiber, and hydrocolloids (Lurue˜ na-Mart´ınez et al., 2004; Choe et al., 2013; Schmiele et al., 2015; Han and Bertram, 2017).
C 2019 Poultry Science Association Inc. Received July 25, 2018. Accepted January 5, 2019. 1 Corresponding author: [email protected]
1
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
Juhui Choe and Hack-Youn Kim1
2
CHOE AND KIM
Table 1. Formulation of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. Level of CSFM-11 (%) Ingredients (%)
NaCl (%) Sodium tripolyphosphate Sodium nitrite Isolate soy protein Monosodium glutamate Spice 1 2
60 20 20 – – 1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
5
10
15
20
5
10
15
20
60 20 15 5 –
60 20 10 10 –
60 20 5 15 –
60 20 – 20 –
60 20 15 – 5
60 20 10 – 10
60 20 5 – 15
60 20 – – 20
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2.
sausages using such a mixture containing chicken skin and dietary fiber as fat replacer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS Materials Chicken (broiler) breast and skin (32.8% fat) were provided by a slaughterhouse (Maniker F&G Co., Gyeonggi, Korea). Pork back fat (moisture 12.61%, fat 85.64%) was purchased from a local processor. All subcutaneous fat and visible connective tissue were removed from the chicken breast. The trimmed chicken breast, pork back fat, and skin were initially ground using an 8 mm plate. The ingredients were placed in polyethylene bags, vacuum packaged using a vacuum packaging system (FJ-500XL, Fujee Tech, Seoul, Korea), and stored at −21◦ C until manufacture. The R wheat fiber (Vitacel , J. Rettenmaier & S¨ ohne GmbH, Rosenberg, Germany) consisted of 74% cellulose, 26% hemicellulose, and <0.5% lignin of particle size 500 μm.
Preparation of Chicken Skin and Wheat Fiber Mixture for Emulsion-type Sausages The chicken skin was thawed at 4◦ C for 4 h prior to chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture (CSFM) preparation. Two different types of CSFMs (CSFM-1, chicken skin:ice:wheat fiber = 5:3:2; CSFM-2, chicken skin:ice:wheat fiber = 3:5:2) were prepared depending on the ratio of chicken skin and ice. This ratio was based on the findings of a preliminary study. The chicken skin, ice, and wheat fiber were emulsified using a silent cutter (Nr-963009, Scharfen, Witten, Germany) and then used for sausage manufacturing. The formulations of the emulsion-type sausages are shown in Table 1. The chicken breast was chopped and ground for 1 min in the silent cutter and then iced water (2◦ C) was added. Additives (1.5% NaCl, 0.3% sodium tripolyphosphate, and 0.01% sodium nitrite) were added to chicken breast and mixed for 1 min.
After 3 min, the CSFM (CSFM-1 or CSFM-2) was added and the batters were homogenized for 6 min with other additives (0.5% isolate soy protein, 0.3% monosodium glutamate, and 0.6% spice). The temperature of the emulsion was maintained below 10◦ C and monitored with a digital temperature probe (KaneMay, KM330, Harlow, Germany) during the manufacturing process. One part of each treatment (batter sample) was stored in the dark at 4◦ C for emulsion stability and viscosity analyses, which were performed within 24 h. The other part was stuffed into collagen casings (#180, NIPPI Inc., Tokyo, Japan; ∼16 mm diameter) using a stuffer (IS-8, Sirman, Marsango, Italy) and each sample was cooked in a 75 ± 1◦ C water bath for 30 min until the internal temperature reached 72◦ C. The cooked samples were immediately cooled in an ice bath, vacuum packed, and stored at 4◦ C until proximate composition, pH, cooking yield, color, texture properties, and sensory evaluation tests could be conducted.
Physicochemical Analysis Proximate Composition Compositional properties of the semi-dried jerky were performed using AOAC (2000). Moisture content was determined by weight loss after 12 h of drying at 105◦ C in a drying oven (SW-90D, Sang Woo Scienctific Co., Bucheon, Korea). Fat content was determined by Soxhlet method with a R Avanti 2050 Auto solvent extraction system (Soxtec System, Foss Tecator AB, H¨oganas, Sweden) and protein was determined by Kjeldahl method with an autoR 2300 Anmatic Kjeldahl nitrogen analyzer (Kjeltec alyzer Unit, Foss Tecator AB, H¨oganas, Sweden). Ash was determined according to AOAC method 923.03. pH and Cooking Yield The pH value for a mixture of sausage sample and distilled water (1:4) was determined using pH-meter (Model 340, Mettler-Toledo GmbH Analytical, Schwerzenbach, Switzerland). The cooking yield in each treatment was determined by weighing meat batters before and after cooking and expressed as percentage.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
Chicken breast Ice Pork back fat CSFM-1 CSFM-2
0 (CON)
Level of CSFM-22 (%)
APPLICATION OF CHICKEN SKIN AND WHEAT FIBER
Water exudation (%) = [the water layer (ml)/ raw meat batter weight (g)] × 100 Fat exudation (%) = [the fat layer (ml)/ raw meat batter weight (g)] × 100
Viscosity The flow behavior and time dependence of batters were investigated at 20 ± 1◦ C using a parallel R , plate rotational viscometer (Hakke Viscotester 500 Thermo Electron Corporation, Karlsruhe, Germany). The batter was allowed to equilibrate for 5 min and was tested using a standard cylinder sensor (SV-2). Time dependency of the batter was evaluated by measuring the apparent viscosity under a constant shear rate of 10/s for 100 s at storage times of 0, 1, and 3 h. Color Evaluation Samples were evaluated on the surface. Color measurements were taken with colorimeter (Chroma meter CR-210, Minolta, Japan; illuminate C, calibrated with white standard plate L∗ = 97.83, a∗ = −0.43, b∗ = +1.98), consisted of an 8 mm diameter measuring area and a 50 mm diameter illumination area. Color values (CIE L∗ , a∗ , and b∗ ) were measured on the surface of samples and results were taken in triplicate for each sample. Texture Profile Analysis The texture profile analysis of each sample was performed in duplicate. Samples were cut into sections with a height of 25 mm and ϕ 16 mm diameter. The textural properties for each sample were measured using a cylinder probe (ϕ 20 mm diameter), set attached to a Texture Analyzer (TA-XT2i, Stable Micro System Ltd., Surrey, UK). The test conditions were as follow: stroke, 2 kg; test speed, 2.0 mm/s; distance, 8 mm. The texture profile analysis parameters, namely hardness [peak force on first compression (N)], springiness [ratio of the sample recovered after the first compression], cohesiveness [ratio of active work done under the second force-displacement curve to that done under the first compression curve], gumminess [hardness × cohesiveness], and chewiness [hardness × cohesiveness × springiness (N)] were computed.
Sensory Evaluation Fifteen panelists (students and staff of Konkuk University, Republic of Korea) were selected from 20 potential panelists using basic taste identification tests and the selection and training of panelists were performed using described by Meilgaard et al. (1999). These panelists were trained using commercial sausage products 4 times for 2 wk. Each pre-cooked sausage sample was warmed, sliced 10-mm thick and coded randomly and served to panelists. A 10-point descriptive was used to evaluate attributes such as color (1 = extremely undesirable, 10 = extremely desirable), flavor (1 = extremely undesirable, 10 = extremely desirable), tenderness (1 = extremely tough, 10 = extremely tender), juiciness (1 = extremely dry, 10 = extremely juicy), and overall acceptability (1 = extremely undesirable, 10 = extremely desirable). Panelists cleanse their palate with water between samples.
Statistical Analysis Data were collected for 3 batches on 2 different days. Nine treatments [CON (0%), CSFM-1 (5, 10, 15, and 20%), and CSFM-2 (5, 10, 15, and 20%)] were manufactured in each batch. In each batch, 3 measurements were averaged and used as 1 replication (n = 3). A model considering the fixed effects of the replacer type, the addition level of the replacer, and the random effect of the manufacturing day (batch) was used for physicochemical analysis and sensory evaluation. Interaction between the replacer type and addition level of the replacer, excluding viscosity, served as the fixed effect for physicochemical analysis. All the data were analyzed using the general linear model SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute Inc., USA) and the results were expressed as mean values with standard error of the means. Significant differences among the mean values were determined using the Student–Newman–Keuls multiple comparison test at a significance level of P < 0.05. A linear regression model was fitted to predict the quality properties of the sausages depending on the fat replacer type (CSFM-1 or CSFM-2) and addition levels of the replacer (0, 5, 10, 15, and 20%) using the SAS 9.3 model. The quality properties were calculated for the addition levels of each replacer type.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Physicochemical and Technical Properties of Emulsion-type Sausages The proximate compositions of CSFM-1 and CSFM2, respectively, were as follows: 57.91% moisture, 5.65% protein, 17.42% fat, and 1.15% ash content, and 67.39% moisture, 3.44% protein, 10.47% fat, and 0.93% ash content. The proximate composition of the sausage samples was significantly affected by the addition of fat replacer
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
Emulsion Stability Triplicate samples of meat batter from each treatment were analyzed for emulsion stability using the method modified by Choe et al. (2013). The 15 mesh sieve (50 mm diameter) was placed in the middle of a graduated glass tube. Approximately 30 g of the meat batter were weighed on the sieve in glass tubes and covered. Triplicate samples from each treatment were respectively cooked at 75 ± 1◦ C for 30 min. After cooling to approximately 4 ± 1◦ C to facilitate fat and water layer separation. The fluid water and fat, which separated well in the bottom of graduated glass tube, were measured in milliliters and calculated as percentage of the original weight of batter. The mean value of the 6 tubes was taken for each treatment.
3
4
CHOE AND KIM
Table 2. Proximate composition and pH of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. Substitution level (%)
Moisture
Protein
Fat
CSFM-11
0 5 10 15 20 SEM3
63.04E,d 64.87D 67.21C 68.97B 70.78A 0.184
16.23D,b 16.57C 16.64C,B 16.72B 16.85A 0.039
16.34A,a 14.58B 11.82C 8.61D 5.66E 0.243
2.49C,b 2.88A,B 2.76A,B 2.97A 2.90A 0.024
6.35B 6.32B 6.33B 6.35B 6.39A 0.010
CSFM-22
5 10 15 20 SEM3
65.02c 68.07b 68.76b 71.99a 0.255
16.56a 16.10b 16.30a,b 16.09b 0.063
13.10b 9.67c 6.99d 3.60e 0.150
2.51b 2.60a 2.59a 2.66a 0.022
6.36 6.35 6.35 6.35 0.004
Replacer (R) Interaction (R × S)
0.021 0.052
0.013 0.051
< 0.001 < 0.001
0.606 0.012
Significance of P-value
< 0.001 0.060
Ash
pH
1
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2. 3 Standard error of means. A–D Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-1 (P < 0.05). a–e Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-2 (P < 0.05). 2
(CSFM-1 or CSFM-2) and their addition levels (Table 2). There were no interaction effects with regard to moisture, fat, and protein contents for either replacer type or their addition levels, except for ash content. The increasing addition of CSFM resulted in higher moisture (P < 0.05) and lower fat (P < 0.0001) contents in the sausage samples compared to the control group. The sausage samples containing CSFM-2 exhibited higher moisture and lower fat contents compared to CSFM-1 when the same amount of fat replacer was added (P < 0.0001). These results might be attributed to the higher moisture and lower fat contents of CSFM2, depending on the water and chicken skin contents. This finding agrees with that of Choe et al. (2013) and Santos Alves et al. (2016), who observed that the addition of pork skin and dietary fiber mixture or higher addition levels led to an increase in moisture and a decrease in fat contents of reduced fat sausages. In the present study, higher or similar protein contents (P < 0.05 or P > 0.05) were observed in sausage samples containing fat replacers compared to the control group. In general, the addition of CSFM resulted in an increase in the ash content (P < 0.0001). This observation was probably due to the wheat fiber in the CSFM. The use of CSFM and its addition level did not significantly influence the pH values of the sausage samples except in the case of the 20% CSFM-1 group (Table 2), which showed the highest pH values (P < 0.05). However, this difference was small (0.04 units) and thus may not be meaningful. The cooking yield of the sausage samples was significantly affected by fat replacer type and its addition level (Table 3). No significant interactions between fat replacer type and its addition level were observed on cooking yield and emulsion stability (fat and water exudation). The sausage samples replaced with CSFM-1 showed cooking yield similar to the control group regardless of the addition level (P < 0.05). Higher level
(20%) of fat replacement with CSFM-2 in the sausage samples led to a significant decrease in cooking yield compared to the control group, indicating quality deterioration. This result was probably caused by the higher water content in CSFM-2 than CSFM-1. Henning et al. (2016) found that an increase in the amount of water added in low fat sausages with the same amount of fiber induced significantly higher cooking loss. In this study, however, the significant difference in fat and water exudation between the control and other groups is not presented. This finding might be due to the water binding capacity of animal skin containing collagen and the porosity and fat absorption ability of the fiber originating from animal skin and the dietary fiber mixture (Figuerola et al., 2005; Choe et al., 2013). Osburn and Mandigo (1998) observed gel made with chicken skin had water binding ability due to the solubilization of collagen from chicken skin during heating. The addition of CSFM induced a significant change in the apparent viscosity of the meat batter (Fig. 1). The highest (P < 0.05) apparent viscosity values were demonstrated in meat batter samples with 20% CSFM-1, while the control group recorded the lowest (P < 0.05) apparent viscosity among all treatments. The increase in the emulsion viscosity of meat batter samples with CSFM might be due to hydrolyzed collagen from chicken skin (Schrieber and Gareis, 2007). The increase in the emulsion viscosity is closely associated with water holding capacity and emulsion stability, because high-viscosity emulsion is typically characterized by high emulsion stability (Dogan et al., 2005). However, in this study, there was no significant difference in water exudation and cooking yield among the treatments with CSFM-1 even though meat batter sample with 20% CSFM-1 had the highest viscosity (P < 0.05). The color (L∗ , a∗ , and b∗ ) of the sausage samples was affected by fat replacer type and its addition level (Table 2). No significant interaction between fat
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
Replacer
5
APPLICATION OF CHICKEN SKIN AND WHEAT FIBER
Table 3. Physicochemical properties of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. Emulsion stability
Instrumental color
Substitution level (%)
Cooking yield
Fat exudation
Water exudation
L∗
a∗
b∗
CSFM-11
0 5 10 15 20 SEM3
94.53a,b 94.43 94.29 94.51 94.58 0.189
1.00 0.97 0.98 0.74 0.72 0.077
4.63 4.12 4.16 4.20 4.14 0.182
80.45A 80.19A,B 79.84A,B 79.45B 79.23B 0.192
5.03a 5.51 5.52 5.55 5.60 0.182
18.14C,c 18.39C 18.89B 19.38A 19.45A 0.128
CSFM-22
5 10 15 20 SEM3
94.38a,b 94.87a 93.90b 93.25c 0.169
0.92 0.97 0.74 0.73 0.083
4.85 4.85 4.39 4.34 0.512
80.45 80.64 80.15 80.02 0.052
4.30b 4.17b 4.81a,b 4.44b 0.164
18.73b,c 19.19b 19.16b 19.77a 0.174
Replacer (R) Interaction (R × S)
0.033 0.052
0.875 0.998
0.218 0.869
< 0.001 0.213
Significance of P-value
< 0.001 0.620
0.5748 0.701
1
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2. 3 Standard error of means. A–C Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-1 (P < 0.05). a–c Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-2 (P < 0.05). 2
120
CSFM 0% (CON) CSFM-1 10% CSFM-1 20% CSFM-2 10% CSFM-2 20%
Viscosity (pa • s)
100 80
CSFM-1 5% CSFM-1 15% CSFM-2 5% CSFM-2 15%
60 40 20 0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Times (s) Figure 1. Viscosity of chicken meat batter using various chicken skin and wheat fiber mixtures as far replacer. CSFM-1, chicken skim and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2; CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2; and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2.
replacer type and its addition level was detected with regard to the color of the sausage samples. Replacements exceeding 15% CSFM-1 led to a significant decrease in L∗ values, while replacements with CSFM-2 showed L∗ values (P > 0.05) similar to those of the control group. The opposite trend was observed for a∗ values depending on fat replacer type and its addition level. There was no significant difference in a∗ values between sausages with CSFM-1 and the control, but replacements with CSFM-2 induced significant decrease in a∗ values. According to Rahardjo et al. (1994), the reduction in the fat level of meat products generally decreased L∗ and increased a∗ values. In general, the b∗ values in the sausage samples increased
significantly with increasing CSFM addition levels regardless of fat replacer type. This observation could be attributed to the inherent yellowish color of chicken skin and wheat fiber. The texture properties of a meat product affect the overall quality of the final product as well as its organoleptic properties (Herrero et al., 2007). The texture properties of sausage samples were dependent on fat replacer type and its addition level (Table 4). Texture properties (hardness, cohesiveness, gumminess, springiness, and chewiness) similar to those of the control group (P > 0.05) were observed in the sausage samples using 5% CSFM-1 and up to 10% CSFM-2. Matulis et al. (1995) found low fat sausage replaced
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
Replacer
6
CHOE AND KIM
Table 4. Texture properties of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. Replacer
Substitution level (%)
Hardness (N)
Gumminess (N)
b
Springiness
C,b
Chewiness (N)
a
0 5 10 15 20 SEM3
40.34 41.94D 46.36C 54.04B 55.75A 0.452
0.54 0.56 0.56 0.54 0.54 0.014
21.98 23.52C 25.88B 29.25A 30.02A 0.420a
0.90 0.89 0.86 0.85 0.84 0.019
19.79C,b 20.88B,C 22.35B 24.76A 25.16A 0.561
CSFM-22
5 10 15 20 SEM3
40.72c 42.33c 47.03b 49.87a 0.610
0.49b,c 0.51b 0.62a 0.45c 0.018
19.97b 21.64b 29.16a 22.44b 0.782
0.84a 0.80a 0.88a 0.61b 0.031
16.82b 17.56b 27.53a 13.20c 1.201
Replacer (R) Interaction (R × S)
< 0.001 0.054
0.0239 0.060
< 0.001 0.070
< 0.001 < 0.001
< 0.001 < 0.001
1
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2. Standard error of means. A–D Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-1 (P < 0.05). a–c Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-2 (P < 0.05). 2 3
mainly with water (fat level 12 to 14%) had lower cohesiveness. The increase in CSFM addition level led to significantly higher hardness in the sausage samples. This result agrees with those reported by Choe et al. (2013) who found high hardness in low fat sausages with increasing concentration of pork skin and wheat fiber mixture. Moreover, Ruiz-Capillas et al. (2012) demonstrated that replacement with konjac gel resulted in higher hardness as compared to the control group, and this was accompanied by hydrophobic mutual reactions between polymers during konjac heating. However, generally, low-fat meat products could induce a decrease in hardness due to an increase in the ratio of humidity to protein (Atashkar et al., 2018). The addition of CSFM-1 did not affect the cohesiveness and springiness of the sausage samples (P > 0.05). No significant interaction between fat replacer type and its addition level was found in terms of texture properties.
Sensory Properties of Emulsion-type Sausages Sensory properties were partially affected by the fat replacer type and its addition level (Table 5). The color difference between the control and fat-replaced groups was not detected by the panel and it might be that the difference in value was small numerically. With regard to instrumental texture properties, the panel detected a decrease (P < 0.05) in the tenderness of the sausages when the hardness values reached ∼50 N, regardless of fat replacer type. A fat level below 10% in meat products may reduce water holding capacity and impact sensory properties negatively (Keeton, 1994). The panel did not detect the significant difference in juiciness between the control and fat-replaced groups even though the fat content was reduced to 3.5% and 2.1% using CSFM-1 and CSFM-2, respectively, in this study.
Table 5. Sensory properties of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. Replacer 1
CSFM-1
CSFM-22
Significance of P-value 1
Substitution level (%) 0 5 10 15 20 SEM3 5 10 15 20 SEM3 Replacer (R) Interaction (R × S)
Color 8.50 8.50 8.63 8.50 8.50 0.187 8.75 8.63 8.50 8.25 0.197 0.988 0.793
Flavor 8.63 8.75 8.75 8.63 8.25 0.258 8.25 7.94 8.00 8.06 0.289 0.003 0.628
Tenderness A,B,a
8.38 8.63A 8.25A,B 7.75B,C 7.50C 0.213 8.00a 7.94a 7.94a 7.38b 0.413 0.066 0.792
Juiciness
Overall acceptability
8.38 8.63 8.25 7.88 7.88 0.198 7.81 7.88 7.88 8.25 0.251 0.052 0.348
8.50A,B,a 8.75A 8.38A,C 8.00B,C 7.75C 0.178 8.38a 7.69b 7.88b 7.88b 0.247 0.078 0.350
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2. 3 Standard error of means. A–C Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-1 (P < 0.05). a,b Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-2 (P < 0.05). 2
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
CSFM-1
Significance of P-value
D,c
Cohesiveness
1
7
APPLICATION OF CHICKEN SKIN AND WHEAT FIBER
Table 6. Linear regression of the quality properties of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. CSFM-11 R2
Traits
t value
P-value
R2
Coefficient
t value
P-value
0.284 < 0.05
0.01 –
2.35 –
0.034 –
< 0.05 0.481
– − 0.06
– − 3.60
– 0.029
0.383 < 0.05
− 0.01 –
− 2.95 –
0.051 –
Emulsion stability
Fat exudation Water exudation
0.440 0.190
− 0.01 0.01
− 3.31 − 1.81
0.051 0.092
Proximate composition
Moisture Protein Fat
0.969 0.844 0.982
0.39 0.03 − 0.54
26.42 5.69 -27.64
< 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001
0.960 0.129 0.997
0.43 − 0.01 − 0.63
23.01 − 1.44 -63.93
< 0.0001 0.172 < 0.0001
Instrumental color
L∗ a∗ b∗
0.697 0.361 0.736
− 0.06 0.02 0.07
− 8.02 3.98 8.84
< 0.0001 0.004 < 0.0001
0.069 < 0.05 < 0.05
− 0.02 – –
− 1.44 – –
0.162 – –
Texture properties
Hardness Cohesiveness Gumminess Springiness Chewiness
0.921 < 0.05 0.803 0.173 0.555
8.21 – 4.30 − 0.01 2.88
22.43 – 13.23 − 3.00 7.32
< 0.0001 – < 0.0001 0.0045 < 0.0001
0.595 < 0.05 0.060 0.378 < 0.05
4.18 – 3.92 − 0.01 –
8.74 – 1.82 − 5.62 –
< 0.0001 – 0.075 0.052 –
Sensory properties
Color Flavor Tenderness Juiciness Overall acceptability
< 0.05 < 0.05 0.281 0.170 0.290
– – − 0.05 − 0.04 − 0.05
– – − 3.86 − 2.79 − 3.94
– – 0.044 0.082 0.032
< 0.05 0.065 0.171 0.052 0.116
– − 0.03 − 0.05 − 0.02 − 0.04
– − 1.63 − 2.80 − 1.44 − 2.23
– 0.112 0.049 0.158 0.031
1 2
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2.
However, a deterioration in overall acceptability of sausage samples replaced with CSFM was observed depending on the addition level (CSFM-1, 20%; CSFM-2, ≥10%).
Predicted Quality Characteristics of Fat-reduced Sausages Using Linear Regression Analysis The effects of fat replacer (CSFM-1 and CSFM-2) on quality characteristics and physicochemical and sensory properties of reduced fat emulsion-type sausages are shown in Table 6. In this study, the fat replacer (CSFM-1 and CSFM-2) did not correlate with emulsion stability and a∗ values (P > 0.05). The moisture content was positively correlated with CSFM-1 (coefficient = 0.39; P < 0.0001) and CSFM-2 (coefficient = 0.43; P < 0.0001), and the R2 values were 0.969 and 0.960, respectively. A negative correlation was observed between fat content and each fat replacer [R2 = 0.982 (CSFM-1) and 0.997 (CSFM-2); P < 0.0001]. The protein content exhibited positive correlation with CSFM1 (R2 = 0.844; P < 0.0001). Instrumental a∗ and b∗ values were affected by CSFM-1 but not CSFM-2. An increase in the addition level of CSFM-1 predicted a darker and stronger yellow color in the sausage samples (coefficient = −0.06 and 0.07; P < 0.0001). The texture properties were partially affected by fat replacer. Hardness, gumminess, and chewiness exhibited positive correlation with CSFM-1 (coefficient = 8.21, 4.30, and 2.88, respectively; P < 0.0001). The hardness trait also showed positive correlation with CSFM-2 (coefficient = 4.18; P < 0.0001). Most sensory properties (color,
flavor, and juiciness) were not affected by the fat replacer. The sensory color did not displayed difference in instrumental color by fat replacer. Both tenderness and overall acceptability were negatively correlated with CSFM-1 (R2 = 0.281 and 0.290; P < 0.05) and CSFM-2 (R2 = 0.171 and 0.116; P < 0.05), respectively.
CONCLUSION In low-fat sausages, fulfilling specific quality characteristics, including physicochemical and sensory properties, is important to satisfy consumers’ and industry needs. The results of this study show that both CSFM-1 and CSFM-2 could be used as a fat replacer in reduced fat emulsion-type sausages, when added up to 15% (7.5% chicken skin, 4.5% water, and 3% wheat fiber based on total weight of meat batter) or 5% (1.5% chicken skin, 2.5% water, and 1% wheat fiber based on total weight of meat batter), respectively, without adverse effects on quality characteristics. Furthermore, fat replacement with CSFM would probably result in economic and health benefits as it contains chicken skin and wheat fiber.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (KRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (2017R1D1A1B03035488) and Mars Korea Co., Ltd.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
pH Cooking yield
Coefficient
CSFM-22
8
CHOE AND KIM
REFERENCES
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
AOAC. 2000. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC. 17th ed, Vol. 41. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, USA. Atashkar, M., M. Hojjatoleslamy, and L. S. Boroujeni. 2018. The influence of fat substitution with κ-carrageenan, konjac, and tragacanth on the textural properties of low-fat sausage. Food Sci. Nutr. 6:1015–1022. Barbut, S. 2001. Poultry Products Processing: An Industry Guide. 1st ed. CRC Press, Florida, USA. Choe, J. H., H. Y. Kim, J. M. Lee, Y. J. Kim, and C. J. Kim. 2013. Quality of frankfurter-type sausages with added pig skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacers. Meat Sci. 93:849– 854. Choe, J. H., and H. Y. Kim. 2016. Effects of swelled pig skin with various natural vinegars on quality characteristics of traditional Korean blood sausages (Sundae). Food Sci. Biotechnol. 25:1605– 1611. Choe, J. H., and H. Y. Kim. 2018. Effects of chicken feet gelatin extracted at different temperatures and wheat fiber with different particle sizes on the physicochemical properties of gels. Poult. Sci. 97:1082–1088. Cierach, M., M. Modzelewska-Kapitula, and K. Szacilo. 2009. The influence of carrageenan on the properties of low-fat frankfurters. Meat Sci. 82:295–299. Cliche, S., J. Amiot, C. Avezard, and C. Gariepy. 2003. Extraction and characterization of collagen with or without telopeptides from chicken skin. Poult. Sci. 82:503–509. Dogan, S. F., S. Sahin, and G. Summnu. 2005. Effects of soy and rice flour addition on batter rheology and quality of deep-fat fried chicken nuggets. J Food Eng. 71:127–132. Dransfield, E. 2008. The taste of fat. Meat Sci. 80:37–42. Feiner, G. 2006. Meat Products Handbook. CRC Press, New York, USA. Figuerola, F., M. L. Hurtado, A. M. Estevez, I. Chiffelle, and F. Asenjo 2005. Fiber concentrates from apple pomace and citrus peel as potential fiber sources for food enrichment. Food Chem. 91:395–401. Han, M., and H. C. Bertram. 2017. Designing healthier comminuted meat products: effect of dietary fibers on water distribution and texture of a fat-reduced meat model system. Meat Sci. 133:159– 165. Henning, S. S., P. Tshalibe, and L. C. Hoffman. 2016. Physicochemical properties of reduced-fat beef species sausage with pork back fat replaced by pineapple dietary fibres and water. Food Sci. Technol. 74:92–98.
Herrero, A. M., J. A. Ord´ on ˜ez, R. de Avila, B. Herranz, L. de la Hoz, and M. I. Cambero. 2007. Breaking strength of dry fermented sausages and their correlation with texture profile analysis (TPA) and physico-chemical characteristics. Meat Sci. 77:331–338. Keeton, J. T. 1994. Low-fat meat products—technological problems with processing. Meat Sci. 36:261–276. Lurue˜ na-Martı´ınez, M. A., A. M. Vivar-Quintana, and I. Revilla. 2004. Effect of locust bean/xanthan gum addition and replacement of pork fat with olive oil on the quality characteristics of low-fat frankfurters. Meat Sci. 68:383–389. Matulis, R. J., F. McKeith, J. W. Sutherland, and M. S. Brewer. 1995. Sensory characteristics of frankfurters as affected by fat, salt, and pH. J. Food Sci. 60:42–47. Mehta, N., S. S. Ahlawat, D. P. Sharma, and R. S. Dabur. 2015. Novel trends in development of dietary fiber rich meat products— a critical review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 52:633–647. Meilgaard, M., G. V. Civille, and B. T. Carr. 1999. Sensory Evaluation Techniques. Page 354. 3rd ed. CRC Press, Florida, USA. Nath, P. M., V. Kumar, P. K. Praveen, and S. Ganguly 2016. Effect of chicken skin, soy protein and olive oil on quality characteristics of chicken nuggets. Int. J. Sci. Environ. Technol. 5:1574–1585. Osburn, W. N., and R. W. Mandigo. 1998. Reduced-fat bologna manufactured with poultry skin connective tissue gel. Poult. Sci. 77:1574–1584. Pintado, T., A. M. Herrero, F. Jim´enez-Colmenero, C. Pasqualin Cavalheiro, and C. Ruiz-Capillas. 2018. Chia and oat emulsion gels as new animal fat replacers and healthy bioactive sources in fresh sausage formulation. Meat Sci. 135:6–13. Rahardjo, R., L. A. Wilson, and J. G. Sebranek. 1994. Spray dried soymilk used in reduced fat pork sausage patties. J. Food Sci. 59:1286–1290. Ruiz-Capillas, C., M. Triki, A. M. Herrero, L. Rodriguez-Salas, and F. Jim´enez-Colmenero. 2012. Konjac gel as pork backfat replacer in dry fermented sausages: processing and quality characteristics. Meat Sci. 92:144–150. Santos Alves, L. A. A., J. M. dos Lorenzo, C. A. A. Gon¸calves, B. A. Santos, R. T. dos Heck, A. Cichoski, and P. C. B. Campagnol. 2016. Production of healthier bologna type sausages using pork skin and green banana flour as a fat replacers. Meat Sci. 121:73–78. Schmiele, M., M. C. C. N. Mascarenhas, A. C. S. Barretto, and M. A. R. Pollonio. 2015. Dietary fiber as fat substitute in emulsified and cooked meat model system. Food Sci. Technol. 61:105– 111. Schrieber, R., and H. Gareis. 2007. Gelatin handbook. Theory and Industrial Practice. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co., Weinheim, Germany.
Department of Animal Resources Science, Kongju National University, Yesan, Chungnam 32439, Korea replacer type and addition level, the panel did not detect the same. Hardness increased significantly with increasing addition levels. The panel detected decreased tenderness at 20% and 10 to 20% CSFM-1 and CSFM2, respectively (P < 0.05). Twenty percent CSFM-1 and >10% CSFM-2 additions induced significant decrease in overall acceptability compared to the control. Thus, CSFM can be used as a fat replacer in reduced fat emulsion-type sausages at addition levels of 15% CSFM-1 (7.5% chicken skin, 4.5% water, and 3% wheat fiber based on total weight of meat batter) or 5% CSFM-2 (1.5% chicken skin, 2.5% water, and 1% wheat fiber based on total weight of meat batter).
ABSTRACT This study identified the suitability of chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture (CSFM) as an optimal fat replacer and its addition levels in reduced fat emulsion-type sausages, also paying heed to quality characteristics. Two CSFM types [CSFM-1 and CSFM2 (chicken skin:ice:wheat fiber = 5:3:2 or 3:5:2, respectively)] were added at 0, 5, 10, 15, and 20% (w/w) as fat replacer. As the addition level increased, higher moisture and lower fat content were observed in the sausage samples without protein content loss (P < 0.05). Emulsion stability and pH were not significantly affected. Replacement with CSFM-2 at levels exceeding 15% significantly reduced cooking yield. While partial change in instrumental color was observed depending on
Key words: chicken skin, dietary fiber, fat replacer, reduced fat sausage, quality characteristic 2019 Poultry Science 0:1–8 http://dx.doi.org/10.3382/ps/pez016
INTRODUCTION
Dietary fiber is typically derived from the edible portion of plants or agricultural products (Mehta et al., 2015). Incorporation of dietary fiber in meat products results in desirable physicochemical properties such as enhancement in water binding capacity and texture (Schmiele et al., 2015; Henning et al., 2016; Pintado et al., 2018). In other words, dietary fiber can supplement the deficient portion of reduced fat meat products in terms of technical functions. Chicken skin containing 3% collagen (Cliche et al., 2003) possesses functionality in terms of water binding and texture-modifying ability due to the characteristic of collagen. For this reason, chicken skin is often used in fat-reduced meat products (Nath et al., 2016). Similarly, a mixture consisting of dietary fiber, water, and pork skin serves as a source of collagen (like chicken skin) and is used in fat-reduced sausages due to its economic and technical advantages (Choe et al., 2013; Choe and Kim, 2016; Santos Alves et al., 2016). Moreover, Choe and Kim (2018) observed functional properties of gel with chicken feet gelatin and wheat fiber as fat replacer. However, to our knowledge, studies on the use of chicken skin, dietary fiber, and water mixture as a fat replacer in meat products are limited despite its potential. Therefore, this study analyzed the suitability and quality characteristics of reduced fat emulsion-type
Chicken sausage is one of the most popular meat products in the world (Barbut, 2001). A chicken sausage generally contains 20 to 35% fat, which plays a major role in eating quality (texture, juiciness, and flavor) of the meat products (Feiner, 2006; Cierach et al., 2009). In recent years, consumers’ interest in reduced fat meat products has been growing due to risks, such as coronary heart disease and obesity, posed by consuming animal fat, which contains large amounts of saturated fatty acids and cholesterol (Dransfield, 2008). Hence, a number of studies have attempted identifying ways to reduce the fat content of these meat products by using fat substitutes or a mixture of water and functional ingredients, and simultaneously minimizing changes in their sensory and textural properties. Examples of such substitutes include collagen, dietary fiber, and hydrocolloids (Lurue˜ na-Mart´ınez et al., 2004; Choe et al., 2013; Schmiele et al., 2015; Han and Bertram, 2017).
C 2019 Poultry Science Association Inc. Received July 25, 2018. Accepted January 5, 2019. 1 Corresponding author: [email protected]
1
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
Juhui Choe and Hack-Youn Kim1
2
CHOE AND KIM
Table 1. Formulation of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. Level of CSFM-11 (%) Ingredients (%)
NaCl (%) Sodium tripolyphosphate Sodium nitrite Isolate soy protein Monosodium glutamate Spice 1 2
60 20 20 – – 1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
5
10
15
20
5
10
15
20
60 20 15 5 –
60 20 10 10 –
60 20 5 15 –
60 20 – 20 –
60 20 15 – 5
60 20 10 – 10
60 20 5 – 15
60 20 – – 20
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
1.5 0.3 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.6
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2.
sausages using such a mixture containing chicken skin and dietary fiber as fat replacer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS Materials Chicken (broiler) breast and skin (32.8% fat) were provided by a slaughterhouse (Maniker F&G Co., Gyeonggi, Korea). Pork back fat (moisture 12.61%, fat 85.64%) was purchased from a local processor. All subcutaneous fat and visible connective tissue were removed from the chicken breast. The trimmed chicken breast, pork back fat, and skin were initially ground using an 8 mm plate. The ingredients were placed in polyethylene bags, vacuum packaged using a vacuum packaging system (FJ-500XL, Fujee Tech, Seoul, Korea), and stored at −21◦ C until manufacture. The R wheat fiber (Vitacel , J. Rettenmaier & S¨ ohne GmbH, Rosenberg, Germany) consisted of 74% cellulose, 26% hemicellulose, and <0.5% lignin of particle size 500 μm.
Preparation of Chicken Skin and Wheat Fiber Mixture for Emulsion-type Sausages The chicken skin was thawed at 4◦ C for 4 h prior to chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture (CSFM) preparation. Two different types of CSFMs (CSFM-1, chicken skin:ice:wheat fiber = 5:3:2; CSFM-2, chicken skin:ice:wheat fiber = 3:5:2) were prepared depending on the ratio of chicken skin and ice. This ratio was based on the findings of a preliminary study. The chicken skin, ice, and wheat fiber were emulsified using a silent cutter (Nr-963009, Scharfen, Witten, Germany) and then used for sausage manufacturing. The formulations of the emulsion-type sausages are shown in Table 1. The chicken breast was chopped and ground for 1 min in the silent cutter and then iced water (2◦ C) was added. Additives (1.5% NaCl, 0.3% sodium tripolyphosphate, and 0.01% sodium nitrite) were added to chicken breast and mixed for 1 min.
After 3 min, the CSFM (CSFM-1 or CSFM-2) was added and the batters were homogenized for 6 min with other additives (0.5% isolate soy protein, 0.3% monosodium glutamate, and 0.6% spice). The temperature of the emulsion was maintained below 10◦ C and monitored with a digital temperature probe (KaneMay, KM330, Harlow, Germany) during the manufacturing process. One part of each treatment (batter sample) was stored in the dark at 4◦ C for emulsion stability and viscosity analyses, which were performed within 24 h. The other part was stuffed into collagen casings (#180, NIPPI Inc., Tokyo, Japan; ∼16 mm diameter) using a stuffer (IS-8, Sirman, Marsango, Italy) and each sample was cooked in a 75 ± 1◦ C water bath for 30 min until the internal temperature reached 72◦ C. The cooked samples were immediately cooled in an ice bath, vacuum packed, and stored at 4◦ C until proximate composition, pH, cooking yield, color, texture properties, and sensory evaluation tests could be conducted.
Physicochemical Analysis Proximate Composition Compositional properties of the semi-dried jerky were performed using AOAC (2000). Moisture content was determined by weight loss after 12 h of drying at 105◦ C in a drying oven (SW-90D, Sang Woo Scienctific Co., Bucheon, Korea). Fat content was determined by Soxhlet method with a R Avanti 2050 Auto solvent extraction system (Soxtec System, Foss Tecator AB, H¨oganas, Sweden) and protein was determined by Kjeldahl method with an autoR 2300 Anmatic Kjeldahl nitrogen analyzer (Kjeltec alyzer Unit, Foss Tecator AB, H¨oganas, Sweden). Ash was determined according to AOAC method 923.03. pH and Cooking Yield The pH value for a mixture of sausage sample and distilled water (1:4) was determined using pH-meter (Model 340, Mettler-Toledo GmbH Analytical, Schwerzenbach, Switzerland). The cooking yield in each treatment was determined by weighing meat batters before and after cooking and expressed as percentage.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
Chicken breast Ice Pork back fat CSFM-1 CSFM-2
0 (CON)
Level of CSFM-22 (%)
APPLICATION OF CHICKEN SKIN AND WHEAT FIBER
Water exudation (%) = [the water layer (ml)/ raw meat batter weight (g)] × 100 Fat exudation (%) = [the fat layer (ml)/ raw meat batter weight (g)] × 100
Viscosity The flow behavior and time dependence of batters were investigated at 20 ± 1◦ C using a parallel R , plate rotational viscometer (Hakke Viscotester 500 Thermo Electron Corporation, Karlsruhe, Germany). The batter was allowed to equilibrate for 5 min and was tested using a standard cylinder sensor (SV-2). Time dependency of the batter was evaluated by measuring the apparent viscosity under a constant shear rate of 10/s for 100 s at storage times of 0, 1, and 3 h. Color Evaluation Samples were evaluated on the surface. Color measurements were taken with colorimeter (Chroma meter CR-210, Minolta, Japan; illuminate C, calibrated with white standard plate L∗ = 97.83, a∗ = −0.43, b∗ = +1.98), consisted of an 8 mm diameter measuring area and a 50 mm diameter illumination area. Color values (CIE L∗ , a∗ , and b∗ ) were measured on the surface of samples and results were taken in triplicate for each sample. Texture Profile Analysis The texture profile analysis of each sample was performed in duplicate. Samples were cut into sections with a height of 25 mm and ϕ 16 mm diameter. The textural properties for each sample were measured using a cylinder probe (ϕ 20 mm diameter), set attached to a Texture Analyzer (TA-XT2i, Stable Micro System Ltd., Surrey, UK). The test conditions were as follow: stroke, 2 kg; test speed, 2.0 mm/s; distance, 8 mm. The texture profile analysis parameters, namely hardness [peak force on first compression (N)], springiness [ratio of the sample recovered after the first compression], cohesiveness [ratio of active work done under the second force-displacement curve to that done under the first compression curve], gumminess [hardness × cohesiveness], and chewiness [hardness × cohesiveness × springiness (N)] were computed.
Sensory Evaluation Fifteen panelists (students and staff of Konkuk University, Republic of Korea) were selected from 20 potential panelists using basic taste identification tests and the selection and training of panelists were performed using described by Meilgaard et al. (1999). These panelists were trained using commercial sausage products 4 times for 2 wk. Each pre-cooked sausage sample was warmed, sliced 10-mm thick and coded randomly and served to panelists. A 10-point descriptive was used to evaluate attributes such as color (1 = extremely undesirable, 10 = extremely desirable), flavor (1 = extremely undesirable, 10 = extremely desirable), tenderness (1 = extremely tough, 10 = extremely tender), juiciness (1 = extremely dry, 10 = extremely juicy), and overall acceptability (1 = extremely undesirable, 10 = extremely desirable). Panelists cleanse their palate with water between samples.
Statistical Analysis Data were collected for 3 batches on 2 different days. Nine treatments [CON (0%), CSFM-1 (5, 10, 15, and 20%), and CSFM-2 (5, 10, 15, and 20%)] were manufactured in each batch. In each batch, 3 measurements were averaged and used as 1 replication (n = 3). A model considering the fixed effects of the replacer type, the addition level of the replacer, and the random effect of the manufacturing day (batch) was used for physicochemical analysis and sensory evaluation. Interaction between the replacer type and addition level of the replacer, excluding viscosity, served as the fixed effect for physicochemical analysis. All the data were analyzed using the general linear model SAS 9.3 (SAS Institute Inc., USA) and the results were expressed as mean values with standard error of the means. Significant differences among the mean values were determined using the Student–Newman–Keuls multiple comparison test at a significance level of P < 0.05. A linear regression model was fitted to predict the quality properties of the sausages depending on the fat replacer type (CSFM-1 or CSFM-2) and addition levels of the replacer (0, 5, 10, 15, and 20%) using the SAS 9.3 model. The quality properties were calculated for the addition levels of each replacer type.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Physicochemical and Technical Properties of Emulsion-type Sausages The proximate compositions of CSFM-1 and CSFM2, respectively, were as follows: 57.91% moisture, 5.65% protein, 17.42% fat, and 1.15% ash content, and 67.39% moisture, 3.44% protein, 10.47% fat, and 0.93% ash content. The proximate composition of the sausage samples was significantly affected by the addition of fat replacer
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
Emulsion Stability Triplicate samples of meat batter from each treatment were analyzed for emulsion stability using the method modified by Choe et al. (2013). The 15 mesh sieve (50 mm diameter) was placed in the middle of a graduated glass tube. Approximately 30 g of the meat batter were weighed on the sieve in glass tubes and covered. Triplicate samples from each treatment were respectively cooked at 75 ± 1◦ C for 30 min. After cooling to approximately 4 ± 1◦ C to facilitate fat and water layer separation. The fluid water and fat, which separated well in the bottom of graduated glass tube, were measured in milliliters and calculated as percentage of the original weight of batter. The mean value of the 6 tubes was taken for each treatment.
3
4
CHOE AND KIM
Table 2. Proximate composition and pH of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. Substitution level (%)
Moisture
Protein
Fat
CSFM-11
0 5 10 15 20 SEM3
63.04E,d 64.87D 67.21C 68.97B 70.78A 0.184
16.23D,b 16.57C 16.64C,B 16.72B 16.85A 0.039
16.34A,a 14.58B 11.82C 8.61D 5.66E 0.243
2.49C,b 2.88A,B 2.76A,B 2.97A 2.90A 0.024
6.35B 6.32B 6.33B 6.35B 6.39A 0.010
CSFM-22
5 10 15 20 SEM3
65.02c 68.07b 68.76b 71.99a 0.255
16.56a 16.10b 16.30a,b 16.09b 0.063
13.10b 9.67c 6.99d 3.60e 0.150
2.51b 2.60a 2.59a 2.66a 0.022
6.36 6.35 6.35 6.35 0.004
Replacer (R) Interaction (R × S)
0.021 0.052
0.013 0.051
< 0.001 < 0.001
0.606 0.012
Significance of P-value
< 0.001 0.060
Ash
pH
1
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2. 3 Standard error of means. A–D Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-1 (P < 0.05). a–e Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-2 (P < 0.05). 2
(CSFM-1 or CSFM-2) and their addition levels (Table 2). There were no interaction effects with regard to moisture, fat, and protein contents for either replacer type or their addition levels, except for ash content. The increasing addition of CSFM resulted in higher moisture (P < 0.05) and lower fat (P < 0.0001) contents in the sausage samples compared to the control group. The sausage samples containing CSFM-2 exhibited higher moisture and lower fat contents compared to CSFM-1 when the same amount of fat replacer was added (P < 0.0001). These results might be attributed to the higher moisture and lower fat contents of CSFM2, depending on the water and chicken skin contents. This finding agrees with that of Choe et al. (2013) and Santos Alves et al. (2016), who observed that the addition of pork skin and dietary fiber mixture or higher addition levels led to an increase in moisture and a decrease in fat contents of reduced fat sausages. In the present study, higher or similar protein contents (P < 0.05 or P > 0.05) were observed in sausage samples containing fat replacers compared to the control group. In general, the addition of CSFM resulted in an increase in the ash content (P < 0.0001). This observation was probably due to the wheat fiber in the CSFM. The use of CSFM and its addition level did not significantly influence the pH values of the sausage samples except in the case of the 20% CSFM-1 group (Table 2), which showed the highest pH values (P < 0.05). However, this difference was small (0.04 units) and thus may not be meaningful. The cooking yield of the sausage samples was significantly affected by fat replacer type and its addition level (Table 3). No significant interactions between fat replacer type and its addition level were observed on cooking yield and emulsion stability (fat and water exudation). The sausage samples replaced with CSFM-1 showed cooking yield similar to the control group regardless of the addition level (P < 0.05). Higher level
(20%) of fat replacement with CSFM-2 in the sausage samples led to a significant decrease in cooking yield compared to the control group, indicating quality deterioration. This result was probably caused by the higher water content in CSFM-2 than CSFM-1. Henning et al. (2016) found that an increase in the amount of water added in low fat sausages with the same amount of fiber induced significantly higher cooking loss. In this study, however, the significant difference in fat and water exudation between the control and other groups is not presented. This finding might be due to the water binding capacity of animal skin containing collagen and the porosity and fat absorption ability of the fiber originating from animal skin and the dietary fiber mixture (Figuerola et al., 2005; Choe et al., 2013). Osburn and Mandigo (1998) observed gel made with chicken skin had water binding ability due to the solubilization of collagen from chicken skin during heating. The addition of CSFM induced a significant change in the apparent viscosity of the meat batter (Fig. 1). The highest (P < 0.05) apparent viscosity values were demonstrated in meat batter samples with 20% CSFM-1, while the control group recorded the lowest (P < 0.05) apparent viscosity among all treatments. The increase in the emulsion viscosity of meat batter samples with CSFM might be due to hydrolyzed collagen from chicken skin (Schrieber and Gareis, 2007). The increase in the emulsion viscosity is closely associated with water holding capacity and emulsion stability, because high-viscosity emulsion is typically characterized by high emulsion stability (Dogan et al., 2005). However, in this study, there was no significant difference in water exudation and cooking yield among the treatments with CSFM-1 even though meat batter sample with 20% CSFM-1 had the highest viscosity (P < 0.05). The color (L∗ , a∗ , and b∗ ) of the sausage samples was affected by fat replacer type and its addition level (Table 2). No significant interaction between fat
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
Replacer
5
APPLICATION OF CHICKEN SKIN AND WHEAT FIBER
Table 3. Physicochemical properties of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. Emulsion stability
Instrumental color
Substitution level (%)
Cooking yield
Fat exudation
Water exudation
L∗
a∗
b∗
CSFM-11
0 5 10 15 20 SEM3
94.53a,b 94.43 94.29 94.51 94.58 0.189
1.00 0.97 0.98 0.74 0.72 0.077
4.63 4.12 4.16 4.20 4.14 0.182
80.45A 80.19A,B 79.84A,B 79.45B 79.23B 0.192
5.03a 5.51 5.52 5.55 5.60 0.182
18.14C,c 18.39C 18.89B 19.38A 19.45A 0.128
CSFM-22
5 10 15 20 SEM3
94.38a,b 94.87a 93.90b 93.25c 0.169
0.92 0.97 0.74 0.73 0.083
4.85 4.85 4.39 4.34 0.512
80.45 80.64 80.15 80.02 0.052
4.30b 4.17b 4.81a,b 4.44b 0.164
18.73b,c 19.19b 19.16b 19.77a 0.174
Replacer (R) Interaction (R × S)
0.033 0.052
0.875 0.998
0.218 0.869
< 0.001 0.213
Significance of P-value
< 0.001 0.620
0.5748 0.701
1
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2. 3 Standard error of means. A–C Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-1 (P < 0.05). a–c Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-2 (P < 0.05). 2
120
CSFM 0% (CON) CSFM-1 10% CSFM-1 20% CSFM-2 10% CSFM-2 20%
Viscosity (pa • s)
100 80
CSFM-1 5% CSFM-1 15% CSFM-2 5% CSFM-2 15%
60 40 20 0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Times (s) Figure 1. Viscosity of chicken meat batter using various chicken skin and wheat fiber mixtures as far replacer. CSFM-1, chicken skim and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2; CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2; and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2.
replacer type and its addition level was detected with regard to the color of the sausage samples. Replacements exceeding 15% CSFM-1 led to a significant decrease in L∗ values, while replacements with CSFM-2 showed L∗ values (P > 0.05) similar to those of the control group. The opposite trend was observed for a∗ values depending on fat replacer type and its addition level. There was no significant difference in a∗ values between sausages with CSFM-1 and the control, but replacements with CSFM-2 induced significant decrease in a∗ values. According to Rahardjo et al. (1994), the reduction in the fat level of meat products generally decreased L∗ and increased a∗ values. In general, the b∗ values in the sausage samples increased
significantly with increasing CSFM addition levels regardless of fat replacer type. This observation could be attributed to the inherent yellowish color of chicken skin and wheat fiber. The texture properties of a meat product affect the overall quality of the final product as well as its organoleptic properties (Herrero et al., 2007). The texture properties of sausage samples were dependent on fat replacer type and its addition level (Table 4). Texture properties (hardness, cohesiveness, gumminess, springiness, and chewiness) similar to those of the control group (P > 0.05) were observed in the sausage samples using 5% CSFM-1 and up to 10% CSFM-2. Matulis et al. (1995) found low fat sausage replaced
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
Replacer
6
CHOE AND KIM
Table 4. Texture properties of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. Replacer
Substitution level (%)
Hardness (N)
Gumminess (N)
b
Springiness
C,b
Chewiness (N)
a
0 5 10 15 20 SEM3
40.34 41.94D 46.36C 54.04B 55.75A 0.452
0.54 0.56 0.56 0.54 0.54 0.014
21.98 23.52C 25.88B 29.25A 30.02A 0.420a
0.90 0.89 0.86 0.85 0.84 0.019
19.79C,b 20.88B,C 22.35B 24.76A 25.16A 0.561
CSFM-22
5 10 15 20 SEM3
40.72c 42.33c 47.03b 49.87a 0.610
0.49b,c 0.51b 0.62a 0.45c 0.018
19.97b 21.64b 29.16a 22.44b 0.782
0.84a 0.80a 0.88a 0.61b 0.031
16.82b 17.56b 27.53a 13.20c 1.201
Replacer (R) Interaction (R × S)
< 0.001 0.054
0.0239 0.060
< 0.001 0.070
< 0.001 < 0.001
< 0.001 < 0.001
1
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2. Standard error of means. A–D Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-1 (P < 0.05). a–c Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-2 (P < 0.05). 2 3
mainly with water (fat level 12 to 14%) had lower cohesiveness. The increase in CSFM addition level led to significantly higher hardness in the sausage samples. This result agrees with those reported by Choe et al. (2013) who found high hardness in low fat sausages with increasing concentration of pork skin and wheat fiber mixture. Moreover, Ruiz-Capillas et al. (2012) demonstrated that replacement with konjac gel resulted in higher hardness as compared to the control group, and this was accompanied by hydrophobic mutual reactions between polymers during konjac heating. However, generally, low-fat meat products could induce a decrease in hardness due to an increase in the ratio of humidity to protein (Atashkar et al., 2018). The addition of CSFM-1 did not affect the cohesiveness and springiness of the sausage samples (P > 0.05). No significant interaction between fat replacer type and its addition level was found in terms of texture properties.
Sensory Properties of Emulsion-type Sausages Sensory properties were partially affected by the fat replacer type and its addition level (Table 5). The color difference between the control and fat-replaced groups was not detected by the panel and it might be that the difference in value was small numerically. With regard to instrumental texture properties, the panel detected a decrease (P < 0.05) in the tenderness of the sausages when the hardness values reached ∼50 N, regardless of fat replacer type. A fat level below 10% in meat products may reduce water holding capacity and impact sensory properties negatively (Keeton, 1994). The panel did not detect the significant difference in juiciness between the control and fat-replaced groups even though the fat content was reduced to 3.5% and 2.1% using CSFM-1 and CSFM-2, respectively, in this study.
Table 5. Sensory properties of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. Replacer 1
CSFM-1
CSFM-22
Significance of P-value 1
Substitution level (%) 0 5 10 15 20 SEM3 5 10 15 20 SEM3 Replacer (R) Interaction (R × S)
Color 8.50 8.50 8.63 8.50 8.50 0.187 8.75 8.63 8.50 8.25 0.197 0.988 0.793
Flavor 8.63 8.75 8.75 8.63 8.25 0.258 8.25 7.94 8.00 8.06 0.289 0.003 0.628
Tenderness A,B,a
8.38 8.63A 8.25A,B 7.75B,C 7.50C 0.213 8.00a 7.94a 7.94a 7.38b 0.413 0.066 0.792
Juiciness
Overall acceptability
8.38 8.63 8.25 7.88 7.88 0.198 7.81 7.88 7.88 8.25 0.251 0.052 0.348
8.50A,B,a 8.75A 8.38A,C 8.00B,C 7.75C 0.178 8.38a 7.69b 7.88b 7.88b 0.247 0.078 0.350
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2. 3 Standard error of means. A–C Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-1 (P < 0.05). a,b Different letters indicate a significant difference by addition levels of CSFM-2 (P < 0.05). 2
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
CSFM-1
Significance of P-value
D,c
Cohesiveness
1
7
APPLICATION OF CHICKEN SKIN AND WHEAT FIBER
Table 6. Linear regression of the quality properties of reduced fat emulsion-type chicken sausages using chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacer. CSFM-11 R2
Traits
t value
P-value
R2
Coefficient
t value
P-value
0.284 < 0.05
0.01 –
2.35 –
0.034 –
< 0.05 0.481
– − 0.06
– − 3.60
– 0.029
0.383 < 0.05
− 0.01 –
− 2.95 –
0.051 –
Emulsion stability
Fat exudation Water exudation
0.440 0.190
− 0.01 0.01
− 3.31 − 1.81
0.051 0.092
Proximate composition
Moisture Protein Fat
0.969 0.844 0.982
0.39 0.03 − 0.54
26.42 5.69 -27.64
< 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001
0.960 0.129 0.997
0.43 − 0.01 − 0.63
23.01 − 1.44 -63.93
< 0.0001 0.172 < 0.0001
Instrumental color
L∗ a∗ b∗
0.697 0.361 0.736
− 0.06 0.02 0.07
− 8.02 3.98 8.84
< 0.0001 0.004 < 0.0001
0.069 < 0.05 < 0.05
− 0.02 – –
− 1.44 – –
0.162 – –
Texture properties
Hardness Cohesiveness Gumminess Springiness Chewiness
0.921 < 0.05 0.803 0.173 0.555
8.21 – 4.30 − 0.01 2.88
22.43 – 13.23 − 3.00 7.32
< 0.0001 – < 0.0001 0.0045 < 0.0001
0.595 < 0.05 0.060 0.378 < 0.05
4.18 – 3.92 − 0.01 –
8.74 – 1.82 − 5.62 –
< 0.0001 – 0.075 0.052 –
Sensory properties
Color Flavor Tenderness Juiciness Overall acceptability
< 0.05 < 0.05 0.281 0.170 0.290
– – − 0.05 − 0.04 − 0.05
– – − 3.86 − 2.79 − 3.94
– – 0.044 0.082 0.032
< 0.05 0.065 0.171 0.052 0.116
– − 0.03 − 0.05 − 0.02 − 0.04
– − 1.63 − 2.80 − 1.44 − 2.23
– 0.112 0.049 0.158 0.031
1 2
CSFM-1, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-1 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-1 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 5:3:2. CSFM-2, chicken skin and wheat fiber mixture-2 and the formulation ratio of CSFM-2 is chicken skin:water:wheat fiber = 3:5:2.
However, a deterioration in overall acceptability of sausage samples replaced with CSFM was observed depending on the addition level (CSFM-1, 20%; CSFM-2, ≥10%).
Predicted Quality Characteristics of Fat-reduced Sausages Using Linear Regression Analysis The effects of fat replacer (CSFM-1 and CSFM-2) on quality characteristics and physicochemical and sensory properties of reduced fat emulsion-type sausages are shown in Table 6. In this study, the fat replacer (CSFM-1 and CSFM-2) did not correlate with emulsion stability and a∗ values (P > 0.05). The moisture content was positively correlated with CSFM-1 (coefficient = 0.39; P < 0.0001) and CSFM-2 (coefficient = 0.43; P < 0.0001), and the R2 values were 0.969 and 0.960, respectively. A negative correlation was observed between fat content and each fat replacer [R2 = 0.982 (CSFM-1) and 0.997 (CSFM-2); P < 0.0001]. The protein content exhibited positive correlation with CSFM1 (R2 = 0.844; P < 0.0001). Instrumental a∗ and b∗ values were affected by CSFM-1 but not CSFM-2. An increase in the addition level of CSFM-1 predicted a darker and stronger yellow color in the sausage samples (coefficient = −0.06 and 0.07; P < 0.0001). The texture properties were partially affected by fat replacer. Hardness, gumminess, and chewiness exhibited positive correlation with CSFM-1 (coefficient = 8.21, 4.30, and 2.88, respectively; P < 0.0001). The hardness trait also showed positive correlation with CSFM-2 (coefficient = 4.18; P < 0.0001). Most sensory properties (color,
flavor, and juiciness) were not affected by the fat replacer. The sensory color did not displayed difference in instrumental color by fat replacer. Both tenderness and overall acceptability were negatively correlated with CSFM-1 (R2 = 0.281 and 0.290; P < 0.05) and CSFM-2 (R2 = 0.171 and 0.116; P < 0.05), respectively.
CONCLUSION In low-fat sausages, fulfilling specific quality characteristics, including physicochemical and sensory properties, is important to satisfy consumers’ and industry needs. The results of this study show that both CSFM-1 and CSFM-2 could be used as a fat replacer in reduced fat emulsion-type sausages, when added up to 15% (7.5% chicken skin, 4.5% water, and 3% wheat fiber based on total weight of meat batter) or 5% (1.5% chicken skin, 2.5% water, and 1% wheat fiber based on total weight of meat batter), respectively, without adverse effects on quality characteristics. Furthermore, fat replacement with CSFM would probably result in economic and health benefits as it contains chicken skin and wheat fiber.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (KRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (2017R1D1A1B03035488) and Mars Korea Co., Ltd.
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
pH Cooking yield
Coefficient
CSFM-22
8
CHOE AND KIM
REFERENCES
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ps/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.3382/ps/pez016/5303864 by Macquarie University user on 23 February 2019
AOAC. 2000. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC. 17th ed, Vol. 41. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, USA. Atashkar, M., M. Hojjatoleslamy, and L. S. Boroujeni. 2018. The influence of fat substitution with κ-carrageenan, konjac, and tragacanth on the textural properties of low-fat sausage. Food Sci. Nutr. 6:1015–1022. Barbut, S. 2001. Poultry Products Processing: An Industry Guide. 1st ed. CRC Press, Florida, USA. Choe, J. H., H. Y. Kim, J. M. Lee, Y. J. Kim, and C. J. Kim. 2013. Quality of frankfurter-type sausages with added pig skin and wheat fiber mixture as fat replacers. Meat Sci. 93:849– 854. Choe, J. H., and H. Y. Kim. 2016. Effects of swelled pig skin with various natural vinegars on quality characteristics of traditional Korean blood sausages (Sundae). Food Sci. Biotechnol. 25:1605– 1611. Choe, J. H., and H. Y. Kim. 2018. Effects of chicken feet gelatin extracted at different temperatures and wheat fiber with different particle sizes on the physicochemical properties of gels. Poult. Sci. 97:1082–1088. Cierach, M., M. Modzelewska-Kapitula, and K. Szacilo. 2009. The influence of carrageenan on the properties of low-fat frankfurters. Meat Sci. 82:295–299. Cliche, S., J. Amiot, C. Avezard, and C. Gariepy. 2003. Extraction and characterization of collagen with or without telopeptides from chicken skin. Poult. Sci. 82:503–509. Dogan, S. F., S. Sahin, and G. Summnu. 2005. Effects of soy and rice flour addition on batter rheology and quality of deep-fat fried chicken nuggets. J Food Eng. 71:127–132. Dransfield, E. 2008. The taste of fat. Meat Sci. 80:37–42. Feiner, G. 2006. Meat Products Handbook. CRC Press, New York, USA. Figuerola, F., M. L. Hurtado, A. M. Estevez, I. Chiffelle, and F. Asenjo 2005. Fiber concentrates from apple pomace and citrus peel as potential fiber sources for food enrichment. Food Chem. 91:395–401. Han, M., and H. C. Bertram. 2017. Designing healthier comminuted meat products: effect of dietary fibers on water distribution and texture of a fat-reduced meat model system. Meat Sci. 133:159– 165. Henning, S. S., P. Tshalibe, and L. C. Hoffman. 2016. Physicochemical properties of reduced-fat beef species sausage with pork back fat replaced by pineapple dietary fibres and water. Food Sci. Technol. 74:92–98.
Herrero, A. M., J. A. Ord´ on ˜ez, R. de Avila, B. Herranz, L. de la Hoz, and M. I. Cambero. 2007. Breaking strength of dry fermented sausages and their correlation with texture profile analysis (TPA) and physico-chemical characteristics. Meat Sci. 77:331–338. Keeton, J. T. 1994. Low-fat meat products—technological problems with processing. Meat Sci. 36:261–276. Lurue˜ na-Martı´ınez, M. A., A. M. Vivar-Quintana, and I. Revilla. 2004. Effect of locust bean/xanthan gum addition and replacement of pork fat with olive oil on the quality characteristics of low-fat frankfurters. Meat Sci. 68:383–389. Matulis, R. J., F. McKeith, J. W. Sutherland, and M. S. Brewer. 1995. Sensory characteristics of frankfurters as affected by fat, salt, and pH. J. Food Sci. 60:42–47. Mehta, N., S. S. Ahlawat, D. P. Sharma, and R. S. Dabur. 2015. Novel trends in development of dietary fiber rich meat products— a critical review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 52:633–647. Meilgaard, M., G. V. Civille, and B. T. Carr. 1999. Sensory Evaluation Techniques. Page 354. 3rd ed. CRC Press, Florida, USA. Nath, P. M., V. Kumar, P. K. Praveen, and S. Ganguly 2016. Effect of chicken skin, soy protein and olive oil on quality characteristics of chicken nuggets. Int. J. Sci. Environ. Technol. 5:1574–1585. Osburn, W. N., and R. W. Mandigo. 1998. Reduced-fat bologna manufactured with poultry skin connective tissue gel. Poult. Sci. 77:1574–1584. Pintado, T., A. M. Herrero, F. Jim´enez-Colmenero, C. Pasqualin Cavalheiro, and C. Ruiz-Capillas. 2018. Chia and oat emulsion gels as new animal fat replacers and healthy bioactive sources in fresh sausage formulation. Meat Sci. 135:6–13. Rahardjo, R., L. A. Wilson, and J. G. Sebranek. 1994. Spray dried soymilk used in reduced fat pork sausage patties. J. Food Sci. 59:1286–1290. Ruiz-Capillas, C., M. Triki, A. M. Herrero, L. Rodriguez-Salas, and F. Jim´enez-Colmenero. 2012. Konjac gel as pork backfat replacer in dry fermented sausages: processing and quality characteristics. Meat Sci. 92:144–150. Santos Alves, L. A. A., J. M. dos Lorenzo, C. A. A. Gon¸calves, B. A. Santos, R. T. dos Heck, A. Cichoski, and P. C. B. Campagnol. 2016. Production of healthier bologna type sausages using pork skin and green banana flour as a fat replacers. Meat Sci. 121:73–78. Schmiele, M., M. C. C. N. Mascarenhas, A. C. S. Barretto, and M. A. R. Pollonio. 2015. Dietary fiber as fat substitute in emulsified and cooked meat model system. Food Sci. Technol. 61:105– 111. Schrieber, R., and H. Gareis. 2007. Gelatin handbook. Theory and Industrial Practice. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co., Weinheim, Germany.