The impact of salt replacers and flavor enhancer on the processing characteristics and consumer acceptance of restructured cooked hams

Meat Science 96 (2014) 1165–1170

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Meat Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/meatsci

The impact of salt replacers and flavor enhancer on the processing characteristics and consumer acceptance of restructured cooked hams Z. Pietrasik ⁎, N.J. Gaudette Food Processing Development Centre, Food and Bio Processing Division, Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Leduc, AB T9E 7C5, Canada

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 9 August 2013 Received in revised form 29 October 2013 Accepted 3 November 2013 Keywords: Salt replacer Flavor enhancer Restructured ham Functionality Sensory properties

a b s t r a c t Two salt replacers (Ocean's Flavor — OF45, OF60) and one flavor enhancer [Fonterra™ ‘Savoury Powder’ (SP)] were evaluated for their ability to effectively reduce sodium, while maintaining the functional and sensory properties of restructured hams. Product functionality and safety were assessed using instrumental measures (yield, purge, pH, expressible moisture, proximate composition, sodium content, color, texture) and microbiological assessment. Sensory attributes were evaluated using consumer sensory panelists. All alternative formulations resulted in products with sodium contents below the Health CheckTM Program guidelines, without detrimental effect on water binding and texture in treatments when NaCl was substituted with sea salt replacers (OF45, OF60). Sodium reduction had no effect on the shelf life of the cooked ham with up to 60 days of refrigerated storage. Consumer hedonics for flavor and aftertaste were lower for OF45 and OF60 compared to control, suggesting that these salt replacers may not be appropriate for inclusion in these products. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction In recent years, consumer demand for the availability of low sodium foods has increased. Continuous awareness from health professionals regarding the benefits of adopting a healthy lifestyle, including choosing low sodium foods more often, has played a key role towards this elevated interest. Associations have been made between a diet high in sodium and an increased risk of certain conditions, including hypertension and cardiovascular disease (Cook et al., 2007; Sacks et al., 2001). In response, many countries have adopted national strategies towards sodium reduction (Webster, Dunford, Hawkes, & Neal, 2011). The Health Check™ Program in Canada provides a target sodium level for the production of reduced sodium foods. However, for certain foods, such as processed meats, creating reduced sodium formulations continues to be challenging (Desmond, 2006). Processed meats have been identified as a major source of sodium in the Western diet (Verma & Banerjee, 2012). Sodium content can be high due to its important role in the functionality, microbial stability, and sensory properties of these products. For example, sodium chloride improves water and fat binding characteristics, which contribute to the formation of stable gel structures within meat products. It also acts as a preservative by lowering the water activity, and thus, decreasing the opportunity for microbial growth. In addition, salty taste enhances the perception of meat flavor, which is an important factor ⁎ Corresponding author at: Food and Bio Processing Division, Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, 6309–45 Street, Leduc, AB T9E 7C5 Canada. Tel.: +1 780 980 4862; fax: +1 780 986 5138. E-mail address: [email protected] (Z. Pietrasik). 0309-1740/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.11.005

in the overall acceptability of meat products (Ruusunen & Puolanne, 2005). Due to the importance of sodium in the formulation of processed meats, its reduction can negatively impact overall quality. As a result, additional approaches towards creating low sodium meat products have been proposed. For example, substitution of sodium chloride with potassium chloride can produce products without a significant loss of functionality. However, at certain concentrations, potassium can elicit levels of bitterness that are undesirable (Bartoshuk, Rifkin, Marks, & Hooper, 1988). Therefore, the use of potassium is limited to products where lower levels can be successfully used. The use of savory eliciting compounds, including monosodium glutamate (MSG), can also be incorporated (Desmond, 2006). However, the addition of MSG to foodstuffs may be an undesirable approach due to some consumer concerns regarding its safety (Prescott & Young, 2002). In recent years, a number of commercial sodium replacers and flavor enhancers have entered the market to fully or partially replace sodium chloride in various products. While these ingredients exist, it is difficult to determine the best approach towards sodium reduction in specific products without their direct comparison in a model system. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of low-salt formulations on the functionality, quality, and safety of processed meat. Here, three separate ingredients [2 salt replacers (SRs), 1 flavor enhancer] were assessed for their ability to create a reduced sodium product that maintained adequate functional, microbial stability and sensory properties. These ingredients were compared to control and straight sodium reduction (40%) and were evaluated in restructured ham.

1166

Z. Pietrasik, N.J. Gaudette / Meat Science 96 (2014) 1165–1170

2. Materials and methods 2.1. Materials and ham processing For each of three replications, boneless, skinless pork inside rounds (semimembranosus and adductor muscles) were purchased from a local producer (Maple Leaf Pork, Lethbridge, AB, Canada) and delivered to the Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development Food Processing Development Centre (Leduc, AB, Canada) for processing. Muscles were trimmed of all visible fat and connective tissue, then ground in a grinder through a plate with 20 mm diameter orifices. All processing was carried out in a refrigerated pilot plant (b 7 °C) at the Food Processing Development Centre (FPDC), Leduc, AB. Five different ham formulations were processed on the same day at the FPDC: Regular salt (Control) ham, low-salt (LS) ham, hams formulated to contain Ocean's Flavor Sea Salts, Ashville, NC, USA (OF45, OF60) and LS ham formulated to contain Savoury Powder (SP). SP is a flavor enhancer meant to be used in combination with a reduced salt level, although exact salt reduction levels were not provided by the manufacturer (Fonterra/DairiConcepts, Springfield, MO, USA) because they vary with the type of food product being manufactured. The regular salt (Control) treatment was formulated to contain 2% NaCl, whereas in the experimental treatments NaCl level was either reduced (LS) or replaced with salt substitutes (OF45, OF60, SP) to meet Health Check™ Program requirements (360 mg sodium per serving). For each formulation, the brine (equivalent to 50% pump above green weight) also included 2.5% dextrose, 0.4% sodium tripolyphosphate, 0.5% sugar, 0.05% sodium erythorbate and 200 ppm sodium nitrite (Newly Weds Foods Co., Edmonton, AB, Canada). For each of three replications, the ground meat and brine (total batch size of 21 kg) were placed in a tumbler (Model DVTS R2-50, Daniels Food Equipment, Parkers Prairie, MN) and then tumbled (10 rpm) under vacuum (−0.9 bar) at 6 °C for 75 min. The meat mixture was then placed into refrigerated overnight storage. The next day each treatment batch was stuffed (Handtmann, Model VF80, Waterloo, ON) into presoaked, fibrous casings (105 mm diameter, UniPac, Edmonton, AB) and casings were tensioned and clipped. The chubs (~ 3000 g each) were individually weighed, thermally processed in a smokehouse (Maurer & Söhne, Insel Reichenau, Germany) to a final internal temperature of 71 °C, cooled in running water for 30 min, and stored at 1 °C until use. Following overnight storage, each chilled meat chub was removed from its casing and weighed to determine smokehouse cook yield, calculated as a percentage of raw stuffed weight before cooking. Five chubs from each formulation were prepared as 3 mm slices that were vacuum packaged (10 slices per package) in high-barrier, mylar/polyethylene pouches (Ulma TF-Supra packaging machine, C y E, S. Coop Ltd., ONATI, Spain) for later use in instrumental and sensory product testing. One chub was vacuum packaged whole from each formulation. Then, the samples were randomly allocated to storage interval subgroups (0, 4, 8 weeks), placed into boxes and stored in dark in a walk-in cooler at 2 °C until evaluation.

2.2. Physical characteristic measurement 2.2.1. Cook loss For each ham treatment, three samples of approx. 250 g of raw ham mixture were weighed into a plastic container, closed with a lid and submerged in a water bath at 80 °C and cooked until they reached an internal temperature of 71 °C. Samples were then removed from the water bath, submerged in cold ice water to 20 °C. The cooked product was removed from its container, blotted on paper towels and then weighed. Cook loss was calculated as a percentage of the initial sample weight [(raw weight–cooked weight)/raw weight] ×100.

2.2.2. Proximate analysis and pH Proximate analysis (total moisture, protein and fat) was conducted using an AOAC-approved (official method 2007.04; Anderson, 2007) near infrared spectrophotometer (FoodScan Lab, Type 78800, FOSS, Hillerød, Denmark). pH of raw batters and cooked products was measured in duplicate with a pH meter (Hanna Instruments FC240, Canadawide Scientific, Ottawa, ON) on a homogenate of 20 g sample in 80 ml deionized water. 2.2.3. Water activity Water activity was measured at ambient temperature using an Aqualab water activity meter (Aqualab CX-2, Decagon Devices Inc., Pullman, WA) according to manufacturer's specifications. 2.2.4. Sodium content Duplicate samples were prepared from each treatment by blending 20 g of sample with 80 g of distilled water for one minute (Magic Bullet blender, Homeland Housewares, USA). The pH of the homogenate was adjusted to pH 9 with sodium ionic strength adjuster (4 M NH4Cl & 4 M NH4OH, Fisher Scientific, Edmonton, AB) and sodium content was measured with an ion-selective combination sodium electrode (pHoenix Electrode Co., Houston, TX) connected to an ion meter (Thermo Fisher Scientific Orion 5-Star pH/ISE/Cond/DO, Beverly, MA), and based on the method described by Averill (1983). Sodium ion concentration (mg · L−1) was read directly from the adjusted homogenate. 2.2.5. Expressible moisture The modified Hamm (Grau & Hamm, 1953) procedure was used to measure the EM from cooked hams. A ground ham sample (approximately 300 mg) was placed on a filter paper (Whatman No. 1) and sandwiched between 2 glass plates. Using an Instron Universal Testing System (Model 5565, Instron Corporation, Burlington, ON, Canada) under compression test mode. The sample was pressed with a target force of 1000 g for 2 min. The sample was immediately weighed after the test. Expressible moisture was measured as the quantity of water released per gram of meat and was expressed in percentage. 2.2.6. Texture profile analysis (TPA) Textural properties were measured using the TPA procedure of Bourne (1982) and an Instron Universal Testing System (Model 5565, Instron Corporation, Burlington, ON, Canada) fitted with a 5000 N load cell. From the center of each product chub, four adjacent slices (20 mm thickness) were prepared from each of which a 5 cm diameter core sample was removed and compressed twice to 30% of its original height using a constant crosshead speed of 60 mm/min. The TPA parameters including hardness (peak force on first compression [N]), springiness (distance the sample recovered after the first compression [mm]), cohesiveness (ratio of the active work done under the second force-displacement curve to that done under the first compression curve [dimensionless]), and chewiness (hardness × cohesiveness × springiness [N*mm]) were computed. 2.2.7. Bind strength The bind force (maximum load supported by a sample before tearing) and bind energy of five adjacent 1.27 cm thick slices (cut from the center of each chub) was determined for each treatment using an Instron texture system. Samples were secured with a set of needles on the test cell platform and the platform was pulled apart at a crosshead speed of 100 mm/min to just beyond the point of rupture of the meat slice. Bind strength was reported as maximum peak force recorded during the test and bind energy as the total energy input required to rupture a sample. 2.2.8. Instrumental color Color was measured using a Minolta handheld spectrophotometer (Konica-Minolta CM-2500C, Osaka, Japan) with a 10° observer angle

Z. Pietrasik, N.J. Gaudette / Meat Science 96 (2014) 1165–1170

and illuminant D65, calibrated against a white tile immediately before readings were taken. Color measurements (CIE L*, a*, and b*) were made through intact packages two days after processing and after 4 and 8 weeks of storage either in a retail display case (4.0 ± 1.0 °C) under 24 h fluorescent lighting with an average intensity of 1630 lx or dark storage. All measurements were taken in duplicate, with a 90° clockwise sample rotation between measurements. Hue angle was calculated as: tan− 1(b*/a*), and the saturation index (chroma) was calculated as: (a*2 + b*2)0.5.

2.2.9. Purge during storage Purge accumulation from cooked sliced product was determined on three vacuum packaged bags from each treatment. After packaging, the bags were stored in a dark walk-in cooler (2 °C) for up to 8 weeks. Purge loss was determined by reweighing blotted slices from three packages following storage, and was expressed as a percentage of the initial slices weight.

2.2.10. Microbiological testing Microbiological testing was conducted by the Agri-Food Laboratories Branch of Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development. At Time 0 (first day post-packaging) and at 4 and 8 weeks post-processing, two packages of each sample were shipped in a chilled state to the lab where duplicate samples were prepared for aerobic plate count, lactic acid bacteria, and coliform count according to Health Canada (2012) protocols.

2.2.11. Sensory testing — consumer panel assessment Consumer sensory analysis was performed on all treatments at the Consumer Product Testing Centre (CPTC) in Edmonton, Alberta. Evaluations were collected using Compusense Five version 5.2 software. A completely randomized design was used (Lawless & Heymann, 2010). Consumers over 18 years of age were screened for allergies and were required to consume packaged deli ham at least once every month (n = 90). Panelists were provided with 1 slice of ham presented on 6-inch foam plate labeled with a 3-digit randomized code. Consumer evaluations on the overall acceptability, and acceptability of appearance, color, flavor, texture, and aftertaste of the samples were collected using a 9-point hedonic scale, where 1 = dislike extremely, 2 = dislike very much, 3 = dislike moderately, 4 = dislike slightly, 5 = neither like/dislike, 6 = like slightly, 7 = like moderately, 8 = like very much, 9 = like extremely. Between samples, a 30-second forced break with 2 water rinses and a bite of cracker was enforced to reduce carryover.

2.3. Data analyses Processing and instrumental data were analyzed using the PROC MIXED procedure of SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC). The model included both fixed (formulation treatment) and random (processing replication) effects. Least-squares means were calculated for main effect of formulation and the means were separated using the probability of difference option with a Tukey HSD adjustment when the respective F-tests were significant (P ≤ 0.05). Sensory data were analyzed using XLSTAT version 2012.6.09 for Microsoft Windows (Addinsoft, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.). A 2-way Mixed Model ANOVA was conducted, with panelist and treatment as independent variables (random and fixed variables, respectively), and consumer hedonic scores corresponding to an individual sensory attribute as the dependent variable. Tukey's HSD mean separation tests were used for post-hoc analyses (α = 0.05).

1167

3. Results and discussion 3.1. Functional characteristics of cooked ham products Reducing formulated salt from 2.0% in the Control ham formulation to 1.2% in the LS treatment resulted in a 30% reduction in sodium content (Table 1). Use of each of the salt replacer ingredients (OF45, OF60, SP) was also successful in terms of meeting Health Check Program requirements; even with sodium levels in the OF60 formulation being significantly lower than in the other products. Replacing salt with OF60 allowed for creation of a product with a per serving sodium content 31% lower than the Health CheckTM Program limit. Proximate composition was not statistically different among the treatments (Table 1). The restructured hams were very lean (1.7 ± 0.26% fat) with a protein content of 20.5 ± 0.46% and a moisture content of 74.5 ± 0.59%. Within each ham formulation, meat protein content was held constant so that any variation in overall moisture, fat, or protein content would be the result of differences in cooking losses among ham treatments. Lack of significantly important variations in proximate composition is consistent with similar cook yields of the cooked hams. There were only small differences in pH of hams among treatments (Table 1). In all formulations, the phosphate content was held constant indicating that the very small differences in pH might be the result of added salt replacers. Hams manufactured with SP had marginally lower pH compared to other treatments but the magnitude of the change (~0.1 unit) might not be of practical importance. Although moisture content was not statistically different across formulations, water activity of both reduced salt treatments (LS, SP) was slightly but significantly (P b 0.05) higher compared to control hams and those produced with OF60. Cooking yield affects the cost of manufacture of processed meats. Control of cook loss is also important because changes in the cooking yields result in compositional changes in the finished products that may affect the palatability characteristics. As moisture is lost from meat during and after thermal processing, product yield and other quality attributes such as tenderness, texture, and flavor are negatively affected (Pietrasik, 1999). There was no significant (P N 0.05) effect of formulation on cook yield of hams stuffed in fibrous casings and processed in a smokehouse. It is interesting to note that negative implications for functionality were observed when the ham meat mixture was cooked in plastic containers using a harsher cooking environment that retained moisture inside the container during cooking rather than allowing for evaporation. This cooking method was included as a means of stressing the reduced-salt meat systems by higher initial temperature and thus faster cooking regime. Under these conditions, only OF45 and OF60 treatments were equivalent to control hams whereas cook loss from hams containing reduced amounts of NaCl (LS, SP) was almost 2 times higher when compared to control. The high cook loss for these treatments indicated that the meat protein matrix could not hold most of the added water. It has been suggested that a slow heating rate may allow more favorable protein–protein interactions to occur, thus producing a stronger, better-ordered three-dimensional gel (Camou, Sebranek, & Olson, 1989), a type of structure which influences the binding properties of meat emulsions (Schmidt, 1985). Although cook yield and moisture content were not different across formulations, the ability for the different ham treatments to retain moisture under stress was affected by formulation. Expressible moisture from the LS formulation was significantly (P b 0.05) greater than from the Control indicating a decreased ability of the low-salt system to bind free water. All other treatments were not different (P N 0.05) from Control in binding ability. The better water retention associated with salt is mainly due to an increase in ionic strength of the meat system, favoring the greater

1168

Z. Pietrasik, N.J. Gaudette / Meat Science 96 (2014) 1165–1170

Table 1 Functional parameters and proximate composition of ham processed with salt replacers and flavor enhancer. Cook loss, % Formulationx Control LS OF45 OF60 SP P-value

9.9b 18.0a 14.1ab 10.5b 17.9a 0.00

pH

Smokehouse cook yield, %

6.31bc 6.38ab 6.37abc 6.42a 6.29c 0.00

aw 0.977c 0.981a 0.980ab 0.978bc 0.980a 0.00

92.5 92.0 92.5 93.0 91.9 0.36

Moisture, %

Protein,%

Fat, %

Sodium, mg/55 g serving

EM, %y

73.9 75.0 74.2 74.8 74.4 0.15

20.4 20.2 20.7 20.4 20.5 0.84

1.7 1.7 1.8 1.5 1.7 0.57

480.4a 332.8b 337.3b 248.3c 334.1b 0.00

28.3b 32.5a 30.1ab 30.1ab 31.3ab 0.03

x

Control (2% salt); LS, low-salt (1.2% salt); OF45 (2% OF-45LSN salt replacer); OF60 (2% OF60-LSB salt replacer; SP (1.2% salt + 1.25% Savoury Powder). EM = expressible moisture.

y

water holding capacity of products high in salt content. An increase in ionic strength, and hence in quantity of extracted proteins, causes an increase in the potential interactions of polypeptide chains during heating. As a result, a much more stable gel matrix is formed which leads to a smaller release of water, thus improving water binding properties of meat products (Carballo, Mota, Barreto, & Jimenez-Colmenero, 1995; Krause, Ockerman, Krol, Moerman, & Plimpton, 1978). The coagulation of the salt soluble proteins probably acted as a sealer to entrap the moisture within the meat mass and to improve the water holding capacity. Also, the treatments formulated with 1.2% NaCl showed significantly (P b 0.05) higher purge losses after 4 and 8 weeks storage (Fig. 1) and lower water holding capacity (WHC) (higher expressible moisture) compared to the samples manufactured with 2% salt (Table 1). In products with high levels of added water, the functionality of the traditional myosin heat-set matrix may be limited due to an unfavorable moisture/protein ratio. Reducing salt concentration limits protein extractability and alters thermal protein denaturation and aggregation patterns of the major muscle proteins (Trout & Schmidt, 1986), which affects the water binding characteristics of meat products. 3.2. Textural parameters The adequate binding of processed meats, as related to both the adhesion of meat particles and water binding (holding) by the meat proteins, relies on extraction of myofibrillar proteins from the meat. The effects of sodium reduction treatments on TPA parameters and bind force are shown in Table 2. Salt reduction adversely affected some textural characteristics of restructured hams. Reducing salt from 2.0 to 1.2% in LS and SP treatments significantly (P b 0.05) decreased the force required to break the ham slices. These results agree with binding data presented by 3.5

C

Purge (%)

2.5

LS a

3

OF45

OF60

SP

4

8 a

ab

ab ab

b

Thiel, Bechtel, McKeith, and Brady (1986a), Thiel, Bechtel, McKeith, Novakofski, and Carr (1986) and Siegel, Theno, Schmidt, and Norton (1978). As indicated earlier, texture depends on structure and integrity of the protein matrix formed during cooking. Salt performs an important function in the production of tumbled/massaged meat products by the extraction of salt soluble proteins to the surface of the boneless ham pieces and their subsequent coagulation during cooking. It contributes to the formation of a stable exudate, which upon heating, results in a product with acceptable quality characteristics. Optimal binding is achieved through the production of an exudate rich in solubilized myofibrillar proteins, demonstrating that 1% salt in a sectioned and formed pork does not guarantee that desired characteristics of the strong binding will be exhibited (Theno, Siegel, & Schmidt, 1978a, b). In the present experiment, the results demonstrate that both reduced salt treatments (LS, SP) did not provide sufficient ionic strength to adequately extract myofibrillar proteins. The binding phenomenon of adjacent meat pieces primarily depends on the extraction of a certain amount of myofibrillar proteins from muscle fibers. The protein exudate coats the pieces of meat and acts as a binding agent (Siegel et al., 1978) to increase the binding strength, promote an increase in cohesiveness, and produce a finer texture during thermal processing. The dissolved proteins assist in binding meat particles together and effectively promote cohesion during thermal processing. This assists in the formation of the texture required to create a uniformly attractive cured product with desirable slicing characteristics. Both sea salt treatments (OF45, OF60) were not statistically different (p N 0.05) in bind strength compared to control hams. This finding is in agreement with Frye, Hand, Calkins, and Mandigo (1986). According to them, 50% of NaCl in a system replaced with KCl (on an ionic basis) in hams is equivalent in bind to 2% NaCl hams. Hams formulated to contain 1.2% NaCl (LS and SP treatments) were less springy compared to control treatments produced with 2% salt addition. OF45 incorporated hams were more cohesive than control treatments but not different from that of other ham formulations.

b

2 Table 2 Textural characteristics of restructured ham processed with salt replacers and flavor enhancer.

1.5 1 0.5

Formulationx Control LS OF45 OF60 SP P-value

0

Ham formulations

Storage (weeks)

Fig. 1. The effect of formulation and storage time on purge during refrigerated storage. The experiment was replicated three times and the average values pooled across storage times (for formulation effect) and pooled across formulations (for storage time effect) were used to plot the graph. abMeans with different letters in the same column are significantly different (P b 0.05)C = Control (2% salt); LS, low-salt (1.2% salt); OF45 (2% OF-45LSN salt replacer); OF60 (2% OF60-LSB salt replacer); SP (1.2% salt + 1.25% Savoury Powder).

ab

Hardness (N)

Cohesiveness

Springiness (mm)

Chewiness (N*mm)

518.7 533.0 480.3 499.9 544.2 0.29

0.28b 0.32ab 0.33a 0.29ab 0.31ab 0.03

10.1a 8.9b 9.6ab 9.7ab 8.9b 0.01

1462.2 1481.9 1515.1 1393.1 1507.3 0.55

Bind (N) 19.7a 13.5b 15.4ab 15.3ab 11.6b 0.02

Means with different letters in the same column are significantly different (P b 0.05). Control (2% salt); LS, low-salt (1.2% salt); OF45 (2% OF-45LSN salt replacer); OF60 (2% OF60-LSB salt replacer; SP (1.2% salt + 1.25% Savoury Powder). x

Z. Pietrasik, N.J. Gaudette / Meat Science 96 (2014) 1165–1170

3.3. Color Ham treatments containing reduced amounts of salt (LS, SP) were lighter, more yellow and less red compared to hams containing 2% of salt or sea salt replacers (Table 3). The effect of salt addition on color is consistent with Ockerman, Plimpton, Cahill, and Parrett (1978) who stated that increased salt level darkened color scores based on both reflectance and panel values. On the other hand increased salt level (0 to 2%) had no effect on instrumental color measurements in hams processed from cured and cooked semitendinosus pork muscles (Froehlich, Gullett, & Usborne, 1983). As storage time increased, there was a general decline in L*, a slight increase in a*, and saturation index (chroma) regardless of the storage conditions (Table 3). There was also a slight decrease in yellowness and hue angle values with increased storage time but only in samples subjected to fluorescent lighting stored in a retail display cabinet. It should be stated, however, that although instrumental color parameters values were significantly different, the practical importance of the measured differences was minimal and no visually detectable color difference were observed. These relatively small color differences did not have an impact on consumer acceptance of the products. No significant interaction between ham formulation treatments and storage time was observed for any of the color parameters, indicating that the replacers do not compromise color stability of vacuum packaged sliced ham. The color values would be expected to change more rapidly if other conditions of storage or packaging methods were used (Møller et al., 2003). 3.4. Microbiological analysis Microbial analysis of the cooked ham formulations indicated no significant differences in aerobic plate and lactic acid bacteria counts across treatments and time periods (data not shown). Aerobic plate counts and lactic acid bacteria counts were below detectable levels for all treatments up to 4 weeks of storage and remained below two (one in log scale was the detectable level) after 8 weeks of storage. Coliform counts were below detectable levels within all treatments and across all time periods. All counts were below acceptable limits for ready-to-eat foods. 3.5. Consumer sensory evaluation Results from consumer sensory evaluation suggest a disliking of some attributes for treatments formulated with OF45 and OF60 (Table 4). Specifically, liking scores for overall flavor were significantly Table 3 The effect of treatment, and storage conditions and time on color of restructured hams.

ab

Effect

L*

a*

b*

C*

h

Formulationx Control LS OF45 OF60 SP P-value

66.4b 68.4a 66.4b 66.8b 68.5a b0.01

14.0ab 13.9b 14.3a 14.1ab 13.9b 0.01

5.2c 6.3a 5.7b 5.5b 6.4a b0.01

15.0b 15.3a 15.4a 15.1ab 15.3a b0.01

20.2c 24.3a 21.6b 21.4b 24.8a b0.01

Storage type Dark Light P-value

67.1 67.5 0.05

14.1 14.0 0.05

6.0a 5.6b b0.01

15.3a 15.1b b0.01

22.9a 22.0b b0.01

Storage time (weeks) 0 67.7a 4 67.3ab 8 66.9b P-value b0.01

13.9b 14.1a 14.1a b0.01

5.8 5.8 5.8 0.76

15.0a 15.3b 15.3b b0.01

22.8 22.4 22.3 0.12

Means with different letters in the same column are significantly different (P b 0.05). Control (2% salt); LS, low-salt (1.2% salt); OF45 (2% OF-45LSN salt replacer); OF60 (2% OF60-LSB salt replacer; SP (1.2% salt + 1.25% Savoury Powder).

x

1169

Table 4 Mean scores from consumer sensory panel assessments for restructured ham (n = 90) using a 9-point hedonic scale1. Means sharing the same letter do not differ significantly within each sensory attribute (Tukey's HSD0.05). Treatment

Overall acceptability

Appearance

Color

Flavor

Texture

Aftertaste

Control LS SP OF45 OF60 P-value

6.7 6.5 6.5 6.2 6.3 0.10

6.6 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.5 0.85

6.9 6.7 6.6 7.0 6.7 0.27

7.0a 6.5ab 6.6a 5.5c 5.9bc b0.0001

6.5a 6.5 6.4 6.6 6.5 0.97

6.9a 6.3a 6.3a 4.9c 5.6b b0.0001

1 1 = dislike extremely, 2 = dislike very much, 3 = dislike moderately, 4 = dislike slightly, 5 = neither like/dislike, 6 = like slightly, 7 = like moderately, 8 = like very much, 9 = like extremely

higher for control compared to OF60 and OF45 (P b 0.05). Liking scores for aftertaste were significantly higher for control, LS, and SP compared to OF60 and OF45, and OF60 scored significantly higher compared to OF45 (P b 0.05). Mean score for the flavor acceptability of LS was lower compared to control, however, this result was not significant (P N 0.05). No differences in liking of texture, appearance, or color among any of the treatments were found. Saltiness is an important driver for the flavor acceptance of meat products (Desmond, 2006), and thus, it is not surprising that control mean scores were highest for liking of overall acceptance, flavor, and aftertaste compared to all other treatments. Unexpectedly, the LS treatment was not liked significantly different than control for these attributes. It is postulated that smoking of the hams may have enhanced the perception of flavor, and therefore, the level of sodium in the LS treatment may be adequate for this type of meat product. OF45 and OF60 were liked significantly less compared to control for flavor and aftertaste. Mean hedonic score for aftertaste of ham containing OF45 was especially lower compared to control (approximately 30% lower; 4.9 vs 6.9, respectively). It is postulated these treatments were rated lower due to the elicitation of bitterness by certain cations within the replacers, especially potassium. It is well known that bitterness takes a longer time to develop in the oral cavity and a longer time to return back to baseline (Guinard, Hong, & Budwig, 1995), and thus at heightened levels, it can be associated with a decrease in the acceptability of aftertaste. 4. Conclusions All non-control ham treatments resulted in products with sodium contents below the Health Check™ Program limit for deli meats. Direct NaCl reduction adversely affected some hydration and textural characteristics of restructured hams, however, no detrimental effect on water binding and texture was observed when NaCl was substituted with sea salt replacers (OF45, OF60). Sodium reduction had no effect on the shelf life of the cooked ham with up to 60 days of refrigerated storage. Consumer hedonics for flavor and aftertaste were lower for OF45 and OF60 compared to control, suggesting that these salt replacers may not be appropriate for inclusion in these products. The present study showed that salt replacers can potentially substitute NaCl in restructured hams, however, further flavor optimization through the application of bitter masking agents may be required to suppress undesirable levels of bitterness elicited by these ingredients. Acknowledgments Financial support for this study by the Alberta Livestock and Meat Agency Ltd. (ALMA) and the Beef Information Centre (BIC) is gratefully acknowledged. Our sincere appreciation is extended to the technological staff at the Food Processing Development Centre (FPDC) for meat processing and instrumental analyses, and to the participants in the consumer sensory panels.

1170

Z. Pietrasik, N.J. Gaudette / Meat Science 96 (2014) 1165–1170

References Anderson, S. (2007). Determination of fat, moisture, and protein in meat and meat products using the FOSS FoodScan near-infrared spectrophotometer with FOSS Artificial Neural Network Calibration Model and Associated Database: Collaborative study. Journal of AOAC International, 90, 1073–1083. Averill, W. F. (1983). Ion-selective electrode system measures sodium content of foods. Food Technology, 37(44–52), 56. Bartoshuk, L. M., Rifkin, B., Marks, L. E., & Hooper, J. E. (1988). Bitterness of KCl and benzoate: Related to genetic status for sensitivity to PTC/PROP. Chemical Senses, 13, 517–528. Bourne, M. C. (1982). Food texture and viscosity. New York: Academic Press. Camou, J. P., Sebranek, J. G., & Olson, D.G. (1989). Effect of heating rate and protein concentration on gel strength and water loss of muscle protein gels. Journal of Food Science, 54, 850–854. Carballo, J., Mota, N., Barreto, G., & Jimenez-Colmenero, F. (1995). Binding properties and colour of Bologna sausages made with varying fat levels, protein levels and cooking temperatures. Meat Science, 41, 301–313. Cook, N. R., Cutler, J. A., Obarzanek, E., Buring, J. E., Rexrode, K. M., Kumanyika, S. K., Appel, L. J., & Whelton, P. K. (2007). Long term effects of dietary sodium reduction on cardiovascular disease outcomes: Observational follow-up of the trials of hypertension prevention (TOHP). British Medical Journal, 334, 885–888. Desmond, E. (2006). Reducing salt: A challenge for the meat industry. Meat Science, 74, 188–196. Froehlich, D. E., Gullett, E. A., & Usborne, W. R. (1983). Effect of nitrite and salt on the color, flavor and overall acceptability of ham. Journal of Food Science, 48(152–154), 171. Frye, C. B., Hand, L. W., Calkins, C. R., & Mandigo, R. W. (1986). Reduction or replacement of sodium chloride in a tumbled ham product. Journal of Food Science, 51, 836–837. Grau, R., & Hamm, R. (1953). Eine einfache Methode zur Bestimmung der Wasserbindung im Muskel. Naturwissenschaften, 40, 29–30. Guinard, J. X., Hong, D. Y., & Budwig, C. (1995). Time-intensity properties of sweet and bitter stimuli: Implications for sweet and bitter taste chemoreception. Journal of Sensory Studies, 10, 45–71. Health Canada (2012). The compendium of analytical methods: Official methods for the microbiological analysis of foods. Available from: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/resrech/analy-meth/microbio/volume2 (Accessed 2013 July 3) Krause, R. J., Ockerman, H. W., Krol, B., Moerman, P. C., & Plimpton, R. F. (1978). Influence of tumbling, tumbling time, trim and sodium tripolyphosphate on quality and yield of cured hams. Journal of Food Science, 43, 853–855. Lawless, H. T., & Heymann, H. (2010). Sensory evaluation of food: principles and practice (2nd ed.)New York: Springer.

Møller, J. K. S., Jakobsen, M., Weber, C. J., Martinussen, T., Skibsted, L. H., & Bertelsen, G. (2003). Optimisation of colour stability of cured ham during packaging and retail display by a multifactorial design. Meat Science, 63, 169–175. Ockerman, H. W., Plimpton, R. F., Cahill, V. R., & Parrett, N. A. (1978). Influence of short term tumbling, salt and phosphate on cured canned pork. Journal of Food Science, 43, 878–881. Pietrasik, Z. (1999). Effect of content of protein, fat and modified starch on binding textural characteristics, and colour of comminuted scalded sausages. Meat Science, 51, 17–25. Prescott, J., & Young, A. (2002). Does information about MSG (monosodium glutamate) content influence consumer ratings of soups with and without added MSG? Appetite, 39, 25–33. Ruusunen, M., & Puolanne, E. (2005). Reducing sodium intake from meat products. Meat Science, 70, 531–541. Sacks, F. M., Svetkey, L. P., Vollmer, W. M., Appel, L. J., Bray, G. A., Harsha, D., Obarzanek, E., Conlin, P. R., Miller, E. R., Simons-Morton, D.G., Karanja, N., Lin, P. H., Aickin, M., Most-Windhauser, M. M., Moore, T. J., Proschan, M.A., & Cutler, J. A. (2001). Effects on blood pressure of reduced dietary sodium and the dietary approaches to stop hypertension (DASH) diet. The New England Journal of Medicine, 344, 3–10. Schmidt, G. R. (1985). Histological techniques to study emulsion microstructureAnnual Reciprocal Meat Conference of the American Meat Science Association Proceedings, 38. (pp. 44–47). Siegel, D.G., Theno, D.M., Schmidt, G. R., & Norton, H. W. (1978). Meat massaging: the effects of salt, phosphate and massaging on cooking loss, binding strength and exudate composition in sectioned and formed ham. Journal of Food Science, 43, 331–333. Theno, D.M., Siegel, D.G., & Schmidt, G. R. (1978a). Meat massaging: effects of salt and phosphate on the microstructural composition of the muscle exudates. Journal of Food Science, 43, 483–487. Theno, D.M., Siegel, D.G., & Schmidt, G. R. (1978b). Meat massaging: effects of salt and phosphate on the microstructure of binding junctions in sectioned and formed hams. Journal of Food Science, 43, 493–498. Thiel, L. F., Bechtel, P. J., McKeith, F. K., & Brady, P. (1986). The influence of reduced salt on the yield, breaking force, and sensory characteristics of chunked and formed ham. Journal of Food Quality, 9, 355–364. Thiel, L. F., Bechtel, P. J., McKeith, F. K., Novakofski, J., & Carr, T. R. (1986). Effect of salt reduction on the yield, breaking force, and sensory characteristics of emulsion-coated chunked and formed ham. Journal of Food Science, 51(1439–1441), 1458. Trout, G. R., & Schmidt, G. R. (1986). Water binding ability of meat products: Effect of fat level, effective salt concentration and cooking temperature. Journal of Food Science, 51, 1061–1062. Verma, A. K., & Banerjee, R. (2012). Low-sodium meat products: Retaining salty taste for sweet health. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 52, 72–84. Webster, J. L., Dunford, E. K., Hawkes, C., & Neal, B. C. (2011). Salt reduction initiatives around the world. Journal of Hypertension, 29, 1043–1050.