JFQ Soy Fiber

THE EFFECT OF SOY FIBER ADDITION ON THE QUALITY OF
FERMENTED SAUSAGES AT LOW-FAT CONTENT

PAULO CEZAR BASTIANELLO CAMPAGNOL
1,3
, BIBIANA ALVES DOS SANTOS
1
, ROGER WAGNER
2
,
NELCINDO NASCIMENTO TERRA
2
and MARISE APARECIDA RODRIGUES POLLONIO
1
1
Universidade Estadual de Campinas, CEP 13083-862, Campinas, So Paulo, Brazil
2
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
3
Corresponding author.
TEL: +55-19-3521-4016;
FAX: +55-19-3289-3617;
EMAIL: paulocampagnol@iftm.edu.br
Received for Publication May 1, 2012
Accepted for Publication October 17, 2012
10.1111/jfq.12013
ABSTRACT
Fermented sausages with different levels of fat and soy ber were manufactured:
control (15% fat), FS1 (10% fat and 1% soy ber) and FS2 (10% fat and 2% soy
ber). During manufacturing, the physicochemical and microbiological para-
meters were assessed. The nal products were submitted to a consumer study, and
volatile compounds were extracted by solid-phase microextraction and analyzed
by gas chromatography/mass spectometry. FS1 and FS2 presented a nal fat
reduction of nearly 40%. There was no change in the manufacturing process.
However, an addition of 2% soy ber detracted from the sensory quality. Volatile
compounds from lipid oxidation were reduced, and volatile compounds from car-
bohydrate and amino acid catabolism were increased in the modied fermented
sausages. To conclude, fermented sausages with healthier characteristics can be
produced without quality loss by reducing fat from 15 to 10% and by adding 1%
soy ber.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
Fermented sausages are consumed worldwide, especially in Brazil; it has a signi-
cant place in the populations diet. Therefore, the fat reduction in these products
provides opportunities for the processing industry to add up healthier consump-
tion appeals. In this study, the use of soy ber in low-fat fermented sausages was
investigated in order to improve nutritional characteristics without affecting
sensory properties.
INTRODUCTION
Fermented sausages are considered a noble meat industry
product, mostly due to the incalculable added value over the
raw material. After fermentation and drying, this product
takes on highly pleasant sensory characteristics, which meet
the tastes of the most demanding palates. However, because
presenting a fat content that can reach up to 50% (Wirth
1988), its consumption is not recommended as part of a
healthy diet because a decrease in fat intake is indicated by
public health authorities as a way to prevent the occurr-
ence of cardiovascular disease (Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health Organization 2009; British
Nutrition Foundation 2009), which is the leading cause of
death in developed countries (World Health Organization
2009).
Thus, it is extremely important to reduce the amount of
fat in sausages. However, such a reduction represents a great
challenge for the meat industry. As shown by Muguerza
et al. (2002) and Mendoza et al. (2001), the sensory quality
is reduced when the fat content in the formulation dimin-
ishes. The decrease in sensory quality can occur as a result
of the depreciation of sensory attributes that the fat delivers
to the meat product, including tenderness, succulence,
aroma and avor (Wirth 1988). In addition to the sensory
quality decrease, fat reduction increases weight loss during
manufacture, raising the production costs (Papadima and
Bloukas 1999; Muguerza et al. 2002).
bs_bs_banner
Journal of Food Quality ISSN 1745-4557
41 Journal of Food Quality 36 (2013) 4150 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Reducing the fat content and simultaneously adding non-
lipid fat substitutes are frequently used to reduce fat without
a drop in fermented sausage quality. In this vein, low-fat,
acceptable-quality fermented sausages have been produced
using different bers, such as inulin, fructooligosaccharides
and fruit ber (Mendoza et al. 2001; Garca et al. 2002; dos
Santos et al. 2012). In addition to reducing the fat content,
using ber as a fat substitute means an extra nutritional
benet because consuming more dietary ber may decrease
obesity, cardiovascular disease and colorectal cancer
(Beecher 1999; Desmedt and Jacobs 2001).
Soy bers are obtained from the cellulosic and noncellu-
losic components of the soy bean cell wall. Such an ingredi-
ent contains 16% soluble ber and 59% insoluble ber
and provides the physiological benets tied to consuming
dietary ber (Vetter 1984). Years ago, soy ber was used
to nutritionally enrich bakery products (Rebolledo et al.
1999) and as a fat substitute in emulsied meat products
(Cofrades et al. 2000). However, the use of soy ber as a fat
substitute in fermented sausages has not been studied.
Thus, in this study, the objective was to verify the effect
of soy ber addition on several sensory, microbiological
and physicochemical parameters of fermented sausages with
low-fat content.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Production of Fermented Sausages
Three treatments were used to evaluate how reducing fat
and adding soy ber affected the physicochemical, micro-
biological and sensory characteristics in fermented sausages.
Three independent replicates of each treatment were made.
The control formulation was prepared with pork (650 g/
kg), beef (200 g/kg) and pork back fat (150 g/kg) as the raw
materials. The modied fermented sausage samples were
prepared with pork (700 g/kg), beef (200 g/kg) and pork
back fat (100 g/kg) as the raw materials. A portion of pork
was ground using a 12-mm disk, and a portion of beef was
ground using an 8-mm disk. The portion of pork back fat
was cut into cubes of approximately 1 cm
3
. A portion of
pork, beef and pork back fat were individually homogenized
before the treatment preparation. The following ingre-
dients were added to the meat mixture in each treatment:
sodium chloride (25 g/kg), glucose (5 g/kg), sucrose (5 g/
kg), sodium nitrate (0.15 g/kg), sodium nitrite (0.15 g/kg),
sodium ascorbate (0.25 g/kg), white pepper (2 g/kg), garlic
(3 g/kg), nutmeg (0.02 g/kg) and Floracarn SPX culture
starter (Chr. Hansen, Valinhos, So Paulo, Brazil) (0.25 g/
kg). Concentrations of 1% (FS1) and 2% (FS2) soy ber
(Solae, So Paulo, Brazil) were added to the low-fat fer-
mented sausages. The treatments were stuffed in collagen
casings (diameter of 60 mm) and were cut into slices
approximately 15 cm in length. In total, 50 pieces (approxi-
mately 200 g each) were prepared for each treatment. After
being stuffed, the samples were subjected to a bath in a 20%
solution of potassium sorbate and then ripened in a labo-
ratory ripening cabinet (Menoncin, Erechim, Brazil). The
ripening cabinet was programmed with the following con-
ditions: 24 h at 25C and a relative humidity (RH) of 95%
followed by 15C and 75% RH until the end of the experi-
ment (21 days).
Physicochemical Analysis
The analysis (moisture, protein, fat and ash contents) was
performed according to the Association of Ofcial Analyti-
cal Chemists (AOAC 2005) at day 0 and at the end of the
process (day 21). All tests were performed in triplicate using
three sausage samples per treatment. The determination
of pH was performed on days 0, 3, 7, 14 and 21 post-
production by homogenizing 10 g of each sample with
distilled water in a sample : water ratio of 1:10. The homo-
genate was subjected to a pH test using a meter electrode
(DM 22, Digimed, So Paulo, Brazil) for 5 min while the pH
readings were performed. The water activity (A
w
) was deter-
mined at days 0, 7, 14 and 21 post-production using an
Aqua lab CX-2 water-activity meter (Decagon Devices, Inc.,
Pullman, WA). Three sausages per batch were used to evalu-
ate the pH and A
w
, and each sample was analyzed in tripli-
cate. The color determination was performed at the end
of fermented sausage production, with a Hunter Lab colo-
rimeter (Colorquest-II, Hunter Associates Laboratory, Inc.,
Reston, VA) using a 10-mm port size, illuminent D
65
and a
10 standard observer. CIELAB L*, a* and b* values were
determined as indicators of lightness, redness and yellow-
ness. Color variables were measured at four points on the
central part of the cut surface of three slices of the ve
sausages. The weight loss was determined by the weight
difference among 10 sausages/batch immediately after the
stufng process and at the end of the sausage production.
Microbiological Analysis
Three sausages per batch were used to evaluate the micro-
biological characteristics on days 0, 3, 7, 14 and 21 post-
production according to the methodology described by
Vanderzant and Splittstoesser (1992). Aliquots of 25 g were
collected and homogenized with 225 mL of 0.1% peptone
water (Oxoid Unipath Ltd., Basingstoke, Hampshire, U.K.).
The aliquots were then serially diluted on a decimal scale.
Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) were quantied using De Man,
Rogosa and Sharpe agar (Oxoid Unipath Ltd.) at 37C for
48 h. Micrococcaceae were quantied using mannitol
salt agar (Oxoid Unipath Ltd.) at 37C for 48 h. The total
coliforms were quantied in crystal agar neutro-bile
SOY FIBER ADDITION IN LOW-FAT SALAMI P.C.B. CAMPAGNOL ET AL.
violet-red (Oxoid Unipath Ltd.) at 37C for 24 h. Fecal
coliforms were quantied in EC broth (Oxoid Unipath Ltd.)
at 45C for 48 h.
Volatile Compound Analysis
From each treatment, three pieces of fermented sausage
were separated and frozen (-18C) after 21 days of ripening.
A signicant portion of each sample was cut into small
cubes and ground in a domestic processor. After processing,
a portion (5 g) of the homogenized sample was weighed in
a 20-mL ask, which was immediately sealed with a septum
with an internal face made of polytetrauoroethylene. The
sample was then subjected to extraction.
The solid-phase microextraction (SPME) method
described by Wagner and Franco (2012) was used to extract
volatile compounds from the headspace of the fermented
sausage samples, using a Carboxen/PDMS coating ber
(10 mm in length and 75 mm lm thickness; Supelco, Belle-
fonte, PA). During volatile compound isolation, the needle
of the SPME system was placed into the ask containing the
sample (via the septum) and then exposed to the headspace.
The ber was exposed in the headspace of the sample for
45 min at a temperature of 50C. After this period, the ber
was collected and removed from the ask. Before exposure
of the ber to the headspace, the ask containing the sample
was immersed into a water bath at the same temperature
as the extraction for 15 min for equilibration. The volatile
compounds were thermally dissolved by inserting the ber
into the injector of a gas chromatograph.
Each analysis was recorded with a chromatogram gener-
ated by a gas chromatograph coupled to a mass spectro-
meter (gas chromatography/mass spectometry [GC/MS],
Shimadzu QP-2010 Plus, Shimadzu Corporation, Kyoto,
Japan). The thermal desorption of the volatile compounds
adsorbed on the SPME ber was performed at a tempera-
ture of 280C in a split/splitless-type injector in splitless
mode for 6 min. The ber was left in the injector for 10 min
to eliminate any memory effects. Compound separations
were performed on a capillary column of fused silica
CP-Wax (Chrompack, Middelburg, The Netherlands)
with the following dimensions: internal diameter of
60 mm 0.25 mm and a thickness of 0.25 mm at the sta-
tionary phase. Helium was used as the carrier gas under a
constant ow of 1.0 mL/min. The temperature program for
column heating started at 35C, where it remained for 5 min.
A 2C/min gradient was then applied until a temperature
of 80C was reached, which was followed by a second gradi-
ent of 4C/min until a temperature of 200C was reached.
This nal temperature was maintained for 5 min. The
GC/MS interface temperature and source of ionization were
maintained at 240C. The instrument was run in electron
ionization (+70 eV) mode.
A homologous series of alkanes (C6C24) was analyzed
at the same chromatography conditions to calculate
the Kovats index (KI) of the volatile compounds. First, the
identication of peaks was attempted by comparing the
mass spectra obtained with the mass spectra provided
by the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST 02). Subsequently, the relative retention index (KI)
and the elution order of the compounds were compared
with those found in the literature (Jennings and Shiba-
moto 1980; Acree and Heinrich 2009). When available as a
pure substance, the mass spectra of suspected compounds
were also compared with the unknown samples to aid in
identication.
Consumer Study
This study protocol was approved by the Ethics in Research
Committee of the University of Campinas (So Paulo,
Brazil) under number 271/2009. All participants signed a
consent form, agreeing to participate voluntarily in the
sensory analysis. The consumer study was conducted by
75 untrained panelists recruited among students, faculty
and staff members from the university campus whose ages
ranged from 18 to 48 years. They were asked to express
their opinion of the color, aroma, taste and texture of the
product. All data were recorded on a questionnaire designed
to indicate the degree of likeability for each sample using a
nonstructured scoring scale of 9 cm (0 = disliked extremely
and 9 = liked extremely) (Meilgaard et al. 1999). Samples
were evaluated by each consumer in a monadic order in two
sessions and were presented to the panelists balancing the
rst-order and carry-over effects according to Mace et al.
(1989).
Statistical Analysis
Data were assessed by using analysis of variance, and the
averages were compared using the Tukeys test with a sig-
nicance level of 5% (P 0.05) in the statistical package
SPSS (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Physicochemical Analysis
The results from the proximate composition of the fer-
mented sausages with reduced fat and addition of soy ber
are shown in Table 1. At the start of the manufacturing
treatments, FS1 and FS2 showed signicantly higher mois-
ture content and signicantly lower fat content than the
control; these results were attributed to the higher lean meat
content in these formulations. Additionally, the ash content
was signicantly higher in treatments FS1 and FS2 because
P.C.B. CAMPAGNOL ET AL. SOY FIBER ADDITION IN LOW-FAT SALAMI
of the addition of soy ber. The nal control fat content
was 31.53%, similar to that found in traditional fermented
sausages (Fernndez et al. 1995; Mendoza et al. 2001). The
treatments FS1 and FS2, however, showed a fat content of
19.21 and 19.96%, respectively, at the end of processing,
which represents a fat reduction of approximately 40%.
The evolutions of A
w
and pH were not signicantly
affected by fat reduction and addition of soy ber (Table 2).
The A
w
decreased from values close to 0.99 on day 0 to
values close to 0.90 at the end of the manufacturing process,
which is similar to trends observed in fermented sausages
with fat reduction (Mendoza et al. 2001; Garca et al. 2002;
Olivares et al. 2010). The initial pH ranged from 5.70 to
5.72. After 3 days of manufacture, the pH reached values
lower than 5.2 for all treatments (P > 0.05) due to the acidi-
cation from LAB (Muguerza et al. 2002). This rapid drop
in pH is crucial in producing safe, high-quality fermented
sausages because it inhibits undesirable microorganisms,
stabilizes conversion and color, and helps to form desirable
avor and aroma compounds (Lcke 1998).
The pH values showed a slight rise during the manufac-
turing process (day 21), reaching a nal pH from 4.75 to
4.77, which was attributed to ammonia production due
to enzymatic activity during maturation (Lcke 1994;
Gonzles-Fernndez et al. 1997). The parameters L*, a*, b*
measured at the end of processing were not affected by the
fat reduction and addition of soy ber (Table 2). Bloukas
et al. (1997), Papadima and Bloukas (1999), Muguerza
et al. (2002) and Liaros et al. (2009) reported increased
weight loss in fermented sausages with reduced fat content.
Although the treatments FS1 and FS2 presented a nal fat
reduction of approximately 40% when compared with
the control, weight loss was not signicantly increased
(Table 2), which shows that soy ber was effective in retain-
ing water in the product.
Microbiological Analysis
Table 3 shows the microbiological characteristics of the
reduced fat fermented sausages with the addition of soy
ber. The LAB count increased by approximately 1 log cycle
in all treatments in the rst 3 days of fermentation and
remained nearly constant until the seventh day. Afterward,
the LAB showed a slight increase and a count kept close to
8.0 log cfu/g in all treatments until the end of the process-
ing, a behavior that is consistent with the literature (Toldr
et al. 2001). At the end of the production period (day 21),
there was no signicant difference between the control and
treatments FS1 and FS2 in terms of the count of LAB.
Micrococcaceae counts during fabrication were similar
in all treatments (P > 0.05); there was a decrease between
the 21st day of approximately 2 log cycles (Table 3). The
decrease in Micrococcaceae counts during manufacturing
was most likely due to reduced pH, as acidication is con-
sidered the main cause of the inhibition of these microor-
ganisms in fermented sausages (Samelis et al. 1998; Lisazo
et al. 1999).
The total coliforms were phased out in all treatments
during manufacturing. Furthermore, there were no fecal
coliforms, indicating good microbiological quality of the
raw material (Table 3). There were no signicant differences
in total coliform counts during manufacturing between the
control and treatments FS1 and FS2.
Volatile Compound Analysis
Table 4 presents the volatile compounds extracted by
HS-SPME of fermented sausages with fat reduction and the
TABLE 1. PROXIMATE COMPOSITION OF FERMENTED SAUSAGES
WITH FAT REDUCTION AND ADDITION OF SOY FIBER
Days Control FS1 FS2
Moisture (%) 0 62.48 0.29
b
64.92 0.31
a
64.32 0.24
a
21 36.58 0.03
c
38.75 0.18
b
41.20 0.11
a
Protein (%) 0 16.44 0.45
a
16.76 0.16
a
17.03 0.21
a
21 28.00 0.69
b
32.14 1.39
a
31.10 0.30
a
Fat (%) 0 15.51 0.05
a
10.24 0.10
b
10.42 0.17
b
21 31.53 0.09
a
19.21 0.59
b
19.96 0.60
c
Ash (%) 0 3.04 0.06
c
3.58 0.07
b
3.98 0.03
a
21 4.29 0.04
c
5.18 0.07
b
5.46 0.03
a
Note: Values represent the average (standard deviation). Averages
with the same letter on the same row are not signicantly different
(P > 0.05) by Tukeys test. Control: 65% pork, 20% beef, 15% pork
back fat; FS1: 70% pork, 20% beef, 10% pork back fat, 1% soy ber;
FS2: 70% pork, 20% beef, 10% pork back fat, 2% soy ber.
TABLE 2. AVERAGE VALUES OF Aw, pH, COLOR (L*, a*, b*) AND
WEIGHT LOSS (WL) OF LOW-FAT CONTENT FERMENTED SAUSAGES
WITH SOY FIBER
Day Control FS1 FS2
Aw 0 0.998 0.002
a
0.997 0.002
a
0.997 0.002
a
7 0.981 0.002
a
0.983 0.003
a
0.983 0.002
a
14 0.949 0.002
a
0.941 0.014
a
0.931 0.012
a
21 0.904 0.012
a
0.897 0.006
a
0.898 0.016
a
pH 0 5.71 0.04
a
5.70 0.02
a
5.72 0.02
a
3 5.05 0.11
a
5.11 0.02
a
5.04 0.02
a
7 4.81 0.02
a
4.77 0.01
a
4.77 0.02
a
14 4.73 0.02
a
4.69 0.08
a
4.70 0.05
a
21 4.77 0.02
a
4.75 0.01
a
4.75 0.01
a
L* 21 51.40 2.55
a
51.20 1.75
a
50.44 0.97
a
a* 21 19.10 2.13
a
17.09 1.79
a
19.20 1.91
a
b* 21 4.95 1.59
a
4.10 1.42
a
5.35 1.26
a
WL % 21 39.21 3.55
a
39.26 3.47
a
40.99 3.13
a
(P > 0.05) by Tukeys test. Control: 65% pork, 20% beef, 15% pork
back fat; FS1: 70% pork, 20% beef, 10% pork back fat, 1% soy ber;
addition of soy ber. More than 160 volatile compounds
were detected, of which 92 were grouped into 10 chemical
classes: aldehydes (20), alcohols (19), terpenes (15), acids
(12), suldes (10), ketones (7), phenols (3), nitriles (2),
furans (2) and esters (2). Aliphatic hydrocarbons (branched
or unbranched) were excluded from Table 4 either because
they had no relevance to odor or because they were con-
sidered contaminants (Stahnke 1994, 1995; Dirinck et al.
1997).
The treatments FS1 and FS2 showed a signicant
reduction compared with the control in sundry short-chain
aldehydes (butanal, pentanal, hexanal, nonenal, 2-butenal,
[E]-2-hexenal, 2-heptenal, 2,4-hexadienal, [E]-2-octenal,
2,4-heptadienal, [E]-2-nonenal, [E]-2-decenal and 2,4-
nonadienal). These compounds have been described as
responsible for giving rancid notes (Stahnke 1999; Casaburi
et al. 2007), and its presence in fermented sausages is tied
to free-fatty acid oxidation, released as a result of lipolytic
reactions during maturation (Toldr 1998; Ansorena et al.
2001). Hexanal was the most abundant aldehyde found in
this study and is regarded as an indicator of the lipid oxida-
tion process of this type of meat product (Ordez et al.
1999). The branched-chain aldehydes 2-methylpropanal,
3-methylbutanal and 2-methylbutanal, which are generated
from valine, leucine and isoleucine, respectively, were sig-
nicantly increased in FS1 and FS2 treatments compared
with the control. These compounds have been described as
crucial in fragrant fermented sausages, they contribute to
the aroma of cured and matured characteristic of this meat
product (Careri et al. 1993; Stahnke 1994; Bruna et al. 2000;
Sondergaard and Stahnke 2002).
The alcohols 2-propanol, ethanol, 1-penten-3-ol,
3-methylbutanol, 3-methyl-3-buten-1-ol, (E)-2-pentenol,
1-octen-3-ol, heptanol, 2,3-butanediol and 2-octen-1-ol
were found in a signicantly lower level in FS1 and FS2
treatments compared with the control. The probable expla-
nation for this observation is that the alcohols are normally
present in fermented sausages mainly generated by the
reduction of aldehydes (Ordez et al. 1999; Flores et al.
2004). The alcohol 1-penten-3-ol can deliver an aroma of
roasted and onion. The compounds 3-methylbutanol and
3-methyl-3-buten-1-ol have great aromatic importance in
fermented sausages because they contribute to the charac-
teristic fermented and oral aroma, respectively (Stahnke
and Tjener 2007). However, the compound 1-octen-3-ol
is related to notes of mushroom, whereas the compound
2,3-butanediol delivers fruity notes (Ordez et al. 1999).
The ketones 2,3-pentanodione, 3-hydroxy-2-butanone
and 1-octen-3-one were signicantly reduced, and the
ketone 2-butanone was signicantly increased in treatments
with reduced fat and the addition of soy ber (FS1, FS2)
compared with the control. These ketones contribute to the
typical aroma of fermented sausages. They deliver notes of
cheese (2,3-pentanodione), butter (3-hydroxy-2-butanone),
mushroom (1-octen-3-one) and matured (2-butanone)
(Montel et al. 1998; Schmidt and Berger 1998).
Acetic acid was found in larger quantities in this study,
and its concentration was signicantly higher in the FS1
and FS2 treatments compared with the control. This com-
pound, formed due to the catabolism of carbohydrates, is
highly important because of its odor, which usually delivers
a ripened aroma (Schmidt and Berger 1998; Marco et al.
2007).
The treatments FS1 and FS2 showed a signicant in-
crease compared with the control in sulfur compounds:
ethylmethyl sulde, 2-propene-1-thiol, methyl allyl sulde,
TABLE 3. MICROBIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS
(LOG CFU/G) OF FERMENTED SAUSAGES
WITH FAT REDUCTION AND THE ADDITION
OF SOY FIBER
Days Control FS1 FS2
Lactic acid bacteria 0 6.59 0.20
a
6.71 0.10
a
6.70 0.13
a
3 7.20 0.36
a
7.67 0.16
a
7.64 0.27
a
7 7.21 0.22
b
7.58 0.27
ab
7.69 0.15
a
14 7.87 0.10
b
8.24 0.09
a
8.02 0.10
b
21 8.25 0.06
a
8.03 0.17
a
8.17 0.20
a
Micrococcaceae 0 6.07 0.30
a
6.30 0.07
a
6.33 0.21
a
3 4.23 0.37
a
4.25 0.16
a
3.96 0.45
a
7 3.70 0.28
a
3.76 0.05
a
3.80 0.20
a
14 4.32 0.06
a
4.53 0.17
a
4.84 0.26
a
21 4.16 0.24
a
4.38 0.17
a
4.22 0.11
a
Total coliforms 0 3.26 0.22
a
3.25 0.21
a
3.35 0.28
a
3 2.88 0.02
a
3.10 0.27
a
2.92 0.16
a
7 1.69 0.48
a
2.24 0.05
a
2.14 0.11
a
14 1.08 0.15
a
1.08 0.15
a
1.15 0.79
a
21 1.00 1.00 1.00
Note: Values represent the average (standard deviation). Averages with the same letter on
the same row are not signicantly different (P > 0.05) by the Tukeys test. Control: 65% pork,
20% beef, 15% pork back fat; FS1: 70% pork, 20% beef, 10% pork back fat, 1% soy ber;
TABLE 4. VOLATILE COMPOUNDS OF
FERMENTED SAUSAGES WITH FAT
REDUCTION AND THE ADDITION OF
SOY FIBER
KI-MS* Compounds I
Control FS1 FS2
A SD A SD A SD
Aldehydes
707 Acetaldehyde B 6.31 0.60
b,
5.01 0.20
b
8.49 1.23
a
816 2-Methylpropanal B 1.12 0.08
c
1.71 0.08
b
2.47 0.16
a
851 2-Propenal B 0.80 0.35
a
0.47 0.15
a
1.94 1.03
a
880 Butanal B 2.42 0.05
a
1.05 0.17
c
1.48 0.15
b
917 2-Methylbutanal B 1.32 0.04
b
1.68 0.07
a
1.91 0.18
a
922 3-Methylbutanal B 5.24 0.15
b
7.66 0.29
a
8.14 0.64
a
984 Pentanal B 63.73 4.45
a
22.71 0.55
b
27.95 4.30
b
1051 2-Butenal C 1.65 0.22
a
0.73 0.13
b
0.98 0.09
b
1090 Hexanal A 225.94 42.32
a
88.89 37.27
b
145.0 23.49
ab
1102 (E)-2-methyl-2-butenal B 0.08 0.01
c
6.65 2.78
b
13.76 3.48
a
1223 (E)-2-hexenal B 3.44 0.49 ND ND
1329 2-Heptenal B 10.74 2.08
a
1.16 0.57
b
2.43 1.08
b
1393 Nonanal A 5.27 1.84
a
1.55 0.37
b
2.35 0.39
b
1406 2,4-Hexadienal B 0.59 0.06 ND ND
1432 (E)-2-octenal B 1.91 0.46
a
0.42 0.13
b
0.74 0.19
b
1499 2,4-heptadienal B 0.73 0.14 ND ND
1531 Benzaldehyde A 1.98 0.44
a
1.55 0.17
a
2.31 0.29
a
1541 (E)-2-nonenal B 0.74 0.10 ND ND
1652 (E)-2-decenal B 0.56 0.15 ND ND
1714 2,4-Nonadienal B 0.18 0.05 ND ND
Alcohols
935 2-Propanol A 0.18 0.02 ND ND
942 Ethanol A 3.99 0.13
a
2.21 0.10
b
2.36 0.07
b
1033 2-Butanol A 0.14 0.01
a
0.14 0.04
a
0.21 0.07
a
1047 Propanol A 0.37 0.09
a
0.20 0.03
b
0.24 0.01
ab
1163 Butanol A 1.35 0.50
ab
0.48 0.04
b
1.94 0.36
a
1173 1-Penten-3-ol B 3.52 0.18
a
0.84 0.11
c
1.42 0.19
b
1217 3-Methylbutanol A 2.26 0.28
a
1.53 0.04
b
1.78 0.18
b
1256 3-Methyl-3-buten-1-ol B 0.59 0.02
a
ND ND
1259 Pentanol A 13.41 2.12
a
8.77 2.94
a
10.79 4.22
a
1318 (E)-2-pentenol B 0.13 0.03 ND ND
1331 3-Methyl-2-butenol B ND 1.28 0.14
a
1.48 0.90
a
1359 Hexanol A 10.02 1.34
b
8.41 0.62
b
15.36 2.20
a
1450 1-Octen-3-ol B 1.38 0.31 ND ND
1456 Heptanol A 2.05 0.25
a
ND 0.63 0.14
b
1487 2-Ethylhexanol C 0.74 0.30
ab
0.39 0.03
b
1.09 0.38
a
1546 2,3-Butanediol B 10.94 1.78
a
5.50 0.72
b
5.26 0.61
b
1558 Octanol A 1.45 0.11
a
0.89 0.09
b
1.18 0.17
ab
1616 2-Octen-1-ol B 0.09 0.02 ND ND
1924 Phenylethyl alcohol A 0.18 0.03
a
0.17 0.03
a
0.19 0.00
a
Ketones
822 Acetone A 6.67 0.43
a
7.10 0.39
a
8.27 0.71
a
908 2-Butanone A 4.77 0.25
b
7.04 0.26
a
8.20 0.93
a
1028 1-Penten-3-one B 0.29 0.07
a
0.17 0.29
a
0.22 0.37
a
1072 2,3-Pentanodione B 0.88 0.12
a
0.27 0.04
b
0.42 0.07
b
1292 3-Hydroxy-2-butanone A 8.39 3.81
a
3.15 0.29
ab
1.91 1.67
b
1302 1-Octen-3-one A 2.19 0.90
a
0.32 0.14
b
0.57 0.21
b
1309 1-Hydroxy-2-propanone C 0.38 0.34
a
0.45 0.02
a
0.56 0.18
a
Acids
1442 Acetic acid A 124.03 1.88
c
171.2 2.01
a
158.18 4.02
b
1537 Propanoic acid A 1.26 0.08
a
1.24 0.10
a
1.30 0.04
a
1626 Butanoic acid A 13.22 0.96
a
10.75 0.68
b
11.99 0.38
ab
1668 Acid 3-methylbutanoic A 1.73 0.12
a
1.22 0.22
a
1.73 0.59
a
1736 Pentanoic acid A 1.92 0.11
a
1.28 0.11
b
1.61 0.17
ab
1775 Crotonic acid C 0.13 0.03
a
0.06 0.01
b
0.08 0.01
ab
1842 Hexanoic acid A 9.68 1.00
a
6.25 0.59
b
7.83 0.70
ab
1944 Acid 2-methylbutanoic C 0.07 0.01
a
0.05 0.01
a
0.06 0.00
a
TABLE 4. CONTINUED
KI-MS* Compounds I
Control FS1 FS2
A SD A SD A SD
1949 Hexanoic acid A 0.55 0.07
a
0.35 0.04
b
0.47 0.03
ab
2058 Butanoic acid A 0.89 0.12
a
0.73 0.08
a
0.85 0.05
a
2084 Sorbic acid B 3.68 0.58
a
3.65 0.14
a
3.37 0.12
a
2159 Nonanoic acid A 0.17 0.01
a
0.10 0.02
b
0.15 0.02
a
Suldes
676 Methanethiol B 1.09 0.94
b
2.35 0.08
ab
2.58 0.23
a
726 Carbon disulde B 4.64 0.67
a
3.35 0.50
b
5.11 0.24
a
829 Ethylmethyl sulfate C 0.69 0.05
c
0.95 0.03
b
1.73 0.10
a
887 2-Propene-1-thiol B 1.61 0.13
b
2.81 0.30
a
2.56 0.32
a
957 Methyl allyl sulde B 15.03 1.94
b
23.11 2.28
a
21.96 2.15
a
1077 Dimethyl disulde B 0.12 0.02
b
0.24 0.03
a
0.22 0.04
a
1094 2-Methylthiophene C 7.68 4.61
a
7.27 0.49
a
8.83 0.86
a
1374 Dimethyl disulde B ND 0.06 0.05
a
0.07 0.01
a
1478 Diallyl sulde B 0.60 0.05
b
1.60 0.16
a
1.35 0.06
a
1725 Metionol B 0.26 0.07
a
0.19 0.04
a
0.28 0.06
a
Phenols
2015 Phenol B 0.55 0.11
a
0.47 0.04
a
0.42 0.04
a
2093 m-Cresol B 0.49 0.05
a
0.49 0.06
a
0.55 0.01
a
2100 o-Cresol B 0.51 0.05
a
0.55 0.08
a
0.53 0.05
a
Nitriles
1011 Acetonitrile A 0.08 0.02
a
0.09 0.01
a
0.11 0.02
a
1400 Heptane nitrile C 0.78 0.30
a
0.55 0.13
a
0.64 0.22
a
Furans
873 2-Methylfuran B 2.09 0.16
a
2.25 0.19
a
2.52 0.22
a
1228 2-Pentylfuran B 1.06 0.25
a
0.88 0.67
a
1.15 1.03
a
Esters
894 Ethyl acetate A 2.06 0.19
a
1.90 0.18
a
1.87 0.29
a
1485 Ethyl sorbate C 0.07 0.06
a
0.07 0.01
a
0.07 0.06
a
Terpenes
1019 a-Pinene A 2.80 0.49
a
2.96 0.14
a
3.13 0.15
a
1026 a-Tujeno B 2.21 0.07
a
1.95 0.18
a
2.53 0.36
a
1099 b-Pinene A 2.21 0.21
a
2.29 0.09
a
2.24 0.06
a
1114 Sabinene B 6.21 1.04
a
1.76 0.22
a
4.71 2.90
a
1139 3-Carene B 8.78 1.97
a
6.45 1.20
a
9.76 2.49
a
1155 a-Phellandrene B 0.25 0.04
a
0.27 0.04
a
0.41 0.13
a
1158 b-Myrcene B 0.42 0.28
a
0.56 0.10
a
0.85 0.13
a
1169 a-Terpinene B 0.21 0.09
a
0.28 0.04
a
0.23 0.04
a
1187 Limonene A 22.08 5.38
a
18.07 2.94
a
17.81 3.05
a
1194 b-Phellandrene B 2.18 0.34
a
1.21 0.55
a
1.89 1.30
a
1264 p-Cymene B 0.11 0.04
a
1.27 2.20
a
3.06 2.66
a
1483 Copaene B 0.32 0.02
a
0.27 0.02
a
0.45 0.35
a
1572 b-Caryophyllene B 4.09 0.06
a
4.29 0.54
a
5.13 0.30
a
1606 4-Terpineol B 2.74 0.11
a
2.03 0.16
b
2.65 0.11
a
1673 a-Humulene B 0.60 0.14
a
0.53 0.15
a
0.84 0.33
a
Note: Values represent the average (standard deviation). Averages with the same letter on the
same row are not signicantly different (P > 0.05) by Tukeys test. Control: 65% pork, 20% beef,
15% pork back fat; FS1: 70% pork, 20% beef, 10% pork back fat, 1% soy ber; FS2: 70% pork,
20% beef, 10% pork back fat, 2% soy ber.
* KI-MS represents the ratio of experimental Kovats index to mass spectrometry (DB-Wax; J and
W Scientic, Folsom, CA).
Identication reliability as follows: A, mass spectra and retention time equal to the standard
(positively identied); B, mass spectra and Kovats index in accordance with literature data;
C, mass spectra in accordance with the National Institute of Standards and Technology 98 library
(tentatively identied).
A is the average area 10
6
.
ND, not detected compound; SD, standard deviation.
dimethyl sulde, dimethyl trisulde and diallyl disulde,
which have a high-impact odor (Schmidt and Berger 1998)
and are correlated positively with the aroma of a cured
and matured product (Stahnke et al. 2002). However, one
could note that large amounts of sulfur compounds can
contribute to an unpleasant aroma and avor (Flores et al.
1998).
Herein, a large formation of esters was not observed,
which can be attributed to the probable inhibition of
esterase enzymes because the pH reached values below 5.0
(Toldr et al. 2001). Terpenes, which are present in fer-
mented sausages due to seasoning added in the formulation,
did not differ signicantly between the treatments; neither
did phenols, nitriles and furans.
Consumer Study
The results of the consumer study are presented in Table 5.
Agreeing with the data obtained in determining the para-
meters L*, a*, b* (Table 2), fat reduction and the addition
of soy ber did not inuence the color of the fermented
sausages, and neither modication causes changes in taste.
Despite the differences in the volatile prole (Table 4), con-
sumers did not detect differences in aroma between the
control and treatments with reduced fat and the addition
of soy ber (FS1, FS2). The volatile compounds generated
from the spices added to the formulation likely damaged the
perception of consumers regarding the differences instru-
mentally found in the volatile prole. The notes to the
attribute of texture were signicantly lower for FS2 treat-
ment, compared with the control; however, there was no
difference between the FS1 treatment and the control.
CONCLUSIONS
A reduction from 15 to 10% in fat of the formulation and
the incorporation of 1 and 2% soy ber produced a
decrease in sundry short-chain aldehydes, associated with
lipid oxidation and a rise in volatile compounds from the
fermentation of carbohydrates and amino acid catabolism.
Additionally, such reformulations reduced the nal fat
content by approximately 40%. The fat reduction and the
addition of soy ber did not change the physicochemical,
microbiological quality of the fermented sausages, but a
level of 2% soy ber caused texture depreciation. Thus, one
can say that fermented sausages with healthier and more
sensory acceptable characteristics can be produced by
reducing pork back fat by 1510% when formulating and
introducing 1% soy ber.
REFERENCES
ACREE, T.E. and HEINRICH, A. 2009. Flavornet and human
odor space. Gas chromatography-olfactometry (GCO) of
natural products. http://avornet.org/avornet.html (accessed
April 10, 2012).
ANSORENA, D., GIMENO, O., ASTIASARN, I. and BELLO, J.
2001. Analysis of volatile compounds by GCMS of a dry
fermented sausage: Chorizo de Pamplona. Food Res. Int. 34,
6775.
AOAC. 2005. Ofcial Methods of Analysis of AOAC International,
Association of Ofcial Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.
BEECHER, G.R. 1999. Phytonutrients role in metabolism:
Effects on resistance to degenerative processes. Nutr. Rev. 57,
36.
BLOUKAS, J.G., PANERAS, E.D. and FOURNITZIS, G.C. 1997.
Effect of replacing pork backfat with olive oil on processing
and quality characteristics of fermented sausages. Meat Sci.
45, 133144.
BRITISH NUTRITION FOUNDATION. 2009. Nutrient
requirements and recommendations. http://www.
nutrition.org.uk/upload/CVD%20pdf%20for%20website.pdf
(accessed April 12, 2012).
BRUNA, J.M., FERNNDEZ, M., HIERRO, E.M., ORDEZ,
J.A. and de la HOZ, L. 2000. Combined use of Pronase E and
a fungal extract (Penicillium aurantiogriseum) to potentiate
the sensory characteristics of dry fermented sausages. Meat
Sci. 54, 135145.
CARERI, M., MANGIA, A., BARBIERI, G., BOLZONI, L.,
VIRGILI, R. and PAROLARI, G. 1993. Sensory property
relationships to chemical data of Italian-type dry-cured ham.
J. Food Sci. 58, 968972.
CASABURI, A., ARISTOY, M.C., CAVELLA, S., DI MONACO,
R., ERCOLINI, D., TOLDR, F. and VILLANI, F. 2007.
Biochemical and sensory characteristics of traditional
fermented sausages of Vallo di Diano (Southern Italy) as
affected by use of starter cultures. Meat Sci. 76, 295307.
COFRADES, S., GUERRA, M.A., CARBALLO, J.,
FERNANDEZ-MARTIN, F. and JIMENEZ-COLMENERO, F.
2000. Plasma protein and soy ber content effect on bologna
sausage properties as inuenced by fat level. J. Food Sci. 65,
281287.
TABLE 5. CONSUMER ACCEPTABILITY OF COLOR, TASTE, AROMA
AND TEXTURE OF THE FERMENTED SAUSAGES WITH FAT REDUCTION
AND THE ADDITION OF SOY FIBER
Control FS1 FS2
Color 5.94 1.67
a
5.66 1.72
a
5.86 1.78
a
Taste 5.98 2.16
a
6.35 1.73
a
6.13 2.05
a
Aroma 5.53 1.94
a
5.60 1.93
a
5.54 2.23
a
Texture 6.63 1.74
a
6.05 1.74
ab
5.80 2.14
b
(P > 0.05) by the Tukeys test. Control: 65% pork, 20% beef, 15%
pork back fat; FS1: 70% pork, 20% beef, 10% pork back fat, 1% soy
ber; FS2: 70% pork, 20% beef, 10% pork back fat, 2% soy ber.
DESMEDT, A. and JACOBS, H. 2001. Soluble bre. In Guide to
Functional Foods (J. Young, ed.) pp. 112132, Leatherhead
Publishing, Leatherhead, U.K.
DIRINCK, P., VAN OPSTAELE, F. and VANDENDRIESSCHE, F.
1997. Flavour differences between Northern and Southern
European cured hams. Food Chem. 59, 511521.
DOS SANTOS, B.A., CAMPAGNOL, P.C.B., PACHECO, M.T.B.
and POLLONIO, M.A.R. 2012. Fructooligosaccharides as a fat
replacer in fermented cooked sausages. Int. J. Food Sci.
Technol. 47(6), 11831192.
FERNNDEZ, M., HOZ, L., DAZ, O., CAMBERO, I. and
ORDEZ, J.A. 1995. Effect of the addition of pancreatic
lipase on the ripening of dry-fermented sausages. Part 1.
Microbial, physico-chemical and lipolytic changes. Meat Sci.
40, 159170.
FLORES, M., SPANIER, A.M. and TOLDR, F. 1998. Flavor of
meat, meat products and seafoods. In Flavour Analysis of
Dry-Cured Ham (F.D. Shahidi, ed.) pp. 320341, Blackie
Academic and Professional, London, U.K.
FLORES, M., DUR, M.A., MARCO, A. and TOLDR, F.
2004. Effect of Debaryomyces spp. on aroma formation and
sensory quality of dry-fermented sausages. Meat Sci. 68,
439446.
GARCA, M.L., DOMINGUEZ, R., GALVEZ, M.D., CASAS, C.
and SELGAS, M.D. 2002. Utilization of cereal and fruit
bres in low fat dry fermented sausages. Meat Sci. 60,
227236.
GONZLES-FERNNDEZ, C., SANTOS, E.M., JAIME, I. and
ROVIRA, J. 1997. Utilizacin de cultivos iniciadores en la
elaboracin de chorizo y su inuencia en las propiedades
sensoriales. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 3, 3142.
JENNINGS, W. and SHIBAMOTO, T. 1980. Evolution and
application of the fused silica column. J. High Res.
Chromatogr. 3, 601608.
LIAROS, N.G., KATSANIDIS, E. and BLOUKAS, J.G. 2009.
Effect of the ripening time under vacuum and packaging
lm permeability on processing and quality characteristics
of low-fat fermented sausages. Meat Sci. 83, 589598.
LISAZO, G., CHASCO, J. and BERIAIN, M.J. 1999.
Microbiological and biochemical changes during ripening of
salchichn, a Spanish dry cured sausage. Food Microbiol. 16,
219228.
LCKE, F.K. 1994. Fermented meat products. Food Res. Int. 27,
299307.
LCKE, F.K. 1998. Fermented sausages. In Microbiology of
Fermented Foods (B.J.B. Wood, ed.) pp. 441483, Blackie
Academic and Professional, London, U.K.
MACFIE, H.J., BRATCHELL, N., GREENHOFF, K. and VALLIS,
L. 1989. Designs balance the effect of order of presentation
and rst-order carry-over effects in hall tests. J. Sensory
Studies 4, 129148.
MARCO, A., NAVARRO, J.L. and FLORES, M. 2007.
Quantitation of selected odor-active constituents in dry
fermented sausages prepared with different curing salts.
J. Agric. Food Chem. 55, 30583065.
MEILGAARD, M., CIVILLE, G.V. and CARR, B.T. 1999. Sensory
Evaluation Techniques, p. 387, CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton,
FL.
MENDOZA, E., GARCA, M.L., CASAS, C. and SELGAS, M.D.
2001. Inulin as fat substitute in low fat, dry fermented
sausages. Meat Sci. 57, 387393.
MONTEL, M.C., MASSON, F. and TALON, R. 1998. Bacterial
role in avor development. Meat Sci. 49, S111S123.
MUGUERZA, E., FISTA, G., ANSORENA, D., ASTIASARN, I.
and BLOUKAS, J.G. 2002. Effect of fat level and partial
replacement of pork backfat with olive oil on processing and
quality characteristics of fermented sausages. Meat Sci. 61,
397404.
OLIVARES, A., NAVARRO, J.L., SALVADOR, A. and FLORES,
M. 2010. Sensory acceptability of slow fermented sausages
based on fat content and ripening time. Meat Sci. 86,
251257.
ORDEZ, J.A., HIERRO, E.M., BRUNA, J.M. and de la
HOZ, L. 1999. Changes in the components of dry-fermented
sausages during ripening. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. 39,
329367.
PAPADIMA, S.N. and BLOUKAS, J.G. 1999. Effect of fat level
and storage conditions on quality characteristics of traditional
Greek sausages. Meat Sci. 51, 103113.
REBOLLEDO, M.A., SANGRONIS, E. and
BARBOSA-CNOVAS, G.V. 1999. Evolucin de galletas
dulces enriquecidas com grmen de maz y bra de soya.
ALAN 49, 253259.
SAMELIS, J., METAXOPOULOS, J., VLASSI, M. and PAPPA, A.
1998. Stability and safety of traditional Greek salami: A
microbiological ecology study. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 44,
6982.
SCHMIDT, S. and BERGER, R.G. 1998. Aroma compounds in
fermented sausages of different origins. Lebensm. Wiss.
Technol. 31, 559567.
SONDERGAARD, A.K. and STAHNKE, L.H. 2002. Growth and
aroma production by Staphylococcus xylosus, S. carnosus and S.
equorum a comparative study in model systems. Int. J. Food
Microbiol. 75, 99109.
STAHNKE, L.H. 1994. Aroma components from dried sausages
fermented with Staphylococcus xylosus. Meat Sci. 38, 3953.
STAHNKE, L.H. 1995. Dried sausages fermented with
Staphylococcus xylosus at different temperatures and with
different ingredient levels II. Volatile compounds. Meat Sci.
41, 193209.
STAHNKE, L.H. 1999. Volatile produced by Staphylococcus
xylosus and Staphylococcus carnosus during growth in sausage
minces. Part I. Collection and identication. Lebensm. Wiss.
Technol. 32, 357364.
STAHNKE, L.H. and TJENER, K. 2007. Inuence of processing
parameters on cultures performance. In Handbook of
Fermented Meat and Poultry (F. Toldr, ed.) pp. 187194,
Blackwell Publishing, Ames, IA.
STAHNKE, L.H., HOLCK, A., JENSEN, A., NILSEN, A. and
ZANARDI, E. 2002. Maturity acceleration by Staphylococcus
carnosus in fermented sausage relationship between
maturity and taste compounds. J. Food Sci. 67, 19141921.
TOLDR, F. 1998. Proteolysis and lipolysis in avour
development of dry-cured meat products. Meat Sci.
49, S101S110.
TOLDR, F., SANZ, Y. and FLORES, M. 2001. Meat
fermentation technology. In Meat Science and Applications
(Y.H. Hur, W. Nip, R.W. Rogers and O.A. Young, eds.)
pp. 537561, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, NY.
VANDERZANT, C. and SPLITTSTOESSER, D.F. 1992.
Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination
of Foods, p. 1219, American Public Health Association,
Washington, DC.
VETTER, J.L. 1984. Fiber as a food ingredient. Food Technol.
38, 6468.
WAGNER, R. and FRANCO, M.R.B. 2012. Effect of the variables
time and temperature on volatile compounds extraction of
salami by solid phase microextraction. Food Anal. Methods
5, 11861195.
WIRTH, F. 1988. Technologies for making fat-reduce meat
products. What possibilities are there? Fleischwirtschaft
68, 11531156.
WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION (WHO). 2009. Preventing
chronic diseases: A vital investment. http://www.who.int/
features/factles/global_burden/en/index.html (accessed April
4, 2012).

JFQ Soy Fiber

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

JFQ Soy Fiber

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

THE EFFECT OF SOY FIBER ADDITION ON THE QUALITY OF

FERMENTED SAUSAGES AT LOW-FAT CONTENT

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi