Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Departamento de Producción Animal, Bogotá D.C 11001, Colombia; University of Guelph, Department of Food Science, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada.
Universidad Federal de Santa Catarina, Department of Food Science and Technology, Florianópolis, SC 88034-001, Brazil.
Meat Sci. 2019 Jul;153:58-65. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2019.03.012. Epub 2019 Mar 14.
Barley sourced beta-glucan (βG), microcrystalline cellulose (MCC), or starch were added to beef emulsions containing beef, olive oil, salts, and water. Emulsions with inclusion levels of 1% of βG, MCC, or starch, 2% of βG, MCC, or starch, or 3% of βG, MCC, or starch, and a mixture of βG (1.5%) and MCC (1.5%) were evaluated for proximate composition, cooking loss, instrumental color, and texture profile analyses (TPA) in three independent replications. As expected, proximate composition differed based mainly on the hydrocolloid used and formulation. Cooking loss was not different among treatments. However, TPA differed with βG samples having lower (P < .05) values for hardness, adhesiveness, cohesiveness, gumminess, and chewiness compared with MCC and starch samples, while samples prepared with MCC and starch presented similar TPA. Emulsions prepared with βG had greater (P < .05) b* values before cooking when compared with emulsions prepared with MCC and starch, but these differences were not observed in cooked emulsions.
大麦来源的β-葡聚糖（βG）、微晶纤维素（MCC）或淀粉被添加到含有牛肉、橄榄油、盐和水的牛肉乳液中。含有 1%βG、MCC 或淀粉、2%βG、MCC 或淀粉、或 3%βG、MCC 或淀粉的乳液，以及 βG（1.5%）和 MCC（1.5%）的混合物，在三个独立的重复中进行了近程组成、烹饪损失、仪器颜色和质地剖面分析（TPA）的评估。如预期的那样，主要基于使用的水胶体和配方，近程组成存在差异。处理之间的烹饪损失没有差异。然而，TPA 不同，与 MCC 和淀粉样品相比，βG 样品的硬度、粘性、内聚性、胶粘性和咀嚼性值较低（P<0.05），而用 MCC 和淀粉制备的样品呈现出相似的 TPA。与用 MCC 和淀粉制备的乳液相比，在用 βG 制备的乳液在烹饪前具有更大的 b*值（P<0.05），但在烹饪后的乳液中未观察到这些差异。
