Effect of Different Processing Methods and Salt Content on the Physicochemical and Rheological Properties of Meat Batters

Figures & data

FIGURE 1 The cutting machine and knives.

FIGURE 2 The beating machine showing blunt paddles.

TABLE 1 Color (L*, a*, and b* values) of raw and cooked meat batter preparations by chopping or beating with various amounts of added salt

Sample	Raw meat batter			Cooked meat batter
	L*value	a* value	b* value	L* value	a* value	b* value
C	50.12 ± 1.08^b	13.67 ± 0.91^b	8.31 ± 0.59^b	63.18 ± 0.40^b	7.08 ± 0.20^a	7.81 ± 0.15^c
T1	49.97 ± 0.92^b	12.69 ± 1.26^b	7.27 ± 0.81^c	66.84 ± 0.51^a	6.56 ± 0.22^b	9.15 ± 0.15^a
T2	55.26 ± 0.99^a	14.41 ± 0.61^a	10.25 ± 0.44^a	66.74 ± 0.45^a	6.30 ± 0.23^b	8.14 ± 0.17^b

Each value represents the mean ± standard deviation.

^a–cDifferent parameter superscripts in the same column indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). C: chopping with 2% salt; T1: beating with 1% salt; T2: beating with 2% salt.

FIGURE 3 Cooking loss (%) of raw batters when produced by chopping or beating with various amounts of added salt.

TABLE 2 Texture profile analysis of cooked meat batters preparations by chopping or beating process with various amounts of added salt

Sample	Hardness	Springiness	Adhesiveness	Gumminess	Chewiness
	(N)			(N)	(N mm)
C	68.80 ± 1.50^c	0.872 ± 0.014^b	0.681 ± 0.014^c	46.72 ± 1.10^c	41.64 ± 2.54^c
T1	73.56 ± 1.39^b	0.886 ± 0.016^a	0.720 ± 0.017^b	49.81 ± 1.30^b	43.10 ± 1.55^b
T2	76.83 ± 1.03^a	0.891 ± 0.013^a	0.738 ± 0.021^a	52.42 ± 1.43^a	46.23 ± 1.52^a

Each value represents the mean ± standard deviation.

^a–cDifferent parameter superscripts in the same column indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). C: chopping with 2% salt; T1: beating with 1% salt; T2: beating with 2% salt.

FIGURE 4 Changes in dynamic storage modulus (G’, Pa) with increasing temperature (T, °C) for different meat formulations. C: chopping with 2% salt; T1: beating with 1% salt; T2: beating with 2% salt.

FIGURE 5 Scanning electron micrographs of cooked meat batters. C: chopping with 2% salt; T1: beating with 1% salt; T2: beating with 2% salt.

TABLE 3 Effect on relaxation time (ms) and peak ration (%) of raw meat batters preparations by chopping or beating process with various amounts of added salt

	Relaxation time (ms)			Peak ration (%)
Sample	T2b (ms)	T21 (ms)	T22 (ms)	T2b (%)	T21 (%)	T22 (%)
C	0.66 ± 0.08^a	29.55 ± 2.13^b	336.62 ± 14.09^a	2.96 ± 0.06^a	96.75 ± 0.18^b	0.29 ± 0.15^b
T1	0.59 ± 0.11^b	32.75 ± 0.00^a	346.57 ± 15.82^a	2.64 ± 0.06^b	97.15 ± 0.09^a	0.20 ± 0.12^b
T2	0.76 ± 0.09^a	32.75 ± 0.00^a	364.26 ± 16.29^a	2.79 ± 0.19^b	96.77 ± 0.20^b	0.46 ± 0.15^a

Each value represents the mean ± standard deviation.

^a–cDifferent parameter superscripts in the same column indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). C: chopping with 2% salt; T1: beating with 1% salt; T2: beating with 2% salt.

TABLE 4 Effect on relaxation time (ms) and peak ration (%) of cooked meat batters preparations by chopping or beating process with various amounts of added salt

Sample	Relaxation time				Peak ration (%)
	T2b1 (ms)	T2b2 (ms)	T21 (ms)	T22 (ms)	T2b1 (%)	T2b2 (%)	T21 (%)	T22 (%)
C	0.53 ± 0.04	1.89 ± 0.24^c	25.70 ± 1.85^a	285.50 ± 12.97^c	0.52 ± 0.17	0.76 ± 0.19^a	87.50 ± 0.30^c	10.97 ± 0.47^a
T1		7.23 ± 1.82^a	20.84 ± 1.40^b	377^.41 ± 10.36^a		0.47 ± 0.3^b	88.89 ± 0.78^b	10.63 ± 0.58^a
T2		4.89 ± 1.03^b	22.35 ± 1.61^b	328.25 ± 16.40^b		0.71 ± 0.25^a	92.01 ± 0.65^a	7.28 ± 0.58^b

Each value represents the mean ± standard deviation.

^a–cDifferent parameter superscripts in the same column indicate significant differences (p < 0.05). C: chopping with 2% salt; T1: beating with 1% salt; T2: beating with 2% salt.