Replacement of pork meat with pork head meat for frankfurters

18Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The effect of reducing pork meat concentrations from 50% to 30% and replacing it with up to 20% pork head meat on chemical composition, cooking characteristics, physicochemical and textural properties, apparent viscosity, and sensory characteristics of frankfurters was determined. The highest moisture content in frankfurters was found in the control and T1 (frankfurter with 45% pork meat + 5% pork head). Protein and fat contents in frankfurters with pork head meat added were significantly (p<0.05) higher than those in the control. When the concentration of pork head meat was increased from 0% to 20%, cooking loss, total expressible fluid separation, fat separation, and pH of frankfurters were increased, while the lightness, redness, yellowness, and apparent viscosity of frankfurters were decreased. Ash contents, cohesiveness, color, and tenderness of sensory characteristics of frankfurters added with different amounts of pork meat or pork head meat were not significantly (p>0.05) different from those of the control or there treatments. Frankfurters in T4 (frankfurter with 30% pork meat + 20% pork head) had the lowest (p<0.05) hardness and gumminess. The hardness and gumminess of frankfurters in other treatments were not significantly different (p>0.05) from that in the control. Frankfurters with higher pork head meat concentrations had lower flavor, juiciness, and overall acceptability scores. Therefore, replacing pork meat with pork head meat in the formulation could successfully produce results similar to those of control frankfurters. The best results were obtained when 10% pork head meat was used to replace pork meat.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Choi, Y. S., Hwang, K. E., Kim, H. W., Song, D. H., Jeon, K. H., Park, J. D., … Kim, C. J. (2016). Replacement of pork meat with pork head meat for frankfurters. Korean Journal for Food Science of Animal Resources, 36(4), 445–451. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2016.36.4.445

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free