Quality attributes of Black-Chin Tilapia (Sarotherodon melanotheron) surimis treated with different cryoprotectants

3Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This baseline investigation tried four surimi formulations using three common cryoprotectants namely sucrose, sorbitol and sodium tripolyphosphate for Black-Chin Tilapia (Sarotherodon melanotheron), an invasive species and known prolific pest in Philippine farm ponds, and then compared the quality attributes of the products across formulations and against those reported from previous studies that utilized more popular species in surimi processing. The quality parameters analysed were pH level, functional properties (water holding capacity, foamability and emulsifiability) and gel strength and elasticity. The surimi formulation that yielded the best quality attributes was the 6% sucrose with 0.5% STPP. The formulation yielded a pH value of 6.33-6.47, a water holding capacity of 3.87-3.98 mL/g, a foaming capacity of 23.06-30.70%, a foaming stability of 13.31-15.19%, an emulsifying capacity of 47.50-47.83%, an emulsifying stability of 81.17-85.00%, a folding test score of 5.00, and a biting test score of 9.00. Still, a better understanding of the effects of different concentrations of cryoprotectants (presently used and other kinds) on the functionality of S. melanotheron surimi is recommended to rationally improve the quality attributes. Also, frozen storage analyses are needed for several and longer periods to see how long the S. melanotheron surimi can withstand freezing for specific formulations. It is concluded that S. melanotheron surimi, with the right formulations, can be at par with quality with those made from traditional raw mater.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Perdio, A. C., Valerio, R. B., Consigna, M. J. S., Llave, D. S., Gonzales, A. J. V., & Turtur, M. L. (2022). Quality attributes of Black-Chin Tilapia (Sarotherodon melanotheron) surimis treated with different cryoprotectants. Food Research, 6(6), 236–243. https://doi.org/10.26656/fr.2017.6(6).610

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