The aim of this study was to evaluate the fatty acid profile and health lipid indices of meat from 3 Polish local goose varieties (Romanian–RO, Pomeranian–PO, and Subcarpathian–SB) and the commercial cross White Kołuda goose (W31). Birds were fed ad libitum with the same complete feeds until 17 wk of age. The geese (n = 72) with body weight close to the arithmetic mean in particular flock were fasted for 12 h and slaughtered in an experimental slaughterhouse (18 females in each flock). Carcasses were stored at 2 to 4°C for 24 h. The breast muscles ( m. pectoralis major ) were cut out from the left side of carcass, separately vacuum-packed, and stored at −80°C until analysis. Fatty acid profile of meat was determined by gas chromatography and health lipid indices were calculated. The W31 muscles had a higher percentage of C 18:0 and a lower of C 16:0 than those of RO, PO, and SB geese. The W31 muscles were characterized by a significantly higher proportion of monounsaturated fatty acids (46.5%) than remaining ones (43.28%–PO, 43.38%–SB, and 44.24%–RO). The lowest proportion of polyunsaturated fatty acids was established for W31 muscles (22.05%). The breast muscles of RO, SB, and PO had more favorable polyunsaturated n-6 and n-3 fatty acid (PUFA)/ saturated fatty acid ( SFA ) ratio (0.85, 0.82, 0.83, respectively) than W31 geese (0.72). The current findings showed that UFA/SFA, PUFA/SFA, and PUFA n-6 / n-3 ratios in RO and SB muscles were within the optimum values for human diets. No significant differences were observed in the atherogenic, thrombogenic, and hypocholesterolemic/hypercholesterolemic indices between the analyzed muscles. Commercial W31 geese breast muscles showed a lower value (43.90%) of peroxidizability index ( PI ) compared to SB (52.88%), PO (53.93%), and RO (53.47%). However, the higher values of the PUFA/SFA and PI in the meat of SB, PO, and RO birds may indicate a higher prohealth value of their meat.
The effect of water bath cooking ( WBC ), oven convection roasting ( OCR ), grilling ( G ), pan frying ( PF ) on selected physical properties of goose meat was compared in this study. A measurement of cooking loss, texture, color parameters, and sensory evaluation was carried out. The experimental material covered 96 breast muscles cut from carcasses of 17-week-old “Polish oat geese.” The kind of goose meat (with and without skin) and the type of heat treatment affected cooking loss, shear force ( SF ), and rheological parameters (hardness, cohesiveness, gumminess, and chewiness). The water bath–cooked and pan-fried samples for both kinds of meat were characterized by lower cooking loss than other ones. Goose meat with skin and subcutaneous fat showed higher cooking loss and lower SF value, hardness, gumminess, and chewiness than that without skin for all methods. The water bath–cooked samples were characterized by the lowest SF value, hardness, and chewiness for both kinds of meat. They had the highest value of L∗ parameter and were characterized by a lighter color among others, too. Pan-fried meat showed the highest value of a∗ and lowest of h o parameters; the color of these samples was redder. Moreover, the lower C values of oven convection-roasted and grilled samples showed that they were brighter. According to the Comission Internationale de l’Eclairage classification, the ΔE parameter only for G and OCR indicated noticeable color differences (<2), whereas other pairs had visible differences. The method of cooking affected sensory descriptors such as the intensity of flavor and aroma, tenderness, juiciness, springiness, cohesiveness, and overall palatability of goose meat. The goose samples of PF, G, and OCR were characterized as very good and WBC as extremely desirable overall palatability. However, in the next stage of research, there is a need to study changes in the chemical composition, the degree of lipid oxidation, and the nutritional value of this meat that underwent different methods of cooking. Only then it will be possibly to clearly determine which method of the heat treatment of goose meat is optimal.
The aim of the study was to compare the chemical and amino acid composition of breast (pectoralis major) and thigh (biceps femoris) muscles in 17-wk-old geese from 2 Polish conservative flocks: Rypińska (Ry, n = 20) and Garbonosa (Ga, n = 20). The geese were fed ad libitum during the experimental period on the same complete feed. Genotypes affected the moisture and fat content of breast and thigh meat. The Ga geese were characterized by higher moisture as well as lower fat lipid content compared with the Ry breast and thigh muscles. The amino acid proportions of meat proteins depended on the goose flock and type of muscles, where significant differences were found. The proteins of Ga breast muscles contained more glutamic acid, glycine, lysine, tryptophan, histidine, and methionine, and less aspartic acid, proline, serine, leucine, valine, phenyloalanine, tyrosine, and threonine than the Ry geese (P ≤ 0.05). The proteins of Ry thigh muscles were characterized by higher content of proline, serine, and essential amino acids (without lysine and methionine) and lower glutamic and asparagine acid, alanine, and glycine compared with the Ga flock. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization (1991) standard, tryptophan was the amino acid limiting the nutritional value of meat proteins of Ry breast muscles (amino acid score for tryptophan = 90%). Except for tryptophan, the meat proteins of the investigated raw materials contained more essential amino acids than the standard. The total content of essential amino acids for all investigated muscles was also higher (52.51 to 55.54%) than the standard (33.90%). It is evident that muscle protein from both flocks of geese have been characterized by high nutritional value. The values of the essential amino acid index of breast muscle proteins were similar in both flocks.
The effect of water bath cooking ( WBC ), oven convection roasting ( OCR ), grilling ( G ), pan-frying ( PF ) on the fatty acid profile and health lipid indices of goose meat was investigated in this study. The experimental material covered 80 breast muscles (40 with skin and subcutaneous fat and 40 without skin) cut from carcasses of 17-week-old “Polish oat geese”. The fatty acid profile of meat was determined by gas chromatography and health lipid indices were calculated. It was stated that the kind of heat treatment as well as the type of goose meat (muscles with and without skin) affected the fatty acid profile and health lipid indices. The sum of SFA was significantly higher in cooked samples for both kinds of meat than in raw ones. The cooked samples with skin had a lower increase in Ʃ SFA than the skinless meat. Boiling (meat without skin) and pan-frying (both kinds of meat) caused a slight decrease, while grilling and oven convection roasting (both kinds of meat) caused an increase of Ʃ MUFA in comparison to raw samples. Moreover, meat with skin is characterized by a higher value of Ʃ MUFA than meat without skin for all cooking methods. The Ʃ PUFA was lower in all cooked samples than in raw meat, wherein this decline was usually higher for skinned meat. The G meat was the lowest and PF the highest in Σ PUFA for both kinds of meat after heat treatment. The highest loss showed C20:4 n-6 in OCR samples and the lowest C18:2 n-6 in PF (both kinds of meat). Heat treatment caused an increase in the Σ PUFA n-6/n-3 ratio, wherein the lowest value was shown by the WBC samples without skin, and the highest by OCR with skin. Water bath cooking of meat was more beneficial for consumers in terms of AI, TI, Σ DFA/Σ OFA, Σ PUFA/Σ SFA, Σ UFA/Σ SFA indexes and Σ SFA, Σ OFA values than the remaining methods.
The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of various types of heat processing used by consumers (water bath cooking WBC , oven convection roasting OCR , grilling G , pan frying PF ) on the energy and the nutritional value of goose breast meat (with and without skin). The material used in the study comprised 72 breast muscles cut from carcasses of 17-wk-old White Koluda geese. The energy value (MJ), the chemical composition (water, fat, protein, ash) and mineral composition (phosphorus P, sodium Na, calcium Ca, potassium K, magnesium Mg, iron Fe, zinc Zn, cooper Cu, manganese Mn) were determined in both raw and thermally processed muscles. It has been concluded that various methods of heat processing have a significant impact on the energy and nutritional values of meat. From a dietary point of view, the most beneficial was OCR meat without skin, and WBC, OCR, PF meat with skin as well, since it had the lowest energy value as well as content and retention of fat, phosphorus, and sodium. However, as for the content of the other minerals and their retention, WBC seems to be the optimal form of heat treatment of skinless muscles. 100 g of such meat provides 3.1; 33.7; 145; 180 and 9% Nutrient Reference Values-Requirements ( NRVs-R ) for Ca, Mg, Fe, Cu, and Mn respectively in a diet of an adult person. As for meat with skin, the optimal method of heat processing to retain minerals is grilling. 100 g of meat processed in this way provides 3.9; 39.7; 125.7; 175; 6 and 12.7% NRVs-R of Ca, Mg, Fe, Cu, and Mn. It follows from the above information that goose breast meat, as analyzed here, cannot be considered as a source of calcium since it provides less than 4% of NRVs-R. The results of the study will be useful for the consumers’ nutritional choices. The geese breast meat, depending on the heat processing used and the content of skin, may be a valuable component of a varied diet, providing nutrients and minerals.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.