Effects of Different End‐Point Cooking Temperatures on the Efficiency of Encapsulated Phosphates on Lipid Oxidation Inhibition in Ground Meat

Abstract

Effects of 0.5% encapsulated (e) phosphates (sodium tripolyphosphate, STP; sodium hexametaphosphate, HMP; sodium pyrophosphate, SPP) on lipid oxidation during storage (0, 1, and 7 d) of ground meat (chicken, beef) after being cooked to 3 end-point cooking temperatures (EPCT; 71, 74, and 77 °C) were evaluated. The use of STP or eSTP resulted in lower (P < 0.05) cooking loss (CL) compared to encapsulated or unencapsulated forms of HMP and SPP. Increasing EPCT led to a significant increase in CL (P < 0.05). Both STP and eSTP increased pH, whereas SPP and eSPP decreased pH (P < 0.05). The higher orthophosphate (OP) was obtained with STP or SPP compared to their encapsulated counterparts (P < 0.05). The lowest OP was determined in samples with HMP or eHMP (P < 0.05). A 77 °C EPCT resulted in lower OP in chicken compared to 74 and 71 °C (P < 0.05), dissimilar to beef, where EPCT did not affect OP. In encapsulated or unencapsulated form, using STP and SPP enhanced reduction in TBARS and lipid hydroperoxides (LPO) compared with HMP (P < 0.05). Regardless of the phosphate type, more effective lipid oxidation inhibition was achieved by the use of encapsulated forms (P < 0.05). Increasing EPCT resulted in lower TBARS in beef and higher LPO values in both beef and chicken samples (P < 0.05). Findings suggest that encapsulated phosphates can be a strategy to inhibit lipid oxidation for meat industry and the efficiency of encapsulated phosphates on lipid oxidation inhibition can be enhanced by lowering EPCT.

Determining the effects of encapsulated polyphosphates on quality parameters and oxidative stability of cooked ground beef during storage

“…Kılıç et al (2014) reported that the encapsulated polyphosphates did not create a significant impact on the final pH due to completely release from hydrogenated vegetable oil during the cooking process. Dur results are in agreement with previous studies about the encapsulated polyphosphates effects on meat pH (Kılıç et al, 2015;Sickler et al, 2013a;Kılıç et al, 2016a, b). pH values of STP and SPP combinations were found to be a lower than groups formulated with solely uSTP or eSTP and generally similar with control and only uSPP or eSPP incorporated groups.…”

“…The findings showed that the rest of treatments provided also a significant reduction in LPD values compared to control (p<0.05). Kılıç et al (2015) reported that the values of lipid hydroperoxide in the ground meat with encapsulated polyphosphates were significantly lower than those without any polyphosphate addition.…”

“…Furthermore, Kılıç et al (2014) also reported that addition of encapsulated or un-encapsulated STP had the lowest CL values in ground chicken and ground beef. Kılıç et al (2015) also stated that the use of uSPP or eSPP in ground chicken and ground beef increased the CL values. The authors stated that increased CL as a result of the use of SPP was associated with the lowering of the meat pH.…”

“…According to the obtained results from this study, it can be concluded that eSPP is more effectively limited lipid oxidation in cooked ground beef. Kılıç et al (2014Kılıç et al ( , 2015 reported that TBARS values of ground meat were reduced with the use of encapsulated polyphosphates. Kılıç et al (2016b) also reported that the highest oxidative stability was accomplished in the ground meat containing eSTP and eSPP.…”

Effects of partial and complete replacement of added phosphates with encapsulated phosphates on lipid oxidation inhibition in cooked ground meat during storage

“…Sodium tripolyphosphate (STP) (product: 5-1327) and sodium pyrophosphate (SPP) (product: 5-1230) were provided by a commercial manufacturer (BK Giulini Corporation, Simi Valley, CA, USA). Encapsulation of PPs was carried out by a commercial coating company (Coating Place Inc., Verona, WI, USA) as described by Kılıç et al. (2015).…”