DEVELOPMENT OF LEAN BEEF LOAF Naseera. A .P1 and George T. Oommen2 College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Mannuthy
ABSTRACT Excessive intake of dietary fat has been implicated as a cause of chronic degenerative disease such as coronary heart disease and cancers. It is accepted that it would be beneficial to reduce the dietary fat energy to about 30 percent of the total daily energy intake. The present study was aimed at formulating a low calorie lean beef loaf and to assess its nutritional value. The loaf was formulated with 65 percent extra lean beef, 13 percent added chilled water, 8 percent plain flour, 5.5 percent beef tallow, 1.3 percent salt, 85ppm NaNO2, 500ppm sodium ascorbate, 2 percent sucrose, 1.4 percent spice mix and 4percent condiment mixture including garlic, ginger and onion. Ground beef and fat were mixed with other ingredients and tumbled. The batter in the loaf pan was cooked to an internal temperature of 820C in a convection oven. The proximate composition of the product was determined and sensory evaluation was conducted using an eight point Hedonic scale. The product constituted of 57.96 ± 0.05percent moisture, 9.8 ± 0.1percent fat,16.5 ± 0.04 percent protein, 2.35 ± 0.01percent ash, 13.4 ± 0.04percent carbohydrate and a gross energy value of 207.8kcal /50kJ per cent. The contribution of energy from fat was only 4percent of the Recommended Daily Level. The yield of the loaf was 85.7 percent and the mean overall acceptability score was 7.3 ± 0.05.
Veterinary Surgeon, Animal Husbandry Department, Kerala
Professor& Head, Dept.of Livestock Products Technology, College of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, Pookot, Kerala
Along with its high level of consumption, ground beef has also been a major contributor of fat. It is a challenge to formulate a low-fat ground beef product in which the organoleptic qualities are not compromised, because researches indicate that people prefer ground beef with 15-20 percent fat. Low fat meat products with fat content starting below 15 percent tend to have less beefy flavor intensity,
Issue 1 April 2012
Many consumers associate meat with a negative image that it contains high fat and red meat is regarded as a cancer promoting food disregarding the important physiological functions of meat due to the presence of meat based bioactive compounds. The nutrients supplied by meat and meat products are beneficial to human health especially the high quality protein and a range of B vitamins and minerals. But the relatively high fat content of some of these products is a barrier to their wide spread acceptability. Diets high in saturated fat are believed to increase risk of cardiovascular disease, certain
cancers, and obesity (Southgate, 1997). Citing a poor diet as one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality, the 2005 Dietary Food Guidelines stress the importance of a diet low in fat. Total fat intake should represent 20 to 35 percent of calories; saturated fat should not exceed 10 percent of total caloric intake. The guidelines also state that consumers should choose lean, low-fat, or fat-free options when selecting and preparing meats.
JIVA Vol. 10
juiciness, and tenderness (Pearson et al., 1987). The different strategies for developing low fat meat and meat products include modification of carcass composition, manipulation of meat raw materials and reformulation of meat products. Maintenance of acceptable palatability must remain an important consideration in any effort to reduce fat in meat products. So manufacturing further processed meat products with beef cuts with excess fat trimmed off and by reformulation with nonmeat and fat replacer ingredients provide greatest opportunity to reduce fat and the problems encountered with the reduction of fat (Colmenero et al.,2001). Carbohydrate based fat replacers are probably the most widely used class of replacers in low fat meat product manufacture (Shand et al., 1990). These achieve fat replacement by stabilizing the added water in a gel-like matrix, resulting in lubricity and moisture release similar to higher fat products (Glicksman, 1991). Skog et al. (1992) reported that adding both starch and glucose to the beef patties inhibited mutagenic activity by up to 54 percent. Processed starches like plain flour, rice starch, modified potato, and tapioca are common in meat formulations. Therefore, the present study was aimed at developing a low fat lean beef loaf utilizing lean beef cut after trimming excess fat, plain flour and other non-meat ingredients and to assess its proximate composition, yield, nutritional value and sensory qualities. MATERIALS AND METHODS
J. Ind. Vet. Assoc., Kerala. 10 (1)
Lean beef loaf development and formulation Lean meat from a bull hygienically slaughtered and dressed in the Department of Livestock Products Technology, College of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, Mannuthy was utilized for the study. The meat, after removal of all visible fat, blood clots, tendons and visible connective tissue, was coarsely ground through kidney plate and a 9mm plate in a meat mincer (MADO Primus Model MEW 613, Germany). All the non-meat ingredients were taken on ground lean meat weight basis (Table 1).
Table 1.Lean beef loaf formulation.(AMSA, 1983). Ingredients
Level of addition (percent)
Extra lean beef
Sodium nitrite (ppm)
Sodium ascorbate (ppm)
Chopped onion, Garlic paste and Ginger paste
Black pepper, Anise, Cinnamon, Red Chilly powder and Turmeric powder
The raw spices like black pepper, anise, cinnamon, red chilly and turmeric were freshly ground just before use. Onion, ginger and garlic were made into a paste. Minced meat was then mixed with salt, sugar, sodium nitrite and sodium ascorbate dissolved in chilled water, plain flour, ground spices, chopped onion, ginger and garlic paste using a hand held mixer into a uniform batter. This was tumbled in a double drum vacuum tumbler (BIRO Model VTS43, Germany) for 1 h (15 min. on and 5 min. off) at 7 rpm and 20â€? of Hg. The tumbled mix was then stuffed into stainless steel loaf pan and cooked in a o convection oven to an internal temperature of 85 C, chilled to 1- 4oC and sliced. The loaf was then analysed for its proximate composition (AOAC, 1990). Total calories and calories from fat, protein and carbohydrate were determined as per FAO (2002). Per cent RDA (Recommended Daily Allowance) for calories from fat, protein, and carbohydrate was calculated based on a 2200 kcal diet (ICMR, 1990). Per cent daily value of nutrient in the loaf was calculated as per cent nutrient in the loaf divided by RDA of the nutrient. RDA of protein was taken as 60g (ICMR, 1990). Cooking yield
percentage (CY) was calculated as follows, CY = (weight of loaf after cooking / weight of loaf before cooking) x 100. The sensory panel evaluation of the loaf was conducted by a semi trained panel consisting of seven panelists The experiment was repeated six times and the average of the values were taken.
Table 4. Sensory evaluation scores of lean beef loaf Attributes Appearance and colour Flavour Texture Saltiness Juiciness Mouth coating Overall acceptability
Score 6.62 ± 0.03 7.55 ± 0.07 7.17 ± 0.02 7.00 ± 0.01 7.50 ± 0.06 8.00 ± 0.00 7.3 ± 0.05
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.
Percentage in lean beef loaf Moisture 57.96 ± 0.05 Protein 16.5 ± 0.04 Fat 9.8 ± 0.1 Carbohydrate 13.4 ± 0.04 Ash 2.35 ± 0.01 Cooking Yield 85.7 Percent Table 3. Calorific value of nutrients and their per cent contribution to the RDA Parameter
Calorific value % Contribution (kcal/100g) to RDA Protein 66 3 Fat 88.2 4 Carbohydrate 53.6 2 Total 207.8 9
SUMMARY The recipe for a lean beef loaf with fat percentage less than 10 and with high nutritional quality was developed using lean beef, plain flour and other non meat ingredients. The percentage of fat in this was 9.8 and the percentage RDA of calories from fat was only 4 which is far below the recommended 30 per cent. The per cent contribution
Issue 1 April 2012
Table 2. Proximate composition, their percentage contribution to RDA and cooking yield of lean beef loaf
The percentage contribution of total calories and calories from fat to the RDA based on a 2,200 kcal diet was 9 and 4, respectively in the loaf. The contribution of calories from carbohydrate and protein to the total calories in the loaf was significantly more than that from fat. Keeton (1994) and Pearson and Gillet (1997) reported that low fat products must contain no more than 10 per cent fat, while extra lean product must be under 5 per cent fat. In the present study it was able to achieve a less than 10 per cent of fat for the loaf. So the product prepared could be labeled as 'low fat'.More over the contribution of calories from fat to the RDA was far below the recommended 30 percent (NRC, 1989) in the formulation. So consumption of this product will not cause any health hazard related with high fat consumption, but will provide 27 percent of RDA of protein of high biological value. The overall acceptability of the product was also excellent. Brester et al (1993) also developed a low fat ground beef and reported that the product was as palatable as beef products that contain significantly higher levels of fat.
JIVA Vol. 10
The average values of proximate composition, nutritional value and the panel scores of sensory qualities of cooked lean beef loaf is presented in the Table 2, 3 and 4 respectively. The product constituted of 57.96 ± 0.05 percent moisture, 9.8 ± 0.1 percent fat,16.5 ± 0.04 percent protein, 2.35 ± 0.01 percent ash, 13.4 ± 0.04 percent carbohydrate and a gross energy value of 207.8kcal/50kJ per cent. The contribution of energy from fat was only 4 percent of the RDA. The mean overall acceptability score of the product was 7.3 ± 0.05. The yield of the loaf was 85.7 percent.
of protein to the RDA was 27. The nutrition information on label would enable the consumers in choosing the meat product depending on their requirement. Lean beef from Indian breeds of cattle and buffaloes could well be utilised for the production of low fat meat loaf using suitable combination of added water and other carbohydrate based fat replacers, without compromising the sensory attributes, yield and with reducing the incidence of health hazards related with high fat consumption. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors are thankful to the Dean, College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Mannuthy and to the Professor and Head, Department of Livestock Products Technology, College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Mannuthy for providing facilities for the work. REFERENCES
J. Ind. Vet. Assoc., Kerala. 10 (1)
AMSA, 1983. Guidelines of sensory, physical and chemical measurements in ground beef. Recip. Meats Conf. Proc. 36:221-228
Dietary Food Guidelines 2005, Executive Summary. www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga200 5/document/html/executivesummary.htm FAO, 2002. Food energy methods of Analysis and conversion factors. Report of a technical workshop.FAO Food and Nutrition. Paper 77 Glicksman, M. 1991. Hydrocolloids and the starch for the 'oily Grail'. Food Technol., 45(10): 94 ICMR, 1990. Report of committee on dietary allowances, ICMR, New Delhi Keeton, J.T. 1994. Low fat Meat products technological problems with processing. Meat Sci. 36: 261-276 NRC, 1989. Recommended Dietary Allowances, Tenth Edition, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C Pearson, A. M. and Gillet, T. A. 1997. Processed Meats. Third Edition. CBS Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi. pp 53-425 Pearson, A. M., Asghar, A., Gray, J.I. and Booren, A.M. 1987. Impact of fat reduction on palatability and consumer acceptance of processed meats. Proc. Recip. Meat Conf.,40: 105
AOAC, 1990. Meat and meat products. Official Methods of Analysis of Analytical Chemists, Fifteenth edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Washington D.C., p. 587
Shand, P.J., Schmidt, G.R., Mandigo, R.W. and Claus, J.R. 1990. New technology for klow fat meat products. Proc. Recip. Meat Conf., 43: 37
Brester, G.W., Lhermite, P., Goodwin, B.K. and Hunt, M.C. 1993. Quantifying The Effects Of New Product Development: The Case Of Low-Fat Ground Beef. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics. 18:2.
Skog, K., Jägerstad, M. and Laser, A.R. 1992. Inhibitory effect of carbohydrates on the formation of mutagens in fried beef patties. Food and Chemical Toxicol. 30:8.pp. 681688
Colmenero, J.F., Carballo, J. and Cofrades, S. 2001. Healthier meat and meat products: their role as functional foods. Meat Sci.59: 5-13.
Southgate, D.A.T. 1997. Demand for healthful meat, poultry and fish products. In. Production and Processing of Healthy meat, poultry and fish products.(Eds. Pearson, A.M. and Dutson, T.R.). Blackei Academic Professional, New York, pp. 1-31
Cooper, Kathyrn and John Michaelides. “Fat Replacers and Extenders.” www.gftc.ca/ articles/2004/fat-replacers-extenders.cfm.