期刊文献+

潮州牛肉丸质构的感官评定与仪器分析 被引量:6

Sensory and instrumental measurement of Chaozhou beef meatballs
原文传递
导出
摘要 质构是潮州牛肉丸品质的决定因素,为正确合理地评价潮州牛肉丸质构特性,对感官评定与仪器分析2种方法进行比较。选用11种市售潮州牛肉丸,采用质地剖面检验法进行感官评定,质构仪(质构剖面分析模式,剪切力模式,穿刺模式)进行仪器分析。运用主成分分析从潮州牛肉丸质构的感官评定与仪器分析数据中提取出2个独立主成分,这2个主成分解释了74.486%的数据,并把样品分成了3类。对感官评定与仪器分析结果进行相关性分析,发现感官评定与仪器分析结果之间存在广泛的程度不同的相关性(r=-0.622~0.896,P<0.05或P<0.01)。以主要感官指标为因变量,仪器分析指标为自变量,进行逐步回归分析,得到具有统计意义的感官硬度、弹性、紧密性、多汁性和易嚼性的预测方程(R2adj=0.696~0.907)。 Texture is the key factors which will influence the quality of Chaozhou beef meatballs.This research is mainly on the correlative analysis between sensory and instrumental measurement of Chaozhou beef meatballs’ texture to find a reasonable way for texture measurement.Eleven normal commercial Chaozhou beef meatballs were collected.Texture profile analysis with twelve trained panelists was used to determine and compare the sensory characteristics of samples,and three instrumental methodology(Texture profile analysis,Shear test and Puncture test) were conducted on eleven samples.In addition,principal component analysis(PCA) could reduce the data of sensory evaluation and instrumental analysis into two independent principal components,which accounted for 74.486% of the total variance,and could categorize samples into three groups.Correlation analysis indicated that there were widespread correlation among the results of sensory evaluation and instrumental analysis(r=-0.622~0.896,P〈0.05 or P〈0.01).Stepwise regression analysis was used to generate prediction equations with the parameters of instrumental analysis as independent variables,and the data of principal sensory attributes as dependent variable.The prediction equations of sensory hardness,springness,tightness,juiciness and chewiness were of significance in statistics(R2adj=0.696-0.907).
作者 殷俊 李汴生
出处 《食品科技》 CAS 北大核心 2012年第5期112-116,共5页 Food Science and Technology
基金 广东省教育部产学研结合项目(2009B090300002)
关键词 牛肉丸 质构 感官评定 模型 beef meatball texture sensory evaluation models
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

  • 1Ken'y J, Kerry J, Ledward D. Meat Processing: Improving- Quality [M]. New York:CRC Press,2002:166-167.
  • 2Brady P L, Hunecke M E. Correlations of sensory and instrumental evaluations of roast beef texture [J]. Journal of Food Science, 1985,50(2):300-303.
  • 3Francois I M, Wins H, Buysens S, et al. Predicting sensory attributes of different chicory hybrids using physico-chemical measurements and visible/near infrared spectroscopy [J]. Postharvest Biology and Technology,2008,49(3):366-373.
  • 4Meullenet J-F C, Gross J. Instrumental single and double compression tests to predict sensory texture characteristics of foods [J]. Journal of Texture Studies,1999,30(2): 167-180.
  • 5Huda N, Shen Y H, Huey Y L, et al. Evaluation of physico- chemical properties of malaysian commercial beef meatballs [J]. American Journal of Food Technology,2010,5(1): 13-21.
  • 6LawlessHT著 王栋 等译.食品感官评价原理与技术[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社,2001..
  • 7GB/T16860--1997.感官分析方法质地剖面检验[S].
  • 8Bourne M C. Food Texture and Viscosity: Concept and Measurement [M]. Academic Press,2002.
  • 9Meullenet J-F C, Gross J, BP Marks, et al. Sensory Descriptive Texture Analyses of cooked rice and its correlation to instrumental parameters using an extrusion cell [J]. Cereal Chemistry,1998,75(5):714-720.
  • 10Cardoso C M L, Mendes R, Nunes M L. Instrumental texture and sensory characteristics of cod frankfurter sausages [J]. International Journal of Food Properties,2009,12(3):625- 643.

共引文献20

同被引文献106

引证文献6

二级引证文献23

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部