• EI
  • Scopus
  • 食品科学与工程领域高质量科技期刊分级目录第一方阵T1
  • DOAJ
  • EBSCO
  • 北大核心期刊
  • 中国核心学术期刊RCCSE
  • JST China
  • FSTA
  • 中国精品科技期刊
  • 中国农林核心期刊
  • CA
  • WJCI
  • 中国科技核心期刊CSTPCD
  • 中国生物医学SinoMed
中国精品科技期刊2020
王琳,李安林,熊双丽,等. 红外烤制和微波烤制猪肉品质的对比分析[J]. 食品工业科技,2024,45(8):57−66. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023040043.
引用本文: 王琳,李安林,熊双丽,等. 红外烤制和微波烤制猪肉品质的对比分析[J]. 食品工业科技,2024,45(8):57−66. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023040043.
WANG Lin, LI Anlin, XIONG Shuangli, et al. Quality Analysis of Infrared and Microwave Roast Pork[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2024, 45(8): 57−66. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023040043.
Citation: WANG Lin, LI Anlin, XIONG Shuangli, et al. Quality Analysis of Infrared and Microwave Roast Pork[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2024, 45(8): 57−66. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023040043.

红外烤制和微波烤制猪肉品质的对比分析

Quality Analysis of Infrared and Microwave Roast Pork

  • 摘要: 以感官评价、质构、丙二醛、过氧化值、蛋白质、挥发性风味物质等为考察因子,比较分析红外烤制和微波烤制对猪里脊肉品质的影响。结果表明:两种烤制方式对猪肉色泽影响的差异性不显著(P>0.05)。红外烤制猪肉感官评分比微波烤制猪肉平均高3.67分,但硬度和咀嚼性更低。红外烤制猪肉丙二醛含量和过氧化值分别比微波烤制猪肉增加了16.89%和38.36%。红外烤制猪肉中活性巯基含量极显著低于微波烤制猪肉(P<0.01),更容易引起蛋白质的氧化。两种烤制方式均使烤肉蛋白质二级结构发生变化,红外烤制下猪肉蛋白质聚集变性作用更强。红外烤制和微波烤制猪肉分别鉴定出48种和60种挥发性风味物质,具有明显差异。红外烤制猪肉的挥发性风味物质中烃类物质种类与相对含量最多,但对风味贡献不大。杂环类硫化物能提供浓郁的肉香及洋葱味,微波烤制猪肉杂环类硫化物相对含量比红外烤制高,种类更多,肉香味更浓。综合考虑烤肉食用品质及人体健康,选择微波烤制方式更好。

     

    Abstract: The effects of infrared baking and microwave baking on the quality of pork tenderloin was compared by using sensory evaluation, texture, malondialdehyde, peroxide value, protein, volatile flavor substances as examination factors. The results showed that, there was no significant difference in the effect of two roasting methods on the color of pork (P>0.05). Infrared roasted pork had an average sensory score of 3.67 points higher than microwave roasted pork, but had lower hardness and chewiness. The content of malondialdehyde and peroxide value of infrared roasted pork were 16.89% and 38.36% higher than those of microwave roasted pork, respectively. The active sulfhydryl content in infrared roasted pork was significantly lower than that in microwave roasted pork (P<0.01), which was more likely to cause protein oxidation. Both baking methods changed the secondary structure of the protein in roasted pork. The aggregation and denaturation effect of pork protein was stronger under infrared roasting. 48 and 60 volatile flavor compounds were identified in infrared and microwave roasted pork, respectively. There were obvious difference between the two types of roasted pork. Among the volatile flavor compounds in infrared roasted pork, the types and relative content of hydrocarbons were the highest, but they didn't greatly contribute to the flavor. Heterocyclic sulfides could provide strong meat aroma and onion flavor. The relative contents of heterocyclic sulfides in microwave roasted pork was higher than that in infrared roasted pork, and there was more types. It indicated that the meat flavor was stronger. Considering the quality of roast meat and human health, microwave roasting was the better choice.

     

/

返回文章
返回