sensory and physical properties of low-saturated fat ... · saturated fat content as evidenced by...

Sensory and Physical Properties of Low-Saturated Fat Meatloaf Prepared by Replacing Ground-Beef with Soy Protein Final Research Paper 7/26/2014 Professor Sung-eun Choi; FNES 307W – Experimental Food Sciences By Kimberly Tierney; Department of Family, Nutrition and Exercise Science, Queens College, CUNY, Flushing, NY, 11367

Kimberly Tierney Due July 26, 2014 Final Research Paper Professor Choi – FNES 307W

2

Sensory and Physical Properties of Low-Saturated Fat Meatloaf Prepared by

Replacing Ground-Beef with Soy Protein

Kimberly Tierney, Professor Sung-eun Choi; FNES 307W – Experimental Food Sciences, Department of

Family, Nutrition, and Exercise Science, CUNY Queens College, Flushing, NY 11367

Abstract: A dietary recommendation has been expressed as a reduction of dietary saturated fat consumption to

positively impact health, secondarily relating to ailments such as cardiovascular health and associating

conditions of stroke, hypertension, cardiac infarct, and angina. This experimental food study examines

the modification of animal-based protein as ground beef with the vegetable-based soy protein as

textured vegetable protein (TVP) within a recipe of meatloaf acceptable to consumers to reduce

saturated fat content. Four samples (N=4) were distributed to 27 untrained panelists (n=27) with

modified ratios as the control 100% beef, 85% beef with 15% TVP, 75% beef with 25% TVP, and 65%

beef with 35% TVP. Physical evaluation included final product percent yield loss assessed by weight

which determined the trend, with possible error, that as TVP percent increased so does the percent

yield loss. Subjective sensory test evaluation was completed utilizing a 15 cm line scale to record

panelist observations regarding beef flavor, appearance as brownness, texture as moistness,

tenderness, and overall acceptability. Data results included in the SPSSC software program ANOVA

analysis showed acceptability and standard deviation as 8.20 ± 2.64 for the 100% beef control sample,

7.93 ± 2.82 for the 85% beef with 15% TVP, 7.61 ± 3.18 for the 75% beef with 25% TVP, and 5.89 ± 3.28

for the 65% beef 35% TVP sample.

The 65% beef with 35% TVP was determined unacceptable to panelists. Both the 85% beef with 15% TVP

and 75% beef with 25% TVP samples demonstrated acceptability within panelist evaluations, therefore

the 75% beef with 25% TVP is selected as having the greatest health benefits associated with lowered

saturated fat content as evidenced by the Food Processor software program and acceptability evidenced

by the ANOVA program. Health benefits through nutrition fact analysis demonstrated a decrease in

calories from fat, total fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, and sodium and increase in protein, carbohydrate,

fiber, calcium, and iron.

Introduction: In the current information-accessible times, society has the option of increasing awareness and

knowledge of beneficial health choices; however, health ailments such as angina, cardiovascular disease

and infarct, stroke, and hypertension remain highly prevalent in correlation with surplus dietary

saturated fat consumption. According to the article “Saturated fatty acid intake and cardiovascular risk”,

studies since the 1960’s have demonstrated that reducing dietary saturated fatty acid intake correlates


3

with reduced risk of cardiovascular disease (Sakata et al, 2013); however, the article “saturated fat,

carbohydrate, and cardiovascular disease” expresses that research in the reduction of saturated fats and

correlation to heart health are inconsistent with limitations in significant proof, but rather a

replacement of food sources may play a more considerable role upon health status, such as the

replacement of fish oil containing poly-unsaturated fatty acids rather than saturated fatty acid (Hu et al,

2010). Until greater evidence arises regarding health effects correlating with fatty acids, the American

Heart Association states that dietary saturated fat consumption raises blood LDL cholesterol resulting in

increased risk of heart disease and stroke (American Heart Association, 2014). Providing consumers

more options of alternative and modified saturated fat content will decrease the frequency of

correlating health ailments while increasing the nutritional benefits associated with soy proteins. This

experiment examined the substitution of a ratio of soy protein for a portion of the ground red beef,

thereby decreasing the saturated fat content per serving of meatloaf. Following evaluations via sensory

evaluations, and yield (cooking loss) calculations, the experiment provided a consumer-accepted

alternative as a plant-based soy protein modification rather than the solely animal-based red-meat

protein which contains higher concentrations of saturated fatty acids and cholesterol.

Methods & Materials:

Utilizing a general recipe, “Easy Cheeseburger Sliders”, acquired from the popular website

BetterRecipes.com (Vanni, 2013), of a food commonly consumed by and agreeable to the population

called “sliders”, this experiment tests a substitution of a soy plant-based protein, textured vegetable

protein or TVP, for a portion of the ground red 85% lean beef containing high saturated fats and

cholesterol. The experiment theory is that by reducing the portioned ratio of red meat via substitution

with a plant-based soy protein, the saturated fat content within the final product can be decreased

without restricting the appealing sensory characteristics, such as appearance, flavor, texture and

tenderness and increasing nutritional benefits thereby improving health status.

The original recipe was altered with the removal of the cheese, burger buns, and condiments to better

assess the modifications made to the protein characteristics of the product while retaining the

ingredients mixed into the protein source; due to this modification, the product was henceforth referred

to as meatloaf.

Ingredients:

The materials included in the meatloaf recipe include the following totaled ingredients to be divided

amongst four meatloaf samples prepared and purchased in the months of March and April 2014 from

local grocery stores located in the regions of New York City:

225 g cooked, wet, & drained Bob’s Red Mill High Protein Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP)

from Bob’s Red Mill Natural Foods, Inc. Milwaukie, OR


4

2 pounds (884 g) Fresh Direct 85% Lean Ground Beef Round Black Angus Beef from Pat

LaFrieda Meat Purveyors, Long Island City, NY

¾ cup (117 g) chopped white onions

½ teaspoon (3 g) salt

½ teaspoon (2 g) pepper

¼ cup (35 g) original Bread Crumbs

4 teaspoon (15 mL) Lea & Perrins Original Worcestershire Sauce, from Lea & Perrins Inc.,

Fair Lawn, NJ

Forumation & Preparation:

The experimental procedure performed utilizes heat application within convention ovens implemented

using following methods and techniques in a step-by-step process of sample preparation and divided

accordingly within the formulation table 1:

Step 1: Two convention ovens are preheated to 400 oF (204 oC).

Step 2: Two white onions have outer layer removed, washed in cold water, then chopped

into quarters and placed into Cuisinart DLC-2007N food processor. The processor’s pulse

setting is applied for 1 ten second increment to consistently chop onion.

Step 3: On an open-flame stove top, 5 cups water are placed within a sauce pan over

medium heat and brought to boil. The flame is reduced to low heat followed by the addition

of 2 cups of Textured Vegetable Protein (TVP) to the boiling water, intermittently stirred

with wooden spoon, and allowed to stand for 10 minutes.

Step 4: The TVP is then transferred to wire-screen strainer and pressed with wooden spoon

to eliminate excess water totaling 225 mL measured by graduated cylinder; the excess water

is discarded as waste.

Step 5: The dry ingredients are measured and weighed using an electronic scale for

breadcrumbs at a weight of 25 grams, 2 grams salt, and 2 grams pepper. The Lea & Perrins

Original Worcestershire Sauce was measured to 15 mL utilizing a graduating cylinder.

Step 6: In a large ceramic bowl, all ingredients, excluding the TVP, are combined and mixed

30 times by hand.

Step 7: The net weight of combined ingredients, aside from the TVP, are measured by

placing a ceramic bowl central upon the scale surface, the scale is then tared to zero, and

combined ingredients placed central within the ceramic bowl to produce a total of 1,050

grams of product.

Step 8: The net combined ingredients are divided among four samples as follows in Table 1:


5

Table 1: Formulation Table: Sample Components, Code, & Measurements

Sample Randomly selected 3 digit code

% Beef

% TVP Weight of Raw Beef & all remaining ingredients (g) *

Weight of Cooked TVP (g)

Additional hand

mixing with TVP

1 (Control)

167 100 0 262 White Onion 29.25 0 2

Salt 0.75

Pepper 0.50

Bread Crumbs 8.75

Worcestershire Sauce

3.75 mL

2 345 85 15 223 White Onion 29.25 39 13

Salt 0.75

Pepper 0.50

Bread Crumbs 8.75


3.75 mL

3 806 75 25 196 White Onion 29.25 66 15

Salt 0.75

Pepper 0.50

Bread Crumbs 8.75


3.75 mL

4 502 65 35 170 White Onion 29.25 92 21

Salt 0.75

Pepper 0.50

Bread Crumbs 8.75


3.75 mL

*Excludes only TVP ingredient; includes white onions, salt, pepper, original Bread Crumbs, and Lea & Perrins Original Worcestershire Sauce. Each sample totals to weight of 262 g containing all ingredients to ratio described.

Step 9: A 262 gram net weight per sample is placed into 4 individual 7.5 inch x 7.5 inch pans

and flattened to fill cooking pan to a consistently even height of 1.2 cm; height

measurement is acquired utilizing a 12 inch ruler.

Step 10: The samples are placed upon the top rack in two convention ovens with a

temperature of 400 oF, assessed via internal oven thermometer, for a total time of 30

minutes; all samples are rotated 180o at 15 minutes of cooking to distribute heat application

evenly. The limitation of oven width prevented all samples from being placed within the

same oven, therefore the height of the oven racks and oven temperatures were correlated

to correct the limitation.


6

Step 11: The samples are removed from the ovens and internal temperature of meat is

determined to be greater than 165 oF via meat thermometer.

Objective Evaluation

The four cooked meatloaf samples are observed to display a morphing in shape and height altered from

the previous flattened and squared shape of the cooking pan prior to the application of heat and varying

from the assumed and anticipated results. Observations of physical characteristics can be described as

amorphic elongated oval-like shape with an increase in height. Weight is again measured to account for

cooking losses of moisture utilizing the electronic scale. Calculations to quantify actual volumes of

product yield will utilize the formula as: total cooking loss (%) = (wt. unbaked loaf – wt. baked loaf)/wt.

unbaked loaf x 100. Values, calculations and results of total cooking loss equation per sample are

located in Table 5: Yield Loss.

Sensory Evaluation

Presentation

The 4 samples, 3 modified and 1 control, were assigned a random three-digit code, as noted in table 1.

The samples were then cut to into small squares of approximately 1 inch widths, however due to the

amorphic cooked product shaped, some samples were unable to be squared and were placed with

samples of similar shape and size to dissuade discrimination amongst sensory panel judgment. The

effort was made to proceed with speed and efficiency to maintain product serving temperature. A single

small squared sample, with a plain wooden toothpick, of each of the 4 samples of meatloaf were placed

equidistant on a plain white paper plate with the correlating assigned three-digit code written in magic

marker. All presented sample plated were kept as uniform as possible in handwriting, sample size, and

placement to avoid preference or assumption of randomly selected panelists.

Scale & Sensory Characteristics

Evaluations of the four samples of protein modified meatloaf were completed using a 15 cm line sensory

scale as a subjective evaluation whereby the panelists are asked to interpret appearance, flavor, texture,

tenderness, and overall acceptability using their five senses of odor, taste, flavor, sight, touch and

hearing. Appearance is evaluated relative to brownness whereby weak means “light brown” and strong

means “dark brown”. Flavor is evaluated relating to the product’s beef flavor as the combination of

protein and fat flavor associated with beef whereby weak means “bland” and strong means “very

beefy”. Texture is evaluated by the product’s moistness as the quality or state of being slightly wet

whereby weak means “having less moisture” and strong means “having more moisture.” Product

tenderness is characterized as weak meaning “it is less tender or hard to chew” and strong means “it is

very tender and easy to chew”. Overall acceptability is a generalization of the product interpreted as

weak liking described as “dislike extremely” and strong like means “like extremely”.


7

Panelists & Testing Procedure

The evaluation forms were presented to random students, instructors, and campus employees

concurrently with the plated samples within the environment of the Remsen building hallways on a

Friday afternoon. Each random sensory evaluation panel member was explained the procedure of

completing an evaluation form whereby their interpretation of each product is to be marked along the

15 cm line scale and labeled with the random three-digit code; the range of validity from evaluations

may display error of significance resulting from some panelists finding instruction difficult to understand

relating to designating the weakness and strength of each sample upon the 15 cm line as a scale rather

than a rank or order. In conclusion, a total of 27 line sensory scale evaluations were completed to

include 14 male and 13 female panelists ranging in age from 19 to 44 years. Difficulty occurred locating

willing participants as panelists due to limited students attending classes on Fridays, as well as the

religious observance of Lent, and other dietary religious observances.

Sensory Evaluation Result Analysis Methods

Analysis of the 27 sensory line evaluations was performed by measuring the distance with a ruler in

centimeters of each labeled sample designation placed upon the 15 cm line to determine individual

sample strength as a quantifiable number whereby 0 cm is designated as weakest and 15 cm is

designated as strongest. The information provided by each random panelist’s evaluation of samples

upon the sensory line forms is then input into the SPSSC software program version 21.0, IBM Corp,

Armonk, NY as an ANOVA analysis to determine significant values. Analysis is also performed utilizing

the Food Processor software program version 10.7, ESHA, Salem, OR to perform nutrition facts analysis

of the control and 3 modified meatloaf samples.

Reflective analysis of the methods and materials leave ample capacity for variation in results pending an

individual’s replication of the procedure whereby moisture content of the TVP modification concluded

variation in cooking loss and rise in final product height of completed samples, thereby the experimental

study may not be accurately replicated unless moisture content is more closely monitored. However, if

another researcher were to reoccupy the sampling stations, they would effectively be provided the

ability to follow the method and material procedure outlined previously, whereby all instruments,

equipment, methods, procedures, and materials were recorded and noted in detail, thereby repetition

of the study could be performed. The data collected relating to sample product weight and height may

vary as result of water moisture content and cooking loss if another researcher were to attempt location

of the data, however analysis of their own performed experiment could be replicated by assessing

weight via an electronic scale, height utilizing a ruler in centimeter measurement, and moisture loss via

a graduated cylinder. Statistical analyses will display variation due to the randomly selected sensory

evaluation panel members resulting from the members’ subjective interpretations and lack of

experience and training in the focus of evaluating, understanding, and interpreting the food

characteristics with senses; however, the method of statistical information input into the computer

software programs can be replicated, as well as the use of the sensory line scale. It is likely that another

researcher would obtain varied and differing results in replication of the algorithms of the ANOVA and

Food Processor software programs due to probable acquisition of varied interpretations of differing or

more experienced subjective evaluation panel members.


8

Results & Discussion:

Sensory Test Results & Statistical Analysis: The results of the sensory tests via 15 cm line scale surveys administered to a sample size of 27 amateur

panelists were analyzed utilizing results entered into the ANOVA, Tukey test as a post hoc test using

SPSS for Windows (version 21.0, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) upon the TVP modified meatloaf samples

relating to appearance as brownness, flavor as beef flavor, texture as moistness, tenderness and overall

acceptability of the four samples. The value of significance is designated as P<0.05 among test results,

denoting a value of ≥0.05 as a significant variant or that “the mean difference is significant at the 0.05

level” according to the Tukey HSD test. Standard error and deviation are to be expected due to the

inexperience or misunderstandings of the amateur, untrained panelists and human error.

The control sample, without modification utilizing TVP, displayed the highest values of mean in all

characteristic sensory tests aside from texture, which expressed the 75% beef with 25% TVP substitution

as the highest mean value; the results shown relating to the control sample correlate with the statistical

findings that denote the control (100%beef) sample as having the highest overall acceptance by

panelists with a mean value of 8.20. The sample of 65% beef with 35% TVP modification displayed the

lowest mean value consistently among all characteristic attributes tested within the sensory survey,

denoting the lowest acceptance by panelists.

Beef Flavor

As shown in tables 1 and 2, in summary of the ANOVA analysis recorded through use survey

information, the samples of 65% beef showed significant findings with the 85% beef and the 100% beef.

The 65% beef did not demonstrate significance to the 75% beef, and the samples of 75%, 85%, and

100% beef evidenced no significance to each other. The sample demonstrating the strongest sensory

attribute of beef flavor as described by panelists was the control (100% beef) sample with a mean of

8.35, while the lowest mean was described as the sample containing the greatest portion of TVP at 35%

TVP to 65% beef with a mean of 4.91. The result is as would be expected due to the control sample

containing the greatest portion of actual beef product contributing to the beef flavor, and inversely true

of the sample containing the lowest beef portion per serving.

Appearance: Brownness

The appearance as brownness upon the surface of the meatloaf samples, whereby the darker brown

was noted as higher values upon the 15 cm line scale surveys, displayed that the 100% beef sample

again had the highest mean value at 9.98 in comparison to the 65% beef sample again demonstrating

the lowest mean value at 5.37, thus the control is the brownest of the samples. Significance was found

between the samples of 65% beef and the 85% beef, as well as the 65% beef to the 100% beef, and the

75% beef to the 100% beef sample. However, significance was not evidenced between the 65% beef to

the 75% beef, the 75% beef to the 85% beef, and the 85% to the 100% beef samples.

Browning of the meat may be attributed to the Maillard reaction which occurs in the presence of

reducing sugars and amino acids that occurs when protein is heated at temperatures above 310 oF

within dry-heat cooking application at the surface of the meat. While the amino acid constituents within


9

the samples are unknown, animal based protein generally contains greater quantities of amino acids

versus plant-based protein such as TVP, which may contribute to an enhanced browning appearance

relating to higher ratios of ground beef versus TVP.

Texture: Moistness

The texture or moistness of the samples was defined as the quality as being slightly wet whereby a more

dry or less moisture within a product is defined by a lower value upon the 15 cm line scale and inversely

a product containing more moisture results in a higher value upon the scale, thus a higher mean defines

a sample with greater moisture in its texture. The texture characteristic was the only sensory attribute

to result in the highest mean being designated to a sample other than the control 100% beef sample.

The highest mean at a value of 8.14 was concluded by panelists to show that the 75% beef sample

contained the greatest moisture whereas the 65% beef sample again received the lowest mean at 5.37.

The designation of the 75% beef sample containing the greatest moisture coincides with later findings

that demonstrate the sample also produced the lowest percent yield loss of final product; thereby the

retention of weight may correlate with the retention of water contributing to the moisture content. The

only samples found to have a significant relationship within the panelist’s surveyed relating to moisture

content as texture were the samples of 65% beef to the 75% beef. The samples of 65, 85, and 100% beef

had no significance to each other, as well as the samples of 75, 85, and 100% beef to each other.

Moisture content may be correlated to the difference in ratios of TVP within each sample whereby the

TVP retains water as described in the cooking methods inclusion of boiling water for hydration of the

TVP prior to admission and mixing with the ground beef. Due to a lack of precise equipment to apply

equivalent pressure when draining the cooked TVP, moisture content may vary between samples

effecting consistency of texture between finished sample products.

Tenderness

The tenderness of samples was described to panelists as greater tenderness being easier to chew and

weaker tenderness as harder or more difficult to chew, therefore greater tenderness received a higher

value upon the 15 cm line scale. The control sample containing only beef and absent of TVP modification

demonstrated the highest mean with a value of 8.24, whereas again the sample containing the greatest

TVP at 35% TVP substitution of beef in the 65% beef sample received the lowest mean at a value of 6.68.

No significance was found in relationship of samples, thereby all samples demonstrated significance to

each other. These findings may show an error in the level of experience of panelists, whereby there

detection of differences in texture may require greater practice and honing.

Overall Acceptability

The overall acceptability is a generalized selection by panelists as to which sample they liked the most

receiving a higher value upon the 15 cm line scale versus which sample was liked the least. The highest

mean value of 8.20 was attributed to the control sample demonstrating that the 100% beef product was

liked most by panelists, whereas the 65% beef sample was like least in general by panelists with the

lowest mean value at 5.89. Significance as well was found between the 65% beef to the 100% beef

samples. The 65, 75, and 85% beef samples did not result in a significant relationship between each

other, nor did the 75, 85, and 100% beef samples to each other.


10

Table 2: Sensory Characteristic Results via ANOVA Program (Post HOC / Tukey

Test)

Sample Random 3-Digit Code

Beef Flavor Appearance (Brownness)

Texture (Moistness)

Tenderness Overall Acceptability

100% Beef (Control)

167 8.35b ± 2.92 9.98c ± 1.99 7.70ab ± 2.85 8.24a ± 3.09 8.20b ± 2.64

85% Beef, 15% TVP

345 8.08b ± 3.19 8.69bc ± 3.07 7.28ab ± 2.90 8.10a ± 2.64 7.93ab ± 2.82

75% Beef, 25% TVP

806 6.92ab ± 2.75 7.03ab ± 2.54 8.14b ± 2.95 7.81a ± 2.94 7.61ab ± 3.18

65% Beef, 35% TVP

502 4.91a ± 2.45 5.37a ± 2.38 5.83a ± 2.90 6.68a ± 3.02 5.89a ± 3.28

*Mean ± SD (Standard Deviation) of 27 panelist sample size in sensory evaluation utilizing 15 cm line scale survey

Table 3: Significance of Sample Results

Significance Beef Flavor Appearance (Brownness)

Texture (Moistness)


No Significance between Samples

65% beef to 75% beef

75%, 85%, & 100% beef with each other






All sample results display no significance



Significance between Samples

65% beef to 85% & 100% beef





None 65% beef to 100% beef

*Significance is determined by differing superscript letters of means in Table 1; means with the similar superscript letters have no significance. “The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.” (ANOVA program)


11

Table 4: Sample Mean Values and Acceptability (Tukey HSD Results)

Sensory Characteristic

Beef Flavor Appearance (Brownness)

Texture (Moistness)


Highest Mean 100% beef; 8.35

100% beef; 9.98

75% beef; 8.14

100% beef; 8.24

100% beef; 8.20

Lowest Mean 65% beef; 4.91

65% beef; 5.37

65% beef; 5.83

65% beef; 6.68

65% beef; 5.89

Figure 1: Sensory Characteristics Evaluation Bar Graph

The bar graph in figure 1 is a visual representation of the mean values concluded within the sensory

tests administered to 27 panelists in a concurrent overall image beside each other to gain perspective of

final sensory test results. In conclusion of all characteristics, the graph depicts that the sample of 65%

beef was designated the weakest in all categories and would not be accepted as a suitable modification

to meatloaf recipes. However, the similarity and proximity of mean found and supported by significance

found between samples demonstrated that the 85% and 75% beef would be accepted as a modification

to a meatloaf recipe. The strongest evidence found within the bar graph to support the acceptance of


12

75% and 85% is shown by the overall acceptability depicting closely ranged mean values in strength of

liking the samples.

Objective Test Results:

Table 5: Yield Percent

Sample Random 3-Digit Code

Pre-Heat (unbaked)

Application Weight (g)

Post-Heat (baked)

Application Weight (g)

Formula: total cooking loss (%) = (wt.

unbaked loaf – wt. baked loaf)/wt. unbaked loaf x 100

Percent Yield Loss (%)

100% Beef (Control)

167 262 g 197 g [(262 g – 197 g)/ 262 g] x 100 32.99%

85% Beef 345 262 g 195 g [(262 g – 195 g)/ 262 g] x 100 34.36%

75% Beef 806 262 g 205 g [(262 g – 205 g)/ 262 g] x 100 27.80%

65% Beef 502 262 g 188 g [(262 g – 188 g)/ 262 g] x 100 41.49%

Calculations to quantify actual volumes of product yield utilized the physical measurement of each total

sample weight prior to division of individual portions and cooking, following by weight of the final baked

product before division upon an electronic scale then applied to the formula as: total cooking loss (%) =

(wt. unbaked loaf – wt. baked loaf)/wt. unbaked loaf x 100. When applied to the equation, the results

determine a near linear trend whereby as the quantifiable portion of TVP modification increases, there

is an increased loss of final cooked product as a greater value of percent yield loss in weight. The linear

trend is disrupted with the 75% beef sample possibly demonstrating a deviation in method from the

other samples or human error. Percent yield loss demonstrated a likely loss by weight of dehydration

within samples which correlates with the panelists’ designation of moistness as defining texture

whereby the lowest yield loss correlates with the greater mean value per sample. Dehydration is likely

lost in the application of heat due to the rehydration of TVP via boiling prior to admission within the

sample mixtures, therefore the greater quantity of TVP will result in decreased density of final product

and greatest losses in water weight. However, a possible alteration in protein denaturation may be

related to increased product yield loss accompanying the modification via TVP due to unforeseen

changes which would have occurred in animal based protein whereby “muscle protein denaturation

cause the most drastic changes during heating, such as shrinkage, tissue hardening, juice release, and

discoloration (Pan et al, 2001).”


13

Nutrition Facts Analysis:

Figure 2: Nutrition Facts per Sample

Figure 2a: 100% Beef (Control) Figure 2b: 85% Beef, 15% TVP


14

Figure 2c: 75% Beef, 25% TVP Figure 2d: 65% Beef, 35% TVP

Table 6: Comparison of Nutrient Content between Samples

Nutrient Per Serving

100% Beef (Control)

85% Beef, 15% TVP

75% Beef, 25% TVP

65% Beef, 35% TVP

Calories 610 kcal 660 kcal 690 kcal 720 kcal

Calories from Fat

360 kcal 310 kcal 270 kcal 230 kcal

Total Fat 40 g 34 g 30 g 26 g

Saturated Fat 15 g 13 g 12 g 11 g

Cholesterol 180 mg 150 mg 135 mg 115 mg

Sodium 490 mg 470 mg 460 mg 440 mg

Total Carbohydrate

9 g 21 g 29 g 37 g

Protein 50 g 63 g 71 g 79 g

*Bolded information included to analyze effects and correlations upon health


15

Nutrition facts were performed by input of individual ingredient information weighted in grams per

sample as described in Table 1: Formulation, correlating to ratios modified per sample into the Food

Processor software program (version 10.7, ESHA, Salem OR); for example, sampe 2 of 85% ground beef

and 15% TVP was entered as 29.25 g white onion, 0.75 g salt, 0.50 g pepper, 8.75 g bread crumbs, 3.75

mL equivalence of 15 g, 165 g ground beef, and 39 g cooked TVP. Data retrieved in conclusion

formulated evident trends whereby increasing the quantity of TVP modification also increased the total

caloric content per serving, however inversely effected the caloric content from fat per serving, thus

supporting the health benefits of plant-based protein such as TVP as substitution of animal-based

protein sources such as ground beef. Trends observed and analyzed include that as the ratio of TVP

modification is increased per serving, the total values of calorie, protein, and carbohydrate content

increases; however, inversely related to the increased ratio of TVP is an observed decrease in values of

calories from fat, total fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, and sodium content per serving. The inverse

relation and nutrients which have decreased by modification of animal-based protein to plant-based

protein correlated with general health guidelines which encourage limiting exactly these nutrients which

have been shown to decrease, thereby enhancing the health of the consumer in application of

modifications.

Conclusion: Current health recommendations are to keep saturated fatty acid, trans fatty acid, and cholesterol

intakes as low as possible while consuming a nutritionally adequate diet (Dillard et al, 2004); therefore

the hypothesis examined within this study of protein alterations addressed decreasing the saturated fat

content per serving of protein modified meatloaf. This hypothesis mimics an alternative perspective as a

dietary modification to reduce saturated fat content as is being applied within the “agricultural

enterprise and food industries being guided by recommendations to the public to decrease saturated

fatty acid contents as low as possible (Dillard et al, 2004).”

The research study approached the substitution of portions of animal-based protein from ground beef

with plant-based protein of textured vegetable soy protein (TVP) to reduce fat content, and secondarily

improve health benefits, demonstrated that the consumer-accepted alternatives may include the 85%

beef and 15% TVP, as well as the 75% beef and 25% TVP modified meatloaf recipes as demonstrated by

the ANOVA analysis delineating no significance to the control 100% beef sample; therefore, conclusively,

the 75% beef and 25% TVP alternative will effectively benefit the health of the consumer as well as

acceptably satisfying the senses as demonstrated through 15 cm line scale sensory evaluation attributes.

Physical evaluation tests concluded summated through percent yield loss calculations indicated that

possible variables to completed product size, weight, and moisture content may vary in cooking,

however this finding is relatively negligible to the consumer, but may affect future studies and

experiment method reproduction attempts.

“Soy protein and isoflavones have gained considerable attention for their potential role in improving risk

factors for cardiovascular disease; many soy products should be beneficial to cardiovascular and overall

health because of their high content of polyunsaturated fats, fiber, vitamins, and minerals and low


16

content of saturated fat (Harris et al., 2006)”. Confirmation of proposed health benefits, as well as

effectively achieving the principal objective of reducing saturated fat content per serving of modified

meatloaf is evidenced within the nutrition facts produced through the Food Processor software program

whereby data determined evident trends in which increasing the percent of TVP modification versus

ground beef content resulted in positive effects, such as decreasing calories from fat, total fat, saturated

fat, cholesterol, and sodium while increasing protein, carbohydrate, fiber, calcium, and iron.

In conclusion, a modification of soy protein alternative as 25% TVP and 75% beef will be accepted by the

consumer and provide health benefits via reduction of saturated fats correlated with health ailments

such as angina, cardiovascular disease and infarct, stroke, and hypertension.

References: American Heart Association (2014, March 13). Getting Healthy: Saturated Fats. In American Heart

Association. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from

http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/FatsAndOils/Fats101/Saturated-

Fats_UCM_301110_Article.jsp

Dillard, C., & German, J.. (September 2004). Saturated fats: what dietary intake? In The American Journal

of Clinical Nutrition, 80(3), 550-559. Retrieved March 26, 2014, from

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/80/3/550.long.

Harris, W., Horn, L., Kris-Etherton, P., Lichtenstein, A., Sacks, F., & Winston, M.. (2006). Soy Protein,

Isoflavones, and Cardiovascular Health. In Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, 26,

1689-1692. Retrieved March 26, 2014, from http://atvb.ahajournals.org/content/26/8/1689.full.

Hu, F., Krauss, R., Siri-Tarino, P., Sun, Q.. (March 2010). Saturated fat, carbohydrate, and cardiovascular

disease. In The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 91(3), 502-509. Retrieved March 26, 2014,

from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2824150/.

McWilliams, M., (2012). Foods Experimental Perspectives (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Pan, Z., & Singh, R.. (2001). Physical and Thermal Properties of Ground Beef During Cooking. In LWT –

Food Science and Technology, 34, 437-444. DOI:10.1006/fstl.2001.0762. Sakata, Y., & Shimokawa, H.. (February 2013). Saturated fatty acid intake and cardiovascular risk. In

European Heart Journal, 57(1), 1093-2003. Retrieved March 26, 2014, from http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/02/20/eurheartj.eht057.

Vanni, K. (May 29, 2013). Easy Cheeseburger Sliders. In BetterRecipes. Retrieved February 22, 2014, from

http://www.betterrecipes.com/blogs/daily-dish/2013/05/29/easy-cheeseburger-sliders.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/80/3/550.long

http://atvb.ahajournals.org/content/26/8/1689.full

http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/02/20/eurheartj.eht057

sensory and physical properties of low-saturated fat ... · saturated fat content as evidenced by...

Documents