<span id="5nxvn"><dl id="5nxvn"></dl></span>
<strike id="5nxvn"></strike>
<ruby id="5nxvn"><dl id="5nxvn"></dl></ruby>
<strike id="5nxvn"></strike>
<th id="5nxvn"></th>
<span id="5nxvn"><video id="5nxvn"></video></span>
  • EI
  • Scopus
  • 食品科學與工程領域高質量科技期刊分級目錄第一方陣T1
  • DOAJ
  • EBSCO
  • 北大核心期刊
  • 中國核心學術期刊RCCSE
  • JST China
  • FSTA
  • 中國精品科技期刊
  • 中國農業核心期刊
  • CA
  • WJCI
  • 中國科技核心期刊CSTPCD
  • 中國生物醫學SinoMed
中國精品科技期刊2020
王琳,李安林,熊雙麗,等. 紅外烤制和微波烤制豬肉品質的對比分析[J]. 食品工業科技,2024,45(8):57?66. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023040043.
引用本文: 王琳,李安林,熊雙麗,等. 紅外烤制和微波烤制豬肉品質的對比分析[J]. 食品工業科技,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.

紅外烤制和微波烤制豬肉品質的對比分析

Quality Analysis of Infrared and Microwave Roast Pork

  • 摘要: 以感官評價、質構、丙二醛、過氧化值、蛋白質、揮發性風味物質等為考察因子,比較分析紅外烤制和微波烤制對豬里脊肉品質的影響。結果表明:兩種烤制方式對豬肉色澤影響的差異性不顯著(P>0.05)。紅外烤制豬肉感官評分比微波烤制豬肉平均高3.67分,但硬度和咀嚼性更低。紅外烤制豬肉丙二醛含量和過氧化值分別比微波烤制豬肉增加了16.89%和38.36%。紅外烤制豬肉中活性巰基含量極顯著低于微波烤制豬肉(P<0.01),更容易引起蛋白質的氧化。兩種烤制方式均使烤肉蛋白質二級結構發生變化,紅外烤制下豬肉蛋白質聚集變性作用更強。紅外烤制和微波烤制豬肉分別鑒定出48種和60種揮發性風味物質,具有明顯差異。紅外烤制豬肉的揮發性風味物質中烴類物質種類與相對含量最多,但對風味貢獻不大。雜環類硫化物能提供濃郁的肉香及洋蔥味,微波烤制豬肉雜環類硫化物相對含量比紅外烤制高,種類更多,肉香味更濃。綜合考慮烤肉食用品質及人體健康,選擇微波烤制方式更好。

     

    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
在线观看国产成人综合视频