The influence of cactus (Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Mill) cladodes powder on improving the characteristics and shelf life of low-fat beef and chicken burgers

Abstract

This research aims to investigate the influence of using cactus cladodes powder (CP) as a binder at three concentrations (1%, 3%, and 5%) on selected quality characteristics of low-fat beef and chicken burgers after formulation and during freeze storage (-18 °C) for 100 days, in comparison to control treatments without CP. Using CP at 3% and 5% influenced (p < 0.05) the proximate composition of the formulated burgers, while 1% CP did not influence the proximate composition significantly. Cooking loss was decreased (p < 0.05) by using CP at 3% and 5%. Oxidation stability of raw and cooked burgers formulated with 3% and 5% CP increased after formulation and during freezing storage for 100 days in comparison to control burger samples. Sensory preferences of color, tenderness, juiciness, taste, and overall acceptability were improved in samples with 3% and 5% CP in comparison to control and 1% CP burgers.

Keywords:
cooking loss; meat binders; meat storage; oxidation; sensory evaluation

1 Introduction

A significant portion of the population's nutritional habits has changed largely as a result of the quickened urban pace and the necessity to cut meal preparation time (Kearney, 2010). However, this change in nutritional habits is associated with the increase in demand for healthier and functional diets (Prado et al., 2019). There is increased interest in foods for their bioactive components needed for the prevention of diseases (Silva et al., 2021).

Burgers are a prevalent product of processed meat in the world and consumed heavily (Mizi et al., 2019). About 47% of the adults in the United States eat one or more sandwiches on any given day where 17% of them are burgers (Sebastian et al., 2015). Burgers, convenience ready-to-eat food, can be made from different types of meat such as beef and chicken. They are highly accepted because of their low prices and fast preparation time and public demand (Carvalho et al., 2019; Oliveira, 2014).

Many studies were conducted to develop and enhance burger such as reduction of fat content to produce low-fat burgers. However, this reduction may be accompanied with adverse effects on the sensory attributes including texture, mouthfeel, and cooking yield (Ospina-Echeverri et al., 2012). A number of non-meat components have been added to meat products to enhance their qualities, as a part of consumer interest, and to produce natural, nutritional, and functional meat products (Longato et al., 2017; López-Vargas, et al., 2014; Xu, 2001). Using plant natural antioxidants in meat products has minimized lipid oxidation in many meat products (Mizi et al., 2019).

Numerous binding agents, or binders, are commonly used in processed meat products to increase moisture and fat binding capacity, enhance shelf stability due to antioxidant properties, and as a result enhance sensory preferences. Moreover, these additives improve the yield and minimize the product cost, which is economically viable for the burger industry (Colle et al., 2019).

Because of their natural origin, capacity to bind water, antioxidant impact, and presence of nutritional and functional components such as fibers and other substances, plant powders, which are high in carbohydrates and fiber, maybe the most accepted binders in meat products by customers (Mancini et al., 2017). The cactus (Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Mill) plant belongs to the Cactaceae family and has four main segments: fruit, cladodes, flower, and seeds. It adapts easily to the environment in many geographic areas for instance; the Middle East, South Africa, North America, Central America, South America, Australia, and India (Loretta et al., 2019). It is used in diet and healthcare due to its high content of antioxidant and polyphenols, anxiolytic and anti-inflammatory properties (Akkol et al., 2020). Due to their hydrocolloid nature, the cladodes of the Opuntia species provide interesting perspectives as a food additive or component; it contains mucilage that is important to modify the texture of food products (Dick et al., 2019), dietary fibers and minerals. Cactus cladodes have bioactive compounds such as polyphenols (phenolic acids and flavonoids) and carotenoids with important antioxidant properties (Mena et al., 2018), which decrease the risk of several diseases related to oxidative stress. Cladodes powder was used to increase the concentration of beneficial compounds in bakery products and as an important ingredient in gluten-free baked products (Akkol et al., 2020). Furthermore, it was used as gelling, thickening, emulsifying and film-forming agents in food (Ayadi et al., 2009). It is a potential candidate to be incorporated food products not only because of it nutritional, nutraceutical, antioxidant, and functional properties but also for its low manufacturing cost (Ventura-Aguilar et al., 2017). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the incorporation of cactus cladodes powder as a natural binder in the .production of low-fat beef and chicken burgers, and its influence on their characteristics after preparation and during frozen storage.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Preparation and biochemical analysis of cactus cladodes powder

Tender mature cactus cladodes (Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Mill.) were randomly collected from different locations in the north of Jordan in March 2021, and transferred to the laboratory using polyethylene bags. Cladodes were washed using tap water, peeled, cut into small cubes, and dried to stable weight at 45 ± 1 °C for five days using a convection oven. After drying, cladodes were grounded, sieved using a wire sieve of 0.25 mm mesh, and the powder was kept in airtight polyethylene bags in the refrigerator at 5-7 °C until subsequent characterization and usage in burgers formulation.

The characterization of cladodes powder included moisture, crude protein, crude lipids, ash, total carbohydrates (by difference), and crude fiber, in addition to the tannins (mg/100 g D.M) according to Association of Official Analytical Chemists (2000). Total polyphenols (µmol of gallic acid (GA)/g sample) and flavonoids (µmol of quercetin (QE)/g of sample) were measured spectrophotometrically (Biotech Engineering Management CO. Ltd, UK) according to Guevara-Figueroa et al. (2010) methods. Total chlorophyll (mg/100 g D.M) content was measured as described by Mencarelli & Saltveit (1988) method. β-carotene (mg/100 g D.M) was measured as described by Rodriguez-Amaya (1999). Antioxidant activity using DPPH (µmol of Trolox/g of the sample) was measured according to Ozgen et al. (2006).

2.2 Preparation of burgers

Fresh beef, fresh de-boned whole chicken meat, salt, and spices used in the preparation of burgers were purchased from the local market. Beef and chicken meat were grounded in a meat mincer using an 8 mm plate. Four batches of beef patties and four batches of chicken patties were made by dividing the ground beef and chicken meats into four portions of ten kg each resulting in 8 samples (four beef and four chicken burger treatments). Three beef and three chicken burger treatments were formulated by adding 1%, 3%, and 5% CP, followed by the addition of 1% salt, 1% spices, and 5% water for each treatment using Hobart (Hobart, London, UK) mixer. The fourth treatment (beef and chicken burgers) was a control treatment containing the same ingredients except for CP. All dry ingredients were first added and thoroughly mixed, followed the by addition of water. The prepared burger treatments were shaped into 100 g patties with 1 cm thickness using a household burger patty mold. Each treatment was performed in duplicate.

Some freshly prepared beef and chicken burger samples were taken and analyzed for physiochemical and sensory properties. The remaining samples were kept frozen in airtight polyethylene bags at -18 ºC to be tested during storage for 100 days at four time points of 25, 50, 75, and 100 days.

2.3 Analyses of burgers

Proximate analysis

The beef and chicken burgers were analyzed immediately after formulation for moisture, crude protein (Kjeldahl method), crude fat (Soxhlet method), ash, and total carbohydrates content as per AOAC (2000) protocol (in triplicates).

Grilling and cooking loss

The burgers in the frozen state were cooked on an electric grill (LT15, maker, Ankara, Turkey) preheated to 150 °C until the internal temperature reached 74 °C in the center. This was measured using a thermocouple thermometer (Digitec, Modena, Italy).

The cooking loss of burgers was determined as the difference between the weight of raw frozen and grilled patties after they were cooled to room temperature (21-22 °C) as follows (Equation 1):

$$\frac{\begin{array}{l}\%cookingloss=Rawfrozenburgerweight\left(g\right)–\\ Grilledburgerweight\left(g\right)\times 100\end{array}}{Rawfrozenburgerweight\left(g\right)}$$ (1)

Thiobarbituric Acid Reactive Substances Values (TBARs)

Lipid oxidation, in both raw and grilled beef and chicken burgers, was measured using the TBARs method using a double-beam UV-visible spectrophotometer as described by Bruna et al. (2001). The results were expressed as mg malonaldehyde (MDA)/kg sample, after the measurement of absorbance at 532 nm.

Sensory evaluation

Color, tenderness, juiciness, taste, and overall acceptability of beef and chicken burgers were assessed separately as described by Larmond (1991) using the 9-hedonic scale, ranging from 9 (like extremely) to 1 (dislike extremely). Thirty experienced panelists assessed the samples in three sessions. Water and bread were used between treatments to neutralize the palates.

2.4 Statistical analysis

All treatments and analyses were carried out in duplicates. All data were expressed as means ± standard deviation (means ± SD). Data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) accompanied by the Duncan test using SAS software (version 9.1 for Windows, North Carolina, SAS Institute Inc, 2013), to identify the significance (p < 0.05) amongst the treatments.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Characterization of cactus cladodes powder

The prepared CP had high carbohydrate content (70.1%) followed by ash (13.6%), protein (8.8%) and lipids (2.1%). Moreover, its content of functional components such as crude fiber (22.3%), tannins (40 mg/100 g D.M), polyphenols (62 µmol of gallic acid (GA)/g sample), carotene (0.95 mg/100 g D.M, and flavonoids (18 µmol of quercetin (QE)/g of sample) could be beneficial to be incorporated in different food items (Table 1).

Table 1
Characterization of cactus cladodes powder.

Content	Mean value
Moisture%	5.4 ± 0.33
Protein %	8.8 ± 0.72
Lipids %	2.1 ± 0.15
Ash %	13.6 ± 0.87
Total carbohydrates%	70.1 ± 1.65
Crude fiber %	22.3 ± 1.28
Tannins mg/100 g D.M	40 ± 0.055
Total polyphenols (µmol of gallic acid (GA)/g sample)	62 ± 1.47
Flavonoids (µmol of quercetin (QE)/g of sample)	18 ± 0.44
Total chlorophyll mg/100 g D.M	50 ± 0.14
β-carotene mg/100 g D.M	0.95 ± 0.006
DPPH (µmol of Trolox/g of the sample)	582 ± 3.2

• Values are means ± SD of duplicates.

3.2 Proximate composition of prepared burgers

The influence of cladodes powder addition on proximate composition for both beef and chicken burgers is shown in Tables 2 and 3, respectively. Moisture significantly decreased at 3% and 5% addition levels, protein, and lipids significantly (P > 0.05) decreased at 5% level, but were not affected at 1% and 3% levels. Ash contents significantly increased in burgers at a 5% level, while total carbohydrates and crude fiber significantly increased at all added three levels. It is a well-known fact that eating enough dietary fiber lowers the risk of degenerative illnesses including bowel cancer, diabetes, coronary heart disease, obesity, and gallstones (Ahmad, 1995; Horn, 1997). Dietary fibers also offer technical features that may be employed in food composition, resulting in texture changes and improved food stability throughout manufacture and storage (Thebaudin et al., 1997).

Table 2
Proximate composition of beef burgers.

Content (%)	B1	B2	B3	B4
Moisture	67.3 ± 0.68a	67 ± 0.55a	65.8 ± 0.46b	64.6 ± 0.58c
Protein	16.8 ± 0.11a	16.6 ± 0.15a	16.4 ± 0.22ab	16 ± 0.17b
Lipids	13.4 ± 0.18a	13.3 ± 0.13a	13.1 ± 0.1ab	12.7 ± 0.19b
Ash	2.1 ± 0.08b	2.2 ± 0.06b	2.3 ± 0.07ab	2.5 ± 0.09a
Total Carbohydrates	0.4 ± 0.02d	1 ± 0.09c	2.4 ± 0.1b	4.2 ± 0.12a
Crude fiber	0d	0.25 ± 0.07c	0.43 ± ± 0.04b	0.71 ± 0.03a

• B1: Beef burger without addition of cladodes powder (control); B2: Beef burger formulated with 1% cladodes powder; B3: Beef burger formulated with 3% cladodes powder; B4: Beef burger formulated with 5% cladodes powder. Values are means ± SD of duplicates. Values followed by various letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).

Table 3
Proximate composition of chicken burgers.

Content (%)	C1	C2	C3	C4
Moisture	67.8 ± 0.48a	67.3 ± 0.34a	66 ± 0.72b	64.7 ± 0.85c
Protein	17 ± 0.17a	16.8 ± 0.18a	16.6 ± 0.13ab	16.3 ± 0.19b
Lipids	12.7 ± 0.26a	12.5 ± 0.28a	12.3 ± 0.33ab	12 ± 0.14b
Ash	1.9 ± 0.05b	2 ± 0.08b	2.3 ± 0.07ab	2.6 ± 0.12a
Total Carbohydrates	0.6 ± 0.1d	1.4 ± 0.15c	2.8 ± 0.13b	4.4 ± 0.21a
Crude fiber	0d	0.26 ± 0.08c	0.46 ± 0.06b	0.75 ± 0.07a

• C1: Chicken burger without addition of cladodes powder (control); C2: Chicken burger formulated with 1% cladodes powder; C3: Chicken burger formulated with 3% cladodes powder; C4: Chicken burger formulated with 5% cladodes powder. Values are means ± SD of duplicates. Values followed by various letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).

3.3 Cooking loss of burgers

Loss during burgers cooking has many negative effects on the economic, nutritional value, and sensorial attributes of these food products. It results in weight and diameter reduction, and loss of important nutrients including minerals, amino acids, and vitamins, moreover, produces products with bad texture and juiciness (López-Vargas et al., 2014).

As shown in Figure 1 of beef (A) and chicken (B) burgers cooking loss, the effect of CP at 3% and 5% in decreasing the cooking loss of beef and chicken burgers was evident at all storage times, while using 1% CP had no significant effect. This influence of CP in decreasing the cooking loss of beef and chicken burgers could be attributed to its components of high levels of carbohydrates, crude fiber, and protein. These components increase water retention and holding capacity. The results of this study are similar to that of Soltanizadeh & Ghiasi-Esfahani (2015) who found that using Aloe vera powder decreased the cooking loss of beef burgers. The polysaccharide content of Aloe Vera retains water and forms a network with proteins to prevent water release. Crude fiber increases water and lipid retention during cooking and enhances emulsion stability. This results in decreased cooking loss and increased yield by strengthening the meat structure system favor in more binding between protein, water, and fat, and improving the technological characteristics of meat products (Mehta et al., 2015). Cactus cladodes powder studied by López-Cervantes et al. (2011) showed high water holding capacity, and they reported that this powder could be beneficial to use in food and food products to improve their texture and functional properties. Antioxidant activity is affected by cooking. A study conducted by Hwang et al. (2012) found that cooking significantly reduced antioxidant activity.

Figure 1
Cook loss values of beef (A) and chicken (B) burgers during storage for 100 days at -18 °C. Lower-case letters denote significant differences among treatments, whereas upper-case letters denote significant differences during storage (P < 0.05). B1 and C1: b=Beef and chicken burger (control) without the addition of cladodes powder; B2 and C2: beef and chicken burger formulated with 1% cladodes powder; B3 and C3: beef and chicken burger formulated with 3% cladodes powder; B4 and C4: beef and chicken burger formulated with 5% cladodes powder.

On the other hand, storage time at -18 °C increased significantly the cooking loss of all burger treatments as investigated at 25, 50, 75, and 100 days compared to cook loss at zero time. It also remained the lowest in burgers produced with CP which could be attributed to the antioxidant effect of this powder (Table 1) that protects the meat proteins against free radicals and reactive oxygen species. These results were confirmed by Mancini et al. (2017) who found that the addition of ginger powder increases water retention and decreases the cooking loss of the burgers.

3.4 TBARs values of burgers

The oxidative stability of raw and grilled beef as well as chicken burgers after formulation and during storage, measured using the TBARs method is illustrated in Figure 2. Regarding raw burgers (Figure 2A and 2C), there was no significant difference at zero time between all burger treatments whether with or without CP. However, during storage for up to 100 days, the TBARs significantly increased for all treatments. Burgers formulated with 5% CP had significantly the lowest TBARs values followed by burgers formulated with 3% CP. Burgers made with 1% CP were not significantly different from the control treatment. TBARs of grilled control and 1% CP burger treatments were not significantly different at zero and during storage intervals, while grilled burgers with 5% CP had significantly the lowest TBARs values followed by grilled burgers with 3% CP at zero and during storage intervals (Figure 2B and 2D).

Figure 2
TBARs values of raw beef (A), grilled beef (B), raw chicken (C), and grilled chicken (D) burgers during storage for 100 days at -18 °C. Lower-case letters denote significant differences among treatments, whereas upper-case letters denote significant differences during storage (P < 0.05). B1 and C1: b = Beef and chicken burger (control) without the addition of cladodes powder; B2 and C2: beef and chicken burger formulated with 1% cladodes powder; B3 and C3: beef and chicken burger formulated with 3% cladodes powder; B4 and C4: beef and chicken burger formulated with 5% cladodes powder.

These results revealed the protective effect of cactus cladodes powder in the protection of meat lipids against oxidation in both raw and grilled burgers which could be attributed to the CP content of tannins, polyphenols, flavonoids, and carotene (Table 1). These compounds scavenge free radicals and protect the lipids from oxidation as indicated by. the DPPH parameters.

The oxidation in meat and meat products is accelerated by storage and/or heat. Lower TBARs values whether in stored or grilled burgers formulated with CP in comparison to freshly prepared and/or raw burgers without CP indicate retaining the antioxidant effect of this powder during storage and cooking. This is similar to the results of oxidation in pork burgers formulated with albedo-fiber powder from yellow passion fruit (López-Vargas et al., 2014). Mireles-Arriaga et al. (2017) reported that using plants as natural antioxidants could improve the nutritional value, overall quality parameters, and human health promotion of meat and meat products.

3.5 Sensory preferences of burgers

Color is one of the main factors that affect consumers’ acceptability of processed meat products. At zero time of preparation, the color evaluation showed that the addition of CP did not affect the preferences of beef burgers at all three added levels compared to the control treatment, but during storage from 25 to 100 days, treatments formulated with 3% and 5% CP were evaluated as the best compared to control and 1% CP treatments. On the other hand, Sensory evaluation of chicken burgers showed that color preferences of chicken burgers at zero time of preparation were evaluated as the best for control and 1% CP treatments, while lowest for 5% then 3% burgers with CP. Then as the storage time progressed from 25 to 100 days, the preferences shifted toward the treatments with 3% and 5% CP. The variations in color acceptability between beef and chicken burgers formulated with CP could be attributed to the difference in muscle type, the red muscle pigment could mask the color of CP that contains chlorophyll (Table 1), while white muscles in chicken burgers; could have less ability to mask the color of CP. At the storage time of both beef and chicken burgers, the antioxidant effect of CP, as shown from its component in Table 1 and TBARs results in Figure 2, could delay the oxidation of myoglobin which enhanced the color preferences of these burgers in comparison to burgers without CP. The oxidative process during the storage of meat contributes to the deterioration of the color. Synthetic antioxidants have been used to slow the oxidation process and extend the shelf life of meat but they have limited applications because their safety is questionable (El-Din Ahmed Bekhit et al., 2019) (Table 4).

Table 4
Sensory evaluation of beef burgers.

Characteristic	Storage time (day)	B1	B2	B3	B4
Color	0	A7.3a	A7.5a	A7.6a	A7.7a
	25	B6.5b	B6.3b	A7.4a	A7.3a
	50	C5.2b	C5.5b	B6.5a	B6.7a
	75	D4.6b	D4.7b	C5.8a	C6.0a
	100	E3.7b	E3.9b	D5.1a	D5.5a
Tenderness	0	A6.5c	A6.8c	A7.8b	A8.7a
	25	B6c	B6.2c	B7.2b	B8a
	50	C5.4c	C5.5c	C6.5b	C7.5a
	75	D4.7c	D4.9c	D5.6b	D6.7a
	100	E4c	E4.3c	E5b	E6a
Juiciness	0	A6.2c	A6.4c	A7.6b	A8.8a
	25	B5.6c	B5.8c	B6.9b	B8.2a
	50	C5c	C5.2c	C6.3b	C7.4a
	75	D4.3c	D4.6c	D5.7b	D6.8a
	100	E3.7c	E4c	E5b	E6.1a
Taste	0	A5.8c	A6.2c	A7.1b	A8.2a
	25	B5.2c	B5.5c	B6.5b	B7.5a
	50	C4.5c	C4.8c	C5.9b	C6.7a
	75	D4c	D4.2c	D5.1b	D6a
	100	E3.3c	E3.6c	E4.2b	E5.5a
Overall acceptability	0	A6.5c	A6.3c	A7.5b	A8.5a
	25	B6c	B5.6c	B6.8b	B7.8a
	50	C5.5c	C5.1c	C6b	C7a
	75	D4.9c	D4.6c	D5.4b	D6.5a
	100	E4c	E4.1c	E4.9b	E6a

• Lower-case letters denote significant differences among treatments, whereas upper-case letters denote significant differences during storage (P < 0.05). B1: Beef burger without addition of cladodes powder (control); B2: Beef burger formulated with 1% cladodes powder; B3: Beef burger formulated with 3% cladodes powder; B4: Beef burger formulated with 5% cladodes powder. Values followed by various letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).

Tenderness, juiciness, taste, and overall acceptability of beef burgers were evaluated as the best for treatment made with 5% CP followed by treatment with 3% CP, indicating that formulation of beef burgers with CP at 3% up to 5% enhanced the sensory characteristics of the made beef burgers. On the other hand, tenderness and juiciness parameters of chicken burgers were higher for treatment with 5% followed by 3% CP, while there was no significant difference between control and 1% cactus burger treatments. The taste and overall acceptability of chicken burgers were evaluated as the best for treatment with 3% CP followed by treatment with 5%, while control and 1% CP treatments were the lowest. Decreasing the cooking loss (Figure 1) and the oxidation of burgers (Figure 2) could enhance their tenderness, juiciness, and taste. The difference between taste preferences between beef and chicken burgers at 5% could be attributed to the differences between white and red muscle. The overall acceptability of the chicken burgers formulated with 5% CP could be affected also by the taste that was lower for this treatment in comparison to the chicken burger with 3% CP (Table 5).

Table 5
Sensory evaluation of chicken burgers.

Characteristic	Storage time (day)	C1	C2	C3	C4
Color	0	A8.5a	A8.3a	A7.5b	A7.0c
	25	B7.5a	B7.2a	A7.1ab	A6.7b
	50	C6.6a	C6.5a	B6.3a	B6.2a
	75	D4.5b	D4.7b	C5.6a	C5.4a
	100	E3.2b	E3.5b	D4.3a	D4.6a
Tenderness	0	A6.7c	A7c	A7.9b	A8.8a
	25	B6c	B6.3c	B7.3b	B8.1a
	50	C5.5c	C5.6c	C6.5b	C7.4a
	75	D4.9c	D5c	D6b	D6.8a
	100	E4.2c	E4.4c	E5.2b	E6.1a
Juiciness	0	A6.5c	A6.9c	A8b	A8.7a
	25	B5.8c	B6.2c	B7.2b	B8a
	50	C5.2c	C5.5c	C6.3b	C7.5a
	75	D4.6c	D4.7c	D5.5b	D6.9a
	100	E3.9c	E4.1c	E5b	E6.3a
Taste	0	A6.2c	A6.5c	A8.5a	A7.6b
	25	B5.5c	B5.8c	B7.9a	B7b
	50	C4.8c	C5c	C7a	C6.4b
	75	D4c	D4.3c	D6.5a	D5.5b
	100	E3.2c	E3.5c	E5.8a	E4.8b
Overall acceptability	0	A6.4c	A6.7c	A8.3a	A7.5b
	25	B5.6c	B6c	B7.5a	B7b
	50	C5c	C5.3c	C6.8a	C6b
	75	D4.3c	D4.6c	D6a	D5.5b
	100	E3.5c	E3.8c	E5.5a	E4.6b

• Lower-case letters denote significant differences among treatments, whereas upper-case letters denote significant differences during storage (P < 0.05). C1: Chicken burger without addition of cladodes powder (control); C2: Chicken burger formulated with 1% cladodes powder; C3: Chicken burger formulated with 3% cladodes powder; C4: Chicken burger formulated with 5% cladodes powder. Values followed by various letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).

4 Conclusion

Inclusion of cactus cladodes powder at 3% and 5% in the formulation of beef and chicken burgers could be beneficial from both the food technology and nutrition point of view since both the cooking loss and the oxidation are decreased, while sensory quality and dietary fiber increased. On the other hand, the polyphenols, flavonoids, and β-carotene contents of cactus cladodes powder could add another nutritional value to the produced burgers.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Al‐Balqa Applied University for their cooperation in providing the necessary laboratory facilities and assistance in the statistical analysis of data.

• Practical Application: The improvement of beef and chicken characteristics using cactus cladodes powder indicates the beneficial use of inclusion of this powder in the formulation of burgers in meat industries to manufacture meat patties with more palatable characteristics and a cheap source of the binder.

References

• Ahmad, J. I. (1995). Health and dietary fiber. Nutrition & Food Science, 95(1), 18-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00346659510076512
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00346659510076512
• Akkol, E. K., Ilhan, M., Karpuz, B., Genç, Y., & Sobarzo-Sánchez, E. (2020). Sedative and anxiolytic activities of Opuntia Ficus indica (L.) Mill.: an experimental assessment in mice. Molecules, 25(8), 1844-1856. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules25081844 PMid:32316321.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules25081844
• Association of Official Analytical Chemists - AOAC. (2000). Official methods of analysis (17th ed.). Maryland: AOAC International.
• Ayadi, M. A., Abdelmaksoud, W., Ennouri, M., & Attia, H. (2009). Cladodes from Opuntia ficus-indica as a source of dietary fiber: effect on dough characteristics and cake making. Industrial Crops and Products, 30(1), 40-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2009.01.003
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2009.01.003
• Bruna, J. M., Ordonez, J. A., Fernández, M., Herranz, B., & de la Hoz, L. (2001). Microbial and physico-chemical changes during the ripening of dry fermented sausages superficially inoculated with or having added an intracellular cell-free extract of Penicillium aurantiogriseum Meat Science, 59(1), 87-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(01)00057-2 PMid:22062509.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(01)00057-2
• Carvalho, F., Pateiro, M., Domínguez, R., Barba‐Orellana, S., Mattar, J., Brnčić, S., Barba, F., & Lorenzo, J. (2019). Replacement of meat by spinach on physicochemical and nutritional properties of chicken burgers. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 43(5), 2-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.13935
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.13935
• Colle, M. C., Richard, R. P., Smith, D. M., Colle, M. J., Loucks, W. I., Gray, S. J., Reynolds, Z. D., Sutton, H. A., Nasados, J. A., & Doumit, M. E. (2019). Dry potato extracts improve water holding capacity, shelf life, and sensory characteristics of fresh and precooked beef patties. Meat Science, 149, 156-162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.11.022 PMid:30528720.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.11.022
• Dick, M., Dal Magro, L., Rodrigues, R. C., Rios, A. D., & Flôres, S. H. (2019). Valorization of Opuntia monacantha (Willd) Haw cladodes to obtain a mucilage with hydrocolloid features: physicochemical and functional performance. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 123, 900-909. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.11.126 PMid:30447373.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.11.126
• El-Din Ahmed Bekhit, A., Morton, J., Bhat, Z., & Kong, L. (2019). Meat color: factors affecting color stability. In L. Melton, F. Shahidi & P. Varelis (Eds.), Encyclopedia of food chemistry (pp. 202-210). Amsterdam: Elsevier. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100596-5.21665-X
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100596-5.21665-X
• Guevara-Figueroa, T., Jiménez-Islas, H., Reyes-Escogido, M., Mortensen, A., Laursen, B., Lin, L., De León-Rodríguez, A., Fomsgaard, I., & Barba, A. (2010). Proximate composition, phenolic acids, and flavonoids characterization of commercial and wild nopal (Opuntia spp.). Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 23(6), 525-532. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2009.12.003
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2009.12.003
• Hwang, I. G., Shin, Y. J., Lee, S., Lee, J., & Yoo, S. M. (2012). Effects of different cooking methods on the antioxidant properties of red pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Preventive Nutrition and Food Science, 17(4), 286-292. http://dx.doi.org/10.3746/pnf.2012.17.4.286 PMid:24471098.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.3746/pnf.2012.17.4.286
• Horn, L. V. (1997). Fiber, lipids, and coronary heart disease. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Nutrition Committee, American Heart Association. Circulation, 95(12), 2701-2704. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.95.12.2701 PMid:9193441.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.95.12.2701
• Kearney, J. (2010). Food consumption trends and drivers. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 365(1554), 2793-2807. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0149 PMid:20713385.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0149
• Larmond, E. (1991). Laboratory methods for sensory evaluation of food (2nd ed.). Ottawa: Canadian Department of Agriculture Publication.
• Longato, E., Lucas‐González, R., Peiretti, P. G., Meineri, G., Pérez‐Alvarez, J. A., Viuda‐Martos, M., & Fernández‐López, J. (2017). The effect of natural ingredients (amaranth and pumpkin seeds) on the quality properties of chicken burgers. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 10(11), 2060-2068. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11947-017-1978-0
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11947-017-1978-0
• López-Cervantes, J., Sánchez-Machado, D., Campas-Baypoli, O., & Bueno-Solano, C. (2011). Functional properties and proximate composition of cactus pear cladodes flours. Food Science and Technology (Campinas), 31(3), 654-659. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0101-20612011000300016
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0101-20612011000300016
• López-Vargas, J. H., Fernández-López, J., Pérez-Álvarez, J., & Viuda-Martos, M. (2014). Quality characteristics of pork burger added with albedo-fiber powder obtained from yellow passion fruit (Passiflora edulis var. flavicarpa) co-products. Meat Science, 97(2), 270-276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.02.010 PMid:24607997.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.02.010
• Loretta, B., Oliviero, M., Vittorio, M., Boj’orquez-Quintal, E., Franca, P., Silvia, P., & Fabio, Z. (2019). Quality by design approach to optimize cladodes soluble fiber processing extraction in Opuntia ficus indica (L.) Miller. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 56(8), 3627-3634. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13197-019-03794-7 PMid:31413390.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13197-019-03794-7
• Mancini, S., Paci, G., Fratini, F., Torracca, B., Nuvoloni, R., Dal Bosco, A., Roscini, V., & Preziuso, G. (2017). Improving pork burgers quality using Zingiber officinale Roscoe powder (ginger). Meat Science, 129, 161-168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.03.004 PMid:28314171.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.03.004
• Mehta, N., Ahlawat, S., Sharma, D., & Dabur, R. (2015). Novel trends in development of dietary fiber rich meat products-a critical review. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 52(2), 633-647. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13197-013-1010-2 PMid:25694673.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13197-013-1010-2
• Mena, P., Tassotti, M., Andreu, L., Nuncio-Jáuregui, N., Legua, P., Del Rio, D., & Hernández, F. (2018). Phytochemical characterization of different prickly pear (Opuntia fificus-indica (L.) Mill.) cultivars and botanical parts: UHPLC-ESI-MSn metabolomics profiles and their chemometric analysis. Food Research International, 108(January), 301-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.03.062 PMid:29735062.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.03.062
• Mencarelli, F., & Saltveit, M. (1988). Ripening of mature green tomato slices. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 113(5), 742-745. http://dx.doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.113.5.742
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.113.5.742
• Mireles-Arriaga, A. I., Ruiz-Nieto, J. E., Juarez-Abraham, M. R., Mendoza-Carrillo, M., & Martínez-Lopereana, R. (2017). Functional restructured meat: Application of ingredients derived from plants. Vitae, 24(3), 196-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.17533/udea.vitae.v24n3a05
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.17533/udea.vitae.v24n3a05
• Mizi, L., Cofrades, S., Bou, R., Pintado, T., López-Caballero, M. E., Zaidi, F., & Jiménez-Colmenero, F. (2019). Antimicrobial and antioxidant effects of combined high pressure processing and sage in beef burgers during prolonged chilled storage. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 51, 32-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2018.04.010
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2018.04.010
• Oliveira, D. F. (2014). Farinha de linhaça dourada como substituto de gordura animal em hambúrguer de carne bovina com redução de sódio. Brazilian Journal of Food Technology, 17(4), 273-282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1981-6723.0714
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1981-6723.0714
• Ospina-Echeverri, J. C., Sierra, A., Ochoa, O., Pérez-Alvarez, J. A., & Fernández-López, J. (2012). Substitution of saturated fat in processed meat products: a review. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 52(2), 113-122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2010.493978 PMid:22059958.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2010.493978
• Ozgen, M., Reese, R., Tulio, A. Jr., Scheerens, J., & Miller, A. (2006). Modified 2,2- azino-bis-3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid (ABTS) method to measure antioxidant capacity of selected small fruits and comparison to ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) and 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) methods. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 54(4), 1151-1157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf051960d PMid:16478230.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf051960d
• Prado, M., Queiroz, V., Correia, V., Neves, E., Roncheti, E., Gonçalves, A., Menezes, C., & Oliveira, F. (2019). Physicochemical and sensorial characteristics of beef burgers with added tannin and tannin-free whole sorghum flours as isolated soy protein replacer. Meat Science, 150, 93-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.12.006 PMid:30616075.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.12.006
• Rodriguez-Amaya, D. (1999). A guide to carotenoid analysis. Washington, DC: ILDI Press.
• SAS Institute Inc (2013). Base SASR 9.4 procedures guide: statistical procedures (2nd ed.). Cary: SAS Institute Inc.
• Sebastian, R. S., Wilkinson Enns, C., Goldman, J. D., Hoy, M. K., & Moshfegh, A. J. (2015). Sandwiches are major contributors of sodium in the diets of American adults: results from What We Eat in America, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2009-2010. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 115(2), 272-277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2014.07.034 PMid:25300226.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2014.07.034
• Silva, M. A., Albuquerque, T. G., Pereira, P., Ramalho, R., Vicente, F., Oliveira, M., & Costa, H. (2021). Opuntia ficus-indica(L.) mill.: amulti-benefit potential to be exploited. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 26(4), 951. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules26040951 PMid:33670110.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules26040951
• Soltanizadeh, N., & Ghiasi-Esfahani, H. (2015). Qualitative improvement of low meat beef burger using Aloe vera. Meat Science, 99, 75-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.09.002 PMid:25282702.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.09.002
• Thebaudin, J. Y., Lefebvre, A. C., Harrington, M., & Bourgeois, C. M. (1997). Dietary fibres: nutritional and technological interest. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 81(2), 41-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0924-2244(97)01007-8
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0924-2244(97)01007-8
• Ventura-Aguilar, R., Bosquez-Molina, E., Bautista-Baños, S., & Rivera-Cabrera, F. (2017). Cactus stem (Opuntia ficus-indica Mill): anatomy, physiology and chemical composition with emphasis on its biofunctional properties. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 97(15), 5065-5073. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.8493 PMid:28631306.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.8493
• Xu, Y. (2001). Perspectives on the 21st century development of functional foods: bridging Chinese medicated diet and functional foods. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 36(3), 229-242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2621.2001.t01-1-00461.x
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2621.2001.t01-1-00461.x

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  27 Jan 2023
• Date of issue
  2023

History

• Received
  01 Nov 2022
• Accepted
  22 Dec 2022