incorporation of dietary fiber in meat products enhanced the fiber content in meat products and prevent various disease related to fiber indeficiency

2. FIBER- It comes from the Latin
word fibra, meaning fiber, thread,
string, filament, entrails
CRUDE FIBER- Crude fiber refers to one type of dietary
fiber, the type that remains as residue after food receives a
standardized laboratory treatment with dilute acid and
alkali. The treatment dissolves all the soluble fiber and
some of the insoluble fiber in a food
DIETARY FIBER- Dietary fiber or
roughage is the indigestible portion of
food derived from plants. It has two
main components soluble & insoluble
TERMS

3. Decision on whetherto include carbohydratesfrom3 to 9
monomericunits should be left to national authorities
Kim and Paik,2012
Edible non digestible component of carbohydrate and
ligninnaturally foundin plant food.
Carbohydrate polymers with ten or more monomeric
units whichare not hydrolyzedby endogenous enzymes in
small intestine of humanbeings.
Codex Alimentarius, 2011

4. CONTRADICTIONS
Dietary fiber definition
Dietary fiber content claims
Identification & updating of
dietary fiber in food
composition databases
Codex definition leaves the decision
of including carbohydrates
from 3 to 9 monomeric units to
national authorities
Dietary fiber content of white bread
determined by AOAC2009.01 has
gone up to 4.1 g/100 g which would
allow for the claim of ‘source of fibre’
Lacking of specific analytical
method & documentation to
distinguish dietary fibre values
Westenbrink, 2013

5. Yangilar, 2013

6. sources
Cereals
Legumes
Oilseeds
Fruits
Vegetable
AnimalMicrobial
Synthetic
Whole grain,
bran,
Milling
fractions,
Oilseed meal
Apple,
peel,
pomace
Potato,
carrot
Shrimps
Lobster
Crab
Xanthomonas
campestris
L. mesenteroids
Polydextrose
Cellulose, Hemicellulose, β-glucan, Mucilage
Pectin, Cellulose, Hemicelluloe, Inulin
Chitin, Chitosan
Gums : xanthan, Dextrins

7. Source Total Dietary
Fibre (g/100g
edible portion)
Soluble Fibre
(g/100g edible
portion)
Insoluble Fibre
(g/100g edible
portion)
Cereal
Whole grain 12.6 2.3 10.2
Wheat bran 48 2.5 45.6
Cellulose powder 95 <1 95
Fruits & Vegetable
Apple 2 0.2 1.8
Potato 7.5 2.12 4.57
Commercial source of high soluble fibre
Inulin 100 100 0
Pectin 90-100 90-100 0
Gums 80-90 80-90 0
Fibersol-2RMD 90 90 0
Robin et al., 2012

8. g/day
India >25 WHO (2003)
USA 38 man
25 woman
IOM (2005)
UK 18 DoH (1991)
France 25-30 AFSSA (2001)
Germany, Austria,
Switzerland
30 German nutrition
society (2000)
Yangilar, 2013

9. FIBER PROPERTIES
PHYSICO-CHEMICAL
 VISCOSITY
 SOLUBILITY
 WATER HOLDING
 WATER BINDING
 OIL BINDING
TECHNO-
FUNCTIONAL
 EMULSIFICATION
 FAT REPLACEMENT
 GEL-FORMING
 CRYOPROTECTANT
 TEXTURIZING
 STABILIZING

10. Factor Effect on techno-functional properties
Type of fibre Water holding capacity of soluble fibre is higher than insoluble
fibres
Particle size Decrease in hydration with decrease in particle size of wheat bran
Increase with reduction in coconut fibre particle size
Molecular weight High molecular weight β- glucan difficult to dissolve in water even
at low concentration of 0.5%
Nature of chain Highly branched guar gum & pectin more soluble & viscous
Water holding
capacity
Oat fibre with high water holding capacity used as a fat replacer
High water holding capacity in mince product which resulted in
reduced drip loss, hardness, cohesiveness & increased cooking
yield
Oil binding
capacity
Sugarcane fibre stabilize emulsions in high fat products
Delcour, 2013
Factor effect on techno-functional properties of dietary fiber

11. • FAST FOOD
 CALORIE RICH DIET
 FAT RICH DIET
 LOW IN NUTRIENTS
 LOW IN FIBER
• 20% OBESE IN WORLD
• 40% DIABETIC
• 35% HEART PATIENTS
• 22% CANCER PATIENTS
PROBLEMS
REDUCED

12. Definition of Meat
The edible parts removed from the carcass of domestic ungulates
including bovine, porcine, ovine and caprine animals as well as
domestic solipeds; poultry; lagomorphs; wild game; farmed game;
small and large wild game (European Comission, 2004).
Sources Of Meat: Buffalo, Cow, Goat, Sheep, Lamb, Pig, Poultry.
Carcass meat (beef and veal, lamb and mutton, and pork)
Poultry (chicken, turkey).
Processed meat/meat products (ham, bacon, tinned meat, sausage
(Frankfurters, Salami, Bologna & chicken sausages).
Offal and game (venison, pheasant, rabbit).
(Linseisen et al., 2002), Sharma,2003

13. Meat Production: World Scenario
Total world production of various kinds of meat is 216.25 million-
MT.
Production increasing at the rate 2.5%.
World meat consumption: Argentina is highest consumer.
Sheep & Goat Meat: Australia accounts for 70% of the world.
China is the largest producer of Poultry meat/Chicken.
Brazil exported the most beef in 2013 followed by India &
Australia.
Major exporters of pork meat are USA, Europe & Australia.

14. Meat Production: Indian Scenario
The total processing capacity in India is over 1 million tons per
annum.
Mainly exports HALAL frozen Buffalo meat.
Allanasons Limited pioneered Indian meat exports in 1969 and
continuous to be the leader in meat export.
Major Export Destinations (2014-15): Saudi Arabia, United Arab
Emirates, Australia, Hong Kong, Spain.
43 years of Indian Meat export: growing at 13% annually.
Exported 488.78 MT of processed meat to the world for the worth of
Rs. 6.93 crores during the year 2014-15.

15. Meat Nutritional Composition
Average protein content is 22%, however it can be as high as
34.5%(chicken breast) or as low as 12.3% (duck meat). Meat protein
scored 0.92 PDCAAS.
Average Fat content is 3 to 6%, while it can vary from 5.4 to 7.9%
fat in beef, Pork fat ranges from 8 to 10.7%, chicken and turkey range
from 1 to 15%.
Excellent source of several vitamins (A,D,E,V12) and minerals (Na,
P, Fe, Zn).
Meat is an important source of arachnidonic acid, an omega 6
polynsaturated fatty acid.
Contribute up to 20% of long chain omega 3 polynsaturated fatty
acid intake.
Pereira et al.,2013

16. Advantages and Disadvantages of Meat Consumption
Advantages:
Meat as a source of high biological value proteins.
Best source for iron, zinc and complex B vitamins especially B12.
Energy (114-294 Kcal/100g) and nutrient dense food.
Provides one or more target functions in the body beyond normal nutritional
effects.
Disadvantages:
Meat contains high amount of saturated fatty acids and cholesterol,
which have often been linked to health problems (cardiovascular
disease).
Processed meat products have high amount of added salt,
contaminates & fat which are additional risk factors for various
diseases (cancer, obesity and type 2 diabetes).
(Fernandez-Gines et al., 2005) ,(Terrell and Brown, 1981).

17. Fermented
meat
products
Image from NRCM,2005

18. Meat product
formulation
Optimize the
presence of
Delcour, 2013
 Meat ingredients
 Non meat
ingredients
a) Animal sources
(fish oil, collagen, egg,
blood)
b) Fruit and Vegetable
sources
 Lipid
 Protein
 Vitamin & Minerals
 Probiotics
 Fibre

19. FIBRE ENRICHED MEAT PRODUCTS
Rich in
fat
Risk of chronic
diseases
Meat
safety
issues
Health
benefits
Meat based
functional food
Fiber
Not healthy Healthy

20. Role of Dietary fiber in meat products
 Development of meat based functional food by altering the fat content using
meat reformulation strategies - reduction of total fat and energy, reduction of
cholesterol and modification of fatty acid profiles.
 Fortified meat with dietary fiber can lead to the prevention of diseases like
coronary heart disease, diabetes, irritable bowel disease, obesity.
 Dietary fiber can effectively incorporated in the processed meat products as
binders, extender and filler.
Acts as a prebiotics supplement in meat products.
 Increase acceptability by improving nutritional components, pH, water holding
capacity, emulsion stability, shear press value, sensory characters etc. of finished
products.
 Dietary fiber in the meat products can increase the cooking yield therefore the
economic gain as well.
Talukder,2014

21. Dietary fiber Source Functionality Meat application
Cellulose Cell walls of higher plants Water holding capacity Avoid synersis, stable
emulsion, casings in
sausages
Oat bran Outer layer of oat groats Fat replacement Fat replacer in ground beef
& pork sausage products
Legume fiber Legume seeds Water –binding & oil binding
capacity
Tenderness and cooking
yeild
Pectin Middle lamellae of plant
cells
Water binding, emulsifying, gel-
forming & thickening
Stabilizer, thickener &
emulsifier; fat replacer
β - glucan Oats & barley Oil binding & water holding
capacity, emulsifying
Fat replacement,
tenderness and juiciness
Xanthan gum Xanthomonas campestris Stabilizing & texture-modifying
capacity, fat replacement
Stabilizer & texture
modifier, thickener
Inulin Banana, chicory, barley,
onion
Gel forming capacity; low
viscosity, heat & acid stability
Fat replacer; stabilizer
Oligosaccharides Enzymatic hydrolysis of
inulin
Water - holding capacity, low
viscosity
Improve the flavor,
mouthfeel
Delcour, 2013
Dietary fiber, Source, Functionality and Meat Application

22. VARIOUS FIBER FORMULATED FOR FIBER RICH MEAT PRODUCTS
Source of fiber Type of meat product References
Inulin Sausages, Mortadella, Veal meatballs Huang et al., 2011
Carrageenan Mutton kofta Modi et al., 2009
CMC Sausages Morin et al., 2004
Legumes (hulls and
flours)
Beef patties, Meat Balls, Chicken nuggets, Camel
meat patties, Goat meat patties
Alakali et al., 2010, Serdaroglu et al.,
2005, Modi et al., 2003
Oat bran/flour Meat balls, Mutton kofta, Chicken patties Serdaroglu, 2006, Modi et al., 2009.
Yasarlar et al., 2007
Rice bran Meat batter, sausages, emulsions, Frankfurters Huang et al., 2005, Choi et al., 2007,
Alvarez et al., 2011
Wheat bran Meat Balls, Beef patties, Chicken patties Yilmaz, 2005, Saricoban et al., 2009,
Talukdar and Sharma, 2010
Apple pulp Chicken nuggets, Fermented sausages Verma et al., 2009, Garcia et al., 2002
Lemon albedo Sausages Aleson-Carbonell et al., 2005
Carrot dietary fiber Sobrassada, Chicken nuggets Eim et al., 2008, Bhosale et al., 2011
Sugarbeet fiber Frankfurters, Turkish type Salami Vural et al., 2004, Javidipour et al.,
2005
Oyster mushroon Chicken patties Wan Rosli et al., 2011
Mehta et al.,2013

23. Effect of Dietary Fiber Addition on the Meat /Meat Products.
Dietary fiber addition on physical properties of meat/meat products (decrease
cooking lose, pH, increase emulsion stability, increase water holding capacity).
Dietary fiber addition on proximate composition of meat products (moisture,
protein, fat, carbohydrates and ash).
Dietary fiber on sensory properties of meat products (flavour, colour,
appearance, tenderness and juiciness).
Dietary fiber and textural properties of meat products (Hardness, Cohesiveness,
Springiness, Gumminess, Chewiness).
Quality characteristics of fiber rich meat products during storage (shelf stability).
Mehta, 2013

24. 1. Physicochemical properties of fibre enriched meat products

25. 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Control Wheat D.F
3.5 %
Oat D.F 3.5
%
Inulin D.F
3.5 %
Dietary fiber
water Activity
pH
6.62
0.93
3.09
0.94
6.57
3.04
0.941
2.86
0.935
6.58
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Control Wheat D.F
3.5 %
Oat D.F 3.5
%
Inulin 3.5 %
L* a* b*
32.82
35.4334.51 35.45
7.11
7.53 6.95 7.05
8.51
8.86
9.09
8.85
O I
c
A.Wheat Fiber, Oat Fiber, and Inulin with Chinese-style Sausages
Conclusion:
 Type of dietary fiber introduced did not significantly influence the pH, aw and color of
sausage as compared to control.
 Sausage with wheat fiber have highest Dietary fiber content followed by oat and then
lowest in inulin.
Haung et al., 2011
6.57
Table 1.Effect of different fibers on Physico chemical properties of Chinese-style Sausages
W
0

26. B. Chicken Meat Patties with Wheat and Oat Bran
Content pH Water Holding capacity Emulsion stability%
Control 6.0 40.5 72.05
Wheat Bran 10% 6.0 49.7 94.6
Oat Bran 10% 6.0 50.8 95.4
1. Physical properties of chicken meat emulsions containing wheat and oat bran
Content Cooking method Control Wheat bran 10 % Oat bran 10%
pH Steamed 6.9 6.8 6.6
Baking 6.7 6.8 6.6
Cooking yield % Steamed 70.2 73 94.7
Baking 67.2 71 90.6
Shear Kg/cm Steamed 1.0 1.1 1.0
Baking 1.1 1.2 1.1
2. pH, cooking yield and shear values of chicken meat patties with wheat and oat bran

27. 3. Total ,soluble and insoluble dietary fiber, cholesterol of wheat and oat bran added
chicken meat patties
Contents Control Wheat bran 10% Oat bran 10%
TDF % 0.35 6.3 1.3
SDF% 0.24 0.63 0.68
IDF% 0.11 5.6 0.57
Cholestrol mg/100g 70.8 54.8 56.4
Conculsion
Oat bran showed better effect on WHC and ES than wheat bran emulsion patties .
Addition of bran resulted in significant increase in cooking yield, firmness, TDF and
decrease cholesterol content.
IDF was higher in wheat bran added patties and SDF in oat bran patties.
Talukder & Sharma, 2010

28. 2. Dietary fiber addition on proximate composition of meat products

29. A. Chevon Patties Containing Oat Bran
Bran % Moisture % Protein % Fat % Ash %
0 68.3 21.57 9.05 0.96
15 54.58 21.52 7.67 1.48
20 52.41 22.78 6.95 1.45
35 52.40 16.32 6.72 1.34
50 48.41 15.83 4.79 1.48
Bran % Myristic Palmitic Stearic Palmitoleic Oleic Linoleic
0 3.36 24.17 2.39 44.2 22.58 0.94
15 2.96 22.05 2.06 16.88 34.13 9.23
20 2.62 20.09 1.79 15.52 32.38 13.12
35 2.32 20.54 1.64 13.99 33.15 16.00
50 2.20 20.21 1.45 12.32 33.51 19.34
1.Effects of levels of bran on composition of chevon oat bran patties
2. Fatty acid content (%) of chevon meat plus oat bran patties (100g)

30. Bran
%
Met Lys Leu His Val Iso Phe Try Thre
15 0.99 3.28 3.40 1.06 2.05 1.72 1.72 0.46 1.79
20 0.88 2.90 3.06 0.95 1.90 1.56 1.58 0.38 1.58
35 0.66 2.08 2.41 0.75 1.49 1.20 1.31 0.35 1.22
50 0.52 1.62 2.03 0.61 1.27 0.99 1.41 0.31 1.00
Conclusion:
 Chevon (goat) meat-based patties were formulated with oat bran (15–50%
w/w) had Moisture, fat, and protein decreased with increased oat bran.
 Patties containing oat bran had higher concentrations of unsaturated fatty
acids and lower cholesterol.
 Selected amino acids in the patties decreased as oat bran increased
Dawkins et al.,1999
3.Amino acid profile of chevon patties with oat bran

31. B. Low Fat Meat Balls with Added Wheat Bran
Parameters control 5 % W. Bran 10 % W.Bran 15 % W.Bran 20 % W.Bran
Moisture 66.8 65.42 62.6 60.97 58.13
Protein 16.21 16.82 17.67 18.49 19.26
Fat 11.70 10.20 9.40 9.30 8.80
Ash 2.34 3.06 3.08 3.23 3.34
Fatty acids Control 5 % W.Bran 10 % W.Bran 15 % W.Bran 20 % W.Bran
Total trans 3.1 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.6
Saturated 50.3 49.4 49.5 48.6 48.5
Monounsaturated 43.6 44.5 44.2 44.7 44.8
Unsaturated 49.7 50.6 50.5 51.4 51.5
1. Physicochemical analysis of wheat bran meatball (10 % fat)
2. Fatty acid composition of wheat bran meatballs

32. Conclusion:
Control samples were formulated with 10% fat addition.
Meat balls made with addition of 20% wheat bran had the highest ash, protein
contents and the lowest moisture.
Meat balls containing wheat bran had lower concentrations of total fat and total
trans fatty acids than the control samples.
Yilmaz, 2005

33. 3. Sensory properties of fiber enriched meat products

34. 1.Sensory properties of beef burgers formulated with different levels of hazelnut pellicle
A. Hazelnut Pellicle in Low-Fat Beef Burgers
Parameters Hazelnut pellicle level (%)
0 1 2 3 4 5
Appearance 7.35 6.57 5.42 4.86 3.93 3.56
Juiciness 6.33 5.81 5.73 5.42 5.06 4.10
Flavor 6.62 6.43 6.17 5.69 5.02 4.71
Overall acceptability 6.76 6.27 5.77 5.32 4.67 4.12
Conculsion:
Increasing levels of hazelnut pellicle resulted in decreased appearance and color,
flavor and juiciness scores as compared to control in low fat beef burgers.
1–2% hazelnut pellicle can be used as a suitable dietary fiber source in low-fat beef burger
production with high acceptability.
9 point Hedonic scale
Turhan et al.,2005

35. 2. Carrot dietary fiber with dry fermented sausage (sobrasada).
Attributes 3 % carrot DF 6% carrot DF 9% carrot DF 12 % carrot
DF
Odour 85 77 54 12
Taste (Acidity) 100 72 17 11
Visual aspect 100 96 29 8
Texture 100 95 42 11
Overall
acceptance
96 79 38 9
2.Effect of carrot DF addition on the sensory properties of dry fermented sausage
sobrasada samples enriched with fibre at different dosages.
Conclusion:
Carrot dietary fiber to sobrassada modified the organoleptic properties depending upon the
concentration. All the sensory attributes were declined when the level of added dietary fiber
was greater than 3 %.
Eim et al.,2008

36. 4. Textural properties of fiber enriched meat products

37. TPA Graphical Representation

38. A. Meatball Containing Bacterial Cellulose (Nata)
1.Texture-profile analysis and shear-force value of cooked Chinese-style meatball containing
varying levels of Nata.
Attribute Control at 20% fat 10% Nata 20% Nata 30% Nata
Springiness(mm/mm) 0.92 0.92 0.90 0.89
Cohesiveness(mm/mm) 0.61 0.60 0.59 0.59
Chewiness (kg mm-1) 4.30 3.77 2.92 2.55
Hardness (kg) 7.75 6.77 5.58 4.76
Shear force (kg) 2.11 1.80 1.36 1.16
Conclusion:
Addition of bacterial cellulose (Nata) in meatball resulted in detrimental effect on textural
attributes, but addition of 10% nata to Chinese-style meatballs produced products with
acceptable textural qualities.
The values for hardness, cohesiveness, springiness, chewiness and shear force showed a
decreasing pattern with an increasing level of Nata incorporation.
Lin and Lin, 2008

39. B. Chicken Patty with Oyster mushroom (Pleurotus sajor-caju)
. Texture profile analysis of chicken patties incorporated with oyster mushroom
Oyster Mushroom Level (%)
Parameters 0 (control) 25 50
Hardness (kg) 22.96 13.20 11.20
Cohesiveness (mm/mm) 0.46 0.37 0.32
Springiness (mm/mm) 0.35 0.36 0.40
Chewiness (kgsmm-1) 2.87 1.72 1.78
Conclusion:
Hardness of chicken patties decreased proportionally with the increasing level of oyster
mushroom.
The cohesiveness, gumminess and chewiness of oyster mushroom based patties had lower
values than control while springiness was higher than control chicken patties.
Addition of 25% oyster mushroom to replace chicken breast is suitable for the purpose of
production of chicken patties commercially.
Wan Rosli et al.,2011

40. 5.Quality characteristics of fiber rich meat products

41. A. Chicken Patties With Psyllium Husk
Treatments Group Storage periods ( Days)
0 3 6 9 12 15
pH Control 6.28 6.30 6.30 6.34 6.37 6.39
4 % P.H 6.31 6.33 6.34 6.37 6.39 6.41
TBARS Control 0.83 0.89 1.12 1.39 1.69 1.84
4 % P.H 0.76 0.87 1.03 1.26 1.51 1.64
FFA Control 0.47 0.58 0.69 0.78 0.93 1.02
4 % P.H 0.45 0.51 0.57 0.73 0.87 0.95
TPC Control 2.79 3.10 3.83 4.47 5.26 5.63
4 % P.H 2.74 3.08 3.67 4.29 5.00 5.48
Effect of refrigeration storage (4±1°C) on physicochemical & microbiological
parameters of chicken patties incorporated with psyllium husk.
Conclusion:
Physico-chemical properties of chicken patties with psyllium husk incorporation at 4%
level was found suitable.
During storage at 4±1°C, the psyllium husk added patties were found to be
microbiologically safe and acceptable up to 15 days.
Mehta et al.,2013

42. B. Grape Fiber Added Hamburgers
Conclusion:
 GADF showed a significant protective effect towards lipid oxidation.
RW-Grape-2 increased lipid oxidation stability of chicken meat during refrigeration storage
CK-GADF-2 showed better results than 1% CK-GADF-1.
CK-GADF-2 showed decreased lipid oxidation stability after 5days storage
Sayogya et al., 2009
Effect of grape antioxidant dietary fiber (GADF) on TBARS values (mg
malondialdehyde/kg meat) in raw chicken hamburger (0, 3, 5 days) and cooked chicken
hamburger
after 0, 3 and 5 days of refrigerated storage

43. Wide range of fiber available to food processors and scientists to provide
wide range of functionality such as emulsification, fat replacement, stabilizing
etc in meat and meat products.
Functionally significant dietary fiber can easily improve the health beneficiary
characters and the consumer acceptance of meat products added with it.
The cholesterol reducing property of dietary fiber is being utilized by the meat
processors to attract the health conscious consumers worldwide.
Various sensory attributes of processed meat products such as texture,
juiciness, color are variably influenced by the dietary fiber addition.
CONCLUSION

44. Challenges and future potential of fiber rich meat products
Suitability of dietary fiber incorporation in meat products increasing various numerous
functional properties like water retention, emulsion stability, lubrication, texture modification
and neutral flavor.
Formulation of some meat products such as patties and sausages for development of
nutritionally balanced diet with various fiber sources like oat, rice, sugar beet, soy, pea,
psyllium etc.
Fat replacer in manufacturing of various meat products.
Dietary fiber is now used in meat products for technological up gradation like improvement
in cooking yields, rheological properties, reducing formulation costs and enhancing the
palatability and texture of meat
products.
Dietary fiber rich meat products are considered clinically better than traditional meat
products. But the real challenge actually lies in effective development and marketing of these
functional meat products.
From the consumer perspective, the trust on the composition and desired outcome of fiber
rich meat products on regular consumption

45. THANK YOU