Meat

Published on November 2016 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 110 | Comments: 0 | Views: 610
of 4
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

Determination of the Composition of Meat though Proximate Analysis 1

Ansaldo, Jared Isaac A.
ANSC 132

September 25, 2014

A report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements in ANSC 132: Comminuted Meat
Laboratory under Mr. Oliver Abanto, 1st sem., 2014-2015.

Introduction
Food is defined as anything solid or liquid which when swallowed, digested and assimilated
nourishes the body.
Meat is defined as the whole or part of the carcass of any that is fit for human consumption. It is
composed of water, protein and amino acids, minerals, fats and fatty acids, vitamins and other bioactive
components, and small quantities of carbohydrates. (Warris, 2000)
Typically, meat is composed of around 75 percent water, 19 percent protein, 3-5 percent of soluble non
protein substances and 2-5 percent fat (Lawrie, 1979)
To determine the certain amount of composition in meat, proximate analysis is used especially for protein,
fat, water, and ash content analyses. Proximate analysis refers to the analysis of composition described in
terms of the percentages of protein, lipid, water (moisture) and ash only. They are determined in different
methods.
The objective of this study is to analyze the composition of meat of two given samples by
proximate analysis. The experiment was conducted in the APPD, Institute of Animal Science, University of
the Philippines, Los Baños.
Methodology
Two samples were used (Fresh Ground Meat and King Sue Longganisa) as they were subjected
into different analysis to determine their proximate composition.
Results and Discussion
Table 2.1 Determination of Moisture Content of Raw Ground Lean Meat and King Sue Longganisa.

Initial weight of
sample (g)
Weight after
drying (g)
Moisture content
(%)
Average MC (%)
SD
Confidence
Interval

1
1.5918

Raw Ground Meat
2
3
1.0125
1.4073

King Sue Longganisa
2
3
1.9685
1.2550

1
1.6483

0.4276

0.2607

0.3663

0.6376

0.7938

0.4345

73.1373

74.2519

73.9714

61.3177

59.6749

65.3785

73.7869
0.5797
73.7869 ± 0.6560

62.1237
2.9360
62.1237 ± 3.3223

Table 2.2 Determination of Ash Content of Raw Ground Lean Meat and King Sue Longganisa.

Initial weight of
sample (g)
Weight after

1
1.5918
0.014

Raw Ground Meat
2
3
1.0125
1.4073
0.0062

0.0106

1
1.6483
0.0511

King Sue Longganisa
2
3
1.9685
1.2550
0.0625

0.0372

ashing(g)
Ash(%)
Average Ash
Content (%)
SD
Confidence
Interval

0.8795

0.6123
0.7484

0.7532

3.1002

3.1750
3.0798

0.1336
0.7484 ±0.1512

2.9641

0.1069
3.0798 ±0.1210

Table 2.3 Determination of Crude Fat of Raw Lean Ground Meat and King Sue Longganisa

Initial weight of
sample (g)
Weight before
extraction(g)
Weight after
extraction(g)
Crude Fat (%)
Average CF (%)
SD

1
2.8842

Raw Ground Meat
2
3
2.2521
2.7956

1
2.0290

King Sue Longganisa
2
3
2.3916
2.0620

0.7300

0.5514

0.704

0.9728

1.1549

1.0102

0.5071

0.4023

0.5068

0.6278

0.7570

0.6393

7.7283

6.6205
7.1342
0.5583

7.0539

17.0034

16.6374
17.2094
0.6982

17.9874

Confidence
Interval

7.1342 ± 0.6318

17.2094 ± 0.7901

Table 2.4 Determination of Crude Protein of Raw Lean Ground Meat and King Sue Longganisa

Sample weight
(g)
Volume of Acid
Used in sample
(ml)
Volume used in
Blank Titration
(ml)
Normality of acid
(N)
Crude Protein
(%)
Average CP(%)
SD
Confidence
Interval

1
0.1607

Raw Ground Meat
2
3
0.2104
0.2200

1
0.1739

King Sue Longganisa
2
3
0.1352
0.1377

4.0000

4.2000

3.5000

2.5500

1.9500

2.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

13.3310

13.1124

13.2044

0.1039
22.6291

18.1479
18.4135
4.0894
18.4135 ± 4.6275

14.4634

13.2160
0.1098
13.2160 ± 0.1242

Table 2.5 Proximate Analysis of Raw Lean Ground Meat and King Sue Longganisa

Moisture Content (%)
Ash (%)
Crude Fat (%)
Crude Protein (%)
Total (%)

Raw Ground Meat
73.7869
0.7484
7.1342
18.4135
100.0830

King Sue Longganisa
62.1237
3.0798
17.2094
13.2160
95.6289

Based on the result, the products used have different proportions in their proximate composition. In fresh
meat, water is relatively high and protein has a considerably good amount. In longganisa, water is a bit
lower than the lean meat; hence its fat content is higher than to lean since it is used to emulsify the
contents. Fat content in emulsified sausages, such as longganisa can range from 15% to 30%
(Benitez). It is also observed that longganisa has lower protein content due to presence of fat in a higher
quantity. It was also observed that longganisa has higher ash content due to the most of preservatives
and stabilizers that are in the product. With also those said, longganisa has many other ingredients not
classified under the major components so it has an in complete composition.
Summary and Conclusion
As we subject the two samples in different kinds of analysis, we determined different proximate
compositions of the two it is seen that when there are different types of meat with different proximate
compositions.
Literature Cited
-

WARRISS, P.D. (2000) Meat Science: An Introduction. UK. CABI Publishing.
LAWRIE, R.A. (1979) Meat Science (Third Edition). UK. Pergamon Press Inc.
BENITEZ, V. U. Retrieved from: http://www2.fea.unicamp.br/~labcarne/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2012/09/9-HUI-Y.-H.pdf

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close