Author Contributions
M.H., conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, supervision, writing—original draft, visualization, writing—review and editing; A.S., formal analysis, investigation, methodology; E.G.-H., formal analysis, methodology; G.K., formal analysis, methodology; E.P.-N., formal analysis, investigation, methodology, supervision, writing—review and editing; A.P.; funding acquisition, supervision, writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Figure 1.
SEM analysis of freeze-dried emulsion hydrogels with encapsulated açai oil (31%), (A,B)—distribution of nanocapsules; (C,D)—multilayer nanocapsules.
Figure 1.
SEM analysis of freeze-dried emulsion hydrogels with encapsulated açai oil (31%), (A,B)—distribution of nanocapsules; (C,D)—multilayer nanocapsules.
Figure 2.
Analysis of cooking losses in grilled burgers with fat replacement after 0 and 7 days of storage. A–D—means with different letters showing a significant effect of the treatment group in the same day of storage, p < 0.05. a,b—means with different letters showing a significant effect of storage time in each treatment group, p > 0.05.
Figure 2.
Analysis of cooking losses in grilled burgers with fat replacement after 0 and 7 days of storage. A–D—means with different letters showing a significant effect of the treatment group in the same day of storage, p < 0.05. a,b—means with different letters showing a significant effect of storage time in each treatment group, p > 0.05.
Figure 3.
Analysis of lipid oxidation (TBARS) in burgers with substituted fat after 0 and 7 days of storage. CO-control with tallow (0% fat substitute), S-25%, S-50%, S-75%, S-100% means, respectively, replacing beef fat with 25, 50, 75, and 100% substitute.
Figure 3.
Analysis of lipid oxidation (TBARS) in burgers with substituted fat after 0 and 7 days of storage. CO-control with tallow (0% fat substitute), S-25%, S-50%, S-75%, S-100% means, respectively, replacing beef fat with 25, 50, 75, and 100% substitute.
Figure 4.
Changes in the volatile compounds profile of raw burgers (A); grilled burgers (B); after 0, 7 days of storage (4 ± 1 °C); CO-control with tallow (0% fat substitute), S-25%, S-50%, S-75%, S-100% means respectively replacing beef fat with 25, 50, 75, and 100% substitute.
Figure 4.
Changes in the volatile compounds profile of raw burgers (A); grilled burgers (B); after 0, 7 days of storage (4 ± 1 °C); CO-control with tallow (0% fat substitute), S-25%, S-50%, S-75%, S-100% means respectively replacing beef fat with 25, 50, 75, and 100% substitute.
Figure 5.
The relative peak areas (%) of the three main groups of volatile compounds: ketones (A), alcohols (B), and aldehydes (C) in beef burgers with substituted fat after 0 and 7 days of storage; CO-control with tallow (0% fat substitute), S-25%, S-50%, S-75%, S-100% means respectively replacing beef fat with 25, 50, 75, and 100% substitute. A–E—means with different letters showing a significant effect of the treatment group in the same day of storage, p < 0.05.
Figure 5.
The relative peak areas (%) of the three main groups of volatile compounds: ketones (A), alcohols (B), and aldehydes (C) in beef burgers with substituted fat after 0 and 7 days of storage; CO-control with tallow (0% fat substitute), S-25%, S-50%, S-75%, S-100% means respectively replacing beef fat with 25, 50, 75, and 100% substitute. A–E—means with different letters showing a significant effect of the treatment group in the same day of storage, p < 0.05.
Figure 6.
Effects of a fat substitute (freeze-dried hydrogel emulsion with encapsulated açai oil) on the fatty acid profile of raw (A) and grilled (B) burgers at 0 and 7 days of storage in cold conditions; CO-control with tallow (0% fat substitute), S-25%, S-50%, S-75%, S-100% means respectively replacing beef fat with 25, 50, 75, and 100% substitute. A–E—means with different letters showing a significant effect of the treatment group in the same day of storage, p < 0.05.
Figure 6.
Effects of a fat substitute (freeze-dried hydrogel emulsion with encapsulated açai oil) on the fatty acid profile of raw (A) and grilled (B) burgers at 0 and 7 days of storage in cold conditions; CO-control with tallow (0% fat substitute), S-25%, S-50%, S-75%, S-100% means respectively replacing beef fat with 25, 50, 75, and 100% substitute. A–E—means with different letters showing a significant effect of the treatment group in the same day of storage, p < 0.05.
Figure 7.
Effects of a fat substitute (freeze-dried hydrogel emulsion with encapsulated açai oil) on the nutritional indexes AI, TI, and h/H of raw (A) and grilled (B) burgers at 0 and 7 days of storage in cold conditions; CO-control with tallow (0% fat substitute), S-25%, S-50%, S-75%, S-100% means respectively replacing beef fat with 25, 50, 75, and 100% substitute. A–D—means with different letters showing a significant effect of the treatment group in the same day of storage, p < 0.05.
Figure 7.
Effects of a fat substitute (freeze-dried hydrogel emulsion with encapsulated açai oil) on the nutritional indexes AI, TI, and h/H of raw (A) and grilled (B) burgers at 0 and 7 days of storage in cold conditions; CO-control with tallow (0% fat substitute), S-25%, S-50%, S-75%, S-100% means respectively replacing beef fat with 25, 50, 75, and 100% substitute. A–D—means with different letters showing a significant effect of the treatment group in the same day of storage, p < 0.05.
Table 1.
Effect of the fat substitute used (freeze-dried hydrogel emulsion with encapsulated açai oil) on the color parameter (L*, a*, b*) and pH at 0 and 7 days of storage for both raw and grilled burgers.
Table 1.
Effect of the fat substitute used (freeze-dried hydrogel emulsion with encapsulated açai oil) on the color parameter (L*, a*, b*) and pH at 0 and 7 days of storage for both raw and grilled burgers.
| Day 0 | Day 7 |
---|
| L* | a* | b* | pH | L* | a* | b* | pH |
---|
raw | | | | | | | | |
CO | 42.15 (3.56) | 21.26 (3.10) b | 10.96 (1.3) Ab | 5.38 (0.02) Aa | 47.19 (3.27) B | 14.01 (1.66) Aa | 7.83 (0.78) Aa | 5.67 (0.05) Ab |
S-25% | 42.26 (2.91) | 22.17 (1.69) b | 12.03 (1.31) ABb | 5.50 (0.02) Ba | 43.89 (4.18) AB | 17.24 (1.62) Ba | 9.87 (0.85) Ba | 5.81 (0.13) Bb |
S-50% | 42.75 (2.46) | 22.43 (0.96) b | 11.75 (1.16) ABb | 5.51 (0.04) Ba | 41.91 (2.23) A | 19.05 (2.60) BCa | 9.92 (1.51) Ba | 5.68 (0.03) Ab |
S-75% | 42.71 (2.17) | 22.11 (2.13) b | 11.67 (1.32) ABb | 5.56 (0.02) Ca | 42.73 (4.15) A | 19.06 (1.45) BCa | 10.30 (0.99) BCa | 5.69 (0.05) ABb |
S-100% | 43.33 (2.59) | 23.16 (1.36) b | 12.99 (0.89) Bb | 5.56 (0.02) Ca | 41.77 (2.30) A | 20.05 (1.18) Ca | 11.46 (1.28) Ca | 5.67 (0.03) Ab |
SEM | 0.381 | 0.283 | 0.189 | 0.016 | 0.534 | 0.388 | 0.226 | 0.016 |
grilled | | | | | | | | |
CO | 30.75 (2.37) Ba | 6.76 (0.40) A | 6.8 (1.01) a | | 37.76 (2.47) b | 6.38 (0.55) A | 8.82 (0.90) Ab | |
S-25% | 26.27 (2.19) Aa | 6.78 (1.40) A | 6.80 (1.50) a | | 34.96 (2.73) b | 6.72 (0.51) A | 9.07 (0.97) Ab | |
S-50% | 28.36 (3.03) ABa | 7.75 (1.16) AB | 8.24 (1.53) a | | 37.39 (2.65) b | 7.86 (0.77) B | 10.09 (0.96) ABb | |
S-75% | 29.14 (2.3) ABa | 8.05 (1.18) AB | 7.89 (1.58) a | | 37.76 (2.90) b | 8.04 (0.84) BC | 10.31 (1.79) ABb | |
S-100% | 29.74 (1.5) Ba | 8.47 (1.17) B | 8.33 (1.34) a | | 38.32 (2.74) b | 8.89 (1.15) C | 10.86 (1.23) Bb | |
SEM | 0.382 | 0.180 | 0.214 | | 0.403 | 0.170 | 0.198 | |
Table 2.
Influence of freeze-dried hydrogel emulsions with the encapsulation açai oil as a fat substitute on the texture parameters (TPA) of grilled burgers at 0 and 7 storage day.
Table 2.
Influence of freeze-dried hydrogel emulsions with the encapsulation açai oil as a fat substitute on the texture parameters (TPA) of grilled burgers at 0 and 7 storage day.
Storage Day | Variants | Hardness (N) | Springiness (-) | Cohesiveness (-) |
---|
0 | CO | 75.82 (5.07) Ca | 0.53(0.06) C | 0.39 (0.03) B |
S-25% | 31.44 (2.31) Ba | 0.48 (0.03) BC | 0.36 (0.02) Bb |
S-50% | 20.64 (7.07) BA | 0.39 (0.07) B | 0.33 (0.02) Bb |
S-75% | 10.29 (0.47) Aa | 0.2 (0.01) A | 0.23 (0.01) Aa |
S-100% | 10.21 (0.68) Aa | 0.26 (0.04) A | 0.25 (0.03) A |
7 | CO | 102.36 (1.94) Db | 0.52 (0.01) B | 0.38 (0) C |
S-25% | 44.83 (3.25) Cb | 0.4 (0.04) AB | 0.3 (0.02) Ba |
S-50% | 27.36 (4.57) B | 0.38 (0.05) AB | 0.28 (0.03) ABa |
S-75% | 20.57 (3.13) BAb | 0.34 (0.09) AB | 0.29 (0.03) ABb |
S-100% | 18.63 (1.07) Ab | 0.27 (0.06) A | 0.24 (0.02) A |
SEM | | 5.366 | 0.021 | 0.011 |
Table 3.
Analysis of the effect of substitute fat on the sensory attributes measured on the 0 and 7 storage day.
Table 3.
Analysis of the effect of substitute fat on the sensory attributes measured on the 0 and 7 storage day.
Storage Day | Treatment |
---|
CO | S-25% | S-50% | S-75% | S-100% |
---|
| Appearance |
0 | 8.6 (1.26) A | 7.6 (1.47) AB | 7.0 (0.92) AB | 6.4 (2.47) AB | 5.5 (2.30) B |
7 | 8.2 (0.96) A | 7.9 (0.98) A | 6.0 (1.34) B | 5.7 (1.34) B | 5.2 (2.28) B |
| Color |
0 | 8.1 (1.40) | 7.6 (1.19) | 6.7 (1.33) | 6.6 (1.73) | 6.5 (1.82) |
7 | 8.0 (0.76) A | 7.4 (1.64) AB | 5.9 (2.21) B | 5.9 (1.36) B | 5.5 (1.29) B |
| Flavor |
0 | 8.4 (1.46) | 8.0 (1.34) | 7.0 (1.71) | 6.7 (1.94) | 6.5 (2.62) |
7 | 7.9 (1.20) A | 7.4 (1.59) AB | 6.0 (1.50) AB | 5.7 (1.70) B | 5.4 (1.78) B |
| Taste |
0 | 8.5 (1.30) A | 7.9 (1.24) AB | 6.6 (1.57) ABC | 5.9 (2.23) BC | 5.4 (1.59) C |
7 | 7.3 (1.41) A | 6.8 (1.30) A | 5.0 (1.84) B | 4.8 (1.94) B | 4.7 (1.79) B |
| Juiciness |
0 | 8.0 (1.80) | 7.5 (1.87) | 7.3 (1.47) | 6.2 (1.77) | 6.3 (1.63) |
7 | 6.9 (2.16) | 6.6 (1.41) | 5.7 (2.01) | 5.1 (1.30) | 5.1 (1.64) |
| Texture |
0 | 8.2 (1.80) A | 7.4 (2.26) A | 6.6 (1.58) AB | 4.7 (1.94 BC | 4.0 (2.57) C |
7 | 6.7 (2.13) | 6.5 (2.06) | 5.4 (2.02) | 4.9 (1.94 | 4.3 (1.66) |
| Overall acceptability |
0 | 8.3 (1.55) A | 7.6 (1.69) AB | 6.8 (1.76) AB | 5.6 (2.21) BC | 4.5 (2.26) C |
7 | 7.4 (1.40) A | 6.7 (1.61) AB | 5.1 (1.42) B | 5.0 (1.45) B | 4.9 (1.72) B |
Table 4.
Analysis of correlations between the fatty acid profile (SFA, MUFA, and PUFA), color parameters (L*, a*, b* and BI) and WHC, pH, weight and cooking loss, TBARS, and TPA parameters (springiness, hardness) in grilled burgers.
Table 4.
Analysis of correlations between the fatty acid profile (SFA, MUFA, and PUFA), color parameters (L*, a*, b* and BI) and WHC, pH, weight and cooking loss, TBARS, and TPA parameters (springiness, hardness) in grilled burgers.
| SA | SC | SF | STa | SJ | STe | SOa | FS | FM | FP | TT | TS | L* | a* | b* | pH | EAd | EAk | EK |
---|
SA | 1 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
SC | 0.92 * | 1 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
SF | 0.95 * | 0.96 * | 1 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
STa | 0.94 * | 0.94 * | 0.98 * | 1 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
SJ | 0.83 * | 0.87 * | 0.92 * | 0.92 * | 1 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
STe | 0.91 * | 0.80 * | 0.86 * | 0.90 * | 0.84 * | 1 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
SOa | 0.96 * | 0.88 * | 0.93 * | 0.96 * | 0.87 * | 0.97 * | 1 | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FS | 0.81 * | 0.6 | 0.64 * | 0.62 | 0.41 | 0.71 * | 0.69 * | 1 | | | | | | | | | | | |
FM | 0.6 | 0.67 * | 0.65 * | 0.69 * | 0.65 * | 0.66 * | 0.70 * | 0.26 | 1 | | | | | | | | | | |
FP | −0.90 * | −0.75 * | −0.78 * | −0.77 * | −0.58 | −0.84 * | −0.83 * | −0.94 * | −0.58 | 1 | | | | | | | | | |
TT | 0.79 * | 0.75 * | 0.69 * | 0.67 * | 0.49 | 0.68 * | 0.72 * | 0.75 * | 0.73 * | −0.90 * | 1 | | | | | | | | |
TS | 0.82 * | 0.7 * | 0.75 * | 0.78 * | 0.66 * | 0.89 * | 0.85 * | 0.79 * | 0.72 * | −0.93 * | 0.82 * | 1 | | | | | | | |
L* | −0.27 | −0.37 | −0.5 | −0.50 | −0.66 * | −0.29 | −0.34 | 0.19 | −0.15 | −0.10 | 0.26 | −0.01 | 1 | | | | | | |
a* | −0.95 * | −0.85 * | −0.88 * | −0.85 * | −0.71 * | −0.86 * | −0.88 * | −0.87 * | −0.55 | 0.93 * | −0.80 * | −0.86 * | 0.13 | 1 | | | | | |
b* | −0.66 * | −0.75 * | −0.84 * | −0.83 * | −0.88 * | −0.63 | −0.69 * | −0.21 | −0.51 | 0.36 | −0.24 | −0.4 | 0.86 * | 0.54 | 1 | | | | |
pH | −0.28 | −0.38 | −0.47 | −0.53 | −0.65 * | −0.41 | −0.44 | 0.20 | −0.61 | 0.05 | −0.05 | −0.23 | 0.73 * | 0.09 | 0.76 * | 1 | | | |
EAd | 0.42 | 0.39 | 0.25 | 0.19 | 0.02 | 0.25 | 0.28 | 0.60 | 0.30 | −0.61 | 0.78 * | 0.48 | 0.63 | −0.55 | 0.26 | 0.54 | 1 | | |
EAk | 0.15 | 0.2 | 0.34 | 0.40 | 0.50 | 0.29 | 0.29 | −0.22 | 0.18 | 0.12 | −0.32 | 0.01 | −0.86 * | 0.00 | −0.75 * | −0.83 * | −0.8 * | 1 | |
EK | −0.88 * | −0.84 * | −0.83 * | −0.82 * | −0.62 | −0.80 * | −0.84 * | −0.78 * | −0.75 * | 0.93 * | −0.93 * | −0.88 * | −0.02 | 0.92 * | 0.48 | 0.18 | −0.62 | 0.05 | 1 |
Table 5.
Basic composition of the substrates used in the experiment.
Table 5.
Basic composition of the substrates used in the experiment.
Fatty Acid Profile (%) | Açai Oil | Tallow |
---|
C14:0 | 0.08 | 3.57 |
C14:1 n5 c-9 | 0.00 | 1.19 |
C15:0 | 0.01 | 0.36 |
C16:0 | 8.27 | 26.91 |
C16:1 n7 c-9 | 0.08 | 3.79 |
C17:0 | 0.06 | 0.85 |
C17:1 n7 c-10 | 0.03 | 0.63 |
C18:0 | 3.38 | 15.36 |
C18:1 n9 c-9 | 28.73 | 44.13 |
C18:2 n6 c-9,12 | 54.51 | 1.71 |
C18:3 n3 c-9,12,15 | 2.95 | 0.24 |
C20:0 | 0.32 | 0.11 |
C18:2 c-9, t-11 | 0.00 | 0.43 |
C22:0 | 0.53 | 0.02 |
C24:0 | 0.18 | 0.00 |
SFA | 13.35 | 47.38 |
MUFA | 28.84 | 49.76 |
PUFA | 57.81 | 2.86 |
Primary composition | meat | |
Protein | 19.6% | |
Moisture | 68.54% | |
fat | 8.21% | |
color | Substitute fat | |
L* | 54.87 | |
a* | 25.11 | |
b* | 16.34 | |
Table 6.
Formulations of beef burger with substitute fat (konjac flour, sodium alginate, linseed flour, encapsulated açai oil), CO—control (0% substitute fat), S-25%—25% substitute fat, S-50%—50% substitute fat, S-75%—75% substitute fat, S-100%—100% substitute fat. These proportions represent the ingredients of a 120 g burger.
Table 6.
Formulations of beef burger with substitute fat (konjac flour, sodium alginate, linseed flour, encapsulated açai oil), CO—control (0% substitute fat), S-25%—25% substitute fat, S-50%—50% substitute fat, S-75%—75% substitute fat, S-100%—100% substitute fat. These proportions represent the ingredients of a 120 g burger.
Treatment Identification | Substitute Fat (%) | Beef Meat (g) | Tallow (g) | Freeze-Dried Emulsion Hydrogel (g) |
---|
CO | 0 | 96 | 24 | 0 |
S-25% | 25 | 96 | 18 | 6 |
S-50% | 50 | 96 | 12 | 12 |
S-75% | 75 | 96 | 6 | 18 |
S-100% | 100 | 96 | 0 | 24 |