Next Article in Journal
EECNet: An Efficient Edge Computing Network for Transmission Line Ice Thickness Recognition
Previous Article in Journal
Reducing Lithium-Ion Battery Testing Costs Through Strategic Sample Optimization
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Processes
Volume 13
Issue 7
10.3390/pr13072031
processes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Optimization of Spirulina platensis Incorporation in Coated Beef Meatballs: Impact on Quality Characteristics and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Formation

by
Yagmur Elikucuk
and
Gulen Yildiz Turp
*
Department of Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ege University, 35040 Izmir, Türkiye
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2025, 13(7), 2031; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13072031
Submission received: 23 May 2025 / Revised: 18 June 2025 / Accepted: 24 June 2025 / Published: 26 June 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Food Process Engineering)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

This study aimed to improve the quality characteristics of coated beef meatballs with Spirulina platensis, optimize its usage level and storage, and reduce the levels of carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the product. Six groups of coated meatball samples were prepared with S. platensis powder at levels of 0.2–2.3% and 0% (control) and stored at −20 °C for 102 days. All ratios of S. platensis significantly increased the protein content and reduced the oxidation and all the PAH-compound and ΣPAH4 contents of the samples (p < 0.05). The sensory characteristics of the samples were improved by higher levels of S. platensis at later periods of storage. Using S. platensis resulted in significant decreases in the ΣPAH4 content of 16.21% and 39.53% in the samples with 1.25% and 2.3%, respectively (p < 0.05). The recommended solution that ensured the highest level of response optimization, with the highest “Desirability” among the top five solutions in terms of color (L*, a*, b*), overall acceptance, and flavor, was determined to be the solution with a S. platensis powder usage level of 1.25% and a storage period of 60 days. Consequently, S. platensis, which is considered to be a food of the future, improved the quality characteristics of coated meatballs and reduced their PAH level.

1. Introduction

Nutrition, with its associated physiological, psychological, sociological, and economic dimensions, is essential for growth and development, the continuation of life, and preserving and enhancing health [1]. The global population is placing considerable pressure on the capacity of current food production systems to ensure a continuous food supply. Food demand is predicted to exceed current production levels by more than 70% in the future. This has led to a growing need for further research to explore and develop sustainable food sources [2,3]. Projections indicate that the global population will reach 10 billion by 2050 [4,5,6]. This scenario emphasizes the need for a 35% to 56% increase in food production between 2010 and 2050 [5,6]. Concurrently, shifts in dietary patterns are propelling increased demand for protein-rich foods [6,7].
Byproducts derived from algae within sustainable food systems possess significant nutritional, sensory, and technological properties. They contribute to the increasing demand for novel food products and ingredients [8]. Algae have emerged as a significant research focus regarding sustainable and alternative food sources, particularly for proteins and other valuable bioactive compounds. The prominence of algae as a sustainable resource is primarily attributed to their valuable composition, their natural presence in ecosystems under existing conditions, and their ability to be produced in open systems with low investment costs [9,10,11]. Algae are photosynthetic organisms capable of producing biomass by utilizing sunlight, water, and carbon dioxide. They are classified into two main groups based on their size: microalgae and macroalgae [12]. Microalgae are single-celled organisms with significant potential in industrial applications [13,14]. The sustainability of microalgae and the versatility of their applications have led to rapidly increased interest in their use as natural biorefineries in various fields, including food and feed production and mitigating global climate change [15,16,17].
The microalgae S. platensis, commonly known as Spirulina, is a planktonic and filamentous cyanobacterium that thrives in warm tropical and subtropical alkaline lakes characterized by high pH and salt concentrations [18,19,20,21,22]. S. platensis is notable for its high content of essential nutrients, including all essential amino acids, beta-carotene, gamma-linolenic acid, B vitamins, and trace elements. Notable differences in calcium content are evident, with S. platensis containing 180% of the calcium content of milk, 5100% of the iron content of spinach, 670% of the protein content of tofu, and 3100% of the beta-carotene content of carrots. Its antioxidant content has been shown to be 60 times higher than that of spinach, 31 times higher than that of blueberries, and 700 times higher than that of apples [23,24]. In 1996, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) designated S. platensis as “the ideal and most complete food of the future”, while the WHO described it as “the best food for humanity in the 21st century” [25,26]. The safe recommended dosage of Spirulina is approximately 3–10 g/d for adults, with 30 g/d being the maximum limit [27,28]. Spirulina, despite being widely recognized for its nutritional value and anti-allergic properties, has been reported to potentially act as a hidden allergen in individuals sensitive to it. Gromek et al. [29] have noted that several Spirulina proteins exhibit sequence homology with known food allergens. Further research is needed to assess the allergenic potential of Spirulina consumption.
S. platensis is the most extensively cultivated microalgae on a global scale. A study conducted by Industry ARC [30] projects a compound annual growth rate of 9.2% for S. platensis powder between 2022 and 2027, with an estimated market value of USD 897.3 million by 2027 [31]. To take advantage of the high nutritional value of S. platensis, considered to be a sustainable food of the future, a number of studies have investigated the product’s properties by adding it to various foods. The addition of S. platensis to bread [32] and biscuits, pastries, and noodles [33] improved the nutritional value of these products while providing acceptable sensory properties, depending on the ratio used. S. platensis has been shown to increase protein and ash levels, which significantly affect the nutritional value of mortadella sausage samples [34] and reduce the moisture content of fish balls [35]. Furthermore, studies have examined its potential as a natural antioxidant in Chinese-style sausages [36] and as an alternative protein source in cooked turkey breast meat [37].
Meat and meat products are viewed as an indispensable food product today because they are a source of protein [38]. However, the consumption and/or excessive consumption of meat increases the risk of experiencing chronic health problems such as colorectal cancer and cardiovascular diseases [39]. Cooking methods that require exposure to high temperatures, such as grilling or barbecuing, have been associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer because they lead to the formation of compounds such as PAHs and HCAs [40].
PAHs are widespread organic contaminants consisting of two or more aromatic rings and are produced mainly from the pyrolysis of organic matter [41,42,43]. PAHs can enter food through two main pathways: environmental pollution or formation during the thermal processing of food [41,43,44,45]. The primary source of PAH exposure for humans is the consumption of meat and meat products cooked at high temperatures [46,47]. PAHs pose a significant risk to human health due to their genotoxic and carcinogenic effects [41,48,49,50]. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) suggested using four compounds, benzo[a]anthracene (BaA), chrysene (Chry), benzo[b]fluoranthene (BbF), and benzo[a]pyrene (BaP), as indicators for assessing PAHs in foods, and these are often labeled as PAH4 [44]. The European Commission Regulation (EC-No.1327/2014) [51] defined the maximum levels of BaP and PAH4 as less than 2 and 12 ng/g, respectively, for smoked meat products. BaP has been classified as a Group 1 carcinogen (carcinogenic to humans), while the other three PAH4 compounds have been categorized as Group 2 carcinogens (possibly carcinogenic to humans) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) [52].
Antioxidants are known to interfere with PAH formation by inhibiting free radical reactions or neutralizing free radicals [53]. In recent studies, it has been shown that adding natural/artificial antioxidants before the cooking process also affects the reduction in PAH formation [42,43,54,55,56,57]. Therefore, adding antioxidant-containing additives to foods is considered an effective strategy to reduce PAH formation. It has been observed that S. platensis contains numerous antioxidants such as beta-carotene, tocopherol, and bound forms of these antioxidants.
Based on this information, the present study hypothesizes that S. platensis reduces PAH formation in coated beef meatballs due to its high antioxidant content. This study is the first to investigate the effects of S. platensis on PAH formation in a meat product and demonstrate its comprehensive effects on product characteristics when used in coated beef patties. The findings are valuable for creating a new application area for S. platensis in terms of sustainability and for providing a new, natural way to prevent carcinogenic PAH compounds in meat products. In this study, the oven cooking method was selected instead of deep-fat frying, which is commonly used in cooking coated products, to ensure that S. platensis could optimally demonstrate its effectiveness and to preserve the healthy characteristics of the coated meatballs to be obtained. The objectives of this study were to establish a new use for S. platensis, considered a food of the future; to develop a novel and healthy formulation of S. platensis powder to add to oven-cooked coated beef meatballs; to optimize the S. platensis powder usage level in terms of product properties and storage period; and to determine the physical, chemical, and sensory characteristics and PAH levels of the obtained product.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

Fresh boneless beef (in the form of brisket) was supplied by a local butcher, while the additives, sunflower oil, and coating components were obtained from a supermarket in Izmir, Türkiye. The S. platensis powder used in producing coated beef meatball was supplied by Egert Natural Products Production Ltd. Co., Izmır, Türkiye. The S. platensis powder (Egert, Izmir, Türkiye) used in this project was developed and commercialized as a result of a research project conducted between Egert Natural Products Production Ltd. Co. and the Science and Technology Application and Research Centre of Ege University.

2.2. Coated Beef Meatball Production

The beef was minced in a meat grinder and then mixed with sunflower oil (3.5%), salt (1.5%) and black pepper (1.8%), cumin (1.8%), and onion powder (1.8%). The resulting mixture was then divided into six groups. To the five sample groups other than the control group, S. platensis powder was added at levels of 0.2% (S0.2), 0.5% (S0.5), 1.25% (S1.25), 2% (S2), and 2.3% (S2.3), and the sample group without S. platensis powder was evaluated as a control (C) (Table 1). Within the meatball formulations, the proportion of S. platensis powder was incorporated by substituting for the proportion of beef. Equal quantities of fat, salt, garlic powder, and spices were added to all sample groups.
The ratios of S. platensis powder used in the meatballs were established by applying the Response Surface Methodology (RSM) (Table 2). After mixing and kneading the dough, the meatball samples were shaped into spheres weighing approximately 25 g each.
In addition to producing a palatable and highly desired product, a coating technique was applied to the meatballs to prevent the S. platensis powder from having an adverse effect on the color of the product. Within this scope, firstly, the meatballs were kept at −20 °C in polypropylene containers for 1.5 h. Then, the first step of the coating process, pre-dusting, was carried out by uniformly immersing the meatball samples in wheat flour. The meatball samples were then dipped in egg white (battering) and coated with rusk as the final step (breading) of the coating technique. The coated products were then cooked in an oven (Arçelik-MD 1300, Arçelik, Bolu, Türkiye) at 170 °C for 30 min until the core temperature reached a minimum of 75 °C. The prepared coated meatball samples were placed in sealed polypropylene containers and stored at −20 °C for 102 days.

2.3. Analyses

2.3.1. DPPH Analysis Performed on the Spirulina platensis Powder

To determine the antioxidant activity of S. platensis powder, a DPPH radical scavenging activity assay [58] was conducted. A sample mixture prepared at a 1:10 ratio (sample:ethanol) was used, from which 0.1 mL was taken and mixed with 5 mL of 0.1 mM DPPH solution. Subsequently, the absorbance value of the sample mixture, which was kept in the dark at room temperature for 30 min, was measured at a 517 nm wavelength using a spectrophotometer (Cary 60, UV-Vis Spectrophotometer, Agilent Technologies, George Town, (Penang, Malaysia). The DPPH radical scavenging activity (% inhibition) was calculated using the following equation:
% Inhibition = [(A_control − A_sample)/(A_control)] × 100 (A: Absorbance)

2.3.2. Analyses of Coated Beef Meatballs

Color, TBARS, and sensory analyses of coated beef meatballs were performed on days 18, 30, 60, 90, and 102 of storage. Other analyses were performed after production.
Proximate Composition Analysis
The moisture and ash content of the cooked meatball samples was measured based on AOAC [59] procedures. The protein content was analyzed via the Kjeldahl method according to [60]. Fat content was determined using the Soxhlet extraction method according to AOAC [61].
pH Value Determination
The pH value of cooked meatball samples was determined using a pH meter (Inolab, WTW Series pH 720, Weilheim, Germany) by directly immersing the glass electrodes (WTW SenTix® 81, Weilheim, Germany) in meatball sample homogenates (1:10) [61].
Texture Profile Evaluation
Texture profile analysis (TPA) of cooked meatball samples was performed with a texture analyzer (TA-XT Plus, Stable Microsystems, Surrey, UK). Cubic-shaped (1 × 1 × 1 cm3) burger patty cuts were prepared using the middle parts of the samples from each group. A cylindrical plate (20 cm in diameter) and a 5 kg power cell were used. Each sample was compressed twice, with a 5 s delay between landings, a distance of 5 mm, and a velocity of 5 mm/s. The samples were compressed twice to 50% of their original height. The results were given as the average of at least 10 repeatable runs for each application. The hardness, springiness, cohesiveness, gumminess, chewiness, and resilience of the samples were determined. The parameters were calculated from the force and time curves using Exponent Connect software (version 8.1.9.0, Stable Micro Systems, Haslemere, UK).
Color Characteristics Measurement
Color measurements were performed on the outer surface of the cooked meatball samples with the HunterLab Colorflex (CFLX 45-0 Model Colorimeter, HunterLab, Reston, VA, USA, instrument; Port Diameter/View Diameter: 31.8 mm, illuminated/25.4 mm measured; directional annular 45◦ illumination/0◦ viewing; light source: pulsed xenon lamp). The instrument was calibrated using black and white plates before each measurement. The color values of the samples were taken in terms of CIE L*, a*, and b* values. Among these values, L* represents brightness, a* represents green/red, and b* represents blue/yellowness [62]. Four readings were taken for each sample, and two samples were taken from each patty, and four samples were evaluated for each treatment group.
TBARS Analysis
The fat oxidation of cooked meatball samples was measured according to the method of Witte, Krause, and Bailey [63]. Sample absorbances were measured spectrophotometrically. The results were expressed as 2-thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARSs) as mg malonaldehyde (MDA)/kg sample.
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) Analysis
-
Chemicals
For the coated meatball samples, four PAH compounds (benzo[a]pyrene (BaP), benzo[a]anthracene (BaA), chrysene (Chry), and benzo[b]fluoranthene (BbF)) and the total PAH (ΣPAH4) specified by European Union (EC No. 1327-2014) legislation with maximum limits were determined.
PAH standards (EPA 610-N PAH Kit, Supelco Co., Bellefonte, PA, USA) obtained for performing PAH compound analyses were diluted separately using methanol/dichloromethane (1:1) to prepare a stock solution for each standard. Calibration graphs for each PAH compound were created using working/calibration solutions prepared from stock solutions at concentrations of 10, 50, 100, and 500 ppb.
-
Sample preparation
PAHs were extracted and purified according to a method developed by Chung et al. [64] and modified by Kendirci et al. [65]. As recommended in the method, for each analysis, 30 g of sample homogenized from cooked coated beef meatballs was placed in a 500 mL flask, followed by 100 mL of 2M KOH solution (methanol/water [9:1]) and 100 mL of hexane, and the mixture was left to stand for 2 h in a water bath (80 ± 2 °C). After 2 h, 100 mL of cold water was added to the flasks, and the solutions were transferred to separation funnels and left to stand in the dark for one night. The hexane phases separated in the separating funnels were filtered through anhydrous Na2SO4 and transferred to 250 mL flasks. The hexane phase was concentrated to approximately 2 mL at 50 ± 2 °C using a rotary evaporator. The hexane concentrate obtained was activated by passing it through a Sep-Pak Florisil cartridge previously activated with dichloromethane (10 mL) and hexane (20 mL) and then transferred to a 10 mL flask. The hexane concentrate obtained was passed through a Sep-Pak Florisil cartridge previously activated with dichloromethane (10 mL) and hexane (20 mL) and collected in a glass tube. Additionally, 10 mL of hexane and 8 mL of dichloromethane/hexane (3:1) were passed through the cartridge and collected in the tube. The extracts were evaporated to dryness under nitrogen gas, dissolved in 1 mL of acetonitrile, and filtered through a 0.45 μm pore size filter before being collected in 2 mL amber-colored glass vials.
-
Chromatographic Conditions
PAHs were detected using an HPLC (Agilent 1260 Infinity II, Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA) with a fluorescence detector (Agilent Tech. 1200 series G1321) and a Hikchrom brand C18 column (Vydac-201TP 5415, 150 mm × 4.6 mm × 5 μm). The mixture of acetonitrile/water (1:1, v/v) was used as mobile phase A, while acetonitrile (100%) was used as mobile phase B. The flow rate was constant at 1.25 mL/min until the end of the analysis. The injection volume was 20 µL. The runtime analysis was 40 min. A gradient program (0–5 min 100% A, 0% B; 5–35 min 0% A, 100% B; 35–40 min 100% A, 0% B) was used. The compounds BaP and BbF were detected using a fluorescence detector (FLD) at excitation and emission wavelengths of 260–420 nm, while BaA and Chry were detected at 254–390 nm.
-
Method validation
The analysis methods for the PAHs were validated in terms of correlation coefficients (R2), limits of detection (LODs), limits of quantification (LOQs), and recovery (%). The linearity was generated via the regression analysis of the calibration curve. The LOD and LOQ were calculated based on signal-to-noise ratios of 3 and 10, respectively. The quantification of the PAHs was based on external calibration. The calibration curves were established from the known concentrations. The recovery levels for the different PAHs in the samples were determined via the standard addition method [66].
Sensory Evaluation
Sensory evaluations of the coated beef meatball samples were performed in two sensory sessions by 20 untrained panelists (10 panelists/session) consisting of graduate and undergraduate students at the sensory evaluation laboratory in individualized booths. Panelists evaluated all the treatment groups in one session. Frozen stored samples were thawed at 4 °C for 15 h prior to sensory evaluation. Samples were coded with 3-digit randomized numbers and served to each panelist in a random order immediately after being heated in a preheated oven (Arçelik-MD 1300, Bolu, Turkey) at 170 °C for 3 min. Samples were evaluated regarding their appearance, color, flavor, texture, and overall acceptance using a 9-point hedonic scale (9–extremely like; 1–extremely dislike) [67,68].
Statistical Analysis
The effects of adding different levels of S. platensis powder into meatball samples on proximate composition, pH value, lipid oxidation, color, texture profile, PAH content, antioxidant content, and sensory characteristics were determined using one-way ANOVA, where the measured variables were set as dependent variables, S. platensis powder levels as a fixed effect, and replicate, panelists, and sessions of sensory evaluation as random effects. Differences among the means were compared in accordance with Duncan’s Multiple Range Test. A significance level of p < 0.05 was used for all evaluations. The data were analyzed using SPSS software version 26 [69]. The values were given in terms of mean values and standard error in tables and figures. The interaction effects of adding different levels of S.platensis powder and storage period on the color, TBARS, and sensory characteristics of coated beef meatballs were determined at a significance level of p < 0.05. The entire trial was replicated twice.

2.4. Experimental Design and Optimization

The Response Surface Methodology (RSM) was employed to optimize the usage level of S. platensis powder as an additive (0.2%, 0.5%, 1.25%, 2%, 2.3%) and the storage period of coated meatballs (18, 30, 60, 90, and 102 days) (Table 2).
The experimental data required to develop mathematical models between responses and variables were obtained using Face-Centered Composite Design to enable the optimization process. The experimental design was carried out using Design Expert 13.0 software. Five responses were used to optimize the S. platensis powder usage level and storage times of coated meatballs: color characteristics (L*, a*, b*) (R1, R2, R3), overall acceptance (R4), and flavor (R5). The utilization level of S. platensis powder and the storage time of the coated meatballs were simultaneously determined to be the conditions providing maximum overall acceptance and flavor using the desirability function method. After optimization, the usage level of S. platensis powder and storage times of coated meatballs were determined. Five replicate validation trials were conducted using the optimum meatball formulation and optimum storage time. The experimental data obtained from the meatball produced under optimal conditions were compared with the data generated via the mathematical model using a one-sample t-test [69] to confirm the accuracy of the optimal S. platensis powder ratio and storage period conditions.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. DPPH Value of Spirulina platensis Powder

The scavenging effect of DPPH radicals by powdered S. platensis was determined to assess the antioxidant activity. Similarly, the scavenging effect of S. platensis powder on DPPH radicals was found to be 91.86%. In a study for determining the antioxidant activity of S. platensis powder, the scavenging effect of DPPH radicals by the ethanolic extract of S. platensis powder was found to be 96.33% [70].

3.2. Proximate Composition and pH Value of Coated Meatballs

The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the moisture, fat, ash, protein, and pH values of cooked coated meatballs is shown in Table 3.
The moisture content of the coated meatball samples decreased significantly as the usage level of S. platensis powder in the formulations increased, with this occurring due to increases in the dry matter content of the samples (p < 0.05). The difference in moisture values between all sample groups was determined to be significant (p < 0.05). The control group had the highest moisture value (55.92), while the S2.3 group had the lowest value (47.06). Similarly, in a study conducted by Barkallah et al. [35], it was found that among the control and the 0.5% and 1% S. platensis powder-containing fish patties, the lowest moisture content was observed in the samples containing 1% S. platensis powder.
Increased fat content was observed due to the decrease in moisture content as the S. platensis powder increased in the samples (p < 0.05). The fat content of all the samples to which S. Platensis powder was added was found to be significantly higher than that of the control sample (p < 0.05). In line with this result, a study on chicken rotti enriched with various protein sources other than soy protein revealed that the fat content of the sample group containing S. platensis powder was notably higher than that of the control group [71]. While the difference between the ash content of sample S0.2 and that of the control sample was found to be insignificant (p > 0.05), it was determined that in all other samples, the ash content increased significantly as the S. platensis powder ratio increased and was significantly higher than that of the control sample (p < 0.05). In a similar manner, it was found that as the ratio of S. platensis powder incorporated into the formulations of the samples increased, the protein content of all samples increased significantly (p < 0.05). The protein content of the samples ranged from 17.46% to 27.78%. Consistent with the high protein and mineral content of S. platensis powder, significant increases in protein and ash content were identified in the samples. Moreover, as the S. platensis powder ratio increased in the sample formulations, the protein and ash ratios of the samples increased proportionally due to the decrease in moisture. It was observed that incorporating S. platensis powder was an effective method for increasing the protein level of coated beef meatball samples. Similarly, in a study conducted by El-Anany et al. [34], as the usage amount (1–5%) of S. platensis powder increased in the formulations of mortadella sausage, the protein content of mortadella sausages increased and, additionally, the samples fortified with 5% S. platensis powder were found to have the highest ash content.
The pH values of the cooked meatball samples were determined to be between 5.63 and 6.10. Incorporating S. platensis powder had a significant impact on the pH values of the samples (p < 0.05). Ladjal-Ettoumi et al. [72] detected the pH value of S. platensis powder to be 7.33 ± 0.06. Due to the high pH of S. platensis powder, a significant increase in the pH values of the samples was observed as the incorporation level increased, with statistically significant differences in pH values exhibited by all sample groups (p < 0.05). The pH value of the sample group containing 2.3% S. platensis powder was found to be significantly higher compared to that of the other sample groups (p < 0.05). This observation is consistent with a previous study, which found that camel burgers formulated with different levels of S. platensis powder exhibited increasing pH values as the S. platensis powder concentration increased [73].

3.3. Texture Profile of Coated Meatballs

The effect of using different ratios of S. platensis powder on the texture profile of cooked coated beef meatballs is presented in Table 4.
The hardness values of the samples were determined to be between 17.17 N (C) and 27.00 N (S2.3). An increase in hardness values was observed as the S. platensis powder addition level increased in the formulations of the samples. While the hardness values of the S0.2, S0.5, and S1.25 samples and the control sample were determined to be statistically non-significant (p > 0.05), the hardness values of the S2 and S2.3 samples were found to be significantly higher than that of the control sample (p < 0.05). A similar tendency was noted in the springiness values of the samples. As the S. platensis powder ratio increased in the sample formulations, the springiness value of all the samples increased significantly (p < 0.05), except for sample S0.2, which had the lowest S. platensis powder content. An increase in the quantity of S. platensis powder in the sample formulations increased the dry matter content of the samples, reduced the moisture content, and resulted in the hardening of the texture of the samples. In line with this result, a study revealed that adding 0.5%, 1%, and 1.5% Cystoseira compressa and Jania adhaerens algae to fish burger formulations significantly increased the hardness and springiness values of the resulting samples. This increase has been attributed to the algae’s high protein and polysaccharide content [74].
Although there was an increase in the cohesiveness and resilience values of the samples with the addition of S. platensis powder, this increase was statistically insignificant (p> 0.05). The gumminess and chewiness values of the samples decreased significantly as the S. platensis powder level increased in the formulations of the samples. The control and S0.2 samples had significantly higher gumminess and chewiness values compared to the other samples (p < 0.05). These results are consistent with those of a study that investigated the effects of a combination of Undaria pinnatifida algae and transglutaminase on the properties of Frankfurter sausages. The gumminess and chewiness values of the control sample were significantly higher than those of the samples with 1%, 1.5%, and 2% added Undaria pinnatifida [75].

3.4. Color Characteristics of Coated Meatballs

Table 5 presents the influence of various S. platensis powder ratios on the L*, a*, and b* values of cooked coated meatballs during storage.
The L⃰ value is defined as a lightness indicator on the color scale. The L* value ranges from 0 to 100 when the color changes from dark to light [76]. It was found that the L* values of the coated meatball samples ranged from 37.25 to 42 during storage. The use of S. platensis powder and the storage time had a significant effect on the L* values of all samples (p < 0.05). As the S. platensis powder level increased in the samples, a darkening of the color and a significant decrease in the L* values were observed (p < 0.05). Compared to the control sample, a significant decrease in L* values was observed in samples containing 1.25% and higher levels of S. platensis powder on the 0th and 18th days and in samples containing 0.5% and higher concentrations of S. platensis powder on the 60th, 90th, and 102nd days of storage (p < 0.05). The distinctive dark green color of S. platensis powder led to a significant darkening of the color of the samples as the usage level increased. Although the coating process partially masked this darkening in the samples, the differences in color observed in the samples, particularly as storage progressed, became slightly more pronounced depending on the S. platensis powder usage level. This occurrence may be attributed to the softening of the coating layer during the storage process, resulting in the expansion of its pores and, consequently, a greater reflection of the colors of the meatballs contained within it.
The storage period had a significant effect on the L* values of the samples (p< 0.05). As the storage period increased, a lightening of the color was observed in all samples. A significant increase in L* values was observed on the 90th and 102nd days of storage compared to in the beginning, as demonstrated in Table 4 (p < 0.05). According to Hector et al. [77], an increase in the L* value of meat may be related to protein degeneration, which causes a denser, more opaque structure and results in higher light reflectance in colorimetric measurements. The storage period may change the protein structures of the meat.
Although the current study showed color lightening in all samples as the storage period increased, the darkening effect observed in samples containing S. platensis caused these samples’ L* values to balance out by the end of the storage period.
In the studies conducted, the algae used had an effect on the L* value of the samples depending on the different types used and the ratio. In a study conducted by López-López et al. [78], a significant decrease in the L* values of Frankfurter sausages was observed due to the dark color of Himanthalia elongata seaweed, which was added at a level of 5%.
It was determined that, as the proportion of S. platensis powder added to the samples increased, a decrease in a* values was detected. During the storage period, the a* values of the control samples were significantly higher than those of the S1.25, S2, and S2.3 sample groups (p < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was determined between the a* values of the S0.2 and S0.5 sample groups, which contained lower amounts of S. platensis powder (p > 0.05).
During storage, no significant change was observed in the a* values of the S1.25, S2, and S2.3 samples, which had the highest usage levels of S. platensis powder, compared to the control (p < 0.05). However, the a* values of the control, S0.2, and S0.5 sample groups decreased significantly at the end of the storage period compared to the values measured on the first day (p < 0.05). This finding indicates that the antioxidant properties of S. platensis powder, depending on its usage level, helped to maintain the a* color values of the samples during storage by counteracting the oxidative effects that occurred in the samples. Red color in meat products is associated with the presence of myoglobin pigment. During storage, myoglobin oxidizes and converts to metmyoglobin, causing the product’s color to change from red to brown [79]. In line with the findings obtained, a study showed that adding S. platensis polysaccharides at concentrations of 0.1%, 0.25%, and 0.5% preserved the redness (a* value) of sausages during storage in a manner dependent on the usage level, while the redness of the control sausages decreased [80].
It has been determined that the unique color of S. platensis powder is associated with a decrease in the b* values of the samples, depending on the usage level. During storage, the b* values of the control samples were found to be statistically significantly higher than the b* values of the S2 and S2.3 sample groups, which contained the highest levels of S. platensis powder (p < 0.05). An increase in the storage period was observed to be concomitant with a decrease in the b* values of all sample groups. The b* values of the sample groups at the beginning of the storage period were found to be significantly higher than those on day 102 (p < 0.05). In a similar manner, the b* values of sausages and chicken rotti samples were significantly reduced when produced with Sargassum polycystum and Caulerpa lentilifera algae [81] and S. platensis [71], respectively.

3.5. TBARS Values of Coated Meatballs

The effects of adding S. platensis powder on the TBARS values of the cooked coated meatball samples during storage are presented in Table 6.
The TBARS values of the coated meatball samples were found to be between 0.07 and 0.66 mg malonaldehyde (MDA)/kg during storage. It was determined that none of the TBARS values of the samples exceeded 2 mg MDA/kg, considered by Campo et al. to be the limiting threshold of TBARS values for the acceptability of oxidized beef [82], during storage.
Incorporating S. platensis powder in the formulation of the coated meatball samples was found to effectively stunt the progression of oxidation. The differences in TBARS values between the samples were statistically significant for all storage periods (p < 0.05). As the usage level of S. platensis powder increased during storage, the TBARS values decreased significantly in the samples. The highest TBARS values were detected in the control group, while the lowest TBARS values were observed in the S2.3 sample (p < 0.05). In the S2 and S2.3 samples, which had the highest levels of S. platensis powder added, no significant change in TBARS values was observed until the 90th day of storage (p > 0.05). However, the TBARS values of the control, S0.2, and S0.5 samples, which had the lowest level of S. platensis powder added, significantly increased from the 18th day compared to the initial storage day (p < 0.05).
It has been observed that S. platensis powder effectively inhibited the oxidation of the coated meatball samples during storage, consistent with the high values of DPPH antioxidant activity detected in S. platensis powder in this study. The high antioxidant content of S. platensis has been demonstrated in numerous studies. Han et al. [83] stated that the primary non-enzymatic antioxidants in S. platensis cells are ascorbate/vitamin C and glutathione, while the secondary non-enzymatic antioxidants include tocopherol/vitamin E, flavonoids, alkaloids, and carotenoids. It was concluded that the coated meatball samples including 2% and 2.3% S. platensis could be stored at −20 °C for 60 days to maintain oxidative quality. In line with this result, in a study conducted by Hlima et al. [84], lower TBARS values were observed in samples of minced beef meat supplemented with sulphated exopolysaccharide (EPS) obtained from Porphyridium cruentum microalgae at concentrations of 0.5–2% compared to the control group. The researchers reported that the lowest TBARS value was observed on the final day of storage (day 14) in the sample with the highest EPS addition (2%).

3.6. PAH4 Levels of Coated Meatballs

The regression coefficient (R2), limit of detection (LOD), limit of quantification (LOQ), and recovery values of PAH4 are given in Table 7.
The R2 values for the standard curves were greater than 0.99 for all the PAHs identified in this study. The LOD and LOQ values ranged from 0.0001 to 0.4083 ng/g and from 0.0003 to 1.3610 ng/g, respectively. The recovery values were found to be between 94.2% and 97.7%.
The influence of adding S. platensis powder on the PAH values of the coated meatball samples is shown in Table 8.
Using S. platensis powder has been demonstrated to exert a significant effect on the PAH values of the coated meatball samples. It has been determined that as the amount of S. platensis powder added to the samples increased, the levels of four PAH compounds and the ΣPAH4 level decreased (p < 0.05). Compared to the control group, the amounts of BaA, BaP, BbF, and Chry decreased by 35.99%, 24%, 40%, and 25.08%, respectively, in the S2 sample and by 45.43%, 28%, 45.71%, and 36.18%, respectively, in the S2.3 sample. The BaA, BaP, BbF, and Chry values of the S2 and S2.3 groups were statistically significantly lower than those of the control, S0.2, and S0.5 groups (p < 0.05).
Among PAH compounds, BaP is of particular importance because it has been classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the IARC [52]. The BaP values of the samples were found to range from 0.72 to 1.00. The BaP values of the S1.25, S2, and S2.3 samples were determined to be significantly lower than that of the control sample (p < 0.05). Moreover, the ΣPAH4 values of all the S. platensis powder-added samples were significantly lower than those of the control sample (p < 0.05). Adding S. platensis powder to the samples resulted in decreases in ΣPAH4 content of 3.17%, 6.97%, 16.21%, 30.17%, and 39.53% in the S0.2, S0.5, S1.25, S2, and S2.3 samples, respectively. The ΣPAH4 values of the samples were determined to range from 4.77 to 7.89. The determined levels of BaP and the ΣPAH4s did not exceed the legal limit declared by the European Commission Regulation [51] of 2 μg/kg and 12 μg/kg, respectively, in any of the analyzed samples.
Haiba et al. [85] reported total PAH levels of 9.94 ng/g in grilled chicken and 8.755 ng/g in grilled beef. Focusing specifically on BaP, Janoszka [86] found a mean level of 1.61 ng/g, and Kafouris et al. [87] reported 1.8 µg/kg in traditionally smoked meat products such as smoked sausage and bacon. In this study, the BaP and ΣPAH4 values of all the samples, including the control sample, were found to be lower than these specified values. It is thought that using an oven during the cooking process is one reason why high levels of PAH compounds were not found in any of the coated meatball samples. Another, more important reason is the significant reducing effect of S. platensis on PAH values in samples containing S. platensis powder. The substantial impact of S. platensis powder on the reduction in PAH compounds in coated meatballs is attributed to its high antioxidant content. Utilizing antioxidants has been demonstrated to reduce the concentration of PAHs in the final products, thereby minimizing exposure [88]. Various studies have shown that S. platensis contains high amounts and a wide variety of antioxidant substances. S. platensis has been found to contain vitamin E, which is known for its antioxidant properties in foods [89]. In one study, it was determined that vitamin E prevents the formation of PAH compounds in cooked meat [90]. Gallic acid and ferulic acid, which also possess antioxidant properties, have been identified in S. platensis [91]. Wang et al. [47] also found that these compounds reduce the formation of PAHs in grilled chicken wings. Therefore, the present study suggests that vitamin E, gallic acid, and ferulic acid, which have been detected in S. platensis in previous studies alongside other antioxidants, may significantly reduce PAH formation in coated meatball samples. Research conducted by Luo et al. [36] revealed a positive association between PAH levels and both lipid and protein oxidation due to their role in forming free radicals. Considering the important role of free radicals in PAH formation, Wang et al. [92] reported that antioxidants may be effective in preventing PAH formation during cooking by eliminating the free radicals caused by lipid and protein oxidation. Consistent with this statement, all ratios of S. platensis used in coated meatballs in the present study were determined to effectively prevent oxidation.
Studies have shown that the PAH levels in meat products can be reduced effectively using natural additives high in antioxidants. A study investigated PAH levels in pork tenderloin dishes cooked in an oven bag and stuffed with dried fruit. The total PAH content of the meat decreased by 35%, 48%, and 58%, respectively, when cooked with apricots, prunes, and cranberries. Cranberries were found to have the strongest inhibitory effect on PAH formation [93]. Similarly, in another study, it was determined that black garlic reduced the total 8 PAH content of the beef patties by 38.17% to 94.12% compared to raw garlic. It was highlighted that black garlic has enhanced antioxidant activity, primarily due to its high contents of phenolic compounds, flavonoids, and sulfuric compounds [43].

3.7. Sensory Evaluation of Coated Meatballs

The sensory evaluation scores of the cooked coated meatball samples are presented in Table 9.
Incorporating S. platensis powder into the meatball samples did not result in a statistically significant difference in appearance or color scores (p > 0.05). This phenomenon can be attributed to the coating process applied to the samples. The characteristic green color of the S. platensis powder in the meatball formulation was effectively masked by the coating process. Additionally, applying the oven cooking method resulted in an appealing, homogeneous coloration of the coated meatball sample’s surfaces.
The storage period was determined to affect the appearance and color scores of the samples. The appearance scores of the control, S0.2, and S0.5 samples did not demonstrate a significant decrease until the 90th day of storage, relative to the beginning of the storage period (p > 0.05), while the appearance scores of the S2 and S2.3 samples, to which the highest amounts of S. platensis powder were added, remained consistent until day 102 of storage (p < 0.05). In a similar manner, it was determined that the color score of the control sample significantly decreased after 90 days (p > 0.05), while the color scores of the S2 and S2.3 samples did not demonstrate any substantial alterations during the storage period (p < 0.05). It was demonstrated that elevated ratios of S. platensis powder increased the efficacy of retarding oxidation and induced a diminished color change in the samples. In contrast to these results, a study in which S. platensis powder was added to mortadella sausage at levels of 1–5% revealed that samples containing 4% and 5% S. platensis powder had significantly lower color scores compared to the control group [34]. In a study evaluating the effect of adding 1%, 2%, and 5% of the seaweeds Himanthalia elongata, Alaria esculenta, Palmaria palmata, and Porphyra umbilicalis to pork sausage, the maximum acceptable addition level was determined to be 1% for Palmaria palmata and 2.5% for the other seaweed species. In that study, the appearance scores of the control sample were significantly higher than those of the samples containing 5% Porphyra umbilicalis or Alaria esculenta [94]. In another study by Sellimi et al. [95], it was found that C. barbata alginate increased the color stability of turkey meat sausages during a 15-day storage period. The differences in the outcomes of studies concerning the impact of algae on the color of meat products can be attributed to the distinctive colors of the algae and the methods of their incorporation into meat products. This study has demonstrated that the coating process had a beneficial effect on the color of the coated meatball samples.
The texture scores of the coated meatball samples, evaluated on a 9-point scale, varied between 6.40 and 8.90. Adding S. platensis powder at different ratios did not result in a significant difference in the texture scores of the samples on the 0th and 18th days of storage (p > 0.05). However, on the 30th day of storage, the texture score of the S2.3 sample was significantly higher than that of the control sample, while on the 60th, 90th, and 102nd days of storage, the texture scores of the S2 and S2.3 samples were significantly higher than that of the control sample (p < 0.05). It was observed that S. platensis powder, when used at high levels in formulations, preserved and improved the sample texture, particularly during the later stages of storage. In meat products, structural changes and undesirable differences in texture can occur as the storage period increases. S. platensis may have protected the samples against these changes during storage, which then resulted in more acceptable textural properties and higher scores than those observed in the control group. The storage period significantly affected the texture scores of the samples. The texture scores of the control, S0.2, S0.5, and S1.25 sample groups on day 0 were significantly higher than those on days 90 and 102 (p < 0.05). Meanwhile, the texture scores of the S2 and S2.3 sample groups, which had the highest levels of S. platensis powder, did not differ significantly during storage (p > 0.05). Similarly, in a study investigating the effect of adding Eucheuma cottonii algal flour at different ratios (2.5–7.5% w/w) on the characteristics of Indonesian-style beef meatballs, increased texture scores were observed as the added Eucheuma cottonii flour ratio increased [96].
The flavor scores of the samples, evaluated on a 9-point scale, were found to range between 6.50 and 8.90 during storage. Using S. platensis powder in the sample formulations did not result in a significant difference in flavor scores on days 0, 18, and 30 of storage (p > 0.05). Interestingly, on the 60th day of storage, the flavor score of the S2.3 sample, which contained the highest level of S. platensis powder, was determined to be significantly higher than those of the control and S0.2 samples (p < 0.05). Evaluations conducted on days 90 and 102 of storage revealed that the flavor scores of the S1.25, S2, and S2.3 sample groups were significantly higher than those of the control, S0.2, and S0.5 sample groups (p < 0.05). These findings particularly indicate that increasing the usage level of S. platensis powder in the later stages of storage positively affected the flavor of the samples. It is believed that using S. platensis powder at high levels in the samples was more effective in preventing oxidation as storage progressed, which mitigated the negative effects of oxidation on flavor, making the samples more flavorful. It was, thus, determined that in the present study, the TBARS values of the S2 and S2.3 samples remained constant for a period of up to 90 days, while the TBARS value of the control sample exhibited a significant increase from the 18th day of storage. Similarly, in a study where S. platensis extract was used as a natural antioxidant in Chinese-style sausages during storage at 4 °C for 18 days, it was observed that the flavor scores of the control sausages decreased more rapidly compared to those of the sample groups with S. platensis extract added during storage. In that study, the flavor scores of sausages containing 2.5% or 5% S. platensis extract remained within a sensorially acceptable range throughout storage [36].
In the current study, in addition to S. platensis’s antioxidant properties, it is predicted that using the oven cooking method instead of deep frying, which is usually applied when cooking coated products, causes oxidation to progress more slowly during storage and maintains the sensory properties of all samples more effectively. A study by Capan and Yildiz Turp [97] reported that gluten-free coated liver samples cooked in the oven had lower oxidation values compared to deep-fried samples and retained their flavor properties for longer during storage.
The overall acceptance scores determined in the samples ranged from 6.50 to 8.80 during storage. No statistically significant difference was found in the overall acceptance scores of the samples on days 0, 18, and 30 (p > 0.05). The overall acceptance scores of the S2.3 sample on the 60th day of storage and the overall acceptance scores of the S2 and S2.3 samples on the 90th and 102nd days of storage were significantly higher than those of the control and S0.2 samples (p < 0.05).
The storage period was found to be effective at influencing the overall acceptance scores of the samples. The overall acceptance scores of the S2 and S2.3 sample groups did not show any significant change until the 90th day of storage (p > 0.05), while the overall acceptance score of the control sample significantly decreased after the 30th day (p < 0.05). The findings obtained from evaluating the overall acceptance scores of the samples are consistent with the color, texture, and flavor scores of the samples. In line with these results, in a study investigating the effect of Himanthalia elongata algae (10–40% w/w) on the sensory properties of cooked beef meatballs, it was determined that the overall acceptance score of the sample group containing the highest level (40%) of Himanthalia elongata was statistically significantly higher than that of the other sample groups [98]. As a result of examining all sensory evaluation scores, S. platensis powder showed antioxidant effects and preserved the sensorial properties of the product against oxidation during the storage period.

3.8. The Optimum S. platensis Powder Level and Storage Period

The amounts of S. platensis powder added to the coated beef meatball samples and the storage periods of the samples have been identified as variable factors for the Response Surface Methodology (RSM).
The comparisons of model compatibilities for each response are presented in Table 10.
For each response variable, statistical parameters were computed for various functions (Linear, 2FI, Quadratic, and Cubic) through software analysis of the obtained data. The analysis identified the most suitable functions as Quadratic (Modified) for L*, Linear for a*, Linear for b*, Linear for flavor, and Quadratic (Modified) for overall acceptance. Evaluating the model and the significance levels of the independent factors (p < 0.05) according to the proposed functions revealed that both the S. platensis powder ratio and storage time significantly influenced the L*, a*, b*, flavor, and overall acceptance values of the meatball samples (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the p-values from the lack-of-fit test for L*, a*, b*, flavor, and overall acceptance were determined to be 0.0757, 0.1057, 0.1173, 0.1048, and 0.5220, respectively, indicating a non-significant lack of fit (p > 0.05) for all responses. The obtained values were then subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA), and the significance of the model and regression values were determined by p-values, as illustrated in Table 11 and Table 12.
The F-values for the L*, a*, b*, flavor, and overall acceptance models were calculated to be 53.28, 108.33, 45.74, 46.57, and 49.49, respectively. The p-values for each of these were found to be less than 0.0001. Consequently, the corresponding variables assumed greater significance as the F-value increased and the p-value decreased [99], as evidenced by the results obtained.
Incorporating a novel variable into the model has been demonstrated to enhance the R2 value. However, it should be noted that a high value for this parameter does not invariably signify the accuracy and suitability of the selected model. Consequently, the adjusted coefficient of determination (Adj-R2) was utilized to address this uncertainty [100]. Therefore, a comparison of the R2 values with the corresponding Adj-R2 values was necessary. It has been demonstrated that the results were both accurate and reliable, exhibiting a high degree of consistency and repeatability.
In general, CV values in excess of 10 are indicative of variations that exceed the mean, thereby suggesting that the selected model is deficient in terms of accuracy. The low values obtained for this parameter serve to further corroborate the validity of the selected model and its adequate accuracy [101].
Additionally, non-significant lack-of-fit tests with F-values of 3.46 (p-value = 0.1263) for L*, 3.87 (p-value = 1057) for a*, 3.61 (p-value = 0.1173) for b*, 3.89 (p-value = 0.1048) for flavor, and 2.10 (p-value = 0.2461) validated the good fit and accuracy of the models.
Response surface analysis was used to investigate the main effects of the independent variables (S. platensis powder amount and storage time of coated beef meatballs) on color (L*, a*, b*), flavor, and overall acceptance values. S. platensis powder amount (X1) and storage time (X2) were selected as independent variables for the following equation:
Y = β0 + β1X1 + β2X2
X1 = S. platensis powder ratio (%);
X2 = Storage time (day).
The derived equations represent the correlation between the L*, a*, b*, flavor, and overall acceptance values in relation to the actual values of the S. platensis powder ratio (%) and storage time (days):
L* = +39.96 − (0.5737 X1) + (0.4174 X2)
a* = +7.11 − (0.4404 X1) − (0.1534 X2)
b* = +20.01 − (0.5705 X1) − (0.3326 X2)
Flavor = +7.39 + (0.2374 X1) − (0.4129 X2)
Overall acceptance = +7.63 + (0.2929 X1) − (0.3460 X2)
A thorough examination of the coefficients of the variables for the L* value was conducted, observing that the S. platensis powder ratio (A) exhibited a negative linear effect, while the storage time (B) demonstrated a positive linear effect. Specifically, as the proportion of S. platensis powder in the beef meatballs increased, a decrease in the L* values of the samples occurred. Conversely, an increase in the storage time led to an increase in the L* values of the samples. For the a* and b* values, the negative linear effect of the S. platensis powder ratio (A) and the storage time (B) was observed. An increase in the S. platensis powder ratio and storage time in the beef meatballs resulted in a reduction in the a* values of the samples.
A thorough examination of the coefficients of the variables for flavor and overall acceptance was conducted, observing that the S. platensis powder ratio (A) exhibited a positive linear effect, while the storage time (B) demonstrated a negative linear effect. Specifically, as the proportion of S. platensis powder in the beef meatballs increased, an increase in the flavor values of the samples occurred. Conversely, as the storage time increased, a decrease in the flavor values of the samples was observed.
The response optimization, evaluated via the program considering all response variables (L*, a*, b*, flavor, and overall acceptance values) together, suggests that the solution providing the highest desirability will be achieved with a S. platensis powder usage level of 1.25% and a storage period of 60 days. When the independent factors are used at this level, the predicted responses for the coated meatball mixture will be as follows: an L* value of 39.96, an a* value of 7.11, a b* value of 20.00, a flavor score of 7.38, and an overall acceptance score of 7.63. Figure 1 presents three-dimensional response surface graphs illustrating the effects of independent variables on various measured values. Specifically, (a) details the impact of independent variables on the L* value, while (b) reveals their effect on the a* value. Similarly, (c) graphically depicts the influence of independent variables on the b* value. In (d), the effects on the flavor value can be observed, and (e) demonstrates how the independent variables affect the overall acceptance value.
Beef meatball production was carried out with the optimized values of 1.25% S. platensis powder and 60 days of storage, as suggested by the optimization. Color measurements and sensory evaluation analyses were conducted on the product. The determined results are presented in Table 13.
It has been determined that there is no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) between the predicted values from the model and the results obtained from the verification experiments for the L*, a*, b*, flavor, and overall acceptance values.

4. Conclusions

In conclusion, based on the results obtained, one of the objectives of this study, to develop a new and healthy coated beef meatball formulation and production technique by adding S. platensis powder and improve sensory properties, has been successfully achieved. Another fundamental objective of this study, to reduce the formation of PAH compounds and oxidation in coated meatballs using S. platensis, has also been successfully achieved to a significant extent. Consistent with the high protein and mineral content of S. platensis powder, the protein and ash content of all the samples was significantly increased in comparison with that of the control sample. Using S. platensis significantly affected the L*, a*, and b* color values of the samples, although it did not result in significant differences in color or appearance scores. The application of a coating process to the meatball samples effectively masked the characteristic green coloration of S. platensis. The strong antioxidant properties of S. platensis, also determined via DPPH analysis, were effective in preventing oxidation and preserving the sensory characteristics of the samples during storage. All concentrations of S. platensis significantly reduced oxidation during storage. Samples containing high levels of S. platensis (1.25–2.3%) in the later stages of storage received higher flavor and overall acceptance scores compared to the control samples. Incorporating S. platensis into the samples led to a significant decrease in all four PAH compounds—BbF, BaP, Chry, BaA—and ΣPAH4, which have been associated with adverse health effects.
The L*, a*, b*, flavor, and overall acceptance values obtained throughout this study were evaluated together as response values and optimized using the Design Expert program (version 13). The solution recommended for providing the highest level of response optimization from the five solutions with the highest ‘desirability’ was determined to be S. platensis powder at a usage level of 1.25% and 60 days of storage. There was no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) between the values predicted by the model and the results obtained from validation tests for the L*, a*, b*, flavor, and overall acceptance values.
These results are of particular importance to producers interested in producing coated meat products using natural ingredients that are high in nutritional value, flavorful, and healthy and have a long shelf-life. To achieve the transfer of the obtained results to the food industry and ensure their availability for commercial purposes, it is essential to investigate the antimicrobial properties of S. platensis and conduct shelf-life studies on the product. There is the potential for in-depth research to be conducted in future on the commercialization of S. platensis and other algae as natural preservatives and sensory-characteristic enhancers in foods.

Author Contributions

G.Y.T.: supervision, methodology, conceptualization, funding acquisition, investigation, project administration, writing—original draft, and writing—review and editing. Y.E.: methodology, conceptualization, analysis, investigation, and writing—original draft. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Ege University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit, Izmir Türkiye, under project no. 28425.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The Ege University Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Committee of Science and Engineering Sciences approved this study (Approval No. 1849, date: 27 February 2023).

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within this article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Unsal, A. Beslenmenin önemi ve temel besin öğeleri [The Importance of Nutrition and Essential Nutrients]. Kırşehir Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilim. Dergisi 2019, 2, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  2. Leandro, A.; Pacheco, D.; Cotas, J.; Marques, J.C.; Pereira, L.; Gonçalves, A.M.M. Seaweed’s bioactive candidate compounds to food industry and global food security. Life 2020, 10, 140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Tavares, J.O.; Cotas, J.; Valado, A.; Pereira, L. Algae food products as a healthcare solution. Mar. Drugs 2023, 21, 578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Adam, D. How far will global population rise? Researchers can’t agree. Nature 2021, 597, 462–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Van Dijk, M.; Morley, T.; Rau, M.L.; Saghai, Y. A meta-analysis of projected global food demand and population at risk of hunger for the period 2010–2050. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 494–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wu, J.Y.; Tso, R.; Teo, H.S.; Haldar, S. The utility of algae as sources of high value nutritional ingredients, particularly for alternative/complementary proteins to improve human health. Front. Nutr. 2023, 10, 1277343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Clark, H.; Wu, H. The Sustainable Development Goals: 17 Goals to Transform Our World; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  8. Matos, Â.P.; Novelli, E.; Tribuzi, G. Algae as food and ingredient: From production to consumer acceptance. Front. Food Sci. Technol. 2023, 3, 1220050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Barsanti, L.; Gualtieri, P. Algae: Anatomy, Biochemistry, and Biotechnology; Taylor & Francis: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  10. Ilter, I.; Akyıl, S.; Koç, M.; Kaymak-Ertekin, F. Alglerden elde edilen stabilize edici maddeler [Stabilizing agents derived from algae]. Akad. Gıda 2016, 14, 315–321. [Google Scholar]
  11. Kumkapu, M.; Yeşilçubuk, N.Ş. Sürdürülebilir gıda, gıda takviyesi ve gıda katkı maddesi üretiminde alglerin önemi [The Importance of Algae in Sustainable Food, Food Supplement, and Food Additive Production]. Akad. Gıda 2023, 21, 187–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sirinyildiz, D.D.; Yorulmaz, A. Alternatif ve sürdürülebilir bir gıda kaynağı olarak algler [Algae as an Alternative and Sustainable Food Source]. Toros Univ. J. Food Nutr. Gastron. 2022, 1, 101–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chew, K.W.; Yap, J.Y.; Show, P.L.; Suan, N.H.; Juan, J.C.; Ling, T.C.; Lee, D.J.; Chang, J.S. Microalgae biorefinery: High value products perspectives. Bioresour. Technol. 2017, 229, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Teng, S.Y.; Yew, G.Y.; Sukačová, K.; Show, P.L.; Máša, V.; Chang, J.S. Microalgae with artificial intelligence: A digitalized perspective on genetics, systems and products. Biotechnol. Adv. 2020, 44, 107631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ratnapuram, H.P.; Vutukuru, S.S.; Yadavalli, R. Mixotrophic transition induced lipid productivity in Chlorella pyrenoidosa under stress conditions for biodiesel production. Heliyon 2018, 4, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Vu, C.H.T.; Lee, H.G.; Chang, Y.K. Axenic cultures for microalgal biotechnology: Establishment, assessment, maintenance, and applications. Biotechnol. Adv. 2018, 36, 380–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Mutanda, T.; Naidoo, D.; Bwapwa, J.K.; Anandraj, A. Biotechnological applications of microalgal oleaginous compounds: Current trends on microalgal bioprocessing of products. Front. Energy Res. 2020, 8, 598803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Nicoletti, M. Microalgae nutraceuticals. Foods 2016, 5, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ljubic, A.; Safafar, H.; Holdt, S.L.; Jacobsen, C. Biomass composition of Arthrospira platensis during cultivation on industrial process water and harvesting. J. Appl. Phycol. 2018, 30, 943–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. De Marco Castro, E.; Shannon, E.; Abu-Ghannam, N. Effect of fermentation on enhancing the nutraceutical properties of Arthrospira platensis (Spirulina). Fermentation 2019, 5, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Papalia, T.; Sidari, R.; Panuccio, M.R. Impact of different storage methods on bioactive compounds in Arthrospira platensis biomass. Molecules 2019, 24, 2810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ramírez-Rodrigues, M.M.; Estrada-Beristain, C.; Metri-Ojeda, J.; Pérez-Alva, A.; Baigts-Allende, D.K. Spirulina platensis protein as sustainable ingredient for nutritional food products development. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wu, H.-L.; Wang, G.-H.; Xiang, W.-Z.; Li, T.; He, H. Stability and antioxidant activity of food-grade phycocyanin isolated from Spirulina platensis. Int. J. Food Prop. 2016, 19, 2349–2362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Anvar, A.A.; Nowruzi, B. Bioactive properties of spirulina: A review. Microb. Bioact. 2021, 4, 134–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Manet, A. La Spiruline: Indications Thérapeutiques, Risques Sanitaires et Conseils à l’Officine. Master’s Thesis, Faculté de Médecine et Pharmacie—Université Grenoble Alpes, La Tronche, France, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  26. Bencheikh, A.; Mamache, W.; Gharzouli, A.; Kouachi, A.; Khadidja, H.; Daichi, M.B.; Rouag, N. Evaluation of the spirulina (Arthrospira platensis Gomont) antimicrobial activity. Turk. J. Agric. Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 10, 2051–2055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Sotiroudis, T.G.; Sotiroudis, G.T. Health aspects of Spirulina (Arthrospira) microalga food supplement. J. Serbian Chem. Soc. 2013, 78, 395–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Gogna, S.; Kaur, J.; Sharma, K.; Prasad, R.; Singh, J.; Bhadariya, V.; Jarial, S. Spirulina—An edible cyanobacterium with potential therapeutic health benefits and toxicological consequences. J. Am. Nutr. Assoc. 2023, 42, 559–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Gromek, W.; Kołdej, N.; Kurowski, M.; Majsiak, E. Spirulina (Arthrospira platensis): Antiallergic agent or hidden allergen? A literature review. Foods 2024, 13, 1052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Industry ARC. Spirulina Powder Market—Forecast (2022–2027). Available online: https://www.industryarc.com/Report/19629/spirulina-powder-market.html (accessed on 5 July 2023).
  31. Fantechi, T.; Contini, C.; Casini, L. Pasta goes green: Consumer preferences for spirulina-enriched pasta in Italy. Algal Res. 2023, 75, 103275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Rahimah, S.; Sonjaya, M.F.; Andoyo, R.; Satya, A.; Nurhasanah, S.; Chrismadha, T. Physical and organoleptic characteristic of bread substituted with Spirulina platensis. In Biomass Conversion and Sustainable Biorefinery: Towards Circular Bioeconomy; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2024; pp. 295–306. [Google Scholar]
  33. Kanojia, S. Development of value-added cookies incorporated with Spirulina platensis for the mitigation of malnutrition in children. Agriculture 2022, 5, 102–108. [Google Scholar]
  34. El-Anany, A.M.; Althwab, S.A.; Alhomaid, R.M.; Ali, R.F.; Mousa, H.M. Effect of spirulina (Arthrospira platensis) powder addition on nutritional and sensory attributes of chicken mortadella. Ital. J. Food Sci. 2023, 35, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Barkallah, M.; Ben Atitallah, A.; Hentati, F.; Dammak, M.; Hadrich, B.; Fendri, I.; Abdelkafi, S. Effect of Spirulina platensis biomass with high polysaccharides content on quality attributes of common carp (Cyprinus carpio) and common barbel (Barbus barbus) fish burgers. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Luo, A.; Feng, J.; Hu, B.; Lv, J.; Liu, Q.; Nan, F.; Xie, S. Arthrospira (Spirulina) platensis extract improves oxidative stability and product quality of Chinese-style pork sausage. J. Appl. Phycol. 2018, 30, 1667–1677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Marti-Quijal, F.J.; Zamuz, S.; Galvez, F.; Roohinejad, S.; Tiwari, B.K.; Gómez, B.; Lorenzo, J.M. Replacement of soy protein with other legumes or algae in turkey breast formulation: Changes in physicochemical and technological properties. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2018, 42, e13845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ozbay, G.; Semint, S.; Tuysuz, V. Et ve et ürünleri tarihi üzerine bir araştırma [A Research on the History of Meat and Meat Products]. MANAS Sos. Araştırmalar Derg. 2024, 13, 765–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Godfray, H.C.J.; Aveyard, P.; Garnett, T.; Hall, J.W.; Key, T.J.; Lorimer, J.; Jebb, S.A. Meat consumption, health, and the environment. Science 2018, 361, eaam5324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mehta, S.S.; Arroyave, W.D.; Lunn, R.M.; Park, Y.M.M.; Boyd, W.A.; Sandler, D.P. A prospective analysis of red and processed meat consumption and risk of colorectal cancer in women. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2020, 29, 141–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Singh, L.; Varshney, J.G.; Agarwal, T. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons’ formation and occurrence in processed food. Food Chem. 2016, 199, 768–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Oz, E. Mutagenic and/or carcinogenic compounds in meat and meat products: Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons perspective. Theory Pract. Meat Process. 2022, 7, 282–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Aoudeh, E.; Oz, E.; Oz, F. Effect of beef patties fortification with black garlic on the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) content and toxic potency. Food Chem. 2023, 428, 136763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in food-Scientific opinion of the panel on contaminants in the food chain. EFSA J. 2008, 724, 1–114. [Google Scholar]
  45. Tarafdar, A.; Chawda, S.; Sinha, A. Health risk assessment from polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) present in dietary components: A meta-analysis on a global scale. Polycycl. Aromat. Compd. 2018, 40, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Domingo, J.L.; Nadal, M. Human dietary exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: A review of the scientific literature. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2015, 86, 144–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Wang, C.; Xie, Y.; Wang, H.; Bai, Y.; Dai, C.; Li, C.; Zhou, G. The influence of natural antioxidants on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon formation in charcoal-grilled chicken wings. Food Control 2019, 98, 34–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Alomirah, H.; Al-Zenki, S.; Al-Hooti, S.; Zaghloul, S.; Sawaya, W.; Ahmed, N. Concentrations and dietary exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from grilled and smoked foods. Food Control 2011, 22, 2028–2035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Racovita, R.C.; Secuianu, C.; Israel-Roming, F. Quantification and risk assessment of carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in retail smoked fish and smoked cheeses. Food Control 2021, 121, 107586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Adeyeye, S.A.O.; Ashaolu, T.J. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons formation and mitigation in meat and meat products. Polycycl. Aromat. Compd. 2022, 42, 3401–3411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. European Union. European Commission Regulation (EU) No 1327/2014 of 12 December 2014 amending Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 as regards maximum levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in traditionally smoked meat and meat products and traditionally smoked fish and fishery products. Off. J. Eur. Union 2014, 358, 13–14. [Google Scholar]
  52. Wang, Z.; Ng, K.; Warner, R.D.; Stockmann, R.; Fang, Z. Reduction strategies for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in processed foods. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2022, 21, 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Shen, X.; Huang, X.; Tang, X.; Zhan, J.; Liu, S. The effects of different natural plant extracts on the formation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in roast duck. Foods 2022, 11, 2104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. El Badry, N. Effect of household cooking methods and some food additives on polycylic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) formation in chicken meat. World Appl. Sci. J. 2010, 9, 963–974. [Google Scholar]
  55. Farhadian, A.; Jinap, S.; Faridah, A.; Zaidul, I.S.M. Effects of marinating on the formation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (benzo[a]pyrene, benzo[b]fluoranthene and fluoranthene) in grilled beef meat. Food Control 2012, 28, 420–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Tkacz, K.; Wiek, A.; Kubiak, M.S. Influence of marinades on the level of PAHs in grilled meat products. Ital. J. Food Sci. 2012, 24, 270–278. [Google Scholar]
  57. Karslıoğlu, B. Et ve et ürünlerinde polisiklik aromatik hidrokarbonların oluşum mekanizmaları ve azaltıcı yaklaşımlar [Formation Mechanisms and Reduction Approaches of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Meat and Meat Products]. Gıda 2022, 47, 1032–1045. [Google Scholar]
  58. Wang, M.F.; Tadmor, Y.; Simon, J.E. Analysis of antioxidative phenolic compounds in artichoke (Cynara scolymus L.). Abstr. Pap. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 223, 42. [Google Scholar]
  59. AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 17th ed.; AOAC Int.: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  60. AOCS. Official Method, Ba 4a-38, Nitrogen-ammonia-protein modified Kjedahl method. In Official Methods and Recommended Practices of the AOCS.; Firestone, D., Ed.; Am. Oil Chem. Soc.: Champaign, IL, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  61. AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 18th ed.; AOAC Int.: Washington, WA, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  62. Kramer, A.; Twigg, B.A. Quality Control for the Food Industry, 3rd ed.; The Avi Publishing: Roslyn, NY, USA, 1984; Volume I. [Google Scholar]
  63. Witte, V.C.; Krause, G.F.; Bailey, M.E. A new extraction method for determining 2-thiobarbituric acid values of pork and beef during storage. J. Food Sci. 1970, 35, 582–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Chung, S.Y.; Yettella, R.R.; Kim, J.S.; Kwon, K.; Kim, M.C.; Min, D.B. Effects of grilling and roasting on the levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in beef and pork. Food Chem. 2011, 129, 1420–1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Kendirci, P.; Icier, F.; Kor, G.; Altug-Onogur, T. Influence of infrared final cooking on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon formation in ohmically pre-cooked beef meatballs. Meat Sci. 2014, 97, 123–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Oz, E. The impact of fat content and charcoal types on quality and the development of carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and heterocyclic aromatic amines formation of barbecued fish. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 56, 954–964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Altug Onogur, T.; Elmaci, Y. Gıdalarda Duyusal Değerlendirmeler [Sensory Evaluation in Foods]; Sidas Publications: Izmir, Türkiye, 2015; p. 135. [Google Scholar]
  68. ISO 6658:2017; Sensory Analysis—Methodology—General Guidance. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017.
  69. SPSS. Statistical Package, SPSS for Windows, version 26.0; SPSS Inc.: Chicago, IL, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  70. Gabr, G.A.; El-Sayed, S.M.; Hikal, M.S. Antioxidant activities of phycocyanin: A bioactive compound from Spirulina platensis. J. Pharm. Res. Int. 2020, 32, 73–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Parniakov, O.; Toepfl, S.; Barba, F.J.; Granato, D.; Zamuz, S.; Galvez, F.; Lorenzo, J.M. Impact of the soy protein replacement by legumes and algae based proteins on the quality of chicken rotti. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 55, 2552–2559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ladjal-Ettoumi, Y.; Hamadi, M.; Douik, L.H.; Cherifi, Z.; Nazir, A. Physicochemical, functional, and nutraceutical properties of Spirulina and Chlorella biomass: A comparative study. Algal Res. 2024, 81, 103561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Zaki, E.F. Quality characteristics of camel burger formulated with different levels of microalgae. J. Food Qual. Hazards Control 2023, 10, 92–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Hentati, F.; Barkallah, M.; Ben Atitallah, A.; Dammak, M.; Louati, I.; Pierre, G.; Abdelkafi, S. Quality characteristics and functional and antioxidant capacities of algae-fortified fish burgers prepared from common barbel (Barbus barbus). Biomed. Res. Int. 2019, 2019, 2907542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Choi, Y.S.; Jeong, T.J.; Kim, H.W.; Hwang, K.E.; Sung, J.M.; Seo, D.H.; Kim, C.J. Combined effects of sea mustard and transglutaminase on the quality characteristics of reduced-salt frankfurters. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2017, 41, e12945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Cortez-Vega, W.R.; Pizato, S.; Prentice, C. Quality of raw chicken breast stored at 5 °C and packaged under different modified atmospheres. J. Food Saf. 2012, 32, 268–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Hector, D.A.; Brew-Graves, C.; Hassen, N.; Ledward, D.A. Relationship between myosin denaturation and the colour of low-voltage-electrically-stimulated beef. Meat Sci. 1992, 31, 299–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. López-López, I.; Cofrades, S.; Jiménez-Colmenero, F. Low-fat frankfurters enriched with n−3 PUFA and edible seaweed: Effects of olive oil and chilled storage on physicochemical, sensory and microbial characteristics. Meat Sci. 2009, 83, 148–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zhou, C.; Li, J.; Tan, S. Effect of l-lysine on the physicochemical properties of pork sausage. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 2014, 23, 775–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Luo, A.; Feng, J.; Hu, B.; Lv, J.; Chen, C.Y.O.; Xie, S. Polysaccharides in Spirulina platensis improve antioxidant capacity of Chinese-style sausage. J. Food Sci. 2017, 82, 2591–2597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Munsu, E.; Mohd Zaini, H.; Matanjun, P.; Ab Wahab, N.; Sulaiman, N.S.; Pindi, W. Physicochemical, sensory properties and lipid oxidation of chicken sausages supplemented with three types of seaweed. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 11347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Campo, M.M.; Nute, G.R.; Hughes, S.I.; Enser, M.; Wood, J.D.; Richardson, R.I. Flavour perception of oxidation in beef. Meat Sci. 2006, 72, 303–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Han, P.; Li, J.; Zhong, H.; Xie, J.; Zhang, P.; Lu, Q.; Zhou, W. Anti-oxidation properties and therapeutic potentials of spirulina. Algal Res. 2021, 55, 102240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Hlima, H.B.; Smaoui, S.; Barkallah, M.; Elhadef, K.; Tounsi, L.; Michaud, P.; Abdelkafi, S. Sulfated exopolysaccharides from Porphyridium cruentum: A useful strategy to extend the shelf life of minced beef meat. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 193, 1215–1225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Haiba, N.S.; Asaal, A.M.; El Massry, A.M.; Ismail, I.; Basahi, J.; Hassan, I.A. Effects of “doneness” level on PAH concentrations in charcoal-grilled beef and chicken: An Egyptian study case. Polycycl. Aromat. Compd. 2021, 41, 553–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Janoszka, B. HPLC-fluorescence analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in pork meat and its gravy fried without additives and in the presence of onion and garlic. Food Chem. 2011, 126, 1344–1353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Kafouris, D.; Koukkidou, A.; Christou, E.; Hadjigeorgiou, M.; Yiannopoulos, S. Determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in traditionally smoked meat products and charcoal grilled meat in Cyprus. Meat Sci. 2020, 164, 108088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Duedahl-Olesen, L.; Ionas, A.C. Formation and mitigation of PAHs in barbecued meat—A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2022, 62, 3553–3568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Ozlu, T.; Bayram, B. Spirulina mikroalginin besinsel özellikleri ve sağlık üzerine potansiyel etkileri [Nutritional Properties and Potential Health Effects of Spirulina Microalgae]. Akad. Gıda 2022, 20, 296–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Zejnelhoxha, S. Formation of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Cooked Meat and the Possibility of Reducing Their Formation by Vitamin E. Ph.D. Thesis, Università degli Studi del Molise, Campobasso, Italy, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  91. Aljabery, R.N.; Auda, M.A.; Al-Rekabi, H.Y. Apoptotic effects of phenolic extract from Spirulina platensis on esophagus cancer cell line SK-GT-4. Oncol. Radiother. 2023, 17, 580–587. [Google Scholar]
  92. Wang, X.; Han, Y.; Cao, Y.; Ni, Y.; Wang, D.; Luan, Y. The formation, stabilization mechanism, and environmental impacts of persistent free radicals in soil humic substances. Agronomy 2025, 15, 602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Bulanda, S.; Janoszka, B. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in roasted pork meat and the effect of dried fruits on PAH content. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Mohammed, H.O.; O’Grady, M.N.; O’Sullivan, M.G.; Hamill, R.M.; Kilcawley, K.N.; Kerry, J.P. Acceptable inclusion levels for selected brown and red Irish seaweed species in pork sausages. Foods 2022, 11, 1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Sellimi, S.; Ksouda, G.; Benslima, A.; Nasri, R.; Rinaudo, M.; Nasri, M.; Haiji, M. Enhancing colour and oxidative stabilities of reduced-nitrite turkey meat sausages during refrigerated storage using fucoxanthin purified from the Tunisian seaweed Cystoseira barbata. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2017, 107, 620–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Widati, A.S.; Rosyidi, D.; Radiati, L.E.; Nursyam, H. The effect of seaweed (Eucheuma cottonii) flour addition on physicochemical and sensory characteristics of an Indonesian-style beef meatball. Int. J. Food Stud. 2021, 10, 112–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Capan, B.; Yildiz Turp, G. Development of Gluten-Free Coated Chicken Liver, Examination of the Effects of Spices and Cooking Methods on Product Quality Characteristics and Heterocyclic Aromatic Amine (HCA) Compounds. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 5295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Cox, S.; Abu-Ghannam, N. Enhancement of the phytochemical and fibre content of beef patties with Himanthalia elongata seaweed. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2013, 48, 2239–2249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Ovissipour, M.; Abedian Kenari, A.; Motamedzadegan, A.; Nazari, R.M. Optimization of enzymatic hydrolysis of visceral waste proteins of yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares). Food Bioprocess Technol. 2012, 5, 696–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Karazhiyan, H.; Razavi, S.M.; Phillips, G.O.; Fang, Y.; Al-Assaf, S.; Nishinari, K.; Farhoosh, R. Rheological properties of Lepidium sativum seed extract as a function of concentration, temperature and time. Food Hydrocoll. 2009, 23, 2062–2068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Samavati, V. Polysaccharide extraction from Abelmoschus esculentus: Optimization by response surface methodology. Carbohydr. Polym. 2013, 95, 588–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Processes 13 02031 g001
Figure 1. Three-dimensional Response Surface Graph showing the effect of independent variables on the L* value (a), three-dimensional Response Surface Graph showing the effect of independent variables on the a* value (b), three-dimensional Response Surface Graph showing the effect of independent variables on the b* value (c), three-dimensional Response Surface Graph showing the effect of independent variables on the flavor value (d), and three-dimensional Response Surface Graph showing the effect of independent variables on the overall acceptance value (e).
Figure 1. Three-dimensional Response Surface Graph showing the effect of independent variables on the L* value (a), three-dimensional Response Surface Graph showing the effect of independent variables on the a* value (b), three-dimensional Response Surface Graph showing the effect of independent variables on the b* value (c), three-dimensional Response Surface Graph showing the effect of independent variables on the flavor value (d), and three-dimensional Response Surface Graph showing the effect of independent variables on the overall acceptance value (e).
Processes 13 02031 g001
Table 1. The formulations of coated meatball samples.
Table 1. The formulations of coated meatball samples.
Sample GroupBeef
(%)		Sunflower Oil (%)Salt
(%)		Garlic Powder and Spice Mix
(%)		S. platensis Powder
(%)
C89.63.51.55.40
S0.289.43.51.55.40.2
S0.589.13.51.55.40.5
S1.2588.353.51.55.41.25
S287.63.51.55.42
S2.387.33.51.55.42.3
Table 2. The design matrix for using S. platensis powder in coated meatballs and the storage period suggested by Design Expert software (version 13).
Table 2. The design matrix for using S. platensis powder in coated meatballs and the storage period suggested by Design Expert software (version 13).
RunFactor 1
S. platensis Powder Ratio (%)		Factor 2
Storage Period (Days)
10.530
2230
30.590
4290
50.260
62.360
71.2560
81.2518
91.25102
101.2560
111.2560
Table 3. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the moisture, fat, ash, protein, and pH values of coated meatballs.
Table 3. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the moisture, fat, ash, protein, and pH values of coated meatballs.
SampleMoisture (%)Fat (%)Ash (%)Protein (%)pH
C55.92 ± 0.24 f32.59 ± 0.25 a1.68 ± 0.01 a17.46 ± 0.13 a5.63 ± 0.01 a
S0.254.66 ± 0.22 e33.32 ± 0.1 b1.71 ± 0.01 ab18.32 ± 0.12 b5.71 ± 0.01 b
S0.552.46 ± 0.24 d33.78 ± 0.11 b1.75 ± 0.01 b19.23 ± 0.04 c5.82 ± 0.01 c
S1.2550.64 ± 0.14 c35.16 ± 0.11 c1.85 ± 0.01 c24.00 ± 0.09 d5.92 ± 0.01 d
S248.37 ± 0.19 b37.22 ± 0.24 d1.95 ± 0.01 d27.35 ± 0.25 e5.99 ± 0.01 e
S2.347.06 ± 0.18 a37.88 ± 0.42 e2.00 ± 0.03 d28.78 ± 0.09 f6.10 ± 0.01 f
The results are presented as mean ± standard error. a–f: Statistical differences between sample groups are shown with different letters (p < 0.05). C: Control sample without added S. platensis powder; S0.2: Sample with 0.2% S. platensis powder; S0.5: Sample with 0.5% S. platensis powder; S1.25: Sample with 1.25% S. platensis powder; S2: Sample with 2% S. platensis powder; S2.3: Sample with 2.3% S. platensis powder.
Table 4. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the texture profiles of the coated meatballs.
Table 4. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the texture profiles of the coated meatballs.
SampleHardness (N)Springiness (mm)CohesivenessGumminess (N)Chewiness (Nxmm)Resilience
C17.17 ± 0.66 a0.17 ± 0.02 a0.22 ± 0.013.47 ± 0.27 b1.42 ± 0.11 c0.04 ± 0.01
S0.217.64 ± 0.75 ab0.22 ± 0.03 ab0.23 ± 0.013.20 ± 0.32 b1.32 ± 0.09 c0.05 ± 0.01
S0.517.84 ± 0.71 ab0.25 ± 0.02 bc0.23 ± 0.012.33 ± 0.21 a0.97 ± 0.08 b0.06 ± 0.02
S1.2518.53 ± 0.46 ab0.27 ± 0.02 bc0.26 ± 0.012.23 ± 0.32 a0.51 ± 0.10 a0.07 ± 0.01
S222.55 ± 0.36 bc0.31 ± 0.02 cd0.27 ± 0.021.88 ± 0.10 a0.47 ± 0.09 a0.07 ± 0.01
S2.327.00 ± 0.43 c0.37 ± 0.02 d0.28 ± 0.021.86 ± 0.16 a0.32 ± 0.08 a0.08 ± 0.01
The results are presented as mean ± standard error. a–d: Statistical differences between sample groups are shown with different letters (p < 0.05). C: Sample without the addition of S. platensis powder; S0.2: Sample with 0.2% S. platensis powder; S0.5: Sample with 0.5% S. platensis powder; S1.25: Sample with 1.25% S. platensis powder; S2: Sample with 2% S. platensis powder; S2.3: Sample with 2.3% S. platensis powder.
Table 5. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the color characteristics (L*, a*, and b* values) of coated meatballs during storage.
Table 5. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the color characteristics (L*, a*, and b* values) of coated meatballs during storage.
Storage Period
(Day)		CS0.2S0.5S1.25S2S2.3
L*040.58 ± 0.63 d,A40.01 ± 0.31 cd,A39.70 ± 0.26 cd,A38.88 ± 0.17 bc,A37.73 ± 0.61 ab,A37.25 ± 0.56 a,A
1840.89 ± 0.25 c,AB40.43 ± 0.24 c,AB39.99 ± 0.24 bc,A39.30 ± 0.50 b,AB38.25 ± 0.24 a,AB37.94 ± 0.49 a,AB
3041.10 ± 0.37 b,AB40.90 ± 0.53 b,ABC40.22 ± 0.27 ab,AB39.88 ± 0.76 ab,AB39.22 ± 0.82 ab,BC38.49 ± 1.29 a,ABC
6041.51 ± 0.30 c,AB41.38 ± 0.1 c,BC40.39 ± 0.44 b,AB40.03 ± 0.36 ab,AB39.73 ± 0.14 ab,C39.39 ± 0.09 a,BC
9041.82 ± 0.24 c,B41.60 ± 0.43 c,C40.85 ± 0.16 b,B40.49 ± 0.23 ab,B40.08 ± 0.26 ab,C39.85 ± 0.15 a,BC
10242.00 ± 0.31 d,B41.52 ± 0.16 cd,C41.06 ± 0.21 bc,B40.60 ± 0.11 ab,B40.12 ± 0.17 a,C40.04 ± 0.19 a,C
a*08.93 ± 0.13 c,C8.41 ± 0.19 bc,C8.16 ± 0.14 bc,C7.77 ± 0.26 ab7.26 ± 0.35 a7.01 ± 0.38 a
188.73 ± 0.15 c,BC8.19 ± 0.22 c,BC7.96 ± 0.06 bc,BC7.30 ± 0.39 ab6.98 ± 0.25 a6.80 ± 0.37 a
308.29 ± 0.32 c,AB7.99 ± 0.18 bc,AB7.61 ± 0.09 abc,AB7.20 ± 0.31 ab6.91 ± 0.46 a6.67 ± 0.47 a
608.02 ± 0.21 c,A7.91 ± 0.31 c,A7.46 ± 0.28 bc,A7.07 ± 0.36 ab6.72 ± 0.16 ab6.46 ± 0.12 a
907.82 ± 0.12 d,A7.73 ± 0.16 d,A7.36 ± 0.11 cd,A6.96 ± 0.31 bc6.60 ± 0.23 ab6.32 ± 0.18 a
1027.71 ± 0.14 d,A7.71 ± 0.26 d,A7.26 ± 0.06 cd,A6.83 ± 0.20 bc6.54 ± 0.08 ab6.24 ± 0.20 a
b*022.04 ± 0.24 d,D21.78 ± 0.37 cd,B21.42 ± 0.12 bcd,C21.01 ± 0.33 abc,C20.73 ± 0.34 ab,B20.24 ± 0.15 a,C
1821.89 ± 0.13 c,CD21.31 ± 0.31 c,AB21.09 ± 0.18 bc,C20.83 ± 0.37 abc,BC20.16 ± 0.44 ab,AB19.87 ± 0.54 a,BC
3021.55 ± 0.25 d,BCD21.00 ± 0.25 d,AB20.83 ± 0.32 cd,BC20.13 ± 0.17 bc,AB19.75 ± 0.34 ab,A19.30 ± 0.24 a,AB
6021.33 ± 0.06 d,ABC20.93 ± 0.37 cd,AB20.34 ± 0.30 bc,AB20.0 ± 0.25 b,A19.57 ± 0.1 ab,A19.16 ± 0.27 a,AB
9020.99 ± 0.19 e,AB20.52 ± 0.24 de,A20.19 ± 0.18 cd,AB19.65 ± 0.21 bc,A19.41 ± 0.08 ab,A18.98 ± 0.22 a,AB
10220.72 ± 0.31 e,A20.49 ± 0.17 de,A20.02 ± 0.21 cd,A19.53 ± 0.06 bc,A19.30 ± 0.13 ab,A18.87 ± 0.20 a,A
The results are presented as mean ± standard error. a–e: Statistical differences between sample groups are shown with different letters (p < 0.05). A–D: Statistical differences during storage are shown with different letters (p < 0.05). C: Sample without the addition of S. platensis powder; S0.2: Sample with 0.2% S. platensis powder; S0.5: Sample with 0.5% S. platensis powder; S1.25: Sample with 1.25% S. platensis powder; S2: Sample with 2% S. platensis powder; S2.3: Sample with 2.3% S. platensis powder.
Table 6. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the TBARS values of coated meatballs during storage.
Table 6. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the TBARS values of coated meatballs during storage.
SampleTBARS (mg Malonaldehyde/kg)
Storage Time (Days)
018306090102
C0.20 ± 0.05 e,A0.25 ± 0.01 f,B0.30 ± 0.01 f,C0.36 ± 0.01 f,D0.50 ± 0.07 f,E0.66 ± 0.01 f,F
S0.20.18 ± 0.02 d,A0.22 ± 0.01 e,B0.23 ± 0.02 e,C0.27 ± 0.01 e,D0.35 ± 0.03 e,E0.50 ± 0.07 e,F
S0.50.18 ± 0.02 d,A0.19 ± 0.05 d,B0.21 ± 0.01 d,C0.25 ± 0.01 d,D0.30 ± 0.01 d,E0.41 ± 0.01 d,F
S1.250.13 ± 0.01 c,A0.14 ± 0.07 c,AB0.15 ± 0.05 c,B0.17 ± 0.02 c,C0.21 ± 0.05 c,D0.27 ± 0.01 c,E
S20.10 ± 0.03 b,A0.10 ± 0.02 b,A0.10 ± 0.03 b,A0.11 ± 0.02 b,A0.14 ± 0.07 b,B0.20 ± 0.03 b,C
S2.30.07 ± 0.06 a,A0.08 ± 0.06 a,A0.08 ± 0.06 a,A0.09 ± 0.04 a,A0.11 ± 0.04 a,B0.15 ± 0.02 a,C
The results are presented as mean ± standard error. a–f: Statistical differences between sample groups are shown with different letters (p < 0.05). A–F: Statistical differences during storage are shown with different letters (p < 0.05). C: Sample without the addition of S. platensis powder; S0.2: Sample with 0.2% S. platensis powder; S0.5: Sample with 0.5% S. platensis powder; S1.25: Sample with 1.25% S. platensis powder; S2: Sample with 2% S. platensis powder; S2.3: Sample with 2.3% S. platensis powder.
Table 7. R2, LOD, LOQ and recovery values of PAH4.
Table 7. R2, LOD, LOQ and recovery values of PAH4.
PAH CompoundR2LOD (ng/g)LOQ (ng/g)Recovery Value (%)
BaA0.99880.00010.000397.7
BaP1.00000.00540.018197.1
BbF0.99990.40831.361095.9
Chry1.00000.06490.216494.2
Table 8. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the PAH values of coated meatballs (ng/g).
Table 8. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the PAH values of coated meatballs (ng/g).
SampleBaABaPBbFChryΣPAH4
C3.39 ± 0.4 c1.00 ± 0.03 c0.35 ± 0.01 c3.15 ± 0.22 b7.89 f
S0.23.18 ± 0.31 c0.99 ± 0.03 c0.32 ± 0.01 bc3.15 ± 0.2 b7.64 e
S0.53.06 ± 0.23 c0.94 ± 0.04 bc0.31 ± 0.01 b3.03 ± 0.17 b7.34 d
S1.252.66 ± 0.11 bc0.84 ± 0.04 ab0.29 ± 0.02 b2.82 ± 0.02 a6.61 c
S22.17 ± 0.1 ab0.76 ± 0.04 a0.21 ± 0.01 a2.36 ± 0.11 a5.50 b
S2.31.85 ± 0.06 a0.72 ± 0.04 a0.19 ± 0.01 a2.01 ± 0.06 a4.77 a
The results are presented as mean ± standard error. a–f: Statistical differences between sample groups are shown with different letters (p < 0.05). C: Sample without the addition of S. platensis powder; S0.2: Sample with 0.2% S. platensis powder; S0.5: Sample with 0.5% S. platensis powder; S1.25: Sample with 1.25% S. platensis powder; S2: Sample with 2% S. platensis powder; S2.3: Sample with 2.3% S. platensis powder.
Table 9. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the appearance, color, texture, flavor, and overall acceptance scores of the coated meatballs.
Table 9. The influence of S. platensis powder addition on the appearance, color, texture, flavor, and overall acceptance scores of the coated meatballs.
Sample
Storage
(Days)		CS0.2S0.5S1.25S2S2.3
Appearance08.60 ± 0.16 B8.60 ± 0.16 C8.50 ± 0.17 C8.40 ± 0.22 B8.30 ± 0.15 B8.20 ± 0.07 B
188.50 ± 0.17 B8.50 ± 0.17 C8.40 ± 0.16 C8.30 ± 0.20 B8.20 ± 0.13 B8.10 ± 0.10 B
308.30 ± 0.20 B8.30 ± 0.20 C8.20 ± 0.29 C8.10 ± 0.35 B8.00 ± 0.15 B8.00 ± 0.21 B
608.10 ± 0.21 B8.00 ± 0.15 C8.00 ± 0.15 BC8.00 ± 0.26 B7.90 ± 0.18 B7.90 ± 0.17 AB
90 7.30 ± 0.30 A7.30 ± 0.26 B7.40 ± 0.27 AB7.80 ± 0.43 B7.80 ± 0.42 B7.80 ± 0.43 AB
1026.70 ± 0.21 A6.70 ± 0.21 A6.80 ± 0.29 A7.00 ± 0.30 A7.20 ± 0.29 A7.30 ± 0.40 A
Color08.50 ± 0.17 C8.40 ± 0.16 C8.40 ± 0.16 B8.30 ± 0.21 B8.20 ± 0.258.20 ± 0.24
188.40 ± 0.16 C8.30 ± 0.21 C8.20 ± 0.36 B8.10 ± 0.31 B8.10 ± 0.288.00 ± 0.21
308.20 ± 0.25 C8.20 ± 0.20 BC8.10 ± 0.23 B8.00 ± 0.26 B8.00 ± 0.338.00 ± 0.26
607.90 ± 0.18 BC7.90 ± 0.28 BC7.90 ± 0.31 B7.80 ± 0.21 B7.80 ± 0.237.80 ± 0.28
907.50 ± 0.17 B7.60 ± 0.22 B7.60 ± 0.26 B7.80 ± 0.13 A7.80 ± 0.137.80 ± 0.36
1026.70 ± 0.26 A6.70 ± 0.25 A6.80 ± 0.26 A7.10 ± 0.23 A7.50 ± 0.227.50 ± 0.31
Texture08.50 ± 0.17 C8.60 ± 0.16 D8.60 ± 0.16 C8.70 ± 0.15 C8.80 ± 0.138.90 ± 0.10
188.30 ± 0.26 C8.40 ± 0.22 CD8.50 ± 0.17 C8.60 ± 0.16 C8.70 ± 0.158.80 ± 0.13
308.00 ± 0.21 a,C8.20 ± 0.20 ab,CD8.30 ± 0.26 ab,C8.50 ± 0.22 ab,C8.60 ± 0.16 ab8.70 ± 0.21 b
607.70 ± 0.21 a,BC7.80 ± 0.33 ab,BC8.00 ± 0.30 abc,BC8.30 ± 0.15 abc,BC8.50 ± 0.17 bc8.60 ± 0.16 c
907.20 ± 0.33 a,B7.30 ± 0.15 a,B7.40 ± 0.31 a,B7.90 ± 0.18 ab,B8.20 ± 0.20 b8.30 ± 0.26 b
1026.40 ± 0.34 a,A6.50 ± 0.27 a,A6.70 ± 0.21 a,A7.00 ± 0.21 ab,A7.20 ± 0.55 b7.30 ± 0.34 b
Flavor08.50 ± 0.17 C8.50 ± 0.16 C8.60 ± 0.16 C8.70 ± 0.15 C8.70 ± 0.158.90 ± 0.10
188.30 ± 0.21 C8.30 ± 0.18 C8.40 ± 0.16 C8.60 ± 0.16 BC8.70 ± 0.158.80 ± 0.13
308.10 ± 0.23 C8.10 ± 0.23 C8.10 ± 0.27 BC8.40 ± 0.22 BC8.60 ± 0.168.70 ± 0.15
607.80 ± 0.25 a,BC7.80 ± 0.24 a,BC8 ± 0.26 ab,BC8.30 ± 0.26 ab,BC8.50 ± 0.17 ab8.60 ± 0.16 b
907.20 ± 0.20 a,AB7.30 ± 0.21 a,AB7.40 ± 0.22 a,AB8.00 ± 0.15 b,B8.30 ± 0.15 b8.40 ± 0.22 b
1026.50 ± 0.45 a,A6.60 ± 0.40 a,A6.70 ± 0.45 a,A7.00 ± 0.21 b,A7.20 ± 0.2 b7.30 ± 0.26 b
Overall Acceptance08.60 ± 0.16 D8.60 ± 0.17 C8.70 ± 0.15 C8.70 ± 0.16 C8.70 ± 0.12 B8.80 ± 0.13 B
188.40 ± 0.22 CD8.40 ± 0.16 C8.60 ± 0.16 C8.60 ± 0.15 C8.70 ± 0.16 B8.70 ± 0.15 B
308.20 ± 0.20 CD8.30 ± 0.21 C8.30 ± 0.26 C8.40 ± 0.22 BC8.60 ± 0.16 B8.70 ± 0.15 B
607.90 ± 0.18 a,C7.90 ± 0.28 a,BC8.10 ± 0.23 ab,BC8.30 ± 0.21 ab,BC8.50 ± 0.17 ab,B8.60 ± 0.16 b,B
907.20 ± 0.20 a,B7.30 ± 0.21 ab,B7.40 ± 0.27 bc,AB7.90 ± 0.10 bc,B8.30 ± 0.15 c,B8.40 ± 0.27 c,B
1026.50 ± 0.31 a,A6.60 ± 0.37 a,A6.80 ± 0.44 bc,A7.00 ± 0.26 bc,A7.20 ± 0.25 c,A7.30 ± 0.30 c,A
The results are presented as mean ± standard error. a–c: Statistical differences between sample groups are shown with different letters (p < 0.05). A–D: Statistical differences during storage are shown with different letters (p < 0.05). C: Sample without addition of S. platensis powder; S0.2: Sample with 0.2% S. platensis powder; S0.5: Sample with 0.5% S. platensis powder; S1.25: Sample with 1.25% S. platensis powder; S2: Sample with 2% S. platensis powder; S2.3: Sample with 2.3% S. platensis powder.
Table 10. Comparisons of model compatibilities for each response.
Table 10. Comparisons of model compatibilities for each response.
SourcedfL*
p-Value		a*
p-Value		b*
p-Value		Flavor
p-Value		Overall Acceptance
p-Value
Mean vs. total1
Linear vs. mean2<0.0001<0.0001<0.0001<0.0001<0.0001
2FI vs. linear10.62360.77050.22450.74180.1724
Quadratic vs. 2FI20.06820.42730.47600.13060.0136
Cubic vs. quadratic20.03700.01600.06350.65390.3223
Residual5
Total13
Lack-of-fit test
Linear60.04680.10570.11730.10480.8665
2FI50.03710.08260.12350.08230.8807
Quadratic30.07570.06280.09060.90830.9012
Cubic10.34780.86020.25160.04180.9185
Pure error4
Table 11. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the L*, a*, and b* value models.
Table 11. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the L*, a*, and b* value models.
SourcedfL* dfa* dfb*
F-Valuep-ValueF-Valuep-ValueF-Valuep-Value
Model353.28<0.0001Significant2108.33<0.0001Significant245.74<0.0001Significant
A—S. platensis powder ratio (%)198.65<0.0001 1193.23<0.0001 168.27<0.0001
B—Storage time (day)152.23<0.0001 123.430.0007 123.20<0.0001
Residual9 10 10
Lack of fit53.460.1263Not significant63.870.1057Not significant63.610.1173Not significant
Pure error4 4 4
Cor total12 12 12
R2 0.9467 0.9559 0.9015
Adj-R2 0.9289 0.9471 0.8817
C.V. (%) 0.4056 1.25 0.9710
df: degree of freedom; Cor total: total correctness; Adj-R2: adjusted-R2; C.V.: coefficient of variation.
Table 12. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the flavor and overall acceptance value models.
Table 12. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the flavor and overall acceptance value models.
SourcedfFlavor DfOverall Acceptance
F-Valuep-ValueF-Valuep-Value
Model246.57<0.0001Significant349.49<0.0001Significant
A—S. platensis powder ratio (%)122.610.0008 158.44<0.0001
B—Storage time (day)170.52<0.0001 181.51<0.0001
Residual10 9
Lack of fit63.890.1048Not significant52.100.2461Not significant
Pure error4 4
Cor total12 12
R2 0.9030 0.9428
Adj-R2 0.8836 0.9238
C.V. (%) 1.90 1.43
df: degree of freedom; Cor total: total correctness; Adj-R2: adjusted-R2; C.V.: coefficient of variation.
Table 13. A comparison of the predicted values from the model with the mean experimental values at the optimum point.
Table 13. A comparison of the predicted values from the model with the mean experimental values at the optimum point.
ResponsePredicted ValueMean Experimental ValueMean Differencep-Value
L* value39.9639.97 ± 0.110.0050.923
a* value7.117.13 ± 0.030.0230.209
b* value20.0119.98 ± 0.13−0.3000.644
Flavor7.397.38 ± 0.08−0.0050.893
Overall Acceptance7.637.64 ± 0.110.0120.824
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Elikucuk, Y.; Yildiz Turp, G. Optimization of Spirulina platensis Incorporation in Coated Beef Meatballs: Impact on Quality Characteristics and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Formation. Processes 2025, 13, 2031. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13072031

AMA Style

Elikucuk Y, Yildiz Turp G. Optimization of Spirulina platensis Incorporation in Coated Beef Meatballs: Impact on Quality Characteristics and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Formation. Processes. 2025; 13(7):2031. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13072031

Chicago/Turabian Style

Elikucuk, Yagmur, and Gulen Yildiz Turp. 2025. "Optimization of Spirulina platensis Incorporation in Coated Beef Meatballs: Impact on Quality Characteristics and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Formation" Processes 13, no. 7: 2031. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13072031

APA Style

Elikucuk, Y., & Yildiz Turp, G. (2025). Optimization of Spirulina platensis Incorporation in Coated Beef Meatballs: Impact on Quality Characteristics and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Formation. Processes, 13(7), 2031. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13072031

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop