Previous Article in Journal
Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Energy Demand and Solid Waste Generation Between Two Manufacturing Processes: A Case Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Recycling
Volume 10
Issue 4
10.3390/recycling10040164
recycling-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

Grape Marc Flour as a Horticulture By-Product for Application in the Meat Industry

by
Manuel Alejandro Vargas-Ortiz
1,
Armida Sánchez-Escalante
1,
Gastón R. Torrescano-Urrutia
1,
Rey David Vargas-Sánchez
1,
Brisa del Mar Torres-Martínez
1 and
Eber Addí Quintana-Obregón
2,*
1
SECIHTI-Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo (CIAD), Coordinación de Tecnología de Alimentos de Origen Animal (CTAOA), Carretera Gustavo Enrique Astiazarán Rosas 46, Hermosillo 83304, Mexico
2
SECIHTI-Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo (CIAD), Coordinación de Tecnología de Alimentos de Origen Vegetal (CTAOV), Carretera Gustavo Enrique Astiazarán Rosas 46, Hermosillo 83304, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Recycling 2025, 10(4), 164; https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling10040164
Submission received: 30 June 2025 / Revised: 1 August 2025 / Accepted: 12 August 2025 / Published: 15 August 2025
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Using agro-industrial byproducts as functional ingredients represents a sustainable approach to food development. This study aimed to characterize the physicochemical and techno-functional properties of grape marc flour and evaluate the metabolite content and antioxidant activity of the extract obtained from these residues. Grape marc flour analysis included pH, color, and techno-functional parameter assessment. The metabolite content and antioxidant activity of the extracts were determined in vitro and in a meat system. The grape marc flour exhibited low pH, lightness (L*), and yellowness (b*) index values, as well as increased redness (a*) values. It also showed the ability to retain water and oil, along with notable swelling capacity. The extracts exhibited high levels of phenolic, tannins, flavonoids, and chlorogenic acid, as well as anti-radical activity and reducing power. When incorporated into a cooked meat system, the extracts decreased pH and lipid oxidation levels. These findings suggest that grape marc flour has potential as a functional ingredient in the formulation of meat products.

1. Introduction

Grapes rank among the most extensively farmed fruits. Winemaking accounts for one-third of grape production, resulting in the generation of grape marc as a byproduct. Grape marc, constituting 10% to 30% of the bulk of crushed grapes, encompasses valuable constituents including sugars, fatty acids, lignocellulosic material, and polyphenols. Despite its potential as a renewable energy source, the limited adoption of sophisticated technology constrains its industrial application [1].
In recent years, the valorization of agro-industrial waste has become increasingly important in mitigating environmental effects. Integrating flours or extracts from these residues into food matrices has facilitated the creation of products with improved functional attributes. Grape marc flours have shown efficacy in bakery product composition; their utilization in meat products, however, remains under explored. Grape marc flours have the potential to enhance functionality and oxidative stability in processed meats, owing to their composition in fiber, antioxidants, and bioactive chemicals [2,3].
A prior study assessed the incorporation of grape seed flour into muffins made with whole wheat, spelt, and oat flours at ratios of 7.5% and 15%. Adding grape seed flour enhanced the overall phenolic content and antioxidant capacity, with the whole oat muffins exhibiting the highest enrichment. Differences in texture and color resulted from varying amounts of grape seed flour; however, the formulations did not exhibit any sensory differences. The findings show that grape by-product flour is a viable component for creating functional baked goods [4]. In muffins, the grape marc flour with varying particle sizes (150–600 µm) modified the chemical, technical, and sensory attributes. In the research, using 15% of this flour enhanced the muffins with antioxidants and dietary fiber. Smaller particle sizes increased anthocyanins, total phenols, and antioxidant activity; the smaller diameters influenced the texture, resulting in uneven pores in the crumb and reduced hardness [5].
Two different extracts of red grape marc, derived from two extraction methods (A: methanol extraction + High-Low Instantaneous Pressure and B: methanol extraction), mixed to meat were tested (pH, microbial spoilage, lipid oxidation, and color). A concentration of 0.06% of these extracts incorporated into pork burgers and stored under aerobic conditions at 4 °C for 6 days, show that hamburgers supplemented with the extract from the extraction method (A) exhibited the highest color stability, prevention of lipid oxidation, and overall acceptability after six days of storage [6]. A prior study assessed the impact of grape by-product extract on the sensory quality, lipid oxidation, and bacterial proliferation of ground meat held at 4 °C for 10 days. The study included five groups: a control, a group treated with butylhydroxytoluene (0.01%), and groups treated with grape seed extract at three doses (50, 200, and 1000 µg/mL). Incorporating grape seed extract enhanced sensory acceptance and decreased pH, lipid oxidation, and total bacterial counts relative to the control group. The grape seed extract showed the highest effectiveness at 1000 µg/mL, where antioxidant and antibacterial efficacy exhibited a dose-dependent relationship. Grape seed extract, according to research [7], is a viable natural alternative for extending the shelf life of ground meat and reducing dependence on synthetic preservatives.
This study seeks to characterize the physicochemical and techno-functional properties of grape marc flours and evaluate the antioxidant activity of extracts derived from these residues, assessing the potential of grape marc as a food additive.

2. Results

2.1. pH, Color, and Techno-Functional Properties

The study observed significant differences (p < 0.05) in the pH and color parameters among the evaluated flours (Table 1). The pH values of the grape marc flours were lower, arranged in the following order: ‘Petit Verdot’ > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Grenache Noir’ > ‘Syrah’. Higher L* (luminosity) was observed in the control (texturizer soy flour) compared to flours (ranked: ‘Grenache Noir’ > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Syrah’ > ‘Petit Verdot’), suggesting improved clarity. The grape marc flours showed higher a* values, showing a greater red inclination, in the order ‘Grenache Noir’ > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Syrah’ > ‘Petit Verdot’, compared to the control. Higher b* values, showing a yellow tendency, were observed in the control group compared to the grape marc flours (‘Grenache Noir’ > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Syrah’ > ‘Petit Verdot’). The values of C* (chroma) and h* (hue angle) were higher in the control group compared to the grape marc flours, following the same trend (‘Grenache Noir’ > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Syrah’ > ‘Petit Verdot’).
Significant differences (p ˂ 0.05) were observed in the techno-functional properties among the evaluated flours (Table 2). The WRC value was markedly greater in the control (textured soy flour) than in the grape marc flours, which ranked as follows: ‘Grenache Noir’ > ‘Syrah’ > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ = ‘Petit Verdot’. The ORC values for grape marc flours (‘Grenache Noir’ and ‘Syrah’) were higher compared to those of the other flours, specifically the control, ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’, and Petit. The SWC values were significantly elevated in the Control and ‘Petit Verdot’ relative to the different flours, with the order being ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ = ‘Syrah’ > ‘Grenache Noir’. No differences were observed in the EMC and GLC of the assessed flours.

2.2. Polyphenol Content and Antioxidant Activity

The results of the metabolite content showed significant differences (p ˂ 0.05) between the aqueous-ethanolic extracts obtained from the evaluated flours (Table 3). The TPC was significantly higher in the extracts obtained from the grape marc flours compared to the Control, in the following order: ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Grenache Noir’ = ‘Petit Verdot’ = ‘Syrah’. Regarding the TTC, the extracts showed the following order of content: ‘Syrah’ > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ = ‘Petit Verdot’ > ‘Grenache Noir’ > Control. On the other hand, the TFVC presented the following order of content: ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Syrah’ > Control > ‘Petit Verdot’ > ‘Grenache Noir’. Moreover, the TCGA was significantly higher in the extracts obtained from the grape marc flours compared to the control, following the order ‘Syrah’ > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Petit Verdot’ > ‘Grenache Noir’.
The antiradical activity and reducing power showed significant differences (p ˂ 0.05) between the aqueous-ethanolic extracts obtained from the evaluated flours (Table 4). The DPPH values were significantly higher in the extracts obtained from the grape marc flours compared to the control, in the following order: ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Syrah’ > ‘Grenache Noir’ > ‘Petit Verdot’. Regarding the ABTS values, the extracts showed the following order of inhibition: ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ = ‘Grenache Noir’ = ‘Petit Verdot’ = ‘Syrah’ > Control. The FPBP and FRAP values showed the following order of activity: ‘Syrah’ > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Petit Verdot’ > ‘Grenache Noir’ > Control.

2.3. Oxidative Stability of Extracts Inside a Meat Matrix

The results of the pH values and lipid oxidation (TBARS) showed significant differences (p ˂ 0.05) between the meat samples added with aqueous-ethanolic extracts (Figure 1). The pH values were significantly higher in the control group samples compared to the samples incorporating extracts obtained from grape marc flours, in the following order: Control > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ = ‘Grenache Noir’ = ‘Petit Verdot’ > ‘Syrah’. Regarding the TBARS values, the samples showed the following order of inhibition: ‘Syrah’ ≥ ‘Petit Verdot’ = ‘Grenache Noir’ = ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > Control.
The results of the color values showed significant differences (p ˂ 0.05) between the meat samples added with aqueous-ethanolic extracts (Figure 2). The L* and h* values were significantly lower in the control group samples compared to the samples incorporating extracts obtained from grape marc flours, in the following order: ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ > ‘Grenache Noir’ = ‘Petit Verdot’ = ‘Syrah’ > Control. Regarding the a*, b*, and C* values, they were significantly higher in the control group samples compared to the samples incorporating extracts obtained from grape marc flours, in the following order: Control > ‘Cabernet Sauvignon’ = ‘Grenache Noir’ = ‘Petit Verdot’ = ‘Syrah’.

3. Discussion

The type of grape marc significantly impacts the final product’s color profile, affecting its aesthetic and sensory qualities in food applications, according to the findings. The pH of flour derived from natural sources is a significant factor, as it can affect their compatibility with various food matrices while maintaining technological properties. Flours with an acidic pH are more appropriate for acidic food matrices, whereas those with a pH near neutrality can be used in neutral pH products, such as meat products. The color of flour, influenced by the raw materials and processing methods, is a critical factor that can impact the final quality of the products [8]. Organic acids are significantly correlated with the pH of grape marc flours [9], whereas the coloration of these flours is linked to the presence of polyphenols [10].
The results of techno-functional characteristics in the flours show these flours may be unsuitable for applications causing emulsion stabilization or gel formation. Tecno-functional properties are characteristics of an additive or ingredient that influence the quality, stability, and functionality of a food matrix, without altering its nutritional value. These properties affect aspects such as water and oil retention, swelling, emulsification, and gelation, among others [8,11]. In this context, the techno-functional properties of grape residues have been demonstrated. For example, in a previous study, dietary fiber flours were obtained from grape residues through super-fine milling, and the results showed that reducing the particle size decreased their water and oil retention capacity [12]. In another study, the water and oil retention capacities, as well as the emulsifying properties, of defatted grape seed flour were showed [13].
Antioxidant additives or ingredients are commonly added to food matrices to prevent or delay the oxidation of their macromolecules, such as lipids and proteins, preventing deterioration and extending shelf life. These compounds can be of synthetic origin, such as BHA and BHT, or natural, like polyphenols, and they act by neutralizing free radicals or inhibiting oxidative reactions [14,15,16]. In this context, studies demonstrated that flours obtained from grape residues exhibit antioxidant activity. For example, in a previous study, dietary fiber flours were obtained from grape residues through superfine milling, and the results showed that reducing the particle size increased the inhibition of free radicals in the extract obtained with hexane [12]. Additionally, the effectiveness of 80% ethanolic extracts of grape marc flours (‘Cabernet Sauvignon’, ‘Grenache Noir’, and ‘Syrah’) to inhibit free radicals has been demonstrated [10].
The pH, TBARS, and color values are related to the loss of quality in meat, as they can be affected by oxidative damage to lipids and proteins caused by free radicals and reactive species. However, synthetic antioxidants have not effectively or safely addressed this problem, leading the industry to seek natural alternatives [15]. Studies showed that the addition of grape marc extracts to raw pork burgers reduces pH values and lipid oxidation during storage, while also improving color stability; while incorporating grape marc flour into cooked beef burgers, a decrease in pH values [6,17]. In aqueous white grape marc extract added to fish fillets reduces lipid oxidation during storage (4 °C for 14 days) without affect L*, a* and b* parameters, which is associated with the presence of phenolic compounds, as well as the antiradical and reducing power exhibited by this extract [18]. Phenolic compounds present in extracts of natural origin can act as pH regulators by transferring electrons (i.e., ArOH → ArO− + H+), as well as neutralizing radicals (i.e., ROS• (ROO•; R•; OH•) + ArOH → ROSH + ArO•), preventing the formation of MDA, and sequestering radicals to prevent the degradation of pigments (i.e., Myoglobin-Fe2+ + ROS• → Metamyoglobin-Fe3+; preventing, Myoglobin-Fe2+ + ROS• + ArOH → Myoglobin-Fe2+ + ROSH + ArO•) [19,20,21].

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Flours and Extracts

Local producers in northwest Mexico (Sonora) supplied grape marc (‘Cabernet Sauvignon’, ‘Grenache Noir’, ‘Petit Verdot’, and ‘Syrah’) for flour production. First, the marc was dried at 65 °C for 12 h. Then, it was ground to a particle size of 20 mesh. The flours were vacuum-sealed and stored at 20 °C until analysis. Next, ultrasonic extraction of the flours to obtain functional chemical compounds was done. This process was conducted at 26 °C for 1 h at a frequency of 45 kHz using a Branson 3800 (Bransonic, Danbury, CT, USA). A (1:1) mixture of water and ethanol served as the solvent, with a Solvent-to-Solid ratio of 1:10. After sonication, the solution was lyophilized to dry it. The extracts from the flours were kept at −18 °C until examination, for a period not exceeding one week [8].

4.2. Physicochemical and Techno-Functional Properties

Following pH and color analysis, the acquired flours were studied [8]. The samples were homogenized with distilled water at a 1:10 flour-to-liquid ratio using an Ultraturrax T25 (IKA, Staufen, Germany), and the pH values were measured with a pH211 potentiometer (Hanna, Woonsocket, RI, USA). Using a colorimeter (CM 508d, Konica Minolta Inc., Tokyo, Japan), the lightness (L*), red index (a*), and yellow index (b*) of the samples were measured. In addition, Chroma (C*) and hue (h*) parameters were calculated (tan−1 a*/b* and √a*2 + b*2, respectively).
Techno-functional assessments were conducted on the flours [8,22]. The samples underwent assessment of water retention capacity (WRC), oil retention capacity (ORC), swelling capacity (SWC), emulsifying capacity (EMC), and gelling capacity (GLC). Textured soy protein served as a control. The WRC and ORC samples were homogenized with distilled water or corn oil at a 1:10 flour-liquid ratio, using a speed of 10,000 rpm for 1 min at 4 °C. Thereafter, they were incubated at 26 °C for 1 h and subsequently centrifuged at 15,000× g for 20 min at 4 °C (Sorvall ST18R, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). The collected sediments were weighed, and the results were presented as percentages. The samples for SWC and EMC were homogenized with distilled water or corn oil (flour-liquid ratio, 1:10) in a graduated test tube at 10,000 rpm for 1 min at 4 °C. The sample volume was documented at the start and finish; results were expressed as percentages. For the GLC evaluation, the sample was homogenized with distilled water (flour-to-liquid ratio, 1:10), heated, and subsequently chilled for 1 h. This was followed by centrifugation at 15,000× g for 20 min at 4 °C. The sediments were quantified, and the findings were articulated as percentages.

4.3. Antioxidant Activity and Polyphenol Content

The total phenolic content (TPC) was determined using the Folin-Ciocalteu method [23]. Each extract (0.02 mL at 5 mg/mL) was homogenized with 0.16 mL of distilled water, 0.04 mL of Folin reagent (2 M), and 0.06 mL of sodium carbonate (7%). After a 1-h incubation at 26 °C in the dark, the device measured the absorbance at 750 nm (Multiskan, Thermo Scientific, Tokyo, Japan), and the presented results as gallic acid equivalents per gram of dry extract (mg GAE/g).
The total tannin content (TTC) was assessed using the vanillin method [24]. Each extract (0.02 mL at 5 mg/mL) was homogenized with 0.1 mL of 1% vanillin and 0.1 mL of 8% hydrochloric acid. Following a 0.5-h incubation at 26 °C in the dark, the absorbance was assessed at 500 nm, and the results were reported as catechin equivalents (mg ECAT/g).
The total flavonoid content (TFVC) was assessed using the aluminum chloride method [23]. 0.02 mL of each extract (at 5 mg/mL) was homogenized with 0.26 mL of methanol and 0.01 mL of a 10% solution of aluminum chloride. After a 0.5-h incubation period at 26 °C in the dark, absorbance was measured at 412 nm and reported as quercetin equivalents (mg EQ/g).
The total chlorogenic acid content (TCGA) was assessed using the sodium nitrite method [25]. Each extract (0.1 mL at 5 mg/mL) was homogenized with 0.2 mL of urea (0.17 M), 0.2 mL of glacial acetic acid (0.1 M), and 0.5 mL of distilled water. The mixture was then incubated in the dark at 26 °C for 10 min. The solution was subsequently combined with 0.5 mL of sodium nitrite (0.14 M) and 0.5 mL of sodium hydroxide (1 M), followed by centrifugation at 2250× g for 10 min at 4 °C. Absorbance was quantified at 510 nm, and the results were reported as chlorogenic acid equivalents (mg CAE/g).
The suppression of free radicals was assessed using the DPPH technique [26]. Each extract (0.02 mL at 5 mg/mL) was homogenized with 0.1 mL of DPPH solution (300 µM concentration). Following a 0.5-h incubation at 26 °C in the dark, the absorbance was assessed at 517 nm, and the results were reported as a percentage of inhibition.
Cation radical suppression (percent inhibition) was evaluated using the ABTS method [26]. Each extract (0.02 mL at 5 mg/mL) was homogenized with 0.2 mL of ABTS solution. Absorbance was determined at 730 nm after a 10-min incubation at 26 °C in the dark.
The reducing power was assessed using the Ferricyanide/Prussian Blue (FPB) technique [27]. Each extract (0.2 mL at 5 mg/mL) was homogenized with 0.5 mL of 1% potassium ferricyanide and incubated at 85 °C in the dark for 10 min. Subsequently, the extracts were combined with 0.5 mL of trichloroacetic acid (10%) and centrifuged at 2300× g for 10 min at 5 °C. Subsequently, 0.1 mL of the supernatant was mixed with 0.1 mL of iron chloride (0.1%); the absorbance was recorded at 700 nm, and the findings were presented as absorbance at 700 nm.
The reducing power was assessed using the ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) method [27]. Each extract (0.02 mL at 5 mg/mL) was homogenized with 0.2 mL of FRAP solution. Following a 10-min incubation at 26 °C in the dark, the absorbance was measured at 595 nm, with results reported as mg of iron oxide equivalents (mg Fe2+/g).

4.4. Oxidative Stability of the Extracts Inside a Meat Matrix

The oxidative stability of a beef system was assessed using pH and thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances (TBARS) methodologies [11]. Ground beef (20% fat) was acquired from a local processor (JC®, Hermosillo, Mexico). Thereafter, the meat homogenate was prepared by combining 1 g of minced meat with 1 mL of each extract and 10 mL of distilled water at 4500 rpm for 1 min at 5 °C. The solution was incubated at 65 °C for one hour in a water bath and thereafter analyzed. The pH was measured on the solution prepared with distilled water at a solution-to-meat-liquid ratio of 1:10. TBARS assessment involved homogenizing 0.5 mL of meat solution with 1 mL of 0.02 M 2-thiobarbituric acid, a 20-min 97 °C water bath incubation, an absorbance reading at 531 nm, and reporting results in mg malondialdehyde (MDA)/kg. Using a spectrophotometer, the L*, a*, b*, C*, and h* parameters were measured on the surface of a quartz cell containing the meat solution.

4.5. Statistical Analysis

The data were presented as mean ± standard deviation from at least three independent experiments (n = 6) and analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance with a fixed treatment effect. A Tukey HSD test was conducted at p < 0.05 to ascertain the differences between treatments.

5. Conclusions

The results obtained show that grape marc flours possess physicochemical and techno-functional properties that make them suitable for food applications. The extracts obtained from these flours exhibited antiradical activity and reducing power, which is related to their high polyphenol content. The incorporation of these extracts into a cooked meat system resulted in a reduction in pH and lipid oxidation, suggesting a protective effect on the product’s quality. Further studies are recommended on the impact of incorporating these extracts into the formulation of different meat products (fresh and cooked) on the physicochemical, microbiological, and sensory properties, as well as studies on their economic feasibility and scalability in other meat formulations.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.A.V.-O. and E.A.Q.-O.; methodology, M.A.V.-O. and R.D.V.-S.; software, R.D.V.-S. and B.d.M.T.-M.; formal analysis, M.A.V.-O. and R.D.V.-S.; investigation, M.A.V.-O. and E.A.Q.-O.; writing—original draft preparation, M.A.V.-O., A.S.-E., G.R.T.-U., B.d.M.T.-M., R.D.V.-S. and E.A.Q.-O.; writing—review and editing, M.A.V.-O., A.S.-E., G.R.T.-U., B.d.M.T.-M., R.D.V.-S. and E.A.Q.-O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the manuscript. Further inquiries can be directed at the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors R.D.V.-S., M.A.V.-O. and E.A.Q.-O. thank SECIHTI for the fellowship from the “Investigadoras e Investigadores por México” (Researchers for Mexico Program).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
L*Brightness
a*Redness
b*Yellowness
C*Chroma
h*Hue
WRCWater retention capacity
ORCOil retention capacity
SWCSwelling capacity
EMCEmulsifying capacity
GLCGelling capacity
TPCTotal phenolic content
TTCTotal tannin content
TFVCTotal flavonoid content
TCGATotal chlorogenic acid content

References

  1. Muhlack, R.A.; Potumarthi, R.; Jeffery, D.W. Sustainable wineries through waste valorisation: A review of grape marc utilisation for value-added products. Waste Manag. 2018, 72, 99–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Boff, J.M.; Strasburg, V.J.; Ferrari, G.T.; De Oliveira Schmidt, H.; Manfroi, V.; De Oliveira, V.R. Chemical, technological, and sensory quality of pasta and bakery products made with the addition of grape marc flour. Foods 2022, 11, 3812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Silva, M.E.D.S.; Grisi, C.V.B.; Silva, S.P.D.; Madruga, M.S.; Silva, F.A.P.D. The technological potential of agro-industrial residue from grape pulping (Vitis spp.) for application in meat products: A review. Food Biosci. 2022, 49, 101877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Yalcin, E.; Ozdal, T.; Gok, I. Investigation of textural, functional, and sensory properties of muffins prepared by adding grape seeds to various flours. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2022, 46, e15316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Troilo, M.; Difonzo, G.; Paradiso, V.M.; Pasqualone, A.; Caponio, F. Grape marc as innovative flour for the formulation of functional muffins: How particle size affects the nutritional, textural and sensory properties. Foods 2022, 11, 1799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Garrido, M.D.; Auqui, M.; Martí, N.; Linares, M.B. Effect of two different red grape marc extracts obtained under different extraction systems on meat quality of pork burgers. LWT 2011, 44, 2238–2243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Amin, R.A.; Edris, S.N. Grape seed extract as natural antioxidant and antibacterial in minced beef. ACS FST 2022, 2, 89–96. [Google Scholar]
  8. López-Marcos, M.C.; Bailina, C.; Viuda-Martos, M.; Pérez-Alvarez, J.A.; Fernández-López, J. Properties of dietary fibers from agroindustrial coproducts as source for fiber-enriched foods. Food Bioprocess Tech. 2015, 8, 2400–2408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sant’Anna, V.; Englert, A.H.; Corrêa, A.P.F.; Brandelli, A.; Ferreira Marczak, L.D.; Tessaro, I.C. Grape marc powder: Physicochemical and microbiological stability during storage and moisture sorption isotherm. Food Bioprocess Tech. 2014, 7, 2500–2506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. San-Martín-Hernández, C.S.; Martínez-Téllez, M.Á.; Sañudo-Barajas, J.A.; Quintana-Obregón, E.A. Characterization of Cabernet, Grenache, and Syrah grape marc powders produced in Northwestern Mexico. Emir. J. Food Agric. 2021, 33, 846–851. [Google Scholar]
  11. Torres-Martínez, B.D.M.; Vargas-Sánchez, R.D.; Pérez-Alvarez, J.Á.; Fernández-López, J.; Esqueda, M.C.; Rodríguez-Carpena, J.G.; Ibarra-Arias, F.J.; Torrescano-Urrutia, G.R.; Sánchez-Escalante, A. Recovery of an additive for pork meat from Pleurotus ostreatus grown in agro-industrial wastes. Biotecnia 2025, 27, e2396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Zhu, F.-M.; Du, B.; Li, J. Effect of ultrafine grinding on physicochemical and antioxidant properties of dietary fiber from wine grape marc. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2014, 20, 55–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Alvarez-Ossorio, C.; Orive, M.; Sanmartín, E.; Alvarez-Sabatel, S.; Labidi, J.; Zufia, J.; Bald, C. Composition and techno-functional properties of grape seed flour protein extracts. ACS Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 2, 125–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Falowo, A.B.; Fayemi, P.O.; Muchenje, V. Natural antioxidants against lipid–protein oxidative deterioration in meat and meat products: A review. Food Res. Int. 2014, 64, 171–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Oswell, N.J.; Thippareddi, H.; Pegg, R.B. Practical use of natural antioxidants in meat products in the US: A review. Meat Sci. 2018, 145, 469–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ribeiro, J.S.; Santos, M.J.M.C.; Silva, L.K.R.; Pereira, L.C.L.; Santos, I.A.; da Silva Lannes, S.C.; da Silva, M.V. Natural antioxidants used in meat products: A brief review. Meat Sci. 2019, 148, 181–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Pereira, A.; Lee, H.C.; Lammert, R.; Wolberg, C.; Ma, D.; Immoos, C.; Casassa, F.; Kang, I. Effects of red-wine grape marc on the quality and sensory attributes of beef hamburger patty. Int. J. Food Sci. Tech. 2022, 57, 1814–1823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sáez, M.I.; Sabio, J.; Galafat, A.; Vizcaíno, A.J.; Alarcón-López, F.J.; Martínez Moya, T.F. Evaluation of white grape marc extract as an additive to extend the shelf-life of fish fillets. Foods 2025, 14, 1438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Huang, B.; He, J.; Ban, X.; Zeng, H.; Yao, X.; Wang, Y. Antioxidant activity of bovine and porcine meat treated with extracts from edible lotus (Nelumbo nucifera) rhizome knot and leaf. Meat Sci. 2011, 87, 46–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Garzon, A.; Bravo, I.; Barbero, A.J.; Albaladejo, J. Mechanistic and kinetic study on the reactions of coumaric acids with reactive oxygen species: A DFT approach. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 9705–9710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wu, H.; Bak, K.H.; Goran, G.V.; Tatiyaborworntham, N. Inhibitory mechanisms of polyphenols on heme protein-mediated lipid oxidation in muscle food: New insights and advances. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2024, 64, 4921–4939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kumar, N.; Saxena, D.C.; Singh, S. Techno-Functional, Thermal, Structural, and Morphological Properties of Indian Halim (Lepidium sativum) Seed Flour. J. Food Sci. 2025, 90, e70388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Matić, P.; Jakobek, L. Spectrophotometric Folin-Ciocalteu and aluminum chloride method validation for the determination of phenolic acid, flavan-3-ol, flavonol, and anthocyanin content. Croat. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 13, 176–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Palacios, C.E.; Nagai, A.; Torres, P.; Rodrigues, J.A.; Salatino, A. Contents of tannins of cultivars of sorghum cultivated in Brazil, as determined by four quantification methods. Food Chem. 2021, 337, 127970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Griffiths, D.W.; Bain, H.; Dale, M.F.B. Development of a rapid colorimetric method for the determination of chlorogenic acid in freeze-dried potato tubers. J. Sci. Food Agric. 1992, 58, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Takatsuka, M.; Goto, S.; Kobayashi, K.; Otsuka, Y.; Shimada, Y. Evaluation of pure antioxidative capacity of antioxidants: ESR spectroscopy of stable radicals by DPPH and ABTS assays with singular value decomposition. Food Biosci. 2022, 48, 101714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Berker, K.I.; Güçlü, K.; Demirata, B.; Apak, R. A Novel antioxidant assay of ferric reducing capacity measurement using ferrozine as the colour forming complexation reagent. Anal. Methods 2010, 2, 1770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Recycling 10 00164 g001
Figure 1. Effect of adding grape marc flour extracts on a meat system’s pH (bar data) and TBARS values (line data). Letters represent (uppercase for bar data and lowercase for line data, respectively) significant differences among the flours evaluated at p ˂ 0.05 (Tukey HSD).
Figure 1. Effect of adding grape marc flour extracts on a meat system’s pH (bar data) and TBARS values (line data). Letters represent (uppercase for bar data and lowercase for line data, respectively) significant differences among the flours evaluated at p ˂ 0.05 (Tukey HSD).
Recycling 10 00164 g001
Recycling 10 00164 g002
Figure 2. Effect of adding grape marc flour extracts on a meat system’s color values. Letters represent significant differences among the flours evaluated at p ˂ 0.05 (Tukey HSD).
Figure 2. Effect of adding grape marc flour extracts on a meat system’s color values. Letters represent significant differences among the flours evaluated at p ˂ 0.05 (Tukey HSD).
Recycling 10 00164 g002
Table 1. pH and Color values from grape marc flours.
Table 1. pH and Color values from grape marc flours.
AssayControl‘Cabernet Sauvignon’‘Grenache Noir’‘Petit Verdot’‘Syrah’
pH6.44 ± 0.01 e3.77 ± 0.01 c3.72 ± 0.01 b3.87 ± 0.01 d3.66 ± 0.01 a
L*80.16 ± 0.26 e41.96 ± 0.08 c51.75 ± 0.60 d38.57 ± 0.13 a39.34 ± 0.16 b
a*2.61 ± 0.21 a6.43 ± 0.08 d7.52 ± 0.23 e4.08 ± 0.08 b5.01 ± 0.11 c
b*20.39 ± 0.45 e4.37 ± 0.08 c9.11 ± 0.25 d1.90 ± 0.08 a2.47 ± 0.13 b
C*20.52 ± 0.48 e7.77 ± 0.08 c11.82 ± 0.33 d4.50 ± 0.08 a5.58 ± 0.14 b
h*82.73 ± 0.36 e34.17 ± 0.61 c50.47 ± 0.42 d24.99 ± 0.86 a26.21 ± 0.94 b
Visual color
The table shows the data as mean ± standard deviation (n = 6). L*, lightness; a*, red index; b*, yellow index; C*, Chroma; h*, hue. Letters represent significant differences among the flours evaluated at p ˂ 0.05 (Tukey HSD).
Table 2. Techno-functional properties of grape marc flours.
Table 2. Techno-functional properties of grape marc flours.
AssayControl‘Cabernet Sauvignon’‘Grenache Noir’‘Petit Verdot’‘Syrah’
WRC71.04 ± 0.42 c61.55 ± 1.01 a70.40 ± 1.64 bc61.03 ± 1.95 a67.78 ± 2.60 b
ORC49.63 ± 1.10 a48.36 ± 3.83 a59.78 ± 4.45 b50.08 ± 3.69 a59.48 ± 1.65 b
SWC90.83 ± 1.17 c25.33 ± 0.82 a34.09 ± 2.49 b91.23 ± 0.37 c35.00 ± 3.16 ab
EMCn.d.n.d.n.d.n.d.n.d.
GLCn.d.n.d.n.d.n.d.n.d.
The table shows the data as mean ± standard deviation (n = 6). WRC, water retention capacity; ORC, oil retention capacity; SWC, swelling capacity; EMC, emulsifying capacity; GLC, gelling capacity. n.d., this property was not detectable. Letters represent significant differences among the flours evaluated at p ˂ 0.05 (Tukey HDS).
Table 3. Polyphenol content values from grape marc flours.
Table 3. Polyphenol content values from grape marc flours.
AssayControl‘Cabernet Sauvignon’‘Grenache Noir’‘Petit Verdot’‘Syrah’
TPC11.48 ± 0.54 a30.34 ± 0.52 d28.48 ± 1.33 b29.18 ± 0.60 bc29.12 ± 0.68 bc
TTC93.09 ± 3.15 a326.41 ± 14.53 c124.38 ± 13.63 b326.42 ± 16.46 c383.33 ± 11.86 d
TFVC56.45 ± 2.51 c70.90 ± 0.78 e42.35 ± 0.70 a47.91 ± 2.58 b64.61 ± 1.24 d
TCGA28.30 ± 0.55 a186.30 ± 2.41 d101.84 ± 1.47 b178.01 ± 2.51 c216.00 ± 2.69 e
The table shows the data as mean ± standard deviation (n = 6). TPC, total phenolic content; TTC, total tannin content; TFVC, total flavonoid content; TCGA, total chlorogenic acid content. Letters represent significant differences among the flours evaluated at p ˂ 0.05 (Tukey HSD).
Table 4. Antiradical and reducing power values from grape marc flours.
Table 4. Antiradical and reducing power values from grape marc flours.
AssayControl‘Cabernet Sauvignon’‘Grenache Noir’‘Petit Verdot’‘Syrah’
DPPH31.10 ± 0.36 a86.71 ± 0.58 e71.02 ± 2.65 c61.18 ± 4.11 b85.87 ± 0.24 d
ABTS32.77 ± 1.39 a86.38 ± 0.42 b86.16 ± 0.66 b86.53 ± 0.84 b85.53 ± 0.95 b
FPBP0.083 ± 0.003 a0.424 ± 0.006 d0.165 ± 0.004 b0.227 ± 0.003 c0.664 ± 0.006 e
FRAP0.094 ± 0.003 a0.449 ± 0.011 d0.177 ± 0.008 b0.226 ± 0.011 c0.530 ± 0.057 e
The table shows the data as mean ± standard deviation (n = 6). DPPH, free radical inhibition; ABTS, cation radical inhibition; FPBP, Ferricyanide/Prussian Blue power; FRAP, ferric reducing antioxidant power. Letters represent significant differences among the flours evaluated at p ˂ 0.05 (Tukey HSD).
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

Vargas-Ortiz, M.A.; Sánchez-Escalante, A.; Torrescano-Urrutia, G.R.; Vargas-Sánchez, R.D.; Torres-Martínez, B.d.M.; Quintana-Obregón, E.A. Grape Marc Flour as a Horticulture By-Product for Application in the Meat Industry. Recycling 2025, 10, 164. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling10040164

AMA Style

Vargas-Ortiz MA, Sánchez-Escalante A, Torrescano-Urrutia GR, Vargas-Sánchez RD, Torres-Martínez BdM, Quintana-Obregón EA. Grape Marc Flour as a Horticulture By-Product for Application in the Meat Industry. Recycling. 2025; 10(4):164. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling10040164

Chicago/Turabian Style

Vargas-Ortiz, Manuel Alejandro, Armida Sánchez-Escalante, Gastón R. Torrescano-Urrutia, Rey David Vargas-Sánchez, Brisa del Mar Torres-Martínez, and Eber Addí Quintana-Obregón. 2025. "Grape Marc Flour as a Horticulture By-Product for Application in the Meat Industry" Recycling 10, no. 4: 164. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling10040164

APA Style

Vargas-Ortiz, M. A., Sánchez-Escalante, A., Torrescano-Urrutia, G. R., Vargas-Sánchez, R. D., Torres-Martínez, B. d. M., & Quintana-Obregón, E. A. (2025). Grape Marc Flour as a Horticulture By-Product for Application in the Meat Industry. Recycling, 10(4), 164. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling10040164

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop