三种家禽血豆腐凝胶特性和滋味研究

王鑫; 王道营; 徐为民; 邹烨; 方维明; 田宏伟; 周富裕

doi:10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2020060236

三种家禽血豆腐凝胶特性和滋味研究

doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2020060236

王鑫^{1, 2,},
王道营²,
徐为民^{1, 2},
邹烨^2, ,,
方维明^1, ,,
田宏伟³,
周富裕³

1.
扬州大学食品科学与工程学院，江苏扬州 225127
2.
江苏省农业科学院农产品加工所，江苏南京 210014
3.
湖北周黑鸭企业发展有限公司，湖北武汉 430040

基金项目: 国家现代农业（肉鸡）产业技术体系建设专项（编号：CARS-41）；国家自然科学基金（31901612）；江苏省农业科技自主创新项目[CX（18）1006]；江苏省自然科学基金项目（BK20180300）；江苏省重点研发计划（现代农业）重点项目[BE2020301]

详细信息

作者简介:
王鑫（1994−），男，硕士研究生，研究方向：动物源副产物综合利用及高值化开发，E-mail：937411786@qq.com

通讯作者:
邹烨(1986−)，女，博士，副研究员，研究方向：动物源副产物综合利用及高值化开发，E-mail：zouye@jaas.ac.cn

方维明(1956−)，男，博士，教授，研究方向：农产品加工及贮藏，E-mail：wmfang@yzu.edu.cn

中图分类号: TS201.1
计量
- 文章访问数: 21
- HTML全文浏览量: 5
- PDF下载量: 8
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 网络出版日期: 2021-01-28

Study on the Gel Properties and Taste of Three Kinds of Poultry Blood Tofu

Xin WANG^{1, 2
,},
Daoying WANG²,
Weimin XU^{1, 2},
Ye ZOU^{2
, ,},
Weiming FANG^{1
, ,},
Hongwei TIAN³,
Fuyu ZHOU³

1.
College of Food Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225127, China
2.
Institute of Agri-products Processing, Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Nanjing 210014, China
3.
Hubei Zhou HeiYaEnterprise Development Company Limited, Wuhan 430040, China

摘要

摘要: 为探究不同家禽血液所制得的血豆腐之间的差异，以鸡血、鸭血和鹅血为样本，制成血豆腐后，对三种血豆腐的保水性、色差、氨基酸分析、滋味物质和微观结构等指标通过显著性差异分析并进行综合评价。结果表明三种血豆腐保水性强弱顺序为鸭血豆腐 > 鹅血豆腐 > 鸡血豆腐（P < 0.05）；质构分析发现鸡血豆腐比鹅血豆腐有更高的硬度、更好的弹性和咀嚼性（P < 0.05），鸭血豆腐硬度、咀嚼性最高，口感最好。鸭血豆腐色泽鲜亮诱人、质构指标最优、肌苷酸含量较高，鹅血豆腐其次，鸡血豆腐综合品质最差；低场核磁结果显示，鸭血豆腐中的结合水更加稳定，不易流失，鹅血豆腐次之，鸡血豆腐中的弱结合水的结合性较低，更容易流失；电子舌结果表明，鸭血豆腐鲜味值更显著，鹅血豆腐咸味更明显，鸡血豆腐在酸味和鲜味丰富性较差；微观结构结果表明，鸭血豆腐具有均一的网络结构能够更加有效地锁住水分；结果表明鸭血是制造血豆腐的最佳材料。以上研究可为家禽血资源的综合利用提供理论支持。
- 鸡血 /
- 鸭血 /
- 鹅血 /
- 血豆腐 /
- 凝胶特性 /
- 滋味
Abstract: Toexplore the difference of blood tofu made from different poultry blood, in this paper, different blood tofu was made from chicken, duck and goose blood. The indexes of water holding capacity(WHC), color difference, amino acid analysis, flavor substance and microstructure of three kinds of blood tofu were analyzed and evaluated by their significant differences. The results showed that the order of WHC of the three kinds of blood tofu was duck blood tofu>goose blood tofu>chicken blood tofu (P<0.05).Texture analysis found that chicken blood tofu had higher hardness, better elasticity and chewiness than goose blood tofu (P<0.05).Duck blood tofu had the highest hardness, chewiness, and taste.In addition, duck blood tofu presented bright and attractive, with the best texture index and high inosinic acid content. Goose blood tofu second, chicken blood tofu has the worst comprehensive quality. The low-field NMR results showed that the bound water in duck blood tofu was more stable and not easy to lose, followed by goose blood tofu, and weakly bound water in chicken blood tofu was less bound and easier to lose.The results of the electronic tongue showed that duck blood tofu had a more significant umami value.Goose blood tofu had a more salty taste, and chicken blood tofu was less rich in sourness and umami.The microstructure results showed that duck blood tofu had a uniform network structure that can lock moisture more effectively.Duck blood was the best raw material for making blood tofu. The above research can provide theoretical support for the comprehensive utilization of poultry blood resources.
- chicken blood /
- duck blood /
- goose blood /
- blood tofu /
- gel properties /
- taste

HTML全文

图 1 鸡血、鸭血和鹅血豆腐的T₂弛豫时间分布

Figure 1. T₂ relaxation time distribution of chicken, duck and goose blood tofu

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 三种家禽血豆腐微观结构图

注：A：鸡血豆腐；B：鸭血豆腐；C：鹅血豆腐；1：放大倍数500×；2：放大倍数3000×。

Figure 2. Microstructural drawings of three kinds of poultry blood tofu

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 鸡血、鸭血和鹅血豆腐的保水性比较

Table 1. The comparison WHC of chicken, duck and goose blood tofu

种类	离心损失（%）	蒸煮损失（%）	析水率（%）
鸡血豆腐	14.00 ± 0.33^a	8.22 ± 0.51^a	18.20 ± 0.51^b
鸭血豆腐	11.56 ± 0.19^c	4.44 ± 0.19^c	15.86 ± 0.38^c
鹅血豆腐	12.94 ± 0.67^b	6.78 ± 0.19^b	27.77 ± 0.83^a
注：同一列数据后肩标不同小写字母表示差异显著（P < 0.05）。表2～表5同。

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 鸡血、鸭血和鹅血豆腐的色泽比较

Table 2. Color comparison of chicken, duck and goose blood tofu

种类	L^*	a^*	b^*
鸡血豆腐	31.42 ± 0.12^b	11.66 ± 0.13^c	6.39 ± 0.11^c
鸭血豆腐	32.49 ± 0.06^a	12.48 ± 0.35^b	9.16 ± 0.05^a
鹅血豆腐	31.92 ± 0.42^b	13.70 ± 0.13^a	7.86 ± 0.21^b

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 鸡血、鸭血和鹅血豆腐的氨基酸含量

Table 4. Amino acid content of chicken, duck and goose blood tofu

氨基酸（g/100 g）	鸡血豆腐	鸭血豆腐	鹅血豆腐
天门冬氨酸(Asp)	7.02 ± 0.01^a	7.12 ± 0.07^a	6.67 ± 0.16^b
苏氨酸(Thr)	3.98 ± 0.01^a	3.55 ± 0.03^b	3.42 ± 0.08^c
丝氨酸(Ser)	2.94 ± 0.03^a	3.33 ± 0.02^b	2.98 ± 0.07^a
谷氨酸(Glu)	8.72 ± 0.01^a	8.42 ± 0.08^a	8.07 ± 0.20^b
甘氨酸(Gly)	3.15 ± 0.01^a	3.20 ± 0.03^a	2.99 ± 0.07^b
丙氨酸(Ala)	6.00 ± 0.03^a	6.83 ± 0.03^b	6.18 ± 0.13^a
胱氨酸(Cys)	0.99 ± 0.01^a	0.82 ± 0.01^b	0.91 ± 0.02^c
缬氨酸(Val)	5.08 ± 0.01^a	5.37 ± 0.02^b	5.12 ± 0.11^a
蛋氨酸(Met)	1.18 ± 0.02^a	1.23 ± 0.01^a	0.87 ± 0.01^b
异亮氨酸(Ile)	3.02 ± 0.02^a	2.87 ± 0.02^b	2.61 ± 0.04^c
亮氨酸(Leu)	8.55 ± 0.06^a	8.71 ± 0.02^a	8.19 ± 0.17^b
酪氨酸 (Tyr)	2.78 ± 0.02^a	2.64 ± 0.02^b	2.37 ± 0.06^c
苯丙氨酸(Phe)	4.73 ± 0.03^a	5.15 ± 0.12^b	4.92 ± 0.02^c
赖氨酸(Lys)	6.89 ± 0.04^a	7.20 ± 0.07^b	6.79 ± 0.16^a
氨(NH₃)	1.07 ± 0.05^a	1.07 ± 0.03^a	0.99 ± 0.05^a
组氨酸 (His)	4.27 ± 0.03^a	4.69 ± 0.01^b	4.38 ± 0.10^c
精氨酸 (Arg)	4.50 ± 0.03^a	4.37 ± 0.04^a	4.03 ± 0.10^b
脯氨酸 (Pro)	2.95 ± 0.01^a	2.69 ± 0.03^b	2.56 ± 0.06^c
合计	78.22 ± 0.26^a	78.87 ± 0.47^a	74.51 ± 1.68^b

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 鸡血、鸭血和鹅血豆腐的质构特性比较

Table 3. Comparison of the texture properties of chicken, duck and goose blood tofu

种类	硬度（g）	弹性（N）	咀嚼性（N）
鸡血豆腐	426.11 ± 16.30^b	3.63 ± 0.11^a	2.50 ± 0.08^a
鸭血豆腐	652.49 ± 9.17^a	3.08 ± 0.12^b	2.53 ± 0.13^a
鹅血豆腐	328.25 ± 5.09^c	2.11 ± 0.09^c	2.21 ± 0.09^b

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 鸡血、鸭血和鹅血豆腐中3种核苷酸含量

Table 5. The contents of three nucleotides in chicken, duck and goose blood tofu

核苷酸	鸡血豆腐（μg/g）	鸭血豆腐（μg/g）	鹅血豆腐（μg/g）
5’-GMP	12.59 ± 0.56^c	68.41 ± 2.33^b	87.87 ± 3.12^a
5^’-IMP	24.83 ± 1.05^c	88.34 ± 1.96^b	113.09 ± 0.96^a
5^’-AMP	19.71 ± 0.83^c	80.75 ± 1.15^a	74.72 ± 1.09^b

下载: 导出CSV

表 6 鸡血、鸭血和鹅血豆腐电子舌滋味响应强度

Table 6. Electronic tongue taste response intensityof chicken, duck and goose blood tofu

组别	酸味	苦味	涩味	回味B	回味A	鲜味	鲜味丰富性	咸味
基准	–13.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	–6.00
鸡血豆腐	–47.24 ± 0.02^a	9.54 ± 0.18^a	0.65 ± 0.03^a	–1.12 ± 0.04^ab	–0.36 ± 0.01^a	13.79 ± 0.25^a	3.93 ± 0.21^ab	–2.04 ± 0.12^a
鸭血豆腐	–48.93 ± 0.05^b	9.68 ± 0.05^b	0.43 ± 0.01^a	–1.11 ± 0.01^b	–0.43 ± 0.01^b	14.37 ± 0.64^b	4.18 ± 0.12^a	–1.63 ± 0.09^b
鹅血豆腐	–47.72 ± 0.02^a	10.30 ± 0.09^c	1.43 ± 0.01^b	–1.21 ± 0.03^a	–0.42 ± 0.03^b	13.47 ± 0.23^c	3.71 ± 0.13^b	–3.34 ± 0.03^c

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(34)

[1]	刘海洋. 鸡血蛋白粉在饲料工业的应用[J]. 新农业,2019(9):54−55.
[2]	周丰, 周志扬, 廖玉英, 等. 工业化肉鸭屠宰加工销售过程细菌污染防控措施[J]. 现代农业科技,2020,4:222−223. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-5739.2020.18.113
[3]	郭彬彬, 朱欢喜, 施振旦. 鹅的季节性繁殖及其调控机制与技术的研究进展[J]. 黑龙江动物繁殖,2020,28(1):42−46.
[4]	张炫, 唐道邦, 陈之遥, 等. 动物血中血红蛋白多肽开发利用的研究进展[J]. 中国食品添加剂,2015,9:141−146. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-2513.2015.09.017
[5]	王征南, 范润梅. 我国动物血深加工产业发展状况及对策[J]. 饲料与畜牧: 新饲料,2011,1:60−68.
[6]	伍梦婷, 郭娟娟, 徐云强, 等. 木薯改性淀粉对鹅血凝胶特性的影响[J]. 食品工业科技,2019,40(6):95−99, 113.
[7]	王斌, 陈希玲. 谷氨酰胺转氨酶处理对鸭血豆腐品质的影响[J]. 食品与机械,2019,35(2):167−172.
[8]	姚星星, 蔡华珍, 吕凤云, 等. 盒装鸡血豆腐品质稳定性研究[J]. 食品工业科技,2015,36(5):208−212.
[9]	Xue S, Xu X, Shan H, et al. Effects of high-intensity ultrasound, high-pressure processing, and high-pressure homogenization on the physicochemical and functional properties of myofibrillar proteins[J]. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies,2018,45:354−360.
[10]	Yang H, Zhang W, Li T, et al. Effectof protein structure on water and fat disb. ibution duringmeat gelling[J]. Food Chemistry,2016,204:239−245. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.01.053
[11]	孙月萍, 李鹏, 孙京新, 等. 魔芋胶和瓜尔豆胶对鸭血豆腐食用品质的影响[J]. 肉类研究,2018,32(6):35−39.
[12]	李鹏, 王宝维, 孙京新, 等. 超声波处理对鸭血豆腐品质的影响[J]. 肉类工业,2017,6:30−33. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-5467.2017.11.009
[13]	Hu T, Zhao S, Fan M, et al. Gel characteristics and microstructure of fish myofibrillar protein cassava starch composites[J]. food Chemistry,2017,218:221−230. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.09.068
[14]	Wang P, Xu X, Huang M, et al. Effect of pH on heat-induced gelation of duck blood plasma protein[J]. Food Hydrocolloids,2014,35:324−331. doi: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2013.06.015
[15]	Han M, Zhang Y, Fei Y, et al. Effect of microbial transglutaminase on NMR relaxometry and microstructure of pork myofibrillar protein gel[J]. European Food Research and Technology,2009,228(4):665−670. doi: 10.1007/s00217-008-0976-x
[16]	杨肖, 孔琰, 丁奇, 等. 加盐方式对鸡汤中呈味物质的影响分析[J]. 精细化工,2018,35(7):1196−1200.
[17]	Zaukuu J Z, Soos J, Bodor Z, et al. Authentication of tokaj wine (hungaricum) with the electronic tongue and near infrared spectroscopy[J]. Journal of Food Science,2019,84(12):3437−3444. doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.14956
[18]	Fan M, Damgaard H, Greve-Poulsen M, et al. Gel properties of potato protein and the isolated fractions of patatins and protease inhibitors – impact of drying method, protein concentration, pH and ionic strength[J]. Food Hydrocolloids,2019,96:246−258. doi: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2019.05.022
[19]	林娴萍, 杨文鸽. 辐照对肌肉蛋白凝胶性能的影响[J]. 辐射研究与辐射工艺学报,2014,32(1):1−7.
[20]	杨雪松, 孙杨赢, 潘道东, 等. 阿拉伯胶、瓜尔豆胶复配对鸭血凝胶特性的影响[J]. 食品科学,2018,39(5):26−32. doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201805005
[21]	王家勤, 姚月凤, 袁海波, 等. 基于色差系统的工夫红茶茶汤亮度的量化评价方法研究[J]. 茶叶科学,2020,40(2):259−268. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-369X.2020.02.012
[22]	Wang D Y, Zhang M H, Bian H, et al. Effects of blood cell membrane disruption by ultrasonic technology on the quality of duck blood tofu[J]. Agricultural Science & Technology,2014,15(4):616−619, 626.
[23]	李翔. 猪血和鸭血豆腐质构分析(TPA)几种测试条件的确定[J]. 西南师范大学学报: 自然科学版,2015,11:36−42.
[24]	Aaslyng M D, Bejerholm C, Ertbjerg P, et al. Cooking loss and juiciness of pork in relation to raw meat quality and cooking procedure[J]. Food Quality and Preference,2003,14(4):277−288. doi: 10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00086-1
[25]	Qiao S C, Tian Y W, Song P, et al. Analysis and detection of decayed blueberry by low ﬁeld nuclear magnetic resonance and imaging[J]. Postharvest Biology and Technology,2019,156:190−206.
[26]	Zhang Q Q, Wei L, Hao K L, et al. Low-ﬁeld nuclear magnetic resonance for online determination of water content during sausage fermentation[J]. Journal of Food Engineering,2017,212:291−297. doi: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2017.05.021
[27]	Huff-Lonergan E, Lonergan S M. Mechanism of water-holding capacity of meat: the role of postmortem biochemical and structural changes[J]. Meat Science,2005,71(1):194−204. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.04.022
[28]	Shao JH, Deng YM, Jia N, et al. Low-field NMR determination of water distribution in meat batters with NaCl and polyphosphate addition[J]. Food Chemistry,2016,200:308−314. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.01.013
[29]	袁乙平, 李靖, 马嫄, 等. 低场核磁结合理化指标分析低温贮藏真空包装牦牛肉的品质[J]. 食品工业科技,2019,40(6):31−36.
[30]	王潇, 韩刚, 张小军, 等. 不同水域中华绒螯蟹雄体营养成分及风味成分差异性研究[J]. 大连海洋大学学报,2019,34:688−696.
[31]	何小峰, 岳馨钰, 王益, 等. 瓦罐鸡汤主要滋味物质研究[J]. 食品科学,2010,31(22):306−310.
[32]	王天泽, 谭佳, 杜文斌, 等. 北京油鸡鸡汤滋味物质分析[J]. 食品科学,2019,40(15):245−255.
[33]	张秀洁, 郭全友, 王鲁民, 等. 养殖大黄鱼滋味和气味物质组成及评价[J]. 食品与发酵工业,2019,45(20):242−249.
[34]	Rhee MS, Wheeler TL, Shackelford SD, et al. Variation in palatability and biochemical traits within and among eleven beef muscles[J]. Journal of Animal Science,2004,82(2):534−550. doi: 10.2527/2004.822534x