a

ISSN 0101-2061 (Print)

Food Science and Technology ISSN 1678-457X (Online)

DDOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.03518

Determining the effects of encapsulated polyphosphates on quality parameters and

oxidative stability of cooked ground beef during storage
Damla BİLECEN1*, Birol KILIÇ2

Abstract
Effects of encapsulated (e) sodium tripolyphosphate (STP), sodium pyrophosphate (SPP) and various combinations of
encapsulated and un-encapsulated (u) forms of these polyphosphates on lipid oxidation in the cooked ground beef during
storage (0, 1, 7 d at 4 0C) were determined. pH, color, cooking loss (CL), thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), lipid
hydroperoxide (LPO) and soluble orthophosphate (OP) analysis were conducted. Study results indicated that STP increased
pH, whereas SPP decreased pH compared to control (p<0.05). SPP was determined as the most effective polyphosphate type
to inhibit lipid oxidation (p<0.05). In addition, the use of eSPP significantly reduced OP content compared to uSPP (p<0.05).
The lowest TBARS and LPO formation were determined in the groups produced with only eSPP or its combinations with uSPP
or uSTP or eSTP (p<0.05). Since the group containing a combination of 0.25% eSTP and 0.25% eSPP was found to have lower
CL than the other groups produced with only eSPP or its combinations with uSPP or uSTP, this group was suggested as the
most appropriate group which can be used in ready to eat meat product processing by the meat industry.
Keywords: meat; polyphosphate; encapsulation; lipid oxidation.
Practical Application: Effect of encapsulated polyphosphates on lipid oxidation in ground meat

1 Introduction
The shelf life of meat and meat products is significantly cooked meat products, reduction of cooking loss, increasing
reduced by lipid oxidation which also leads the generation of a water-holding capacity, improvement of the textural and sensory
large number of by-products that can have negative effects on characteristics of muscle foods (Sickler, 2000). Addition of
consumer health. In this regard, controlling lipid oxidation is alkaline polyphosphates during the preparation of meat products
a great deal of importance in the production of healthy meat provides an increased water-holding capacity and product yield
and meat products to meet demands of consumers who claim by raising the pH and enhancing the swelling properties of
quality and healthy food (Min & Ahn, 2005). muscle proteins. However; acid polyphosphates lowers the pH
and negatively affect the water-holding capacity by shrinking the
Lipid oxidation starts in the membrane phospholipid
meat proteins (Yapar et al., 2006; Anar, 2012; Shao et al., 2016).
fractions of muscle cell membranes and accelerates during
Polyphosphates also increase the consumer acceptability of the
process and storage of meat and meat products (De La Ossa,
product by promoting the color formation and stability via pH
2009). As a result of lipid oxidation, the nutritional value of the
buffering effect (Baublits et al., 2005). Polyphosphates have a
meat and meat products is reduced as far as development of
synergistic effect with salt to enhance the textural properties
undesirable taste, color, smell and toxic compounds (Ulu, 2004;
by improving extraction of myosin (Hsu & Yu, 1999; Cheng
Ceylan et al., 2007).
& Ockerman, 2003; Gadekar et al., 2014; O’Flynn et al., 2014).
Many strategies are implemented in meat industry to prevent Even though polyphosphates are not known as antimicrobial
lipid oxidation, inhibit undesirable changes, increase shelf ingredients, they have antimicrobial properties at a certain level
life and protect human health. The use of antioxidants is the by sequestering metal ions such as Ca, Mg, and Fe that play
most common strategy in meat and meat products technology role in microbial growth (Akhtar et al., 2008; Long et al., 2011;
(Nassu et al., 2003). Aksu & Alp, 2012).
Polyphosphates have strong antioxidant effects that can The chelating ability of polyphosphates increases with increase
retard the oxidation reactions by chelating metal ions (Sickler, in pH, temperature and the chain length of polyphosphate (Marsh,
2000; Bektas, 2009; Fonseca  et  al., 2011). At the same time, 1992). However, the antioxidant potential of polyphosphates is
the polyphosphates have many other beneficial functional partially reduced by endogenous phosphatase enzymes in the
properties such as pH buffering during the production of meat due to hydrolysis of polyphosphates into orthophosphates

Received 21 Feb, 2018

Accepted 18 July 2018
1
Department of Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Burdur, Turkey
2
Department of Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey
*Corresponding for author: [email protected]

Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 39(Suppl. 1): 341-347, June 2019 341/347 341
 Encapsulated polyphosphates

(Yamazaki  et  al., 2010). Hydrolysis of polyphosphates into production day and the analysis was carried out in duplicate for
orthophosphates causes problems in maintaining the oxidative each experimental replication. The experimental groups were
stability of cooked muscle foods during storage since a low subjected to the cooking process in centrifuge tubes containing
antioxidant potential of orthophosphates. Even though the 45 g ground meat. After the tubes were placed in water-bath
application of heat totally inactivates the enzymes, significant at 60 °C, the temperature of the water-bath was set at 85 °C.
amounts of polyphosphates are hydrolyzed prior to heat The standard number tube was placed in the water-bath during
processing and they are not utilized effectively as an antioxidant. each experiment and the final internal cooking temperature was
Therefore, it is critical to protecting the polyphosphates from monitored with the thermocouple placed in the geometric center
hydrolysis until phosphatase enzymes are totally inactivated by of extra tube with 45 g ground meat. Cooked samples were stored
heat processing (Kılıç et al., 2014). at 4 °C for 7 days and they were analyzed for dependent variables.
Encapsulation technology is defined as the coating of
solid, liquid or gaseous food ingredients, enzymes, cells, 2.2 Cooking loss analysis
microorganisms and other substances by a coating materials
The weight of raw ground beef used for each test group was
such as oil, protein or carbohydrate (Gouin, 2004; Madene et al.,
2006). The encapsulation technology has been used successfully registered. The weight of cooked ground beef was also determined
in the food industry to maintain stability a functional property after the samples were cooled to approximately 25 °C. Cooking
of encapsulated substance by protecting them against moisture, loss was calculated according to the following Equation 1.
heat and other harsh conditions (Kılıç et al., 2014).
 weight of raw ground beef – 
In this study, the use of encapsulated polyphosphates and Cooking loss:   / ( weight of raw ground beef ) * 100
 weight of cooked ground beef 
their combinations on oxidative stability and physicochemical
properties of cooked ground beef during storage was investigated.
2.3 pH analysis
2 Materials and methods 5 g sample was taken from each group and homogenized 1 min
2.1 Sample preparation in 50 ml of distilled water using homogenizer. pH measurements
were performed using glass electrode (FC 200, Hanna Instruments,
In this study, 24 hours post mortem beef (M. longissimus dorsi) Germany) which is calibrated with the buffer solutions pH 4.0-7.0.
and polyphosphates (STP: Brifisol 5-1327; SPP: 5-230) were
supplied from a local slaughterhouse and BK Giulini Corporation
(Simi Valley, CA, A.B.D) company respectively. 2.4 Color analysis

Vacuum packaged beef muscle was stored frozen at -18 °C The color measurements were performed with Minolta
until used. After thawing, the beef was ground (9.5 mm), mixed Colorimeter (Model CR-200, Illuminant D65, Minolta corp.,
and then again ground (3.2 mm). 1% sodium chloride and 10% Ramsey, NJ, U.S.A.) and CIE L* a* b* values were determined
water was added to ground meat (meat weight basis). Then the (Hullberg & Lundström, 2004). Colorimeter was calibrated using
ground beef was separated equal amounts for each experimental its own standard before the measurements.
group. Test ingredients (polyphosphates) were added according
to the experiment formulation of each group. 10 different 2.5 Soluble orthophosphates analysis
treatment groups including encapsulated and un-encapsulated
STP or SPP or their combinations were prepared (Table  1). The amount of soluble orthophosphate was determined with
The whole experiment was replicated (two times) on separate modified procedure of Molins et al. (1985). Cooked ground beef
(2 g) samples were taken, mixed with 18 ml of deionized water
and homogenized 13500 rpm for 10 s. Homogenized samples
were kept at 4 °C for 30 min. Samples were filtered through
Table 1. Coding for the ten polyphosphate treatments and control
group evaluated.
Whatman No. 1 filter paper and then 1 ml filtrate was centrifuged
with 1 ml 10% TCA at 4000 rpm for 10 min. After centrifugation,
Groups Added polyphosphate level (%)a 0.1 ml supernatant was diluted with 0.5 ml distilled water and on
C no polyphosphate the mixture was mixed with 1 ml of a color solution (6N sulfuric
uSTP 0.5 uSTP acid+distilled water+2,5% ammonium molybdate+10% ascorbic
uSPP 0.5 uSPP acid, volume 1:2:1:1, respectively). Absorbance was read at
eSTP 0.5 eSTP 690 nm within 1 h after the mixture was incubated at 37 °C for
eSPP 0.5 eSPP 10 min. The amount of soluble orthophosphate was determined
uSTP+eSTP 0.25 uSTP + 0.25 eSTP by a standard curve prepared using potassium phosphate.
uSPP+eSPP 0.25 uSPP + 0.25 eSPP
uSTP+uSPP 0.25 uSTP + 0.25 uSPP 2.6 TBARS analysis
uSTP+eSPP 0.25 uSTP + 0.25 eSPP
eSTP+uSPP 0.25 eSTP + 0.25 uSPP
TBARS analysis was carried out according to Kılıç & Richards
(2003). In this method, the trichloroacetic acid (TCA) extraction
eSTP+eSPP 0.25 eSTP + 0.25 eSPP
C: control group, STP: sodium tripolyphosphate, SPP: sodium pyrophosphate, e:
solution is added into EDTA and the propyl gallate to prevent the
encapsulated. u: un-encapsulated; aThe amount of polyphosphate added on a meat formation of TBARS during analysis. 1 g of beef sample was mixed
weight basis. with 6 ml extraction solution, homogenized for 15 s and filtered

342 342/347 Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 39(Suppl. 1): 341-347, June 2019
 Bilecen; Kılıç

through Whatman No.1 filter paper. The filtrate (1 ml) was vortexed samples produced with SPP. CL values of samples containing
with 1 ml of thiobarbituric acid (TBA, 98%). Then the mixture 0.5% eSPP was significantly lower than the samples containing
was heated at 100 °C for 40 min and centrifuged at 2000 rpm for a combination of uSPP and eSPP (p<0.05). Results indicated
5 min after cooling. The absorbance values were determined at that the use of uSTP or eSTP in combinations with uSPP or
532 nm against a blank including 1 ml TCA extraction solution eSPP resulted in higher CL values in samples compared to
and 1 ml TBA solution. In order to achieve accurate measurement, those produced with either uSTP or eSTP (p<0.05) and did
each filtrate was measured two times, and their average value was not contribute to reducing CL values obtained in samples
taken as the final reference value. TBARS values were calculated incorporated with uSPP or eSPP except for eSTP+eSPP group.
by multiplying absorbance values with coefficient obtained from As far as the combinations of STP and SPP are concerned, a
a standard curve. A calibration curve was constructed for each combination of eSTP and eSPP provided lower (p<0.05) CL
run using tetramethoxypropane as the standard. than the other combinations groups except eSTP+uSPP which
had similar CL values. Sickler et al. (2013a, b) reported that the
2.7 Lipid hydroperoxide analysis addition of encapsulated or un-encapsulated STP reduced CL
values in beef and turkey meat. Furthermore, Kılıç et al. (2014)
The method which was explained by Shantha & Decker (1994) also reported that addition of encapsulated or un-encapsulated
was used for the lipid hydroperoxide analysis. In this method, 1g of STP had the lowest CL values in ground chicken and ground
the sample was homogenized within 5 ml chloroform/methanol beef. Kılıç et al. (2015) also stated that the use of uSPP or eSPP
(1:1) in 30 s and vortexed for 30 s again after adding 3 ml of 0.5% in ground chicken and ground beef increased the CL values.
NaCl. The mixture separates into two phases after centrifuging The authors stated that increased CL as a result of the use of SPP
for 10 min. 2 ml were taken from the lower phase and mixed with was associated with the lowering of the meat pH.
cold chloroform/methanol (1.3 ml; 1: 1). 25 μl of ammonium
It is well demonstrated that water-holding capacity of the
thiocyanate (4.38 cm) and 25 μl of iron (II) chloride (18 mM)
meat depends on pH. Water-holding capacity is lowest when meat
was added to assay the lipid hydroperoxide (Shantha & Decker,
pH get close to isoelectric point of the meat proteins (Genccelep,
1994). Samples were incubated at room temperature for 20 min
2008). It has also been stated that alkaline polyphosphates
before determining the absorbance values at 500 nm and the
increase water-holding capacity and decrease CL by raising the
standard curve was prepared using a cumene hydroperoxide.
pH of meat. (Sickler et al., 2013a). It has also been reported that
water-holding capacity is enhanced by STP due to improving
2.8 Statistical analysis the solubility of the meat protein (Hsu & Yu, 1999).
The eleven different experimental groups were produced
and the whole study was replicated two times and the analysis 3.2 pH
was carried out with two replications. The differences identified
On the average pH values obtained during a storage period of
in the analysis results were calculated by using Statistical
samples were illustrated in Table 2. It was found that polyphosphate
Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 18. The data obtained type is effective on the change in pH (p<0.05). While STP increased
cooking loss measurement results were evaluated by one-way pH, SPP caused a decrease in pH compared to control (p<0.05).
analysis of a variance technique. The data obtained TBARS, It was previously stated that the alkaline polyphosphates tend
lipid hydroperoxide, soluble orthophosphate, pH and color to increase the pH and improve water-holding capacity (Cheng
measurement results were applied repeated measures analysis
of a variance technique. Tukey test was used to determine the
difference between the mean of the groups.
Table 2. Cooking loss and pH values of treatment groups.
3 Results and discussion Cooking loss pH
Groups
3.1 Cooking loss (%) Day 0 Day 1 Day 7
C 20.4ab 5.65Xb 5.68Xb 5.66Xb
The results presented (Table 2) the lowest CL values were uSTP 13.8e 5.77Xa 5.81Xa 5.80Xa
obtained in samples manufactured with STP and the highest uSPP 20.3abc 5.51Xcd 5.55Xbc 5.55Xcd
CL values were determined in samples incorporated with SPP eSTP 13.4e 5.76Xa 5.80Xa 5.78Xa
and control group (p<0.05). Lee et al. (1998) reported that STP eSPP 19.2bc 5.40Yd 5.48Xc 5.46XYd
significantly increased the cooking yield compared to SPP in uSTP+eSTP 13.3e 5.73Xab 5.79Xa 5.78Xa
restructured polyphosphates beef. Similarly, Cheng & Ockerman uSPP+eSPP 21.3a 5.42Xd 5.47Xc 5.48Xd
(2003) stated that added phosphate in conjunction with the uSTP+uSPP 19.3bc 5.62Xbc 5.68Xb 5.62Xbc
tumbling process created a more uniform product and the higher uSTP+eSPP 19.0bc 5.62Xbc 5.61Xbc 5.57Xcd
cooking yield by increasing the ionic strength. It was demonstrated eSTP+uSPP 18.4cd 5.64Xb 5.67Xb 5.62Xbc
that the addition of phosphate decreased the CL by increasing eSTP+eSPP 17.4d 5.60Xbc 5.59Xbc 5.58Xcd
water-holding capacity and pH (Villamonte et al., 2013). S.E. 0.34 0.02 0.01 0.01
The results showed that there was no significant difference a-e: Different letters within a column are significantly different (p<0.05). X,Y: Different
letters within a row are significantly different (p<0.05). C: control group, STP: sodium
in terms of CL values among the samples containing uSTP or tripolyphosphate, SPP: sodium pyrophosphate, e: encapsulated, u: un-encapsulated,
eSTP or their combination. However, this was not a case in the S.E.: standard error.

Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 39(Suppl. 1): 341-347, June 2019 343/347 343
 Encapsulated polyphosphates

& Ockerman, 2003; Cheng  et  al., 2007; Roldán  et  al., 2014; a* values of raw beef rolls. However, in cooked beef rolls, the
Chmiel et al., 2015). authors stated that there were no significant differences among
treatment groups in L*,a*,b* values.
Results indicated that the storage day did not appear to
influence pH values for all treatment groups. pH values were Results indicated that cooked ground beef formulated
almost constant during a storage period for each treatment group. with uSPP or eSPP had lower (p<0.05). a* values on day 0 and
Likewise it was not found any significant difference among the 1 compared to control which had similar a* values with the
samples containing uSPP or eSPP or their combination. As far samples incorporated with uSTP or eSTP. However, on 7-d display,
as the combinations of STP and SPP are concerned, pH did not there were no significant differences between control and the
show significant differences among these combination groups. samples with uSPP or eSPP or their combination while higher
This means that the encapsulation had no effect on final pH of a (p<0.05) a* values were determined in samples containing uSTP
combination groups. Kılıç et al. (2014) reported that the encapsulated or eSTP or their combination. This result may be explained by
polyphosphates did not create a significant impact on the final a superior buffering effect on myoglobin. In addition, there was
pH due to completely release from hydrogenated vegetable oil no significant difference regarding a* values among the groups
during the cooking process. Our results are in agreement with containing uSPP or eSPP or their combination. The same result
previous studies about the encapsulated polyphosphates effects was also obtained in the samples produced with uSTP or eSTP
on meat pH (Kılıç et al., 2015; Sickler et al., 2013a; Kılıç et al., or their combination. Regarding combinations of STP and SPP,
2016a, b). pH values of STP and SPP combinations were found the highest a* values were observed in the group formulated with
to be a lower than groups formulated with solely uSTP or eSTP uSTP and uSPP (p<0.05). Rest of the combinations (uSTP+eSPP,
and generally similar with control and only uSPP or eSPP eSTP+uSPP, eSTP+eSPP) had similar a* values which were not
incorporated groups. found to be different from those determined in the control group.
Furthermore, a decreasing trends in the a* values during storage
3.3 Color were observed in control, eSPP, uSTP+eSPP, eSTP+uSPP and
eSTP+eSPP groups (p<0.05). Nevertheless, the a* values in rest
The results of CIE L*, a*, b* values were presented in Table 3. of the treatment groups were quite stable during a 7-d of storage.
Results revealed that the use of uSTP resulted in lower (p<0.05)
L* values while the samples with uSPP or eSPP or eSTP had Results indicated that there were no significant b* values
similar L* values compared to control during each storage time. differences among treatment groups on day 0 except uSTP+eSTP
In addition, the use of uSTP or eSTP or their combination did not group which had lower b* values than those of uSPP, eSPP
create any difference in L* values among these three treatment and uSPP+eSPP groups. However, the treatment effects on
groups during storage. This was also a case as far as SPP was b* values were more evident at the end of the storage (p<0.05).
concerned. This results demonstrated that the encapsulation In general, the control and groups formulated with uSPP or
of polyphosphates had no significant effect on L* values of eSPP or their combinations tend to have increasing trends in
ground meat. Furthermore, no significant L* value differences b* values during storage and had higher b* values at the end of
were observed among the groups formulated with a various the storage compared with groups incorporated with uSTP or
combination of uSTP or eSTP with uSPP or eSPP. Results showed eSTP or their combination. Baublits et al. (2005) reported that
that L* values of all treatment groups were quite constant during the use of STP resolved the deterioration of meat color caused by
the whole storage period. Lee  et  al. (1998) reported that the 2% added NaCl. Kılıç et al. (2014) reported that the use of eSTP
use of STP and SPP decreased L* and b* values but increased reduced CIE L* and b* values and increased a* values. Likewise,

Table 3. CIE L*, a*, b* color values of treatment groups during storage period.
L* a* b*
Groups
Day 0 Day 1 Day 7 Day 0 Day 1 Day 7 Day 0 Day 1 Day 7
C 63.67Xa 63.27Xa 63.99Xa 13.87Xab 13.99Xabcd 10.90Ycd 3.10Zab 4.31Ya 5.70Xa
uSTP 59.56Xb 60.27Xb 58.97Xb 14.90Xab 15.88Xa 15.31Xa 3.13Xab 2.45Xc 2.40Xd
uSPP 61.43Xab 62.52Xab 61.34Xab 10.92Xc 10.85Xe 10.79Xcd 4.02Xa 4.44Xa 4.27Xbc
eSTP 60.43Xab 60.56Xab 60.01Xab 15.84Xa 15.86Xab 14.60Xab 2.83Xab 2.22Xc 2.69Xd
eSPP 62.82Xab 62.79Xab 63.40Xb 12.62Xbc 10.61Ye 10.02Yd 3.80Ya 4.18XYab 4.86Xab
uSTP+eSTP 59.92Xb 60.04Xb 58.91Xab 16.10Xa 15.64Xab 14.88Xab 2.38Xb 2.42Xc 2.64Xd
uSPP+eSPP 62.42Xab 61.70Xab 63.03Xab 11.26Xc 10.31Xe 10.04Xcd 3.81Ya 4.03Yab 5.06Xab
uSTP+uSPP 62.17Xab 61.55Xab 61.84Xab 13.93Xab 14.52Xabc 15.31Xa 3.63Xab 2.98XYbc 2.10Yd
uSTP+eSPP 62.61Xab 61.94Xab 63.34Xab 15.31Xa 12.25Ycde 10.78Zcd 3.21Yab 3.28Yabc 4.58Xab
eSTP+uSPP 62.20Xab 61.57Xab 61.89Xab 14.95Xab 13.39Ybcd 12.51Ybc 2.94Xab 3.18Xabc 3.22Xcd
eSTP+eSPP 62.82Xab 62.62Xab 63.32Xab 14.73Xab 11.53Yde 10.37Ycd 3.20Yab 3.86XYab 4.18Xbc
S.E 0.42 0.61 0.44 0.49 0.50 0.53 0.20 0.23 0.35
a-d: Different letters within a column are significantly different (p<0.05). X,Y,Z: Different letters within a row are significantly different (p<0.05). C: control group, STP: sodium
tripolyphosphate, SPP: sodium pyrophosphate, e: encapsulated, u: un-encapsulated, S.E.: standard error; CIE: Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage, L*: lightness, a*: green–red
color, b*: blue–yellow color.

344 344/347 Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 39(Suppl. 1): 341-347, June 2019
 Bilecen; Kılıç

the authors stated that the use of eSPP caused an increase in 3.5 TBARS
L* and b* values and a decrease in a* values.
The average of TBARS values was presented in Table  5.
The study results indicated that the use of uSTP or eSTP It was determined that added STP and SPP was restricted TBARS
or their combination caused a decrease in L* and b* values formation effectively compared to the control group (p<0.05).
and increase in a* values of cooked ground beef at the end of Lee et al. (1998) reported that transition metals such as iron
the storage period. Similar results were reported previously and copper and heme compounds play an important role in
(Baublits et al., 2005; Kılıç et al., 2014). the oxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids in the meat and
meat products. Researchers stated that polyphosphate inhibits
lipid oxidation by forming chelates with metal ions. The authors
3.4 Soluble orthophosphate content
indicated that the polyphosphate reduced TBARS values in
Soluble orthophosphate results were shown in Table  4. the cooked meat products by especially binding of non-heme
The soluble orthophosphate contents of all treatment groups did iron. Other previous studies also indicated that the addition of
not show any significant change during 7-d of storage period. polyphosphates into meat was an effective strategy to enhance
The lowest soluble orthophosphate values were determined in the oxidative stability of meat products by reducing the TBARS
the control group. Addition of polyphosphates into the meat formations (Cheng & Ockerman, 2003; Hsu & Sun, 2006).
was found to increase the amount of soluble orthophosphate in TBARS results revealed that the control group had higher
the samples (p <0.05). This observation was also supported by (p<0.05) TBARS values on processing day than the rest of all
Lee et al. (1998). Authors reported that the amount of soluble treatment groups which were not different from each other. In general,
orthophosphate was increased as increasing quantity of phosphate there was a gradual increase in TBARS values of treatment groups
added to meat. during storage period (p<0.05). At the end of the storage period,
the lowest (p<0.05) TBARS values were determined in the samples
A significant difference was not found among the samples
formulated with only eSPP or combinations including eSPP (uSPP
containing uSTP or eSTP or their combination on each day of the
+ eSPP, uSTP + eSPP, eSTP + eSPP). This result showed that lipid
storage period. However, the use of eSPP significantly reduced oxidation inhibition was effectively enhanced by the use of eSPP.
orthophosphate content compared to that of uSPP (p<0.05) as far This result showed that increasing the amount of eSPP added to a
as all the combinations were concerned, orthophosphate content meat system provide an increase in the amount of active phosphate
did not show significant variations among combination groups. (the amount of pure phosphate added to the meat), leading to
This result showed that SPP can be effectively protected from have more effective lipid oxidation inhibition. On the other hand,
phosphatase enzyme activities due to the encapsulation process, uSTP or eSTP or their combination was found to be less effective
but this was not evident for STP. Kılıç et al. (2014) encapsulation in controlling TBARS formation compared to SPP counterparts.
process was effective to reduce soluble orthophosphate content However, these groups still had lower (p<0.05) TBARS compared
in the ground meat. In addition, Kılıç et al. (2016a) predicted to control. In addition, no significant TBARS differences existed
that the use of STP in meat contributed to more orthophosphate among these groups. This means that the encapsulation of STP did
formation compared to that of SPP due to increased pH by STP. not provide any significant benefit to having a further reduction

Table 4. Soluble orthophosphate content (μg/g) of treatment groups Table 5. TBARS results (µmol/kg) of treatment groups during storage
during storage period. period.
Groups Day 0 Day 1 Day 7 Groups Day 0 Day 1 Day 7
C 2928.12Xc 2955.01Xc 3105.80Xc C 5.23Za 11.58Ya 28.46Xa
uSTP 6315.47Xa 6206.26Xa 6060.36Xa uSTP 2.55Yb 6.83Ybc 21.42Xb
uSPP 6224.19Xa 6244.56Xa 6105.19Xa uSPP 2.16Yb 5.19Yc 15.19Xc
eSTP 6410.83Xa 6308.14Xa 6290.21Xa eSTP 2.63Yb 6.78Ybc 21.81Xb
eSPP 4902.99Xb 4934.78Xb 4879.35Xb eSPP 2.81Xb 2.41Xd 2.89Xd
uSTP+eSTP 6430.40Xa 6493.97Xa 6899.87Xa uSTP+eSTP 2.55Yb 7.02Yb 19.88Xbc
uSPP+eSPP 5537.91Xab 5820.74Xab 5487.38Xab uSPP+eSPP 1.95Xb 1.82Xd 1.90Xd
uSTP+uSPP 6503.75Xa 6457.29Xa 6337.48Xa uSTP+uSPP 2.31Zb 7.34Yb 23.39Xab
uSTP+eSPP 6058.73Xa 6071.77Xa 5838.67Xa uSTP+eSPP 2.06Xb 1.10Xd 2.24Xd
eSTP+uSPP 6308.14Xa 6767.83Xa 6119.05Xa eSTP+uSPP 2.50Yb 5.13Yc 21.16Xb
eSTP+eSPP 6366.00Xa 6089.70Xa 5868.82Xa eSTP+eSPP 2.36Xb 2.13Xd 2.41Xd
S.E. 236.89 195.26 347.02 S.E. 0.33 0.96 2.64
a-c: Different letters within a column are significantly different (p<0.05). X: Different a-d: Different letters within a column are significantly different (p<0.05). X,Y,Z: Different
letters within a row are significantly different (p<0.05). C: control group, STP: sodium letters within a row are significantly different (p<0.05). C: control group, STP: sodium
tripolyphosphate, SPP: sodium pyrophosphate, e: encapsulated, u: un-encapsulated, tripolyphosphate, SPP: sodium pyrophosphate, e: encapsulated, u: un-encapsulated,
S.E.: standard error. S.E.: standard error.

Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 39(Suppl. 1): 341-347, June 2019 345/347 345
 Encapsulated polyphosphates

Table 6. Lipid hydroperoxide (µmol/kg) results of treatment groups storage and the encapsulation process strongly enhanced the
during storage period. effectiveness of SPP on lipid oxidation inhibition. In addition,
Groups Day 0 Day 1 Day 7
results indicated that the same level of lipid oxidation inhibition
can be accomplished with the use of eSPP or uSPP + eSPP or
C 23.71Yab 35.04Ya 315.93Xa
uSTP + eSPP or eSTP + eSPP. Based on the study results, the
uSTP 23.10Yab 23.39Ybc 196.66Xbc
use of eSTP + eSPP combination in ready to eat meat product
uSPP 22.87Yab 24.82Ybc 141.51Xde
formulation is suggested to the meat industry to have extended
eSTP 15.80Yb 31.11Yab 149.83Xde
shelf life. However, it is important to keep in mind that the
eSPP 25.84Xa 25.09Xbc 29.78Xf
eSTP+eSPP combination may partially reduce a beneficial effect
uSTP+eSTP 16.02Yb 26.65Ybc 118.00Xe
of STP on cooking loss.
uSPP+eSPP 26.10Xa 32.82Xab 28.02Xf
uSTP+uSPP 28.02Ya 37.71Ya 225.86Xb
uSTP+eSPP 21.55Xab 26.10Xbc 30.43Xf Acknowledgements
eSTP+uSPP 21.54Yab 26.35Ybc 167.42Xcd Appreciation is expressed to The Scientific and Technological
eSTP+eSPP 19.13Xab 22.39Xc 33.16Xf Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) and Suleyman Demirel
S.E. 4.18 4.68 29.29 University for providing financial support for this work. Also,
a-f: Different letters within a column are significantly different (p<0.05). X,Y: Different the authors would like to express their thanks to Özgür Koşkan
letters within a row are significantly different (p<0.05). C: control group, STP: sodium
tripolyphosphate, SPP: sodium pyrophosphate, e: encapsulated, u: un-encapsulated,
from Department of Animal Sciences, at Süleyman Demirel
S.E.: standard error. University, Turkey for his help on the statistical analysis.

References
Akhtar, S., Paredes-Sabja, D., & Sarker, M. R. (2008). Inhibitory effects
in TBARS formation. According to the obtained results from this
of polyphosphates on Clostridium perfringens growth, sporulation
study, it can be concluded that eSPP is more effectively limited and spore outgrowth. Food Microbiology, 25(6), 802-808. http://
lipid oxidation in cooked ground beef. Kılıç et al. (2014, 2015) dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fm.2008.04.006. PMid:18620972.
reported that TBARS values of ground meat were reduced with
Aksu, M. İ., & Alp, E. (2012). Effects of sodium tripolyphosphate and
the use of encapsulated polyphosphates. Kılıç et al. (2016b) also modified atmosphere packaging on the quality characteristics and
reported that the highest oxidative stability was accomplished in storage stability of ground beef. Food Technology and Biotechnology,
the ground meat containing eSTP and eSPP. However, researchers 50(1), 81-87.
did not test a combination of different polyphosphate types in Anar, S. (2012). Et ve et ürünleri teknolojisi. Dora Yayıncılık, 2, 97-98.
their study. [Bursa].
Baublits, R. T., Pohlman, F. W., Brown, A. H. Jr, & Johnson, Z. B.
3.6 Lipid hydroperoxides (2005). Effect of enhancement with varying phosphate types and
concentrations, at two different pump rates on beef biceps femoris
The results for lipid hydroperoxide were presented in instrumental color characteristics. Meat Science, 71(2), 264-276.
Table 6. Similar to TBARS results added STP and SPP caused http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.03.015. PMid:22064225.
to reduction in lipid hydroperoxide values compared to control Bektas, G. (2009). Sodyum tripolifosfatın ve tamburlama (tumbling)
group (p<0.05). Although the lower (p<0.05) LPO values were prosesinin döner kebabın oksidatif stabilitesine etkisi. Ankara: Ankara
obtained in the samples containing eSTP compared to those Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi.
produced with eSPP, there were no significant LPO differences Ceylan, Z. G., Ozturan, K., & Demirkaya, A. K. (2007). Erzurum
among all treatment groups on processing day. As expected, a piyasasında tüketime sunulan piliç gövde etlerindeki tiyobarbiturik
gradual increase (p<0.05) in LPO values were observed during a asit sayılarının belirlenmesi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Veteriner Bilimleri
7-d storage period in all treatment groups except eSPP, uSPP+eSPP, Dergisi, 2(1), 41-43.
uSTP+eSPP and eSTP+eSPP groups where LPO values were Cheng, J. H., & Ockerman, H. W. (2003). Effect of phosphate with
quite stable during the whole storage period. Results indicated tumbling on lipid oxidation of precooked roast beef. Meat Science,
that the lowest LPO values were obtained in the same treatment 65(4), 1353-1359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(03)00057-
groups (eSPP, uSPP+eSPP, uSTP+eSPP and eSTP+eSPP) at the 3. PMid:22063779.
end of the storage period (p<0.05). The findings showed that Cheng, J. H., Wang, S. T., & Ockerman, H. W. (2007). Lipid oxidation
the rest of treatments provided also a significant reduction in and color change of salted pork patties. Meat Science, 75(1), 71-77.
LPO values compared to control (p<0.05). Kılıç et al. (2015) http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.06.017. PMid:22063413.
reported that the values of lipid hydroperoxide in the ground Chmiel, M., Dasiewicz, K., & Slowinski, M. (2015). Effect of types
meat with encapsulated polyphosphates were significantly lower of phosphate preparations used on the quality of emulsion-type
than those without any polyphosphate addition. sausages. Nauka Technologia, 5(102), 121-131.
De La Ossa, T.I.P. (2009). Omega-3 enrichment and oxidative stability
of broiler chicken meat (Master of Science in Food Science and
4 Conclusion Technology). University of Alberta, Edmonton.
The findings of the present study demonstrated that SPP Fonseca, B., Kuri, V., Zumalacarregui, J. M., Fernandez-Diez, A., Salva,
was the most effective type of polyphosphate in the limiting B. K., Caro, I., Osorio, M. T., & Mateo, J. (2011). Effect of the use of
lipid oxidation development in the cooked ground beef during a commercial phosphate mixture on selected quality characteristics

346 346/347 Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 39(Suppl. 1): 341-347, June 2019
 Bilecen; Kılıç

of 2 spanish-style dry-ripened sausages. Journal of Food Science, and uncooked pork containing acid-labile polyphosphates and
76(5), 300-305. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2011.02199.x. pyrophosphates. Journal of Food Science, 50(5), 1482-1483. http://
PMid:22417444. dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1985.tb10504.x.
Gadekar, Y. P., Sharma, B. D., Shinde, A. K., & Mendiratta, S. K. (2014). Nassu, R. T., Goncalves, L. A. G., Pereira da Silva, M. A. A., &
Effect of different phosphates on quality of goat meat and restructured Beserra, F. J. (2003). Oxidative stability of fermented goat meat
goat meat product. Full-Lenght Research Article, 3(4), 370-376.
sausage with different levels of natural antioxidant. Meat Science,
Genccelep, H. (2008). Et proteinlerinin fonksiyonel özellikleri. Gıda 63(1), 43-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(02)00051-7.
Teknolojileri Elektronik Dergisi, (2), 9-18. PMid:22061984.
Gouin, S. (2004). Microencapsulation: Industrial appraisal of existing
O’Flynn, C. C., Cruz-Romero, M. C., Troy, D. J., Mullen, A. M., &
technologies and trends. Food Science and Technology (Campinas),
15(7-8), 330-347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2003.10.005. Kerry, J. P. (2014). The application of high-pressure treatment in the
reduction of phosphate levels in breakfast sausages. Meat Science,
Hsu, S. Y., & Sun, L. Y. (2006). Effects of salt, phosphates, potassium
96(1), 633-639. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.08.028.
sorbate and sodium erythorbate on qualities of emulsified meatball.
Journal of Food Engineering, 73(3), 246-252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. PMid:24056406.
jfoodeng.2005.01.027. Roldán, M., Antequera, T., Perez-Palacios, T., & Ruiz, J. (2014). Effect of
Hsu, S. Y., & Yu, S. H. (1999). Effects of phosphate, water, fat and salt on added phosphate and type of cooking method on physico-chemical
qualities of low-fat emulsified meatball. Journal of Food Engineering, and sensory features of cooked lamb loins. Meat Science, 97(1), 69-75.
39(2), 123-130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(98)00134-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.01.012. PMid:24530991.
Hullberg, A., & Lundström, K. (2004). The effects of RN genotype and Shantha, N. C., & Decker, E. A. (1994). Rapid, sensitive, iron-based
tumbling on processing yield in cured-smoked pork loins. Meat Science, spectrophotometric methods for determination of peroxide values
67(3), 409-419. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2003.11.015. of food lipids. Journal of AOAC International, 77(2), 421-424.
PMid:22061515. PMid:8199478.
Kılıç, B., & Richards, M. P. (2003). Lipid oxidation in poultry doner
Shao, J. H., Deng, Y. M., Jia, N., Li, R. R., Cao, J. X., Liu, D. Y., & Li, J.
kebab: Pro-oxidative and antioxidative factors. Journal of Food Science,
68(2), 686-689. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2003.tb05732.x. R. (2016). Low-field NMR determination of water distribution in
meat batters with NaCl and polyphosphate addition. Food Chemistry,
Kılıç, B., Simsek, A., Claus, J. R., & Atilgan, E. (2014). Encapsulated
200, 308-314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.01.013.
phosphates reduce lipid oxidation in both ground chicken and ground
beef during raw and cooked meat storage with some ınfluence on PMid:26830593.
color, pH, and cooking loss. Meat Science, 97(1), 93-103. http:// Sickler, M. L. (2000). Inhibition of lipid oxidation with phosphates in
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.01.014. PMid:24553491. muscle foods (Master of Science). State University, Virginia Polytechnic
Kılıç, B., Simsek, A., Claus, J. R., & Atilgan, E. (2016a). Melting release Institute, Blacksburg.
point of encapsulated phosphates and heating rate effects on control of Sickler, M. L., Claus, J. R., Marriott, N. G., Eigel, W. N., & Wang, H.
lipid oxidation in cooked ground meat. Food Science and Technology (2013a). Antioxidative effects of encapsulated sodium tripolyphosphate
(Campinas), 66, 398-405.
and encapsulated sodium acid pyrophosphate in ground beef
Kılıç, B., Simsek, A., Claus, J. R., Atilgan, E., & Bilecen, D. (2016b). patties cooked immediately after antioxidant incorporation and
Impact of added encapsulated phosphate level on lipid oxidation stored. Meat Science, 94(3), 285-288. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
inhibition during the storage of cooked ground meat. Journal of Food
meatsci.2013.03.011. PMid:23567126.
Science, 81(2), 359-368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.13205.
PMid:26753985. Sickler, M. L., Claus, J. R., Marriott, N. G., Eigel, W. N., & Wang, H.
Kılıç, B., Simsek, A., Claus, J. R., Atilgan, E., & Aktas, N. (2015). Effects (2013b). Reduction in lipid oxidation by incorporation of encapsulated
of different end-point cooking temperatures on the efficiency of sodium tripolyphosphate in ground turkey. Meat Science, 95(2), 376-
encapsulated phosphates on lipid oxidation inhibition in ground 380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.04.024. PMid:23747632.
meat. Journal of Food Science, 80(10), 2161-2169. PMid:26317488. Ulu, H. (2004). Evaluation of three 2-thiobarbituric acid methods
Lee, B. J., Hendricks, D. G., & Cornforth, D. P. (1998). Effect of sodium for the measurement of lipid oxidation in various meats and meat
phytate, sodium pyrophosphate and sodium tripolyphosphate on products. Meat Science, 67(4), 683-687. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
physico-chemical characteristics of restructured beef. Meat Science, meatsci.2003.12.014. PMid:22061818.
50(3), 273-283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(98)00002-3.
PMid:22061146. Villamonte, G., Simonin, H., Duranton, F., Chéret, R., & Lamballerie,
M. (2013). Functionally of pork meat proteins: Impact of sodium
Long, N. H. B. S., Gal, R., & Bunka, F. (2011). Use of phosphates in meat
chloride and phosphates under high-pressure processing. Innovative
products. African Journal of Biotechnology, 10(86), 19874-19882.
Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 18, 15-23. http://dx.doi.
Madene, A., Jacquot, M., Scher, J., & Desobry, S. (2006). Flavour
org/10.1016/j.ifset.2012.12.001.
encapsulation and controlled release: a review. International Journal
of Science and Technology, 41, 1-21. Yamazaki, M., Shen, Q. W., & Swartz, D. R. (2010). Tripolyphosphate
Marsh, S. L. K. (1992). Effects of phosphates on Pseudomonas fragi hydrolysis by bovine fast and slow myosin subfragment 1
growth, protease production and activity. (Retrospective Theses and isoforms. Meat Science, 85(3), 446-452. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
Dissertations). Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. meatsci.2010.02.014. PMid:20416813.
Min, B., & Ahn, D. U. (2005). Mechanism of lipid oxidation in meat and Yapar, A., Atay, S., Kayacier, A., & Yetim, H. (2006). Effects of different
meat products: a review. Food Science and Biotechnology, 14, 152-163. levels of salt and phosphate on some emulsion attributes of the
Molins, R. A., Kraft, A. A., & Olson, T. G. (1985). Adaptation of a common carp. Food Hydrocolloids, 20(6), 825-830. http://dx.doi.
method for the determination of soluble ortho-phosphates in cooked org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2005.08.005.

Food Sci. Technol, Campinas, 39(Suppl. 1): 341-347, June 2019 347/347 347