Animal and Vegetable Protein Burgers: Bromatological Analysis, Mineral Composition, and Bioaccessibility Evaluation

Higuera, Julymar M.; Santos, Herick Macedo; Oliveira, Aline Fernandes de; Nogueira, Ana Rita

doi:10.1021/acsfoodscitech.1c00215

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Meat-alternative products are aimed primarily at vegetarians, vegans, pescetarians, or flexitarians, as well as those seeking to diversify their diets [ 19 ]. Meat substitutes are largely based on soya, mycoprotein, vegetables, wheat derivatives, and pulses [ 20 , 21 ]. These meat analogues often mimic products traditionally prepared from animals, as they can be manufactured into burger, meatball, and sausage formats.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Content and Availability of Minerals in Plant-Based Burgers Compared with a Meat Burger

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing numbers of individuals follow plant-based diets. This has sparked interest in the nutritional evaluation of the meat substitute sector. Nutritional understanding of these products is vital as plant-based eating becomes more common. For example, animal products are rich sources of iron and zinc, and plant-based foods could be inadequate in these minerals. The main aim was to analyse the mineral composition and absorption from a range of plant-based meat-free burgers and compare them to a typical beef burger. Total and bioaccessible mineral contents of plant-based burgers and a beef burger were determined using microwave digestion and in vitro simulated gastrointestinal digestion, respectively. Mineral bioavailability was analysed by in vitro simulated gastrointestinal digestion of foods, followed by exposure of Caco-2 cells to the sample digests and assessment of mineral uptake. Mineral quantification for all samples was achieved using inductively coupled ICP-optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES). The content of minerals varied significantly amongst the burgers. Significantly greater quantities of Fe and Zn were found in the beef burger compared to most meat substitutes. Bioaccessible Fe was significantly higher in the beef compared to most of the plant-based meat alternatives; however, bioavailable Fe of most plant-based burgers was comparable to beef (p > 0.05). Similarly, bioaccessible Zn was significantly (p < 0.001) higher from the beef burger. Moreover, beef was superior regarding bioavailable Zn (p ≤ 0.05–0.0001), with only the mycoprotein burger displaying comparable Zn bioavailability (p > 0.05). Beef is an excellent source of bioaccessible Fe and Zn compared to most plant-based substitutes; however, these plant-based substitutes were superior sources of Ca, Cu, Mg and Mn. The quantity of bioaccessible and absorbable Fe varies dramatically among the meat alternatives. Plant-based burgers have the potential to provide adequate quantities of iron and zinc to those consuming such burgers as part of a varied diet. Thus, guiding consumer choices will depend on the variety of the vegetable constituents and their iron nutritional quality in different burgers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Content and Availability of Minerals in Plant-Based Burgers Compared with a Meat Burger

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Animal source protein is the most consumed and valued for its nutritional and protein quality, determined by its ability to meet the amino acid (AA) requirement [ 23 ], the level of digestion, absorption and its use for metabolic functions in the individual [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. However, the use of mixtures of complementary protein sources in the production of modern analog products such as hamburgers could offer approximately the same nutrient composition as traditional meat products [ 27 , 28 , 29 ]. To know the protein quality there are several methods such as net protein utilization and the protein efficiency index, the protein digestibility corrected amino acid score (PDCAAS) method, is a practical way to ensure the adequacy of protein intake [ 28 ] regardless of whether the protein of each food is high or low.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protein Quality and Sensory Perception of Hamburgers Based on Quinoa, Lupin and Corn

Chilón-Llico

Siguas-Cruzado

Apaza-Humerez

et al. 2022

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The need for partial or total substitution of animal protein sources by vegetable sources of high protein quality with good sensory acceptance is a promising alternative. The objective was to develop a hamburger with vegetable protein using a mixture design based on quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.), Peruvian Andean corn (Zea mays) and Andean lupine (Lupinus mutabilis Sweet). The design of these mixtures allowed obtaining eleven formulations, three of which were selected for complying with the amino acid intake for adults recommended by FAO. Then, a completely randomized design was applied to the selected samples plus a commercial product. Proximal composition was measured on a dry basis (protein, fat, carbohydrates, and ash), calculation of the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS) and a sensory analysis was carried out using the Check-All-That-Apply (CATA) method with acceptability in 132 regular consumers of vegetarian products. Protein, fat, carbohydrate, and ash contents ranged from 18.5–24.5, 4.1–7.5, 65.4–72.1 and 2.8–5.9%, respectively. The use of Andean crops favored the protein content and the contribution of sulfur amino acids (SAA) and tryptophan from quinoa and lysine and threonine from lupin. The samples with Andean crops were described as easy to cut, soft, good, healthy, legume flavor, tasty and light brown, however the commercial sample was characterized as difficult to cut, hard, dark brown, uneven color, dry and grainy. The sample with 50% quinoa and 50% lupin was the most acceptable and reached a digestibility of 0.92. It complied with the lysine, threonine, and tryptophan intake, with the exception of SAA, according to the essential amino acid pattern proposed by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

show abstract

“…In a recent study in Brazil by Higuera et al (2021), the mineralization of soybean and pea PBBs samples was also performed in AM, using subdistilled concentrate HNO 3 and 30% H 2 O 2 . The essential elements were determined using an inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP MS), where the contents of Ca (soybean: 186.5 mg 100 g −1 , pea: 141.3 mg 100 g −1 ), Mg (soybean: 126.0 mg 100 g −1 , pea: 111.8 mg 100 g −1 ), Fe (soybean: 4.7 mg 100 g −1 , pea: 4.0 mg 100 g −1 ) and Mn (soybean: 1.2 mg 100 g −1 , pea:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Essential Elements in Plant-Based Burgers – Validation of a Simple Method for Analysis and Nutritional Evaluation

Luz

Orlando

Pallone

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to validate an alternative analytical method of samples preparation to evaluate the content of essential elements (Ca, Mg, Fe, Zn, Cu, Mn, Na, and K) in plant-based burgers (PBBs) marketed in Brazil, formulated with mushroom, pea, chickpea, and soybean. Samples are prepared by wet mineralization in the open system in digester block (DB) and the closed vessel by analytical microwave (AM), employing 50% nitric acid (HNO3) solution, considered eco-friendly and 30% hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and subsequent determination of the elements low-cost technique flame atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS). AM proved to be a more adequate mineralization procedure due to the various challenges observed by DB. In the validation of the analytical method, all parameters evaluated met the established prerequisites and followed the official guides. The essential elements contents determined in all types of PBBs varied from 44.2 to 139.2 mg 100 g-1 for Ca, from 29.8 to 95.8 mg 100g-1 for Mg, from 4.0 to 9.3 mg 100g-1 for Fe, 1.4 to 2.8 mg 100g-1 for Zn,

show abstract

Animal and Vegetable Protein Burgers: Bromatological Analysis, Mineral Composition, and Bioaccessibility Evaluation

Cited by 5 publications

References 41 publications

Content and Availability of Minerals in Plant-Based Burgers Compared with a Meat Burger

Content and Availability of Minerals in Plant-Based Burgers Compared with a Meat Burger

Protein Quality and Sensory Perception of Hamburgers Based on Quinoa, Lupin and Corn

Essential Elements in Plant-Based Burgers – Validation of a Simple Method for Analysis and Nutritional Evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About