Evaluation of textural and sensorial properties of burger patties produced with plant-based protein alternatives

Abstract

Recently, there has been a growing interest in alternative protein sources. This study aimed to determine the textural and sensory properties of vegan burger patties produced with plant-based (soy and pea) protein sources instead of meat protein. For this purpose, 14 different vegan burger patties produced with soy and pea-based protein alternatives were obtained from different brands in the İstanbul market. Burger patties were analysed in terms of moisture content, cooking properties, instrumental colour, texture profile, and sensory properties. According to the results, pea-based burger patties have a higher moisture content and cooking loss and a lower cooking yield than soy-based patties. The L* and a* values of the pea-based patties tended to be higher than those of the soy-based patties, while the b* values were generally higher. In addition, the texture profile analysis of soy and pea-based burger patties shows differences in texture attributes that may affect consumer preference and overall eating experience. In the sensory evaluation, a significant difference between soy and pea-based burger patties was observed only for juiciness and spicy taste characteristics. The research findings shed light on alternative proteins' textural and sensorial properties and their role in the food industry, particularly in developing vegan burger patties. These differences in sensory attributes and colour and texture analysis between soy and pea-based burger patties highlight the importance of ingredient selection and formulation in developing plant-based protein products.

Keywords

• Pea-based burger patties
• Sensorial properties
• Soy-based burger patties
• Textural properties

References

1. AMSA (2012). American Meat Science Association. Meat Color Measurement Guidelines. Champaign, Il.
2. Apostolidis, C., McLeay, F. (2019). To meat or not to meat? Comparing empowered meat consumers’ and anti-consumers’ preferences for sustainability labels. Food Quality and Preference, 77, 109-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.04.008
3. Asgar, M.A., Fazilah, A., Huda, N., Bhat, R., Karim, A.A. (2010). Nonmeat protein alternatives as meat extenders and meat analogs. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 9, 513-529. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2010.00124.x
4. Bakhsh, A., Lee, S.J., Lee, E.Y., Hwang, Y.H., Joo, S.T. (2021). Evaluation of rheological and sensory characteristics of plant-based meat analog with comparison to beef and pork. Food Science of Animal Resources, 41(6), 983-996. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2021.e50
5. Bhat, R., Karim, A.A. (2009). Exploring the nutritional potential of wild and underutilized legumes. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 8, 305–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2009.00084.x
6. Bourne, M. (1978). Texture profile analysis. Food Technology, 32, 62-67.
7. Boye, J., Zare, F., Pletch, A. (2010). Pulse proteins: processing, characterization, functional properties and applications in food and feed. Food Research International, 43, 414–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2009.09.003
8. Cengiz, E., Gokoglu, N. (2005). Changes in energy and cholesterol contents of frankfurter-type sausages with fat reduction and fat replacer addition. Food Chemistry, 91, 443–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2004.06.025

9. Chin, S.W., Baier, S.K., Stokes, J.R., Smyth, H.E. (2024). Evaluating the sensory properties of hybrid (meat and plant‐based) burger patties. Journal of Texture Studies, 55(1), 12819, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtxs.12819
10. De Vries, W., Kros, J., Reinds, G.J., Butterbach-Bahl, K. (2011). Quantifying impacts of nitrogen use in European agriculture on global warming potential. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3, 291–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2011.08.009
11. Dubois, D.K., Hoover, W.J. (1981). Soy protein products in cereal grain foods. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society, 58, 343-346. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02582375
12. Erisman, J.W., Galloway, J., Seitzinger, S., Bleeker, A., Butterbach-Bahl, K. (2011). Reactive nitrogen in the environment and its effect on climate change. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3, 281–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2011.08.012
13. Escribano, A.J., Peña, M.B., Díaz-Caro, C., Elghannam, A., Crespo-Cebada, E., Mesías, F.J. (2021). Stated preferences for plant-based and cultured meat: A choice experiment study of Spanish consumers. Sustainability, 13, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158235
14. FAOSTAT (2023). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FAOSTAT. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home. Accessed at 24 May 2024.
15. Fiorentini, M., Kinchla, A.J., Nolden, A.A. (2020). Role of sensory evaluation in consumer acceptance of plant-based meat analogs and meat extenders: A scoping review. Foods, 9(9), 1334, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9091334
16. Forster, R.A., Hassall, E., Hoffman, L.C., Baier, S.K., Stokes, J.R., Smyth, H.E. (2024). Comparing the sensory properties of commercially available animal and plant-based burgers. Journal of Texture Studies, 55, e12838. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtxs.12838
17. Golbitz, P., Jordan, J. (2006). Soy foods: market and products, In; Soy applications in food, Ed; Riaz, M.N., CRC Press, New York, pp; 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420037951.ch1
18. Hu, F.B., Otis, B.O., McCarthy, G. (2019). Can plant-based meat alternatives be part of a healthy and sustainable diet? Journal of American Medical Association, 322(16), 1547–1548. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.13187
19. Ilic, J., Berg, M., Oosterlinck, F. (2024). The textural and sensory properties of plant-based meat. In: Handbook of Plant-Based Meat Analogs, pp. 331-346. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-21846-0.00008-3
20. Joseph, P., Searing, A., Watson, C., McKeague, J. (2020). Alternative proteins: Market research on consumer trends and emerging landscape. Meat and Muscle Biology, 4(2), 16, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.22175/mmb.11225
21. Katare, B., Yim, H., Byrne, A., Wang, H.H., Wetzsteinet, M. (2022). Consumer willingness to pay for environmentally sustainable meat and a plant-based meat substitute. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 45, 145-163. https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13285
22. Keoleian, G.A., Heller, M.C. (2018). Beyond Meat's beyond burger life cycle assessment: a detailed comparison between a plant-based and an animal-based protein source. Centre for Sustainable Systems University of Michigan.
23. Klein, B.P., Perry, A.K., Adair, N. (1995). Incorporating soy proteins into baked products for use in clinical studies. The Journal of Nutrition, 125, 666-674. https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/125.3_Suppl.666S
24. Kyriakopoulou, K., Dekkers, B., van der Goot, A.J. (2019). Plant-based meat analogues, In: Sustainable Meat Production and Processing, Ed; Galanakis CM, Academic Press, London UK, pp; 103-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-814874-7.00006-7
25. Lam, A.C.Y., Can Karaca, A., Tyler, R.T., Nickerson, M.T. (2018). Pea protein isolates: Structure, extraction, and functionality. Food Reviews International, 34(2), 126-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/87559129.2016.1242135
26. Lu, Z.X., He, J.F., Zhang, Y.C., Bing, D.J. (2020). Composition, physicochemical properties of pea protein and its application in functional foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 60(15), 2593-2605. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2019.1651248
27. Mabrouki, S., Brugiapaglia, A., Patrucco, S.G., Tassone, S., Barbera, S. (2023). Texture profile analysis of homogenized meat and plant-based patties. International Journal of Food Properties, 26(2), 2757-2771. https://doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2023.2255758
28. Muguerza, E., Gimeno, O., Ansorena, D., Astiasaran, I. (2004). New formulations for healthier dry fermented sausages: a review. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 15, 452–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2003.12.010
29. Murphy, E.W., Criner, P.E., Grey, B.C. (1975). Comparison of methods for calculating retentions of nutrients in cooked foods. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 23, 1153–1157. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf60202a021
30. Onwezen, M.C., Bouwman, E.P., Reinders, M.J., Dagevos, H. (2021). A systematic review on consumer acceptance of alternative proteins: Pulses, algae, insects, plant-based meat alternatives, and cultured meat. Appetite, 159, 105058, 1-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.105058
31. Piazza, J., Ruby, M.B., Loughnan, S., Luong, M., Kulik, J., Watkins, H.M., Seigerman, M. (2015). Rationalizing meat consumption. The 4Ns. Appetite, 91, 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.011
32. Profeta, A., Baune, M.C., Smetana, S., Broucke, K., Van Royen, G., Weiss, J., Heinz, V., Terjung, N. (2021). Discrete choice analysis of consumer preferences for meathybrids—Findings from Germany and Belgium. Foods, 10, 71, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10010071
33. Profeta, A., Hamm, U. (2019). Do consumers care about local feedstuffs in local food? Results from a German consumer study. NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 88, 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2018.12.003
34. Reijnders, L., Soret, S. (2003). Quantification of the environmental impact of different dietary protein choices. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 78(3), 664–668. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/78.3.664S
35. Richi, E.B., Baumer, B., Conrad, B., Darioli, R., Schmid, A., Keller, U. (2015). Health risks associated with meat consumption: A review of epidemiological studies. International Journal for Vitamin and Nutrition Research, 85, 70-78. https://doi.org/10.1024/0300-9831/a000224
36. Samard, S., Maung, T.T., Gu, B.Y., Kim, M.H. (2021). Influences of extrusion parameters on physicochemical properties of textured vegetable proteins and its meatless burger patty. Food Science and Biotechnology, 30(3), 395-403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-021-00879-y
37. Simopoulos, A.P. (2002). The importance of the ratio of omega-6/omega-3 essential fatty acids. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, 56, 365–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0753-3322(02)00253-6
38. Singh, P., Kumar, R., Sabapathy, S.N., Bawa, A.S. (2008). Functional and edible uses of soy protein products. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 7, 14-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2007.00025.x
39. Slade, P. (2018). If you build it, will they eat it? Consumer preferences for plant-based and cultured meat burgers. Appetite, 125, 428-437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.02.030
40. SPSS 25.00 (2017). IBM SPSS Statistics. Inc, Chiago, IL.
41. Szejda, K., Urbanovich, T., Wilks, M. (2020). Accelerating consumer adoption of plant-based meat. Good Food Inst: Washington, DC, USA.
42. Szenderák, J., Fróna, D., Rákos, M. (2022). Consumer acceptance of plant-based meat substitutes: A narrative review. Foods, 11, 1274, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11091274
43. Thavamani, A., Sferra, T.J., Sankararaman, S. (2020). Meet the meat alternatives: The value of alternative protein sources. Current Nutrition Reports, 9, 346–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-020-00341-1
44. Tilman, D., Clark, M. (2014). Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature, 515, 518-522. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13959
45. Tulbek, M.C., Wang, Y.L., Hounjet, M. (2024). Pea-A Sustainable Vegetable Protein Crop, In: Sustainable Protein Sources, Eds; Nadathur, S., Wanasundara, J.P.D, Scanlin, L., Elsevier Publishing, pp; 143-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-91652-3.00027-7
46. WHO (2003). Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases. World Health Organisation technical report series 916. Geneva, Switzerland.
47. Xiong, Y.L. (2004). Muscle Protein, In: Proteins in Food Processing, Ed; Yada, R.Y., Woodhead Publishing Limited, England, pp; 1022. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781439823309.ch5 Yi, H.C., Cho, H., Hong, J.J., Ryu, R.K., Hwang, K.T., Regenstein, J.M. (2012). Physicochemical and organoleptic characteristics of seasoned beef patties with added glutinous rice flour. Meat Science, 92, 464–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.05.012