Selected minerals concentration and microbiological safety in non-carcass bovine components of “PANELADA” dish

ROQUE, Ana Kledna Leite; MENDES, Mikael Kélvin de Albuquerque; CARAPELLI, Rodolfo; LOPES JÚNIOR, Cícero Alves; VIEIRA, Edivan Carvalho

doi:10.1590/fst.33619

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Food Science and Technology

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Original Article • Food Sci. Technol (Campinas) 40 (suppl 2) • Dec 2020 • https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.33619 copy

Selected minerals concentration and microbiological safety in non-carcass bovine components of “PANELADA” dish

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

“Panelada” is a typical dish from Brazil, made up of some bovine non-carcass components (intestine, rumen and ox feet), whose nutritional value and microbiological quality are not reported. The total contents of selected minerals were determined using flame atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS) and electrothermal (ETAAS) for samples of raw, seasoned and Panelada dish. The content of metal nutrients found in raw sample was higher than for various types of conventional cuts and meats. The added seasoning increased of the content of metal nutrients comparing to from raw sample, except for Zn. Instead, the cooking process interferes negatively in the minerals content, in contrast to Mg concentration. The Panelada dish presented high nutritional value being found 3.3, 79, 334 and 75 mg kg^-1 for Cu, Fe, Mg and Zn, respectively. The microbiological analyses revealed absence of Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp. and Listeria monocytogenes from Panelada dish.

Keywords:
Panelada dish; bovine non-carcass components; mineral nutrient; microbiological quality; food safety

Element	Concentration (mg kg^-1)
Element	Certified	Found
Copper	160 (± 8)	169 (± 3)
Iron	184 (± 15)	183 (± 1)
Magnesium	601 (± 28)	608 (± 8)
Zinc	127 (± 16)	135 (± 1)

Element	Total concentration (mg kg^-1)
Element	Raw	SP^a	SCP^a a Seasoned Panelada dish; Seasoned and cooked Panelada dish;
Copper	3.60 (±0.21) ^b b Significant differences by the Tukey test (p < 0.05) are signaled with different symbols (▪, ⬤, ★). ^,▪	3.95 (±0.40) ▪	2.40 (±0.25) ^⬤
Iron	69.3 (±0.8) ▪	112.5 (±5.9) ^⬤	55.6 (±4.9) ^★
Magnesium	319.1 (±4.7) ▪	354.9 (±2.9) ^⬤	328.0 (±3.4) ▪
Zinc	81.1 (±6.1) ▪	77.2 (±0.5) ▪	65.7 (±4.4) ^⬤

Cut/Animal	Total concentration (mg kg^-1)			Author
Cut/Animal	Iron	Magnesium	Zinc	Author
Panelada	68.5-70.1	314.4-323.8	75.0-87.2	Our study
Chest/bovine	12.5-15.9	153.0-207.0	44.6-49.8	(Gerber et al., 2009Gerber, N., Scheeder, M. R. L., & Wenk, C. (2009). The influence of cooking and fat trimming on the actual nutrient intake from meat. Meat Science, 81(1), 148-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.07.012. PMid:22063975. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008... )
Loin/bovine	18.5-22.7	940-1120	137.2-157.2	(Camargo et al., 2008Camargo, A. M., Rodrigues, V. C., Ramos, K. C. B. T., Oliveira, É. C. D., & Medeiros, L. F. D. (2008). Composição mineral da carne de bovinos de diferentes grupos genéticos com idades distintas. Revista Brasileira de Saúde e Produção Animal, 9(3), 578-584.)
Beef/bovine	17.9-18.1	164.8-205.2	34.4- 35.6	(Mohammed et al., 2020Mohammed, H. H. H., Jin, G., Ma, M., Khalifa, I., Shukat, R., Elkhedir, A. E., Zeng, Q., & Noman, A. E. (2020). Comparative characterization of proximate nutritional compositions, microbial quality and safety of camel meat in relation to mutton, beef, and chicken. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft + Technologie, 118, 108714. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2019.108714. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2019.108... )
Rib/bovine	14.1-18.1	161.0-199	39.3-53.7	(Gerber et al., 2009Gerber, N., Scheeder, M. R. L., & Wenk, C. (2009). The influence of cooking and fat trimming on the actual nutrient intake from meat. Meat Science, 81(1), 148-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.07.012. PMid:22063975. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008... )
Filet/bovine	22.7-24.7	^a a -Not evaluated in the study. -	38.1-40.1	(Lombardi-Boccia et al., 2005Lombardi-Boccia, G., Lanzi, S., & Aguzzi, A. (2005). Aspects of meat quality: trace elements and B vitamins in raw and cooked meats. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 18(1), 39-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2003.10.007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2003.10... )
Thick flank/bovine	16.0-20.0	-	40.9-44.9	(Lombardi-Boccia et al., 2005Lombardi-Boccia, G., Lanzi, S., & Aguzzi, A. (2005). Aspects of meat quality: trace elements and B vitamins in raw and cooked meats. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 18(1), 39-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2003.10.007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2003.10... )
Shank/pork	20-22	930-936	44-46	(Menezes et al., 2018Menezes, E. A., Oliveira, A. F., França, C. J., Souza, G. B., & Nogueira, A. R. A. (2018). Bioaccessibility of Ca, Cu, Fe, Mg, Zn, and crude protein in beef, pork and chicken after thermal processing. Food Chemistry, 240, 75-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.07.090. PMid:28946338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.201... )
Loin/Pork	1.2-7.2	38.9-42.1	0.96-1.1	(Goran et al., 2016Goran, G. V., Tudoreanu, L., Rotaru, E., & Crivineanu, V. (2016). Comparative study of mineral composition of beef steak and pork chops depending on the thermal preparation method. Meat Science, 118, 117-121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.03.031. PMid:27088876. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016... )
Belly/pork	7.3-9.3	198.8-201.2	25.1-32.7	(Gerber et al., 2009Gerber, N., Scheeder, M. R. L., & Wenk, C. (2009). The influence of cooking and fat trimming on the actual nutrient intake from meat. Meat Science, 81(1), 148-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.07.012. PMid:22063975. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008... )
Chest/chicken	-	173.6-246.4	5.85-8.43	(Djinovic-Stojanovic et al., 2017Djinovic-Stojanovic, J. M., Nikolic, D. M., Vranic, D. V., Babic, J. A., Milijasevic, M. P., Pezo, L. L., & Jankovic, S. D. (2017). Zinc and magnesium in different types of meat and meat products from the Serbian market. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 59, 50-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2017.02.009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2017.02... )
Muscle/emu	26.1-37.9	151.0-153.0	12.2-13.4	(Ramos et al., 2009Ramos, A., Cabrera, M. C., Del Puerto, M., & Saadoun, A. (2009). Minerals, haem and non-haem iron contents of rhea meat. Meat Science, 81(1), 116-119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.07.005. PMid:22063970. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008... )
Rib/veal	3.8-7.6	177.0-223.0	27.0-34.2	(Gerber et al., 2009Gerber, N., Scheeder, M. R. L., & Wenk, C. (2009). The influence of cooking and fat trimming on the actual nutrient intake from meat. Meat Science, 81(1), 148-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.07.012. PMid:22063975. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008... )
Breast/veal	3.7-6.5	187.0-193.0	23.0-26.2	(Gerber et al., 2009Gerber, N., Scheeder, M. R. L., & Wenk, C. (2009). The influence of cooking and fat trimming on the actual nutrient intake from meat. Meat Science, 81(1), 148-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.07.012. PMid:22063975. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008... )
Filet/veal	11.0-13.0	-	47.1-53.1	(Lombardi-Boccia et al., 2005Lombardi-Boccia, G., Lanzi, S., & Aguzzi, A. (2005). Aspects of meat quality: trace elements and B vitamins in raw and cooked meats. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 18(1), 39-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2003.10.007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2003.10... )
Meat/fish	-	-	2.45-9.8	(Bilandžić et al., 2014Bilandžić, N., Sedak, M., Ðokić, M., Varenina, I., Kolanović, B. S., Božić, Ð., Brstilo, M., & Šimić, B. (2014). Determination of zinc concentrations in foods of animal origin, fish and shellfish from Croatia and assessment of their contribution to dietary intake. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 35(2), 61-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2014.04.006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2014.04... )
Seabass/ fish	2.3-2.6	-	3.7-3.9	(Marengo et al., 2018Marengo, M., Durieux, E. D. H., Ternengo, S., Lejeune, P., Degrange, E., Pasqualini, V., & Gobert, S. (2018). Comparison of elemental composition in two wild and cultured marine fish and potential risks to human health. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 158, 204-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.04.034. PMid:29704791. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.... )

Microorganisms	Sample		Recommended limit^b b Current Brazilian Legislation for microbiological parameters in food (Brasil, 2001); (CFU g^-1)
Microorganisms	Raw	SCP^a a Seasoned and cooked Panelada;
Coagulase-positive Staphylococcus aureus	< 2.0 x 10¹	< 2.0 x 10¹	3.0 x 10³
Total coliforms	> 6.3 x 10⁴	__^c c Values below detection limit.	< 1.0 x 10³
Thermotolerant Coliforms	__	> 6.3 x 10⁴	< 1.0 x 10³
Sulphite-reducing Clostridium	> 6.3 x 10⁴	> 6.3 x 10⁴	< 5.0 x 10²
Salmonella spp.	absence	absence	__
Listeria monocytogenes	absence	absence	__

Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência e Tecnologia de Alimentos Av. Brasil, 2880, Caixa Postal 271, 13001-970 Campinas SP - Brazil, Tel.: +55 19 3241.5793, Tel./Fax.: +55 19 3241.0527 - Campinas - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revista@sbcta.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *Corresponding author: ciceroalj@ufpi.edu.br, edivanvieira@yahoo.com.br