Ham processing: effects of tumbling, cooking and high pressure on proteins
- 108 Downloads
Meat is recognized as an important source of protein and amino acids. Before consumption, meat products are transformed, and processing modifies the protein characteristics and impacts their digestibility. The present study aims to evaluate the impact of physicochemical modifications (solubility, oxidation, and denaturation) on the degree of in vitro digestibility and the digestion rate of high-pressure-treated cooked ham during the different process steps (curing, cooking and high-pressure treatment). Samples were homogenized and digested by pepsin and then by trypsin. The curing step increased the degree of proteolysis and the digestion rate compared with those of raw meat. Brining and tumbling caused partial denaturation of the proteins, which provided digestive enzymes better access to their specific cleavage sites. Otherwise, the substantial denaturation and protein oxidation induced by the cooking step decreased the degree of digestibility and significantly increased the digestion rate of cooked ham. Finally, the high-pressure treatment decreased the digestibility of cooked ham and simultaneously increased its digestion rate. The denaturation and oxidation phenomena leading to protein aggregation thus masked the cleavage sites necessary for the digestive enzymes. Therefore, each step of the processing of high-pressure cooked ham had an impact on the protein digestion parameters: the curing step promoted the digestibility and proteolysis rate of pork protein, while cooking and high-pressure treatment reduced the digestibility and proteolysis rate of pork protein.
KeywordsProtein Digestibility Oxidation Ham processing Meat
The authors thank the French National Research Agency (ANR) for its financial support in the framework of the BLac-HP project (ANR-14-CE20-0004).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Compliance with ethics requirements
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.
- 1.Rémond D, Duchène C (2014) Qualité nutritionnelle des protéines de la viande. CIVGoogle Scholar
- 2.Wood JD (2017) In: Toldra F (ed) Lawrie’s meat science. 8th edn. ElsevierGoogle Scholar
- 3.Santé-Lhoutellier V, Astruc T, Daudin JD, Kondjoyan A, Scislowski V, Gaudichon C, Rémond D (2013) Influence des modes de cuisson sur la digestion des protéines: approches in vitro et in vivo. Innov Agron 33:69–79Google Scholar
- 11.Xiong YL (2000) In: Decker EA, Faustman C, Lopez-Bote C (eds) Antioxidants in muscle foods: nutritional strategies to improve quality. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 12.Jongberg S, Lund MN, Skibsted LH, María Pastore G, Candoğan K, Medina Meza IG (2017) Caetano da Silva. In: Lannes S, Buckel K, Yada RY, Rosenthal A (eds) Global food security and wellness Barbosa-Cánovas GV. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 18.Bax ML, Buffière C, Hafnaoui N, Gaudichon C, Savary-Azeloux I, Dardevet D, Santé-Lhoutellier V, Rémond D, Blachier F (2013) Effects of meat cooking, and of ingested amount, on protein digestion speed and entry of residual proteins into the colon: a study in minipigs. PLoS One 8:e61252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Sazonova S, Galoburda R, Gramatina I (2017) Application of high-pressure processing for safety and shelf-life quality of meat—a review. In: 11th Baltic Conference on Food Science and Technology “FOODBALT 2017”. Latvia. https://doi.org/10.22616/FoodBalt.2017.001
- 25.Gornall AG, Bardawill CJ, David MM (1949) Determination of serum proteins by means of the biuret reactionGoogle Scholar
- 37.Von Hippel PH, Wong KY (1965) On the conformational stability of globular proteins. The effects of various electrolytes and nonelectrolytes on the thermal ribonuclease transition. J Biol Chem 240(10):3909–3923Google Scholar
- 46.Santé-Lhoutellier V, Astruc T, Daudin JD, Kondjoyan A, Scislowski V, Duchène C, Gaudichon C, Rémond D (2017) Digestion des protéines des viandes en fonction de la cuisson. Viande et produits carnés VPC2017 33(3):3Google Scholar