4.7 Article

Addition of various carbohydrates to beef burgers affects the formation of heterocyclic amines during frying

Journal

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
Volume 52, Issue 25, Pages 7561-7566

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jf0493831

Keywords

heterocyclic amines; beef burger; frying; carbohydrates; water holding; PhlP; MelQx; 4,8-DiMelQx; Harman; Norharman

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The influence of the addition of carbohydrates with different physicochemical properties on weight loss and formation of heterocyclic amines (HAs) during the frying of beef burgers was examined. Furthermore, the capability of carbohydrates to bind HAs was tested. Beef burgers containing NaCl and 0.3% tripolyphosphate (reference), with the addition of 1.5% carbohydrate. were fried for 5 min at 200 degreesC in a double-sided pan fryer. The beef burgers were analyzed for HAs with solid phase extraction and liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. 2-Amino-3.8-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline (MelQx), 2-amino-3,4,8-trimethylimidazo[4.5-f]quinoxaline (4,8-DiMelQx), 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenyl-imidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP), and 9H-pyrido[3,4-b]indole (Norharman) were detected in all of the beef burgers. The addition of carbohydrates affected both the weight loss and the formation of HAs during cooking. The formation of HAs could be correlated to depend on both the weight loss and the type of the added carbohydrate. Of the 11 different carbohydrates tested, raw potato Starch was most capable of inhibiting the formation of HAs, while potato fiber gave the lowest weight loss and a comparably low amount of PhIP. Wheat bran and potato fiber were found to reversibly bind HAs. It is concluded that adding small amounts of certain carbohydrates may be a simple and effective way of reducing the amount of HAs and can easily be applied in households and commercial preparations of beef burgers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available