Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Textural and Consumer-Aided Characterisation and Acceptability of a Hybrid Meat and Plant-Based Burger Patty
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Textural and Consumer-Aided Characterisation and Acceptability of a Hybrid Meat and Plant-Based Burger Patty
Do you wish to request the book?
Textural and Consumer-Aided Characterisation and Acceptability of a Hybrid Meat and Plant-Based Burger Patty
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Textural and Consumer-Aided Characterisation and Acceptability of a Hybrid Meat and Plant-Based Burger Patty
2023
Overview
The hamburger has been targeted for substitution by numerous plant-based alternatives. However, many consumers find the taste of these alternatives lacking, and thus we proposed a hybrid meat and plant-based burger as a more acceptable alternative for these consumers. The burger was made from 50% meat (beef and pork, 4:1) and 50% plant-based ingredients, including texturised legume protein. Texture and sensory properties were evaluated instrumentally and through a consumer survey (n = 381) using the check-all-that-apply (CATA) method. Expressible moisture measurements indicated a significantly juicier eating experience for the hybrid compared to a beef burger (33.5% vs. 22.3%), which was supported by the CATA survey where “juicy” was used more to describe the hybrid than the beef burger (53% vs. 12%). Texture profile analysis showed the hybrid burger was significantly softer (Young’s modulus: 332 ± 34 vs. 679 ± 80 kPa) and less cohesive than a beef burger (Ratio 0.48 ± 0.02 vs. 0.58 ± 0.01). Despite having different textural and CATA profiles, overall liking of the hybrid burger and a beef burger were not significantly different. Penalty analysis indicated that “meat flavour”, “juiciness”, “spiciness” and “saltiness” were the most important attributes for a burger. In conclusion, the hybrid burger had different attributes and was described with different CATA terms than a beef burger but had the same overall acceptability.
