Previous Article in Journal
Efficient Enzymatic Hydrolysis and Polyhydroxybutyrate Production from Non-Recyclable Fiber Rejects from Paper Mills by Recombinant Escherichia coli
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Processes
Volume 12
Issue 8
10.3390/pr12081577
processes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Horse Meat Subjected to Sous-Vide Cooking: Texture Changes and Sensory Acceptability

by
Renata Stanisławczyk
1,*,
Jagoda Żurek
2,
Mariusz Rudy
1,
Marian Gil
1,
Anna Krajewska
3 and
Dariusz Dziki
3,*
1
Department of Agricultural Processing and Commodity Science, Institute of Food and Nutrition Technology, College of Natural Sciences, University of Rzeszow, Zelwerowicza 4, 35-601 Rzeszów, Poland
2
Department of Financial Markets and Public Finance, Institute of Economics and Finance, College of Social Sciences, University of Rzeszow, Cwiklinskiej 2, 35-601 Rzeszów, Poland
3
Department of Thermal Technology and Food Process Engineering, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Głęboka 31, 20-612 Lublin, Poland
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2024, 12(8), 1577; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12081577 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 27 June 2024 / Revised: 23 July 2024 / Accepted: 24 July 2024 / Published: 27 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers in the "Food Process Engineering" Section)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Meat preservation is necessary to prevent harmful changes caused by microbiological, chemical, and physical processes in order, among other things, to extend storage life. In this study, we investigated how the duration (4, 8, 12, and 24 h) and temperature (50 °C, 55 °C, 60 °C) of SV (sous-vide) treatment for horse meat influence the sensory properties and quality of m. longissimus thoracis specimens. The SV temperature and time of heat treatment demonstrated notable enhancements of most texture parameters. Increasing the duration of heat treatment from 4 h to 8, 12, and 24 h at all applied temperature values resulted in an improvement in the shear force, hardness, springiness, gumminess, and chewiness of horse meat (however, the differences were not statistically significant in every case). Increasing the duration of heat treatment from 4 to 24 h, but only at a temperature of 60 °C, improved the scent (intensity and desirability) and flavor desirability. Multiple regression analysis showed that many texture parameters could be effectively described by the cooking time and process temperature. The most accurate representation of the empirical data (R2 > 0.903) was attained for adhesiveness, springiness, gumminess, and chewiness, which exhibited the highest coefficients of determination.

1. Introduction

Horse meat possesses distinctive chemical and physical attributes, setting it apart from other meat varieties. It is rich in protein [1,2,3] yet low in fat [1,4], with a significant proportion of unsaturated fatty acids [5,6,7]. Its high myoglobin content categorizes it as a dark-colored meat [7], and its elevated glycogen levels impart a mildly sweet taste and require an extended maturation period [8]. These attributes, influenced by the age of the horses, determine the meat’s physicochemical, sensory, and technological properties. Notably, the unsatisfactory quality often associated with horse meat is attributed to the aging process of the animals at the time of slaughter, resulting in meat with inadequate tenderness due to high levels of connective tissue proteins and collagen’s elevated thermal resistance. As horses age, the mechanical integrity of their connective tissue improves due to collagen cross-linking. This leads to alterations in the collagen present in the intermuscular connective tissue, resulting in increased stiffness, hardness, and heightened resistance to thermal denaturation. This phenomenon significantly contributes to the gradual toughening of the meat [8,9]. In light of these challenges, the meat industry is actively exploring strategies to improve the quality of horse meat, particularly focusing on enhancing its textural parameters and sensory characteristics.
Meat preservation is necessary to prevent harmful changes caused by microbiological, chemical, and physical processes in order, among other things, to extend storage life. Meat and its derivatives are typically prepared through cooking before being consumed. This process enhances their digestibility, makes them easier to eat, and enhances their palatability. Consumers usually opt for cooking methods that result in meat products with superior qualities such as tenderness, appealing appearance, and delicious flavor [10]. In the past few years, the sous-vide (SV) technique has emerged as a highly effective preservation method, providing an extended shelf life for food while ensuring a consistent and high quality. This approach minimizes the loss of flavor and mitigates nutritional degradation [11,12,13]. SV entails a controlled cooking process wherein fresh food is vacuum-sealed in heat-stable, high-barrier plastic bags or films, followed by cooking (pasteurization) at specific time–temperature combinations that are sufficient to eliminate vegetative pathogens and optimize sensory attributes [14,15]. The technique is praised for its ability to retain food moisture, ensure juiciness, and minimize flavor and aroma degradation [16], resulting in an enhanced preservation of flavor, aroma, and texture [16,17]. Currently, this method is primarily used in the thermal processing of meats [17,18]. SV cooking typically requires longer durations compared to traditional methods, with temperatures ranging from 50 to 80 °C, and cooking times depend on the type of meat [19]. For tougher cuts like beef chuck and pork shoulder, recommended temperatures are between 55 and 60 °C for 24–48 h, while intermediate cuts like beef sirloin are suggested to cook at 55–60 °C for 6–8 h [17]. Suriaatmaja and Lanier [20] showcased the efficacy of the SV technique in tenderizing lower-quality beef cuts. They found that subjecting beef to temperatures between 50 and 58 °C for durations of 24–48 h effectively tenderizes lean and tough beef. In another investigation, Botinestean and colleagues [21] noted that beef steaks cooked by SV at 60 °C for 270 min displayed increased tenderness, chewiness, and gumminess in comparison to those cooked at 75 °C or until reaching an internal temperature of 70 °C. Furthermore, this approach resulted in a decrease in meat hardness. Studies conducted by da Silva and colleagues [22] propose that the SV process improves mineral bioavailability. SV-cooked beef liver demonstrated an enhanced bioavailability of several minerals, including a 33.7% rise in calcium, 12% in copper, 28.3% in iron, 12.9% in magnesium, and 18.3% in zinc compared to boiling. Furthermore, SV cooking reduces lipid oxidation, as indicated by decreased TBA values [23]. Haghighi et al. [24] demonstrated that using lower SV processing temperatures, such as 60 °C, and shorter processing times, like 60 min, led to the lowest TBARS value of 0.29 mg MDA kg−1 in chicken breast fillets, in contrast to longer processing times ranging from 70–150 min or 80–150 min. Within the realm of SV technology, variations in processing temperatures exert a more significant effect on meat weight loss than the duration of the process. Shin et al. [25] noted considerable variations in cooking loss among duck breast samples subjected to different cooking conditions. Specifically, they observed disparities between samples cooked at 80 °C for 180 min and those cooked at alternative temperatures (50°, 60°, and 70 °C) for either 60 or 180 min. Additionally, SV cooking temperature significantly impacts brightness (L*) and color parameters (a* and b*). Pork cheek samples cooked at 60 °C exhibited elevated L* values and a more pronounced red color (higher a* values) in comparison to those cooked at 80 °C [19].
The prior investigations into SV heat treatment (SV) have predominantly centered on traditional meats derived from prominent slaughter animals like cattle, pigs, or poultry. In contrast, there exists a paucity of research exploring the ramifications of SV treatment on the quality of horse meat. In our preliminary examination of horse meat [26], our primary emphasis was on ascertaining the impact of SV processing conditions on alterations in color and chemical properties. The objective of the current study is to fill this research gap by scrutinizing the influence of SV duration and temperature on the textural parameters and sensory attributes of horse meat.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Material

This research utilized specimens extracted from the longissimus thoracis muscle (m. longissimus thoracis). These samples were obtained from 16 half-carcasses of horses. These horses were sourced from individual farmers located in the southeastern region of Poland [26]. The ages of the horses were established by referencing purchase documentation. Fifty percent of the animals were geldings, while the remaining half were mares. The study included two horse breeds: Silesian and Malopolski. These horses were raised under conditions within extensive farming systems. During transportation, the horses were accommodated in separate pens within livestock warehouses for approximately 24 h, ensuring animal welfare with supervision by veterinary professionals. A uniform slaughtering process was employed utilizing a captive bolt pistol in adherence to standard industry practices. The selection of half-carcasses was conducted solely based on purchase documentation, without any direct intervention or influence from the researchers. In order to investigate the impact of SV treatment on the textural parameters and sensory characteristics of horse meat, samples were obtained from the longissimus thoracis muscle situated between the 13th and 14th thoracic vertebrae. The muscle samples collected were stored under refrigeration at 4 ± 0.5 °C for a period of 10 days prior to undergoing analysis.

2.2. Cooking Procedure

Once the muscle samples had been transported to the laboratory under refrigerated conditions (3 ± 0.5 °C), they underwent division into individual portions, each with an approximate weight of 300 ± 30 g. Following this, the samples were vacuum-sealed utilizing a vacuum packer manufactured by Inauen, Switzerland. The meat samples, after vacuum sealing, underwent heat treatment in a water bath (Hendi, Gądki, Poland). They were exposed to temperatures of 55 °C, 60 °C, and 65 °C for durations of 4, 8, 12, and 24 h, resulting in a total of 192 meat samples. Subsequent to the thermal treatment, the meat samples were swiftly chilled to reach a temperature range of 4 ± 0.5 °C (Figure 1).

2.3. Instrumental Texture Analysis and pH

For the analysis of texture, raw meat samples from each batch were cubed into pieces with a side length of 20 mm. The texture parameters were assessed by employing texture profile analysis, facilitated by a CT3-25 texture analyzer (Brookfield, WI, USA) outfitted with a cylindrical probe. Each sample was subjected to dual compressions, where it was compressed to 50% of its original height at a crosshead speed of 2 mm/s, with a 2. s pause between compressions. The Texture Pro CT software (V.1.9 Build 39; Brookfield, WI, USA) was utilized to determine various texture parameters, including gumminess (N), hardness 1 and 2 (N), chewiness (mJ), springiness (mm), adhesiveness (mJ), stiffness at 5 and 8 mm (N), and resilience. During the batch measurements, automatic computation was employed for all of these parameters. Using a texture analyzer, shear force analysis was performed on raw meat samples (TA-XT plus; Stable Micro System Ltd., Surrey, UK). Samples were first cored into cylinders with a diameter of 1.0 cm using a cork borer. Subsequently, they were sliced into discs using a Warner–Bratzler blade equipped with a triangular notch. Averaging of the recorded shear force required for cutting (measured in N/cm2) was performed based on three consecutive replicates that showed closely matching values.
The pH of the horse meat subjected to sous-vide heat treatment was determined using an OSH 12-01 electrode and a CPC-411 pH meter (produced by ELMETRON, Zabrze, Poland), with an accuracy of up to 0.01. The device was calibrated based on buffers with pH values of 4.00 and 7.00.

2.4. Sensory Evaluation

Sensory evaluation was carried out by a panel of 15 individuals with established sensory sensitivity, and the assessment of sample sensitivity and sensory proficiency adhered to ISO 8586-2:2008 [27] and ISO 8587:2006 standards [28]. Qualitative characteristics of the samples were appraised using a 5-point scale with the following parameters: aroma intensity, taste intensity, aroma desirability, taste desirability, juiciness, and tenderness. Qualitative indices of the samples were assessed using a 5-point scale as follows: intensity of aroma (5 = very strong, 1 = negative and very poorly perceptible), intensity of taste (5 = very strong, 1 = negative and very poorly perceptible), desirability of aroma (5 = highly desirable, 1 = not desirable), desirability of taste (5 = highly desirable, 1 = not desirable), juiciness (5 = very juicy, 1 = very dry), and tenderness (5 = very tender, 1 = very hard). The evaluation was conducted in a dedicated laboratory that met relevant standard requirements.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

All analyses were conducted in triplicate, and the obtained results underwent statistical analysis subsequent to grouping. The statistical assessment encompassed all observations (16 half-carcasses × 3 SV processing temperature ranges × 4 SV processing duration ranges). Utilizing the GLM procedure in Statistica (STATISTICA v. 10; StatSoft, Krakow, Poland), a two-factor analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to examine the selected texture parameters and sensory attributes of the meat samples. When significance was observed (p < 0.05), means were compared using the post-hoc Tukey’s honestly significant difference test. Furthermore, a multiple linear regression analysis was conducted.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Texture Results

Table 1 displays data pertaining to the texture parameters of horse meat. It is notable that consumers prefer lower shear force values, indicating greater tenderness in the final product. Meat tenderness is intricately linked to the proteins of myofibrils and connective tissue, with their transformations during heat treatment involving the denaturation of myofibrillar proteins and the solubilization of connective tissue [29]. The application of elevated temperatures in heat treatment results in the solubilization of connective tissue, enhancing meat tenderness, while the denaturation of myofibrillar proteins leads to meat hardening. Meat tenderness improvement occurs distinctly in two temperature phases: at 45–55 and 60–65 °C. The enhancement in meat tenderness with an increase in beef temperature from 45 to 55 °C is attributed to the rise in total collagen solubility, increasing from 12% to 27%, driven by the accumulation of thermal energy over a longer processing time of 4 h, which adversely affects collagen fibers [17].
Likewise, Alahakoon et al. [30] documented a rise in beef brisket tenderness within the temperature range of 60–65 °C during SV, attributing it to an augmented solubility of total collagen. As SV duration is extended, the increase in total solubilized collagen leads to enhanced meat tenderness, facilitated by the gradual accumulation of thermal energy and subsequent solubilization of collagen fibers during processing SV [31]. Alternatively, a decline in meat tenderness might be observed during SV processing between 55 and 60 °C, attributed to protein denaturation and shrinkage at varying temperature thresholds: collagen at 55–100 °C, actin at 65–75 °C, and myosin at 40–50 °C [17]. Furthermore, meat toughness is additionally affected by the dehydration of muscle tissue during thermal processing [32], primarily due to the longitudinal contraction of muscle fibers, notably occurring between 60 and 70 °C [33]. In evaluating the impact of SV time and temperature on the shear force of horse meat, a significant influence on the variation in shear force in the examined raw material was observed, influenced by the temperature, the duration of SV, and the interaction effect between time and temperature (Table 1). Increasing the duration of SV from 4 to 12 and 24 h at all temperature ranges led to a noteworthy reduction in the force required to cut the sample of the studied raw material (p < 0.05). Conversely, considering the temperature employed, an increase from 55 to 65 °C following 4, 8, and 12 h of SV also significantly decreased the analyzed parameter’s value. These findings are consistent with the observations of other researchers. Christensen et al. [34] demonstrated that elevating the temperature resulted in a decrease in the shear force. In their investigation, Ismail et al. [35] observed significant effects of cooking time, temperature, and the interaction between temperature and time on the shear force value of beef semitendinosus subjected to SV. Steaks subjected to a temperature of 60 °C produced lower shear force, but extending the processing time to 12 h did not necessarily result in tender meat. Christensen et al. [35] revealed in their study that the force required to cut semitendinosus (ST) samples from young bulls was highest when subjected to 53 °C for 2.5 h. For ST from cows, the force required to cut the samples diminished as the temperature rose. At 63 °C, there were no significant differences between the two categories of beef. As indicated by the study authors, the meat from cows displayed higher toughness in comparison to that from young bulls, attributed to varying degrees of thermal resilience cross-linking in connective tissue. On the contrary, in the investigation conducted by Haghighi et al. [24] on chicken breast fillets, it was found that the formation of shear force values was solely impacted by the cooking temperature. The observed trend indicated an increase in the analyzed parameter as the temperature rose. The lowest value of the force required to cut through meat samples was found for SV heat-treated chicken at 60 and 70 °C.
An examination of the outcomes from this investigation revealed that the extension of SV processing duration and elevation of the processing temperature significantly impacted the hardness of horse meat. Hardness 1 is the maximum force recorded during the first compression cycle, while hardness 2 is the maximum force recorded during the second compression cycle. The analysis of m. longissimus thoracis texture disclosed statistically significant effects on the variation in hardness 1 and hardness 2 of the horse meat, attributable to the applied temperature, duration of SV, and the interaction effect between time and temperature (Table 1). Elevating the SV temperature from 55 to 60 °C and 65 °C resulted in a notable reduction in hardness 1 and hardness 2 of horse meat across all analyzed time intervals. Furthermore, prolonging the SV duration from 4 to 8, 12, and 24 h significantly decreased the hardness 1 and hardness 2 of horse meat at 55 and 60 °C, while from 4 to 24 h, it substantially diminished the hardness 1 and hardness 2 of horse meat at 65 °C. The SV process allowed for an improvement in the horse meat texture parameters, especially the shear force and texture of hard pieces of meat, improving horse meat tenderness, which is associated with increasing the hydrolysis of myosin heavy chain, resulting in a higher myofibrillar fragmentation index, collagen solubility, and longer sarcomere length. This is due to the proteolysis of the myofibrillar protein and collagen induced by cathepsin B and L and the limited longitudinal shrinkage. This trend aligns with findings in the literature by other researchers [32].
Roldán et al. [32] reported diminished hardness for lamb loins at higher temperatures (80 °C) with longer cooking times (24 h), likely due to the breakdown of perimysium around the muscle bundle. In their research, Christensen et al. [35] illustrated that elevating the temperature of heat treatment, along with extending its duration, markedly decreased the hardness of ST samples obtained from cows. A notable decrease in hardness was observed in ST muscle samples derived from young bulls, correlating with the rise in temperature and the increase in holding time. Higher heating temperatures and longer heating times were necessary due to the increased hardness of cow meat compared to the raw material from young bull carcasses. Literature analysis also indicates that the influence of cooking variables on meat texture is not straightforward. Polak and Markowska [36], investigating the texture of turkey breast meat, demonstrated that the lowest firmness was observed in meat samples exposed to 64 °C for 240 min, while for other samples, the parameter value was comparable, regardless of temperature variables and process time. Increasing the processing time did not alter the hardness of the meat tissue. Conversely, Jeong et al. [37], analyzing the texture of pork ham cooked using SV technology, showed that increasing the processing time from 45 to 90 min at both 61 and 71 °C resulted in increased meat hardness. Palka [38], meanwhile, studying the texture of beef cooked at different internal temperatures, noted higher hardness values in samples cooked at 70 and 80 °C compared to those cooked at an internal temperature of 60 °C.
Thermal processing methods shape the textural characteristics of products. The application of sous-vide cooking for 45 min at 80 °C and 60 min at 70 °C yields better textural characteristics than those of meat prepared using traditional techniques [14]. Rinaldi et al. [39] concluded that beef samples cooked at 100 °C for 2 h in a traditional manner presented much higher hardness compared to meat samples cooked sous-vide at 100 °C for 2 h, while meat samples also cooked sous-vide at 75 °C for 36 h showed the lowest value of the tested parameter.
In contrast, based on the study, it was found that the applied SV variables did not have a statistically significant effect on the stiffness and resilience of horse meat (Table 1). Stiffness up to 5 mm is the force value recorded when the probe is recessed at 5 mm, while stiffness up to 8 mm is the force value recorded when the probe is recessed at 8 mm. This means that the maximum force values necessary to compress the sample did not occur when the probe was deeper than 5 mm or 8 mm, but occurred in the range from 8 to 10 mm. The maximum force values (hardness 1, hardness 2) showed statistically significant differences for these features, taking into account the assumed SV variables. In the case of resilience, defined as the proportion of time taken to achieve maximum deformation in the second compression compared to that required for maximum deformation in the first compression, it should be stated that the differences between the means for such a defined feature are statistically insignificant, in contrast to the springiness, defined as the distance that the sample will regain after the deforming forces have subsided after the first compression.
Another crucial parameter determining meat texture is adhesiveness. The texturometric analysis of this parameter revealed that prolonged SV led to weakened connective tissue and decreased adhesiveness values, consistent with findings from other studies [32]. Both the temperature of the treatment and its duration had a statistically significant effect on reducing adhesiveness values.
The texturometric analysis of SV heat-treated horse meat revealed statistically significant effects of temperature, heat treatment duration, and the interaction between time and temperature on springiness, chewiness, and gumminess. Increasing the treatment temperature and duration resulted in a significant decrease in springiness (p < 0.05). Conversely, significant increases in chewiness and gumminess were noted with rising temperature. Nevertheless, the extension of SV duration led to a significant reduction in the values of springiness, chewiness, and gumminess (p < 0.05). Rinaldi et al. [39] observed increased chewiness in beef cooked using SV technology at 100 °C compared to meat cooked at 75 °C. Palka and Daun [40] reported lower chewiness in beef cooked at 60 °C compared to that at 70 or 80 °C, attributing this to myosin and actin denaturation (at 40–60 and 66–73 °C, respectively) and collagen shrinkage (56–62 °C). Roldán et al.’s [32] texturometric analysis of lamb revealed that the appropriate choice of cooking time significantly influenced chewiness and gumminess. Increasing the cooking time from 6 to 12 h at 60 °C elevated the values of both parameters, while only a 24 h cooking period had the opposite effect. In Polak and Markowska’s [36] study, extending the cooking time of turkey breast at 60 °C from 150 to 240 min did not affect the meat’s gumminess. In Bıyıklıa et al.’s [41] research, they found that the gumminess increased linearly with higher cooking temperatures. The study indicated that both time and temperature, whether considered individually or combined, significantly impacted the springiness, adhesiveness, and gumminess parameters. Additionally, higher cooking temperatures were observed to alter the chewiness values.
In a separate study [32], it was found that both springiness and gumminess were notably impacted by temperature, cooking time, and the interaction between temperature and time. Specifically, gumminess was influenced by cooking time and the interaction effect between temperature and time.
Taking into account the type of thermal treatment used, in the case of beef samples cooked at 100 °C for 2 h in the traditional way, meat samples cooked sous-vide at 100 °C for 2 h, and meat samples cooked sous-vide at a temperature of 75 °C for 36 h, the values of cohesion and springiness did not differ significantly between the samples, while the chewiness values were significantly higher for beef samples cooked at 100 °C for 2 h in a traditional manner and in the case of samples processed sous-vide at 100 °C for 2 h, depending on hardness [39]. In another study [19], the values of hardness, cohesion, and chewiness when samples were cooked in boiling water in the traditional manner for only 30 min were higher than in samples cooked at 80 °C for 12 h. According to the authors, the texture values in samples cooked in boiling water, which were similar to those in samples cooked at 60 °C (despite presumably greater collagen solubility), may be related to the greater contraction of myofibrillar proteins and collagen. This effect may be due to the higher temperatures used in traditional boiling water samples, as the contraction of myofibrillar proteins leads to an increase in meat hardness.
The alterations in meat texture parameters based on temperature and cooking time were delineated using regression equations. For the majority of evaluated parameters, both the cooking time and temperature significantly differentiated the assessed meat attributes. The empirical data demonstrated the best fit (R2 > 0.903) for adhesiveness, springiness, gumminess, and chewiness, with the highest values of the coefficient of determination obtained (Table 2).
In our investigation, the development of meat texture was undeniably influenced by the age of the animals and the specific characteristics of the studied raw material. Horse meat is recognized for its limited tenderness, primarily attributed to the elevated content of connective tissue proteins and the heightened heat resistance of muscle collagen. For this study, samples of m. longissimus thoracis from animals aged 21–24 years were utilized, and the mechanical stability of connective tissue increased with the age of the horses due to collagen cross-linking. Collagen within the intermuscular connective tissue exhibited increased stiffness, hardness, and resistance to thermal denaturation, thereby contributing to the gradual toughening of the meat [8]. Górska and Wojtysiak [42] reported that muscles containing minimal connective tissue achieve the desired tenderness when exposed to high temperatures for a short period or to lower temperatures for an extended duration. It is plausible that the observed lack of tenderness in horse meat at lower temperatures (55 °C) and shorter SV durations (4 h) could be attributed to the incomplete dissolution of collagen during this timeframe. Consequently, this incomplete dissolution may not effectively counteract the hardness resulting from the shrinkage of myofibrillar proteins. The notable decrease in hardness observed in horse meat samples treated with SV at 65 °C for 24 h could be attributed to the extensive breakdown of the perimysium surrounding muscle bundles. Heating meat at 65 °C leads to the aggregation of sarcoplasmic proteins, resulting in the formation of a gel that aids in meat fracturing during chewing. Additionally, the improvement in meat tenderness might be influenced by the residual activity of collagenase at 60 °C even after 6 h of heat treatment, which could contribute to the tenderization of meat cooked at such temperatures for extended periods. Taking into account the specificity of horse meat, the obtained test results show that the higher the temperature used and the longer the heat treatment duration, especially up to 12 h, the more favorable the features, i.e., hardness and cutting force. Beef, especially that obtained from the carcasses of older animals [43,44], or game meat may have similar characteristics [45]. Therefore, it should be assumed that the above dependencies will also apply to these raw materials.

3.2. Sensory Results

Heat treatment methods can significantly influence the sensory qualities of food products. Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the average sensory quality evaluation scores of horse meat following SV. The duration of SV had a notable impact on the aroma variation of horse meat. Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4 indicate that with SV, the lowest scores (but not statistically significant) were found for the intensity and desirability of the scent after 4 h of thermal treatment. Increasing the SV duration from 4 to 24 h at 60 °C significantly increased the intensity and desirability of horse meat aroma. However, such differences were statistically insignificant for other temperatures tested. The volatile composition and aroma of meat are influenced by the precursors found in its raw state. After cooking, meat releases a diverse array of volatile organic compounds, such as alcohols, hydrocarbons, ketones, aldehydes, carboxylic acids, esters (including lactones), ethers, furans, pyrazines, pyrroles, pyridines, thiazoles, thiazolines, oxazoles, oxazolines, thiophenes, and other compounds containing sulfur and halogens. During the cooking process, various reactions occur that contribute to the development of the meat’s aroma, including lipid oxidation, Strecker degradation, the Maillard reaction, thiamine degradation, carbohydrate degradation, and the interactions between reaction products [46].
In the evaluation of the juiciness and tenderness of SV heat-treated horse meat, it is noteworthy that the highest ratings were given to these sensory quality aspects after 4 h of cooking at 55 °C. Extending the duration of thermal treatment from 4 to 24 h (but without taking into account intermediate times, i.e., 8 and 12 h of thermal treatment) at 55 °C resulted in lower scores for juiciness and tenderness, while the opposite trend was observed at 60 and 65 °C. However, the differences described were statistically insignificant. Statistically significant differences were found only for the tenderness of horse meat, but only between treatment times of 8 and 24 h at 60 °C. For the process conducted at 65 °C, the values of juiciness and tenderness were rated lower compared to those awarded after treatment at 55 °C, regardless of the process duration (however, the differences were statistically insignificant). This implies that the elevation of SV temperature (from 55 to 65 °C) contributes to a decline in the juiciness and tenderness of horse meat. The observed phenomenon can be attributed to both transversal and longitudinal shrinkages of the meat occurring within the temperature ranges of 45–60 °C and 60–90 °C. These shrinkages reduce the meat’s water absorption capacity, consequently compromising its juiciness and tenderness. This explanation finds support in a study conducted by Kurp et al. [11], which showed that pork loin exhibited the lowest juiciness and less tenderness at 75 °C. Additionally, other studies [47,48] suggest that the juiciness of sous-vide processed pork and turkey meat products can be enhanced by utilizing lower temperatures within the range of 60–65 °C. Regarding the taste (both intensity and desirability) of SV heat-treated horse meat, an increase in temperature from 55 to 65 °C resulted in an enhancement of the analyzed sensory quality characteristics, irrespective of the processing duration (with statistically insignificant differences). Extending the SV duration from 4 to 24 h, but only at 60 °C, significantly contributed to improving the taste desirability of the analyzed raw material.
Heterocyclic compounds containing sulfur stand out among the diverse volatile compounds that play a significant role in shaping the overall flavor profile of cooked meat. These compounds, formed as a result of the Maillard reaction, add distinct savory, meaty, roasted, and boiled flavor notes [33]. Roldán et al. [49] propose that the flavor profile of cooked meat is mainly shaped by two processes: the Maillard reaction and the thermal degradation of lipids. The Maillard reaction’s progression is influenced by temperature, with a significant intensification observed at temperatures exceeding 140 °C. Sanchez Del Pulgar et al. [50] conducted research showing that volatile compounds resulting from the Maillard or thiamine reaction are detectable in sous-vide pork cooked at 80 °C, whereas they are not detectable in samples prepared at 60 °C. In addition, higher levels of volatile compounds resulting from fatty acid degradation were discovered in SV samples cooked at 60 °C. Roldán et al. [49], while conducting SVHT of lamb loins at 60 °C for 6 and 24 h and at 80 °C for 6 h, noted that exposing meat to higher temperatures, rather than prolonging the heat treatment time, encourages the formation of volatile compounds through Strecker degradation, thereby enhancing desirable flavors. Polak and Markowska [36] conducted an investigation to evaluate the impact of sous-vide (SV) on the sensory characteristics of turkey breast. They found that meat prepared at 64 °C for 120 min received the highest ratings, while meat prepared at 64 °C for 60 min and meat cooked traditionally received the lowest ratings. Similarly, Karpinska-Tymoszczyk et al. [48] noted that the most favorable taste and aroma were observed in SV processed chicken breast fillets treated at 55 °C for 260 min. They also found that the highest juiciness score was achieved with heat treatments of 55 °C for 260 min and 55 °C for 320 min. According to the study authors, the most tender meat was achieved through treatments at 58 °C for 140 min and 58 °C for 200 min. Kurp et al. [11] demonstrated that SV conducted at 60 or 65 °C for 4 h provided the most attractive and acceptable sensory traits of pork loin. Saito et al. [51] showed an increase in the juiciness and aroma in beef meat at 65 °C with an SV processing duration of 120 h.
Thermal processing methods shape the sensory characteristics of products. When compared to the SV processing of meat with conventional thermal processing methods, sous-vide processing can improve the texture of meat while upgrading the sensory characteristics by reducing protein aggregation and gelling, which can induce a lowering of meat hardness [15]. Many studies [52,53] indicate better sensory characteristics of beef, pork, and poultry after SV. In another study [54], the sensory quality of chicken breast meat obtained by the SV method was higher in terms of attributes such as color tone, tenderness, juiciness, and overall quality. At the same time, it was lower in terms of the odor of cooked meat and the flavor of cooked meat as compared to meat subjected to traditional cooking. Higher sensory quality compared to traditional methods is also noted by other authors, e.g., beef in Korean sauce [55], beef shank cuts [56], and veal [57].
Based on the sensory scoring results of horse meat (Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4), it is challenging to conclusively identify the most favorable variant in terms of organoleptic qualities for preparing this raw material, considering SV thermal processing. Nonetheless, it should be noted that increasing the duration of heat treatment from 4 to 24 h contributes to improving most of the quality characteristics of sensory evaluation: intensity and desirability of aroma, desirability of taste, and tenderness in the case of heat treatments conducted at 60 °C. In contrast, a decrease in the juiciness and tenderness and an improvement in the flavor (intensity and desirability) of horse meat were observed when the temperature was increased from 55 to 65 °C (although the differences were statistically insignificant).
In the case of horse meat properties, better assessments regarding the intensity and desirability of scent, tenderness, and flavor desirability were obtained when the duration of heat treatment was extended from 4 to 24 h, but only in the case of 60 °C. Beef, especially that from older animals, or game meat may also have unsatisfactory sensory qualities [58]. Therefore, the above relationships could also prove effective in improving the sensory characteristics of these raw materials.

4. Conclusions

Increasing the duration of SV from 4 to 24 h enhances the intensity and desirability of scent and the desirability of flavor in horse meat, but only at a temperature of 60 °C, making the meat more appealing and acceptable. Furthermore, this extended treatment significantly improves several texture parameters of this raw material, including shear force, hardness, gumminess, and chewiness. Additionally, elevating the temperature from 55 to 65 °C leads to improvements in certain texture parameters of horse meat, notably reducing the values of shear force, hardness, adhesiveness, and chewiness in the studied raw material. Considering all the findings, it can be concluded that SV is an effective heat treatment method capable of ameliorating the unfavorable characteristics of horse meat, particularly that from older animals, especially by enhancing selected texture parameters. Therefore, it is recommended and warranted to conduct further research exploring the use of higher SV processing temperatures for horse meat, such as exceeding 70 or 80 °C.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: R.S. and M.R.; methodology: M.R.; formal analysis: M.G.; data curation: R.S.; investigations: R.S., M.R., M.G., A.K. and D.D.; writing—original draft preparation: R.S.; writing—review and editing: R.S., M.R., M.G. and D.D.; project administration: J.Ż. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The sensory evaluation of meat was carried out on a hedonic scale. According to the information provided by the Bioethics Committee of the University of Rzeszów, ethical consent was not required for this type of research. This declaration is also in accordance with Polish national law and the Helsinki Convention on Human Rights. The research did not involve human experimentation in the same way as clinical or psychological research.

Informed Consent Statement

Before the study, all participants were informed about the characteristics of the samples and consented to participate.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Strashynskyi, I.; Fursik, O. Using of horsemeat as an additional source of raw materials for expanding the range of meat products. Spec. Multidiscip. Sci. Res. 2020, 2, 38–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Stanciu, S. Horse meat consumption–between scandal and reality. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2015, 23, 697–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Zhumanova, G.T.; Shadrin, M.A.; Grunina, A.A.; Sultonov, B.A.; Yakunina, V.N. Results of semi-finished horse meat products research using protein fortifiers after heat treatment. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2021, 677, 032038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Franco, D.; Rodríguez, E.; Purriňos, L.; Crecente, S.; Bermúdez, R.; Lorenzo, J.M. Meat Quality of “Galician Mountain” Foals Breed. Effect of Sex, Slaughter Age and Livestock Production System. Meat Sci. 2011, 88, 292–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Lorenzo, J.M.; Pateiro, M. Influence of type of muscles on nutritional value of foal meat. Meat Sci. 2013, 93, 630–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Lorenzo, J.M.; Carballo, J. Changes in physico-chemical properties and volatile compounds throughout the manufacturing process of dry-cured foal loin. Meat Sci. 2015, 99, 44–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Lorenzo, J.M.; Sarries, M.V.; Tateo, A.; Polidori, P.; Franco, D.; Lanza, M. Carcass characteristics, meat quality and nutritional value of horsemeat: A review. Meat Sci. 2014, 96, 1478–1488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Stanisławczyk, R.; Rudy, M.; Rudy, S. The quality of horsemeat and selected methods of improving the properties of this raw material. Processes 2021, 9, 1672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Stanisławczyk, R.; Rudy, M.; Gil, M. The influence of frozen storage and selected substances on the quality of horse meat. Meat Sci. 2019, 155, 74–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Aviles, M.V.; Naef, E.; Lound, L.; Olivera, D. Impact of sous vide cooking on nutritional quality of meat. Nutri. Food Sci. Int. J. 2020, 10, 555789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kurp, L.; Danowska-Oziewicz, M.; Kłebukowska, L. Sous vide cooking effects on physicochemical, microbiological and sensory characteristics of pork loin. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 2365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Głuchowski, A.; Czarniecka-Skubina, E.; Buła, M. The use of the SV method in the preparation of poultry at home and in catering—Protection of nutrition value whether high energy consumption. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Latoch, A.; Głuchowski, A.; Czarniecka-Skubina, E. SV as an alternative method of cooking to improve the quality of meat: A review. Foods 2023, 12, 3110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Stankov, S.; Fidan, H.; Rusev, R.; Baeva, M. Low-temperature cooking method „SV” in the restaurant industry: A review. Food Sci. Appl. Biotechnol. 2020, 3, 92–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Thathsarani, A.P.K.; Alahakoon, A.U.; Liyanage, R. Current status and future trends of sous vide processing in meat industry; A review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 129, 353–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kilibarda, N.; Brdar, I.; Baltic, B.; Markovic, V.; Mahmutovic, H.; Karabasil, N.; Stanisic, S. The safety and quality of sous vide food. Meat Technol. 2018, 59, 38–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Baldwin, D.E. Sous vide cooking: A review. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2012, 1, 15–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Dominguez-Hernandez, E.; Salaseviciene, A.; Ertbjerg, P. Low-temperature long-time cooking of meat: Eating quality and underlying mechanisms. Meat Sci. 2018, 143, 104–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Sánchez del Pulgar, J.; Gázquez, A.; Ruiz-Carrascal, J. Physico-chemical, textural and structural characteristics of SV cooked pork cheeks as affected by vacuum, cooking temperature, and cooking time. Meat Sci. 2012, 90, 828–835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Suriaatmaja, D.; Lanier, T. Mechanism of meat tenderization by sous vide cooking. Meat Sci. 2014, 96, 457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Botinestean, C.; Keenan, D.F.; Kerry, J.P.; Hamill, R.M. The effect of thermal treatments including SV, blast freezing and their combinations on beef tenderness of M. semitendinosus steaks targeted at elderly consumers. LWT—Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 74, 154–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Da Silva, F.L.; de Lima, J.P.; Melo, L.S.; da Silva, Y.S.; Gouveia, S.T.; Lopes, G.S.; Matos, W.O. Comparison between boiling and vacuum cooking (SV) in the bioaccessibility of minerals in bovine liver samples. Food Res. Int. 2017, 100, 566–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Kim, A.-N.; Lee, K.-Y.; Park, C.E.; Choi, S.-G. Effect of heating under different vacuum levels on physicochemical and oxidative properties of beef sirloin. Foods 2023, 12, 1393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Haghighi, H.; Belmonte, A.M.; Masino, F.; Minelli, G.; Lo Fiego, D.P.; Pulvirenti, A. Effect of time and temperature on physicochemical and microbiological properties of sous vide chicken breast fillets. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Shin, D.M.; Yune, J.H.; Kim, D.H.; Han, S.G. Effect of SV cooking conditions on the physicochemical, microbiological, and microstructural properties of duck breast meat. Anim. Biosci. 2023, 36, 1596–1603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Stanisławczyk, R.; Żurek, J.; Rudy, M.; Gil, M.; Krajewska, A.; Dziki, D. Effect of time and temperature in SV heat treatment on selected physicochemical properties of horsemeat. Processes 2023, 11, 3126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. ISO 8586-2; Sensory Analysis. General Guidance for the Selection, Training and Monitoring of Assessors. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2008.
  28. ISO 8587; Sensory Analysis. Methodology, International Organization for Standardization (ISO). International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.
  29. Ayub, H.; Ahmad, A. Physiochemical changes in SV and conventionally cooked meat. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2019, 17, 100145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Alahakoon, A.U.; Oey, I.; Bremer, P.; Silcock, P. Optimisation of sous vide processing parameters for pulsed electric fields treated beef briskets. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2018, 11, 2055–2066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yin, Y.; Pereira, J.; Zhou, L.; Lorenzo, J.M.; Tian, X.; Zhang, W. Insight into the effects of sous vide on cathepsin B and L activities, protein degradation and the ultrastructure of beef. Foods 2020, 9, 1441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Roldán, M.; Antequera, T.; Martin, A.; Mayoral, A.I.; Ruiz, J. Effect of different temperature-time combinations on physicochemical, microbiological, textural and structural features of SV cooked lamb loins. Meat Sci. 2013, 93, 572–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ismail, I.; Hwang, Y.H.; Joo, S.T. Effect of different temperature and time combinations on quality characteristics of SV cooked goat Gluteus Medius and Biceps Femoris. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2019, 12, 1000–1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Christensen, L.; Ertbjerg, P.; Aaslyng, M.D.; Christensen, M. Effect of prolonged heat treatment from 48 °C to 63 °C on toughness, cooking loss and color of pork. Meat Sci. 2011, 88, 280–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Christensen, L.; Ertbjerg, P.; Løje, H.; Risbo, J.; van den Berg, F.W.J.; Christensen, M. Relationship between meat toughness and properties of connective tissue from cows and young bulls heat treated at low temperatures for prolonged times. Meat Sci. 2013, 93, 787–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Polak, E.; Markowska, J. Effect of SV cooking under different temperature and time conditions on the performance, texture and organoleptic quality of the SV cooked turkey breast. Postępy Nauk. I Technol. Przemysłu Rolno-Spożywczego 2019, 74, 32–47. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  37. Jeong, K.; O, H.; Shin, S.Y.; Kim, Y.S. Effects of SV method at different temperatures, time and vacuum degrees on the quality, structural, and microbiological properties of pork ham. Meat Sci. 2018, 143, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Palka, K. The influence of post-mortem ageing and roasting on the microstructure, texture and collagen solubility of bovine semitendinosus muscle. Meat Sci. 2003, 64, 191–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Rinaldi, M.; Dall’Asta, C.; Paciulli, M.; Cirlini, M.; Manzi, C.; Chiavaro, E. A novel time/temperature approach to sous vide cooking of beef muscle. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2014, 7, 2969–2977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Palka, K.; Daun, H. Changes in texture, cooking losses, and myofibrillar structure of bovine M. semitendinosus during heating. Meat Sci. 1999, 51, 237–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Bıyıklıa, M.; Akoğlub, A.; Kurhanc, Ş.; Akoğlu, İ.T. Effect of different sous vide cooking temperature-time combinations on the physicochemical, microbiological, and sensory properties of turkey cutlet. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2020, 20, 100204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Górska, M.; Wojtysiak, D. Effect of long-term antemortem factors on sensory quality of meat from gallinaceous poultry. Wiadomości Zootech. 2016, LIV, 171–176. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  43. Kopuzlu, S.; Esenbuga, N.; Onenc, A.; Macit, M.; Yanar, M.; Yuksel, S.; Ozluturk, A.; Unlu, N. Effects of slaughter age and muscle type on meat quality characteristics of Eastern Anatolian Red bulls. Arch. Anim. Breed. 2018, 61, 497–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Tuell, J.R.; Nondorf, M.J.; Brad Kim, Y.H. Post-harvest strategies to improve tenderness of underutilized mature beef: A review. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 2022, 42, 723–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Fabijanić, N.; Konjačić, M.; Luković, Z.; Prpić, Z.; Ugarković, N.K. Physical parameters of wild boar meat quality: A review. J. Cent. Eur. Agric. 2023, 24, 340–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Bleicher, J.; Ebner, E.E.; Bak, K.H. Formation and analysis of volatile and odor compounds in meat—A review. Molecules 2022, 27, 6703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Ji, D.S.; Kim, J.H.; Yoon, D.K.; Kim, J.H.; Lee, H.J.; Cho, W.Y.; Lee, C.H. Effect of different storage-temperature combinations on longissimus dorsi quality upon SV processing of frozen/thawed pork. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 2019, 39, 240–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Karpińska-Tymoszczyk, M.; Draszanowska, A.; Danowska-Oziewicz, M.; Kurp, L. The effect of low-temperature thermal processing on the quality of chicken breast fillets. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2020, 26, 563–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Roldán, M.; Ruiz, J.; Sánchez del Pulgar, J.; Pérez-Palacios, T.; Antequera, T. Volatile compound profile of SV cooked lamb loins at different temperature–time combinations. Meat Sci. 2015, 100, 52–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Sanchez del Pulgar, J.; Roldan, M.; Ruiz-Carrascal, J. Volatile compounds profile of SV cooked pork cheeks as affected by cooking conditions (vacuum packaging, temperature and time). Molecules 2013, 18, 12538–12547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Saito, K.; Yoshinari, M.; Ishikawa, S.I. Effects of low-temperature long-time SV cooking on the physicochemical and sensory characteristics of beef and pork shank. J. Culin. Sci. Technol. 2022, 20, 165–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Christensen, L.; Gunvig, A.; Tørngren, M.A.; Aaslyng, M.D.; Knøchel, S.; Christensen, M. Sensory characteristics of meat cooked for prolonged times at low temperature. Meat Sci. 2012, 90, 485–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mortensen, L.M.; Frøst, M.B.; Skibsted, L.H.; Risbo, J. Effect of time and temperature on sensory properties in low-temperature long-time sous-vide cooking of beef. J. Culin. Sci. Technol. 2012, 10, 75–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Przybylski, W.; Jaworska, D.; Kajak-Siemaszko, K.; Sałek, P.; Pakuła, K. Effect of heat treatment by the sous-vide method on the quality of poultry meat. Foods 2021, 10, 1610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Jang, J.D.; Lee, D.S. Development of a sous-vide packaging process for Korean seasoned beef. Food Control 2005, 16, 285–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Gámbaro, A.; Panizzolo, L.A.; Hodos, N.; da Rosa, G.; Barrios, S.; Garmendia, G.; Gago, C.; Martínez-Monzó, J. Influence of temperature and time in sous-vide cooking on physicochemical and sensory parameters of beef shank cuts. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2023, 32, 100701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kaliniak-Dziura, A.; Domaradzki, P.; Kowalczyk, M.; Florek, M.; Skałecki, P.; Kędzierska-Matysek, M.; Stanek, P.; Dmoch, M.; Grenda, T.; Kowalczuk-Vasilev, E. Effect of heat treatments on the physicochemical and sensory properties of the longissimus thoracis muscle in unweaned Limousin calves. Meat Sci. 2022, 192, 108881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Županjac, M.; Šojić, B.; Ikonić, P. Masking strategies to avoid the boar taint in meat products. J. Process. Energy Agric. 2022, 26, 101–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Processes 12 01577 g001
Figure 1. Horse meat subjected to sous-vide heat treatment for 4 h at 55 °C, 60 °C, and 65 °C.
Figure 1. Horse meat subjected to sous-vide heat treatment for 4 h at 55 °C, 60 °C, and 65 °C.
Processes 12 01577 g001
Processes 12 01577 g002
Figure 2. Sensory properties of horse meat (points) subjected to sous-vide heat treatment for 4, 8, 12, and 24 h at 55 °C.
Figure 2. Sensory properties of horse meat (points) subjected to sous-vide heat treatment for 4, 8, 12, and 24 h at 55 °C.
Processes 12 01577 g002
Processes 12 01577 g003
Figure 3. Sensory properties of horse meat (points) subjected to sous-vide heat treatment for 4, 8, 12, and 24 h at 60 °C. a, b—values marked with different letters on lines differ significantly between heat treatment times p < 0.05.
Figure 3. Sensory properties of horse meat (points) subjected to sous-vide heat treatment for 4, 8, 12, and 24 h at 60 °C. a, b—values marked with different letters on lines differ significantly between heat treatment times p < 0.05.
Processes 12 01577 g003
Processes 12 01577 g004
Figure 4. Sensory properties of horse meat (points) subjected to sous-vide heat treatment for 4, 8, 12, and 24 h at 65 °C.
Figure 4. Sensory properties of horse meat (points) subjected to sous-vide heat treatment for 4, 8, 12, and 24 h at 65 °C.
Processes 12 01577 g004
Table 1. Texture parameters and pH of horse meat depending on the time and temperature of SV.
Table 1. Texture parameters and pH of horse meat depending on the time and temperature of SV.
ParameterTemp.
[oC]		Duration of SV [h]
481224ANOVA
Shear force (N/cm2)5593.88 a,x ± 5.0388.61 a,b,x ± 1.4975.86 b,x ± 5.7463.43 b ± 5.35S*; T*; T × S*
6091.88 a,x,y ± 2.4677.28 a,b,x,y ± 2.9968.99 b,x,y ± 4.9360.16 b ± 6.89
6582.07 a,y ± 8.4571.17 a,b,y ± 7.0965.40 b,y ± 4.5357.55 b ± 16.33
Hardness 1
(N)		55175.67 a,x ± 49.20147.38 b,x ± 35.20116.96 c,x ± 5.1097.02 d,x ± 22.53S*; T*; T × S*
60148.90 a,y ± 78.24121.70 b,y ± 24.1591.58 c,y ± 4.6977.79 d,y ± 9.65
6584.18 a,z ± 15.2274.12 a,b,z ± 7.4666.62 a,b,z ± 15.1162.18 b,z ± 25.70
Hardness 2
(N)		55124.42 a,x ± 27.93105.46 b,x ± 28.9786.48 c,x ± 14.5171.73 d,x ± 20.78S*; T*; T × S*
60120.01 a,y ± 57.4686.28 b,y ± 10.1771.16 c,y ± 4.2152.46 d,y ± 9.34
6578.78 a,z ± 15.1863.82 a,b,z ± 7.0052.24 a,b,z ± 11.4041.81 b,z ± 23.00
Stiffness up to 5 mm
(N)		5516.03 ± 4.8316.01 ± 1.8215.10 ± 1.3515.60 ± 2.09
6015.29 ± 2.5815.08 ± 5.6414.46 ± 1.2915.40 ± 2.43
6514.66 ± 2.4314.64 ± 0.7013.83 ± 0.6013.57 ± 4.00
Stiffness up to 8 mm
(N)		5575.35 ± 19.5674.46 ± 10.9467.67 ± 7.1469.17 ± 13.62
6068.64 ± 24.0368.20 ± 26.1166.96 ± 1.4166.61 ± 6.27
6562.33 ± 8.0661.48 ± 2.4160.94 ± 5.1560.77 ± 14.12
Adhesiveness (mJ)551.56 a,b,x ± 0.131.33 b,x ± 0.201.03 c,x ± 0.320.70 d,x ± 0.15S*; T*;
601.20 a,b,x,y ± 0.140.96 b,x,y ± 0.070.56 c,x,y ± 0.040.36 d,x,y ± 0.05
650.83 a,y ± 0.070.66 a,b,y ± 0.020.53 a,b,y ± 0.020.32 b,y ± 0.08
Springiness
(mm)		555.23 a,x ± 0.145.15 b,x ± 0.144.82 b,x ± 1.054.73 b,x ± 0.30S*; T*
T × S*
604.56 a,y ± 0.044.51 b,y ± 0.904.42 b,y ± 0.204.32 b,y ±0.42
654.00 a,z ± 0.333.62 b,z ± 0.293.48 b,z ± 0.423.34 b,z ±0.28
Resilience550.13 ± 0.050.10 ± 0.020.17 ± 0.010.16 ± 0.02
600.15 ± 0.020.15 ± 0.030.18 ± 0.010.17 ± 0.01
650.18 ± 0.010.17 ± 0.010.20 ± 0.040.18 ± 0.02
Gumminess (N)5549.14 a,x ± 5.1345.12 b,x ± 6.0040.61 c,x ± 8.9535.71 d,x ± 5.34S*; T*
T × S*
6056.90 a,y ± 3.5253.68 b,y ± 4.2846.95 c,y ± 5.8542.21 d,y ± 5.96
6563.59 a,z ± 5.3759.87 b,z ± 5.0554.46 c,z ± 6.5150.96 d,z ± 6.64
Chewiness (mJ)55203.53 a,x ± 45.95182.23 b,x ± 21.08159.40 c,x ± 39.32131.00 d,x ± 38.57S*; T*
T × S*
60221.76 a,y ± 46.04208.50 b,y ± 37.03186.93 c,y ± 31.4162.70 d,y ± 33.12
65244.26 a,z ± 47.59222.46 b,z ± 43.725210.00 c,z ± 45.43193.53 d,z ± 37.0
pH556.10 ± 0.156.13 ± 0.086.20 ± 0.126.30 ± 0.09
606.15 ± 0.146.18 ± 0.136.23 ± 0.146.32 ± 0.12
656.21 ± 0.096.26 ± 0.156.29 ± 0.136.35 ± 0.10
a, b, c, d—values showing distinct letters across the lines indicate significant differences between heat treatment times—p < 0.05. x, y, z—values marked with different letters in rows differ significantly between treatment temperatures—p < 0.05. ANOVA, two-way ANOVA analysis among the height of SV temperature, T; duration of SV, S. * p < 0.05.
Table 2. Multiple linear regression equations describing the relation between the texture parameters and cooking conditions of horse meat.
Table 2. Multiple linear regression equations describing the relation between the texture parameters and cooking conditions of horse meat.
Texture ParameterEquation: y = atg + btp + cp-ValueR2p-Value for the Equation
ParameterValue
Shear force (N/cm2)a−1.3650.00000.8980.0001
b−1.1400.0050
c159.4540.0000
Hardness 1 (N)a−2.2600.07220.6850.0055
b−7.9980.0035
c606.5270.0008
Hardness 2 (N)a−2.4050.00020.8770.0008
b−3.7860.0005
c335.5700.0000
Stiffness up to 5 mm (N)a−0.0240.00000.7430.0220
b−0.1510.1920
c24.3170.0008
Stiffness up to 8 mm (N)a130.5150.00000.8720.0001
b−0.1610.1920
c−1.0280.0008
Adhesiveness
(mJ)		a−0.0360.00010.9030.0003
b−0.0570.0002
c4.6850.0002
Springiness
(mm)		a−0.0220.00000.9540.0001
b−0.1370.0038
c12.8470.0000
Gumminess (N)a0.0720.00000.9580.0001
b0.1320.0048
c7.9620.0000
Chewiness (mJ)a−62.2340.09780.9490.0001
b−2.9200.0000
c4.8520.0000
tg—cooking time, tp—cooking temperature.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Stanisławczyk, R.; Żurek, J.; Rudy, M.; Gil, M.; Krajewska, A.; Dziki, D. Horse Meat Subjected to Sous-Vide Cooking: Texture Changes and Sensory Acceptability. Processes 2024, 12, 1577. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12081577

AMA Style

Stanisławczyk R, Żurek J, Rudy M, Gil M, Krajewska A, Dziki D. Horse Meat Subjected to Sous-Vide Cooking: Texture Changes and Sensory Acceptability. Processes. 2024; 12(8):1577. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12081577

Chicago/Turabian Style

Stanisławczyk, Renata, Jagoda Żurek, Mariusz Rudy, Marian Gil, Anna Krajewska, and Dariusz Dziki. 2024. "Horse Meat Subjected to Sous-Vide Cooking: Texture Changes and Sensory Acceptability" Processes 12, no. 8: 1577. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12081577

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop