Ground beef

The lambda type is nongelling, and functions as a thickner. Iota-carrageenan has been recommended (45) for use in formulating low fat ground beef due to its abihty to retain moisture, especially through a freeze—thaw cycle which is typical for ground beef patties. Oat bran and oat fiber can also be used to improve moisture retention and mouth feel. Modified starches can be used as binders to maintain juiciness and tenderness in low fat meat products. Maltodextrins (dextrose equivalent less than 20) may be used as binders up to 3.5% in finished meat products. Other carbohydrates such as konjac flour, alginate, microcrystalline cellulose, methylceUulose, and carboxymethylceUulose have also been used in low fat meat products (see CELLULOSE ETHERs). 

In 1994, Nam and King (68) developed a SFE/SFC/GC instrumentation system for the quantitative analysis of organochlorine and organophosphorus pesticide residues in fatty food samples (chicken fat, ground beef and lard). In this way, SFC was used as an on-line clean-up step to remove extracted material. The fraction containing pesticide residues is then diverted and analysed by GC. 

Peelable film in case-ready ground beef package add color and shelf life. As an example Cryovac Div. of W. R. GRACE CO uses a peelable barrier lid and foam tray system. It is two packages in one there is an oxygen barrier structure, which is peeled off, leaving an oxygen-permeable film over the meat. 

C06-0007. Bicyclists in the Tour de France are on the road an average of 4.0 hr/day, and their average speed is at least 20 km/hr. How much ground beef must a 55-kg bicyclist consume daily to maintain his weight If the cyclist ate fruit rather than ground beef, how much fruit would he require (Consult the tables in the. )... 

C06-0054. Refer to the data in the and calculate how far a person weighing 55 kg must walk at a rate of 6.0 km/hr to consume the additional energy contained In 250 g of ground beef relative to 250 g of broiled chicken. 

Experiments with aldicarb sulfone in ground beef involved simple extraction with acetonitrile during tissue homogenization and resulted in a definite immunoassay response at the tolerance level of 10 qg kg A moderate, but rather consistent, matrix effect was observed. A more severe matrix effect was observed in bovine milk, blood, and urine. For the liquid matrices, sample dilution was not a satisfactory strategy, because the assay variability increased at lower concentrations, negating any benefit of reducing the matrix effect. This work clearly demonsttated that matrix effects are... 

Van Emon et al. ° developed an immunoassay for paraquat and applied this assay to beef tissue and milk samples. Milk was diluted with a Tween 20-sodium phosphate buffer (pH 7.4), fortified with paraquat, and analyzed directly. Fortified paraquat was detected in milk at less than 1 pgkg , a concentration which is considerably below the tolerance level of 10 pg kg Ground beef was extracted with 6 N HCl and sonication. Radiolabeled paraquat was extracted from ground beef with recoveries of 60-70% under these conditions. The correlation coefficient of ELISA and LSC results for the ground beef sample was excellent, with = 0.99, although the slope was 0.86, indicating a significant but reproducible difference between the assays. 

How many -pound hamburgers can be made from 6 pounds of ground beef ... 

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in the USA has estimated that Campylobacter and Salmonella are the top two bacterial foodbome pathogens as they are responsible for a total of 2 and 1.3 million foodbome infections every year (Mead et al., 1999). Most of the cases of infection with Campylobacter and Salmonella appear to be due to eggs and poultry, but a significant number of cases are related to beef products (CDC, 2005 Jay, 2000). EHEC does not cause as many infections as the top two pathogens (approximately 100,000 in the USA), but EHEC is frequently linked to outbreaks of diarrhea caused by the consumption of contaminated ground beef (Mead et al., 1999, Rangel et al., 2005). Infections caused by EHEC are the major microbial public health concern related to ruminant food products. 

In the last 20 years, an increased number of enterohemorrhagic diarrhea outbreaks have been caused by highly virulent E. coli strains. EHEC are capable of causing serious complications such as hemolytic uremic syndrome in children and vascular disease in elderly people. E. coli serotype 0157 H7 has been the primary cause of outbreaks of EHEC, but other serotypes such as 026 and Olll are also a major public health concern. The Center for Disease Control has calculated that E. coli 0157 H7 is responsible for more than 70,000 infections and 60 deaths, and other EHEC strains cause approximately 36,000 illnesses and 30 deaths every year in the USA (Mead et al., 1999). In 1994 E. coli 0157 H7 was legally declared an adulterant in ground beef in the USA (USDA/FSIS Directive 10,010.1, 2004). Since then... 

Demarco D.R., Lim D.V., Detection of Escherichia coli 0157 H7 in 10-and 25-gram ground beef samples with an evanescent-wave biosensor with silica and polystyrene waveguides, J. Food Protect. 2002 65 596-602. 

Crawford C.G., Wijey C., Fratamico P., Tu S.I., Brewster J., Immunomagnetic-electrochemiluminescent detection of E. coli 0157 H7 in ground beef, J. Rapid Meth. Auto. Micro. 2000 8 249-264. 

Table I. Effects of 17o Orthophosphate, Tripolyphosphate, and Hexametaphosphate on Calcium Solubility from Ground Beef or Soy Protein Concentrate Subjected to In Vitro Gastric and Gastrointestinal Digestions...

A meal of cooked lean ground beef provided 15 g of protein and served as the normal or control beef meal. Four additional beef meals were formulated to provide 45 g of protein and 2 levels each of calcium and phosphorus. The lower levels of calcium and phosphorus in the beef meals, that is 166 mg calcium and 308 mg phosphorus, were determined by the natural levels present in those meals containing 45 g of protein from beef. The high levels of calcium and phosphorus in the beef meals were set at one-third of the values shown by other investigators to reverse high-protein induced calciuria (19). Other components of the meals, shown on the bottom of Table I, were maintained as constant as possible. 

Soy proteins are used extensively in meat and meat products by the military, the school lunch program and consumers to save money. Their ultimate acceptability is equally dependent upon the nutritional, chemical, sensory and shelf life changes which occur when they are added. Soy proteins in meat products such as ground beef inhibit rancidity, improve tenderness, increase moisture retention, decrease cooking shrink, fat dispersion during cooking and have no important effect on microbiological condition. Concomittantly, inordinate amounts of added soy protein may cause the meat product to be too soft, exhibit an undesirable flavor and may lead to a decreased PER and a deficiency in B-vitamins and trace minerals. In emulsified meat products, soy protein effectively binds water but does not emulsify fat as well as salt soluble muscle protein. Prudent incorporation of plant proteins can result in an improvement of the quality of the meat product with inconsequential adverse effects. 

Rakosky ( ) reported that if a 25% shrink were obtained with an all meat product, the shrink in a meat product augmented with soy concentrate would be about 22.5%, or a 10% reduction in shrink. Use of textured soy rather than soy concentrate (Table IV) has been shown to reduce shrink in beef patties ( ,7 ). In a comparison of textured soy, soy concentrate and soy isolate, Berry et al. (7) found isolates gave the lowest cooked yields. In that study, cooking yields were directly related to the amount of dry soy in the ground beef-soy formulations. The greater quantity of soy (and correspondingly less water) in the textured soy flour formulation increased moisture retention and decreased total cooking loss. 

Wolf (8) attributed the water binding by soy flour not only to the presence of the proteins but also to the polysaccharides which are present. Kotula and Rough (6) demonstrated that ground beef patties extended with soy flour or concentrate were more tender than the all beef patties. Berry et al. (7 ) found patties made with soy flour or concentrate to be more tender than all-beef patties or patties formulated with soy isolate. The dilution... 

Table II. Cost Comparison of Ground Beef Blends...

An evaluation of the composition of the cooking juices, as presented in Table IV, demonstrates, by difference, that fat is retained to a greater extent by the soy concentrate meat product than by the soy flour meat product or the ground beef. The meat product containing soy flour lost more fat during cooking than did the all-beef (Table IV). Similar results were reported by Anderson and Lind ( ). When soy protein concentrates are used in canned meat products like chili, the fat islands within the chopped meat products and the fat cap are eliminated (10). When 4% soy concentrate was added to a minced pork product, cook out of fat and moisture was reduced 31% for pasteurized product and 34% for sterilized product. 

Figure 1. Rancidity development in ground beef with and without soy protein. (Reproduced with permission from reference 30.)...

Sources used Cooked ground beef, parmesan cheese, nonfat dry milk and egg white powder. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2003. Nicotine poisoning after ingestion of contaminated ground beef—Michigan, 2003. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 52 (18) 413-16. 

---