KR20210030631A - Preparation Method for Meat Analogue Comprising Emulsion as a Substitute for Meat Fat - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to a method for manufacturing vegetable meat to which an emulsion is added as a meat fat substitute. More particularly, the present invention relates to: a method for manufacturing vegetable meat comprising a step of separately adding an emulsion composed of Tween 80, water, oil, and lecithin as a fat substitute; and the vegetable meat manufactured by using the method. In the present invention, it is confirmed that the quality and storage stability of the vegetable meat prepared by manufacturing and adding the emulsion are improved when contents and amounts of components are the same, and thus it is confirmed that the sensory preference of the vegetable meat to which the emulsion is added is greatly improved.

Description

Preparation Method for Meat Analogue Comprising Emulsion as a Substitute for Meat Fat}

The present invention relates to a method for producing vegetable meat with an emulsion added as a meat fat substitute, and more particularly, a method for producing vegetable meat, characterized in that an emulsion composed of Tween 80, water, oil and lecithin is separately added as a fat substitute, and It relates to a vegetable meat prepared using this.

Vegetable meat is a product that replaces meat by making color, taste, and smell similar to animal meat by using vegetable ingredients instead of animal ingredients. Meat and sausages using separated soy protein made from by-products of skim soybeans. A lot of products are being developed to replace animal foods such as.

The main use of soybeans for the development of vegetable meat is a major source of protein, lower cholesterol than animal protein, and arginine and vegetable meat, which can prevent cancer, etc., use vegetable ingredients instead of animal ingredients. As a product to replace meat by making odors similar to animal meat, many products to replace animal foods such as meat and sausages are being developed using isolated soy protein made from by-products of skim soybeans.

The main use of soybeans for vegetable meat development is the main source of protein, lower cholesterol than animal protein, and arginine and glycine, which can prevent cancer, etc., in total amino acids of 8.25% and 4.27%, respectively. This is because it is known to contain.

When manufacturing emulsified meat products, there is a problem that fat becomes unstable due to physical force due to the process. Therefore, even in the manufacture of vegetable meat, the emulsification stability of the meat substitute fat acts as an important factor. Currently, in meat products, animal fats are partially replaced with vegetable oils and fish or seaweed oils, but products with only replacement oils have poor elasticity, resulting in a difference in texture, and due to the nature of the oil, oxidation in the product is promoted and the storage period There is a drawback of reducing this and causing nutrient loss.

Oil-in-water emulsions and emulsion gels used as fat substitutes received good evaluation in terms of lipid composition, moisture retention, oxidation stability and organoleptic properties of meat products when mixed with meat products. It is known to be affected by various processing conditions such as the quality of meat products, the physicochemical state of proteins, the ratio of fat or oil, pH and food additives.

Surfactants used in emulsion production include soy protein isolate (SPI) and lecithin, which are widely used after being extracted from soybeans.Emulsions using soy protein isolate are in the form of gels, emulsion stability upon freezing, thawing and heating. It is known to be high. Lecithin is a cationic substance and is widely used as a surfactant. It is a mixture of phospholipids extracted from plants and animals, and has antioxidant properties, and is known to increase the oxidation stability of fat when used as a surfactant.

Accordingly, the present inventors have made diligent efforts to improve the texture of vegetable meat and increase the storage stability. As a result, when an emulsion is separately prepared as a fat substitute and added to the production of vegetable meat, not only the texture of vegetable meat is improved, but also storage stability and quality It was confirmed that this was maintained, and the present invention was completed.

An object of the present invention is to provide a method for preparing vegetable meat with an emulsion added as a meat fat substitute, and to provide a vegetable meat prepared by the above method.

To achieve the above object,

The present invention comprises the steps of (a) preparing an emulsion consisting of a surfactant, water, oil and lecithin;

(b) mixing the tissue soy protein TPV and water to hydrate, and then dehydrating; And

(c) Per 100 parts by weight of tissue soy protein prepared in step (b), 25 to 35 parts by weight of emulsion prepared in step (a), 4 to 5 parts by weight of soy protein isolate (SPI), 3 to 4 parts by weight of binder It provides a vegetable meat manufacturing method comprising; mixing and kneading parts and 0.6 to 0.7 parts by weight of lecithin.

According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the size of the emulsion may be 0.1 ~ 5.0 μm.

According to another preferred embodiment of the present invention, the emulsion of step (a) is 3 to 4% (w/w) surfactant in water and oil mixed in a ratio of 6:4 to 7:3 (w/w). ) And lecithin 0.4 ~ 0.6% (w/w) can be added and then homogenized.

According to another preferred embodiment of the present invention, the surfactant in step (a) may be Tween 80.

According to another preferred embodiment of the present invention, the oil may be MCT oil, coconut oil or peanut oil.

In addition, the present invention provides a vegetable meat prepared by the method for producing vegetable meat,

The vegetable meat has a hardness of 2000 to 3000 g, cohesiveness 0.2 to 0.3, springiness 4 to 7 mm, gumminess 400 to 700 g, and chewiness 15 to 50 mJ. I can have it.

In the present invention, an emulsion was separately prepared as a meat fat substitute and added to the production of vegetable meat. When the contents and amounts of the components were the same, it was confirmed that the quality and storage stability of the vegetable meat prepared by adding after the emulsion production were improved. It was confirmed that the sensory preference of vegetable meat to which the emulsion was added was greatly improved.

1 is data showing a phase transition curve of MCT oil, coconut oil, and peanut oil by DCS analysis.
2 is an optical microscope image of an emulsion prepared by mixing oil and water in a ratio of 1:9. (A) MCT oil and Tween®80; (B) coconut oil and Tween®80; (C) peanut oil and Tween® 80; (D) MCT oil and SPI; (E) coconut oil and SPI; (F) Peanut oil and SPI.
3 is an optical microscope image of an emulsion prepared by mixing oil and water in a ratio of 4:6. (A) MCT oil and Tween®80; (B) coconut oil and Tween®80; (C) peanut oil and Tween® 80; (D) MCT oil and SPI; (E) coconut oil and SPI; (F) Peanut oil and SPI.
Figure 4 is a schematic diagram showing a method for producing vegetable meat.
5 is data obtained by observing the outer surface of vegetable meat.
6 is data obtained by observing a cross section of vegetable meat.
7 is data showing the heating loss of vegetable meat. ad AC: Significant differences between samples were verified using Duncan's multiple range test, and differences between the same oils were shown in lowercase letters and uppercase letters between the same liquid additives.
8 is data showing the liquid retention power of vegetable meat. ad AC: Significant differences between samples were verified using Duncan's multiple range test, and differences between the same oils were shown in lowercase letters and uppercase letters between the same liquid additives.
9 is data showing the sensory evaluation results of vegetable meat mixed with MCT oil.
10 is data showing the sensory evaluation results of vegetable meat mixed with coconut oil.
11 is data showing the sensory evaluation results of vegetable meat mixed with peanut oil.
12 is data showing the sensory evaluation results of vegetable meat.
13 is data confirming the change in hardness during the storage process of vegetable meat.
14 is data confirming the change in hardness during the storage process of vegetable meat prepared by varying the emulsion particle size.

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in detail.

In one aspect, the present invention comprises the steps of: (a) preparing an emulsion consisting of a surfactant, water, oil and lecithin;

(b) mixing the tissue soy protein TPV and water to hydrate, and then dehydrating; And

(c) Per 100 parts by weight of tissue soy protein prepared in step (b), 25 to 35 parts by weight of emulsion prepared in step (a), 4 to 5 parts by weight of soy protein isolate (SPI), 3 to 4 parts by weight of binder It relates to a method for producing vegetable meat comprising; mixing and kneading parts and 0.6 to 0.7 parts by weight of lecithin.

In the present invention, "emulsion" is also referred to as emulsification, and is a state in which liquid substances that do not dissolve with each other are mixed and dispersed by mechanical stirring, and mainly water and oil exhibit such characteristics. Since it has a thermodynamically unstable state, oil separation and water separation occur to return to the original state over time. Interfacial tension exists at the interface between the two solutions of the emulsion, and the higher the interfacial tension, the lower the storage stability of the emulsion. To lower the interfacial tension, a surfactant having hydrophilic and hydrophobic residues is added to make emulsification.

Vegetable meat prepared by the general method of adding oil has a problem that the elasticity is poor, and the texture is different. Due to the nature of the oil, oxidation is promoted in the product, reducing the storage period and causing nutrient loss. In order to solve this problem, in the present invention, instead of the conventional method of preparing vegetable meat by mixing all ingredients at once, an emulsion is separately prepared as a fat substitute, and then mixed with tissue soy protein to produce vegetable meat with improved texture and stability. Was prepared.

In the present invention, the emulsion of step (a) is 3 to 4% (w/w) surfactant and 0.4 to 0.6 of lecithin in water and oil mixed in a ratio of 6:4 to 7:3 (w/w). It can be prepared by adding% (w/w) and then homogenizing.

In addition, the surfactant of the present invention was used within a range not exceeding the recommended intake, and may be mixed with soy protein isolate (SPI) if necessary.

In a specific embodiment of the present invention, the physicochemical properties of the emulsion for each oil and surfactant were confirmed. Depending on the type of oil, the stability of the emulsion did not show a distinct difference, and it was confirmed that Tween®80, used as a surfactant, lowered the interfacial tension more than the isolated soy protein, and the absolute value of the zeta potential of the emulsion was high, so the emulsion stability was high. Soybean protein isolate had high oil collection efficiency. As for the mixing ratio of oil and water, it was confirmed that the oil collection efficiency was excellent at 3:7 (Tables 2 to 6).

In the present invention, the oil may be MCT oil, coconut oil, or peanut oil, but is not limited thereto, and both vegetable oil and animal oil that can be used in the manufacture of vegetable meat may be used.

MCT oil is extracted from vegetable oils with a high content of saturated fatty acids, such as coconut oil, and is a vegetable oil composed of medium-chain fatty acids with between 6 and 12 carbon atoms. It exists as a liquid at room temperature and is consumed as energy directly in the body. In addition, MCT oil has the advantage of being more stable than other oils when it is prepared as an emulsion. Peanut oil has a strong aroma and taste peculiar to peanuts, and it is known that there is no resistance to taste and aroma even when mixed by replacing fat in meat products.

In the present invention, the size of the emulsion may be characterized in that 0.1 ~ 5.0 μm.

In another specific embodiment of the present invention, vegetable meat was prepared by setting the particle size of the emulsion to 40.0, 4.0, or 0.4 μm, and then, as a result of observing the hardness, it was found that the larger the particle size, the sharper the 14 days of storage increased. Confirmed (Fig. 14). On the other hand, in the case of vegetable meat containing an emulsion having a particle size of 0.4 μm, it was confirmed that the stability was excellent because there was no difference in hardness. Therefore, it was confirmed that the particle size of the emulsion is 0.1 to 5.0 μm, preferably 0.1 to 1.0 μm, and more preferably 0.1 to 0.5 μm for vegetable meat production.

In the present invention, the step (c) is preferably, by mixing 27.08 parts by weight of emulsion per 100 parts by weight of tissue soy protein, 4.3 parts by weight of soy protein isolate (SPI), 3.2 parts by weight of binder, and 0.68 parts by weight of lecithin. You can knead it.

In the present invention, textured vegetable protein (TVP) and soy protein isolate (SPI) were used as main ingredients used to manufacture vegetable meat. Meatline® 2714 containing egg white powder, glucose, locust bean gum, carrageenan, and guar gum was used as the binder, but it is not limited thereto, and any binder that can be used in the manufacture of vegetable meat may be used.

The method for producing vegetable meat of the present invention may further include the step of (d) molding the dough prepared in step (c) and then heat-treating.

In another aspect, the present invention relates to a vegetable meat prepared by the method for producing vegetable meat,

The vegetable meat has a hardness of 2000 to 3000 g, cohesiveness 0.2 to 0.3, springiness 4 to 7 mm, gumminess 400 to 700 g, and chewiness 15 to 50 mJ. It is characterized by having.

In the present invention, the vegetable meat may be applied as tteokgalbi, sausage, dumplings, hamburger patties, meatballs, ham, and the like.

In a specific embodiment of the present invention, vegetable meat prepared by mixing each of MCT oil, coconut oil and peanut oil with only water, oil only, water and oil separately, or in an emulsion form with vegetable meat (FIGS. 4 and 7) Changes in physicochemical properties (FIGS. 5 to 8, Tables 7 to 9) and sensory differences (FIGS. 9 to 12) were analyzed.

As for the external appearance and cross section, the sample with only water was the most coarse visually, and the sample with oil was not. In color difference, vegetable meat mixed with isolated soy protein was higher than that of other samples. In both heating loss and water content, vegetable meat with water was the highest, and vegetable meat with oil was the lowest. As for the liquid-phase retention, the loss of heating and the moisture content showed opposite tendency. In the TPA test, hardness, cohesiveness, springiness, gumminess, and chewiness showed similar trends. In the sensory test, the higher the strength and acceptability for succulent and softness, the higher the overall sensory test, and the vegetable meat mixed with Tween® 80 received better evaluation than other samples.

In the results of physicochemical characterization, no significant difference was found between the types of oil, but MCT oil, which showed the highest overall sensory test in the sensory test, was found to be the most suitable. In addition, it was confirmed that when the emulsion was added rather than simply adding water or oil, the hardness of the vegetable meat was lowered, and the softness and juiciness were increased.

In addition, in another specific embodiment of the present invention, in order to check whether the storage stability of the vegetable meat prepared by the method of the present invention is excellent, the storage temperature and duration of the vegetable meat containing the emulsion using MCT oil and other liquid components The physicochemical properties were analyzed.

As shown in FIG. 13, the heat-treated sample was more stable in terms of storage period than the sample without the heat treatment in terms of liquid retention and hardness. In the case of hardness, the sample to which the emulsion was added showed the lowest value at -20°C, and it was confirmed that the storage stability of the vegetable meat prepared by adding after the emulsion preparation was improved when the contents and amounts of the components were the same.

Further, in another specific embodiment of the present invention, the particle size of the emulsion is 40.0, 4.0, 0.4 μm, and as a result of confirming the change in hardness during the storage process, as shown in Fig. 14, the difference in hardness is not until the 7th day of storage. Although it did not appear, it was confirmed that the larger the particle size, the sharper the increase was at the 14th day of storage, whereas the vegetable meat containing the emulsion having a particle size of 0.4 μm did not show a difference in hardness, so it was confirmed that the stability was excellent.

Therefore, in the present invention, an emulsion is prepared using MCT oil as a meat substitute fat applicable to vegetable meat, and an emulsion in which the ratio of oil and water is 3:7 by using Tween®80 and lecithin as surfactants is most suitable. For storage, it was confirmed that it is most suitable to store vegetable meat at -20°C in a heat-treated state.

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in more detail through examples.

These examples are for illustrative purposes only, and it will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that the scope of the present invention is not construed as being limited by these examples.

Preparation of emulsion using Tween 80 and analysis of physicochemical properties

1-1: emulsion preparation

The oils used in this experiment were MCT oil (liquid coconut oil extraction, Chemrez Technologies Inc., Quezon, Philippines), coconut oil (Earth Born Co., Ltd., Thailand), and peanut oil (Qinhuangdao Jinhai Food Industry Co., Ltd.) ., China), and lecithin (soybean extract, Samchun, Korea), soy protein isolate (SPI, more than 90% protein, Avention, Korea), Tween®80 ( polyoxyethylene (20) sorbitan monooleate, Samchun, Korea) was used.

The concentration of Tween®80 used in the preparation of an oil in water (O/W) emulsion was selected as 3.5% (w/w) that does not exceed the recommended intake (CODEX, 2018), and isolated soybeans, a natural surfactant. Protein was also used at the same concentration. The ratio of water and oil is 9:1, 8:2, 7:3, 6:4 (w:w), and lecithin 0.5% (w/w) is added to each oil as a surfactant (co-surfactant). Mixed. The water and oil mixed according to the mixing ratio were homogenized at 20,000 rpm for 2 minutes using an ultra-high-speed homogenizer (IKA®TA25, Digital Ultra-Turrax®Germany).

1-2: Thermal characterization

Thermal properties of MCT oil, coconut oil and peanut oil were analyzed to select oils suitable for vegetable meat development. The state of the product according to the storage temperature after the manufacture of vegetable meat is mainly determined by vegetable protein, but the type of fat also plays an important role in the product's properties and storage stability.

In order to measure the amount of heat generated in the phase change of oil, 15 mg of a sample was put in a crucible (ø6 mm, aluminum 99.5%, Netzsch, Germany) and sealed by compression, and then measured by putting it in a differential scanning calorimeter. _{Nitrogen gas (N 2} ) was used as the purge gas, and the temperature was maintained at a rate of ±10 K/min. The initial starting temperature was set to -50°C, and after maintaining the constant temperature for 5 minutes, the temperature was increased to 50°C at 10 K/min. Measurements were repeated three times per sample, and the freezing point was confirmed at the melting point.

Analysis of thermal properties according to the type of oil Oil type Peak △ H _max ¹⁾ (J/g) T _peak (℃) T _onset (℃) T _endset (℃) MCT Peak 1 -172.8 -7.7 -17.3 -1.2 Coconut Peak 1 -100.2 28.7 11.8 29.5 Peanut Peak 1 -25.9 -25.9 -31.4 -22.6 Peak 2 -46.8 -13.0 -21.1 -1.0

△ H _max : enthalpy, T _peak : peak temperature. T _onset : onset temperature. T _endset : endset temperature

As shown in Fig. 1 and Table 1, MCT oil showed an endothermic process between -23℃ and 10℃, and the melting point of MCT oil was -7.7℃ based on _{the temperature (T peak) at which the heat absorption was greatest.} . Coconut oil started to melt at 10℃ and all turned into liquid at 30℃. This means that liquid and solid can coexist when stored at 20 ~ 30℃.

Peanut oil is an oil that has similar thermal properties to MCT oil, but the first endothermic process between -33℃ and -22℃ and the second endothermic process between -21℃ and 5℃ showed two thermal changes. The onset temperature was in the order of peanut oil, MCT oil, and coconut oil, and MCT oil had the most endothermic heat generated. The endothermic heat amount decreases as the content of unsaturated fatty acids increases, and increases as the content of saturated fatty acids increases. In particular, it is known to increase as the length of the saturated fatty acid increases, and similar results are shown in the present invention.

1-3: viscosity

Depending on the type of oil or the viscosity of the same oil, there is a big difference from the texture you feel in your mouth. In order to find out these characteristics, the viscosity of the oil according to the type and temperature was measured.

In order to confirm the correlation between the viscosity of oil and emulsion, it was measured using a stress controlled rheometer (Rheometer®MCR 302, Anton-Paar, Austria). The probe used at this time was a cylindrical (cup & bob) probe with a diameter of 26 mm and a height of 28 mm. The shear rate was set to 0.01 ~ 100/s ¹ , and the melting point of coconut oil (based on about 25°C was measured at 10°C to 40°C section, and the emulsion was measured at 25°C. 10 at each temperature) After holding for a minute to equilibrate the temperature, measurements were taken.

Viscosity according to the mixing ratio of oil, surfactant and water Oil type Mixing ratio (O:W) Viscosity (mPa·s) Tween® 80 SPI MCT 1:9 1.44±0.01 1.42±0.01 2:8 1.53±0.01 1.54±0.01 3:7 1.64±0.01 1.65±0.01 4:6 2.33±0.01 3.30±0.01 Coconut 1:9 2.00±0.01 1.99±0.01 2:8 2.12±0.01 2.14±0.01 3:7 2.28±0.01 2.28±0.01 4:6 3.24±0.00 4.61±0.01 Peanut 1:9 2.74±0.09 2.60±0.06 2:8 2.90±0.07 2.78±0.13 3:7 3.12±0.08 3.23±0.03 4:6 4.43±0.12 6.29±0.18

As a result of measuring the viscosity by preparing an emulsion according to the emulsion composition ratio, oil type, and surfactant, overall viscosity was high at 4:6 ratio, and 1:9 ratio was found to have the lowest viscosity. It is believed that the viscosity was low because a large amount of water, which had a lower viscosity than oil, was included, and at the same water and oil mixing ratio, depending on the type of oil, the viscosity of the emulsion composition ratio of the oil, the type of oil, and the surfactant As a result of measuring the viscosity by preparing the emulsion according to, the overall viscosity was found to be high at the 4:6 ratio, and the 1:9 ratio was found to have the lowest viscosity. It is believed that the viscosity was lower because a large amount of water, which had a lower viscosity than oil, was included, and it was found that at the same water and oil mixing ratio, depending on the type of oil, the viscosity of the oil was different regardless of the surfactant. As the amount of oil increased, there was a difference according to the type of surfactant, and there was a difference between Tween®80 and soy protein isolate at the 4:6 mixing ratio of all oil types.

1-4: interfacial tension

The interfacial tension represents the value of the tension generated between the interface due to the cohesive force of each substance between two unmixed substances. The lower the interfacial tension value, the higher the emulsion stability.

In order to measure the interfacial tension between oil and water according to the type of surfactant, the mixture was carried out at the same concentration as the emulsion was prepared. To measure the density of each liquid, fix the probe of the spherical shape (T113, Biolin Scientific) in a transparent vessel (sample vessel, 50 mm in diameter, Biolin Scientific) to a surface tension meter (Sigma 703D, Biolin Scientific), and then place the transparent vessel up and down. And measured the density. Fix a ring-shaped probe (T106, Biolin Scientific) to a surface tension meter, input the difference in density between the two liquids to measure the interface, and put water or a liquid mixture of water and surfactant in a transparent bowl, and place a transparent bowl. Immerse the probe. After that, the oil or oil mixed with lecithin was put so as not to touch the probe, and the probe was pulled up into the oil layer until the water dropped from the probe to measure the maximum value, and this value was used as the interfacial tension value.

Interfacial tension according to oil type Oil type Interfacial tension (mN/m) WO ¹⁾ TW-LO (%) ²⁾ SW-LO (%) MCT 13.58±0.48 1.79±0.05 (13.2%) 3.41±0.15 (25.1%) Coconut 19.62±0.49 2.29±0.22 (11.7%) 4.15±0.03 (21.2%) Peanut 22.81±0.17 2.36±0.18 (10.3%) 4.77±0.26 (20.9%)

¹⁾ W: water. O: Oil, T: Tween® 80, S: SPI, L: Lecithin

²⁾ Percentage of interfacial tension value before mixing activator

If no surfactant was added, the interfacial tension was lower in the order of MCT oil, coconut oil, and peanut oil, and was 13.58 mN/m, 19.62 mN/m, and 22.81 mN/m, respectively. This indicates that the higher the viscosity, the greater the resistance value inside the liquid, and as a result, the interfacial tension increases.

Among the Tween®80 and soybean protein isolates used as surfactants, it was confirmed that Tween®80 lowers the interfacial tension more than the soybean isolate isolates. In other words, even at the same concentration, the molecular weight of Tween®80 is less than that of protein, and it is judged to lower the interfacial tension more by adsorbing to the interface more efficiently than protein. In general, oleic acid (C18:1) present in Tween® 80 quickly adsorbs to the interface, and after adsorbing to the interface, surfactants of proteins are adsorbed to the interface, and then the protein structure unfolds and the hydrophobic group inside is adsorbed to the interface. It is done. Therefore, it was found that Tween®80 was more effective than isolated soybean protein to quickly and effectively lower the interfacial tension.

1-5: particle size

The size of the particles is an important factor in predicting the quality stability of emulsion foods. The smaller the particle size, the higher the dispersion stability, so it can be stored for a long time. When mixing vegetable meat production, it may affect the stability of physical properties, so the particle size according to the type of oil, mixing ratio, and surfactant was measured.

To measure the particle size of the emulsion, add 400 mL of distilled water to a 600 mL beaker, submerge the suction port of the laser diffraction particle size analyzer (Mastersizer®3000E, Malvern, UK), and then add the emulsion to be measured, and the measured concentration is 7.5% to 8.0. %, and the size of the particles was measured by volume volume fraction (d _{4,3 ).}

Emulsion particle size according to oil, surfactant and water mixing ratio Oil type Mixing ratio (O:W) Droplet size (d ₄₃ , μm) Tween®80 SPI MCT 1:9 4.92±0.01 6.12±0.06 2:8 5.31±0.00 6.64±0.05 3:7 5.28±0.03 7.50±0.06 4:6 4.94±0.02 7.21±0.45 Coconut 1:9 7.58±0.26 7.84±0.05 2:8 8.47±0.00 7.73±0.21 3:7 8.57±0.00 8.49±0.09 4:6 7.41±0.00 8.21±0.30 Peanut 1:9 10.60±0.00 8.87±0.08 2:8 8.60±0.01 9.44±0.16 3:7 7.81±0.01 9.21±0.22 4:6 7.74±0.00 10.62±1.98

The emulsion containing Tween® 80 by type of oil showed the smallest particle size in MCT oil, and the emulsion containing Tween®80 by type of coconut oil and peanut oil showed the smallest particle size in MCT oil. Peanut oil did not show a big difference, and the emulsion mixed with soy protein isolate was analyzed in the order of MCT oil, coconut oil, and peanut oil. The emulsion mixed with Tween®80 showed the smallest particle size in the ratio of 4:6 in the ratio of oil and water, and the relatively large particle size in the ratio of 2:8 and 3:7. In the case of peanut oil, as the mixing ratio of oil increased, the particle size decreased. In the case of the emulsion containing the isolated soy protein, it was confirmed that the particle size increased as the oil content increased.

In addition, in order to check the shape, shape, and density of the emulsion particles, the magnification of photographing was adjusted using an optical microscope (CX 31RTSF, Olympus Optical Co., Japan) equipped with a CCD camera (3.0M, Olympus Optical Co., Japan). It was observed by fixing at 1,000 times. In order to confirm a clear difference, an emulsion with an oil-water ratio of 1:9 and 4:6 was observed immediately after preparation.

As shown in Figs. 2 and 3, it was confirmed that the emulsion in which the ratio of oil and water is 1:9 was larger than that of other oils, depending on the type of oil, but the difference due to the surfactant. Could not be confirmed. It was confirmed that the emulsion with a ratio of oil and water of 4:6 has a larger number of particles than the emulsion with a ratio of 1:9. It was confirmed that the isolated soy protein was not evenly dispersed in the mixed coconut oil and peanut oil emulsion and aggregation occurred.

The zeta potential value of the emulsion mixed with the isolated soy protein is close to 0, so dispersion stability is lower than when the Tween® 80 is mixed. In addition, as larger particles move faster than particles with smaller upward and downward movements, the frequency of collisions between particles increases. Therefore, it seems that aggregate formation occurred in the other two emulsions, which have a larger particle size than the emulsion made with MCT oil.

1-6: Zeta analysis

The repulsive force is generated by the electric charge between the particles of the emulsion, and the higher the charge value, the higher the repulsive force between the particles, which increases the stability of the emulsion (McClements, 2016). To measure the zeta potential, dilute the emulsion 500 times with distilled water, and then inject 700 μL into a capillary cell (DTS1070, UK), and use an identification scattering meter (Zeta-Sizer®, Nano ZS 90, UK) to measure the emulsion. Zeta potential was measured.

Table 5 shows the zeta potential of the emulsion prepared according to the type of oil, mixing ratio, and surfactant.

Zeta potential of emulsion according to oil, surfactant and water mixing ratio Oil type Mixing ratio (O:W) Zeta potential (mV) 80Tween® SPI MCT 1:9 -40.77±1.23 -20.60±0.42 2:8 -42.40±0.61 -22.95±2.19 3:7 -40.40±2.84 ^a -23.50±0.28 4:6 -41.27±0.31 -23.35±0.35 Coconut 1:9 -43.23±1.53 -22.00±0.85 2:8 -44.27±1.90 -21.97±0.42 3:7 -45.60±2.34 -23.37±1.14 4:6 -43.93±3.07 -26.85±0.64 Peanut 1:9 -43.67±1.24 -19.85±0.07 2:8 -43.23±2.61 -22.30±0.00 3:7 -45.93±0.68 -22.40±1.13 4:6 -45.13±0.80 -25.20±1.13

Among the surfactant types, Tween®80 showed a value of -45.93 mV to -40.40 mV, but the isolated soy protein showed a slightly lower value of -26.85 mV to -19.85 mV ( p <0.01). However, there was no significant difference in the zeta potential value according to the type of oil and the mixing ratio.

1-7: oil collection efficiency

In order to confirm the oil trapping efficiency of the emulsion, the method of Min et al. (2018) was applied. Before preparing the emulsion, Oil Red O (CAS No. 1320-06-5, Sigma-Aldrich, USA) was dissolved in oil at 0.02% (w/w) and used as an oil collection efficiency value. Put the emulsion and nucleic acid to be measured in a 1:3 (v/v) 15 mL centrifuge tube, homogenize using a vortexer for 1 minute, and then centrifuge (1736R, LaboGene, Denmark) at 25°C at 3000. It was centrifuged under the conditions of rpm and 10 min. Thereafter, 3 mL of the supernatant was taken and the absorbance of the uncoated oil was measured using a visible light spectrophotometer (Optizen, MECASYS Co., Korea) under the condition of 510 nm. The measured value was calculated by substituting it in the following equation (1).

[Equation 1]

FO: Amount of free (uncoated) oil red O extracted with n-hexane from the emulsion (mg)

TO: Calculated weight (mg) of total oil red O added in the emulsion

Oil collection efficiency of emulsion according to oil, surfactant and water mixing ratio Oil type Mixing ratio (O:W) Encapsulation efficiency (%) Tween® 80 SPI MCT 1:9 91.36±0.40 90.12±0.00 2:8 93.05±0.57 96.59±0.00 3:7 98.02±0.40 98.06±0.00 4:6 91.96±0.81 97.51±0.00 Coconut 1:9 75.31±0.14 88.51±1.21 2:8 92.62±0.80 95.96±0.90 3:7 94.52±0.71 96.90±1.10 4:6 91.67±1.30 96.51±0.10 Peanut 1:9 74.07±0.04 96.07±0.33 2:8 81.82±0.00 94.61±0.40 3:7 93.61±0.28 97.29±0.65 4:6 90.93±0.76 96.05±1.07

Among the oil types, MCT oil, coconut oil, and peanut oil were higher in the order of Tween®80-mixed emulsion, and there was no significant difference in the emulsion-mixed soybean protein isolate. In terms of mixing ratios, in the emulsion mixed with Tween®80, the collection efficiency was highest when oil and water were mixed at a ratio of 3:7, and the emulsion mixed with soy protein isolate had a mixing ratio of 1:9 except for peanut oil. It was the lowest. As a result of analyzing the emulsion and physicochemical properties, it was confirmed that the properties of the emulsion were determined according to the type of oil, and other characteristics were not related. Therefore, in the present invention, MCT oil, coconut oil, and peanut oil were mixed with water at 3:7 to prepare an emulsion, mixed with vegetable meat, and then physicochemical properties and sensory tests were performed.

Statistical analysis

In the present invention, the results of the physicochemical analysis were SPSS statistical program (statistical package for the social science, Ver. 24.0 IBM., USA), one-way batch variance analysis (one-way ANOVA) and Dunkin's multiple range analysis (Duncan's multiple range test) was used to verify significant differences between samples. An independent sample t-test was used to see the difference between surfactants. The principal component analysis (PCA) was analyzed using the XLSTAT program (ver. 2018. 06. 54124, Addinsoft, USA) to see the correlation between the physicochemical properties of the oil and emulsion used and the emulsion samples.

Manufacture of vegetable meat using emulsion prepared using Tween 80

Main ingredients used to make vegetable meat are textured vegetable protein (TVP, Supromax 5050®, 50% protein, Supromax 5010®, 59.3% protein, Brazil), binder (Meatline® 2714, egg white powder, glucose). , Containing locust soybean gum, carrageenan, guar gum, Danisco, Denmark), soy protein isolate (SPI, more than 90% protein, Avention, Korea) was used, and MCT oil (coconut oil) was used in the liquid material and emulsion to be added. Extract, Chemrez Technologies Inc., Philippines), Coconut Oil (Earth Born Co. Ltd, Thailand), Peanut Oil (Qinhuangdao Jinhai Food Industry Co., Ltd, China), Soy Protein Isolate, Lecithin (Extracted from Soybean, Samchun, Korea) ), Tween® 80 (polyoxyethylene (20) sorbitan monooleate, Samchun, Korea).

The emulsion to be mixed with vegetable meat was prepared in the same manner as in Example 1-1, and the mixing ratio of oil and water was selected as 3:7 (w:w) based on the optimum production conditions.

Vegetable meat was prepared using the manufacturing method shown in FIG. 4, and the dried tissue soy protein Supromax 5050® and Supromax 5010® were mixed in a ratio of 1:2 (w:w) and 5 times the weight of distilled water for 2 hours. During the hydration, it was dehydrated for 5 minutes using a dehydrator (ws-6600, Hanil Electric, Korea). It was added to the dehydrated TVP according to the composition ratio in Table 7, and then mixed for 1 minute using a hand blender (Multiquick 3 Vario MQ3145, Braun, Germany). 19.5 g of the mixed dough was put into a cylindrical mold (diameter 30 mm, height 25 mm) and molded. An oven (M4207, Simfer, Turkey) was used to set the internal temperature at 180°C for 15 minutes to 80°C, and after heat treatment, it was allowed to cool at room temperature for 30 minutes.

Composition and content of major ingredients for vegetable meat manufacturing Abbreviation TVP (g) SPI (g) Binder (g) Liquid treatments Liquid homogenization Oil (g) Water (g) Emulsion (g) Tween® 80 or
SPI (g) Lecithin (g) Water 100.00 4.30 3.20 0.00 27.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 X Oil 100.00 4.30 3.20 27.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 X O+W (Tween® 80) 100.00 4.30 3.20 7.72 19.36 0.00 0.04 0.68 X Emulsion (Tween® 80) 100.00 4.30 3.20 0.00 0.00 27.08 0.04 0.68 O O+W (SPI) 100.00 4.30 3.20 7.72 19.36 0.00 0.04 0.68 X Emulsion (SPI) 100.00 4.30 3.20 0.00 0.00 27.08 0.04 0.68 O

Identification of the characteristics of vegetable meat

In the present invention, the characteristics of the vegetable meat prepared in Example 2 were compared.

3-1: Observation of appearance

The surface and cross section of vegetable meat were photographed using a digital camera (Alpha 350, Sony, Japan).

It was observed how the heat treatment process affected the outer surface and cross-section of the food appearance for each treatment zone.

5 and 6, it was confirmed that the outer surface was rough in the order of water addition, emulsion addition, and oil-added vegetable meat. Vegetable meat to which gulf was added showed a relatively non-coarse outer surface. In the case of the cut side, it was confirmed that the cross section of vegetable meat containing oil and soy protein isolate had high density. However, vegetable meat mixed with water and Tween® 80 was less dense than vegetable meat containing oil and soy protein isolate.

3-2: Observation of chromaticity

Using a colorimeter (CR-400, Konica Minolta sensing, Inc., Japan), the colors of the vegetable meat dough and heat treated vegetable meat are measured using a colorimeter (lightness, L ^* ), redness, a ^* ), and yellowness. b ^* ) was measured. The total color difference (ΔE) before and after heat treatment was calculated by substituting it into Equation 2 below.

[Equation 2]

L1, a1, b1: chromaticity of the sample before heating

L2, a2, b2: chromaticity of the sample after heating

Vegetable meat chromaticity analysis Color Heat
treatment Oil type Liquid materials Water Oil O+W
(Tween®80) Emulsion (Tween®80) O+W (SPI) Emulsion (SPI) L* Non-heated MCT 71.86±2.10 63.04±4.64 71.56±1.44 67.54±1.16 66.14±0.36 69.99±0.12 Coconut 71.86±2.10 63.04±1.41 68.47±1.11 67.86±0.63 67.68±1.76 71.12±0.59 Peanut 71.86±2.10 63.04±1.94 68.57±0.78 68.59±0.88 69.62±0.76 71.78±1.17 Heated MCT 66.18±0.34 60.24±0.89 64.01±0.65 66.34±0.95 65.98±0.94 65.37±0.62 Coconut 66.18±0.34 60.24±1.10 65.34±1.09 65.22±0.67 65.64±0.70 67.47±0.48 Peanut 66.18±0.34 60.24±0.80 68.40±1.39 66.31±0.17 65.66±0.82 67.52±0.72 a* Non-heated MCT 2.27±0.23 2.05±0.08 1.89±0.15 2.24±0.16 2.01±0.27 2.48±0.05 Coconut 2.27±0.23 2.05±0.17 2.08±0.20 2.25±0.07 2.01±0.19 2.17±0.13 Peanut 2.27±0.23 2.05±0.18 1.44±0.06 1.98±0.13 1.98±0.06 2.22±0.17 Heated MCT 1.87±0.18 2.31±0.04 2.10±0.13 1.94±0.06 2.06±0.05 1.89±0.24 Coconut 1.87±0.18 2.31±0.08 1.86±0.07 1.96±0.13 1.83±0.13 1.66±0.13 Peanut 1.87±0.18 2.31±0.06 2.00±0.30 2.05±0.11 2.05±0.08 1.90±0.19 b* Non-heated MCT 16.31±0.87 15.95±0.24 15.12±0.13 16.37±0.63 15.92±0.25 16.49±0.14 Coconut 16.31±0.87 15.95±0.15 15.56±0.28 16.37±0.04 15.96±0.28 16.47±0.32 Peanut 16.31±0.87 15.95±0.73 14.85±0.51 16.11±0.32 16.41±0.19 16.18±0.38 Heated MCT 16.48±0.35 16.14±0.15 16.04±0.24 16.16±0.33 16.27±0.21 16.76±0.13 Coconut 16.48±0.35 16.14±0.14 15.40±0.16 15.99±0.14 16.00±0.19 16.57±0.15 Peanut 16.48±0.35 16.14±0.19 15.85±0.33 16.10±0.14 16.08±0.12 16.52±0.24 Δ E MCT 2.93±1.83 4.34±0.69 1.56±1.43 1.20±0.48 4.70±1.05 4.70±0.62 Coconut 2.93±1.83 3.15±1.33 2.70±1.64 2.05±0.61 3.63±1.55 5.71±0.81 Peanut 2.93±1.83 2.60±0.54 2.43±1.22 2.98±0.89 4.29±0.66 5.29±1.22

Table 8 shows the difference in color for each treatment group. In the L ^* value, the dough with only water showed the highest value at 70.28-72.24, and the dough with oil showed the lowest value at 63.04 regardless of the type of oil. When heat-treated vegetable meat containing oil, the lowest was 60.24. MCT oil was the lowest in Tween®80, coconut oil was an emulsion with SPI, and peanut oil was water and oil with Tween®80 added. It was highest in vegetable meat mixed separately. In the dough state, the L ^* value was high, but it was found to be low after heat treatment. The a ^* value was generally 1.89-2.27, and in vegetable meat added with MCT oil, the emulsion sample mixed with SPI showed the highest value at 2.48. In the heat-treated vegetable meat, the oil-only sample was the highest at 2.31. After the heat treatment, the a ^* value in the emulsion sample containing isolated soy protein showed a tendency to decrease, and the vegetable meat with oil only increased. The ^{values of b*} represent 14.85-16.76 values as a whole. In the treatment section, it was confirmed that the sample containing only oil appeared the lowest in ^{the L * value, and the a *} and b ^* values could not find a significant trend. There was no difference in color between oil types, and vegetable meat mixed with SPI was high among treatment groups.

3-3: heating loss

The vegetable meat sample was measured using Equation 3 below by measuring the weight of the sample that was left to cool for 30 minutes before and after the heat treatment.

[Equation 3]

W1: Weight of vegetable meat dough before heating (g)

W2: Weight of vegetable meat dough after heating (g)

In general meat products, the succulence is deeply related to consumer preference. The juicyness of vegetable meat was confirmed through heating loss and liquid retention. As shown in FIG. 7, it was confirmed that the heating loss was the highest in the vegetable meat added with water among all samples, and the heating loss was the lowest in the vegetable meat added with oil. Vegetable meat mixed with oil and water and vegetable meat mixed with emulsion were lower than the heating loss value of vegetable meat mixed with only oil and higher than the heating loss value of vegetable meat mixed only with water. In vegetable meat mixed with MCT oil, Tween®80 was found to have significantly lower heat loss than that of vegetable meat mixed with SPI.

3-4: liquid retention

The liquid holding capacity of vegetable meat is expressed as liquid holding capacity (LHC) by measuring water and oil together with the existing water holding capacity measurement method (Pietrasik & Shand, 2004).

Specifically, liquid retention is calculated by measuring the moisture content and liquid material of the tissue soy protein used to measure the weight of vegetable meat before and after heat treatment to calculate the amount of heating loss generated during the heat treatment process. In addition, about 2 g of the heat-treated sample was placed in a 15 mL conical tube containing sterile gauze, centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 10 minutes in a centrifuge (1736R, LaboGene, Denmark), and then the weight of the sample was measured. It was calculated by substituting.

[Equation 4]

LHC: Liquid holding capacity

WTL: Total weight of liquid added to vegetable meat dough (g)

LWP: Weight loss in vegetable meat production (g)

WHM: heated vegetable meat weight (g)

LWC: weight loss by centrifugation of heated vegetable meat (g)

As shown in FIG. 8, the liquid retention power was the same as the heating loss. The liquid retention power of vegetable meat added with water was the lowest, and the liquid retention power of vegetable meat added only oil was the highest. In vegetable meat mixed with MCT oil and coconut oil, there was no significant difference in vegetable meat mixed with water and oil separated mixed vegetable meat and emulsion. Vegetable meat with peanut oil and water separated and mixed with emulsion showed significant difference, and it was found to have lower liquid retention than other oils.

3-5: TPA(Texture profile analysis)

For the physical property test of vegetable meat, a texture analyzer (CT3-1000, Brookfield Engineering Laboratories, Inc., USA) was used using a sample that has been cooled and cooled as it is. The measurement was performed 15 times per treatment using a texture profile analysis type, a strain rate of 50%, a trigger load of 100 g, a measurement speed of 1 mm/s, and a plate type probe (TA4/1000).

TPA analysis results Oil type Liquid materials Water Oil O+W
(Tween ^ⓡ 80) Emulsion
(Tween ^ⓡ 80) O+W (SPI) Emulsion (SPI) Hardness
(g) MCT 3844.75±389.77 4790.00±211.98 2890.50±67.65 2203.00±186.69 5144.75±291.45 5338.50±54.88 Coconut 3844.75±389.77 6365.50±594.78 3063.00±338.67 2766.00±583.43 4796.50±73.17 4174.75±312.56 Peanut 3844.75±389.77 5404.00±301.30 2991.75±151.13 2816.25±60.26 4873.50±477.48 4292.75±246.10 Adhesiveness
(mJ) MCT 0.03±0.05 0.03±0.06 0.08±0.10 0.10±0.08 0.08±0.05 0.10±0.08 Coconut 0.03±0.05 0.05±0.06 0.03±0.05 0.07±0.06 0.10±0.08 0.08±0.10 Peanut 0.03±0.05 0.00±0.00 0.00±0.00 0.00±0.00 0.05±0.06 0.00±0.00 Cohesiveness MCT 0.26±0.01 0.34±0.02 0.22±0.01 0.21±0.01 0.29±0.03 0.33±0.07 Coconut 0.26±0.01 0.41±0.01 0.22±0.01 0.21±0.02 0.27±0.01 0.25±0.02 Peanut 0.26±0.01 0.41±0.01 0.25±0.02 0.24±0.01 0.30±0.01 0.27±0.01 Springiness
(mm) MCT 7.67±1.13 9.94±0.36 6.44±0.45 5.02±0.60 9.63±0.34 9.76±0.29 Coconut 7.67±1.13 10.31±0.18 6.86±1.14 6.10±1.55 9.34±0.26 8.30±0.72 Peanut 7.67±1.13 10.55±0.10 7.34±0.91 6.64±0.11 9.27±0.74 8.11±0.80 Gumminess
(g) MCT 1006.50±122.97 1621.00±32.05 645.00±17.19 458.75±62.03 1507.50±221.30 1743.75±347.11 Coconut 1006.50±122.97 2619.00±327.80 679.75±101.14 566.33±85.71 1283.75±48.01 1061.00±163.46 Peanut 1006.50±122.97 2191.25±157.22 739.25±67.62 682.00±22.41 1445.50±195.42 1180.25±71.85 Chewiness
(mJ) MCT 76.73±18.53 157.97±7.47 40.73±3.31 22.85±6.05 142.78±23.90 166.98±33.64 Coconut 76.73±18.53 265.08±36.29 46.60±14.38 34.73±14.29 117.65±7.31 86.93±20.06 Peanut 76.73±18.53 226.58±16.27 53.63±11.36 44.38±1.76 132.23±26.33 94.30±14.30

The TPA test is a measure that can infer the chewing movement when a consumer consumes a product, and is used as an important reference material in product development. The physical properties of vegetable meat to which various liquid ingredients were added are shown in Table 9. Except for adhesiveness, there are significant differences between liquid materials in hardness, cohesiveness, springiness, gumminess, and chewiness. The chewiness was highest in coconut oil and lowest in MCT oil. Depending on the surfactant, the hardness of the sample mixed with SPI tended to be high, and the lowest value was the sample mixed with Tween®80 in the liquid material. There was no clear tendency to be found between the samples to which water and oil were added separately and the samples to which the emulsion was added. Vegetable meat added with SPI is high in all items except for the adhesion of vegetable meat with Tween®80 because it forms a gel matrix structure warned by the added soy protein isolate upon heat denaturation. On the other hand, vegetable meat containing Tween® 80 showed lower values than other samples except for stickiness.

Sensory testing of vegetable meat

In order to protect the human rights of the subject and secure the reliability of the experiment before performing the sensory test, the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Konkuk University in accordance with the Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice by International Conference on Harmonization (ICH GCP). ) Was approved (700355-201901-HR-294). The sensory test of vegetable meat was conducted on 12 graduate students who received education and training for 3 months periodically. For the education and training of the sensory test, the adaptation to the taste, aroma, and texture of vegetable meat, which is difficult to encounter normally, and the evaluation items of the sensory test were selected through a preliminary review of the contents. Samples used for sensory testing were provided at the same temperature and size, and random numbers were used for each sample. The items are surface color, inside color, oil flavor, bean flavor, tenderness, springiness, juiciness, and compactness. , Intensity, acceptability and overall sensation for fattiness were evaluated using a 7-point scale. In terms of intensity,'less' and'weak' were evaluated as 0 points,'many' and'strong' were evaluated as 7 points, and preference was evaluated as'dislike' (0) and'like' (7).

The results of the physicochemical analysis of the present invention were SPSS statistical program (statistical package for the social science, Ver. 24.0 IBM., USA), one-way batch variance analysis (one-way ANOVA) and post-test Duncan's multiple range test. Was used to verify the significant difference between the samples. The sensory test results were analyzed using a principal component analysis (PCA) to analyze the strength and preference of test items and the relationship between samples using the XLSTAT program (XLSTAT ver. 2018. 06. 54124, Addinsoft, USA).

The principal component analysis was performed on the sensory test results of vegetable meat to which MCT oil was added, and is shown in FIG. 9. Between the sensory test item and the sample, there was a positive (+) correlation between soybean flavor, external color, oily flavor, elasticity, and preference of internal color, and it was found that vegetable meat mixed with water was higher than that of other vegetable meats. There was a negative (-) correlation between test items, elasticity and greasy strength, and vegetable meat mixed with SPI. Vegetable meat mixed with Tween®80 and vegetable meat mixed only with oil showed the opposite tendency, and the preference of density, strength and preference for succulent and softness had a positive correlation with the overall sensory test. It was found that the value of vegetable meat mixed with ®80 was higher than that of other vegetable meats.

The principal component analysis was performed on the sensory test results of vegetable meat to which coconut oil was added, and the results are shown in FIG. 10. The relationship between the sensory test item and the sample has a negative (-) correlation between the strength and preference for density, the preference for external color, and the strength and preference for elasticity, and the sensory characteristics of vegetable meat mixed with oil and water. Appeared to be similar. There is a positive correlation between the overall sensory evaluation and the strength and preference of succulent and softness, and the preference of greasy and oily flavor, and these items are compared to other vegetable meats. It was found to be high, and vegetable meat with oil was the lowest.

The principal component analysis was performed on the sensory test results of vegetable meat to which peanut oil was added, and shown in FIG. 11. As for the relationship between sensory test items and sample treatment groups, most of the sensory test items were related to the overall sensory test, and in particular, the preference of oil flavor was found to be highly related.

The principal component analysis was performed on the results of the sensory test of vegetable meat between the added liquid materials and shown in FIG. 12. Each vegetable meat was divided into water, oil, Tween®80, and SPI according to the type of mixed material, so the difference in organoleptic properties between oil and water mixture and emulsion could not be clearly identified. The sensory test item having the most close relationship with the general sensory test was found to be succulent, and it was confirmed that the strength of soybean flavor, the taste of grease, the strength of the softness and the taste are highly related.

Characterization according to storage conditions

Storage temperature is a very important factor in determining animal or vegetable food. In the present invention, the physicochemical properties of vegetable meat containing emulsions using MCT oil and other liquid components were analyzed according to storage temperature and duration.

Vegetable meat was prepared in the same manner as in Example 2, and the dough and dough of vegetable meat were separately separated and stored in order to check the storage stability between each sample that was cooled after heat treatment, and each sample was 19×15×6. It was stored in a cm-sized polypropylene (PP) container. In order to prevent water generated during the storage process from accumulating under the vegetable meat sample, the foil was obliquely laid and the vegetable meat sample was placed on it. To prevent drying during the storage process, a polypropylene container was covered with a polyester (PET) film, and then sealed and packaged with a food packaging machine (M-Series, Packsis, Korea). A 25°C incubator (103M, Vision Lab & Instrument, Korea) was used for room temperature storage, a 4°C refrigerator (A255WD, LG, Korea) was used for cold storage, and a direct cooling freezer (A255WD) fixed at -20°C for freezer storage. , LG, Korea), 4 days, 7 days, 14 days. Refrigerated and frozen samples were used in the experiment when the sample temperature reached 25°C in an incubator set at 25°C.

For the physical property test of vegetable meat, a texture analyzer (CT3-1000, Brookfield Engineering Laboratories, Inc., USA) was used using a sample that has been cooled and cooled as it is. The measurement was performed 15 times per treatment using a texture profile analysis type, a strain rate of 50%, a trigger load of 100 g, a measurement speed of 1 mm/s, and a plate type probe (TA4/1000).

As shown in FIG. 13, similar to the value disclosed in Table 9 of Example 3, the sample containing only oil was found to have the highest hardness. However, in the case of the treatment with only oil added, it was observed that the hardness change was abrupt regardless of the temperature, whereas in the case of the emulsion-added sample, there was little change in hardness due to storage temperature.

Changes of Vegetable Meat Hardness According to Emulsion Particle Size

The particle size of the emulsion prepared in Example 1 was confirmed to be 4.0 μm.

Therefore, in the present invention, the hardness of the mixed vegetable meat was confirmed by varying the emulsion particle size. The particle size of the emulsion was 40.0, 4.0, 0.4 μm, and vegetable meat was prepared in the same manner as in Example 2, and then stored at -20°C, and hardness measurement was performed in the same manner as in Example 5.

As a result, as shown in FIG. 14, the difference in hardness did not appear until the 7th day of storage, but it was confirmed that the larger the particle size, the sharply increased on the 14th day of storage, whereas vegetable containing an emulsion having a particle size of 0.4 μm In the case of meat, it was confirmed that the stability was excellent because there was no difference in hardness.

Claims (7)

(a) preparing an emulsion consisting of a surfactant, water, oil and lecithin;
(b) mixing the tissue soy protein TPV and water to hydrate, and then dehydrating; And
(c) Per 100 parts by weight of tissue soy protein prepared in step (b), 25 to 35 parts by weight of emulsion prepared in step (a), 4 to 5 parts by weight of soy protein isolate (SPI), 3 to 4 parts by weight of binder Mixing and kneading parts and 0.6 to 0.7 parts by weight of lecithin; vegetable meat manufacturing method comprising.
The method of claim 1, wherein the emulsion has a size of 0.1 to 5.0 μm.
The method of claim 1, wherein the emulsion in step (a) is 3 to 4% (w/w) surfactant and 0.4 to lecithin in water and oil mixed in a ratio of 6:4 to 7:3 (w/w). Addition of 0.6% (w/w), and then homogenization to prepare a vegetable meat manufacturing method.
The method of claim 1, wherein the surfactant in step (a) is Tween 80.
The method of claim 1, wherein the oil is MCT oil, coconut oil or peanut oil.
Vegetable meat prepared by the method of any one of claims 1 to 5.
The method of claim 6, wherein the vegetable meat has a hardness of 2000 to 3000 g, a cohesiveness of 0.2 to 0.3, a springiness of 4 to 7 mm, a guminess of 400 to 700 g, and a chewiness of 15 Vegetable meat, characterized in that it has a physical property of ~ 50 mJ.

Images