Meat Science 83 (2009) 45–49

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Meat Science
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/meatsci

Beef hamburgers enriched in lycopene using dry tomato peel as an ingredient

M. Luisa García a, Marta M. Calvo b,*, M. Dolores Selgas a
a
Departamento de Nutrición, Bromatología y Tecnología de los Alimentos, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain
b
Instituto de Fermentaciones Industriales, CSIC, C/ Juan de la Cierva 3, 28006 Madrid, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The direct addition of dry tomato peel (DTP) to hamburgers may be useful both to obtain a new product
Received 30 April 2008 enriched in lycopene and for providing a use for this by-product from the tomato industry. In this study,
Received in revised form 5 March 2009 different amounts of DTP (0–6.0% w/w) were added to raw and cooked hamburgers, and the effects on the
Accepted 27 March 2009
meat’s physico–chemical and sensorial characteristics were studied. The maximum DTP concentration
compatible with good sensory acceptability and high lycopene content was determined. Addition of
DTP increased the colour parameters a and b of raw and cooked hamburgers, and modified all textural
Keywords:
properties probably because of the presence of fibre. The hardness values of cooked samples was
Hamburgers
Lycopene
significantly higher in the batch containing 6% DTP (67.6 N) than in a control batch (50.9 N, p < 0.05).
Dry tomato peel The addition of DTP to 4.5% results in hamburgers with good overall acceptability and a lycopene content
of 4.9 mg/100 g of cooked hamburger.
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Oxidative stress induced by reactive oxygen species (ROS) that
are generated by normal metabolic activity as well as by some life-
style factors have been implicated in the genesis and progression of
several chronic diseases, such as cancer and some cardiovascular
diseases (Rao, 2006). Lycopene has been shown to have a strong
antioxidant effect and to exhibit the highest quenching rate con-
stant with singlet oxygen (Britton, 1995). Antioxidants such as
lycopene, by virtue of their ability to interact with ROS, can miti-
gate the damaging effect of oxidants and may play a significant role
in the prevention of chronic diseases. Lycopene may also act by
other mechanisms in metabolism, immune modulation and hor-
monal induction (Rao & Rao, 2007).
Numerous studies have examined the addition of antioxidants
to meat products to maintain their properties during storage or
to improve their health benefits. However, few studies have looked
at the addition of lycopene or tomatoes to meat products. Cando-
gan (2002) reported the use of tomato paste in beef patties and
Deda, Bloukas, and Fista (2007) in frankfurters. Yilmaz, Sßimsßek,
and Isßikli (2002) have studied the influence of tomato juice on
the composition and quality characteristics of low-fat cooked sau-
sages. Østerlie and Lerfall (2005) studied the effect of lycopene
from sun-dried tomatoes, tomato paste and crystalline lycopene
on the storage qualities of minced meat. Sánchez-Escalante, Tor-
rescano, Djenane, Beltrán, and Roncalés (2003) have analyzed the
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 91 5622900.
E-mail address: mmcalvo@ifi.csic.es (M.M. Calvo).
effects of the addition of oleoresins and frozen tomato pulp con-
taining lycopene on the colour and odour of beef patties.
Tomato processing industries generate large amounts of waste.
The waste during tomato processing is obtained mainly in the form
of seeds and peels. If these products remain unused, they not only
add to the problems of disposal but they also aggravate environ-
mental pollution. Seeds and peels contain highly biologically active
compounds. The importance of natural food compounds is increas-
ing due to the more extensive use of natural compounds in food,
cosmetics and pharmaceuticals, following the EU directives in fa-
vour of natural rather than synthetic compounds (Vági et al., 2007).
The re-use of these by-products that accumulate during pro-
cessing and are available in large amounts can reduce the treat-
ment cost. Obtaining carotenoids such as lycopene from tomato
peel may be a good way to re-use the peel obtained from the toma-
to industries. Lycopene can be extracted from tomato using organic
solvents (Breithaupt, 2004; Calvo, Dado, & Santa-María, 2007a;
Ishidal, Chapman, & Randhave, 2005) or supercritical CO2
(Gómez-Prieto, Caja, Herraiz, & Santa-Maria, 2003; Rozzi, Sing,
Vierling, & Walkins, 2002; Topal, Sasaki, Goto, & Hayakawa,
2006). This extraction yields a lipidic extract rich in carotenoids;
the concentration of lycopene obtained depends on such factors
as the source of lycopene and the extraction conditions.
The direct addition of peel to such food as meat products is
cheaper than obtaining purified lycopene (Calvo, Rodríguez,
Santa-María, Selgas, & García, 2007b). In addition, tomato peel con-
tains acid detergent fiber (Knoblich, Anderson, & Latshaw, 2005).
The addition of tomato peel to meat products can result in a
healthier product due to both the lycopene and fiber present in this
by-product of tomato processing.

0309-1740/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.03.009
46 M.L. García et al. / Meat Science 83 (2009) 45–49
The aim of this study was to determine the maximal concentra-
tion of dry tomato peel (DTP) that can be added to hamburgers to
obtain a product enriched in lycopene with minimal changes in
physico–chemical and sensorial properties.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Preparation of dry tomato peel
Tomato peels were obtained from a local factory and freeze-
dried in a Virtis lyophiliser (model FM12XL). DTP was ground with
a mill (0.025–0.05 mm particle size) and stored at 30 °C until use.
2.2. Hamburger manufacture
Hamburgers of 100 g were manufactured using beef meat
(Quadriceps femoris). This cut of meat was chosen because it is a
lean and uniform muscle that can provide standardized raw mate-
rial in the experiments. The fat content of this hamburger meat
was approximately 10%. Meat was ground using a 3 mm plate
(C10 Grinder, Falsf Co., Spain). The hamburgers were produced in
moulds with a diameter of 10 cm and a height of 1 cm. The meat
was compressed by hand, then maintained under refrigeration
for one day or frozen for less than one month until analysis.
DTP was added to the ground meat and mixed until a homoge-
neous distribution was obtained. To achieve this, a vertical cutter–
mixer (Robot-Coupé Model R6-02VB) equipped with blending
blades was used at the low speed (300 rpm). The mixture was con-
sidered homogeneous when the ground-up particles of tomato
peel were uniformly distributed.
Then the hamburgers were formed. Five batches were manufac-
tured, and the following amounts of DTP were added to four of
them (in g/100 g of ground meat): 1.5 (sample A), 3.0 (sample B),
4.5 (sample C) and 6.0 (sample D). The fifth batch was manufac-
tured without peel and was considered the control. All batches
were manufactured in quadriplicate.
Hamburgers were cooked on a preheated electric grill at
approximately 180 °C for 2 min, then turned over and cooked for
another 2 min. The temperature of the centre of hamburger
reached approximately 80 °C. After cooling to room temperature,
hamburgers were sensorially analyzed or frozen for storage until
analysis.
2.3. pH determination
The pH values were determined in raw and cooked hamburgers
using a Crison 2001 pH-meter. The pH was measured in a homog-
enate prepared with 1 g of hamburger and 9 ml of distilled water.
2.4. Lycopene quantification
One gram of dry tomato peel or 30 g of unfrozen hamburgers
were mixed with 60 ml of 10% KOH-methanol for 10 s using an
Ultraturrax macerator (Janke & Kaudel, IKA). The mixture was stir-
red using a magnetic stirrer in darkness at 40 °C for 2 h. After
saponification, 60 ml of distilled water, 30 ml of petroleum ether
and 3 ml of methanol were added and the mixture was shaken vig-
orously; the petroleum ether containing the lycopene and other li-
pid-soluble components were collected and stored at 4 °C in the
dark. The water phase was mixed again with 30 ml petroleum
ether and 3 ml methanol with shaking. The petroleum ether was
removed as before and the water phase was mixed again with
30 ml of petroleum ether and 3 ml methanol. The extraction of
lycopene from the aqueous phase was performed until the petro-
leum ether had no colour.
All the petroleum ether phases obtained was mixed and 200 ml
distilled water was added; after shaking, two phases formed: an
upper phase of petroleum ether containing the lycopene, and a
lower phase of water containing some alkali residues. The petro-
leum ether phase was collected and washed twice more with
200 ml of distilled water to eliminate the residual alkali. Then
the petroleum ether containing the lycopene was filtered through
a 1PS phase separator filter (Whatman) in order to eliminate the
residual water and immediately evaporated under vacuum at room
temperature. Samples were kept frozen in a nitrogen atmosphere
until quantification. All the extractions were performed in the dark.
The concentration of lycopene was calculated using response
factors relative to b-apo-80 -carotenal (Calvo et al., 2007a). The
internal standard and the sample extracts were dissolved in meth-
anol/MTBE 25:75 (v:v). To prepare each sample, 200 ll of internal
standard solution were added to 500 ll of sample extract, the mix-
ture was filtered through a 0.45 lm filter and a volume of 20 ll
was injected. A Beckman System Gold binary delivery system
(module 126) equipped with a UV–vis photodiode array detector
Model 168 (Beckman Instruments, Fullerton, CA). Analytical sepa-
ration was carried out on a stainless steel (250  6.6 mm i.d.) Dev-
elosil UG C30 (5 lm particle size) column (Nomura Chemical, Sojo,
Japan), fitted with a guard cartridge (Phenomenex, Macclesfield,
UK) packed with ODS C18. Sample injection was performed by
means of a valve (Rheodyne, Cotati, CA) with a 20 ll peek loop.
The mobile phase, methanol (4% H2O)/MTBE, was applied as a
linear gradient from 83:17 to 33:67 over 60 min at a flow rate of
1 ml/min. The column was thermostated at 22 °C in a Shimadzu
CO-10AS column oven (Columbia, MD). The Gold Nouveau soft-
ware data system (Beckman Instruments) was used to evaluate
peak areas.
All the extractions and quantifications were performed by
triplicate.
2.5. Colour
Meat colour was measured at the surface of raw and cooked
hamburgers. The colour was measured with a Chroma Meter CR-
200 colorimeter (Minolta Co., Osaka, Japan) using the Space colour
CIE Lab system and calibrated with a rose tile (L* 44.88, a* 25.99, b*
6.67) and a D-65 illuminant source. Hue angle (tonality) and satu-
ration index (vivacity) were estimated following the formulas de-
scribed by Artes, Minguez, and Moreno (2002). The average value
for each hamburger was the mean of 25 determinations.
2.6. Textural analysis
The textural properties of cooked hamburgers were evaluated
using the Stable Micro System Mod. TA.XT 2i/25 texturometer.
Textural profile analysis (TPA) test (Bourne, 1978) was performed
using two portions of each hamburger (1 cm high and 2.5 cm in
diameter) which were compressed twice to 50% of their original
height. The following parameters were determined: hardness (N),
maximum force required to compress the sample; springiness
(cm), ability of the sample to recover its original form after the
deforming force was removed; cohesiveness (ratio), extent to
which the sample can be deformed prior to rupture; and chewiness
(N cm), work to masticate the sample for swallowing.
Work of shearing (N s), the work needed to move the blade
through the sample, was estimated with a Warner–Bratzler blade
attached to the same texture analyser. As above, this test was car-
ried out on two portions (1 cm high and 2.5 cm diameter) of each
hamburger.
In both tests, the crosshead speed was 2 mm/s and at least five
replicates were measured from at least two hamburgers of each
batch.
 M.L. García et al. / Meat Science 83 (2009) 45–49
2.7. Sensory analysis
Samples were evaluated by 30 untrained assessors selected
according to their habits, their familiarity with the hamburgers
to be analysed, their sensitivity and the ability to reproduce the
evaluation made. The analysis was performed in individual booths
constructed according to the specifications of the International
Standards Organisation (ISO) (1985) under white fluorescent
lights. A hamburger of each batch was served to the assessors
2 min after cooking. Unsalted crackers and room temperature
water were also provided to clean the palate between samples.
A hedonic test was carried out using non-structured 9 point
scales (0 = dislike extremely and 9 = like extremely) in which the
assessors evaluated different attributes: odour, colour, texture,
taste and overall acceptability.
2.8. Statistical methods
The physico–chemical properties, lycopene concentration, col-
our and textural properties and attributes of the hedonic test were
studied using a one-way analysis of variance.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. pH values
The pH values of raw and cooked control hamburgers were
6.05 ± 0.06 and 5.99 ± 0.01, respectively. The incorporation of DTP
decreased the pH values significantly (p < 0.05) and in a concentra-
tion-dependent manner. Raw hamburgers containing 6% (w/w)
DTP had a pH value of 5.43 ± 0.02; the cooked ones, 5.52 ± 0.02.
The pH decrease may be due to the low pH values of dry tomato
peel added (4.45–4.42). A decrease in pH values was also observed
by Candogan (2002) and Deda et al. (2007) when they added toma-
to paste to several meat products. In fact, the acidity of the 6% DTP
batch could be one of the reasons for its lower overall acceptability
(see sensory analysis).
3.2. Lycopene concentration
All the raw hamburger batches showed the expected lycopene
concentration, taking into account that the carotene concentration
determined in DTP samples was 82.0 ± 4.72 mg/100 g DTP.
In all batches, the cooked samples showed a higher concentra-
tion of lycopene than the raw samples (Fig. 1). Water and fat loss
7
6
Lycopene (mg/100g)
5
4
3
2 evaluated. The only noticeably lower score was that of batch D in
1 The odour score was not significantly different among the
0 formed during cooking mask the tomato odour.
0 1 2 3 4 5
Dry tomato peel (g/100g)
Fig. 1. Mean and standard deviation of the lycopene concentration (mg/100 g of
hamburger) in raw (h) and cooked (D) hamburgers (n = 4) containing different
concentrations of dry tomato peel (g/100 g of hamburger).
47
during cooking could explain part of the differences between raw
and cooked samples. Moreover, heating improves the solvent
extraction and recovery of lycopene; this could be because more
lycopene becomes bioaccessible when cell walls break down (Gärt-
ner, Stahl, & Sies, 1997; Shi & Le Maguer, 2000), or because cooking
releases a greater amount of phytochemicals from the tomato ma-
trix (Dewanto, Wu, Adom, & Liu, 2002).
Despite the lycopene concentration, an intake of 100 g of ham-
burger containing DTP could increase intake by 1.4–5.9 mg of lyco-
pene. Rao and Shen (2002) reported that a daily intake level of 5–
7 mg of lycopene in normal healthy humans may be sufficient to
combat oxidative stress and prevent chronic diseases.
3.3. Colour properties
The addition of DTP to hamburgers significantly affected all col-
our parameters in both raw and cooked samples (p < 0.05) (Table
1). The L* value was significantly lower and a* and b* significantly
higher (p < 0.05) in batches containing DTP than in control batches.
Similar results have been reported by Candogan (2002) using beef
patties containing tomato paste.
Although lycopene is a red pigment, its addition to meat can
shift the colour towards orange, which could explain the increase
in a* and b* parameters in batches containing DTP, in the case of
both cooked and raw hamburgers.
A noticeable difference between raw and cooked hamburger
was found in L* and a* parameters. The higher L* values found in
cooked samples than in raw ones could be due to a surface film
of fat that formed from the fat that had melted during cooking.
The a* values were lower in cooked than in raw hamburgers, and
these differences could be a consequence of the colour changes
caused by the Maillard reaction during cooking.
3.4. Textural properties
All textural parameters analyzed were significantly (p < 0.05)
affected by the addition of DTP (Table 2). Hardness showed a sig-
nificant increase (p < 0.05) only in those samples containing 6%
(w/w) DTP.
Springiness, cohesiveness and work of shearing showed signifi-
cant differences (p < 0.05) between control hamburgers and ham-
burgers containing DTP; however, no significant differences
(p > 0.05) were observed for the different concentrations of tomato
peel.
The fibre content of DTP is mainly acid detergent fibre (cellulose
and lignin) (299.4 g/kg of peel) (Knoblich et al., 2005), together
with a smaller amount of pectin (2.16 g/kg of peel) (Kmiecik & Lis-
iewska, 2000). These fibre components could affect the textural
properties of the hamburgers. Pectin could be responsible for the
increase in springiness, due to its capacity to form gels, while the
cellulose and lignin, could influence hardness, cohesiveness and
work of shearing.
3.5. Sensory properties
In general, all batches scored well for all sensory parameters
relation to texture, taste and overall acceptability (Table 3).
batches (p > 0.05). This could be because volatile compounds
6 7
The colour score for batches B–D was significantly lower than
that for the control or for batch A (p < 0.05). The decrease in
pleasantness may be because batches containing high DTP
concentrations showed an increase in the red/orange tone as
the amount of lycopene increased. An increase in this tone
48 M.L. García et al. / Meat Science 83 (2009) 45–49

Table 1
Effect of dry tomato peel addition on the CIE L* a* b* values, hue angle and saturation index of raw or cooked hamburgers.

Sample L* a* b* Hue angle Saturation index

Raw samples
Control 38.69 ± 7.24a 23.53 ± 3.90b 10.26 ± 2.60b 23.35 ± 2.37b 25.70 ± 4.56c
A 27.06 ± 7.11b 30.23 ± 5.70a 16.81 ± 2.33a 28.72 ± 3.18a 34.64 ± 7.00b
B 22.51 ± 3.94c 33.88 ± 2.83a 19.45 ± 4.57a 29.83 ± 2.11a 39.09 ± 3.38a
C 23.68 ± 6.13c 31.92 ± 4.82a 17.94 ± 2.79a 29.34 ± 1.09a 36.20 ± 5.52a
D 23.33 ± 6.20c 30.57 ± 4.18a 17.14 ± 2.53a 29.26 ± 6.69a 35.05 ± 5.05a
Cooked samples
Control 41.72 ± 3.20a 10.67 ± 1.82b 12.71 ± 1.02c 50.18 ± 6.14a 16.69 ± 1.03c
A 38.40 ± 3.00b 12.79 ± 1.22a 15.63 ± 1.60b 50.63 ± 4.15a 20.25 ± 1.23b
B 38.51 ± 2.44b 13.37 ± 1.67a 17.50 ± 1.35a 52.71 ± 2.46a 22.04 ± 1.93a
C 36.02 ± 2.13c 13.25 ± 1.62a 17.40 ± 1.29a 52.60 ± 2.51a 22.07 ± 1.81a
D 38.68 ± 3.20b 13.88 ± 1.66a 17.84 ± 1.62a 51.19 ± 2.23a 22.60 ± 2.62a

L*: 0 = black and 100 = white; a* 60 = green and +60 = red; b* 60 = blue and +60 = yellow.
Hue angle: Calculated as arctg (b*/a*): 90° = yellow, 180° = green and 0° = red.
Saturation index: Calculated as (a*2 + b*2)0.5: distance from the coordinates in the origin to the determined colour point.
Means in column with common letter are not different (p < 0.05).

Table 2
Effect of dry tomato peel addition on the textural properties of cooked hamburgers.

Sample Hardness (N) Springiness (cm) Cohesiveness (ratio) Chewiness (N cm) Work of shearing (N s)
b b b c
Control 50.90 ± 3.72 0.47 ± 0.03 0.44 ± 0.03 10.68 ± 1.03 226.49 ± 94.52b
A 46.89 ± 6.26b 0.51 ± 0.02a 0.51 ± 0.02a 12.19 ± 1.90c 379.92 ± 56.40a
B 45.32 ± 2.15b 0.50 ± 0.01a 0.59 ± 0.03a 13.20 ± 2.51bc 424.35 ± 72.55a
C 52.69 ± 5.73b 0.52 ± 0.02a 0.57 ± 0.09a 15.39 ± 2.30ab 493.70 ± 86.07a
D 67.64 ± 2.86a 0.50 ± 0.02a 0.52 ± 0.09a 17.59 ± 2.68a 460.24 ± 86.80a

Means in column with common letter are not different (p > 0.05).

Table 3
Sensory characteristics and overall acceptability of control and dry tomato peel added cooked hamburgers (starndarised assessors scores from 0 to 9).

Sample Odour Colour Texture Taste Overall acceptability

Control 6.48 ± 1.41a 6.88 ± 0.89a 6.60 ± 0.73a 7.07 ± 1.03a 6.91 ± 0.86a
A 5.86 ± 1.15a 6.21 ± 1.11a 5.46 ± 1.97ab 5.75 ± 1.05b 5.42 ± 1.18b
B 5.71 ± 0.97a 5.43 ± 1.69b 5.70 ± 1.59ab 5.25 ± 1.02b 5.12 ± 1.16b
C 6.22 ± 1.07a 5.63 ± 1.88b 5.78 ± 1.13ab 5.63 ± 1.75b 5.70 ± 1.77b
D 5.65 ± 1.19a 5.72 ± 1.98b 4.65 ± 1.36b 4.35 ± 1.37c 4.41 ± 1.18c

Means in column with common letter are not different (p > 0.05).

produces a colour very different from that expected in a conven-
tional hamburger.
In the case of texture, the results obtained were as expected due
to those obtained with the instrumental analysis. The value was
noticeably lower in batches containing 6% (w/w) DTP.
Taste and overall acceptability were significantly modified
(p > 0.05) even when only 1.5% DTP was present. The taste modifi-
cations found in hamburgers containing DTP were caused by the
tomato flavour, which produced a taste different from the normal
one expected for this meat product.
Overall acceptability was significantly higher (p > 0.05) for con-
trol samples than for samples containing DTP. Nevertheless, scores
higher than 5 were found in hamburgers containing up to 4.5% (w/
w) DTP. Batch D showed a score lower than 5, which could be a re-
sult of the low values obtained for the texture and taste properties.
4. Conclusions
A new meat product, a hamburger enriched in lycopene, has
been obtained by adding dry tomato peel (DTP) directly to ham-
burger meat. The hamburgers have a characteristic colour due to
the carotene.
The sensory quality of the hamburgers remains good up to DTP
concentrations of 4.5% (w/w). The lycopene concentration of ham-
burgers manufactured with 4.5% (w/w) DTP contains approxi-
mately 4.9 mg of this carotene per 100 g of product; this amount
is close to the daily intake of lycopene recommended as healthier.
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank María José Rodríguez for her technical sup-
port. This work was supported by the Spanish Science and Technol-
ogy Commission (Comisión Interministerial de Ciencia y
Tecnología, projects AGL2007-63666/ALI and CONSOLIDER-Ingenio
CSD2007-00016) and by the Comunidad de Madrid TEMINYSA
(CAM S-0505/AGR-0314).
References
Artes, F., Minguez, M. I., & Moreno, D. (2002). Analysing changes in fruit pigments.
In D. B. MCDougall (Ed.), Colour in food (pp. 248–282). Cambridge, England:
Woodhead Publishing Limited.
Bourne, M. C. (1978). Texture profile analysis. Food Technology, 32, 62–66.
Breithaupt, D. E. (2004). Simultaneous HPLC determination of carotenoids used as
food coloring additives: Applicability of accelerated solvent extraction. Food
Chemistry, 86, 449–456.
Britton, G. (1995). Structure and properties of carotenoids in relation to function.
FASEB Journal, 9, 1551–1558.
Calvo, M. M., Dado, D., & Santa-María, G. (2007a). Influence of extraction with
ethanol or ethyl acetate on the yield of lycopene, b-carotene, phytoene and
phytofluene from tomato peel powder. European Food Research Technology, 224,
567–571.
 M.L. García et al. / Meat Science 83 (2009) 45–49
Calvo, M. M., Rodríguez, M. J., Santa-María, J. G., Selgas, M. D., & García, M. L.
(2007b). Productos cárnicos y de las pesca enriquecidos en licopeno mediante la
adición de piel de tomate. Patent (P200701670).
Candogan, K. (2002). The effect of tomato paste on some quality characteristics of
beef patties during refrigerated storage. European Food Research and Technology,
215, 305–309.
Deda, M. S., Bloukas, J. G., & Fista, G. A. (2007). Effect of tomato paste and nitrite
level on processing and quality characteristics of frankfurters. Meat Science, 76,
501–508.
Dewanto, V., Wu, X., Adom, K. K., & Liu, R. H. (2002). Thermal processing enhances
the nutritional value of tomatoes by increasing total antioxidant activity.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 50, 3010–3014.
Gärtner, C., Stahl, W., & Sies, H. (1997). Lycopene is more bioavailable from tomato
paste than from fresh tomatoes. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 66,
116–122.
Gómez-Prieto, M. S., Caja, M. M., Herraiz, M., & Santa-Maria, G. (2003). Supercritical
fluid extraction of all-trans lycopene from tomato. Journal of Agricultural and
Food Chemistry, 51, 3–7.
Ishidal, B. K., Chapman, M. H., & Randhave, S. S. (2005). A new environmentally
friendly method for lycopene extraction from tomato waste for food use. Abstracts
of papers of the American Chemical Society, 230 (U27-U28), 50-AGFD AUG28.
ISO (1985). Sensory analysis. Methodology. General guidance. (ISO-DP 6658).
International Organization for Standarization, Geneve.
Kmiecik, W., & Lisiewska, Z. (2000). Studies on the morphological traits and
chemical composition of the fruit of six tomato cultivars recommended as raw
material for freezing. Nahrung, 44, 349–353.
Knoblich, M., Anderson, B., & Latshaw, D. (2005). Analysis of tomato peel and seed
byproducts and their use as a source of carotenoids. Journal of the Science of Food
and Agriculture, 85, 1166–1170.
49
Østerlie, M., & Lerfall, J. (2005). Lycopene from tomato products added minced
meat: Effect on storage quality and colour. Food Research International, 38,
925–929.
Rao, A. V. (2006). Tomatoes, lycopene and human health. Scotland Caledonian Science
Press.
Rao, A. V., & Rao, L. G. (2007). Carotenoids and human health. Pharmacological
Research, 55, 207–216.
Rao, A. V., & Shen, H. L. (2002). Effect of low dose lycopene intake on lycopene
bioavailability and oxidative stress. Nutrition Research, 22, 1125–1131.
Rozzi, N. L., Sing, R. K., Vierling, R. A., & Walkins, B. A. (2002). Supercritical fluid
extraction of lycopene from tomato processing byproducts. Journal of
Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 50, 2638–2643.
Sánchez-Escalante, A., Torrescano, G., Djenane, D., Beltrán, J. A., & Roncalés, P.
(2003). Stabilization of colour and odour of beef patties using lycopene-rich
tomato and peppers as a source of antioxidants. Journal of the Science of Food and
Agriculture, 83, 187–194.
Shi, J., & Le Maguer, M. (2000). Lycopene in tomatoes: Chemical and physical
properties affected by food processing. Critical Review in Food Science and
Nutrition, 40, 1–42.
Topal, K., Sasaki, M., Goto, M., & Hayakawa, K. (2006). Extraction of lycopene from
tomato skin with supercritical carbon dioxide: Effect of operating conditions
and solubility. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 54, 5604–5610.
Vági, E., Simándi, B., Vásárhelyiné, K. P., Dado, H., Kéry, Á., Doleschall, F., et al.
(2007). Supercritical carbon dioxide extraction of carotenoids, tochopherols and
sitosterols from industrial tomato by-products. Journal of Supercritical Fluids, 40,
218–226.
Yilmaz, I., Sß imsßek, O., & Isßikli, M. (2002). Fatty acid composition and quality
characteristics of low-fat cooked sausages made with beef and chicken meat,
tomato juice and sunflower oil. Meat Science, 62, 253–258.