STORAGE STUDY OF TOFU EXTENDED CHICKEN MEAT NUGGETS

N. K.NAYAK, V. PATHAK, V.P.SINGH AND M GOSWAMI

Department of Livestock Products Technology
U.P. Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhayaya Pashu Chikitsa Vigyan Vishwavidyalaya
Evum Go Anusnadhan Sansthan, Mathura-281001

ABSTRACT

The study was conducted with an aim to increase the shelf life of chicken nuggets

by replacing part of lean meat with soy paneer (Tofu) and soy flakes. Tofu and water soaked

soya flakes at the rate of 20% each was used in the formulation of chicken nuggets. Initially

TBA value was observed significantly (P<0.05) lower in both extended nuggets but there was

no significant (P>0.05) difference in pH. The physicochemical, microbiological and sensory

characteristics of extended chicken nuggets were studied at 4 days interval under

refrigeration. The values of TBA, pH and TPC subsequently increased upto 12 days of

storage however, did not exceed the safer limit throughout the study period. The result of

sensory evaluation revealed significant increase in various attributes at tofu and soy flakes

added nuggets. However, tofu extended nuggets were relatively superior on the basis of

various parameters like consumer acceptability and quality of the product. This incorporation

have also increase the shelf life of nuggets without affecting the sensory attributes of the

product.

Key words: Nuggets, Tofu, Soy flakes and chicken meat

 Non-meat proteins in meat products are primarily added to improve water binding,

stabilize fat, and control cost (Hsu and Sun, 2006). Soybean is one of the most extensively

used extender in meat recipes. Researchers throughout the globe have established drastic

reduction in anti-nutrient content by processing methods such as soaking, cooking,

fermentation and germination (Ene- Obong and Obizoba, 1996). Soy proteins have been

successfully used in various meat products in different forms viz. soy flour, soy flakes, soy

concentrate, soy protein isolate, textured soy products etc. However the functionality will

differ with the form in which soy protein is used. Advantages of soya in meat formulations

have been well established. It improves tenderness, increases moisture retention, decreases

cooking shrink, and inhibit rancidity (Kotula and Berry, 1986). Ahmad, et al. (2010)

reported that addition of soy protein isolate can improve the texture, juiciness and color of a

buffalo meat sausage emulsion. Kilic et al. (2010) reported that up to 20% textured soy

protein can be incorporated into ground beef to decrease cooking loss and decrease

evaporative loss. Tofu is one product derived from soybean which is relished throughout the

globe. It is a cheap source of high quality protein comparable to animal protein which is

affordable for common man. (Kong et al., 2008). The present study was taken up to evaluate

the effect of incorporation of soy flakes and tofu in chicken meat nuggets.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Preparation of nuggets: Deboned meat was cut into small cubes and minced first through 9

mm and then through 4 mm plate of meat mincer. Minced meat was replaced with soy paneer

(Tofu) and water soaked soy flakes at the rate of 20% each. The emulsion was prepared by

addition and mixing of all ingredients (Refined wheat flour 3%, Condiments 3%, Spices 2%,

Salt 1.5%, Vegetable oil 6%, Ice flakes 8% and phosphate 0.5%) in appropriate manner in

bowl chopper. The prepared emulsion was filled in stainless steel moulds and steam cooked
at 1210C for 35 minutes. The prepared loaf was cut into standard size of nuggets and packed

in pre sterilized LDPE bags. The products were divided in three different groups ie (1. C =

only meat, 2. T-1 =Meat + Soya Flakes, 3. T-2 = Meat + Tofu) for the study. The products

were subjected to 12 days of storage study at 4 days of interval kept under refrigeration

Physicochemical analysis of meat nuggets: For determination of pH, the sample from each

treatment was blended with distilled water (5 times the weight of the sample) to get uniform

suspension and the pH was recorded by using a digital pH meter by immersing the electrode

of pH meter into aliquot of the sample.

Thiobarbituric acid value was estimated as per procedure given by Tarladgis, et al., (1960).

Microbiological analysis of chicken nuggets: Total plate count, coliform count, and yeast

and mold were determined using a colony counter according to guidelines of the American

Public Health Association (APHA 1992).

Sensory evaluation of chicken nuggets: The sensory quality of samples was evaluated

using a 8 point hedonic scale where in 1 indicates dislike extremely and 8 indicates like

extremely. At least seven sensory panelists drawn from staff and students of this university

were utilized for sensory evaluation.

Statistical analysis of data: Statistical analysis of the data obtained, was done using

ANOVA technique according to the method described by Snedecor and Cochran (1967).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

TBA value: The data presented in table 1 indicated that the TBA values have observed lower

in the nuggets added with tofu and soya flakes, this might be due to antioxidant properties of

soy. A significant (P < 0.05) increase in TBA values was observed with the advancement of

storage period in the treated nuggets. However, The TBA value of treated nuggets remained

lower as compared control throughout the storage period. Chowdhury et al. (2002) observed
that TBA content increased during refrigerated storage in 10% hydrated TSP extended

patties.

pH: The pH of nuggets incorporated with tofu and soya flakes (Table 1) indicated non

significant variation among the treatment . Further with increase in time of storage a

significant (P<0.05) increase in pH was observed. The effect was almost similar for both the

treated nuggets. Nayak & Tanwar (2004) also reported the similar results in tofu extended

chicken patties.

Microbiological analysis of chicken nuggets: Data presented in table-1 indicated that the

total plate count was found to increase significantly (P<0.05) during storage. However, initial

growth of microorganism was slow while the rapid growth rate was observed on 8 th day

onwards. This might be due to break down of fat and protein in smaller form, which might be

rapidly utilized by the microorganisms. Nayak & Tanwar (2004) also observed a significant

increase in TPC of tofu extended chicken patties under refrigeration. In this study initially all

the meat nuggets failed to show any coliform counts as well as yeast and mold. This might

be due to reduction in coliforms number during cooking. The growth of coliform as well as

yeast and mold became evident on 12th day of storage period during study and the count was

slightly higher in treated nuggets than control but the difference was non significant.

Thompson et al. (1978) also observed no increase in number of coliforms during storage of

TSP extended ground beef as compared to control.

Sensory attributes of chicken nuggets: The results (Table 2) indicated that the colour

scores differed non-significantly among the treatment group. The colour score were superior

in tofu extended nuggets. It might be due to good colour combination with white colour of

tofu. Bhoyar, et al.,(1997) found best colour score in chicken steaks extended with 20% TSP

+ 10% CCP (milk co-precipitate). Texture of chicken meat nuggets was observed

significantly (P<0.05) higher in tofu added nuggets. Flavor scores decreased slightly with
addition of tofu. It might be due to slight beany flavor of tofu. However, the nuggets added

with soy flakes showed slightly higher score in this study. These findings are in accordance

with the observation of Nayak et al., (2006) in tofu incorporated chicken meat patties. With

the advancement of storage period the colour score also decreased non-significantly. A

Significant decreasing trend in texture of the product was noticed irrespective of treatment

during storage period. It might be due to increase in pH and bacterial load with the

advancement of storage period. Initially the flavor scores reduced slowly but on 8 th and 12th

days the scores went down drastically in all the nuggets, it might be due to synergistic effect

of increasing pH and microbial load during the storage period. From the above study it could

be concluded that the overall acceptability of the nuggets extended with 20% tofu were

relatively superior then added with soya flakes and control.

SUMMARY
Tofu and water soaked soya flakes at the rate of 20% each was used in the formulation

of chicken nuggets. Initially TBA value was observed significantly (P<0.05) lower in both

extended nuggets but there was no significant (P>0.05) difference in pH. Under refrigeration

storage the values of TBA, pH and TPC subsequently increased upto 12 days of storage

however, did not exceed the safer limit throughout the study period. The result of sensory

evaluation revealed significant increase in various attributes at tofu and soy flakes added

nuggets. From the study it concluded that the tofu extended nuggets were found relatively

superior on the basis of various parameters like consumer acceptability and quality of the

product. This incorporation have also increase the shelf life without affecting the sensory

attributes of the product.

 REFERENCES

Ahmad, S., Rizawi, J. A., & Srivastava, P. K. (2010) Journal of Food Science and
Technology. 47(3): 290–294.

A.P.H.A. (1992). Compendium of methods for the microbiological examination of foods. Ed.
C. Vandergrant and D.F. Splittstoesser. pp. 919-927. American Public Health
Association, Washington, D.C.

Bhoyar, A.M., Pandey, N.K. Anand, S.K. and Verma, S.S. (1997) I. J. Poultry Sci.,
32(3):253-258.

Chowdhury, J., Kumar, S. and Murthy, T.R.K. (2002) Environment and Ecology, 20(4): 773-
777.

Ene-Obong HN, Obizoba IC (1996) Plant Foods for Human Nutr. 1:43-52.

Hsu, S. Y., & Sun, L. Y. (2006) Journal of Food Engineering. 74(1): 47−53.

Kilic, B., Kankaya, T., Ekici, Y. K., & Orhan, H. (2010) Journal of Animal and Veterinary
Advances, 9(2): 3048–3054.

Kong F, Chang SKC, Liu Z, Wilson LA (2008) J. Food Sci. 73:134-144.

Kotula, A. W. and Berry, B. W. (1986) American Chemical Society symposium series, 312.
(pp. 74–89) (Chapter 7).

Nayak, N. K and Tanwar, V.K. (2004) Indian Journal of Poul Sc., 39(2):142-146.

Nayak, N. K ,Tanwar, V.K. and Naruka, S.S. (2006) Ind. Vet Journal., 83(10): 1084-1086.

Snedecor, G.W. and Cochran, W.G. (1967) Statistical methods, 6 th Edn., Allied Pacific Pvt.
Ltd., Bombay, 557 pp.

Tarladgis, B.G., Watts, B.M., Younathan, M.T. and Dugan, L. J. (1960) J. Am. Oil Chem.
Soc., 37: 44-48.

Thompson, S.G., Ockerman, H.W., Cahil, V.R. and Plimpton, R.F. (1978) J. Food. Sci.,
43:289-291.
Table 1 : Effect on TBA, pH and microbial growth during storage of chicken meat
Nuggets.

Fi
gu Storage Treatment re
s period
C T-1 T-2
(days)
TBA

0 0.4581A ±0.014 0.4451A±0.018 0.4381A ±0.021

4 0.5332A ±0.013 0.4952B±0.020 0.4872B±0.017

8 0.7183A±0.018 0.6553B± 0.008 0.6273B±0.030

12 0.9204A±0.022 0.8884B±0.021 0.7324C±0.023

pH

0 6.231A±0.07 6.221A±0.06 6.211A±0.07

4 6.282A±0.06 6.261A±0.05 6.251A±0.06

8 6.323A±0.05 6.312A±0.05 6.292A±0.05

12 6.374A±0.05 6.363A±0.04 6.343A±0.04

Total plate count ( Log10 cfu/g)

0 4.43± 0.161A 4.46± 0.121A 4.47± 0.121A

4 4.63 ± 0.111A 4.71± 0.141A 4.77 ± 0.161A

8 5.89 ± 0.122A 5.93± 0.082A 5.99 ± 0.12A

12 6.42± 0.16 3A 6.44±0.123A 6.47 ± 0.173A

with different alphabet A, B, C…….row wise and number 1, 2, 3……. Column wise
differ significantly (p<0.05)
Table 2: Effect of tofu addition on sensory attributes during storage of chicken
meat patties.

Treatment
Storage period Colour
(days) C T-1 T-2

0
7.00 ± 0.21 7.00 ± 0.21 7.11 ± 0.19
4
6.92 ± 0.25 6.88 ± 0.23 6.97 ± 0.26
8
6.82 ± 0.28 6.81 ± 0.38 6.88 ± 0.37
12
6.73 ± 0.34 6.72 ± 0.37 6.79 ± 0.32
Texture
0
6.68 ± 0.311A 6.72 ± 0.341A 7.00 ± 0.291B
4
6.35 ± 0.242A 6.53 ± 0.281B 6.87 ± 0.361B
8
6.02 ± 0.323A 6.49 ± 0.302B 6.79 ± 0.321B
12
5.71 ± 0.323A 5.97 ± 0.342B 6.07 ± 0.372B
Flavor
0
6.82 ± 0.321A 6.83 ± 0.261A 6.70 ± 0.291A
4
6.57 ± 0.391A 6.60 ± 0.301A 6.53 ± 0.321A
8
6.11 ± 0.262A 6.16 ± 0.292A 6.06 ± 0.302A
12
5.72 ± 0.373A 5.71 ± 0.403A 5.62 ± 0.303A
Overall acceptability
0
6.97 ± 0.211A 6.97 ± 0.211A 6.99 ± 0.191A
4
6.89 ± 0.251A 6.86 ± 0.231A 6.89 ± 0.261A
8
6.78 ± 0.281A 6.83 ± 0.381A 6.78 ± 0.371A
12
6.72 ± 0.342A 6.75 ± 0.372A 6.76 ± 0.322A
Figures with different alphabet A, B, C…….row wise and number 1, 2, 3……. Column
wise differ significantly (p<0.05)
To,
The Editor
Indian Veterinary Journal
11/7, Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar Road (Chamiers Road),
Nandanam, Chennai – 600035, India.

Sub: Submission of article for publication

Respected Sir,
Kindly find enclosed two copies of research article entitled “Storage Study
of Tofu Extended Chicken Meat Nuggets” authored by Nayak, et al. along with DD of
Rs150/- as processing fee for publication in your esteemed journal. Further all the authors’
have also deposited the membership fee.
Hoping for earliest reply

Thanking you

With warm regards

( N.K.Nayak)
The authors of the manuscript are:

1. Dr.N.K. Nayak (Corresponding Author)

Asstt. Professor & PhD Scholar, Department of LPT,
College of Veterinary Science & A.H., Mathura (U.P.)
E-mail : nayaknarendra2@rediffmail.
Phone no. 09457029596.
Subscription No. 6026 (Annual member)

2. Dr. Vikas Pathak

Professor & Head, Department of LPT,
College of Veterinary Science & A.H., Mathura (U.P.)
Subscription No. 8537 (Annual member)

3. Dr.V.P.Singh
Asstt. Professor & PhD Scholar Department of LPT,
College of Veterinary Science & A.H., Mathura (U.P.)
Subscription No.8538 (Annual member)

4. Dr. Meena Goswami

Asstt. Professor ,Department of LPT,
College of Veterinary Science & A.H., Mathura (U.P.)
Subscription No. 8686 (Annual member)

CERTIFICATE

A. This is to certify that the article being send for publication neither been published nor
being considered for publication elsewhere.

B. This is to certify that the research work has been carried as per the laws in force at the
time of carrying out the work and at the time of sending the paper for publication in the
country in which the research work was carried out

( N.K.Nayak)