Agricultural and Food Science in Finland, Vol. 10 (2001): 27–32. Vol. 10 (2001): 27–32. 27 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Vol. 10 (2001): 27–32. © Agricultural and Food Science in Finland Manuscript received November 2000 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Vol. 10 (2001): 27–32. Saltiness of coarsely ground cooked ham with reduced salt content Marita Ruusunen Department of Food Technology, PO Box 27 (Viikki E), FIN-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland, e-mail: marita.ruusunen@helsinki.fi Marjo Särkkä-Tirkkonen Mikkeli Institute for Rural Research and Training, Lönnrotinkatu 3–5, FIN-50100 Mikkeli, Finland Eero Puolanne Department of Food Technology, PO Box 27 (Viikki E), FIN-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland When the salt content of food is reduced a lack of flavor is anticipated to be the greatest problem related to consumer acceptance. The aim of this study was to examine how much the salt content of cooked ham can be reduced without a significant effect on sensory saltiness. Hams made up of coarsely ground pork with added phosphate were prepared and the cooking loss was determined. The salt content of the hams were 1.1, 1.4, 1.7, 2.0, 2.3 and 2.6% NaCl. The saltiness intensity of cold hams was rated against a reference ham (1.7% NaCl) using a relative-to-standard scale. The cooking loss in ham made with 1.1% added salt was higher than in the other hams. The ham with 1.7% NaCl was rated as salty as the hams with 2.0 and 2.3% NaCl (P>0.05), but saltier than those with 1.1 and 1.4% (P<0.05). The ham with 2.6% NaCl was the saltiest, but it did not differ significantly from those with 2.0 or 2.3% (P>0.05). The results of this study suggest that based on saltiness evaluations it is possi- ble to reduce the salt content of cooked ham to 1.7% NaCl. Key words: meat products, ham, salt Introduction The number of health-conscious consumers is increasing. Therefore, the demand for a variety of low fat and low salt meat products has in- creased. The public has become more aware of the relationship between sodium and hyperten- sion. The most important source of sodium is NaCl (Kolari 1980). Food processors are devel- oping numerous low salt products to meet the demands of consumers. Developing low-salt meat products is, however, not straightforward. Salt plays an important role in meat products as mailto:marita.ruusunen@helsinki.fi 28 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Ruusunen, M. et al. Saltiness of cooked ham a flavoring and preservative agent. It also has an important role in meat products, where it sol- ubilizes meat proteins, which contribute to meat binding, moisture and fat retention, and the for- mation of a desirable gel texture upon cooking (Terrell 1983, Sofos 1984). Salt is also the most effective substance for lowering water activity in meat products and thus influences their shelf life (Sofos 1984). Owing to its low-fat content, cooked ham is considered healthier than sausages. High-mois- ture hams are usually prepared by tumbling with the brine (water, salt, phosphate, nitrite and oth- er ingredients) for extraction of salt-soluble pro- tein and the meat pieces are bound together by subsequent thermal processing. The binding of muscle pieces results from gelation of salt-ex- tracted myofibrillar proteins (Mcfarlane et al. 1977, Siegel and Schmidt 1979). The binding of ham muscle pieces and retained water are togeth- er responsible for the texture of the final prod- uct (Prabhu and Sebranek 1997). In meat products, alkaline phosphates are generally used to enhance water-holding capac- ity and to improve cooking yield. This is brought about by an increase in the pH of the meat from its isoelectric point (Hamm 1960, Shults et al. 1972, Shahidi et al. 1994) and ionic strength (Seman et al. 1980). The combined effects of salt and phosphate on improving the water retention properties in processed meats are well known (Pepper and Schmidt 1975, Matlock et al. 1984a, b). In many countries the salt content of cooked hams made using the wet-curing process either with meat pieces or coarsely ground meat, usu- ally ranges from 2.0 to greater than 3.0% (Lin et al. 1991, Nute et al. 1987). Olson (1982) made sectioned and shaped massaged hams with salt levels of 2.5%, 2.0% and 1.5%. The sensory char- acteristics of these hams clearly showed that a small reduction in salt (2.0%) does not change the characteristics of the ham but reducing salt content by 40% (1.5% treatment) reduces the desirability of hams. The salt contents of Finnish sausages and cooked hams have been greatly reduced over the last 20 years (Karanko and Puolanne 1996), and consumers have up to now accepted these prod- ucts. However, the high salt content of hams, an average of 2.3% NaCl (Puolanne and Ruusunen 1997), is higher than the average salt content of cooked sausage, 1.7% NaCl (Karanko and Puolanne 1996). The average ham consumption in Finland in 1997 was 5.5 kg per capita and consumption is constantly increasing due to its healthy image and reduced price. Manufacturers will continue to reduce the salt content of cooked hams. The aim of this study was to examine how much the salt content of cooked ham can be reduced with- out significant effects on its sensory saltiness. Material The formulations of the cooked hams are given in Table 1. The added salt concentrations were 1.1, 1.4, 1.7, 2.0, 2.3 and 2.6%. For each formu- lation 5 kg of coarsely ground (Ø 13 mm plate) lean hams (taken from M. semimembranosus, M. adductor, M. gluteus medius and M. superficia- lis) were used. The brine solution for each for- mulation was prepared by dissolving a commer- cial phosphate mixture (58% P 2 O 5 ), followed by ascorbic acid, sodium nitrite and sodium chlo- ride in tap water (2ºC). The brine was added to the ground ham in a vacuum tumbler. The hams were massaged continuously for an hour (14 rpm, 3ºC) in a vacuum and kept overnight at 3ºC. Next day the hams were stuffed into a casing (Ø 90 mm). For each formulation, four hams (1.4 kg), were obtained. The hams were thermally proc- essed (Vemag, Vemag Verdener Maschinen- und Apparatebau GMBH, Germany) to a meat-core temperature of 72ºC by using a stepwise ther- mal-processing schedule (drying: 10 min at 55ºC, 12 min at 60ºC and 12 min at 65ºC, smoking: 12 min at 68ºC, cooking: 50 min at 72ºC and 100 min at 77ºC and cooling 59 min in a cold show- er). The hams were made once but the sensory evaluations were done twice. 29 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Vol. 10 (2001): 27–32. Methods Cooking loss The cooking loss was determined by weighing all the hams with the same salt content together before cooking and three hours after cooking. Chemical analysis Moisture content was determined by drying the sample at 104ºC for 16 h. Protein content was determined by the Kjeldal method (NMKL 1976). The NaCl concentration of the hams was determined by analyzing their chloride-ion con- tent (Corning 926 Chloride Analyzer, Corning Medical and Scientific Corning Limited, Eng- land). The sodium content was analyzed with an Na-selective electrode (RossTM sodium electrode, Orion Research, Inc.) (Kivikari 1996). The Na- selective electrode method was a modification of Averill’s (1983) and Kühne’s (1988) methods. In this study the analyte addition method was used contrary to the studies of Averill (1983) and Kühne (1988), where the known addition meth- od was used. Sensory evaluation Nineteen assessors, all trained to evaluate meat products, evaluated the hams. The hams were prepared once, but the sensory evaluations were done twice. A relative-to-standard scale was used for rating the saltiness of the hams (Fig. 1) (Tu- naley et al. 1987, Ruusunen et al. 1999). At each session, the saltiness intensity of cold ham sam- ples of six different salt concentrations was rat- ed against a reference sample which contained 1.7% salt. The reference sample was also hid- den among the samples without informing the assessors. Each assessor was given samples in a different randomized order. The reference sam- ple was tasted immediately before tasting each of the other ham samples. The assessors rinsed their mouths with water between each sample. Saltiness intensity rating were recorded by mark- ing the appropriate point on a 100 mm continu- ous line scale (Fig. 1). The assessors were in- formed beforehand that the mid-point of the scale (marked ‘standard’) represented the saltiness intensity of the reference sample. Statistical analysis The data was analyzed statistically using the SAS program (SAS Institute Inc. 1989). All saltiness values were corrected according to Powers et al. (1977) by multiplying the saltiness values of each assessor by w (weight coefficient). The Table 1. Formulations of the cooked hams. Formulations, % NaCl 1.1 1.4 1.7 2.0 2.3 2.6 Pork, g 5000 5000 5000 5000 5000 5000 Water, g 830 830 830 830 830 830 Phosphate mixture, g 25.5 25.6 25.7 25.7 25.8 25.9 NaNO 2 , g 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Ascorbic acid, g 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 Added NaCl, g 65.2 83.3 101.5 119.7 138.1 156.6 Much less salty Standard Much more salty –50 0 +50 Fig. 1. Relative-to-standard scale used for rating saltiness. 30 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Ruusunen, M. et al. Saltiness of cooked ham weight coefficient (w) was calculated using the following formula: w = 10/(10 + x k – x u ), where x k = 0 is the score the assessor should give to the reference sample (standard sample) and x u is the score s/he gave to the hidden refer- ence sample. If both x k and x u were zero, the weight (w) attached to the judgment was taken as 1. If the assessor makes a misjudgment the weighting was less than 1. The differences in saltiness among the hams with different salt content were studied using two-way analysis of variance. The two factors were assessors (the subjectivity of the assessors) and added NaCl (%). A t-test with a significance level of P=0.05 was used to locate the differ- ences. Results and discussion Cooking loss In this study the cooking loss was higher in hams made with 1.1% added salt when compared to all other treatments (Table 2). The moisture con- tent was lower and the protein content higher than in the other hams for the ham made with 1.1% added salt (Table 2). Müller (1991) has also pointed out that reducing the salt content of cooked ham by reducing the brine strength whilst otherwise leaving the manufacturing technolo- gy unchanged led to a clear increase in cooking loss. In products with low salt content and a high amount of added water is necessary to add extra protein or other ingredients e.g. carrageenan or starch to increase the yield (Prabhu and Sebranek 1997). Starch addition (2%) has been reported to improve surface appearance, sliceability and the texture of hams containing 0.5% carrageen- an. The surface of products with carrageenan alone appeared to be jelly-like and wet (Trudso 1985). Chemical composition In this study one of the hams with middle salt content, 1.7%, was chosen to be the reference sample. The analyzed NaCl and sodium contents are given in Table 2. The NaCl content of the reference ham was 1.7% and the sodium content was 0.82 g Na/100g (Table 2). Sensory evaluation In the sensory evaluations, a reference sample was also among the samples (hidden reference). Table 2. Cooking loss (%), moisture (%) and protein (%) as well as NaCl (%) and sodium (g Na/100 g) content of cooked hams. Added NaCl, % Cooking loss, % Moisture, % Protein, % NaCl, % Sodium, g 100 g-1 1.1 5.5 74.5 20.3 1.1 0.51 1.4 3.6 76.5 18.5 1.4 0.67 1.7 3.7 76.5 18.5 1.7 0.82 2.0 3.7 76.3 18.5 2.0 0.90 2.3 3.5 76.1 18.7 2.3 1.04 2.6 3.8 75.5 18.3 2.6 1.14 The moisture, protein, NaCl and sodium content have been analyzed of one ham per each salt content. The cooking loss was determined by weighing all the hams with the same salt content together before cooking and three hours after cooking. 31 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Vol. 10 (2001): 27–32. The hidden reference was, however, rated dif- ferently than the reference when evaluating the saltiness (Fig. 2). All saltiness values were cor- rected according to Powers et al. (1977) by mul- tiplying the saltiness values of each assessor by w (the weight coefficient). It has also to be not- ed that the saltiness of the reference ham is not known and the scale is based on a comparison with the reference (1.7% NaCl). The assessors’ evaluations of saltiness cor- responded to the actual salt content (Fig. 2). The ham with 1.7% NaCl was rated as salty as hams with 2.0 and 2.3% NaCl (P>0.05), but saltier than those with 1.1 and 1.4% (P<0.05). The ham with 2.6% NaCl was the saltiest, but it did not differ significantly from those with 2.0 or 2.3% (P>0.05). The average salt content of Finnish cooked hams is 2.3% NaCl (Puolanne and Ruu- sunen 1997). Based on this study, it can be con- cluded that the lowest ham salt content which is as salty as a normal cooked ham in Finland is 1.7% added salt. On the basis of these results, it is hard to say if the findings would have been the same if the cooked ham with 2.0% NaCl would have been chosen for the reference. The simplest way to decrease the amount of salt people obtain from meat products is to re- duce the salt content of meat products with the highest salt content to average values of similar products on the market. This reduction is possi- ble without any technological or taste problems. Products like these are now being produced and consumers have accepted them. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that it would be possible to reduce the salt content of cooked ham to 1.7% NaCl, while still maintaining the nor- mal sensory saltiness of cooked ham. Acknowledgements. This study was funded by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. We would like to thank all the assessors who took part in the sensory evaluations. Fig. 2. Saltiness of the cooked hams. A different letter a, b, c or d at each average saltiness value means a significant dif- ference in saltiness between the hams. References Averill, W. 1983. Ion-selective electrode system meas- ures sodium content of foods. Food Technology 37: 44–52, 56 Hamm, R. 1960. Biochemistry of meat hydration. Ad- vances in Food Research 10:355–463. Karanko, E. & Puolanne, E. 1996. Chemical composition of Finnish sausages in 1973–95. Meat Day 1996. University of Helsinki, Department of Meat Technol- ogy, reports from meat technology Nr. 536. p. 49– 55. (in Finnish). Kivikari, R. 1996. Analysis of sodium in meat products using an Na-selective electrode. Meat Day 1996. University of Helsinki, Department of Meat Technol- ogy, reports from meat technology Nr. 536. p. 64– 66. (in Finnish). Kolari, O. 1980. Salt dietary concerns. In: Proceedings of the Meat Industry Research Conference. Ameri- can Meat Institute Foundation, Chicago, Illinois. p. 89–100. Kühne, D. 1988. Analysis of common salt and sodium in meat products. Fleischwirtschaft 68: 1007–1010. Lin, G., Mittal, G. & Barbut, S. 1991. Optimization of tum- bling and KCl substitution in low sodium restructured hams. Journal of Muscle Foods 2: 71–91. Matlock, R., Terrell, R., Savell, L., Rhee, K. & Dutson, T. 1984a. Factors affecting properties of raw-frozen pork sausage patties made with various NaCl/phosphate combinations. Journal of Food Science 49: 1363– 1366. – , Terrell, R., Savell, L., Rhee, K. & Dutson, T. 1984b. 32 A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E I N F I N L A N D Ruusunen, M. et al. Saltiness of cooked ham Factors affecting properties of raw-frozen pork sau- sage patties made with various NaCl/phosphate com- binations. Journal of Food Science 49: 1372–1375. Mcfarlane, J., Schmidt, G. & Turner, R. 1977. Binding of meat pieces: a comparison of myosin, actomyosin and sarcoplasmic proteins as binding agents. Jour- nal of Food Science 42: 1603–1605. Müller, W.-D. 1991. Cooked cured products. Influence of manufacturing technology. Fleischwirtschaft 71: 544– 550. NMKL 1976. Nitrogen determination in foods and feeds according to Kjeldahl. Nordic Committee on Food Analysis No 6, 3rd ed. Nute, G., Jones, R., Dransfield, E. & Whelehan, O. 1987. Sensory characteristics of ham and their relationships with composition, visco-elasticity and strength. Inter- national Journal of Food Science and Technology 22: 461–476. Olson, D. 1982. Salt for processing probably can be cut by only one quarter. The National Provisioner 7–10. Pepper, F. & Schmidt, G. 1975. Effects of blending time, salt, phosphate and hot-boned beef on binding strength and cook yield of beef rolls. Journal of Food Science 40: 227–230. Powers, J., Godwin, D. & Bargmann, R. 1977. Relations between sensory and objective measurements for quality evaluation of green beans. ACS Symposium series 51: 51–70. Prabhu, G. & Sebranek, J. 1997. Quality characteristics of ham formulated with modified corn starch and kappa- carrageenan. Journal of Food Science 62: 198–202. Puolanne, E. & Ruusunen, M. 1997. Lämpökäsiteltyjen kinkkutuotteiden laatuluokituksen kehittäminen. De- velopment of quality classification for cooked hams. University of Helsinki, Department of Meat Technol- ogy, reports from meat technology Nr. 561. Ruusunen, M., Särkkä-Tirkkonen, M. & Puolanne, E. 1999. The effect of salt reduction on taste pleasant- ness in cooked ‘Bologna-type’ sausages. Journal of Sensory Studies 14: 263–270. SAS Institute Inc. 1989. SAS/STAT User’s Guide. Ver- sion 6 Fourth edition, Vol. 2. Gary, NC. 846 p. Seman, D., Olson, D. & Mandigo, R. 1980. Effect of re- duction and partial replacement of sodium on bolo- gna characteristics and acceptability. Journal of Food Science 45: 1116–1121. Shahidi, F., Synowiecki, J. & Balejko, J. 1994. Proteolyt- ic hydrolysis of muscle proteins of harp seal. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 42: 2634–2638. Shults, G., Russell, D. & Wierbicki, E. 1972. Effects of condensed phosphates on pH, swelling and water- holding capacity of beef. Journal of Food Science 37: 860–864. Siegel, D. & Schmidt, G. 1979. Ionic, pH and tempera- ture effects on the binding of myosin. Journal of Food Science 44: 1686–1689. Sofos, J. 1984. Antimicrobial effects of sodium and other ions in foods: A review. Journal of Food Safety 6: 45–78. Terrell, R. 1983. Reducing the sodium content of proc- essed meats. Food Technology 37: 66–71. Trudso, J. 1985. Increasing yields with carrageenan. Meat Processing 24: 37–42. Tunaley, A., Thomson, D. & McEwan, J. 1987. Determi- nation of equi-sweet concentrations of nine sweet- eners using a relative rating technique. International Journal of Food Science and Technology 22: 627– 635. SELOSTUS Suolapitoisuuden pienentämisen vaikutus kinkkuleikkeen aistittuun suolaisuuteen Marita Ruusunen, Marjo Särkkä-Tirkkonen ja Eero Puolanne Helsingin yliopisto Tutkimuksen tarkoituksena oli selvittää kuinka pal- jon kinkkuleikkeen suolapitoisuutta voi alentaa ilman vaikutusta tuotteen aistittavaan suolaisuuteen. Kink- kuleikkeet valmistettiin karkeaksi hienonnetusta sianlihasta. Suolapitoisuudet olivat 1,1, 1,4, 1,7, 2,0, 2,3 ja 2,6 % ja valmistuksessa käytettiin fosfaattia. Tutkimuksessa määritettiin painotappio kypsennyk- sen aikana. Kinkkuleikkeiden suolaisuus suhteessa referenssikinkkuleikkeeseen arvioitiin aistinvaraisesti käyttäen graafista jana-asteikkoa (välimatka-asteik- ko). Referenssikinkkuleikkeen suolapitoisuus oli 1,7 %. Painotappio oli 1,1 %:n suolalisällä valmistetus- sa kinkkuleikkeessä suurempi kuin muissa kink- kuleikkeissä. Kinkkuleike, jossa oli 1,7 % suolaa ar- vioitiin yhtä suolaiseksi kuin kinkkuleikkeet, joissa oli 2,0 ja 2,3 % suolaa, mutta suolaisemmaksi kuin kinkkuleikkeet, joissa oli 1,1 ja 1,4 % suolaa. Kink- kuleike, jossa oli 2,6 % suolaa oli suolaisin, mutta ei eronnut merkitsevästi kinkkuleikkeistä, joissa oli 2,0 tai 2,3 % suolaa. Tämän tutkimuksen tulokset osoittavat, että kinkkuleikkeen suolapitoisuuden voi alentaa 1,7 %:iin ilman, että aistittu suolaisuus oleel- lisesti heikkenee. Title Introduction Material Methods Results and discussion Conclusions References SELOSTUS