超市肉类加工食品酸价安全期与氧化安全期比较  

Comparison of acid value and oxidative safe period in meat products from supermarkets

作　　者：詹磊[1] 唐书泽[1] 唐玲[1] 严琼琼[1] 林少玲[1] 

机构地区：[1]暨南大学食品科学与工程系,广东广州510632

出　　处：《食品与机械》2010年第1期52-56,共5页Food and Machinery

基　　金：广州市科技局重点攻关项目(编号:2006Z2-E0201)

摘　　要：对超市出售的鱿鱼丝、肉片、鱼片、卤鸡腿、火腿肠、午餐肉罐头、广式腊肠7大类15种肉类加工食品的营养组成、酸价(AV)、过氧化值(POV)、硫代巴比妥酸值(TBA)以及感官品质进行测定和分析,根据国标对被测食品的酸价安全期和氧化安全期进行分析比较。在保存期为货架期的1/3～1/2时,盐焗卤制鸡腿、广式腊肠、油炸牛肉干、火腿肠、鱿鱼丝、鱼片等9个样品的感官评分为良好,但其AV已接近或超过酸价国标值,AV安全期仅为货架期的1/5～1/3;同样的产品,其POV值却大大低于国标值,POV氧化安全期多数超过货架期;TBA值与感官评分结果相近,TBA氧化安全期比较接近于货架期。结果表明,AV不宜作为肉类加工食品安全指标,POV因其不稳定性,也不宜作为氧化安全指标,TBA值因其具有安全学意义并更接近于氧化安全实际,可作为肉类加工食品的氧化安全指标。Food composition, acid value （AV）, peroxide value （POV）, thiobarbituric acid value （TBA） and sensory quality in sev en types of meat products such as shredded squid, meat slice, fish slice, stewed product, ham sausage, canned meat and Cantonese style sausage were investigated for comparison and analysis of AV and oxidative safe period based on GB standard. At the storage time of 1/3-1/2 of marking shelf life, nine tested samples with good sensory attributes of the overall score of over 85 had the AV over the GB limit and the AV safe period was only 1/5- 1/3 of the marking shelf life. However, the POV of the same samples were much lower than GB limit and the POV shelf life were much longer than the marking shelf life. TBA had close relation to the sensory scores and also close to the marking shelf life. Results from this study indicated that AV and POV are not suitable as indicators for meat products safety.TBA, due to its reflection of carcinogenic melondialdehyde and close relation to the oxidative process and marking shelf life, can be oxidative safety indicator as meat processed products.

关 键 词：肉类加工食品 氧化安全性 酸价安全期 

分 类 号：TS251.7[轻工技术与工程—农产品加工及贮藏工程]