Meat Science 91 (2012) 179–184

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Meat Science

j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r .com/ locate /meatsc i

Antioxidant effects of broccoli powder extract in goat meat nuggets

Rituparna Banerjee a,⁎, Arun K. Verma b, Arun K. Das b, V. Rajkumar b, A.A. Shewalkar a, H.P. Narkhede a

a Department of Livestock Products Technology, NVC, Nagpur, 440006, Indiab GPT Lab, CIRG, Makhdoom, Farah, Mathura, U.P., 281122, India

⁎ Corresponding author. Fax: +91 712 2510883.E-mail address: rituparnabnrj@gmail.com (R. Banerj

0309-1740/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. Alldoi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.01.016

a b s t r a c t

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 30 September 2011Received in revised form 16 December 2011Accepted 19 January 2012

Keywords:Goat meat nuggetsNatural antioxidantBroccoli powderTBARS number

The antioxidant potential of broccoli powder extract (BPE) was determined and evaluated in goat meat nug-gets at three different levels 1, 1.5 and 2%, compared with control and butylated hydroxyl toluene (100 ppmBHT). Total phenolics in 5 mg broccoli powder was higher (Pb0.05) than 100 ppm BHT. Free radical scaveng-ing activity of 2.25 mg and 3 mg broccoli powder was found similar to 50 and 100 ppm BHT. Reducing powerof 10 mg broccoli powder was comparable to the 100 ppm BHT. Incorporation of 1.5 and 2% BPE decreased(Pb0.05) the pH value of the products. Total phenolics in product with 2% BPE was similar to BHT nuggets.Chroma value of products with 1.5 and 2% BPE was lower (Pb0.05) than control and BHT nuggets. Thiobar-bituric acid reactive substances number of BPE nuggets was lower (Pb0.05) than control throughout the stor-age. Thus 2% BPE can be used as natural antioxidant in goat meat nuggets without affecting productacceptability.

© 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Oxidation of lipid and auto-oxidation are one of the major causes ofquality deterioration and reduced shelf life of meat products. This mayproduce changes in meat quality parameters such as colour, flavour,odour, texture and even nutritional value (Fernandez, Perej-Alvarez, &Fernandez–Lopez, 1997). Meat mincing, cooking and other processingprior to refrigerated storage disrupt muscle cell membranes facilitatingthe interaction of unsaturated lipids with pro-oxidant substances suchas non-haem iron, accelerating lipid oxidation leading to rapid qualitydeterioration and development of rancidity (Tichivangana & Morrissey,1985). Initially lipid oxidation in meat products results cardboard flavourand progresses with development of painty, rancid and oxidized flavour(Angelo, Crippen, Dupuy, & James, 1990). Susceptibility of muscle tissueto lipid oxidation is also related to the degree of lipid unsaturation, mus-cle type, animal diet, additives such as salt, cooking method, manner ofstorage and pH of the muscle (Kanner, 1994; Rhee & Ziprin, 2001).

The rate and extent of oxidative deterioration can be reducedthrough various means like curing, vacuum packaging, modified at-mosphere packaging and most importantly adding synthetic or natu-ral antioxidants. Although synthetic antioxidants such as butylatedhydroxytoluene (BHT) and butylated hydroxy anisole (BHA) havebeen used extensively, recent studies have implicated them to havetoxic effects (Lindenschmidt, Tryka, Goad, & Witschi, 1986; Shahidi,Janita, & Wanasundara, 1992). These findings together with consum-er interest in natural food additives have reinforced the need for

ee).

rights reserved.

effective antioxidants from natural sources as an alternative to pre-vent deterioration of meat products during processing and storage.Fruits and vegetables are rich sources of antioxidants (Phillips et al.,1993; Slattery et al., 2000) and can serve as a source of natural antiox-idants for meat products. These antioxidants include fat-soluble vita-mins and precursors, such as tocopherols and carotenoids, as well asthe water-soluble vitamin ascorbic acid, and flavonoids. Applicationof plant extracts in meat products as natural antioxidants have beenattempted by different researchers. The antioxidant and antimicrobialpotential of pomegranate peel and seed extract in chicken productswas investigated by Kanatt, Chander, and Sharma (2010). The efficacyof pomegranate juice, pomegranate rind powder extract and butylat-ed hydroxyl toluene as antioxidants in cooked chicken patties duringrefrigerated storage was observed by Naveena, Sen, Vaithiyanathan,Babji, and Kondaiah (2008). Tea catechins were found to be more ef-ficient than α-tocopherol (both applied at 300 mg/kg level) in inhi-biting minced muscle lipid oxidation in fresh meats, poultry and fish(Tang, Sheehan, Buckley, Morrissey, & Kerry, 2001). Lau and King(2003) reported that the addition of grape seed extract to dark poul-try meat patties at 1.0 and 2.0% levels effectively inhibited the devel-opment of TBARS, with treated samples having 10-fold lower TBARSnumber compared to untreated control.

Epidemiological studies have identified specific phytochemicals inBrassica vegetables that may confer protection against certain degener-ative diseases such as cancer (Finley, 2003;Matusheski et al., 2006). Cer-tain cruciferous vegetables of the genus Brassica including cauliflower,broccoli, cabbage, and Brussels sprouts have been studied extensivelyas they are rich sources of antioxidants including carotenoids, tocoph-erols, ascorbic acid, and flavonoids, vitamins, and fibre but contain littlefat and energy (Kurilich et al., 1999; Mukherjee, Gangopadhyay, & Das,

180 R. Banerjee et al. / Meat Science 91 (2012) 179–184

2008). Although not yet reported in the literature, broccoli or broccoliextracts, being a rich source of various phenolic compounds could there-fore be incorporated inmeat products as a source of natural antioxidantsto prolong quality and stability. In the present study, antioxidant poten-tial of broccoli powder extract (BPE) in goat meat nuggets was evaluat-ed and compared to BHT. The quality and acceptability of the productswere determined.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Raw materials

Dressed and deboned goat meat procured from local market, Nag-pur, India was packed in clean Low Density Polyethylene bags andquickly brought to the laboratory of Department of Livestock ProductsTechnology and stored frozen at−18 °C till further use. Other additivesused were sodium chloride, sodium tripolyphosphate, sodium nitrite,BHT, refined vegetable oil, condiments (onion and garlic paste), refinedwheat flour and spice mix. Fresh broccoli was purchased from localmarket and dried after fine chopping in an oven at 50 °C. After drying,fine powder of broccoli was prepared using home mixer. Ten grams ofbroccoli powder was added in 100 ml boiled distilled water and left for1 h followed by filtration through Whatmann No 1 filter paper to getextract. The formulation of control product and products preparedwith broccoli powder extract and with BHT is given in Table 1.

2.2. Detailed study

In the present study antioxidant potential of different concentra-tion of broccoli powder was evaluated against 50, 100 and 150 μgBHT.

2.3. Product processing

Frozen goat meat was thawed for 12 h in a refrigerator (4±1 °C),cut into small cubes and minced in a mincer (Electrolux, Model-9152,Italy). Meat emulsion was prepared in a bowl chopper (Stadler Corpo-ration, Mumbai) under controlled temperature (10±2 °C). In a pre-weighed quantity of minced goat meat, salt, sodium tripolyphosphate,and sodium nitrite were added and chopped for 2–3 min with simulta-neous addition of ice flakes. Refined sunflower oil was slowly incorpo-rated while chopping till it was completely dispersed in the batter.Condiment paste, broccoli powder extract, dry spice mix and refinedwheat flour were added. Chopping continued till uniform dispersionof all the ingredients and desired consistency of the emulsion wasachieved. About 360 g of emulsion was taken and filled in stainless

Table 1Formulation for goat meat nuggets prepared with Broccoli powder extract (BPE) andbutylated hydroxyl toluene (BHT).

Ingredient Controlnuggets

BPE1nuggets

BPE1.5nuggets

BPE2nuggets

BHTnuggets

Meat (%) 72.9 71.9 71.4 70.9 72.9NaCl (%) 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8Na nitrite (ppm) 150 150 150 150 150Sodium tripolyphosphate (%) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5Ice flakes (%) 7 7 7 7 7Liquid egg white (%) 2 2 2 2 2Refined oil (%) 7 7 7 7 7Condiments (%) 4 4 4 4 4Broccoli extract (%) – 1 1.5 2 –

BHT (ppm) – – – – 100Spice mix (%) 3 3 3 3 3Refined wheat flour (%) 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8

Control: Goat meat nuggets; BPE1: Goat meat nuggets with 1% BPE; BPE1.5: Goat meatnuggets with 1.5% BPE; BPE2: Goat meat nuggets with 2% BPE; BHT: Goat meat nuggetswith BHT.

steel mould. Mould was covered with lid and tied with thread andsteam cooked for pre-standardized 35 min to achieve an internal tem-perature of about 85 °C. Goat meat blocks so obtained were sliced andcut into pieces to get nuggets (~1.5×1.5×1.5 cm3) and analyzed forvarious physicochemical, colour and sensory characteristics. The prod-ucts were aerobically packaged in a bags and kept at refrigerated tem-perature to evaluate the antioxidant activity of broccoli powder extract.

2.4. Analytical procedure

2.4.1. Estimation of total phenolicsThe concentration of phenolic compounds in the broccoli powder

extracts and BHT was determined by the F-C method as described bySingleton and Rossi (1965). In a 0.1 ml of different dilutions of extract,0.75 ml of Folin–Ciocalteau reagent was added and final volume wasmade ten times with distilled water (7.65 ml). After 5 min, 0.75 ml ofa sodium carbonate solution (7.5%) was added to each tube. Thetubes were incubated for 90 min at room temperature in the darkand absorbance was measured at 725 nm (Hitachi, U-28000 Spectro-photometer, Tokyo, Japan) against a blank. A standard curve was plot-ted using different concentrations of gallic acid, and the amount of totalphenolics was calculated as gallic acid equivalents (GAE) in mg/g ofplant materials. Total phenolics in cooked goat meat nuggets was ana-lyzed by using the Folin–Ciocalteu assay (Escarpa & Gonzalez, 2001)with slight modifications. Five grams of cooked product was homoge-nized with 25 ml of 70% acetone and kept overnight for extraction atrefrigeration temperature. Suitable aliquots of extracts were taken ina test tube and the volume was made to 0.5 ml with distilled water fol-lowed by the addition of 0.25 ml F-C (1 N) reagent and 1.25 ml sodiumcarbonate solution (20%). The tubes were vortex mixed and the absor-bance recorded at 725 nm after 40 min.

2.4.2. Radical Scavenging activity using DPPH assayThe DPPH assay was performed according to the method of

Fargere, Abdennadher, Delmas, and Boutevin (1995). An aliquot ofthe various concentrations of extract and BHT was mixed with 3 mlof 2, 2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl in methanol (final concentrationof 250 μM) and the mixture was vortexed vigorously. The tubeswere then incubated at room temperature for 30 min in the dark,and the absorbance was taken at 517 nm. The radical scavenging ac-tivity (RSA) was calculated by the following equation:

RSA %ð Þ ¼ AbsorbanceControl−AbsorbanceSample=AbsorbanceControl� �

� 100

2.4.3. FRAP assayFerric reducing antioxidant power of the extracts was determined

according to the method of Oyaizu (1986). Different concentrations ofbroccoli powder extract and BHT were mixed with 2.5 ml of phos-phate buffer (0.2 M, pH 6.6) and 2.5 ml of 1% (w/v) potassium ferricy-anide in 10 ml test tubes. The mixtures were incubated for 20 min at50 °C followed by addition of 2.5 ml of 10% trichloroacetic acid andthen centrifugation at 700 g for 10 min. The supernatant (2.5 ml)was mixed with 2.5 ml distilled water and 0.5 ml of ferric chloride(0.1% w/v), and the absorbance was measured at 700 nm (Hitachi,U-28000 Spectrophotometer, Tokyo, Japan). Increase in absorbanceof the reaction mixture indicated the reducing power of the sample.

2.4.4. pH and cooking yieldThe pH of the cooked nuggets was determined by blending 10 g

sample with 50 ml distilled water for a minute in a homogenizer(Model PT-MR-2100, Kinematica AG, Switzerland). The pH valueswere measured using a standardized electrode attached to a digitalpH meter (Systronics, μ pH system 361, Delhi, India). Cooking yield

181R. Banerjee et al. / Meat Science 91 (2012) 179–184

was determined by dividing the weight of cooked product by theweight of raw uncooked meat batter and expressed as percent.

2.4.5. Instrumental colourThe colour of cooked nuggets was compared using a Lovibond

Tintometer (Model F; UK). Samples from two different nuggets foreach product were taken in the sample holder and secured againstthe viewing aperture. The sample colour was matched by adjustingred (a) and yellow (b) units, while keeping the blue units fixed at 2.The corresponding colour units were recorded. The hue and chroma(saturation) values were determined using the formula, (tan−1 b/a)and (a2+b2)1/2 respectively.

2.4.6. TBARS numberLipid oxidation in the goat meat nuggets was monitored by mea-

suring thiobarbituric acid reactive substances at an interval of4 days during refrigerated storage. Thiobarbituric acid reactive sub-stances number (mg malonaldehyde/kg) of the goat meat productwas determined using the extraction method described by Witte,Krause, and Bailey (1970).

2.5. Sensory analysis of goat meat patties

The sensory attributes such as appearance, flavour, texture, juici-ness and overall acceptability of the product were evaluated using8 point descriptive scale (Keeton, 1983) where 8 corresponded to‘components characteristic of the highest quality’. Scores from 5 to8 were considered acceptable. The panel consisted of 10 trained andexperienced members of the institute who were familiar with thecharacteristics of meat product. Nuggets were warmed in a micro-wave oven for 20 s just before sensory evaluation and coded sampleswere served at room temperature in separate booths. Water wasserved for cleansing the mouth between samples.

2.6. Statistical analysis

Three replications of the study were performed and measure-ments of all parameters were made in duplicate. Mean values for var-ious parameters were calculated and compared by analysis ofvariance using the SPSS software for windows (version 11.0). Meansof pH, DPPH, total phenolics and sensory attributes were analyzedusing one-way ANOVA. Storage data of TBARS values were analyzedusing two-way ANOVA with treatment and storage time as main ef-fects. Statistical significance was identified at the 95% confidencelevel (Pb0.05). The values were presented as mean along with stan-dard error (Mean±Standard Error).

Fig. 1. Total phenolics (mg gallic acid equivalent) in dif

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Total phenolics

Phenolics constitutes one of the major groups of compounds act-ing as primary antioxidants or free radical terminators. Determina-tion of total phenolics is one of important parameters to estimatethe amount of antioxidants. Fig. 1 shows concentration dependenttotal phenolics in broccoli powder and BHT. Total phenolics in 5 mgbroccoli powder was significantly higher (Pb0.05) than 100 ppmBHT but less as compared to 150 ppm. Broccoli naturally containsmany antioxidants, including carotenoids, tocopherols, ascorbic acid,and flavonoids, and has been reported to have high antioxidant ca-pacity (Azuma, Ippoushi, Ito, Higashio, & Terao, 1999; Kurilich et al.,1999). According to Domínguez Perles, Martínez Ballesta, Carvajal,García Viguera, and Moreno (2010), total phenolic contents (mg/gof dry matter) in the broccoli are different in the leaves and stalkand reported to be 99.37–135.64 and 8.13–11.74, respectively. Theamount of total phenolics in broccoli powder in our study wasabout 63 mg GAE/g of dry matter. Intermediate value in the studycould be due to the preparation of broccoli powder by mixing ofleaves and stalks.

3.2. DPPH free radical scavenging activity

The DPPH free radical scavenging activity of broccoli powder andBHT is shown in Fig. 2. The DPPH radical has been widely used totest the free radical scavenging ability of various natural productsand has been accepted as a model compound for free radicals origi-nating in lipids (Da Porto, Calligaris, Celotti, & Nicoli, 2000). The per-cent radical scavenging activity of BPE and BHT was increasedsignificantly (Pb0.05) with the concentration. DPPH radical scaveng-ing activity of 2.25 mg and 3 mg broccoli powder was comparable tothe activity of 50 and 100 ppm BHT, respectively. The DPPH free rad-ical scavenging by antioxidants is due to their hydrogen donatingability; the more the number of hydroxyl groups, the higher the pos-sibility of free radical scavenging ability (Chen & Ho, 1995). A linearcorrelation between radical scavenging activity and polyphenoliccontent has been reported in an extensive range of vegetables andfruits (Robards, Prenzler, Tucker, Swatsitang, & Glover, 1999).

3.3. FRAP assay

Reducing properties are generally associated with the presence ofreductones (Duh, 1998). According to Gordon (1990) the antioxida-tive action of reductones is based on the breaking of free radical

ferent concentrations of broccoli powder and BHT.

Fig. 2. Radical scavenging activity (%) of different concentrations of broccoli powder and BHT.

182 R. Banerjee et al. / Meat Science 91 (2012) 179–184

chains by the donation of hydrogen atom. Fig. 3 shows the reducingpower of the BPE and BHT as a function of concentration. In thisassay, the reductants present in the extract cause reduction of Fe3+ tothe Fe2+ form,which can bemonitored spectrophotometrically. Reduc-ing power of 15 mg broccoli powder was even significantly higher(Pb0.05) as compared to 150 ppm BHT. The reducing power of a com-pound is related to its electron-transfer ability; therefore, the reducingcapacity of a compoundmay serve as a significant indicator of its poten-tial antioxidant activity. Amarowicz, Pegg, Rahimi-Moghaddam, Barl,and Weil (2004) observed a direct correlation between antioxidantactivities and reducing power of certain plant extracts, which havebeen shown to exert antioxidant action by breaking the free radicalchain through donation of hydrogen atom.

Fig. 3. Ferric reducing antioxidant power (A700) of dif

3.4. pH, product yield and total phenolics

The pH, yield and total phenolics of control, nuggets preparedwith broccoli powder extract and BHT is presented in Table 2. Nug-gets prepared with 1% BPE had pH values similar (P>0.05) to thoseof control and BHT nuggets. However, higher amount of BPE signifi-cantly decreased (Pb0.05) the pH value of goat meat nuggets. Thiscould be due to slightly lower pH (4.90) of broccoli powder extractthan the normal pH of goat meat. The cooking yield was not signifi-cantly different in any of the formulations tested. Total phenolics inBPE nuggets and BHT nuggets was significantly higher (Pb0.05)with respect to control nuggets. In BPE nuggets, phenolic content in-crease was correlated to the amount of BPE added and product

ferent concentrations of broccoli powder and BHT.

Table 2Effect of broccoli powder extract and BHT on pH, product yield and total phenolics ofgoat meat nuggets (Mean±SE).

Treatment pH Cooking yield Total phenolics(GAE) mg/g

Control nuggets 6.17±0.02a 93.66±0.33 0.06±0.01d

BPE1 nuggets 6.16±0.01a 93.67±0.42 0.09±0.01c

BPE 1.5 nuggets 6.07±0.01b 93.52±0.48 0.12±0.01b

BPE 2 nuggets 5.93±0.02c 93.69±0.39 0.16±0.01a

BHT nuggets 6.18±0.01a 93.31±0.26 0.16±0.01a

Control: Goat meat nuggets; BPE1: Goat meat nuggets with 1% BPE; BPE1.5: Goat meatnuggets with 1.5% BPE; BPE2: Goat meat nuggets with 2% BPE; BHT: Goat meat nuggetswith BHT.Mean values with different superscripts in the same column differ significantly(Pb0.05).n=6.

Table 4Effect of broccoli powder extract and BHT on sensory characteristics of goat meat nug-gets (Mean±SE).

Treatment Appearance Flavour Texture Juiciness Overallacceptability

Controlnuggets

7.23±0.05 7.06±0.6 7.15±0.08 7.07±0.07 7.18±0.05

BPE 1nuggets

7.22±0.06 7.05±0.08 7.03±0.07 7.13±0.04 7.08±0.06

BPE 1.5nuggets

7.18±0.06 7.03±0.06 7.01±0.06 7.15±0.05 7.11±0.06

BPE 2 nuggets 7.12±0.04 6.94±0.07 7.02±0.06 7.17±0.05 7.05±0.07BHT nuggets 7.18±0.05 7.02±0.08 6.99±0.07 7.14±0.05 7.06±0.06

Control: Goat meat nuggets; BPE1: Goat meat nuggets with 1% BPE; BPE1.5: Goat meatnuggets with 1.5% BPE; BPE2: Goat meat nuggets with 2% BPE; BHT: Goat meat nuggetswith BHT.None of the mean value within a parameter differed significantly.n=30.

Table 5Effect of broccoli powder extract and BHT on TBARS number (mg malonaldehyde/kg)of goat meat nuggets during refrigerated storage (Mean±SE).

183R. Banerjee et al. / Meat Science 91 (2012) 179–184

containing 2% BPE had similar total phenolics to the BHT nuggets. Thehigher level of phenolics in goat meat nuggets indicates their nutri-tional enrichment due to added broccoli powder extract (Leheska etal., 2006).

3.5. Instrumental colour

Lovibond tintometer colour values of the control nuggets, BPEnuggets and BHT nuggets are presented in Table 3. There were no sig-nificant differences (P>0.05) in the redness, yellowness and huevalues among all products. Incorporation of BPE at 1.5 and 2% levelssignificantly decreased (Pb0.05) chroma value. Control nuggets,BHT nuggets and BPE1 nuggets had almost similar chroma values.But, yellowness and chroma values of products with BPE slightly de-creased at higher levels. This could be attributed to the slightly grey-ish colour of the broccoli powder extract. According to Naveena et al.(2008) incorporation of pomegranate rind powder extracted resultedin slightly darker chicken patties. Mitsumoto, O'Grady, Kerry, and JoeBuckley (2005) have reported the discolouration of chicken meat pat-ties with addition of natural antioxidants like tea catechins.

3.6. Sensory analysis

There were no significant differences in the organoleptic charac-teristics of all the products (Table 4). Appearance, flavour, texture,juiciness and overall acceptability scores of control nuggets, BPE nug-gets and BHT nuggets were almost similar and incorporation of broc-coli powder extract did not make marked changes in any of theattributes.

3.7. TBARS number

Total phenolics, radical scavenging activity and reducing powderestimation indicate that broccoli powder has good antioxidant

Table 3Effect of broccoli powder extract and BHT on instrumental colour value of goat meatnuggets (Mean±SE).

Treatment Redness Yellowness Hue Chroma

Control nuggets 2.83±0.08 3.23±0.06 50.34±2.36 4.31±0.04a

BPE1 nuggets 2.80±0.05 3.20±0.03 49.82±1.17 4.25±0.03ab

BPE 1.5 nuggets 2.77±0.03 3.10±0.09 51.73±2.04 4.16±0.06bc

BPE 2 nuggets 2.73±0.03 3.05±0.07 51.31±1.47 4.10±0.05c

BHT nuggets 2.80±0.06 3.20±0.04 51.16±1.83 4.25±0.04ab

Control: Goat meat nuggets; BPE1: Goat meat nuggets with 1% BPE; BPE1.5: Goat meatnuggets with 1.5% BPE; BPE2: Goat meat nuggets with 2% BPE; BHT: Goat meat nuggetswith BHT.Mean values with different superscripts in the same column differ significantly(Pb0.05).n=6.

potential. So its efficiency in controlling lipid oxidation of goat meatnuggets was evaluated during refrigerated storage against controlnuggets and BHT nuggets. Thiobarbituric acid reactive substancenumber of all the products increased significantly with the advance-ment of storage period (Table 5). However, these values were wellbelow the acceptable limits of 1–2 mg malonaldehyde per kilogrammeat (Witte et al., 1970). Among different goat meat nuggets, controlhad significantly higher (Pb0.05) TBARS number. Among BPE nug-gets, TBARS number decreased with the higher levels of extractwith significant effect at 2% level and its value was similar to theproduct with 100 ppm BHT. The antioxidant capacity of broccoli ex-tracts could be attributable to presence of natural antioxidants(Heimler, Vignolini, Dini, Vincieri, & Romani, 2006; Podsedek,2007). Broccoli contains high amounts of bioactive phytochemicals,phenolic compounds and nutrients (Jeffery et al., 2003; Moreno,Carvajal, López-Berenguer, & García-Viguera, 2006).The antioxidantactivity of phenolic compounds is mainly due to their redox proper-ties, which can play an important role in adsorbing and neutralizingfree radicals, quenching singlet oxygen, or decomposing peroxides(Cao, Sofic, & Prior, 1997).

4. Conclusion

The results of the present study revealed that broccoli powder isbestowedwith phenolic compounds which have excellent free radicalscavenging activity and reducing power. Incorporation of broccolipowder extracts at 1 and 2% level which is equivalent to 0.1 and0.2% broccoli powder significantly increases the phenolic contents in

Treatment 0th day 4th day 8th day 12th day 16th day

Control 0.31±0.02eA

0.47±0.02dA

0.70±0.01cA

0.97±0.01bA

1.18±0.02aA

BPE 1nuggets

0.28±0.03eAB

0.45±0.02dAB

0.67±0.01cA

0.94±0.01bAB

1.09±0.02aB

BPE 1.5nuggets

0.24±0.01eBC

0.40±0.01dB

0.64±0.02cA

0.87±0.03bB

0.99±0.02aC

BPE 2nuggets

0.19±0.02eC

0.32±0.02dC

0.53±0.04cB

0.76±0.04bC

0.91±0.02aD

BHTnuggets

0.19±0.02eC

0.31±0.02dC

0.52±0.04cB

0.75±0.03bC

0.92±0.02aD

Control: Goat meat nuggets; BPE1: Goat meat nuggets with 1% BPE; BPE1.5: Goat meatnuggets with 1.5% BPE; BPE2: Goat meat nuggets with 2% BPE; BHT: Goat meat nuggetswith BHT.Mean values with different superscripts in the same column and row differsignificantly (Pb0.05).n=6.

184 R. Banerjee et al. / Meat Science 91 (2012) 179–184

goat meat nuggets and can act as a source of natural antioxidants. Al-though instrumental colour redness of products decreases at higherlevel of broccoli powder extract, upon sensory evaluation no differ-ence was perceived as compared to control. Storage study of theproducts shows that broccoli powder extract significantly reducesthe lipid peroxidation similar to the 100 ppm BHT thus improvingthe product quality and stability.

References

Amarowicz, R., Pegg, R., Rahimi-Moghaddam, P., Barl, B., & Weil, J. (2004). Free-radicalscavenging capacity and antioxidant activity of selected plant species from theCanadian prairies. Food Chemistry, 84(4), 551–562.

Angelo, A. J. S., Crippen, K., Dupuy, H., & James, C., Jr. (1990). Chemical and sensorystudies of antioxidant treated beef. Journal of Food Science, 55(6), 1501–1505.

Azuma, K., Ippoushi, K., Ito, H., Higashio, H., & Terao, J. (1999). Evaluation of antioxidativeactivity of vegetable extracts in linoleic acid emulsion and phospholipid bilayers.Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 79(14), 2010–2016.

Cao, G., Sofic, E., & Prior, R. L. (1997). Antioxidant and prooxidant behavior of flavonoids:structure–activity relationships. Free Radical Biology & Medicine, 22(5), 749–760.

Chen, C. W. E. N., & Ho, C. H. I. T. (1995). Antioxidant properties of polyphenolsextracted from green and black teas. Journal of Food Lipids, 2(1), 35–46.

Da Porto, C., Calligaris, S., Celotti, E., & Nicoli, M. C. (2000). Antiradical properties ofcommercial cognacs assessed by the DPPH test. Journal of Agricultural and FoodChemistry, 48(9), 4241–4245.

Domínguez Perles, R., Martínez Ballesta, M. C., Carvajal, M., García Viguera, C., & Moreno,D. A. (2010). Broccoli derived by products—a promising source of bioactive ingredi-ents. Journal of Food Science, 75(4), C383–C392.

Duh, P. D. (1998). Antioxidant activity of Budrock (Arctium lappa L.): Its scavenging ef-fects on free radical and active oxygen. Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society,75, 455–461.

Escarpa, A., & Gonzalez, M. C. (2001). Approach to the content of total extractable phe-nolic compounds from different food samples by comparison of chromatographicand spectrophotometric methods. Analytica Chimica Acta, 427(1), 119–127.

Fargere, T., Abdennadher, M., Delmas, M., & Boutevin, B. (1995). Determination of per-oxides and hydroperoxides with 2, 2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH). Applica-tion to ozonized ethylene vinyl acetate copolymers (EVA). European PolymerJournal, 31(5), 489–497.

Fernandez, J., Perej-Alvarez, J. A., & Fernandez–Lopez, J. A. (1997). Thiobarbituric acidtest for monitoring lipid oxidation in meat. Food Chemistry, 59, 345–353.

Finley, J. W. (2003). Reduction of cancer risk by consumption of selenium-enrichedplants: enrichment of broccoli with selenium increases the anticarcinogenic prop-erties of broccoli. Journal of Medicinal Food, 6(1), 19–26.

Gordon, M. F. (1990). The mechanism of antioxidant action in vitro. In B. J. F. Hudson(Ed.), Food antioxidants (pp. 1–18). London: Elsevier Applied Science.

Heimler, D., Vignolini, P., Dini, M. G., Vincieri, F. F., & Romani, A. (2006). Antiradicalactivity and polyphenol composition of local Brassicaceae edible varieties. FoodChemistry, 99(3), 464–469.

Jeffery, E., Brown, A., Kurilich, A., Keck, A., Matusheski, N., Klein, B., et al. (2003).Variation in content of bioactive components in broccoli. Journal of Food Compositionand Analysis, 16(3), 323–330.

Kanatt, S. R., Chander, R., & Sharma, A. (2010). Antioxidant and antimicrobial activity ofpomegranate peel extract improves the shelf life of chicken products. InternationalJournal of Food Science and Technology, 45(2), 216–222.

Kanner, J. (1994). Oxidative processes in meat and meat products: quality implications.Meat Science, 36(1–2), 169–189.

Keeton, J. T. (1983). Effect of fat and NaCl/phosphate levels on the chemical and sensoryproperties of pork patties. Journal of Food Science, 48(878–881), 885.

Kurilich, A. C., Tsau, G. J., Brown, A., Howard, L., Klein, B. P., Jeffery, E. H., et al. (1999).Carotene, tocopherol, and ascorbate contents in subspecies of Brassica oleracea.Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 47(4), 1576–1581.

Lau, D. W., & King, A. J. (2003). Pre-and post-mortem use of grape seed extract in darkpoultry meat to inhibit development of thiobarbituric acid reactive substances.Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 51(6), 1602–1607.

Leheska, J. M., Boyce, J., Brooks, J., Hoover, L. C., Thompson, L. D., & Miller, M. F. (2006).Sensory attributes and phenolic content of precooked pork breakfast sausage withfruit purees. Journal of Food Science, 71(3), S249–S252.

Lindenschmidt, R., Tryka, A., Goad, M., & Witschi, H. (1986). The effects of dietarybutylated hydroxytoluene on liver and colon tumor development inmice. Toxicology,38(2), 151–160.

Matusheski, N. V., Swarup, R., Juvik, J. A., Mithen, R., Bennett, M., & Jeffery, E. H. (2006).Epithiospecifier protein from broccoli (Brassica oleracea L. ssp. italica) inhibits for-mation of the anticancer agent sulforaphane. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chem-istry, 54(6), 2069–2076.

Mitsumoto, M., O'Grady, M. N., Kerry, J. P., & Joe Buckley, D. (2005). Addition of tea cat-echins and vitamin C on sensory evaluation, colour and lipid stability duringchilled storage in cooked or raw beef and chicken patties. Meat Science, 69(4),773–779.

Moreno, D. A., Carvajal, M., López-Berenguer, C., & García-Viguera, C. (2006). Chemicaland biological characterisation of nutraceutical compounds of broccoli. Journal ofPharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis, 41(5), 1508–1522.

Mukherjee, S., Gangopadhyay, H., & Das, D. K. (2008). Broccoli: a unique vegetable thatprotects mammalian hearts through the redox cycling of the thioredoxin super-family. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 56(2), 609–617.

Naveena, B. M., Sen, A. R., Vaithiyanathan, S., Babji, Y., & Kondaiah, N. (2008). Compar-ative efficacy of pomegranate juice, pomegranate rind powder extract and BHT asantioxidants in cooked chicken patties. Meat Science, 80, 1304–1308.

Oyaizu, M. (1986). Studies on products of browning reactions: Antioxidative activitiesof products of browning reaction prepared from glucoseamine. Japanese Journal ofNutrition, 44, 307–315.

Phillips, R. W., Kikendall, J. W., Luk, G. D., Willis, S. M., Murphy, J. R., Maydonovitch, C.,et al. (1993). Carotene inhibits rectal mucosal ornithine decarboxylase activity incolon cancer patients. Cancer Research, 53(16), 3723–3725.

Podsedek, A. (2007). Natural antioxidants and antioxidant capacity of Brassica vegeta-bles: A review. LWT- Food Science and Technology, 40(1), 1–11.

Rhee, K., & Ziprin, Y. (2001). Pro-oxidative effects of NaCl in microbial growth-controlled and uncontrolled beef and chicken. Meat Science, 57(1), 105–112.

Robards, K., Prenzler, P. D., Tucker, G., Swatsitang, P., & Glover, W. (1999). Phenoliccompounds and their role in oxidative processes in fruits. Food Chemistry, 66(4),401–436.

Shahidi, F., Janita, P. K., & Wanasundara, P. D. (1992). Phenolic antioxidants. CriticalReviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 32, 67–103.

Singleton, V., & Rossi, J. A., Jr. (1965). Colorimetry of total phenolics with phosphomolybdic-phosphotungstic acid reagents. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 16(3),144–158.

Slattery, M. L., Benson, J., Curtin, K., Ma, K. N., Schaeffer, D., & Potter, J. D. (2000). Carotenoidsand colon cancer1. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 71(2), 575–582.

Tang, S., Sheehan, D., Buckley, D. J., Morrissey, P. A., & Kerry, J. P. (2001). Anti oxidantactivity of added tea catechins on lipid oxidation of raw minced red meat, poultryand fish muscle. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 36(6),685–692.

Tichivangana, J. Z., & Morrissey, P. A. (1985). Metmyoglobin and inorganic metals asprooxidantes in raw and cooked muscle systems. Meat Science, 15, 107–116.

Witte, V. C., Krause, G. F., & Bailey, M. F. (1970). A new extraction method for determining2-thiobarbituric acid values of pork and beef during storage. Journal of Food Science,35, 582–585.