Printer Friendly

Cooking ways on composition of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids of inra rabbit/Influencia do cozimento na composicao de acidos graxos fosfolipidos intramusculares do coelho inra.

INTRODUCTION

For the past few years, not only the amount of intramuscular phospholipids, but also the composition of phospholipid fatty acids was widely concerned. The amount of intramuscular lipid significantly influenced the palatability of meat (HOCQUETTE et al., 2010). Muscle lipids comprise polar lipids and triacylglycerols, the main component of polar lipid is phospholipids, which located in the cell membranes, and the triacylglycerols are along the muscle fibers, which had high level of saturated fatty acids (SFA) and monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA).(RAES et al., 2004). In the intramuscular fat, PUFA is mainly derived from the contribution of phospholipids (WOOD et al., 2004). Thus, the content of intramuscular phospholipid is an important index to reflect the nutrition of meat (GRAY et al., 1996). Phospholipids contain quite many long-chain fatty acids attached to the phosphoryl group. But, the unsaturated fatty acids (UFA) portion, especially PUFA are easily oxidized (ALFAIA et al., 2010), thus the oxidation reaction during heat treatment significantly affects the intramuscular fatty acids composition.

Functional food plays an important role in human nutrition. Rabbit meat is characterized by high levels of PUFA, high levels of protein with essential amino acids; high digestibility value; lower cholesterol contents; high quality of vitamin B family etc (DALLE ZOTTE and SZENDRO, 2011; SIMITZIS et al., 2014). Moreover, the dietary rabbit meat can provide people with various nutrients needed to maintain health, since the nutrition of meat can be improved by adding essential fatty acids to its diet, such as n-3 PUFA (DAL BOSCO et al., 2004; KOUBA et al., 2008). Since the rabbit meat is characterized relatively abundant n-3 PUFAs and lower n-6/n-3 value (7~12) than a variety of other meats (DALLE ZOTTE, 2002). Inra rabbit is a French rabbit, which has high breeding efficiency. However, there are few reports about the effects of different cooking ways on its composition of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids.

Since the 1970s, in some European countries rabbit meat production has progressively become a highly specialized industry, which has made Europe the second (after China) largest rabbit meat producer in the world (CULLERE et al., 2018). Chinese people have been consuming rabbit meat for a long period of time due to its delectable texture and taste. Several advanced processed rabbit meat products, including smoked, roasted, canned, cured, dried, sauce-picked, and sausage products, are currently available in China (LI et al., 2018; ZENG et al., 2016). As far as we know, three household cooking ways of boiling, microwaving and Al foil-baking were effective to realize palatable and safe product (TORNBERG, 2005). Besides, by the heat processing, not only the pathogenic microorganisms can be killed or inhibited, the flavor and tenderness can also be enhanced (BRONCANO et al., 2009; RODRIGUEZ-ESTRADA et al., 1997). The cooking type, heating rate, cooking time and cooking temperature can modify the chemical composition of meat, which may lead to a massive loss of nutrients, especially the fatty acid profiles (CLAUSEN and OVESEN, 2005). Fatty acid composition and the content of intramuscular phospholipid of the meat were afected by the cooking methods, and the report found microwave processing to be better than stewing and baking. (XUE et al, 2015). WANG et al. (2015) reported that the drip loss, shear force, and textural properties of rabbit meat varied significantly with central temperatures during the cooking process. To sum up, diferent processing methods form diferent sensory characteristics by afecting the food components. Consequently, the efect of diferent processing methods on the quality of rabbit meat should be analyzed to further develop the rabbit industry as a specialty meat source.

Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the change of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acid composition of Inra rabbit cooked by three household treatments, in order to provide theoretical basis for deep-processing and dietary nutrition guidance of rabbit meat. This study has not been previously reported.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Materials

Inra standardized farming and a total of 30 male Inra rabbits were tested as samples. The facilities rabbits of the abattoir met the requirements of the Institute of Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), which is funded by the United States National Institutes of Health. Processing of raw materials was the same with XUE et al (2016a). After 24 h post-mortem, the longissimus dorsi muscle (LD) of the carcass was removed and immediately vacuumpacked and frozen at -20 [degrees]C until analyzed.

Experimental methods

Cooking treatment

The material processing method referred to XUE (2016b): The LD sample was thawed, and removed visible fat and connective tissue. The meat was cut into about 30*20*20 mm portions. All samples were divided into four groups, one of which represented the raw reference, whereas the other groups were randomly cooked by boiling, microwaving and Al foil-baking, respectively (Table 1). Every process of cooking was divided into three stages (Level 1, Level 2, Level 3), and the final stage had reached a final internal temperature of 75 [degrees]C as ascertained by an iron constantan (type J) wire thermocouple connected to a digital potentiometer (Mod. Microtemp 2, Eurotron Italiana, S.r.l., Italia).

The analysis of intramuscular phospholipid

The chloroform--methanol solvent (2:1 v/v) was used for extraction intramuscular lipids (FOLCH, 1957). Total lipid content was measured by weighing after solvent evaporation. Fractions of intramuscular phospholipids were separated with silica cartridges (Sep-Pack, Waters, Milford, MA, USA) (JUANEDA and ROCQUELIN, 1985). Phosphorous determination was used to quantify the phospholipids by the method of BARTLETT (1959). Phospholipids were methylated with boron fluoride-methanol (Sigma Aldrich) according to XUE (2016a).

The fatty acid methyl esters were analyzed by a QP-2010 gas chromatograph (Shimadzu, Japan) equipped with a flame ionization detector and a split injector. One microliter of fatty acid methyl esters was injected in split mode (5:1) onto a Rtx-Wax capillary column (Restek, USA; 30 m x 0.25 mm id x 0.25 pm film thickness). Temperature of the column was programmed as follows: 1 min at 140 [degrees]C, increments of 8 [degrees]C/min to 180 [degrees]C and held at 180 [degrees]C for 2 min; increments of 3 [degrees]C/min to 210 [degrees]C; and increments of 5 [degrees]C/min to 230 [degrees]C and held at 230 [degrees]C for 10 min. Temperature of injector and the detector were both 250 [degrees]C. Flow rate of the carrier gas (N2) was 1.5 mL/min. Fatty acids were identified by comparing the retention time of the samples with those of the standards (Sigma). Results were expressed as percent of the total fatty acid methyl esters (XUE, 2016a).

Statistical analysis

The means and standard errors were determined by the SAS[R] 9.0 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, USA). Difference among means was compared by Duncan's multiple range test.

The results were performed by ANOVApartial least squares regression. Seven 0/1 indicators variables (raw sample, boiling, microwaving and Al foil-baking, level 1, level 2, level 3), SFA+MUFA, and PUFA/SFA in the X-matrix. The 21 kinds of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids were represented in the Y-matrix. Ellipses represent R2=0.5 (50%) and 1.0 (100%). The Unscrambler Software was used to make the analysis of PLSR.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Influence of cooking ways on content of intramuscular phospholipid

Table 2 represented the effect of processing conditions on the intramuscular phospholipid content of Inra rabbit. The content of total intramuscular lipids (cooked muscle %) of LD were all significantly increased (P<0.05), while the intramuscular phospholipid (total intramuscular lipid %) were all significantly decreased after cooking (P<0.05). The significantly increasing of absolute content of phospholipid (cooked muscle %) were observed in all cooked samples (P<0.05). Absolute content of phospholipids in microwaved- and boiledsamples were obviously higher than foil-baking, and the increase of absolute content of phospholipids in microwaved- and boiled-samples were relatively rapid. Comparing the three cooking methods, the Al foil-baking accounted for the largest degradation of phospholipid proportion (total intramuscular lipid %), followed by boiling and microwaving.

The cooking loss of raw material and heated samples under different processing conditions were showed in table 3. Among the processing, the cooking loss of microwaving was higher, and changed severer with the cooking gradient increase (time), whilst the cooking loss of Al foil-baking was lower, and changed more smoothly with the processing. Thus, considering the different cooking loss extent of heated samples, the dry matter of the intramuscular phospholipids (dry weight %) would be more accurate to present the results. During the processing, the intramuscular phospholipids (dry weight %) significantly decreased (P<0.05). The longer the cooking time was, the higher the reduction would be. Among the cooking methods, microwaving showed the least change in the content of intramuscular phospholipids; whilst the biggest change was observed in boiling treatment.

At level 1, the content of intramuscular lipid in Al foil-baking group decreased more obviously than other groups, which may be due to the higher baking temperature (180 [degrees]C) and longer cooking time (5 min). To our knowledge, heat treatment may cause lipid oxidation, and the temperature and time are key factors (BYRNEA et al. 2002). According to RODRIGUEZESTRADA et al. (1997), baking treatment can produces more obvious lipid oxidation because of the high-temperature and long-time cooking condition. Hence, the aluminium foil is often used for wrapping heat-sensitive raw food for protection against direct heat, during storage and preparation of food (RANAU et al, 2001), and there are no evident risks to the health of the consumer from using aluminium foil to cook meats (TURHAN, 2006). Besides, the research of RODRIGUEZ-ESTRADA et al. (1997) showed that the microwave treatment can also cause lipid oxidation, though the time is shorter and the temperature is lower. Anyway, boiling, microwaving, Al foil-baking are all basic and familiar thermal processes of food preparation, which may change the fatty acid profiles, sensory characteristics and nutritional value of food (MARGARET et al, 2014, FELLOWS, 2017).

Effect of cooking ways on composition of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids in LD

The fatty acids composition of intramuscular phospholipid significantly changed under different cooking methods (boiling, microwaving and Al foil baking) and cooking extent (time) (table 4,5,6). The SFA proportion in cookedLD significantly increased during the processing (P<0.05), corresponding to the significant decrease of UFA, including the PUFA and MUFA proportion (P<0.05). Among the cooking methods, the maximum increase of SFA was reported in boiled samples, while the minimum in microwaved-samples. Therefore, the microwaving treatment was more effective to protect the UFA (especially the MUFA) than baking and boiling. At the same time, the boiling treatment did the worst in maintaining the stability of UFA, especially the PUFA fraction. The change of single major fatty acid was represented in table 7.

The unique biological effects of fatty acids vary with different species and chemical structures (HOSSEINI et al., 2014). According to LARSEN et al. (2011), long-chain PUFA (e.g. C20:4n-6, 20:5n-3 and 22:6n-3) have markedly different physiological properties and biological functions compared to the shorter chain PUFAs, such as C18:2n-6 and C18:3n-3. Indeed, the PUFA portion was more susceptible to oxidation during cooking than their saturated analogues. The change of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids (n-6 PUFA, n-3 PUFA, n-6/n-3 value, PUFA/SFA) was showed in figure 1. With the extension of processing time, the n-6 PUFA and n-3 PUFA portion decreased significantly (P<0.05), and the microwaving treatment did the minimal impact than boiling and baking, whilst the boiling treatment did more damage on n-6 PUFA, the Al foil-baking did more damage on n-3 PUFA. The increase trend of n-6/n-3 value was reported from level 1 to level 3 (P<0.05). Boiling, microwaving and Al foil-baking treatment changed the n-6/n-3 values from 3.95 (raw material) to 4.13~4.23, 4.16~4.46, 4.11~4.52, respectively. In the early stage of cooking, the three processing methods had little effect on the value, but in the later stage, the value of microwave and baking increased significantly. As for the PUFA/SFA value, a downward trend was observed (P<0.05), and the most decrease was reported in boiled samples. To sum up, the microwaving did less significant effect on the proportion of n-6 PUFAs, n-3 PUFAs, and PUFA/ SFA value than boiling and baking. This may be due to the lower temperature and shorter time of microwaving treatment than boiling and baking, resulting in the less oxidation of fatty acids, especially the proportion of PUFAs.

According to WHO, the SFA have been recognized as the main goal of weight loss by the international dietary authorities. In contrast, the increase of PUFA intake, especially the n-3 PUFA portion, may have a significant impact on the improvement of public health and nutrition. Based on FAO/WHO, the recommended ratio of n-6 PUFA/n-3 PUFA in a healthy daily diet was 5~10, and a lower ratio is more desirable in reducing the risk of many of chronic diseases, and the requirements for optimal ration vary by different disease (SIMOPOULOS, 2002). Nutritionists recommend that n-6 PUFA/n-3 PUFA should be less than 5 (KOUBA et al., 2003; WOOD et al., 2004), and the ratio in the diet should be less than 4.0 to combat "lifestyle diseases", such as cancer and coronary heart disease (SIMOPOULOS, 2004; WILLIAMS, 2000). Therefore, the micro wavedLD of Inra rabbits may characterize excellent intramuscular fatty acids profile, which has potential nutritive value.

Analysis of partial least squares regression (PLSR) The PLSR is a new method of multivariate statistical data analysis, which makes a combination of the advantages of three analytical methods including principal component analysis, canonical correlation analysis and multiple linear regression analysis. (MARINI, 2010). This regression has been applied in analysis the change of total intramuscular fatty acids of cooked Hyla rabbit (XUE et al, 2016b), the composition of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids of Inra rabbit during growth (XUE, 2016a), discriminating low-fat and full-fat yogurts (CRUZ et al., 2013), and the discrimination of Brazilian artisanal and inspected pork sausages (MATERA et al., 2014) and so on.

The change of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids of Inra rabbit was showed in figure 2. Results showed that the first and second main ingredients explained Y variables as 70% and 8%, respectively. In the first principal, both cooking ways and processing time (level) affected the composition of intramuscular fatty acids significantly. Besides, the processing time (level) affected the fatty acids composition more obviously than the cooking ways did.

As shown in the figure 2, On the first principal component, "microwaving" is much closer to "raw material", indicating that the microwaving treatment was more effective to preserve the composition of phospholipid fatty acids than the boiling and Al foil baking, whilst the biggest influence were reported in boiled-sample. Besides, the "shorttime-cooking" (Level 1) located closer with raw material, and the long-time-cooking (Level 2 and Level 3) located further with raw material; therefore, we can easily know that the longer the processing time, the more dramatic changes in the composition of fatty acids. With the extention of cooking time, the significantly decreasing of PUFA and significantly increasing of SFA in intramuscular phospholipid were observed from Level 1 to Level 3 (P<0.05). Based on the figure, the level 1 samples contained more PUFA (e.g., 16 (C20:2n-6), 18 (C20:4n-6), 19 (C20:5n-3), 20 (C22:5n-3) and 21 (C22:6n-3)) and some of MUFA (e.g., 10 (C18:1n-9), 11 (C18:1n-7)). The long-time-cooking (Level 3) was closely related to most of the SFA (e.g., 4(C15:0), 5(C16:0), 9(C18:0)). Thus the shorter processing time was more conducive to retain the PUFA in intramuscular phospholipids, especially the long chain PUFAs (C20-22). From what has been discussed above, comparing the three cooking ways, microwaving treatment showed the relatively superiority in reserving the composition of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids of Inra rabbit, especially the long chain PUFAs (n-6 PUFA and n-3 PUFA) portion, while boiling did the most serious damage to intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids of Inra rabbit. This result was consistent with the previous study in this paper.

CONCLUSION

After heat treatment of boiling, microwaving and Al foil-baking, the proportion of intramuscular phospholipids (dry weight %) of Inra rabbit were significantly decreased (P <0.05). The microwaving treatment did the minimal impact on the change of intramuscular phospholipids content, whilst the foil baking did the greatest impact on the content. Despite the composition of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids varied according to different treatment, the n-6/n-3 ratio in each of our experimental groups was all within the recommended range. Due to the analysis of PLSR, the microwaving showed the superiority in keeping stable on the phospholipid fatty acids composition of Inra rabbit, especially the UFA portion, which was consistent with the experimental results in this paper, and may be instructive to the processing of rabbit meat.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20190007

Received 01.03.19 Approved 03.20.19 Returned by the author 04.17.19

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This study was funded by the middle-aged teachers in Fujian Province (Grant No. JT180307); Postdoctoral program of Damin Food Co., Ltd. & Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University; College outstanding youth research talent cultivation program in Fujian Province.

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results.

AUTHORS' CONTRIBUTIONS

I contributed for the conception and writing of the manuscript. I critically revised the manuscript and approved of the final version.

REFERENCES

ALFAIA, C.M.M., et al. Effect of cooking methods on fatty acids, conjugated isomers of linoleic acid and nutritional quality of beef intramuscular fat. Meat Science, v.84, n.4, p.769-777, 2010. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.11.014> Accessed: Nov. 20, 2009. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.11.014.

BARTLETT, G.R. Phosphorus assay in column chromatography. Journal of Biological Chemistry, v.234, n.3, p.466-468, 1959. Available from: <https://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/pubmed/13641241>. Accessed: Mar. 15, 2009. doi: 10.0000/PMID13641241.

BRONCANO, J.M., et al. Effect of different cooking methods on lipid oxidation and formation of free cholesterol oxidation products (COPs) in Latissimus dorsi muscle of Iberian pigs. Meat Science, v.83, n.3, p.431-437, 2009. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j. meatsci.2009.06.021>. Accessed: Jun. 16, 2009. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.06.021.

BYRNEA, D.V., et al. (2002). Sensory and chemical investigations on the effect of oven cooking on warmed-over flavour development in chicken meat. Meat Science, v.61, n.2, p.127-139, 2002. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0309-1740(01)00171-1>. Accessed: Mar. 06, 2002. doi: 10.1016/S0309-1740(01)00171-1.

CLAUSEN, I. et al. Changes in fat content of pork and beef after pan-frying under different condition. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, v.18, n.2-3, p.201-211, 2005. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/jjfca.2004.03.024> Accessed: Aug. 06, 2004. doi: 10.1016/jjfca.2004.03.024.

CRUZ, A.G., et al. Assessing the use of different chemometric techniques to discriminate low-fat and full-fat yogurts. LWT-Food Science and Technology, v.50, n.1, p.210-214, 2013. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016Zj.lwt.2012.05.023>. Accessed: Jun. 13, 2012. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2012.05.023.

CULLERE, M., et al. Rabbit meat production and consumption: State of knowledge and future Perspectives. Meat Science, v.143, p.137-146, 2018. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j. meatsci.2018.04.029>. Accessed: Apr. 28, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j. meatsci.2018.04.029.

DAL BOSCO, A., et al. Effect of dietary a-linolenic acid and vitamin E on the fatty acid composition, storage stability and sensory traits of rabbit meat. Meat Science, v.66, n.2, p.407-413, 2004. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(03)00127-X>. Accessed: Jul. 11, 2003. doi: 10.1016/S0309-1740(03)00127-X.

DALLE ZOTTE, A. Perception of rabbit meat quality and major factors influencing the rabbit carcass and meat quality. Livestock Production Science, v.75, n.1, p. 11-32, 2002. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/s0301-6226(01)00308-6>. Accessed: May. 08, 2002. doi: 10.1016/s0301-6226(01)00308-6.

DALLE ZOTTE, A., et al. The role of rabbit meat as functional food. Meat Science, v.88, n.3, p.319-331, 2011. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2011.02.017>. Accessed: Feb. 24, 2011. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2011.02.017.

FELLOWS, PJ. Baking and roasting. In: Food Processing Technology. 4 rd. The Woodhead. Kidlington, Kingdom, 2017, Chap. 16. p. 733-752.

FOLCH, J., et al. A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipids from animal tissues. The Journal of Biological Chemistry, v.226, n.1, p.497-509, 1957. Available from: <https:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/13428781>. Accessed: May, 15, 2012. doi: PMID: 13428781.

GRAY, J. I., et al. Oxidative quality and shelf life of meats. Meat Science, v.43, n.1, p.111-123, 1996. Available from: <https://doi. org/10.1016/0309-1740(96)00059-9>. Accessed: Dec. 16, 1999. doi: 10.1016/0309-1740(96)00059-9.

HOCQUETTE, J. F., et al. Intramuscular fat content in meatproducing animals: Development, genetic and nutritional control, and identification of putative markers. Animal, v.4, n.2, p.303-319, 2010. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1751731109991091>. Accessed: Feb. 16, 2009. doi: 10.1017/ S1751731109991091.

HOSSEINI, H., et al. Effect of different cooking methods on minerals, vitamins and nutritional quality indices of kutum roach (Rutilus frisii kutum). Food Chemistry, v. 148, p.86-91, 2014. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j. foodchem.2013.10.012>. Accessed: Oct. 12, 2013. doi: 10.1016/j. foodchem.2013.10.012.

JUANEDA, P., ROCQUELIN, G. Rapid and convenient separation of phospholipids and nonphosphorus lipids from rat heart using silica cartridges. Lipids, v.20, n.1, p.40-41, 1985. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02534360>. Accessed: Jan. 12, 2009. doi: 10.1007/BF02534360.

KOUBA, M., et al. Effect of a linseed diet on lipid oxidation, fatty acid composition of muscle, perirenal fat, and raw and cooked rabbit meat. Meat Science, v.80, n.3, p.829-834, 2008. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.03.029>. Accessed: Apr. 01, 2008. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.03.029.

KOUBA, M., et al. Effect of a high-linolenic acid diet on lipogenic enzyme activities, fatty acid composition, and meat quality in the growing pig. Journal of Animal Science, v.81, n.8, p.1967-1979, 2003. Available from: <https://doi.org/10. 1089/107555303322284884>. Accessed: Aug. 19, 2009. doi: 10.1089/107555303322284884.

LARSEN, R., et al. Health benefits of marine foods and ingredients. Biotechnology Advances, v.29, n.5, p.508518, 2011. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016Aj. biotechadv.2011.05.017>. Accessed: Jun. 06, 2011. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.05.017.

LI, S. B., et al. Rabbit meat production and processing in China. Meat Science, v.145, p.320-328, 2018. Available from: <https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.06.037>. Accessed: Jun. 28, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.06.037.

MARINI, F. Classification methods in chemometrics. Current Analytical Chemistry, v.6, n.1, p.72-79, 2010. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.2174/157341110790069592>. Accessed: Nov.15, 2009. doi: 10.2174/157341110790069592.

MARGARET, et al. Effects of different cooking methods on fatty acid profiles in four freshwater fishes from the Laurentian Great Lakes region. Food Chemistry, v. 164, p.544-550, 2014. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j. foodchem.2014.04.104>. Accessed: May. 09, 2014. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.04.104.

MATERA, J.A., et al. Discrimination of Brazilian artisanal and inspected pork sausages: Application of unsupervised, linear and non-linear supervised chemometric methods. Food Research International, v.64, p.380-386, 2014. Available from: <https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2014.07.003>. Accessed: Jul. 11, 2014. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2014.07.003.

MORRISON, W. R., et al. Preparation of fatty acid methyl esters and dimethylacetals from lipids with boron fluoride-methanol. Journal of Lipid Research, v.5, p.600-608, 1964. Available from: <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14221106>. Accessed: Oct. 19, 2009. doi: PMID: 14221106.

RAES, K., et al. Effect of dietary fatty acids on incorporation of long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acid in lamb, beef and pork meat: a review. Animal Feed Science and Technology, v. 113, n.1-4, p.199-221, 2004. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j. anifeedsci.2003.09.001>. Accessed: Oct. 23, 2003. doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2003.09.001.

RANAU, R., et al. Aluminium levels of fish fillets baked and grilled in aluminium foil. Food Chemistry, v.73, n.1, p.1-6, 2001. Available from: < https://doi.org/ 10.1016/s0308-8146(00)003186>. Accessed: Feb. 28, 2001. doi: 10.1016/s0308-8146(00)003186.

RODRIGUEZ-ESTRADA, M.T., et al. Effect of different cooking methods on some lipid and protein components of hamburgers. Meat Science, v.45, n.3, p.365-375, 1997. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(96)00123-4>. Accessed: Jan. 05, 1998. doi: 10.1016/S0309-1740(96)00123-4.

SIMITZIS, P.E., et al. Effect of hesperidin dietary supplementation on growth performance, carcass traits and meat quality of rabbits. World Rabbit Science, v.22, n.2, p.113-121, 2014. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2014.1760>. Accessed: Jun. 16, 2009. doi: 10.4995/wrs.2014.1760.

SIMOPOULOS, A.P. The importance of the ratio of omega-6/ omega-3 essential fatty acids. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, v.56, n.8: 365-379, 2002. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0753-3322(02)00253-6>. Accessed: Sep. 11, 2002. doi: 10.1016/ S0753-3322(02)00253-6.

SIMOPOULOS, A.P. Omega-3 fatty acids and antioxidants in edible wild plants. Biological Research, v.37, n.2, p.263277, 2004. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.4067/S071697602004000200013>. Accessed: Feb. 17, 2009. doi: 10.4067/ S0716-97602004000200013.

TORNBERG, E. Effects of heat on meat proteins. Implications on structure and quality of meat products. Meat Science, v.70, n.3, p.493-508, 2005. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/). meatsci.2004.11.021>. Accessed: Mar. 08, 2005. doi: 10.1016/j. meatsci.2004.11.021.

TURHAN, S. Aluminium contents in baked meats wrapped in aluminium foil. Meat Science, v.74, n.4, p.644-647, 2006. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.03.031>. Accessed: Jul. 11, 2006. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.03.031.

WANG, Z., et al. Efect of diferent central temperatures of rabbit meat on quality characteristics after heating. Food Science, v.36, n.19, 67-71, 2015. (In Chinese). Available from: <https://doi. org/10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201519012>. Accessed: Nov. 18, 2009. doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201519012.

WILLIAMS, C.M. Dietary fatty acids and human health. Annales de Zootechnie, v.49, n.3, p.165-180, 2000. Available from: <https://doi.org/10.1051/animres:2000116>. Accessed: May, 10, 2009. doi: 10.1051/animres:2000116.

WOOD, J.D., et al. Effects of fatty acids on meat quality: a review. Meat Science, v.66, n.1, p.21-32, 2004. Available from: <https:// doi.org/10.1016/s0309-1740(03)00022-6>. Accessed: Mar. 07, 2003. doi: 10.1016/s0309-1740(03)00022-6.

XUE, S. Composition of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids of Inra rabbit at different ages. Italian Journal of Food Science, v.28, n.4, p.683-696, 2016a. Available from: <https://www. researchgate.net/publication/310611660>. Accessed: Nov. 17, 2009. doi: PMID: 310611660.

XUE, S., et al. Efect of heat treatment on the intramuscularlipid of Ira rabbit meat during cold storage. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, v.48, n.11, p.2241-2250, 2015. (In Chinese). Available from: <https:// doi.org/ 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.11.015>. Accessed: Nov. 12, 2009. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.11.015.

XUE, S., et al. Effect of different cooking methods on the composition and nutritional value of intramuscular fatty acids of Hyla rabbit. Korean Journal for Food Science of Animal resources, v.36, n.2, p.178-185, 2016b. Available from: <https:// doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2016.36.2.178>. Accessed: Apr. 30, 2016. doi: 10.5851/kosfa.2016.36.2.178.

ZENG, W., et al. Chinese ethnic meat products: Continuity and development. Meat Science, v. 120, p.37-46, 2016. Available from: <https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.007>. Accessed: Apr. 09, 2016. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.007.

Xue Shan (1) * (iD)

(1) College of Biological Science and Technology, Minnan Normal University, 363000, Zhangzhou, PR, China. E-mail: yixuanchenglion@sina.com. * Corresponding author.

Caption: Figure 1--Comparison of degradation proportion of intramuscular fatty acids of Inra rabbit under different processing conditions.

Caption: Figure 2--The PLSR correlation loadings plot for first two Principal Components (PCs), Main design variables: seven 0/1 indicator variables (raw material, three cooking methods and three processing levels), SFA/PUFA and SFA+MUFA value in the X-matrix and change in the composition of intramuscular phospholipid fatty acid in the Y-matrix. Ellipses represent [r.sup.2] = 0.5 (50%) and 1.0 (100%).
Table 1--The sample processing group.

Processing method                     Heat treatment time (min)

                                     Level 1   Level 2   Level 3

boiling treatment                       3         6         9
microwaving treatment (2450 MHz)        1         2         3
Al foil-baking treatment (180 oC)       5        10        15
The control group                              No processing

Table 2--The effect of processing conditions on the intramuscular
lipid content of Inra rabbit (ab).

Content                       Cooking               Raw
                              methods             material

intramuscular                 boiling       0.96 [+ or -] 0.11c
  lipid (cooked             microwaving     0.96 [+ or -] 0.11d
  muscle %)                Al foil baking   0.96 [+ or -] 0.11d
intramuscular                 boiling       32.28 [+ or -] 1.02a
  phospholipid (total       microwaving     32.28 [+ or -] 1.02a
  intramuscular lipid %)   Al foil baking   32.28 [+ or -] 1.02a
intramuscular                 boiling       0.31 [+ or -] 0.03c
  phospholipid              microwaving     0.31 [+ or -] 0.03d
  (cooked muscle %)        Al foil baking   0.31 [+ or -] 0.03d
intramuscular lipid           boiling       1.24 [+ or -] 0.03a
  (dry weight %)            microwaving     1.24 [+ or -] 0.03a
                           Al foil baking   1.24 [+ or -] 0.03a

Content                       Cooking             Level 1
                              methods

intramuscular                 boiling       2.05 [+ or -] 0.08b
  lipid (cooked             microwaving     1.39 [+ or -] 0.03c
  muscle %)                Al foil baking   1.27 [+ or -] 0.02c
intramuscular                 boiling       29.67 [+ or -] 0.94b
  phospholipid (total       microwaving     31.07 [+ or -] 0.69a
  intramuscular lipid %)   Al foil baking   30.69 [+ or -] 0.66b
intramuscular                 boiling       0.61 [+ or -] 0.04b
  phospholipid              microwaving     0.43 [+ or -] 0.01c
  (cooked muscle %)        Al foil baking   0.39 [+ or -] 0.01c
intramuscular lipid           boiling       1.06 [+ or -] 0.08b
  (dry weight %)            microwaving     1.11 [+ or -] 0.03b
                           Al foil baking   0.97 [+ or -] 0.02b

Content                       Cooking             Level 2
                              methods

intramuscular                 boiling       2.20 [+ or -] 0.05b
  lipid (cooked             microwaving     2.09 [+ or -] 0.04b
  muscle %)                Al foil baking   1.92 [+ or -] 0.06b
intramuscular                 boiling       28.63 [+ or -] 0.66b
  phospholipid (total       microwaving     30.75 [+ or -] 0.85a
  intramuscular lipid %)   Al foil baking   28.76 [+ or -] 0.81c
intramuscular                 boiling       0.63 [+ or -] 0.03b
  phospholipid              microwaving     0.64 [+ or -] 0.02b
  (cooked muscle %)        Al foil baking   0.55 [+ or -] 0.03b
intramuscular lipid           boiling       0.84 [+ or -] 0.04c
  (dry weight %)            microwaving     1.05 [+ or -] 0.02c
                           Al foil baking   0.89 [+ or -] 0.05c

Content                       Cooking             Level 3
                              methods

intramuscular                 boiling       2.98 [+ or -] 0.05a
  lipid (cooked             microwaving     2.75 [+ or -] 0.02a
  muscle %)                Al foil baking   2.54 [+ or -] 0.09a
intramuscular                 boiling       26.91 [+ or -] 0.92c
  phospholipid (total       microwaving     28.54 [+ or -] 0.70b
  intramuscular lipid %)   Al foil baking   26.43 [+ or -] 0.53d
intramuscular                 boiling       0.80 [+ or -] 0.04a
  phospholipid              microwaving     0.81 [+ or -] 0.02a
  (cooked muscle %)        Al foil baking   0.67 [+ or -] 0.03a
intramuscular lipid           boiling       0.73 [+ or -] 0.04d
  (dry weight %)            microwaving     0.94 [+ or -] 0.03d
                           Al foil baking   0.78 [+ or -] 0.04d

(a) Results were expressed as means [+ or -] SE, data were means
of three replicates (n=3).

(b) Values in the same row with different letters were significantly
different (P<0.05).

Table 3--The cooking loss (%) under different processing
conditions (ab).

Cooking methods         Level 1                Level 2

boiling           33.35 [+ or -] 0.16c   36.18 [+ or -] 2.09b
microwaving       31.55 [+ or -] 0.31c   38.75 [+ or -] 2.35b
foil baking       32.97 [+ or -] 0.10c   35.15 [+ or -] 1.86b

Cooking methods         Level 3

boiling           40.79 [+ or -] 0.27a
microwaving       48.13 [+ or -] 0.85a
foil baking       37.49 [+ or -] 0.16a

(a) Results were expressed as means [+ or -] SE, data were means of
three replicates (n=3).

(b) Values in the same row with different letters were significantly
different (P<0.05).

Table 4--Effect of boiling conditions on the composition of
intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids (%) of Inra rabbit (a).

Fatty acids       Raw material             Level 1

C12:0 (b)     0.12 [+ or -] 0.03a    0.12 [+ or -] 0.01a
C14:0         0.60 [+ or -] 0.17b    1.04 [+ or -] 0.03a
C14:1         0.11 [+ or -] 0.02a    0.08 [+ or -] 0.01b
C15:0         1.81 [+ or -] 0.22d    2.34 [+ or -] 0.03c
C16:0         22.37 [+ or -] 0.11d   23.05 [+ or -] 0.06c
C16:1n-7      0.34 [+ or -] 0.03a    0.25 [+ or -] 0.04b
C17:0         0.38 [+ or -] 0.02c    0.45 [+ or -] 0.03c
C17:1         0.92 [+ or -] 0.07a    0.74 [+ or -] 0.01ab
C18:0         12.56 [+ or -] 0.13d   13.56 [+ or -] 0.05c
C18:1n-9      15.01 [+ or -] 0.03a   14.30 [+ or -] 0.03b
C18:1n-7      1.00 [+ or -] 0.03a    0.58 [+ or -] 0.06b
C18:2n-6      22.67 [+ or -] 0.02a   22.87 [+ or -] 0.04b
C18:3n-3      0.48 [+ or -] 0.02a    0.43 [+ or -] 0.03ab
C20:0         0.11 [+ or -] 0.03a    0.09 [+ or -] 0.03a
C20:1n-9      0.18 [+ or -] 0.06a    0.17 [+ or -] 0.04a
C20:2n-6      1.19 [+ or -] 0.02a    1.23 [+ or -] 0.04a
C20:3n-6      1.26 [+ or -] 0.03a    1.23 [+ or -] 0.02a
C20:4n-6      9.72 [+ or -] 0.14a    9.47 [+ or -] 0.04b
C20:5n-3      4.60 [+ or -] 0.04a    4.39 [+ or -] 0.07b
C22:5n-3      2.34 [+ or -] 0.02a    2.23 [+ or -] 0.02b
C22:6n-3      1.40 [+ or -] 0.03a    1.36 [+ or -] 0.04a
SFA (c)       37.96 [+ or -] 0.11d   40.65 [+ or -] 0.06c
PUFA          43.68 [+ or -] 0.17a   43.23 [+ or -] 0.02b
MUFA          18.36 [+ or -] 0.18a   16.12 [+ or -] 0.05b

Fatty acids         Level 2                Level 3

C12:0 (b)     0.13 [+ or -] 0.01a    0.15 [+ or -] 0.02a
C14:0         1.10 [+ or -] 0.04a    1.14 [+ or -] 0.04a
C14:1         0.08 [+ or -] 0.02b    0.07 [+ or -] 0.01b
C15:0         3.13 [+ or -] 0.02b    4.15 [+ or -] 0.14a
C16:0         24.87 [+ or -] 0.13b   26.04 [+ or -] 0.08a
C16:1n-7      0.25 [+ or -] 0.02b    0.31 [+ or -] 0.05ab
C17:0         0.57 [+ or -] 0.03b    0.78 [+ or -] 0.08a
C17:1         0.66 [+ or -] 0.02b    0.64 [+ or -] 0.06b
C18:0         14.52 [+ or -] 0.06b   15.61 [+ or -] 0.08a
C18:1n-9      13.86 [+ or -] 0.03c   13.35 [+ or -] 0.12d
C18:1n-7      0.26 [+ or -] 0.06c    0.24 [+ or -] 0.08c
C18:2n-6      22.64 [+ or -] 0.06c   22.37 [+ or -] 0.10d
C18:3n-3      0.38 [+ or -] 0.03b    0.32 [+ or -] 0.03c
C20:0         0.09 [+ or -] 0.01a    0.07 [+ or -] 0.02a
C20:1n-9      0.16 [+ or -] 0.02a    0.18 [+ or -] 0.08a
C20:2n-6      0.84 [+ or -] 0.06b    0.70 [+ or -] 0.02c
C20:3n-6      0.80 [+ or -] 0.05b    0.70 [+ or -] 0.02c
C20:4n-6      8.27 [+ or -] 0.04c    6.37 [+ or -] 0.06d
C20:5n-3      4.09 [+ or -] 0.06c    3.80 [+ or -] 0.06d
C22:5n-3      2.01 [+ or -] 0.02c    1.82 [+ or -] 0.03d
C22:6n-3      1.29 [+ or -] 0.03b    1.19 [+ or -] 0.04c
SFA (c)       44.42 [+ or -] 0.08b   47.94 [+ or -] 0.28a
PUFA          40.31 [+ or -] 0.04c   37.28 [+ or -] 0.04d
MUFA          15.27 [+ or -] 0.04c   14.79 [+ or -] 0.30d

(a) Results were expressed as means [+ or -] SE, data were means of
three replicates (n=3).

(b) Values in the same row with different letters were significantly
different (P<0.05).

(c) SFA, total saturated fatty acids (C12:0, C14:0, C15:0; C16:0,
C17:0, C18:0, C20:0); MUFA, total monounsaturated fatty acids (C14:1,
C16:1n-7, C17:1, C18:1n-9, C18:1n-7, C20:1n-9); PUFA, total
polyunsaturated fatty acids (C18:2n-6, C18:3n-3, C20:4n-6, C20:5n-3,
C22:5n-3, C22:6n-3).

Table 5--Effect of microwaving conditions on the composition of
intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids (%) of Inra rabbit (a).

Fatty acids       Raw material             Level 1

C12:0 (b)     0.12 [+ or -] 0.03a             --
C14:0         0.60 [+ or -] 0.17c    1.04 [+ or -] 0.03b
C14:1         0.11 [+ or -] 0.02a    0.07 [+ or -] 0.02b
C15:0         1.81 [+ or -] 0.22b    2.34 [+ or -] 0.03a
C16:0         22.37 [+ or -] 0.11d   23.02 [+ or -] 0.02c
C16:1n-7      0.34 [+ or -] 0.03a    0.25 [+ or -] 0.04b
C17:0         0.38 [+ or -] 0.02d    0.75 [+ or -] 0.03c
C17:1         0.92 [+ or -] 0.07a    0.74 [+ or -] 0.01b
C18:0         12.56 [+ or -] 0.13d   13.56 [+ or -] 0.05c
C18:1n-9      15.01 [+ or -] 0.03a   14.30 [+ or -] 0.03b
C18:1n-7      1.00 [+ or -] 0.03a    0.58 [+ or -] 0.06c
C18:2n-6      22.67 [+ or -] 0.02a   22.86 [+ or -] 0.05a
C18:3n-3      0.48 [+ or -] 0.02a    0.43 [+ or -] 0.03a
C20:0         0.11 [+ or -] 0.03b    0.07 [+ or -] 0.01b
C20:1n-9      0.18 [+ or -] 0.06b    0.24 [+ or -] 0.03ab
C20:2n-6      1.19 [+ or -] 0.02b    1.27 [+ or -] 0.03a
C20:3n-6      1.26 [+ or -] 0.03a    1.23 [+ or -] 0.02a
C20:4n-6      9.72 [+ or -] 0.14a    9.35 [+ or -] 0.04b
C20:5n-3      4.60 [+ or -] 0.04a    4.35 [+ or -] 0.02b
C22:5n-3      2.34 [+ or -] 0.02a    2.23 [+ or -] 0.02b
C22:6n-3      1.40 [+ or -] 0.03a    1.33 [+ or -] 0.02b
SFA (c)       37.96 [+ or -] 0.11d   40.78 [+ or -] 0.03c
PUFA          43.68 [+ or -] 0.17a   43.04 [+ or -] 0.01b
MUFA          18.36 [+ or -] 0.18a   16.17 [+ or -] 0.03b

Fatty acids         Level 2                Level 3

C12:0 (b)              --                     --
C14:0         1.17 [+ or -] 0.02ab   1.32 [+ or -] 0.06a
C14:1         0.06 [+ or -] 0.02b    0.06 [+ or -] 0.02b
C15:0         2.42 [+ or -] 0.02a    2.54 [+ or -] 0.04a
C16:0         23.60 [+ or -] 0.07b   24.47 [+ or -] 0.05a
C16:1n-7      0.26 [+ or -] 0.02b    0.32 [+ or -] 0.03a
C17:0         0.83 [+ or -] 0.04b    0.97 [+ or -] 0.03a
C17:1         0.69 [+ or -] 0.02bc   0.66 [+ or -] 0.04c
C18:0         14.07 [+ or -] 0.03b   14.82 [+ or -] 0.03a
C18:1n-9      14.16 [+ or -] 0.05c   13.91 [+ or -] 0.03d
C18:1n-7      0.64 [+ or -] 0.02c    0.77 [+ or -] 0.02b
C18:2n-6      22.39 [+ or -] 0.06a   21.69 [+ or -] 0.06a
C18:3n-3      0.35 [+ or -] 0.02b    0.22 [+ or -] 0.03c
C20:0         0.11 [+ or -] 0.02b    0.18 [+ or -] 0.03a
C20:1n-9      0.24 [+ or -] 0.02ab   0.25 [+ or -] 0.03a
C20:2n-6      1.17 [+ or -] 0.05b    1.03 [+ or -] 0.03c
C20:3n-6      1.08 [+ or -] 0.03b    0.88 [+ or -] 0.04c
C20:4n-6      9.17 [+ or -] 0.04c    8.86 [+ or -] 0.05d
C20:5n-3      4.20 [+ or -] 0.02c    4.00 [+ or -] 0.06d
C22:5n-3      2.10 [+ or -] 0.04c    1.89 [+ or -] 0.06d
C22:6n-3      1.27 [+ or -] 0.03b    1.16 [+ or -] 0.03c
SFA (c)       42.19 [+ or -] 0.11b   44.30 [+ or -] 0.07a
PUFA          41.76 [+ or -] 0.03c   39.73 [+ or -] 0.08d
MUFA          16.06 [+ or -] 0.13b   15.97 [+ or -] 0.09b

(a) Results were expressed as means [+ or -] SE, data were means of
three replicates (n=3).

(b) Values in the same row with different letters were significantly
different (P<0.05).

(c) SFA, total saturated fatty acids (C12:0, C14:0, C15:0; C16:0,
C17:0, C18:0, C20:0); MUFA, total monounsaturated fatty acids (C14:1,
C16:1n-7, C17:1, C18:1n-9, C18:1n-7, C20:1n-9); PUFA, total
polyunsaturated fatty acids (C18:2n-6, C18:3n-3, C20:4n-6, C20:5n-3,
C22:5n-3, C22:6n-3).

Table 6--Effect of Al foil-baking conditions on the composition of
intramuscular phospholipid fatty acids (%) of Inra rabbit (a).

Fatty acids       Raw material             Level 1

C12:0 (b)     0.12 [+ or -] 0.03a             --
C14:0         0.60 [+ or -] 0.17c    1.54 [+ or -] 0.04b
C14:1         0.11 [+ or -] 0.02a    0.09 [+ or -] 0.02ab
C15:0         1.81 [+ or -] 0.22c    2.20 [+ or -] 0.10b
C16:0         22.37 [+ or -] 0.11c   23.21 [+ or -] 0.05b
C16:1n-7      0.34 [+ or -] 0.03a    0.23 [+ or -] 0.02b
C17:0         0.38 [+ or -] 0.02c    0.47 [+ or -] 0.06bc
C17:1         0.92 [+ or -] 0.07a    0.78 [+ or -] 0.08a
C18:0         12.56 [+ or -] 0.13d   13.32 [+ or -] 0.09c
C18:1n-9      15.01 [+ or -] 0.03a   14.23 [+ or -] 0.05b
C18:1n-7      1.00 [+ or -] 0.03a    0.61 [+ or -] 0.05b
C18:2n-6      22.67 [+ or -] 0.02b   22.86 [+ or -] 0.05a
C18:3n-3      0.48 [+ or -] 0.02a    0.43 [+ or -] 0.03a
C20:0         0.11 [+ or -] 0.03b    0.09 [+ or -] 0.03b
C20:1n-9      0.18 [+ or -] 0.06a    0.17 [+ or -] 0.03a
C20:2n-6      1.19 [+ or -] 0.02a    1.18 [+ or -] 0.06a
C20:3n-6      1.26 [+ or -] 0.03a    1.20 [+ or -] 0.05a
C20:4n-6      9.72 [+ or -] 0.14c    9.41 [+ or -] 0.09b
C20:5n-3      4.60 [+ or -] 0.04a    4.40 [+ or -] 0.07b
C22:5n-3      2.34 [+ or -] 0.02a    2.23 [+ or -] 0.02b
C22:6n-3      1.40 [+ or -] 0.03a    1.36 [+ or -] 0.05ab
SFA (c)       37.96 [+ or -] 0.11d   40.82 [+ or -] 0.16c
PUFA          43.68 [+ or -] 0.17a   43.07 [+ or -] 0.05b
MUFA          18.36 [+ or -] 0.18a   16.11 [+ or -] 0.13b

Fatty acids         Level 2                Level 3

C12:0 (b)              --                     --
C14:0         1.95 [+ or -] 0.03a    1.96 [+ or -] 0.02a
C14:1         0.06 [+ or -] 0.02b    0.07 [+ or -] 0.01b
C15:0         2.40 [+ or -] 0.04b    2.84 [+ or -] 0.08a
C16:0         24.11 [+ or -] 0.56a   24.08 [+ or -] 0.06a
C16:1n-7      0.25 [+ or -] 0.04b    0.23 [+ or -] 0.02b
C17:0         0.54 [+ or -] 0.04b    0.73 [+ or -] 0.07a
C17:1         0.62 [+ or -] 0.03b    0.66 [+ or -] 0.04b
C18:0         14.45 [+ or -] 0.08b   15.66 [+ or -] 0.12a
C18:1n-9      14.09 [+ or -] 0.03c   13.86 [+ or -] 0.07d
C18:1n-7      0.51 [+ or -] 0.05c    0.41 [+ or -] 0.04d
C18:2n-6      22.37 [+ or -] 0.06c   21.88 [+ or -] 0.08d
C18:3n-3      0.35 [+ or -] 0.02b    0.19 [+ or -] 0.04c
C20:0         0.15 [+ or -] 0.04b    0.20 [+ or -] 0.02a
C20:1n-9      0.14 [+ or -] 0.02a    0.14 [+ or -] 0.02a
C20:2n-6      1.04 [+ or -] 0.03b    1.03 [+ or -] 0.03b
C20:3n-6      1.07 [+ or -] 0.05b    0.93 [+ or -] 0.09c
C20:4n-6      8.46 [+ or -] 0.12c    8.25 [+ or -] 0.11c
C20:5n-3      4.12 [+ or -] 0.08c    3.99 [+ or -] 0.06d
C22:5n-3      2.10 [+ or -] 0.04c    1.88 [+ or -] 0.06d
C22:6n-3      1.21 [+ or -] 0.05bc   1.04 [+ or -] 0.17c
SFA (c)       43.59 [+ or -] 0.43b   45.46 [+ or -] 0.10a
PUFA          40.74 [+ or -] 0.32c   39.19 [+ or -] 0.09d
MUFA          15.67 [+ or -] 0.12c   15.35 [+ or -] 0.01d

(a) Results were expressed as means [+ or -] SE, data were means
of three replicates (n=3).

(b) Values in the same row with different letters were significantly
different (P<0.05).

(c) SFA, total saturated fatty acids (C12:0, C14:0, C15:0; C16:0,
C17:0, C18:0, C20:0); MUFA, total monounsaturated fatty acids (C14:1,
C16:1n-7, C17:1, C18:1n-9, C18:1n-7, C20:1n-9); PUFA, total
polyunsaturated fatty acids (C18:2n-6, C18:3n-3, C20:4n-6, C20:5n-3,
C22:5n-3, C22:6n-3).

Table 7--The change of single major fatty acid effected by
different cooking.

Category   Main single    Change       The most      significance
           fatty acid                influential
                                    cooking method

SFA           C16:0      increase      Boiling           Yes
              C18:0      increase    Foil baking         Yes
MUFA        C18:1n-7     decrease      Boiling           Yes
            C18:1n-9     decrease      Boiling           Yes
PUFA        C18:2n-6     decrease    microwaving         Yes
            C20:4n-6     decrease      Boiling           Yes
            C20:5n-3     decrease      Boiling           Yes
            C22:5n-3     decrease      Boiling           Yes
            C22:6n-3     decrease      Boiling           Yes
COPYRIGHT 2019 Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2019 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:FOOD TECHNOLOGY
Author:Shan, Xue
Publication:Ciencia Rural
Date:May 1, 2019
Words:7587
Previous Article:Molecular characterization of virulence genes cctA, nanA, and fliC in Clostridium chauvoei from Rio Grande do Sul and Sao Paulo State,...
Next Article:Synovial fluid as an auxiliary diagnostic tool for different stages of canine visceral leishmaniasis/Liquido sinovial como ferramenta diagnostica...
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters