4.7 Article

Effect of fat content, casing type and smoking procedures on PAHs contents of Portuguese traditional dry fermented sausages

Journal

FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY
Volume 58, Issue -, Pages 369-374

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2013.05.015

Keywords

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); Dry fermented sausages; Fat content; Casing type; Smoking procedures

Funding

  1. Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) [SFRH/BD/44255/2008]
  2. European Commission [ERA-FOOD/0001/2008]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Portuguese dry fermented sausages are traditionally processed through direct drying/smoking, making them susceptible to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) contamination. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of added fat (20% and 40%), casing type (hog and collagen) and smoking procedures (direct and indirect exposure) on the 16 EPA priority PAHs in dry fermented sausages manufactured according traditional processing. The total PAHs content (sum of 16 PAHs) found in whole product (casing included) varied between 150 and 870 mu g kg(-1), with more than 99% of this content corresponding to harmless low molecular weight compounds. Concerning benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) and PAH4, the respective maximum contents (0.32 and 10.35 mu g kg(-1), respectively) did not exceed the imposed limits regulated by the European Union. According to our results, casing type was the most influential factor. For hog samples, fat content and smoking regime alone did not influenced the total PAHs amount. However, significantly higher (p < 0.05) contamination levels were detected in hog casing samples combining high fat content and direct smoking procedures. In opposition, irrespective of the fat content and smoking regime, safer products, with significantly lower (p < 0.001) contamination levels, were obtained when collagen casing was used. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available