## 3 Results and Discussion
### Moisture Content and Water Holding Capacity  
Sausages produced via ohmic heating (OH) exhibited both a significantly higher moisture content and water holding capacity (WHC) compared to samples treated with conventional heating (COV). The disparity in moisture content is less pronounced than that in the WHC between OH- and COV-treated samples, as illustrated in Table 1. [PERSON] et al. also investigated the WHC, as well as the quantity of expressible fluids and solids, of OH- and COV-treated meat emulsion sausages [9]. The authors noted that COV-treated samples contained more loosely bound water compared to OH-treated ones, resulting in a higher level of water that can be drained from COV-treated sausages.  
In this study, corresponding samples after ohmic heating (OH) and conventional heating (COV) were produced from the same meat emulsion batters, resulting in comparable moisture contents for both heating methods. However, OH-treated samples consistently exhibited a slightly higher moisture content, attributed to a lower degree of water bound to the proteins. Several authors have noted that OH can lead to less denaturation of proteins, resulting in a state less capable of binding water molecules [37; 38; 39; 40; 41]. This less denatured state is less capable of binding water molecules [9]. Consequently, more water can be classified as retained water, which is easier to mobilize from the gel network [42] and which is more likely to drain due to syneresis from COV samples during storage, which decreases the total moisture content compared to OH samples. Another influencing factor might be the cooling process applied in this study. To ensure comparable cooling behavior, samples from both heating methods were removed from the cooling cell or casing, respectively, and cooled under rinsed water. Consequently, OH samples might have a slightly higher water uptake as the proteins are less denatured and thus more capable of binding additional water.  
Similar to the moisture content, the water holding capacity (WHC) of a protein network depends on the amount of absorbed and retained water, i.e., water molecules bound to proteins and water trapped in the protein matrix, respectively [43]. The higher water holding capacity of OH-treated samples is also related to a lower degree of protein denaturation, resulting in more water molecules being absorbed by the protein molecules and remaining immobile during centrifugation, leading to the higher WHC of OH-treated samples. Conversely, more loosely bound water is expected in COV-treated samples, as described by [PERSON] et al. [9]. This water is easier to mobilize during centrifugation, thus decreasing the WHC of COV-treated samples.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Moisture** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Water Holding**} & & \\  & **(\%)** & **Capacity** & **Color (\(\mathbf{+^{a}\mathbf{+^{b}\mathbf{+}}}\) Value Determination)** \\ \hline OH & 67.28 \(\pm\) 0.66 b  & 73.38 \(\pm\) 1.18 b  & L: 71.29 \(\pm\) 0.4 b  & a: 7.08 \(\pm\) 0.14 a  & b: 8.69 \(\pm\) 0.19 a  \\ \hline COV & 66.55 \(\pm\) 0.91 a  & 68.03 \(\pm\) 1.70 a  & L: 70.71 \(\pm\) 0.64 a  & a: 7.42 \(\pm\) 0.04 b  & b: 8.95 \(\pm\) 0.20 b  \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Properties of Bologna-style sausage after ohmic and conventional heating (OH and COV, respectively). Different superscript letters within each column indicate statistically significant differences between samples.