# The Effect of the Improvement Technology on the Quality of Midu Pork Roll
## 3 Results and Discussion
### The Effect of Process Improvement on the Content of FAAs of MPR
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Taste Characteristics** & **FAAs** & **C** & **T1** & **T2** & **Sig.** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Umami Amino Acids} & Glutamic acid (Glu) & 0.74 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 1.49 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 1.66 \(\pm\) 0.19 \({}^{\rm a}\) & ** \\  & Aspartic acid (Asp) & 0.09 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.13 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.15 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & ** \\  & Alanine (Ala) & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.03 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.02 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\  & Glycine (Gly) & 0.07 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.04 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\ \cline{2-5} Sweet amino acid & Serine (Ser) & 0.12 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.03 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.08 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\  & Threonine (Thr) & 0.12 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.03 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.09 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\  & Arginine (Arg) & 0.14 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.05 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.08 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\  & Isoleucine (Ile) & 0.08 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.03 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.04 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\  & Leucine (Leu) & 0.07 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.03 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.04 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\ Bitter amino acid & Methionine (Met) & 0.17 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\  & Phenylalanine (Phe) & 0.13 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.05 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.11 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & ** \\  & Tyrosine (Tyr) & 0.01 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.02 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.02 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & ns \\  & Valine (Val) & 0.12 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.08 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.08 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\  & Lysine (Lys) & 0.02 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.08 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.16 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm a}\) & ** \\ Odorless amino acids & Proline (Pro) & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.06 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.07 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm a}\) & ns \\  & Total FAAs & 1.96 \(\pm\) 0.05 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 2.23 \(\pm\) 0.08 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 2.74 \(\pm\) 0.19 \({}^{\rm a}\) & ** \\  & Umami Amino Acids & 0.83 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 1.63 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 1.81 \(\pm\) 0.09 \({}^{\rm a}\) & ** \\ Total content & Sweet amino acid & 0.32 \(\pm\) 0.02 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.13 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.25 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\  & Bitter amino acid & 0.72 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm a}\) & 0.33 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.44 \(\pm\) 0.13 \({}^{\rm b}\) & ** \\  & Odorless amino acids & 0.09 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm c}\) & 0.14 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\rm b}\) & 0.24 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\rm a}\) & ** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* C: Control group; T1: test group 1 (using the improved technology of Sichuan spicy flavor formula); T2: test group 2 (using the improved technology of halogen flavor formula). The results are expressed as mean \(\pm\) standard deviation (\(n=3\)). \({}^{\rm a<}\) within the same row, different lowercase letters indicate significant differences (\(p<0.05\)). Sig. is the significance regarding the MPR treatment. ns: not significant (\(p>0.05\)); \({}^{\rm a+}\): important (\(p<0.01\)).  
\end{table} 
Table 4: The effect of the content of FAAs (mg/g) in MPR. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Texture Index** & **C** & **T1** & **T2** & **Sig.