# Influence of Finely Chopped Meat Addition on Quality Parameters of Minced Meat
## 3 Results and Discussion
### Texture Analyses
#### 3.3.2 Sensory Texture Analysis  
Samples containing an increased FCM portion were rated as firmer than samples with less FCM (Figure 6a). Comparing sensory rating of firmness to results of texture analysis of cooked meat (see Figure 5a), the tendency towards an increased firmness with the addition of FCM is obvious. However, the increased sensory firmness of cooked meatballs is not supported by the decreased cutting force with increased FCM portion (see Figure 5b). In comparison to the compression of cooked meat, this could be due to the difference in the analysis. [PERSON], et al. [24] stated that sensory analysis of cooked beef predicts significantly better firmness than Warner-Bratzler-shear force. Correlation between sensory and instrumental hardness, performed with a texture profile analysis, shown for fish sausages, underline the comparability of sensory and mechanical texture analysis [56, 57]. By investigating different cooking techniques and core temperatures of  
Figure 5: Mean \(\pm\) standard deviation of (**a**) compression of raw (white) (\(n=12\)) and cooked (black) (\(n=27\)) minced meat with finely chopped meat added and (**b**) cutting force of cooked minced meatballs (\(n=30\)). For comparability, amount of non-intact cells is illustrated on top of graph. Different letters indicate significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) for each parameter (cooked in italic).  
two muscles, Bejerholm and Aaslyng [58] found that sensory tenderness and hardness at first bite highly correlate (r = \(-\)0.98).  
With increasing sensory firmness due to higher FCM portions, meatballs became less juicy (Figure 6b). The lower fat content in samples with an increased FCM portion could be a reason for the lower juiciness rating as some fat is released while chewing contributing to the perception of juiciness [44]. The impact of cooking loss can be excluded as this loss is uniform throughout the different samples (see Table 1). In addition to the impact of fat, the interrelation between tenderness and juiciness needs be considered too: firmness and juiciness show inversely related tendencies--the firmer, the dryer. As chewing time and hardness at first bite highly correlate (r = 0.97) [58], the decreasing juiciness is inevitable.  
The inner structure of the cooked meatballs was evaluated as courser with less FCM and as finer with an increased FCM portion (Figure 6c). The disrupted structure is also  
Figure 6: Boxplots of sensory evaluation of (**a**) firmness, (**b**) juiciness, (**c**) inner structure and (**d**) inner cohesion (\(n\) = 30) of cooked meatballs consisting of minced meat with finely chopped meat added; 0 means firm, dry, fine structure, and loose cohesion, whereas 10 means soft, juicy, coarse inner structure, and strong cohesion. Dotted line marks mean full line marks median, box marks lower and upper quartile, and whiskers mark distance until lower and upper extreme and single data points mark outliers. Different letters close to mean emphasize significant differences (\(p\) < 0.05) for each parameter.  
visible in the SEM pictures as 100% FCM shows significantly fewer intact muscle cells (see Figure 3c,f,i). [PERSON] and [PERSON] [58] found a high correlation of pork's structure with the hardness at first bite (r = 0.82) with the chewing time (r = 0.86), probably influencing juiciness rating.  
Inner cohesion was rated as stronger the higher the FCM portion (Figure 6d). This finding supports the results of compression of cooked meat mixtures, which show the same increase due to a higher FCM portion (see Figure 5a). The firmness of cooked meat mixtures as well as the rating of inner cohesion are most likely connected with the increased soluble protein content due to an increased FCM portion [46] (see Figure 4). Using 126 trained sensory panelists, [PERSON], et al. [59] found a strong correlation (r = 0.95) between the destructuration, meaning the loss or modification of muscle fiber structure, and the sensory assessment.