# Influence of Finely Chopped Meat Addition on Quality Parameters of Minced Meat
## 3 Results and Discussion  
### Cell Disintegration  
#### 3.1.1 Amount of Non-Intact Cells  
The amount of non-intact cells (ANIC) significantly (\(p<0.05\)) increases with an increased portion of finely chopped meat (FCM) added to the minced meat (Figure 2). Highest ANIC was measured for 100% FCM with 82.48 Vol.-% and lowest ANIC for minced meat (0% FCM) with 28.83 Vol.-%. This indicates that even processing in a pilot hall scale (30 kg) with eleven cutting levels and manual handling results in an ANIC over 20 Vol.-%, which is the officially defined threshold for minced meat in Germany [22]. According to [PERSON] and [PERSON] [32], in minced meat products such as hamburger, it is technologically unavoidable to obtain an ANIC \(\leq 10\) Vol.-%. Moreover, when frozen meat is added, an ANIC \(\leq 20\) Vol.-% is technologically unavoidable [32]. Since the process of mincing meat changed [33] due to increased production volume and the need for faster production [15], higher ANIC are inevitable. Thus, [PERSON] [15] stated that muscle abrasion, calculated to ANIC, in raw minced meat might not be the best indicator to determine minced meat quality. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [34] found only two out of 34 artisan produced minced meat with an ANIC higher than 20 Vol.-%, whereas they found eight out of 18 industrial produced minced meat with an ANIC over 20 Vol.-%. This supports statements that the ANIC might not be the best indicator to characterize minced meat quality. [PERSON], et al. [8] recommended to also consider raw material properties resulting from species, sex, age, and conditions during slaughter as these can influence batches. By comparing conventional with novel objective methods to detect cell destruction in minced chicken mixed with meat batter, [PERSON], et al. [18] found that immunohistochemical worked best in comparison to three histological approaches.  
For this study, the ANIC proves that the idea of simulating an intensive processing of meat while producing minced meat with FCM is possible. By mixing different portions of FCM with minced meat, the ANIC could be set to a specific value. Regarding meat quality, a meaningful amount of FCM addition lays between 0 and 30% FCM, which results already in 50 Vol.-% ANIC. Other than [PERSON], et al. [8] study, few studies reported an ANIC in minced meat between 20 and 50 Vol.-% [9; 34]. This underlines that an ANIC over 50 Vol.-% or the addition of more than 30% FCM is highly unrealistic [35].  
[PERSON], et al. [9] reported that the second mincing step results in highest ANIC in minced beef. In their study, six cutting levels result in app. 24 Vol.-% ANIC. [PERSON] [36] pointed out that in histometric analysis a scope for assessment exists, meaning that the result is dependent on the evaluator. Thus, [PERSON] [37] referred to [PERSON], et al. [38], who demanded the analysis of further properties of minced meat in addition to the ANIC. [PERSON] [15] is in line with this demand. [PERSON], et al. [8] stated that the higher the ANIC, the more multidimensional morphological changes are created leading to a heterogeneous system. Thus, further quality and material properties shall be considered during evaluation of minced meat, which could be influenced by morphological changes. As described, an ANIC over 50 Vol.-% would not be detected in industrial produced minced meat, which is why less than 30% FCM were discussed (see Figure 2, hatched area) to achieve the aim of this study: if the ANIC would allow any inferences on the quality of minced meat.  
Figure 2: Amount of non-intact cells (\(n=16\)) (mean \(\pm\) standard deviation) of raw minced meat with finely chopped meat (FCM) added. The shaded area shows the realistic range of the FCM addition. Different letters indicate significant differences (\(p<0.05\)).