4.1 pH
The influence of rose and hibiscus edible flower powders on the pH of raw ground beef patties is depicted in Fig. 2. The pH values of raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with rose at 1% and 2% concentrations exhibited significant differences on days 0 and 7 of storage (p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in pH values among the raw ground beef patties treated with 1%, 2%, and 3% hibiscus powders and 3% rose powder between the 0th and 7th day of storage.
On day 0, the pH of raw ground beef patties (control) was 5.7, which increased to 5.9 by the 7th day (p < 0.05). In contrast, patties treated with 1% hibiscus powder showed a pH of 5.5 on day 0, which remained the same at 5.5 by day 7 with no significant difference (p < 0.05). Also, patties treated with 2% hibiscus powder had a pH of 5.3 on day 0, which remained almost unchanged at 5.3 on day 7 (p < 0.05). Likewise, those treated with 3% hibiscus powder maintained a pH of 5.0 on days 0, 5, and 7 (p < 0.05). On the other hand, patties treated with 2% rose powder exhibited similar pH results on both days, 0 and 7. Patties treated with 1% rose powder showed a pH of 5.6 on day 0, which remained the same as 5.6 by day 7 (p < 0.05). However, those treated with 2% rose powder had a pH of 5.5 on day 0, which decreased to 5.4 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Also, patties treated with 3% rose powder had the lowest pH on day 0 compared to control and patties treated with 1% and 2% rose powders, with pH values of 5.4 on day 0 remained the same which was 5.4 on day 7 (p < 0.05).
4.2 Water holding capacity
The impact of rose and hibiscus on raw ground beef patties is illustrated in Fig. 3. Water holding capacity (WHC) values of raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with 2% and 3% rose powder exhibited significant differences on both the 0th and 7th day of storage (p < 0.05). Conversely, there were no significant differences in WHC values among patties treated with 1%, 2%, and 3% hibiscus powders and 1% rose powder between the 0th and 7th day of storage.
On day 0, raw ground beef patties (control) had a WHC of 97.8%, which remained to be 97.8% by the 7th day (p > 0.05). However, patties treated with 1% hibiscus powder exhibited a WHC of 97.3% on day 0, slightly increasing to 97.5% by the 7th day with no significant difference (p < 0.05). Similarly, those treated with 2% hibiscus powder had a WHC of 96.8% on day 0 and 97.3% on the 7th day, showing no significant difference (p > 0.05). Likewise, patties treated with 3% hibiscus powder maintained a consistent WHC, with values of 96.5% on day 0 and 96.6% on day 7 (p < 0.05).
However, patties treated with 2% and 3% rose powder showed significant differences in WHC on days 0 and 7. This rise in WHC could be due to the higher dietary fiber content of rose powder added to raw ground beef patties, with higher concentrations further enhancing WHC, unlike those treated with 1% rose powder, which exhibited no significant difference. For instance, patties treated with 2% rose powder had a WHC of 96.3% on day 0, which increased to 97.2% by the 7th day (p > 0.05). Similarly, those treated with 3% rose powder had the lowest WHC on day 0 compared to control and other treatments, with 96.1% and 97.3% on days 0 and 7, respectively (p < 0.05).
4.3 Color
The L* -mean values of raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus powders 1%, 2%, and 3%, and rose powders 1%, 2%, and 3%, are presented in Table 1. On day 0, the L* value for raw ground beef patties (control) was 45.27 ± 0.82, which increased to 50.11 ± 0.02 on day 7, indicating a significant difference (p < 0.05). Similarly, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powder 1% exhibited a lightness of 40.95 ± 0.97 on day 0, which increased to 46.57 ± 0.65 on day 7, showing a significant difference (p < 0.05). Comparable trends were observed for raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powder 2% and 3%, with initial lightness values of 39.11 ± 0.62 and 33.95 ± 0.68 on day 0, respectively, increasing to 43.63 ± 0.12 and 40.81 ± 0.3 on day 7, respectively (p < 0.05).
Table 1
The table represents Lightness (L*), red/green coordinate (a*), and yellow/blue coordinate (b*) from the data obtained from Day 0 to Day 7, with treatments shown in the first column. P-value is < 0.05. Letters connected by different letters are significantly different.
| L* |
| Day 0 | Day 1 | Day 3 | Day 5 | Day 7 |
Control | 45.27 ± 0.82cd | 46.57 ± 0.9bc | 48.54 ± 0.57ab | 50.05 ± 1.09a | 50.11 ± 0.02a |
Hibiscus 1% | 40.95 ± 0.97fghijk | 41.76 ± 0.75efghij | 44.45 ± 0.41cde | 45.46 ± 0.12bcd | 46.57 ± 0.65bc |
Hibiscus 2% | 39.11 ± 0.62jklmno | 40.41 ± 0.4hijklm | 42.78 ± 0.08defghi | 43.26 ± 0.06defgh | 43.63 ± 0.12cdefg |
Hibiscus 3% | 33.95 ± 0.68p | 37.54 ± 0.21mno | 39.99 ± 0.35ijklm | 40.02 ± 0.03ijklm | 40.81 ± 0.3ghijkl |
Rose 1% | 45.29 ± 0.9cd | 44.82 ± 0.21cde | 44.02 ± 0.74cdef | 38.34 ± 0.24klmno | 37.78 ± 0.4lmno |
Rose 2% | 44.49 ± 0.21cde | 44.23 ± 0.1cde | 44.42 ± 0.43cde | 37.81 ± 1.22klmno | 35.29 ± 1.06op |
Rose 3% | 44.43 ± 0.02cde | 43.56 ± 0.04cdefgh | 42.09 ± 0.12efghij | 36.25 ± 0.07nop | 34.16 ± 0.48p |
| a* |
Control | 19.34 ± 0.77a | 16.42 ± 0.7bc | 7.64 ± 0.36ijklmno | 6.71 ± 0.38lmnop | 7.12 ± 0.3jklmno |
Hibiscus 1% | 11.11 ± 0.41fg | 10.17 ± 0.62gh | 6.63 ± 0.24lmnop | 4.45 ± 0.08qr | 3.81 ± 0.12r |
Hibiscus 2% | 9.22 ± 0.3ghi | 7.95 ± 0.24ijklmn | 6.15 ± 0.17nopq | 6.2 ± 0.19mnopq | 5.09 ± 0.16pqr |
Hibiscus 3% | 9.18 ± 0.32ghi | 7 ± 0.03klmnop | 6.46 ± 0.08lmnop | 6.01 ± 0.16nopq | 5.91 ± 0.19opq |
Rose 1% | 19.62 ± 0.55a | 15.2 ± 0.63cd | 9.42 ± 0.36 ghi | 9.46 ± 0.19ghi | 6.77 ± 0.17klmnop |
Rose 2% | 17.72 ± 0.09ab | 13.66 ± 0.22de | 9.33 ± 0.21ghi | 9.02 ± 0.39hij | 8.16 ± 0.39ijklm |
Rose 3% | 17.03 ± 0.51bc | 13.05 ± 0.46ef | 8.69 ± 0.23hijk | 8.38 ± 0.06hijkl | 7.59 ± 0.29ijklmno |
| b* |
Control | 15.15 ± 0.05f | 16.05 ± 0.04ef | 16.93 ± 0.05bcdef | 17.91 ± 0.05abcde | 18.22 ± 0.17abcde |
Hibiscus 1% | 11.37 ± 0.21g | 11.26 ± 0.34g | 11.33 ± 0.65g | 11.41 ± 0.74g | 8.52 ± 0.29hi |
Hibiscus 2% | 8.72 ± 0.22h | 8.56 ± 0.19hi | 8.45 ± 0.28hi | 7.22 ± 0.47hij | 6.32 ± 0.12ijk |
Hibiscus 3% | 6.14 ± 0.06jk | 4.41 ± 0.19kl | 3.78 ± 0.15l | 3.12 ± 0.18l | 3.81 ± 0.03l |
Rose 1% | 18.22 ± 0.62abcde | 16.48 ± 0.62def | 19.09 ± 0.94ab | 18.6 ± 0.12abcd | 16.97 ± 0.08bcdef |
Rose 2% | 18.08 ± 0.14abcde | 16.73 ± 0.33cdef | 19.52 ± 0.49a | 18.97 ± 0.71abc | 16.53 ± 0.75def |
Rose 3% | 18.02 ± 0.34abcde | 16.65 ± 0.53def | 16.9 ± 0.32bcdef | 17.96 ± 0.03abcde | 17.06 ± 0.58bcdef |
In contrast, raw ground beef patties treated with rose powder 1%, 2%, and 3% displayed different results. For instance, those treated with rose powder 1% had a lightness of 45.29 ± 0.9 on day 0, which decreased to 37.78 ± 0.4 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Similarly, patties treated with rose powder 2% exhibited a lightness of 44.49 ± 0.21 on day 0, which decreased to 35.29 ± 1.06 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Likewise, patties treated with rose powder 3% showed a lightness of 44.43 ± 0.02 on day 0, decreasing to 34.16 ± 0.48 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Thus, patties treated with rose powder 3% on days 0 and 7 also displayed significant differences, like raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus 1%, 2%, and 3%, as well as rose 1% and 2%. Consequently, this experiment suggests that lightness was higher on day 7 in raw ground beef patties (control) compared to those treated with hibiscus 1%, 2%, and 3%, and rose 1%, 2%, and 3% powder percentages.
The a* -mean values of raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus powders 1%, 2%, and 3%, as well as rose powders 1%, 2%, and 3%, are presented in Table 1. On day 0, the a* value for raw ground beef patties (control) was 19.34 ± 0.77, which decreased to 7.12 ± 0.3 on day 7, indicating a significant difference (p > 0.05). Similarly, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powder 1% exhibited a redness of 11.11 ± 0.41 on day 0, which decreased to 3.81 ± 0.12 on day 7, showing a significant difference (p > 0.05). Comparable trends were observed for raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powder 2% and 3%, with initial redness values of 9.22 ± 0.3 and 9.18 ± 0.32 on day 0, respectively, decreasing to 5.09 ± 0.16 and 5.91 ± 0.19 on day 7, respectively (p > 0.05).
In addition, raw ground beef patties treated with Rose powder 1%, 2%, and 3% displayed comparable results. For instance, those treated with rose powder 1% had a redness of 19.62 ± 0.55 on day 0, which decreased to 6.77 ± 0.17 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Similarly, patties treated with rose powder 2% exhibited a redness of 17.72 ± 0.09 on day 0, which decreased to 8.16 ± 0.39 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Likewise, patties treated with rose powder 3% showed a redness of 17.03 ± 0.51 on day 0, decreasing to 7.59 ± 0.29 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Thus, patties treated with rose powder 3% on days 0 and 7 also displayed significant differences, like raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus 1%, 2%, and 3%, as well as rose 1% and 2%.
Consequently, this experiment suggests that retention of redness on day 7 was higher in raw ground beef patties treated with rose powder 3% compared to raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus 1%, 2%, 3%, and rose 1%, 2% powders.
The b* -mean values of raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus powders 1%, 2%, and 3%, as well as rose powders 1%, 2%, and 3%, are presented in Table 1. On day 0, the b* value for raw ground beef patties (control) was 15.15 ± 0.05, which increased to 18.22 ± 0.17 on day 7, indicating a significant difference (p < 0.05). Similarly, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powder 1% exhibited a yellowness of 11.37 ± 0.21 on day 0, which decreased to 8.52 ± 0.29 on day 7, showing a significant difference (p > 0.05). Comparable trends were observed for raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powder 2% and 3%, with initial yellowness values of 8.72 ± 0.22 and 6.14 ± 0.06 on day 0, respectively, decreasing to 6.32 ± 0.12 and 3.81 ± 0.03 on day 7, respectively (p > 0.05).
In contrast, raw ground beef patties treated with rose powder 1%, 2%, and 3% showed different results. For instance, those treated with rose powder 1% had a yellowness of 18.22 ± 0.62 on day 0, which slightly decreased to 16.97 ± 0.08 on day 7, with no significant difference observed between the two days (p > 0.05). Similarly, patties treated with rose powder 2% exhibited a yellowness of 18.08 ± 0.14 on day 0, which slightly decreased to 16.53 ± 0.75 on day 7, with no significant difference observed (p > 0.05). Likewise, patties treated with rose powder 3% showed a yellowness of 18.02 ± 0.34 on day 0, which slightly decreased to 17.06 ± 0.58 on day 7, with no significant difference observed (p > 0.05).
Therefore, this experiment suggests that yellowness was lower on day 7 in raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powder 3% compared to raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus powder 1%, 2%, and rose powder 1%, 2%.
4.4 Texture
The textural property of hardness in beef patties is illustrated by the mean values presented in Table 2. Table 2 compares the hardness of raw ground beef patties (control) with patties treated with various percentages of hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, 3%). On day 0, raw beef patties (control) exhibited a hardness of 2696.34 ± 574.62, which increased to 4734.1 ± 576.55 by day 7 (p < 0.05), indicating a significant difference over the storage period. In contrast, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powder 1% showed a decrease in hardness from day 0 to day 7, with values decreasing from 5150.17 ± 531.04 to 4278.76 ± 763.02 (p > 0.05). Similarly, patties treated with hibiscus powder 2% and 3% exhibited a decrease in hardness over the same period, with values decreasing from 5853.81 ± 874.01 to 4841.29 ± 201.56 and from 6837.73 ± 341.99 to 5150.17 ± 531.04, respectively (p > 0.05).
Table 2
The table represents Hardness obtained from Day 0 to Day 7, with treatments shown in the first column. P-value is < 0.05. Letters connected by different letters are significantly different.
| HARDNESS(g) |
| Day 0 | Day 1 | Day 3 | Day 5 | Day 7 |
Control | 2696.34 ± 574.62 g | 3846.32 ± 128.38 bcdef | 4535.49 ± 256.07 abcdef | 4685.48 ± 93.72 abcdef | 4734.1 ± 576.55 abcdef |
Hibiscus 1% | 5150.17 ± 531.04 abcdef | 3243.89 ± 272.72 cdef | 4379.01 ± 550.32 bcdef | 3071.89 ± 457.14 def | 4278.76 ± 763.02 bcdef |
Hibiscus 2% | 5853.81 ± 874.01 abcde | 4824.41 ± 653.5 abcdef | 6118.2 ± 724.69 abcd | 4298.7 ± 491.33 bcdef | 4841.29 ± 201.56 bcdef |
Hibiscus 3% | 6837.73 ± 341.99 af | 4325.66 ± 249.66 bcdef | 5820.19 ± 536.11 abcde | 4199.51 ± 352.05 bcdef | 5150.17 ± 531.04 abcdef |
Rose 1% | 5461.37 ± 716.71 abcde | 4398.11 ± 47.23 bcdef | 5629.83 ± 952.17 abcde | 5027.67 ± 477.46 abcdef | 4249.32 ± 653.61bcdef |
Rose 2% | 5629.83 ± 952.17 abcde | 4292.46 ± 147.8 bcdef | 4535.49 ± 256.07 abcdef | 3939.75 ± 656.32 bcdef | 3399.18 ± 643.03 bcdef |
Rose 3% | 5853.81 ± 874.01 abcde | 2567.12 ± 34.41 ef | 6452.82 ± 2035.06 abc | 3286.35 ± 276.99 bcdef | 3093.71 ± 348.34 bcdef |
In comparison, raw ground beef patties treated with rose powder 1% did not exhibit a significant difference, with hardness values decreasing from 5461.37 ± 716.71 on day 0 to 4249.32 ± 653.61 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Similarly, patties treated with rose powder 2% and 3% showed similar trends, with hardness values decreasing from 5629.83 ± 952.17 to 3399.18 ± 643.03 and from 5853.81 ± 874.01 to 3093.71 ± 348.34, respectively (p > 0.05).
Overall, the hardness analysis indicates that raw ground beef patties treated with rose powder 3% had the lowest hardness value on day 7 compared to raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus and rose powders (2%, 3%). However, no significant difference was observed between raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, 3%) on both day 0 and day 7 of the analysis.
Table 3 presents the mean cohesiveness values in beef patties, indicating the cohesion percentage in raw ground beef patties (control) and patties treated with hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, 3%). Cohesiveness increased in raw ground beef patties compared to those treated with hibiscus powders 1%, 2%, 3%, and rose powder 2%, 3%.
Table 3
The table represents and Cohesion % obtained from Day 0 to Day 7, with treatments shown in the first column. P-value is < 0.05. Letters connected by different letters are significantly different.
| COHESION% |
| Day 0 | Day 1 | Day 3 | Day 5 | Day 7 |
Control | 41.78 ± 2.52cdef | 42.54 ± 1.36cdef | 41.45 ± 1.41cdef | 44.68 ± 2.72 cdef | 49.96 ± 2.59 cdef |
Hibiscus 1% | 47.25 ± 3.25cdef | 44.82 ± 1.65cdef | 44.31 ± 2.45cdef | 42.74 ± 1.15cdef | 42.06 ± 0.91cdef |
Hibiscus 2% | 42.42 ± 1.02cdef | 40.38 ± 1.55ef | 42.16 ± 0.61cdef | 41.14 ± 0.74cdef | 37.67 ± 0.67f |
Hibiscus 3% | 46.18 ± 2.01 cdef | 48.29 ± 0.37ef | 47.02 ± 1.85def | 37.22 ± 0.74f | 38.04 ± 1.22f |
Rose 1% | 47.66 ± 2.34 cdef | 44.76 ± 2.43cdef | 41 ± 1.33def | 45.97 ± 2.21cdef | 40.45 ± 2.28ef |
Rose 2% | 44.12 ± 1bcde | 41.34 ± 1.05cdef | 38.66 ± 0.51ef | 42.12 ± 1.31cdef | 38.45 ± 2.94ef |
Rose 3% | 48.81 ± 5.13cdef | 43.04 ± 1.91cdef | 40.7 ± 0.97ef | 37.75 ± 1.49f | 37.67 ± 0.67f |
On day 0, raw beef patties (control) exhibited a cohesiveness of 41.78 ± 2.52, which increased slightly to 49.96 ± 2.59 on the 7th day, showing no significant difference (p < 0.05). However, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powder 1% showed a decrease in cohesiveness from 47.25 ± 3.25 on day 0 to 42.06 ± 0.91 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Similarly, patties treated with hibiscus powder 2% decreased cohesiveness from 42.42 ± 1.02 on day 0 to 37.67 ± 0.67 on day 7 (p > 0.05).
Comparable results were observed for patties treated with hibiscus powder 3%, with cohesiveness decreasing from 46.18 ± 2.01 to 38.04 ± 1.22 from day 0 to day 7 (p > 0.05), raw ground beef patties treated with rose powder 1% showed a significant decrease in cohesiveness from 47.66 ± 2.34 on day 0 to 40.45 ± 2.28 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Likewise, patties treated with rose powder 2% and 3% exhibited comparable results to those treated with rose powder 1%, with cohesiveness decreasing from 44.12 ± 1 on day 0 to 38.45 ± 2.94 on day 7 (p > 0.05) and from 48.81 ± 5.13 on day 0 to 37.67 ± 0.67 on day 7 (p > 0.05), respectively. In conclusion, the analysis of cohesiveness suggests that raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus and rose powder 1,2 and 3 percentages were not significantly different when observed from day 0 to day 7.
The mean value in Table 4 indicates the springiness percentage in raw ground beef patties (control) and patties raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus and rose powders 1,2,3 percentages. Springiness increased in raw ground beef patties (control) than in raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powders 1,2,3 and rose powders 1,2,3 percentages. On the day of 0, raw ground beef patties (control) had (42.26 ± 1.11 of springiness, which increased to 54.54 ± 1.04 on the 7th day, which also showed that the springiness in raw ground beef patties was significantly not different; p < 0.05).
Table 4
The table represents Springiness% and Gumminess% obtained from Day 0 to Day 7, with treatments shown in the first column. P-value is < 0.05. Letters connected by different letters are significantly different.
| SPRINGINESS% |
| Day 0 | Day 1 | Day 3 | Day 5 | Day 7 |
Control | 42.26 ± 1.11ef | 43.25 ± 0.53def | 44.27 ± 3.66def | 51.71 ± 1.99 cdef | 54.54 ± 1.04 cdef |
Hibiscus 1% | 48.91 ± 2.83 cdef | 44.69 ± 1.7def | 38.66 ± 1.61f | 50.76 ± 4.56cdef | 47.99 ± 2.44 cdef |
Hibiscus 2% | 50.27 ± 1.38cdef | 42.75 ± 0.86def | 47.28 ± 4.14 cdef | 47.77 ± 1.38cdef | 46.47 ± 2.17 cdef |
Hibiscus 3% | 52.45 ± 1.18 cdef | 43.52 ± 3.11def | 41.88 ± 2.15ef | 40.86 ± 0.74f | 47.86 ± 1.29 cdef |
Rose 1% | 47.56 ± 1.32 cdef | 40.77 ± 3.27f | 48.81 ± 8.07cdef | 45.68 ± 1.74def | 46.47 ± 2.17 cdef |
Rose 2% | 51.52 ± 3.38 cdef | 44.66 ± 2.57def | 45.68 ± 1.74def | 40.86 ± 0.74f | 43.52 ± 3.11def |
Rose 3% | 54.23 ± 1.44 cdef | 40.43 ± 0.82f | 38.74 ± 0.82f | 43.21 ± 7.5def | 45.07 ± 5.12 cdef |
| GUMMINESS% |
| Day 0 | Day 1 | Day 3 | Day 5 | Day 7 |
Control | 109810.62 ± 16510.7 c | 163300.93 ± 1981.76 abc | 200206.18 ± 23450.06 abc | 139217.19 ± 11486.19 c | 125050.7 ± 4003.89c |
Hibiscus 1% | 215659.34 ± 18151.57 abc | 142404.37 ± 3948.71 bc | 194427.18 ± 17829.78 abc | 130929.36 ± 19025.95 c | 164877.17 ± 24421.49 abc |
Hibiscus 2% | 249414.59 ± 40987.32 abc | 203894.61 ± 30002.16 abc | 248750.69 ± 37941.55 abc | 177500.68 ± 22971.38 abc | 186344.36 ± 10421.96 abc |
Hibiscus 2% | 297894.21 ± 4146.04 ab | 176580.22 ± 4384.23 abc | 228993.47 ± 23082.25 abc | 155882.51 ± 10737.79 abc | 250807.07 ± 11783.06 abc |
Rose 1% | 146878.18 ± 9942.14 bc | 105213.78 ± 3169.53 c | 307923.96 ± 110601.17 a | 171800.16 ± 21091.27 abc | 129559.08 ± 23101.4c |
Rose 2% | 191752.64 ± 15662.73 abc | 165954.41 ± 6377.45 abc | 187011.88 ± 6600.09 abc | 181937.76 ± 32017.27 abc | 165838.63 ± 29305.76abc |
Rose 3% | 221515.7 ± 27296.9 abc | 165890.32 ± 4890.05 abc | 228133.96 ± 35556.99 abc | 217535.78 ± 28074.84 abc | 184323.91 ± 16079.01abc |
Contrast results were obtained in raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus 1 percentage showed different results to that of raw ground beef patties as the springiness decreased from day 0 to 7 (48.91 ± 2.83 to 47.99 ± 2.44; p > 0.05) in raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus powder 1 percentage; p > 0.05) was not significantly different. Whereas patties treated with hibiscus powder two percent resulted in (50.27 ± 1.38 on the 0th day and 46.47 ± 2.17 springiness on the 7th day; p > 0.05) also showed that patties treated with hibiscus powder 2 percent were not significantly different.
Similar results were obtained from raw ground patties treated with hibiscus powder three percentage as the results showed (52.45 ± 1.18 on the 0th day and 47.86 ± 1.29 on the 7th day; p > 0.05). For raw ground beef patties treated with rose powder, one percentage was not significantly different from day 0 to 7 as the results on the 0th day were (47.56 ± 1.32) decreased to 46.47 ± 2.17 on the 7th day; p > 0.05). Raw ground beef patties treated with rose powder two percentage showed results of (51.52 ± 3.38 on the 0 day, which decreased to 43.52 ± 3.11 on the 7th day; p > 0.05) was also not significantly different, whereas raw ground beef patties treated with rose powder three percentage showed (54.23 ± 1.44 on 0th day increased to 45.07 ± 5.12 on 7th day; p > 0.05) was also not significantly different. Hence, through this experiment, according to the mean values of springiness, we can conclude that raw ground beef patties (control) and patties treated with hibiscus and rose powder 1,2 and 3 percentages were not significantly different when seen on the 0th to 7th day of analysis.
In addition, Table 4 also includes the mean values of gumminess % in raw ground beef patties, including both the control group and patties treated with various percentages of hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, 3%). Gumminess increased in raw ground beef patties (control) compared to those treated with hibiscus 1%, 2%, 3%, and rose 1%, 2%, and 3% powder percentages. On day 0, raw beef patties (control) exhibited a gumminess of 109810.62 ± 16510.7, which increased to 125050.7 ± 4003.89 on the 7th day, showing no significant difference (p < 0.05). However, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus 1% powder showed a decrease in gumminess from 215659.34 ± 18151.57 on day 0 to 164877.17 ± 24421.49 on day 7 (p > 0.05), which was not significantly different. Similarly, patties treated with hibiscus 2% powder decreased gumminess from 249414.59 ± 40987.32 on day 0 to 186344.36 ± 10421.96 on day 7 (p > 0.05), also not significantly different. The same trend was observed for patties treated with 3% of hibiscus powder, with gumminess decreasing from 297894.21 ± 4146.04 on day 0 to 250807.07 ± 11783.06 on day 7 (p > 0.05), also not significantly different. Raw ground beef patties treated with rose 1% powder showed similar results to those treated with hibiscus powder 1%, 2%, and 3% when observed from day 0 to day 7, with gumminess decreasing from 146878.18 ± 9942.14 on day 0 to 129559.08 ± 23101.4 on day 7 (p > 0.05). Likewise, patties treated with rose 2% powder exhibited a decrease in gumminess from 191752.64 ± 15662.73 on day 0 to 165838.63 ± 29305.76 on day 7 (p > 0.05), not significantly different.
Similarly, patties treated with rose 3% powder showed gumminess decreasing slightly from 221515.7 ± 27296.9 on day 0 to 184323.91 ± 16079.0 on day 7 (p > 0.05), also not significantly different. In conclusion, according to the mean gumminess values, there was no significant difference observed between raw beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus powders 1%, 2%, 3%, and rose powders 1%, 2%, 3% when observed on day 0 and day 7 of analysis.
Table 5 presents the mean chewiness values in raw ground beef patties, including the control group and patties treated with various percentages of hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, 3%). Chewiness increased from the 0th day to the 7th day of analysis in raw ground beef patties and in those treated with hibiscus powders, 1%, 2%, 3%, and rose 1%, 2%, and 3% percentages.
Table 5
The table represents Chewiness obtained from Day 0 to Day 7, with treatments shown in the first column. P-value is < 0.05. Letters connected by different letters are significantly different.
| CHEWINESS % |
| Day 0 | Day 1 | Day 3 | Day 5 | Day 7 |
Control | 46034.47 ± 5758.71 b | 70626.3 ± 1409.78 ab | 87107.72 ± 5502.34 ab | 101194.74 ± 9938.55 ab | 100069.6 ± 10541.27 ab |
Hibiscus 1% | 110186.93 ± 14772.77 ab | 63513.08 ± 1224.24 ab | 75710.72 ± 9882.55 ab | 68168.77 ± 16306.75 ab | 99596.83 ± 11805.62 ab |
Hibiscus 2% | 126482.05 ± 23531.03 ab | 86816.27 ± 11511.53 ab | 120659.3 ± 29504.38 ab | 85042.07 ± 11871 ab | 86695.83 ± 7197.83 ab |
Hibiscus 3% | 138466.07 ± 5397.6 ab | 76664.6 ± 4655.57 ab | 96821.29 ± 14449.42 ab | 63678.84 ± 4370.63 ab | 122847.71 ± 18308.6 ab |
Rose 1% | 118937.18 ± 21704.82 ab | 145876.19 ± 26999.5 ab | 167032.83 ± 86670.47 ab | 43036.76 ± 4492.52 b | 55360.12 ± 5368.62 b |
Rose 2% | 125373.92 ± 36546.08 ab | 120712.71 ± 23049.01 ab | 73791.95 ± 1823.14 ab | 85624.11 ± 6135.23 ab | 80181.21 ± 11777.99 a |
Rose 3% | 105357.28 ± 15572.55 ab | 67044.93 ± 2041.9 ab | 88788.16 ± 14919.52 ab | 119723.07 ± 32114.95 ab | 103135.75 ± 18667.74 ab |
On the 0th day, raw ground beef patties (control) exhibited a chewiness of 46034.47 ± 5758.71, which increased to 100069.6 ± 10541.27 on the 7th day, indicating that raw beef patties were significantly different (p < 0.05). Similarly, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus 1% powder showed a similar increase in chewiness from 99596.83 ± 11805.62 to 110186.93 ± 14772.77 on the 7th day (p < 0.05). However, patties treated with hibiscus 2% powder decreased chewiness from 126482.05 ± 23531.03 on the 0th day to 86695.83 ± 7197.83 on the 7th day (p > 0.05). The same trend was observed for patties treated with hibiscus 3% powder, with chewiness decreasing from 138466.07 ± 5397.6 on the 0th day to 122847.71 ± 18308.6 on the 7th day (p > 0.05).
In contrast, raw ground beef patties treated with rose 1% powder did not show a significant difference when observed from the 0th to the 7th day, with values increasing from 55360.12 ± 5368.62 on the 0th day to 118937.18 ± 21704.82 on the 7th day (p < 0.05). Likewise, patties treated with rose 2% powder exhibited an increase in chewiness from 80181.21 ± 11777.99 on the 0th day to 125373.92 ± 36546.08 on the 7th day (p < 0.05), not significantly different. Similarly, patties treated with rose 3% powder showed chewiness values decreasing from 105357.28 ± 15572.55 on the 0th day to 103135.75 ± 18667.74 on the 7th day (p > 0.05).
In conclusion, according to the mean values of chewiness, raw ground beef patties (control) and raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus and rose powders 1%, 2%, and 3%, were not significantly different when observed from the 0th to the 7th day of analysis.
4.5 MDA
Figure 4 illustrates the impact of MDA development in raw ground beef patties (control) compared to those treated with various percentages of hibiscus and rose powders over 0, 1, 3, 5, and 7 days of analysis. Throughout the analysis period, oxidative changes in lipids occurred in all raw beef patties, resulting in notably higher MDA values in raw ground beef patties (control) compared to those treated with hibiscus and rose powders 1,2 and 3 percentages.
MDA equivalents per µg/kg in raw ground beef patties on the 0th day were 50.0 per µg/kg, escalating to 309.8 per µg/kg on day 7 (p < 0.05), significantly different from those treated with hibiscus 1% powder, with MDA equivalents per µg/kg starting at 43.2 and gradually increasing to 97.2 on the 7th day (p < 0.05). The results on days 0 and 7 were significantly different. Similarly, patties treated with hibiscus 2% powder showed MDA equivalents of 38.8 per µg/kg on day 0, which increased to 87.2 on the 7th day (p < 0.05), also significantly different.
Likewise, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus 3% powder exhibited significant differences on days 0 and 7, with MDA equivalents of 33.7 per µg/kg on day 0 and 80.7 on day 7 (p < 0.05). Raw ground beef samples treated with rose 1%, 2%, and 3% powders also displayed notably lower MDA values. Rose 1% powder resulted in MDA equivalents per µg/kg of 22.3 on the 0th day, increasing to 63.4 on the 7th day (p < 0.05). Similarly, rose 2% powder showed lower MDA equivalents, with values of 18.0 on the 0th day and 53.8 on the 7th day (p < 0.05). Likewise, patties treated with rose 3% powder showed lower MDA equivalents per µg/kg on days 0 and 7, with values of 17.4 and 48.3, respectively (p < 0.05), as depicted in Fig. 4.
In conclusion, this experiment establishes that raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus 1%, 2%, and 3% and rose 1%, 2%, and 3% were significantly different when observed on days 0 and 7 of the analysis, as indicated alphabetically.
4.6 Carbonyls
Figure 5 presents the findings regarding protein carbonylation in raw ground beef patties and those treated with varying percentages of hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, and 3%). Protein carbonyl levels increased significantly in raw ground beef patties (control) compared to those treated with powders.
On day 0, raw ground beef patties (control) exhibited 27.3 nmol per mg of protein carbonyls, which significantly increased to 59.7 nmol per mg on the 7th day (p > 0.05). Figure 4 indicates different alphabets on days 0 and 7, representing significant differences in protein carbonyl levels. Raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus 1% powder displayed results like the control group, with a similar increase in protein carbonyl content on both days 0 and 7 (24.01 nmol per mg protein on day 0 and 56.76 nmol per mg protein on day 7; p > 0.05). Similarly, patties treated with hibiscus 2% powder showed increased protein carbonyl content from 21.98 nmol per mg protein on day 0 to 53.03 nmol per mg protein on day 7 (p > 0.05). Comparable results were observed for raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus 3% powder, with levels increasing from 18.7 nmol per mg protein on day 0 to 50.8 nmol per mg protein on day 7 (p > 0.05).
Raw ground beef patties treated with rose 1% powder exhibited an increase in protein carbonyl content from 25.4 nmol per mg protein on day 0 to 51.7 nmol per mg protein on day 7 (p > 0.05). Similarly, patties treated with rose 2% and rose 3% powders showed similar trends, with protein carbonyl levels from day 0 to day 7 (20.4 nmol per mg protein to 53.91 nmol per mg protein for rose 2% powder and 19.3 nmol per mg protein to 48.8 nmol per mg protein for rose 3% powder; p > 0.05).
In conclusion, based on the mean values of protein carbonyls, raw ground beef patties and raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, and 3%) exhibited similar trends on both days 0 and 7, except for the control group. The protein carbonyl retention in raw ground beef patties (control) on the 7th day was comparatively lower than in those treated with hibiscus and rose powders.
4.7 Schiff bases
Figure 6 illustrates another marker of protein oxidation in raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with varying percentages of hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, and 3%). Schiff bases showed a significant increase in raw ground beef patties (control) compared to those treated with powders.
On day 0, raw ground beef patties (control) exhibited 264.0 nmol per mg of protein of Schiff bases, which significantly increased to 315.6 nmol per mg on the 7th day (p < 0.05). The alphabets in Fig. 6 denote significant differences in Schiff bases from day 0 to day 7. Raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus 1% powder displayed results like the control group, significantly increasing Schiff bases content from day 0 to 7 (221.3 to 264.0 nmol per mg protein; p < 0.05). Similarly, patties treated with hibiscus 2% powder showed an increase from 202.2 to 247.8 nmol per mg protein (p < 0.05), and those treated with hibiscus 3% powder increased from 169.9 to 192.5 nmol per mg protein (p < 0.05).
Raw ground beef patties treated with rose 1% powder exhibited similar results to those treated with hibiscus powders, with increased Schiff bases content from 57.4 on day 0 to 100.0 nmol per mg protein on day 7 (p < 0.05). Additionally, patties treated with rose 2% and rose 3% powders showed comparable trends, with increases from 19.2 to 48.2 nmol per mg protein (p < 0.05) for rose 2% powder and from 11.5 to 21.3 nmol per mg protein (p < 0.05) for rose 3% powder. In conclusion, based on the mean values of Schiff bases, raw ground beef patties (control) and those treated with hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, and 3%) exhibited alphabetical differences on both days 0 and 7, as indicated in Fig. 6. Additionally, the Schiff base content increased daily during the analysis week in raw ground beef patties(control) and those treated with hibiscus and rose powders. Notably, patties treated with these powders showed lower Schiff base content on the 7th day than raw ground beef patties (control).
4.8 Free Thiols
Figure 7 illustrates another aspect of protein oxidation in raw ground beef patties and those treated with varying percentages of hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, and 3%). Free thiol levels significantly decreased in raw ground beef patties (control) compared to the treated samples.
On day 0, raw ground beef patties had a free thiol level of 1.0 nmol per mg protein, significantly decreasing to 0.3 nmol per mg on the 7th day. The alphabets in the figure indicate that the free thiols from day 0 to 7 were significantly different (p > 0.05). Raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus 1% powder showed comparable results to the control, with a significant decrease in free thiol content from day 0 to 7 (0.8 to 0.3 nmol per mg protein; p > 0.05). This difference is also evident in the figure, showing that raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus 1% were significantly different from day 0 to 7.
Similarly, patties treated with hibiscus 2% powder decreased from 0.4 to 0.2 nmol per mg protein from day 0 to day 7 (p > 0.05). The same trend was observed in patties treated with hibiscus 3% powder, decreasing from 0.6 to 0.1 nmol per mg protein (p > 0.05). Raw ground beef patties treated with rose 1% powder also showed similar trends to those treated with hibiscus powders, decreasing from 0.8 to 0.2 nmol per mg protein on days 0 to 7 (p > 0.05). Likewise, patties treated with rose 2% and rose 3% powders exhibited similar trends, with decreases from 0.9 to 0.2 nmol per mg protein (p > 0.05) and from 0.9 to 0.2 nmol per mg protein (p > 0.05), respectively.
In conclusion, based on the mean values of free thiols, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, and 3%) showed similar trends on days 0 and 7, except for the control. This indicates that the retention of free thiols in raw ground beef patties (control) on the 7th day was lower, suggesting higher protein oxidation than those treated with hibiscus and rose powders.
4.9 Radical scavenging activity
Figure 8 depicts an assessment of antioxidant capacity in both raw ground beef patties and those treated with varying percentages of hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, and 3%). Radical scavenging activity exhibited a significant decrease in raw ground beef patties (control) compared to the treated samples.
On day 0, raw ground beef patties (control) displayed a radical scavenging activity of 8.8, which significantly decreased to 5.8 on the 7th day (p > 0.05). The alphabets, in the figure denotes that the radical scavenging activity from day 0 to 7 did not significantly differ. In contrast, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus 1% powder showed significantly different results than the control, with radical scavenging activity increasing from 43.2 on day 0 to 56.1 on day 7 (p < 0.05).
Similarly, patties treated with hibiscus 2% powder exhibited an increase from 43.0 to 57.8 (p < 0.05), and those treated with hibiscus 3% powder showed an increase from 44.6 to 58.3 (p < 0.05). Raw ground beef patties treated with rose 1% powder also showed comparable results to those treated with hibiscus powders, with radical scavenging activity increasing from 45.7 on day 0 to 55.2 on day 7 (p < 0.05).
Additionally, patties treated with rose 2% and rose 3% powders demonstrated similar trends to those treated with rose 1% powder, with radical scavenging activity increasing from 45.1 to 58.5 (p < 0.05) for rose 2% powder and from 47.7 to 59.4 (p < 0.05) for rose 3% powder.
In conclusion, based on the mean values of radical scavenging activity, raw ground beef patties treated with hibiscus and rose powders (1%, 2%, and 3%) significantly differed from days 0 to 7 during the analysis. Notably, the radical scavenging activity content in raw ground beef patties (control) on the 7th day was comparatively lower than that of the treated samples.