Table 2. Effect of various combinations of pork meat and pork head levels on proximate composition of frankfurters.
Treatments1) | Moisture content (%) | Protein content (%) | Fat content (%) | Ash content (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Control | 61.37±0.14a | 18.27±0.31b | 16.08±0.26b | 1.51±0.09 |
T1 | 61.20±0.47a | 20.16±0.96a | 17.86±0.95a | 1.48±0.09 |
T2 | 59.96±0.73b | 20.50±0.33a | 17.99±1.15a | 1.55±0.05 |
T3 | 59.73±0.33b | 20.92±2.94a | 18.43±0.95a | 1.48±0.05 |
T4 | 59.05±0.74b | 21.87±0.50a | 18.72±0.34a | 1.45±0.15 |
All values are mean±standard deviation of three replicates (n=9).
a,bMeans within a column with different letters are significantly different (p<0.05).
1)Control, frankfurter with 50% pork meat; T1, frankfurter with 45% pork meat + 5% pork head; T2, frankfurter with 40% pork meat + 10% pork head; T3, frankfurter with 35% pork meat + 15% pork head; T4, frankfurter with 30% pork meat + 20% pork head.