IS THE CRICKET FLOUR A GOOD MEAT REPLACER IN BEEF BURGER?

Edible insects are considered a trend in the food market around the world, mainly because of their protein content and amino acid profile. Among the edible insects, the cricket has great potential, both for consumption in its whole processed form (cricket chips, fried cricket, and others) and as flour and protein concentrates to be used as an ingredient in foods rich in proteins, such as meat products. The aim of this research was evaluating the physicochemical, technological, and sensorial properties of beef burgers with partial meat replacement by cricket flour (CF). Four formulations were elaborated, a control with 66% m/m of beef (FC) and the others with substitution of the meat for 10 (F10%), 15 (F15), and 20% m/m (F20%) of CF. Analysis of chemical composition, shrinkage, cooking loss, and fat, pH, lipid oxidation (TBARS), and texture were performed. 80 panelists evaluated the sensorial properties (CAAE: 55832322.5.0000.5166) of burgers by acceptance test (using a 9-point hedonic scale) and check-all-that-apply (CATA). The protein content of burgers was not affected by edible insects (p > 0.05). The chemical composition of CF increased the lipid content of reduced meat treatments (p < 0.05). The insect flour used did not influence (p > 0.05) the pH values of burgers. Adding insect protein resulted in burgers with lower shrinkage and cooking loss, and greater moisture and fat retention (p < 0.05). This possibly occurred due to the functional properties of CF, such as high water and fat binding capacity. Related to texture, treatments with CF were softer than control (p < 0.05) (average value of 9.83 N for reduced meat samples versus 17.53 N for FC), with no difference between reformulated burgers (p > 0.05). This may be due to the weak interaction between the myofibrillar protein and insect protein. TBARS values were higher as CF addition increased, with no difference among FC and F10% (p > 0.05). CF has higher composition of polyunsaturated fatty acids than beef fat, which probably induced lipid oxidation in samples with high content of insect flour. However, TBARS values were lower than 0.110 mg MDA/kg of sample, considered a low level with no sensory changes and no harm to health. The FC had greater sensory acceptance (7.24, 7.88, 8.26, 8.08, and 8.09 for color, aroma, flavor, texture and overall acceptance, respectively), but F10% was well accepted by consumers (7.22, 6.88, 7.04, 6.63, and 6.29 for color, aroma, flavor, texture and overall acceptance, respectively). The lower acceptance of F15% and F20% can be explained by CATA test, when consumers characterized these sample with a strange and unpleasant aroma, strange and aftertaste, bad appearance, sandy and crumbly. F10% was closer to FC being characterized with a characteristic color, burger aroma and juiciness. The results showed that CF can be used to replace beef in fraction of up to 10%, obtaining a meat product with higher protein content, greater moisture retention, less shrinkage and cooking loss, without effects on the lipid oxidation, and with a good sensory acceptance.