Homogeneity of Meats Prepared for Analysis with a Commercial Food Processor: Collaborative Study

The food processor was evaluated as an alternative to the food chopper and bowl cutter for preparing meat samples for analysis in AOAC procedure 24.001. Samples of 6 meat types—cooked sausage, pork sausage, canned ham, hamburger, water-added ham, and smoked ham—were distributed to 9 laboratories for preparation using a food processor. The resulting 54 samples were sent to a USDA-accredited laboratory for analysis in triplicate for moisture, protein, and fat. Standard deviations and their 95% confidence intervals calculated for the analytical results were compared with USDA Performance Standards. With few exceptions, the upper limits were lower than the Performance Standards and for the exceptions, the intervals included the Performance Standards. By these criteria, the food processor is as effective in preparing homogeneous samples as the preparation procedures used to set the Performance Standards. Collaborators found the processor faster to use and easier to clean than the food chopper. Use of the food processor has received interim approval as an alternative to the food chopper or bowl cutter in AOAC procedure 24.001 for preparing meat samples for analysis.

Comparative Analysis of Meat Samples Prepared with Food Chopper and Bowl Cutter

Analyses of meat samples after preparation with either a bowl cutter or by the official procedure with a food chopper were compared for homogeneity of comminution and for differences in fat, moisture, and protein content. Cutting time in the bowl cutter was limited to minimize temperature rise in samples. Beef chuck, pork shoulder, and beef shank, cheek, and tongue were used in the study. Variances of replicate analysis data for the 5 meat types were pooled for either cutter or chopper treatment and for each analyzed component. Sample portions cut and mixed by using the bowl cutter were more homogeneous than those ground with a food chopper. Comparative accuracy was indicated by fat and moisture means: 5 were in good agreement and 5 differed significantly; 3 of 5 paired protein means differed significantly but were within 0.3% protein. Results on precision and accuracy as well as the simplicity and convenience of the bowl cutter procedure favor its use as an alternative to a food chopper for preparing meat samples for analysis.

Extrusion of Homogeneous Pastes from Small Samples of Dried Fruit

A simple, rapid procedure is described for preparing homogeneous pastes from small quantities of dried fruit or similar soft, pasty material. Raisin pastes prepared from five 60 g samples by extrusion through a plate with 0.046 in. diam holes, and by the AOAC grinding procedure were in close agreement in average moisture content and standard deviation. The amount of sample lost in the equipment was much less by extrusion than by grinding with a food chopper, averaging 1.3 and 32.4 g, respectively. Various dried fruits including apples, apricots, figs, pears, prunes, raisins, and a glacéed fruit mix, with moisture contents of 12.6-33.9%, were extruded as pastes through either 1 plate with 0.046 in. diam holes, or a stack of 3 plates with 0.045, 0.046, and 0.033 in. diam holes, except that figs pressed with 3 plates were compacted. Moisture data from averages of three 25 g samples were equally precise using 3 plates or 1 plate.