A method for improving mutton jerky pickling efficiency and product quality by using acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology

Abstract

This invention discloses a method for improving the curing efficiency and product quality of cured mutton using acoustic resonance and vacuum sous-vide cooking technology, belonging to the field of meat processing technology. Addressing the shortcomings of traditional cured mutton processing methods—namely, high salt content, low efficiency, and unstable quality—and the limitations of using acoustic resonance and vacuum sous-vide cooking technologies alone, this invention combines acoustic resonance curing pretreatment with vacuum sous-vide cooking. This improves the curing efficiency of the mutton while simultaneously optimizing its textural properties, enhancing tenderness, and increasing elasticity, resulting in a product with excellent sensory quality and greater consumer acceptance.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of meat processing technology, and in particular to a method for improving the efficiency and quality of cured mutton by using acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology. Background Technology

[0002] Preserved mutton is a traditional mutton product with a rich aroma and high nutritional value, and is loved by consumers. As the mutton processing industry develops towards standardization and modernization, the market demand for high-quality mutton products is increasing. Curing is a key process in the processing of preserved mutton. Taking traditional preserved mutton as an example, its curing process has the following systemic defects: (1) The curing efficiency is extremely low. Static high-salt curing is used. It takes 1-2 days in summer, 3-4 days in spring and autumn, and 4-5 days in winter. Cooking still requires 4-5 hours. The process parameters are vague and cannot be adapted to industrial production; (2) The amount of salt used is too high (usually >5%). High sodium intake is associated with the risk of cardiovascular disease, and high salt accelerates protein and lipid oxidation, resulting in dark color and deteriorated flavor of the product; (3) Long-term high-temperature braising (above 100℃) causes excessive denaturation of protein, severe contraction of muscle fibers, and loss of a large amount of water, resulting in a rough texture and low meat yield of the product.

[0003] Acoustic resonance (RAM) is a novel mixing technology that uses low-frequency, high-intensity sound waves to induce overall resonance in materials, achieving whole-field mixing without impeller shearing or friction. Compared to ultrasonic treatment, it avoids localized high temperatures and pressures, making it a promising technology for the food industry. However, existing research on RAM for meat curing follows a traditional technical bias: the assumption that the integrity of muscle fibers is a prerequisite for water retention, and that any physical damage will lead to juice loss. Therefore, efforts are focused on finding parameters for "minimum damage."

[0004] Slow cooking (SV) is a gentle heat processing technology that uses vacuum packaging to precisely control the temperature (65-95℃) of food, inducing slow protein denaturation, reducing moisture loss, and preserving the nutrients and flavor of meat products. However, SV alone relies on traditional static marinating, which has low salt penetration efficiency, and the low-temperature environment has limited softening effect on muscle fibers, resulting in products that are less tender and have less flavor intensity than those made with traditional high-temperature braising.

[0005] Currently, there are no reports on the combined application of acoustic resonance technology and vacuum sous-vide in the processing of cured mutton, especially on the use of acoustic resonance to controllably destroy and create a favorable microstructure for sous-vide. Summary of the Invention

[0006] Based on this, in view of the defects of the above-mentioned traditional process of "high salt, low efficiency and unstable quality" and the shortcomings of existing acoustic resonance technology and vacuum low temperature slow cooking alone, the present invention provides a method to improve the curing efficiency and product quality of cured mutton by using acoustic resonance and vacuum low temperature slow cooking technology, aiming to solve the following technical problems: (1) break through the technical prejudice that "muscle fiber damage will inevitably lead to juice loss" and improve water retention by using controllable damage; (2) while significantly shortening the curing time, avoid excessive physical action to degrade the meat texture; (3) form functional coupling through mild heat processing and pretreatment steps to retain the product nutrition and flavor to the greatest extent.

[0007] This invention is achieved through the following technical solution:

[0008] This invention provides a method for improving the efficiency and quality of cured mutton by utilizing acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology, comprising the following steps:

[0009] (1) Acoustic resonance marinating pretreatment: Place the pretreated mutton pieces in the marinating solution and perform acoustic resonance assisted marinating treatment at 0-10℃ for 10-30 min under the conditions of acoustic resonance frequency of 55-65kHz and acoustic resonance acceleration of 20-40g.

[0010] (2) Vacuum low-temperature slow cooking: Take out the mutton after step (1), dry the surface marinade, put it into a cooking bag containing brine, vacuum seal it, and then heat it in a low-temperature slow cooking water bath system at 55-75℃ for 80-100 minutes. After heating, cool it down to 4℃ within 15 minutes.

[0011] Preferably, the pretreatment in step (1) includes: removing fat, bones and hair from fresh hind leg meat, removing excess oil from the surface, and cutting it into pieces with a volume of 20-30 cm³ and a weight of 25-35 g.

[0012] Preferably, the acoustic resonance frequency in step (1) is 60kHz, the acoustic resonance acceleration is 30g, the processing temperature is 4℃, and the processing time is 20min.

[0013] Preferably, the pickling solution in step (1) consists of 2.0-3.0% salt, 0.2-0.3% compound phosphate, 0.002-0.005% sodium nitrite, and the remainder water, accounting for 2.0-3.0% of the total weight of the pickling solution.

[0014] More preferably, the salt in the pickling solution accounts for 2.7% of the total weight of the pickling solution.

[0015] More preferably, the compound phosphate in the pickling solution is a mixture of sodium tripolyphosphate and sodium pyrophosphate in a mass ratio of 1:1.

[0016] Preferably, the braising liquid in step (2) is obtained by adding the following ingredients by weight to 1000-2000 parts of water, boiling for 30 minutes and then filtering: 15-25 parts of scallions, 15-25 parts of ginger, 15-25 parts of cooking wine, 3-7 parts of star anise, 1-3 parts of Sichuan pepper, 0.5-1.5 parts of longan, and 0.5-1.5 parts of cardamom.

[0017] Preferably, the low-temperature slow cooking temperature in step (2) is 65°C and the time is 90 min.

[0018] Preferably, the mass ratio of mutton to brine in step (2) is 1:2.

[0019] On the other hand, the present invention also provides a cured mutton, which is prepared by any of the above methods, and has a water content of ≥93%, a salt content of 2.0%-3.0%, a hardness of ≤1400g, and a cooking loss rate of ≤15%.

[0020] The technical principle of this invention is as follows:

[0021] (1) Physical-chemical synergy (acoustic resonance + compound phosphate): Acoustic resonance accelerates the penetration of pickling liquid, and compound phosphate enhances the protein hydration capacity by increasing pH and chelating metal ions. The combination of the two makes the salt penetrate evenly while compensating for the hardness increase that may be caused by simple physical damage.

[0022] (2) Structure-process synergy (acoustic resonance + vacuum low temperature slow cooking): Acoustic resonance is controlled within the "effective window" of acceleration of 20-40g and time of 10-30min, so that muscle fibers are moderately broken and fragmented, forming a three-dimensional network structure with micron-level gaps, exposing a large number of protein hydrophilic groups; then, in the low temperature slow cooking at 55-75℃, these groups efficiently bind free water and are converted into water that is not easy to flow, realizing the "destruction-reconstruction" closed loop.

[0023] (3) Parameter-Effect Synergy (Irreplaceability of Narrow Window): Below the lower limit of the window (acceleration less than 20g or time less than 10min), insufficient damage occurs, and the structure required for subsequent water retention cannot be generated; above the upper limit of the window (acceleration greater than 40g or time greater than 30min), excessive damage occurs, leading to meat mushying and increased firmness. Below 55℃, collagen dissolution is insufficient and tenderization is limited; above 75℃, protein denaturation is excessive and water loss is aggravated. The synergistic effect is only valid within the parameter window defined by this invention.

[0024] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0025] (1) Improved water retention: The proportion of non-flowing water in the acoustic resonance marinating alone was 91.57%, and that in the vacuum sous-vide cooking alone was 92.12%, while the combination of the present invention increased it to 93.32%, while the proportion of free water decreased to 2.76%. The proportion of non-flowing water in the combination of the present invention was 1.75 percentage points higher than that of acoustic resonance marinating alone and 1.20 percentage points higher than that of vacuum sous-vide cooking alone, proving that there is a synergistic effect between acoustic resonance pretreatment and vacuum sous-vide cooking. It is speculated that the reason may be that: acoustic resonance pretreatment causes moderate breakage and fragmentation of muscle fibers, exposing more protein water-holding groups; sous-vide cooking allows these groups to effectively bind free water, thereby transforming the 'destructive defect' in the traditional understanding into a 'superior structure' for water retention.

[0026] (2) Significant improvement in tenderness: The hardness of the combination of the present invention is 1226.46g, which is significantly lower than that of slow cooking alone (1436.35g) and acoustic resonance + traditional braising (2185.91g). Compared with slow cooking alone, the hardness is reduced by about 14.6%. In terms of elasticity, the combination of the present invention is 0.61, which is higher than that of acoustic resonance + traditional braising (0.51) and slow cooking alone (0.58), indicating that the combination of the present invention effectively improves the tenderness of cured mutton.

[0027] (3) Significant improvement in pickling efficiency: The NaCl content of mutton pickled by acoustic resonance for 20 minutes was significantly higher than that of mutton pickled by static means for 20 minutes, indicating that acoustic resonance technology can achieve efficient salt penetration in a short time. At the same time, the amount of salt added in this invention is reduced to 2.0-3.0%, which is much lower than the amount of salt used in traditional cured mutton (usually >5%), thus achieving "low-salt" pickling.

[0028] In summary, this invention uses acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking to marinate mutton, breaking through the prejudices of traditional technology. While shortening the marinating time and reducing the amount of salt used, it significantly improves the water retention, tenderness and sensory quality of cured mutton. Attached Figure Description

[0029] Figure 1 A bar chart comparing the effects of different amounts of salt added in the marinating solution, acoustic resonance intensity, and acoustic resonance treatment time on the yield of steamed mutton.

[0030] Figure 2 The contour plot and response surface plot show the interaction between the amount of salt added and the acoustic resonance intensity in Example 1.

[0031] Figure 3 Contour plot and response surface plot showing the interaction between salt addition amount and acoustic resonance treatment time in Example 1;

[0032] Figure 4 The contour plot and response surface plot show the interaction between acoustic resonance intensity and acoustic resonance processing time in Example 1.

[0033] Figure 5 The bar chart shows the comparison of NaCl content in mutton under different curing processes in Examples 1-3.

[0034] Figure 6 The bar charts show the comparison of meat loss during steaming and cooking under different marinating processes in Examples 1-3.

[0035] Figure 7 Bar charts showing the comparison of centrifugal loss of mutton under different marinating processes in Examples 1-3;

[0036] Figure 8 Electron micrographs of the microstructure of mutton under different curing processes in Comparative Examples 1-3;

[0037] Figure 9 This is a bar chart comparing the yield of cured mutton under different cooking processes in Example 2;

[0038] Figure 10 This is a bar chart comparing the loss of cured mutton during steaming and boiling under different cooking processes in Example 2;

[0039] Figure 11 This is a distribution diagram of T2 relaxation time of cured mutton under different cooking processes in Example 2;

[0040] Figure 12 The radar chart shows the sensory scores of cured mutton under different cooking processes in Example 2. Detailed Implementation

[0041] To make the above-mentioned objects, features, and advantages of the present invention more apparent and understandable, specific embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Many specific details are set forth in the following description to provide a thorough understanding of the present invention. However, the present invention can be practiced in many other ways different from those described herein, and those skilled in the art can make similar modifications without departing from the spirit of the present invention. Therefore, the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments disclosed below.

[0042] Example 1: Optimization of Acoustic Resonance Marinating Process for Lamb Based on Response Surface Methodology

[0043] The process of curing mutton using acoustic resonance based on response surface methodology includes the following steps:

[0044] S1: Raw material pretreatment: Remove fat, bones, and hair from fresh lamb hind leg meat, while removing excess surface fat, and cut into similar sizes and shapes (3×3×3cm). 3 Each piece of meat, weighing approximately 30g, is processed separately.

[0045] S2: Single-factor experimental design: A single-factor experiment was designed with the amount of salt added to the pickling solution, the acoustic resonance intensity, and the acoustic resonance treatment time as single-factor variables. The salt addition amounts to the pickling solution were set to 0.5%, 1.5%, 2.5%, 3.5%, and 4.5%; the acoustic resonance intensities were 10g, 20g, 30g, 40g, and 50g; and the acoustic resonance treatment times were 10min, 20min, 30min, 40min, and 50min. The effects of different treatment conditions on the yield of steamed mutton were analyzed, and the results are as follows: Figure 1 As shown, when the amount of salt added to the marinade is 2.5%, the acoustic resonance intensity is 30g, and the acoustic resonance treatment time is 20min, the yield of mutton reaches its maximum value. Thus, the optimal single-factor conditions are determined.

[0046] Wipe the surface of the marinated mutton dry with filter paper, weigh it and record the weight as M1. Then remove the cooked mutton from the bag, absorb the surface moisture with filter paper, weigh it and record the weight as M2. The formula for calculating the yield is:

[0047] Cooking yield =

[0048] S3: Acoustic Resonance Marinating: Place the mutton pieces in a 100mL marinating container, add 70mL of marinating solution, place the container in an acoustic resonance device, and marinate in a 4℃ water bath. The acoustic resonance frequency is fixed at 60kHz. The marinating solution formula is: 2.5% salt, 0.25% compound phosphate, 0.003% sodium nitrite, with the remainder being water.

[0049] S4: Response surface design: After comprehensively comparing the results of single-factor experiments, a three-factor, three-level Box-Behnken response surface design was carried out with salt addition (A), acoustic resonance intensity (B), and acoustic resonance treatment time (C) as independent variables and cooking yield as the response value (see Table 1) to optimize the process parameters.

[0050] Table 1. Acoustic Resonance Pickling Process Response Table and Design Factors Table

[0051]

[0052] Table 2 Response Surface Experimental Design and Results

[0053]

[0054] S5: Regression Model Establishment and Significance Analysis: Using Design-Expert 13 software, data analysis and fitting were performed on the response surface experimental results (Table 2). Regression analysis was conducted on the independent variables A (salt addition), B (acoustic resonance intensity), and C (acoustic resonance treatment time) using the cooking yield as the response value, and a numerical model was established. The resulting regression equation is:

[0055] R=2.84056+11.42 A+2.8241 B+1.6844 C-0.0075 AB-0.03675 AC-0.01925 BC-1.89725 A 2 -0.0402475 B 2 -0.0233225 C 2， An analysis of variance was performed to verify the significance of the model and its parameters. The results are shown in Table 3.

[0056] Table 3. Analysis of variance of the regression model for cooking yield

[0057]

[0058] The results, as shown in Table 3, indicate that the F-value of this model is 50.72, and the p-value is <0.0001, indicating that the predictive model is highly significant. The lack-of-fit term (p=0.1810>0.05) is not significant, indicating that the model fits well and has certain statistical significance. The linear terms A, C, and BC, and the quadratic term A... 2 B 2 C 2 The effects on the steaming and cooking yield of mutton were extremely significant (p < 0.01), while the effects on the other items were not significant.

[0059] Optimization Result Analysis and Validation

[0060] To gain a more intuitive understanding of the impact of the interactions between various factors on each indicator, an analysis of variance using a regression model was employed to derive the corresponding response surface interaction plot, exploring the interaction effects of the three factors on the steaming yield of mutton. Contour plots can visually reflect the importance of the interaction between two elements; circles on the contour plot indicate no significant interaction, while ellipses represent a significant interaction.

[0061] Depend on Figures 2-4 It can be seen that the highest point appears within the set range of the independent variable, indicating that the selected range of independent variables meets the requirements; the ellipticity of the contour plots of AB and BC is higher than that of AC, indicating that the interaction between AB and BC has a greater impact on the yield of mutton steaming than AC; at the same time, the F test shows that F(BC) > F(AB) > F(AC), which is consistent with the results reflected by the contour plots, and only the BC score interaction term has a significant impact on the yield of mutton steaming.

[0062] The experimental results were analyzed using Design Expert 13. The model predicted the optimal process parameters as follows: salt addition of 2.74%, acoustic resonance intensity of 29.64 g, and acoustic resonance treatment time of 21.73 min, resulting in a mutton cooking yield of 78.63%. Considering the feasibility of actual experimental operation, the process parameters were adjusted to: salt addition of 2.7%, acoustic resonance intensity of 30 g, and acoustic resonance treatment time of 20 min. The experiment was repeated three times for verification, yielding a mutton cooking yield of 78.93%, which is close to the theoretical value of the model. This indicates that the model can be effectively used to optimize the mutton curing process, providing a basis for subsequent experiments.

[0063] Comparative Example 1: Traditional Pickling Process

[0064] (1) Raw material pretreatment: Same as in Example 1;

[0065] (2) Preparation of pickling solution: The pickling solution formula is 2.7% salt, 0.25% compound phosphate, and 0.003% sodium nitrite;

[0066] (3) Static marinating: Place the mutton pieces in a 100mL marinating container, add 70mL of marinating liquid, marinate at 4℃ for 20min, remove and wipe dry with absorbent paper for later use;

[0067] Comparative Example 2: Acoustic Resonance Assisted Pickling Process

[0068] Steps (1)-(2) are the same as in Comparative Example 1

[0069] (3) Acoustic resonance-assisted marinating: Place the mutton pieces in a 100mL marinating container, add 70mL of marinating liquid, place them in an acoustic resonance device, and marinate them in a 4℃ water bath. The acoustic resonance frequency is fixed at 60kHz, the acoustic resonance intensity is 30g, and the acoustic resonance treatment time is 20min. After taking them out, wipe them dry with absorbent paper for later use.

[0070] Comparative Example 3: Ultrasonic-Assisted Marinating Process

[0071] Steps (1)-(2) are the same as in Comparative Example 1;

[0072] (3) Ultrasonic-assisted marinating: Place the mutton pieces in a sealed bag, add 70mL of marinating liquid, place them in an ultrasonic device, marinate at 4℃, fix the ultrasonic frequency at 40kHz, ultrasonic power at 200W, ultrasonic time at 20min, take them out and wipe them dry with absorbent paper for later use.

[0073] The sodium chloride content, texture, color, water retention performance, and microstructure of the mutton marinated in Comparative Examples 1-3 were determined.

[0074] 1) Determination of sodium chloride content

[0075] The sodium chloride content of cured mutton was determined according to GB5009.44-2016 "Determination of Chloride in Food".

[0076] Measurement results: Figure 5 The comparison of NaCl content under different curing methods reflects the curing efficiency of different methods. The NaCl content of mutton cured with acoustic resonance for 20 minutes was significantly higher than that cured with static methods for 20 minutes, indicating that acoustic resonance technology can achieve efficient salt penetration in a short time. Simultaneously, the salt addition amount in this invention is reduced to 2.0%-3.0%, far lower than the salt content of traditional cured mutton (usually >5%), achieving "low-salt" curing.

[0077] 2) Texture determination

[0078] The mutton sample was cut into 1×1×1 cm pieces perpendicular to the muscle fiber tissue direction. 3 The textural properties of mutton were measured using a texture analyzer with a P / 75 probe and a TPA program. The parameters were set as follows: pre-test rate 2 mm / s, test rate 1 mm / s, post-test rate 2 mm / s, trigger force 5 g, and compression ratio 50%. The hardness, elasticity, viscosity, cohesiveness, and chewiness of the mutton were determined.

[0079] Results: Texture properties are important indicators of mutton's taste. Table 4 shows that acoustic resonance treatment is most effective in reducing hardness, viscosity, chewiness, and improving elasticity. Static treatment is most effective in maintaining or even enhancing sample cohesion, better preserving the integrity of the sample's internal structure.

[0080] Table 4. Texture characteristics of mutton prepared using different curing methods

[0081]

[0082] 3) Color measurement

[0083] Color difference was measured using a colorimeter. Residual juices on the surface of the mutton were absorbed with filter paper, and the mutton was placed tightly against the measuring probe to prevent light leakage. Three different locations were randomly selected on the cross-section of each sample for measurement, and the L*, a*, and b* values ​​were recorded. L* represents luminance, a* represents redness, and b* represents yellowness. The average value was taken as the color value of the sample. The colorimeter was calibrated using a white board and a black board before each measurement, and three parallel samples were measured for each treatment group.

[0084] Results: Color is a key sensory indicator affecting consumer acceptance. Table 5 shows the effects of four different treatments on the color characteristics of the samples. The samples treated with acoustic resonance had the highest brightness, exceeding all other groups, but the effect of reducing red was most significant, accompanied by a noticeable increase in yellowness. There was no significant difference between the static treatment and the control, indicating that the static treatment did not significantly change the brightness of the samples.

[0085] Table 5. Effects of different curing methods on the color of mutton

[0086]

[0087] 4) Water retention test

[0088] Cooking loss rate: Wipe the surface moisture of the marinated mutton dry with filter paper, weigh it and record it as W1 (g). Then, remove the cooked mutton from the bag, absorb the surface moisture with filter paper, weigh it and record it as W2 (g). The formula for calculating cooking loss is:

[0089]

[0090] Centrifugation loss rate: Wipe the surface moisture of the marinated mutton dry with filter paper, cut off the middle part of the mutton piece and weigh it as W3 (g). Then wrap the mutton in filter paper and place it in a centrifuge tube with defatted cotton. Centrifuge at 6000 r / min for 15 min. Finally, measure the mass of the mutton and record it as W4 (g). The centrifugation loss calculation formula is:

[0091]

[0092] Test results: Cooking loss and centrifugation loss together measure the water retention performance of mutton. Figure 6 and Figure 7 It can be seen that acoustic resonance curing can significantly improve the water retention of mutton, and the effect is better than static curing and ultrasonic curing.

[0093] 5) Microstructure determination

[0094] Measurement results: Figure 8 The microstructure of mutton under different curing methods was observed. In the control and static curing groups, muscle fibers were neatly arranged with small inter-fiber gaps and smooth surfaces. In the ultrasonic curing group, the gaps between muscle fibers increased, and more pores appeared. In the acoustic resonance curing group, with increasing acoustic resonance intensity, the gaps between muscle fibers continued to increase, the degree of muscle fiber breakage increased, and muscle fiber separation and fragmentation occurred. It is speculated that this moderate structural disruption may be beneficial for moisture redistribution during the subsequent vacuum sous-vide cooking process.

[0095] Example 2: Optimization and synergistic effect verification of vacuum low-temperature slow cooking process for cured mutton.

[0096] Based on the optimal pickling process parameters (salt addition amount 2.7%, acoustic resonance intensity 30g, processing time 20min) obtained in Example 1, this embodiment further verifies the synergistic effect of acoustic resonance pickling and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking, and optimizes the slow cooking temperature.

[0097] The raw material pretreatment is the same as in Example 1. Marinating liquid formula: 2.7% salt, 0.25% compound phosphate, 0.003% sodium nitrite. Brine formula: 20g scallions, 20g ginger, 20g cooking wine, 5g star anise, 2g Sichuan peppercorns, 1g longan, 1g cardamom, add 1.5L water, boil for 30 minutes, and filter to obtain the final product.

[0098] Configure the following processing groups:

[0099] J-CT: Static marinating + traditional braising (comparison)

[0100] S-CT: Acoustic resonance marinating (30g, 20min) + traditional braising

[0101] J-SV-55 / 65 / 75℃: Static marinating + vacuum sous-vide cooking (temperatures of 55, 65, and 75℃ respectively, 90 min).

[0102] S-SV-55 / 65 / 75℃: Acoustic resonance marinating (30g, 20min) + vacuum sous-vide cooking (temperatures of 55, 65, and 75℃, 90min respectively)

[0103] Traditional braising conditions: Heat in a 100℃ water bath for 10 minutes, then maintain at 85℃ for 30 minutes. Vacuum sous-vide cooking: Place the marinated mutton into a cooking bag containing 200% of the weight of the braising liquid, vacuum seal it, and heat it at the set temperature for 90 minutes (start timing after the center temperature reaches the set value). After heating, quickly place it in ice to cool to 4℃.

[0104] Meat yield, cooking loss, color, texture, moisture distribution, and sensory scores were measured for each treatment group. The results are as follows: Figures 9-12 As shown in Table 6-8.

[0105] 1) Meat yield determination ( Figure 9 Under the same temperature conditions, the meat yield of the acoustic resonance-assisted marinating group was significantly higher than that of the static marinating group; the meat yield of vacuum low-temperature slow cooking increased significantly as the temperature decreased, reaching a maximum at 55℃.

[0106] 2) Determination of cooking loss ( Figure 10 The lower the temperature, the lower the cooking loss rate; acoustic resonance pickling further reduces the cooking loss rate.

[0107] 3) Color determination (Table 6): L, a, and b all showed a decreasing trend with increasing processing temperature and time. The L value of the vacuum low-temperature slow cooking group was significantly higher than that of the traditional braising group.

[0108] Table 6. Color of cured mutton under different cooking methods

[0109]

[0110] 4) Texture determination (Table 7): The hardness and chewiness of mutton increased with increasing temperature; the hardness and cohesion of the acoustic resonance-assisted curing group were lower than those of the static curing group; the hardness of the S-SV-65℃ group (1226.46g) was significantly lower than that of the J-SV-65℃ group (1436.35g) and the S-CT group (2185.91g), and the hardness decreased by about 14.6% compared with the J-SV-65℃ group; the elasticity of the S-SV-65℃ group (0.61) was higher than that of the S-CT group (0.51) and the J-SV-65℃ group (0.58).

[0111] Table 7. Texture characteristics of cured mutton under different cooking processes

[0112]

[0113] 5) Low-field NMR moisture distribution determination ( Figure 11 Table 8): As the cooking temperature decreases, T 21 The percentage of peak area (for non-flowing water) gradually increases, with T2b (strongly bound water) and T 22 The percentage of free water gradually decreased. The proportion of non-flowing water in acoustic resonance pickling alone (S-CT) was 91.57%, and in vacuum sous-vide cooking alone (J-SV-65℃) it was 92.12%, while the combined method of this invention (S-SV-65℃) increased it to 93.32%, while the proportion of free water decreased to 2.76% (Table 8). The proportion of non-flowing water in the acoustic resonance treatment group was higher than that in the static pickling group, increasing by 1.75 percentage points compared to the S-CT group and 1.20 percentage points compared to the J-SV-65℃ group, demonstrating a synergistic effect between acoustic resonance pretreatment and vacuum sous-vide cooking. It is speculated that this may be because acoustic resonance pretreatment causes moderate breakage and fragmentation of muscle fibers. Figure 8 As shown in the figure, more water-holding groups of the protein are exposed; slow cooking at low temperatures allows these groups to effectively bind free water, thus transforming what was traditionally perceived as a 'destructive defect' into a 'superior structure' for water retention.

[0114] Table 8. Variation of low-field nuclear magnetic resonance relaxation time T2 and percentage of low-field nuclear magnetic resonance relaxation peak area in cured mutton under different cooking processes.

[0115]

[0116] 6) Sensory evaluation ( Figure 12 The traditional braising method (J-CT) had the lowest overall acceptability score, while the vacuum sous-vide method performed relatively evenly across all sensory indicators. The acoustic resonance marinating combined with 65°C vacuum sous-vide treatment (S-SV-65°C) had the highest overall acceptability score.

[0117] Optimization Result Analysis

[0118] Based on the above indicators, the acoustic resonance-assisted vacuum sous-vide cooking method (S-SV-65℃) showed the best performance in terms of cooking loss, meat yield, water retention, tenderness, moisture distribution, and sensory evaluation. The optimal process parameters are: salt addition of 2.7%, acoustic resonance intensity of 30g, acoustic resonance treatment time of 20min, vacuum sous-vide cooking temperature of 65℃, and time of 90min.

[0119] The embodiments described above are merely illustrative of several implementations of the present invention, and while the descriptions are relatively specific and detailed, they should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention patent. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can make various modifications and improvements without departing from the concept of the present invention, and these all fall within the protection scope of the present invention. Therefore, the protection scope of this invention patent should be determined by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A method for improving the efficiency and quality of cured mutton by utilizing acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology, characterized in that, The steps include the following: (1) Acoustic resonance marinating pretreatment: Place the pretreated mutton pieces in the marinating solution and perform acoustic resonance assisted marinating treatment at 0-10℃ for 10-30 minutes under the conditions of acoustic resonance frequency of 55-65kHz and acoustic resonance acceleration of 20-40g. (2) Vacuum low-temperature slow cooking: Take out the mutton after step (1), dry the surface marinade, put it into a cooking bag containing brine, vacuum seal it, and then heat it in a low-temperature slow cooking water bath system at 55-75℃ for 80-100 minutes. After heating, cool it down to 4℃ within 15 minutes.

2. The method for improving the efficiency and quality of cured mutton by utilizing acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology according to claim 1, characterized in that, The pretreatment described in step (1) includes: removing fat, bones and hair from fresh lamb hind leg meat, removing excess oil from the surface, and cutting it into pieces with a volume of 20-30 cm³ and a weight of 25-35 g.

3. The method for improving the efficiency and quality of cured mutton by utilizing acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology according to claim 1, characterized in that, The acoustic resonance frequency in step (1) is 60kHz, the acoustic resonance acceleration is 30g, the processing temperature is 4℃, and the processing time is 20min.

4. The method for improving the efficiency and quality of cured mutton by utilizing acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology according to claim 1, characterized in that, The pickling solution described in step (1) consists of 2.0-3.0% salt, 0.2-0.3% compound phosphate, 0.002-0.005% sodium nitrite, and the remainder water, accounting for 2.0-3.0% of the total weight of the pickling solution.

5. The method for improving the curing efficiency and product quality of cured mutton using acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology according to claim 4, characterized in that, Salt accounts for 2.7% of the total weight of the pickling solution.

6. The method for improving the curing efficiency and product quality of cured mutton using acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology according to claim 4, characterized in that, The compound phosphate in the pickling solution is a mixture of sodium tripolyphosphate and sodium pyrophosphate in a mass ratio of 1:

1.

7. The method for improving the efficiency and quality of cured mutton by utilizing acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology according to claim 1, characterized in that, The braising liquid mentioned in step (2) is obtained by adding the following ingredients by weight to 1000-2000 parts of water, boiling for 30 minutes and then filtering: 15-25 parts of scallions, 15-25 parts of ginger, 15-25 parts of cooking wine, 3-7 parts of star anise, 1-3 parts of Sichuan pepper, 0.5-1.5 parts of longan, and 0.5-1.5 parts of cardamom.

8. The method for improving the efficiency and quality of cured mutton by utilizing acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology according to claim 1, characterized in that, The slow cooking temperature in step (2) is 65°C and the time is 90 min.

9. The method for improving the efficiency and quality of cured mutton by utilizing acoustic resonance and vacuum low-temperature slow cooking technology according to claim 1, characterized in that, The mass ratio of mutton to brine in step (2) is 1:

2.

10. A type of cured mutton, characterized in that, The cured mutton is prepared by the method described in any one of claims 1 to 9, and has a water content of ≥93%, a salt content of 2.0%-3.0%, a hardness of ≤1400g, and a cooking loss rate of ≤15%.

Images