European Food Research and Technology

, Volume 244, Issue 5, pp 913–924 | Cite as

Edible mushroom mycelia of Pleurotus sapidus as novel protein sources in a vegan boiled sausage analog system: functionality and sensory tests in comparison to commercial proteins and meat sausages

  • Alexander Stephan
  • Jenny Ahlborn
  • Martina Zajul
  • Holger Zorn
Original Paper


In this study, various vegetable proteins and two different mycelia of P. sapidus [submerged cultivated with isomaltulose molasses (Südzucker AG, Offstein) or apple pomace (Döhler AG, Darmstadt)] were examined in a vegan boiled sausage analog system and compared with two different formulations of boiled sausage (German recipe/Russian recipe) by sensory tests and texture profile analysis (TPA). The samples were analyzed and tasted immediately after production and after 4 weeks of storage at 2 °C. In addition, the a w value, pH value, color (L × a × b value), and weight loss after boiling were determined. The hardness of the samples as determined by TPA was correlated with the sensory impressions. Compared to the Russian formulation, the vegan alternative with basidiomycetous mycelia showed particularly strong advantages in terms of strength and hardness. The use of mycelia of basidiomycetes proved to be a suitable alternative to commercial vegetable proteins.


Mycelia of basidiomycetes Pleurotus sapidus Vegan boiled sausage analog system Texture profile analyses Alternative protein sources 



This project (HA Project No. 478/15–20) has been funded within the framework of the HessenModellProjekte, financed with funds of LOEWE—Landes-Offensive zur Entwicklung Wissenschaftlich-ökonomischer Exzellenz, Förderlinie 3: KMU-Verbundvorhaben (State Offensive for the Development of Scientific and Economic Excellence).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.


  1. 1.
    Paillard S, Treyer S, Dorin B (2014) Agrimonde—scenarios and challenges for feeding the world in 2050. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim K, Choi B, Lee I, Lee H, Kwon S, Oh K, Kim AY (2011) Bioproduction of mushroom mycelium of Agaricus bisporus by commercial submerged fermentation for the production of meat analogue. J Sci Food Agric 91(9):1561–1568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Steinfeld H, Wassenaar T, Jutzi S (2006) Livestock production systems in developing countries: status, drivers, trends. Rev Sci Tech 25(2):505–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Asgar M, Fazilah A, Huda N, Bhat R, Karim A (2010) Nonmeat protein alternatives as meat extenders and meat analogs. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 9(5):513–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kumar P, Chatli M, Mehta N, Singh P, Malav O, Verma AK (2017) Meat analogues: health promising sustainable meat substitutes. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr .57(5):923–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    O’Riordan T, Stoll-Kleemann S (2015) The challenges of changing dietary behavior toward more sustainable consumption. Environment 57(5):4–13Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ruby MB (2012) Vegetarianism. A blossoming field of study. Appetite 58(1):141–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haverstock K, Forgays DK (2012) To eat or not to eat. A comparison of current and former animal product limiters. Appetite 58(3):1030–1036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ugalde U, Castrillo J (2002) Single cell proteins from fungi and yeasts. Appl Mycol Biotechnol 2:123–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rodger G (2001) Production and properties of mycoprotein as a meat alternative. Food Technol 55(7):36–41Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wiebe M (2002) Myco-protein from Fusarium venenatum: a well-established product for human consumption. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 58(4):421–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moss MO, Smith JE (2011) The applied mycology of Fusarium: symposium of the British Mycological Society held at Queen Mary College London, September 1982. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 264Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Di Mario F, Rapana P, Tomati U, Galli E (2008) Chitin and chitosan from Basidiomycetes. Int J Biol Macromol 43(1):8–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Muzzarelli RA, Boudrant J, Meyer D, Manno N, DeMarchis M, Paoletti MG (2012) Current views on fungal chitin/chitosan, human chitinases, food preservation, glucans, pectins and inulin: a tribute to Henri Braconnot, precursor of the carbohydrate polymers science, on the chitin bicentennial. Carbohydr Polym 87(2):995–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bosse AK, Fraatz MA, Zorn H (2013) Formation of complex natural flavours by biotransformation of apple pomace with basidiomycetes. Food Chem 141(3):2952–2959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bourne MC (1978) Texture profile analysis [Food acceptability]. Food Technol 32:62–66Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brennan J, Bourne M (1994) Effect of lubrication on the compression behaviour of cheese and frankfurters. J Texture Stud 25(2):139–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nishinari K, Kohyama K, Kumagai H, Funami T, Bourne MC (2013) Parameters of texture profile analysis. Food Sci Technol Res 19(3):519–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    de Ávila MDR, Cambero MI, Ordóñez JA, de la Hoz L, Herrero AM (2014) Rheological behaviour of commercial cooked meat products evaluated by tensile test and texture profile analysis (TPA). Meat Sci 98(2):310–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Friedman HH, Whitney JE, Szczesniak AS (1963) The texturometer—a new instrument for objective texture measurement. J Food Sci 28(4):390–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Puolanne EJ, Ruusunen MH, Vainionpää JI (2001) Combined effects of NaCl and raw meat pH on water-holding in cooked sausage with and without added phosphate. Meat Sci 58(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Peelman N, Ragaert P, Vandemoortele A, Verguldt E, De Meulenaer B, Devlieghere F (2014) Use of biobased materials for modified atmosphere packaging of short and medium shelf-life food products. Food Sci Emerg Technol 26:319–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lücke F-K (2000) Utilization of microbes to process and preserve meat. Meat Sci 56(2):105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dolata W, Piotrowska E, Mróz J (2001) Texture and plasticity of chopped canned meat products as affected by various volumes of water added to the batter. Strain 54(56):75Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gorbatov A, Gorbatov V (1974) Advances in sausage meat rheology. J Texture Stud 4(4):406–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cai Y, Corke H (1999) Amaranthus betacyanin pigments applied in model food systems. J Food Sci 64(5):869–873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    De Huidobro FR, Miguel E, Blázquez B, Onega E (2005) A comparison between two methods (Warner–Bratzler and texture profile analysis) for testing either raw meat or cooked meat. Meat Sci 69(3):527–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Andrès S, Zaritzky N, Califano A (2006) The effect of whey protein concentrates and hydrocolloids on the texture and colour characteristics of chicken sausages. Int J Food Sci Technol 41(8):954–961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sathe SK (2012) Protein solubility and functionality. In: Hettiarachchy N, Sato K, Marshall M, Kannan A (eds) Food proteins and peptides: chemistry, functionality, interactions, and commercialization. Taylor and Francis Group, Boca Raton, pp 95–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nishinari K, Fang Y, Guo S, Phillips G (2014) Soy proteins: a review on composition, aggregation and emulsification. Food Hydrocoll 39:301–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wilde PJ (2014) Protein functional properties. In: Williams P, Phillips G (eds) Gums and stabilisers for the food industry 17: the changing face of food manufacture: the role of hydrocolloids. Royal Society of Chemistry, London, pp 1–10Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Food Chemistry and Food BiotechnologyJustus Liebig University GiessenGiessenGermany
  2. 2.VAN HEES GmbHWallufGermany

Personalised recommendations