Goose Meat as a Source of Dietary Manganese: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Sirius Huang and Version 1 by Gabriela Haraf.

Manganese is a trace element with essential physiological functions that should be supplied to animals and humans through diet. The primary source of manganese in the human diet is tea and plant products. Diversifying the diet with goose meat is also worthwhile because, unlike plant food, it does not contain substances that diminish bioavailability, such as fiber or phytates. As a natural source of this element, goose meat does not increase exposure to overconsumption, as can happen when consuming dietary supplements. Manganese content of domestic or wild goose meat depends on the type of muscles (more Mn in leg muscles), presence of skin (more Mn in skinless muscles), and thermal treatment (pan fried with oil, grilled, and cooked meat contains more).

  • goose
  • meat
  • manganese
  • thermal treatment

1. Introduction

Manganese (Mn) is one of the essential minerals in animal and human nutrition. It is classified as a micronutrient or trace element. Manganese (Mn) is an essential dietary mineral for mammals and is a component of metalloenzymes such as arginase, glutamine synthetase, and pyruvate carboxylase [1]. Because it activates manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD), manganese is necessary for normal antioxidant defenses. In addition, it is an activator for many hydrolases, kinases, decarboxylases, and transferases. Manganese is involved in amino acid-, lipid- and carbohydrate metabolism, and proteoglycan synthesis in bone formation. Its role in regulating and transforming thyroid hormones is indicated [2]. It is necessary for utilizing biotin, vitamin B1, and vitamin C. Metabolic association between manganese and choline affects fat metabolism in the liver [3]. Manganese competes directly with cobalt (Co) and iron (Fe) for binding sites in the digestive tract. Therefore, an excess of Co or Fe may result in lower absorption of Mn and its potential deficiency. The amount of manganese absorbed is inversely related to the concentration of manganese in the diet. The human body content of manganese is estimated to be 10–20 mg. The concentration is relatively high in bone and organs rich in mitochondria, such as the liver, pancreas, and kidney, and concentrations are low in muscle and plasma [4]. This regulation seems to be part of the adaptive changes to the amount of dietary manganese intake, which allow the maintenance of manganese homeostasis over a wide range of intakes.
Humans obtain manganese from the air, water, and food. Plant sources have much higher manganese concentrations than animal sources. Whole grains (wheat germ, oats, and bran), rice, and nuts (hazelnuts, almonds, and pecans) contain the highest amounts of manganese. Chocolate, tea, mussels, clams, legumes, fruit, leafy vegetables (spinach), seeds (flax, sesame, pumpkin, sunflower, and pine nuts), and spices (chili powder, cloves, and saffron) are also rich in manganese [5,6][5][6].
Geese are waterfowl consumed in some regions of the world, especially Asia, some countries of Europe, and the USA [11][7]. The quality of meat obtained from them is a complex combination of characteristics such as appearance, color, texture, functionality (e.g., cooking loss), taste, and nutritional value, including mineral content [12][8]. Goose meat can be a valuable source of minerals in the human diet [13][9]. However, their amount of meat depends on many factors: poultry species, age, sex of birds, rearing system and region, time of fattening, content in the feed, drinking water, premixes, and even medicines.
Deficiency of Mn in young birds causes perosis (swelling and deformation of the tibia-metatarsal joints, “slipping” of the Achilles tendon, and lameness). Manganese in plant materials is available in 50–60%, but its bioavailability in poultry feed mixtures is reduced in excess calcium and phosphorus. Because its content and bioavailability in plant feed fluctuate significantly, it is often added to premixes in the form of inorganic trace minerals (ITM), for example, oxides, carbonates, chlorides, and sulphates. Manganese has a low potential for toxicity due to its poor intestinal absorption and efficient biliary elimination. Still, it can interact with several other dietary nutrients, such as Zn and Fe, by competing with Fe for intestinal absorption sites or reducing Fe and Zn tissue concentrations [3]. Historically, manganese sulfate has been the most common source of manganese in animal supplements. Manganese sulphate monohydrate is generally used as the standard reference for assessing Mn bioavailability. Still, the actual absorption of the Mn in this compound is 2% to 8%, depending on the species and the diet to which Mn is added. Manganese can be added to feed in the form of organic trace minerals (OTM), for example, metal proteinate and metal amino acid chelate, which are more expensive than ITM. Relative bioavailability values for manganese in poultry can range from 29% for manganese dioxide MnO (ITM) to 174% for manganese methionine Mn-Met (OTM) compared to the sulphate standard [3]. However, an excessive supply of this ingredient in the feed reduces the absorption of iron, magnesium, and phosphorus. The minimum nutritional requirements of geese is 60 mg/kg in a grower and 40 mg/kg in a breeder.
The manganese content in goose feed, its chemical form, and bioavailability may be reflected in its range in goose meat. In the literature, there are few published research results on the content of Mn in goose muscles in terms of its consumption and, more often, in biomonitoring as a bioindicator of environmental pollution [14,15][10][11]. In addition, in the literature, the content of minerals in poultry meat is often given without dividing it into breast and leg meat, which as culinary portions, are most often consumed by consumers. However, muscles differ in their histological structure and the nature of metabolic changes, which may affect the content of minerals, including manganese [16][12]. Similarly, considering the sex of poultry, males, and females differ in the growth rate, which affects the amount of feed and manganese intake, and thus its use in the body, as well as excretion. Despite these facts, research conducted in the pectoral muscles of the Egyptian goose by Geldenhuys et al. [17][13] shows that the manganese content in males and females did not differ significantly, amounting to an average of 0.06 mg/100 g dry basis. In addition, as part of preventing cardiovascular disease or weight reduction, consumers are encouraged to remove the skin and subcutaneous fat from carcass elements before cooking. The skin is a source of fat, cholesterol, sulfur amino acids, collagen, elastin, fat-soluble vitamins, and minerals [18,19][14][15]. For the consumer, it may be essential to know the manganese content in the elements of a goose carcass with or without skin.

2. Manganese Content in Raw Goose Meat

The manganese content (mg/kg of tissue) in raw goose muscles is shown in Table 1. In Poland, a series of studies on the content of, for example, manganese, as an element necessary in animal organisms but also as a bioindicator of environmental pollution was conducted by Falandysz et al. [27,28,29,30,31,32][16][17][18][19][20][21]. In the studies carried out in the years 1978–1983, in the raw meat of geese for slaughter from northern Poland, 0.17 mg Mn/kg was found [27][16]; in 1984, 0.38 mg Mn/kg was found [28][17]; and in 1985, 0.26 mg Mn/kg was found [30][19]. In 1986, the average content of Mn in the raw muscles of slaughter geese from northern Poland was comparable to that found in earlier years (1983–1985) (1.9 mg/kg) [29][18], and in 1987 the mean value obtained was 0.27 mg Mn/kg [31][20]. In subsequent studies, in the meat of geese randomly selected from slaughterhouses during 1988–1991, Falandysz et al. [32][21] determined 0.25 mg Mn/kg. The content of manganese in the muscles of Polish geese, stated by the above-cited authors, was characteristic of this animal species and the type of tissue. Kunachowicz et al. [26][22] give 0.2 mg Mn/kg of tissue in the muscles of Polish geese. Chen et al. [34][23], examining goose meat purchased in markets and supermarkets in Taipei (Taiwan), found the average Mn content at 0.268 mg/kg of tissue. Considering the type of muscles, Oz and Celik [35][24] determined the manganese content in Turkish goose’s breast and leg muscles, which was 0.2 and 5.0 mg/kg tissue, respectively.
Table 1.
Manganese content of goose meat raw (mg/kg tissue).
Meat Goose n Age Carcass Breast Leg/Thigh Reference
Meat raw Anser Anser 29 n.d. 0.17 ± 0.04

(0.12–0.24)		 n.d. n.d. [27][16]
. Losses of minerals during the thermal treatment of meat depend on the form in which they occur. Mineral components, which can be found as soluble dissociated salts (part of sodium, small amounts of phosphorus, calcium, and potassium), go to the leakage. Components, such as iron, that combine with proteins remain in the meat [39][30]. The thermal treatment can lead to the loss of a part of the mineral matter, thereby reducing the product’s nutritional value. The most significant mineral matter reduction is generated when the meat is thermally treated in the aquatic environment [40][31]. The manganese content in goose meat subjected to thermal processing is presented in Table 2. USDA data analysis [25] shows the identical Mn content in raw and cooked skinless carcasses (0.24 mg/kg tissue), whereas in cooked carcasses with skin higher than in raw carcasses with skin (0.24 vs. 0.23 mg/kg tissue). The research conducted by Kunachowicz et al. [26][22] showed a higher content of Mn in cooked and roasted geese carcasses with skin than in raw carcasses (0.30 vs. 0.20 mg/kg tissue).
Table 2.
Manganese content of goose meat after thermal treatment (mg/kg tissue).
Meat Goose n Age Carcass Breast Leg/Thigh Reference
Meat only, cooked, roasted Anser Anser n.d. n.d. 0.24 n.d. n.d. [25]
Meat raw Anser Anser 18 n.d. 0.38

(0.14–2.41)		 n.d. n.d. [28][17]
Meat and skin, cooked, roasted Anser Anser n.d. n.d. 0.23 n.d. n.d. [25] Meat raw Anser Anser 18 n.d. 0.25

(0.17–0.31)		 n.d. n.d. [30][19
Meat and skin, cooked, roasted Anser Anser n.d. n.d. 0.30 n.d. n.d.]
[26][22] Meat raw Anser Anser 39 n.d. 0.26

(0.14–0.48)		 n.d. n.d. [29][18]
Meat: Turkish goose 16 16 weeks n.d.     [35][24] Meat raw Anser Anser 32 4–7 months 0.27

(0.15–0.42)		 n.d. n.d. [31][20]
Boiled 0.7 ± 0.2 8.0 ± 8.0 Meat raw Anser Anser 16 4–7 months 0.25 ± 0.06

(0.15–0.30)		 n.d. n.d. [32][21]
Grilled 0.4 ± 0.1 5.0 ± 3.0 Meat raw Anser Anser n.d. n.d. 0.20 n.d. n.d. [26][22]
Pan fried without fat or oil 4.5 ± 6.0 3.4 ± 3.1 Meat raw Anser Anser 10 n.d. 0.268 ± 0.073

(0.151–0.367)		 n.d. n.d. [34][23]
Pan with oil 0.5 ± 0.5 16.3 ± 18.1 Meat only, raw Anser Anser n.d. n.d. 0.24 n.d. n.d. [25]
Deep-fat fried 0.6 ± 0.7 2.1 ± 0.3 Meat and skin, raw Anser Anser n.d. n.d. 0.20 n.d. n.d. [25]
Oven cooked 0.3 ± 0.3 2.4 ± 0.9 Meat raw Turkish goose 16 16 weeks n.d. 0.2 5.0 [35][24]
Microwave 0.1 ± 0.1 1.15 ± 2.0 Meat raw: White Kołuda® 24 17 weeks n.d   n.d [36]
Meat: White Kołuda®[26]
48 17 weeks n.d.   n.d. [36][ Without skin 1.7
26]
Water bath cooking   With skin 1.5
Without skin 2.7 Meat raw Egyptian goose

Alopochen aegyptiacus		 36 n.d. n.d. 0.6 ± 0.01 ♀♂

0.6 ± 0.08 season winter/summer		 n.d. [17][13]
Meat raw, skinless Canada goose

Branta canadensis		 6 n.d. 0.50 n.d. n.d. [25]
n.d.—no data.
Considering the presence of skin, data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture) [25] show that raw goose with skin has less of this mineral than meat without skin (0.20 vs. 0.24 mg/kg tissue, respectively). Similarly, Goluch et al. [36][26] analyzed the Mn content in raw breast muscles with and without skin from White Kołuda®. The mean Mn content in breast muscles was 1.6 mg/kg dry mass (DM) and did not differ significantly between with skin and without skin (1.5 vs. 1.7 mg/kg DM). Game geese are also a source of energy and nutrients for the population in many parts of the world. For example, in South Africa hunted (during spring and autumn hunting) Egyptian geese (Alopochen aegyptiacus) are eaten. In the Eastern James Bay Cree of Quebec in Canada, goose (Branta canadensis) is traditionally eaten by local rural communities. A study by Geldenhuys et al. [24][27] in the pectoral muscles of the Egyptian goose showed that the Mn content did not differ significantly in terms of sex and season (winter vs. summer) and was, on average, 0.6 mg/kg dry basis. Canada’s goose raw breast muscles without skin contained 0.50 mg Mn/kg of tissue [25].

3. Manganese Content in Goose Meat after Thermal Treatment

Because people rarely eat raw meat, the mineral content after it has been subjected to various thermal treatments is important. Cooking meat is essential to achieve a tasty and safe product. Different ways of processing meat strengthen its taste and delicacy and improve its hygienic quality by inactivating pathogenic microorganisms. During the heat treatment, cooking losses due to mass transfer depend on not only the cooking conditions, such as cooking method, cooking surface, cooking temperature, and time but also the meat properties, such as water content, fat content, protein content, pH value of the raw meat, and the meat portion size [37][28]. The internal temperature endpoint, during boiling, significantly affects mineral content [38][29]
With skin
1.4
Grilled
 
Without skin
2.0
With skin
3.8
Oven convection Roasting  
Without skin 1.3
With skin 1.1
Pan fried  
Without skin 1.1
With skin 1.3
Meat breast, cooked Egyptian goose

Alopochen aegyptiacus		 6 n.d. n.d. 1.0 n.d. [33][32]
n.d.—no data.
Oz and Celik [35][24] researched the breast and leg muscles of Turkish geese slaughtered at 24 weeks. Their estimates of manganese content were made both in raw meat (Table 1) as well as that submitted to boiling (<100 °C), grilling (180 °C), pan-frying without fat or oil (180 °C), pan-frying with oil (180 °C), deep-fat frying (180 °C), oven roasting (200 °C), and automatic microwave cooking. These various thermal treatments were applied for 5 to 35 min, depending on the cooking method and type of muscle. The content of Mn in the breast and leg muscles of geese was changed under the influence of various types of thermal processing; however, these changes were not statistically significant. Goluch et al. [36][26] studied the effect of various methods of heat treatment (water bath cooking WBC, oven convection roasting OCR, grilling G, pan frying PF) on manganese content in White Kołuda® goose breast muscles with and without skin. They found significantly (p ≤ 0.05) the highest Mn content in skinless WBC muscles compared to PF muscles (2.7 vs. 1.1 mg/kg DM). However, in muscles with skin, significantly (p ≤ 0.01), the highest content of Mn was found in grilled muscles (3.8 mg/kg DM), compared to raw muscles and other methods of heat treatment (raw 1.5, WBC 1.4, ORC 1.1, PF 1.3 mg/kg DM). In terms of Mn, the interaction between the type of breast muscle (with or without skin) and the heat processing method was statistically significant (p ≤ 0.001). However, the authors did not note significant differences in this ingredient retention, regardless of the muscle type (with or without skin) and the applied heat treatment. Considering the wild goose, Geldenhuys et al. [33][32] found 1 mg Mn/kg of tissue in the breast muscles of Egyptian geese cooked in a preheated oven (160 °C). According to Sorbal et al. [39][30], boiling and frying lower the mineral content of meat, whereas baking, grilling, and microwaving increases it. Grilling and boiling pork and beef decrease the contents of Na, K, P, Ca, and Mg while increasing the contents of Fe and Zn [37][28]. Deep-frying, pan-frying, oven-cooking, and microwaving decrease the mineral content of cooked beefsteak, and microwaving causes the highest loss [41][33]. Purchas et al. [42][34] compared the mineral content in uncooked and cooked lean beef and reported a decrease in the contents of Na and K and an increase in Ca, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn in cooked meat in comparison with raw meat. These results indicate that divalent minerals are better retained during cooking than Na and K. The lower loss of divalent minerals during cooking is due to their greater association with protein. For manganese, Goluch et al. [36][26] observed no significant differences in the retention of this component, regardless of the type of goose muscle (skinless or with skin) and the applied heat treatment.

References

  1. Li, L.; Yang, X. The Essential Element Manganese, Oxidative Stress, and Metabolic Diseases: Links and Interactions. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2018, 2018, 7580707.
  2. Soldin, O.P.; Aschner, M. Effects of Manganese on Thyroid Hormone Homeostasis: Potential Links. Neurotoxicology 2007, 28, 951–956.
  3. Byrne, L.; Murphy, R.A. Relative Bioavailability of Trace Minerals in Production Animal Nutrition: A Review. Animals 2022, 12, 1981.
  4. Buchman, A. Manganese. In Modern Nutrition in Health and Disease; Ross, C., Cousins, R., Tucker, K., Ziegler, T., Eds.; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2014; pp. 238–244.
  5. Freeland-Graves, J.H.; Mousa, T.Y.; Kim, S. International Variability in Diet and Requirements of Manganese: Causes and Consequences. J. Trace Elem. Med. Biol. 2016, 38, 24–32.
  6. Peres, T.V.; Schettinger, M.R.C.; Chen, P.; Carvalho, F.; Avila, D.S.; Bowman, A.B.; Aschner, M. Manganese-Induced Neurotoxicity: A Review of Its Behavioral Consequences and Neuroprotective Strategies. BMC Pharmacol. Toxicol. 2016, 17, 57.
  7. Nam, K.-C.; Jo, C.; Lee, M. Meat Products and Consumption Culture in the East. Meat Sci. 2010, 86, 95–102.
  8. Baéza, E.; Guillier, L.; Petracci, M. Review: Production Factors Affecting Poultry Carcass and Meat Quality Attributes. Animal 2022, 16, 100331.
  9. Goluch-Koniuszy, Z.; Haraf, G. Geese for Slaughter and Wild Geese as a Source of Selected Mineral Elements in a Diet. J. Elem. 2018, 23, 1343–1360.
  10. Kalisińska, E. (Ed.) Mammals and Birds as Bioindicators of Trace Element Contaminations in Terrestrial Environments; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; ISBN 9783030001193.
  11. Kim, J.; Oh, J.-M. Tissue Distribution of Metals in White-Fronted Geese and Spot-Billed Ducks from Korea. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2013, 91, 18–22.
  12. Wideman, N.; O’bryan, C.A.; Crandall, P.G. Factors Affecting Poultry Meat Colour and Consumer Preferences—A Review. Worlds. Poult. Sci. J. 2016, 72, 353–366.
  13. Geldenhuys, G.; Hoffman, L.C.; Muller, N. The Fatty Acid, Amino Acid, and Mineral Composition of Egyptian Goose Meat as Affected by Season, Gender, and Portion. Poult. Sci. 2015, 94, 1075–1087.
  14. Marangoni, F.; Corsello, G.; Cricelli, C.; Ferrara, N.; Ghiselli, A.; Lucchin, L.; Poli, A. Role of Poultry Meat in a Balanced Diet Aimed at Maintaining Health and Wellbeing: An Italian Consensus Document. Food Nutr. Res. 2015, 59, 27606.
  15. Stangierski, J.; Lesnierowski, G. Nutritional and Health-Promoting Aspects of Poultry Meat and Its Processed Products. Worlds. Poult. Sci. J. 2015, 71, 71–82.
  16. Falandysz, J.; Centkowska, D.; Falandysz, J.; Lorenc-Biała, H. Trace Metals and Organochlorine Pesticides Content in Duck, Goose, and Rabbit Tissues. Bromatol. Chem. Toksykol. 1986, 19, 151–155.
  17. Falandysz, J.; Centkowska, D.; Lorenc-Biała, H. Levels of Certain Metals (Ca, Pb, Cu, Zn, Fe, Mn and As) in the Muscles, Liver and Kidneys of Slaughtered Domestic Animals and Game in Northern Poland, 1984. Rocz. Państowego Zakałdu Hig. 1987, 38, 347–355.
  18. Falandysz, J.; Lorenc-Biała, H. Metals in Muscle Tissue, Liver and Kidney of Slaughter Animals from the Northern Region of Poland. Bromatol. Chem. Toksykol. 1989, 22, 19–22.
  19. Falandysz, J.; Lorenc-Biała, H.; Centkowska, D. Metals in Muscles, Liver and Kidney of Slaughtered Animals Froma the Northern Region of Poland, 1985. Rocz. Panstw. Zakl. Hig. 1989, 40, 279–283.
  20. Falandysz, J. Manganese, Copper, Zinc, Iron, Cadmium, Mercury and Lead in Muscle Meat, Liver and Kidneys of Poultry, Rabbit and Sheep Slaughtered in the Northern Part of Poland, 1987. Food Addit. Contam. 1991, 8, 71–83.
  21. Falandysz, J.; Kotecka, W.; Kannan, K. Mercury, Lead, Cadmium, Manganese, Copper, Iron and Zinc Concentrations in Poultry, Rabbit and Sheep from the Northern Part of Poland. Sci. Total Environ. 1994, 141, 51–57.
  22. Kunachowicz, H.; Przygoda, B.; Nadolna, I.; Iwanow, K. Tables of Composition and Nutritional Value of Food; PZWL: Warszawa, Poland, 2020.
  23. Chen, S.S.; Lin, Y.W.; Kao, Y.M.; Shih, Y.C. Trace Elements and Heavy Metals in Poultry and Livestock Meat in Taiwan. Food Addit. Contam. Part B Surveill. 2013, 6, 231–236.
  24. Oz, F.; Celik, T. Proximate Composition, Color and Nutritional Profile of Raw and Cooked Goose Meat with Different Methods. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2015, 39, 2442–2454.
  25. USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference Release. Available online: https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/?query=goose,meat (accessed on 17 December 2022).
  26. Goluch, Z.; Barbara, K.; Haraf, G.; Wołoszyn, J.; Okruszek, A.; Wereńska, M. Impact of Various Types of Heat Processing on the Energy and Nutritional Values of Goose Breast Meat. Poult. Sci. 2021, 100, 101473.
  27. Agro Base. Available online: http://agro.icm.edu.pl/agro/search/article.action?cid=d5857527-6593-4747-9d30-0a3390556d94 (accessed on 17 October 2022).
  28. Gerber, N.; Scheeder, M.R.L.; Wenk, C. The Influence of Cooking and Fat Trimming on the Actual Nutrient Intake from Meat. Meat Sci. 2009, 81, 148–154.
  29. Tomović, V.M.; Vujadinović, D.D.; Grujić, R.P.; Jokanović, M.R.; Kevrešan, Ž.S.; Škaljac, S.B.; Šojić, B.V.; Tasić, T.A.; Ikonić, P.M.; Hromiš, N.M. Effect of Endpoint Internal Temperature on Mineral Contents of Boiled Pork Loin. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2015, 39, 1854–1858.
  30. Sobral, M.M.C.; Cunha, S.C.; Faria, M.A.; Ferreira, I.M. Domestic Cooking of Muscle Foods: Impact on Composition of Nutrients and Contaminants. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2018, 17, 309–333.
  31. Yong, W.; Amin, L.; Dongpo, C. Status and Prospects of Nutritional Cooking. Food Qual. Saf. 2019, 3, 137–143.
  32. Geldenhuys, G.; Hoffman, L.C.; Muller, N. Aspects of the Nutritional Value of Cooked Egyptian Goose (Alopochen Aegyptiacus) Meat Compared with Other Well-Known Fowl Species. Poult. Sci. 2013, 92, 3050–3059.
  33. Oz, F.; Aksu, M.İ.; Turan, M.A. The Effects of Different Cooking Methods on Some Quality Criteria and Mineral Composition of Beef Steaks. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2017, 41, e13008.
  34. Purchas, R.W.; Wilkinson, B.H.P.; Carruthers, F.; Jackson, F. A Comparison of the Nutrient Content of Uncooked and Cooked Lean from New Zealand Beef and Lamb. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2014, 35, 75–82.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Video Production Service
Feedback