Aproveitamento de subprodutos da indústria de carne suína: caracterização físico-química do queijo de porco

Headcheese is a meat sausage originated from Europe made from hog slaughter by-products. It is a much appreciated product in the South of Brazil which is increasingly established in the market, however it does not have official regulations yet. This study aimed to present the physicochemical characterization of headcheese in a western Santa Catarina industry supervised by Companhia Integrada de Desenvolvimento Agrícola de Santa Catarina and assess 10 different brands to find the relationship between chemical composition and texture profile analysis (TPA). Thus, the chemical composition, energy value, total nitrite, lipid oxidation and physical parameters (color and texture) were evaluated. The product exhibited great variability in moisture content, lipid and protein because the different formulations, processing and intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics of raw material. The utilization of offal provided higher cholesterol and iron levels, and the high content of collagen was accountable for the shear force responses (7.84 ± 1.68 N). The product showed higher amount of sodium, due to the use of additives, but calcium levels were compatible with other sausages. There was a predominance of polyunsaturated fatty acids and polyunsaturated fatty acids/saturated fatty acids ratio was more favorable than other sausage in the same category. Nitrite assured preservation effects and thus lower product levels of oxidation were observed. The high Water Activity and pH 6.5 showed that the product is susceptible to growth of pathogens and requires cooling for preservation. Its brownish occurred due to cooking and production of metmyoglobin. There was a strong positive correlation between collagen and attributes of TPA, especially for chewiness (r = 0.855). The use of Hierarchical Cluster Analysis and Principal Component Analysis were able to separate three groups based on the amount of collagen and texture attributes, especially hardness, gumminess and chewiness.

Uma API criptográfica para aplicações embarcadas

This document presents GEmSysC, an unified cryptographic API for embedded systems. Software layers implementing this API can be built over existing libraries, allowing embedded software to access cryptographic functions in a consistent way that does not depend on the underlying library. The API complies to good practices for API design and good practices for embedded software development and took its inspiration from other cryptographic libraries and standards. The main inspiration for creating GEmSysC was the CMSIS-RTOS standard, which defines an unified API for embedded software in an implementation-independent way, but targets operating systems instead of cryptographic functions. GEmSysC is made of a generic core and attachable modules, one for each cryptographic algorithm. This document contains the specification of the core of GEmSysC and three of its modules: AES, RSA and SHA-256. GEmSysC was built targeting embedded systems, but this does not restrict its use only in such systems – after all, embedded systems are just very limited computing devices. As a proof of concept, two implementations of GEmSysC were made. One of them was built over wolfSSL, which is an open source library for embedded systems. The other was built over OpenSSL, which is open source and a de facto standard. Unlike wolfSSL, OpenSSL does not specifically target embedded systems. The implementation built over wolfSSL was evaluated in a Cortex- M3 processor with no operating system while the implementation built over OpenSSL was evaluated on a personal computer with Windows 10 operating system. This document displays test results showing GEmSysC to be simpler than other libraries in some aspects. These results have shown that both implementations incur in little overhead in computation time compared to the cryptographic libraries themselves. The overhead of the implementation has been measured for each cryptographic algorithm and is between around 0% and 0.17% for the implementation over wolfSSL and between 0.03% and 1.40% for the one over OpenSSL. This document also presents the memory costs for each implementation.