Hyperbaric storage at variable room temperature – a new preservation methodology for minced meat compared to refrigeration

Fernandes, Pedro Alexandrino; Moreira, Silvia A.; Santos, Mauro D.; Duarte, Ricardo V.; Santos, Diana I.; Inácio, Rita S.; Alves, Susana P.; Bessa, Rui J. B.; Delgadillo, Ivonne; Saraiva, Jorge A.

doi:10.1002/jsfa.9540

Cited by 18 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, from a microbiological point of view, the present work reinforces and increases the data already published by Freitas et al () and Fernandes et al () that HS at a pressure level of only 75 MPa is capable not only of inhibiting microbial growth at variable RT but also of inactivating microorganisms over 60 days for these products, and looks a better alternative than RF to extend the microbial shelf life of raw meat.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Similar findings were reported by Fernandes et al () on three different batches of minced pork when stored under pressure at 100 MPa up to 24 h. In this study, HS could not only inhibit microbial growth but also inactivate microorganisms during storage, being verified by a pH increase (of ≈0.4) on HS samples during storage. Regarding lipid oxidation, although one of the three tested batches presented an increase of 25% on TBARS values in the last 12 h of HS, the two other batches in the study exhibited no statistically significant differences between HS and RF.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…For instance, Freitas et al () performed HS studies on sliced fresh top round beef and found that at variable RT, 50 MPa allowed a microbial effect similar to RF and 100 and 150 MPa led to a microbial inactivation (of TAM, ENT, YM, coliform and psychrophilic bacteria) over 12 h. Later, these authors extended the storage period up to 10 days at 50 MPa (variable RT) and reported results pointing to a possible microbial shelf life extension considering coliform bacteria, ENT and YM with the reduction of these microbial loads (although TAM and psychrophilic bacteria presented values above 6 log CFU g −1 ). Interesting results were also obtained by Fernandes et al () at 100 MPa and variable RT with raw minced pork meat, since microbial inactivation of TAM, ENT and YM was obtained over 24 h. On the other hand, in the study of Fernandes et al (), sliced cooked ham was stored under pressure at RT and exhibited microbial growth inhibition at 50 MPa/30 °C for TAM and LAB, while microbial inactivation was achieved at 100/25, 100/30, 100/37 and 150 MPa/30 °C for TAM and LAB (it should be highlighted that this study examined a cooked meat product and a storage period of only 8 h).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…Regarding lipid oxidation, although one of the three tested batches presented an increase of 25% on TBARS values in the last 12 h of HS, the two other batches in the study exhibited no statistically significant differences between HS and RF. Regarding fatty acid content and colour parameters, in general, HS had no effect on fatty acids probably due to the short storage time studied (10 days) and only affected the b* colour parameter (Fernandes et al , ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since 2012, an increasing number of studies regarding hyperbaric storage (HS) as a new food preservation methodology have been published (Bermejo‐Prada et al , ). Among them, fruit juices (Bermejo‐Prada & Otero, ; Lemos et al , ), ready‐to‐eat meals (Moreira et al , ), whey cheese (Duarte et al , ), sliced cooked ham (Fernandes et al , ), raw bovine meat (Freitas et al , ), raw pork meat (Fernandes et al , ), hake loins (Otero et al , ) were successfully stored under pressure at different storage conditions (pressure level/temperature) over different periods of time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Extended preservation of raw beef and pork meat by hyperbaric storage at room temperature

Santos

Delgadillo

Saraiva

2020

Int J of Food Sci Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Hyperbaric storage (HS) was evaluated as a new food preservation methodology at room temperature (RT) for beef and pork meat, both minced and in pieces, and compared to refrigeration (RF) storage. The meat samples were stored at 50, 75 and 100 MPa and variable RT up to 60 days. HS at 75 and 100 MPa could not only inhibit microbial growth but also inactivate microorganisms. Regarding physicochemical analyses, an overall equal to better pH maintenance in HS samples was achieved, and similar colour differences between HS and RF were observed. Generally, similarities in moisture content and drip loss between HS (mostly 75 and 100 MPa) and RF were detected (tendency for lower values in the former and higher values in the latter for the higher pressure level). Protein solubility revealed a decrease of sarcoplasmic protein values during storage with a pressure level dependency in some samples.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 74%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Extended preservation of raw beef and pork meat by hyperbaric storage at room temperature

Santos

Delgadillo

Saraiva

2020

Int J of Food Sci Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Improvement of the refrigerated preservation technology by hyperbaric storage for raw fresh meat

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: This work aimed to compare raw fresh meat (minced bovine and pork in pieces) preserved by hyperbaric storage (HS) at room-like temperature (75 MPa/25 ∘ C) and HS at cold temperatures (60 MPa/10 ∘ C) for up to 60 days, being both compared to refrigeration (RF, 4 ∘ C). RESULTS: HS conditions showed microbial load reductions over 60 days of storage, leading to a possible shelf-life extension when compared to samples at RF. Moreover, between both HS conditions similar results were found at the 60 th day, reaching in some cases values < 1.00 log CFU g −1 . Overall, pH presented an increase with storage for both HS conditions (e.g. over 30 days, from 5.51 ± 0.02 to 5.70 ± 0.01 and 5.85 ± 0.03, for 60 MPa/10 ∘ C and 75 MPa/25 ∘ C, respectively, on pork meat in pieces, PP) contrary to RF where pH values decreased (from 5.51 ± 0.02 to 5.33 ± 0.03). Regarding moisture content and drip loss, lower and higher values were found, respectively at 75 MPa/25 ∘ C, mainly in bovine minced meat. Overall, colour E* did not present considerable differences for both samples under all storage conditions. Lipid oxidation presented an increase tendency over time, with both HS conditions showing the higher values (1.795 ± 0.217 and 2.169 ± 0.117 for 60 MPa/10 ∘ C and 75 MPa/25 ∘ C, respectively, compared to 0.895 ± 0.084 g MDA g −1 in PP samples at the 30 th day).CONCLUSION: Although several advantages were found further studies should be carried out in order to optimize the HS conditions for raw fresh meat and assess the impact of this preservation methodology on other meat quality parameters as for instance sensorial aspects. a Not applicable.Different lowercase letters (a-d) and different uppercase letters (A-C) indicate significant differences (P < 0.05) between storage times at each tested storage condition and between storage conditions at each storage time, respectively.J Sci Food Agric 2020; 100: 969-977

show abstract

High‐pressure pretreatment in albacore (Thunnus alalunga) for reducing freeze‐driven weight losses with minimal quality changes

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND This research evaluates the application of high‐pressure processing (HPP) before freezing to reduce weight loss related to thawing and cooking of frozen albacore steaks (Thunnus alalunga) with a minimal impact on fish quality (color, texture, soluble protein, lipid oxidation). Albacore steaks were HPP pretreated (200, 250, and 300 MPa for 0, 2, 4 and 6 min), frozen (−20 °C, 5 m s−1), thawed (4 °C; 24 h), and then analyzed. RESULTS At lower pressures (200 MPa) there was a clear effect of pressurization time on most of the fish quality parameters tested (thawing loss, L* value, b* value, ΔE, adhesiveness, springiness, salt‐soluble protein content), whereas at higher pressures (300 MPa) similar changes took place independently of the pressurization time. High‐pressure processing had no impact on lipid oxidation . A pressure of 200 MPa applied for 6 min decreased thawing, cooking, and total weight losses (53.7%, 55.4%, and 51.0% lower than the frozen control, respectively) although it led to noticeable changes in color. A pressure of 200 MPa applied for 2 min decreased thawing, cooking, and total weight losses by 23.2%, 44.0% and 33.7% with respect to the frozen control, respectively, with only minor changes in color. CONCLUSION High‐pressure processing pretreatment could be a promising tool for reducing weight loss in frozen fish when HPP conditions are properly selected. A pressure of 200 MPa applied for 2 min could be a good compromise treatment, cutting thawing and cooking losses in albacore, and reducing HPP‐mediated color alterations and the related possible consumer rejection. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry

show abstract

Hyperbaric storage at variable room temperature – a new preservation methodology for minced meat compared to refrigeration

Cited by 18 publications

References 27 publications

Extended preservation of raw beef and pork meat by hyperbaric storage at room temperature

Extended preservation of raw beef and pork meat by hyperbaric storage at room temperature

Improvement of the refrigerated preservation technology by hyperbaric storage for raw fresh meat

High‐pressure pretreatment in albacore (Thunnus alalunga) for reducing freeze‐driven weight losses with minimal quality changes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About