essay/report/assignments/paper/research/summary代写
Review
Preservation technologies for fresh meatA review
G.H. Zhou
a,
, X.L. Xu
a
, Y. Liu
b
aLab of Meat Processing and Quality Control, EDU, Nanjing Agricultural University, P. R. China bCollege of Food Science and Technology, Shanghai Ocean University, P. R. China
article info abstract
Article history: Received 3 February 2010 Received in revised form 19 April 2010 Accepted 23 April 2010
Keywords: Fresh meat Preservation technologies Superchilling HHP Natural biopreservation Packaging
Fresh meat is a highly perishable product due to its biological composition. Many interrelated factors
influence the shelf life and freshness of meat such as holding temperature, atmospheric oxygen (O 2 ),
endogenous enzymes, moisture, light and most importantly, micro-organisms. With the increased demand
for high quality, convenience, safety, fresh appearance and an extended shelf life in fresh meat products,
alternative non-thermal preservation technologies such as high hydrostatic pressure, superchilling, natural
biopreservatives and active packaging have been proposed and investigated. Whilst some of these
technologies are efficient at inactivating the micro-organisms most commonly related to food-borne
diseases, they are not effective against spores. To increase their efficacy against vegetative cells, a
combination of several preservation technologies under the so-called hurdle concept has also been
investigated. The objective of this review is to describe current methods and developing technologies for
preserving fresh meat. The benefits of some new technologies and their industrial limitations is presented
and discussed.
2010 The American Meat Science Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Contents
1. Introduction…………………………………………………….. 120
2. Refrigeration…………………………………………………….. 120
2.1. Chilling……………………………………………………. 120
2.2. Freezing …………………………………………………… 120
2.3. Superchilling…………………………………………………. 120
2.3.1. Advantage and application ……………………………………….. 121
2.3.2. Challenges in superchilling ……………………………………….. 121
3. Ionising radiation ………………………………………………….. 121
4. Chemical preservatives and biopreservation……………………………………….. 122
4.1. Chemical preservatives …………………………………………….. 122
4.2. Biopreservation and natural antimicrobials…………………………………….. 122
5. High hydrostatic pressure (HHP)……………………………………………. 122
6. Packaging……………………………………………………… 123
6.1. Vacuum packaging (VP)…………………………………………….. 123
6.2. Modified atmosphere packaging (MAP)………………………………………. 123
6.3. Active packaging (AP)……………………………………………… 124
6.3.1. Antimicrobial packaging…………………………………………. 124
7. Hurdle technology (HT) ……………………………………………….. 126
8. Conclusion……………………………………………………… 126
References ……………………………………………………….. 127
Meat Science 86 (2010) 119 128
Corresponding author. Lab of Meat Processing and Quality Control, EDU, Nanjing Agricultural University, P. R. China.
E-mail address:ghzhou@njau.edu.cn(G.H. Zhou).
0309-1740/$see front matter 2010 The American Meat Science Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.04.
Contents lists available atScienceDirect
Meat Science
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/meatsci
1. Introduction
Meat is defined as theflesh of animals used as food. The termfresh
meatincludes meat from recently processed animals as well as
vacuum-packed meat or meat packed in controlled-atmospheric
gases, which has not undergone any treatment other than chilling
to ensure preservation. The diverse nutrient composition of meat
makes it an ideal environment for the growth and propagation of
meat spoilage micro-organisms and common food-borne pathogens.
It is therefore essential that adequate preservation technologies are
applied to maintain its safety and quality (Aymerich, Picouet, &
Monfort, 2008). The processes used in meat preservation are
principally concerned with inhibiting microbial spoilage, although
other methods of preservation are sought to minimise other
deteriorative changes such as colour and oxidative changes.
A number of interrelated factors influence the shelf life and
keeping quality of meat, specifically holding temperature, atmospher-
ic oxygen (O 2 ), endogenous enzymes, moisture (dehydration), light
and, most importantly, micro-organisms. All of these factors, either
alone or in combination, can result in detrimental changes in the
colour (Faustmann & Cassens, 1990), odour, texture andflavour of
meat. Although deterioration of meat can occur in the absence of
micro-organisms (e.g., proteolysis, lipolysis and oxidation), microbial
growth is by far the most important factor in relation to the keeping
quality of fresh meat (Lambert, Smith, & Dodds, 1991). Traditionally,
methods of meat preservation may be grouped into three broad
categories based on control by temperature, by moisture and, more
directly, by inhibitory processes (bactericidal and bacteriostatic, such
as ionising radiation, packaging, etc.), although a particular method of
preservation may involve several antimicrobial principles. Each
control step may be regarded as ahurdleagainst microbial
proliferation, and combinations of processes (so-called hurdle
technology (HT)) can be devised to achieve particular objectives in
terms of both microbial and organoleptic quality (Lawrie & Ledward,
2006 ).
The most investigated new preservation technologies for fresh
meat are non-thermal inactivation technologies such as high
hydrostatic pressure (HHP), new packaging systems such as modified
atmosphere packaging (MAP) and active packaging (AP), natural
antimicrobial compounds and biopreservation. All these alternative
technologies attempt to be mild, energy saving, environmentally
friendly and guarantee natural appearance while eliminating patho-
gens and spoilage micro-organisms. The aim of this article is to review
these technologies for the preservation of fresh meat.
2. Refrigeration
Temperatures below or above the optimum range for microbial
growth will have a preventative action on the latter. For fresh meat,
refrigeration, including storage above or below the freezing point, has
been the traditional preservation method. Superchilling technology,
which stores meat just above the freezing point, has been used with
success (Nowlan, Dyer, & Keith, 1974; Beaufort, Cardinal, Le-Bail, &
Midelet-Bourdin, 2009).
2.1. Chilling
Recognition by early civilizations of the preservative effects of cool
temperature storage of perishable products such as meat led to
storage of such products in natural caves where temperatures were
relatively low throughout the year. The principles of artificial ice
formation and of mechanical refrigeration date from about 1750 (see
Lawrie & Ledward, 2006) and commercial-scale operations based on
mechanical refrigeration were in use 100 years later.
Chilling is critical for meat hygiene, safety, shelf life, appearance
and eating quality. Chilling in air reduces carcass surface temperature
and enhances carcass drying; both of which reduce the growth of
bacteria (Ockerman & Basu, 2004). An increase in air velocity and/or a
decrease in temperature (both controllable) decrease chilling time. A
limiting factor, however, is the difficulty in removing heat quickly
from the deeper tissue of carcasses.
Natural-convection air chilling, where refrigerant is pumped
through cooling tubes, is slow and largely uncontrollable, whereas
forced-convection air chilling, coupled with fans for air movement is
much more efficient. Rapid carcass chilling increases product yield
due to lower evaporation from the surface, while rapid drying of the
carcass surface helps to reduce bacterial growth. Ultra-rapid chilling
of pre-rigour meat may, on the other hand, lead to cold-shortening
and toughening. Spray-chilling can enhance the oxygenation of
surface myoglobin without increasing metmyoglobin, thus maintain-
ing a bright appearance and eliminating weight loss (Feldhusen,
Kirschner, Koch, Giese, & Wenzel, 1995).
2.2. Freezing
In Britain, large-scale preservation of meat by freezing commenced
about 1880, when thefirst shipments of frozen beef and mutton
arrived from Australia (Critchell & Raymond, 1969; Arthur, 2006). At
that time, there was a surplus of meat animals in the southern
hemisphere, especially in New Zealand and Australia, and freezing
offered a means of preserving meat during the long voyages involved
between the two areas (Critchell & Raymond, 1969). The advantages
of temperatures below the freezing point were in prolonging the
useful storage life of meat and in discouraging microbial and chemical
changes (Lawrie & Ledward, 2006).
Fast freezing produces minute intracellular ice crystals and thus
diminishes drip on thawing. The rate of freezing is dependent not only
on the bulk of the meat and its thermal properties (e.g., specific heat
and thermal conductivity), but also on the temperature of the
refrigerating environment, on the method of applying the refrigera-
tion and, with smaller cuts of meat, on the nature of the wrapping
material used.
A temperature of55 C has been suggested as ideal storage
conditions for frozen meat to completely prevent quality changes
(Hansen et al., 2004). At these low temperatures, enzymic reactions,
oxidative rancidity and ice recrystallisation are likely to be minimal
and thus few deteriorative changes will occur during storage.
Cryogenic freezing offers faster freezing times compared with
conventional air freezing because of the large temperature differences
between the cryogen and the meat product and the high rate of
surface heat transfer resulting from the boiling of the cryogen.
Cryogenic freezing requires no mechanical refrigeration equipment;
simply a cryogen tank and suitable spray equipment. However, there
may be some distortion of the shape of the product caused by the
cryogenic process that might impact on the commercial application.
Furthermore, the cost of cryogenic liquid is relatively high and
therefore may limit its commercial application. (Lovatt, James, James,
Pham, & Jeremiah, 2004).
2.3. Superchilling
The process of superchilling was described as early as 1920 by Le
Danois, even though he did not actually use the termssuperchilling,
deep-chillingorpartial ice formation. The termssuperchillingand
partial freezingare used to describe a process where a minor part of
the product’s water content is frozen (Magnussen et al., 2008). During
superchilling, the temperature of the product is lowered, often 12 C,
below the initial freezing point of the product. After initial surface
freezing, the ice distribution equilibrates and the product obtains a
uniform temperature at which it is maintained during storage and
distribution (Magnussen et al., 2008). This has been effectively used
for seafood (Olafsdottir, Lauzon, Martinsdottir, Oehlenschlager, &
Kristbergsson, 2006; Beaufort et al., 2009) and there is now increasing
interest in this process for extension of chilled storage life of meat
(Schubring, 2009).
2.3.1. Advantage and application
At superchilling temperatures, most microbial activity is inhibited
or terminated. Chemical and physical changes may progress and, in
some cases, even accelerate. Superchilling, as a commercial practice,
can reduce the use of freezing/thawing for production buffers and
thereby reduce labour, energy costs and product weight losses. The ice
present in superchilled products protects the meat from temperature
rises in poor cold chains; however, some increase in product drip loss
may occur during storage (Magnussen et al., 2008).
Superordeepchilling has been commonly used in the USA,
although the product is seldom referred to assuper-chilledsince,
legally, in the USA poultry meat kept above3.3 C (26 F) can be
marketed asfresh(US Poultry Products Inspection Regulations
9CFR381). The process involves water chilling of carcasses and then
putting them through an air freezer operating at15 C for
approximately 30 min. After packaging, they are again placed in an
air freezer to achieve the required meat temperature. The carcasses
are then stored and distributed at1to2 C.
The main reason for implementing this technology is its ability to
prolong shelf life of meat for at least 1.44 times the life of traditional
meat-chilling methods (Magnussen et al., 2008). Ice-forming and
recrystallisation can cause microstructural changes to food tissue
during freezing, resulting in cell dehydration, drip loss and tissue
shrinkage during thawing. Food characteristics such as pH, ionic
strength, concentration of dissolved gases, viscosity, oxidation-
reduction potential and surface tension may also be altered, leading
to changes in enzymic activity and protein denaturation (Cheftel,
Levy, & Dumay, 2000).
Reports on superchilling have mainly involvedfish (Beaufort et al.,
2009 ) and poultry (Bogh-Sorensen, 1976).Gallart-Jornet et al. (2007)
evaluated the effect of superchilled storage compared with ice and
frozen storage on the quality of raw Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar)
fillets and found superchilled storage was beneficial for the preser-
vation of freshness of the raw material before processing.Duun,
Hemmingsen, Haugland, & Rustad (2008)also found the storage time
of vacuum-packed salmonfillets could be doubled by superchilled
storage at1.4 C and3.6 C compared to ice chilled storage. Drip
loss was not a major problem in superchilled salmon. Textural
hardness was significantly higher in superchilled salmonfillets stored
at3.6 C compared to those stored at1.4 C, ice chilled and frozen
(Morkore, Hansen, Unander, & Einen, 2002; Hultmann, Rora, Steins-
land, Skara, & Rustad, 2004). Cathepsins B and B+L remained active
at the selected storage temperatures, which may therefore lead to
softening during subsequent chilled storage.
Duun et al. (2008)found superchilling of pork roasts at2.0C
improved the shelf life significantly compared with traditional
chilling at +3.
C. The superchilled roasts maintained good sensory
quality and low microbiological counts during the whole storage
period (16 weeks), while the shelf life of chilled samples was just
14 days. Sensory tests indicated that the quality of the superchilled
roasts was not reduced by high numbers of psychrotrophic bacteria.
The drip loss in superchilled samples was low and showed less
variation than in the chilled references and the temperature-abused
samples. The temperature-abused and chilled samples had lower
liquid losses, measured by centrifugation, than the superchilled
samples (Duun et al., 2008).
2.3.2. Challenges in superchilling
Calculating the required superchilling times and estimating the
temperature distributions in a chilling and freezing process is a
challenging exercise. It is also difficult to define the degree of
superchilling required to sufficiently improve shelf life and fulfil the
demands of the process to achieve the quality attributes desired
(Magnussen et al., 2008).
The media used to achieve superchilling will affect the possibilities
for implementing it in an industrial process. A change from
traditional technologiessuch as chilling, freezing, thawing to the
more complex superchilling technology is difficult. Superchilling
demands more accurate information on product variation andflow.
Special care needs to be taken prior to, and after, the superchilling
process itself. Most equipment producers today do not have the
required energy and thermodynamic competence to design and
control superchilling processes (Magnussen et al., 2008).
Clearly, industry will need support to develop basic data for graphs
and software, of chilling times, chilling temperatures, air-flow and
refrigeration loads. This also includes principles for control regulate
monitor (CRM) systems for the superchilling process and refrigera-
tion system (Magnussen et al., 2008).
3. Ionising radiation
Ionising radiation has been a method of direct microbial inhibition
for preserving meat since around 1940 (seeLawrie & Ledward, 2006).
In 1980, participating bodies (including the Food and Agricultural
Organization (FAO) and World Health Organization (WHO)) pro-
posed that irradiation with a dose less than 10 kGy (1 Mrad) should be
accepted as a process for preserving all major categories of food
(WHO, 1981). In the UK,The Food (Control of Irradiation) Regulations
(1990)allows certain classes of food may be irradiated up to a
maximum dosage (e.g., 7 kGy for poultry) and underThe Food
Labelling (Amendment)(Irradiated Food) Regulations (1990)all
irradiated foods are required to have a label indicating that they
have received such treatment. Irradiation technology was promoted
by the FAO in the Codex Alimentarius in 2003 and has been well
accepted in 50 countries, especially in the USA, Egypt, China and
across Latin America (Aymerich et al., 2008).
The radionuclides approved for food irradiation include^137 Cs and
60
Co. Radioactive cobalt (
60
Co) decays to non-radioactive nickel by
emitting high-energy particles and X-rays. The X-rays kill rapidly
growing cells (microbes) but do not leave the product radioactive.
Because it is highly penetrating, it can be used to treat packaged food
(Brewer, 2009).
The advantages of ionising radiation for food preservation include
its highly efficient inactivation of bacteria, the fact that the product is
essentially chemically unaltered and the appreciable thickness of
material, which can be treated after packing in containers (Lawrie &
Ledward, 2006). A maximum dosage of 10 kGy represents a low
amount of energy (equivalent to that needed to raise the temperature
of 1 g water 2.4 C), which is why the technology is considered non-
thermal, thus preserving the freshness and nutritional quality of the
meat and meat products when compared with thermal methods
(Aymerich et al., 2008).
Colour changes in irradiated fresh meat occur because of the
inherent susceptibility of the myoglobin molecule to energy input
and alterations in the chemical environment; haem iron being
particularly susceptible.Brewer (2004)summarised the effects of
ionising radiation on meat colour, and concluded that mainte-
nance of ideal meat colour during the process of irradiation could
be enhanced by various combinations of pre-slaughter feeding of
antioxidants to livestock, condition of the meat prior to irradiation
(pH, oxymyoglobin vs. metmyoglobin), addition of antioxidants
directly to the product, gas atmosphere (MAP) or lack thereof, pack-
aging and temperature control (Brewer, 2004). Radiation treat-
ment resulted in essentially no loss of thiamine (one of the least
stable vitamins) (Graham, Stevenson, & Stewart, 1998), therefore
suggesting that such radiation has no detrimental effects on these
nutrients.
4. Chemical preservatives and biopreservation
4.1. Chemical preservatives
Carbon dioxide and ozone have been used to discourage the
growth of surface micro-organisms on beef carcasses during pro-
longed storage at chill temperatures. Although ozone leaves no toxic
residues in meat, its use in a production environment can be
dangerous for personnel. Moreover, it accelerates the oxidation of
fat and is more effective against air-borne micro-organisms than
against those on meat (Lawrie & Ledward, 2006).
Various micro-organisms produce organic acids and alcohols by
anaerobic fermentation of food substrates and these, by inhibiting
other organisms that are concomitantly present and which could spoil
the food or make it toxic, can act in its preservation. Lactic acid, for
example, is a frequently effective inhibitory agent used in fresh meat
preservation; however, other organic acids have also been found to be
responsible for discolouration and production of pungent odours
(Teotia, 1974).
Salts such as sodium lactate have been used in the meat industry
because of their ability to increaseflavour, prolong shelf life, and
improve the microbiological safety of products (Diez, Santos, Jaime, &
Rovira, 2009). The antimicrobial effects of lactates are due to their
ability to lower water activity and the direct inhibitory effect of the
lactate ion (Houtsma, Wit, & Rombouts, 1993; Koos & Jansener, 1995).
Several researchers have successfully extended the shelf life of fresh
meat products (Shelef, Mohammed, Wei, & Webber, 1997; Vasavada,
Carpenter, Cornforth, & Ghorpade, 2003) by adding sodium lactate.
Nadeem et al. (2003)extended freshly slaughtered sheep and goat
carcasses stored at 57 C for 3 and 2 days, respectively, after spraying
the carcasses with solutionBcontaining potassium sorbate, sodium
acetate, sodium citrate, sodium lactate each at 2.5% and sodium
chloride at 5%, when compared with solutionA(without potassium
sorbate) and control.
4.2. Biopreservation and natural antimicrobials
Natural compounds, such as essential oils, chitosan, nisin and
lysozyme, have been investigated to replace chemical preservatives
and to obtaingreen labelproducts. Storage life is extended and safety
is increased by using natural or controlled microflora, of which lactic
acid bacteria (LAB) and their antimicrobial products such as lactic acid
and bacteriocins have been studied extensively. Bacteriocins are a
heterogeneous group of antibacterial proteins that vary in spectrum of
activity, mode of action, molecular weight, genetic origin and
biochemical properties (Stiles & Hastings, 1991).
Various spices and essential oils have preservative properties and
have been used to extend the storage life of meat products. These
include eugenol in cloves and allyl isothiocyanate in mustard seed.
Roller et al. (2002) and Sagoo, Board and Roller (2002)reviewed the
antifungal and antimicrobial properties of the polysaccharide chit-
osan. Its efficacy, especially in combination with other antimicrobial
agents, warrants further investigation.
Nisin is the only commercial bacteriocin and has been used to
decontaminate artificially contaminated pieces of raw pork (Murray &
Richard, 1997) and in combination with 2% of sodium chloride as an
anti-listerial agent in minced raw buffalo meat (Pawar, Malik,
Bhilegaonkar, & Barbuddhe, 2000). Bacteriocins produced by lactic
acid bacteria are listed inTable 1.
Recently, pentocin 31-1, which was produced byLactobacillus
pentosus31-1 and isolated from the traditional Chinese fermented
Xuanwei ham, was studied as a biopreservative in storage of tray-
packaged chilled pork. Results showed that pentocin 31-1 could
substantially inhibit the accumulation of volatile basic nitrogen (VBN)
and generally suppress the growth of microflora, especiallyListeria
andPseudomonas, during chilled pork storage (Jinlan, Guorong,
Pinglan, & Yan, 2010).
5. High hydrostatic pressure (HHP)
Derived from material sciences (ceramics, superalloys, artificial
diamonds, etc.), high-pressure technology (1001000 MPa, i.e., 1000
10 000 bar) is of increasing interest to biological and food systems
(Cheftel & Culioli, 1997). High hydrostatic pressure (HHP), a non-
thermal technology, is of primary interest because it can inactivate
product-spoiling micro-organisms and enzymes at low temperatures
without changing the sensory or nutritional characteristics of the
product. Pressure processing is usually carried out in a steel cylinder
containing a liquid pressure-transmitting medium such as water, with
the sample being protected from direct contact by using sealed
flexible packaging. Maintaining the sample under pressure for an
extended period of time does not require any additional energy apart
from that required to maintain the chosen temperature (Cheftel &
Culioli, 1997).
HHP renders food more stable due to its ability to reduce the
number of spoilage and pathogenic micro-organisms, and to inacti-
vate certain food enzymes (Patterson, 2005). HHP is a powerful tool to
control risks associated withSalmonellaspp.andListeria monocyto-
genesin raw or marinated meats (Hugas, Garriga, & Monfort, 2002).
The effectiveness of HHP for microbial control depends on factors such
as the process parameters, pressure level, temperature and exposure
time, as well as by intrinsic factors of the food itself, such as pH, strain
and growth stage of micro-organisms, and food matrix (Hugas et al.,
2002; Garriga, Grebol, Aymerich, Monfort, & Hugas, 2004).
HHP, combined with moderate temperature, has been shown to
result in changes in the mechanical properties leading to improved
tenderness of meat (Cheftel & Culioli, 1997; Ma & Ledward, 2004;
Sikes, Tornberg, & Tume, 2010). However, HHP even at low
temperatures may have an undesirable effect on fresh meat colour.
Table 1
Bacteriocins produced by lactic acid bacteria (Adapted fromStiles & Hastings, 1991;
Castellano, Belfiore, Fadda, & Vignolo, 2008).
Producer
organism
Bacteriocin Producer organism Bacteriocin
L. Lactis subsp.
lactis
Nisin Lb. curvatusLTH1174 Curvacin A
L. LactisBB24 Nisin Lb. curvatusCRL705 Lactocin 705
L. LactisWNC Nisin Z Lb. curvatusFS47 Curvaticin FS
L. lactis subsp.
lactis
Lacticin 481 Lb. curvatusL442 Curvacin L
L. lactis subsp.
cremoris
Diplococcin Lb. plantarumCTC305 Plantaricin A
L. lactis subsp.
lactis
Lactostrepcins Lc. gelidumUAL187 Leucocin A
L. lactis subsp.
diacetilactis
Bacteriocin
550
Lc. mesenteroides
TA33a
Leucocin A
L. fermenti 46 ND Lc. carnosumTA11a Leucocin A
L. helveticus27 Lactocin 27 P. acidilacticiL50 Pediocin L
L. helveticus Helveticin J P. pentosaceousZ102 Pediocin PA-
L. acidophilus Lactacin B C. piscicolaLV17B Carnobacteriocin B
L. acidophilus Lactacin F C. piscicolaV1 Piscicocin vla
L. plantarum Plantaricin A C. piscicolaLV17A Carnobacteriocin A
L. sakeiLb 706 Sakacin A C. piscicolaJG126 Piscicolin 126
L. sakeiI151 Sakacin P C. piscicolaKLV17B Carnobacteriocin B1/B
L. sakei
LTH673, 674
Sakacin K, P C. divergens 750 Divergicin 750
L. sakeiCTC494 Sakacin K C. divergensLV13 Divergicin A
L. sakeiL 45 Lactocin S E. faeciumCTC492 Enterocin B
L. sakeiMN Bavaricin MN E. faeciumCTC492 Enterocin A
Lb. brevisSB27 Brevicin 27 E. casseliflavus
IM416K
Enterocin 416K
L. casei Caseicin 80 P. acidilacticiiPAC1.0 Pediocin PA
P. acidilacticH Pediocin AcH P. pentosaceusFBB61 Pediocin A
Colour of fresh beef (Carlez, Veciana-Nogues, & Cheftel, 1995; Jung,
Ghoul & de Lamballerie-Anton, 2003) changes with pressure as a
result of denaturation of globin in myoglobin and haem displace-
ment or release, and ferrous oxidation (Mor-Mur & Yuste, 2003).
Denaturation of other proteins such as myosin and actin results in a
greater opacity and therefore minimises the red appearance. In
contrast to beef and pork, poultry muscles are not drastically
discoloured because of their lower myoglobin content (Hansen,
Trinderup, Hviid, Darre, & Skibsted, 2003). Lipid stability of pressure-
treated foods of animal origin has been little investigated, and results
are contradictory (Orlien, Hansen, & Skibsted, 2000; Wiggers,
Kroger-Ohlson, & Skibsted, 2004; Tume, Sikes, & Smith, 2010).
Rivas-Caedo, Fernndez-Garca and Nuez (2009)used high
pressure (400 MPa, 10 min at 12 C) to treat minced beef and
chicken breast, which was packaged with or without aluminium foil
in a multilayer polymeric bag. They found pressurisation produced
significant changes in the levels of some volatile compounds
presumably originating from microbial activity and the plastic
material (Rivas-Caedo et al., 2009). In the USA, several meat
companies have made this methodology available (e.g., Hormel
Foods and Purdue Farms) for the extension of shelf life of processed,
sliced meats (Hugas et al., 2002).
Although the initial investment is high, the processing cost has
been estimated at about 14 eurocent per kilogram of product when
treated at 600 MPa, including investment and operation costs, and the
technology is well accepted in Europe as an alternative technology
(Aymerich et al., 2008).Table 2lists some applications of HHP in meat
products.
6. Packaging
Packaging protects products against deteriorative effects, which
may include discolouration, off-flavour and off-odour development,
nutrient loss, texture changes, pathogenicity and other measurable
factors. Variables that influence shelf life properties of packaged fresh
meat are product type, gas mixture, package and headspace,
packaging equipment, storage temperature and additives.
Fresh meat packaging is only minimally permeable to moisture
and so surface desiccation is prevented, while gas permeability varies
with the particularfilm type used. Packaging options for raw chilled
meat are air-permeable packaging, low O 2 vacuum, low O 2 MAP with
anoxic gases and high O 2 MAP. While air-permeable packaging is not
MAP, use of overwrapped packaging materials within master pack or
tray-in-sleeve systems allows for this packaging option to be a
component of MAP (McMillin, Huang, Ho, & Smith, 1999).
6.1. Vacuum packaging (VP)
Vacuum packaging materials for primal cuts are usually three
layered co-extrusions of ethyl vinyl acetate/polyvinylidene chloride/
ethyl vinyl acetate, which generally have an O 2 permeability of less
than 15.5 ml m^2 (24 h)^1 at 1 atmosphere as a result of the
polyvinylidene chloride layer (Jenkins & Harrington, 1991). The lack
of O 2 in packages may minimise the oxidative deteriorative reactions,
and reduce aerobic bacteria growth, which usually causes pigments to
be in the deoxymyoglobin state. Low O 2 vacuum packages for retail
meat cuts are usually vacuum skin packaging (VSP) systems for
placing the retail cut in a barrier styrene or polypropylene tray and
vacuum sealing barrierfilms that are heat shrunk to conform to the
shape of the product (Belcher, 2006). VSP packaging equipment
removes atmospheric air orflushes the air from the package with
gaseous mixtures such as N 2 ,CO 2 or mixtures of N 2 and CO 2 before
heat sealing thefilm layers. The common construction for the top and
bottom package webs is nylon barrier polymer of polyvinylidene
chloride or ethylene vinyl alcohol, tie layer and ionomer. Nylon
provides bulk, toughness and low melting point, while the barrier
layer prevents vapour permeation and the ionomer gives necessary
seal characteristics (Jenkins & Harrington, 1991). A variation of VSP is
for the liddingfilm to have outer barrier and inner air-permeable
layers so that before retail display, the outer barrierfilm layer is
peeled away from the permeable layer so that air can then contact the
meat product and result in a bloomed colour (Belcher, 2006;
Jeyamkondan, Jayas, & Holley, 2000; Renerre, 1987).
6.2. Modified atmosphere packaging (MAP)
MAP for meat requires a barrier of either of moisture and gas
permeation through packaging materials to maintain a constant
package environment during storage. For any type of MAP, it is
necessary to remove or change the normal composition of atmo-
spheric air, and encompass both aerobic and anaerobic types of
packaging for meat. The major gases in dry air by volume at sea level
are N 2 (78%), O 2 (20.99%), argon (0.94%) and CO 2 (0.03%), but the
percentages vary when calculated by weight (McMillin, 2008).
Low O 2 MAP has been readily available, but lesser used even
though VP is the most cost-effective packaging (McMillin, 2008).
Shrinkablefilm development for use on horizontal form-fill-seal
equipment eliminates excessivefilm use, and wrinkles (Eilert, 2005).
Low O 2 MAP may be used as a barrier package with an anoxic
atmosphere of N 2 and CO 2 .N 2 is an inert gas that is not reactive with
meat pigments or absorbed by the meat; therefore, it maintains
integrity of the package by its presence in the headspace. However,
Table 2 Application of HHP in meat products (adapted fromAymerich et al (2008).
Target Product Initial counts Reduction Processa Reference
log (CFU/g) log (CFU/g)
FBPb Meat homogenate 6 7 Total inactivation after treatment 400 MPa, 10 min, 25 C Shigehisa, Ohmori, Saito,
Taji and Hayashi (1991)
C. freundii Minced beef muscle 7 N5 after treatment 300 MPa 10 min, 20 C Carlez, Rosec, Richard
P.fluorescens 200 MPa 20 min, 20 C and Cheftel (1993)
L. innocua 400 MPa 20 min, 20 C
Total microflora Minced beef muscle 6.8 N4 after 10 days (3 C) 450 MPa, 20 min, 20 C Carlez, Rosec, Richard
and Cheftel (1994)
E. coliO157:H Raw minced meat 5.9 5 after treatment 700 MPa, 1 min, 15 C Gola et al. (2000)
Aerobic total count Marinated beef loin 6.5 N4.5 after 120 days (4 C) 600 MPa, 6 min, 31 C Garriga, Aymerich, Costa,
Monfort and Hugas (2002)
Toxoplasma gondiicysts Ground pork meat Viable tissue cysts Non-viable 300 MPa Lindsay, Collins, Holliman,
Flick and Dubey (2006)
Salmonella enteritidisstrains Chicken breastfillets 7 4.8 400 MPa, 15 min, 12 C Morales, Calzada, Rodriguez,
de Paz and Nunez (2009)
aInitial temperatures are reported.bEscherichia. coli, Campylobacter jejuni, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Salmonella typhimurium, Yersinia enterocolitica.
CO 2 reacts with meat, changing the properties as noted in the next
section. Barrier trays arefilled with product and then sealed with
barrier liddingfilm afterflushing with the desired gas mixture. The
barrier tray is usually preformed off-site, but may be made on form-
fill-seal packaging equipment where the web or basefilm is heated
and drawn into the tray mould by a vacuum so product can be placed
into the formedfilm cavity before heat sealing of barrierfilm to the
top edges of the formed tray (Jenkins & Harrington, 1991). This
process leads to the meat pigment being in the deoxymyoglobin state,
which appears as a purple colour and may be unfamiliar to many
consumers (Lynch, Kastner, & Kropf, 1986).
Non-barrier overwrapped packages of meat may be enclosed in a
barrier pouch appropriately sized for each individual overwrapped
tray package (tray-in-sleeve configuration), or in a larger barrierfilm
master pack that contains multiple packages in the anoxic gas
(McMillin et al., 1999). The meat pigments become oxygenated
when the overwrapped permeablefilm package is removed from the
master pack for retail display (Belcher, 2006). Another variation is the
use of anoxic MAP that has an inner air-permeablefilm and outer
barrierfilm sealed to the barrier tray or bottom web containing the
meat. When the outerfilm is peeled before display, the meat is
exposed to O 2 in the atmospheric air and subsequently blooms. Where
air-permeablefilms may not allow sufficient O 2 passage for adequate
oxymyoglobin formation, microperforated shrinkfilms with addi-
tional holes or perforations have been manufactured and used to
promote faster meat blooming after removal of barrierfilm or removal
of overwrapped trays from master packs (Beggan, Allen, & Butler,
2005 ).
Carbon monoxide (CO) has also been used in low O 2 retail
packaging systems. Meat may be exposed to CO before packaging or
CO may also be used to gasflush VSP packages before sealing, but the
small amounts of CO are still sufficient to impart a desired red meat
colour (Belcher, 2006; Eilert, 2005; Sebranek, Hunt, Cornforth &
Brewer, 2006). The majority of MAP for fresh meat has been with a
high O 2 environment (around 80% O 2 ) that allows sufficient shelf life
for processors and retailers with controlled distribution systems
(Eilert, 2005).
6.3. Active packaging (AP)
AP is the incorporation of specific compounds into packaging
systems that interact with the contents or environment to maintain or
extend product quality and shelf life, while intelligent or smart
packaging provides for sensing of the food properties or package
environment to inform the processor, retailer and/or consumer of the
status of the environment or food (Kerry, O’Grady & Hogan, 2006).
In AP, the primary active technologies mostly enhance the
protection or shelf life of the product in response to interactions of
the product, package and environment, although it may perform other
functions. AP may also involve the deliberate altering of the package
environment at a specified time or condition through passive or active
means, but without the inputs and continuous monitoring needed
with controlled atmosphere packaging (CAP) (Yanyun, Wells, &
McMillin, 1994). Intelligent packaging systems have components that
sense the environment and process the information and then allow
action to protect the product by conducting communication functions
(Yam, Takhistov, & Miltz, 2005).
AP functions and technologies include moisture control, O 2 –
permeablefilms, O 2 scavengers or absorbers, O 2 generators, CO 2
controllers, odour controllers,flavour enhancement, ethylene remov-
al, antimicrobial agents and microwave susceptors (Brody, Bugusu,
Han, Koelsch Sand, & McHugh, 2008; Brody, 2009) in addition to
indicators of specific compounds (Vermeiren, Devlieghere, Beest,
Kruijf, & Debevere, 1999) and temperature control packaging.
6.3.1. Antimicrobial packaging
One promising type of active packaging is the incorporation of
antimicrobial substances in food packaging materials to control
undesirable growth of micro-organisms on the surface of foods.
Antimicrobial packaging is an extremely challenging technology that
could extend shelf life and improve food safety in both synthetic
polymers and ediblefilms. The market volume for antimicrobial use in
polyolefins is projected to increase from 3300 tons in 2006 to 5480
tons in 2012 (McMillin, 2008).
Antimicrobialfilms can be defined as four basic categories as
follows (Cooksey, 2005): (1) Incorporation of the antimicrobial
substances into a sachet connected to the package from which the
bioactive substance is released during further storage. (2) Direct
incorporation of the antimicrobial into the packagingfilm (Table 3).
When applied in a hot extrusion material, thermoresistance and
shearing resistance of the antimicrobial must be considered. (3)
Coating of the packaging with a material that acts as a carrier for the
additive. The substance will not be submitted to high temperature or
shearing forces; moreover, it could be applied as the later step. (4)
Antimicrobial macromolecules withfilm-forming properties.
Sachets include O 2 scavengers, CO 2 generators, chlorine dioxide
generators, while bioactive agents dispersed in the packaging may be
O 2 scavenging films, silver ions, triclosan, bacteriocins, spices,
essential oils, enzymes and other additives (Coma, 2008). Extrusion
of the antimicrobial agent into thefilm results in less product-to-
agent contact than application of the agent to the surface of thefilm.
However, agents bound to thefilm surface are likely limited to
enzymes or other proteins because the molecular structure must be
large enough to retain activity on the micro-organism cell wall
while being bound to the plastic. Another approach is the release of
active agents onto the surface of the food. Slow migration of the
Table 3 Natural active components incorporated directly into polymers used for meat packaging.
Active component Polymer/carrier Substrate References
Nisin Silicon coating Beef tissue Daeschel, McGuire and Al-Makhlafi(1992)
PE Beef carcass tissue Siragusa, Cutter and Willett (1999),
Lactic acid Alginate Lean beef muscle Siragusa and Dickson (1992))
Tocopherol LDPE Beef Moore, Han, Acton, Ogale, Barmore and Dawson (2003)
Rosemary extract Polystyrene lamb steaks Camo, Beltrn and Roncals (2008)
Thyme, rosemary and sage spice Cross-linked caseinate
and whey proteinfilm
Ground beef Balentine, Crandall, O'Bryan, Duong and Pohlman (2006)
Oregano extract Polystyrene lamb steaks Camo et al. (2008)
Chitosan Chitosan Cooked ham Ouattara et al. (2000)
Chitosan Chitosan Culture media -Listeria monocytogenes Coma et al. (2002)
Triclosan Plastic matrix Food borne pathogenic bacteria and bacteria
associated with meat surface
Cutter (1999)
Abbreviations: PEpolyethylene, LDPElow density PE.
antimicrobial agents to the product surface improves efficiency and
helps maintain high concentrations. Packages with headspace require
volatile active substances to migrate through the headspace and gaps
between the package and food (Quintavalla & Vicini, 2002). Some
food-related antimicrobial packaging applications have been com-
mercialised (Table 4).
6.3.1.1. Potential antimicrobial agents.Antimicrobial substances are
defined as biocidal products under EU Directives, but would only be
permitted in food packaging if there were no direct impact on the
packaged food quality. This requires that agent migration into food
must be incidental rather than intentional, the agent could not
provide a preservative effect to the food and the agent could not allow
selection of biocide resistance in micro-organisms (Quintavalla &
Vicini, 2002). Potential antimicrobial agents for use in food packaging
systems are organic acids, acid salts, acid anhydrides, para-benzoic
acids, alcohol, bacteriocins, fatty acids, fatty acid esters, chelating
agents, enzymes, metals, antioxidants, antibiotics, fungicides, sterilis-
ing gases, sanitising agents, polysaccharides, phenolics, plant volatiles,
plant and spice extracts and probiotics (Cutter, 2006). Antimicrobial
compounds that have been evaluated infilm structures are organic
acids and their salts, enzymes, bacteriocins, triclosan, silver zeolites
and fungicides (Quintavalla & Vicini, 2002). Triclosan, at 500 and
1000 mg kg
1
in low density polyethylene (LDPE)films, exhibited
antimicrobial activity against pathogenic bacteria in agar diffusion
assay, but did not effectively reduce micro-organism growth on
chicken breast meat in VP at 7 C (Vermeiren, Devlieghere, &
Debevere, 2002).
Bioactive surface coatings on packaging materials might have
activity based on migration or release by evaporation into headspace
and may be bacteriocins, spices or essential oils (Coma, 2008).
Examination of four polyethylenefilms differing in ethylene vinyl
acetate and erucamide content, and coated with three different
bacteriocins, showed antimicrobial activity against most of the
indicator strains, with antimicrobial agent distribution and roughness
of thefilm related to activity of the packaging (Storia, Ercolini,
Marinello, & Mauriello, 2008).
One of the most promising fields is the incorporation of
antimicrobials such as bacteriocins and plants extracts to the active
packaging and their association to biodegradable packaging such as
alginate, zein (natural) or synthetic polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) to reduce
wastes and also, being environment friendly (Aymerich et al., 2008).
Antimicrobial agents such as nisin and chlorine dioxide have
shown effectiveness against bacteria but further technical develop-
ments are needed for commercial implementation (Cooksey, 2005).
Fast- and slow-release ClO 2 sachets reduced total plate counts by 1
1.5 logs in packages of chicken breast meat after 15 days, with no off-
odour detected by sensory panelists, but the colour of chicken
adjacent to the ClO 2 was adversely affected (Ellis, Cooksey, Dawson,
Han, & Vergano, 2006). Nisin incorporated into polylactic acid had
antimicrobial effectiveness against food-borne pathogens such asL.
monocytogenes,Escherichia coliO157:H7 andSalmonella enteritidis
when evaluated in culture media and liquid foods (Jin & Zhang, 2008).
The same approaches to using agents to control micro-organisms may
also be applicable for control of oxidative processes. Rosemary extract,
when incorporated into polypropylene (PP)film, enhanced the
stability of myoglobin and beef steaks by inhibition of metmyoglobin
and lipid oxidation (Nerin et al., 2006).
6.3.1.2. Sensors and indicators.Many intelligent packaging systems use
sensors and indicators for a variety of measurements including
fluorescence-based O 2 gas detection, temperature monitoring, toxic
compounds, freshness through monitoring of specific components,
package integrity and product identification (Kerry et al., 2006; De
Kruijf, van Beest, Rijk, Sipilaeinen-Malm, Paseiro-Losada, & de
Meulenaer, 2002; Potter, Campbell, & Cava, 2008).
A colour-changing sensor was accurately related to the concentra-
tions of amines (microbial breakdown products) in package head-
space, and was also correlated to changes in non-pathogenic microbial
populations offish (Pacquit et al., 2007).
The formation of volatile amines in chicken meat during chilled
storage in air packaging, VP and MAP with 30% CO 2 :5% O 2 was highly
related to total microbial counts and negatively with sensory taste
scores, suggesting that biosensors for the volatiles might be developed
to indicate spoilage in chicken (Balamatsia, Patsias, Kontominas, &
Savvaidis, 2007). However, food pathogen levels were not related to
microbial and sensory spoilage traits in ground beef patties in high O 2
MAP and low O 2 MAP with 0.4% CO or in chicken in low O 2 with 0.4%
CO because food spoilage is defined collectively by factors such as
storage temperature, package atmosphere, light intensity, meat
constituents, initial microbial loads, endogenous enzyme activity
and consumer perceptions that are ineffective to growth and
survivability of food pathogens under controlled conditions (Brooks
et al., 2008).
6.3.1.3. Bioactive edible coatings.Bioactive edible coatings incorporate
an antimicrobial compound in an edible coating, applied by dipping or
spraying onto the food. Edible coatings of polysaccharides, proteins
and lipids can improve the quality of fresh, frozen and processed meat
and poultry products by, for instance, delaying moisture loss, reducing
lipid oxidation and discolouration, enhancing product appearance and
functioning as carrier of food additives (Gennadios, Hanna, & Kurth,
1997 ). The applications of bioactive edible coating in fresh meat
preservation are summarised inTable 5.
6.3.1.4. Future research of AP.As might be surmised from previous
sections of this article, further research is needed in most areas
regarding meat-packaging materials, selection of meat and its
handling before packaging, meat properties under differing condi-
tions, meat in packaging systems and integration of the different
logistical components of the cold chain.
The key research needs for MAP of meat are as follows:
(1) Characterisation of each MAP optionbiochemical effects on
Table 4 Selected commercial antimicrobial packaging for food applications (adapted from Appendini & Hotchkiss, 2002; Devlieghere, Vermeiren & Debevere, 2004).
Active component Tradename Producer
Company
Packaging forms
for food applications
Allylisothio-cyanate WasaOuro Lintec Corp. Sachets
Silver Zeolite AglonTM Agion Paper, plastics
Glucose oxidase
(H 2 O 2 )
Bioka Bioka Ltd Sachets
Triclosan Microban Microban prod. Plastic packaging
Ethanol vapour Ethicap Freund Sachets
Oitech Nippon Kayaku Sachets
Carbon dioxide FreshpaxTM Multisorb technologies Sachets
Verifrais SARL Codimer
Chlorine dioxide Micro-sphre Bernard Technologies Sachets,film,
wraps, plastics
Table 5
Applications of bioactive edible coating in fresh meat preservation.
Bioactive edible coating Substrate References
Agar coatings Fresh poultry Natrajan (1997)
Cold smoked salmon Neetoo, Mu and Haiqiang (2010)
Calcium alginate gels Raw beef Siragusa et al. (1999)
Milk protein-based
ediblefilm
Beef muscle Oussalah, Caillet, Salmieri,
Saucier and Lacroix (2004)
appearance and palatability traits, including postmortem tenderisa-
tion processes, and interactions with each MAP system; interactions
of meat components with packaging materials, gases, and headspace
volumes; blooming ability and bloomed colour stability. (2) Addi-
tional and improved methodologies for evaluation of meat and meat
productsinadequate or imprecise analytical techniques for meat in
MAP, particularly with multistage systems; techniques not sufficiently
rapid for continuous process and quality control programs; expensive
or unavailable scanning and digital technologies for analytical or
online meat assessment. (3) Pigment chemistry datacreation and
reversion of deoxymyoglobin pigments under different conditions of
MAP; formation and stability of carboxymyoglobin under different
conditions; fundamental relationships between metmyoglobin re-
duction and O 2 consumption processes. (4) Roles of genetics and
quantitative trait locigenetic inheritance of colour and other meat
traits are not well characterised. (5) Application of AP technologies for
meatimproved petroleum and biological polymers have not been
examined for use in meat packaging; no reports of micro-organism
growth, oxidative stability, package gas concentrations, and other
shelf-life factors for many meat and package interactions. (6)
Nanotechnologies and nanoscale materials: improved mechanical,
thermal and barrier properties of materials would enhance meat
quality and shelf life; methods, materials, safety evaluations, and risk
assessments for meat use have not been reported. (7) Clinical trials on
specific product and packaging interactions and components
insufficient or unavailable information on many MAP systems creates
reliance on inferences for assessments of safety and risk (McMillin et
al., 1999; Mancini, Hunt, Hachmeister, Kropf, & Johnson, 2005;
McMillin, 2008).
7. Hurdle technology (HT)
HT (also called combined methods, combined processes, combi-
nation preservation, combination techniques or barrier technology)
advocates the deliberate combination of existing and novel preserva-
tion techniques to establish a series of preservative factors (hurdles)
to improve the microbial stability and the sensory quality of foods as
well as their nutritional and economic properties (Leistner & Gorris,
1995; Leistner, 2000).
The most important hurdles used in food preservation are
temperature (high or low), water activity (a), acidity (pH), redox
potential (Eh), preservatives (e.g., nitrite, sorbate, sulphite), and
competitive micro-organisms (e.g., lactic acid bacteria). However,
more than 60 potential hurdles for foods, which improve the stability
and/or quality of the products, have been described, and the list of
possible hurdles for food preservation is by no means complete
(Leistner & Gorris, 1995). The influence of food preservation methods
on the physiology and behaviour of micro-organisms in foods, that is,
their homeostasis, metabolic exhaustion and stress reactions, should
be taken into account.
Generally, biopreservation and natural antimicrobials provide an
excellent opportunity for such combined preservation systems. For
example, oregano essential oil, combined with MAP, were studied as
hurdles in the storage of fresh meat and a longer shelf life was
observed over that of the same packaging alone (Skandamis & Nychas,
2002; Chouliara, Karatapanis, Savvaidis, & Kontominas, 2007). In
Atlantic salmon (S. salar)fillets, the greatest extension of shelf life was
obtained by a combination of superchilling and MAP. The samples
with the highest CO 2 concentration (90%) and gas-to-product volume
(g/p) ratio of 2.5 showed the highest shelf life: 22 days versus 11 days
for the control sample (Fernndez, Aspe, & Roeckel, 2009).
Many studies indicate that it is possible to reduce bacterial spores
through combinations of mild heat (Hayakawa, Kanno, Tomita, &
Fujio, 1994; Ross, Griffiths, Mittal, & Deeth, 2003) or nisin (Michiels,
Hauben, Versyck, & Wuytack, 1995; Stewart, Dunne, Sikes, & Hoover,
2000; Garriga et al., 2002; Lee, Heinz, & Knorr, 2003; Jofre, Aymerich &
Garriga, 2008; Ogihara, Yatuzuka, Horie, Furukawa, & Yamasaki, 2009)
and HHP. The combined effect of gamma irradiation in the presence of
ascorbic acid on the microbiological characteristics and lipid oxidation
of ground beef coated with an edible coating were evaluated. Results
showed that lactic acid bacteria andBrochothrix thermosphactawere
more resistant to irradiation thanEnterobacteriaceaeandPseudomo-
nas. Shelf-life extension periods estimated on the basis of a limit level
of 6 log CFU g^1 for APCs were 4, 7 and 10 days for samples irradiated
at 1, 2 and 3 kGy, respectively. However, the incorporation of ascorbic
acid in ground beef did not improve significantly (pN0.05) the
inhibitory effect of gamma irradiation (Lacroix, Ouattara, Saucier,
Giroux, & Smoragiewicz, 2004).
8. Conclusion
This review aimed to describe current methods and technologies
for fresh meat preservation and their developments. In addition to the
relatively mature technologies, such as chilling, freezing and ionising
radiation, new preservation techniques for fresh meat are introduced.
We conclude this review by presenting important opportunities and
some drawbacks of the following new techniques.
1. Superchilling can reduce the use of freezing/thawing for produc-
tion buffers and thereby reduce labour, energy costs and product
weight losses. The other two advantages of the technique are its
capability for prolonging shelf life and improving meat safety.
However, the major drawback is that complex calculations and
measurements of heat transfer and temperatures are required for
each product. More research is required before the wide applica-
tion of this new technology. Furthermore, this process will only
function effectively with improved cold chains, as many current
meat supply chains are comprised of fragmented components
rather than logical cold chain systems.
2. As a mild, non-thermal technology, HHP can inactivate some
product spoilage micro-organisms and enzymes at low tempera-
tures without changing the majority of the sensory or nutritional
properties. However, spores are not sensitive to these pressures
and they can only be inactivated when pressure is combined with
heat or another system such as lactoperoxidase or lysozyme
treatment. Although HHP has certain advantages, it does however
have some drawbacks in that high pressures may result in
discolouration through protein denaturation. Further, commercial-
ly it involves a batch process, which is not convenient for product
handling.
3. Active packaging: This technique is attractive to producers as
oxygen scavengers in sachets are effective and enables surface
treatment of food products. As it incorporates compounds into
packing systems to maintain or extend product quality and shelf
life, it can facilitate processing. However, when oxygen scavengers
are incorporated in packagingfilms, as distinct from packet sachets,
their effectiveness is often limited. Efforts have to be made to make
this technique compatible with current legislation. Usually, the
amounts of active compound migrating are not substantial. In
addition, active compounds need to be thermostable when
incorporated in plasticfilms.
4. Natural antimicrobial compounds: Essential oils, chitosan, nisin
and lysozyme are natural compounds. As they can replace chemical
preservatives, they provide the opportunity forGreen labellingto
which consumers are attracted by theirnatural image. This is
imperative in the current world environment in which food quality
and safety food are of prime importance. Nevertheless, they are
often less attractive commercially due to their ability to react with
other food ingredients and some may have low water solubility.
They can also change the organoleptical properties and have a
narrow activity spectrum.
In conclusion, by applying these new technologies to meet increased
demand, the storage life of fresh chilled meat can be largely extended to
many weeks by proper control of the hygienic condition and
temperatures of the product, and by the appropriate selection and use
of preservative methods. Factors restricting the commercial extension of
shelf life are the current processing and distribution systems.
References
Appendini, P., & Hotchkiss, J. H. (2002). Review of antimicrobial food packaging. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 3 , 113126. Arthur, I. (2006). Shipboard refrigeration and the beginnings of the frozen meat trade. The Journal of the Royal Australian Historical Society, 92 Part 1. Aymerich, T., Picouet, P. A., & Monfort, J. M. (2008). Decontamination technologies for meat products.Meat Science, 78 , 114129. Balamatsia, C. C., Patsias, A., Kontominas, M. G., & Savvaidis, I. N. (2007). Possible role of volatile amines as quality-indicating metabolites in modified atmosphere- packaged chickenfillets: Correlation with microbiological and sensory attributes. Food Chemistry, 104 , 16221628. Balentine, C. W., Crandall, P. G., O’Bryan, C. A., Duong, D. Q., & Pohlman, F. W. (2006). The pre- and post-grinding application of rosemary and its effects on lipid oxidation and color during storage of ground beef.Meat Science, 73 , 413421. Beaufort, A., Cardinal, M., Le-Bail, A., & Midelet-Bourdin, G. (2009). The effects of superchilled storage at -2 degrees C on the microbiological and organoleptic properties of cold-smoked salmon before retail display.International Journal of Refrigeration, 32 , 18501857. Beggan, M., Allen, P., & Butler, F. (2005). The use of micro-perforated liddingfilm in low-oxygen storage of beef steaks.Journal of Muscle Foods, 16 , 103116. Belcher, J. N. (2006). Industrial packaging developments for the global meat market. Meat Science, 74 , 143148. Bogh-Sorensen, L. (1976). Superchilling of poultry.Livsmedelsteknik, 18 , 267269. Brewer, S. (2004). Irradiation effects on meat color – a review.Meat Science, 68 ,117. Brewer, M. S. (2009). Irradiation effects on meatflavor: A review.Meat Science, 81 , 1 14. Brody, A. L. (2009). Innovations in fresh prepared meal delivery systems.Food Technology, 63 ,8486. Brody, A. L., Bugusu, B., Han, J. H., Koelsch Sand, C., & McHugh, T. H. (2008). Innovative food packaging solutions.Journal of Food Science, 73 , R107R116. Brooks, J.C., Alvarado, M.,Stephens, T.P., Kellermeier, J. D.,Tittor, A. W., Miller, M.F., et al. (2008). Spoilage and safety characteristics of ground beef packaged in traditional and modified atmosphere packages.Journal of Food Protection, 71 , 293301. Camo, J., Beltrn, J. A., & Roncals, P. (2008). Extension of the display life of lamb with an antioxidant active packaging.Meat Science, 80 , 10861091. Carlez, A., Rosec, J. P., Richard, N., & Cheftel, J. C. (1993). High pressure inactivation of Citrobacter freundii,PseudomonasfluorescensandListeria innocuain inoculated minced beef muscle.Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie, 26 , 357363. Carlez, A., Rosec, J. P., Richard, N., & Cheftel, J. C. (1994). Bacterial growth during chilled storage of pressure-treated minced meat.Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie, 27 ,4854. Carlez, A., Veciana-Nogues, T., & Cheftel, J. C. (1995). Changes in colour and myoglobin of minced beef meat due to high pressure processing.Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie, 28 , 528538. Castellano, P., Belfiore, C., Fadda, S., & Vignolo, G. (2008). A review of bacteriocinogenic lactic acid bacteria used as bioprotective cultures in fresh meat produced in Argentina.Meat Science, 79 , 483499. Cheftel, J. C., & Culioli, J. (1997). Effects of high pressure on meat: a review.Meat Science, 46 , 211236. Cheftel, J. C., Levy, J., & Dumay, E. (2000). Pressure-assisted freezing and thawing: principles and potential applications.Food Reviews International, 16 , 453483. Chouliara, E., Karatapanis, A., Savvaidis, I. N., & Kontominas, M. G. (2007). Combined effect of oregano essential oil and modified atmosphere packaging on shelf-life extension of fresh chicken breast meat, stored at 4 degrees C.Food Microbiology, 24 , 607 617. Coma, V. (2008). Bioactive packaging technologies for extended shelf life of meat-based products.Meat Science, 78 ,90103. Coma, V., Martial-Gros, A., Garreau, S., Copinet, A., Salin, F., & Deschamps, A. (2002). Edible antimicrobialfilms based on chitosan matrix.Journal of Food Science, 67 , 1162 1169. Cooksey, K. (2005). Effectiveness of antimicrobial food packaging materials.Food Additives & Contaminants, 22 , 980987. Critchell, J. T., & Raymond, J. (1969).A history of the frozen meat trade.London: Dawsons of Pall Mall. Cutter, C. N. (1999). The effectiveness of triclosan-incorporated plastic against bacteria on beef surfaces.Journal of Food Protection, 62 , 474479. Cutter, C. N. (2006). Opportunities for bio-based packaging technologies to improve the quality and safety of fresh and further processed muscle foods.Meat Science, 74 , 131 142. Daeschel, M. A., McGuire, J., & Al-Makhlafi, H. (1992). Antimicrobial activity of nisin adsorbed to hydrophilic and hydrophobic silicon surfaces.Journal of Food Protection, 55 , 731735. De Kruijf, N., van Beest, M., Rijk, R., Sipilaeinen-Malm, T., Paseiro-Losada, P., & de Meulenaer, B. (2002). Active and intelligent packaging: applications and regulatory aspects.Food Additives & Contaminants, 19 , 144162.
Devlieghere, F., Vermeiren, L., & Debevere, J. (2004). New preservation technologies:
Possibilities and limitations.International Dairy Journal, 14 , 273285.
Diez, A. M., Santos, E. M., Jaime, I., & Rovira, J. (2009). Effectiveness of combined
preservation methods to extend the shelf life of Morcilla de Burgos.Meat Science,
81 , 171177.
Duun, A. S., Hemmingsen, A. K. T., Haugland, A., & Rustad, T. (2008). Quality changes
during superchilled storage of pork roast.LWT - Food Science & Technology, 41 ,
2136 2143.
Eilert, S. J. (2005). New packaging technologies for the 21st century.Meat Science, 71.
Ellis, M., Cooksey, K., Dawson, P., Han, I., & Vergano, P. (2006). Quality of fresh chicken
breasts using a combination of modified atmosphere packaging and chlorine
dioxide sachets.Journal of Food Protection, 69 , 19911996.
Faustmann, C., & Cassens, R.G. (1990). The biochemical basis for discoloration in fresh
meat: a review. In: Journal of Muscle Foods. 1, (3):217-243, 1990.
Feldhusen, F., Kirschner, T., Koch, R., Giese, W., & Wenzel, S. (1995). Influence on meat
colour of spray-chilling the surface of pig carcasses.Meat Science, 40 , 245251.
Fernndez, K., Aspe, E., & Roeckel, M. (2009). Shelf-life extension onfillets of Atlantic
Salmon (Salmo salar) using natural additives, superchilling and modified
atmosphere packaging.Food Control, 20 , 10361042.
Gallart-Jornet, L., Rustad, T., Barat, J. M., Fito, P., & Escriche, I. (2007). Effect of
superchilled storage on the freshness and salting behaviour of Atlantic salmon
(Salmo salar)fillets.Food Chemistry, 103 , 12681281.
Garriga, M., Aymerich, M. T., Costa, S., Monfort, J. M., & Hugas, M. (2002). Bactericidal
synergism through bacteriocins and high pressure in a meat model system during
storage.Food Microbiology, 19 , 509518.
Garriga, M., Grebol, N., Aymerich, M. T., Monfort, J. M., & Hugas, M. (2004). Microbial
inactivation after high-pressure processing at 600 MPa in commercial meat products
over its shelf life.Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 5 ,451457.
Gennadios, A., Hanna, M. A., & Kurth, L. B. (1997). Application of Edible Coatings on
Meats, Poultry and Seafoods: A Review.Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und-Technologie,
30 , 337350.
Gola, S., Mutti, P., Manganelli, E., Dazzi, M., Squarcina, N., Ghidini, M., et al. (2000).
Behaviour of pathogenicE. coliin a model system and in raw minced meat treated
by HP: microbiological and technological aspects.Industria Conserve, 75 ,1325.
Graham, W. D., Stevenson, M. H., & Stewart, E. M. (1998). Effect of irradiation dose and
irradiation temperature on the thiamin content of raw and cooked chicken breast
meat.Journal of the Science of Food & Agriculture, 78 , 559564.
Hansen, E., Trinderup, R. A., Hviid, M., Darre, M., & Skibsted, L. H. (2003). Thaw drip loss
and protein characterization of drip from air-frozen, cryogen-frozen, and pressure-
shift-frozen pork longissimus dorsi in relation to ice crystal size.European Food
Research & Technology, 218 ,26.
Hansen, E., Juncher, D., Henckel, P., Karlsson, A., Bertelsen, G., & Skibsted, L. H. (2004).
Oxidative stability of chilled pork chops following long term freeze storage.Meat
Science, 68 , 479484.
Hayakawa, I., Kanno, T., Tomita, M., & Fujio, Y. (1994). Application of high pressure for
spore inactivation and protein denaturation.Journal of Food Science, 59 , 159163.
Houtsma, P. C., Wit, J. C. d., & Rombouts, F. M. (1993). Minimum inhibitory concentration
(MIC) of sodium lactate for pathogens and spoilage organisms occurring in meat
products.International Journal of Food Microbiology, 20 , 247257.
Hugas, M., Garriga, M., & Monfort, J. M. (2002). New mild technologies in meat
processing: high pressure as a model technology.Meat Science, 62 , 359371.
Hultmann, L., Rora, A. M. B., Steinsland, I., Skara, T., & Rustad, T. (2004). Proteolytic
activity and properties of proteins in smoked salmon (Salmo salar)effects of
smoking temperature.Food Chemistry, 85 (3), 377387.
Jenkins, W. A., & Harrington, J. P. (1991).Packaging foods with plastics..
Jeyamkondan,S.,Jayas,D.S.,&Holley,R.A.(2000).Reviewofcentralizedpackagingsystems
for distributing of retail-ready meat.Journal of Food Protection, 63 ,796804.
Jin, T., & Zhang, H. (2008). Biodegradable polylactic acid polymer with nisin for use in
antimicrobial food packaging.Journal of Food Science, 73 , M127M134.
Jinlan, Z., Guorong, L., Pinglan, L., & Yan, Q. (2010). Pentocin 31-1, a novel meat-borne
bacteriocin and its application as biopreservative in chill-stored tray-packaged
pork meat.Food Control, 21 , 198202.
Jofre, A., Aymerich, T., & Garriga, M. (2008). Assessment of the effectiveness of
antimicrobial packaging combined with high pressure to controlSalmonellasp. in
cooked ham.Food Control, 19 , 634638.
Jung, S., Ghoul, M., & de Lamballerie-Anton, M. (2003). Influence of high pressure on the
color and microbial quality of beef meat.Lebensmittel Wissenschaft & Technologie,
36 , 625631.
Kerry, J. P., O'Grady, M. N., & Hogan, S. A. (2006). Past, current and potential utilisation
of active and intelligent packaging systems for meat and muscle-based products: A
review.Meat Science, 74 , 113130.
Koos, J. d., & Jansener, K. E. (1995). Lactate - an opportunity to improve safety of
processed meat and poultry.Fleischwirtschaft, 75 , 12961298.
Lacroix, M., Ouattara, B., Saucier, L., Giroux, M., & Smoragiewicz, W. (2004). Effect of
gamma irradiation in presence of ascorbic acid on microbial composition and
TBARS concentration of ground beef coated with an edible active coating.Radiation
Physics and Chemistry, 71 ,7377.
Lambert, A. D., Smith, J. P., & Dodds, K. L. (1991). Shelf life extension and microbiological
safety of fresh meata review.Food Microbiology, 8 , 267297.
Lawrie, R. A., & Ledward, D. A. (2006).Lawrie's Meat Science. Seventh English, edition ed.
Cambridge England: Woodhead Publishing Limited.
Lee, D. U., Heinz, V., & Knorr, D. (2003). Effects of combination treatments of nisin and
high-intensity ultrasound with high pressure on the microbial inactivation in liquid
whole egg.Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 4 , 387393.
Leistner, L. (2000). Basic aspects of food preservation by hurdle technology.
International Journal of Food Microbiology, 55 , 181186.
Leistner, L., & Gorris, L. G. M. (1995). Food preservation by hurdle technology.Trends in Food Science & Technology, 6 ,4146. Lindsay, D. S., Collins, M. V., Holliman, D., Flick, G. J., & Dubey, J. P. (2006). Effects of high- pressure processing onToxoplasma gondiitissue cysts in ground pork.Journal of Parasitology, 92 , 195196. Lovatt, S. J., James, C., James, S. J., Pham, Q. T., & Jeremiah, L. E. (2004). Refrigeration and freezing technology. In J. Werner Klinth (Ed.),Encyclopedia of Meat Sciences (pp. 11311161). Oxford: Elsevier. Lynch, N. M., Kastner, C. L., & Kropf, D. H. (1986). Consumer acceptance of vacuum packaged ground beef as influenced by product color and educational materials. Journal of Food Science, 51 , 253255. Ma, H. -J., & Ledward, D. A. (2004). High pressure/thermal treatment effects on the texture of beef muscle.Meat Science, 68 , 347355. Magnussen, O. M., Haugland, A., Torstveit Hemmingsen, A. K., Johansen, S., & Nordtvedt, T. S. (2008). Advances in superchilling of food – process characteristics and product quality.Trends in Food Science & Technology, 19 , 418424. Mancini,R.A.,Hunt,M.C.,Hachmeister,K.A.,Kropf,D.H.,&Johnson,D.E.(2005).Exclusion of oxygen from modified atmosphere packages limits beef rib and lumbar vertebrae marrow discoloration during display and storage.Meat Science, 69 , 493500. McMillin, K. W. (2008). Where is MAP Going? A review and future potential of modified atmosphere packaging for meat.Meat Science, 80 ,4365. McMillin, K. W., Huang, N. Y., Ho, C. P., & Smith, B. S. (1999). Quality and shelf-life of meat in case-ready modified atmosphere packaging. In Y. L. Xiong, F. Shahidi, & C. T. Ho (Eds.),Quality attributes in muscle foods(pp. 7393). New York: ACS Symposium Series, Plenum Publishing Corporation. Michiels, C., Hauben, K., Versyck, K., & Wuytack, E. (1995). Sensitization ofEscherichia colito nisin and lysozyme by high hydrostatic pressure, EDTA and chitosan.Journal of Food Protection, 58 , 32. Moore, M. E., Han, I. Y., Acton, J. C., Ogale, A. A., Barmore, C. R., & Dawson, P. L. (2003). Effects of antioxidants in polyethylenefilm on fresh beef color.Journal of Food Science, 68 ,99104. Morales, P., Calzada, J., Rodriguez, B., de Paz, M., & Nunez, M. (2009). Inactivation of Salmonella enteritidisin chicken breastfillets by single-cycle and multiple-cycle high pressure treatments.Foodborne Pathogens & Disease, 6 , 577581. Morkore, T., Hansen, A. A., Unander, E., & Einen, O. (2002). Composition, liquid leakage, and mechanical properties of farmed rainbow trout: Variation betweenfillet sections and the impact of ice and frozen storage.Journal of Food Science, 67 (5), 19331938. Mor-Mur, M., & Yuste, J. (2003). High pressure processing applied to cooked sausage manufacture: physical properties and sensory analysis.Meat Science, 65 , 11871191. Murray, M., & Richard, J. A. (1997). Comparative study of the antilisterial activity of nisin A and pediocin AcH in fresh ground pork stored aerobically at 5 degrees C. Journal of Food Protection, 60 , 15341540. Nadeem, S., Chattopadhyay, U. K., Sherikar, A. T., Waskar, V. S., Paturkar, A. M., Latha, C., et al. (2003). Chemical sprays as a method for improvement in microbiological quality and shelf-life of fresh sheep and goat meats during refrigeration storage (5- 7 degrees C).Meat Science, 63 , 339344. Natrajan, N. (1997). Development of bacteriocin-containing packaging to reduce pathogenic and spoilage microorganisms associated with fresh poultry products. Dissertation Abstracts International, B, 58, Neetoo, H., Mu, Y., & Haiqiang, C. (2010). Bioactive alginate coatings to controlListeria monocytogeneson cold-smoked salmon slices andfillets.International Journal of Food Microbiology, 136 , 326331. Nerin, C., Tovar, L., Djenane, D., Camo, J., Salafranca, J., Beltran, J. A., et al. (2006). Stabilization of beef meat by a new active packaging containing natural antioxidants.Journal of Agricultural & Food Chemistry, 54 , 78407846. Nowlan, S. S., Dyer, W. J., & Keith, R. A. (1974). Superchilling – a new application for preserving freshness offishfillets during marketing.Canadian Institute of Food Science & Technology Journal, 7 , A16A19. Ockerman, H. W., & Basu, L. (2004). Carcass chilling and boning. In J. Werner Klinth (Ed.),Encyclopedia of Meat Sciences(pp. 144149). Oxford: Elsevier. Ogihara, H., Yatuzuka, M., Horie, N., Furukawa, S., & Yamasaki, M. (2009). Synergistic effect of high hydrostatic pressure treatment and food additives on the inactivation ofSalmonella enteritidis.Food Control, 20 , 963966. Olafsdottir, G., Lauzon, H. L., Martinsdottir, E., Oehlenschlager, J., & Kristbergsson, K. (2006). Evaluation of shelf life of superchilled cod (Gadus morhua)fillets and the influence of temperaturefluctuations during storage on microbial and chemical quality indicators.Journal of Food Science, 71 , S97S109. Orlien, V., Hansen, E., & Skibsted, L. H. (2000). Lipid oxidation in high-pressure processed chicken breast muscle during chill storage: critical working pressure in relation to oxidation mechanism.European Food Research & Technology, 211 , 99 104. Ouattara, B., Simard, R. E., Piette, G., Begin, A., & Holley, R. A. (2000). Inhibition of surface spoilage bacteria in processed meats by application of antimicrobialfilms prepared with chitosan.International Journal of Food Microbiology, 62 , 139148. Oussalah, M., Caillet, S., Salmieri, S., Saucier, L., & Lacroix, M. (2004). Antimicrobial and antioxidant effects of milk protein-basedfilm containing essential oils for the preservation of whole beef muscle.Journal of Agricultural & Food Chemistry, 52 , 5598 5605. Pacquit, A., Frisby, J., Diamond, D., Lau, K. -T. L., Farrell, A., & Quilty, B. (2007). Development of a smart packaging for the monitoring offish spoilage.FoodChemistry, 102 ,466470.
Patterson, M. F. (2005). Microbiology of pressure-treated foods.Journal of Applied
Microbiology, 98 , 14001409.
Pawar, D. D., Malik, S. V. S., Bhilegaonkar, K. N., & Barbuddhe, S. B. (2000). Effect of nisin
and its combination with sodium chloride on the survival ofListeria monocytogenes
added to raw buffalo meat mince.Meat Science, 56 , 215219.
Potter, L., Campbell, A., & Cava, D. (2008).Active and intelligent packaging - a review, 62 ,:
Campden & Chorleywood Food Research Association.
Quintavalla, S., & Vicini, L. (2002). Antimicrobial food packaging in meat industry.Meat
Science, 62 , 373380.
Renerre, M. (1987). Effect of packaging method on the colour of meat.Viandes et
Produits Carnes, 8 ,4750.
Rivas-Caedo, A., Fernndez-Garca, E., & Nuez, M. (2009). Volatile compounds in
fresh meats subjected to high pressure processing: Effect of the packaging material.
Meat Science, 81 , 321328.
Roller, S., Sagoo, S., Board, R., O'Mahony, T., Caplice, E., Fitizgerald, G., et al. (2002).
Novel combinations of chitosan, carnocin and sulphite for the preservation of
chilled pork sausages.Meat Science, 62 , 165177.
Ross, A. I. V., Griffiths, M. W., Mittal, G. S., & Deeth, H. C. (2003). Combining non-thermal
technologies to control foodborne microorganisms.International Journal of Food
Microbiology, 89 , 125138.
Sagoo, S., Board, R., & Roller, S. (2002). Chitosan inhibits growth of spoilage
microorganisms in chilled pork products.Food Microbiology, 19 , 175182.
Schubring, R. (2009). 'Superchilling' - an 'old' variant to prolong shelf life of freshfish
and meat requicked.Fleischwirtschaft, 89 , 104113.
Sebranek, J. G., Hunt, M. C., Cornforth, D. P., & Brewer, M. S. (2006). Carbon monoxide
packaging of fresh meat.Food Technology, 60.
Shelef, L. A., Mohammed, S., Wei, T., & Webber, M. L. (1997). Rapid optical
measurements of microbial contamination in raw ground beef and effects of
citrate and lactate.Journal of Food Protection, 60 , 673676.
Shigehisa, T., Ohmori, T., Saito, A., Taji, S., & Hayashi, R. (1991). Effects of high
hydrostatic pressure on characteristics of pork slurries and inactivation of
microorganisms associated with meat and meat products.International Journal of
Food Microbiology, 12 , 207215.
Sikes, A. L., Tornberg, E., & Tume, R. K. (2010). A proposed mechanism of tenderising
post-rigor beef using high pressure-heat treatment.Meat Science, 84 , 390399.
Siragusa, G. R., & Dickson, J. S. (1992). Inhibition ofListeria monocytogeneson beef tissue
by application of organic acids immobilized in a calcium alginate gel.Journal of Food
Science, 57 , 293296.
Siragusa, G. R., Cutter, C. N., & Willett, J. L. (1999). Incorporation of bacteriocin in plastic
retains activity and inhibits surface growth of bacteria on meat.Food Microbiology,
16 , 229235.
Skandamis, P.N., & Nychas, G.-J.E. (2002). Preservation of fresh meat with active and
modified atmosphere packaging conditions. In: International Journal of Food
Microbiology. 79(1-2):35-45, 15 November, 2002.
Stewart, C. M., Dunne, C. P., Sikes, A., & Hoover, D. G. (2000). Sensitivity of spores of
Bacillus subtilisandClostridium sporogenesPA 3679 to combinations of high
hydrostatic pressure and other processing parameters.Innovative Food Science &
Emerging Technologies, 1 ,4956.
Stiles,M.E.,&Hastings,J.W.(1991).Bacteriocinproductionbylacticacidbacteria:potential
for use in meat preservation.Trends in Food Science & Technology, 2 ,247251.
Storia, A. l., Ercolini, D., Marinello, F., & Mauriello, G. (2008). Characterization of
bacteriocin-coated antimicrobial polyethylenefilms by atomic force microscopy.
Journal of Food Science, 73 , T48T54.
Teotia, J.S. (1974). Chemical pasteurization of poultry meat.Dissertation Abstracts
International, B, 34, 4142.
The Food (Control of Irradiation) Regulations 1990, SI 2490, HMSO, 1991.
The Food Labelling (Amendment)(Irradiated Food) Regulations, 1990, SI 2489, HMSO,
1991.
Tume, R. K., Sikes, A. L., & Smith, S. B. (2010). EnrichingM. sternomandibulariswith
alpha-tocopherol by dietary means does not protect against the lipid oxidation
caused by high-pressure processing.Meat Science, 84 ,6670.
Vasavada, M., Carpenter, C. E., Cornforth, D. P., & Ghorpade, V. (2003). Sodium
levulinate and sodium lactate effects on microbial growth and stability of fresh
pork and turkey sausages.Journal of Muscle Foods, 14 , 119129.
Vermeiren, L., Devlieghere, F., Beest, M. v., Kruijf, N. d., & Debevere, J. (1999).
Developments in the active packaging of foods.Trends in Food Science & Technology,
10 ,7786.
Vermeiren, L., Devlieghere, F., & Debevere, J. (2002). Effectiveness of some recent
antimicrobial packaging concepts.Food Additives & Contaminants, 19 , 163171.
WHO. (1981). Wholesomeness of irradiated foods.Technical ReportSeries 659,. Geneva:
World Health Organization.
Wiggers, S. B., Kroger-Ohlson, M. V., & Skibsted, L. H. (2004). Lipid oxidation in high-
pressure processed chicken breast during chill storage and subsequent heat
treatment: effect of working pressure, packaging atmosphere and storage time.
European Food Research & Technology, 219 , 167170.
Yam, K. L., Takhistov, P. T., & Miltz, J. (2005). Intelligent packaging: concepts and
applications.Journal of Food Science, 70 ,R1R10.
Yanyun, Z., Wells, J. H., & McMillin, K. W. (1994). Application of dynamic modified
atmosphere packaging systems for fresh red meats: review.Journal of Muscle Foods,
5 , 299328.