Physicochemical and microbiological characteristics of beef treated with high‐intensity ultrasound and stored at 4 °C

Caraveo, Omaro; Alarcón-Rojo, Alma D.; Rentería‐Monterrubio, Ana Luisa; Santellano‐Estrada, Eduardo; Paniwnyk, Larysa

doi:10.1002/jsfa.6979

Cited by 64 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of mesophilic aerobic and lactic acid bacteria present in meat pork, decreased 40 to 50% after 2 minutes with the 25 kHz US and 2W/cm² intensity (Dolatawski and Stasiak, 2002). As was also observed reduction by 3 log CFU/cm² enterobacteria, mesophilic aerobic and psychrotrophic bacteria in beef exposed with 40 kHz US and 11 W/cm² intensity for between 60-90 minutes (Caraveo et al, 2014).…”

Section: Ultrasound and Microbiological Contamination Of Meatsupporting

confidence: 59%

The use of ultrasound and slightly acidic electrolyzed water as alternative technologies in the meat industry

Flores¹,

Athayde²,

Silva³

et al. 2017

Food Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quality of meat from different animal species is defined by chemical, physical sensory and microbiological characteristics, which can be influenced by procedures during the slaughter of animals. Technologies such as ultrasound (US) and slightly acidic electrolyzed water (SAEW) are being studied in order to assist in food processing and in developing methods that are economically viable and environmentally sustainable. The aim of this paper is to discuss the relationship between US and SAEW in relation to tenderness, microbiology, and oxidation of meat. The meat industry was a pioneer in the use of the ultrasound, which initially aimed to determine the layer of fat on carcasses and subsequently improve the tenderness of the meat. Recently studies mention that the ultrasound and SAEW can influence the microbiological parameters. The combination of both technologies should also be considered, with the possibility of enhancing the antimicrobial effects. However, there is little information regarding oxidative parameters promoted in meat for these two alternative technologies, where the individual or when interspersed use. Knowing the actions and consequences of ultrasound and SAEW in meat will enable the opening of new perspectives about the application of these technologies in the meat industry.

show abstract

Section: Ultrasound and Microbiological Contamination Of Meatsupporting

confidence: 59%

The use of ultrasound and slightly acidic electrolyzed water as alternative technologies in the meat industry

Flores¹,

Athayde²,

Silva³

et al. 2017

Food Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…L * was higher ( p < .05) after ultrasound treatment and presented slightly higher values as sonication time increased. Other authors have found similar effects when ultrasonicating (11 W cm −2 ) beef Semitendinosus steaks for 60 and 90 min (Caraveo, Alarcon‐Rojo, Renteria, Santellano, & Paniwnyk, ). They described an increase in L * when beef was sonicated (either 60 or 90 min) compared to control (nonsonicated), but no differences between 60 and 90 min of sonication.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…From these, decimal dilutions (10 −1 to 10 −6 ) were prepared, using 0.1% peptone as sterile diluent. From beef Semitendinosus steaks for 60 and 90 min (Caraveo, Alarcon-Rojo, Renteria, Santellano, & Paniwnyk, 2015). They described an increase in L* when beef was sonicated (either 60 or 90 min) compared to control (nonsonicated), but no differences between 60 and 90 min of sonication.…”

Section: Microbial Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Time matters when ultrasonicating beef: The best time for tenderness is not the best for reducing microbial counts

Diaz‐Almanza

Reyes-Villagrana

Alarcón-Rojo

et al. 2019

J Food Process Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on the effects of high‐intensity ultrasound (HIU) on meat quality properties shows contradictory results. The latter has been sometimes attributed to limited exposure time, not enough to cause cellular modifications. This study evaluated the effect of different exposure times (0, 10, 20, and 40 min) of HIU (37 kHz, 90 W cm−2) on physicochemical properties including; pH, color, tenderness, and microbial counts of two different portions of beef Longissimus lumborum (cranial–caudal). No significant effect of loin portion was observed (p > .05). Ultrasonication time caused a 20.7% toughness reduction of beef (p < .05). However, ultrasonication time also increased hue from 0.62 to 0.76 from red to orange values (p < .05), but it did not affect important coordinates such as a* or C*. Ultrasound caused an increase in the pH from 5.46 to 5.6 (p < .05), but pH was not affected by the time. The highest tenderness was achieved at 40 min of sonication. Significant reductions of mesophiles, psychrophiles, and coliforms were observed after ultrasonication when compared to control (p < .05). The best ultrasonic condition for microbial reduction was at 10 min, when the lowest microorganism counts were achieved, with a subsequent growth when increasing ultrasonication time. Practical Applications High‐intensity ultrasound application appears to be a promising method to increase tenderness in beef. However, optimum time, intensity, and methodology for its application have to be defined, because the variations may affect other quality characteristics such as color or microbial contamination. To find ideal parameter values may help the industry to take decisions on the design of specialized equipment for ultrasonication of meat.

show abstract

“…According to Figure 7 a significant decrease in the counts of coliform bacteria was observed with the use of US (P < 0.0001). Caraveo et al (2015) observed a significant increase in total coliform counts during aging of semitendinosus bovine muscle at 4 °C following sonication for 60 or 90 min in an ultrasonic bath (40 kHz, 11 W/cm 2 ). Dn the other hand, studies with other food classes have reported the inhibition of Escherichia coli (Nazari & Jochen, 2010).…”

Section: Microbiological Countsmentioning

confidence: 90%

High intensity ultrasound homogenizes and improves quality of beef longissimus dorsi

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aims to evaluate the uniformity of the high intensity ultrasound (US) effects on the quality of beef longissimus dorsi. For this purpose L. dorsi muscles from Hereford carcasses were cut into 2.54 cm thick slices. Each sample was marked into concentric areas of 2 cm wide. Ultrasound (37 kHz and 7 W/cm 2) treatment was performed for 60 min using an ultrasonic bath and treated meat was stored at 4 °C for 0 and 7 days. pH values decreased after 7 days of aging at 4 °C with and without ultrasound application (P < 0.0001). The color parameters a* and b* and WHC increased significantly in the sonicated samples after 7 d of storage at 4 °C (P < 0.0001). No differences by US (P = 0.6711) and storage time (P = 0.4184) were found. Therefore, ultrasonic intensity was homogeneously distributed in the samples and had no negative effects on the quality of the meat. A reduction (P < 0.0001) in psychrophilic and coliform (P < 0.0001) bacteria was observed by US, while mesophilic bacteria increased (P < 0.0001) by US. US could be considered as an efficient technology to be used in beef to improve meat quality and safety.

show abstract

Physicochemical and microbiological characteristics of beef treated with high‐intensity ultrasound and stored at 4 °C

Cited by 64 publications

References 61 publications

The use of ultrasound and slightly acidic electrolyzed water as alternative technologies in the meat industry

The use of ultrasound and slightly acidic electrolyzed water as alternative technologies in the meat industry

Time matters when ultrasonicating beef: The best time for tenderness is not the best for reducing microbial counts

High intensity ultrasound homogenizes and improves quality of beef longissimus dorsi

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About