<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>high-pressure processing &#8211; Science</title>
	<atom:link href="https://scienmag.com/tag/high-pressure-processing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://scienmag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2026 16:17:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.3</generator>

 
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">73899611</site>	<item>
		<title>Celery Powder Matches Synthetic Nitrite in Smoked Ham Quality Test</title>
		<link>https://scienmag.com/celery-powder-matches-synthetic-nitrite-in-smoked-ham-quality-test/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daisy Hatcher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2026 16:17:11 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Agriculture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[celery powder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[celery powder as nitrite substitute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clean label]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comparison of synthetic sodium nitrite and vegetable-derived nitrates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer perceptions of uncured versus cured meats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cured color]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[effectiveness of celery powder in antimicrobial preservation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food safety of vegetable-based nitrates in processed meats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food science research on meat curing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high-pressure processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impact of celery juice powder on cured meat quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industry standards for "cured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lipid oxidation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Listeria monocytogenes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meat science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[natural curing methods in meat processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nitrite]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ready-to-eat meat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulatory implications of natural curing agents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[role of spices and red wine in meat curing processes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sensory evaluation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smoked ham]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smoked ham preservation]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://scienmag.com/?p=230822</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A University of Nevada study found that celery powder delivers cured-ham quality equivalent to synthetic nitrite, while high-pressure processing only harmed the flavor of nitrite-free hams.]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Walk down the deli aisle of any American supermarket and you will find packages of ham labeled &#8220;uncured&#8221; and boasting &#8220;no nitrate or nitrite added.&#8221; Yet many of those products contain celery juice powder, a vegetable-derived ingredient that converts into nitrite during processing and performs essentially the same chemical role as the synthetic sodium nitrite it replaces. A new study from the University of Nevada, Reno, published in Food Science of Animal Resources, has put this paradox to a rigorous test, and the results carry implications not only for the meat industry but also for the regulators who decide what the word &#8220;cured&#8221; actually means.</p>
<p>The research team, led by Nadini H. Gamage and Amilton S. de Mello, manufactured thirty-two smoked hams at a USDA-inspected commercial facility using four different brine formulations. The first was a conventional recipe built on synthetic sodium nitrite. The second replaced the synthetic compound with celery powder and added a buffered vinegar antimicrobial called MOstatin V. The third combined celery powder with spices, and the fourth contained no nitrite source at all, relying instead on spices, red wine, and annatto paste to simulate the appearance and flavor of a cured product. Each batch of hams was then split in two: half of the slices were subjected to high-pressure processing at 85,000 psi, roughly 586 megapascals, for two minutes at 5 degrees Celsius, while the other half remained untreated.</p>
<p>The choice of high-pressure processing was no accident. Ready-to-eat meats, despite being fully cooked, remain vulnerable to contamination after processing, most notably by Listeria monocytogenes, a pathogen of serious public health concern. United States regulations under 9 C.F.R. 430.4 require post-lethality treatments to suppress this organism, and high-pressure processing has emerged as one of the most effective options for sliced cured hams. The catch is that earlier studies suggested the treatment could alter texture, tenderness, color, and lipid stability, raising the question of whether the safety benefit comes at a sensory cost.</p>
<p>To answer that question, the researchers tracked the hams through twenty-nine days of refrigerated vacuum display, measuring lightness, redness, yellowness, hue angle, and chroma with a calibrated colorimeter on eight separate days. They also ran texture profile analysis and Warner-Bratzler shear force tests, determined moisture content following AOAC protocols, and recruited 240 consumer panelists across eight sensory sessions, each participant scoring color, odor, flavor, texture, and overall desirability on nine-point hedonic scales. The statistical design was a completely randomized 4 by 2 factorial, with curing treatment as the whole-plot factor and pressure treatment as the split-plot factor, analyzed in SAS using the GLIMMIX procedure.</p>
<p>The chemistry behind the characteristic pink of cured meat explains much of what the team found. During curing, nitric oxide reacts with myoglobin to form nitrosylmyoglobin, which is converted upon heating into nitrosyl hemochromogen, a heat-stable pigment built around a porphyrin ring with a central ferrous iron bound to nitric oxide. This molecule proved remarkably robust under pressure. Hams cured with either synthetic nitrite or celery powder showed comparable color stability, and the pressure treatment had no significant effect on redness at all. Only small shifts in yellowness and hue angle appeared late in the display period among pressurized samples, with a maximum difference of 0.36 in a* and 1.94 in hue angle, changes far too subtle for the human eye to detect under retail lighting.</p>
<p>The uncured hams told a different story. Without nitrite, the annatto paste and red wine added to the brine simply could not reproduce the rosy pink of genuine curing. Annatto&#8217;s carotenoid pigments produce orange-yellow to brick-red tones that fade in light, while the anthocyanins in red wine appear to have oxidized during the ten-hour smoking cycle at 108 degrees Celsius. Neither pigment can mimic the specific cool pink generated by the nitrogen-iron bond at the heart of nitrosyl hemochromogen. Instrumental measurements confirmed it: the uncured hams showed the lowest redness values and the highest yellowness, hue angle, and chroma, and panelists rated their color the least desirable of all four treatments.</p>
<p>Texture results reinforced nitrite&#8217;s functional necessity. The uncured hams recovered their shape less effectively after compression, showing reduced springiness compared with the conventional and spiced celery-powder hams. The researchers hypothesize that lower sodium chloride levels in the uncured formulation reduced salt-mediated protein solubilization, leaving muscle fibers more swollen and water-laden. Notably, moisture content itself did not differ among treatments, hovering around 63 to 65 percent, which suggests other brine ingredients contributed to the textural deficit. High-pressure processing, meanwhile, produced only one measurable textural change, a slight reduction in deformation, and left hardness, shear force, chewiness, and cohesiveness untouched. The authors attribute this resilience to the fact that the hams were already cooked: their proteins were thermally denatured before pressurization and did not undergo further transformation during the brief two-minute treatment.</p>
<p>The sensory panel delivered the most commercially significant verdict. Hams cured with synthetic nitrite and those cured with celery powder plus the buffered vinegar antimicrobial received the highest flavor and overall desirability scores, and they were statistically indistinguishable from each other. Panelists clearly preferred the traditional cured flavor profile over the seasoned alternatives, and the spiced formulations of both the celery-powder and uncured hams scored lower on flavor, odor, and overall appeal. The equivalence of the two nitrite-cured products indicates that the source of the nitrite, whether synthesized in a factory or extracted from celery, leads to the same flavor and color development during processing.</p>
<p>One interaction between curing source and pressure treatment stood out. In the celery-powder hams containing the buffered vinegar antimicrobial, high-pressure processing actually reduced off-flavor intensity, consistent with earlier work showing that buffered vinegar improves flavor perception in restructured beef. In the uncured hams, however, pressure treatment increased off-flavor intensity. The researchers point to lipid oxidation as the likely culprit: pressures above 400 megapascals are known to markedly accelerate lipid oxidation in uncured pork, while nitrite protects against oxidation by stabilizing heme iron and preventing the release of catalytic pro-oxidants. Vacuum packaging, which removes oxygen before storage, appears to have shielded the nitrite-cured hams from this effect entirely.</p>
<p>The study&#8217;s conclusions cut in two directions. For manufacturers, the message is reassuring: naturally sourced nitrite performs equivalently to synthetic nitrite in maintaining quality, and high-pressure processing does not compromise the attributes of nitrite-cured ready-to-eat hams. For regulators, the findings sharpen an existing dilemma. Because the USDA does not recognize celery powder as an equivalent curing agent, products made with it can be labeled &#8220;uncured&#8221; even though the ingredient functions as nitrite once converted. The authors argue that this labeling convention deserves reconsideration, noting that the similarity between naturally and synthetically cured products in their study supports regulatory recognition of naturally cured hams. They also acknowledge the study&#8217;s limits: lipid oxidation and residual nitrite were not directly measured, and future work should examine how different nitrite sources interact with pressure treatment to affect food safety indicators, including Listeria contamination. Until then, the humble slice of deli ham remains a surprisingly rich case study in how chemistry, consumer perception, and labeling law collide on the supermarket shelf.</p>
<p><strong>Subject of Research:</strong> Effects of natural versus synthetic nitrite curing sources and high-pressure processing on the quality of smoked ready-to-eat hams</p>
<p><strong>Article Title:</strong> Effects of curing sources and high-pressure processing on quality attributes of smoked hams</p>
<p><strong>Article References:</strong> Gamage, N. H., Ewasko, D., Yeh, Y., &amp; de Mello, A. S. (2026). Effects of curing sources and high-pressure processing on quality attributes of smoked hams. <em>Food Science of Animal Resources, 46</em>(1), Article 63. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00063-y" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00063-y</a></p>
<p><strong>Image Credits:</strong> AI Generated</p>
<p><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00063-y" rel="noopener noreferrer">10.1007/s44463-026-00063-y</a></p>
<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> nitrite, celery powder, high-pressure processing, smoked ham, clean label, meat science, Listeria monocytogenes, lipid oxidation, sensory evaluation, cured color, ready-to-eat meat, food regulation</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">230822</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Quiet Quest to Strip Phosphates From Your Sausage</title>
		<link>https://scienmag.com/the-quiet-quest-to-strip-phosphates-from-your-sausage/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daisy Hatcher]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2026 21:19:16 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Agriculture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chelation and emulsion stabilization in meat products]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clean label]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clean-label meat product trends]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dietary fiber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[emulsified meat products]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[environmental impact of phosphate rock extraction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food additive regulation and consumer demand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food additives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health concerns of inorganic phosphorus in processed meats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high-pressure processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lipid oxidation prevention in processed meats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meat processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meat product shelf life improvement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[phosphate alternatives in sausage manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[phosphate functionality in meat processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[phosphate substitutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[phosphates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[processed meat additives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sustainability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sustainability of phosphate resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[transglutaminase]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[water retention in sausages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[water-holding capacity]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://scienmag.com/?p=229095</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A new review maps the ingredients and processing technologies that could finally free processed meats from their dependence on multifunctional phosphate additives.]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Phosphates are the unsung workhorses of the processed meat industry. In sausages, hams, bacon, and restructured meat products, these multifunctional additives raise the pH of muscle tissue above the isoelectric point of myofibrillar proteins, triggering electrostatic repulsion, protein swelling, and dramatically improved water retention. They also dissociate actomyosin complexes, chelate divalent metal ions that would otherwise catalyze lipid oxidation, stabilize emulsions, and boost cooking yields. The result is meat that stays juicy, tender, and visually appealing on the shelf. Yet a comprehensive review published in Food Science of Animal Resources by Tae-Kyung Kim, Min Hyeock Lee, Yun-Sang Choi, and colleagues argues that the era of unquestioned phosphate dominance may be drawing to a close, driven by clean-label consumer demand, health concerns over highly bioavailable inorganic phosphorus, and the uncomfortable reality that phosphate rock is a finite resource with no direct substitute.</p>
<p>The chemistry behind phosphate functionality is more intricate than most shoppers would ever suspect. Food-grade phosphates are derived from rock phosphorus, which is converted into phosphoric acid, purified to food grade, and neutralized with strong alkali before being melted and polymerized. Only about one percent of the world&#8217;s phosphoric acid ends up in food and beverages; the vast majority goes into fertilizer. The resulting phosphate salts fall into structural families, including ring, linear, and combined forms, and their behavior in meat depends heavily on chain length. Short-chain pyrophosphates excel at dissociating actomyosin and extracting myofibrillar proteins, which is critical for water retention and emulsion formation in comminuted products. Longer-chain tripolyphosphates and polyphosphates, by contrast, offer superior cold-water solubility and metal-ion sequestration, making them better suited for brine systems where they help control warmed-over flavor and discoloration. Monophosphates buffer well but bind calcium poorly and dissolve reluctantly in cold water, which is why manufacturers typically blend phosphate types to balance buffering behavior, brine stability, extraction efficiency, and oxidative control.</p>
<p>These structural differences translate directly into product quality. Phosphates influence meat color by reducing surface light scattering from moisture exudation and by shifting the equilibrium among myoglobin forms, the pigments responsible for the red, purple, and brown hues of muscle tissue. Studies on Spanish-style chorizo showed that phosphate addition altered lightness and yellowness values while changing moisture dynamics during drying. In emulsion-type sausages stored for thirty days at refrigeration temperatures, phosphate inclusion stabilized hardness and reduced purge loss, while higher phosphate levels increased emulsion stability and cooking yield. Texture effects extend to whole-muscle products as well: phosphate-enhanced chicken breast and beef showed improved tenderness, with shear force responding significantly to salt concentration. Interestingly, the review notes that phosphate addition is not universally beneficial, as sous-vide cooked lamb loins with high moisture content and phosphate actually exhibited increased hardness and shear force, likely because swollen tissue and excessive protein denaturation demanded greater compression forces.</p>
<p>Flavor presents a subtler picture. At recommended addition levels of 0.3 to 0.5 percent, phosphates generally leave flavor perception largely unchanged, though certain types can impart bitterness or an alkaline, soapy aftertaste at higher concentrations. Tetrapotassium pyrophosphate scored lower on flavor in goat meat studies than tetrasodium pyrophosphate. More importantly, phosphates protect flavor indirectly by sequestering the metal ions that drive lipid oxidation, thereby suppressing warmed-over flavor and other storage-related off-notes in cooked, refrigerated meats. Consumer studies of enhanced Australian beef fajitas found that phosphate-treated samples earned higher flavor and overall liking scores, an effect the researchers attributed to the strong correlation between juiciness and perceived flavor intensity. In this sense, phosphates act less as flavorings and more as guardians of the flavor that meat naturally possesses.</p>
<p>The health case for reduction rests on a crucial biochemical distinction. Phosphorus is an essential mineral, with roughly 85 percent of the body&#8217;s supply stored in bones and teeth, and homeostasis is tightly regulated by the kidneys, intestine, parathyroid hormone, fibroblast growth factor-23, and vitamin D. But the inorganic phosphates added to processed foods behave very differently from the organic phosphorus bound in meat and dairy. Inorganic phosphate additives exhibit approximately 90 to 100 percent bioavailability, producing rapid intestinal absorption and elevated serum phosphate levels. High dietary phosphate intake has been associated with disturbed mineral metabolism, particularly in people with chronic kidney disease, and elevated serum phosphate may stimulate secretion of parathyroid hormone and FGF-23, promoting altered calcium metabolism, vascular calcification, bone demineralization, and increased cardiovascular risk. Epidemiological analyses have even linked high serum phosphate to cardiovascular mortality within the upper normal physiological range. Emerging evidence also suggests excessive phosphate may perturb gut microbiota composition and intestinal barrier function, though the authors caution that this area requires further investigation.</p>
<p>Regulatory frameworks reflect this ambivalence. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration classifies phosphate food additives as generally recognized as safe when used according to good manufacturing practices, though specific applications in meat products carry quantity limits. European legislation permits phosphates in meat preparations, minced meat, and processed meat products but prohibits them in fresh meat, capping the permitted maximum at 5 grams per kilogram expressed as phosphorus pentoxide in the finished product. The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives has set a maximum tolerable daily intake of 70 milligrams of phosphorus per kilogram of body weight, based on the lowest dose that caused nephrocalcinosis in rats. Estimated daily phosphorus intakes across European Union populations, ranging from about 265 milligrams per day in infants to roughly 1,767 milligrams in adults, currently fall within tolerable limits, but the cumulative contribution of processed foods to long-term exposure remains a genuine public health concern.</p>
<p>So what can replace a molecule that simultaneously adjusts pH, extracts protein, binds water, stabilizes emulsions, and chelates prooxidants? The review&#8217;s central conclusion is sobering: no single ingredient fully replicates the multifunctional portfolio of phosphates. Dietary fibers from citrus, wheat, bamboo, and oats bind water effectively through their porous structures and hydrophilic functional groups, and citrus fiber has partially replaced sodium phosphate in emulsified bologna while maintaining acceptable cooking yield and texture. Native and modified starches improve water retention and viscosity, with pregelatinized and resistant starches enhancing gel formation and reducing purge loss, though starch does little for myofibrillar protein extraction. Proteins from milk, blood plasma, soy, and peas stabilize emulsions through interfacial activity and gelation, compensating for reduced phosphate-induced protein solubilization, though allergen labeling and flavor consequences must be weighed. Alkaline salts such as sodium bicarbonate mimic the pH-shifting effect, and studies on enhanced beef showed bicarbonate improved tenderness and juiciness, but overuse risks soapy flavors and excessive alkalinity. Transglutaminase, the enzyme that cross-links proteins covalently, strengthens gel structure without directly raising water-holding capacity.</p>
<p>Processing technologies offer a complementary path. High-pressure processing at moderate levels of 100 to 300 megapascals unfolds muscle proteins and enhances gelation and water binding without any additives, though the capital cost of pressure equipment remains a barrier for smaller plants. Ultrasound generates cavitation that improves mass transfer and myofibrillar protein extraction, boosting the functionality of low-phosphate systems. Vacuum tumbling optimizes brine penetration and protein extraction, potentially allowing reduced phosphate levels when salt concentration and temperature are carefully controlled. Adjusting sodium chloride levels and ionic strength can partially compensate for missing phosphate by enhancing protein solubilization, although sodium reduction targets complicate that lever. The most promising industrial strategy, the authors argue, is a hurdle-based approach that combines multifunctional ingredients with optimized processing, pairing affordable technologies like vacuum tumbling with fiber, starch, or protein systems so that small-scale manufacturers are not locked out by expensive equipment.</p>
<p>The bottom line from the Korean research team, supported by the Korea Food Research Institute, is that strategic phosphate reduction is technologically achievable but demands product-specific reformulation rather than one-to-one substitution. Partial replacement is generally more feasible than complete elimination, particularly in emulsified meat systems where phosphate functionality is most deeply embedded. Future research, the review concludes, should focus on elucidating the fundamental mechanisms of protein-water interactions, developing clean-label multifunctional ingredient systems, validating long-term storage quality and sensory performance, and aligning reformulation efforts with evolving regulations. As consumers increasingly scrutinize ingredient lists and sustainability pressures mount on finite phosphate reserves, the humble sausage may soon owe its juiciness to citrus fiber, high pressure, and clever engineering rather than a sprinkle of sodium tripolyphosphate, a shift that would reshape one of the food industry&#8217;s oldest chemical partnerships.</p>
<p><strong>Subject of Research:</strong> Strategies for reducing and replacing phosphate additives in processed meat products</p>
<p><strong>Article Title:</strong> Strategies for replacing phosphates in meat processing</p>
<p><strong>Article References:</strong> Kim, T.-K., Lee, M. H., Shin, D.-M., Kim, Y.-J., Jung, S., &amp; Choi, Y.-S. (2026). Strategies for replacing phosphates in meat processing. <em>Food Science of Animal Resources, 46</em>(1), Article 65. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00069-6" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00069-6</a></p>
<p><strong>Image Credits:</strong> AI Generated</p>
<p><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00069-6" rel="noopener noreferrer">10.1007/s44463-026-00069-6</a></p>
<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> phosphates, meat processing, clean label, water-holding capacity, phosphate substitutes, food additives, emulsified meat products, high-pressure processing, dietary fiber, transglutaminase, food safety, sustainability</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">229095</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Processing Tricks Could Turn Ordinary Meat Into Superfood for Babies and Seniors</title>
		<link>https://scienmag.com/how-processing-tricks-could-turn-ordinary-meat-into-superfood-for-babies-and-seniors/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Beatrice Stafford]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2026 04:41:04 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Agriculture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[actinidin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boosting amino acid bioavailability in processed meats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dry ageing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dynamic nutritional properties of meat based on processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enhancing meat digestibility with high-pressure techniques]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enzymatic treatment of meat for seniors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free amino acids]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[geriatric nutrition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high-pressure processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[improving protein intake in infants and seniors via advanced meat treatments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infant nutrition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[leucine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meat as a superfood for vulnerable age groups]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meat processing innovations for infant and elderly nutrition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meat protein digestibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nutritional optimization of meat through processing methods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[protein quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[role of enzymes from kiwifruit peels in meat processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sarcopenia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scientific]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sous vide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tailored meat preparation for infant growth and elderly health]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://scienmag.com/?p=225746</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A new review details how cut selection, sous vide cooking, high-pressure processing, dry ageing, and fruit-derived enzymes can dramatically boost the digestibility and amino acid delivery of red meat for infants and the elderly.]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Meat has long been a dietary staple, but a new review argues that the way we choose, cook, and treat it could transform a modest portion into a far more powerful nutritional package for the two groups that need it most: infants and the elderly. Writing in the journal Food Science of Animal Resources, food scientist Michelle Ji Yeon Yoo of Auckland University of Technology lays out a technical roadmap for maximizing the digestibility and amino acid delivery of mammalian meat, from beef tenderloin to lamb shank, using tools that range from high-pressure processing to enzymes extracted from kiwifruit peels. The central insight is deceptively simple: the nutritional value of meat is not fixed at slaughter. It is a dynamic property that can be engineered, cut by cut and process by process, to suit bodies whose digestive systems are either still developing or quietly declining.</p>
<p>The biological case for targeting these populations is grounded in protein physiology. Infants require between roughly 0.85 and 1.31 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight daily to fuel rapid tissue growth, organ development, and neurocognitive maturation, according to European Food Safety Authority reference values. Older adults, meanwhile, face a subtler problem known as anabolic resistance: their muscles respond less vigorously to dietary protein, demanding higher quality inputs to maintain the same rate of muscle protein synthesis. Compounding the challenge, both groups digest protein less efficiently. Infants produce reduced gastric acid and protease activity, while seniors experience diminished mastication, lower digestive enzyme secretion, and slower gastrointestinal transit. A piece of steak that delivers a full complement of amino acids to a healthy adult may pass through a fragile or aging gut with much of its nutritional payload unabsorbed and ultimately wasted.</p>
<p>Red meat is uniquely positioned to meet these demands because it is a complete protein, containing all nine essential amino acids, alongside heme iron, zinc, phosphorus, selenium, vitamins B6 and B12, and bioactive molecules such as creatine, taurine, and carnitine. Protein makes up roughly 20 to 25 percent of raw red meat, and its quality metrics are exceptional. Using the Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score, the method now endorsed by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, beef, pork, and lamb all score above 100, indicating highly digestible proteins with balanced essential amino acid profiles. By contrast, many plant-based protein products fall short on lysine, methionine, and cysteine. For vulnerable populations who cannot afford to lose amino acids to poor digestion, that quality gap matters.</p>
<p>One of the review&#8217;s most striking arguments is that not all cuts are created equal. Amino acid profiles vary across species, anatomical locations, and muscle fiber types. Slow-twitch, oxidative muscles are richer in free amino acids such as glutamine, glutamate, aspartate, serine, and histidine, and their higher protein turnover yields a larger pool of readily digestible substrates. Fast-twitch muscles, by contrast, concentrate dipeptides like carnosine and anserine along with free glycine and alanine, but produce tougher, firmer textures. The differences are quantifiable. In raw pork, glutamine levels in the masseter muscle of the cheek reach 808.57 micromoles per 100 grams, compared with 447.37 in the longissimus dorsi of the back. In beef, cardiac muscle contains 96.24 milligrams of histidine per 100 grams against just 9.71 in the full back, while taurine in the masseter measures 111.21 milligrams per 100 grams, well above the knuckle or inside round.</p>
<p>These compositional nuances translate directly into functional benefits. Beef tenderloin stands out for its leucine content, and leucine is the branched-chain amino acid that most potently stimulates mTOR signaling and skeletal muscle protein synthesis, precisely the pathway that anabolic resistance blunts in the elderly. Collagen-rich cuts such as shank, chuck, and brisket deliver abundant glycine and proline, and glycine supplementation has been linked to improvements in metabolic syndrome markers including diabetes, obesity, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension, conditions disproportionately relevant to aging populations. Taurine, concentrated in oxidative muscles, supports cardiovascular function, the retina, and the central nervous system, and has been proposed as a therapeutic candidate for bone disorders and neurodegenerative disease. Selecting the right cut, in other words, is a form of precision nutrition.</p>
<p>Once the cut is chosen, processing becomes the lever. Conventional boiling yields protein digestibility of roughly 85 to 88 percent, but gentler thermal approaches do better. Sous vide cooking, in which vacuum-packed meat is held in a water bath at 55 to 60 degrees Celsius for extended periods, pushes digestibility to 90 to 92 percent by limiting thermal aggregation while still gelatinizing collagen in tough cuts. The temperature window is critical. Moderate heat unfolds proteins and exposes cleavage sites to digestive enzymes, but prolonged heating above 100 degrees Celsius promotes aggregation and intermolecular cross-linking that resist proteolysis. Grilling and frying can also degrade lysine through Maillard reactions, whereas moist-heat methods like braising and stewing preserve amino acid integrity while softening connective tissue, a combination well suited to infants and older adults who need tender, easily masticated food.</p>
<p>High-pressure processing offers an even more powerful intervention. Treating meat at pressures between 100 and 300 megapascals disrupts actomyosin complexes, converts alpha-helix structures toward beta-sheets, and unfolds myofibrillar proteins such as myosin and actin, making them far more accessible to digestive proteases. Studies compiled in the review show that moderate pressure enhances free amino acid liberation by approximately 15 to 40 percent, with the greatest gains, up to 50 percent, observed in beef longissimus dorsi treated at 600 megapascals. The mechanism appears to involve lysosomal disruption: pressures above 200 megapascals destroy lysosomes, releasing endogenous proteases that continue degrading proteins during storage. But the dose-response curve is unforgiving. Beyond 300 to 400 megapascals, hydrophobic interactions and disulfide bonding drive protein aggregation, and aminopeptidases and carboxypeptidases are inactivated, partially reversing the digestibility gains. Combining high-pressure processing with mild thermal treatment maximizes digestibility to 95 to 97 percent, and infant-model digestion studies confirm that pressure-treated beef outperforms untreated controls.</p>
<p>Ageing the meat adds a third dimension. Dry ageing and its more controlled variant, in-bag dry ageing, harness endogenous calpains, cathepsins, and exopeptidases to progressively fragment myofibrillar and cytoskeletal proteins during storage. The result is an accumulation of low-molecular-weight peptides below 3 kilodaltons and free amino acids that act as pre-digested intermediates, accelerating gastric-phase hydrolysis without necessarily changing total digestibility. In-bag dry ageing, which uses semi-permeable packaging to permit moisture loss while limiting microbial contamination, achieves comparable or greater amino acid accumulation than conventional dry ageing with reduced trimming losses. Dry-aged lamb shows greater gastric digestibility and free amino acid release than wet-aged counterparts, suggesting the technique tunes digestion kinetics rather than overall protein utilization. For consumers with intact dentition, aged meat offers a degree of pre-digestion without the need for industrial hydrolysates.</p>
<p>The final tool is enzymatic, and it draws on an unexpected resource: fruit waste. Papain from papaya, bromelain from pineapple, actinidin from kiwifruit, and ficin from fig are all generally recognized as safe proteases capable of cleaving both myofibrillar proteins and collagen. Actinidin treatment increases protein solubility, reduces beef shear force, and generates low-molecular-weight fragments that hydrolyze rapidly in simulated gastric and intestinal conditions. Papain treatment of beef raises intestinal degrees of hydrolysis to roughly 34 to 44 percent while cutting shear force by more than 40 percent, improving both digestibility and ease of chewing. Because these enzymes can be extracted from peels that would otherwise be discarded, the approach doubles as food waste valorization. The review&#8217;s synthesis is a layered protocol: actinidin pre-treatment at refrigeration temperatures, followed by high-pressure processing at 200 to 300 megapascals, then sous vide cooking, applied to leucine-rich tenderloin, represents the optimal combination for infants, toddlers, and seniors with swallowing difficulties.</p>
<p>Yoo frames the strategy as more than a nutritional refinement. By extracting maximal absorbable nutrition from a given quantity of meat, cut selection and processing optimization support a more sustainable food system, potentially unlocking value from lower-value, collagen-rich cuts that currently command premium prices only after lengthy cooking. The author acknowledges that significant work remains: quantifying digestion kinetics in vivo, tracking leucine bioaccessibility and post-prandial amino acid absorption, and conducting full sustainability assessments of energy use and yield. But the underlying premise is compelling. If the goal is to feed growing populations with limited resources while protecting those whose bodies struggle to extract nutrition from ordinary food, the future of meat may lie less in what we raise and more in how we prepare it.</p>
<p><strong>Subject of Research:</strong> Optimizing the nutritional profile and protein digestibility of mammalian meat for infant and geriatric nutrition</p>
<p><strong>Article Title:</strong> Strategies to optimize the nutritional profile of mammalian meat for infants and geriatric population</p>
<p><strong>Article References:</strong> Yoo, M. J. Y. (2026). Strategies to optimize the nutritional profile of mammalian meat for infants and geriatric population. <em>Food Science of Animal Resources, 46</em>(1), Article 71. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00094-5" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00094-5</a></p>
<p><strong>Image Credits:</strong> AI Generated</p>
<p><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00094-5" rel="noopener noreferrer">10.1007/s44463-026-00094-5</a></p>
<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> meat protein digestibility, infant nutrition, geriatric nutrition, high-pressure processing, sous vide, dry ageing, free amino acids, leucine, actinidin, sarcopenia, protein quality, food processing</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">225746</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>High-Pressure Treatment Zaps Dangerous Bacteria in Wild Venison Without Ruining the Taste</title>
		<link>https://scienmag.com/high-pressure-treatment-zaps-dangerous-bacteria-in-wild-venison-without-ruining-the-taste/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alan Morgan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 21:33:39 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Agriculture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cryo-SEM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[E. coli]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enzymatic activity reduction in venison]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food safety innovations in game meat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[game meat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high-pressure processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high-pressure processing for game meat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impact of HPP on meat taste and texture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Listeria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meat colour]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbial contamination in field-harvested meat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbial inactivation in wild game]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbial reduction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-thermal food preservation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[preserving flavor in high-pressure treatments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Salmonella]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sensory analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sterilization alternatives for wild game]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sustainable protein sources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[venison]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[water-holding capacity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wild red deer meat handling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wild venison safety]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://scienmag.com/?p=223738</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Spanish researchers have found that treating wild venison at 350 megapascals for six minutes eliminates Salmonella and Listeria and cuts bacterial loads by up to 99.99 percent while leaving the cooked meat indistinguishable from untreated cuts.]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wild venison has never been more popular. Consumers across Europe increasingly prize game meat as a natural, sustainable protein, produced without conventional livestock farming and raised on pasture-based systems. Yet the very qualities that make venison appealing also make it tricky to handle. In Spain alone, trophy hunting of wild red deer yields an estimated 11,250 tonnes of meat each year, much of it harvested during autumn and winter driven hunts known as monterías. Because these animals are shot, eviscerated and transported under field conditions that vary widely, their meat can pick up a heavy microbial burden from the gut, the hide and the soil. Now a team of Spanish researchers has shown that a carefully tuned burst of industrial-scale pressure can strip away nearly all of that bacterial load — and that the treatment is essentially invisible to the diner once the meat hits the pan.</p>
<p>The study, published in Food Science of Animal Resources, set out to optimize high-pressure processing, or HPP, for wild deer loins. HPP is a non-thermal preservation technology that subjects vacuum-packed food to uniform hydrostatic pressure, inactivating microorganisms and enzymes at low temperatures without the sensory and nutritional damage caused by sterilization or pasteurization. The technique is already used commercially on juices, guacamole and deli meats, but its effects depend heavily on the food matrix. Moderate pressures between 300 and 400 megapascals achieve partial microbial reduction while better preserving raw meat quality, whereas pressures above 500 megapascals kill more microbes but can wreck colour and texture. Finding the sweet spot for venison was the goal of Beatriz García-Béjar, Almudena Soriano and colleagues at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, working with the Castilla y León Agricultural Technological Institute.</p>
<p>The raw material came from 16 male Iberian red deer shot during montería hunts in the province of Ciudad Real at the end of the hunting season. Each animal was eviscerated and inspected by a veterinarian in the field, hung in a refrigerated truck and aged for two days at 4 to 5 degrees Celsius before the loins — the longissimus thoracis et lumborum muscles — were extracted. Each left loin was halved and vacuum-packed, with one half kept as an untreated control and the other processed on an industrial Hiperbaric Wave 6000/135 unit, a 135-litre vessel calibrated annually and fitted with alarms that interrupt the cycle if pressure or temperature drifts. Treatments were applied on the fifth day after death, and all analyses were completed one week after slaughter, giving a realistic picture of how the technology would perform in a commercial workflow.</p>
<p>In the optimization phase, the team tested six pressure-time combinations: 350, 450 and 550 megapascals, each for either 3 or 6 minutes, with biological replicates from different animals. Initial bacterial counts hovered around 6 log colony-forming units per gram. The heaviest treatment, 550 megapascals, delivered the biggest microbial kill, reducing viable mesophilic aerobic bacteria by more than 2 log units — roughly 99.5 percent. Treatments at 350 and 450 megapascals still achieved reductions greater than 1 log unit, corresponding to about 94.9 to 96.8 percent. Interestingly, processing time on its own and the pressure-time interaction had no statistically significant effect on bacterial reduction, suggesting that pressure, not duration, is the dominant lever. But the price of brute force became obvious the moment the researchers looked at the meat itself.</p>
<p>Colour is the single most important quality cue for raw meat, and HPP left a visible fingerprint. Control loins bloomed to a bright red after 45 minutes of exposure to oxygen, as myoglobin converted to oxymyoglobin. Treated samples turned a pinkish-brown, and the effect intensified with pressure. Instrumental measurements confirmed the shift: lightness and yellowness values rose across all treatments, while redness dropped significantly from the 450 megapascal, 6-minute condition onward. The mechanism is well understood — myoglobin begins to denature at pressures of 400 megapascals and above, altering the way muscle absorbs and reflects light. A trained sensory panel of four experts with more than 25 years of experience each, working under ISO consensus-profiling protocols, agreed: aroma and tenderness were unaffected, but adhesiveness increased and red colour faded, with the worst damage at 550 megapascals, where colour intensity fell by two to three points on a three-point scale.</p>
<p>Based on this trade-off, the researchers selected 350 megapascals for 6 minutes as the best compromise and put it through a tougher test. Four loins from different animals were deliberately chosen because their high microbial loads reflected particularly poor hygiene during field handling — a worst-case scenario, though not fully representative of the wider population. The results were striking. Mesophilic aerobic bacteria fell by 99.97 percent, from about 7.9 to 4.4 log CFU per gram. Enterobacteriaceae dropped by 99.98 percent, and Escherichia coli by 99.99 percent, plunging from 7.8 to 2.1 log CFU per gram. Staphylococcus spp. counts were cut by 99.99 percent, and neither Salmonella spp. nor Listeria spp. could be detected in treated samples, with absence confirmed in 25-gram portions. Notably, no Staphylococcus aureus was found in any sample, treated or not.</p>
<p>The microbiology behind these numbers is revealing. Gram-negative bacteria such as E. coli and the Enterobacteriaceae are known to be more pressure-sensitive than gram-positive species, whose cross-linked peptidoglycan cell walls provide structural armour. Yet even the gram-positive Staphylococcus spp. in this study collapsed under treatment, a sensitivity the authors attribute to variability in baro-resistance and to the stage of the cell cycle. Rod-shaped bacteria also tend to be more vulnerable than spherical cocci, which helps explain the dramatic elimination of Listeria. The data also hinted that the treatment works harder on dirtier meat: samples starting at 8 log CFU per gram lost 99.97 percent of their bacteria, while cleaner samples starting at 6.1 log CFU per gram lost 94.9 percent. For a sector where carcass contamination ranges from below 2 to over 6 log CFU per square centimetre depending on field practices, that scalability matters.</p>
<p>Crucially, the gentler treatment left the meat&#8217;s chemistry largely intact. pH rose only slightly and non-significantly, moisture content was unchanged at around 76 percent, and cooking losses were statistically identical between treated and control loins at roughly 28 to 31 percent. Drip loss during 48 hours of refrigerated storage was actually lower in the pressurized meat, indicating improved water-holding capacity — a potential commercial bonus. The sensory story, however, had a twist. In a triangle test with 14 expert tasters following ISO 4120 protocols, panellists could reliably distinguish raw treated venison from raw controls, citing colour and tactile texture in every case. But once the loins were grilled to an internal temperature of 72 degrees Celsius, the differences vanished: the panel could no longer tell treated from untreated meat. Thermal denaturation of muscle proteins and surface browning reactions appear to homogenize whatever HPP changed, meaning consumers would never notice on the plate.</p>
<p>To understand what pressure actually does to muscle, the team turned to cryo-scanning electron microscopy, freezing samples in liquid nitrogen and imaging them with a field-emission microscope. The treated loins showed clearly defined separation between myofibrils — a subtle structural loosening that likely underlies the increased adhesiveness the panellists noted and the textural differences detected in raw samples. Similar disruption of sarcomere continuity has been reported in myofibrils exposed to 300 megapascals. The authors are careful to frame the work as preliminary: only four loins were used in the validation assay, and larger datasets are needed to confirm the findings and to test whether HPP extends shelf life. Still, the message is compelling. A 6-minute treatment at 350 megapascals can eliminate Salmonella and Listeria and slash bacterial loads by up to 99.99 percent in heavily contaminated wild venison, while leaving pH, moisture and cooked eating quality untouched. For a growing game meat industry operating outside the hygiene controls of conventional slaughterhouses, that combination of safety and subtlety could be exactly what it takes to bring wild deer from the hunting field to the supermarket shelf — and finally to the fork — with confidence.</p>
<p><strong>Subject of Research:</strong> Optimization of high-pressure processing conditions for microbial reduction and quality preservation in wild venison</p>
<p><strong>Article Title:</strong> Preliminary optimization and quality assessment of high-pressure processing for venison preservation</p>
<p><strong>Article References:</strong> García-Béjar, B., González-Fernández, J. L., Alarcón, M., Delgado, B., Peinado, C., &amp; Soriano, A. (2026). Preliminary optimization and quality assessment of high-pressure processing for venison preservation. <em>Food Science of Animal Resources, 46</em>(1), Article 109. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00117-1" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00117-1</a></p>
<p><strong>Image Credits:</strong> AI Generated</p>
<p><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00117-1" rel="noopener noreferrer">10.1007/s44463-026-00117-1</a></p>
<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> high-pressure processing, venison, game meat, food safety, microbial reduction, Salmonella, Listeria, E. coli, meat colour, sensory analysis, cryo-SEM, water-holding capacity</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">223738</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>High-Pressure Processing Tames Dangerous Bacteria in Raw Beef Pet Food</title>
		<link>https://scienmag.com/high-pressure-processing-tames-dangerous-bacteria-in-raw-beef-pet-food/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kristina Jarvis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 09:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Agriculture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beef loin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[effects of high-pressure processing on meat texture and nutrients]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food safety technology for raw pet diets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foodborne pathogens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high-pressure processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[High-pressure processing in raw pet food safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[impact of high-pressure processing on meat quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lipid oxidation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Listeria monocytogenes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meat Quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbial inactivation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbial inactivation in raw meat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microbial safety trade-offs in high-pressure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-thermal sterilization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-thermal sterilization for pet food]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pathogen reduction methods in raw pet food]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pet food industry safety measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[raw pet food]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risks of raw pet food handling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Salmonella]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Salmonella and Listeria in raw pet diets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Staphylococcus aureus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zoonotic pathogen control in raw beef]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://scienmag.com/?p=221810</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A new study shows that high-pressure processing can dramatically reduce dangerous pathogens in raw beef pet food, but the highest pressures also toughen the meat and accelerate oxidation, pointing to a moderate-pressure sweet spot.]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Raw pet food has become one of the fastest-growing segments of the companion animal market, driven by owners who increasingly regard their dogs and cats as family members and who want diets that look more natural and less processed than extruded kibble. But the same minimal processing that makes raw diets appealing also leaves them vulnerable. Because raw meat products are distributed without a terminal heat treatment, they can carry zoonotic pathogens such as Salmonella, Listeria, and pathogenic Escherichia coli, posing risks not only to pets but also to the humans who handle their food. A new study published in Food Science of Animal Resources by Ui-Bin Baek and Hack-Youn Kim of Kongju National University in South Korea now offers a detailed map of how high-pressure processing, a non-thermal sterilization technology, can make raw beef safer while revealing the quality trade-offs that come with it.</p>
<p>The research team set out to answer a question that has practical consequences for the pet food industry: how much pressure is enough to kill dangerous microbes, and how much is too much before the meat itself begins to suffer? They treated raw beef loin, a primary ingredient in raw pet food formulations, at pressures of 0.1, 100, 300, and 500 megapascals for holding times of 5 to 15 minutes, then tracked both microbial survival and a battery of physicochemical properties over two weeks of refrigerated storage. Five pathogens were inoculated onto the meat: Salmonella Typhimurium, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Listeria monocytogenes, and Bacillus cereus. The samples were vacuum-packed and processed within two hours of inoculation to minimize any changes in microbial populations before treatment.</p>
<p>The microbial results followed a clear pressure-time hierarchy. At 100 megapascals, the inactivation effect was limited, consistent with reversible cellular responses rather than irreversible damage; membranes may become permeabilized without sufficient disruption of intracellular structures, allowing microorganisms to recover. As pressure increased, structural disruption of cell membranes and protein denaturation progressed, leading to irreversible cellular damage. The most striking result came at 500 megapascals for 15 minutes, where Salmonella Typhimurium was reduced to below the detection limit of one log colony-forming unit per gram and was never re-detected during the entire two-week storage period. The other pathogens were not completely eliminated, but they showed substantial reductions with limited regrowth.</p>
<p>The differential survival of the pathogens tells a fascinating story about cell architecture. Gram-positive bacteria such as Listeria monocytogenes and Staphylococcus aureus possess thicker peptidoglycan layers than their gram-negative counterparts, conferring greater pressure resistance. Among all the organisms tested, Staphylococcus aureus proved the toughest, and the authors attribute this to a suite of defensive features: the antioxidant pigment staphyloxanthin, a high content of branched-chain fatty acids in the cell membrane, extensive secondary cross-linking of peptidoglycan, and teichoic acids that stabilize the cell wall against deformation. Immediately after the 500-megapascal, 15-minute treatment, E. coli, Listeria, Staphylococcus, and Bacillus were reduced by 77.47, 77.58, 48.77, and 71.83 percent respectively compared with the control, and over the storage period the reductions reached 59.46, 68.35, 53.39, and 92.08 percent.</p>
<p>Bacillus cereus added another layer of complexity because of its spore-forming ability. Rather than being killed directly, pressures above 50 megapascals stimulate germinant receptors and SpoVA channels within the spores, triggering the release of calcium and calcium-dipicolinic acid and raising the water content of the spore core. Once germinated, the spores convert into vegetative cells, losing their pressure resistance and becoming more susceptible to oxidative stress and DNA damage. This supports what the authors describe as a germination-inactivation sequence rather than direct spore lethality, a nuance that matters greatly for shelf-stable product design.</p>
<p>On the quality side, the picture was more mixed. Proximate composition, meaning moisture, protein, fat, and ash content, remained unchanged across all treatments, largely because vacuum packaging prevented drip loss, the main route by which pressure treatment can alter bulk nutritional composition. pH was similarly stable throughout processing and storage, which the researchers link to the suppression of microbial metabolism and endogenous enzymatic activity, the two main drivers of postmortem biochemical change. However, higher pressures and longer holding times increased lightness, yellowness, shear force, water-holding capacity, and thiobarbituric acid reactive substances, a marker of lipid oxidation, while redness declined. The 500-megapascal, 15-minute treatment raised lightness by 36.95 percent compared with the control, producing a visibly paler product.</p>
<p>One of the most intriguing findings is a paradox in texture. The highest pressure-time combination produced both the greatest water-holding capacity and the highest shear force, meaning the meat held more water yet became tougher. The authors explain this through pressure-induced protein aggregation: dissociated myofibrillar proteins interact through exposed sulfhydryl groups and hydrophobic residues, forming gel-like networks that immobilize water within a mechanically rigid matrix. Water retention, in other words, does not equal tenderness under high pressure. Meanwhile, color changes were governed by non-linear interactions between structural light scattering and myoglobin redox chemistry; at an intermediate 300 megapascals, metmyoglobin-reducing enzymes remain active enough to partially preserve redness, whereas 500 megapascals inactivates those enzymatic defenses.</p>
<p>Oxidation and spoilage chemistry also responded to pressure in opposing directions. Lipid oxidation, measured as TBARS, increased with both pressure intensity and storage time, driven by the release of non-heme iron when myoglobin&#8217;s porphyrin structure is destroyed; that iron reacts with hydrogen peroxide to generate hydroxyl radicals that attack lipids. Volatile basic nitrogen, an indicator of protein deterioration, moved the opposite way, falling significantly at 500 megapascals because high pressure suppresses both the microbes and the proteolytic enzymes, including calpains and cathepsins, that would otherwise degrade muscle proteins. Yet even here, storage mattered: VBN values climbed in all groups by week two, suggesting residual enzymatic activity persists after treatment.</p>
<p>The study&#8217;s practical conclusion is that processing intensity must be optimized rather than maximized. The 500-megapascal, 15-minute condition delivered the strongest antimicrobial effect but also the worst quality outcomes, including tougher texture, more lipid oxidation, and color deterioration. Moderate conditions around 300 megapascals for 15 minutes achieved substantial microbial reduction while better preserving the attributes that determine palatability, which matters because companion animals are sensitive to texture and appearance as well as to microbial hazards. The authors acknowledge limitations, notably the absence of sensory evaluation, and propose that future work employ electronic nose and tongue instruments and gas chromatography-based volatile analysis, along with digestibility trials, to establish biologically relevant processing windows. For an industry racing to make raw diets safe without making them sterile and unappetizing, this study provides exactly the kind of pressure-time framework needed to find that balance.</p>
<p><strong>Subject of Research:</strong> Effects of high-pressure processing on microbial safety and physicochemical quality of raw beef loin for pet food</p>
<p><strong>Article Title:</strong> Analyses of the microbial safety and physicochemical characteristics of beef loin treated with high-pressure</p>
<p><strong>Article References:</strong> Baek, U.-B., &amp; Kim, H.-Y. (2026). Analyses of the microbial safety and physicochemical characteristics of beef loin treated with high-pressure. <em>Food Science of Animal Resources, 46</em>(1), Article 74. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00081-w" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00081-w</a></p>
<p><strong>Image Credits:</strong> AI Generated</p>
<p><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44463-026-00081-w" rel="noopener noreferrer">10.1007/s44463-026-00081-w</a></p>
<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> high-pressure processing, raw pet food, beef loin, foodborne pathogens, Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus, microbial inactivation, lipid oxidation, meat quality, non-thermal sterilization, food safety</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">221810</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>High-Pressure Steam Cooking Dismantles Peanut&#8217;s Dominant Allergen</title>
		<link>https://scienmag.com/high-pressure-steam-cooking-dismantles-peanuts-dominant-allergen/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bethany Barker]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2026 23:24:32 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Chemistry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advances in allergy immunotherapy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[allergen deactivation methods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[allergenicity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[allergenicity of peanut proteins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ara h 1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ara h 1 allergen in peanuts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atomic force microscopy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[childhood peanut allergy rates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circular dichroism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ELISA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food allergen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food allergy management strategies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food processing sterilization techniques]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high-pressure processing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high-pressure steam sterilization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibody response]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[immunoreactivity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peanut allergen reduction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peanut allergy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peanut allergy prevalence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[peanut allergy treatment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[protein structure]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://scienmag.com/?p=213259</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A new study shows that standard high-temperature, high-pressure sterilization can cut the immunoreactivity of peanut's major allergen Ara h 1 to as little as 10 percent of untreated levels by dismantling its structure.]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peanut allergy affects roughly two percent of people in Western countries and about 2.2 percent worldwide, and its prevalence keeps climbing, particularly among children. In the United States, self-reported peanut allergy tripled among 4-to-17-year-olds between 2011 and 2017, and childhood prevalence rose from 0.4 percent in 1997 to 1.4 percent in 2008. The allergy is stubbornly persistent too: between 75 and 80 percent of children who develop it carry it into adulthood. With no cure that reliably protects patients, and with half of affected individuals reporting severe reactions after accidental ingestion, the only dependable defense has been strict avoidance. That is why a new study from Chinese researchers, published in Discover Chemistry, is drawing attention: it shows that an industrial sterilization technique already common in food processing can strip much of the antibody-binding power from Ara h 1, the most prominent peanut allergen.</p>
<p>Ara h 1 is no minor player. It makes up 12 to 16 percent of total peanut protein and is recognized by IgE antibodies in 70 to 90 percent of peanut-allergic patients. Of the 19 peanut allergens officially designated by the WHO/IUIS Allergen Nomenclature Sub-Committee, Ara h 1 stands out as a seed storage protein whose three-dimensional shape underpins much of its allergenicity. The research team, led by Yong-Qiang Wang and Ying-Chao Li of Changzhou Vocational Institute of Engineering together with colleagues at Jiangyin People&#8217;s Hospital, Yangzhou University and Jiangnan University, set out to test whether high-temperature and high-pressure (HTHP) treatment, essentially the saturated steam conditions of commercial autoclaving and retorting, could reshape that protein enough to blunt its immunoreactivity.</p>
<p>The researchers worked with two systems side by side: purified Ara h 1 and a crude peanut protein extract, so they could compare how the allergen behaves in isolation versus within the complex matrix of a real food. They subjected both to steam treatment at 121 degrees Celsius under 0.1 megapascals of pressure and at 135 degrees Celsius under 0.22 megapascals, for durations ranging from 10 to 60 minutes. These temperatures were chosen deliberately because they correspond to standard commercial sterilization protocols, meaning any findings could translate directly into existing food industry practice rather than requiring novel equipment or processing steps.</p>
<p>The results were striking. After 20 minutes at 135 degrees Celsius, the immunoreactivity of purified Ara h 1 fell to 33.4 percent of the untreated control, and after 60 minutes it dropped to just 16.7 percent. In the crude peanut extract, the effect was even more pronounced: immunoreactivity fell to 25.0 percent and 10.0 percent of control levels after 20 and 60 minutes respectively. The team measured this using competitive ELISA with rabbit polyclonal antibodies raised against the allergen, and confirmed the pattern with Western blotting, which revealed that the intact 65-kilodalton Ara h 1 band progressively disappeared while immunoreactive fragments accumulated at roughly 55, 35, 25 and 15 kilodaltons depending on the treatment and the sample matrix.</p>
<p>Electrophoresis told a story of molecular demolition. Under the harshest conditions, 135 degrees Celsius for 20 minutes or longer, small proteins of 15 kilodaltons or less came to dominate the soluble fraction, constituting approximately 56 to 75 percent of total soluble protein after an hour. Soluble protein content of purified Ara h 1 dropped by about 36 percent after 20 minutes at 135 degrees Celsius before plateauing, suggesting that part of the protein had aggregated into insoluble forms or degraded while the remainder resisted further precipitation. Intriguingly, Ara h 1 appeared less thermally stable within the crude extract than on its own, with the intact 65-kilodalton band vanishing more readily in the mixed protein environment, possibly because interactions with a protein of around 55 kilodaltons promoted its aggregation or altered its degradation pathway.</p>
<p>To see what the treatment actually did to the protein&#8217;s architecture, the team turned to atomic force microscopy, circular dichroism spectroscopy and intrinsic fluorescence. Native Ara h 1 appeared under the microscope as uniform spheres roughly 5 nanometers tall. After 20 minutes at 135 degrees Celsius, those spheres had transformed into irregular short rod-like aggregates about 3 nanometers in height, and after an hour at either temperature the protein formed heterogeneous globular fragments only around 2 nanometers tall. The morphology mirrored that of Ara h 1 extracted from roasted peanuts in earlier studies, reinforcing the picture of a protein that refolds into compact, fragmented structures after thermal assault.</p>
<p>The spectroscopic data filled in the molecular details. Circular dichroism in the far-ultraviolet region showed that the native protein, initially composed of 20.9 percent alpha-helix, 24.5 percent beta-sheet, 19.4 percent beta-turn and 36.8 percent random coil, progressively lost beta-sheet and beta-turn content while gaining alpha-helical and disordered structures. Near-ultraviolet circular dichroism, which probes the microenvironments of aromatic amino acids, revealed that ordered tertiary structure containing tyrosine residues was nearly eliminated during the first 10 to 20 minutes of treatment, although longer treatment partially restored the tyrosine packing signal. Intrinsic fluorescence showed a slight red shift in the tryptophan emission maximum after treatments longer than 20 minutes, indicating that buried tryptophan residues were increasingly exposed to the aqueous solvent.</p>
<p>These structural changes matter because they plausibly explain the loss of immunoreactivity. Conformational epitopes, the folded three-dimensional shapes that B lymphocytes and IgE antibodies primarily recognize, depend on higher-order protein structure, so dismantling that structure destroys the shapes antibodies bind. Increased exposure of aromatic residues may also make the protein more vulnerable to digestive enzymes such as gastric protease, which cleave preferentially at aromatic amino acids, potentially reducing the allergen&#8217;s ability to survive the gut intact and sensitize the immune system. The rise in random coil and alpha-helix content coupled with reduced beta-sheet structure has previously been associated with diminished allergenic reactivity in other food proteins.</p>
<p>The authors are careful to flag important caveats. Immunoreactivity here was assessed with rabbit IgG as a surrogate, not with human IgE from peanut-allergic patients, so the findings demonstrate structural epitope destruction but do not directly measure clinical allergenicity; residual IgE binding in sensitized individuals could still trigger reactions. The analyses were also restricted to the soluble fraction, leaving the insoluble precipitate, which may retain allergenic potential, uncharacterized. Only two temperatures were tested, and questions about long-term stability, flavor, texture and nutrient content remain open before industrial application. The team recommends follow-up work with human serum-based assays, basophil activation tests, and in vivo models to confirm clinical relevance.</p>
<p>Even with those caveats, the implications are compelling. HTHP processing is already an established sterilization technique, so a food manufacturer could in principle reduce the immunoreactivity of peanut ingredients using equipment and protocols that exist today, without genetic engineering, enzymatic additives or chemical treatments that raise consumer safety concerns. As a step toward hypoallergenic peanut products, the study offers a detailed structure-activity account of exactly how heat and pressure dismantle one of the world&#8217;s most consequential food allergens, molecule by molecule, and a roadmap for the clinical validation that must come next.</p>
<p><strong>Subject of Research:</strong> Structural modification and immunoreactivity reduction of the peanut allergen Ara h 1 by high-temperature and high-pressure processing</p>
<p><strong>Article Title:</strong> Structural modifications and immunoreactivity reduction of peanut allergen Ara h 1 under high-temperature and high-pressure processing</p>
<p><strong>Article References:</strong> Wang, Y.-Q., Li, Y.-C., Duan, H.-Y., Zhu, H.-K., Jiang, L., &amp; Qian, H. (2026). Structural modifications and immunoreactivity reduction of peanut allergen Ara h 1 under high-temperature and high-pressure processing. <em>Discover Chemistry, 3</em>(1), Article 542. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44371-026-01004-w" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://doi.org/10.1007/s44371-026-01004-w</a></p>
<p><strong>Image Credits:</strong> AI Generated</p>
<p><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s44371-026-01004-w" rel="noopener noreferrer">10.1007/s44371-026-01004-w</a></p>
<p><strong>Keywords:</strong> peanut allergy, Ara h 1, food allergen, high-pressure processing, immunoreactivity, protein structure, circular dichroism, atomic force microscopy, ELISA, food processing, allergenicity, food safety</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">213259</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
