Treatments Used in Food Processing

**Chapter 7**

**Abstract**

**1. Introduction**

**109**

High Hydrostatic Pressure

*Rosa María García-Gimeno*

*and Guiomar Denisse Posada Izquierdo*

Treatment of Meat Products

modelling tool is introduced for the optimisation of meat treatment.

Today the food security situation is continually under review and questioned as a result of several food-borne outbreaks that occurred. The company, mainly responsible for the safety of its products, strives to achieve techniques and procedures that allow it to ensure all risks and at the same time extend commercial shelf life and all this without altering the sensory characteristics of optimum quality. Consumers demand insistently fresher, healthier, safer and more convenient food,

In the case of ready-to-eat products (RTE), the need is even more pressing since it is a product for direct human consumption without the need for cooking or other processing effective to eliminate or reduce to an acceptable level of microorganisms. In this sense, European legislation (Regulation EC 2073/2005, [1]) establishes clear limits of various pathogens, such as regulating the presence of *L. monocytogenes* in ready-to-eat products, *Escherichia coli* in fruits, vegetables and live bivalve

**Keywords:** high hydrostatic pressure, high pressure processing, microbial inactivation, extension shelf life, predictive microbiology

molluscs or *Salmonella* in ready-to-eat foods containing raw egg.

with good tasting and without preservatives.

High hydrostatic pressure (HHP) treatment has been described to improve the microbiological safety and shelf life of ready-to-eat (RTE) meat products, as a nonthermal decontamination technology in the meat industry, applied at pre- or post-packaging. The pathogen widely studied in this product is *Listeria monocytogenes* that reflects the concern of the food industry. In general, microorganism's lethality during HHP treatment depends on specific intrinsic factors of the microorganism; those factors are related to food and technological factors of treatment. In addition to processing parameters, intrinsic factors of the food matrix also exert an effect on bacteria inactivation during pressure treatment. It is known that low water activity (aw) protects microorganisms against the effects of pressure. Predictive modelling is an important tool of the novel microbial food safety management strategy that provides with accurate information to demonstrate and guarantee the safety and shelf life of the food products. The chapter describes the effect of parameters on the efficiency of this technology on meat products over pathogens, composition and the sensorial quality consequences. The predictive

## **Chapter 7**

## High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products

*Rosa María García-Gimeno and Guiomar Denisse Posada Izquierdo*

## **Abstract**

High hydrostatic pressure (HHP) treatment has been described to improve the microbiological safety and shelf life of ready-to-eat (RTE) meat products, as a nonthermal decontamination technology in the meat industry, applied at pre- or post-packaging. The pathogen widely studied in this product is *Listeria monocytogenes* that reflects the concern of the food industry. In general, microorganism's lethality during HHP treatment depends on specific intrinsic factors of the microorganism; those factors are related to food and technological factors of treatment. In addition to processing parameters, intrinsic factors of the food matrix also exert an effect on bacteria inactivation during pressure treatment. It is known that low water activity (aw) protects microorganisms against the effects of pressure. Predictive modelling is an important tool of the novel microbial food safety management strategy that provides with accurate information to demonstrate and guarantee the safety and shelf life of the food products. The chapter describes the effect of parameters on the efficiency of this technology on meat products over pathogens, composition and the sensorial quality consequences. The predictive modelling tool is introduced for the optimisation of meat treatment.

**Keywords:** high hydrostatic pressure, high pressure processing, microbial inactivation, extension shelf life, predictive microbiology

## **1. Introduction**

Today the food security situation is continually under review and questioned as a result of several food-borne outbreaks that occurred. The company, mainly responsible for the safety of its products, strives to achieve techniques and procedures that allow it to ensure all risks and at the same time extend commercial shelf life and all this without altering the sensory characteristics of optimum quality. Consumers demand insistently fresher, healthier, safer and more convenient food, with good tasting and without preservatives.

In the case of ready-to-eat products (RTE), the need is even more pressing since it is a product for direct human consumption without the need for cooking or other processing effective to eliminate or reduce to an acceptable level of microorganisms.

In this sense, European legislation (Regulation EC 2073/2005, [1]) establishes clear limits of various pathogens, such as regulating the presence of *L. monocytogenes* in ready-to-eat products, *Escherichia coli* in fruits, vegetables and live bivalve molluscs or *Salmonella* in ready-to-eat foods containing raw egg.

The occurrence of food-borne outbreaks in Europe has a decreasing tendency. A total of 5079 food-borne (including waterborne) outbreaks were reported by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) [2]. This report describes *Salmonella* as the commonest detected agent, and the highest-risk agent/food pairs the *Salmonella* in eggs and meat and meat products, and the analysis of strong-evidence foodborne outbreaks is associated with animal origin food [2]. In the case of meat products with longer shelf life, bacteria have more time to grow if they have the conditions (such as cooked sausages, cooked sliced ham and fermented salami) [3].

enzymes equivalent to thermal pasteurisation processed but preserving the taste, colour and nutritious value of the product [4, 6, 23, 30, 31]. The treatment can be prepackaging (liquid food) or post-packaging (all types of food), although the latter is most frequently used [20]. The meat industry tries to apply the shortest HHP treatment on production lines as they can, currently from 3 to 6 min maximum [9, 32]; although many potential HPP applications would require long treatment times to ensure an adequate inactivation level of pathogens and spoilage microorganisms, pressure treatments alone would not be sufficient to guarantee food safety [33]. The application of HHP technology follows *two basic principles*: Le Chatelier principle and isostatic rule (Pascal principle). The first principle postulates that pressure accelerates reactions (phase change, changes in the molecular configuration, chemical reactions) that involve volume reductions and vice versa and inhibits reactions that occur with increases in volume. Since the medium used to transmit the pressure is usually water (incompressible fluid), the isostatic rule principle is verified in the HHP application, stating that "the increase in pressure applied to the surface of an incompressible fluid, contained in an undeformable container, is transmitted with the same value to each of its parts". The applied pressure is transmitted in an isostatic (uniform) and almost instantaneous way to all points of the food, regardless of its composition, size and shape. This prevents deformation of the product, despite being subjected to such high pressures, and makes it very homogeneous and does not have over-treated areas. When food is treated in its packaging, it must be flexible and deformable (it must tolerate volume reductions of up to 15%). The evacuation of gases from the interior is especially necessary to prevent their compression from reducing the pressurisation efficiency [34, 35]. The pressure range for a commercial purpose is usually from 100 to 600 Mpa [30], but this only can approach to a pasteurisation process but not commercial sterilisation where spores should be destroyed and more than 1000 Mpa should be applied for the sterilisation [30]. The new commercial unit implemented has increased in capacity and pressure, reducing the time to a few minutes, which helps manufacturers to reduce costs. The consumer has demonstrated a high level of acceptance of products treated with HHP because of the minimal changes in sen-

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

Two types of HHP treatment can be distinguished: the classical or also named single-pulsed HHP or the multi-pulsed high hydrostatic pressure (mpHHP). Difference between both is the number of compressions done. In the single HPP treatment, a compression hold for a certain time is followed by decompression to atmospheric pressure, while in the mpHHP more than one compression is applied with its respective decompression phase. It was reported that the mpHHP treatment, with few exceptions, is more effective than the classical or single-pulsed HHP treatment for inactivation of microorganisms in fruit juice, dairy products, liquid whole egg, meat products and seafood [4]. The reports of applying mpHHP on meat

products describe better inactivation rates of *E. coli* O157:H7 and *Salmonella* Enteritidis in ground beef and chicken fillets, respectively, than the classic HHP [4, 36, 37]. Moreover, the mpHHP treatment could also be used to inactivate

around 3°C per 100 MPa applied for water and 8–9°C for fat and oils and

The high pressure applied causes a temperature increase in the treated product,

intermediated values for proteins and carbohydrates have been described [30, 38].

The effectiveness of HHP on meat products constituents depends on different

enzymes in foods and to increase the shelf life of foods [4].

factors as initial microbial, pH and ionic strength [39].

**2.1 Effect of HHP on food components**

**111**

sory and safety characteristics they perceive.

All the facts mentioned above has made companies look for alternative techniques that guarantee the safety of their products, as is the case of HHP. HHP has become a reality in the food industry and has spread worldwide [4]. This technique achieves a microbial inactivation without using high temperatures, so they manage to keep the sensory characteristics of the product almost intact, providing a larger commercial shelf life [5–7]. This preservation technique consists of the application of isostatic pressures, transmitted to foods uniformly and instantaneously by airdriven pumps through a liquid, generally water [8].

One of the main advantages of high pressure processing (HPP) is that it reaches acceptable microbial inactivation in meat products, but the sensorial and nutritional characteristics remain with good quality [9, 10].

In the meat industry, the application of HPP has focused on products ready for consumption with the additional aim of extending commercial life. For example, several studies have described the behaviour of *L. monocytogenes* in ready-to-eat meat products treated by HHP at different points of processes: prepackaging (liquid food) [11] and post-packaging (all types of food) [5, 12–19], the latter application being the most used [20]. In general, pathogen lethality during HHP treatment depends on various processing parameters such as the pressure level and holding time, temperature and food matrix. The optimisation of these parameters of the treatment for the pathogens' inactivation has been reinforced by the use of predictive microbiology tool that has been applied on different meat products [5, 15, 21–26].

Different organisations and administrations have recognised the listericidal effect of HHP treatments on RTE foods [27–29]. The objectives of this study are the revision of the effect of all parameters on the efficiency of this technology on meat products over pathogens and the sensorial quality consequences. Also, the predictive modelling tool for the optimisation of the meat treatment will be introduced.

### **2. High hydrostatic pressure treatment of meat**

HHP was very well accepted since its beginning as an alternative to thermal inactivation treatments and as an in-package cold pasteurisation process [4]. In the last three decades, the number of companies with HHP facilities has increased considerably in the world, from just a few in 1990 to more than 200 units and with an increasing capacity [30].

The inactivation of bacteria effect of high pressure was demonstrated 100 years ago, although the industrial technology was built up at the end of the twentieth century [20]. The system consists in exerting high and uniform pressure on the food, for enough time to achieve the desired effect. This is called adiabatic heat and occurs instantaneously with pressure increase and as the pressure is uniform over the product [20]. HHP is probably the most developed nonthermal technology commercially in the world market, mainly applied for sliced meat products, fruit jellies and jams, fruit juices, dressings for salad, raw oysters, ham and guacamole, among others.

The packaged food is usually submerged in water inside a tank, and through this, high pressure is caused. HHP treatment will inactivate bacteria, yeast, moulds and

#### *High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

The occurrence of food-borne outbreaks in Europe has a decreasing tendency. A total of 5079 food-borne (including waterborne) outbreaks were reported by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) [2]. This report describes *Salmonella* as the commonest detected agent, and the highest-risk agent/food pairs the *Salmonella* in eggs and meat and meat products, and the analysis of strong-evidence foodborne outbreaks is associated with animal origin food [2]. In the case of meat products with longer shelf life, bacteria have more time to grow if they have the conditions (such as cooked sausages, cooked sliced ham and fermented salami) [3]. All the facts mentioned above has made companies look for alternative techniques that guarantee the safety of their products, as is the case of HHP. HHP has become a reality in the food industry and has spread worldwide [4]. This technique achieves a microbial inactivation without using high temperatures, so they manage to keep the sensory characteristics of the product almost intact, providing a larger commercial shelf life [5–7]. This preservation technique consists of the application of isostatic pressures, transmitted to foods uniformly and instantaneously by air-

One of the main advantages of high pressure processing (HPP) is that it reaches acceptable microbial inactivation in meat products, but the sensorial and nutritional

In the meat industry, the application of HPP has focused on products ready for consumption with the additional aim of extending commercial life. For example, several studies have described the behaviour of *L. monocytogenes* in ready-to-eat meat products treated by HHP at different points of processes: prepackaging (liquid food) [11] and post-packaging (all types of food) [5, 12–19], the latter application being the most used [20]. In general, pathogen lethality during HHP treatment depends on various processing parameters such as the pressure level and holding time, temperature and food matrix. The optimisation of these parameters of the treatment for the pathogens' inactivation has been reinforced by the use of predictive microbiology tool

Different organisations and administrations have recognised the listericidal effect of HHP treatments on RTE foods [27–29]. The objectives of this study are the revision of the effect of all parameters on the efficiency of this technology on meat products over pathogens and the sensorial quality consequences. Also, the predictive modelling tool for the optimisation of the meat treatment will be introduced.

HHP was very well accepted since its beginning as an alternative to thermal inactivation treatments and as an in-package cold pasteurisation process [4]. In the last three decades, the number of companies with HHP facilities has increased considerably in the world, from just a few in 1990 to more than 200 units and with

The inactivation of bacteria effect of high pressure was demonstrated 100 years ago, although the industrial technology was built up at the end of the twentieth century [20]. The system consists in exerting high and uniform pressure on the food, for enough time to achieve the desired effect. This is called adiabatic heat and occurs instantaneously with pressure increase and as the pressure is uniform over the product [20]. HHP is probably the most developed nonthermal technology commercially in the world market, mainly applied for sliced meat products, fruit jellies and jams, fruit juices, dressings for salad, raw oysters, ham and guacamole, among others.

The packaged food is usually submerged in water inside a tank, and through this, high pressure is caused. HHP treatment will inactivate bacteria, yeast, moulds and

driven pumps through a liquid, generally water [8].

that has been applied on different meat products [5, 15, 21–26].

**2. High hydrostatic pressure treatment of meat**

an increasing capacity [30].

**110**

characteristics remain with good quality [9, 10].

*Food Processing*

enzymes equivalent to thermal pasteurisation processed but preserving the taste, colour and nutritious value of the product [4, 6, 23, 30, 31]. The treatment can be prepackaging (liquid food) or post-packaging (all types of food), although the latter is most frequently used [20]. The meat industry tries to apply the shortest HHP treatment on production lines as they can, currently from 3 to 6 min maximum [9, 32]; although many potential HPP applications would require long treatment times to ensure an adequate inactivation level of pathogens and spoilage microorganisms, pressure treatments alone would not be sufficient to guarantee food safety [33].

The application of HHP technology follows *two basic principles*: Le Chatelier principle and isostatic rule (Pascal principle). The first principle postulates that pressure accelerates reactions (phase change, changes in the molecular configuration, chemical reactions) that involve volume reductions and vice versa and inhibits reactions that occur with increases in volume. Since the medium used to transmit the pressure is usually water (incompressible fluid), the isostatic rule principle is verified in the HHP application, stating that "the increase in pressure applied to the surface of an incompressible fluid, contained in an undeformable container, is transmitted with the same value to each of its parts". The applied pressure is transmitted in an isostatic (uniform) and almost instantaneous way to all points of the food, regardless of its composition, size and shape. This prevents deformation of the product, despite being subjected to such high pressures, and makes it very homogeneous and does not have over-treated areas. When food is treated in its packaging, it must be flexible and deformable (it must tolerate volume reductions of up to 15%). The evacuation of gases from the interior is especially necessary to prevent their compression from reducing the pressurisation efficiency [34, 35].

The pressure range for a commercial purpose is usually from 100 to 600 Mpa [30], but this only can approach to a pasteurisation process but not commercial sterilisation where spores should be destroyed and more than 1000 Mpa should be applied for the sterilisation [30]. The new commercial unit implemented has increased in capacity and pressure, reducing the time to a few minutes, which helps manufacturers to reduce costs. The consumer has demonstrated a high level of acceptance of products treated with HHP because of the minimal changes in sensory and safety characteristics they perceive.

Two types of HHP treatment can be distinguished: the classical or also named single-pulsed HHP or the multi-pulsed high hydrostatic pressure (mpHHP). Difference between both is the number of compressions done. In the single HPP treatment, a compression hold for a certain time is followed by decompression to atmospheric pressure, while in the mpHHP more than one compression is applied with its respective decompression phase. It was reported that the mpHHP treatment, with few exceptions, is more effective than the classical or single-pulsed HHP treatment for inactivation of microorganisms in fruit juice, dairy products, liquid whole egg, meat products and seafood [4]. The reports of applying mpHHP on meat products describe better inactivation rates of *E. coli* O157:H7 and *Salmonella* Enteritidis in ground beef and chicken fillets, respectively, than the classic HHP [4, 36, 37]. Moreover, the mpHHP treatment could also be used to inactivate enzymes in foods and to increase the shelf life of foods [4].

The high pressure applied causes a temperature increase in the treated product, around 3°C per 100 MPa applied for water and 8–9°C for fat and oils and intermediated values for proteins and carbohydrates have been described [30, 38].

#### **2.1 Effect of HHP on food components**

The effectiveness of HHP on meat products constituents depends on different factors as initial microbial, pH and ionic strength [39].

The pressure affects properties of water contained in food such as density, viscosity, dipole moment, dielectric constant, and surface tension and thermal properties such as freezing and melting point and consequently will exert its effect on enzymes, chemical reactions and microorganism [40, 41]. For example, high pressures reduce the freezing point of water to 22°C at a pressure of 207.5 MPa because it prevents the increase in ice volume [40].

Among the intrinsic factors of microorganisms that will affect inactivation would be the number, species, strain and their physiological state [40, 51, 52]. Even the size of the microorganism has been described as influential [53]. In the different phases of physiological state, the cell and the membrane vary, and it has been observed that in the logarithmic phase of growth, it is more sensitive to the treat-

The spores are even more resistant, and heat needs to be applied at the same time to inactivate them [34, 54]. For example, the spores of yeast and moulds had been reported to be inactivated by pressures of 600 MPa [9] although some species have been described as more resistant, as the ascospores of *Byssochlamys nivea* [40]. The factors related to food that affects the efficiency of treatment would influence variables such as pH, aw, salt concentration and the general composition of the

The treatment gains effectiveness by lowering the pH of the food [52] or adding

antimicrobials [34]. In a study by Alfaia et al. [42] carried out in chorizo, it describes a significant increase in pH by increasing the intensity of the treatment, which was also found in other products such as raw sausage batter, fresh chicken breast fillets and raw poultry sausages [26, 56]. At high pressure, there is increased ionisation and redistribution of ions that can be the origin of the pH increase and also the release of imidazolium groups by histidine [57]. Alfaia et al. [42] verified that the HPP resulted in a significant increase (p < 0.001) of the pH of chorizo compared to the control samples and in a significant decrease of the *a*<sup>w</sup> (p < 0.01). The increase in pH was also reported on raw sausage batter, fresh chicken breast

It has been observed that the decrease of aw decreases the effectiveness of lethality of bacteria [4, 19], probably related to the stabilisation of protein, especially enzymes, which suffers less pressure [58]. It has been demonstrated that lyophilised *L. monocytogenes* treated with HPP was not inactivated [59]. On the other hand, it is also described that low aw will inhibit the recovery of cells and potential growth during storage of the product treated by HPP [15, 60], that is to say that two

Synergistic effects of HHP treatment with the addition of sodium lactate on the

Also, the fat content has been described as a parameter that affects the effectiveness of microorganism inactivation, having in general a protective effect of bacteria [5, 15, 19, 25]. High fat concentration decreases the inactivation of bacteria [15, 25], but it is also related to the pressure exerted; the higher the pressure of

HPP and the addition of essential oils have similar effects on microbial structures, and thus they may act synergistically on the inactivation of microorganisms. Therefore, the combination of HPP with EOs is a promising alternative to expand

The concentration of other components has been described affecting inactivation of bacteria as vitamins and amino acids [43], proteins [63], sucrose [64] and

Not only food component can affect the efficacy of HPP but also the food structure. Several authors have described it as an essential factor of variability on the resistance of microorganisms by comparing inactivation on food matrix and culture media where the food displays a protective effect against HHP [10, 66, 67]. Among the technological or process factors, the pressure exerted, the treatment

time, the depressurisation rate, the temperature and the come-up time (CUT) required to reach the desired pressure should be mentioned [40]. If the CUT is prolonged, it is as if a pretreatment is performed, and the temperature is

inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* in cooked chicken have been described [11].

ment of HHP and, in the stationary phases, it is more resistant [53].

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

food [40, 51, 55].

fillets and raw poultry sausages.

antagonistic effects that could compensate each other.

650 MPa, the more is the protection [5, 18].

minerals such as calcium or magnesium [65].

the HPP food industry [61, 62].

**113**

Whether the fat is affected or not by the treatment is very important because it has a significant impact on the sensory characteristics and it will depend on the intensity of treatment. It has been described that 450 MPa is applied during 154 s in dry fermented sausage; the total fatty acids and the stability of the fatty ones were not affected [42].

The denaturation that the proteins of the food undergo by the treatment of high pressures will depend on the level of pressure exerted, the pH and the temperature. Irreversible changes that have been described include the dissociation of oligomeric proteins into their subunit, aggregation or gelation of protein or changes in the conformation of the active site of enzymes. Reversible changes are observed when the pressures are between 100 and 300 MPa [30]. Proteins and sugars have been described as protective agents for bacteria in these treatments [5, 43–45].

#### **2.2 Effect of HHP on the sensory quality of food**

The effect of HHP on the sensory quality of food depends on the conditions, pressures and time, but physical properties of the food play an important role in its sensory quality. The colour of meat is critical because it is the main criterion that consumers will evaluate before making purchases.

The significant change of the texture and visual appearance, colour in the raw meat, depends on the intensities of pressure, observing significant changes at HPP at 600 MPa, but not at lower as 175 MPa [46, 47]. Nevertheless, on cases of cured meat products, changes on colour mainly depended on water content and water activity [48].

In case of salted chicken meat, it has been described that, in general, the use of HHP treatment improved the texture of cooked meat and colour of raw meat, and it is proposed as a processing alternative to reduce NaCl content [49]. Siddig et al. [50] in other study concluded that the colour of chicken was slightly affected by treatment, but pH, moisture content and the oxidation of lipids were not substantially changed.

Pressure treatment of meat can promote oxidation reactions, and it is crucial to control the balance between pro- and anti-oxidants to prevent this phenomenon because it will affect the colour. Lipid oxidation has been extensively investigated in meat because it can react with proteins, leading to organoleptic modifications and the loss of nutritional value. In the case of meat, the oxidation is one of the most important mechanisms of the degradation of meat, which can be initiated endogenously via metallic ions, especially hemic iron, or via exogenous reactive oxygen species. This process will result in changes in the organoleptic properties of the meat, as degradations in colour, aroma and flavour. These effects will be related to the type of meat, the treatment used and the methods used to evaluate the reactions with the oxidation of lipids and proteins. The pressure above 400 MPa seems to be critical for the initiation of lipid oxidation [7].

#### **2.3 Effect of HHP on microorganisms**

The effect of inactivation of HP on microorganisms in foods will depend on specific intrinsic factors of the microorganism, those related to food and technological factors of treatment [40, 51].

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

The pressure affects properties of water contained in food such as density, viscosity, dipole moment, dielectric constant, and surface tension and thermal properties such as freezing and melting point and consequently will exert its effect on enzymes, chemical reactions and microorganism [40, 41]. For example, high pressures reduce the freezing point of water to 22°C at a pressure of 207.5 MPa

Whether the fat is affected or not by the treatment is very important because it has a significant impact on the sensory characteristics and it will depend on the intensity of treatment. It has been described that 450 MPa is applied during 154 s in dry fermented sausage; the total fatty acids and the stability of the fatty ones were

The denaturation that the proteins of the food undergo by the treatment of high pressures will depend on the level of pressure exerted, the pH and the temperature. Irreversible changes that have been described include the dissociation of oligomeric proteins into their subunit, aggregation or gelation of protein or changes in the conformation of the active site of enzymes. Reversible changes are observed when the pressures are between 100 and 300 MPa [30]. Proteins and sugars have been described as protective agents for bacteria in these treatments [5, 43–45].

The effect of HHP on the sensory quality of food depends on the conditions, pressures and time, but physical properties of the food play an important role in its sensory quality. The colour of meat is critical because it is the main criterion that

The significant change of the texture and visual appearance, colour in the raw meat,

Pressure treatment of meat can promote oxidation reactions, and it is crucial to control the balance between pro- and anti-oxidants to prevent this phenomenon because it will affect the colour. Lipid oxidation has been extensively investigated in meat because it can react with proteins, leading to organoleptic modifications and the loss of nutritional value. In the case of meat, the oxidation is one of the most important mechanisms of the degradation of meat, which can be initiated endogenously via metallic ions, especially hemic iron, or via exogenous reactive oxygen species. This process will result in changes in the organoleptic properties of the meat, as degradations in colour, aroma and flavour. These effects will be related to the type of meat, the treatment used and the methods used to evaluate the reactions with the oxidation of lipids and proteins. The pressure above 400 MPa seems to be

The effect of inactivation of HP on microorganisms in foods will depend on specific intrinsic factors of the microorganism, those related to food and technolog-

depends on the intensities of pressure, observing significant changes at HPP at 600 MPa, but not at lower as 175 MPa [46, 47]. Nevertheless, on cases of cured meat products, changes on colour mainly depended on water content and water activity [48]. In case of salted chicken meat, it has been described that, in general, the use of HHP treatment improved the texture of cooked meat and colour of raw meat, and it is proposed as a processing alternative to reduce NaCl content [49]. Siddig et al. [50] in other study concluded that the colour of chicken was slightly affected by treatment, but pH, moisture content and the oxidation of lipids were not substan-

because it prevents the increase in ice volume [40].

**2.2 Effect of HHP on the sensory quality of food**

consumers will evaluate before making purchases.

critical for the initiation of lipid oxidation [7].

**2.3 Effect of HHP on microorganisms**

ical factors of treatment [40, 51].

**112**

not affected [42].

*Food Processing*

tially changed.

Among the intrinsic factors of microorganisms that will affect inactivation would be the number, species, strain and their physiological state [40, 51, 52]. Even the size of the microorganism has been described as influential [53]. In the different phases of physiological state, the cell and the membrane vary, and it has been observed that in the logarithmic phase of growth, it is more sensitive to the treatment of HHP and, in the stationary phases, it is more resistant [53].

The spores are even more resistant, and heat needs to be applied at the same time to inactivate them [34, 54]. For example, the spores of yeast and moulds had been reported to be inactivated by pressures of 600 MPa [9] although some species have been described as more resistant, as the ascospores of *Byssochlamys nivea* [40].

The factors related to food that affects the efficiency of treatment would influence variables such as pH, aw, salt concentration and the general composition of the food [40, 51, 55].

The treatment gains effectiveness by lowering the pH of the food [52] or adding antimicrobials [34]. In a study by Alfaia et al. [42] carried out in chorizo, it describes a significant increase in pH by increasing the intensity of the treatment, which was also found in other products such as raw sausage batter, fresh chicken breast fillets and raw poultry sausages [26, 56]. At high pressure, there is increased ionisation and redistribution of ions that can be the origin of the pH increase and also the release of imidazolium groups by histidine [57]. Alfaia et al. [42] verified that the HPP resulted in a significant increase (p < 0.001) of the pH of chorizo compared to the control samples and in a significant decrease of the *a*<sup>w</sup> (p < 0.01). The increase in pH was also reported on raw sausage batter, fresh chicken breast fillets and raw poultry sausages.

It has been observed that the decrease of aw decreases the effectiveness of lethality of bacteria [4, 19], probably related to the stabilisation of protein, especially enzymes, which suffers less pressure [58]. It has been demonstrated that lyophilised *L. monocytogenes* treated with HPP was not inactivated [59]. On the other hand, it is also described that low aw will inhibit the recovery of cells and potential growth during storage of the product treated by HPP [15, 60], that is to say that two antagonistic effects that could compensate each other.

Synergistic effects of HHP treatment with the addition of sodium lactate on the inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* in cooked chicken have been described [11].

Also, the fat content has been described as a parameter that affects the effectiveness of microorganism inactivation, having in general a protective effect of bacteria [5, 15, 19, 25]. High fat concentration decreases the inactivation of bacteria [15, 25], but it is also related to the pressure exerted; the higher the pressure of 650 MPa, the more is the protection [5, 18].

HPP and the addition of essential oils have similar effects on microbial structures, and thus they may act synergistically on the inactivation of microorganisms. Therefore, the combination of HPP with EOs is a promising alternative to expand the HPP food industry [61, 62].

The concentration of other components has been described affecting inactivation of bacteria as vitamins and amino acids [43], proteins [63], sucrose [64] and minerals such as calcium or magnesium [65].

Not only food component can affect the efficacy of HPP but also the food structure. Several authors have described it as an essential factor of variability on the resistance of microorganisms by comparing inactivation on food matrix and culture media where the food displays a protective effect against HHP [10, 66, 67].

Among the technological or process factors, the pressure exerted, the treatment time, the depressurisation rate, the temperature and the come-up time (CUT) required to reach the desired pressure should be mentioned [40]. If the CUT is prolonged, it is as if a pretreatment is performed, and the temperature is

fundamental, it seems that values of 45–50°C increase the inactivation of pathogens and yeasts [54].

It has been described in various publications that this treatment of HHP, 20–180 Mpa, can produce populations with sublethal damage [30, 68–70]. It is very important to take into account if the treatment carried out in food can produce this type of population since it would produce an estimate of economic life and erroneous security by being able to survive and revive over time even if it is in low concentrations.

The inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* in different meat products has been studied by several authors [60, 71], which reported that pressure treatments of up to 300 MPa are insufficient to inactivate it.

In fermented products such as chorizo, it has been described that the application of HHP can contribute to lowering the altering microbiota, without adverse effects on fermentative bacteria with a treatment of 400 MPa/154 s [42].

The mechanism of action of HHP on microorganisms has been described by various authors that causes damage to the cell membrane [30, 51, 72] and induces morphological changes in the microorganism [73].

The cell membrane is damaged and therefore causes irreversible damage and cell death. It produces crystallisation of the acyl chains of the phospholipid bilayer that leads to bud formation, intracellular material leakage and membrane rupture [30].

Proteins at pressures greater than 100 MPa hydrophobic interactions tend to increase in volume and will cause protein denaturation. In the case of enzymes, it generates conformation changes and, therefore, cell damage and death [34, 74].

There is also inactivation of enzymes related to DNA replication and transcription [34, 74].

#### **2.4 Predictive modelling applied to meat products treated by HPP**

Although the effectiveness of HHP application has been recognised by various authors to reduce the levels of various pathogens to acceptable levels in several foods, it is important to take into account the fact that the treatment can be sublethal and only cause lesions in subpopulations of microbial cells. These cells can recover from this type of lesions and grow during the period of storage of the product or before its consumption, reaching levels above the levels allowed by current legislation. Based on this, many authors evaluated and modelled the behaviour of *L. monocytogenes* during and after the treatment of APH in meat products, that is, throughout their useful life [15, 25, 75–77]. These models are essential tools for decision-making in the industry in terms of meeting microbiological criteria. In addition to the predictive models described, there are models in the literature that describe the probability of inactivation/recovery, or also called survival/death (logistic) interface models, of *L. monocytogenes* in meat products or culture media.

Predictive models of inactivation developed in culture media, once validated in specific food matrices such as chorizo, can be applied in the meat industry. Examples of these models would be those developed for *L. monocytogenes* and *L. innocua* (as a surrogated for safety purpose) in meat products [5, 19, 22, 24–26].

In **Table 1**, several types of predictive models that consider treatment inactivation and/or growth on storage phase of meat product can be observed.

Bover-Cid et al. [22] developed and validated a polynomial model of the inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* induced by HPP on dry-cured ham (Eq. (1)), as a function of the technological parameters: pressure intensities (347–852 MPa), pressure holding time (2.3–15.75 min) and fluid temperature (7.6–24.4°C). Pressure and time were the most critical factors influencing microbial inactivation, and the little effect was observed applying pressures below 450 MPa. The increase in holding time for

**Reference**

**115**

Inactivation

Bover-Cid et al. [5]

Growth model after treatment

Hereu et al. [14]

Probability

Valdramidis

Koseki and Yanamoto [78]

*N and N0 represent the final and initial* 

*P = applied pressure; t = treatment time; ts = storage time; F = fat content; aw = water activity; T = storage temperature;*

**Table 1.** *Predictive models obtained during/after*

 *the process of inactivation*

 *of* L.

monocytogenes

 *by HHP on meat products.*

 et al. [18]

Uncured meat Saline solution

*concentrations*

 *of the pathogen, respectively.*

Logit Pr ð Þ¼ 62*:*08

10�3 � P � aW

Logit Pr ð Þ¼

 *IC = initial* 

*concentration*

 *of the pathogen, Pr = probability.*

12*:*9973

� 0*:*0775 � P � 9*:*1909 � log tð Þþ 2*:*3331 � pH

þ 1*:*6674 � IC

� 1*:*83 � 10�1 � P þ 1*:*38 � 10�4 � P2 � 0*:*18 � 10�3 � P � ts � 4*:*25 �

 of recovery during and after treatment

 model during treatment

**Meat product**

Cured ham Cooked ham

log Nð Þ¼ log

1þ 109*:*09

 

N0 �1 

� exp � 0*:*023� Tþ1*:*80 ð Þ

ð

 Þ<sup>2</sup>

� t�

6*:*30�23*:*85*=*

0*:*023� Tþ1*:*80 ð Þ

 Þ<sup>2</sup>

ð

T2 ð

 

 

 

> Þ� ln 2ð Þ

109*:*09

log N*=*N0 

¼ 38*:*653

� 34*:*29 � aw � 0*:*0237 � P �

0*:*00349 � F2 þ

0*:*000334 � P � F

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

**Equation**


*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

fundamental, it seems that values of 45–50°C increase the inactivation of pathogens

security by being able to survive and revive over time even if it is in low

on fermentative bacteria with a treatment of 400 MPa/154 s [42].

**2.4 Predictive modelling applied to meat products treated by HPP**

(as a surrogated for safety purpose) in meat products [5, 19, 22, 24–26].

tion and/or growth on storage phase of meat product can be observed.

In **Table 1**, several types of predictive models that consider treatment inactiva-

Bover-Cid et al. [22] developed and validated a polynomial model of the inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* induced by HPP on dry-cured ham (Eq. (1)), as a function of the technological parameters: pressure intensities (347–852 MPa), pressure holding time (2.3–15.75 min) and fluid temperature (7.6–24.4°C). Pressure and time were the most critical factors influencing microbial inactivation, and the little effect was observed applying pressures below 450 MPa. The increase in holding time for

by several authors [60, 71], which reported that pressure treatments of up to

It has been described in various publications that this treatment of HHP, 20–180 Mpa, can produce populations with sublethal damage [30, 68–70]. It is very important to take into account if the treatment carried out in food can produce this type of population since it would produce an estimate of economic life and erroneous

The inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* in different meat products has been studied

In fermented products such as chorizo, it has been described that the application of HHP can contribute to lowering the altering microbiota, without adverse effects

The cell membrane is damaged and therefore causes irreversible damage and cell death. It produces crystallisation of the acyl chains of the phospholipid bilayer that leads to bud formation, intracellular material leakage and membrane rupture [30]. Proteins at pressures greater than 100 MPa hydrophobic interactions tend to increase in volume and will cause protein denaturation. In the case of enzymes, it generates conformation changes and, therefore, cell damage and death [34, 74]. There is also inactivation of enzymes related to DNA replication and

Although the effectiveness of HHP application has been recognised by various authors to reduce the levels of various pathogens to acceptable levels in several foods, it is important to take into account the fact that the treatment can be

sublethal and only cause lesions in subpopulations of microbial cells. These cells can recover from this type of lesions and grow during the period of storage of the product or before its consumption, reaching levels above the levels allowed by current legislation. Based on this, many authors evaluated and modelled the behaviour of *L. monocytogenes* during and after the treatment of APH in meat products, that is, throughout their useful life [15, 25, 75–77]. These models are essential tools for decision-making in the industry in terms of meeting microbiological criteria. In addition to the predictive models described, there are models in the literature that describe the probability of inactivation/recovery, or also called survival/death (logistic) interface models, of *L. monocytogenes* in meat products or culture media. Predictive models of inactivation developed in culture media, once validated in specific food matrices such as chorizo, can be applied in the meat industry. Examples of these models would be those developed for *L. monocytogenes* and *L. innocua*

The mechanism of action of HHP on microorganisms has been described by various authors that causes damage to the cell membrane [30, 51, 72] and induces

and yeasts [54].

*Food Processing*

concentrations.

transcription [34, 74].

**114**

300 MPa are insufficient to inactivate it.

morphological changes in the microorganism [73].

longer than 10 min and the temperature tested did not lead to a significant increase in inactivation of the pathogen.

$$\begin{aligned} \log\left(\%\_{N\_0}\right) &= -380.3164 + 292.5942 \cdot P\_{\log} - 56.1268 \cdot P\_{\log}{}^2 + 1.4090 \cdot t \\ &+ 0.0133 \cdot t^2 - 0.6423 \cdot P\_{\log} \cdot t \end{aligned} \tag{1}$$

Bover-Cid et al. [5] used the response surface methodology (RSM) (**Table 1**) to evaluate the effect of aw and fat content in the inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* by HPP in dry-cured ham. Besides these two intrinsic factors, the pressure intensity (347–600 MPa, during 5 min) was also considered as an independent variable for model development. According to the best fitting polynomial equation, all the three factors evaluated influenced on HHP inactivation, reaching inactivation levels from 0.92 to 6.82 logs.

Hereu et al. [25] obtained inactivation curves of *L. monocytogenes* on sliced RTE cooked meat products, ham (Eq. (2)) and mortadella (Eq. (3)) (which differ mainly on fat concentration), during HPP at pressures from 300 to 800 MPa. Their results suggested that the fat content of mortadella would have a protective effect on *L. monocytogenes* to pressure, in comparison with cooked ham. The log-linear with tail primary model was adequate to describe the inactivation kinetics at different holding times, which means that a first-order kinetics was applicable to describe the inactivation before a tailing effect appeared that suggests the presence of a more resistant subpopulation of cells. Secondary model was also performed to establish the relationship between the primary kinetic parameters, log *Kmax* and log *Nres*, and pressure treatments. Combining the equations resulted from the primary and secondary modelling approaches; the inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* could be estimated as a function of pressure and holding time

$$\begin{split} \log \mathbb{N}\_{N\_0} &= \log \left[ \begin{pmatrix} \mathbf{1} \mathbf{0}^{\log N\_0} - \mathbf{1} \mathbf{0}^{8.0832 - 0.0121 \cdot P} \end{pmatrix} \cdot e^{-\left( \mathbf{1}^{-2.966 + 0.069 \cdot P\_d} \right)} + \mathbf{1} \mathbf{0}^{8.0832 - 0.0121 \cdot P} \right] \\ &- \log \left( N\_0 \right) \text{(cooked ham)} \\\\ \log \mathbb{N}\_{\stackrel{\scriptstyle \mathcal{N}\_0}{\rightarrow}} &= \log \left[ \begin{pmatrix} \mathbf{1} \mathbf{0}^{\log N\_0} - \mathbf{1} \mathbf{0}^{8.6636 - 0.0125 \cdot P} \end{pmatrix} \cdot e^{-\left( \mathbf{1}^{-3.666 + 0.009 \cdot P\_d} \right)} + \mathbf{1} \mathbf{0}^{8.6636 - 0.0125 \cdot P} \right] \\ &- \log \left( N\_0 \right) \text{(mortadelha)} \end{split} \tag{2}$$

(3)

systems was assessed. A protective effect was remarked at low aw values which led

Koseki and Yanamoto [78] developed a probability model (a simple linear logistic regression model, R2 = 0.9213, **Table 1**) of recovery of *L. monocytogenes* on sliced cooked ham during and after HHP treatment, with a storage of 10°C during 70 days. Authors defined "recovery" as the detection of >102 cfu/g bacteria, and the ham score was "1" as when there was a recovery of cells and "0" when not. The treatment applied to 500 MPa for 10 min allowed the reduction of *L. monocytogenes* of 5 logs cfu/g, reaching below the detectable level (10 cfu/g). However, they described a gradual increase of bacterial count during storage that at the end of the experiment, reached 7–8 log cfu/g. This model does not only calculate the appropriate process condition of HPP treatment but also provides information for the estimation of risk of the recovery of *L. monocytogenes* during storage of the product.

Mussa et al. [79] obtained kinetic data on *L. monocytogenes* inactivation by HPP

¼ �*kt* (4)

*slope* (5)

*slope* (6)

on pork chop samples. The variables studied were pressure intensities (200– 400 MPa) and duration of pressure treatments (0–90 min). Interestingly, this is one of the few studies in which the pressure inactivation kinetics was analysed assuming

> log *<sup>N</sup>=N*<sup>0</sup>

where N refers to the number of viable cells in samples after pressure treatments; N0 is the number of viable cells just before pressures achieved the intensities set in the experimental design; t is the time in minutes; and k is the reaction rate

The D value, which is the treatment time at any given pressure required to produce one decimal reduction, was calculated as the inverse of the slope (Eq. (5)):

*D* ¼ � <sup>1</sup>

slope of the curve of log D values versus pressure as follows (Eq. (6)):

ence on the destruction kinetics of *L. monocytogenes* by HPP.

ZHP ¼ � <sup>1</sup>

Results indicated that to achieve a 5 log cfu/g reduction of *L. monocytogenes* levels, approximately 7.5 min of pressure holding time, when pressure is set to be 400 MPa (D value = 1.49 min), would be necessary. At the same conditions of this study, Mussa et al. [79] obtained a D value = 3.52 min on pork, which makes clear that, besides the technological parameters, the type and composition of food influ-

Oliveira et al. [80] evaluated the effect of HPP (600 MPa/180 s at 25°C) in combination with the application of natural phenolic bioactive carvacrol (at 200 ppm) to reduce *Listeria innocua* levels in a low-sodium sliced vacuum-packed turkey breast ham during 60 days of storage at 4°C. The initial contamination of

*=*

*=*

Two secondary models were assessed to describe the pressure dependence as a function of kinetic parameters (k and decimal reduction time *D*): Arrhenius-type and the pressure death time (PDT) models. Both models described well the kinetic parameters (R > 0.96). Higher lethal effects were observed when higher pressures were applied, with an increase in K values and a decrease in *D* values as pressure levels increased. The holding time also had a significant effect on inactivation. The pressure ZHP (the pressure range between which the decimal reduction time changes by a factor of 10) was calculated as the negative of the inverse of the

a first-order kinetic process (Eq. (4)):

).

constant (min�<sup>1</sup>

**117**

to low inactivation levels both immediately and during storage.

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

Hereu et al. [14] built up another model for the estimation of growth of *L. monocytogenes* in sliced cooked meat products (cooked ham and mortadella) after pressurisation but includes other factors as two different inoculum levels (107 or 10<sup>4</sup> cfu/g), two physiological states of cells (freeze-stressed or cold-adapted) and different storage temperatures (4, 8, and 12°C). The logistic model with delay (primary model) was fitted to data to estimate the lag phase (λ) and the maximum specific growth rate (*μmax*). Secondary modelling was performed, using the Ratkowsky square root model (**Table 1**) and the relative lag time (RLT) concept. They observed that the time to achieve a 2-log cfu/g concentration of *L. monocytogenes* was similar for both physiological states. Freeze-stressed cells were more resistant to pressures and showed more extended lag phase during storage than the cold-adapted bacteria.

Based on logistic regression (**Table 1**), [18] concluded that the recovery of *L. monocytogenes* in a simulated cured meat after HPP treatments is influenced by the pressure applied, the storage time and the synergistic effect of pressure and aw. The effect of salt reduction on the recovery of *L. monocytogenes* following HPP in meat

longer than 10 min and the temperature tested did not lead to a significant increase

Bover-Cid et al. [5] used the response surface methodology (RSM) (**Table 1**) to evaluate the effect of aw and fat content in the inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* by HPP in dry-cured ham. Besides these two intrinsic factors, the pressure intensity (347–600 MPa, during 5 min) was also considered as an independent variable for model development. According to the best fitting polynomial equation, all the three factors evaluated influenced on HHP inactivation, reaching inactivation levels from

Hereu et al. [25] obtained inactivation curves of *L. monocytogenes* on sliced RTE cooked meat products, ham (Eq. (2)) and mortadella (Eq. (3)) (which differ mainly on fat concentration), during HPP at pressures from 300 to 800 MPa. Their results suggested that the fat content of mortadella would have a protective effect on *L. monocytogenes* to pressure, in comparison with cooked ham. The log-linear with tail primary model was adequate to describe the inactivation kinetics at different holding times, which means that a first-order kinetics was applicable to describe the inactivation before a tailing effect appeared that suggests the presence of a more resistant subpopulation of cells. Secondary model was also performed to establish the relationship between the primary kinetic parameters, log *Kmax* and log *Nres*, and pressure treatments. Combining the equations resulted from the primary and secondary modelling approaches; the inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* could be esti-

� <sup>10</sup>�2*:*9869þ0*:*0069�*<sup>P</sup>* ð Þ�*<sup>t</sup>* <sup>þ</sup> <sup>10</sup><sup>8</sup>*:*0832�0*:*0121�*<sup>P</sup>* h i

� <sup>10</sup>�3*:*6586þ0*:*0079�*<sup>P</sup>* ð Þ�*<sup>t</sup>* <sup>þ</sup> <sup>10</sup><sup>8</sup>*:*6636�0*:*0125�*<sup>P</sup>* h i

Hereu et al. [14] built up another model for the estimation of growth of *L. monocytogenes* in sliced cooked meat products (cooked ham and mortadella) after pressurisation but includes other factors as two different inoculum levels (107 or 10<sup>4</sup> cfu/g), two physiological states of cells (freeze-stressed or cold-adapted) and different storage temperatures (4, 8, and 12°C). The logistic model with delay (primary model) was fitted to data to estimate the lag phase (λ) and the maximum

specific growth rate (*μmax*). Secondary modelling was performed, using the Ratkowsky square root model (**Table 1**) and the relative lag time (RLT) concept.

*monocytogenes* was similar for both physiological states. Freeze-stressed cells were more resistant to pressures and showed more extended lag phase during storage

Based on logistic regression (**Table 1**), [18] concluded that the recovery of *L. monocytogenes* in a simulated cured meat after HPP treatments is influenced by the pressure applied, the storage time and the synergistic effect of pressure and aw. The effect of salt reduction on the recovery of *L. monocytogenes* following HPP in meat

They observed that the time to achieve a 2-log cfu/g concentration of *L.*

<sup>2</sup> <sup>þ</sup> <sup>1</sup>*:*<sup>4090</sup> � *<sup>t</sup>*

(1)

(2)

(3)

� � ¼ � <sup>380</sup>*:*<sup>3164</sup> <sup>þ</sup> <sup>292</sup>*:*<sup>5942</sup> � *Plog* � <sup>56</sup>*:*<sup>1268</sup> � *Plog*

<sup>2</sup> � <sup>0</sup>*:*<sup>6423</sup> � *Plog* � *<sup>t</sup>*

in inactivation of the pathogen.

þ 0*:*0133 � *t*

mated as a function of pressure and holding time

*<sup>N</sup>*<sup>0</sup> <sup>¼</sup> log 10*log N*<sup>0</sup> � <sup>10</sup><sup>8</sup>*:*0832�0*:*0121�*<sup>P</sup>* � � � *<sup>e</sup>*

*<sup>N</sup>*<sup>0</sup> <sup>¼</sup> log 10*log N*<sup>0</sup> � <sup>10</sup><sup>8</sup>*:*6636�0*:*0125�*<sup>P</sup>* � � � *<sup>e</sup>*

� log ð Þ *N*<sup>0</sup> ð Þ cooked ham

� log ð Þ *N*<sup>0</sup> ð Þ mortadella

than the cold-adapted bacteria.

log *N=N*<sup>0</sup>

*Food Processing*

0.92 to 6.82 logs.

log *<sup>N</sup>=*

log *<sup>N</sup>=*

**116**

systems was assessed. A protective effect was remarked at low aw values which led to low inactivation levels both immediately and during storage.

Koseki and Yanamoto [78] developed a probability model (a simple linear logistic regression model, R2 = 0.9213, **Table 1**) of recovery of *L. monocytogenes* on sliced cooked ham during and after HHP treatment, with a storage of 10°C during 70 days. Authors defined "recovery" as the detection of >102 cfu/g bacteria, and the ham score was "1" as when there was a recovery of cells and "0" when not. The treatment applied to 500 MPa for 10 min allowed the reduction of *L. monocytogenes* of 5 logs cfu/g, reaching below the detectable level (10 cfu/g). However, they described a gradual increase of bacterial count during storage that at the end of the experiment, reached 7–8 log cfu/g. This model does not only calculate the appropriate process condition of HPP treatment but also provides information for the estimation of risk of the recovery of *L. monocytogenes* during storage of the product.

Mussa et al. [79] obtained kinetic data on *L. monocytogenes* inactivation by HPP on pork chop samples. The variables studied were pressure intensities (200– 400 MPa) and duration of pressure treatments (0–90 min). Interestingly, this is one of the few studies in which the pressure inactivation kinetics was analysed assuming a first-order kinetic process (Eq. (4)):

$$\log\left(\mathbb{V}\_{\mathbb{N}\_0}\right) = -kt \tag{4}$$

where N refers to the number of viable cells in samples after pressure treatments; N0 is the number of viable cells just before pressures achieved the intensities set in the experimental design; t is the time in minutes; and k is the reaction rate constant (min�<sup>1</sup> ).

The D value, which is the treatment time at any given pressure required to produce one decimal reduction, was calculated as the inverse of the slope (Eq. (5)):

$$D = -\left(\mathbb{1}\zeta\_{slope}\right) \tag{5}$$

Two secondary models were assessed to describe the pressure dependence as a function of kinetic parameters (k and decimal reduction time *D*): Arrhenius-type and the pressure death time (PDT) models. Both models described well the kinetic parameters (R > 0.96). Higher lethal effects were observed when higher pressures were applied, with an increase in K values and a decrease in *D* values as pressure levels increased. The holding time also had a significant effect on inactivation.

The pressure ZHP (the pressure range between which the decimal reduction time changes by a factor of 10) was calculated as the negative of the inverse of the slope of the curve of log D values versus pressure as follows (Eq. (6)):

$$\text{ZHP} = -\begin{pmatrix} \downarrow\_{slope} \\ \end{pmatrix} \tag{6}$$

Results indicated that to achieve a 5 log cfu/g reduction of *L. monocytogenes* levels, approximately 7.5 min of pressure holding time, when pressure is set to be 400 MPa (D value = 1.49 min), would be necessary. At the same conditions of this study, Mussa et al. [79] obtained a D value = 3.52 min on pork, which makes clear that, besides the technological parameters, the type and composition of food influence on the destruction kinetics of *L. monocytogenes* by HPP.

Oliveira et al. [80] evaluated the effect of HPP (600 MPa/180 s at 25°C) in combination with the application of natural phenolic bioactive carvacrol (at 200 ppm) to reduce *Listeria innocua* levels in a low-sodium sliced vacuum-packed turkey breast ham during 60 days of storage at 4°C. The initial contamination of

slices with *L. innocua* was �10<sup>6</sup> cfu/g of slice. The primary model of Baranyi and Roberts, fitted to data obtained during the storage period, showed a significant extension of shelf life of low-sodium vacuum-packed turkey breast ham, with the reduction of maximum population density and the increase in lag phase duration. *L. innocua* has been used as a surrogate of *L. monocytogenes* for processing plant safety purposes, as it has similar physiological and metabolic characteristics to those of pathogenic species [81].

The effect of HPP treatments and potassium lactate on inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* was evaluated by Lerasle [26] considering the variables pressure intensities (200–500), holding time (2–14 min) and potassium lactate concentrations of 0 or 1.8% w/w. The Weibull model was fitted to the inactivation data (*log N* versus *time*) obtained at the different pressure holding times evaluated. The secondary model was a linear regression that defines log b as a function of the pressure intensity and explanatory factors (Eq. (7)). Considering that the lactate concentration effect was not significant (ANOVA, *p* > 0.05), the secondary model was:

$$
\log b = \log b \ast -\frac{P}{Z\_p} + \varepsilon;\tag{7}
$$

High pressure processing and biopreservation can contribute to food safety by inactivation of bacterial contaminants. However, these treatments are inefficient against bacterial endospores such as *Bacillus* and *Clostridium* species. Moreover, HPP can induce spore germination [85]. In [85], it is reported that *Lactococcus lactis* strain CH-CH15 was able to regrow after HPP treatments, thus an excellent option to be preservative against *Bacillus* and *Clostridium* strains during chilled storage. The inactivation model used was fitted by using a reparametrized

*Screenshot of the microHibro web application of a predictive model of HHP treatment of chorizo.*

Weibull model, whereas growth curves of lactic acid bacteria were modelled with

For further information, there are several reviews as [4, 10, 23, 30, 31, 78].

Although the main application of HHP is enzymatic and microbial inactivation to extend commercial life and inactivate pathogens, other possible applications such as obtaining different types of fish, meat, egg and milk gels have been described. Likewise, this technology accelerates the diffusion of solutes in various foods, the solubilisation of gases and the extraction processes. The possibility of using high pressures to keep food at temperatures below 0°C in a liquid state (at 207.5 MPa, the

(supercooling) and ultra-fast defrosting constitutes a promising new field of study and application in the food industry [34, 40]. Also applying low pressures, 100– 150 MPa have been employed to tenderised pre-rigour meat of rabbit, chicken, pork

smoking to treat roast beef and bacon, to inactivate microflora of minced meat or to

and beef. Higher pressures, 250 MPa, has been applied, for example, before

water remains liquid at temperatures of �22°C) or to induce freezing

Predictive microbiology modelling easy-to-use software has been developed to allow users involved in food safety management to use a tool to asses them and help them for decision-making. Several applications have been developed, but just a few had incorporated the prediction of HHP treatment. One of it is the "HP3", available online (www.hp3.cat) elaborated by the Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (Spain), and another is microHibro (www.microhibro.com), built up by the

a logistic model.

**Figure 1.**

University of Córdoba (Spain) (**Figure 1**).

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

treat foie gras to extend shelf life [40, 41].

**119**

**2.5 Other applications of HPP on meat products**

where *Zp* might be interpreted as the pressure required to reduce *b* by 10-fold and *logb*\* is the y-intercept and ε the model error. The estimated values for the parameters are represented below (Eq. (8)):

$$
\log b = \mathbf{143} - \frac{P}{\mathbf{3.1}} + \varepsilon \tag{8}
$$

Combining primary and secondary models makes it possible to recalculate the log reduction obtained at various times and pressures intensities.

These models developed by Lerasle et al. [26] were subsequently applied in a multi-criteria framework combining safety, hygiene and sensorial quality to investigate the possibility of extending the shelf life of a ready-to-cook poultry product, using the HPP technology [82]. Models developed for *Salmonella* and *E. coli* were also considered in the framework in which the maximum allowed contamination level of *L. monocytogenes* was set to be 100 cfu/g (according to the microbiological criteria of the foodstuffs defined by the Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/ 2005) [1]. The approach is a decision support tool for shelf life determination.

Also the significant inactivation effect (P < 0.001) of HHP (540 MPa/270 s) on *Enterobacteriaceae*, *E. coli* and *Pseudomonas*, coagulase-negative *Staphylococcus* (CNS) and LAB of natural casings and condiments used in the processing of cured meat sausage using response surface methodology was described by Fraqueza et al. [83]. Treated casings turned slightly whiter, but their resistance (FT) to breakage (i.e. casings structural integrity) was not affected.

Recently, Guillou and Membré [52] have carried out a hierarchical model based on a study of metadata of the determining factors in inactivation by the treatment of high pressures in different microorganisms and substrates, concluding that those more relevant factors studied were the species, the strain and the pH and that the most resistant species was *Staphylococcus* and the most sensitive *Salmonella*.

Novel approaches have been described as the potential use of Listex™ P100 in sausage "Alheira" combined with high hydrostatic pressure, applying Weibull model [84] and concluding that at mild HHP treatment, phage P100 remained active and seemed to present potential to be added in nonthermal inactivation of *L. monocytogenes*.

**Figure 1.**

slices with *L. innocua* was �10<sup>6</sup> cfu/g of slice. The primary model of Baranyi and Roberts, fitted to data obtained during the storage period, showed a significant extension of shelf life of low-sodium vacuum-packed turkey breast ham, with the reduction of maximum population density and the increase in lag phase duration. *L. innocua* has been used as a surrogate of *L. monocytogenes* for processing plant safety purposes, as it has similar physiological and metabolic characteristics to those

The effect of HPP treatments and potassium lactate on inactivation of *L. monocytogenes* was evaluated by Lerasle [26] considering the variables pressure intensities (200–500), holding time (2–14 min) and potassium lactate concentrations of 0 or 1.8% w/w. The Weibull model was fitted to the inactivation data (*log N* versus *time*) obtained at the different pressure holding times evaluated. The secondary model was a linear regression that defines log b as a function of the pressure intensity and explanatory factors (Eq. (7)). Considering that the lactate concentration effect was not significant (ANOVA, *p* > 0.05), the secondary

log *<sup>b</sup>* <sup>¼</sup> log *<sup>b</sup>* <sup>∗</sup> � *<sup>P</sup>*

log *<sup>b</sup>* <sup>¼</sup> <sup>143</sup> � *<sup>P</sup>*

log reduction obtained at various times and pressures intensities.

where *Zp* might be interpreted as the pressure required to reduce *b* by 10-fold and *logb*\* is the y-intercept and ε the model error. The estimated values for the

Combining primary and secondary models makes it possible to recalculate the

These models developed by Lerasle et al. [26] were subsequently applied in a multi-criteria framework combining safety, hygiene and sensorial quality to investigate the possibility of extending the shelf life of a ready-to-cook poultry product, using the HPP technology [82]. Models developed for *Salmonella* and *E. coli* were also considered in the framework in which the maximum allowed contamination level of *L. monocytogenes* was set to be 100 cfu/g (according to the microbiological criteria of the foodstuffs defined by the Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/ 2005) [1]. The approach is a decision support tool for shelf life determination.

Also the significant inactivation effect (P < 0.001) of HHP (540 MPa/270 s) on

Recently, Guillou and Membré [52] have carried out a hierarchical model based on a study of metadata of the determining factors in inactivation by the treatment of high pressures in different microorganisms and substrates, concluding that those more relevant factors studied were the species, the strain and the pH and that the most resistant species was *Staphylococcus* and the most sensitive *Salmonella*.

Novel approaches have been described as the potential use of Listex™ P100 in sausage "Alheira" combined with high hydrostatic pressure, applying Weibull model [84] and concluding that at mild HHP treatment, phage P100 remained active and seemed to present potential to be added in nonthermal inactivation of *L.*

*Enterobacteriaceae*, *E. coli* and *Pseudomonas*, coagulase-negative *Staphylococcus* (CNS) and LAB of natural casings and condiments used in the processing of cured meat sausage using response surface methodology was described by Fraqueza et al. [83]. Treated casings turned slightly whiter, but their resistance (FT) to breakage

*Zp*

3*:*1

þ *ε*; (7)

þ *ε* (8)

of pathogenic species [81].

parameters are represented below (Eq. (8)):

(i.e. casings structural integrity) was not affected.

model was:

*Food Processing*

*monocytogenes*.

**118**

*Screenshot of the microHibro web application of a predictive model of HHP treatment of chorizo.*

High pressure processing and biopreservation can contribute to food safety by inactivation of bacterial contaminants. However, these treatments are inefficient against bacterial endospores such as *Bacillus* and *Clostridium* species. Moreover, HPP can induce spore germination [85]. In [85], it is reported that *Lactococcus lactis* strain CH-CH15 was able to regrow after HPP treatments, thus an excellent option to be preservative against *Bacillus* and *Clostridium* strains during chilled storage. The inactivation model used was fitted by using a reparametrized Weibull model, whereas growth curves of lactic acid bacteria were modelled with a logistic model.

Predictive microbiology modelling easy-to-use software has been developed to allow users involved in food safety management to use a tool to asses them and help them for decision-making. Several applications have been developed, but just a few had incorporated the prediction of HHP treatment. One of it is the "HP3", available online (www.hp3.cat) elaborated by the Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology (Spain), and another is microHibro (www.microhibro.com), built up by the University of Córdoba (Spain) (**Figure 1**).

For further information, there are several reviews as [4, 10, 23, 30, 31, 78].

#### **2.5 Other applications of HPP on meat products**

Although the main application of HHP is enzymatic and microbial inactivation to extend commercial life and inactivate pathogens, other possible applications such as obtaining different types of fish, meat, egg and milk gels have been described. Likewise, this technology accelerates the diffusion of solutes in various foods, the solubilisation of gases and the extraction processes. The possibility of using high pressures to keep food at temperatures below 0°C in a liquid state (at 207.5 MPa, the water remains liquid at temperatures of �22°C) or to induce freezing (supercooling) and ultra-fast defrosting constitutes a promising new field of study and application in the food industry [34, 40]. Also applying low pressures, 100– 150 MPa have been employed to tenderised pre-rigour meat of rabbit, chicken, pork and beef. Higher pressures, 250 MPa, has been applied, for example, before smoking to treat roast beef and bacon, to inactivate microflora of minced meat or to treat foie gras to extend shelf life [40, 41].

## **3. Conclusion**

High hydrostatic pressure treatment has been described to improve the microbiological safety and shelf life of ready-to-eat meat products, as a nonthermal decontamination technology in the meat industry, applied at pre- or postpackaging. There are a variety of factors that influence the treatment effect that should be taken into account when applied to food. The pathogen widely studied in this product is *L. monocytogenes* that reflects the concern of the food industry. The predictive modelling is an important tool of the novel microbial food safety management strategy that provides with accurate information to demonstrate and guarantee the safety and shelf life of the food products and also helps to the optimisation of the meat treatment.

**References**

1-26

[1] Commission E. Commission regulation (EC) N0. 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs. Official Journal of the European Communities. 2005;**338**:

[2] European Food Safety Authority and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (EFSA and ECDC). The European Union summary report on trends and sources of zoonoses, zoonotic agents and food-borne outbreaks in 2017. EFSA Journal. 2018;**16**(12):5500

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

> High pressure as a model technology. Meat Science. 2002;**62**(3):359-371

[9] Garriga M, Grèbol N, Aymerich MT, Monfort JM, Hugas M. Microbial inactivation after high-pressure processing at 600 MPa in commercial meat products over its shelf life. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies. 2004;**5**(4):451-457

[10] Rendueles E, Omer MK, Alvseike O, Alonso-Calleja C, Capita R, Prieto M. Microbiological food safety assessment of high hydrostatic pressure processing: A review. LWT- Food Science and Technology. 2011;**44**(5):1251-1260

[11] Bajovic B, Bolumar T, Heinz V. Quality considerations with high pressure processing of fresh and value added meat products. Meat Science.

[12] Ananou S, Garriga M, Jofré A, Aymerich T, Gálvez A, Maqueda M, et al. Combined effect of enterocin AS-48 and high hydrostatic pressure to control food-borne pathogens inoculated in low acid fermented sausages. Meat Science. 2010;**84**:

[13] Balamurugan S, Ahmed R, Chibeu A, Gao A, Koutchma T, Strange P. Effect of salt types and concentrations on the high-pressure

ground chicken. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2016;**218**:51-56

[14] Hereu A, Dalgaard P, Garriga M, Aymerich T, Bover-Cid S. Analysing and modelling the growth behaviour of *Listeria monocytogenes* on RTE cooked meat products after a high pressure treatment at 400 MPa. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2014;**186**:

inactivation of *Listeria monocytogenes* in chapter II 77

2012;**92**(3):280-289

594-600

84-94

[3] Nastasijevic I, Milanov D, Velebit B, Djordjevic V, Swift C, Painset A, et al. Tracking of *Listeria monocytogenes* in meat establishment using whole genome

management tool: A proof of concept.

hydrostatic pressure treatment of foods.

[5] Bover-Cid S, Belletti N, Aymerich T, Garriga M. Modeling the protective effect of aw and fat content on the high

*monocytogenes* in dry-cured ham. Food Research International. 2015;**75**:194-199

[6] Hayagreeva D, Pandey M. Novel approaches in improving the quality and

[7] Guyon C, Meynier A, Lamballerie M. Protein and lipid oxidation in meat: A review with emphasis on high-pressure treatments. Trends in Food Science &

[8] Hugas M, Garriga M, Monfort J. New mild technologies in meat processing:

safety aspects of processed meat products through high pressure processing technology - a review. Trends in Food Science and Technology.

Technology. 2016;**50**:131-143

2016;**54**:175-185

**121**

sequencing as a food safety

International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2017;**18**:157-164

[4] Buzrul S. Multi-pulsed high

pressure resistance of *Listeria*

Food. 2015;**4**:173-183

## **Acknowledgements**

We greatly acknowledged the Spanish government and European ERDF funding for supporting the RTA-2013-00055-C02-02 project, providing material and especially human resources, making possible the continuation of risk assessment and management activities at national and European level by our research group AGR170 "HIBRO".

## **Author details**

Rosa María García-Gimeno\* and Guiomar Denisse Posada Izquierdo Department of Food Science and Technology, Agrifood Campus of International Excellence, Universidad de Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain

\*Address all correspondence to: bt1gagir@uco.es

© 2020 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

## **References**

**3. Conclusion**

*Food Processing*

optimisation of the meat treatment.

**Acknowledgements**

AGR170 "HIBRO".

**Author details**

**120**

High hydrostatic pressure treatment has been described to improve the micro-

We greatly acknowledged the Spanish government and European ERDF funding for supporting the RTA-2013-00055-C02-02 project, providing material and especially human resources, making possible the continuation of risk assessment and management activities at national and European level by our research group

Rosa María García-Gimeno\* and Guiomar Denisse Posada Izquierdo

Excellence, Universidad de Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain

\*Address all correspondence to: bt1gagir@uco.es

provided the original work is properly cited.

Department of Food Science and Technology, Agrifood Campus of International

© 2020 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

biological safety and shelf life of ready-to-eat meat products, as a nonthermal decontamination technology in the meat industry, applied at pre- or postpackaging. There are a variety of factors that influence the treatment effect that should be taken into account when applied to food. The pathogen widely studied in this product is *L. monocytogenes* that reflects the concern of the food industry. The predictive modelling is an important tool of the novel microbial food safety management strategy that provides with accurate information to demonstrate and guarantee the safety and shelf life of the food products and also helps to the

[1] Commission E. Commission regulation (EC) N0. 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs. Official Journal of the European Communities. 2005;**338**: 1-26

[2] European Food Safety Authority and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (EFSA and ECDC). The European Union summary report on trends and sources of zoonoses, zoonotic agents and food-borne outbreaks in 2017. EFSA Journal. 2018;**16**(12):5500

[3] Nastasijevic I, Milanov D, Velebit B, Djordjevic V, Swift C, Painset A, et al. Tracking of *Listeria monocytogenes* in meat establishment using whole genome sequencing as a food safety management tool: A proof of concept. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2017;**18**:157-164

[4] Buzrul S. Multi-pulsed high hydrostatic pressure treatment of foods. Food. 2015;**4**:173-183

[5] Bover-Cid S, Belletti N, Aymerich T, Garriga M. Modeling the protective effect of aw and fat content on the high pressure resistance of *Listeria monocytogenes* in dry-cured ham. Food Research International. 2015;**75**:194-199

[6] Hayagreeva D, Pandey M. Novel approaches in improving the quality and safety aspects of processed meat products through high pressure processing technology - a review. Trends in Food Science and Technology. 2016;**54**:175-185

[7] Guyon C, Meynier A, Lamballerie M. Protein and lipid oxidation in meat: A review with emphasis on high-pressure treatments. Trends in Food Science & Technology. 2016;**50**:131-143

[8] Hugas M, Garriga M, Monfort J. New mild technologies in meat processing:

High pressure as a model technology. Meat Science. 2002;**62**(3):359-371

[9] Garriga M, Grèbol N, Aymerich MT, Monfort JM, Hugas M. Microbial inactivation after high-pressure processing at 600 MPa in commercial meat products over its shelf life. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies. 2004;**5**(4):451-457

[10] Rendueles E, Omer MK, Alvseike O, Alonso-Calleja C, Capita R, Prieto M. Microbiological food safety assessment of high hydrostatic pressure processing: A review. LWT- Food Science and Technology. 2011;**44**(5):1251-1260

[11] Bajovic B, Bolumar T, Heinz V. Quality considerations with high pressure processing of fresh and value added meat products. Meat Science. 2012;**92**(3):280-289

[12] Ananou S, Garriga M, Jofré A, Aymerich T, Gálvez A, Maqueda M, et al. Combined effect of enterocin AS-48 and high hydrostatic pressure to control food-borne pathogens inoculated in low acid fermented sausages. Meat Science. 2010;**84**: 594-600

[13] Balamurugan S, Ahmed R, Chibeu A, Gao A, Koutchma T, Strange P. Effect of salt types and concentrations on the high-pressure inactivation of *Listeria monocytogenes* in chapter II 77 ground chicken. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2016;**218**:51-56

[14] Hereu A, Dalgaard P, Garriga M, Aymerich T, Bover-Cid S. Analysing and modelling the growth behaviour of *Listeria monocytogenes* on RTE cooked meat products after a high pressure treatment at 400 MPa. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2014;**186**: 84-94

[15] Hereu A, Bover-Cid S, Garriga M, Aymerich T. High hydrostatic pressure and biopreservation of dry-cured ham to meet the food safety objectives for *Listeria monocytogenes*. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2012a;**154** (3):107-112

[16] Patterson M, Mackle A, Linton M. Effect of high pressure, in combination with antilisterial agents, on the growth of *Listeria monocytogenes* during extended storage of cooked chicken. Food Microbiology. 2011;**28**(8): 1505-1508

[17] Porto-Fett ACS, Call JE, Shoyer BE, Hill DE, Pshebniski C, Cocoma GJ, et al. Evaluation of fermentation, drying, and/or high pressure processing on viability of *Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli* O157:H7, *Salmonella* spp., and *Trichinella spiralis* in raw pork and Genoa salami. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2010;**140**: 61-75

[18] Valdramidis VP, Patterson MF, Linton M. Modelling the recovery of *Listeria monocytogenes* in high pressure processed simulated cured meat. Food Control. 2015;**47**:353-358

[19] Rubio B, Possas A, Rincón F, García-Gimeno RM, Martínez B. Model for *Listeria monocytogenes* inactivation by high hydrostatic pressure processing in Spanish chorizo sausage. Food Microbiology. 2018;**69**:18-24

[20] Hjelmqwist J. Commercial high pressure equipment. In: Barbosa-Cánovas GV, Tapia MS, Cano MP, editors. Novel Food Processing Technologies. New York: CRC Press; 2005. pp. 361-374. EEUU

[21] Possas A, Valdramidis V, García-Gimeno RM, Pérez-Rodríguez F. High hydrostatic pressure processing of sliced fermented sausages: A quantitative exposure assessment for *Listeria monocytogenes*. Innovative Food Science

and Emerging Technologies. 2019;**52**: 406-419

[28] Codex Alimentarius. Guidelines on the application of general principles of food hygiene to the control of *Listeria*

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

lácteas infantiles: desarrollo de modelos

predictivos y evaluación de la exposición [tesis doctoral]. Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València;

[35] Barbosa-Canovas GV, Ibarz A. Introduction to Food Process Engineering. New York: CRC Press;

[36] Morales P, Calzada J, Ávila M, Nuñez M. Inactivation of *Escherichia coli* O157: H7 in ground beef by single-cycle and multiple-cycle high-pressure treatments. Journal of Food Protection.

[37] Morales P, Calzada J, Rodríguez B, de Paz M, Nuñez M. Inactivation of *Salmonella Enteritidis* in chicken breast fillets by single-cycle and multiple-cycle high pressure treatments. Foodborne Pathogens and Disease. 2009;**6**(5):

[38] Patazca E, Koutchma T,

Balasubramaniam V. Quasiadiabatic temperature increase during high pressure processing of selected foods. Journal of Food Engineering. 2007;

[39] McArdle R, Marcos B, Kerry J, Mullen A. Monitoring the effects of high pressure processing and temperature on selected beef quality attributes. Meat

[40] Welti-Chanes J, López-Malo E, Palou D, Bermúdez J, Guerrero-Beltrán G, Barbosa-Cánovas G. Fundamentals and applications of high pressure processing to foods. In: Barbosa-

Cánovas GV, Tapia S, Cano MP, editors. Novel Food Processing Technologies. New York: Marcel Dekker. EEUU; 2005

constituents: An overview. In: Balny C, Hayashi R, Heremans K, Masson P,

Science. 2010;**86**(3):629-634

[41] Cheftel JC. Effects of high hydrostatic pressure on food

editors. High Pressure and

2011

2014. EEUU

2008;**71**(4):811-815

577-581

**80**(1):199-205

[29] USDA/FSIS. Compliance Guidelines to Control *Listeria monocytogenes* in Postlethality Exposed Ready-to-Eat Meat and Poultry Products. US Department of Agriculture:

Washington D.C; 2006. Available from: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/oppde/rdad/ FRPubs/97-013F/LM\_Rule\_Complia nce\_Guidelines\_May\_2006.pdf

[30] Serment-Moreno V, Barbosa-Cánovas G, Torres J, Welti-Chanes J. High-pressure processing: Kinetic models for microbial and enzyme inactivation. Food Engineering Reviews.

[31] Campus M. High pressure

processing of meat, meat products and seafood. Food Engineering Reviews.

[32] Tonello C. Case studies on high pressure processing of foods. In: Zhang HQ, BarbosaCánovas GV, Balasubramaniam VM, Dunne CP, Farkas J, Yuan JTC, editors. Nonthermal Processing Technologies for Food. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011.

[33] Das S, Lalitha K, Joseph G,

destruction kinetics along with combined effect of potassium sorbate and high pressure against *Listeria monocytogenes* in Indian white prawn muscle. Annals of Microbiology. 2016;

[34] Pina Pérez MC. Aplicación de tecnologías no térmicas de

conservación, pulsos eléctricos de alta intensidad (PEAI) y altas presiones hidrostáticas (APH), para el control de *Cronobacter sakazakii* en fórmulas

Kamalakanth C, Bindu J. High pressure

*monocytogenes* in foods. Codex Alimentarius Commission, CAC/GL.

2007;**61**:1-28

2014;**6**(3):56-88

2010;**2**:256-273

pp. 36-50

**66**(1):245-251

**123**

[22] Bover-Cid S, Belletti N, Garriga M, Aymerich T. Model for listeria monocytogenes inactivation on drycured ham by high hydrostatic pressure processing. Food Microbiology. 2011; **28**(4):804-809

[23] Possas A, Pérez-Rodríguez F, Valero A, García-Gimeno RM. Modelling the inactivation of *Listeria monocytogenes* by high hydrostatic pressure processing in foods: A review. Trends in Food Science & Technology. 2017;**70**:45-55

[24] Carlez A, Rosec J, Richard N, Cheftel J. High pressure inactivation of *Citrobacter freundii, Pseudomonas fluorescens* and *Listeria innocua* in inoculated minced beef muscle. LWT - Food Science and Technology. 1993; **26**(4):357-363

[25] Hereu A, Dalgaard P, Garriga M, Aymerich T, Bover-Cid S. Modeling the high pressure inactivation kinetics of *Listeria monocytogenes* on RTE cooked meat products. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies. 2012b;**16**: 305-315

[26] Lerasle M, Guillou S, Simonin H, Anthoine V, Chealret R, Federighi M, et al. Assessment of *Salmonella* and *Listeria monocytogenes* level in ready-tocook poultry meat: Effect of various high pressure treatments and potassium lactate concentrations. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2014;**186**: 74-83

[27] AESAN (Agencia Española de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición). Opinión del Comité científico de la AESA sobre una cuestión presentada por la Dirección Ejecutiva, en relación con la aplicación de altas presiones en carne y productos cárnicos (Ref.: AESA-2003-007) Revista del Comité Científico de la AESAN, 1; 36–71; 2005

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

[28] Codex Alimentarius. Guidelines on the application of general principles of food hygiene to the control of *Listeria monocytogenes* in foods. Codex Alimentarius Commission, CAC/GL. 2007;**61**:1-28

[15] Hereu A, Bover-Cid S, Garriga M, Aymerich T. High hydrostatic pressure and biopreservation of dry-cured ham to meet the food safety objectives for *Listeria monocytogenes*. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2012a;**154** and Emerging Technologies. 2019;**52**:

[22] Bover-Cid S, Belletti N, Garriga M,

Aymerich T. Model for listeria monocytogenes inactivation on drycured ham by high hydrostatic pressure processing. Food Microbiology. 2011;

[23] Possas A, Pérez-Rodríguez F, Valero A, García-Gimeno RM. Modelling the inactivation of *Listeria monocytogenes* by high hydrostatic pressure processing in foods: A review. Trends in Food Science & Technology.

[24] Carlez A, Rosec J, Richard N, Cheftel J. High pressure inactivation of *Citrobacter freundii, Pseudomonas fluorescens* and *Listeria innocua* in inoculated minced beef muscle. LWT - Food Science and Technology. 1993;

[25] Hereu A, Dalgaard P, Garriga M, Aymerich T, Bover-Cid S. Modeling the high pressure inactivation kinetics of *Listeria monocytogenes* on RTE cooked meat products. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies. 2012b;**16**:

[26] Lerasle M, Guillou S, Simonin H, Anthoine V, Chealret R, Federighi M, et al. Assessment of *Salmonella* and *Listeria monocytogenes* level in ready-tocook poultry meat: Effect of various high pressure treatments and potassium lactate concentrations. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2014;**186**:

[27] AESAN (Agencia Española de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición). Opinión del Comité científico de la AESA sobre una cuestión presentada por la Dirección Ejecutiva, en relación con la aplicación de altas presiones en carne y productos cárnicos (Ref.: AESA-

2003-007) Revista del Comité Científico

de la AESAN, 1; 36–71; 2005

406-419

**28**(4):804-809

2017;**70**:45-55

**26**(4):357-363

305-315

74-83

[16] Patterson M, Mackle A, Linton M. Effect of high pressure, in combination with antilisterial agents, on the growth

[17] Porto-Fett ACS, Call JE, Shoyer BE, Hill DE, Pshebniski C, Cocoma GJ, et al. Evaluation of fermentation, drying, and/or high pressure processing on viability of *Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli* O157:H7, *Salmonella* spp., and *Trichinella spiralis* in raw pork and Genoa salami. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2010;**140**:

[18] Valdramidis VP, Patterson MF, Linton M. Modelling the recovery of *Listeria monocytogenes* in high pressure processed simulated cured meat. Food

[19] Rubio B, Possas A, Rincón F, García-Gimeno RM, Martínez B. Model for *Listeria monocytogenes* inactivation by high hydrostatic pressure processing in

Control. 2015;**47**:353-358

Spanish chorizo sausage. Food Microbiology. 2018;**69**:18-24

2005. pp. 361-374. EEUU

**122**

[20] Hjelmqwist J. Commercial high pressure equipment. In: Barbosa-Cánovas GV, Tapia MS, Cano MP, editors. Novel Food Processing Technologies. New York: CRC Press;

[21] Possas A, Valdramidis V, García-Gimeno RM, Pérez-Rodríguez F. High hydrostatic pressure processing of sliced fermented sausages: A quantitative exposure assessment for *Listeria monocytogenes*. Innovative Food Science

of *Listeria monocytogenes* during extended storage of cooked chicken. Food Microbiology. 2011;**28**(8):

(3):107-112

*Food Processing*

1505-1508

61-75

[29] USDA/FSIS. Compliance Guidelines to Control *Listeria monocytogenes* in Postlethality Exposed Ready-to-Eat Meat and Poultry Products. US Department of Agriculture: Washington D.C; 2006. Available from: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/oppde/rdad/ FRPubs/97-013F/LM\_Rule\_Complia nce\_Guidelines\_May\_2006.pdf

[30] Serment-Moreno V, Barbosa-Cánovas G, Torres J, Welti-Chanes J. High-pressure processing: Kinetic models for microbial and enzyme inactivation. Food Engineering Reviews. 2014;**6**(3):56-88

[31] Campus M. High pressure processing of meat, meat products and seafood. Food Engineering Reviews. 2010;**2**:256-273

[32] Tonello C. Case studies on high pressure processing of foods. In: Zhang HQ, BarbosaCánovas GV, Balasubramaniam VM, Dunne CP, Farkas J, Yuan JTC, editors. Nonthermal Processing Technologies for Food. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011. pp. 36-50

[33] Das S, Lalitha K, Joseph G, Kamalakanth C, Bindu J. High pressure destruction kinetics along with combined effect of potassium sorbate and high pressure against *Listeria monocytogenes* in Indian white prawn muscle. Annals of Microbiology. 2016; **66**(1):245-251

[34] Pina Pérez MC. Aplicación de tecnologías no térmicas de conservación, pulsos eléctricos de alta intensidad (PEAI) y altas presiones hidrostáticas (APH), para el control de *Cronobacter sakazakii* en fórmulas

lácteas infantiles: desarrollo de modelos predictivos y evaluación de la exposición [tesis doctoral]. Editorial Universitat Politècnica de València; 2011

[35] Barbosa-Canovas GV, Ibarz A. Introduction to Food Process Engineering. New York: CRC Press; 2014. EEUU

[36] Morales P, Calzada J, Ávila M, Nuñez M. Inactivation of *Escherichia coli* O157: H7 in ground beef by single-cycle and multiple-cycle high-pressure treatments. Journal of Food Protection. 2008;**71**(4):811-815

[37] Morales P, Calzada J, Rodríguez B, de Paz M, Nuñez M. Inactivation of *Salmonella Enteritidis* in chicken breast fillets by single-cycle and multiple-cycle high pressure treatments. Foodborne Pathogens and Disease. 2009;**6**(5): 577-581

[38] Patazca E, Koutchma T, Balasubramaniam V. Quasiadiabatic temperature increase during high pressure processing of selected foods. Journal of Food Engineering. 2007; **80**(1):199-205

[39] McArdle R, Marcos B, Kerry J, Mullen A. Monitoring the effects of high pressure processing and temperature on selected beef quality attributes. Meat Science. 2010;**86**(3):629-634

[40] Welti-Chanes J, López-Malo E, Palou D, Bermúdez J, Guerrero-Beltrán G, Barbosa-Cánovas G. Fundamentals and applications of high pressure processing to foods. In: Barbosa-Cánovas GV, Tapia S, Cano MP, editors. Novel Food Processing Technologies. New York: Marcel Dekker. EEUU; 2005

[41] Cheftel JC. Effects of high hydrostatic pressure on food constituents: An overview. In: Balny C, Hayashi R, Heremans K, Masson P, editors. High Pressure and

Biotechnology, Colloque INSERM, Vol. 224. Montrouge, France: John Libbey Eurotext; 1992. pp. 195-209

[42] Alfaia A, Alfaia C, Patarata L, Fernandes MJ, Fernandes MH, Elias M, et al. Binomial effects of high isostatic pressure and time on the microbiological, sensory characteristics and lipid composition stability of vacuum packed dry fermented sausages "chouriço". Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies. 2015;**32**: 37-44

[43] Black E, Huppertz T, Fitzgerald G, Kelly A. Baroprotection of vegetative bacteria by milk constituents: A study of *Listeria innocua*. International Dairy Journal. 2007;**17**:104-110

[44] Gao Y, Ju X, Wu D. A predictive model for the influence of food components on survival of *Listeria monocytogenes* LM 54004 under high hydrostatic pressure and mild heat conditions. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2007;**117**(3): 287-294

[45] Garcia-Graells C, Masschalck B, Michiels C. Inactivation of *Escherichia coli* in Milk by high-hydrostatic pressure treatment in combination with antimicrobial peptides. Journal of Food Protection. 1999;**62**(11):1248-1254

[46] Kaur L, Astruc T, Vénien A, Loison O, Cui J, Irastorza M, et al. High pressure processing of meat: Effects on ultrastructure and protein digestibility. Food & Function. 2016;**7**(5):2389-2397

[47] Huang Y, Wang Y, Wu Z, Li F. Combined effects of high-pressure and thermal treatments on lipid oxidation and enzymes in pork. Food Science and Biotechnology. 2016;**25**(1):261-266

[48] Ferrini G, Comaposada J, Arnau J, Gou P. Colour modification in a cured meat model dried by quick-dry-slice process® and high pressure processed

as a function of NaCl, KCl, K-lactate and water contents. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies. 2012;**13**: 69-74

breast supplemented with carvacrol. British Food Journal. 2019;**121**(11):

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

> [63] Park S, Sohn K, Shin J, Lee H. High hydrostatic pressure inactivation of *Lactobacillus viridescens* and its effects on ultrastructure of cells. International

of Journal Food Science and Technology. 2001;**36**:775-781

**70**:2013-2020

[64] Molina-Hoppner A, Doster W, Vogel R, Ganzle M. Protective effect of sucrose and sodium chloride for *Lactococcus lactis* during sublethal and lethal high-pressure treatments. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2004;

[65] Hauben K, Bernaerts K, Michiels C.

[66] Baert L, Debevere J, Uyttendaele M. The efficacy of preservation methods to

Protective effect of calcium on inactivation of *Escherichia coli* by high hydrostatic pressure. Journal of Applied

Microbiology. 1998;**85**:678-684

inactivate foodborne viruses. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2009;**131**(2-3):83-94

[67] Calci K, Meade G, Tezloff R, Kingsley D. High-pressure inactivation of hepatitis a virus within oysters. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2005;**71**(1):339-343

[68] Pagan R, Mackey B. Relationship between membrane damage and cell death in pressure-treated *Escherichia coli* cells: Differences between exponentialand stationary-phase cells and variation

Environmental Microbiology. 2000;**66**:

Environmental Microbiology. 2001;**67**:

Smelt JPPM. Effects of high pressure on inactivation kinetics and events related to proton in *Lactobacillus plantarum*.

among strains. Applied and

O157:H7 cells. Applied and

[70] Wouters PC, Glaasker E,

[69] Pagan R, Jordan S, Benito A, Mackey B. Enhanced acid sensitivity of pressure-damaged *Escherichia coli*

2829-2834

1983-1985

[56] Rodríguez-Calleja JM, Cruz-Romero MC, Sullivan MGO, García-López ML, Kerry JP. High-pressure-based hurdle strategy to extend the shelf-life of fresh chicken breast fillets. Food Control.

[57] MacFarlane J, McKenzie I, Turner R. Pressure induced pH and length changes in meat. Meat Science. 1980;**7**:169-181

[58] Georget E, Sevenich R, Reineke K, Mathys A, Heinz V, Callanan M. Inactivation of microorganisms by high isostatic pressure processing in complex matrices: A review. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies.

Anantheswaran R, Floros J, Knabel S. Effect of water activity on inactivation of *Listeria monocytogenes* and lactate dehydrogenase during high pressure processing. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2008;**124**(1):21-26

[60] Jofré A, Aymerich T, Grèbol N, Garriga M. Efficiency of high

food-borne microorganisms by challenge tests on convenience meat products. LWT- Food Science and Technology. 2009;**42**(5):924-928

Hurdle approach to increase the microbial inactivation by high pressure processing: Effect of essential oils. Food Engineering Reviews. 2012;**4**(3):141-148

[62] Chien SY, Sheen S, Sommers C, Sheen LY. Combination effect of highpressure processing and essential oil (*Melissa officinalis* extracts) or their constituents for the inactivation of *Escherichia coli* in ground beef. Food and Bioprocess Technology. 2019;**12**(3):

359-370

**125**

hydrostatic pressure at 600 MPa against

[61] Gayán E, Torres JA, Paredes-Sabja D.

2592-2606

2012;**25**:516-524

2015;**27**:1-14

[59] Hayman M, Kouassi G,

[49] Ros-Polski V, Koutchma T, Xue J, Defelice C, Balamurugan S. Effects of high hydrostatic pressure processing parameters and NaCl concentration on the physical properties, texture and quality of white chicken meat. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies. 2015;**30**:31-42

[50] Siddig H, Salah A, Aljasass F. Effect of high hydrostatic pressure treatment on the microbial contamination and on some chemical and physical properties of minced chicken. Research Journal of Biotechnology. 2019;**14**(9): 89-95

[51] Patterson M. Microbiology of pressure-treated foods. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 2005;**98**(6): 1400-1409

[52] Guillou S, Membré J. Inactivation of *Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus*, and *Salmonella enterica* under high hydrostatic pressure: A quantitative analysis of existing literature data. Journal of Food Protection. 2019;**82**(10):1802-1814

[53] Barbosa-Cánovas G, Gongora-Nieto M, Pothakamury U, Swanson B. Preservation of Foods with Pulsed Electric Fields. San Diego: Academic Press. EEUU; 1999

[54] Zook CD, Parish ME, Braddock RJ, Balaban MO. High pressure inactivation kinetics of *Saccharomyces cerevisiae* ascospores in orange and apple juice. Journal of Food Science. 1999;**64**: 533-535

[55] Oliveira T, Haddad G, Ramos A, Ramos E, Piccoli R, Cristianini M. Optimization of high pressure processing to reduce the safety risk of low-salt ready-to-eat sliced Turkey

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

breast supplemented with carvacrol. British Food Journal. 2019;**121**(11): 2592-2606

Biotechnology, Colloque INSERM, Vol. 224. Montrouge, France: John Libbey Eurotext; 1992. pp. 195-209 as a function of NaCl, KCl, K-lactate and water contents. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies. 2012;**13**:

[49] Ros-Polski V, Koutchma T, Xue J, Defelice C, Balamurugan S. Effects of high hydrostatic pressure processing parameters and NaCl concentration on the physical properties, texture and quality of white chicken meat. Innovative Food Science & Emerging

[50] Siddig H, Salah A, Aljasass F. Effect of high hydrostatic pressure treatment on the microbial contamination and on

properties of minced chicken. Research Journal of Biotechnology. 2019;**14**(9):

[52] Guillou S, Membré J. Inactivation of *Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus*, and *Salmonella enterica* under

[53] Barbosa-Cánovas G, Gongora-Nieto

[54] Zook CD, Parish ME, Braddock RJ, Balaban MO. High pressure inactivation kinetics of *Saccharomyces cerevisiae* ascospores in orange and apple juice. Journal of Food Science. 1999;**64**:

[55] Oliveira T, Haddad G, Ramos A, Ramos E, Piccoli R, Cristianini M. Optimization of high pressure

processing to reduce the safety risk of low-salt ready-to-eat sliced Turkey

M, Pothakamury U, Swanson B. Preservation of Foods with Pulsed Electric Fields. San Diego: Academic

Press. EEUU; 1999

533-535

[51] Patterson M. Microbiology of pressure-treated foods. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 2005;**98**(6):

high hydrostatic pressure: A quantitative analysis of existing literature data. Journal of Food Protection. 2019;**82**(10):1802-1814

Technologies. 2015;**30**:31-42

some chemical and physical

69-74

89-95

1400-1409

[42] Alfaia A, Alfaia C, Patarata L, Fernandes MJ, Fernandes MH, Elias M, et al. Binomial effects of high isostatic

microbiological, sensory characteristics and lipid composition stability of vacuum packed dry fermented sausages "chouriço". Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies. 2015;**32**:

[43] Black E, Huppertz T, Fitzgerald G, Kelly A. Baroprotection of vegetative bacteria by milk constituents: A study of *Listeria innocua*. International Dairy

[44] Gao Y, Ju X, Wu D. A predictive model for the influence of food components on survival of *Listeria monocytogenes* LM 54004 under high hydrostatic pressure and mild heat conditions. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2007;**117**(3):

[45] Garcia-Graells C, Masschalck B, Michiels C. Inactivation of *Escherichia coli* in Milk by high-hydrostatic pressure

antimicrobial peptides. Journal of Food Protection. 1999;**62**(11):1248-1254

treatment in combination with

[46] Kaur L, Astruc T, Vénien A, Loison O, Cui J, Irastorza M, et al. High pressure processing of meat: Effects on ultrastructure and protein digestibility. Food & Function. 2016;**7**(5):2389-2397

[47] Huang Y, Wang Y, Wu Z, Li F. Combined effects of high-pressure and thermal treatments on lipid oxidation and enzymes in pork. Food Science and Biotechnology. 2016;**25**(1):261-266

[48] Ferrini G, Comaposada J, Arnau J, Gou P. Colour modification in a cured meat model dried by quick-dry-slice process® and high pressure processed

pressure and time on the

*Food Processing*

Journal. 2007;**17**:104-110

37-44

287-294

**124**

[56] Rodríguez-Calleja JM, Cruz-Romero MC, Sullivan MGO, García-López ML, Kerry JP. High-pressure-based hurdle strategy to extend the shelf-life of fresh chicken breast fillets. Food Control. 2012;**25**:516-524

[57] MacFarlane J, McKenzie I, Turner R. Pressure induced pH and length changes in meat. Meat Science. 1980;**7**:169-181

[58] Georget E, Sevenich R, Reineke K, Mathys A, Heinz V, Callanan M. Inactivation of microorganisms by high isostatic pressure processing in complex matrices: A review. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies. 2015;**27**:1-14

[59] Hayman M, Kouassi G, Anantheswaran R, Floros J, Knabel S. Effect of water activity on inactivation of *Listeria monocytogenes* and lactate dehydrogenase during high pressure processing. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2008;**124**(1):21-26

[60] Jofré A, Aymerich T, Grèbol N, Garriga M. Efficiency of high hydrostatic pressure at 600 MPa against food-borne microorganisms by challenge tests on convenience meat products. LWT- Food Science and Technology. 2009;**42**(5):924-928

[61] Gayán E, Torres JA, Paredes-Sabja D. Hurdle approach to increase the microbial inactivation by high pressure processing: Effect of essential oils. Food Engineering Reviews. 2012;**4**(3):141-148

[62] Chien SY, Sheen S, Sommers C, Sheen LY. Combination effect of highpressure processing and essential oil (*Melissa officinalis* extracts) or their constituents for the inactivation of *Escherichia coli* in ground beef. Food and Bioprocess Technology. 2019;**12**(3): 359-370

[63] Park S, Sohn K, Shin J, Lee H. High hydrostatic pressure inactivation of *Lactobacillus viridescens* and its effects on ultrastructure of cells. International of Journal Food Science and Technology. 2001;**36**:775-781

[64] Molina-Hoppner A, Doster W, Vogel R, Ganzle M. Protective effect of sucrose and sodium chloride for *Lactococcus lactis* during sublethal and lethal high-pressure treatments. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2004; **70**:2013-2020

[65] Hauben K, Bernaerts K, Michiels C. Protective effect of calcium on inactivation of *Escherichia coli* by high hydrostatic pressure. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 1998;**85**:678-684

[66] Baert L, Debevere J, Uyttendaele M. The efficacy of preservation methods to inactivate foodborne viruses. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2009;**131**(2-3):83-94

[67] Calci K, Meade G, Tezloff R, Kingsley D. High-pressure inactivation of hepatitis a virus within oysters. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2005;**71**(1):339-343

[68] Pagan R, Mackey B. Relationship between membrane damage and cell death in pressure-treated *Escherichia coli* cells: Differences between exponentialand stationary-phase cells and variation among strains. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2000;**66**: 2829-2834

[69] Pagan R, Jordan S, Benito A, Mackey B. Enhanced acid sensitivity of pressure-damaged *Escherichia coli* O157:H7 cells. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2001;**67**: 1983-1985

[70] Wouters PC, Glaasker E, Smelt JPPM. Effects of high pressure on inactivation kinetics and events related to proton in *Lactobacillus plantarum*.

Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 1998;**64**:509-514

[71] Aymerich T, Jofré A, Garriga M, Hugas M. Inhibition of *Listeria monocytogenes* and *Salmonella* by natural antimicrobials and high hydrostatic pressure in sliced cooked ham. Journal of Food Protection. 2005;**68**:173-177

[72] Patterson MF, Linton M. Pasteurización de alimentos por altas presiones. In: Instituto Tomás Pascual Sanz para la Nutrición y la Salud; Universidad de Burgos (Eds.) Nuevas tecnologías en la conservación y transformación de los alimentos. International Marketing and Communication. España; 2010. pp. 59-72

[73] Ferreira M, Almeida A, Delgadillo I, Saraiva J, Cunha Â. Susceptibility of *Listeria monocytogenes* to high pressure processing: A review. Food Reviews International. 2016;**32**:377-399

[74] Téllez-Luis S, Ramírez J, Pérez-Lamela C, Vázquez M, Simal-Gándara J. Aplicación de la alta presión hidrostática en la conservación de los alimentos. Ciencia y Tecnologia Alimentaria. 2001; **3**(2):66-80

[75] Jofré A, Aymerich T, Bover-Cid S, Barriga M. Inactivation and recovery of *Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella enterica* and *Staphylococcus aureus* after high hydrostatic pressure treatments up to 900 MPa. International Microbiology. 2010;**13**:105-112

[76] Stollewerk K, Jofré A, Comaposada J, Arnau J, Garriga M. The effect of NaCl-free processing and high pressure on the fate of *Listeria monocytogenes* and *Salmonella* on sliced smoked dry-cured ham. Meat Science. 2012;**90**(2):472-477

[77] Stollewerk K, Jofré A, Comaposada J, Arnau J, Garriga M. NaCl-free processing, acidification, smoking and high pressure: Effects on growth of

*Listeria monocytogenes* and *Salmonella enterica* in QDS processed® dry-cured ham. Food Control. 2014;**35**(1):56-64

The protective effect of food matrices on *Listeria* lytic bacteriophage P100 application towards high pressure processing. Food Microbiology. 2018;**76**:

*High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

[85] Ramaroson M, Guillou S, Rossero A, Rezé S, Anthoine V, Moriceau N, et al. Selection procedure of bioprotective cultures for their combined use with high pressure processing to control spore-forming bacteria in cooked ham.

International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2018;**276**:28-38

416-425

**127**

[78] Koseki S, Yamamoto K. Modelling the bacterial survival/death interface induced by high pressure processing. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2007;**116**(1):136-143

[79] Mussa D, Ramaswamy H, Smith J. High-pressure destruction kinetics of *Listeria monocytogenes* on pork. Journal of Food Protection. 1999;**62**(1):40-45

[80] Oliveira T, Junior B, Ramos A, Ramos E, Piccoli R, Cristianini M. Phenolic carvacrol as a natural additive to improve the preservative effects of high pressure processing of low-sodium sliced vacuum-packed Turkey breast ham. LWT- Food Science and Technology. 2015;**64**(2):1297-1308

[81] Saucedo-Reyes D, Marco-Celdrán A, Pina-Pérez MC, Rodrigo D, Martínez-López A. Modeling survival of high hydrostatic pressure treated stationaryand exponential-phase *Listeria innocua* cells. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies. 2009;**10**(2): 135-141

[82] Guillou S, Lerasle M, Simonin H, Federighi M. High pressure processing of meat and meat products. In: Cummins EJ, Lyng J, editors. Emerging Technologies in Meat Processing. 1st ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; 2016. pp. 35-99

[83] Fraqueza M, Martins C, Gama L, Fernandes MH, Fernandes MJ, Ribeiro M, et al. High hydrostatic pressure and time effects on hygienic and physical characteristics of natural casings and condiments used in the processing of cured meat sausage. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies. 2019;**58**:102242

[84] Komora N, Bruschi C, Ferreira V, Maciel C, Brandão T, Fernandes R, et al. *High Hydrostatic Pressure Treatment of Meat Products DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.90858*

The protective effect of food matrices on *Listeria* lytic bacteriophage P100 application towards high pressure processing. Food Microbiology. 2018;**76**: 416-425

Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 1998;**64**:509-514

*Food Processing*

[72] Patterson MF, Linton M.

[71] Aymerich T, Jofré A, Garriga M, Hugas M. Inhibition of *Listeria*

*monocytogenes* and *Salmonella* by natural antimicrobials and high hydrostatic pressure in sliced cooked ham. Journal of Food Protection. 2005;**68**:173-177

*Listeria monocytogenes* and *Salmonella enterica* in QDS processed® dry-cured ham. Food Control. 2014;**35**(1):56-64

[78] Koseki S, Yamamoto K. Modelling the bacterial survival/death interface induced by high pressure processing.

[79] Mussa D, Ramaswamy H, Smith J. High-pressure destruction kinetics of *Listeria monocytogenes* on pork. Journal of Food Protection. 1999;**62**(1):40-45

[80] Oliveira T, Junior B, Ramos A, Ramos E, Piccoli R, Cristianini M. Phenolic carvacrol as a natural additive to improve the preservative effects of high pressure processing of low-sodium sliced vacuum-packed Turkey breast ham. LWT- Food Science and Technology. 2015;**64**(2):1297-1308

[81] Saucedo-Reyes D, Marco-Celdrán A, Pina-Pérez MC, Rodrigo D, Martínez-López A. Modeling survival of high hydrostatic pressure treated stationaryand exponential-phase *Listeria innocua* cells. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies. 2009;**10**(2):

[82] Guillou S, Lerasle M, Simonin H, Federighi M. High pressure processing of

Cummins EJ, Lyng J, editors. Emerging Technologies in Meat Processing. 1st ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.;

[83] Fraqueza M, Martins C, Gama L, Fernandes MH, Fernandes MJ, Ribeiro M, et al. High hydrostatic pressure and time effects on hygienic and physical characteristics of natural casings and condiments used in the processing of cured meat sausage. Innovative Food Science and Emerging

Technologies. 2019;**58**:102242

[84] Komora N, Bruschi C, Ferreira V, Maciel C, Brandão T, Fernandes R, et al.

meat and meat products. In:

135-141

2016. pp. 35-99

International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2007;**116**(1):136-143

Pasteurización de alimentos por altas presiones. In: Instituto Tomás Pascual Sanz para la Nutrición y la Salud; Universidad de Burgos (Eds.) Nuevas tecnologías en la conservación y transformación de los alimentos. International Marketing and

Communication. España; 2010. pp. 59-72

[73] Ferreira M, Almeida A, Delgadillo I, Saraiva J, Cunha Â. Susceptibility of *Listeria monocytogenes* to high pressure processing: A review. Food Reviews International. 2016;**32**:377-399

[74] Téllez-Luis S, Ramírez J, Pérez-Lamela C, Vázquez M, Simal-Gándara J. Aplicación de la alta presión hidrostática en la conservación de los alimentos. Ciencia y Tecnologia Alimentaria. 2001;

[75] Jofré A, Aymerich T, Bover-Cid S, Barriga M. Inactivation and recovery of *Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella enterica* and *Staphylococcus aureus* after high hydrostatic pressure treatments up to 900 MPa. International Microbiology.

Comaposada J, Arnau J, Garriga M. The effect of NaCl-free processing and high

*monocytogenes* and *Salmonella* on sliced smoked dry-cured ham. Meat Science.

[77] Stollewerk K, Jofré A, Comaposada J,

processing, acidification, smoking and high pressure: Effects on growth of

**3**(2):66-80

2010;**13**:105-112

2012;**90**(2):472-477

**126**

[76] Stollewerk K, Jofré A,

pressure on the fate of *Listeria*

Arnau J, Garriga M. NaCl-free

[85] Ramaroson M, Guillou S, Rossero A, Rezé S, Anthoine V, Moriceau N, et al. Selection procedure of bioprotective cultures for their combined use with high pressure processing to control spore-forming bacteria in cooked ham. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 2018;**276**:28-38

**129**

**Chapter 8**

**Abstract**

**1. Introduction**

Gamma Irradiation and High

Hamburger Conservation

*Michelle Guimarães Horta, Fabiana Regina Lima,* 

**Keywords:** hamburger, gamma irradiation, high hydrostatic pressure,

as well as in the construction and maintenance of tissues [3].

of technology for the production of industrialized meat.

The nutrition is an essential process for humans as they provide the essential nutrients. Meat and meat products have a prominent position among foods in the human diet, since it is rich in high-quality protein, essential amino acids, B vitamins, minerals, and other nutrients [1, 2] . These nutrients are important in the formation of enzymes, hormones, antibodies, structural proteins, and transporters

Meats are defined as muscle tissues, without or not include their bone base, and can come from different animal species as long as they are fit for consumption. Meat products are those obtained from meat, edible parts of different animal species in which the properties of the raw materials are modified by means of physical, chemical, or biological treatment techniques or a combination of these methods [4]. These techniques in general may involve the addition of ingredients or co-adjuvants

The nutritional composition of meat and meat products favors the possibility microorganism's proliferation [5]. Contamination of meat products may occur during processing and handling of food such as slaughtering, deboning, cutting,

natural food additives, nonthermal technologies

Hydrostatic Pressure Applied to

*Carlos Alberto Gois Suzart and Poliana Mendes De Souza*

Human nutrition is an essential process, since it provides the essential nutrients for their development. Animal source foods are rich in protein, amino acids, vitamins, and minerals. And they are subject to contaminants from the raw material to the final consumption. To avoid microbial contamination and deterioration, various technologies are used to ensure their innocuity. These include gamma irradiation and high hydrostatic pressure (HHP), which are nonthermal treatments. Such treatments may reduce the known adverse effects that occur during thermal processing. In meat products, these technologies may induce lipid oxidation, and to limit this process, the addition of synthetic or natural food antioxidants or both are used. This chapter discusses the use of gamma irradiation, high hydrostatic pressure, and application of natural antioxidants in beef hamburger to ensure their quality.

## **Chapter 8**
