Optimising the use of proteins from rich meat co-products and non-meat alternatives: Nutritional, technological and allergenicity challenges.

An exponential growth in the global demand for high quality proteins over the next 20 years is expected, mainly due to global population growth and the increasing awareness toward protein rich foods for more nutritive diets. Coupled with this, is the pressing need for more sustainable approaches within a bio-economy mindset. Although meat production is expected to increase to address this rising demand, a better use of the currently available resources provided by the food, and specially, the meat industry is required. In this regard, despite the high-quality proteins and other nutrients found in meat co-products; they are currently underused and their valorisation needs to be revisited. Also, emerging protein sources need to be investigated to alleviate the environmental pressure coming from the meat industry. In this review, the main focus was attributed to (i) the current and forthcoming challenges for the use of meat co-products as meat replacers to produce a new range of meat derived products (with high nutritional value, improved technological properties and better consumer acceptance); (ii) their performance regarding to the non-animal origin proteins currently used as meat protein replacers; and (iii) the allergenicity of the proteins that might fall into the category of novel protein sources.

Opportunities and perspectives for utilisation of co-products in the meat industry.

Meat co-products are the non-meat components arising from meat processing/fabrication and are generated in large quantities on a daily basis. Co-products are considered as low added-value products, and in general it is difficult for industries to divert efforts into increasing their value. While many of these products can be edible those not used for human consumption or pet food is usually processed to be used as animal feed, fertilizer or fuel. However, to a large extent meat co-products are an excellent source of high nutritive value protein, minerals and vitamins and hence may be better diverted to contribute to alleviate the increasing global demand for protein. In this review the current uses, legislation and potential techniques for meat co-products processing are reviewed with the aim of showing a route to improve meat industry sustainability, profitability and better usage of available resources.

Alternative uses for co-products: Harnessing the potential of valuable compounds from meat processing chains.

Opportunities for exploiting the inherent value of protein-rich meat processing co-products, in the context of increased global demand for protein and for sustainable processing systems, are discussed. While direct consumption maybe the most profitable route for some, this approach is influenced greatly by local and cultural traditions. A more profitable and sustainable approach may be found in recognizing this readily available and under-utilised resource can provide high value components, such as proteins, with targeted high value functionality of relevance to a variety of sectors. Applications in food & beverages, petfood biomedical and nutrition arenas are discussed. Utilization of the raw material in its entirety is a necessary underlying principle in this approach to help maintain minimum waste generation. Understanding consumer attitudes to these products, in particular when used in food or beverage systems, is critical in optimizing commercialization strategies.

Effects of processing parameters on immersion vacuum cooling time and physico-chemical properties of pork hams.

The effects of agitation (1002 rpm), different pressure reduction rates (60 and 100 mbar/min), as well as employing cold water with different initial temperatures (IWT: 7 and 20°C) on immersion vacuum cooling (IVC) of cooked pork hams were experimentally investigated. Final pork ham core temperature, cooling time, cooling loss, texture properties, colour and chemical composition were evaluated. The application for the first time of agitation during IVC substantially reduced the cooling time (47.39%) to 4.6°C, compared to IVC without agitation. For the different pressure drop rates, there was a trend that shorter IVC cooling times were achieved with lower cooling rate, although results were not statistically significant (P>0.05). For both IWTs tested, the same trend was observed: shorter cooling time and lower cooling loss were obtained under lower linear pressure drop rate of 60 mbar/min (not statistically significant, P>0.05). Compared to the reference cooling method (air blast cooling), IVC achieved higher cooling rates and better meat quality.

Vacuum cooling of meat products: current state-of-the-art research advances.

Vacuum cooling (VC) is commonly applied for cooling of several foodstuffs, to provide exceptionally rapid cooling rates with low energy consumption and resulting in high-quality food products. However, for products such as meat and cooked meat products, the higher cooling loss of vacuum cooling compared with established methods still means lower yields, and important meat quality parameters can be negatively affected. Substantial efforts during the past ten years have aimed to improve the technology in order to offer the meat industry, especially the cooked meat industry, optimized production in terms of safety regulations and guidelines, as well as meat quality. This review presents and discusses recent VC developments directed to the cooked meat industry. The principles of VC, and the basis for improvements of this technology, are firstly discussed; future prospects for research and development in this area are later explored, particularly in relation to cooling of cooked meat and meat products.

Immersion vacuum cooling of cooked beef - Safety and process considerations regarding beef joint size.

Cooked beef samples (1, 2, and 3kg; 4.7, 5.6, and 6.2cm average radius, respectively) were cooled from ∼72 to 4°C core temperature using either air blast (AB), immersion vacuum (IVC) or vacuum (VC) cooling. IVC cooled larger samples within 4h and took less than 2.5h between 72 and 10°C. IVC cooling times were on average shorter than AB and longer than VC for all sizes. Differences increased with size. IVC and AB cooling losses were comparable (P>0.05) while lower on average (P<0.05) than VC losses for same size samples. Additionally, samples between 1.0 and 4.3kg (4.2-8.7cm average radius) were cooled by either IVC or VC. Cooling times were between 2.8 and 5.5h for IVC and between 1.1 and 3.2h for VC. There was a significant effect (P<0.01) of sample size on IVC cooling times. Cooling profiles of larger samples were tested using USDA cooling growth model for Clostridium perfringens in beef broth. According to the model, none of the analyzed profiles would support significant growth of the bacteria.

Temperature evolution and mass losses during immersion vacuum cooling of cooked beef joints - A finite difference model.

A finite difference model was developed to describe and predict the temperature and mass loss evolution in reconstructed beef joints during immersion vacuum cooling. Fast cooling is obtained within beef pores and at beef surface when evaporation in the surrounding liquid is high. The cooling rate diminishes as the vacuum chamber pressure stabilizes and the liquid temperature reaches its lower value. The maximum deviation between measured and calculated temperatures was within 5°C for the beef (core and surface) and within 7°C for the surrounding liquid (measured at the bottom of the container). Absolute differences between predicted and experimental mass losses for the liquid and beef sample were around 2% and 1%, respectively. Mass losses are higher during the first period when evaporation is the main mode of heat transfer. Mechanical agitation in the surrounding liquid is suggested as a way to further reduce cooling times and to prevent uneven cooling.