4.7 Review

Non-thermal Technologies as Alternative Methods for Saccharomyces cerevisiae Inactivation in Liquid Media: a Review

期刊

FOOD AND BIOPROCESS TECHNOLOGY
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 487-510

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11947-018-2066-9

关键词

Emerging technologies; Microorganism inactivation; High pressure processing; High-power ultrasound; Pulsed electric fields; Supercritical carbon dioxide

资金

  1. PRODEP-Mexico [UGTO-PTC-557]
  2. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia Mexico [CONACyT/N.218273]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ongoing demand for high-quality processed foods which would preserve their natural and fresh-like characteristics has awakened a growing interest in non-thermal technologies. Thanks to their ability to inactivate microorganisms under mild conditions, these technologies avoid drawbacks usually attributed to the use of thermal treatments, such as nutrient loss, off-flavors, and changes in the food's physical and chemical properties. Saccharomyces cerevisiae (S. cerevisiae) mainly causes spoilage in liquid foods with high sugar content and low pH values. Thus, it is one of the most undesirable microorganisms in the food industry since its presence may lead to important economic losses. This review offers an exhaustive compilation and critical revision of research conducted in the field of S. cerevisiae inactivation in liquid media, emphasizing the use of non-thermal technologies, such as high pressure processing, high-power ultrasound, supercritical carbon dioxide, pulsed electric fields, and others. Likewise, using these technologies in combination (the hurdle approach) may enhance their individual effect and significantly reduce the treatment time needed to obtain a given level of S. cerevisiae inactivation. In general, non-thermal technologies are proving to be able to successfully inactivate S. cerevisiae in liquid media. However, the need for further investigation and complete industrial implementation is made evident throughout this review.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据