Cargando…

A first study comparing preservation of a ready‐to‐eat soup under pressure (hyperbaric storage) at 25°C and 30°C with refrigeration

Hyperbaric storage (HS), storage under pressure at 25°C and 30°C, of a ready‐to‐eat (RTE) soup was studied and compared with refrigeration. Soup was stored at different time (4 and 8 h), temperature (4°C, 25°C, and 30°C), and pressure (0.1, 100, and 150 MPa) conditions, to compare microbial loads an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moreira, Sílvia A., Fernandes, Pedro A. R., Duarte, Ricardo, Santos, Diana I., Fidalgo, Liliana G., Santos, Mauro D., Queirós, Rui P., Delgadillo, Ivonne, Saraiva, Jorge A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4708648/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26788288
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.212
_version_ 1782409513786146816
author Moreira, Sílvia A.
Fernandes, Pedro A. R.
Duarte, Ricardo
Santos, Diana I.
Fidalgo, Liliana G.
Santos, Mauro D.
Queirós, Rui P.
Delgadillo, Ivonne
Saraiva, Jorge A.
author_facet Moreira, Sílvia A.
Fernandes, Pedro A. R.
Duarte, Ricardo
Santos, Diana I.
Fidalgo, Liliana G.
Santos, Mauro D.
Queirós, Rui P.
Delgadillo, Ivonne
Saraiva, Jorge A.
author_sort Moreira, Sílvia A.
collection PubMed
description Hyperbaric storage (HS), storage under pressure at 25°C and 30°C, of a ready‐to‐eat (RTE) soup was studied and compared with refrigeration. Soup was stored at different time (4 and 8 h), temperature (4°C, 25°C, and 30°C), and pressure (0.1, 100, and 150 MPa) conditions, to compare microbial loads and physicochemical parameters. HS resulted in similar (microbial growth inhibition) to better (microbial inactivation) results compared to refrigeration, leading to equal and lower microbial loads, respectively, at the end of storage. Lower/higher pressure (100 vs. 150 MPa) and shorter/longer storage times (4 vs. 8 h) resulted in more pronounced microbial growth inhibition/microbial inactivation. Aerobic mesophiles showed less susceptibility to HS, compared to Enterobacteriaceae and yeast and molds. HS maintained generally the physicochemical parameters at values similar to refrigeration. Thus, HS with no need for temperature control throughout storage and so basically energetically costless, is a potential alternative to refrigeration.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4708648
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47086482016-01-19 A first study comparing preservation of a ready‐to‐eat soup under pressure (hyperbaric storage) at 25°C and 30°C with refrigeration Moreira, Sílvia A. Fernandes, Pedro A. R. Duarte, Ricardo Santos, Diana I. Fidalgo, Liliana G. Santos, Mauro D. Queirós, Rui P. Delgadillo, Ivonne Saraiva, Jorge A. Food Sci Nutr Original Research Hyperbaric storage (HS), storage under pressure at 25°C and 30°C, of a ready‐to‐eat (RTE) soup was studied and compared with refrigeration. Soup was stored at different time (4 and 8 h), temperature (4°C, 25°C, and 30°C), and pressure (0.1, 100, and 150 MPa) conditions, to compare microbial loads and physicochemical parameters. HS resulted in similar (microbial growth inhibition) to better (microbial inactivation) results compared to refrigeration, leading to equal and lower microbial loads, respectively, at the end of storage. Lower/higher pressure (100 vs. 150 MPa) and shorter/longer storage times (4 vs. 8 h) resulted in more pronounced microbial growth inhibition/microbial inactivation. Aerobic mesophiles showed less susceptibility to HS, compared to Enterobacteriaceae and yeast and molds. HS maintained generally the physicochemical parameters at values similar to refrigeration. Thus, HS with no need for temperature control throughout storage and so basically energetically costless, is a potential alternative to refrigeration. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-02-26 /pmc/articles/PMC4708648/ /pubmed/26788288 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.212 Text en © 2015 The Authors. Food Science & Nutrition published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Moreira, Sílvia A.
Fernandes, Pedro A. R.
Duarte, Ricardo
Santos, Diana I.
Fidalgo, Liliana G.
Santos, Mauro D.
Queirós, Rui P.
Delgadillo, Ivonne
Saraiva, Jorge A.
A first study comparing preservation of a ready‐to‐eat soup under pressure (hyperbaric storage) at 25°C and 30°C with refrigeration
title A first study comparing preservation of a ready‐to‐eat soup under pressure (hyperbaric storage) at 25°C and 30°C with refrigeration
title_full A first study comparing preservation of a ready‐to‐eat soup under pressure (hyperbaric storage) at 25°C and 30°C with refrigeration
title_fullStr A first study comparing preservation of a ready‐to‐eat soup under pressure (hyperbaric storage) at 25°C and 30°C with refrigeration
title_full_unstemmed A first study comparing preservation of a ready‐to‐eat soup under pressure (hyperbaric storage) at 25°C and 30°C with refrigeration
title_short A first study comparing preservation of a ready‐to‐eat soup under pressure (hyperbaric storage) at 25°C and 30°C with refrigeration
title_sort first study comparing preservation of a ready‐to‐eat soup under pressure (hyperbaric storage) at 25°c and 30°c with refrigeration
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4708648/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26788288
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.212
work_keys_str_mv AT moreirasilviaa afirststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT fernandespedroar afirststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT duartericardo afirststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT santosdianai afirststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT fidalgolilianag afirststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT santosmaurod afirststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT queirosruip afirststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT delgadilloivonne afirststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT saraivajorgea afirststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT moreirasilviaa firststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT fernandespedroar firststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT duartericardo firststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT santosdianai firststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT fidalgolilianag firststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT santosmaurod firststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT queirosruip firststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT delgadilloivonne firststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration
AT saraivajorgea firststudycomparingpreservationofareadytoeatsoupunderpressurehyperbaricstorageat25cand30cwithrefrigeration