| Literature DB >> 35954097 |
Coral Barcenilla1, Avelino Álvarez-Ordóñez1,2, Mercedes López1,2, Ole Alvseike3, Miguel Prieto1,2.
Abstract
Salt is widely employed in different foods, especially in meat products, due to its very diverse and extended functionality. However, the high intake of sodium chloride in human diet has been under consideration for the last years, because it is related to serious health problems. The meat-processing industry and research institutions are evaluating different strategies to overcome the elevated salt concentrations in products without a quality reduction. Several properties could be directly or indirectly affected by a sodium chloride decrease. Among them, microbial stability could be shifted towards pathogen growth, posing a serious public health threat. Nonetheless, the majority of the literature available focuses attention on the sensorial and technological challenges that salt reduction implies. Thereafter, the need to discuss the consequences for shelf-life and microbial safety should be considered. Hence, this review aims to merge all the available knowledge regarding salt reduction in meat products, providing an assessment on how to obtain low salt products that are sensorily accepted by the consumer, technologically feasible from the perspective of the industry, and, in particular, safe with respect to microbial stability.Entities:
Keywords: low-salt meat products; microbiological safety; shelf-life; water activity
Year: 2022 PMID: 35954097 PMCID: PMC9367943 DOI: 10.3390/foods11152331
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Salt content in a selection of meat products from different countries.
| Product | NaCl Content | Country | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Beef, cured, dried beef | 8.68 | USA | [ |
| Pork, cured, bacon, cooked, broiled, pan-fried, or roasted | 3.99 | USA | |
| Pork sausage | 3.23 | USA | |
| Canned meat chop | 3.44 | Serbia | [ |
| Cooked sausages | 2.95 | Serbia | |
| Smoked products | 3.44 | Serbia | |
| Hard pork sausage | 3.18 | Spain | [ |
| Cooked ham | 2.45 | Czech Republic | [ |
| Frankfurters | 2.44 | Czech Republic | |
| Knackauer | 2.34 | Germany | |
| Schinkenwurst | 2.03 | Germany | |
| Bierschinken | 2.2 | Germany | |
| Pancetta | 2.94 | Serbia | [ |
| Kulen sausage | 4.24 | Serbia | |
| Chorizo | 3.58 | Spain | [ |
| Fuet-type sausage | 3.94 | Spain | |
| Mortadella sausage | 1.97 | Spain |
Limiting conditions regarding aw for the growth of bacterial pathogens (adapted from Table A-1 in (FDA, 2011) [71]).
| Bacterial Pathogens | Min. aw | Max. % Water-Phase NaCl | Min pH |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.92 | 10 | 4.3 |
|
| 0.987 | 1.7 | 4.9 |
| 0.935 | 10 | 4.6 | |
| 0.97 | 5 | 5.0 | |
|
| 0.93 | 7 | 5 |
|
| 0.95 | 6.5 | 4 |
|
| 0.92 | 10 | 4.4 |
| 0.94 | 8 | 3.7 | |
| 0.96 | 5.2 | 4.8 | |
| 0.83 | 20 | 4 | |
| 0.85 | 10 | 4 | |
|
| 0.97 | 6 | 5 |
|
| 0.94 | 10 | 4.8 |
|
| 0.96 | 5 | 5 |
|
| 0.945 | 7 | 4.2 |
Use of cumulative and synergistic hurdles with salt to achieve the safety and quality of meat products.
| Product | Combined Hurdles | Results | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Raw pork meat | 350 MPa HPP + 1, 1.5 or 3% NaCl | Synergism between HPP and salt showed to control bacteria recovery (aerobic mesophiles, LAB and | [ |
| Sliced dry cured ham | 2.8% NaCl + 600 MPa | Combined hurdles achieved | [ |
| Sausage ( | 1.01% NaCl + 0.48% KCl + 0.91% CaCl2 + olive oil emulsified alginate replacing pork fat | A reduction of 58% NaCl in sausages seems to be feasible since no pH and microbial counts remained in the normal values. | [ |
| Pork sausage | 600 Mpa HPP + carrot fibers or potato starch + 1.2% NaCl | Reducing salt content from 1.8% to 1.2% with the addition of HPP and hydrocolloids did not negatively influence the water binding capacity, color, or texture of sausages. | [ |
| Sheep natural sausage casings | 0, 4, 7 or 12% NaCl + 0, 100, 150, 200 ug/g nisin | Combined hurdles greatly controlled | [ |
| Pork | Ultrasound (9 and 54.9 W/cm2) + 5% NaCl or a commercial salt replacer | Ultrasound only enhanced NaCl diffusion into the meat but did not influence the replacer diffusion. | [ |
Approaches to guarantee the microbiological safety of low-salt meat products.
| Approach | Main Mechanism | Advantages * | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|
| Use of preservatives that supplement or replace inhibitory power of salt | Low aw and inhibition power of preservatives (KCl, MgCl2, CaCl2, MgSO4, food cultures, bacteriocins, etc.) | Characteristics of the product remain (almost) unchanged. | Need to evaluate inhibitory power. Synergy with other hurdles absent. |
| Increase intensity of remaining hurdles | Stricter conditions that inhibit microbiota (acidification, drying, freezing) | Green label. | Products of quite different sensory quality. |
| Processing technologies. Decontamination | Inactivation of microbiota (HHP) | Avoids recontamination (product packaged). | No application to raw materials. |
| High level of hygiene in production | Raw materials of good quality with low numbers of spoilage and absence of pathogenic microorganisms | Strategy that it is beneficial and needed in any event. | Insufficient on its own, needs supplementation with other strategies. |
* In addition to those linked to health due to salt reduction.