The effect of intense light pulses (ILP) on sensory quality of 16 different varieties of meat, meat products, game, poultry and seafood are reviewed. Changes induced by ILP are animal species, type of meat product and fluences applied dependent. ILP significantly deteriorates sensory quality of cooked meat products. It causes less change in the sensory properties of dry cured than cooked meat products while fermented sausage is least affected. The higher fluence applied significantly changes the instrumental color values of meat, poultry, game and meat products. The use of ILP on seafood regarding its influence on sensory quality is promising

Cheigh

Figueroa-García

Ganan

Hierro

Kaack

Keklik

Oms-Oliu

Ozer

Paskeviciute

Rajkovic

Tomasevic

Wambura

Procedia Food Science

English

Tomasevic, I.

Rajkovic, A.

Open Marine Archive

 Procedia Food Science  5 ( 2015 )  285 – 288 
2211-601X © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license 
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of scientific committee of The 58th International Meat Industry Conference (MeatCon2015)
doi: 10.1016/j.profoo.2015.09.081 
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
International 58th Meat Industry Conference “Meat Safety and Quality: Where it goes?” 
The sensory quality of meat, game, poultry, seafood and meat 
products as affected by intense light pulses: A systematic review 
Igor Tomasevica,*, Andreja Rajkovicb,c 
aAnimal Source Food Technology Department, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Nemanjina 6, 11080 Belgrade, Serbia 
bLaboratory of Food Microbiology and Food Preservation, Department of Food Safety and Food Quality, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, 
Coupure 653, B-9000 Gent, Belgium 
cDepartment of Food Safety and Food Quality Management, University of Belgrade-Faculty of Agriculture, Nemanjina 6, 11080 Belgrade, 
Serbia 
Abstract 
The effect of intense light pulses (ILP) on sensory quality of 16 different varieties of meat, meat products, game, poultry and 
seafood are reviewed. Changes induced by ILP are animal species, type of meat product and fluences applied dependent. ILP 
significantly deteriorates sensory quality of cooked meat products. It causes less change in the sensory properties of dry cured 
than cooked meat products while fermented sausage is least affected. The higher fluence applied significantly changes the 
instrumental color values of meat, poultry, game and meat products. The use of ILP on seafood regarding its influence on sensory 
quality is promising. 
 
© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 
Peer-review under responsibility of scientific committee of International 58th Meat Industry Conference “Meat Safety and 
Quality: Where it goes?” (MeatCon2015)”. 
Keywords: intense light pulses; sensory quality; red meat; meat products; game; poultry; seafood  
1. Introduction 
A number of thermal and non-thermal decontamination and preservation methods have been, and continue to be 
developed in order to sustain meat safety and quality. The fact that not only the shelf life but also the quality of food 
 
 
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +381-11-2615-315; fax: +381-11-2193-659. 
E-mail address: tbigor@agrif.bg.ac.rs 
© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license 
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of scientific committee of The 58th International Meat Industry Conference (MeatCon2015)
286   Igor Tomasevic and Andreja Rajkovic /  Procedia Food Science  5 ( 2015 )  285 – 288 
 
is important to consumers gave birth to the concept of preserving foods using non-thermal methods. Non-thermal 
methods of food preservation are being developed to eliminate or at least minimize the quality degradation of foods 
that results from thermal processing. They are expected to induce only minimum quality degradation of food. It is 
therefore necessary to evaluate changes in sensory attributes of foods1. 
Intense light pulses (ILP), also known as pulsed light2, pulsed white light3 and pulsed UV light4 are included 
among the emerging technologies that are intensely investigated as an alternative to thermal treatment for killing 
pathogenic and spoilage microorganisms. Most of the literature concerning the application of ILP for the 
preservation of foods mainly deals with microbiological inactivation and few data are reported on sensory analysis5. 
Therefore, the aim of this review was to systematically present the effects of ILP on sensory quality of 16 different 
varieties of meat, meat products, game, poultry and seafood. Since meat purchasing decisions are influenced by 
color more than any other quality factor, special attention was paid to the effect of ILP on this. 
2. Materials and methods 
Samples preparation, ILP equipment used and treatments applied, five-point-scale scoring sensory method 
sensory evaluation by a professional panel, instrumental color measurements and statistical analysis performed were 
all explained in previous publications6,7,8,9. 
3. Results and discussion 
3.1. Five-point-scale scoring method 
ILP treatment did not significantly change appearance and total score values of the beef samples8. The color 
score also remained unchanged regardless of the level of fluence applied, which is in contrast of the findings of 
Hierro et al.10 where the color of beef was assessed by panel members as slightly lighter after the treatment of 11.9 
J/cm2. The application of 1-pulse (3.4 J/cm2) in our investigation8 significantly decreased the score for beef odor 
while the same happened only after 8.4 J/cm2 when applied to beef carpaccio in the experiments of Hierro et al.10. 
The beef odor was assessed as acceptable in both studies even after the highest fluency rate was applied. According 
to our results, the odor of beef meat is a bit more sensitive to the ILP then the odor of pork meat. For the poultry, the 
only sensory attribute affected by the ILP treatment was odor but not to such extent that it could also affect the 
pondered average values of the total sensory quality for the chicken and turkey meat8. A similar finding was 
published by Paskeviciute et al.11 where UV light dose higher than 6 J/cm2 had only some moderate effect on odor of 
chicken. The odor scores significantly decreased in all game meat samples after the 17 J/cm2 treatment but they 
were most easily observable in deer meat, and essentially contributed to the significant change of its pondered 
average value of total sensory quality. The effect of the treatment on odor was least pronounced in kangaroo meat8.  
The 17 J/cm2 treatment resulted in significant quality degradation in both ready-to-eat cooked meat products 
evaluated. The sensory quality of Parisian sausage and cooked ham deteriorated after the 17 J/cm2 treatment to such 
an extent that they were assessed as unacceptable products, with unpleasant odor similar to the one found in scalding 
facilities in slaughterhouses, terrible taste even regardless of smell, untypical yellowish and brownish color, strong 
aftertaste and poor texture7. Our findings are quite the opposite of what was previously reported by E. Hierro et al.5 
where the test panelists did not find significant differences in any of the parameters evaluated among pulsed and 
non-pulsed ham slices.  
Dry-cured meat product, Parma ham and bacon, showed a greater resistance to the effects of ILP than the cooked 
meat products examined. There were no statistically significant differences in any of the attributes evaluated 
between 1-pulse treated and untreated samples of Parma ham7. In the case of bacon, the same treatment caused 
significant difference only in odor, although assessors noted that the odor of both, treated and control bacon 
samples, was not so pronounced. When the higher fluence of 17 J/cm2 was applied to Parma ham and bacon their 
odor and taste significantly decreased to the level of neither good nor poor, as assessed by the panelists. However, 
287 Igor Tomasevic and Andreja Rajkovic /  Procedia Food Science  5 ( 2015 )  285 – 288 
 
changes in their texture and juiciness followed7. This was in agreement with the previously observed changes in dry 
cured loin imediately after the ILP treatment of 11.9 J/cm2 when odor and flavor also significantly decreased12. 
The sensory quality of 1-pulse treated fermented sausage was not significantly different to the untreated sample7, 
which is in concurrence with the findings of Ganan et al.12 where also no significant differences were observed in 
salchichón treated with different fluences. When the fermented sausage was exposed to 5-pulses treatment its 
temperature raised by 12°C and the texture and juiciness was significantly affected.  
All of the seafood samples were assessed as very acceptable, with the total score value greater than 4.5, whether 
they were ILP treated or not9. Even though significant changes in odor were assessed after the 5-pulses treatment, it 
was still described as pleasant and acceptable. We could not confirm the development of sulphur notes in tuna 
induced by the fluences higher than 8.4 J/cm2 10. All the other sensory attributes evaluated remained unaffected by 
the ILP treatments9. Ozer and Demirci13 also noticed that ILP treatment of 5.6 J/cm2 did not affect the quality of 
salmon fillets. 
3.2. Instrumental color measurement 
The instrumental color values of beef meat were not affected by 1-pulse treatment, since no significant 
differences were observed8. Treatment of 5 pulses significantly decreased redness in beef, while no significant 
differences were observed for lightness and yellowness. The changes in redness, although significant, were not 
sufficient to be noted by our sensory panel. In beef carpaccio subjected to ILP, Hierro et al.10 also observed 
decreases in a* values but they were accompanied by significant differences in b* value when the samples were 
treated with fluences equal to or higher than 8.4 J/cm2. Pork meat a* and b* values significantly decreased after the 
treatment of 17 J/cm2. Chicken color values were not significantly changed irrespective of the level of treatment8. 
This is in agreement with the results of Keklik et al.14 indicating that mild and moderate pulsed light treatments also 
did not affect the color of chicken samples, although extreme ILP treatment did increase the lightness (L*), redness 
(a*), and yellowness (b*) of samples significantly. The a* value of treated turkey samples were significantly lower 
than that of the untreated samples with the significant difference observed among the fluences assayed8. The redness 
gradually decreased as fluence increased. Similar ILP color resistance to that observed in chicken meat was 
observed only in rabbit meat samples. Deer meat suffered significant decrease in redness value after the 5-pulses 
treatment while the kangaroo meat was significantly lower in L* (after 1-pulse) and in b* (after 5 pulses)8. 
Pulsed light lightened cooked ham after the higher treatment was applied7. The a* value gradually decreased as 
fluence increased while only the highest fluences significantly affected the b* value, in the same way as was 
observed by Hierro et al.5. The lightness of Parisian sausage remained unaffected while redness and yellowness 
suffered significantly with observed difference among the fluences assayed. The significant increase in b* values of 
cooked ham after the ILP treatment was already reported15 as it was in other cooked-meat products like bologna5 
and chicken frankfurters4.  
In Parma ham, lightness (L*) was significantly lower in samples treated with 17 J/cm2 compared to control and 
samples treated with 3.4 J/cm2 while in fermented sausage and bacon it remained unaffected by the ILP7. The 
lightness of dry-cured loin also endured, while it was significantly higher in salchichón (fermented sausage) in 
samples treated with 11.9 J/cm2 as reported by Ganan et al.12. The a* value significantly decreased after the 5-pulses 
treatment in Parma ham, fermented sausage and bacon while the b* value significantly increased only in bacon7. It 
has been reported that when cured meat products are exposed to light, discoloration appears as a decrease in a* 
values and an increase in b* values, with or without a change in L*16. 
Pulsed light darkened tuna but only after the fluence of 17 J/cm2 was applied while a* and b* values were not 
significantly different to the control samples9. This is contradictory to the results of Hierro et al.10 where 8.4 J/cm2 
significantly increased L* and decreased a* and b* values in tuna carpaccio. The lower dose of 3.4 J/cm2 
significantly affected none of the color values in tuna in our study9, similar to the results of Figueroa-García et al.17 
with catfish or of Cheigh et al.18 with flatfish where no changes were observed in the CIELAB parameters at 
fluences lower than 2 J/cm2. The color of flounder and crab were not significantly affected9. 
288   Igor Tomasevic and Andreja Rajkovic /  Procedia Food Science  5 ( 2015 )  285 – 288 
 
4. Conclusion 
Our study indicated that the sensory quality changes induced by intense light pulses are different and depend on 
animal species, type of meat product and ILP dose applied. Only the odor of all the meat, poultry and game samples 
suffered significant changes after the pulsed light treatment. Higher doses of ILP can significantly compromise the 
instrumental color values of meat, poultry and game. The results for cooked meat products are not promising 
because ILP significantly deteriorated their quality. ILP caused fewer changes in the sensory properties of dry cured 
then in cooked meat products. Fermented sausage was least affected by ILP of all the meat products. All of the 
seafood samples were assessed as very acceptable, with the total score value greater than 4.5, whether they were ILP 
treated or not. The use of pulsed light on seafood regarding its influence on sensory quality is quite positive. 
Acknowledgements 
The data cited in this paper are an integral part of the PhD thesis of Dr Igor Tomasevic accomplished at Ghent 
University – Belgium, defended and published at the University of Belgrade – Serbia, and funded by BASILEUS 
PROJECT-EM ECW programme. The loan of the equipment from Claranor, France are gratefully acknowledged. 
References 
1. Barbosa-Cánovas GV. Nonthermal preservation of foods. Dekker, New York; 1998. 
2. Oms-Oliu G, Martín-Belloso O, Soliva-Fortuny R. Pulsed Light Treatments for Food Preservation. A Review. Food Bioprocess Tech 
2010;3:13-23. 
3. Kaack K, Lyager B. Treatment of slices from carrot (Daucus carota) using high intensity white pulsed light. Eur Food Res Technol 
2007;224:561-66. 
4. Keklik NM, Demirci A, Puri VM. Inactivation of Listeria monocytogeneson Unpackaged and Vacuum-Packaged Chicken Frankfurters Using 
Pulsed UV-Light. J Food Sci 2009;74:M431-9. 
5. Hierro E, Barroso E, L de la Hoz, Ordonez JA, Manzano S, Fernandez M. Efficacy of pulsed light for shelf-life extension and inactivation of 
Listeria monocytogenes on ready-to-eat cooked meat products. Innov Food Sci Emerg 2011;12:275-81. 
6. Rajkovic A, Tomasevic I, Smigic N, Uyttendaele M, Radovanovic R, Devlieghere F. Pulsed UV light as an intervention strategy against 
Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli O157:H7 on the surface of a meat slicing knife. J Food Eng 2010;100:446-51. 
7. Tomasevic I. Intense light pulses upset the sensory quality of meat products. Tehn mesa 2015;56. 
8. Tomasevic I. The effect of intense light pulses on the sensory quality and instrumental color of meat from different animal breeds. Biotechnol 
Anim Husb 2015;31:273-81. 
9. Tomasevic I. The sensory quality of seafood as affected by intense light pulses. Meso 2015;XVII:260-63. 
10. Hierro E, Ganan M, Barroso E, Fernández M. Pulsed light treatment for the inactivation of selected pathogens and the shelf-life extension of 
beef and tuna carpaccio. Int J Food Microbiol 2012;158:42-8. 
11. Paskeviciute E, Buchovec I, Luksiene Z. High-power pulsed light for decontamination of chicken from food pathogens: a study on 
antimicrobal efficiency and organolpetic properties. J Food Saf 2011;31:61-8. 
12. Ganan M, Hierro E, Hospital XF, Barroso E, Fernandez M. Use of pulsed light to increase the safety of ready-to-eat cured meat products. 
Food Cont 2013;32:512-7. 
13. Ozer NP, Demirci A. Inactivation of Escherichia coli O157 : H7 and Listeria monocytogenes inoculated on raw salmon fillets by pulsed UV-
light treatment. Int J Food Sci Technol 2006;41:354-60. 
14. Keklik NM, Demirci A, Puri VM. Decontamination of unpackaged and vacuum-packaged boneless chicken breast with pulsed ultraviolet 
light. Poultry Sci 2010;89:570-81. 
15. Wambura P, Verghese M. Effect of pulsed ultraviolet light on quality of sliced ham, LWT - Food Sci Technol 2011;44:2173-79. 
16. Hunt MC, Acton JC, Benedict RC, Calkins CR, Conforth DP, Jeremiah LE. American Meat Science Association Committee on Guidelines 
for Meat Color Evaluation. In: National Live Stock and Meat Board, Chicago; 1991. 
17. Figueroa-García JE, Silva JL, Kim T, Boeger J, Cover R. Use of pulsed-light to treat raw channel catfish fillets. J Miss Acad Sci 
2002;47:114–20. 
18. Cheigh CI, Hwang HJ, Chung MS. Intense pulsed light (IPL) and UV-C treatments for inactivating Listeria monocytogenes on solid medium 
and seafoods. Food Res Int 2013;54:745-52. 


The sensory quality of meat, game, poultry, seafood and meat products as affected by intense light pulses: a systematic review

AbstractThe effect of intense light pulses (ILP) on sensory quality of 16 different varieties of meat, meat products, game, poultry and seafood are reviewed. Changes induced by ILP are animal species, type of meat product and fluences applied dependent. ILP significantly deteriorates sensory quality of cooked meat products. It causes less change in the sensory properties of dry cured than cooked meat products while fermented sausage is least affected. The higher fluence applied significantly changes the instrumental color values of meat, poultry, game and meat products. The use of ILP on seafood regarding its influence on sensory quality is promising

Tomasevic, Igor

Rajkovic, Andreja

Elsevier - Publisher Connector 

The Sensory Quality of Meat, Game, Poultry, Seafood and Meat Products as Affected by Intense Light Pulses: A Systematic Review 

Ghent University Academic Bibliography

 Procedia Food Science  5 ( 2015 )  285 – 288 2211-601X © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Peer-review under responsibility of scientific committee of The 58th International Meat Industry Conference (MeatCon2015)doi: 10.1016/j.profoo.2015.09.081 Available online at www.sciencedirect.comScienceDirectInternational 58th Meat Industry Conference “Meat Safety and Quality: Where it goes?” The sensory quality of meat, game, poultry, seafood and meat products as affected by intense light pulses: A systematic review Igor Tomasevica,*, Andreja Rajkovicb,c aAnimal Source Food Technology Department, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Nemanjina 6, 11080 Belgrade, Serbia bLaboratory of Food Microbiology and Food Preservation, Department of Food Safety and Food Quality, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Coupure 653, B-9000 Gent, Belgium cDepartment of Food Safety and Food Quality Management, University of Belgrade-Faculty of Agriculture, Nemanjina 6, 11080 Belgrade, Serbia Abstract The effect of intense light pulses (ILP) on sensory quality of 16 different varieties of meat, meat products, game, poultry and seafood are reviewed. Changes induced by ILP are animal species, type of meat product and fluences applied dependent. ILP significantly deteriorates sensory quality of cooked meat products. It causes less change in the sensory properties of dry cured than cooked meat products while fermented sausage is least affected. The higher fluence applied significantly changes the instrumental color values of meat, poultry, game and meat products. The use of ILP on seafood regarding its influence on sensory quality is promising.  © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Peer-review under responsibility of scientific committee of International 58th Meat Industry Conference “Meat Safety and Quality: Where it goes?” (MeatCon2015)”. Keywords: intense light pulses; sensory quality; red meat; meat products; game; poultry; seafood  1. Introduction A number of thermal and non-thermal decontamination and preservation methods have been, and continue to be developed in order to sustain meat safety and quality. The fact that not only the shelf life but also the quality of food   * Corresponding author. Tel.: +381-11-2615-315; fax: +381-11-2193-659. E-mail address: tbigor@agrif.bg.ac.rs © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Peer-review under responsibility of scientific committee of The 58th International Meat Industry Conference (MeatCon2015)286   Igor Tomasevic and Andreja Rajkovic /  Procedia Food Science  5 ( 2015 )  285 – 288  is important to consumers gave birth to the concept of preserving foods using non-thermal methods. Non-thermal methods of food preservation are being developed to eliminate or at least minimize the quality degradation of foods that results from thermal processing. They are expected to induce only minimum quality degradation of food. It is therefore necessary to evaluate changes in sensory attributes of foods1. Intense light pulses (ILP), also known as pulsed light2, pulsed white light3 and pulsed UV light4 are included among the emerging technologies that are intensely investigated as an alternative to thermal treatment for killing pathogenic and spoilage microorganisms. Most of the literature concerning the application of ILP for the preservation of foods mainly deals with microbiological inactivation and few data are reported on sensory analysis5. Therefore, the aim of this review was to systematically present the effects of ILP on sensory quality of 16 different varieties of meat, meat products, game, poultry and seafood. Since meat purchasing decisions are influenced by color more than any other quality factor, special attention was paid to the effect of ILP on this. 2. Materials and methods Samples preparation, ILP equipment used and treatments applied, five-point-scale scoring sensory method sensory evaluation by a professional panel, instrumental color measurements and statistical analysis performed were all explained in previous publications6,7,8,9. 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Five-point-scale scoring method ILP treatment did not significantly change appearance and total score values of the beef samples8. The color score also remained unchanged regardless of the level of fluence applied, which is in contrast of the findings of Hierro et al.10 where the color of beef was assessed by panel members as slightly lighter after the treatment of 11.9 J/cm2. The application of 1-pulse (3.4 J/cm2) in our investigation8 significantly decreased the score for beef odor while the same happened only after 8.4 J/cm2 when applied to beef carpaccio in the experiments of Hierro et al.10. The beef odor was assessed as acceptable in both studies even after the highest fluency rate was applied. According to our results, the odor of beef meat is a bit more sensitive to the ILP then the odor of pork meat. For the poultry, the only sensory attribute affected by the ILP treatment was odor but not to such extent that it could also affect the pondered average values of the total sensory quality for the chicken and turkey meat8. A similar finding was published by Paskeviciute et al.11 where UV light dose higher than 6 J/cm2 had only some moderate effect on odor of chicken. The odor scores significantly decreased in all game meat samples after the 17 J/cm2 treatment but they were most easily observable in deer meat, and essentially contributed to the significant change of its pondered average value of total sensory quality. The effect of the treatment on odor was least pronounced in kangaroo meat8.  The 17 J/cm2 treatment resulted in significant quality degradation in both ready-to-eat cooked meat products evaluated. The sensory quality of Parisian sausage and cooked ham deteriorated after the 17 J/cm2 treatment to such an extent that they were assessed as unacceptable products, with unpleasant odor similar to the one found in scalding facilities in slaughterhouses, terrible taste even regardless of smell, untypical yellowish and brownish color, strong aftertaste and poor texture7. Our findings are quite the opposite of what was previously reported by E. Hierro et al.5 where the test panelists did not find significant differences in any of the parameters evaluated among pulsed and non-pulsed ham slices.  Dry-cured meat product, Parma ham and bacon, showed a greater resistance to the effects of ILP than the cooked meat products examined. There were no statistically significant differences in any of the attributes evaluated between 1-pulse treated and untreated samples of Parma ham7. In the case of bacon, the same treatment caused significant difference only in odor, although assessors noted that the odor of both, treated and control bacon samples, was not so pronounced. When the higher fluence of 17 J/cm2 was applied to Parma ham and bacon their odor and taste significantly decreased to the level of neither good nor poor, as assessed by the panelists. However, 287 Igor Tomasevic and Andreja Rajkovic /  Procedia Food Science  5 ( 2015 )  285 – 288  changes in their texture and juiciness followed7. This was in agreement with the previously observed changes in dry cured loin imediately after the ILP treatment of 11.9 J/cm2 when odor and flavor also significantly decreased12. The sensory quality of 1-pulse treated fermented sausage was not significantly different to the untreated sample7, which is in concurrence with the findings of Ganan et al.12 where also no significant differences were observed in salchichón treated with different fluences. When the fermented sausage was exposed to 5-pulses treatment its temperature raised by 12°C and the texture and juiciness was significantly affected.  All of the seafood samples were assessed as very acceptable, with the total score value greater than 4.5, whether they were ILP treated or not9. Even though significant changes in odor were assessed after the 5-pulses treatment, it was still described as pleasant and acceptable. We could not confirm the development of sulphur notes in tuna induced by the fluences higher than 8.4 J/cm2 10. All the other sensory attributes evaluated remained unaffected by the ILP treatments9. Ozer and Demirci13 also noticed that ILP treatment of 5.6 J/cm2 did not affect the quality of salmon fillets. 3.2. Instrumental color measurement The instrumental color values of beef meat were not affected by 1-pulse treatment, since no significant differences were observed8. Treatment of 5 pulses significantly decreased redness in beef, while no significant differences were observed for lightness and yellowness. The changes in redness, although significant, were not sufficient to be noted by our sensory panel. In beef carpaccio subjected to ILP, Hierro et al.10 also observed decreases in a* values but they were accompanied by significant differences in b* value when the samples were treated with fluences equal to or higher than 8.4 J/cm2. Pork meat a* and b* values significantly decreased after the treatment of 17 J/cm2. Chicken color values were not significantly changed irrespective of the level of treatment8. This is in agreement with the results of Keklik et al.14 indicating that mild and moderate pulsed light treatments also did not affect the color of chicken samples, although extreme ILP treatment did increase the lightness (L*), redness (a*), and yellowness (b*) of samples significantly. The a* value of treated turkey samples were significantly lower than that of the untreated samples with the significant difference observed among the fluences assayed8. The redness gradually decreased as fluence increased. Similar ILP color resistance to that observed in chicken meat was observed only in rabbit meat samples. Deer meat suffered significant decrease in redness value after the 5-pulses treatment while the kangaroo meat was significantly lower in L* (after 1-pulse) and in b* (after 5 pulses)8. Pulsed light lightened cooked ham after the higher treatment was applied7. The a* value gradually decreased as fluence increased while only the highest fluences significantly affected the b* value, in the same way as was observed by Hierro et al.5. The lightness of Parisian sausage remained unaffected while redness and yellowness suffered significantly with observed difference among the fluences assayed. The significant increase in b* values of cooked ham after the ILP treatment was already reported15 as it was in other cooked-meat products like bologna5 and chicken frankfurters4.  In Parma ham, lightness (L*) was significantly lower in samples treated with 17 J/cm2 compared to control and samples treated with 3.4 J/cm2 while in fermented sausage and bacon it remained unaffected by the ILP7. The lightness of dry-cured loin also endured, while it was significantly higher in salchichón (fermented sausage) in samples treated with 11.9 J/cm2 as reported by Ganan et al.12. The a* value significantly decreased after the 5-pulses treatment in Parma ham, fermented sausage and bacon while the b* value significantly increased only in bacon7. It has been reported that when cured meat products are exposed to light, discoloration appears as a decrease in a* values and an increase in b* values, with or without a change in L*16. Pulsed light darkened tuna but only after the fluence of 17 J/cm2 was applied while a* and b* values were not significantly different to the control samples9. This is contradictory to the results of Hierro et al.10 where 8.4 J/cm2 significantly increased L* and decreased a* and b* values in tuna carpaccio. The lower dose of 3.4 J/cm2 significantly affected none of the color values in tuna in our study9, similar to the results of Figueroa-García et al.17 with catfish or of Cheigh et al.18 with flatfish where no changes were observed in the CIELAB parameters at fluences lower than 2 J/cm2. The color of flounder and crab were not significantly affected9. 288   Igor Tomasevic and Andreja Rajkovic /  Procedia Food Science  5 ( 2015 )  285 – 288  4. Conclusion Our study indicated that the sensory quality changes induced by intense light pulses are different and depend on animal species, type of meat product and ILP dose applied. Only the odor of all the meat, poultry and game samples suffered significant changes after the pulsed light treatment. Higher doses of ILP can significantly compromise the instrumental color values of meat, poultry and game. The results for cooked meat products are not promising because ILP significantly deteriorated their quality. ILP caused fewer changes in the sensory properties of dry cured then in cooked meat products. Fermented sausage was least affected by ILP of all the meat products. All of the seafood samples were assessed as very acceptable, with the total score value greater than 4.5, whether they were ILP treated or not. The use of pulsed light on seafood regarding its influence on sensory quality is quite positive. Acknowledgements The data cited in this paper are an integral part of the PhD thesis of Dr Igor Tomasevic accomplished at Ghent University – Belgium, defended and published at the University of Belgrade – Serbia, and funded by BASILEUS PROJECT-EM ECW programme. The loan of the equipment from Claranor, France are gratefully acknowledged. References 1. Barbosa-Cánovas GV. Nonthermal preservation of foods. Dekker, New York; 1998. 2. Oms-Oliu G, Martín-Belloso O, Soliva-Fortuny R. Pulsed Light Treatments for Food Preservation. A Review. Food Bioprocess Tech 2010;3:13-23. 3. Kaack K, Lyager B. Treatment of slices from carrot (Daucus carota) using high intensity white pulsed light. Eur Food Res Technol 2007;224:561-66. 4. Keklik NM, Demirci A, Puri VM. Inactivation of Listeria monocytogeneson Unpackaged and Vacuum-Packaged Chicken Frankfurters Using Pulsed UV-Light. J Food Sci 2009;74:M431-9. 5. Hierro E, Barroso E, L de la Hoz, Ordonez JA, Manzano S, Fernandez M. Efficacy of pulsed light for shelf-life extension and inactivation of Listeria monocytogenes on ready-to-eat cooked meat products. Innov Food Sci Emerg 2011;12:275-81. 6. Rajkovic A, Tomasevic I, Smigic N, Uyttendaele M, Radovanovic R, Devlieghere F. Pulsed UV light as an intervention strategy against Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli O157:H7 on the surface of a meat slicing knife. J Food Eng 2010;100:446-51. 7. Tomasevic I. Intense light pulses upset the sensory quality of meat products. Tehn mesa 2015;56. 8. Tomasevic I. The effect of intense light pulses on the sensory quality and instrumental color of meat from different animal breeds. Biotechnol Anim Husb 2015;31:273-81. 9. Tomasevic I. The sensory quality of seafood as affected by intense light pulses. Meso 2015;XVII:260-63. 10. Hierro E, Ganan M, Barroso E, Fernández M. Pulsed light treatment for the inactivation of selected pathogens and the shelf-life extension of beef and tuna carpaccio. Int J Food Microbiol 2012;158:42-8. 11. Paskeviciute E, Buchovec I, Luksiene Z. High-power pulsed light for decontamination of chicken from food pathogens: a study on antimicrobal efficiency and organolpetic properties. J Food Saf 2011;31:61-8. 12. Ganan M, Hierro E, Hospital XF, Barroso E, Fernandez M. Use of pulsed light to increase the safety of ready-to-eat cured meat products. Food Cont 2013;32:512-7. 13. Ozer NP, Demirci A. Inactivation of Escherichia coli O157 : H7 and Listeria monocytogenes inoculated on raw salmon fillets by pulsed UV-light treatment. Int J Food Sci Technol 2006;41:354-60. 14. Keklik NM, Demirci A, Puri VM. Decontamination of unpackaged and vacuum-packaged boneless chicken breast with pulsed ultraviolet light. Poultry Sci 2010;89:570-81. 15. Wambura P, Verghese M. Effect of pulsed ultraviolet light on quality of sliced ham, LWT - Food Sci Technol 2011;44:2173-79. 16. Hunt MC, Acton JC, Benedict RC, Calkins CR, Conforth DP, Jeremiah LE. American Meat Science Association Committee on Guidelines for Meat Color Evaluation. In: National Live Stock and Meat Board, Chicago; 1991. 17. Figueroa-García JE, Silva JL, Kim T, Boeger J, Cover R. Use of pulsed-light to treat raw channel catfish fillets. J Miss Acad Sci 2002;47:114–20. 18. Cheigh CI, Hwang HJ, Chung MS. Intense pulsed light (IPL) and UV-C treatments for inactivating Listeria monocytogenes on solid medium and seafoods. Food Res Int 2013;54:745-52. 

The sensory quality of meat, game, poultry, seafood and meat products as affected by intense light pulses : a systematic review

Igor Tomasevic

Andreja Rajkovic

Crossref

The Sensory Quality of Meat, Game, Poultry, Seafood and Meat Products as Affected by Intense Light Pulses: A Systematic Review

Tomašević, Igor

Rajković, Andreja

AgroSpace

The sensory quality of meat, game, poultry, seafood and meat products as affected by intense light pulses: A systematic review

file:///data/core-remote/dit/data/elsevier/pdf/de7/aHR0cDovL2FwaS5lbHNldmllci5jb20vY29udGVudC9hcnRpY2xlL3BpaS9zMjIxMTYwMXgxNTAwMTcxNg==.pdf

The sensory quality of meat, game, poultry, seafood and meat products as affected by intense light pulses: A systematic review

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Open Marine Archive

Elsevier - Publisher Connector

Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Crossref

AgroSpace

Elsevier - Publisher Connector