Next Article in Journal
Assessing the Effect of Flour (White or Whole-Grain) and Process (Direct or Par-Baked) on the Mycotoxin Content of Bread in Spain
Previous Article in Journal
Changes in Composition of Some Bioactive Molecules upon Inclusion of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Probiotic Strains into a Standard Yogurt Starter Culture
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Foods
Volume 12
Issue 23
10.3390/foods12234239
foods-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

The Research Field of Meat Preservation: A Scientometric and Visualization Analysis Based on the Web of Science

by
Jingjing Zhang
1,2,†,
Zixiang Wei
3,†,
Ting Lu
1,
Xingzhen Qi
1,
Lan Xie
1,
Silvia Vincenzetti
2,
Paolo Polidori
4,
Lanjie Li
1,5,* and
Guiqin Liu
1,*
1
Shandong Engineering Technology Research Center for Efficient Breeding and Ecological Feeding of Black Donkey, College of Agronomy and Agricultural Engineering, Liaocheng University, Liaocheng 252000, China
2
School of Biosciences and Veterinary Medicine, University of Camerino, Via Circonvallazione 93, 62024 Matelica, MC, Italy
3
Key Laboratory of Industrial Fermentation Microbiology, College of Biotechnology, Tianjin University of Science and Technology, Tianjin 300222, China
4
School of Pharmacy, University of Camerino, Via Gentile da Varano, 62032 Camerino, MC, Italy
5
Office of International Programs, Liaocheng University, Liaocheng 252000, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Foods 2023, 12(23), 4239; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12234239
Submission received: 22 October 2023 / Revised: 14 November 2023 / Accepted: 20 November 2023 / Published: 24 November 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Meat)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Meat plays a significant role in human diets, providing a rich source of high-quality protein. With advancements in technology, research in the field of meat preservation has been undergoing dynamic evolution. To gain insights into the development of this discipline, the study conducted an analysis and knowledge structure mapping of 1672 papers related to meat preservation research within the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) spanning from 2001 to 2023. And using software tools such as VOSviewer 1.6.18 and CiteSpace 5.8.R3c allowed for the convenient analysis of the literature by strictly following the software operation manuals. Moreover, the knowledge structure of research in the field of meat preservation was synthesized within the framework of “basic research—technological application—integration of technology with fundamental research,” aligning with the research content. Co-cited literature analysis indicated that meat preservation research could be further categorized into seven collections, as well as highlighting the prominent role of the antibacterial and antioxidant properties of plant essential oils in ongoing research. Subsequently, the future research direction and focus of the meat preservation field were predicted and prospected. The findings of this study could offer valuable assistance to researchers in swiftly comprehending the discipline’s development and identifying prominent research areas, thus providing valuable guidance for shaping research topics.

1. Introduction

The desire to offer meat products characterized by superior quality, affordability, eco-friendliness, and appeal to consumers has led meat processors, distributors, retailers, and industrialists to strive for the provision of such desired attributes [1]. Meat stands as a crucial source of animal-based nourishment for humans, offering a rich supply of high-quality protein. In recent years, the consumer demand for meat has surged significantly, driven by its appealing taste and nutritional benefits [2]. According to Ritchie (2017), per capita meat consumption has significantly increased by approximately 20 kg since 1961, reaching 43 kg per capita in 2014 [3]. Nonetheless, while meat is a rich source of protein and fat, it is inherently vulnerable to spoilage during processing, transportation, and sales. This susceptibility could contribute to environmental problems, economic losses, and poses significant health risks to consumers. For example, chemical additives used to prevent meat spoilage can enter water sources with wastewater, leading to the pollution of aquatic environments [4]. Troy et al. (2016) reported that food preservation and processing are energy-intensive processes; therefore, limiting energy usage can not only reduce environmental impact (e.g., greenhouse effect) but also decrease economic losses [5,6]. Thus, the focal point in meat preservation has revolved around the examination of spoilage and deterioration mechanisms, encompassing digestive enzymes, microorganisms, as well as fat and protein oxidation. Additionally, the application of various preservation techniques has been paramount in efforts to extend the shelf life of meat products, with the aim of meeting the growing demand for high-quality and safe meat products.
The high protein content and abundant moisture and fat in meat make it highly susceptible to microbial proliferation and natural oxidation, leading to spoilage [7]. Consequently, finding solutions to maintain meat quality and sensory attributes has been a focal point for professionals and researchers in the meat industry. Common meat preservation techniques primarily fall into three categories: (a) temperature and gas control [8]. These techniques, including freezing, chilling, and superchilling, are designed to slow or limit the rate of meat spoilage by controlling the temperature below the optimal range to inhibit the growth of microorganisms. (b) The use of chemical preservatives, biological preservatives, and physical treatments [9,10]. Preservatives are the substances used to extend the shelf life of meat by reducing microbial proliferation, including chlorides, nitrites, sulfides, and organic acids. The addition of these antimicrobial preservatives during processing can be combined with refrigeration techniques to provide enhanced protection for meat products. (c) Moisture content control in meat [11,12]. The water activity in meat products directly affects the microbiological safety of food and can be controlled through methods such as drying, refrigeration, the addition of chemicals, or their combinations. For instance, chemical substances like sodium chloride and sugar are typically used to regulate water activity by binding free water, thereby inducing osmotic imbalances, and ultimately inhibiting cell growth. With the advancement of meat preservation technology and the promotion of the clean label concept, safe, minimally toxic, green, and efficient chemical and natural antimicrobial agents, as well as non-thermal preservation techniques, have gradually replaced traditional meat preservation methods such as hot water treatment, chlorinated surface rinsing, freezing, air drying, and fermentation [13,14,15]. However, the term “clean label” has not yet been clearly defined by food authorities and is quite subjective. In general, the term refers to products that do not contain or use as few “artificial” additives as possible and are produced “naturally” or based on traditional formulation methods already known to consumers. The use of “clean labels” in meat products helps to meet consumers’ desire for “natural, nutritious and healthy” properties in food [16,17].
Scientific literature can be used to help researchers understand the structure and dynamics of a research field. However, traditional meat research reviews cannot satisfy people’s comprehensive understanding of this field. Furthermore, obtaining a large-scale literature review from a huge corpus of relevant research papers is not easy for researchers [18]. As subject areas progress, the ability to present the dynamic visual knowledge within the field of meat preservation research is becoming increasingly vital. Bibliometrics relies on statistical and visualization techniques, is used to summarize historical research results and predict future research trends based on scientific literature databases, and is extensively employed in a range of fields, including but not limited to food, health, environmental protection, and agricultural management [19,20,21]. In a bibliometric analysis conducted by de Melo, A. M (2021), it was determined that the bacupari fruit holds substantial potential for application in the realms of both food and health [22]. Notably, the amalgamation of traditional review papers, which offer comprehensive insights into the evolution of a research discipline, empowers researchers to attain a more precise, clear, and in-depth understanding of the research field, facilitating a swift grasp of the research frontiers. At the same time, the widespread adoption of bibliometric software, such as VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and BibExcel, aids researchers in effortlessly mapping the knowledge networks within subject areas, allowing them to discern research structures and hotspots [23,24,25]. Therefore, it seems particularly important to conduct a specific bibliometric analysis of meat preservation research.
This study used bibliometrics to scrutinize the developmental structure of the meat preservation field utilizing the WOS database, with the aim being to gain insight into future research trends in this field. The results of this study will help scientists to better understand the research progress and relevant research hotspots in the field of meat preservation, as well as providing reference points for future research work in this field.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data Sources and Search Strategy

The articles used in the present study for analysis were selected from the Web of Science Core Collection. Search date: 1 January 2001/31 August 2023. Search formula: TS = (“preserva*”) OR TS = (“extend*shelf life”) OR TS = (“extend* storage”) AND TS = (“meat”). Document Type: Articles or Review Articles or Early Access. A total of 2311 articles were initially retrieved through the search. Subsequently, literature records from the WOS database were exported in full-record format. Duplicate documents were removed using the “Remove Duplicates” function in the Citespace software 5.8.R3c. Following this, based on comprehensive reviews of the full texts, irrelevant studies were excluded. All authors assessed their relevance until a consensus was reached. In the end, 1672 articles meeting the criteria were obtained for further analysis.

2.2. Software Used

For the visual analysis in this study, Citespace 5.8.R3c and VOSviewer 1.6.18 were employed. Origin 2022 and Scimago Graphica 1.0.17 were used to create visual representations, while data statistics were conducted using Microsoft Excel 2019. Within the scope of this study, various plots and visual representations were created using different software tools. For example, origin software 2022 was employed for plotting the annual publication volume and citation trends. Citespace software was used to analyze and generate the journal double citation map, co-citation journal clustering map, and co-citation journal timeline map. For specific drawing methods, see the research of Citespace developer Chen [26,27]. VOSviewer aided in creating the keyword spatio-temporal map and keyword clustering hotspot map [28]. The network visualization map of inter-country cooperation was jointly analyzed and generated using VOSviewer and Scimago Graphica. The specific procedures involved regions belonging to the same country were merged by VOSviewer (e.g., Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau were represented by the People’s Republic of China; Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales were represented by England), and Scimago Graphica was used to create the network visualization map. Furthermore, the rest of the tables were drawn using Excel statistics.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. The Field of Meat Preservation Research

The field of meat preservation research is focused on studying how to prolong and protect the quality and food safety of meat products during storage and transportation. It is a complex research area that involves multiple disciplines working together. Moreover, it is crucial for researchers to dynamically and intuitively analyze and assess the variations in research between different disciplines within this research field. However, this issue can be effectively addressed by utilizing double-layered thematic overlays on a global scientific map and examining the characteristics of publication combinations from both spatial and temporal perspectives [26]. Therefore, we used Citespace to generate a double map of meat preservation research.
The dual map of meat preservation research mainly establishes the relationship between the citing literature and the cited literature using journals from the WOS database [29]. The left half of the figure represents the current status of meat preservation research with the subject distribution of citations, while the right half represents the research foundation of meat preservation studies based on the subjects of citations. The wavy curve connects the relationship between the research status and the research foundation. And the size of the ellipse reflects the number of papers published in each discipline; meanwhile, the bar chart at the top illustrates the yearly variations in the number of published papers [30]. In the dual map, the connection between published articles in the meat preservation research field and the disciplines of the cited articles is depicted for the period 2001–2022. Similar disciplines are denoted with purple labels, and the various research subjects related to meat preservation are organized into distinct color-coded sections from top to bottom in Figure 1. The purple areas cluster within the disciplines of physics, materials, and chemistry. The blue sections are associated with the disciplines of ecology, earth, and marine studies. Additionally, the orange regions are connected to the disciplines of molecular biology and immunology, while the green areas pertain to dentistry, dermatology, surgery, and various medical and clinical fields. Moreover, the primary yellow citation paths in Figure 1 reveal that the literature published in the veterinary and animal sciences disciplines were predominantly cited in the fields of plant ecology, zoology, environmental science, toxicology, and nutrition.
The red dotted line in the enlarged figures at the top of the dual map diagram represents the dynamic changes in the disciplines of citing and cited journals since 2001. The published literature existed as part of the veterinary/animal/science discipline from beginning to end, and the current research hotspot has been concentrated in the discipline of veterinary/animal/science. Concurrently, the disciplines of the cited journals fluctuated repeatedly from 2001 to 2022, but the subject remains in the discipline of veterinary/animal/parasitology, which was almost consistent with the dynamic change in the citation discipline. This suggests that both the citing literature and the cited literature had a certain degree of stability.

3.2. Annual Volume of Articles and Citation Trend

The volume of periodical paper publications serves as a significant indicator for assessing the research status of an industry [31]. An annual analysis of 1672 journal papers in the field of meat preservation from the WOS database is presented in Figure 2. Overall, the analysis of publication numbers and citations reveals certain trends. Notably, from 2001 to 2009, there were relatively few studies on meat preservation, with only 216 articles published, accounting for a mere 15.5% of the total. This period signifies the infancy of relevant research in the field.
However, a significant uptick in the number of related articles occurred between 2010 and 2022, indicating a sustained increase in the popularity and attention to this research area, culminating in the development of a notable research scale. Furthermore, it is important to note that in 2023, only 129 articles were published, which is based solely on the number of periodical papers from the first three months of the year.
The annual citation count of the papers exhibited a pattern similar to the number of articles published. Notably, the citation frequency in 2020 and 2022 surpassed 5000, indicating the sustained interest of researchers in this field and a preference for citing newly published literature.

3.3. Meat Preservation Research among Countries and Institutions

The number of publications and amount of international cooperation among countries are illustrated in Figure 3. In this visual representation, each circle represents a specific country, with the size of the circle corresponding to the number of publications from that country [32]. Additionally, the connections between circles denote cooperative relationships between the respective countries.
The thickness of each line signifies the degree and quantity of collaboration between countries, while the depth of color indicates the overall intensity of their cooperation [33]. Obviously, China and Spain had a high intensity of cooperation, among which Spain had close cooperative relations with Italy, Brazil, and Australia. Furthermore, China and the United States also maintained a closely collaborative relationship. When considering the data presented in Table 1, it becomes evident that China published 238 articles, accounting for 17.02% of the total. Spain contributed 153 articles, representing 10.94% of the total publications, while the United States published 124 articles, making up 8.87% of the total. And the remaining articles published were from countries such as Brazil, India, Iran, Italy, South Korea, Turkey, and Australia.
In summary, China and Spain not only lead in terms of research output in the field of meat research but also maintain positive collaborations with numerous other countries. Interestingly, it is noteworthy that half of the top 10 countries involved are developing countries, which could be attributed to the significant role that the meat industry plays in the economies of these developing countries.
Subsequently, we made statistics on the top 10 journals in terms of publication volume in Table 2. The journal of Meat Sci. topped the list, followed by J. Food Process Pres. and LWT-Food Sci. Technol. The top 10 journals are all in the fields of Food Science and Technology, which also provides support for subsequent researchers to analyze research preamble and submit articles.

3.4. Keywords in Meat Preservation Research

Keywords provide an overview of the core content of an article and can be used to analyze the objects and content of the research. Visual analysis of keyword clustering and recurrence frequency allows researchers to quickly grasp the main directions and hot topics of the research [27]. Additionally, keyword co-occurrence analysis could help assess the relevance and impact of the literature, supporting researchers in evaluating and formulating research objectives. In the course of the research, a keyword co-occurrence analysis was carried out within the field of meat preservation using VOSviewer software. A total of 324 keywords were extracted, utilizing a co-occurrence threshold of more than 10 times. Moreover, synonyms were amalgamated, resulting in 262 distinct keywords that were used to draw the cluster density map.
As depicted in Figure 4, all the keywords are effectively grouped into five clusters, primarily categorized under meat variety, meat physical and chemical quality, research on meat quality, preservation technology, and related subjects. However, we observed that there were no clear boundaries between the clusters, indicating close connections between them. This finding suggested there was significant overlap between different research directions. For instance, keywords such as “essential oil, packaging, nisin” and “sensory attributes, microorganisms, temperature”, which are located in different clusters, intersect with each other. This reminds us that the impact of microorganisms and the environment on meat quality and the combination of preservation technologies may currently be the hotspot and focus of research. Further analysis of co-citation in the references is needed to address the aforementioned issues.
In Cluster 1, the keywords primarily revolve around research related to microorganisms, meat quality, and safety, with representative terms such as listeria-monocytogenes, lactic acid bacteria, and spoilage. Cluster 2 emphasizes research on meat antioxidants, featuring keywords like antioxidant activities, lipid oxidation, and natural antimicrobials. Cluster 3 is focused on various aspects of meat quality and shelf-life studies, with representative keywords like meat, shelf life, and quality. In Cluster 4, the keywords center around research on meat antimicrobials, including terms like antibacterial activity, essential oils, and antibacterial agents.
Lastly, Cluster 5 is dedicated to the study of preservation technology, featuring representative keywords such as modified atmosphere packaging, nisin, and packaging techniques.
We then created a density network diagram of the keywords, as seen in Figure 5, where the color gradient from left to right signifies the evolving emphasis on these keywords over time. Blue represents earlier research in this field, while yellow indicates the current research frontier [34]. In the field of meat research, a large number of detailed and in-depth research has been carried out on the physical and chemical properties of meat, as well as on microbial indicators and representative microorganisms in meat. Furthermore, by observing the size of the circles representing keywords, it was found that the current research hotspots include lipid oxidation, active packaging, antibacterial activity, essential oil preservation, film preservation, and so on. For example, Borzi et al. (2019) conducted a study in which they prepared antioxidant polyamide active packaging films through leaching. They observed that these active packaging films effectively prolonged the storage period of pork, extending it up to 23 days, while also significantly reducing fat oxidation [35]. Xavier et al. (2021) prepared cinnamon essential oil into nano-microcapsules and then combined it with corn alcohol solution to make active packaging for beef preservation, which effectively extended the shelf life of the beef and delayed fat oxidation [36].

3.5. Co-Citation in Meat Preservation Research

The co-citation analysis of the literature stands as a crucial component of citation analysis. It involves selecting high-impact literature within a particular subject area and examining the simultaneous citations of these works as a means to gauge the similarity of their respective research areas. This serves as a foundational approach for studying the trends in the development of the discipline [24]. In CiteSpace, the parameters are configured, and the time frame is established based on the literature’s predetermined years spanning from 2001 to 2022. Each year is segmented into distinct time slices, with the node type designated as “literature co-citation”. Simultaneously, the top 100 most frequently cited pieces of literature are extracted for analysis. Then, a literature co-citation network graph is generated. Figure 6 displays the network clustering map of co-cited literature published between 2001 and 2023, presenting a total of 17 citation clustering color blocks.
It is important to note that a lower number of clustering color blocks indicates a higher number of papers within the set of clusters being represented. The clustering module’s Q value exceeded 0.8687, indicating a significant distinction in the clustered cited literature. Additionally, each clustering color block achieved an S value greater than 0.9, affirming the credibility and robustness of the clustering results [37].
We selected the top 10 co-cited literature clusters, which were used to make a timeline. In this visualization, the length of the solid line within each row signifies the duration of the study, while the size of the circle denotes the current point in time when the cited literature is highlighted. Notably, the longest duration span was observed in Figure 7 for Clusters 1 and 3, which have remained active for 11 years. On the other hand, Clusters 7, 8, and 9 have not displayed significant recent activity. Clusters 0, 1, 3, and 10 have demonstrated sustained activity in recent years, as confirmed by the average years presented in Table 3 and Figure 6. Following this, we tallied the highly referenced and cited papers within each cluster based on the labels provided in Table 3. We then conducted an analysis, with the cited literature representing the knowledge base and the citing literature representing the research frontier [38]. The clustering labels are further organized based on their research categories and the associated technologies. Notably, Cluster 0 and Cluster 3 exemplify well-established advancements in the field of meat preservation, emphasizing strategies for extending shelf life through synergistic enhancements. The earliest cited literature in both collections is the article by Fernandez-Pan I, published in the journal J SCI FOOD AGR in 2013, which explores the enhancement of chicken shelf life through the synergistic use of oregano and clove essential oils [39]. Additionally, the literature with burst citations in both collections is predominantly concentrated within the period of 2014 to 2018.
Cluster 1 and Cluster 7 contain fundamental research in the field of meat preservation. The related studies have highlighted that the primary cause of meat spoilage is attributed to microorganisms [48]. These microorganisms contribute to food safety concerns within meat products by breaking down proteins, fats, and other components, ultimately producing volatile amines and waste materials. The microbial degradation of proteins and fats results in the production of volatile amines and fecal odors, which in turn contribute to food safety concerns in meat products. Thus, the adoption of targeted strategies to manage the dominant spoilage bacteria can effectively prolong the shelf life of meat. Annalisa Casaburi (2015) reviewed meat spoilage microorganisms, including Fusobacterium and Pseudomonas [49]. The research within the collection is divided into two distinct periods: the first spanning from 1997 to 2003, and the second from 2010 to 2020. This division signifies the continuous investigation of microorganisms in meat throughout the research phase. The shift between these two periods is primarily driven by the replacement of tradition methods of in-depth microorganism research, including culture methods, with the high-throughput sequencing and newly developed molecular sequencing techniques. Furthermore, it is essential to highlight that preservation strategies should be thoughtfully adapted to account for the evolving dynamics of the dominant spoilage bacteria across different stages.
In the realm of meat preservation applications, nanoemulsion is frequently utilized to encapsulate and safeguard essential oils, aimed at diminishing their volatility and hydrophobic characteristics, particularly when these essential oils possess antimicrobial properties. Therefore, the authors have consolidated Cluster 2 and Cluster 5 into a collective entity, characterized by its continuous activity. A large number of studies have pointed out the efficacy of transparent or translucent emulsions with diameters ranging from 100 to 600 nm in enhancing both the quality and shelf life of meat products [53,57,86]. For instance, Xiong (2020) developed nanoemulsions containing oregano essential oil and resveratrol in a piece of highly co-cited research. These emulsions were subsequently applied to pectin films, effectively extending the freshness of pork by 3–4 days [55]. Extending the shelf life of meat products through nanoemulsion combined with coating loading has emerged as a popular and valuable research direction.
Cluster 4 and Cluster 9, along with Cluster 13 and Cluster 14, have been amalgamated into a distinct category of research directions aimed at extending the shelf life of meat. These groupings encompass physical techniques designed to protect meat quality and prolong shelf life using methods like lamination and air conditioning preservation. A multitude of studies in the field of meat preservation have underscored the efficacy of substrates such as chitosan, sodium alginate, and konjac gum in the form of laminating films with antibacterial properties [87]. The utilization of air conditioning packaging in meat preservation research has demonstrated its efficacy in effectively extending shelf life and retarding color loss. However, it has been suggested that air conditioning can also exert a notable influence on the proliferation of parthenogenic and anaerobic bacteria during the storage of meat products. This can lead to the rapid growth of bacteria, including lactic acid bacteria, even when the color of the meat has not significantly deteriorated. Simultaneously, consumers harbor negative perceptions of carbon monoxide (CO), viewing it as a potentially hazardous gas [88]. Addressing how to mitigate the negative issues associated with gas preservation is a matter for researchers to contemplate. Additionally, it is necessary to develop films that are non-toxic, non-hazardous, readily degradable, and economically cost-effective, all while maintaining high barrier properties.
The authors have concluded that Cluster 6 and Cluster 16 represent containment and inclusion relationships. Within these clusters, common antimicrobial agents are categorized into chemical preservatives and biological preservatives, of which secondary metabolites produced through bacterial metabolism, such as nisin, laminin, and ε-polylysine, have a well-established history of utilization in food and meat industry production. Research has indicated that the use of bacteriocins can effectively inhibit bacterial proliferation, thus extending shelf life in a noteworthy manner [89,90].
Cluster 8, Cluster 11, and Cluster 12 served as the classification subsets for the subjects under investigation. Notably, the timeline graph indicates that the study of rabbit meat has been emerging, signifying a growing trend of researching meat with distinctive local characteristics in recent years.
Likewise, Clusters 10 and 15 have brought together fundamental research in the field of meat preservation. Within these clusters, it has been established that meat protein oxidation and lipid oxidation can result in undesirable off-flavors, color degradation, and alterations in textural properties [18,91,92]. Employing physical or chemical methods to reduce fat and protein oxidation and peroxidation can effectively enhance quality indicators.
Citation bursts are indicative of the depth of engagement in a specific field over a particular time period. Therefore, the top 10 bursts of cited literature in the realm of meat research are listed in Table 4. Notably, five of the highly emergent cited literatures are review articles, all of which have received significant attention. This underscores the widespread appreciation of reviews among researchers, and their role in effectively portraying the research foundation and advancement of current topics. Subsequently, we counted the literatures that continue to exhibit burst citations to the present day, signifying the prevailing research focus that is detailed in Table 5. Notably, the topics covered in the cited literature predominantly revolve around plant extracts and plant essential oils, indicating that the pursuit of natural and effective biopreservatives derived from plants has emerged as a prominent and current research hotspot.

3.6. Knowledge Structure Framework in the Field of Meat Preservation

Based on the preceding analysis of the evolution of research disciplines in meat storage and preservation, it becomes evident that these disciplines evolve along a trajectory characterized by “basic research—technology application—technology application combined with basic research”. This developmental pathway is further illustrated in Figure 8, which outlines three distinct knowledge areas. The research within the domain of meat storage and preservation is divided into these three knowledge areas, as depicted in Figure 8, with each area being the focus of ongoing investigation.
First of all, the green segment signifies the realm of basic research. This research involves the examination of various types of meat, and it entails the establishment of shelf-life criteria. These criteria are determined through an analysis of changes in the population of total bacteria and conditionally pathogenic bacteria, alongside the evaluation of physicochemical indicators such as TVB-N, TBARS, and biogenic amines during storage. Another research focus is the investigation of microbial succession during the storage process. This examination of microbial succession proves effective in discerning the shifts in species and quantities of dominant spoilage bacteria as they evolve during the storage period. Such insights have provided valuable guidance for the selection of preservatives and preservation methods. For example, Wei et al. (2021) conducted research on donkey meat, revealing that the dominant spoilage bacteria in this context were Pseudomonas spp. and Fusobacterium spp. According to this discovery, nanoemulsions were developed by incorporating polylysine and clove essential oil within chitosan matrices. This formulation effectively enhanced the texture attributes and extended the shelf life of the donkey meat [99,100].
The red section constitutes the foundation of the core research in this field. The selection of different preservatives and methods is based on different types of meat and different storage methods. Within this category, research is bifurcated into two main aspects: the development of preservatives on one front, and the application of physical preservation methods (such as refrigeration, freezing, vacuum packing, and air conditioning) on the other. Notably, biological preservatives with antibacterial and antioxidant properties are more favored by researchers. For instance, Liu et al. (2020) used clove essential oil to preserve Yao meat, which offered antibacterial and antioxidant effects and imparted a distinctive flavor, thus leading to a reduction in the quantity of spices required [90]. Subsequently, researchers have integrated technologies from the orange segment to jointly explore meat preservation. In these studies, various advanced techniques, including near-infrared spectroscopy [101], chromatography [102], high-throughput sequencing [103], histology [71], high-pressure homogenization [55], pulsed electric fields [104], and magnetic fields [105], are applied to assess the physical and chemical parameters of meat, microorganisms, and preservation methods and agents. These technologies have played a pivotal role in advancing the research discipline of meat storage and preservation. As depicted in Figure 7, all the components are interconnected and mutually reliant. Basic research serves as a guiding force for the advancement of research techniques, and conversely, the application of research techniques propels the deepening of the theoretical foundation.

3.7. Trends and Outlook of Meat Preservation

3.7.1. New Packaging

Utilizing appropriate packaging methods for meat portioning, transportation, and storage can efficiently mitigate the microbial contamination of meat and safeguard against the deterioration of its physical and chemical properties [71]. Recent research on new packaging can be categorized into the following three primary areas.

Biodegradable, Edible Packaging

With the continuous development of the concept of green safety, public awareness of environmental protection has steadily risen. Therefore, the pursuit of novel materials that can conserve resources, safeguard the environment, and exhibit hygiene, degradability, and even edibility has become an inevitable trend in the evolution of food packaging. Biodegradable packaging is a relatively new packaging concept that has emerged in recent years. It encompasses plastic-substitute packaging created by utilizing polypropylene film [93] and biodegradable films with excellent flexibility and air-isolation characteristics, which are produced from raw materials such as starch [106], modified starch [107], cellulose [108], polylactic acid [109], and some raw materials together with plasticizers and other auxiliary materials. In parallel, there is significant research interest in edible films.
Chitosan, known for its antibacterial properties, freshness preservation, ease of film formation, and biodegradability, is widely employed in laminating and preservation films. Furthermore, the freshness-preserving capabilities are enhanced through the addition of antibacterial agents. However, compared with synthetic composite films, polysaccharide films have poor water resistance and mechanical strength [81], which could have a negative impact on meat preservation later. As a result, the future trajectory of development may involve the utilization of degradable films endowed with robust mechanical strength, exceptional water and air barrier qualities, and freshness preservation technology, in conjunction with the composite efficiency preservation approach, which incorporates antimicrobial agents into polysaccharide films as a foundational element.
While research on biodegradable edible packaging has seen some progress in the field of meat preservation, there are still several issues that need to be addressed. For instance, many polysaccharide-based films are still in the experimental stage, and their production capacity has not yet met the standards for large-scale manufacturing. And it is important to strengthen the evaluation of production capacity and economic costs for each reactive packaging technology to ensure its wide application in real-life scenarios. Meanwhile, Li et al. (2023) have pointed out that single-component films often cannot simultaneously meet requirements for mechanical performance, water solubility, and air barrier properties [110]. Therefore, in order to overcome the limitations of edible films, exploring the formulation of different components such as polysaccharides, proteins, and lipids, as well as the production processes, holds potential as a future research direction.

Active Antibacterial Packaging

Promising results have been observed in preserving and extending the shelf life of meat products by incorporating active substances into the packaging film matrix. Furthermore, a plethora of studies have inclined towards integrating active ingredients into the active packaging film matrix to confer antioxidant and antibacterial properties, thereby retarding the oxidative degradation of meat. In particular, the incorporation of nanoparticles (such as Ag and TiO2) and tocopherols, known for their antimicrobial and antioxidant attributes, into packaging materials has enhanced the antimicrobial characteristics of the packaging [57]. Additionally, the concept of attaching antimicrobial agents to the material surface through covalent or ionic bonds has opened new avenues for research. For example, Huang et al. (2019) utilized plasma treatment for covalently grafting nisin and polylysine onto PLA films, which were subsequently employed in beef preservation [111]. In summary, active antimicrobial packaging can significantly prolong the shelf life of meat by effectively inhibiting microbial growth and oxidative reactions in the long term.

Smart Packaging

Smart packaging is a kind of intelligent packaging with the role of extending the shelf life of products and improving product quality and safety, all while providing early warnings for potential quality issues. Meat spoilage is a consequence of the combined effects of microorganisms and environmental factors, characterized by microbial proliferation and alterations in physical and chemical parameters. The visual labeling of spoilage microorganisms, pH, and volatile odors offers a clear indication of product quality. For instance, the ToxinGuardTM packaging film can detect the presence of Salmonella and Campylobacter through an enzyme-linked reaction. When these microorganisms are present, the packaging film changes color from white to red [112]. Additionally, Kim et al. (2017) employed bromocresol green as an indicator to create a TVB-N test indicator label package for assessing the shelf life of chicken meat [113]. This highlights that the product’s condition can be visually observed through smart labels on the packaging. However, smart package labels also come with certain challenges: (1) Accuracy issues: Smart packaging labels typically indicate a single indicator, while meat spoilage results from the interplay of multiple indicators, which could potentially be misleading to consumers; (2) Safety concerns: The coloring substances used on the label may dissolve into the product itself due to moisture outflow from the meat product; (3) Economic considerations: Meat products are a common and economically significant product. The use of one or more smart labels may raise the overall price of the meat product.
Based on previous research, a recent study by Yana et al. (2023) involved the preparation of degradable smart packaging using a 10% extract derived from purple tomatoes in combination with chitosan and polyvinyl alcohol as the matrix. The results indicate that the smart packaging effectively maintains the quality of pork products and, through color changes, can monitor the decay and spoilage of the pork [114].
Zhai et al. (2020) substituted synthetic pH-sensitive dyes with natural curcumin, eliminating potential hazards. They utilized industrially produced low-density polyethylene and hot-melt extrusion technology to create smart packaging for beef preservation, achieving satisfactory results in freshness identification. Additionally, curcumin imparted functional properties, such as resistance to lipid oxidation and antimicrobial capabilities, effectively prolonging the beef’s shelf life [115].
Similarly, these studies are currently in the laboratory research phase. It is crucial to consider factors such as the potential for industrial-scale implementation, standardization of preservation stage discrimination, and how to combine them with highly isolative active films to minimize the impact of external conditions on the indicators. However, the above-mentioned research has provided us with a direction for future studies, indicating the potential to load several naturally safe indicators with monitoring and preservation functions onto low-cost, degradable films with good air barrier properties. Therefore, finding solutions to the aforementioned challenges associated with smart packaging labels and making them more practical for widespread adoption in the supermarket market will likely be a focal point for future research.

3.7.2. New Preservation Technology

Nano-Emulsion Composite Coating Technology

The utilization of plant essential oils as both antibacterial and antioxidant agents, with their low water solubility being addressed through emulsification, has emerged as the leading edge of research in meat preservation [46]. However, the application of essential oils in food preservation still faces some limitations, such as hydrophobicity and low solubility, and the irritating odor of essential oils hinders their addition to meat in large quantities [100]. Therefore, in addition to improving the solubility of essential oils, encapsulating them in emulsion particles in a specific form provides effective stability [53]. The preparation of nanoemulsions can effectively protect food quality, slow down their volatility, and enhance controlled release, ultimately extending the shelf life of the food while reducing the negative impact of odors and off-flavors on sensory attributes. As detailed in Section 3.5 the application of nanoemulsion essential oils, which exhibit robust antibacterial and antioxidant effects alongside gradual release characteristics, in combination with coating technology, holds great promise in the realm of meat storage and preservation.
In summary, due to variations in meat types, transportation methods, storage conditions, and environmental temperatures, the release time and enhancement strategies of each type of essential oil nanoemulsion differ significantly. Therefore, in the development of nanoemulsion composite coating technology, it is essential not only to research the stability and functionality of the biobased materials themselves, but also to further investigate the characteristics and additive proportions of each component based on different application scenarios and objectives. The synergistic interaction between components in the packaging is expected to be one of the key trends in the future development of nanoemulsion composite coating technology.

Physical Sterilization Technology

Physical sterilization techniques help reduce dependence on chemical preservatives and mitigate the loss of quality indicators that can occur during thermal processing treatments. With the continuous development of technology, various physical sterilization methods, such as irradiation, microwaves, and pulsed electric fields, have found applications in meat preservation. Among them, emerging technologies like photodynamic inactivation and cold plasma (CP) have garnered increased attention in this field. Photodynamic inactivation (PDI) technology, characterized by its safety, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness, has been widely researched in the field of food preservation. PDI is a sterilization technology that efficiently deactivates microorganisms by stimulating photosensitizers with visible light. In practical applications, PDI technology has demonstrated effective bacterial inhibition. For instance, Li et al. (2018) utilized a 405 nm LED light source to irradiate salmon and observed a significant reduction in Listeria monocytogenes [116]. In the development of PDI technology, the current research focus lies in selecting photosensitizers (PS) that are safe, stable, and readily accepted by consumers. Studies have shown that naturally sourced curcumin and hypericin serve as excellent alternatives to traditional photosensitizers like porphyrins and their derivatives [117,118]. Lu et al. (2023) used LED as a light source to combine curcumin with citric acid to treat ground beef and refrigerate it and found that the shelf life could be extended by 2 days and the texture index could be improved, indicating that the combination of other types of preservation technology could play a synergistic role in extending the shelf life [119].
Cold plasma technology utilizes the surrounding medium of food to generate photoelectrons, ions, and reactive free-radical groups upon contact with the microbial surface, resulting in cell destruction and sterilization. The CP technology, due to its effective sterilization and low-temperature operation (60 °C), has been applied in the field of food preservation, offering excellent safety [120]. However, researchers have also found that prolonging the CP treatment time significantly reduces the a* value of red meats like pork and beef, leading to a loss of sensory quality. This is attributed to the highly oxidative nature of generated ionized oxygen molecules and free radicals [121,122].
These techniques have demonstrated effectiveness in removing bacterial biofilms from the meat surface. However, both techniques have drawbacks, including limited penetration depth and the potential to promote fat and protein oxidation. Subsequent studies can be conducted by combining antioxidants and optimizing process parameters (type of plasma gas, irradiation, angle of PID light source, device strength, treatment time) to ensure bactericidal effect and effectively reduce the loss of meat quality indexes caused by the above technology. In summary, the strategic integration of emerging preservation technologies with advanced packaging technologies will be a significant and increasingly prominent area of focus. This harmonious fusion of these technologies holds the potential to play a pivotal role in extending the shelf life of meat products, enhancing their quality and ultimately bolstering consumer satisfaction.

Active Functional Water

Water plays a vital role in slaughter, meat processing, and household cleaning and storage. In recent years, there has been considerable interest in the application of active functional water in the field of meat preservation. By using electrolysis, ozonization, plasma, and other technologies to activate pure water, the active water with antibacterial function is obtained. Ozone water is typically generated using low-cost electrolyzed water, and research indicates its effectiveness in eradicating foodborne pathogens. However, its 20 min half-life significantly limits practical application [123] Compared with ozone water, plasma water obtained by cold plasma discharge treatment not only has a bactericidal effect, because it is rich in NO2− and NO3− ions, but also has a color protection effect, which can help reduce nitrite usage to a certain extent [124].
Active functional water is easy to produce, cost-effective, and exhibits sterilization and sensory quality-enhancing characteristics, making it a promising prospect for enhancing meat quality and safety. In the future, research will likely focus on exploring the synergistic treatment effects of active functional water when combined with other technologies to effectively extend the shelf life and enhance the quality of meat.

4. Conclusions

This study visualized 1672 papers in the field of meat preservation using CiteSpace and VOSviewer software. Dual map visualizations illuminate the interdisciplinary nature of meat preservation research, while dynamic keyword network analyses reveal the evolving focal points of this field over time. Keyword contribution research suggests that current research hotspots focus on three aspects: (a) meat quality indicators; (b) the exploration of preservation technologies; (c) the activity and application of preservatives. Additionally, co-cited literature analysis provides a systematic overview of the knowledge underpinning meat preservation research, which was further categorized into seven collections based on intelligent software clustering to analyze and present different research categories. Moreover, the overview of different directions and technologies in meat preservation research was also obtained by summarizing the results of co-cited literature reclassification research. The highly cited literature and the most recent surges in co-cited literature emphasize the prominent role of plant essential oils with antibacterial and antioxidant attributes in ongoing research.
Furthermore, the present paper includes an outlook analysis of trends within the meat preservation field based on the literature analysis, which serves as a valuable reference for researchers seeking insights into the subject matter and its developmental direction. The pursuit of green and safe preservatives and technologies, degradable and functionally active film packaging, and visual rapid detection technology are worthy of further study. However, a single preservation technology and packaging technology have specific application scope. Thus, the rational combination of new fresh-keeping technology and packaging technology will be an emerging focus. The combination of these technologies could play a key role in extending the shelf life of meat products, improving quality, and increasing consumer acceptance. Nevertheless, the processing costs of emerging technologies and the mechanism research and safety assessment of new preservation methods should also be considered.
Compared with traditional systematic reviews, the bibliometric approach enables for a more intuitive, systematic, and scientifically grounded presentation of the discipline’s development patterns and future research directions. However, it is important to note that reliance on a single database (e.g., WOS) might lead to some limitations, such as limited data coverage, citation bias, lack of diversity, data lags, and restricted reading access for researchers. In the future, our aim is to expand our dataset to encompass more databases, thus providing a more comprehensive and three-dimensional analysis. For example, comprehensive databases (PubMed, Scopus), food field-specific literature databases (FSTA, AGRIS), patent databases, and non-English speaking country literature databases will be used to reduce the impact of a single database.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.Z., L.L. and G.L.; methodology, J.Z. and Z.W.; software, T.L.; validation, L.X., J.Z. and L.L.; formal analysis, P.P.; investigation, X.Q.; resources, S.V.; data curation, G.L.; writing—original draft preparation, J.Z. and Z.W.; writing—review and editing, G.L., P.P. and S.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Shandong Donkey Industry Innovation Team Project of Modern Agricultural Technology System, grant number SDAIT-27; the Key Research and Development Plan of Shandong Province, grant number 2021TZXD012.

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. ur Rahman, U.; Sahar, A.; Ishaq, A.; Aadil, R.M.; Zahoor, T.; Ahmad, M.H. Advanced meat preservation methods: A mini review. J. Food Saf. 2018, 38, e12467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zhao, S.; Li, N.; Li, Z.; He, H.; Zhao, Y.; Zhu, M.; Wang, Z.; Kang, Z.; Ma, H. Shelf life of fresh chilled pork as affected by antimicrobial intervention with nisin, tea polyphenols, chitosan, and their combination. Int. J. Food Prop. 2019, 22, 1047–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ritchie, H.; Roser, M. Meat and Dairy Production; OurWorldInData: Oxford, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  4. Rudy, M.; Kucharyk, S.; Duma-Kocan, P.; Stanisławczyk, R.; Gil, M. Unconventional methods of preserving meat products and their impact on health and the environment. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Troy, D.J.; Ojha, K.S.; Kerry, J.P.; Tiwari, B.K. Sustainable and consumer-friendly emerging technologies for application within the meat industry: An overview. Meat Sci. 2016, 120, 2–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Gómez, I.; Janardhanan, R.; Ibañez, F.C.; Beriain, M.J. The effects of processing and preservation technologies on meat quality: Sensory and nutritional aspects. Foods 2020, 9, 1416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ben Akacha, B.; Michalak, M.; Najar, B.; Venturi, F.; Taglieri, I.; Kačániová, M.; Ben Saad, R.; Mnif, W.; Garzoli, S.; Ben Hsouna, A. Recent Advances in the Incorporation of Polysaccharides with Antioxidant and Antibacterial Functions to Preserve the Quality and Shelf Life of Meat Products. Foods 2023, 12, 1647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhou, G.; Xu, X.; Liu, Y. Preservation technologies for fresh meat–A review. Meat Sci. 2010, 86, 119–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Chipley, J.R. Sodium benzoate and benzoic acid. In Antimicrobials in Food; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2020; pp. 41–88. [Google Scholar]
  10. Ray, B.; Bhunia, A. Fundamental Food Microbiology; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  11. Smaoui, S.; Hlima, H.B.; Braïek, O.B.; Ennouri, K.; Mellouli, L.; Khaneghah, A.M. Recent advancements in encapsulation of bioactive compounds as a promising technique for meat preservation. Meat Sci. 2021, 181, 108585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Jiao, X.; Xie, J.; Du, H.; Bian, X.; Wang, C.; Zhou, L.; Wen, Y. Antibacterial smart absorbent pad with Janus structure for meat preservation. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2023, 37, 101066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Delgado-Pando, G.; Ekonomou, S.I.; Stratakos, A.C.; Pintado, T. Clean label alternatives in meat products. Foods 2021, 10, 1615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Guerrero, A.; Ferrero, S.; Barahona, M.; Boito, B.; Lisbinski, E.; Maggi, F.; Sañudo, C. Effects of active edible coating based on thyme and garlic essential oils on lamb meat shelf life after long-term frozen storage. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2020, 100, 656–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Nkosi, D.V.; Bekker, J.L.; Hoffman, L.C. The use of organic acids (Lactic and acetic) as a microbial decontaminant during the slaughter of meat animal species: A review. Foods 2021, 10, 2293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Cegielka, A. “Clean label” as one of the leading trends in the meat industry in the world and in Poland-a review. Rocz. Państwowego Zakładu Hig. 2020, 71, 1. [Google Scholar]
  17. Asioli, D.; Aschemann-Witzel, J.; Caputo, V.; Vecchio, R.; Annunziata, A.; Næs, T.; Varela, P. Making sense of the “clean label” trends: A review of consumer food choice behavior and discussion of industry implications. Food Res. Int. 2017, 99, 58–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhang, X.-L.; Zheng, Y.; Xia, M.-L.; Wu, Y.-N.; Liu, X.-J.; Xie, S.-K.; Wu, Y.-F.; Wang, M. Knowledge domain and emerging trends in vinegar research: A bibliometric review of the literature from WoSCC. Foods 2020, 9, 166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chen, C. Science mapping: A systematic review of the literature. J. Data Inf. Sci. 2017, 2, 1–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kirby, A. Exploratory Bibliometrics: Using VOSviewer as a Preliminary Research Tool. Publications 2023, 11, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wang, N.; Tang, G.; Jiang, B.; He, Z.; He, Q. The development of green enterprises: A literature review based on VOSviewer and Pajek. Aust. J. Manag. 2023, 48, 204–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Melo, A.M.D.; Almeida, F.L.C.; Cavalcante, A.M.D.M.; Ikeda, M.; Ribani, R.H. Garcinia brasiliensis fruits and its by-products: Antioxidant activity, health effects and future food industry trends—A bibliometric review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 112, 325–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lu, X.; Lu, C.; Yang, Y.; Shi, X.; Wang, H.; Yang, N.; Yang, K.; Zhang, X. Current Status and Trends in Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy in the Past 20 Years (2000–2019): A Bibliometric Study. Front. Pharmacol. 2021, 12, 624534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Chen, C.M. CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2006, 57, 359–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Chen, C. Searching for intellectual turning points: Progressive knowledge domain visualization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 5303–5310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chen, C.; Leydesdorff, L. Patterns of connections and movements in dual-map overlays. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2014, 65, 334–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Chen, C.; Dubin, R.; Kim, M.C. Emerging trends and new developments in regenerative medicine: A scientometric update (2000–2014). Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 2014, 14, 1295–1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kuzior, A.; Sira, M. A Bibliometric Analysis of Blockchain Technology Research Using VOSviewer. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Liao, K.; Lv, P.; Wei, S.; Fu, T. A scientometric review of residential segregation research: A CiteSpace-based visualization. Sustainability 2022, 15, 448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Meng, L.; Wen, K.H.; Brewin, R.; Wu, Q. Knowledge Atlas on the Relationship between Urban Street Space and Residents’ Health—A Bibliometric Analysis Based on VOSviewer and CiteSpace. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Núez-Merino, M.; Maqueira-Marín, J.M.; Moyano-Fuentes, J.; Martínez-Jurado, P.J. Information and digital technologies of Industry 4.0 and Lean supply chain management: A systematic literature review. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 5034–5061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wu, H.; Li, Y.; Tong, L.; Wang, Y.; Sun, Z. Worldwide research tendency and hotspots on hip fracture: A 20-year bibliometric analysis. Arch. Osteoporos. 2021, 16, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Shen, C.; Wei, M.; Sheng, Y. A bibliometric analysis of food safety governance research from 1999 to 2019. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 9, 2316–2334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Manual for VOSviewer Version 1.6; Leiden University: Leiden, The Netherlands, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  35. Borzi, F.; Torrieri, E.; Wrona, M.; Nerín, C. Polyamide modified with green tea extract for fresh minced meat active packaging applications. Food Chem. 2019, 300, 125242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Xavier, L.O.; Sganzerla, W.G.; Rosa, G.B.; Rosa, C.G.D.; Agostinetto, L.; Veeck, A.P.D.L.; Bretanha, L.C.; Micke, G.A.; Costa, M.D.; Bertoldi, F.C. Chitosan packaging functionalized with Cinnamodendron dinisii essential oil loaded zein: A proposal for meat conservation. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 169, 183–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zhang, J.; Vogeley, M.S.; Chen, C. Scientometrics of big science: A case study of research in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Scientometrics 2011, 86, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zhang, D.; Xu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, J.; He, S.; Zhou, X. Study on sustainable urbanization literature based on Web of Science, scopus, and China national knowledge infrastructure: A scientometric analysis in CiteSpace. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 264, 121537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Fernández-Pan, I.; Mendoza, M.; Maté, J.I. Whey protein isolate edible films with essential oils incorporated to improve the microbial quality of poultry. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2013, 93, 2986–2994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Umaraw, P.; Munekata, P.E.S.; Verma, A.K.; Barba, F.J.; Lorenzo, J.M. Edible films/coating with tailored properties for active packaging of meat, fish and derived products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 98, 10–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bazargani-Gilani, B.; Aliakbarlu, J.; Tajik, H. Effect of pomegranate juice dipping and chitosan coating enriched with Zataria multiflora Boiss essential oil on the shelf-life of chicken meat during refrigerated storage. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2015, 29, 280–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Pateiro, M.; Gómez-Salazar, J.A.; Jaime-Patlán, M.; Morales, M.E.S.; Lorenzo, J.M. Plant Extracts Obtained with Green Solvents as Natural Antioxidants in Fresh Meat Products. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Zhang, H.; Wu, J.; Guo, X. Effects of antimicrobial and antioxidant activities of spice extracts on raw chicken meat quality. Food Sci. Hum. Wellness 2016, 5, 39–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Horita, C.N.; Baptista, R.C.; Caturla, M.Y.; Lorenzo, J.M.; Barba, F.J.; Sant’Ana, A.S. Combining reformulation, active packaging and non-thermal post-packaging decontamination technologies to increase the microbiological quality and safety of cooked ready-to-eat meat products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 72, 45–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Falowo, A.B.; Fayemi, P.O.; Muchenje, V. Natural antioxidants against lipid–protein oxidative deterioration in meat and meat products: A review. Food Res. Int. 2014, 64, 171–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ji, J.; Shankar, S.; Royon, F.; Salmieri, S.; Lacroix, M. Essential oils as natural antimicrobials applied in meat and meat products—A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 63, 993–1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Krishnan, K.R.; Babuskin, S.; Babu, P.A.S.; Sasikala, M.; Sabina, K.; Archana, G.; Sivarajan, M.; Sukumar, M. Antimicrobial and antioxidant effects of spice extracts on the shelf life extension of raw chicken meat. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2014, 171, 32–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zhu, M.; Du, M.; Cordray, J.; Ahn, D.U. Control of Listeria monocytogenes Contamination in Ready-to-Eat Meat Products. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2005, 4, 34–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Casaburi, A.; Piombino, P.; Nychas, G.J.; Villani, F.; Ercolini, D. Bacterial populations and the volatilome associated to meat spoilage. Food Microbiol. 2015, 45, 83–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Gullón, P.; Astray, G.; Gullón, B.; Tomasevic, I.; Lorenzo, J.M. Pomegranate Peel as Suitable Source of High-Added Value Bioactives: Tailored Functionalized Meat Products. Molecules 2020, 25, 2859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Shah, M.A.; Bosco, S.J.D.; Mir, S.A. Plant extracts as natural antioxidants in meat and meat products. Meat Sci. 2014, 98, 21–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Patel, S. Plant essential oils and allied volatile fractions as multifunctional additives in meat and fish-based food products: A review. Food Addit. Contam. A 2015, 32, 1049–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Noori, S.; Zeynali, F.; Almasi, H. Antimicrobial and antioxidant efficiency of nanoemulsion-based edible coating containing ginger (Zingiber officinale) essential oil and its effect on safety and quality attributes of chicken breast fillets. Food Control 2018, 84, 312–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sánchez-Ortega, I.; García-Almendárez, B.E.; Santos-López, E.M.; Amaro-Reyes, A.; Barboza-Corona, J.E.; Regalado, C. Antimicrobial edible films and coatings for meat and meat products preservation. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 248935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Xiong, Y.; Chen, M.; Warner, R.D.; Fang, Z.X. Incorporating nisin and grape seed extract in chitosan-gelatine edible coating and its effect on cold storage of fresh pork. Food Control 2020, 110, 107018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Jun-Bo, L.; Yang, S.; Jia-Ni, S.; Shan-Shan, T.; Yao-Hui, H.U.; Rui-Fa, J. A Theoretical Study on the Interaction between Melamine and Acrylamide Functional Monomer in Molecularly Imprinted Polymers. Food Sci. 2013, 34, 96–101. [Google Scholar]
  57. Pabast, M.; Shariatifar, N.; Beikzadeh, S.; Jahed, G. Effects of chitosan coatings incorporating with free or nano-encapsulated Satureja plant essential oil on quality characteristics of lamb meat. Food Control 2018, 91, 185–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Shen, C.; Geornaras, I.; Kendall, P.A.; Sofos, J.N. Control of Listeria monocytogenes on frankfurters by dipping in hops beta acids solutions. J. Food Prot. 2009, 72, 702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Samelis, J.; Bedie, G.K.; Sofos, J.N.; Belk, K.E.; Scanga, J.A.; Smith, G.C. Control of Listeria monocytogenes with combined antimicrobials after postprocess contamination and extended storage of frankfurters at 4 °C in vacuum packages. J. Food Prot. 2002, 65, 299–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Gálvez, A.; López, R.L.; Abriouel, H.; Valdivia, E.; Omar, N.B. Application of bacteriocins in the control of foodborne pathogenic and spoilage bacteria. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 2008, 28, 125–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Mbandi, E.; Shelef, L.A. Enhanced antimicrobial effects of combination of lactate and diacetate on Listeria monocytogenes and Salmonella spp. in beef bologna. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2002, 76, 191–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Luchansky, J.B.; Cocoma, G.; Call, J.E. Hot water postprocess pasteurization of cook-in-bag turkey breast treated with and without potassium lactate and sodium diacetate and acidified sodium chlorite for control of Listeria monocytogenes. J. Food Prot. 2006, 69, 39–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Stekelenburg, F.K. Enhanced inhibition of Listeria monocytogenes in Frankfurter sausage by the addition of potassium lactate and sodium diacetate mixtures. Food Microbiol. 2003, 20, 133–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Simonin, H.; Duranton, F.; Lamballerie, M.D. New Insights into the High-Pressure Processing of Meat and Meat Products. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2012, 11, 285–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Duranton, F.; Guillou, S.; Simonin, H.; Chéret, R.; De Lamballerie, M. Combined use of high pressure and salt or sodium nitrite to control the growth of endogenous microflora in raw pork meat. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2012, 16, 373–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Karabagias, I.; Badeka, A.; Kontominas, M.G. Shelf life extension of lamb meat using thyme or oregano essential oils and modified atmosphere packaging. Meat Sci. 2011, 88, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Olaoye, O.A.; Dodd, C.E.R. Evaluation of bacteriocinogenic pediococcus acidilactici as protective culture in the preservation of tsire, a traditional nigerian stick meat. J. Food Saf. 2010, 30, 867–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Chouliara, E.; Karatapanis, A.; Savvaidis, I.N.; Kontominas, M.G. Combined effect of oregano essential oil and modified atmosphere packaging on shelf-life extension of fresh chicken breast meat, stored at 4 °C. Food Microbiol. 2007, 24, 607–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Olaoye, O.A.; Onilude, A.A. Investigation on the potential application of biological agents in the extension of shelf life of fresh beef in Nigeria. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2010, 26, 1445–1454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Esmer, O.K.; Irkin, R.; Degirmencioglu, N.; Degirmencioglu, A. The effects of modified atmosphere gas composition on microbiological criteria, color and oxidation values of minced beef meat. Meat Sci. 2011, 88, 221–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Aymerich, T.; Picouet, P.A.; Monfort, J.M. Decontamination technologies for meat products. Meat Sci. 2008, 78, 114–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Zhang, H.Y.; Kong, B.H.; Xiong, Y.L.L.; Sun, X. Antimicrobial activities of spice extracts against pathogenic and spoilage bacteria in modified atmosphere packaged fresh pork and vacuum packaged ham slices stored at 4 °C. Meat Sci. 2009, 81, 686–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Velázquez, L.; Quiñones, J.; Díaz, R.; Pateiro, M.; Lorenzo, J.M.; Sepúlveda, N. Natural Antioxidants from Endemic Leaves in the Elaboration of Processed Meat Products: Current Status. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 1396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Duarte, A.M.; Silva, F.; Pinto, F.R.; Barroso, S.; Gil, M.M. Quality Assessment of Chilled and Frozen Fish-Mini Review. Foods 2020, 9, 1739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Carvalho, L.T.; Lorenzo, J.M.; Carvalho, F.A.L.D.; Bellucci, E.R.B.; Domínguez, R. Use of Turkey Meat Affected by White Striping Myopathy for the Development of Low-Fat Cooked Sausage Enriched with Chitosan. Foods 2020, 9, 1866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Lorenzo, J.M.; Pateiro, M.; Domínguez, R.; Barba, F.J.; Putnik, P.; Kovačević, D.B.; Shpigelman, A.; Granato, D.; Franco, D. Berries extracts as natural antioxidants in meat products: A review. Food Res. Int. 2018, 106, 1095–1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Alirezalu, K.; Movlan, H.S.; Yaghoubi, M.; Pateiro, M.; Lorenzo, J.M. e-polylysine coating with stinging nettle extract for fresh beef preservation. Meat Sci. 2021, 176, 108474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Munekata, P.E.S.; Rocchetti, G.; Pateiro, M.; Lucini, L.; Domínguez, R.; Lorenzo, J.M. Addition of plant extracts to meat and meat products to extend shelf-life and health-promoting attributes: An overview. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2020, 31, 81–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Ahmed, I.; Lin, H.; Zou, L.; Brody, A.L.; Li, Z.X.; Qazi, I.M.; Pavase, T.R.; Lv, L.T. A comprehensive review on the application of active packaging technologies to muscle foods. Food Control 2017, 82, 163–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Liang, C.; Zhang, D.; Zheng, X.; Wen, X.; Hou, C. Effects of different storage temperatures on the physicochemical properties and bacterial community structure of fresh lamb meat. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 2021, 41, 509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Dominguez, R.; Barba, F.J.; Gomez, B.; Putnik, P.; Kovacevic, D.B.; Pateiro, M.; Santos, E.M.; Lorenzo, J.M. Active packaging films with natural antioxidants to be used in meat industry: A review. Food Res. Int. 2018, 113, 93–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Bekhit, E.D.A.; Holman, B.W.B.; Giteru, S.G.; Hopkins, D.L. Total volatile basic nitrogen (TVB-N) and its role in meat spoilage: A review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 109, 280–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Fan, X.J.; Liu, S.Z.; Li, H.H.; He, J.; Feng, J.T.; Zhang, X.; Yan, H. Effects of Portulaca oleracea L. extract on lipid oxidation and color of pork meat during refrigerated storage. Meat Sci. 2019, 147, 82–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Bekhit, E.D.A.; Giteru, S.G.; Holman, B.W.B.; Hopkins, D.L. Total volatile basic nitrogen and trimethylamine in muscle foods: Potential formation pathways and effects on human health. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2021, 20, 3620–3666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Duran, A.; Kahve, H.I. The effect of chitosan coating and vacuum packaging on the microbiological and chemical properties of beef. Meat Sci. 2020, 162, 107961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Salvia-Trujillo, L.; Soliva-Fortuny, R.; Rojas-Graü, M.A.; McClements, D.J.; Martin-Belloso, O. Edible Nanoemulsions as Carriers of Active Ingredients: A Review. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 8, 439–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Zhang, W.; Jiang, H.; Rhim, J.W.; Cao, J.; Jiang, W. Effective strategies of sustained release and retention enhancement of essential oils in active food packaging films/coatings. Food Chem. 2021, 367, 130671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Bhagath, Y.B.; Manjula, K. Influence of composite edible coating systems on preservation of fresh meat cuts and products: A brief review on their trends and applications. Int. Food Res. J. 2019, 26, 377–392. [Google Scholar]
  89. Cao, Y.; Warner, R.D.; Fang, Z.X. Effect of chitosan/nisin/gallic acid coating on preservation of pork loin in high oxygen modified atmosphere packaging. Food Control 2019, 101, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Liu, Q.; Zhang, M.; Bhandari, B.; Xu, J.C.; Yang, C.H. Effects of nanoemulsion-based active coatings with composite mixture of star anise essential oil, polylysine, and nisin on the quality and shelf life of ready-to-eat Yao meat products. Food Control 2020, 107, 106771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Lu, J.N.; Li, M.Y.; Huang, Y.S.; Xie, J.H.; Shen, M.Y.; Xie, M.Y. A comprehensive review of advanced glycosylation end products and N-Nitrosamines in thermally processed meat products. Food Control 2022, 131, 108449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Bao, Y.; Ertbjerg, P.; Estévez, M.; Yuan, L.; Gao, R. Freezing of meat and aquatic food: Underlying mechanisms and implications on protein oxidation. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2021, 20, 5548–5569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Lorenzo, J.M.; Batlle, R.; Gómez, M. Extension of the shelf-life of foal meat with two antioxidant active packaging systems. Lwt-Food Sci. Technol. 2014, 59, 181–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Hyldgaard, M.; Mygind, T.; Meyer, R.L. Essential Oils in Food Preservation: Mode of Action, Synergies, and Interactions with Food Matrix Components. Front. Microbiol. 2012, 3, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Pateiro, M.; Barba, F.J.; Dominguez, R.; Sant’Ana, A.S.; Khaneghah, A.M.; Gavahian, M.; Gomez, B.; Lorenzo, J.M. Essential oils as natural additives to prevent oxidation reactions in meat and meat products: A review. Food Res. Int. 2018, 113, 156–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Vital, A.C.P.; Guerrero, A.; Monteschio, J.D.O.; Valero, M.V.; Prado, I.N.D. Effect of Edible and Active Coating (with Rosemary and Oregano Essential Oils) on Beef Characteristics and Consumer Acceptability. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0160535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Zhang, J.; Wang, Y.; Pan, D.-D.; Cao, J.-X.; Shao, X.-F.; Chen, Y.-J.; Sun, Y.-Y.; Ou, C.-R. Effect of black pepper essential oil on the quality of fresh pork during storage. Meat Sci. 2016, 117, 130–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Raeisi, M.; Tabaraei, A.; Hashemi, M.; Behnampour, N. Effect of sodium alginate coating incorporated with nisin, Cinnamomum zeylanicum, and rosemary essential oils on microbial quality of chicken meat and fate of Listeria monocytogenes during refrigeration. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2016, 238, 139–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Wei, Z.X.; Chu, R.D.; Li, L.J.; Zhang, J.J.; Zhang, H.C.; Pan, X.H.; Dong, Y.F.; Liu, G.Q. Study on Microbial Community Succession and Protein Hydrolysis of Donkey Meat during Refrigerated Storage Based on Illumina NOVA Sequencing Technology. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 2021, 41, 701–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Wei, Z.X.; Zhang, J.J.; Zhang, H.C.; Ning, Z.; Zhang, R.Y.; Li, L.J.; Liu, G.Q. Effect of nanoemulsion loading a mixture of clove essential oil and carboxymethyl chitosan-coated ε-polylysine on the preservation of donkey meat during refrigerated storage. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2021, 45, e15733. [Google Scholar]
  101. Guan, B.B.; Kang, W.C.; Jiang, H.; Zhou, M.; Lin, H. Freshness Identification of Oysters Based on Colorimetric Sensor Array Combined with Image Processing and Visible Near-Infrared Spectroscopy. Sensors 2022, 22, 683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Leng, P.; Hu, H.W.; Cui, A.H.; Tang, H.J.; Liu, Y.G. HS-GC-IMS with PCA to analyze volatile flavor compounds of honey peach packaged with different preservation methods during storage. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 149, 111963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Zhuang, S.; Hong, H.; Zhang, L.; Luo, Y. Spoilage-related microbiota in fish and crustaceans during storage: Research progress and future trends. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2021, 20, 252–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Mok, J.H.; Her, J.Y.; Kang, T.; Hoptowit, R.; Jun, S. Effects of pulsed electric field (PEF) and oscillating magnetic field (OMF) combination technology on the extension of supercooling for chicken breasts. J. Food Eng. 2017, 196, 27–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Kantono, K.; Hamid, N.; Oey, I.; Wang, S.; Xu, Y.; Ma, Q.L.; Faridnia, F.; Farouk, M. Physicochemical and sensory properties of beef muscles after Pulsed Electric Field processing. Food Res. Int. 2019, 121, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Amiri, E.; Aminzare, M.; Azar, H.H.; Mehrasbi, M.R. Combined antioxidant and sensory effects of corn starch films with nanoemulsion of Zataria multiflora essential oil fortified with cinnamaldehyde on fresh ground beef patties. Meat Sci. 2019, 153, 66–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Jovanovic, J.; Cirkovic, J.; Radojkovic, A.; Mutavdzic, D.; Tanasijevic, G.; Joksimovic, K.; Bakic, G.; Brankovic, G.; Brankovic, Z. Chitosan and pectin-based films and coatings with active components for application in antimicrobial food packaging. Prog. Org. Coat. 2021, 158, 106349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Yin, L.; Yin, F.; Huang, D.; Zheng, W.; Li, L.; Fu, Y. Synergistic enhancement of toughness and antibacterial properties of plant cellulose/glycerin/chitosan degradable composite membranes. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2021, 96, 491–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Shavisi, N.; Khanjari, A.; Basti, A.A.; Misaghi, A.; Shahbazi, Y. Effect of PLA films containing propolis ethanolic extract, cellulose nanoparticle and Ziziphora clinopodioides essential oil on chemical, microbial and sensory properties of minced beef. Meat Sci. 2017, 124, 95–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Li, X.L.; Shen, Y.; Hu, F.; Zhang, X.X.; Thakur, K.; Rengasamy, K.R.; Rosa, B.; Wei, Z.J. Fortification of polysaccharide-based packaging films and coatings with essential oils: A review of their preparation and use in meat preservation. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2023, 242, 124767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Huang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Li, Y.; Luo, C.; Li, L. Covalent Immobilization of Polypeptides on Polylactic Acid (PLA) Films and Their Application to Beef Preservation. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2020, 68, 10532–10541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Bodenhamer, W.T. Method and Apparatus for Selective Biological Material Detection. U.S. Patent 6051388, 18 April 2000. [Google Scholar]
  113. Kim, D.; Lee, S.; Lee, K.; Baek, S.; Seo, J. Development of a pH indicator composed of high moisture-absorbing materials for real-time monitoring of chicken breast freshness. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 2017, 26, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Yana, L.; Zhiwei, C.; Yunuo, Z.; Jingxi, W. Application of biodegradable colorimetric films based on purple tomatoes anthocyanins loaded chitosan and polyvinyl alcohol in pork meat. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Zhai, X.; Wang, X.; Zhang, J.; Yang, Z.; Zou, X. Extruded low density polyethylene-curcumin film: A hydrophobic ammonia sensor for intelligent food packaging. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2020, 26, 100595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Li, X.; Kim, M.J.; Bang, W.S.; Yuk, H.G. Anti-biofilm effect of 405-nm LEDs against Listeria monocytogenes in simulated ready-to-eat fresh salmon storage conditions. Food Control 2017, 84, 513–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Zhang, X.H. Effect of photodynamic inactivation of Escherichia coli by hypericin. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018, 34, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Corrêa, T.Q.; Blanco, K.C.; Garcia, R.B.; Perez, S.M.L.; Bagnato, V.S. Effects of ultraviolet light and curcumin-mediated photodynamic inactivation on microbiological food safety: A study in meat and fruit. Photodiagnosis Photodyn. Ther. 2020, 30, 101678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Lu, H.; Zheng, S.; Fang, J.; Zhu, J. Photodynamic inactivation of spoilers Pseudomonas lundensis and Brochothrix thermosphacta by food-grade curcumin and its application on ground beef. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2023, 87, 103410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Akhtar, J.; Abrha, M.G.; Teklehaimanot, K.; Gebrekirstos, G. Cold plasma technology: Fundamentals and effect on quality of meat and its products. Food Agric. Immunol. 2022, 33, 451–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Huang, M.; Wang, J.; Zhuang, H.; Yan, W.; Zhao, J.; Zhang, J. Effect of in-package high voltage dielectric barrier discharge on microbiological, color and oxidation properties of pork in modified atmosphere packaging during storage. Meat Sci. 2019, 149, 107–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Misra, N.N.; Jo, C. Applications of cold plasma technology for microbiological safety in meat industry. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 64, 74–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Preethi, P.; Reddy, S.V.R.; Rao, D.V.S.; Sharma, R.R.; Pandiselvam, R. Role of Ozone in Post-Harvest Disinfection and Processing of Horticultural Crops: A Review. Ozone Sci. Eng. 2022, 44, 127–146. [Google Scholar]
  124. Jung, S.; Lee, J.; Lim, Y.; Choe, W.; Yong, H.I.; Jo, C. Direct infusion of nitrite into meat batter by atmospheric pressure plasma treatment. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2016, 39, 113–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Foods 12 04239 g001
Figure 1. The dual map overlay of journals related to meat preservation research.
Figure 1. The dual map overlay of journals related to meat preservation research.
Foods 12 04239 g001
Foods 12 04239 g002
Figure 2. Times cited and publications over time.
Figure 2. Times cited and publications over time.
Foods 12 04239 g002
Foods 12 04239 g003
Figure 3. Network visualization map of cooperation between countries.
Figure 3. Network visualization map of cooperation between countries.
Foods 12 04239 g003
Foods 12 04239 g004
Figure 4. Cluster label mapping of keywords in the field of meat preservation, obtained using VOSviewer.
Figure 4. Cluster label mapping of keywords in the field of meat preservation, obtained using VOSviewer.
Foods 12 04239 g004
Foods 12 04239 g005
Figure 5. Visual mapping of keyword co-occurrence in meat preservation studiesobtained using VOSviewer.
Figure 5. Visual mapping of keyword co-occurrence in meat preservation studiesobtained using VOSviewer.
Foods 12 04239 g005
Foods 12 04239 g006
Figure 6. Cluster label mapping of co-cited documents in the field of meat preservation, obtained using CiteSpace.
Figure 6. Cluster label mapping of co-cited documents in the field of meat preservation, obtained using CiteSpace.
Foods 12 04239 g006
Foods 12 04239 g007
Figure 7. Timelines of cluster labels of co-cited documents in the field of meat preservation, obtained using CiteSpace.
Figure 7. Timelines of cluster labels of co-cited documents in the field of meat preservation, obtained using CiteSpace.
Foods 12 04239 g007
Foods 12 04239 g008
Figure 8. Schematic diagram of the knowledge structure framework in the field of meat preservation.
Figure 8. Schematic diagram of the knowledge structure framework in the field of meat preservation.
Foods 12 04239 g008
Table 1. Top 10 countries and institutions in publications (N = number).
Table 1. Top 10 countries and institutions in publications (N = number).
High Publication CountriesHigh Publication Institutions
RankCountryN (%)InstitutionN (%)
1Peoples R China238 (17.02%)Egyptian Knowledge Bank34 (2.43%)
2Spain153 (10.94%)Nanjing Agricultural University29 (2.07%)
3USA124 (8.87%)Universidade De Sao Paulo28 (2.00%)
4Brazil120 (8.58%)Spanish National Research Council26 (1.86%)
5India92 (6.58%)Indian Council of Agricultural Research24 (1.86%)
6Iran87 (6.22%)CTR Tecnol Carne Galicia21 (1.50%)
7Italy70 (5.01%)National Research Institute for Agriculture and Food19 (1.36%)
8South Korea54 (3.86%)Islamic Azad University19 (1.36%)
9Turkey48 (3.43%)United States Department of Agriculture18 (1.29%)
10Australia47 (3.36%)Universidade Estadual De Campinas17 (1.29%)
Table 2. Top 10 journals in publications (IF = influence factor in 2022).
Table 2. Top 10 journals in publications (IF = influence factor in 2022).
High Publication Journals
RankJournalIFQuartileN (%)Discipline
1Meat Sci.7.1Q1113 (8.08%)Food Science and Technology
2J. Food Process Pres.2.609Q485 (6.08%)Food Science and Technology
3LWT-Food Sci. Technol.6Q163 (4.51%)Food Science and Technology
4Food ControlONTROL6Q156 (4.01%)Food Science and Technology
5Foods5.2Q149 (3.51%)Food Science and Technology
6J. Food Sci.3.9Q243 (3.08%)Food Science and Technology
7J. Food Sci. Tech. Mys.3.1Q338 (2.72%)Food Science and Technology
8J. Food Process Pres.2.609Q437 (2.65%)Food Science and Technology
9Food Chem.8.8Q136 (2.58%)Food Science and Technology
10Int. J. Food Microbiol.5.4Q134 (2.43%)Food Science and Technology
Table 3. Highly referenced and cited literature in each cluster.
Table 3. Highly referenced and cited literature in each cluster.
Citing PapersCited Papers
ClusterCoverage %AuthorAuthorFrequency
0, 324Umaraw et al. [40]Bazargani et al. [41]20
16Pateiro et al. [42]Zhang et al. [43]17
15Horita et al. [44]Falowo et al. [45]16
1, 715Ji et al. [46]Krishnan et al. [47]19
14Zhu et al. [48]Casaburi et al. [49]15
15Gullón et al. [50]Shah et al. [51]14
2, 511Patel et al. [52]Noori et al. [53]19
10Sánchez et al. [54]Xiong et al. [55]18
9Liu et al. [56]Pabast et al. [57]16
6, 1616Shen et al. [58]Samelis et al. [59]9
15Galvez et al. [60]Mbandi et al. [61]8
13Luchansky et al. [62]Stekelenburg et al. [63]8
4, 9
13, 14		17Simonin et al. [64]Zhou et al. [8]21
13Duranton et al. [65]Karabagias et al. [66]11
12Olaoye et al. [67]Chouliara et al. [68]11
12Olaoye et al. [69]Esmer et al. [70]7
12Aymerich et al. [71]Zhang et al. [72]7
8, 11
12		11Velázquez et al. [73]Dominguez et al. [74]22
11Carvalho et al. [75]Lorenzo et al. [76]13
10Alirezalu et al. [77]Munekata et al. [46]11
9Munekata et al. [78]Ahmed et al. [79]11
10, 1513Liang et al. [80]Dominguez et al. [81]15
12Bekhit et al. [82]Fan et al. [83]12
11Bekhit et al. [84]Duran et al. [85]10
Table 4. Top 10 references with the strongest citation bursts.
Table 4. Top 10 references with the strongest citation bursts.
DOICluster IDDuration in 2001–2022Article TypeTheme
10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.04.0339Foods 12 04239 i001ReviewReview of meat preservation technology [8]
10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2013.11.0111Foods 12 04239 i002Journal articleApplication of plant extracts in chicken meat [47]
10.3390/antiox810042911Foods 12 04239 i003ReviewReview of lipid oxidation in meat [45]
10.1016/j.foodres.2014.06.0220Foods 12 04239 i004ReviewClassification of natural antioxidants for meat [63]
10.1016/j.fm.2006.12.0054Foods 12 04239 i005Journal articleApplication of essential oil [68]
10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.08.0155Foods 12 04239 i006Journal articleApplication of coatings based on nanoemulsions [53]
10.1016/j.lwt.2014.04.0613Foods 12 04239 i007Journal articleApplication of active packaging [93]
10.1016/j.tifs.2013.09.0022Foods 12 04239 i008ReviewReview of the effect of essential oils [56]
10.3389/fmicb.2012.000122Foods 12 04239 i009ReviewApplication of essential oils [94]
10.1016/j.ifset.2015.04.0073Foods 12 04239 i010Journal articleSynergistic effect of essential [41]
(Each node from 2001 to 2022 is represented by a blue color block, and the shade of blue from light to deep indicates the frequency cited from most to least; The red marks the year of the cited outbreak.).
Table 5. The latest references with the strongest citation bursts.
Table 5. The latest references with the strongest citation bursts.
DOICluster IDDuration in 2001–2022Article TypeTheme
10.1016/j.foodres.2018.07.0140Foods 12 04239 i011ReviewApplication of essential oils in meat preservation [95]
10.1371/journal.pone.01605350Foods 12 04239 i012Journal articleApplication of essential-oil-coated film [96]
10.3390/antiox810042911Foods 12 04239 i013ReviewReview of lipid oxidation in meat [74]
10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.08.0155Foods 12 04239 i014Journal articleApplication of coatings based on nanoemulsions [53]
10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.03.0475Foods 12 04239 i015Journal articleApplication of coatings based on nanoemulsions [57]
10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.03.0020Foods 12 04239 i016Journal articleApplication of essential oils in meat preservation [97]
10.1016/j.foodres.2018.06.07310Foods 12 04239 i017ReviewLoaded essential oil films for meat applications [81]
10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2016.08.0425Foods 12 04239 i018Journal articleSynergistic effect of essential oils [98]
10.1016/j.cofs.2020.03.00311Foods 12 04239 i019ReviewAddition of plant extracts to meat [78]
10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.1067715Foods 12 04239 i020Journal articleApplication of composite nanoemulsions coating [90]
10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.08.02210Foods 12 04239 i021Journal articleApplication of plant extracts [83]
10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.02.0135Foods 12 04239 i022Journal articleSynergistic effect of gases and biopreservatives [89]
(Each node from 2001 to 2022 is represented by a blue color block, and the shade of blue from light to deep indicates the frequency cited from most to least; The red marks the year of the cited outbreak.).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, J.; Wei, Z.; Lu, T.; Qi, X.; Xie, L.; Vincenzetti, S.; Polidori, P.; Li, L.; Liu, G. The Research Field of Meat Preservation: A Scientometric and Visualization Analysis Based on the Web of Science. Foods 2023, 12, 4239. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12234239

AMA Style

Zhang J, Wei Z, Lu T, Qi X, Xie L, Vincenzetti S, Polidori P, Li L, Liu G. The Research Field of Meat Preservation: A Scientometric and Visualization Analysis Based on the Web of Science. Foods. 2023; 12(23):4239. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12234239

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Jingjing, Zixiang Wei, Ting Lu, Xingzhen Qi, Lan Xie, Silvia Vincenzetti, Paolo Polidori, Lanjie Li, and Guiqin Liu. 2023. "The Research Field of Meat Preservation: A Scientometric and Visualization Analysis Based on the Web of Science" Foods 12, no. 23: 4239. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12234239

APA Style

Zhang, J., Wei, Z., Lu, T., Qi, X., Xie, L., Vincenzetti, S., Polidori, P., Li, L., & Liu, G. (2023). The Research Field of Meat Preservation: A Scientometric and Visualization Analysis Based on the Web of Science. Foods, 12(23), 4239. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12234239

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop