Ultrasound Technology Applied in Food Industry: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Catherine Yang and Version 1 by Carlotta Lauteri.

An efficient microbiological decontamination protocol is required to guarantee safe food products for the final consumer to avoid foodborne illnesses. Ultrasound and non-thermal technology combinations represent innovative methods adopted by the food industry for food preservation and safety. Ultrasound power is commonly used with a frequency between 20 and 100 kHz to obtain an “exploit cavitation effect”. Microbial inactivation via ultrasound derives from cell wall damage, the oxidation of intracellular amino acids and DNA changing material.

  • ultrasound
  • hurdle technologies
  • foodborne pathogens

1. Introduction

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) reported 5175 foodborne outbreaks from 2015 to 2019 [1]; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) publishes yearly reports that highlight interesting data: 48 million people become ill due to foodborne diseases (128,000 are hospitalized, with 3000 deaths [2]). Due to the increase in outbreak numbers, it is necessary to develop efficient food chain surveillance and adequate microbiological decontamination protocols to guarantee safe food products for consumers. To achieve safety and genuineness, food processing technologies represent essential tools for microbiological control and products’ shelf-life enhancement [3,4][3][4]. Due to consumers’ growing requests for “minimally processed products”, the food industry applies new technologies to produce safe food matrices that maintain “fresh-like” characteristics [5].
Indeed, in conventional technologies, such as thermal treatments, this concept is not applicable: pasteurization and sterilization, commonly used in food industries, cause color alterations, characteristic flavors and a decrease in nutritional value [6,7,8][6][7][8].
Therefore, the food industry and scientific researchers have evaluated alternative non-thermal technologies (NTTs) that maintain the aroma, nutrient value, texture and color while decreasing bacteria that cause spoilage. Tiwari and coworkers defined NTTs as procedures, performed at efficient sublethal or ambient temperatures, that lead to minimal or no impacts on nutritional and quality food parameters [9] (see Figure 1).
Figure 1.
Overview of non-thermal technologies (created with Biorender.com).

2. Ultrasound: Mechanisms of Action Applied in Food Industry

Ultrasound is a form of vibrational energy produced by a transducer converting electrical energy into acoustic energy. It is a wave that exceeds the human hearing threshold [10]. Basing on the frequency, ultrasound can be classified as follows: power ultrasound (20–100 kHz), high-frequency ultrasound (100 kHz–1 MHz), and diagnostic ultrasound (1–500 MHz) [11]. At medium frequencies (200–500 kHz), chemical effects are prevalent, and collapse is less violent. On the other hand, at high frequencies (>1 MHz), chemical and physical effects decrease and cavitation is minimal; in this case, acoustic flow is predominant [11,12][11][12]. In the food industry, power ultrasound is commonly used with a frequency between 20 and 100 kHz to obtain an “exploit cavitation effect” [13]. The molecules are compressed and rarefactive when ultrasound is spread through any medium. Alternative pressure changes cause bubble formation in a liquid medium. There are physical and chemical effects correlated with ultrasound: agitation, vibration, pressure, shock waves, shear forces, microjets, compression and rarefaction, acoustic streaming, cavitation, and the formation of free radicals [14].
This phenomenon of the creation of small vapor bubbles (cavities), expansion, and implosive collapse in ultrasonically irradiated liquids is named “acoustic cavitation” [13,15,16][13][15][16]. There are two types of bubbles: transient and stable [17]. Under ultrasound action, bubbles oscillate, grow, and collapse asymmetrically, forming microjets. Outburst produces pressure shocks up to several 1000 atm, strong shock waves with 400 km/h microjets, and the production of hot spots with a 5000 K temperature; the mechanical effects predominate over the chemical ones [18,19][18][19]. In the reaction environment, three different phases have been identified: inside the bubble cavity gas environment, the liquid–bubble interface, and the liquid. In the first phase, there are pyrolysis reactions. In the second and third ones, radicals can occur. In the aqueous environment, the most frequently encountered phenomenon is the formation of the hydroxide radical OH-. It is highly reactive and attacks organic substrates or OH- and recombines with another OH- radical, forming H2O2. In the interphase area, the temperature is very high; therefore, the occurring reactions are thermal degradation and solute reactions with OH- radicals. Small bubbles are generated by the diffusion of these radicals due to the cavitation bubble’s disruption. In the interphase zone or in liquid nonvolatile solutes, reactive and volatile solids penetrate the bubble and degrade during collapse [19]. Physical and chemical effects are the basis for ultrasound’s application in the food industry [12].
New technologies, such as as vacuum cooling technology, high-pressure processing, ultrasound, and pulsed electric field technology, could guarantee safe and high-quality products. The aim of these new technologies is to reduce processing times, save energy and solvents, and improve the products’ shelf-life. From a “green” methodological point of view, ultrasound-assisted extraction has huge potential as an emergent and innovative technology. It has a low environmental impact, due to decreasing CO2 emissions, reducing time, and not presenting toxic effects towards human health [20]. There are two types of ultrasound systems applied in the food industry: contact and non-contact [21]. The first one employs liquids as transmission media and generates waves that have chemical and physical effects in food matrices. This technology is employed for different activities: the extraction of bioactive substances [22], the enhancement of drying rates [23] and freezing rates [24], the degassing of liquids [25], fat separation [26], power hydration [27], the intensification of heat and mass transfer [28], emulsification [29], and liquid food pasteurization [30,31][30][31]. Nevertheless, when using this technology, erosion could produce effects on the radiating surfaces and cause the consequent contamination of sonicated food [32]. However, new inert materials such as quartz, Pyrex, ceramics, and polyether could limit the use of metal horns, which are instruments used to evaluate ultrasonic irradiation in different materials (see Table 1).
Table 1.
Use of ultrasound in food industry: mechanisms, advantages, products.
Application Conventional Method Advantages Ultrasound Principle Products Reference
Cutting Knife Small deformation

Less cracks and crumbling		 Cavitation phenomenon Fragile and frozen foods

Viscoelastic products

Heterogenous products		 [33]

[34,35][34][35]

[36]
Cooking Stove

Fried

Water		 Homogeneous cooking

Less time		 Uniform heat

transfer		 Poultry

Beef

Vegetables

Fruit

Crustaceans		 [37,38][37][38]

[39]

[40]

[39]

[41]
Freezing Ice Less freezing time

Homogeneous cooking

Less damage to cells		 Cavitation

Fragmentation of large ice crystals

Triggering secondary ice nucleation		 Vegetables

Meat

Fish		 [42]

[39]

[43]
Drying Hot gas streaming

Pulverization		 Less time

Improved heat transfer		 Uniform heat transfer Vegetables

Meat

Fish

Fruit		 [44]

[45]

[46]

[47]
Pickling/marinating Brine Improved organoleptic quality

Less time		 Uniform heat

transfer

Microchannel		 Meat

Vegetables

Cheese

Fish		 [48]

[49]

[50]

[51]
Tenderization Time Improved meat

tenderization		 Acoustic cavitation Meat

Fish		 [52]

[53]
Wang and coworkers [39] underlined that US has a positive effect in decreasing frying times, in the improvement of cooking yields, and improving the sensory evaluation of meat. The major consequences of ultrasound’s irradiation within a liquid are cavitation and agitation. These two factors are useful in improving heat transfer and freezing rates and accelerating freezing processes [54,55][54][55]. In the last mentioned process, there are primary and secondary nucleations: the first allows crystal formation in a solution where crystals are not detected. Primary nucleation can take place in two categories: homogenous and heterogeneous. Homogeneous nucleation occurs when the nuclei are formed spontaneously from the random density fluctuation. On the other hand, heterogeneous nucleation occurs due to the presence of solid impurities that form stable surfaces for nuclei formation, and secondary nucleation takes place where pre-existing crystals are present [56]. Ultrasonic application improves drying in all food matrices [56,57][56][57].
There are many advantages: water is removed easily, improving water diffusion from the interior to the product surface; intracellular and extracellular cavitation provides new microchannels; US creates air turbulence to remove moisture; it accelerates the process without a temperature increase [57]. This technology can be employed as a pre-treatment: in fact, many authors underlined that US pre-treatment improved the drying period [58]. As previously mentioned, waves involve a rate mass transfer by physically breaking down tissues and the formation of microchannels [20]. Ozuna and coworkers [59] evaluated the improvement in solute distribution during marination, and changes in water retention capability. McDonnel et al. [60] also underlined the possibility of conserving food sensory properties through these methods.
Iguglia et al. [61] investigated how different US frequencies can influence chicken marination times in terms of meat quality, texture, and lipid oxidation.
The applicability of US in seafood products has been evaluated: Pedròs- Garrido et al. [62] investigated US usage (30 kHz for 5 to 45 min) in different fish (salmon, mackerel, cod, hake). They noticed a major reduction in microbiological spoilage in oily fish, due to having higher fat content, which impacted bacterial decontamination. After 45 min of US treatment, there was a reduction in thiobarbituric acid reactive substances; on the other hand, lipids did not show changes.
US has been used for the tenderization of fish: Chang and Wang [53] found that US application for 60 to 90 min in cobia (Rachycentron canadum) improved the time required for tenderizing compared with the traditional aging process and optimized the firmness.
Non-contact technology, known also as the “air-couple technique”, uses a medium to ensure a gap between the transducer and the foodstuff. However, there are some drawbacks, such as the mismatch of the acoustic impedance magnitude between air and matrices [63].

References

  1. European Food Safety Authority European. The European Union One Health 2019 Zoonoses Report. EFSA J. 2021, 19, 6406.
  2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Foodborne Illnesses and Germs. Last modified 18 March 2020. 2021. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/foodborne-germs.html (accessed on 1 October 2022).
  3. Sango, D.M.; Abela, D.; McElhatton, A.; Valdramidis, V. Assisted ultrasound applications for the production of safe foods. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2014, 116, 1067–1083.
  4. Bevilacqua, A.; Campaniello, D.; Speranza, B.; Altieri, C.; Sinigaglia, M.; Corbo, M.R. Two Nonthermal Technologies for Food Safety and Quality—Ultrasound and High Pressure Homogenization: Effects on Microorganisms, Advances, and Possibilities: A Review. J. Food Prot. 2019, 82, 2049–2064.
  5. Onyeaka, H.; Miri, T.; Hart, A.; Anumudu, C.; Nwabor, O.F. Application of Ultrasound Technology in Food Processing with emphasis on bacterial spores. Food Rev. Int. 2021, 1–26.
  6. Lee, H.S.; Coates, G.A. Effect of thermal pasteurization on Valencia orange juice color and pigments. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2003, 36, 153–156.
  7. Rattanathanalerk, M.; Chiewchan, N.; Srichumpoung, W. Effect of thermal processing on the quality loss of pineapple juice. J. Food Eng. 2005, 66, 259–265.
  8. Gandy, A.; Schilling, M.; Coggins, P.; White, C.; Yoon, Y.; Kamadia, V. The Effect of Pasteurization Temperature on Consumer Acceptability, Sensory Characteristics, Volatile Compound Composition, and Shelf-Life of Fluid Milk. J. Dairy Sci. 2008, 91, 1769–1777.
  9. Tiwari, B.K.; O’Donnell, C.P.; Cullen, P.J. Effect of nonthermal processing technologies on the anthocyanin content of fruit juices. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2009, 20, 137–145.
  10. Shung, K.K.; Cannata, J.M.; Zhou, Q.F. Piezoelectric materials for high frequency medical imaging applications: A review. J. Electroceramics 2007, 19, 141–147.
  11. Laborde, J.-L.; Bouyer, C.; Caltagirone, J.-P.; Gérard, A. Acoustic bubble cavitation at low frequencies. Ultrasonics 1998, 36, 589–594.
  12. Feng, H.; Lee, H. Effect of Power Ultrasound on Food Quality. In Ultrasound Tech for Food and Bioprocessing; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 154–196.
  13. Chen, F.; Zhang, M.; Yang, C.-H. Application of ultrasound technology in processing of ready-to-eat fresh food: A review. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2020, 63, 104953.
  14. Ojha, K.S.; Tiwari, B.K.; O’Donnell, C.P. Effect of Ultrasound Technology on Food and Nutritional Quality. Adv. Food Nutr. Res. 2018, 84, 207–240.
  15. Franc, P.; Michel, J.M. Fundamentals of Cavitation; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2004.
  16. Zupanc, M.; Pandur, Ž.; Perdih, T.S.; Stopar, D.; Petkovšek, M.; Dular, M. Effects of cavitation on different microorganisms: The current understanding of the mechanisms taking place behind the phenomenon. A review and proposals for further research. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2019, 57, 147–165.
  17. Feng, H.; Yang, W.; Hielscher, T. Power Ultrasound. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2008, 14, 433–436.
  18. Pokhrel, P.R.; Bermúdez-Aguirre, D.; Martínez-Flores, H.E.; Garnica-Romo, M.G.; Sablani, S.; Tang, J.; Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V. Combined Effect of Ultrasound and Mild Temperatures on the Inactivation of E. coli in Fresh Carrot Juice and Changes on its Physicochemical Characteristics. J. Food Sci. 2017, 82, 2343–2350.
  19. Chahine, G.L.; Hsiao, C.-T. Modelling cavitation erosion using fluid–material interaction simulations. Interface Focus 2015, 5, 2015–2016.
  20. Chemat, F.; Khan, M.K. Applications of ultrasound in food technology: Processing, preservation and extraction. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2011, 18, 813–835.
  21. Charoux, C.M.G.; Ojha, K.S.; O’Donnell, C.P.; Cardoni, A.; Tiwari, B.K. Applications of airborne ultrasonic technology in the food industry. J. Food Eng. 2017, 208, 28–36.
  22. Kumari, B.; Tiwari, B.K.; Hossain, M.B.; Brunton, N.P.; Rai, D.K. Recent advances on application of ultrasound and pulsed electric field technologies in the extraction of bioactives from agro-industrial by-products. Food Bioprocess Tech. 2018, 11, 223–241.
  23. Magalhães, M.L.; Cartaxo, S.J.; Gallão, M.I.; García-Pérez, J.V.; Cárcel, J.A.; Rodrigues, S.; Fernandes, F.A. Drying intensification combining ultrasound pre-treatment and ultrasound-assisted air drying. J. Food Eng. 2017, 215, 72–77.
  24. Islam, M.N.; Zhang, M.; Adhikari, B. Ultrasound-assisted freezing of fruits and vegetables: Design, development, and appli-cations. In Global Food Security and Wellness; Barbosa-Canovas, G., Pastore, G., Candoðan, K., Meza, I.M., Da Silva Lannes, C., Lannes, S., Buckle, K., Yada, R., Rosenthal, A., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 457–487.
  25. Liu, X.; Zhang, C.; Zhang, Z.; Xue, J.; Le, J. The role of ultrasound in hydrogen removal and microstructure refinement by ul-trasonic argon degassing process. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2017, 38, 455–462.
  26. Torkamani, A.E.; Juliano, P.; Fagan, P.; Jimenez-Flores, R.; Ajlouni, S.; Singh, T.K. Effect of ultrasound-enhanced fat separation on whey powder phospholipid composition and stability. J. Dairy Sci. 2016, 99, 4169–4177.
  27. Bhandari, B.; Zisu, B. Effect of ultrasound treatment on the evolution of solubility of milk protein concentrate powder. In Handbook of Ultrasonics and Sonochemistry; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 1–19.
  28. Gondrexon, N.; Cheze, L.; Jin, Y.; Legay, M.; Tissot, Q.; Hengl, N.; Baup, S.; Boldo, P.; Pignon, F.; Talansier, E. Intensification of heat and mass transfer by ultrasound: Application to heat exchangers and membrane separation processes. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2015, 25, 40–50.
  29. Reboredo-Rodríguez, P.; Rey-Salgueiro, L.; Regueiro, J.; Gonzalez-Barreiro, C.; Cancho- Grande, B.; Simal-Gándara, J. Ultrasound-assisted emulsification– microextraction for the determination of phenolic compounds in olive oils. Food Chem. 2014, 150, 128–136.
  30. Czank, C.; Simmer, K.; Hartmann, P.E. Simultaneous pasteurization and homogenization of human milk by combining heat and ultrasound: Effect on milk quality. J. Dairy Res. 2010, 77, 183–189.
  31. Jambrak, A.R.; Šimunek, M.; Petrovic, M.; Bedic, H.; Herceg, Z.; Juretic, Z. Aromatic profile and sensory characterization of ultrasound treated cranberry juice and nectar. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2017, 38, 783–793.
  32. Kentish, S.; Feng, H. Application of power ultrasound in food processing. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2014, 5, 263–284.
  33. Schneider, Y.; Zahn, S.; Rohm, H. Ultrasonic cutting of foods. In Ultrasound Technologies for Food and Bioprocessing; Feng, H., Barbosa-Canovas, G.V., Weiss, J., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2011.
  34. Arnold, G.; Zahn, S.; Legler, A.; Rohm, H. Ultrasonic cutting of foods with inclined moving blades. J. Food Eng. 2011, 103, 394–400.
  35. Arnold, G.; Leiteritz, L.; Zahn, S.; Rohm, H. Ultrasonic cutting of cheese: Composition affects cutting work reduction and energy demand. Int. Dairy J. 2009, 19, 314–320.
  36. Shanmugam, A.; Chandrapala, J.; Ashokkumar, M. The effect of ultrasound on the physical and functional properties of skim milk. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2012, 16, 251–258.
  37. Flores, D.R.M.; Brasil, C.C.B.; Campagnol, P.C.B.; Jacob-Lopes, E.; Zepka, L.Q.; Wagner, R.; Cichoski, A.J. Application of ultrasound in chicken breast during chilling by immersion promotes a fast and uniform cooling. Food Res. Int. 2018, 109, 59–64.
  38. Al-Hilphy, A.R.; Al-Temimi, A.B.; Al Rubaiy, H.H.M.; Anand, U.; Delgado-Pando, G.; Lakhssassi, N. Ultrasound applications in poultry meat processing: A systematic review. J. Food Sci. 2020, 85, 1386–1396.
  39. Wang, Y.; Zhang, W.; Zhou, G. Effects of ultrasound-assisted frying on the physiochemical properties and microstructure of fried meatballs. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 54, 2915–2926.
  40. Dehghannya, J.; Abedpour, L. Influence of a three stage hybrid ultrasound-osmotic-frying process on production of low-fat fried potato strips. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2018, 98, 1485–1491.
  41. Cadòn-Abant, S.; Arroyo, C.; Álvarez, I.; Brunton, N.; Whyte, P.; Lyng, J.G. An assessment of the application of ultrasound in the processing of ready-to-eat whole brown crab (Cancer pagurus). Ultrason. Sonochem. 2018, 40, 497–504.
  42. Qui, L.; Zhang, M.; Chitrakar, B.; Bhandari, B. Application of power ultrasound in freezing and thawing Processes: Effect on process efficiency and product quality. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2020, 68, 105230.
  43. Sun, Q.; Sun, F.; Xia, X.; Xu, H.; Kong, B. The comparison of ultrasound-assisted immersion freezing, air freezing and immersion freezing on the muscle quality and physicochemical properties of common carp (Cyprinus carpio) during freezing storage. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2019, 51, 281–291.
  44. Fan, K.; Zhang, M.; Mujumdar, A.S. Application of airborne ultrasound in the convective drying of fruits and vegetables: A review. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2017, 39, 47–57.
  45. Başlar, M.; Kılıçlı, M.; Toker, O.S.; Sağdıç, O.; Arici, M. Ultrasonic vacuum drying technique as a novel process for shortening the drying period for beef and chicken meats. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2014, 26, 182–190.
  46. Başlar, M.; Kılıçlı, M.; Yalinkilic, B. Dehydration kinetics of salmon and trout fillets using ultrasonic vacuum drying as a novel technique. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2015, 27, 495–502.
  47. Huang, D.; Men, K.; Li, D.; Wen, T.; Gong, Z.; Sunden, B.; Wu, Z. Application of ultrasound technology in the drying of food products. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2019, 63, 104950.
  48. Shi, H.; Zhang, X.; Chen, X.; Fang, R.; Zou, Y.; Wang, D.; Xu, W. How ultrasound combined with potassium alginate marination tenderizes old chicken breast meat: Possible mechanisms from tissue to protein. Food Chem. 2020, 328, 127144.
  49. Yilmaz, B.; Cakmak, H.; Tavman, S. Ultrasonic pretreatment of carrot slices: Effects of sonication source on drying kinetics and product quality. An. Da Acad. Bras. De Ciências 2019, 91, e20180447.
  50. Sánchez, E.S.; Simal, S.; Femenia, A.; Rosselló, C. Effect of acoustic brining on the transport of sodium chloride and water in Mahon cheese. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2000, 212, 39–43.
  51. Turhan, S.; Saricaogliu, T.; Oz, F. The Effect of Ultrasonic Marinating on the Transport of Acetic Acid and Salt in Anchovy Marinades. Food Sci. Technol. Res. 2013, 19, 849–853.
  52. Alarcon-Rojo, A.; Carrillo-Lopez, L.M.; Reyes-Villagrana, R.; Huerta-Jimenez, M.; Garcia-Galicia, G. Ultrasound, and meat quality: A review. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2019, 55, 369–382.
  53. Chang, H.-C.; Wong, R.-X. Textural and biochemical properties of cobia (Rachycentron canadum) sashimi tenderized with the ultrasonic water bath. Food Chem. 2012, 132, 1340–1345.
  54. Wang, W.; Chen, W.; Zou, M.; Lv, R.; Wang, D.; Hou, F.; Feng, H.; Ma, X.; Zhong, J.; Ding, T.; et al. Applications of power ultrasound in oriented modification and degradation of pectin: A review. J. Food Eng. 2018, 234, 98–107.
  55. Kiani, H.; Sun, D.-W.; Delgado, A.; Zhang, Z. Investigation of the effect of power ultrasound on the nucleation of water during freezing of agar gel samples in tubing vials. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2012, 19, 576–581.
  56. Musielak, G.; Mierzwa, D.; Kroehnke, J. Food drying enhancement by ultrasound—A review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 56, 126–141.
  57. Bhargava, N.; Mor, R.S.; Kumar, K.; Sharanagat, V.S. Advances in application of ultrasound in food processing: A review. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2021, 70, 105293.
  58. Wiktor, A.; Dadan, M.; Nowacka, M.; Rybak, K.; Witrowa-Rajchert, D. The impact of combination of pulsed electric field and ultrasound treatment on air drying kinetics and quality of carrot tissue. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 110, 71–79.
  59. Ozuna, C.; Puig, A.; García-Pérez, J.V.; Mulet, A.; Cárcel, J.A. Influence of high intensity ultrasound application on mass transport, microstructure and textural properties of pork meat (Longissimus dorsi) brined at different NaCl concentrations. J. Food Eng. 2013, 119, 84–93.
  60. McDonnell, C.K.; Lyng, J.G.; Arimi, J.M.; Allen, P. The acceleration of pork curing by power ultrasound: A pilot-scale pro-duction. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2014, 26, 191–198.
  61. Inguglia, E.S.; Burgess, C.M.; Kerry, J.P.; Tiwari, B.K. Ultrasound-Assisted Marination: Role of Frequencies and Treatment Time on the Quality of Sodium-Reduced Poultry Meat. Foods 2019, 8, 473.
  62. Pedros-Garrido, S.; Condon-Abanto, S.; Beltran, J.; Lyng, J.; Brunton, N.; Bolton, D.; Whyte, P. Assessment of high intensity ultrasound for surface decontamination of salmon (S. salar), mackerel (S. scombrus), cod (G. morhua) and hake (M. mer- luc-cius) fillets, and its impact on fish quality. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2017, 41, 64–70.
  63. Khairi, M.T.M.; Ibrahim, S.; Yunus, M.A.M.; Faramarzi, M. Contact and non-contact ultrasonic measurement in the food industry: A review. Meas. Sci. Technol. 2015, 27, 12001.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Video Production Service
Feedback