Potentials of Natural Preservatives to Enhance Food Safety and Shelf Life: A Review

Teshome, Ejigayehu; Forsido, Sirawdink Fikreyesus; Rupasinghe, H. P. Vasantha; Olika Keyata, Ebisa

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9901018

The Scientific World Journal

On this page

Abstract Introduction Conclusion Conflicts of Interest References Copyright Related Articles

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 9901018 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9901018

Potentials of Natural Preservatives to Enhance Food Safety and Shelf Life: A Review

Ejigayehu Teshome,¹Sirawdink Fikreyesus Forsido,²H. P. Vasantha Rupasinghe,³and Ebisa Olika Keyata⁴

Academic Editor: Carlos H. G. Martins

Received25 Jun 2022

Accepted06 Sept 2022

Published23 Sept 2022

Abstract

Food-borne illnesses are a significant concern for consumers, the food industry, and food safety authorities. Natural preservatives are very crucial for enhancing food safety and shelf life. Therefore, this review aimed to assess the literature regarding the potential of natural preservatives to enhance food safety and extend the shelf life of food products. The review paper indicated that natural antimicrobial agents that inhibit bacterial and fungal growth for better quality and shelf life have been of considerable interest in recent years. Natural antimicrobials are mainly extracted and isolated as secondary metabolites of plants, animals, and microorganisms. Plants, especially herbs and spices, are given more attention as a source of natural antimicrobials. Microorganisms used in food fermentation also produce different antimicrobial metabolites, including organic acids, hydrogen peroxide, and diacetyl, in addition to bacteriocins. Products of animal origin, such as tissues and milk, contain different antimicrobial agents. Natural antimicrobials are primarily extracted and purified before utilization for food product development. The extraction condition and purification of natural preservatives may change their structure and affect their functionality. Selecting the best extraction method coupled with minimal processing such as direct mechanical extraction seems to preserve active ingredients. The activity of natural antimicrobials could also be influenced by the source, time of harvesting, and stage of development. The effectiveness of natural antimicrobial compounds in food applications is affected by different factors, including food composition, processing method, and storage conditions. Natural antimicrobials are safe because they can limit microbial resistance and meet consumers’ demands for healthier foods.

1. Introduction

In recent decades, the growing demand for natural food preservatives has prompted research into their use in preserving perishable foods [1]. Because food-borne infections are a significant issue for consumers, the food industry, and food safety authorities. Natural antimicrobial compounds that suppress bacterial and fungal development for better quality and shelf life. Food-borne pathogens such as Clostridium botulinum, Staphylococcus aureus, Campylobacter jejuni, Bacillus cereus, Listeria monocytogenes, Cryptosporidium hominis, and Escherichia coli 0157: H7 are the main concerns for food safety [2].

Consumption of fresh foods such as seafood, meat, and horticultural products has increased due to the need of consumers for convenient, ready-to-eat, or ready-to-cook foods, and the desire to lead a healthy lifestyle. Fruits, vegetables, seafood, and meat generally have a concise shelf life, thus requiring appropriate preservation technologies to extend their shelf lives [3, 4]. Food-borne disease outbreaks are on the rise even in developed countries, with a shift from challenges posed by foods of animal origin to fresh foods such as minimally processed fruits and vegetables. New risks are being encountered because of changes to food production practices, the environment, an increase in the global trade of food, and changes to the genetic characteristics of the relevant pathogenic microorganisms [5]. The rise in the fresh-cut convenient salad market has coincided with an increase in food-borne diseases; precutting of the salad leaves releases nutrients that support microbial growth. The modified atmosphere within the package reduces spoilage by aerobes but enhances the virulence of pathogens like E.coli 0157: H7 [6]. The limited storage life of these fresh items and their link to food-borne disease outbreaks has resulted in continued commercial pressure to utilize synthetic chemicals as preservatives. As a result, there are calls for chemical additives to be used as preservatives to prevent food spoiling caused by microbes and the lipid oxidation process. Consumers are becoming more aware of the flaws in synthetic antibacterial and antioxidant compounds and their link to human health problems. This is owing to increased complications such as carcinogenicity, teratogenicity, liver, renal, heart, respiratory, or neurological difficulties, and other ailments resulting from artificial components. In this crisis, consumers demand partial or complete removal of chemically synthesized preservatives from foodstuffs, which are used to extend food shelf life [7].

Natural food preservatives are very safe for utilization. Natural food preservatives are usually obtained from plant, animal, and microbial origins [8]. The main application of natural preservatives in the food industry is to prevent the growth of undesirable microorganisms. It is possible to add plant antimicrobials into the product formulation, coat them on the surface of foods, or incorporate them into the packaging material [1]. However, its mechanism of action is also different. Essential oils derived from plants, enzymes obtained from animal sources, bacteriocins from microbial sources, organic acids, and naturally occurring polymers (chitosan) have been used in different food industries [9].

It is critical to promote and understand the current situation regarding the potential of natural preservation to improve food safety and shelf life of fresh, minimally processed, and ready-to-eat foods to improve future research study interventions and solve the problem of food and nutrition insecurity [10]. However, there is a paucity of comprehensive reviews on the potential of natural preservation, particularly antimicrobial and antioxidation agents found in plants and animals, application of natural edible coatings, and factors affecting antimicrobial activities of natural products to improve food safety and shelf life [11]. As a result, the goal of this review was to gather the literature on natural food preservatives’ potential and function in improving food safety and shelf life.

2. Potentials of Natural Preservatives to Boost the Safety and Shelf Life of Foods

Traditional food preservation methods are ineffective in reducing the spread of food-borne viruses in food items. The growing desire for chemical-free food has paved the way for the use of antimicrobials in the food sector [12]. Antimicrobials are a novel technology used by the food industry to extend the shelf life of food and address quality and safety concerns [13].

2.1. Natural Antimicrobial Agents

Primary metabolites serve an essential purpose in the organism, whereas secondary metabolites may be waste products or play an essential role in production. Natural antimicrobials are secondary metabolites with antimicrobial action. Plants (fruits, vegetables, seeds, herbs, and spices), animals (eggs, milk, and tissues), and microorganisms (fungi and bacteria) can all be used to extract them [14, 15]. Secondary metabolites have been discovered to be beneficial substances that act as antimicrobials or disease-controlling agents in plants [16]. Due to the antibacterial ability of secondary metabolites against pathogenic and spoilage microorganisms, they are becoming increasingly important for use in food items [17]. They are believed to be a superior option for food preservation to synthetic preservatives because they have antibacterial and antioxidant characteristics at the same time.

2.1.1. Application of Plant-Based Antimicrobials

Natural antimicrobials can be found in raw vegetables, fruits, and herbs/spices. Fruits and vegetables (garlic, pepper, onion, cabbage, and guava), seeds and leaves (olive leaves, parsley, caraway, nutmeg, fennel, and grape seeds), and herbs and spices (marjoram, basil, oregano, rosemary, thyme, sage, clove, and cardamom) all include natural plant-derived chemicals [18]. Essential oils (Eos) and extracts derived from plants have long been used as food additives to improve taste and impart distinct flavors, and extend the shelf life of foods by preventing rancidity and controlling microbiological contamination. Indeed, these chemicals can limit or impede the growth of harmful bacteria because of their high presence of secondary metabolites, primarily phenolic compounds, iso-flavonoids, terpenes, ketones, aliphatic alcohols, acids, and aldehydes [19].

The antimicrobial activity of plant-derived compounds mainly depends on microorganism type, inoculum size, culture medium, extraction method, and method for antimicrobial activity determination [18]. Plant-based compounds, such as polyphenols, terpenes, and alkaloids, are produced from natural sources. Because of their biocidal effects against bacteria or herbivore repellence, plants have a diverse range of secondary metabolites that protect them from predators and microbial pathogens [20]. The phenolic and polyphenolic groups are two of the significant classes found in secondary metabolite compounds. Flavonoids, quinones, coumarins, phenolic acids, tannins, phenols, flavones, and flavonols are some of the subgroup chemicals important for inhibiting microbial activity. Phenol is a hydroxyl (-OH) group-containing chemical. The amount and locations of phenol groups present in the substance correlate with their relative microbial toxicity.

Many Eos have been classified as generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and may be used as food preservatives [21]. Eos is the most crucial phytochemical employed in food preservation [22]. Eos are highly volatile, sweet-smelling molecules with an oily consistency, produced by plants. EOs can be extracted from various plant components, including flowers, seeds, and leaves. Essential oils can be extracted from various portions of aromatic plants using a variety of processes, including distillation, supercritical fluid, and many more. The Eos antibacterial properties are oxygenated terpenoids (such as alcohol and phenolic terpenes). Several hydrocarbons, such as aliphatic, monoterpene, and sesquiterpene hydrocarbons, have characteristics that make them microbially active [20].

Herbs and spices are used as antibacterial agents. Eos extracted from plants, spices, and herbs has a high vapor pressure and can reach microbes via liquid and gas phases [5]. Eos’ hydrophobic qualities react with lipids in the microbe’s cell membrane, causing the cell wall to disintegrate. As a result, the cell’s permeability will grow, and the cytoplasmic membrane will be damaged. There will be cell content leakage and cytoplasm coagulation. As a result, the cell’s original structure will be disrupted [23].

Bitencourt et al. [21] found that by employing a two-fold dilution of mint essential oil, the inhibition of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enteritidis could be resolved using the usual broth dilution approach. The use of an edible coating containing mint essential oil prevented the growth of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enteritidis; the higher the mint essential oil concentration, the lower the microbiological activity. Matan [24] found that using anise oil, which includes multiple active chemicals including trans-anethole, -trans-bergamotene, and limonene, inhibits bacteria such as Salmonella typhimurium, Staphylococcus aureus, and Vibrio parahaemolyticus was adequate. These bacteria are commonly found in seafood. Furthermore, anise oil may prevent spore germination.

Furthermore, according to Matan [24], cinnamon and clove oil include a variety of active chemicals such as cinnamaldehyde, eugenol, and linalool. As a result, both oils reduce the growth of yeasts and molds, and extend the shelf life of dried fish. According to Rehman et al. [25], citrus peel essential oils have various uses in bread. According to the findings, the oils impacted sensory properties and slowed microbial growth. Spraying peel essential oil has the most inhibitory impact against molds and germs. To extend the shelf life of gluten-free sliced bread, researchers used active packaging using cinnamon essential oil and modified atmosphere packaging (MAP). The active packaging outperformed MAP by increasing product shelf life since it reduced microbial development while retaining the gluten-free bread’s sensory qualities [26].

Aronian berry, asparagus, bell pepper, beet, blackberry, blueberry, broccoli, carrot, cucumber, cherry, cranberry, garlic, ginger, grape, red onion, red cabbage, rhubarb, raspberry, pomegranate, spinach, strawberry, and green tea have all been studied for their antibacterial effects [27]. According to the authors, all green vegetables have no antibacterial action against Staphylococcus epidermidis and Klebsiella pneumonia, while all purple and red vegetables and fruit juices have. Pomegranate juice has reduced E. coli O157: H7 growth [28].

Fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, stems, flowers, and leaves contain saponin and flavonoids [29]. Saponins and flavonoids obtained from plants such as Bersama engleriana (Melianthaceae) have been shown to have antibacterial activity when extracted from roots, stems, bark, leaves, and wood [30, 31]. The antimicrobial activity of thiosulfinate has also been demonstrated against Gram-negative bacteria. Glucosinolates are secondary metabolites found in mustards, cabbage, cauliflower, brussels sprouts, broccoli, kohlrabi, kale, horseradish, and radishes, among other plants [32]. Hydrolysis products of glucosinolates have been shown to exhibit substantial antibacterial activity against Gram-positive bacteria, Gram-negative bacteria, and fungus, either alone or in combination with other substances [32].

Pathogenic bacteria and fungi were tested on olive leaves. The aqueous extract of an olive leaf at 0.6 percent (w/v) destroyed practically all bacterium cells in three hours. However, Dermatophytes and Candida albicans required 1.25 percent and 15 percent (w/v) olive leaf extract, respectively [33]. Olive leaf extract also has potent antibacterial and antifungal properties [34]. Olive leaves’ antibacterial and antifungal properties are attributed to phenolic substances such as caffeic acid, verbascoside, oleuropein, luteolin 7-O-glucoside, rutin, apigenin 7-O-glucoside, and luteolin 4-O-glucoside, according to the authors [34]. As a result, the authors indicated that olive leaf extract could be used as a nutraceutical, particularly as a source of phenolic chemicals. Table 1 shows some of the beneficial effects of plant-derived extracts in food systems.

2.1.2. Application of Animal-Based Antimicrobials

Animals also contain antibacterial compounds that are safe for humans to consume. Antimicrobial compounds produced from animal sources are employed for various applications, as shown in Table 2. The utilization of chitosan, which is commonly used in the food industry, is cited as an example. Chitosan is a polycationic biopolymer typically found in crustacean exoskeletons such as crabs and lobsters. Because of its features, such as its inability to dissolve in neutral conditions and a higher pH value, chitosan’s utility in food preservation is limited [49]. Chitosan is now commonly used in edible coatings and films to reduce water vapor content, limit oxygen transmission, and lengthen the shelf life of fruits. As a result, food spoilage will be avoided [50].

Apart from chitosan, lysozyme, which is found in eggs and milk, can also be utilized as an antibacterial of animal origin and is widely accepted as safe. The lysozyme enzyme, found in eggs, is often used as an antibacterial and preservative in chicken, meat, and fruits. Because of its ability to hydrolyze the β-1,4 connection between N acetylmuramic acids and N-acetyl glucosamine at the microbial cell wall, lysozyme possesses antibacterial characteristics [49]. Lysozyme is well-known commercially used to prevent Clostridium tyrobutyricum-induced late blowing in semihard cheese. Gram-positive bacteria are frequently susceptible to lysozyme but Gram-negative bacteria are not. A lipopolysaccharide layer on the cell membrane’s surface causes this effect [50].

Lactoferrin is one of the natural antimicrobial agents found in mammalian secretions such as saliva, milk, and tears, according to Murdock et al. [51], and it is one of the most effective antimicrobial agents in milk. Lactoferrin will help to reduce the amount of iron in the environment. As a result, the bacteria cell’s development will be hampered by this circumstance. Lipopolysaccharides will then be released from Gram-negative bacteria’s outer membrane, causing the outer membrane to deform. Pores, or “blebs,” will form as a result. Lactoferrin has been shown to suppress the microbiological activity of Escherichia coli and Listeria monocytogenes.

Antimicrobial peptides are also naturally found in milk. Lactoperoxidase, for example, is a common enzyme found in milk that has been demonstrated to have potent antibacterial properties against bacteria, fungi, and viruses [45]. Cow milk, ewe milk, goat milk, buffalo milk, pig milk, and human milk all include lactoperoxidase [45]. The dairy industry utilizes the lactoperoxidase system to maintain microbiological purity in cow milk. Lactoperoxidase-mediated food preservation affects Gram-negative bacteria more than Gram-positive bacteria.

The antimicrobial activity of animal lipids against various microorganisms has also been reported [52]. Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and fungi may be rendered inactive by milk lipids [53]. Lipids in food may help prevent pathogenic and spoilage microbes from proliferating in food matrixes. Other components found in animals, such as eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid, have been shown to have antibacterial properties against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria [53].

2.1.3. Application of Microbial-Based Antimicrobials

Microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi, and mold produce various chemicals that are potentially harmful to other microorganisms. Bacteria that fight other bacteria produce a variety of chemicals. Those active bacteria can thwart and prevent the growth of microbes that can cause food deterioration [54]. Table 3 shows some of the microbial-based preservatives used in the food system. Bacteriocin, a protein molecule, is a crucial component that can function as an antibacterial agent against spoilage or microbial pathogens. Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria can create bacteriocins [49]. These proteinaceous molecules permeate the cytoplasmic membrane, allowing intracellular metabolites to flow out. As a result, membrane depletion may be taking place. Other active bacteria, such as reuterin and pediocin, can successfully limit the growth of spoilage germs in addition to bacteriocins [19]. Food-borne pathogens such as Clostridium botulinum, Enterococcus faecalis, and Listeria monocytogenes can be inhibited by bacteriocins. Bacteriocins are also safe to employ in bio preservatives because they are protease-degradable [60].

Nisin is a well-known bacteriocin that is often listed in European food additives and by the FDA in the United States. Nisin is commonly used in cheese and sausage preparation [61]. Lactococcus lactis produces nisin, made up of amino acids such as lanthionine, dehydroalanine, and aminobutyric acid [60]. Nisin can inhibit a wide range of Gram-positive bacteria. Nisin will be connected to the microbe’s cell membrane, and a pore will form due to the ionic contact with the C-terminus. For example, nisin should be used with chelators such as ethylene diamine tetra-acetic (EDTA) [51]. Nisin is used to make cheese because it inhibits the bacteria Staphylococcus aureus, which is found in raw milk [23].

Because of its powerful oxidizing effect on the bacterial cell and destruction of basic molecular structures of cell proteins, hydrogen peroxide has significant antibacterial activity [56]. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are the main biocontrol agents used to extend the life of perishable products. It acts as an antimicrobial and a probiotic [62]. The antimicrobial activities of lactic acid bacteria are due to their potential to produce various antimicrobials such as hydrogen peroxide, organic acids, carbon dioxide, bacteriocins, reuterin, and ethanol [60]. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are thought to produce hydrogen peroxide as their major metabolite [63]. Another antibacterial molecule produced by heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria (LAB) during fermentation is diacetyl (2,3-butanedione). However, due to its buttery aroma and the high concentration required for food preservation, diacetyl’s usage as a food preservative has been limited [64]. Acetaldehyde, produced by heterofermentative LAB, has also been demonstrated to have an antibacterial effect against various pathogenic bacteria.

Lactobacillus reuteri produces reuterin and reutericyclin, both of which are active antimicrobials against Gram-positive bacteria. The antimicrobial activity of Reuterin was discovered against Gram-negative bacteria, yeasts, molds, and protozoa. Reuterin (-hydroxy propionaldehyde) is a nonproteinaceous glycerol metabolite that is water-soluble [65]. L. monocytogenes, E. coli O157: H7, S. choleraesuis subsp. Choleraesuis, Yersinia enterocolitica, Aeromonas hydrophila subsp. Hydrophila, and Campylobacter jejuni have all been found to have high antimicrobial activity [66]. Reuter’s antibacterial action against Gram-negative bacteria was not boosted when it was tested in combination with nisin [66].

Pediocin, a heat-stable bacteriocin generated by Pediococcus species such as Pediococcus acidilactici and Pediococcus pentosaceus, is another heat-stable bacteriocin. Most of these peptides are thermostable and active across a broad pH range (pH 2 to 8). Pediocin, unlike nisin, has a relatively narrow range of activity. Overall, pediocins are active against some Enterococcus, Clostridium, Lactobacillus, Carnobacterium, Pediococcus, and Leuconostoc and Streptococcus species as Leuconostoc and Streptococcus, yet they have vigorous antimicrobial activity against L. monocytogenes [67]. Pediocins have been employed as preservatives in various foods, including cheese and meat-based foods. In this regard, Rodriguez et al. [68] found that pediocin preparations from Lactobacillus lactis CL1 and L. lactis CL2 reduced E. coli O157: H7 counts by 0.83 and 1.66 log units, S. aureus counts by 0.98 and 0.40 log units, and L. monocytogenes counts by 2.97 and 1.64 log units, respectively, when compared to control cheese at day 30.

2.2. Natural Antimicrobial Agents in Edible Coatings

Some researchers have observed the effectiveness of natural antimicrobial agents in reducing microbial contamination when applied directly to food systems, the rapid dispersion of these agents within the bulk of food, and their putative interactions with food components. On the other hand, their antibacterial activity may decrease after storage, limiting their practical utility in the food business. Recently, edible coatings have been examined as a polymeric matrix for trapping natural antibacterial agents as a possible alternative to overcome these restrictions.

Keep active chemical concentrations at a crucial level for long-term microbial growth inhibition by reducing the diffusion of active chemicals onto food surfaces [49]. Table 4 shows some examples of edible coating applications. Furthermore, compared to direct application, this method can produce a highly localized functional effect without compromising the product’s organoleptic qualities [70]. Furthermore, edible coatings can serve as a semipermeable barrier, protecting foods from moisture loss, solute migration, gas exchange, respiration, and oxidative processes [75].

Edible coatings are thin layers made from naturally occurring polymers that are applied to food surfaces using various mechanical methods such as spraying, brushing, and dipping [76], or electrostatic deposition [76, 77]. Overall, coating characteristics (composition, chemical structure, viscosity of coating solutions, coating thickness, and degree of cross-linking), coating, processing conditions (temperature, pH, and type of solvent), and type and concentration of additives all influence the functional properties of edible coatings (emulsifiers, plasticizers, or cross-linking agents). The addition of various bioactive compounds, primarily antimicrobial agents, improved the performance of edible coatings by reducing biochemical deteriorations produced by processing, such as textural disintegration, enzymatic browning, and off-flavor development [78]. Edible coatings are utilized as natural antimicrobial delivery systems to improve the shelf life of perishable foods such as fresh and minimally processed fruits, seafood, poultry, and meat products.

Fernandez-Pan et al. [79] found that whey protein isolate-based coatings enriched with oregano EO at a concentration of 20 g/kg could extend the refrigerated shelf life of chicken breast from 6 to 13 days while keeping total mesophilic aerobic, LAB, and Pseudomonas spp counts below the critical microbiological limits set for distribution and consumption. According to Bazargani-Gilani et al. [80], CH-based coatings enriched with 2% Zataria multiflora EO effectively controlled microbial growth, delayed chemical changes, improved sensory attributes, and improved sensory attributes, extending the shelf life of chicken breast dipped in pomegranate juice by 15 days during refrigerated storage.

According to Jasour et al. [81], the lactoperoxidase system (LPS) added to CH coatings can extend the shelf life of trout fillets while maintaining excellent sensory acceptability until the 16th day of storage at 4°C. Asik and Candogan [82] observed that CH coatings incorporating garlic oil were efficient in lowering aerobic bacteria counts and prolonging the refrigerated shelf life of shrimp flesh by 2 days.

2.3. Application of Antioxidation Agents

Antioxidant compounds are frequently employed to improve the shelf life of food by avoiding oxidative rancidity, degradation, and food color change. Phenolic compounds, vitamin C, and vitamin E are natural antioxidants that serve as free radical scavengers [83]. Unwanted melanosis on the surface of fresh-cut fruits and vegetables is a common problem for merchants [84]. Fruits and vegetables will take on a new appearance due to these changes. This is because the reaction took place on their surface. Two types of enzymes, polyphenol oxidase (PPO) and peroxidase (POD), are used as catalysts in this reaction. The hydroxylation will occur gradually at first, converting monophenol molecules to diphenols. Lipid oxidation is a concern in poultry, meat, and fish, with most lipid oxidation occurring in the muscle due to the oxidation of myoglobin species and hemoglobin [85].

2.3.1. Antioxidation Agents from Plant Origin

Plants are a good source of antioxidants since they contain various active chemicals. Spices, citrus pulp, peel, and oilseeds are high in antioxidant chemicals. For example, black pepper, turmeric, and garlic can inhibit oxidation qualities in many food systems. Because active components such as lignans, flavonoids, polyphenolics, and terpenoids are present in most spices, they have antioxidant properties [85]. Essential oils have been well-known in recent years for their usage as an antioxidant agent for food preservation due to the presence of antioxidant components. By suppressing the oxidation chain reaction, these chemicals can prevent or delay lipid oxidation in chicken, meat, and fish.

Four types of Thai culinary herbs (holy basil, Vietnamese coriander, turmeric, and green peppercorn) were examined for antioxidant capabilities, according to Nugboon and Intarapichet [86]. Compared to turmeric and Vietnamese coriander, holy basil and green peppercorns have a longer shelf life. However, compared to the control meatballs, which lasted less than six days, all of the meatballs tested with Thai herbs had a longer shelf life.

2.3.2. Antioxidation Agents from Animal Origin

Various natural materials have been revealed to be potential sources of natural food preservation chemicals [15]. Free radical scavenging, bleaching inhibition, and reducing power are essential properties of animal-derived antioxidants. Honey has been used to evaluate these capacities. Active substances in honey include phenolic acids, vitamins, and enzymes. Honey has the most potent antioxidant activity due to its flavonoid concentration. They assume that these chemicals, in addition to vitamins, contribute to the antioxidant capacity of honey samples [87].

Aside from honey, chitosan is the best animal-derived antioxidant [88]. Most research on chitosan’s oxidative activity reveals that it can slow lipid oxidation and reduce reactive oxygen species in biological systems and foods. Chitosan’s antioxidant activity is based on its ability to scavenge free radicals by donating hydrogen or lone pairs of electrons. Chitosan contains essential chemicals for the antioxidant process, such as hydroxyl groups (-OH) and amino groups (-NH). Due to chitosan’s semicrystalline structure and strong hydrogen bonds, it is not easy to break. Chitosan inhibits the radical scavenging activity of 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), superoxide anion radicals, and hydrogen peroxide [89].

3. Conclusion

Researchers and food processors are looking for natural food preservatives with a wide range of antibacterial action. Antimicrobial agents, natural antioxidants, and natural edible coating agents are all essential instruments for protecting foods and other related items from the harmful impacts of bacteria and other spoiling processes. Fruits, vegetables, herbs, and spices are the most commonly utilized plants by the food industry as natural antimicrobials to suppress food-borne viruses and improve food shelf life. Peptides are the most common antimicrobial compounds found in mammals (polypeptides). Microorganisms create a variety of chemicals that may be effective against pathogenic and rotting bacteria. Most antibacterial compounds of microbial origin are generated as end-product metabolites during food fermentation. The antibacterial impact of natural products can be influenced by various parameters, including botanical source, harvesting time, development stage, and extraction method. Food components, processing, and other factors in food applications may modify these natural antibacterial compounds. As a result, more significant concentrations may be required for transport and storage than those employed in laboratory media. On the other hand, the sensory properties of food products may be influenced by adding natural antimicrobials. As a result, developing an optimized combination of low doses of antimicrobial agents that can maintain product safety and extend shelf life while minimizing undesirable flavor and sensory changes associated with the addition of high concentrations of natural antimicrobials is a challenge for the practical application of natural antimicrobials. However, natural antimicrobials are only used in many commercial food products.

4. Prospect

Even though a considerable number of natural antimicrobials and antioxidants are nowadays known, only a limited number of natural antimicrobial/antioxidant compounds are currently used in commercial applications due to the higher cost associated with them compared to chemical preservatives. Thus, more research needs to be explored utilizing low-cost production methods of natural antimicrobials and antioxidants. Basically, natural antimicrobials and antioxidants are extracted and tested on food products. An extraction method without toxic solvents, such as direct extraction or subcritical water, seems to be a promising method to avoid safety concerns and minimize environmental fingerprints. Natural antimicrobials appear to be the most promising solution for many food safety and quality concerns. Thus, the future will anticipate more investigation of natural antimicrobials in food systems, especially in minimally processed foods. Many types of natural sources are still not being studied to be used as food preservatives. Future research should aim to alleviate this problem and boost the use of natural preservatives in food systems.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

L. Bouarab Chibane, P. Degraeve, H. Ferhout, J. Bouajila, and N. Oulahal, “Plant antimicrobial polyphenols as potential natural food preservatives,” Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, vol. 99, no. 4, pp. 1457–1474, 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
A. A. Bergwerff and S. B. Debast, “Modernization of control of pathogenic micro-organisms in the food-chain requires a durable role for immunoaffinity-based detection methodology—a review,” Foods, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 832, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Babuskin, P. A. S. Babu, M. Sasikala et al., “Antimicrobial and antioxidant effects of spice extracts on the shelf life extension of raw chicken meat,” International Journal of Food Microbiology, vol. 171, pp. 32–40, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Martínez-Graciá, C. A. González-Bermúdez, A. M. Cabellero-Valcárcel, M. Santaella-Pascual, and C. Frontela-Saseta, “Use of herbs and spices for food preservation: advantages and limitations,” Current Opinion in Food Science, vol. 6, pp. 38–43, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
A. H. Havelaar, S. Brul, A. De Jong, R. De Jonge, M. H. Zwietering, and B. H. Ter Kuile, “Future challenges to microbial food safety,” International Journal of Food Microbiology, vol. 139, pp. S79–S94, 2010.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Sun, X. Zhao, Y. Ma, H. Guan, H. Liang, and D. Wang, “Inhibitory effect of modified atmosphere packaging on Escherichia coli O157: H7 in fresh-cut cucumbers (Cucumis sativus L.) and effectively maintain quality during storage,” Food Chemistry, vol. 369, Article ID 130969, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
S. R. Ahmad, P. Gokulakrishnan, R. Giriprasad, and M. A. Yatoo, “Fruit-based natural antioxidants in meat and meat products: a review,” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 1503–1513, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
J. E. Inetianbor, J. M. Yakubu, and S. C. Ezeonu, “Effects of food additives and preservatives on man-a review,” Asian Journal of Science and Technology, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1118–1135, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Mahmud and R. A. Khan, “Characterization of natural antimicrobials in food system,” Advances in Microbiology, vol. 8, no. 11, p. 894, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Aziz and S. Karboune, “Natural antimicrobial/antioxidant agents in meat and poultry products as well as fruits and vegetables: a review,” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 486–511, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Carocho, M. F. Barreiro, P. Morales, and I. C. Ferreira, “Adding molecules to food, pros and cons: a review on synthetic and natural food additives,” Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 377–399, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
M. S. Arshad and S. A. Batool, “Natural antimicrobials, their sources and food safety,” Food additives, vol. 87, no. 1, 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
H. Aloui and K. Khwaldia, “Natural antimicrobial edible coatings for microbial safety and food quality enhancement,” Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1080–1103, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Jalosinska and J. Wilczak, “Influence of plant extracts on the microbiological shelf life of meat products,” Polish Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 303–308, 2009.
View at: Google Scholar
M. H. Medema, K. Blin, P. Cimermancic et al., “antiSMASH: rapid identification, annotation and analysis of secondary metabolite biosynthesis gene clusters in bacterial and fungal genome sequences,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 39, pp. W339–W346, 2011.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Atarés, C. De Jesús, P. Talens, and A. Chiralt, “Characterization of SPI-based edible films incorporated with cinnamon or ginger essential oils,” Journal of Food Engineering, vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 384–391, 2010.
View at: Google Scholar
C. L. Moo, S. K. Yang, M. A. Osman et al., “Antibacterial activity and mode of action of β-caryophyllene on,” Polish Journal of Microbiology, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 49–54, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
M. M. Tajkarimi, S. A. Ibrahim, and D. O. Cliver, “Antimicrobial herb and spice compounds in food,” Food Control, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 1199–1218, 2010.
View at: Google Scholar
V. P. Singh, “Recent approaches in food bio-preservation-a review,” Open Veterinary Journal, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 104–111, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
I. H. N. Bassolé and H. R. Juliani, “Essential oils in combination and their antimicrobial properties,” Molecules, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 3989–4006, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
R. G. Bitencourt, A. M. M. Possas, G. P. Camilloto, R. S. Cruz, C. G. Otoni, and N. D. F. F. Soares, “Antimicrobial and aromatic edible coating on fresh-cut pineapple preservation,” Ciência Rural, vol. 44, pp. 1119–1125, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
T. Hintz, K. K. Matthews, and R. Di, “The use of plant antimicrobial compounds for food preservation,” BioMed Research International, vol. 2015, Article ID 246264, 12 pages, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. S. Pinto, A. F. de Carvalho, A. C. dos Santos Pires et al., “The effects of nisin on Staphylococcus aureus count and the physicochemical properties of traditional minas serro cheese,” International Dairy Journal, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 90–96, 2011.
View at: Google Scholar
N. Matan, “Antimicrobial activity of edible film incorporated with essential oils to preserve dried fish (Decapterus maruadsi),” International Food Research Journal, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1733–1738, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Rehman, S. Hussain, and H. Nawaz, “Inhibitory effect of citrus peels essential oils on the microbial growth of bread,” Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, vol. 6, pp. 558–561, 2007.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Gutiérrez, R. Batlle, S. Andújar, C. Sánchez, and C. Nerín, “Evaluation of antimicrobial active packaging to increase shelf life of gluten‐free sliced bread,” Packaging Technology and Science, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 485–494, 2011.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. L. Lee, T. Cesario, Y. Wang, E. Shanbrom, and L. Thrupp, “Antibacterial activity of vegetables and juices,” Nutrition, vol. 19, no. 11-12, pp. 994–996, 2003.
View at: Google Scholar
S. A. Ibrahim, G. Yang, D. Song, and T. S. Tse, “Antimicrobial effect of guava on Escherichia coli O157: H7 and Salmonella typhimurium in liquid medium,” International Journal of Food Properties, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 102–109, 2011.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Corpuz, “Phytochemical screening and antibacterial properties of indigenous vegetables in Cagayan Valley, Philippines,” Linker: The Journal of Emerging Research in Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, vol. 3, no. 1, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
V. Kuete, A. T. Mbaveng, M. Tsaffack et al., “Antitumor, antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of Bersama engleriana (Melianthaceae),” Journal of Ethnopharmacology, vol. 115, no. 3, pp. 494–501, 2008.
View at: Google Scholar
D. M. Musyimi, J. A. Ogur, and P. M. Muema, “Phytochemical compounds and antimicrobial activity of extracts of aspilia plant (Aspilia mossambicensis) (oliv) wild,” International Journal of Botany, vol. 4, 2008.
View at: Google Scholar
A. Aires, V. R. Mota, M. J. Saavedra, E. A. S. Rosa, and R. N. Bennett, “The antimicrobial effects of glucosinolates and their respective enzymatic hydrolysis products on bacteria isolated from the human intestinal tract,” Journal of Applied Microbiology, vol. 106, no. 6, pp. 2086–2095, 2009.
View at: Google Scholar
D. Markin, L. Duek, and I. Berdicevsky, “In vitro antimicrobial activity of olive leaves. Antimikrobielle Wirksamkeit von Olivenblättern in vitro,” Mycoses, vol. 46, no. 3‐4, pp. 132–136, 2003.
View at: Google Scholar
A. P. Pereira, I. C. Ferreira, F. Marcelino et al., “Phenolic compounds and antimicrobial activity of olive (Olea europaea L. Cv. cobrançosa) leaves,” Molecules, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1153–1162, 2007.
View at: Google Scholar
D. Bukvički, D. Stojković, M. Soković et al., “Satureja horvatii essential oil: in vitro antimicrobial and antiradical properties and in situ control of listeria monocytogenes in pork meat,” Meat Science, vol. 96, no. 3, pp. 1355–1360, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Pellegrino and A. Tirelli, “A sensitive HPLC method to detect hen’s egg white lysozyme in milk and dairy products,” International Dairy Journal, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 435–442, 2000.
View at: Google Scholar
D. Dussault, K. D. Vu, and M. Lacroix, “In vitro evaluation of antimicrobial activities of various commercial essential oils, oleoresin and pure compounds against food pathogens and application in ham,” Meat Science, vol. 96, no. 1, pp. 514–520, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
S. M. da Silveira, F. B. Luciano, N. Fronza, A. Cunha Jr, G. N. Scheuermann, and C. R. W. Vieira, “Chemical composition and antibacterial activity of Laurus nobilis essential oil towards foodborne pathogens and its application in fresh Tuscan sausage stored at 7°C,” LWT--Food Science and Technology, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 86–93, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
H. S. Elshafie, E. Mancini, I. Camele, L. De Martino, and V. de Feo, “In vivo antifungal activity of two essential oils from mediterranean plants against postharvest brown rot disease of peach fruit,” Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 66, pp. 11–15, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
L. Espina, M. Somolinos, A. A. Ouazzou, S. Condon, D. Garcia-Gonzalo, and R. Pagán, “Inactivation of Escherichia coli O157: H7 in fruit juices by combined treatments of citrus fruit essential oils and heat,” International Journal of Food Microbiology, vol. 159, no. 1, pp. 9–16, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
P. Kotzekidou, P. Giannakidis, and A. Boulamatsis, “Antimicrobial activity of some plant extracts and essential oils against foodborne pathogens in vitro and on the fate of inoculated pathogens in chocolate,” LWT--Food Science and Technology, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 119–127, 2008.
View at: Google Scholar
N. K. Lee, B. S. Jung, H. H. Yu, J. S. Kim, and H. D. Paik, “The impact of antimicrobial effect of chestnut inner shell extracts against Campylobacter jejuni in chicken meat,” LWT--Food Science and Technology, vol. 65, pp. 746–750, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
N. Khorshidian, E. Khanniri, M. R. Koushki, S. Sohrabvandi, and M. Yousefi, “An overview of antimicrobial activity of lysozyme and its functionality in cheese,” Frontiers in Nutrition, vol. 9, no. 9, Article ID 833618, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
B. Niaz, F. Saeed, A. Ahmed et al., “Lactoferrin (LF): a natural antimicrobial protein,” International Journal of Food Properties, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 1626–1641, 2019.
View at: Google Scholar
Z. Koksal, I. Gulcin, and H. Ozdemir, “An important milk enzyme: lactoperoxidase,” Milk Proteins-From Structure to Biological Properties and Health Aspects, Intechopen, Rijeka, Croatia, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Legros, S. Jan, S. Bonnassie et al., “The role of ovotransferrin in egg-white antimicrobial activity: a review,” Foods, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 823, 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
E. J. Quinto, I. Caro, L. H. Villalobos-Delgado, J. Mateo, B. De-Mateo-Silleras, and M. P. Redondo-Del-Río, Food Safety through Natural Antimicrobials Antibiotics, vol. 8, no. 4, p. 208, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site
A. M. Pisoschi, A. Pop, C. Georgescu, V. Turcuş, N. K. Olah, and E. Mathe, “An overview of natural antimicrobials role in food,” European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 143, pp. 922–935, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
R. Gyawali and S. A. Ibrahim, “Natural products as antimicrobial agents,” Food Control, vol. 46, pp. 412–429, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
M. A. Del Nobile, A. Lucera, C. Costa, and A. Conte, “Food applications of natural antimicrobial compounds,” Frontiers in Microbiology, vol. 3, no. 8, pp. 1–13, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
C. A. Murdock, J. Cleveland, K. R. Matthews, and M. L. Chikindas, “The synergistic effect of nisin and lactoferrin on the inhibition of Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli O157: H7,” Letters in Applied Microbiology, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 255–261, 2007.
View at: Google Scholar
A. P. Desbois and V. J. Smith, “Antibacterial free fatty acids: activities, mechanisms of action and biotechnological potential,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 1629–1642, 2010.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Y. Shin, V. K. Bajpai, H. R. Kim, and S. C. Kang, “Antibacterial activity of bioconverted eicosapentaenoic (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) against foodborne pathogenic bacteria,” International Journal of Food Microbiology, vol. 113, no. 2, pp. 233–242, 2007.
View at: Google Scholar
A. Singh, R. K. Singh, A. K. Bhunia, and N. Singh, “Efficacy of plant essential oils as antimicrobial agents against Listeria monocytogenes in hotdogs,” LWT--Food Science and Technology, vol. 36, no. 8, pp. 787–794, 2003.
View at: Google Scholar
S. P. Bangar, S. Suri, M. Trif, and F. Ozogul, “Organic acids production from lactic acid bacteria: a preservation approach,” Food Bioscience, vol. 46, Article ID 101615, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
B. Zhou, Y. Luo, X. Nou et al., “Effects of a novel combination of gallic acid, hydrogen peroxide and lactic acid on pathogen inactivation and shelf-life of baby spinach,” Food Control, vol. 143, Article ID 109284, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
R. Montiel, I. Martín-Cabrejas, S. Langa et al., “Antimicrobial activity of reuterin produced by Lactobacillus reuteri on Listeria monocytogenes in cold-smoked salmon,” Food Microbiology, vol. 44, pp. 1–5, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Dias and A. P. Rauter, “Membrane-targeting antibiotics: recent developments outside the peptide space,” Future Medicinal Chemistry, vol. 11, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Zheng, Y. Du, Z. Qiu et al., “Nisin variants generated by protein engineering and their properties,” Bioengineering, vol. 9, p. 251, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Agriopoulou, E. Stamatelopoulou, M. Sachadyn-Król, and T. Varzakas, “Lactic acid bacteria as antibacterial agents to extend the shelf life of fresh and minimally processed fruits and vegetables: quality and safety aspects,” Microorganisms, vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 1–24, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
E. Abebe, G. Gugsa, and M. Ahmed, “Review on major food-borne zoonotic bacterial pathogens,” Journal of Tropical Medicine, vol. 2020, Article ID 4674235, 19 pages, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Sadeghi, B. Panahi, A. Mazlumi, M. A. Hejazi, D. E. A. Komi, and Y. Nami, “Screening of potential probiotic lactic acid bacteria with antimicrobial properties and selection of superior bacteria for application as biocontrol using machine learning models,” Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft & Technologie, vol. 162, Article ID 113471, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
G. Reid, “Probiotic Lactobacilli for urogenital health in women,” Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology, vol. 42, pp. S234–S236, 2008.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Šušković, B. Kos, J. Beganović, A. Leboš Pavunc, K. Habjanič, and S. Matošić, “Antimicrobial activity–the most important property of probiotic and starter lactic acid bacteria,” Food Technology and Biotechnology, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 296–307, 2010.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Doleyres, P. Beck, S. Vollenweider, and C. Lacroix, “Production of 3-hydroxypropionaldehyde using a two-step process with Lactobacillus reuteri,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, vol. 68, no. 4, pp. 467–474, 2005.
View at: Google Scholar
J. L. Arqués, J. Fernández, P. Gaya, M. Nuñez, E. Rodrı́guez, and M. Medina, “Antimicrobial activity of reuterin in combination with nisin against food-borne pathogens,” International Journal of Food Microbiology, vol. 95, no. 2, pp. 225–229, 2004.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Zhu, M. Du, J. Cordray, and D. U. Ahn, “Control of Listeria monocytogenes contamination in ready‐to‐eat meat products,” Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 34–42, 2005.
View at: Google Scholar
E. Rodrıguez, J. Calzada, J. L. Arqués, J. M. Rodrıguez, M. Nunez, and M. Medina, “Antimicrobial activity of pediocin-producing Lactococcus lactis on Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli O157: H7 in cheese,” International Dairy Journal, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 51–57, 2005.
View at: Google Scholar
N. H. M. Zaki, H. Z. M. Som, and Z. A. Haiyee, “Application of palm stearin-chitosan edible coating on star fruits (Averrhoa carambola L.),” Malaysian Journal of Analytical Sciences, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 325–334, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
R. P. Campos, M. D. A. Rodovalho, and E. Clemente, “Coating on “camarosa” organic strawberries stored at low temperature,” Brazilian Journal of Food Technology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 60–67, 2009.
View at: Google Scholar
M. H. Jafarizadeh, A. Osman, C. P. Tan, and R. Abdul, “Development of an edible coating based on chitosan-glycerol to delay “Berangan” banana (Musa sapientum cv. Berangan) ripening process,” International Food Research Journal, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 989–997, 2011.
View at: Google Scholar
R. A. Ghavidel, M. G. Davoodi, A. F. A. Asl, T. Tanoori, and Z. Sheykholeslami, “Effect of selected edible coatings to extend shelf-life of fresh-cut apples,” The International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences, vol. 6, no. 16, pp. 1171–1178, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
X. Zeng, Y. Duan, W. Zhe et al., “Edible coating based on soy protein to improve shelf life and overall quality of minimally processed jujubes,” Journal of Food Agriculture and Environment, vol. 11, pp. 263–269, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Rakshit and C. Ramalingam, “Gum acacia coating with garlic and cinnamon as an alternate, natural preservative for meat and fish,” African Journal of Biotechnology, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 406–413, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
A. E. Quirós-Sauceda, J. F. Ayala-Zavala, G. I. Olivas, and G. A. González-Aguilar, “Edible coatings as encapsulating matrices for bioactive compounds: a review,” Journal of Food Science & Technology, vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 1674–1685, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
R. K. Dhall, “Advances in edible coatings for fresh fruits and vegetables: a review,” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 435–450, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
E. Poverenov, Y. Zaitsev, H. Arnon et al., “Effects of composite chitosan–gelatin edible coating on postharvest quality and storability of red bell peppers,” Postharvest Biology and Technology, vol. 96, pp. 106–109, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
A. Valdés, N. Burgos, A. Jiménez, and M. C. Garrigós, “Natural pectin polysaccharides as edible coatings,” Coatings, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 865–886, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
I. Fernández-Pan, X. Carrión-Granda, and J. I. Maté, “Antimicrobial efficiency of edible coatings on the preservation of chicken breast fillets,” Food Control, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 69–75, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
B. Bazargani-Gilani, J. Aliakbarlu, and H. Tajik, “Effect of pomegranate juice dipping and chitosan coating enriched with Zataria multiflora Bois' essential oil on the shelf-life of chicken meat during refrigerated storage,” Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, vol. 29, pp. 280–287, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
M. S. Jasour, A. Ehsani, L. Mehryar, and S. S. Naghibi, “Chitosan coating incorporated with the lactoperoxidase system: an active edible coating for fish preservation,” Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, vol. 95, no. 6, pp. 1373–1378, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
E. Aşik and K. Candoğan, “Effects of chitosan coatings incorporated with garlic oil on quality characteristics of shrimp,” Journal of Food Quality, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 237–246, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
O. Skurtys, C. Acevedo, F. Pedreschi, J. Enronoe, F. Osorio, and J. M. Aguilera, Food Hydrocolloid Edible Films and Coatings, Nova Science Publishers, Hauppauge, NY, USA, 2014.
C. Kaur and H. C. Kapoor, “Inhibition of enzymatic browning in apples, potatoes and mushrooms,” Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 389–394, 2000.
View at: Google Scholar
M. P. Doyle and M. C. Erickson, “Emerging microbiological food safety issues related to meat,” Meat Science, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 98–112, 2006.
View at: Google Scholar
K. Nugboon and K. Intarapichet, “Antioxidant and antibacterial activities of Thai culinary herb and spice extracts, and application in pork meatballs,” International Food Research Journal, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 1788–1800, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
L. S. Chua, N. L. A. Rahaman, N. A. Adnan, and T. T. Eddie Tan, “Antioxidant activity of three honey samples in relation with their biochemical components,” Journal of Analytical Methods in Chemistry, vol. 2013, Article ID 313798, 10 pages, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Charernsriwilaiwat, P. Opanasopit, T. Rojanarata, and T. Ngawhirunpat, “In vitro antioxidant activity of chitosan aqueous solution: effect of salt form,” Tropical Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 235–242, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
A. Rajalakshmi, N. Krithiga, and A. Jayachitra, “Antioxidant activity of the chitosan extracted from shrimp exoskeleton,” Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 1446–1451, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Ejigayehu Teshome et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

3416

Downloads

1925

Citations