Next Article in Journal
Multi-Transcripts and Expressions of Trypsin Inhibitor and α-Amylase Inhibitor Genes of Sengon (Falcataria falcata) Against Xystrocera festiva Stem Borer Infestation
Previous Article in Journal
Buddleja globosa Leaf Methanolic Extract Acts Against Trypanosoma cruzi Parasites by Inducing Mitochondrial Inner Membrane Hyperpolarization
Previous Article in Special Issue
Phytotoxic Activity Analysis of 2-Methoxyphenol and 2,6-Di-tert-butyl-4-methylphenol Present in Cistus ladanifer L. Essential Oil
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 14
Issue 17
10.3390/plants14172737
plants-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
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Multifunctional Roles of Medicinal Plants in the Meat Industry: Antioxidant, Antimicrobial, and Color Preservation Perspectives

by
Alexandra Cristina Tocai (Moțoc)
1,
Cristina Adriana Rosan
2,
Andrei George Teodorescu
3,
Alina Cristiana Venter
3 and
Simona Ioana Vicas
2,*
1
Department of Preclinical Disciplines, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, University of Oradea, 410073 Oradea, Romania
2
Department of Food Engineering, Faculty of Environmental Protection, University of Oradea, 410048 Oradea, Romania
3
Department of Morphological Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, University of Oradea, 410073 Oradea, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2025, 14(17), 2737; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants14172737
Submission received: 1 August 2025 / Revised: 25 August 2025 / Accepted: 27 August 2025 / Published: 2 September 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Plant-Based Products and Ingredients: Isolation, Characterization, Bioactivity and Applications)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

There is growing interest from researchers, the food industry, and consumers in reducing or eliminating synthetic preservatives such as nitrites in meat products. In this context, medicinal plants have emerged as promising sources of natural compounds with multifunctional roles. This review summarizes recent advances in the application of medicinal plant extracts as natural antioxidants, antimicrobials, and color-preserving agents in the meat industry. A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed and Lens databases, complemented by a bibliometric analysis with the VOS viewer, to identify research trends and key contributors in the field. The incorporation of plant-based ingredients in meat and meat analogues has the potential to enhance flavor, nutritional value, and shelf life while responding to the demand for clean-label and health-oriented products. Particular attention is given to the phytochemical composition, bioactivity, and practical application of selected medicinal plants that have demonstrated efficacy in preserving the oxidative stability, microbial safety, and visual quality of meat. Furthermore, the review highlights emerging plant species with potential in meat preservation and discusses the challenges related to their incorporation into meat matrices. These findings support the strategic use of plant-based bioactive compounds as sustainable and functional alternatives to synthetic additives in meat systems.

1. Introduction

Since ancient times, plants have been used to enhance the sensory properties of food and extend its shelf life. In traditional medicine, they were employed to alleviate symptoms caused by pathogens [1]. However, the current interest in medicinal plants as food preservatives stems not from their historical uses, but from their bioactive properties [2,3]. In recent years, these plants and their components have gained popularity due to their multifunctional roles and high consumer acceptance [4]. Regulation (EC) No. 1333/2008 of the European Parliament governs the use of food additives, including preservatives [5]. Among the natural sources of bioactive compounds, polyphenols and essential oils derived from plants are particularly important for extending the shelf life of meat and meat products [2,6]. Vitamins such as ascorbic acid (C), alpha-tocopherol (E), and beta-carotene (A precursor), along with polyphenols such as flavonoids, contribute significantly to the antioxidant potential of plant-based foods [7]. Herbs and spices—commonly used in culinary applications for flavor—often contain high concentrations of phenols, capable of donating hydrogen and preserving color [8,9]. Furthermore, medicinal plants containing phenolic compounds have antimicrobial properties that inhibit the growth of microorganisms responsible for producing biogenic amines in meat products, thus reducing health risks associated with their consumption [10]. Medicinal plants add nutritional value to meat products and provide natural alternatives to synthetic additives, improving food safety and quality [11].
Plant-derived bioactive compounds can be obtained by a variety of methods. These include extraction, distillation, fermentation, and enzymatic processes. The food industry needs to be able to extract bioactive compounds efficiently. In order to do this, hybrid technologies combine different processes (conventional and non-conventional) [12]. The new methods in use are a step in the direction of technologies that are more environmentally friendly and are less dependent on chemicals. It is essential that these techniques be safe without compromising consumer acceptance, which requires appropriate validation [13]. The use of medicinal plants in the production of meat products has the potential to produce healthier meat complying with medical and nutrition standards [14].
Meat products are fundamental to the global diet, providing vital nutrients such as proteins, vitamins, and minerals. The safety of meat, especially processed meat, has been recognized as a major public health issue. With the improvement of food production methods, the utilization of food additives has escalated, improving the shelf life, taste, and visual appeal of meat items. Nitrites play a crucial role in the processing of meat products, offering several positive effects that enhance both safety and quality. They are primarily used as curing agents, contributing to flavor enhancement, color stabilization, and the prevention of microbial growth, particularly against pathogens like Clostridium botulinum [15]. Additionally, nitrites exhibit antioxidative properties, which help in prolonging the shelf life of cured meats [16]. The distinctive pink color of cured meats, a hallmark of quality, is also attributed to nitrite use [17]. Furthermore, nitrites can inhibit lipid oxidation, thereby preserving the sensory attributes of meat products. Nitrites in meat products act as preservatives but pose considerable health hazards, mainly through the generation of carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds. These compounds occur when nitrites interact with amines in meat, resulting in potential carcinogenic effects [16,18]. Additionally, nitrites can cause methemoglobinemia, a condition where hemoglobin is altered, reducing oxygen transport in the body [19]. The current trend is to replace negative additives with medicinal plants. Some of the medicinal plants reported to have antibotulinal properties present in Salvia officinalis L., Salvia rosmarinus Spenn., and Syzygium aromaticum L. extracts include eugenol, isoeugenol, D-borneol, citronellol, menthol, cinnamic acid aldehyde, and rosemarin acid [20]. In addition to medicinal and aromatic plants, fruits and fruit by-products have also been reported as important sources of natural antioxidants and antimicrobials in meat systems, as recently reviewed by Orădan et al. [21]. These findings highlight the broader interest in plant-based ingredients for meat preservation, although the current review focuses specifically on medicinal plants. The objective of this review is to synthesize current evidence on the potential of medicinal plants as natural antioxidants, antimicrobials, and color-stabilizing agents in meat products, highlighting their role as viable alternatives to synthetic additives and their relevance to the growing demand for healthier, clean-label foods.

2. Research Methodology

The literature reviewed in this study was collected from two main databases: PubMed and Lens. The search strategy was based on Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and included the following keywords: “plants in meat products,” “natural antioxidants in meat and meat products,” “medicinal plants in pork,” “medicinal plants in poultry,” “medicinal plants in beef,” and “medicinal plants in lamb.” The articles selected for inclusion were published between 2000 and 2025 and focused specifically on the use of medicinal plants in the meat industry. Studies were included if they provided relevant data on phytochemical composition, antioxidant capacity, antimicrobial effects, or application in meat matrices. Studies were excluded if they (i) focused on herbal dietary supplements rather than food applications, (ii) were published in languages other than English, or (iii) did not provide relevant or specific outcomes related to meat preservation. Data were systematically organized in tables according to (i) the botanical family of each plant species, (ii) the type of meat product tested, (iii) the plant part and concentration used, (iv) the storage conditions, and (v) the main outcomes (e.g., antioxidant capacity, TBARS, microbial growth inhibition, and color parameters). The publication year and plant taxonomy were also included for contextual accuracy (Table 1).
Following the database search, a total of 125 publications were retrieved from PubMed, and 155 publications were retrieved from Lens. Publication trends for medicinal plants in the meat industry are provided in Supplementary Figure S1. The most cited article was authored by Noori et al. [22], published in Food Control, which received 412 citations according to Web of Science (accessed on 24 August 2025). This study investigated the effect of Zingiber officinalis Roscoe essential oil on the safety and quality attributes of chicken breast fillets [22].
A bibliometric analysis was conducted using VOSviewer software (version 1.6.20; Leiden, The Netherlands), which was selected over other tools due to its robust capabilities in clustering and visualizing the scientific literature [23,24]. The software identifies key terms by parsing titles and abstracts of publications, linking them to citation data, and generating visual outputs. Results are presented as density maps or term bubble maps using default settings [25] (Figure 1).
The size of a node is determined by how often an item is used. Moreover, the internode thickness and the connecting line thickness indicate how frequently the labels appear together. Connectivity is stronger between nodes that have the same color. A total of 1846 keywords from 2000 to 2025 underwent ranking based on their word frequencies, reflecting the number of papers featuring each keyword. The keywords in the list are categorized into 7 big clusters. The red bubbles are related to lipid oxidation and the mainly chemical compounds found, the green ones and yellow ones are mainly related to meat quality, and the blue ones are divided into lighter and darker colors but are all focused on antioxidant activity or natural antioxidants, while the purple ones are associated with antioxidant and antimicrobial activities and the orange ones are focused on medicinal plants. The most common keywords are represented in Table 2. In this context, it may be considered that lipid oxidation is more debated when discussing topics related to medicinal plants used in the meat industry.
The clusters, however, did not have clear boundaries, suggesting close connections. This bibliometric analysis indicates that different research directions have significant overlap. For instance, keywords such as “food safety”, “shelf life”, “bioactive compounds”, “antioxidant capacity”, and “natural antioxidant”, which are located in different clusters, intersect with each other. These findings indicate that the impact of medicinal plants on meat and meat products is a prominent topic in the present-day literature, which was confirmed our selection criteria, such as impact factor, citation index, and keyword frequency.
The literature search strategy and selection process are summarized in a PRISMA flowchart [26] (Figure 2), which complements the bibliometric analysis.

3. Phytochemical Composition of Medicinal Plants and Their General Biological Properties

The use of medicinal plants in food systems, particularly in meat products, has gained interest due to their rich contents of multifunctional bioactive phytochemicals [4,10,14]. These bioactive compounds, including flavonoids, phenolic acids, tannins, alkaloids, essential oils, and micronutrients, exhibit antioxidant, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, and color-stabilizing properties [7,14]. In this review, we selected 33 species from 17 botanical families based on their documented application in meat preservation and enhancement. Table 3 provides an overview of the phytochemical composition and biological properties of these medicinal plants. The classification of compounds is grouped into major categories (e.g., phenolic acids, alkaloids, essential oils, micronutrients, and subclasses of flavonoids such as flavones, flavonols, and anthocyanins), highlighting their functional relevance in meat systems.
Apigenin (a flavone) and its glucosylated derivative, apigenin-7-O-glucoside, were found in 16 medicinal plants. Among the flavonol class, quercetin and kaempferol, along with their derivatives, were reported in 27 and 24 medicinal plants, respectively. Interestingly, the phytochemical profiles of N. sativa L. [95,96,97,98], T. kotschyanus Boiss. & Hohen. [157,158,159], T. serpyllum L. [163,164], and Z. multiflora Boiss. [185,186,187] (Table 3) did not indicate the presence of flavonols such as quercetin or kaempferol, although these species are rich in other secondary metabolites. Flavanols, primarily epicatechin and catechin, were found in 11 medicinal plants. Anthocyanins, the pigments responsible for the blue-to-red coloration in plant tissues, were detected in C. sativus L., E. uniflora L., and Q. alba L. (Table 3). Phenolic acids, a distinct class of plant-derived compounds, are well-known for their strong antioxidant properties and are commonly present in medicinal plants. The predominant types include caffeic acid, ferulic acid, gallic acid, p-coumaric acid, and chlorogenic acid. These compounds offer a wide range of health benefits and contribute to disease prevention and overall wellness. In the context of meat preservation, phenolic acids play an important role. Their potent antioxidant and antibacterial activities enhance the quality, safety, and shelf life of meat products while also improving their nutritional value. The chemical structures of the main flavonoids and phenolic acids identified in medicinal plants are shown in Supplementary Table S1.
Alkaloids, a class of nitrogen-containing compounds found in medicinal plants, exhibit several therapeutic benefits, primarily anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activities. The medicinal plants in Table 3 that contain alkaloids include C. sinensis (L.) Kuntze (predominantly caffeine), N. sativa L. (rich in nigellidine), and P. nigrum L. (containing piperine). The chemical structures of the dominant alkaloids identified in these medicinal plants are shown in Supplementary Table S1.
Essential oils derived from medicinal plants are increasingly utilized in meat products due to their preservative, antibacterial, antioxidant, and flavor-enhancing properties [2,4]. Extracted from a variety of herbs, spices, and aromatic plants, these oils represent a clean-label alternative to synthetic preservatives and additives in meat processing. The chemical structures of the main essential oils identified in medicinal plants are shown in Supplementary Table S1.
In addition to their high content of polyphenolic bioactive compounds, the 33 medicinal plants included in this review (Table 3) are also valuable sources of essential nutrients, including vitamins (A, B complex, C, E, and K) and minerals (K, Mg, Ca, Mn, Fe, Se, and Zn).
Medicinal plants also contain a variety of fatty acids, both saturated (e.g., palmitic and stearic acids stearic) and unsaturated (e.g., linolenic, arachidonic, eicosadienoic, linoleic, oleic, and myristoleic acids). Three medicinal plants (N. sativa L., S. aromaticum L., and U. dioica L.) were identified as sources of linolenic acid (Table 3), an essential omega-3 fatty acid, with multiple therapeutic benefits [96,99,147,148,179,180]. Five medicinal plants (Laurus nobilis L., Origanum vulgare L., N. velutina Wooton, N. sativa L., and S. rosmarinus Spenn.) were found to contain oleic acid (Table 3), an omega-9 fatty acid with recognized nutritional and health-promoting properties. The highest concentration of oleic acid was reported in S. rosmarinus Spenn. (40%), followed by N. velutina Wooton (28%), while O. vulgare L. contained only trace amounts [81,96,101,111,119].
L-theanine, an amino acid found in the leaves of C. sinensis (L.) Kuntze, has potential applications as a functional food additive or dietary supplement due to its beneficial physiological properties [197]. 4-hydroxyisoleucine, a non-proteinogenic amino acid, identified in fenugreek seeds, has been shown to enhance insulin sensitivity and improve glucose uptake in the body [174]. Additionally, S. montana L. contains ursolic acid and oleanolic acid, two triterpenoid compounds with notable antibacterial and antioxidant activities [142].
Overall, the phytochemical complexity and diverse biological activities of the medicinal plants listed in Table 3 highlight their potential not only for promoting human health, but also for enhancing the quality and shelf life of meat products through natural preservation strategies.

4. Antioxidant Capacity of Medicinal Plants in Meat

Whether applied as a spice, herb, essential oil, crude extract, or phenolic-rich concentrated extract, a plant-derived antioxidant must be compatible with the selected meat system, both in terms of functional performance (i.e., efficacy under specific processing conditions) and organoleptic properties (i.e., sensory acceptability) [198].
From the 33 medicinal plants previously described (Table 3), a subset has been extensively investigated for their antioxidant effects in meat and meat products. Table 4 summarizes the experimental conditions and main outcomes reported in studies evaluating the antioxidant capacity of selected medicinal plants in meat systems. The included studies describe the anatomical parts used (e.g., leaves, seeds, and essential oils); the types of meat products; the concentrations applied; the storage conditions; and the relevant parameters, such as total phenolic contents, antioxidant activities, and lipid oxidation indices (e.g., TBARS and peroxide values). This information offers a comparative overview of plant efficacy under various meat preservation scenarios.
After reviewing studies about the antioxidant capacity of medicinal plants in meat products, it was observed that pork was the most frequently used meat matrix, followed by beef, chicken, lamb, rabbit, and fish. Among these, patties represented the most common product format for pork, beef, and chicken applications.
Studies have shown that pork and chicken contain higher concentrations of polyunsaturated fatty acids, particularly linoleic and α-linolenic acids, compared to beef, suggesting that these meats may serve as preferable dietary sources of essential fatty acids [223,224,225]. The high content of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) in meat increases its susceptibility to lipid peroxidation, especially during storage and processing [226]. Notably, pork and chicken, which have higher concentrations of linoleic and α-linolenic acids compared to beef, may be more prone to oxidative degradation, despite their nutritional advantage as sources of essential fatty acids.
In the European Union (EU), the use of antioxidants in meat products is regulated under Regulation (EC) No. 1831/2008, which outlines the list of permitted additives and sets specific conditions for their use. Synthetic antioxidants are subject to strict limitations regarding type and concentration. In the United States, the use of antioxidants in meat products is regulated by multiple authorities, including the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The USDA sets limits for the inclusion levels of synthetic antioxidants in meat and poultry products, while the FDA regulates the use of natural antioxidants classified as GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) substances [14].
As the food industry increasingly chooses medicinal plants as prime sources of functional ingredients such as antioxidants, they become major players in the protection of meat products against oxidative damage. We provide a graphical abstract depicting how bioactive phytochemicals identified in these selected medicinal plants contribute to oxidation control and thus to an extended shelf life of clean-label meat products through molecular protective action upon key points in the lipid and protein oxidative pathways, discriminating lipid autoxidation, photoxidation, and enzymatic oxidation (via lipoxygenase), as well as the conversion of myoglobin oxidation (Figure 3). Ultimately, these interactions support oxidation control, extended shelf life, and the development of clean-label meat products.
Antioxidants are generally categorized into two main types based on their mechanisms of action: (1) primary antioxidants, also known as chain-breaking antioxidants, which stabilize free radicals by donating electrons or hydrogen atoms—typically from hydroxyl groups—which interrupts the initiation phase and slows down the propagation phase of lipid autoxidation, thereby halting the free radical chain reaction; (2) secondary antioxidants, which prevent the formation of free radicals through deactivation of singlet oxygen and absorption of UV radiation, as well as through oxygen radical scavenging and regenerative redox of primary antioxidants [227].
Protein lipoxidation induced by reactive oxygen species (ROS) through covalent interaction between oxidized lipids and amino acid side chains produces highly reactive carbonyl-containing fatty acid fragments which compromise meat along with reactive carbon species (RCS), a class of lipid oxidation-derived electrophiles also involved in cellular signaling, gene regulation, and stress response pathways. The levels of ROS and RCS in meat products are influenced by both biotic and abiotic stressors, namely, meat matrix composition and storage conditions, respectively [227].
The use of antioxidants remains one of the most effective strategies for mitigating both lipid and protein oxidation in meat products. D. ambrosioides L., traditionally used as a condiment and in folk medicine, is rich in flavonoids with known antioxidant properties. A study conducted by Villalobos-Delgado et al. investigated the effects of infusion and ethanolic extraction of D. ambrosioides L. on lipid oxidation and color stability in raw ground pork during refrigerated storage. The antioxidant activity observed in both preparations was attributed to the presence of flavonoids and organic acids, particularly citric acid. Between the two types of extract, the ethanolic extract demonstrated the highest efficacy, likely due to its content of quercetin, a flavonoid widely recognized for its strong antioxidant potential [201].
Curcuminoids are the principal antioxidant constituents of turmeric (C. longa L.), with curcumin being the most extensively studied. Although structurally classified under the phenolic acid group, curcumin displays multiple antioxidant mechanisms. It acts as an effective quencher of singlet oxygen and also possesses the ability to suppress lipid peroxidation and scavenge superoxide anions and hydroxyl radicals [202]. In addition to its biological functions, curcumin (E 100) is an approved food additive in the European Union, classified under Group III (colors with combined maximum limits) according to EU Regulations [228]. It is commonly used in the food industry as a yellow natural colorant, contributing both functional and aesthetic value.
In recent years, natural compounds such as essential oils have gained increasing attention from researchers due to their notable bioactive potential and applicability in food systems. Essential oils offer several advantages: they are generally recognized as safe, are widely accepted by consumers, and are subject to fewer regulatory restrictions compared to synthetic additives [222]. The results of Amiri et al. [222] demonstrated that starch-based films incorporating nanoemulsions of Z. multiflora Boiss. essential oil exhibited superior antioxidant activity compared to films containing the conventional (non-nano) form of the essential oil. This effect was observed in beef hamburger patties during a 20-day refrigerated storage period. A likely explanation for this enhanced performance is that the reduction in droplet size provided by nanoemulsification increases the oxidative stability of the essential oil. This, in turn, slows down the initiation phase of lipid oxidation and reduces hydroperoxide formation during the early stages of spoilage [222]. The primary constituents of Z. multiflora Boiss. essential oil were identified as thymol, followed by p-cymene and 3-carene [222]. Thymol, a natural monoterpenoid phenol present in the essential oils of various medicinal plants, exhibits strong antioxidant activity, primarily due to its hydroxyl group, which enables it to efficiently neutralize free radicals (Table S1). A separate study [220] reported that the protective effect of T. serpyllum L. extracts against protein oxidation is closely linked to the presence of bioactive constituents, particularly phenolic monoterpenes such as thymol and carvacrol. In the case of rosemary (S. rosmarinus Spenn.), more than 90% of its antioxidant capacity has been attributed to carnosic acid and carnosol, two diterpenoid compounds known as potent inhibitors of lipid peroxidation [214].
Medicinal plants represent a valuable source of natural antioxidants, which play a crucial role in improving the overall quality of meat products by delaying lipid and protein oxidation, preserving color and aroma, maintaining nutritional value, and ultimately extending shelf life. Their incorporation into meat processing aligns with growing consumer demand for clean-label products, offering a natural alternative to synthetic additives while enhancing product safety and sensory attributes. In addition to their technological benefits, these plant-derived antioxidants contribute to healthier and more sustainable food production, supporting both human health and environmentally responsible practices.

5. Antimicrobial Activity of Medicinal Plants in Meat

A wide range of bioactive compounds with antimicrobial and antioxidant properties are utilized in the food industry, including phenolic compounds, ascorbic acid, carotenoids, and tocopherols [14]. In addition to delaying spoilage and improving sensory attributes, many of these compounds are also effective in inhibiting the growth of foodborne pathogens.
Several medicinal plants from the group presented in Table 3 have demonstrated significant antimicrobial activity, making them promising candidates for use as natural preservatives in meat products. Numerous studies have reported the ability of plant extracts to inhibit microbial proliferation in various meat matrices [229,230]. For example, extracts from S. officinalis L., Eucalyptus spp., S. rosmarinus Spenn., and Thymus spp. have been shown to exert antibacterial effects against common meat-contaminating pathogens such as S. aureus, E. coli, and K. pneumoniae [231,232,233,234,235].
The antimicrobial mechanisms proposed for plant-derived polyphenols include several modes of action [236]: (1) disruption of bacterial membrane functionality, including leakage of cellular contents via hydroxyl groups, inhibition of metabolic enzymes, and dissipation of ATP-based energy; (2) alteration of medium pH and internal cellular pH as a result of acid dissociation and proton accumulation, leading to impaired membrane permeability; (3) interference with the bacterial electron transport chain, such as inhibition of NADH oxidation by organic acids, thereby reducing the availability of reducing equivalents. Table 5 summarizes the medicinal plants with documented antimicrobial activity in meat systems, including information on the anatomical part used, type of meat product, concentration, storage conditions, and observed microbial inhibition.
Based on the data summarized in Table 5, it is evident that specific plant extracts have demonstrated promising antimicrobial activity across different meat types and storage conditions, particularly against key spoilage and pathogenic bacteria.
Flavonoids, a class of polyphenolic compounds, are widely recognized for their antibacterial properties, which are mediated through multiple mechanisms of action [260].
Suriyaprom et al. [261] proposed several such mechanisms, including (i) disruption of the bacterial cell membrane via interaction with phospholipid bilayers, leading to increased permeability, leakage of cytoplasmic contents, ion imbalance, and loss of membrane potential; (ii) interference with gene regulation and intercellular communication; and (iii) the suppression of metabolism and enzyme activity.
Medicinal plants listed in Table 5 have demonstrated antimicrobial activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Shamsudin et al. observed that specific structural features of flavonoids, such as hydroxylation at positions C5, C7, C3, and C4 and the presence of geranyl or prenyl groups at C6, may enhance their antibacterial efficacy. Notably, the hydroxyl group at position C3 of ring C appears to be critical for activity. Flavonoids such as quercetin, kaempferol, and myricetin, frequently found in medicinal plants, all possess this structural feature. An essential aspect of flavonoid functionality lies in their amphiphilic nature, which facilitates membrane penetration and enables them to exert antibacterial effects within the bacterial cell [260].
In addition to flavonoids, many medicinal plants are rich in essential oils, which contain compounds with strong antibacterial action. For instance, the essential oil of S. rosmarinus Spenn. has shown bacteriostatic effects against Salmonella typhimurium and Listeria monocytogenes in poultry fillets, effects attributed to its major constituents, 1,8-cineole and α-pinene [247].
Some medicinal plants also contain fatty acids that may contribute to antimicrobial activity and preservation effects in meat systems [262]. N. sativa L. is particularly rich in oleic and linoleic acids, which have been associated with antibacterial and antifungal activities [263]. Similarly, oleic and linoleic acids have been reported in L. nobilis L. [264], S. rosmarinus Spenn. [265], A. citrodora Paláu [266], and U. dioica L. [267], while C. verum J.Presl contains lauric, oleic, and linoleic acids [268] and C. sativus L. contains small amounts of lauric acid [269]. Although their antimicrobial efficacy may be less potent than that of polyphenols [270], the presence of these fatty acids could act synergistically by disrupting microbial membranes and thus contribute to the overall preservation features of medicinal plants in meat products.
In conclusion, medicinal plants represent a promising natural alternative for controlling microbial contamination in meat products owing to their rich content in flavonoids, essential oils, and other bioactive compounds with well-documented antimicrobial mechanisms. Their efficacy against a broad spectrum of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria has been demonstrated in various meat systems. However, the effectiveness of plant-derived antimicrobials is influenced by multiple factors, including compound structure, concentration, interactions with the meat matrix, and storage conditions. Further research is necessary to optimize their application, assess potential synergistic effects, and validate their functionality under industrial-scale processing conditions.

6. Plants That Remove Specific Meat Aromas and Improve/Protect Meat Color

Certain medicinal and aromatic plants have been traditionally used not only to enhance the flavor of meat, but also to mask or neutralize undesirable odors such as the characteristic “fishy” smell often associated with certain meat types. One of the earliest examples is Perilla frutescens (L.) Britton, an edible and medicinal plant used in cooking to impart a distinctive aroma and reduce fishy odors in meat preparations [271]. Similarly, S. rosmarinus Spenn. extract has been identified as an effective agent for odor control [272]. This effect is attributed to its content of carnosic acid and carnosol, diterpenes that can suppress the formation of volatile organic compounds responsible for rancid or off-flavors in raw lamb meat [273]. The incorporation of plant extracts in commercial formulations for deodorizing marine fish further supports the trend towards natural, eco-friendly odor-removing agents [274].
Several plants have also shown the ability to modulate the aroma profile of lamb meat. For instance, the use of maguey leaves (Agave salmiana Otto ex Salm-Dyck) in the preparation of traditional Mexican barbacoa influences both flavor and meat quality during steaming [275]. Additionally, the dietary inclusion of Arnica montana L. essential oil has been shown to affect the fatty acid profile of lamb meat, potentially altering its aroma during cooking and storage [276]. These findings suggest that the chemical composition of plant-based additives can interact with lipids and volatile precursors in meat, thus impacting the final sensory attributes [277,278,279]. Altogether, the evidence supports the use of selected plants and their extracts not only for microbial and oxidative stabilization, but also for aroma enhancement and odor correction, aligning with clean-label strategies and consumer expectations for natural meat products.
In addition to their antioxidant and antimicrobial effects, medicinal plants can also influence the color attributes of meat products, a critical quality factor affecting consumer perception and acceptability. Color changes can result either from the direct coloration effects of plant pigments or from indirect mechanisms, such as the stabilization of myoglobin and the inhibition of lipid oxidation, which prevents discoloration during storage. Several studies have investigated how the incorporation of medicinal plants or their extracts affects instrumental color parameters, specifically L* (lightness), a* (redness), and b* (yellowness), in various meat matrices. These findings are summarized in Table 6, which presents the type of plant used, the meat product tested, and the observed changes in color parameters.
The color of meat products is primarily determined by the pigment myoglobin, a globular protein consisting of eight α-helical chains and a heme prosthetic group. The central iron atom (Fe) in the heme group forms four coordinate bonds with the nitrogen atoms of the porphyrin ring, one bond with the proximal histidine residue (His-93), and a sixth reversible binding site that interacts with small diatomic molecules such as oxygen (O2), carbon monoxide (CO), water (H2O), and nitric oxide (NO). The color variations observed in meat are closely related to both the ligand bound at this sixth coordination site and the oxidation state of the iron atom. Depending on these factors, myoglobin can exist in four main forms, each associated with a distinct color: deoxymyoglobin (Fe2+): no ligand, purple-red (freshly cut muscle); oxymyoglobin (Fe2+ + O2): bright red (oxygenated surface); carboxymyoglobin (Fe2+ + CO): cherry red (CO-bound); and metmyoglobin ( Fe3+ + H2O): brown, oxidized form [282]. A water ligand is present at iron’s sixth position in the metmyoglobin. A relationship exists between the amount of metmyoglobin in meat products and the amount of protein oxidation. A longer storage period increases the amount of metmyoglobin. The oxidation process causes meat discoloration because pro-oxidants can combine with oxymyoglobin to produce metmyoglobin. The addition of antioxidants to fresh red meat prevents lipid oxidation and metmyoglobin production (Figure 3) [283,284].
The instrumental color parameters of meat, L* (lightness), a* (redness), and b* (yellowness), can be influenced by the incorporation of medicinal plant extracts, primarily due to their antioxidant and antimicrobial activities. These bioactive properties contribute to the stabilization of myoglobin, inhibition of lipid and protein oxidation, and prevention of discoloration. Most of the medicinal plants listed in Table 6 demonstrated a tendency to reduce the L value*, indicating a darker appearance of the meat. This effect may be related to the inhibition of oxidative reactions that would otherwise lead to increased lightness due to myoglobin degradation. Notably, three medicinal plants, E. uniflora L., P. nigrum L., and S. officinarum L., were exceptions, showing increased L* values, likely due to their inherent dark pigmentation or the presence of colored phytochemicals that interact differently with the meat matrix. The redness parameter (a*) increased in nearly all meat products treated with medicinal plant extracts, with few exceptions (Table 6). This suggests that the bioactive compounds present in these plants play a role in inhibiting myoglobin oxidation, thereby preserving the characteristic red color of fresh meat. Natural antioxidants from plants such as D. ambrosioides (L.) Mosyakin & Clemants, C. longa L., P. nigrum L., N. velutina Wooton, Q. alba L., S. rosmarinus Spenn., S. aromaticum L., T. vulgaris L., and T. foenum-graecum L. have demonstrated efficacy in delaying discoloration through the stabilization of myoglobin. Their rich content in phenolic acids and flavonoids contributes to this effect by preventing oxidative changes that would otherwise convert oxymyoglobin to metmyoglobin, the latter being responsible for the undesirable brown color in meat. As a result, these plant-derived compounds not only enhance the visual appeal of meat products but also contribute to shelf-life extension and clean-label preservation strategies. The observed increase in yellowness (b*) in meat products containing medicinal plants is primarily attributed to the presence of natural pigments in the plant material. In particular, C. longa L. contributes to elevated b* values due to the intense yellow hue of curcumin, its principal pigment. It is important to note that color parameters (L*, a*, and b*) are influenced not only by the plant species, but also by the dosage applied and the processing conditions used during meat preparation. Overall, medicinal plant extracts can significantly enhance meat color stability by inhibiting oxidative processes, thereby maintaining visual appeal and consumer acceptance in both fresh and processed meat products.
In summary, medicinal plants can contribute significantly to maintaining or enhancing the color of meat products through mechanisms such as myoglobin stabilization, inhibition of oxidation, and the contribution of natural pigments. Improvements in redness (a*) and yellowness (b*) parameters have been observed in multiple studies, often correlating with the presence of phenolic compounds and plant-derived colorants like curcumin. However, the impact on color is not always predictable. High concentrations or strongly pigmented extracts may cause undesirable darkening or deviations from the expected color profile, potentially affecting consumer acceptance. These findings emphasize the importance of carefully selecting plant species, optimizing dosage, and considering product-specific processing conditions when aiming to preserve or enhance meat color using natural additives.

7. New Potential Medicinal Plants for Application in Meat Products

Several medicinal plants with promising antioxidant and antimicrobial properties have not yet been tested in meat systems, despite their established phytochemical richness and traditional use in natural therapies. Species such as Polygonum aviculare L., Origanum majorana L., Bidens tripartite L., Calendula officinalis L., Matricaria chamomilla L. (flowers), Eucalyptus spp., Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (L.) Spreng., Sanguisorba officinalis L., and Sanguisorba minor Scop. have been widely studied for their polyphenolic composition, antioxidant capacity, and antibacterial effects, suggesting a strong potential as natural preservatives for extending the shelf life of meat products without relying on synthetic additives [230,285,286,287,288,289,290,291]. Furthermore, extracts from Vaccinium subg. oxycoccus, Alchemilla vulgaris L., and Filipendula ulmaria (L.) Maxim. have demonstrated significant antioxidant and antimicrobial activities, positioning them as promising candidates for future application in meat preservation [292,293,294]. Incorporating these underutilized medicinal plants into meat formulations could contribute not only to improved oxidative stability and spoilage control, but also to added nutritional value and clean-label innovation.

8. Clean-Label Meat Products Enriched with Medicinal Plants

The “clean-label” concept has emerged as a major trend in the food industry, extending beyond meat to a wide range of processed products. It refers to efforts to eliminate or minimize artificial additives and replace them with natural, recognizable ingredients. However, a universally accepted definition is lacking, as interpretations of “clean” and “natural” differ across consumers, manufacturers, and regulators. In general, clean-label products are characterized by a simplified ingredient list, the use of naturally derived substances, and the absence of synthetic additives, flavors, or preservatives [295]. According to the Institute of Food Technologists, a clean-label food should include a minimal number of ingredients, only recognizable names, and no synthetic chemicals perceived as “unhealthy” or “unfamiliar” by consumers [296].
The growing demand for clean-label meat products has led to a shift from synthetic additives toward natural alternatives derived from herbs and medicinal plants. Clean-label strategies prioritize transparency, simplicity, and the use of recognizable ingredients, aligning with consumer expectations for safer and more “natural” foods.
Medicinal plants rich in antioxidants, antimicrobials, and pigments provide functional benefits that allow them to replace traditional preservatives such as nitrites, sulfites, and phosphates, which are often perceived as undesirable. For example, extracts of S. officinalis L., O. vulgare L., and S. rosmarinus Spenn. have demonstrated strong antioxidant properties in meat matrices, contributing to oxidative stability and shelf-life extension [209,213,214,216]. Similarly, C. sinensis L. extracts are being evaluated as natural preservatives with dual health-promoting and technological functions [200].
Several studies [201,209,222] have shown that the inclusion of plant extracts not only improves quality parameters (e.g., lipid oxidation and color preservation) but also enables label simplification, which increases consumer trust and marketability. These ingredients are perceived as “clean” due to their botanical origin, multifunctionality, and historical use in human nutrition.
Nonetheless, while the clean-label appeal is strong, regulatory classifications of some plant-derived ingredients (e.g., colorants or extracts with concentrated actives) may vary, and standardization remains a challenge. Future research should focus on characterizing the bioactive dose ranges needed for efficacy without compromising flavor or appearance and on validating their technological functionality in real-scale formulations.

9. Emerging Technologies for the Application of Medicinal Plants in Meat Systems

Conventional methods involving the direct incorporation of powders, essential oils, or extracts were traditionally utilized to incorporate medicinal herbs into meat systems. Advancements in food technology have offered innovative methods to improve the stability, bioavailability, and functioning of phytochemicals in meat preservation.
Nanoencapsulation and nanocarriers. Nanoencapsulation of curcumin provides a viable strategy for improving its utilization in the meat industry and mitigating its intrinsic limitations, including poor solubility and stability. Diverse nanocarrier systems, including liposomes, polymer nanoparticles, and bilayer coatings, have been designed to enhance curcumin’s bioavailability and functional attributes, such as antioxidant and antibacterial efficacy [297,298,299]. The encapsulation of catechin and epicatechin in bovine serum albumin nanoparticles, enhancing their stability and antioxidant potential, which could be beneficial for applications in the meat industry to improve food quality and shelf life. Catechin-loaded niosomes exhibited high encapsulation efficiency and stability, making them suitable for food applications [300]. Additionally, the use of nanocarriers can optimize the delivery of catechins, ensuring sustained release and improved sensory characteristics in meat products [301]. Rosemary oil-based nanoemulsions and nanocapsules exhibit superior antioxidant properties and thermal stability compared to their free oil counterparts, making them viable natural preservatives against oxidation in meat products [302].
Smart and active packaging. Plant extract-based biodegradable films and coatings also represent an emerging field for extending meat shelf life. Edible whey protein films containing ginger and rosemary essential oils significantly inhibited microbial growth and lipid oxidation in lamb meat [303]. Such packaging systems combine preservation with sustainability and consumer appeal.
Advanced extraction techniques like microwave-assisted extraction and ultrasound-assisted extraction yield higher concentrations of beneficial phytochemicals, which can be synergistically combined with high-pressure processing to enhance meat preservation and quality [304,305].
These technologies, in general, represent a shift from traditional additive-based preservation to integrated systems that combine medicinal plants with innovative processing and packaging methods. While their potential is considerable, challenges related to scalability, cost, sensory impact, regulatory approval, and consumer acceptance still hinder large-scale application. Future research should refine these approaches to enable safe, sustainable, and economically viable implementation in the meat industry.

10. Safety Considerations: Toxicological and Allergenic Aspects of Medicinal Plants

The incorporation of medicinal plants into meat products requires careful evaluation of their toxicological and allergenic potential. Although medicinal plants are generally regarded as safe at culinary levels, several species included in this review have been associated with toxic and allergic reactions in sensitive individuals. D. ambrosioides (L.) Mosyakin & Clemants represents an example of a plant with highly toxic essential oils, where overdoses have been associated with acute gastroenteritis and systemic toxic manifestations. Nonetheless, such adverse effects are primarily linked to the concentrated essential oil, whereas the seeds and leaves are traditionally consumed in small amounts after cooking. Thermal processing reduces the toxic potential by decomposing compounds such as saponins and oxalic acid, which are naturally present in many vegetables and plant-derived foods but are considered harmless at low dietary levels [38,306].
S. officinalis L. is considered safe for the majority of people when utilized in standard culinary or therapeutic doses. However, sage also contains compounds that contribute to its allergenic and toxic properties, mainly due to the presence of thujones and camphor. The essential oil of S. officinalis L. is rich in α-thujone and β-thujone, which can be neurotoxic in high concentrations [307]. Environmental conditions greatly affect the composition of the essential oil [308], and international rules [309] control the quantities of α-thujone to reduce toxicity concerns. α-Thujone is regulated due to its neurotoxic potential, with maximum levels established in the European Union under Regulation (EC) No. 1334/2008. The combined content of α- and β-thujone is limited to 5 mg/kg in foodstuffs and non-alcoholic beverages, 10 mg/kg in alcoholic beverages containing ≤25% vol. alcohol, 25 mg/kg in other foods and beverages, and up to 35 mg/kg only in bitters. Another component, camphor, can also irritate sensitive people’s skin and cause allergic responses [307,310].
C. sinensis (L.) Kuntze can exhibit toxicity under certain conditions, primarily related to its consumption patterns and chemical composition. Notable side effects include hepatotoxicity and gastrointestinal disorders, with increased toxicity observed in fasting conditions and specific populations, such as pregnant women [311]. Additionally, the plant is a hyperaccumulator of potentially toxic elements such as aluminum, nickel, and lead, which can pose health risks if consumed in high quantities [312]. No Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) has been defined for green tea catechins; however, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) [313] has suggested that supplemental doses of ≥800 mg/day of EGCG may present a risk of hepatotoxicity, whereas consumption of catechin in conventional green tea infusions is regarded as safe.
While moderate dietary intake of coumarin-rich foods is generally considered safe, excessive consumption can lead to hepatotoxicity and other harmful effects. Thus, understanding dosage, route of administration, and individual metabolic differences is essential for assessing the safety of coumarin-containing products [314].
Several bioactive compounds occurring in medicinal plants are subject to international safety limits due to their toxicological profiles. Coumarin, present in Cinnamomum spp., has been associated with hepatotoxicity, leading the EFSA to establish a tolerable daily intake of 0.1 mg/kg body weight per day [315]. Curcumin, the main pigment in C. longa L. and approved as food additive E100, has an ADI of 0–3 mg/kg body weight per day as defined by JECFA and EFSA [316]. Eugenol, the characteristic phenolic compound of S. aromaticum L. (clove), has been evaluated by JECFA, which set an ADI of 0–2.5 mg/kg body weight per day [317]. These regulatory thresholds provide guidance for safe use of such compounds in foods, including meat products, ensuring that functional benefits can be exploited without exceeding toxicological limits.
The food industry has largely overcome these risks by selecting safer species or chemotypes (e.g., C. verum J. Presl with lower coumarin), employing dried plant material instead of essential oils, and using standardized extracts with established maximum permitted levels, such as rosemary extract (E392).
In addition to toxicological aspects, allergenicity is another consideration for consumer safety. Several medicinal plants have been linked to allergic reactions in humans, ranging from contact dermatitis to severe food allergy.
T. foenum-graecum L. (fenugreek) has been identified as an allergenic substance, particularly among individuals with sensitivities to other legumes. Several studies report cases of allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, following the ingestion of fenugreek-containing foods, such as curry and spiced dishes [318,319,320]. N. sativa L., another medicinal herb, may surprisingly increase allergy problems in sensitive persons, requiring caution in using it. The major component, thymoquinone, has been implicated in allergic responses, although its precise role remains under investigation [321].
P. nigrum L., commonly known as black pepper, can indeed cause allergic reactions, particularly in occupational settings. A case study highlighted a 52-year-old woman who developed allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis after prolonged exposure to black pepper dust [322]. Conversely, P. nigrum L. extracts, particularly piperine, have shown potential in alleviating allergic responses in various models by modulating immune responses and reducing Th2 cytokine production [323].
Although the risk in meat products is generally low at culinary doses, awareness of such potential allergens is important to ensure proper labeling and prevent adverse reactions in sensitive consumers.
Overall, addressing toxicological and allergenic considerations is essential to ensure that the application of medicinal plants in the meat industry remains both safe and acceptable to consumers. By adhering to established regulatory limits, choosing appropriate plant parts and forms, and ensuring transparent labeling, the food industry can successfully harness the functional benefits of medicinal plants while minimizing potential risks.

11. Challenges in Choosing Plants for the Meat Industry

The use of plant extracts in the meat industry presents several challenges, ranging from technological and sensory limitations to regulatory constraints and consumer acceptance issues. Some plant-based ingredients may impart unwanted flavors or aromas, or induce undesirable color changes in the final product. Another key challenge is determining the optimal dosage—one that ensures sufficient antioxidant or antimicrobial efficacy without negatively affecting the product’s quality attributes. Moreover, the potential interactions between plant compounds and other food ingredients must be carefully evaluated, as they may influence bioavailability, functionality, or stability. The incorporation of plant-based components in meat products, whether as natural preservatives or functional fortifiers, is a complex, multidisciplinary task that requires collaboration among food technologists, researchers, nutritionists, regulatory bodies, and, critically, consumer engagement.
Despite the promising results demonstrated by medicinal plants in improving oxidative stability in meat products, several challenges remain. Variability in plant composition due to geographic origin, harvesting time, and extraction method can influence antioxidant efficacy. Additionally, the organoleptic impact (e.g., flavor or odor intensity) of certain extracts may limit their acceptability in specific meat matrices. Furthermore, the majority of available studies are conducted under controlled laboratory conditions, and more research is needed to validate these findings in industrial-scale applications. Standardization of doses, delivery systems (e.g., nanoemulsions and films), and synergy with other natural additives are also areas that require further investigation.
The use of crude plant extracts in meat preservation is inherently variable, as they contain complex mixtures of phytochemicals rather than single active compounds. The concentration of phenolics, flavonoids, and essential oils differs according to species, plant organ, cultivation conditions, and harvest stage. For example, S. rosmarinus Spenn. leaves are particularly rich in carnosic and rosmarinic acids, while O. vulgare L. contains higher levels of carvacrol and thymol, resulting in distinct preservation outcomes. Post-harvest factors, such as drying method, storage, and extraction process (aqueous, ethanolic, enzymatic, or supercritical), further modulate the chemical profile and activity of extracts. Consequently, even samples from the same species may exhibit marked differences in antioxidant and antimicrobial efficacy. Moreover, concentration-dependent effects are critical, as low doses may act as effective preservatives while higher doses can impair sensory quality or display pro-oxidant activity. This variability complicates standardization and reproducibility but also offers opportunities to tailor extracts to specific meat matrices by optimizing harvesting, processing, and marker compound selection. Addressing these challenges is essential for translating laboratory findings into reliable industrial applications.
A critical limitation in the replacement of synthetic additives with plant-based alternatives lies in the control of Clostridium botulinum, a pathogen of major concern in meat safety. To date, sodium nitrite (E250) remains the most effective and widely used additive for inhibiting the germination and outgrowth of C. botulinum spores in cured meats. However, this compound is increasingly controversial, as its interaction with amines in meat can lead to the formation of nitrosamines, compounds classified as potentially carcinogenic. While medicinal plants and natural extracts show promising antioxidant and antimicrobial properties, no plant-derived compound has yet demonstrated the same level of efficacy against C. botulinum under industrial conditions. This highlights the need for further research into safe, effective, and multifunctional alternatives that can provide both microbial control and consumer acceptability in clean-label meat products.
Therefore, addressing these challenges requires integrative approaches that combine food technology, microbiology, and consumer research in order to safely and effectively implement plant-derived solutions in meat processing.

12. Conclusions

The increasing consumer demand for minimally processed and additive-free foods is encouraging the meat industry to replace synthetic preservatives with natural alternatives. Medicinal plants, rich in antioxidants and antimicrobials, offer a promising solution that aligns with clean-label trends while maintaining meat quality, freshness, and shelf life. These plants not only inhibit microbial growth and lipid oxidation but also protect meat color by stabilizing myoglobin and delaying rancidity.
Based on the reviewed literature, the most frequently used medicinal plants in meat products are S. rosmarinus Spenn., C. sinensis (L.) Kuntze, N. sativa L., C. longa L., and Thymus spp. Their effectiveness depends largely on the extraction method, which plays a crucial role in identifying and preserving bioactive compounds suitable for safe food applications.
Overall, the integration of medicinal plants in meat processing represents a sustainable and economically viable approach to reducing the reliance on synthetic additives. This strategy supports both public health and innovation in the food industry by fulfilling consumer expectations for natural, safe, and functional meat products.
Nevertheless, their large-scale application faces regulatory hurdles, since certain bioactive compounds are subject to strict maximum limits (e.g., thujone in S. officinalis L., coumarin in Cinnamomum spp., and eugenol in S. aromaticum L.), while only a few standardized extracts such as rosemary extract (E392) are currently authorized as food additives. Moreover, approval processes, labeling requirements, and harmonization across international markets remain challenges that must be addressed to ensure both safety and consumer acceptance.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/plants14172737/s1: Figure S1. Publication trends for medicinal plants used in the meat industry (based on data retrieved from Pubmed and Lens databases), Table S1. The main chemical structures identified in medicinal plants.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.I.V. and A.C.T.; investigation, C.A.R., A.C.V., and A.G.T.; resources, S.I.V.; data curation, C.A.R. and A.C.V.; writing—original draft preparation, S.I.V. and A.C.T.; writing—review and editing, S.I.V. and A.C.T.; visualization, S.I.V., A.C.T., and C.A.R.; supervision, S.I.V.; project administration, S.I.V.; funding acquisition S.I.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The APC was supported by the University of Oradea.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the University of Oradea through the grant “Excellence scientific research related to priority fields with capitalization through technology transfer: INO-TRANSFER-UO-2nd edition”, project no. 250/08.11.2022, which provided logistical support for this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Aminzare, M.; Hashemi, M.; Ansarian, E.; Bimkar, M.; Azar, H.H.; Mehrasbi, M.R.; Daneshamooz, S.; Raeisi, M.; Jannat, B.; Afshari, A. Using Natural Antioxidants in Meat and Meat Products as Preservatives: A Review. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci. 2019, 7, 417–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. 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]
  3. Kumar, Y.; Yadav, D.N.; Ahmad, T.; Narsaiah, K. Recent Trends in the Use of Natural Antioxidants for Meat and Meat Products. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2015, 14, 796–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Caleja, C.; Barros, L.; Antonio, A.L.; Oliveira, M.B.P.P.; Ferreira, I.C.F.R. A Comparative Study between Natural and Synthetic Antioxidants: Evaluation of Their Performance after Incorporation into Biscuits. Food Chem. 2017, 216, 342–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Regulation-1333/2008-EN-Additives-EUR-Lex. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1333/oj (accessed on 4 April 2024).
  6. 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] [PubMed]
  7. Masoodi, F.A. Advances in Use of Natural Antioxidants as Food Additives for Improving the Oxidative Stability of Meat Products. Madridge J. Food Technol. 2016, 1, 10–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Boskovic, M.; Glisic, M.; Djordjevic, J.; Vranesevic, J.; Djordjevic, V.; Baltic, M.Z. Preservation of Meat and Meat Products Using Nanoencapsulated Thyme and Oregano Essential Oils. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019; Volume 333, p. 012038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Bojorges, H.; Ríos-Corripio, M.A.; Hernández-Cázares, A.S.; Hidalgo-Contreras, J.V.; Contreras-Oliva, A. Effect of the Application of an Edible Film with Turmeric (Curcuma longa L.) on the Oxidative Stability of Meat. Food Sci. Nutr. 2020, 8, 4308–4319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Alañón, M.E.; Alarcón, M.; Marchante, L.; Díaz-Maroto, M.C.; Pérez-Coello, M.S. Extraction of Natural Flavorings with Antioxidant Capacity from Cooperage By-Products by Green Extraction Procedure with Subcritical Fluids. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017, 103, 222–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Jiang, J.; Xiong, Y.L. Natural Antioxidants as Food and Feed Additives to Promote Health Benefits and Quality of Meat Products: A Review. Meat Sci. 2016, 120, 107–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ahn, J.; Grun, I.; Mustapha, A. Effects of Plant Extracts on Microbial Growth, Color Change, and Lipid Oxidation in Cooked Beef. Food Microbiol. 2007, 24, 7–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Olvera-Aguirre, G.; Piñeiro-Vázquez, Á.T.; Sanginés-García, J.R.; Sánchez Zárate, A.; Ochoa-Flores, A.A.; Segura-Campos, M.R.; Vargas-Bello-Pérez, E.; Chay-Canul, A.J. Using Plant-Based Compounds as Preservatives for Meat Products: A Review. Heliyon 2023, 9, e17071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Petcu, C.D.; Mihai, O.D.; Tăpăloagă, D.; Gheorghe-Irimia, R.-A.; Pogurschi, E.N.; Militaru, M.; Borda, C.; Ghimpețeanu, O.-M. Effects of Plant-Based Antioxidants in Animal Diets and Meat Products: A Review. Foods 2023, 12, 1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Dissanayake, K.; Rifky, M.; Zokirov, K.; Jesfar, M.; Farmonov, J.; Sanaev, E.; Makhmayorov, J.; Samadiy, M. Impact of Curing Salt (Nitrites) on the Processed Meat Products and Its Alternatives: A Review. New Mater. Compd. Appl. 2024, 8, 254–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Jia, J.; Peng, H.; Qian, Q.; Pan, Z.; Liu, D. Nitrite and Nitrate in Meat Processing: Functions and Alternatives. Curr. Res. Food Sci. 2023, 6, 100470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Sorour, M.; Mehanni, A.-H.; Mahmoud, E.-S.; El-Hawashy, R. Nitrate, Nitrite and N-Nitrosamine in Meat Products. J. Sohag Agrisci. (JSAS) 2023, 8, 121–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Shakil, M.H.; Trisha, A.T.; Rahman, M.; Talukdar, S.; Kobun, R.; Huda, N.; Zzaman, W. Nitrites in Cured Meats, Health Risk Issues, Alternatives to Nitrites: A Review. Foods 2022, 11, 3355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Cygan-Szczegielniak, D.; Karolina, S. Effect of Freezing and Cooking on Sodium Nitrite Content in Processed Meat Products. 2023. Available online: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4578613 (accessed on 3 August 2024).
  20. Cui, H.; Gabriel, A.A.; Nakano, H. Antimicrobial Efficacies of Plant Extracts and Sodium Nitrite against Clostridium botulinum. Food Control 2010, 21, 1030–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Orădan, A.C.; Tocai (Moțoc), A.C.; Rosan, C.A.; Vicas, S.I. Fruit Extracts Incorporated into Meat Products as Natural Antioxidants, Preservatives, and Colorants. Processes 2024, 12, 2756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. 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]
  23. Obileke, K.; Onyeaka, H.; Omoregbe, O.; Makaka, G.; Nwokolo, N.; Mukumba, P. Bioenergy from Bio-Waste: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Trend in Scientific Research from 1998–2018. Biomass Convers. Biorefin. 2022, 12, 1077–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Omoregbe, O.; Mustapha, A.N.; Steinberger-Wilckens, R.; El-Kharouf, A.; Onyeaka, H. Carbon Capture Technologies for Climate Change Mitigation: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Scientific Discourse during 1998–2018. Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 1200–1212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Fadda, A.; Sanna, D.; Sakar, E.H.; Gharby, S.; Mulas, M.; Medda, S.; Yesilcubuk, N.S.; Karaca, A.C.; Gozukirmizi, C.K.; Lucarini, M.; et al. Innovative and Sustainable Technologies to Enhance the Oxidative Stability of Vegetable Oils. Sustainability 2022, 14, 849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Oukerrou, M.A.; Tilaoui, M.; Mouse, H.A.; Leouifoudi, I.; Jaafari, A.; Zyad, A. Chemical Composition and Cytotoxic and Antibacterial Activities of the Essential Oil of Aloysia citriodora Palau Grown in Morocco. Adv. Pharmacol. Pharm. Sci. 2017, 2017, 7801924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hosseini, M.; Jamshidi, A.; Raeisi, M.; Azizzadeh, M. The Antibacterial and Antioxidant Effects of Clove (Syzygium aromaticum) and Lemon Verbena (Aloysia citriodora) Essential Oils. J. Hum. Environ. Health Promot. 2019, 5, 86–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Al-Maharik, N.; Salama, Y.; Al-Hajj, N.; Jaradat, N.; Jobran, N.T.; Warad, I.; Hamdan, L.; Alrob, M.A.; Sawafta, A.; Hidmi, A. Chemical Composition, Anticancer, Antimicrobial Activity of Aloysia citriodora Palau Essential Oils from Four Different Locations in Palestine. BMC Complement. Med. Ther. 2024, 24, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Felgines, C.; Fraisse, D.; Besson, C.; Vasson, M.-P.; Texier, O. Bioavailability of Lemon Verbena (Aloysia triphylla) Polyphenols in Rats: Impact of Colonic Inflammation. Br. J. Nutr. 2014, 111, 1773–1781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Polumackanycz, M.; Petropoulos, S.A.; Añibarro-Ortega, M.; Pinela, J.; Barros, L.; Plenis, A.; Viapiana, A. Chemical Composition and Antioxidant Properties of Common and Lemon Verbena. Antioxidants 2022, 11, 2247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Luo, K.-W.; Ko, C.-H.; Yue, G.G.-L.; Lee, J.K.-M.; Li, K.-K.; Lee, M.; Li, G.; Fung, K.-P.; Leung, P.-C.; Lau, C.B.-S. Green Tea (Camellia sinensis) Extract Inhibits Both the Metastasis and Osteolytic Components of Mammary Cancer 4T1 Lesions in Mice. J. Nutr. Biochem. 2014, 25, 395–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Yan, Y.; Ren, Y.; Li, X.; Zhang, X.; Guo, H.; Han, Y.; Hu, J. A Polysaccharide from Green Tea (Camellia sinensis L.) Protects Human Retinal Endothelial Cells against Hydrogen Peroxide-Induced Oxidative Injury and Apoptosis. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2018, 115, 600–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Zhao, T.; Li, C.; Wang, S.; Song, X. Green Tea (Camellia sinensis): A Review of Its Phytochemistry, Pharmacology, and Toxicology. Molecules 2022, 27, 3909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Balaji, G.; Chalamaiah, M.; Hanumanna, P.; Vamsikrishna, B.; Jagadeesh Kumar, D.; Venu Babu, V. Mast Cell Stabilizing and Anti-Anaphylactic Activity of Aqueous Extract of Green Tea (Camellia sinensis). Int. J. Vet. Sci. Med. 2014, 2, 89–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Santiago, J.A.; Cardoso, M.D.G.; Batista, L.R.; Castro, E.M.D.; Teixeira, M.L.; Pires, M.F. Essential Oil from Chenopodium ambrosioides L.: Secretory Structures, Antibacterial and Antioxidant Activities. Acta Sci. Biol. Sci. 2016, 38, 139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kasali, F.M.; Tusiimire, J.; Kadima, J.N.; Agaba, A.G. Ethnomedical Uses, Chemical Constituents, and Evidence-Based Pharmacological Properties of Chenopodium ambrosioides L.: Extensive Overview. Future J. Pharm. Sci. 2021, 7, 153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kamdem, B.P.; Le Doux Kamto, E.; Paumo, H.K.; Katata-Seru, L.M.; Pegnyemb, D.E.; Igne, F.E. Chemical Constituents, Ethnomedicinal Uses, Pharmacology, and Toxicity of Dysphania ambrosioides (L.) Mosyakin & Clemants, Formerly Chenopodium ambrosioides L. Nat. Prod. J. 2022, 12, e200921196661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Muhayimana, A.; Chalchat, J.-C.; Garry, R.-P. Chemical Composition of Essential Oils of Chenopodium ambrosioides L. from Rwanda. J. Essent. Oil Res. 1998, 10, 690–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ouadja, B.; Katawa, G.; Toudji, G.A.; Layland, L.; Gbekley, E.H.; Ritter, M.; Anani, K.; Ameyapoh, Y.; Karou, S.D. Anti-Inflammatory, Antibacterial and Antioxidant Activities of Chenopodium ambrosioides L. (Chenopodiaceae) Extracts. J. Appl. Biosci. 2021, 162, 16764–16794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Narayanankutty, A.; Kunnath, K.; Alfarhan, A.; Rajagopal, R.; Ramesh, V. Chemical Composition of Cinnamomum verum Leaf and Flower Essential Oils and Analysis of Their Antibacterial, Insecticidal, and Larvicidal Properties. Molecules 2021, 26, 6303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Al-Mijalli, S.H.; Mrabti, H.N.; El Hachlafi, N.; El Kamili, T.; Elbouzidi, A.; Abdallah, E.M.; Flouchi, R.; Assaggaf, H.; Qasem, A.; Zengin, G.; et al. Integrated Analysis of Antimicrobial, Antioxidant, and Phytochemical Properties of Cinnamomum verum: A Comprehensive In Vitro and In Silico Study. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2023, 110, 104700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Farias, A.P.P.; Monteiro, O.D.S.; Da Silva, J.K.R.; Figueiredo, P.L.B.; Rodrigues, A.A.C.; Monteiro, I.N.; Maia, J.G.S. Chemical Composition and Biological Activities of Two Chemotype-Oils from Cinnamomum verum J. Presl Growing in North Brazil. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 57, 3176–3183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Phu, H.H.; Pham Van, K.; Tran, T.H.; Pham, D.T.N. Extraction, Chemical Compositions and Biological Activities of Essential Oils of Cinnamomum verum Cultivated in Vietnam. Processes 2022, 10, 1713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kuttithodi, A.M.; Narayanankutty, A.; Visakh, N.U.; Job, J.T.; Pathrose, B.; Olatunji, O.J.; Alfarhan, A.; Ramesh, V. Chemical Composition of the Cinnamomum malabatrum Leaf Essential Oil and Analysis of Its Antioxidant, Enzyme Inhibitory and Antibacterial Activities. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Srivastava, R.; Ahmed, H.; Dixit, R.K.; Saraf, S.A. Crocus sativus L.: A Comprehensive Review. Pharmacogn. Rev. 2010, 4, 200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Maggi, M.A.; Bisti, S.; Picco, C. Saffron: Chemical Composition and Neuroprotective Activity. Molecules 2020, 25, 5618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Yang, W.; Qiu, X.; Wu, Q.; Chang, F.; Zhou, T.; Zhou, M.; Pei, J. Active Constituents of Saffron (Crocus sativus L.) and Their Prospects in Treating Neurodegenerative Diseases (Review). Exp. Ther. Med. 2023, 25, 235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ayatollahi, H.; Javan, A.O.; Khajedaluee, M.; Shahroodian, M.; Hosseinzadeh, H. Effect of Crocus sativus L. (Saffron) on Coagulation and Anticoagulation Systems in Healthy Volunteers. Phytother. Res. 2014, 28, 539–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Moras, B.; Loffredo, L.; Rey, S. Quality Assessment of Saffron (Crocus sativus L.) Extracts via UHPLC-DAD-MS Analysis and Detection of Adulteration Using Gardenia Fruit Extract (Gardenia jasminoides Ellis). Food Chem. 2018, 257, 325–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Avila-Sosa, R.; Nevárez-Moorillón, G.V.; Ochoa-Velasco, C.E.; Navarro-Cruz, A.R.; Hernández-Carranza, P.; Cid-Pérez, T.S. Detection of Saffron’s Main Bioactive Compounds and Their Relationship with Commercial Quality. Foods 2022, 11, 3245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Li, R.; Jiang, Z. Chemical Composition of the Essential Oil of Cuminum cyminum L. from China. Flavour Fragr. J. 2004, 19, 311–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Bettaieb, I.; Bourgou, S.; Sriti, J.; Msaada, K.; Limam, F.; Marzouk, B. Essential Oils and Fatty Acids Composition of Tunisian and Indian Cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) Seeds: A Comparative Study. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2011, 91, 2100–2107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Allahghadri, T.; Rasooli, I.; Owlia, P.; Nadooshan, M.J.; Ghazanfari, T.; Taghizadeh, M.; Astaneh, S.D.A. Antimicrobial Property, Antioxidant Capacity, and Cytotoxicity of Essential Oil from Cumin Produced in Iran. J. Food Sci. 2010, 75, H54–H61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wanner, J.; Bail, S.; Jirovetz, L.; Buchbauer, G.; Schmidt, E.; Gochev, V.; Girova, T.; Atanasova, T.; Stoyanova, A. Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Activity of Cumin Oil (Cuminum cyminum, Apiaceae). Nat. Prod. Commun. 2010, 5, 1934578X1000500904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Srinivasan, K. Cumin (Cuminum cyminum) and Black Cumin (Nigella sativa) Seeds: Traditional Uses, Chemical Constituents, and Nutraceutical Effects. Food Qual. Saf. 2018, 2, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Tyagi, A.K.; Prasad, S.; Yuan, W.; Li, S.; Aggarwal, B.B. Identification of a Novel Compound (β-Sesquiphellandrene) from Turmeric (Curcuma longa) with Anticancer Potential: Comparison with Curcumin. Investig. New Drugs 2015, 33, 1175–1186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Guimarães, A.; Vinhas, A.C.; Gomes, A.; Souza, L.; Krepsky, P. Essential Oil of Curcuma longa L. Rhizomes Chemical Composition, Yield Variation and Stability. Química Nova 2020, 43, 909–913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Dosoky, N.S.; Setzer, W.N. Chemical Composition and Biological Activities of Essential Oils of Curcuma Species. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Vo, T.S.; Vo, T.T.B.C.; Vo, T.T.T.N.; Lai, T.N.H. Turmeric (Curcuma longa L.): Chemical Components and Their Effective Clinical Applications. J. Turk. Chem. Soc. Sect. A Chem. 2021, 8, 883–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Shah, G.; Shri, R.; Panchal, V.; Sharma, N.; Singh, B.; Mann, A. Scientific Basis for the Therapeutic Use of Cymbopogon citratus, Stapf (Lemon Grass). J. Adv. Pharm. Technol. Res. 2011, 2, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Wahyuni, D.K.; Kharisma, V.D.; Murtadlo, A.A.A.; Rahmawati, C.T.; Syukriya, A.J.; Prasongsuk, S.; Subramaniam, S.; Wibowo, A.T.; Purnobasuki, H. The Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Activity of Ethanolic Extract in Roots, Stems, and Leaves of Three Commercial Cymbopogon Species. BMC Complement. Med. Ther. 2024, 24, 272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kiani, H.S.; Ali, A.; Zahra, S.; Hassan, Z.U.; Kubra, K.T.; Azam, M.; Zahid, H.F. Phytochemical Composition and Pharmacological Potential of Lemongrass (Cymbopogon) and Impact on Gut Microbiota. Appl. Chem. 2022, 2, 229–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Sengupta, A.; Bhattacharjee, S. Cardamom (Elettaria cardamomum) and Its Active Constituent, I,8-Cineole. In Molecular Targets and Therapeutic Uses of Spices; World Scientific: Singapore, 2009; pp. 65–85. ISBN 978-981-283-790-5. [Google Scholar]
  65. Ashokkumar, K.; Murugan, M.; Dhanya, M.K.; Warkentin, T.D. Botany, Traditional Uses, Phytochemistry and Biological Activities of Cardamom [Elettaria cardamomum (L.) Maton]—A Critical Review. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2020, 246, 112244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Moulai-Hacene, F.; Boufadi, M.Y.; Keddari, S.; Homrani, A. Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Properties of Elettaria cardamomum Extract. Pharmacogn. J. 2020, 12, 1058–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Souissi, M.; Azelmat, J.; Chaieb, K.; Grenier, D. Antibacterial and Anti-Inflammatory Activities of Cardamom (Elettaria cardamomum) Extracts: Potential Therapeutic Benefits for Periodontal Infections. Anaerobe 2020, 61, 102089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Almohammed, H.I.; Alkhaibari, A.M.; Alanazi, A.D. Antiparasitic Effects of Elettaria cardamomum L. Essential Oil and Its Main Compounds, 1-8 Cineole Alone and in Combination with Albendazole against Echinococcus granulosus Protoscoleces. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2022, 29, 2811–2818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Sreedharan, S.; Nair, V.; Cisneros-Zevallos, L. Protective Role of Phenolic Compounds from Whole Cardamom (Elettaria cardamomum (L.) Maton) against LPS-Induced Inflammation in Colon and Macrophage Cells. Nutrients 2023, 15, 2965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Zeng, Q.Y.; Wu, J.; Lin, P.C. Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Activity of the Essential Oil from Epilobium angustifolium. Chem. Nat. Compd. 2016, 52, 1113–1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Nowak, A.; Zagórska-Dziok, M.; Ossowicz-Rupniewska, P.; Makuch, E.; Duchnik, W.; Kucharski, Ł.; Adamiak-Giera, U.; Prowans, P.; Czapla, N.; Bargiel, P.; et al. Epilobium angustifolium L. Extracts as Valuable Ingredients in Cosmetic and Dermatological Products. Molecules 2021, 26, 3456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Nowak, A.; Cybulska, K.; Makuch, E.; Kucharski, Ł.; Różewicka-Czabańska, M.; Prowans, P.; Czapla, N.; Bargiel, P.; Petriczko, J.; Klimowicz, A. In Vitro Human Skin Penetration, Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Activity of Ethanol-Water Extract of Fireweed (Epilobium angustifolium L.). Molecules 2021, 26, 329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. de Oliveira, F.M.; Romão, W.; Kuster, R.M. Identification of Phenolic Compounds in Eugenia uniflora Leaves by FTICR MS in Association with Different Ionization Sources. Anal. Methods 2018, 10, 1647–1655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Bagatini, L.; Zandoná, G.P.; Hoffmann, J.F.; De Souza Cardoso, J.; Teixeira, F.C.; Moroni, L.S.; Junges, A.; Kempka, A.P.; Stefanello, F.M.; Rombaldi, C.V. Evaluation of Eugenia uniflora L. Leaf Extracts Obtained by Pressurized Liquid Extraction: Identification of Chemical Composition, Antioxidant, Antibacterial, and Allelopathic Activity. Sustain. Chem. Pharm. 2023, 35, 101214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Santos, R.M.; Fortes, G.A.C.; Ferri, P.H.; Santos, S.C. Influence of Foliar Nutrients on Phenol Levels in Leaves of Eugenia uniflora. Rev. Bras. De Farmacogn. 2011, 21, 581–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Oriola, A.O.; Miya, G.M.; Singh, M.; Oyedeji, A.O. Flavonol Glycosides from Eugenia uniflora Leaves and Their In Vitro Cytotoxicity, Antioxidant and Anti-Inflammatory Activities. Sci. Pharm. 2023, 91, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Fidelis, E.M.; Savall, A.S.P.; De Oliveira Pereira, F.; Quines, C.B.; Ávila, D.S.; Pinton, S. Pitanga (Eugenia uniflora L.) as a Source of Bioactive Compounds for Health Benefits: A Review. Arab. J. Chem. 2022, 15, 103691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Caputo, L.; Nazzaro, F.; Souza, L.; Aliberti, L.; De Martino, L.; Fratianni, F.; Coppola, R.; De Feo, V. Laurus nobilis: Composition of Essential Oil and Its Biological Activities. Molecules 2017, 22, 930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Fidan, H.; Stefanova, G.; Kostova, I.; Stankov, S.; Damyanova, S.; Stoyanova, A.; Zheljazkov, V.D. Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Activity of Laurus nobilis L. Essential Oils from Bulgaria. Molecules 2019, 24, 804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Mssillou, I.; Agour, A.; El Ghouizi, A.; Hamamouch, N.; Lyoussi, B.; Derwich, E. Chemical Composition, Antioxidant Activity, and Antifungal Effects of Essential Oil from Laurus nobilis L. Flowers Growing in Morocco. J. Food Qual. 2020, 2020, 8819311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Awada, F.; Hamade, K.; Kassir, M.; Hammoud, Z.; Mesnard, F.; Rammal, H.; Fliniaux, O. Laurus nobilis Leaves and Fruits: A Review of Metabolite Composition and Interest in Human Health. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 4606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Mkaddem Guedri, M.; Romdhane, M.; Lebrihi, A.; Mathieu, F.; Bouajila, J. Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Activities of Tunisian, France and Austrian Laurus nobilis (Lauraceae) Essential Oils. Not. Bot. Horti Agrobot. Cluj-Napoca 2020, 48, 1929–1940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Stefanova, G.; Girova, T.; Gochev, V.; Stoyanova, M.; Petkova, Z.; Stoyanova, A.; Zheljazkov, V.D. Comparative Study on the Chemical Composition of Laurel (Laurus nobilis L.) Leaves from Greece and Georgia and the Antibacterial Activity of Their Essential Oil. Heliyon 2020, 6, e05491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Si, L.; Chen, Y.; Han, X.; Zhan, Z.; Tian, S.; Cui, Q.; Wang, Y. Chemical Composition of Essential Oils of Litsea cubeba Harvested from Its Distribution Areas in China. Molecules 2012, 17, 7057–7066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Yang, K.; Wang, C.F.; You, C.X.; Geng, Z.F.; Sun, R.Q.; Guo, S.S.; Du, S.S.; Liu, Z.L.; Deng, Z.W. Bioactivity of Essential Oil of Litsea cubeba from China and Its Main Compounds against Two Stored Product Insects. J. Asia-Pac. Entomol. 2014, 17, 459–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Yang, N.-Q.; Wang, X.-Y.; Shen, G.-D.; Lu, S.-C.; Fan, Y.-N.; Li, B.-T.; Wang, Y.-S.; Yang, J.-H. Chemical Constituents of Litsea cubeba. Chem. Nat. Compd. 2023, 59, 135–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Li, W.-R.; Shi, Q.-S.; Liang, Q.; Xie, X.-B.; Huang, X.-M.; Chen, Y.-B. Antibacterial Activity and Kinetics of Litsea cubeba Oil on Escherichia coli. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e110983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Thielmann, J.; Muranyi, P. Review on the Chemical Composition of Litsea cubeba Essential Oils and the Bioactivity of Its Major Constituents Citral and Limonene. J. Essent. Oil Res. 2019, 31, 361–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Sivamaruthi, B.S.; Kesika, P.; Chaiyasut, C. The Composition, Pharmacological and Economic Importance of Essential Oil of Litsea cubeba (Lour.) Pers. Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 42, e35720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Berté, K.A.S.; Beux, M.R.; Spada, P.K.W.D.S.; Salvador, M.; Hoffmann-Ribani, R. Chemical Composition and Antioxidant Activity of Yerba-Mate (Ilex paraguariensis A.St.-Hil., Aquifoliaceae) Extract as Obtained by Spray Drying. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2011, 59, 5523–5527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Rząsa-Duran, E.; Kryczyk-Poprawa, A.; Drabicki, D.; Podkowa, A.; Sułkowska-Ziaja, K.; Szewczyk, A.; Kała, K.; Opoka, W.; Zięba, P.; Fidurski, M.; et al. Yerba Mate as a Source of Elements and Bioactive Compounds with Antioxidant Activity. Antioxidants 2022, 11, 371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Teselkin, Y.O.; Babenkova, I.V.; Kochetova, A.A.; Osipov, A.N. Inhibitory Effect of Aqueous Extract from Yerba Mate (Ilex paraguariensis) on the Process of Lipid Peroxidation of Liposomal Membranes. Biophysics 2022, 67, 541–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Pachura, N.; Kupczyński, R.; Sycz, J.; Kuklińska, A.; Zwyrzykowska-Wodzińska, A.; Wińska, K.; Owczarek, A.; Kuropka, P.; Nowaczyk, R.; Bąbelewski, P.; et al. Biological Potential and Chemical Profile of European Varieties of Ilex. Foods 2021, 11, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Filip, R.; Davicino, R.; Anesini, C. Antifungal Activity of the Aqueous Extract of Ilex paraguariensis against Malassezia furfur. Phytother. Res. 2010, 24, 715–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Enomoto, S.; Asano, R.; Iwahori, Y.; Narui, T.; Okada, Y.; Singab, A.N.B.; Okuyama, T. Hematological Studies on Black Cumin Oil from the Seeds of Nigella sativa L. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 2001, 24, 307–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Ahmad, A.; Husain, A.; Mujeeb, M.; Khan, S.A.; Najmi, A.K.; Siddique, N.A.; Damanhouri, Z.A.; Anwar, F. A Review on Therapeutic Potential of Nigella sativa: A Miracle Herb. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 2013, 3, 337–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Forouzanfar, F.; Bazzaz, B.S.F.; Hosseinzadeh, H. Black Cumin (Nigella sativa) and Its Constituent (Thymoquinone): A Review on Antimicrobial Effects. Iran. J. Basic Med. Sci. 2014, 17, 929–938. [Google Scholar]
  98. Tembhurne, S.V.; Feroz, S.; More, B.H.; Sakarkar, D.M. A Review on Therapeutic Potential of Nigella sativa (Kalonji) Seeds. J. Med. Plants Res. 2014, 8, 167–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Cheikh-Rouhou, S.; Besbes, S.; Hentati, B.; Blecker, C.; Deroanne, C.; Attia, H. Nigella sativa L.: Chemical Composition and Physicochemical Characteristics of Lipid Fraction. Food Chem. 2007, 101, 673–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Hannan, A.; Saleem, S.; Chaudhary, S.; Barkaat, M.; Arshad, M.U. Anti Bacterial Activity of Nigella sativa against Clinical Isolates of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J. Ayub Med. Coll. Abbottabad 2008, 20, 72–74. [Google Scholar]
  101. Teixeira, B.; Marques, A.; Ramos, C.; Serrano, C.; Matos, O.; Neng, N.R.; Nogueira, J.M.F.; Saraiva, J.A.; Nunes, M.L. Chemical Composition and Bioactivity of Different Oregano (Origanum vulgare) Extracts and Essential Oil. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2013, 93, 2707–2714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Lombrea, A.; Antal, D.; Ardelean, F.; Avram, S.; Pavel, I.Z.; Vlaia, L.; Mut, A.-M.; Diaconeasa, Z.; Dehelean, C.A.; Soica, C.; et al. A Recent Insight Regarding the Phytochemistry and Bioactivity of Origanum vulgare L. Essential Oil. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 9653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Ilić, Z.; Stanojević, L.; Milenković, L.; Šunić, L.; Milenković, A.; Stanojević, J.; Cvetković, D. The Yield, Chemical Composition, and Antioxidant Activities of Essential Oils from Different Plant Parts of the Wild and Cultivated Oregano (Origanum vulgare L.). Horticulturae 2022, 8, 1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Rao, G.; Mukhopadhyay, T.; Annamalai, T.; Radhakrishnan, N.; Sahoo, M. Chemical Constituents and Biological Studies of Origanum vulgare Linn. Pharmacogn. Res. 2011, 3, 143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Oniga, I.; Pușcaș, C.; Silaghi-Dumitrescu, R.; Olah, N.-K.; Sevastre, B.; Marica, R.; Marcus, I.; Sevastre-Berghian, A.C.; Benedec, D.; Pop, C.E.; et al. Origanum vulgare ssp. vulgare: Chemical Composition and Biological Studies. Molecules 2018, 23, 2077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Ashokkumar, K.; Murugan, M.; Dhanya, M.K.; Pandian, A.; Warkentin, T.D. Phytochemistry and Therapeutic Potential of Black Pepper [Piper nigrum (L.)] Essential Oil and Piperine: A Review. Clin. Phytosci. 2021, 7, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Feitosa, B.D.S.; Ferreira, O.O.; Franco, C.D.J.P.; Karakoti, H.; Kumar, R.; Cascaes, M.M.; Jawarkar, R.D.; Mali, S.N.; Cruz, J.N.; De Menezes, I.C.; et al. Chemical Composition of Piper nigrum L. Cultivar Guajarina Essential Oils and Their Biological Activity. Molecules 2024, 29, 947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Jeena, K.; Liju, V.B.; Umadevi, N.P.; Kuttan, R. Antioxidant, Anti-Inflammatory and Antinociceptive Properties of Black Pepper Essential Oil (Piper nigrum Linn). J. Essent. Oil Bear. Plants 2014, 17, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Andriana, Y.; Xuan, T.D.; Quy, T.N.; Tran, H.-D.; Le, Q.-T. Biological Activities and Chemical Constituents of Essential Oils from Piper Cubeba Bojer and Piper nigrum L. Molecules 2019, 24, 1876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Smiljkovic, M.; Stanisavljevic, D.; Stojkovic, D.; Petrovic, I.; Marjanovic Vicentic, J.; Popovic, J.; Golic Grdadolnik, S.; Markovic, D.; Sanković-Babić, S.; Glamoclija, J.; et al. Apigenin-7-O-Glucoside versus Apigenin: Insight into the Modes of Anticandidal and Cytotoxic Actions. EXCLI J. 2017, 16, 795–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Valencia, D.; Rueda Puente, E.O.; Leyva Peralta, M.A.; Mazón-López, S.R.; Ortega-García, J. Bioactive Compounds, Antioxidant Activity and Profile of Fatty Acids in Mesquite Seed Oil (Prosopis spp). Arch. Latinoam. De Nutr. 2020, 70, 50–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Zhong, J.; Lu, P.; Wu, H.; Liu, Z.; Sharifi-Rad, J.; Setzer, W.N.; Suleria, H.A.R. Current Insights into Phytochemistry, Nutritional, and Pharmacological Properties of Prosopis Plants. Evid.-Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2022, 2022, 2218029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Zhang, B.; Cai, J.; Duan, C.-Q.; Reeves, M.; He, F. A Review of Polyphenolics in Oak Woods. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16, 6978–7014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Burlacu, E.; Nisca, A.; Tanase, C. A Comprehensive Review of Phytochemistry and Biological Activities of Quercus Species. Forests 2020, 11, 904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Othón-Díaz, E.D.; Fimbres-García, J.O.; Flores-Sauceda, M.; Silva-Espinoza, B.A.; López-Martínez, L.X.; Bernal-Mercado, A.T.; Ayala-Zavala, J.F. Antioxidants in Oak (Quercus spp.): Potential Application to Reduce Oxidative Rancidity in Foods. Antioxidants 2023, 12, 861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Taib, M.; Rezzak, Y.; Bouyazza, L.; Lyoussi, B. Medicinal Uses, Phytochemistry, and Pharmacological Activities of Quercus Species. Evid.-Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2020, 2020, 1920683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Morales, D. Oak Trees (Quercus spp.) as a Source of Extracts with Biological Activities: A Narrative Review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 109, 116–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Duskaev, G.K.; Rakhmatullin, S.G.; Kazachkova, N.M.; Sheida, Y.V.; Mikolaychik, I.N.; Morozova, L.A.; Galiev, B.H. Effect of the Combined Action of Quercus Cortex Extract and Probiotic Substances on the Immunity and Productivity of Broiler Chickens. Vet. World 2018, 11, 1416–1422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Elbanna, K.; Assiri, A.M.A.; Tadros, M.; Khider, M.; Assaeedi, A.; Mohdaly, A.A.A.; Ramadan, M.F. Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis) Oil: Composition and Functionality of the Cold-Pressed Extract. Food Meas. 2018, 12, 1601–1609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Ulbricht, C.; Abrams, T.R.; Brigham, A.; Ceurvels, J.; Clubb, J.; Curtiss, W.; Kirkwood, C.D.; Giese, N.; Hoehn, K.; Iovin, R.; et al. An Evidence-Based Systematic Review of Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis) by the Natural Standard Research Collaboration. J. Diet. Suppl. 2010, 7, 351–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Aziz, E.; Batool, R.; Akhtar, W.; Shahzad, T.; Malik, A.; Shah, M.A.; Iqbal, S.; Rauf, A.; Zengin, G.; Bouyahya, A.; et al. Rosemary Species: A Review of Phytochemicals, Bioactivities and Industrial Applications. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2022, 151, 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Elyemni, M.; El Ouadrhiri, F.; Lahkimi, A.; Elkamli, T.; Bouia, A.; Eloutassi, N. Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Activity of Essential Oil of Wild and Cultivated Rosmarinus officinalis from Two Moroccan Localities. J. Ecol. Eng. 2022, 23, 214–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Begum, A.; Sandhya, S.; Shaffath Ali, S.; Vinod, K.R.; Reddy, S.; Banji, D. An In-Depth Review on the Medicinal Flora Rosmarinus officinalis (Lamiaceae). Acta Sci. Pol. Technol. Aliment. 2013, 12, 61–73. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  124. Jafari-Sales, A.; Pashazadeh, M. Study of Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Properties of Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis) Essential Oil on Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli in Vitro. Int. J. Life Sci. Biotechnol. 2020, 3, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Payet, B.; Shum Cheong Sing, A.; Smadja, J. Comparison of the Concentrations of Phenolic Constituents in Cane Sugar Manufacturing Products with Their Antioxidant Activities. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54, 7270–7276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Singh, A.; Lal, U.; Mukhtar, H.; Singh, P.; Shah, G.; Dhawan, R. Phytochemical Profile of Sugarcane and Its Potential Health Aspects. Pharmacogn. Rev. 2015, 9, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Duarte-Almeida, J.M.; Negri, G.; Salatino, A.; De Carvalho, J.E.; Lajolo, F.M. Antiproliferative and Antioxidant Activities of a Tricin Acylated Glycoside from Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum) Juice. Phytochemistry 2007, 68, 1165–1171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Ali, S.E.; El Gedaily, R.A.; Mocan, A.; Farag, M.A.; El-Seedi, H.R. Profiling Metabolites and Biological Activities of Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum Linn.) Juice and Its Product Molasses via a Multiplex Metabolomics Approach. Molecules 2019, 24, 934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Ali, S.E.; Yuan, Q.; Wang, S.; Farag, M.A. More than Sweet: A Phytochemical and Pharmacological Review of Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.). Food Biosci. 2021, 44, 101431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Capek, P.; Hříbalová, V. Water-Soluble Polysaccharides from Salvia officinalis L. Possessing Immunomodulatory Activity. Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 1983–1992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Porte, A.; Godoy, R.L.O.; Maia-Porte, L.H. Chemical Composition of Sage (Salvia officinalis L.) Essential Oil from the Rio de Janeiro State (Brazil). Rev. Bras. De Plantas Med. 2013, 15, 438–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Ghorbani, A.; Esmaeilizadeh, M. Pharmacological Properties of Salvia officinalis and Its Components. J. Tradit. Complement. Med. 2017, 7, 433–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Lima, C.F.; Valentao, P.C.R.; Andrade, P.B.; Seabra, R.M.; Fernandes-Ferreira, M.; Pereira-Wilson, C. Water and Methanolic Extracts of Salvia officinalis Protect HepG2 Cells from T-BHP Induced Oxidative Damage. Chem.-Biol. Interact. 2007, 167, 107–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. El Euch, S.K.; Hassine, D.B.; Cazaux, S.; Bouzouita, N.; Bouajila, J. Salvia officinalis Essential Oil: Chemical Analysis and Evaluation of Anti-Enzymatic and Antioxidant Bioactivities. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2019, 120, 253–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Jažo, Z.; Glumac, M.; Paštar, V.; Bektić, S.; Radan, M.; Carev, I. Chemical Composition and Biological Activity of Salvia officinalis L. Essential Oil. Plants 2023, 12, 1794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Golparvar, A.R.; Gheisari, M.M.; Hadipanah, A.; Khorrami, M. Antibacterial, Antifungal Properties and Chemical Composition of Essential Oils of Satureja hortensis L. and Satureja khuzestanica Jamzad. J. Herbs Drug. 2018, 8, 243–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Davoodi, M.; Nejad-Ebrahimi, S.; Rustaiyan, A.; Esmaeili, D. The Chemical Composition and Antibacterial Activity of a Methanolic Extract of Satureja khuzistanica. Braz. J. Pharm. Sci. 2022, 58, e19233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Karami, F.; Dastan, D.; Fallah, M.; Matini, M. In Vitro Antitrichomonal Activity of Satureja khuzestanica and Main Essential Oil Components Carvacrol, Thymol, and Eugenol. J. Infect. Dev. Ctries. 2023, 17, 80–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Ćavar, S.; Maksimović, M.; Šolić, M.E.; Jerković-Mujkić, A.; Bešta, R. Chemical Composition and Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Activity of Two Satureja Essential Oils. Food Chem. 2008, 111, 648–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Fallahi, S.; Beyranvand, M.; Mahmoudvand, H.; Nayebzadeh, H.; Kheirandish, F.; Jahanbakhsh, S. Chemical Composition, Acute and Sub-Acute Toxicity of Satureja khuzestanica Essential Oil in Mice. Marmara Pharm. J. 2017, 21, 515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Skočibušić, M.; Bezić, N. Chemical Composition and Antidiarrhoeal Activities of Winter Savory (Satureja montana L.) Essential Oil. Pharm. Biol. 2003, 41, 622–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Abdelshafeek, K.A.; Osman, A.F.; Mouneir, S.M.; Elhenawy, A.A.; Abdallah, W.E. Phytochemical Profile, Comparative Evaluation of Satureja montana Alcoholic Extract for Antioxidants, Anti-Inflammatory and Molecular Docking Studies. BMC Complement. Med. Ther. 2023, 23, 108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Momtaz, S.; Abdollahi, M. An Update on Pharmacology of Satureja Species; From Antioxidant, Antimicrobial, Antidiabetes and Anti-Hyperlipidemic to Reproductive Stimulation. Int. J. Pharmacol. 2010, 6, 346–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Santos, J.D.C.; Coelho, E.; Silva, R.; Passos, C.P.; Teixeira, P.; Henriques, I.; Coimbra, M.A. Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Activity of Satureja montana Byproducts Essential Oils. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019, 137, 541–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Miladi, H.; Ben Slama, R.; Mili, D.; Zouari, S.; Bakhrouf, A.; Ammar, E. Chemical Composition and Cytotoxic and Antioxidant Activities of Satureja montana L. Essential Oil and Its Antibacterial Potential against Salmonella Spp. Strains. J. Chem. 2013, 2013, 275698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. El-Saber Batiha, G.; Alkazmi, L.M.; Wasef, L.G.; Beshbishy, A.M.; Nadwa, E.H.; Rashwan, E.K. Syzygium aromaticum L. (Myrtaceae): Traditional Uses, Bioactive Chemical Constituents, Pharmacological and Toxicological Activities. Biomolecules 2020, 10, 202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Xue, Q.; Xiang, Z.; Wang, S.; Cong, Z.; Gao, P.; Liu, X. Recent Advances in Nutritional Composition, Phytochemistry, Bioactive, and Potential Applications of Syzygium aromaticum L. (Myrtaceae). Front. Nutr. 2022, 9, 1002147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. Pandey, V.K.; Srivastava, S.; Ashish; Dash, K.K.; Singh, R.; Dar, A.H.; Singh, T.; Farooqui, A.; Shaikh, A.M.; Kovacs, B. Bioactive Properties of Clove (Syzygium aromaticum) Essential Oil Nanoemulsion: A Comprehensive Review. Heliyon 2024, 10, e22437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Han, X.; Parker, T.L. Anti-Inflammatory Activity of Clove (Eugenia caryophyllata) Essential Oil in Human Dermal Fibroblasts. Pharm. Biol. 2017, 55, 1619–1622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Zhang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zhu, X.; Cao, P.; Wei, S.; Lu, Y. Antibacterial and Antibiofilm Activities of Eugenol from Essential Oil of Syzygium aromaticum (L.) Merr. & L. M. Perry (Clove) Leaf against Periodontal Pathogen Porphyromonas Gingivalis. Microb. Pathog. 2017, 113, 396–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Jaouadi, R.; Cardoso, S.M.; Silva, A.M.S.; Ben Hadj Yahia, I.; Boussaid, M.; Zaouali, Y. Variation of Phenolic Constituents of Tunisian Thymus capitatus (L.) Hoff. et Link. Populations. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2018, 77, 10–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Ben Miri, Y.; Djenane, D. Antifungal, Anti-Aflatoxigenic, Antioxidant Activity and in Vivo Efficacy of Essential Oil of the Aerial Parts of Thymus capitatus (L.) Hoffmanns & Link. Phytothérapie 2019, 17, 299–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Belén Sabater-Jara, A.; Pina Funes, M.; Angeles Pedreño, M.; Belchí-Navarro, S. Essential Oils of Thymbra capitata and Thymus hyemalis and Their Uses Based on Their Bioactivity. In Thymus; Rezaei, N., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2020; ISBN 978-1-78985-133-5. [Google Scholar]
  154. Benoutman, A.; Erbiai, E.H.; Edderdaki, F.Z.; Cherif, E.K.; Saidi, R.; Lamrani, Z.; Pintado, M.; Pinto, E.; Esteves Da Silva, J.C.G.; Maouni, A. Phytochemical Composition, Antioxidant and Antifungal Activity of Thymus capitatus, a Medicinal Plant Collected from Northern Morocco. Antibiotics 2022, 11, 681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Tagnaout, I.; Zerkani, H.; Hadi, N.; El Moumen, B.; El Makhoukhi, F.; Bouhrim, M.; Al-Salahi, R.; Nasr, F.A.; Mechchate, H.; Zair, T. Chemical Composition, Antioxidant and Antibacterial Activities of Thymus broussonetii Boiss and Thymus capitatus (L.) Hoffmann and Link Essential Oils. Plants 2022, 11, 954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Maniki, E.; Kostoglou, D.; Paterakis, N.; Nikolaou, A.; Kourkoutas, Y.; Papachristoforou, A.; Giaouris, E. Chemical Composition, Antioxidant, and Antibiofilm Properties of Essential Oil from Thymus capitatus Plants Organically Cultured on the Greek Island of Lemnos. Molecules 2023, 28, 1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Rasooli, I.; Mirmostafa, S.A. Bacterial Susceptibility to and Chemical Composition of Essential Oils from Thymus kotschyanus and Thymus persicus. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 2200–2205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  158. Tohidi, B.; Rahimmalek, M.; Arzani, A. Variations in Chemical Composition and Bioactive Compounds of Thymus kotschyanus Boiss. & Hohen Populations Originated from Different Collection Sites. J. Essent. Oil Bear. Plants 2018, 21, 1272–1283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Ghasemi, G.; Alirezalu, A.; Ghosta, Y.; Jarrahi, A.; Safavi, S.A.; Abbas-Mohammadi, M.; Barba, F.J.; Munekata, P.E.S.; Domínguez, R.; Lorenzo, J.M. Composition, Antifungal, Phytotoxic, and Insecticidal Activities of Thymus kotschyanus Essential Oil. Molecules 2020, 25, 1152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Khanavi, M.; Hajimehdipoor, H.; Emadi, F.; Khandani, N.K. Essential Oil Compositions of Thymus kotschyanus Boiss. Obtained by Hydrodistillation and Microwave Oven Distillation. J. Essent. Oil Bear. Plants 2013, 16, 117–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Zhiani, R.; Dolatabadi, S.; Imani, H.; Moradi, M.; Emrani, S. A Comparison of the Chemical Composition of Flowering Shoot Thymus kotschyanus and Thymus vulgaris by Using GC-Mass and Antimicrobial Effects of the Bacteria Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J. Essent. Oil Bear. Plants 2016, 19, 1639–1647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Mahboubi, M.; Heidarytabar, R.; Mahdizadeh, E.; Hosseini, H. Antimicrobial Activity and Chemical Composition of Thymus Species and Zataria multiflora Essential Oils. Agric. Nat. Resour. 2017, 51, 395–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Nikolić, M.; Glamočlija, J.; Ferreira, I.C.F.R.; Calhelha, R.C.; Fernandes, Â.; Marković, T.; Marković, D.; Giweli, A.; Soković, M. Chemical Composition, Antimicrobial, Antioxidant and Antitumor Activity of Thymus serpyllum L., Thymus algeriensis Boiss. and Reut and Thymus vulgaris L. Essential Oils. Ind. Crops Prod. 2014, 52, 183–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Tazabayeva, K.; Sylibaeva, B. Chemical Composition of The Essential Oil and Flavonoids of Thymus serpyllum L., Growing on Territory of the East Kazakhstan. Acta Pol. Pharm.-Drug Res. 2018, 75, 1329–1337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Pina-Vaz, C.; Gonçalves Rodrigues, A.; Pinto, E.; Costa-de-Oliveira, S.; Tavares, C.; Salgueiro, L.; Cavaleiro, C.; Gonçalves, M.; Martinez-de-Oliveira, J. Antifungal Activity of Thymus Oils and Their Major Compounds. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol. 2004, 18, 73–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Pruteanu, A.; Popescu, C.; Vladut, V.; Gageanu, G. Biochemical Analysis of Some Vegetal Extracts Obtained from Indigenous Spontaneous Species of Thymus serpyllum L. Rom. Biotechnol. Lett. 2018, 23, 14013–14024. [Google Scholar]
  167. Galovičová, L.; Borotová, P.; Valková, V.; Vukovic, N.L.; Vukic, M.; Terentjeva, M.; Štefániková, J.; Ďúranová, H.; Kowalczewski, P.Ł.; Kačániová, M. Thymus serpyllum Essential Oil and Its Biological Activity as a Modern Food Preserver. Plants 2021, 10, 1416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Bairwa, R.; Rajawat, B.; Sodha, R.  Trachyspermum ammi. Phcog. Rev. 2012, 6, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Gandomi, H.; Abbaszadeh, S.; JebelliJavan, A.; Sharifzadeh, A. Chemical Constituents, Antimicrobial and Antioxidative Effects of Trachyspermum ammi Essential Oil: Ajwan EO’s Antimicrobial and Antioxidative Effects. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2014, 38, 1690–1695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Moein, M.R.; Zomorodian, K.; Pakshir, K.; Yavari, F.; Motamedi, M.; Zarshenas, M.M. Trachyspermum ammi (L.) Sprague: Chemical Composition of Essential Oil and Antimicrobial Activities of Respective Fractions. J. Evid.-Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2015, 20, 50–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Singh, G.; Maurya, S.; Catalan, C.; De Lampasona, M.P. Chemical Constituents, Antifungal and Antioxidative Effects of Ajwain Essential Oil and Its Acetone Extract. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 3292–3296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Abdel-Hameed, E.-S.S.; Bazaid, S.A.; Al Zahrani, O.; El-Halmouch, Y.; El-Sayed, M.M.; El-Wakil, E. Chemical Composition of Volatile Components, Antimicrobial and Anticancer Activity of n-Hexane Extract and Essential Oil from Trachyspermum ammi L. Seeds. Orient. J. Chem. 2014, 30, 1653–1662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Mazzara, E.; Scortichini, S.; Fiorini, D.; Maggi, F.; Petrelli, R.; Cappellacci, L.; Morgese, G.; Morshedloo, M.R.; Palmieri, G.F.; Cespi, M. A Design of Experiment (DoE) Approach to Model the Yield and Chemical Composition of Ajowan (Trachyspermum ammi L.) Essential Oil Obtained by Microwave-Assisted Extraction. Pharmaceuticals 2021, 14, 816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Naicker, N.; Nagiah, S.; Phulukdaree, A.; Chuturgoon, A. Trigonella foenum-graecum Seed Extract, 4-Hydroxyisoleucine, and Metformin Stimulate Proximal Insulin Signaling and Increase Expression of Glycogenic Enzymes and GLUT2 in HepG2 Cells. Metab. Syndr. Relat. Disord. 2016, 14, 114–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Sharma, V.; Singh, P.; Rani, A. Antimicrobial Activity of Trigonella foenum-graecum L. (Fenugreek). Eur. J. Exp. Biol. 2017, 7, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Chaudhary, S.; Chaudhary, P.S.; Chikara, S.K.; Sharma, M.C.; Iriti, M. Review on Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) and Its Important Secondary Metabolite Diosgenin. Not. Bot. Horti Agrobot. Cluj-Napoca 2018, 46, 22–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Premanath, R.; Sudisha, J.; Devi, N.L.; Aradhya, S.M. Antibacterial and Anti-Oxidant Activities of Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum graecum L.) Leaves. Res. J. Med. Plant 2011, 5, 695–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Visuvanathan, T.; Than, L.T.L.; Stanslas, J.; Chew, S.Y.; Vellasamy, S. Revisiting Trigonella foenum-graecum L.: Pharmacology and Therapeutic Potentialities. Plants 2022, 11, 1450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  179. Jan, K.N.; Zarafshan, K.; Singh, S. Stinging Nettle (Urtica dioica L.): A Reservoir of Nutrition and Bioactive Components with Great Functional Potential. Food Meas. 2017, 11, 423–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Devkota, H.P.; Paudel, K.R.; Khanal, S.; Baral, A.; Panth, N.; Adhikari-Devkota, A.; Jha, N.K.; Das, N.; Singh, S.K.; Chellappan, D.K.; et al. Stinging Nettle (Urtica dioica L.): Nutritional Composition, Bioactive Compounds, and Food Functional Properties. Molecules 2022, 27, 5219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  181. Semwal, P.; Rauf, A.; Olatunde, A.; Singh, P.; Zaky, M.Y.; Islam, M.M.; Khalil, A.A.; Aljohani, A.S.M.; Al Abdulmonem, W.; Ribaudo, G. The Medicinal Chemistry of Urtica dioica L.: From Preliminary Evidence to Clinical Studies Supporting Its Neuroprotective Activity. Nat. Prod. Bioprospect. 2023, 13, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Đurović, S.; Pavlić, B.; Šorgić, S.; Popov, S.; Savić, S.; Petronijević, M.; Radojković, M.; Cvetanović, A.; Zeković, Z. Chemical Composition of Stinging Nettle Leaves Obtained by Different Analytical Approaches. J. Funct. Foods 2017, 32, 18–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Tarasevičienė, Ž.; Vitkauskaitė, M.; Paulauskienė, A.; Černiauskienė, J. Wild Stinging Nettle (Urtica dioica L.) Leaves and Roots Chemical Composition and Phenols Extraction. Plants 2023, 12, 309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Đurović, S.; Kojić, I.; Radić, D.; Smyatskaya, Y.A.; Bazarnova, J.G.; Filip, S.; Tosti, T. Chemical Constituents of Stinging Nettle (Urtica dioica L.): A Comprehensive Review on Phenolic and Polyphenolic Compounds and Their Bioactivity. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 3430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Gandomi, H.; Misaghi, A.; Basti, A.A.; Bokaei, S.; Khosravi, A.; Abbasifar, A.; Javan, A.J. Effect of Zataria multiflora Boiss. Essential Oil on Growth and Aflatoxin Formation by Aspergillus flavus in Culture Media and Cheese. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2009, 47, 2397–2400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Mahmoudvand, H.; Mirbadie, S.R.; Sadooghian, S.; Harandi, M.F.; Jahanbakhsh, S.; Saedi Dezaki, E. Chemical Composition and Scolicidal Activity of Zataria multiflora Boiss Essential Oil. J. Essent. Oil Res. 2017, 29, 42–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Karimi, A.; Krähmer, A.; Herwig, N.; Schulz, H.; Hadian, J.; Meiners, T. Variation of Secondary Metabolite Profile of Zataria multiflora Boiss. Populations Linked to Geographic, Climatic, and Edaphic Factors. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  188. Hosseinzadeh, H.; Ramezani, M.; Salmani, G. Antinociceptive, Anti-Inflammatory and Acute Toxicity Effects of Zataria multiflora Boiss Extracts in Mice and Rats. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2000, 73, 379–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  189. Sharififar, F.; Moshafi, M.H.; Mansouri, S.H.; Khodashenas, M.; Khoshnoodi, M. In Vitro Evaluation of Antibacterial and Antioxidant Activities of the Essential Oil and Methanol Extract of Endemic Zataria multiflora Boiss. Food Control 2007, 18, 800–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Pilevar, Z.; Haglund, K.; Ranaei, V.; Taghizadeh, M.; Maghboli Balasjin, N.; Hosseini, H. Emerging Studies on Zataria multiflora Boiss L.: Pioneering the Antimicrobial and Antifungal Characteristics–A Systematic Review. Appl. Food Biotechnol. 2024, 11, e20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Nishidono, Y.; Saifudin, A.; Nishizawa, M.; Fujita, T.; Nakamoto, M.; Tanaka, K. Identification of the Chemical Constituents in Ginger (Zingiber officinale) Responsible for Thermogenesis. Nat. Prod. Commun. 2018, 13, 1934578X1801300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Mao, Q.-Q.; Xu, X.-Y.; Cao, S.-Y.; Gan, R.-Y.; Corke, H.; Beta, T.; Li, H.-B. Bioactive Compounds and Bioactivities of Ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe). Foods 2019, 8, 185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Zhang, S.; Zhang, L.; Yu, M.; Luo, D.; Chen, S.; Liu, W.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, L.; Zhao, T. Essential Oils of Zingiber officinale: Chemical Composition, in Vivo Alleviation Effects on TPA Induced Ear Swelling in Mice and in Vitro Bioactivities. Front. Nutr. 2022, 9, 1043175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Munda, S.; Dutta, S.; Haldar, S.; Lal, M. Chemical Analysis and Therapeutic Uses of Ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.) Essential Oil: A Review. J. Essent. Oil Bear. Plants 2018, 21, 994–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Liu, Y.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Y. Research Progress on Chemical Constituents of Zingiber officinale Roscoe. BioMed Res. Int. 2019, 2019, 5370823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Shalaby, E.A.; Shanab, S.M.M.; Hafez, R.M.; El-Ansary, A.E. Chemical Constituents and Biological Activities of Different Extracts from Ginger Plant (Zingiber officinale). Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric. 2023, 10, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Li, M.-Y.; Liu, H.-Y.; Wu, D.-T.; Kenaan, A.; Geng, F.; Li, H.-B.; Gunaratne, A.; Li, H.; Gan, R.-Y. L-Theanine: A Unique Functional Amino Acid in Tea (Camellia sinensis L.) with Multiple Health Benefits and Food Applications. Front. Nutr. 2022, 9, 853846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  198. Estévez, M. Critical Overview of the Use of Plant Antioxidants in the Meat Industry: Opportunities, Innovative Applications and Future Perspectives. Meat Sci. 2021, 181, 108610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  199. Özalp Özen, B.; Soyer, A. Effect of Plant Extracts on Lipid and Protein Oxidation of Mackerel (Scomber scombrus) Mince during Frozen Storage. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 55, 120–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  200. Jongberg, S.; Tørngren, M.; Skibsted, L. Dose-Dependent Effects of Green Tea or Maté Extracts on Lipid and Protein Oxidation in Brine-Injected Retail-Packed Pork Chops. Medicines 2018, 5, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  201. Villalobos-Delgado, L.H.; González-Mondragón, E.G.; Salazar Govea, A.Y.; Andrade, J.R.; Santiago-Castro, J.T. Potential Application of Epazote (Chenopodium ambrosioides L.) as Natural Antioxidant in Raw Ground Pork. LWT 2017, 84, 306–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Mancini, S.; Preziuso, G.; Dal Bosco, A.; Roscini, V.; Szendrő, Z.; Fratini, F.; Paci, G. Effect of Turmeric Powder (Curcuma longa L.) and Ascorbic Acid on Physical Characteristics and Oxidative Status of Fresh and Stored Rabbit Burgers. Meat Sci. 2015, 110, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. De Carvalho, F.A.L.; Munekata, P.E.S.; Lopes De Oliveira, A.; Pateiro, M.; Domínguez, R.; Trindade, M.A.; Lorenzo, J.M. Turmeric (Curcuma longa L.) Extract on Oxidative Stability, Physicochemical and Sensory Properties of Fresh Lamb Sausage with Fat Replacement by Tiger Nut (Cyperus esculentus L.) Oil. Food Res. Int. 2020, 136, 109487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Boeira, C.P.; Piovesan, N.; Soquetta, M.B.; Flores, D.C.B.; Lucas, B.N.; Rosa, C.S.D.; Terra, N.N. Extraction of Bioactive Compounds of Lemongrass, Antioxidant Activity and Evaluation of Antimicrobial Activity in Fresh Chicken Sausage. Cienc. Rural 2018, 48, e20180477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  205. Dilek, N.M.; Gümrükçüoğlu, A.; Demirel, G.; Durmaz, A.; Torunoğlu, E.I.; Aytar, E.C.; Ünal, K. Antioxidant and Preservative Effects of Epilobium angustifolium Extract in Beef Burgers Products: Physicochemical Properties, Color Stability, Lipid Oxidation, and Molecular Docking Analyses. Food Sci. Nutr. 2025, 13, e70125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  206. Lorenzo, J.M.; Vargas, F.C.; Strozzi, I.; Pateiro, M.; Furtado, M.M.; Sant’Ana, A.S.; Rocchetti, G.; Barba, F.J.; Dominguez, R.; Lucini, L.; et al. Influence of Pitanga Leaf Extracts on Lipid and Protein Oxidation of Pork Burger during Shelf-Life. Food Res. Int. 2018, 114, 47–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  207. De Carvalho, F.A.L.; Lorenzo, J.M.; Pateiro, M.; Bermúdez, R.; Purriños, L.; Trindade, M.A. Effect of Guarana (Paullinia cupana) Seed and Pitanga (Eugenia uniflora L.) Leaf Extracts on Lamb Burgers with Fat Replacement by Chia Oil Emulsion during Shelf Life Storage at 2 °C. Food Res. Int. 2019, 125, 108554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Chauhan, P.; Das, A.K.; Nanda, P.K.; Kumbhar, V.; Yadav, J.P. Effect of Nigella sativa Seed Extract on Lipid and Protein Oxidation in Raw Ground Pork during Refrigerated Storage. Nutr. Food Sci. 2018, 48, 2–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. Al-Hijazeen, M.; Lee, E.; Mendonca, A.; Ahn, D. Effect of Oregano Essential Oil (Origanum vulgare subsp. hirtum) on the Storage Stability and Quality Parameters of Ground Chicken Breast Meat. Antioxidants 2016, 5, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. 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]
  211. Ramírez-Rojo, M.I.; Vargas-Sánchez, R.D.; Torres-Martínez, B.D.M.; Torrescano-Urrutia, G.R.; Lorenzo, J.M.; Sánchez-Escalante, A. Inclusion of Ethanol Extract of Mesquite Leaves to Enhance the Oxidative Stability of Pork Patties. Foods 2019, 8, 631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Soriano, A.; Alañón, M.E.; Alarcón, M.; García-Ruíz, A.; Díaz-Maroto, M.C.; Pérez-Coello, M.S. Oak Wood Extracts as Natural Antioxidants to Increase Shelf Life of Raw Pork Patties in Modified Atmosphere Packaging. Food Res. Int. 2018, 111, 524–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  213. Wang, Y.; Wang, S.; Fu, S.; Yang, D.; Yu, Y.; Chen, J.; Chen, Y. Effects of Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.) Extracts and Dry Ice on the Physicochemical Stability of Omega-3 Fatty-acid-fortified Surimi-like Meat Products. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2019, 99, 3843–3851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Kahraman, T.; Issa, G.; Bingol, E.B.; Kahraman, B.B.; Dumen, E. Effect of Rosemary Essential Oil and Modified-Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) on Meat Quality and Survival of Pathogens in Poultry Fillets. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2015, 46, 591–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  215. Dumandan, N.G.; Kagaoan, A.C.T.; Acda, R.D.; Tumambing, C.R.; Esteban, M.A.S.; Leonardo, L.P.A.; Lim, L.R.A.; Pham, L.J. Protective Effects of Sugarcane Phenolic Extract against Lipid Oxidative Damages in Raw Ground Pork and Beef during Refrigerated Storage Conditions. Heliyon 2023, 9, e14486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Šojić, B.; Ikonić, P.; Pavlić, B.; Zeković, Z.; Tomović, V.; Kocić-Tanackov, S.; Džinić, N.; Škaljac, S.; Ivić, M.; Jokanović, M.; et al. The Effect of Essential Oil from Sage (Salvia officinalis L.) Herbal Dust (Food Industry by-Product) on the Microbiological Stability of Fresh Pork Sausages. LWT—Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 89, 749–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Šojić, B.; Pavlić, B.; Tomović, V.; Ikonić, P.; Zeković, Z.; Kocić-Tanackov, S.; Đurović, S.; Škaljac, S.; Jokanović, M.; Ivić, M. Essential Oil versus Supercritical Fluid Extracts of Winter Savory (Satureja montana L.)—Assessment of the Oxidative, Microbiological and Sensory Quality of Fresh Pork Sausages. Food Chem. 2019, 287, 280–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Zahid, M.A.; Choi, J.Y.; Seo, J.-K.; Parvin, R.; Ko, J.; Yang, H.-S. Effects of Clove Extract on Oxidative Stability and Sensory Attributes in Cooked Beef Patties at Refrigerated Storage. Meat Sci. 2020, 161, 107972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Zhang, H.; Peng, X.; Li, X.; Wu, J.; Guo, X. The Application of Clove Extract Protects Chinese-Style Sausages against Oxidation and Quality Deterioration. Korean J. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 2017, 37, 114–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Šojić, B.; Tomović, V.; Kocić-Tanackov, S.; Kovačević, D.B.; Putnik, P.; Mrkonjić, Ž.; Đurović, S.; Jokanović, M.; Ivić, M.; Škaljac, S.; et al. Supercritical Extracts of Wild Thyme (Thymus serpyllum L.) by-Product as Natural Antioxidants in Ground Pork Patties. LWT 2020, 130, 109661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Engy, F.; Zaki, E. Incorporation of Fenugreek Seed Powder in the Manufacturing of Rabbit Sausage and its Effects on the Quality Properties During Frozen Storage. J. Adv. Food Sci. 2018, 5, 8–14. [Google Scholar]
  222. 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]
  223. Wood, J.D.; Enser, M. Manipulating the Fatty Acid Composition of Meat to Improve Nutritional Value and Meat Quality. In New Aspects of Meat Quality; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 501–535. ISBN 978-0-08-100593-4. [Google Scholar]
  224. Montalvo-Puente, A.P.; Torres-Gallo, R.; Acevedo-Correa, D.; Montero-Castillo, P.M.; Tirado, D.F. Nutritional Comparison of Beef, Pork and Chicken Meat from Maracaibo City (Venezuela). Adv. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 15, 218–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  225. Dinh, T.T.N.; To, K.V.; Schilling, M.W. Fatty Acid Composition of Meat Animals as Flavor Precursors. Meat Muscle Biol. 2021, 5, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Domínguez, R.; Pateiro, M.; Gagaoua, M.; Barba, F.J.; Zhang, W.; Lorenzo, J.M. A Comprehensive Review on Lipid Oxidation in Meat and Meat Products. Antioxidants 2019, 8, 429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  227. Namal Senanayake, S.P.J. Green Tea Extract: Chemistry, Antioxidant Properties and Food Applications—A Review. J. Funct. Foods 2013, 5, 1529–1541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Food and Feed Information Portal Database|FIP. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/food/food-feed-portal/screen/food-additives/search/details/POL-FAD-IMPORT-2985 (accessed on 21 October 2024).
  229. Eremeeva, N.B.; Makarova, N.V. Antioxidant Properties of Medicinal Plants and Their Effect on Microbial Spoilage of Semi-Finished Meat, Poultry and Fish. Izv. Vuzov. Prikl. Khim. Biotekhnol. 2022, 11, 590–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  230. Meshaal, A.K.; Hetta, H.F.; Yahia, R.; Abualnaja, K.M.; Mansour, A.T.; Al-Kadmy, I.M.S.; Alghamdi, S.; Dablool, A.S.; Emran, T.B.; Sedky, H.; et al. In Vitro Antimicrobial Activity of Medicinal Plant Extracts against Some Bacterial Pathogens Isolated from Raw and Processed Meat. Life 2021, 11, 1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  231. Abid, M.M.; Hussain, T.K.; Hwaidi, E.H.; Kadhim, H.I. Effect of Aromatic Oil of Three Plants of Labiatae Gene on Microorganism by Using in Preservation of Minced Meat. J. Pharm. Negat. Results 2022, 13, 686–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  232. Al-Moghazy, M.; Ammar, M.S.; Sief, M.M.; Mohamed, S.R. Evaluation the Antimicrobial Activity of Artemisia and Portulaca Plant Extracts in Beef Burger. Evaluation 2017, 1, 31–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  233. Manilal, A.; Sabu, K.R.; Woldemariam, M.; Aklilu, A.; Biresaw, G.; Yohanes, T.; Seid, M.; Merdekios, B. Antibacterial Activity of Rosmarinus officinalis against Multidrug-Resistant Clinical Isolates and Meat-Borne Pathogens. Evid.-Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2021, 2021, 6677420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  234. Elmaadawy, A.A. Antimicrobial activity of some plant extracts using food model media. Maj. Dirasat Buḥuth Tarbia Naw‘ia. 2022, 8, 3–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  235. Rastgou, M.; Rezaee Danesh, Y.; Ercisli, S.; Sayyed, R.Z.; El Enshasy, H.A.; Dailin, D.J.; Alfarraj, S.; Ansari, M.J. The Effect of Some Wild Grown Plant Extracts and Essential Oils on Pectobacterium betavasculorum: The Causative Agent of Bacterial Soft Rot and Vascular Wilt of Sugar Beet. Plants 2022, 11, 1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  236. Gyawali, R.; Hayek, S.A.; Ibrahim, S.A. Plant Extracts as Antimicrobials in Food Products. In Handbook of Natural Antimicrobials for Food Safety and Quality; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015; pp. 49–68. ISBN 978-1-78242-034-7. [Google Scholar]
  237. Hosseini, M.; Jamshidi, A.; Raeisi, M.; Azizzadeh, M. Effect of Sodium Alginate Coating Containing Clove (Syzygium aromaticum) and Lemon Verbena (Aloysia citriodora) Essential Oils and Different Packaging Treatments on Shelf Life Extension of Refrigerated Chicken Breast. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2021, 45, e14946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Ahmed, J.; Arfat, Y.A.; Bher, A.; Mulla, M.; Jacob, H.; Auras, R. Active Chicken Meat Packaging Based on Polylactide Films and Bimetallic Ag–Cu Nanoparticles and Essential Oil. J. Food Sci. 2018, 83, 1299–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  239. Alizadeh-Sani, M.; Tavassoli, M.; McClements, D.J.; Hamishehkar, H. Multifunctional Halochromic Packaging Materials: Saffron Petal Anthocyanin Loaded-Chitosan Nanofiber/Methyl Cellulose Matrices. Food Hydrocoll. 2021, 111, 106237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  240. Fatimeh, S.; Gholamreza, J.K.; Nabi, S. Chitosan/Cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) Essential Oil Edible biodegradable Coating: Its Effect on Microbial, Physicaland Sensory Properties of Chicken Meat During referigeration. Carpathian J. Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 13, 75–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  241. Yang, H.-J.; Song, K.B. Application of Lemongrass Oil-Containing Polylactic Acid Films to the Packaging of Pork Sausages. Korean J. Food Sci. Anim. Resour. 2016, 36, 421–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Cui, H.; Wu, J.; Li, C.; Lin, L. Promoting Anti-listeria Activity of Lemongrass Oil on Pork Loin by Cold Nitrogen Plasma Assist. J. Food Saf. 2017, 37, e12316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Wu, Z.; Zhou, W.; Pang, C.; Deng, W.; Xu, C.; Wang, X. Multifunctional Chitosan-Based Coating with Liposomes Containing Laurel Essential Oils and Nanosilver for Pork Preservation. Food Chem. 2019, 295, 16–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  244. Konuk Takma, D.; Korel, F. Active Packaging Films as a Carrier of Black Cumin Essential Oil: Development and Effect on Quality and Shelf-Life of Chicken Breast Meat. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2019, 19, 210–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  245. Moraes-Lovison, M.; Marostegan, L.F.P.; Peres, M.S.; Menezes, I.F.; Ghiraldi, M.; Rodrigues, R.A.F.; Fernandes, A.M.; Pinho, S.C. Nanoemulsions Encapsulating Oregano Essential Oil: Production, Stability, Antibacterial Activity and Incorporation in Chicken Pâté. LWT 2017, 77, 233–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  246. Šojić, B.; Tomović, V.; Pavlić, B.; Ikonić, P.; Škaljac, S.; Jokanović, M.; Ivić, M. The Effect of Winter Savory (Satureja montana L.) Extract on the Quality of Cooked Pork Sausages. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019; Volume 333, p. 012103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  247. Ruiz, A.; Williams, S.K.; Djeri, N.; Hinton, A.; Rodrick, G.E. Nisin, Rosemary, and Ethylenediaminetetraacetic Acid Affect the Growth of Listeria Monocytogenes on Ready-to-Eat Turkey Ham Stored at Four Degrees Celsius for Sixty-Three Days. Poult. Sci. 2009, 88, 1765–1772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  248. Alizadeh-Sani, M.; Mohammadian, E.; McClements, D.J. Eco-Friendly Active Packaging Consisting of Nanostructured Biopolymer Matrix Reinforced with TiO2 and Essential Oil: Application for Preservation of Refrigerated Meat. Food Chem. 2020, 322, 126782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  249. Sirocchi, V.; Devlieghere, F.; Peelman, N.; Sagratini, G.; Maggi, F.; Vittori, S.; Ragaert, P. Effect of Rosmarinus officinalis L. Essential Oil Combined with Different Packaging Conditions to Extend the Shelf Life of Refrigerated Beef Meat. Food Chem. 2017, 221, 1069–1076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Hadian, M.; Rajaei, A.; Mohsenifar, A.; Tabatabaei, M. Encapsulation of Rosmarinus officinalis Essential Oils in Chitosan-Benzoic Acid Nanogel with Enhanced Antibacterial Activity in Beef Cutlet against Salmonella typhimurium during Refrigerated Storage. LWT 2017, 84, 394–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  251. Danilović, B.; Đorđević, N.; Milićević, B.; Šojić, B.; Pavlić, B.; Tomović, V.; Savić, D. Application of Sage Herbal Dust Essential Oils and Supercritical Fluid Extract for the Growth Control of Escherichia coli in Minced Pork during Storage. LWT 2021, 141, 110935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  252. 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]
  253. El Abed, N.; Kaabi, B.; Smaali, M.I.; Chabbouh, M.; Habibi, K.; Mejri, M.; Marzouki, M.N.; Ben Hadj Ahmed, S. Chemical Composition, Antioxidant and Antimicrobial Activities of Thymus capitata Essential Oil with Its Preservative Effect against Listeria monocytogenes Inoculated in Minced Beef Meat. Evid.-Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2014, 2014, 152487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  254. Mehdizadeh, T.; Tajik, H.; Langroodi, A.M.; Molaei, R.; Mahmoudian, A. Chitosan-Starch Film Containing Pomegranate Peel Extract and Thymus kotschyanus Essential Oil Can Prolong the Shelf Life of Beef. Meat Sci. 2020, 163, 108073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  255. Boskovic, M.; Djordjevic, J.; Ivanovic, J.; Janjic, J.; Zdravkovic, N.; Glisic, M.; Glamoclija, N.; Baltic, B.; Djordjevic, V.; Baltic, M. Inhibition of Salmonella by Thyme Essential Oil and Its Effect on Microbiological and Sensory Properties of Minced Pork Meat Packaged under Vacuum and Modified Atmosphere. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2017, 258, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  256. Quesada, J.; Sendra, E.; Navarro, C.; Sayas-Barberá, E. Antimicrobial Active Packaging Including Chitosan Films with Thymus vulgaris L. Essential Oil for Ready-to-Eat Meat. Foods 2016, 5, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  257. Azarifar, M.; Ghanbarzadeh, B.; Sowti Khiabani, M.; Akhondzadeh Basti, A.; Abdulkhani, A. The Effects of Gelatin-CMC Films Incorporated with Chitin Nanofiber and Trachyspermum ammi Essential Oil on the Shelf Life Characteristics of Refrigerated Raw Beef. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2020, 318, 108493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  258. Alirezalu, K.; Movlan, H.S.; Yaghoubi, M.; Pateiro, M.; Lorenzo, J.M. Ɛ-Polylysine Coating with Stinging Nettle Extract for Fresh Beef Preservation. Meat Sci. 2021, 176, 108474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  259. Raeisi, M.; Hashemi, M.; Sadeghi, A.R.; Aminzare, M.; Khodadadi, M.; Ahmadzadeh, A.M.; Afshari, A. Salmonella typhimurium and Listeria monocytogenes Growth Inhibition by Zataria multiflora Essential Oil in Ground Meat. J. Hum. Environ. Health Promot. 2017, 2, 261–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  260. Shamsudin, N.F.; Ahmed, Q.U.; Mahmood, S.; Ali Shah, S.A.; Khatib, A.; Mukhtar, S.; Alsharif, M.A.; Parveen, H.; Zakaria, Z.A. Antibacterial Effects of Flavonoids and Their Structure-Activity Relationship Study: A Comparative Interpretation. Molecules 2022, 27, 1149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  261. Suriyaprom, S.; Mosoni, P.; Leroy, S.; Kaewkod, T.; Desvaux, M.; Tragoolpua, Y. Antioxidants of Fruit Extracts as Antimicrobial Agents against Pathogenic Bacteria. Antioxidants 2022, 11, 602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  262. Rehman Nengroo, Z.; Rauf, A.; Danish, M.; Sharief Dar, M. Evaluation of Fatty Acid Composition and Antimicrobial Activity of Eight Medicinal Plants from Kashmir. Orient. J. Chem. 2020, 36, 44–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  263. Albakry, Z.; Karrar, E.; Ahmed, I.A.M.; Oz, E.; Proestos, C.; El Sheikha, A.F.; Oz, F.; Wu, G.; Wang, X. Nutritional Composition and Volatile Compounds of Black Cumin (Nigella sativa L.) Seed, Fatty Acid Composition and Tocopherols, Polyphenols, and Antioxidant Activity of Its Essential Oil. Horticulturae 2022, 8, 575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  264. Türkmen, M.; Koçer, O. Variation of Components in Laurel (Laurus nobilis L.) Fixed Oil Extracted by Different Methods. Int. J. Chem. Technol. 2021, 5, 167–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  265. Ramadan, M.F.; Khider, M.; Abulreesh, H.H.; Assiri, A.M.A.; Elsanhoty, R.M.; Assaeedi, A.; Elbanna, K. Cold Pressed Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis) Oil. In Cold Pressed Oils; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 683–694. ISBN 978-0-12-818188-1. [Google Scholar]
  266. Rashid, H.M.; Mahmod, A.I.; Afifi, F.U.; Talib, W.H. Antioxidant and Antiproliferation Activities of Lemon Verbena (Aloysia citrodora): An In Vitro and In Vivo Study. Plants 2022, 11, 785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  267. Bhusal, K.K.; Magar, S.K.; Thapa, R.; Lamsal, A.; Bhandari, S.; Maharjan, R.; Shrestha, S.; Shrestha, J. Nutritional and Pharmacological Importance of Stinging Nettle (Urtica dioica L.): A Review. Heliyon 2022, 8, e09717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  268. Pathak, R.; Sharma, H. A Review on Medicinal Uses of Cinnamomum verum (Cinnamon). J. Drug Deliv. Ther. 2021, 11, 161–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  269. Mykhailenko, O.; Ivanauskas, L.; Bezruk, I.; Sidorenko, L.; Lesyk, R.; Georgiyants, V. Characterization of Phytochemical Components of Crocus sativus Leaves: A New Attractive By-Product. Sci. Pharm. 2021, 89, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  270. Ofosu, F.K.; Daliri, E.B.-M.; Elahi, F.; Chelliah, R.; Lee, B.-H.; Oh, D.-H. New Insights on the Use of Polyphenols as Natural Preservatives and Their Emerging Safety Concerns. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2020, 4, 525810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  271. Wu, X.; Dong, S.; Chen, H.; Guo, M.; Sun, Z.; Luo, H. Perilla frutescens: A Traditional Medicine and Food Homologous Plant. Chin. Herb. Med. 2023, 15, 369–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  272. Huang, P.; Wang, Z.; Shi, Y.; Zhang, R.; Feng, X.; Kan, J. Deodorizing Effects of Rosemary Extract on Silver Carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix) and Determination of Its Deodorizing Components. J. Food Sci. 2022, 87, 636–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  273. Ortuño, J.; Serrano, R.; Bañón, S. Use of Dietary Rosemary Diterpenes to Inhibit Rancid Volatiles in Lamb Meat Packed under Protective Atmosphere. Animal 2016, 10, 1391–1401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  274. Zhu, W.; Jiang, B.; Zhong, F.; Chen, J.; Zhang, T. Effect of Microbial Fermentation on the Fishy-Odor Compounds in Kelp (Laminaria japonica). Foods 2021, 10, 2532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  275. Soto-Simenta, S.; Caro, I.; Mateo, J.; Quinto, E.J. Effect of Cooking Lamb Using Maguey Leaves (Agave salmiana) on Meat Volatile Composition. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302584181_Effect_of_cooking_lamb_using_maguey_leaves_Agave_salmiana_on_meat_volatile_composition (accessed on 4 April 2024).
  276. Dias, P.C.G.; Ferreira, E.M.M.; Santos, I.J.; Carlis, M.; Vicente, A.C.S.; Silva, A.S.A.; Assis, R.G.; Comelli, J.H.; Biava, J.S.S.; Soares, L.C.B.; et al. PSVI-16 The Essential Oil of Arnica Montana Positively Modulates the Fatty Acid Profile of Lamb Meat. J. Anim. Sci. 2022, 100, 403–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  277. Purnamayanti, L.; Jamhari, J.; Hanim, C.; Irawan, A. Physicochemical Properties, Oxidative Stability, and Sensory Quality of Lamb Sausage Added with Green Tea Leaves (Camelia sinensis) Powder. Trop. Anim. Sci. J. 2020, 43, 57–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  278. Mahmoud, S.H.; Wafa, M.M. The Antibacterial Activity of Laurus nobilis Leaf Extract and Its Potential Use as a Preservative for Fresh Lamb Meat. Afr. J. Microbiol. Res. 2020, 14, 617–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  279. Martínez-Zamora, L.; Ros, G.; Nieto, G. Synthetic vs. Natural Hydroxytyrosol for Clean Label Lamb Burgers. Antioxidants 2020, 9, 851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  280. Mokhtar, H.; Saad, S.M.; Sabeq, I.I.; Hamad, A.; Edris, S.N. Impact of Cold Pressed Cardamom Oil (Elettaria cardamomum) on The Sensory Attributes and Color Stability of Frozen Chicken Burger. Benha J. Appl. Sci. 2025, 10, 7–13. [Google Scholar]
  281. Šojić, B.; Tomović, V.; Savanović, J.; Kocić-Tanackov, S.; Pavlić, B.; Jokanović, M.; Milidrag, A.; Martinović, A.; Vujadinović, D.; Vukić, M. Sage (Salvia officinalis L.) Essential Oil as a Potential Replacement for Sodium Nitrite in Dry Fermented Sausages. Processes 2021, 9, 424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  282. Sarewicz, M.; Pintscher, S.; Pietras, R.; Borek, A.; Bujnowicz, Ł.; Hanke, G.; Cramer, W.A.; Finazzi, G.; Osyczka, A. Catalytic Reactions and Energy Conservation in the Cytochrome bc1 and b6f Complexes of Energy-Transducing Membranes. Chem. Rev. 2021, 121, 2020–2108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  283. Demir, T.; Ağaoğlu, S. Antioxidant, Antimicrobial and Metmyoglobin Reducing Activity of Artichoke (Cynara scolymus) Powder Extract-Added Minced Meat during Frozen Storage. Molecules 2021, 26, 5494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  284. Palanisamy, S.; Singh, A.; Zhang, B.; Zhao, Q.; Benjakul, S. Effects of Different Phenolic Compounds on the Redox State of Myoglobin and Prevention of Discoloration, Lipid and Protein Oxidation of Refrigerated Longtail Tuna (Thunnus tonggol) Slices. Foods 2024, 13, 1238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  285. Zinchenko, R.; Slyva, Y. Analysis of the Use of Plant Components in the Production of Meat Products. Anim. Sci. Food Technol. 2022, 13, 19–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  286. Saeed, F.; Mehjabeen; Jahan, N.; Ahmad, M. In Vivo Evaluation & Safety Profile Evaluation of Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (L.) Spreng. Extract in Rabbits. Pak. J. Pharm. Sci. 2014, 27, 2197–2205. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  287. Lamien-Meda, A.; Lukas, B.; Schmiderer, C.; Franz, C.; Novak, J. Validation of a Quantitative Assay of Arbutin Using Gas Chromatography in Origanum majorana and Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Extracts. Phytochem. Anal. 2009, 20, 416–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  288. Tocai (Moţoc), A.C.; Kokeric, T.; Tripon, S.; Barbu-Tudoran, L.; Barjaktarevic, A.; Cupara, S.; Vicas, S.I. Sanguisorba minor Scop.: An Overview of Its Phytochemistry and Biological Effects. Plants 2023, 12, 2128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  289. Tocai (Moţoc), A.-C.; Ranga, F.; Teodorescu, A.G.; Pallag, A.; Vlad, A.M.; Bandici, L.; Vicas, S.I. Evaluation of Polyphenolic Composition and Antimicrobial Properties of Sanguisorba officinalis L. and Sanguisorba minor Scop. Plants 2022, 11, 3561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  290. Erener, G.; Turan, C.; Gungor, E.; Altop, A. Effect of Chamomile (Matricaria chamomilla L.), Linden (Tilia cordata Mill.), and Green Tea (Camellia sinensis L.) Aqueous Extract Administration in the Drinking Water during Pre-Slaughter Feed Withdrawal Period in Broiler Chickens. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2023, 55, 252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  291. Uysal, S.; Ugurlu, A.; Zengin, G.; Baloglu, M.C.; Altunoglu, Y.C.; Mollica, A.; Custodio, L.; Neng, N.R.; Nogueira, J.M.F.; Mahomoodally, M.F. Novel in Vitro and in Silico Insights of the Multi-Biological Activities and Chemical Composition of Bidens tripartita L. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2018, 111, 525–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  292. Pateiro, M.; Gómez-Salazar, J.A.; Jaime-Patlán, M.; Sosa-Morales, M.E.; Lorenzo, J.M. Plant Extracts Obtained with Green Solvents as Natural Antioxidants in Fresh Meat Products. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  293. Khadijah, H.A.H.; Nurul, A.M.A.; Shalyda, S. Alchemilla vulgaris and Filipendula ulmaria Extracts as Potential Natural Preservatives in Beef Patties. MAJS 2017, 21, 986–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  294. Mantzourani, I.; Daoutidou, M.; Dasenaki, M.; Nikolaou, A.; Alexopoulos, A.; Terpou, A.; Thomaidis, N.; Plessas, S. Plant Extract and Essential Oil Application against Food-Borne Pathogens in Raw Pork Meat. Foods 2022, 11, 861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  295. Inguglia, E.S.; Song, Z.; Kerry, J.P.; O’Sullivan, M.G.; Hamill, R.M. Addressing Clean Label Trends in Commercial Meat Processing: Strategies, Challenges and Insights from Consumer Perspectives. Foods 2023, 12, 2062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  296. 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]
  297. Liu, Y.; Yin, R.; Tian, Y.; Xu, S.; Meng, X. Curcumin Nanopreparations: Recent Advance in Preparation and Application. Biomed. Mater. 2024, 19, 052009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  298. Li, J.; Jiang, L.; Yang, Y.; Su, Y.; Chang, C.; Gu, L.; Yu, H. A Comprehensive Review in the Formulation of Nanocurcumin and Its Potential Application in Functional Foods. Food Rev. Int. 2024, 40, 3487–3507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  299. Rafiee, Z.; Nejatian, M.; Daeihamed, M.; Jafari, S.M. Application of Curcumin-Loaded Nanocarriers for Food, Drug and Cosmetic Purposes. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 88, 445–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  300. Gadapa, S.; Battula, S.N.; Pushpadass, H.A.; Naik, L.N.; Emerald, M.E. Optimization of Green Tea Catechin Loaded Niosomes by Thin Film Hydration Technique Using Food Grade Surfactants. J. Sci. Res. Rep. 2024, 30, 177–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  301. Yadav, R.; Kumar, D.; Kumari, A.; Yadav, S.K. Encapsulation of Catechin and Epicatechin on BSA NPS Improved Their Stability and Antioxidant Potential. EXCLI J. 2014, 13, 331–346. [Google Scholar]
  302. Ojeda-Piedra, S.A.; Zambrano-Zaragoza, M.L.; González-Reza, R.M.; García-Betanzos, C.I.; Real-Sandoval, S.A.; Quintanar-Guerrero, D. Nano-Encapsulated Essential Oils as a Preservation Strategy for Meat and Meat Products Storage. Molecules 2022, 27, 8187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  303. Tsironi, M.; Kosma, I.S.; Badeka, A.V. The Effect of Whey Protein Films with Ginger and Rosemary Essential Oils on Microbiological Quality and Physicochemical Properties of Minced Lamb Meat. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  304. Bolumar, T.; Orlien, V.; Sikes, A.; Aganovic, K.; Bak, K.H.; Guyon, C.; Stübler, A.; De Lamballerie, M.; Hertel, C.; Brüggemann, D.A. High-pressure Processing of Meat: Molecular Impacts and Industrial Applications. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2021, 20, 332–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  305. Alirezalu, K.; Pateiro, M.; Yaghoubi, M.; Alirezalu, A.; Peighambardoust, S.H.; Lorenzo, J.M. Phytochemical Constituents, Advanced Extraction Technologies and Techno-Functional Properties of Selected Mediterranean Plants for Use in Meat Products. A Comprehensive Review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 100, 292–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  306. Ahmad, N.H.; Yaacob, J.S.; Lim, S.A.H.; Rahim, M.H.A. Food processing to reduce antinutrients in plant-based foods. Int. Food. Res. J. 2023, 30, 25–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  307. Anjali; Garg, D.; Pragi; Kumar, V.; Dimple; Rohilla, M. A Review of Therapeutic Properties and Uses of Salvia officinalis: Review Article. J. Pharma Insights Res. 2024, 2, 146–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  308. Ilie, C.; Golet, I.; Craciunescu, M.; Hogea, E.; Popescu, R.; Horhat, F. Chemical Composition and Antimicrobial Activity of Essential Oil of Western Romanian Salvia officinalis. Rev. Chim. 2016, 67, 131–133. [Google Scholar]
  309. Regulation-1334/2008-EN-EUR-Lex. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1334/oj/eng (accessed on 25 August 2025).
  310. Oniga, I.; Oprean, R.; Toiu, A.; Benedec, D. Chemical Composition of the Essential Oil of Salvia officinalis L. from Romania. Rev. Med. Chir. Soc. Med. Nat. Iasi. 2010, 114, 593–595. [Google Scholar]
  311. Bedrood, Z.; Rameshrad, M.; Hosseinzadeh, H. Toxicological Effects of Camellia sinensis (Green Tea): A Review. Phytother. Res. 2018, 32, 1163–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  312. Girolametti, F.; Annibaldi, A.; Illuminati, S.; Damiani, E.; Carloni, P.; Truzzi, C. Essential and Potentially Toxic Elements (PTEs) Content in European Tea (Camellia sinensis) Leaves: Risk Assessment for Consumers. Molecules 2023, 28, 3802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  313. EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS); Younes, M.; Aggett, P.; Aguilar, F.; Crebelli, R.; Dusemund, B.; Filipič, M.; Frutos, M.J.; Galtier, P.; Gott, D.; et al. Scientific Opinion on the Safety of Green Tea Catechins. EFSA J. 2018, 16, e05239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  314. Elmusa, F.; Elmusa, M. Mini-Review on Coumarins: Sources, Biosynthesis, Bioactivity, Extraction and Toxicology. J. Turk. Chem. Soc. Sect. A Chem. 2024, 11, 933–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  315. Coumarin in Flavourings and Other Food Ingredients with Flavouring Properties—Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Materials in Contact with Food (AFC)|EFSA. Available online: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/793 (accessed on 25 August 2025).
  316. Curcumin—61st Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) Meeting—Chemical and Technical Assessment (CTA). 2003. Available online: https://openknowledge.fao.org/items/25fb60b8-3481-4a7e-ba05-a611af0bf17f (accessed on 25 August 2025).
  317. Bend, J.; Hattan, D.G.; Kawamura, Y.; Knaap, A.G.A.C.; Kuznesof, P.M.; Larsen, J.C.; Meyland, I.; Rao, M.V.; Schlatter, J.; Toledo, M.C.; et al. WHO Technical Report Series: Evaluation of Certain Food Additives: Eugenol. World Health Organ.-Tech. Rep. Ser. 2005, 928, 1–156. [Google Scholar]
  318. Aurich, S.; Spiric, J.; Engin, A.; Simon, J.; Mahler, V.; Treudler, R. Report of a Case of IgE-Mediated Anaphylaxis to Fenugreek. J. Investig. Allergol. Clin. Immunol. 2019, 29, 56–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  319. Joseph, N.I.; Slavin, E.; Peppers, B.P.; Hostoffer, R.W. Fenugreek Anaphylaxis in a Pediatric Patient. Allergy Rhinol. 2018, 9, 2152656718764134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  320. Alessandrello, C.; Sanfilippo, S.; Gangemi, S.; Pioggia, G.; Minciullo, P.L. Fenugreek: New Therapeutic Resource or Emerging Allergen? Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 9195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  321. Seiller, H.; Kurihara, F.; Chasset, F.; Soria, A.; Barbaud, A. Tert-butylhydroquinone Is a Marker for Sensitivity to Nigella sativa Oil Allergy: Five New Cases. Contact Dermat. 2021, 84, 447–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  322. Perić, A.; Sotirović, J.; Jovančević, L.; Medić, S.P. Occupational Rhinitis Caused by Hypersensitivity to Black Pepper. Occup. Med. 2023, 73, 167–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  323. Jung, S.K.; Choi, D.W.; Jung, C.H.; Kim, Y.-J.; Jung, S.Y.; Shon, D.-H. Piper nigrum Fruit Extract Prevents TMA-Induced Allergic Contact Dermatitis by Regulating Th2 Cytokine Production. J. Agric. Sci. 2015, 7, 135–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Plants 14 02737 g001
Figure 1. Research content knowledge mapping for high-frequency keywords between 2000 and 2025.
Figure 1. Research content knowledge mapping for high-frequency keywords between 2000 and 2025.
Plants 14 02737 g001
Plants 14 02737 g002
Figure 2. PRISMA flowchart illustrating the identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion of studies on medicinal plants and their applications in the meat industry.
Figure 2. PRISMA flowchart illustrating the identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion of studies on medicinal plants and their applications in the meat industry.
Plants 14 02737 g002
Plants 14 02737 g003
Figure 3. Schematic representation of the key intervention points where bioactive compounds from medicinal plants act within oxidative processes in meat. Arrows interrupted by a red prohibition symbol denote inhibition of lipid oxidation (enzymatic or photo- and autoxidation) and protein oxidation (via myoglobin transformation). The combined effects contribute to oxidation control, extended shelf life, and the development of clean-label meat products. (Illustration made via www.BioRender.com, accessed on 31 July 2025).
Figure 3. Schematic representation of the key intervention points where bioactive compounds from medicinal plants act within oxidative processes in meat. Arrows interrupted by a red prohibition symbol denote inhibition of lipid oxidation (enzymatic or photo- and autoxidation) and protein oxidation (via myoglobin transformation). The combined effects contribute to oxidation control, extended shelf life, and the development of clean-label meat products. (Illustration made via www.BioRender.com, accessed on 31 July 2025).
Plants 14 02737 g003
Table 1. Numbers of published papers on medicinal plant families based on annual publications.
Table 1. Numbers of published papers on medicinal plant families based on annual publications.
Plants Family Years of PublicationsNo. of Publications
Amaranthaceae2016, 2017, 2021–20227
Apiaceae2004, 2011–2012, 2014–2015, 2018, 2020–202120
Aquifoliaceae2010, 2011, 2019, 2021–20229
Fabaceae2011, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2021 11
Fagaceae2015, 2018–202310
Iridaceae2010, 2014, 2018, 2020–20238
Lamiaceae2000, 2003–2004, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2013–2014, 2016–2025 99
Lauraceae2012, 2014, 2017–202321
Myrtaceae2011, 2017, 2018–202417
Onagraceae20251
Piperaceae2014, 2016, 2019, 2021, 20246
Poaceae2006, 2007, 2011, 2015, 2019, 2021–202414
Ranunculaceae2001, 2007–2008, 2013, 2014, 2018–20199
Theaceae2014, 2018, 20228
Urticaceae2017, 2021–20248
Verbenaceae2014, 2017, 2019, 2021–2022, 20247
Zingerberaceae2009, 2015, 2018–202325
TOTAL 280
Table 2. Keyword frequencies and thematic clusters for medicinal plants in meat products.
Table 2. Keyword frequencies and thematic clusters for medicinal plants in meat products.
KeywordAppearancesCluster/Category
Lipid oxidation70/Red bubbles (lipid oxidation and chemical compounds)
Antioxidant57/Blue bubbles (antioxidant activity or natural antioxidants)
Meat quality44/Green and yellow bubbles (meat quality)
Antioxidant activity36/Blue bubbles (antioxidant activity or natural antioxidants)
Natural antioxidant35/Blue bubbles (antioxidant activity or natural antioxidants)
Meat23/Green and yellow bubbles (meat quality)
Medicinal plants15/Orange bubbles (medicinal plants)
Table 3. Phytochemical composition and biological properties of medicinal plants.
Table 3. Phytochemical composition and biological properties of medicinal plants.
FamilyScientific/Common NamePhotosPhytochemical CompositionBiological Properties
VerbenaceaeAloysia citrodora Paláu/lemon verbenaPlants 14 02737 i001Flavones: luteolin 7-diglucuronide, apigenin, scutellarein, and pedalitin;
Flavonols: kaempferol;
Phenylethanoid glycosides: verbascoside;
Essential oils: geranial, neral, α-curcumene, spathulenol, and caryophyllene oxide [27,28,29].		Antibacterial, antiviral, antioxidant, anticancer, anti-inflammatory, insecticidal, and immunomodulatory properties [27,30,31].
TheaceaeCamellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze/tea plantPlants 14 02737 i002Flavones: myricetin glycosides;
Flavonols: quercetin glycosides, camelliquercetiside, quercetin-3-O-β-D- glucopyranoside, and rutin;
Flavanols: epigallocatechin 3-O-gallate, epicatechin, and catechin;
Triterpenoid saponins: teasperol and teasperin;
Alkaloids: caffeine, theophylline, and theobromine;
Nutrients: calcium, magnesium, iron, and manganese;
Other: L-theanine [32,33,34].		Antioxidant, antibacterial, antiviral, anticancer, antidiabetic, and neuroprotective effects [33,35].
AmaranthaceaeDysphania ambrosioides (L.) Mosyakin & Clemants/Jerusalem teaPlants 14 02737 i003Flavonols: quercetin 3-O-rutinoside, quercetin 3-O-glucoside, quercetin O-rhamnosyl-glucoside, and kaempferol 3-O-rutinoside;
Phenolic acids: p-coumaric acid and ferulic acid;
Nutrients: potassium, calcium, magnesium, iron, fructose, glucose, sucrose, malic, ascorbic, citric, and fumaric acids [36,37,38].		Antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antipyretic, analgesic, antidiabetic, antimalarial, antipyretic, and insecticidal effects [39,40].
LauraceaeCinnamomum verum J.Presl/Ceylon cinnamon treePlants 14 02737 i004Flavanols: proanthocyanidins A and B and catechin;
Flavonols: kaempferol and quercetin;
Phenolic acids: vanillic acid, caffeic acid, gallic acid, p-coumaric acid, ferulic acid, and chlorogenic acid;
Essential oils: linalool and (E)-cinnamyl acetate β-caryophyllene;
Nutrients: cinnamic acid, vitamin A, vitamin C, thiamin, riboflavin, vitamin B6, calcium, magnesium, and iron [41,42].		Antibacterial, antifungal, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antidiabetic, and anticancer activities [43,44,45].
IridaceaeCrocus sativus L./saffron crocusPlants 14 02737 i005Flavonols: astragalin, kaempferol-3- glycopyranosyl (1-2)-6 acetylglucopyranoside, kaempferol-3-glucopyranosyl (1-2)-glucopyranoside, myricetin, and quercetin;
Anthocyanins: cyanidin-3-glucoside, delphinidin, and petunidin;
Carotenoids: crocin and crocetin;
Essential oils: safranal and picrocrocin;
Nutrients: riboflavin, thiamine, potassium, manganese, magnesium, zinc, and sodium [46,47,48].		Antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anticancer, and antidepressant functions [49,50,51].
ApiaceaeCuminum cyminum L./cuminPlants 14 02737 i006Flavones: apigenin, luteolin, amentoflavone, and 5,7-dihydroxy-3,4-dimethoxyflavone;
Flavonols: kaempferol and quercetin;
Phenolic acids: caffeic acid, ferulic acid and p-coumaric acid, and protocatechuic acid;
Essential oils: cuminaldehyde, cymene, terpenoids, p-menthal,3-dien-7-al, p-mentha-l,4-dien-7-al, α-terpinene, p-cymene, and β-pinene;
Nutrients: calcium, iron, magnesium, and phosphorus, and niacin [52,53].		Antimicrobial, diuretic, antihypertensive, antidiabetic, anticancer, immune-modulatory, anthelmintic, analgesic, anti-inflammatory, spasmolytic, bronchodilator, gastroprotective, hepatoprotective, and renal-protective properties [54,55,56].
ZingiberaceaeCurcuma longa L./turmericPlants 14 02737 i007Flavones: luteolin;
Flavonols: myricetin, quercetin, and kaempferol;
Curcuminoids: curcumin, demethoxycurcumin, and bisdemethoxycurcumin;
Essential oils: α-turmerone, curlone, γ-turmerone, β-sesquiphellandrene, and the monoterpenes β-pinene, and para-cymene;
Nutrients: sodium, iron, magnesium, calcium, and vitamins C and E [57,58]. 		Antibacterial, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anticarcinogenic, antidiabetic, and wound-healing activities [59,60].
PoaceaeCymbopogon citratus (DC.) Stapf/lemongrassPlants 14 02737 i008Flavones: isoorientin 2’-O-rhamnoside, luteolin, and apigenin;
Flavonols: quercetin and kaempferol;
Phenolic acids: caffeoylquinic acid and chlorogenic acids;
Essential oils: β-myrcene, β-ocimene, linalool, citronellal, citronellol, caryophyllene, and β-pinene;
Nutrients: citric acid, vitamin D, potassium, sodium, magnesium, manganese, iron, and zinc [61,62]. 		Antibacterial, antiamoebic, anti-inflammatory, antimalarial, and ascaricidal activity [61,63].
ZingiberaceaeElettaria cardamomum (L.) Maton/true cardamomPlants 14 02737 i009Flavonols: quercetin and kaempferol;
Flavones: luteolin;
Flavanols: catechin;
Phenolic acids: protocatechuic acid, caffeic acid, syringic acid, and 5-O-caffeoylquinic acid, gallic acid, vanillic acid, ferulic acid, and synapic acid;
Anthocyanidin: pelargonidin;
Essential oils: 1,8-cineole, terpineol, limonene, terpinyl acetates, linalyl acetate, linalool, sabinene, eucalyptol, terpineol, and limonene;
Nutrients: vitamin C, calcium, potassium, magnesium, phosphorus, sulfur, and manganese [64,65,66].		Antioxidant, antitumor, antihypertensive, immunomodulatory, anti-inflammatory, antidiabetic, antiulcerogenic, and insecticidal activities [67,68,69].
OnagraceaeEpilobium angustifolium L./fireweedPlants 14 02737 i010Flavonols: quercetin-3-O-rhamnoside, quercetin-3-O-glucuronide, kaempferol, and myricetin;
Phenolic acids: gallic acid, caffeic acid, ellagic acid, ferulic acid, and protocatechuic acid;
Fatty acids: tricosanoic, nervonic, linoleic, palmitic, caprylic, caproic, and butyric acids [70,71,72].		Antioxidant, anticancer, antiandrogen, immunostimulatory, metal-binding, and antimicrobial activities [71,72].
MyrtaceaeEugenia uniflora L./Pitanga or Surinam cherryPlants 14 02737 i011Flavonols: kaempferol pentoside, myricetin galloyl hexoside, myricetin hexoside, myricetin pentoside, myricetin rhamnoside, quercetin galloyl hexoside, quercetin rhamnoside, quercetin hexoside and quercetin pentoside, and rutin;
Phenolic acids: gallic acid and ellagic acid,
Anthocyanins: cyanidin-3-glucoside and delphinidin-3-glucoside;
Carotenoids: lycopene, γ-carotene, and β-cryptoxanthin
Essential oils: trans-β-ocimene, cis-ocimene, β-pinene, eugenilones A-N, seline-1,3,7-triene-8-one oxide, and β-caryophyllene;
Nutrients: vitamins C and A [73,74,75].		Antimicrobial, antiviral, antifungal, hepatoprotective, and antioxidant effects [76,77].
LauraceaeLaurus nobilis L./bay laurelPlants 14 02737 i012Flavonols: kaempferol-3-O-rhamnoside, kaempferol-3-O-(2′′,4”-di-E-p-coumaroyl)-rhamnoside, kaempferol-3-O-arabinoside, isoquercitrin, quercetin-3-O-rhamnoside, 3′-methoxyquercetin-3-O-glucopyranoside, and rutin;
Flavones: luteolin and izovitexin-2′′-rhamnoside;
Phenolic acids: gallic, vanillic, and rosmarinic acids;
Essential oils: 1,8-cineole, α-terpinyl acetate, and α-terpineol;
Fatty acids: lauric, palmitic, oleic (ω-9), and linoleic (ω-6) acids [78,79,80,81]. 		Antioxidant, antimicrobial, digestive, antitumor, analgesic, anti-inflammatory, antiproliferative, antimutagenic, anticholinergic, and insect-repellent effects [82,83].
LauraceaeLitsea cubeba (Lour.) Pers./mountain pepperPlants 14 02737 i013Flavonols: kaempferol-3 and 7-glucosides, naringin, and quercetin;
Phenolic acids: caffeic acid;
Essential oils: E-citral (geranial), Z-citral (neral) and D-limonene, β-thujene, β-pinene, α-pinene, 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one, and linalool;
Fatty acids: palmitic acid, stearic acid, and myristoleic acid;
Nutrients: vitamins E and A [84,85,86]. 		Antibacterial, antioxidant, antiparasitic, anticancer, and cytotoxic effects [87,88,89].
AquifoliaceaeMate (Ilex paraguariensis) A.St.-Hil./Yerba matePlants 14 02737 i014Flavonols: quercetin, kaempferol, and rutin;
Flavones: luteolin;
Phenolic acids: 3-O-caffeoylquinic acid, 5-O-caffeoylquinic acid, 4-O-caffeoylquinic acid, and caffeic acid;
Nutrients: vitamins (A, B1, B2, B3, C, and E) and minerals (potassium, magnesium, calcium, manganese, iron, selenium, phosphorus, and zinc) [90,91,92]. 		Anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, hypocholesterolemic, hypotensive, and antidiabetic activities [93,94].
RanunculaceaeNigella sativa L./black cuminPlants 14 02737 i015Flavanols: catechin;
Flavones: apigenin;
Phenolic acids: chlorogenic acid, gallic acid, and vanillic acid;
Alkaloids: nigellicin, nigellidin, and quanazoline;
Essential oils: nigellone, thymoquinone, thymohydroquinone, dithymoquinone, thymol, carvacrol, α and β-pinene, d-limonene, and d-citronellol; volatile oils of the seeds: p-cymene, t-anethole, 4-terpineol, and longifoline;
Fatty acids: arachidonic (ω-6), eicosadienoic (ω-6), linoleic (ω-6), linolenic (ω-3), oleic (ω-9), palmitoleic (ω-7), palmitic, and stearic acids;
Phytosterols: beta-sitosterol, cycloeucalenol, cycloartenol, sterol esters, and sterol glucosides [95,96,97,98].		Antioxidant, antitussive, gastroprotective, antianxiety, antiulcer, antiasthmatic, anticancer, anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory antitumor, and hepatoprotective effects, as well as protection against cardiovascular disorders [99,100].
LamiaceaeOriganum vulgare L./oreganoPlants 14 02737 i016Flavones: luteolin, scutellarein, apigenin, apigenin-7-O-glucoside, and naringenin;
Flavonols: quercetin O-hexoside, quercetin dimethyl ether, and quercitrin;
Phenolic acids: rosmarinic acid, caffeic acid, gallic acid, and chlorogenic acid;
Essential oils: carvacrol and/or thymol, linalool, and p-cymene;
Fatty acids: linoleic (ω-6), oleic (ω-9), and stearic palmitic acids;
Nutrients: iron, copper, sulfur, chlorine, iodine, and selenium [101,102,103].		Antimicrobial, antiviral, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antispasmodic, antiurolithic, antiproliferative, and neuroprotective effects [104,105].
PiperaceaePiper nigrum L./black pepperPlants 14 02737 i017Flavonols: quercetin, kaempferol, and rhamnetin;
Phenolic acids: gallic acid, naringenin, moracin C, vanillin, and 6-gingerol;
Alkaloids: piperine, pellitorine, and piperolactam D
Essential oils: sabinene, 3-carene, D-limonene, α-pinene, caryophyllene, β-phellandrene, α-phellandrene, α-thujene, and β-bisabolene;
Nutrients: carbohydrates, proteins, calcium, magnesium, potassium, iron, and vitamin C [106,107].		Antimicrobial, cytotoxicity, insecticidal, anti-inflammatory, and toxicity effects [108,109].
FabaceaeNeltuma velutina Wooton/velvet mesquitePlants 14 02737 i018Flavones: luteolin, apigenin, apigenin-7-O-glucoside, vitexin, and isovitexin;
Flavonols: quercetin and kaempferol;
Phenolic acids: gallic acid, hydroxybenzoic acid, chlorogenic acid, ferulic acid, caffeic acid, and p-coumaric acid;
Fatty acids: stearic acid, linoleic acid (ω-6), oleic acid (ω-9), palmitic acid, and arachidic acid;
Nutrients: calcium and potassium [110,111].		Antibacterial, antihelmintic, insecticidal, antioxidant, and cytotoxic effects [111,112].
FagaceaeQuercus alba L./white oakPlants 14 02737 i019Flavonols: quercetin and kaempferol;
Flavanols: catechin and epicatechin;
Flavanones: naringin;
Tannins: castalagin and vescalagin;
Phenolic acids: gallic, ellagic, vanillic, p-hydroxybenzoic, syringic, salicylic, p-coumaric, caffeic, ferulic acid, sinapic acid, and protocatechuic acid;
Anthocyanins: cyanidin-3-O-glucoside and cyanidin-3-O-sophoroside;
Fatty acids: linoleic (ω-6) and palmitic acids;
Nutrients: vitamin B12, iron, and potassium [113,114,115].		Antibacterial, antiviral, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anticancer activities [116,117,118].
LamiaceaeSalvia rosmarinus Spenn./rosemaryPlants 14 02737 i020Flavones: luteolin and apigenin;
Flavanols: gallocatechin and epigallocatechin;
Phenolic acids: rosmarinic acid, caffeic acid, ferulic acid, and quinic acid;
Phenolic diterpenes: carnosic acid, carnosol
Essential oils: 1,8-cineole, camphor, α-pinene, camphene, α-terpineol,
Terpenoids: ursolic acid, betulinic acid, carnosic acid, and carnosol;
Fatty acids: linoleic acid (ω-6) and oleic acid (ω-9);
Nutrients: phosphorus, potassium, copper, vitamin A, vitamin C, thiamin, and riboflavin [119,120,121,122]. 		Antifungal, antibacterial, antioxidant, analgesic, anti-inflammatory, antirheumatic, antispasmodic (in renal colic and dysmenorrhea), carminative, and choleretic activities [123,124].
PoaceaeSaccharum officinarum L./sugar canePlants 14 02737 i021Flavones: apigenin, luteolin, tricin, orientin, vitexin, schaftoside, and swertisin;
Flavonols: kaempferol-3-O-rutinoside, quercetin-3-O-rutinoside, and kaempferol-3-O-glucopyranoside;
Phenolic acids: sinapic acid and caffeic acid;
Fatty acids: palmitic and linoleic (ω-6) acids
Nutrients: sucrose, fibers, and vitamin C [125,126]. 		Anti-inflammatory, analgesic, antihyperglycemic, diuretic, hepatoprotective, diuretic, and antithrombotic effects [127,128,129].
LamiaceaeSalvia officinalis L./sagePlants 14 02737 i022Flavonols: quercetin, kaempferol, and rutin;
Flavones: luteolin 7-O-glucoside;
Flavanols: epicatecin and epigallocatechin gallate;
Phenolic acids: rosmarinic acid, methyl rosmarinate, caffeic acid, salvianolic acid K, syringic acid, and vanillic acid;
Essential oils: α-thujone, (E)-β-caryophyllene, 1,8-cineole, α-humulene, β-pinene, β-thujone, camphor, allo-aromadendrene, borneol, and α-pinene;
Nutrients: magnesium, zinc, copper, and vitamins A, C, and E [130,131,132].		Antioxidant, anticancer, antimutagenic, anti-inflammatory, and antiseptic effects [133,134,135].
LamiaceaeSatureja khuzestanica Jamzad/savoryPlants 14 02737 i023Flavones: apigenin, galangin, luteolin, cirsilineol, and diosmin;
Flavonols: quercetin, epigallocatechin-3-O-gallate, kaempferol, and myrcetin;
Phenolic acids: rosmarinic acid, ferulic acid, gallic acid, and vanillic acid;
Essential oils: carvacrol, ƴ-terpinene, p-cymene, α-terpinene, and thymol;
Fatty acids: linoleic acid (ω-6), palmitic acid, 9-octadecenoic acid, methyl ester, and hexadecanoic acid;
Nutrients: potassium and α-tocopherol [136,137,138].		Antibacterial, antifungal, antioxidant, antidiabetic, antihyperlipidemic, and anti-inflammatory effects [139,140].
LamiaceaeSatureja montana L./winter savoryPlants 14 02737 i024Flavones: luteolin and apigenin;
Flavonols: quercetin, kaempferol, and rutin;
Phenolic acids: ellagic, caffeic, p-coumaric, protocatehuic, rosmarinic, and syringic acids;
Essential oils: linalool, α-terpineol, cis-sabinene hydrate, and p-cymene;
Nutrients: vitamins A, C, B1, B3, and B6; potassium; iron; calcium; magnesium; manganese; zinc; and selenium;
Others: ursolic acid and oleanolic acid [141,142,143].		Antibacterial, antiviral, antioxidant, antiseptic, antifungal, carminative, and digestive properties [143,144,145].
MyrtaceaeSyzygium aromaticum L./clovePlants 14 02737 i025Flavones: apigenin;
Flavonols: quercetin, myricetin, rhamnocitrin, kumatakenin, kaempferol, pachypodol, and isorhamnetin;
Phenolic acids: gallic acid, ellagic acid, and salvianolic acid C;
Essential oils: eugenol, eugenyl acetate, caryophyllene, and α-humulene;
Fatty acids: palmitic, stearic, linoleic (ω-6), and linolenic (ω-3) acids;
Nutrients: aspartic acid; glutamic acid; arginine; alanine; vitamins, including B1, B6, C, K, riboflavin, and A; zinc; iron; calcium; and manganese [146,147,148].		Antibacterial, antiviral, and antifungal activities, as well as hypoglycemic, antitumor, and anti-inflammatory effects [149,150].
LamiaceaeThymbra capitatus (L.) Cav./Mediterranean wild thymePlants 14 02737 i026Flavones: apigenin and flavone;
Flavonols: myristin, quercetin dihydrite, and campherol;
Flavanols: catechin and epicatechin;
Phenolic acids: gallic acid, chlorogenic acid, and rosmarinic acid;
Others: resorcinol, carnosic acid;
Essential oils: thymol, carvacrol, γ-terpinene, and p-cymene;
Nutrients: vitamins C and E, potassium, magnesium, lignoceric acid, and hexadecanoic acid [151,152,153].		Antibacterial, antioxidant, analgesic, and antiseptic properties [154,155,156].
LamiaceaeThymus kotschyanus Boiss. & Hohen./Kotschyanus thymePlants 14 02737 i027Phenolic acids: gallic acid;
Essential oils: carvacrol, thymol, p-cymene, and geraniol;
Nutrients: β-carotene and vitamins C and E [157,158,159].		Antifungal, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, and expectorant properties [160,161,162].
LamiaceaeThymus serpyllum L./wild thymePlants 14 02737 i028Flavones: catechol, naringin, and luteolin.
Phenolic acids: rosmarinic acid, gallic acid, caffeic acid, p-coumaric acid, ferullic acid, and veratric acid;
Essential oils: thymol, carvacrol, p-cymol, linalol, and α -pinene;
Nutrients: potassium, iron, vitamin A, vitamin C, and vitamin E [163,164].		Antimicrobial, antioxidant, antiseptic, antispasmodic, and antihypertensive effects [165,166,167].
ApiaceaeTrachyspermum ammi Sprague/carawayPlants 14 02737 i029Flavones: apigenin;
Flavonols: quercetin;
Phenolic acids: gallic acid, chlorogenic acid, caffeic acid, p-coumaric acid, ferulic acid, and rosmarinic acid;
Essential oils: γ-terpinene, ρ-cymene, pulegone, carvacrol, and thymol;
Nutrients: calcium, phosphorous, iron, nicotinic acid, and carotene [168,169,170].		Antifungal, antioxidant, antimicrobial, antinociceptive, cytotoxic activity, hypolipidemic, antihypertensive, antispasmodic, and diuretic properties [171,172,173].
FabaceaeTrigonella foenum-graecum L./fenugreekPlants 14 02737 i030Flavones: apigenin, orientin, luteolin, vitexin, and isovitexin;
Flavonols: quercetin and kaempferol 7- O-rhamnosyl-(1→2)-glucoside;
Phenolic acids: gallic acid, galloyl-coumaric acid pentoside, caffeoyl-coumaroyl-quinic acid, tricaffeoyl-glucosyl-glucoside, and dihydrogallic acid derivative;
Saponins: diosgenin, yamogenin, tigogenin, and neotigogenin;
Nutrients: arginine; lysine; histidine; calcium; iron; vitamins B, A, and C; and nicotinic acid
Others: 4-hydroxyisoleucine [174,175,176].		Antimicrobial, antioxidant, anticancer, hypoglycaemic, hypocholesterolemic, immunomodulatory, and neuroprotective effects [174,177,178].
UrticaceaeUrtica dioica L./nettlePlants 14 02737 i031Flavonols: Quercetin 3-O-rutinoside, quercetin 3-O-galactoside; kaempferol 3-O-glucoside, and isorhamnetol 3-O-rutinoside;
Flavones: apigenin, luteolin 7-O-neohesperidoside, and luteolin 7-O-b-d-Glucopyranoside;
Phenolic acids: chlorogenic, neochlorogenic, cichoric, and caffeoylmalic acids;
Essential oils: hexanal, linalool, carvone, cumin aldehyde, and carvacrol;
Fatty acids: palmitic acid and linolenic acid (ω-3);
Nutrients: glucose, sucrose, vitamin A, potassium, phosphorus, magnesium, sodium, and zinc;
Others: inositol and rhamnose [179,180,181].		Antioxidant, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, antiulcer, and analgesic effects [182,183,184].
LamiaceaeZataria multiflora Boiss./Shirazi thyme Plants 14 02737 i032Flavones: apigenin, luteolin, and 6-hydroxyluteolin;
Phenolic acids: gallic acid, syringic acid, protocatechuic acid, and 4-hydroxybenzoic acid;
Essential oils: carvacrol; gamma-terpinene, alpha-pinene, eucalyptol, globulol, thymol, and linalool;
Nutrients: vitamin E;
Others: oleanolic acid, β-sitosterol, and betolin [185,186,187].		Antibacterial, antiseptic, analgesic, and carminative effects [188,189,190].
ZingiberaceaeZingiber officinalis Roscoe/common gingerPlants 14 02737 i033Flavonols: quercetin, kaempferol, and rutin;
Flavones: naringenin;
Flavanols: catechin and epicatechin;
Phenolic acids: gallic acid, ferulic acid, caffeic acid, and p-coumaric acid;
Essential oils: gingerols (6-gingerol, 8-gingerol, and 10-gingerol), β-bisabolene, α-curcumene, zingiberene, α-farnesene, and β-sesquiphellandrene;
Nutrients: vitamin E, iron, potassium, and sodium [191,192,193].		Antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, anticancer, antipyretic, antidiabetic, analgesic, antihelmintic, and antiviral activities [194,195,196].
All the photos were taken from https://identify.plantnet.org/ (accesed on 24 August 2025) and resized to fit the table.
Table 4. Medicinal plants with high antioxidant capacities utilized in meat products and the main outcomes of their applications.
Table 4. Medicinal plants with high antioxidant capacities utilized in meat products and the main outcomes of their applications.
Scientific Plant NameType of Anatomical Part Used/Form UsedType of Meat UsedQuantity Used Storage ConditionsPhenolic Content and Antioxidant CapacityMain OutcomesReferences
C. sinensis (L.) KuntzeLeaf extract/direct
in formula incorporation		Fish mince0.01%6 months frozen storage at −18 ± 1 °CNot determined↓ level of TBARS
↓ level of peroxide 		[199]
C. sinensis (L.) Kuntze
and I. paraguariensis		Whole-plant extracts/direct
in formula incorporation		Brine-injected pork chops100, 350, or 700 ppm extract7 days at 5 °C At 100 ppm: TPC: 29 ± 0 ppm GAE (C. sinensis); TPC: 28 ± 4 ppm GAE (I. paraguariensis)
At 350 ppm: TPC: 68 ± 13 ppm GAE (C. sinensis); TPC: 83 ± 11 ppm GAE (I. paraguariensis)
At 700 ppm: TPC: 105 ± 36 ppm GAE (C. sinensis); TPC:150 ± 33 ppm GAE (I. paraguariensis)		↑ antioxidant capacity
↓ level of TBARS		[200]
D. ambrosioides (L.) Mosyakin & ClemantsWhole plant/water and ethanol extractsRaw ground pork50 mL/kg9 days at 4 °CTPC: 126.3 mg GAE/100 g; TFC: 147.26 mg QE/100 g; DPPH (IC50): 0.97 mg/mL; DPPH: 16.65% of radical inhibition↑ antioxidant capacity[201]
C. longa L.Rhizome powder/direct in formula incorporationRabbit patties3.5%7 days at 4 ± 1 °CFRAP: 0.94 mmol Trolox; DPPH: 2.51 mmol Trolox↑ antioxidant capacity
↓ lipid
oxidation		[202]
C. longa L.Roots/extractFresh lamb sausage 0.025, 0.05, and 0.075%18 days at 2 ± 1 °CTPC: 5018.42 mg GAE/100 g; ABTS: 1490.53 mg AAE/100 g; DPPH: 42.92 mg TE/g; FRAP: 980.27 µmol Fe+2/100 g↑ antioxidant capacity
↓ lipid oxidation 		[203]
C. citratus (DC.) StapfWhole fruit/cereal alcohol (70%)Fresh chicken sausage0.5 and 1.0%42 days at 4 °CTPC: 133.84 mg GAE/g; TFC: 13.42 mg QE/g; IC50: 0.45 mg/mL↑ antioxidant capacity[204]
E. angustifolium L.Whole plant/methanol plantBeef burgers1 g, 3 g, and 9 g4 °C ± 1 °C for a period of 8 daysDPPH: 48.80 ± 3.74%
FRAP: 2198.05 ± 78.56 mg/L; TPC: 1263.48 ± 12.13 mg GAE/100 mL; TFC: 278.43 ± 3.27 mg CE/100 mL		↑ antioxidant capacity[205]
E. uniflora L.Leaf powder/hydroethanolic extractPork burgers0.02, 0.05, and 0.1%Refrigerated storage (2 ± 1 °C) under light to simulate supermarket conditions for 18 daysTPC: 229.38 mg GAE/g; DPPH: 242 µg/mL↑ antioxidant capacity
↓ level of TBARS		[206]
E. uniflora L. Leaves/hydroethanolic extractLamb burgers250 mg/kg18 days at 2 °CTPC: 229.38 mg GAE/g; DPPH: 242 μg/mL; ABTS: 570.97 mg TE/g↑ antioxidant capacity
↓ level of TBARS		[207]
N. sativa L.Seed extract/hydroethanolic extractFresh minced beef1.5%9 days at 4 °CNot determined↓ level of TBARS
↓ lipid
oxidation		[208]
O. vulgare L.Essential oil/direct
in formula incorporation		Ground chicken breast100 ppm; 300 ppm; 400 ppm7 days at 4 °C Not determined↓ lipid oxidation
↓ protein oxidation		[209]
P. nigrum L.Whole plant/anhydrous ethanolFresh pork0.1 and 0.5% (v/v) in 20%9 days at 4 °CNot determined↓ level of TBARS[210]
N. velutina WootonLeaves/ultrasound-assisted extraction—ethanolPork patties2%10 days at 4 °CTPC: 278.50 mg GAE/g; TFC: 226.8 mg RE/g; DPPH (100 µg/mL): 85.3% radical inhibition↑ antioxidant capacity[211]
Q. alba L. Chips/subcritical waterPork patties0.05, 0.5, and 1.0%12 days at 4 °CTPC: 2180.8 mg GAE/L; ABTS: 32.00 mM TE/L; DPPH: 31.20 mM TE/L↑ antioxidant capacity
↓ lipid
oxidation		[212]
S. rosmarinus Spenn.Leaves/ethanolic extract 80% (v/v)Chicken surimi200 mg/kg14 days at 4 °CTPC: 24.46 mg/g; TFC: 38.36 mg/g;
TDTC: 88.76 mg/g		↑ antioxidant capacity
↓ level of TBARS		[213]
S. rosmarinus Spenn.Essential oil of leaves/direct
in formula incorporation		Poultry fillets0.2%Two different conditions: air-packaging and modified atmosphereNot determined↓ lipid oxidation
↓ rancidity		[214]
S. officinarum L.Whole plant/direct
in formula incorporation		Raw ground pork and beef50 μg/mL14 days at 4 °CDPPH: 191.00 mg TE/g; ABTS: 359.80 mg TE/g; FRAP: 97.80 mg TE/g↑ antioxidant capacity
↓ level of TBARS
↓ lipid oxidation		[215]
S. officinalis L.Whole plant/subcritical fluid extractionFresh pork sausages0.05, 0.075, and 0.1 μL/g8 days at 3 °CDPPH (IC50): 0.0242 mg/mL↑ antioxidant capacity[216]
S. montana L.Aerial parts/direct
in formula incorporation		Fresh pork sausages0.075 and 0.150 µL/g10 days at 3 °CDPPH: 26.17–27.87 µg/mL↑ antioxidant capacity
↓ lipid oxidation		[217]
S. aromaticum L.Powder/condensed aqueous extractBeef patties0.1%10 days at 4 °CNot determined↓ lipid oxidation
↓ level of TBARS		[218]
S. aromaticum L.Dried flower buds/clove extract was dissolved in edible ethanol before being mixed with the ingredientsChinese-style sausage0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, and
2%		21 days at 4 °CNot determined↓ level of TBARS
↓ lipid oxidation		[219]
T. serpyllum L.Whole plant/subcritical fluid extractionGround pork patties0.075 and 0.150 µL/g3 days at 4 °CABTS: 576.7–665.6 µM TE/g; DPPH: 37.5–58.3 µM TE/g↑ antioxidant capacity
↓ lipid oxidation		[220]
T. foenum-graecum L.Seed powder/direct
in formula incorporation		Rabbit sausage5, 10, or 15%Frozen storage at ̶ 18 °C ± 1 for 3 monthsNot determined↓ lipid oxidation[221]
Z. multiflora Boiss.Aerial parts/corn starch films and fortified nanoemulsionGround beef patties6%20 days at 4 ± 1 °CNot determined↓ level of TBARS
↓ level of peroxide		[222]
AAE—ascorbic acid equivalents; ABTS—2,2′-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzthiazolin-6-sulfonic acid; BHT—butylated hydroxytoluene; DPPH—2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl) radical scavenging assays; FRAP—ferric-reducing antioxidant power assay; GAE—gallic acid equivalent; IC50—half-maximal inhibitory concentration; FRSA—free-radical scavenging activity; QE—quercetin equivalent; PCPs—physicochemical properties; RE—rutin equivalents; RPA—reducing power assay; TBARS—thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances; TE—Trolox equivalent; TEAC—Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity; TFC—total flavonoid content; TPC—total phenolic content; TDTC—total diterpene compounds; ↓—low/decrease; ↑—high/increase.
Table 5. Application of medicinal plants with antimicrobial effects extracted with emerging technologies in meat and meat products.
Table 5. Application of medicinal plants with antimicrobial effects extracted with emerging technologies in meat and meat products.
Scientific Plant NameType of Anatomical Part Used/Form UsedType of Meat UsedQuantity
Used 		Storage
Conditions		Antimicrobial EffectReferences
A. citrodora Paláu and
S. aromaticum L.		Leaves of A. citriodora and flowers of buds of S. aromaticum/sodium alginate-based coatings Chicken breast0.2 and
0.5%		15 days,
refrigerated		Total bacterial count, Pseudomonas, lactic acid bacteria, psychrotrophic bacteria, Enterobacteriaceae, molds, and yeasts[237]
C. verum J. PreslCinnamon essential oil/polymer matrix Chicken meat25 and 50%21 at 4 °CS. typhimurium, C. jejuni, and L. monocytogenes[238]
C. sativus L.Petals/films based on chitosan and methylcellulose nanofiberLamb meat3%25 days at 3 °CE. coli and S. aureus[239]
C. cyminum L.Powdered
cumin seed/chitosan-based coating		Chicken meat0.2,
0.4, and 0.6%		9 days at 4 °CTotal count of bacteria, Enterobacteriaceae, S. aureus, E. coli, mold, and yeast[240]
C. citratus (DC.) StapfAerial-part essential oil/poly lactic acid filmPork sausages2%12 days storage at 4 °CL. monocytogenes[241]
C. citratus (DC.) StapfLeaf oils/direct in formula incorporationPork loin5 mg/mL8 days at 4 °C L. monocytogenes[242]
L. nobilis L. Leaf essential oil/liposomes encapsulated with
silver nanoparticles		Pork1%15 days at 4 °C E. coli and S. aureus[243]
N. sativa L.Black cumin essential oil/multilayer film based on chitosan and alginateChicken meat1%5 days at 4 °CS. aureus and E. coli[244]
O. vulgare L.Leaves/direct nanoemulsion encapsulationChicken pâté5%8 days at (4.0 ± 2 °C)S. aureus and E. coli[245]
S. montana L.Supercritical
fluid extract of aerial parts		Cooked pork sausages0.025, 0.050,
0.075, and 0.100 µL/g		0, 15, and 30 days at 4 °CSalmonella spp., E. coli, and L. monocytogenes[246]
S. rosmarinus Spenn.Leaves/direct
in formula incorporation		Turkey ham1%63 days at 4 °CL. monocytogenes counts[247]
S. rosmarinus Spenn.Leaves/whey protein isolate-based filmLamb meat2%15 days at (4.0 ± 1 °C)Total count of psychrotrophic bacteria[248]
S. rosmarinus Spenn.Leaf essential oil/spraying on packagingBeef meat4%
(30% essential oil/70% ethanol)		4 °C for up to 20 daysPseudomonas spp., Brochothrix thermosphacta, and Enterobacteriaceae[249]
S. rosmarinus Spenn.Leaf essential oil/nanogel encapsulation Beef cutlet0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mg of nanoencapsulated oil per g of meat12 days at 4 °CS. typhimurium[250]
S. officinalis L.Leaf essential oil/direct in formula incorporationMinced pork0.4 and 0.6 µL/g14 days at 4 °CE. coli[251]
S. khuzestanica Jamzad Aerial parts/chitosan-based coatingLamb meat1%20 days at 4 °CPseudomonas, total count of bacteria, and lactic acid bacteria[252]
T. capitatus (L.) Cav.Leaf essential oil/direct in formula incorporationMinced beef meat0.01, 0.05, 0.25, and 1.25%15 days at 7 °CL. monocytogenes[253]
T. kotschyanus Boiss. & Hohen.Leaf essential oil/films based on corn starch and chitosanBeef1 and 2%21 days at 4 °CPseudomonas, lactic acid bacteria, and L. monocytogenes[254]
Thymus spp.Leaf essential oils/direct in formula incorporationFresh pork meat0.3, 0.6, and 0.9%15 days at 3 ± 1 °CSalmonella S. enterica ser. Enteritidis S. enterica ser. Typhimurium, S. enterica ser. Montevideo, and S. enterica ser. Infantis)[255]
T. vulgaris L.Chitosan film with thyme essential oilCooked ham0%, 0.5%, 1%, and 2%21 days at 3 ± 1 °CAerobic mesophilic bacteria, lactic acid bacteria, and enterobacteria[256]
T. ammi SpragueSeed essential oil/films based on gelatin and carboxymethylcellulose with chitin nanofiberBeef0.24,
0.64,
and 1%		15 days at 4 °CTotal viable count, psychotrophic count, Pseudomonas spp., S. aureus, lactic acid bacteria, molds, and yeasts[257]
U. dioica L.Leaves/ε-polylysine coatingBeef3, 6, and 9%12 days at 4 °CMolds and yeasts and total bacterial and coliform counts[258]
Z. multiflora Boiss.Whole-plant essential oil/direct in formula incorporationMinced beef meat0.03, 0.5, 1, and 2%9 days of storage at 7 °CL. monocytogenes[259]
Z. officinalis RoscoeRhizomes of ginger essential oil /nanoemulsion-based edible sodium caseinate Chicken breast fillets3% and 6%12 days at 4 °CL. monocytogenes[22]
Table 6. Color differences (ΔL*, Δa*, Δb*, Chroma, ΔE, and Hue) of meat samples treated with medicinal plants compared to the control.
Table 6. Color differences (ΔL*, Δa*, Δb*, Chroma, ΔE, and Hue) of meat samples treated with medicinal plants compared to the control.
Medicinal PlantsMeat ProductColor Parameters References
∆L*∆a*∆b*Chroma∆EHue
C. sinensis (L.) KuntzeBrine-injected pork chops+2.18ns+2.51+2.513.3ns[200]
I. paraguariensis A.St.-Hil.Brine-injected pork chops+2.57ns+0.88+0.892.7ns[200]
D. ambrosioides (L.) Mosyakin & ClemantsRaw ground pork−0.89−0.28−1.26nsnsns[201]
C. longa L.Fresh lamb sausage−0.18+2.5+0.34nsnsns[203]
E. cardamomumFrozen chicken burger−1.95+0.3−1.21−13.44−2.29[280]
E. uniflora L.Pork burger−0.05+4+0.07nsnsns[206]
E. uniflora L. Lamb burgers+3.02−1.38+0.88nsnsns[207]
N. sativa L.Fresh minced beef0−0.9nsnsnsns[208]
O. vulgare L.Ground chicken breast+0.87+2.14+2.56nsnsns[209]
P. nigrum L.Fresh pork+0.1−0.23+1.89nsnsns[210]
N. velutina WootonPork patties+2.2−2.86−2.77−6.41.13ns[211]
Q. alba L.Pork patties+6.74−0.94+1.73nsnsns[212]
S. rosmarinus Spenn.Poultry fillets+2.77−1.1−0.1nsnsns[214]
S. officinarum L.Raw ground pork and beef−3.16−1.32 −2.64−3.092.44−1.81[215]
S. officinalis L.Fresh pork sausages+1.5−0.4−0.48nsnsns[281]
S. montana L.Fresh pork sausages−3.83+1.990.54+1.6+2.09+1.96[217]
S. aromaticum L.Beef patties+1.16−1.08−0.19−0.52ns+4.06[218]
S. aromaticum L.Chinese-style sausage+2.56−0.18−2.21nsnsns[219]
T. serpyllum L. Ground pork patties−0.8−0.61−1ns+1.98ns[220]
T. vulgaris L.Cooked ham−2.52−0.24−0.28−0.37+2.28+0.28[256]
T. foenum-graecum L.Rabbit sausage+1.16−2.95−2.66nsnsns[221]
Values represent the difference between treated samples and the control group. Data shown correspond to the highest concentration of plant extract tested. L = lightness, a* = redness/greenness, b* = yellowness/blueness. Positive and negative values indicate the direction of change relative to the control. ns—not specified.
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

Tocai, A.C.; Rosan, C.A.; Teodorescu, A.G.; Venter, A.C.; Vicas, S.I. Multifunctional Roles of Medicinal Plants in the Meat Industry: Antioxidant, Antimicrobial, and Color Preservation Perspectives. Plants 2025, 14, 2737. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants14172737

AMA Style

Tocai AC, Rosan CA, Teodorescu AG, Venter AC, Vicas SI. Multifunctional Roles of Medicinal Plants in the Meat Industry: Antioxidant, Antimicrobial, and Color Preservation Perspectives. Plants. 2025; 14(17):2737. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants14172737

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tocai (Moțoc), Alexandra Cristina, Cristina Adriana Rosan, Andrei George Teodorescu, Alina Cristiana Venter, and Simona Ioana Vicas. 2025. "Multifunctional Roles of Medicinal Plants in the Meat Industry: Antioxidant, Antimicrobial, and Color Preservation Perspectives" Plants 14, no. 17: 2737. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants14172737

APA Style

Tocai, A. C., Rosan, C. A., Teodorescu, A. G., Venter, A. C., & Vicas, S. I. (2025). Multifunctional Roles of Medicinal Plants in the Meat Industry: Antioxidant, Antimicrobial, and Color Preservation Perspectives. Plants, 14(17), 2737. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants14172737

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