Next Article in Journal
Heavy Metal Pollution in a Cu Mine Dump and in Close Agricultural Soils and Crops in Mozambique
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of Zn-Organic Supplementation on Growth, Body Composition, Carcass Traits, and Meat Quality of Grazing Lambs Fed with Two Levels of Concentrate
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

A Comprehensive Review on the Recent Technological Advancements in the Processing, Safety, and Quality Control of Ready-to-Eat Meals

1
Prefabricated Dish Industry Development Research Institute, Zhejiang Dong Fang Polytechnic, Wenzhou 325000, China
2
Zhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Resources Protection and Innovation of Traditional Chinese Medicine, College of Food and Health, Zhejiang A&F University, Hangzhou 311300, China
3
Wenzhou Food Research Institute, Wenzhou 325000, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2025, 13(3), 901; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13030901
Submission received: 10 February 2025 / Revised: 6 March 2025 / Accepted: 12 March 2025 / Published: 19 March 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Food Process Engineering)

Abstract

:
Ready-to-eat meals (RTEMs) are increasingly popular due to their convenience, but ensuring their safety and quality presents significant challenges. This comprehensive review analyzes recent technological advancements in RTEM safety control throughout the entire supply chain, from raw material sourcing to consumer consumption. We examine cutting-edge detection methods, including chromatography–mass spectrometry, real-time PCR, and CRISPR-based techniques for contaminants such as pesticide residues, veterinary drugs, heavy metals, and microorganisms. The review also explores innovative sterilization processes, such as irradiation, microwave, and radio frequency technologies, emphasizing their impact on microbial safety and product quality. Furthermore, we discuss the crucial role of packaging innovations, including modified atmosphere packaging, functional antimicrobial materials, and intelligent packaging systems, in preserving RTEM freshness and extending shelf life. This review provides valuable insights into current trends and future directions in RTEM safety and quality control, aiming to contribute to sustainable growth and consumer confidence in this rapidly expanding industry.

1. Introduction

With global economic development and accelerating life pace, ready-to-eat (RTE) foods, as significant products of the modern food industry, are experiencing rapid growth. The RTEM industry originated in the United States during the 1980s, triggered by a “food revolution” due to the rapidly growing consumer demand for convenient foods (Figure 1) [1]. Subsequently, the industry developed swiftly in developed countries such as Japan, establishing complete industrial chains and standardized systems. According to global market research data, the RTEM market is projected to exceed USD 7.3 trillion by 2025, maintaining a compound annual growth rate above 8.5% (https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/ready-to-eat-food-market (accessed on 10 December 2024)). In addition, the prefabricated vegetable markets show different characteristics in the global scope (https://www.sphericalinsights.com/reports/ready-to-eat-food-market (accessed on 3 March 2025)). For example, in North America and Europe, prefabricated markets are mature, and consumer demand for healthy and convenience foods is growing. In the Asian Pacific region, the market is growing rapidly, especially in countries such as China and India, where the demand for prepared vegetables is increasing due to the faster pace of life and changing consumer habits. These data and analyses provide important perspectives for understanding the dynamics and potential of prefabricated vegetable markets worldwide.
RTEMs refer to food products that undergo processing steps, including washing, cutting, and pre-cooking, and are stored and distributed under frozen, refrigerated, or ambient conditions with appropriate packaging. These products primarily utilize raw materials from agricultural products, poultry, livestock, and aquatic products and can be consumed directly or after minimal heating [2]. Based on the different product forms, RTE meals (RTEMs) can be categorized into four types: ready-to-heat, ready-to-eat, ready-to-cook, and ready-to-assemble (Figure 2). Most of the frozen RTEMs need to be processed after heating and thawing. According to the main ingredients used, RTEMs can be further classified into pre-processed vegetable products, pre-processed seafood products, pre-processed poultry and livestock products, etc. Based on the temperature required during distribution, they can be divided into three categories: ambient temperature distribution RTEMs, refrigerated distribution ready-to-eat meals, and frozen distribution RTEMs [3,4].
While these products offer significant advantages in convenience and operational cost reduction for food service businesses, they face safety challenges due to potential microbial contamination during production, storage, and transportation, as well as quality issues such as nutritional loss [5,6].
World Health Organization assessment indicates that contaminated food can cause or transmit over 200 different types of diseases, posing particular threats to vulnerable populations such as the elderly, pregnant women, and infants [7]. Therefore, ensuring food safety throughout the RTEM supply chain, from production and processing to transportation and storage, is crucial (Figure 3). Recent years have witnessed substantial improvements in RTEM safety control through innovations in detection methods, sterilization processes, and packaging technologies, particularly in raw material quality control, processing safety management, and packaging innovations [8]. Despite the continuous expansion of the RTEM market, food safety remains a key factor limiting the industry’s development. Studies have shown that cross-contamination is common during the production process of RTEMs, improper temperature control during storage and transportation can lead to microbial contamination, and some regions lack unified quality standards and regulatory systems [9]. This issue is particularly prominent in the rapidly developing Asia–Pacific market, where problems such as inadequate cold chain logistics and low standardization of production processes are especially challenging. Furthermore, the technical issues related to nutrient loss and deterioration in taste still need to be addressed, as solving these problems will directly impact the sustainable development of the industry [10].
This review systematically examines recent technological advances in RTEM safety control, focusing on innovations in key areas such as detection methods, sterilization processes, and packaging technologies while also providing insights into future development trends, aiming to contribute to the healthy and sustainable development of the RTEM industry.
The literature search was conducted using prominent databases such as Web of Science, Science Direct, and Scopus. The search string employed a combination of keywords, including ready-to-eat food, prepared meals, safety, quality, and contamination. The time frame for the literature search spanned from the years 2000 to 2024. The inclusion criteria for the selection of literature were stringent, limited to English-language peer-reviewed articles, highly cited papers, and authoritative reviews. A flowchart depicting the literature screening process is appended for clarity (Figure 4).

2. Quality and Safety Control of Raw Materials

Quality control of raw materials is crucial for ensuring the safety of RTEM foods. Due to their diverse sources of raw materials and complex processing technologies, RTEMs face multiple safety risks throughout the farm-to-table chain. Studies have shown that raw materials may be contaminated by pesticide residues, veterinary drug residues, heavy metals, microorganisms, and mycotoxins during cultivation, breeding, storage, and transportation [11].
These contaminants not only endanger consumer health but may also generate secondary hazards during subsequent processing. For example, in a study, the microbial content of the samples exceeding 105 CFU/g was detected by testing the total number of colonies, indicating a serious problem in microbial contamination of ready-to-eat meat products [12]. Studies have shown that in the production process of ready-to-eat salad, E. coli, Salmonella, Staphylococcus aureus, and other microorganisms will cause its corruption [13]. At the same time, study analysis found that under different production conditions, there are differences in microbial contamination of street- and market-vended ready-to-eat grasshopper. These cases suggest that ready-to-eat foods face challenges with multiple microbial contamination during production and distribution. Therefore, establishing a systematic raw material quality and safety control system is vital for the sustainable development of the RTEM industry.

2.1. Contamination Detection in RTEMs

Recent innovative developments in raw material safety detection technologies have provided technical support for source safety control of RTEMs (Figure 5). Table 1 shows the application of different detection techniques in RTEM.
In the field of pesticide and veterinary drug residue detection, chromatography–mass spectrometry coupling technology has achieved significant breakthroughs. High-performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) has become the gold standard for residue detection due to its ultra-high sensitivity and selectivity [14,15,20]. This technology can simultaneously detect and quantify hundreds of agricultural and veterinary drug residues with detection limits reaching ng/kg levels. The application of ultra-performance liquid chromatography–quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UPLC-Q-TOF MS/MS) has further improved detection throughput and enables structural identification of unknown compounds [21]. Recent research shows that non-targeted screening strategies combined with artificial intelligence algorithms can identify novel contaminants that are difficult to detect using traditional methods [22].
Microbial contamination, as one of the main threats to RTEM raw material safety, has undergone significant evolution in detection technology from traditional cultivation methods to molecular biological approaches. Real-time fluorescent quantitative PCR technology has significantly shortened detection time while providing more accurate quantification results [16,23]. The ELISA technology has been reported to detect the amount of E. coli in fresh vegetables [17]. Novel detection methods, such as the combination of immunomagnetic separation (IMS) with PCR, enable enrichment and rapid detection of pathogens in complex matrices [24]. CRISPR-based nucleic acid detection technology demonstrates extremely high specificity and sensitivity, showing broad application prospects in the rapid screening of foodborne pathogens [25]. Additionally, the development of microfluidic chip technology has made portable on-site detection possible, particularly suitable for rapid screening at production sites [26]. Despite progress, challenges remain, such as the complexity of food matrices, the need for sophisticated laboratory equipment, and the cost of efficient testing methods [27]. These factors pose challenges for food producers and testing agencies.
Progress in heavy metal contamination detection technology is primarily reflected in the optimization of instrumental analysis methods and innovation in sample pretreatment techniques. Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) combined with ion chromatography systems can not only measure total heavy metal content but also analyze their valence state distribution, providing more comprehensive data support for contamination risk assessment [18]. Novel nanomaterials show unique advantages in sample pretreatment, such as magnetic nanomaterials efficiently enriching trace heavy metals, significantly improving detection sensitivity [28].
The prevention and control of mycotoxin contamination has shifted from single detection to comprehensive management. The development of multi-component simultaneous detection technology has made it possible to screen multiple mycotoxins in a single analysis. Aptamer sensors based on surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) achieve rapid and sensitive detection while maintaining excellent specificity [19]. Furthermore, the establishment of predictive models helps evaluate mycotoxin production risks under different environmental conditions, providing a basis for preventive control [29].

2.2. Adulteration in RTEMs

Adulteration in RTEM products involves deliberate food manipulation through the introduction, blending, or substitution of substandard or dangerous substances. Consuming adulterated foods can trigger allergic reactions, foodborne illnesses, or chronic health issues from toxic contaminants. Common RTEM adulteration includes raw material substitution, unauthorized additive use, and misleading labeling.
Raw material substitution occurs when cheaper meat or seafood varieties replace advertised products or authentic cheese is substituted with inferior alternatives. For example, misrepresenting freeze–thaw smoked salmon as fresh reduces quality and deceives consumers. Pezzolato et al. demonstrated histology’s effectiveness in detecting such fraud in premium products like smoked salmon [30]. Proteomics widely identifies protein substitution in meat products with a 1% detection threshold, confirming product authenticity [31]. Real-time PCR verifies DNA in aquatic products, detecting adulteration at 0.1% levels essential for confirming seafood species and origin [32].
Illegal additives involve prohibited chemicals or excessive amounts of permitted additives like colorants, preservatives, or flavor enhancers. Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) is preferred for elemental analysis in nutrient-fortified foods, with detection limits as low as 0.01 mg/kg, ensuring accurate nutrient addition and absence of harmful elements [33].
In summary, the safety and quality of ready-to-eat meal (RTEM) products depend on strict control measures throughout the production chain. Raw materials face numerous contaminants, including pesticide and veterinary drug residues, heavy metals, microbial pathogens, mycotoxins, and adulterants, which present health risks and may cause product deterioration. Modern detection methods such as HPLC-MS/MS for residue analysis, real-time PCR and CRISPR-based techniques for pathogen identification, and ICP-MS for heavy metal detection provide effective tools for monitoring these hazards. Nevertheless, limitations remain regarding costs, complex food matrices, and equipment requirements. Additionally, economically motivated adulteration highlights the need for vigilance and effective regulations. A comprehensive approach combining advanced detection technologies, preventative strategies, and consumer awareness is necessary to reduce risks and maintain RTEM product safety. Ongoing innovation and cooperation between the food industry, regulatory authorities, and research institutions are essential to address emerging challenges in RTEM food safety.

3. Quality and Safety Control in the Production and Processing Stages

Microbial contamination is the main safety risk during the processing of RTEMs. Feglo et al. identified a variety of microorganisms present in RTEMs, including Staphylococcus aureus, Bacillus species, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Escherichia coli (E. coli) [34]. Additionally, Gizaw et al. also identified various bacterial species responsible for food poisoning and foodborne diseases, such as Salmonella, Shigella, and E. coli [3]. Research by Mengistu et al. [2] showed that bacteria in RTEMs, such as Enterobacter species (11.3%), Klebsiella species (9.1%), Bacillus cereus (26.8%), and Pseudomonas species (6.1%), exceeded the hygienic standard limits and could pose potential health risks. Furthermore, Listeria monocytogenes, a pathogen capable of growing in low-temperature environments and resistant to salt and nitrites, is commonly detected in RTE meat products [4]. Therefore, one of the significant challenges faced by the RTEM processing industry is how to improve the microbiological safety of their products while preserving the nutritional value and flavor of the meals.

3.1. Control of Microorganisms in RTEMs Through Sterilization Technologies

Sterilization technologies play a crucial role in the production of RTEMs, as they can effectively control the microbial load, ensure food safety, and extend the shelf life of the products. Table 2 summarizes the application of various sterilization techniques in RTEM processing and their potential impacts on the products. Different sterilization techniques offer distinct advantages and limitations, as summarized in Table 3.

3.1.1. Conventional Thermal Sterilization

Thermal sterilization, a widely employed method for microbial inactivation in the food industry [9], plays a crucial role in maintaining food freshness and safety. High-temperature treatments effectively eliminate microorganisms, thereby extending shelf life. For instance, heating Listeria monocytogenes inoculated onto the surface of pre-cooked ham packaging at 90.6–96.1 °C for 2 min significantly reduced bacterial counts [44]. Similarly, a 10 s exposure to an 85 °C water bath effectively eliminated L. monocytogenes inoculated onto low-fat turkey frankfurters [45]. Studies have shown that conventional heat sterilization can cause the inactivation of microorganisms, including mesophilics and thermophiles, to ensure the eradication of spoilage and food poisoning [50]. However, while thermal sterilization prolongs shelf life, it often compromises sensory attributes (e.g., color and flavor), rheological properties, and nutritional value. Studies have demonstrated the detrimental effects of thermal processing on various food products. For example, changes in texture have been observed in canned sardines and Indian mackerels, along with alterations in color, shear force, cooking loss, and elasticity in salmon muscle [51]. Mud cans are canned products made by crushing the food, stirring up the resulting meat, and then going through a certain heat sterilization procedure. However, after the chestnut mud is made into cans for disinfection, the chestnut mud near the edge of the can wall will browbrown, causing a waste of food [52]. Furthermore, conventional high-temperature sterilization processes can be constrained by packaging limitations and pose a risk of product recontamination. Therefore, despite its efficacy in microbial control, thermal sterilization requires careful consideration of the balance between microbial safety and product quality. Traditional high-temperature sterilization may not be suitable for certain ready-to-eat (RTE) meals due to potential adverse effects on sensory characteristics, potentially leading to consumer rejection [53]. Consequently, milder processing methods are needed to preserve both quality and microbial safety in RTE products.
Recent research on food processing technologies has demonstrated the considerable potential of autoclave heat sterilization (HPTS) and related methods. One study thoroughly examined HPTS advantages compared to conventional heat treatment in reducing processing contaminants while preserving food quality attributes [54]. The findings confirmed that HPTS effectively minimized processing contaminants while maintaining high food quality. Additionally, significant advancements have been made in high hydrostatic pressure (HHP) treatment applications for food preservation [55]. This technology effectively inactivates microorganisms and enzymes, resulting in higher-quality foods with extended shelf life and enhanced safety.
Additional research has evaluated how various sterilization techniques affect food quality. For instance, one study comparing the effects of HV, thermal pasteurization, and heat sterilization on pickle juice color and nutrient content provided valuable data for food processing applications [56]. Another investigation revealed synergistic bactericidal effects of combined high-pressure and -temperature treatments on fruits and vegetables, offering important insights into high-pressure applications for food preservation [57].
Furthermore, high-pressure processing at room temperature (HPP) for pasteurizing foods and beverages has gained attention. Research indicates that HPP effectively inactivates key microbial pathogens, including Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Listeria monocytogenes, and Salmonella, thereby ensuring food and beverage safety [58]. Collectively, these studies highlight the significant value of autoclaves and other high-pressure techniques in food processing applications.

3.1.2. Irradiation Sterilization

Irradiation sterilization, a non-thermal process, inactivates microorganisms by exposing food to a controlled dose of ionizing radiation, typically gamma rays, X-rays, or electron beams [51]. This technology, already widely used in agriculture and food processing, holds considerable promise for broader applications within the food industry. Its advantages over conventional sterilization methods include high efficiency, comprehensiveness, versatility, and energy conservation [59].

Gamma Irradiation

Irradiation achieves sterilization by transferring energy from ionizing radiation to the food product. Gamma rays, a highly penetrating form of ionizing radiation typically generated by radioactive isotopes (commonly cobalt-60), can penetrate both the surface and interior of food, effectively eliminating microorganisms [60]. One study investigated the effects of varying gamma irradiation doses on the microbial safety, sensory quality, and protein content of pre-cooked diced chicken with chili peppers. Results indicated no significant impact on product quality at doses of 10 kGy and 20 kGy [35]. Another study demonstrated that a 1 kGy gamma irradiation dose significantly reduced microbial contamination and extended the shelf life of pre-cut fresh fruits and mixed vegetables [36]. A high dose of gamma irradiation (25 kGy), combined with refrigeration and vacuum packaging, effectively preserved the nutritional content of pre-cooked chicken breast, achieving sterility and extending shelf life [37]. Research has also shown that a 40 kGy gamma irradiation dose provided superior microbial control compared to a 5 kGy dose in pre-cooked chicken breast but potentially impacted sensory characteristics (e.g., off-odor) [38]. Furthermore, the combination of active coating and gamma irradiation exhibited a synergistic effect on the sterilization of pre-cooked broccoli, further extending its shelf life [43]. Smita et al. analyzed the physicochemical properties of the four colored rice noodles and found that the viscosity of the colored rice noodles decreased after γ-ray irradiation [61]. These findings suggest the potential of gamma irradiation for sterilization and shelf-life extension in various RTEMs. However, careful dose selection is crucial to balance sterilization efficacy with product quality.

X-Ray Irradiation

X-rays, generated by high-energy electron streams produced when fast-moving electrons strike a metal target, possess high penetration capabilities. It is able to destroy the biofilms of Escherichia coli O157:H7, Salmonella typhimurium, and Listeria monocytogenes to achieve the sterilization effect [62]. One study evaluated the sterilization efficacy of X-ray irradiation on pre-cooked, vacuum-packed smoked mullet. Samples irradiated at different doses (0 kGy, 0.5 kGy, 1.0 kGy, 1.5 kGy, and 2.0 kGy) were analyzed for microbial populations and sensory quality during storage. Results indicated effective sterilization without compromising flavor [39]. Another study inoculated shrimp samples with pathogenic bacteria and treated them with varying X-ray irradiation doses (0.1 kGy to 4.0 kGy). Doses of 2.0 kGy, 3.0 kGy, and 4.0 kGy reduced microbial counts to below the detection limit. Moreover, X-ray treatment improved the quality of raw tuna fillets inoculated with Salmonella enterica [63]. Similarly, X-ray irradiation of S. enterica at increasing doses resulted in significant reductions in bacterial counts [40]. These studies suggest that X-ray irradiation can effectively sterilize and enhance the microbial safety of various RTEMs while preserving flavor and quality.

Electron Beam

Electron beam (e-beam) irradiation, a cost-effective, environmentally friendly, and time-efficient alternative to conventional thermal decontamination [64], offers advantages in terms of cost, environmental impact, and processing time. However, its effectiveness depends on factors such as irradiation dose, food composition, and microbial species. One study investigating e-beam irradiation of three vacuum-packed RTE products (Iberian dry-cured ham, dry-cured beef, and smoked tuna) found that a 1.5 kGy dose ensured product safety and extended shelf life [49]. Another study on beef jerky treated with e-beam irradiation (0–10 kGy) observed a significant reduction in total aerobic bacteria with increasing doses, particularly at 10 kGy, which enhanced microbial safety without compromising product quality [48]. Furthermore, low-dose (below 1 kGy) e-beam irradiation under modified atmosphere packaging (100% O2 and N2:O2 [2:1]) has been proposed as a viable method for reducing microbial populations or eliminating Salmonella spp. and Listeria spp. in RTE spinach [47]. New studies suggest that electron beam irradiation inhibits the growth of Rhizopus oryzae by causing structural damage and metabolic dysfunction in cells, as well as disturbed redox homeostasis [65].

3.1.3. Microwave Sterilization

Microwave sterilization, widely used in food processing for applications such as thawing, heating, blanching, pasteurization, sterilization, cooking, drying, and frying [66], offers rapid heat transfer, significantly reducing processing times compared to conventional thermal methods. Its impact on food quality primarily involves microbial and sensory characteristics. Akbar et al. found Salmonella contamination in RTE poultry during storage [46]. Microwave heating (900 W) for 90 s or more effectively eliminated the target bacteria (106–107 CFU/g). Peng et al. compared microwave and hot water treatments using a carrot model system, demonstrating superior color retention in microwaved carrots [41]. However, microwave technology has limitations, including uneven temperature distribution and the “edge overheating effect” [67]. Research efforts are addressing these challenges, for example, by using water as an intermediary heating step to improve uniformity and mitigate edge effects [68].

3.1.4. Radio Frequency

Radio frequency (RF) heating, a physical method employing electromagnetic waves (1–100 MHz), generates rapid and deep internal heating in food products. Generally, it is used as a thaw for frozen RTEM [69]. These waves penetrate the food matrix, interacting with ions, atoms, and molecules to produce heat. Wang et al. used a combined RF (27.12 MHz, 6 kW) and hot water treatment to successfully inactivate Staphylococcus aureus spores in RTE spicy sliced pork, achieving a 5-log reduction while maintaining desirable sensory attributes [70]. Xu et al. evaluated the effects of zinc oxide nanoparticles combined with RF heating on RTE carrots [42]. After 60 days of storage, total plate counts remained below 1000 CFU/g, and color, firmness, and carotenoid content were well preserved. Despite its potential, research on RF heating in food processing has been relatively limited, and its advantages in the RTE sector remain largely unexplored, necessitating further investigation.

3.2. Microbial Control in RTEMs Using Natural Extracts

3.2.1. Antimicrobial Activity of Natural Extracts

Perishable foods, particularly RTE meat products, are susceptible to bacterial and fungal contamination, leading to undesirable reactions that compromise flavor, odor, color, sensory qualities, and texture. To address this, in addition to incorporating sterilization techniques during RTEM processing, natural extracts can be introduced at earlier stages for antimicrobial and preservative effects. For example, bioactive compounds with antioxidant properties can be added during processing, applied as coatings, or incorporated into packaging materials to inhibit microbial growth and reduce lipid oxidation in RTE meat products [71,72]. A meta-analytic study showed that natural plant extracts significantly improved the quality of meat products, including decreased pH, increased antioxidant capacity, reduced degree of oxidation, and inhibited microbial growth [73]. In this context, plant extracts have been extensively studied and utilized due to their safety and potential as antimicrobial and antioxidant agents (Table 4) [74].
Recent studies indicate that plant extracts in meat products serve beyond antimicrobial and antioxidant functions, acting as natural preservatives and pigments. The addition of fruit extracts like pomegranate seeds, acai berry leaves, and black pepper to meat products enhances antioxidant capacity and increases fiber content, improving overall product health properties [83]. Additionally, plant extracts obtained using green solvents as natural antioxidants in fresh meat products effectively scavenge free radicals, providing additional health benefits [84].
In the specific application studies, Higginbotham et al. investigated the antimicrobial activity of freeze-dried hibiscus flower extract as a rinse on all-beef frankfurters against L. monocytogenes and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) [75]. High extract concentrations (240 mg/mL) proved the most effective in preventing or reducing contamination. Cadet et al. studied the antimicrobial efficacy of galangal flower extract (GFE) on RTE turkey ham inoculated with L. monocytogenes and S. aureus and stored at 4 °C [78]. GFE significantly inhibited both pathogens, reducing counts by 1.00 log CFU/g without adversely affecting color or pH. Furthermore, incorporating GFE into the meat mixture before cooking proved more effective than post-treatment application. An ethanolic extract of Rhodotorula mucilaginosa leaves exhibited good inhibitory activity against L. monocytogenes in cooked chicken under microwave conditions (internal temperature of 80 °C). Antimicrobial activity was enhanced when storage temperature was increased from 4 °C to 37 °C. Both low (104 CFU/g) and high (106 CFU/g) extract concentrations, applied via rinsing or injection, effectively reduced L. monocytogenes counts [79].
Chan et al. demonstrated that treating chicken meatballs with 200 ppm cinnamon extract under frozen storage reduced peroxide values throughout the storage period without impacting sensory characteristics [80]. Moarefian et al. showed that adding cinnamon essential oil (20 and 40 ppm) to RTE-cooked sausages reduced peroxide values without affecting sensory qualities [81]. Baldin et al. observed reduced lipid oxidation in fresh sausages containing microencapsulated jaboticaba extract (MJE) [82]. After 15 days of storage, 2% and 4% MJE effectively inhibited oxidation. However, while 2% MJE had no adverse sensory effects, 4% MJE negatively impacted color, texture, and overall acceptability. Price et al. compared the effects of grape seed and green tea extracts with sodium ascorbate on bacterial spoilage in RTE-cooked pork meatballs during refrigerated storage [76]. Samples containing green tea and grape seed extracts exhibited lower thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) values, reduced volatile compounds, lower microbial counts, and greater inhibition of cholesterol oxidation product formation compared to sodium ascorbate samples. Combining heat treatment (65 °C, 104 s) with plant extracts and chemical preservatives synergistically inhibited L. monocytogenes growth in chicken frankfurters [77]. Thus, natural plant extracts, combined with thermal treatments, can potentially reduce reliance on chemical preservatives.
Combined with these research results, we can see that the application of natural plant extracts in RTE meat products not only helps ensure their safety and extend their shelf life but also can maintain the sensory quality and nutritional value of the products to a certain extent. These studies provide new ideas and methods for future processing of RTE meat products.

3.2.2. Natural Extracts for Nitrite Inhibition and Replacement

Sodium nitrite, a multifunctional ingredient used in food processing, enhances color, flavor, and shelf life. However, high nitrite levels are common in many RTE products, and excessive nitrite/nitrate intake poses potential cancer risks [85]. To mitigate nitrite usage, natural plant extracts with antimicrobial and antioxidant properties are being explored as alternatives, offering the added benefit of color enhancement. Plant polyphenols, widely used as antioxidants and antimicrobials, can extend the shelf life of meat products [86,87]. Their mechanisms of action include disrupting bacterial cell walls, inhibiting biofilm formation, suppressing microbial enzymes, interfering with protein regulation, altering bacterial metabolism, and inhibiting ATP and DNA synthesis. Moreover, polyphenols reduce lipid peroxidation, inhibit lipoxygenase activity, improve color stability, and minimize the degradation of salt-soluble myofibrillar proteins and sulfhydryl groups. Importantly, plant polyphenols possess strong hydrogen-donating abilities and react with nitrite under acidic conditions [86]. Studies have shown that components from various plant extracts can reduce nitrite content. For instance, non-extractable polyphenols (NEPs) from hawthorn pomace significantly reduced nitrite levels in Chinese mustard [88]. Organic peppermint essential oil and tomato pomace extract also decreased residual nitrite in sausages [89]. Furthermore, plant-derived nitrite from vegetable powders or young radish extract effectively inhibited lipid oxidation and bacterial growth in sausages [90].
Maintaining RTEM quality and safety, particularly for prefabricated vegetables, is essential in the production chain, with microbial contamination as the main challenge. Different products require specific preservation strategies. For RTEMs where nutrition and sensory qualities matter most, mild methods like autoclave treatments and plant extracts effectively eliminate microbes while preserving quality. Combined with proper packaging, these approaches enhance safety and shelf life. Long-shelf-life RTEMs benefit from irradiation and autoclave heat sterilization, providing efficient broad-spectrum protection. Selection factors include product type, production scale, and cost considerations. Large operations typically prioritize efficiency, while smaller producers focus on quality. Combining methods can optimize both nutrition and shelf life, with environmental conditions requiring careful management. Emerging technologies like microwave and RF heating offer new sterilization possibilities despite uneven heating challenges. Natural extracts provide valuable antibacterial, antioxidant, and nitrite-inhibiting properties, reducing chemical preservative needs. Future research should explore mechanisms of action, application methods, and synergistic preservation techniques to meet the growing consumer demand for healthy convenience foods.

4. Packaging Technologies and Safety Control in RTEMs

Packaging plays a vital role in RTEM safety, preserving quality, extending shelf life, and preventing contamination and pathogen transmission. Recent innovations in packaging technology offer multi-layered safety solutions for the RTEM industry, enhancing product quality, extending shelf life, and reducing environmental impact [91]. The adoption of these technologies is particularly prevalent in developed countries like those in Europe, North America, and Japan [92], highlighting the increasing importance of packaging in RTEM safety. Key packaging technologies for RTEMs include modified atmosphere packaging (MAP), functional packaging materials, and intelligent packaging (Figure 6).

4.1. Modified Atmosphere Packaging

The modified atmosphere packaging mainly includes vacuum packaging, modified atmosphere packaging, and dynamic modified atmosphere packaging (Figure 7). Vacuum packaging, a fundamental MAP technique, inhibits aerobic microbial growth by reducing oxygen levels, thereby extending shelf life. Generally, vacuum packaging, due to its exclusion of air, offers superior product quality preservation compared to conventional packaging. Siriskar et al. demonstrated that vacuum-packed RTE anchovies stored at 30–35 °C had a shelf life of several months, compared to just 5 weeks for conventionally packaged products [93]. Studies have confirmed that vacuum packaging reduces the growth rate of aerobic bacteria in RTEMs [94]. However, its effectiveness varies depending on product moisture content. For low-moisture RTEMs (e.g., baked goods), vacuum packaging can extend shelf life by 2–3 times, whereas the effect is more limited in high-moisture products [95,96]. Xu et al. found that vacuum packaging combined with ascorbic acid effectively preserved the quality of fresh-cut potatoes during storage, extending shelf life [97].
MAP for mixed gases, a more sophisticated approach, adjusts the proportions of nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and oxygen within the package to further inhibit microbial growth and extend shelf life. Stamatis et al. found that MAP extends the shelf life of mackerel compared to vacuum packaging [98]. Commonly used gas mixtures include high-oxygen (70–80% O2/20–30% CO2) for fresh RTE meats [99], high-nitrogen (70–80% N2/20–30% CO2) for fried RTE products [100], and balanced mixtures (40–45% O2/40–45% N2/10–20% CO2) for mixed RTEMs. The efficacy of different gas mixtures is significantly distinct. High O2 concentrations (>70%) inhibit enzymatic browning, prevent anaerobic fermentation, and suppress both aerobic and anaerobic microbial growth [101]. High CO2 concentrations (>20%) effectively inhibit aerobic bacteria and mold growth, while high N2 concentrations prevent package collapse and oxidative reactions [102].
Dynamic MAP represents a significant advancement. Yam et al. developed a smart sensor system for real-time monitoring of gas composition within the package [103]. Sandhya’s research demonstrated that dynamic MAP extends RTEM shelf life by 25–40% compared to traditional MAP [104]. Zhang et al. showed that dynamic MAP significantly improves food quality by reducing moisture loss and preserving color [105].

4.2. Functional Packaging Materials

Antimicrobial packaging, a key area of functional packaging, incorporates antimicrobial agents into packaging materials to inhibit microbial growth and maintain food quality. These agents can be natural (derived from plants, animals, or microorganisms), inorganic, or organic (e.g., organic acids and phenols) (Figure 8).
Natural antimicrobial agents offer advantages in terms of safety, non-toxicity, and efficacy. Studies have shown that plant essential oil blends, such as rosemary/thyme, can extend the shelf life of RTE meat products by 40% [106]. Dinika et al. reported that antimicrobial peptides from animal sources (e.g., lactoferrin) possess broad-spectrum activity and can be incorporated into edible film composites for shelf-life extension [107]. Iseppi et al. found that microbially derived antimicrobials (e.g., bacteriocin bacLP17) exhibit specific activity against Listeria [108].
In inorganic antimicrobial packaging, Azizi-Lalabadi et al. demonstrated the excellent broad-spectrum antimicrobial properties of nano-zinc oxide and nano-titanium dioxide composite packaging [109]. Nano-zinc oxide has been shown to preserve color, prevent spoilage, and enhance the mechanical properties of packaging materials [110]. Research indicates that nanocomposites containing 5% nanosilver and 5% TiO2 nanoparticles exhibit strong antimicrobial activity against Escherichia coli and S. aureus [111]. Nanosilver, in particular, is a highly effective inorganic antimicrobial agent. Nano silver is added to plastic or polymer, which can significantly improve the gas barrier of packaging materials, especially for oxygen and water barrier, which helps extend the shelf life of food [112]. In addition, nanofillers such as carbon nanotubes and nanosilica can enhance the mechanical strength and toughness of packaging materials, making them more resistant to tearing and compression [113].
In organic antimicrobial packaging, Huang et al. [114] synthesized a series of novel quaternary ammonium compounds, among which dodecyl-containing compounds demonstrated the most potent and broad-spectrum activity against tested bacteria and fungi, with minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) ranging from 0.24 to 0.98 μg/mL. Organic acids inhibit microbial growth by lowering the pH of the microenvironment, and composite packaging systems incorporating these acids have shown good antifungal activity [115]. However, despite their rapid action and wide availability, organic antimicrobials often lack long-term efficacy and are susceptible to environmental factors. Furthermore, the potential migration of these agents into food requires further investigation [116].

4.3. Intelligent Packaging

Intelligent packaging integrates devices, sensors (mechanical, biological, electronic, chemical), and network technologies into packaging materials to monitor changes in food quality and freshness (Figure 9). However, high costs limit its widespread adoption.
Research on time–temperature indicators (TTIs) has led to the development of novel photochromic TTIs that accurately monitor the temperature history of RTEMs during storage and transport with a precision of ±0.5 °C [52]. Theofania et al. [117] reported the use of a TTI model to estimate quality degradation in RTE fresh-cut salads throughout the supply chain, enabling the prediction of remaining shelf life at any point. Furthermore, new-generation TTIs based on nanomaterials can monitor both temperature and humidity, providing comprehensive monitoring during storage and transportation [118,119].
In freshness indication technology, pH-sensitive dye-based indicators provide visual cues for RTEM freshness through color changes, achieving an accuracy of 85–90% [120]. Hanie et al. developed biosensor indicators for specific detection of pathogenic microorganisms, enhancing RTEM safety monitoring [121]. Wang et al. developed a laccase-based microcapsule time–temperature indicator (TTI) that accurately indicated spoilage in button mushrooms [55].
In intelligent traceability systems, radio frequency identification (RFID) tags use radio waves to identify and track RTE products [122]. RFID tags are well suited for food supply chain management due to their high data storage capacity (up to 1 MB) and their ability to collect real-time data wirelessly and without line-of-sight [123]. These tags can be combined with TTIs to record environmental parameters like humidity [124]. Studies have shown that companies using intelligent traceability systems experience a 40% reduction in product quality complaints and a threefold increase in traceability efficiency [124].
Packaging technology is vital for prepared dish quality and safety, protecting products from damage and contamination while preserving sensory qualities and nutrients and extending shelf life. Common technologies include vacuum, modified atmosphere, active, and intelligent packaging. Vacuum packaging inhibits aerobic microorganisms and oxidation by removing air, though it poorly protects fragile items. Modified atmosphere packaging regulates gas composition to control respiration and microbial growth, maintaining freshness. Active packaging incorporates functional substances like oxygen absorbers and antimicrobials. Intelligent packaging uses integrated sensors to monitor product status in real-time. Future packaging trends will focus on sustainability, intelligence, and functionality. Biodegradable and edible materials will reduce environmental impact. IoT and big data integration will enable traceability and quality monitoring. Research will emphasize multifunctional composite materials. Ongoing innovation will deliver safer, convenient products while supporting sustainable industry development.

5. Quality and Safety Control Systems

RTEMs face complex quality and safety risks during transportation and storage. Statistics indicate that approximately 35% of global RTEM safety incidents stem from deficiencies in transportation and storage management [125]. Establishing robust and comprehensive quality and safety control systems for these stages is crucial for industry development (Figure 10).
Ensuring the quality and safety of food products, particularly during long-distance transportation, necessitates a robust cold chain infrastructure [126]. This infrastructure is pivotal in maintaining the freshness of perishable goods and reducing waste and losses during transit [127]. For example, frozen RTEMs will deteriorate when the temperature is too high [128]. Advanced quality and safety control systems, such as intelligent cold chain systems, play a crucial role in providing optimal temperature and humidity conditions across various stages of food production, processing, transportation, storage, and sales. These systems effectively inhibit microbial activity, slow down food spoilage, and mitigate the risk of foodborne diseases [127].
Key elements of modern cold chain logistics systems include precise temperature control systems, intelligent inventory management, and humidity control. For instance, the colorimetric temperature monitoring system developed by Chu et al. and the smart temperature and humidity monitoring system designed by Chen et al. offer precise environmental control, extending the shelf life of ready-to-eat meals [129,130]. Artificial intelligence is employed in inventory management to optimize stock turnover, reduce product backlog, and adjust inventory structures based on sales forecasts, enhancing economic efficiency [131].
Humidity control is equally critical, with studies indicating that relative humidity should be maintained between 60 and 70% during transportation [132]. The integration of IoT technologies in modern logistics enables comprehensive monitoring throughout the process [133]. Additionally, the application of photocatalytic disinfection systems, air purification systems, and effective pest control measures, such as the use of insect traps and sticky mouse boards, ensures food storage safety [134,135].
Emergency management and risk prevention are integral to storage and transportation safety. The development of an improved early warning method by Geng et al. and the implementation of emergency response decision support systems provide optimized solutions in the event of emergencies, reducing response times [136]. Blockchain technology has become increasingly popular for traceability in the transportation of ready-to-eat meals, offering real-time tracking, authentication, protection, and monitoring capabilities [137].
The research and development of smart transportation containers, like those using phase change materials for adaptive multi-temperature control by Zhou et al., have significantly enhanced transportation safety [138]. Moreover, the application of rapid detection technologies has improved quality control efficiency [139]. Portable biosensors can complete pathogen detection in just 15 min, and image recognition systems based on deep learning, as demonstrated by Zhu et al., can automatically identify the spoilage characteristics of ready-to-eat meals with high accuracy [140].
In conclusion, the integration of these quality and safety control systems not only ensures the quality and safety of ready-to-eat meals but also drives the continuous development of the cold chain logistics industry. These systems underscore the importance of technological advancements in maintaining high standards of food quality and safety throughout the supply chain.

6. Conclusions and Prospects

This comprehensive review has provided a detailed analysis of the current state of technological advancements in RTEM safety and quality control, spanning the entire supply chain from raw material sourcing to consumer consumption. We have explored a wide range of innovations, including novel detection methods for contaminants, novel sterilization processes, and advanced packaging technologies. These advancements are transforming the RTEM industry, enabling the production of safer, higher-quality, and more convenient meals. However, despite the significant progress achieved, several key challenges and opportunities remain, shaping the future trajectory of this rapidly evolving sector.
One crucial area for future research lies in the development of integrated, multi-hurdle approaches to safety and quality control. Rather than relying on single interventions, combining different technologies can offer synergistic benefits and enhance overall effectiveness. For instance, integrating natural antimicrobials with modified atmosphere packaging and non-thermal sterilization techniques could provide a comprehensive strategy for minimizing microbial growth and extending shelf life while preserving product quality. This holistic approach requires further investigation into the compatibility and efficacy of different combinations, tailoring the approach to specific product types and storage conditions.
A significant challenge facing the RTEM industry is maintaining the nutritional value and sensory appeal of products throughout processing and storage. Conventional sterilization methods, while effective in eliminating pathogens, can often compromise the taste, texture, and nutrient content of meals. Therefore, future research should prioritize the development of minimal processing techniques and innovative packaging solutions that preserve the freshness, flavor, and nutritional integrity of RTEMs. This includes exploring novel non-thermal sterilization methods, such as pulsed electric fields and high-pressure processing, as well as developing active and intelligent packaging systems that can respond to changes in the product environment and maintain optimal conditions for quality preservation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, methodology, and writing the original draft, Z.Z.; data curation, formal analysis, and writing the review and editing, G.X.; resources, supervision, and funding acquisition, S.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by a grant from the Zhejiang Dong Fang Polytechnic Research Fund (DF2024YKY03) and the Zhejiang Natural Science Foundation Project (LY17C200019).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Torstensson, L.; Johansson, R.; Mark-Herbert, C. Food dishes for sustainable development: A Swedish food retail perspective. Foods 2021, 10, 932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mengistu, D.A.; Belami, D.D.; Tefera, A.A.; Alemeshet Asefa, Y. Bacteriological quality and public health risk of ready-to-eat foods in developing countries: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Microbiol. Insights 2022, 15, 11786361221113916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Gizaw, Z. Public health risks related to food safety issues in the food market: A systematic literature review. Environ. Health Prev. Med. 2019, 24, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ivy, R.A.; Wiedmann, M.; Boor, K.J. Listeria monocytogenes grown at 7 °C shows reduced acid survival and an altered transcriptional response to acid shock compared to L. monocytogenes grown at 37 °C. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2012, 78, 3824–3836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Oliveira, H.; Blocquel, C.; Santos, M.; Fretigny, M.; Correia, T.; Gonçalves, A.; Cabado, A.G.; López, L.B.; Raaholt, B.W.; Ferraris, F.; et al. Semi-industrial development of nutritious and healthy seafood dishes from sustainable species. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2021, 155, 112431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wang, P.; Hu, A.; Fan, X.; Zhao, X.; Ge, Y.; Chen, Y. Bacterial communities in prepared foods available at supermarkets in Beijing, China. Food Res. Int. 2019, 120, 668–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pires, S.M.; Thomsen, S.T.; Nauta, M.; Poulsen, M.; Jakobsen, L.S. Food safety implications of transitions toward sustainable healthy diets. Food Nutr. Bull. 2020, 41, 104–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Jiang, J.; Xiong, Y.L. Technologies and mechanisms for safety control of ready-to-eat muscle foods: An updated review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2015, 55, 1886–1901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Huang, M.S.; Zhang, M.; Bhandari, B. Recent development in the application of alternative sterilization technologies to prepared dishes: A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 59, 1188–1196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Smyth, A.B.; Song, J.; Cameron, A.C. Modified atmosphere packaged cut iceberg lettuce: Effect of temperature and O2 partial pressure on respiration and quality. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1998, 46, 4556–4562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Makinde, O.M.; Ayeni, K.I.; Sulyok, M.; Krska, R.; Adeleke, R.A.; Ezekiel, C.N. Microbiological safety of ready-to-eat foods in low- and middle-income countries: A comprehensive 10-year (2009 to 2018) review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2020, 19, 703–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Yang, S.; Pei, X.; Yang, D.; Zhang, H.; Chen, Q.; Chui, H.; Qiao, X.; Huang, Y.; Liu, Q. Microbial contamination in bulk ready-to-eat meat products of China in 2016. Food Control 2018, 91, 113–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Łepecka, A.; Zielińska, D.; Szymański, P.; Buras, I.; Kołożyn-Krajewska, D. Assessment of the microbiological quality of ready-to-eat salads—Are there any reasons for concern about public health? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 1582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Cai, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Pan, H.; Tie, X.; Ren, Y. Simultaneous determination of 24 sulfonamide residues in meat by ultra-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 2008, 1200, 144–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Bailac, S.; Ballesteros, O.; Jiménez-Lozano, E.; Barrón, D.; Sanz-Nebot, V.; Navalón, A.; Vílchez, J.L.; Barbosa, J. Determination of quinolones in chicken tissues by liquid chromatography with ultraviolet absorbance detection. J. Chromatogr. A 2004, 1029, 145–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ricke, S.C.; Kim, S.A.; Shi, Z.; Park, S.H. Molecular-based identification and detection of Salmonella in food production systems: Current perspectives. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2018, 125, 313–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zhu, L.; He, J.; Cao, X.; Huang, K.; Luo, Y.; Xu, W. Development of a double-antibody sandwich ELISA for rapid detection of Bacillus cereus in food. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 16092. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhu, J.; Yin, H.; Xin, Y.; Wang, L.; Geng, X.; Zhao, H.; Deng, Y. A “turn-on” fluorometric aptasensor for simultaneous detection of Hg(II) and Pb(II) in fruits and vegetables after digestion. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2025, 139, 107102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Alieva, R.; Sokolova, S.; Zavyalova, E. A surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy-based aptasensor for the detection of deoxynivalenol and T-2 mycotoxins. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 9534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Liu, W.G.; Su, Y.Z.; Liu, J.; Zhang, K.; Wang, X.Y.; Chen, Y.G.; Duan, L.C.; Shi, F. Determination of cyflufenamid residues in 12 foodstuffs by QuEChERS-HPLC-MS/MS. Food Chem. 2021, 362, 130148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhang, L.P.; Zhang, W.Q.; Yang, W.X.; Duan, M.H.; Wei, M.Q. Study on the action mechanism of Euphorbia peplus in the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease based on UPLC-Q-TOF-MS/MS combined with network pharmacology and molecular docking. J. Agric. Biotechnol. 2023, 12, 122–131. [Google Scholar]
  22. Rocco, K.; Margoum, C.; Richard, L.; Coquery, M. Enhanced database creation with in silico workflows for suspect screening of unknown tebuconazole transformation products in environmental samples by UHPLC-HRMS. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 440, 129706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kong, X.H.; Kong, L.Y.; Hu, A.T.; Li, J.J.; Lu, Z.X.; Bie, X.M. Establishment of PCR assay with internal amplification control for rapid detection of Salmonella sp. Appl. Biochem. Microbiol. 2021, 57, 666–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zheng, Q.; Mikš-Krajnik, M.; Yang, Y.; Xu, W.; Yuk, H.G. Real-time PCR method combined with immunomagnetic separation for detecting healthy and heat-injured Salmonella Typhimurium on raw duck wings. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2014, 186, 6–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Shin, J.; Miller, M.; Wang, Y.C. Recent advances in CRISPR-based systems for the detection of foodborne pathogens. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2022, 21, 3010–3029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Han, X.; Liu, Y.; Yin, J.; Yue, M.; Mu, Y. Microfluidic devices for multiplexed detection of foodborne pathogens. Food Res. Int. 2021, 143, 110246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Truchado, P.; Randazzo, W. New challenges for detection and control of foodborne pathogens: From tools to people. Foods 2022, 11, 1788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zhu, J.; Wang, D.; Yu, H.; Yin, H.; Wang, L.; Shen, G.; Geng, X.; Yang, L.; Fei, Y.; Deng, Y. Advances in colorimetric aptasensors for heavy metal ion detection utilizing nanomaterials: A comprehensive review. Anal. Methods 2023, 15, 6320–6343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Cui, H.; Wang, S.; Yang, X.; Zhang, W.; Chen, M.; Wu, Y.; Li, S.; Li, L.; Cai, D.; Guo, B.; et al. Predictive models for assessing the risk of Fusarium pseudograminearum mycotoxin contamination in post-harvest wheat with multi-parameter integrated sensors. Food Chem. X 2022, 16, 100472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Pezzolato, M.; Baioni, E.; Maurella, C.C.; Varello, K.; Meistro, S.; Balsano, A.; Bozzetta, E. Distinguishing between fresh and frozen-thawed smoked salmon: Histology to detect food adulteration in high-value products. J. Food Prot. 2020, 83, 52–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Sneha, S.; Surjith, S.; Raj, S.M.A. A review on food adulteration detection techniques: Methodologies, applications, and challenges. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Control, Communication and Computing (ICCC), Thiruvananthapuram, India, 19–21 May 2023; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  32. Anagaw, Y.K.; Ayenew, W.; Limenh, L.W.; Geremew, D.T.; Worku, M.C.; Tessema, T.A.; Simegn, W.; Mitku, M.L. Food adulteration: Causes, risks, and detection techniques—Review. SAGE Open Med. 2024, 12, 20503121241250184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chen, W.; Yang, Y.; Fu, K.; Zhang, D.; Wang, Z. Progress in ICP-MS analysis of minerals and heavy metals in traditional medicine. Front. Pharmacol. 2022, 13, 891273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Feglo, P.; Sakyi, K. Bacterial contamination of street vending food in Kumasi, Ghana. J. Med. Biomed. Sci. 2012, 1, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  35. Chen, Q.; Cao, M.; Chen, H.; Gao, P.; Fu, Y.; Liu, M.; Wang, Y.; Huang, M. Effects of gamma irradiation on microbial safety and quality of stir fry chicken dices with hot chili during storage. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2016, 127, 122–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Feliciano, C.P.; De Guzman, Z.M.; Tolentino, L.M.M.; Asaad, C.O.; Cobar, M.L.C.; Abrera, G.B.; Baldos, D.T.; Diano, G.T. Microbiological quality of brown rice, ready-to-eat pre-cut fresh fruits, and mixed vegetables irradiated for immuno-compromised patients. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2017, 130, 397–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Feliciano, C.P.; De Guzman, Z.M.; Tolentino, L.M.; Cobar, M.L.; Abrera, G.B. Radiation-treated ready-to-eat (RTE) chicken breast adobo for immuno-compromised patients. Food Chem. 2014, 163, 142–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Yun, H.; Lee, K.H.; Lee, H.J.; Lee, J.W.; Ahn, D.U.; Cheorun, J. Effect of high-dose irradiation on quality characteristics of ready-to-eat chicken breast. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2012, 81, 1107–1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Robertson, C.B.; Andrews, L.S.; Marshall, D.L.; Coggins, P.; Schilling, M.W.; Martin, R.E.; Collette, R. Effect of X-ray irradiation on reducing the risk of listeriosis in ready-to-eat vacuum-packaged smoked mullet. J. Food Prot. 2006, 69, 1561–1564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mahmoud, B.S.M.; Nannapaneni, R.; Chang, S.; Wu, Y.; Coker, R. Improving the safety and quality of raw tuna fillets by X-ray irradiation. Food Control 2016, 60, 569–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Peng, J.; Tang, J.; Luan, D.; Liu, F.; Tang, Z.; Li, F.; Zhang, W. Microwave pasteurization of pre-packaged carrots. J. Food Eng. 2017, 202, 56–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Xu, J.; Zhang, M.; An, Y.; Roknul, A.S.; Adhikari, B. Effects of radio frequency and high-pressure steam sterilization on the color and flavor of prepared Nostoc sphaeroides. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2018, 98, 1719–1724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ben-Fadhel, Y.; Saltaji, S.; Khlifi, M.A.; Salmieri, S.; Dang Vu, K.; Lacroix, M. Active edible coating and γ-irradiation as cold combined treatments to assure the safety of broccoli florets (Brassica oleracea L.). Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2017, 241, 30–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Muriana, P.M.; Quimby, W.; Davidson, C.A.; Grooms, J. Postpackage pasteurization of ready-to-eat deli meats by submersion heating for reduction of Listeria monocytogenes. J. Food Prot. 2002, 65, 963–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. McCormick, K.; Han, I.Y.; Acton, J.C.; Sheldon, B.W.; Dawson, P.L. D- and z-values for Listeria monocytogenes and Salmonella typhimurium in packaged low-fat ready-to-eat turkey bologna subjected to a surface pasteurization treatment. Poult. Sci. 2003, 82, 1337–1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Akbar, A.; Anal, A.K. Isolation of Salmonella from ready-to-eat poultry meat and evaluation of its survival at low temperature, microwaving, and simulated gastric fluids. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 52, 3051–3057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gomes, C.; Moreira, R.G.; Castell-Perez, E. Radiosensitization of Salmonella spp. and Listeria spp. in ready-to-eat baby spinach leaves. J. Food Sci. 2011, 76, E141–E148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Kim, H.J.; Chun, H.H.; Song, H.J.; Song, K.B. Effects of electron beam irradiation on the microbial growth and quality of beef jerky during storage. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2010, 79, 1165–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Cambero, M.I.; Cabeza, M.C.; Escudero, R.; Manzano, S.; Garcia-Márquez, I.; Velasco, R.; Ordóñez, J.A. Sanitation of selected ready-to-eat intermediate-moisture foods of animal origin by E-beam irradiation. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2012, 9, 594–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Soni, A.; Brightwell, G. Effect of hurdle approaches using conventional and moderate thermal processing technologies for microbial inactivation in fruit and vegetable products. Foods 2022, 11, 1811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Sreenath, P.G.; Abhilash, S.; Ravishankar, C.N.; Anandan, R.; Gopal, T.K.S. Heat penetration characteristics and quality changes of Indian mackerel (Rastrelliger kanagurta) canned in brine at different retort temperatures. J. Food Process Eng. 2010, 32, 893–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Wang, J.Y.; Yue, C.Z.; Wang, Z.Q.; Wang, G.Y. Research progress of time-temperature indicators in intelligent food packaging. Food Ferment. Ind. 2023, 49, 328–334. [Google Scholar]
  53. Norton, T.; Sun, D.W. Recent advances in the use of high pressure as an effective processing technique in the food industry. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2008, 1, 2–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sevenich, R.; Nieder, S.; Rauh, C.; Olivier, S.; Knoerzer, K. High-pressure thermal sterilization (HPTS) and its effect on production of food processing contaminants and quality-related properties in food in comparison to thermal-only processing. In High Pressure Thermal Processing; Knoerzer, K., Sevenich, R., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2023; pp. 103–182. [Google Scholar]
  55. Wang, M.; Kong, B.; Guo, Y.; Yue, C.; Wang, G. Immobilization of laccase on sodium alginate/soluble starch microcapsules to develop a time-temperature indicator for freshness monitoring of Agaricus bisporus. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024, 285, 138166. [Google Scholar]
  56. Zhang, J.; Cheng, J.; Li, Z.; Weng, M.; Zhang, X.; Tang, X.; Pan, Y. Effects of ultra-high pressure, thermal pasteurization, and ultra-high temperature sterilization on color and nutritional components of freshly-squeezed lettuce juice. Food Chem. 2024, 435, 137524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Zhang, S.; Meenu, M.; Hu, L.; Ren, J.; Ramaswamy, H.S.; Yu, Y. Recent progress in the synergistic bactericidal effect of high pressure and temperature processing in fruits and vegetables and related kinetics. Foods 2022, 11, 3698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Silva, F.V.M. Pasteurization of food and beverages by high-pressure processing (HPP) at room temperature: Inactivation of Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella, and other microbial pathogens. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 1193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Roberts, P.B. Food irradiation is safe: Half a century of studies. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2014, 105, 78–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Grandison, A. Food processing technology: Principles and practice. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2011, 64, 455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Smita, M.; Meera, K.; Sundaramoorthy, H.; Jha, D.; Mohan, B.C.; Pavithraa, G.; Reddy, C.K. Influence of γ-irradiation on physicochemical, functional, proximate, and antioxidant characteristics of pigmented rice flours. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2023, 60, 1621–1632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Cha, M.Y.; Ha, J.W. Low-energy X-ray irradiation effectively inactivates major foodborne pathogen biofilms on various food contact surfaces. Food Microbiol. 2022, 106, 104054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Mahmoud, B.S. Effect of X-ray treatments on inoculated Escherichia coli O157:H7, Salmonella enterica, Shigella flexneri, and Vibrio parahaemolyticus in ready-to-eat shrimp. Food Microbiol. 2009, 26, 860–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Khaneghah, A.M.; Moosavi, M.H.; Oliveira, C.A.F.; Vanin, F.; Sant’Ana, A.S. Electron beam irradiation to reduce the mycotoxin and microbial contaminations of cereal-based products: An overview. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2020, 143, 111557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Li, L.; Fan, L.; Shang, F.; Zhang, Y.; Shuai, L.; Xie, Y.; Duan, Z. Antifungal activity and mechanism of electron beam irradiation against Rhizopus oryzae. J. Food Prot. 2023, 86, 100070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Paulina, G.; Piotr, K.; Marzena, Z.; Władysław, M. Microwave applications in the food industry: An overview of recent developments. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2022, 62, 7989–8008. [Google Scholar]
  67. Resurreccion, F.P.; Tang, J.; Pedrow, P.; Cavalieri, R.; Liu, F.; Tang, Z. Development of a computer simulation model for processing food in a microwave-assisted thermal sterilization (MATS) system. J. Food Eng. 2013, 118, 406–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Hong, Y.K.; Stanley, R.; Tang, J.; Bui, L.; Ghandi, A. Effect of electric field distribution on the heating uniformity of a model ready-to-eat meal in microwave-assisted thermal sterilization using the FDTD method. Foods 2021, 10, 311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Hassoun, A.; Siddiqui, S.; Slim, S.; İlknur, U.; Arshad, R.N.; Bhat, Z.F.; Bhat, H.F.; Carpena, M.; Prieto, M.A.; Kaddour, A.A.; et al. Emerging technological advances in improving the safety of muscle foods: Framing in the context of the food revolution 4.0. Food Rev. Int. 2022, 40, 37–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Wang, K.; Ran, C.Y.; Cui, B.Z.; Sun, Y.Y.; Fu, H.F.; Chen, X.W.; Wang, Y.Q.; Wang, Y.Y. Sterilizing ready-to-eat poached spicy pork slices using a new device: Combined radio frequency energy and superheated water. Foods 2022, 11, 2841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Horita, C.N.; Baptista, R.C.; Caturla, M.Y.R.; Lorenzo, J.M.; Barba, F.J.; Sant’Ana, A.S. Combining reformulation, active packaging, and non-thermal post-packaging decontamination technologies to increase the microbiological quality and safety of cooked ready-to-eat meat products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 72, 45–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Nikmaram, N.; Roohinejad, S.; Hashemi, S.; Koubaa, M.; Barba, F.J.; Abbaspourrad, A.; Greiner, R. Emulsion-based systems for fabrication of electrospun nanofibers: Food, pharmaceutical and biomedical applications. RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 28951–28964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Zhou, T.; Wu, J.; Zhang, M.; Ke, W.; Shan, K.; Zhao, D.; Li, C. Effect of natural plant extracts on the quality of meat products: A meta-analysis. Food Mater. Res. 2023, 3, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Vinceković, M.; Viskić, M.; Jurić, S.; Giacometti, J.; Kovačević, D.B.; Putnik, P.; Donsì, F.; Barba, F.J.; Jambrak, A.R. Innovative technologies for encapsulation of Mediterranean plant extracts. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 69, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Higginbotham, K.L.; Burris, K.P.; Zivanovic, S.; Davidson, P.M.; Stewart, C.N. Aqueous extracts of Hibiscus sabdariffa calyces as an antimicrobial rinse on hot dogs against Listeria monocytogenes and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Food Control 2014, 40, 274–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Price, A.; Díaz, P.; Bañón, S.; Garrido, M.D. Natural extracts versus sodium ascorbate to extend the shelf life of meat-based ready-to-eat meals. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2013, 19, 427–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Perumalla, A.V.S.; Hettiarachchy, N.S.; Over, K.; Ricke, S.C.; Slavik, M.F.; Gbur, E.; Davis, B.; Acosta, S. Effect of partial replacement of potassium lactate and sodium diacetate by natural green tea and grape seed extracts and postpackaging thermal treatment on the growth of Listeria monocytogenes in hotdog model system. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2012, 48, 918–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Cadet, M. Antimicrobial efficacy of flower extract from Alpinia galanga (Linn.) Swartz against Listeria monocytogenes and Staphylococcus aureus in a ready-to-eat turkey ham product. Master’s Thesis, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  79. Odedina, G.F.; Vongkamjan, K.; Voravuthikunchai, S.P. Use of Rhodomyrtus tomentosa ethanolic leaf extract for the bio-control of Listeria monocytogenes post-cooking contamination in cooked chicken meat. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 53, 4234–4243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Chan, K.W.; Khong, N.M.H.; Iqbal, S.; Ch’ng, S.E.; Younas, U.; Babji, A.S. Cinnamon bark deodorized aqueous extract as potential natural antioxidant in meat emulsion system: A comparative study with synthetic and natural food antioxidants. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2012, 51, 3269–3276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Moarefian, M.; Barzegar, M.; Sattari, M. Cinnamomum zeylanicum essential oil as a natural antioxidant and antibacterial agent in cooked sausage. J. Food Biochem. 2013, 37, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Baldin, J.C.; Michelin, E.C.; Polizer, Y.J.; Rodrigues, I.; de Godoy, S.H.; Fregonesi, R.P.; Pires, M.A.; Carvalho, L.T.; Fávaro-Trindade, C.S.; de Lima, C.G.; et al. Microencapsulated jabuticaba (Myrciaria cauliflora) extract added to fresh sausage as natural dye with antioxidant and antimicrobial activity. Meat Sci. 2016, 118, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Munekata, P.E.S.; Rocchetti, G.; Pateiro, M.; Lucini, L.; Domínguez, R.; Lorenzo, J.M. Addition of plant extracts to meat and meat products to extend shelf-life and health-promoting attributes: An overview. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2020, 31, 81–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. 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] [PubMed]
  85. Teng, X.X.; Zhang, M.; Adhikari, B.; Liu, K. Garlic essential oil emulsions stabilized by microwave dry-heating induced protein-pectin conjugates and their application in controlling nitrite content in prepared vegetable dishes. Food Hydrocoll. 2023, 136, 108267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Magdalena, E.S.; Agnieszka, N.; Agata, C. Plant extracts rich in polyphenols: Antibacterial agents and natural preservatives for meat and meat products. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 61, 149–178. [Google Scholar]
  87. Papuc, C.; Goran, G.V.; Predescu, C.N.; Nicorescu, V.; Stefan, G. Plant polyphenols as antioxidant and antibacterial agents for shelf life extension of meat and meat products: Classification, structures, sources, and action mechanisms. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2017, 16, 1243–1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Teng, X.X.; Zhang, M.; Mujumdar, A.S.; Wang, H.Q. Inhibition of nitrite in prepared dish of Brassica chinensis L. during storage via non-extractable phenols in hawthorn pomace: A comparison of different extraction methods. Food Chem. 2022, 393, 133344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Šojić, B.; Pavlić, B.; Tomović, V.; Kocić-Tanackov, S.; Đurović, S.; Zeković, Z.; Belović, M.; Torbica, A.; Jokanović, M.; Urumović, N. Tomato pomace extract and organic peppermint essential oil as effective sodium nitrite replacement in cooked pork sausages. Food Chem. 2020, 330, 127202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Mi, K.Y.; Hwa, P.J.; Sun, Y.K. Nitrite formation from vegetable sources and its use as a preservative in cooked sausage. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2017, 97, 1774–1783. [Google Scholar]
  91. Erceg, T.; Vukić, N.; Šovljanski, O.; Teofilović, V.; Porobić, S.; Baloš, S.; Kojić, S.; Terek, P.; Banjanin, B.; Rakić, S. Preparation and characterization of biodegradable cellulose acetate-based films with novel plasticizer obtained by polyethylene terephthalate glycolysis intended for active packaging. Cellulose 2023, 30, 5825–5844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Albaridi, N.A.; Badr, A.N.; Ali, H.S.; Shehata, M.G. Outstanding approach to enhance the safety of ready-to-eat rice and extend the refrigerated preservation. Foods 2022, 11, 1928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Siriskar, D.A.; Khedkar, G.D.; Lior, D. Production of salted and pressed anchovies (Stolephorus sp.) and its quality evaluation during storage. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2013, 50, 1172–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Domínguez, R.; Bohrer, B.; Pateiro, M.; Munekata, P.E.S.; Lorenzo, J.M. Sustainable production technology in food. In Packaging Systems; Lorenzo, J.M., Munekata, P.E.S., Barba, F.J., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2021; pp. 49–69. [Google Scholar]
  95. Katarzyna, M.; Patrycja, L.; Dorota, Z.; Michal, S.; Katarzyna, Z.; Piotr, L.; Anna, Z. The influence of chestnut flour on the quality of gluten-free bread. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Nichols, B.W.; Morales, G.M.B.; Douglas, S.L.; Johnson, G.F.; Cordero, R.J.B.; Belk, A.D.; Ball, J.J.; Sawyer, J.T. Thermoforming vacuum packaging influences fresh pork loin chop characteristics. Foods 2024, 13, 2701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Xu, D.; Chen, C.; Zhou, F.; Liu, C.; Tian, M.; Zeng, X.; Jiang, A. Vacuum packaging and ascorbic acid synergistically maintain the quality and flavor of fresh-cut potatoes. LWT 2022, 162, 113356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Stamatis, N.; Arkoudelos, J. Quality assessment of Scomber colias japonicus under modified atmosphere and vacuum packaging. Food Control 2005, 18, 292–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Bassey, A.P.; Chen, Y.; Zhu, Z.; Odeyemi, O.A.; Frimpong, E.B.; Ye, K.; Li, C.; Zhou, G. Assessment of quality characteristics and bacterial community of modified atmosphere packaged chilled pork loins using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing analysis. Food Res. Int. 2021, 145, 110412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Chen, X.; Zhao, J.; Zhu, L.; Luo, X.; Mao, Y.; Hopkins, D.L.; Zhang, Y.; Dong, P. Effect of modified atmosphere packaging on shelf life and bacterial community of roast duck meat. Food Res. Int. 2020, 137, 109645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Cortellino, G.; Gobbi, S.; Bianchi, G.; Rizzolo, A. Modified atmosphere packaging for shelf life extension of fresh-cut apples. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 46, 320–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Ping, K.; Sun, J.; Yang, Y.I.; Hou, W.F.; Min, T.; Wang, H.X. Optimization of gas mixture ratio of modified atmosphere packaging for chilled meat by simplex-centroid design. Sci. Technol. Food Ind. 2016, 7, 310–315. [Google Scholar]
  103. Yam, K.L.; Lee, D.S. Emerging Food Packaging Technologies: Principles and Practice; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  104. Sandhya, S. Modified atmosphere packaging of fresh produce: Current status and future needs. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2010, 43, 381–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Zhang, M.; Meng, X.; Bhandari, B.; Fang, Z. Recent developments in film and gas research in modified atmosphere packaging of fresh foods. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2016, 56, 2174–2182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Irkin, R.; Esmer, O.K. Novel food packaging systems with natural antimicrobial agents. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 52, 6095–6111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Dinika, I.; Verma, D.K.; Balia, R.; Utama, G.L.; Patel, A.R. Potential of cheese whey bioactive proteins and peptides in the development of antimicrobial edible film composite: A review of recent trends. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 103, 57–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Iseppi, R.; Camellini, S.; Sabia, C.; Messi, P. Combined antimicrobial use of essential oils and bacteriocin bacLP17 as seafood biopreservative to control Listeria monocytogenes both in planktonic and in sessile forms. Res. Microbiol. 2020, 171, 351–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Azizi-Lalabadi, M.; Ehsani, A.; Divband, B.; Alizadeh-Sani, M. Antimicrobial activity of titanium dioxide and zinc oxide nanoparticles supported in 4A zeolite and evaluation of the morphological characteristic. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 17439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Sharma, N.; Gupta, P.C.; Upadhyay, S.; Rai, S.; Mishra, P. Metal and metal-oxide based nanomaterials: Synthesis, agricultural, biomedical and environmental interventions. In Antimicrobial Applications of Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles in Food Packaging Industry; Bachheti, R.K., Bachheti, A., Husen, A., Eds.; Springer Nature Singapore: Singapore, 2024; pp. 67–93. [Google Scholar]
  111. Lotfi, S.; Ahari, H.; Sahraeyan, R. The effect of silver nanocomposite packaging based on melt mixing and sol–gel methods on shelf life extension of fresh chicken stored at 4 °C. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2019, 39, e12625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Deng, J.; Ding, Q.M.; Li, W.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, S. Preparation of Nano-Silver-Containing Polyethylene Composite Film and Ag Ion Migration into Food-Simulants. J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 2020, 20, 1613–1621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Velásquez, E.; López de Dicastillo, C.; Patiño Vidal, C.; Rodríguez, A. Feasibility of valorization of post-consumer recycled flexible polypropylene by adding fumed nanosilica for its potential use in food packaging toward sustainability. Polymers 2023, 15, 1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Huang, Y.; Huo, S.; Mo, J. Highly effective and broad-spectrum antimicrobial quaternary ammonium salts containing camphene structure: Preparation, surface-active properties, and bioassay. ACS Omega 2023, 8, 34687–34697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Hauser, C.; Thielmann, J.; Muranyi, P. Organic acids: Usage and potential in antimicrobial packaging. In Antimicrobial Food Packaging; Barros-Velázquez, J., Ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2016; pp. 563–580. [Google Scholar]
  116. Sung, S.Y.; Sin, L.T.; Tee, T.T.; Bee, S.T.; Rahmat, A.R.; Rahman, W.A.W.A.; Tan, A.C.; Vikhraman, M. Antimicrobial agents for food packaging applications. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2013, 33, 110–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Tsironi, T.; Dermesonlouoglou, E.; Giannoglou, M.; Gogou, E.; Katsaros, G.; Taoukis, P. Shelf-life prediction models for ready-to-eat fresh cut salads: Testing in real cold chain. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2017, 240, 131–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Lim, S.; Gunasekaran, S.; Imm, J.Y. Gelatin-templated gold nanoparticles as novel time–temperature indicator. J. Food Sci. 2012, 77, N45–N49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Pereira, P.F.M.; Picciani, P.H.S.; Calado, V.M.A.; Tonon, R.V. Gelatin-based nanobiocomposite films as sensitive layers for monitoring relative humidity in food packaging. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2020, 13, 1063–1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Choi, I.; Lee, J.Y.; Lacroix, M.; Han, J. Intelligent pH indicator film composed of agar/potato starch and anthocyanin extracts from purple sweet potato. Food Chem. 2017, 218, 122–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Yousefi, H.; Ali, M.M.; Su, H.M.; Filipe, C.D.M.; Didar, T.F. Sentinel wraps: Real-time monitoring of food contamination by printing DNAzyme probes on food packaging. ACS Nano 2018, 12, 3287–3294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Lee, S.Y.; Lee, S.J.; Choi, D.S.; Hur, S.J. Current topics in active and intelligent food packaging for preservation of fresh foods. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2015, 95, 2799–2810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Müller, P.; Schmid, M. Intelligent packaging in the food sector: A brief overview. Foods 2019, 8, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Kerry, J.P.; Butler, P. Smart Packaging Technologies for Fast Moving Consumer Goods; John Wiley & Sons: West Sussex, UK, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  125. Gustavsson, J.; Cederberg, C.; Sonesson, U.; van Otterdijk, R.; Meybeck, A. Global food losses and food waste: Extent, causes and prevention. Food Agric. Organ. United Nations 2011, 38, 29. [Google Scholar]
  126. Pan, S. Research on Quality Control of Fresh Food Supply Chain. Acad. J. Bus. Manag. 2024, 6, 278–283. [Google Scholar]
  127. Bai, L.; Liu, M.; Sun, Y. Overview of Food Preservation and Traceability Technology in the Smart Cold Chain System. Foods 2023, 12, 2881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Roos, Y.H. Glass transition and re-crystallization phenomena of frozen materials and their effect on frozen food quality. Foods 2021, 10, 447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Chu, J.O.; Jeong, H.S.; Park, J.P.; Park, K.; Kim, S.K.; Yi, H.; Choi, C.H. Capsule-based colorimetric temperature monitoring system for customizable cold chain management. Chem. Eng. J. 2023, 455, 140753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Chen, J.; Xiao, J. Design of Intelligent Temperature and Humidity Monitoring System Based on STM32. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2023, 2493, 012002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Zatsu, V.; Shine, A.E.; Tharakan, J.M.; Peter, D.; Ranganathan, T.V.; Alotaibi, S.S.; Mugabi, R.; Muhsinah, A.B.; Waseem, M.; Nayik, G.A. Revolutionizing the food industry: The transformative power of Artificial Intelligence—A review. Food Chem. X 2024, 24, 101867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Khade, H.D.; Saxena, S.; Hajare, S.N.; Gautam, S. Gamma radiation processing for extending shelf-life and ensuring quality of minimally processed ready-to-eat onions. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2023, 60, 2265–2274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Li, X.; Trebar, M.; Liu, X.; Li, Z.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, X. Developing an advanced multi-parameter monitoring system for wireless real-time monitoring and traceability of chilled chicken in cold chain. In Proceedings of the 2019 ASABE Annual International Meeting, Boston, MA, USA, 7–10 July 2019; Volume 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Ding, Y.; Yang, G.; Zheng, S.; Gao, X.; Xiang, Z.; Gao, M.; Wang, C.; Liu, M.; Zhong, J. Advanced photocatalytic disinfection mechanisms and their challenges. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 366, 121875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Brincat, J.P.; Sardella, D.; Muscat, A.; Decelis, S.; Grima, J.N.; Valdramidis, V.; Gatt, R. A review of the state-of-the-art in air filtration technologies as may be applied to cold storage warehouses. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 175–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Geng, Z.; Liu, F.; Shang, D.; Han, Y.; Shang, Y.; Chu, C. Early warning and control of food safety risk using an improved AHC-RBF neural network integrating AHP-EW. J. Food Eng. 2021, 292, 110239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Torky, M.; Hassanein, A.E. Integrating blockchain and the internet of things in precision agriculture: Analysis, opportunities, and challenges. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2020, 178, 105476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Zhou, X.; Xu, X.; Huang, J. Adaptive multi-temperature control for transport and storage containers enabled by phase-change materials. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 5449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Nnachi, R.C.; Sui, N.; Ke, B.; Luo, Z.; Bhalla, N.; He, D.; Yang, Z. Biosensors for rapid detection of bacterial pathogens in water, food and environment. Environ. Int. 2022, 166, 107357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Zhu, L.; Spachos, P.; Pensini, E.; Plataniotis, K.N. Deep learning and machine vision for food processing: A survey. Curr. Res. Food Sci. 2021, 4, 233–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Key development milestones of ready-to-eat meals.
Figure 1. Key development milestones of ready-to-eat meals.
Processes 13 00901 g001
Figure 2. Classification of ready-to-eat meals and related products.
Figure 2. Classification of ready-to-eat meals and related products.
Processes 13 00901 g002
Figure 3. Safety control at each stage of ready-to-eat meal production.
Figure 3. Safety control at each stage of ready-to-eat meal production.
Processes 13 00901 g003
Figure 4. Literature screening flowchart.
Figure 4. Literature screening flowchart.
Processes 13 00901 g004
Figure 5. Detection techniques for various contaminations of raw materials.
Figure 5. Detection techniques for various contaminations of raw materials.
Processes 13 00901 g005
Figure 6. Different packaging in ready-to-eat foods.
Figure 6. Different packaging in ready-to-eat foods.
Processes 13 00901 g006
Figure 7. Application of modified atmosphere packaging in ready-to-eat foods.
Figure 7. Application of modified atmosphere packaging in ready-to-eat foods.
Processes 13 00901 g007
Figure 8. Application of functional packaging materials in ready-to-eat foods.
Figure 8. Application of functional packaging materials in ready-to-eat foods.
Processes 13 00901 g008
Figure 9. Application of intelligent packaging in ready-to-eat foods.
Figure 9. Application of intelligent packaging in ready-to-eat foods.
Processes 13 00901 g009
Figure 10. Process management and application of quality and safety control systems in the quality and safety control of ready-to-eat foods.
Figure 10. Process management and application of quality and safety control systems in the quality and safety control of ready-to-eat foods.
Processes 13 00901 g010
Table 1. Application of different detection techniques in RTEM.
Table 1. Application of different detection techniques in RTEM.
Food NameDetection IndexDetection MethodRefs
MeatPesticide residueLC-MS/MS[14]
ChickenVeterinary drug residueGC-MS/MS[15]
SeafoodSalmonellaReal-time PCR[16]
VegetablesEscherichia coli O157:H7ELISA[17]
FruitHeavy metalInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS)[18]
Wheat grainsT-2 mycotoxinsSurface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS)[19]
Table 2. Application of different sterilization techniques in the processing of RTEMs and their effect on products.
Table 2. Application of different sterilization techniques in the processing of RTEMs and their effect on products.
ProductSterilization TechnologyFactorEffectRefs
Pre-made stir-fried chicken with chili peppersγ-ray10/20 kGyEnsure shelf stability, microbiological safety, organoleptic quality, and nutritional value of pre-made dishes[35]
Pre-made mixed vegetablesγ-ray1 kGyReduced microbial contamination levels in pre-made mixed vegetables[36]
Pre-made chicken breastsγ-ray combined refrigerated and vacuum-packed processing25 kGyExtend shelf life to 60 days[37]
Pre-made chicken breastsγ-ray40/5 kGyAfter 10 days of irradiation treatment, the 40 kGy irradiated samples showed a more significant improvement in microbiological quality than the 5 kGy but were also accompanied by off-flavors that could affect sensory properties[38]
Pre-made smoked ospreyX-ray2.0 kGyHighly effective in killing bacteria without altering their flavor[39]
Pre-made shrimpX-ray0.75 kGySignificantly reduced the initial flora on the surface of prepared shrimps below the detectable limit[40]
Simulated pre-made carrotsMicrowave/hot water Retained the color of carrots better treated by microwave[41]
Pre-made carrotsNano-zinc oxide composite radio frequency heating6 kW, 27 MHz, 20 minSignificantly reduced colony counts during storage and extended shelf life up to 60 days compared to carrots treated only with radio frequency heating[42]
Pre-made broccoliγ-ray with active coating0.4 kGyActive coating and irradiation treatment had a synergistic sterilizing effect on prepared broccoli, extending shelf life[43]
Raw tuna filletsX-ray0.6 kGySignificant (p < 0.05) decrease in Salmonella enterica counts[40]
Pre-cooked hamThermal sterilization90.6–96.1 °C for 2 minReduced mixture of four Listeria monocytogenes strains significantly [44]
Pre-made low-fat turkey jumbo salamiThermal sterilization85 °C water bath heating for 10 sInactivated all Listeria monocytogenes on the surface[45]
Pre-made poultryMicrowave900 W for 90 sEffective removal targets bacteria[46]
Pre-made spinachElectron beamAerosol packaging (100% O2 and N2:O2 [2:1]), low dose (less than 1 kGy)Reduced Salmonella spp. and Listeria spp.[47]
Pre-made beef jerkyElectron beam10 kGySignificantly reduced the total number of aerobic bacteria, increasing microbiological safety without altering the jerky quality[48]
Pre-made Iberian dry-cured ham, dried beef, and smoked tunaElectron beam1.5 kGyIncreased the shelf life of the product [49]
Table 3. Comparison of advantages and disadvantages of different sterilization technologies.
Table 3. Comparison of advantages and disadvantages of different sterilization technologies.
Sterilization TechnologyAdvantagesDisadvantages
Thermal sterilizationReducing/eliminating pathogens that cause foodborne illness; extend shelf lifeImpact on food sensory and quality; long processing time
IrradiationReducing/eliminating pathogens that cause foodborne illness; extending shelf life; no residual hazardous substances or additional nutritional changes; high sanitation and permeability; package products; no heat or wastewater generationRequire equipment to prevent radiation leakage; produce off-flavors after irradiation; exist concerns about irradiation technology
MicrowaveShorten heat treatment time; reduce the impact of heat treatment on food quality; sterilizationUneven heating
RadiofrequencyRapid heating; sterilization; stronger penetration abilityUneven heating
Table 4. Application of different natural extracts in the processing of RTEMs and their effect on the products.
Table 4. Application of different natural extracts in the processing of RTEMs and their effect on the products.
ProductNatural AdditiveEffectRefs
All-beef hot dog Freeze-dried Hibiscus sabdariffa flower extract240 mg/mL was most effective in preventing or reducing Listeria monocytogenes and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus[75]
Cooked pork balls Grape seed and green tea extractSamples containing green tea and grape seed extracts had lower thiobarbituric acid reactive substances, major volatile compounds, and microbial counts than sodium ascorbate samples and inhibited the formation of cholesterol oxidation products[76]
Hot dogGreen tea (0.35%) and grape seed (0.22%)Significant inhibited Listeria monocytogenes[77]
Pre-made turkey hamGalangal flower extractSignificantly inhibited Staphylococcus aureus and Listeria monocytogenes, with no adverse effects on sample color or pH[78]
Cooked chickenFollicular red yeast leaf ethanol extractInhibited Listeria monocytogenes[79]
Chicken meatballs Cinnamon extractDecreased peroxide value without any effect on sensory properties[80]
SausagesCinnamon essential oilReduced peroxide value, no effect on sensory properties[81]
Pork sausageMicroencapsulated cornus officinalis extractReduced lipid oxidation in fresh pork sausage[82]
MeatFruit extractsExtend shelf life and health-promoting attributes[83]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, Z.; Xu, G.; Hu, S. A Comprehensive Review on the Recent Technological Advancements in the Processing, Safety, and Quality Control of Ready-to-Eat Meals. Processes 2025, 13, 901. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13030901

AMA Style

Zhang Z, Xu G, Hu S. A Comprehensive Review on the Recent Technological Advancements in the Processing, Safety, and Quality Control of Ready-to-Eat Meals. Processes. 2025; 13(3):901. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13030901

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Zhi, Guangzhi Xu, and Shengqun Hu. 2025. "A Comprehensive Review on the Recent Technological Advancements in the Processing, Safety, and Quality Control of Ready-to-Eat Meals" Processes 13, no. 3: 901. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13030901

APA Style

Zhang, Z., Xu, G., & Hu, S. (2025). A Comprehensive Review on the Recent Technological Advancements in the Processing, Safety, and Quality Control of Ready-to-Eat Meals. Processes, 13(3), 901. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13030901

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