Table 2.

Characteristics of food-processing technologies and effectiveness on foodborne viruses’ inactivation.

Technology	Principle	Advantages	Limitations and Drawbacks	Effectiveness on Foodborne Viruses’ Inactivation	Key Mechanism of Viruses’ Inactivation	References
High-pressure processing (HPP)	An intense pressure of ≤600 MPa at chilled or mild process temperatures (<45 °C) is held on either liquid or high-moisture-content solid foods for a given exposure period (few s to over 20 min).	Inactivation of microorganisms and enzymes. Minimal effects on nutritive and organoleptic quality. Independent of food shape or size. Uniformity of treatment throughout food. Reduced treatment times. Post-packaging treatments; prevention of the post-pasteurization contamination. Easy to use. Commercial systems available. Energy-efficient process; relatively environmentally friendly process. Positive consumer appeal. Approved by regulatory.	Foods should have >40% free water for antimicrobial effect. Efficacy depends on type of microorganism, and the food composition. Spores not inactivated. Mixed effects on enzymes. Limited packaging options. Batch processing. High cost of equipment.	Promising for viral inactivation in foods. Virus- and strain-dependent; enveloped viruses less stable than non-enveloped. Depends on processing parameters (pressure, temperature, and holding time) and non-processing parameters (food matrix, pH and water activity of foods).	Denaturation of the viral capsid proteins incapacitates the infection virions from attachment and penetration to the host cells. Enveloped viruses: distortion of the virion morphology and disruption of the viral envelope.	[8,31,32,33,34]
Cold plasma (CP)	Food are exposed to CP, which is generated by the application of an electric or electromagnetic field to a gas; various types of apparatus are used. CP consist of various active agents, radicals, reactive species, or charged particles.	High efficiency against various spoilage microorganisms and food pathogens, even sporulated. Short treatment times. No heat treatment. Relatively low cost. No shadow effects. In-package treatment.	Efficacy depends on the type of microorganism, inactivation medium, number, and physiological state of the cells. Efficacy also affected by physical and chemical properties of foods, operating gas mixture and flow. Negative effects in some of the quality attributes of the food products. Technology in an early development stage. Consideration of safe application.	Becomes a promising solution for viral inactivation in foods. Enteric viruses and their surrogates have been successfully treated in aqueous solutions, and other liquid media and also on the surfaces of food.	The main mode of inactivation depends on virus target. Chemical interaction of reactive agents, particularly ROS and RNS and charged particles. Modification and/or degradation of proteins, nucleic acids, and lipids of viral envelopes.	[31,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43]
Ultraviolet light (UV)	An electromagnetic radiation with wavelengths (100 to 400 nm) that can induce damage in a variety of organisms. Foods are exposed to UV-C (200–280 nm): germicidal range, inactivates bacteria and viruses.	Improvement of food safety with minor effects on the nutritional and sensory properties of foods at low doses. Inactivation of bacterial spores. Equipment of moderate-to-low cost-and easy to use. Stimulates the synthesis of health-promoting compounds. Suitable for food contact surfaces.	Low degree of penetration (surface treatment). Pretreatment can be necessary. Occurrence of shadow effects. Process parameters difficult to standardize. The efficacy depends on several processed factors, target microorganisms, microbial concentration and material or food composition.	Many factors affect the efficiency, such as the type of nucleic acid of the virus, viral proteins, type of host cell, viral strain, virus aggregation, and experimental conditions. Single-stranded (ss) viruses, independent of the nucleic acid, at least 10 times more susceptible than double-stranded (ds) viruses. The food composition has great impact on efficiency.	Predominately attack of the viral nucleic acid, but at high enough doses (>1000 mW s/cm2) it can also affect the capsid proteins.	[8,31,34,44]
Irradiation	Packaged foods are exposed to a certain amount of ionizing radiation which mainly includes gamma rays, X-rays and electron beams.	A cold process. Highly effective. Suitable for sterilization. Insect disinfestation and parasites inactivation. Delay ripening and senescence. Excellent penetration into foods. Post-packaging treatments. Suitable for large-scale processing.	Low consumers’ preference. Expensive equipment. Possibility of affecting quality parameters. Efficacy depends on food composition and type of microorganisms. Strict safety standards.	Enteric viruses are more resistant compared to bacteria, parasites, and fungi. Many factors including the size of the virus, suspending medium/type of food product, dose and temperature affect the efficiency.	The destruction of nucleic acids. Radiolytic cleavage or crosslinking of genetic material. Formation of free radicals and other reactive species contribute to damage of nucleic acid, protein, and viral envelopes.	[8,34,45,46,47]
Pulsed electric field (PEF)	An electrical treatment of short time (from several ns to several ms) with pulse electric field strength from 100 to 300 V/cm to 20–80 kV/cm.	Minimally processing of foods; retention of sensorial, nutritional, and health-promoting attributes of some food products. Noticeably short treatment times. Improvement of energy usage economically and efficiently.	Low efficacy at destroying spores and enzymes. Other preservation techniques will be required to preserve the quality and stability of the food during distribution and storage. The industrial equipment is under development. Efficiency depends on process factors, microbial entity factors and media factors.	Doubts about the effectiveness.	Electrical breakdown of cell membranes, known as electroporation. The ineffectiveness in viruses may be explained by the presence of a protein capsid on enteric viruses compared to the lipid membranes of bacterial cells.	[8,48,49,50,51]