Table 1.
Overview of studies testing the efficacy of essential oils and plant extracts or their components when added to meat products.
| Anti-Microbial Agent—Concentration Applied | Food Product | Microorganisms Targeted |
Indicative Reduction (Log10 CFU/g, Log10 CFU/mL, Log10 CFU/cm2) 1,2,3,4 |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bay—0.5% v/w | Ground chicken | Total viable counts | 0.14–0.47 | [35] |
| Listeria monocytogenes | 0.07–0.36 | |||
| Escherichia coli | 0.12–1.22 | |||
| Cinnamon—1% w/w | Marinade on chicken | Lactic acid bacteria | 0.5 | [36] |
| Yeasts and moulds | 0.8 | |||
| E. coli | 0 | |||
| Coliforms | 0 | |||
| 1% w/w | Marinade on pork | Lactic acid bacteria | 0 | [36] |
| Yeasts and moulds | 2.4 | |||
| E. coli | 0 | |||
| Coliforms | 0 | |||
| Clove—0.5%, 1% | Minced beef | Aspergillus flavus | 2.42–3.01 5 | [37] |
| Coriander—0.02% v/w | Ground beef | Total viable counts | 0.1–0.4 | [38] |
| Enterobacteriaceae | 1–1.5 | |||
| Lactic acid bacteria, | 0–0.8 | |||
| Total anaerobic counts | 0.5 | |||
| Fennel—0.2% v/w | Chicken | Total viable counts | 0.9 | [39] |
| Enterobacteriaceae | 2.4 | |||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 0 | |||
| Garlic—0.5%, 1% | Minced beef | A. flavus | 1.93–2.12 5 | [37] |
| Ginger—3%, 6% w/w | Chicken | Psychrophilic bacteria | 2.7–4.5 6 | [40] |
| Yeasts and moulds | 0.9–3.3 6 | |||
| Hop—5000 ppm | Model marinade on pork |
Mesophilic bacteria | 0.9 | [41] |
| Enterobacteriaceae | 0 | |||
| Listeria monocytogenes | 1.5 | |||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 1.3 | |||
| Hyssop—0.02% v/w | Ground beef | Total viable counts | 0–0.3 | [38] |
| Enterobacteriaceae | 0.9–1 | |||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 0.1 | |||
| Total anaerobic counts | 0.5 | |||
| Nutmeg—10, 20 ppm | Cooked Sausage | Total mesophilic bacteria | 0.13–0.38 7 | [42] |
| Oregano—0.3%, 0.4%, 0.5% v/w | Chicken | Salmonella sp. | 2.7–3.8 | [43] |
| 0.2% w/w | Chicken | Lactic acid bacteria | 0.67–0.86 | [44] |
| Pepper—0.1%, 0.5% v/v | Pork | Pseudomonas spp. | 2.1–3.05 | [45] |
| Enterobacteriaceae | 1.05–1.85 | |||
| Brochothrix spp. | 0 | |||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 0 | |||
| Peppermint—0.25%, 0.5% v/w | Minced beef | Total aerobic bacteria | 1.44–1.58 | [46] |
| Psychrotrophic bacteria | 1.36–1.4 | |||
| Enterobacteriaceae | 0.3–1.2 | |||
| Pseudomonas spp. | 1–1.11 | |||
| Rosemary—2% v/w | Chicken | Pseudomonas aeruginosa | 0 | [47] |
| Lactic acid bacteria | 2.57 | |||
| 0.2% v/w | Chicken | Anaerobic bacteria | 1.05 | [48] |
| Enterobacteriaceae | 3.62 | |||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 0.69 | |||
| Pseudomonas spp. | 2.72 | |||
| Sage—0.2% v/w | Chicken | Anaerobic bacteria | 1.13 | [48] |
| Enterobacteriaceae | 3.62 | |||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 0.81 | |||
| Pseudomonas spp. | 2.72 | |||
| 0.1% w/w | Mechanical Separated Meat (MSM) from chicken | Mesophilic bacteria | 1.2 | [49] |
| Psychrotrophic bacteria | 0.3 | |||
| Enterobacteriaceae | 2.4 | |||
| Coliforms | 2.3 | |||
| Enterococci bacteria | 1.4 | |||
| Savory—0.2% v/w | Chicken | Total viable counts | 0.8 | [39] |
| Enterobacteriaceae | 1 | |||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 0 | |||
| Sweet lemon—500 ppm | Sausage | Total viable count | 0.03 | [50] |
| Pseudomonas spp. | 0.05 | |||
| Psychrotrophic bacteria | 0.04 | |||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 0.08 | |||
| Enterobacteriaceae | 0.11 | |||
| Thyme—500 ppm | Sausage | Total viable count | 1.75 | [50] |
| Pseudomonas spp. | 0.85 | |||
| Psychrotrophic bacteria | 1.69 | |||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 1.18 | |||
| Enterobacteriaceae | 0.09 | |||
| 0.5%, 1% | Minced beef | A. flavus | 2.25–2.64 5 | [37] |
The synergistic effect of anti-microbial agents or their component, where it has been studied, is not cited. 1 The difference of population that is cited is sometimes an approximate number, because of lack of exact data; 2 Where the range of population difference is cited it corresponds to the different experimental conditions studied (e.g., different concentrations, storage temperatures, etc.); 3 Where the anti-microbial agents were combined with other preservation methods, the effect of the agent alone is cited; 4 These classifications apply to the end point of each experiment; 5 The population difference cited corresponds to the 3rd day of the experiment, because of lack of data for the control sample; 6 The population difference cited corresponds to the 8th day of the experiment, because of lack of data for the control sample; 7 The population of total mesophilic bacteria was converted from CFU/g to Log10 CFU/g.