Table 3.
Overview of studies testing the efficacy of flavonoid anti-microbial agents when added to meat products or incorporated into packaging materials.
| Anti-Microbial Agent—Concentration Applied | Food Product | Packaging Material | Microorganisms Targeted | Indicative Reduction (Log10 CFU/g, Log10 CFU/mL, Log10 CFU/cm2) 1,2,3,4 | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bee pollen—20% v/v | Salami | Polypropylene (PP) film coated with chitosan solution | L. monocytogenes | 0.2–1.5 | [137] |
| Cranberry—2.5%, 5%, 7.5% w/w | Ground beef | - | Total viable bacteria | 1.5–2.7 | [138] |
| E. coli O157:H7 | 0.4–2.4 | ||||
| 2% | Pork slurry | - | L. monocytogenes | 4.45 | [139] |
| Pseudomonas putida | 3.4–3.64 | ||||
| B. thermosphacta | 5.4–7 | ||||
| Aerobic mesophilic bacteria | 3–3.5 | ||||
| 2% | Pork burger | - | L. monocytogenes | 3.78 | [139] |
| P. putida | 3.5–4 | ||||
| B. thermosphacta | 4 | ||||
| Aerobic mesophilic bacteria | 1.5 | ||||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 1.4 | ||||
| 2% | Cooked ham | - | L. monocytogenes | 1.6 | [139] |
| Aerobic mesophilic bacteria | 2.3–7.3 | ||||
| Lactic acid bacteria | 1.7–4.5 | ||||
| 2.5% w/w | Minced pork | - | S. aureus | >3.7 | [140] |
| L. monocytogenes | >5 | ||||
| E. coli O26 | >3.32 | ||||
| S. Enteritidis | >3.54 | ||||
| Grape seed extract—5%, 10%, 15% w/w | Chicken | Chitosan film | Mesophilic bacteria | 1–1.5 | [141] |
| Coliforms | 1–2.5 | ||||
| 1200 ppm | Turkey frankfurters | Soy protein coating | L. monocytogenes | 0 | [142] |
| Grapefruit seed extract—0.5%, 1% | Ground beef | Low density polyethylene (LDPE) film | Total aerobic bacteria | 0.5–3 | [143] |
| Coliforms | 0.6 | ||||
| 0.08% | Pork | Gelidium corneum–gelatin blend film | E. coli O157:H7 | 0.6 | [144] |
| L. monocytogenes | 1.33 | ||||
| Green tea extract—2.8% | Pork | Gelidium corneum–gelatin blend film | E. coli O157:H7 | 1 | [144] |
| L. monocytogenes | 0.98 | ||||
| 1200 ppm | Turkey frankfurters | Soy protein coating | L. monocytogenes | 0 | [142] |
| 5% | Hamburger patties | - | Total mesophilic aerobic bacteria | 0.2 | [145] |
| Coliforms | 0.55 | ||||
| Yeasts and moulds | 0.23 | ||||
| 0.5% | Hamburger patties | Chitosan coating | Total mesophilic aerobic bacteria | 0.07–0.14 | [145] |
| Coliforms | 0–0.10 | ||||
| Yeasts and moulds | 0–0.23 | ||||
| Propolis extract—20% v/v | Salami | Polypropylene (PP) film coated with chitosan solution | L. monocytogenes | 2.4–4 | [137] |
| 2% w/w | Beef patties | - | Mesophilic bacteria | 0.6–1 | [146] |
| Psychrotrophic bacteria | 0.6–2.6 | ||||
| 0.6% v/w | Sausage | - | Proteolytic count | 2.92 5 | [147] |
| Lipolytic count | 3.23 5 | ||||
| Yeasts and moulds | 3.13 5 |
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 When the range of population difference is cited; it corresponds to the different experimental conditions studied (e.g., different concentrations, storage temperatures, etc.); 3 When the anti-microbial agents were combined with other preservation methods or were incorporated into chitosan coatings, 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 12th day of the experiment, because of lack of data for the control sample.