Principles and Application of High Pressure - Based Technologies in The Food Industry

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/272827902
Principles and Application of High Pressure--Based Technologies in the Food

Industry
Article in Annual Review of Food Science and Technology · February 2015

DOI: 10.1146/annurev-food-022814-015539
CITATIONS READS
207 12,533
3 authors, including:
VM Balasubramaniam Sergio I. Martinez-Monteagudo

The Ohio State University New Mexico State University
142 PUBLICATIONS 5,362 CITATIONS 66 PUBLICATIONS 736 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
High Pressure Homogenization View project
Sanitation of food processing plant surfaces View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Sergio I. Martinez-Monteagudo on 28 February 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

FO06CH19-Balasubramaniam ARI 18 February 2015 15:1
Review in Advance first posted online

V I E W
E on February 26, 2015. (Changes may
R
still occur before final publication
S
online and in print.)
C E
I N
A
D V A
Principles and Application

of High Pressure–Based
Technologies in the Food
Access provided by Ohio State University Library on 02/27/15. For personal use only.
Industry
Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2015.6. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
V.M. (Bala) Balasubramaniam,1,2,∗

Sergio I. Martı́nez-Monteagudo,1
and Rockendra Gupta1
1
Department of Food Science and Technology, 2 Department of Food Agricultural and
Biological Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus Ohio 43210;
email: balasubramaniam.1@osu.edu
Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2015. 6:19.1–19.28 Keywords

The Annual Review of Food Science and Technology is high pressure, pasteurization, sterilization, homogenization, microbial
online at food.annualreviews.org
safety, quality, process design
This article’s doi:
10.1146/annurev-food-022814-015539 Abstract
Copyright c 2015 by Annual Reviews. High pressure processing (HPP) has emerged as a commercially viable food
All rights reserved
manufacturing tool that satisfies consumers’ demand for mildly processed,
convenient, fresh-tasting foods with minimal to no preservatives. Pressure
treatment, with or without heat, inactivates pathogenic and spoilage bacteria,
yeast, mold, viruses, and also spores and extends shelf life. Pressure treat-
ment at ambient or chilled temperatures has minimal impact on product
chemistry. The product quality and shelf life are often influenced more by
storage conditions and packaging material barrier properties than the treat-
ment itself. Application of pressure reduces the thermal exposure of the food
during processing, thereby protecting a variety of bioactive compounds. This
review discusses recent scientific advances of high pressure technology for
food processing and preservation applications such as pasteurization, steril-
ization, blanching, freezing, and thawing. We highlight the importance of in
situ engineering and thermodynamic properties of food and packaging ma-
terials in process design. Current and potential future promising applications
of pressure technology are summarized.
19.1
Changes may still occur before final publication online and in print
INTRODUCTION
The food and beverage manufacturing industry represents one of the largest manufacturing sectors
in the United States and generated an economic output of more than $1.08 trillion in 2010 (Myles
2013). In 2011, food processing plants accounted for 14.7% of the value of shipments from all US
manufacturing plants (http://www.ers.usda.gov). In a consumer-driven market, food processors
are constantly challenged to develop food products with consumer-desired characteristics at afford-
able costs without compromising food safety. Consumers’ health and wellness-oriented lifestyles
lead to a preference for mildly processed, fresher-tasting foods with minimal or no preservatives.
In a way, health-conscious consumers are increasingly considering foods as delivery systems for
nutrients, embracing a long-known connection between healthy eating and human well-being. In-
terestingly, developments in mass communications and social media have significantly increased
the consumer awareness of microbiological outbreaks in processed foods as well as many unin-
tended adverse effects of conventional food preservation methods such as nutrient destruction,
preservative use, and formation of toxins and off-flavor compounds. However, the beneficial effects
of industrial food manufacturing are often underappreciated (van Boekel et al. 2010).
Researchers from the food industry and academia are responding to the consumer’s desire for
microbiologically safe, yet minimally processed, foods by developing different advanced thermal-
based technologies, such as aseptic processing and ohmic, microwave, and radio-frequency heating,
and nonthermal processing methods, such as irradiation and high pressure, pulsed electric field,
and UV processing. Although advanced thermal processing technologies employ rapid volumetric
heat to overcome limitations of the conventional conduction and convection heat transfer to
make food safe, nonthermal technologies employ lethal agents (such as pressure, electric field, and
irradiation doses) with or without the combination of heat to kill pathogens and spoilage organisms
(Floros et al. 2010, Zhang et al. 2011). This review summarizes various basic principles and the
current and future promising applications of high pressure processing (HPP) in the food industry.
Topics discussed include typical processing steps, key pressure equipment components, packaging
material selection, and the role of engineering and thermodynamic properties in process uniformity
and design. Attention must be paid to understanding the synergistic, additive, or antagonistic
effects of combining pressure and heat treatment on product microbiological safety, instrumental
quality, and nutritional attributes. Table 1 summarizes some key advantages and limitations of
high pressure applications in the food industry. Due to space constraints, the works cited should
be considered as representative and not comprehensive.
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
The history of high pressure food processing applications dates back to the late nineteenth century
(1880–1899) (Table 2). In 1882, the conversion of starch into glucose was studied under pressure
(Soxhlet 1881). Years later, the acid inversion of sucrose was inhibited by the application of 50 MPa,
500 times the atmospheric pressure (Stern 1897). The ability to operate vessels at pressure levels
of more than 100 MPa opened a window to an unexplored region. The effectiveness of pressure in
inactivating spoilage bacteria was demonstrated by pressure treating milk at 680 MPa (Hite 1899).
In the early twentieth century (1909–1959), Percy W. Bridgman investigated extensively the en-
gineering aspects of HPP. Specifically, he investigated compressibility (Bridgman 1909), thermal
conductivity (Bridgman 1923), phase change (Bridgman 1914a), and polymorphic transformations
(Bridgman 1912). The water phase diagram is one of the most significant impacts of Bridgman’s
research (Figure 1). This is particularly important in the field of food science, given water is a ma-
jor component of most food systems. An investigation on the coagulation of albumen showed that
19.2 Balasubramaniam · Martı́nez-Monteagudo · Gupta
Table 1 Unique advantages and limitations of high pressure food processing

Description Advantage Limitations
Hydrostatic pressure Rapid, quasi-instantaneous uniform distribution Batch or semicontinuous operation
throughout the sample
Thermal distribution Minimal or reduced thermal exposure Preheating step for pressure-assisted thermal
Instant temperature increase and subsequent cooling processing (PATP)
upon depressurization Thermal nonuniformity during PATP
Physical compression Suitable for high moisture–content foods Not suitable for products containing dissimilar
compressibility materials such as marshmallows
Product handling Suitable for both liquid and pumpable foods Throughput limited due to batch operation
Process time Independent of product shape and size
Functionality Opportunity for novel product formulation
Distinct products through pressure effects such as
protein denaturation, carbohydrate gelatinization,

and fat crystallization

Reaction rate Within some pressure-thermal boundary conditions, Variable efficacy in enzyme inactivation; pressure
pressure accelerates microbial inactivation alone cannot inactivate bacterial spores
Consumer acceptance Consumer acceptance as a physical process Higher processing costs and batch operations are
barriers for commodity product processing
the appearance of a pressure-treated egg resembles that of a hard-boiled egg (Bridgman 1914b).
Another important discovery was by Larson et al. (1918), who showed that bacterial spores (Bacillus
subtilis used in this experiment) could survive applications of 1,200-MPa treatments at ambient
temperatures. The effects of pressure on chemical reactions were acknowledged in the 1920s with
a remarkable example reported by Brown (1920), who manufactured phenol from chlorobenzene
under pressure using a continuous reactor. Throughout the twentieth century, there were success-
ful developments in areas such as chemical, material, and process engineering. Sheet metal forming,
polymerization of ethylene, synthesis of diamonds, and isostatic pressing of advanced materials
are notable examples of industrial applications of high pressure. In the 1970s, the food industry
investigated use of supercritical pressures (30–50 MPa) for decaffeinating coffee (King 2014).
In contrast, elevated high pressure (400–900 MPa) applications in the food industry were
explored as recently as 1990 in Japan with the commercial introduction of pressure-treated jams
and jellies. By 1997, pressure-treated guacamole was commercialized in the United States. Spanish
sliced cooked ham was among the first of pressure-treated products introduced in Europe (Tonello
2011). To date, HPP represents a $2.5 billion market with various products. HPP has been
considered as one the most important innovations in food processing during the past 50 years
(Dunne 2005).
In 2009, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the application of high pressure
to a preheated sample for commercial sterilization of low-acid foods ( Juliano et al. 2012, Stewart
et al. 2015). This is a significant milestone for the commercialization of sterile foods preserved
by pressure-assisted thermal processing (PATP). More recently, Park et al. (2013b, 2014) de-
veloped a new method that utilizes simultaneous application of pressure, heat, and electric field
for inactivation of bacterial spores. More importantly, they found that the application of electric
field under pressure yielded enhanced volumetric heating, which significantly reduced the thermal
load. In short, high-quality, shelf-stable products can be obtained by the simultaneous application
of pressure, heat, and electric field, also known as pressure-ohmic-thermal sterilization (POTS)
(V.M. Balasubramaniam, S. Park, S.K. Sastry, patent application No. 61/733,608 submitted).
www.annualreviews.org • Principles and Application of High Pressure 19.3
Table 2 Selected scientific and commercial milestones in high pressure food processing applications
Year Application Reference (or URL)
1881 Conversion of starch into sugar Soxhlet 1881
1897 Inversion of cane sugar Stern 1897
1897 Starch saccharification Lippmann 1897
1899 Experiments on milk preservation Hite 1899
1900 Homogenization for stabilization of dairy emulsion Donsı̀ et al. 2009
1909 Experiments on compressibility Bridgman 1909
1912 Water phase diagram Bridgman 1912
1914 Coagulation of albumen Bridgman 1914b
1918 Pressure effects on bacteria Larson et al. 1918
1920 Continuous manufacture of phenols Brown 1920
1923 Experiments on thermal conductivity Bridgman 1923

1943 Mutarotation of glucose Sander 1943

1969 Biological reaction rates Yayanos 1969
1970 Decaffeinating coffee via supercritical fluid extraction King 2014
1980 Beef protein quality Elgasim et al. 1980
1990 Meidi-Ya Food Co. launched high pressure–treated products in Mozhaev et al. 1994
Japan
1995 Thermodynamic properties of water under pressure, http://www.nist.gov/srd/upload/STEAM30-
NIST/ASME Steam database 2.pdf
1997 Pressure-treated Gucagmole by Avomex (now Fresherized Sizer et al. 2002
Foods)
1998 Spain introduced pressure-treated sliced cooked ham Tonello 2011
2002 Hormel introduced pressure-treated deli meat products in the Sizer et al. 2002
US market
2005 Cited as one of the best innovations in food processing Dunne 2005
2009 FDA issued no objection to an industry petition for PATP Juliano et al. 2012
(research sponsored by Army-Industry consortium)
2012 Introduction of pressure-treated juices http://www.starbucks.com/promo/evolution-
fresh-juice
2013 Development of pressure-ohmic-thermal sterilization http://tco.osu.edu/technologies/#/tech/959
Abbreviations: ASME, American Society of Mechanical Engineers; FDA, US Food and Drug Administration; NIST, National Institute of Standards and
Technology; PATP, pressure-assisted thermal processing.
HIGH PRESSURE PROCESSING: BASIC PRINCIPLES, PROCESS

DESCRIPTION, AND CHARACTERIZATION
HPP (also known as high hydrostatic pressure processing and ultrahigh pressure processing)
involves the use of pressures in the range of 100–800 MPa, with or without the application of heat,
for inactivating a variety of pathogenic and spoilage vegetative bacteria, yeasts, molds, viruses,
and spores to ensure microbiologically safe foods. In practical food processing applications, the
combined intensity of both thermal and pressure effects can cause various physical, chemical, or
biological changes in foods.
10,000
VIII VII
1,000 VI
II V
Liquid
100
I Critical point
Co
nd
en
10 Solid Tc = 370°C
sa
Pressure (MPa)
tio
Pc = 22 MPa
n
Melting
1
Freezing
Va
po
riz
ati
0.1
on
Gas
0.01
Triple point
0.001
P = 6 × 10–4 MPa
T = 0.01°C
Sublimation
0.0001
–75 25 125 225 325
Temperature (°C)
Figure 1
Water phase diagram as influenced by pressure-thermal effects. I–VIII represent different types of ice.
Abbreviations: P, pressure; Pc , critical pressure; T, temperature; Tc , critical temperature. Source: Phase
Equilibria Diagrams database, version 3.4.0 (http://www.nist.gov/srd/nist31.cfm).
Basic Governing Principles

As with heat, pressure is a basic thermodynamic variable. Strictly speaking, during HPP the
effects of temperature cannot be separated from the effects of pressure. This is because for every
temperature there is a corresponding pressure. Thermal effects during pressure treatment can
cause volume and energy changes. However, pressure primarily affects the volume of the product
being processed. The combined net effect during HPP may be synergistic, antagonistic, or additive
(Gupta et al. 2011). Mathematically, the impact of pressure ( p) and temperature (T ) can be
quantitatively related using Gibbs’s definition of free energy G:
G ≡ H − TS, (1)
where H and S are the enthalpy and entropy, respectively. Further,
H ≡ U + pV , (2)
where U = internal energy and V = volume.

It can be deduced from Equations 1 and 2 that
d (G) = V d p − Sd T . (3)
Therefore, reactions such as phase transitions or molecular reorientation depend on both

temperature and pressure and cannot be treated separately. The following are some basic governing
principles behind HPP.
Isostatic principle. The first consideration involving the application of high pressure is the iso-
static principle, which presumes that the uniform application of pressure acts equally in all direc-
tions. A true hydrostatic condition should be independent of time and space. It can be established
when a fluid is used to transmit the pressure throughout the food. In high pressure applications,
the pressure and more importantly, its effects, are instantaneously and homogeneously distributed
within the food item, regardless of food geometry and size. This unique characteristic has enabled
the development of processes that have been successfully commercialized. This principle helps
explain why nonporous foods with high-moisture content are not damaged macroscopically by
pressure treatment. Because air and water differ in compressibility under pressure, the structure
and shape of the foods containing air pockets (as in the case of marshmallows) may be altered
upon pressure treatment, unless the food is perfectly elastic and consists of closed-cell foam from
which air cannot escape (Balasubramaniam et al. 2008).
Le Chatelier’s principle. This principle addresses changes to equilibrium as a result of pressure

application. It states that any phenomenon (phase transition, change in molecular configuration,
chemical reaction) accompanied by a decrease in volume is enhanced by pressure. If pressure
(extensive variable) changes, the equilibrium shifts in a direction that tends to reduce the change
in the corresponding intensive variable (volume). Thus, pressure shifts the system to that of the
lowest volume.
Principle of microscopic ordering. At constant temperature, an increase in pressure increases

the degree of ordering of molecules of a given substance. Therefore, pressure and temperature
exert antagonistic forces on molecular structure and chemical reactions (Balny & Masson 1993).
Arrhenius relationship. As with thermal processing, various reaction rates during HPP are also
influenced by thermal effects during pressure treatment. The net pressure-thermal effects can be
synergistic, additive, or antagonistic.
Hydrostatic pressure alters interatomic distances, affecting those interactions for which bond-
ing energy depends on distance (Martı́nez-Monteagudo et al. 2012). For instance, the force of elec-
trostatic interactions is inversely proportional to the distance between charged particles, whereby
the application of pressure will affect its bonding strength. Hydrogen bonding and van der Waals
forces are also distance-dependent and therefore are greatly affected by pressure. However, co-
valent bonds are unlikely to be affected by pressure because their bonding distance can be only
minimally compressed further. Indeed, studies have revealed that covalent bonds that constitute the
primary structure of proteins are unaffected by pressure (up to 1,500 MPa) (Mozhaev et al. 1994).
The ability of hydrostatic pressure to keep covalent bonds unaffected has been the central hypoth-
esis for the preservation of biological activity of functional compounds, such as ascorbic acid (Oley
et al. 2006), folates (Butz et al. 2004), antioxidants (Matser et al. 2004), anthocyanins (Verbeyst
et al. 2010), lycopene (Gupta et al. 2010), and conjugated linoleic acid (Martı́nez-Monteagudo &
Saldaña 2014).
The consequences of altering the interatomic distance by means of high pressure can be viewed
as (a) changes in physical properties, such as melting point, solubility, density, and viscosity;
(b) effects on equilibrium processes, such as dissociation of weak acids, acid-based equilibria, and
ionization; and (c) effects on rates of processes, such as delaying or accelerating the rate at which
a particular reaction occurs. In pressure-treated products, some intrinsic quality attributes are the
result of the above phenomena or their combinations. For instance, inactivation of microorganisms
is influenced by a combination of changes in physical properties of membrane lipids, changes in the
chemical equilibrium that modify the internal pH, and changes in the rate of specific physiological
functions that cause irreversible or lethal damage to bacteria cells (Molina-Guitierrez et al. 2002).
Table 3 provides examples on how food quality attributes are dictated by the ways pressure affects
Table 3 Examples of how pressure on physical properties, equilibrium, and rate processes influence food quality attributes
Pressure treatment effect
Quality attribute Physical process Equilibrium process Rate process
Volatile formation: Disruption of cell integrity Changes in the pH value that Decrease in the
aroma development in onions (Butz that brought phenols and affect enzyme activity concentration of dipropyl
et al. 1994) enzymes together disulfide

Color and appearance: Cell damage that releases Shifts the equilibrium that Decrease in the reaction
color degradation in broccoli juice different enzymes triggers different rate
(Van Loey et al. 1998) mechanisms
Changes in brightness in cow milk Disruption of casein Shifts the equilibrium Upon pressure release,
(Needs et al. 2000) micelles between colloidal and some changes are partially
Changes in the solubility of soluble calcium reversible
ions and minerals Shifts the pH value
Nutritional properties: Physically bound vitamins Shifts the pH value that Pressure increases the rate
stability of thiamin and riboflavin in were released by pressure could trigger different constant without affecting
pork and model systems mechanisms the activation energy
(Butz et al. 2007)
Ascorbic acid degradation (Oley et al. Solubility of small Degradation mechanisms of Temperature and pressure
2006) compounds creates a ascorbic acid are highly act synergistically on the
protective effect dependent on its pH degradation reaction rate
Functionality: Changes in the melting Shifts the equilibrium Pressure affects fat
milk fat crystallization in emulsion curve measured by DSC between attractive and crystallization
(Buchheim & Abou El-Nour 1992) Changes in the solubility repulsive forces
that yields different solid
fat content
Starch dispersion Changes in viscosity of Shifts the chemical balance Retrogradation rate is
(Buckow et al. 2007) starch suspension affected by pressure
Changes in rheological
properties
Microorganism inactivation: Cell damage: membrane Intracellular pH shifts Decreased DNA synthesis
pressure-induced inactivation in lipids change physical state Changes in equilibrium in
microorganisms solute transport
(Smelt 1998)
Spore inactivation: Cortex degradation and Shift the osmotic equilibrium Inactivation rate is affected
bacterial spore inactivation (Black release of dipicolinic acid Shifts the equilibrium of by pressure
et al. 2007) electrolytes
Sensory and texture: Surface adhesion and Shift the equilibrium Accelerates hydrolysis of
cheddar cheese treated by HPP to flexibility of protein between solutes and water amino acids
improve visual appearance Disruption of the
(Serrano et al. 2004) paracasein network
Abbreviations: DSC, differential scanning calorimetry; HPP, high pressure processing.
the physical, equilibrium, and rate processes. A rate process is considered when pressure increases
or decreases the concentration of a particular compound.
High Pressure Processing Equipment

HPP primarily employs batch equipment, although semicontinuous equipment is also available.
The equipment is typically made up of high strength steel alloys with high fracture toughness
and corrosion resistance. The following are typical components of batch high pressure equipment
(Ting 2011):
1. pressure vessel (thick-wall cylinder),
2. two end closures to cover the cylindrical pressure vessel,
3. yoke (structure for restraining end closures while under pressure),
4. high pressure pump and intensifier for generating target pressures,
5. process control and instrumentation, and
6. a handling system for loading and removing the product.

HPP could be performed as a batch process (both solid and liquid foods) or be developed into a
semi-continuous process for pumpable foods. A batch process is analogous in operation to thermal
processing in a retort system.
The food product is typically vacuum packaged and placed inside a sample loading basket, which
is then loaded into the pressure vessel containing pressure-transmitting fluid. The pressure vessel
and its content are closed with the end closures. A yoke structure slides across the closed vessel
to restrain top and bottom closures under pressure. The desired process pressure is achieved
through compression of pressure-transmitting fluid using the combined action of a pump and
intensifier. During HPP, the product is held for the desired time at the target pressure, the vessel
is depressurized at the end of the treatment time, and the product is unloaded. Product holding
times of less than 10 min may be required to develop a commercially viable process. In a modified
high pressure treatment method (also known as pulsed high pressure processing), the product is
subjected to compression-decompression cycles of fixed pressure holding time. Microbial efficacy
of the process has been reported to be more effective than an equivalent single pulse of equal time.
However, rapid compression and decompression increases the number of cycles on the vessel and
subjects the vessel material to enormous stress and the risk of early failure.
Semicontinuous systems for processing pumpable foods use two or more pressure vessels con-
taining a free floating piston for compression (Ting 2011). The vessels are connected such that
when one vessel discharges the product, the second system pressurizes, while the third vessel is
loaded with the food sample. Thus, a continuous output is maintained.
Pressure-Transmitting Fluid
Pressure-transmitting fluid is used to transmit pressure to prepackaged food samples. Water is
the most commonly used pressure-transmitting fluid in industrial-scale equipment. Alternatively,
laboratory- or pilot-scale equipment may use glycol, glycol and water, silicone oil, sodium ben-
zoate solution, or castor oil as pressure-transmitting fluids, as the equipment may be prone to
corrosion due to low-cost steel structures. The selection of pressure-transmitting fluid is in part
dependent on its ability to seal under pressure, corrosion prevention properties, fluid viscosity
changes under pressure, and heat of compression. The composition of the pressure-transmitting
fluid, its thermal characteristics, and the fluid-to-sample ratio play an important role in governing
the thermal behavior of foods under pressure. The importance of considering the compression
heating behavior of pressure-transmitting fluid on microbial inactivation kinetics has been ad-
dressed in several articles (Balasubramanian & Balasubramaniam 2003, de Heij et al. 2003, Matser
et al. 2004, Otero & Sanz 2003). Differences in compressibility and heat of compression val-
ues of different pressure-transmitting fluids can affect the inactivation kinetics of bacterial spores
(Balasubramanian & Balasubramaniam 2003).
Packaging
A variety of flexible, high barrier packaging materials can be used to contain samples of HPP. The
volume, geometry, and composition (polymer type, film thickness, and sealing and barrier prop-
erties) of the packaging material are important considerations for selecting packaging materials
for HPP (Balasubramaniam et al. 2004). At least one interface of the package should be flexible
enough to transmit pressure. Thus, rigid metal containers may not survive the pressure treatment
(Rastogi et al. 2007). The presence of headspace air, oxygen in particular, can adversely affect prod-
uct quality at elevated pressure-temperature conditions. Dissolved oxygen becomes more reactive
(ground oxygen) when pressure is applied. Okamoto (1992) reported that the lifetime of singlet
oxygen increases significantly with pressures of up to 400 MPa, which can initiate detrimental
reactions. Furthermore, air has different compressibility properties than water and more effort is
needed to compress the air. Thus, it would be desirable to minimize the presence of headspace air
in the packages or preferably vacuum package the product.
It is noteworthy that the intensity of the pressure-thermal treatment can alter the barrier prop-
erties of packaging material (Schauwecker et al. 2002; Caner et al. 2004; Galotto et al. 2008, 2009;
Halim et al. 2009; Fairclough & Conti 2009; Yoo et al. 2014). Schauwecker et al. (2002) studied
propylene glycol (PG) migration in different pouches under various pressure-temperature con-
ditions. PG migration in EVOH/PE-EVOH pouches decreased significantly in pressure-treated
samples (400, 600, and 827 MPa at 30, 50, and 75◦ C for 10 min) compared with thermally treated
samples (30, 50, and 75◦ C for 10 min under an atmospheric pressure of 0.1 MPa). Pouch structures
having a plastic-metallic interface as used in meal, ready-to-eat pouches processed at elevated pres-
sures (≥200 MPa) and at 90◦ C for 10 min showed signs of delamination between polypropylene
and aluminum layers. An investigation of pressure-assisted thermally processed carrots packaged
in flexible pouches (Nylon/EVOH/EVA, Nylon/EVA, and MetPET/PE) revealed that the pro-
cessing conditions (600 MPa and 110◦ C for 10 min) induced physical changes in the structure of
the polymers. More importantly, it was determined that the oxygen transmission rate of Nylon/
EVOH/EVA was minimally impacted by the processing conditions (Ayvaz et al. 2012). More re-
search is needed on the effect of elevated pressure-heat treatments on different packaging materials.
Development of nanocomposite packaging material with superior barrier properties is desired.
Typical Processing Steps and Pressure-Temperature Response

Figure 2 illustrates the basic steps involved in a combined pressure-thermal treatment. First,
the food to be treated is preferably vacuum packaged in a flexible, high barrier package. At least
one interface of the package should be flexible enough to transfer pressure to the packaged food
(Balasubramaniam et al. 2004). Then, the prepackaged food material along with the pressure-
transmitting fluid is preconditioned (preheated or cooled) to a certain initial temperature
(e.g., heating from T1 to T2 for a given time t1 , Figure 2) inside the sample-loading basket.
Subsequently, the sample basket containing prepackaged food material is loaded inside the
pressure vessel. The pressure vessel is also preconditioned to a predetermined initial temperature
using an external jacket.
The remaining volume of the pressure vessel is filled with the preconditioned pressure-
transmitting fluid. The loading time (t2 ) is the time needed to insert the sample, adjust the trans-
mission fluid volume, and close the high pressure vessel. Upon loading, the sample is pressurized
P2 P2
T3 T3
Temperature (°C)
ΔT
Pressure (MPa)
T2 T4
T1
P1
P1
t1 t3 t5
t2 t4
Time (min)
Figure 2
Schematic representation of a typical pressure-temperature profile experienced by a food sample during
preheating and compression, and holding time during pressure-assisted thermal processing. T1 , T2 , T3 , and
T4 are the initial, preheating, target and final temperature, respectively; P1 , and P2 are the atmospheric and
target pressure, respectively; t1 , t2 , t3 , t4 , and t5 are the preheating, loading, come-up, holding, and
decompression time, respectively; T is the difference between the product temperature increase due to
adiabatic compression during pressure treatment. Figure adapted from Balasubramaniam et al. (2004), with
permission from Elsevier.
from atmospheric pressure (P1 ) to a target pressure (P2 ). The time interval between P1 and P2
represents the pressure come-up time (t3 ). Typical commercial equipment may have a pressure
come-up time of approximately 2 min to reach 600 MPa (5 MPa per s). The pressure come-up
time is characterized by the existence of nonisothermal and nonisobaric conditions.
During compression, the temperature of both the food sample and medium rises (indicated by
T in Figure 2) due to adiabatic heating. This rise in temperature enables reaching the target
process (or working) temperature (T3 ). The time at which the target process temperature and
pressure are reached is considered the beginning of the holding time (t4 ). Then, samples are
processed for the desired holding time typically under isothermal and isobaric conditions. For
economic reasons and to minimize adverse thermal effects on product quality, pressure holding
times of less than 10 min may be desired.
After processing, the samples are depressurized back to atmospheric pressure (P1 ). Most of
the commercial-scale high pressure equipment have short (<30 s) decompression times (t5 ). The
treatment time is the sum of the preheating (t1 ), loading (t2 ), come-up (t3 ), holding (t4 ), and
decompression (t5 ) times.
The temperature of a food material transiently increases due to compression under pres-
sure (Ting et al. 2002, Rasanayagam et al. 2003). The magnitude of this temperature change
(Figure 2, T ) depends on the compressibility of the substance, its thermal properties, initial
temperature, and target pressure. The maximum product temperature at the target process pres-
sure is independent of the rate of compression as long as heat transfer to the surroundings is
negligible. During depressurization (T4 ), the temperature may decrease below the initial temper-
ature if heat is lost from the sample to the environment during pressure holding.
Thermophysical Properties of Foods Under Pressure

During pressure treatment, the temperature of different food materials increases transiently due
to physical compression and returns back to its initial value upon decompression (Figure 2).
To understand the extent of process nonuniformity during pressure treatment, it is important to
investigate the thermophysical properties of food and packaging material in pressure-transmitting
fluid at different pressure-thermal conditions.
Past studies have documented heat of compression (δ m ) values of water, food, and packaging
materials under pressures (Bridgman 1931, Otero et al. 2000, Rasanayagam et al. 2003, Houška
et al. 2004, Patazca et al. 2007, Knoerzer et al. 2010) (Table 4). The heat of compression of most
of the high-moisture food materials is very similar to that of water, 3◦ C per 100 MPa at 25◦ C.
However, fatty foods have higher compression heating due to their higher compressibility with
long-chain unsaturated fatty acids and lower specific heat (Rasanayagam et al. 2003). Although
the heat of compression of water and high moisture–content foods (Table 4) generally increases
with increasing initial product temperature, the heat of compression value of fatty materials does
not vary as a function of initial temperature. Knoerzer & Chapman (2011) demonstrated the
significance of the compression-heating factor in estimating the temperature distribution inside a
high pressure chamber using computational fluid dynamics modeling. The product temperature
stability during pressure holding time can be influenced by the insulation characteristics of the
pressure vessel (Balasubramaniam et al. 2004).
Researchers are able to estimate in-situ thermal and physical properties (thermal conductiv-
ity, electrical conductivity, specific heat, pH, compressibility, density, and thermal diffusivity) of
Table 4 Heat of compression values of selected food and packaging materials

Substance at 25◦ C Temperature change per 100 MPa
Water, juice, tomato salsa, 2% milk, and other water like 3.0
substances
Tofu 3.1
Egg albumin 3.0
Mashed potato 3.0
Yogurt 3.1
Honey 3.2
Salmon 3.2
Chicken fat 4.5
Water/Glycol (50/50) 4.8 to <3.7a
Beef fat 6.3
Olive oil 8.7 to <6.2a
Soy oil 12.01
Silicone oil 18.5
Metal (for making pressure vessel) 0
Polypropylene polymer ≈4.0
a
Substances exhibited decreased temperature as pressure increased.
various food materials under pressure (Min et al. 2007, 2009, 2010; Nguyen et al. 2012; Ra-
maswamy et al. 2007; Park et al. 2013a).
The thermophysical properties of the pressure-transmitting fluid, insulation characteristics of
the packaging material, the type of pressure generating system, and heat exchange through the
vessel are some of the major factors influencing thermal gradients within the processed volume.
Particularly, indirect pressurization has a great influence on the thermal nonuniformity due to
the injection of a colder pressure-transmitting fluid within a hotter pressure chamber during
PATP studies.
High pressure is believed to cause ionic dissociation of water molecules with a correspond-
ing decrease in pH (Cheftel 1995, Hoover et al. 1989). Studies by Heremans (1995) revealed a
lowering of the pH of apple juice by 0.2 units per 100 MPa increase in pressure. Because pH
plays an important role in phenomena such as gelation, enzyme activity, protein denaturation,
and microbial inactivation kinetics, most microorganisms show increased susceptibility and are
unable to recover from sublethal injury (Hoover et al. 1989) methods. Recently, Samaranayake &
Sastry (2013) developed an in situ pH sensor for investigating pressure effects of food samples at
pressures up to 825 MPa at room temperature (25◦ C). The sensor essentially consists of a Nafion
membrane (permeable to water and cations but impermeable to anions) coupled with two reverse
osmosis membranes. Thr sensor directly relates the input voltage with the hydrogen ion concen-
tration. More research is needed to better characterize the transient pH shift that occurs under
combined pressure-heat treatment as a function of various food composition.
It is also interesting that electrical conductivity values of food materials not only increase
as a function of temperature, but also under increased pressure. For example, in situ electrical
conductivity of raw carrots was 0.027 S/m, at 0.1 MPa and 25◦ C, and then reached 0.185 S/m, at
600 MPa and a 10-min holding time (Park et al. 2013a). The study also revealed that it is possible to
apply an electric field under pressure and manipulate product temperature in a controlled manner.
Finally, there has been very limited research to elucidate the impact that phase transition during
combined pressure-thermal treatment has had on food safety and quality. Figure 1 illustrates the
physical state of water as a function of pressure and temperature.
MICROBIOLOGICAL SAFETY OF HIGH

PRESSURE–PROCESSED PRODUCTS
Generally, the microbial efficacy of a pressure treatment depends on the intensity of the com-
bined pressure-thermal application. Resistance to pressure treatment varies considerably among
microorganisms. Milder pressure treatment (400–600 MPa) at ambient or chilled conditions have
been effective in inactivating a variety of pathogenic and spoilage vegetative bacterial cells, yeasts,
molds and viruses. A combined pressure (400–600 MPa) and thermal (>70◦ C) treatment was found
to be effective for bacterial spore inactivation.
Among vegetative bacteria, Gram-positive bacteria generally tend to have a higher resistance to
pressure resistance than Gram-negative bacteria. There can be significant variation among strains.
Microbial cells in the stationary growth phase tend to have higher pressure resistance than in the
exponential phase.
Because different inactivation mechanisms are involved for pressure and heat treatments,
there appears to be no direct correlation between thermal and pressure resistance of different
microorganisms. As with conventional thermal processing, the magnitude of microbial reduction
during pressure treatment is also influenced by the composition of the food, including its pH and
water activity. Thus, food processors interested in validating pressure-pasteurization treatment
should work with competent high pressure–processing experts in designing and conducting
validation trials.
Pressure alone at or near ambient temperature has very limited or no effect on spore destruction
(Farkas & Hoover 2000). However, pressure treatment can trigger germination in the spores by
activating the nutrient germinant receptors (Black et al. 2007). Modest pressures (100–400 MPa)
applied between 20–50◦ C can trigger spore germination. Different spores may require a different
magnitude of pressure for germination (Reineke et al. 2013). Once the spores germinate, the out-
growing cells may be less resistant to further lethal treatments and, thus, can be inactivated with
a moderate application of heat or pressure-heat. However, it is difficult to assure 100% pressure-
induced germination during the treatment and therefore difficult to ensure microbiological safety
of the processed product. Thus, early attempts to apply a moderate pressure (200–400 MPa at am-
bient temperature, i.e., a Tyndallization process) treatment to germinate bacterial spores followed
by heat pasteurization may not be a commercially viable sterilization process for low-acid foods.
Many studies have revealed that combined pressure (400–600 MPa)-temperature (>70◦ C)
treatment has a synergistic effect on spore inactivation (Rovere et al. 1998; Ananta et al. 2001;
Margosch et al. 2004, 2006; Rajan et al. 2006; Rodriguez et al. 2004; Reddy et al. 2006; Patazca
et al. 2006; Ahn et al. 2007; Bull et al. 2009; Songming et al. 2008; Daryaei et al. 2013).
When the intensity of treatment is above a certain threshold (400–600 MPa and 90–120◦ C),
the treatment is often referred to as PATP, pressure-assisted thermal sterilization, or ultrahigh
pressure thermal sterilization. Studies to date have revealed that strains of Clostridium botulinum
are the target pathogens for PATP treatment (Stewart et al. 2015, Reddy et al. 2013, Skinner et al.
2014). Unlike thermal processing, traditional surrogate microbes such as Bacillus sterothermophilus
are sensitive to a combined pressure-heat treatment. Current research suggests that nonpathogenic
bacterial spores such as Bacillus amyloliquefaciens and Clostridium sporogenes have exhibited high
pressure-thermal resistance. Such spores could be potential surrogate candidates for the assessment
of PATP sterility (Margosch et al. 2004, Ahn et al. 2007, Rajan et al. 2006, Wan 2014). More
research is needed to identify a suitable surrogate organism for PATP process validation studies.
Unlike the typical linear profile on a semi-log plot of spore inactivation behavior during
thermal processing, a characteristic tailing has been observed for inactivation curves of various
microorganisms during combined pressure-heat treatments (Tay et al. 2003, Ananta et al. 2001,
Rajan et al. 2006, Reddy et al. 2003). Hence, the use of nonlinear kinetic models to describe
combined pressure-heat microbial inactivation has been suggested to be more appropriate (Peleg
& Cole 1998, Rajan et al. 2006, Ahn et al. 2007). Some empirical nonlinear models reported in
the literature include the nth order kinetics, the log-logistic, the Weibull distribution, and the
biphasic models (Ananta et al. 2001, Ardia et al. 2003, Koutchma et al. 2005, Rajan et al. 2006,
Ahn et al. 2007). The nonlinear survivor curves described above are thought to be due to the
multiple effects of high pressure and temperature on both spores and vegetative cells, thereby
resulting in shoulders and tails. Nguyen et al. (2013) proposed an integrated process lethality
model that considers lethal effects of both pressure and heat on spore inactivation.
APPLICATION OF PRESSURE-BASED TECHNOLOGIES

IN THE FOOD INDUSTRY
Application of Pressure in Conventional Food Processing Operations

Conventional thermal processing operations such as freezing, blanching, and thermal pasteur-
ization are primarily conducted at ambient pressure conditions (Ibarz & Barbosa-Cánovas 2001,
Toledo 2007, Singh & Heldman 2008) (Figure 3a). Thermal processes such as retorting and
ultrahigh temperature (UHT) treatment of foods are often applied at slightly elevated steam pres-
sures (0.2–0.4 MPa). Several other food technologies such as freeze-drying, vacuum drying, and
vacuum impregnation are carried out under moderate vacuum conditions.
Figure 3
a Solid Liquid
Schematic diagram
illustrating various 0.1 Blanching Pasteurization
Freezing
food processing
Log pressure (MPa)

operations performed
Vacuum
at certain impregnation
pressure-thermal 0.01
intensity.
(a) Conventional
processing
technologies employ 0.001
ambient pressure or Gas
less. (b) Processing Freeze-
technologies drying
conducted at moderate
pressures (up to 50 –20 0 20 40 60 80 100

MPa). Temperature (°C)

(c) Processing
technologies
conducted at high
pressures (>100 MPa). 50
b
homogenization
Abbreviations: HPH,
high pressure
Standard
homogenization; 40 Liquid
HPP, high pressure
Pressure (MPa)
processing; PAF,
pressure-assisted 30
freezing; PAT,
pressure-assisted l
ica
thawing; PATP, 20 rit
e rc ids
p u
pressure-assisted Su fl
Spray-
thermal processing; drying
POTS, pressure- 10
ohmic-thermal Extrusion
UHT Gas
sterilization; UHT, Retort
0.1
ultrahigh-temperature 30 90 150 210 270 330 390
pasteurization. Figure
Temperature (°C)
is not drawn to scale.
1,000
c
Solid
800
Liquid
Pressure (MPa)
600
PATP
400
HPP POTS
PAF
PAT
200
HPH
–30 –20 –10 0 30 40 60 80 100 120

Temperature (°C)
Practical applications of vacuum impregnation in diverse food products have been reviewed by
Zhao & Xie 2004 and Fito et al. 2001 (Figure 3b). The dairy industry uses moderate pressures (up
to 50 MPa) in the homogenization and stabilization of various dairy products. This has been widely
used in the manufacture of ice cream mixes, yogurt, and milk-based beverages (Huppertz 2011).
Combinations of pressure and temperature yielding water in the subcritical state, i.e., water above
the boiling and below the critical point (<22 MPa and 100–374◦ C), have been used for the ex-
traction of bioactive compounds (Singh & Saldaña 2011). Similarly, supercritical pressures (≈300
atmosphere) have been used in decaffeination and similar food processing operations (Figure 3b).
Extrusion is another thermal process that may employ modest pressure. It is a process in which
the ingredients are discharged through an opening in a perforated plate or die. Extrusion can be
used for making pasta, breakfast cereals, ready-to-eat snacks, confectionary, textured vegetable
protein, and semimoist pet foods.
Novel Application of High Pressure Processing in the Food Industry

Similar to the addition or removal of heat, application of elevated pressures (100–800 MPa) can
be used for a variety of food processing and preservation applications, including freezing and
thawing, blanching, pasteurization, and commercial sterilization. Depending on the extent of the
pressure-thermal intensity applied, the following are the current and future industrial applications
for HPP (Figure 3c).
Food pasteurization. High pressures (400–600 MPa) at ambient or chilled temperatures can be
useful for pasteurizing a variety of liquid and solid foods, including deli meats, salads, seafood,
fruit juices, and vegetable products (Mujica-Paz et al. 2011, Tonello 2011, Norton & Sun 2008).
High pressure pasteurization equipment is available in both vertical and horizontal configurations
and in a range of sizes (35-L through 525-L capacity).
Because pasteurization treatments do not typically inactivate bacterial spores, it is important to
maintain pressure-pasteurized products under refrigerated storage and handling. Unlike thermal
pasteurization, the process conditions necessary for microbial inactivation of pressure-pasteurized
products may not be adequate to inactivate enzymes. Hence, if enzyme inactivation is desired in
pressure-pasteurized products, a mild thermal treatment may be given prior to pressure pasteur-
ization. When validating the efficacy of a high pressure pasteurization process for inactivating
microbes, one must understand the potential injury and sublethal recovery of various microor-
ganisms of concern during extended storage.
Pressure-assisted thermal processing. PATP is an emerging sterilization technology that in-

volves the preheating of food materials to approximately 75–90◦ C, followed by the application of
high pressure up to approximately 500 to 600 MPa at a target process temperature (90–120◦ C)
over short durations (3–10 min) (Meyer et al. 2000, de Heij et al. 2003, Matser et al. 2004, Rajan
et al. 2006, Juliano et al. 2012). The rapid temperature increase during compression and subse-
quent cooling upon decompression is a unique PATP benefit. Table 5 highlights the impact of
PATP treatment on selected quality parameters evaluated.
During PATP, the temperature of the food material increases due to physical compression
under pressure. Upon decompression, the product cools volumetrically to its initial temperature
within seconds. The entire process results in a shorter treatment time (3–15 min) when compared
to that of conventional canning, which involves slower external heat transfer. In 2009, the FDA
approved an industrial petition for sterilization of mashed potatoes by PATP. Although there
are no low-acid products preserved by PATP commercialized to date, this technology has the
potential to deliver a variety of low-acid products, such as egg- and milk-based products, baby
Table 5 Examples of the impact of PATP on quality attributes

Quality parameter Food matrix Conditions Pressure effect Reference
Formation of Equimolar buffer T = 100–115 Pressure inhibited the formation of De Vleeschouwer
acrylamine solution of P = 400–700 acrylamide compared with the control et al. 2010
asparagine/glucose t = 0–60 treatment (0.1 MPa).
Ti = NR
Aroma Aqueous solution of T = 90–120 Pressure in combination with Alt & Schieberle,
Nα -acetylarginine P = 600 temperature induced arginine 2005
(2 mmol) and glucose t = 120 modifications, changing the aroma
(6 mmol) in MOPS Ti = NR profile.
buffer (7.00)
Texture Apple pectin (pH = T = 90–115 β-elimination was retarded by pressure, de Roeck et al.
6.5). P = 500–700 whereas demethoxylation was 2009
t = 0–100 stimulated by pressure.

Ti = 66
Lycopene stability Tomato juice T = 100 All-trans lycopene was found to be Gupta et al. 2010
P = 600–700 stable to isomerization during
t = 10 processing.
Ti = 80
Stability of Raspberry puree T = 90–120 A synergistic effect was observed Verbeyst et al.
anthocyanins P = 200–700 between pressure and temperature. 2011
t = 0–50
Ti = NR
Ti = 36–93
Degradation of Strawberries T = 80–130 Pressure reduced the degradation rates. Verbeyst et al.
anthocyanins P = 200–700 2010
t = 0–30
Ti = 36–93
Degradation of Strawberries and T = 60–110 A synergistic effect was observed Verbeyst et al.
ascorbic acid raspberries P = 700 between temperature and pressure. 2013
t = 0–120
Ti = NR
Stability of Blueberry juice T = 40–121 Pressure and temperature increased the Buckow et al. 2010
anthocyanins P = 100–700 degradation rate.
t = 0–150
Ti = NR
Retention of CLA Enriched milk T = 90–120 Pressure enhanced the retention of Martı́nez-
P = 100–600 CLA. Monteagudo &
t = 0–60 Saldaña 2014
Ti = 72–117
Bovine serum Buffer (pH 9) solution T = 60–132 The protein-sugar conjugation rate Buckow et al. 2011
albumin stability containing bovine P = 0.1–600 increased with temperature and
serum albumin and t = 0–120 decreased with pressure.
glucose Ti = NR
Furanone formation Whey protein gels T = 105 Temperature increased formation of Gupta et al. 2011
P = 350 and 4-hydroxy-5-methyl-3(2H)-furanone
700 marker, whereas high pressure
t = 0–20 processing inhibited marker
Ti = 57 and 84 formation.
(Continued )
Table 5 (Continued )
Quality parameter Food matrix Conditions Pressure effect Reference
Isomerization of Olive oil/carrot T = 85–115 Pressure enhanced the stability of Knockaert et al.
β-carotene emulsion P = 300–700 β-carotene toward isomerization. 2013
t = 0–60
Ti = NR
Formation of furan Sardines in olive oil T = 90–121 Pressure inhibited the formation of Sevenich et al.
P = 600 furans. 2013
t = 0–35
Formation of furan Baby food puree T = 90–121 There was a reduction in furans of up to Sevenich et al.
P = 600 97%. 2014
t = 0–35
Ti = 38–80
Nutrients retention, Carrot T = 124 The combination of pressure and Vervoort et al.
formation of P = 700 temperature enhanced the overall 2012

furfural, texture, t = 3 quality compared with conventional
and color Ti = 90 sterilization.
Lactulose formation Milk T = 100–120 Increasing temperature and pressure Martı́nez-
P = 100–600 accelerated the formation of lactulose. Monteagudo &
t = 0–15 Saldaña 2015
Ti = 82–117
Abbreviations and variables: CLA, conjugated linoleic acid; MOPS, 3-(N-morpholino)propansulfonic acid; NR, not reported; P, pressure (MPa); t,
holding time (min); T, temperature (◦ C); Ti , initial temperature (◦ C).
foods, vegetables, ready-to-eat foods, desserts, gravies, soups, and sauces ( Juliano et al. 2012).
PATP equipment is primarily restricted to the laboratory or pilot-scale (5 to 55-L capacity).
Because PATP utilizes intensive pressure and heat, from the standpoint of materials science and
engineering, the process applies significant stress on the vessel and seals, thereby limiting the
equipment’s life. An additional PATP technology limitation is the application of a preheating
process (Nguyen et al. 2007, Juliano et al. 2010), wherein the food packages are typically heated
(75–90◦ C) by conventional conduction and convection heat transfer at ambient pressures.
In comparison to conventional thermal retorting, researchers have shown that pressure-assisted
thermal processing enhances the stability and protects the biological activity of bioactive com-
pounds. The stability of lycopene was evaluated in tomato juice treated with PATP (600 MPa,
100◦ C, and 10 min), HPP (700 MPa, 45◦ C, and 10 min), and thermal treatment (0.1 MPa, 100◦ C,
and 35 min) (Gupta et al. 2010). The stability of anthocyanins upon PATP has been studied
in raspberries and strawberries (Verbeyst et al. 2010, 2011). An antagonistic effect was reported
by Buckow et al. (2010), who studied the degradation of anthocyanins in blueberry juice treated
with PATP. The retention of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), a bioactive compound naturally
occurring in bovine milk, was enhanced with pressure, regardless of the temperature (Martı́nez-
Monteagudo & Saldaña 2014). The retained CLA obtained with PATP yielded comparable values
to that obtained by UHT pasteurization of milk. Because preserving nutritional attributes is a
major objective of any process, more studies are needed to characterize the effect of combined
pressure-heat treatments on various bioactive and nutritional compounds commonly occurring in
foods. Few studies have investigated the impact of pressure treatment on bioavailability of various
nutrients, and more studies are needed (Balasubramaniam & Farkas 2008). Similarly, compre-
hensive kinetic studies on the impact of pressure-thermal treatment on potential formation or
inhibition of various allergens and toxic compounds are also necessary.
Pressure-ohmic-thermal sterilization. POTS is a novel sterilization technology that involves

sequential or simultaneous application of elevated pressure and ohmic heating to sterilize low-
acid foods. The technology synergistically combines the heat of compression effects of elevated
pressures along with ohmic heating to minimize thermal exposure effects on product quality (Park
et al. 2013b, 2014). POTS treatment (600 MPa, 105◦ C, 50 V/cm) inactivated Bacillus amyloliq-
uefaciens and B. stearothermophilus spores suspended in 0.1% NaCl at pH 5.0, by 3.0 and 4.1 log,
respectively, during a 10-min treatment. Increasing the acidity of the food matrices accelerated
the inactivation of both types of spores. This indicates that POTS spore inactivation is primarily
influenced by pressure and thermal effects (Park et al. 2014). This feasibility study was carried
out using laboratory-scale equipment, and more studies using pilot-scale equipment are needed
to better understand the advantages, limitations, and potential applications of POTS technology.
High pressure freezing and thawing. Pressure treatment at 210 MPa depresses the freezing
point of water from 0◦ C (at atmospheric pressure) to −21◦ C. This phase change phenomenon is
reversible when the pressure is reversed to ambient pressure. This could be potentially exploited to
rapidly freeze and thaw high moisture–content foods. During pressure-assisted freezing (PAF), the
sample is cooled under pressure up to its phase change temperature at the applied pressure (LeBail
et al. 2002). The product is frozen under pressure by super cooling at a rapid ice-nucleation rate.
This process helps in preserving the microstructure of food and biological materials. Pressure-
assisted thawing (PAT) involves thawing a food material under constant pressure. This process
can help in reducing thawing time and drip loss. Presently, no commercial products are frozen or
thawed using high pressure–based technologies.
High pressure homogenization. A high pressure homogenizer (HPH) is an apparatus that hy-
drostatically pressurizes the fluid (up to ≈300 MPa) to be treated. The pressurized food is then
forced to flow through a minute orifice homogenization chamber. The passage of a pressurized
fluid through this tiny gap disrupts the motion of the fluid, thereby dissipating the kinetic en-
ergy by means of cavitation, shear, and turbulence. During HPH, the temperature in the sample
increases due to the heat of compression (similar to HPP) as well as a temperature increase due
to the homogenization effect. Unlike conventional pressure treatment, the temperature increase
during homogenization (approximately 16◦ C/100 MPa) is not reversible. The magnitude of this
temperature increase in part depends on the specific geometry of the HPH valve. Valve geometry
can also influence the characteristics of the final processed product. By adjusting the initial fluid
temperature, target pressure, and HPH valve design, it may be possible to achieve both pasteur-
ization and sterilization treatment temperatures. Hence, HPH has the potential for applications
in the chemical, pharmaceutical, and food industries. Emulsion, dispersion, and mixing are among
the main purposes for using HPH.
A consequence of operating a homogenizer at high pressure levels (>100 MPa) is an increase
in the fluid temperature, which is roughly 16◦ C per 100 MPa for water. Studies in which target
microorganisms were inactivated by HPH are summarized in Table 6. In general, the thermal
effect is the predominant factor causing microbial inactivation. For instance, a 6-log reduction
of S. aureus was obtained at 300 MPa and an inlet temperature of 50◦ C. However, with an inlet
temperature of 25◦ C and 300 MPa, only a 3-log reduction of S. aureus was observed (Diels et al.
2003, Wuytack et al. 2002). Unlike conventional HPP, the product temperature does not return
to its initial value upon depressurization.
Dense phase CO2 . Dense phase CO2 is a method that utilizes moderate pressures (<50 MPa) in
combination with CO2 to pasteurize liquid foods without compromising quality attributes (Damar
Table 6 High pressure homogenization inactivation of specific microorganisms

FO06CH19-Balasubramaniam
Microorganism Matrix Reduction Conditions Type of valve Reference

Pseudomonas Bovine milk 6-log Tin = 45; P = 250; Axial-flown through orifice valve Hayes et al. 2005
fluorescens AFT 36
ARI
Tout = 76.8
Escherichia coli K-12 Apple juice and apple 7-log Tin = 25; P = 250; Axial-flown through orifice valve Kumar et al. 2009
cider Tout = 70
E. coli K-12 PBS buffer (pH 7) 6-log Tin = 25; P = 300; Axial-flown through orifice valve Diels et al. 2005
Tout = NR
E. coli K-12 Saline solution 7-log Tin = 5; P = 300; Axial-flown through orifice valve Taylor et al. 2007
18 February 2015
Tout = 70
E. coli 058:H21 Orange juice 3.9-log (058:H21) Tin = 20; P = 300; Tout = Axial-flown through orifice valve Briñez et al. 2006a
15:1
ATCC 10536 3.7-log (0157:H7) NR; flow = 18 L h−1

E. coli 0157:H7
CCUG 44857
E. coli 0157:H7 PBS buffer (pH 7) 8-log (after 3 passes) Tin = 25; P = 200; Tout = Counterjet dispergator Vachon et al. 2002
ATCC 35150 NR; flow = 1.5 L h−1
E. coli MG1655 Skim, soy, and Skim, 3.5-log;soy, Tin = 25; P = 300; Counterjet dispergator Diels et al. 2005
strawberry-raspberry 3.0-log;strawb./raspb., Tout = 18
milk 3.0-log
E. coli MG1655 PBS buffer (pH 7) 7-log Tin = 50; P = 250; Counterjet dispergator Diels et al. 2004
Tout = 18
Listeria innocua Apple and carrot juice 5-log Tin = 4; P = 350; Axial-flown through orifice valve Pathanibul et al.
ATCC 51742 Tout = 80 2009
L. innocua ATCC Milk 2.7-log Tin = 20; P = 300; Tout = Axial-flown through orifice valve Briñez et al. 2006b
33090 NR; flow = 18 L h−1
L. innocua PBS buffer (pH 7) 5-log Tin = 25; P = 300; Counterjet dispergator Wuytack et al. 2002
Tout = 42
L. monocytogenes PBS buffer (pH 7) 8-log (after 3 passes) Tin = 25; P = 200; Tout = Counterjet dispergator Vachon et al. 2002
LSD 105–1
NR; flow = 1.5 L h−1
www.annualreviews.org • Principles and Application of High Pressure

(Continued )
19.19
FO06CH19-Balasubramaniam
Table 6 (Continued )
19.20
Microorganism Matrix Reduction Conditions Type of valve Reference
ARI
Alicyclobacillus Malt extract broth 5-log Tin = NR; P = 170; Radial diffuser Bevilacqua et al.
acidoterrestris Tout = <55 2009
DSMZ 2498
Staphylococcus aureus Milk and orange juice Milk, 3.6-log; Tin = 20; P = 300; Tout = Axial-flown through orifice valve Briñez et al. 2007
ATCC 13565 orange juice, 4.2-log
Balasubramaniam
18; flow = 18 L h−1
·
S. carnosus CECT Milk and orange juice Orange juice, 4.8-log Tin = 20; P = 300; Tout = Axial-flown through orifice valve Briñez et al. 2007
18 February 2015
4491 18; flow = 18 L h−1

S. aureus PBS buffer (pH 7) 3-log Tin = 50; P = 300; Counterjet dispergator Diels et al. 2003
15:1
Tout = 18
S. aureus PBS buffer (pH 7) 6-log Tin = 25; P = 300; Counterjet dispergator Wuytack et al. 2002
Tout = 42
Martı́nez-Monteagudo
·
S. aureus CECT 976 Milk 7-log Tin = 20; P = 330; Tout = Axial-flown through orifice valve López et al. 2006
NR; flow = 16 L h−1
Gupta
Yersinia enterocolitica PBS buffer (pH 7) 6-log Tin = 50; P = 250; Counterjet dispergator Diels et al. 2003
Tout = 18
Salmonella enterica PBS buffer (pH 7) 8-log (after 5 passes) Tin = 25; P = 200; Tout = Counterjet dispergator Vachon et al. 2002
serotype enteritidis NR; flow = 1.5 L h−1
ATCC 13047
Enterococcus faecalis PBS buffer (pH 7) 3-log Tin = 25; P = 250; Counterjet dispergator Wuytack et al. 2002
Tout = 42
Lactobacillus PBS buffer (pH 7) 4-log Tin = 25; P = 300; Counterjet dispergator Wuytack et al. 2002
plantarum Tout = 42
Leuconostoc PBS buffer (pH 7) 6-log Tin = 25; P = 300; Counterjet dispergator Wuytack et al. 2002
dextranicum Tout = 42
Abbreviations and variables: NR, not reported; P, homogenization pressure (MPa); PBS, phosphate buffered saline; Tin , inlet temperature (◦ C); Tout , outlet temperature (◦ C).
& Balaban 2006). The technology is reported to be effective against pathogenic and spoilage bacte-
ria, yeasts, molds, and enzymes. Although the exact mechanism of inactivation of microorganisms
through dense phase CO2 is not known, the pH lowering effect of CO2 when dissolved in the
aqueous part of the food as well as disruption of bacterial cells by rapid decompression of CO2
from 50 MPa to ambient pressures are attributed as key factors influencing the microbiological
inactivation efficacy.
SUMMARY POINTS
1. Increased consumer demand for mildly processed, fresh-tasting, preservative-free food
products facilitated industry adaptation of high pressure pasteurization technology for
pasteurization of value-added products. Extended shelf life and pressure-assisted ther-
mally sterilized low-acid products are likely to follow this trend.
2. High pressure pasteurization treatment provides a unique opportunity to food processors

for inactivating various harmful pathogenic and spoilage microbes without adversely
impacting product quality and nutritional attributes.
3. A qusi-instantaneous temperature increase during compression, and subsequent cooling
upon decompression can substantially reduce product thermal exposure and helps in
preserving the product quality.
4. The pressure-thermal effect on product microbiological, enzymatic, and nutritional qual-
ity attributes could be synergistic, antagonistic, or additive. One must understand unique
technology advantages and limitations on a variety of foods.
5. Limited throughput and initial equipment costs currently limit the application of HPP
technology to high value-added processing. Widespread industry adaptation, especially
for commodity product processing, requires novel technological solutions to reduce
equipment cost and improve throughput.
6. Enhanced efforts are needed to establish the process equivalency criteria when comparing
the quality advantages and limitations of pressure-treated products against conventionally
treated products.
7. Enhanced funding of university-based research programs is critical to fully exploit and
sustain the benefits of various novel nonthermal food processing technologies such as
various high pressure–based technologies discussed in this review. Sustained long-term
research and development investments for academia are critical to continue to create the
knowledge base necessary to facilitate technology commercialization, serve as a catalyst
for industrial technology transfer, as well as train the next generation of thought leaders
(Anonymous 2014).
FUTURE ISSUES
1. Develop aids (chemical or biological process indicators, electronic sensors) for pressure-
thermal process validation studies.
2. Develop novel nanocomposite-based packaging material that can withstand pressure-
thermal treatment and have excellent barrier properties.
3. Determine the impact of phase change during pressure-thermal treatment on food con-
stituents (water, carbohydrate, protein among others) as well as on product safety and
quality.
4. Conduct molecular- and thermodynamic-based kinetic studies on the impact of combined
pressure-thermal processing on food, biologics and packaging material for the design and
development of healthy, nutritious functional foods that satisfy consumer demand.
5. Develop novel equipment and process design approaches to reduce equipment and oper-
ating costs and improve throughput. Ensure HPP sustainability through improvements
in energy efficiency of pressure-generating systems as well as minimize water use (e.g.,
use efficient pressure-transmitting fluid).
6. Determine the engineering and thermodynamic properties of food materials during com-
bined pressure-thermal treatment for establishing process uniformity.

7. Evaluate the benefits and limitations of pressure -based pasteurization methods (such as
pressure-ohmic-thermal sterilization, high pressure homogenization) on product quality
and safety.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
The authors are not aware of any afiliations, memberships, funding, or financial holdings that
might be perceived as affecting the objectivity of this review.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Research support was provided, in part, by the US Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Na-
tional Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA) HATCH project OHO01323, Ohio Agricultural
Research and Development Corporation (OARDC), Center for Advanced Processing and Pack-
aging Studies (CAPPS), and the food industry. References to commercial products or trade names
are made with the understanding that no endorsement or discrimination by Ohio State University
is implied.
LITERATURE CITED
Ahn J, Balasubramaniam VM, Yousef AE. 2007. Inactivation kinetics of selected aerobic and anaerobic bacterial
spores by pressure-assisted thermal processing. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 113:321–29
Alt N, Schieberle P. 2005. Model studies on the influence of high hydrostatic on the formation of glycated
arginine modifications at elevated temperatures. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53:5789–97
Ananta E, Volker H, Schlüter O, Knorr D. 2001. Kinetic studies on high-pressure inactivation of Bacillus
stearothermophilus spores suspended in food matrices. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2:261–72
Anonymous. 2014. Spurring Innovation in Food and Agriculture: A Review of the USDA
Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Program. Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
Ardia A, Knorr D, Ferrari G, Heinz V. 2003. Kinetic studies on combined high-pressure and temperature
inactivation of Alicyclobacillus acidoterrestris spores in orange juice. Appl. Biotechnol. Food Sci. Policy 1:169–73
Ayvaz H, Schirmer S, Yash P, Balasubramaniam VM, Somerville J, Daryaei H. 2012. Influence of selected
packaging materials on some quality aspects of pressure-assisted thermally processed carrots during stor-
age. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 46:437–47
Balasubramanian S, Balasubramaniam VM. 2003. Compression heating influence of pressure transmitting

fluids on bacteria inactivation during high pressure processing. Food Res. Int. 36:661–68
Balasubramaniam VM, Farkas D. 2008. High-pressure food processing. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 14:413–18
Balasubramaniam VM, Farkas D, Turek EJ. 2008. Preserving foods through high-pressure processing. Food
Technol. Chicago 62(11):32–38
Balasubramaniam VM, Ting E, Stewart CM, Robbins JA. 2004. Recommended laboratory practices for con-
ducting high-pressure microbial experiments. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 5:299–306
Balny C, Masson P. 1993. Effects of high pressure on proteins. Food Rev. Int. 9:611–28
Bevilacqua A, Costa C, Corbo MR, Sinigaglia M. 2009. Effects of the high pressure of homogenization on
some spoiling micro-organisms, representative of fruit juice microflora, inoculated in saline solution. Lett.
Appl. Microb. 48:261–67
Black EP, Setlow P, Hocking AD, Stewart CM, Kelly AL, Hoover DG. 2007. Response of spores to high-
pressure processing. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 6:103–19
Bridgman PW. 1909. An experimental determination of certain compressibilities. Proc. Am. Acad. Arts Sci.
44:255–79
Bridgman PW. 1912. Water, in liquid and five solid forms, under pressure. Proc. Am. Acad. Arts Sci. 47:441–558
Bridgman PW. 1914a. Change of phase under pressure I. The phase diagram of eleven substances with especial
reference to melting curve. Phys. Rev. 3:153–203
Bridgman PW. 1914b. The coagulation of alumen by pressure. J. Biol. Chem. 19:511–13
Bridgman PW. 1923. The thermal conductivity of liquids under pressure. Proc. Am. Acad. Arts Sci. 59:141–69
Bridgman PW. 1931. The Physics of High Pressure. London: G. Bell & Sons
Briñez WJ, Roig-Sagués AX, Herrero MH, López BG. 2006a. Inactivation by ultrahigh-pressure homoge-
nization of Escherichia coli strains inoculated into orange juice. J. Food Prot. 69:984–89
Briñez WJ, Roig-Sagués AX, Herrero MH, López BG. 2006b. Inactivation of Listeria innocua in milk and
orange juice by ultrahigh-pressure homogenization. J. Food Protect. 69:86–92
Briñez WJ, Roig-Sagués AX, Herrero MH, López BG. 2007. Inactivation of Staphylococcus spp. strains in whole
milk and orange juice using ultra high pressure homogenisation at inlet temperatures of 6 and 20 degrees
C. Food Control. 10:1282–88
Brown K. 1920. The manufacture of phenol in a continuous high-pressure autoclave. J. Ind. Eng. Chem.
12:279–80
Buchheim W, Abou El-Nour AM. 1992. Induction of milkfat crystallization in the emulsified state by high
hydrostatic-pressure. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Tech. 94:369–73
Buckow R, Heinz V, Knorr D. 2007. High pressure phase transition kinetics of maize starch. J. Food Eng.
81:469–75
Buckow R, Kastell A, Terefe NS, Versteeg C. 2010. Pressure and temperature effects on degradation kinetics
and storage stability of total anthocyanins in blueberry juice. J. Agric. Food Chem. 105:513–21
Buckow R, Wendorff J, Hemar Y. 2011. Conjugation of bovine serum albumin and glucose under combined
high pressure and heat. J. Agric. Food Chem. 59:3915–23
Bull MK, Oliver SA, Diepenbeek RJ, Kormelink F, Chapman B. 2009. Synergistic inactivation of spores of
proteolytic Clostridium botulinum strains by high pressure and heat is strain and product dependent. Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 75:434–45
Butz P, Bognar A, Dieterich S, Tauscher B. 2007. Effect of high-pressure processing at elevated temperatures
on thiamin and riboflavin in pork and model systems. J. Agric. Food Chem. 55:1289–94
Butz P, Koller WD, Tauscher B, Wolf S. 1994. Ultra-high pressure processing of onions—chemical and
sensory changes. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 27:463–67
Butz P, Serfert Y, Fernandez-Garcia A, Dieterich S, Lindauer R, et al. 2004. Influence of high-pressure
treatment at 25 degrees C and 80 degrees C on folates in orange juice and model media. J. Food Sci.
69:S117–21
Caner C, Hernandez RJ, Pascall MA, Balasubramaniam VM, Harte BR. 2004. The effect of high-pressure
food processing on the sorption behaviour of selected packaging materials. Packag. Technol. Sci. 17:139–53
Cheftel JC. 1995. Review: high-pressure, microbial inactivation and food preservation. Food Sci. Technol. Int.
1:75–90
Damar S, Balaban M. 2006. Review of dense phase Co2 technology: microbial and enzyme inactivation, and
effects on food quality. J. Food Sci. 71:R1–11
Daryaei H, Balasubramaniam VM, Legan JD. 2013. Kinetics of bacillus cereus spore inactivation in cooked rice
by combined pressure-heat treatment. J. Food Protect. 76:616–23
de Heij WBC, Van Schepdael LJMM, Moezelaar R, Hoogland Hans, Matser AM, van den Berg RW. 2003.
High-pressure sterilization: maximizing the benefits of adiabatic heating. Food Technol.-Chicago 57:37–41
De Vleeschouwer K, Van der Plancken I, Van Loey A, Hendrickx ME. 2010. The effect of high pressure–high
temperature processing conditions on acrylamide formation and other Maillard reaction compounds.
J. Agric. Food Chem. 58:11740–48
Diels AMJ, Callewaert L, Wuytack EY, Masschalck B, Michiels CW. 2004. Moderate temperatures affect
Escherichia coli inactivation by high-pressure homogenization only through fluid viscosity. Biotechnol. Prog.
20:1512–17
Diels AMJ, Callewaert L, Wuytack EY, Masschalck B, Michiels CW. 2005. Inactivation of Escherichia coli
by high-pressure homogenisation is influenced by fluid viscosity but not by water activity and product
composition. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 101:281–91

Diels AMJ, Wuytack EY, Michiels CW. 2003. Modelling inactivation of Staphylococcus aureus and Yersinia
enterocolitica by high-pressure homogenisation at different temperatures. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 87:55–62
Donsı̀ F, Ferrari G, Maresca P. 2009. High-pressure homogenization for food sanitization. In Global Issues
in Food Science and Technology, ed. GV Barbosa-Cánovas, A Mortimer, D Lineback, W Spiess, K Buckle,
P Colonna, pp. 309–52. San Diego: Academic
de Roeck A, Duvetter T, Fraeye I, Van der Plancken I, Sila DN, et al. 2009. Effect of high-pressure/high-
temperature processing on chemical pectin conversions in relation to fruit and vegetable texture. Food
Chem. 115:207–13
Dunne CP. 2005. High pressure keeps food fresher. SSC-Natick Press Release #05-22, May 3. http://www.natick.
army.mil/about/pao/05/05-22.htm
Elgasim EA, Holmes ZA, Meyer PF. 1980. The effect of pressurisation of pre-rigor muscle on post-rigor meat
characteristics. Meat Sci. 4:33–40
Fairclough JPA, Conti M. 2009. Influence of ultra-high pressure sterilization on the structure of polymer
films. Packag. Technol. Sci. 22:303–10
Farkas D, Hoover D. 2000. High pressure processing. J. Food Sci. 65:47–64
Fito P, Chiralt A, Betoret N, Gras M, Chafer M, et al. 2001. Vacuum impregnation and osmotic dehydration
in matrix engineering—application in functional fresh food development. J. Food Eng. 49(2–3):175–83
Floros JD, Newsome R, Fisher W, Barbosa-Canovas GV, Chen H, et al. 2010. Feeding the world today and
tomorrow: the importance of food, science and technology. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 9:572–99
Galotto MJ, Ulloa P, Escobar R, Guarda A, Gavara R, Miltz J. 2008. Effect of high-pressure food processing
on the mass transfer properties of selected packaging materials. Packag. Technol. Sci. 23:253–66
Galotto MJ, Ulloa PA, Guarda A, Gavara R, Miltz J. 2009. Effect of high-pressure food processing on the
physical properties of synthetic and biopolymer films. J. Food Sci. 74:E304–11
Gupta R, Balasubramaniam VM, Schwartz SJ, Francis DM. 2010. Storage stability of lycopene in tomato juice
subjected to combined pressure-heat treatments. J. Agric. Food Chem. 58:8305–13
Gupta R, Mikhaylenko G, Balasubramaniam VM, Tang J. 2011. Combined pressure–temperature effects on
the chemical marker (4-hydroxy-5-methyl-3(2H)-furanone) formation in whey protein gels. LWT-Food
Sci. Technol. 44:2141–46
Halim L, Pascall MA, Lee J, Finnigan B. 2009. Effect of pasteurization, high-pressure processing, and retorting
on the barrier properties of nylon 6, nylon 6/ethylene vinyl alcohol, and nylon 6/nanocomposites films.
J. Food Sci. 74:N9–15
Hayes MG, Fox PF, Kelly AL. 2005. Potential applications of high pressure homogenisation in processing of
liquid milk. J. Dairy Res. 72:25–33
Heremans K. 1995. High pressure effects on biomolecules. In High Pressure Processing of Foods, ed. DA Ledward,
DE Johnston, RG Earnshaw, pp. 81–97. Reading, UK: Nottm. Univ. Press
Hite BH. 1899. The effect of high pressure preservation of milk. West Virginia Agric. Exp. Station Bull. 58:15–35
Hoover D, Metrick C, Papineau AM, Farkas DF, Knorr D. 1989. Biological effects of high hydrostatic pressure
on food microorganisms. Food Technol.-Chicago 3:99–107
Houška M, Kubásek M, Strohalm J, Landfeld A, Kamarád J. 2004. Warming of olive oil processed by high
hydrostatic pressure. High Pressure Res. 24:303–8
Huppertz T. 2011. Homogenization of milk. High-pressure homogenizers. In Encyclopedia of Dairy Sciences,
ed. JW Fuquay, pp. 755–60. San Diego: Academic. 2nd ed.
Ibarz A, Barbosa-Cánovas GV. 2001. Unit Operations in Food Engineering. Boca Raton, Fla: CRC
Juliano P, Bilbao-Sainz C, Koutchma T, Balasubramaniam VM, Clark S, et al. 2012. Shelf-stable egg-based
products processed by high pressure thermal sterilization. Food Eng. Rev. 4:55–67
Juliano P, Koutchma T, Sui Q, Barbosa-Cánovas GV, Sadler G. 2010. Polymeric-based food packaging for
high-pressure processing. Food Eng. Rev. 2:274–97
King JW. 2014. Modern supercritical fluid technology for food applications. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol.
5:215–38
Knockaert G, Sudheer KP, Lemmers L, Van Buggenhout S, Hendrickx ME, Van Loey A. 2013. Isomerisation
of carrot β-carotene in presence of oil during thermal and combined thermal/high pressure processing.
Food Chem. 138:1515–20
Knoerzer K, Buckow R, Versteeg C. 2010. Adiabatic compression heating coefficients for high-pressure
processing—a study of some insulating polymer materials. J. Food Eng. 98:110–19

Knoerzer K, Chapman B. 2011. Effect of material properties and processing conditions on the prediction
accuracy of a CFD model for simulating high pressure thermal (HPT) processing. J. Food Eng. 104:404–
13
Koutchma T, Guo B, Patazca E, Parisi B. 2005. High pressure–high temperature sterilization: from kinetic
analysis to process verification. J. Food Process Eng. 28:610–29
Kumar S, Thippareddi H, Subbiah J, Zivanovic S, Davidson PM, Harte F. 2009. Inactivation of Escherichia
coli K-12 in apple juice using combination of high-pressure homogenization and chitosan. J. Food Sci.
74:M8–14
Larson WP, Harzell TB, Diehl HS. 1918. The effect of high pressure on bacteria. J. Infect. Dis. 22:271–79
LeBail A, Chevalier D, Mussa DM, Ghoul M. 2002. High pressure freezing and thawing of foods: a review.
Int. J. Refrig. 25:504–13
Lippmann F. 1897. Over the effect of pressure and temperature on the starch saccharification. Chem. Zentr.
26:657–68
López-Pedemonte T, Brinez WJ, Roig-Sagués AX, Guamis B. 2006. Fate of Staphylococcus aureus in cheese
treated by ultrahigh pressure homogenization and high hydrostatic pressure. J. Dairy Sci. 89:4536–44
Margosch D, Ehrmann MA, Buckow R, Heinz V, Vogel RF, Ganzle MG. 2006. High-pressure-mediated sur-
vival of Clostridium botulinum and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens endospores at high temperature. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 72:3476–81
Margosch D, Gaenzle MG, Ehrmann MA, Vogel RF. 2004. Pressure inactivation of Bacillus endospores. Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 70:7321–28
Martı́nez-Monteagudo SI, Saldaña MDA. 2015. Kinetics of lactulose formation in milk treated with pressure-
assisted thermal processing. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. In press. doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2014.12.010
Martı́nez-Monteagudo SI, Saldaña MDA. 2014. Modeling the retention kinetics of conjugated linoleic acid
during high-pressure sterilization of milk. Food Res. Int. 62:169–76
Martı́nez-Monteagudo SI, Saldaña MDA, Torres JA, Kennelly JJ. 2012. Effect of pressure-assisted thermal
sterilization on conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) content in CLA-enriched milk. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg.
Technol. 16:291–97
Matser AM, Krebbers B, van den Berg RW, Bartels PV. 2004. Advantages of high pressure sterilization on
quality of food products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 15:79–85
Meyer RS, Cooper KL, Knorr D, Lelieveld HLM. 2000. High pressure sterilization of foods. Food Technol.-
Chicago 54:67–72
Min S, Sastry S, Balasubramaniam VM. 2007. In situ electrical conductivity measurement of select liquid foods
under hydrostatic pressure to 800 MPa. J. Food Eng. 82:489–97
Min S, Sastry S, Balasubramaniam VM. 2009. Variable volume piezometer for measurement of volumetric
properties of materials under high pressure. High Pressure Res. 29:278–89
Min S, Sastry S, Balasubramaniam VM. 2010. Compressibility and density of select liquid and solid foods
under pressures up to 700 MPa. J. Food Eng. 96:568–74
Molina-Guitierrez A, Stippl V, Delgado A, Ganzle MG, Vogel R. 2002. In situ determination of the intercel-
lular pH of Lactococcus lactis and Lactobacillus plantarum during pressure treatment. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
68:4399–406
Mozhaev VV, Heremans K, Frank J, Masson P, Balny C. 1994. Exploiting the effects of high hydrostatic
pressure in biotechnological applications. Trends Biotechnol. 12:493–501
Mujica-Paz H, Valdez-Fragoso A, Samson CT, Welti-Chanes J, Torres JA. 2011. High-pressure processing
technologies for the pasteurization and sterilization of foods. Food Bioproc. Technol. 4(6):969–85
Myles AE. 2013. Economic impact of the U.S. food processing industry. J. Food Dist. Res. 44(1):103
Needs EC, Stenning RA, Gill AL, Ferragut V, Rich GT. 2000. High-pressure treatment of milk: effects on
casein micelle structure and on enzymic coagulation. J. Dairy Res. 67:31–42
Nguyen LT, Balasubramaniam VM, Ratphitagsanti W. 2013. Estimation of accumulated lethality under
pressure-assisted thermal processing. Food Bioprocess Technol. 7:633–44
Nguyen LT, Balasubramaniam VM, Sastry S. 2012. Determination of in-situ thermal conductivity, thermal
diffusivity, volumetric specific heat and isobaric specific heat of selected foods under pressure. Int. J. Food
Prop. 15:169–87
Nguyen LT, Rastogi NK, Balasubramaniam VM. 2007. Evaluation of the instrumental quality of pressure-
assisted thermally processed carrots. J. Food Sci. 5:E264–70
Norton T, Sun D-W. 2008. Recent advances in the use of high pressure as an effective processing technique
in the food industry. Food Bioprocess Technol. 1:2–34
Okamoto M. 1992. The contribution by diffusion to the cycloaddition reactions of singlet oxygen with furans
in solution under high pressure. J. Phys. Chem. 96:245–48
Oley I, Verlinde P, Hendrickx ME, Van Loey A. 2006. Temperature and pressure stability of L-ascorbic acid
and/or [6s] 5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid: a kinetic study. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 223:71–77
Otero L, Molina-Garcı́a AD, Sanz PD. 2000. Thermal effect in foods during quasi-adiabatic pressure treat-
ments. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 1:119–26
Otero L, Sanz PD. 2003. Modelling heat transfer in high pressure food processing: a review. Innov. Food Sci.
Emerg. Technol. 4:121–34
Park SH, Balasubramaniam VM, Sastry SK. 2013a. Estimating pressure induced changes in vegetable tissue
using in situ electrical conductivity measurement and instrumental analysis. J. Food Eng. 114:47–56
Park SH, Balasubramaniam VM, Sastry SK. 2014. Quality of shelf-stable low-acid vegetables processed using
pressure-ohmic-thermal sterilization. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 57:243–52
Park SH, Balasubramaniam VM, Sastry SK, Lee J. 2013b. Pressure–ohmic–thermal sterilization: a feasible
approach for the inactivation of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens and Geobacillus stearothermophilus spores. Innov.
Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 19:115–23
Patazca E, Koutchma T, Balasubramaniam VM. 2007. Quasi-adiabatic temperature increase during high
pressure processing of selected foods. J. Food Eng. 80:199–205
Patazca E, Koutchma T, Ramaswamy HS. 2006. Inactivation kinetics of Geobacillus stearothermophilus spores
in water using high-pressure processing at elevated temperatures. J. Food Sci. 71:M110–16
Pathanibul P, Taylor TM, Davidson PM, Harte F. 2009. Inactivation of Escherichia coli and Listeria innocua in
apple and carrot juices using high pressure homogenization and nisin. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 129:316–20
Peleg M, Cole MB. 1998. Reinterpretation of microbial survival curves. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 5:353–80
Rajan S, Ahn J, Balasubramaniam VM, Yousef AE. 2006. Combined pressure-thermal inactivation kinetics of
Bacillus amyloliquefaciens spores in egg patty mince. J. Food Prot. 69:853–60
Ramaswamy R, Balasubramaniam VM, Sastry S. 2007. Thermal conductivity of selected liquid foods at elevated
pressures up to 700 MPa. J. Food Eng. 83:444–51
Rasanayagam V, Balasubramaniam VM, Ting E, Sizer CE, Bush C, Anderson C. 2003. Compression heating
of selected fatty food materials during high-pressure processing. J. Food Sci. 68:254–59
Rastogi N, Raghavarao KMS, Balasubramaniam VM, Niranjan K, Knorr D. 2007. Opportunities and chal-
lenges in high pressure processing of foods. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 47:69–112
Reddy NR, Solomon HM, Tetzloff RC, Rhodehamel EJ. 2003. Inactivation of Clostridium Botulinum type A
spores by high-pressure processing at elevated temperatures. J. Food Prot. 8:1402–7
Reddy NR, Tetzloff RC, Solomon HM, Larkin JW. 2006. Inactivation of Clostridium Botulinum nonproteolytic
type B spores by high pressure processing at moderate to elevated high temperatures. Innov. Food Sci.
Emerg. Technol. 3:169–75
Reddy NR, Marshall KM, Morrissey TR, Loeza V, Patazca E, et al. 2013. Combined high pressure and thermal
processing on inactivation of type A and proteolytic type B spores of Clostridium botulinum. J. Food Prot.
76(8):1384–92
Reineke K, Mathys A, Heinz V, Knorr D. 2013. Mechanisms of endospore inactivation under high pressure.
Trend Microbiol. 21:296–304
Rodriguez AC, Larkin JW, Dunn J, Patazca E, Reddy NR, et al. 2004. Model of the inactivation of bacterial
spores by moist heat and high pressure. J. Food Sci. 8:E367–73
Rovere P, Gola S, Maggi A, Scaramuzza N, Miglioli L. 1998. Studies on bacterial spores by combined high
pressure-heat treatment: possibility to sterilize low acid foods. In High Pressure Food Science, Bioscience and
Chemistry, ed. NS Issacs, pp. 222. Cambridge, UK: R. Soc. Chem.
Sander FV. 1943. The effects of high pressure on the inversion of sucrose and the mutarotation of glucose.
J. Biol. Chem. 148:311–19

Samaranayake CP, Sastry SK. 2013. In-situ pH measurement of selected liquid foods under high pressure.
Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 17:22–26
Schauwhecker A, Balasubramaniam VM, Sadler G, Pascall MA, Adhikari C. 2002. Influence of high pressure
processing on selected polymeric materials and on the migration of a pressure transmitting fluid. Packag.
Technol. Sci. 15:255–62
Serrano J, Velazquez G, Lopetcharat K, Ramirez JA, Torres JA. 2004. Effect of moderate pressure treatments
on microstructure, texture, and sensory properties of stirred-curd cheddar shreds. J. Dairy Sci. 87:3172–82
Sevenich R, Bark F, Crews C, Anderson W, Pye C, et al. 2013. Effect of high pressure thermal sterilization
on the formation of food processing contaminants. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 20:42–50
Sevenich R, Elke K, Crews C, Anderson W, Pye C, et al. 2014. High-pressure thermal sterilization: food
safety and food quality of baby food puree. J. Food Sci. 79:M230–37
Skinner GE, Marshall KM, Morrissey TR, Loeza V, Patazca E, et al. 2014. Combined high pressure and
thermal processing on inactivation of type E and nonproteolytic type B and F spores of Clostridium
botulinum. J. Food Prot. 77(12):2054–61
Singh PP, Saldaña MDA. 2011. Subcritical water extraction of phenolic compounds from potato peel. Food
Res. Int. 44:2452–58
Singh PR, Heldman DR. 2008. Introduction to Food Engineering. Burlington, MA: Academic. 5th. ed.
Sizer CE, Balasubramaniam VM, Ting E. 2002. Validating high-pressure processes for low-acid foods. Food
Technol.-Chicago 2:36–42
Smelt JP. 1998. Recent advances in the microbiology of high pressure processing. Trends Food Sci. Technol.
9:152–58
Songming Z, Marcotte M, Ramaswamy H, Shao Y, Le-Bail A. 2008. Evaluation and comparison of thermal
conductivity of food materials at high pressure. Food Bioprod. Process. 86:147–53
Soxhlet F. 1881. Supposed conversion of starch into sugar by water at a high temperature. J. Chem. Soc. Abstr.
42:554–57
Stern O. 1897. The influence of a pressure of 500 atmospheres on the rate of inversion of cane sugar. Annalen
Physik. 59:652
Stewart C, Dunne PC, Keener L. 2015. Pressure-assisted thermal sterilization validation. In High Pressure
Processing Principles, Technology and Applications, ed. VM Balasubramaniam, HLM Lelieveld, GV Barbosa-
Canovas. New York: Springer. In press
Tay A, Shellhammer TH, Yousef AE, Chism GW. 2003. Pressure death and tailing behavior of Listeria
monocytogenes strains having different barotolerances. J. Food Prot. 66(11):2057–61
Taylor TM, Roach A, Black DG, Davidson PM, Harte F. 2007. Inactivation of Escherichia coli K-12 exposed
to pressures in excess of 300 MPa in a high-pressure homogenizer. J. Food Protect. 4:820–1053
Ting E. 2011. High-pressure processing equipment fundamentals. See Zhang et al. 2011, pp. 20–27
Ting E, Balasubramaniam VM, Raghubeer E. 2002. Determining thermal effects in high pressure processing.
Food Technol.-Chicago 56:31–35
Toledo RT. 2007. Fundamentals of Food Process Engineering. New York, NY: Springer
Tonello C. 2011. Case of studies on high-pressure processing of foods. See Zhang et al. 2011, pp. 36–50
Vachon JF, Kheadr EE, Giasson J, Paquin P, Fliss I. 2002. Inactivation of foodborne pathogens in milk using
dynamic high pressure. J. Food Prot. 65:345–52
Van Boekel M, Fogliano V, Pellegrini N, Stanton C, Scholz G, et al. 2010. A review on the beneficial aspects
of food processing. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 54:1215–47
Van Loey A, Ooms V, Weemaes C, Van den Broeck I, Ludikhuyze L, et al. 1998. Thermal and pressure-
temperature degradation of chlorophyll in broccoli (brassica oleracea L. italica) juice: a kinetic study.
J. Agric. Food Chem. 46:5289–94
Verbeyst L, Bogaerts R, Van der Plancken I, Hendrickx M, Van Loey A. 2013. Modelling of vitamin C
degradation during thermal and high-pressure treatments of red fruits. Food Bioprocess Technol. 6:1015–23
Verbeyst L, Crombruggen KV, Van der Plancken I, Hendrickx ME, Loey AV. 2011. Anthocyanin degradation
kinetics during thermal and high pressure treatments of raspberries. J. Food Eng. 105:513–21
Verbeyst L, Oey I, Van der Plancken I, Hendrickx M, Van Loey A. 2010. Kinetic study on the thermal and
pressure degradation of anthocyanins in strawberries. Food Chem. 123:269–74

Vervoort L, Van der Plancken I, Grauwet T, Verlinde P, Matser A, et al. 2012. Thermal versus high pressure
processing of carrots: a comparative pilot-scale study on equivalent basis. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol.
15:1–13
Wan J. 2014. High Pressure Processing for Inactivation of Clostridium botulinum Spores for Low-Acid Foods:
Technical Program and Abstract Book of the 2014 International Nonthermal Processing Workshop and Short
Course at The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. October 21–23, ed. VM Bala. Columbus, OH: Ohio
Univ. Press
Wuytack EY, Diels AJ, Michiels CW. 2002. Bacterial inactivation by high-pressure homogenisation and high
hydrostatic pressure. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 77:205–12
Yayanos AA. 1969. A technique for studying biological reaction rates at high pressure. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 40:961
Yoo S, Holloman C, Tomasko D, Koelling K, Pascall MA. 2014. Effect of high pressure processing on the
thermal and mechanical properties of polyethylene films measured by dynamical mechanical and tensile
analyses. Packag. Technol. Sci. 27:169–78
Zhang H, Barbosa-Canovas GV, Balasubramaniam VM, Dunne CP, Farkas DF, Yuan JTC. 2011. Nonthermal
Processing Technologies for Food. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell
Zhao Y, Xie J. 2004. Practical applications of vacuum impregnation in fruit and vegetable processing. Trends
Food Sci. Technol. 15:434–51
View publication stats

Principles and Application of High Pressure - Based Technologies in The Food Industry

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Principles and Application of High Pressure - Based Technologies in The Food Industry

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Principles and Application of High Pressure--Based Technologies in the Food

Article in Annual Review of Food Science and Technology · February 2015

VM Balasubramaniam Sergio I. Martinez-Monteagudo

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

High Pressure Homogenization View project

Sanitation of food processing plant surfaces View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Review in Advance first posted online

still occur before final publication

Principles and Application

V.M. (Bala) Balasubramaniam,1,2,∗

Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2015. 6:19.1–19.28 Keywords

19.2 Balasubramaniam · Martı́nez-Monteagudo · Gupta

Table 1 Unique advantages and limitations of high pressure food processing

protein denaturation, carbohydrate gelatinization,

and fat crystallization

www.annualreviews.org • Principles and Application of High Pressure 19.3

1923 Experiments on thermal conductivity Bridgman 1923

1943 Mutarotation of glucose Sander 1943

HIGH PRESSURE PROCESSING: BASIC PRINCIPLES, PROCESS

19.4 Balasubramaniam · Martı́nez-Monteagudo · Gupta

Basic Governing Principles

where H and S are the enthalpy and entropy, respectively. Further,

where U = internal energy and V = volume.

d (G) = V d p − Sd T . (3)

www.annualreviews.org • Principles and Application of High Pressure 19.5

Therefore, reactions such as phase transitions or molecular reorientation depend on both

Le Chatelier’s principle. This principle addresses changes to equilibrium as a result of pressure

Principle of microscopic ordering. At constant temperature, an increase in pressure increases

19.6 Balasubramaniam · Martı́nez-Monteagudo · Gupta

et al. 1994) enzymes together disulﬁde

Abbreviations: DSC, differential scanning calorimetry; HPP, high pressure processing.

www.annualreviews.org • Principles and Application of High Pressure 19.7

High Pressure Processing Equipment

6. a handling system for loading and removing the product.

19.8 Balasubramaniam · Martı́nez-Monteagudo · Gupta

Typical Processing Steps and Pressure-Temperature Response

www.annualreviews.org • Principles and Application of High Pressure 19.9

19.10 Balasubramaniam · Martı́nez-Monteagudo · Gupta

Thermophysical Properties of Foods Under Pressure

Table 4 Heat of compression values of selected food and packaging materials

www.annualreviews.org • Principles and Application of High Pressure 19.11

MICROBIOLOGICAL SAFETY OF HIGH

19.12 Balasubramaniam · Martı́nez-Monteagudo · Gupta

APPLICATION OF PRESSURE-BASED TECHNOLOGIES

Application of Pressure in Conventional Food Processing Operations

www.annualreviews.org • Principles and Application of High Pressure 19.13

Log pressure (MPa)

pressures (up to 50 –20 0 20 40 60 80 100

MPa). Temperature (°C)

–30 –20 –10 0 30 40 60 80 100 120

19.14 Balasubramaniam · Martı́nez-Monteagudo · Gupta

Novel Application of High Pressure Processing in the Food Industry

Pressure-assisted thermal processing. PATP is an emerging sterilization technology that in-

www.annualreviews.org • Principles and Application of High Pressure 19.15

Table 5 Examples of the impact of PATP on quality attributes

t = 0–100 stimulated by pressure.

19.16 Balasubramaniam · Martı́nez-Monteagudo · Gupta

formation of P = 700 temperature enhanced the overall 2012

www.annualreviews.org • Principles and Application of High Pressure 19.17

Pressure-ohmic-thermal sterilization. POTS is a novel sterilization technology that involves

19.18 Balasubramaniam · Martı́nez-Monteagudo · Gupta