Innovative Food Processing Technologies 3 Volumes 2021 Elsevier Kasiviswanathan Muthukumarappan Full Chapter PDF

Innovative Food Processing
Technologies 3 Volumes (2021,

Elsevier) Kasiviswanathan
Muthukumarappan
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/innovative-food-processing-technologies-3-volumes-2
021-elsevier-kasiviswanathan-muthukumarappan/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Food Waste Recovery: Processing Technologies,

Industrial Techniques, and Applications 2nd Edition
Charis M. Galanakis
https://ebookmass.com/product/food-waste-recovery-processing-
technologies-industrial-techniques-and-applications-2nd-edition-
charis-m-galanakis/
Regulation of Innovative Technologies: Blockchain,

Artificial Intelligence and Quantum Computing Rosario
Girasa
https://ebookmass.com/product/regulation-of-innovative-
technologies-blockchain-artificial-intelligence-and-quantum-
computing-rosario-girasa/
Food Processing Technology: Principles and Practice 5th

Edition P.J. Fellows
https://ebookmass.com/product/food-processing-technology-
principles-and-practice-5th-edition-p-j-fellows/
Microbiological Analysis of Foods and Food Processing

Environments Osman Erkmen
https://ebookmass.com/product/microbiological-analysis-of-foods-
and-food-processing-environments-osman-erkmen/
Electromagnetic Technologies in Food Science Vicente M.
Gómez-López
https://ebookmass.com/product/electromagnetic-technologies-in-
food-science-vicente-m-gomez-lopez/
Food processing technology: principles and practice 4th

ed Edition Peter Fellows
https://ebookmass.com/product/food-processing-technology-
principles-and-practice-4th-ed-edition-peter-fellows/
Starch-based materials in food packaging processing,

characterization and applications Barbosa
https://ebookmass.com/product/starch-based-materials-in-food-
packaging-processing-characterization-and-applications-barbosa/
Innovations in Thermochemical Technologies for Biofuel

Processing 1st Edition Sonil Nanda
https://ebookmass.com/product/innovations-in-thermochemical-
technologies-for-biofuel-processing-1st-edition-sonil-nanda/
Netter Atlas of Human Anatomy-Classic Regional

Approach, 8e (Mar 29, 2022)_(0323793738)_(Elsevier) NOT
TRUE PDF Frank H. Netter
https://ebookmass.com/product/netter-atlas-of-human-anatomy-
classic-regional-approach-8e-mar-29-2022_0323793738_elsevier-not-
true-pdf-frank-h-netter/
1.01 Overview of Research Needs, Future and Potential Applications of High-
Pressure Processing
Robert Sevenich, Cornelia Rauh, and Dietrich Knorr, Department of Food Biotechnology and Food Process Engineering,
Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany
© 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1.01.1 Introduction 1
1.01.2 Vegetative Microorganisms, Spores, Viruses, Parasites, Bacteriophages and Nematodes 2
1.01.2.1 Vegetative Microorganisms 2
1.01.2.2 Spores 3
1.01.2.3 Viruses, Bacteriophages, Parasites and Nematodes 4
1.01.3 Chemical Reactions: Influence on Allergens, Toxins (Food Borne and Agriculturally Based) 5
1.01.3.1 Allergens 5
1.01.3.2 Toxins 6
1.01.3.2.1 Food Processing Contaminants 6
1.01.3.2.2 Aflatoxins, Pesticides and Herbicides 7
1.01.4 Process-Structure-Relationship 7
1.01.4.1 Starch 8
1.01.4.2 Pectin 8
1.01.4.3 Proteins 9
1.01.5 Packaging Material 10
1.01.5.1 Polylactides (PLA) 11
1.01.6 Data Reporting and Experimental Design 11
1.01.7 Conclusion 11
References 14
1.01.1 Introduction
Today, the consumers’ demand for high quality safe foods requires the development and application of emerging processing tech-
nologies for the gentle pasteurization and sterilization of foods. Therefore, the food industry is looking for new ways to produce
safe, healthy and stable foods. One way to meet this aim is applying high pressure, in the order of 600 MPa, to foods, which is
referred to in the literature as cold pasteurization (Matser et al., 2004; Knoerzer et al., 2010; Mújica-Paz et al., 2011). Currently,
high-pressure processing (HPP) in the food industry is solely used for pasteurization purposes. The trend of using high pressure
as a technology for pasteurization of different kinds of foods, e.g., juices, ham, sauces and seafood is a growing sector in the
food industry since the 1990’s (Hogan and Kelly, 2005). Pasteurization of foods with high pressure (HP) is well established in
the food industry. In 2018, 500 industrial-scale high pressure systems were in use worldwide, producing approx. Four million
metric tons annually of pressurized foods. There is still a need for research in this field, e.g., considering the impact on food struc-
ture, food quality, microorganisms, enzyme activity, and nutrients. Furthermore, there is a high acceptance of pressurized foods on
the consumer side due to the clean label and health promoting attributes the technology offers (Olsen et al., 2010), without which
industrial application would be less attractive. Despite the steadily increasing commercial production of high pressure treated food,
some important scientific and technological questions, as well as some potential other applications of HPP are still unresolved. One
of these issues is the impact of different intrinsic and extrinsic factors on the inactivation mechanisms of vegetative bacteria and
bacterial spores under pressure. To unravel the impact of the different pressure and temperature combinations on a possible cell
death or recovery, detailed analyses about the physiological state of the cells and how they are influenced by different food compo-
nents are needed. According to Le Chatelier’s principle, in a system facing a shift of equilibrium, all cellular components are affected
by high pressure, including the cell membrane and its membrane proteins, enzymes and ribosomes as well as the entire cell metab-
olism (Winter and Jeworrek, 2009; Georget et al., 2015). In general, prokaryotic cells show a higher resistance toward pressure than
eukaryotic cells. Yeasts and molds are in general more pressure sensitive, although ascospores of some molds such as Byssochlamys
and Talaromyces can be very pressure resistant (Smelt, 1998; Considine et al., 2008; Georget et al., 2015). Within prokaryotes, gram
positive microorganisms such as Bacillus, Listeria, Staphylococcus and Clostridium have a thicker peptidoglycan layer and are therefore
more pressure resistant than gram-negative microorganisms (Smelt, 1998; Considine et al., 2008; Dumay et al., 2010). The mech-
anisms leading to cell death have been investigated in several bacterial species (Huang et al., 2014). However, the particular events
leading to inactivation are not well understood (Cheftel, 1995; Buckow and Heinz, 2008; Klotz et al., 2010). High pressure between
300 and 800 MPa at ambient temperatures can lead to the unfolding and denaturation of important cell enzymes and proteins in
vegetative microorganisms (Rastogi et al., 2007; Knorr et al., 2011a,b), but the specific pressure effects on microorganisms are more
Innovative Food Processing Technologies, Volume 1 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100596-5.22991-0 1

2 Overview of Research Needs, Future and Potential Applications of High-Pressure Processing
complex and several different mechanisms leading to cell death can interact when high pressures are applied. Primarily, pressure at
a sufficiently high level, can induce enzyme inactivation, membrane proteins denaturation and cell membrane rupture caused by
a phase transition of the membrane and change in its fluidity (Ananta et al., 2005; Georget et al., 2015). The pressure level needed to
achieve a 5 log10 reduction of pathogenic microorganism in different food-products ranges from 300 to 800 MPa(Hendrickx et al.,
2001) and often synergy between pressure and temperature is observed (Buckow and Heinz, 2008). By increasing the process pres-
sure, it is possible to decrease the temperature needed to achieve the same inactivation. According to the literature, the pressure
induced effects leading to cell death of vegetative microorganisms can be attributed to four factors:
(i) Protein and enzyme unfolding, including partial or complete denaturation
(ii) Cell membranes undergoing a phase transition and change of fluidity
(iii) Disintegration of ribosomes in their subunits
(iv) Intracellular pH changes related to the inactivation of enzymes and membrane damage (Knorr et al., 2011a,b; Molina-
Höppner et al., 2013; Georget et al., 2015)
Further, the influence on the food matrix still needs clarification in terms of what compounds are formed or destroyed in compar-
ison to the conventional process. Also, a clear assessment of what the potential and limits of HPP are, is still missing to this point.
Some well-known potential and limits are:
(i) Advantages and Potentials
Rapid, quasi-instantaneous uniform distribution throughout the sample; Minimal or reduced thermal exposure; Instant
temperature increase and subsequent cooling upon depressurization; Suitable for high moisture–content foods; in package
processing; Suitable for both liquid and pumpable foods; Independent of product shape and size; Opportunity for novel
product formulation; Distinct products through pressure effects such as protein denaturation, carbohydrate gelatinization, and
fat crystallization; Within some pressure-thermal boundary conditions, pressure accelerates microbial inactivation; Consumer
acceptance as a physical process.
(ii) Limits
Batch or semi-continuous operation; Preheating step for pressure-assisted thermal processing (PATP) required; Thermal
nonuniformity during PATP; Not suitable for products containing dissimilar compressibility materials such as foams;
Throughput limited due to batch operation; Variable efficacy in enzyme inactivation; pressure alone cannot inactivate bacterial
spores; Higher processing costs.
Some authors have looked beyond the obvious application of HPP, other than just mimicking of thermal processing. An overview
of some of the applications can be found in the literature (Smelt, 1998; Oey et al., 2008; Verbeyst et al., 2010; Van Der Plancken
et al., 2012). Most of these authors are referring to the promising use of high-pressure processing as a gentle preservation technique
but are also mentioning the possible applications, if the food safety is given, to alter texture, increase the bioavailability of certain
health promoting compounds, allergenicity reduction as well as vitamin retention.
Initially, the empiric approach of trial an error was used, which drove the evolution of high pressure processing from inactivation
studies of vegetative microorganism (Hite, 1899; Timson and Short, 1965; Sale et al., 1970; Metrick et al., 1989; Cheftel, 1995; Fior-
etto et al., 2005; Georget et al., 2015) to inactivation of enzymes (Sila et al., 2008; Rauh et al., 2009; Knorr et al., 2011b; Grauwet
et al., 2012) to shucking of crustaceans (Kingsley 2014) to spore inactivation (Sale et al., 1970; Reddy et al., 2003; Black et al., 2007;
Olivier et al., 2012; Setlow and Markland, 2012; Reineke et al., 2013a,b; Olivier et al., 2015; Sevenich and Mathys, 2018) to struc-
ture/texture induced by high pressure (Oey et al., 2008; Sila et al., 2008; Sikes and Warner, 2016; Balasubramaniam et al., 2016; Thai
Union Group, 2017; Sim et al., 2019) to currently the latest frontier of the influence on chemical reactions pathways (e.g., degra-
dation of vitamins, oxidation of poly unsaturated fatty acids and mitigation of food process contaminants) (Oey et al., 2008; Ver-
beyst et al., 2010; Van Der Plancken et al., 2012; Sevenich et al., 2013). To see beyond the obvious, one must ask what is different
compared to the thermal processes and why. How can this difference be used as a potential and advantage to create for example new
functional food ingredients, food properties and health foods? Some of these aspects are tackled and covered by some recent reviews
(Balasubramaniam et al., 2016; Huang et al., 2017).
Another issue that needs further research focus could be to think of novel combination processes as for example done in the past
with HPP/PEF, high pressure thermal sterilization, pressure assisted thermal sterilization (PATS), pressure induced freezing (PIF),
pressure assisted freezing (PAF), high pressure homogenization (HPH) and high pressure extraction (Volkert et al., 2008; Park et al.,
2013; Huang et al., 2013; Sevenich et al., 2015a,b; Sevenich and Mathys, 2018).
This article will review the recent literature and will dive into different areas where the authors consider high pressure processing
to have a significant impact in the coming years.
1.01.2 Vegetative Microorganisms, Spores, Viruses, Parasites, Bacteriophages and Nematodes

1.01.2.1 Vegetative Microorganisms
The use of HPP to inactivate pathogenic vegetative microorganisms has been largely investigated for the pasteurization of commer-
cial products for decades (Buckow and Heinz, 2008). In 1899, Hite (1899) was first to conduct experiments using high pressure in
combinations with foods to extend shelf life, and reported that milk stayed sweet longer after the treatment with high pressure. Since
Overview of Research Needs, Future and Potential Applications of High-Pressure Processing 3
then, significant research efforts have focused on understanding the underlying mechanisms of the inactivation of microorganisms
under high pressure conditions. HPP offers a lower thermal input into the product by comparison with conventional thermal treat-
ment and therefore increases the quality of the food while maintaining food safety (Smelt, 1998; Hogan and Kelly, 2005; Balasu-
bramaniam et al., 2008; Bermudez-Aguirre and Barbosa-Canovas, 2011; Barba et al., 2012). Despite the steadily increasing
commercial production of high pressure pasteurized food with several millions of tons per year (Aganovic et al., 2017), some
important scientific and technological questions are still unsolved.
One of these issues is the impact of different intrinsic and extrinsic factors on the inactivation mechanisms of vegetative bacteria
and bacterial spores under pressure. To unravel the impact of the different pressure and temperature combinations on a possible cell
death or recovery, detailed analyses about the physiological state of the cells and how they are influenced by different food compo-
nents are needed, In recent years, a common world-wide concern has been foodborne outbreaks with pathogens like EHEC
(O157:H5; O104:H4) and others (Adley and Ryan, 2016). The contamination of the food supply with spoilage and pathogenic
microorganisms continues to be a global problem, despite the wide range of preservation methods employed (Kaczmarek et al.,
2019). Despite significant advances in food processing technologies (hurdle concept, new innovative non-thermal technologies),
an annual estimated 76 million cases of foodborne illnesses occur in the US alone, resulting in approximately 5000 deaths (Scallan
et al., 2011). The report by the US Center for disease control and prevention center states that most (58%) illnesses were caused by
norovirus, followed by nontyphoidal Salmonella spp. (11%), Clostridium perfringens (10%), and Campylobacter spp. (9%). Leading
causes of hospitalization were nontyphoidal S. spp. (35%), norovirus (26%), C. spp. (15%), and Toxoplasma gondii (8%). Leading
causes of death were nontyphoidal S. spp. (28%), T. gondii (24%), Listeria monocytogenes (19%), and norovirus (11%). In the year
2000, e.g., approximately 2.4 million pounds of beef were recalled due to possible contamination with Escherichia coli O157:H7
(Kaczmarek et al., 2019). Newest studies from the WHO (2015) on foodborne diseases caused by pathogenic microorganisms,
such as Salmonella, Campylobacter, EHEC and Norovirus, show that worldwide 1 in 10 people fall ill every year from eating contam-
inated food and 420,000 die as a result. Here, the application of high pressure in combination with mild temperatures at pressures
between 300 and 700 MPa could possibly be used to inactivate vegetative pathogenic microorganisms as well as several enzymes,
which cause food deterioration. The resistance toward temperature of the pathogenic Escherichia coli strains is usually higher than
its non-pathogenic counterpart (Garcia-Graells et al., 1998). Hence, a more intense heat treatment needs to be applied. The more
complex and resistant the microorganism the more intense must be the treatment. In comparison to the pathogenic E. coli, higher
temperatures and higher pressures must be applied to inactivate spores (Reineke et al., 2013a,b). This becomes even more complex
if this is conducted in a real food system since here baro-protective effects can occur and the severe heat treatment can lead to
unwanted changes in the food matrix, leading to the formation of unwanted and possibly unhealthy compounds in the foodstuff.
The comparison of pressure resistance among vegetative food-borne pathogens revealed that strains of Escherichia coli O157:H7 were
the most resistant so far encountered. The USDA (2012) has requirements of E. coli O157:H7 as the indicator strain for reprocessing,
an HPP process that achieves a 5-log10 E. coli O157:H7 reduction should be sufficient enough to produce microbially safe products.
Other possible indicators to monitor if HPP is sufficiently applied during processing is by copper tablets in combination with
Heckel value (rate of density change of e.g., chopper under pressure). The increase in density over the entire pressure range is linear.
The tablets can be placed inside the vessel as well as directly into the food. Measurements at 400 MPa revealed that for trials with
ham the product experienced 9 MPa less than the surrounding water. This could lead to short comings in terms of sufficient inac-
tivation. The trial was not repeated at 600 MPa (Minerich and Labuza, 2003).
Another phenomenon that could lead to false results in terms of inactivation kinetic is agglomeration, which is very common for
vegetative microorganisms as well as spores. The effectiveness of inactivation processes is often verified by challenge tests using
foods that have been spiked with highly concentrated microbe suspensions. Due to preparation, storage and handling of those
suspensions, the clumping and the formation of aggregates can hardly be avoided. This phenomenon is well known, first reported
on the effect of spore agglomerations on inactivation. However, the importance for the quantitative assessment of survivors in inac-
tivation experiments has rarely been addressed. Its importance becomes evident by the following: Agglomerates produce one colony
for a high number of cells up to 103 CFU’s. Consequently, agglomerates of unknown cell numbers are always counted as one spore
until all spores in the agglomerate are inactivated. Beyond this, agglomeration and disintegration can change the colony forming
units per milliliter. In this context a model for the discussed phenomenon was developed (Mathys and Heinz, 2006).
1.01.2.2 Spores
The inactivation of bacterial endospores by pressure is generally considered to rely on pressure-induced spore germination, followed
by inactivation of germinated spores (Setlow, 2003; Margosch et al., 2004; Margosch et al., 2004). In the past decades, other
possible non-physiological pathways of spore germination have been detected. Non-nutrient germination can be further catego-
rized into a (recently discovered) second physiological and several non-physiological routes. The physiological routes include
germination initiated by eukaryotic-like serine/threonine kinase, which is located in the inner spore membrane like nutrient recep-
tors. This kinase, which is present in Bacillus and Clostridium species, recognizes peptidoglycan fragments. Non-physiological germi-
nation pathways initiate spore germination by bypassing individual germination steps. This could be stimulated by physiochemical
agents, such as exogenous Ca-DPA (Paidhungat et al., 2002; Moir, 2006), which directly activates the CLE CwlJ, or cationic surfac-
tants such as dodecylamine (Setlow, 2003), which interferes with the inner spore membrane and causes a direct release of Ca-DPA.
At pressures between 100 and 400 MPa it has been shown that the nGeR of Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus cereus are triggered. The spores
germinated quite well between pressures of 100–200 MPa and led to a maximum 4 log10 inactivation but the pressure induced
physiological germination decreased for higher pressures, indicating that other pathways must be active (Wuytack et al., 1998; Paid-
hungat et al., 2002; Reineke et al., 2013a,b). A treatment of 200–400 MPa at 40 C for 30 min showed germination of the spores but
negligible inactivation (Wuytack et al., 1998).
To achieve a quick and sudden inactivation of spores, which is relevant for food processing, pressures above 500 MPa must be
applied in combination with temperatures above 60 C. Under these conditions, Paidhungat et al. (2002) were able to germinate
B. subtilis spores that lack all major nutrient receptors. This suggests a direct opening of the spores’ Ca–DPA channels, a germination
mechanism identified as active at 200 MPa and moderate temperatures (<50 C) using B. subtilis mutant strains that lack the nGeR.
These findings were also verified by Reineke et al. (2012) for pressures 600 MPa and temperatures 60 C. The following step,
which is rapid release of Ca–DPA under pressure, is accompanied by core hydration. This step of germination is the crucial step with
regard to loss of resistance, and it is therefore of great interest for a variety of sterilization techniques and research (Reineke et al.,
2013a,b). Therefore, the ability of the spore to retain the DPA as long as possible under these conditions becomes the rate limiting
step of the spore inactivation (Margosch et al., 2006; Reineke et al., 2013a,b). This suggests that the structure most susceptible to HP
(600 MPa) and high temperatures (60 C) is the inner spore membrane or its associated membrane proteins (Reineke et al.,
2013a,b). At pressures above or equal to 400 MPa, when an opening of the Ca - Dipicolinic acid (DPA) - channels occur, the
following happens: (i) DPA is released from the spore core; (ii) the spore core gets hydrated; and (iii) the spore becomes thermo-
and pressure sensitive and can be inactivated (Reineke et al., 2012). Further, a threshold pressure of 600 MPa was established; at and
above this pressure level the DPA-release is dominated by temperature. To guarantee a successful inactivation of spores by pressures
of 600 MPa, many researchers recommend a treatment at 90–121 C (Margosch et al., 2004; Juliano and Barbosa-Canovas, 2005;
Margosch et al., 2006; Mathys et al., 2007; Knorr et al., 2011b; Georget et al., 2015; Sevenich et al., 2016) due to the synergistic effect
pressure and temperature have on the spore inactivation (Olivier et al., 2015). In comparison to conventional retorting, this could
reduce the thermal load applied to the product without affecting the safety or the quality of the food. Two sterilization approaches
can be derived from this, both of which need the adiabatic heat of compression to reach the target temperature:
• Pressure assisted thermal sterilization (PATS): pressure is neglected and only seen as the method to reach the end temperature
faster (Dunne et al., 2010)
• High Pressure Thermal Sterilization (HPTS) which takes into account the impact of pressure on the spore inactivation (Mathys,
2008; Knorr et al., 2011)
Recently, the differences in germination under pressure between Clostridium spores and Bacillus were revealed, showing interesting
insights (Paredes-Sabja et al., 2011; Lenz and Vogel, 2015; Doona et al., 2016). In Bacillus spp., DPA release triggers cortex lytic
enzyme (CLE) activation; CLE action is not essential for DPA release, but it can accelerate it. In Clostridium difficile or
C. perfringens, the initiation of cortex hydrolysis by SleC precedes and triggers DPA release. Using C. difficile spores, which lack inner
spore germinant receptors, 550 MPa treatment triggered DPA release. However, spore germination was not completed because cortex
hydrolysis is not activated by DPA release. C. perfringens spores became activated by high pressures during the come-up time to
550 MPa. It could be shown that (i) the action of 550 MPa directly stimulated DPA release and (ii) activation of inner membrane
germinant receptors during the come-up time to 550 MPa and that this activated state of germinant receptors is maintained for a while
and activates cortex lytic enzymes (Doona et al., 2016). This is only valid if temperatures below 80 C are used; if a heat shock T
>80 C is applied, spore germination can be completed. These findings were very interesting since they showed how different spores
are and how important process knowledge and microbiological knowledge are to create safe processes, such as the HPTS.
The question of what kind of indicator strain should be used is to this point still not settled. Some researchers use the non-
pathogenic Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, instead of Clostridium botulinum, as a surrogate to check for sufficient inactivation respectively
sterilization success (Olivier et al., 2015; Margosch et al., 2006; Sevenich et al., 2016). Since other strains usually used to test for
sterilization like Geobacillus stearothermophilus and Clostridium sporogenes are very high pressure high temperature sensitive (Sevenich
et al., 2016). It is also important to note that one cannot conclude based on inactivation kinetics obtained in buffer or model food
systems how the inactivation of spores will be in real food systems (Georget et al., 2015; Sevenich et al., 2015a,b; Sevenich and
Mathys, 2018). The US FDA recommends testing for a 4 log10 inactivation of Clostridium botulinum (Dunne, 2009; Balasubrama-
niam and Lelieveld, 2016).
1.01.2.3 Viruses, Bacteriophages, Parasites and Nematodes

In total, there are 31 known pathogens that cause food borne diseases, 21 are bacteria related (E. coli, Salmonella, Listeria etc.), five
viruses and five parasites (Adley and Ryan, 2016). Especially viruses and parasites are generally underrecognized if it comes to food
borne diseases. The growing global interconnection of the food supply chain and more sophisticated analytical tools are reasons for
the increased diagnosis of food borne diseases (Dorny et al., 2009). Food borne diseases also have an impact on the economy, each
incident was calculated with 1500 $/person and a total annually estimated cost of $75 billion, in the United States in 2015 alone
(Moye et al., 2018). Before going into further detail on how high-pressure processing might have an impact on the inactivation of
these organisms, a short introduction on what defines these groups, where they can come in contact with foods and what disease
they can cause, is given.
(i) Viruses/Bacteriophages: A virus is a small infectious vehicle that cannot grow or reproduce without a living cell. A virus invades
living cells and uses their chemical machinery to keep itself alive and to replicate itself. It may reproduce with fidelity or with
errors (mutations); this ability to mutate is responsible for the ability of some viruses to change slightly in each infected person,
making treatment difficult. In common usage, the term virus is used to describe viruses that can only affect humans. Viruses
cause many common human infections and are also responsible for several rare diseases. The two main food borne viruses of
concern in the food industry are the Norovirus and Hepatitis A virus. In 2011, the Norovirus was the main cause of food borne
illnesses in the United States (Adley and Ryan, 2016; Pan et al., 2016).
There are mainly two food types that have a high risk for contamination during production or harvest. One would be fruits and
vegetables, where the contamination can be due to the use of non-potable water for cleaning or fecally contaminated fingers
(Kingsley, 2013). The second food type having elevated risk of containing high amounts of viruses are shellfish (oysters, clams,
cockles etc.). Due to their nature as filter feeders and the high amounts of viruses found in seawater (9 108 virons/mL), they
can accumulate viruses as much as 1000-fold (Kingsley 2013, 2014). Bacteriophages are viruses that can only attack and
replicate in bacteria and archaea. Phages have been used since the late 19th century as an alternative to antibiotics in the former
Soviet Union and Central Europe, as well as in France. They are seen as a possible therapy against multi-drug-resistant strains of
many bacteria (phage therapy). Since 2006, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) have approved several bacteriophage products. LMP-102 (Intralytix) was approved for
treating ready-to-eat (RTE) poultry and meat products. In that same year, the FDA approved LISTEX (developed and produced
by Micreos) using bacteriophages on cheese to kill Listeria monocytogenes bacteria, in order to give them generally recognized as
safe (GRAS) status. In July 2007, the same bacteriophage was approved for use on all food products. In 2011, USDA confirmed
that LISTEX is a clean label processing aid. Research in the field of food safety is continuing to see if lytic phages are a viable
option to control other food-borne pathogens in various food products (Moye et al., 2018).
(ii) Parasites including nematodes: Parasitism is a relationship (consumer-resource interaction) between species, where one
organism lives on or in another organism on the expense of the host. Parasites include protozoans, tapeworms, nematodes etc.
Some of the major parasites that are of concern for the food industry are e.g., Echinococcus multilocularis associated with berries
and water; Cryptosporidium spp. are beginning to be associated not only with water, but also with salads; Trypanosoma cruzi is
found in juices; Trichinella spp. are nowadays found in game animals; Anisakiasis is becoming a global problem as the world
develops a taste for sushi (Robertson, 2018).
Literature on the pressure inactivation of viruses is scarce and there are only a handful of papers that are dealing with inactivation
studies of viruses in foods (Kova et al., 2010; Kingsley 2013, 2014; Balasubramaniam et al., 2015). Especially research dealing with
the inactivation mechanism are limited (Pan et al., 2016). Research with human norovirus strains and viruses in generalis difficult
due to the lack of suitable laboratory animals and the inability to propagate the virus in vitro. A study conducted by Wiezorek
(2012)with Pixuna virus, which is a surrogate for many human parthenogenic alphavirus, showed that Pixuna could be inactivated
by 109 with a treatment at 150 MPa/37 C.
The inactivation of viruses via high pressure processing is associated with altering the proteins located at the capsid of the virus.
Due to conformation change of these proteins the virus is not able to dock onto the host cell and release the RNA into the cell
(Moroni et al., 2002; Kova et al., 2010; Kingsley, 2013; Lou et al., 2015). Non-enveloped viruses are generally more sensitive toward
high pressure processing in comparison to enveloped viruses, which have a lipid envelope. The inactivation of viruses is depending,
as valid for spores and bacteria, on the temperature, pressure and time applied (Pan et al., 2016). Pressures above 400 MPa are effi-
cient enough to inactivate most viruses (Kova et al., 2010). Although, higher pressures do not necessarily need to lead to a more
efficient inactivation of a more resistant virus.
The studies found in the literature suggest that viruses like human norovirus (Norwalk 8fIIb) inoculated in oysters (104) can be
completely inactivated by 600 MPa and 5 min (Leon et al., 2011). Studies with Hepatitis A virus also inoculated in oysters with 106
showed an inactivation of more than 3 log10 after 400 MPa and 1 min (Kingsley, 2013). Rotavirus in buffer solution was inactivated
by 8 log10 at 300 MPa and 2 min (Khadre and Yousef, 2002). Very pressure resistant are the viruses Aichivirus and Poliovirus, which
were completely resistant at 600 MPa and 5 min (Kingsley et al., 2002).
For viruses, the USFDA is proposing a maximum desired reduction in virus level of 5 log10 (Pan et al., 2016).
The literature on nematodes and other parasites is very scarce and virtually non-existing. There is one publication on the inac-
tivation of a pinewood nematode in wood chips, inoculated with 1.2 105 by high pressure processing. Here it was shown that the
nematodes were completely inactivated by 30 MPa at a holding time of 5 min (Fonseca et al., 2014). This suggests that the bigger the
organism the easier it can be inactivated by high pressure processing. The question that still needs to be answered is if that is also
valid for other parasites like Cryptosporidium, Trypanosoma etc.
The research on the influence of high pressure processing on viruses and parasites needs to be driven forward since it is a prom-
ising alternative to guarantee the safety of usually non-processed or gentle processed fresh products.
1.01.3 Chemical Reactions: Influence on Allergens, Toxins (Food Borne and Agriculturally Based)
1.01.3.1 Allergens
Allergy is a false, hypersensitive and intense immune response toward typically harmless substances in the environment. Food can
be a trigger for the immune system to overreact, especially dairy, egg, soy, peach, cherry, selfish, wheat, nuts and apple can cause an
allergic reaction (Somkuti and Smeller, 2013). Food allergy is more prevalent in young children (5%) but 3%–4% of adults also
exhibit a form of food allergy.
The beginning of a type I allergic reaction is the sensitization to an allergen. The initial contact of an allergen with the mucosa of
a susceptive organism is followed by a complex series of events, leading to the production of allergen specific immunoglobulin E
(IgE). The effector phase of an allergic reaction is initiated upon second exposure to the allergen. Allergen binding to the specific IgE
antibody on the mast cells will cause an inflammatory response due to the release of histamine and other mediators. Not all aller-
gens are able to sensitize, i.e., induce the production of specific IgE-type antibodies (Somkuti and Smeller, 2013; Ontiveros et al.,
2015; Ekezie et al., 2018). Allergens which are capable to both sensitize and trigger allergic reactions are called complete allergens.
Cross reactive allergens bind to IgE antibodies that are present in the body due to an earlier sensitization by another allergen. There
are more than 6000 allergens which can have a negative impact and there are currently no accepted therapeutic approaches other
than avoiding the foods that contain the possible allergen (Ontiveros et al., 2015; Meinlschmidt et al., 2016). Here, the targeted
treatment by food processing technologies, such as high pressure, enzymatic hydrolyzes, heat treatment or combined processes,
could be a promising strategy to create hypoallergenic foods. To gain knowledge if a food protein is allergenic or not it needs to
be characterized by the allergic (epitopes) and non-allergic components; this can be done with the help of immune-informatics
(Ontiveros et al., 2015). The main sequence/pattern in allergenic proteins’ secondary structure are (1) antiparallel b-strands; (2)
antiparallel b-sheets; (3) aþb structures and (4) a-helical proteins (Somkuti and Smeller, 2013). Since high pressure processing
can have an impact on the functionality of proteins by altering the secondary, tertiary and quaternary structure of the protein
due to changes in electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions it surely influences the reactive properties of allergenic proteins (Jimé-
nez-Saiz et al., 2015). The application, also in combination with other processes, is an interesting tool to create foods with reduced
food allergenicity. Somkutti and Smeller (2013) mentioned in their review that three questions need to be discussed to find out if
high pressure is suitable: (1) How high is the pressure needed to unfold the protein? (2) Is the unfolding reversible? and (3) How is
the binding of IgE to the allergen?
In general, it can be said that for some of the major food allergens like Mal D1 (apple), Bos d 5 (Milk), Gal d 2 (Egg), Ara h 2
(Peanut), Gad m 1 (fish), pressures and temperatures of 150–600 MPa and 30–80 C are needed (Somkuti and Smeller, 2013). The
mechanism of a potential allergenic reduction while applying high pressure processing is either the masking of epitopes due to
conformational changes induced by high pressure, or the higher exposure of epitopes but therefore leading to higher enzymatic
hydrolyzes (Peñas et al., 2008; Meinlschmidt et al., 2016). The second mechanism will only work if the food/allergens are treated
with enzymes like pepsin, chymotrypsin or papain after the treatment, otherwise it would make the food even more allergenic. It
could be shown that the allergenic potential of the walnut allergens Jug r 1–5 can be reduced by pressures ranging from 550–
650 MPa(Ekezie et al., 2018). Further a decrease of 40%–60% of alpha-casein in milk and Pru p 3 in peach could be shown in a pres-
sure range of 200–600 MPa (Lavilla et al., 2016; Ekezie et al., 2018).
High pressure alone could not modify the allergenic properties of carrots, peanut, milk, celery, apple (Jiménez-Saiz et al., 2015).
As it is suitable for other technologies, the most effective way to reduce the allergenicity by high pressure processing is the combi-
nation with other processes that act synergistically. One possibility is to combine pressure and heat, which works well, but more
effective seems to be the combined treatment of high pressure and enzymic hydrolyzes during or after the treatment (Somkuti
and Smeller, 2013; Jiménez-Saiz et al., 2015; Meinlschmidt et al., 2016). Meinlschmidt (2016) studied the effect on soy protein
isolate with an enzymatic hydrolysis during and after high pressure processing at pressures ranging from 100 to 600 MPa at
50 C and a dwell time of 15 min. It was shown here that a combined process at pressures from 300 to 600 MPa could lead to
a nearly complete loss of immunoreactivity of the mentioned allergen. Further, the oil binding and foaming activity were enhanced.
Similar results and studies are summarized by Somkutti and Smeller (2013), e.g., beta-lactoglobulin and ovalbumin in combina-
tion with pepsin led to an increased hydrolysis at 600 MPa and a few minutes of treatment time. For peanut allergen Ara h 6 no
changes could be shown at 700 MPa at 20 or 80 C.
The pressure stability of allergen proteins varies greatly, dependent on their secondary structure, the surroundings and treatment
conditions applied. Further, combined studies are needed to assess the influence and the effectiveness of pressure-enzymatic hydro-
lyzes processes. Eventually, only prick test studies in combination with structural analysis of the allergen will validate the effective-
ness of the reduction.
1.01.3.2 Toxins
There are two types of toxins that are of interest in food. One being those incorporated due to the use of chemicals during growth of
crops (pesticides and herbicides) as well as the generation of microbiological toxins, such as aflatoxins, C. botulinum toxin, etc. The
second one being toxins that arise during the processing of the foods due to heat treatment, the so-called food processing contam-
inants (furan, acrylamide, HMF, MCPD-esters etc.)
1.01.3.2.1 Food Processing Contaminants

The occurrence of FPCs in foods is not new, as they have always existed since the first day humans started to prepare and conserve
their foods by fire or heat. Nowadays, the awareness of what these compounds can do within the human body is more advanced and
the analytical tools are available to analyze the amounts of these compounds within foods in the mg kg1 range (Sevenich, 2016;
Sevenich et al., 2016).
The high temperatures at >110 C needed during thermal sterilization for the inactivation of spores lead to the formation of
unhealthy compounds within the food. Since the beginning of the new millennium, more attention has been given to the mech-
anisms and mitigation strategies of these compounds. The way of our foods from farm to fork or from raw material to better
digestible safe foods is made possible by processes such as heat treatment. Those treatments often result in an over-processing and,
due to chemical changes in the product, giving rise to the food processing contaminants (FPCs); synonyms are, process-induced
toxicants and neo-formed contaminants. FPCs only involve those compounds formed during the processing (heating, roasting,
frying, baking, grilling etc.) of the food. FPCs are substances present in food because of food processing/preparation that are consid-
ered to exert adverse physiological (toxicological) effects in humans, i.e., substances which pose a potential or real risk to human
health. Ingredients commonly occurring in food formulations are excellent substrates for chemical reactions occurring under the
conditions encountered in food processing. The reaction products formed depend on the processes and conditions used, such as
fermentation, irradiation, or heat processing (Stadler and Lineback, 2009). The compounds formed play a vital role in food prop-
erties such as flavor, aroma and color. Precursors of FPCs are sugars and amino acids; other reaction pathways can involve poly-
unsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs; linoleic acid), ascorbic acid, sugars (glucose, fructose), glycerol, chloride or carotenoids (Crews
and Castle, 2007; Vranová and Ciesarová, 2009; Lachenmeier and Kuballa, 2010; Bravo et al., 2012; Crews, 2012). Therefore,
changing the recipe of foods is not an option since some of the most potent precursors of FPCs are essential nutrients, like poly-
unsaturated fatty acids, reducing sugars, carotenoids, proteins etc. Compounds formed during the processing of food are, for
example, acrylamide, furan, 3-MCPD esters etc. These show carcinogenic, mutagenic (genotoxic), or neurotoxic properties at
high doses in animal studies (BfR, 2004, 2012; Studer et al., 2004; Märk et al., 2006; Vranová and Ciesarová, 2009; Jestoi et al.,
2009; Larsen, 2009; Stadler and Lineback, 2009; Lachenmeier and Kuballa, 2010; Palmers et al., 2014; Sevenich et al., 2015a,b; Ket-
tlitz et al., 2019). Therefore, a risk for humans, especially for infants, the elderly and immune suppressed person is not neglectable.
The risk of the exposure to FPCs is not a new one, since humans always have been exposed to these kinds of compounds from the
moment “they caught fire”. Nevertheless, there is a public concern and those risks must be minimized (Curtis et al., 2013). For gen-
otoxic and carcinogenic substances, such as furan and acrylamide, the ALARA principle (as low as reasonably achievable) is applied
to foods as a possible risk assessment (Crews and Castle, 2007). Nevertheless, the data shown here clearly indicates that the FPCs of
major concern in foods are acrylamide, furan and 3-MCPD. The European Commission and the European Food Safety Authority
(EFSA) have been monitoring different FPCs, especially acrylamide, furan (and its derivates), 3-MCPD and -esters and glycidyl
esters, in all kinds of foods over the last years and have already issued benchmark levels for acrylamide in 2017 (EU, 2017). The
creation and introduction of new guidelines in the future is likely and will be a difficult task for the food industry (EFSA, 2013;
Kettlitz et al., 2019). Therefore, other technologies and research is needed to find mitigation strategies which lead to the same
quality without affecting the safety of the product. Here the high-pressure thermal sterilization or high-pressure pasteurization
(instead of conventional heat treatment), ohmic heating and vacuum baking, just to name a few innovative technologies, could
be powerful tools to achieve this aim. Research in all these areas is progressing at a rapid pace and these selected examples show
that process toxicants have in the past few years gained significant attention on a global scale in terms of potential human health
risk. In March 2018, EFSA issued a call for the continuous collection of chemical contaminants occurrence data in food and feed
(EFSA, 2018). These data are used in EFSA’s scientific opinions and reports on contaminants in food and feed. This last call shows
how important it is to legislative organizations to be on top of this sensitive matter. There are only a few studies available that show
the mitigating influence of high-pressure thermal sterilization on the reduction in real food systems. Sevenich et al. (2013) and Sev-
enich et al. (2015a,b) showed that a reduction of furan in different food systems (vegetable baby food and sardine in olive oil) is
possible with HPTS (600 MPa, 90–121 C) by up to 95% in comparison to thermal sterilization. Palmers et al. (2014) also showed
a reduction of furan in various vegetable blends under high pressure thermal sterilization conditions (600 MPa, 117 C) in compar-
ison to thermal treatment. To this point, the question if the pressure, following the Le Chatelier principle, has an influence on the
formation pathway of these compounds is still unanswered. In the opinion of the authors the reduction of FPCs can be solely attrib-
uted to the lower thermal load applied to the product. For high pressure pasteurization the formation of food processing is not an
issue since the threshold temperatures of above 110 C or higher are not reached.
1.01.3.2.2 Aflatoxins, Pesticides and Herbicides

To this date there is no literature available how high-pressure processing affects or destroys either aflatoxins or pesticides and herbi-
cides. It will be interesting to investigate these compounds and how they may be altered by high pressure processing. Aflatoxin for
example is very temperature stable and starts decomposing at temperatures between 237 and 306 C (Kumar et al., 2017) but a heat
treatment between 90 and 120 C can already reduce the amount of aflatoxin as much as 25%–65%. There are some studies in the
public domain on processing by extrusion cooking of peanut and rice meal at temperatures of 140–200 C and pressures in the
extruder of 30–60 bar. The highest aflatoxin reduction was found to be 51%–95% with a moisture content of 35% in peanut
meal, and the extrusion variables did not significantly affect its nutritional composition (Castells et al., 2006; Kumar et al.,
2017). It is worthwhile to investigate the effect of HPTS and HPP on aflatoxins. There was no publication found on influence of
high-pressure processing on pesticides or herbicides.
1.01.4 Process-Structure-Relationship
High pressure processing can alter the properties of macromolecules like starch, pectin and proteins and combinations of the afore-
mentioned compounds. Therefore, it can be of great interest to create new textures, which could lead to the development of new and
exciting structures. This is not only to design new foods but also to evaluate how the process influences products in terms of texture
and structure that usually would have been thermally treated. There is significant interest in understanding the effects of high pres-
sure on food and food ingredients, to anticipate further applications of the technology (ETP, 2007; Sun and Holley, 2010). The
following section will summarize ongoing research activities and needs in this field.
1.01.4.1 Starch
Starch is one of the major carbohydrates used in the food industry and in human diet. As a source of energy and a major source of
carbon, starch is an essential part of human nutrition. In the food industry, starch serves as a thickening and gelling agent, e.g., for
sauces and puddings. Starch and its derivatives are also important in the chemical, textile and paper industries. It is obtained from
the reserve organs of plants. Wheat, potatoes, maize and tapioca are the most important raw materials in global starch production.
As already mentioned, ultra-high pressure has a significant impact on the physical and chemical properties of macromolecules. In
terms of carbohydrates, ultra-high pressure leads to gel formation, a lowering of the gelation temperature, a reduced enzymatic
stability of starch and little or no Maillard reaction at room temperature (Hendrickx et al., 2001). Partial swelling and gelatinization
of starch can occur under high pressure conditions even at room temperature (Stute, 1999; Douzals et al., 2001; Katopo et al., 2002).
The required treatment parameters, such as pressure, temperature, holding time and water concentration depend to a large extent on
the type of starch (Autio, 1998; Bauer and Knorr, 2005). The gelatinization under ultra-high pressure at room temperature is accord-
ing to Rubens et al. (1999) described similar to thermal gelatinization by a 2-step mechanism. First, the amorphous areas are
hydrated, which loosens the crystalline structures and swells the grain. In the second step, the crystalline areas are increasingly
broken up and hydrated. Only a small amount of amylose leakage from the grains can be observed. Stolt et al. (1997) also describe
stabilization of the crystalline areas through interactions with the remaining amylose. Hydrogen bonds and van der Waals forces are
likely stabilized by ultra-high pressure, which in turn favors the double helix (Buckow et al., 2007). The granular character of the
grains is largely retained during the ultra-high pressure treatment (Hayashi, 1992) and there is no complete disintegration of the
structure as in the case of thermal gelatinization. Thus, the pressure-induced, pasty to solid starch gels can only be referred to as
particle gels, which do not form a real gel network. In addition, the thermally formed starch gels and paste have a much higher
strength or viscosity (Buckow et al., 2007). Interestingly, the starch grains lose the double refraction despite no degradation of
the crystalline structures. It becomes clear that the process described requires an excess of water molecules and is therefore heavily
dependent on the water content. Additions of water-binding substances such as sugar or salts can therefore have a significant impact
on the high-pressure-induced swelling. Rumpold and Knorr (2005) showed that the previously described influence of the number
of equatorial groups also exists in the case of swelling and gelatinization induced by high pressure. Starches with a high amylose-
amylopectin ratio, such as wheat or potatoes, have very high pressure resistance (Hendrickx et al., 2001). Waxy starches therefore
show little resistance to pressure (Simonin et al., 2009). Stute (1999) used loss of birefringence to show that pressure resistance is
also visible in the X-ray diffraction pattern. Accordingly, mostly B-type starches are more pressure-resistant than those of the A and C
types, but due to overlaps, a clear distinction cannot be made in this regard (Rubens et al., 1999; Katopo et al., 2002). X-ray structure
analyses also showed that an X-ray diffraction pattern change during ultra-high-pressure treatment can occur. For example, native A-
type starches show the X-ray diffraction pattern of B-type starches after treatment, with the latter undergoing no change (Hibi et al.,
1993; Katopo et al., 2002). According to the authors mentioned, this change is due to the structure of the amylopectin. As already
mentioned, B-type starches have channels between the double helices in which a large number of water molecules can be
embedded. Under ultra-high-pressure conditions, these interact with and stabilize the double helices. Due to the molecular flexi-
bility of the A-type double helices, these can form channels under ultra-high-pressure conditions. In combination with the thermal
process, gelatinization under ultra-high pressure can be achieved below the atmospheric gelatinization temperature since ultra-high
pressure lowers it. As the temperature rises, this pressure effect becomes weaker (Buckow et al., 2007).
The features high pressure treated starch of different plant-based origins offer are not fully assessed and used. One possibility
could be to use the texture to design and build low fat foods since the gels have a mouth feel like fat. Further starch in combinations
with e.g. proteins could be used to create a hybrid networks of starch and proteins to develop meat free plant-based protein rich and
fiber rich foods. Due to the nature of the starch after the treatment, the starch would be resistant and therefore the food would have
a low glycemic index. Papathanasiou et al. (2015) showed that 5% starch solutions of wheat, tapioca, potato, corn, waxy corn and
resistant starch (RS3) released less glucose after 120 min of enzymatic digestions if they were pressurized at 600 MPa for 15 min at
room temperature in comparison to heat treated starch solutions.
1.01.4.2 Pectin
Pectin is mainly found in plant-based products. Here the highest amounts are found in apple (1.5% w/w) and carrots (1.4% w/w).
In processing, pectin, which is mainly found in the middle lamella, can be altered by either chemical or biochemical conversions.
This can be in favor of the texture (demethoxylation) or detrimental (depolymerization/beta-elimination) (Van Der Plancken et al.,
2012). Demethoxylation of pectin can either be triggered by non-enzymatic or enzymatic demethoxylation (Pectin methyl esterase,
PME). In the case of high-pressure processing, both mechanisms could be present simultaneously since the process does not affect
PME to such an extent that it would be fully inactivated. The rate of this reaction is accelerated with increasing degrees of methyl-
ation, temperature, and pH (4–6) (Diaz et al., 2007). Especially the pH for fruit and vegetable-based products is at an optimum. For
non-enzymatic degradation of pectin there are two mechanisms that could apply:beta-elimination or demethoxylation by acid
hydrolysis (Van Der Plancken et al., 2012; Chen et al., 2015). The ß-elimination reaction is primarily base-catalyzed, but can
also become dominant at pH >4, and leads to the cleavage at a glycosidic linkage next to an esterified galacturonic acid; as a result,
pectin with a high degree of methoxylation (DM) is more subject to ß-elimination than pectin with a low DM (Chen et al., 2015). At
low degree of methoxylation (DM), demethoxylation can also occur by acid hydrolysis, enhanced by temperature but not by pres-
sure. Two possible explanations were suggested for the improved retention of hardness under pressure by Van der Plancken et al.
and Chen et al. (2015): (i) inhibition of the beta-eliminative depolymerization, either directly by pressure or indirectly by the
observed extensive demethoxylation and (ii) formation of fortifying networks of the low methoxylated pectin with endogenous
Ca2þ ions. In the case of HP pasteurization, only limited texture loss was observed as processing temperatures were not high enough
to support beta-eliminative pectin degradation. High hydrostatic pressure treatment did not cause degradation of the main chain
(covalent bonds) of pectic substance. In addition, when combining high temperature with high pressure, ß-elimination that
predominates in high temperature was retarded or even stopped, whereas demethoxylation was stimulated (Chen et al., 2015).
These results are very promising in the texture preservation of high-pressure sterilized fruits and vegetables, as ß-elimination is
accepted to be one of the main causes of thermal softening and low methoxylated pectin can enhance tissue strength by forming
cross-links with calcium ions present.
1.01.4.3 Proteins
The literature of protein denaturation and changes to the nature of the protein structure in real food systems (mainly meat) is exten-
sive (Cheftel and Culiolib, 1997; Galazkaa et al., 2000; Hendrickx et al., 2001; Hogan and Kelly, 2005; Sun and Holley, 2010;
Escobedo-Avellaneda et al., 2011; Barba et al., 2015; Santos et al., 2017). Limited knowledge is present on how specific proteins
could be used and changed to increase the techno functional abilities or create new food systems in combination e.g. with starch.
This part will try to highlight the possibilities to use proteins as structuring agents to form gels in protein only solutions or to form
three-dimensional networks in combination with other macromolecules.
For protein solutions, one of the main protein group of interest concerning their structuring abilities were whey proteins, and
here in particular beta-lactoglobulin (b-LG). A book chapter by Patel and Huppertz (2014) summarizes the current knowledge well.
At high protein concentration of >10%, aggregation and amount of disulfide bonds are favored and lead to the formation of high
pressure induced protein gels. The intensity of pressure, holding time, protein concentration, pH of the medium (the closer to the
isoelectric point the better) and temperature have a severe influence on the characteristic of the formed gel. The threshold concen-
tration of whey protein to form a self-supporting gel is 8%–12% w/v, if treated at pressures of 600–800 MPa and 20 C. Gels can
also be formed at lower pressures 200–400 MPa, but here the concentration needs to be up to 20%. The induced gels differ to heat
induced gels by lower firmness and a more porous structure. The mechanism behind the high pressure induced gel formation is that
pressure favors aggregate formation of whey proteins which are stabilized/crosslinked by intermolecular disulfide bonds and non-
covalent interactions, which lead to an increased viscosity and opacity of the solution. It was proposed that beta-LG plays a vital role
in the formation of whey protein gels, since the formation of beta-LG disulfide bonds proceeds the formation of other bonds within
the protein solution. Therefore, the major whey protein defines and determines the functional behavior under high pressure.
An indirect way how pressure processing can have an impact on the texture/structure of a food is the treatment of milk with
pressure prior to yoghurt fermentation (Guamis et al., 2005). High pressure treatment of milk has the following effects. (i) As
with heat treatment at temperatures greater 70 C, high pressure treatment of milk leads to denaturation of whey proteins; beta-
lactoglobulin is primarily denatured by pressure (López-Fandiño, 2006). (ii) The casein micelles are broken down into smaller
pieces at higher pressures (>250 MPa). This effect is more pronounced than with a thermal treatment (Huppertz et al., 2004; Patel
and Huppertz, 2014). (iii) An increase in the soluble content of calcium was observed in part, which was attributed to the removal
of calcium phosphate from the micelles (Schrader et al., 1997). This has several consequences in the production of yoghurt from
high-pressure milk. Due to the high level of destruction of the casein micelles, there is a significantly more uniform distribution and
closer crosslinking through disulfate bonds between denatured beta-lactoglobulin and kappa-casein than in the untreated and also
the thermally treated milk (Harte et al., 2003; Aguilera and Park, 2016). If high pressure treated milk is fermented, small sub
micelles are obtained during gel formation, which are arranged in larger groups. The increased proportion of soluble calcium, which
is essential for the formation of the structure, is also helpful here. These can bind water extremely well, which leads to a reduced
syneresis in the resulting gel.
Another focus in the light of meat alternatives is currently also given to local and sustainable protein sources, such pea protein.
One study from Sim et al. (2019) has been looking into the structuring of pea protein concentrates. They applied pressure between
250 and 500 MPa, temperatures of 20–33 C for 15 min and used pea protein concentrations of 8%–24% (w/v). Gel formation
started at 16% at pressures of 250 MPa for the HPP-treated samples, and at 12% ion for the heat-treated samples. Gel strength
increased with both pressure level and protein concentration. Heat-treated samples exhibited greater gel strength than pressure-
treated samples at the same protein concentration. A greater extent of protein denaturation, aggregation, and network formation
occurred with increasing pressure level, due to protein tertiary and quaternary conformation changes. Starch granules present in
PPC retained their structure and were not gelatinized even at 550 MPa. The authors also mentioned the ability of creating novel
pea-based products, such as puddings or tofu analogs. The low temperature of the treatment will help preserve the sensory and
nutritional properties of such products.
Further structuring and texturing approaches by high pressure, which are discussed in the literature is the combination of high
pressure processing and transglutaminase (TG) during the production of gels. In surimi and other fish meat products, high pressure
readily induces gelation at low temperatures. This process can be enhanced by TG, which can induce crosslinking of proteins and the
process is called setting or suwari. TG catalyzes a covalent bond between the e-amino group of lysyl residues and the c-carboxamide
group of glutaminyl residues of adjacent proteins (Ashie and Lanier, 1999; Uresti et al., 2006; Trespalacios and Pla, 2007). It was
further observed that even after a treatment of 600 MPa and 60 min that the TG kept 60% of their activity indicating the pressure
resistance of this enzyme (Trespalacios and Pla, 2007).
Urestie et al. (2006) looked at the usage of TG and high pressure to produce restructured fish products out of Arrowtooth
flounder. They found that fish paste inoculated with TG and treated at 600 MPa and 5 min had better mechanical properties in
comparison to heat treated gels. They concluded that pressures of 600 MPa induce an aggregation characterized by side-to-side inter-
actions of proteins with a low degree of denaturation and not by aggregation of proteins with large changes in molecular confor-
mation, allowing TG to improve mechanical properties of heat-induced gels.
Trespalicos and Pla (2007)investigated the simultaneous effects of microbial TG (MTG) and high pressure (500, 700 and
900 MPa) on chicken meat and egg. The proposed mechanism of protein-TG interaction during pressure is the following: irrevers-
ible changes in the beta structure of the protein above 400 MPa by HP treatment. The pressure causes the protein hydrophobic core
to become more exposed and thus more readily available for the MTG action. The increase in cutting force, hardness and chewiness
of gels suggests that a heterologous complex of meat and egg proteins was formed when high pressure processing and MTG were
combined. Although the enzyme and higher pressure at 700 and 900 MPa considerably improved the yield, color and texture, there
were no differences between the two pressure levels. The synergistic effect of combining enzymatic crosslinking with high pressure
treatment at 700 MPa is of interest for food manufacturers, in order to generate high quality products, which exhibit many desirable
characteristics that satisfy the consumers’ demands, such as low-fat, low-sodium content, phosphate-free and improved sensorial
attributes, while assuring the nutritive value and microbiological safety. Ashie and Lanier (1999) treated turkey breast in combina-
tion with TG and the samples were pressurized at 250 or 300 MPa at 4 C, 40 C, or 50 C for 15 min. They concluded that high
pressure processing is rendering myosin to make it more accessible to TG catalyzed cross linking. The effects of prior pressurization
on gel strengthening by TG were most pronounced in uncooked gels. Thus, the greatest commercial application maybe in enhancing
TG-mediated crosslinking of uncooked proteins.
1.01.5 Packaging Material
Packaging is essential to keep the quality and safety of the product over its shelf-life and can avoid food waste to some extent
(Guillard et al., 2018). Especially for high pressure processing, where suitable packaging materials that can cope with the “extreme”
process conditions to keep the better quality are essential. For the HPP and the HPTS-treatments, flexible (important for pressure
transmission), resilient and high barrier packaging need to be used. That packaging must withstand not only 600 MPa, but also cope
with high temperature, not changing its barrier properties toward the food. Further, the head space of this packaging must be as low
as possible to limit oxidation reactions (Balasubramaniam et al., 2016). The reduction of head space can be accomplished through
vacuum sealing. Stand up, meal-ready-to-eat (MRE) pouches, already used by the food industry for various products (ketchup,
soups, sauces, fish foods and vegetable and fruit purees etc.), have the optimal geometric form to be placed in the high-pressure
treatment baskets to get a maximum filling efficiency. The packaging materials that should be used have been discussed in many
research projects and in literature (Welti-Chanes et al., 2005; Galotto et al., 2009; Juliano et al., 2010; Koutchma et al., 2010; Bala-
subramaniam et al., 2016). Fleckenstein et al. (2010; 2014) divided the damages of polymeric packaging materials that could occur
during HPP into direct effects (caused by high pressure treatment) and indirect effects (generated by compression of other
substances in the package). Direct effects have a temporal and reversible decrease in permeability not negatively affecting the func-
tional properties of the packaging; morphology of the polymers may change and the delamination of the multilayer system (mainly
between inorganic (e.g., Aluminum) and polymeric layers (e.g., Polypropylene). The two last mentioned effects have a negative
impact on the packaging, therefore either the adhesion needs to be improved or systems without inorganic layers need to be devel-
oped. Indirect effects represent all influences of compressed substances inside the package. The higher concentration of gases in the
polymeric matrix at high pressure can lead to a plasticization of polymers, followed by structural changes or an extraction of
constituents from the polymer enabled by the supercritical state. These failures arise in the form of cracks, blistering or other micro-
structures and show mostly in weak zones of the materials. Therefore, packaging material such as EVOH (Nylon based ethylene-
vinyl-alcohol-co-polymer) based materials show a high potential due to their integrity and low oxygen permeability (Fleckenstein
et al., 2014; Sterr et al., 2014). A combination of a three layered system of polyethylene, aluminum foil and 4 mL polyolefin showed
good results for a high pressure high temperature processing between 105 and 121 C at 700 MPa(Juliano and Barbosa-Canovas,
2005; Juliano et al., 2010). Nevertheless, more research is needed to evaluate the influence of HP and HPTS treatment on different
packaging materials and to assess if there is a migration from packaging compounds into the food. Development of suitable pack-
aging will be crucial for a wider application of HP and HPTS processing.
Concerning the sustainability and circular economy of packaging materials, one of the agendas of the European union by 2030 is
to only have 100% recyclable packaging solutions. Therefore, the search for alternatives, which have the aforementioned attributes
is currently ongoing (EU, 2018). The most promising way will be to design a packaging that consists of two layers from the same
material, which make up approximately 90% of the packaging. By only having one material, but still two layers, recycling can be
enhanced, and the quality and safety assured at the same time. Also, a focus of many studies is to look into the possibilities to use
green platform chemicals like polylactides (PLA),hydroxy-hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) or starch, instead of petroleum-based
plastic polymers, to develop new and green packaging solutions. Guillard et al. (2018) summarizes the difficulties bio-based pack-
aging materials currently are facing: An unavoidable raw material variability and smaller process windows in comparison to
petroleum-based packaging, which hinders their scale up and industrial implementation. Also, there are no tools available that
make a conversion from tailor-made packaging to food requirements possible. Their readiness for high pressure processing needs
to be tested and validated. Following, two of the most promising materials will be introduced.
1.01.5.1 Polylactides (PLA)

Polymerization of lactic acid produces PLA by two methods, direct polycondensation and ring-opening polymerization. Lactic acid
(LA) can be produced by chemical synthesis and by microbial fermentation, which offers advantages due to the production of opti-
cally highly pure LA, the utilization of renewable carbohydrate biomass, low temperature, and low energy consumption during the
process (de Oliveira et al., 2017). PLA has good biodegradability, biocompatibility, a high mechanical strength, and excellent
shaping and molding properties. Therefore, it becomes a good candidate for packaging materials due to its close similarity with
poly (ethylene terephthalate) (PET) (Ahmed et al., 2009). PLA containers are already in use for bottled water, bottled juices,
and yogurts in European and North American markets. Ahmed et al. (2009)investigated the thermal properties of PLA solutions
under pressure. At pressures of 350, 450 and 650 MPa for 15 min they concluded, based on the results of the performed analysis
(FTIR and DSC), that glass transition temperature decreased, melting temperature remained unaffected while partial shift in crys-
tallinity of L-isomer was detected after high pressure (650 MPa). FTIR spectra did not show any shift of crystalline band after pres-
sure treatment. Their final comment was that PLA seems suitable but more detailed research needed to be conducted.
Further studies with actual PLA-based packaging material was conducted by Galotto et al. (2009). They tested a PET based pack-
aging in comparison to a PLA based packaging, treated at 500 MPa for 15 min at a temperature of 50 C and compared the mechan-
ical, thermal and chemical properties of the different materials. HPP treatment affects significantly the mechanical, thermal, and gas
barrier properties of PET and PLA films. For the PET film, all physical properties were negatively affected. For the PLA film, major
changes occurred when the film was in contact with water (due to the plasticization effect of the latter on PLA) and minimal changes
occurred when oil was inside the packaging. This film can be used in HPP applications while in contact with fatty foods, when
medium gas barrier properties are sufficient.
Another promising compound for biodegradable packaging is starch. Although, challenges involve water solubility and poten-
tial changes in mechanical properties due to molecular rearrangement upon water exposure (retrogradation). Among some reported
HPP applications, Kim et al. (2018) reported that a more compact structure of buckwheat starch films processed at high pressure
(600 MPa, 20 min) improved water vapor permeability when compared to heated films, although properties were not evaluated
during storage.
There are also starch/protein -based bioplastics available but these have, to the best knowledge of the authors, never been tested
for the application with high pressure processing (Gonzalez-Gutierrez et al., 2010). Further research needs to be conducted to use
the many opportunities high pressure in combination with bio-degradable or 100% recyclable packaging could give.
1.01.6 Data Reporting and Experimental Design
Data reporting is the process of collecting and submitting data which gives rise to accurate analyses of the facts. In some articles
involving high pressure processing, the main information is on, e.g., high-pressure system, applied pressures, come-up time,
temperature, temperature-pressure-time profiles, initial temperature (pre-HP application), end temperature (post-HP application),
sporulation temperature of spores, packaging, pressure transmitting medium, pH of growth medium for microorganisms, pH of
tested food, other influential food characteristics, kinetic approach not end point approach, choice of model etc. All the points
mentioned make it difficult to compare and relate the mass of data available on high pressure processing in the literature. Balasu-
bramaniam et al. (2004) came up with a concept called “minimal description to be included” in a publication dealing with high
pressure processing. They also concluded that research articles on new technology assessment should include enough description of
process equipment (or citation), experimental design, methods (or citation if standard methods were used) of data analysis and
reporting.
Raso et al. (2016) published a guideline for reporting studies conducted for pulsed electric fields (PEF) applications. Their table
is more detailed and could also be used for high pressure reporting if the bullet points are changed and adapted to high pressure
processing. The version for HPP and HPTS adapted from Raso et al. (2016) and Balasubramaniam et al. (2004) can be found in
Table 1.
Nevertheless, most published papers on the topics do not provide enough information for other researchers to assess results
properly. A general rule/guidance in reporting experimental data and most of all exposure conditions would be to report details
to the extent that other researchers will be able to repeat, judge and evaluate experiments and the data obtained. To the opinion
of the authors there are still multiple research challenges for high pressure processing that need to be assessed and unraveled in
systematic studies. The variables, options and action are summarized in Table 2.
1.01.7 Conclusion
High pressure processing has been proven very valuable as a decontamination technology, but it has much more to offer than just
being an alternative to thermal processing. Reactions are favored differently under high pressure in comparison to thermal
processes, therefore other activation systems exist under pressure. These new acting principles could be used to develop new
food systems, e.g., raw materials with different functionalities, instead of just being an inactivation tool. Historically, most food
raw materials have been selected empirically based on their edibility and safety as raw, fermented or heated. Since high pressure
Table 1 Recommended information to be reported in studies on microbial inactivation and chemical analyses for HPP and HPTS.
Category Information and description
Microorganism culture and recovery condition Genus, species and strain of the microorganisms/spores
Culture conditions
Initial inoculum
• Description of the procedure for microbial cultivation
• Growth medium composition, growth/sporulation temperature,
incubation time and growth phase (exponential or stationary)
Recovery conditions
• Time and storage conditions between treatment and microbiological
analysis
• Description of the procedure for enumerating microorganisms
• Composition of the recovery medium, incubation time and incubation
temperature
HPP/HPTS equipment HPP/HPTS system
• For commercial: equipment name of the supplier company and model
• For prototypes/lab scale systems: adequate description of the
components
High pressure vessel
• Volume; horizontal or vertical; heating systems (vessel immersed in
bath or jacket with heating)
• Heating medium;
• Pressure transmitting medium
• Thermocouples (where located)
Processing parameters • Pressure, pressure build-up rate
• Starting temperature; end temperature after pressure build up;
temperature shortly before decompression; temperature after
decompression
• p,T,t-diagram, kinetic approach at fixed pressure and temperature at
least 5–6 independent data points (time),
• Description of sample container
Treatment medium Composition (Recipe of the food; Origin and name of the fruit or vegetable /
Degree of ripeness)
• pH
• aw
• Sugar content
• Salt content
• Inoculum / Number of CFU’s per g or mL
Enumeration of survivors • Agar used
• Plating method
• Time between treatment and microbiological analysis (storage
conditions)
• Enumeration method
• Model used to fit inactivation kinetics (including R2; equation and
constants)
Analytical methods Description of methodology (References)
• Analytical System used (e.g. HPLC or GC/MS etc.) with information on
set up, important parts and chemicals
• Storage conditions
• Preparation steps
Other things to consider • To have comparable results to other technologies Ce, Fe or P-values if
possible, should be calculated
• Product of comparison should always the industry processing standard
for the investigated product (if possible)
Based on Raso et al. (2016) and Balasubramaniam et al. (2004).
provides a different principle of action than heat inactivation of antinutritional or toxic food constituents, it should be possible to
identify new raw materials to be made safe and edible via high pressure processing. Ananta and Knorr (2003) used mild high pres-
sure conditions (100 MPa, 37 C, 10 min) to trigger a stress response in Lactobacillus rhamnosus, which led to the production of stress
metabolites (proteins). This effect made the probiotics more resistant toward spray drying and therefore a more optimized produc-
tion of probiotic starter cultures is possible. High pressure processing could also be used to convert certain compounds or activate
certain plant cell systems due to stress induction in foods or food waste streams, so that a higher yield of valuable compounds could
be generated. This was just recently shown by Ramos-Parra et al. (2019), who treated papaya fruit with high pressure (50–400 MPa)
Table 2 Variables for future systematic studies of HPP.
Variables Options Action 1 Action 2 Action 3 Action 4 Action 5 Action 6
Pressure Pressure variation Static Steps (pulses) High p Low p High T Low T
Pressure build up Slow Fast Stepwise – – –
Pressure release Slow Fast Step wise – – –
Temperature High Low Steps Initial low or high – –
Cycle time Short Long Holding Starting at set – –
pressure
Packaging Renewable Chitin Lignin Cellulose PLA Starch –
Antimicrobial Chitosan Essential oils Lactobacillus pH – –
Smart Indicators Integrators
In package media Vacuum Gas/air Functional Plasma Brine Infusion
liquids
Product Changes High Low Gases/plasma Degassing pH [ pH Y
temperature temperature
Product Modifications Food package Foods Food Response of – Indicator
interaction constituents constituents microorganism
and proved that HPP triggers the de novo carotenoid biosynthesis, which is regulated at the transcriptional level, possibly by
inducing oxidative stress signaling in fruit tissue. Another approach includes the use of high pressure as an extraction method
and texture improvement via high pressure treatment. There are different combinations of processes that are worth considering,
such as the combination of high pressure and medium to high temperature (60–80 C). This intensified high-pressure processing
would still be much shorter than the thermal process but in comparison to the ambient high pressure process it would not have the
problem concerning the enzymatic activity. Future equipment should be continuous or at least semi-continuous. This seems
possible since some of the ultra-high-pressure homogenizers can go as high as 450 MPa, but this would only work for pumpable
foods like clear juices, milk etc. High pressure processing has come a long way and there is still a long way to go especially in under-
standing the full range of benefits and applications this technology could offer to food technology. High pressure processing at low
temperatures (below ambient temperature) also received little attention and should be explored further, as well as high pressure
assisted/combined processes such as extrusion, ohmic heating or ultrasound.
High pressure offers numerous benefits (Fig. 1) but there are still key issues in terms of food safety that need closer and further
evaluation: (i) indicator microorganism currently E. coli O157:H7, Salmonella and Listeria are used to distinguish the effectiveness of
Reduced FPCs
formation
Activation of Increased Food
biosynthesis quality
High pressure Cosmetics and

Food safety processing applications medical products
Improved Allergen
bioavailability reduction
Structure
Figure 1 Possible future application of high-pressure processing.

the high pressure treatment but maybe other non-pathogenic surrogates, with the same resistance could be used; (ii) aggregation of
spores/microorganisms because those could lead to a false interpretation of inactivation kinetics or false calculation of process
windows; (iii) spiking model/buffer systems and (iv) model foods vs real foods is also an important issue since inactivation can
differ based on the baro-protective properties of certain food compounds.
References
Adley, C.C., Ryan, M.P., 2016. The nature and extent of foodborne disease. In: Antimicrobial Food Packaging. Elsevier Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800723-
5.00001-2.
Aganovic, K., Smetana, S., Grauwet, T., Toepfl, S., Mathys, A., Van Loey, A., Heinz, V., 2017. Pilot scale thermal and alternative pasteurization of tomato and watermelon juice: an
energy comparison and life cycle assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 141, 514–525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.015.
Aguilera, J.M., Park, D.J., 2016. Texture-modified foods for the elderly: status, technology and opportunities. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 57, 156–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.tifs.2016.10.001.
Ahmed, J., Varshney, S.K., Zhang, J.X., Ramaswamy, H.S., 2009. Effect of high pressure treatment on thermal properties of polylactides. J. Food Eng. 93 (3), 308–312. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2009.01.026.
Ananta, E., Voigt, D., Zenker, M., Heinz, V., Knorr, D., 2005. Cellular injuries upon exposure of Escherichia coli and Lactobacillus rhamnosus to high-intensity ultrasound. J. Appl.
Microbiol. 271–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2005.02619.x.
Ananta, E., Knorr, D., 2003. Pressure-induced thermotolerance of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG. Food Res. Int. 36 (9–10), 991–997.
Ashie, I.N.A., Lanier, T.C., 1999. High pressure effects on gelation of surimi and turkey breast muscle enhanced by microbial transglutaminase. J. Food Sci. 64 (4), 704–708.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1999.tb15115.x.
Autio, K., 1998. Fresh novel foods by high pressure, pp. 83–95.
Balasubramaniam, V., Farkas, D., Turek, E., 2008. Preserving foods through high-pressure processing. Food Technol. 62 (11), 32–38.
Balasubramaniam, V., Lelieveld, H., Barbosa-Cánovas, G., 2016. High Pressure Processing of Food Principles, Technology and Applications.
Balasubramaniam, V.M., Martínez-Monteagudo, S., Gupta, R., 2015. Principles and application of high pressure–based technologies in the food industry. Annu. Rev. Food Sci.
Technol. 6 (1), 435–462. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-food-022814-015539.
Balasubramaniam, V., Ting, E.Y., Stewart, C.M., Robbins, J.A., 2004. Recommended laboratory practices for conducting high-pressure microbial inactivation experiments. Innovat.
Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 5 (3), 299–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2004.04.001.
Barba, F.J., Esteve, M.J., Frígola, A., 2012. High pressure treatment effect on physicochemical and nutritional properties of fluid foods during storage: a review. Compr. Rev. Food
Sci. Food Saf. 11 (3), 307–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2012.00185.x.
Barba, F.J., Terefe, N.S., Buckow, R., Knorr, D., Orlien, V., 2015. New opportunities and perspectives of high pressure treatment to improve health and safety attributes of foods. A
review. Food Res. Int. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2015.05.015.
Bauer, B.A., Knorr, D., 2005. The impact of pressure, temperature and treatment time on starches: Pressure-induced starch gelatinisation as pressure time temperature indicator for
high hydrostatic pressure processing. J. Food Eng. 68 (3), 329–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2004.06.007.
Bermudez-Aguirre, D., Barbosa-Canovas, G.V., 2011. Recent advances in emerging nonthermal technologies. In: Food Engineering Interfaces. Springer, pp. 285–345.
BfR, 2004. Vorkommen von Furan in Lebensmitteln.
BfR, 2012. 3-MCPD-Fettsäureester in Lebensmitteln (Issue 006).
Black, E., Setlow, P., Hocking, A., Stewart, C., Kelly, A., Hoover, D., 2007. Response of spores to high-pressure processing. Comp. Rev. Food Sci. F. 6, 103–119.
Bravo, K.S., Ramírez, R., Durst, R., Escobedo-Avellaneda, Z.J., Welti-Chanes, J., Sanz, P.D., Torres, J.a., 2012. Formation risk of toxic and other unwanted compounds in pressure-
assisted thermally processed foods. J. Food Sci. 77 (1), R1–R10.
Buckow, R., Heinz, V., 2008. High pressure processing – a database of kinetic information. Chem. Ing. Tech. 8, 1081–1095.
Buckow, R., Heinz, V., Knorr, D., 2007. High pressure phase transition kinetics of maize starch. J. Food Eng. 81 (2), 469–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.11.027.
Castells, M., Marin, S., Sanchis, V., Ramos, A., 2006. Reduction of aflatoxins by extrusion-cooking of rice meal. J. Food Sci. 71 (7) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-
3841.2006.00122.x.
Cheftel, J., 1995. Review: high-pressure, microbial inactivation and food preservation/revision: alta-presion, inactivacion microbiologica y conservacion de alimentos. Food Sci.
Technol. Int. 1 (2–3), 75–90.
Cheftel, J., Culiolib, J., 1997. Effects of high pressure on meat: A review. Meat Sci. 46 (3), 211–236.
Chen, J., Liu, W., Liu, C.M., Li, T., Liang, R.H., Luo, S.J., 2015. Pectin modifications: a review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 55 (12), 1684–1698. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10408398.2012.718722.
Considine, K.M., Kelly, A.L., Fitzgerald, G.F., Hill, C., Sleator, R.D., 2008. High-pressure processing - effects on microbial food safety and food quality. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 281 (1),
1–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2008.01084.x.
Crews, C., 2012. Fatty Acid Esters of Chloropropanols and Glycidol in Foods – Analysis and Exposure (Issue May).
Crews, C., Castle, L., 2007. A review of the occurrence, formation and analysis of furan in heat-processed foods. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 18 (7), 365–372.
Curtis, T., Postles, J., Halford, N., 2013. Reducing the potential for processing contaminant formation in cereal products. J. Cereal. Sci. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jcs.2013.11.002.
de Oliveira, J., Vandenberghe, L.P.S., Zawadzki, S.F., Rodrigues, C., de Carvalho, J.C., Soccol, C.R., 2017. Production and application of polylactides. Curr. Dev. Biotechnol. Bioeng.
633–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63662-1.00028-2.
Diaz, J.V., Anthon, G.E., Barrett, D.M., 2007. Nonenzymatic degradation of citrus pectin and pectate during prolonged heating: effects of pH, temperature, and degree of methyl
esterification. J. Agric. Food Chem. 55 (13), 5131–5136. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf0701483.
Doona, C.J., Feeherry, F.E., Setlow, B., Wang, S., Li, W., Nichols, F.C., Talukdar, P.K., Sarker, M.R., Li, Y.-Q., Shen, A., Setlow, P., 2016. Effects of high-pressure treatment on
spores of Clostridium species. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 82 (17), 5287–5297. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01363-16.
Dorny, P., Praet, N., Deckers, N., Gabriel, S., 2009. Emerging food-borne parasites. Vet. Parasitol. 163, 196–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2009.05.026.
Douzals, J.P., Perrier-Cornet, J.M., Coquille, J.G., Gervais, P., 2001. Pressure-temperature phase transition diagram for wheat starch. J. Agric. Food Chem. 49 (2), 873–876.
https://doi.org/10.1021/jf000497w.
Dumay, E., Chevalier-Lucia, D., Lopez-Pedemonte, T., 2010. High pressure and food conservation. In: Sebert, P. (Ed.), Comparative High Pressure Biology. Science Publishers,
pp. 85–121.
Dunne, C., 2009. New Technologies For Shelf-Stable Foods – Successful Efforts of S&T Consortia (Issue November).
Dunne, P., Beckwitt, R., Wright, A., Yang, T., 2010. Quality and Nutritional Information for PATS Produced Product: Case Study with Mashed Potatoes. IFT.
EFSA, 2013. Analysis of occurrence of 3-monochloropropane-1,2-diol (3-MCPD) in food in Europe in the years 2009-2011 and preliminary exposure assessment. EFSA Journal 11
(9), 1–45. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3381.
EFSA, 2018. Call for Continuous Collection of Chemical Contaminants Occurrence Data in Food and Feed. October. https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/consultations/call/180307.
Ekezie, F.C., Cheng, J., Sun, D., 2018. Effects of nonthermal food processing technologies on food allergens: a review of recent research advances. Trends Food Sci. Technol.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.01.007.
Escobedo-Avellaneda, Z., Pateiro Moure, M., Chotyakul, N., Torres, J., Welti-Chanes, J., Lamela, C., 2011. Benefits and limitations of food processing by high pressure tech-
nologies: effects on functional compounds and nonbiotic contaminants. J. Foodserv. 9.
ETP, 2007. European Technology Platform Food for Life Strategic Research Agenda 2007-2020. https://doi.org/10.1051/iufost:20061189.
EU, 2017. Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/2158 of 20 November 2017 Establishing Mitigation Measures and Benchmark Levels for the Reduction of the Presence of Acrylamide
in Food (Text with EEA Relevance) COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) 2017/2158 of 20 November.
EU, 2018. A European Strategy for Plastics. July, 24. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b02368.
Felckenstein, B., Sterr, J., Langowski, H.C., 2010. Effect of high-pressure food processing on the mass transfer properties of selected packaging materials. Packag. Technol. Sci. 23
(5), 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1002/pts.
Fioretto, F., Cruz, C., Largeteau, A., Sarli, T.A., Demazeau, G., El Moueffak, A., 2005. Inactivation of Staphylococcus aureus and Salmonella enteritidis in tryptic soy broth and caviar
samples by high pressure processing. Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res. 38, 1259–1265. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-879X2005000800015.
Fleckenstein, B., Sterr, J., Langowski, H.C., 2014. The effect of high pressure processing on the integrity of polymeric packaging – analysis and categorization of occurring. Packag.
Technol. Sci. 29 (2), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1002/pts.
Fonseca, L., Santos, M.D., Queiro, R.P., 2014. Laboratory tests on the elimination of the pinewood nematode (Bursaphelenchus xylophilus) in Pinus pinaster wood by high pressure.
Eur. J. Wood Production 825–827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-014-0836-2.
Galazkaa, V.B., Dickinson, E., Ledwardb, D.A., 2000. Influence of high pressure processing on protein solutions and emulsions. Curr. Opin. Colloid. Interface. Sci. 182–187.
Galotto, M.J., Ulloa, P.A., 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 (6) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2009.01212.x.
Garcia-Graells, C., Hauben, K., Soontjes, C., Michiels, C., 1998. High pressure inactivation and survival of pressure-resistant Escherichia coli mutants in fruit juices. Adv. High Press.
Food Sci. Biosci. Chem. 304–309. https://doi.org/10.1533/9781845698379.4.304.
Georget, E., Sevenich, R., Reineke, K., Mathys, A., Heinz, V., Callanan, M., Rauh, C., Knorr, D., 2015. Inactivation of microorganisms by high isostatic pressure processing in
complex matrices: a review. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 27, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2014.10.015.
Gonzalez-Gutierrez, J., Partal, P., Garcia-Morales, M., Gallegos, C., 2010. Development of highly-transparent protein/starch-based bioplastics. Bioresour. Technol. 101 (6), 2007–
2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.10.025.
Grauwet, T., Rauh, C., Van der Plancken, I., Vervoort, L., Hendrickx, M., Delgado, A., Van Loey, A., 2012. Potential and limitations of methods for temperature uniformity mapping in
high pressure thermal processing. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 23 (2), 97–110.
Guamis, B., Trujillo, A., Capellas, M., Gervilla, R., Saldo, R., Yuste, J., 2005. High-pressure processing of milk and dairy and egg products. In: Novel Food Processing Technologies,
pp. 343–359.
Guillard, V., Gaucel, S., Fornaciari, C., Angellier-Coussy, H., Buche, P., Gontard, N., 2018. The next generation of sustainable food packaging to preserve our environment in
a circular economy context. Front. Nutr. 5 (December), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2018.00121.
Harte, F., Luedecke, L., Swanson, B., Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V., 2003. Low-fat set yogurt made from milk subjected to combinations of high hydrostatic pressure and thermal
processing. J. Dairy Sci. 86 (4), 1074–1082. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73690-X.
Hayashi, R., 1992. Utilization of pressure in addition to temperature in food science and technology. High Press. Biotechnol. 185–192.
Hendrickx, M., Knorr, D., Ludikhuyze, L., Van Loey, A., Heinz, V., 2001. In: Hendrickx, M., Knorr, D. (Eds.), Ultra High Pressure Treatments of Foods. Springer ScienceþBuisness
Media, LLC. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0723-9.
Hibi, Y., Matsumoto, T., Hagiwara, S., 1993. Effect of high pressure on the crystalline structure of various starch granules. Am. Assoc. Ceral Chem. 70 (6), 671–676.
Hite, B., 1899. The Effect of Presusre in the Preservation of Milk. Technical Bulletion of the West Verginia University.
Hogan, E., Kelly, A., 2005. High pressure processing of foods: an overview. Food Technol. 0–12.
Huang, H., Hsu, C., Yang, B., Wang, C., 2013. Advances in the extraction of natural ingredients by high pressure extraction technology. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 33 (1), 54–62.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2013.07.001.
Huang, H.W., Lung, H.M., Yang, B.B., Wang, C.Y., 2014. Responses of microorganisms to high hydrostatic pressure processing. Food Contr. 40 (1), 250–259. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.foodcont.2013.12.007.
Huang, H.W., Wu, S.J., Lu, J.K., Shyu, Y.T., Wang, C.Y., 2017. Current status and future trends of high-pressure processing in food industry. Food Contr. 72 (12), 1–8. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.07.019.
Huppertz, T., Fox, P.F., Kelly, A.L., 2004. Properties of casein micelles in high pressure-treated bovine milk. Food Chem. 87 (1), 103–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.foodchem.2003.10.025.
Jestoi, M., Järvinen, T., Järvenpää, E., Tapanainen, H., Virtanen, S., Peltonen, K., 2009. Furan in the baby-food samples purchased from the Finnish markets – determination with
SPME–GC–MS. Food Chem. 117 (3), 522–528.
Jiménez-Saiz, R., Benedé, S., Molina, E., López-Expósito, I., 2015. Effect of processing technologies on the allergenicity of food products. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 55 (13), 1902–
1917. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2012.736435.
Juliano, P., Barbosa-Canovas, G., 2005. Food sterilization by combining high pressure and thermal energy. In: Gutiérrez-López, G., Barbosa-Canovas, G.V., Welti-Chanes, J.,
Parada-Arias, E. (Eds.), Food Engineering: Integrated Approaches, pp. 9–46.
Juliano, P., Koutchma, T., Sui, Q., Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V., Sadler, G., 2010. Polymeric-based food packaging for high-pressure processing. Food Eng. Rev. 2, 274–297. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12393-010-9026-0.
Kaczmarek, M., Avery, S.V., Singleton, I., 2019. Microbes associated with fresh produce: sources, types and methods to reduce spoilage and contamination. In: Advances in
Applied Microbiology, first ed., vol. 107. Elsevier Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aambs.2019.02.001.
Katopo, H., Song, Y., Jane, J.L., 2002. Effect and mechanism of ultrahigh hydrostatic pressure on the structure and properties of starches. Carbohydr. Polym. 47 (3), 233–244.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0144-8617(01)00168-0.
Kettlitz, B., Scholz, G., Theurillat, V., Cselovszky, J., Buck, N.R., O’ Hagan, S., Mavromichali, E., Ahrens, K., Kraehenbuehl, K., Scozzi, G., Weck, M., Vinci, C., Sobieraj, M.,
Stadler, R.H., 2019. Furan and methylfurans in foods: an update on occurrence, mitigation, and risk assessment. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 18 (3), 738–752. https://
doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12433.
Khadre, M.A., Yousef, A.E., 2002. Susceptibility of human rotavirus to ozone, high pressure, and pulsed electric field. J. Food Protect. 65 (9), 1441–1446. https://doi.org/10.4315/
0362-028X-65.9.1441.
Kim, S., Yang, S.Y., Chun, H.H., Song, K.B., 2018. High hydrostatic pressure processing for the preparation of buckwheat and tapioca starch films. Food Hydrocoll. 81, 71–76.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2018.02.039.
Kingsley, D.H., Hoover, D., Papafragkou, E.F.I., Richards, G.P., 2002. Inactivation of hepatitis A virus and a calicivirus by high hydrostatic pressure. J. Food Protect. 65 (10),
1605–1609.
Kingsley, D., 2014. High pressure processing of bivalve shellfish and HPP’s use as a virus intervention. Foods 3 (2), 336–350. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods3020336.
Kingsley, D.H., 2013. High pressure processing and its application to the challenge of virus-contaminated foods. Food Environ. Virol. 5 (1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12560-
012-9094-9.
Klotz, B., Mañas, P., Mackey, B.M., 2010. The relationship between membrane damage, release of protein and loss of viability in Escherichia coli exposed to high hydrostatic
pressure. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 137 (2–3), 214–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2009.11.020.
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, 110–119.
Knorr, D., Froehling, A., Jaeger, H., Reineke, K., Schlueter, O., Schoessler, K., 2011a. Emerging technologies in food processing. Agric. Eng. 203–238. https://doi.org/10.1146/
annurev.food.102308.124129.
Knorr, D., Reineke, K., Mathys, A., Heinz, V., Buckow, R., 2011b. High-pressure-induced effects on bacterial spores, vegetative microorganisms , and enzymes. In: Food Engineering
Interfaces, pp. 325–340.
Koutchma, T., Song, Y., Setikaite, I., Juliano, P., Barbosa-Cánovas, G., Dunne, C., Patazca, E., 2010. Packaging evaluation for high-pressure high-temperature sterilization of shelf-
stable foods. J. Food Process. Eng. 33 (6), 1097–1114. http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1745-4530.2008.00328.x.
Kova, K., Diez-valcarce, M., Hernandez, M., Raspor, P., Rodrı, D., 2010. High hydrostatic pressure as emergent technology for the elimination of foodborne viruses. Trends Food Sci.
Technol. 21, 558–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2010.08.002.
Kumar, P., Mahato, D.K., Kamle, M., Mohanta, T.K., 2017. Aflatoxins: a global concern for food safety , human health and their management. Front. Microbiol. 7 (January), 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.02170.
Lachenmeier, D., Kuballa, T., 2010. Furan in Lebensmitteln. Deutsche Lebensmittelrundschau, pp. 160–163.
Larsen, J., 2009. 3-MCPD-esters in Food Products.
Lavilla, M., Orcajo, J., Araceli, D., Gamboa, P., 2016. Examining the effect of high pressure processing on the allergenic potential of the major allergen in peach (Pru p 3). Innovat.
Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2016.06.021.
Lenz, C., Vogel, R., 2015. Pressure-based strategy for the inactivation of spores. In: High Pressure Bioscience, pp. 344–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9918-8_15.
Leon, J.S., Kingsley, D.H., Montes, J.S., Richards, G.P., Lyon, G.M., Abdulhafid, G.M., Seitz, S.R., Fernandez, M.L., Teunis, P.F., Flick, G.J., Moe, C.L., 2011. Randomized, double-
blinded clinical trial for human norovirus inactivation in oysters by high hydrostatic pressure processing. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 77 (15), 5476–5482. https://doi.org/10.1128/
AEM.02801-10.
López-Fandiño, R., 2006. High pressure-induced changes in milk proteins and possible applications in dairy technology. Int. Dairy J. 16 (10), 1119–1131. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.idairyj.2005.11.007.
Lou, F., Neetoo, H., Chen, H., Li, J., 2015. High hydrostatic pressure processing: a promising nonthermal technology to inactivate viruses in high-risk foods. Annual Review of Food
Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-food-072514-104609.
Margosch, D., Ehrmann, M., Buckow, R., Heinz, V., Vogel, R., Gänzle, M., 2006. High-pressure-mediated survival of Clostridium botulinum and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens
endospores at high temperature. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72 (5), 3476–3481.
Margosch, D., Ehrmann, M., Gänzle, M., Vogel, R., 2004. Comparison of pressure and heat resistance of Clostridium botulinum and other endospores in mashed carrots. J. Food
Protect. 67 (11), 2530–2537.
Margosch, D., Gänzle, M., Ehrmann, M., Vogel, R., 2004. Pressure inactivation of Bacillus endospores pressure inactivation of Bacillus endospores. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 70 (12).
Märk, J., Pollien, P., Lindinger, C., Blank, I., Märk, T., 2006. Quantitation of furan and methylfuran formed in different precursor systems by proton transfer reaction mass
spectrometry. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54 (7), 2786–2793. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf052937v.
Mathys, A., 2008. Inactivation Mechanisms of Geobacillus and Bacillus Spores during High Pressure Thermal Sterilization. Berlin University of Technology.
Mathys, A., Heinz, V., 2006. Impact of agglomeration on the quantitative assessment of Bacillus stearothermophilus heat inactivation. J. Food Eng. 81, 380–387.
Mathys, A., Toepfl, S., Heinz, V., Knorr, D., 2007. Food sterilisation under high pressure- Fundamentals, new insights and challenges, pp. 1–6.
Matser, A., Krebbers, B., van den Berg, R., Bartels, P., 2004. Advantages of high pressure sterilisation on quality of food products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 15 (2),
79–85.
Meinlschmidt, P., 2016. Nonthermal processing technologies for the mitigation of soy protein isolates immunoreactivity with focus on their sensory and physicochemical
properties.
Meinlschmidt, P., Brode, V., Sevenich, R., Ueberham, E., Schweiggert-Weisz, U., Lehmann, J., Rauh, C., Knorr, D., Eisner, P., 2016. High pressure processing assisted enzymatic
hydrolysis – an innovative approach for the reduction of soy immunoreactivity. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2016.06.022.
Metrick, C., Hoover, D., Farkas, D., 1989. Effects of high hydrostatic pressure on heat-resistant and heat-sensitive strains of Salmonella. J. Food Sci. 54 (6), 1547–1549. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1989.tb05156.x.
Minerich, P., Labuza, T., 2003. Development of a pressure indicator for high hydrostatic pressure processing of foods. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol.
Moir, a., 2006. How do spores germinate? J. Appl. Microbiol. 101, 526–530. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2006.02885.x.
Molina-Höppner, A., Doster, W., Vogel, R.F., Ga, M.G., 2013. Protective effect of sucrose and sodium chloride for Lactococcus lactis during sublethal and Lethal High-Pressure
Treatments. Appl. Environ, Microbiol. 70 (4), 2013–2020. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.70.4.2013.
Moroni, O., Jean, J., Autret, J., 2002. Inactivation of lactococcal bacteriophages in liquid media using dynamic high pressure. Int. Dairy J. 12, 907–913.
Moye, Z.D., Woolston, J., Sulakvelidze, A., 2018. Bacteriophage applications for food production and processing. Viruses 10 (4), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/v10040205.
Mújica-Paz, H., Valdez-Fragoso, A., Samson, C.T., Welti-Chanes, J., Torres, J.A., 2011. High-pressure processing technologies for the pasteurization and sterilization of foods. Food
Bioprocess Technol. 4 (6), 969–985. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-011-0543-5.
Oey, I., Lille, M., Van Loey, A., Hendrickx, M., 2008. Effect of high-pressure processing on colour, texture and flavour of fruit- and vegetable-based food products: a review. Trends
Food Sci. Technol. 19 (6), 320–328.
Oey, I., Van der Plancken, I., Van Loey, A., Hendrickx, M., 2008. Does high pressure processing influence nutritional aspects of plant based food systems? Trends Food Sci. Technol.
19 (6), 300–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2007.09.002.
Olivier, S.A., Smith, R., Bull, M.K., Chapman, B., Knoerzer, K., 2015. Apparatus for the simultaneous processing of mesophilic spores by heat-only and by high pressure and heat in
a high pressure vessel to investigate synergistic spore inactivation. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 27, 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2014.12.003.
Olivier, S., Bull, M., Chapman, B., 2012. Bacillus spp. spores produced at lower temperatures are more resistant to high pressure thermal processes but mineralization does not
predict relative resistance. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 16, 96–101.
Olsen, N., Grunert, K., Sonne, A., 2010. Consumer acceptance of high-pressure processing and pulsed-electric field: a review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 21 (9), 464–472.
Ontiveros, N., Flores-Mendoza, L., Canizalez-Roman, V., Cabrera-Chavez, F., 2015. Food allergy: prevalence and food technology approaches for the control of IgE-mediated food
allergy. Austin J. Nutr. Food Sci. 2 (5).
Paidhungat, M., Setlow, B., Daniels, W., Hoover, D., Papafragkou, E., Setlow, P., 2002. Mechanisms of induction of germination of Bacillus subtilis spores by high pressure. Appl.
Environ. Microbiol. 68 (6), 3172–3175.
Palmers, S., Grauwet, T., Kebede, B.T., Hendrickx, M.E., Loey, A. Van, 2014. Reduction of furan formation by high-pressure high-temperature treatment of individual vegetable
purées. Food Bioproc Technol. 2679–2693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-014-1300-3.
Pan, H., Buenconsejo, M., Reineke, K.F., Shieh, Y.C., 2016. Effect of process temperature on virus inactivation during high hydrostatic pressure processing of contaminated fruit
puree and juice. J. Food Protect. 79 (9), 1517–1526. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-16-004.
Papathanasiou, M., Reineke, K., Gogou, E., Taoukis, P., Knorr, D., 2015. Impact of high pressure treatment on the available glucose content of various starch types: a case study on
wheat, tapioca, potato, corn, waxy corn and resistant starch (RS3). Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 30, 24–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2015.05.003.
Paredes-Sabja, D., Setlow, P., Sarker, M.R., 2011. Germination of spores of Bacillales and Clostridiales species: mechanisms and proteins involved. Trends Microbiol. 19 (2), 85–
94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2010.10.004.
Park, S.H., Balasubramaniam, V.M., Sastry, S.K., Lee, J., 2013. Pressure-ohmic-thermal sterilization: a feasible approach for the inactivation of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens and
Geobacillus stearothermophilus spores. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 19, 115–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2013.03.005.
Patel, H.A., Huppertz, T., 2014. Effects of high-pressure processing on structure and interactions of milk proteins. In: Milk Proteins, second ed. Elsevier Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/
b978-0-12-405171-3.00008-8.
Peñas, E., Gómez, R., Frías, J., Vidal-Valverde, C., 2008. Application of high-pressure treatment on alfalfa (Medicago sativa) and mung bean (Vigna radiata) seeds to enhance the
microbiological safety of their sprouts. Food Contr. 19 (7), 698–705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2007.07.010.
Ramos-Parra, P.A., García-Salinas, C., Rodríguez-López, C.E., García, N., García-Rivas, G., Hernández-Brenes, C., Díaz de la Garza, R.I., 2019. High hydrostatic pressure treatments
trigger de novo carotenoid biosynthesis in papaya fruit (Carica papaya cv. Maradol). Food Chem. 277 (May 2018), 362–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.10.102.
Raso, J., Frey, W., Ferrari, G., Pataro, G., Knorr, D., Teissie, J., Miklavcic, D., 2016. Recommendations guidelines on the key information to be reported in studies of application of
PEF technology in food and biotechnological processes. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 37, 312–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2016.08.003.
Rastogi, N., Raghavarao, K., Balasubramaniam, V., Niranjan, K., Knorr, D., 2007. Opportunities and challenges in high pressure processing of foods. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 47 (1),
69–112.
Rauh, C., Baars, A., Delgado, A., 2009. Uniformity of enzyme inactivation in a short-time high-pressure process. J. Food Eng. 91 (1), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jfoodeng.2008.08.019.
Reddy, N.R., Solomon, H.M., Tetzloff, R.C., Rhodehamel, E.J., 2003. Inactivation of Clostridium botulinum type A spores by high-pressure processing at elevated temperatures.
J. Food Protect. 66 (8), 1402–1407. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-66.8.1402.
Reineke, K., Doehner, I., Schlumbach, K., Baier, D., Mathys, A., Knorr, D., 2012. The different pathways of spore germination and inactivation in dependence of pressure and
temperature. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 13 (1998), 31–41.
Reineke, K., Mathys, A., Heinz, V., Knorr, D., 2013a. Mechanisms of endospore inactivation under high pressure. Trends Microbiol. 1–9.
Reineke, K., Mathys, A., Heinz, V., Knorr, D., 2013b. Mechanisms of endospore inactivation under high pressure. Trends Microbiol. 21 (6), 296–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.tim.2013.03.001.
Robertson, L.J., 2018. Parasites in food: from a neglected position to an emerging issue. In: Advances in Food and Nutrition Research, first ed., vol. 86. Elsevier Inc. https://doi.org/
10.1016/bs.afnr.2018.04.003.
Rubens, P., Snauwaert, J., Heremans, K., Stute, R., 1999. In situ observation of pressure-induced gelation of starches studied with FTIR in the diamond anvil cell. Carbohydr. Polym.
39 (3), 231–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0144-8617(99)00005-3.
Rumpold, B., Knorr, D., 2005. Impact of High Hydrostatic Pressure on Wheat, Tapioca, and Potato Starches. Department of Food Biotechnology and Food Process Engineering,
p. 120. August.
Sale, A.J., Gould, G.W., Hamilton, W.A., 1970. Inactivation of bacterial spores by high hydrostatic pressure. J. Gen. Microbiol. 60, 38–43. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/
23631742.
Santos, L.M.R., Oliveira, F.A., Ferreira, E.H.R., Rosenthal, A., 2017. Application and possible benefits of high hydrostatic pressure or high-pressure homogenization on beer
processing: a review. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 23 (7), 561–581. https://doi.org/10.1177/1082013217714670.
Scallan, E., Hoekstra, R.M., Angulo, F.J., Tauxe, R.V., Widdowson, M.A., Roy, S.L., Jones, J.L., Griffin, P.M., 2011. Foodborne illness acquired in the United States-Major
pathogens. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 17 (1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1701.P11101.
Schrader, K., Buchheim, W., Morr, C.V., 1997. High pressure effects on the colloidal calcium phosphate and the structural integrity of micellar casein in milk. Part 1 phosphate in
heated milk systems. High pressure dissolution of colloidal calcium. Nahrung 41.
Setlow, P., 2003. Spore germination. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 550–556.
Setlow, P., Markland, S., 2012. Nonthermal inactivation of superdormant spores. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 19, 44.
Sevenich, R., Bark, F., Kleinstueck, E., Crews, C., Pye, C., Hradecky, J., Reineke, K., Lavilla, M., Martinez-de-Maranon, I., Briand, J.C., Knorr, D., 2015a. The impact of high
pressure thermal sterilization on the microbiological stability and formation of food processing contaminants in selected fish systems and baby food puree at pilot scale. Food
Contr. 50, 539–547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.09.050.
Sevenich, R., Mathys, A., 2018. Continuous versus discontinuous ultra-high-pressure systems for food sterilization with focus on ultra-high-pressure homogenization and high-
pressure thermal sterilization: a review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12348.
Sevenich, R., Rauh, C., Knorr, D., 2016. A scientific and interdisciplinary approach for high pressure processing as a future toolbox for safe and high quality products: a review.
Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 38, 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2016.09.013.
Sevenich, R. (2016). High pressure processing at ambient and high temperatures and its influence on food processing contaminants , food borne diseases.
Sevenich, R., Bark, F., Crews, C., Anderson, W., Pye, C., Riddellova, K., Hradecky, J., Moravcova, E., Reineke, K., Knorr, D., 2013. Effect of high pressure thermal sterilization on
the formation of food processing contaminants. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 20, 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2013.07.006.
Sevenich, R., Reineke, K., Hecht, P., Fröhling, A., Rauh, C., Schlüter, O., Knorr, D., 2015b. Impact of different water activities (aw) adjusted by solutes on high pressure high
temperature inactivation of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens spores. Front. Microbiol. 6 (July), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2015.00689.
Sikes, A.L., Warner, R., 2016. Application of high hydrostatic pressure for meat tenderization. In: Innovative Food Processing Technologies: Extraction, Separation, Component
Modification and Process Intensification, pp. 259–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100294-0.00010-9. Issue October 2017.
Sila, D.N., Duvetter, T., De Roeck, A., Verlent, I., Smout, C., Moates, G.K., Hills, B.P., Waldron, K.K., Hendrickx, M., Van Loey, A., 2008. Texture changes of processed fruits and
vegetables: potential use of high-pressure processing. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 19 (6), 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2007.12.007.
Sim, S.Y.J., Karwe, M.V., Moraru, C.I., 2019. High pressure structuring of pea protein concentrates. J. Food Process. Eng. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpe.13261. August.
Simonin, H., Marzouki, S., Guyon, C., Orlowska, M., Le-Bail, A., De Lamballerie, M., 2009. Pasting properties of high-pressure-treated starch suspensions. High Pres. Res. 29 (4),
726–731. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957950903384099.
Smelt, J., 1998. Recent advances in the microbiology of high pressure processing. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 9 (4), 152–158.
Somkuti, J., Smeller, L., 2013. High pressure effects on allergen food proteins. Biophys. Chem. 183, 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpc.2013.06.009.
Stadler, H., Lineback, D.R., 2009. Process-induced Food Toxicanst. Occurrence, Formation, Mitigation and Health Risks. WILEY.
Sterr, J., Fleckenstein, B., Langowski, H.C., 2014. The effect of high-pressure processing on tray packages with modified atmosphere. Food Eng. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12393-014-9081-z.
Stolt, M., Onionen, S., Autio, K., 1997. Effect of high pressure on the dielectric properties of relaxor. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 6, 122–125. https://ac.els-cdn.com/
S1466856400000175/1-s2.0-S1466856400000175-main.pdf?_tid¼38a030c8-5887-4e8b-8293-70b03b0f7069&acdnat¼1552594574_
3acf4b5ea1428e70406230e08527c693.
Studer, A., Blank, I., Stadler, R.H., 2004. Thermal processing contaminants in foodstuffs and potential strategies of control. Czech J. Food Sci. 22 (Special Issue), 1–88.
Stute, R., 1999. High Pressure Treated Starch.
Sun, X.D., Holley, R.A., 2010. High hydrostatic pressure effects on the texture of meat and meat products. J. Food Sci. 75 (1) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2009.01449.x.
Thai Union Group. (2017). WO 2017/065700 Al (51).
Timson, J., Short, A., 1965. Resistance of microorganisms to hydrostatic pressure. Biotechnol. Bioeng. VII, 139–159.
Trespalacios, P., Pla, R., 2007. Synergistic action of transglutaminase and high pressure on chicken meat and egg gels in absence of phosphates. Food Chem. 104 (4), 1718–
1727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.01.077.
Uresti, R.M., Velazquez, G., Vázquez, M., Ramírez, J.A., Torres, J.A., 2006. Effects of combining microbial transglutaminase and high pressure processing treatments on the
mechanical properties of heat-induced gels prepared from arrowtooth flounder (Atheresthes stomias). Food Chem. 94 (2), 202–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.foodchem.2004.11.005.
USDA, 2012. High Pressure Processing (HPP) and Inspection Program Personnel (IPP) Verification Responsibilities. USDA.
Van Der Plancken, I., Verbeyst, L., De Vleeschouwer, K., Grauwet, T., Heiniö, R.L., Husband, F.A., Lille, M., Mackie, A.R., Van Loey, A., Viljanen, K., Hendrickx, M., 2012. Bio)
chemical reactions during high pressure/high temperature processing affect safety and quality of plant-based foods. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 23 (1), 28–38. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.tifs.2011.08.004.
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 (2), 269–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2010.04.027.
Volkert, M., Ananta, E., Luscher, C., Knorr, D., 2008. Effect of air freezing, spray freezing, and pressure shift freezing on membrane integrity and viability of Lactobacillus rhamnosus
GG. J. Food Eng. 87 (4), 532–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2008.01.00.
Vranová, J., Ciesarová, Z., 2009. Furan in food – a review. Czech J. Food Sci. 27 (1), 1–10.
Welti-Chanes, J., Palou, E., Lopez-Malo, A., Bermudez, D., 2005. Fundamentals and applications of high pressure processing to foods. In: Barbosa-Canovas, G.V., Tapia, M.S.,
Cano, M.P. (Eds.), Novel Food Processing Technologies, pp. 157–181. Issue 1995.
Wiezorek, T., 2012. Kombinierte Inaktivierung von Bacillus – Sporen und Pixuna Virus durch Hochdruck – Temperaturbehandlung sowie chemischen Reagenzien Eingereicht. TU
Berlin.
Winter, R., Jeworrek, C., 2009. Effect of pressure on membranes. Soft Matter 5 (17), 3157–3173. https://doi.org/10.1039/b901690b.
Wuytack, E., Boven, S., Michiels, C., 1998. Comparative study of pressure-induced germination of Bacillus subtilis spores at low and high pressures. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 64
(9), 3220–3224.
1.02 High-Pressure Processing: Fundamentals, Misconceptions, and
Advances
Sergio I Martı́nez-Monteagudo and Kaavya Rathnakumar, Dairy and Food Science Department, South Dakota State University,
Brookings, SD, United States
1.02.2 Historical Progress 20
1.02.3 Governing Principles 21
1.02.3.1 Definition of Pressure 21
1.02.3.2 Hydrostatic Condition 22
1.02.3.3 Atomic Changes 22
1.02.3.4 Pressure-Volume-Temperature Relations 23
1.02.3.5 Le Chatelier’s Principle 23
1.02.3.6 Transition State Theory 24
1.02.4 Equipment Overview 25
1.02.4.1 Hydraulic Configuration 25
1.02.4.2 Pressure Generation 25
1.02.4.3 Transmitting Fluid 27
1.02.4.4 Pressure Vessels 28
1.02.4.5 Closures 28
1.02.4.6 Seals 28
1.02.4.7 Fluid Reservoir 29
1.02.5 Misconceptions 30
1.02.5.1 Non-thermal View 30
1.02.5.2 Pressure Versus Temperature Effect 30
1.02.5.3 Process Uniformity 30
1.02.5.4 Reaction Volume Versus Activation Volume 32
1.02.6 Applications 33
1.02.6.1 Pasteurization 33
1.02.6.2 Pressure-Assisted Thermal Processing 34
1.02.6.3 Operational Mode 35
1.02.6.4 High-Pressure Freezing and Thawing 36
1.02.6.5 Pressure-Assisted Extraction 36
1.02.7 Conclusions 36
Acknowledgments 37
References 37
1.02.1 Introduction
High-pressure refers to a hydraulic power system that uses pressure levels in the range of 100 to 600 MPa. In such a hydraulic system,
a food material (liquid or solid) is hydrostatically compressed by means of a fluid, which produces nearly uniform change in the
molecular volume, and consequently desirable modifications in the material. Examples of such modifications are the crystallization
of fat, phase transition, ionization, inactivation of enzymes, denaturation of proteins, inactivation of microorganisms, and delaying
the rate of some chemical reactions.
In a short span of approximately 30 years, high-pressure has transitioned from a proof-concept carried out in few research labo-
ratories to an established unit operation, adopted in multiple food plants. Nowadays, high-pressure products including deli meats,
seafood, fruit juices, vegetable products, salads, and salsa are readily available in the supermarkets of North America, Europe, and
Asia-Pacific with a volume of sales estimated at over $2 billion annually.
Around the globe, scientists and engineers have performed basic and applied research in universities, national laboratories, and
industries. These research activities have resulted in significant advancement in different aspects of the technology, including funda-
mental compression studies, physical properties, process uniformity, and structural modifications. These technological develop-
ments have led to a multitude of applications, from pasteurization to extraction. The significant growth in the research activities
of high-pressure has led to a vast amount of literature on the subject, and it becomes increasingly incomprehensible to review
the state-of-the-art. The notorious developments of high-pressure also bring some misconceptions as well. This chapter covers

20 High-Pressure Processing: Fundamentals, Misconceptions, and Advances
an overview of the historical progress, fundamentals of high-pressure, equipment overview, some common misconceptions, and
a summary of recent advances.
1.02.2 Historical Progress
In this historical overview, those milestones that the authors considered as the forerunner in the development of high-pressure are
included. Many early experiments, particularly those dealing with the compressibility of liquids (1760s), devising accurate methods
for measuring pressure (1850s), and melting of solids (1890s) are not included. The industrial adaptation of high-pressure appli-
cations is a result of many technological milestones over centuries. More specifically, the foundations, development, and implemen-
tation of high-pressure has been tight to two major disciplines: mechanical and chemical engineering. Table 1 lists some remarkable
milestones that directly and indirectly helped the development of high-pressure processing as currently known. The invention of the
steam engine in 1769 by James Watt was perhaps the first relevant milestone regarding the use of high-pressure. Watt’s invention
allowed to transfer thermal energy into kinetic energy at elevated pressures (Eggers, 2005). By 1826, it was observed that the boiling
point of water raised with increasing the pressure. Years after, these observations led to the discovery of the critical point of fluids
including water and CO2 (Dewar, 1882), which in turns laid the foundation of supercritical fluid technology. By mid-19th century
(1820–60), industrial operations at pressure levels of tens MPa had become a reality. By 1884, the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers published the first standard test methods of boilers operated at high pressures.
The ability of pressure to influence the course of chemical reactions was a topic of research interest in the late part of the 19th
century (1850–99), where the foundations of chemical kinetics in the gas phase at elevated pressures enabled the hydrogenation
process, which later became an essential step during the synthesis of fine chemicals. In 1881, the hydrolysis of starch to produce
glucose monomers was performed under pressure (Soxhlet, 1881). Years later, it was observed that the application of 50 MPa
inhibited the acid inversion of sucrose (Stern, 1897). Such early milestones laid the foundations for high-pressure chemical
synthesis. A remarkable example is the synthesis of ammonia from nitrogen and hydrogen at 20 MPa by Haber and Bosch (Nobel
prize in 1918) (Eggers, 2005). Soon after, many other chemical syntheses were developed into commercial processes including
methanol, phenols (Brown, 1920), polyols, and polymerization of ethylene using pressure levels of 300 MPa (Vetter, 2001). The
development of seamless and forged cylindrical components enabled the safe operation and control of the vessels at pressure levels
in the range of hundreds MPa. The production of synthetic diamonds from graphite at pressures above 1200 MPa became a reality
in the mid-20th century.
Table 1 Selected developments in the industrial application of high pressure
Year Milestone Reference
1769 Invention of the steam engine Eggers (2005)

1826 Experiments on boiling point of water Vetter (2001)
1860 Discovery of the critical point of fluids Dewar (1882)
1881 Conversion of starch into sugar Soxhlet (1881)
1897 Inversion of cane sugar Stern (1897)
1899 Experiments on milk preservation Hite (1899)
1900 Homogenization of milk Pandolfe (1982)
1909 Experiments on compressibility Bridgman (1909)
1914 Water phase diagram Bridgman (1914a)
1914 Coagulation of albumen Bridgman (1914b)
1918 Pressure effect on bacteria Larson et al. (1918)
1920 First commercial plant of ammonia Vetter (2001)
1920 Phenol synthesis Brown (1920)
1923 Experiments on thermal conductivity Bridgman (1923)
1943 Mutarotation of glucose Sander (1943)
1953 Synthetic diamonds Vetter (2001)
1978 Commercial decaffeination plant King (2014)
1980 Beef protein quality Kennick et al. (1980)
1990 Commercial application of food products Mozhaev et al. (1994)
1995 Experiments on pressure-assisted freezing Kalichevsky et al. (1995)
1997 Introduction of pressure treated guacamole Sizer et al. (2002)
2002 Early observation of pressure-assisted extraction Wanehaya et al. (2002)
2004 Pressure as a pasteurization method Balasubramaniam et al. (2015)
2009 FDA issued no objection to an industry petition Balasubramaniam et al. (2015)
2014 Development of pressure-ohmic-thermal sterilization Park et al. (2014)
2015 FDA approved the process pressure enhanced sterilization IFSH (2015)
Adapted from Balasubramanian et al. (2015).

High-Pressure Processing: Fundamentals, Misconceptions, and Advances 21
Behind such landmarks is the development of pumps, compressors, tubes, seals, and sensors. Altogether, it opened a window to
an unexplored region of high pressure. Sheet metal forming and isostatic pressing of advanced materials are notable examples of
industrial applications of high pressure.
Operating at 680 MPa, Hite (1899) prevented the spoilage of milk by killing some microorganisms. Hite’s experiment was
the first application of high pressure aimed at extending the shelf-life of foods. In 1900, Auguste Gaulin invented the first appa-
ratus for applying high-pressure into fluid milk, reaching pressure levels 15 MPa (Pandolfe, 1982). Gaulin’s invention aimed at
reducing the size of the milk fat globule that led to the development of a critical unit operation, homogenization, of dairy
manufacturing. Between the early and mid-20th century (1909–59), Percy W. Bridgman, who is considered the father of
high-pressure, performed fundamental studies dealing with the compressibility of fluids (Bridgman, 1909), thermal conduc-
tivity (Bridgman, 1923), and phase change (Bridgman, 1914a). Bridgman elucidated the phase diagram of water over
a wide range of pressure and temperature. For the first time, a phenomenological description of the physical state of water
was provided. This is a significant milestone that greatly benefited the food industry since several processes have been designed
and optimized according to the phase diagram of water. Another relevant milestone in the field of food science was the coag-
ulation of albumen by pressure, whose appearance resembled that of the hard-boiled egg (Bridgman, 1914b). This demonstra-
tion was an early indicator of the potential use of high-pressure for structural modifications of food proteins. Another relevant
early observation was reported by Sander (1943), who significantly increased the speed of mutarotation of glucose with the
application of high-pressure. Soon after, it was discovered that pressure killed non-spore-forming microorganisms, while bacte-
rial spores resisted pressure levels up to 1200 MPa (Larson et al., 1918).
In 1978, the decaffeination process using supercritical carbon dioxide was commercially established. By the 1980s, a consid-
erable number of research papers were available documenting the effects of high-pressure on microbes, starches, and various
proteins including enzymes. Kennick et al. (1980) demonstrated that pressurization of pre-rigor muscles produces very tender
form meat. Despite all the research, the operational and maintenance costs were the main limiting factor for the commercial-
ization of food products treated by high-pressure. Nevertheless, a Japanese company in the early 1990’s launched the first pres-
sure treated product, jams and jellies. Such a milestone marked the beginning of a new era for the food industry (Mozhaev
et al., 1994). In 1995, the potential application of high-pressure for freezing and thawing was documented (Kalichevsky
et al., 1995). Soon after (1997), Fresherized Foods (formerly Avomex) launched the first pressurized food product in the
USA, an avocado paste made from fresh ripe avocados (Sizer et al., 2002). In 2002, a novel technique for the digestion of
metals in solid matrices was developed using a programmed sequence of temperature and pressure (Wanekaya et al., 2002),
which demonstrates the potential application of high-pressure for enhancing the extraction in food materials. By 2004, the
National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for Foods recommended to the federal regulators to redefine the
term of pasteurization. The agency redefines the term as any process treatment (such as high-pressure) or combination thereof,
that is applied to food to reduce the most resistant microorganism(s) of public health significance to a level that is not likely to
present a public health risk under normal conditions of distribution and storage. In 2009, the Food Drug Administration
agency (FDA) approved the application of high pressure to a preheated sample for sterilization of low-acid foods (Balasubra-
maniam et al., 2015). From a regulatory point of view, this is a significant milestone for the commercialization of sterile foods,
which is expected to be on the short to medium term. In the following years, pressure pasteurized products including deli
meats, seafood, fruit juices, vegetable products, salads, and salsa are readily available in the supermarkets in North America,
(USA, Canada), Europe and Asia-Pacific with a volume of sales estimated at over $2 billion annually. More recently, a new
technology was developed named pressure-ohmic-thermal sterilization to reduce thermal damage in vegetables (Park et al.,
2014). In 2015, the FDA approved the process of pressure enhanced sterilization for the commercial production of complex
particulate-bearing foods.
1.02.3 Governing Principles
As discussed earlier, the principles of high-pressure are based on mechanical and chemical engineering. In this section, such govern-
ing principles are presented and discussed.
1.02.3.1 Definition of Pressure

Pressure can be defined as the ratio of a force divided by the area which that force acts on (Skelton and Webb, 2003). This definition
is rather vague since the numerical description of a solid subjected to a force (pressure) not only depends on the direction in which it
acts but also on the orientation of the surface upon which it is acing. These considerations are decomposed into nine components,
stress tensors, and they are derived from a Cartesian coordinate system (x, y, and z coordinate directions). The nine components
represent the direct stress (compressive) and the shear stress (tangential) induced by the application of pressure.
The units of pressure are force per unit of area, Newtons per square meter ¼ 1 Pa or pounds per square inch. A number of unit
operations in the food industry involve the application of pressure, ranging from ten to hundred MPa (Table 2). Extrusion is
a 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. Spray-drying involves the application of pressure for the atomization of particles. Combinations of pres-
sure and temperature yielding water in the subcritical state, i.e., water above the boiling and below the critical point, have been used
Table 2 Examples of industrial operations of high-

pressure in food industry
Unit operation Pressure (Pa)
Extrusion 1.0 106

Spray drying 2.0 107
Supercritical fluid technology 3.0 107
High-pressure homogenization 2.0 108
High-pressure processing 6.0 108
for the extraction of bioactive compounds. Similarly, supercritical pressures have been used in decaffeination and similar food pro-
cessing operations.
1.02.3.2 Hydrostatic Condition

Pressurization of a material employing a fluid is the essential element of hydrostatic pressure. The hydrostatic term refers to the
physics of contact forces acting on fluids at rest, fluids without any global motion, and it is founded on two principles, equi-
librium and transmission of the force. Microscopically, the pressure within a fluid is a result of direct contact between mole-
cules, where the average molecular transfer of momentum on a given surface produces the acting force known as pressure. In
a particle or a body immersed in the fluid, the acting force is equally distributed in all directions, a phenomenon known as
hydrostatic equilibrium. This is because the pressure is the only contact force that is possible in a fluid at rest, and it acts
on the surface of a body. The second principle states that all fluids yield to a force imposed on it, transporting the force among
themselves without friction and acting without friction on subsequent contact surface. Under a hydrostatic condition, the diag-
onal components of the stress tensor are the same value, meaning that the resulting shear component is zero. Thus, a true
hydrostatic condition will not subject a test specimen directly to shear stress, and it is considered that the hydrostatic condition
is independent of time, space and magnitude (Martínez-Monteagudo and Balasubramaniam, 2016). In high-pressure applica-
tions where a packed food material is surrounded by pressuring fluid, the pressure and, more importantly, its effects are often
considered to be instantaneous and homogenous within the food item, regardless of geometry and size. This unique charac-
teristic has enabled processes development, contributing to successful commercial applications (Balasubramaniam et al.,
2015).
1.02.3.3 Atomic Changes

The most noticeable effect induced by hydrostatic pressure is the uniform change in volume of a fluid or solid, whose magnitude is
greater than the volume changes induced by temperature. A system composed of molecules and atoms forms nuclei of surrounding
electromagnetic forces, and on which an external hydrostatic pressure reduces the internal potential energy (PE) while increasing the
internal kinetic (KE) energy according to Eqs. (1) and (2) (Bridgman, 1935).
KE z E þ p$v (1)
PE z E p$v (2)
Where E is the total energy of the system, p is the hydrostatic pressure, and v is the volume. In an idealized system, the increase
in the internal kinetic energy due to the hydrostatic pressure is a direct result of the increment of the electron volts per atom,
which results in a shrinkage of the orbits, a compression of the atom. Such theoretical interpretation has been exemplified by
the ionic lattice of the NaCl (Bridgman, 1935). The ionic lattice is held together by the electrostatic attractions of the ions and
prevented from collapsing by a repulsive force due to ionic interpenetration. The magnitude of the attractive forces can be
derived from the lattice structure and the ionic charges, while the component of repulsive force is somewhat related to the
distance between atoms. Under this consideration, the repulsive force obeys the law of force between atoms, where the
assemblage of the entire lattice is a function only of the distance between atomic centers irrespective of the orientation
(orientation is negligible for hydrostatic pressure). According to the law of force approximation, hydrostatic pressure alters the
interatomic distance affecting only those interaction whose bonding energy is distance-dependent (Martinez-Monteagudo and
Saldaña, 2014). For instance, the force of electrostatic 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, covalent bonds are unlikely to be affected by
pressure because their bonding distance can be minimally compressed further. Indeed, studies have revealed that covalent
bonds that constitute the primary structure of proteins are unaffected by pressure (up to 1500 MPa) (Mozhaev et al., 1994).
Table 3 exemplifies the effect of hydrostatic pressure on chemical bonds based on their interatomic distance. The ability of
hydrostatic pressure to keep covalent bonds unaffected has been the central hypothesis for the preservation of biological
Table 3 Illustration of the influence of hydrostatic pressure on selected chemical bonds
Type of interaction Working distance [nm] Distance dependence Possible pressure effect
Coulomb 20 Proportional inversely Highly affected

van der Waals 1–20 Optimum distance Highly affected
Hydrogen bonding 0.2 Quadratic Affected
Solvation >2 Exponential Affected
Hydrophobic >2 Exponential Affected
Covalent 0.2 Independent Unlikely affected
Reprinted by permission from Springer Nature: Food Engineering Reviews Martinez-Monteagudo and Saldaña (2014).
activity of functional compounds, such as ascorbic acid (Indrawati et al., 2004), folates (Butz et al., 2004), antioxidants (Matser
et al., 2004), anthocyanins (Verbeyst et al., 2010), lycopene (Yan et al., 2017), and conjugated linoleic acid (Martínez-
Monteagudo et al., 2012).
1.02.3.4 Pressure-Volume-Temperature Relations

The assumption of the law of force provides a qualitative approximation of the shrinkage of the ionic lattice and applied pressure,
compressibility. Over the years, this approximation has been redefined in terms of the estimation of the internal kinetic energy, and
it has brought a thermodynamic relation between the deformation of the atoms and the change of internal energy (E) with pressure,
Eq. (3).

vE vv vv
¼ T$ p$ (3)
vp T vT p vp T
Thermodynamically, a substance is completely characterized when the relation of pressure-volume-temperature is known. Eq.
(3) explains the molecular changes induced by pressure. Examples of such changes are density, viscosity, solubility, compressibility,
melting, as well as electrical, thermophysical, and optical properties.
A closer examination of the Eq. (3) reveals that the application of pressure decreases the internal energy (the term of the left side
of Eq. 3), meaning that more energy flowing out in the form heat to counteract the mechanical energy work produced by the
external pressure. This phenomenon is known as adiabatic heat or heat of compression. Most of the foods containing high moisture
produce values of heat of compression similar to that of water, 3 C per 100 MPa. On the other hand, the heat of compressing foods
rich in fat is on average 8.7–9.1 C per 100 MPa. Table 4 reports values of heat of compression for selected foods. The numerical
value of the heat of compression is of technological interest for enhancing the thermal processing of a preheated sample, a tech-
nology known as pressure-assisted thermal processing (PATP) or Pressure Enhanced Sterilization (PES). The idea behind this tech-
nology is to use the heat of compression to reach commercial sterilization temperatures (120 C). Samples compressed
hydrostatically rise their temperature pseudo-instantaneously and uniformly throughout the sample. Such rapid heating reduces
the severity of traditional thermal process and the lack of temperature uniformity that occurs in a traditional thermal process (Sev-
enich and Mathys, 2018). PATP was first developed for the sterilization of low-acid foods (Sizer et al., 2002).
1.02.3.5 Le Chatelier’s Principle

The Le Chatelier principle has a basis in the first and second law of thermodynamics. For a reversible process, the changes in the
internal energy are the product of the relations temperature-entropy and pressure-volume, Eq. (4):
dU ¼ T$dS p$dV (4)
Table 4 Values of heat compression for

selected food products
Food Heat of compression ( C per 100 MPa)
Water 3.0
Milk 3.0
Yogurt 3.1
Honey 3.2
Salmon 3.2
Olive oil 8.7
Soy oil 9.1
Adapted from Balasubramanian et al. (2015).

In general terms, the Le Chatelier principle stated that a system in equilibrium would shift to new equilibrium to partially undo
an external force, action, or stress that disturbs the equilibrium. The Le Chatelier’s principle is often used to explain the effects of
pressure and temperature on chemical, biological, and physical phenomena. Despite its various applications, the Le Chatelier’s prin-
ciple is a very general statement about systems in equilibrium and their behavior when subjected to external force or stress. In 1920s,
the term of affinity was developed based on the thermodynamic conjugate pairs, extensive and intensive variables. Thermodynamic
variables come in conjugate pairs: temperature and entropy; pressure and volume; chemical potential and moles. An interpretation
of affinity is that such system held at fixed entropy and volume will come to equilibrium by varying temperature and pressure. In the
case of HPP, if pressure (extensive variable) changes, the equilibrium shifts in the direction that tends to reduce the change in the
corresponding intensive variable (volume). Thus, any phenomenon (phase transition, change in molecular configuration, chemical
reaction) accompanied by a decrease in volume is enhanced by pressure.
1.02.3.6 Transition State Theory

The Transition State Theory (TST) was developed by Eyring and Polanyi (Eyring, 1935), and it stated that an elementary chemical
reaction proceeds when the molecular positions of their reagents rearrange into a critical position or activated state (Murzin and
Salmi, 2005). Fig. 1 illustrates the transition state and activated complex of a hypothetical reaction in solution. Essentially, the
TST considers thermodynamic and statistical mechanics principles to predict the number of combinations of reactants that will
be present in the transition state. It is assumed that interphase exists between the region of reactants and products. This dividing
interphase is located at the transition state, maximum value of the potential energy surface on the minimum energetic path that
connects reactants and products. This state is induced by the collision of molecules, and it the most energetically favourable posi-
tion. Any trajectory passing through the dividing surface from the reactant side is assumed to eventually form products. During the
transition, the reactants and activated complexes are assumed to be in some type of equilibrium maintaining their Boltzmann
energy distributions corresponding to the temperature of the reacting system, while the whole system is not at equilibrium. The
activated complex has the same properties of an ordinary molecule, meaning that Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution governs their
energy profile within the transition state (Murzin and Salmi, 2005). Fig. 2 exemplifies the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. As
the temperature increases, the population of molecules with more energy also increases. From the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution,
it can be evident that higher temperatures produce not only higher average kinetic energy but also broader energy range. Once the
products are formed, their potential energy decreases and the number of molecules in the transition state is small compared with the
number of reactants. The probability of finding a particle in the transition state depends on the Maxwell-Boltzmann energy distri-
bution and the partition function. According to statistical physics, the partition function for a particle is a result of the sum of ener-
gies derived from electronic, vibrational, rotational, and translational. Since the activated complex is a point on a potential surface,
the rate of a reaction given by the equilibrium of activated complexes near the top of the potential barrier multiplied by the average
velocity of crossing the barrier. Mathematically, the rate constant (ki) is given by Eq. (5):
Qrgts
kT DGs g
ki ¼ expð RT Þ s (5)
h g
Figure 1 Energy profile of a hypothetical reaction illustrating the transition state theory. Reprinted from Catalytic Kinetics, Murzin and Salmi (2005),
Chapter 3 - Elementary reactions with permission for Elsevier.
Figure 2 Representation of Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution for a hypothetical reaction. Reprinted from Catalytic Kinetics, Murzin and Salmi (2005),
Chapter 3 - Elementary reactions with permission for Elsevier.
where k and h are the Boltzmann and Planck constants, respectively, and DGs is the standard free energy change between reagents
and transition state. The last term of Eq. (5) is the activity coefficient. Partial differentiation of Eq. (5) yields Eq. (6), which
introduces the term activation volume (DVs):

vln k v DGs DV s
¼ $ ¼ (6)
vp T vp R$T R$T
The term DVs is the difference in partial molar volumes between reagents and transition state. Eq. (6) predicts an increase in the
rate when the transition state occupies a smaller volume than the volume of reagents, negative values of activation volume. The
activation volume is perhaps the most important parameter derived from kinetic studies. The sensitivity of a chemical reaction
to pressure depends on the absolute value of DVs (positive or negative). Reactions with large positive DVs values may occur at
a very low rate with increasing pressure. Contrary, reaction with negative values of DVs are favored by the application of pressure.
Although the transition state theory and its associated activation volume was originally developed for chemical reactions, it has
been widely used to explain the effect of pressure in many applications such as fat crystallization, starch gelation, enzyme inacti-
vation, protein denaturation, and inactivation of microorganisms.
1.02.4 Equipment Overview
The methods for the generation of high-pressure are expensive to build, operate, and maintain. Thus, the application of high-
pressure will only be successful if clear advantages are obtained with respect to the product quality, mitigation of food process
contaminants, and overall costs (Sevenich et al., 2015). This section provides an overview of the basic components and their
main function of high-pressure units.
1.02.4.1 Hydraulic Configuration

In a nutshell, HPP units are essentially hydraulic power systems, where the power generated by a compressed fluid is delivered from
its point of generation to its place of deployment. This energy transfer is carried out in different arrangements. The scope of this
section is to introduce the fundamental principles and the basic configurations of HPP and major composing elements.
An HPP unit uses a pump, an intensifier, a control valve, a hydraulic actuator, a fluid reservoir, at least a vessel, and connecting
pipes (Fig. 3). One of the most noteworthy features of HPP units is its power-carrying media or pressure-transmitting fluid, which
allows the hydraulic potential energy to be delivered to all directions with the same capacity. This feature allows the arrangement of
multiple vessels being equally powered by the same pump-intensifier. The schematics showed in Fig. 3 are a simplified view of how
the components are connected and their basic function. Actual structure, installation, capacity, and parameters of the individual
components will depend on the specific unit and equipment vendor.
1.02.4.2 Pressure Generation

In HPP, the pressures commonly used (100–600 MPa) cannot be achieved by a pump directly. The target pressure is thus obtained
by the combined action of a hydraulic pump and a pressure intensifier. A hydraulic intensifier is a mechanical device for intensifying
Figure 3 Simplified diagram of the principal components of high-pressure processing. (1) fluid reservoir, (2) hydraulic pump, (3) intensifier, (4)
check valve, (5) needle valve, (6) decompression valve, (7) pressure transducer, and (8) high-pressure vessel.
High-pressure discharge
Compression
chamber
Fluid from the

hydraulic pump
Fluid from the

reservoir
Figure 4 Illustration of a single-acting intensifier.
the hydraulic power at low pressure into a reduced volume of higher pressure. The underlying physics of an intensifier is based on
the Pascal’s law for incompressible fluids. Overall, the generation of pressure and its multiplication is conducted by the combined
action of a hydraulic pump and an intensifier. The hydraulic pump not only converts mechanical kinetic energy into hydraulic
potential energy but also provides the intake flow of the intensifier, which operates on the ratio-of-areas principle. As illustrated
in Fig. 4, a typical intensifier (single-acting intensifier) has a common rod connecting two pistons of different sizes: 1) the actuator
piston, larger piston; and 2) the boosting piston, smaller piston. The large cylinder has a port connecting the flow corresponding
from the hydraulic pump, while the small cylinder has a port connecting to the low-pressure fluid supply lines, and the high-
pressure outline line. A set of check valves separates the low- and the high-pressure lines. During the pressure generation, the
low-pressure fluid is supplied to the large cylinder and acts on the larger piston driven the smaller piston to discharge pressurized
fluid. The ratio between the large and the small cylinder is inversely proportional to the areas ratio, according to Eq. (7):
R2
P ¼ p$ þF (7)
r2
where p is the pressure generated by the hydraulic pump, low-pressure; P is the final pressure; R and r are the radio of the large and
small cylinder; and F is a constant related the friction. In general, an intensifier is designed to magnify between 6–10 times the input
pressure value. The actuating cylinder is normally retracted by the fluid. The pressure intensifier illustrated in Fig. 4 boosts pressure
• High-pressure
discharge
Fluid from the
To the reservoir hydraulic pump
Fluid from the Fluid from the

reservoir reservoir
Figure 5 Illustration of a double-acting intensifier.
intermittently – each piston stroke discharges pressurized fluid. Single acting-intensifier can be grouped in a pair to provide more
continues supply of pressure. Another configuration of the intensifier is the double-acting intensifier, illustrated in Fig. 5. Essen-
tially, a double-acting intensifier is a combined design of two single acting-intensifier sharing a large cylinder. The two boosting
piston and the actuating piston are mounted on one rod. This design allows the retraction of one of the boosting pistons, while the
other is extending with every stroke of the actuating piston. The retraction of a boosting piston drawn fluid from the inlet line into
the compression chamber. Reciprocally, the extension of a boosting piston discharges the fluid into the high-pressure outlet. Several
commercially available intensifiers are on the market actuated by a hydraulic pump, which makes it unnecessary for the in-house
construction.
1.02.4.3 Transmitting Fluid

The power-carrying or transmitting fluid performs various functions. The primary function is the transmission of power or pressure.
For this task, the fluid should be little compressible over the entire operating range of pressure. All hydraulic fluids experience some
degree of compressibility in proportion to the operating pressure. For instance, water presents compressibility values of about 15%
at 600 MPa (Mathys and Knorr, 2009). Although extreme changes in the compressibility cause delay in the response rate, the
compressibility of fluids commonly used in HPP is not a concern. On the other hand, the presence of dissolved air or gases nega-
tively impacts the response and performance of the fluid. Thus, one critical property of the transmitting fluid is the percentage of
gases that can be dissolved in the fluid.
A secondary function of the transmitting fluid is lubrication, which minimizes wear and reduces friction. Overall, the transmit-
ting fluid provides sufficient lubricity by forming a film that separates metal-to-metal contact between surfaces. In case of insuffi-
cient lubricity, antiwear additives are used for improving the lubricity capability. A third function of the fluid is to remove
contaminants between gaps and crevices. Contaminants are small particles from surfaces that torn off, and they can accelerate wear.
In order to perform such key functions, the transmitting fluids are evaluated based on their properties including specific gravity,
viscosity index, bulk modulus, antifoaming, lubricity, and oxidation stability. Another important parameter of the transmitting
fluids is the bulk modulus, which is a measure of the compressibility. The basic definition of the fluid bulk modulus is the fractional
reduction in the fluid volume with respect to the applied pressure, Eq. (8).

vp
b ¼ V$ (8)
vV
where b is the bulk modulus, V is the volume, and p is the pressure. The bulk modulus of a fluid can be either defined as the
isothermal tangent bulk modulus if its compressibility is measured under a constant temperature, or as the isoentropic tangent bulk
modules if its compressibility is measured under constant entropy.
Another relevant property of transmitting fluid is the antifoaming ability. The formation of foam contains entrained air,
which reduces the dynamic responses in power transmission due to decreased bulk modules, shortening fluid service life
because of increased fluid oxidation. Under certain conditions, hydraulic fluids may dissolve a certain amount of air. In general,
the dissolving rate of gases in fluids is proportional to the pressure and inversely proportional to the temperature. During
pressurization and depressurization cycles, the dissolved gases are released from the fluids forming foams. Oxidation and
thermal stability are other important properties of the transmitting fluids. The resistance to oxidation is known as oxidative
stability, and the oxidation rate increases as the temperature rises. Thermal stability is the capability of the fluids in resisting
chemical reactions and further decomposition during high-temperature operations. The seal compatibility of fluid is one more
property that needs to be considered for high-pressure applications. The fluid selected should be compatible with the sealing
materials. While water is commonly used as transmitting fluid in HPP, other transmitting fluids such as petroleum-based and
environmentally safe fluids are used for PATP applications. Synthetic esters, polyglycols, vegetable oils, and water-glycol
mixtures are examples of transmitting fluids used in PATP.
1.02.4.4 Pressure Vessels

It serves as a point of contact between the packed food and transmitting fluid. Pressure vessels that are intended for use in HPP
require specific design features, the shape of the vessel and thickness of the wall. There are three types of high-pressure vessels
used for HPP: i) thick-walled or monobloc, ii) multiwalled, and iii) wire-wound (Balasubramaniam et al., 2016). The first type
of vessel is essentially a cylindrical wall consisting of a single layer (nonwelded), avoiding large side ports in the wall, with the
end closures being for openings and connections. Monobloc vessels are suitable for a wide range of pressure levels and application
that require high temperatures (PATP). The associated thermal stresses from heating and cooling are rather low because of the
thermal conductivity across the wall. The monobloc vessels are particularly suitable for laboratory units, where heating and cooling
can be accomplished quite reliable. Another feature of the monobloc vessels is the large wall thickness that depends on the oper-
ational pressure. Due to the nature of hydrostatic pressure, tangential stress is highest at the inner bore and decays toward the outer
diameter. The monobloc vessels are designed according to the maximum allowable pressure at a given ratio of the outer diameter to
inner diameter, and yield strength of the material (Vetter, 2001). The second type of vessels, multiwalled, is suitable for operating at
larger volumes and higher-pressure levels than that of the monobloc vessel. However, the thermal conductivity through the multi-
wall is lower than the monobloc, an aspect that should not be overlooked for application that involves extensive heating and cool-
ing. Multiwalled vessels are manufactured by autofrettage technique, where the inner part of a cylindrical vessel is compressed until
experiences plastic deformation, while the outer part only experiences elastic deformation. Upon decompression, the outer part of
the cylinder tends to regain its original form, and the net results is a constant condition of pre-stressed between the plastic and elastic
deformation. Another technique for the manufacturing of multiwalled vessels is the heat-shrink technique, where two separate
cylinders, outer and inner, are assembled by heating the outer cylinder to induce its expansion, while the inner cylinder is simul-
taneously cooled to induce shrinking. During the shrinking process, compressive stresses are produced in the smaller cylinder, and
tensile stresses in the larger cylinder, both in the circumferential and longitudinal directions. The third type of vessel is the wire-
wound, which is a variation of the multiwalled vessel. The manufacture of wire-wound vessels combines a number of turns of
high tensile strength wire wound around an inner cylinder, which shrinks the inner diameter of the cylinder. The shrinking of
the inner cylinder is a result of the pressure derived from the wire, leading to compressive and residual stresses inside the vessel
and providing great strength.
1.02.4.5 Closures
The type of closure is an important consideration for the HPP vessels. Generally, closures can be either attached to the vessel or
supported by an external frame. In the first case, the vessel not only experiences circumferential and radial stresses but also axial
load from the attached closure. Contrary, the use of an external frame minimizes the axial load reduces the fatigue of the vessel.
However, an external frame results in larger and heavier equipment. The end closures are designed with the idea of reducing cyclic
stress and fatigue as well as facilitating the opening and closing. An end closure with continuous internal thread benefits the fatigue
and cyclic stress of the vessel but it prolongs the time needed for opening and closing. Another design is the end closure connected
by bolts. The bolts can be tightened hydraulically or pneumatically. Despite that a bolted closure reduces the cyclic stress, its oper-
ation is very time consuming since each bolt is manipulated individually. A clamp supported by an external frame may be sued in
conjunction with an interrupted thread or locked-type system. This arrangement can be automatized, simplifying the overall
operation.
1.02.4.6 Seals
Leaking is one of the most common occurrences in HPP units, which negatively impacts the hydraulic performance of the entire
unit. Proper sealing prevents leakage without adding much friction under the entire operational conditions. Another function of
the sealing is to exclude contaminants that shorten the service life of the unit. In high-pressure applications, there are two types
of seals, static and dynamic seals. The former is used to seal the clearance between immobile components, and the latter is for appli-
cations with relative motion between surfaces. The static seals act within the clearance of two surfaces to stop fluids from leaking
from the gap while allowing the components to move freely. Factors such as the size of the gap, the length of the seal, the applied
pressure, and the smoothness of the surfaces determine the sealing effectiveness. Static seals act on small gaps which therefore results
in low friction and low generation of heat. Metallic seals, ring joints, conical-, flat-, lapped-, and O-rings are examples of static seals
used in HPP units.
On the other hand, dynamic seals should match the microscopic irregularities of the contacting surfaces to prevent pressure fluid
penetration. A proper dynamic seal should have enough flexibility to expand or compress to fit the gap variation caused by the
mechanical movement. In addition, dynamic seals must withstand shear stress produced by the system and to resist being forced
into the extrusion gap. The fundamental principle of sealing for HPP is that the pressure itself provides the sealing element. A suit-
able seal is normally selected in terms of pressure, transmitting fluid, and temperature. Elastomer O-ring is frequently used to seal
high-pressure connections. O-ring seals have a round shape cross-section and they are made of oil-resistant rubber. Under pressure,
the O-ring is pushed by the high-pressure fluid to the low-pressure side of the groove, resulting in a tighter seal. These seals are
simple, robust, and effective. Cyclic stress creates fatigue problems in the seal. Seals are not only used for connecting pipes but
also for the junction of two moving parts (piston and cylinder).
1.02.4.7 Fluid Reservoir

The fluid reservoir is a storage tank for holding the transmitting fluid. The reservoir may vary in size, shape (rectangular, cylindrical, T-
shaped, or L-shaped), and material of construction (steel, stainless steel, aluminum, or plastic). Reservoirs are designed to store
between two to four times the pump flow. This consideration helps to maintain a continuous supply of fluid in the intensifier
and the unit as a whole. Intensifiers having cylinders with large rods require a constant supply of fluid since the volume of the return-
ing fluid is greatly reduced with every stroke of the piston. Moreover, a large reservoir provides sufficient cooling capability since the
heat of the returning fluid is dissipated within the excess of fluid and subsequently within the exterior walls of the reservoir. A well-
designed reservoir performs many other functions such as facilitating the settling down of contaminants, releasing of entrained air,
preventing the return of fluids, removing used fluids and contaminants, and indicating fluid levels for maintenance. In a way, a fluid
reservoir is much more than merely a fluid storage tank. Reservoirs for HPP are equipped with an assembly of supporting elements
(Fig. 6), including a filter cap, a breather cap, a fluid level indicator, a separation baffle, an outlet filter, a fluid returning pipe, and
a drain plug. The filler cap is designed to add new fluid, and it is normally located at the top of the reservoir. On the other hand, the
breather cap is used to prevent a vacuum inside the reservoir that will stop the fluid from flowing out the reservoir. A common feature
of a reservoir is a baffling device which prevents the returning fluid from being directly recirculated back into the system without
mixing or allowing to settle down or discharge air. A magnetic drain plug is perhaps the most effective way to keep metal-based
contaminant near the plug and prevent those contaminants from being carried away into the intensifier. A simple and reliable
way to detect malfunction within the system is by the routine inspection of the fluid level indicator, which is attached on the outside
wall of the reservoir. The outlet filter is used to prevent large solids contaminant s from entering the intensifier.
(1)
(3) (4)
(6)
(2)
(5)
(7)
Figure 6 Illustration of a typical fluid reservoir. (1) returning fluid, (2) baffle, (3) filter cap, (4) breather cap, (5) outlet with filter, (6) level indicator,
and (7) drain plug.
1.02.5 Misconceptions
1.02.5.1 Non-thermal View
One of the first misconceptions of high-pressure is the view as a non-thermal technology. The term non-thermal was coined by
Professor Dietrich Knorr in the 1990s, and in a broad sense it refers to food preservation processes that do not use heat. The
view of high-pressure as a non-thermal technology is clearly at odds with the pressure-volume-temperature relations, Eq. (3).
The physical meaning of Eq. (3) is the heat of compression, which has been investigated quite extensively elsewhere (Patazca
et al., 2007; Rasanayagam et al., 2003). The estimation of the heat of compression can be theoretically calculated according to
Eq. (9):

dT T$a
¼ (9)
dp Cp $r
where a is the thermal conductivity, Cp is the heat capacity, and r is the density of the product. Eq. (9) is valid within a small range of
pressures, where the values of a, Cp, and r remain unchanged with pressure. Unfortunately, these parameters significantly change
within the domain of high-pressure (400–600 MPa). Moreover, the magnitude of the temperature rise depends on the initial
temperature, the applied pressure, the composition of the food, and the transmitting fluid. Over the years, the estimation of the heat
of compression has been conducted in a number of food products using regression models. Among the most popular models are
those based on polynomial equations of second order. The parameters of such models do not have physical meaning, and they are
valid only within the experimental conditions and the food material from which were derived. A reliable and straightforward
approximation to calculate the heat of compression was developed by Patazca et al. (2007), Eq. (10).
Tf Ti
ds y100$ (10)
p
where ds is the temperature increase, Tf is the final temperature, and Ti is the initial temperature. All these approaches yield
numerical values of the heat of compression which highlights the flowing of thermal energy. As seen from the brief overview
presented here, any claims that high-pressure processing does not use heat are nothing more than a misconception. It is worth
mentioning that the temperature (up to 40 C) used in the industrial pasteurization by high-pressure will not inactivate micro-
organisms. Thus, pressure is driving force behind the inactivation rather than a combination of temperature and pressure.
1.02.5.2 Pressure Versus Temperature Effect

Pressure is a basic thermodynamic variable just like temperature, and they are mathematically related according to Gibbs’s defini-
tion of free energy. Gibbs energy is defined by entropy, internal energy, pressure-volume work, and temperature (Eq. 11).
G ¼ U þ p$V T$S (11)
In a strict sense, 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. A graphical representation of the pressure and temperature relationship is the water
phase diagram, where the physical state of water is given by a pair of pressure and temperature (Fig. 7). Thermal effects during pres-
sure treatment can cause volume and energy changes. On the other hand, pressure primarily affects the volume of the product being
processed. The combined net effect during high-pressure processing has been phenomenologically classified as synergistic, antag-
onistic or additive. Therefore, changes in food such as reactions, phase transitions, molecular reorientation, and others depend on
both temperature and pressure and cannot be treated separately.
1.02.5.3 Process Uniformity

Ideally, the uniformity of high-pressure requires that the target pressure and temperature are set immediately and applied uniformly
throughout the vessel and product irrespectively of the holding time, product size, and geometry. The view of high-pressure as
a uniform process has been challenged over the past few years (Denys et al., 2000; Grauwet et al., 2016; Nair et al., 2016; Rauh
et al., 2009; Salvi et al., 2017). In this section, the uniformity with respect to pressure and temperature is briefly discussed. The appli-
cation of pressure is commonly assumed to be uniform throughout the vessel and product, hydrostatic principle, which is a safe
assumption for liquids and relative homogeneous solids. However, gradients of pressure have been reported for solid foods
with hard inclusions (Minerich and Labuza, 2003; Nair et al., 2016). Minerich and Labuza (2003) reported a pressure gradient
of 9 MPa in the center of ham with respect to the transmitting fluid. Numerical simulations of a model food made of a gel and
a wood inclusion showed that hydrostatic pressure decreased at the interphase between the solid and the inclusion, creating shear
stress. In summary, the uniformity of pressure is strongly dependent on the heterogeneity of the food material and the compress-
ibility associated with it. Thus, pressure gradients may exist over a short time, and the magnitude of such gradients are too small for
impacting the overall uniformity of pressure. Contrary, the nonuniformity of temperature has been documented over the years. The
temperature gradients during high-pressure are due to the heat of compression of the different components involved. Upon
compression, the temperature of the transmitting fluid and the food increases. Concomitantly, the heat of compression for the
vessel (steel) is negligible, which creates a thermal gradient. Such a thermal gradient can lead to subsequent cooling of the sample
Figure 7 Water phase diagram as influenced by pressure-thermal effects.
due to heat loss toward the vessel. The determination of temperature gradients has been performing mainly three methods (Grau-
wet et al., 2016):
i) Direct measure of the temperature at different locations.
ii) Computational thermal fluid dynamic modelling (CTFD).
iii) Pressure-temperature-time indicators.
The direct measurement of the thermocouple during compression was the first indicator of the existence of thermal gradients.
However, proper evaluation of the temperature distribution requires multiples thermal sensors across the vessel, which is a daunting
task for large vessels. In addition, wired thermocouples such as Type K and J involve special attention to the sealing of the thermo-
couple passage through the vessel (Grauwet et al., 2016). An important limitation of the wired thermocouples is that such devices
may affect the normal movement of the flow inside the vessel, impacting the temperature gradient itself.
Numerical simulations of the temperature distribution inside the vessel have been documented elsewhere (Hartmann et al.,
2003; Hartmann et al., 2004; Rauh et al., 2009; Rauh and Delgado, 2010). Rauh et al. (2009) simulated the temperature uniformity
in a vertically oriented vessel under four hypothetical operating scenarios. The first scenario consists of the temperature distribution
when the vessel and the fluid have the same initial temperature, 50 C. The second hypothetical scenario was considered 20 C as
the initial temperature for the vessel and the fluid. The third scenario involves the boundary conditions of the first situation but with
an increased viscosity as a way to suppress convection inside the vessel. The last scenario used an initial temperature of 50 C and
a final temperature equal to the temperature the product after compression under adiabatic conditions (70 C). For the first
scenario, the wall temperature showed to be colder than the center of the vessel after compression. Thus, heat transfer occurs
between the walls and fluid, developing a temperature and density layer in the vicinity of the walls and grows into the bulk liquid.
In the first two scenarios, cold fluid flows down at the lateral wall, and thermal stratification develops in the vertical direction from
bottom to top. At the top surface of the vessel, unstable temperature stratification arises with colder liquid above warmer liquid. The
thermal layering is less developed in scenario three due to the higher viscosity, where the free convection is suppressed, and only
conduction governs the heat transfer. In the last scenario, the zero-temperature difference between the wall and the bulk fluid leads
to a homogeneous temperature field at the end of the pressure-holding time. Smith et al. (2014) simulated the temperature profiles
of a horizontal and vertical vessel and it was demonstrated that the horizontal arrangement exhibited more temperature inhomo-
geneity than the vertical vessel.
The development of process indicators has been a topic of research and commercial interest. Indicators such as pressure-
temperature-time can be used as sensors to obtain insight in the temperature gradients within the vessel (Van der Plancken
et al., 2008). A series of protein-based indicators has been developed as a robust system for detecting temperature nonuniformity
in high-pressure vessels (Grauwet et al., 2009, 2010a, 2010b, 2011). These indicators consist of flexible microtubes filled a buffer
solution of a biologically active protein, whose activity after treatment can be easily evaluated spectrophotometrically. Although
such indicators can be used as uniformity test, profiling the temperature distribution within the vessel using these type of indicators
presents some limitations. For instance, indicators are designed for a specific application for which the reaction rate constant is high
enough to be detected. Measurements outside the specific operating conditions significantly impact the reliability of the sensor.
Moreover, indicators respond to a specific temperature range, and uniform readouts at different coordinates inside the vessel do
not necessarily prove that no temperature difference existed (Grauwet et al., 2016).
Overall, temperature gradients within the vessel will exist during compression, and strategies has been developed to minimize
the heat transfer inside the vessel. Selecting components with comparable heat of compression, equilibrating the initial and working
temperature, optimizing the compression rate, using insulated container, and the overall configuration of the hydraulic systems
(preventing the injection of cold transmitting fluid) are examples of such strategies.
1.02.5.4 Reaction Volume Versus Activation Volume

Over the years, a number of benefits of high-pressure have been documented that deal with changes in the physical properties,
effects on the equilibrium processes, and influences the rate of processes. These processes include crystallization of fat (Zulkurnain
et al., 2019), phase transition of starch (Buckow et al., 2007), ionization equilibria (Stippl et al., 2005), inactivation of enzymes
(Hendrickx et al., 1998), denaturation of proteins, inactivation of microorganisms (Daryaei et al., 2016), mitigate the toxicological
potential of foods (Sevenich et al., 2015), and delaying the rate of some chemical reactions (Martinez-Monteagudo and Saldaña,
2014). These applications have been somewhat studied using kinetic analysis with the idea to estimate relevant kinetic parameters
(pre-exponential factor, activation, energy, activation volume, constant rate, and reaction volume). In this section, an attempt to
clarify the difference between reaction volume and activation volume is presented.
Kinetics of chemical reactions as a function of pressure at isothermal conditions is governed by van’t Hoff like equations:

vlnK DV
¼ (12)
vP T RT

vln k DV s
¼ (13)
vP T RT

where K and k are the equilibrium constant and the rate constant, respectively; DV is the reaction volume and DVs is the activation

volume. More specifically, DV is the difference between total partial molar volumes of products and those of reagents. Reaction

volume is an important relationship to determine the effect of a pressure change on the equilibrium constant in dilute solution. DV
is somewhat analogous to the treatment of an ideal gas equilibrium.
Pressure and its corresponding conjugated pair, volume, reveal information on the volume profile of the process. For a hypothet-
ical reaction (Scheme 1), the reaction volume defined by Eq. (14) and the activation volume according to Eq. (15):

DV ¼ VAB VA VB (14)
DV s ¼ VAB
s
VAs VBs (15)
The measurement of concentrations of species involved in an equilibrium as a function of pressure yields the value of the equi-
librium constant. The change of equilibrium constant with pressure will be positive or negative according to whether the volume
change for the reaction is negative or positive, respectively (Fig. 8). Pressure will, therefore, favor a process that involves a diminu-
tion in volume, and conversely. The determination of the change in volume can be carried out in a dilatometer, where a series of
concentrations is obtained. The subject of measuring reaction volume has been thoroughly reviewed in textbooks and data compi-
lation, where approximate some 1500 reaction volumes of organic and inorganic reaction are collected.
The relative short processing times and the complexity of food matrices make it difficult to reach equilibrium for a given chem-
ical reaction. Food matrices are very complex systems with various components that simultaneously undergo chemical transforma-
tions at different rates. Consequently, the rate at which the reactions occur is often more important than the equilibrium and
therefore most of the literature considers the activation volume as an indicator whether a particular reaction is promoted or
inhibited by pressure. The DVs is a reflection of all volume changes that might occur during the progression of a reaction from
the ground to the transition state and within the transition state. Three factors determine the reaction volume of a dissolved species:
(i) the intrinsic size of the species as determined by its van der Waals radius; (ii) the interaction of the species with the solvent to

cause electrostriction; (iii) the interaction of the species with all the solute species. The DV represents those changes in molar
volume due to molecular reorganization, alteration of bond angles and length (known as intrinsic changes, DVint s ), and those
changes due to interactions of the reactants with the solvent (known as medium or solvent changes, DVm ), according to Eq. (16).
s
Scheme 1
Ln K
Pressure
Figure 8 Effect of pressure on the equilibrium constant for a hypothetical reaction.
DV s ¼ DVint
s
þ DVms (16)
The term DVms represents the solvent effects, such as changes in polarity, electrostatic forces, dipole interactions, and solvopho-
bic interactions. If DVms is zero, the reaction is isopolar and the effect of pressure is less pronounced. On the other hand, if DVms is
different from DVs, the medium plays a critical role in the reaction kinetics. The DVs cannot be measured experimentally because
the activated state is very unstable. Nevertheless, a common practice for estimating the DVs is to evaluate the effect of pressure on
the constant reaction rate at isothermal conditions in the form of Eq. (17).
DV s
k ¼ ko $expð R$T
$pÞ
(17)
Most important is that Eq. (17) explains the effect of pressure on the overall activation volume, which accounts for the changes
in volume occurring during the transition state and interaction of reactants with the solvent. This is somewhat analogous to the
apparent activation energy reported for some food systems. Examples of activation volumes on food systems are reviewed elsewhere
(Martinez-Monteagudo and Saldaña, 2014).
1.02.6 Applications
The motivation of using high pressure lies on chemical and physical effects induced by pressure. There are three important conse-
quences of applying high hydrostatic pressure:
1) changes in physical properties, such as melting point, solubility, density, viscosity, etc.
2) effects on equilibrium processes, such as acid-base equilibria, ionization, etc.
3) effects on rates of processes, such as delaying or accelerating the rate at which a particular reaction occurs.
In general, qualities attributes such as microbiological safety, functionality, instrumental quality and nutritional attributes are the
resultants of the way of these three phenomena are affected by pressure. For instance, inactivation of microorganisms is a combi-
nation 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 on bacteria cells (Molina-Gutierrez
et al., 2002). Table 5 summarizes various examples on how food quality attributes are dictated by the way of pressure affect the
physical, equilibrium and rate processes. A rate process was considered when pressure increase or decrease the concentration of
a particular compound.
1.02.6.1 Pasteurization
Fig. 9 exemplifies a hypothetical flow diagram of a high-pressure operation. The process starts with traditional operations such as
blending, mixing, or dissolving, depending on the product to be treated. Then, the food to be treated is preferably vacuum packaged
in a flexible polymeric package, and subsequently loaded inside a cylindrical carrier basket. Then, the carrier basket containing the
packed product is loaded into the stainless-steel vessel. Subsequently, the pressure vessel is closed with the end closures. The pres-
sure vessel is filled with pressure transmitting fluid. The target process pressure is achieved through compression of pressure trans-
mitting fluid using the combined action of a pump and intensifier. Once the desired pressure is obtained, the product is held for the
desired time. After this time, the vessel depressurized quickly and the product is unloaded.
Table 5 Examples on how food quality attributes are influenced by the effect of pressure on physical properties, equilibrium and rate processes
Effect upon pressure treatment

Quality attribute Physical property Equilibrium process Rate process
Mechanically shucking of oysters - Detaching the adductor - Releasing intramuscular components - The extend of shucking depends on
muscle the pressure level
Improving of meat tenderness by - Pressure causes - Shifts the pH value that prevents re- - Biochemical reactions are controlled
pressure-heat treatment disaggregation of proteins association of proteins fragments by pressure
Starch gelatinization - Changes in viscosity of starch - Shifts the chemical balance - Retrogradation rate is controlled by
suspension pressure
- Changes in rheological
properties
Increasing cheese yield - Disruption of casein micelles - Alter mineral balance (colloidal and - Pressure controls the extend of
- Denaturation of whey soluble calcium) protein-fat interactions
proteins
Improving texture in egg patties - Increase viscosity of egg - Change in pH, which enhances - Pressure affects the rate of protein
patties hydrophobic interactions aggregation
- Protein aggregation
Cell membrane damage in onions - Induce membrane - Shifts the balance between extra- and - Pressure controls diffusion of solutes
permeabilization intra-cellular pH within the cell
Reprinted by permission from Springer Nature: Food Engineering Reviews Martinez-Monteagudo and Saldaña (2014).
Figure 9 Schematic diagram of a hypothetical high-pressure processing operation.
High hydrostatic pressure has been effective in inactivating variety of pathogenic and spoilage vegetative cells, yeast, mold,
and viruses. The inactivation level depends on the pressure used (typically between 400 and 600 MPa), temperature (25–
50 C), time (3–10 min), the composition of the food, pH, and water activity. The microbial effectiveness of HPP depends
on the type of microorganisms. In other words, the sensitivity towards HPP may vary from different microorganisms and
strains (Balci and Wilbey, 1999). Mackey et al. (1995) reported that high-pressure caused physical changes to the cell structure,
stationary phase cells are more resistant than the exponential phase cells. These authors also reported that treatment of
400 MPa for 10 min caused a log reduction of 1.3 in Listeria monocytogenes cell at the stationary phase, while the exponential
phase was reduced by more than 7.0 log. The resistance of certain microorganisms towards pressure is related to the
morphology of the cells. Rod-shaped bacteria are most sensitive, while the spherical shaped are considered one of the most
resistant. Yeasts and molds that cause spoilage in foods are very sensitive to HPP. Several researchers have demonstrated
the effectiveness of HPP for pasteurizing liquid and solid foods such as deli meats, salads, seafood, fruit juices, and vegetable
products (Balasubramaniam et al., 2015).
1.02.6.2 Pressure-Assisted Thermal Processing

The application of high-pressure can be carried out without or with the application of external heating. In the first case, the oper-
ation is known as high-pressure processing (HPP), and it involves the use of pressure levels in the range of 100–800 MPa at near
room temperature in order to inactivate pathogenic and spoilage vegetative bacteria, yeast, and molds. HPP results in
Pressure
(2)
Transmitting fluid temperature
Pressure [MPa]
Temperature [˚C]
Product temperature
(1)
(3)
Treatment time [min]

Figure 10 Illustration of a typical pressure-assisted thermal processing treatment. t15 is the floading, compression, holding, decompression, and
unloading time. Figure adapted from Martínez-Monteagudo et al. (2012), with permission from Elsevier.
a pasteurization effect. Since pasteurization does not inactivate bacterial spores, it is important to maintain the pressure pasteurized
product under refrigerated storage and handling.
On the other hand, the combination of pressure and heating is known as Pressure-assisted thermal processing (PATP). This
technology involves the preheating of food materials to about 75–90 C, and subsequently the application of 600 MPa for 5–
10 min. The rapid temperature increase during hydrostatic compression and subsequent cooling upon decompression is
a unique feature of PATP. Interestingly, PATP is somewhat analogous to in-container sterilization (retorts), where the food
is packaged, loaded, and treated for a prescribed combination of time-temperature or time-pressure. Despite such similarities,
their governing principles are quite different. Fig. 10 attempts to provide a detailed description of a typical PATP treatment. The
treatment time is the sum of the loading (t1), compression (t2), holding (t3), decompression (t4), and unloading (t5) time. At
the beginning of the treatment, a drop in the medium temperature (indicated by arrow (1)). This drop occurs when the pre-
heated sample is inserted in the high-pressure vessel. Arrow (1) also indicates the start of loading time, which is the time
needed to insert the preheated sample, adjust the transmitted fluid volume and close the high-pressure vessel. Then, the sample
is pressurized until it reaches the target pressure. This period is known as compression or build-up time. Due to the adiabatic
heating, the temperature of both sample and medium rises (arrow (2)). During t2, the sample is submitted to a non-isothermal
and non-isobaric conditions over a relatively short time. At the point at which the target temperature and pressure have been
reached is considered as the start of the holding time. The holding time is the only period at which the sample is at isothermal
and isobaric conditions. At the end of the holding time, the decompression takes place which is characterized by a drop in the
medium temperature indicated by arrow (3). This period is usually short and indicates the end of the treatment. In 2009, FDA
approved an industrial petition for sterilization of mashed potato by PATP. More recently, Pressure Enhanced Sterilization
(PES) received regulatory acceptance for commercial production of multi-component foods. Although there are no low-acid
products preserved by PATP commercialized yet, this technology has the potential to deliver a variety of low-acid products,
such as egg, and milk-based products, baby foods, vegetables, ready-to-eat foods, desserts, gravies, soups, and sauces. Further,
units for PATP are primarily restricted to pilot scale (5–55 L). Since PATP utilize intensive pressure and heat, from the stand-
point of material science and engineering, the process demands significant stress on the vessel and seals, potentially limiting
the equipment life. Additional PATP technology limitation is the preheating process, wherein food packages are typically
heated (75–90 C) by conventional conduction and convection heat transfer at ambient pressures.
1.02.6.3 Operational Mode

High-pressure processing of foods is fundamentally a batch operation, wherein a prepacked product is subjected to a given pressure
(400–600 MPa) for a specific time (<5 min). Although the actual application of pressure may take a few minutes, the entire oper-
ation requires much longer time. The time for typical HPP consists the time needed for filling the vessel with the transmitting fluid,
loading the sample, adjusting the final volume, closing the vessel, pressurization, holding, depressurization, opening, and unload-
ing the sample. Another important feature of HPP regarding its operational mode is the size of the vessel which is limited not only
by the strength of the construction material but also by the availability of the large parts of high-grade steel. Increasing the
Figure 11 Schematic representation of a semi-continuous high-pressure processing. Reprinted by permission from Elservier: Innovative Food
Science & Emerging Technologies Martinez-Monteagudo et al. (2012).
throughput of HPP involves the repetition of all operational steps carried out during the batch process. Thus, the development and
implementation of continuous high-pressure processing would contribute to the cost-effectiveness and scalability of the tech-
nology. Fig. 11 shows an arrangement for continuous high-pressure processing. The working principle consists of using a pumpable
food as a transmitting fluid in the high-pressure chamber of the intensifier, while the fluid acting in the low-pressure chamber of the
intensifier is a typical transmitting fluid. The product to be treated is delivered by a low-pressure pump into the vessel, which is close
by a set of check valves. The target pressure inside the vessel is accomplished by means of a high-pressure pump and an intensifier.
After the treatment, the liquid is transferred to a balance tank which can be connected to a filling machine. This arrangement offers
the advantage to increase the throughput by connecting more vessels in such a way that while one vessel is being filled, another one
is pressurized and a third one is being emptied. Although conceptual process design has been developed for semi-continuous
process, the industrial implementation of HPP remains a batch operation (Lelieveld and Hoogland, 2016).
1.02.6.4 High-Pressure Freezing and Thawing

Pressure levels of 200 MPa cause a reversible depression of the freezing point of water 0 to 21 C. Such a phenomenon has been
exploited to rapidly freeze and thaw g high moisture content foods, known as pressure-assisted freezing (PAF) and pressure-assisted
thawing (PAT), respectively. During PAF, the samples are cooled under pressure up to its phase change temperature at applied pres-
sure. The product is frozen under pressure by supercooling at faster ice-nucleation rate. This process helps in preserving the micro-
structure of food and biological materials. Pressure-assisted thawing (PAT) involves thawing food material under constant pressure.
The process can help in reducing the thawing time and drip loss. Another potential application is the storage at freezing conditions
(up to 20 C) without the transition from liquid to solid (You et al., 2016).
1.02.6.5 Pressure-Assisted Extraction

Extraction of valuable compounds from biological matrix has been enhanced by high hydrostatic pressure. Extraction yields ob-
tained by pressure mainly depend on the pressure, time, and type solvent used. Mixtures of organic solvents have been tested under
pressure to assist the extraction of antioxidants and other bioactive compounds. Upon decompression, pressure can break weak
chemical bonds of the extracting matrix, making some compounds available for extraction.
1.02.7 Conclusions
As seen in this chapter, high-pressure has been evolving very successfully. Over the past few years, multiple applications have
appeared, while the old ones have expanded. Perhaps the most important development is the commercialization of pasteurized
products by high-pressure. This is because high-pressure provides a unique opportunity to food processors for inactivating
various harmful pathogenic and spoilage microbes without adversely impacting product quality and nutritional attributes. A
pseudo-instantaneous temperature increase during compression, and subsequent cooling upon decompression, substantially
reduce the thermal damage. Extended shelf-life products and pressure-sterilized products are likely to follow this trend.
High-pressure units can be seen as unit operation, where theory and practice can combine to yield a desirable modification
within the food processing line. It is hoped that the discussion of some misconceptions will aid in a better understanding
of the development of high-pressure.
Acknowledgments
This work has been made possible through the partial financial support of USDA National Institute for Food and Agriculture (HATCH project
SD00H607-16).
References
Balasubramaniam, V.M., Barbosa-Canovas, G.V., Lelieveld, H.L.M., 2016. High-pressure processing equipment for the food industry. In: Balasubramaniam, V.M., Barbosa-
Canovas, G.V., Lelieveld, H.L.M. (Eds.), High Pressure Processing of Food Principles, Technology and Applications. Springer ScienceþBusiness, pp. 39–66.
Balasubramaniam, V.M., Martínez-Monteagudo, S.I., Gupta, R., 2015. Principles and application of high pressure–based Technologies in the food industry. Ann. Rev. Food Sci.
Technol. 6 (1), 435–462.
Balci, A.T., Wilbey, R.A., 1999. High pressure processing of milk-the first 100 years in the development of a new technology. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 52 (4), 149–155.
Bridgman, P.W., 1909. An experimental determination of certain compressibilities. Proc. Am. Acad. Arts Sci. 44 (10), 255–279.
Bridgman, P.W., 1914a. Change of phase under pressure. I. The phase diagram of eleven substances with especial reference to the melting curve. Phys. Rev. 3 (2), 126–141.
Bridgman, P.W., 1914b. The coagulation of albumen by pressure. J. Biol. Chem. 19 (4), 511–512.
Bridgman, P.W., 1923. The thermal conductivity of liquids under pressure. Proc. Am. Acad. Arts Sci. 59 (7), 141–169.
Bridgman, P.W., 1935. Theoretically interesting aspects of high pressure phenomena. Rev. Mod. Phys. 7 (1), 1–33.
Brown, K., 1920. The manufacture of phenol in a continuous high pressure autoclave. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 12 (3), 279–280.
Buckow, R., Heinz, V., Knorr, D., 2007. High pressure phase transition kinetics of maize starch. J. Food Eng. 81 (2), 469–475.
Butz, P.B., Serfert, Y., Garcia, A.F., Dieterich, S., Lindauer, R., Bognar, A., Tauscher, B., 2004. Influence of high-pressure treatment at 25 C and 80 C on folates in orange juice
and model media. J. Food Sci. 69 (3), SNQ117–SNQ121.
Daryaei, H., Yousef, A.E., Balasubramaniam, V.M., 2016. Microbiological aspects of high-pressure processing of food: inactivation of microbial vegetative cells and spores. In:
Balasubramaniam, V.M., Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V., Lelieveld, H.L.M. (Eds.), High Pressure Processing of Food: Principles, Technology and Applications. Springer New York, New
York, NY, pp. 271–294.
Denys, S., Van Loey, A.M., Hendrickx, M.E., 2000. A modeling approach for evaluating process uniformity during batch high hydrostatic pressure processing: combination of
a numerical heat transfer model and enzyme inactivation kinetics. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 1 (1), 5–19.
Dewar, J., 1882. The critical point of mixed vapours. Proc. R. Soc. 30, 538–546.
Eggers, R., 2005. Historical retrospect on high-pressure processes. In: Eggers, R. (Ed.), Industrial High Pressure Applications: Processes, Equipment and Safety. Wiley-VCH Verlag
GmbH & Co. KGaA, pp. 1–46.
Eyring, H., 1935. The activated complex and the absolute rate of chemical reactions. Chem. Rev. 17 (1), 65–77.
Grauwet, T., Plancken, I.V.d., Vervoort, L., Hendrickx, M.E., Loey, A.V., 2010a. Mapping temperature uniformity in industrial scale HP equipment using enzymatic pressure–
temperature–time indicators. J. Food Eng. 98 (1), 93–102.
Grauwet, T., Van der Plancken, I., Verbeyst, L., Hendrickx, M., van loey, A., 2016. High-pressure processing uniformity. In: Balasubramaniam, V.M., Barbosa-Canovas, G.V.,
Lelieveld, H.L.M. (Eds.), High Pressure Processing of Food: Principles, Technology and Applications. Springer ScienceþBusiness Media, New York.
Grauwet, T., Van der Plancken, I., Vervoort, L., Hendrickx, M.E., Loey, A.V., 2009. Investigating the potential of Bacillus subtilis a-amylase as a pressure-temperature-time indicator
for high hydrostatic pressure pasteurization processes. Biotechnol. Prog. 25 (4), 1184–1193.
Grauwet, T., Van der Plancken, I., Vervoort, L., Hendrickx, M.E., Van Loey, A., 2010b. Solvent engineering as a tool in enzymatic indicator development for mild high pressure
pasteurization processing. J. Food Eng. 97 (3), 301–310.
Grauwet, T., Van der Plancken, I., Vervoort, L., Matser, A., Hendrickx, M., Van Loey, A., 2011. Temperature uniformity mapping in a high pressure high temperature reactor using
a temperature sensitive indicator. J. Food Eng. 105 (1), 36–47.
Hartmann, C., Delgado, A., Szymczyk, J., 2003. Convective and diffusive transport effects in a high pressure induced inactivation process of packed food. J. Food Eng. 59 (1),
33–44.
Hartmann, C., Schuhholz, J.-P., Kitsubun, P., Chapleau, N., Le Bail, A., Delgado, A., 2004. Experimental and numerical analysis of the thermofluiddynamics in a high-pressure
autoclave. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 5 (4), 399–411.
Hendrickx, M., Ludikhuyze, L., Van den Broeck, I., Weemaes, C., 1998. Effects of high pressure on enzymes related to food quality. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 9 (5), 197–203.
Hite, B.H., 1899. The effect of high pressure preservation of milk. W. Va. Agric. Exp. Station Bull. 58, 15–35.
Indrawati, Arroqui, C., Messagie, I., Nguyen, M.T., Van Loey, A., Hendrickx, M., 2004. Comparative study on pressure and temperature stability of 5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid in
model systems and in food products. J. Agric. Food Chem. 52 (3), 485–492.
Illinois Institute of Technology’s Institute for Food Safety and Health, 2015. IFSH receives FDA acceptance of pressure enhanced sterilization process for commercial production of
MultiComponent shelf-stable foods. Food Safety Mag.
Kalichevsky, M.T., Knorr, D., Lillford, P.J., 1995. Potential food applications of high-pressure effects on ice-water transitions. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 6, 253–259.
Kennick, W.H., Elgasim, E.A., Holmes, Z.A., Meyer, P.F., 1980. The effect of pressurisation of pre-rigor muscle on post-rigor meat characteristics. Meat Sci. 4 (1), 33–40.
King, J.W., 2014. Modern supercritical fluid technology for food applications. Ann. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 5 (1), 215–238.
Larson, W.P., Hartzell, T.B., Diehl, H.S., 1918. The effect of high pressures on bacteria. J. Infect. Dis. 22 (3), 271–279.
Lelieveld, H.L.M., Hoogland, H., 2016. Continuous high-pressure processing to extend product shelf life. In: Balasubramaniam, V.M., Barbosa-Canovas, G.V., Lelieveld, H.L.M.
(Eds.), High Pressure Processing of Food. Springer ScienceþBusiness.
Mackey, B., Forestiere, K., Isaacs, N.S., 1995. Factors affecting the resistance of Listeria monocytogenes to high hydrostatic pressure. Food Biotechnol. 9 (1–2), 1–11.
Martínez-Monteagudo, S.I., Balasubramaniam, V.M., 2016. Fundamentals and applications of high-pressure processing technology. In: Balasubramaniam, V.M., Barbosa-
Canovas, G.V., Lelieveld, H.L.M. (Eds.), High Pressure Processing of Food. Springer ScienceþBusiness, New York, NY, pp. 3–17.
Martinez-Monteagudo, S.I., Saldaña, M.D.A., 2014. Chemical reactions in food systems at high hydrostatic pressure. Food Eng. Rev. 6 (4), 105–127.
Martínez-Monteagudo, S.I., Saldaña, M.D.A., Torres, J.A., Kennelly, J.J., 2012. Effect of pressure-assisted thermal sterilization on conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) content in CLA-
enriched milk. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 16, 291–297.
Mathys, A., Knorr, D., 2009. The properties of water in the pressure–temperature landscape. Food Biophys. 4, 77–82.
Matser, A.M., Krebbers, B., van den Berg, R.W., Bartels, P.V., 2004. Advantages of high pressure sterilisation on quality of food products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 15 (2), 79–85.
Minerich, P.L., Labuza, T.P., 2003. Development of a pressure indicator for high hydrostatic pressure processing of foods. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 4 (3), 235–243.
Molina-Gutierrez, A., Stippl, V., Delgado, A., Gänzle, M.G., Vogel, R.F., 2002. In situ determination of the intracellular pH of Lactococcus lactis and Lactobacillus plantarum during
pressure treatment. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 68 (9), 4399–4406.
Mozhaev, V.V., Heremans, K., Frank, J., Masson, P., Balny, C., 1994. Exploiting the effects of high hydrostatic pressure in biotechnological applications. Trends Biotechnol. 12 (12),
493–501.
Murzin, D., Salmi, T., 2005. Elementary reactions. In: Catalytic Kinetics. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam (Chapter 3).
Nair, A., Maldonaldo, J.A., Miyazawa, Y., Cuitiño, A.M., Schaffner, D.W., Karwe, M., 2016. Numerical simulation of stress distribution in heterogeneous solids during high pressure
processing. Food Res. Int. 84, 76–85.
Pandolfe, W.D., 1982. Development of the new Gaulin micro-gap™ homogenizing valve. J. Dairy Sci. 65 (10), 2035–2044.
Park, S.H., Balasubramaniam, V.M., Sastry, S.K., 2014. Quality of shelf-stable low-acid vegetables processed using pressure–ohmic–thermal sterilization. LWT – Food Sci. Technol.
57, 243–252.
Patazca, E., Koutchma, T., Balasubramaniam, V.M., 2007. Quasi-adiabatic temperature increase during high pressure processing of selected foods. J. Food Eng. 80 (1), 199–205.
Rasanayagam, V., Balasubramaniam, V.M., Ting, E., Sizer, C.E., Bush, C., Anderson, C., 2003. Compression heating of selected fatty food materials during high-pressure pro-
cessing. J. Food Sci. 68 (1), 254–259.
Rauh, C., Baars, A., Delgado, A., 2009. Uniformity of enzyme inactivation in a short-time high-pressure process. J. Food Eng. 91 (1), 154–163.
Rauh, C., Delgado, A., 2010. Analytical considerations and dimensionless analysis for a description of particle interactions in high pressure processes. High Press. Res. 30 (4),
567–573.
Salvi, D., Khurana, M., Karwe, M.V., 2017. Prediction of temperature distribution in a horizontal high pressure food processing vessel and its impact on process uniformity. J. Food
Process. Eng. 40 (5), e12547.
Sander, F.V., 1943. The effects of high pressure on the inversion of sucrose and the mutarotation of glucose. J. Biol. Chem. 148 (2), 311–319.
Sevenich, R., Mathys, A., 2018. Continuous versus discontinuous ultra-high-pressure systems for food sterilization with focus on ultra-high-pressure homogenization and high-
pressure thermal sterilization: a review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 17, 646–662.
Sevenich, R., Bark, F., Kleinstueck, E., Crews, C., Pye, C., Hradecky, J., Reineke, K., Lavilla, M., Martinez-de-Maranon, I., Briand, J.C., Knorr, D., 2015. The impact of high pressure
thermal sterilization on the microbiological stability and formation of food processing contaminants in selected fish systems and baby food puree at pilot scale. Food Control 50,
539–547.
Sizer, C.E., Balasubramaniam, V.M., Ting, E., 2002. Validating high-pressure processes for low-acid foods. Food Technol.-Chicago 2, 36–42.
Skelton, E.F., Webb, A.W., 2003. High-pressure research. In: Meyers, R.A. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology, third ed. Academic Press, New York,
pp. 345–363.
Smith, N.A.S., Knoerzer, K., Ramos, A.M., 2014. Evaluation of the differences of process variables in vertical and horizontal configurations of High Pressure Thermal (HPT)
processing systems through numerical modelling. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 22, 51–62.
Soxhlet, F., 1881. Supposed conversion of starch into sugar by water at a high temperature. Biedermann’s Zentralblatt 86, 554–557.
Stern, O., 1897. The influence of a pressure of 500 atmospheres on the rate of inversion of cane sugar. Ann. Phys. 86, 554–557.
Stippl, V.M., Delgado, A., Becker, T.M., 2005. Ionization equilibria at high pressure. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 221 (1), 151–156.
Van der Plancken, I., Grauwet, T., Oey, I., Van Loey, A., Hendrickx, M., 2008. Impact evaluation of high pressure treatment on foods: considerations on the development of
pressure–temperature–time integrators (pTTIs). Trends Food Sci. Technol. 19 (6), 337–348.
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 (2), 269–274.
Vetter, G., 2001. In: Bertucco, A., Vetter, G. (Eds.), High Pressure Process Technology: Fundamentals and Applications, vol. 9. Elsevier Science.
Wanekaya, A.K., Myung, S., Sadik, O.A., 2002. Pressure assisted chelating extraction: a novel technique for digesting metals in solid matrices. Analyst 127, 1272–1276.
Yan, B., Martínez-Monteagudo, S.I., Cooperstone, J.L., Riedl, K.M., Schwartz, S.J., Balasubramaniam, V.M., 2017. Impact of thermal and pressure-based Technologies on
carotenoid retention and quality attributes in tomato juice. Food Bioprocess Technol. 10 (5), 808–818.
You, J., Habibi, M., Rattan, N., Ramaswamy, H.S., 2016. Pressure shift freezing and thawing. In: Balasubramaniam, V.M., Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V., Lelieveld, H.L.M. (Eds.), High
Pressure Processing of Food: Principles, Technology and Applications. Springer New York, New York, NY, pp. 143–166.
Zulkurnain, M., Balasubramaniam, V.M., Maleky, F., 2019. Effects of lipid solid mass fraction and non-lipid solids on crystallization behaviors of model fats under high pressure.
Molecules 24 (15), 2853.
1.03 Food and Beverage Commercial Applications of High Pressure
Processing
Mario González-Anguloa, Vinicio Serment-Morenob, Rui P Queirósa, and Carole Tonello-Samsona, a Department of Applications
and Food Processing, Hiperbaric S.A, Burgos, Spain; and b Department of Applications and Food Processing, Hiperbaric USA, Miami,
FL, United States
1.03.2 Commercial Applications 42
1.03.2.1 Avocado Products 42
1.03.2.2 Plant-Based Products 45
1.03.2.3 Meat Products 47
1.03.2.3.1 Raw-Meat 48
1.03.2.3.2 Cured-Meat 49
1.03.2.3.3 Cooked-Meat 50
1.03.2.4 Pet Food 51
1.03.2.5 Seafood Products 52
1.03.2.5.1 Shucking 52
1.03.2.5.2 Raw and RTE Seafood Products 53
1.03.2.6 Baby & Infant Food 54
1.03.2.7 Ready-to-Eat Meals 57
1.03.2.8 Dairy 59
1.03.2.8.1 Milk 59
1.03.2.8.2 Fermented Dairy Products 60
1.03.2.9 Juices & Beverages 60
1.03.3 Product Development and Future Applications 64
1.03.4 Conclusion 66
References 66
1.03.1 Introduction
The demand from consumers to have high quality, healthier, safe, preservative-free and gentler processed food products has driven
food companies to explore alternatives to traditional thermal methods. In this regard, several non-thermal technologies are being
developed to satisfy consumer needs. There are many technologies being developed, for instance, pulsed electric fields, cold atmo-
spheric plasma, intense pulsed light or ionizing radiation (food irradiation). Still, the most widely implemented minimal-
processing technology in the food industry is high pressure processing (HPP), both for addressing the needs of the food industry
as well as meeting the consumer demands. Furthermore, the consumers well perceive HPP comparatively to other novel food pro-
cessing technologies (Cardello et al., 2007; Jermann et al., 2015).
HPP is a technology that uses high hydrostatic pressure, usually in the range of 400–600 MPa (4000–6000 bar or 58,000–
87,000 psi) for a few minutes, to inactivate pathogenic microorganisms at chilled or room temperature. It can be applied to
a wide range of high or medium moisture foods (having a water activity or aw > 0.8) and it is not dependent on their size or shape.
Since it typically does not uses heat, HPP does not considerably affect nutritional and physicochemical properties of foods, such as
color or flavor, and has a small impact on bioactive compounds (Balasubramaniam et al., 2015).
The main goal of HPP is the inactivation of pathogenic and spoilage microflora to make products safe with an extended shelf-
life, which is the first and main industrial application. The second main industrial application is the use of high pressure in the range
of 200–400 MPa (2000–4000 bar or 29,000–58,000 psi) for bivalves’ shucking and crustacean meat extraction. Other food appli-
cations have been researched in the last years, such as the extraction of bioactive compounds (Khan et al., 2019), modification of
structural and functional properties of proteins (Queirós et al., 2018) enhancement of enzymes (Eisenmenger and Reyes-
De-Corcuera, 2009), or improvement of biotechnological processes (Mota et al., 2013).
The efficiency of HPP in the inactivation of vegetative spoilage bacteria was first demonstrated in milk in 1899 (Hite, 1989),
although it was about a century later, in 1990, when the first industrial HPP equipment for food processing was installed in Japan.
This very first unit was used to process apple, strawberry and kiwi jams, followed by jellies and yogurt sauces, commercialized by
Meidi-Ya Food Co (Hori et al., 1992). Four years later, Ulti in France, introduced HPP products in Europe by starting the commer-
cialization of HPP citrus juices (Tonello, 2011). In 1997, the US company Avomex (currently Fresherized Foods) initiated its

40 Food and Beverage Commercial Applications of High Pressure Processing
production of HPP guacamole in a plant in Mexico to export to the USA (Tonello, 2011). One year later, the first HPP meat product
(sliced cooked ham) was introduced in the market by Espuña in Spain (Grèbol, 2002).
During the first decade of industrial development of HPP (from 1990 to 2000), only 19 industrial HPP machines were imple-
mented. Ten years later in 2010, 158 units were in production worldwide (Mújica-Paz et al., 2011). This exponential growth was due
to consumers’ interest for premium products delivered by HPP as well as the industry necessity to improve food safety with
a nonthermal gentler processing technology. The total number of industrial HPP machines (from 35 to 525 L of capacity) installed
since 1990 is over 575. Around 550 units were still in use by the end of 2019 with a total vessel volume estimated in 130,000 L
(Fig. 1).
Despite the first adopters of the technology were based in Japan and Europe, nowadays approximately 47% of the machines
installed worldwide are located in North America, namely in the USA, Canada, and Mexico. Then follows Europe, where 24%
of the machines are installed and Asia with 18%. More than 520 units are used for commercial food production, while the rest
are installed in technical centers, universities or pilot plants of companies and are used for research and development purposes.
In addition to the companies that have their own HPP machine(s), many companies process their products through toll processors
or contract manufacturers. Toll processors do not have their own production but, instead, offer their services to process other
companies’ products. Contract manufacturers offer product manufacturing and HPP under the same roof, selling the HPP products
to other companies in charge of marketing and commercialization (brands and retailers). Toll processors and HPP contract manu-
facturers own almost 20% of the installed machines worldwide. A list of the main companies is in Table 1.
As already mentioned, the potential of high pressure processing as a preservation technique able to deliver gentler processed
foods with a significantly longer shelf-life is documented since the late 19th century (Hite, 1989). However, limitations linked
to the design of reliable equipment at industrial scale prevented the introduction of HPP food products in the market until the
late 20th century (Knorr, 1993). Research about high pressure processing was scarce until the 1980s, so the lack of scientific evidence
and the uniqueness of these products pushed national food safety authorities to adapt regulations for their commercialization.
Being HPP a new technology, high-pressure processed foods were generally considered worldwide as “novel”, which required
producers to scientifically document that the process did not give rise to significant changes in the composition of the food, and
to validate that critical processing parameters addressed food safety requirements concerning pathogen control.
In the European Union, Regulation (EC) 258/97 concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients was implemented in 1997
and updated in 2015 by Regulation (EC) 2015/2283. Companies willing to place HPP foods on the market were requested to
comply with this rule, but in 2018 the European Commission published a guidance document on the implementation of certain
provisions of Regulation (EC) 852/2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs. The document stipulated that HPP is authorized at the EU
level and not subjected to authorization. According to Regulation (EC) 2015/2283 a novel process only delivers novel foods when it
has an effect on their nutritional value, metabolism or level of undesired substances, so HPP is not expected to bring novel foods.
This was reflected in a notice published in 2010 by the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety
(ANSES), stating that foods processed at pressures up to 600 MPa/5 min at chilled or ambient temperature were not significantly
different to their non-processed equivalent. Other countries outside the EU followed a similar regulatory approach, such as Canada.
After compilation of sufficient scientific evidence, Health Canada announced in 2016 that the commercial launching of HPP foods
no longer required notification since HPP was not considered a novel process.
In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires food processors to demonstrate that processing technol-
ogies deliver safe foods. In the case of HPP, validation studies should be conducted to determine the pressure-time conditions
required to achieve the desired pathogen inactivation, and the storage time during which food remains safe. Specialized laboratories
Figure 1 Accumulated number of industrial HPP machines in production (columns) and their corresponding accumulated volume (gray line)
(updated: 2020).
Food and Beverage Commercial Applications of High Pressure Processing 41
Table 1 Companies using the high pressure processing (HPP) technology for toll processing.
Company Websites Country
Longfresh http://www.longfresh.com.au/ Australia

HiFood Tec https://hifoodtec.be/ Belgium
HPP services https://hppservices.be/ Belgium
Aquabar https://www.aquabar.bg/ Bulgary
HPP services Canada https://www.hppservicescanada.com/ Canada
HPP West Coast http://www.hppwestcoast.com/ Canada
Natural HPP https://naturalhpp.com/ Canada
Alta HPP services http://www.altahpp.com/ Chile
Natural safe http://www.naturalsafe.cl Chile
Carpo http://carpofoods.com.co/ Colombia
HPP center https://www.hppcentre.fr/ France
HPP Atlantique https://hppatlantique.fr/ France
HPP Deutschland https://hpp-deutschland.de/ Germany
High pressure process Tolling https://www.hpptolling.com/ Ireland
HPP Italia https://www.hppitalia.com/ Italy
SterilParma http://www.sterilparma.com/ Italy
HPP food Mexico https://www.hppfoods.mx/ Mexico
Fruity line https://fruity-line.nl/ The Netherlands
Pascal processing https://www.pascalprocessing.com/ The Netherlands
WLNA http://www.wlna.com.sg/ Singapore
HPP South Africa http://sahpp.co.za/ South Africa
Accua HPP solutions https://www.accuahpp.com/ Spain
APA processing http://apaprocessing.com/ Spain
Fruselva http://www.fruselva.com/ Spain
Idro http://idro.es/ Spain
Itacyl http://www.itacyl.es/ Spain
MRM http://www.mrm.es/ Spain
Woo Yang http://www.foodkorea.com/ South Korea
HPP Nordic http://hppnordic.se/ Sweden
HPP competence https://hppcompetence.ch/ Switzerland
KFS http://www.kfs-foodtech.com/ Taiwan
Smart foods solutions https://www.sfoods.ae/ UAE
Deli 24 http://deli24.co.uk/ United Kingdom
Sunmagic https://sunmagic.co.uk/ United Kingdom
American pasteurization company https://www.americanpasteurizationcompany.com/ USA
Dora’s natural http://www.dorasnaturals.com/ USA
Fresh advantage http://www.fresherpressure.com/ USA
Green plant http://www.greenplant.com/ USA
HPPLA https://hpplosangeles.com/ USA
HPP food services https://www.hppfs.com/ USA
HPP fresh Florida https://www.hppfreshflorida.com/ USA
Hydrofresh HPP https://hydrofreshhpp.com/ USA
Great Lakes HPP http://greatlakeshpp.com/ USA
Intermountain HPP https://intermountainhpp.com/ USA
Lineage https://www.lineagelogistics.com/ USA
Maryland packaging https://marylandpackaging.com/ USA
Nutrifresh https://www.nutrifreshservices.com/ USA
Texas food solutions http://texasfoodsolutions.com/ USA
True fresh https://truefreshhpp.com/ USA
Universal pure https://universalpure.com/ USA
Vincent Giordiano http://www.vgiordano.com/ USA
place foods in contact with the pertinent pathogens of each food category. Then, the food is subjected to the target pressure-time
combination. An inactivation equal or greater to 5 or 6 log10 CFU*g1 must be achieved immediately after HPP and remain during
the desired commercial shelf-life. Regarding ready-to-eat meat products, commercialization policies are established by the Food
Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), who in 2003 issued a letter of no objection
for the use of HPP as an effective post-packaged intervention method to control Listeria monocytogenes, which is considered the
42 Food and Beverage Commercial Applications of High Pressure Processing
pertinent pathogen in this food category. Process verification responsibilities for HPP as a killing step for pathogens are established
in the FSIS Directive 6120.2.
1.03.2 Commercial Applications
Nowadays there are HPP commercial applications in almost all food categories that can be divided as (1) avocado products; (2)
plant-based products; (3) meat products; (4) pet food; (5) seafood products; (6) baby and infant food; (7) ready-to-eat (RTE) meals;
(8) dairy; and (9) juices and beverages. Distribution of machines and production volume through HPP food applications can be
found below in Fig. 2 and Table 2. HPP food production in 2019 can be estimated at around 1.8 billion kg or 4 billion lbs. About
60% of the products processed under pressure are plant-based liquids (juices and beverage) or solid products (avocado products,
fruit & vegetable products and dips, salsa and wet salads). Animal protein based products (meat, seafood, dairy products, pet foods
and ready-meals) represented about 40% of the HPP products.
Commercial foods are processed in a range of pressure comprised between 200 and 600 MPa, being 600 MPa the maximum
working pressure of commercial size HPP machines. The temperature of processing is not a critical parameter since microbial inac-
tivation does not vary significantly at chilled or room temperature. The product generally enters the HPP vessel at chilled temper-
ature (between 2 and 10 C), and the processing water temperature is kept between 5 C and room temperature. On the machine
side, it is not recommended to process frozen product at industrial scale because ice formation can occur. There is the risk of water to
freeze in the vessel before the pressure cycle starts, or at depressurization, when the vessel is loaded with a large amount of frozen
food. This phenomenon can damage the machine because ice, instead of water, will exit through the release valves. Moreover plugs,
vessel and seals characteristics change significantly at subzero temperatures, which can induce water tightness problems.
1.03.2.1 Avocado Products

Avocado based products along with fresh salsas by Fresherized Foods, formerly known as Avomex helped to establish the HPP
industry in the United States in the late 1990s (Tonello, 2011). Nowadays, the avocado industry constitutes nearly 20% of global
installed HPP units, located in 12 countries where Mexico leads with the highest installed capacity (Table 3). Consumers widely
accept HPP avocado products as “natural” and allows processors to advertise the products as “minimally processed” with a clean
label, overcoming organoleptic limitations of other conventional technologies like thermal processing, freezing, or chemical preser-
vatives (Tonello et al., 2017).
Figure 2 Worldwide distribution of industrial HPP machines by food sectors (updated: 2020).
Food and Beverage Commercial Applications of High Pressure Processing 43
Table 2 Estimation of global HPP food production in 2019 based on global equipment capacity and average production conditions in different food
sectors.
Production per
Total equipment volume Number of cycles per Volumetric efficiency Working hours per Working days per year
(L) a hour (%) day year
Products 106 kg 106 lb
Juices & beverages 37,339 8 45 16 250 538 1186

Meat products 37,693 6 45 14 300 427 943
Avocado products 18,696 8 55 14 250 288 635
Seafood products 10,695 10 70 16 180 216 475
Dips, Salsas & Salads 8800 8 50 14 300 148 326
Fruit & vegetable 9455 8 50 12 300 136 300
products
Ready-meals 3631 6 45 12 250 29 65
Dairy products 2481 6 45 12 250 20 44
Pet food 1297 6 45 14 300 15 32
Total 130,087 1817 4006
a
It was assumed that the distribution of different type of products processed by HPP tolling companies is identical with the distribution of the rest of the equipment owned by the
different food sector companies.
Table 3 Companies using the high pressure processing (HPP) technology for avocado products.
Company Websites Country
Calavo http://www.calavo.com/ Mexico

Freshcourt https://www.freshcourt.com/ Mexico
Fresh innovations http://www.fresh-innovations.com/ Mexico
Fresherized foods http://fresherizedfoods.com/ Mexico
Freza http://www.grupofreza.com.mx/ Mexico
Frozavo http://www.frozavo.com/ Mexico
Go Verden http://goverden.com/ Mexico
International Fresh Guacamole https://ifguacamole.com/ Mexico
La Viña http://www.avocadosdongoyo.com.mx/ Mexico
San Lorenzo http://aguacate.com.mx/ Mexico
Simplot http://simplot.com.mx/ Mexico
Cupanda http://www.cupanda.mx/ Mexico
Austchili https://www.austchilli.com.au/ Australia
Avovita http://freshproduce.org.au/ Australia
Simpson farms https://www.simpsonfarms.com/ Australia
Freshurized (Not available) Chile
Macapi – Fresh directions http://www.grupomacapi.com/ Dominican Republic
Gordian http://www.gordian.com.gt/ Guatemala
Highland fresh https://www.highlandfreshfoods.com/ Guatemala
Avoke https://www.avoke.co.uk/ Ireland
Fresh Technologies https://www.freshconnection.co.nz/ New Zealand
AIB https://www.aib.com.pe/ Peru
Camposol https://www.camposol.com.pe/ Peru
Phoenix foods https://vittafresh.pe/ Peru
Avomix https://www.avomix.com/ Spain
Frutas montosa https://www.frutasmontosa.com/ Spain
Avolands http://avolands.co.za/ South Africa
Westfalia https://www.westfaliafruit.com/ South Africa
Allied avocados http://www.alliedfruits.com/ USA
Garden fresh gourmet https://www.gardenfreshgourmet.com/ USA
Good foods https://goodfoods.com/ USA
In 2012, the Canadian Government issued an official statement notifying no objection to apply HPP at 600 MPa with 3–9 min
holding time, as a mean to achieve food safety in pure avocado pulp, guacamole, and tomato based salsas (Health Canada, 2012).
The mildest processing conditions cited by the Canadian Government (600 MPa/3 min) reduced microbial counts of spoilage
microorganisms from 6–7 log10 CFU*g1 to less than 2 log10 CFU*g1, with no recovery after 40 days at 4 C (Fig. 3A)
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Peterborough, and others, which may have rivalled them in earlier
times.
The twelfth century, the golden age of feudalism
Intellectual and the Crusades, was also marked by a notable
revival of the movement of thought and revival of speculative
twelfth century activity. The culture and science which had long
found a home at Cordova now began to diffuse
themselves over Western Europe, and the works of Avicenna
introduced a curious relish for Aristotle’s ‘Natural Philosophy,’ which
veiled itself in mysticism to escape ecclesiastical censure. The old
scholastic Trivium of grammar, logic, and rhetoric, with the
mathematical Quadrivium, comprising arithmetic, geometry,
astronomy, and music, still constituted the magic circle of ‘Arts’ in the
mediæval sense. But the ‘sciences,’ as they were then called, of
physics, Roman law, and systematic theology, if not medicine, were
now claiming a place in the curriculum of education; and valuable
histories, in the form of chronicles, were compiled in several English
monasteries. That age cannot be called intellectually barren which
produced Lanfranc, Anselm, Abelard, Bernard, Peter the Lombard,
Averroes, Gratian, and Maimonides. The University of Bologna, with
its School of Law, opened by Irnerius under imperial patronage, was
among the first fruits of this mediæval renaissance. The cultivation of
Roman jurisprudence is usually dated from the discovery of a copy
of the Pandects at the capture of Amalfi in 1135, but it cannot have
been wholly unknown at an earlier period, since the religious orders
had been forbidden by a Papal mandate to study it. The lectures of
Irnerius, however, apparently preceding the capture of Amalfi,
methodised and popularised the new learning, which spread rapidly
through Western Europe.
There is historical evidence of Vacarius, a
Lectures of professor from Bologna, having commenced
Vacarius, and lectures in civil law at Oxford, under the patronage
first germs of of Archbishop Theobald, about 1149, in the reign
the University
of Stephen, by whom they were prohibited for a
while at the instance of teachers interested in philosophy and
theology. This is the earliest well-ascertained event in the
academical life of Oxford, but it may safely be inferred that if
Vacarius came from Italy to lecture in the schools of Oxford, those
schools had already attained something like a European reputation,
and were fitted to become the germ of an University.[1] We have the
positive testimony of John of Salisbury, who had studied at Paris,
that Oxford, just before the accession of Henry II., was engrossed by
logical controversies about the nature of Universals. Yet this
concourse of eager students apparently possessed no chartered
rights. There is no sufficient ground for the assertion that Henry I.
was educated at Oxford, and granted some important privileges to
the so-called ‘University;’ but we know that he lived much both at
Oxford and at Woodstock, that he built the palace of Beaumont on
the north of the city, and that he demised to its corporation the fee
farm of the city for the annual rent of sixty-three pounds. Nor can it
be proved, as it has been alleged, that, having sunk again to a low
ebb under Stephen and Henry II., it was revived by the judicious
patronage of Richard I., himself born at Beaumont. On the other
hand, starting from the fact that the Oxford schools attracted a
professor from Italy in the reign of Stephen, we are justified in
believing that they could scarcely have escaped the notice of Henry
I., who earned a name for scholarship in that unlettered era, and is
said to have ‘pleased himself much with the conversation of clerks;’
or of Stephen, who twice held Councils at Oxford; or of Henry II.,
who, like his grandfather, constantly resided in the immediate
neighbourhood. Without the encouragement of the Crown as well as
of the Church, they could not have attained the position which they
clearly occupied before the end of the twelfth century. By this time
Oseney Abbey had been founded, and had annexed the church of
St. George within the Castle. Both of these religious houses served
as lodgings for young scholars, who contributed to swell the number
of Oxford students. It is true that we have no trace of academical
endowments, or of royal charters recognising the Oxford schools, in
the twelfth century. But we are informed on good authority that
Robert Pullen (or Pulleyne), author of the Sententiarum Libri Octo,
and for some years a student at Paris, delivered regular courses of
lectures on the Scriptures at Oxford some years before the visit of
Vacarius. More than a generation later, in the year 1186 or 1187,
Giraldus Cambrensis, having been despatched to Ireland by Henry
II. as companion of Prince John, publicly read at Oxford his work on
the Topography of Ireland. According to his own account, ‘not willing
to hide his candle under a bushel, but to place it on a candlestick,
that it might give light to all, he resolved to read it publicly at Oxford,
where the most learned and famous of the English clergy were at
that time to be found.’ These recitations lasted three successive
days, and the lecturer has left it on record that he feasted not only
‘all the doctors of the different faculties and such of their pupils as
were of fame and note,’ but ‘the rest of the scholars,’ with many
burgesses and even the poor of the city. Whether or not the schools
thus frequented at Oxford were mainly founded by the Benedictines,
as has been maintained, and whether or not they were mainly
conducted by teachers from Paris, they assuredly existed, and
constituted an University in all but the name.
It is no longer doubtful that, in their earliest
Connection of stage, the schools of Oxford owed much to those
Oxford with the of Paris, then in a far more advanced state of
University of development, though not formally incorporated into
Paris
an ‘University’ until early in the thirteenth century.
William of Champeaux had opened a school of logic at Paris so far
back as 1109. His pupil, Abelard, followed him; and the fame of
Abelard himself was far surpassed by that of Peter Lombard, whose
text-book of ‘Sentences’ became the philosophical Bible of the
Middle Ages. Students flocked in from all parts of Europe; lectures
multiplied, not only in one faculty, as at Bologna or Salerno, but in
every branch of mediæval study, especially in those comprised
under ‘Arts;’ a system of exercises, degrees, academical discipline,
and even college life, was gradually matured; and when Philip
Augustus gave the new academical guild his royal approval, it was
already in a condition of vigorous activity. In this sense, the growth of
the University of Paris was spontaneous. Like that of Oxford, it was
originally nothing but an association of teachers united by mutual
interest; but, like all mediæval institutions, it grew up under Church
authority. It had originally sprung from the cathedral school of Notre-
Dame; the ecclesiastical chancellor of Paris claimed a paramount
jurisdiction over it, which, however, was constantly resisted by the
University, not without support from the Court of Rome; and the
validity of its highest degrees was derived from the sanction of the
Pope himself. Considering the links which bound England to France,
through Normandy and her other French provinces, as well as the
intellectual ascendency of Paris over Western Europe, it is natural
that Oxford should have borrowed many features of her internal
regulations from this source, though it cannot be affirmed with
certainty that she did so. The presumption is strongly confirmed by
the undoubted fact that the ‘English nation’ was one of the four
‘nations’ into which the students of Paris were divided, the Normans
forming another distinct nation by themselves. Leland tells us that
young Englishmen who then aspired to a high education got their
schooling, as we should call it, at Oxford, but their college training at
Paris, and Anthony Wood gives a list of eminent Oxonians who had
studied at Paris, including the names of Giraldus Cambrensis,
Robert Pulleyne, Robert Grosteste, Roger Bacon, and Stephen
Langton. If this be so, it was inevitable that, on their return, they
should bring home with them ideas based on their experience of
Paris, which might thus gradually become a model of academical
organisation for Oxford. In the year 1229, a fresh link of connection
with the great French University was created by a large immigration
of Parisian students. The immediate cause of this immigration was
an outbreak of hostility between the scholars and citizens of Paris,
like those which so constantly recurred between the same parties at
Oxford. Henry III. had the foresight to seize this opportunity of
reinforcing his own University, and among the many students who
came from Paris to Oxford on his invitation were several of his own
subjects who had gone abroad for their education.
At all events, at the beginning of the thirteenth
Recognition of century, we find at Oxford an academical body
the scholars by singularly like that long established at Paris, and
the Papal exhibiting almost equal vitality. In one respect,
Legate after the
indeed, its position was still more independent; for,
riot of 1209
whereas at Paris the University was overshadowed
by a Royal Court with all the great dignitaries of the French Church
and State, at Oxford the University authorities had no competitors
but the corporation of the city. Moreover, while at Paris there was a
resident chancellor of Notre-Dame, ever ready to assert his authority,
there was no episcopal see of Oxford; the diocesan lived at a safe
distance, and the archdeacon was the highest resident functionary of
the Church. About the beginning of the thirteenth century, Edmund
Rich, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, and Robert Grosteste,
afterwards bishop of Lincoln, became pioneers of Aristotelian study
in Oxford, and were among the earliest graduates in divinity, a
faculty then in its infancy. In the year 1214 we come upon more solid
ground in a documentary record preserved in the archives of the
University. This record, in the shape of a letter from the Papal
Legate, refers to an important incident which had occurred five years
before, in 1209, when three students had been seized and hanged
by a mob of townspeople, with the mayor and burgesses at their
head, in revenge for the death of a woman accidentally killed by
another student. In consequence of this outrage, said to have been
countenanced by King John, the city was laid under an interdict by
the Pope, who issued a prohibition against lecturing in Oxford, and
the great body of students migrated to Cambridge, Reading, or
elsewhere. The letter of the Papal Legate, reciting the submission of
the burgesses to his authority, and his disposition to deal mercifully
with them, proceeds to impose upon them certain penalties. One of
these is the remission of half the fixed rent payable for halls tenanted
by scholars, for a period of ten years. Another is the payment of fifty-
two shillings yearly for the support of poor scholars, and the
obligation to feast one hundred poor scholars every year on St.
Nicholas’s Day. They are also to swear that, in future, they will
furnish the scholars with provisions at a just and reasonable price;
and that if they shall arrest a clerk they shall deliver him up, upon
due requisition from the bishop of Lincoln or the archdeacon of
Oxford, or his official, or the chancellor, or ‘him whom the bishop of
Lincoln shall have deputed to this office.’ This oath is to be repeated
yearly. All masters who continued to lecture after the retirement of
scholars under Papal mandate are to be suspended from lecturing
for three years. All townsmen convicted of participation in the original
crime are to come, without shoes, hats, or cloaks, to the graves of
the murdered ‘clerks,’ and are to give their bodies proper burial in a
place to be solemnly chosen. Upon any default in the fulfilment of
these conditions, the former sentence of excommunication is again
to be enforced by the bishop of Lincoln.
It is to be observed that in this memorable
Office of document there is no mention of an ‘University.’
chancellor The members of the academical fraternity are
called simply ‘clerks’ or ‘scholars studying at
Oxford.’ It may further be inferred from the expressions respecting
the chancellor, that no chancellor of the University existed distinct
from the chancellor of the diocese, or, at least, that, if he existed, he
was a nominee of the bishop of Lincoln. On the other hand, the
scholars are recognised throughout as under the special protection
of the Papal See, as well as under special jurisdiction of the bishop
of Lincoln, afterwards to become ex officio Visitor of the University. It
seems to follow that, while the University, as a corporation, was not
yet fully constituted, such a corporation already existed in an
inchoate state, and the schools of Oxford enjoyed a privileged status
at the supreme court of Western Christendom. When they first
became, in the legal sense, an ‘University’ under a chancellor of their
own, is still a disputed question, though a seal has been engraved,
supposed to be of about the year 1200, which bears the inscription,
‘Sigillum Cancellarii et Universitatis Oxoniensis.’ Much learning has
been expended on the origin of the chancellorship, and it will
probably never be determined with certainty whether the earliest
chancellors derived their authority exclusively from the bishop of
Lincoln as diocesan, or were in the nature of elective rectors of the
schools (Rectores Scholarum), whose election was confirmed by the
bishop of Lincoln. What is certain is that the acting head of the
University was always entitled Cancellarius rather than Rector
Scholarum, that from the beginning of Henry III.’s reign he is
frequently mentioned under this official title, especially in the
important charters of 1244 and 1255, and that by the middle of the
thirteenth century he was treated as an independent representative
of the University, while the official deputy of the bishop at the
University was not the chancellor but the archdeacon of Oxford. At
this period, then, we may regard the University as fully constituted,
and the official list of chancellors begins in the year 1220, when
three persons are mentioned as having filled the office, the last of
whom is Robert Grosteste, afterwards the celebrated reforming
bishop of Lincoln. From this epoch we may safely date the election
of the chancellor by Convocation, though it long continued to be
subject to confirmation by the diocesan. A century later (1322) the
election was made biennial.
In the year 1219 the abbot and Convent of
University Eynsham took upon themselves the obligations
chests, and laid upon the burgesses in 1214, so far as
sources of regarded the double provision for poor scholars.
revenue in the
This agreement was carried out, yet the burgesses
thirteenth
century. Rise of are still treated as liable in an ordinance issued, in
Halls 1240, by Robert Grosteste, then bishop of Lincoln,
which provides for the regular application of the
fund to its original purpose. This ordinance marks an important
epoch in the growth of the University. The ‘Frideswyde Chest,’ and
other chests formed on a like principle by successive benefactions
for the relief of poor scholars, appear to have been the earliest form
of corporate property held by the University. They continued to
multiply up to the end of the fifteenth century, when they had
reached the number of twenty-four at least, and are computed to
have contained an aggregate sum of 2,000 marks, all of which might
be in circulation on loan at the same time.[2] It is very difficult to
ascertain what other sources of revenue the University may have
possessed in the first stage of its existence. In the next stage, its
income seems to have been largely derived from academical fines
and fees on graces, as well as from duties paid by masters keeping
grammar-schools and principals of halls, into which the primitive
boarding-schools were first transforming themselves. It is clear that,
at this period, the great mass of students, not being inmates of
religious houses, were lodged and boarded in these unendowed
halls, mostly hired from the citizens by clerks, who in some cases
were not even graduates, but were regularly licensed by the
chancellor or his commissary on September 9, and were subject to
fixed rules of discipline laid down from time to time by the governing
body of the University. How many of them may have been open in
the middle of the thirteenth century is a question which cannot be
answered. About seventy are specified by name in a list compiled
nearly two centuries later, but we have no means of knowing how
many ancient halls may have then become extinct, or how many new
halls may have been founded. The evidence now in our possession
does not enable us to identify more than about eighty as having ever
existed, and it is certain that all these did not exist at any one time.
Even if we suppose that several hundred students were housed in
monastic buildings during the age preceding the foundation of
colleges, and make a large allowance for those in private lodging-
houses, we cannot estimate the whole number of University scholars
at more than 2,000, or at the most 3,000. The loose statement of
Richard of Armagh, so lightly repeated by Anthony Wood and others,
that some 30,000 scholars were collected at Oxford in this age, not
only rests upon no sure historical ground, but is utterly inconsistent
with all that we know of the area covered by the city, and of the
position occupied by the academical population.
It is well known that Henry III. frequently visited
Early University Oxford for the purpose of holding councils or
charters otherwise, and his relations with the University
were constant. Amongst the letters and charters
issued by him in regard to University affairs three are specially
notable. One of these letters, dated 1238, was addressed to the
mayor and burghers, directing them to inquire into the circumstances
of a riot at Oseney Abbey between the servants of Otho, the Papal
Legate, and a body of disorderly students. This riot led to a struggle,
lasting a whole year, between the Legate and the University,
supported by the English bishops, and especially by Robert
Grosteste. The Legate was ultimately appeased by the public
submission of the University representatives in London to his
authority, whereupon he withdrew the interdict which he had laid
upon the Oxford clerks, some of whom had retired to Northampton,
and others, it is said, to Salisbury. Meanwhile the conflicts between
the students and townspeople were incessant. In 1244, after a
violent attack of gownsmen on the Jewry, the chancellor of the
University was given by a royal writ exclusive cognisance of all pleas
arising out of contracts relating to personalty, and in 1248 the
‘mayor’s oath’ of fidelity to the privileges of the University was
imposed by letters patent. By a similar charter, granted in 1255 to the
city of Oxford, these privileges are incidentally confirmed, for it is
there provided that if a ‘clerk’ shall injure a townsman he shall be
imprisoned until the chancellor shall claim him, while, if a townsman
shall injure a clerk, he shall be imprisoned until he make satisfaction
according to the judgment of the chancellor. Two years later (in
1257) the liberties of the University were defended against the
bishop of Lincoln himself before the king at St. Albans, on the ground
that Oxford was, after Paris, ‘schola secunda ecclesiæ.’
FOOTNOTES:
[1] It is perhaps needless to observe that ‘universitas’ signifies
a ‘corporation’ or guild, and implies no universality in the range of
subjects taught, or Universitas Facultatum. ‘Studium Generale’
probably signifies a place of education open to all comers.
[2] See the Introduction to Anstey’s Munimenta Academica, pp.
xxxv. et sqq.
CHAPTER II.
THE EARLY COLLEGES.
By far the most important event in the academical

Rise of Colleges history of the thirteenth century was the foundation
of University, Balliol, and Merton Colleges. The
idea of secular colleges, it is true, was not wholly new. Harold’s
foundation at Waltham, afterwards converted into an abbey, was
originally non-monastic, and designed to be a home for secular
priests, but it was not an educational institution. There were colleges
for the maintenance of poor scholars at Bologna; rather, however, in
the nature of the Oxford halls. If the founders of the earliest Oxford
college were indebted for their inspiration to any foreign source, they
must have derived it from the great French University in Paris, of
which the collegiate system already formed a distinctive feature. Not
to speak of still more ancient colleges at Paris, either attached to
monasteries or serving the purpose of mere lodging-houses, the
Sorbonne, founded about 1250, furnishes a striking precedent for its
Oxford successors, as an academical cloister specially planned for
the education of the secular clergy. Nevertheless, there is no proof
that its constitution was actually imitated or studied by the founder of
any Oxford college, and there is one important difference between
the Paris and Oxford colleges, that whereas the former were
appropriated to special faculties, the latter welcomed students in all
faculties. It is, therefore, by no means improbable that in the
development of the college system, as in the original incorporation of
schools into an academical body, like causes produced like results
by independent processes at the French and English Universities.
The claim of University College to priority among
Foundation of Oxford colleges cannot be disputed, if the
University and foundation of a college is to be dated from the
Balliol earliest of the endowments afterwards
appropriated to its support. It was in 1249 that
William of Durham left by will a sum of 310 marks to the University of
Oxford for the maintenance of ten or more Masters, being natives of
the county of Durham, in lodgings to be provided at Oxford out of this
fund. Two houses in School Street, Oxford, and one in High Street,
were purchased by the University before 1263, and were probably
occupied by students. There was, however, no royal charter of
incorporation, no provision for corporate self-government, or for the
succession of fellows, no organised society, no distribution of powers
or definition of duties. In a word, the institution founded by William of
Durham was not a college, but an exhibition-fund to be administered
by the University. It was not until 1292 that this scattered body of
exhibitioners was consolidated into ‘the Great Hall of the University,’
as it was then called, under statutes which are a very meagre copy
of those issued nearly thirty years earlier by Walter de Merton, and
which, unlike his, were imposed, not by the founder, but by the
University itself. Meanwhile, at some time between 1263 and 1268,
John Balliol, of Barnard Castle, father of John Balliol, king of
Scotland, provided similar exhibitions for poor scholars at Oxford.
His intention was completed by his wife, Dervorguilla, who collected
the recipients of his bounty into a single building on the present site
of the college, increased the endowments so that it might support a
body of sixteen exhibitioners with a yearly stipend of twenty-seven
marks apiece, and in 1282 issued statutes regulating the new
foundation, but fully conceding the principle of self-government.
In the meantime Merton College had been
Foundation of founded on a far larger scale, and had received
Merton College statutes which, viewed across the interval of six
centuries, astonish us by their comprehensive
wisdom and foresight. As an institution for the promotion of
academical education under collegiate discipline but secular
guidance, it was the expression of a conception entirely new in
England, which deserves special consideration, inasmuch as it
became the model of all other collegiate foundations, and
determined the future constitution of both the English Universities. In
this sense, Merton College is entitled to something more than
precedence, for its founder was the real founder of the English
college-system.
The oldest foundation charter of Merton College,
Merton College, issued in 1264, was itself the development of still
Statutes of, earlier schemes for the support of poor scholars, in
1274 scholis degentes. It established an endowed
‘House of the scholars of Merton’ at Malden, in
Surrey, under a warden or bailiffs, with two or three ‘ministers of the
altar.’ Out of the estates assigned to this collegiate house were to be
maintained a body of twenty students in a hall or lodging at Oxford,
or elsewhere, if a more flourishing studium generale should
elsewhere be instituted. In 1274, Walter de Merton, having greatly
expanded his first design, put forth his final statutes, transferring the
warden, bailiffs, and ministers of the altar, from Malden to Oxford,
and designating Oxford as the exclusive and permanent home of the
scholars. These statutes, which continued in force until the year
1856, are a marvellous repertory of minute and elaborate provisions
governing every detail of college life. The number and allowances of
the scholars; their studies, diet, costume, and discipline; the
qualifications, election, and functions of the warden; the distribution
of powers among various college officers; the management of the
college estates, and the conduct of college business, are here
regulated with truly remarkable sagacity. The policy which dictated
and underlies them is easy to discern. Fully appreciating the
intellectual movement of his age, and unwilling to see the paramount
control of it in the hands of the religious orders—the zealous
apostles of Papal supremacy—Walter de Merton resolved to
establish within the precincts of the University a great seminary of
secular clergy, which should educate a succession of men capable
of doing good service in Church and State. He was not content with
a copy or even a mere adaptation of the monastic idea; on the
contrary, it may be surmised that he was influenced, consciously or
unconsciously, by the spirit of those non-monastic institutions, now
almost forgotten, in which the parochial clergy of an earlier age had
sometimes lived together under a common rule. The employment of
his scholars was to be study—not the claustralis religio of the older
religious orders, nor the more practical and popular self-devotion of
the Dominicans and Franciscans. He forbade them ever to take
vows; he enjoined them to maintain their corporate independence
against all foreign encroachments; he ordained that all should apply
themselves to studying the liberal arts and philosophy before
entering upon a course of theology; and he provided special
chaplains to relieve them of ritual and ceremonial duties. He
contemplated and even encouraged their going forth into the great
world, only reminding those who might win an ample fortune (uberior
fortuna) to show their gratitude by advancing the interests of the
college. No ascetic obligations were laid upon them, but residence
and continuous study were strictly prescribed, and if any scholars
retired from the college with the intention of giving up learning, or
even ceased to study diligently, their salaries were no longer to be
paid. If the scale of these salaries and statutable allowances was
humble, it was chiefly because the founder intended the number of
his scholars to be constantly increased, as the revenues of the
house might be enlarged. He even recognised the duty of meeting
the needs of future ages, and empowered his scholars not only to
make new statutes, but even to migrate elsewhere from Oxford in
case of necessity.
If we seek to measure the effect produced by the
Social position, rise of colleges on the character of the University,
manners, and we must endeavour to realise the aspect of
academical life University life and manners before colleges were
of early
planted in Oxford. The students, as we have seen,
students
were lodged in religious houses, licensed halls, or
private chambers. The former were mostly destined to swell the
ranks of the regular clergy, and, it may be presumed, were subjected
to some wholesome rules of discipline, independent of any authority
exercised by the University. As they also received the whole or the
greater part of their instruction within the walls of their convents, they
probably were rarely seen in the streets, cultivated a certain degree
of refinement, and took comparatively little part in the riots which
constantly disturbed the peace of Oxford in the Middle Ages. With
the other two classes it was far otherwise. Even the inmates of halls
lived in a style and under conditions which, in our own age, would be
regarded as barbarism. Like other scholars, they were chiefly drawn
from a social grade below that of esquires or wealthy merchants.
Many of them were the less vigorous members of yeomen’s or
tradesmen’s families; not a few sprang from the very lowest ranks,
and actually begged their way to Oxford. The majority had probably
come as mere schoolboys, at the age of eleven or twelve, to one of
the numerous grammar-schools which prepared their pupils for the
higher studies taught in the ‘Schools of Oxford’ properly so called. It
was for these younger scholars, we may suppose, that regular
‘fetchers’ and ‘bringers’ were licensed by the University, as we learn
from a document of 1459, though some were attended by private
servants. The older scholars, however, doubtless travelled in parties,
for the sake of protection and economy, with their scanty baggage
slung over the backs of pack-horses. Having safely arrived in Oxford,
they would disperse to their several halls; and it does not appear
that, at this period, a freshman underwent any process of
matriculation or took any oath before acquiring the privileges of the
University. He would, of course, share his bedroom, if not his bed,
with others, and be content with the roughest fare, but he must also
have dispensed with nearly all the manifold aids to study now
enjoyed by the humblest students. Books existed only in the form of
costly manuscripts treasured up in the chilly reading-rooms of
monasteries; privacy was as impossible by day as by night; and the
only chance of acquiring knowledge was by hanging upon the lips of
a teacher lecturing to a mixed class of all ages and infinitely various
attainments, in an ill-lighted room, unprovided with desks or
fireplace, which in these days would be condemned as utterly unfit
for an elementary school-room. The principal of his hall, it is true,
was supposed to be his tutor, but we have positive evidence, in a
statute of 1432, that principals themselves were sometimes illiterate
persons, and of doubtful character; nor was it until that year that it
was necessary for them to be graduates. What kind of language he
would hear, and what kind of habits he would learn, from his
chamber-mates and class-mates in the century preceding the age of
Chaucer, we can be at no loss to imagine. And yet the inmate of a
hall, being under some kind of domestic superintendence, was a
model of academical propriety compared with the unattached
students, or ‘chamber-dekyns,’ whose enormities fill so large a space
in the mediæval annals of the University.
It is possible that a certain jealousy on the part
‘Chamber- of principals and others personally interested in the
dekyns’ prosperity of halls may have exaggerated the vices
of these extra-aularian students. At the same time
it is self-evident that raw youths congregated together, under no
authority, in the houses of townspeople, or ‘laymen,’ would be far
more likely to be riotous and disorderly than members of halls, or,
still more, of colleges. Accordingly, the ‘chamber-dekyns’ were
always credited with the chief share in the street brawls and other
excesses which so often disgraced the University in the Middle
Ages. The leading statute on the subject, it is true, was passed in the
year 1432, when colleges and halls had already established a
decisive ascendency, and when the ‘chamber-dekyns’ may have
sunk into greater contempt than in earlier times. But that statute,
abolishing the system of lodging in private houses, treats its abuses
as of long standing, and probably describes a state of things which
had existed for two centuries. It is here recited that the peace of the
University is constantly disturbed by persons who, having the
appearance of scholars, dwell in no hall and are subject to no
principal, but lurk about the town in taverns and brothels, committing
murders and thefts; wherefore it is ordained that all scholars must
reside in some college or hall, under pain of imprisonment, and that
no townsman shall harbour scholars without special leave from the
chancellor.
The reality of the evils against which this statute
Street brawls was aimed is attested by the frequent recurrence
and disorders of other statutes against crimes of violence
committed by scholars, as well as by college rules
against frequenting the streets except under proper control. We may
take as an example an University statute passed in 1432 against ‘the
unbridled prevalence of execrable disturbances’ in Oxford, which
specifically imposes fines, on a graduated scale, for threats of
personal violence, carrying weapons, pushing with the shoulder or
striking with the fist, striking with a stone or club, striking with a knife,
dagger, sword, axe, or other warlike weapon, carrying bows and
arrows, gathering armed men, and resisting the execution of justice,
especially by night. The main cause of these brawls is clearly
indicated by the further injunction that no scholar or Master shall take
part with another because he is of the same country, or against him
because he is of a different country. The statutable fines range from
one shilling to no less than forty—a highly deterrent penalty in the
reign of Henry VI. It is to be observed that while the parade of arms
within the chancellor’s jurisdiction is prohibited, the possession of
them is rather taken for granted, since they were usually carried for
purposes of defence on long journeys. Bows and arrows, as
essentially offensive weapons, are naturally placed under a stricter
ban, and the heaviest punishment is properly reserved for riotous
assemblages, which had so often led to bloodshed in the streets of
mediæval Oxford.
In such a state of society colleges offered not
Superiority of only a tranquil retreat to adult scholars, but also a
colleges in safe and well-regulated home to younger students
discipline and attending courses of lectures in the schools. The
tuition
early founders, it is true, did not design them to be
mainly educational seminaries for the general youth of the country,
and probably expected their inmates to obtain much of their
instruction outside the walls of the college. But the statutes of Merton
prove conclusively that ‘Scholars’[3] on admission were supposed to
be of about the same age as modern freshmen, and to need
rudimentary teaching, while express provision was made for the
reception of mere schoolboys. Doubtless, for at least two centuries
after the institution of colleges, their members were greatly
outnumbered by those of halls, and the system which in the fifteenth
century triumphed over the rivalry of private hostels may be more
properly called aularian than collegiate. Nevertheless, the superiority
of colleges as boarding-houses for students inevitably made itself felt
from the very first. Humble as their buildings and domestic
arrangements may originally have been, they were imposing and
luxurious by contrast with those of lodging-houses or halls. Their
endowments enabled them to maintain a standard of decency and
comfort in itself conducive to study; their statutes ensured regularity
of discipline; their corporate privileges and rights of self-government
imparted a dignity and security to all connected with them; the
example and authority of their elder fellows, mostly engaged in
scholastic or scientific research, if not in vigorous lecturing, cannot
have been wholly lost upon the juniors. In Merton, and probably in
other colleges, disputations were carried on as in the University
schools; attendance at Divine service was a statutable obligation;
students were not allowed to go about the streets unless
accompanied by a Master of Arts; in the dormitories the seniors were
invested with a kind of monitorial authority over the rest; and
misconduct was punishable with expulsion. By degrees, some of the
halls came into the possession and under the control of colleges,
which might naturally elect the most promising of their inmates to
scholarships. No wonder that, however weak numerically, the seven
colleges founded before the end of the fourteenth century produced
an immense proportion of the men who adorned that age by their
learning and virtues.[4] Thus, out of eighteen vice-chancellors who
can be identified as having filled that office in the fourteenth century,
five at least were members of Merton College, two of Oriel, and one
of Queen’s. Of sixty-four proctors known to have been elected during
the same century, twenty-two at least were members of Merton,
eight of Oriel, four of Balliol, and one of University, Exeter, Queen’s,
and New College respectively, while it is probable that others, of
whom nothing definite is known, really belonged to one of the seven
ancient colleges. Considering how largely the non-collegiate
population of the University outnumbered these small collegiate
bodies, it is a very significant fact that so many vice-chancellors and
proctors should have been chosen from them in days when election
to both these offices was entirely free. Such a fact goes far to prove
that the ‘college monopoly,’ of which so much has been heard in
later times, owed its origin, in a great degree, to natural selection in a
genuine struggle for existence between endowed and unendowed
societies.
FOOTNOTES:
[3] In the Merton Statutes the words ‘Scholar’ and ‘Fellow’ are
convertible, the Scholar being a Junior Fellow upon his first
admission.
[4] Though Canterbury College was founded in this century, it
does not seem to have ranked with other colleges in the
University, and no vice-chancellor or proctor is recorded to have
been elected from it.
CHAPTER III.
PROGRESS OF THE UNIVERSITY IN THE FOURTEENTH
CENTURY.
The fourteenth century deserves to be regarded as

Europe in the the most progressive and eventful in the history of
fourteenth the Middle Ages. All the kingdoms of Europe were
century engaged in wars, for the most part destitute of
permanent results, yet the work of civilisation went
forward with unbroken steadiness and rapidity. The Spanish
monarchies of Castile and Arragon continued their long struggle for
supremacy with each other, and for national existence with the
Mohammedan power at Granada. Germany was distracted by civil
wars and double imperial elections; Italy was torn asunder by the
factions of the Guelphs and Ghibellines. The usurpation and avarice
of the Roman Court produced an all but general revolt against Papal
authority; the seat of the Holy See was transferred for sixty years to
Avignon, and the return of the Pope to Rome was followed by ‘the
Great Schism,’ which lasted fifty years longer; Russia was subject to
the Khan of Kipchak until its southern provinces were overrun by the
hordes of Timur; Poland and Hungary were exhausting their strength
in expeditions against their neighbours or against Venice, while the
Ottoman Turks were advancing into the heart of Eastern Europe.
England was entering upon its purely dynastic crusades for the
possession of the Scotch and French crowns, which, fruitful as they
were in military glory, diverted the energies of the nation, wasted its
resources, and retarded its internal development for several
generations. Nevertheless, literature, art, and education flourished
marvellously in the midst of the storms which racked European
society. Ancient learning was revived in Italy chiefly by the influence
of Petrarch and Boccaccio; Dante became the father of modern
Italian poetry; Cimabue and his pupils founded the Italian school of
painting; scholastic philosophy culminated and gave place to a more
independent spirit of inquiry; scientific research first began to
emancipate itself from magical arts; Roman law extended its
dominion everywhere except in England, where, however, Chaucer
and Wyclif gave the first powerful impulse to native English thought;
free thinking in politics and religion penetrated deeply into the
popular mind, and increasing refinement of manners kept pace with
the growth of trade and industry. Universities sprang up one after
another—in France, in Spain, in Italy, in Poland, in Hungary, in
Austria, and in Germany; nor is it unduly rash to surmise that, if the
invention of printing could have been anticipated by a century, the
Renaissance and the Reformation itself might have preceded the
capture of Constantinople and the discovery of America.
At the commencement of this century Oxford
Social condition presented strange contrasts between the social
of the University and the intellectual aspects of its academical life.
The great riot of 1297 was scarcely over, and had
left a heritage of ill-will which bore fruit in the frightful conflict of 1354;
the encounters between the northern and southern nations were of
frequent recurrence, and there was no effective system of University
discipline, while college discipline, still in its infancy, was confined
within the precincts of Merton, University, and Balliol. The common
herd of students, inmates of halls and inns and lodging-houses, were
still crowded together in miserable sleeping-rooms and lecture-
rooms, without domestic care or comfort, and strangers to all those
frank and generous relations which naturally grow up between young
Englishmen, especially of gentle birth, in the kindly intercourse of
modern college life. They often rendered more or less menial
services in return for their instruction, and were sometimes enabled
to borrow from the University Chest; at other times they relapsed into
mendicity, and asked for alms on the public highways. There were
no libraries or museums, and the few books possessed by the
University were stored in a vault under St. Mary’s Church. The laws
of health being unknown, and every sanitary precaution neglected,
the city of Oxford was constantly scourged with pestilence from
which members of the University were fain to fly into neighbouring
country villages.

Innovative Food Processing Technologies 3 Volumes 2021 Elsevier Kasiviswanathan Muthukumarappan Full Chapter PDF

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

Innovative Food Processing Technologies 3 Volumes 2021 Elsevier Kasiviswanathan Muthukumarappan Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Innovative Food Processing

Technologies 3 Volumes (2021,

Food Waste Recovery: Processing Technologies,

Regulation of Innovative Technologies: Blockchain,

Food Processing Technology: Principles and Practice 5th

Microbiological Analysis of Foods and Food Processing

Food processing technology: principles and practice 4th

Starch-based materials in food packaging processing,

Innovations in Thermochemical Technologies for Biofuel

Netter Atlas of Human Anatomy-Classic Regional

Innovative Food Processing Technologies, Volume 1 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100596-5.22991-0 1

1.01.2 Vegetative Microorganisms, Spores, Viruses, Parasites, Bacteriophages and Nematodes

1.01.2.3 Viruses, Bacteriophages, Parasites and Nematodes

1.01.3.2.1 Food Processing Contaminants

1.01.3.2.2 Aflatoxins, Pesticides and Herbicides

1.01.5 Packaging Material

1.01.5.1 Polylactides (PLA)

1.01.6 Data Reporting and Experimental Design

Category Information and description

Based on Raso et al. (2016) and Balasubramaniam et al. (2004).

Table 2 Variables for future systematic studies of HPP.

Variables Options Action 1 Action 2 Action 3 Action 4 Action 5 Action 6

High pressure Cosmetics and

Figure 1 Possible future application of high-pressure processing.

Innovative Food Processing Technologies, Volume 1 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100596-5.22949-1 19

1.02.2 Historical Progress

Table 1 Selected developments in the industrial application of high pressure

Year Milestone Reference

1769 Invention of the steam engine Eggers (2005)

Adapted from Balasubramanian et al. (2015).

1.02.3 Governing Principles

1.02.3.1 Deﬁnition of Pressure

Table 2 Examples of industrial operations of high-

Unit operation Pressure (Pa)

Extrusion 1.0 106

1.02.3.2 Hydrostatic Condition

1.02.3.3 Atomic Changes

Table 3 Illustration of the inﬂuence of hydrostatic pressure on selected chemical bonds

Coulomb 20 Proportional inversely Highly affected

1.02.3.4 Pressure-Volume-Temperature Relations

1.02.3.5 Le Chatelier’s Principle

Table 4 Values of heat compression for

Food Heat of compression ( C per 100 MPa)

Adapted from Balasubramanian et al. (2015).

1.02.3.6 Transition State Theory

1.02.4 Equipment Overview

1.02.4.1 Hydraulic Conﬁguration

1.02.4.2 Pressure Generation

Fluid from the

Fluid from the

Figure 4 Illustration of a single-acting intensiﬁer.

Fluid from the Fluid from the

Figure 5 Illustration of a double-acting intensiﬁer.

1.02.4.3 Transmitting Fluid

1.02.4.4 Pressure Vessels

1.02.4.7 Fluid Reservoir

1.02.5.2 Pressure Versus Temperature Effect

1.02.5.3 Process Uniformity

Figure 7 Water phase diagram as inﬂuenced by pressure-thermal effects.

1.02.5.4 Reaction Volume Versus Activation Volume

Effect upon pressure treatment

Figure 9 Schematic diagram of a hypothetical high-pressure processing operation.

1.02.6.2 Pressure-Assisted Thermal Processing