Recent advancements in the utilization of ultrasonic technology for the curing of processed meat products: A comprehensive review.

Curation meat products involves multiple stages, including pre-curing processing (thawing, cleaning, and cutting), curing itself, and post-curing processing (freezing, and packaging). Ultrasound are nonthermal processing technology widely used in food industry. This technology is preferred because it reduces the damages caused by traditional processing techniques on food, while simultaneously improving the nutritional properties and processing characteristics of food. The utilization of ultrasonic-assisted curing technology has attracted significant attention within the realm of meat product curing, encouraging extensive research efforts. In terms of curing meat products, ultrasonic-assisted curing technology has been widely studied due to its advantages of accelerating the curing speed, reducing nutrient loss, and improving the tenderness of cured meats. Therefore, this article aims to comprehensively review the application and mechanism of ultrasound technology in various stages of meat product curing. Furthermore, it also elaborates the effects of ultrasonic-assisted curing on the tenderness, water retention, and flavor substances of the meat products during the curing process. Besides, the implication of the ultrasound in the processing of meat curation plays a potent role together with other technologies or methods. The use of ultrasound technology in the process of meat curation was analyzed, which might be a theoretical insight for the industrialization prospects of the meat product.

A comprehensive review of ultrasonic assisted extraction (UAE) for bioactive components: Principles, advantages, equipment, and combined technologies.

The increasing focus on health and well-being has sparked a rising interest in bioactive components in the food, pharmaceutical, and nutraceutical industries. These components are gaining popularity due to their potential benefits for overall health. The growing interest has resulted in a continuous rise in demand for bioactive components, leading to the exploration of both edible and non-edible sources to obtain these valuable substances. Traditional extraction methods like solvent extraction, distillation, and pressing have certain drawbacks, including lower extraction efficiency, reduced yield, and the use of significant amounts of solvents or resources. Furthermore, certain extraction methods necessitate high temperatures, which can adversely affect certain bioactive components. Consequently, researchers are exploring non-thermal technologies to develop environmentally friendly and efficient extraction methods. Ultrasonic-assisted extraction (UAE) is recognized as an environmentally friendly and highly efficient extraction technology. The UAE has the potential to minimize or eliminate the need for organic solvents, thereby reducing its impact on the environment. Additionally, UAE has been found to significantly enhance the production of target bioactive components, making it an attractive method in the industry. The emergence of ultrasonic assisted extraction equipment (UAEE) has presented novel opportunities for research in chemistry, biology, pharmaceuticals, food, and other related fields. However, there is still a need for further investigation into the main components and working modes of UAEE, as current understanding in this area remains limited. Therefore, additional research and exploration are necessary to enhance our knowledge and optimize the application of UAEE. The core aim of this review is to gain a comprehensive understanding of the principles, benefits and impact on bioactive components of UAE, explore the different types of equipment used in this technique, examine the various working modes and control parameters employed in UAE, and provide a detailed overview of the blending of UAE with other emerging extraction technologies. In conclusion, the future development of UAEE is envisioned to focus on achieving increased efficiency, reduced costs, enhanced safety, and improved reliability. These key areas of advancement aim to optimize the performance and practicality of UAEE, making it a more efficient, cost-effective, and reliable extraction technology.

Immune response to different types of hepatitis B vaccine booster doses 2-32 years after the primary immunization schedule and its influencing factors.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the immune effect of different types of hepatitis B vaccine (HepB) booster doses 2-32 years after primary immunization, explore the influencing factors, and offer guidance regarding the necessity and timing of boosters. METHODS: In total, 1163 participants who were born from 1986 to 2015, received the HepB full-course primary vaccination, were hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) negative, and had hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs) <10 mIU/mL were enrolled. Individuals were randomly divided into two groups and received a booster dose of HepB. Venous blood samples were collected 30 days later and tested for anti-HBs. RESULTS: In total, 595 and 568 individuals received a single dose of HepB (CHO) and HepB (SC), respectively. Venous blood samples were obtained from 1079 vaccinees (CHO: 554, SC: 525). The seroconversion rates were 93.68% (519/554) and 86.67% (455/525) (p < 0.05), with geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) of 426.58 mIU/ml and 223.8 mIU/ml, respectively. This result indicated that BMI, smoking status, vaccine types of booster and prebooster anti-HBs concentration significantly influenced anti-HBs levels. Only BMI, prebooster anti-HBs concentrations and booster types were different between the anti-HBs positive and negative groups. CONCLUSIONS: Participants boostered with HepB (CHO) had a relatively higher seroconversion rate than those boostered with HepB (SC). The high seroconversion rates in the two groups suggested that the subjects remained protected despite low circulating antibodies, so there is currently no urgent need for booster immunization. Factors including BMI ≥ 25 and prebooster anti-HBs concentration <2.5 mIU/mL, which contributed to lower responses to a booster dose, might indicate a greater risk of breakthrough infection.