Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41458129›Full record

ArticleFood chemistry: X2025

Influence of different sterilization methods on texture and quality of ready-to-eat braised beef: An analysis from protein and metabolomic perspectives.

Chang Su, Xiaoli Pu, Li Yang, Yuxin Huang, Hongjun Li, Bin Zhang, Dong Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Food chemistry: X, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Chang SuCollege of Food and Bioengineering, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China.
Xiaoli PuCollege of Food and Bioengineering, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China.
Li YangCollege of Food and Bioengineering, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China.
Yuxin HuangCollege of Food and Bioengineering, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China.
Hongjun LiCollege of Food Science, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715, China.
Bin ZhangCity Agriculture and Animal Husbandry Science Research and Promotion Center, Shigatse 857007, China.
Dong ZhangCollege of Food and Bioengineering, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluated the eating quality of braised beef using four sterilization methods from the protein conformation and metabolites perspective. High-temperature sterilization (HTS) and pasteurization (PS) reduced textural integrity and promoted water migration to free states, while irradiation (IS) and high-pressure processing (HPP) mitigated these effects. Sensory analysis ranked PS highest among treated samples. Non-targeted metabolomics indicated both HTS and IS degraded the umami-enhancing amino acid L-Lys while elevating odorous proline levels. HPP altered fatty acid profiles and similarly increased proline (+19.94 %). Notably, PS uniquely preserved lysine (>60.99 % retention) and boosted IMP by 68.79 %, accounting for its superior sensory performance in braised beef. Mechanistically, HTS and PS accelerated protein/lipid oxidation, inducing protein aggregation via hydrophobic/disulfide bonds and conversion of ordered structures to random coils. PS maintained metabolite profiles closest to non-sterilized controls. Thus, pasteurization emerges as the optimal industrial-scale sterilization method for braised beef, balancing quality preservation and sensory attributes.

Indexed as

Myofibrillar proteinNon-targeted metabolomicsReady-to-eat braised beefSterilization methodsTaste compoundsTexture quality

Identifiers

PMID41458129
PMCPMC12743518

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.