A Review on Hot Boning of Beef: Quality Implications and Traditional Practices in Developing Regions.
Saved in:
| Title: | A Review on Hot Boning of Beef: Quality Implications and Traditional Practices in Developing Regions. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Mahbub, Most. Mustary1 (AUTHOR), Badhan, Shraboni Jhora1 (AUTHOR), Murshed, Hasan Mohammad1 (AUTHOR) hasan.murshed@bau.edu.bd, Shishir, Md Safiqur Rahaman2 (AUTHOR), Juthi, Jannatul Fardous1 (AUTHOR), Habib, Masuma3 (AUTHOR), Azad, Md. Abul Kalam1 (AUTHOR) azad_animalscience@bau.edu.bd, Chauhan, Surinder Singh4 (AUTHOR), Jha, Poulami (AUTHOR) pojha@wiley.com |
| Source: | Journal of Food Processing & Preservation. 6/7/2026, Vol. 2026, p1-24. 24p. |
| Subjects: | Beef processing, Beef quality, Slaughtering, Electric stimulation, Developing countries, Meat preservation, Meat industry, Food safety |
| Abstract: | This review is aimed at exploring the evolution, scientific basis, and technological advancements related to hot boning (HB) and its implications on beef quality, safety, and other related areas. HB, which is one of the traditional and ancient slaughter methods, has become more well known because of its logistical and financial advantages, such as decreased energy usage, easier processing, and cheaper chilling costs. In contrast to traditional cold boning, prerigor muscle excision frequently impairs tenderness, color stability, and water‐holding capacity. Many postharvest techniques, including electrical stimulation, wet and dry aging, chemical and enzymatic interventions, pulsed electric field (PEF), high‐pressure processing (HPP), and mechanical tenderization, have been studied to address these issues. Among these, electrical stimulation and modified chilling strategies appear most feasible for adoption in resource‐limited settings, whereas high‐cost technologies such as HPP and PEF remain economically constrained. Furthermore, the elevated temperatures associated with prerigor processing raise microbiological safety concerns, particularly in regions with inadequate infrastructure. This review highlights the trade‐offs between functional advantages and quality limitations of HB and emphasizes the integration of cost‐effective technologies to enhance its applicability. Overall, HB systems, when combined with appropriate interventions, present a viable strategy to balance processing efficiency, meat quality, and food safety in both developing and industrialized meat sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Food Processing & Preservation is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | This review is aimed at exploring the evolution, scientific basis, and technological advancements related to hot boning (HB) and its implications on beef quality, safety, and other related areas. HB, which is one of the traditional and ancient slaughter methods, has become more well known because of its logistical and financial advantages, such as decreased energy usage, easier processing, and cheaper chilling costs. In contrast to traditional cold boning, prerigor muscle excision frequently impairs tenderness, color stability, and water‐holding capacity. Many postharvest techniques, including electrical stimulation, wet and dry aging, chemical and enzymatic interventions, pulsed electric field (PEF), high‐pressure processing (HPP), and mechanical tenderization, have been studied to address these issues. Among these, electrical stimulation and modified chilling strategies appear most feasible for adoption in resource‐limited settings, whereas high‐cost technologies such as HPP and PEF remain economically constrained. Furthermore, the elevated temperatures associated with prerigor processing raise microbiological safety concerns, particularly in regions with inadequate infrastructure. This review highlights the trade‐offs between functional advantages and quality limitations of HB and emphasizes the integration of cost‐effective technologies to enhance its applicability. Overall, HB systems, when combined with appropriate interventions, present a viable strategy to balance processing efficiency, meat quality, and food safety in both developing and industrialized meat sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 01458892 |
| DOI: | 10.1155/jfpp/3695155 |
