Background: The concept of a clean label is difficult to define, even in common language, as the interpretation of what a “clean” food is differs from one person to another and from one organisation to another. The lack of a unique definition and regulations of what the term “clean” means, along with the growing consumer demand for more “natural” and healthier foods, is posing new challenges for manufacturers and ingredient producers. The meat industry, in particular, has been affected by this new movement owing to negative attitudes and feelings consumers associate with consuming processed meat products. Scope and approach: The review scope is to describe attributes and associations around the “clean” label term by analysing the most recent ingredients, additives and processing methods currently available for meat manufacturers. Their application in meat, plant-based alternatives and hybrid meat/plant products, current limitations and challenges presented in consumer perception, safety and potential impacts on product quality are also presented. Key findings and conclusions: The availability of a growing number of “clean” label ingredients provides a new suite of approaches that are available for application by meat processors to help overcome some of the negative connotations associated with processed meat products and also support plant-based meat alternatives and hybrids.

Hybrid plant and meat (HPM) products, in which a portion of meat is substituted with alternative plant protein-containing ingredients, offer a promising option for flexitarian consumers seeking to increase plant protein consumption while continuing to enjoy the sensory qualities of meat products. This study evaluated the effects of faba bean protein (FBP), pea protein (PP), and rice protein (RP) ingredients at a 12.5% meat protein substitution level, under varying pre-hydration conditions and, subsequently, on the technological properties of hybrid plant/beef patties (HPBP). Colour measurements indicated that plant protein ingredient addition to HPBP resulted in increased lightness (L*) and decreased redness (a*) values. HPBP showed reduced cooking loss compared to 100% beef patties, and cooking loss increased with higher pre-hydration levels of plant proteins. Faba bean hybrid patty (FBHP) exhibited lower texture scores, while the patty containing non-hydrated RP had the highest hardness values. The texture of patties with PP was comparable to the control, irrespective of the hydration status of the plant protein. Inclusion of plant proteins also reduced water mobility by restricting intracellular water. Overall, these findings provide valuable insights into the selection of suitable plant proteins and the requirement for optimal pre-hydration of plant proteins prior to incorporation into HPBP to ensure optimal technological properties.

HPM products combine plant-based ingredients with meat to enhance taste, texture, and nutritional quality. This review investigates formulation and processing technologies, and explores the challenges and opportunities in their development.

In this study, two types of cooling methods (vacuum cooling and air cooling) were used to cool cooked macro‐porous sausage. Alterations in the microbiological conditions, pH, instrumental color (L*, a*, and b*), total volatile nitrogenous bases (TVB‐N), lipid oxidation (TBARS), water activity (aW), moisture content, and texture indicators were evaluated to determine sausages' quality changes during storage under refrigeration for up to 10 days. In general, the shelf life of sausages chilled by vacuum cooling (8 days) was similar to that of sausages cooled by air cooling (9 days). For pH, no significant difference (p > .05) was obtained between two cooling methods. However, vacuum‐cooled sausages have lower L* value (p < .05), lower moisture content, and water activity compared with the air‐cooled sausages. However, sausages cooled by vacuum cooling showed a sharp increase in TBARS and TVB‐N values but maintained texture characteristics for a longer time compared with air‐cooled sausages. Although the results indicated that the quality of sausages treated by those two methods remarkably decreased after 7 days, characteristics of sausages cooled by vacuum cooling are better within accepted standards compared with air‐cooled sausages. In conclusion, vacuum cooling can be a feasible cooling method with great potential to be used in cooked macro‐porous sausages to maintain the quality and may provide reference experiences for the food with similar structure.