EVALUATION OF POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS IN PORK MEAT PRODUCTS OBTAINED IN TRADITIONAL SYSTEMS IN ROMANIA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24193/subbchem.2018.1.14Keywords:
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, traditional, industrial, smoked, productAbstract
The aim of this study was to determine the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) levels in the smoked meat products obtained in the traditional system in Romania. The importance of this study resides in the fact that these compounds are known to be carcinogenic, and their levels should be strictly monitored to ensure the safety of the consumers. Until now, no study was performed in Romania that addresses this issue in the traditional pork meat products. The study was performed on 60 meat products samples (sausages, bacon, ham) taken from a certified traditional meat processing unit but also from retail units that delivered industrially processed meat products. The method used in the detection of the 15 PAHs analysed was HPLC. Our results showed that the highest percent of total PAHs is found in the traditionally obtained smoked bacon and the lowest in industrially produced pork meat sausage. None of the samples examined exceeded the limit imposed by the European legislation for benzo[a]pyrene (BaP), but the smoked bacon revealed higher values for PAH4 than the allowed limit. Following this study, we suggest that a more careful attention should be paid to all factors and apply such smoking conditions that result in the lowest possible contamination with PAH in pork meat products obtained in the traditional system in Romania.
References
G. Gheorghe, B.G. Nistoreanu, A. Filip, Business and Sustainable Development, 2013, XV, 645.
J. Pleadin, L. Demšar, T. Polak, A. Vulić, T. Lešić T., D. Kovačević, Meso, 2016, 18, 89.
C. Marcos, C. Viegas, A.M. de Almeida, M.M. Guerra, Journal of Ethnic Foods, 2016, 3, 51.
S.A. Rather, F.A. Masoodi, R. Akhter, Journal of Ethnic Foods, 2016, 3, 246.
S.E. Yotsuyanagi, C.J. Contreras-Castillo, M.H. Haguiwara, M.V. Katia, A.B. Cipolli, L.S.C. Lemos, M.A. Morgano, E.A. Yamada, Meat Science, 2016, 115, 50.
O.A. Olaoye, International Food Research Journal, 2011, 18(3), 877.
P. Simko, Journal of Chromatography, 2002, B 770, 3.
J. Djinovic, A. Popovic, W. Jira, Meat Science, 2008, 80, 449.
EC (European Comission Regulation) No. 835/2011, Official Journal of the European Union, 2011, L215, 4.
EFSA, EFSA Journal, 2008, 724, 1.
S. Higginbotham, N.V.S. RamaKrishna, S.L. Johansson, E.G. Rogan, E.L. Cavalieri, Carcinogenesis, 1993, 14, 875.
EC (European Comission Regulation) No. 108/2005, Official Journal of the European Union, 2005, L34, 43.
SCF, 2002, http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out153_en.pdf
SCOOP, 2004, http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/chemicalsafety/contaminants/scoop_3-2–12_final_report_pah_en.pdf
J.M Lorenzo, L. Purrinos, M.C Fontan, D. Franco, Meat Science, 2010, 86(3), 660.
C. Santos, A. Gomes, L. C. Roseiro, Food Chemical Toxicolology, 2011, 49, 2343.
G. Purcaro, S. Moret, L.S. Conte, Meat Science, 2009, 81(1), 275.
S. Wretling, A. Eriksson, G.A. Eskhult, B. Larsson, Journal Food Composition Analysis, 2010, 23, 264.
H. Ojaveer, R. Tanner, Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences Ecology, 1996, 6, 136.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Chemia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.