Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 328

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 106 of the 106 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Essential oils as natural additives to prevent oxidation reactions in meat and meat products: A review

Pateiro, Mirian, Barba, Francisco J., Domínguez, Rubén, Sant'Ana, Anderson S., Mousavi Khaneghah, Amin, Gavahian, Mohsen, Gómez, Belén, Lorenzo, Jose M.·2018·Food Research International

Abstract

Oxidation reactions during manufacturing, distribution, and storage of meat and meat products result in undesirable physicochemical changes and aromas, which leads to detrimental effects on the product quality. This could be translated into the consumer dissatisfaction and economic loss. One of the most common practices to overcome this issue is the incorporation of synthetic antioxidants. However, the increasing health-consciousness of consumers and their preference for natural additives leads to the search of natural alternatives to synthetic antioxidants. A number of essential oils have strong antioxidant properties and are explored as potential alternatives to chemical antioxidants in the meat industry. These compounds are classified as Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS), and their application single or combined with other essential oils, ingredients or preservation technologies have beneficial effects on meat products. Their activity depends on several parameters including their concentrations, their possible synergistic effects, and the extraction method used to obtain them. Although steam distillation is the most common industrial technique for essential oils extraction, novel technologies have been emerged to address the drawbacks of the traditional extraction method and to obtain high-quality essential oils. This paper provides an overview of the application of essential oils as potential substitutes for synthetic antioxidants in the meat industry, exploring their mechanism of action against oxidation reactions, and the effect of extraction methods on their effectiveness.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodres.2018.07.014

Cites

106 of 106 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 106 references

Cited by

See all 328

Metadata

Authors
Pateiro, M., Barba, F. J., Domínguez, R., Sant'Ana, A. S., Mousavi Khaneghah, A., Gavahian, M., Gómez, B., & Lorenzo, J. M.
Venue
Food Research International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
113
Pages
156-166
ISSN
0963-9969 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2823099944
Cited by
328
References
106
FWCI
32.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Essential oils as natural additives to prevent oxidation reactions in meat and meat products: A review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.07.014
The paper
Pateiro, M., Barba, F. J., Domínguez, R., Sant'Ana, A. S., Mousavi Khaneghah, A., Gavahian, M., Gómez, B., & Lorenzo, J. M. (2018). Essential oils as natural additives to prevent oxidation reactions in meat and meat products: A review. Food Research International. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.07.014

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.