1H NMR Relaxometry in Meat Science

  • Hanne Christine Bertram
Reference work entry


Proton NMR relaxometry is a very useful analytical technique in the characterization of intrinsic water in muscle and meat-based foods. Applications of proton NMR relaxometry in meat science have expanded tremendously recent years. Through dynamic studies on the postmortem conversion of muscle to meat, proton NMR relaxometry has gained unique insight into the reorganization of water compartmentalization that takes place when muscle is converted into meat. Furthermore, proton NMR relaxometry has been applied to study genetic and breed-related effects on water compartmentalization in meat and peri-mortal factors such as handling before slaughter, stunning, carcass chilling, and handling. In recent years, proton NMR relaxometry has also found a very broad range of applications in the study of a variety of meat processing technologies and types of meat products. Consequently, proton NMR relaxometry has been implemented in studies on meat curing, high pressurization processing, ultrasound treatment, and meat fermentation to elucidate the processing-induced changes in meat structure and accompanying effects on mobility and distribution of intrinsic water. Combining proton NMR relaxometry with other chemico-physical analyses that provide information on protein structure characteristics, such as FT-IR spectroscopy and DSC, in the study of meat products has advanced our insight into the associations between water–protein interactions and the T2 relaxation pattern observed.


Postmortem conversion of muscle to meat Water compartmentalization Peri-mortal factors Meat processing technologies Meat curing High pressurization processing Ultrasound treatment Meat fermentation Water–protein interactions T2 relaxation pattern Myofibrillar gels Water-holding capacity Juiciness Water-protein interactions 


  1. 1.
    Bertram HC, Andersen HJ. NMR and the water-holding issue of pork. J Anim Breed Genet. 2007;124:35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Renou J-P, Monin G, Sellier P. Nuclear magnetic resonance measurements on pork of various qualities. Meat Sci. 1985;15:225–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tornberg E, Andersson A, Goransson A, von Seth G. Water and fat distribution in pork in relation to sensory properties. In: Puolanne E, Demeyer DI, Ruusunen M, Ellis S, editors. Pork quality: genetic and metabolic factors. Oxon: CAB International; 1993.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Broendum J, Munck L, Henckel P, Karlsson AH, Tornberg E, Engelsen SB. Prediction of water-holding capacity and composition of porcine meat with comparative spectroscopy. Meat Sci. 2000;55:177–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brown RJS, Capozzi F, Cavani C, Cremonini MA, Petracci M, Petracci G. Relationships between 1H NMR relaxation data and some technological parameters of meat: a chemometric approach. J Magn Reson. 2000;147:89–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bertram HC, Andersen HJ, Karlsson AH. Comparative study of low-field NMR relaxation measurements and two traditional methods in the determination of water holding capacity of pork. Meat Sci. 2001;57:125–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bertram HC, Donstrup S, Karlsson AH, Andersen HJ. Continuous distribution analysis of T-2 relaxation in meat – an approach in the determination of water-holding capacity. Meat Sci. 2002;60:279–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Straadt IK, Aaslyng MD, Bertram HC. Assessment of meat quality by NMR-an investigation of pork products originating from different breeds. Magn Reson Chem. 2011;49:s71–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Young JF, Bertram HC, Young JF. Rest before slaughter ameliorates pre-slaughter stress-induced increased drip loss but not stress-induced increase in the toughness of pork. Meat Sci. 2009;83:634–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Huang JC, Huang M, Yang J, Wang P, Xu XL, Zhou GH. The effects of electrical stunning methods on broiler meat quality: effect on stress, glycolysis, water distribution, and myofibrillar ultrastructures. Poult Sci. 2014;93:2087–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bertram HC, Karlsson AH, Andersen HJ. The significance of cooling rate on water dynamics in porcine muscle from heterozygote carriers and non-carriers of the halothane gene – a low-field NMR relaxation study. Meat Sci. 2003;65:1281–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bertram HC, Whittaker AK, Andersen HJ, Karlsson AH. pH dependence of the progression in NMR T-2 relaxation times in post-mortem muscle. J Agric Food Chem. 2003;51:4072–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bertram HC, Schafer A, Rosenvold K, Andersen HJ. Physical changes of significance for early postmortem water distribution in porcine M-longissimus. Meat Sci. 2004;66:915–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bertram HC, Rommereim DN, Wind RA, Andersen HJ. Dynamic high-resolution H-1 and P-31 NMR spectroscopy and H-1 T-2 measurements in postmortem rabbit muscles using slow magic angle spinning. J Agric Food Chem. 2004;52:2681–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bertram HC, Stagsted J, Young JF, Andersen HJ. Elucidation of membrane destabilization in post-mortem muscles using an extracellular paramagnetic agent (Gd-DTPA): an NMR study. J Agric Food Chem. 2004;52:5320–5.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    McDonnell CK, Allen P, Duggan E, Arimi JM, Casey E, Duane G, Lyng JG. The effect of salt and fibre direction on water dynamics, distribution and mobility in pork muscle: a low field NMR study. Meat Sci. 2013;95:51–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Guo L-Y, Shao J-H, Liu D-Y, Xu X-L, Zhou G-H. The distribution of water in pork meat during wet-curing as studied by low-field NMR. Food Sci Technol Res. 2014;20:393–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wu Z, Bertram HC, Kohler A, Bocker U, Ofstad R, Andersen HJ. Influence of aging and salting on protein secondary structures and water distribution in uncooked and cooked pork. A combined FT-IR microspectroscopy and H-1 NMR relaxometry study. J Agric Food Chem. 2006;54:8589–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bertram HC, Meyer RL, Wu Z, Zhou X, Andersen HJ. Water distribution and microstructure in enhanced pork. J Agric Food Chem. 2008;56:7201–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Andersen RH, Andersen HJ, Bertram HC. Curing-induced water mobility and distribution within intra- and extramyofibrillar spaces of three pork qualities. Int J Food Sci Technol. 2007;42:1059–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cheftel JC, Culioli J. Effects of high pressure on meat: a review. Meat Sci. 1997;46:211–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bertram HC, Wu Z, Straadt IK, Aagaard M, Aaslyng MD. Effects of pressurization on structure, water distribution, and sensory attributes of cured ham: can pressurization reduce the crucial sodium content? J Agric Food Chem. 2006;54:9912–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Khan MA, Ali S, Abid M, Cao J, Jabbar S, Tume RK, Zhou G. Improved duck meat quality by application of high pressure and heat: a study of water mobility and compartmentalization, protein denaturation and textural properties. Food Res Int. 2014;62:926–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Khan MA, Ali S, Abid M, Ahmad H, Zhang L, Tume RK, Zhou G. Enhanced texture, yield and safety of a ready-to-eat salted duck meat product using a high pressure-heat process. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol. 2014;21:50–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang Z, Yang Y, Tang X, Chen Y, You Y. Chemical forces and water holding capacity study of heat-induced myofibrillar protein gel as affected by high pressure. Food Chem. 2015;188:111–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zheng H, Xiong G, Han M, Deng S, Xu X, Zhou G. High pressure/thermal combinations on texture and water holding capacity of chicken batters. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol. 2015;30:8–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ruberio-Celero M, Fulladosa E, Garcia-Gil N, Bertram HC. Multiple spectroscopic approach to elucidate water distribution and water-protein interactions in dry-cured ham after high pressure processing. J Food Eng. 2016;169:291–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Venturi L, Rocculi P, Cavani C, Placucci G, Rosa MD, Cremonini MA. Water absorption of freeze-dried meat at different water activities: a multianalytical approach using sorption isotherm, differential scanning calorimetry, and nuclear magnetic resonance. J Agric Food Chem. 2007;55:10572–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jayasooriya SD, Bhandari BR, Torley P, D’Arcy BR. Effect of high power ultrasound waves on properties of meat: a review. Int J Food Prop. 2004;7:301–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stadnik J, Dolatowski ZJ, Baranowska HM. Effect of ultrasound treatment on water holding properties and microstructure of beef (m. semimembranosus) during ageing. LWT Food Sci Technol. 2008;41:2151–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    McDonnell CK, Allen P, Morin C, Lyng JG. The effect of ultrasonic salting on protein and water–protein interactions in meat. Food Chem. 2014;147:145–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Li K, Kang Z-L, Zou Y-F, Xu X-L, Zhou G-H. Effect of ultrasound treatment on functional properties of reduced-salt chicken breast meat batter. J Food Sci Technol. 2015;52:2622–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ordonez JA, Hierro EM, Bruna JM, Hoz L. Changes in the components of dry-fermented sausages during ripening. Crit Rev Food Sci. 1999;34:329–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Garcia Garcia AB, Larsen LB, Cambero Rodríguez MI, Díaz KPC, Bertram HC. Proteolysis process in fermented sausage model systems as studied by NMR relaxometry. J Agric Food Chem. 2015;63:3039–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Garcia Garcia AB, Cambero Rodríguez MI, Hidalgo DRA, Bertram HC. Water mobility and distribution during dry fermented sausages ‘Spanish type’ manufacturing and its relationship with physicochemical and textural properties: a low-field NMR study. Eur Food Res Technol. 2016.
  36. 36.
    Barbut S. Importance of fat emulsification and protein matrix characteristics in meat batter stability. J Muscle Food. 1995;6:161–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Miklos R, Mora-Gallego H, Larsen FH, Serra X, Cheong L–Z, Xu X, Arnau J, Lametsch R. Influence of lipid type on water and fat mobility in fermented sausages studied by low-field. NMR Meat Sci. 2014;96:617–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Baranowska HM. Water molecular properties in forcemeats and finely ground sausages containing plant fat. Food Biophys. 2001;6:133–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhang F-L, Liang Y, Tan C-P, Lu Y-M, Cui C. Research on the water-holding capacity of pork sausage with acetate cassava starch. Starch. 2014;66:1033–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Resconi VC, Keenan DF, Gough S, Doran L, Allen P, Kerry JP, Hamill RM. Response surface methodology analysis of rice starch and fructo oligosaccharides as substitutes for phosphate and dextrose in whole muscle cooked hams. LWT- Food Sci Technol. 2015;64:946–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Møller SM, Grossi A, Christensen M, Orlien V, Søltoft-Jensen J, Straadt IK, Thybo AK, Bertram HC. Water properties and structure of pork sausages as affected by high-pressure processing and addition of carrot fibre. Meat Sci. 2011;87:387–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Møller SM, Bertram HC, Andersen U, Lillevang SK, Rasmussen A, Hansen TB. Physical sample structure as predictive factor in growth modeling of Listeria innocua in a white cheese model system. Food Microbiol. 2013;36:90–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Møller SM, Gunvig A, Bertram HC. Effect of starter culture and fermentation temperature on water mobility and distribution in fermented sausages and correlation to microbial safety studied by nuclear magnetic resonance relaxometry. Meat Sci. 2010;86:462–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bertram HC, Straadt IK, Jensen JA, Aaslyng MD. Relationship between water mobility and distribution and sensory attributes in pork slaughtered at an age between 90 and 180 days. Meat Sci. 2007;77:190–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bertram HC, Aaslyng MD. Pelvic suspension and fast post-mortem chilling: effects on technological and sensory quality of pork – a combined NMR and sensory study. Meat Sci. 2007;76:524–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bertram HC, Aaslyng MD, Andersen HJ. Elucidation of the relationship between cooking temperature, water distribution and sensory attributes of pork – a combined NMR and sensory study. Meat Sci. 2005;70:75–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hullberg A, Bertram HC. Relationships between sensory perception and water distribution determined by low-field NMR T-2 relaxation in processed pork – impact of tumbling and RN- allele. Meat Sci. 2005;69:709–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Bordoni A, Laghi L, Babini E, Di Nunzio M, Picone G, Ciampa A, Valli V, Danesi F, Capozzi F. Elucidation of the relationship between cooking temperature, water distribution and sensory attributes of pork – a combined NMR and sensory study. Electrophoresis. 2014;35:1607–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Food ScienceAarhus UniversityAarslevDenmark

Personalised recommendations