food australia Journal, Vol. 75 (4) October - December 2023

ISSN 1032 5298 • PRINT POST APPROVED PP241613/00096 VOL 75 ISSUE 4

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 2023

OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF AIFST

The science of food security and sustainability

Plants for space and sustainability on Earth

3D food printing and texture modified foods

Sustainable packaging design

Tackling food security data challenges &

&

ADVERTORIAL

HAVE YOU EVER HAD A FIELD BIOLOGIST REVIEW YOUR FACILITY FOR POTENTIAL PESTS? WERE YOU SURPRISED AT THE FINDINGS? The problem with using your current pest control company to review your site for pest activity and to propose a pest control plan is a lack of independence. Many of the larger pest control companies have their own field biologists. However, it is often difficult to know whether a recommendation to increase bait stations is a legitimate recommendation or if it is an opportunity to increase their level of service. It also puts the field biologist in a difficult situation as they may feel they cannot comment on the work of one of their colleagues or make a recommendation only to be accused of trying to sell more.

In September this year, QMS Audits launched its pest assessment service. QMS Audits is one of the few consultancies in Australia and New Zealand who have a national team of field biologists.

QMS Audits’ field biologists come from both food and grain businesses as well as pest management. The fiveperson team includes tertiary qualified entomologists and people who have completed the Field Biologists course with Australian Environmental Pest Managers Association (AEPMA).

Each of the field biologists have had

2 food australia

extensive experience controlling pests in the food industry and are able to make practical recommendations.

Natasha Bowe, QMS Audits’ Principal and Director, was incredulous at the amount of pest activity the field biologists found. “I was really surprised when our field biologists found mice droppings on a pallet of dry ingredients which had just arrived on site. When we rang the supplier they were caught completely unaware.

They came back that afternoon and had found mice droppings on a further four pallets and were in the process of laying traps.”

“Going out on site recently with two of our field biologists has given me a brand new appreciation for the amount of pest activity at a food manufacturing business. Our field biologists have a completely different bank of knowledge regarding pests and their life cycles. The life cycle of insects in products must be considered when extending shelf life.

We can’t just say it is a dry product with low moisture, so should last for another six months. We need to consider the potential pest activity and the environment it has been in.”

Having a field biologist in almost

every state has also given our food safety team direct access to more information, allowing us to be more targeted when writing up pest management programs for SQF clients. We use our field biologists to conduct both initial and annual pest assessments to fulfil audit requirements for Brand Reputation Compliance Global Standard (BRCGS), Coles Food Manufacturing Supplier Requirements (CFMSR) and American Institute of Baking (AIB).

By having an independent and objective pest assessment, we can recommend the level of servicing required by the pest control company.

“It has enabled our clients to become more targeted with their use of rodenticide, which I think is good for everyone,” Natasha said.

For more information, contact us: Phone: 1300 404 505 Email: info@qmsaudits.com.au Web: www.qmsaudits.com.au

OCTOBER – DECEMBER 2023

14

20

28

30

IN THIS ISSUE

REGULARS

12

05

By the Numbers

Key themes emerge at cellular agriculture event

06

AIFST News

14

40

Food Files

47

Fast Five

Collaborating for success at the CellAg Summit

The science of food security and sustainability

Food science should be part of transforming agriculture and food systems to futureproof our food supply 18

Tackling Australia’s food security data challenges

Improving digital infrastructure to enhance Australia's food security research capability 20

Plants for space and sustainability on Earth

The ARC Centre of Excellence for Plants for Space - addressing food production challenges in space and on Earth 23

Exploring the antimicrobial effects of plasma-activated water on beef samples

Winner of the 2023 AIFST Research Poster Competition 24

Novel-grain flours blended with chickpea for quality improvement of pasta

Joint runner up in the 2023 AIFST Research Poster Competition 26

Exploring virtual reality for space applications: food odour cue perception

Joint runner up in the 2023 AIFST Research Poster Competition 28

Australia’s growing appetite for plant-based foods

Plant-based eating is not a passing trend and reflects a shift to values-driven eating 30

Is saving the planet the strongest commercial decision a company can make?

Sustainability means including the planet as a key stakeholder 32

COVER QMS Audits - How good is your pest management?

Designing delicious plant-based meats to make a positive impact

Using science and technology to underpin product development 36

Information search tips for food scientists

Navigate the online literature with confidence 38

The key principles and challenges of effective sustainable packaging design

Balancing competing demands in food packaging design 42

3D food printing technology to produce novel texture modified foods

An emerging strategy for improving the nutritional and sensory quality of food for those with difficulty swallowing 46

Food microbiologists: Who are they? What do they do?

An insight into the world of the food microbiologist

food australia 3

Published by The Australian Institute of Food Science and Technology Limited.

Food for Thought

Editorial Coordination Melinda Stewart | aifst@aifst.com.au

Contributors Dr Mary Ann Augustin, Lauren Branson, Dr Andrew Costanzo, Dr Dan Dias, Jessica Freitag, Dr Matthew Gilliham, Dr Sally Gras, Dr Koentadi Hadinoto, Ian Hayes, Dr Stefanie Kethers, Katherine La Macchia, Dr Djin Gie Liem, Grace Loke, Dr Thu McCann, Amanda Orchard, Dr Lisa Ronquest-Ross, Jo Savill, Dr Francisco J. Trujillo, Dr Dipon Sarkar, Dr Kate Secombe, Melinda Stewart, Dr Regine Stockman, Dr Liezhou Zhong.

Advertising Manager Clive Russell | aifst@aifst.com.au

Subscriptions AIFST | aifst@aifst.com.au

Production Bite Communications

2024 Subscription Rates Australia $145.00 (incl. GST); Overseas (airmail) $225.00.

Single copies (Australia) $36.50 (incl. GST); Overseas $56.50 food australia is the official journal of the Australian Institute of Food Science and Technology Limited (AIFST). Statements and opinions presented in the publication do not necessarily reflect the policies of AIFST nor does AIFST accept responsibility for the accuracy of such statement and opinion.

Editorial Contributions Guidelines are available at https://www.aifst.asn.au/ food-australia-Journal.

Original material published in food australia is the property of the publisher who holds the copyright and may only be published provided consent is obtained from the AIFST. Copyright © 2018 ISSN 1032-5298

AIFST Board Acting Chair: Dr Michael Depalo Non-executive directors: Mr Marc Barnes, Ms Julie Cox, Dr Heather Haines, Dr Gregory Harper, Ms Bronwyn Powell.

AIFST National Office PO Box 780 Cherrybrook NSW 2126 Tel: +61 447 066 324 Email: aifst@aifst.com.au Web: www.aifst.asn.au

Welcome to the Spring edition of food australia, our final journal for 2023.

Education is a major focus for AIFST, built around our key priorities of Grow, Learn, Connect, and Champion - these speak to a key role of AIFST in supporting the development of food scientists. In today’s increasingly competitive and changing world, food scientists and technologists need to stay at the cutting edge of new developments throughout their careers.

Continuing Professional Development (CPD) refers to the ongoing process of acquiring and maintaining the skills, knowledge, and expertise necessary for individuals to excel in their careers and professions. CPD is about lifelong learning, helping professionals stay current with the latest developments, ensuring they are equipped with the most upto-date knowledge and techniques in their work.

CPD can take various forms including attending conferences and seminars, on the job learning, reading food australia, engaging in networking events and activities to connect with other professionals, joining and actively participating in professional associations relevant to one's field, attending association-sponsored events, workshops, and conferences and collaborating with industry peers. CPD is not only about acquiring technical skills but also about personal development.

It may include activities that improve skills in communication, leadership, time management, and other soft skills that are important and valued in the workplace.

In 2024, and beyond, AIFST will continue to focus on providing a range of opportunities for CPD. My challenge to you for 2024; how are you going to champion CPD and learning across the many disciplines of food science and technology in the food and agri-business sector – what will you do differently, what will your role be, and how will you create change?

As this is the last edition for 2023, on behalf of the AIFST team and Board, I would like to thank all our journal contributors, Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee members, event partners, members, and the wider agri-food industry community for your support during what has been a busy and rewarding year.

Fiona Fleming B. App Sc (Food Tech); MNutr Mgt; FAIFST Chief Executive Officer fiona.fleming@aifst.com.au

BY THE NUMBERS

Survey finds strong levels of support for science Australia was one of 17 countries surveyed in the State of Science Index 2022, with more than 1,000 Australians surveyed in this Ipsos global poll.

First undertaken in 2018, the annual survey seeks to explore and measure global attitudes towards science, with the 2022 Index being released in Australia to coincide with National Science Week 2023.

The State of Science Index 2022 survey was conducted using a representative sample of about 1,000 general population adults, aged 18 and older, across the following countries: US, Canada, UK, Germany, France, Poland, Italy, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, China, India, UAE and Australia.

The 2022 survey found that people recognise the relevance of science in their lives and look to science to solve a range of significant social issues with 89% of Australian respondents feeling that science is either quite or very important to them in their everyday life.

Younger Australians are more likely to agree that science is very important to their everyday lives and are also more likely to put their complete trust in new stories about science.

Participants were asked to respond to a wide range of questions related to the themes for the 2022 survey: STEM equity, upskilling and trade skills, sustainability, health equity and future technology.

The survey found “scientists are still trusted” with 83% of global respondents “wanting to hear more from them”.

Scientists emerged as the most credible source for scientific information with 85% responding that they “mostly believe” scientists and engineers.

Australians show strong levels of support for science

87% agree

the world will be more dependent on scientific knowledge in the future

93% believe positive outcomes can be achieved if people stand up for science

JOIN

81% think

underrepresented groups are a source of untapped potential in the STEM workforce

88% clearly see how science can improve their life

92% say

STEM professionals can help solve the problems of tomorrow

90% believe

companies should do more to help consumers be more sustainable

References: 1. 3M (2023). State of Science Index 2022: Global report. https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/ media/2183175O/3m-state-of-science-index-sosi2022-global-report.pdf 2. Science and Technology Australia (2023).

Australians urge business to back science https:// scienceandtechnologyaustralia.org.au/australiansurge-business-to-back-science/

92% want business to take action to defend science

food australia 5

AIFST NEWS

AIFST 2023 Fellows Four AIFST members were elevated to the status of Fellows of the Institute at the AIFST Convention in July 2023.

Congratulations to AIFST’s newest Fellows.

Professor Yasmina Sultanbawa.

Dr Michael Patane.

Professor Yasmina Sultanbawa Director, Centre for Nutrition and Food Science, University of Queensland Professor Sultanbawa is a wellrespected academic and currently Director of the Centre for Nutrition and Food Science in the Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation at the University of Queensland.

Professor Sultanbawa has dedicated herself to the advancement of food science and technology in Australia for the past 16 years since moving from Sri Lanka.

She has led the development of numerous food industry projects and is committed to developing Australian food and agribusinesses through innovation and technology transfer.

Professor Sultanbawa has extensive experience in food science and technology, with a particular focus on the agribusiness development framework, specifically in the area of food processing, preservation, food safety and nutrition. Her work has been published in top-tier scientific journals, and she has presented her research at numerous national and international conferences (for examples see her UQ profile).

Since joining UQ in 2010, Professor Sultanbawa has led research on underutilised food plant resources, focusing on their nutritional potential,

6 food australia

Wendy Jarvis.

quality and safety. This has resulted in a paradigm shift in promoting and understanding the important role these plants can play in food and nutrition security. Professor Sultanbawa’s research has resulted in major achievements in developing the native food value chain and supported social enterprises led by Indigenous communities.

Professor Sultanbawa has been an active Professional member of AIFST since 2013, contributing her time and expertise to various committees, AIFST summer schools and working groups. She has also been involved in organising AIFST events, such as conferences and seminars, to bring together food scientists and technologists from across Australia.

In addition to her academic and professional achievements, Professor Sultanbawa is a strong advocate for diversity and inclusion in the food industry. She has mentored many young food scientists and technologists, especially those from underrepresented groups, and has worked to increase awareness of the importance of diversity in the food industry.

Dr Michael Patane Business Consultant, Plantec Dr Michael Patane has worked within the food and allied health industries for more than 40 years, starting with

Andrea Currie.

a three-month assignment at Cottee’s General Foods which eventually spanned 10 years.

During his career he has enjoyed solving technical problems and bringing good ideas, products and science to market in a commercially successful way for enhanced business growth.

Dr Patane has been fortunate to have had several exceptional mentors within the food industry during his career and recommends all graduates seek out someone who can assist their aspirational development.

One of the achievements he is most proud of is forming a biotech company post his PhD, called Protech Research, which developed and licenced intellectual property to several global partners. The company transferred novel technology related to bioactive and enzyme extraction, including encapsulation and delivery of therapeutics with targeted control release technology, primarily derived from materials up-cycled from plant waste.

During the last 20 years Dr Patane has been fortunate to work with several multinational companies in different locations around the world in both executive and advisory roles. With them he helped develop and commercialise technology in collaboration with internal teams, academic institutions and government bodies to improve both

human health and the agri-food industry.

During his time in Singapore, he developed a food incubator and accelerator with DSM called the Bright Science Hub which worked with start-ups, universities, venture capital firms and government funding bodies.

Dr Patane is currently a mentor in the AIFST Mentoring Program and is working with companies in ANZ, Asia and the US on water recycling, fermentation for food and fuel and the generation of functional food ingredients from agrifood and crop waste.

Wendy Jarvis Food Technology Teacher, William Angliss Institute Wendy is a teacher within the Food Science and Technology Department at William Angliss Institute, part of the Centre for Food Trades and Culinary Arts. As a university drop out in 1982, Wendy began working as a laboratory assistant at a flavours company and joined AIFST in 1994 after completing her first part-time qualification, the Diploma of Food Science and Technology.

She has valuable industry experience in a variety of food processing sectors - food flavours and additives, seafood canning and processing in an export facility, shelf stable vegetables and tomato based products – working in quality assurance, innovation, product development, laboratory analysis and production supervision.

Her experience in the education sector spans almost 25 years in TAFE as a food technology teacher both working on campus and in industry.

She is also an instructional designer and project officer developing curriculum, educational resources and online training programs.

Having educated many hundreds of students from all age groups, demographics, cultures and backgrounds, Wendy has taught food science from the Certificate I in Food Processing up to Masters level, always tailoring information to her audience

and promoting the Australian food processing industry and AIFST with an inherent passion and devotion.

Wendy studied part-time over her career to obtain a Bachelor of Science (Food Technology), Graduate Diploma in Secondary Education, Qualified Cannery Person Certification and Certificate IV in Training and Assessment.

Wendy also has her own consultancy business which specialises in thermal process determinations, sensory analysis and product development.

Andrea Currie Head of Quality and Technical Standards, Coles Group Andrea is a retail veteran, having worked in the industry for 30 years.

A qualified food technologist, she commenced her career in food ingredients – flavours application and then salt – which gave her an understanding of a broad range of food systems, both product development and quality assurance.

Introduced to the exciting world of retail food technology by AIFST Fellow Peter Hocking, Andrea made the leap into quality assurance support of Kmart’s newly launched private label food offer in 1993, including the now iconic Ultimate Chocolate Chip Cookie. Since then, she has led retail technical teams supporting private label development across grocery, dairy, frozen, bakery, health and beauty, homecare, apparel and general merchandise within Coles Group divisions.

A stint in responsible sourcing project management saw her deliver Coles’ no artificial colours and flavours, and sustainable palm oil initiatives as well as scope and commence delivery of Coles’ cagefree shell egg program.

In her current role as Head of Quality and Nutrition, she is Coles’ recall coordinator and operates the foundational programs of work. These programs deliver product safety and quality due diligence across the entire Coles Own Brand offer – some 6,500 products sourced from 2,200 supplier

sites around the globe – as well as working to deliver excellence in health and nutrition across every store.

Andrea has spent time as an AIFST Victorian Branch Committee member and national Councillor.

A Fellow of AIFST is the highest level of our membership and is reserved for members who have dedicated themselves to the progression of the food industry and of the Institute.

The Institute recognises members who have given outstanding service in research and development, technology transfer and education and/ or development of the food industry, in addition to a longstanding membership with AIFST and contribution to the profession of food science and technology through development of the affairs of the Institute or an equivalent professional body through the awarding of Fellow status.

Becoming a Fellow of AIFST is acknowledgment of the expertise and accomplishments of the Fellow.

food australia 7

AIFST NEWS

2023 AIFST Awards - Congratulations to all our winners and nominees AIFST congratulates our 2023 award winners and all those who were nominated – it is wonderful that we have so much talent within the Institute and the agrifood industry in Australia. A sincere thank you to all our judges who contributed hours of their time and expertise during the selection and judging process.

The annual AIFST Awards Ceremony was held on Monday July 24, at AIFST23 in Melbourne where we were able to acknowledge our award winners in person and celebrate their achievements.

Award Winners AIFST Keith Farrer Award of Merit This award is the Institute’s highest honour, acknowledging an individual whose work has resulted in significant positive change for the food industry, the food science and technology profession, food research and innovation, and/or food science education, and/or has promoted the health and enjoyment of the wider community regarding food.

The recipient’s achievements must also include substantial contributions made to further the aims and objectives of AIFST. The award is named after Dr Keith Farrer OBE, a pioneering scientist and author, who was involved in the formation of AIFST in 1967.

The 2023 award winner is Professor Michelle Colgrave from CSIRO. Professor Colgrave is a recognised leader in the use of proteomics to strengthen Australia’s food and ag industries. She is internationally renowned for the application of biomolecular analysis using mass spectrometry to agricultural products, leading to safer food sources for millions of people worldwide.

Professor Colgrave is an internationally recognised authority in the detection of allergens and/or toxic proteins in processed food products which has allowed regulators and industry to provide accuracy and transparency in food labelling. The US Food and Drug Administration released an amendment to the gluten-free labelling regulation based on her findings.

Michelle is Deputy Director (Impact) for CSIRO Agriculture and Food, former leader of CSIRO’s Future

8 food australia

AIFST Keith Farrer Award winner, Professor Michelle Colgrave with AIFST President Duncan McDonald.

Protein Mission bringing together diverse science disciplines from across the innovation system to create new protein-based products, companies and industries. She deftly communicates science to diverse audiences.

The full citation for Professor Colgrave can be found on the AIFST website.

through student training, education coordination, conference organisation, research support and advocacy align with and reinforce AIFST's mission. His partnership with AIFST has achieved numerous milestones that have positively impacted the food industry and he is a worthy recipient of the 2023 AIFST President’s Award.

The full citation for Professor Turner can be found on the AIFST website.

AIFST President’s Award The AIFST President’s Award recognises, acknowledges and acclaims an individual or an organisation who has made an outstanding contribution to the Institute.

The 2023 award winner is Professor Mark Turner from the University of Queensland.

Mark’s passion, dedication and impact on the food industry

AIFST Foodbank Hunger Hero Award The Foodbank Hunger Hero Award recognises a person or team for going ‘above and beyond’ to tackle food insecurity. Whether it’s championing a new initiative within their company or volunteering their time and expertise in the community. The award recognises an individual’s or team’s contribution as an inspiration to others.

AIFST ILSI Dr David Roberts Emerging Young Leader Award AIFST Bruce Chandler Award winner, Dr Zhongxiang Fang winner, Dr Dipon Sarkar with AIFST President Duncan with AIFST President Duncan McDonald.

McDonald.

The award winner for 2023 is Nicci Harrison, Operations Director ANZ at Tip Top. A worthy recipient of the title, Nicci is proof that significant outcomes can be achieved through the efforts of individuals. Nicci has been the driving force behind organising consistent weekly bread donations in every state and territory from Tip Top. Bread donations across Australia in the past year have climbed from one million to two million loaves, thanks in large measure to Nicci's energy and commitment to her company's partnership with Foodbank.

The bread that Tip Top donates is crucial to Foodbank's services as it's a key staple food item that needs to be in Foodbank warehouses every day.

It's essential to charities for all aspects of food relief from making sandwiches at a community drop-in centre for the elderly to providing toast for children attending a school breakfast club. Tip Top's commitment means the bread is fresh and reliable - a true expression of the Tip Top commitment to feeding hungry people.

AIFST ILSI Dr David Roberts Emerging Young Leader Award This award has been created in memory of Dr David (Dave) Roberts as a means of encouraging and

supporting the development of a young food scientist, technologist or nutritionist for their endeavour or achievement and leadership potential within the food industry.

The 2023 award recipient is Dipon Sarkar from Victual.

The judges had a difficult decision to make, as all nominees for the award in 2023 were outstanding candidates who would be worthy recipients. They had strong academic credentials and engagement with extra-curricular activities that furthered their fields of science and showed their leadership potential.

The judges ultimately decided the award should be conferred to Dipon Sarkar. Dipon demonstrated his leadership through his preparedness to step outside the university environment and engage with the industry and the wider community, particularly in regard to science communication.

Anthony (Tony) Williams.

The 2023 award recipients were: Winner: Jasmine Ngo for Multiple sip progressive profiling: greater insights on the sensory experience of beverages.

Runner-up: Saskia Urlass for Sensory profiling of Australian seaweed ingredients.

Thank you to Sensory Solutions for your ongoing support for this award.

AIFST Jack Kefford Award This award recognises the contribution to food science and technology of Institute members who publish research and technical papers.

The 2023 winning paper was: The antimicrobial effects of mist spraying and immersion on beef samples with plasma-activated water.

Authors: Koentadi Hadinoto, Hanxia Yang, Tianqi Zhang, Patrick J. Cullen, Stuart Prescott, Francisco J. Trujillo.

The award was accepted by Koentadi Hadinoto.

AIFST Sensory Solutions Tony Williams Sensory Award

AIFST Bruce Chandler Award

The AIFST Sensory Award is open to young members of the Institute (under 35) including undergraduate and postgraduate student members, who demonstrate an interest and passion for sensory research. The AIFST Sensory Award is sponsored annually

by Sensory Solutions in honour of

This award recognises AIFST members who are authors of books or substantial reviews, considered to make the greatest contribution to the literature on food science and technology in particular years.

The 2023 winner was Sorghum Grain: From Genotype, Nutrition, and

food australia 9

AIFST NEWS

engaging subjects and spanned a wide range of disciplines. Posters were presented in a clear and eyecatching way with data presented in a thoughtful narrative.

Judges’ Award - winner Poster: Spray or Soak: Unleashing the Antimicrobial Power of PlasmaActivated Water on Beef.

Authors Koentadi Hadinoto, Francisco J Trujillo.

Accepted by: Koentadi Hadinoto, UNSW.

Judges’ Award joint runner-up AIFST Research Poster Competition and AIFST Jack Kefford Award winner, Dr Koentadi Hadinoto, with AIFST President Duncan McDonald.

Poster: Investigating Food Odour Cue Perception, Liking, and Wanting in Virtual Reality Versus NonVirtual Reality Contexts for Space Applications.

Authors: Grace Loke, Hirdesh Chand, Ian Peake, Anne Besnard Chabot, Kevin Kantono, Lisa Newman, James Collett, Marcel Takac, Julia Low. Accepted by: Grace Loke, RMIT University.

Judges’ Award joint runner-up

AIFST Foodbank Hunger Hero Award winner Nicci Harrison (L) with Sarah Pennell, General Manager, Foodbank Australia.

AIFST Sensory Solutions Tony Williams Sensory Award winner, Jasmine Ngo (RHS) and runner-up Saskia Urlass with AIFST President Duncan McDonald.

Phenolic Profile to Its Health Benefits and Food Applications.

Authors: Zhongxiang Fang, Yun Xiong, Pangzhen Zhang, Robyn Dorothy Warner.

The award was accepted by Zhongxiang Fang.

effectively communicate and justify the key learnings of their work to an interested scientific audience. The platform for the 2023 competition was virtual, providing an opportunity for scientists from all over Australia to share their research.

The judges would like to thank all participants in the 2023 AIFST Convention Poster Competition for the effort that went into creating these posters and they commend all authors on their work.

The research topics encompassed a broad range of interesting and

AIFST Research Poster Competition This competition provides a space for food scientists to present a summary of their recent work or a key aspect of their work in poster form.

The challenge for entrants is to

10 food australia

Poster: Novel grain flours blended with chickpea for quality improvement of pasta.

Authors: Thu McCann, Rangika Weerakkody, Jenny Favaro, Roman Buckow, Regine Stockmann.

Accepted by: Thu Hoa McCann, CSIRO.

People's Choice Award - winner Poster: Quantifying the effects of preroasting on structural and functional properties of yellow peas.

Authors: Yanyan Lao, Qianyu Ye, Yong Wang, Cordelia Selomulya.

People's Choice Award runner-up Poster: Significance of red seaweed Gracilaria in inhibiting the advanced glycation during Maillard conjugation of Amaranth seed protein.

Authors: Rishi Ravindra Naik, Yong Wang, Cordelia Selomulya.

Thank you to our Poster Partner SQF.

FUTURE FOOD

Collaborating for success at the CellAg Summit Words by Jessica Freitag and Dr Kate Secombe

Cellular Agriculture Australia CEO Dr Sam Perkins speaking at the 2023 CellAg Summit, 15 June 2023.

W

ith cultivated meat now for sale in multiple countries following recent approvals in the US, cellular agriculture has gained significant media attention. Cellular agriculture is a fast-growing field that uses cells and innovative technologies such as precision fermentation and cell cultivation to produce safe, ethical and sustainable agricultural and food products.

In recognition of this growth, Cellular Agriculture Australia (CAA) and Future Alternative recently co-hosted Australia’s first cellular agriculture conference, the CellAg Summit. More than 140 representatives from cellular agriculture start-ups, established food companies, universities, government and investors gathered for the one day event.

Multiple themes emerged around how to develop a strong cellular agriculture sector in Australia, some of which we discuss here. A full report of the event is available on CAA’s website.

12 food australia

Collaboration Possibly the most critical takeaway from the day was the need for crosssectoral collaboration. There is huge potential in working with, learning from and leveraging the existing food industry. It is integral that companies collaborate on common noncompetitive challenges, particularly with existing food manufacturers, to access existing supply chains, infrastructure and markets. A great example of this is CSIRO’s animal-free dairy spinout Eden Brew and their strategic partnership with dairy cooperative Norco.

Government Australia is well placed to develop a strong cellular agriculture sector. It is clear, however, that this will only happen with government involvement and support. There is pressing need for policy prioritisation, along with investment and private sector incentives to support further research and infrastucture development and enable the sector to grow.

As the first nation to approve cultivated meat, Singapore’s

supportive regulatory framework and sustained funding of local start-ups demonstrates how governments can effectively kickstart emerging industries. To initiate this type of support locally, the sector must identify key government motivators and promote the benefits of cellular agriculture in Australia with a strong and unified voice.

Investment Despite investor confidence in the sector, there is now greater appreciation of the complexity and capital required to prove business models at scale and begin generating viable returns. This involves commercialising technologies and moving through pilot scale and regulatory approval. It highlights the need for investors to ‘double down’ on their current investments, particularly in what is currently a tough economic climate.

Scale The ability to reach commercial scale is one of the hot topics in the sector.

One of the day’s highlight sessions

was a debate between Vow’s George Peppou and Professor Paul Wood, moderated by Professor Michelle Colgrave from CSIRO. The speakers considered the following question can cultivated meat scale to a point where it makes a genuine impact on food security? It was argued that the sector needs a significant mindset shift from thinking like tech companies to food manufacturers if this is to be achieved.

the program generated meaningful collaboration, the CellAg Summit was dialogue and optimised value for the a great demonstration of the sector’s sector. We were deliberate about willingness to collaborate. Through ensuring diverse representation (both working together on multiple fronts speakers and attendees) in order and presenting as a unified voice, to break outside the echo-chamber we can successfully build a pretypical of a small and nascent sector. competitive environment which Attendees scored the Summit an will allow the sector to flourish in overall approval rating of 90% in the Australia. post-event survey. We are currently You can find out more about CAA reflecting on survey feedback, which and our work on Cellular Agriculture will allow us to create an even better Australia’s website. event next year!

Jessica Freitag is Marketing and Consumers Australia’s cellular agriculture Communications Coordinator, and Discussion on the day called into sector has huge potential, however Dr Kate Secombe is Newsletter question the lack of knowledge about there is much work still to be done Coordinator and Content Developer how Australian consumers perceive to overcome current challenges. at Cellular Agriculture Australia. f cellular agriculture. Insights presented Circling back to the theme of R+K_AD_2023_Yogurt_118x162 Australian.qxp_Layout 1 16.04.23 19:23 Seite 1

by Food Frontier found that cellular agriculture awareness did not necessarily translate into acceptance in five key Asian markets. A subsequent panel discussed the intentionaction gap, commonly seen in environmental sustainability fields, whereby one’s values or attitudes don’t translate into actions.

Overall, these insights emphasise the importance of building consumer trust and deeply understanding the key drivers behind consumer preferences and behaviour - something existing food manufacturers are well versed in.

Trust can also be built by getting consumers involved in the R&D process early and allowing them to shape messaging and decision making.

Lessons learned We learned a great deal from running Australia’s first CellAg Summit. It is clear that the cellular agriculture sector in Australia needs dedicated, targeted and ongoing support, and that both CAA and Future Alternative can play a significant role.

We saw the success of a sector-led approach, which we achieved by interviewing a range of key stakeholders to ensure the design and format of

THE NATURAL COLOUR CHALLENGE Our distributor in Australia

I N D U S T R I E S

food australia 13

JR VICKERY ADDRESS

The science of food security and sustainability Words by Dr Mary Ann Augustin

F

ood science has an important role in ensuring the delivery of safe, nutritious and culturally acceptable foods. ‘Food security’ was defined at the World Food Summit in 1996 as a state “when all people at all times have physical, social and economic access to safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”.

Traditionally there were four dimensions of food security (‘availability’, ‘accessibility’, ‘utilisation’ and ‘stability’) which has now evolved into six pillars with the inclusion of ‘agency’ and ‘sustainability’.1 Sustainability is defined as “the long term ability of food systems to provide food security and nutrition in such a way that does not compromise the economic, social and environmental bases that generate food security and nutrition for future generations”.2 Although at the midpoint of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, the world is not on track to meet most of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). SDG2 (end hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture) has been on the rise since 2015 and SDG12 (ensure sustainable consumption and production) is also far from being on track.3 According to the World Food Program, there are 345 million people who face high food insecurity in 2023, which is more than double the number in 2020.4 The EAT-Lancet Commission proposed a diet that advocates a reduction in consumption of animal-

14 food australia

based food for more sustainable diets.5 Sustainable foods need to be affordable and appealing to customers to meet their dietary needs. Policy actions are needed to promote sustainable healthy diets.6 Water deficits threaten food security and future sustainability. Water scarcity affects almost four billion people and more attention has to be paid to alleviate water scarcity and the loss of drinking water.7 We need to feed a population of 9.7 billion by 2050 with diminishing natural resources, whilst ensuring the health of people and the planet in a changing world with significant shifts in social, economic, environmental and geopolitical conditions, and significant threats to food security posed by the climate emergency.

Figure 1 shows the global megatrends that will influence approaches for achieving food security.

Strategies for improving food security and sustainability Feeding 10 billion people sustainably by 2050 requires closing the food calorie gap, the land gap and greenhouse gas mitigation gap.8 Keating et al. estimated that global food demand will increase by an additional 127x1015 kcal/ year between 2010 and 2050.9 Closing the kcal requirement food gap needs pathways to reduce the food production demand, fill the production gap and avoid food loss and waste (Figure 2).9-11 Selected approaches to improving

Figure 1: Food security in a changing world. Inner circle – Food security pillars.1 Outer circle – Global megatrends.39

food security and sustainability are elaborated below: Optimising the food value chain: Developing a sustainable food value chain from traditional and alternative food sources requires minimisation of energy use, emissions, water use and reduction of waste. This calls for an integrated approach across the whole supply chain from farm to fork.12 Developing alternative food sources: There is interest in exploring sustainable food sources as alternatives to animal-based products. Among some of the alternatives being explored are plantbased proteins and foods, algae, microbial protein, cell-based meats, insects and fermentation derived food ingredients/products.

Bringing new ingredients to market requires ensuring the safety of alternatively sourced food ingredients, considering the feasibility of large scale production, application of sustainable processing methods, development of fitness-for-purpose specifications and functionality in the food application, as well as navigating regulations.13-15 Consumers who are considering shifting their diets are demanding greater transparency.16 Acknowledging indigenous resilience: We can learn a lot from Indigenous Australians about food security and sustainability, care for the planet and preserving biodiversity. In Australia, native plants have been part of the diet of Australian Indigenous peoples for many years and these foods can play a role in cuisines. Some of the potentially commercially significant native food plants include bush tomatoes, raisins and sultanas, the Kakadu plum, wattle seed, Davidson plum and wild limes.17 Developing equitable sustainable value chains: When developing a value chain for any food resource, one has to consider where value is added and for whom, ensuring that there are benefits at all parts of the chain.

Post-farm processing delivers valueadded products and it is essential that farmers are adequately rewarded.18,19

Figure 2: Selected approaches to close the food gap for a more sustainable future.

Shifting from linear food chain to food webs: We need to transition from linear food chain thinking to closed loop systems as activities in food chains become more interconnected.20 Value optimisation (economic, social, environmental) in food systems requires companies and communities to collaborate and share resources and knowledge. We need to build a circular economy.

Reducing and upcycling food waste: Better supply chain management, food transport, packaging and upcycling of food waste contribute to value optimisation.21 Food banks are essential for preventing food loss and waste and alleviating hunger. During 2018-2019, food banks redirected 1.07 metric tons of food from landfills to feed hungry people and prevented 1.85 billion kilograms of greenhouse gas emissions.22 Where there are short supply chains, active involvement of local communities is essential for food rescue operations to re-distribute recovered food. Perishable foods are often wasted due to deterioration and this needs to be managed by appropriate post-harvest strategies. Managing food safety is a prerequisite for upcycling food waste into human food. There are significant challenges due to contamination

and loss of identity due to batch dispersion.23 Foods that do not meet the cosmetic specifications of supermarkets and by-products from processing can be recycled into new added-value food products.

For example, fruits and vegetables are an excellent source of nutrients, with numerous health benefits, and can be used for production of value added food ingredients and products to improve the sustainability of healthy diets and reduce the environmental footprint.24 Lignocellulosic biomass and green waste are attractive feedstocks for various industries. The carbohydrates in biomass can be hydrolysed into sugars and used for fermentation.

Many valuable food ingredients, bio-based chemicals and bioenergy (biofuels and ethanol) can also be produced from the biomass.20,25

The role of food processing for improving food security and sustainability Food processing converts raw materials from agri-food production systems into edible, functional and culturally acceptable food products.

Processing has an important role for improving food security and sustainability.26 There are a number of traditional and emerging technologies

food australia 15

JR VICKERY ADDRESS

that provide the essential link between food production and consumption.

In a typical food supply chain, the raw material is checked for quality and then processed, packaged, stored (frozen, refrigerated or at ambient conditions), transported and distributed direct to consumer or food service, or to food manufacturing plants for processing.

Processing for food safety: Traditional processing may involve thermal processes (eg. pasteurising, sterilisation, canning), use of chemical preservatives (eg. salt, sugar), refrigeration, drying or fermentation.

These traditional methods are used to minimise pathogens, improve food safety and stability, enable convenience and reduce waste.

Emerging processing technologies applied to raw materials can include high pressure processing, pulsed electric field, cold plasma and microwave. These alternatives to traditional food processes are gentler and more sustainable processes.27 Processing for manufacture of formulated foods: Foods may be formulated to improve their nutritional profile. Examples include reformulating foods to reduce fat, sugar or salt, and fortification of foods with desirable macronutrients (eg. protein, omega-3 oils, fibre) and micro-nutrients (eg. iron, calcium, vitamins). It is a continuing challenge to re-formulate foods to improve nutritional value while maintaining appealing sensory quality, controlling product cost and managing the environmental footprint.28 A food classification (NOVA) based on the degree of processing has been proposed, with a suggested link between consumption of ultraprocessed foods and adverse health outcomes.29 Linking processing to nutritional outcomes is not appropriate and there should be a scholarly debate to inform policy about consumption of processed food.30,31 Processing for improving yields: Pre-processing of raw materials may be used to improve extraction yields

16 food australia

of desired components from food or pre-treat biomass for more efficient valorisation. An example is the use of megasonics in the oil palm industry, which has enabled an enhanced oil yield from the palm fruit in palm milling operations.32 Ultrasound treatment in combination with enzyme processing has been applied to lignocellulosic material (eg. wheat chaff) to enhance disruption of the recalcitrant matrix,33 pre-disposing the material to easier degradation and facilitating conversion to products (eg. chemicals and sugars from breakdown of the biomass).

Processing for value addition to food waste: Separation technologies may be used to extract bioactives or fractions enriched in health promoting compounds from food waste. Examples are the extraction of polyphenols from by-products of processing (eg. olive water from olive oil processing, fruit/ vegetable pomaces after juicing).

Alternatively food loss that is edible may be used for the production of powders (eg. pomaces left after extraction of juice from fruits and vegetables), which may be used for production of nutritious formulated foods (eg. vegetable extruded snack products).34

Moving to transdisciplinary and multistakeholder input for innovation Traditionally, we have viewed food science as a multi-disciplinary science built on foundations in chemistry, biology, microbiology and engineering, which deals with raw material transformation after harvest from agri-food production systems into food. However in addressing food security and sustainability, other disciplines (eg. health, social science, energy, water, economics, business and government policy) need to be brought in for developing implementable solutions for enhancing food security and sustainability.

Diversity is key, not only in knowledge disciplines, but there

is also a need to engage people from various cultures and different age groups. Beyond the level of consumers, various players in the food system need to work together across the food system. Improved food security and sustainability cannot be achieved without taking into consideration the viewpoints of multiple stakeholders and working towards a common goal (often with trade-offs) and collective action for co-creating solutions.35

Conclusions Our current food system is at a watershed. There needs to be greater emphasis on understanding the connectedness of the food supply and the world’s ecosystem.36 Transitioning to more sustainable food systems calls for (1) equitable access to healthy and sustainable diets (2) improving circularity (3) transitions for reducing emissions to net zero (4) linking resilience with socioeconomic and environmental stability and (5) increasing value and

productivity.37 In order to stem the tide of growing food insecurity, we as a society need to understand its root causes, recognise and acknowledge inequality, empower underprivileged people and cultures and have a fairer distribution of resources.38 There is a need for transformative change to agriculture and food systems and innovative approaches to futureproof our food supply. As food scientists, we have a responsibility to contribute to improving food security and sustainability.

Acknowledgements The many interactions with Professor Dietrich Knorr and Dr Martin Cole, who have both contributed to my understanding of food security and sustainability, are gratefully acknowledged.

References 1.

FAO, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. (2022). The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2022. Repurposing food and agricultural policies to make healthy diets more affordable.

Rome.

2. HLPE. (2020). Food security and nutrition: building a global narrative towards 2030.

Report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security, HLPE Report 18, Rome.

3. United Nations. (2023). Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals: Towards a Rescue Plan for People and Planet, Advance Unedited Versuib. (United Nations General Assembly of Economic and Social Council, 2023). https://sdgs.un.org/sites/default/ files/2023-04/SDG_Progress_Report_Special_ Edition_2023_ADVANCE_UNEDITED_ VERSION.pdf. Accessed 26 July 2023.

4. World Food Programme. (2023). A global food crisis. 2023: Another year of extreme jeopardy for those struggling to feed their families, https://www.wfp.org/global-hunger-crisis.

Accessed 16 July 2023.

5. Rockström, J., Edenhofer, O., Gaertner, J. & DeClerck, F. (2020). Planet-proofing the global food system. Nature Food 1, 3-5, doi:10.1038/ s43016-019-0010-4.

6. Machado, P. et al. (2023). Measuring Adherence to Sustainable Healthy Diets: A Scoping Review of Dietary Metrics.

Advances in Nutrition 14, 147-160, doi:10.1016/j. advnut.2022.11.006.

7. Knorr, D. & Augustin, M. A. (2023). Vanishing Water: Rescuing the Neglected Food Resource. Food Engineering Reviews. 1-16, Published on line 10 June 2023, doi:10.1007/ s12393-023-09349-z .

8. Ranganathan, L., Waite, R., Searchinger, T. & Hanson, C. (2018). How to Sustainably Feed 10 Billion People by 2050, in 21 Charts, https://www.wri.org/insights/howsustainably-feed-10-billion-people-2050-21-

charts#:~:text=The%20solutions%20are%20 organized%20into,GHG%20emissions%20 from%20agricultural%20production. Accessed 16 July 2023 9. Keating, B. A., Herrero, M., Carberry, P. S., Gardner, J. & Cole, M. B. (2014). Food wedges: Framing the global food demand and supply challenge towards 2050. Global Food Security 3, 125-132, doi:10.1016/j.gfs.2014.08.004.

10. Cole, M. B., Augustin, M. A., Robertson, M. J. & Manners, J. M. (2018). The science of food security. NPJ science of food 2, 14, doi:10.1038/ s41538-018-0021-9.

11. Ehrlich, P. R. & Harte, J. (2015). To feed the world in 2050 will require a global revolution.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112, 14743-14744, doi:10.1073/ pnas.1519841112.

12. Augustin, M. A., Udabage, P., Juliano, P. & Clarke, P. T. (2013). Towards a more sustainable dairy industry: Integration across the farm-factory interface and the dairy factory of the future. International Dairy Journal 31, 2-11, doi:10.1016/j.idairyj.2012.03.009.

13. Augustin, M. A. & Cole, M. B. (2022) Towards a sustainable food system by design using faba bean protein as an example. Trends in Food Science & Technology 125, 1-11, doi:10.1016/j. tifs.2022.04.029.

14. Augustin, M. A., Hartley, C. J., Maloney, G. & Tyndall, S. (2023). Innovation in precision fermentation for food ingredients. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 1-21, doi :10.1080/10408398.2023.2166014.

15. Nyyssölä, A., Suhonen, A., Ritala, A. & OksmanCaldentey, K.-M. (2022). The role of single cell protein in cellular agriculture. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 75, 102686, doi:10.1016/j. copbio.2022.102686.

16. Karmaus, A. L. & Jones, W. (2021). Future foods symposium on alternative proteins: Workshop proceedings. Trends in Food Science & Technology 107, 124-129, doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2020.06.018.

17. Sommano, S., Caffin, N., McDonald, J. & Cocksedge, R. (2011). Food safety and standard of Australian native plants. Quality Assurance and Safety of Crops & Foods 3, 176184, doi:10.1111/j.1757-837X.2011.00109.x.

18. Cucagna, M. E. & Goldsmith, P. D. (2018).

Value adding in the agri-food value chain.

International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 21, 293-316.

19. Neven, D. (2014) Developing Sustainable Food Value Chains: Guiding Principles. FAO, Rome, 2014.

20. Knorr, D. & Augustin, M. A. (2021). From value chains to food webs: The quest for lasting food systems. Trends in Food Science & Technology 110, 812-821, doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2021.02.037.

21. Poponi, S., Arcese, G., Ruggieri, A. & Pacchera, F. (2022). Value optimisation for the agri‐food sector: A circular economy approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 1-18, doi: 10.1002/bse.3274.

22. The Global Food Banking Network. (2020).

2020 update. Advancing the Sustainable Development Goals: Roadmap to 2030. https://www.foodbanking.org/resources/ advancing-the-sdgs/. Accessed 16 July 2023.

23. Lavelli, V. (2021). Circular food supply chains – Impact on value addition and safety. Trends in Food Science & Technology 114, 323-332, doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2021.06.008.

24. Augustin, M. A., Sanguansri, L., Fox, E. M., Cobiac, L. & Cole, M. B. (2020). Recovery of wasted fruit and vegetables for improving sustainable diets. Trends in Food Science & Technology 95, 75-85, doi:10.1016/j. tifs.2019.11.010.

25. Langsdorf, A., Volkmar, M., Holtmann, D. &

Ulber, R. (2021). Material utilization of green waste: a review on potential valorization methods. Bioresources and Bioprocessing 8, 19, doi:10.1186/s40643-021-00367-5.

26. Augustin, M. A. et al. (2016). Role of food processing in food and nutrition security.

Trends in Food Science & Technology 56, 115125, doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2016.08.005.

27. Knorr, D., Augustin, M. A. & Tiwari, B. (2020).

Advancing the Role of Food Processing for Improved Integration in Sustainable Food Chains. Frontiers in Nutrition 7, 34, doi:10.3389/fnut.2020.00034.

28. Drewnowski, A., Detzel, P. & Klassen-Wigger, P. (2022). Perspective: Achieving Sustainable Healthy Diets Through Formulation and Processing of Foods. Current Developments in Nutrition 6, nzac089, doi:10.1093/cdn/ nzac089.

29. Monteiro, C. A. et al. (2018). The UN Decade of Nutrition, the NOVA food classification and the trouble with ultra-processing.

Public Health Nutrition 21, 5-17, doi:10.1017/ s1368980017000234.

30. Gibney, M. J. (2019). Ultra-Processed Foods: Definitions and Policy Issues. Current Developments in Nutrition 3, nzy077, doi:10.1093/cdn/nzy077.

31. Knorr, D. & Augustin, M. A. (2021). Food processing needs, advantages and misconceptions. Trends in Food Science & Technology 108, 103-110, doi:10.1016/j. tifs.2020.11.026.

32. Juliano, P., Swiergon, P., Mawson, R., Knoerzer, K. & Augustin, M. A. (2013). Application of Ultrasound for Oil Separation and Recovery of Palm Oil. Journal of the American Oil Chemists Society 90, 579-588, doi:10.1007/s11746-0122191-y.

33. Oliver, C. M. et al. (2014). Sequential low and medium frequency ultrasound assists biodegradation of wheat chaff by white rot fungal enzymes. Carbohydrate Polymers 111, 183-190, doi:10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.04.028.

34. Ying, D., Sanguansri, L., Cheng, L. & Augustin, M. A. (2021). Nutrient-Dense Shelf-Stable Vegetable Powders and Extruded Snacks Made from Carrots and Broccoli. Foods 10, 2298, doi:10.3390/foods10102298.

35. FAO. (2018). Multi-stakeholder partnerships to finance and improve food security and nutrition in the framework of the 2030 Agenda. FAO, Rome.

36. Knorr, D. & Augustin, M. A. (2022). Food systems at a watershed: Unlocking the benefits of technology and ecosystem symbioses.

Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 1-18, doi:10.1080/10408398.2021.2023092.

37. CSIRO Futures. (2023). Reshaping Australian Food Systems. CSIRO, Canberra, Australia.

38. HLPE. (2023). Reducing inequalities for food security and nutrition. Report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security HLPE Report 18, FAO, Rome.

39. PwC (2022). Megatrends: Five global shifts reshaping the world we live in https://www. pwc.com/gx/en/issues/megatrends.html

At the time of writing, Dr Mary Ann Augustin was Chief Research Scientist at CSIRO Agriculture & Food. She is currently an Affiliate with the School of Chemistry, Monash University.

This paper is based on Dr Augustin’s JR Vickery Address at the 2023 AIFST Convention. f

food australia 17

FOOD SECURITY

Tackling Australia’s food security data challenges Words by Dr Stefanie Kethers and Jo Savill

The ARDC Food Security Data Challenges program will provide enduring benefits to Australia. Credit: Tim Hüfner on Unsplash.

F

ood security is a growing challenge for Australia. Research and innovation are fundamental for a resilient and sustainable Australian food industry, ensuring we continue to deliver high-quality food nationally and internationally.

However, there are currently gaps in data and tools to support research and translation.

Digital infrastructure solutions enable innovative and high-impact research. As Australia’s leading research data infrastructure facility, the Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC) launched its Food Security Data Challenges program in January 2022. ARDC partners with key stakeholders to create digital infrastructure that enables research to promote food security in Australia.

Through an 11-month consultation process involving conversations, workshops, and roundtable discussions, more than 300 stakeholders from 130 organisations including research, government and industry helped identify priority areas for digital infrastructure to enhance Australia's food security research capability. In support of this, the ARDC co-invested $3.6 million in a portfolio of ‘Food Security Data Challenges’ projects. Our project partners have also co-invested more than $5.7 million, demonstrating their strong commitment to enhancing food security research.

The two-year projects now underway within Food Security Data Challenges encompass a variety

18 food australia

of areas including agriculture, fisheries, food equity, nutrition, food provenance and traceability as well as cross-cutting topics such as data aggregation and visualisation, data governance and secure data sharing.

Sarah Pennell, Chief Operating Officer for Foodbank Australia, said: “The ARDC’s Food Security Data Challenges program is providing the opportunity to accelerate bringing together the data in the food relief sector to create unparalleled visibility of food insecurity and where gaps exist in our services to vulnerable Australians. As organisations that are relatively new to this discipline, the program also gives us access to experience and expertise which is helping us on our journey to make the most of the data we have.”

Kyaw Kyaw Soe Hlaing, General Manager ICT & Digitalisation, Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, said: “Technology is changing the way people live, work and relate to one another.

Some of these ‘new technologies’ present opportunities for fishing and aquaculture to easily combine and analyse data to make decisions that reduce costs and increase benefits. We are delighted to partner with ARDC to work together and through this project make fishing and aquaculture more sustainable, efficient, and deliver community benefits by lowering the barriers to entry to access data and analytics.”

Here is an overview of the Food Security Data Challenges projects:

Increasing food security through liberation of fishing and aquaculture data Australia’s food sector suffers from siloed data that is often inaccessible to researchers and industry who can generate new understandings from data. Led by the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, this project will create a national data platform to safely share fishing and aquaculture data. The platform will unlock the value of unused or underutilised fishing and aquaculture data through best practice standardisation, ingestion, security, storage, cataloguing and analysis.

Data sharing initiative This project, led by Federation University, will enable food producers to safely and confidently adopt new technologies, participate in research and share their data, thus improving the efficiency and quality of agriculture production.

The project will deliver a digitised Data Sharing Agreement template that incorporates best practice for data management and sharing.

Additionally, the project will provide training materials and a certification against the Australian Farm Data Code developed by the National Farmers’ Federation.

Connecting/federating stable isotopic data resources The ability of Australian agrifood businesses to trade globally is increasingly dependent on providing

evidence-based verification and assurance of product claims and attributes. This project, led by CSIRO, will develop a federated data platform that allows environmental isotope data to be shared across organisations. The data could ultimately be combined with industryspecific data to provide assurance for food security.

Improving food security through pathogen resistance tracking and analysis Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the greatest threats to health and food security facing humanity this century, affecting agricultural productivity, food and water security, food safety and international food trade. This project, led by the CRC for Solving Antimicrobial Resistance in Agribusiness, Food and Environments (CRC SAAFE), will work with agribusiness partners to develop a nationwide data asset to support Australia’s AMR monitoring and evaluation framework. This will support the National AMR Action Plan by building the digital foundations for collecting and collating antimicrobial use and AMR data.

Multi-scalar crop characterisation network Agriculture faces increasingly challenging and variable environments. This project, led by the Australian Plant Phenomics Facility (APPF), will use established Australian research farms and surrounding agricultural and ecological research sites to develop a framework, standards and best-practice recommendations for the publication of heterogeneous data, combined with integration pipelines and user access tools to explore all aspects of crop development.

Enhancing the Apparent Consumption of Foodstuffs dataset to inform food consumption patterns Building on the Apparent Consumption of Selected Foodstuffs (ACSF) collection recently established

by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), this project, led by the ABS, will develop enhancements to the utility and accessibility of the ACSF, including regular reporting of food consumption patterns at smaller geographical areas. It will also provide further enhancements to improve the timeliness and comprehensiveness of the data.

These enhancements will provide policymakers and researchers with invaluable information for food security research and inform policy settings.

Mapping food insecurity and food relief in Australia On any given day, more than half a million Australian households experience food insecurity, making it an extremely serious health and welfare issue facing our country. This project, led by Foodbank Australia, will provide a comprehensive map of the incidence and depth of food insecurity nationally, along with the current provision of food relief. This will help determine the geographic and volume gaps in ensuring everyone in Australia has access to the food they need to thrive.

Additional research will be conducted to augment the data relating to First Nations People.

The project will also create a public dashboard to assist with research and planning to address food insecurity.

Building a traceability data infrastructure to track provenance and quality in Australian seafood supply chains This project will build a digital traceability data infrastructure for the Australian seafood sector, using the mud crab (Scylla spp.) supply chain as a model. Led by the Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, the project brings together key researchers, industry members and government regulators with a common goal of improving traceability data systems to allow end-to-end tracking of individual mud crabs through the supply chain. The

new traceability platform will be an ongoing national data infrastructure with a wide range of research applications, food commodities and supply chains.

Implementing GS1 traceability standards for orchard chemical use and beehive movements Bee deaths at recent pollination events along the New South Wales and Victorian border have raised concerns regarding the potential negative impact of chemical use on beehive health. Complementing ongoing research and innovation into orchard traceability, this project, led

by Agriculture Victoria, will develop an integrated traceability system enabling better communication of orchard chemical use to apiarists to better understand its relationship to beehive health. The system can also support national pest and disease traceability in the event of an outbreak, allowing for fast and accurate delimitation and response.

Learn more about the ARDC Food Security Data Challenges and receive updates by registering your interest: https://bit.ly/ARDC-food-security The ARDC is supported by the Australian Government’s National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS) to drive development of world-class national digital research infrastructure that gives Australian researchers competitive advantage through data.

Dr Stefanie Kethers is the Program Manager for Food Security Data Challenges at the ARDC. She has worked in the eResearch sector since 2009, and her main interest is enabling and supporting collaboration between individuals and groups to address societal challenges and deliver better outcomes.

Jo Savill is the Senior Science Communicator for the ARDC. Jo leads strategic communication for the ARDC and writes articles about dataintensive research. f

food australia 19

FUTURE FOOD

Plants for space and sustainability on Earth Words by Drs Sally Gras and Matthew Gilliham

A

ustralians famously had a role in relaying footage of humankind’s ‘giant leap’ onto the moon’s surface when Neil Armstrong took his ‘small steps’, via a tracking station near Canberra at Honeysuckle Creek.1 A new Australian Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence is again spearheading an Australian contribution to a human presence on the moon, by focusing on space food.

With funding secured until 2031, the Centre will further Australia’s decadal plans to build our space capabilities, foster innovation, inspire Australians2 and our national commitment to build international space collaboration and research development initiatives such as Artemis.3 The ARC Centre of Excellence for Plants for Space (P4S), a collaborative initiative involving five Australian universities (Adelaide, Melbourne, Flinders, Western Australia and La Trobe), aims to support human deep space exploration and contribute to Earth's sustainability through plant

20 food australia

and food redesign. This virtual centre’s research endeavours are underpinned by a multi-nodal approach and extensive international collaboration, including Yuri, Axiom Space, German Aerospace Center (DLR) and NASA, as well as laboratories at University of California Berkeley and Davis, University of Wisconsin, Rice University, The University of Arizona, University of Cambridge, University of Nottingham, INRAE, ETH Zurich and Jülich Research Centre (FJZ).

The Centre’s mission revolves around addressing the challenges of food production for long-duration space missions, particularly when considering the constraints of resupply missions and the need for stable, nutritious and psychologically satisfying food options. The focus is on developing plant-based foods due to their potential utilisation of resources available on extraterrestrial surfaces, such as Mars.

The research program is ambitiously aligned with both shorter-term objectives - assisting missions to the

moon by 2030 - and longer-term ambitions such as supporting a 2040’s mission to Mars. The challenges the Centre aims to tackle include ensuring sustainability using low water and energy solutions for food processing, storage and distribution, optimising plant growth for controlled environments, producing complete nutrition plant-based foods, enabling on-demand bio-resource production and fostering workforce development and education.

The team comprises a diverse group of researchers including plant scientists, engineers, psychologists, nutritionists, sensory experts, educators and legal experts, all working collaboratively to address the multifaceted challenges of space food production.

A key objective of the centre is to achieve spin-off innovations that benefit both space missions and terrestrial applications. Historical examples of space spin-offs, which number in the thousands, include memory foam, camera phones, laser

eye surgery and space blankets developed by NASA. These examples illustrate how space research can lead to real-world solutions and commercial products.4 The Centre draws parallels between the challenges faced in space and those on Earth, including extreme weather conditions, water scarcity and the need for energy-efficient food processing. The program will contribute to Australia's space industry ambitions, creating jobs and fostering innovation in the space industry, in Australian agriculture and food sustainability and in biomolecule and food manufacturing.

The Centre's four main missions focus on: 1. Zero waste plants: The goal is to maximise the utility of plant components for consumption, focusing on rapid growth in controlled environments and efficient plant use 2. Complete nutrition plant-based foods: P4S aims to engineer plants for improved nutritional content, while addressing texture and flavour challenges, to make plant-based foods more suitable for space consumption 3. On-demand bio-resource production: Researchers are exploring the potential for space-based biomanufacturing, producing essential resources like nutraceuticals, ingredients and even building materials, while ensuring precise spatial and temporal control 4. Future ready workforce and society: Training more than 400 researchers to form the foundation of a new generation of internationally connected and industry focused plant, food and space researchers, and build Australia’s critical mass and public interest in STEM. Space food has evolved over the years, from the apple sauce sent to space in 1962 as part of the Friendship mission, which is currently housed at the National Air and Space Museum Washington,5 to a mix of fresh produce and prepackaged meals today. However, the challenge remains to develop food that can be grown and processed on Mars.

The Centre addresses the development of plant food, aligning with the rising ‘on Earth’ trend of flexitarian and sustainable diets. The challenges of taste, texture and water solubility in plant foods are similar whether on Earth or in space. The research teams will develop a range of processing technologies from hierarchical assembly of plant materials to 3D printing. These efforts will aim to understand the effect of food processing on the molecular properties of plant ingredients.

Researchers will also investigate various preservation methods including freezing, concentration, fermentation, drying and fractionation, to ensure the long-term stability of space food. Among the target crops is duckweed, known for its rapid growth and protein production potential.

A further goal is to assess the psychological and sensory aspects of space food production and consumption, including the psychological benefits of cultivating plants in space environments, and to improve sensory experiences of space food. This will

Quality Endorsed Company ISO 9001:2015 SAI Global

Do you test for Mycotoxins in your raw materials?

• Do you wait for days to receive your test results from an external laboratory?

• Are you looking for fast and accurate results?

CHARM EZ®-M SYSTEM

GC0173

Rapid mycotoxin testing in feed and grain Run any ROSA Mycotoxin Test Simply pipette diluted extract on to the Charm ROSA strip, incubate, and read results on the EZ-M.

Test Types • Qualitative (Positive/Negative): Determines the presence or absence of the mycotoxin.

• Quantitative: Accurately determines mycotoxin concentration.

• FAST Quantitative: Test results in 3 or 5 minutes.

• WET™ Quantitative: Water is used for the extraction solvent, not ethanol or methanol.

This enables negative tests to be discarded in regular waste.

Test Families • Aflatoxin • DON (Vomitoxin) • Fumonisin • Ochratoxin • T2/HT2 • Zearalenone

Test Raw Materials in Receiving Since testing with the EZ-M is both rapid and easy, it can be performed at the point of receiving, eliminating testing in a laboratory setting. Facilities can perform real-time analysis on raw ingredients as part of acceptance testing.

Facilities do not need to accept untested materials that may contain unacceptable levels of mycotoxins.

By screening grains as they are received, food manufacturers can be assured that raw materials are of an acceptable quality.

For more information scan the QR code on the right, or visit

www.rowe.com.au Stirring and Mixing

New South Wales & ACT Ph: (02) 9603 1205 rowensw@rowe.com.au

Queensland

Ph: (07) 3376 9411 roweqld@rowe.com.au

Victoria & Tasmania Ph: (03) 9701 7077 rowevic@rowe.com.au REF:101

South Australia & NT Ph: (08) 8186 0523 rowesa@rowe.com.au

Western Australia

Ph: (08) 9302 1911 rowewa@rowe.com.au

x/marketing/advertising/AIFST/101-AIFST.OCT 2023

food australia 21

FUTURE FOOD

Technology Future Science Platform10 and complement current research endeavours developing plantbased foods, synthetic biology and biomanufacturing, as well as research to protect food production from climatic extremes.

In conclusion, P4S is a multidisciplinary pioneering initiative that seeks to address the challenges of food production in space while also benefiting Earth. With collaborations across various universities and international partners, the centre is poised to make significant contributions to space exploration and Earth's sustainability.

References

include innovative techniques such as biometrics and artificial intelligence, coupled with immersive environments to simulate space conditions. The effect of plant-based food formulation and structure on nutrition, transit and digestion will also form a focus, informing plant product design.

These capabilities will enable an ‘end to end capability’ for plant food production from the initial plant attributes, from processing for structure and texture through to product properties including flavour and nutrition, as well as favourable sensory and digestive attributes. The legal, ethical and biosecurity aspects of growing plants in space will also be addressed, enabling the Centre’s vision to support crewed missions to Mars and develop pick-and-eat crops for the International Space Station.

Collaborations with various partners, including NASA and other space agencies, have already begun, with the visit of NASA head administrator Senator Bill Nelson, and Deputy Administrator Colonel Pam Melroy, to The University of Adelaide in March this year.6 Pharmaceutical samples have also been sent by Plants for Space researcher Professor Volker

22 food australia

Hessel to the International Space Station, initiating efforts to assess stability.7 P4S is also already receiving further investment, such as through the UK Space Agency, to design autonomous plant growth systems for Earth and space.8 The Centre aims to extend its impact beyond academic research by fostering education, training and job readiness in various sectors.

The Australian government has set ambitious targets for the space sector, aiming to create 30,000 new jobs and grow a $12 billion industry.

The Centre's research will contribute to these goals and the growth of trained STEM professionals in the Australian food and beverage sector.

Collaborations with industry partners are also welcomed to further enhance the practical applications of the research outcomes.

P4S will operate a collaborative model, intentionally building and leveraging synergies across the sector. The centre will build upon and complement The Australian Space Agency’s Team Artemis space research efforts including Australia’s first moon mission,9 developments within Defence and CSIRO’s Space

1. https://honeysucklecreek.net/index.html 2. Australia in Space: a decadal plan for Australian space science 2021–2030 https://www.science. org.au/supporting-science/science-policy-andanalysis/decadal-plans-science/australiainspace 3. Australia signs NASA’s Artemis Accords https://www.industry.gov.au/news/australiasigns-nasas-artemis-accords 4. NASA Spinoff https://spinoff.nasa.gov/ 5. Space Food, Applesauce, Friendship 7 https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/ space-food-applesauce-friendship-7/nasm_ A19630328000#:~:text=This%20partially%20 consumed%20tube%20of,mission%20on%20 February%2020%2C%201962 6. NASA delegation visits Plants for Space https://www.adelaide.edu.au/newsroom/news/ list/2023/03/27/nasa-delegation-visits-plants-forspace 7. Smelly tablets survive better in space https://www.adelaide.edu.au/newsroom/news/ list/2022/07/01/smelly-tablets-survive-better-inspace 8. UK Space Agency backs Plants for Space partner https://www.adelaide.edu.au/newsroom/news/ list/2023/08/15/uk-space-agency-backs-plantsfor-space-partner 9. Space industry partners chosen for Australia’s first Moon mission https://www.industry.gov.au/news/spaceindustry-partners-chosen-australias-first-moonmission 10. Space Technology Future Science Platform https://research.csiro.au/space/

Professor Sally Gras is a Deputy Director of P4S and gave a keynote presentation ‘Plants for Space and Sustainability on Earth’ at the AIFST23 Convention held in Melbourne. This article draws on this presentation and includes text from transcript summaries produced by ChatGPT3.5 and ChatGPT4, with further content and editorial contributions from Professor Sally Gras and P4S Director Professor Matthew Gilliham. f

AIFST 2023 RESEARCH POSTER COMPETITION

Exploring the antimicrobial effects of plasma-activated water on beef samples via mist spraying and immersion Words by Drs Koentadi Hadinoto and Francisco J. Trujillo

Figure 1. Experimental setup of chilled beef samples treated with spraying and immersion methods.

I

n the pursuit of safer and more effective techniques for preserving meat quality and safety, researchers have turned to innovative technologies to combat microbial contamination. One such cuttingedge approach is the use of plasmaactivated water (PAW) to enhance the antimicrobial properties of mist spraying and immersion techniques.

Our recent study titled ‘The antimicrobial effects of mist spraying and immersion on beef samples with plasma-activated water’ delves into the application of PAW to combat Salmonella Typhimurium on chilled beef during meat washing, shedding light on its potential ability to improve meat safety and extend shelf life.

In the study, two primary meat washing methods - mist spraying and immersion - were subjected to assessment at varying contact times (15, 30 and 60 seconds) and meat storage times (0, 1 and 7 days) as shown in Figure 1. Importantly, the

temperature of the PAW was raised to 55 °C during the washing procedure, as this elevation in temperature was found to enhance the microbial inactivation process compared to using the solution at ambient temperature.

At a contact time of 60 seconds and a meat storage duration of seven days, both PAW spraying and immersion methods achieved substantial reductions in S. Typhimurium counts. Specifically, PAW spraying achieved 0.74 log reduction, while immersion achieved a slightly lower value at 0.71 log reduction.

Significantly, there were no statistically significant differences between the two methods, with spraying being preferred for commercial application.

Crucially, the application of PAW did not negatively impact most of the quality parameters of the beef samples. Parameters such as lightness, hue angle values, TBARS value (a marker of lipid oxidation),

water holding capacity and pH were largely unaffected. However, there were observed changes in colour attributes, such as a decrease in redness, yellowness and chroma values. Additionally, the content of oxymyoglobin was reduced by 44.1% after one day of storage.

To mitigate the colour changes induced by PAW treatment, an additional water washing at 25°C for 60 seconds following PAW spraying was introduced. This combined method not only achieved 0.70 log reduction in S. Typhimurium but also maintained colour attributes without causing colour differences perceptible to the human eye (∆E). Furthermore, this strategy preserved the myoglobin content, contributing to the overall visual appeal of the meat samples.

The study's findings demonstrate the potential of PAW as an effective antimicrobial agent in combating S. Typhimurium contamination on chilled beef during meat washing processes.

The study's insights have implications for the food industry, offering a promising avenue to enhance food safety without compromising the appeal of meat products. As further research is conducted, the application of PAW may pave the way for safer, more efficient, and visually appealing meat processing practices.

Dr Koentadi Hadinoto is Graduate Implementation Specialist at Foods Connected. Dr Francisco Trujillo is a senior lecturer at the UNSW School of Chemical Engineering. Their poster won the 2023 Research Poster Competition. f

food australia 23

AIFST 2023 RESEARCH POSTER COMPETITION

Novel-grain flours blended with chickpea for quality improvement of pasta Words by Drs Thu McCann and Regine Stockmann blending chickpea flour (CP) with those produced from novel grains to provide more complete nutrient profiles in pasta, and importantly, to understand the functionality that can be achieved with the inclusion of CP flour into a pasta food model.

Different ratios Novel grain flours blended with chickpea for quality of flours of high improvement of pasta. amylose wheat ovel cereal grains have been (HAW), Kebari® Barley (KB) or developed by CSIRO to BARLEYmax® (BM) were mixed with improve the composition CP flour (100:0, 80:20, 50:50, 20:80 of health-active components such and 0:100) and used in preparing as resistant starch, dietary fibre, pasta with a domestic pasta machine, polyphenols1 and gluten.2 While the which was then dried at 85°C for food functionality of such novel three hours. The dried pasta was grains is still being explored, they are boiled in water for 15 minutes before increasingly being incorporated into measuring the hardness and water staple foods such as baked goods absorption (WA) of the cooked pasta. including bread and cereals. Cereal The changes in total phenolics (TP) grains are nutritionally limited in and antioxidant activity (AA) through amino acids such as lysine, threonine cooking was determined. and tryptophan, but this can be The addition of CP with BM and overcome by blending with other food HAW did not impact on the cooking ingredients which are rich in these performance of pasta. However, amino acids. the 100:0 and 80:20 KB-CP pasta Pulses (beans, peas and lentils) were deformed and only 50:50 and have been consumed as foods for at 20:80 KB-CP pasta could maintain least 10,000 years. They are high in their shape through cooking. Texture protein and fibre, and a significant analysis showed that both 100% BM source of vitamins and minerals such and 100% KB formed very soft pasta as iron, zinc, folate and magnesium. whilst 100% HAW pasta was too firm.

Additionally, the phytochemicals Increasing the amount of CP flour in and tannins found in pulses possess BM-CP and KB-CP pastas resulted in antioxidant and anti-inflammatory a firmer texture. The WA of 100% BM properties. Pulses are good sources and 100% KB pasta was the highest at of proteins with complementary 69% and 78%, respectively. It reduced amino acid profiles, starches, fibre and with increasing CP content in the micronutrients. pasta. The firmness of cooked pasta With increasing demand on could be correlated with the increased healthier staple foods, this study level of CP flour in pasta formulation aimed to evaluate the potential of and low level of WA during cooking.

N

24 food australia

BARLEYmax® (100 %) pasta had the highest phenolic content (158mg GAE/100g pasta) which decreased with increasing CP in pasta. Mixing CP with KB or HAW improved phenolic levels in pasta (67mg and 51mg GAE/100g, respectively) to the phenolic levels in CP (107mg GAE/100g). AA was highest in 100% BM pasta (50mg TE/100g) and lowest in 100% HAW pasta (9mg TE/100g).

AA decreased with increasing CP content in BM-CP pasta, and it increased in HAW-CP pasta while mixing CP and KB did not reduce the AA in the pasta from the related mixture.

In summary, mixing CP with BM and KB improved the cooking quality of pasta, providing it with a firmer texture, increased AA in HAW-CP pasta and not impacting on AA of KB-CP pasta. These results indicated that the functional properties of staple foods (such as pasta) can be tailored by blending novel cereal grains and pulse flours (such as CP). These findings could provide strategies for designing healthier staple foods with improved texture and processing properties through blending flours produced from novel grains and pulses.

References 1. Bird, A. R., & Regina, A. (2018). “High amylose wheat: A platform for delivering human health benefits” Journal of Cereal Science, 82, 99-105. doi:10.1016/j.jcs.2018.05.011 2. Howitt, C. A., Larkin, P. J., & Colgrave, M. L. (2018). “Gluten Reduction Strategies for Wheat and Barley”. Cereal Foods World, 63(5), 184-187. doi:10.1094/cfw-63-5-0184

Dr Thu McCann is a Senior Experimental Scientist and Dr Regine Stockmann is a Principal Research Scientist at CSIRO Agriculture and Food, experienced in developing protein ingredients and foods.

Their poster was joint runner up in the 2023 AIFST Research Poster Competition. f

ADVERTORIAL

SAFEGUARDING YOUR FOOD BUSINESS WITH DIGITAL PEST MANAGEMENT

Introducing PestConnect

by Rentokil, going beyond traditional baits and traps to safeguard your business In the FMCG sector, approximately 50% of business leaders have experienced operational disruptions in the past three years as a result of pest infestations.* In the complex world of the food manufacturing and handling industry, maintaining impeccable standards of hygiene and safety is non-negotiable.

Yet, lurking in the shadows are a myriad of pests that can cause havoc, threatening the reputation, health, and bottom line of your business.

Silent troublemakers that can turn a thriving establishment into a nightmare scenario.

The Silent Threat Within: Why Pest Prevention is Crucial 75% of businesses have reported incurring losses due to pest-related issues such as reduced revenue, damage to reputation, or spoiled produce.* Pests may be small, but their impact on food business can be catastrophic.

From rodents scurrying across storage rooms to crawling insects infiltrating cooking areas, pests can compromise the quality and safety of products.

Here's why pest prevention is crucial: 1 Health Hazards: Pests can carry diseases and pathogens that pose a serious risk to consumers and employees alike. A single contaminated item can trigger a health crisis, disrupting your

operations and damaging your brand's reputation 2 Regulatory Nightmares: Noncompliance with hygiene and safety regulations can lead to fines or even shutdowns. Pests found on your premises can be a glaring violation, inviting trouble from health authorities 3 Loss of Revenue: Pests can contaminate stored goods, leading to significant financial losses as you are forced to discard affected products. This can also have a negative impact on brand and customer trust, resulting in decreased sales.

Real-Life Nightmares: Horror Stories of Pest Infestations 50% of Australians stated they would refuse to make a repeat purchase if they discovered a pest in packaged food* In the food industry, there are numerous horror stories linked to pest infestations. Picture a prestigious restaurant, visited by a renowned critic, only to have its reputation shattered by a cockroach dashing across the table.

Consider a food processing facility, its image destroyed when footage of rodents were caught on camera nibbling on raw ingredients. These instances highlight the critical need for strong pest prevention protocols.

Beyond Traditional Baits & Traps - Introducing PestConnect by Rentokil PestConnect is Rentokil’s state-of-theart digital pest management solution.

This revolutionary system employs cutting-edge technology to ensure a 24/7 monitoring and control from rodents in your business environment: 1 Continuous Monitoring: PestConnect employs advanced sensors to detect and monitor pest activity around the clock. Early detection means swift action can be taken before an infestation takes hold.

2 Real-Time Alerts: The system notifies our experts in real-time if any unusual pest activity is detected.

This allows both our experts and our customers to address potential problems promptly, reducing the risk of contamination.

3 Tailored Solutions: PestConnect offers customised solutions based on your unique business needs.

From restaurants to food production facilities, its adaptability ensures precise pest control strategies.

4 Data-Driven Insights: PestConnect provides you with comprehensive data analytics, empowering you to make informed decisions about pest management and improve your overall hygiene practices.

5 Sustainable Solutions: PestConnect uses a combination of non-toxic and smart solutions to significantly reduce the amount of rodenticide as well as provides fully digital reporting to help reduce the impact on the environment.

Choose Excellence, Choose PestConnect When it comes to safeguarding your food business against pests, mere prevention is not enough – it's about anticipating and controlling threats before they manifest. With PestConnect, Rentokil elevates pest management to an unprecedented level, ensuring your establishment remains a haven of quality, safety, and trust.

Don't wait for pests to strike – fortify your business today with Rentokil's PestConnect, because in the food industry, there's no room for compromise.

Contact Us Phone: 1300 306 148 Email: customer-care-au@ rentokil-initial.com Website: www.rentokil.com/au

*Findings from recent independent research carried out by Lonergan on behalf of Rentokil, July 2023

food australia 25

AIFST 2023 RESEARCH POSTER COMPETITION

Exploring virtual reality for space applications: food odour cue perception, liking and wanting Words by Grace Loke

Exploring Virtual Reality for Space Applications. Virtual Reality (VR) simulated space laboratory designed for odour evaluation within the VR context experimental block.

C

onsumption context is a known contributing factor toward food perception.

Sensory field testing of consumer products has shown improved ecological validity,1 but such methods are limited in physical access to niche environments. Extreme contexts such as outer space are less represented in the food and sensory field in comparison to Earth-based research. This is expected due to various financial, logistical, and ethical barriers associated with space research.

Space flight meals are curated for space crew members from Earth – considering their unique physical and biological characteristics, and allowing for the pre-selection of menu items that rotate in effort to counter menu fatigue.2,3 However, this does not account for sensory changes that occur in space and, therefore, food flavour perception may differ from Earth.

During spaceflight, alterations to odour perception have been observed to affect the overall

26 food australia

eating experience, flavour-wise. This phenomenon has been attributed to temporary physiological fluid shift towards the upper bodily region and altered aroma dissipation within the spacecraft, which remains poorly understood.4 Therefore, the present study aimed to understand the context of space and its possible effects on food odour perception, namely odour intensity, liking and wanting toward food odours. Due to the limitations of conducting space research, the present study utilised a Virtual Reality (VR) simulation of the International Space Station (ISS) which was built on the game engine, Unity (Unity Software Inc.), using low-poly graphic assets. Sensory data collection tools were integrated within the VR program to allow for data collection while maintaining participant immersion in the simulated space environment.

A total of 44 participants (23 male, 21 female; 24.5 ± 3.9 years) were involved in evaluating eight food odour samples, which were divided

into pure (vanilla, almond, lemon, lemon myrtle, lemongrass) and trigeminal (eucalyptus, peppermint, vinegar) odour stimuli. These evaluations were conducted across (a) neutral (b) NASA-neutral (~122°, natural microgravity body posture) and (c) VR context, with sample randomisation within each block.

Significant findings in pure odour stimuli such as vanilla (P = 0.002) and almond (P < 0.001) were identified, in which these odours were perceived to be more intense in the VR context in comparison to the neutral and NASA-neutral contexts.

The same trends were also observed when comparing the perception of trigeminal odours in VR versus the NASA-neutral context. These odours included eucalyptus (P = 0.033), peppermint (P = 0.037), and vinegar (P = 0.041). Interestingly, there were no differences in intensity for citrus group odours, lemon, lemongrass and lemon myrtle.

The findings on trigeminal odours fascinatingly link with reported food preferences in space, in which

astronauts often favour trigeminally activating foods such as Tabasco sauce or onions.5,6 However, evidence reflecting higher or lower odour intensity perception towards these foods (in space) remain unknown.

Therefore, the present findings may be a fundamental step to furthering our understanding of sensory perception and eating habits in space.

Responses towards odour liking were only significant for the almond (P = 0.042) and lemon (P = 0.004) odours, in which these odours were preferred in the neutral context in comparison to the VR context. Furthermore, the data on odour wanting only indicated that the lemon odour (P = 0.005) was significantly more desired in the neutral context in comparison to the NASA-neutral context.

The differences in hedonic responses across these environmental contexts remain reasonably unknown and warrants further research –

perhaps with a larger sample size for more meaningful results. However, these findings suggest a potential interaction between the conditions of a digitally simulated space environment and odour perception, which could influence food choice.

While the present study demonstrated that the NASA-neutral posture position was associated with lower odour intensity and hedonic ratings, future combination of this position with VR may improve ground-based methods for sensory evaluation. Subsequent research depends on immersive technology improvements and will consider personal variation in odour perception that may indicate different sensitivity groups for select food odours.

References 1. Jaeger, S. R., & Porcherot, C. (2017).

Consumption context in consumer research: methodological perspectives. Current Opinion in Food Science, 15, 30-37. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2017.05.001 2. Shimada, K., & Fujii, Y. (2012). Mass

measurement of the astronauts on the International Space Station (ISS) for nutritional control. Procedia Engineering, 32, 18-24. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j. proeng.2012.01.1232 3. Tang, H., Rising, H. H., Majji, M., & Brown, R. D. (2022). Long-Term Space Nutrition: A Scoping Review. Nutrients, 14(1), 194. https://www.mdpi. com/2072-6643/14/1/194 4. Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency. (n.a.).

What happens to the human body in space?

Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency,.

Retrieved 14 May from https://humans-in-space. jaxa.jp/en/life/health-in-space/body-impact/ 5. Kerwin, J., & Seddon, R. (2002). Eating in space—from an astronaut’s perspective.

Nutrition, 18(10), 921-925. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-9007(02)009358 6. Stuster, J. (2010). Behavioral issues associated with long-duration space expeditions: review and analysis of astronaut journals: experiment 01-E104 (Journals). National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Johnson Space Center Houston, TX.

Grace Loke is a PhD candidate in Food Science at RMIT University.

Her current research explores how digitally simulated environmental context affects olfactory perception and eating behaviour in humans.

Her poster was joint runner up in the 2023 AIFST Research Poster Competition. f

food australia 27

HEALTH & NUTRITION

Australia’s growing appetite for plantbased foods Words by Katherine La Macchia

I

n Australia, consumers are becoming increasingly conscious of food's impact on individual health and the environment.1 According to a 2023 Lancet report on the burden and trends of diseases in Australia, almost half of the population is affected by a noncommunicable disease, with poor dietary habits being one of the leading preventable risk factors.2 Over the years, Australians’ dietary preferences have shifted from a low-fat approach to a focus on low-carbohydrates and, more recently, a high-protein diet. Amidst these changes, Australians have not had issues with protein intake, as approximately 95% of the population meets their protein requirements.3 In comparison, more than 70% of Australians do not consume adequate amounts of dietary fibre.4 An emerging dietary approach gaining traction is a plant-based dietary pattern typically comprised of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes, nuts, seeds and spices, providing dietary fibre, plant protein and vital nutrients.5 Evidence shows that a diet rich in plant-based foods can reduce the risk of cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes and support healthy weight management, mental well-being and a balanced gut microbiome.1,6 Regarding planetary benefits, plant-based diets can help mitigate climate change by minimising diet-related land and greenhouse gas emissions.7 Dietary choices impact more than

28 food australia

individual and environmental health; Australia’s per-capita out-of-pocket health expenditure ranked eighth highest globally in 2019.2 However, if Australians incorporate a quarter-cup of legumes daily, $85.5 million in annual healthcare costs related to coronary heart disease could be realised.8 This figure underscores the profound potential of plant-based foods in alleviating the nationwide disease burden.

The growth of plant-based eating in Australia Australia is the third fastest-growing vegan market worldwide.9 One in three Australians are consciously reducing meat consumption, and 10% consider themselves vegetarian or vegan.10 Some primary motivations for shifting towards a plant-based diet are health, environmental and animal welfare concerns.10 With these evolving consumer preferences, the Australian food supply has witnessed the growth of a sector devoted to producing plant-based products that closely emulate these conventional products in taste, aroma and texture.

Since 2018, the sales of dairy and meat substitutes purchased from Australian supermarkets have increased by 30%, with this trend anticipated to continue in the years ahead.11

The plant-based report The Grains and Legumes Nutrition Council conducted a category audit

of plant-based products across major Australian metropolitan supermarkets in 2022. More than 800 plant-based meat, milk and dairy alternatives, and ready-meal products, were analysed in a comprehensive report examining product growth, nutritional quality, labelling claims and manufacturers within these categories.12

Plant-based meat alternatives Plant-based meat alternatives are typically made of plant-derived ingredients to provide an alternative to meat as a ‘centre of plate’ option.

Plant-based meat alternatives have seen a remarkable surge, with the number of plant-based meat substitutes in Australia increasing fivefold since 2015.13 A total of 313 plantbased meat alternative products were collected for the audit in 2022, marking a 33% increase from 2020.

Across various product types, plant-based meat alternatives typically exhibit lower kilojoules and sodium levels, comparable or higher protein content, lower saturated fat per 100 grams, and contain health-promoting dietary fibre, which their conventional meat counterparts lack. Sixty of these products were fortified with vitamins and minerals, such as vitamin B12 and zinc, to offer the same nutrients inherent in animal-based products.14

Plant-based milk Plant-based milk is the most developed of all plant-based categories. The Australian Bureau of Statistics reported that plant-based milk consumption is

increasing at the same rate that dairy milk consumption is declining.11 There was nearly a 60% increase in plant-based milk from 2020 to 2022, predominantly driven by the popularity of nut and grain milk varieties. These plant-based alternatives are inherently fibre-rich, resulting in higher dietary fibre content than cow's milk. Threequarters of plant-based milks were fortified with calcium to minimise the nutritional gap between dairy and plant-based milk.

Plant-based dairy alternatives Plant-based yoghurt, cheese and cream represent a vital segment among dairy-free alternatives, meeting the needs of many consumers, including those with dairy allergies or ethical concerns.

One hundred plant-based dairy alternative products were collected, and two-thirds were yoghurt products.

Like plant-based meat and milk alternatives, these products contain higher levels of dietary fibre than conventional dairy varieties. However, across all three categories, the protein content of plant-based products was much lower when compared to traditional dairy products.

Only one-quarter of plant-based dairy alternatives were fortified, with the average calcium content still lower than that of conventional dairy products. This is where fortification of plant-based dairy alternative products may be an opportunity for manufacturers to better assist in meeting consumers' dietary needs.

Plant-based meals Over the past five years, Australia’s pre-prepared meals production industry has benefited from rising consumer demand for healthy and convenient meals.15 Consumer interest in healthier eating and a growing preference for reduced meat consumption are major driving factors behind the projected growth of the ready meals market, which is expected to reach $1.6 billion by 2028.16 Of the 276 non-meat-containing preprepared meals collected in the audit, 134 were plant-based. Of all plant-

based ready meals, meat analoguecontaining products had the highest protein, fibre and sodium content, whereas fresh salads had the highest sugar content per serving. Though these meals suit consumers with busy lifestyles, the quality of these products varies.

Addressing concerns Some public health and nutrition professionals have voiced concerns about plant-based alternatives, suggesting that a health halo exists around these products where the health benefits of traditional plantbased diets are assumed for these plant-based products, with the nutritional issues not well understood by consumers.

While the nutritional profile of plant-based foods is topical and can be confusing for consumers, many of these foods offer essential nutrients such as protein and dietary fibre. These alternative proteins are being explored as complementary protein sources, aiding the transition to a plant-based or flexitarian dietary pattern. However, there is a need for the food industry to improve some of these products nutritionally, as this category is pivotal in fostering a more sustainable food system.

Conclusion The rise of plant-based eating in Australia is not a passing trend; it reflects a significant shift in valuesdriven eating, prioritising the health of people and the planet. Incorporating more plant-based foods offers a pathway to improved health, ultimately lowering healthcare costs and the burden of disease in Australia.8

References 1. Willett, W. et al. (2019). Food in the Anthropocene: The EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. The Lancet. 393, 447–492 2. G. 2. A. C. (2023). The burden and trend of diseases and their risk factors in Australia, 1990– 2019: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The Lancet, 8(8), 585-599. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(23)00123-8 3. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2011, December).

Australian Health Survey: Usual Nutrient Intakes.

ABS. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/ health-conditions-and-risks/australian-healthsurvey-usual-nutrient-intakes/2011-12.

4. Fayet-Moore, F., Cassettari, T., Tuck, K., McConnell,

A., & Petocz, P. (2018). Dietary Fibre Intake in Australia. Paper II: Comparative Examination of Food Sources of Fibre among High and Low Fibre Consumers. Nutrients, 10(9), 1223. https:// doi.org/10.3390/nu10091223 5. Ostfeld RJ. (2017). Definition of a plant-based diet and overview of this special issue. J Geriatr Cardiol. May;14(5):315. https://doi.org/10.11909/j. issn.1671-5411.2017.05.008 6. Barber TM, Kabisch S, Pfeiffer AFH, Weickert MO. (2020). The Health Benefits of Dietary Fibre.

Nutrients, 12(10):3209. https://doi.org/10.3390/ nu12103209 7. P.R. Shukla, et al., (eds.). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); (2022). Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change.

Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA. doi:10.1017/9781009157926 8. Abdullah MMH, Hughes J, Grafenauer S. (2022).

Legume Intake Is Associated with Potential Savings in Coronary Heart Disease-Related Health Care Costs in Australia. Nutrients, 14(14): 2912. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14142912 9. Wan L. (2018). Fact not fad: why the vegan market is going from strength to strength in Australia [Online]; [accessed 17 January 2023].

Available from: https://www.foodnavigator-asia. com/Article/2018/04/25/Fact-not-fad-Whythe-vegan-mar-ket-isgoing-from-strength-tostrength-in-Australia.​ 10. CSIRO. (2022). CSIRO Futures: Protein–A Roadmap for Unlocking Technology-Led Growth Opportunities for Australia. Canberra, ACT ​ 11. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2020-21).

Apparent Consumption of Selected Foodstuffs, Australia. ABS. https://www.abs.gov.au/ statistics/health/health-conditions-and-risks/ apparent-consumption-selected-foodstuffsaustralia/2020-21.

12. Pham, T; La Macchia, K; Strand, C; Gam, T. (2023).

The Plant-Based Report. The Grains & Legumes Nutrition Council. https://www.glnc.org.au/australias-growingappetite-for-plant-based-foods/ 13. Estell M, Hughes J, Grafenauer S. (2021). Plant protein and plant-based meat alternatives: consumer and nutrition professional attitudes and perceptions. Sustainability. 13:1478. https:// doi.org/10.3390/su13031478 14. International Food Information Council. (2023).

What You Should Know About Plant-Based Alternatives to Meat [Internet]; [accessed 1 February 2023]. Available from https:// foodinsight.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/ Plant-Alternatives-Fact-Sheet.pdf 15. Mintel Group Ltd. (2022) A year of innovation in prepared meals & meal kits, 2022 [Internet]; accessed 27 February 2023] Available from: https://clients.mintel.com/content/report/a-yearof-innovation-in-prepared-meals-meal-kits-2022.

16. Food & Drink Business. (2020). The Rise of Ready Meals [Internet]; [accessed 27 February 2023] Available from: https://www. foodanddrinkbusiness.com.au/news/the-rise-ofready-meals.

Katherine La Macchia, an Australian dietitian with more than 25 years of international experience in the food and dietetics sector, is the General Manager of the Grains & Legumes Nutrition Council, a not-for-profit organisation which advocates for the nutritional benefits of grains, legumes and plant-based diets. f

food australia 29

SUSTAINABILITY FEATURE

Is saving the planet the strongest commercial decision a company can make?

Words by Lauren Branson

S

ustainably marketed products have dominated the consumer packaged goods (CPG) growth curve for more than five years. Recent data across more than $14 billion in sales shows consumers are willing to pay for sustainable products. Looking at historical data we can predict that those brands who deliver on sustainability will be more resilient in an inflationary market compared to other wellness categories.1 The question is, how do brands deliver and compete on sustainability?

Food sustainability experts Calyx.eco and Davidson Branding have recently released a white paper discussing how food brands build sustainability advantage to maintain market share and capture growth.

To understand environmental sustainability as it relates to our food supply chains and build sustainability advantage, we need to take a step back. We need to understand why we’re talking about sustainability, use data to show what’s material and start embedding regeneration deep into our businesses.

we are in the middle of the world’s next mass extinction event, known as the Holocene extinction. These two events mean we are seeing a dramatic shift in consumer values, regulatory requirements and financial markets.

These changes have significant implications for our food system as the primary driver of biodiversity loss and accounting for one third of global greenhouse gas emissions.2 More than 100 countries have set targets to reach climate neutrality over coming decades, and regulation to deliver on this is following suit. Globally, more than 4,838 companies have set targets to reduce their emissions in line with climate science through science based target initiatives.3 Financial institutions managing more than $200 trillion in assets have expressed support for either the Task Force for Climate Related Financial Disclosure or the Task Force for Nature Related Climate Disclosure. For businesses, this means sustainable initiatives are now key to creating long-term value and competing in a global economy.

Sustainability is no longer just a marketing bonus.4

The drivers of sustainability

The Consumer Brands Association reported that the world’s top 50 CPG brands have all made commitments in the areas of packaging, climate change and water usage.5 Nine out of ten business leaders said

Over the coming decade we will see trillions of dollars pass hands from the baby boomers to millennials, changing the balance of economic power. It is widely recognised that

30 food australia

consumers hold them accountable for the environmental impact of their company, even more so than shareholders, employees and regulators.6 The challenge for companies at all stages of our food supply chains is knowing what to change and how to change it. The answer is - with data.

The urgency with which we need to drive landscape level system change across food supply chains means consumers, retailers, governments and financial institutions are all demanding data driven impact transparency. It is clear that science backed, data driven insights and action must underpin any approach to sustainability advantage.

What do we measure and how do we measure it?

As governments and industries grapple with the enormity of addressing climate change, we are seeing a regulatory environment that is rapidly evolving. This can make it hard for companies to understand what regulations, methodologies and standards they need to adhere to and where to focus their efforts when it comes to sustainability. In the absence of clear regulation and guidance it is science that companies and governments are turning to, to deliver on sustainability.

This backdrop is encouraging

a return to scientifically robust methodologies to deliver data based insights as brands drive deeper into their supply chains to truly understand their impact and communicate sustainability. When focusing on environmental sustainability there are three main metrics that food supply chains should focus on: • Carbon • Water • Biodiversity.

Carbon Financial markets, governments and regulators have developed a clearly defined playbook for measuring and reporting on the carbon footprint of global industries. Carbon must underpin any impact measurement and reporting on sustainability but it is by no means the complete picture.

The food and beverage industry has become increasingly aware of its significant contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and the consequent environmental impact. The industry’s carbon footprint is a result of various factors such as land use change, agriculture, food processing and transportation.

Carbon measurement is broken down into three categories or ‘scopes’.

Scope 1 emissions are direct emissions from sources the industry controls or owns, such as fossil fuel combustion and livestock management. Scope 2 emissions are indirect emissions arising from purchased electricity, heat or steam. Scope 3 emissions include all other indirect emissions across the value chain, including raw material production, transportation, product use and disposal. Critically, for food supply chains, scope 3 emissions can account for up to 90% of a food company's footprint and therefore must be addressed.

Water The food system uses 70% of global fresh water and is one of the major sources of water pollution.7 Stakeholders such as customers, investors and regulatory agencies are becoming more interested in the water use of products and processes,

making it necessary to calculate and report water footprints to enhance transparency and build trust. In water scarce environments such as Australia, water risk across a portfolio can be one of the greatest challenges when scaling supply chains.

Biodiversity Our food system is highly dependent on biodiversity to produce food, and the activities associated with food production can have significant impacts on the health of global biodiversity.

Biodiversity loss as a result of food production happens in several ways: • Habitat destruction • Soil erosion • Water pollution • Greenhouse gas emissions • Loss of genetic diversity in crops and livestock.

The process of measuring and reporting on biodiversity is incredibly complex and currently a topic of great debate globally. There is, however, a clear message from regulators, financial markets and consumers that we must consider biodiversity when we are looking at the impacts of food production on our planet.8 On December 19, 2022, at COP15 in Montreal, 94 countries agreed to protect 30% of the land and water considered important for biodiversity by 2030. Currently, only 16% of terrestrial and 10% of marine areas are protected. This will have significant implications for our food system that uses 38% of our current global land surface and is expected to double over the coming years.

Conclusion Sustainability is not a one-off commodity you can buy, it’s a mind set and a way of operating that includes the planet as a key stakeholder in your business. To achieve this, sustainability needs to be data based and deeply embedded across your business through strategy, brand and operations. Your approach should acknowledge a long-term commitment to continuous improvement and excellence. Notably, any genuine

effort to address sustainability must be underpinned by credible data, understanding materiality and the impact of your efforts.

For detailed insights, download the full white paper from the Davidson Branding website.

References 1. McKinsey & Company (2023). Consumers are in fact buying sustainable goods: highlights from new research. https://www.mckinsey. com/industries/consumer-packaged-goods/ our-insights/consumers-are-in-fact-buyingsustainable-goods-highlights-from-new-research 2. Chatham House (2021). Food system impacts on biodiversity loss: Three levers for food system transformation in support of nature. https:// www.chathamhouse.org/2021/02/food-systemimpacts-biodiversity-loss 3. Science Based Targets https:// sciencebasedtargets.org/ 4. Sphera (2021). 2021 Snapshot of Sustainability Maturity https://sphera.com/wp-content/ uploads/2021/07/2021-Snapshot-ofSustainability-Maturity-1.pdf 5. Consumer Brands Association 50 Top CPG Company Sustainability Commitments https://consumerbrandsassociation.org/ sustainability/50-top-cpg-companysustainability-commitments/ 6. Environmental Defence Fund (2019). Business and the fourth wave of environmentalism https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/Businessand-the-Fourth-Wave-of-Environmentalism_2019. pdf 7. OECD (2021). Water: Key to food systems sustainability https://www.oecd. org/agriculture/water-food-systemssustainability/#:~:text=Agriculture%20 accounts%20for%2070%20 8. Capital Institute. 8 Principles of a regenerative economy https://capitalinstitute.org/8-principlesregenerative-economy/

Lauren Branson is CEO at Calyx.eco, a data intelligence company delivering sustainability insights for our food industry. f

food australia 31

FUTURE FOOD

Designing delicious plantbased meats to make a positive impact

Words by Dr Lisa Ronquest-Ross

I

t is estimated that the food system is responsible for one-third (34%) of global emissions.1 The Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates that by 2050 we will need to produce 60% more food to feed a world population of 9.3 billion.2 With an increase in population comes an increase in meat consumption, with livestock taking up nearly 80% of global agricultural land while producing less than 20% of the world’s supply of calories.3 We will simply run out of land and water if we continue to feed growing populations the way we do now. v2food’s mission is to try and address this challenge through designing delicious plant-based protein that is as delicious as meat but with far less impact on the planet in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, land and water use. A life cycle assessment (LCA) study conducted

by CSIRO determined that GHG emissions for v2food’s mince product is equivalent to 2.2kg CO2/kg, while global averages for beef equate to 99.5kg.4 We're doing this with science and technology at the very core of our business and how we design our products. v2food’s advantage was embedded in how the business

32 food australia

was designed back in 2019. Born out of a collaborative ‘venture science’ approach with founding members being CSIRO, Main Sequence Ventures and Jack Cowin (of Competitive Foods and Hungry Jack’s fame).

Our Founder, Nick Hazell, was able to leverage the unique strengths of the founding members to enable a fast start for v2food. CSIRO brought deep science into the technical product design challenges, delivering patents and IP early in the business evolution. Jack Cowin’s Competitive Foods provided access to meat processing assets to be able to produce our products at scale through access to the right equipment, infrastructure and distribution channels to reach the market.

Furthermore, Hungry Jack's was our first customer receiving the plantbased ‘Rebel Whopper’ after only six months and 57 product iterations.

We're now the market leader in Australia in terms of the value and volume for meat analog products with about 40% market share. Our product range has innovated beyond burgers, sausages and mince, to include a coated chicken range as well as ready meals. We have also expanded into Asia, spearheaded

through our partnership with Hungry Jack’s global network, Burger King.

The plant-based meat market While there were enormous predictions for the growth of the plant-based meat category, such as the Kearney report indicating the category would reach US$120 billion by 2025, the reality is the category is only about US$6 billion in global retail sales in 2022.5 In some markets, category growth is slowing, especially in the US. There's been lots of press lately suggesting plant-based meat is dead, or was just a fad.

We believe we're following the typical Gartner Hype Cycle of any emerging new product. There have been a lot of products on the market that have not delivered on consumer expectations and, in fact, turned consumers away from the category after a disappointing first experience.

Our CEO, Tim York says when he worked in large FMCG companies you feared your competitors because their products were so good, while in this sector you fear your competitors whose products aren’t good, as they slow consumer adoption and erodes category growth. There needs to be large shifts regarding taste, price and nutrition to turn the category around.

Product design challenges and v2foods’ approach to overcoming them There is no shortage of challenges when it comes to designing plantbased meats. We have clustered these into four systems: flavour, texture, colour and nutrition, and address these challenges through our RepliTechTM science and technology approach. This approach uses research to understand the science of animal meat and determine how to replicate these in a plant-based system.

Flavour (RepliTaste ) TM

From a flavour perspective, what is the meat flavour chemistry and meat profile that needs to be replicated in a plant-based matrix?

How is this delivered from a raw to cooked product? How are the meaty aromas generated when products are cooked? Plant proteins have ‘off’ notes associated with them that can be beany, astringent or bitter.

Overcoming these through removal or masking is another challenge. How do

you manage mouthfeel and aftertaste?

How do you create products that can cook in different ways from steaming to pan frying to grilling, and how do you do this for all different animal proteins from chicken to pork to beef?

University of Adelaide. We research how we can use simple ingredients to be able to replicate meat chemistry in an efficient way that provides consumers with an authentic cooking and eating experience.

v2food approach: From the beginning with CSIRO, v2food has approached flavour mimicking from first principles regarding understanding meat chemistry and how to replicate this in a plant-based system. Often plant-based meat products on the market use top notes for meat flavour and hence the raw and cooked product almost tastes the same. We have a partnership with the worldclass flavour research centre at the University of Nottingham and have brought similar capabilities to the

Texture (RepliTexTM)

MASTER OF FOOD SCIENCE AND AGRIBUSINESS If you are passionate about creating a better world with a focus on how food is created and managed, the Monash Master of Food Science and Agribusiness is for you.

For more information about the course, see: https://www.monash.edu/science/mfsaa

Texture is all about being able to select plant proteins and texturisers that can hold and release water and fat at the right times but retain enough to provide succulence and juiciness when eaten. Many plantbased meat products are too soft, pasty or mushy and therefore creating multiple textures in different products is important. Other challenges include how to design products that can be processed effectively and then hold up in a distribution chain, designing the

When compared to other food science programs, the Monash Master’s stands out as a leading ‘post-farm gate’ focused Master’s in food in Australia.

The course spans the themes of food science and agribusiness that underpin the current and future approaches to delivering a sustainable food supply.

The course traverses the food value chain including emerging technologies and teaches skills for understanding the highest value segment that is the interface with consumers.

Students benefit from the industry-based expertise of the Monash Food Innovation team and have the option to secure valuable work experience through internships that can progress to employment.

We also welcome expressions of interest from food and stakeholder companies to host students for 12 week internship placements (Contact: wil.science@monash.edu).

food australia 33

FUTURE FOOD

texture system for different products from comminuted, to sausages to whole muscle products. v2food approach: We have a patent pending for textured vegetable proteins that provide a multi-dimensional textured eating experience replicating the gristle of meat achieving more bounce and chewiness when eaten. We continue to research optimum texture systems for different product formats.

Colour (RepliHueTM) When it comes to colour, plant-based meats often look cooked in their ’raw’ state or look ‘raw’ (pink) in the chilled state and remain pink after cooking.

Pigments like beetroot and caramel are used to colour plant-based meats and these are heat stable, essentially not changing colour during cooking.

It is difficult for consumers to know when you've cooked your burger or your mince. Challenges on colour relate to achieving authentic raw and cooked state and achieving a pink to brown/grey colour change during cooking. v2food approach: From a colour point of view, v2food has developed a patented novel, non-GM algae ingredient that changes colour at the same time and temperature as meat does on cooking. The raw appearance is similar to uncooked meat when you purchase the product in store and then changes to a cooked browngrey appearance during cooking.

This experience helps to normalise cooking with plant-based meats and makes it easier for consumers to cook with them. We plan to bring this to market in 2024.

Nutrition (RepliHealthTM) The standout benefit of designing products with plant proteins is the inherent fibre content and no cholesterol. Nutrition design aspects include whether to fortify with micronutrients to ensure equivalence to meat and how bioavailable these micronutrients are, understanding how digestible plant proteins

34 food australia

are compared to meat, how to simplify the ingredients list and use ingredients consumers recognise, as well as understanding the long-term health impacts of eating plant-based meats. v2food approach: At v2food we are serious about nutrition, and have been since the beginning working with CSIRO to conduct research that informs how we design our products.

More recently, we’ve developed nutrition composition targets by product category, that our product developers use to develop new products and measure compliance against. Our overarching targets are around ‘good source of protein’, because that's what consumers would expect as well as ‘good source of fibre’ because that's what's inherently beneficial in plant proteins and lacking in most Western diets.

We also fortify with the most bioavailable micronutrients - iron, zinc and B vitamins. We target a four-star Health Star Rating, to help provide shortcuts for consumers to understand that these products are nutritious. We also collaborate with organisations trying to advance alternative products such as the Alternative Proteins Council and Grains and Legumes Nutrition Council.

More recently, we have joined a consortium research program with one of the top agricultural universities in the world, Wageningen University & Research in the Netherlands. The study called ‘Improving plant-based meat analogues by evaluating effects on human health’ is using clinical trials to determine the cardiovascular and gut microbiome consequences of swapping out meat for plant-based meats, and how products can be designed to enhance beneficial health outcomes.

In designing plant-based meats, we must remember that food is about enjoyment and bringing people together. Ultimately, people don't make food choices based purely on environmental considerations, they're driven by taste and enjoyment.

We work hard with our marketing

and sales teams to have the right products at the right price so consumers can have many product options able to be easily incorporated into their daily repertoire. We've recently partnered with chef Miguel Maestre to inspire consumers to ‘update their plate’ and use our products to create delicious-tasting recipes for everyday meals.

Our mission is to feed the planet in a way that takes care of it, and provide enjoyment and deliciousness along the way.

References 1. M. Crippa, et al. (2021). Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nature Food Nature Food Vol 2 198-209. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-02100225-9 2. Da Silva, JG (2012). United Nations Chronicle Feeding the World Sustainably. No. 1 & 2 Vol. XLIX, The Future We Want?

3. Ritchie, H. (2017). How much of the world’s land would we need in order to feed the global population with the average diet of a given country? Our World in Data 4. Poore, J & Nemecek, T. (2018). Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science Vol 360 No. 6392 5. Good Food Institute (2023). 2023 outlook: The state of the plant-based meat category

Lisa Ronquest-Ross is a passionate food scientist with extensive global R&D experience working for a variety of multinationals that include Unilever, Mars and Woolworths. Before joining v2food in Australia, Lisa was the R&D Executive for MANE Flavours leading their Innovation Centre and R&D program for Sub-Saharan Africa based in Cape Town. Lisa is currently Chief Science Officer where she is responsible for developing, leading, and translating v2food’s science research strategy into breakthrough products that help unlock barriers to plant-based meat adoption. Lisa has a particular passion for ensuring the application of science and technology is meaningful for both people and the planet. Lisa has recently completed her PhD in Food Science through the University of Stellenbosch. Her research explored the current and future application of food science and technology in South Africa to address food security needs. f

AIFST CONVENTION PARTNERS 2023

Convention Partners 2023 AIFST would like to thank our 2023 Convention Partners.

Gold Partner

Bronze Partners

Silver Partners

Food & Wine Networking Evening

Young Professionals in Food & 2023 National Mentoring Networking Breakfast

Convention Partners

food australia 35

INFORMATION RESEARCH

Information search tips for food scientists Words by Melinda Stewart

T

he sheer amount of information available to us from our desktops can make finding authoritative information on a topic daunting. Whilst there are numerous categories of information and publications which can be seen as ‘authoritative’, in this article we will focus on the journal literature.

However, even when we look at journal literature alone, the quantity of material is vast. A 2022 online ranking of journals covering most academic disciplines listed more than 27,000 journals. When the subject area is narrowed to food science, the same survey listed 359 journals (146 of which are open access) with each of these journals publishing hundreds, and in some cases thousands, of articles in 2022 alone.1 The amount of published information pertaining to food science as a discipline is staggering without even considering the range of related disciplines which many working in the field need to stay upto-date with.

So how can food scientists navigate the volume of information available and maximise the authority of what they are retrieving and relying on to inform their research and professional decision making?

36 food australia

Where should you look?

Research databases and scholarly search engines are an integral part of any search for journal literature.

It is important to utilise as many options as possible to ensure good coverage, as databases differ with respect to the breadth of disciplines covered, the total number of journals indexed, the number of food science discipline-specific journals indexed, and the number of articles included per indexed journal.

Many databases contain citations unique to the given database. For example, Urhan et al. found more than half of the articles retrieved on a specific research topic were unique to a single database. This study highlighted “the importance of thoughtful database selection and multiple database usage when comprehensively assessing knowledge in the food sciences”.2 If you are affiliated with an organisation which has an institutional library, the library discovery system is a great place to start. Similarly, if you have access to subscription scholarly databases such as Food Science and Technology Abstracts, Web of Science or Scopus, they are a great resource.

If not, don’t despair, there are

plenty of quality resources freely available to all users.

For instance, studies have found that Google Scholar is very likely the most comprehensive multidisciplinary academic search engine available.3,4 Despite the demise of Microsoft Academic in 2021, Google Scholar is not the only scholarly search engine available, with newer search engines such as Semantic Scholar (https:// www.semanticscholar.org) and Lens (https://www.lens.org) also indexing food science related content.

In addition to search engines, other online resources for finding scholarly literature on food science and related disciplines include: SSRN: Hosting the Food Science Research Network - FoodSciRN Subject Matter eJournals Paperity: A multidisciplinary aggregator of open access journals and papers Preprints.org and bioRix: Preprint services Biomed Central: an evolving portfolio of some 300 peer-reviewed journals sharing discoveries from research communities in science, technology, engineering and medicine CORE: CORE’s aim is to aggregate all open access research outputs from repositories and journals

worldwide, facilitating free unrestricted access to research DOAB - Directory of Open Access Books: A directory of peer-reviewed academic books from a range of publishers DOAJ - Directory of Open Access Journals: A community-curated independent online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peerreviewed journals Europe PMC: A repository providing access to worldwide life sciences articles, books, patents and clinical guidelines. Europe PMC provides links to relevant records in databases such as Uniprot, European Nucleotide Archive (ENA), Protein Data Bank Europe (PDBE) and BioStudies PLoS (Public Library of Science ): Founded in 2001 as a non-profit open access publisher, innovator and advocacy organisation with a mission to accelerate progress in science and medicine by leading a transformation in research communication Unpaywall: Maintains a database of links to full-text articles from openaccess sources all over the world.

They provide access to their database so researchers and members of the public can access this open content, rather than paying to access that same content when it is held behind paywalls.

Searching or browsing When looking for information, remember that ‘searching’ is not the only option available to you.

Many publisher websites are highly structured and information is organised by discipline and subdiscipline. Browsing can be very fruitful on these websites, so look for their subject, discipline and domain headings, and navigate using the indexing provided.

Staying up-to-date One of the simplest ways to stay up-to-date with the literature in your field is to set up alerts. Google Scholar has an alerts function and most journal websites enable you to sign-up for alerts for specific journals

and topics. This way, every time a new issue of a journal is published, or there is a match for your topic alert, you receive the table of contents and topic results in your inbox.

To set up table of contents alerts, you can head straight to your favourite journal’s website and sign up. If you want to identify other journals, publisher websites can be a great resource for discovering publications in your fields of interest.

Wiley Online Library, for instance, has a subject category for food science and technology (https:// onlinelibrary.wiley.com/topic/ browse/000058) via which you can navigate to more than 20 subcategories such as food processing, production and manufacture (31 journals), food biotechnology (eight journals) and sensory science (two journals).

Springer has a dedicated food science and nutrition subject category where 22 journals are listed (https://www.springer.com/gp/foodscience-nutrition) and ScienceDirect (https://www.sciencedirect.com/) has a sub-domain dedicated to food science (navigate to it via the life sciences – agricultural and biological sciences domains). If you select the ‘publication type’ journal there are currently 66 journals listed, twenty of which are open access (https://www. sciencedirect.com/browse/journalsand-books?subject=food-science).

Which journals should I monitor?

Journal level metrics measure, compare and rank research and scholarly publications. They can also be referred to as journal rankings, journal importance or a journal's impact. Journal metrics, while originally developed as a tool to assist librarians make collection development decisions, also allow scholars and researchers to compare scholarly periodicals.

Each journal ranking metric uses its own formula to determine a journal's importance to the research community. Many include counting the number of times the journal

has been cited in other works. The differing formulas and methodology mean the results will differ from metric to metric.

Examples of journal metrics include impact factor, journal rank in a category, acceptance rate, h-index, and CiteScore.

To easily check the top 20 ranked journals (h5-index and h5-median metrics) in the subject category food science and technology, use the metrics function in Google Scholar.

Publishers will usually include a journal’s impact factor or other metric on its homepage, so if you’re curious, you can find it there.

References 1.

2.

Scimago Journal Rank, www.scimagojr.com Urhan, Tuba Karaarslan et al. Information Retrieval in Food Science Research: A Bibliographic Database Analysis. Journal of Food Science 83(12) (2018), 2912-2922 https:// doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.14388 3. Gusenbauer, M. Google Scholar to overshadow them all? Comparing the sizes of 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases.

Scientometrics 118, 177–214 (2019) https://doi. org/10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5 4. Gusenbauer, M. Search where you will find most: Comparing the disciplinary coverage of 56 bibliographic databases. Scientometrics 127, 2683–2745 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11192-022-04289-7

Melinda Stewart is Technical Information Specialist at AIFST. f

food australia 37

PACKAGING

The key principles and challenges of effective sustainable packaging design Words by Ian Hayes

T

here are various considerations in designing packaging for optimal usage, such as to help with effective product identification and marketing. Packaging may, for example, include regulated information (including product weight, nutrition information panels, contact information of the brand owner and barcodes for effective scanning at a point of sale) as part of legal requirements. Packaging may also be designed and printed to attract consumer attention.

Ultimately, however, the key goal of effective packaging design is to ensure the product is protected and the consumer can use it safely and effectively.

Challenges to packaging design In Figure 1, the black box surrounding the product represents the package.

The package must withstand a variety of hazards at each stage of the supply chain to ensure the product is not compromised.

The first key concern is that the package could be damaged mechanically during storage and transportation. This supply chain extends from the packing line, through the various warehouses and ultimately into the consumers' own supply chain, where the package could be thrown into a shopping trolley, then into the car boot and finally onto the kitchen shelves at home.

Additionally, packaging must protect the product from light oxidation, which can lead to discolouration and nutrient loss.

This is why some products require light protection, including protection against both UV light and visible light.

Gases can also permeate through the package and cause product quality issues. For example, some food products require a modified

38 food australia

Figure 1 – Product protection. atmosphere that reduces the oxygen level from atmospheric levels (about 21%) to less than 1%. If this is not achieved, the flavour of the product can be compromised, or it can spoil.

Conversely, sometimes we need to keep gas in the package, such as carbon dioxide in a carbonated beverage. If the CO2 escapes, the beverage quality or drinking experience will not be as good.

We also need to be careful that the package itself does not taint the product quality. The package is made of a variety of materials and additives, and it is important that these materials do not interact negatively with the product. This can cause the product to have ‘off flavour’ profiles or, in some cases, it can even lead to negative health or environmental outcomes when not well designed.

Although sustainability considerations can add another layer of complexity to an already complex design process, it is an important step to take in the journey of improving packaging design.

Effective sustainable packaging design Sustainable packaging is packaging

that protects the product and ensures consumer safety, while also having a lower environmental impact than existing or conventional packaging.

One of the most effective ways to design sustainable packaging is to use less packaging. The simplest option is to use no packaging if this does not compromise product quality and performance, but this may not always be feasible. The challenge is to balance using the optimal amount of packaging without under- or overpackaging the product.

The Consumer Goods Forum's ‘A Global Language for Packaging and Sustainability’ (Figure 2)1 provides a helpful visual representation of the relationship between packaging and environmental impact. The chart shows the ultimate ‘sweet spot’, where the optimum amount of packaging is used to deliver fully functional product protection while ensuring consumer safety.

Over-packaging is a major contributor to environmental impact, as it increases the amount of carbon footprint that is used and the amount of waste that is generated. However, under-packaging can also be a problem, as it can lead to product

spoilage. When products spoil, they create their own greenhouse gas emissions which will inevitably be much higher than those caused by the packaging. This is due to the amount of land and water needed to grow or develop the product that has now been lost due to the compromised under-packaged product. As Figure 2 shows, the environmental impact of underpackaging a food product will be higher than for over-packaging the same product.

The ideal amount of packaging is the amount that is necessary to protect the product and ensure consumer safety without being excessive. This ‘sweet spot’ can be difficult to find, but it is important to strive for it.

The Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation’s Sustainable Packaging Guidelines (SPGs)2 are a vital resource that can help packaging designers and businesses looking into sustainable packaging. The SPGs principles cover a wide range of considerations, including 10 key principles: 1. Design for recovery 2. Optimise material efficiency 3. Design to reduce product waste 4. Eliminate hazardous materials 5. Use recycled materials 6. Use renewable materials 7. Design to minimise litter 8. Design for transport efficiency 9. Design for accessibility 10. Provide consumer information on sustainability.

Following these principles as closely as possible will help businesses achieve optimum packaging design.

Regulation on the horizon In June 2023, the State and Federal Environment Ministers announced that packaging will soon be subject to strict new government rules aimed at cutting waste and boosting recycling, thanks to a historic agreement struck at a national meeting of environment ministers.

These new rules will help make sure packaging waste is minimised in the first place and, where packaging

Figure 2 – Optimum packaging: The Innventia AB model.1 is used, that it is designed to be recovered, reused, recycled or reprocessed.

The rules will include mandatory packaging design standards and targets – including for recycled content and to address the use of harmful chemicals in food packaging.3 With this announcement, the public will have an opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed regulations in late 2023, and the regulations are not expected to be implemented before the end of 2025.

As we are at the beginning of defining packaging design standards and/or packaging targets, the final implication of any proposed regulation is still under review.

However, the SPGs remain a good source of information and guidance for effective packaging design, as they are already founded on global best practice sustainable packaging practices.

Where to next?

When considering sustainable packaging design, it's important to appreciate that packaging design is nuanced. Effective packaging design must protect the product and keep the consumer safe first and foremost. Any changes to deliver a more sustainable outcome should be thoroughly tested to ensure there is no compromise to the product integrity at any point within the supply chain.

Reducing and light weighting packaging is a good starting point for sustainable packaging design.

Redesigning packaging to improve recoverability will also be a key

requirement moving forward.

Where possible, consider implementing reuse models for packaging as an effective way of reducing packaging’s environmental footprint.

As we think about the potential introduction of mandatory packaging design standards and mandatory targets (including for recycled content), now is the best time to review your packaging for its functionality, product protection efficacy and its potential for sustainability improvements.

References 1.

2.

3.

The Consumer Goods Forum (2011). A Global Language for Packaging and Sustainability https://www.theconsumergoodsforum. com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/GlobalPackaging-Report-2011.pdf APCO (2020). Sustainable Packaging Guidelines (SPGs) https://apco.org.au/sustainable-packagingguidelines Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (2023). Environment Ministers step in to cut packaging waste https://minister.dcceew.gov.au/plibersek/ media-releases/environment-ministers-stepcut-packaging-waste

Ian Hayes is Head of Packaging Transformation, Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation. This article is based on his presentation at the AIFST 2023 Convention held in Melbourne in July 2023. f

food australia 39

SENSORY & CONSUMER SCIENCE FEATURE

FOOD FILES

Words by Drs Djin Gie Liem, Andrew Costanzo and Dan Dias

The sweet taste of distraction Distracted eating can lead to overeating, but the exact reasons behind this phenomenon are not fully understood. Previous research has shown that when our minds are busy with cognitive tasks, the taste of food might not be as intense, causing us to eat more. To delve deeper into this concept, researchers conducted two experiments using brain scans (fMRI) and taste tests.

In the first experiment, participants were given sweet solutions to taste, ranging from weak to strong sweetness levels. At the same time, they were asked to perform a digit-span task to increase their cognitive load. The participants found the strong sweet solutions less intense when they were under high cognitive load, and this was linked to specific brain areas being less active. These brain areas are associated with taste perception and decisionmaking. The study also showed changes in brain connections related to reward and decision-making during this process.

The second experiment focused on participants' preferred level of sweetness while under varying cognitive load. Interestingly, the distraction didn't influence participants preference for sweetness levels.

Overall, the results suggest that when

40 food australia

our minds are occupied, the perception of taste changes, especially for strongly sweet foods. This could mean that our brain's attention resources are more strained when dealing with highly sweet foods, potentially leading to overeating. The research sheds light on how our cognitive load affects our eating habits and highlights avenues for further exploration in this area. van Meer, F., van Steenbergen, H., & van Dillen, L. F. (2023). The effect of cognitive load on preference and intensity processing of sweet taste in the brain. Appetite, 188, 106630.

Exploring off-odors in diverse recycled polypropylene for food ventures Polypropylene (PP), a widely utilised polymer in the realm of food packaging, owes its popularity to its effective functionality and relatively modest expense. Despite these advantages, the use of disposable plastic packaging contributes to the burgeoning problem of plastic pollution, harming the environment and potentially impacting food aroma and flavour when recycled.

Paiva and co-authors analysed six polypropylene samples subjected to forced contamination and recycling in which they identified 45 compounds using headspace-solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME) which

were subsequently analysed using gas chromatography-olfactometry-mass spectrometry (GC-O-MS). Among these, nine compounds exhibited distinct off-odours, with descriptors indicative of apple vinegar, scented smell, hot oil, vinegar steam, burnt synthetic and plastic, as identified by the panellists.

Within this subset, two noteworthy markers emerged: diethyl phthalate, likely stemming from the catalyst employed during PP polymerisation as an intentionally added substance, and glycerine, indicative of non-intentionally added substances. Notably, plastic scents from benzophenone dominated, present in both forcibly contaminated and uncontaminated samples.

To summarise, the author’s findings underscore the significance of pinpointing the compounds accountable for distinct off-odours within the samples. Additionally, the amalgamation of contaminants with elevated shear rates and temperatures inherent to extrusion recycling could yield new degradation compounds possessing odorous attributes impacting food aroma and flavour.

This highlights the requirements for legislative bodies and businesses to formulate process strategies that mitigate the influence of these contaminants.

Paiva, R., Wrona, M., Nerin, C., Veroneze, I. B., Gavril, G.-L., & Cruz, S. A. (2021). Importance of profile of volatile and off-odors compounds from different recycled polypropylene used for food applications. Food Chemistry, 350, 129250.

Reducing fat and sugar in chocolate milk: effects on sensory attributes Manufacturers are trying to find novel ways to reduce the sugar and fat content of food products to improve their health profile. However, there are interactions between the perception of fat and sugar and reducing one may affect the sensory properties of the other.

Researchers in Denmark assessed the sensory attributes of chocolate milk with varying levels of fat (0.1% and 4.5%), sucrose (0%, 2.5%, and 5%) and acesulfame-K (0% and 0.015%). The study involved sensory evaluation by eleven trained panellists who underwent three days of training on reference samples. The panellists evaluated aromas, tastes, flavours, textures and aftertastes.

The findings revealed that reducing the fat concentration resulted in a decrease in cream aroma, sweet taste intensity, cream flavour and viscosity.

However, attributes like cocoa flavour, burnt and smoky flavours, and dusty sensation increased with decreased fat concentration. Decreasing sucrose levels led to lower sweet taste intensity and higher bitter taste intensity.

Attributes such as chocolate flavour, cream flavour, fruity/lactic flavour, viscosity and mouth-watering all showed an increase with higher sucrose concentration, while bitter taste intensity, cocoa flavour, burnt and smoky flavour, dusty sensation, mouth-drying, sour aftertaste and bitter aftertaste decreased.

The addition of acesulfame-K did not significantly alter the sensory profile of the chocolate milk, except for an increase in sweet taste intensity. The study indicated that acesulfame-K could be a potential substitute for the sweetness of sucrose in chocolate milk with minimal impact on other sensory

attributes.

Overall, the study highlights that changing fat and sucrose concentrations in chocolate milk has complex effects on various sensory attributes, including taste, flavour and texture. It emphasises the importance of considering both direct and indirect effects when reformulating food products to reduce sugar and fat content while maintaining desirable sensory qualities. The findings provide valuable insights for product development and reformulation strategies aimed at creating healthier food options without compromising consumer preferences.

Pedersen, L., Bertelsen, A. S., Byrne, D. V., & Kidmose, U. (2023). Sensory Interactions between Sweetness and Fat in a Chocolate Milk Beverage.

Foods, 12(14), 2711.

Dr Djin Gie Liem is Associate Professor, Dr Andrew Costanzo is Lecturer and Dr Dan Dias is Senior Lecturer. All are at CASS Food Research Centre at Deakin University. f

We create innovative diagnostics for a healthier world.

food australia 41

FOOD SCIENCE

3D food printing technology to produce novel texture modified foods Words by Dr Liezhou Zhong and Amanda Orchard

More work is needed to improve the nutritional and sensory qualities of texture modified foods The food and nutrition service in some residential aged care facilities has recently been in sharp focus, with texture modified foods (TMFs) being repeatedly used as examples of serious deficiencies in food quality, presentation and choice.1 TMFs are clinically prescribed for residents with chewing and swallowing difficulties (also called dysphagia).2 The foods are generally minced, pureed or thickened foods and liquids to reduce the risk of aspiration and choking.3 It is estimated that 8% of the population worldwide has difficulty swallowing, including people with motor neurone disease, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease or Alzheimer’s disease, cancer/stroke survivors, the geriatric population and children with cerebral palsy.4 Speech Pathology Australia suggests

42 food australia

that more than one million Australians are affected by swallowing disorders.5 Some countries, such as USA6, Japan and Canada,4 use instrumental texture and rheological measurements (ie. yield stress, hardness and viscosity) as indicators to classify TMFs. More recently, the International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) framework established descriptive terminologies and easy-to-implement in-house testing methods for a hierarchy of seven texture levels for TMFs and fluids.3 In contrast, the ‘Smile Care Food’ system in Japan differentiates foods for chewing difficulties (in orange) and swallowing difficulties (in red) (Table 1).7 Although TMFs are commonly used for these vulnerable populations, the foods have been found to severely compromise nutrition, and often lack visual and/or taste appeal. TMFs are commonly served in ‘blobs’. In addition, in order to achieve the

required texture, the foods are commonly overcooked, diluting nutrients and flavour due to the extra water and food gums added.

People on TMFs report lower appetite and nutrient intake than those on a standard diet. In addition, due to the inherent challenges in texture modifications, TMF variety is extremely limited, with texture modified snack options being particularly restrictive. Collectively, the issues contribute to unplanned weight loss and ultimately the high malnutrition prevalence in people on TMFs.9-11 Moreover, preparing TMFs that are safe for swallowing but also appealing can be a huge daily challenge for chefs and caregivers.

There are only a limited number of commercial TMF providers in Australia, including Textured Concept Foods (VIC), EZY FOODS (VIC), Care Food Co (NSW), Meals on Nutritious Cuisine/ NuFoods (QLD) and Smooth Dining (QLD), with only a handful

IDDSI classification 3

NDD – US 6 Instrumental texture and rheological indicators, i.e., yield stress, hardness and viscosity

7

Regular

Regular

7EC

Easy to Chew

6

Soft & Bite-size (1.5 cm for adults; 8 mm for children)

3-Dysphagia advanced

Yellow 4-Can be crushed with gums

5

Minced & Moist (4 mm for adults; 2mm for children)

2- Dysphagia mechanically altered (Dysphagia ground)

Yellow 3-Can be crushed with tongue

4

Pureed foods/ Extremely thick drinks

Red 2 - Can be swallowed 1- Dysphagia pureed/ Spoon Yellow 2-No chew food after some chewing or pudding think (> 1750 cP*)

3

Liquidised foods/ Moderately thick

Honey thick (351 – 1750 cP)

Red 1 - Can be swallowed after some crushing

2

Mildly thick

Nectar thick (51 – 350 cP)

Red 0-Swallow at once

1

Slightly thick

-

Red 0-Swallow at once

0

Thin

Thin (1 – 50 cP)

Red 0-Swallow at once

“Smile Care Food” – Japan 7 Energy ≥ 100 kcal/ 100g Protein ≥ 8.1 g /100g Blue-Regular with supplement Yellow 5-Easy to chew

Table 1. IDDSI, the National Dysphagia Diet (NDD) United States and “Smile Care Food” Japan terminologies for texture modified foods and drinks (reproduced from Zhong, et al.8).

Figure 1. Complex interactions among food materials, IDDSI, 3D food printing. of registered National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) food service providers - Meals on Wheels Cowra/Grenfell (NSW) and Able Foods (NSW) for example, have TMF menus. Recently, many institutions and organisations (eg. Maggie Beer Foundation and Dietitians Australia), chefs and dietitians across the country have made a great effort to improve the public's awareness of TMFs.

Adopt 3D food printing to improve nutritional and sensory qualities of TMFs Adopting three dimensional food printing (3DFP) technology to

reshape TMFs is an important emerging strategy to improve nutritional and sensory qualities of TMFs. 3DFP can produce foods layer by layer, from the bottom to the top, to achieve appealing presentations, therefore, it has an evident freedom in food design and personalised nutrition.

There are different types of 3DFP technologies: extrusion-based 3DFP (including hot-melt printing and cryoprinting), powder bed 3DFP (including sintering or binding) and inkjet 3DFP, while lithography 3D printing is not commonly used for edible food printing.8 Among them, extrusion-based 3DFP is the most

common technology because of its higher compatibility with food materials.

Many TMFs, those at IDDSI Level 4 (Pureed) and 5 (Mince & Moist) particularly, are ideal food materials (food inks) for extrusion-based 3DFP.12-14 Typically, these materials for extrusion-based 3DFP should flow through a nozzle and then be self-supporting after being deposited on a surface (shear thinning behaviour). Beyond shapes, food sensory properties (colour, taste, smell, texture and mouthfeel) and nutritional properties (nutrient provisions and digest rate) can be well manipulated by fortifying food ink, optimising 3DFP and postprinting processing.8 Many of the current commercial products can be directly used for 3DFP. Despite the current challenges as summarised in Table 2, 3DFP has apparent advantages over moulding in redesigning TMFs into appealing plate presentations. It also can be a household kitchen appliance to help community caregivers prepare high-quality TMFs for their loved ones. However, more work is needed to implement 3DFP based TMF food service models at real-world settings,

food australia 43

FOOD SCIENCE

Challenges

Opportunities

Limited food materials (not all TMFs are directly printable).

Novel food materials such as novel ingredients form fungi, algae and insects.

Upcycle aesthetically imperfect fruits and vegetables or other food waste sources.

Printability of food inks will shift after storage.

Commercialised pre-packaged food inks.

Skills and time required for building printable 3D shapes.

Not all shapes expected from consumers are printable.

Low quality 3D models are required.

Commercialised or open-source pre-built 3D models or services.

ML based 3D model generators using natural language.

3D models can be used for printing different food inks.

3D food printing finetuning and human supervision required.

Computer vision based real time printing adjustment.

Low printing speed.

Higher degree of automation.

Smaller portion size.

Multiple print heads and improved printer architecture (eg multi-axis robotic arm 3D printers).

Texture shifts during processing (including storage).

Shape changes or collapse.

Restore hard structure using post-printing processing for general public.

TMFs are cooked as normal, and generally directly consumed after printing.

Integrate into the current food system as an operation unit.

Food safety and regulations.

Extra equipment and training cost.

More cost effectiveness analyses are required.

Higher capacity than moulding which is widely used.

Improved TMFs acceptability.

Automation can save staff costs.

Food inks

3D shape design

3D food printing

Post-printing processing

Food service system

Table 2. Challenges and opportunities of adopting 3D food printing to improve texture modified foods.8 in the Australian context. In particular, residential care institutions and the food industry (commercial TMFs providers for example) should be involved in this process and co-design the new food system to address current technological issues, and evaluate its benefits, risks and costs.

7

8

9

References 1.

2

3

4

5

6

Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety Final Report: Care, Dignity and Respect. (2021).

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

Consumers’ experience of residential aged care - Australia 2017–19. (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra, 2019).

The International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI). Complete IDDSI Framework Detailed definitions <https:// iddsi.org/framework> (2019).

Cichero, J. A. Y. et al. The Need for International Terminology and Definitions for Texture-Modified Foods and Thickened Liquids Used in Dysphagia Management: Foundations of a Global Initiative. Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports 1, 280-291, doi:10.1007/s40141-013-0024-z (2013).

Speech Pathology Australia. (2021).

Swallowing Awareness Day, https://www. speechpathologyaustralia.org.au.

Nishinari, K. et al. Role of fluid cohesiveness in safe swallowing. NPJ Sci Food 3, 5, doi:10.1038/s41538-019-0038-8 (2019).

44 food australia

10

11

12

13

14

Maksimenko, A. et al. Texture-modified foods for the elderly and people with dysphagia: insights from Japan on the current status of regulations and opportunities of the high pressure technology. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 548, 022106, doi:10.1088/1755-1315/548/2/022106 (2020).

Zhong, L. et al. 3D food printing: its readiness for a food and nutrition insecure world. Proc Nutr Soc 15, 1-10 (2023).

Burger, C. et al. Texture modified diet in German nursing homes: availability, best practices and association with nursing home characteristics. BMC Geriatr 19, 284, doi:10.1186/s12877-019-1286-9 (2019).

Painter, V. et al. Texture-modified food and fluids in dementia and residential aged care facilities. Clin Interv Aging 12, 1193-1203, doi:10.2147/CIA.S140581 (2017).

Abbey, K. L. et al. Menu planning in residential aged care-the level of choice and quality of planning of meals available to residents.

Nutrients 7, 7580-7592, doi:10.3390/ nu7095354 (2015).

Zhang, J. Y. et al. Advancements in 3D food printing: a comprehensive overview of properties and opportunities. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, doi:10.1080/104 08398.2021.1878103 (2021).

Sun, J. et al. Extrusion-based food printing for digitalized food design and nutrition control. Journal of Food Engineering 220, 1-11, doi:10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2017.02.028 (2018).

Baiano, A. 3D Printed Foods: A Comprehensive Review on Technologies, Nutritional Value, Safety, Consumer Attitude, Regulatory Framework, and Economic and Sustainability Issues. Food Reviews International 38, 986-1016, doi:10.1080/8755912 9.2020.1762091 (2022).

Dr Liezhou Zhong is a postdoc at the Nutrition & Health Innovation Research Institute Edith Cowan University (ECU). He established the Future Foods & Digital Gastronomy (FFDG) lab at ECU and is the lead researcher. He developed novel 3D printed food products to improve the physical and mental well-being of people reliant on TMFs. Chef Amanda Orchard is experienced in culinary service management and the provision of meals for older Australians living in residential aged care, Founder of Texture Modified Food Solutions and Chef Manager at the Maggie Beer Foundation. Chef Orchard has been working with Dr Zhong at the FFDG lab to develop 3D printed texture modified foods since 2021. f

AIFST24 SAVE THE DATE

Join us in Sydney in August to Grow, Learn, Connect & Champion Tuesday 6 - Wednesday 7 August 2024

Food Science Navigating our Future

AIFST24 The 2024 AIFST Convention will be held in Sydney on August 6 & 7 at the International Convention Centre.

Food science and technology is a dynamic and evolving field, with new research, technologies, and regulations constantly emerging.

Attending the AIFST convention offers a unique opportunity to engage with industry professionals, expand your knowledge, explore

Errata Two articles in Vol.75(3) contained errors.

Creating food texture with plant protein - by Kim, W. et al.

Page 8, column 3, paragraph 1, 2nd sentence has been corrected to read: “It has been approved as a food additive in countries such as Japan,

www.aifst.asn.au

new technologies and latest developments, ensuring you can apply the most up-to-date knowledge and techniques in your work.

AIFST24 will feature a comprehensive technical program and the great networking opportunities offered by our face-toface event, providing a platform for growth, innovation, and collaboration - a valuable investment of your time and resources.

Join us in Sydney in August to grow, learn, connect, and champion.

the United States and China, and also has potential as a prebiotic.3”

(a) (b) (c)

Functional properties of gluten can be modified during fermentation by Sayanjali, S. et al.

Page 28, column 2, paragraph 2 has been corrected to read: 'For a product to be labelled as gluten-free in Australia and New Zealand it must not contain:

&

detectable gluten; or & oats or oat products; or cereals containing gluten* that have been malted, or products of such cereals. *gluten means the main protein in wheat, rye, oats, barley, triticale and spelt relevant to the medical conditions coeliac disease and dermatitis herpetiformis.

food australia 45

FOOD MICROBIOLOGY

Food microbiologists: Who are they? What do they do?

Words by Dr Dipon Sarkar

W

hen you think about a food microbiologist, what is the image that comes to mind?

Is it a person in a lab coat staring down a microscope, or looking at a Petri dish with questionable microscopic organisms isolated from our food?

Even though this traditional image of the food microbiologist still rings true, the role has evolved and is no longer restricted to lab coats and Petri dishes. Nowadays, there are also food microbiologists working exclusively to develop computer models to assess product safety, or developing a machine learning algorithm to detect food spoilage, or working with humans and data to develop industry guidelines and government regulations.

So, what is food microbiology? It is a branch of microbiology that focuses on the study of microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi, yeasts, viruses and parasites in the context of food production, processing and consumption. The primary focus of a food microbioligist’s work is to understand the interactions between food products and microorganisms that are either naturally present in foods, accidentally contaminate the food, or are intentionally inoculated in the food to enhance its characteristics.

The pathway to becoming a food microbiologist begins with building a strong educational foundation. This can be achieved through a bachelor degree with courses focusing on biology, microbiology, food science and chemistry, and these foundations

46 food australia

can be further developed through advanced degrees. This is followed by gaining work experience, understanding the regulatory framework, and furthering your skills through professional certifications and targeted on-the-job learning.

Food microbiologists may find work in: • Food and beverage companies • Food ingredient suppliers • Analytical laboratories • Academic research and teaching • Private research companies • Government agencies and regulatory bodies • International food agencies, such as WHO. Some of the functions food microbiologists might be involved in are: Microbial analysis: This involves the identification and quantification of microorganisms in food products using a range of laboratory techniques, thus playing a pivotal role in maintaining the safety and quality of raw materials, ingredients and finished food products.

Research and innovation: Advancing knowledge in food microbiology is a core responsibility. This research leads to improved food safety practices, novel preservation methods and a deeper understanding of microbial interactions.

Regulatory compliance: Food microbiologists often work with government agencies and regulatory bodies to establish and enforce food safety standards and regulations.

Fermentation: Food microbiologists study fermentation processes used

in the production of various foods such as cheese, yogurt, bread, and using precision fermentation to create novel ingredients, food products and proteins. They manage and optimise these processes for desirable product characteristics.

Microbial risk analysis: Conducting risk assessments and developing risk assessment models helps estimate the likelihood of foodborne illness outbreaks due to specific pathogens, helping regulatory agencies and food producers make informed decisions to mitigate risks.

Food safety management: Participating and developing food safety plans and HACCP plans to identify and control potential hazards in food production processes.

These are just some of the areas that a food microbiologist can work in. Nowadays, when cross-functional collaboration is encouraged, if not actively practiced, a food microbiologist may not be restricted to just one of these realms. Thus, you may find an academic professor doing research with food manufacturing companies while also providing expert advice on government regulations.

Or you may find an industry R&D professional, holding an academic position in a university while teaching students and mentoring researchers.

In summary, through involvement in academia, regulatory bodies and industries, food microbiologists play a vital role in ensuring the food we consume is both safe to eat and of high quality. Their multidisciplinary expertise in microbiology, food safety and quality assurance has a profound impact on public health, consumer confidence and the success of food companies worldwide.

Dipon Sarkar is a food safety and crisis consultant working at Victual.

With a PhD in Agriculture, specialising in predictive microbiology models for food safety applications. He has been recognised as a thought leader - winning the AIFST Young Food Microbiologist Award in 2022 - and in 2023 was the recipient of the AIFST ILSI Dr David Roberts Emerging Young Leader Award. f

Food science has long underpinned the ability of our food industry to deliver safe and nutritious food so, with a view to the future, we asked our latest Fellows and this year’s recipient of the AIFST President’s Award to respond to our question:

Q: What is the role of food science in supporting the food industry of the future?

Dr Michael Patane Business Consultant, Plantec The role of food science and scientists has been to improve food production and packaging, ensure food safety and sustainability of supply, and foster essential nutritional parameters for good health, food taste and smell great as well as having visual appeal.

The role of scientists in this field encompasses a range of disciplines from agriculture to biotechnology, chemistry, engineering, nutrition, sensory and quality.

Future trends to feed the planet, help mediate greenhouse gas production and provide foods that have health and wellness benefits for consumers are paramount. In the future, this will encompass up-cycling food waste and agricultural crops to growing food economically through fermentation.

Developing technology and scaling operations to commercialise these ambitions will require a collaborative approach involving a range of food science disciplines and trained people with the passion and enthusiasm to make them a reality.

Wendy Jarvis Food Technology Teacher, Centre for Food Trades and Culinary Arts, William Angliss Institute There’s an old saying “the only constant is change”, so our future food industry is constantly evolving and wonderfully challenging. In my experience, this has always been the situation – so all the new ‘exciting’ technologies – lab grown meat, pulsed electric field preservation, HPP, natural flavours, protein enhanced fermentations - to name just a few, to me represent just how this industry is, was and always will be.

In essence, food science is the study of food composition and

behaviour – chemistry, microbiology, nutrition, biochemistry - all the fun stuff! Providing graduates with the necessary skills to successfully apply food science knowledge and function as a food technologist has been my vocation for a quarter of a century and that is, was and always will be an amazing experience.

Professor Mark Turner Professor and Academic Senior Lead, School of Agriculture and Food Sustainability, Faculty of Science, University of Queensland The future food industry will need to continue to supply safe food that is healthier and more sustainable, catering to consumers who are increasingly wary of processed foods and climate change. Food science is essential for mitigating food safety risks and underpins the design or reformulation of the next generation of foods, using new combinations of ingredients that are healthier whilst retaining consumer appeal.

As a multidisciplinary science, food science merges broad ranging fundamental knowledge with creativity and will continue to embrace new technologies, including AI and big data analytics. It will also be important for food scientists to continue to champion the importance of an industry that plays an essential role in ensuring a safe and secure food supply.

Professor Yasmina Sultanbawa Director, Centre for Nutrition and Food Sciences, Director, ARC Training Centre for Uniquely Australian Foods, Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation (QAAFI), The University of Queensland Food science will play a critical role in supporting the future food industry to address the challenges of feeding a global population a healthy diet while also being climate resilient.

Food science will make significant

5

FAST

contributions in several areas such as product development and innovation, creating healthier, more sustainable and convenient food products. Food science also ensures the safety and quality of food products by developing rapid and robust testing methods that are cost-effective for industry adoption. Globally there would be a harmonisation of laws, food safety processes and traceability principles to promote trade and food scientists will play a key role.

Food scientists support the food industry by contributing to consumer education by translating complex scientific information into easy-tounderstand messages. In summary, food science is indispensable to the future food industry as it will address the needs of the consumer by driving innovation, sustainability, safety and quality.

Andrea Currie Head of Quality and Technical Standards, Coles Group The warming climate and growing global population require new scientific solutions to secure safe and sufficient food supply. Food technology has the capability of developing innovative food sources adapted to climate change, advancing food preservation to improve food security, optimising nutrition, and reducing food loss and waste through the supply chain. The role of appetite appeal should not be underestimated, ensuring innovative, nutritious foods are embraced by consumers, enhancing overall wellbeing.

food australia 47

CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Unlock your potential, empower excellence

GROW

LEARN

CONNECT

CHAMPION

Take your career to the next level The AIFST CPD program is designed to empower you with the knowledge and skills necessary for success in the ever evolving agrifood industry.

How do I get involved?

To be a part of the CPD Program, you just need to be an active AIFST member.

Look out for events and education opportunities offering CPD points.

Visit the AIFST website for more information.

Contact us today! www.aifst.asn.au

aifst@aifst.com.au