Physical Processing of Aquatic Gel Foods: From Protein Structure Regulation to Health, Sustainability, and Personalized Design

ABSTRACT

Aquatic gel foods, including surimi, minced crustacean products, and algal gels, are important platforms for aquatic protein valorization. However, their production is constrained by uneven thermal gelation, endogenous enzyme–driven deterioration, nutrient loss, additive dependence, and limited flexibility for personalized design. This review synthesizes recent advances in physical processing of aquatic gel systems from a process–structure–function perspective, comparing the mechanisms, benefits, and limitations of major technologies. The central premise is that physical energy delivery can regulate protein conformation, intermolecular interactions, water mobility, and gel network assembly, thereby affecting texture, nutritional quality, safety, and consumer acceptance. Rather than presenting technologies separately, the review groups them into non‐thermal physical fields, thermally assisted volumetric heating, and additive manufacturing. Their roles in remodeling aquatic protein and polysaccharide matrices are discussed alongside matrix‐dependent responses and implementation constraints. Available evidence suggests that, under optimized and matrix‐specific conditions, these technologies may contribute to gel network reinforcement, salt and fat reduction, nutrient retention, improved digestibility, shelf‐life extension, by‐product valorization, and personalized product development. However, overprocessing, nonuniform energy delivery, and matrix‐specific responses can offset these benefits. Reported outcomes vary with processing intensity, treatment duration, raw‐material composition, ionic conditions, and product geometry, limiting direct generalization across aquatic gel systems. Industrial translation is further constrained by fragmented mechanisms, limited quantitative structure–function relationships, insufficient scale‐up validation, inconsistent evaluation metrics, and limited life‐cycle, techno‐economic, and consumer evidence. Future work should integrate standardized assessment, online monitoring, multi‐field design, predictive modeling, and sustainability evaluation to support healthy, sustainable, and personalized aquatic gel foods.