Cited by 180Organic Food and AgricultureFood and Agricultural SciencesFatty Acid Research and Health

Comparison of nutritional quality between conventional and organic dairy products: a meta‐analysis

Palupi, Eny, Jayanegara, Anuraga, Ploeger, Angelika, Kahl, Johannes·2012·Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture

Abstract

As a contribution to the debate on the comparison of nutritional quality between conventional versus organic products, the present study would like to provide new results on this issue specifically on dairy products by integrating the last 3 years' studies using a meta‐analysis approach with Hedges' d effect size method. The current meta‐analysis shows that organic dairy products contain significantly higher protein, ALA, total omega‐3 fatty acid, cis‐9,trans‐11 conjugated linoleic acid, trans‐11 vaccenic acid, eicosapentanoic acid, and docosapentanoic acid than those of conventional types, with cumulative effect size ( ± 95% confidence interval) of 0.56 ± 0.24, 1.74 ± 0.16, 0.84 ± 0.14, 0.68 ± 0.13, 0.51 ± 0.16, 0.42 ± 0.23, and 0.71 ± 0.3, respectively. It is also observed that organic dairy products have significantly (P < 0.001) higher omega‐3 to ‐6 ratio (0.42 vs. 0.23) and Δ9‐desaturase index (0.28 vs. 0.27) than the conventional types. The current regulation on organic farming indeed drives organic farms to production of organic dairy products with different nutritional qualities from conventional ones. The differences in feeding regime between conventional and organic dairy production is suspected as the reason behind this evidence. Further identical meta‐analysis may be best applicable for summarizing a comparison between conventional and organic foodstuffs for other aspects and food categories. Copyright © 2012 Society of Chemical Industry

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jsfa.5639

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Palupi, E., Jayanegara, A., Ploeger, A., & Kahl, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Kassel (DE)
  • IPB University (ID)
Corresponding author
Kahl, Johannes
Venue
Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-03-19
Volume
92
Issue
14
Pages
2774-2781
ISSN
  • 0022-5142 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0010
OpenAlex
W2155266820
Cited by
180
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
11.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Organic Food and Agriculture
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food and Agricultural Sciences
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Fatty Acid Research and Health
Keywords
organic dairy products, nutritional value, omega-3 fatty acids, conjugated linoleic acid, vaccenic acid, eicosapentaenoic acid, docosapentaenoic acid, n-6/n-3 ratio, organic farming regulation
MeSH terms
Animals, Cattle, Dairy Products, Dairying, Humans, Milk, Nutritive Value, Seasons, Food, Organic, Food Quality

About these checks

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

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

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

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

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