CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 593Consumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFood and Agricultural SciencesAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact

An investigation of the formulation and nutritional composition of modern meat analogue products

Open access
Bohrer, Benjamin M.·2019·Food Science and Human Wellness
DOI 10.1016/j.fshw.2019.11.006
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Meat analogues, or plant-based products that simulate the properties of traditional meat products, have secured a position in the conversation of protein foods. Rapid growth of the meat analogue industry is occurring in the global food marketplace in both the retail and food service sectors. The purpose of this review was to investigate the ingredients used in the formulation of modern meat analogues, evaluate the nutrient specifications of modern meat analogue products, and then form a comparison with traditional meat products. Based on this investigation, it was determined – firstly, the ingredients used in the formulation of modern meat analogue products make these products fit under the classification of ultra-processed foods; and secondly, the nutrient specifications of popular meat analogue products can effectively simulate the nutrient specifications of the meat products they are attempting to simulate. Therefore, based on these findings, modern meat analogue products can offer roughly the same composition of nutrients as traditional meat products, albeit with many different ingredients and a high level of further processing.

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

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

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.fshw.2019.11.006

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

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

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

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

Self-check

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

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

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 65 · Cited by 593

Research works printed but not linked: 51

  1. M.J. Gibney, C.G. Forde, D. Mullally, et al., Ultra-processed foods in human health: a critical appraisal, Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 106 (2017) 717-724, http://dx. doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.117.160440. · DOI
  2. V.K. Joshi, S. Kumar, Meat Analogues: plant based alternatives to meat products-a review, Int. J. Food Ferment. Tech. 5 (2015) 107-119, http://dx.doi. org/10.5958/2277-9396.2016.00001.5. · DOI
  3. P. Kumar, M.K. Chatli, N. Mehta, et al., Meat analogues: health promising sustainable meat substitutes, Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Tech. 57 (2017) 923-932, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2014.939739. · DOI
  4. L.M. Keefe, #FakeMeat: how big a deal will animal meat analogs ultimately be? Anim. Front. 8 (2018) 30-37, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/af/vfy011. · DOI
  5. C.A. Monteiro, J.C. Moubarac, G. Cannon, et al., Ultra-processed products are becoming dominant in the global food system, Obes. Rev. 14 (2013) 21-28, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/obr.12107. · DOI · Paper page
  6. P. Pinstrup-Andersen, Nutrition-sensitive food systems: from rhetoric to action, Lancet 382 (2013) 375-376, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140- 6736(13)61053-3. · DOI
  7. C.A. Monteiro, G. Cannon, J.C. Moubarac, et al., The UN Decade of Nutrition, the NOVA food classification and the trouble with ultra-processing, Public Health Nutr. 21 (2018) 5-17, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1368980017000234. · DOI · Paper page
  8. J.E. Elzerman, A.C. Hoek, M.J. van Boekel, et al., Appropriateness, acceptance and sensory preferences based on visual information: a web-based survey on meat substitutes in a meal context, Food Qual. Prefer. 42 (2015) 56-65, http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2010.10.006. · DOI · Paper page
  9. K. Kyriakopoulou, B. Dekkers, A.J. van der Goot, Plant-based meat analogues, in: Sustainable Meat Production and Processing, Academic Press, 2019, pp. 103-126, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-814874-7.00006-7. · DOI
  10. F.B. Hu, Plant-based foods and prevention of cardiovascular disease: an overview, Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 78 (2003) 544S-551S, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ ajcn/78.3.544S. · DOI · Paper page
  11. R.H. Liu, Health-promoting components of fruits and vegetables in the diet, Adv. Nutr. 4 (2013) 384S-392S, http://dx.doi.org/10.3945/an.112.003517. · DOI · Paper page
  12. P.J. Tuso, M.H. Ismail, B.P. Ha, et al., Nutritional update for physicians: plant-based diets, Perm. J. 17 (2013) 61-66, http://dx.doi.org/10.7812/TPP/ 12-085. · DOI
  13. M.J. Sadler, Meat alternatives -market developments and health benefits, Trends Food Sci. Tech. 15 (2004) 250-260, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs. 2003.09.003. · DOI
  14. S. Damodaran, K.L. Parkin, Fennema's Food Chemistry, fifth edition, CRC press, 2017.
  15. M. Friedman, Nutritional value of proteins from different food sources. A review, J. Agri. Food Chem. 44 (1996) 6-29, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ jf9400167. · DOI
  16. E.A. Foegeding, J.P. Davis, Food protein functionality: a comprehensive approach, Food Hydrocolloid. 25 (2011) 1853-1864, http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.foodhyd.2011.05.008. · DOI · Paper page
  17. B.M. Bohrer, Nutrient density and nutritional value of meat products and non-meat foods high in protein, Trends Food Sci. Tech. 65 (2017) 103-112, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2017.04.016. · DOI
  18. S. Huang, L.M. Wang, T. Sivendiran, et al., Amino acid concentration of high protein food products and an overview of the current methods used to determine protein quality, Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 58 (2018) 2673-2678, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2017.1396202. · DOI
  19. V.R. Young, P.L. Pellett, Plant proteins in relation to human protein and amino acid nutrition, Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 59 (1994) 1203S-1212S, http://dx.doi.org/10. 1093/ajcn/59.5.1203S. · DOI · Paper page
  20. J.W. Anderson, B.M. Johnstone, M.E. Cook-Newell, Meta-analysis of the effects of soy protein intake on serum lipids, New Engl. J. Med. 333 (1995) 276-282, http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/nejm199508033330502. · DOI · Paper page
  21. C.W. Xiao, Health effects of soy protein and isoflavones in humans, J. Nutr. 138 (2008) 1244S-1249S, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jn/138.6.1244S. · DOI
  22. M. Friedman, D.L. Brandon, Nutritional and health benefits of soy proteins, J. Agric. Food Chem. 49 (2001) 1069-1086, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf0009246. · DOI
  23. S. Huang, S.M. Vasquez Mejía, S.J. Murch, et al., Cooking loss, texture properties, and color of comminuted beef prepared with breadfruit (Artocarpus altilis) flour, Meat Musc. Biol. 3 (2019) 231-243, http://dx.doi. org/10.22175/mmb2018.11.0039. · DOI
  24. O.P. Malav, S. Talukder, P. Gokulakrishnan, et al., Meat analog: a review, Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 55 (2015) 1241-1245, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 10408398.2012.689381. · DOI
  25. I.J. Joye, Protein digestibility of cereal proteins, Foods 8 (2019) 199, http://dx. doi.org/10.3390/foods8060199. · DOI
  26. C. Mota, M. Santos, R. Mauro, et al., Protein content and amino acids profile of pseudocereals, Food Chem. 193 (2016) 55-61, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. foodchem.2014.11.043. · DOI
  27. M.G. Nosworthy, J.D. House, Factors influencing the quality of dietary proteins: implications for pulses, Cereal Chem. 94 (2017) 49-57, http://dx.doi. org/10.1094/cchem-04-16-0104-fi. · DOI
  28. E. Derbyshire, K.T. Ayoob, Mycoprotein: nutritional and health properties, Nutr. Today 54 (2019) 7-15, http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/NT. 0000000000000316. · DOI
  29. T.J.A. Finnigan, Mycoprotein: Origins, Production and Properties. In Handbook of Food Proteins, Woodhead Publishing, 2011, pp. 335-352, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1533/9780857093639.335. · DOI
  30. D.G. Edwards, J.H. Cummings, The protein quality of mycoprotein, Proc. Nutr. Soc. 69 (2010) E331, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0029665110001400. · DOI
  31. R.M. Krauss, R.J. Deckelbaum, N. Ernst, et al., Dietary guidelines for healthy American adults: a statement for health professionals from the Nutrition Committee, American Heart Association, Circulation 94 (1996) 1795-1800, http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.94.7.1795. · DOI
  32. L.J. Appel, M.W. Brands, S.R. Daniels, et al., Dietary approaches to prevent and treat hypertension: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association, Hypertension 47 (2006) 296-308, http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01. hyp.0000202568.01167.b6. · DOI · Paper page
  33. F.M. Sacks, A.H. Lichtenstein, J.H. Wu, et al., Dietary fats and cardiovascular disease: a presidential advisory from the American Heart Association, Circulation 136 (2017) e1-e23, http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIR. 0000000000000510. · DOI · Paper page
  34. N.G. Forouhi, R.M. Krauss, G. Taubes, et al., Dietary fat and cardiometabolic health: evidence, controversies, and consensus for guidance, Br. Med. J. 361 (2018) k2139, http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k2139. · DOI
  35. D.S. Ludwig, W.C. Willett, J.S. Volek, et al., Dietary fat: From foe to friend? Science 362 (2018) 764-770, http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2096. · DOI
  36. C.J. Field, L. Robinson, Dietary fats, Adv. Nutr. 10 (2019) 722-724, http://dx. doi.org/10.1093/advances/nmz052. · DOI
  37. K. Chowdhury, L.A. Banu, S. Khan, et al., Studies on the fatty acid composition of edible oil, Bangladesh J. Sci. Ind. Res. 42 (2007) 311-316, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.3329/bjsir.v42i3.669. · DOI
  38. R.C. Zambiazi, R. Przybylski, M.W. Zambiazi, et al., Fatty acid composition of vegetable oils and fats, Bol. Do Cent. Pesqui. Process. Aliment. 25 (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/cep.v25i1.8399. · DOI
  39. R. Tarté (Ed.), INgredients in Meat Products: Properties, Functionality and Applications, Springer Science & Business Media, 2009.
  40. D. Topping, Cereal complex carbohydrates and their contribution to human health, J. Cereal Sci. 46 (2007) 220-229, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcs.2007. 06.004. · DOI
  41. M. Viuda-Martos, M.C. López-Marcos, J. Fernández-López, et al., Role of fiber in cardiovascular diseases: a review, Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 9 (2010) 240-258, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2009.00102.x. · DOI
  42. V. Schuh, K. Allard, K. Herrmann, et al., Impact of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) on functional characteristics of emulsified sausages, Meat Sci. 93 (2013) 240-247, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.meatsci.2012.08.025. · DOI
  43. D.J. Jenkins, T.M. Wolever, A.R. Leeds, et al., Dietary fibres, fibre analogues, and glucose tolerance: importance of viscosity, Br. Med. J. 1 (1978) 1392-1394, http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.1.6124.1392. · DOI
  44. D.L. Topping, D. Oakenfull, R.P. Trimble, et al., A viscous fibre (methylcellulose) lowers blood glucose and plasma triacylglycerols and increases liver glycogen independently of volatile fatty acid production in the rat, Brit. J. Nutr. 59 (1988) 21-30, http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/BJN19880006. · DOI
  45. K.C. Maki, M.L. Carson, M.P. Miller, et al., Hydroxypropylmethylcellulose and methylcellulose consumption reduce postprandial insulinemia in overweight and obese men and women, J. Nutr. 138 (2008) 292-296, http://dx.doi.org/10. 1093/jn/138.2.292. · DOI
  46. D.B. Watson, Public health and carrageenan regulation: a review and analysis, in: Nineteenth International Seaweed Symposium, Springer, Dordrecht, 2007, pp. 55-63.
  47. D. Asioli, J. Aschemann-Witzel, V. Caputo, et al., Making sense of the "clean label" trends: a review of consumer food choice behavior and discussion of industry implications, Food Res. Int. 99 (2017) 58-71, http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.foodres.2017.07.022. · DOI
  48. A.V.A. Resurreccion, Sensory aspects of consumer choices for meat and meat products, Meat Sci. 66 (2004) 11-20, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0309- 1740(03)00021-4. · DOI
  49. R.A. Mancini, M. Hunt, Current research in meat color, Meat Sci. 71 (2005) 100-121, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.03.003. · DOI
  50. R.Z. Fraser, M. Shitut, P. Agrawal, et al., Safety evaluation of soy leghemoglobin protein preparation derived from Pichia pastoris, intended for use as a flavor catalyst in plant-based meat, Int. J. Toxicol. 37 (2018) (2018) 241-262, https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1091581818766318. · DOI
  51. J.W. Anderson, P. Baird, R.H. Davis, et al., Health benefits of dietary fiber Nutr. Rev. 67 (2009) 188-205, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2009.00189.x. · DOI · Paper page

Authors
Bohrer, B. M.
Affiliations
University of Guelph (CA)
Corresponding author
Bohrer, Benjamin M.
ORCID
Bohrer, Benjamin M.
Venue
Food Science and Human Wellness
Publisher
Tsinghua University Press
Published
2019-12
Volume
8
Issue
4
Pages
320-329
ISSN
  • 2097-0765 (ISSN-L)
  • 2213-4530
DOI
10.1016/j.fshw.2019.11.006
OpenAlex
W2991426791
Cited by
593
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 57 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 120 · 2023: 129 · 2022: 112 · 2021: 63 · 2020: 20
FWCI
44.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Food Science and Human Wellness (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food and Agricultural Sciences
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Keywords
meat substitutes, plant-based meat, food formulation, nutritional composition, ultra-processed foods, protein-rich foods, food ingredients

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