Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Current situation and future prospects for beef production in Europe - A review

  • Received : 2018.03.11
  • Accepted : 2018.04.26
  • Published : 2018.07.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The European Union (EU) is the world's third largest producer of beef. This contributes to the economy, rural development, social life, culture and gastronomy of Europe. The diversity of breeds, animal types (cows, bulls, steers, heifers) and farming systems (intensive, extensive on permanent or temporary pastures, mixed, breeders, feeders, etc) is a strength, and a weakness as the industry is often fragmented and poorly connected. There are also societal concerns regarding animal welfare and environmental issues, despite some positive environmental impacts of farming systems. The EU is amongst the most efficient for beef production as demonstrated by a relative low production of greenhouse gases. Due to regional differences in terms of climate, pasture availability, livestock practices and farms characteristics, productivity and incomes of beef producers vary widely across regions, being among the lowest of the agricultural systems. The beef industry is facing unprecedented challenges related to animal welfare, environmental impact, origin, authenticity, nutritional benefits and eating quality of beef. These may affect the whole industry, especially its farmers. It is therefore essential to bring the beef industry together to spread best practice and better exploit research to maintain and develop an economically viable and sustainable beef industry. Meeting consumers' expectations may be achieved by a better prediction of beef palatability using a modelling approach, such as in Australia. There is a need for accurate information and dissemination on the benefits and issues of beef for human health and for environmental impact. A better objective description of goods and services derived from livestock farming is also required. Putting into practice "agroecology" and organic farming principles are other potential avenues for the future. Different future scenarios can be written depending on the major driving forces, notably meat consumption, climate change, environmental policies and future organization of the supply chain.

Keywords

References

  1. FAPRI. US and World Agricultural Outlook [Internet]. Ames, IA and Columbia, MO, USA: Iowa State University and University of Missouri; 2012 [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://www.fapri.iastate.edu/outlook/2012/.
  2. Metzger MJ, Murray-Rust D, Houtkamp J, et al. How do Europeans want to live in 2040? Citizen visions and their consequences for European land use. Reg Environ Change 2018;18:789-802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1091-3
  3. Gerber PJ, Steinfeld H, Henderson B, et al. Tackling climate change through livestock - A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); 2013.
  4. Ryschawy J, Disenhaus C, Bertrand S, et al. Assessing multiple goods and services derived from livestock farming on a nationwide gradient. Animal 2017;11:1861-72. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731117000829
  5. Bouvard V, Loomis D, Guyton KZ, et al. International agency for research on cancer monograph working group. Carcinogenicity of consumption of red and processed meat. Lancet Oncol 2015;16:1599-600. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00444-1
  6. Li C. The role of beef in human nutrition and health. In: Dikeman E, editor. Ensuring safety and quality in the production of beef. Volume 2: Quality. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing Limited; 2017. p. 329-38.
  7. Regan A, Marcu A, Shan LC, Wall P, Barnett J, McConnon A. Conceptualising responsibility in the aftermath of the horsemeat adulteration incident: an online study with Irish and UK consumers. Health Risk Soc 2015;17:149-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2015.1030367
  8. Barnett J, Begen F, Howes S, et al. Consumers' confidence, reflections and response strategies following the horsemeat incident. Food Control 2016;59:721-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2015.06.021
  9. Farmer LJ, Straif K, De Smet S, et al. Report of the workshop "Sustainable beef quality for Europe II - A workshop for industry and scientists" [Internet]. Viandes & Produits Carnes 2017;33:VPC-2017-33-2-8 [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://www.viandesetproduitscarnes.fr/index.php/fr/845-compte-rendu-du-second-congres-intitule-qualite-durablede-la-viande-bovine-en-europe
  10. Ihle R, Dries L, Jongeneel R, Venus T, Wesseler J. Research for agri-committee - The EU cattle sector: challenges and opportunities - milk and meat. European Parliament, Directorategeneral for internal policies. Policy department B: structural and cohesion policies agricultural and rural development [Internet]. European Parliament Committees; 2017 [cited 2018 April 24]. Available from: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/supporting-analyses
  11. Lherm M, Agabriel J, Devun J. Status and trends of suckler beef production in France and in three European countries. In: Agabriel J, Renand G, Baumont R, editors. Suckler beef production. Paris, France: Dossier, INRA Productions Animales; 2017;30:93-106.
  12. Henchion M, DeE Backer CJS, Hudders L. Ethical and sustainable aspects of meat production; consumer perceptions and system credibility. In: Purslow P, editor. New aspects of meat quality - from genes to ethics. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead publishing Limited; 2017. p. 649-66.
  13. Hocquette JF. Is in vitro meat the solution for the future? Meat Sci 2016;120:167-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.036
  14. Scollan ND, Dannenberger D, Nuernberg K, et al. Enhancing the nutritional and health value of beef lipids and their relationship with meat quality. Meat Sci 2014;97:384-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.02.015
  15. Hocquette JF, Van Wezemael L, Chriki S, et al. Modelling of beef sensory quality for a better prediction of palatability. Meat Sci 2014;97:316-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.07.031
  16. Troy DJ, Kerry JP. Consumer perception and the role of science in the meat industry. Meat Sci 2010;86:214-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.05.009
  17. Patou-Mathis M. Meat eaters. From prehistory to nowadays. Paris, France: Editions Perrin; 2009. 408 p.
  18. Polkinghorne RJ, Thompson JM. Meat standards and grading. A world view. Meat Sci 2010;86:227-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.05.010
  19. Ranganathan J, Vennard D, Wate R, Lipinski B, et al. Shifting diets for a sustainable food future. Working paper, installment 11 of creating a sustainable food future [Internet]. Washington, DC, USA: World Resources Institute; 2016 [cited 2018 April 24]. Available from: http://www.worldresourcesreport.org.
  20. Van Huis A. New sources of animal proteins: edible insects. In: Purslow P, editor. New aspects of meat quality - from genes to ethics. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing Limited; 2017. pp. 443-61.
  21. Leroy F, Praet I. Animal killing and postdomestic meat production. J Agric Environ Ethic 2017:30:67-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-017-9654-y
  22. Chapouthier G. Respect for animals through the ages: from mere objects to sentient beings. Bull Acad Vet France 2009;162:5-12 (in French).
  23. Wolff F. Legal and moral consequences of the non-existence of the animal. Pouvoirs; 2009;131:135-47. https://doi.org/10.3917/pouv.131.0135
  24. Collectif CIV, Viande, Sciences et Societe. Animal, meat and society: the relation is dying out [Internet]. Viandes Prod Carnes 2017;VPC-2017-33-1-5 (in French) [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://www.viandesetproduitscarnes.fr/index.php/fr/810-animal-viande-et-societe-des-liens-qui-seffilochent
  25. Veysset P, Benoit M, Laignel G, et al. Analysis and determinants of the performances evolution of sheep for meat and suckler cattle farms in less favored areas from 1990 to 2012. INRA Prod Anim 2014;27:49-64.
  26. European Commission. Prospects for Agricultural Markets and Income in the EU 2013-2023 [Internet]. Brussels: European Commission; 2013 [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/markets-and-prices/medium-termoutlook_en
  27. Holm L, Mohl M. The role of meat in everyday food culture: An analysis of an interview study in Copenhagen. Appetite 2000;34:277-83. https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.2000.0324
  28. Font-I-Furnols M, Guerrero L. Consumer preference, behavior and perception about meat and meat products: an overview. Meat Sci 2014;98:361-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.06.025
  29. Stanciu S. Horse Meat consumption - between scandal and reality. Procedia Econ Finance 2015;23:697-703. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00392-5
  30. Moyer DC, DeVries JW, Spink J. The economics of a food fraud incident - Case studies and examples including Melamine in Wheat Gluten. Food Control 2017;71:358-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.07.015
  31. Sheffield H. Processed meat and cancer link eats ${\pounds}3m$ in sausage and bacon sales [Internet]. The Independent, Monday 23 November 2015 [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/processedmeat-and-cancer-link-eats-3m-in-sausage-and-baconsales-a6744806.html
  32. Fortune A. 2016. Volume sales of red meat suffer decline [Internet]. Crawley, UK: Meat Trades Journal, 17 Mar 2016 [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://meatinfo.co.uk/news/fullstory.php/aid/19475/Volume_sales_of_red_meat_suffer_decline.html
  33. Laisney C. Vegetarianism and flexitarism, emerging tendencies? How to understand the phenomenon, its evolution in the pass and planning its future? [Internet] Viandes Prod Carnes 2016; VPC-2016-32-4-2. [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://viandesetproduitscarnes.com/index.php/fr/nutrition2/778-vegetarisme-et-flexitarisme-une-tendance-emergente
  34. Laisney C. Social differences in diet. Centre D'etudes et de Prospective, Analyse 2013;64.
  35. NIAA. Living in a world of decreasing resources and increasing regulation: how to advance animal agriculture. In: Annual Conference of the National Institute for Animal Agriculture; 2012 Mar 26-29. Colorado Springs, USA; 2012 [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://www.animalagriculture.org/solutions/proceedings/annualconference/2012/whitepaper.pdf
  36. Bhat ZF, Kumar S, Bhat HF. In vitro meat: a future animal-free harvest. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2017;57:782-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2014.924899
  37. Le Mouel C, Marajo-Petitzon E, Dumas P, et al. How to feed the World: Is reducing meat consumption part of the solution. In: International Congress of Meat Science and Technology; 2015, Aug 23-28. Clermont-Ferrand, France; 2015 [cited 2018 April 24]. Available from: https://colloque.inra.fr/icomst2015/content/download/6384/73051/version/1/file/LE+MOUEL_slides.pdf
  38. van Zanten HHE, Meerburg BG, Bikker P, Herrero M, de Boer IJM. Opinion paper: The role of livestock in a sustainable diet: a land-use perspective. Animal 2016;10:547-49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731115002694
  39. Bonny SPF, Gardner GE, Pethick DW, Hocquette JF. What is Artificial Meat and what does it mean for the future of the meat industry? J Integr Agric 2015;14:255-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60888-1
  40. WHO, Fact Sheet No 394 on "Healthy Diet" [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; September 2015; [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs394/en/
  41. WHO, Q&A on the carcinogenicity of the consumption of red meat and processed meat [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; October 2015; [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://www.who.int/features/qa/cancerred-meat/en/
  42. WHO, Q&A: What is the recommended food for children in their very early years? [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; July 2011 [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://www.who.int/features/qa/57/en/
  43. Jeremiah LE, Dugan MER, Aalhus JL, Gibson LL. Assessment of the chemical and cooking properties of the major beef muscles and muscle groups. Meat Sci 2003;65:985-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(02)00308-X
  44. Ahhmed AM, Muguruma M. A review of meat protein hydrolysates and hypertension. Meat Sci 2010;86:110-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.04.032
  45. Stadnik J, Keska P. Meat and fermented meat products as a source of bioactive peptides. Acta Sci Pol Technol Aliment 2015;14:181-90. https://doi.org/10.17306/J.AFS.2015.3.19
  46. Decker EA, Park Y. Healthier meat products as functional foods. Meat Sci 2014;86:49-55.
  47. Geay Y, Bauchart D, Hocquette JF, Culioli J. Effect of nutritional factors on biochemical, structural and metabolic characteristics of muscles in ruminants; consequences on dietetic value and sensorial qualities of meat. Reprod Nutr Dev 2001;41:1-26. Erratum, 2001;41:377. https://doi.org/10.1051/rnd:2001108
  48. Amit M. Vegetarian diets in children and adolescents. Paediatr Child Health 2010;15:303-14.
  49. Farmer LJ, Bowe R, Troy DT, et al. Report of the workshop "Sustainable beef quality for Europe - A workshop for industry and scientists" [Internet]. Viandes Prod Carnes 2016;32: VPC-2016-2032-2011-2016 [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://viandesetproduitscarnes.com/index.php/fr/125-process-viande-bovine-ovine-caprine-equine/721-compterendu-du-congres-intitule-qualite-durable-de-la-viande-bovineen-europe
  50. Farmer LJ, Farrell DT. Beef eating quality - a European journey. Animal 2018 Mar 11 [in press]. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731118001672
  51. Hocquette JF, Botreau R, Picard B, et al. Opportunities for predicting and manipulating beef quality. Meat Sci 2012;92:197-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.007
  52. Thaler RH. Transaction utility theory. Adv Consum Res 1983;10:296-301
  53. Thaler RH. Mental accounting and consumer choice. Mark Sci 1985;4-3:199-214.
  54. Normand J, Rubat E, Evrat-Georgel C, Turin F, Denoyelle C. A national survey of beef tenderness in France [Internet]. Viandes Prod Carnes 2014;VPC-2014-30-5-2 [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://www.viandesetproduitscarnes.fr/phocadownload/vpc_vol_30/3052_normand_enquete_nationale_tendrete.pdf
  55. Gouin S. Quality of meat products: what kind of marketing to create an added-value? [Internet]. Viandes Prod Carnes 2014; VPC-2014-30-6-8 [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://www.viandesetproduitscarnes.fr/phocadownload/vpc_vol_30/3068_gouin_qualite_produits_animaux_et_marketing.pdf
  56. Scollan ND, Greenwood PL, Newbold CJ, et al. Future research priorities for animal production in a changing world. Anim Prod Sci 2011;51:1-5. https://doi.org/10.1071/AN10051
  57. Pethick DW, Thompson J, Polkinghorne R, et al. Beef and Lamb carcass grading to underpin consumer satisfaction [Internet]. Viandes Prod Carnes 2015 ; VPC-2015-31-4-3 [cited 2018 April 24]. Available from: http://www.viandesetproduitscarnes.fr/phocadownload/vpc_vol_31/3143_hocquette_prediction_qualite_viande_ruminants.pdf
  58. Bonny SPF, Pethick DW, Legrand I, et al. European conformation and fat scores have no relationship with eating quality. Animal 2016;10:996-1006. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731115002839
  59. Bonny SPF, Hocquette J-F, Pethick DW, et al. The variability of the eating quality of European beef can be reduced by predicting consumer satisfaction. Animal 2018;2:1-9.
  60. Hocquette JF, Botreau R, Legrand I, et al. Win-win strategies for high beef quality, consumer satisfaction, and farm efficiency, low environmental impacts and improved animal welfare. Anim Prod Sci 2014;54:1537-48. https://doi.org/10.1071/AN14210
  61. Farmer LJ, Devlin DJ, Gault NFS, et al. Prediction of eating quality using the Meat Standards Australia system for Northern Ireland beef and consumers. In: International Congress on Meat Science and Technology, Copenhagen, 2009 August 16-21; 2009. pp. PE7-34.
  62. Farmer LJ, Devlin DJ, Gault NFS, et al. Effect of type and extent of cooking on the eating quality of Northern Ireland beef. In: International Congress on Meat Science and Technology, Copenhagen, 2009 Aug 16-21; 2009. pp. PE7-33.
  63. Legrand I, Hocquette JF, Polkinghorne RJ, Pethick DW. Prediction of beef eating quality in France using the Meat Standards Australia system. Animal 2013;7:524-9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731112001553
  64. Guzek D, Glabska D, Gutkowska K, et al. Influence of cut and thermal treatment on consumer perception of bee fin Polish trials. Pak J Agric Sci 2015;52:533-8.
  65. Thompson JM, Polkinghorne R, Hwang IH, et al. Beef quality grades as determined by Korean and Australian consumers. Aust J Exp Agric 2008;48:1380-8. https://doi.org/10.1071/EA05111
  66. Hwang IH, Polkinghorne R, Lee JM, Thompson JM. Demographic and design effects on beef sensory scores given by Korean and Australian consumers. Aust J Exp Agric 2008;48:1387-95. https://doi.org/10.1071/EA05113
  67. Polkinghorne RJ, Nishimura T, Neath KE, Watson R. Japanese consumer categorisation of beef into quality grades, based on Meat Standards Australia methodology. Anim Sci J 2011;82:325-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-0929.2010.00825.x
  68. Meat and Livestock Australia. Meat Standards Australia Annual Outcomes. 2016. Report 2015-16 [Internet]. Sydney, Australia: Meat Livestock Australia [cited 2018 April 24]. Available from https://www.mla.com.au/marketing-beefand-lamb/meat-standards-australia/msa-beef/msa-annualoutcomes-report-2015-16/
  69. Lynch DH, Sumner J, Martin RC. Framing the social, ecological and economic goods and services derived from organic agriculture in the Canadian context. In: Bellon S, Penvern S, editors. Organic farming, prototype for sustainable agricultures. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer Netherlands, Springer; 2014. p. 347-65.
  70. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Ecosystem goods and services in development planning: a good practice guide. Montreal; 2010. 80+iv pages.
  71. Lesschen JP, van den Berg M, Westhoek HJ, Witzke HP, Oenema O. Greenhouse gas emission profiles of European livestock sectors. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2011;166-167:16-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.04.058
  72. Cerles A, Agabriel J, Lherm M, Poux X. Foresight study of ruminant meat sector in the Massif Central area of France in 2050 [Internet]. Viandes Prod Carnes 2017; VPC-2017-33-2-2 (in French) [cited 2018 Apr 24]. Available from: http://viandesetproduitscarnes.com/index.php/fr/113-resumesdes-articles-economie/827-etude-prospective-des-filieresviande-de-ruminants-du-massif-central-a-l-horizon-2050
  73. Dumont B, Fortun-Lamothe L, Jouven M, Thomas M. Prospects from agroecology and industrial ecology for animal production in the 21st century. Animal 2013;7:1028-43. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731112002418
  74. Hyland JJ, Henchion M, McCarthy M, McCarthy SN. The role of meat in strategies to achieve a sustainable diet lower in greenhouse gas emissions: a review. Meat Sci 2017;132:189-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.04.014
  75. de Boer J, Schosler H, Aiking H. "Meatless days" or "less but better"? Exploring strategies to adapt Western meat consumption to health and sustainability challenges. Appetite 2014;76:120-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.02.002
  76. Ellies Oury MP, Cantalapiedra Hijar G, Durand D, et al. An innovative approach combining animal performances, nutritional value and sensory quality of meat. Meat Sci 2016;122:163-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.08.004

Cited by

  1. The alternative approach of low temperature-long time cooking on bovine semitendinosus meat quality vol.32, pp.2, 2019, https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.18.0347
  2. Precaution in Introducing Double-Muscled Exotic Breeds into Indonesian Cattle Population vol.207, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/207/1/012022
  3. Epidemiological Survey and Retrospective Analysis of Salmonella Infections between 2000 and 2017 in Warmia and Masuria Voivodship in Poland vol.55, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina55030074
  4. Health, behaviour and growth performance of Charolais and Limousin bulls fattened on different types of flooring vol.13, pp.11, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1017/s175173111900106x
  5. The economic impact of diversification into agritourism vol.23, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.22434/ifamr2020.0076
  6. Beef quality indicators and their dependence on keeping technology of bull calves of different genotypes vol.5, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3934/agrfood.2020.1.20
  7. Various Statistical Approaches to Assess and Predict Carcass and Meat Quality Traits vol.9, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9040525
  8. Environmental Impacts of Beef as Corrected for the Provision of Ecosystem Services vol.12, pp.9, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093828
  9. Effects of A Concentrate Rich in Agro-Industrial By-Products on Productivity Results, Carcass Characteristics and Meat Quality Traits of Finishing Heifers vol.10, pp.8, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081311
  10. Validation of a beef cattle maternal breeding objective based on a cross-sectional analysis of a large national cattle database vol.98, pp.11, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skaa322
  11. Evaluation of Greek Cattle Carcass Characteristics (Carcass Weight and Age of Slaughter) Based on SEUROP Classification System vol.9, pp.12, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9121764
  12. Determination of rearing practices combinations increasing the carcase weight according to the heifers slaughter age by the decision tree method vol.20, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051x.2021.1988738
  13. Are Marbling and the Prediction of Beef Eating Quality Affected by Different Grading Sites? vol.8, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.611153
  14. The Welfare of Beef Cattle in the Scientific Literature From 1990 to 2019: A Text Mining Approach vol.7, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.588749
  15. Animal food products: policy, market and social issues and their influence on demand and supply of meat vol.80, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0029665120007971
  16. Implementation of management recommendations in unweaned dairy calves in western Germany and associated challenges vol.104, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2020-19829
  17. A Retrospective, Observational Study on Antimicrobial Drug Use in Beef Fattening Operations in Northwestern Italy and Evaluation of Risk Factors Associated with Increased Antimicrobial Usage vol.11, pp.7, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11071925
  18. Tree Canopy Management Affects Dynamics of Herbaceous Vegetation and Soil Moisture in Silvopasture Systems Using Arboreal Legumes vol.11, pp.8, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11081509
  19. Friend and foe? The effects of grassland management on global patterns of spider diversity vol.46, pp.5, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1111/een.13065
  20. Biosecurity at Cattle Farms: Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats vol.10, pp.10, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10101315
  21. Animal board invited review - Beef for future: technologies for a sustainable and profitable beef industry vol.15, pp.11, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2021.100358
  22. Review: An overview of beef production from pasture and feedlot globally, as demand for beef and the need for sustainable practices increase vol.15, pp.suppl1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2021.100295
  23. Bacterial quality and safety of raw beef: A comparison between Finland and Nigeria vol.100, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fm.2021.103860
  24. Evaluating environmental and economic trade-offs in cattle feed strategies using multiobjective optimization vol.195, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103308
  25. Towards an integration of pre- and post-slaughter factors affecting the eating quality of beef vol.255, pp.None, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2021.104795
  26. Review of factors affecting consumer acceptance of cultured meat vol.170, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105829