Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

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

DOI QR Code

Status of meat alternatives and their potential role in the future meat market - A review

  • Lee, Hyun Jung (Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, Center for Food and Bioconvergence, and Research Institute of Agriculture and Life Science, Seoul National University) ;
  • Yong, Hae In (Research Group of Food Processing, Korea Food Research Institute) ;
  • Kim, Minsu (Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, Center for Food and Bioconvergence, and Research Institute of Agriculture and Life Science, Seoul National University) ;
  • Choi, Yun-Sang (Research Group of Food Processing, Korea Food Research Institute) ;
  • Jo, Cheorun (Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, Center for Food and Bioconvergence, and Research Institute of Agriculture and Life Science, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2020.06.19
  • Accepted : 2020.07.20
  • Published : 2020.10.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Plant-based meat analogues, edible insects, and cultured meat are promising major meat alternatives that can be used as protein sources in the future. It is also believed that the importance of meat alternatives will continue to increase because of concerns on limited sustainability of the traditional meat production system. The meat alternatives are expected to have different roles based on their different benefits and limitations. Plant-based meat analogues and edible insects can replace traditional meat as a good protein source from the perspective of nutritional value. Furthermore, plant-based meat can be made available to a wide range of consumers (e.g., as vegetarian or halal food products). However, despite ongoing technical developments, their palatability, including appearance, flavor, and texture, is still different from the consumers' standard established from livestock-based traditional meat. Meanwhile, cultured meat is the only method to produce actual animal muscle-based meat; therefore, the final product is more meat-like compared to other meat analogues. However, technical difficulties, especially in mass production and cost, remain before it can be commercialized. Nevertheless, these meat alternatives can be a part of our future protein sources while maintaining a complementary relationship with traditional meat.

Keywords

References

  1. Alexander P, Brown C, Arneth A, et al. Could consumption of insects, cultured meat or imitation meat reduce global agricultural land use? Glob Food Sec 2017;15:22-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.04.001
  2. Fiddes, N. Meat: A natural symbol. 1st ed. New York, USA: Routledge; 2004.
  3. Pereira PMDCC, Vicente AFDRB. Meat nutritional composition and nutritive role in the human diet. Meat Sci 2013;93:586-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.09.018
  4. Elmadfa I, Meyer AL. Animal proteins as important contributors to a healthy human diet. Annu Rev Anim Biosci 2017; 5:111-31. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-animal-022516-022943
  5. de Smet S, Vossen E. Meat: The balance between nutrition and health. A review. Meat Sci 2016;120:145-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.008
  6. Williams P. Nutritional composition of red meat. Nutr Diet 2007;64:S113-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-0080.2007.00197.x
  7. 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
  8. Leroy F, Praet I. Meat traditions. The co-evolution of humans and meat. Appetite 2015;90:200-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.03.014
  9. Seleshe S, Jo C, Lee M. Meat consumption culture in Ethiopia. Korean J Food Sci An 2014;34:7-13. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2014.34.1.7
  10. 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
  11. Bryant C, Barnett J. Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: a systematic review. Meat sci 2018;143:8-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.04.008
  12. Nam KC, Jo C, Lee M. Meat products and consumption culture in the East. Meat Sci 2010;86:95-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.04.026
  13. Asgar MA, Fazilah A, Huda N, Bhat R, Karim AA. Nonmeat protein alternatives as meat extenders and meat analogs. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 2010;9:513-29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2010.00124.x
  14. Bohrer BM. An investigation of the formulation and nutritional composition of modern meat analogue products. Food Sci Hum Wellness 2019;8:320-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fshw.2019.11.006
  15. Shurtleff W, Aoyagi A. History of meat alternatives (965 CE to 2014). 1st ed. Lafayette CA, USA: Soyinfo Center; 2014.
  16. Joshi VK, Kumar S. Meat Analogues: Plant based alternatives to meat products-a review. Int J Food Ferment Technol 2015; 5:107-19. https://doi.org/10.5958/2277-9396.2016.00001.5
  17. Tabe L, Higgins TJV. Engineering plant protein composition for improved nutrition. Trends Plant Sci 1998;3:282-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1360-1385(98)01267-9
  18. Malav OP, Talukder S, Gokulakrishnan P, Chand S. Meat analog: a review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2015;55:1241-5. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2012.689381
  19. Liu X, Zhang X, Zhu C, Wang J. Nutrition and health function of soybean drawing protein and its application in food. In: Proceedings of the 2017 6th International Conference on Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development; 2017 Mar 11-12; Zhuhai, China: Atlantis Press; 2017. pp. 581.
  20. Dekkers BL, Boom RM, van der Goot AJ. Structuring processes for meat analogues. Trends Food Sci Technol 2018; 81:25-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.08.011
  21. Kim CJ. Development of meat substitutes using vegetable protein. In: Proceedings of the EASDL Conference 2005; 2005 Apr 30; Chonan, Korea: The East Asian Society of Dietary Life; 2005. pp. 75.
  22. Tziva M, Negro SO, Kalfagianni A, Hekkert MP. Understanding the protein transition: the rise of plant-based meat substitutes. Environ Innov Soc Transit 2020;35:217-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.09.004
  23. Alam MS, Kaur J, Khaira H, Gupta K. Extrusion and extruded products: changes in quality attributes as affected by extrusion process parameters: a review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2016;56:445-73. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2013.779568
  24. Samard S, Ryu GH. A comparison of physicochemical characteristics, texture, and structure of meat analogue and meats. J Sci Food Agric 2019;99:2708-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.9438
  25. Mottram DS. Flavour formation in meat and meat products: a review. Food Chem 1998;62:415-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-8146(98)00076-4
  26. Kyriakopoulou K, Dekkers B, van der Goot AJ. Plant-based meat analogues. In: CM Galanakis, editors. London UK: Sustainable Meat Production and Processing Academic Press; 2019. p. 103-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-814874-7.00006-7
  27. 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
  28. Suman SP, Joseph P. Myoglobin chemistry and meat color. Annu Rev Food Sci Technol 2013;4:79-99. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-food-030212-182623
  29. Goldstein B, Moses R, Sammons N, Birkved M. Potential to curb the environmental burdens of American beef consumption using a novel plant-based beef substitute. PloS one 2017; 12:e0189029. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189029
  30. Fraser RZ, Shitut M, Agrawal P, Mendes O, Klapholz S. 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 2018;37:241-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091581818766318
  31. Jeong JY, Jo C. Utilization of meat substitutes and materials in the meat and meat processing industry. Food Sci Anim Resour Ind 2018;7:2-11.
  32. Sadler MJ. Meat alternatives - market developments and health benefits. Trends Food Sci Technol 2004;15:250-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2003.09.003
  33. Stork NE. How many species of insects and other terrestrial arthropods are there on Earth? Annu Rev Entomol 2018; 63:31-45. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-020117-043348
  34. de Carvalho NM, Madureira AR, Pintado ME. The potential of insects as food sources-a review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2019 Dec 23 [Epub]. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2019.1703170
  35. Kourimska L, Adamkova A. Nutritional and sensory quality of edible insects. NFS J 2016;4:22-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nfs.2016.07.001
  36. Kim TK, Yong HI, Jeong CH, et al. Technical functional properties of water- and salt-soluble proteins extracted from edible insects. Food Sci Anim Resour 2019;39:643-54. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2019.e56
  37. Kim TK, Yong HI, Kim YB, Kim HW, Choi YS. Edible insects as a protein source: a review of public perception, processing technology, and research trends. Food Sci Anim Resour 2019; 39:521-40. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2019.e53
  38. Pippinato L, Gasco L, Di Vita G, Mancuso T. Current scenario in the European edible-insect industry: a preliminary study. J Insects Food Feed 2020 Apr 17 [Epub]. https://doi.org/10.3920/JIFF2020.0008
  39. de Gier S, Verhoeckx K. Insect (food) allergy and allergens. Mol Immunol 2018;100:82-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molimm.2018.03.015
  40. Jongema Y. List of edible insects of the world [internet]. Wageningen University Research; c2017. [Cited 2020 Jun 5]. Available from: https://www.wur.nl/en/Research-Results/ Chair-groups/Plant-Sciences/Laboratory-of-Entomology/Edible-insects/Worldwide-species-list.htm
  41. Looy H, Dunkel FV, Wood JR. How then shall we eat? Insect-eating attitudes and sustainable foodways. Agric Hum Values 2014;31:131-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-013-9450-x
  42. Dobermann D, Swift JA, Field LM. Opportunities and hurdles of edible insects for food and feed. Nutr Bull 2017;42:293-308. https://doi.org/10.1111/nbu.12291
  43. van Thielen L, Vermuyten S, Storms B, Rumpold B, Van Campenhout L. Consumer acceptance of foods containing edible insects in Belgium two years after their introduction to the market. J Insects Food Feed 2019;5:35-44. https://doi.org/10.3920/JIFF2017.0075
  44. de Castro RJS, Ohara A, dos Santos Aguilar JG, Domingues MAF. Nutritional, functional and biological properties of insect proteins: Processes for obtaining, consumption and future challenges. Trends Food Sci Technol 2018;76:82-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.04.006
  45. Xiaoming C, Ying F, Hong Z, Zhiyong C. Review of the nutritive value of edible insects. In: Proceedings of a Workshop on Asia-Pacific Resources and their Potential for Development 2010; 2010 Feb 19-Feb 21. Bangkok, Thailand. pp. 85.
  46. Ramos-Elorduy J, Moreno JMP, Prado EE, Perez MA, Otero JL, de Guevara OL. Nutritional value of edible insects from the state of Oaxaca, Mexico. J Food Compost Anal 1997;10:142-57. https://doi.org/10.1006/jfca.1997.0530
  47. Bukkens SG. The nutritional value of edible insects. Ecol Food Nutr 1997;36:287-319. https://doi.org/10.1080/03670244.19 97.9991521
  48. Stanley-Samuelson DW, Jurenka RA, Cripps C, Blomquist GJ, de Renobales M. Fatty acids in insects: composition, metabolism, and biological significance. Arch Insect Biochem Physiol 1988;9:1-33. https://doi.org/10.1002/arch.940090102
  49. Rumpold BA, Schluter OK. Potential and challenges of insects as an innovative source for food and feed production. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 2013;17:1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2012.11.005
  50. Mlcek J, Rop O, Borkovcova M, Bednarova M. A comprehensive look at the possibilities of edible insects as food in Europe - a review. Pol J Food Nutr Sci 2014;64:147-57. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10222-012-0099-8
  51. Ghosh S, Lee SM, Jung C, Meyer-Rochow VB. Nutritional composition of five commercial edible insects in South Korea. J Asia-Pac Entomol 2017;20:686-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aspen.2017.04.003
  52. Megido RC, Gierts C, Blecker C, et al. Consumer acceptance of insect-based alternative meat products in Western countries. Food Qual Prefer 2016;52:237-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.05.004
  53. Sosa DAT. Fogliano V. Potential of insect-derived ingredients for food applications. In: Shields VDC, editors. Insect physiology and ecology. Rijeka, Croatia: IntechOpen; 2017. p. 215-31. https://doi.org/10.5772/67318
  54. van Huis A. Potential of insects as food and feed in assuring food security. Annu Rev Entomol 2013;58:563-83. https://doi. org/10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153704
  55. Verbeke W. Profiling consumers who are ready to adopt insects as a meat substitute in a Western society. Food Qual Prefer 2015;39:147-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.07. 008
  56. Post MJ. Cultured beef: medical technology to produce food. J Sci Food Agric 2014;94:1039-41. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.6474
  57. Han R, Shin JT, Kim J, Choi YS, Kim YW. An overview of the South Korean edible insect food industry: challenges and future pricing/promotion strategies. Entomol Res 2017;47:141-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-5967.12230
  58. Elhassan M, Wendin K, Olsson V, Langton M. Quality aspects of insects as food-nutritional, sensory, and related concepts. Foods 2019;8:95. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods8030095
  59. Melgar-Lalanne G, Hernandez-Alvarez AJ, Salinas-Castro A. Edible insects processing: traditional and innovative technologies. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 2019;18:1166-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12463
  60. Mishyna M, Martinez JJI, Chen J, Benjamin O. Extraction, characterization and functional properties of soluble proteins from edible grasshopper (Schistocerca gregaria) and honey bee (Apis mellifera). Food Res Int 2019;116:697-706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2018.08.098
  61. Ribeiro JC, Cunha LM, Sousa-Pinto B, Fonseca J. Allergic risks of consuming edible insects: a systematic review. Mol Nutr Food Res 2018;62:1700030. https://doi.org/10.1002/mnfr.201700030
  62. Post MJ. Cultured meat from stem cells: challenges and prospects. Meat Sci 2012;2:297-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. meatsci.2012.04.008
  63. Bhat ZF, Kumar S, Fayaz H. In vitro meat production: Challenges and benefits over conventional meat production. J Integr Agric 2015;14:241-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14) 60887-X
  64. Kadim IT, Mahgoub O, Baqir S, Faye B, Purchas R. Cultured meat from muscle stem cells: a review of challenges and prospects. J Integr Agric 2015;14:222-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60881-9
  65. Heffernan, O. A meaty issue. Nature 2017;544:S18-S20. https://doi.org/10.1038/544S18a
  66. Choi KH, Yoon JW, Kim M, et al. Optimization of culture conditions for maintaining pig muscle stem cells in vitro. Food Sci Anim Resour 2020;40:659-67. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2020.e39
  67. Chriki, S, Hoequtte, JF. The myth of cultured meat: a review. Front Nutr 2020;7:7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2020.00007
  68. Zhang G, Zhao X, Li X, Du G, Zhou J, Chen J. Challenges and possibilities for bio-manufacturing cultured meat. Trends Food Sci Technol 2020;97:443-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2020.01.026
  69. Digital Food Lab. In 2040, clean meat will be the size of conventional meat [Internet]. Digital Food Lab; c2020 [cited 2020 June 5]. Available from: https://www.digitalfoodlab.com/2040-clean-meat-will-size-conventional-meat/
  70. Specht EA, Welch DR, Clayton EMR, Lagally CD. Opportunities for applying biomedical production and manufacturing methods to the development of the clean meat industry. Biochem Eng J 2018;132:161-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2018.01.015
  71. Gaydhane MK, Mahanta U, Sharma CS, Khandelwal M, Ramakrishna S. Cultured meat: state of the art and future. Biomanuf Rev 2018;3:1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40898-018-0005-1
  72. Bhat ZF, Fayaz H. Prospectus of cultured meat-advancing meat alternatives. J Food Sci Technol 2011;48:125-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-010-0198-7
  73. Stephens N, Di Silvio L, Dunsford I, Ellis M, Glencross A, Sexton A. Bringing cultured meat to market: technical, socio-political, and regulatory challenges in cellular agriculture. Trends Food Sci Technol 2018;78:155-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.04.010
  74. Choi KH, Kim M, Yoon JW, et al. Purification of pig muscle stem cells using magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) based on the expression of CD29. Food Sci Anim Resour 2020 Jul 15 [Epub]. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2020.e51
  75. Arshad MS, Javed M, Sohaib M, Saeed F, Imran A, Amjad Z. Tissue engineering approaches to develop cultured meat from cells: a mini review. Cogent Food Agric 2017;3:1320814. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2017.1320814
  76. King JA, Miller WM. Bioreactor development for stem cell expansion and controlled differentiation. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2007;11:394-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpa.2007.05. 034
  77. Portner R, Nagel-Heyer S, Goepfert C, Adamietz P, Meenen NM. Bioreactor design for tissue engineering. J Biosci Bioeng 2005;100:235-45. https://doi.org/10.1263/jbb.100.235
  78. Post MJ, Levenberg S, Kaplan DL, et al. Scientific, sustainability and regulatory challenges of cultured meat. Nat Food 2020;1:403-15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-0112-z
  79. Fraeye I, Kratka M, Vandenburgh H, Thorrez L. Sensorial and nutritional aspects of cultured meat in comparison to traditional meat: much to be inferred. Front Nutr 2020;7:35. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2020.00035
  80. Dick A, Bhandari B, Prakash S. 3D printing of meat. Meat Sci 2019;153:35-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2019. 03.005

Cited by

  1. Muscle stem cell isolation and in vitro culture for meat production: A methodological review vol.20, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12661
  2. Food synthetic biology-driven protein supply transition: From animal-derived production to microbial fermentation vol.30, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche.2020.11.014
  3. Effects of High Hydrostatic Pressure on Technical Functional Properties of Edible Insect Protein vol.41, pp.2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2020.e85
  4. Trends and ideas in technology, regulation and public acceptance of cultured meat vol.3, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fufo.2021.100032
  5. A Consumer Segmentation Study for Meat and Meat Alternatives in Switzerland vol.10, pp.6, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10061273
  6. Technologies and perspectives for achieving carbon neutrality vol.2, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xinn.2021.100180
  7. Improved functional properties of meat analogs by laccase catalyzed protein and pectin crosslinks vol.11, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-96058-4
  8. Drying-induced restructured jerky analog developed using a combination of edible insect protein and textured vegetable protein vol.373, pp.no.pb, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.131519