To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Cultured meats (CMs) are produced by in vitro culture of animal cells. Since the first CM burger patty was created in 2013, many companies have been founded to commercialize CM products. We discuss the meat focus and geographical spread of CM companies, the funding landscape, and challenges for commercialization
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.
... The overwhelming majority of Chinese urban consumers have been shown to be unfamiliar with CM . CM products have yet to meet the taste expectations of consumers and the manufacturing cost is high . ...
... PM substitutes are sustainable protein sources that can match the taste, texture, color, and nutrients of specific types of meat , but they are still a source of ethical dilemmas . First, PM substitutes lack universal regulations on product naming, which may cause consumers to mistakenly regard the nutritional value of PM substitutes as equal to those of traditional meat . ...
... Many articles have discussed the factors affecting consumers' ethical risk perceptions of PM and CM [30,40,. However, these past studies have focused on a single type of meat substitute and its product attributes, while the current study expands upon the literature by explicitly recognizing the different origins of PM and CM. ...
The world’s growing population requires an adequate supply of protein to maintain food security, but animal protein production is limited by the finite resources of land, fresh water, and ocean capacity. Several meat substitutes offer protein alternatives that may improve food security in less-developed economies. However, perceptions of difference in the ethical risk associated with consumption of plant-based substitutes (PM) vs. cultured meat (CM) may affect purchases of these products. This study examined differences in ethical risk perception using online survey data gathered in 2020. An ordered logit technique yielded the probabilities of changes in ethical risk perception influenced by demographic attributes, views about the technology, and adequacy of industry regulations. The results show that consumers associated PM with low ethical risk. Educated consumers were more likely to agree that the ethical risks of CM are higher than PM and to regard PM products as safer than CM. Price sensitivity made consumers more likely to agree that the ethical risks related to CM are higher than those related to PM. Ingredient safety concerns increased the ethical risk perception of CM. Consumers perceiving the meat substitute classification to be unclear were more likely to assign a higher ethical risk to CM than PM. The perception of ethical risk associated with CM was greater than that associated with PM if meat substitute industry regulations were inadequate. The results suggest a need to provide verifiable information about each type of meat substitute as well as transparent and understandable standards and rules before these products can improve protein availability and food security.
... A large number of these companies are focussing on cultured beef (25%) followed by poultry (22%), pork and seafood (19% each) and exotic meat (15%), with 40% companies based in North America followed by Asia (31%) and Europe (25%). Two companies are exploring mouse meat as alternative pet food, and another two companies are working on kangaroo and horse meat . These companies are working on business-to-consumer (B2C) model mostly, but now some companies are set up on business-to-business (B2B) model for ensuring an adequate supply of necessary inputs such as hormones, growth regulators, scaffolds, culture media, cell lines, fats, etc. for companies working on cultured meat. ...
... Sources: [26,44,83]. ...
... Specht et al  found that all ingredients required for production should be sourced as food ingredients. In USA, joint regulatory framework for cultured meat was proposed by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) in 2018, with FDA overlooking cell collection, cell banks, cells proliferation and differentiation stages whereas FSIS regulating cell harvesting and labelling of end product originated from cell cultures obtained from livestock and poultry . In EU the regulations as applied for Novel Foods will be applicable to cultured meat. ...
The in-vitro meat is a novel concept in food biotechnology comprising field of tissue engineering and cellular agriculture. It involves production of edible biomass by in-vitro culture of stem cells harvested from the muscle of live animals by self-organizing or scaffolding methodology. It is considered as efficient, environmental friendly, better ensuring public safety and nutritional security, as well as ethical way of producing meat. Source of stem cells, media ingredients, supply of large size bioreactors, skilled manpower, sanitary requirements, production of products with similar sensory and textural attributes as of conventional meat, consumer acceptance, and proper set up of regulatory framework are challenges faced in commercialization and consumer acceptance of in-vitro meat. To realize any perceivable change in various socio-economic and environmental spheres, the technology should be commercialized and should be cost-effective as conventional meat and widely accepted among consumers. The new challenges of increasing demand of meat with the increasing population could be fulfill by the establishment of in-vitro meat production at large scale and its popularization. The adoption of in-vitro meat production at an industrial scale will lead to self-sufficiency in the developed world.
... In recent years, food companies have invested in artificial meat research and development and expect a rapid expansion in retail and food service sales. However, the global commercialization of artificial meat is facing technological innovation challenges, lack of consumer awareness, and inadequate regulation . At the same time, there are several important questions requiring answers and timely solutions that support sustained purchasing and consumption of artificial meat. ...
... Professor Zhou Guanghong of Nanjing Agricultural University of China cultivated the first cultured meat (CM) in China in 2019 . Meat substitutes offer a solution to the consumer's desire to eat meat while protecting global food security, and assuring protein supply in the future [5,15]. ...
... Distrust affects cooperative relationships [19,20] between consumers and artificial meat producers. Therefore, regardless of short-term technical difficulties, an effective regulatory system is necessary for long-term safety . ...
The sustained growth of global meat consumption incentivized the development of the meat substitute industry. However, long-term global commercialization of meat substitutes faces challenges that arise from technological innovation, limited consumer awareness, and an imperfect regulatory environment. Many important questions require urgent answers. This paper presents a review of issues affecting meat substitute manufacturing and marketing, and helps to bridge important gaps which appear in the literature. To date, global research on meat substitutes focuses mainly on technology enhancement, cost reduction, and commercialization with a few studies fo-cused on a regulatory perspective. Furthermore, the studies on meat substitute effects on environmental pollution reduction, safety, and ethical risk perception are particularly important. A review of these trends leads to conclusions which anticipate the development of a much broader market for the meat substitute industry over the long term, the gradual discovery of solutions to technical obstacles, upgraded manufacturing, the persistent perception of ethical risk and its influence on consumer willingness to accept meat substitutes, and the urgent need for constructing an effective meat substitute regulatory system.
... The cultured meat sector is projected to minimise the gap between the existing demand and supply of meatderived proteins among the Indian population. Conventional animal meat products can be substituted by novel PBM or CM products with a similar taste and texture appeal, a tailor-made nutritional profile, low saturated fats, and a high fibre quotient with a negligible risk of contamination and a minor amount of antibiotics [1,8]. A rise in the average income of consumers and the gross domestic product (GDP) of India may enable its population to purchase affordable, hygienic, and healthy CM products by addressing the issues of the prevailing pandemic situation, health concerns, food adulteration, food sanitisation, violation of ISO standards and hygiene, and the inadequate traditional meat supply chains [9,10]. ...
... The CM industry is anticipated to become more diverse in the near future. The key to commercialisation and making CM an economically sustainable option is to encourage business-to-business (B2B) collaborations and industry-academic research partnerships in terms of speciality or product focus as the industry begins to become more diverse ( Figure 1) . On par with technological advancements, significant progress on the regulatory front is also essential in order to create a fair and transparent regulatory framework for the propagation of the CM market and the sale of designated CM products in India and abroad [17,18]. ...
... India's CM industry is expected to diversify in terms of company specialisation and business creation opportunities and emphasise research and development ( Figure 1) [7,28]. Large companies and startups in the CM sector are primarily focused on technical challenges, including cell line optimisation, the design of costeffective procedures such as procedures for the production of media variants, scaffolding methodologies, and the design of scalable bioprocesses . It would certainly be advantageous for leading life sciences and protein manufacturing firms to create specialised divisions and cultivate B2B partnerships along with CM value chain entry points [29,30]. ...
The dietary protein requirements of almost 9.8 billion people need to be fulfilled in a healthy and sustainable manner by 2050. Meat consumption contributes to 35% of the total protein requirement of the Indian population. Meat intake needs to be sustainable and economical without causing food security and production issues. Consumption of meat in India is projected to rise with an increase in consumer incomes. Hence, novel alternative proteins, including cultured meat (CM) and plant-based meat (PBM), are being developed to satisfy the demand for meat-derived proteins in the diet. This involves the creation of novel PBM/CM products with a similar taste and texture as conventional animal meat with tailor-made nutritional attributes. In this article, we provide critical insights into the technical and business aspects of relevance to production and sustainability encountered by the Indian CM industry at a series of stages that can be termed the CM value chain comprising upstream and downstream processes. We shed light on the need for regulatory authorities and a framework. Consumer concerns towards CM products can be alleviated through effective scientific communication strategies, including prior familiarity, narrative building and transparency, and labelling aspects of CM products.
... This technique involves meat production through tissue-engineering technologies and cell culture methods without engaging with animal rearing and slaughtering. This type of meat production under controlled laboratory conditions facilitates health, animal welfare, global environmental conditions, and financial systems as well . Traditional meat production systems involve the rearing of ruminants, which are accountable for 37% of methane release. ...
... These highlight the promising aspects of acceptance in the European markets . Initiation by policy makers and support through government funds and marketing campaigns will prompt the emergence of start-ups and will provide concomitant exposure to society and play a prominent role in influencing the public's perceptions of cultured meat . A primary exploratory study conducted in Belgium with 180 participants revealed that most of the participants expressed a liking towards the cultured meat, while 9% objected, 43% indicated willingness, and 51% were hypothetical on accepting it. ...
Due to a proportionally increasing population and food demands, the food industry has come up with wide innovations, opportunities, and possibilities to manufacture meat under in vitro conditions. The amalgamation of cell culture and tissue engineering has been the base idea for the development of the synthetic meat, and this has been proposed to be a pivotal study for a futuristic muscle development program in the medical field. With improved microbial and chemical advancements, in vitro meat matched the conventional meat and is proposed to be eco-friendly, healthy, nutrient rich, and ethical. Despite the success, there are several challenges associated with the utilization of materials in synthetic meat manufacture, which demands regulatory and safety assessment systems to manage the risks associated with the production of cultured meat. The role of 3D bioprinting meat analogues enables a better nutritional profile and sensorial values. The integration of nanosensors in the bioprocess of culture meat eased the quality assessment throughout the food supply chain and management. Multidisciplinary approaches such as mathematical modelling, computer fluid dynamics, and biophotonics coupled with tissue engineering will be promising aspects to envisage the future prospective of this technology and make it available to the public at economically feasible rates.
... Cultured meat can be a viable option for such groups. However, cultured meat is often associated with misnomers like fake, artificial, and unnatural (Choudhury et al., 2020). ...
... Increased capital cost and high resource input are important parameters for the bioprocess scale-up of cultured meat. Currently, cultured meat production involves the use of the very expensive media supplement fetal bovine serum which covers approximately 80% of the total production cost (Choudhury et al., 2020;Chriki & Hocquette, 2020). Thus, upscaling the production of cultured meat with the same media, would incur heavy prices and thus limiting the product to only rich masses. ...
Cultured meat, also known as ‘in-vitro meat’ or ‘clean meat’, holds the potential solution to environmental sustainability along with conventional meat alternatives, including plant-based meat, insects, algae, and pulses. A critical step to its widescale acceptance is consumer perception. Both qualitative research and quantitative analysis are being carried out to enhance the acceptability of cultured meat. In this review, consumer behavior towards cultured meat is accessed to understand the current market scenario. Psychological factors that can hinder or improve cultured meat acceptance are discussed. Consumer social factors geared towards consumer behavior on cultured meat are also summarized. As per the research findings, meat lovers are more likely to try cultured meat owing to the attached sustainability claims. The consumers' concerns about the unnaturalness of cultured meat should be addressed in order to encourage them to get more acquainted with the product and modify their attitudes about it. Marketing tactics of labeling it as ‘clean meat’ rendered better purchasing as compared to other terms. Furthermore, educating the masses likely reduced the unfamiliarity with newly marketed products resulting in improved consumer perception of cultured meat.
... Cellular agriculture is an emerging field which involves technologies to produce biologically equivalent agricultural products from cell cultures . Cultured meat (CM), also known as cell-based meat, in vitro meat, labgrown meat or propagating cultivated meat, is a form of cellular agriculture . ...
... Cellular agriculture is an emerging field which involves technologies to produce biologically equivalent agricultural products from cell cultures . Cultured meat (CM), also known as cell-based meat, in vitro meat, labgrown meat or propagating cultivated meat, is a form of cellular agriculture . Instead of slaughtering animals for food, biopsies can be performed on animalsin order to obtain starter cells and expand these cells in vitro, specifically in bioreactors to produce meat . ...
The cultured meat market has been growing at an accelerated space since the first creation of cultured meat burger back in 2013. Substantial efforts have been made to reduce costs by eliminating serum in growth media and improving process efficiency by employing bioreactors. In parallel, efforts are also being made on scaffolding innovations to offer better cells proliferation, differentiation and tissue development. So far, scaffolds used in cultured meat research are predominantly collagen and gelatin, which are animal-derived. To align with cell-based meat vision i.e. environment conservation and animal welfare, plant-derived biomaterials for scaffolding are being intensively explored. This paper reviews and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of scaffold materials and potential scaffolding related to scale-up solution for the production of cultured meat.
... In addition to sustainability and environmental improvements, cultivated meat also relieves ethical concerns surrounding animal farming and health concerns arising from animal-borne diseases and the overuse of antibiotics [9,10]. The cumulative potential benefits of realizing a cultivated meat food supply have led to an influx in governmental and private funding of cultivated meat research and development [11,12]. ...
Cellular agriculture is an emerging scientific discipline that leverages the existing principles behind stem cell biology, tissue engineering, and animal sciences to create agricultural products from cells in vitro. Cultivated meat, also known as clean meat or cultured meat, is a prominent subfield of cellular agriculture that possesses promising potential to alleviate the negative externalities associated with conventional meat production by producing meat in vitro instead of from slaughter. A core consideration when producing cultivated meat is cell sourcing. Specifically, developing livestock cell sources that possess the necessary proliferative capacity and differentiation potential for cultivated meat production is a key technical component that must be optimized to enable scale-up for commercial production of cultivated meat. There are several possible approaches to develop cell sources for cultivated meat production, each possessing certain advantages and disadvantages. This review will discuss the current cell sources used for cultivated meat production and remaining challenges that need to be overcome to achieve scale-up of cultivated meat for commercial production. We will also discuss cell-focused considerations in other components of the cultivated meat production workflow, namely, culture medium composition, bioreactor expansion, and biomaterial tissue scaffolding.
... Since Post and coworkers unveiled bovine cell fiber-based hamburger, various types of cultured meat have been demonstrated. However, cultured steak with a composition and a structure similar to real steak, comprising mostly adipose cells and aligned muscle cells, is still challenging 4,8,9 . Various tissue engineering techniques could be applied, such as cell sheet engineering 10,11 , cell fiber engineering 12 , cell culture on a 3D-printed scaffold 13 , and 3D cell printing 14,15 for mimicking the structural characteristics of steak. ...
With the current interest in cultured meat, mammalian cell-based meat has mostly been unstructured. There is thus still a high demand for artificial steak-like meat. We demonstrate in vitro construction of engineered steak-like tissue assembled of three types of bovine cell fibers (muscle, fat, and vessel). Because actual meat is an aligned assembly of the fibers connected to the tendon for the actions of contraction and relaxation, tendon-gel integrated bioprinting was developed to construct tendon-like gels. In this study, a total of 72 fibers comprising 42 muscles, 28 adipose tissues, and 2 blood capillaries were constructed by tendon-gel integrated bioprinting and manually assembled to fabricate steak-like meat with a diameter of 5 mm and a length of 10 mm inspired by a meat cut. The developed tendon-gel integrated bioprinting here could be a promising technology for the fabrication of the desired types of steak-like cultured meats.
... Since the first cultured beef hamburger was made in 2013, dozens of companies have entered the cultured meat sector, and a variety of product species, including chicken, beef, pork, and seafood, are now being developed. By the end of 2020, about 60 early-stage companies concentrating on cultured meat end-products and raw materials throughout the value chain had been established worldwide, with more than half of them having launched within the last two years [19,20]. These companies are geographically distributed across 19 countries and five continents, with 37% in North America, 25% in Asia, and 21% in Europe. ...
The world’s population continues to increase, meaning we require more consistent protein supply to meet demand. Despite the availability of plant-based protein alternatives, animal meat remains a popular, high-quality protein source. Research studies have focused on cultured meat (meat grown in vitro) as a safe and more efficient alternative to traditional meat. Cultured meat is produced by in vitro myogenesis, which involves the processing of muscle satellite and mature muscle cells. Meat culture efficiency is largely determined by the culture conditions, such as the cell type and cell culture medium used and the biomolecular composition. Protein production can be enhanced by providing the optimum biochemical and physical conditions for skeletal muscle cell growth, while myoblasts play important roles in skeletal muscle formation and growth. This review describes the cell types used to produce cultured meat and the biological effects of various myokines and cytokines, such as interleukin-6, leukemia inhibitory factor, interleukin-4, interleukin-15, and interleukin-1β, on skeletal muscle and myogenesis and their potential roles in cultured meat production.
... In medicine, dECM and CDM have been extensively used as biomaterials for constructing grafts (such as bone graft and skin graft) and medical devices (as a base component in bioinks for 3D bioprinting) . Most recently, the nascent field of cultured-meat manufacturing is actively seeking suitable bioactive scaffolds . CDM could be just the needed scaffold for the industrial cultivation of animal tissue. ...
Cell-derived matrices (CDM) are the decellularised extracellular matrices (ECM) of tissues obtained by the laboratory culture process. CDM is developed to mimic, to a certain extent, the properties of the needed natural tissue and thus to obviate the use of animals. The composition of CDM can be tailored for intended applications by carefully optimising the cell sources, culturing conditions and decellularising methods. This unique advantage has inspired the increasing use of CDM for biomedical research, ranging from stem cell niches to disease modelling and regenerative medicine. However, while much effort is spent on extracting different types of CDM and exploring their utilisation, little is spent on the scale-up aspect of CDM production. The ability to scale up CDM production is essential, as the materials are due for clinical trials and regulatory approval, and in fact, this ability to scale up should be an important factor from the early stages. In this review, we first introduce the current CDM production and characterisation methods. We then describe the existing scale-up technologies for cell culture and highlight the key considerations in scaling-up CDM manufacturing. Finally, we discuss the considerations and challenges faced while converting a laboratory protocol into a full industrial process. Scaling-up CDM manufacturing is a challenging task since it may be hindered by technologies that are not yet available. The early identification of these gaps will not only quicken CDM based product development but also help drive the advancement in scale-up cell culture and ECM extraction.
... Cette dernière idée est corroborée par les travaux de Ong et al. (2020) qui affirment que l'utilisation du terme « viande » pourrait dérouter le consommateur et créer des malentendus quant à l'origine du produit. De plus, Choudhury et al. (2020) plaident en faveur de l'utilisation des termes « synthétique » ou « artificielle » pour l'étiquetage de cette technologie afin de ne pas tromper le consommateur. Les personnes interrogées semblent plutôt en accord avec cet avis puisque 24% d'entre elles considèrent le terme « viande » artificielle adapté. ...
Suscitant des avis divergents, la culture de cellules musculaires à des fins alimentaires couramment appelée « viande » artificielle par ses promoteurs est annoncée comme susceptible de répondre à la demande grandissante en protéines animales sans les inconvénients de l'élevage. Cette étude vise à appréhender le ressenti de 118 consommateurs vis-à-vis de cette technologie selon leurs régimes alimentaires. Les consommateurs réguliers de viande sont plus favorables à cette technologie que les végétariens et végans dont les convictions les empêchent de goûter la « viande » artificielle et qui perçoivent sa consommation comme un retour en arrière. Cette technologie pose question quant à ses possibles effets indésirables sur la santé (41% des répondants). Environ 30% des personnes interrogées ne croient pas en une bonne qualité de ce produit. Ce dernier suscite toutefois de la curiosité, 80% des sondés ayant envie de goûter ce nouveau produit, sous réserve d'un prix de vente acceptable. De plus, pour 80% des personnes interrogées, ce produit va se généraliser plus ou moins vite car toutes les mentalités évoluent, mais peut être avec des vitesses différentes selon la perception des consommateurs. La dénomination « viande artificielle » ne fait toutefois pas consensus. L'enjeu sémantique est important et l'appellation de ces nouveaux produits ne doit pas tromper le consommateur. Les produits issus de la culture de cellules musculaires ne sont pas perçus comme de la viande.
Abstract: Perception of artificial "meat" by French consumers according to their diet The culture of muscle cells for food purposes, so-called artificial "meat" by its advocates, is announced by them as likely to meet the growing demand for animal protein without the disadvantages of animal husbandry, but it arouses divergent opinions among consumers. This study aims to understand the feelings of 118 consumers according to their diets. Regular meat consumers are more favorable to this technology than vegetarians and vegans whose convictions prevent them from tasting artificial "meat" and who perceive the consumption of this product as a step backwards. This technology raises questions about its possible undesirable health effects (41% of respondents). About 30% of respondents do not believe in the quality of this product. However, this product arouses curiosity, with the majority of respondents (80%) wanting to try this novel product, as long as there is an affordable selling price. Also, for 80% of the people questioned, this product will become widespread more or less quickly depending on the perceptions of consumers because the mentalities of the French are evolving. However, no consensus was reached for the product name "artificial meat". The semantic issue is important and the name of these new products must not mislead the consumer. Products derived from the culture of muscle cells are not perceived as meat.
... This last idea is corroborated by the work of Ong et al. (2020) who state that the use of the term "meat" could confuse the consumer and create misunderstandings as to the origin of the product. Furthermore, Choudhury et al. (2020) argue for the use of the terms "synthetic" or "cultured" for the labelling of this product in order not to mislead the consumer. Respondents seem to agree with this view, as 24% of them consider the term "cultured" meat to be appropriate. ...
The culture of muscle cells for food purposes, so-called cultured "meat", is advertised by its proponents as likely to meet the growing demand for animal protein without the disadvantages of animal farming. However, while this product is still in development and not yet widely commercialised, it is already attracting various forms of criticism from consumers. The present study follows a large international online survey of 5,418 consumers in France which was aimed at understanding consumer perceptions of muscle cell culture for food purposes. Based on 118 interviews conducted on volunteers with specific dietary habits (vegans, vegetarians, flexitarians, regular meat consumers), the aim of this study was to target an audience with a variety of diets and thus to analyse more closely consumers' feelings towards this product. Regular meat consumers are more favourable to this product than vegetarians and vegans whose convictions prevent them from tasting artificial "meat". The consumption of this new product would be perceived by the latter as a step backwards. Of the 118 people questioned, half of them think that this product could have a negative impact on the animal industry, 41% fear undesirable health effects and 29% do not believe in the quality of this product. However, this new product arouses curiosity among the respondents, the majority of whom (80%) would like to try it. While the selling price of this product is questionable, 22% of respondents indicated that they had no intention of buying it. For those who were likely to buy this product, prices were expected to be lower or equal to those of conventional meat for 72% of them. Despite the uncertainties regarding its future development, the majority of respondents were optimistic about the future of this product. 80% of them believe it will become widespread more or less quickly, whether they like it or not, mainly because French people's mentalities are changing, despite that fact that the implementation of this product would appear difficult on certain points. The vegans are more likely to be neutral than the other consumers. There is no consensus on the term "meat" for this new foodstuff, with 25% of those questioned agreeing with the term "cultured meat"(14%) in particular. The majority of flexitarians (55%) are opposed to the use of the term "meat" for this new product, whereas this term seems to be suitable for 91% of the vegans and 82% of the vegetarians. The semantic issue is important and the name of this new product must not mislead the consumer.
... The cell culture technology is rarely presented. The cultured meat and mycoprotein as the most common example of cell culture technology has also been reviewed by several authors . However, there is a scarce information on producing food by plant cell culture technology. ...
The growing population and the climate changes put a pressure on food production globally, therefore a fundamental transformation of food production is required. One approach to accelerate food production is application of modern biotechnology such as cell culture, marker assisted selection, and genetic engineering. Cell culture technology reduce the usage of arable land, while marker assisted selection increases the genetic gain of crop breeding and genetic engineering enable to introduce a desired traits to crop. The cell culture technology has resulted in development of cultured meat, fungal biomass food (mycoprotein), and bioactive compounds from plant cell culture. Except cultured meat which recently begin to penetrate the market, the other products have been in the market for years. The marker assisted selection and genetic engineering has contributed significantly to increase the resiliency against emerging pests and abiotic stresses. This review addresses diverse techniques of cell culture technology as well as advanced genetic engineering technology CRISPR Cas-9 and its application for crop improvement. The pros and cons of different techniques as well as the challenges and future perspective of application of modern biotechnology for strengthening food security are also discussed.
... Since the first demonstration of cultured meat hamburger in 2013 (Figure 2A), cultured meat has gathered great interest owing to its environmentally friendly production process compared with the meat from husbandry . In 2020, 32 companies have been working on cultured meat including beef, pork, chicken, and shrimp  (Figure 2B), which can be used to cook dishes such as thin-cut steaks ( Figure 2C) and meatballs. Despite some achievements on proliferating cells through bioreactors and adjusting the taste through food additives, the current culturing methods cannot produce meat that has uniformly aligned tissue structure in large scale (e.g. ...
With the current rapidly growing global population, the animal product industry faces challenges which not only demand drastically increased amounts of animal products but also have to limit the emission of greenhouse gases and animal waste. These issues can be solved by the combination of microfabrication and tissue engineering techniques, which utilize the microtissue as a building component for larger tissue assembly to fabricate animal products. Various methods for the assembly of microtissue have been proposed such as spinning, cell layering, and 3D bioprinting to mimic the intricate morphology and function of the in vivo animal tissues. Some of the demonstrations on cultured meat and leather-like materials present promising outlooks on the emerging field of in vitro production of animal products.
... g. According toChoudhury et al. (2020), the companies interested in cultured meat are: Atemys Foods, Balletic Foods, Just, New Age Meats, Wild Type, Because Animals, Fork & Goode); Canada (Seafuture); Europe (Macanta Meats, higher Steaks, Biotech Foods, GOURMEY, Peace of Meat, Innocent Meat, Mosa Meat, Meatable); Asia (BioFood Systems, Future Meat technologies, Mea Tech, Aleph Farms, SuperMeat, ArtMeat, Clear Meat, Shiok Meats, IntegriCulture, Avant Meats, VOW). See alsoFig. ...
The world-intensive livestock farming is currently under pressure because of its environmental, human health, and animal welfare impacts. Scientists, policymakers, and investors envisage alternative production systems and more sustainable diets, replacing meat with alternative protein sources. One potential scenario is represented by cultured meat, produced by taking cells from a living animal, then grown in a laboratory environment. Relying upon the up-to-date available literature on the topic, this chapter aims to present the multiple facets that cultured meat embraces: from the most debated issues, such as the environmental benefits and consumers perception, to some less analyzed aspects, including legislation and nomenclature, as well some expected supply chain impacts which may derive from the scaling up of cultured meat production in the next future.
... Cette dernière idée est corroborée par les travaux de Ong et al. (2020) qui affirment que l'utilisation du terme « viande » pourrait dérouter le consommateur et créer des malentendus quant à l'origine du produit. De plus, Choudhury et al. (2020) plaident en faveur de l'utilisation des termes « synthétique » ou « artificielle » pour l'étiquetage de cette technologie afin de ne pas tromper le consommateur. Les personnes interrogées semblent plutôt en accord avec cet avis puisque 24% d'entre elles considèrent le terme « viande » artificielle adapté. ...
... A disruptive innovation with the potential to initiate a paradigm shift in the livestock industry is cultured meat. Cultured meat, also known as in-vitro meat, cell-based meat, clean meat, and laboratory meat, refers to meat produced through cellular agriculture using tissue engineering techniques (Choudhury et al., 2020;Treich, 2021). To produce cultured meat, stem cells are harvested from an animal and cultivated in a culture medium to subsequently produce meat end-products (Post, 2014). ...
Cultured meat, i.e. meat produced in vitro using animal stem cells, heralds a paradigm shift in the global food system. In addition, cultured meat has the potential to substantially reduce the environmental footprint of meat production and consumption. However, achieving a sufficient level of consumer acceptance of cultured meat is critical to realize this potential. Building on the omnivore's paradox, which refers to people's simultaneous aversion and attraction to new foods, this paper examines the importance of perceived organizational competence and excitement for consumer acceptance of cultured meat in terms of willingness to buy. The results of a survey-based experiment among 714 German participants show that a) both perceived competence and excitement have a positive relationship with consumer acceptance, b) multinational companies score higher in perceived competence, whereas startups are more strongly associated with the feeling of excitement, and c) the type of a collaborative venture between a startup and a multinational company (cooperation vs. acquisition with integration) can affect consumer acceptance.
... By "emerging meaning system" we refer to the opinions of the public that shape the potential acceptance or rejection of cultured meat before the product is even on the market. More than 70 start-up companies are developing cultured meat globally (Byrne 2021; see also Choudhury, Tseng, and Swartz 2020), but none of these are in Finland. The media publicity regarding cultured meat is also rather limited in Finland. ...
Narratives of cellular agriculture, or food technologies using cell cultivation to produce agricultural products such as cultured meat, promise sustainable, ethical alternatives as well as solutions to global food challenges. Although cultured meat is unavailable to consumers, people have formed opinions about it on the basis of media coverage. Drawing on studies of the meaning system of food and the media publicity surrounding cultured meat, the aim is to analyze the emerging meanings of cultured meat in Finnish online news comments (n = 662). The comments were examined using qualitative content analysis and the results were utilized to construct an emerging meaning system for cultured meat. The results indicate that this system draws from nine themes and three aggregate categories, based on the following questions: Why is cultured meat necessary (environmental, animal wellbeing and healthiness considerations)? What are the anticipated product characteristics (naturalness, potential risks and sensory qualities)? How is cultured meat expected to influence societies (the role of actors, decision-making and inequities caused by cultured meat)? The uncertainties of these issues have led to conflicting interpretations, which prevent the achievement of a shared definition of cultured meat and complicate the establishment of cultured meat as an accepted food.
... In this particular context, meat produced in vitro, called "artificial meat" or "cultured meat" is presented, according to its supporters and the start-ups developing it, as a new biotechnology capable of addressing some of the current problems, such as overcoming world hunger, limiting the environmental impacts of animal husbandry while respecting current ethical values (reduction of animal slaughter and animal suffering) (Choudhury, Tseng, & Swartz, 2020) although these points are controversial, particularly with regard to environmental impact . Furthermore, so called "artificial meat" does not currently qualify as meat according to the definition of the American Meat Science Association (Boler & Woerner, 2017). ...
This research aimed to study the perception of French consumers on “cultured meat”. The respondents (n = 5418) are characterised by an over-representation of young people, meat professional or scientists compared to the French population. Approximately 40–50% of them believed that animal husbandry faced ethical and environmental issues. Only 18–26% of them believed that “cultured meat” could solve these difficulties, a majority thought that it would not be healthy or tasty and that”cultured meat” is an “absurd and/or disgusting” idea. However, 23.9% and 16.9% thought it is a “fun and/or interesting” and a “promising and/or feasible” idea and 91.7% were not prepared to buy”cultured meat” at a higher price than meat. The respondents not familiar with”cultured meat”, young people or women are more in support of it due to a greater sensitivity to issues related to livestock systems. Older men and meat professionals are the most reluctant. Thus, the”cultured meat” market would represent at best a niche market.
... Yet, consumers will likely have alternative protein options to choose from when making decisions in a real-life shopping scenario. Further, no previous work has considered the specific type (e.g., chicken versus beef) of LGM in models of willingness to consume or purchase (Choudhury, Tseng, & Swartz, 2020). Thus, a greater understanding of consumers' beliefs regarding key attributes (e.g., environmental impact, animal friendliness) of LGM relative to those of competing or substitute products; and the relationship between beliefs and consumers' willingness to consume LGM will provide insights on the market issues and opportunities for LGM and alternative protein products. ...
Concerns over the impact of global meat production and consumption patterns are leading to increasing interest in alternative sources of protein. This study provides new insight into consumers’ attitudes towards different protein products and factors associated with the acceptance of lab-grown meat. We measured and compared 1078 Australian consumers’ beliefs regarding conventionally raised meat (chicken and beef), plant-based meat alternatives and lab-grown meat products across six attributes: health, safety, affordability, eating enjoyment, animal welfare, and environmental friendliness. Beliefs regarding the health and affordability of conventionally raised chicken were statistically highest. For all attributes, beliefs relating to plant-based meat alternatives were more positive than those relating to lab-grown meat, and with respect to animal welfare and environmental friendliness, plant-based products were viewed most positively relative to all products. Despite average negative belief scores for all attributes, except for animal welfare, around one-quarter of consumers still indicated a willingness to consume lab-grown meat. Multinomial logistic regressions were used to explain factors associated with consumers’ willingness to consume lab-grown meat products. Factors associated with willingness to consume the lab-grown meat products were positive beliefs regarding eating experience (enjoyment), safety, animal welfare, and healthiness; familiarity; higher consumption frequency of conventionally raised chicken meat; tertiary education; and younger age. Although lower environmental impact has been proposed as one of the main benefits of lab-grown meat, beliefs regarding environmental friendliness were not significant in either model.
... The biomaterials used to make scaffolds must be edible and/or biodegradable, while also maintaining their structural integrity and supporting cells in bioreactors. To recreate the feel of traditional meat, the scaffolds must allow for the proper arrangement of lipids, muscles, and connective structures (Choudhury et al., 2020). ...
The food industry has come up with a wide range of innovations, changes, and possibilities to create meat through in vitro conditions as a result of a proportionally expanding population and food demands. This breakthrough has the potential to completely transform the meat business, with far-reaching repercussions for the environment, human health, and animal welfare. Thus, animal cells rather than slain animals are used to make cell-based meat, where the proliferation and differentiation of the cells take place in the culture media. The main purpose of this paper is to analyze the overall mechanism and various techniques involved in cell-based meat production. It also discusses upcoming challenges such as technical, consumer, regulatory aspects, environmental issues, product costs, the economy, health safety concerns, ethical, religious, and social taboos. Finally, it analyzes the prospects of the cell-based meat production technique.
... One of the most promising meat alternatives is cultured meat, since animal-based proteins can be obtained directly from ex vivo cultivation of stem cells without raising and slaughtering animals [41,42]. Production of cultured meat products provides a more sustainable and environmentally friendly alternative to traditional meat production with similar flavor, taste, and nutritional profiles, so it is a potentially revolutionary meat production technology [43,44]. The production process for the development of cultured meat can be divided into three steps: (A) preparation of raw material (e.g., preparation of culture medium and isolation of animal stem cells); (B) formation of tissue cultures, such as the proliferation and growth of stem cells in large bioreactors, for the development of tissues and muscle fibers; (C) processing of end products-developed muscle cells are processed into required meat products. ...
Conventional meat consumption has triggered an environmental burden along with effects on different disease spectrums according to existing research. The dietary patterns adopted by consumers significantly impact both planetary and individual health. Interventions are needed to support the protein transition. However, there is not yet an overview of interventions towards acceptance of novel proteins available. This systemic review highlights different varieties of alternative proteins and interventions adopted to increase the acceptance of alternative protein sources. Educational intervention, persuasion, training, and modeling approaches are summarized in this review. Furthermore, behavioral models triggering the consumer’s response towards different alternative proteins are also discussed. The systemic review highlights that consumer acceptance varies among different alternative proteins. Food choice motives, familiarity, food neophobia, disgust, and cultural norms are among the various drivers of consumer acceptance. A comparison of these drivers indicates inconsistencies, presenting the need for future research.
... By 2013, the first CM prototype-a beef hamburger-was eaten in a live tasting, and the process of obtaining muscle fibers that composed the cultivated hamburger was further described in a publication the following year (Post 2014). Over the past decade, CM has grown from an idea into a nascent field consisting of various academic labs and forprofit companies (Choudhury et al. 2020;Nyika et al. 2021). ...
Cultivated meat, also known as cultured or cell-based meat, is meat produced directly from cultured animal cells rather than from a whole animal. Cultivated meat and seafood have been proposed as a means of mitigating the substantial harms associated with current production methods, including damage to the environment, antibiotic resistance, food security challenges, poor animal welfare, and—in the case of seafood—overfishing and ecological damage associated with fishing and aquaculture. Because biomedical tissue engineering research, from which cultivated meat draws a great deal of inspiration, has thus far been conducted almost exclusively in mammals, cultivated seafood suffers from a lack of established protocols for producing complex tissues in vitro. At the same time, fish such as the zebrafish Danio rerio have been widely used as model organisms in developmental biology. Therefore, many of the mechanisms and signaling pathways involved in the formation of muscle, fat, and other relevant tissue are relatively well understood for this species. The same processes are understood to a lesser degree in aquatic invertebrates. This review discusses the differentiation and maturation of meat-relevant cell types in aquatic species and makes recommendations for future research aimed at recapitulating these processes to produce cultivated fish and shellfish.
... FBS, rich in GFs, nutrients, and proteins has been one of the main cell culture media supplements. However, due to its mentioned downsides as well as the insufficient knowledge of the actual components of FBS and batch-to-batch variability in FBS production as well as the potential risk of using serum contaminated by viruses or prions, many CM/CS companies pledged to fully eliminate FBS in their bioprocessing procedures . ...
Global food systems are under significant pressure to provide enough food, particularly protein-rich foods whose demand is on the rise in times of crisis and inflation, as presently existing due to post-COVID-19 pandemic effects and ongoing conflict in Ukraine and resulting in looming food insecurity, according to FAO. Cultivated meat (CM) and cultivated seafood (CS) are protein-rich alternatives for traditional meat and fish that are obtained via cellular agriculture (CA) i.e., tissue engineering for food applications. Stem and progenitor cells are the building blocks and starting point for any CA bioprocess. This review presents CA-relevant vertebrate cell types and procedures needed for their myogenic and adipogenic differentiation since muscle and fat tissue are the primary target tissues for CM/CS production. The review also describes existing challenges, such as a need for immortalized cell lines, or physical and biochemical parameters needed for enhanced meat/fat culture efficiency and ways to address them.
... The hashtags ranked first (#culturedmeat), second (#cultivatedmeat), and seventh (#cellbasedmeat) included the most commonly used synonyms of this product. The most frequently used terms for this product are "cultured meat", "cultivated meat", and "cellbased meat" [16,83]. Other frequently used synonyms were found in the hashtags ranked fourth (#cellag) and eleventh (#cellularagriculture), which reference cell-based meat. ...
The rapid development of technologies for cultured meat production has led to new challenges for producers regarding appropriate communication with future customers in order to deliver products to a viable market. Communication analysis of social media enables the identification of the key characteristics of the monitored topic, as well as the main areas of communication by individual users based on active digital footprints. This study aimed to identify the key characteristics of cultured meat based on communication analysis of the social network Twitter. Communication analysis was performed based on 36,356 Tweets posted by 4128 individual users. This analysis identified the following main communicated characteristics: clean meat, future meat, and sustainable meat. Latent Dittrich allocation identified five communication topics: (1) clean and sustainable products, (2) comparisons with plant-based protein and the impact on agribusiness, (3) positive environmental aspects, (4) cultured meat as an alternative protein, and (5) the regulation of cultured meat.
... Since Post et al. produced a hamburger from cultured meat, various types of cultured meat have been demonstrably synthesized. However, cultured meat with a structure similar to that of real meat and possessing different tissue composition, comprising mostly adipose cells and aligned muscle cells, is still challenging (Choudhury et al., 2020). ...
Tissue engineered cultured meat has been proposed as an emerging innovative process for meat production to overcome the severe consequences of livestock farming, climate change, and an increasing global population. However, currently, cultured meat lacks organized tissue structure, possesses insufficient fat content, and incurs high production costs, which are the major ongoing challenges. In this study, a developed scaffold was synthesized using gelatin and soymilk to create a friendly environment for myogenesis and adipogenesis in C2C12 and 3T3-L1 cells, respectively. The fat containing cultured meat was fabricated with an aligned muscle-like layer and adipose-like layer by stacking these layers alternately. The muscle-like layer expressing myosin and the adipose-like layer abundant in fat were sandwiched to form fat containing muscle tissue. The cytotoxicity and cell survival rate were evaluated using the WST-1 assay and live/dead staining. Myogenesis was confirmed by the expression of myogenin and myosin. The myotubes, myofibrils, and sarcomeres were observed under an inverted microscope, fluorescence microscope, and scanning electron microscope. Adipogenesis was evaluated by protein expression of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ, and oil droplet accumulation was determined by fluorescence microscopy with Nile Red stain. Extracellular matrix secretion was examined by safranin-O staining. In this study, the cultured meat was prepared with muscle-like texture with the addition of pre-adipocyte, where the multilayered muscle-like tissues with fat content would produce juicy cultured meat.
Cultured meat technology is a promising alternative strategy for supplying animal protein taking advantage of its efficiency, safety, and sustainability. The muscle stem cell (MuSC) is one of the most important seed cells for producing muscle fibers, but its weak ex vivo proliferation capacity limits the industrialization of cultured meat. Here we reported that vitamin C (VC) is an excellent supplement for the long-term culture of porcine MuSCs (pMuSCs) ex vivo with considerable proliferative and myogenic effects. After 29 days of culture with 100 μM VC, pMuSCs achieved a 2.8 × 107 ± 0.8 × 107-fold increase in the total cell number, which was 360 times higher than that of cells without VC treatment. pMuSCs that were exposed to VC were less arrested in the G0/G1 phase and showed a significant increase in the expression of cell cycle-related genes such as Cdk1, Cdk2, and Ki67. Additionally, the differentiation potential of pMuSCs was enhanced when cells were proliferated with VC, as evidenced by increased expression of MyoD and MyHC. Furthermore, we demonstrated that VC exerted its proliferative effect through activating the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway via the IGF-1 signaling. These findings highlighted the potential application of VC in the ex vivo expansion of pMuSCs for cultured meat production.
Meat production has long suffered from practical problems, such as high resource consumption, pollution, animal antibiotic residues and zoonotic diseases. The meat-based diet has also been criticized for not only inefficient production processes and a high carbon footprint, but also potential nutritional unbalance. In addition to challenges from population growth, animal disease epidemics and trade wars, the safety and sustainability of traditional meat production is encountering unprecedented challenges. Considerable progress has been made towards the development and production of meat alternatives, including cultured meat, plant-based meat alternatives, microbial protein, edible fungi, microalgae, and insect protein. In this review, we summarize the development status of various meat alternatives, discuss the associated technological challenges, and highlight important areas for future research. The current status of legislation, standard setting, and regulatory acceptance of meat alternatives are also discussed.
Meat is one of the main dietary protein sources that is important in human health and development. Today, the rapid growth of the world's population has resulted in an increasing demand for meat sources worldwide. With the climate crisis devastating natural and agricultural resources, the Earth's ecosystems may no longer support an expanded traditional meat industry. At the same time, increasing meat production and consumption have raised issues regarding the environment, animal ethics, and human health. In line with the global sustainability trends, lab-based meat has been introduced in the last decade as a meat alternative. The production of lab-based meat required high-throughput technology at a wide scale to develop high-quality meat in the laboratory customized for the livestock agriculture industry, environment, animal welfare and human health. However, the development of laboratory-produced meat is still in its early stages, and it is currently confronted with significant challenges such as technological limitations and consumer acceptance. Therefore, there is no legal recognition of lab-based meat worldwide. Nevertheless, due to the trend for a high market demand for meat analogues, this field of study is expected to contribute to the company portfolio, thus more funding and research are required to ensure its safety and societal requirements.
Technical and social perspectives can highlight the interconnectedness of people, planet and profit in cultured meat production. The sector must engage in the socioeconomics and politics of their technology to avoid greenwashing and enact effective change.
In vitro cultured meat is an emerging area of research focus with an innovative approach through tissue engineering (i.e., cellular engineering) to meet the global food demand. The manufacturing of lab-cultivated meat is an innovative business that alleviates life-threatening environmental issues concerning public health and animal well-being on the global platform. There has been a noteworthy advancement in cultivating artificial meat, but still, there are numerous challenges that impede the swift headway of lab-grown meat production at a commercially large scale. In this review, we focus on the manufacturing of edible scaffolds for cultured meat production. In brief, first an introduction to cultivating artificial meat and its current scenario in the market is provided. Further, a discussion on the understanding of composition, cellular, and molecular communications in muscle tissue is presented, which are vital to scaling up the production of lab-grown meat. In continuation, the major components (e.g., cells, biomaterial scaffolds, and their manufacturing technologies, media, and potential bioreactors) for cultured meat production are conferred followed by a comprehensive discussion on the most recent advances in lab-cultured meat. Finally, existing challenges and opportunities including future research perspectives for scaling-up cultured meat production are discussed with conclusive interpretations.
Humans have appropriated modern (food and biomass) and ancient (fossil fuels) biological productivity in unprecedented quantities over the last century, generating the biodiversity and climate ‘crises’ respectively. While the energy sector is gradually addressing the underlying cause of climate change, transitioning from biological to physical sources of energy, the biodiversity and conservation community seems more focussed on treating the symptoms of human exploitation of biological systems. Here, I argue that the biodiversity crisis can only be addressed by an equivalent technological transition to our food systems. Developing three scenarios for future technological and agricultural developments, I illustrate how using renewable physical sources of energy to culture animal products, microbes and carbohydrates will enable humanity to circumvent the inefficiencies of photosynthesis and the conversion of photosynthetic materials into animal products, thus releasing over 80% of agricultural and grazing land ‘back to nature’. However, new political will, governance structures and economic incentives are required to make it a reality.
Cultured meat (CM) has emerged as a breakthrough technology, which has the potential to minimise future negative impacts associated with the rapidly growing world population; such as serious environmental, sustainability, global public health, and animal welfare concerns. Recently numerous researchers in academia and companies have been putting significant efforts into scientific and translational development in this field. Since various pillars of CM manufacturing hold substantial translational potential, there has been a steady interest in filing patent applications globally in the past decade. For the first time, we have performed a patentometric analysis for cultured meat by highlighting the current patents landscape, determining prolific organisations and geographical locations active in the area, and identifying the overall outlook for the field. In total, > 190 patents published in the English language were collected from 1997 to 2020 for the analysis. Relevant data were extracted from the patents, including technology focus, country of origin, assignees, priority date, cooperative patent classification (CPC) code, to analyse the current patent landscape.
The interest in cultured meat is increasing because of the problems with conventional livestock industry. Recently, many studies related to cultured meat have been conducted, but producing large‐sized cultured meat remains a challenge. It is aimed to introduce 3D bioprinting for producing large cell aggregates for cultured meat production. A hydrogel scaffold is produced at the centimeter scale using a bioink consisting of photocrosslinkable materials for digital light processing‐based (DLP) printing, which has high printing accuracy and can produce geometrically complex structures. The light exposure time for hydrogel photopolymerization by DLP bioprinting is optimized based on photorheometry and cell viability assays. Naturally immortalized bovine embryonic fibroblast cells transformed with MyoD and PPARγ2 instead of primary cells are used as the latter have difficulties in maintaining stemness and are associated with animal ethics issues. The cells are mixed into the hydrogel for printing. Myogenesis and adipogenesis are induced simply by changing the medium after printing. Scaffolds are obtained successfully with living cells and large microchannels. The cooked cultured meat maintains its size and shape upon cutting. The overall dimensions are 3.43 cm × 5.53 cm × 0.96 cm. This study provides proof‐of‐concept for producing 3D cultured meat using bioinks. 3D‐bioprinted steak‐type cultured meat production process using digital light processing‐based printing is suitable for solving the scalability challenges. The method allows not only using a simple mixture of muscle and fat cells but also controlling the muscle‐to‐fat ratio.
Meat production has been in the spotlight and has been controversial since the last decades of the past century on aspects such as sustainability, environmental impact and excessive consumption. Remarkable efforts are being made to tackle the challenges that the current meat production system faces. One of the most researched topics is the use of meat replacers. Meat replacers are those products in which a fraction of the meat proteins are substituted by another type of protein (coming from a more sustainable production system), while providing the same organoleptic and nutritional properties as the original product. \r\nIn this introductory chapter, the authors will explore, in a very succinct way, the main aspects driving the need for improving the meat industry sustainability, what are the options currently under investigation, why meat replacers may be a good alternative, and what general considerations need to be contemplated when developing meat replaced products.
This study focuses on the details of consumer response to lab grown ‘cultured meat (CM)’, compared to meat derived from insects, plants and animals. A sample of 254 New Zealanders were interviewed. A word association exercise revealed that consumer reaction to CM was dominated by affective, rather than cognitive factors. The linkages between a general food neophobia scale, a specific CM evaluation scale and purchase intent were studied. The general neophobia scale performed poorly as a predictor, while the 19-point CM evaluation scale performed well. Reducing this scale to its seven affective components, and then to just the two key affective components did not significantly reduce the scale's predictive performance. Overall, the results of this research reveal very significant differences in preference for meat products based upon their origins. Insect protein was strongly disfavoured over all alternatives, while cultured meat was significantly disfavoured compared to more established alternatives. The implications of this for the commercialisation of CM are discussed.
Rapid economic growth and urbanization are driving a growing and changing demand for food in China. However, food production has contributed significantly to greenhouse gas (GHG) and human-induced nitrogen emissions. Specifically, beef and pork are two major contributors to China's direct GHG footprint from livestock. The shift from conventional meat to meat protein alternatives is reportedly one of the promising strategies to reduce resource use and emissions. The paper narratively reviews the literature on whether novel meat alternatives can contribute to the attainment of sustainable development goal 2 (SDG 2), whether meat alternatives have a lower ecological footprint, and whether its supply is sustainable – a step toward achieving SDG 12. We observed that most studies portrayed the environmental footprint of meat alternatives in favourable terms, with few dissenting opinions. In addition, meat alternatives have been shown to expand the supply of protein, possess attributes that are important for food stability and can increase the availability of protein-rich foods to meet the nutritional needs of people. However, there are safety concerns and negative perceptions among the public. The insights from this study will be useful in assessing the prospects and informing decisions in moving towards responsible production, consumption and food security in China.
Cultivating meat from stem cells rather than by raising animals is a promising solution to concerns about the negative externalities of meat production. For cultivated meat to fully mimic conventional meat's organoleptic and nutritional properties, innovations in scaffolding technology are required. Many scaffolding technologies are already developed for use in biomedical tissue engineering. However, cultivated meat production comes with a unique set of constraints related to the scale and cost of production as well as the necessary attributes of the final product, such as texture and food safety. This review discusses the properties of vertebrate skeletal muscle that will need to be replicated in a successful product and the current state of scaffolding innovation within the cultivated meat industry, highlighting promising scaffold materials and techniques that can be applied to cultivated meat development. Recommendations are provided for future research into scaffolds capable of supporting the growth of high‐quality meat while minimizing production costs. Although the development of appropriate scaffolds for cultivated meat is challenging, it is also tractable and provides novel opportunities to customize meat properties. Cultivating meat from cells is a promising solution to the environmental, ethical, health, and food‐security challenges associated with conventional meat production. Cultivated meat will require the development of scalable, low‐cost, and edible or biodegradable scaffolds to support cell growth. This review discusses the unique challenges of cultivated meat scaffolding and highlights promising materials and processing methods worthy of further investigation.
Cultivated (CM) has emerged as a breakthrough technology to produce meat in the lab, which will not only be nutritious (protein-rich) but also mimic the organoleptic properties of conventional meat. However, being in nascent stage, CM technology is facing various limitations. Fermentation, on the other hand, has existed for centuries and is traditionally associated with textural and flavour enhancements in food. The recent developments in the fermentation technology have garnered increased interest among the players in the alternative protein sector.
Scope and approach
This paper discusses how the incorporation of fermentation technology, especially biomass and precision fermentation, into the manufacturing process of CM can potentially alleviate or even eliminate some of its limitations. We have also discussed the technology and product focus and geographical spread of companies in the fermentation and CM space.
Key findings and conclusions
The use of fermentation to produce food ingredients and the industry's fast growth reflects its applicability to CM or alternative protein industries. As the CM industry develops, fermentation continues to engage in essential roles in the CM production process through the provision of natural food-safe ingredients, which could potentially enhance the taste, texture, post-production nutrition and shelf life of the product. Production of ingredients may be derived from engineered metabolic pathways or biomass fermentation with mycelial and macrofungal species. A sizeable proportion of fermentation companies are yielding ingredients of relevance to the CM space. It is postulated that its application will continue to broaden with future research and development.
Cell-based meat has attracted great attention in recent years as a novel product of future food biomanufacturing and a breakthrough in the global food industry. Previous reports mainly focus on the relatively independent investigation of the nature and consumer acceptance of cultured meat, and there is limited research upon its commercialization, safety, and quality control. Based on the existing literature, we overview current cultured meat startups distribution, product varieties, investment, and financing status. Furthermore, the challenges of commercializing cultured meat products are systematically discussed from the aspects of key technologies, safety and supervision, and market expectation. Finally, some strategies and prospects related to the marketing of cultured meat are put forward. Although some cultured meat startups’ development and financing results are exciting, the greatest obstacles to the market promotion of cultured meat products are the large-scale production, safety assessment, improvement of a supervision system, and product-based market survey influenced by technology challenges.
Cell-cultured (cell-based, in vitro) fishes have emerged as a potentially more sustainable alternative to traditional fishes. However, consumer acceptability remains a major challenge to their success in the food market. As observed with plant-based alternatives, consumers expect tasty products. Presence of desired flavors is key to consumer acceptability and may help overcome neophobia. Desired fish flavors vary among fish species due to muscle composition, living environment, and diet. Additionally, traditional “fishy” off-flavors must be avoided. Understanding which flavors are desired or undesired by consumers is vital to the development of successful cell-cultured fish products. Thus, this review summarizes recent information on fish flavors and identifies current challenges in flavor development and potential applications in cell-cultured fish products.
In response to a growing population and rising food demand, the food industry has come up with a wide array of alterations, innovations, and possibilities for making meat in vitro. In addition to revolutionizing the meat industry, this advancement also has profound effects on the environment, health, and welfare of animals. Thus, rather than using slaughtered animals, animal cells are employed to generate cell-based meat, with the cells' proliferation and differentiation taking place in the culture environment. The primary goal of this paper is to examine the overall mechanism and numerous approaches involved in the creation of cell-based meat. It also covers upcoming issues like technical, consumer, and regulatory issues, environmental concerns, the economy, cost of the product, health and safety concerns, and ethical, religious, and societal taboos. Finally, it assesses the future prospects of cell-based meat production.
Artificial meat shows great promise as a method for use in future food production. It is predicted that traditional meat will be insufficient with the increasing human population. In addition, artificial meat has many advantages in terms of human health, such as being sustainable for the environment, controlled fat content, and absence of antibiotics and hormones compared to traditional meat. Artificial meat, also known as cultured meat, is produced through in vitro myogenesis, which includes muscle tissue-based protein products, stem cell culture, and differentiation, and mature muscle cell processing for flavor and texture. Artificial meat production consists of a sequential process; firstly muscle sampling for stem cell collection and followed by muscle tissue dissociation and muscle stem cell isolation, primary cell culture, high cell culture, and ending with muscle differentiation and maturation. A deep understanding of the process by considering its pros and cons will help not only artificial meat production but also the food industry in business sectors seeking new biomaterials. By explaining the methods utilized for artificial meat production, this study is created to prepare for the new era of cellular agriculture as well as for application in academia and industry.
A key step in the manufacturing of cultured meat is to produce myotubes by induced myogenic differentiation. The development of effective, low-cost, and food-safe components that promote the in vitro differentiation of myoblasts is essential for the industrialization of cultured meat. Flavonoids are a class of plant secondary metabolites with various biological activities, but their effects on the regulation of myoblast behaviors are a lack of study. In this study, we selected four representative flavonoids including luteolin, chrysin, apigenin, and genistein, and investigated their effects on porcine myoblasts in the aspects of proliferation, migration, and differentiation. The results showed that four flavonoids all had relatively low cell toxicity but weak ability to promote the proliferation of porcine myoblasts. A positive effect of luteolin was observed in the migration and differentiation of porcine myoblasts, as indicated by improved migration rate and fusion index, as well as upregulated expression of Myogenin and MyHC. Pharmacological inhibition of PI3K activity attenuated the efficacy of luteolin on porcine myoblasts, and further analysis showed that luteolin increased the phosphorylation of PI3K, Akt, and mTOR, indicating the activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling pathway. In conclusion, these findings showed that luteolin promoted the migration and differentiation of porcine myoblast via the activation of PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling, providing biological evidence for its application in cultured meat production.
Cultured meat is still under development but could possibly serve as a meat alternative. As a result, the acceptance and perception of cultured meat have received considerable attention in consumer research. However, only few comparisons to meat or meat alternatives have been made, which makes it unclear how cultured meat compares to these products. This is the first study to directly compare cultured meat to plant‐based meat alternatives (PBMA), fish, insects, and conventional meat. Dutch consumers (n = 288) evaluated their perception and willingness to consume (WTC) patties made from the five sources listed above. Consumer segmentation based on the WTC ratings was performed, and the resulting clusters were compared in terms of their preferences, perception of cultured meat, and demographic and psychographic variables. To see if naming affected consumers’ cultured meat perception, respondents were assigned to one of five naming conditions for cultured meat. The clusters analysis yielded three clusters, two of which showed moderate WTC cultured meat. The first cluster could be characterized as “meat lovers.” Their WTC was strongest for conventional meat, followed by cultured meat, and tastiness was their main driver of WTC. The second cluster's preference was fish, followed by PBMA, with naturalness, safety, and tastiness being their drivers of WTC. The third cluster's highest WTC was for PBMA, followed by cultured meat. Among their drivers of WTC were healthiness, sustainability, and animal friendliness. Psychographic variables were highly valuable in explaining the clusters. Finally, no effects of naming for cultured meat were observed. The results contribute to the design of guidelines to promote different meat alternatives considering specific target populations.
For decades, two-dimensional cell culture has been regarded as a major tool in cellular and molecular biology due to its simplicity, reproducibility and reliable nature. However, it is now recognized that 2D cell culture underrepresents the in vivo environment of living cells. The development and use of 3D scaffolds and biomaterials provide researchers an ability to more closely mimic the in vivo environment. However, many biomaterials are of animal origin, leading to variability, environmental and ethical concerns. Here we present three animal-free scaffolds: decellularized plant tissue, chitin/chitosan and recombinant collagen. Decellularized plant tissue provides a wide array of structures with varying biochemical, topographical and mechanical properties; chitin/chitosan-based scaffolds have shown synergistic bactericidal effects and improved cell-matrix interaction; and lastly, recombinant collagen has the potential to closely resemble native tissue, as opposed to the other two. These benefits, alongside potential scalability and tunability, open the door to applications beyond the biomedical realm, such as innovations in cellular agriculture and future food technologies.
Recent years have seen increasing interest in research on consumer acceptance of clean meat. Whilst some consumers are enthusiastic about the prospect of reducing the health risks, environmental harms, and animal welfare implications associated with conventional meat production, others have concerns about the product's taste, price, safety, and naturalness. Some evidence suggests that acceptance of clean meat will vary substantially across cultures, though there is currently a lack of quantitative research in Asia and country comparisons on this topic. Both are likely to be important areas given the forecasted increase in meat consumption in developing countries. Participants (n = 3.030) were recruited through the research panel CINT to take an online questionnaire about clean meat and plant-based meat. The participants were representative of China, India, and the U.S. in terms of age and gender, though participants in India and China were disproportionately urban, high income, and well-educated. As well as clean meat, participants were asked about plant-based meat, a conceptually similar product with similar potential to displace demand for conventional meat. They also answered the Meat Attachment Questionnaire and the Food Neophobia Scale. We compared these variables between countries, and used regression models to identify which demographic and attitudinal factors predicted purchase intent toward both products. We found significantly higher acceptance of clean and plant-based meat in India and China compared to the USA. We also found significantly higher food neophobia and significantly lower meat attachment in India compared to China and the USA. We identified several demographic patterns of clean and plant-based meat acceptance as well as which beliefs were important predictors of acceptance within each country. In particular, higher familiarity predicted higher acceptance of plant-based and clean meat across all countries. We found high levels of acceptance of clean meat in the three most populous countries worldwide, and with even higher levels of acceptance in China and India compared to the USA. These results underline the importance of clean meat producers exploring new markets for their products, especially as meat consumption in developing countries continues to rise.
Cultured meat forms part of the emerging field of cellular agriculture. Still an early stage field it seeks to deliver products traditionally made through livestock rearing in novel forms that require no, or significantly reduced, animal involvement. Key examples include cultured meat, milk, egg white and leather. Here, we focus upon cultured meat and its technical, socio-political and regulatory challenges and opportunities.
Scope and approach
The paper reports the thinking of an interdisciplinary team, all of whom have been active in the field for a number of years. It draws heavily upon the published literature, as well as our own professional experience. This includes ongoing laboratory work to produce cultured meat and over seventy interviews with experts in the area conducted in the social science work.
Key findings and conclusions
Cultured meat is a promising, but early stage, technology with key technical challenges including cell source, culture media, mimicking the in-vivo myogenesis environment, animal-derived and synthetic materials, and bioprocessing for commercial-scale production. Analysis of the social context has too readily been reduced to ethics and consumer acceptance, and whilst these are key issues, the importance of the political and institutional forms a cultured meat industry might take must also be recognised, and how ambiguities shape any emergent regulatory system.
Due to the nutritional importance and the sustained popularity of meat as a foodstuff, the livestock production sector has been expanding incessantly. This exponential growth of livestock meat sector poses a gigantic challenge to the sustainability of food production system. A new technological breakthrough is being contemplated to develop a substitute for livestock meat. The idea is to grow meat in a culture in the lab and manipulate its composition selectively. This paper aims to discuss the concept of In Vitro Meat production system, articulate the underlying technology and analyse the context of its implications, as proposed by several scientists and stakeholders. The challenges facing this emerging technology have also been discussed.
In vitro meat production is a novel idea of producing meat without involving animals with the help of tissue engineering techniques. This biofabrication of complex living products by using various bioengineering techniques is a potential solution to reduce the ill effects of current meat production systems and can dramatically transform traditional animal-based agriculture by inventing 'animal-free' meat and meat products. Nutrition-related diseases, food borne illnesses, resource use and pollution, and use of farm animals are some serious consequences associated with conventional meat production methods. This new way of animal-free meat production may offer health and environmental advantages by reducing environmental pollution and resource use associated with current meat production systems and will also ensure sustainable production of designer, chemically safe and disease free meat as the conditions in an in vitro meat production system are controllable and manipulatable. Theoretically, this system is believed to be efficient enough to supply the global demand for meat, however, establishment of a sustainable in vitro meat production would face considerably greater technical challenges and a great deal of research is still needed to establish this animal-free meat culturing system on an industrial scale.
In vitro meat production system is the production of meat outside the food animals by culturing the stem cells derived from farm animals inside the bioreactor by using advanced tissue engineering techniques. Besides winning the favour of animal rights activists for its humane production of meat, in vitro meat production system also circumvents many of the issues associated with conventional meat production systems, like excessively brutal slaughter of food animals, nutrition-related diseases, foodborne illnesses, resource use, antibiotic-resistant pathogen strains, and massive emissions of methane that contribute to global warming. As the conditions in an in vitro meat production system are controlled and manipulatable, it will be feasible to produce designer, chemically safe and disease-free meat on sustainable basis. However, many challenges are to be faced before cultured meat becomes commercially feasible. Although, the production cost and the public acceptance are of paramount importance, huge funds are desperately required for further research in the field.
Meat produced in vitro has been proposed as a humane, safe and environmentally beneficial alternative to slaughtered animal flesh as a source of nutritional muscle tissue. The basic methodology of an in vitro meat production system (IMPS) involves culturing muscle tissue in a liquid medium on a large scale. Each component of the system offers an array of options which are described taking into account recent advances in relevant research. A major advantage of an IMPS is that the conditions are controlled and manipulatable. Limitations discussed include meeting nutritional requirements and large scale operation. The direction of further research and prospects regarding the future of in vitro meat production will be speculated.Industrial relevanceThe development of an alternative meat production system is driven by the growing demand for meat and the shrinking resources available to produce it by current methods. Implementation of an in vitro meat production system (IMPS) to complement existing meat production practices creates the opportunity for meat products of different characteristics to be put onto the market. In vitro produced meat products resembling the processed and comminuted meat products of today will be sooner to develop than those resembling traditional cuts of meat. While widening the scope of the meat industry in practices and products, the IMPS will reduce the need for agricultural resources to produce meat.
A myooid is a three-dimensional skeletal muscle construct cultured from mammalian myoblasts and fibroblasts. The purpose was to compare over several weeks in culture the morphology, excitability, and contractility of myooids developed from neonatal and adult rat cells. The hypotheses tested were as follows: (1) baseline forces of myooids correlate with the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the myooids composed of fibroblasts, and (2) peak isometric tetanic forces normalized by total CSA (specific P(o)) of neonatal and adult rat myooids are not different. Electrical field stimulation was used to measure the excitability and peak tetanic forces. The proportion of the CSA composed of fibroblasts was greater for neonatal (40%) than adult (17%) myooids. For all myooids the baseline passive force normalized by fibroblast CSA (mean = 5.5 kPa) correlated with the fibroblast CSA (r(2) = 0.74). A two-element cylindrical model was analyzed to determine the contributions of fibroblasts and myotubes to the baseline force. At each measurement period, the specific P(o) of the adult myooids was greater than that of the neonatal myooids. The specific P(o) of the adult myooids was approximately 1% of the control value for adult muscles and did not change with time in culture, while that of neonatal myooids increased.
In vitro tissue engineering of skeletal muscle involves culturing myogenic cells in an environment that emulates the in vivo environment so that the cells proliferate, fuse, organize in three dimensions, and differentiate into functional skeletal muscle. The tissue engineer uses a multitude of in vitro environmental cues to direct the proliferation process. The end result will be a skeletal muscle construct that resembles skeletal muscle in both form and function. The construct will be organized like a skeletal muscle, with long multinucleated cells oriented parallel to its long axis, and the construct will be capable of generating useful directed force and power. Such constructs have been developed from avian, rodent, and human primary muscle cells as well as immortalized myogenic cells. Measurements and characterization of the construct’s biochemical and contractile functions have begun. Use of these early generation constructs for basic science research, as implantable therapeutic protein delivery devices, and as drug screening constructs are moving forward. Skeletal muscle constructs will likely be implanted into humans as sources of secreted proteins in the near future, and will no doubt one day replace muscle contractile function in patients with functional deficits in force and power generation.
Consumer acceptance of cultured meat is expected to depend on a wide diversity of determinants ranging from technology-related perceptions to product-specific expectations, and including wider contextual factors like media coverage, public involvement, and trust in science, policy and society. This paper discusses the case of cultured meat against this multitude of possible determinants shaping future consumer acceptance or rejection. The paper also presents insights from a primary exploratory study performed in April 2013 with consumers from Flanders (Belgium) (n=180). The concept of cultured meat was only known (unaided) by 13% of the study participants. After receiving basic information about what cultured meat is, participants expressed favorable expectations about the concept. Only 9% rejected the idea of trying cultured meat, while two thirds hesitated and about quarter indicated to be willing to try it. The provision of additional information about the environmental benefits of cultured meat compared to traditional meat resulted in 43% of the participants indicating to be willing to try this novel food, while another 51% indicated to be ‘maybe’ willing to do so. Price and sensory expectations emerged as major obstacles. Consumers eating mostly vegetarian meals were less convinced that cultured meat might be healthy, suggesting that vegetarians may not be the ideal primary target group for this novel meat substitute. Although exploratory rather than conclusive, the findings generally underscore doubts among consumers about trying this product when it would become available, and therefore also the challenge for cultured meat to mimic traditional meat in terms of sensory quality at an affordable price in order to become acceptable for future consumers.
Between people who unabashedly support eating meat and those who adopt moral vegetarianism, lie a number of people who are
uncomfortably carnivorous and vaguely wish they could be vegetarians. Opposing animal suffering in principle, they can ignore
it in practice, relying on the visual disconnect between supermarket meat and slaughterhouse practices not to trigger their
moral emotions. But what if we could have the best of both worlds in reality—eat meat and not harm animals? The nascent biotechnology
of tissue culture, originally researched for medical applications, holds out just such a promise. Meat could be grown invitro
without killing animals. In fact, this technology may not just be an intriguing option, but might be our moral obligation
Cultured meat (i.e., meat produced in vitro using tissue engineering techniques) is being developed as a potentially healthier and more efficient alternative to conventional meat. Life cycle assessment (LCA) research method was used for assessing environmental impacts of large-scale cultured meat production. Cyanobacteria hydrolysate was assumed to be used as the nutrient and energy source for muscle cell growth. The results showed that production of 1000 kg cultured meat requires 26-33 GJ energy, 367-521 m(3) water, 190-230 m(2) land, and emits 1900-2240 kg CO(2)-eq GHG emissions. In comparison to conventionally produced European meat, cultured meat involves approximately 7-45% lower energy use (only poultry has lower energy use), 78-96% lower GHG emissions, 99% lower land use, and 82-96% lower water use depending on the product compared. Despite high uncertainty, it is concluded that the overall environmental impacts of cultured meat production are substantially lower than those of conventionally produced meat.
Meat and Seafood Production & Consumption, Our World in Data
Ritchie, H. and Roser, M. (2018) Meat and Seafood
Production & Consumption, Our World in Data
Developing cultured meat scaffolds of extruded vegetable-based proteins
Krona, A. et al. (2017) Developing cultured meat scaffolds
of extruded vegetable-based proteins. Annu. Transact.
Nordic Rheol. Soc. 45, 311-313