Structuring processes for meat analogues

By B. Dekkers, R. Boom, A. J. Goot. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 2018

584 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract Background Animal-derived protein foods, such as meat, have a large impact on the environment. Meat analogues are products that replace meat in its functionality, i.e. have similar product properties and sensory attributes, which is achieved by the fibrous nature of those products. Scope and approach The techniques used to make fibrous products that mimic muscle meats are outlined and categorized based on their approach. The bottom-up approach refers to assembly of structural elements that are combined. The top-down approach refers to structuring of biopolymer blends using an overall force field. The strengths and weaknesses of these approaches are discussed in terms of ingredient and equipment use, (achievable) product resemblance, robustness, scalability, and resource efficiency. To enlarge the theoretical framework, the techniques with the top-down strategy are further contextualized by relating to structure formation processes of materials with other applications, and the methods to analyse the fibrous structures are further outlined. Key findings and conclusions Techniques that follow the bottom-up strategy have the potential to resemble the structure of meat most closely, by structuring the proteins hierarchically through assembly of individual structural components. The top-down strategy is better scalable, is more efficient in its use of resources, but can only create the desired structure on larger length scales. Significant progress has been made on the methods to analyse structured products from the last category. Most analysis methods focussed on the (micro)structural anisotropy of the fibrous products, however there is also a need for methods that allow in situ analysis of the evolution of the structure during processing.

Subfields: Animal Science and Zoology, Biomaterials, Food Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/48cf106e3fe6d4c9580fde7ccc3bddb9abea4738

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Animal Science and Zoology

1. A. Kinchla
2. M. Fiorentini
3. A. Nolden
4. K. Ramachandraiah

In Biomaterials

1. A. Kinchla
2. M. Fiorentini
3. A. Nolden
4. R. Boom
5. A. J. Goot
6. K. Ramachandraiah

In Food Science

1. A. Kinchla
2. M. Fiorentini
3. A. Nolden
4. R. Boom
5. A. J. Goot
6. K. Ramachandraiah

Citations in the corpus

• Potential Development of Sustainable 3D-Printed Meat Analogues: A Review (2021, background): “, in vitro culture, electrospinning) that mainly focus on the uniaxial alignments of muscle cells [25,35].”
• Role of Sensory Evaluation in Consumer Acceptance of Plant-Based Meat Analogs and Meat Extenders: A Scoping Review (2020, methodology): “While there are many different processing methods to prepare meat analogs, one top-down strategy is high-moisture wet extrusion, which is highly successful in achieving a desirable structure, most resembling animal proteins [13].”
• Texture methods for evaluating meat and meat analogue structures: A review (2021, background): “As described by Dekkers, Boom, and van der Goot (2018), two approaches exist to make meat analogues: top-down and bottom-up.”