Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32899106›Full record

ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Strategies for Sustainable Substitution of Livestock Meat.

Guihun Jiang, Kashif Ameer, Honggyun Kim, Eun-Jung Lee, Karna Ramachandraiah, Geun-Pyo Hong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Could Cultured Meat Be a Sustainable and Safe Source of Protein?Molecular nutrition & food research · 2025
    Review
  6. Feasibility of UsingFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Digital Phenotyping: A Game Changer for the Broiler Industry.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Meat substitutes: Resource demands and environmental footprints.Resources, conservation, and recycling · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Guihun JiangSchool of Public Health, Jilin Medical University, Jilin 132013, China.
Kashif AmeerInstitute of Food and Nutritional Sciences, PMAS-Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi 46300, Pakistan.ORCID 0000-0003-4019-1772
Honggyun KimDepartment of Food Science & Biotechnology, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Korea.
Eun-Jung LeeDepartment of Food Science & Biotechnology, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Korea.
Karna RamachandraiahDepartment of Food Science & Biotechnology, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Korea.
Geun-Pyo HongDepartment of Food Science & Biotechnology, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6343-3407

Funding

Korea Institute of Planning and Evaluation for Technology in Food, Agriculture and Forestry 317040-05
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The consequences of climate change are becoming increasingly discernible everywhere, and initiatives have been taken worldwide to mitigate climate change. In agriculture, particularly meat production from the livestock sector is known to contribute to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) that drive climate change. Thus, to mitigate climate impact, strategies that include a shift in consumption patterns, technological advancements and reduction in food wastes/losses have been discussed. In this review, strategies that focus on meat consumption patterns are evaluated from the technological feasibility, environmental impact and consumer acceptance viewpoints. While plant-based substitutes have efficient nutrient conversion and lower GHG emissions, consumer perception, cost, and other trade-offs exist. Although cultured meat precludes the need of any animals and large land areas, its environmental impact is not clear and is contingent upon production systems and the achievement of decarbonization. Reducing wastes and the re-use of meat processing by-products have the potential to lower the environmental impact. Valuable proteins, heat, electricity and biofuels extracted from wastes and by-products not only reduce the disposal of wastes but also offset some GHG emissions. Perception related challenges that exist for all substitution strategies require specific consumer target marketing strategies. Policy measures such as taxation of meat products and subsidies for alternatives are also met with challenges, thereby requiring reforms or new policies.

Indexed as

climate changegreenhouse gas emissionslivestockmeat consumption

Identifiers

PMID32899106
PMCPMC7555167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.