ArticleNature food2022
Upgrading agrifood co-products via solid fermentation yields environmental benefits under specific conditions only.
Article in Nature food, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dietary fermented cassava peel improves laying performance, yolk fatty acid profile, and economic return in laying hens.Veterinary world · 2026Article
- Biowaste-grown live microbial feed additive sustainably and significantly cut enteric methane emissions in Indian livestock.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Genetic Ablation of the Conidiogenesis Regulator Enhances Mycoprotein Production.Journal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2025Article
- Neurospora intermedia from a traditional fermented food enables waste-to-food conversion.Nature microbiology · 2024Article
- Edible mycelium bioengineered for enhanced nutritional value and sensory appeal using a modular synthetic biology toolkit.Nature communications · 2024Article
- A microbial evolutionary approach for a sustainable future.Microbial biotechnology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transforming residual biomass into edible ingredients is increasingly promoted to alleviate the environmental impacts of food systems. Yet, these approaches mostly rely on emerging technologies and constrained resources, and their environmental benefits remain unclear. By combining process-based consequential life cycle analysis, uncertainty assessment and biomass resource estimation, we quantified the impacts of deploying waste-to-nutrition pathways, here applied to the upgrading of agrifood co-products by solid-state fermentation (SSF). The benefits of reducing the demand for soybean meal by enhancing the protein concentration of feed through SSF do not compensate for the environmental burdens induced by the process on climate change, water depletion and land use. Besides unlocking feed markets to low-feed-quality streams, SSF outperforms energy valorization for most environmental impacts but is less competitive to mitigate climate change. Yet, SSF yields overall environmental benefits when unlocking food markets rather than supplying feed and energy services. Systematic methodological harmonization is required to assess the potential of novel ingredients, as outcomes vary according to the displaced food and feed baskets, and related land use changes.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.