ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Visualization-Based Rapid Screening and Quantitative Analysis of Target Peptides for Meat Authentication.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Identification of Species-Specific Peptide Markers in Highly Processed Meat Products Using De Novo Sequencing.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Amidst growing demand for meat products, concerns regarding their authenticity and safety have intensified, primarily due to potential fraudulent substitutions of cheaper meats, which are not accurately labeled. This study presents a novel strategy for the rapid screening and validation of target peptides for accurate quantitative analysis using high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) coupled with multivariate statistical analysis. By integrating hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA) with parallel reaction monitoring (PRM), five species-specific peptides were validated as reliable biomarkers for pork quantification. These peptides demonstrated accurate quantification in simulated meat products with known accurate contents, achieving recoveries of 78-128%, with RSD less than 12%. This methodology markedly enhances screening efficiency by excluding 80% of non-quantitative peptides, providing a robust solution for meat authenticity verification.
Indexed as
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.