Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41109903›Full record

ReviewNPJ science of food2025

Trends in non-animal scaffolds for cultured meat structuration.

Gabrielle Antunes Seibert, Vivian Feddern, Ana Paula Almeida Bastos, Anuj Kumar, Silvani Verruck

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NPJ science of food, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Starch-Based Scaffolds for Cultivated Meat Production: Challenges and Perspectives.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Gabrielle Antunes SeibertDepartment of Food Science and Technology, Agricultural Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina, 88034-001, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil.
Vivian FeddernEmbrapa Clima Temperado, BR-392, km 78, Monte Bonito, 96010971, Pelotas, RS, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8678-2415
Ana Paula Almeida BastosEmbrapa Suínos e Aves, BR 153, km 110, 89715-899, Concórdia, SC, Brazil.
Anuj KumarSchool of Materials Science and Technology, Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi, India.
Silvani VerruckDepartment of Food Science and Technology, Agricultural Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina, 88034-001, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil. silvani.verruck@ufsc.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0266-5885

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa e Inovação do Estado de Santa Catarina (Foundation for Research and Innovation of the State of Santa Catarina) 2024TR002561Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation | Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) 200015/2025-7
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cultured meat offers a sustainable protein alternative to meet growing food demands, relying on scaffolds to structure muscle tissue. This review evaluates plant-derived and polymeric scaffolds-synthetic polymers, peptides, fungal/plant materials-and techniques like 3D bioprinting, electrospinning, and microcarriers. Scaffold types (fibrous, porous, hydrogels) are assessed for adhesion, degradation, cost, and scalability. Highlighting cell compatibility, material pros/cons, and scalability challenges, the study identifies research gaps to advance cultured meat production.

Identifiers

PMID41109903
PMCPMC12535591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.