German consumers' attitudes toward artificial meat.

The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of sociodemographic characteristics on willingness to try (WTT), regularly eat (WTE), or pay (WTP) for artificial meat, its expected societal challenges and general acceptance as well as its future potential development in Germany. Answers to an online questionnaire by 3,558 potential German adult consumers were evaluated. About 63% of the respondents thought this novel food was promising/acceptable. The vast majority (70%) stated that they would be willing to try it, with the most important drivers being ethics, curiosity and eco-friendliness. Around 57% of the participants said they would be willing to eat artificial meat regularly. Most of the respondents (40%) were willing to pay the same price for artificial as for conventional meat. In terms of its future potential, almost 75% of respondents believed that this new product would become commercialized in more than five years and that it was perceived as a solution that is both more ethical (67%) and more environmentally friendly (58%) than traditional meat. In addition, there were significant impacts of demographic factors on the willingness to engage with artificial meat. For example, high WTT and WTE were found among young male respondents (18-30 years of age), males that rarely consumed meat or had a low income (< €1,500). This also applied to the female respondents, who, however, belonged to higher income classes. Young German consumers with a high level of education or income up to €3,000 as well as consumers who did not eat meat had a high WTP for this novel food. In addition, respondents' positive opinion and acceptance of artificial meat had a positive influence on WTT and WTP. These results are important for the discussion of a paradigm shift in global meat production with respect to sustainability, demand for meat and the adoption of new food products.

Does transport stress have any effect on carcass quality of Nellore cattle (Bos taurus indicus) in Brazil? - A case study.

With the increasing concomitant demands for Brazilian beef and in particular high-quality beef, there is a need for observational studies of the effects of pre- and post-slaughter practices on beef carcass traits. We hypothesized in our case study that pre-slaughter transport of bovines over significant distances would induce stress in animals, and that this would reduce carcass quality because of higher pH resulting from long-distance transportation. To test this hypothesis, 30,230 Nellore carcasses from a private slaughterhouse were evaluated 24 h postmortem. Analysis showed correlations between animal maturity, ultimate pH, distance, and carcass weight. More precisely, there was a slight positive correlation between ultimate pH and weight (but not with transportation distance) and a slight positive correlation between maturity and weight. A linear regression model (R2 = 0.016) failed to show distance having a significant effect on ultimate pH (P = 0.63), while carcass weight significantly affected ultimate pH (P < 0.001) with a low coefficient of 0.0003. Maturity negatively affected ultimate pH also (P < 0.001) but with also a small effect (-0.0008). Results (from 95% confidence intervals of variance of the random effects and of the random errors) showed that the variability within farms was higher than between farms. The linear mixed model showed that maturity had a significant effect on carcass weight value (P < 0.001) with a large coefficient of 2.90. The R2 of the linear mixed model was 46.03%. In conclusion, while weight and maturity both affect ultimate pH, long distances did not significantly impact ultimate pH and therefore the beef quality from Nellore cattle. This could be because of low stress during transport, as well as the physical characteristics of the Nellore breed that favor greater resistance to tropical climatic conditions.

Review: Will "cultured meat" transform our food system towards more sustainability?

Our agri-food system today should provide enough healthy food of good quality for the growing human population. However, it should also preserve natural resources and better protect livestock. In this context, some FoodTech companies are developing a disruptive approach: cell culture for in vitro food production of "meat" but this technology is still at the research and development stage. This article will highlight its development, the technologies used and the stakeholders involved (Part 1), its potential environmental impacts (Part 2) but also regulatory, social and ethical issues (Part 3). This article aims to shed light throughout the manuscript on two major controversies related to "cultured meat". The first controversy is related to its ethical aspects, which includes different points: its potential to reduce animal suffering and therefore to improve animal welfare, the future values of our society, and a trend towards food artificialisation. The second controversy includes environmental, health and nutritional issues, in relation to the characteristics and quality of "cultured meat" with an important question: should we call it meat? These two controversies act in interaction in association with related societal, legal and consequently political issues. Answers to the various questions depend on the different visions of the World by stakeholders, consumers and citizens. Some of them argue for a moderate or a strong reduction in livestock farming, or even the abolition of livestock farming perceived as an exploitation of farm animals. Others just want a reduction of the current much criticised intensive/industrial model. Compared with other potential sustainable solutions to be implemented such as reduction of food losses and waste, new food consumption habits with less proteins of animal sources, sustainable intensification, development of agroecological livestock production, or the development of the market for other meat substitutes (proteins from plants, mycoproteins, algae, insects, etc.), "cultured meat" has an uncertain future.

Perception of cultured "meat" by Italian, Portuguese and Spanish consumers.

The aim of this study was to investigate how consumers (n = 2,171) originated from South-Western Europe (Italy, Portugal, and Spain) perceive cultured "meat" (CM) and if their demographic characteristics (origin, gender, age, education, occupation, and meat consumption) are related to their willingness to try (WTT), to regularly eat (WTE) and to pay (WTP) for CM. We found the current respondents had an initially positive attitude towards CM: 49% of them perceived CM as "promising and/or acceptable" and 23% "fun and/or intriguing" whereas 29% considered it as "absurd and/or disgusting". In addition, 66 and 25% would be willing and not willing to try CM, respectively. However, 43% had no WTE for CM and, 94% would not pay more for CM compared to conventional meat. Age and especially occupation were good indicators of consumer acceptance of CM. Respondents of 18-30 years of age had the highest acceptance. Respondents outside the meat sector had the highest WTE and people working within the meat sector had the lowest WTE, scientists (within or outside the meat sector) had the highest WTT, people not scientists but within the meat sector had the lowest WTT. Additionally, we found that men are more likely to accept CM than women, Spanish-speaking consumers had the highest WTT and WTE, people with vegan and vegetarian diets may pay more for CM but generally no more than for conventional meat. The perceptions that CM may be more eco-friendly, ethical, safe and healthy than conventional meat, and to a lower extent, the perception that current meat production causes ethical and environmental problems are likely to be major motives for the current respondents to try, regularly eat and pay for CM. On the opposite, lower perceptions of CM benefits and of conventional meat weaknesses more generally, plus emotional resistance towards CM are main barriers to accept CM.

Consumer perception of "artificial meat" in the educated young and urban population of Africa.

African's population is expected to grow especially in cities to reach about 2.5 billion in 2050. This will create an unprecedented boom in the demand for animal products over the coming years which will need to be managed properly. Industry stakeholders worldwide have been touting the potential benefits of "artificial meat" in recent years as a more sustainable way of producing animal protein. "Artificial meat" is therefore moving into the global spotlight and this study aimed to investigate how African meat consumers of the coming generations perceive it, i.e., the urban, more educated and younger consumers. Three surveys were conducted with more than 12,000 respondents in total. The respondents came from 12 different countries (Cameroon, Congo, -DRC Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal South Africa, Tanzania and Tunisia). Respondents in this survey prefered the term "artificial meat". This term was therefore used throughout the survey. "Artificial meat" proved to be fairly well known in the surveyed countries as about 64% the respondents had already heard of "artificial meat." Only 8.9% were definitely willing to try "artificial meat" (score of 5 on a scale of 1-5) mostly males between 31 and 50 years of age. Furthermore, 31.2% strongly agreed that "artificial meat" will have a negative impact on the rural life (score of 5 on a scale of 1-5) and 32.9% were not prepared to accept "artificial meat" as a viable alternative in the future but were still prepared to eat meat alternatives. Of all the results, we observed significant differences in responses between respondents' countries of origin, age and education level with interactions between these factors for willingness to try. For instance, the richest and most educated countries that were surveyed tended to be more willing to try "artificial meat." A similar pattern was observed for willingness to pay, except that gender had no significant effect and age had only a small effect. One major observation is that a large majority of respondents are not willing to pay more for "artificial meat" than for meat from livestock.

Consumer perception of the challenges facing livestock production and meat consumption.

With the global meat market growing and intensive livestock farming systems increasing, the impacts of livestock are a growing concern among consumers, further influencing their meat consumption. Understanding consumer perceptions of livestock production is therefore a key issue. This study surveyed 16,803 respondents in France, Brazil, China, Cameroon and South Africa to investigate the different perceptions of the ethical and environmental impacts of livestock production among consumer segments in different countries based on their sociodemographic characteristics. On average, the current respondents in Brazil and China and/or who consume little meat, are female, not in the meat sector and/or more educated, are more likely to think that livestock meat production causes serious ethical and environmental problems; while those in China, France and Cameroon and/or who consume little meat and/or are women, younger, not in the meat sector, and/or more educated, are more likely to agree that reducing meat consumption could be a good solution to these problems. Additionally, an affordable price and sensory quality are the main drivers of food purchases for the current respondents. In conclusion, sociodemographic factors have significant effects on consumer perception of livestock meat production and meat consumption habits. Perceptions of the challenges facing livestock meat production differ between countries in different geographic regions based on social, economic, cultural contexts and dietary habits.

Should and will "cultured meat" become a reality in our plates?

Produced from proliferating cells in bioreactors with a controlled culture medium, "cultured meat" has been presented by its supporters, who are mainly private actors (start-ups), as a sustainable solution to meet the growing demand for animal proteins without weaknesses of animal husbandry in terms of environmental impact, animal welfare or even health. The aim of this chapter is to take stock of current knowledge on the potential benefits and pitfalls of this novel product. Since robust scientific arguments are lacking on these aspects, there is no consensus on the health and nutritional qualities of "cultured meat" for human consumption and on its potential low environmental impact. In addition, many issues related to the market, legislation, ethics and consumer perception remain to be addressed. The way in which this new product is regarded appears to be influenced by many factors related mainly to its price, as well as to the perception of safety, sensory traits but also environmental and nutritional issues. Therefore, research by universities and public research institutes indicates that "cultured meat" production does not present any major advantages in economic, nutritional, sensory, environmental, ethical or social terms compared to conventional meat. Thus, a more balanced diet by diversifying our sources of plant and animal proteins, consuming other meat substitutes, and reducing food losses and waste appear to be more effective short-term solutions to the urgent need of producing enough food for the growing human population (while reducing environmental degradation and animal suffering).

Does the future of meat in France depend on cultured muscle cells? Answers from different consumer segments.

This research aimed to study the perception of French consumers on "cultured meat". The respondents (n = 5418) are characterised by an over-representation of young people, meat professional or scientists compared to the French population. Approximately 40-50% of them believed that animal husbandry faced ethical and environmental issues. Only 18-26% of them believed that "cultured meat" could solve these difficulties, a majority thought that it would not be healthy or tasty and that "cultured meat" is an "absurd and/or disgusting" idea. However, 23.9% and 16.9% thought it is a "fun and/or interesting" and a "promising and/or feasible" idea and 91.7% were not prepared to buy "cultured meat" at a higher price than meat. The respondents not familiar with "cultured meat", young people or women are more in support of it due to a greater sensitivity to issues related to livestock systems. Older men and meat professionals are the most reluctant. Thus, the "cultured meat" market would represent at best a niche market.

Brazilian Consumers' Attitudes towards So-Called "Cell-Based Meat".

The main goal of this online survey was to investigate the attitudes of Brazilians towards "cell-based meat", which has become the subject of great scientific and media enthusiasm. The answers of 4471 respondents concluded that 46.6% of them thought "cell-based meat" was promising and acceptable. More than 66% would be willing to try this novel product compared to 23% who expressed reluctance to do so. Nearly 40% of the total respondents did not want to eat "cell-based meat" regularly at all, whereas 29%, 43.2%, and 39.9% were willing to eat it regularly in restaurants, at home, and/or in ready-made meals, respectively. However, the majority of respondents (71%) were keen to pay much less for "cell-based meat" than conventionally produced meat (or even nothing at all), compared to 24.3% who were willing to pay the same price as conventional meat, whereas only 4.8% were willing to pay more. Approximately 51% of them considered that "cell-based meat" should not be called "meat" for marketing purposes. Job, monthly income, age, and gender were major factors impacting consumer acceptance. Meat professionals and consumers with higher incomes were less willing to eat "cell-based meat" regularly. Women (especially younger women) were the most concerned about the ethical and environmental issues related to meat production and were the most convinced that reducing meat consumption could be a good solution to the meat industry's problems. Respondents who did not accept "cell-based meat" and did not eat meat substitutes had a negative attitude to this novel food (they considered it absurd and/or disgusting) and did not believe that "cell-based meat" should be called "meat" for marketing purposes. In contrast, the people who thought that "cell-based meat" could be called "meat" perceived it in a rather positive way. These results are important for consumers of meat and meat substitutes and for companies aiming to enter the potential future Brazilian market of "cell-based meat".

Chinese Consumers' Attitudes and Potential Acceptance toward Artificial Meat.

The interest for artificial meat has recently expanded. However, from the literature, perception of artificial meat in China is not well known. A survey was thus carried out to investigate Chinese attitudes toward artificial meat. The answers of 4666 respondents concluded that 19.9% and 9.6% of them were definitely willing and unwilling to try artificial meat respectively, whereas 47.2% were not willing to eat it regularly, and 87.2% were willing to pay less for it compared to conventional meat. Finally, 52.9% of them will accept artificial meat as an alternative to conventional meat. Emotional resistance such as the perception of "absurdity or disgusting" would lead to no willingness to eat artificial meat regularly. The main concerns were related to safety and unnaturalness, but less to ethical and environmental issues as in Western countries. Nearly half of the respondents would like artificial meat to be safe, tasty, and nutritional. Whereas these expectations have low effects on willingness to try, they may induce consumers' rejection to eat artificial meat regularly, underlying the weak relationship between wishes to try and to eat regularly. Thus, potential acceptance of artificial meat in China depends on Chinese catering culture, perception of food and traditional philosophy.

Analysis of Scientific and Press Articles Related to Cultured Meat for a Better Understanding of Its Perception.

Cultured meat is presented by its advocates as a good alternative for consumers who want to be more ethically minded but who do not wish to change their diet. This novel food has become an emerging topic in both the scientific field and the press media. From a bibliometric analysis of scientific publications and on a sociometric analysis of the mainstream press, the aim of this study was to identify potential differences between the scientific view and the public perception. This research analyzed the publications indexed by SCI-EXPANDED in the Web of Science Core Collection database owned by Clarivate Analytics, for scientific literature analysis, and indexed by the Factiva database, for the press media. A total of 327 scientific publications were analyzed according to year of publication and country and institution of origin, also including coauthorships, co-citations, and scientific fields' and journals' networks. A knowledge mapping using VOSviewer was used to study the literature in the field. Based on Factiva, 12,900 press articles dealing with artificial meat, mainly in English, have been found through public databases. The main conclusion is that cultured meat is mainly developing in the USA and the UK, with other countries, such as China, observing the trend for potential future applications. Scientific articles seemed initially to focus mainly on technical aspects of artificial meat and more recently on health value, consumer's acceptance, and sustainability. However, the potential environment-friendly effects of this novel food are more and more studied or described in scientific or press articles.

European conformation and fat scores of bovine carcasses are not good indicators of marbling.

Marbling is one of the primary carcass attributes utilized in most beef grading systems for eating quality evaluation. In Europe, the current beef grading system is the EUROP grid, which is focused on carcass commercial value and production yield rather than eating quality estimation. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between marbling and the most common scores for carcass classification in Europe. If there are strong associations between marbling and European classification scores, marbling score may be estimated from the carcass characteristics. However, this study indicated that European classification scores explain only a slight proportion of the variance in marbling score (32%, 46%, 34% and 21% for the entire cattle group, young bulls, females and steers, respectively). Therefore, whereas the EUROP grid is well adapted to estimate yield, it does not reflect marbling at all. The European beef industry should take into account additional indicators related to beef palatability to assist the determination of the commercial value of carcasses.

Contributions of tenderness, juiciness and flavor liking to overall liking of beef in Europe.

This study evaluated the contributions of sensory traits to overall liking in Europe. Perceptions by untrained consumers of tenderness, juiciness, flavor liking and overall liking were determined using the Meat Standards Australia protocols. According to European consumer testing with European beef samples, flavor liking was the most important contributor (39%) to beef overall liking, followed by tenderness (31%) and juiciness (24%) (P < .05; R2 > 0.94). The improvement in tenderness over the last decades may explain the highest contribution of flavor liking nowadays. Flavor liking is therefore the main driver of variability in overall liking. Juiciness is the least robust trait which could be influenced by other traits during consumer perception. For outstanding steaks, each sensory trait should have excellent scores and high contributions to overall liking. For medium cuts, one sensory trait with a low score has the potential to be compensated by other traits with higher scores and more emphasis will be placed on the trait with the lowest perception.

Various Statistical Approaches to Assess and Predict Carcass and Meat Quality Traits.

The beef industry is organized around different stakeholders, each with their own expectations, sometimes antagonistic. This article first outlines these differing perspectives. Then, various optimization models that might integrate all these expectations are described. The final goal is to define practices that could increase value for animal production, carcasses and meat whilst simultaneously meeting the main expectations of the beef industry. Different models previously developed worldwide are proposed here. Two new computational methodologies that allow the simultaneous selection of the best regression models and the most interesting covariates to predict carcass and/or meat quality are developed. Then, a method of variable clustering is explained that is accurate in evaluating the interrelationships between different parameters of interest. Finally, some principles for the management of quality trade-offs are presented and the Meat Standards Australia model is discussed. The "Pareto front" is an interesting approach to deal jointly with the different sets of expectations and to propose a method that could optimize all expectations together.

The Myth of Cultured Meat: A Review.

To satisfy the increasing demand for food by the growing human population, cultured meat (also called in vitro, artificial or lab-grown meat) is presented by its advocates as a good alternative for consumers who want to be more responsible but do not wish to change their diet. This review aims to update the current knowledge on this subject by focusing on recent publications and issues not well described previously. The main conclusion is that no major advances were observed despite many new publications. Indeed, in terms of technical issues, research is still required to optimize cell culture methodology. It is also almost impossible to reproduce the diversity of meats derived from various species, breeds and cuts. Although these are not yet known, we speculated on the potential health benefits and drawbacks of cultured meat. Unlike conventional meat, cultured muscle cells may be safer, without any adjacent digestive organs. On the other hand, with this high level of cell multiplication, some dysregulation is likely as happens in cancer cells. Likewise, the control of its nutritional composition is still unclear, especially for micronutrients and iron. Regarding environmental issues, the potential advantages of cultured meat for greenhouse gas emissions are a matter of controversy, although less land will be used compared to livestock, ruminants in particular. However, more criteria need to be taken into account for a comparison with current meat production. Cultured meat will have to compete with other meat substitutes, especially plant-based alternatives. Consumer acceptance will be strongly influenced by many factors and consumers seem to dislike unnatural food. Ethically, cultured meat aims to use considerably fewer animals than conventional livestock farming. However, some animals will still have to be reared to harvest cells for the production of in vitro meat. Finally, we discussed in this review the nebulous status of cultured meat from a religious point of view. Indeed, religious authorities are still debating the question of whether in vitro meat is Kosher or Halal (e.g., compliant with Jewish or Islamic dietary laws).

Modelling of beef sensory quality for a better prediction of palatability.

Despite efforts by the industry to control the eating quality of beef, there remains a high level of variability in palatability, which is one reason for consumer dissatisfaction. In Europe, there is still no reliable on-line tool to predict beef quality and deliver consistent quality beef to consumers. Beef quality traits depend in part on the physical and chemical properties of the muscles. The determination of these properties (known as muscle profiling) will allow for more informed decisions to be made in the selection of individual muscles for the production of value-added products. Therefore, scientists and professional partners of the ProSafeBeef project have brought together all the data they have accumulated over 20 years. The resulting BIF-Beef (Integrated and Functional Biology of Beef) data warehouse contains available data of animal growth, carcass composition, muscle tissue characteristics and beef quality traits. This database is useful to determine the most important muscle characteristics associated with a high tenderness, a high flavour or generally a high quality. Another more consumer driven modelling tool was developed in Australia: the Meat Standards Australia (MSA) grading scheme that predicts beef quality for each individual muscle×specific cooking method combination using various information on the corresponding animals and post-slaughter processing factors. This system has also the potential to detect variability in quality within muscles. The MSA system proved to be effective in predicting beef palatability not only in Australia but also in many other countries. The results of the work conducted in Europe within the ProSafeBeef project indicate that it would be possible to manage a grading system in Europe similar to the MSA system. The combination of the different modelling approaches (namely muscle biochemistry and a MSA-like meat grading system adapted to the European market) is a promising area of research to improve the prediction of beef quality. In both approaches, the volume of data available not only provides statistically sound correlations between various factors and beef quality traits but also a better understanding of the variability of beef quality according to various criteria (breed, age, sex, pH, marbling etc.).

Cluster analysis application identifies muscle characteristics of importance for beef tenderness.

BACKGROUND: An important controversy in the relationship between beef tenderness and muscle characteristics including biochemical traits exists among meat researchers. The aim of this study is to explain variability in meat tenderness using muscle characteristics and biochemical traits available in the Integrated and Functional Biology of Beef (BIF-Beef) database. The BIF-Beef data warehouse contains characteristic measurements from animal, muscle, carcass, and meat quality derived from numerous experiments. We created three classes for tenderness (high, medium, and low) based on trained taste panel tenderness scores of all meat samples consumed (4,366 observations from 40 different experiments). For each tenderness class, the corresponding means for the mechanical characteristics, muscle fibre type, collagen content, and biochemical traits which may influence tenderness of the muscles were calculated. RESULTS: Our results indicated that lower shear force values were associated with more tender meat. In addition, muscles in the highest tenderness cluster had the lowest total and insoluble collagen contents, the highest mitochondrial enzyme activity (isocitrate dehydrogenase), the highest proportion of slow oxidative muscle fibres, the lowest proportion of fast-glycolytic muscle fibres, and the lowest average muscle fibre cross-sectional area. Results were confirmed by correlation analyses, and differences between muscle types in terms of biochemical characteristics and tenderness score were evidenced by Principal Component Analysis (PCA). When the cluster analysis was repeated using only muscle samples from m. Longissimus thoracis (LT), the results were similar; only contrasting previous results by maintaining a relatively constant fibre-type composition between all three tenderness classes. CONCLUSION: Our results show that increased meat tenderness is related to lower shear forces, lower insoluble collagen and total collagen content, lower cross-sectional area of fibres, and an overall fibre type composition displaying more oxidative fibres than glycolytic fibres.