Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39246536›Full record

ArticleFood science of animal resources2024

Development and Comparative Evaluation of Imitated Fiber from Different Protein Sources Using Wet-Spinning.

Swati Kumari, So-Hee Kim, Chan-Jin Kim, Yong Sik Chung, Young-Hwa Hwang, Seon-Tea Joo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Food science of animal resources, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
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.

Swati KumariDivision of Applied Life Science (BK21 Four), Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52828, Korea.ORCID 0009-0001-3330-7821
So-Hee KimDivision of Applied Life Science (BK21 Four), Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52828, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3966-6160
Chan-Jin KimDivision of Applied Life Science (BK21 Four), Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52828, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5020-6873
Yong Sik ChungDepartment of Organic Materials and Textile Engineering, Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju 54896, Korea.ORCID 0009-0009-9693-2825
Young-Hwa HwangInstitute of Agriculture & Life Science, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52828, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3687-3535
Seon-Tea JooDivision of Applied Life Science (BK21 Four), Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52828, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5483-2828

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Texture is a major challenge in addressing the need to find sustainable meat alternatives, as consumers desire alternative meat to have a sensory profile like meat. In this study, the fabrication of imitated muscle fiber (IMF) is performed by introducing different kinds of protein sources, with an effective bottom-up technique- wet spinning. Herein, the protein sources (pea protein isolate, wheat protein, and myofibrillar paste) were combined with sodium alginate to stimulate the bonding with the coagulation solution for fabrication. It has been found that the fabrication of IMF is possible using all the protein sources, however, due to the difference in protein structure, a significant difference was observed in quality characteristics compared to conventional meat. Additionally, combination of wheat protein and pea protein isolate has given similar values as conventional meat in terms of some of the texture profiles and Warner-Bratzler shear force. In general, the optimization of protein sources for wet spinning can provides a novel way for the production of edible fiber of alternative meat.

Indexed as

imitate muscle fibermeat alternativequalitytexture profilingwet spinning

Identifiers

PMID39246536
PMCPMC11377202

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.