ArticleFood chemistry: X2025
An integrated metabolomics-flavoromics analysis reveals flavor diversity in indigenous and hybrid cattle via UHPLC-MS/MS and GC×GC-TOF-MS.
Article in Food chemistry: X, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Breed-specific meat quality and flavor characteristics of Wannan and Chinese Simmental cattle revealed by whole transcriptome and metabolome analysis.Food chemistry. Molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Integration of volatilomics, non-targeted metabolomics, and electronic sensory technologies reveals the flavor evolution mechanism in 'Queen Nina' table grapes during ripening.Food chemistry: X · 2026Article
- Article
- Flavor diversity characterization of three loquat cultivars via flavoromics combined with E-nose and GC × GC-TOF-MS.Food chemistry: X · 2026Article
- Carbohydrate metabolism and phosphorylation cascades regulate flavor formation in chicken meat.Food chemistry. Molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Comprehensive profiling of volatile aroma compounds and non-volatile metabolites in five salted chili peppers using multi-omics technologies:Food chemistry: X · 2026Article
- Transcriptomics and metabolomics provide insights into meat flavor precursor differences between different duck lines.Poultry science · 2026Article
- LC-MS/MS-based metabolomics coupled with machine learning for screening candidate biomarkers in bacon.Food chemistry: X · 2026Article
- Assessment of nutritional value and flavor characteristics of Taihe silky fowl across varieties and marketing ages.Food chemistry: X · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated breed-specific flavor characteristics in Guanling (GL), Sinan (SN), and Simmental-crossbred (XZ) cattle using UHPLC-MS/MS and GC × GC-TOF MS. Specifically, XZ had 73 and 48 differential metabolites compared to GL and SN, respectively, whereas GL and SN showed 31 discriminated metabolites. Notably, these differences were linked to flavor-related metabolic pathways, particularly beta-alanine, histidine, glutathione, and purine metabolism. Regarding the composition of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), GL displayed a higher ketone content (18.58 %), whereas XZ was enriched in alcohol (56.25 %). Key VOCs with the highest flavor contributions across all breeds were 2,3-Butanedione, (E)-2-nonenal, 2-ethyl-1-hexanol, and (E)-2-octenal. However, dimethyl sulfide contributed significantly to GL and SN flavors but not to XZ. Collectively, the 49 differential VOCs led to aroma profiles of breeds varied in "sweet", "fruity", "nutty", and "waxy" characteristics. This comprehensive analysis of non-volatile metabolites and flavor-related VOCs revealed breed-specific profiles and crossbreeding effects, providing insights for improving meat quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.