Abstract
Due to the considerable environmental impact and the controversial animal welfare associated with industrial meat production, combined with the ever-increasing global population and demand for meat products, sustainable production alternatives are indispensable. In 2013, the world's first laboratory grown hamburger made from cultured muscle cells was developed. However, coming at a price of $300.000, and being produced manually, substantial effort is still required to reach sustainable large-scale production. One of the main challenges is scalability. Microcarriers (MCs), offering a large surface/volume ratio, are the most promising candidates for upscaling muscle cell culture. However, although many MCs have been developed for cell lines and stem cells typically used in the medical field, none have been specifically developed for muscle stem cells and meat production. This paper aims to discuss the MCs' design criteria for skeletal muscle cell proliferation and subsequently for meat production based on three scenarios: (1) MCs are serving only as a temporary substrate for cell attachment and proliferation and therefore they need to be separated from the cells at some stage of the bioprocess, (2) MCs serve as a temporary substrate for cell proliferation but are degraded or dissolved during the bioprocess, and (3) MCs are embedded in the final product and therefore need to be edible. The particularities of each of these three bioprocesses will be discussed from the perspective of MCs as well as the feasibility of a one-step bioprocess. Each scenario presents advantages and drawbacks, which are discussed in detail, nevertheless the third scenario appears to be the most promising one for a production process. Indeed, using an edible material can limit or completely eliminate dissociation/degradation/separation steps and even promote organoleptic qualities when embedded in the final product. Edible microcarriers could also be used as a temporary substrate similarly to scenarios 1 and 2, which would limit the risk of non-edible residues.
Highlights
The livestock sector is responsible for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions, 8% of human water consumption and contributes to water, air and soil pollution [1]
Pork and poultry produced by cellular agriculture technology would lead to higher global warming potential, whereas beef would lead to a lower impact [5]
This review aims to discuss the possibility of upscaling cultured meat production with the use of microcarriers, taking into consideration the specific requirements of satellite cells and the specific requirements deriving from the fact that the product needs to be suitable for consumption
Summary
The livestock sector is responsible for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions, 8% of human water consumption and contributes to water, air and soil pollution [1]. Other long-term, worst case scenario models predict an initially greater peak warming due to cattle as opposed to cultured meat, but a higher warming effect of cultured meat in the long run, due to the different way that CO2 and CH4 gases accumulate in the atmosphere. These studies use current methods of energy production in their models not taking into account potential energy decarbonization for the 1,000 years [6]. Mainly due to the astronomical production costs, substantial effort is still required to reach sustainable and cost-effective large-scale production
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
