The appetite for new plant-based foods shows no sign of slowing down. Consumers are demanding more from meat and dairy alternatives, which has accelerated innovation in this category, creating a diverse market with a variety of formats to choose from. Food-technology is advancing rapidly to catch up with the pace of the market, providing novel solutions to taste, texture and nutrition. With 10 billion people to feed sustainably by 2050, the plant-based journey is only beginning.

In this webinar, our experts dive into the challenges and opportunities for future innovation in the ever-evolving plant-based market by answering questions such as:

1. How has the plant-based market changed and what might the future look like?
2. Who are the movers / shakers and disrupters to watch in the plant-based arena?
3. What opportunities for plant based have emerged with advances in food technology & processing?
4. What are the key technical challenges when innovating plant-based foods?
5. What does successful plant-based innovation look like?

Watch the full recording.

Animal-derived proteins such as dairy proteins have been used broadly for many years as they have many nutritional and techno-functional benefits (binding, gel-forming, foaming, etc). Animal-derived proteins are generally high-quality protein sources because they provide all the essential amino acids our body needs. Moreover, they have good techno-functionality, they are easy to formulate with and deliver a clean taste.

However, an increasing focusing on sustainability has led to a growth in the plant-based food market. This is shifting the focus to plant proteins despite the many challenges remain with this protein source in food and beverage applications.

From a nutritional perspective, most protein sources are deficient in some essential amino acids and are, as such, incomplete protein sources. The strategy to improve the nutritional profile of plant protein was already discussed in a previous KHNI Article: How Can We Optimise Plant Proteins?, such as combining different protein sources to deliver a complete plant protein solution with all essential amino-acids.

Beyond nutrition, other aspects very important for food and beverage manufacturers such as solubility, taste and process-ability remain challenging and must be considered.

How can we fill the gap between animal and plant proteins to develop nutritionally balanced and tasty foods?

Challenges and advancements in formulating with plant protein: functionality in foods and beverages

Some of the challenges in using plant proteins in food and beverage applications are a result of the different processing techniques used to isolate plant proteins from a raw material (e.g. peas or pea flour) compared to those used to isolate animal proteins. These can include solubility, texture, and dry mouthfeel depending on application.

Many plant proteins have poor solubility in water. Good solubility is critical for applications with high water content (beverages, dairy alternatives, sauces & soups, etc.) since protein solubility is required for a visual aspect (no phase separation), low viscosity and good mouthfeel (smoothness, creaminess, low graininess/sandiness).

For products with low water content (bakery, snacks, etc.), challenges also exist, as some plant proteins yield dryness and hard texture, which are often associated with sensory issues.

Processing differences between plant and animal proteins result in different functional properties

For plant proteins, processes used for the generation of the protein ingredients (e.g. pea protein concentrates) often occur after starch/fibre extraction. Early or excessive protein denaturation can happen during starch or fibre extraction, meaning that plant proteins can lose in their native techno-functional properties (solubility, water biding properties, gelling, etc.) before they reach the protein extraction step.

Potato starch cell – starch isolation is often the first processing step for plants, which can negatively impact the functionality of proteins extracted afterwards

In contrast, for animal-derived proteins, the focus of processing is generally the manufacture of the protein ingredient. As a result, protein denaturation is minimised, and native techno-functional properties are preserved.

Plant protein ingredients are generally produced following two main processes:

• • • Dry processing (milling and air classification) – A process based on mechanical separation of proteins from starch granules. Protein separation is based on size/density difference with other components.
    • Wet processing – Protein suspension in aqueous medium. Protein separation from other components is generally based on differential solubility at various pH values (isoelectric precipitation), ionic strength (salting-out effect) sometimes associated with separation based on differential molecular mass (membrane separation by dialysis and/or ultrafiltration).

Wet processing is more severe and has a bigger impact on plant-protein techno-functionality, making protein ingredients generated through this process more difficult to formulate with.

How has processing of plant protein improved to enable better plant-based foods and beverages?

Several strategies can be employed to improve techno-functional properties of plant proteins ingredients. Those are often focused on modifying solubility or unfolding plant proteins to expose their hydrophobic groups to improve gelling, emulsifying and aeration properties. The processes used to modify the techno-functional properties of plant proteins are classified under physical, chemical or biological treatments (Table 1). Physical processes can be used in conjunction with chemical and or biological processes to further modify selected techno-functional properties of plant proteins (Akharume et al., 2020).

Table 1. Processes used to modify techno-functional properties of plant proteins (For information on these techniques, see Akharume et al., 2020 & Nasrabadi et al., 2021)

With these improvements, many foods which were traditionally manufactured with animal-derived proteins are now considered for plant-based options (beverages, dairy, ice-cream, snacks, etc.). The key techno-functional properties required for protein ingredients vary depending on the food product and some sources are more suitable than others (Table 2).

Choosing the right protein source

Table 2. Examples of protein functional properties needed in different food and beverage applications.

Challenges and advancements in formulating with plant protein: flavour and mouthfeel

In addition to having better functional properties than plant proteins, dairy proteins also have more positive taste profiles and mouthfeel for use in food and beverage. This is due to gentle processing conditions which prevent excessive denaturation and the development of off-notes (e.g., low heat treatment conditions) compared to the processing for plant proteins described above.

Plant protein ingredients on the other hand are generally associated with undesirable sensory attributes (green, bitter, astringent, etc.) in addition to their gritty texture which can cause a grainy mouthfeel (Saint-Eve et al., 2019). Other parameters such as processing history (e.g., heat treatment, hydrolysis, milling, etc.) can also modify their organoleptic properties. The sensorial properties of plant proteins also vary depending on their botanical origin and state (intact vs. hydrolyzed, Table 3).

Sensory issues to overcome in different plant proteins

Table 3. Lexicon of sensory descriptors used to describe commercial intact and hydrolyzed plant protein ingredients (Kerry internal data)

There are different solutions available to minimize these sensory defects. Two main avenues can be used alone or in combination to improve the sensory profile of plant proteins:

• • • Flavour and taste masking technologies are used to cover taste and flavour compounds responsible for an unbalanced profile. Their inclusion can therefore decrease off-notes and taste defects of plant proteins.
    • Processing such as fermentation and solvent extraction may help reduce sensory defects linked to flavour and taste of plant proteins. Other technologies involving particle size reduction, partial protein hydrolysis and cross-linking are used to improve mouthfeel (reduction of sandiness/grittiness and/or viscosity), more particularly in foods with high water content. Particle size reduction and hydrolysis may negatively impact the taste and flavour of the protein either by increasing the surface area (particle size reduction) or releasing peptides and free amino acids which have bitter, savory taste profiles.

Plant and dairy hybrids: a strategy focusing on flexitarian consumers

Today, plant proteins are not a focus only for vegan and vegetarians but also for consumers who are still consuming animal protein but are looking to bring a better balance between both sources by incorporating more plant-based options in their diets. Hybrid foods and beverages (containing both animal and plant proteins) are a useful tool in diet transition, helping to bridge the gap between the two markets.

There is an opportunity for food and beverage manufacturers to develop hybrid products targeting this consumer category.

Combination of plant and animal proteins can allow to achieve synergistic benefits by taking the best of both worlds. There are many benefits with using hybrid proteins (e.g. a mix of dairy and plant proteins) over plant proteins alone:

• • • Better solubility: as dairy proteins are more soluble than plant proteins, combining both sources will enhance the overall solubility.
    • Reduced grittiness: dairy proteins are associated with smoothness and creaminess, combining them with plant proteins can help to significantly reduce grittiness perception of plant proteins.
    • Superior taste: the sensory profile of dairy proteins is in most cases desirable. Plant protein sources can bring unpleasant taste (bitter, earthy, beany and astringent) which has become a major obstacle for consumers’ product purchase. Hybrid foods could also offer a solution here to improve palatability of plant-based food and beverages by reducing these off-notes.
    • Higher protein content: several plant-based food and beverages have significantly lower protein content than their animal-derived equivalent. This is because of the formulation challenges present in plant proteins mentioned above. By combining plant and milk proteins, food manufacturers can boost the protein content of their final products.
    • Better nutritional profile: from a nutrition perspective, it is important to emphasize the benefits of having a varied diet that includes both animal and plant-based foods. Plant-based foods can come with “positive” co-passengers like fibre, vitamins (folate, B12, D) and minerals (e.g. iron, zinc, calcium). On their side, dairy proteins offer high nutritional value (high quality protein, calcium, potassium, etc). It makes sense to say that innovation through the design of hybrid foods could therefore bring the best of both worlds and be used as a strategy to improve the nutrition of a product.

The are many options and strategies available to improve the profile of plant-protein, making them a suitable candidate for protein-fortified food and beverage product development. The gap between dairy and plant protein is getting smaller, bringing endless opportunities for food and beverage manufacturers. It is evident that over the coming years more protein-fortified products with plant protein ingredients will be present on store shelves.

Consumers are thinking about food safety and food waste in plant-based meat alternatives

Consumer concern for food safety has increased, with 60% of consumers saying they are more concerned about food safety due to the COVID-19 pandemic (2021 Kerry Proprietary Insights– Food Safety Fundamentals). Specifically, 49% of consumers are concerned about food safety in plant-based meat alternatives (2021 Kerry Proprietary Insights – Food Safety Fundamentals). Plant-based meat and dairy alternatives topped the list in terms of concerns, outranked only by fresh and processed meat. This increased concern can be attributed to consumer unfamiliarity with plant-based products. Consumers have limited experience with plant-based meat alternatives, which can result in inconsistent quality and taste. Product recalls are another factor with plant-based products, with media publicity raising public awareness and concern.

Sustainability and avoiding artificial preservatives are also top-of-mind when it comes to plant-based products. “No artificial preservatives” is a top claim consumers look for when purchasing plant-based products (Innova 2021). Consumers are paying closer attention to product labels than ever before. In a previous consumer research survey, 64% of plant-based consumers stated they read nutritional labels (Kerry Proprietary Insights 2019 – Meat: The Challenge).

Finding the balance with sustainability (reduced food waste) and ingredients that align with consumer’s health and wellness goals can be challenging. Now is the time for plant-based producers to rise to this challenge as increased market growth continues.

Plant-based meat alternatives have different food safety challenges than meat and require different solutions

Extensive food safety data, shelf-life data, and predictive models for food protection exist for meat and poultry products, but the same cannot be said for novel plant-based foods. It’s important to understand the technical challenges to formulate safe and quality plant-based meat alternatives. These technical challenges and considerations can include:

1. Plant-based ingredients have different levels and forms of macronutrients (carbohydrate, fat, protein) than their animal counterparts. For instance, the primary carbohydrate in milk is lactose, in meat it’s glycogen, and in pea, soy, and mushroom it’s various starches and oligosaccharides. This can lead to variation in the types and resultant levels of microorganisms able to thrive in the product. This means that threshold levels for what is considered “spoilage” (e.g. 10⁶ CFU/g) traditionally agreed upon for meat and poultry products may not be appropriate for plant-based products. In a survey of commercially available U.S. plant-based meats, starting bacterial populations varied from non-detectable to >10⁷ CFU/g at the time of purchase (Stafl 2020). This level of variability between products is significant and further emphasizes that there is more we need to understand about these products.
2. The array of ingredients used in plant-based foods can bring different microbial loads. Plant-based products typically have higher diversity in their ingredient lists than animal products, which consist mainly of one major raw ingredient (e.g. milk, beef). Including ingredients with high microbial loads (e.g. yeast extract, spices) to mimic meat flavor can introduce different bacteria into plant-based meat alternatives than those traditionally found in animal products.
3. The U.S. regulatory bodies governing plant-based foods and animal-based meats differ (FDA and USDA, respectively). With the FDA, a minimum cooking temperature of 135°F is suggested. For animal-based meats, the USDA recommends a minimum cooking temperature of 160°F for beef products and 165°F for poultry products. This could lead to confusion or inconsistent “best practices” being carried into consumer homes, with some consumers treating plant-based meats like meat and some like other foods. Manufacturers must therefore educate on what “best practice” is for their protein. Cooking to temperatures 145-165°F was shown to kill Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens at equal rates in beef- and plant-based burgers, suggesting cooking guidance for animal products could be applicable to plant-based analogs.
4. Many legacy technologies (curing, smoking, carcass washing, fermentation) used by meat and poultry processors have not been vetted or are non-transferrable to plant-based meat alternatives. Nevertheless, some learnings from meat can be applied to their plant-based counterparts. For example, ground or ground/formed products (i.e. products with additional handling) will have higher microbial counts than “whole muscle” products.

From an industry perspective, ingredient suppliers are often testing antimicrobial ingredient efficacy and product shelf-life in a lab environment which may not correctly mimic the specific production environment factors that are impacting a plant-based meat alternative’s ability to meet its shelf-life and safety goals. This means that microorganisms impacting the antimicrobial ingredient efficacy and plant-based shelf life may differ from findings based on lab or pilot-plant produced product trials. Product manufactures should consider testing in their production environment early in the product development process.

Learn more about unique food protection challenges and solutions for plant-based foods in our webinar Reducing Food Waste: Optimising Safety and Sustainability

The solution is an integrated approach

Taking an integrated approach to food protection in plant-based products is critical as these products continue to become mainstream. A science-backed approach to formulation with application and substrate-specific hurdles to avoid early spoilage and food safety risks is key as consumers demand quality and convenience.

This means understanding the specific microbes a plant-based meat is exposed to from ingredients or during production, the packaging used for a specific product and how well it offers shelf life protection, and selecting the appropriate ingredients that can solve these unique challenges.

Ensuring food safety is at the core of new product development will always be in the consumer’s best interest and will lend well to market success for plant-based meat manufacturers.

The growth of plant-based meat alternatives can be linked to health. Over the years, meat consumption’s repeated link to disease like cancer in studies and media headlines has caused many people to eat less meat.

Pea protein continues to be a popular choice of plant protein in meat alternatives. The main reason for this is their high protein content, as well as the low saturated fat and high fiber content. As the plant protein trend continues, both consumers and manufacturers look towards new and innovative sources for their food and beverage products. Among the plant-based proteins, lentil, chickpea, rice, fava, hemp and potato are rapidly growing in interest.

What affects the off-tastes of a plant protein?

• • Amount of protein in the product
  • Type of protein used
  • Extraction process: pH, temperature, processing time
  • Precipitation process: centrifugation conditions, fermentation microorganisms used, etc.
  • Drying temperature
  • Consumer storage and preparation conditions

Understanding the source of off-tastes is the first step in properly masking them. Typical plant-based protein off-tastes include: beany, bitter, cardboardy and chalky. There might also be unpleasant perceptions around aroma, mouthfeel, and astringency.

The off-tastes can be associated with varying amino acid profiles which are derived from plant-based proteins. They all have unique, inherent off-tastes along with green aftertaste depending on the plant source.

The amount of plant-based proteins used, the types of protein used, and  the protein extraction/processing/drying methods all play critical roles in generating the types of off-tastes perceived in the finished application.

Off-tastes in plant proteins differ depending on how much of the protein is in a serving of food or beverage.

Starting at the raw material, the type of protein and its serving size both dramatically contribute to off-tastes. It’s then important to take into account how the plant protein has been extracted, precipitated, and dried from the manufacturer. During extraction, the pH, temperature, processing time, and the types of treatment chemicals used can all contribute to off-notes. During precipitation, the sedimentation method, centrifuge condition (rpm, flow rate, operation time) and, if fermentation is involved, the type of microorganisms used, can all contribute to off-notes as well.

During drying, the temperature (inlet and outlet) of the spray dryer and the drying methods (freeze drying, drum drying and etc.) can contribute to off-notes.

In summary, the proprietary process that a manufacturer is using to produce the plant-based proteins will contribute its own unique off-taste. To further complicate the matter, there are a number of challenges for the developer when formulating with plant-based proteins such as different product formats, consumer’s cooking methods, storage conditions of the finished products, working with multiple suppliers with different off-note challenges, and batch to batch off-taste variation.

The principles of plant-based protein flavour masking

In order to mask multidimensional off-tastes, a multidisciplinary approach is required.

During the manufacturing process, off-flavouring molecules (e.g. specific amino acids) can be removed using physical or chemical treatments such as soaking, thermal treatment, germination, enzymatic treatment, or solvent extraction.

Another option is to mask off-taste using making agents. A major challenge is the increase in demand for natural and organic masking agents. Claims such as natural, halal, kosher, non-GMO, and organic make it difficult to use many traditional or artificial flavouring agents.

To develop clean labelled flavour masking agents, an understanding of analytical chemistry and sensory science for volatile and non-volatile compounds are required. By understanding the flavour chemistry mechanisms, one is in a better position to correlate the off-tastes to critical flavour compounds as well as to enable to the development of effective flavour masking solutions.

Off-tastes in pea protein are linked to specific chemistry. For example, in the chart above, high amounts of lipid oxidation are linked to a strong hay off-taste. Understanding what is causing off-tastes helps solve the issue at its root.

For example, prolamin coating is a known method for bitter taste masking. Prolamin is a plant storage protein which is mainly found in the seeds of cereal grains such as oat and rice and accounts for about 5-10 % of the total proteins in those plants. Manufacturers and flavour companies could produce a clean labelled flavour masking agent through extraction, separation, and purification of prolamin-rich fractionation.

Traditionally, addition of sugars, salts, and acids are used for suppressing the inherent off-taste through trial and error. However, understanding the chemistry and source of off-notes can help the masking process be more time efficient and better for health, without requiring excessive use of sugars or salts that are linked to poor health.

A study by Houston et al. (2008) showed that ageing adults who had a daily protein intake of 1.1 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight (around 88g per day for an 80kg male) lost 40% less muscle over the course of three years when compared to those who were consuming 0.8g/kg BW (around 64g per day for an 80kg male).

Let’s look at the science of plant proteins and muscle health, and how plant proteins could be optimised for active ageing.

Not all proteins are the same when it comes to healthy ageing

Plant proteins are often missing important amino acids or can be harder to digest

Most plant-based proteins are lower in certain essential amino acids than animal-based proteins and can also be harder to digest. This is reflected in the figure below, which uses a score called PDCAAS to represent the amino acid content of different proteins relative to the needs of the human body. Protein quality can also be measured using a score called DIAAS, which measures the amount of amino acids absorbed by the small intestine after protein is consumed.

What this chart shows is that consuming the same amount of whey protein compared to wheat protein will not result in the same amount of amino acids being absorbed into the body. In this example, the whey protein would provide all of the necessary amino acids for adequate muscle maintenance, whereas consuming the same amount of wheat protein would result in a lack of some of the amino acids the body needs.

When it comes to active ageing, this means plant proteins may be less efficient at activating muscle growth and repair and this must be considered when making recommendations for active ageing. For example, this article discusses the importance of leucine in activating muscle growth and repair. However, wheat protein has 37% less leucine than the same amount of whey protein (Herreman et al., 2020).

Plant proteins can be limited in their ability to stimulate muscle growth and repair in older individuals

The limited effectiveness of  plant proteins to stimulate the muscle protein synthesis system, when compared to animal-derived protein, was shown by Gorissen et al. (2016) in a study where the ability of 35g of whey, casein, or wheat protein to stimulate muscle protein synthesis was measured in 60 healthy older men (70 -72 years old).

Myofibrillar protein synthesis (FSR), during the fasting state (Basal) and over the entire (0–4 h) postprandial period after the ingestion of 35g of wheat protein (WPH-35), 35g of casein protein (MCas-35), or 35g of whey protein (Whey-35) in healthy older men (Gorissen et al., 2016).

The results from the study, shown in the figure above, show that 35g of wheat protein had little to no impact on muscle protein synthesis beyond the baseline rate (i.e., resting rate before a meal).The subjects who consumed whey or casein proteins (which are animal derived) showed an increase in muscle synthetic response. The higher response to the consumption of the animal-derived whey and casein proteins is attributable to the greater content of essential amino acids, and higher overall digestibility which is reflected directly in their protein quality values: wheat=0.48, whey=0.85 and casein=1.17, as measured by DIAAS (Herreman et al., 2020).

The participants needed to eat almost twice as much wheat protein (60g) to see the same response in muscle protein synthesis as 35g of whey or casein. This would be a difficult amount of protein to eat in one sitting, especially in older individuals where diminished appetite is common. Another consideration is the environmental impact of growing the quantity of plant protein required to maintain this increased level of consumption which could counteract some of the benefits attributed to switching from animal protein to plant protein.

How can we improve the ability of plant proteins to support muscle health during ageing?

Choose the right protein source

Plant proteins with high protein quality scores are a good place to start when it comes to active ageing. Soy protein has a DIAAS value of 0.9, which is higher than most other plant sources. Soy protein has been shown to efficiently meet the body’s need to form new muscle but some negative perceptions around soy’s role in health, many of which are unwarranted, has led some consumers to stop consuming soy protein and search for other alternatives.

Pea protein (DIAAS value of 0.71) and rice protein (DIAAS value of 0.47) have become more prevalent and application of these ingredients is increasing over recent years. Emerging plant proteins of nutritional interest also include potato (DIAAS value of 1), pseudo-cereals (such as quinoa, amaranth and buckwheat), legumes (lentils, chickpeas and lupin) and oilseeds (canola, rapeseed and hemp) due to their levels of essential amino acids (Herreman et al., 2020; Martínez-Villaluenga et al., 2020). Mostly, methionine, cysteine, lysine and leucine are four essential amino acids that cause low DIAAS values for plant proteins and, therefore, limit their nutritional quality (Lonnie et al., 2018).  Much scientific research has been conducted in this area to identify plant protein sources that are more nutritionally complete and have similar levels of these essential amino acids to that of soy and animal-derived proteins.

An alternative to finding a single source of plant protein which can act as complete source of nutrition for the healthy growth and maintenance of muscle in ageing individuals is to modify the physical, chemical or functional nature of plant proteins to optimise the effect they have on muscle growth and repair.

Improve digestibility via processing

One of the major limitations preventing plant proteins from having a high protein quality score is their limited digestibility and bioavailability. Within plants, proteins are usually encased in fibre-rich husks or layers that are very difficult for the body to digest, limiting our access to the protein when we eat it. Additionally, plants contain a range of bio-compounds, termed phytochemicals, which slow or inhibit protein digestion (Lonnie et al., 2018).

Physical processes such as cooking (i.e. heating), extrusion, drying, and enzymatic hydrolysis have all been shown to increase the digestibility of numerous plant proteins (Sá et al., 2019). For example, processing a soy flour into a soy protein isolate increases the PDCAAS score from 0.86 to 1.0. These processes can degrade the bio-compounds that limit digestibility or change the structure of the proteins to make them more accessible to the digestive enzymes in the intestine. These physical processing treatments (i.e. heating, wet fractionation, dry fractionation, drying, etc.,) are commonly used in the enrichment and isolation of plant proteins to produce protein-rich flours (e.g. protein concentrates or isolates), which results in the a large improvement in digestibility.

Blend different plant proteins together to improve amino acid profiles

Since many plant proteins are lacking in just a few essential amino acids, such as cereals being low in lysine and legumes being low in methionine, different plant protein sources can be blended to account for the other’s “amino acid weakness” so to speak. The right blend of rice and pea protein will have sufficient amounts of both lysine and methionine, creating a “complete” protein that is more efficient, gram for gram, at delivering amino acids to our muscles than either protein alone.

Plant-animal protein blends are also a possibility, since the plant-based market has expanded beyond vegans and vegetarians to flexitarians or those just looking to eat more plant-based foods. Blends of plant and animal proteins have already seen some use to enhance the functionality (e.g. solubility, taste, texture) of plant proteins in foods and beverages. A series of studies have tested the ability of milk protein, soy protein and a milk-soy protein blend to stimulate protein synthesis after exercise in both older men and young adults. Results from these studies showed that the muscle protein synthesis rates were higher and remained higher for a longer period of time for the milk-soy protein blend (Borack et al., 2016; Reidy et al., 2014, 2013), suggesting possible health benefits in consuming a plant-animal blend of protein. More research would be needed to fully understand how different protein blends interact and their potential health benefits.

Increase leucine content of plant protein

As mentioned earlier, the amino acid leucine has an important role in activating muscle growth and repair. Many plant proteins contain around 20-30% less leucine than animal proteins, although there are a few plants high in leucine, such as corn, soy, and potato (Herreman et al., 2020).  It stands to reason, then, that adding leucine to plant proteins or breeding plants to contain higher levels of leucine might improve their ability to promote active ageing.

A study by Wall et al. (2013) found that the addition of crystalline leucine (2.5g) to a 20g serving of casein had a greater effect on protein synthesis compared to the consumption of 20g of casein alone. Although this study used animal-sourced protein, it shows that addition of leucine can help overcome the reduced sensitivity of the mTOR system (responsible for initiating muscle growth and repair) that is seen during ageing. A study done in mice found that adding leucine to a wheat protein to match the leucine content typically found in whey protein led to a similar ability to stimulate muscle growth compared to whey (Norton et al., 2012).

Conclusion

To promote active ageing it is key that not only the right quantity of protein is consumed but the quality of the protein should also be considered. There are actionable strategies such as processing, protein blending, or targeting leucine content that can improve the ability of plant proteins to promote active ageing while also addressing growing concerns over the environmental impact of animal proteins.

Now that the trend is becoming a mainstay in the global food economy, these foods and beverages are no longer getting a free pass on nutrition. In the United States, for example, health and nutrition are the top two reasons consumers purchase plant-based cheese, yogurt, or ice cream and health is ranked third for plant-based meat alternatives (Winning with Plant-based, Kerry Proprietary Research 2020).

Studies are also beginning to show that people who replace animal-based foods with plant-based alternatives can end up decreasing their intake of important nutrients while increasing their intake of nutrients linked to disease like saturated fat, sodium, and sugar. These studies emphasize the importance of addressing nutrients beyond protein for this trend.

As a result, the nutrition attributes of plant-based foods and beverages are under more scrutiny worldwide. We talked to our nutrition, food science, and marketing experts across the globe to understand the challenges in plant-based nutrition and keys to success for the future.

Common nutrition challenges when formulating plant-based foods and beverages

Choosing the right protein source

There are a lot of considerations that go into choosing the protein source for a plant-based product from the multitude of options available. Supply chain, consumer perception, taste, flexibility in formulation, sustainability, and nutrition can all be deciding factors in whether to choose soy, pea, sunflower, hemp, chickpea, rice, and so on.

For nutrition, protein quantity and quality matter are the main things to consider. Most plant proteins are missing specific amino acids the human body needs, and this will differ depending on source. Plants are generally low in methionine (e.g. beans, nuts and seeds), lysine (e.g. grains like wheat), or tryptophan (e.g. corn), and higher in non-essential amino acids arginine, glycine, alanine and serine.

This, along with digestibility, mean many plant proteins have different protein quality ‘scores’. You can see some examples below, but for more information check out our article “Nutrition Benefits of Plant Protein Taking Root with Consumers”.

Lengthy ingredient declarations

When making plant-based alternatives to dairy or meat, it’s often necessary to use many ingredients to build the same taste, texture, and functionality that you’d see in a dairy-based milk or a beef patty. This makes sense in some respects, because something like cow’s milk is made up of many different proteins, fats, carbohydrates, and other compounds when it’s produced by a cow.

A product must have the right taste and texture to be appealing and taste good, but the challenge is that long ingredient labels can be overwhelming or not preferred by consumers. The average plant-based cheese has 11 ingredients while traditional cheese has only four (Winning with Plant-based, Kerry Proprietary Research 2020), for example.

Salt and sugar content

Salt (in plant-based meat alternatives) and sugar (in plant-based dairy alternatives or beverages) can be a major nutrition concern for two key reasons. The first is that it takes away from the consumer appeal of a plant-based product. If health and nutrition are the top reasons why a consumer would choose a plant-based yogurt, then it should deliver on that expectation of healthy and not be abnormally high in sugar. The second is the impact adding sugar or salt can have on product labels, especially in parts of the world where front-of-pack labeling systems call out high sugar or salt levels on a product.

Many countries in Latin America have warnings on foods that contain high levels of salt or sugar. The Nutri-Score system continues to spread across Europe, among other calorie-reduction initiatives, so high salt and sugar levels can give foods unfavorable front-of-pack ratings in those countries, as well.

Sugar or salt are often used to build taste in plant-based products that have challenges compared to their animal-based counterparts, but it is important to remember the reason why consumers choose plant-based foods in the first place and to make sure foods are delivering on the expectation of health.

“The ultimate goal  is to have a product which delivers an equal or better nutritional profile to their meat equivalent. Currently, many products are delivering a “less healthy” product due to the addition of high levels of fat and salt in order to meet the taste and mouthfeel requirements.” – Nicky Dear, Business Development Director for Plant Protein, Kerry Europe & Russia

Dairy and meat are sources of important nutrients that plant-based alternatives may lack

Dairy and meat contribute important nutrients to the diet, including vitamin D, calcium, iron, zinc, protein, and potassium. Many meat or dairy alternatives do not consider the nutrient content of the foods they are replacing, which can have an impact on people making changes to their diet to include more plant-based options.

For example, dairy is the #1 contributor of vitamin D and calcium in the diet of people in the United States and in Canada, and a major contributor of many nutrients to the diets of those living in Europe.. These are key nutrients for health and are already under-consumed in the US. If plant-based dairy alternatives do not deliver similar amounts of calcium or vitamin D, then a plant-based alternative could actually be less healthy for a consumer than the animal-based version. As a result, it is not delivering on the reason why the consumer chose the plant-based alternative in the first place.

A key challenge for formulating plant-based foods and beverages, then, is to think about the nutrition of the food the alternative is replacing.

“To deliver on consumer expectations, ‘plant-based’ should offer the same nutritional quality of animal-based foods in terms of nutrients like protein, vitamins, and minerals.” – Denise Wilkes, Nutrition Scientist, Kerry Latin America

Opportunities for improving nutrition of when formulating plant-based foods and beverages

Offer nutrients beyond protein

“A major opportunity is pairing the nutrition of plants, like fiber, vitamins, and minerals you’d see in vegetables, grains, and fruit, with improved plant-based protein – taking the best of both and combining them to make a truly healthy product” – Genny Tan, MSc, Business Development Manager, Kerry Asia Pacific

For meat and dairy alternatives, consider the nutrition of the food that’s being replaced. Dairy is a key source of vitamin D, potassium, vitamin A, protein, iodine, and calcium in the diet of many people across the globe, so plant-based dairy alternatives should strive to match those nutrient contributions. Iron, zinc, and B vitamins are important to consider for plant-based meat alternatives, alongside protein.

There are many nutrients that are harder to get enough of when consuming more plant-based foods. The article “Nutrition for Plant-based Diets: Managing Nutrient Intake and Bioavailability” is a great resource for which nutrients to consider for plant-based foods.

Another option is to offer a new nutrition benefit, rather than match that of the animal-based food. For example, a plant-based milk alternative made from oat might offer a serving of whole grains and some fiber. Most people in developed countries do not consume enough whole grains or fiber, so the product can still deliver on the expectation of ‘healthy’ without having to be identical in nutrition to milk from cows.

Keep ingredient declarations short by using multi-functional ingredients that offer nutrition and help with taste and texture.

Some fibers offer nutrition benefits but can also bind ingredients together in a bar or thicken a beverage. By being diligent about the selection of each ingredient, you can maximize the effectiveness of each one to keep the ingredient label short when formulating plant-based foods.

Innovation by suppliers in this area is ongoing and will be key for the future of the plant-based trend. Artificial intelligence is being used more often to screen plant sources for unique properties, such as mimicking the behavior of dairy-based proteins to make plant-based chees more authentic. Finding unique ways to process whole plant ingredients, like oat flour, to improve their functionality in foods and beverages while still delivering nutrition can make plant-based offerings more appealing to both consumers and product developers.

Keep sodium and sugar low to avoid front-of-pack warnings and improve health

Sugar and salt are important for overcoming some of the taste challenges in plant-based foods, but using too much can prevent foods from delivering on consumer expectations for plant-based foods to be healthy.

Unfortunately, there is no 1-1 replacement for sodium chloride in foods. “Challenges and Opportunities in Sodium Reduction” is a great resource to learn more about balancing sodium content.

Many options exist to reduce sugar. Taste modulators, low-calorie sweeteners, or intense flavors are all possibilities. Our webinar recording “Sugar Reduction: Formulating for Success” is a place to hear nutrition and formulation experts talk about the challenges and solutions for sugar reduction.

In this webinar, learn:

• How we can optimize plant based protein for taste and nutrition – what we do and don’t know about healthy diets and the role of protein sources
• How we can optimize new plant-based proteins for the environment – highlighting the trade-offs and unknowns of plant-based protein development
• Which new protein sources have the most promise? – addressing the limitations of a few ‘hot’ sources and highlighting a few under-explored but high-potential options

Watch the full recording.

Plant-based alternatives are perceived as being a healthier and more environmentally friendly protein source and can play a key role in reducing the environmental footprint of food production systems. However, this should not overshadow that the over-reliance on a limited number of crops can cause issues such as water scarcity, deforestation and biodiversity loss in some parts of the world.

Plant-based protein can provide complete amino acid nutrition when consumed as part of a balanced diet. As plant-based foods are introduced as snacks or indulgence foods, there is a need for transparency in their health credentials – products which are highly refined, or high in fat, sugar, salt or artificial preservatives may not retain the benefits of eating plant-based.

The above issues are key considerations to ensure the hoped-for potential of a plant-based future, can indeed, become a reality.

This science review looks at:

• Nutrients commonly under-consumed from a plant-based diet, and how to increase intake of those nutrients from plants
• Which nutrients are less bioavailable from plant-based foods
• How bioavailability can be improved by cooking and processing

The nutrients of special concern in plant-based diets are (click to jump to that nutrient on the page):

• Calcium
• Protein
• Vitamin D
• Iron
• Zinc
• Vitamin B₁₂
• Vitamin A
• Omega-3 fats/a-linoleic acid
• Iodine

What does bioavailability mean?

The European Food Information Council (EUFIC) defines bioavailability as “the proportion of a nutrient that is absorbed from the diet and used for normal body functions”[2]. Everything food that is eaten needs to be digested and absorbed in the intestine, and the presence of some compounds in plants can make that process more difficult for the body. For example, antinutrients can block digestive enzymes from reaching parts of a food to be digested. Oxalic acid is a molecule that plants produce to bind extra calcium within the plant. This molecule helps the plant function properly, but it also means that when we eat the plant, the calcium is harder for the human body to digest and absorb. In this example, the calcium would have a low bioavailability.

Cooking can increase the bioavailability of many nutrients from plants.

Calcium

Plant-based calcium sources

Plant sources that are naturally rich in bioavailable calcium are limited[3],[4]. Commonly recommended plant sources of calcium include kale, legumes, figs, bok choy, and broccoli. However, the quantity and bioavailability of calcium within these foods is far lower than dairy products or calcium fortified foods[5],[6]. For example, the EPIC-Oxford cohort observed that vegans had inadequate intakes of calcium, approximately half the mean intake level of non-vegetarians[7]. The presence of oxalic acid, or oxalate, reduces calcium bioavailability[8]. Oxalic acid, which is present in many calcium rich plant foods, particularly leafy vegetables[9], binds to calcium to form oxalate, which is not very well absorbed across the gut[10].

Spinach is a renowned example of a food high in calcium, yet absorption is very low due to the oxalate content. Turnip greens have a similar calcium level but lower oxalate content, thus absorption is significantly higher than from spinach[11]. Grains and legumes, which in general make up a substantial part of a plant-based diet, are high in phytates, which bind calcium strongly and these complexes are insoluble in the small intestine, making them hard to digest and absorb. It is estimated that 32% of calcium from dairy-based foods is absorbed, but only 5% of calcium from spinach is absorbed.

Turnip greens have a lower oxalate content than spinach, making the calcium from turnip greens more bioavailable.

Get KHNI articles delivered to your inbox

SUBSCRIBE

Improving bioavailability of plant-based calcium

Studies have shown reducing phytates levels significantly increases calcium absorption from grains, pulses and legumes[12],[13]. Tannins and fibre can also negatively affect calcium bioavailability. In vitro tests have shown that germinating and de-hulling cowpeas, lentils or chickpeas to reduce tannin and fibre levels can significantly increase calcium bioavailability[14].

Factors in the human body can also influence calcium bioavailability. Calcium is absorbed across the gut by vitamin D dependent active transport and facilitated diffusion. Therefore, an individual’s vitamin D levels can affect calcium absorption. Factors such as sex, age, and individual calcium stores affect the rate of facilitated diffusion. The lower a person’s calcium stores, the more the gut will absorb this nutrient, but this ability decreases with age[15].

To summarise, bioavailability of calcium in a plant-based diet is not optimum mainly due to the quantity and presence of innate inhibitors. Cooking or processing plants to remove antinutrients can improve bioavailability, and some plant-based sources of calcium are more bioavailable than others. However, it is commonly suggested that people who do not consume animal products, particularly dairy, should eat foods fortified with calcium or take a calcium and vitamin D supplement to meet the recommended daily allowance (RDA) for this mineral[16],[17].

Protein

Differences between plant-based protein and animal-based protein

The most obvious concern regarding protein in plant-based diets is that sources are generally limited in one or more essential amino acids that cannot be made by the human body. Therefore, plant-sourced proteins are often referred to as ‘incomplete’. This is contrary to animal derived protein sources, which contain complete combinations of essential amino acids. The most common limited essential amino acids in plant-based diets are lysine (mainly limited in cereals), methionine (legumes, nuts and seeds), tryptophan (cereals) and cysteine (legumes)[18].

Protein complementation

Protein complementation, the combination of vegetable proteins to get all of the amino acids that are essential for the body, is the most effective way to meet protein needs when consuming a plant-based diet[19]. Individuals who eat a variety of plant protein sources such as legumes, nuts, grains, and seeds in enough quantities can meet optimum protein needs through plant sources alone. Interestingly, protein complementation is not required for each meal, as the body has the capability of storing amino acids[20],[21].

Table 1. Examples of Protein Complementation[22],[23]

However, the amino acid content is not the only limitation to plant protein bioavailability. The presence of other components such as fibre, tannins, and phytates can reduce protein digestibility, thus making it more difficult for the body to utilise the amino acids.

Vitamin D

Sources of vitamin D

The human body acquires vitamin D by two methods: (1) vitamin D is produced in the skin via UV rays from sunlight and (2) intake from the diet. There are two forms of vitamin D: vitamin D₃ (active form) and vitamin D₂. Vitamin D₃ is considerably more bioavailable than the plant source vitamin D₂, which means vitamin D₃ is more effective than vitamin D₂ at raising serum 25(OH)D concentrations, which is an important molecule for the body to actively absorb calcium[24]. Vitamin D₃ is produced by human skin in the presence of ultraviolet light from the sun, or sourced from animal products are rich in vitamin D₃, whereas plant sources contain vitamin D₂ only[25],[26].

Vitamin D levels of vegans and non-vegetarians

The EPIC-Oxford cohort reported the average vitamin D intakes of vegans were approximately 73% lower than non-vegetarians[27]. Vitamin D deficiency is evident within the European population at concerning rates of prevalence[28]. Recent national UK surveys identified 1 in 5 people with low vitamin D levels (serum levels below 25 nmol/L)[29]. Individuals that derive vitamin D from sunlight and a plant-based diet alone will unlikely meet the RDA for vitamin D, especially during winter. The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) advises to consume fortified foods and supplements to meet adequate vitamin D requirements[30]. More recently, England’s national health service (NHS) extended their recommendation of taking a daily supplement containing 10 micrograms vitamin D to the entire UK population. This is to counteract the risk of getting less sun exposure due to current measures enforced by UK government to keep people in their homes to control the spread of Covid-19[31].

Iron

The World Health Organisation (WHO) describes iron deficiency as the most common and widespread nutritional disorder in the world[32]. It is prevalent in developing countries where diets are predominantly plant-based. Deficiency is a major issue due to a significant amount of the population having high iron needs such as women of childbearing age, combined with the low bioavailability of iron in available foods.

Haem iron and non-haem iron

Iron is present in two forms: haem and non-haem iron. Haem iron is more readily absorbed across the gut compared to non-haem iron[33]. Red meat and other animal derived foods are rich sources of haem iron[34]. Plant sources contain non-haem iron only[35] and include foods such as green leafy vegetables, legumes, nuts, seeds, and grains.

Iron bioavailability can vary significantly due to inhibitors within the same or other foods in a meal[36]. Phytates, which are complexes found in legumes, grains, oil seeds and nuts, are arguably the most potent inhibitors to non-haem iron absorption[37]. Phytates form insoluble complexes in the gut, reducing iron bioavailability considerably[38].

Increasing iron bioavailability

Soaking lentils and legumes is one way to improve bioavailability of iron and other nutrients.

Many studies have shown that common cooking and preparation methods such as fermenting, germinating and de-hulling legumes, and malting cereals can reduce phytate levels and, hence, increase iron bioavailability from these foods[39]. Phenolic compounds such as tannins and polyphenols, which are abundant in tea and coffee, also inhibit iron absorption. Avoiding drinking tea and coffee within two hours of consuming a meal rich in iron is recommended for individuals with low iron status[40],[41],[42].

Nutrient-nutrient interactions can also affect bioavailability.  For instance, calcium is another inhibitor of iron bioavailability, due to competition for absorption across the intestinal wall. This is more often observed when calcium and iron are part of the same meal and calcium quantity is high[43].

On the other hand, foods rich in vitamin C can increase plant-based iron absorption[44] because this vitamin binds to non-haem iron to form a chelate that is soluble and digestible within the small intestine. However, it is important to note that cooking vitamin C-rich foods at a high temperature can destroy some of the vitamin C present in foods, reducing its ability to improve iron absorption[45],[46].

There is evidence to suggest individuals can maintain adequate iron stores without consuming animal derived foods, provided effective planning of meals to reduce the presence of inhibitors and increase enhancers is applied[47],[48]. This approach takes careful management, and the prevalence of iron deficiency globally would suggest fortification and supplementation are supported, especially for menstruating women[49].

Zinc

Zinc deficiency is prevalent globally, particularly for developing countries that consume a primarily plant-based diet[50]. This is mainly due to the low bioavailability of zinc in plant foods rather than a lack of plant zinc sources[51]. The EPIC-Oxford cohort reported that average zinc intakes of vegans were approximately 20% lower than non-vegetarians[52]. In this study, even non-vegetarians had zinc intakes that were below the RDA, suggesting that plant-based eaters might be at an even higher risk of deficiency due to the low bioavailability of plant-based zinc[53]. However, the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada expressed no considerable concern for vegetarians and inadequate zinc intakes in their position paper on vegetarian diets in 2003[54].

Plant-based zinc bioavailability

In research studies, zinc bioavailability from plant-based diets is often measured alongside iron. In general, good quality plant-based diets predominantly consist of whole grains and legumes, which are rich sources of zinc. As with non-haem iron, phytic acid has a significant inhibitory effect on zinc absorption[55],[56]. However, processing methods that can increase the activity of phytate degrading enzymes counteract this considerably. Processes such as heating, germination, soaking, and fermentation of legumes and grains increase zinc bioavailability, provided the optimum pH is achieved. Enzymes for degrading phytates work best in an acidic pH environment for cereals and neutral or alkaline for some legumes[57]. The high fibre content in whole grains and legumes inhibit zinc absorption but preparation methods like de-hulling, pressure-cooking, and fermentation can breakdown the fibre and enhance zinc bioavailability[58],[59].

Sprouting or fermenting legumes can improve bioavailability of nutrients like zinc.

There are studies suggesting that consuming a meal that is both high in protein and zinc has a positive effect on zinc bioavailability[60],[61],[62]. Although bioavailability of zinc in plant-based diets is low, with prudent cooking and meal planning, it is possible to meet adequate body needs.

Vitamin B₁₂

The main dietary sources of Vitamin B₁₂ are products derived from ruminants, such as cows, because microorganisms present in the digestive tracts of ruminants produce this nutrient^[63]. Vitamin B₁₂ is generally not present in plant foods, but fortified breakfast cereals are a readily available source of vitamin B₁₂ with high bioavailability for vegetarians. This aligns with the EPIC-Oxford cohort observation that on average vegans consumed approximately 93% less vitamin B₁₂ than meat eaters[64]. However, inadequate vitamin B₁₂ quantities in plant-based diets are widely acknowledged and individuals following a plant-based diet are advised to consume foods fortified with vitamin B₁₂ and to take a supplement[65],[66],[67].

Vitamin B₁₂ absorption depends on two compounds produced in the stomach: (i) a protein called “intrinsic factor” (IF) and (ii) gastric acid. The ability of the stomach to produce these compounds functionality declines with age, thus the ability to absorb vitamin B₁₂ reduces over time[68].

Vitamin B₁₂ is typically added to foods and supplements in its free form, meaning gastric acid is not required to make this type of vitamin B₁₂ absorbable. However, the IF is at capacity at only 1-2 mcg vitamin B₁₂, and absorption decreases considerably then[69]. Therefore, vitamin B₁₂ is best absorbed in small quantities. To ensure adequate intake individuals following a plant-based diet should eat vitamin B₁₂ fortified foods on more than one occasion throughout the day[70].

Vitamin A

Sources of vitamin A

Vitamin A deficiency is a major issue in developing counties. There are two forms of vitamin A available in the human diet; preformed vitamin A, for example retinol, and provitamin A carotenoids. Animal derived products such as liver, fish oils, milk, and eggs are rich in preformed vitamin A. Both provitamin A carotenoids and preformed vitamin A must be metabolised before use by the body[71]. The most abundant and efficiently converted carotenoid in plant-based diets is b-Carotene, and provides fruits and vegetables, such as mangos, oranges, carrots, and beetroot, with a yellow/orange/red colour[72]. Conversion of b-Carotene to retinol is not very efficient in the body; therefore, the daily requirement of b-Carotene is considerably higher than the RDA for vitamin A[73]. Hence, RDAs for vitamin A are given as retinol activity equivalents (RAE) to account for the different bioactivities of retinol and provitamin A carotenoids. One mcg RAE is equivalent to 1 mcg retinol and 12 mcg dietary beta-carotene[74].

Vitamin A bioavailability

However, a healthy plant-based diet is abundant in fruit and vegetables that are rich in b-Carotene. Therefore, meeting the required amount is feasible[75], unless part of a population that depends on a staple diet of poor vitamin A source grain, such as rice. Cooking methods can increase the bioavailability of carotenoids, particularly heating in a little fat/oil[76]^,[77] or adding acidulants or antioxidant spices such as lime, tamarind, onion or turmeric[78]. Although b-Carotene bioavailability is lower than vitamin A, this can be overcome with a varied diet of fruit and vegetables and specific cooking processes.

Essential Fatty Acids

Omega-6 and Omega-3 fatty acids are both essential for the human body, meaning they need to be consumed in the diet to support adequate amounts in the body. The long chain omega-3 fatty acids eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) are key nutrients for optimum health and development. They contribute to many functions in the body such as normal brain and eye development and maintenance of cardiovascular health[79].  Oily fish are the richest source of these fatty acids, while plant-based diets are low in these nutrients[80]. The current UK dietary recommendation for essential fatty acid intake is to eat at least two portions of fish a week, one of which should be oily[81]. For some individuals, fish may not be part of a plant-based diet; therefore, levels of these fatty acids are generally sub-optimal.

Plant-based sources of omega-3 fats

The body can convert a plant sourced omega-3 fatty acid, a-linoleic acid (ALA) to EPA and DHA, however the conversion efficacy is low[82]. Good quality plant-based diets are high in ALA. Rich sources include chia seeds, flaxseeds, hemp seeds, and rapeseed oil[83],[84]. However, bioavailability of ALA is reduced by the presence of the omega-6 fatty acid linoleic acid (LA), which is also abundant in plant-based foods. Sources of LA include sunflower oil, sesame oil, almonds, and cashews[85]. LA competes with ALA for enzymes needed to convert ALA to EPA and DHA[86]. Therefore, good quality plant-based diets will aim to have a ratio of 1:3 omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids in the diet and avoid them within the same meal[87].

Chia seeds are a plant-based source of omega-3 fatty acids.

Protein, calcium, biotin, magnesium and zinc can increase ALA bioavailability[88],[89], and a good quality plant-based diet is sufficient in these nutrients. According to the American Dietetic Association, a sufficient intake of ALA in the diet is adequate to meet EPA and DHA needs; however, if an individual has increased needs or poor conversion then a direct source such as DHA-rich microalgae is advised[90]. EPA and DHA supplementation is a controversial topic, as there were concerns regarding the safety of over consumption, however the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has concluded 5g of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids raise no safety concerns for adults[91].

Iodine

Iodine is an essential trace element imperative for brain development, normal growth and metabolism[92]. Plant foods can be insufficient and unreliable iodine sources[93]. Adequate iodine intake is a concern for people who follow a plant-based diet. Iodised salt policies were implemented in various countries across the globe to eradicate deficiency. However, recommendations to reduce salt intake to support heart health also mean reducing iodine intake. Most salt used in packaged foods is not iodised.

Iodine in plant-based diets

Dairy products are a main source of iodine in the diet because iodine is used as a disinfectant in many dairy farms.

In the United States, Ireland, UK, and most of Europe, the main source of iodine is from milk and milk products, followed by fish and meat. The high content in milk is a result of iodine addition in cow feed and iodine-containing disinfectants used during milking[94]. Therefore, it is important to note that vegetarians who swap dairy milk to a plant-based alternative may be at risk of inadequate iodine intake. Furthermore, a study conducted by the University of Surrey reported that organic milk was 42% lower in iodine than conventional milk[95].

Seaweed is a very rich source of iodine, particularly kelp. However, the iodine content can be too high, and excessive iodine intake can have negative health effects. For this reason, it is advised to limit seaweed consumption to once a week, particularly if you are pregnant[96]. There is limited research investigating the bioavailability of iodine in plant-based diets, although it appears to be high[97]. However, most literature papers investigating vegan diets highlight iodine as a nutrient at risk of inadequate intakes[98],[99],[100].

Summary of Bioavailability for Plant-based Nutrients

Conclusion

Plant sources of certain nutrients have a significantly lower quantity and bioavailability compared with animal derived foods. Many factors can affect nutrient bioavailability including the presence of anti-nutrients; cooking and processing methods; host factors; and nutrient-nutrient interactions. Bioavailability is an important factor when evaluating the quality of a diet because it has a substantial effect on the amount of nutrients available to the body for important functions. Therefore, rating foods and diets on nutrient quantities alone is not fully reflective of nutritional quality.

It is important to note that plant-based diets can meet the nutritional needs of an individual, provided they are good quality and supplemented with specific nutrients, if needed[101] [102].

References

[1] Ghavidel R A, Prakash J. The impact of germination and dehulling on nutrients, antinutrients, in vitro iron and calcium bioavailability and in vitro starch and protein digestibility of some legume seeds. LWT – Food Science and Technology. 2007 Sep; 40(7):1292-1299.

[2] The European Food Information Council (2010) ‘Nutrient bioavailability: Getting the most out of food’  https://www.eufic.org/en/food-today/article/nutrient-bioavailability-getting-the-most-out-of-food. Accessed May 2020.

[3] Yang J, Punshon T, Guerinot M, et al. (2012) ‘Plant Calcium Content: Ready to Remode.’ Nutrients. 2012 Aug; 4(8): 1120–1136. Published online 2012 Aug 21. doi: 10.3390/nu4081120

[4] Clarys P, Deliens T, Huybrechts I, et al. (2014) ‘Comparison of nutritional quality of the vegan, vegetarian, semi-vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian and omnivorous diet.’ Nutrients. 2014 Mar 24; 6(3):1318-32.

[5] Messina V, Mangels AR. (2001) ‘Considerations in planning vegan diets: children.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2001 Jun;101(6):661-9.

[6] Platel K, Srinivasan K. (2013) ‘Bioavailability of Micronutrients from Plant Foods: An Update.’ Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2016 Jul 26;56(10):1608-19. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2013.781011.

[7] Davey GK, Spencer EA, Appleby PN, et al. (2003) ’EPIC-Oxford: lifestyle characteristics and nutrient intakes in a cohort of 33 883 meat-eaters and 31 546 non meat-eaters in the UK.’ Public Health Nutr. 2003 May;6(3):259-69.

[8] Amalraj A, Pius A.(2015) ‘Bioavailability of calcium and its absorption inhibitors in raw and cooked green leafy vegetables commonly consumed in India – An in vitro study.’ Food Chemistry. (2015) Mar 1;170:430-6. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.08.031. Epub 2014 Aug 27.

[9] Noonan SC, Savage GP. (1999) ‘Oxalate content of foods and its effect on humans.’ Asia Pacific J Clin Nutr. (1999) 8(1): 64-74

[10] Yang, Jian et al. “Plant calcium content: ready to remodel.” Nutrients vol. 4,8 (2012): 1120-36. doi:10.3390/nu4081120

[11] Cockwell KA. Calcium. Elsevier Science Ltd., 2003.

[12] Ghavidel R A, Prakash J. The impact of germination and dehulling on nutrients, antinutrients, in vitro iron and calcium bioavailability and in vitro starch and protein digestibility of some legume seeds. LWT – Food Science and Technology. 2007 Sep; 40(7):1292-1299.

[13] Hambidge KM, Krebs NF, Westcott JL, et al. (2005) ‘Absorption of calcium from tortilla meals prepared from low-phytate maize.’ Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 Jul;82(1):84-7.

[14] Ghavidel R A, Prakash J. The impact of germination and dehulling on nutrients, antinutrients, in vitro iron and calcium bioavailability and in vitro starch and protein digestibility of some legume seeds. LWT – Food Science and Technology. 2007 Sep; 40(7):1292-1299.

[15] Caroli A et al. (2011) ‘Invited review: Dairy intake and bone health: A viewpoint from the state of the art.’ J Dairy Sci 2011;94(11):5249-62.

[16] Craig WJ. (2009) ‘Health effects of vegan diets.’ Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;89(5):1627S–1633S. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2009.26736N.

[17] American Dietetic Association; Dietitians of Canada. (2003) ‘Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Vegetarian diets.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2003 Jun;103(6):748-65.

[18] Lonnie, Marta et al. “Protein for Life: Review of Optimal Protein Intake, Sustainable Dietary Sources and the Effect on Appetite in Ageing Adults.” Nutrients vol. 10,3 360. 16 Mar. 2018, doi:10.3390/nu10030360

[19] American Society for Nutrition. (2011) “Community and Public Health Nutrition; Protein Complementation”. https://nutrition.org/protein-complementation/. Accessed May 2020.

[20] American Dietetic Association; Dietitians of Canada. (2003) ‘Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Vegetarian diets.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2003 Jun;103(6):748-65.

[21] De Gavelle, Erwan et al. “Protein Adequacy Is Primarily a Matter of Protein Quantity, Not Quality: Modeling an Increase in Plant:Animal Protein Ratio in French Adults.” Nutrients vol. 9,12 1333. 8 Dec. 2017, doi:10.3390/nu9121333

[22] American Society for Nutrition. (2011) “Community and Public Health Nutrition; Protein Complementation”. https://nutrition.org/protein-complementation/. Accessed May 2020.

[23] Jonnalagadda S. Matthews O. (2020) ‘Nutritional Benefits of Plant Proteins Taking Root with Consumers’. Kerry health and Nutrition Institute. https://khniuat.kerry.com/news/blog/nutritional-benefits-of-plant-proteins-taking-root-with-consumers/. Accessed: May 2020.

[24] Trang HM, Cole DE, Rubin LA, et al. (1998) Evidence that vitamin D3 increases serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D more efficiently than does vitamin D2. Am J Clin Nutr. 1998 Oct;68(4):854-8.

[25] Nair, R., & Maseeh, A. (2012). Vitamin D: The “sunshine” vitamin. Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics, 3(2), 118–126. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-500X.95506

[26] NHS. (2020) ‘Vitamins and Minerals; Vitamin D’ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vitamins-and-minerals/vitamin-d/. Accessed: May 2020

[27] Davey GK, Spencer EA, Appleby PN, et al. (2003) ‘EPIC-Oxford: lifestyle characteristics and nutrient intakes in a cohort of 33 883 meat-eaters and 31 546 non meat-eaters in the UK.’ Public Health Nutr. 2003 May;6(3):259-69.

[28] Cashman, Kevin D et al. “Vitamin D deficiency in Europe: pandemic?.” The American journal of clinical nutrition vol. 103,4 (2016): 1033-44. doi:10.3945/ajcn.115.120873

[29] British Nutrition Foundation. (2020) ‘New advice on Vitamin D.’ British Nutrition Foundation website. https://www.nutrition.org.uk/nutritioninthenews/new-reports/983-newvitamind.html. Accessed: May 2020.

[30] The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) (2016) ‘Vitamin D and Health’. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/537616/SACN_Vitamin_D_and_Health_report.pdf. Accessed: May 2020.

[31] NHS. (2020) ‘Vitamins and Minerals; Vitamin D’ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vitamins-and-minerals/vitamin-d/. Accessed: May 2020

[32] De Benoist, Hempstead R. (2001). ‘Iron Deficiency Anaemia Assessment, Prevention and Control A guide for programme managers’ World Health Organisation’ 2001 5(15).

[33] West, A. R., & Oates, P. S. (2008). Mechanisms of heme iron absorption: current questions and controversies. World journal of gastroenterology, 14(26), 4101–4110. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.14.4101

[34] Young, I., Parker, H. M., Rangan, A., et al. (2018). ‘Association between Haem and Non-Haem Iron Intake and Serum Ferritin in Healthy Young Women.’ Nutrients, 10(1), 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10010081

[35] American Dietetic Association; Dietitians of Canada. (2003) ‘Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Vegetarian diets.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2003 Jun;103(6):748-65.

[36] Sandberg AS. (2002) Bioavailability of minerals in legumes.Br J Nutr. 2002 Dec;88 Suppl 3:S281-5.

[37] Gupta, Raj Kishor et al. (2015) “Reduction of phytic acid and enhancement of bioavailable micronutrients in food grains.” Journal of food science and technology 2015;52(2):676‐684. doi:10.1007/s13197-013-0978-y

[38] Sandberg AS. (2002) Bioavailability of minerals in legumes.Br J Nutr. 2002 Dec;88 Suppl 3:S281-5.

[39] Gibson RS, Perlas L, Hotz C. (2006) Improving the bioavailability of nutrients in plant foods at the household level. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society (2006), 65, 160–168 Proceedings of the Nutrition Society (2006), 65, 160–168 DOI:10.1079/PNS2006489

[40] De Benoist, Hempstead R. (2001). ‘Iron Deficiency Anaemia Assessment, Prevention and Control A guide for programme managers’ World Health Organisation’ 2001 8(66).

[41] Janet R, Hunt Am. (2003) ‘Bioavailability of iron, zinc, and other trace minerals from

vegetarian diet.’ J Clin Nutr 2003;78(suppl):633S–9S

[42] Delimont NM, Haub MD, Lindshield BL. (2017) ‘The Impact of Tannin Consumption on Iron Bioavailability and Status: A Narrative Review.’ Curr Dev Nutr. 2017 Feb; 1(2): 1–12. Published online 2017 Jan 19. doi: 10.3945/cdn.116.000042

[43] Hallberg L, Rossander-Hultén L, Brune M, Gleerup A. (1992) ‘Calcium and iron absorption: mechanism of action and nutritional importance.’ Eur J Clin Nutr. 1992;46(5):317‐327

[44] Purushothaman V, M A, Tsou SC, S S. Supplementing iron bioavailability enhanced mung bean. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2008;17 Suppl 1:99-102.

[45] Teucher B, Olivares M, Cori H. (2004) ‘Enhancers of iron absorption: ascorbic acid and other organic acids.’ Int J Vitam Nutr Res. 2004;74(6):403‐419. doi:10.1024/0300-9831.74.6.403

[46] Lynch SR, Cook JD. (1980) ’Interaction of vitamin C and iron.’ Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1980;355:32‐44. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1980.tb21325.x

[47] Young, I., Parker, H. M., Rangan, A., et al. (2018). ‘Association between Haem and Non-Haem Iron Intake and Serum Ferritin in Healthy Young Women.’ Nutrients, 10(1), 81. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu10010081

[48] Anderson BM, Gibson RS, Sabry JH.  (1981) ‘The iron and zinc status of long-term vegetarian women.’ Am J Clin Nutr. 1981 Jun;34(6):1042-8

[49] De Benoist, Hempstead R. (2001). ‘Iron Deficiency Anaemia Assessment, Prevention and Control A guide for programme managers’ World Health Organisation’ 2001 8(66).

[50]IZiNCG Secretariat. UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland. (2019) ‘ESTIMATING NATIONAL RISK OF ZINC DEFICIENCY: PROXY INDICATORS VS. PLASMA/SERUM ZINC CONCENTRATIONS’. https://www.izincg.org/new-blog-1/estimating-national-risk-of-zinc-deficiency

[51] Platel K, Srinivasan K. (2016) ‘Bioavailability of Micronutrients from Plant Foods: An Update.’ Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2016 Jul 26;56(10):1608-19. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2013.781011.

[52] Davey GK, Spencer EA, Appleby PN, et al. (2003) ‘EPIC-Oxford: lifestyle characteristics and nutrient intakes in a cohort of 33 883 meat-eaters and 31 546 non meat-eaters in the UK.’ Public Health Nutr. 2003 May;6(3):259-69.

[53] Davey GK, Spencer EA, Appleby PN, et al. (2003) ‘EPIC-Oxford: lifestyle characteristics and nutrient intakes in a cohort of 33 883 meat-eaters and 31 546 non meat-eaters in the UK.’ Public Health Nutr. 2003 May;6(3):259-69.

[54] American Dietetic Association; Dietitians of Canada. (2003) ‘Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Vegetarian diets.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2003 Jun;103(6):748-65.

[55] Janet R, Hunt Am. (203) ‘Bioavailability of iron, zinc, and other trace minerals from

vegetarian diet.’ J Clin Nutr 2003;78(suppl):633S–9S

[56] Fredlund K, Isaksson M, Rossander-Hulthén L, et al. (2006) ‘Absorption of zinc and retention of calcium: dose-dependent inhibition by phytate.’ J Trace Elem Med Biol. 2006;20(1):49-57. Epub 2006 Mar 2.

[57] Sandberg AS. (2002) Bioavailability of minerals in legumes.Br J Nutr. 2002 Dec;88 Suppl 3:S281-5.

[58] Hemalatha, S., Platel, K. and Srinivasan, K. (2007). ‘Zinc and iron content and their bioaccessibility in cereals and pulses consumed in India.’ Food Chem. 102:1328–1336.

[59] Suliburska, J., & Krejpcio, Z. (2014). Evaluation of the content and bioaccessibility of iron, zinc, calcium and magnesium from groats, rice, leguminous grains and nuts. Journal of food science and technology, 51(3), 589–594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0535-5

[60] Dietary factors influencing zinc absorption. J Nutr. 2000 May;130(5S Suppl):1378S-83S. doi: 10.1093/jn/130.5.1378S.

[61] Platel K, Srinivasan K. (2016) ‘Bioavailability of Micronutrients from Plant Foods: An Update.’ Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2016 Jul 26;56(10):1608-19. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2013.781011.

[62] Janet R, Hunt Am. (2003) ‘Bioavailability of iron, zinc, and other trace minerals from vegetarian diet.’ J Clin Nutr 2003;78(suppl):633S–9S

[63] Rogerson D. (2017) ‘Vegan diets: practical advice for athletes and exercisers.’ J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017; 14: 36. Published online 2017 Sep 13. doi: 10.1186/s12970-017-0192-

[64] Davey GK, Spencer EA, Appleby PN, et al. (2003) ‘EPIC-Oxford: lifestyle characteristics and nutrient intakes in a cohort of 33 883 meat-eaters and 31 546 non meat-eaters in the UK.’ Public Health Nutr. 2003 May;6(3):259-69.

[65] Davey GK, Spencer EA, Appleby PN, et al. (2003) ‘EPIC-Oxford: lifestyle characteristics and nutrient intakes in a cohort of 33 883 meat-eaters and 31 546 non meat-eaters in the UK.’ Public Health Nutr. 2003 May;6(3):259-69.

[66] Messina V, Mangels AR. (2001) ‘Considerations in planning vegan diets: children.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2001 Jun;101(6):661-9.

[67] Craig WJ. (2009) ‘Health effects of vegan diets.’ Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;89(5):1627S–1633S. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2009.26736N.

[68] Agnoli C, Baroni L, Bertini I, et al. (2017) ‘Position paper on vegetarian diets from the working group of the Italian Society of Human Nutrition.’ Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2017 Dec;27(12):1037-1052. doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2017.10.020. Epub 2017 Oct 31.

[69] Office of Dietary Supplements (February 2020) ‘Vitamin B12; Fact Sheet for Consumers’ U.S. Department of Health & Human Services; National Institutes of Health: https://ods.od.nih.gov/pdf/factsheets/VitaminB12-Consumer.pdf

[70] British Dietetic Association (2017) ‘Plant-based diet: Food Fact Sheet’. https://www.bda.uk.com/resource/plant-based-diet.html. Accessed: May 2020.

[71] Office of Dietary Supplements (March 2020) ‘Vitamin A; Fact Sheet for Health Professionals’ U.S. Department of Health & Human Services; National Institutes of Health:https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminA-HealthProfessional/#h3. Accessed on: May 2020.

[72] Platel K, Srinivasan K. (2013) ‘Bioavailability of Micronutrients from Plant Foods: An Update.’ Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2016 Jul 26;56(10):1608-19. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2013.781011.

[73] Platel K, Srinivasan K. (2013) ‘Bioavailability of Micronutrients from Plant Foods: An Update.’ Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2016 Jul 26;56(10):1608-19. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2013.781011.

[74] Office of Dietary Supplements (March 2020) ‘Vitamin A; Fact Sheet for Health Professionals’ U.S. Department of Health & Human Services; National Institutes of Health:https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/VitaminA-HealthProfessional/#h3. Accessed on: May 2020.

[75] American Dietetic Association; Dietitians of Canada. (2003) ‘Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Vegetarian diets.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2003 Jun;103(6):748-65.

[76] American Dietetic Association; Dietitians of Canada. (2003) ‘Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Vegetarian diets.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2003 Jun;103(6):748-65.

[77] Nair K M, Augustine LF. (2018) ‘Food synergies for improving bioavailability of micronutrients from

plant foods’. Food Chemistry. 2018. 238:180–185.

[78] Veda S, Platel K, Srinivasan K.J.(2008) ‘Influence of food acidulants and antioxidant spices on the bioaccessibility of beta-carotene from selected vegetables.’ Agric Food Chem. 2008 Sep 24;56(18):8714-9. doi: 10.1021/jf801374d. Epub 2008 Aug 27.

[79]European Food Safety Authority (2020) ‘EU Register on nutrition and health claims.’ https://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/labelling_nutrition/claims/register/public/?event=search. Accessed May 2020.

[80] Agnoli C, Baroni L, Bertini I, et al. (2017) ‘Position paper on vegetarian diets from the working group of the Italian Society of Human Nutrition.’ Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2017 Dec;27(12):1037-1052. doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2017.10.020. Epub 2017 Oct 31.

[81] British Nutrition Foundation (2018) ‘The Eatwell Guide  – A revised healthy eating model’. https://www.nutrition.org.uk/healthyliving/healthydiet/eatwell.html. Accessed May 2020.

[82] Rogerson D. (2017) ‘Vegan diets: practical advice for athletes and exercisers.’ J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017; 14: 36. Published online 2017 Sep 13. doi: 10.1186/s12970-017-0192-

[83] Agnoli C, Baroni L, Bertini I; et al. (2017) ‘Nutrition, Metabolism & Cardiovascular Diseases Position paper on vegetarian diets from the working group of the Italian Society of Human Nutrition.’ Nutr. Metab. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2017, 27, 1037–1052.

[84] Welch A, Shakya-Shrestha S, Lentjes M, et al. (2010) ‘Dietary intake and status of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in a population of fish-eating and non fish-eating meat-eaters, vegetarians, and vegans and the precursor-product ratio of a-linolenic acid to long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids: Results from the EPIC-Norfolk cohort.’ Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2010, 92, 1040–1051

[85] Whelan, Jay, and Kevin Fritsche. (2013) “Linoleic acid.” Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) vol. 4,3 311-2. 1 May. 2013, doi:10.3945/an.113.003772

[86] Cholewski, Mateusz et al. (2018) “A Comprehensive Review of Chemistry, Sources and Bioavailability of Omega-3 Fatty Acids.” Nutrients vol. 10,11 1662. 4 Nov. 2018, doi:10.3390/nu10111662

[87] Welch A, Shakya-Shrestha S, Lentjes M, et al. (2010) ‘Dietary intake and status of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in a population of fish-eating and non fish-eating meat-eaters, vegetarians, and vegans and the precursor-product ratio of a-linolenic acid to long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids: Results from the EPIC-Norfolk cohort.’ Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2010, 92, 1040–1051

[88] Welch A, Shakya-Shrestha S, Lentjes M, et al. (2010) ‘Dietary intake and status of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in a population of fish-eating and non fish-eating meat-eaters, vegetarians, and vegans and the precursor-product ratio of a-linolenic acid to long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids: Results from the EPIC-Norfolk cohort.’ Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2010, 92, 1040–1051

[89] Rogerson D. (2017) ‘Vegan diets: practical advice for athletes and exercisers.’ J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017; 14: 36. Published online 2017 Sep 13. doi: 10.1186/s12970-017-0192-

[90] American Dietetic Association; Dietitians of Canada. (2003) ‘Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Vegetarian diets.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2003 Jun;103(6):748-65.

[91] European Food Safety Authority (2012) ‘EFSA assesses safety of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids’. https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/120727. July 2012.

[92] British Dietetic Association (2019) ‘Iodine: Food Fact Sheet’. https://www.bda.uk.com/resource/iodine.html Accessed: May 2020

[93] Rogerson D. (2017) ‘Vegan diets: practical advice for athletes and exercisers.’ J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017; 14: 36. Published online 2017 Sep 13. doi: 10.1186/s12970-017-0192

[94] Van der Reijden O L, Zimmermann M B, Galetti V. (2017) ‘Iodine in dairy milk: Sources, concentrations and importance to human health.’ Best Practice & Research Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. 2017; 31(4)385-395.

[95] Bath, S., Button, S., & Rayman, M. (2012). ‘Iodine concentration of organic and conventional milk: Implications for iodine intake.’ British Journal of Nutrition, 107(7), 935-940. doi:10.1017/S0007114511003059

[96] British Dietetic Association (2019) ‘Iodine: Food Fact Sheet’. https://www.bda.uk.com/resource/iodine.html Accessed: May 2020

[97] Platel K, Srinivasan K. (2013) ‘Bioavailability of Micronutrients from Plant Foods: An Update.’ Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2016 Jul 26;56(10):1608-19. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2013.781011.

[98] Rogerson D. (2017) ‘Vegan diets: practical advice for athletes and exercisers.’ J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017; 14: 36. Published online 2017 Sep 13. doi: 10.1186/s12970-017-0192

[99] Sebastiani G, Barbero A H, Borrás-Novell C, et al. (2019) ‘The Effects of Vegetarian and Vegan Diet during Pregnancy on the Health of Mothers and Offspring.’ Nutrients. 2019;11(3):557. Published 2019 Mar 6. doi:10.3390/nu11030557

[100] American Dietetic Association; Dietitians of Canada. (2003) ‘Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Vegetarian diets.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2003 Jun;103(6):748-65.

[101] Agnoli C, Baroni L, Bertini I, et al. (2017) ‘Position paper on vegetarian diets from the working group of the Italian Society of Human Nutrition.’ Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2017 Dec;27(12):1037-1052. doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2017.10.020. Epub 2017 Oct 31.

[102] American Dietetic Association; Dietitians of Canada. (2003) ‘Position of the American Dietetic Association and Dietitians of Canada: Vegetarian diets.’ J Am Diet Assoc. 2003 Jun;103(6):748-65.

Summary

As mainstream consumers become more aware of protein’s benefits in supporting active lifestyles, muscle health, weight wellness and cardiometabolic health, they are fuelling demand for protein, and interest in plant proteins is also rising.  The market growth of plant-based protein options can be linked to multiple consumer drivers including consumers becoming more proactive about their health and wellness, greater attention being paid to the ethics and sustainability associated with meat consumption and an avoidance of consuming animal based protein that potentially contains hormones or antibiotics.  These factors can resonate with all types of consumers, and the increasing number of vegetarian, flexitarians and vegans are not the only ones contributing to the demand for plant protein.  Furthermore, with a growing population and need for alternative food sources, plant-based options are in demand to help diversify diets and spread resources.

Food and beverage manufacturers responding to this demand are finding that developing food and beverages with plant proteins, whether it be in the format of a snack bar, nutrition shake, or meat alternative product, comes with inherent consumer barriers and formulation challenges.  For example, current plant-based proteins and meat alternative products often don’t meet consumers’ expectations for appearance, taste or texture. And while consumer knowledge of nutrition and good protein sources is increasing, taste remains the number one purchase motivator.  Furthermore, finding plant proteins with high nutritional quality is a challenge for product manufacturers because the nutritional value of plant-based proteins often falls behind animal-based proteins.

In order to successfully meet the needs of consumers, food and beverage manufacturers need to leverage insights into the marketplace and find the right plant-based protein solution that appeals to consumer demands.  An expert understanding of how plant protein sources and processing technologies impact product formulation, nutritional values and tastes profiles is essential to product innovation in this space.  Bringing taste and nutrition together in this way will help manufacturers capture this growing demand and bring more innovative and uncompromising products to the market.

Join us for a webinar that looks to the future of plant-based proteins and meat alternatives including the marketplace, consumer insights, nutrition benefits, sourcing and suitability, and how nutrition and food science can work together to improve the nutritional profile of plant protein products and  solve application challenges.

Speakers

Orlaigh Matthews, RNutr, Strategic Marketing Manager, Kerry – “What’s Driving the Plant Protein Trend? Market Trends and Consumer Insights”

Anke Golde, MS, Senior R&D Director of Sweet & Cereals, Kerry – “Formulating Great Tasting and Nutritious Plant Protein Products: Technical Considerations”