MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410952498 · doi:10.3390/su17115110

Recent Advances in Protein Extraction Techniques for Meat Secondary Streams

2025· article· en· W4410952498 on OpenAlexafffund
Olugbenga P. Soladoye, Yu Fu, Juárez Manuel, David Tinotenda Mbiriri, Ajibola Bamikole Oyedeji, Tawanda Tayengwa, Jianping Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMeat and Animal Product Quality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsSTREAMSExtraction (chemistry)Environmental scienceComputer scienceChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Meat secondary streams command low value along the meat value chain, with a significant portion of these exiting the food value chain and contributing to global food loss and waste. Valorizing these substantial secondary streams through the efficient extraction of high-biological-value proteins could translate into significant social, economic, and environmental benefits. Protein extraction from meat secondary streams offers a promising approach to enhance their nutritional and commercial value while supporting global food security initiatives. This approach could also help to distant these by-products from their original source, making them more appealing to consumers. The current review evaluates the protein content and valorization potential of meat secondary streams from various animal sources. It further provides a critical assessment of both traditional and emerging protein extraction techniques, highlighting their advantages, limitations, and applications. Existing knowledge gaps are also identified to guide future research. This review aligns the role of protein recovery technologies with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goal target 12.3, which seeks to halve global food waste by 2030.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicMeat and Animal Product QualityFrench-language works237,207