Foods (Average)
WTC was measured on a 9-point scale (1 = ’Never or less than once yearly’, 5 = ‘1–3 times per month’, 9 = ‘Once daily or more’). Cluster sizes are given as % of the total sample ( n = 2494). Standard errors around WTC means were between 0.1 and 0.2 for all clusters and all PB food categories). The last two columns show p -value and effect size (η 2 ) following analysis of variance within clusters. Results from Tukey’s post hoc tests are shown, and within rows, PB food categories with same capital letters are not significant at the 5% level of significance.
A follow-up cluster analysis identified three sub-groups of consumers within Cluster 1 ( Part S9 of Supplementary Materials includes a dendrogram and a plot of WTC means). Although each of these three sub-groups were non-discriminating among food categories, they differed significantly in the magnitude of their stated WTC. The largest group ( n = 865, 34.7% of total sample) gave low WTC ratings to all five PB food categories (between ‘2–3 times a year’ and ‘never or less than once a year’). The smallest group ( n = 203, 8.1% of total sample) gave higher WTC ratings across food categories (between ‘once every month’ and ‘every 2–3 months’), while the third group ( n = 314, 12.6% of total sample) gave high WTC ratings to all PB food categories (around ‘2–4 times a week’).
Part S10 of Supplementary Materials has the demographic profiles for the Cluster 1 sub-groups and it fits that Group 2 which had the lowest average WTC across the five PB food categories (between ‘never or less than once yearly’ and ‘2–3 times a year’) comprised more older people (60%), more people with lower educational attainment (46.5%), was dominated by self-declared omnivores (73.4%) and was most food neophobic (38.4) and food technology neophobic (60.2). This was contrasted with Group 3 where average WTC was highest. In this group, people from the younger age group (18 to 45 years old) were in the majority (65.3%), as were those who had higher educational attainment (70.7%). Consumers from India were also relatively overrepresented (39.2%) in this latter group.
Each of the 6 smaller segments had distinct WTC patterns by PB food category, and based on effect size, the PB category differences were largest in Cluster 5 (η 2 = 0.72) and Cluster 2 (η 2 = 0.68) ( Table 2 ). In Cluster 5 ( n = 150, 6.0% of total sample), average WTC ratings were high for PB Milk (between ‘2–4 times per week’ and ‘5–6 times per week’) and much lower for all other PB food categories. Among these consumers, PB Cheese had the highest WTC, followed by PB Meat 33% and then 100% PB Meat and PB Fish . In Cluster 2 ( n = 127, 5.1% of total sample), the high average WTC for PB Milk was similar to Cluster 5. Furthermore, in this cluster WTC for PB Cheese was also high (between ‘once every week’ and ‘2–4 times every week’). In a further parallel to Cluster 5, PB Meat 33% was the PB food category with the third highest average WTC rating (between ‘every 2–3 months’ and ‘2–3 times a year’). PB Meat and PB Fish had the lowest average WTC (around ‘2–3 times a year’). These distinct WTC profiles are seen in Figure 4 which presents two-dimensional biplots following Principal Components Analysis of mean WTC ratings by PB product category across the six category discriminating clusters ( Figure 4 A plots PC1 vs. PC2; Figure 4 B plots PC1 vs. PC3). Briefly, PC1 and PC2 separated, respectively, PB Milk and PB Cheese from the other PB food categories, while PC3 separated the two variants of PB Meat .
Two-dimensional biplots following Principal Components Analysis of mean willingness to consume (WTC) ratings for PB food categories in the six PB category discriminating clusters (Cluster 2 to Cluster 7). Confidence ellipses (95%) around average cluster positions were obtained by bootstrapping. ( A ) PC1 vs. PC2; ( B ) PC1 vs. PC3. ( A , B ), PB food categories are shown in bold and italic font.
Cluster 6 ( n = 143, 5.7% of total sample) resembled Clusters 2 and 5 by having high average WTC ratings for PB Milk and PB Cheese ( Table 1 ), as well as high WTC for PB Meat (between ‘2–4 times per week’ and ‘5–6 times per week’) ( Table 2 ). Conversely, in this cluster, WTC was lowest for PB Meat 33% (between ‘every 2–3 months’ and ‘2–3 times a year’), although still higher than in Clusters 2 and 5. Overall, Cluster 6 comprised the people who gave the highest average WTC ratings to PB foods.
In Cluster 3 ( n = 214, 8.6% of total sample), WTC for PB Milk was again high ( Table 2 ), and Cluster 3 resembled Cluster 5 in having a much lower average WTC rating for PB Cheese than PB Milk ( Figure 4 A). Differentiating its WTC profile from the other clusters was a higher WTC for 33% PB Meat compared to 100% PB Meat ( Figure 4 B). Finally, Cluster 3 resembled Cluster 6 in having an overall high WTC for PB foods ( Table 1 ).
Cluster 7 ( n = 182, 7.3% of total population) had the lowest WTC for PB Milk among the six category discriminating clusters ( Part S11 of Supplementary Materials has results from ANOVA for each of the five PB food categories separately). Consumers in this cluster rated, on average, WTC for PB Meat 33% the highest (between ‘once every month’ and ‘every 2–3 months’). PB Meat had the same average rating as PB Milk ( Table 2 ). The distinct WTC profile for Cluster 7 was clearly seen in Figure 4 .
Cluster 4 was the largest of the six category discriminating clusters ( n = 296, 11.9% of total sample) and, compared to the other five clusters, differences in mean WTC for the PB food categories were smallest (η 2 = 0.14) ( Table 2 ), which could also be seen from its position closer to the origins of the plots in Figure 4 . The WTC profile in Cluster 4 most strongly resembled that from the aggregate sample ( Figure 1 ), with highest WTC for PB Milk followed by PB Cheese , and then lower ratings for the other three PB food categories ( Table 2 ).
Directed by the third objective of the research (Obj. 3), Penalty/Lift analysis was performed to identify emotional, conceptual and situational use drivers of WTC in each of the PB category discriminating consumer segments (Cluster 2 to Cluster 7). Supported by the findings from Penalty/Lift analysis, where none of the explanatory CATA terms strongly impacted WTC (change in WTC was with one exception always less than 0.5 scale points), no further consideration was given to the non-discriminating PB category cluster (Cluster 1).
The results following Penalty/Lift analysis for PB food categories within each of the six discriminating clusters are shown in Table 3 for the 20 emotional and conceptual terms. When term selection was associated with a change in WTC that was significantly different from zero ( p < 0.05), the five terms with negative valence—‘boring’, ‘dissatisfied’, ‘nervous’, ‘tense’, and ‘uninspired’—overwhelmingly reduced WTC. Table 3 shows this by the red shading of cells and a negative value up to one WTC scale points (blank cells in Table 3 indicate that significance testing of change in WTC was not performed due to infrequent term use (<5%) for a specific PB food category; tables of citation frequencies for terms by PB food category in individual clusters are given in Part S12 of Supplementary Materials ). The two exceptions to this pattern of WTC penalties were Cluster 2 and Cluster 3, where an association between ‘nervous’ and PB Meat 33% resulted in a significant WTC increase ( Table 3 ).
Results following Penalty/Lift analysis for PB food categories in each of the six plant-based (PB) category discriminating clusters (Cluster 2 to Cluster 7), showing emotional and conceptual drivers of willingness to consume (WTC).
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
Milk-2 | 1. Milk | 2 | PB Milk | −0.2 | 0.3 | −0.2 | −0.4 | −0.3 | −0.1 | −0.2 | −0.3 | −0.1 | 0.4 | 0.1 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | ||||||
Cheese-2 | 2. Cheese | 2 | PB Cheese | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.4 | −0.2 | −0.2 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 0.3 | −0.2 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.1 | |||
Fish-2 | 3. Fish | 2 | PB Fish | 0.0 | −0.2 | 0.1 | −0.3 | −0.2 | −0.2 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.2 | −0.1 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | −0.1 | −0.2 | |
Meat-2 | 4. Meat | 2 | PB Meat | −0.2 | −0.2 | −0.2 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | −0.1 | 0.3 | −0.1 | 0.1 | −0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.0 | |
Meat33-2 | 5. Meat33 | 2 | PB Meat 33% | −0.3 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.5 | −0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | −0.5 | −0.5 | 0.1 | −0.5 | −0.2 | 0.3 | −0.4 | 0.0 | −0.1 | 0.5 | ||
Milk-3 | 1. Milk | 3 | PB Milk | −0.6 | −0.4 | −0.3 | −0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | −0.1 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | −0.6 | −0.3 | 0.0 | −0.3 | 0.3 | −0.1 | −0.4 | ||
Cheese-3 | 2. Cheese | 3 | PB Cheese | −0.3 | −0.9 | 0.1 | −0.4 | −0.6 | −0.3 | −0.3 | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | −0.1 | 0.2 | −0.1 | −0.2 | |
Fish-3 | 3. Fish | 3 | PB Fish | −0.2 | −0.5 | −0.3 | −0.6 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.5 | −0.1 | 0.6 | |
Meat-3 | 4. Meat | 3 | PB Meat | 0.0 | −0.3 | −0.5 | −0.5 | 0.1 | −0.3 | −0.4 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.5 | −0.2 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.8 |
Meat33-3 | 5. Meat33 | 3 | PB Meat 33% | −0.6 | −0.3 | 0.7 | −0.3 | −0.1 | −0.1 | −0.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.9 | −0.1 | −0.2 | 0.3 | −0.1 | |
Milk-4 | 1. Milk | 4 | PB Milk | −0.2 | −0.1 | −0.3 | 0.2 | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.0 | −0.2 | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.2 | −0.2 | 0.1 | |
Cheese-4 | 2. Cheese | 4 | PB Cheese | −0.5 | 0.0 | 0.2 | −0.1 | −0.3 | −0.1 | −0.2 | −0.2 | −0.3 | 0.0 | −0.2 | −0.1 | 0.0 | −0.1 | 0.0 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
Fish-4 | 3. Fish | 4 | PB Fish | 0.0 | −0.2 | −0.3 | −0.6 | −0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.2 | −0.3 | 0.0 | −0.2 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 | −0.1 |
Meat-4 | 4. Meat | 4 | PB Meat | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | −0.1 | −0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.2 | −0.2 | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.0 | |
Meat33-4 | 5. Meat33 | 4 | PB Meat 33% | −0.4 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | −0.2 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 | |
Milk-5 | 1. Milk | 5 | PB Milk | 0.0 | −0.6 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | −0.1 | −0.4 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.0 | −0.3 | −0.4 | |||||
Cheese-5 | 2. Cheese | 5 | PB Cheese | −0.2 | −0.5 | −0.2 | −0.6 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.0 | ||
Fish-5 | 3. Fish | 5 | PB Fish | −0.1 | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | −0.2 | 0.2 | −0.1 | −0.1 | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | −0.1 | −0.1 | 0.0 | −0.1 | ||
Meat-5 | 4. Meat | 5 | PB Meat | −0.2 | −0.2 | −0.2 | 0.3 | −0.2 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 0.1 | −0.1 | −0.1 | 0.4 | 0.3 | |
Meat33-5 | 5. Meat33 | 5 | PB Meat 33% | −0.2 | −0.1 | −0.3 | −0.1 | −0.4 | 0.2 | −0.2 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.0 | −0.1 | −0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | −0.2 | 0.0 | −0.1 | |
Milk-6 | 1. Milk | 6 | PB Milk | −0.7 | −0.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.0 | −0.4 | −0.1 | −0.3 | 0.1 | −0.4 | 0.0 | ||||
Cheese-6 | 2. Cheese | 6 | PB Cheese | −0.6 | −0.6 | −0.6 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.2 | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 0.3 | |||
Fish-6 | 3. Fish | 6 | PB Fish | 0.4 | −0.5 | −0.7 | −0.8 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.1 | −0.2 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.3 | |||
Meat-6 | 4. Meat | 6 | PB Meat | −0.4 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | −0.1 | −0.4 | −0.6 | −0.4 | 0.5 | −0.5 | −0.3 | −0.3 | −0.5 | ||
Meat33-6 | 5. Meat33 | 6 | PB Meat 33% | −0.4 | −0.2 | −0.1 | −1.0 | 0.0 | −0.2 | 0.4 | −0.1 | 0.8 | 0.4 | −0.2 | −0.5 | 0.1 | 0.7 | −0.3 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.4 | ||
Milk-7 | 1. Milk | 7 | PB Milk | −0.9 | −0.9 | −0.9 | −0.8 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.3 | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.6 | 0.4 | −0.5 | −0.1 | −0.7 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.1 | ||
Cheese-7 | 2. Cheese | 7 | PB Cheese | −0.5 | −0.6 | −0.2 | −0.2 | −0.5 | 0.0 | 0.3 | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | −0.3 | 0.1 | |
Fish-7 | 3. Fish | 7 | PB Fish | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.4 | −0.1 | −0.3 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.6 |
Meat-7 | 4. Meat | 7 | PB Meat | 0.0 | −0.2 | −0.2 | −0.6 | −0.2 | 0.3 | 0.8 | −0.2 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.1 | −0.1 | −0.4 | 0.3 | 0.6 | −0.4 |
Meat33-7 | 5. Meat33 | 7 | PB Meat 33% | 0.3 | 0.0 | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | −0.1 | −0.1 | 0.1 | −0.1 | 0.2 | −0.1 | −0.3 | 0.1 | −0.2 | −0.3 | 0.1 |
WTC was measured on a 9-point scale (1 = ’Never or less than once yearly’, 5 = ‘1–3 times per month’, 9 = ‘Once daily or more’). Cell values indicate average WTC change, where red shading used for emotional/conceptual terms with average WTC impact significantly less than zero ( p < 0.05) and green shading used for terms with average WTC impact significantly less than zero ( p < 0.05). Blank cells indicate that significance testing of change in WTC was not performed due to infrequent term use (<5%) for a focal PB food category. The presentation order for terms is based on grouping as ‘negative valence’, ‘positive valence’ and ‘conceptual’, shown in three blocks from left to right in the figure.
Differences between the PB food categories regarding the penalty on WTC of negative emotional associations were seen in Table 3 , with reduced WTC for PB Milk often associated with the terms ‘boring’ and ‘uninspired’. Conversely, ‘dissatisfied’ was most often associated with reduced WTC for PB Cheese . Table 3 also showed that many negative emotional associations reduced WTC for PB Milk in Cluster 7 and the same applied to PB Cheese in Cluster 6. The average negative impact on WTC was highest for PB Milk in Cluster 7, which could tentatively be explained by the low average WTC for this food category in this cluster ( Table 1 ). The largest WTC penalty (1 scale point) was observed for ‘uninspired’ in response to 33% PB Meat in Cluster 6 and is likely explained by the much lower WTC for this hybrid PB category than the other PB food categories in this cluster. Just as it was an infrequent emotion at the aggregate level ( Section 3.1.2 ), ‘tense’ was infrequently used for individual food categories within clusters and was often <5% (blank cells in Table 3 ). The only instance where selection of this term was associated with a significant WTC penalty was for PB Fish in Cluster 4.
When citation of terms with positive valence (‘enthusiastic’, ‘comforting’, ‘easygoing’, ‘energetic’, ‘happy’, and ‘inspiring’) significantly impacted WTC, the change was always positive, as seen from the green shading in Table 3 . The results aligned well with the WTC changes for terms with negative valence. For example, WTC significantly increased when ‘inspiring’ was used to characterize PB Meat 33% in Cluster 6, which fitted with the significant WTC decrease for ‘uninspired’ for this product-by-cluster combination. For PB Cheese in Cluster 5, significant WTC increases for ‘happy’ and ‘enthusiastic’ fitted with significant WTC decreases for, respectively, ‘dissatisfied’ and ‘uninspired’. Another example was PB Meat in Cluster 7, where a WTC increase for ‘comforting’ fitted with a WTC decrease for ‘tense’. In the two instances where ‘easygoing’ was significantly associated with a WTC increase, it was for PB Fish (Cluster 3 and Cluster 6).
Contrary to the systematic WTC impact for terms with negative or positive valence (respectively, WTC penalty and WTC lift), selection of conceptual terms (‘adventurous’, ‘classy’, ‘feminine’, ‘passive’, ‘powerful’, ‘pretentious’, ‘sophisticated’, ‘unique’, ‘youthful’) largely resulted in WTC increases, although some occasional WTC decreases were noted (a mix of green and red shading in Table 3 ). In the case of ‘classy’, WTC significantly increased for PB cheese in Cluster 2 and Cluster 5. However, in Cluster 3, WTC was penalized when ‘classy’ was associated with PB Milk , while it increased when this term was associated with PB Fish . The term ‘feminine’, was associated with a WTC increase for PB Fish in Cluster 6, but a WTC decrease for PB Meat . Furthermore, in Cluster 6, mixed WTC impacts were seen for ‘pretentious’, which was negative for PB Meat but positive for PB Fish and PB Cheese .
For ‘adventurous’, ‘powerful’ and ‘unique’, WTC changes were positive (green shading), although never for the same clusters and PB food categories. However, in Cluster 7, where PB Milk had the lowest within-cluster WTC rating, selection of ‘adventurous’ increased WTC. When ‘powerful’ was significantly associated with WTC increase it was only for PB Meat or PB Meat 33% . Perceiving PB food categories as ‘sophisticated’ never resulted in a significant WTC change. Least significant impacts on WTC for emotional and conceptual terms were observed for Cluster 4, which was the largest of the six PB category discriminating clusters (11.9% of total sample). There were only two instances ( Table 3 ), which both revealed a WTC penalty – PB Cheese (highest WTC in cluster) when associated with ‘boring’, PB Fish (lowest WTC in cluster) when associated with ‘tense’.
Table 4 pertains to situational use terms but is otherwise the same as Table 3 . It, shows the impact on WTC for PB food categories in each of the six plant-based (PB) category discriminating clusters (Cluster 2 to Cluster 7) as determined by Penalty/Lift analysis ( Part S13 of Supplementary Materials has citation frequency for situational use CATA terms by cluster for the five plant-based (PB) food categories). Compared with the WTC changes observed for emotional and conceptual terms, the average impacts were smaller for situation use situations.
Results following Penalty/Lift analysis for PB food categories in each of the six plant-based (PB) category discriminating clusters (Cluster 2 to Cluster 7), showing situational use drivers of willingness to consume (WTC).
1. Milk | 2 | PB Milk | −0.2 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 | −0.1 | 0.3 | 0.5 |
2. Cheese | 2 | PB Cheese | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 |
3. Fish | 2 | PB Fish | 0.1 | 0.1 | −0.3 | −0.1 | −0.1 | 0.1 | −0.2 | 0.1 |
4. Meat | 2 | PB Meat | 0.2 | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 |
5. Meat33 | 2 | PB Meat 33% | −0.2 | 0.4 | 0.1 | −0.3 | −0.2 | −0.2 | −0.4 | 0.2 |
1. Milk | 3 | PB Milk | 0.3 | −0.4 | 0.1 | 0.1 | −0.2 | 0.0 | 0.2 | −0.1 |
2. Cheese | 3 | PB Cheese | 0.2 | −0.4 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.2 |
3. Fish | 3 | PB Fish | 0.5 | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
4. Meat | 3 | PB Meat | −0.1 | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.1 | −0.4 | 0.1 | 0.7 | 0.4 |
5. Meat33 | 3 | PB Meat 33% | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.3 | −0.1 | 0.0 |
1. Milk | 4 | PB Milk | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | −0.2 | 0.0 | −0.1 |
2. Cheese | 4 | PB Cheese | 0.1 | −0.1 | −0.2 | −0.3 | −0.3 | −0.3 | −0.3 | 0.0 |
3. Fish | 4 | PB Fish | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 | −0.2 | −0.2 | −0.2 | 0.0 | 0.1 |
4. Meat | 4 | PB Meat | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.4 | −0.1 | 0.0 |
5. Meat33 | 4 | PB Meat 33% | 0.1 | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.1 |
1. Milk | 5 | PB Milk | −0.1 | −0.1 | −0.2 | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.0 |
2. Cheese | 5 | PB Cheese | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | −0.2 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.1 |
3. Fish | 5 | PB Fish | −0.1 | 0.0 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | −0.1 | 0.2 | −0.1 |
4. Meat | 5 | PB Meat | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.1 |
5. Meat33 | 5 | PB Meat 33% | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | −0.1 | −0.1 | −0.3 | −0.1 | 0.0 |
1. Milk | 6 | PB Milk | 0.1 | −0.5 | 0.0 | 0.2 | −0.2 | −0.2 | 0.5 | 0.2 |
2. Cheese | 6 | PB Cheese | 0.5 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.2 |
3. Fish | 6 | PB Fish | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.9 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.6 |
4. Meat | 6 | PB Meat | 0.1 | −0.2 | −0.1 | −0.2 | −0.1 | 0.3 | 0.3 | −0.3 |
5. Meat33 | 6 | PB Meat 33% | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.4 | −0.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.4 |
1. Milk | 7 | PB Milk | 0.6 | −0.1 | −0.2 | 0.7 | 0.4 | −0.1 | 0.7 | 0.2 |
2. Cheese | 7 | PB Cheese | 0.3 | −0.1 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.3 | −0.2 | 0.0 | 0.1 |
3. Fish | 7 | PB Fish | 0.2 | −0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.0 | −0.2 | −0.1 |
4. Meat | 7 | PB Meat | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | −0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
5. Meat33 | 7 | PB Meat 33% | −0.3 | −0.1 | 0.0 | −0.3 | −0.2 | −0.1 | −0.1 | −0.1 |
WTC was measured on a 9-point scale (1 = ’Never or less than once yearly’, 5 = ‘1–3 times per month’, 9 = ‘Once daily or more’). Cell values indicate average WTC change, where red shading used for emotional/conceptual terms with average WTC impact significantly less than zero ( p < 0.05) and green shading used for terms with average WTC impact significantly less than zero ( p < 0.05).
Selection of ‘when I want something I like’ was associated with significant WTC increases in Clusters 3, 4, 6 and 7, but never pertained to PB Meat 33% . For the situational use ‘as part of easy and convenient meals’, the significant WTC increases only pertained to PB Fish (Clusters 3 and 6). The greater familiarity of PB Milk and PB Cheese compared with the other PB food categories likely explained why selection of ‘when I feel like trying something new’ was only significant in connection with these two PB food categories and negatively impacted WTC. Selection of ‘when I want something healthy’ resulted in eight significant WTC changes (6 were increases and 2 were decreases), both across and within clusters and across and within PB food categories. In the case of PB Cheese , the WTC impact was positive in Cluster 2, 3 and 5 and negative in Cluster 4. In Cluster 7, there was a significant WTC lift for PB Meat , but a significant WTC penalty for PB Meat 33% . There was also a mix of significant WTC increases and decreases for ‘as a regular part of my diet’ across clusters and PB food categories. There were mostly positive WTC changes associated with selection of ‘to set a good example to those around me’, except for Cluster 4 where a significant lift was found for PB Meat but a significant penalty for PB Cheese .
Two situational uses – ‘to move my diet in a more sustainable direction’ and ‘to set a good example to those around me’ – were never associated with significant WTC changes.
4.1. willingness to consume, emotional, conceptual, and situational use characterizations for pb food categories (aggregate level).
About 2500 consumers in four countries took part in the present research, and rated WTC for five categories of PB foods – PB Milk, PB Cheese, PB Meat, PB Meat 33% and PB Fish . Across all countries and participants, WTC declined in the order as listed above, which separated the “dairy” categories from the “meat” and “fish” categories ( Figure 1 A). This finding was consistent with initial expectations that the food category to which a product belongs has an important influence on consumer responses to alternative proteins, and the contraposition of PB dairy foods with PB fish was consistent with projective mapping data that show PB dairy products on a perceptual dipole with PB fish products [ 127 ].
More generally, the ordering of the PB food categories according to WTC was consistent with the established market for PB milk being the most developed (Good Food Institute, 2022) and, therefore, most familiar to consumers. In contrast, existing challenges with product quality for PB cheese [ 128 , 129 ] and PB meat alternatives [ 130 , 131 ] has hampered migration of these products into the mainstream of consumer purchases. Lastly, PB fish is still extremely novel and not generally available to consumers. The category of fish also suffers from a relatively low level of product interest due to generally lower acceptance of fish products due to sensory, preparation and cost barriers [ 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 ].
The average WTC ratings for all PB food categories were low and between ‘1–3 times per week’ and ‘every 2–3 month’ ( Figure 1 A), which corresponded with low citation frequencies of positive emotional associations (<25% on average) ( Part S6 of Supplementary Materials ). These findings were consistent with the observed low uptake of PB food categories in general [ 109 ] but are concern for the needed transition to more sustainable food systems and consumption patterns [ 14 ]. As previously noted by, for example, [ 51 , 136 ], findings ways to help consumers to incorporate PB food categories into their diet is paramount. The present results confirmed this by showing that the situational use ‘as a regular part of my diet’ was associated with the strongest positive impact on WTC in the Penalty/Lift analysis ( Figure 3 B), followed by associations with specific benefits related to health (‘when I want something healthy’) and taste (‘when I want something I like’).
With this in mind (also known as, helping consumers to find ways to make PB foods a regular part of their diets), it was encouraging that emotional associations to the PB food categories were more positive than negative ( Part S6 of Supplementary Materials ). Thus, negative overall attitude to PB foods may not be the primary consumption barrier. This may instead lie with product and category specific factors which is an encouraging finding, since such factors can be addressed through the combined efforts of product development, information/education efforts and marketing initiatives [ 137 , 138 , 139 ]. The conceptual associations supported the notion that marketing and branding efforts can play a role in increasing uptake since significant impacts on WTC were seen for ‘sophisticated’, ‘feminine’, ‘powerful’, ‘classy’, ‘youthful, ‘comforting’ ( Figure 3 B). Shaping perceptions of PB food categories in positive ways through such conceptual associations can help to overcome negative stereotypes related to early market introductions of poorer quality plant-based products, as described by Cardello et al. [ 48 ] in the case of PB milk.
Associations to ‘adventurous’ and ‘unique’ were, on average, also found to positively impact WTC, and as above, branding and product positioning can capitalize on these associations, although care should be taken to ensure that such market positioning does not evoke conceptualizations of extreme novelty that may evoke neophobic responses. This is the case, because consumers with higher levels of food neophobia are known to be laggards in the uptake of PB foods [ 69 , 140 , 141 , 142 ], and further associating such foods to novelty might slow their uptake among this group of consumers. More generally, harnessing the novelty of PB food categories as a pathway to greater consumption also seems questionable given the finding that WTC was slightly, but significantly reduced (~0.2 scale points) with the selection of the situational use ‘when I feel like trying something new’. This suggests an expectation that unfamiliar PB foods may not provide enjoyable sensory experiences. Such negative expectations have been raised previously with regard to PB foods [ 48 , 143 ], although as the development of PB foods progresses and products of higher sensory and hedonic quality appear in the market, such negative expectations are likely to diminish.
4.2.1. consumer segments based on wtc for pb food categories.
The average WTC ratings for the PB food categories masked significant heterogeneity in ratings from individual consumers ( Figure 1 B) and a 7-cluster solution was derived comprising one large PB non-category discriminating cluster (~55% of participants) and six smaller PB category discriminating clusters (~45% of participants). It was a key finding of the present research that about half of the participants viewed all PB food categories similarly be it relatively positively (with higher WTC ratings) or quite negatively (with low/lower WTC ratings)—while the remaining participants displayed varying preferences (as proxied by WTC) for the different PB food categories. To our knowledge, it has not previously been shown within the context of a wide range of food categories that consumers hold highly specific PB food category preferences, and that, for these people, a high WTC for one PB food category is an unreliable predictor of WTC (and preferences) for other PB food categories. This insight has implications for the promotion of PB diets, since it implies that generic marketing efforts to improve PB consumption may not have their desired effect, because consumers are more or less open to PB foods within one or more food categories, but not others. Future research is needed to explore this possibility and better understand whether consumers are receptive for persuasive arguments regarding increasing PB food consumption for categories where they have low WTC.
While the six PB discriminating clusters (Clusters 2 to 7 in Table 2 ) had distinct WTC profiles ( Figure 2 ), they also showed consistency, in that PB Milk always had the highest/second highest WTC rating, while PB Fish always had the lowest/second lowest WTC rating. This corresponded with the aggregate sample WTC results discussed in Section 4.1 . The greatest between-cluster differences in WTC were seen for PB Cheese , PB Meat and PB Meat 33%, which in individual clusters varied between having the highest and/or lowest WTC ratings. The PB category discriminating clusters also differed in overall WTC for PB foods, as seen in the average WTC ratings in the second column of Table 2 . Clusters 4 and 6 had similar high overall WTC, but this was underpinned by different WTC for 4 of the 5 individual PB food categories (except PB Fish ) ( Part S8 of Supplementary Material has post hoc cluster comparisons of WTC within PB food categories). In Clusters 4 and 6, the greatest share of people who self-declared as flexitarians (46–48%) were found ( Table 1 ). This was in sharp contrast to Cluster 2 which had the lowest overall WTC and “rejected” PB food categories other than PB Milk . The highest proportion of self-declared vegans/vegetarians were found in this cluster (29%), confirming previous reports that many PB foods lack appeal for such consumers [ 37 ]. The overall WTC in Clusters 3 and 7 was equally low (about ‘once a month’ on average), but this was underpinned by significant differences in WTC for 3 of the 5 PB food categories ( PB Milk, PB Cheese and PB Fish ; Part S8 of Supplementary Material ). The low overall WTC fitted with the self-declared dietary preferences, which was dominated by omnivores (60–65%) and the near absence of veg*ns (1–4%) ( Table 1 ).
The drivers of the uncovered cluster specific PB food category preferences is likely multifactorial, and also an interactive function of personal cognitive, experiential and value-based associations with PB foods and the specific food categories used in this study. For example, PB Milk had highest WTC among most clusters, but it was also perceived as healthier and tastier than most of the other PB food categories according to the situational appropriateness data ( Part S10B of Supplementary Materials ). While consumers may believe that all PB foods are equally sustainable, these environmental benefits may not lead to an increased WTC, unless other benefits (sensory, health) are also associated with some of the less familiar food categories, like PB Fish . Similarly, previous disappointing experiences with PB foods within a specific category, e.g., PB cheeses, can disrupt any generalized halo effect across categories. Likewise, it is possible to envisage consumers making the inference that that if they dislike, e.g., fish, they will also likely dislike PB fish, and in the case of PB Meat 33% , it is possible to imagine that people may eschew such a product with the reasoning that they prefer to just eat less meat than eating a PB blend.
By gaining a better understanding of the preference drivers within each cluster, it becomes possible to understand the unique profiles more fully and how to achieve greater PB food uptake. This could take many forms, including a focus on increasing consumption for the PB food category with lowest WTC or focusing on achieving a complete substitution to PB alternatives in the food category where WTC was highest, or combinations hereof. Suggestions like these resonate with previous authors including Lang [ 136 ] who note that understanding consumer context and motivations for adopting PB foods has important consequences for marketing positioning, messaging and promotion.
Systematically, across all PB food categories and clusters, WTC decreased significantly when associations were made to negative emotions. Similarly, WTC increased significantly when associations were made to positive emotions. However, based on number of significant WTC changes ( Table 3 ), an overall positive effect on WTC was less certain. This could suggest that care must be taken to avoid negative emotions for PB product consumption experiences and understanding that, if they occur, their impact may be greater, in accordance with prospect theory where “losses loom larger” [ 144 , 145 ].
An association between ‘nervous’ and PB Meat 33% resulted in a significant WTC increase in Clusters 2 and 3 ( Table 3 . At a first glance this result was counter intuitive in the sense that a negative emotion would be associated with greater WTC. However, it is possible that consumers in these two clusters were positive about such meat hybrids being available in the marketplace, while at the same time experiencing some nervousness and unease about them because they do not understand what they are. For example, the stimulus description used in this study ( Meat—blend containing 33% plant-based ingredients ) lacked specificity about the source of the non-PB part of the blend. In spite of years of development efforts on hybrid meat products, e.g., PB-extended hamburger products [ 146 ], sensory quality issues remain. Grasso and Jaworska [ 147 ] who summarized recent commercial developments in the UK in the hybrid meat category noted mixed results in relation to attempts to bring products to market. The authors reported that several early launches had not maintained a place in the market and suggested that hybrids have been received with confusion and are not understood by consumers, leaving them as a minor alternative for those most attached to meat [ 86 ]. Desire for ingredient transparency and clean labels by consumers in relation to PB foods [ 34 , 148 ] is also consistent with the need to reduce this continuing confusion with hybrid products.
Health and environmental concern are often regarded as the two key motivators for PB food consumption [ 109 ]. In this regard it was interesting that the health-related situational use situation (‘when I want something healthy’) was significantly associated with WTC change in the PB category discriminating clusters, while the environment-related use situation (‘when I want to move my diet in a more sustainable direction’) never was ( Table 4 ). Tentatively both factors are important for motivating PB food uptake, but only personal health concerns are effective at regulating the frequency of consumption. A slightly different interpretation would be that consumers feel that they are actively contributing to the needed sustainability transition if they sometimes eat PB foods, and that as long as they do so sometimes, environmental and biodiversity challenges are not sufficient to motivate increases in PB food consumption. In a study on meat hybrids, Profeta et al. [ 105 ] found that choice probability increased with perceived product healthiness, and that this self-centered motive seemed to outperform altruistic motives like animal welfare or environmental concerns when it came to choices within this emerging product category. In a similar vein, Grasso and Jaworska [ 147 ] noted that the most recent meat hybrid product launches did not mention flexitarianism and instead stressed flavor, healthiness and convenience, including messages such as “5-a-day”, the convenience of having vegetables already in minced meat and the use of vegetables as flavor enhancers.
Of further interest regarding the role of healthiness in driving WTC for PB foods, was the result in Cluster 7. For the situational use ‘when I want something healthy’ there was a significant WTC lift for PB Meat , but a significant WTC penalty for PB Meat 33% . Interestingly, the latter had the highest within-cluster WTC, suggesting good intention to consume, but not because of a positive health perception of this hybrid product. None of the other situational uses were associated with significant WTC increases for this cluster-product combination suggesting that other drivers likely exist which explain reasons for consumption or lack thereof. A worthy extension of the present research would be to include more PB category consumption drivers and to disregard those not having relevance. The use ‘as part of meal that I post on social media about’ did not provide useful insights, suggesting that “bragging” about PB food consumption is not something to which consumers in this sample aspired. Had the sample comprised more young people, then social media use may have been cited more frequently, because use of social media is known to decline with age [ 149 ].
The result from Cluster 4 further supported the notion that the situational uses included in the present research were not fully encompassing of uses and motivations for consumption. Notably, PB Cheese had the highest within-cluster WTC (around ‘once every week’), but significant WTC decreases were associated with selection of ‘when I want something healthy’, ‘as a regular part of my diet’, and ‘to set a good example to those around me’. This suggested that these were not reasons that motivated consumption for consumers in Cluster 4.
It should be noted that the short text presented to all participants prior to the study, although designed to establish a common frame of reference for all participants, may also have had an influence on participant responses. However, any influence of this text on responses would be a random effect, unlikely to differentially influence responses among consumer segments or food categories. In addition, it should be noted that PB food categories extend far beyond those included in the present research. Some of these categories would be interesting to consider further in relation to category vs. product-specific preferences and would add desirable diversity in terms encompassing ready-to-eat foods (e.g., PB pizza), menu dishes (e.g., PB lasagna), condiments (e.g., PB mayonnaise), and desserts (e.g., PB ice-cream). Whether an ice-cream is PB or not may not matter greatly to consumers considering that ice-cream is an indulgence product and sensory quality and enjoyment is paramount [ 150 , 151 ]. However, it is likely that PB meat topping on a pizza is perceived differently from the patty of a PB meat burger or from the PB meat category in general. Previously, in support of the notion that “gastronomic context” matters, Elzerman et al. [ 49 , 50 ] found that meat substitutes are perceived differently depending on their shape (e.g., pieces vs. mince) and the type of meals they are in (e.g., pasta, soup, and salad). Future research should also look to emerging PB categories, notably PB eggs, which is a new growth category in the PB space [ 152 ]. The latter products are interesting because of the important nutritional properties of eggs, their multi-functionality in cooking, and the fact that they may have an important impact on overall PB food consumption and dietary health.
There is often considerable interest in the effect of demographic and socio-economic variables on consumer responses. Where testable hypotheses relating to these can be developed we encourage their testing as part of future research.
It is clear from the present study that the food category to which a plant-based food belongs can be an important factor in the willingness to consume PB alternatives to animal products. In particular, a large number of distinct clusters of consumers with different WTC for PB foods falling into different food categories was observed in the present research. Among these clusters, there also exists a large cluster of consumers who are less differentiating in their WTC PB products, although they differ significantly in the magnitude of their WTC for these products. In general, WTC is greatest among consumers for PB Milk vs. PB Cheese or PB Meat (100% or 33%). PB Fish had generally low WTC for all consumer groups. Emotional, conceptual and situational use characterizations of the PB foods by food category, combined with penalty/lift analysis of the effect of these characterizations on WTC, showed significant effects on WTC. Positive and negative emotional associations effected corresponding positive and negative effects on WTC. Specific conceptualizations, like ‘adventurous’, ‘classy’, ‘feminine’, and ‘pretentious’ had important contributions to WTC for specific PB food categories and within specific consumer clusters. Similarly, most situational use characterizations drove WTC positively, e.g., ‘when I want something healthy’ or ‘when I want something I like’, or negatively, e.g., ‘when I feel like trying something new’, within PB food discriminating clusters, although specific PB food category-cluster combinations produced alternative effects. In sum, the data urge caution when interpreting data on plant-based food preferences/WTC without taking consideration of the specific food category to which the PB food belongs. Findings regarding PB food preferences within one food category should not be generalized to other food categories.
Staff at the Sensory & Consumer Science Team at PFR are thanked for help with data collection and management.
The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/foods11193059/s1 : (1) Summary of participant characteristics by country; (2) List of 12 food technologies and background text given to participants about each of these; (3) Items included in the environmental concern scale; (4) Information regarding online data quality by country; (5) Descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests for the 5 PB food categories (aggregate sample); (6) Citation frequency for emotion, conceptual and situational use terms by for the five plant-based (PB) food categories; (7) Stimuli plots with 95% confidence intervals following Correspondence Analysis (aggregate sample) for emotional/conceptual and situational use responses; (8) Results following hierarchical cluster analysis on willingness to consume (WTC) ratings (7-cluster solution for aggregate sample); (9) Results following hierarchical cluster analysis on willingness to consume (WTC) ratings (3 sub-groups in C1 from aggregate sample); (10) Summary of participant characteristics in the 3 sub-groups of the PB food non-discriminating cluster (Cluster 1); (11) Results of ANOVA of WTC across clusters by PB food category; (12) Citation frequency for emotional and conceptual CATA terms by cluster for the five plant-based (PB) food categories; (13) Citation frequency for situational use CATA terms by cluster for the five plant-based (PB) food categories [ 153 , 154 ].
Financial support was received from two sources: (1) The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited, and (2) The New Zealand Ministry for Business, Innovation & Employment.
A.V.C.: Conceptualization, Writing—Original draft, Writing—Review and Editing. F.L.: Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing—Review and Editing. D.G.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing—Review and Editing. S.L.C.: Investigation, Data curation. S.R.J.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Visualization, Writing—Original draft, Writing—Review and Editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. It was covered by a general approval for sensory and consumer research from the Human Ethics Committee at the New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited (205-2021, 649-2021).
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Conflicts of interest.
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results. The companies did not affect the authenticity and objectivity of the experimental results of this work.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.
All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.
Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.
Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.
Original Submission Date Received: .
Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.
Please let us know what you think of our products and services.
Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.
Low carbon sustainable diet choices—an analysis of the driving factors behind plant-based egg purchasing behavior.
2. literature review and hypothesis development, 2.1. value-belief-norm theory, 2.1.1. the role of value orientation, 2.1.2. environmental beliefs and awareness, 2.1.3. personal norms and environmental behavior, 2.2. theory of planned behavior, 2.2.1. behavioral intention (bi), 2.2.2. attitude (at), 2.2.3. subjective norm (sn), 2.2.4. perceived behavioral control (pbc), 3. research methodology, 3.1. research framework, 3.2. research design, 3.3. sample and data collection, 3.4. methods of data analysis, 4. analysis and results, 4.1. demographic analysis, 4.2. measurement model: reliability and validity, 4.3. model fit test, 4.4. overall model path analysis, 5. discussion, 5.1. the influence of biospheric and altruistic values, 5.2. outcome awareness as a mediator, 5.3. attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, 5.4. contributions and implications, 6. conclusions and recommendations, 6.1. research conclusions, 6.2. management recommendations, 6.3. research limitations and future research directions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.
Click here to enlarge figure
N = 387 | Item | Sample Size | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 198 | 51.2 |
Female | 189 | 48.8 | |
Age | 20 years and below | 6 | 1.6 |
21–30 years | 81 | 20.9 | |
31–40 years | 72 | 18.6 | |
41–50 years | 69 | 17.8 | |
51–60 years | 144 | 37.2 | |
60 years and above | 15 | 3.9 | |
Education Level | High school/vocational or below | 90 | 23.3 |
College/university | 189 | 48.8 | |
Master’s or above | 108 | 27.9 | |
Personal pre-tax monthly income | Less than NTD 20,000 (USD 660) (inclusive) | 63 | 16.3 |
NTD 20,001–40,000 (USD 660–1320) | 48 | 12.4 | |
NTD 40,001–60,000 (USD 1320–1980) | 99 | 25.6 | |
NTD 60,001–80,000 (USD 1980–2640) | 78 | 20.2 | |
NTD 80,001–100,000 (USD 2640–3300) | 78 | 20.2 | |
Above NTD 100,001 (USD 3300) | 21 | 5.4 | |
Occupation | Student | 66 | 17.1 |
Army, civil service, and education | 150 | 38.8 | |
Service industry | 84 | 21.7 | |
Freelance | 27 | 7.0 | |
Traditional manufacturing | 15 | 3.9 | |
Specialized occupation (e.g., doctor and lawyer) | 15 | 3.9 | |
Other (e.g., temporary workers, homemakers and retirees) | 30 | 7.8 | |
Dietary habits | Omnivorous | 334 | 86.3 |
Flexitarian | 53 | 13.7 |
Variables/Items | Standardized Factor Loading | CR | AVE | Cronbach’s α |
---|---|---|---|---|
Biospheric Values (BV) | 0.896 | 0.742 | 0.821 | |
1. I can feel an emotional connection with nature | 0.815 *** | |||
2. I believe the environment can be protected and preserved | 0.883 *** | |||
3. I think humans can live in harmony with other species | 0.884 *** | |||
Altruistic Values (AV) | 0.900 | 0.751 | 0.801 | |
4. I pursue a world of peace, without wars and conflicts | 0.904 *** | |||
5. I support social justice, correcting injustices, and caring for the vulnerable | 0.923 *** | |||
6. I believe in equality for all, with equal opportunities | 0.764 *** | |||
Awareness of Consequences (AC) | 0.885 | 0.720 | 0.802 | |
7. I think the modern livestock production system causes environmental pollution, climate change, and depletion of natural resources | 0.858 *** | |||
8. I believe the type of food we choose to eat can have a positive or negative impact on the environment | 0.850 *** | |||
9. I think choosing to buy plant-based eggs is an action that can help improve the Earth’s environment | 0.837 *** | |||
Attribution of Responsibility (AR) | 0.898 | 0.747 | 0.824 | |
10. I believe that, as citizens, buying plant-based eggs is a way for us to share the responsibility of protecting the environment | 0.789 *** | |||
11. I think every consumer should take responsibility for the environmental degradation caused by their choice of food and consumption behavior | 0.870 *** | |||
12. I believe every consumer should bear some responsibility for the environmental problems caused by modern livestock farming | 0.928 *** | |||
Personal Norms (PN) | 0.903 | 0.758 | 0.839 | |
13. I believe I have a duty to choose plant-based eggs to make the environment more sustainable | 0.913 *** | |||
14. I think choosing food in an environmentally friendly way is crucial for every consumer | 0.801 *** | |||
15. I believe that for the sake of environmental protection, we should prioritize buying plant-based eggs over animal eggs | 0.893 *** | |||
Attitudes (AT) | 0.935 | 0.828 | 0.893 | |
16. I believe from a health perspective, plant-based eggs are superior to animal eggs | 0.855 *** | |||
17. My attitude towards buying plant-based eggs is positive and active | 0.925 *** | |||
18. I believe purchasing plant-based eggs is a responsible and wise decision | 0.948 *** | |||
Subjective Norms (SN) | 0.875 | 0.802 | 0.924 | |
19. My family thinks I should choose to buy plant-based eggs to protect the environment | 0.877 *** | |||
20. I am influenced by news, newspapers, and magazines to choose plant-based eggs | 0.915 *** | |||
21. The positive feedback from my friends/colleagues about plant-based eggs makes me more inclined to buy them | 0.894 *** | |||
Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) | 0.905 | 0.760 | 0.841 | |
22. If given the chance, I would choose to buy plant-based eggs | 0.872 *** | |||
23. I have enough resources, financial means, and time to buy plant-based eggs | 0.836 *** | |||
24. I have sufficient knowledge to purchase and choose plant-based eggs | 0.906 *** | |||
Behavioral Intention (BI) | 0.935 | 0.827 | 0.896 | |
25. Considering the lower environmental pollution caused by plant-based eggs, I will consider buying them | 0.885 *** | |||
26. If I happen to find plant-based eggs in a store, I will choose to buy them | 0.919 *** | |||
27. I plan to actively seek out and buy plant-based eggs in stores | 0.924 *** |
Mean | Standard Deviation | 1. | 2. | 3. | 4. | 5. | 6. | 7. | 8. | 9. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. BV | 5.477 | 1.235 | |||||||||
2. AV | 6.235 | 0.927 | 0.500 ** | ||||||||
3. AC | 5.284 | 1.017 | 0.208 ** | 0.174 ** | |||||||
4. AR | 5.507 | 1.073 | 0.584 ** | 0.362 ** | 0.531 ** | ||||||
5. PN | 5.215 | 1.071 | 0.559 ** | 0.310 ** | 0.545 ** | 0.834 ** | |||||
6. AT | 4.749 | 1.222 | 0.396 ** | 0.223 ** | 0.481 ** | 0.659 ** | 0.799 ** | ||||
7. SN | 4.744 | 1.191 | 0.456 ** | 0.264 ** | 0.344 ** | 0.611 ** | 0.719 ** | 0.843 ** | |||
8. PBC | 4.767 | 1.223 | 0.161 ** | 0.182 ** | 0.445 ** | 0.470 ** | 0.622 ** | 0.791 ** | 0.700 ** | ||
9. BI | 4.739 | 1.257 | 0.313 ** | 0.207 ** | 0.452 ** | 0.549 ** | 0.728 ** | 0.834 ** | 0.752 ** | 0.862 ** |
Component | Initial Eigenvalues | ||
---|---|---|---|
Total | % of Variance | Cumulative % | |
1 | 12.540 | 46.446 | 46.446 |
2 | 3.233 | 11.975 | 58.420 |
3 | 1.913 | 7.086 | 65.506 |
4 | 1.594 | 5.906 | 71.412 |
5 | 0.942 | 3.489 | 74.900 |
6 | 0.891 | 3.298 | 78.199 |
7 | 0.685 | 2.538 | 80.737 |
8 | 0.518 | 1.918 | 82.655 |
9 | 0.501 | 1.856 | 84.510 |
10 | 0.467 | 1.730 | 86.241 |
11 | 0.455 | 1.686 | 87.927 |
12 | 0.414 | 1.534 | 89.461 |
13 | 0.361 | 1.337 | 90.798 |
14 | 0.330 | 1.222 | 92.019 |
15 | 0.310 | 1.147 | 93.166 |
16 | 0.274 | 1.016 | 94.182 |
17 | 0.247 | 0.915 | 95.096 |
18 | 0.222 | 0.822 | 95.919 |
19 | 0.200 | 0.739 | 96.658 |
20 | 0.171 | 0.634 | 97.292 |
21 | 0.162 | 0.600 | 97.892 |
22 | 0.130 | 0.480 | 98.372 |
23 | 0.121 | 0.448 | 98.820 |
24 | 0.105 | 0.390 | 99.210 |
25 | 0.087 | 0.321 | 99.531 |
26 | 0.070 | 0.259 | 99.790 |
27 | 0.057 | 0.210 | 100.000 |
Statistic | Recommended Value | Obtained Value | Meets Standard |
---|---|---|---|
/df | <3 | 2.632 | Yes |
RMR | <0.05 | 0.042 | Yes |
RMSEA | ≤0.05 (marginal fit) | 0.072 | Good fit |
0.05–0.08 (good fit) | |||
0.08–0.10 (moderate fit) | |||
>0.10 (poor fit) | |||
AGFI | >0.8 | 0.812 | Yes |
NFI | >0.9 | 0.902 | Yes |
CFI | >0.9 | 0.911 | Yes |
IFI | >0.9 | 0.913 | Yes |
Hypothesized Paths | Unstandardized Coefficient | S.E. | p | Standardized Coefficients | Verification Results |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1a: BV → AC | 0.171 | 0.041 | <0.001 | 0.208 *** | Supported |
H1b: AV → AC | 0.191 | 0.055 | <0.001 | 0.174 *** | Supported |
H2: AC → AR | 0.560 | 0.046 | <0.001 | 0.531 *** | Supported |
H3a: AC → PN | 0.574 | 0.045 | <0.001 | 0.545 *** | Supported |
H3b: AR → PN | 0.832 | 0.028 | <0.001 | 0.834 *** | Supported |
H4: PN → BI | 0.854 | 0.041 | <0.001 | 0.728 *** | Supported |
H5: AT → BI | 0.858 | 0.029 | <0.001 | 0.834 *** | Supported |
H6: SN → BI | 0.794 | 0.035 | <0.001 | 0.752 *** | Supported |
H7: SN → PN | 0.646 | 0.032 | <0.001 | 0.719 *** | Supported |
H8: PBC → BI | 0.907 | 0.025 | <0.001 | 0.882 *** | Supported |
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
Li, P.; Lin, I.-K.; Chen, H.-S. Low Carbon Sustainable Diet Choices—An Analysis of the Driving Factors behind Plant-Based Egg Purchasing Behavior. Nutrients 2024 , 16 , 2604. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16162604
Li P, Lin I-K, Chen H-S. Low Carbon Sustainable Diet Choices—An Analysis of the Driving Factors behind Plant-Based Egg Purchasing Behavior. Nutrients . 2024; 16(16):2604. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16162604
Li, Ping, I-Kai Lin, and Han-Shen Chen. 2024. "Low Carbon Sustainable Diet Choices—An Analysis of the Driving Factors behind Plant-Based Egg Purchasing Behavior" Nutrients 16, no. 16: 2604. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16162604
Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.
Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals
Editorial: advances in conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources.
Editorial on the Research Topic Advances in conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources
We made a broad call for perspective papers, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or traditional research papers on topics related to conservation and use of plant genetic resources. We invited to present advances in characterization and evaluation, strategies to improve gene bank operations and collaboration, new tools for managing and sharing information, or novel knowledge of conservation gaps. We especially encouraged contributions on underutilized crops and crops wild relatives. We received 58 positive responses, whereof 20 finalized their submissions and passed the review process with a total of 125 authors included in the accepted papers. Our motivation was to assemble contributions underlining that genetic resources are essential for crop improvement, which is achieved via plant breeding and release of new varieties that farmers cand access and use. We see that future crops need to produce high and stable yields but also be of high nutritional quality. They must adapt to shifting climates and support a sustainable agricultural or horticultural production avoiding negative environmental impacts. In addition, we need to contribute to efforts to avoid the loss of biodiversity, including the genetic resources of crop plants and crop wild relatives, which are in our focus. We are aware that there is a large body of research and literature on this, because plant breeders in the late 19 th century already imitated research and conservation activities which serve the same purpose and they recognized the loss of biodiversity, albeit not using this term. However, the global biodiversity crisis has become much bigger and globally recognized and any additional step, any additional insight addressing this topic is worth to be shared. At the same time more and more genomic tools and other technologies are available to add to our understanding of diversity and can support conservation and target promising germplasm for further research and breeding. We hope this special edition will be a small additional step in a positive direction, part of the evolutionary process of coping with the grand challenges we all face.
Six papers focused on conservation, which included conservation methods and priorities as well as core collections. Of these, one is a review paper and five are research articles.
Subramanian et al. ’s review on Brassica biodiversity conservation discusses issues related to distribution of accessions, conservation methods, technical hurdles and future avenues for research. Despite that there are more than 80,000 Brassica accessions conserved across 81 countries the authors see that the diversity of the conserved taxa is limited in most countries, which they see may lead to biodiversity loss in the longer run. In addition, they see practical challenges as taxonomic issues in the conservation system.
The research paper from Weise et al. focuses on the rapeseed ( Brassica napus L.) gene pool that is conserved in European genebanks. They highlight that most of these species are underrepresented in current collections and that many of the natural distribution areas are not covered as it stands now. By using niche modelling they further illustrate how climate change may affect the species’ distribution ranges. The authors suggest to further develop the conservation strategies for the rapeseed gene pool and propose a list of priority species that should be targeted for collecting missions.
Carvajal-Yepes et al. made a work to identify genetically redundant accessions in the world’s largest cassava ( Manihot esculenta ) collection with 5,302 accessions maintained at the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). Am empirical distance threshold methodology was applied with two types of molecular markers (SNP and SilicoDArT). The results showed 2,776 (SNP) and 2,785 (SilicoDArT) accessions were part of accession clusters. By comparing passport and historical characterization data clusters of genetically redundant accessions the authors provided a roadmap for genebank curators to assess redundancy within collections and/or identifying subsets of genetically distinct accessions.
Almeida et al. presented a methodology for landrace threat assessment which can assist in setting priorities for conservation. The methodology of this work was in line with the IUCN Red Listing judgement for wild species and involves the collation of time series information on population range and trends. Unlike for wild species the information used here involved farmers and market actors. The authors conclude that the archived information can be compared to a standardized set of threat criteria with a set threshold level and the methodology can be applied to any crop and geographical scale.
Dos Santos et al. developed a core collection of the cassava ( Manihot esculenta Crantz) germplasm bank in Brazil based on morphological traits, agronomic traits, and genotypic data from 20k single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Out of the 1,486 accessions in the germplasm bank a consolidated core with 204 accessions was suggested, which is 14% of the complete collection. This core collection showed less genetic variation but retained over 97% of the allelic richness compared to the complete collection. The authors see that the core approach provides a robust and representative resource for further research and breeding in cassava.
Bernad et al. examined the genetic diversity and population structure of the newly introduced two-row spring European Heritage Barley collection. This is a small collection which consists of 363 spring-barley accessions mainly from Northern Europe and include both landraces (~14%), old cultivars (~18%), elite cultivars (~67%) and accessions with unknown breeding history (~1%). The authors used 26,585 informative SNPs based on 50k iSelect array data and the results showed that the collection could be subdivided into three main clusters. The clusters were primarily based on the accession’s year of release. Furthermore, power analysis identified a core with 230 genotypically and phenotypically diverse accessions, which shows that the collection represents a high diversity and can be a resource for research and breeding.
Twelve research articles from recent characterization and evaluation projects are presented, which included a range of crops, methods and aims and showing how molecular markers and genomic tools can help to identify promising germplasm for further phenotyping and evaluation.
Gomez-Galvez et al. examined more than 500 olive ( Olea europaea L.) genotypes from different regions in Spain based on 96 EST-SNP markers and identified 173 new genotypes. Based on this work the number of distinct Spanish genotypes documented in the World Olive Germplasm Bank of IFAPA, Córdoba increased from 269 to 427 accessions. In addition, a new diversity hot spot was identified in the northern regions of La Rioja and Aragon. According to the authors this adds to the great diversity already described in Spanish olive germplasm. The authors highlight the risk of genetic erosion given the expansion of modern olive cultivation with only a few cultivars and argue that conserving a broad range of genotypes will be crucial to meet the future challenges of olive cultivation. To further enhance the conservation and use of these accessions, the World Olive Germplasm Bank of Córdoba was recognized in June 2024 to become an international collection following Article 15 of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.
Adhikari et al. conducted a genomic characterization using more than 45k SNPs of the 1,041 Aegilops accessions preserved in the Wheat Genetics Resource Center (WGRC) collection. The Aegilops genus contains a range of crop wild relative species which are regarded as critical for future wheat crop improvements. The authors present phylogenetic tree and principal component analyses that showed some species overlap but also pathways of species evolution and diversification. The high genetic diversity identified among the species indicate their importance as genetic resources for future wheat breeding. For genebank curation the study found 49 misclassified and 28 sets of redundant accessions in the WGRC collection.
Berkner et al. worked on genomic prediction to identify winter wheat accessions that can be used to breed varieties with a combined high protein and high lysine content. Their point of departure was a large-scale screening that was conducted back in the 1970s at the Leibniz Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research in Germany. Additionally, they used a genomic dataset generated in 2022. The datasets were curated, four genomic prediction approaches were compared, and the best model was used to predict the traits of interests. Out of the 7,651 accessions included in the predictions, five accessions were highlighted as combining outstanding high protein content with high lysine content.
Chao et al. examined the genetic diversity and population structure of annual medicks ( Medicago spp.) from the Crimean Peninsula of Ukraine collected in 2008. The colleting mission was done to fill gaps at National Plant Germplasm System in USA and 102 accessions from 10 species were collected. The authors present the results from characterization work, which included 24 phenotypic descriptors and a 3k SNP marker set developed for lucerne (alfalfa). The results showed a high reproducibility between single and pooled biological replicate leaf samples, which indicates that sampling individual plants for these mostly self-pollinating species is sufficient. According to the authors the phenotypic descriptors and the applied SNP marker set was useful in assessing the population structure.
Liu et al. conducted a complete mitochondrial genome characterization and phylogenetic analysis of the endangered species Prunus pedunculata in China. The authors highlight that the results provide a basis for understanding the evolution of the genetic background and genetic breeding of Prunus.
Abondano et al. compared single plants, multiple plants, and DNA pools sampling strategies for DArTseq genotyping common bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces from the Alliance Biodiversity and CIAT gene bank. They concluded that pooling tissue from 25 individual plants per accession was a viable approach for characterizing germplasm compared to genotyping individual plants separately by balancing genotyping effort and costs. The results add valuable insights for characterization of collections and in marker-trait association studies.
Loarca et al. evaluated shoot-growth variation in a diversity panel of 695 accessions of carrot ( Daucus carota L.) from the United States Department of Agriculture National Plant Germplasm System. They found phenotypic variability for seedling emergence and early-season canopy coverage, which is indicating quantitative inheritance and potential for improvement through plant breeding. Accessions with high emergence and vigorous canopy growth are of immediate use to breeders targeting stand establishment, weed-tolerance, or weed-suppressant carrots, which is of advantage to the organic carrot production. In a second paper Loarca et al. evaluated flowering habit trait of the same accessions. They found a high broad-sense heritability for biennial flowering habit which indicates a strong genetic component of this trait.
Li et al. conducted phylogeographic analysis of the native grass Elymus nutans using microsatellite markers and covering 361 individual plants across 35 populations from the Qinghai-Tibetan plateau. The species has pastoral and environmental importance, and the study unveiled a notable degree of genetic diversity. Correlations were established between external environmental factors and effective alleles potentially linked to glutathione S-transferases T1 or hypothetical proteins, which are affecting environmental adaptation.
An et al. analyzed the genetic diversity and structure of a perennial evergreen tree Albizia odoratissima using 16 simple sequence repeat markers and covering 280 individuals across 10 populations from Hainan Island and mainland China. The genetic diversity of Hainan population was lower than that of the mainland population Furthermore there were significant differences in the genetic structure between Hainan and mainland populations.
Lu et al. examined the diversity of an herbaceous climber Dioscorea bulbifera native to Africa and Asia and locally used as vegetable and medicine. The study included accessions from mainland China and Taiwan that were analyzed using SSR marker and phylogenetic analyses. They showed structural features across accessions and three distinct clades indicating potential genetic divergence among populations from different geographic regions in China and Taiwan.
Yang et al. present a characterization work on an unusual type of horny goat weed ( Epimedium koreanum Nakai) discovered in the Jilin Province in China. Horny goat weed is a well-known traditional Chinese medicinal herb that is collected from natural habitats. The newly discovered type had much higher number of leaflets than commonly found (27 compared to 9). By DNA barcoding this novel type was identified as E. koreanum. Parallel RNA-seq analysis showed 1171 differentially expressed genes compared to wild type. Due to a decreasing natural population cultivation could be an alternative source for utilization and this high leaf-yielding Epimedium plant could be potentially used in breeding or cultivation.
Two research articles are presented, which includes one article on international breeding collaboration to achieve frost tolerance in potato, and one article overviewing breeding seeds as part of the official seed system in India.
Arcos-Pineda et al. report the results from an international breeding project using a wild potato relative Solanum commersonii that resulted in two new frost-tolerant native potato cultivars for the Andes and the Altiplano. The project was a collaboration between partners from USA and Peru as well as the International Potato Center (CIP). After 8 years of breeding the two new cultivars were released. The project shows that international collaboration and the use of valuable genetic diversity can produce results of importance for food security.
Chand et al. provide a retrospective overview on the seed production system of lucerne ( Medicago sativa L.) in India. Out of 14 lucerne varieties released and notified over the past 24 years, only nine entered the seed chain. The varietal replacement rate was found to be moderate, and the authors present a holistic overview and a way forward to develop more varieties and improved production of certified seeds in the country.
The provided contributions cover a good mix of topics related to conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources from across the globe, but we miss reports from Africa. We know that more and more research is being done on neglected and underutilized species in this region. On the other hand, we note active work on these matters especially in China. We further note a strong molecular emphasis but that many challenges of managing genetic resources be in genebanks or in in situ situations are the same as they were before.
SS: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. MZ: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. AD: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Keywords: conservation, crop wild relatives, diversity, evaluation, food security, genebank, plant genetic resources, seed bank
Citation: Solberg SØ, van Zonneveld M and Diederichsen A (2024) Editorial: Advances in conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources. Front. Plant Sci. 15:1468904. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1468904
Received: 22 July 2024; Accepted: 29 July 2024; Published: 07 August 2024.
Edited and Reviewed by:
Copyright © 2024 Solberg, van Zonneveld and Diederichsen. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Svein Øivind Solberg, [email protected]
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
The Ohio State University
Leave a reply cancel reply.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Supplements can feel inescapable: they're seemingly in every grocery store and being peddled by influencers across social media. But with dietitians recommending people get their nutrients from food, it can be hard to know whether we should join the more than half of US adults who take supplements every day, according to the CDC.
Dr. Tim Spector , a top British epidemiologist, gut health expert, and cofounder of the science and nutrition company ZOE, has a simple answer: no.
After assessing the evidence, he stopped taking vitamin C, vitamin D, and omega-3 supplements .
"The science doesn't back up any of these as definitely working, so people are just wasting their money," he told Business Insider.
The jury is still out on supplements — some studies suggest supplements could be beneficial for healthy aging , among other things. However, some experts, such as supplement researcher Dr. Andrea Myer and writer Michael Pollan , have previously told BI that they get their nutrients from food and don't bother with supplements.
Spector thinks that 99.9% of all supplements are "completely worthless."
"Unless you have a medical condition, you really don't need these supplements," he said. "Evidence shows that we only need tiny amounts of these substances, and getting extra doesn't help."
That being said, Spector has continued to take two supplements (on top of eating a gut-healthy diet ) that he said research supports.
Spector eats a mostly plant-based diet, so he takes a B12 supplement most days. He skips it on the one or two days a month he eats meat and fish.
Related stories
People who don't eat meat can struggle to get enough B12 in their diets because it's mostly found in meat, eggs, and dairy, but we need it to make DNA and to keep blood and nerve cells healthy.
BI previously reported that vegans and vegetarians can also increase the amount of B12 in their diets by eating algae.
Spector also uses a scoop of ZOE's new "Daily 30" mix to supplement his healthy diet.
Daily 30 is a minimally processed mixture of whole foods, including eight types of mushrooms, seven fruits and vegetables, six types of seeds, five herbs, three types of nuts, and two legumes and whole grains. It's meant to be added to meals to increase the diversity of plants people eat each day.
Spector previously told BI that eating 30 plants a week is key for a healthy gut, because the more diverse a person's diet, the better their gut health. The number 30 comes from a 2018 study called The American Gut Project by researchers at the University of California, San Diego. Samples from over 11,000 participants showed that those who ate more than 30 plants a week had much more diverse gut microbiomes than those who ate fewer than 10.
You can also make your own version of the Daily 30. BI previously reported on Spector's " diversity jar ," which is a similar mix of nuts, seeds, and other plants that can be added to meals.
Posted on August 12, 2024 by Ed Kromer . This entry was posted in Eating Well . Bookmark the permalink .
The author Michael Pollen has boiled down the contents of several bestselling books and a lifetime of inquiry on healthy dining into a prescriptive motto with the economy of a haiku: “eat food, not too much, mostly plants.”
Mostly plants . It sounds like a virtuous sentiment. But why? What is it that fruits and vegetables provide that you can’t get from animal proteins, processed foods and supplements?
We asked UW Medicine dietitian Anna Fogel to help us understand why eating produce is so important to our health and well-being.
“From a dietitian’s perspective, we think about food as either being calorie dense or nutrient dense,” she says. “We categorize highly processed foods as calorie dense. Fruits and vegetables, lean protein and whole grains are nutrient dense. They have multiple components that are beneficial for our health. The most important are fiber and micronutrients (vitamins and minerals).”
The best source of fiber and micronutrients happens to be the most naturally occurring: fruits and vegetables, which deliver so many health benefits to all aspects of our bodies and operating systems. “Eating a variety of fruits and vegetables is a great way to maintain gut health and energy in the short term and to protect us against nutrition-related chronic illness as we get older,” Fogel says.
As anyone who has visited a grocery store produce section or farmer’s market in high season will know, fruits and vegetables come in an enormous variety of sizes, flavors, textures and colors. So, how do you know what your body needs?
Fortunately, all fruits and vegetables provide dietary fiber, which is essential to maintaining digestive health and safe levels of cholesterol, blood sugar and body weight. Beyond fiber, each type of produce, from apples to zucchini, supplies its own array of vitamins, minerals and antioxidants — substances that strengthen our cells and promote health and longevity.
Conveniently, the benefits of fruits and vegetables align with their colors.
“That’s why color is so important,” Fogel explains. “Different colors affect different parts of the body and aspects of our health.”
And so, she says, the best way to maximize the benefits of these incredible, edible plants is to turn your plate into a palette of colors. The brighter the better.
Here is the general categorization of health benefits found in the richly pigmented rainbow of fruits and vegetables.
Red – High in antioxidants and carotenoids such as lycopene and rich in vitamin C, vitamin A and potassium, that provide anti-inflammatory properties, boost immune system and may protect against certain cancers, lower risk of heart and lung disease and reduce sun-related skin damage.
Examples: strawberries, pomegranates, cranberries, tomatoes, cherries, cherries, apples, beets, watermelon, red grapes, red peppers, red onions.
Yellow/Orange – Loaded with vitamin C, vitamin A and potassium that boost the immune system and enhance vision. Also a good source of cryptothanxin, which supports a complex microbiome, digestive health and reduces the risk of heart disease and cancer.
Examples: carrots, sweet potatoes, yellow peppers, oranges, bananas, pineapple, tangerines, mango, pumpkin, apricots, winter squash, peaches, cantaloupe, corn.
Green – High in a variety of nutrients, such as vitamin K, folate, magnesium and potassium, for maintaining cardiovascular health and vision, bones and teeth. Green veggies are rich in cancer-blocking chemicals like sulforaphane, isothiocyanates and indoles. Dark green, leafy vegetables have the highest concentrations of antioxidants and fiber. Cruciferous veggies are particularly helpful in lowering the risk of cancer and heart disease.
Examples: spinach, avocados, asparagus, artichokes, broccoli, kale, cabbage, lettuce, alfalfa sprouts, Brussels sprouts, kiwi fruit, collard greens, green tea, green herbs.
Examples: blueberries, blackberries, elderberries, grapes, raisins, eggplants, plums, figs, prunes, lavender, purple cabbage.
White (and Brown) – Rich in potassium and magnesium. Support the immune system and heart health, and prevent against colon cancer and other cancers. The onion family contains allicin, which has anti-tumor properties. Other foods in this group contain antioxidant flavonoids like quercetin and kaempferol that control cholesterol levels.
Examples: onions, cauliflower, garlic, leeks, parsnips, potatoes, daikon, mushrooms, jicama, bananas, pears.
Fogel says that raw produce — with all its color, fiber and micronutrients intact — provides the greatest level of nutritional benefits. But you don’t always need to find fresh-picked fruits and vegetables, especially when they are out of season.
“We’re in the height of fresh produce season right now,” she says. “But it’s important to remember that canned and frozen fruits and vegetables have their place — especially during the winter.”
She recommends frozen produce, which is picked and processed at peak ripeness, so it delivers all the benefits of fresh produce.
Many fruits and vegetables can be eaten raw or cooked in a variety of ways. Which is better? Whichever works for you. Eating a crisp apple or a handful of snap peas out of hand can be a nutritious treat. But raw produce can make some people feel bloated or experience abdominal pain. “If you have a harder time digesting fresh fruits or vegetables, cooking is a great way to break down the fibrous structure,” Fogel says. “Plus, then you can add flavor into it, too.”
She adds that you shouldn’t worry about cooking out nutrients or fiber.
“The best way to prepare fruits and vegetables is the way that you enjoy them the most,” she says, “because that means you’re probably going to actually eat them.”
Speaking of which… there are innumerable ways to assemble or cook fruits and vegetables — or just eat them out of hand — to span this healthy rainbow in your diet. The key is to mix and match.
So, eating a green salad is good. But even better is eating a green salad with some orange carrots, red tomatoes, yellow peppers, white pears and blueberries. That is a nutritional powerhouse on your plate.
“If I’m eating the same-colored things all the time, whether they be fruits or vegetables, I’m probably not getting the most benefits I can out of my diet because I’m restricting myself,” Fogel says.
“It’s summer so nobody is thinking about hot broths right now, but we’ll be there soon,” she says. “Soups are a fantastic way to add in different colors and amounts of fiber. And veggies cook quickly.”
Have a finicky kiddo —or grownup — in your house? Or maybe even the resident picky eater is you?
Fogel says that repetition is the key to introducing new fruits and vegetables into your repertoire. It can take more than 10 tries to come to appreciate a new taste. And, yes, most people’s palates do change as they mature. Tastes can be acquired.
“We tell people to try to remain open to a food even if they have tried it before and didn’t like it,” she says.
For those with a list of don’t-likes, Fogel warns against hiding fruits and vegetables in foods they do like. “It’s essentially telling them, ‘I know you don’t like this but I’m going to force you to eat it without your knowledge,’” she says. “You’re veggie gaslighting them.”
Instead, Fogel recommends making fruits and vegetables as convenient as processed snack foods or take-out. Think pre-cut apple slices and baby carrots for lunch boxes, frozen fruit for smoothies and pre-cut mixed frozen veggies for quick weeknight stir fries or soups.
“What we tell our patients is to set yourself up for success,” Fogel says.
Another bit of advice, especially for people living with picky eaters, is to model an appreciation of fruits and veggies and an openness to unfamiliar tastes and textures. It’s important for kids to see people around them enjoying a variety of healthy foods and trying new things. If you don’t like Brussels sprouts or bananas, don’t transfer this to your kids.
“Try to create a welcoming environment for all foods,” Fogel adds. “Our environment can make a huge difference in how we experience food. If everyone around us likes something we don’t think we like, we’ll probably be more open to trying it.”
In the modern culinary world, processed convenience foods are omnipresent on store shelves and engineered to hit the “bliss point,” at which the melding of salt, sugar and fat proves difficult to resist. But they are empty calories at best.
Fruits and vegetables, on the other hand, come naturally packed with virtuous nutrients and enormous health benefits. And they can provide their own degree of bliss, once we can appreciate their natural sweetness and rich flavors.
A great way to get there is by eating your way across this agricultural rainbow every day. And the reward for doing so is greater health and wellness, now and in the future.
To Pollen’s proposition, Fogel might recommend an addendum: eat food, not too much, mostly plants, many colors.
Your email address will not be published.
You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Genetics and genomics.
Every organisms has thousands of genes, and we want to know what’s happening at the genetic level to understand the organism better.
We study the genes and genetic interactions of a wide range of organisms involved in food production – not just the plants and fish that we eat, but the insects, fungi, viruses and other organisms they might interact with in the wider ecosystem. We also want to understand how food interacts with the human body, right down to how different genes might impact on food preferences.
We use cutting edge technologies to identify, sequence and map genes, as well as understand how genes interact with each other and the wider environment. We use this knowledge to identify individuals in our plant and fish breeding programmes, as well as helping us create new technologies to detect and manage pests and diseases .
Our human genetic research helps us understand how food affects the body, and how our individual genetic make-up influences our smell, taste and food tolerances.
We’re also investigating the potential of new breeding technologies, such as gene editing, to make sure we keep all the options open for our industry partners.
06 Dec 2022
26 Jul 2022
10 May 2022
26 Sep 2021
11 May 2020
05 Mar 2024
21 Feb 2024
25 Jan 2024
01 Nov 2023
27 Apr 2022
15 Nov 2021
Our scientists are using gene technologies to understand plant biology.
Get in touch
Discover the world's research
Uses of acai.
Similar supplements.
Acai is a plant belonging to the palm family, grown for its edible fruit and hearts of palm. They are a source of nutrition, as well as medicinal uses for managing blood sugar, cholesterol, and more.
Acai pulp and oil extracts may boost your health because they contain compounds like phenolic acids . The root and leaf extracts may offer antioxidant or anti-inflammatory properties that deliver health benefits. However, more research is needed to understand these benefits.
In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not regulate supplements the way it regulates prescription drugs. That means some supplement products may not contain what the label says. When choosing a supplement , look for third-party tested products and consult a healthcare provider, registered dietitian nutritionist (RD or RDN), or pharmacist.
While additional, extensive research is necessary regarding acai's efficacy, people use it to treat various health conditions.
Research is most robust for acai's effects concerning the following:
In a small clinical trial, study participants added 200 grams (g) of acai pulp to their daily diet for four weeks. By the end of the study, the results showed that acai has antioxidant effects.
In general, antioxidants attack unstable atoms known as free radicals . Free radicals can damage components and systems within the body, including DNA .
While results from the clinical trial are promising, this small study only included healthy individuals assigned female at birth.
More research with higher-quality, long-term large trials is still necessary.
In a small clinical trial, participants carrying excess weight took 100 grams of acai pulp twice daily for one month.
At the end of the study, the participants had lower fasting (before-meal) blood sugar and total cholesterol levels.
Although the results were positive, this study was small. Therefore, updated research with higher-quality, longer-term, and more extensive trials is still needed.
In a small clinical trial, study participants with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (those who had a rise in blood marker levels after surgery or other treatment) drank 2 ounces of a specific acai juice product twice daily for 36 weeks.
By the study's end, only one participant experienced a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reduction that was at least 50% from baseline (measurement from the starting point of the trial). However, 71% of participants did have a lengthening of their PSA doubling time (PSADT).
PSADT is the amount of time it takes for your PSA to double. A short PSADT is typically linked with a higher risk of metastasis (spreading of cancer) and mortality (death).
While this clinical trial didn't reach its primary objective of at least a 50% PSA reduction from baseline for most participants, results did show that the acai juice product tested stabilized PSA levels.
Still, high-quality, more significant, and longer-term clinical trials are needed to understand acai's benefits.
Acai oil is a source of fatty acids.
The acai pulp also has proteins and a few B vitamins, including thiamine (B1) and pyridoxine (B6). Its minerals include boron , calcium , chromium , copper , manganese, magnesium , nickel , and potassium .
As with many medications and natural products, acai can have side effects.
In an older study, no side effects were detected in a clinical trial that studied acai's effects on blood sugar and cholesterol in people with excess weight.
There were also no reported side effects in another clinical trial that studied acai's effects on PSA levels in people with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer.
Since weight loss is one of the acai's health claims, however, weight loss might be a potential side effect in those not looking to lose weight. But high-quality clinical trials in humans are necessary to determine acai's effects on weight.
Possible serious side effects may include:
If you're having a severe allergic reaction or if any of your symptoms feel life-threatening, call 911 and get medical help right away.
A healthcare provider may advise against acai use if any of the following applies to you:
Severe allergic reaction : Avoid acai if you have a known allergy to it or its ingredients or components.
Pregnancy and breastfeeding : There is limited information about acai's effects and safety during pregnancy or while breastfeeding .
But some acai product labels target pregnant or breastfeeding parents. Since more data is necessary, contact a healthcare provider to discuss the benefits and risks.
Adults over age 65 : While older adults have participated in acai-based studies, additional research with more senior individuals is still necessary to assess the safety of acai in this age group.
Children : There is little information on acai's effects and safety in infants and children, but acai has been used as an alternative contrast agent in imaging tests, such as MRIs, in this age group.
While acai product labels are unlikely to target infants, some target children.
Diabetes : Acai may lower your blood sugar levels. For this reason, a healthcare provider may want to closely monitor you if you have diabetes, especially if you're taking diabetes medications like insulin .
Prostate cancer : Acai may lengthen your PSADT. Your healthcare provider may want to monitor you closely if you have prostate cancer.
Travelers : Before traveling, healthcare providers will likely recommend avoiding unprocessed acai. This prevents you from getting Chagas disease.
While there are some studies on acai in humans, more research with high-quality clinical trials is still necessary.
For this reason, there are no guidelines on the appropriate dosage of acai for any condition.
In an antioxidant clinical trial, however, the amount of acai pulp was 200 grams by mouth daily for four weeks.
And in another study, participants with excess weight took 100 grams of acai pulp by mouth twice daily for 30 days to lower their blood sugar and cholesterol.
In the study testing lengthening of PSADT, the dosage was 2 ounces of a specific acai juice product taken twice daily for 36 weeks.
Dosing may vary based on the individual's dosage form and medical condition. Follow a healthcare provider's recommendations or product label instructions if you use acai.
Always speak with a healthcare provider before taking a supplement to ensure that the supplement and dosage are appropriate for your individual needs.
There is little information about the safety, toxicity, and overdose of acai in humans. However, overdose symptoms with acai are likely similar to its potentially common and serious side effects, just excessive and more severe.
If you accidentally take too much acai or suspect you are experiencing life-threatening side effects, seek immediate medical attention.
Before you prepare, use, or consume acai, please ensure it is processed. Consuming unprocessed acai is linked to Chagas disease.
You may use fresh acai pulp in sweets and beverages like wine. And you may mix the juice with tapioca.
You may also buy acai in powder form, which might also be available as dried or frozen, as in smoothies or juices. The hearts of palm may be eaten.
Possible interactions are mainly based on acai's potential uses or side effects.
Cholesterol medications : Acai may affect your cholesterol levels, meaning it might interact with cholesterol medications. A study showed an interaction between acai berries and a statin drug called Lipitor (atorvastatin).
Diabetes medications : Acai may affect your blood sugar levels, causing an additive effect (increasing potency) of some diabetes medications . A study showed that acai berry interacts with Jardiance (empagliflozin) and Nesina (alogliptin).
Prostate cancer treatments : Acai may lengthen the prostate-specific antigen, affecting the impact of prostate cancer treatments .
Be sure to carefully read a supplement's ingredients list and nutrition facts panel to know which ingredients and how much of each element is included.
Unless otherwise indicated, most medicines should be stored in a cool and dry place. You should keep your medications tightly closed and out of the reach of children and pets, ideally locked in a cabinet or closet.
Discard after one year or as indicated on the packaging. Fresh acai fruit will only last one day after being picked.
Avoid putting unused and expired products down the drain or in the toilet. Visit the FDA website to learn where and how to discard all unused and expired medications.
You may also find disposal boxes in your area.
If you plan to travel with acai, become familiar with your final destination's regulations. Also, checking with the U.S. Embassy or Consulate before your trip may be helpful.
Acai has potential antioxidant, blood sugar–lowering, and cholesterol-lowering properties. Acai may also have some positive effects on prostate cancer.
Other similar supplements include:
Chromium : Chromium may improve blood sugar control in some people with diabetes. But there is conflicting evidence on this.
Flaxseed : A potential benefit of flaxseed is in lowering cholesterol, but study results are mixed.
Red yeast rice : Some red yeast rice Products have a substance called monacolin K that may lower cholesterol. Other red yeast rice products have very little monacolin K, but it's hard to determine how much.
It also has not been determined if cholesterol is reduced with red yeast rice products with little monacolin K. For these reasons, it's difficult to know whether red yeast rice lowers cholesterol.
Vitamins C or E : Vitamins C and E are examples of antioxidants. But in the Women's Antioxidant Cardiovascular Study, neither of these vitamins had beneficial effects on heart-related events, such as cardiac arrest or stroke.
Moreover, neither of these antioxidants decreased the likelihood of diabetes (high blood sugar) or cancer. Based on the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) results, vitamin E with selenium didn't prevent prostate cancer.
However, vitamins C and E with lutein and zeaxanthin antioxidants may decrease the risk of worsening age-related macular degeneration (AMD).
In AMD, blood leaks into the macula , which is the center of the retina in the back of the eye. The macula helps you see fine details and objects in your central field of vision. AMD can become vision-threatening.
Checking with a healthcare provider can help you to avoid possible harmful interactions and side effects and ensure you're taking appropriate doses.
There are several different sources of acai, but health nutrition guidelines typically place more importance on food sources to improve the diet.
Although food sources are preferable, there is still a place for supplements for people with nutrient absorption problems. This may happen to people in certain age groups or with certain medical conditions.
Acai is naturally available as a plant from the palm family grown for its edible fruit and hearts of palm.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) generally categorizes acai or E. oleracea as food. The FDA also placed acai on its list of approved substances added to food.
You may add fresh acai pulp to sweets and beverages like wine. And you may mix the juice with tapioca.
It is also available in powder form and dried or frozen for smoothies or juices. The hearts of palm can be eaten.
Acai supplements are likely commonly available in capsule and powder forms.
Other acai supplement forms are:
Some of these other forms may come with additional ingredients. Vegetarian and vegan options should be available.
Acai is a plant from the palm family. Acai has potential antioxidant, blood sugar–lowering, and cholesterol-lowering effects. Acai may also have some benefits for prostate cancer.
Since additional research is needed, you will need to make sure the diagnosis and treatment of your medical conditions are completed on time.
Before using acai, consult with a dietitian, pharmacist, or healthcare provider regarding the safety and efficacy of acai.
de Almeida Magalhães TSS, de Oliveira Macedo PC, Converti A, et al. The use of Euterpe oleracea Mart. as a new perspective for disease treatment and prevention . Biomolecules . 2020;10(6):813. doi:10.3390%2Fbiom10060813
Oliveira Barbosa P, Pala D, Teixeira Silva C, et al. Acai ( Euterupe oleracea Mart.) pulp dietary intake improves cellular antioxidant enzymes and biomarkers of serum in healthy women . Nutrition . 2016;32(6):674-680. doi:10.1016/j.nut.2015.12.030
National Cancer Institute. Oxidative stress .
Udani JK, Singh BB, Singh VJ, et al. Effects of açai ( Euterpe oleracea Mart.) berry preparation on metabolic parameters in a healthy overweight population: a pilot study . Nutr J . 2011;10:45. doi:10.1186%2F1475-2891-10-45
Kessler ER, Su LJ, Gao D, et al. Phase II trial of acai juice product in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer . Integr Cancer Ther . 2018;17(4):1103-1108. doi:10.1177%2F1534735418803755
Jackson WC, Johnson SB, Li D, et al. A prostate-specific antigen doubling time of <6 months is prognostic for metastasis and prostate-specific death for patients receiving salvage radiation therapy post radical prostatectomy . Radiation Oncology . 2013;8(170). doi:10.1186/1748-717X-8-170
Laurindo LF, Barbalho SM, Araújo AC, et al. Açaí ( Euterpe oleracea Mart.) in health and disease: a critical review . Nutrients . 2023;15(4):989. doi:10.3390/nu15040989
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. Acai .
Nóbrega AA, Garcia MH, Tatto E, et al. Oral transmission of Chagas disease by consumption of açaí palm fruit, Brazil . Emerg Infect Dis . 2009;15(4):653-655. doi:10.3201%2Feid1504.081450
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Parasites - American trypanosomiasis (also known as Chagas disease) .
World Health Organization. Chagas disease (also known as American trypanosomiasis) .
Callahan MJ, Talmadge JM, MacDougall R, et al. The use of enteric contrast media for diagnostic CT, MRI, and ultrasound in infants and children: a practical approach . AJR Am J Roentgenol . 2016;206:973-979. doi:10.2214/AJR.15.15437
National Institutes of Health: Office of Dietary Supplements. Dietary supplement label database: Euterpe oleracea .
U.S. Department of Agriculture. FoodData Central: acai .
U.S. Department of Agriculture. FoodData Central: Euterpe oleracea .
Food and Drug Administration. Substances added to food (formerly EAFUS) .
Kumar Nanjappan S, Adinarayan Somabattini R, Ravichandiran V. Investigation of the effect of acai berry on the pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin, alogliptin and empagliflozin: a herb-drug interaction study . J Pharm Pharmacol . 2022;74(8):1125-1132. doi:10.1093/jpp/rgac022
Petruzzello M. Acai . Encyclopedia Britannica.
Food and Drug Administration. Where and how to disposed of unused medicines .
National Association Boards of Pharmacy. Drug disposal .
USEmbassy.gov. Home .
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. 6 things to know about type 2 diabetes and dietary supplements .
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. 5 tips: What you should know about high blood cholesterol .
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. Antioxidants: in depth .
American Academy of Ophthalmology. What is macular degeneration? .
Lentjes MAH. The balance between food and dietary supplements in the general population . Proceedings of the Nutrion Society . 2019;78(1):97-109. doi: 10.1017%2FS0029665118002525
By Ross Phan, PharmD, BCACP, BCGP, BCPS Ross is a writer for Verywell and has years of experience practicing pharmacy in various settings. She is also a board-certified clinical pharmacist, the founder of Off Script Consults, and director of the PharmacyChecker international verification program.
COMMENTS
At Plant & Food Research, we believe science can create a better future. By finding smarter, greener options today, we're helping secure the world we want to live in tomorrow. With our partners, we use world-leading science to improve the way they grow, fish, harvest, prepare and share food. Every day, we have 1000 people working across ...
Our people. We have 1,000 people across Aotearoa New Zealand and the world, each using their skills, their ideas and their passion to help create a smart green future. At Plant & Food Research, we believe science can create a better future. By finding smarter, greener options today, we're helping secure the world we want to live in tomorrow.
We don't know exactly what the future will bring, but we're creating the knowledge we believe will be needed to produce healthy, nutritious food from land and sea in 2030 and beyond. At Plant & Food Research, we believe science can create a better future. By finding smarter, greener options today, we're helping secure the world we want to ...
a Global mean meat production from 1960 to 2020. In 1961, 12 (7.3%) of 164 countries produced more than a million tonnes of meat, whereas by 2020, 46 (10.9%) of 193 countries surpassed this ...
Plant & Food Research (Māori: Rangahau Ahumāra Kai) is a New Zealand Crown Research Institute (CRI). Its purpose is to enhance the value and productivity of New Zealand's horticultural, arable, seafood and food & beverage industries. The interests of the institute are based in horticulture, arable and seafood research, specifically in the ...
The message that food systems are currently responsible for a third of all current anthropogenic GHG emissions 2, so widely publicized, was determinant for food systems to be placed at the centre ...
Plant & Food Research receives $42.7 million per year SSIF investment for research in 2 Science Platforms. A science platform is a combination of people, facilities, information and knowledge that provides a particular, ongoing science and innovation capability for New Zealand. Plant-based food and seafood production ($20.9 million per annum ...
Plant-Based Protein Sources. Among all the existing sources of dietary proteins, plant-based sources dominate the supply of proteins (57%), with the remaining 43% consisting of dairy products (10%), shellfish and fish (6%), meat (18%), and other products from animals (9%) ().To provide dietary protein supply and overcome the challenges of feeding the population, several sources of proteins ...
His current research interests include food rheology, plant-based food texturization, food dehydration, and utilization of by-products from food processing. Weibiao Zhou is the foundation Head of the Department of Food Science and Technology and the inaugural Cheng Tsang Man Chair Professor in Food Science and Technology, National University of ...
Plant Power is the first research article of its kind, "because it is at the intersection of consumer health and the climate crisis. ... By not eating these foods, those holding this value hope to ...
73% of Plant & Food Research employees would recommend working there to a friend based on Glassdoor reviews. Employees also rated Plant & Food Research 4.1 out of 5 for work life balance, 3.4 for culture and values and 3.0 for career opportunities.
Dietary patterns that emphasize the consumption of plant-based foods while eliminating most or all animal products are defined as plant-based diets (PBDs) [13,15,16]. There are different types of PBDs: pesco-vegetarian diets that eliminate animal products except for fish and seafood; lacto-ovo-vegetarians that exclude meat and fish but not ...
In this prospective cohort study, we used data from a food-frequency questionnaire in the US-based Nurses' Health Study II. Participants were categorised by quintiles of four dietary indices, including the alternative healthy eating index-2010 (AHEI), plant-based diet index (PDI), unhealthy PDI, and healthy PDI.
It is important to identify and characterize these underutilized food plant species in the context of climate change and food and nutritional poverty. A survey was conducted among 45 participants in four rural localities, and field visits were carried out. The data obtained were analyzed thematically and through descriptive statistics.
New research published Wednesday found heavy metals in dark chocolate, the latest in a string of studies to raise concerns about toxins in cocoa products.. The researchers tested 72 dark chocolate ...
With our partners, we use world-leading science to improve the way they grow, fish, harvest, prepare and share food. Every day, we have 1000 people working across Aotearoa New Zealand and the world to help deliver healthy foods from the world's most sustainable systems. Our smart green future starts here.
1. Introduction. Over the past decades, it has become increasingly clear that the consumption of animal products has had unsustainable effects on the environment through high demand on land, water, feed, housing and the production of greenhouse gases [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10].In addition, excess consumption of animal products is known to have harmful effects on human health, including cancer ...
In the face of escalating climate change, environmental pollution, and global crises, plant-based eggs are a viable solution for environmental conservation and health promotion. This study uses an integrated framework combining value-belief-norm (VBN) theory and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to explore the factors influencing Taiwanese consumers' inclination towards plant-based eggs.
The Value of Native Plants and Local Production in an Era of Global Agriculture. December 2017; Frontiers in Plant Science 8(8) ... A recent call to rethink the research and development of food.
We made a broad call for perspective papers, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or traditional research papers on topics related to conservation and use of plant genetic resources. We invited to present advances in characterization and evaluation, strategies to improve gene bank operations and collaboration, new tools for managing and sharing ...
Is Plant & Food Research a good company to work for? Plant & Food Research has an overall rating of 3.7 out of 5, based on over 60 reviews left anonymously by employees. 67% of employees would recommend working at Plant & Food Research to a friend and 45% have a positive outlook for the business. This rating has improved by 10% over the last 12 months.
This result is in line with findings reported in a hypothetical online study among Italians who expressed greater willingness to buy food without meat and dairy when labels said "plant-based ...
diet quality study, a diet consisting of novel plant-based foods provided more saturated fat, sodium, and sugar, above the traditional r eference diet, and did not meet the recommended. daily ...
Organic Matter Accumulation in Bentgrass Cultivars as Influenced by Nitrogen Rate and Plant Growth Regulator July 30, 2024 at 12:59pm August 9, 2024 by carr.981 Posted in Field Day 2024 Bookmark the permalink .
Daily 30 is a minimally processed mixture of whole foods, including eight types of mushrooms, seven fruits and vegetables, six types of seeds, five herbs, three types of nuts, and two legumes and ...
The health benefits of fruits and vegetables: taste the rainbow. Posted on August 12, 2024 by Ed Kromer.This entry was posted in Eating Well.Bookmark the permalink.. The author Michael Pollen has boiled down the contents of several bestselling books and a lifetime of inquiry on healthy dining into a prescriptive motto with the economy of a haiku: "eat food, not too much, mostly plants."
At Plant & Food Research, we believe science can create a better future. By finding smarter, greener options today, we're helping secure the world we want to live in tomorrow. ... New plant cultivars Fish breeding Consumer and stakeholder research Food and ingredient formulation Health & nutrition Genetics & genomics. Sustainable, resilient ...
Filling the Void - boosting the nutritional value of fruit . 06 Dec 2022. Rebecca Bloomer: genetic and epigenetic variation in plants . 06 Dec 2022. Julie Blommaert: new territories. ... Plant & Food Research epigenetic project receives Marsden grant. 01 Nov 2023. New Zealand researchers lead world-first sequencing of bilberry genome.
According to the statistics, the value of the plant-based foods market i n the United States reached 6.021 billion dollars [3]. Figure 1: Value of the plant-based foods market in the United States ...
Acai is a plant within the palm family grown for its edible fruit and hearts of palm. Acai may also have health benefits, including antioxidant effects and the ability to lower cholesterol and blood sugar. However, further research is necessary to quantify acai's clinical benefits fully.