Comparing the Chemical Profiles of Plant-Based and Traditional Meats Using GC–MS-Based Metabolomics

As the consumer interest and market for plant-based meat alternatives grows, understanding the nutritional differences between alternative and traditional meats is essential. This article describes an untargeted gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS)‑based metabolomics approach that compares the chemical profiles of a popular plant-based meat alternative and grassfed ground beef using a GC system coupled to a GC–MS device. The samples were derivatized to simplify the chromatographic process and render the polar metabolites more volatile for GC–MS analysis. Statistical and multivariate analysis of the acquired and processed GC–MS data revealed that 90% of the annotated compounds differed between the plant-based alternative meat and the grass-fed ground beef samples. The ground beef and plant-based products each contained several compounds that were found in much smaller quantities, or not at all, in the other product. These results indicate differences in organic composition even though the nutritional labels on the back of the products were nearly identical. Heat maps, principal component analysis (PCA) score plots, variable importance plots (VIPs), and the clustering of compounds into metabolite classes provided further insights into the differences between the two types of meat products. The biological significance of the comparative data was studied using online databases and pathway analysis tools.

Duke Scholars

Author James R. Bain Medicine, Endocrinology, Metabolism, and Nutrition

Author Carl F. Pieper Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Division of Biostatistics

Author Kim Marie Huffman Medicine, Rheumatology and Immunology