Purpose of review This review examines why the incorporation of plant proteins into meat products is frequently associated with technological and structural limitations. It aims to determine whether these constraints arise from ingredient selection, processing conditions, or fundamental differences between plant and myofibrillar proteins, and why formulation-driven strategies often fail. Recent findings Plant proteins differ markedly from myofibrillar proteins in molecular organization, unfolding behavior, aggregation pathways, and crosslinking capacity. Under conventional meat-processing operations such as chopping, emulsification, and heating, plant proteins tend to form particulate aggregates rather than continuous networks, leading to reduced emulsion stability, water and fat retention, and textural integrity. Summary This review demonstrates that intrinsic structural and process-level constraints primarily dictate the performance limits of plant proteins in meat products. Complete functional equivalence is therefore difficult to achieve under conventional processing conditions, supporting realistic partial-replacement strategies. Future research should focus on process-oriented strategies and realistic partial replacement approaches.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hollweg et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: