Plant-based ground beef alternatives (GBA) have been in the retail market for several decades and have evolved through time from initial products comprised of soy-based proteins to recent GBA that are commonly comprised of bean, mushroom, pea, or other plant-sourced proteins.

These products have served as both a direct competitor and attempted replacement for traditional beef products, as well as complementary protein products for consumers wanting to vary their diets. Over the past several years, there has been a renewed interest in research related to these products. Research efforts have looked at the overall eating quality, flavor profile, color characteristics, economic traits, environmental impacts, and nutritional value of these products. However, it is noteworthy that the studies that have evaluated the eating quality of the products have typically evaluated the products directly head-to-head with ground beef, and only as a single protein product. However, when consumers typically consume these products, they are part of a larger meal, including the GBA as the protein in a burger, taco, or other larger food items.

To date, it is unclear how including other ingredients and seasoning may impact the eating quality of plant-based GBA. It was therefore the objective of the current study to evaluate the eating quality of GBA in comparison to ground beef under real-world eating scenarios as both a patty (hamburger) and ground/crumbled (taco) product.

For this study, 3 plant-based GBA alternatives were used and represented a modern GBA sold at retail (RGBA), a modern GBA sold in foodservice (FGBA), and a traditional soy-based GBA (TGBA). Additionally, 80% lean ground beef was evaluated in comparison. Consumers (N = 240; n = 120 per panel type) evaluated samples for juiciness, tenderness, texture, beef flavor, overall flavor, and overall liking, purchase intent, and purchase price and rated traits as either acceptable or unacceptable. For hamburger panels, consumers were served samples on buns and were given the option to add cheese, lettuce, pickles, ketchup, and/or mustard. For taco panels, samples were seasoned with a taco seasoning blend and served on flour tortillas, with consumers given the option to add cheese, lettuce, and/or tomatoes. In both scenarios, consumers rated ground beef higher (P < 0.05) for juiciness, texture liking, overall flavor liking, beef flavor liking, overall liking, purchase intent, and price willing to be paid than all three GBA. But, ground beef  was rated similar (P > 0.05) for tenderness to FGBA and RGBA. Additionally, a higher (P < 0.05) percentage of ground beef samples were rated acceptable overall and for flavor characteristics than all three GBA. Few differences were found between FGBA and RGBA for any palatability characteristics evaluated. TGBA was rated lower (P < 0.05) than all other treatments for all palatability traits for taco panels and was similar (P > 0.05) to only RGBA for beef flavor and overall flavor liking within hamburger panels. 

Plant-based beef alternatives are a current and ever evolving segment of the protein sector, with the number of product offerings changing how consumers view protein foods. Unlike in the past, these products are not solely being marketed to vegetarian consumers, but instead are being offered as a direct substitute for beef products. Results from the current study provide evidence of the consumer preferred eating quality offered by beef products in comparison to these plant-based alternatives, even if other commonly used taco and hamburger ingredients are included. As the growing body of work highlights how these products differ from beef, the current study underscores that the use of these products as an ingredient does not compensate for their overall reduced palatability characteristics. Thus, additional industry efforts are needed related to plant protein structures and functionalities in order to improve palatability, as our work would indicate the use of seasonings and ingredients alone does not reduce the palatability gap with beef. Current work combined with previous studies provide clear evidence that these plant-based GBA are different products from ground beef and should be marketed as such by purveyors and considered as such by consumers. Ultimately, the level of eating satisfaction offered by beef products is unique and has not been matched with GBA currently available on the market, even when these GBA have included ingredients commonly found in hamburgers and tacos.

O'Quinn, T. G., Egger, L. A., Farmer, K. J., Beyer, E. S., Lybarger, K. R., Vipham, J. L., Zumbaugh, M. D. & Chao, M. D., (2024) “Consumer Evaluation of Plant-Based Ground Beef Alternatives in Real-World Eating Scenarios”, Meat and Muscle Biology 8(1): 16904, 1-14. doi: https://doi.org/10.22175/mmb.16904