Cellular agriculture is making it possible to produce meat by growing cells in bioreactors, offering a sustainable alternative to traditional farming. Industrial animal farming currently contributes the majority of CO2 emissions, so lab-grown meat could help reduce the climate impact of our food system while still delivering the familiar taste and texture of beef, pork, and poultry.
Researchers at the Tufts University Center for Cellular Agriculture, led by David Kaplan, have achieved notable progress. They have created bovine muscle cells capable of producing their own growth signals, a breakthrough that could substantially lower production costs by cutting the need to supply costly external growth factors.
In cultured meat experiments, growth factors bind to receptors on the cell surface and trigger a cascade of signals that guide cells to proliferate and differentiate into mature muscle fibers. These factors have represented a major expense in production, so enabling cells to generate their own signals is a critical cost-reduction strategy.
In this line of work, researchers published findings in Sustainability of Cell Reports showing that stem cells were engineered to produce fibroblast growth factor, or FGF, which stimulates the formation of skeletal muscle cells the same way they appear in a steak or burger.
“FGF is not exactly a nutrient,” explained Andrew Stout, scientific director of the Tufts Cellular Agriculture Commercialization Laboratory. “This acts as an instruction set for cells to behave in a certain way. We engineered bovine muscle stem cells to produce these growth factors and to activate the signaling pathways themselves.”
Up to 90% of the cost of cultured meat
Previously, growth factors needed to be added from external sources, and recombinant proteins supplied by industry account for most of the production cost of cultured meat, often reaching ninety percent or more. This new approach aims to remove that recurring expense by enabling cells to sustain their own growth signals.
Growth factors in the culture medium must be replenished every few days because they do not persist long in cell culture. Eliminating this ongoing input represents a major savings opportunity and could help bring cultured meat to market at a lower price point.
“While we have substantially reduced the media cost, further work is required to scale the method for industry use,” Stout noted. “Growth may be slower with engineered cells, but the path forward looks promising. Future efforts may adjust the level and timing of FGF expression or modify other cellular growth pathways to optimize production.”
— The diet of the future may rely on cultured meat, with advances like these guiding the way.—
“With this approach, no foreign genes are added to the cells,” the researchers stated. Instead, they edit and express existing genes to improve muscle growth. This native gene editing approach could streamline regulatory approval for final food products since it avoids foreign gene insertion, which is typically subject to stricter oversight.
Apply to other types of meat
Could this strategy work for chicken, pork, or fish? The team believes it could. Growth of muscle cells generally depends on FGF, so the framework may be adaptable to various meat types. Different species may respond best to different growth factors, but the core concept remains applicable.
Work continues at Tufts and other research centers to refine cultured meat technology. Efforts focus on reducing nutrient costs in growth environments and improving texture, flavor, and nutritional content so products can appeal to mainstream consumers.
Regulatory approvals for cultured meat have progressed in several regions, but cost and availability still pose challenges. Experts remain confident that continued breakthroughs will bring affordable cultured meats to local supermarkets in the coming years.
Reference work: Sustainability of Cell Reports, with detailed findings from TUCCA researchers. Attribution: Tufts University Center for Cellular Agriculture and collaborating institutions.
— End of summary —