SpringerLink
Log in

Enzymes in the production of cultivated meat products

  • Review
  • Published:
Systems Microbiology and Biomanufacturing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Enzymes play a pivotal role in meat processing and maturation, starting with endogenous enzymes that catalyse a partial proteolysis in natural meat that enhances texture and flavor, to exogenous enzymes that may be incorporated for additional processing. Therefore, a question is raised whether endogenous and exogenous proteases could be used to improve the quality of meat products originated from in vitro cell-based technology. This manuscript aims at presenting the main applications of enzymes in meat processing, starting with conventional meat products and expanding to reported and potential applications in cultured meat technologies. Enzymes are applied since the early stages of cell isolation, multiplication and detaching from supports. The use of endogenous enzymes, such as cathepsins and calpains, has been proposed to improve the palatability of cultivated meat, and the application of transglutaminases has already been reported in scientific papers and patent documents, with the aim of promoting crosslinking reactions among proteins. This feature can be used to modulate the texture of cultivated meat products. Also, their use has been directed to the manufacture of scaffolds and microcarriers for animal cell cultivation. As concluded from the scientific and technological literature survey, it is evident that a substantial area of study remains unexplored regarding the utilization of enzymes in cultivated meat products.

Graphical Abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Good Food Institute. (2021) Building an ecosystem for cultivated meat in India. In: https://gfi-india.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Building-an-ecosystem-for-cultivated-meat-in-India.pdf.

  2. Soccol CR, Karp SG, Letti LAJ, et al. Is the development of low-cost media one of the greatest challenges to produce cultivated meat on an industrial scale? Biotechnol Res Innov. 2022;6:e2022005. https://doi.org/10.4322/biori.20226201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Thyden R, Dominko T, Weathers P, et al. Recycling spent animal cell culture media using the thermally resistant microalga Chlorella sorokiniana. Syst Microbiol Biomanufacturing. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43393-024-00280-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Pang C, Yin X, Zhang G, et al. Current progress and prospects of enzyme technologies in future foods. Syst Microbiol Biomanufacturing. 2021;1:24–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ding Z, Wei Q, Liu C, Zhang H, Huang F. The quality changes and proteomic analysis of cattle muscle postmortem during rigor mortis. Foods. 2022;11. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11020217.

  6. Abril B, Bou R, García-Pérez JV, Benedito J. Role of enzymatic reactions in meat processing and use of emerging technologies for process intensification. Foods. 2023;12:1940. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12101940.

  7. Ordoñez JA. Tecnologia De Alimentos. Porto Alegre: Artmed; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kaur L, Hui SX, Morton JD, Kaur R, Chian FM, Boland M. Endogenous proteolytic systems and meat tenderness: influence of post-mortem storage and processing. Food Sci Anim Resour. 2021;41:589–607. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2021.e27.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Madhusankha GDMP, Thilakarathna RCN. Meat tenderization mechanism and the impact of plant exogenous proteases: a review. Arab J Chem. 2021;14:102967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2020.102967.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mohd Azmi SI, Kumar P, Sharma N, Sazili AQ, Lee SJ, Ismail-Fitry MR. Application of plant proteases in meat tenderization: recent trends and future prospects. Foods. 2023;12:1336. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12061336.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Melloni E, Averna M, Stifanese R, et al. Association of Calpastatin with Inactive Calpain. J Biol Chem. 2006;281:24945–54. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M601449200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang H, Pan J, Wu Z. Investigation of the effects of high pressure processing on the process of rigor in pork. Meat Sci. 2018;145:455–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.07.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bai Y, Hou C, Huang C, Fang F, Dong Y, Li X, et al. Phosphorylation of calpastatin negatively regulates the activity of calpain. Life. 2023;13:854. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13030854.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Warner RD, Kerr M, Kim YHB, Geesink G. Pre-rigor carcass stretching counteracts the negative effects of high rigor temperature on tenderness and water-holding capacity– using lamb muscles as a model. Anim Prod Sci. 2014;54:494. https://doi.org/10.1071/AN13062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lyu J, Puolanne E, Ertbjerg P. Relationship between pre-rigor temperature of pork longissimus muscle, myofibril-bound calpain activity and protein degradation. Meat Sci. 2023;198:109094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.109094.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Álvarez C, Morán L, Keenan DF, Mullen AM. Mechanical and biochemical methods for rigor measurement: relationship with eating quality. J Food Qual. 2019;2019:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1894543.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ramos PM, Wright SA, Delgado EF, et al. Resistance to pH decline and slower calpain-1 autolysis are associated with higher energy availability early postmortem in Bos taurus indicus cattle. Meat Sci. 2020;159:107925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2019.107925

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Peng Y, He W, Teng S, Jamali MA. The degradation of intramuscular connective tissue in vitro with purified cathepsin L from bovine pancreas. Foods. 2023;12:3517. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12183517.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Kaur L, Hui SX, Boland M. Changes in cathepsin activity during low-temperature storage and sous vide processing of beef brisket. Food Sci Anim Resour. 2020;40:415–25. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2020.e21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Morellon-Sterling R, El-Siar H, Tavano OL, et al. Ficin: A protease extract with relevance in biotechnology and biocatalysis. Int J Biol Macromol. 2020;162:394–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.06.144.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Naveena BM, Mendiratta SK, Anjaneyulu ASR. Tenderization of buffalo meat using plant proteases from Cucumis trigonus Roxb (Kachri) and Zingiber officinale Roscoe (ginger rhizome). Meat Sci. 2004;68:363–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.04.004.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kwatra B. A review on potential properties and therapeutic applications of bromelain. World J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2019;8:488–500.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Israelian V, Holembovska N, Slobodianiuk N. Application of the papain enzyme in meat products technology. Anim Sci Food Technol. 2021;12:60–7. https://doi.org/10.31548/animal2021.03.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sullivan GA, Calkins CR. Application of exogenous enzymes to beef muscle of high and low-connective tissue. Meat Sci. 2010;85:730–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.03.033.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Zhang B, Sun Q, Liu H-J, et al. Characterization of actinidin from Chinese kiwifruit cultivars and its applications in meat tenderization and production of angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitory peptides. LWT. 2017;78:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2016.12.012.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Naqvi ZB, Campbell MA, Latif S, et al. Improving tenderness and quality of M. biceps femoris from older cows through concentrate feeding, zingibain protease and sous vide cooking. Meat Sci. 2021;180:108563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2021.108563

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kaur L, Mao B, Bailly J, Oladeji O, Blatchford P, McNabb WC. Actinidin in green and SunGold kiwifruit improves digestion of alternative proteins—An in vitro investigation. Foods. 2022;11. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11182739.

  28. Lanzoni D, Bracco F, Cheli F, Colosimo BM, Moscatelli D, Baldi A, et al. Biotechnological and technical challenges related to cultured meat production. Appl Sci. 2022;12:6771. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12136771.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Yuen JSK, Saad MK, **ang N, et al. Aggregating in vitro-grown adipocytes to produce macroscale cell-cultured fat tissue with tunable lipid compositions for food applications. Elife. 2023;12. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.82120.

  30. Dominguez-Hernandez E, Salaseviciene A, Ertbjerg P. Low-temperature long-time cooking of meat: eating quality and underlying mechanisms. Meat Sci. 2018;143:104–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.04.032.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lee J-H, Kim T-K, Kang M-C, et al. Methods to isolate muscle stem cells for cell-based cultured meat production: a review. Animals. 2024;14:819. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14050819.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Spinazzola J, Gussoni E. Isolation of primary human skeletal muscle cells. Bio Protoc. 2017;7. https://doi.org/10.21769/BioProtoc.2591.

  33. Feige P, Rudnicki MA. Isolation of satellite cells and transplantation into mice for lineage tracing in muscle. Nat Protoc. 2020;15:1082–97. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-019-0278-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Takahashi H, Yoshida A, Gao B, et al. Harvest of quality-controlled bovine myogenic cells and biomimetic bovine muscle tissue engineering for sustainable meat production. Biomaterials. 2022;287:121649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2022.121649.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mitterer A, Tauer C, Reiter M, Mundt W. Method of isolation and purification of trypsin from pronase protease and use thereof. Patent document US6830917 B2. 2004.

  36. Miersch C, Stange K, Röntgen M. Effects of trypsinization and of a combined trypsin, collagenase, and DNase digestion on liberation and in vitro function of satellite cells isolated from juvenile porcine muscles. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim. 2018;54:406–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11626-018-0263-5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Huang H-L, Hsing H-W, Lai T-C, et al. Trypsin-induced proteome alteration during cell subculture in mammalian cells. J Biomed Sci. 2010;17:36. https://doi.org/10.1186/1423-0127-17-36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Lai T-Y, Cao J, Ou-Yang P, et al. Different methods of detaching adherent cells and their effects on the cell surface expression of Fas receptor and Fas ligand. Sci Rep. 2022;12:5713. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-09605-y.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Derakhti S, Safiabadi-Tali SH, Amoabediny G, Sheikhpour M. Attachment and detachment strategies in microcarrier-based cell culture technology: a comprehensive review. Mater Sci Engineering: C. 2019;103:109782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2019.109782.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Kim N-S, Yu H-Y, Chung N-D, et al. High-level production of recombinant trypsin in transgenic rice cell culture through utilization of an alternative carbon source and recycling system. Enzyme Microb Technol. 2014;63:21–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enzmictec.2014.04.010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhang Y, Ling Z, Du G, Chen J, Kang Z. Improved production of active Streptomyces griseus trypsin with a novel auto-catalyzed strategy. Sci Rep. 2016;6:23158. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep23158.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Matinfar A, Dezfulian M, Haghighipour N, et al. Replacement of trypsin by proteases for medical applications. Iran J Pharm Res. 2022;21. https://doi.org/10.5812/ijpr-126328.

  43. Zhang Y, Zhang Y, Zhang Y, et al. Improving production of Streptomyces griseus trypsin for enzymatic processing of insulin precursor. Microb Cell Fact. 2020;19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12934-020-01338-9

  44. Biagini G, Senegaglia AC, Pereira T, et al. 3D poly(lactic acid) scaffolds promote different behaviors on endothelial progenitors and adipose-derived stromal cells in comparison with standard 2D cultures. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2021;9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.700862.

  45. Weber C, Pohl S, Pörtner R, et al. Expansion and harvesting of hMSC-TERT. Open Biomed Eng J. 2007;1:38–46. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874120700701010038.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Nienow AW, Rafiq QA, Coopman K, Hewitt CJ. A potentially scalable method for the harvesting of hMSCs from microcarriers. Biochem Eng J. 2014;85:79–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2014.02.005.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Rodrigues AL, Rodrigues CAV, Gomes AR, Vieira SF, Badenes SM, Diogo MM, et al. Dissolvable microcarriers allow scalable expansion and harvesting of human induced pluripotent stem cells under xeno- free conditions. Biotechnol J. 2019;14. https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.201800461.

  48. Van Beylen K, Papantoniou I, Aerts J-M. Microcarrier screening and evaluation for dynamic expansion of human periosteum-derived progenitor cells in a xenogeneic free medium. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2021;9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.624890

  49. Tzimorotas D, Solberg NT, Andreassen RC, et al. Expansion of bovine skeletal muscle stem cells from spinner flasks to benchtop stirred-tank bioreactors for up to 38 days. Front Nutr. 2023;10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2023.1192365.

  50. Rafiq QA, Brosnan KM, Coopman K, Nienow AW, Hewitt CJ. Culture of human mesenchymal stem cells on microcarriers in a 5 L stirred-tank bioreactor. Biotechnol Lett. 2013;35:1233–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10529-013-1211-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Hanga MP, de la Raga FA, Moutsatsou P, et al. Scale-up of an intensified bioprocess for the expansion of bovine adipose‐derived stem cells (bASCs) in stirred tank bioreactors. Biotechnol Bioeng. 2021;118:3175–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.27842.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Wang Z, Zhang X, Xue L, et al. A controllable gelatin-based microcarriers fabrication system for the whole procedures of MSCs amplification and tissue engineering. Regen Biomater. 2023;10. https://doi.org/10.1093/rb/rbad068.

  53. Fraeye I, Kratka M, Vandenburgh H, Thorrez L. Sensorial and nutritional aspects of cultured meat in comparison to traditional meat: much to be inferred. Front Nutr. 2020;7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2020.00035.

  54. Broucke K, Van Pamel E, Van Coillie E, Herman L, Van Royen G. Cultured meat and challenges ahead: a review on nutritional, technofunctional and sensorial properties, safety and legislation. Meat Sci. 2023;195:109006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.109006.

  55. Lambert EG, O’Keeffe CJ, Ward AO, Anderson TA, Yip Q, Newman PLH. Enhancing the palatability of cultivated meat. Trends Biotechnol. 2024;2476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2024.02.014.

  56. Heck T, Faccio G, Richter M, Thöny-Meyer L. Enzyme-catalyzed protein crosslinking. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2013;97:461–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-012-4569-z.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Yang X, Zhang Y. Expression of recombinant transglutaminase gene in Pichia pastoris and its uses in restructured meat products. Food Chem. 2019;291:245–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.04.015

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Abril B, Bou R, García-Pérez JV, Benedito J. Role of enzymatic reactions in meat processing and use of emerging technologies for process intensification. Foods 2023;12(10):1940. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12101940.

  59. Dong H, Wang P, Yang Z, Xu X. 3D printing based on meat materials: challenges and opportunities. Curr Res Food Sci. 2023;6:100423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crfs.2022.100423.

  60. Yokoyama K, Nio N, Kikuchi Y. Properties and applications of microbial transglutaminase. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2004;64:447–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-003-1539-5.

  61. Yen FC, Glusac J, Levi S, et al. Cultured meat platform developed through the structuring of edible microcarrier-derived microtissues with oleogel-based fat substitute. Nat Commun. 2023;14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-38593-4.

  62. Liu Y, Wang R, Ding S, et al. Engineered meatballs via scalable skeletal muscle cell expansion and modular micro-tissue assembly using porous gelatin micro-carriers. Biomaterials. 2022;287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2022.121615.

  63. Siddiqui SA, Bahmid NA, Karim I, Mehany T, Gvozdenko AA, Blinov AV, t al. Cultured meat: processing, packaging, shelf life, and consumer acceptance. LWT 2022;172:114192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2022.114192.

  64. Kang DH, Louis F, Liu H, et al. Engineered whole cut meat-like tissue by the assembly of cell fibers using tendon-gel integrated bioprinting. Nat Commun. 2021;12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-25236-9.

  65. Kuppusamy P, Kim D, Soundharrajan I, Hwang I, Choi KC. Adipose and muscle cell co-culture system: a novel in vitro tool to mimic the in vivo cellular environment. Biology. 2020;10(1):6. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology.

  66. Rubio NR, **ang N, Kaplan DL. Plant-based and cell-based approaches to meat production. Nat Commun. 2020;11:6276. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20061-y.

  67. Letti LAJ, Karp SG, Molento CFM, et al. Cultivated meat: recent technological developments, current market and future challenges. Biotechnol Res Innov. 2021;5:e2021001. https://doi.org/10.4322/biori.202101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Karp SG, Herrmann LW, Biagini G, et al. Patents and innovations in cultivated meat production. In: Soccol CR, Molento CFM, Reis GG, Karp SG, editors. Cultivated meat - technologies, commercialization and challenges. Springer Nature; 2024.

  69. Liu S, Wang X, Zhou J et al. (2020) Improving morphology of artificial meat derived from animal cells used in food engineering, by mixing and stirring animal stem cell cultured meat emulsion, salt, phosphate, water, casein powder and substrate transglutaminase. Patent document CN111513263-A.

  70. Hong W, Wu Z, Tao T et al. (2023) Edible cell cultured meat hydrogel bioscaffold useful in preparing cell culture foods comprises hydrogel system formed by plant protein, transglutaminase and polyphenols. Patent document CN117247886-A.

  71. Hong JK, Choi BK. Scaffold to produce cultured meat, comprises biocompatible enzymatically cross-linked polymer comprising gelatin-containing polypeptide, patterned surface in some areas, and third surface region of planarized surface. Patent document KR2023081978-A. 2023.

  72. Machluf M, Fishman A, Davidovich-Pinhas M et al. (2023) Composition-of-matter used to produce food products comprises edible microparticles portion of edible microparticles including plant protein. Patent document WO2023026291-A1.

  73. Yang F, Li S, Li Y et al. Preparation raw material of the biological ink comprises pectin, transglutaminase, the first protein component and the second protein component. Patent document CN115747197-A/B. 2023.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors are thankful to the Secretariat of Science, Technology and Higher Education of the State of Paraná (SETI-PR) for supporting this work.

Funding

This work was supported by the Araucária Foundation [NAPI Proteínas Alternativas, grant number 19.810.961-4] and by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development – CNPq [grant number 309237/2021-1].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Bioprocess Engineering and Biotechnology, Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

    Susan Grace Karp, Mariana Zanlorenzi Weber, Giuliana Biagini, Gilberto Vinícius de Melo Pereira, Vanete Thomaz-Soccol & Carlos Ricardo Soccol

  2. Graduate Program in Biotechnology, PPGBIOTEC, Federal Technological University of Paraná - UTFPR, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

    Kely Priscila de Lima & Gilberto Vinícius de Melo Pereira

Authors
  1. Susan Grace Karp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mariana Zanlorenzi Weber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Giuliana Biagini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kely Priscila de Lima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gilberto Vinícius de Melo Pereira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Vanete Thomaz-Soccol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Carlos Ricardo Soccol
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SGK: literature survey, writing and supervision; MZW: literature survey and writing; GB: literature survey and writing; KPL: literature survey and writing; GVMP: writing and revision; VTS: supervision and funding; CRS: supervision and funding.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan Grace Karp.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

As an Editor and an Editorial Board member of SMAB, the authors Carlos Ricardo Soccol and Susan Grace Karp declare a conflict of interest for this paper. They have been excluded from the peer review and decision-making process to ensure unbiased evaluation and strict adherence to ethical guidelines.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Karp, S.G., Weber, M.Z., Biagini, G. et al. Enzymes in the production of cultivated meat products. Syst Microbiol and Biomanuf (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43393-024-00284-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43393-024-00284-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation