Lucas Krusinski

Regenerative agriculture has emerged as a promising framework for improving the sustainability of food systems. Interest is also growing in its potential to enhance food nutrient density. Mechanistic links between agricultural practices, soil health, and food composition are biologically plausible and supported by emerging evidence. However, substantial variability in nutrient composition across production systems, combined with methodological limitations in current research, has hindered consistent conclusions. Concurrently, regenerative and grass-fed and finished certification programs in the United States have expanded rapidly, standardizing production practices and, in some cases, incorporating environmental indicators such as soil health and biodiversity. Yet these frameworks rely primarily on the verification of practices (obligations of means) rather than the measurement of outcomes (obligations of results), particularly at the level of food composition. Despite this, nutrition-related claims, both explicit and implicit, are increasingly associated with these systems, while routine measurement of nutrient density remains absent. This perspective examines the intersection of regenerative agriculture, nutrient density, and certification systems, highlighting a structural gap between production practices, communicated claims, and measurable outcomes, and proposes a shift toward integrating obligations of results, including standardized nutrient profiling and improved data transparency, alongside existing practice-based standards. Drawing on examples such as the Bleu-Blanc-Coeur initiative, we argue that hybrid frameworks combining practices with outcome-based verification are feasible and could strengthen the scientific basis of regenerative agriculture, support more rigorous evaluation of food quality, and improve transparency and trust within the food system.

Regenerative agriculture has emerged as a promising framework for improving the sustainability of food systems, with increasing interest in its potential to enhance food nutrient density. Mechanistic links between agricultural practices, soil health, and food composition are biologically plausible and supported by emerging evidence; however, substantial variability in nutrient composition across production systems, combined with methodological limitations in current research, has hindered consistent conclusions. At the same time, regenerative and grass-fed and finished certification programs in the United States have expanded rapidly, standardizing production practices and, in some cases, incorporating environmental indicators such as soil health and biodiversity, yet these frameworks rely primarily on the verification of practices (obligations of means) rather than the measurement of outcomes (obligations of results), particularly at the level of food composition. Despite this, nutrition-related claims, both explicit and implicit, are increasingly associated with these systems, while routine measurement of nutrient density remains absent. This perspective examines the intersection of regenerative agriculture, nutrient density, and certification systems, highlighting a structural gap between production practices, communicated claims, and measurable outcomes, and proposes a shift toward integrating obligations of results, including standardized nutrient profiling and improved data transparency, alongside existing practice-based standards. Drawing on examples such as the Bleu-Blanc-Coeur initiative, we argue that hybrid frameworks combining practices with outcome-based verification are feasible and could strengthen the scientific basis of regenerative agriculture, support more rigorous evaluation of food quality, and improve transparency and trust within the food system.

The objective of this study was to use a multi‐omics (i.e., gene expression quantification, metabolomics, and fatty acid [FA] profiling) approach to separate and authenticate beef from three different dietary groups. In this 2‐year study, Red Angus steers (n = 54) were randomly allocated to one of three treatments: (1) complex biodiverse pasture (GRASS), (2) total mixed ration (TMR) in feedlot (GRAIN), or (3) TMR in feedlot supplemented with 5% (dry matter) grapeseed extract for the last 30 days (GRAPE). FAs were measured by gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry (GC–MS), secondary metabolites were identified using ultra‐high‐performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC–MS/MS), and gene expression analysis was performed using quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT–qPCR). All target genes were upregulated in beef from GRASS compared to the other two groups. Multivariate analyses showed that long‐chain n‐3 polyunsaturated FAs, the n‐6:n‐3 ratio, vitamin E, organic acids, amino acid derivatives, and the nephronectin isoform X1 (NPNT‐1) gene were the most important compounds for group separation. These compounds, considered to be beneficial for human health, showed higher concentrations in beef from GRASS. The success of beef separation by dietary treatment was highlighted by the 90.4% prediction accuracy of the random forest model, with beef from GRASS being 100% accurately predicted and beef from GRAPE being 94.4% accurately predicted. Beef from GRAIN was 76.5% accurately predicted. In conclusion, coupling gene expression analysis to metabolomics and FA profiling allowed for the separation of beef samples from varying dietary backgrounds with a high degree of confidence.

Beef raised using rotational grazing practices on biodiverse pastures offers potential benefits to animal and environmental health and can improve the nutrient density of meat to favor human health. However, many cattle producers contend with the seasonal unavailability of fresh forage, necessitating the utilization of supplementary feeds or indoor feeding. The objective of this study was to profile secondary metabolites and fatty acids in grass-finished beef supplemented with different feeds (4.5 kg/head/day) and to explore the potential for grass-finished beef authentication. In this two-year study, steers (n = 115) were randomly allocated to one of four diets: 1) pastured/supplemented with hay (control group), 2) pastured/supplemented with baleage, 3) pastured/supplemented with soybean hulls, or 4) baleage/soybean hulls in confinement. Secondary metabolites and fatty acids were measured using UHPLC-MS/MS and GC-MS, respectively. Of the 94 measured metabolites, pyridoxine, alpha-tocopherol, hippuric acid, and gallic acid differed between diets (p < 0.05 for all). Based on random forest classification, beef from the pasture/hay, pasture/baleage, pasture/soybean hulls, and confinement baleage/soybean hulls groups could be identified with a predictive accuracy of 100%, 50%, 41%, and 97%, respectively. Although minimal significant differences were observed, our data indicate that certain supplemental feeds maintain favorable nutritional profiles of grass-finished beef. In addition, metabolomics can predict cattle on exclusively forage-based or feed-based diets with a high degree of certainty.

Grass-finished beef (GFB) can provide beneficial bioactive compounds to healthy diets, including omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 PUFAs), conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), and secondary bioactive compounds, such as phytochemicals. The objective of this study was to compare fatty acids (FAs), micronutrients, and phytochemicals of beef fed a biodiverse pasture (GRASS), a total mixed ration (GRAIN), or a total mixed ration with 5% grapeseed extract (GRAPE). This was a two-year study involving fifty-four Red Angus steers (n = 54). GFB contained higher levels of n-3 PUFAs, vitamin E, iron, zinc, stachydrine, hippuric acid, citric acid, and succinic acid than beef from GRAIN and GRAPE (p < 0.001 for all). No differences were observed in quantified phytochemicals between beef from GRAIN and GRAPE (p > 0.05). Random forest analysis indicated that phytochemical and FA composition of meat can predict cattle diets with a degree of certainty, especially for GFB (5.6% class error). In conclusion, these results indicate that GFB contains higher levels of potentially beneficial bioactive compounds, such as n-3 PUFAs, micronutrients, and phytochemicals, compared to grain-finished beef. Additionally, the n-6:n-3 ratio was the most crucial factor capable of separating beef based on finishing diets.

Grass-finished beef (GFB) has demonstrated wide nutritional variations with some GFB having a considerably higher n-6:n-3 ratio compared to grain-finished beef. To better understand these variations, the current study investigated the effects of commonly used supplemental feeds on the nutritional profile of GFB. This two-year study involved 117 steers randomly allocated to one of four diets: (1) grass+hay (G-HAY), (2) grass+baleage (G-BLG), (3) grass+soybean hulls (G-SH), and (4) baleage+soybean hulls in feedlot (BLG-SH). Feed samples were analyzed for their nutritional value, and beef samples underwent analysis for fatty acids (FAs), vitamin E, minerals, lipid oxidation, and shear force. FAs were measured by GC-MS, vitamin E was analyzed chromatographically, minerals were analyzed by ICP-MS, and lipid oxidation was measured via a thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) assay. G-SH beef had the highest n-6:n-3 ratio (p < 0.001), while BLG-SH beef contained less vitamin E (p < 0.001) and higher TBARS values (p < 0.001) compared to the other groups. G-HAY beef contained more long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated FAs compared to the other groups (p < 0.001). In conclusion, G-HAY beef had the most beneficial nutritional profile, while soybean hulls increased the n-6:n-3 ratio of beef.

Cattle diet and breed modify the nutritional profile of beef. The objective of this study was to compare the fatty acid (FA) and micronutrient profiles of Red Angus (RA) and RA x Akaushi (AK) crossbreed steers fed either a grass or grain diet. This two-year study randomly assigned steers to the diets using a 2 × 2 factorial experiment. FAs and micronutrients were analyzed. Diet effect was the strongest with grass-finished beef being higher in n-3 polyunsaturated FAs (p < 0.001), conjugated linoleic acid (p < 0.05), vaccenic acid (p < 0.05), iron (p < 0.001), and vitamin E (p < 0.001) compared to grain-finished beef. Breed effects were observed for lauric and myristic acids (p < 0.05), selenium (p < 0.05), and zinc (p < 0.01) with AK containing more of these compounds than RA. Diet × breed effects were non-existent. These results indicate that diet has a stronger influence than breed on modifying the nutritional profile of beef. Because of a more favorable FA and antioxidant profile, consumption of grass-finished beef could benefit human health.

As the global population increases, so does meat consumption. This trend is accompanied by concerns regarding the meat industry, and consumers are demanding transparency on the environmental and health effects of the products they are purchasing. Many leading health organizations recommend reducing red meat consumption. Nevertheless, no differentiation is made among red meats and beef. The beef production system is generally ignored despite nutritional differences between grain- and grass-fed beef. Compared to grain-fed beef, grass-fed beef contains a healthier fatty acid profile, including more omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acid, and increased concentrations of phytochemicals desired by health-conscious customers. However, there is a lack of consistency among grass-fed beef in the United States regarding clear product labeling and cattle dietary components. Grass-fed beef labeling confusion has emerged, including misunderstandings between grass-fed and grass-finished beef. Along with this, previous studies observed significant nutritional variation among grass-finished beef from different producers across the country. Cattle diet has the strongest influence on the nutritional composition of beef. Therefore, understanding differences in feeding practices is key to understanding differing nutritional quality of grass-fed beef. Feeding cattle diverse pastures composed of multiple plant species including grasses and legumes managed in a rotational grazing fashion results in higher omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and phytochemical levels in beef compared to feedlots and monocultures. Seasonal differences including changes in temperature, rainfall, grazing practices, and plant growth cycles affect the nutritional composition of feeds and ultimately meat. Additional feeds utilized in grass-fed beef production systems such as conserved forages may reduce or increase health-promoting nutrients in grass-fed beef, while supplements such as grape byproducts and flaxseed may improve its nutritional profile. Further research should measure the effects of individual feedstuff and the finishing period on the nutritional profile on grass-fed beef. A better understanding of these details will be a step toward the standardization of pasture-raised ruminant products, strengthening the relationship between grass-fed beef consumption and human health.

Background: Skin carotenoids measured by reflection spectroscopy (RS) score as a biomarker of fruit and vegetable (F/V) intake has not been used extensively in USA minority populations, and there are concerns about the impact of skin tone on the validity of skin carotenoid scores as a biomarker of F/V intake. Methods: The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between skin carotenoids measured by RS score, plasma carotenoids, dietary carotenoids, and F/V intake in African American/Black college students and explore the effect of skin tone on RS score readings. One hundred African American/Black students at a Historically Black Colleges and Universities institution participated in this study. RS score was assessed by Veggie Meter, plasma carotenoids measured by high performance liquid chromatography, and dietary carotenoids and F/V intake were estimated by a weekly food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). Skin tone was matched visually and read using a skin swatch on a scale of 1-15, 1 being the lightest and 15 being the darkest. Correlations between RS scores with total plasma carotenoid concentrations, dietary carotenoids, and F/V intake were examined. Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to assess the relationship of skin tone at the fingertip and inner arm, BMI, and %body fat on the correlation between RS and total plasma carotenoid levels. Results: Skin carotenoid levels indicated by RS scores were correlated with total plasma carotenoid concentrations (R= 0.595, p