Influence of different processing techniques on microalgal protein extraction

dc.commentsCEB58197por
dc.contributor.authorMoreira, Catarinapor
dc.contributor.authorSantos, Pedro Miguel Ferreirapor
dc.contributor.authorNunes, R.por
dc.contributor.authorCarvalho, Bernardopor
dc.contributor.authorPereira, Hugopor
dc.contributor.authorTeixeira, J. A.por
dc.contributor.authorRocha, Cristina M. R.por
dc.date.accessioned2025-02-26T16:00:00Z
dc.date.available2025-02-26T16:00:00Z
dc.date.issued2025-03
dc.date.updated2025-02-26T15:49:39Z
dc.description.abstractThe nutrient-rich composition of microalgae biomass positions it as a highly promising natural food ingredient. This holds the potential to not only enhance the nutritional value of various food products but also simultaneously alter their structural attributes. This work investigated the effect of five protein extraction techniques such as freeze-thawing, enzymatic-assisted extraction, high-pressure homogenization, ultrasounds-assisted extraction, and pH adjustment (pH 7, pH 10, and pH 13) in protein yield, and subsequente cell and protein structure of three microalgal suspensions, namely, Chlorella vulgaris, Nannochloropsis oceanica, and Tetraselmis chui. In Chlorella vulgaris, freeze- thawing and high-pressure homogenization exhibited a higher effect in terms of protein yield (~26.60 g protein /100 g protein microalgae). The same occurred for Nannochloropsis oceanica with also ultrasounds-assisted extractions and pH 7 and 10 having a protein yield above 30 %. Tetraselmis chui was similar to Chlorella vulgaris (>20.00 g protein /100 g protein microalgae) for freeze-thawing, high-pressure homogenization and ultrasound-assisted extraction. Enzymatic-assisted had a the lower protein yield for all the three microalgae (<10.00 g protein /100 g protein microalgae). The majority of proteins extracted from Chlorella vulgaris samples had molecular weights exceeding 337 kDa, whereas proteins extracted from Nannochloropsis and Tetraselmis had molecular weights ranging from 5 to 50 kDa. -helices occurred in proteins extracted from Chlorella vulgaris through freeze-thawing and enzymatic-assisted extraction, while Nannochloropsis and Tetraselmis only had -sheet. In conclusion, for optimal protein yield recovery, methodologies such as freeze-thawing and high-pressure homogenization are the most efficient across all studied microalgae. The method selected for extraction had a greater impact on both the protein yield and structure for spray-dried cells. © 2025 The Authorspor
dc.description.publicationversioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was supported by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) under the scope of the strategic funding of UIDB/04469/2020 unit and LA/P/0029/2020 (LABBELS – Associate Laboratory in Biotechnology, Bioengineering and Microelectromechanical Systems). This study was also supported by “Pacto da Bioeconomia Azul” (Project No. C644915664-00000026) within the WP5 Algae Vertical, funded by Next Generation EU European Fund and the Portuguese Recovery and Resilience Plan (PRR), under the scope of the incentive line “Agendas for Business Innovation” through the funding scheme C5- Capitalization and Business Innovation. Catarina Moreira, Rafaela Nunes, and Bernardo Carvalho are recipients of Ph.D. scholarships supported by FCT (Ref. 2021.05734.BD, SFRH/BD/07527/2020, and 2022.12615.BDANA, respectively). Pedro Ferreira-Santos would like to express gratitude to the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities and the European Union - NextGenerationEU/PRTR - for financial support (FJC2021-046978-I).por
dc.distributioninternationalpor
dc.identifier.articlenumber103958por
dc.identifier.citationMoreira, C., Ferreira-Santos, P., Nunes, R., Carvalho, B., Pereira, H., Teixeira, J. A., & Rocha, C. M. R. (2025, March). Influence of different processing techniques on microalgal protein extraction. Algal Research. Elsevier BV. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2025.103958por
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.algal.2025.103958por
dc.identifier.issn2211-9264por
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1822/94880
dc.language.isoengpor
dc.peerreviewedyespor
dc.publisherElsevier B.V.por
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/6817 - DCRRNI ID/UIDB%2F04469%2F2020/PTpor
dc.relationLA/P/0029/2020por
dc.relationSFRH/BD/07527/2020por
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211926425000670por
dc.rightsopenAccesspor
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/por
dc.subjectCell disrupt methodspor
dc.subjectExtractionpor
dc.subjectMicroalgaepor
dc.subjectProteinpor
dc.subjectStructurepor
dc.titleInfluence of different processing techniques on microalgal protein extractionpor
dc.typearticle
dspace.entity.typePublicationen
oaire.citationConferencePlaceNetherlands
oaire.citationVolume86por
oaire.versionVoRpor
sdum.journalAlgal Researchpor

Ficheiros

Pacote original

A mostrar 1 - 1 de 1
A carregar...
Nome:
document_58197_1.pdf
Tamanho:
3.9 MB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format