Repository logo
 
Publication

Influence of different processing techniques on microalgal protein extraction

dc.contributor.authorMoreira, Catarina
dc.contributor.authorFerreira-Santos, Pedro
dc.contributor.authorNunes, Rafaela
dc.contributor.authorCarvalho, Bernardo
dc.contributor.authorPereira, Hugo
dc.contributor.authorTeixeira, José A.
dc.contributor.authorRocha, Cristina M.R.
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-20T11:07:49Z
dc.date.available2025-03-20T11:07:49Z
dc.date.issued2025-03
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 (similar to 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. alpha-helices occurred in proteins extracted from Chlorella vulgaris through freeze-thawing and enzymatic-assisted extraction, while Nannochloropsis and Tetraselmis only had beta-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.eng
dc.description.sponsorshipC644915664-00000026; 2021.05734.BD; SFRH/BD/07527/2020; 2022.12615.BDANA; FJC2021-046978-I
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.algal.2025.103958
dc.identifier.issn2211-9264
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/26931
dc.language.isoeng
dc.peerreviewedyes
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.relationCentre of Biological Engineering of the University of Minho
dc.relationAssociate Laboratory on Biotechnology, Bioengineering and microELectromechanical Systems
dc.relation.ispartofAlgal Research
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectMicroalgae
dc.subjectProtein
dc.subjectStructure
dc.subjectCell disrupt methods
dc.subjectExtraction
dc.titleInfluence of different processing techniques on microalgal protein extractioneng
dc.typejournal article
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.awardTitleCentre of Biological Engineering of the University of Minho
oaire.awardTitleAssociate Laboratory on Biotechnology, Bioengineering and microELectromechanical Systems
oaire.awardURIinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/6817 - DCRRNI ID/UIDB%2F04469%2F2020/PT
oaire.awardURIinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/6817 - DCRRNI ID/LA%2FP%2F0029%2F2020/PT
oaire.citation.startPage103958
oaire.citation.titleAlgal Research:Biomass, Biofuels and Bioproducts
oaire.citation.volume86
oaire.fundingStream6817 - DCRRNI ID
oaire.fundingStream6817 - DCRRNI ID
oaire.versionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
person.familyNameCarvalho
person.familyNamePereira
person.givenNameBernardo
person.givenNameHugo
person.identifier282781
person.identifier.ciencia-id331E-84FD-2F34
person.identifier.orcid0000-0003-4612-3797
person.identifier.orcid0000-0002-1369-2099
person.identifier.ridE-9360-2015
person.identifier.scopus-author-id54080259900
project.funder.identifierhttp://doi.org/10.13039/501100001871
project.funder.identifierhttp://doi.org/10.13039/501100001871
project.funder.nameFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
project.funder.nameFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
relation.isAuthorOfPublication0655cee0-5f6a-407a-8ba6-bb446a45a9f4
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationebcb2180-5235-4502-b562-cd1e7786e6f9
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryebcb2180-5235-4502-b562-cd1e7786e6f9
relation.isProjectOfPublication3a508ddf-c25b-4458-ae4c-4e254dfb20d6
relation.isProjectOfPublicationece8d4a0-fc62-4de9-a509-8dca57065a53
relation.isProjectOfPublication.latestForDiscovery3a508ddf-c25b-4458-ae4c-4e254dfb20d6

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
1-s2.0-S2211926425000670-main.pdf
Size:
3.89 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
3.46 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: