Extraction of Protein from Four Different Seaweeds Using Three Different Physical Pre-Treatment Strategies

Seaweeds are a rich source of protein and can contain up to 47% on the dry weight basis. It is challenging to extract proteins from the raw biomass of seaweed due to resilient cell-wall complexes. Four species of macroalgae were used in this study-two brown, <i>Fucus vesiculosus</i> and...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jack O’ Connor, Steve Meaney, Gwilym A. Williams, Maria Hayes
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2020-04-01
Series:Molecules
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/25/8/2005
_version_ 1797569722804338688
author Jack O’ Connor
Steve Meaney
Gwilym A. Williams
Maria Hayes
author_facet Jack O’ Connor
Steve Meaney
Gwilym A. Williams
Maria Hayes
author_sort Jack O’ Connor
collection DOAJ
description Seaweeds are a rich source of protein and can contain up to 47% on the dry weight basis. It is challenging to extract proteins from the raw biomass of seaweed due to resilient cell-wall complexes. Four species of macroalgae were used in this study-two brown, <i>Fucus vesiculosus</i> and <i>Alaria esculenta</i>, and two red, <i>Palmaria palmata</i> and <i>Chondrus crispus</i>. Three treatments were applied individually to the macroalgal species: (I) high-pressure processing (HPP); (II) laboratory autoclave processing and (III) a classical sonication and salting out method. The protein, ash and lipid contents of the resulting extracts were estimated. Yields of protein recovered ranged from 3.2% for <i>Fucus vesiculosus</i> pre-treated with high pressure processing to 28.9% protein recovered for <i>Chondrus crispus</i> treated with the classical method. The yields of protein recovered using the classical, HPP and autoclave pre-treatments applied to <i>Fucus vesiculosus</i> were 35.1, 23.7% and 24.3%, respectively; yields from <i>Alaria esculenta</i> were 18.2%, 15.0% and 17.1% respectively; yields from <i>Palmaria palmata</i> were 12.5%, 14.9% and 21.5% respectively, and finally, yields from <i>Chondrus crispus</i> were 35.2%, 16.1% and 21.9%, respectively. These results demonstrate that while macroalgal proteins may be extracted using either physical or enzymatic methods, the specific extraction procedure should be tailored to individual species.
first_indexed 2024-03-10T20:15:38Z
format Article
id doaj.art-96e431ba5b6d4a2cba94a56695d41ce1
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1420-3049
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-10T20:15:38Z
publishDate 2020-04-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Molecules
spelling doaj.art-96e431ba5b6d4a2cba94a56695d41ce12023-11-19T22:38:28ZengMDPI AGMolecules1420-30492020-04-01258200510.3390/molecules25082005Extraction of Protein from Four Different Seaweeds Using Three Different Physical Pre-Treatment StrategiesJack O’ Connor0Steve Meaney1Gwilym A. Williams2Maria Hayes3The Food BioSciences Department, Teagasc Food Research Centre, Ashtown, Dublin 15, IrelandSchool of Biological and Health Sciences, Technological University Dublin (TU Dublin)–City Campus, Kevin Street, Dublin 2, IrelandSchool of Biological and Health Sciences, Technological University Dublin (TU Dublin)–City Campus, Kevin Street, Dublin 2, IrelandThe Food BioSciences Department, Teagasc Food Research Centre, Ashtown, Dublin 15, IrelandSeaweeds are a rich source of protein and can contain up to 47% on the dry weight basis. It is challenging to extract proteins from the raw biomass of seaweed due to resilient cell-wall complexes. Four species of macroalgae were used in this study-two brown, <i>Fucus vesiculosus</i> and <i>Alaria esculenta</i>, and two red, <i>Palmaria palmata</i> and <i>Chondrus crispus</i>. Three treatments were applied individually to the macroalgal species: (I) high-pressure processing (HPP); (II) laboratory autoclave processing and (III) a classical sonication and salting out method. The protein, ash and lipid contents of the resulting extracts were estimated. Yields of protein recovered ranged from 3.2% for <i>Fucus vesiculosus</i> pre-treated with high pressure processing to 28.9% protein recovered for <i>Chondrus crispus</i> treated with the classical method. The yields of protein recovered using the classical, HPP and autoclave pre-treatments applied to <i>Fucus vesiculosus</i> were 35.1, 23.7% and 24.3%, respectively; yields from <i>Alaria esculenta</i> were 18.2%, 15.0% and 17.1% respectively; yields from <i>Palmaria palmata</i> were 12.5%, 14.9% and 21.5% respectively, and finally, yields from <i>Chondrus crispus</i> were 35.2%, 16.1% and 21.9%, respectively. These results demonstrate that while macroalgal proteins may be extracted using either physical or enzymatic methods, the specific extraction procedure should be tailored to individual species.https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/25/8/2005seaweedsproteinsautoclavehigh pressure processingtraditional protein extractiontotal and free amino acids
spellingShingle Jack O’ Connor
Steve Meaney
Gwilym A. Williams
Maria Hayes
Extraction of Protein from Four Different Seaweeds Using Three Different Physical Pre-Treatment Strategies
Molecules
seaweeds
proteins
autoclave
high pressure processing
traditional protein extraction
total and free amino acids
title Extraction of Protein from Four Different Seaweeds Using Three Different Physical Pre-Treatment Strategies
title_full Extraction of Protein from Four Different Seaweeds Using Three Different Physical Pre-Treatment Strategies
title_fullStr Extraction of Protein from Four Different Seaweeds Using Three Different Physical Pre-Treatment Strategies
title_full_unstemmed Extraction of Protein from Four Different Seaweeds Using Three Different Physical Pre-Treatment Strategies
title_short Extraction of Protein from Four Different Seaweeds Using Three Different Physical Pre-Treatment Strategies
title_sort extraction of protein from four different seaweeds using three different physical pre treatment strategies
topic seaweeds
proteins
autoclave
high pressure processing
traditional protein extraction
total and free amino acids
url https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/25/8/2005
work_keys_str_mv AT jackoconnor extractionofproteinfromfourdifferentseaweedsusingthreedifferentphysicalpretreatmentstrategies
AT stevemeaney extractionofproteinfromfourdifferentseaweedsusingthreedifferentphysicalpretreatmentstrategies
AT gwilymawilliams extractionofproteinfromfourdifferentseaweedsusingthreedifferentphysicalpretreatmentstrategies
AT mariahayes extractionofproteinfromfourdifferentseaweedsusingthreedifferentphysicalpretreatmentstrategies