A comparison of protocols for isolating and concentrating protein from the green seaweed Ulva ohnoi

Angell, Alex R.; Paul, Nicholas A.; Nys, Rocky de

doi:10.1007/s10811-016-0972-7

Cited by 32 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The protein extractability of freeze-dried U. lactuca biomass in this study with 9.1% was comparable with the results of Harrysson et al (2018) who extracted roughly 10.9% of the total amino acids. The 37.9% protein extracted in fresh U. lactuca is slightly lower but comparable with the 43.1% found by Angell et al (2017) with Ulva ohnoi. Angell et al (2017) adjusted the pH to 12 when extracting protein; with the 0.1 M NaOH used in this study, the pH of our extracts remained low compared with the other species.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…The 37.9% protein extracted in fresh U. lactuca is slightly lower but comparable with the 43.1% found by Angell et al (2017) with Ulva ohnoi. Angell et al (2017) adjusted the pH to 12 when extracting protein; with the 0.1 M NaOH used in this study, the pH of our extracts remained low compared with the other species. This might also explain the lower values found here compared with Angell et al (2017).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…Angell et al (2017) adjusted the pH to 12 when extracting protein; with the 0.1 M NaOH used in this study, the pH of our extracts remained low compared with the other species. This might also explain the lower values found here compared with Angell et al (2017). Even when comparing literature with the same species, differences within species can have an effect on the results.The composition of the four species tested did not always correspond to the median macromolecular content of 1117 observations from seaweeds found in the wild (Fiset et al 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of preservation on protein extraction in four seaweed species

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using either freshly pulped or preserved seaweed biomass for the extraction of protein can have a great effect on the amount of protein that can be extracted. In this study, the effect of four preservation techniques (frozen, freeze-dried, and air-dried at 40 and 70 °C) on the protein extractability, measured as Kjeldahl nitrogen, of four seaweed species, Chondrus crispus (Rhodophyceae), Ascophyllum nodosum, Saccharina latissima (both Phaeophyceae) and Ulva lactuca (Chlorophyceae), was tested and compared with extracting freshly pulped biomass. The effect of preservation is species dependent: in all four seaweed species, a different treatment resulted in the highest protein extractability. The pellet (i.e., the non-dissolved biomass after extraction) was also analyzed as in most cases the largest part of the initial protein ended up in the pellet and not in the supernatant. Of the four species tested, freeze-dried A. nodosum yielded the highest overall protein extractability of 59.6% with a significantly increased protein content compared with the sample before extraction. For C. crispus extracting biomass air-dried at 40 °C gave the best results with a protein extractability of 50.4%. Preservation had little effect on the protein extraction for S. latissima; only air-drying at 70 °C decreased the yield significantly. Over 70% of the initial protein ended up in the pellet for all U. lactuca extractions while increasing the protein content significantly. Extracting freshly pulped U. lactuca resulted in a 78% increase in protein content in the pellet while still containing 84.5% of the total initial total protein. These results show the importance of the right choice when selecting a preservation method and seaweed species for protein extraction. Besides the extracted protein fraction, the remaining pellet also has the potential as a source with an increased protein content.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of preservation on protein extraction in four seaweed species

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This can be achieved either through the direct extraction and isolation of protein or by removing non-protein components, such as ash and soluble carbohydrates, thus increasing the relative proportion of protein in the residual macroalgal biomass. 105,[143][144][145][146] However, these processes are still being developed and while not yet commercialized, 145 they have been successfully applied to Ulva ohnoi, a commercially grown bioremediation species, to increase its protein content from 22% to 45% on a dry-weight basis. 105 Importantly, the quality of the concentrated protein in that study was comparable with that of soybean meal and white fish meal, suggesting that it would be a suitable protein replacement option, with the caveat that it still must be tested in vivo.…”

Section: Macroalgaementioning

confidence: 99%

The Future of Aquatic Protein: Implications for Protein Sources in Aquaculture Diets

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Approximately 70% of the aquatic-based production of animals is fed aquaculture, whereby animals are provided with high-protein aquafeeds. Currently, aquafeeds are reliant on fish meal and fish oil sourced from wild-captured forage fish. However, increasing use of forage fish is unsustainable and, because an additional 37.4 million tons of aquafeeds will be required by 2025, alternative protein sources are needed. Beyond plantbased ingredients, fishery and aquaculture byproducts and insect meals have the greatest potential to supply the protein required by aquafeeds over the next 10-20 years. Food waste also has potential through the biotransformation and/or bioconversion of raw waste materials, whereas microbial and macroalgal biomass have limitations regarding their scalability and protein content, respectively. In this review, we describe the considerable scope for improved efficiency in fed aquaculture and discuss the development and optimization of alternative protein sources for aquafeeds to ensure a socially and environmentally sustainable future for the aquaculture industry.

show abstract

“…Epiphytes, sand, and silt were removed by washing twice with 3.2 g per 100 mL NaCl (Harnedy and FitzGerald 2013) and twice with sterile seawater using a soft brush, followed by a final rinse in distilled water (Wong et al 2006). Raw biomass was then pre-treated according to three different procedures: (1) oven-dried (55°C for 48 h) and milled (<1 mm) (DM); (2) ground to a fine powder in liquid nitrogen using a mortar and pestle (LN); (3) fresh, pulped, filtered (through Whatman filter paper 1; Safdar et al 2017), and ground using a mortar and pestle (FP) (Wong et al 2006;Angell et al 2017). The seaweed pretreated materials obtained were then processed following 5 different protein extraction protocols (PEPs) (Fig.…”

Section: Sample Preparation and Extraction Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative evaluation of multiple protein extraction procedures from three species of the genus Caulerpa

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to define the simplest and least expensive protocol for total protein extraction for three different macroalgae of the genus Caulerpa (the invasive C. taxifolia and C. cylindracea and the autochthonous C. prolifera). Five multi-step protein extraction procedures, set up for other macroalgal species, were tested. For each of them, different pre-treatment and extraction conditions were simultaneously examined, according to a factorial design, considering the starting material, the solvent-to-biomass ratio, and the incubation temperature. Protein yield in the obtained extracts was estimated with the Bradford method. Further, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) was used to resolve proteins, assessing their quality and integrity. Significant differences in protein yield were observed among the extraction protocols and the conditions tested, also in relation to the considered species. Profiles having an acceptable quality were obtained for C. prolifera and C. cylindracea, and from the obtained results, the best method to obtain high yield and quality protein extracts for the two above-mentioned species appears to require the use of a primary TCA/acetone extraction buffer followed by a lysis buffer with NaCl, KCl, urea, Triton, SDS and a protease inhibitor. The best results, in particular, were obtained starting from fresh pulped material with a buffer-to-biomass ratio of 10:1 and an incubation temperature of 4°C. For C. taxifolia, instead, none of the tested protocols produced satisfactory results and further studies will be required.

show abstract

A comparison of protocols for isolating and concentrating protein from the green seaweed Ulva ohnoi

Cited by 32 publications

References 49 publications

Effects of preservation on protein extraction in four seaweed species

Effects of preservation on protein extraction in four seaweed species

The Future of Aquatic Protein: Implications for Protein Sources in Aquaculture Diets

Comparative evaluation of multiple protein extraction procedures from three species of the genus Caulerpa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About