Intensified recovery of lipids, proteins, and carbohydrates from wastewater-grown microalgae Desmodesmus sp. by using ultrasound or ozone

Biorefinery process intensification by ultrasound and ozone for phosphorus and biocompounds recovery from microalgae

“…The main objective of the combined ultrasound and ozone pretreatment was to achieve the tandem recovery of microalgae biocompounds and intensify the extraction process for biorefinery purposes. During the study of the individual effect of each pretreatment, ultrasound was shown to be effective in cell disruption, significantly improved lipid and protein recovery, reduced solvent waste and obviated protein extraction process as previously shown [8]. On the other hand, ozone pretreatment resulted in low cell disruption efficiency at the experimental parameters applied, due to the low yields of recovered lipids and proteins.…”

“…The combination of ultrasound pretreatment with other disruption methods is interesting in a microalgae biorefinery context [6]. Ultrasound pretreatment is effective in disrupting wet microalgae for the extraction of valuable intracellular materials and thus increasing the concentration of extracellular organic microalgal material in suspension [6][7][8]. Ultrasound has been combined with: 1) dilute acid pretreatment to improve fermentative hydrogen production, 2) ozone for microalgae cell disruption, lipids and carbohydrate extraction, or for stabilization of raw activated sludge [9][10][11].…”

“…Applying ozone to microalgae releases stored carbohydrates to the aqueous phase, an attractive raw material for biofuels [8,12]. Ozone pretreatment is more successful in extracting higher glucose yields, for ethanol production, than acid and alkaline methods [13].…”

Metaproteomics insights into traditional fermented foods and beverages

“…However, at present, few methods or reagents used in the above four steps have been systematically optimized in TFFB metaproteomics; instead, direct methods are commonly used, such as lysis with certain concentrations of detergents (mostly sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) or 3‐((3‐Cholamidopropyl) dimethylammonium)‐1‐propanesulfonate (CHAPS)) combined with grinding, ultrasonication (Kunath et al., 2019), and other methods. The release of proteins from the microorganisms (Gonzalez‐Balderas, Velasquez‐Orta, Valdez‐Vazquez, & Orta Ledesma, 2020) and the choice of extractant/buffer (Bastida, Jehmlich, Torres, & Garcia, 2018), precipitant, and lysate (Miskiewicz & MacPhee, 2019) have crucial effects on protein extraction. For the extraction of proteins in many substrates, the conditions mentioned above must be optimized systematically (Awad & Brueck, 2019; Parkhey, Chandrakar, Naithani, & Keshavkant, 2015; Wohlbrand et al., 2017), and optimal extraction results had been achieved.…”

Ultrasound for microalgal cell disruption and product extraction: A review

“…Conventionally, low ultrasound frequencies in the range of 20–40 kHz were most commonly used in the process of microalgal bioproducts extraction [ [48] , [55] , [58] , [59] , [60] , [61] , [62] ]. Specially, for susceptive microalgae with thin cell walls, low-frequency ultrasound is highly effective towards cell disruption.…”