SwePub
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Extended search

WFRF:(Bruhn Sören)
 

Search: WFRF:(Bruhn Sören) > Ulva fenestrata pro...

  • Juul, LouiseÅrhus Universitet,Aarhus University (author)

Ulva fenestrata protein – comparison of three extraction methods with respect to protein yield and protein quality

  • Article/chapterEnglish2021

Publisher, publication year, extent ...

  • Elsevier BV,2021

Numbers

  • LIBRIS-ID:oai:gup.ub.gu.se/307412
  • https://gup.ub.gu.se/publication/307412URI
  • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2021.102496DOI
  • https://research.chalmers.se/publication/526313URI

Supplementary language notes

  • Language:English

Part of subdatabase

Classification

  • Subject category:ref swepub-contenttype
  • Subject category:art swepub-publicationtype

Notes

  • Seaweed is gaining attention as a possible alternative and sustainable source of proteins. This study investigates three protein extraction methods and their effect on protein yield and quality when applied to Ulva fenestrata . Two of the methods included alkaline extractions (pH-shifts); one version solubilizing the proteins at pH 8.5 and one solubilizing them at pH 8.5 followed by pH 12 (pH 8.5+12). The third method was a mechanical pressing, using a double screw press. All extraction methods were followed by isoelectric precipitation to concentrate the proteins. Extraction at pH 8.5 gave the significantly highest total protein yield after the isoelectric precipitation, followed by extraction at pH 8.5+12 and lastly mechanical extraction gave the lowest yield. Proteins extracted with both alkaline methods had a significantly higher solubility at pH 7 and pH 9, compared to proteins from the mechanical pressing. There were no significant differences between the three methods in total D/L-amino acid ratio. Amino acid cross-links measured as lysinoalanine (LAL) and lanthionine (LAN) where found in significantly higher amounts in alkali-extracted proteins compared to mechanically extracted, however not to a degree that expect to compromise functional or nutritional quality. Further, no significant difference in protein in vitro digestibility was found between extraction methods. In conclusion, results indicated that protein extraction at pH 8.5 can be recommended, especially regarding total protein yield and solubility of the final protein extract.

Subject headings and genre

Added entries (persons, corporate bodies, meetings, titles ...)

  • Danielsen, MarianneÅrhus Universitet,Aarhus University (author)
  • Nebel, CarolineÅrhus Universitet,Aarhus University (author)
  • Steinhagen, SophieGothenburg University,Göteborgs universitet,Institutionen för marina vetenskaper,Institutionen för marina vetenskaper, Tjärnö marinlaboratoriet,SWEMARC,Department of marine sciences,Department of marine sciences, Tjärnö Marine Laboratory,University of Gothenburg,Århus Universitet,Aarhus University(Swepub:gu)xstsop (author)
  • Bruhn, AnnetteÅrhus Universitet,Aarhus University (author)
  • Krogh Jensen, Søren (author)
  • Undeland, Ingrid,1968Chalmers tekniska högskola,Chalmers University of Technology(Swepub:cth)undeland (author)
  • Kastrup Dalsgaard, TrineÅrhus Universitet,Aarhus University (author)
  • Århus UniversitetInstitutionen för marina vetenskaper (creator_code:org_t)

Related titles

  • In:Algal Research: Elsevier BV602211-9264

Internet link

Find in a library

To the university's database

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view