13 Process Intensification Aspects of Extraction …
321
Feed concentrations up to 25% w/w can be effectively processed using HPH. HPH are
reported to demonstrate higher extents of disruption as compared to other processes
like ball milling, freeze drying, colloidal milling, PEF, ultrasound and microwave
(Poojary et al. 2016). Taucher et al. (2016) studied pigment extraction from H.
pluvialis using HPH operated at 1000 bar with 3 passes and reported 4.21 μg/mg
of pigment yield which was higher as compared to other processes like ball mill
(3.56 μg/mg) and freeze and thaw cycles (0.02 μg/mg) (Taucher et al. 2016). Another
study also reported HPH (1500 bar and 1–10 passes) to be more effective resulting
in higher cell disruption and pigment extraction as compared to other processes like
US, PEF and HVED (Grimi et al. 2014). Very few studies are reported on application
of HPH in pigment extraction, especially considering scale up issues. HPH also has
disadvantages like high capital investment in process setup and also result in rise
in temperatures after few passes which further affects the yield of thermally labile
pigments. Overall it can be said that more work is indeed required for developing
successful applications of HPH.
13.4 Conclusions
Current chapter focused on presenting details of the intensified processes like SFE,
PLE, PEF, MAE, UAE and HPH for pigment extraction from microalgae. It has been
demonstrated that PLE, MAE and UAE can provide an energy efficient process with
lesser requirement of time and chemicals along-with better selectivity and yield.
MAE and UAE are reported as rapid extraction techniques with higher pigment
recovery while PEF significantly reduces the solvent requirement. Temperature
increase during MAE and UAE is one of the disadvantages and needs to be optimised
while PEF is ineffective with microalgae having complex cell structures. SFE is also
reported to be an efficient technique but comes with disadvantages of no specific
pigment selectivity and requires dry samples for processing. Economic feasibility
of these processes in terms of energy and cost needs to be assessed and further
scientific investigation in terms of commercialisation is also required. Further development of these processes can lead to efficient recovery of valuable pigments playing
a significant role in medicinal and food industry.
References
Bin, Z. T., Jia, Q., Li, H. W., et al. (2013). Response surface methodology for ultrasound-assisted
extraction of astaxanthin from Haematococcus pluvialis. Mar Drugs, 11, 1644–1655.
Cichoski, A. J., Nogara, G. P., Zepka, L. Q., et al. (2016). Identification of chlorophyll molecules
with peroxyl radical scavenger capacity in microalgae Phormidium autumnale using ultrasoundassisted extraction. Food Research International, 99, 1036–1041.
D’Alessandro, E. B., Antoniosi Filho, N. R. (2016). Concepts and studies on lipid and pigments of
microalgae: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 58, 832–841.
321
Feed concentrations up to 25% w/w can be effectively processed using HPH. HPH are
reported to demonstrate higher extents of disruption as compared to other processes
like ball milling, freeze drying, colloidal milling, PEF, ultrasound and microwave
(Poojary et al. 2016). Taucher et al. (2016) studied pigment extraction from H.
pluvialis using HPH operated at 1000 bar with 3 passes and reported 4.21 μg/mg
of pigment yield which was higher as compared to other processes like ball mill
(3.56 μg/mg) and freeze and thaw cycles (0.02 μg/mg) (Taucher et al. 2016). Another
study also reported HPH (1500 bar and 1–10 passes) to be more effective resulting
in higher cell disruption and pigment extraction as compared to other processes like
US, PEF and HVED (Grimi et al. 2014). Very few studies are reported on application
of HPH in pigment extraction, especially considering scale up issues. HPH also has
disadvantages like high capital investment in process setup and also result in rise
in temperatures after few passes which further affects the yield of thermally labile
pigments. Overall it can be said that more work is indeed required for developing
successful applications of HPH.
13.4 Conclusions
Current chapter focused on presenting details of the intensified processes like SFE,
PLE, PEF, MAE, UAE and HPH for pigment extraction from microalgae. It has been
demonstrated that PLE, MAE and UAE can provide an energy efficient process with
lesser requirement of time and chemicals along-with better selectivity and yield.
MAE and UAE are reported as rapid extraction techniques with higher pigment
recovery while PEF significantly reduces the solvent requirement. Temperature
increase during MAE and UAE is one of the disadvantages and needs to be optimised
while PEF is ineffective with microalgae having complex cell structures. SFE is also
reported to be an efficient technique but comes with disadvantages of no specific
pigment selectivity and requires dry samples for processing. Economic feasibility
of these processes in terms of energy and cost needs to be assessed and further
scientific investigation in terms of commercialisation is also required. Further development of these processes can lead to efficient recovery of valuable pigments playing
a significant role in medicinal and food industry.
References
Bin, Z. T., Jia, Q., Li, H. W., et al. (2013). Response surface methodology for ultrasound-assisted
extraction of astaxanthin from Haematococcus pluvialis. Mar Drugs, 11, 1644–1655.
Cichoski, A. J., Nogara, G. P., Zepka, L. Q., et al. (2016). Identification of chlorophyll molecules
with peroxyl radical scavenger capacity in microalgae Phormidium autumnale using ultrasoundassisted extraction. Food Research International, 99, 1036–1041.
D’Alessandro, E. B., Antoniosi Filho, N. R. (2016). Concepts and studies on lipid and pigments of
microalgae: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 58, 832–841.