| Literature DB >> 32859046 |
Hui Teng Tan1, Nicholas M H Khong2, Yam Sim Khaw1, Siti Aqlima Ahmad3, Fatimah M Yusoff4,5.
Abstract
The freezing-thawing method had been reported to be the best phycobiliprotein extraction technique. However, optimum parameters of this extraction method for Arthrospira sp. (one of the major phycobiliprotein sources) still remained unclear. Hence, this study aimed to optimize the freezing-thawing parameters of phycobiliprotein extraction in Arthrospira sp. (UPMC-A0087). The optimization of the freezing-thawing method was conducted using different solvents, biomass/solvent ratios, temperatures, time intervals and freezing-thawing cycles. The extracted phycobiliproteins were quantified using a spectrophotometric assay. Double distilled water (pH 7) with a 0.50% w/v biomass/solvent ratio was the most efficient solvent in extracting high concentrations and purity of phycobiliproteins from Arthrospira sp. In addition, the combination of freezing at -80 °C (2 h) and thawing at 25 °C (24 h) appeared to be the optimum temperature and extraction time to obtain the highest amount of phycobiliproteins. A minimum of one cycle of freezing and thawing was sufficient for extracting high concentrations of phycobiliproteins. The findings from this study could reduce the cost and labor needed for extracting high quality phycobiliproteins. It also allowed the harvesting of large amounts of valuable phycobiliproteins.Entities:
Keywords: Arthrospira sp.; cyanobacteria; extraction; freezing–thawing process; optimum parameters; total phycobiliproteins
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32859046 PMCID: PMC7503228 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25173894
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Total phycobiliproteins content extracted from Arthrospira sp. (UPMC-A0087) using different solvents with varying pH values. Red color indicates pH 6; blue color indicates pH 6.5; yellow color indicates pH 7; green color indicates pH 7.5; purple color indicates pH 8; DDW indicates double distilled water; PBS indicates phosphate buffer saline; SPB indicates sodium phosphate buffer; PPB indicates potassium phosphate buffer.
Figure 2Extractions of phycobiliproteins content from Arthrospira sp. (UPMC-A0087) using different biomass solvent ratios. Values annotated with different letters indicate a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in terms of total phycobiliproteins among the tested parameter.
Figure 3Extractions of phycobiliproteins content of Arthrospira sp. (UPMC-A0087) using different freezing–thawing temperatures. A: freezing at 0 °C, thawing at 4 °C; B: freezing at 0 °C, thawing at 25 °C; C: freezing at −30 °C, thawing at 25 °C; D: freezing at −30 °C, thawing at 4 °C; E: freezing at −80 °C, thawing at 4 °C; F: freezing at −80 °C, thawing at 25 °C. Values annotated with different letters indicate a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in terms of total phycobiliproteins among the tested parameters.
Figure 4Extractions of phycobiliproteins from Arthrospira sp. (UPMC-A0087) using different freezing–thawing times. A: freezing for 0.5 h–thawing for 1 h; B: freezing for 0.5 h–thawing for 1.5 h; C: freezing for 0.5 h–thawing for 2 h; D: freezing for 1 h–thawing for 2 h; E: freezing for 2 h–thawing for 2 h; F: freezing for 2 h–thawing for 12 h; G: freezing for 2 h–thawing for 24 h. Values annotated with different letters indicate a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in terms of total phycobiliproteins among the tested parameters.
Figure 5Extractions of phycobiliproteins content from Arthrospira sp. (UPMC-A0087) using different number of freezing–thawing cycles. Values annotated with different letters indicate a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in terms of total phycobiliproteins among the tested parameters.