Advertisement

European Food Research and Technology

, Volume 245, Issue 3, pp 545–558 | Cite as

Processing of brewing by-products to give food ingredient streams

  • Matias Falk Bjerregaard
  • Angelos Charalampidis
  • Rasmus Frøding
  • Radhakrishna Shetty
  • Helena Pastell
  • Charlotte Jacobsen
  • Shiwen Zhuang
  • Manuel Pinelo
  • Preben Bøje Hansen
  • Timothy John HobleyEmail author
Original paper
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

Very large amounts of brewer’s spent grains (BSG) are produced in the world which is usually considered as a waste, or animal feed, rather than food for humans. Here, we report, for the first time, a new process at pilot scale for the separation of brewer’s spent grain and trub to solid and liquid streams that can be used in foods. A new type of continuous rotary drum press was used to process hot BSG to produce a liquid filtrate and a filter cake stream. Analysis showed that of the starting mass of BSG (ca. 120 kg), the liquid filtrate composed 50% of the mass, and the filter cake fraction composed 50% of the mass. The dry weight (DW) content of the BSG increased from 23 to over 35%. This led to concentration of insoluble dietary fibre (from 38 to 54%) and phenolics in the filter cake (from 102 to 150 mg/100 g DW as gallic acid equivalents). No fractionation of soluble species such as proteins occurred. Centrifugation of the filtrate from the rotary drum press led to a clarified supernatant stream and a paste. Concentration of insoluble dietary fibre and phenolics occurred in the paste (from 5 to 14% of DW and 61 to 114 mg/100 g DW as gallic acid equivalents), whereas soluble fibre and protein did not selectively partition. Given that the unit operations used here are scaleable and approved for food production, an industrially feasible route now exists to process brewers spent grains to ingredients.

Keywords

Brewer’s spent grains Filter press Pilot scale Trub Separation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Hening-Holck Larsen and Novozymes foundation for a scholarship til Radhakrishna Shetty. We acknowledge the support of Groen Omstillingsfond project number 2014–98907. We thank Heidi Olander Petersen and Inge Holmberg for excellent technical assistance on Kjeldahl, Dumas, and antioxidant measurements. We thank Per Hägglund for advice on mass spectrometry measurements.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Compliance with ethics requirements

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects.

Supplementary material

217_2018_3224_MOESM1_ESM.docx (62 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 61 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Mussatto S (2014) Brewer’s spent grain: a valuable feedstockfor industrial applications. J Sci Food Agric 94:1264–1275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kunze W (2004) Technology Brewing and Malting, 3rd edn. VLB, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mathias TRS, Alexandre VMF, Cammarota MC, de Mello PPM, Sérvulo EFC (2015) Characterization and determination of brewer’s solid wastes composition. J Inst Brew 121:400–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beer statistics (2017) https://www.brewersofeurope.org. Accessed 30 July 2018. ISBN 978-2-9601382-9-0
  5. 5.
    Weber G (2009) Untersuchungen zur Silierung von Biertrebern. Logos Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Steiner J, Procopio S, Becker T (2015) Brewer’s spent grain: source of valueadded polysaccharides for the food industry in reference to the health claims. Eur Food Res Technol 241:303–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mussatto SI, Dragone G, Roberto IC (2006) Brewers’ spent grain: Generation, characteristics and potential applications. J Cereal Sci 43:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    El-Shafey EI, Gameiro MLF, Correia PFM, de Carvalho JMR (2004) Dewatering of brewer’s spent grain using a membrane filter press: a pilot plant study. Sep Sci Technol 39:3237–3261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lu S, Gibb SW (2008) Copper removal from wastewater using spent-grain as biosorbent. Bioresour Technol 99:1509–1517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Canedo MS, de Paula FG, da Silva FA, Vendruscolo F (2016) Protein enrichment of brewery spent grain from Rhizopus oligosporus by solid-state fermentation. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 39:1105–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mussatto SI, Roberto IC (2005) Acid hydrolysis and fermentation of brewer’s spent grain to produce xylitol. J Sci Food Agric 85:2453–2460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhuang S, Shetty R, Hansen M, Fromberg A, Hansen PB, Hobley TJ (2017) Brewing with 100% unmalted grains: barley, wheat, oat and rye. Eur Food Res Technol 243:447–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Celus I, Brijs K, Delcour JA (2006) The effects of malting and mashing on barley protein extractability J. Cereal Sci 44:203–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Osborne TB (1924) The vegetable proteins, 2nd edn. Longmans, Green and Co, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kupetz M, Geiinger C, Gastl M, Becker T (2018) Comparison of Dumas and Kjeldahl method for nitrogen determination in malt, wort and beer. Brewing Sci 71:18–23Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oehlenschläger J (1997) WEFTA interlaboratory comparison on nitrogen determination by Kjeldahl digestion in fishery products and standard substances. Inf Fischwirtsch Fischereiforsch 44:31–37Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jones DB (1941) Factors for converting percentages of nitrogen in foods and feeds into percentages of proteins. Circular 183, US Department of Agriculture Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Elementar (2017) Dumas - a well-established method for n/protein analysis. Technical Note http://www.elementar.de/en/products/nprotein-analysis/rapid-max-n-exceed.html. Accessed 30 July-2018
  19. 19.
    Popov N, Schmitt M, Schulzeck S, Matthies H (1975) Eine störungsfreie mikromethode zur bestimmung des proteingehaltes in gewebehomogenaten. Acta Biol Med Ger 34:1441–1446Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Glatter T, Ludwig C, Ahrne E, Aebersold R, Heck A, Schmidt A (2012) Large-scale quantitative assessment of different in-solution protein digestion protocols reveals superior cleavage efficiency of tandem lys-C/trypsin proteolysis over trypsin digestion. J Proteom Res 11:5145–5156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Farvin KHS, Jacobsen C (2013) Phenolic compounds and antioxidant activities of selected species of seaweeds from Danish coast. Food Chem 138:1670–1681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Farvin KHS, Jacobsen C (2015) Antioxidant activity of seaweed extracts: in vitro assays, evaluation in 5% fish oil–in–water emulsions and characterization. J Am Oil Chem Soc 92:571–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Farvin KHS, Andersen LL, Nielsen HH, Jacobsen C, Jakobsen G, Johansson I, Jessen F (2014) Antioxidant activity of cod (Gadusmorhua) protein hydrolysates: in vitro assays and evaluation in 5% fish oil-in-water emulsion. Food Chem 149:326–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stojceskaa V, Ainswortha P, Plunketta A, Íbanoglu S (2008) The recycling of brewer’s processing by-product into ready-to-eat snacks using extrusion technology. J Cereal Sci 47:469–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Westenbrink S, Brunt K, van der Kamp JW (2013) Dietary fibre: challenges in production and use of food composition data. Food Chem 140:562–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rainakari AI, Rita H, Putkonen T, Pastell H (2016) New dietary fibre content results for cereals in the Nordic countries using AOAC 2011.25 method. J Food Compos Anal 51:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Özvural EB, Vural H, Gökbulut I, Özbas Ö (2009) Utilization of brewer’s spent grain in the production of frankfurters. Int J Food Sci Technol 44:1093–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Forssell P, Treimo J, Eijsink VGH, Faulds CB, Collins S, Schols HA, Hinz SWA, Myllymäki O, Tamminen T, Zoldners J, Viljanen K, Waldron KW, Buchert J (2011) Enzyme-aided fractionation of brewer’s spent grains in pilot scale. J Am Soc Brew Chem 69:91–99Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Machado RM, Rodrigues RAD, Henriques CMC, Gameiro MLF, Ismael MRC, Reis MTA, Freire JPB, Carvalho JMR (2016) Dewatering of brewer’s spent grain using an integrated membrane filter press with vacuum drying capabilities. Sep Sci Technol 51:692–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Finley JW, Walkera CE, Hautala E (1976) Utilisation of press water from brewer’s spent grains. J Sci Food Agric 27:655–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Socaci SA, Farcas AC¸ Diaconeasa ZM, Vodnar DC, Rusu B, Tofan M (2018) Influence of the extraction solvent on phenolic content, antioxidant, antimicrobial and antimutagenic activities of brewers’ spent grain. J Cereal Sci 80:180–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    McCarthy AL, O’Callaghan YC, Piggott CO, Fitzgerald RJ, O’Brien NM (2013) Brewers’ spent grain; bioactivity of phenolic component, its role in animal nutrition and potential for incorporation in functional foods: a review. Proc Nutrition Soc 72:117–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Robertson JA, I’Anson KJA, Treimo J, Faulds CB, Brocklehurst TF, Eijsink VGH, Waldron KW (2010) Profiling brewers’ spent grain for composition and microbial ecology at the site of production. Food Sci Technol 43:890–896Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rørby K (2018) Effect on the properties of bread of using fractions from brewers spent grains as an ingredient. Masters thesis, Technical University Denmark, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jensen M (2018) Funktionelle effekter af separeret mask i pølser. Masters thesis, Technical University Denmark, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Öztürk S, Özboy Ö, Köksel H (2002) Effects of brewer’s spent grain on the quality and dietary fibre contrent of cookies. J Inst Brew 108:23–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute for FoodTechnical University DenmarkKongens LyngbyDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Chemical EngineeringTechnical University DenmarkKongens LyngbyDenmark
  3. 3.Finnish Food Safety Authority Evira, Chemistry and Toxicology Research UnitHelsinkiFinland
  4. 4.Dacofi ApSKongens LyngbyDenmark
  5. 5.Carlsberg Research LaboratoryCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations