Advertisement

Journal of Applied Phycology

, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp 1001–1009 | Cite as

Amino acid composition, protein content, and nitrogen-to-protein conversion factors of 21 seaweed species from Norwegian waters

  • I. Biancarosa
  • M. Espe
  • C. G. Bruckner
  • S. Heesch
  • N. Liland
  • R. Waagbø
  • B. Torstensen
  • E. J. Lock
Article

Abstract

The Norwegian seaweed industry is expanding and there is a need for accurate estimates of protein content of seaweed species from Norwegian waters. A solid method to calculate protein content is through the sum of the proteomic amino acids; however, it can be expensive and beyond the capacities of many laboratories. The most commonly used method to quantify protein is based on the assessment of crude protein from overall nitrogen content, using the traditional nitrogen-to-protein conversion factor of 6.25. However, this approach can be inaccurate when applied to seaweeds, often resulting in an overestimation of their protein content. Specific nitrogen-to-protein conversion factors, calculated from amino acid composition and total nitrogen, give a more reliable protein quantification in seaweeds. However, no such factors are available for species from Norwegian waters. This study was designed to characterize the amino acid composition of 21 seaweed species from Norwegian waters and use the amino acid data to estimate protein contents of the seaweeds. Crude protein analysis (nitrogen × 6.25) was performed and resulted in overestimation (18–44 %) of the protein content compared to the sum of proteomic amino acids. Specific nitrogen-to-protein conversion factors, calculated for each species, ranged from 3.53 ± 0.1 to 5.13 ± 0.1. This study provides nutritional data on Norwegian seaweeds, covering a relatively wide range of species. Moreover, it is the first study to assess nitrogen-to-protein conversion factors on such species.

Keywords

Amino acids Macroalgae Nitrogen N-Prot factor Protein Seaweed 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Norwegian Research Council project Aquafly, grant number 238997, and RAFFPINN, grant number 220634. No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

References

  1. Aitken K, Melton L, Brown M (1991) Seasonal protein variation in the New Zealand seaweeds Porphyra columbina Mont. & Porphyra subtumens J. Ag. (Rhodophyceae). Jap J Phycol 39:307–317Google Scholar
  2. Angell AR, Mata L, de Nys R, Paul NA (2014) Variation in amino acid content and its relationship to nitrogen content and growth rate in Ulva ohnoi (Chlorophyta). J Phycol 50:216–226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Angell AR, Mata L, de Nys R, Paul NA (2015) The protein content of seaweeds: a universal nitrogen-to-protein conversion factor of five. J Appl Phycol 28:511–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbarino E, Lourenço SO (2005) An evaluation of methods for extraction and quantification of protein from marine macro- and microalgae. J Appl Phycol 17:477–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bartolomeo MP, Maisano F (2006) Validation of a reversed-phase HPLC method for quantitative amino acid analysis. J Biomol Tech 17:131–137PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye-binding. Anal Biochem 72:248–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Cochran WG, Cox GM (1953) Experimental designs. John Wiley & Sons, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Diniz GS, Barbarino E, Oiano-Neto J, Pacheco S, Lourenço SO (2011) Gross chemical profile and calculation of specific nitrogen-to-protein conversion factors for five tropical seaweeds. Am J Plant Sci 2:287–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dumas JP (1831) Lettre de M. Dumas a M. Gay-Lussac, sur le procedes de l’analyse organique. Ann Chim Phys 2:198–215Google Scholar
  10. Fleurence J (1999a) The enzymatic degradation of algal cell walls: a useful approach for improving protein accessibility? J Appl Phycol 11:313–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Freshwater DW, Rueness J (1994) Phylogenetic relationships of some European Gelidium (Gelidiales, Rhodophyta) species, based on rbcL nucleotide sequence analysis. Phycologia 33:187–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Galland-Irmouli AV, Fleurence J, Lamghari R, Luçon M, Rouxel C, Barbaroux O, Bronowicki JP, Vuillaume C, Gueant JL (1999) Nutritional value of proteins from edible seaweed Palmaria palmata (Dulse). J Nutr Biochem 10:353–359CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hanisak MD (1979) Nitrogen limitation of Codium fragile ssp. tomentosoides as determined by tissue analysis. Mar Biol 50:333–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heesch S, Broom JES, Neill KF, Farr TJ, Dalen JL, Nelson WA (2009) Ulva, Umbraulva and Gemina: genetic survey of New Zealand taxa reveals diversity and introduced species. Eur J Phycol 44:143–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heesch S, Pažoutová M, Moniz MBJ, Rindi F (2016) Prasiolales (Trebouxiophyceae, Chlorophyta) of the Svalbard archipelago: diversity, biogeography and description of the new genera Prasionella and Prasionema. Eur J Phycol 51:171–187Google Scholar
  16. Heidelbaugh ND, Huber CS, Bednarczyk JF, Smith MC, Rambaut PC, Wheeler HO (1975) Comparison of the three methods for calculating protein content of foods. J Agr Food Chem 23:611–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Khairy HM, El-Shafay SM (2013) Seasonal variations in the biochemical composition of some common seaweed species from the coast of Abu Qir Bay, Alexandria. Egypt Oceanologia 55:435–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kjeldahl J (1883) Neue Methode zur Bestimmung des Stickstoffs in organischen Körpern. Z Anal Chem 22:366–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lane CE, Lindstrom S, Saunders GW (2007) A molecular assessment of northeast Pacific Alaria species (Laminariales, Phaeophyceae) with reference to the utility of DNA barcoding. Mol Phylogenet Evol 44:634–648CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Leliaert F, Rousseau F, de Reviers B, Coppejans E (2003) Phylogeny of the Cladophorophyceae (Chlorophyta) inferred from partial LSU rRNA gene sequences: is the recognition of a separate order Siphonocladales justified? Eur J Phycol 38:233–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lourenço SO, Barbarino E, De-Paula JC, da Pereira LOS, Marquez UML (2002) Amino acid composition, protein content and calculation of nitrogen-to-protein conversion factors for 19 tropical seaweeds. Phycol Res 50:233–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Randall RJ (1951) Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem 193:265–275PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Mahre HK, Malde MK, Eilertsen KE, Elvevoll EO (2014) Characterization of protein, lipid and mineral contents in common Norwegian seaweeds and evaluation of their potential as food and feed. J Sci Food Agric 94:3281–3290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mineur F, De Clerck O, Le Roux A, Maggs CA, Verlaque M (2010) Polyopes lancifolius (Halymeniales, Rhodophyta), a new component of the Japanese marine flora introduced to Europe. Phycologia 49:86–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mossé J (1990) Nitrogen-to-protein conversion factor for ten cereals and six legumes or oilseeds. A reappraisal of its definition and determination. Variation according to species and to seed protein content. J Agr Food Chem 38:18–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pocock T, Lachance MA, Pröschold T, Priscu JC, Kim SS, Huner NPA (2004) Identification of a psychrophilic green alga from Lake Bonney Antarctica: Chlamydomonas raudensis Ettl. (UWO 241) Chlorophyceae. J Phycol 40:1138–1148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ramos MV, Monteiro ACO, Moreira RA, Carvalho AFFU (2000) Amino acid composition of some brazilian seaweed species. J Food Biochem 24:33–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rødde RSH, Kjell MV, Larsen BA, Sverre MM (2004) Seasonal and geographical variation in the chemical composition of the red alga Palmaria palmata (L.) Kuntze. Bot Mar 47:125–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Salo-väänänen PP, Koivistoinen PE (1996) Determination of protein in foods: comparison of net protein and crude protein (N × 6.25) values. Food Chem 57:27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Saunders GW (2005) Applying DNA barcoding to red macroalgae: a preliminary appraisal holds promise for future applications. Phil Trans R Soc B 360:1879–1888CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Shuuluka D, Bolton JJ, Anderson RJ (2013) Protein content, amino acid composition and nitrogen-to-protein conversion factors of Ulva rigida and Ulva capensis from natural populations and Ulva lactuca from an aquaculture system, in South Africa. J Appl Phycol 25:677–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Skjermo J, Aasen IM, Arff J, Broch OJ, Carvajal A, Christie H, Forbord S, Olsen Y, Reitan KI, Rustad T et al (2014) A new Norwegian bioeconomy based on cultivation and processing of seaweeds: opportunities and R&D needs. SINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture—Report A25981:48Google Scholar
  33. Sosulski FW, Imafidon GI (1990) Amino acid composition and nitrogen-to-protein conversion factors for animal and plant foods. J Agr Food Chem 38:1351–1356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sriperm N, Pesti GM, Tillman PB (2011) Evaluation of the fixed nitrogen-to-protein (N:P) conversion factor (6.25) versus ingredient specific N:P conversion factors in feedstuffs. J Sci Food Agric 91:1182–1186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Templeton DW, Laurens LML (2015) Nitrogen-to-protein conversion factors revisited for applications of microalgal biomass conversion to food, feed and fuel. Algal Res 11:359–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wong KH, Cheung CK (2000) Nutritional evaluation of some subtropical red and green seaweeds part I: proximate composition, amino acid profiles and some physico-chemical properties. Food Chem 71:475–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. Biancarosa
    • 1
    • 5
  • M. Espe
    • 1
  • C. G. Bruckner
    • 2
  • S. Heesch
    • 3
    • 4
  • N. Liland
    • 1
  • R. Waagbø
    • 1
    • 5
  • B. Torstensen
    • 1
  • E. J. Lock
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute of Nutrition and Seafood Research (NIFES)NordnesNorway
  2. 2.Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy ResearchBodøNorway
  3. 3.Irish Seaweed Research Group, Ryan InstituteNational University of Ireland GalwayGalwayIreland
  4. 4.Station Biologique de Roscoff, UMR 8227TeissierFrance
  5. 5.Department of BiologyUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations