creating health & wealth from rejected food resources · developing regions while food waste at...
TRANSCRIPT
Creating health & wealth from rejected food resources
1
Antonio Patti
School of Chemistry, Monash University, Australia
2http://www.fao.org/save-food/resources/keyfindings/en/
Wasted Food - A Worldwide Issue
During or
immediately after
harvesting on the
farm
After leaving the
farm for handling,
storage, and
transport
During industrial
or domestic
processing and/or
packaging
During distribution
to markets,
including at
wholesale and
retail markets
In the home or
business of the
consumer, including
restaurants and
caterers
Food Losses Along the Entire Value Chain
Source: WRI analysis based on FAO. 2011. Global food losses and food waste – extent, causes and prevention. Rome: UN FAO.
Food loss and
waste more
‘near the fork’
in developed
regions and
more ‘near the
farm’ in
developing
regions
Source: WRI analysis based on FAO. 2011. Global food losses and food waste – extent, causes and prevention. Rome: UN FAO.
Food Losses
Losses at production are more prevalent in developing regions while food waste at consumption is more prevalent in developed regions
Note: Number may not sum to 100 due to rounding.
Source: WRI analysis based on FAO. 2011. Global food losses and food waste – extent, causes and prevention. Rome: UN FAO.
32% of global food
supply by weight
24% of global food
supply by energy
content (calories)
Food Losses150-300 kg per capita per year is lost
Sze Ki Lin et al., Biofuels, Bioprod. Bioref. 8:686–715 (2014)
Discarded Food - Valuable Unused ResourcesSelected Grocery Items
7Ravindran and Jaiswal, Trends in Biotechnology, 2016, 34, 58-69
Food By-product Use Options
8
Why the Need to Address Food Waste?
• One-fourth of the food currently lost, if
saved, would be enough to feed 870
million hungry people in the world.
Mango processing waste
43%
27%
30%
Kensington – grown in Australia
Peel
Kernel
Shell
Peels
Seed & Seed Kernel
>50% of Mango Fruit is discarded, or used as stock feed
Large volumes in India and stable in Australia
eg India 18 Mt p.a.
Banerjee, Arora, Vijayaraghavan, MacFarlane, Patti, Food Chemistry, 2017, 225, 10-22
Chemical structure of Pectin (Courtesy Pfaltzgraff, 2014)
Reported pectin content: 25-30%(Berardini et al, 2005)
Method and type: Acid extraction , high methoxyl (70-80% DM)
Limitations of existing method: 1 kg dry peel may require 20 ml of concentrated HCl, effluent stream is around pH 2.0, chlorine toxicity of water
Typical reported yields 15-25%
Potential for Pectin - Recovery from Mango Peel
Novel methods of Pectin Extraction for Mango Peel
Crude Pectin - wet
Wet pectin after washing with alcohol24% w/w dry yield
Alcohol-water filtrate - analysed for carbohydrates and phenolics
Banerjee, Patti, Arora, Vijayaraghavan, MacFarlane
ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2016, 4, 5915−5920
• Pectin cost:
US$15 /kg
• Market
potential
Expected to be
> US$2 Billion
by 2020
20 minutes sonication @ 37KHz, 80 0C
Banerjee, Patti et al ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2016, 4, 5915−5920
Sonication Assisted Extraction
Chemical nature of the pectin needs to be considered as a result of different extraction methods:Molecular weightGelling propertiesDegree of Methylation
Microwave based pectin extraction
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Power range (W)%
yie
ld o
f P
ecti
n (
w/w
)
Power 180
Power 360
Power 540
1. Pectin Precipitate 2. Washed pectin 3. FiltrateNovel fractionation - Separation of pectin, sugars, phenolics & fibres Simple sequential process
Banerjee, Patti, Arora, Vijayaraghavan, MacFarlane Food Hydrocolloids 2018, 77,142-151
Mango processing waste biorefinery
Arora, Banerjee, Vijayaraghavan, MacFarlane & Patti, Industrial Crops and Products, 2018, 116, 24-34
Pomegranate: “super fruit”
15
Pomegranate processing
40-50% waste in the form of peels and seeds 16
Pomegranate seeds
17
Pomegranate seed
powder
Enzyme treatment
Centrifugation
Free oil
Emulsion
(Protein + Oil)
Aqueous phase
(Protein)
Solid residue
(Insoluble fibres)
Enzymatic
green process
Challenges:
• Selection of enzyme
• Less emulsion
18
Talekar, Patti, Arora et al., Industrial Crops and Products 2018, 112, 790–802
Protease treatment to extract oil, protein and insoluble fibres
19Talekar, Patti, Singh, Vijayraghavan, Arora, Industrial Crops and Products 2018, 112, 790–802
SEM analysis of pom seeds before and after protease treatment
20
A and B: before
C and D: after
Talekar, Patti, Singh, Vijayraghavan, Arora, Industrial Crops and Products 2018, 112, 790–802
Total mass balance on oil, protein and insoluble fibres
21
Fatty acid analysis of extracted oil
Fatty acid Protease-derived oil Hexane-extracted oil
C16:0 8.07 0.02a8.53 0.03b
C18:2 6.74 0.01a5.14 0.07b
C18:1 24.89 0.04a26.24 0.02b
C18:0 5.84 0.02a5.95 0.05b
C18:3 53.92 0.01a53.14 0.03b
C20:3 0.52 0.01a0.60 0.01b
SFAA 13.91 0.04a14.48 0.08b
UFAB 86.07 0.07a85.10 0.17b
PUFAC 61.18 0.03a58.85 0.07b
The values not sharing a common superscript small letter are significantly different (P < 0.05) 22
Rapid enzymatic one pot extraction of oil and protein by microwave pretreatment of pomegranate seeds
Wet seeds
Grinding for 1 min
Protease Treatment
Centrifugation
Power: 950 W, 440W, 100WTime: 4 min, 7 min, 10 min
Protease: 10U, 25U, 40UPer g dry weight of seed
pH 7, temp. 45°C,time 4 h, L/S: 8
Oil content: 18.2%Protein content: 16.3%
Microwave pretreatment
Oil
Proteins
Microwave pretreatment affects oil quality
Power
(W)
Time
(min)
Protease
loading
(U/g)
Protein recovery
(%)
Oil recovery
(%)
440 W 7 min 25 14.9 ± 0.8(91.4% of total)
16.7 ± 1.2(91.7% of total)
Power
(W)
Time
(min)
Protease
loading
(U/g)
Protein recovery
(%)
Oil recovery
(%)
950 W 7 min 25 15.3 ± 0.5(93.8% of total)
17.3 ± 1.3(95% of total)
Fatty acid Content (%)
C16 4.38 ± 0.02
C18:2 8.79 ± 0.06
C18:1 7.20 ± 0.08
C18:0 2.61 ± 0.01
C18:3 76.53 ± 0.1
C20:0 0.48 ± 0.01
Fatty acid Content (%)
C16 7.33 ± 0.04
C18:2 17.83 ± 0.02
C18:1 15.98 ± 0.16
C18:0 4.64 ± 0.03
C18:3 53.19 ± 0.16
C20:0 1.03 ± 0.06
TPC: 0.10 ± 0.02 µg GAE/mg of oil
Antioxidant activity: max. 94.8% DPPH inhibition
TPC: 0.12 ± 0.03 µg GAE/mg of oil
Antioxidant activity: max. 83.6% DPPH inhibition
Pomegranate peel
25
Extraction of pectin and phenolicsConventional methods:
Extraction of pectin using acidic conditions (pH 1.5-2) at high temperature 80-100°C
Disadvantage:
1) Generation of large quantity of acid waste
2) Corrosion of equipment
Extraction of phenolics using organic solvents such as methanol, ethyl acetate, acetone, ether
Disadvantage: toxic and non-food grade solvents
Alternative:
Enzymatic method using cell wall degrading enzyme
Advantages:
1) Mild reaction conditions: low temperature (40-50°C) and pH (around 5)
2) Occurs in aqueous medium
Major limitation of enzymatic approach:
Costly due to the poor recovery, reusability, and stability of enzymes 26
How to overcome limitation?
Possible way:
Immobilize (attach) enzyme on suitable carrier and use
Magnetic nanoparticles as best carrier:
1) Easy separation by magnetic field
2) High dispersion and improved mass transfer (pseudohomogeneous)
3) Easy surface modification and outstanding stability
4) High enzyme loading capacity due to high surface area
Enzyme attached to magnetic nanoparticles- magnetic nanobiocatalyst
27Chem. Soc. Rev., 2013, 42, 6223-6235; Green Chem., 2014, 16, 2906-2933.
Synthesis of magnetic nanoparticles
Fe2+ + 2Fe3+ + 8OH- → Fe3O4 + 4H2O 28
Preparation of magnetic nanobiocatalyst
Enzyme immobilization onto MNP to form magnetic nanobiocatalyst
Activity recovery - 94%
29
Process Diagram
30
Magnetic separation and recycling of magnetic nanobiocatalyst
Dispersed (left) and separated (right)
magnetic nanobiocatalyst
Batch reaction cycle conditions: cellulase loading of 75 U/g peel powder
5 h time at pH 6 and 50°C
Constant pectin yield: 19-19.2%
Constant total phenolics yield: 8.4-8.6%
Stable cellulase activity31
1. Alpha Punicalagin
2. Beta Punicalagin
3. Ellagic acid
Composition of phenolics
Effect of ultrasound pretreatment time on yields of pectin and phenolics
Ultrasound
treatment
timea (min)
With magnetic
nanobiocatalystb
Without magnetic
nanobiocatalystc
Pectin yield
(g/100 g db)
TPC yield
(g/100 g db)
Pectin yield
(g/100 g db)
TPC yield
(g/100 g db)
0 8.8 ± 1.2 4.7 ± 0.8 3.0 ± 0.4 1.9 ± 0.3
10 13.7 ± 1.6 6.3 ± 0.9 4.6 ± 0.9 2.8 ± 0.5
20 19.1 ± 0.8 8.6 ± 1.0 6.2 ± 0.9 3.7 ± 0.2
30 19.2 ± 1.1 8.4 ± 0.6 7.1 ± 0.7 4.9 ± 1.1
a Ultrasound treatment was given at a fixed frequency of 37 kHz, liquid-solid ratio of 15, 50°C and pH 5.b Magnetic nanobiocatalyst at a cellulase dosage of 100 U/g of peel powder was added to ultrasound treated WPP
and stirred at 180 rpm and 50°C for 7h. c Ultrasound treated WPP was directly stirred at 180 rpm and 50°C for 7h in absence of magnetic nanobiocatalyst.
33
Amino acid composition of extracted proteinsAmino acid Amount of amino acid in protein hydrolysates
(g/100g)Essential amino acids
Histidine 2.14 0.15
Isoleucine 4.53 0.35
Leucine 12.17 0.02
Lysine 4.7 0.20
Methionine + Cysteine 2.30 0.10
Phenylalanine + Tyrosine 8.28 0.63
Threonine 2.61 0.22
Tryptophan 0.93 0.04
Valine 4.48 0.17
Non- essential amino acids
Aspartic acid 9.21 0.60
Glutamic acid 20.78 0.80
Aspargine 0.43 0.06
Serine 4.38 0.02
Glutamine 1.06 0.01
Glycine 6.25 0.25
Arginine 7.37 0.60
Alanine 7.16 0.28
Proline ND
Hydroxyproline 0.73 0.0934
Protein sample
Hydrolysis by 6 N HCl
at 110°C for 20 h
in presence of 0.1% phenol
Neutralization by NaOH
HPLC analysis of
clear liquid
Spent coffee grounds Coffee Husks
Cinque Lire – 10 kg
Coffee Wastes
Current disposal is directly to land or compostingAre there alternatives?
Spent coffee grounds
Cinque Lire – 10 kg
Coffee Wastes
Current disposal is directly to land or composting
Not always good for the soil!!
Higher value uses of Coffee Waste?
37
Component Range (%) Potential applications
Carbohydrates
- Hemicellulose
- Cellulose
37-39
8.5-12
Fermentation for sugars and ethanol
Antioxidant dietary fiber potential (Campos-Vega
et al., 2015)
Proteins 13.6 Animal feed
Caffeine 1-2% Pharmaceutical industry
Lipids 10-15 Cosmetics, Biodiesel
Phenolic
compounds
1-1.5 Pharmaceutical industry
Food industry
A Current use of Coffee Grounds Discarded
38
$21.95 online!
Coffee waste composition
39
Spent Coffee Grounds Coffee Husks
Lipid Extractions
40
Ethanol was the most successful solvent
– New research regarding husks
– Supercritical CO2 with husks has potential
Extracted lipids have potential application in:
– Cosmetic industry (soaps, hand creams) (Campos-
Vega et al., 2015)
– Synthetic polymer production (Obruca et al. 2014)
Solvent Method Yield (%)
Husks SCGs
Ethanol Ultrasonic 6.7 ± 0.6 10.5 ± 0.8
N-hexane Ultrasonic 1.5 ± 0.2 10.2 ± 0.2
THF Ultrasonic 5.4 ± 1.3 7.6 ± 2.4
Pure CO2 Sc-CO2 1.7 ± 0.4 1.6 ± 0.3
Coffee oil GC-FID analysis
100% Hexane
100% EtOH2 hr ultrasonic extractions with a 10 g material to 300 ml solvent.
100% H2O
70% EtOH
60% MeOH
Acquisition time (min)
Res
po
nse
(m
Au
)R
esp
on
se (
mA
u)
Res
pon
se (
mA
u)
1
2
34
1
2
3
41
2
3
1. O-Caffeoyl-quinic acid isomer
2. Caffeine
3. O-Caffeoyl-quinic acid isomer
4. O-Caffeoyl-quinic acid isomer
1. O-Caffeoyl-quinic acid isomer
2. Caffeine
3. O-Caffeoyl-quinic acid isomer
4. O-Caffeoyl-quinic acid isomer
1. O-Caffeoyl-quinic acid isomer
2. Caffeine
3. O-Caffeoyl-quinic acid isomer
4. O-Caffeoyl-quinic acid isomer
2 hr ultrasonic extractions with a 1 g material to 40 ml solvent.
Caffeine and polyphenol analysis
caffeine
$US 10-80 per Kg
PLANT – FOOD – SOIL NEXUS
BIOOILS & VALUABLE CHEMICALS
Plants for FoodProduction
Plants for Non- foodProduction
ANIMAL FEED
BIOCHAR
“Waste” Additional By-products
TARGET 12.3
By 2030, halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and
reduce food losses along production and supply chains, including post-harvest losses
CollaboratorsPhD Scholars
Jhumur Bannerjee (IITB-
Monash)
Temma Carruthers-Taylor
Sachin Talekar (IITB-Monash)
Vasudha Kotia (IITB-Monash)
Post Docs
Dr Karen Little
Dr Sepa Nanayakkara
Staff
Prof Amit Arora (IITB - India)
Prof Santosh Noronha (IITB –
India)
Dr Kei Saito
Prof Douglas MacFarlane
Dr Vijay Raganathan
Prof Roy Jackson
Prof Bart Follink
$$ Funding for Projects Mentioned $$
Monash-IITB Academy (JB)Reliance (VK)Tata Chemicals (ST)EPA Victoria (T.C-T.)Faculty of Science for PhD Scholarships Chemicals and Plastics Manufacturing Graduate Research Interdisciplinary ProgramFederal and Victorian Government Industry Vouchers
Thank-you for your Attention
46
47
Comparison with conventional method
Magnetic nanobiocatalyst
for simultaneous pectin and
phenolics extraction
Conventional- acid
mediated pectin extraction
Conventional- Soxhlet
extraction of phenolics with
methanol
Conditions pH 6, Temp 50°C, 5 h pH 1.5, Temp 85°C, 2 h Temp 65°C, 4 h
Pectin yield (%) 19.2 20 -
Phenolic yield (%) 8.6 - 10
48
R Ciriminna, et al., 2015, Pectin: A new perspective from biorefinery standpoint, Biofuels Bioproducts & Biorefining, 9, 368-377
Potential for Pectin - Recovery from Mango Peel
• Pectin cost: US$15 /kg
• Market potential Expected to be > US$2 Billion by 2020
50
Pectin production from mango peel waste.
Arora, Banerjee, Vijayaraghavan, MacFarlane & Patti, Industrial Crops and Products, 2018, 116, 24-34
540 640 740 840 940 1040
1083.3
(58.1)
1083.7
(38.6)
706.7
(2.8)
541.1
(100)
541.1
(100)
1027.4
(1.5)
933.8
(1.4)
540 640 740 840 940 1040 1140
1186.8
(1.1)
1105.2
(2.6)
100
60
20Cou
nts
(%
) Alpha-punicalagin [M-H]-1 = 1083
Beta-punicalagin [M-H]-1 = 1083100
60
20Cou
nts
(%
)
Mass-to-Charge (m/z)
Mass-to-Charge (m/z)
Ellagic acid [M-H]-1 = 301
100 150 200 250 300
301.0
(100)100
60
20
Mass-to-Charge (m/z)
Cou
nts
(%
)
Composition of phenolics from each batch cycle
Batch
number
TPC (g/100 g
db)
Punicalagin (g/100 g db) Ellagic acid (g/100 g db)
1 8.60 ± 0.3 6.65 ± 0.4 (77.4%) 0.48 ± 0.03 (5.6%)
2 8.53 ± 0.7 6.42 ± 0.1 (75.3%) 0.49 ± 0.02 (5.8%)
3 8.44 ± 0.4 6.60 ± 0.2 (78.2%) 0.55 ± 0.03 (6.6%)
4 8.50 ± 0.2 6.49 ± 0.5 (76.4%) 0.50 ± 0.05 (5.9%)
5 8.57 ± 0.5 6.59 ± 0.4 (76.9%) 0.60 ± 0.01 (7.1%)
52
Influence of operational conditions on yields of pectin and phenolics
Maximum yields of pectin (19.2%) and total phenolics (8.5%) were obtained by magnetic nanobiocatalyst
treatment at cellulase loading of 75 U/g of peel powder, pH 6, 50°C for 5 h.
Thermal stability of
magnetic nanobiocatalyst
53
Source: WRI analysis based on FAO. 2011. Global food losses and food waste—extent, causes and
prevention. Rome: UN FAO.
Cereals comprise the most loss and waste when measured by calories, while fruits and vegetables by weight
Valuable sources of primary chemicals, pharmaceuticals, nutraceuticals - not waste
55
Other Extractives
Acids, alkaloids, dyes
Fruit Vegetable and other Agricultural by-products
Source: www.forbes.com and UN FAO
Worldwide Food Wastage - Valuable Unused Resources
Occurs at all stages of the Life cycle of Food
Production, processing and Consumption
150-300 kg per capita per year is lost
Monash University
School of Chemistry
Green Chemical Futures Building