ArticlePhytochemical analysis : PCA2025
Comparison of Pressurized Water Extraction With Ultrasound Assisted Extraction for Isolation of Phycobiliproteins From Arthrospira platensis (Spirulina).
Article in Phytochemical analysis : PCA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Spirulina (Food chemistry: X · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCyanobacterium Arthrospira platensis (AP) (Nordstedt) Gomont contains high content of phycobiliproteins (PBP), which are an important source for food industry. Methods effectively extracting proteins contained in AP cells are demanded to provide a supply of the material. Water-based extraction methods are advisable due to the high solubility of the PBP.
objectivesExtraction techniques such as ultrasound assisted extraction (UAE) and pressurized water extraction (PWE) are popular due to their environmental friendliness, better extraction efficiency, and faster extraction process. In this paper, efficiency of the two methods is compared. MATERIALS AND
methodsPWE along with UAE is utilized for release of PBP from the AP cells. The extraction parameters including time, temperature, pressure, and ultrasound intensity are tested to obtain the most efficient setup. The methods were evaluated using sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE), and the replicates of PWE extracts were further analyzed by capillary isoelectric focusing with laser-induced fluorescence (cIEF-LIF).
resultsThe developed PWE method using higher pressure treatment at lower temperature was significantly faster than UAE methods, and the SDS-PAGE results showed a high content of phycobiliproteins in the extracts. cIEF-LIF analysis showed that the sequential PWE of individual samples was repeatable, and the mild extraction provided a fluorescent profile similar to the commercially available C-phycocyanin standard.
conclusionPressurized water extraction was shown to be an efficient, rapid, and well-automated extraction method for AP proteins in general, including bioactive phycobiliproteins. Obtained results encourage the use of PWE in small-scale analytical applications for primary extraction of proteins.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.