ArticleBioprocess and biosystems engineering2026
A greener and simpler lutein extraction process applied to heterotrophically-grown Scenedesmus almeriensis.
Article in Bioprocess and biosystems engineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, the extraction of lutein from the microalgae Scenedesmus almeriensis cultivated under heterotrophic conditions was investigated with the aim of making the process more environmentally friendly, less toxic for subsequent food and feed usage, and with a reduced ecological footprint. The results show that freeze-drying the biomass does not increase lutein recovery (p > 0.05). Additionally, [Formula: see text]C storage of wet biomass is a viable alternative (15 % loss) to -[Formula: see text]C storage. Ethanolic KOH solution was found to be more effective (+32.8 %) for lutein extraction compared to aqueous solution, although saponification ultimately did not provide benefits for lutein extraction. Among the solvents compared, ethanol (0.85 ± 0.01 mg [Formula: see text]) performed as well as acetone (0.91 ± 0.11 mg [Formula: see text]) or isopropanol (0.87 ± 0.01 mg [Formula: see text]) and was better than methanol (0.61 ± 0.01 mg [Formula: see text]) or 2-methyltetrahydrofuran (0.38 ± 0.08 mg [Formula: see text]). In addition, a single bead-beating round allows for the recovery of [Formula: see text] % of the pigments, and the maceration step appears facultative. Ethanolic extracts remained stable at both [Formula: see text]C and –[Formula: see text]C for at least one month. All these findings were agglomerated and proposed as a streamlined protocol. Finally, it was observed that cells of S. almeriensis grown under heterotrophic conditions offer less disruption resistance than their autotrophic counterparts.
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.