Summary The efficiency of various techniques pulsed electric field ( PEF ), ultrasound ( US ), high‐pressure microfluidisation ( HPMF ), hydrochloric acid ( HC l) and ionic liquids ( IL s) for cell wall disruption in astaxanthin extraction from Haematococcus pluvialis was compared. The results indicated that IL s, HC l and HPMF treatment were shown the most efficient for cell disruption with more than 80% astaxanthin recovery. While the cell wall integrity of H. pluvialis cyst cell was less affected by US and PEF treatment. It was found that imidazolium‐based IL s showed the greater potential for cell disruption than pyridinium‐based and ammonium‐based IL s. Among all the IL s examined, 1‐butyl‐3‐methylimidazolium chloride ([Bmim] Cl) exhibited efficient cell disruption and capability of astaxanthin recovery at mild condition (pretreatment with 40% IL aqueous solution at 40 °C, followed by extraction with methanol at 50 °C) without extensive energy consumption and special facility requirement. In addition, recyclability of IL s was excellent.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: