Production and fractionation of tuna by-product protein hydrolysate by
Ultrafiltration and Nanofiltration: Impact on interesting peptides fractions and
nutritional properties

Sami Saidi, Andre Deratani, Marie-Pierre Belleville, Raja Ben Amar

PII: S0963-9969(14)00275-0
DOI: doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2014.04.026
Reference: FRIN 5212

To appear in: Food Research International

Received date: 20 February 2014

Revised date: 4 April 2014
Accepted date: 13 April 2014

Please cite this article as: Saidi, S., Deratani, A., Belleville, M.-P. & Amar, R.B., Pro-
duction and fractionation of tuna by-product protein hydrolysate by Ultraltration and
Nanoltration: Impact on interesting peptides fractions and nutritional properties, Food
Research International (2014), doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2014.04.026

This is a PDF le of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.
As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.
The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof
before it is published in its nal form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could aect the content, and all legal disclaimers that
apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Production and fractionation of tuna by-product protein hydrolysate by Ultrafiltration and

Nanofiltration: impact on interesting peptides fractions and nutritional properties

Sami Saidia,b, Andr Deratania, Marie-Pierre Bellevillea, Raja Ben Amarb.

PT
RI
a
IEM (Institut Europen des Membranes), UMR 5635 (CNRS-ENSCM-UM2), Universit

SC
Montpellier 2, Place E. Bataillon, F-34095 Montpellier, France
b
Laboratory of Materials Science and Environment, Faculty of Science of SFAX, Route de la

NU
Soukra Km 3.5, BP 1171, Sfax 3000, Tunisia
MA
*Corresponding author: Sami SAIDI
D

E-mail: sami1saidi@yahoo.fr.
TE

Tel: +216 97 866 581. Fax: +216 74 274 437.

P
CE
AC

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Abstract

The production of fish protein hydrolysates (FPH) is a promising route to add value to fish by-

products due to their potential application as a source of interest peptide fractions. Using

Aalcalse for hydrolysis of tuna dark muscle by-product, the influence of enzyme/substrate ratio

PT
and hydrolysis time on the rate of interest peptide fractions (1-4 kDa) was studied. The rate of

RI
this fraction obtained under optimized conditions (temperature 55C, pH 8.5, enzyme/substrate

SC
ratio of 1% and 60 min of hydrolysis reaction) was 26%.The performance of the combined

process associating ultrafiltration and nanofiltration membranes was evaluated for fractionation

NU
of produced hydrolysate in order to isolate fractions enriched in peptides of specific molecular
MA
weight (MW). The interest peptide fraction (1-4 kDa) was isolated and the positive effect of

diafiltration on peptide purification process was underlined. The peptide fractions produced have
D

a high nutritional quality can be used in human nutrition and they have a potential for
TE

applications in aquaculture diets.

P
CE

Keywords:

Alcalase tuna by-product hydrolysis, Tuna protein by-product hydrolysate,,

AC

Ultrafiltration/Nanofiltration for peptide fractionation, diafiltration, Amino acids

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
1. Introduction

Today the fish by-products are a potential resource of high added-value components. However,

large amounts of protein by-products from seafood processing industry are discarded without any

attempt of recovery and valorization. Considering the limited biological resources and increasing

PT
environmental pollution, there is a great need to find a solution for better management and use of

RI
by-products generated (Gurard, 2007). Each year, the global tuna fishing is about 3 billion tons

SC
(FAO, 2008). However, the processing industry and canned tuna generate large amounts of solid

waste that can reach 50 to 70% of the raw material.

NU
Therefore, to recover the protein by-products for further utilization, the enzymatic hydrolysis is a
MA
means of transforming fish by-product into high added-value products with functional, biological

and nutritional properties (Kristinsson & Rasco, 2000a, 2000b; Shahidi, Han, & Synowiecki,
D

1995). In recent years, a great number of peptides of biological interest have been produced by
TE

enzymatic hydrolysis such as cellular growth factors (Ravallec-Pl et al., 2001), antioxidant

compounds (Hsu, 2010; Hsu, Lu, & Jao, 2009; Je, Lee, Lee, & Ahn, 2009; Je, Park, & Kim,
P
CE

2005; Jun, Park, Jung, & Kim, 2004) and peptides with antiproliferative properties (Hsu, Li-

Chan, & Jao, 2011; Picot et al., 2006). Proteolytic enzymes from microorganisms have been
AC

found to be more suitable to produce fish protein hydrolysates (FPH) such as Alcalase (alkaline

serine endopeptidase) (Gurard, Dufosse, De La Broise, & Binet, 2001; Kristinsson & Rasco,

2000c). Using this enzyme under optimal conditions (pH 9.5; temperature 60C; 1h time

reaction; 20 AU/kg enzyme concentration) lead to high degree of hydrolysis in a relatively short

time compared to other enzymes acting in neutral or acidic conditions (Benjakul & Morrissey,

1997). All the studies have shown that there is a relation between the physicochemical

characteristics of the peptides and their activities. As well, the most of these studies highlight a

relation between molecular weight (MW) and biological activity. In particular, fractions with

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
MW between 1 and 4 kDa would be the most interesting for nutritional and/or pharmaceutical

uses. The extraction of this fraction from the hydrolysate is a key issue.

The membrane separation is a useful technology for fractionation of molecules and offers a good

alternative separation for achieving an environmentally friendly and cost effective process

PT
(Drioli, Stankiewicz, & Macedonio, 2011). However, the membrane process has been effective

RI
technology used for to fractionation of high value molecules from by-products protein

SC
hydrolysate with the objective of enhancing their functional properties (Vandanjon, Cros,

Jaouen, Qumneur, & Bourseau, 2002).

NU
Generally, many studies related to protein and peptide fractionation have been devoted to the
MA
investigation of the operating conditions (pH, temperature, ionic strength, etc.) (Li, H-Kittikun,

& Youravong, 2008) and the interactions between solutes or between these solutes and the
D

membranes employed (Gourley, Gauthier, & Pouliot, 1995; Martin-Orue, Bouhallab, & Garem,
TE

1998). However, only few studies are related to the use of membrane technology for fractioning

FPH (Chabeaud, Vandanjon, Bourseau, Jaouen, Chaplain-Derouiniot et al., 2009; Chabeaud,

P
CE

Vandanjon, Bourseau, Jaouen, & Gurard, 2009; Vandanjon, Grignon, Courois, Bourseau, &

Jaouen, 2009; Vandanjon, Johannsson, Derouiniot, Bourseau, & Jaouen, 2007).

AC

Thus, the UF membranes are used in most studies as a useful tool for fractionation or separation

(Je et al., 2005; Jeon, Byun, & Kim, 1999; Kim, Je, & Kim, 2007) or the NF membrane for

peptide or amino acid concentration (Kovacs & Samhaber, 2009; Martin-Orue et al., 1998). It

has to be noted that the influence of the operating mode on the effectiveness of the membrane

separation has been seldom taken into account.

The diafiltration has been applied in order to obtain a product with the desirable purity. The

process of diafiltration generally includes three steps: UF-concentration step, UF-diafiltration

step and NF-concentration step. In diafiltration process, the feed volume is kept constant by

adding solvent (water or buffer). Thus, the feed is diluted by added solvent to reduce the

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
concentration of permeable components and to remove them by passing this through a

membrane. Therefore, the purity of the retained components should be further increased.

In this work, the classes [10004000] Da have been identified as the most bioactive ones.

Consequently, the aim of the present work is to optimize the hydrolysis reaction conditions using

PT
commercial alkali proteases in order to produce tuna by-products protein hydrolysate enriched in

RI
peptide fractions of MW of 1-4 KDa and propose a sequence of separation using UF/NF

SC
membranes in order to obtaining a fraction enriched with peptides of MW between 14 kDa. The

amino acid composition, MW distribution and nutritional value of the obtained peptide fractions

NU
were considered.
MA
2. Material and methods

2.1 Substrate
D

The tuna dark muscle by-product was obtained from TUNA EL SULTON Foods Industry Ltd.
TE

(Sfax, Tunisia). During the processing of canned tuna, the dark muscle was recovered after the

steam-cooking of the whole fish. The dark muscle by-product was placed in polyethylene bag
P
CE

(4000 ml) and then transported to the laboratory in iced condition where they was stored at -20

C until being used.. The protein, lipid, ash and moisture contents of the dark muscle by-product
AC

were 26, 2.4, 1.35 and 70.5% respectively, as determined according to the AOAC methods

(AOAC, 2005).

2.2 Enzyme

Alcalase PROLYVE 1000, is an alkaline serine endopeptidase produced by fermentation using a

selected strain of Bacillus licheniformis, it was provided by Lyven France. The optimal

conditions of use determined by the producer were: a temperature between 55 and 60C and a pH

between 9.0 and 10.5. A declared minimal activity is 2.2 Anson. Alcalase can be inactivated by

heating at 90C for 10 to 15 min.

2.3 Optimization of process and preparation of the hydrolysate

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
The rate of enzymatic reactions is related to the enzyme concentration and the results during the

optimization study show that when the enzyme concentration increases the final degree of

hydrolysis (DH) achieved was great. However, a high DH does not necessarily correspond to

optimal rate of produced interest peptide concentration. Therefore, the impact of enzyme

PT
concentration and reaction time on the percentage (%) of different classes of peptides obtained

RI
was investigated.

SC
Thus, for each test, fifty grams of tuna dark muscle by-product were homogenized with 100 ml

of deionized water and incubated at a specific temperature (55C) and pH (8.5). The pH of the

NU
mixture was adjusted to the desired level (8.5) with 2N sodium hydroxide and maintained
MA
constant during hydrolysis reaction using pH-stat (Titroline Alpha Plus). After homogenization

and incubation, the enzyme was added. At the end of hydrolysis, the reaction was terminated by
D

heating the solution to 90C for 20 min to inactivate the enzymes. Afterward, the hydrolysates
TE

were centrifuged (Centrifuge SIGMA) at 9500 rpm for 30 min. A portion of the supernatant was

taken to determine the protein content and the other part was freezedried and stored in a
P
CE

desiccator for further analysis.

2.4 Determination of the degree of hydrolysis (DH)

AC

The degree of hydrolysis (DH) is generally used as a proteolysis monitoring parameter when the

pH-stat method was employed. The pH-stat reaction allowed the estimation of DH based on the

consumption of alkali to maintain a constant pH at the desired value. Thus, the DH is defined as

the percent of peptide bonds cleaved during the enzymatic reaction. There is proportionality

between the number of peptide bonds cleaved and the acid or base consumption.

The values for DH could be determined using the following equation described by Adler-Nissen

(Adler-Nissen, 1982).

h
DH .100 Eq. (1)
htot

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Where, h is the number of peptide bonds cleaved during the reaction and htot is total number of

peptide bonds in substrate which is assumed to be 8.6 meq/g for fish protein by-product.

According to Adler-Nissen (Adler-Nissen, 1986), when the reaction pH is above the pKa of the

-NH group, then the equation is:

PT
V .N a
DH .100 Eq. (2)
.Mp.htot

RI
SC
Where V is the amount of alkali consumed to keep the pH constant during the reaction, Na is the

normality of the alkali, Mp is the mass of the protein in the reaction mixture (determined as N

NU
(total nitrogen) 6.25) and is the average degree of dissociation of -NH2 groups released

during hydrolysis (=0.96).

MA
2.5 Membrane and filtration experiments
D

Three channel tubular ceramic membrane (hydraulic diameter: 3.5 mm, membrane length and
TE

surface area: 23 cm and 155 cm2, Molecular Weight Cut-off (MWCO) 8 kDa) purchased from

Tami industry (UF membrane) was used. The zeta potentials for Tami membrane determined by
P
CE

Changwon et al. were +4 mV (pH 3), +6 mV (pH 5), +3mV (pH 7) and -10mV (pH 11). Note

that the TAMI membrane has a positive charge below pH 4, and negatively charged at higher pH
AC

values, with a point of zero charge near pH 4 (Changwon, 2013).

The NF experiments were carried out with a 1 kDa polyethersulfone membrane (membrane

NP010, Microdyn Nadir). The mean pore size of NP010 determined by Carvalho et al. was 0.743

nm (Carvalho, Maugeri, Silva, Hernandez, Palacio, & Pradanos, 2011a). The zeta potentials for

NP010 membrane determined by Carvalho et al. were +5 mV (pH 4), -4 mV (pH 6), -8 mV (pH

7) and -10mV (pH 8). Note that the membrane is negatively charged at neutral pH, with the

isoelectric point of 5.3 (Carvalho, Maugeri, Prdanos, Silva, & Hernndez, 2011b).

The filtration experiments were carried out in tangential filtration mode with a very versatile lab-

scale pilot equipped with tubular or flat sheet membranes (Figure 1). The used membranes were

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
characterized according to the procedure described by Saidi et al. (Saidi, Deratani, Ben Amar, &

Belleville, 2013) and the index of irreversible fouling (IF) was estimated according to the

following equation:

( J w, 0 J w,1 )

PT
IF (%) 100 Eq. (3)
J w, 0

RI
Where Jw, 0 is the water flux of clean (new) membrane; Jw, 1 is the water flux of used membrane.

SC
The operation mode tested includes three successive steps of membrane filtration (UF-

concentration, UF-diafiltration and NF-concentration) carried out in batch mode. It can be noted

NU
that in diafiltration step, the UF retentate of the UF concentration was diafiltrated on the same

UF membrane. Finally, the both permeate obtained at the end of two UF steps were mixed in
MA
order to be used as feed solution in the NF step.

After use, the ceramic membrane was washed according to the method described by Saidi et al.
D
TE

(Saidi, Deratani, Ben Amar, & Belleville, 2013). A new membrane was used for each NF

experiments in order to avoid problems linked to a loss of permeability due to fouling.

P

The filtration was carried out at constant temperature (25C) under a transmembrane pressure of
CE

2 bars for UF and 10 bars for NF experiments. The feed flow was fixed at 300 L.h-1 which
AC

corresponds to a tangential velocity equals to 3 m.s-1 and 1.25 m.s-1 in the case of UF and NF

respectively (Saidi, Deratani, Ben Amar, & Belleville, 2013). During the concentration and

diafiltration steps, the volume reduction factor (VRF) and diafiltration volume (DV) were

determined according to Eq. (4) and Eq. (5) respectively.

V0 V0
VRF Eq. (4)
V f V0 V p

Vb V p
DV Eq. (5)
V0 V0

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Where V0 is the initial feed volume; Vf is the feed bulk left in the tank during concentration

process, Vb is the volume of newly added buffer during diafiltration process and Vp is the

collected permeate volume.

2.6 Size exclusion chromatography

PT
MW distribution of peptides in the different hydrolysate was obtained by size exclusion

RI
chromatography (SEC) using Fast Protein Liquid Chromatography (FPLC) gel filtration. The

SC
SEC column was a Superdex Peptide GL 10/300 column (Amersham, fractionation range:

7000100 Da) according to Gurard et al. (Gurard, Dufosse, De La Broise, & Binet, 2001). The

NU
calibration of the column was established according to Saidi et al. (Saidi, Deratani, Ben Amar, &
MA
Belleville, 2013) using peptides of known MW (purchased from Sigma) such as cytochrome C

(12384 Da), aprotinin (6512 Da), neurotensin (1678.9 Da), insulin chain B (3495 Da), substance
D

P fragment 611 (764 Da), and leupeptin (463 Da).

TE

2.7 Retention factor

The retention factor (R) of the solute is usually expressed by Eq. (6) as follow:
P
CE

Cp
R (1 ) 100 Eq. (4)
Cr
AC

Where Cp and Cr are the solute concentration in the permeate and the retentate samples

respectively.

Considering the linear correlation between the surface area under chromatogram (AUC) and the

peptide concentration, the R was estimated by the Eq. (7) as suggested by Vandanjon et al.

(Vandanjon et al., 2007):

AUC p
R 1 Eq. (7)
AUC r

Where AUCp and AUCr are the surface area under chromatogram for the permeate and the

retentate samples respectively.

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
The total area of the chromatogram was integrated and separated into five MW fractions ranges

i (>7000, 70004000, 40001000, 1000300 and <300 Da, respectively), expressed as the

percentage of the total area. The retention of different peptide fractions (RF) were estimated in

the same way by Eq. (8) (Vandanjon et al., 2007):

PT
AUC p ,i Eq. (8)
Ri 1
AUCr ,i

RI
2.8 Amino acid analysis and chemical score of protein hydrolysate

SC
Amino acid composition was determined using a Biochrom amino acid analyzer equipped with a

NU
Na + column. Indeed, proteins are hydrolyzed using 4 N methane sulfoxide at 150C for 2 h. The

hydrolysate obtained is analyzed by HPLC using the ion exchange column (cationic resin) and
MA
the detection was realized at 570 nm and 440 nm after reaction with ninhydrin. Considering the

contents of essential amino acids (EAA) in the protein hydrolysate and in the standard protein as
D

described by FAO/WHO (1999), the chemical score of the protein hydrolysate was calculated
TE

using the following relation (Vidotti, Viegas, & Carneiro, 2003).

P

Chemical score = EAA in test protein (g.100g-1)/EAA in Standard Protein (g.100g-1)

CE

3. Results and discussion

AC

3.1 Optimization of Production of interest peptide fractions (MW 1-4 kDa)

The optimal conditions of hydrolysis of tuna protein by-product using Alcalase was determined

in previous study using Response Surface Methodology (RSM) when the degree of hydrolysis

(DH) was used as response factor. So it's no surprise that we have highlighted that DH factor was

higher when the reaction time was long. However, the aim of our study was determine the

optimal conditions for the production of interest peptide fractions (MW 1-4 kDa) from tuna

protein by-product. A hydrolysis test has been carried out under optimal conditions (temperature

55 C, time 136 min, enzyme/substrate ratio 1.5% and pH 8.5) following simultaneous changes

in the DH and the MW distribution of the peptides. The results confirm that these conditions lead

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
to a degree of hydrolysis of about 20% with a yield of protein solubilization of 89%. The

evolution of MW of peptides during hydrolysis was investigated by calculating for each sample

the percentage of each class of peptides from the area under the chromatogram obtained by SEC

of samples taken at different reaction times.

PT
The results show that the percentage of interest fractions (such as peptides 1 <MW <4 kDa)

RI
decreases from 29% to 17% with increasing hydrolysis time. In parallel, the percentage of low

SC
MW fractions was increased from 35% to 46% at the end of hydrolysis reaction. Indeed, the

peptides formed during protein hydrolysis reaction are themselves degraded into peptides of

NU
smaller MW, and even amino acids. Therefore, the longer reaction time increase the percentage
MA
(%) of solubilization proteins but it is not conducive to the production of interest peptides

fractions. Thus, a compromise must be found.

D

3.1.1 Effect of enzyme concentration and reaction time

TE

The temperature and pH were fixed at the values defined in previous study (55C, pH 8.5) and

the hydrolysis reaction was performed for 160 minutes at various enzyme concentrations (ie
P
CE

0.75, 1, 1.5, 3 and 4.5%).

First, the evolution of the DH function of time according to enzyme concentration show that
AC

regardless of the enzyme concentration used, the reaction mixture initially viscous suspension

was quickly transformed into a fluid solution. As can be seen in Figure 2a, the DH increases

rapidly during the first 20 minutes of reaction at all concentrations. Then this parameter evolves

more slowly and tends to stabilize. At the end of reaction, the final value after 160 minutes of

reaction depends on the enzyme concentration used. This value was much greater than the

enzyme concentration was high. However, the relationship between the value of the final DH and

enzyme concentration was not linear and the final DH increased from 20.6 to 24.7% when the

enzyme concentration varies from 1.5 to 3%. Then it varies only from 24.7 to 26.9% when the

concentration goes 3 and 4.5%.

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Similar results are observed for the evolution of the concentration of soluble protein components

in function of time for different enzymes concentrations (Figure 2b). Thus, the concentration of

soluble protein increases very rapidly at the start of reaction and the concentration tend to a

limited value. The final values vary from 41 to 64 g.L-1 when the enzyme concentration increased

PT
from 0.75 to 1%. Beyond 1%, the effect of increasing the enzyme concentration on the

RI
solubilization of the protein was more limited. This concentration increases from 64 to 78 g.L-1

SC
when the enzyme concentration increases from 1 to 4.5 %. Similar observations have been

reported for enzymatic hydrolysis of proteins of different fish such as sardine (Quaglia & Orban,

NU
1987), capelin (Shahidi et al., 1995), tuna (Kuo-Chiang, 2010) and shark (Diniz & Martin, 1998).
MA
It is interesting to note that the change in the concentration of soluble protein was positively

correlated with the evolution of the soluble content in the reaction mixture. Indeed, as can be
D

seen, that during the hydrolysis in presence of 1% of enzyme, the soluble dry extract (SDE)
TE

increases rapidly from 1 to 6% (w/w) in first 20 minutes of hydrolysis and the increase was

slower (6 to 9% (w/w)) between 20 and 60 minutes and this parameter tends to a limited value of
P
CE

about 11% (w/w). Meanwhile, there was a decrease of insoluble dry extract (IDE) 11% (w/w) to

1% (w/w) between 0 and 60 minutes, then this parameter to stabilize at around 0.5 % (w/w). The
AC

increasing of the hydrolysis time beyond 60 minutes does not allow a significant gain in the rate

of solubilization of the raw material, the rate increase from 80% to 87% between 60 and 170

minutes of reaction. Similar results have been observed with other concentrations of enzymes.

Therefore, all these results confirm that it is not effective to use high enzymes concentrations and

long reaction time. This leads to an increase in operating costs (enzymes costs, capital cost of

facilities, energy consumption etc) hardly offset by a slight increase in the yield of solubilization.

To optimize the time and enzyme concentration, we are interested in the percentage change (%)

of the interest peptide fractions during the hydrolysis (Figure 2c). It was found that the decrease

of the content of interest peptides (1-4kDa) was even faster and larger than the enzyme

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
concentration was high. In 60 minutes, this content deceases from 29 to 23% (w/w) when

enzyme substrate ratio of 1% and it decreases from 29 to 14 % (w/w) when the hydrolysis is

carried out in the presence of 4.5 % of enzymes. Little difference was observed between the

experiments at 0.75 and 1% of enzymes. In both cases, the rate of interest peptides fractions

PT
remains practically constant between 0 and 20 min of reaction and reached respectively 27 and

RI
25 % (w/w) after 60 minutes of reaction. Our aim was to produce the maximum of interest

SC
peptide fractions and at a lower cost to ensure the economic viability of the process of recovery.

Thus, we decided to carry out the hydrolysis in the presence of 1% (w/w) enzyme and hydrolysis

NU
time of 60 minutes.
MA
3.1.2 Validation of the process

The production of hydrolysate using Alcalase under optimal conditions was carried out at pilot
D

scale in order to validate the process of production of interest peptide fractions and production a
TE

lot amounts of hydrolysate for the study of membrane fractionation. These hydrolysis were

performed in a 5 L reactor over 1.5 kg of raw material. The hydrolysis conditions were set to the
P
CE

same values when tested on a laboratory scale as follows: concentration of the raw material

about 33% (w/w), temperature 55C, pH 8.5, enzyme/substrate ratio 1% (w/w) and the duration
AC

of hydrolysis at 60 minutes.

The result showed that regardless of the scale at which the hydrolysis is made, the SDE and IDE,

as protein concentrations are similar of magnitude. When the hydrolysis reaction was carried out

at laboratory scale, the IDE decreased from 34% to 3.8 % and the SDE increased from 2.9 % to

30% and the final protein concentration was equal to 66g.L-1 corresponding to 80% of yield of

protein solubilization. When the hydrolysis reaction was carried out at pilot scale, the IDE

decreased from 33.8% to 3.3%, the SDE increased from 2.6% to 30% and the protein

concentration of 70 g.L-1 was reached with a yield of solubilization of 80%. Thus, we can

conclude that in quantitative terms, the change of the scale does not lead in significant

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
differences. This result was better than obtained by others studies of hydrolysis of different fish

by-products using Alcalase (Gurard, Dufosse et al., 2001; Liaset, Lied, & Espe, 2000). It can be

noticed that, the rate of interest peptide fraction recovered (1-4 kDa) after hydrolysis in

laboratory scale and pilot scale was of 26 and 25 % respectively which corresponds respectively

PT
to protein concentrations equal to 66 and 70 gL-1.

RI
3.2 Fractionation of tuna dark muscle hydrolysate

SC
3.2.1 Performance of the membranes

3.2.1.1 UF concentration step:

NU
The profile of the evolution of permeate flux versus VRF observed in the concentration step was
MA
very typical of a UF concentration process. Indeed, after a sharp decrease of flux values within

the first minutes of filtration, the permeate flux decreased slightly from 27 L.h-1.m-2 and tend to
D

level off around to 10 L.h-1.m-2 when the VRF tend to 2 was reached. This VRF corresponding to
TE

a high peptide concentration (95 g.L-1), which explains the weak flux observed at the end of the

concentration. Thus, the initial decrease was generally explained by the effect of concentration
P
CE

polarization phenomena, whereas the second phase of decrease was due to protein aggregates

deposited on the membrane surface and additional molecules added to the initial deposits leading
AC

to the formation a multi-layer fouling on membrane surface or inside the pores of the membrane

as far as the concentration of the feed solution increases (Kwon, Vigneswaran, Fane, & Aim,

2000). In UF-concentration, the fouling in this study was probably due to the adsorption of

protein molecules onto pore and membrane surface. Indeed, the protein concentration

continuously increased from 72 to 95 g.L-1. This is probably due to the presence of proteins with

MW higher than 7 kDa can be only observed in the peptide MW distribution of the tuna

hydrolysate (Figure 3). These proteins totally rejected by membrane were thus responsible of an

increase of membrane fouling leading to lower flux values.

3.2.1.2 UF diafiltration step:

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
The diafiltration step was carried out after a concentration step; the flux value measured during

diafiltration (9 L.h-1.m-2) was in the same order of magnitude of the flux value obtained at the

end of the concentration step (10 L.h-1.m-2). Even though adding buffer could dilute the feed

solution, it might improve the flux by decreasing the effect of previously formed fouling. Indeed,

PT
the fouling formed in UF-concentration step probably reduced transmission of solute in

RI
following UF-diafiltration. This fouling could not be redispersed by diluting feed in diafiltration.

SC
Therefore the negative effect of concentration polarization on flux was reduced by adding buffer

leading a decrease of protein concentration in feed solution and membrane surface. Thus, best

NU
performance could be obtained if the UF diafiltration was carried before a UF concentration step
MA
or a clean membrane was used.

3.2.1.3 NF concentration step:

D

The both permeate obtained at the end of the UF steps (concentration and diafiltration) were used
TE

as the feed solution for NF experiments. Thus, the flux decreased during the NF step from 54 to

40 L.h-1.m-2 and the UF permeates were finally concentrated until VRF= 2.4 was reached. The
P
CE

flux was very high because the very low fouling of the membrane (37%). This latter fact was

probably due to the fact that all UF permeates contained only traces of peptides with MW higher
AC

than 4 kDa (Figure 3).

3.2.2 Selectivity of the fractionation

In this section, the objective is to isolate the fractions contain interest peptides with MW between

1 and 4 kDa. It can be noticed that Figure 3 shows the effect of the fractionation process by UF

and NF membranes in the MW distribution of peptide fractions. Indeed, the retentate of UF

concentration was enriched in peptide fractions with large and medium MW. Almost all the

peptides above 4 kDa were retained by the membrane. It can be seen that the retentate still

contained many peptide fractions with MW inferior to 4kDa because only very small peptides

have passed freely through the membrane. For permeate, it can be seen that it was enriched in

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
smaller peptide fractions and its totally free from peptide fractions with MW superior to 4 kDa.

Indeed, the profiles of MW peptides distributions of the tuna hydrolysate and permeate are

different showing that the effective fractionation process (Figure 3a).

For the UF diafiltration, the profile of MW peptides distribution of retentate was under the

PT
profile of feed solution indicate the effect of dilution of feed solution by adding buffer during

RI
diafiltration process. However, it is worth noting that retention rates were constant all long the

SC
experiment process (Figure 3b). The values obtained were respectively equal to 100 %, 90 %, 50

%, 20 % and 10 % for the peptide fractions superior to 7 kDa, 4-7 kDa, 1-4 kDa, 0.3-1 kDa and

NU
inferior to 0.3 kDa (Table 1).
MA
However, in NF concentration step; the retentate was enriched in fractions with high MW

superior to 1KDa and inferior to 4kDa. The NF permeate and feed solution profiles are very
D

different, meaning that the fractionation process is really effective. Thus, the interest peptide
TE

fraction was concentrated in the NF retentate (Figure 3c). Indeed, the low membrane fouling

(38%) did not change significantly the membrane selectivity. Therefore, the retention rate of
P
CE

fractions of low MW (MW< 0.3 kDa) increased and it stabilized to 49 %. The retention rate of

fractions 0.3-1 kDa and 1 kDa were equal to 72 % and 87 % respectively. Finally, the peptide
AC

fractions with MW higher than 4 kDa were totally rejected by the NP010 membrane (Table 1).

3.2.3 Retention of protein components in tuna hydrolysate

The variation of protein concentration generally is modelled by equation 9 and 10 for

concentration and diafiltration processes respectively:

C f ,i V0 Robs,i Eq. (9)

( )
C f ,i 0 Vf

Ca ,i V V
exp b (1 Robs,i ) exp( b S a ,i ) Eq. (10)
Ca ,io 0
V V0

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Where Cf,i and Cf,i0 were the concentrations of solute i in feed during concentration process at

time t and the initial time. Robs, i is the observed rejection of solute i. Sa,i is the apparent

sieving coefficient of solute i was expressed by Eq. (11) as follow:

Cp Eq. (11)

PT
Sa
Cr

RI
In this study, samples of feed and permeate solutions were used for determining the soluble

protein concentration during the process and the experimental data from the samples was

SC
compared to theoretical data from equations 9 and 10.

NU
During the concentration step the protein concentration in feed increased 67% (from 36 to 96

g.L-1) when VRF of 1.8 (tend to 2) was reached. Since Sa was 0.38, most the protein was rejected
MA
by the membrane. This Sa was applied in equation 9. The results indicate the agreement between

experimental and theoretical data (Figure 4a).

D

In diafiltration step, it can be seen that the protein concentration decreased from 96 to 58 g.L-1
TE

(40%) when DV of 0.6 was achieved. The practical Sa of protein was determined at about 0.8 by
P

protein content in permeate and feed during diafiltration process. The higher Sa of protein
CE

obtained was probably due to the reduction of effect of concentration polarization by adding
AC

buffer in feed tank. Indeed, the transmission of the solute through the membrane increases with

decreasing concentration polarization effect leading to a very high apparent sieving coefficient

(Sa). This Sa was applied in equation 10, the experimental data obtained by measuring the

protein content in feed solution were in acceptable agreement with theoretical data (Figure 4b).

In NF concentration, the protein concentration increased from 42 to 80 g.L-1 (40%) when VRF

2.4 was achieved. Since, Sa was just about 0.14, most protein was rejected by the membrane and

concentrated in the retentate. This Sa was applied in equation 9. The results indicate the

agreement between experimental data and theoretical data (Figure 4c). Thus, the low fouling of

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
NF membrane (38%) indicates that the fouling might play major role in the transmission of the

solute through the membrane.

3.2.4 Mass balances of NF and UF steps

The mass balance of dry matter, protein and peptide fractions in the different retentate and

PT
permeate fractions obtained at the end of a process are reported in Figure 5. It can be observed

RI
that the process was effective. At the end of process less than 60 % of the total protein fractions

SC
were still in the retentate of the UF step. In fact, more than 40 % of proteins were recovered in

NF fractions. In particular, 41 % of total 1-4 kDa fraction and 45 % of total 0.3-1 kDa fraction

NU
were recovered in NF retentate; these both fractions are the most interesting for nutritional and/or
MA
pharmaceutical use. These figures confirm that diafiltration permits to increase the purification

factor of a fractionation process.

D

3.3 Nutritional aspects

TE

The results of analysis of the total amino acid (AA) composition of the samples analyzed taking

into account both free AA and those present as peptides or proteins are reported in Table 2.
P
CE

Therefore, we can conclude that the overall nutritional value of the fraction without knowing if

they are free AA or AA involved in peptide bonds. However, due to the distribution of MW
AC

protein compounds in different fractions analyzed, it is likely that AA can be found mostly in

free form or in the di-tripeptide form in the NF permeate while the UF retentate can contain

much peptide with a higher degree of polymerization. First, we note that the membrane

fractionation allowed to recover enriched protein compounds namely NF retentate. Indeed, AA is

only 60% (w/w) of the dry matter of the crude hydrolysate represent nearly 80 % of the dry

matter of this fraction. More AA mainly present in the crude hydrolysate (glutamic acid, aspartic

acid, leucine, alanine and lysine) was concentrated in the interest fraction. To our knowledge,

there is no study on the amino acid composition of dark muscle of the tuna itself. However,

many studies on by-products of tuna and other marine species (Catla catla) reported similar

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
results to ours in terms of composition and abundance of amino acids (Bhaskar, Benila, Radha,

& Lalitha, 2008; Bhaskar & Mahendrakar, 2008; Li, Youravong, & H-Kittikun, 2009;

Motamedzadegan, Davarniam, Asadi, Abedian, & Ovissipour, 2010). It is also important to note

the high proportion of essential amino acids (EAA) in the raw material. The EAA represents

PT
44% of AA of the crude hydrolysate, 40% of AA of retentate UF, 42 % of AA of the retentate

RI
NF and 57 % of AA of the NF permeate. This last point is important because, as noted above,

SC
this fraction consists essentially of free AA or very small peptides.

The nutritive value of any ingredient depends on the proteins capacity to fulfill the needs of

NU
organisms with respect to essential amino acids. Thus, to evaluate the quality, the degree of
MA
assimilation and digestibility of a particular protein can be estimated by determining the

chemical score. The chemical score is determined by comparing the levels of AAE of a protein
D

hydrolysate with those of a standard protein.

TE

In this study, the chemical scores were calculated on the basis of reference proteins of the

FAO/WHO (FAO/WHO, 1999) and amino acid requirements of juvenile common carp as
P
CE

established by the NRC (NRC, 1993) (see Table 2). According to the values reported in Table 2,

the chemical score calculated from the reference protein to the needs of an adult male (RP-1) are
AC

substantially greater than 1 whatever the considered fraction.

Thus, only the chemical score of methionine was less than 1 (0.8) and only for the UF retentate.

More generally, the chemical score of this EAA is always the lowest, so it is the limiting EAA.

Except of the methionine, the content of the EAA of tuna dark muscle by-product hydrolysate is

generally superior to protein profiles required by the FAO and WHO for adults.

However, when we compare our fractions with the second reference protein (protein for common

carp (RP-2), we find that the protein hydrolysate of tuna dark muscle by-product does not fully

cover the needs of AAE for juvenile carp. The Chemical scores of EAA (valine, threonine,

methionine, phenylalanine, tryptophan and lysine) are less than 1. These gaps are also found in

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
the NF permeate and in the UF retentate where they are accentuated. Therefore, in the NF

retentate only the chemical scores of phenylalanine, tryptophan and methionine are lower than 1.

This result confirms the interest of the fractionation process developed in this study. The NF

retentate is not only enriched interest biofunctional peptides (peptides with MW between 1 and 4

PT
kDa) but also thanks to its balanced composition of the EAA, it can be incorporated as additional

RI
ingredients in the diet of fish in aquaculture and can be for example used as a nitrogen source in

SC
microbial growth media (F. Gurard, Dufoss, De La Broise, & Binet, 2001). These results

confirm the hypothesis that the produced tuna protein hydrolysate (dark muscle by-product) can

NU
be a source of high nutritional quality, especially in human nutrition and to a lesser extent in
MA
aquaculture nutrition. However, when it is incorporated as additional ingredients in the diet of

fish, they increase the power palatable " of the protein hydrolysate because of their high rate of
D

glycine and alanine and the fish growth especially of carnivores was then promoted (Wilson,
TE

2002).

4. Conclusion and future works

P
CE

The study showed that the protease Alcalase was suitable for production of the interesting

peptides fractions by hydrolysis of tuna dark muscle by-product. Tuna protein hydrolysate
AC

produced under optimum conditions (Temperature 55C, pH 8.5, Time 60 min, E/S 1%) has a

high proportion of interest peptides fractions (1-4 kDa). In addition, it has been found that the

concentration of available hydrolysable bonds was the factor controlling the hydrolysis rate

while the time of hydrolysis was the main factor controlling the MW of peptide fractions and the

characteristic of the fish protein hydrolysate. The efficiency of the combined membrane

separation process involving UF and NF membranes was improved for fractionation of the una

protein by-product hydrolysate and a better separation was obtained. Thus, the positive effect of

diafiltration on peptide purification process was underlined. The fractions of hydrolysate

produced (NF retentate and NF permeate) from tuna dark muscle can be used as a source of high

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
nutritional quality, especially in human nutrition and it has potential for applications in

aquaculture diets and as a source of nitrogen in microbial growth media.

However, further works are needed to evaluate the biological interest of recovered fractions as

well as the economic aspect of the process. In particular, the development of specific models and

PT
simulation will permit to design industrial units (i.e. surface calculation related to the amount of

RI
protein hydrolysate) and estimate the optimal performances in view to confirm the economic

SC
feasibility of the process.

NU
Acknowledgements
MA
The authors thankfully acknowledge the Averroes program for financial supports.
D
P TE
CE
AC

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
References

Adler-Nissen, J. (1982). Limited enzymic degradation of proteins: A new approach in the

industrial application of hydrolases. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology,

32 (1), 138-156.

PT
Adler-Nissen, J. (1986). Enzymic Hydrolysis of Food Proteins. Elsevier Applied Science

RI
Publishers (1st ed.). London, UK; p 427.

SC
AOAC. (2005). Official Methods of Analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists

In (16 ed.). Washington: Washington DC.

NU
Benjakul, S., & Morrissey, M. T. (1997). Protein Hydrolysates from Pacific Whiting Solid
MA
Wastes. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 45 (9), 3423-3430.

Bhaskar, N., Benila, T., Radha, C., & Lalitha, R. G. (2008). Optimization of enzymatic
D

hydrolysis of visceral waste proteins of Catla (Catla catla) for preparing protein
TE

hydrolysate using a commercial protease. Bioresource Technology, 99 (2), 335-343.

Bhaskar, N., & Mahendrakar, N. S. (2008). Protein hydrolysate from visceral waste proteins of
P
CE

Catla (Catla catla): Optimization of hydrolysis conditions for a commercial neutral

protease. Bioresource Technology, 99 (10), 4105-4111.

AC

Carvalho, A.L., Maugeri, F., Silva, V., Hernndez, A., Palacio, L., & Prdanos, P. (2011a). AFM

analysis of the surface of nanoporous membranes: application to the nanofiltration of

potassium clavulanate. Journal of Materials Science, 46, 33563369

Carvalho, A.L., Maugeri, F., Prdanos, P., Silva, V., & Hernndez, A. (2011b). Separation of

potassium clavulanate and potassium chloride by Nanofiltration: Transport and

evaluation of membranes. Separation and Purification Technology, 83, 2330

Chabeaud, A., Vandanjon, L., Bourseau, P., Jaouen, P., Chaplain-Derouiniot, M., & Guerard, F.

(2009). Performances of ultrafiltration membranes for fractionating a fish protein

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
hydrolysate: Application to the refining of bioactive peptidic fractions. Separation and

Purification Technology, 66 (3), 463-471.

Chabeaud, A., Vandanjon, L., Bourseau, P., Jaouen, P., & Gurard, F. (2009). Fractionation by

ultrafiltration of a saithe protein hydrolysate (Pollachius virens): Effect of material and

PT
molecular weight cut-off on the membrane performances. Journal of Food Engineering,

RI
91 (3), 408-414.

SC
Changwon, H. (2013). Ozonation and/or Coagulation - Ceramic Membrane Hybrid for Filtration

of Impaired-Quality Source Waters. King Abdullah University of Science and

NU
Technology, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. (http://hdl.handle.net/10754/302778)
MA
Diniz, F. M., & Martin, A. M. (1998). Influence of process variables on the hydrolysis of shark

muscle protein / Influencia de las variables de proceso en la hidrlisis de protena del

D

msculo de tiburn. Food Science and Technology International, 4, 91-98.

TE

Drioli, E., Stankiewicz, A. I., & Macedonio, F. (2011). Membrane engineering in process

intensification- An overview. Journal of Membrane Science, 380 (1-2), 1-8.

P
CE

FAO. (2008). fisheries departement: La situation mondiale des pches et de l'aquaculture.

FAO/WHO. (1999). Energy and protein requirements. Report of Joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert
AC

Consultation Technical Report. FAO/WHO and United Nations University. In (pp. 113-

121). Geneva.

Gourley, L., Gauthier, S. F., & Pouliot, Y. (1995). Separation of casein hydrolysates using

polysufone ultrafiltration membranes with pH and EDTA treatments applied. Lait, 75,

259269.

Gurard, F. (2007). Enzymatique esxtraction methods for by-product recovery. In Maximissing

the Value of Marine By-Product. Woodhead.

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Gurard, F., Dufoss, L., De La Broise, D., & Binet, A. (2001). Enzymatic hydrolysis of proteins

from yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares) wastes using Alcalase. Journal of Molecular

Catalysis B: Enzymatic, 11 (4-6), 1051-1059.

Gurard, F., L. Dufosse, D. De La Broise, & A. Binet. (2001). Enzymatic hydrolysis of proteins

PT
from yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares) wastes using Alcalase. Journal of Molecular

RI
Catalysis B: Enzymatic, 11, 1051-1059.

SC
Hsu, K.-C. (2010). Purification of antioxidative peptides prepared from enzymatic hydrolysates

of tuna dark muscle by-product. Food Chemistry, 122(1), 42-48.

NU
Hsu, K.-C., Li-Chan, E. C. Y., & Jao, C.-L. (2011). Antiproliferative activity of peptides
MA
prepared from enzymatic hydrolysates of tuna dark muscle on human breast cancer cell

line MCF-7. Food Chemistry, 126 (2), 617-622.

D

Hsu, K.-C., Lu, G.-H., & Jao, C.-L. (2009). Antioxidative properties of peptides prepared from
TE

tuna cooking juice hydrolysates with orientase (Bacillus subtilis). Food Research

International, 42 (5-6), 647-652.

P
CE

Je, J.-Y., Lee, K.-H., Lee, M. H., & Ahn, C.-B. (2009). Antioxidant and antihypertensive protein

hydrolysates produced from tuna liver by enzymatic hydrolysis. Food Research

AC

International, 42 (9), 1266-1272.

Je, J.-Y., Park, P.-J., & Kim, S.-K. (2005). Antioxidant activity of a peptide isolated from Alaska

pollack (Theragra chalcogramma) frame protein hydrolysate. Food Research

International, 38 (1), 45-50.

Jeon, Y.-J., Byun, H.-G., & Kim, S.-K. (1999). Improvement of functional properties of cod

frame protein hydrolysates using ultrafiltration membranes. Process Biochemistry, 35 (5),

471-478.

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Jun, S.-Y., Park, P.-J., Jung, W.-K., & Kim, S.-K. (2004). Purification and characterization of an

antioxidative peptide from enzymatic hydrolysate of yellowfin sole (Limanda aspera)

frame protein. European Food Research and Technology, 219 (1), 20-26.

Kim, S.-Y., Je, J.-Y., & Kim, S.-K. (2007). Purification and characterization of antioxidant

PT
peptide from hoki (Johnius belengerii) frame protein by gastrointestinal digestion. The

RI
Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry, 18 (1), 31-38.

SC
Kovacs, Z., & Samhaber, W. (2009). Nanofiltration of concentrated amino acid solutions.

Desalination, 240 (13), 78-88.

NU
Kristinsson, H. G., & Rasco, B. A. (2000a). Biochemical and functional properties of Atlantic
MA
salmon (Salmo salar) muscle proteins hydrolyzed with various alkaline proteases.

Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry., 48 (3), 657-666

D

Kristinsson, H. G., & Rasco, B. A. (2000b). Fish protein hydrolysates: production, biochemical,
TE

and functional properties. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 40 (1), 43-81.

Kristinsson, H. G., & Rasco, B. A. (2000c). Kinetics of the hydrolysis of Atlantic salmon (Salmo
P
CE

salar) muscle proteins by alkaline proteases and a visceral serine protease mixture.

Process Biochemistry, 36 (1-2), 131-139.

AC

Kuo-Chiang, H. (2010). Purification of antioxidative peptides prepared from enzymatic

hydrolysates of tuna dark muscle by-product. Food Chemistry, 122 (1), 42-48.

Kwon, D. Y., Vigneswaran, S., Fane, A. G., & Aim, R. B. (2000). Experimental determination of

critical flux in cross-flow microfiltration. Separation and Purification Technology, 19

(3), 169-181.

Layne, E. (1957). Spectrophotometric and turbidimetric methods for measur proteins (Vol. 3).

New York: Academic press.

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Li, Z.-Y., H-Kittikun, A., & Youravong, W. (2008). Separation of protease from yellowfin tuna

spleen extract by ultrafiltration: Effect of hydrodynamics and gas sparging on flux

enhancement and selectivity. Journal of Membrane Science, 311 (1-2), 104-111.

Li, Z.-Y., Youravong, W., & H-Kittikun, A. (2009). Protein hydrolysis by protease isolated from

PT
tuna spleen by membrane filtration: A comparative study with commercial proteases.

RI
LWT - Food Science and Technology, 43 (1), 166-172.

SC
Liaset, B., Lied, E., & Espe, M. (2000). Enzymatic hydrolysis of by-products from the fish-

filleting industry; chemical characterisation and nutritional evaluation. Journal of the

NU
Science of Food and Agriculture, 80 (5), 581-589.
MA
Martin-Orue, C., Bouhallab, S., & Garem, A. (1998). Nanofiltration of amino acid and peptide

solutions: mechanisms of separation. Journal of Membrane Science, 142 (2), 225-233.

D

Motamedzadegan, A., Davarniam, B., Asadi, G., Abedian, A., & Ovissipour, M. (2010).
TE

Optimization of enzymatic hydrolysis of yellowfin tuna Thunnus albacares viscera using

Neutrase. International Aquatic Research, 2, 173-181

P
CE

NRC. (1993). National Research Council-nutrient requirements of fish. Washington.

Picot, L., Bordenave, S., Didelot, S., Fruitier-Arnaudin, I., Sannier, F., Thorkelsson, G., Berg, J.
AC

P., Gurard, F., Chabeaud, A., & Piot, J. M. (2006). Antiproliferative activity of fish

protein hydrolysates on human breast cancer cell lines. Process Biochemistry, 41 (5),

1217-1222.

Quaglia, G. B., & Orban, E. (1987). Enzymic solubilisation of proteins of sardine (sardina

pilchardus) by commercial proteases. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 38

(3), 263-269.

Ravallec-Pl, R., Charlot, C., Pires, C., Braga, V., Batista, I., Van Wormhoudt, A., Le Gal, Y., &

Fouchereau, P. M. (2001). The presence of bioactive peptides in hydrolysates prepared

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
from processing waste of sardine Sardina pilchardus. Journal of the Science of Food and

Agriculture, 81, 1120-1125.

Saidi, S., Deratani, A., Ben Amar, R., & Belleville, M.-P. (2013). Fractionation of a tuna dark

muscle hydrolysate by a two-step membrane process. Separation and Purification

PT
Technology, 108 (0), 28-36.

RI
Shahidi, F., Han, X.-Q., & Synowiecki, J. (1995). Production and characteristics of protein

SC
hydrolysates from capelin (Mallotus villosus). Food Chemistry, 53 (3), 285-293.

Vandanjon, L., Cros, S., Jaouen, P., Qumneur, F., & Bourseau, P. (2002). Recovery by

NU
nanofiltration and reverse osmosis of marine flavours from seafood cooking waters.
MA
Desalination, 144 (1-3), 379-385.

Vandanjon, L., Grignon, M., Courois, E., Bourseau, P., & Jaouen, P. (2009). Fractionating white
D

fish fillet hydrolysates by ultrafiltration and nanofiltration. Journal of Food Engineering,

TE

95 (1), 36-44.

Vandanjon, L., Johannsson, R., Derouiniot, M., Bourseau, P., & Jaouen, P. (2007).
P
CE

Concentration and purification of blue whiting peptide hydrolysates by membrane

processes. Journal of Food Engineering, 83 (4), 581-589.

AC

Vidotti, R. M., Viegas, E. M. M., & Carneiro, D. J. (2003). Amino acid composition of

processed fish silage using different raw materials. Animal Feed Science and Technology,

105 (1-4), 199-204.

Wilson, R. P. (2002). Amino acids and proteins. San Diego. CA, USA, : Academic Press, .

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Figure Captions

Figure 1: Experimental set-up (1 Feed tank ; 2 Pump ; 3 Pressure gauge ; 4 Membrane module ;

5 Valve ; 6 Thermostated waterbath ; 7 Balance ; 8 Computer)

PT
Figure 2: Variation of the Degree of hydrolysis (a), the soluble protein concentration (b) and the

RI
percentage of peptide fractions 1-4KDa (c) with time and at different enzyme/substrate ratios

SC
(E/S) (pH 8.5, Temperature 55C) (standard deviation: <5%).

NU
Figure 3: Normalized chromatograms of the retentates and permeates resulting from membrane
MA
fractionation of tuna protein hydrolysate: (a) UF concentration with membrane 8kDa, (b) UF

diafiltration with membrane 8kDa, (c) NF concentration with membrane 1 kDa

D
TE

Figure 4: Evolution of the protein concentration in feed during the fractionation of tuna protein

hydrolysate with volume reduction factor (VRF) and diafiltration volume (DV) (standard
P
CE

deviation: <5%):

(a) UF concentration step; membrane 8kDa, P=2 bar, T=25C, V=3 m.s-1,
AC

(b) UF diafiltration step; membrane 8kDa, P=2 bar, T=25C, V=3 m.s-1

(c) NE concentration step; membrane 1kDa, P=10 bar, T=25C, V=1.25 m.s-1

Figure 5: Mass balance of dry matter, protein and peptide fractions (molar mass (kDa)). (

Retentate of the UF step; Retentate of the NF step; Permeate of the NF step) (standard

deviation: <5%).

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Figures

PT
RI
SC
1 6

NU
3 3
4

MA
ED
5
2

PT
CE
AC

8
7

Figure 1

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

30 80 35

(a) (b) (c)

PT
E/S=4.5% 70 30
25

Protein concentration (g.L )

E/S=3%

-1
Degre of Hydrolysis (%)

Rate of fractions 4-1 KDa (%)

60
25

RI
20 E/S=1.5%
50
E/S=1% 20

SC
15 40
E/S=0.75% 15
30
10

NU
20 10

5 10 5

MA
0
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Temps (min) Time (min)
Time (min)
E/S=0,75% E/S=1% E/S=1,5% E/S=3% E/S=4,5% E/S=0,75% E/S=1% E/S=1,5% E/S=3% E/S=4,5%

ED
PT Figure 2
CE
AC

30
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 kDa 1 kDa 1 kDa P (UF1+ UF2)

FPH (b) R UF1
(a) (c)
Absorbance 220 nm
P UF1 P UF2 P NF
R UF1 R UF2 R NF

PT
7 kDa 4 kDa

RI
7 kDa
7 kDa

SC
Time (min)

NU
MA
Figure 3

ED
PT
CE
AC

31
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D
TE
P
CE
AC

32
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

100 100 100

Protein concentration in feed (g.L-1)

90 90 90
80 80 80

PT
70 70 70
60 60 60

RI
50 50 50
40 40 40

SC
30 30 30
20 20 20
(a) (b) (c)

NU
10 10 10
0 0 0
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4

MA
Volume Reduction Factor (VRF) Diafiltration Volume (DV) Volume Reduction Factor (VRF)

ED
Figure 4

PT
CE
AC

33
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

100
90 RUF

80 RNF

PT
70 PNF

RI
60

SC
50
40

NU
30
20 MA
10
0
Dry matter Protein >7 kDa 4-7 KDa 1-4 kDa 0.3-1 KDa <0.3 KDa
D
P TE

Figure 5
CE
AC

34
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
NU
MA
D
TE
P
CE
AC

35
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 1: Composition of different fractions obtained by membrane fractionation

Concentration (UF1) Diafiltration (UF2) Concentration (NF)

T
IP
TPH Retentat Permeate Retentat Permeate Mean UF Permeate Retentate Permeate

CR
Dray Matter (% w/w) 14.6 e
19.2 (UF1)
7.6 e
17.5 (UF2)
5.5 (UF1+UF2)
6.7 9.6 3.1
Protein Concentration (g.L- 72 95 36.5 67 48 43 76 11

US
1Peptidic Populations (%)
)

N
Fraction> 7kDa 11.4 17.5 00 18.2 00 00 00 00

MA
Fraction 4-7kDa 2.6 7.8 0.6 9.7 1.08 0.9 1.2 00
Fraction 1- 4kDa 19.2 17.6 18.4 18.4 18.2 16.9 20.3 4.9

D
TE
Fraction 0.3-1kDa 28.5 21.3 30.6 19.2 32 31.7 32.3 22.5
Fraction <0.3kDa 38.3 35.9 51.1 34.6 48.7 50.5 46.2 72.5

P
TPH: Tuna protein hydrolysate CE
AC
(Standard deviations are less than 10% and 5% for dry matter and protein quantifications)

36
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 2: Amino acid composition and chemical score of the by-products protein tuna hydrolysate and the different fractions obtained by

membrane fractionation (Experimental errors are lower than 5%).

T
IP
CR
Amino Acid TPH Retentate UF Retentate NF Permeate NF RP-1 RP-2

US
Q CS-1 CS-2 Q CS-1 CS-2 Q CS-1 CS-2 Q CS-1 CS-2 Q Q
Valine* 3.200 2.462 0.889 2.801 2.155 0.778 3.860 2.969 1.072 4.917 3.782 1.366 1.3 3.6

N
Leucine* 4.932 2.596 1.494 4.092 2.154 1.240 5.961 3.137 1.806 4.857 2.556 1.472 1.9 3.3

MA
Isoleucine* 4.082 3.140 1.633 3.050 2.346 1.220 4.023 3.094 1.609 2.397 1.844 0.959 1.3 2.5
Threonine* 2.995 3.327 0.768 2.282 2.536 0.585 3.944 4.382 1.011 2.302 2.557 0.590 0.9 3.9

D
Methionine* 1.739 1.023 0.561 1.367 0.804 0.441 2.192 1.290 0.707 1.711 1.007 0.552 1.7 3.1

TE
Phenylalanine* 2.413 1.270 0.371 2.164 1.139 0.333 2.773 1.459 0.427 2.169 1.142 0.334 1.9 6.5

P
Tryptophan* 0.343 0.685 0.428 0.295 0.590 0.369 0.513 1.025 0.641 0.312 0.624 0.390 0.5 0.8
Lysine* 4.710 2.944 0.826 3.836
CE 2.397 0.673 6.050 3.781 1.061 4.482 2.801 0.786 1.6 5.7
AC
Histidine* 2.401 1.501 1.144 1.784 1.115 0.850 2.928 1.830 1.394 3.355 2.097 1.598 1.6 2.1
Tyrosine 1.835 1.589 2.185 1.713 - -
Arginine 2.378 2.405 3.915 2.366 - 1.31
Aspartic Acid 5.351 4.707 7.480 2.703
Ornitine 0.050 0.223 0.119 0.179
Glutamic Acid 8.523 7.281 12.069 4.891
Proline 2.222 1.918 2.885 3.040
Serine 2.339 1.651 2.985 1.877
Glycine 3.620 2.972 4.775 2.991
37
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Alanine 4.561 3.711 6.046 1.533

Cysteine 0.388 0.388 0.373 1.930

T
total 60.739 50.787 78.229 45.977

IP
TPH: Tuna protein hydrolysate

CR
RP-1: reference protein 1: Profile of Amino Acid suggest for an adult (FAO/WHO. 1999)

US
RP-2: reference protein 2: Amino Acid needs of common carp according to NRC (1993)

N
Q: quantity (g/100g) of dry matter

MA
CS-1: chemical score relative to protein reference 1

D
CS-2: chemical score relative to protein reference 2

TE
* Amino Acids Essentials (AAE)

P
CE
AC

38
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Graphical abstract

T
IP
Agitation

CR
Optimal conditions 100
NF membrane

US
-Temperature 50C 90
80
-pH 8.5

Retention Rate (%)

70

N
-E/S 1% 60

MA
pH-stat -Time 60 mn 50
40
Enzymatic hydrolysis
30

D
20
UF membrane

TE
10
UF Retentate 0

P
<300 300-1000 1000-4000 4000-7000 > 7000

Enriched of MW> 4KDa Molecular Weight (Da)

Tuna protein hydrolysate CE NF Retentate
Water
AC
UF diafiltration
Feed Almost free of MW > 4kDa and
(8KDa)
solution enriched of 1<MW<4KDa
UF
NF 1kDa NF Permeate
concentration UF Permeate T 20C; P 10 bar;
(8 kDa)
V 1.25 m.s-1 Almost free of
(T 20C; P 2bar; Almost free of MW> 4KDa
V 3 m.s-1) MW> 1KDa

39
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights

Production of interest peptide fractions (MM 1-4 kDa) from tuna by-product using Alcalase.

Coupling of membrane separation processes for fractionation of fish protein hydrolysates.

T
The peptide fraction rich in peptides of MM between 1 and 4 kDa was recovered and isolated.

IP
The positive effect of diafiltration on peptide purification was underlined.

R
The peptides fractions produced have a high nutritional quality.

SC
NU
MA
D
P TE
CE
AC

40