Cited by 183Proteins in Food SystemsAgricultural and Biological ResearchFood and Agricultural Sciences

Optimization of enzyme assisted extraction of protein from the sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) leaves for alternative plant protein concentrate production

Akyüz, Ayça, Ersus, Seda·2021·Food Chemistry

Abstract

This research focused on the effect of temperature (25-75 °C), extraction time (40-120 min) and solvent/solid ratio (15-45 mL/g) and the enzyme assisted extraction on protein extraction efficiency from by-product of sugar beet. 3 different methods were applied in protein isolation and the highest protein yield (34.55%) was obtained by the isoelectric-ammonium sulfate precipitation method. At the optimized condition of temperature 54.25 °C, 81.35 min, and solvent/solid ratio of 27.65 mL/g, the protein yield was found 55.15%. The protein yield has reached 79.01% with an increase of 43.27% with the aid of the enzyme assisted extraction. The physicochemical properties were determined for revealing its potential use in food industry. It is promising that the isolated protein concentrates (SPC-IAP) show high protein content (69.08% d.b) as well as high solubility (98.71% at pH 7.5). SPC-IAP's high brightness (L* = 79.55), low redness (a* = 0.33) and low yellowness (b* = 13.27) values are encouraging for food industry.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.127673

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Protein yield of 55.15% was obtained by isoelectric-ammonium sulfate precipitation method from sugar beet byproduct.

    “Protein yield of 55.15% was obtained by isoelectric-ammonium sulfate precipitation method from sugar beet byproduct [117].”

    From Food Waste Biorefinery: Pathway towards Circular Bioeconomy (2021) · cites this paper as [117]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Akyüz, A., & Ersus, S.
Affiliations
Ege University (TR)
Corresponding author
Akyüz, Ayça
Venue
Food Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-01
Volume
335
Pages
127673
ISSN
0308-8146 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3046128027
Cited by
183
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 10
FWCI
9.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Food Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ege Üniversitesi
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Proteins in Food Systems
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural and Biological Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food and Agricultural Sciences
Keywords
enzymatic extraction, protein extraction, sugar beet leaves, Beta vulgaris, plant protein concentrates, sugar beet by-products, isoelectric precipitation, ammonium sulfate precipitation, extraction optimization, protein yield, protein solubility, physicochemical properties, color features, alternative plant protein
MeSH terms
Enzymes, Food-Processing Industry, Chemical Fractionation, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Plant Proteins, Powders, Solubility, Solvents, Temperature, Plant Leaves, Beta vulgaris

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review