Method for fractionating soluble fractions of peas, fraction thus obtained and upgrade thereof

Abstract

A method for fractionating soluble fractions of peas, includes, in sequence, a step of microfiltering or centrifuging, followed by a step of ultrafiltering, and optionally a reverse-osmosis step. A reduction of the leakage of proteins toward the soluble fractions, an improvement of the yield of the single concentration step by evaporating the soluble fractions, and the selective isolation of proteins of interest are thus achieved. The method is easy to implement, the devices used at each single step are conventional and well known to the person skilled in the art. Also, the method does not use any organic solvent other than water.

Claims

1. A method for treating pea soluble fractions, comprising: a) a soluble fractions preparation step comprising (i) preparing a starch milk, by mixing pea flour and water in a kneading machine, (ii) extracting the starch and the fibers from said milk to obtain a protein-rich product, (iii) flocculating said protein-rich product, (iv)isolating through centrifugal decantation carried out on the product obtained from step iii) a highly protein-rich composition called a floc and a supernatant called soluble fractions, b) microfiltering or centrifuging said soluble fractions to obtain a microfiltration permeate and a microfiltration retentate or a centrifugation supernatant, c) ultrafiltering one of said microfiltration permeate and centrifugation supernatant to obtain an albumin-rich ultrafiltration permeate and an ultrafiltration retentate rich in PA1b fraction, d) subjecting said ultrafiltration permeate to reverse osmosis to obtain one of a reverse osmosis permeate enriched in PA1b fraction and a reverse osmosis retentate, and e) reintroducing all or part of said microfiltration permeate, microfiltration retentate, ultrafiltration retentate, and reverse osmosis retentate to the floc, downstream of the centrifugal decanting step.

2. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein said soluble fraction is microfiltered by tangential membrane microfiltration.

3. The method as claimed in claim 2, wherein the tangential membrane microfiltration is carried out with ceramic membranes having a porosity of 0.01 μm to 1 μm.

4. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein said microfiltering or centrifuging step b) is preceded by flocculation of insoluble particles contained in the pea soluble fraction.

5. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein said soluble fraction is ultrafiltered using membranes which have a cut-off threshold of between 0.1 and 0.5 μm, at a transmembrane pressure maintained below 4 bar.

6. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the reverse osmosis is carried out with membranes having a cut-off threshold of between 100 Da and 500 Da.

7. The method as claimed in claim 2, wherein the tangential membrane microfiltration is carried out with ceramic membranes having a porosity of 0.05 μm to 0.5 μm.

8. The method as claimed in claim 2, wherein flocculation of insoluble particles contained in the pea soluble fraction is performed prior to microfiltering.

9. The method as claimed in claim 3, wherein flocculation of insoluble particles contained in the pea soluble fraction is performed prior to microfiltering.

10. The method as claimed in claim 2, wherein the ultrafiltering is carried out using membranes which have a cut-off threshold of between 0.1 and 0.5 μm, and a transmembrane pressure maintained below 4 bar.

11. The method as claimed in claim 3, wherein ultrafiltering is carried out using membranes which have a cut-off threshold of between 0.1 and 0.5 μm, the transmembrane pressure being maintained below 4 bar.

12. The method as claimed in claim 4, wherein ultrafiltering is carried out using membranes which have a cut-off threshold of between 0.1 and 0.5 μm, the transmembrane pressure being maintained below 4 bar.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

(1) FIG. 1 illustrates the principle process in accordance with the disclosed invention.

(2) FIG. 2 graphically compares the solubility of the disclosed invention with that of Nutralys® as a function of pH.

(3) FIG. 3 graphically compares emulsifying capacity of the disclosed invention with that of Nutralys® prior art as a function of pH.

(4) FIG. 4 graphically compares foaming capacity and the foam stability of the spray-dried fraction of R15-2 of Example 2 relative to Nutralys®.

(5) FIG. 5 illustrates the electrophoretic profile of the process fractions.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

(6) The other FIGS. 2 to 5 illustrate the results and an electrophoretic profile obtained in the tests exemplified in the present application.

(7) A very precise isolation of various categories of proteins of interest, which can subsequently be exploited in a given application, is thus achieved. Entirely advantageously, the microfiltration retentate and the sediment resulting from the centrifugation are rich in phytic acid. As it happens, this acid inhibits the absorption of various cations (Zn, Cu, Co, Mn, Ca, Fe) by forming insoluble salts (phytates). This property is exploited in enology: treatment with calcium phytate is the only one which is authorized (in France) for removing iron from red wines.

(8) Likewise advantageously, the retentate resulting from the reverse osmosis step is particularly rich in a-galactoside, but also in the fraction termed PA1b which has a direct application in the production of insecticides of entirely biobased origin (as disclosed in the abovementioned document FR 2 778 407). Furthermore, all or part of the fractions rich in the various proteins of interest, and obtained at the level of each unitary filtration step, can be redirected to the floc, downstream of the centrifugal decanting step. As a result, the rich protein content of the floc increases.

(9) Finally, the final permeate resulting from the reverse osmosis step, which advantageously contains the amino acids, carbohydrates and other salts, particles of very small sizes, can easily be concentrated by means of an evaporator, without however causing clogging problems, which require production to be frequently stopped for cleaning operations, or even changing devices.

(10) Thus, a first subject of the present invention consists of a method for treating pea soluble fractions, comprising:

(11) a) a step of microfiltration or centrifugation of said soluble fractions resulting in a microfiltration permeate or a centrifugation supernatant,

(12) b) followed by a step of ultrafiltration of the microfiltration permeate or of the centrifugation supernatant, resulting in an ultrafiltration permeate and an ultrafiltration retentate,

(13) c) followed by an optional step of reverse osmosis of the ultrafiltration permeate resulting in a permeate and a retentate from the reverse osmosis.

(14) One of the originalities of the present invention consists in subjecting the pea soluble fractions, compositions which are a priori non-noble, to a certain number of treatment steps with a view to exploiting their content. This type of method where unitary treatment steps are applied directly to the soluble fractions should be clearly distinguished from the prior art processes which may have recourse to these same individual steps, but with a view to treating:

(15) either the pea proteins free of the soluble fractions with a view to purifying said pea proteins,

(16) or these same pea proteins still loaded with soluble fractions and with a view precisely to carrying out a separation between proteins and soluble fractions.

(17) The first step of the method according to the invention is therefore a microfiltration or centrifugation step a) which is carried out directly on the pea soluble fractions, as derived from the centrifugal decanting step. The objective of this step is in particular to isolate a globulin-rich protein fraction.

(18) The microfiltration of the pea soluble fractions results in a microfiltration permeate and a microfiltration retentate. It is the permeate which is then treated in the subsequent ultrafiltration step b). The centrifugation of the pea soluble fractions results, for its part, in a centrifugation supernatant and a centrifugation sediment. It is the supernatant which is then treated in the subsequent ultrafiltration step b).

(19) When the first step is a microfiltration, it is preferentially a tangential membrane microfiltration. More particularly, the tangential microfiltration is preferentially carried out with ceramic membranes having a porosity of 0.01 μm to 1 μm, preferentially of 0.05 μm to 0.5 μm.

(20) Optionally, this first microfiltration or centrifugation step may be preceded by a step of flocculation of the insoluble particles contained in the starch plant soluble fraction, by any technique known, moreover, to those skilled in the art.

(21) The second step of the method according to the invention consists of an ultrafiltration step b), carried out on the microfiltration permeate or on the centrifugation supernatant. It makes it possible to obtain, on the one hand, an albumin-rich ultrafiltration retentate and, on the other hand, a permeate rich in the fraction termed PAlb about which it has already been mentioned that it can be exploited in the production of insecticide. The permeate in its entirety can therefore be directly exploited for this insecticide application; it is not necessary to overly treat/separate it.

(22) More particularly, it is recommended to carry out the ultrafiltration using membranes which have a cut-off threshold of between 0.1 and 0.5 μm, the transmembrane pressure being maintained below 4 bar.

(23) Finally, the method according to the invention comprises a third step c) which remains optional, but which is preferentially performed: it is a reverse osmosis step carried out on the ultrafiltration permeate.

(24) The applicant recommends performing this osmosis with membranes which have a cut-off threshold of between 100 Da and 500 Da.

(25) The examples which follow make it possible to illustrate the application more clearly without, however, limiting the scope thereof.

EXAMPLES

Example 1

(26) This example illustrates the effectiveness of combining microfiltration with ultrafiltration in order to obtain, firstly, a globulin-rich microfiltration retentate and, secondly, a carbohydrate-rich ultrafiltration permeate.

(27) The pea soluble fraction is first of all produced. Pea flour is initially prepared by grinding shelled fodder peas in an Alpine hammer mill equipped with a 100 μm screen. 300 kg of flour containing 87% of solids are then soaked in water at the final concentration of 25% on a dry weight basis, at a pH of 6.5. 1044 kg of flour suspension containing 25% of solids (i.e., therefore, 261 kg of dry flour) are then introduced with 500 kg of water into a battery of hydrocyclones composed of 14 stages. It is fed with the flour suspension at stage No. 5. This separation results in the production of a light phase which corresponds to the outlet of stage No. 1. It consists of the mixture of proteins, internal fibers and soluble materials.

(28) This light phase at the hydrocyclone outlet contains as a mixture (142 kg on a dry weight basis in total): the fibers (approximately 14.8% by weight, i.e. 21 kg on a dry weight basis), the proteins (approximately 42.8% by weight, i.e. 60.8 kg on a dry weight basis) and the soluble materials (approximately 42.4% by weight, i.e. 60.2 kg on a dry weight basis). This fraction has a solids content of 11.4%. The fiber separation is carried out on Westfalia centrifugal decanters used in an industrial potato-processing starch unit. The light phase at the centrifugal decanter outlet contains a mixture of proteins and soluble materials, whereas the heavy phase contains the pea fibers. The heavy phase contains 105 kg of fibers containing 20% of solids. It is noted that virtually all the fibers are indeed found in this fraction.

(29) As for the protein and soluble material fraction, it contains 1142 kg of a mixture in solution of soluble materials and proteins (fraction containing 6% of solids). The flocculation of the proteins is carried out at their isoelectric point by adjusting the light phase at the centrifugal decanter outlet to a pH of 4.5 and heating to 50° C.

(30) The proteins thus flocculated are left in a maturing tank for 10 minutes. After precipitation of the proteins, centrifugal decanting is carried out, which makes it possible to recover, after drying, sediment containing 56 kg of proteins (86% of N×6.25 on a dry weight basis) containing 93% of solids.

(31) The process is carried out in this way until 2500 liters of pea solubles are obtained, the pH of which is adjusted to 7.0 by adding 50% sodium hydroxide. The temperature of the resulting suspension was brought to 70° C. The composition of the resulting suspension (SOLF_1) is given in Table 1.1.

(32) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1.1 SOLF_1 Solids content 2.5 g for 100 g Protein content 27 g for 100 g of solids (N × 6.25) Ash content 16 g for 100 g of solids Total carbohydrate 47 g for 100 g of solids content of which: Raffinose 4.0 g for 100 g of solids Stachyose 13.4 g for 100 g of solids Verbacose 15.1 g for 100 g of solids Others 10 g for 100 g of solids

(33) The solution is pumped through a microfiltration unit equipped with Inside Ceram® ceramic membranes having a cut-off threshold of 0.14 μm (19 channels of 4.5 mm). Throughout the filtration, the temperature is regulated at 60° C. and the transmembrane pressure is maintained at a value of between 0.4 and 0.6 bar.

(34) 707 liters of microfiltration permeate (P014_1) and 1768 liters of microfiltration retentate (R014_1) are thus recovered. The compositions of each of the fractions are given in Table 1.2.

(35) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 1.2 P014_1 R014_1 Solids content 2.5 2.5 % Protein content 26.5 27.2 g/100 g of solids (N × 6.25) Ash content 21.0 14.0 g/100 g of solids Total carbohydrate 45.0 47.0 g/100 g of solids content Others 7.5 11.8 g/100 g of solids

(36) 550 liters of the permeate (P014_1) are pumped through an ultrafiltration unit. The ultrafiltration unit is equipped with Kerasep® BX ceramic membranes sold by the company Novasep and having a cut-off threshold of 15 kDa (7 channels of 6 mm). Throughout the filtration, the temperature is regulated at 60° C. and the transmembrane pressure is maintained at a value of between 1 and 3 bar.

(37) 467 liters of ultrafiltration permeate (P15_1) and 33 liters of retentate (R15_1) are thus recovered. The compositions of each of the fractions are given in Table 1.3.

(38) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 1.3 P15_1 R15_1 Solids content 2.2 7.2 % Protein content 15.0 75.1 g/100 g of solids (N × 6.25) Ash content 23.6 10.3 g/100 g of solids Total carbohydrate 52.6 12.5 g/100 g of solids content Others 8.8 2.1 g/100 g of solids

Example 2

(39) In comparison with the previous example, this example illustrates the benefit of diafiltration for optimizing the richness of the retentate.

(40) 600 liters of pea solubles resulting from an isoelectric coagulation process are adjusted to a pH of 7.0 by adding 50% sodium hydroxide. The temperature of the resulting suspension was brought to 60° C. The composition of the suspension is the one given in Table 1.1 above.

(41) The solution is pumped through a microfiltration unit equipped with Inside Ceram® ceramic membranes having a cut-off threshold of 0.14 μm (19 channels of 4.5 mm). Throughout the filtration, the temperature is regulated at 60° and the transmembrane pressure is maintained at a value of between 0.4 and 0.6 bar.

(42) 160 liters of microfiltration permeate (P014_2) and 400 liters of microfiltration retentate (R014_2) are thus recovered.

(43) 110 liters of the permeate (P014_2) are pumped through an ultrafiltration unit. The ultrafiltration unit is equipped with Kerasep® BX ceramic membranes sold by the company Novasep and having a cut-off threshold of 15 kDa (7 channels of 6 mm). The retentate fraction is maintained in total recycling on the feed and the permeate is discharged. The feed is supplemented with a permanent flow of water in a proportion of one volume of water for 7 volumes of permeate discharged. Throughout the filtration, the temperature is regulated at 60° C. and the transmembrane pressure is maintained at a value of between 2 and 3 bar.

(44) 107 liters of ultrafiltration permeate (P15_2) and 7 liters of retentate (R15_2) are thus recovered. The retentate (R15_2) is spray-dried. The composition of the fractions analyzed is given in Table 2.1.

(45) TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 2.1 P15_2 R15_2 Solids content 3.3 11.0 % Protein content 15.8 81.7 g/100 g of solids (N × 6.25) Ash content 20.4 10.3 g/100 g of solids Total carbohydrate 51.0 6.8 g/100 g of solids content Others 12.8 1.2 g/100 g of solids

Example 3

(46) This examples illustrates the beneficial effect of reverse osmosis for demineralizing and increasing the concentration of total carbohydrates of interest of the ultrafiltration permeate.

(47) 150 liters of pea solubles are treated according to the protocol described in example 2. 60 liters of ultrafiltration permeate (P15-3) are thus obtained and then pumped through a reverse osmosis unit equipped with Osmonics Desal® spiral organic membranes sold by General Electric Company and having a cut-off threshold of 350 Da. The retentate fraction is maintained in total recycling on the feed and the permeate is discharged. Throughout the filtration, the temperature is regulated at 50° C. and the pressure is maintained at a value of about 20 bar.

(48) 5 liters of retentate (R350_3) are thus recovered. The composition of the various fractions is given in Table 3.1.

(49) TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 3.1 P15_3 R350_3 Solids content 2.2 14 g/100 g Protein content 14.5 9 g/100 g of solids (N × 6.25) Ash content 20 6 g/100 g of solids Total carbohydrate 56 65 g/100 g of solids content Raffinose 4.5 6.0 g/100 g of solids Stachyose 18.0 19.1 g/100 g of solids Verbacose 16.9 21.0 g/100 g of solids Others 16.5 12.0 g/100 g of solids

Example 4

(50) The solubility as a function of the pH of the spray-dried fraction R15_2 obtained in example 2 is measured. It is compared to that of a Nutralys® F85M pea protein isolate sold by the applicant.

(51) The solubility is considered to be equal to the solids of a supernatant from centrifugation (15 min at 3000 g) of a suspension at a given pH and prepared by homogenization of 5 g of product in 100 g of water. FIG. 2 represents the solubility of the two products as a function of the pH. The R15_2 fraction has a better solubility than the Nutralys® F85M. This better solubility is an advantage for the energy formulation sector in the sport field.

Example 5

(52) The emulsifying capacity as a function of the pH of the spray-dried fraction R15_2 obtained in example 2 is measured. It was compared to that of a Nutralys® F85M pea protein isolate.

(53) The emulsifying activity of the product is determined on the basis of the volume of emulsion remaining (as %) after dispersion in a water-oil mixture at a given pH and then centrifugation. The emulsifying activity of the product is determined on the basis of the volume of emulsion remaining (as %) after dispersion in a water-oil mixture at a given pH and then centrifugation according to the method of Yasumatsu et al. (1972) described by: Naczk M., Rubin L. J., Shahidi F., Functional properties and phytate content of pea protein preparations. Journal of Food Science, Volume 51, No. 5, 1986, p. 1245-1247.

(54) FIG. 3 shows that, at pH 4.5 and 5.5, the R15_2 fraction has the best emulsifying capacity, the Nutralys® F85M having no emulsifying capacity at this pH. These emulsifying properties can be exploited, inter alia, in the pork meat field.

Example 6

(55) The foaming capacity and the foam stability of the spray-dried fraction R15_2 obtained in example 2 is measured at various pHs. It is compared to that of a Nutralys® F85M pea protein isolate (see FIG. 4).

(56) The foaming capacity of a sample of proteins is determined according to the method of Sumner A. K., Nielsen M. A., Youngs C. G., Production and evaluation of pea protein isolate. Journal of Food Science, Volume 46, 1981, p. 364-372. The loss of foam obtained is calculated from the percentage decrease in foam volume after being left to stand for 30 minutes.

(57) The retention of the foam of the R15_2 fraction is much better than that of the Nutralys® F85M. In ice creams, meringues, fruit cakes, bread or high-protein bars, a better foam retention will actually be sought.

Example 7

(58) The organoleptic qualities of the spray-dried fraction R15_2 obtained in example 2 are evaluated by a group of 20 panelists. They are compared to that of a Nutralys® F85M pea protein isolate.

(59) For each test, 5 g of product are mixed with 150 ml of water and kept in a water bath at 50° C.

(60) The R15_2 fraction is more neutral in terms of odor and taste in comparison with Nutralys® F85M.

(61) Table 7.1 lists the descriptors proposed by the panelists during the analysis.

(62) TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 7.1 R15_2 Nutralys ® F85M Odor Neutral, virtually Vegetable, fermented neutral Taste Neutral to almost Bitter neutral

Example 8

(63) The industrial stream of a part of the pea solubles preconcentrated to 10% of solids (SOPPr) is diverted from the final concentration steps intended to bring it to 28% of solids in order to feed a pilot circuit, composed:

(64) of a Westfalia® CA-505 centrifugal decanting unit adjusted to an acceleration of 3600 g and fed at approximately 12 m.sup.3/h. Said unit continuously generates 11 m.sup.3/h of an overflow fraction (OVF), reintroduced into the soluble-concentrating circuit downstream of the point where the SOPPr fraction is withdrawn, and 600 kg/h of sediment (SED) mixed with the protein isolate before drying;

(65) of an ultrafiltration unit equipped with Kerasep® BW ceramic membranes sold by the company Novasep and having a cut-off threshold of 5 kDa (19 channels of 3.5 mm). Said unit is fed batchwise with a fraction of the volume of overflow (OVF) generated by the previous step.

(66) The retentate fraction is maintained in total recycling on the feed and the permeate is discharged. The feed is supplemented with a permanent flow of water in a proportion of one volume of water for 5 volumes of permeate discharged. Throughout the filtration, the temperature is regulated at 60° C. and the transmembrane pressure is maintained at a value of between 2 and 3 bar. 2 fractions are generated: retentate (RET) and permeate (PERM).

(67) The composition of the various fractions is given in Tables 8.1 and 8.2.

(68) TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 8.1 SOPPr OVF SED Solids content 10 8 25 g/100 g Protein content 30 29 72 g/100 g of solids (N × 6.25) Ash content 13 14  4 g/100 g of solids Total carbohydrate 44 45 12 g/100 g of solids content Raffinose 5 4 — g/100 g of solids Stachyose 14 13 — g/100 g of solids Verbacose 13 15 — g/100 g of solids Others 13 12 12 g/100 g of solids

(69) TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8.2 RET PERM Solids content 14  5 g/100 g Protein content 84  3 g/100 g of solids (N × 6.25) Ash content 5 19 g/100 g of solids Total carbohydrate 3 61 g/100 g of solids content Raffinose — 5 g/100 g of solids Stachyose — 18 g/100 g of solids Verbacose — 20 g/100 g of solids Others 8 17 g/100 g of solids

Example 9

(70) An electrophoretic profile, presented in FIG. 5, is determined on the spray-dried fraction R15_2 obtained in example 2, the R014_1 fraction obtained in example 1, and the SED and RET fractions obtained in example 8. The profile is produced by migrating the sample under denaturing and reducing conditions through a 20% polyacrylamide gel, followed by staining with Coomassie blue. The corresponding profiles appear in FIG. 5.

(71) For the R15_2 and RET fractions, the marked presence of bands around 14 kDa corresponding to the albumins PA1 is noted, the band at 30 kDa corresponding to the albumin dimers PA2. This is in fact a fraction that is particularly advantageous for being exploited according to the indications of document FR 2 778 407 A1.

(72) For the R014_1 and RET fractions, a predominance of bands at around 50 kDa and above is noted, reflecting the considerable presence of globulins, which enables it to be exploited, inter alia, in animal feed.

Example 10

(73) This example illustrates the beneficial effect of the pretreatment of the solubles on the duration of the cycles and therefore of the availability of the concentrating step.

(74) The operation of the centrifugal decanting unit described in example 8 is kept constant so as to observe the impact on the operating cycle duration of the soluble-concentrating step. The data are thus compared to those of this concentrating step without pretreatment of the solubles by the decanting unit. In the two situations, the parameters with which the concentrating system is operated (steam flow rate, vacuum, temperature produced, inlet and outlet solids of the solubles) are kept constant. The cycle duration is defined by the period of time which elapses between two interruptions of the evaporation system for washing. Washing was initiated as soon as the evaporation condensate flow rate decreased by more than 15% relative to its nominal value obtained after complete cleaning (>40 m.sup.3/h for a soluble-feed flow rate of 55 m.sup.3/h).

(75) TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 10.1 Cycle duration (h) Without Cycle 1 72 pretreatment of Cycle 2 65 the solubles Cycle 2 68 concentrated With pretreatment Cycle 1 86 of the solubles Cycle 2 90 concentrated Cycle 3 89