Open Archive TOULOUSE Archive Ouverte (OATAO)

OATAO is an open access repository that collects the work of Toulouse researchers and
makes it freely available over the web where possible.

This is an author-deposited version published in : http://oatao.univ-toulouse.fr/

Eprints ID : 6852

To link to this document : DOI:10.1016/j.indcrop.2012.06.035

URL : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2012.06.035

To cite this version : Nesterenko, Alla and Alric, Isabelle and Silvestre,
Françoise and Durrieu, Vanessa Vegetable proteins in microencapsulation:
a review of recent interventions and their effectiveness. ( In Press: 2013)
Industrial Crops and Products, vol. 42 . pp. 469-479. ISSN 0926-6690

Any correspondance concerning this service should be sent to the repository

administrator: staff-oatao@inp-toulouse.fr.
Vegetable proteins in microencapsulation: a review of recent

interventions and their effectiveness

Alla Nesterenko1,2, Isabelle Alric1,2, Francoise Silvestre1,2, Vanessa Durrieu1,2

1
Université de Toulouse, INP-ENSIACET, LCA (Laboratoire de Chimie Agro-industrielle), F-31030 Toulouse,

France
2
INRA, UMR 1010 CAI, F-31030 Toulouse, France

email : Vanessa.Durrieu@ensiacet.fr

phone number : +33 (0)5 34 32 35 09

fax: +33 (0) 5 34 32 35 97

Keywords: vegetable proteins, microencapsulation, soy proteins, pea proteins, spray-drying,

coacervation

1
Abstract

Proteins from vegetable seeds are interesting for research at present because they are an

abundant alternative to animal-based sources of proteins and petroleum-derived polymers.

They are a renewable and biodegradable raw material with interesting functional and/or

physico-chemical properties. In microencapsulation, these biopolymers are used as a wall

forming material for a variety of active compounds. In most cases, two techniques of

microencapsulation, spray-drying and coacervation, are used for the preparation of

microparticles from vegetable proteins. Proteins extracted from soy bean, pea and wheat have

already been studied as carrier materials for microparticles. These proteins could be suitable

shell or matrix materials and show good process efficiency. Some other plant proteins, such as

rice, oat or sunflower, with interesting functional properties could be investigated as potential

matrices for microencapsulation.

Contents

1. Introduction

2. The microencapsulation techniques applied to vegetable proteins

3. Vegetable proteins in microencapsulation

3.1. Soy proteins

3.1.1. Microencapsulation by spray-drying

3.1.2. Microencapsulation by coacervation

3.2. Pea proteins

3.2.1. Microencapsulation by spray-drying

3.2.2. Microencapsulation by coacervation

3.2.3. Pea proteins as an additive for microencapsulating systems

3.3. Wheat and other cereal proteins

2
 3.3.1. Microencapsulation by coacervation

3.3.2. Microencapsulation using other processes

3.4. Other vegetable proteins useful in microencapsulation

3.4.1. Rice proteins

3.4.2. Oat proteins

3.4.3. Sunflower proteins

4. Industrial applications of microencapsulation by vegetable proteins

5. Conclusions and future prospects

References

1. Introduction

Microencapsulation consists of the isolation of active substances (in the liquid, solid or gas

state), to obtain products with spherical form and micrometric size, in which the active

material or core, is shielded by a membrane from the surrounding environment. This

technique can be applied for different purposes: protecting sensitive substances from the

surroundings, development of controlled release properties, masking of unpleasant taste and

odor of the substances, dilution of core material when it must be used in very small amounts

or transformation of liquid compounds into mobile solids. Microencapsulation allows the

creation of a physical barrier between the core and wall materials and the protection of

sensitive ingredients (flavors, antioxidants, polyunsaturated oils, vitamins, drugs…) from the

external medium, particularly, moisture, pH and oxidation. The release of microparticle

content at controlled rates can be triggered by shearing, solubilization, heating, pH or enzyme

action. This technology has different applications in the food, biomedical, pharmaceutical and

cosmetic industries as well as in agriculture and catalysis (Dubey et al., 2009). The structure

of microparticles is generally classified into microcapsules with a single core surrounded by a

3
layer of wall material; microspheres with the core dispersed in a continuous matrix network

and more complex structures such as multilayer microcapsules or multishell microspheres

(Figure 1). Various processes may be used to produce encapsulated ingredients (Augustin et

al., 2006; Benita, 2006; Dubey et al., 2009; Gouin, 2004; Munin and Edwards-Lévy, 2011;

Jyothi et al., 2010): spray-drying, spray-cooling/chilling, fluidized bed, coacervation/phase

separation, gelation, solvent evaporation, supercritical fluid expansion, interfacial

polymerization (polycondensation), emulsion polymerization and extrusion. Choice of

microencapsulation technique for a particular process will depend on the size,

biocompatibility and biodegradability of microparticles needed, the physico-chemical

properties of core and coating, the microparticles’ application, the proposed mechanism for

active core release, and on the process costs.

Fig. 1. Different morphologies of microparticles obtained by microencapsulation: (a)

microcapsule, (b) microsphere, (c) multilayer microcapsule and (d) multishell and multicore
microsphere.

Wall material particularly affects the microparticles’ stability, the process efficiency

and the degree of protection of the active core. Materials commonly used as carriers in the

makeup of encapsulated ingredients, are synthetic polymers and co-polymers, and bio based

materials such as carbohydrates, fats, waxes, and animal and plant derived proteins.

4
Petroleum derived polymers commonly used in pharmacy and medicine as a matrix for

microparticle preparation are polystyrenes, polyamides, polyurethanes, polyacrylates,

phenolic polymers, and poly(ethylene glycols) (Dubey et al., 2009). Functionalization of

polymeric chains makes it possible to obtain microparticles with new properties, different

from those obtained with other wall materials, for example resistance to the action of

chemical agents (Patel et al., 2010). Polysaccharides studied as a matrix for

microencapsulation are starches (Jeon et al., 2003; Murúa-Pagola et al., 2009), maltodextrin

(Krishnan et al., 2005; Saénz et al., 2009; Semyonov et al., 2010), gum arabic (Kim et al.,

1996; Shaikh et al., 2006), pectin (Drusch, 2007; Gharsallaoui et al., 2010), chitosan

(Higuera-Ciapara et al., 2004; Pedro et al., 2009), and alginates (Yoo et al., 2006; Huang et

al., 2010; Wikstrom et al., 2008). The major advantages of these biopolymers are their good

solubility in water and low viscosity at high concentrations, compared to proteins. Often

carbohydrates are mixed with proteins (Augustin et al., 2006; Ducel et al., 2004b; Mendanha

et al., 2009; Pereira et al., 2009; Pierucci et al., 2006; Pierucci et al., 2007; Yu et al., 2007) to

improve the emulsifying and filmogenic properties during microencapsulation. Furthermore,

protein-carbohydrate conjugates covalently cross-linked by the Maillard reaction had shown

interesting functional properties (Augustin et al., 2006; Rusli et al., 2006). Various lipophilic

substances such as glycerides, oils, phospholipids, carotenoids and waxes are also used as

carrier materials in microencapsulation (Eldem et al., 1991; Lee et al., 2003; McClements et

al., 2007; Muller et al., 2002; Patel et al., 2010). They permit barrier creation for the

protection of sensitive ingredients against moisture, plus their transport in aqueous media.

Proteins extracted from animal derived products (whey proteins, gelatin, casein) and

from vegetables (soy proteins, pea proteins, cereal proteins) are widely used for encapsulation

of active substances. These natural polymers present several advantages: biocompatibility,

biodegradability, good amphiphilic and functional properties such as water solubility, and

5
emulsifying and foaming capacity. The use of vegetable proteins as wall-forming materials in

microencapsulation, reflects the present "green" trend in the pharmaceutical, cosmetics and

food industries. In food applications, plant proteins are known to be less allergenic compared

to animal derived proteins (Jenkins et al., 2007; Li et al., 2012). For these reasons, over the

past few years, the development of new applications for plant products rich in proteins has

became an increasingly interesting area for research. For the last decade, the protein

ingredient industry has been turning towards plants as a preferred alternative to animal-based

sources, e.g. in vegetarian diets, due to increased consumer concerns over the safety of

animal-derived products (Jiménez-Yan et al., 2006; Sawashita et al., 2006; Choi et al., 2010).

Currently, the widespread presence of microparticles based on animal proteins, contrasts with

the very limited use of plant proteins in industry. This tendency should be reversed in coming

years.

Vegetable proteins consist of several fractions: the major fraction is glutenin, soluble

in alkaline water solutions; the globulin fraction, soluble in salt solutions, followed by the

albumin and prolamin, fractions soluble in water and ethanol respectively (Osborne, 1909).

Among vegetable proteins used as a wall material in microencapsulation, we find mainly soy

protein isolate, pea protein isolate and cereal proteins. Soybean proteins have functional

properties suitable for microencapsulation, such as solubility, water and fat absorption,

emulsion stabilization, gelation, foaming, plus good film-forming and organoleptic properties

(Franzen and Kinsella, 1976). Soy glycinin and conglycinin are somewhat similar

(comparable molecular weights, amino acid composition, subunit structures) to pea legumin

and vicilin (Koyoro and Powers, 1987). The globulins of pea protein have all the functional

properties necessary for successful incorporation into microencapsulation systems as a wall

material. The proteins of cereals (oat, wheat, barley and corn) are more advantageous from

the nutritional standpoint, and they have attracted research and commercial attention for this

6
reason. Due to their interesting functional properties and potential food applications, these

proteins were also studied as wall material for microencapsulation (Ducel et al., 2005; Ducel

et al., 2004b; Wang et al., 2011b). Sunflower proteins have particularly interesting thermal

behavior, gelling properties and surface activity. Compared with other sources of vegetable

proteins, sunflower seeds have been reported to have a low content in anti-nutritional factors.

These proteins have often been compared to commercial soy proteins, extensively researched

on functionality, with regard to their functional properties (Gonzalez-Perez and Vereijken,

2007).

This review presents the recent works dealing with the use of vegetable proteins in

microencapsulation. The influence of the proteins functional properties as well as the

microencapsulation technique on process efficiency and properties of obtained microparticles

is particularly discussed.

2. The microencapsulation techniques applied to vegetable proteins

The two techniques mainly used for microencapsulation of active material by vegetable

proteins are spray-drying and coacervation. Both processes share the aspect of "green

chemistry" with vegetable proteins as renewable and biodegradable resources, plus, the two

techniques do not need the use of organic solvents. Other processes such as gelation or

solvent evaporation techniques can be also considered (Dubey et al., 2009; Gouin, 2004).

Spray-drying is a continuous process to convert an initial liquid into a solid powder of

microparticles (Figure 2a). It is a very common dehydration process used to form a

continuous matrix surrounding the active substances. The initial liquid (solution, emulsion or

suspension) containing wall and core materials is sprayed into a stream of heated air. The

solvent, almost always water, is evaporated to give instantaneous powder production. This

technology offers several advantages: it is simple, relatively inexpensive, rapid and thus

7
widely used in industry. The important factor for successful microencapsulation by spray-

drying is a high solubility of shell material in water (or other chosen solvent) and a low

viscosity at high solid content. Disadvantages of this technique are loss of a significant

amount of product (due to adhesion of the microparticles to the wall of the spray-dryer) and

the possibility of degradation of sensitive products at high drying temperatures.

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of microencapsulation process by spray-drying (a) and

coacervation (b) techniques. (Redrawn from Jyothi et al., 2010).

Microencapsulation by coacervation is carried out by precipitation of wall forming

materials around the active core under the effect of one of the following factors: change of pH

or temperature, addition of a non-solvent or electrolyte compound (Figure 2b). This controlled

desolvation results in the formation of a polymeric network around the core. This shell of

coacervates can be solidified using a chemical or enzymatic cross-linker (Gouin, 2004).

Coacervation occurs either via a simple or complex method. Simple coacervation involves

only one colloidal solute and thus formation of a single polymer envelope. Complex

coacervation is produced by mixing two oppositely charged polyelectrolytes for shell

formation around an active core (Wilson and Shah, 2007). Finally, one of the factors that

8
limits the use of coacervates in encapsulation is their sensitivity to pH and ionic strength

(Augustin et al., 2006).

The important point to consider for the use of proteins in encapsulation systems is

their instability in acid media. The isoelectric point of proteins means they are insoluble in

most acidic systems and sensitive to precipitation with pH values lower than 7, especially

when acidic core materials are used (e.g. ascorbic acid). For the majority of vegetable proteins

in aqueous solution, the isoelectric point is located in a pH range between 3 and 5. For this

reason these biopolymers are usually used in alkaline conditions in order to obtain good

solubility of proteins and to efficiently encapsulate active substances.

Particle properties, such as morphology, size and releasing characteristics, can be very

different depending on the process chosen. Two forms are mainly obtained by the spray-

drying and coacervation method: microcapsules and microspheres (Figure 1). Particle size

obtained by the spray-drying process is typically between 1 µm and 50 µm (Richard and

Benoit, 2000) while size of particles obtained by the coacervation method can vary from

nanometers to several hundred microns (Merodio et al., 2001; Bayomi et al., 1998; Gan et al.,

2008).

These two processes give high values (up to 100%) of microencapsulation efficiency

(MEE). The latter is defined as the ratio between the percentage of active core encapsulated in

the powder and the percentage of active core in the initial liquid.

3. Vegetable proteins in microencapsulation

3.1. Soy proteins

Soy bean seeds contain an important fraction (35-40%) of proteins mainly glycinin and

conglycin (50-90% of total proteins) (Ruiz-Henestrosa et al., 2007). The glycinin fraction

(11S globulin) has a molecular weight of about 350 kDa while conglycin (7S globulin

9
fraction) is about 70 kDa. Isolated and purified soy proteins show interesting physico-

chemical and functional attributes in particular gel-forming, emulsifying and surfactant

properties (Gu et al., 2009). These protein characteristics and their solubility are strongly

dependent on pH, heat treatment, and the presence and concentration of salts or other

ingredients (oil, carbohydrate, surfactant).

Soy protein isolate (SPI) use in microencapsulation has already been studied by

various authors (Table 1). SPI is generally used as an individual coating material, but can also

be mixed with polysaccharides (Augustin et al., 2006; Rusli et al., 2006; Yu et al., 2007). The

combination of proteins with carbohydrates as a carrier material favors better protection,

oxidative stability and drying properties (Augustin et al., 2006). Due to SPI hydrosolubility,

microparticles are mainly produced using the spray-drying technique (Augustin et al., 2006;

Charve and Reineccius, 2009; Favaro-Trindade et al., 2010; Kim et al., 1996; Ortiz et al.,

2009; Rascon et al., 2010; Rusli et al., 2006; Yu et al., 2007), but coacervation and gelation

have also been investigated (Chen and Subirade, 2009; Gan et al., 2008; Lazko et al., 2004a;

Lazko et al., 2004b; Mendanha et al., 2009; Nori et al., 2010).

10
Table 1. Microencapsulation with SPI-based wall material.
Microencapsulation Wall material Core material Reference
process
Spray-drying SPI Orange oil Kim et al. (1996)
Spray-drying Mixture of proteins Fish oil Augustin et al.
and polysaccharides (2006)
Spray-drying SPI/glucose syrup Stearin, palme oil Rusli et al. (2006)
Spray-drying SPI/maltodextrin Phospholipide Yu et al. (2007)
Spray-drying SPI Flavors Chavre and
Reineccius (2009)
Spray-drying SPI Casein hydrolysate Ortiz et al. (2009)
Spray-drying SPI Paprika oleoresin Rascon et al. (2010)
Spray-drying SPI/gelatin Casein hydrolysate Favaro-Trindane et
al. (2010)
Spray-drying SPI α-tocopherol Nesterenko et al.
(2012)
Simple coacervation SPI Fish oil Gan et al. (2008)

Simple coacervation Soy glycinin Hexadecane Lazko et al. (2004a)

Complex Soy glycinin/sodium Hexadecane Lazko et al. (2004b)
coacervation dodecylsulfate
Complex SPI/pectin Casein hydrolysate Mendanha et al.
coacervation (2009)
Complex SPI/pectin Propolis Nori et al. (2010)
coacervation
Complex SPI/gum arabic Orange oil Jun-xia et al. (2011)
coacervation
Gelation SPI Riboflavin Chen and Subirade
(2009)

11
3.1.1. Microencapsulation by spray-drying

In the case of hydrophobic core microencapsulation, an oil-in-water emulsion is

prepared before the encapsulation step (Augustin et al., 2006; Kim et al., 1996; Rascon et al.,

2010; Rusli et al., 2006; Yu et al., 2007; Nesterenko et al., 2012). These emulsions are often

carried out by high pressure homogenization because of its interesting results in terms of

emulsion properties and stability (Gharsallaoui et al., 2007). Moreover, increasing

homogenization pressure gives a slight decrease in oil droplet size (Rusli et al., 2006) and

emulsion viscosity (Yu et al., 2007). Rusli et al. (2006) also noted a slight improvement in

microencapsulation efficiency with an increase of homogenization pressure. Some results are

given in Table 2.

Table 2. High pressure homogenization influence on the SPI-based emulsions properties.

Wall/core w/w Pressure (MPa) Droplet size (µm) Viscosity Reference
(cP)
2/1 35 1.52 - Kim et al. (1996)
2/1 35 0.57±0.1 - Augustin et al.
(2006)
1/1 18 → 35 0.45→0.32 - Rusli et al. (2006)
1/1 15 → 55 - 100 → 70 Yu et al. (2007)
4/1 30 1.05±0.66 - Rascon et al. (2010)
2/1 50 1.1±0.02 15 Nesterenko et al.
(2012)

The intense mechanical forces undergone by globular proteins and oil droplets during

homogenization, promotes oil droplet dispersion and protein structure modification (Rampon

et al., 2003), such as unfolding of proteinic chains. This unfolding causes the exposure of

polar and non polar protein regions, and movement of charged amino acids to new local

environments and makes them more surface-active. The main changes are in the secondary

12
and tertiary structure that can modify the surface appearance of the amino acids. As proteins

are the most surface-active components in the emulsion they accumulate at the oil-water

interface, enwrapping the newly formed oil droplets. This can be explained by the tendency of

proteins to adsorb more extensively and less reversibly at hydrophobic surfaces than at

hydrophilic surfaces (Dickinson, 1999). The resulting stabilizing layer provides immediate

protection of the fine droplets against re-coalescence and thus gives physical stability to the

emulsion (Dickinson, 2001).

The solid level in the emulsion is also a key parameter influencing active core

retention (Charve and Reineccius, 2009), and it has been shown that the MEE is improved

with increasing solid content. This could be explained by the reduction of core molecule

mobility in wall material and of the time needed to form the protective shell, both induced by

a high solid content. On the other hand, past a critical concentration (generally 20% w/w solid

content) an abrupt increase in viscosity is observed, which involves a significant fall in

process efficiency (Yu et al., 2007).

From the process point of view, it has been shown that drying inlet temperature also

affects the MEE. Indeed, a high drying temperature supports the formation of a rigid wall

material shell on the microparticle surface, limiting core molecule migration and release

(Rascon et al., 2010).

In the spray-drying microencapsulation process, efficiency can also be influenced by

volatile properties of active core material, e.g. a decrease of MEE for encapsulation of volatile

composites such as aromas compared to classic oils. Indeed, during the drying process, the

liquid preparations are subjected to high temperatures (150-180°C) and this provokes core

material evaporation, which explains the low efficiency of microencapsulation of citral (35%)

(Charve and Reineccius, 2009) compared to stearin (91%) (Rusli et al., 2006) by SPI.

13
 In our recent study (Nesterenko et al., 2012), it has been shown that grafting of

hydrophobic fatty acid chain to soy proteins by acylation can enhance the retention of

hydrophobic active material (α-tocopherol) during microencapsulation by spray-drying.

Process efficiency was improved from 79.7% to 94.8% when soy proteins were acylated with

dodecanoyl chloride. Moreover, this increased retention efficiency after protein acylation was

observed for different core/wall ratios, demonstrating that soy proteins in native and modified

state represent a relevant encapsulant agent for hydrophobic substances.

3.1.2. Microencapsulation by coacervation

Soy proteins have also been studied in microencapsulation as wall materials using the

coacervation method, and several parameters influencing the coacervation MEE have been

found. Among them: the active core and wall material concentrations, the temperature and the

pH of the media. When active hydrophobic core concentration exceeds 50% w/w, a decrease

in process efficiency is generally observed (Lazko et al., 2004a; Mendanha et al., 2009; Rusli

et al., 2006; Jun-xia et al., 2011). This phenomenon is particularly well illustrated in the work

of Mendanha et al. (2009) where a change of wall/core ratio from 1/1 to 1/3 involved a

decrease of MEE from 92% to 79%. Jun-xia et al. (2011) attributed this tendency to

incomplete emulsification after addition of excessive oil in system. Unemulsified oil affected

the electrostatic interactions between soy proteins and gum arabic, and thus emulsion

destabilization.

The protein concentration (as wall material) during the emulsification step is strongly

related to the stability and size of coacervates. This could be explained by the specific surface

of oil droplets, which is inversely proportional to their mean diameter in emulsion (Lazko et

al., 2004a). Due to protein surfactant properties, increasing protein concentration would result

in an increase in oil droplet specific surface, improving the adsorption of proteins on the oil-

14
water interface and the droplets’ coalescence resistance, and thus a decrease in their mean

diameter (generally detected by light scattering). On the other hand, Lazko et al. (2004a) also

demonstrated that protein concentration does not seem to have a significant influence on the

microcapsule wall thickness.

Some authors (Lazko et al., 2004a) have noticed that microencapsulation by the

coacervation method is more effective under acidic pH and high temperature conditions (pH 2

and 55°C respectively). Acid mediums favor 11S globular protein denaturation, characterized

by deformation of their quaternary structure to secondary and tertiary structures. The overall

accessibility of hydrophobic protein sites inside the spherical formations can be improved by

this structure change (Magdassi, 1996; Wagner and Gueguen, 1995). At pH’s below the

isoelectric point, the protein COO- functions become uncharged COOH groups, and protein

hydrophilicity decreases. Thus, an acidic medium would favor the affinity between proteins

and the hydrophobic active core in the emulsions, which should result in improved MEE.

When microencapsulation is undertaken by coacervation, a cross-linking step is often

added at the end of the process, mainly to reinforce the microcapsule shells. This

supplementary step would not affect the efficiency of protein precipitation around oil

droplets, but would play an important role in emulsion stability, and consequently on

microcapsule size and dispersion, particularly with prolonged stirring. Without reticulation,

the coalescence of microcapsules was observed, resulting in a significant increase in

microcapsule average diameter (from 90 µm to more than 200 µm), whereas this coalescence

is absent when microcapsules were cross-linked (no change in microcapsule diameter was

observed) (Lazko et al., 2004a). Glutaraldehyde is the most commonly used cross-linking

agent, allowing stable microcapsule dispersion to be obtained over time (Lazko et al., 2004b),

plus better mechanical properties. But glutaraldehyde is a relatively toxic product, which

limits its use in applications such as the food industry (Leung, 2001).

15
 In an effort to mask the bitter taste of some hydrophobic hydrolysates (e.g. casein

hydrolysate) and be able to incorporate them into food products, their microencapsulation by

soy proteins was investigated by spray-drying (Favaro-Trindade et al., 2010; Ortiz et al.,

2009) and coacervation (Mendanha et al., 2009) techniques. During encapsulation, the

hydrophobic interactions between casein hydrolysate and soy proteins lessen the undesirable

taste of casein. In both cases, the authors demonstrate the decrease in microencapsulation

efficiency and the increase in particle size with increasing active core concentration.

Chen and Subirade (2009) reported the preparation of soy protein based microspheres

by cold gelation method (initiated by glacial acetic acid in the presence of calcium carbonate)

to elaborate delivery systems for nutraceutical products (riboflavin). Obtained microparticles

had spherical morphology with the diameter about 15 µm. Active material was efficiently

encapsulated by soy proteins (process efficiency of 79-88%) at ambient temperature without

using cross-linking reagents, which could be interesting for various food and pharmaceutical

applications.

Overall, numerous studies have shown the abilities of SPI as an encapsulating agent,

using both spray-drying and coacervation techniques. In both methods, specific parameters

affect microencapsulation efficiency and microparticle size, particularly the active core

concentration (Lazko et al., 2004a; Mendanha et al., 2009; Rusli et al., 2006; Yu et al., 2007),

but authors showed that high values of MEE could be attained in both cases, by using suitable

experimental conditions. The main differences between these two methods are the structure of

the microparticles obtained, and consequently the release of the active core, and the

microparticle sizes, usually higher with coacervation (less than 100 µm for spray dried

microparticles instead of generally more than 100 µm for coacervated microcapsules).

16
3.2. Pea proteins

Pea proteins are extracted from pea seeds where they represent a 20% to 30% fraction

including mainly globulins (65-80%) and two minority fractions, albumins and glutelins.

Globulins comprise three different proteins – legumin, vicilin and convicilin (Koyoro and

Powers, 1987). Pea legumin represents the 11S globulin fraction with a molar mass between

350 and 400 kDa, while vicilin and convicilin represent the 7S globulin fraction with a molar

mass of about 150 kDa.

Pea proteins extracted from grains possess interesting gel-forming (Akintayo et al.,

1999) and emulsifying (Raymundo et al., 2005) properties. However, in the literature for

microencapsulation uses, these proteins are generally associated with polysaccharides (Ducel

et al., 2004b; Gharsallaoui et al., 2010; Pereira et al., 2009; Pierucci et al., 2006; Pierucci et

al., 2007). Indeed, polysaccharide/protein interactions give new functions to pea proteins

without chemical or enzymatic modification, particularly solubility, foaming and surfactant

properties (Liu et al., 2010). These interactions can also create stable emulsions and thus give

better particle size distribution and improve the efficiency of the microencapsulation process.

Table 3 shows various pea protein/polysaccharide pairs and the different processes used for

active core microencapsulation.

17
Table 3. Microencapsulation based on the complexes pea protein/polysaccharide as a wall
material.
Microencapsulation Wall material Core material Reference
process Protein Polysaccharide
Complex coacervation Pea globulins Gum arabic Triglyceride Ducel et al.
Carboxy- (2004)
methylcellulose
Sodium alginate
Spray-drying Pea proteins Maltodextrin Ascorbic acid Pierrucci et
al. (2006)
Spray-drying Pea proteins Maltodextrin α-tocopherol Pierrucci et
al. (2007)
Spray-drying Pea proteins Maltodextrin Ascorbic acid Pereira et al.
(2009)
Spray-drying Pea proteins Pectin Triglyceride Gharsallaoui
(as additive) Maltodextrin et al. (2010)

3.2.1. Microencapsulation by spray-drying

Several studies deal with pea proteins as wall material for microencapsulation, using

the spray-drying technique. The main properties of the microparticles obtained are

summarized in Table 4. Utilization of protein/polysaccharide mixtures allows the possibility

of combining the specific properties of each of these polymers. Polysaccharide products

possess low emulsification properties compared to proteins, and are usually used as wall

materials in the presence of a surface-active constituent. The incorporation of carbohydrates

with proteins as the encapsulated matrix, gives increased emulsion stability and better

protection of active ingredients against oxidation (Young et al., 1993). Gharsallaoui et al.

(2010) noted that in protein/carbohydrate blends, proteins serve as an emulsifying and film-

forming agent, while polysaccharides act as a matrix forming material. The retention of the

18
active core observed in pea protein microparticles is similar to (or better than) in the particles

with a protein/carbohydrate mixture. This, presumably, is induced by electrostatic interactions

between proteins and encapsulated material (Pierucci et al., 2007). As stated in the literature,

the addition of maltodextrin to the pea protein wall material increases the particle size, in

particular for a hydrosoluble active material (Pierucci et al., 2006). The authors justified this

increase by the fact that maltodextrin can induce the rapid formation of a glassy surface which

would allow air expansion inside microparticles, giving an increase in particle diameter.

Table 4. The properties of microparticles produced by spray-drying with the pea proteins as a
wall material (wall/core ratio of 2/1 w/w).
Wall material Core material Microparticle MEE Core amount Reference
size (µm) (%) (g/100 g
powder)
Pea proteins α-tocopherol 2.2 86.8 28 Pierrucci
et al.
Pea proteins/ α-tocopherol 3.5 77.8 25 (2007)
maltodextrin (1/1,
w/w)
Pea proteins Ascorbic acid 2.7 101.9 34.6 Pierrucci
et al.
Pea proteins/ Ascorbic acid (2006)
maltodextrin (1/1, 8.2 95.9 29
w/w)

The results reported, demonstrate that pea proteins alone or in association with

polysaccharides are totally appropriate for the microencapsulation of hydrophilic (ascorbic

acid (Pereira et al., 2009; Pierucci et al., 2006)) hydrophobic (α-tocopherol (Pierucci et al.,

2007), and triglyceride (Ducel et al., 2004b; Gharsallaoui et al., 2010)) active core materials.

19
3.2.2. Microencapsulation by coacervation

Ducel et al. (2004) examined the use of pea globulin (isoelectric point in a pH range

4.4-4.6) for triglyceride microencapsulation by complex coacervation (Table 3), plus the

influence of pH and polymer concentration on the microcapsule size. Increasing pea globulin/

gum arabic (50:50) blend concentration in the initial makeup, resulted in increased

microcapsule size. For example, at pH 3.5, microcapsule diameters varied from 28 µm to 97

µm with a concentration change of 1 g/L to 10 g/L respectively. Conversely, Lazko et al.

(2004a) observed a decrease of coacervate size with an increase of soy protein concentration.

In fact, the mean diameter of microparticles obtained, decreased from 153 µm to 88 µm as the

protein concentration increased from 0.5 g/L to 5 g/L respectively. This discordance between

published results was probably due to coacervation process differences. Complex

coacervation was used in the case of pea proteins, and particle agglomeration and coalescence

increased their size. The presence of polysaccharides in the initial preparation can also

influence coacervate agglomeration (Klassen and Nickerson, 2012). On the other hand, simple

coacervation was used for preparing soy protein microparticles. Higher concentrations of

surface active protein in the emulsion increased the coalescence resistant coacervates. In

addition, the two coacervation processes were not made under exactly the same conditions,

for example temperatures of 30°C and 55°C, pH values of 3.5 and 2.0, mechanical stirring at

500 rpm and magnetic stirring at 600 rpm, for pea proteins and soy proteins respectively.

It is apparently also possible to prepare microparticles from one fraction of pea

proteins (legumin (Irache et al., 1995) or vicilin (Ezpeleta et al., 1997; Ezpeleta et al., 1996a))

without polysaccharide addition, and to coat an active material, and these studies involved

microparticle preparation (with legumin or vicilin) using simple coacervation. Concerning

particle size distribution, the mean particle diameter varied from 200 to 700 nm. Finally, the

average sizes of microcapsules based on pea proteins obtained by coacervation, varied from

20
about 10, to hundreds of microns, while for spray-dried microspheres, the average size is

always less than or near 10 µm.

3.2.3. Pea proteins as an additive for microencapsulating systems

The emulsifying properties of pea proteins (Ducel et al., 2004a) make them potentially

useful as an additive to improve emulsion stabilization instead of as a simple main wall

material. Gharsallaoui et al. (2010) used a small amount of pea protein (0.5% w/w) as an

emulsifier to form oil-in-water emulsion containing small oil droplets. Then pectin and

maltodextrin were added, to produce an emulsion containing triglyceride droplets coated with

protein-polysaccharide membranes. This study confirmed the interest of combining the

properties of polysaccharides with those of proteins. The emulsions with polysaccharides

seemed to be less sensitive to pH variations, high ionic strengths and high temperatures, than

those with only proteins (Dickinson, 2003; McClements, 1999). In addition, the hydrophobic

polypeptides of proteins, added to polysaccharide based emulsions, have a high capacity to

adsorb at the oil-water interfaces, (for example pea globulin at acid pH) and thus to stabilize

emulsions (Gharsallaoui et al., 2010). These studies show that the use of small quantities of

protein could stabilize emulsions against coalescence, pH and temperature variations.

To sum up, pea extracted proteins show convenient encapsulating properties and are

used for active material protection or for emulsion stabilization. Properties of the resulting

microparticles were dependent on the microencapsulation technique used, process conditions

and the use of additives such as polysaccharides.

3.3. Wheat proteins and other cereal proteins

Wheat contains a specific protein: gluten, obtained as a by-product during starch

isolation from wheat flour. The latter is a complex material, composed of proteins and a small

21
polysaccharide fraction. Its two main components are gliadin and glutenin. Gliadin is

composed of single chain polypeptides, with an average molecular weight of 25-100 kDa,

linked by intramolecular disulfide bonds, and soluble in neutral 70% ethanol. Glutenin is a

hydrosoluble fraction consisting of gliadin-like subunits stabilized by intermolecular disulfide

bonds in large aggregates, with a molecular weight greater than 105 kDa (Bietz and Rothfus,

1970).

Gluten represents approximately 80% of wheat seed proteins, plays an important role

in wheat flour quality (Day et al., 2006), and is used essentially as a human and animal food

source. While its insoluble nature is an important property for traditional applications,

particularly in bread and baked products, this insolubility in water limits its use in many other

applications such as cosmetics and drugs.

Wheat gluten is the cereal protein most studied in the microencapsulation field (Ducel

et al., 2005; Ducel et al., 2004b; Ezpeleta et al., 1996b; Iwami et al., 1987; Mauguet et al.,

2002; Yu and Lee, 1997). Its low water solubility and its viscoelasticity provide this plant

polymer with various interesting physico-chemical characteristics, such as gel- and film-

forming properties (Sun et al., 2009). Wheat proteins alone, or in combination with

polysaccharides are good for encapsulating active core materials using various techniques.

Some studies have also been made with other cereal proteins as a wall material: barley protein

or corn zein (Parris et al., 2005; Wang et al., 2011a; Wang et al., 2011b; Zhong et al., 2009;

Patel et al., 2012). Barley proteins, studied by Wang et al. (2011b), are composed of two

protein fractions: glutelin and hordein. Both these fractions show excellent film-forming and

emulsifying properties (Wang et al., 2011a). Corn extracted prolamin – zein is a protein

fraction soluble in hydro-alcoholic solutions and well-known for its good filmogenic

properties (Beck et al., 1996). Table 5 summarizes microencapsulation studies with these

biopolymers.

22
Table 5. Cereal proteins in the microencapsulation
Microencapsulation Wall material Core material Reference
process
Spray-drying Wheat gliadin, corn zeine Linoleic acid Iwami et al. (1987)
Spray-drying Barley protein Fish oil Wang et al.
(2011a,b)
Simple coacervation Gluten/casein Pyrrolnitrin Yu and Lee (1997)
Simple coacervation Gliadin Hexadecane Mauguet et al.
(2002)
Complex α-Gliadin/arabic gum Vaselin oil Ducel et al. (2004,
coacervation 2005)
Solvent evaporation Gliadin Retinoic acid Ezpeleta et al.
(1996)
Solvent evaporation Gluten/poly(ethylen oxide) Diltiazem Andreani et al.
hydrochloride (2009)
Phase separation Corn zein Essential oils Parris et al. (2005)
Supercritical anti- Corn zein Lysozyme Zhong et al. (2009)
solvent process
Anti-solvent Corn zein Quercetin Patel et al. (2012)
precipitation method

3.3.1. Microencapsulation by coacervation

Ducel et al. (2005) studied the encapsulation of vaseline oil with a gliadin/ gum arabic

wall, by complex coacervation, focusing on protein concentration and effect of pH on

microcapsule properties. They found that a decrease in medium pH (from 3.5 to 3) gave an

increase in viscoelasticity and a decrease in microcapsule average size (from 50 µm to 25

µm). The wall polymer distribution on the droplet surface was more homogeneous so particle

aggregation was reduced. Encapsulation conditions and efficiency were improved by the pH

decrease. Analogous behavior for a pea protein/ gum arabic encapsulating system, has been

23
observed (Ducel et al., 2004), and this result agrees with observations by Lazko et al. (2004a)

concerning complex coacervation microencapsulation using soy glycinin. The range of wheat

protein microcapsule size using coacervation (simple or complex) can vary from a few to two

hundred micrometers (Ducel et al., 2005; Mauguet et al., 2002; Yu et al., 2007). These values

are in line with those obtained from pea protein and soy protein microcapsules (Ducel et al.,

2004b; Lazko et al., 2004a).

3.3.2. Microencapsulation using other processes

Only a few studies deal with wheat proteins for spray drying microencapsulation. Iwami et al.

(1987) reported the encapsulation of linoleic acid in a gliadin matrix to improve its stability

and digestibility, particularly for bread making applications. Wheat proteins were also used

as wall material for microencapsulation with the solvent evaporation method (Andreani et al.,

2009; Ezpeleta et al., 1996b), and proteins extracted from barley seeds were used as carrier

material for fish oil microencapsulation by Wang et al. (2011). The spray-drying method was

used for microparticle preparation with an inlet temperature of 150°C. The authors

demonstrated 97-100% encapsulation efficiency and high oil content in the powder – around

50%. The barley protein microparticles obtained have a spherical shape and porous inner

structure with diameters ranging from 1 to 5 µm. These proteins had a good capacity for

protecting fish oil against oxidation in food preparations.

Andreani et al. (2009) worked on wheat gluten microspheres for the controlled release of a

model drug (diltiazem), and evaluated the effect of a small amount of poly(ethylene oxide) on

microsphere properties. They demonstrated that perfectly spherical porous microspheres

could be obtained, with mean particle diameters of between 10 and 20µm, and encapsulation

efficiency from 73% to 97%. They showed that the addition of 5% w/w of PEO to the gluten

matrix improved the MEE significantly. This is probably due to higher porosity of

24
microparticles with PEO, and therefore greater specific surface area favoring better

incorporation of the active core material. The effect of nature of solvent was studied by

Ezpeleta et al. (1996b), They observed significant variations in microparticle diameter,

according to solvent composition, highlighting the influence of physico-chemical interactions

between proteins and solvents. Antimicrobial chicken egg white lysozyme, was encapsulated

by zein protein using a supercritical anti-solvent process (Zhong et al., 2009), and

heterogeneously sized microparticles, ranging from a few to 50 µm and 46.5% MEE were

obtained. The active material release kinetics showed very promising microparticle properties

for use in food production.

In short, cereal proteins are relevant biomaterials as a matrix for microencapsulation.

They perform well for microencapsulation of hydrophobic and hydrophilic compounds alone,

as well as mixed with polysaccharides or synthetic polymers.

3.4. Other vegetable proteins potentially useful in microencapsulation

Other proteins have properties making them possible contenders as wall material in

microencapsulation, and this is especially true for rice proteins, oat proteins and sunflower

proteins. Rice and oat proteins already have a large range of applications in the food sector.

However, the physico-chemical properties of sunflower proteins have been extensively

studied, and this natural polymer has no major industrial uses, meaning that it would be

interesting to find new applications and develop high added-value products based on them.

3.4.1. Rice proteins

Rice is among the most important cereal crops in the world. It is established as the basic

foodstuff for over half the world’s population. Containing from 12 to 20% proteins, rice bran,

mainly removed from the grain during the milling process to produce white rice, may be a

25
potential source of inexpensive high quality proteins (Hamada, 2000). Compared to rice bran,

the protein content in rice grains is slightly lower, varying from 6 to 15% (Bienvenido, 1994).

Rice proteins are generaly prepared by alkali extraction followed by isoelectric precipitation

(Kaewka et al., 2009; Pinciroli et al., 2009) and by subcritical water treatement (Hata et al.,

2008; Sereewatthanawut et al., 2008). In addition, rice has also been studied for the

production of starch, monosodium glutamate, pigments and rice wine; thus rice protein could

be an additional by-product to be exploited (Cao et al., 2009). After the sequential extraction

of rice protein fractions, the following distribution has been obtained: about 75% glutenin,

15% globulin, 6% albumin and 3% prolamin (Agboola et al., 2005).

Chandi et al. (2007) analyzed the functional properties of rice protein concentrate

(55% of the protein fraction). They noticed the excellent foaming stability lasting several

days, the high emulsifying capacity in sugar based (5-15% w/w) solutions, and the good

stability of emulsions depending on the pH and salt/sugar presence. The physico-chemical

properties are similar to those of casein (Chandi and Sogi, 2007).

Rice bran isolate containing approximately 92% protein is prepared from defatted rice

bran and its properties have been studied (Wang M et al., 1999). They showed that: the

foaming properties of rice protein are similar to those of albumin from egg white; the

emulsifying capacities of albumin from bovine serum (BSA) are significantly higher than

those of rice proteins; minimum protein solubility is close to the isoelectric point at pH 4 and

the maximum at pH 10; the main amino acid content of rice proteins is similar to that of

casein and soy proteins; the denaturation temperature of rice protein isolate is about 83.4°C.

Rice proteins also associate well with polysaccharides (alginate and carrageenan) to

form complex precipitates with possible new industrial applications (Fabian et al., 2010).

From these results, the physico-chemical properties of rice proteins could provide favorable

characteristics for wall material in microencapsulation. However overall, rice protein use

26
concerns the food industry, rather than potential low volume, high added value applications of

microencapsulation.

3.4.2. Oat proteins

Oats is one of the most popular cereals for human and animal foods because of its high

protein and fatty acid content. Protein content in oat grain is one of the highest, varying from

12 to 24% (Chronakis et al., 2004). The average amino acid composition of oat proteins is

very attractive from a nutritional value point of view, and this is probably related to the higher

proportion of albumins and globulins compared to proteins from the other cereal grains.

Globulin represents the major part of oat proteins (around 70-80%). Oat protein concentrate

has poor solubility and functional properties. To improve these physico-chemical properties,

modifications such as enzymatic hydrolysis (Yao et al., 2007), acetylation and succinylation

(Mohamed et al., 2009) were carried out, and demonstrated that these chemical modifications

could improve the solubility, emulsifying activity and foaming capacity of oat proteins.

In conclusion, oat native proteins do not offer the required properties to be used in

microencapsulation, but some specific modifications could allow them to be considered as

wall materials.

3.4.3. Sunflower proteins

Sunflowers are mainly cultivated for the production of oil extracted from their seeds, and they

are one of the major sources of edible oil. Proteins are the majority constituents in sunflower

oil cakes, valued essentially as animal feed. The defatted sunflower flour contains a high

quantity of proteins, around 27% in dry weight (Ordonez et al., 2001). The dehulled seed

consists of about 20-40% crude protein, this value being highly affected by sunflower variety

27
(Gonzalez-Perez and Vereijken, 2007). The quantity of proteins extracted from the sunflower,

also varies according to used solvent (mainly aqueous solutions) and the extraction conditions

(stirring mode, temperature, pH). In the sunflower oil cake, four fractions of proteins are

present (Linden, 1994): globulins constitute the main fraction ranging from 55 to 60%;

albumins account for about 17-23% of total proteins and two minor fractions glutelins and

prolamins give 11-17% and 1-4% protein fractions respectively.

In terms of sedimentation coefficients, sunflower proteins show two major fractions:

the 11S globulins (also named helianthinin) and the 2S albumins. Helianthinin has been

reported to be present as a globular oligomeric protein with a molecular weight of 300-350

kDa (Gonzalez-Perez and Vereijken, 2007), and this protein mainly exists in the 11S form

(hexametric structure). Depending on pH, ionic strength, temperature and protein

concentration, helianthinin may also occur in the 15-18S, 7S or 3S forms. In 11S sunflower

proteins, different subunits are traditionally processed to give an acidic and a basic

polypeptide linked by a single disulfide bond. These basic and acidic polypeptides range in

molecular weight from about 21 to 27 kDa and from about 32 to 44 kDa respectively. The

solubility of helianthinin with a minimum of 4-5.5 depends strongly on pH and ionic strength.

Albumin proteins from sunflower, with a sedimentation coefficient of approximately 2S and

molecular weights ranging from 10 to 18 kDa, show good solubility in aqueous solutions,

independent of pH and ionic strength. Contrary to the majority fractions, the functional

properties of glutelins and prolamins from sunflower seeds have not been reported in the

literature.

The amino acid composition of soy proteins (Kovalenko et al., 2006) and sunflower

proteins (Conde et al., 2005) are shown in Figure 3. Some similarities in total amino acid

content for these vegetable proteins can be seen. The physico-chemical properties of

sunflower proteins have already been studied (Gonzalez-Perez et al., 2005; Molina et al.,

28
2004; Patino et al., 2007). Most authors showed that sunflower preparations have better (or at

least similar) emulsifying properties as those of soy protein preparations. The main results of

these studies showed that the highest emulsifying capacity is observed in the pH range of 7-8

and the minimum at the isoelectric pH of 4.3; the extraction method and solvent used for

protein extraction does not change the emulsifying ability of proteins; heating involving

protein denaturation, increases the stability of emulsions but reduces their emulsifying

capacities. This latter observation can be explained by the change of protein structure during

heating denaturation, favoring chain unfolding and increased conformational flexibility. Thus

the surface-active capacity of unfolded sunflower proteins becomes lower during emulsion

formation, but after emulsion preparation it stays stable longer.

Fig. 3. Amino acid composition of soy (Kovalenko et al., 2006) and sunflower (Conde et al.,
2005) proteins, every amino acid fraction is presented in g/100g of protein isolate.

Concerning foam properties, sunflower proteins seemed to be less efficient at forming

foam than soy proteins. Nevertheless, sunflower protein foams are stable over time at a basic

pH and a high concentration. Chemical modifications (for example enzymatic hydrolysis) of

29
sunflower proteins could lead to an improvement in their functional properties and to new

interesting applications (Conde and Patino, 2007). The presence of phenolic compounds in

sunflower proteins, which cause the green-brown color of its powder, limits their

development as a source of food proteins for humans. Therefore, there could be very

interesting new openings for these proteins in non-food industrial sectors. Microencapsulation

could be one possibility for an industrial application of this agricultural by-product.

4. Industrial applications of microencapsulation by vegetable proteins

Pea proteins show a good properties for their potential application, in particular for the

production of adhesives, bioplastics, emulsifiers and wall forming materials for

microencapsulation (De Graaf et al., 2001). However, these proteins are no suggested to be

used in technical applications. The functional properties of wheat proteins and corn zein also

suggest several potential applications for these natural polymers in the fields of adhesives,

matrix materials for microencapsulation, textiles, cosmetics and biodegradable plastics

(Shukla and Cheryan, 2001). For both of these proteins, there is still no actual industrial

application in microencapsulation, but they are potentially good candidates.

Conversely, soy bean proteins are already used as wall forming materials in the food

industry, in particular to mask the undesirable taste of some nutritional additives (bioactive

compounds for athletes, such as casein hydrolysate) (Favaro-Trindade et al., 2010; Mendanha

et al., 2009; Ortiz et al., 2009; Sun-Waterhouse and Wadhwa, 2012) or to protect components

sensitive to oxidation and\or volatile aromas (orange oil) (Gharsallaoui et al., 2007; Kim et

al., 1996; Xiao et al., 2011).

30
5. Conclusions and future prospects

The use of vegetable proteins as a wall material for microencapsulation of various sensitive

materials, reflects the actual "green" tendency in the food, pharmaceutical and cosmetics

industries. The two main techniques used for microencapsulation of different core substances

by these natural polymers, are spray-drying and coacervation. Particle morphology is very

dependent on the process chosen, mainly because coacervation produces microcapsules,

whereas microspheres are generally obtained with spray-drying. Vegetable proteins widely

used as encapsulants are pea protein isolate, soy protein isolate, wheat gliadins, corn zein and

barley protein. The various studies have proved the ability of proteins to efficiently protect

different forms of active materials (hydrophilic or hydrophobic, solid or liquid) as an

encapsulating agent, using both spray-drying and coacervation methods. However,

microencapsulation efficiency, preparation stability and microparticle size could be affected

by different parameters, such as active core and wall material concentrations, temperature and

pH of media, encapsulation technique, use of additives or proteins combined with

polysaccharides.

Other inexpensive proteins extracted from rice, oat or sunflower seeds are known for

their interesting functional properties and could be suitable microencapsulation wall forming

materials. These natural polymers show good solubility, emulsion forming ability and

foaming stability, giving them the appropriate characteristics for potential use as efficient

coating materials. Moreover, they can be associated with polysaccharides as is commonly the

case in microencapsulation. Thus, the good physico-chemical properties of all these vegetable

proteins open a new path for specific applications, the development of innovative delivery

systems, and/or functional food products.

Some limitations of vegetable protein use for making high added value products could

be the extraction cost to obtain high-quality proteins, low solubility of some proteins and

31
large polydispersity in the size of naturally occurring protein chains. Compared to other bio

based materials for microencapsulation, such as polysaccharides, synthetic polymers or

animal-based proteins, plant extracted vegetable proteins represent a very promising source of

polymers with interesting functional properties. Their use as a wall material augurs well for

the encapsulation of hydrophilic and hydrophobic substances by different techniques, and

production of microparticles, with good microencapsulation efficiency and various potential

applications.

References

Agboola, S., Ng, D., Mills, D., 2005. Characterisation and functional properties of Australian
rice protein isolates. J. Cereal Sci. 41, 283-290.
Akintayo, E.T., Oshodi, A.A., Esuoso, K.O., 1999. Effects of NaCl, ionic strength and pH on
the foaming and gelation of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) protein concentrates. Food
Chem. 66, 51-56.
Andreani, L., Cercena, R., Ramos, B.G.Z., Soldi, V., 2009. Development and characterization
of wheat gluten microspheres for use in a controlled release system. Mater. Sci. Eng.
29, 524-531.
Augustin, M.A., Sanguansri, L., Bode, O., 2006. Maillard reaction products as encapsulants
for fish oil powders. J. Food Sci. 71, 25-32.
Bayomi, M.A., Al-Suwayeh, S.A., El-Helw, A.M., Mesnad, A.F., 1998. Preparation of
casein–chitosan microspheres containing diltiazem hydrochloride by an aqueous
coacervation technique. Pharm. Acta Helv. 73, 187-192.
Beck, M., Tomka, I., Waysek, E., 1996. Physico-chemical characterization of zein as a film
polymer. A direct comparison with ethyl cellulose. Int. J. Pharm. 141, 137-150.
Benita, S. 2006. Microencapsulation. Methods and industrial applications. Second edition.
New York London, Taylor and Francis Group.
Bienvenido, O.J., 1994. Le riz dans la nutrition humaine. Organisation des nations unies pour
l'alimentation et l'agriculture, Rome.
Bietz, J.A., Rothfus, J.A., 1970. Comparison of peptides from wheat gliadin and glutenin.
Cereal. Chem. 47, 381-392.

32
Cao, X., Wen, H., Li, C., Gu, Z., 2009. Differences in functional properties and biochemical
characteristics of congenetic rice proteins. J. Cereal Sci. 50, 184-189.
Chandi, G.K., Sogi, D.S., 2007. Functional properties of rice bran protein concentrates. J
Food Eng 79, 592-597.
Charve, J., Reineccius, G.A., 2009. Encapsulation performance of proteins and traditional
materials for spray dried flavors. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57, 2486-2492.
Chen, L., Subirade, M., 2009. Elaboration and characterization of soy/zein protein
microspheres for controlled nutraceutical delivery. Biomacromolecules. 10, 3327-
3334.
Choi, Y.S., Choi, J.H., Han, D.J., Kim, H.Y., Lee, M.A., Jeong, J.Y., Chung, H.J., Kim, C.J.,
2010. Effects of replacing pork back fat with vegetable oils and rice bran fiber on the
quality of reduced-fat frankfurters. Meat Sci. 84, 557-563.
Chronakis, I.S., Fredholm, A., Triantafyllou, A.O., Oste, R., 2004. Complex formation in
aqueous medium of partially hydrolysed oat cereal proteins with sodium stearoyl-2
lactylate (SSL) lipid surfactant and implications for bile acids activity. Colloid.
Surface. 35, 175-184.
Conde, J.M., Escobar, M.M., Pedroche, J.J.J., Rodriguez, F.M., Rodriguez, P.J.M., 2005.
Effect of enzymatic treatment of extracted sunflower proteins on solubility, amino
acid composition, and surface activity. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 8038-8045.
Conde, JM, Patino, JMR, 2007. The effect of enzymatic treatment of a sunflower protein
isolate on the rate of adsorption at the air-water interface. J Food Eng. 78, 1001-1009.
Day, L., Augustin, M.A., Batey, I.L., Wrigley, C.W., 2006. Wheat-gluten uses and industry
needs. Trends Food Sci. Tech. 17, 82-90.
De Graaf , L.A., Harmsen, P.F.H., Vereijken, J.M., Monikes, M., 2001. Requirements for
non-food applications of pea proteins. A review. Nahrung/Food. 45, 408-411.
Dickinson, E., 1999. Adsorbed protein layers at fluid interfaces : interactions, structure and
surface rheology. Colloid Surface. 15, 161-176.
Dickinson, E., 2001. Milk protein interfacial layers and the relationship to emulsion stability
and rheology. Colloid Surface. 20, 197-210.
Dickinson, E., 2003. Hydrocolloids at interfaces and the influence of the properties of
dispersed system. Food Hydrocolloid. 17, 25-39.
Drusch, S., 2007. Sugar beet pectin: A novel emulsifying wall component for
microencapsulation of lipophilic food ingredients by spray-drying. Food Hydrocolloid.
21, 1223-1228.

33
Dubey, R., Shami, T.C., Bhasker Rao, K.U., 2009. Microencapsulation technology and
application. Defence Sci. J. 59, 82-95.
Ducel, V., Richard, J., Popineau, Y., Boury, F., 2004a. Adsorption kinetics and rheological
interfacial properties of plant proteins at the oil-water interface. Biomacromolecules.
5, 2088-2093.
Ducel, V., Richard, J., Popineau, Y., Boury, F., 2005. Rheological interfacial properties of
plant protein-arabic gum coacervates at the oil-water interface. Biomacromolecules. 6,
790-796.
Ducel, V., Richard, J., Saulnier, P., Popineau, Y., Boury, F., 2004b. Evidence and
characterization of complex coacervates containing plant proteins: application to the
microencapsulation of oil droplets. Colloid. Surface. 232, 239-247.
Eldem, T., Speiser, P., Hincal, A., 1991. Optimization of spray-dried and -congealed lipid
micropellets and characterization of their surface morphology by scanning electron
microscopy. Pharm. Res. 8, 47-54.
Ezpeleta, I, Irache, JM, Stainmesse, S, Chabenat, C, Gueguen, J, Orecchioni, AM, 1996a.
Preparation of lectin-vicilin nanoparticle conjugates using the carbodiimide coupling
technique. Int J Pharm. 142, 227-233.
Ezpeleta, I, Irache, JM, Stainmesse, S, Chabenat, C, Gueguen, J, Popineau, Y, Orecchioni,
AM, 1996b. Gliadin nanoparticles for the controlled release of all-transretinoic acid.
Int J Pharm. 131, 191-200.
Ezpeleta, I., Irache, J.M., Gueguen, J., Orecchioni, A.M., 1997. Properties of glutaraldehyde
cross-linkes vicilin nano- and microparticles. J. Microencapsul. 14, 557-565.
Fabian, C.B., Huynh, L.H., Ju, Y.H., 2010. Precipitation of rice bran protein using
carrageenan and alginate. Food Sci. Technol. 43, 375-379.
Favaro-Trindade, C.S., Santana, A.S., Monterrey-Quintero, .E.S., Trindade, M.A., Netto,
F.M., 2010. The use of spray drying technology to reduce bitter taste of casein
hydrolysate. Food Hydrocolloid. 24, 336-340.
Franzen, K.L., Kinsella, J.E., 1976. Functional properties of succinylated and acetylated soy
protein. J. Agric. Food Chem. 24, 788-795.
Gan, C.Y., Cheng, L.H., Easa, A.M., 2008. Evaluation of microbial transglutaminase and
ribose cross-linked soy protein isolate-based microcapsules containing fish oil. Innov.
Food Sci. Emerg. Tech. 9, 563-569.

34
Gharsallaoui, A., Roudaut, G., Chambin, O., Voilley, A., Saurel, R., 2007. Applications of
spray-drying in microencapsulation of food ingredients: An overview. Food Res. Int.
40, 1107-1121.
Gharsallaoui, A., Saurel, R., Chambin, O., Cases, E., Voilley, A., Cayot, P., 2010. Utilisation
of pectin coating to enhance spray-dry stability of pea protein-stabilised oil-in-water
emulsions. Food Chem. 122, 447-454.
Gonzalez-Perez, S, Vereijken, JM, Koningsveld, GA, Gruppen, H, Voragen, A, 2005.
Physicochemical properties of 2S albumins and the corresponding protein isolate from
sunflower (Helianthus annuus). J Food Sci. 70, 98-103.
Gonzalez-Perez, S., Vereijken, J.M., 2007. Sunflower proteins: overview of their
physicochemical, structural and functional properties. J. Sci. Food Agr. 87, 2173-
2191.
Gouin, S., 2004. Microencapsulation: industrial appraisal of existing technologies and trends.
Trends Food Sci. Tech. 15, 330-347.
Gu, X., Campbell, L.J., Euston, S.R., 2009. Effects of different oils on the properties of soy
protein isolate emulsions and gels. Food Res. Int. 42, 925-932.
Hamada, J.S., 2000. Characterization and functional properties of rice bran proteins modified
by commercial exoproteases and endoproteases. J. Food Sci. 65, 305-310.
Hata, S., Wiboonsirikul, J., Maeda, A., Kimura, Y., Adachi, S., 2008. Extraction of defatted
rice bran by subcritical water treatment. Biochem. Eng. J. 40, 44-53.
Higuera-Ciapara, I., Felix-Valenzuela, L., Goycoolea, F.M., Arguelles-Monal, W., 2004.
Microencapsulation of astaxanthin in a chitosan matrix. Carbohyd. Polym. 56, 41-45.
Huang, S.B., Wu, M.H., Lee, G.B., 2010. Microfluidic device utilizing pneumatic micro-
vibrators to generate alginate microbeads for microencapsulation of cells. Sensor.
Actuator. 147, 755-764.
Irache, J.M., Bergougnoux, L., Ezpeleta, I., Gueguen, J., Orecchioni, A.M., 1995.
Optimization and in vitro stability of legumin nanoparticles obtained by a
coacervation method. Int. J. Pharm. 126, 103-109.
Iwami, K., Hattori, M., Nakatani, S., Ibuki, F., 1987. Spray-dried gliadin powders inclusive of
linoleic acid (microcapsules): their preservability, digestibility and application to
bread making. Agric. Biol. Chem. 51, 3301-3307.
Jenkins, J.A., Breiteneder, H., Mills, E.N., 2007. Evolutionary distance from human
homologs reflects allergenicity of animal food proteins. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.
120, 1399-1405.

35
Jeon, Y.J., Vasanthan, T., Temelli, F., Song, B.K., 2003. The suitability of barley and corn
starches in their native and chemically modified forms for volatile meat flavor
encapsulation. Food Res. Int. 36, 349-355.
Jiménez-Yan, L., Brito, A., Cuzon, G., Gaxiola, G., García, T., Taboada, G., Soto, L.A.,
Brito, R., 2006. Energy balance of Litopenaeus vannamei postlarvae fed on animal or
vegetable protein based compounded feeds. Aquaculture. 260, 337-345.
Jun-xia, X., Hai-yan, Y., Jian, Y., 2011. Microencapsulation of sweet orange oil by complex
coacervation with soybean protein isolate/gum Arabic. Food Chem. 125, 1267-1272.
Jyothi, N.V.N., Prasanna, P.M., Sakarkar, S.N., Prabha, K.S., Ramaiah, P.S., Srawan, G.Y.,
2010. Microencapsulation techniques, factors influencing encapsulation efficiency. J.
Microencapsul. 27, 187-197.
Kaewka, K., Therakulkait, C., Cadwallader, K.R., 2009. Effect of preparation conditions on
composition and sensory aroma characteristics of acid hydrolyzed rice bran protein
concentrate. J. Cereal. Sci. 50, 56-60.
Kim, Y.D., Morr, C.V., Schenz, T.W., 1996. Microencapsulation properties of gum arabic
and several food proteins: spray-dried orange oil emulsion particles. J. Agric. Food
Chem. 44, 1314-1320.
Klassen, D.R., Nickerson, M.T., 2012. Effect of pH on the formation of electrostatic
complexes within admixtures of partially purified pea proteins (legumin and vicilin)
and gum Arabic polysaccharides. Food Res. Int. 46, 167-176.
Kovalenko, I.V., Rippke, G.R., Hurburgh, C.R., 2006. Determination of amino acid
composition of soybeans (Glycine max) by near-infrared spectroscopy. J. Agric. Food
Chem. 54, 3485-3491.
Koyoro, H., Powers, J.R., 1987. Functional properties of pea globulin fractions. Cereal Chem.
64, 97-101.
Krishnan, S., Bhosale, R., Singhal, R.S., 2005. Microencapsulation of cardamom oleoresin:
Evaluation of blends of gum arabic, maltodextrin and a modified starch as wall
materials. Carbohyd. Polym. 61, 95-102.
Lazko, J., Popineau, Y., Legrand, J., 2004a. Soy glycinin microcapsules by simple
coacervation method. Colloid. Surface. 37, 1-8.
Lazko, J., Popineau, Y., Renard, D., Legrand, J., 2004b. Microcapsules based on glycinin-
sodium dodecyl sulfate complex coacervation. J. Microencapsul. 21, 59-70.
Lee, K.E., Cho, S.H., Lee, H.B., Jeong, S.Y., Yuk, S.H., 2003. Microencapsulation of lipid
nanoparticles containing lipophilic drug. J. Microencapsul. 20, 489-496.

36
Leung, H.W., 2001. Ecotoxicology of glutaraldehyde: review of environmental fate and
effects studies. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 49, 26-39.
Li, H., Zhu, K., Zhou, H., Peng, W., 2012. Effects of high hydrostatic pressure treatment on
allergenicity and structural properties of soybean protein isolate for infant formula.
Food Chem. 132, 808-814.
Linden, G.L.D. 1994. Biochimie agro-industrielle: Valorisation alimentaire de la production
agricole. Paris, Masson.
Liu, S., Elmer, C., Low, N.H., Nickerson, M.T., 2010. Effect of pH on the functional
behaviour of pea protein isolate-gum arabic complexes. Food Res. Int. 43, 489-495.
Magdassi, S., 1996. Surface activity of proteins chemical and physico-chemical
modifications, Marcel Dekker, New York.
Mauguet, M.C., Legrand, J., Brujes, L., Carnelle, G., Larre, C., Popineau, Y., 2002. Gliadin
matrices for microencapsulation processes by simple coacervation method. J.
Microencapsul. 19(3), 377-384.
McClements, D.J. 1999. Food emulsions: Principles, practice and techniques. Boca Raton,
FL: CRC Press.
McClements, DJ, Decker, EA, Weiss, J, 2007. Emulsion-based delivery systems for lipophilic
bioactive components. J Food Sci. 72, 109-124.
Mendanha, D.V., Ortiz, S.E.M., Favaro-Trindade, C.S., Mauri, A., Monterrey-Quintero, E.S.,
Thomazini, M., 2009. Microencapsulation of casein hydrolysate by complex
coacervation with SPI/pectin. Food Res. Int. 42, 1099-1104.
Merodio, M., Arnedo, A., Renedo, M.J., Irache, J.M., 2001. Ganciclovir-loaded albumin
nanoparticles: characterization and in vitro release properties. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 12,
251-259.
Mohamed, A., Biresaw, G., Xu, J., Hojilla-Evangelista, M., Rayas-Duarte, P, 2009. Oats
protein isolate: Thermal, rheological, surface and functional properties. Food Res. Int.
42, 107-114.
Molina, M.I., Petruccelli, S., Anon, M.S., 2004. Effect of pH and ionic strength modifications
on thermal denaturation of the 11S globulin of sunflower (Helianthus annuus). J.
Agric. Food Chem. 52, 6023-6029.
Muller, R.H., Radtke, M., Wissing, S.A., 2002. Nanostructured lipid matrices for improved
microencapsulation of drugs. Int. J. Pharm. 242, 121-128.
Munin, A., Edwards-Lévy, F., 2011. Encapsulation of natural polyphenolic compounds; a
review. Pharmaceut. 3, 793-829.

37
Murúa-Pagola, B., Beristain-Guevara, C.I., Martínez-Bustos, F., 2009. Preparation of starch
derivatives using reactive extrusion and evaluation of modified starches as shell
materials for encapsulation of flavoring agents by spray drying. J. Food Eng. 91, 380-
386.
Nesterenko, A., Alric, I., Silvestre, F., Durrieu, V., 2012. Influence of soy protein’s structural
modifications on their microencapsulation properties: α-tocopherol microparticles
preparation. Food Res. Int. 48, 387-396.
Nori, M.P., Favaro-Trindade, C.S., Alencar, S.M., Thomazini, S.M., Balieiro, J.C.C., 2010.
Microencapsulation of propolis extract by complex coacervation. Food Sci. Technol.
44, 429-435.
Ordonez, C., Asenjo, M.G., Benitez, J.L., Gonzalez, J.L., 2001. Obtaining a protein
concentrate from integral deffated sunflower flour. Bioresource Technol. 78, 187-190.
Ortiz, S.E.M., Mauri, A., Monterrey-Quintero, E.S., Trindade, M.A., 2009. Production and
properties of casein hydrolysate microencapsulated by spray drying with soybean
protein isolate. Food Sci. Technol. 42, 919-923.
Osborne, T.B. 1909. The vegetable proteins. London, Longmans, Green and Co.
Parris, N., Cooke, P.H., Hicks, K.B., 2005. Encapsulation of Essential Oils in Zein
Nanospherical Particles. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 4788-4792.
Patel, A.R., Heussen, P.C.M., Hazekamp, J., Dorst, E., Velikov, K.P., 2012. Quercetin loaded
biopolymeric colloidal particles prepared by simultaneous precipitation of quercetin
with hydrophobic protein in aqueous medium. Food Chem. 133, 423-429.
Patel, S.K., Lavasanifar, A., Choi, P., 2010. Molecular dynamics study of the encapsulation
capability of a PCL–PEO based block copolymer for hydrophobic drugs with different
spatial distributions of hydrogen bond donors and acceptors. Biomaterials. 31, 1780-
1786.
Patino, J.M.R., Conde, J.M., Linaresa, H.M., Jimenez, J.J.P., Sanchez, C.C., Pizones, V.,
Rodrıguez, F.M., 2007. Interfacial and foaming properties of enzyme-induced
hydrolysis of sunflower protein isolate. Food Hydrocolloid. 21, 782-793.
Pedro, A.S., Cabral-Albuquerque, E., Ferreira, D., Sarmento, B., 2009. Chitosan: An option
for development of essential oil delivery systems for oral cavity care? Carbohyd.
Polym. 76, 501-508.
Pereira, H.V.R., Saraiva, K.P., Carvalho, L.M.J., Andrade, L.R., Pedrosa, C., Pierucci,
A.P.T.R., 2009. Legumes seeds protein isolates in the production of ascorbic acid
microparticles. Food Res. Int. 42, 115-121.

38
Pierucci, A.P.T.R., Andrade, L.R., Baptista, E.B., Volpato, N.M., Rocha-Leao, M.H.M.,
2006. New microencapsulation system for ascorbic acid using pea protein concentrate
as coat protector. J. Microencapsul. 23, 654-662.
Pierucci, APTR, Andrade, LR, Farina, M, Pedrosa, C, Rocha-Leao, MHM, 2007. Comparison
of a-tocopherol microparticles produced with different wall materials: pea protein a
new interesting alternative J Microencapsul. 24, 201-213.
Pinciroli, M., Vidal, A.A., Anon, M.C., Martınez, E.N., 2009. Comparison between protein
functional properties of two rice cultivars. Food Sci. Technol. 42, 1605-1610.
Rampon, V., Riaublanc, A., Anton, M., Genot, C., McClements, D.J., 2003. Evidence that
homogenization of BSA-stabilized hexadecane-in-water emulsion induces structure
modification of the nonadsorbed protein. J. Agric. Food Chem. 51, 5900-5905.
Rascon, M.P., Beristain, C.I., Garcie, H.S., Salgado, M.A., 2010. Carotenoid retention and
storage stability of spray-dried paprika oleoresin using gum arabic and soy protein
isolate as wall materials. Food Sci. Technol. 44, 549-557.
Raymundo, A., Gouveia, L., Batista, A.P., Empis, J., Sousa, I., 2005. Fat mimetic capacity of
Chlorella vulgaris biomass in oil-in-water food emulsions stabilized by pea protein.
Food Res. Int. 38, 961-965.
Richard, J., Benoit, J.P., 2000. Microencapsulation. Techniques de l'Ingénieur. J 2 210, 1-20.
Ruiz-Henestrosa, V.P., Sanchez, C.C., Escobar, M.M.Y., Jimenez, J.J.P., Rodrıguez, F.M.,
Patino, J.M.R., 2007. Interfacial and foaming characteristics of soy globulins as a
function of pH and ionic strength. Colloid. Surface. 309, 202-215.
Rusli, J.K., Sanguansri, L., Augustin, M.A., 2006. Stabilization of oils by microencapsulation
with heated protein-glucose syrup mixtures. JAOCS. 83, 965-971.
Saénz, C., Tapia, S., Chávez, J., Robert, P., 2009. Microencapsulation by spray drying of
bioactive compounds from cactus pear (Opuntia ficus-indica). Food Chem. 114, 616-
622.
Sawashita, N., Naemura, A., Shimizu, M., Morimatsu, F., Ijiri, Y., Yamamoto, J., 2006.
Effect of dietary vegetable and animal proteins on atherothrombosis in mice.
Nutrition. 22, 661-667.
Semyonov, D., Ramon, O., Kaplun, Z., Levin-Brener, L., Gurevich, N., Shimoni, E., 2010.
Microencapsulation of Lactobacillus paracasei by spray freeze drying. Food Res. Int.
43, 193-202.

39
Sereewatthanawut, I., Prapintip, S., Watchiraruji, K., Goto, M., Sasaki, M., Shotipruk, A.,
2008. Extraction of protein and amino acids from deoiled rice bran by subcritical
water hydrolysis. Bioresource Technol. 99, 555-561.
Shaikh, J., Bhosale, R., Singhal, R., 2006. Microencapsulation of black pepper oleoresin.
Food Chem. 94, 105-110.
Shukla, R., Cheryan, M., 2001. Zein: the industrial protein from corn. Ind. Crop. Prod. 13,
171-192.
Sun-Waterhouse, D., Wadhwa, S.S., 2012. Industry-relevant approaches for minimising the
bitterness of bioactive compounds in functional foods: a review. Food Bioprocess
Technol. DOI 10.1007/s11947-012-0829-2.
Sun, S., Song, Y., Zheng, Q., 2009. Rheological behavior of heat-induced wheat gliadin gel.
Food Hydrocolloid. 23, 1054-1056.
Wagner, J.R., Gueguen, J., 1995. Effects of dissociation, deamidation, and reducing treatment
on structural and surface active properties of soy glycinin. J. Agric. Food Chem. 43,
1993-2000.
Wang M, Hettiarachchy NS, Qi M, Burks W, Siebenmorgen T, 1999. Preparation and
functional properties of rice bran protein isolate. J Agric Food Chem. 47, 411-416.
Wang, R., Tian, Z., Chen, L., 2011a. Nano-encapsulations liberated from barley protein
microparticles for oral delivery of bioactive compounds. Int. J. Pharm. 406, 153-162.
Wang, R., Tian, Z., Chen, L., 2011b. A novel process for microencapsulation of fish oil with
barley protein. Food Res. Int. 44, 2735-2741.
Wikstrom, J., Elomaa, M., Syvajarvi, H., Kuokkanen, J., Yliperttula, M., Honkakoski, P.,
Urtti, A., 2008. Alginate-based microencapsulation of retinal pigment epithelial cell
line for cell therapy. Biomaterials. 29, 869-876.
Wilson, N., Shah, N.P., 2007. Microencapsulation of Vitamins. ASEAN Food J. 14, 1-14.
Xiao, J.X., Yu, H.Y., Yang, J., 2011. Microencapsulation of sweet orange oil by complex
coacervation with soybean protein isolate/gum arabic. Food Chem. 125, 1267-1272.
Yao, X.G.H., Chen, Z., Shan, L., Zhang, M., 2007. Some functional properties of oat bran
protein concentrate modified by trypsin. Food Chem. 10, 163-170.
Yoo, S.H., Song, Y.B., Chang, P.S., Lee, H.G., 2006. Microencapsulation of
-tocopherol
using sodium alginate and its controlled release properties. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 38,
25-30.
Young, S.L., Sadra, X., Rosenberg, M., 1993. Microencapsulating properties of whey proteins
2. Combination of whey proteins with carbohydrates. J. Dairy Sci. 76, 2878-2885.

40
Yu, C., Wang, W., Yao, H., Liu, H., 2007. Preparation of phospholipid microcapsules by
spray drying. Dry. Technol. 25, 695-702.
Yu, J.Y., Lee, W.C., 1997. Microencapsulation of pyrrolnitrin from Pseudomonas cepacia
using gluten and casein. J. Ferment. Bioeng. 84, 444-448.
Zhong, Q., Jin, M., Davidson, P.M., Zivanovic, S., 2009. Sustained release of lysozyme from
zein microcapsules produced by a supercritical anti-solvent process. Food Chem. 115,
697-700.

41