Next Article in Journal
Effects of Salt Soaking Treatment on the Deodorization of Beef Liver and the Flavor Formation of Beef Liver Steak
Previous Article in Journal
The Effect of Black Garlic on the Volatile Compounds in Heat-Treated Sucuk
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Foods
Volume 12
Issue 20
10.3390/foods12203878
foods-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Applications of Microalgae in Foods, Pharma and Feeds and Their Use as Fertilizers and Biostimulants: Legislation and Regulatory Aspects for Consideration

by
Min Su
1,
Leen Bastiaens
2,
Joran Verspreet
2 and
Maria Hayes
1,*
1
The Food BioSciences Department Ashtown, Teagasc Food Research Centre, 15D05 Dublin, Ireland
2
Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), 2400 Mol, Belgium
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2023, 12(20), 3878; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12203878
Submission received: 26 July 2023 / Revised: 24 September 2023 / Accepted: 13 October 2023 / Published: 23 October 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Food Security and Sustainability)
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Microalgae are a rich resource of lipids, proteins, carbohydrates and pigments with nutritional and health benefits. They increasingly find use as ingredients in functional foods and feeds as well as in cosmetics and agricultural products including biostimulants. One of their distinct advantages is their ability to grow on wastewaters and other waste streams, and they are considered an environmentally friendly and cheap method to recover nutrients and remove pollutants from the environment. However, there are limits concerning their applications if grown on certain waste streams. Within, we collate an overview of existing algal applications and current market scenarios for microalgal products as foods and feeds along with relevant legislative requirements concerning their use in Europe and the United States. Microalgal compounds of interest and their extraction and processing methodologies are summarized, and the benefits and caveats of microalgae cultivated in various waste streams and their applications are discussed.

1. Introduction

It is predicted that demand for food will increase from 35% to 56% between 2010 and 2050 [1,2]. Consumers’ demand for meat and dairy products will increase by over 70%. However, at present, over 800 million people are malnourished [3]. Agriculture is necessary for food production but global annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from traditional food systems are now known to account for around 34% of total global annual GHG emissions [4]. A sustainable future food supply in the face of the growing population, natural resource depletion, climate change and rapid urbanization is a global challenge and there is a need to add alternative biomasses to help feed our growing animal and human population and ensure food security.
Products derived from microalgae can contribute to food security and may help prevent environmental problems like greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) associated with animal-sourced proteins. When in perfect environmental conditions, microalgae can grow extremely fast and it is estimated that the growth of algae can be up to 10 times quicker than land-based, conventional crops [5], making them a potentially sustainable source of feed ingredients. Microalgae use as food is not new and dates back to Aztec times but there is growing demand for food ingredients [6], feed ingredients [7], and agents for water purification [8] that are of algal origin. Moreover, they are known for their potential use as biofuels in renewable energy [9], as well as ingredients for use in biostimulants [10], cosmetic compounds [11] and healthcare products. For example, the alga Parachlorella kessleri R-3 is known to accumulate lipids and holds potential for use as a biodiesel when grown under suitable conditions [12]. Microalgae have advantages over terrestrial sources of ingredients due to their high growth rate (over 1 d−1) and high biomass productivity and yield [13] as well as their composition of bioactive compounds. Indeed, market demand for microalgae is set to be USD 55.67 billion dollars by the end of 2031 [14].
Microalgae have an excellent nutritional composition and content of proteins, lipids, and carbohydrates along with many therapeutically active enzymes, pigments, sterols, and vitamins [15,16,17]. Microalgal protein is reported to be similar to traditional protein sources like egg protein in terms of total amino acid composition [18]. A number of studies [15,19] have identified bioactive compounds from microalgae with benefits for human health including anticancer [20,21], anti-inflammatory [20,22], antimicrobial [23,24], antioxidant [22,25], and anti-obesity activities [26,27] as well as anti-hypocholesterolemia benefits [28]. Hence, they have potential for use as health-beneficial ingredients and nutraceuticals.
Overuse of antimicrobials including antibiotics for the treatment and prevention of animal illness has led to antibiotic resistance that affects both animal health and the food chain. For example, antibiotic use in feed as growth promoters has resulted in the development of antibiotic-resistant strains and antibiotic residues in food products destined for the human market previously [29]. Zinc oxide (ZnO), a regularly used antimicrobial, was recently banned for use in the EU due to the risk of absorption and subsequent accumulation in animals with potential to cause environmental contamination in the food chain [30]. Its use was examined by the EU in 2017 and drugs containing greater than 3000 mg Kg−1 of ZnO were banned for use in the EU to treat animals from 2022 [31]. Microalgal derived compounds have potential for use in animal as therapeutic agents due to their known bioactivities that include immunomodulatory [32], antioxidative [25], antimicrobial and antiviral benefits [33].
In terms of their use as foods, Spirulina sp. and Chlorella sp. in the form of dried, whole microalgal biomass are used as a food source currently in the EU and have applications for human health. In addition, bioactive extracts derived from other microalgae are used in different ways to provide a health benefit to consumers. For example, the immunomodulatory compounds sulphate polysaccharides derived from algae are promising candidates for drug development. In addition, sulfolipids are used as vaccine adjuvants to improve immune response against cancer cells [34]. The pigment astaxanthin is a known health food supplement, and commercially available astaxanthin derived from the microalga Haematococcus pluvialis has FDA approval for use [35]. The quantity of microalgal nutrients and their bioactive composition must be measured accurately if they are to be used as foods. Accurate methods for measurement of protein, lipid, vitamin and mineral contents are available, and these are nutritionally important components of microalgae that can benefit health [36]. The late-logarithmic growth phase of microalgae is the best time to harvest most algae as this phase results in more protein (30–40% more), about 10–20% lipids and 5–15% carbohydrates [37]. When cultured through to the stationary growth phase, composition changes. Changing the cultivation conditions for different species can also influence the nutrient and bioactive composition. Generally, lipid, protein and carbohydrate content can reach up to 77% dry weight [38], 70% dry weight [39] and about 50% dry weight, respectively. The Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) microalgal species including Arthrospira platensis, Haematococcus pluvialis, Dunaliella bardawill, Chlorella protothecoides, Crypthecodinium cohnii and Porphyridium cruentum contain about 40% protein. Soy contains around 38% protein and rice contains about 10% protein. Legumes like peas have up to 2.8% protein. Animal proteins like milk contain 4% protein while eggs are reported to contain 13% [40]. Algal protein is rich in essential amino acids compared to common plant proteins. Unlike most plant proteins, all GRAS microalgae with the exception of Euglena gracilis are complete protein sources [36]. In addition, microalgae contain bioactives like carotenoids, fatty acids, polyhydroxyalkonates and carbohydrates, and oligosaccharides, which can be extracted from algae and have potential for use in foods or functional foods as well as feeds [19,41,42].
Whilst microalgae promise to deliver many benefits, there are also several hurdles to overcome concerning their use as food and feed ingredients. Some of the major bottlenecks limiting the expansion of microalga use include costs and limitations in terms of the scale of production of microalgae. Microalgal production is still a small-scale activity because the high growth rate and productivity often observed at the laboratory scale is difficult to replicate at an industrial scale. Using outdoor cultivation conditions, the duplication time for microalga and the biomass productivity decreases (by as much as 40 t ha−1 per year) [43,44,45,46] compared to what is observed in the laboratory. Productivity of algae in terms of growth is usually lower in outdoor environments compared to laboratory environments because the temperature and light intensities outdoors are more variable and extreme [47]. Microalgae find it challenging to cope with natural fluctuations in unpredictable outdoor weather, especially for commercial production. Additionally, cultivation of algae outdoors in pond systems can result in environmental contamination with bacteria, virus, fungi, protozoa, rotifers or other unwanted algae if ponds are poorly designed and maintained. It is therefore important that the end biomass produced be assessed for the accumulation of toxins and pathogens especially where algae are produced on “waste” resources or wastewaters. The initial growth environment can therefore limit use of algae especially for feed, food and pharmaceutical purposes. Growth conditions also impact the potential to use algae as fertilizers and even their potential to be used as fuel feedstock as heavy-metal bioaccumulations could affect fuel properties and the composition of emissions [46].
Despite challenges, currently, global microalgal production is over 7000 tons (dry weight) per year. Microalgae produced today is used primarily for feed premixes and food applications [44]. The widely consumed microalgae worldwide include species belonging to the Genera Spirulina, Dunaliella, Haematococcus and Chlorella. Species belonging to these groups are used as foods, in tablets and supplements. Phycocyanin extracted from Spirulina sp. costs approximately 11 EUR mg−1 dry weight (DW) [43]. Beta-carotene extracted from Dunaliella sp. is priced at between 215 and 2150 EUR kg−1 DW [43]. Astaxanthin extracted from Haematococcus sp. can reach prices up to 7150 EUR kg−1 DW [43]. The fisheries sector generated greater than 7000 kilotons (kT) a year of fish oil and fish meal, used primarily for aquaculture feed [43]. More than 200,000 kT per year of soy oil and soy meal are produced and this resource contributes significantly to animal feed production globally. Prices for soy meal and soy oil regularly cost less than 0.5 EUR kg−1 [43]. This indicates that cost due to production scale and volume and additionally market uptake are hurdles towards widespread microalgal use. Additional issues concerning microalgal use include the problem that when operating at an industrial scale, cultivation of microalgae may be subject to contamination issues with biological pollutants. Growing microalgae is a symbiotic system where microalgae and bacteria as well as zooplankton communicate and assist each other’s growth. As a result, contamination often occurs and pure microalga culture production is costly [45]. Cultivation in open pond systems can result in contamination with environmental pollutants and culture collapse, resulting in loss of the product. In addition, there is the possibility of biomass contamination with pathogens present in harvested biomass or in the final process effluent when microalgae are cultivated with wastewater sources. This may present a potential health risk [46]. In addition, microalgae producers must become knowledgeable on the legislation governing the use of microalgae as/or in food and feeds, and they must be compliant with what is required to obtain an ecological footprint certification, and the Nagoya Protocol.

2. Current Markets for Microalgae as Food

2.1. Current Market Scenario

Valuable components can be extracted from microalgae and find applications in nutraceuticals or functional foods [48]. These extracts and bioactives are used in the formulation of soups, juices, biscuits, ice-creams and as natural coloring agents (Table 1), [49,50].
Nutrients and bioactive compounds including proteins and hydrolysates, as well as fatty acids, oligosaccharides and other small molecules contribute to health when consumed due to antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and other bioactivities [50].
Microalgae used in food and feed applications must first and foremost be safe for consumption and must be free of contaminants (like heavy metals), hazardous substances and must not pose a risk of causing allergy. Microalgae currently used for food and feeds are listed in Table 1 and are considered safe for use.
At the moment, there are five microalgae-derived components—astaxanthin, β-carotene, phycocyanin, Omega-3, and two algae biomass products, i.e., Spirulina and Chlorella sp. approved for use as food and feed ingredients even though research has demonstrated the potential of a myriad of other microalgae for use in the food and feed industries. Table 2 lists different algal components with potential use as techno-functional or bioactive ingredients to improve nutrition and the health benefits of foods.

2.2. Microalgal Compounds of Interests and Current Applications

2.2.1. Pigment Derivatives

A number of microalgal pigments and compounds are listed in Table 3 [51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62]. Pigments like chlorophylls, carotenoids and phycobiliproteins are associated with health benefits observed in lab-based assays [63,64,65] and in vivo in animals [63,64,65,66], and when consumed by human subjects [67]. Astaxanthin, lutein, fucoxanthin, canthaxanthin, zeaxanthin and β-cryptoxanthin are used as antioxidants, anti-inflammatory agents, and as anti-tumor agents [68]. Benefits of carotenoids have also been shown using in vivo studies. Ranga Rao et al. [69] looked at bioavailability of Spirulina platensis, Haematococcus pluvialis and Botryococcus braunii biomass with a focus on β-carotene, astaxanthin and lutein. When the plasma, liver and eye tissue of rats following consumption of carotenoids were examined, astaxanthin and lutein were found in all tissues. S. platensis, H. pluvialis and B. braunii biomass could prevent lipid peroxidation through scavenging free radicals and hydroxy radicals. Some astaxanthin ester derivatives including astaxanthin mono and diesters obtained from the green algae Haematococcus pluvialis were also found to improve antitumor effects in rat [70,71].
Pigment production from algae varies when up-scaling from lab- to industrial-scaled production. Some active pigments including PBPs (blue pigment extracted from Spirulina), astaxanthin (yellow-to-red pigment extracted from Haematococcus) and β-carotene (yellow pigment extracted from Dunaliella) are produced at industrial scale with the end products used extensively [72]. The most extensive application for pigments is as food colorants. Pigments may also have antiseptic properties and may be used as preservatives due to their antioxidant activities, which may prevent spoiling of foods by inhibiting fatty acid oxidation. In addition, chlorophylls are known to be excellent deodorizers of foods [73].
Several factors can affect the cost of microalgal pigments extractions. These factors include the target algal organism, market trends and available technology. Extraction involves either non-mechanical methods like chemical, thermal, and enzymatic treatments or mechanical extraction using pressure and ultrasonics, microwave treatment or electric field treatment as well as supercritical fluid extraction (SCF). Yields of pigments depend on the cell wall structure of the alga and how well this can be disrupted as well as the solubility of the pigments in different solutes. Cell disruption methods include homogenization, CO2 SCF, omics heating and electric pulse field [74,75,76,77,78,79,80]. Pigment extracts and how they are produced are shown in Table 3.

2.2.2. Protein Derivatives

Protein value depends on protein content and size which results from refining, for example, achieved using filtration methods with size limits (e.g., 3 kDa or 10 kDa). Whole-cell protein contains 40–50% protein, protein concentrates contain 60–89% protein and isolates can contain between 90 and 95% proteins. Hydrolysates are usually 70–95% pure protein and bioactive peptides containing permeates have >95% protein purity [81]. Methods used to produce proteins result in its quality in terms of protein digestibility and functional activities. Processing can affect technofunctional attributes of proteins including emulsification and foaming properties [81,82,83,84], and different protein derivatives have different processing methods and applications.

Protein Concentrates or Isolates

Concentrates and isolates find use in products like soup and sauces where the technofunctional attributes like absorption and emulsification properties are important as well as foaming and gelation [81]. Concentrates are also used in muffin manufacture, pastas and biscuits [85]. It was reported that emulsifying capacity and stability of microalgae concentrates are comparable to or even higher than ingredients like sodium caseinate [81,86]. The literature suggests different approaches for the production of protein concentrates but, in general, the following steps are followed [81]: microalgal harvest, spray drying, high-pressure homogenization (pH 8–10), clarification (centrifugation), membrane UF-DF (50–300 kDa MWCO) filtration and refining with enzymes (hydrolysis).
Downstream processing needs to enable the recovery of functional proteins cost effectively and at high protein purity and yield. Disruption of algal cells using either high-pressure homogenization and milling at high pH values (pH 8–10) can be performed, followed by clarification with centrifuges or phase separation decanters. Additional purification is still required using filtration or protein precipitation. This approach can yield around 80% protein. Membrane filtration is more suitable than precipitation to produce protein concentrates due to the enhanced solubility and functionality of the proteins [86]. Additional purification steps result in isolate production—these have, on average, greater than 90% protein content. Protein precipitates and retentates that result from filtration include polysaccharides and small molecules [81,84].

Protein Hydrolysates and Bioactive Peptides

Protein hydrolysates are used in food and beverages where solubility and stability at elevated temperatures, which occur during processes like pasteurization, are present. Acid pH conditions are also suitable for protein hydrolysates. Enzymes and or acids are used in hydrolysis generation. Lipids are removed prior to hydrolysis usually or directly after hydrolysis using solvent systems or centrifugation. Ethanol is often used to extract high-value lipids and pigments prior to protein hydrolysis.
Bioactive peptides can be recovered from hydrolysates [81]. Proteinogenic amino acids and peptides from microalgae can be applied as antioxidants, antihypertensive agents, anticoagulants, and as anti-proliferative and immunostimulants [18,87]. Hydrolysate fractions less than 3 kDa in size usually contain bioactive peptides and these can be recovered using different filtration methods including tangential flow filtration and MWCO methods.

2.2.3. Lipid Derivatives

Microalgae are promising sources of natural edible oils for nutritional application in foods [88,89,90] as they contain PUFAs and produce oils efficiently compared to land-based crops. Microalgae make lipids in the triacylglycerol (TAG) form and these lipids can be used in products like infant formula as an alternative to human milk TAGs [91]. Microalgae increase lipid production when stressed, for example, under conditions of intense light or high salinity as well as under a combination of stressful conditions [92].
PUFAs which include the n-3 and n-6 classes are known for their health benefits [93] and have beneficial properties for the cardiovascular system, anti-cholesterol activity, and other bioactivities [94,95]. Omega-3 fatty acids include alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) (18:3, n-3), stearidonic acid (STA) (18:4, n-3), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) (20:5, n-3), docosapentaenoic acid (DPA) (20:5, n-3) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) (22:6, n-3). Omega-6 fatty acids include linoleic (LA, C18:2), ɣ-linolenic (GLA, C18:3) and arachidonic (ARA, C20:4) acid. PUFAs are used in nutraceuticals, pharmaceutical and therapeutic applications [96]. EPA and DHA are known for their health benefits and the market for these is expansive [97]. PUFA production for use in infant formula is a significant sector and includes DHA [98]. GLA and ARA from species like Arthrospira platensis, Porphyridium cruentum, Mortieriella alpine and Parietochloris incisa find use in supplements. Some microalgal sources of lipids and the potential applications of algal-derived PUFAs are shown in Table 4.

2.2.4. Carbohydrate Derivatives

Microalgal polysaccharides are stable, and versatile and generally regarded as safe [99]. Microalgal polysaccharides consist of the sugars galactose, xylose, and glucose. Polysaccharides from microalgae consist usually of β-glucans, cellulose, hemicellulose and uronic acids as well as fucose [100]. Exopolysaccharides are known to be very bioactive with activities that include antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial activities [99]. Several factors including growth conditions of the microalga affect the polysaccharide concentration [101]. The use of microalgal polysaccharides was reported previously and they find application in functional foods, nutraceuticals, and supplements, namely as sources of dietary fiber [102], as food thickeners [103] or food ingredients for weight management [104].
Microalgal sources of polysaccharides include Porphyridium sp., Chlorella sp., and Spirulina sp. [101]. S. platensis polysaccharides can be extracted using enzyme hydrolysis, ultrasound and other pre-treatments, and are known to be very nutritious [105]. Chlorella pyrenoidosa and Spirulina platensis polysaccharides have known anti-obesity properties [106] and those isolated from Chlorella vulgaris can prevent airway inflammation [107].
Polysaccharides are extracted usually with centrifugation and microfiltration to remove cells from polysaccharides. The solvents methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, or acetone can be applied for precipitation. Sonication and other physical methods or chemicals like formaldehyde, hot water, or sodium hydroxide or resins with ionic capacity can help recover the polysaccharide fractions [108,109].

2.3. Legislation Concerning Microalgae Use as Food in EU and USA

2.3.1. EU

EU regulations apply to microalgal use as foods in the EU, as shown in Table 5. Food safety legislation is also of great importance for microalgal use as foods or feeds. The history of use as food of the alga is important for its regulatory status. The Novel Food Regulation which states that “species having not been used as food to a significant degree in any of the EU member countries before 15 May 1997 need to undergo authorization procedures in order to ensure their safety for human consumption (Regulation (EC) No 258/97)”.
Table 6 cites relevant regulations that are relevant to food and feed development and use in the EU. The New Novel Food Regulation (EC) 2015/2283 provides for species that have a demonstrated history of safe use (equal to or greater than 25 years) external to the EU.
The novel food catalogue contains the EU list of all approved novel foods. The catalogue collates both imported and EU algae, and there are around 22 approved algae listed here (https://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/novel-food/novel-food-catalogue_en (accessed on 11 January 2022)) including Arthrospira platensis, Chlorella luteoviridis, Chlorella pyrenoidosa, Chlorella vulgaris, Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, and Spirulina sp.
Regulation EC/1924/2006 concerns nutrition and health claims. EFSA evaluates the scientific evidence supporting these claims. Annex XIII details the recommended daily allowances (RDA) for foods (Nutrition Information Regulation (EU) 1169/2011). Iodine has an RDA of 150 µg. Algae are the only non-animal source of omega-3 PUFAs—EPA and DHA specifically. If a product contains 0.3 g ALA per 100 g and per 100 kcal, 40 mg of EPA and DHA per 100 g and per 100 kcal, a claim like “high in omega-3 fatty acids” can be made on a product according to Regulation (EC) 1924/2006.
Microalgae with a high contaminant level cannot be put on the market. Substances of relevance are dioxins, aflatoxins, heavy metals (such as lead and mercury) and nitrates. Microalgae may accumulate heavy metals from surrounding waters/wastewaters. Heavy metals need to be assessed. Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 on contaminants sets permitted levels of heavy metals for food. There is no maximum level of cadmium or inorganic arsenic set for microalgae. Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 sets the permitted maximum level for mercury at 0.01 mg/kg. The maximum limit for cadmium is 3.0 mg/kg for food supplements. The maximum limit for mercury and lead are 0.1 mg/kg and 3.0 mg/kg. EU Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 governs food additive use in the EU, and contains eight algal additives (codes E401-E407a).
Foodstuffs may contain pathogens that pose a food safety risk. Good Hygiene and Manufacturing Practices (GHP, GMP) and Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles should be followed where algae are used as foods to ensure food safety. Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 concerns microbiological criteria for foods (January 2006).

2.3.2. USA

Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) is granted by the FDA to substances considered safe for human consumption. GRAS can be obtained by an operator by use of documented evidence of human consumption. Alternatively, it can be determined by substantiating scientifically the safety of the substance. The purity of a substance is important to ensure safety. Securing GRAS status requires time and money, and currently only microalgal species Spirulina sp., Chlorella sp., Dunaliella sp., Haematococcus sp., Schizochytrium sp., Porphyridium cruentum and Crypthecodinium cohnii have GRAS status. Oil from Schizochytrium and Ulkenia, as well as a whole microalgal protein powder and a lipid ingredient derived from Chlorella sp. also have GRAS status in the USA.

3. Current Market Scenario for Microalgal Use as Feed

3.1. Current Market Scenario

The utilization of microalgae as livestock feed greatly depends on the type of microalgae and their nutrient composition, as well as animal adaption to the ingredient [33]. Research demonstrates that utilizing microalgae biomass in animal feed could enhance the immune response, durability towards illness as well as antibacterial and antiviral action. Spirulina sp. and Chlorella sp. are permitted for feed use only currently. Dunaliella sp. for pure β-carotene is permitted for use, and production of astaxanthin from Haematococcus sp. is allowed as a feed additive. Chlamydomonas sp., Chlorococcum sp., and Scenedesmus sp. are allowed in aquaculture feed but do not have GRAS status.

3.1.1. Aquaculture

Fishmeal use in aquaculture is considered not sustainable and microalgae are growing in popularity in this application field as they are protein- and oil-rich [121]. Species including Chlorella, Isochrysis, Pavlova, Phaeodactylum, Chaetoceros and Nannochloropsis are often used in fish feed [122]. Table 7 shows the proximate composition of algae compared to fishmeal and soy. In addition, the amino acid profile and high levels of PUFAs also make microalgal use in feed and nutrition extremely effective [123].
Microalgae can improve stress responses in fish as well as growth. They positively impact against disease development in fish and improve carcass quality [126]. Pigment in fish flesh is also increased by consumption of microalgae likely due to carotenoid content of the microalgae used as feed [121]. Table 8 shows examples of commercially available microalgae used as feed ingredients and their observed health benefits.

3.1.2. Livestock and Poultry Feed

Microalgal inclusion in livestock feed can improve weight gain, health and end product quality, as shown in trials with rabbits and poultry previously [132,133]. Arthrospira sp. was applied in the feed of pet animals—dogs, cats, and ornamental birds previously as well as in the diet of pigs, horses and cattle. Arthrospira platensis increased average daily weight gain in pigs in a trial. Schizochytrium sp. was found to improve the fatty acid composition of pork and poultry. When used to feed chickens, microalgae improve the yellow color of egg yolks [133]. Chlorella sp. was found to improve poultry growth performance. These examples illustrate that microalgae, as feed ingredients, are a promising alternative to corn and soybean. Table 9 shows the benefits of microalgal inclusion in feeds on animal health and growth.

3.2. Legislation Concerning Microalgae Use as Feed in EU and USA

3.2.1. EU

Two regulations relate to feed on the EU market—Regulation EC No 767/2009 related to putting feed on the EU market [141,142] and Regulation EC No 183/2005 concerning feed hygiene [143]. The goal of both regulations is feed safety. An animal diet/feed ingredient must be on the list of permitted items on the ‘Feed Materials Register’ (www.feedmaterialsregister.eu (accessed on 11 January 2022)). If not on this list, the material has to be announced via notification (art. 24 (part 6), Council regulation 767/2009/EC). Feed safety is regulated by Council Regulation 767/2009/EC (e.g., Art. 4), the General Foodstuff Council regulation (e.g., Art. 15), and the hygiene regulations in Council Regulation 183/2005/EC. Feed additives are regulated by Council Regulation 1831/2003 [144] and there is a European Union Register of Feed Additives. Until 2013, microalgae as animal feed additives were not allowed due to concerns regarding manure and digestate use [145]. The GMP+ legislation was changed and microalgae can be used as dietary feed ingredients for animals following a risk assessment. Accepted feed materials in the EU, including algal meals as well as algae oil and extracts are defined in Commission Regulation 68/2013. Toxic contaminants in animal feed are detailed in Directive 2002/32/EC. Arsenic is permitted in feed at a concentration of 10 mg/kg in complete and complementary feed for pet animals and 40 mg/kg for algal meal and algae derived feed materials (Directive 2002/32/EC). Inorganic arsenic must be lower than 2 mg/kg. Amounts of 10 mg/Kg, 0.1 mg/kg and 0.1 mg/kg are the maximum permitted levels of lead, cadmium and mercury in feeds. The increase in the global population has raised questions about what is fed to companion animals and pets and the need for more sustainable ingredients. The nutritional composition and metabolomic profile of the microalgae Tetradesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris, and Nannochloropsis oceanica met the requirement for essential amino acids (except for cysteine and methionine) in the diet of dogs at all stages of life. Additionally, microalgae provided the FEDIAF-approved amount of fatty acids required in the diet of dogs. FEDIAF regulates and provides guidance on pet ingredients and their use in the EU [146].

3.2.2. USA

The FDA Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) are authorities on feed in the USA. The Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) publishes feed ingredient definitions in the AAFCO official publication. Laws concerning feed in the US that permit use of algae as feeds include the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C) which regulates all food and feed additives introduced since 1938 and the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (1994) that includes the dietary supplement sectors.

4. Applications of Microalgae Produced on Wastewaters

4.1. Benefits of Cultivating Microalgae on Wastewaters

Growth of microalgae on wastewater allows for a reduction in nitrogen and phosphate, and a decrease in both biological and chemical oxygen demands [147]. Organic wastes are carbon-rich and microalgae have grown on them successfully, previously [148,149]. To remove carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus from waste waters, different algae have been used and their growth assessed on agricultural, brewery, and industrial effluents, with promising results in terms of growth and nutrient removal [150,151,152,153]. Scenedesmus obliquus removed ammonia and nitrogen from municipal wastewater effectively previously [150]. Chlorella sp. grown on brewery wastewater also was found to remove 94.38% ammonia and 88.52% nitrogen with a decrease in COD [152].
Microalgae can use urea (organic N) and ammonium (inorganic N), and nitrates [154]. Ammonium is the preferred N source for microalgae as it does not require reduction steps in algal cells [155]. Using ammonia-containing wastewaters for microalgal growth may help to recover nitrogen. This is positive in terms of Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with microalgal culture and several studies report the negligible emission of N2O caused by microalgae in wastewater treatment [156,157]. Alcántara [158] established a microalgae wastewater treatment process. This was estimated to have an emission factor of 0.0047% g N2O-N g−1 N-input.
Microalgae can remove heavy metals and chemicals from wastewaters [159]. Pharmaceutical manufacture results in chemicals in the water course. It has been reported that over 200 substances are released into water bodies, including antibiotics like ciprofloxacin from Pharma [160]. Nannochloropsis sp. was shown to remove acetaminophen (commonly known as paracetamol), ibuprofen and olanzapine from industry wastewater [161]. In addition to pharmaceuticals, microalgae can absorb heavy metals. Chlorella miniata and Scenedesmus quadricauda were used to remove zinc and nickel from wastewater [162]. Scenedesmus quadricauda reduced nickel and zinc by 99%, Chlorella miniata reduced the amount of nickel by 70%. Additionally, Bellucci et al. [163] demonstrated the removal of Escherichia coli from waste water previously.
To produce 100 tons of microalgae biomass, up to 10 tons of N and 1 ton of P are needed [164]. Wastewater treatment and microalgal cultivation could concurrently reduce nutrient costs for algal production and clean up water courses in a more economic manner [13,165]. In short, utilizing microalgae with wastewater treatment effectively can clean wastewaters and prevent eutrophication. Microalgae could be used for energy and fuel production when produced on wastewaters [166,167] but the safety of this process must be assessed firstly.

4.2. Caveats of Cultivating Microalgae on Wastewaters

Limits and challenges of cultivating microalgae with wastewater also have to be considered. Limitations include the following:
(i)
Microalgal bioremediation is seasonal and may not be suitable for use in the winter when UV levels are low and microalgal growth is hampered by UV and temperatures.
(ii)
CO2 supply is critical for microalgal growth and therefore wastewater treatment [168]. CO2 sources near the cultivation site are needed.
(iii)
Very high concentrations of contaminants have a negative impact on microalgae. An adaptation step for the microalgal strain to the target compound(s) is required on site.
(iv)
High concentrations of ammonia are toxic to many microalgal strains and pH control in wastewaters is needed to ensure ammonia concentrations are regulated [154]. Low concentrations of nitrogen and/or phosphorus in wastewater result in little microalgal biomass and costs where this happens are high and the process could be nonviable [169].
(v)
Xenobiotic pollutants require a combination of microalgae for their removal. Consistency in polyculture biomass quality can be a concern.
(vi)
The effect of annual variations in light and temperature on the bioremediation efficiency and microalgal biomass quality and yield needs further work as production of algae at a large-scale is currently limited.
(vii)
Additional applications of wastewater-grown microalgal biomass are required to make production processes economically viable in the context of the bio-economy.

4.3. Current Applications of Microalgae Produced Using Wastewaters

Microalgae cultivated on wastewaters cannot be used for human applications. Algae produced in this manner find application as biofertilizers, biofuels and bioplastics, which do not directly affect the human food chain. It is not permitted to use algal biomass recovered from urban wastewater in animal feeds except for manure application [170]. However, microalgae produced on waste streams may have potential for use as animal feed ingredients if the safety and quality of the end algal product is achieved through processing. Strict control of toxic bacteria and microbiological assessment for pathogens in wastewater treatment is necessary and important to determine biomass safety [171,172], as bacteria which could contain toxic compounds or release bio-toxin co-exist with microalgae especially growing in wastewater, and pose a threat to the food chain. Microalgae produced on “waste” streams and their potential applications are in Table 10. The microalgae used in these studies showed not only high nutrient recovery ability, recovering nitrogen, phosphorus, and reducing chemical oxygen demand, but also positively impacted animal growth performance in several instances.

4.4. Legislation Concerning Use of Microalgae Grown on Wastewater as Biostimulants and Fertilizers

Other applications of microalgae grown on wastewaters include use as biostimulants or fertilizers. Regulation EU2019/1009 dictates the permitted levels of cadmium, hexavalent chromium, mercury, arsenic, nickel and other heavy metals in fertilisers. An amount of 2 mg/kg cadmium is permitted in sewage sludge fertiliser and this is proposed to be reduced to 0.8 mg/kg by 2030 in some EU countries (Sweden, for example). The maximum level for cadmium in bio fertilisers in the EU is 1.5 mg/kg (Regulation EU 2019/1009). Under the above regulation, a list of EU-accepted biostimulants would be created. Maximum limits for heavy metals are identical to those for fertilisers. Only scientifically proven claims can be put on a label concerning biostimulant action. Ricci [146] describes principles for justifying plant biostimulant claims and field trials needed. CEN is also developing a standard on this.

5. Conclusions

The ability of microalgae to make bioactive components makes it a promising raw material for many applications in food, feed and biostimulant uses. This review detailed potential uses of microalgae in food and feeds as well as caveats concerning their use. Current applications of microalgae are summarized including the compounds of interests with their current and potential applications, along with the processing methods for their production and the legislation concerning their use in the EU and USA. However, with current downstream processing techniques, multiple-product extraction from microalgae is not economically viable. This issue can be tackled by combining wastewater treatment and microalgal cultivation to reduce nutrient costs. However, many challenges have to be considered when considering the potential applications of microalgae grown on wastewaters, specifically the safety of the resulting biomass as well as consumer perception and public acceptability. Hence, in-depth investigations and further research are required in this field.

Funding

This research was funded by EU Interreg, North West Europe (NWE), grant number NWE639, as part of the Implementation and development of economic viable algae-based value chains in Northwest Europe (IDEA project).

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations. World Population Prospects 2022; Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2022; ISBN 978-92-1-148373-4. [Google Scholar]
  2. van Dijk, M.; Morley, T.; Rau, M.L.; Saghai, Y. A Meta-Analysis of Projected Global Food Demand and Population at Risk of Hunger for the Period 2010–2050. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 494–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Doering, O.; Sorensen, A. The Land That Shapes and Sustains Us. In How to Feed World; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2018; pp. 46–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Crippa, M.; Solazzo, E.; Guizzardi, D.; Monforti-Ferrario, F.; Tubiello, F.N.; Leip, A. Food Systems Are Responsible for a Third of Global Anthropogenic GHG Emissions. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 198–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Khoo, K.S.; Chew, K.W.; Yew, G.Y.; Leong, W.H.; Chai, Y.H.; Show, P.L.; Chen, W.H. Recent Advances in Downstream Processing of Microalgae Lipid Recovery for Biofuel Production. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 304, 122996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Baldia, A.; Rajput, D.; Kumar, A.; Pandey, A.; Dubey, K.K. Engineering Microalgae as the Next-Generation Food. Syst. Microbiol. Biomanufacturing 2022, 3, 166–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Soto-Sánchez, O.; Hidalgo, P.; González, A.; Oliveira, P.E.; Hernández Arias, A.J.; Dantagnan, P. Microalgae as Raw Materials for Aquafeeds: Growth Kinetics and Improvement Strategies of Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Production. Aquac. Nutr. 2023, 2023, 5110281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Song, Y.; Wang, L.; Qiang, X.; Gu, W.; Ma, Z.; Wang, G. The Promising Way to Treat Wastewater by Microalgae: Approaches, Mechanisms, Applications and Challenges. J. Water Process Eng. 2022, 49, 103012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sarwer, A.; Hamed, S.M.; Osman, A.I.; Jamil, F.; Al-Muhtaseb, A.H.; Alhajeri, N.S.; Rooney, D.W. Algal Biomass Valorization for Biofuel Production and Carbon Sequestration: A Review; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; Volume 20, ISBN 0123456789. [Google Scholar]
  10. González-Pérez, B.K.; Rivas-Castillo, A.M.; Valdez-Calderón, A.; Gayosso-Morales, M.A. Microalgae as Biostimulants: A New Approach in Agriculture. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2022, 38, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zhuang, D.; He, N.; Khoo, K.S.; Ng, E.P.; Chew, K.W.; Ling, T.C. Application Progress of Bioactive Compounds in Microalgae on Pharmaceutical and Cosmetics. Chemosphere 2022, 291, 132932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Song, X.; Liu, B.-F.; Kong, F.; Song, Q.; Ren, N.-Q.; Ren, H.-Y. Lipid accumulation by a novel microalga Parachlorella kessleri R-3 with wide pH tolerance for promising biodiesel production. Algal Res. 2023, 69, 102925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Acién Fernández, F.G.; Gómez-Serrano, C.; Fernández-Sevilla, J.M. Recovery of Nutrients From Wastewaters Using Microalgae. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2018, 2, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Transparency Market Research No Title.Report. Algae Mark. Size, Sales, Share Forecast. by 2027. Available online: https://4kzw.short.gy/P80Sm1 (accessed on 25 July 2023).
  15. Camacho, F.; Macedo, A.; Malcata, F. Potential Industrial Applications and Commercialization of Microalgae in the Functional Food and Feed Industries: A Short Review. Mar. Drugs 2019, 17, 312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Leu, S.; Boussiba, S. Advances in the Production of High-Value Products by Microalgae. Ind. Biotechnol. 2014, 10, 169–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Venkata Mohan, S.; Rohit, M.V.; Chiranjeevi, P.; Chandra, R.; Navaneeth, B. Heterotrophic Microalgae Cultivation to Synergize Biodiesel Production with Waste Remediation: Progress and Perspectives. Bioresour. Technol. 2015, 184, 169–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Koyande, A.K.; Chew, K.W.; Rambabu, K.; Tao, Y.; Chu, D.T.; Show, P.L. Microalgae: A Potential Alternative to Health Supplementation for Humans. Food Sci. Hum. Wellness 2019, 8, 16–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wang, Y.; Tibbetts, S.M.; McGinn, P.J. Microalgae as Sources of High-Quality Protein for Human Food and Protein Supplements. Foods 2021, 10, 3002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Avila-Roman, J.; Garda-Gil, S.; Rodriguez-Luna, A.; Motilva, V.; Talero, E. Anti-Inflammatory and Anticancer Effects of Microalgal Carotenoids. Mar. Drugs 2021, 19, 531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Khavari, F.; Saidijam, M.; Taheri, M.; Nouri, F. Microalgae: Therapeutic Potentials and Applications. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2021, 48, 4757–4765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gallego, R.; Valdés, A.; Suárez-Montenegro, Z.J.; Sánchez-Martínez, J.D.; Cifuentes, A.; Ibáñez, E.; Herrero, M. Anti-Inflammatory and Neuroprotective Evaluation of Diverse Microalgae Extracts Enriched in Carotenoids. Algal Res. 2022, 67, 102830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Stirk, W.A.; van Staden, J. Bioprospecting for Bioactive Compounds in Microalgae: Antimicrobial Compounds. Biotechnol. Adv. 2022, 59, 107977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ognistaia, A.V.; Markina, Z.V.; Orlova, T.Y. Antimicrobial Activity of Marine Microalgae. Russ. J. Mar. Biol. 2022, 48, 217–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Coulombier, N.; Jauffrais, T.; Lebouvier, N. Antioxidant Compounds from Microalgae: A Review. Mar. Drugs 2021, 19, 549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Oshida, Y. Effects of Exercise-Training on Metabolic Syndrome. Nippon Rinsho. Jpn. J. Clin. Med. 2006, 64 (Suppl. S9), 584–588. [Google Scholar]
  27. Regueiras, A.; Huguet, Á.; Conde, T.; Couto, D.; Domingues, P.; Domingues, M.R.; Costa, A.M.; da Silva, J.L.; Vasconcelos, V.; Urbatzka, R. Potential Anti-Obesity, Anti-Steatosis, and Anti-Inflammatory Properties of Extracts from the Microalgae Chlorella Vulgaris and Chlorococcum Amblystomatis under Different Growth Conditions. Mar. Drugs 2022, 20, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Bao, K.; Wang, K.; Wang, X.; Zhang, T.; Liu, H.; Li, G. Effects of dietary manganese supplementation on nutrient digestibility and production performance in male sika deer (Cervus Nippon). Anim. Sci. J. 2017, 88, 463–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Cheng, D.; Liu, Y.; Shehata, E.; Feng, Y.; Lin, H.; Xue, J.; Li, Z. In-Feed Antibiotic Use Changed the Behaviors of Oxytetracycline, Sulfamerazine, and Ciprofloxacin and Related Antibiotic Resistance Genes during Swine Manure Composting. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 402, 123710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Heinzl, I.; Barbosa, F.F.; Nutrition, E.W. The Zinc Oxide Ban: What Led to It, What Are the Alternatives? Zinc Oxide: The Disadvantages Outweigh the Advantages. 2022. Available online: https://ew-nutrition.com/the-2022-zinc-oxide-ban-what-are-the-alternatives/ (accessed on 25 July 2023).
  31. European Commission. CommissionImplementing Decision of 26.6.2017 Concerning, in the Framework of Article 35 of Directive 2001/82/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, the Marketing Authorisations for Veterinary Medicinal Products Containing “Zinc Oxide” to Be Administered Orally to Food Producing Species. EC Dir. 2017. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/health/documents/community-register/2017/20170626136754/dec_136754_en.pdf (accessed on 8 October 2021).
  32. Riccio, G.; Lauritano, C. Microalgae with Immunomodulatory Activities. Mar. Drugs 2020, 18, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kusmayadi, A.; Leong, Y.K.; Yen, H.W.; Huang, C.Y.; Chang, J.S. Microalgae as Sustainable Food and Feed Sources for Animals and Humans–Biotechnological and Environmental Aspects. Chemosphere 2021, 271, 129800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Manzo, E.; Cutignano, A.; Pagano, D.; Gallo, C.; Barra, G.; Nuzzo, G.; Sansone, C.; Ianora, A.; Urbanek, K.; Fenoglio, D.; et al. A New Marine-Derived Sulfoglycolipid Triggers Dendritic Cell Activation and Immune Adjuvant Response. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 6286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Brendler, T.; Williamson, E.M. Astaxanthin: How Much Is Too Much? A Safety Review. Phyther. Res. 2019, 33, 3090–3111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Torres-Tiji, Y.; Fields, F.J.; Mayfield, S.P. Microalgae as a future food source. Biotechnol Adv. 2020, 41, 107536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Barsanti, L.; Gualtieri, P. Algae Utilization; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2014; ISBN 9781439867334. [Google Scholar]
  38. Chisti, Y. Biodiesel from Microalgae. Biotechnol. Adv. 2007, 25, 294–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Chew, K.W.; Yap, J.Y.; Show, P.L.; Suan, N.H.; Juan, J.C.; Ling, T.C.; Lee, D.J.; Chang, J.S. Microalgae Biorefinery: High Value Products Perspectives. Bioresour. Technol. 2017, 229, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, United Nations. World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables; Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP/248; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  41. Borowitzka, M.A. High-Value Products from Microalgae-Their Development and Commercialisation. J. Appl. Phycol. 2013, 25, 743–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Fernández, F.G.A.; Reis, A.; Wijffels, R.H.; Barbosa, M.; Verdelho, V.; Llamas, B. The Role of Microalgae in the Bioeconomy. New Biotechnol. 2021, 61, 99–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Vigani, M.; Parisi, C.; Rodríguez-Cerezo, E.; Barbosa, M.J.; Sijtsma, L.; Ploeg, M.; Enzing, C. Food and Feed Products from Micro-Algae: Market Opportunities and Challenges for the EU. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 42, 81–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Wang, H.; Zhang, W.; Chen, L.; Wang, J.; Liu, T. The Contamination and Control of Biological Pollutants in Mass Cultivation of Microalgae. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 128, 745–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Usher, P.K.; Ross, A.B.; Camargo-Valero, M.A.; Tomlin, A.S.; Gale, W.F. An Overview of the Potential Environmental Impacts of Large-Scale Microalgae Cultivation. Biofuels 2014, 5, 331–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Sarker, N.K.; Kaparaju, P. A Critical Review on the Status and Progress of Microalgae Cultivation in Outdoor Photobioreactors Conducted over 35 Years. Energies 2023, 16, 3105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Lucakova, S.; Branyikova, I.; Hayes, M. Microalgal Proteins and Bioactives for Food, Feed, and Other Applications. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 4402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Raja, R.; Coelho, A.; Hemaiswarya, S.; Kumar, P.; Carvalho, I.S.; Alagarsamy, A. Applications of Microalgal Paste and Powder as Food and Feed: An Update Using Text Mining Tool. Beni-Suef Univ. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2018, 7, 740–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ampofo, J.; Abbey, L. Microalgae: Bioactive Composition, Health Benefits, Safety and Prospects as Potential High-Value Ingredients for the Functional Food Industry. Foods 2022, 11, 1744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Bazarnova, J.; Nilova, L.; Trukhina, E.; Bernavskaya, M.; Smyatskaya, Y.; Aktar, T. Use of Microalgae Biomass for Fortification of Food Products from Grain. Foods 2021, 10, 3018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Mohamed, A.G.; Abo-El-Khair, B.E.; Shalaby, S.M. Quality of Novel Healthy Processed Cheese Analogue Enhanced with Marine Microalgae Chlorella Vulgaris Biomass. World Appl. Sci. J. 2013, 23, 914–925. [Google Scholar]
  52. Gouveia, L.; Batista, A.P.; Miranda, A.; Empis, J.; Raymundo, A. Chlorella Vulgaris Biomass Used as Colouring Source in Traditional Butter Cookies. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2007, 8, 433–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Fradique, M.; Batista, A.P.; Nunes, M.C.; Gouveia, L.; Bandarra, N.M.; Raymundo, A. Incorporation of Chlorella Vulgaris and Spirulina Maxima Biomass in Pasta Products. Part 1: Preparation and Evaluation. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2010, 90, 1656–1664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Hlaing, S.A.A.; Sadiq, M.B.; Anal, A.K. Enhanced Yield of Scenedesmus Obliquus Biomacromolecules through Medium Optimization and Development of Microalgae Based Functional Chocolate. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 57, 1090–1099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Rodríguez De Marco, E.; Steffolani, M.E.; Martínez, M.; León, A.E. The Use of Nannochloropsis Sp. as a Source of Omega-3 Fatty Acids in Dry Pasta: Chemical, Technological and Sensory Evaluation. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 53, 499–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Lafarga, T.; Mayre, E.; Echeverria, G.; Viñas, I.; Villaró, S.; Acién-Fernández, F.G.; Castellari, M.; Aguiló-Aguayo, I. Potential of the Microalgae Nannochloropsis and Tetraselmis for Being Used as Innovative Ingredients in Baked Goods. LWT 2019, 115, 108439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Lucas, B.F.; de Morais, M.G.; Santos, T.D.; Costa, J.A.V. Spirulina for Snack Enrichment: Nutritional, Physical and Sensory Evaluations. LWT 2018, 90, 270–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Rodríguez De Marco, E.; Steffolani, M.E.; Martínez, C.S.; León, A.E. Effects of Spirulina Biomass on the Technological and Nutritional Quality of Bread Wheat Pasta. LWT 2014, 58, 102–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Şahin, O.I. Functional and Sensorial Properties of Cookies Enriched with SPIRULINA and DUNALIELLA Biomass. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 57, 3639–3646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Valencia, I.; Ansorena, D.; Astiasarán, I. Development of Dry Fermented Sausages Rich in Docosahexaenoic Acid with Oil from the Microalgae Schizochytrium sp.: Influence on Nutritional Properties, Sensorial Quality and Oxidation Stability. Food Chem. 2007, 104, 1087–1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Palabiyik, I.; Durmaz, Y.; Öner, B.; Toker, O.S.; Coksari, G.; Konar, N.; Tamtürk, F. Using Spray-Dried Microalgae as a Natural Coloring Agent in Chewing Gum: Effects on Color, Sensory, and Textural Properties. J. Appl. Phycol. 2018, 30, 1031–1039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Demarco, M.; Oliveira de Moraes, J.; Matos, Â.P.; Derner, R.B.; de Farias Neves, F.; Tribuzi, G. Digestibility, Bioaccessibility and Bioactivity of Compounds from Algae. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 121, 114–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Bhat, V.B.; Madyastha, K.M. C-Phycocyanin: A Potent Peroxyl Radical Scavenger in Vivo and in Vitro. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2000, 275, 20–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Jiang, L.; Wang, Y.; Zhu, F.; Liu, G.; Liu, H.; Ji, H.; Zheng, S.; Li, B. Molecular Mechanism of Anti-Cancer Activity of the Nano-Drug C-PC/CMC-CD59sp NPs in Cervical Cancer. J. Cancer 2019, 10, 92–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Ranga Rao, A.; Baskaran, V.; Sarada, R.; Ravishankar, G.A. In Vivo Bioavailability and Antioxidant Activity of Carotenoids from Microalgal Biomass—A Repeated Dose Study. Food Res. Int. 2013, 54, 711–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. García-Casal, M.N.; Ramírez, J.; Leets, I.; Pereira, A.C.; Quiroga, M.F. Antioxidant Capacity, Polyphenol Content and Iron Bioavailability from Algae (Ulva sp., Sargassum sp. and Porphyra sp.) in Human Subjects. Br. J. Nutr. 2009, 101, 79–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Patel, A.K.; Albarico, F.P.J.B.; Perumal, P.K.; Vadrale, A.P.; Ntan, C.T.; Chau, H.T.B.; Anwar, C.; ud din Wani, H.M.; Pal, A.; Saini, R.; et al. Algae as an Emerging Source of Bioactive Pigments. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 351, 126910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Alam, M.A.; Xu, J.L.; Wang, Z. Microalgae Biotechnology for Food, Health and High Value Products; Springer: Singapore, 2020; ISBN 9789811501692. [Google Scholar]
  69. Rao, A.R.; Sindhuja, H.N.; Dharmesh, S.M.; Sankar, K.U.; Sarada, R.; Ravishankar, G.A. Effective Inhibition of Skin Cancer, Tyrosinase, and Antioxidative Properties by Astaxanthin and Astaxanthin Esters from the Green Alga Haematococcus Pluvialis. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61, 3842–3851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Méresse, S.; Fodil, M.; Fleury, F.; Chénais, B. Fucoxanthin, a Marine-Derived Carotenoid from Brown Seaweeds and Microalgae: A Promising Bioactive Compound for Cancer Therapy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 9273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Sun, H.; Wang, Y.; He, Y.; Liu, B.; Mou, H.; Chen, F.; Yang, S. Microalgae-Derived Pigments for the Food Industry. Mar. Drugs 2023, 21, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Carvalho, A.P.; Silva, S.O.; Baptista, J.M.; Malcata, F.X. Light Requirements in Microalgal Photobioreactors: An Overview of Biophotonic Aspects. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2011, 89, 1275–1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Pagels, F.; Pereira, R.N.; Vicente, A.A.; Guedes, A.C. Extraction of Pigments from Microalgae and Cyanobacteria-a Review on Current Methodologies. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 5187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Mary Leema, J.T.; Persia Jothy, T.; Dharani, G. Rapid Green Microwave Assisted Extraction of Lutein from Chlorella Sorokiniana (NIOT-2)–Process Optimization. Food Chem. 2022, 372, 131151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Molino, A.; Mehariya, S.; Iovine, A.; Casella, P.; Marino, T.; Karatza, D.; Chianese, S.; Musmarra, D. Enhancing Biomass and Lutein Production From Scenedesmus Almeriensis: Effect of Carbon Dioxide Concentration and Culture Medium Reuse. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Pan-utai, W.; Boonpok, S.; Pornpukdeewattana, S. Combination of Mechanical and Chemical Extraction of Astaxanthin from Haematococcus Pluvialis and Its Properties of Microencapsulation. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2021, 33, 101979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Pan-utai, W.; Iamtham, S. Extraction, Purification and Antioxidant Activity of Phycobiliprotein from Arthrospira Platensis. Process Biochem. 2019, 82, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Di Lena, G.; Casini, I.; Lucarini, M.; Lombardi-Boccia, G. Carotenoid Profiling of Five Microalgae Species from Large-Scale Production. Food Res. Int. 2019, 120, 810–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Sarnaik, A.; Nambissan, V.; Pandit, R.; Lali, A. Recombinant Synechococcus Elongatus PCC 7942 for Improved Zeaxanthin Production under Natural Light Conditions. Algal Res. 2018, 36, 139–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Soto-Sierra, L.; Stoykova, P.; Nikolov, Z.L. Extraction and Fractionation of Microalgae-Based Protein Products. Algal Res. 2018, 36, 175–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Timira, V.; Meki, K.; Li, Z.; Lin, H.; Xu, M.; Pramod, S.N. A Comprehensive Review on the Application of Novel Disruption Techniques for Proteins Release from Microalgae. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2022, 62, 4309–4325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Grossmann, L.; Hinrichs, J.; Weiss, J. Cultivation and Downstream Processing of Microalgae and Cyanobacteria to Generate Protein-Based Technofunctional Food Ingredients. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2020, 60, 2961–2989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Amorim, M.L.; Soares, J.; Coimbra, J.S.D.R.; Leite, M.D.O.; Albino, L.F.T.; Martins, M.A. Microalgae Proteins: Production, Separation, Isolation, Quantification, and Application in Food and Feed. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 61, 1976–2002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Nakhost, Z.; Karel, M. Potential Utilization of Algal Protein Concentrate as a Food Ingredient in Space Habitats. Sci. Aliment. 1989, 9, 491–506. [Google Scholar]
  85. Ursu, A.V.; Marcati, A.; Sayd, T.; Sante-Lhoutellier, V.; Djelveh, G.; Michaud, P. Extraction, Fractionation and Functional Properties of Proteins from the Microalgae Chlorella Vulgaris. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 157, 134–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Bleakley, S.; Hayes, M. Algal Proteins: Extraction, Application, and Challenges Concerning Production. Foods 2017, 6, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Xue, Z.; Wan, F.; Yu, W.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Z.; Kou, X. Edible Oil Production From Microalgae: A Review. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 2018, 120, 1700428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Klok, A.J.; Lamers, P.P.; Martens, D.E.; Draaisma, R.B.; Wijffels, R.H. Edible Oils from Microalgae: Insights in TAG Accumulation. Trends Biotechnol. 2014, 32, 521–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. He, Y.; Wu, T.; Sun, H.; Sun, P.; Liu, B.; Luo, M.; Chen, F. Comparison of Fatty Acid Composition and Positional Distribution of Microalgae Triacylglycerols for Human Milk Fat Substitutes. Algal Res. 2019, 37, 40–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Zou, L.; Pande, G.; Akoh, C.C. Infant Formula Fat Analogs and Human Milk Fat: New Focus on Infant Developmental Needs. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 7, 139–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Song, X.; Liu, B.F.; Kong, F.; Ren, N.Q.; Ren, H.Y. Overview on Stress-Induced Strategies for Enhanced Microalgae Lipid Production: Application, Mechanisms and Challenges. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 183, 106355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Harwood, J.L. Algae: Critical Sources of Very Long-Chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids. Biomolecules 2019, 9, 708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Marik, P.E.; Varon, J. Omega-3 Dietary Supplements and the Risk of Cardiovascular Events: A Systematic Review. Clin. Cardiol. 2009, 32, 365–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Freitas, R.D.; Campos, M.M. Protective effects of omega-3 fatty acids in cancer-related complications. Nutrients 2019, 11, 945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Koller, M.; Muhr, A.; Braunegg, G. Microalgae as Versatile Cellular Factories for Valued Products. Algal Res. 2014, 6, 52–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Oliver, L.; Dietrich, T.; Marañ, I.; Carmen, M.; Barrio, J. Producing Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids: A Review of Sustainable Sources and Future Trends for the EPA and DHA Market. Resources 2020, 9, 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Jakhwal, P.; Kumar, J.; Tiwari, A.; Kwon, E.E.; Bhatnagar, A. Bioresource Technology Genetic and Non-Genetic Tailoring of Microalgae for the Enhanced Production of Eicosapentaenoic Acid (EPA) and Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA)—A Review. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 344, 126250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Ghazani, S.M.; Marangoni, A.G. Microbial Lipids for Foods. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 119, 593–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Moreira, J.B.; Vaz, B.D.S.; Cardias, B.B.; Cruz, C.G.; Almeida, A.C.A.D.; Costa, J.A.V.; Morais, M.G.D. Microalgae Polysaccharides: An Alternative Source for Food Production and Sustainable Agriculture. Polysaccharides 2022, 3, 441–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Costa, J.A.V.; Lucas, B.F.; Alvarenga, A.G.P.; Moreira, J.B.; de Morais, M.G. Microalgae Polysaccharides: An Overview of Production, Characterization, and Potential Applications. Polysaccharides 2021, 2, 759–772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Gouda, M.; Tadda, M.A.; Zhao, Y.; Farmanullah, F.; Chu, B.; Li, X.; He, Y. Microalgae Bioactive Carbohydrates as a Novel Sustainable and Eco-Friendly Source of Prebiotics: Emerging Health Functionality and Recent Technologies for Extraction and Detection. Front. Nutr. 2022, 9, 806692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Usman, A.; Khalid, S.; Usman, A.; Hussain, Z.; Wang, Y. Algal Polysaccharides, Novel Application, and Outlook. In Algae Based Polymers, Blends, and Composites Chemistry, Biotechnology and Materials Science; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 115–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Gómez-Zorita, S.; Trepiana, J.; González-Arceo, M.; Aguirre, L.; Milton-Laskibar, I.; González, M.; Eseberri, I.; Fernández-Quintela, A.; Portillo, M.P. Anti-Obesity Effects of Microalgae. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Ai, X.; Yu, P.; Li, X.; Lai, X.; Yang, M.; Liu, F.; Luan, F.; Meng, X. Polysaccharides from Spirulina Platensis: Extraction Methods, Structural Features and Bioactivities Diversity. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2023, 231, 123211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Guo, W.; Zhu, S.; Li, S.; Feng, Y.; Wu, H.; Zeng, M. Microalgae Polysaccharides Ameliorates Obesity in Association with Modulation of Lipid Metabolism and Gut Microbiota in High-Fat-Diet Fed C57BL/6 Mice. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 182, 1371–1383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Barboríková, J.; Šutovská, M.; Kazimierová, I.; Jošková, M.; Fraňová, S.; Kopecký, J.; Capek, P. Extracellular Polysaccharide Produced by Chlorella Vulgaris–Chemical Characterization and Anti-Asthmatic Profile. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 135, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Prybylski, N.; Toucheteau, C.; El Alaoui, H.; Bridiau, N.; Maugard, T.; Abdelkafi, S.; Fendri, I.; Delattre, C.; Dubessay, P.; Pierre, G.; et al. Chapter 20-Bioactive Polysaccharides from Microalgae; Jacob-Lopes, E., Manzoni Maroneze, M., Isabel Queiroz, M., Queiroz Zepka, L., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  108. Delattre, C.; Pierre, G.; Laroche, C.; Michaud, P. Production, Extraction and Characterization of Microalgal and Cyanobacterial Exopolysaccharides. Biotechnol. Adv. 2016, 34, 1159–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Enzing, C.; Ploeg, M.; Barbosa, M.; Sijtsma, L. Microalgae-Based Products for the Food and Feed Sector: An Outlook for Europe; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2014; ISBN 9789279340376. [Google Scholar]
  110. Kagan, M.L.; Sullivan, D.W., Jr.; Gad, S.C.; Ballou, C.M. Safety Assessment of EPA-Rich Polar Lipid Oil Produced From the Microalgae Nannochloropsis Oculata. Int. J. Toxicol. 2014, 33, 459–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Stiefvatter, L.; Neumann, U.; Rings, A.; Frick, K.; Schmid-staiger, U.; Bischoff, S.C. The Microalgae Phaeodactylum Tricornutum Is Well Suited as a Food with Positive Effects on the Intestinal Microbiota and the Generation of SCFA: Results from a Pre-Clinical Study. Nutrients 2022, 14, 2504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Kelley, D.S.; Siegel, D.; Fedor, D.M.; Adkins, Y.; Mackey, B.E. DHA Supplementation Decreases Serum C-Reactive Protein and Other Markers of Inflammation in Hypertriglyceridemic Men 1–3. J. Nutr. 2009, 139, 495–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Konkol, D.; Korczy, M. Optimization of Docosahexaenoic Acid Production by Schizochytrium SP.—A Review. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2021, 35, 102076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Lewis, K.D.; Huang, W.; Zheng, X.; Jiang, Y.; Feldman, R.S.; Falk, M.C. Toxicological Evaluation of Arachidonic Acid (ARA) -Rich Oil and Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) -Rich Oil. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2016, 96, 133–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Spolaore, P.; Joannis-Cassan, C.; Duran, E.; Isambert, A.; De Génie, L.; Paris, E.C. Commercial Applications of Microalgae. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2006, 101, 87–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Darwish, R.; Gedi, M.A.; Akepach, P.; Assaye, H.; Zaky, A.S.; Gray, D.A. Chlamydomonas Reinhardtii Is a Potential Food Supplement with the Capacity to Outperform Chlorella and Spirulina. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Paggi, Â.; Rafael, M.; Elisa, F.; Siegel, H.; Vladimir, J.; Agenor, D.O.; Junior, F.; Bianchini, R. Chemical Characterization of Six Microalgae with Potential Utility for Food Application. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 2016, 93, 963–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Mendes, R.L.; Reis, A.D. Supercritical CO2 Extraction of γ-Linolenic Acid and Other Lipids from Arthrospira (Spirulina) maxima: Comparison with Organic Solvent Extraction. Food Chem. 2006, 99, 57–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Fan, Y.; Chapkin, R.S. Importance of Dietary γ-Linolenic Acid in Human Health and Nutrition. J. Nutr. 1998, 128, 1411–1414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Colusse, G.A.; Carneiro, J.; Duarte, M.E.R.; Carvalho, J.C.D.; Noseda, M.D. Advances in Microalgal Cell Wall Polysaccharides: A Review Focused on Structure, Production, and Biological Application. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 2022, 42, 562–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Becker, E.W. Micro-Algae as a Source of Protein. Biotechnol. Adv. 2007, 25, 207–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Patras, D.; Moraru, C.V.; Socaciu, C. Bioactive Ingredients from Microalgae: Food and Feed Applications. Bull. Univ. Agric. Sci. Vet. Med. Cluj-Napoca. Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 76, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Robin Shields, I.L. Microalgae Biotechnology: Integration and Economy; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  124. Tibbetts, S.M.; Bjornsson, W.J.; McGinn, P.J. Biochemical Composition and Amino Acid Profiles of Nannochloropsis Granulata Algal Biomass before and after Supercritical Fluid CO2 Extraction at Two Processing Temperatures. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2015, 204, 62–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Roy, S.S.; Pal, R. Microalgae in Aquaculture: A Review with Special References to Nutritional Value and Fish Dietetics. Proc. Zool. Soc. 2015, 68, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Lazo, J.P.; Dinis, M.T.; Holt, G.J.; Faulk, C.; Arnold, C.R. Co-Feeding Microparticulate Diets with Algae: Toward Eliminating the Need of Zooplankton at First Feeding in Larval Red Drum (Sciaenops Ocellatus). Aquaculture 2000, 188, 339–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Cleave, T.L. Effects of Dietary Fibre. Br. Med. J. 1972, 3, 645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Adel, M.; Yeganeh, S.; Dadar, M.; Sakai, M.; Dawood, M.A.O. Effects of Dietary Spirulina Platensis on Growth Performance, Humoral and Mucosal Immune Responses and Disease Resistance in Juvenile Great Sturgeon (Huso Huso Linnaeus, 1754). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2016, 56, 436–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Vizcaíno, A.J.; López, G.; Sáez, M.I.; Jiménez, J.A.; Barros, A.; Hidalgo, L.; Camacho-Rodríguez, J.; Martínez, T.F.; Cerón-García, M.C.; Alarcón, F.J. Effects of the Microalga Scenedesmus Almeriensis as Fishmeal Alternative in Diets for Gilthead Sea Bream, Sparus Aurata, Juveniles. Aquaculture 2014, 431, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Gong, Y.; Bandara, T.; Huntley, M.; Johnson, Z.I.; Dias, J.; Dahle, D.; Sørensen, M.; Kiron, V. Microalgae Scenedesmus Sp. as a Potential Ingredient in Low Fishmeal Diets for Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar L.). Aquaculture 2019, 501, 455–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Madeira, M.S.; Cardoso, C.; Lopes, P.A.; Coelho, D.; Afonso, C.; Bandarra, N.M.; Prates, J.A.M. Microalgae as Feed Ingredients for Livestock Production and Meat Quality: A Review. Livest. Sci. 2017, 205, 111–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Becker, W.; Richmond, A. Handbook of Microalgal Culture; Blackwell Publishing Oxford: Oxford, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  133. EL-Sabagh, M.R.; Abd Eldaim, M.A.; Mahboub, D.H.; Abdel-Daim, M. Effects of Spirulina Platensis Algae on Growth Performance, Antioxidative Status and Blood Metabolites in Fattening Lambs. J. Agric. Sci. 2014, 6, 92–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Holman, B. Growth and Body Conformation Responses of Genetically Divergent Australian Sheep to Spirulina (Arthrospira Platensis) Supplementation. Am. J. Exp. Agric. 2012, 2, 160–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Yan, L.; Lim, S.U.; Kim, I.H. Effect of Fermented Chlorella Supplementation on Growth Performance, Nutrient Digestibility, Blood Characteristics, Fecal Microbial and Fecal Noxious Gas Content in Growing Pigs. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2012, 25, 1742–1747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Rezvani, M.; Zaghari, M.; Moravej, H. A Survey on Chlorella Vulgaris Effect’s on Performance and Cellular Immunity in Broilers. Int. J. Agric. Sci. Res. 2012, 3, 9–15. [Google Scholar]
  137. Oh, S.T.; Zheng, L.; Kwon, H.J.; Choo, Y.K.; Lee, K.W.; Kang, C.W.; An, B.K. Effects of Dietary Fermented Chlorella Vulgaris (CBT®) on Growth Performance, Relative Organ Weights, Cecal Microflora, Tibia Bone Characteristics, and Meat Qualities in Pekin Ducks. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 28, 95–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Ginzberg, A.; Cohen, M.; Sod-Moriah, U.A.; Shany, S.; Rosenshtrauch, A.; Arad, S. Chickens Fed with Biomass of the Red Microalga Porphyridium Sp. Have Reduced Blood Cholesterol Level and Modified Fatty Acid Composition in Egg Yolk. J. Appl. Phycol. 2000, 12, 325–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Peiretti, P.G.; Meineri, G. Effects of Diets with Increasing Levels of Spirulina Platensis on the Performance and Apparent Digestibility in Growing Rabbits. Livest. Sci. 2008, 118, 173–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Novoveská, L.; Ross, M.E.; Stanley, M.S.; Pradelles, R.; Wasiolek, V.; Sassi, J.F. Microalgal Carotenoids: A Review of Production, Current Markets, Regulations, and Future Direction. Mar. Drugs 2019, 17, 640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC). No 767/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on the Placing on the Market and Use of Feed. Off. J. Eur. Union 2009, 83, 1–36. [Google Scholar]
  142. European Parliament. Council of the European Union, E 8.2.2005. 2005; Volume 2004. [Google Scholar]
  143. Commission regulation This Document Is Meant Purely as a Documentation Tool and the Institutions Do Not Assume Any Liability for Its Contents Setting Maximum Levels for Certain Contaminants in Foodstuffs (Text with EEA Relevance). 2006; Volume 1881, 1–5.
  144. Spruijt, J.; Rommie van der Weide, P.; Marinus van Krimpen, P. Opportunities for Micro Algae as Ingredient in Animal Diets. In Report from Project: Nutritional Value of Micro Algae in Diets for Livestock; Application Centre for Renewable Resources:: Lelystad, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 12–45. [Google Scholar]
  145. Geremia, E.; Ripa, M.; Catone, C.M.; Ulgiati, S. A Review about Microalgae Wastewater Treatment for Bioremediation and Biomass Production—A New Challenge for Europe. Environments 2021, 8, 136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Ricci, M.; Tilbury, L.; Daridon, B.; Sukalae, K. General principles to justify plant biostimulant claims. Front. Plant. Sci. 2019, 10, 494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Stiles, W.A.V.; Styles, D.; Chapman, S.P.; Esteves, S.; Bywater, A.; Melville, L.; Silkina, A.; Lupatsch, I.; Fuentes Grünewald, C.; Lovitt, R.; et al. Using Microalgae in the Circular Economy to Valorise Anaerobic Digestate: Challenges and Opportunities. Bioresour. Technol. 2018, 267, 732–742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Mohsenpour, S.F.; Hennige, S.; Willoughby, N.; Adeloye, A.; Gutierrez, T. Integrating Micro-Algae into Wastewater Treatment: A Review. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 752, 142168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Devi, N.D.; Sun, X.; Ding, L.; Goud, V.V.; Hu, B. Mixotrophic Growth Regime of Novel Strain Scenedesmus Sp. DDVG I in Municipal Wastewater for Concomitant Bioremediation and Valorization of Biomass. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 365, 132834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Ahmad, A.; Banat, F.; Alsafar, H.; Hasan, S.W. Algae Biotechnology for Industrial Wastewater Treatment, Bioenergy Production, and High-Value Bioproducts. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 806, 150585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Wang, S.; Yin, C.; Yang, Z.; Hu, X.; Liu, Z.; Song, W. Assessing the Potential of Chlorella Sp. for Treatment and Resource Utilization of Brewery Wastewater Coupled with Bioproduct Production. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 367, 132939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Goswami, R.K.; Agrawal, K.; Shah, M.P.; Verma, P. Bioremediation of Heavy Metals from Wastewater: A Current Perspective on Microalgae-Based Future. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2022, 75, 701–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  153. Collos, Y.; Harrison, P.J. Acclimation and Toxicity of High Ammonium Concentrations to Unicellular Algae. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2014, 80, 8–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  154. Kumar, A.; Bera, S. Revisiting Nitrogen Utilization in Algae: A Review on the Process of Regulation and Assimilation. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2020, 12, 100584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Guieysse, B.; Plouviez, M.; Coilhac, M.; Cazali, L. Nitrous Oxide (N2O) Production in Axenic Chlorella Vulgaris Microalgae Cultures: Evidence, Putative Pathways, and Potential Environmental Impacts. Biogeosciences 2013, 10, 6737–6746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Fagerstone, K.D.; Quinn, J.C.; Bradley, T.H.; De Long, S.K.; Marchese, A.J. Quantitative Measurement of Direct Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Microalgae Cultivation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 9449–9456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Alcántara, C.; Domínguez, J.M.; García, D.; Blanco, S.; Pérez, R.; García-Encina, P.A.; Muñoz, R. Evaluation of Wastewater Treatment in a Novel Anoxic-Aerobic Algal-Bacterial Photobioreactor with Biomass Recycling through Carbon and Nitrogen Mass Balances. Bioresour. Technol. 2015, 191, 173–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Goswami, R.K.; Agrawal, K.; Verma, P. An Exploration of Natural Synergy Using Microalgae for the Remediation of Pharmaceuticals and Xenobiotics in Wastewater. Algal Res. 2022, 64, 102703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Wang, Y.; Ho, S.H.; Cheng, C.L.; Guo, W.Q.; Nagarajan, D.; Ren, N.Q.; Lee, D.J.; Chang, J.S. Perspectives on the Feasibility of Using Microalgae for Industrial Wastewater Treatment. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 222, 485–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. Encarnação, T.; Palito, C.; Pais, A.A.C.C.; Valente, A.J.M.; Burrows, H.D. Removal of Pharmaceuticals from Water by Free and Imobilised Microalgae. Molecules 2020, 25, 3639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Chong, A.M.Y.; Wong, Y.S.; Tam, N.F.Y. Performance of Different Microalgal Species in Removing Nickel and Zinc from Industrial Wastewater. Chemosphere 2000, 41, 251–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  162. Bellucci, M.; Marazzi, F.; Naddeo, L.S.; Piergiacomo, F.; Beneduce, L.; Ficara, E.; Mezzanotte, V. Disinfection and Nutrient Removal in Laboratory-Scale Photobioreactors for Wastewater Tertiary Treatment. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2020, 95, 959–966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Gabriel Acien Fernandez, F.; González-López, C.V.; Fernández Sevilla, J.M.; Molina Grima, E. Conversion of CO 2 into Biomass by Microalgae: How Realistic a Contribution May It Be to Significant CO2 Removal? Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2012, 96, 577–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Vo Hoang Nhat, P.; Ngo, H.H.; Guo, W.S.; Chang, S.W.; Nguyen, D.D.; Nguyen, P.D.; Bui, X.T.; Zhang, X.B.; Guo, J.B. Can Algae-Based Technologies Be an Affordable Green Process for Biofuel Production and Wastewater Remediation? Bioresour. Technol. 2018, 256, 491–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Peralta, E.; Jerez, C.G.; Figueroa, F.L. Centrate Grown Chlorella Fusca (Chlorophyta): Potential for Biomass Production and Centrate Bioremediation. Algal Res. 2019, 39, 101458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Ferro, L.; Gorzsás, A.; Gentili, F.G.; Funk, C. Subarctic Microalgal Strains Treat Wastewater and Produce Biomass at Low Temperature and Short Photoperiod. Algal Res. 2018, 35, 160–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Posadas, E.; del Mar Morales, M.; Gomez, C.; Acién, F.G.; Muñoz, R. Influence of PH and CO2 Source on the Performance of Microalgae-Based Secondary Domestic Wastewater Treatment in Outdoors Pilot Raceways. Chem. Eng. J. 2015, 265, 239–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Al-Jabri, H.; Das, P.; Khan, S.; Thaher, M.; Abdulquadir, M. Treatment of Wastewaters by Microalgae and the Potential Applications of the Produced Biomass—A Review. Water 2021, 13, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Vieira, V.V.; Cadoret, J.P.; Acien, F.G.; Benemann, J. Clarification of Most Relevant Concepts Related to the Microalgae Production Sector. Processes 2022, 10, 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Han, P.; Lu, Q.; Fan, L.; Zhou, W. A Review on the Use of Microalgae for Sustainable Aquaculture. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Bux, F.; Chisti, Y. Green Energy and Technology Algae Biotechnology Products and Processes; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; ISBN 9783319123332. [Google Scholar]
  172. Moheimani, N.R.; Vadiveloo, A.; Ayre, J.M.; Pluske, J.R. Nutritional Profile and in Vitro Digestibility of Microalgae Grown in Anaerobically Digested Piggery Effluent. Algal Res. 2018, 35, 362–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Viegas, C.; Gouveia, L.; Gonçalves, M. Aquaculture Wastewater Treatment through Microalgal. Biomass Potential Applications on Animal Feed, Agriculture, and Energy. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 286, 112187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Yaakob, M.A.; Mohamed, R.M.S.R.; Al-Gheethi, A.; Tiey, A.; Kassim, A.H.M. Optimising of Scenedesmus Sp. Biomass Production in Chicken Slaughterhouse Wastewater Using Response Surface Methodology and Potential Utilisation as Fish Feeds. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 12089–12108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Li, J.; Otero-Gonzalez, L.; Michiels, J.; Lens, P.N.L.; Du Laing, G.; Ferrer, I. Production of Selenium-Enriched Microalgae as Potential Feed Supplement in High-Rate Algae Ponds Treating Domestic Wastewater. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 333, 125239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Nishshanka, G.K.S.H.; Liyanaarachchi, V.C.; Premaratne, M.; Ariyadasa, T.U.; Nimarshana, P.H.V. Sustainable Cultivation of Haematococcus Pluvialis and Chromochloris Zofingiensis for the Production of Astaxanthin and Co-Products. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2022, 100, 2835–2849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Dourou, M.; Tsolcha, O.N.; Tekerlekopoulou, A.G.; Bokas, D.; Aggelis, G. Fish Farm Effluents Are Suitable Growth Media for Nannochloropsis Gaditana, a Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid Producing Microalga. Eng. Life Sci. 2018, 18, 851–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Safafar, H.; Hass, M.Z.; Møller, P.; Holdt, S.L.; Jacobsen, C. High-EPA Biomass from Nannochloropsis Salina Cultivated in a Flat-Panel Photo-Bioreactor on a Process Water-Enriched Growth Medium. Mar. Drugs 2016, 14, 144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  179. Cabrita, A.R.J.; Guilherme-Fernandes, J.; Valente, I.M.; Almeida, A.; Lima, S.A.C.; Fonseca, A.J.M.; Maia, M.R.G. Nutritional Composition and Untargeted Metabolomics Reveal the Potential of Tetradesmus obliquus, Chlorella vulgaris and Nannochloropsis oceanica as Valuable Nutrient Sources for Dogs. Animals 2022, 12, 2643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1. Nutraceutical products made using microalgae or components of microalgae and delivery in different food and supplement forms.
Table 1. Nutraceutical products made using microalgae or components of microalgae and delivery in different food and supplement forms.
Bioactive IngredientMicroalgal SourceClaimed Health BenefitExamples of Products (Trade-Name)Producing Company
CarotenoidsDunaliella salinaAntioxidant activitySupplements—β-carotene patented Betatene®Cyanotech, Mera Pharmaceuticals, AstraReal AB, Jingzhou Naturals
AstaxanthinHaematococcus pluvialisImmunomodulationSupplements—Max botanics astaxanthin supplements/sunscreensMera Pharmaceticuals, AstraReal AB, Jingzhou Naturals Astaxanthin Inc. Max Botanics UK and Europe.
Beta-caroteneChlorella vulgaisRetinal degradation preventionSupplements—Dr. Mercola, Fermented Chlorella with Chlorophyll, 450 TabletsMercola, Florida
LuteinChlorella pyrenoidosaMuscular dystrophy preventionTerranova freeze dried Chlorella pyrenoidosaTerranova Synergenistic nutrition, UK
CantaxanthinChlorella ellipsoideaHelps to prevent cancer; This carotenoid can also positively impact human health and enhance the appeal of foods with egg.Animal feed ingredient—Used in animal feed for chickens to increase shelf life of eggs, health benefits for chickensBASF SE, Wellgreen Technology Co., Ltd., and Nikken Shohonsha Co., Japan are producers of Cantaxanthin.
ViolaxanthinDunaliella tertiolecta/Chlorella ellipsoideaAnti-proliferative, anti-inflammatory, and proapoptotic activity against human cancer cell lines in vitroSupplements Cognis Nutrition and Health, Illnois, United States
Sulphated polysaccharidesPorphyridium sp., Rhodella reticulataAntioxidant, Anti-aging, used in cosmetics as a substitute for hyaluronic acid, antibacterial, anti-inflammatoryAcqualift®—dried powder supplied in air and light sensitive packagingNaturZell—BASM blue International
β-1-3-glucanSkeletonema sp., Porphyridium sp., Nostoc flegelliforme; Euglena gracilisActives receptors on white blood cells and activates the immune system following the binding to the beta glucans.BioGlena™—a next generation source of Beta-glucanAlgatech Ltd., Southern Israel, produces β-1,3-glucan from Euglena gracilis
Bioecolians is a a-gluco-oligosaccharide, composed out of short glucose chains linked by glycosidic bond(α1-2) and (α1-6).UnknownGut health, prebiotic actionBioecoliansTMSolabia-Algatech Nutrition, Israel and France
Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)Schizochytrium sp.Emulsions for beverage fortificationSource Oil®/Algae Omega-3Unknown
Algal inksArthrospira platensis/Chlorella vulgaris3D printed cookies/edible inks/used in dying clothesFristads (producers of algal inks for dying garments—start up)Fristads, Sweden
Chlorella vulgaris protein and Vitamin B12, whole protein (biomass)Chlorella sp.Ice cream, milk, cheeseAlgal proteins or whole biomassSophie’s BioNutrients, Singapore, Solazyme who became erravia and were taken over by Corbion, A Dutch company. Cheese was a collaboration with Ingredion, Singapore
Algal protein ingredientsChlamydomonas (Hardtii) sp.Algal protein ingredients and seafood alternativesHardtii Alt-Meat and Tuna productsTriton Algae Innovations, San Diego, USA
Table 2. Microalgae relevant for food/feed applications and their safety aspects.
Table 2. Microalgae relevant for food/feed applications and their safety aspects.
SpeciesSafety AspectSpeciesSafety Aspect
Arthrospira platensisGRAS 1Navicula sp.NT 2
Synechococcus sp.NTNitzschia dissipataNT
Tetraselmis sp.NTPhaeodactylum tricornutumNT
Chlamydomonas reinhardtiiNTThalassiosira pseudonanaNT
Haematococcus pluvialisGRASOdontella auritaNT
DunaliellabardawilGRASSkeletonema sp.NT
Chlorococcum sp.NTMonodus subterraneusNT
ScenedesmusNTNannochloropsis sp.NT
Desmodesmus sp.NTIsochrysis sp.NT
Chlorella protothecoidesGRASPavlova sp.NT
Parietochloris incisaNTCrypthecodinium cohniiGRAS
Porphyridium cruentumGRAS
This table is cited from Lucakova et al. [48]. 1 GRAS refers to Generally Recognized as Safe. 2 NT refers to no toxins known.
Table 3. Use of algae in food products, different food delivery formats and observed health benefits.
Table 3. Use of algae in food products, different food delivery formats and observed health benefits.
Microalgae SpeciesBioactive ComponentsFood ProductSensory EffectFormHealth BenefitsReference
Chlorella sorokinianaProtein, chlorophyll, and carotenoidsPastaImproved colourN.A. 1Prevention of foodborne diseases[51]
Chlorella sp.Protein, PUFA 2 -ω3, EPA 3, DHA 4MilkImproved flavour and mouthfeelPowder or liquidReduced risk of anaemia[52]
Chlorella vulgarisProtein, chlorophyll pigmentCookiesImproved colour stabilityPowderHigh antioxidant activity[53]
Chlorella vulgarisProtein, pigments (chlorophylls, phycocyanin and canthaxanthin)PastaImproved colour and texturePowderPrevention of gastric ulcers, constipation and anaemia[54]
Scenedesmus obliquusProtein, PUFA, EAAFunctional chocolateNo significant difference in the textureN.A.Prevention of cardiovascular diseases, hypertension and inflammation[55]
Nannochloropsis sp.EPA, phenolic compoundsPastaImproved appearance and colourN.A.High antioxidant activity[56]
Nannochloropsis sp.Phenolic compounds, bioactive peptides, carotenoidsFunctional breads and crackersImproved nutritional valueN.A.Increased antioxidant capacity[57]
Spirulina sp.Proteins, lipids and carotenoidsReady-to-eat snacksHigh sensory acceptance index (82%)PowderIncreased nutritional composition[58]
Spirulina sp.Phenolic compoundsBread wheat pastaN.A.N.A.Increased antioxidant activity[59]
Dunaliella salinaProtein, fatty acids, phenolic compoundsFunctional cookiesGood mouthfeel, colour and appearance.PowderIncreased moisture and antioxidant activity[60]
Schizochytrium sp.PUFADry-fermented meatproductsNo significant difference in appearance and odourPre-emulsified algae oilShowed better omega-6 to omega-3 ratio and increased DHA content, increased stability to the oxidation[61]
Isochrysis galbana
Nannochloropsis oculata		Chlorophyll-a and carotenoidChewing gumNo significant difference in appearance, chewiness, adhesiveness and alga taste of I. galbana.DriedIncreased pigment value[62]
1 N.A. refers to not available. 2 PUFA refers to polyunsaturated fatty acid. 3 EPA refers to Eicosapentaenoic acid. 4 DHA refers to Docosahexaenoic acid.
Table 4. Microalgal pigments: extraction and applications.
Table 4. Microalgal pigments: extraction and applications.
MicroalgaePigmentExtraction MethodApplicationReferences
Chlorella sorokinianaLuteinUse of potassium hydroxide (KOH) and L-ascorbic acid combined with microwaveIndustrial applications for marine microalgae[75]
Scenedesmus almeriensisLuteinBall milling; extracted with ethanolCommercial production of lutein[76]
Haematococcus pluvialisAstaxanthinUltrasonicated; extracted using ethyl acetatePharmaceutical (encapsulation)[77]
Arthrospira platensis IFRPD 1182phycobiliproteinsUltrasonicationFood addictive[78]
Nannochloropsis gaditanaβ-caroteneUltrasonication combined with solvents like acetone following freeze-dryingFood and nutraceutical[79]
Synechococcus elongatusZeaxanthinchemical products for food, pharma useChemical products for food and pharmaceuticals [80]
Table 5. Microalgae fatty acids and potential application.
Table 5. Microalgae fatty acids and potential application.
Fatty AcidFractionMicroalgae SourceApplicationsDaily Intake Recommendation for Human (mg)References
Omega-3
Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA)Nannochloropsis
oculata		Brain development for children, cardiovascular health250–500[74,110,111,112]
Phaeodactylum
tricornutum
Monodus
subterraneus
Isochrysis galbana
Pavlova lutheri
Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)Pavlova lutheriFood supplement, infant formulas for full-term/preterm infants, significant for cardiovascular, supplements250–500[74,96,113,114,115,116]
Schizochytrium
limacinum
Crypthecodinium cohnii
Alpha-linolenic acid (ALA)Chlorella vulgarisNutritional supplement1000–2000[117,118]
Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
Omega-6
Gamma-linolenic acid (GLA)Arthrospira
platensis		Inflammation prevention, auto-immune diseases500–750[119,120]
Arachidonic acid (ARA)Porphyridium
cruentum		Anti-inflammatory, muscle anabolic formulations50–250[115,118]
Mortieriella alpina
Parietochloris incisa
Table 6. Key EU regulations concerning microalgae for use as foods/food ingredients.
Table 6. Key EU regulations concerning microalgae for use as foods/food ingredients.
ArticleDate of IssueContentAimCritical Issues
Novel foods and novel food ingredients
EC
258/97		15 May 1997Set out the legal framework for the marketing of “Novel Foods” and provide a system of authorization for the novel food marketingTo grant a high level of consumer protection and the functioning of the internal market.Takes 3 years, high costs for novel food status (>€200,000).
EU 2015/228325 November 2015Algae/extract considered to be novel food if it has not been consumed to a significant degree within the Union before May 15, 1997To protect consumers.Complex frameworks of policies to progress the microalgae food industry are challenging and time-consuming.
EU 2017/240720 December 2017Maintained an online list called the novel food catalogue that contains the unions list of all authorized novel foods. The novel food catalogue contains both European and imported algae.To summarize the novel food catalogue up to date (https://food.ec.europa.eu/safety/novel-food/novel-food-catalogue_en (accessed on 11 January 2022)).
Food safety
EC 2002/17828 January 2002Provided EC (2002/178) provided a framework for a coherent approach in the development of any food legislation.To ensure food safety during food production and distribution. Relates to commonly consumed foods, not “new” foods.
Nutrition and health
EC 1924/200620 December 2006Health claims should be supported with science and substantiated. Scientific substantiation applied when making the claims.
Table 7. Typical composition of commercially available feed ingredients and microalgal species.
Table 7. Typical composition of commercially available feed ingredients and microalgal species.
Feed Ingredients/MicroalgaeProtein (% DW)Lipid (% DW)Carbohydrate (% DW)Ash
(% DW)		References
Fish meal63.011.0N.A 116.8[124]
Soy bean meal44.02.239.06.1
Corn-gluten meal62.05.018.54.8
Wheat meal12.22.969.01.6
Chlorella sp.52.07.524.38.2
Chlorella pyrenoidosa57226N.A.[123]
Chlorella vulgaris51–5814–2212–17N.A.
Chlamydomonas rheinhardii43–5614–222.9–17N.A.
Scenedesmus obliqus50–5612–1410–52N.A.
Nannochloropsis granulata (CCMP-535)33.523.636.26.7[125]
1 N.A. refers to not available.
Table 8. Commercially available microalgae use as aquaculture ingredients and health benefits.
Table 8. Commercially available microalgae use as aquaculture ingredients and health benefits.
MicroalgaFish TrialFeed ProductSuggested ContentComponents of InterestHealth BenefitsReference
Chlorella sp.Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)Fish meal substitution Up to 50%N.A.Enhanced fish growth, feed conversion ratio and protein-productive value [127]
Spirulina sp.
Chlorella ellipsoideaJuvenile flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus)Dietary supplementation 2%N.A.Enhanced growth, feed utilization, serum cholesterol level, and whole-body fat contents [128]
Spirulina platensisGreat sturgeon (Huso huso Linnaeus, 1754)Dietary supplementation 10%N.A.Enhanced growth and activation of immune responses[129]
Scenedesmus almeriensis asJuvenile gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata)Fishmeal alternative 20%ProteinIncreased the level of intestinal enzyme activities and intestinal absorptive surface[130]
Scenedesmus sp.Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)Fishmeal dietUp to 10%EAA, PUFA Improved the total n-3 and PUFA content in salmon[131]
Table 9. Benefits of microalgae use in feeds.
Table 9. Benefits of microalgae use in feeds.
MicroalgaeLevel in the Diet (% DM) Experiment DurationAnimalMain FindingsReferences
Arthrospira platensis0.01%5 weeksLambIncrease in ADG 1, ADFI 2 and final body weight; FCR negatively impacted 3[134]
Arthrospira platensis10–20%6 weeksWeaned lambNo negative impacts observedBody weight positively impacted (increase) (10% dosage)[135]
Chlorella vulgaris0.1–0.2%6 weeksFemale PigIncrease in ADG (0.1% dosage); no negative impacts observed[136]
Chlorella vulgaris0.07–0.21%42 daysDay-old broiler chicks No negative effects observed[137,138]
Chlorella sp.0.1–0.2%42 daysDay-old male Pekin ducks Increased feed intake
Porphyridium sp.5–10%10 daysThirty-week-old chickens Negative, reduced ADFI[139]
Arthrospira platensis5–15%24 daysWeaned rabbitsIncrease in ADFI (10% dosage)[140]
1 ADG refers to average daily gain. 2 ADFI refers to average daily feed intake. 3 FCR refers to feed conversion ratio.
Table 10. Potential applications of microalgae cultivated in different waste streams used as animal feed.
Table 10. Potential applications of microalgae cultivated in different waste streams used as animal feed.
MicroalgaeCultivation MediumCultivation ModeProduction/ProductivityNutrient RemovalFinal ProductTarget CompoundPotential Commercial DevelopmentHealth BenefitsFurther AnalysisReferences
Microalgae consortium (Chlorella sp. Scenedesmus sp.)Anaerobic digested
piggery
effluent 		Semi-continuous2.20 ± 0.49
gm−2d−1 (n = 5)		N-NH4: 1.97 ± 0.32 gm−2 d−1 (n = 5) COD: 5.83 ± 1.37 gm−2 d−1 (n = 5)Pig feedstock mealProtein; PUFAReplacement for soybean mealω−3:ω−6 ~1.9 value-adding useIn vivo studies and long term feeding trials[173]
Chlorella vulgarisSeafood
Production
effluent from crabs		Semi-continuous1.1 Kg (DW)/weekTN: 100%; TP: 96.5%; COD: 96.2%; BOD5: 99.7%Fish diet supplementProtein; carbohydratesProcess as pellets for aquaculture fish feedHigh
protein;
Carotenoid content for attracting colours 		Optimal inclusion for different aquaculture species diet[174]
Scenedesmus obliquus0.82 Kg (DW)/weekTN: 100%; TP: 98.6%; COD: 97.7%; BOD5: 99.7%
Scenedesmus sp. Chicken slaughterhouse wastewaterBatch//Fish feedsCarbohydrate; protein; lipids—EPAFish feedsHigh EPA content/[175]
Microalgae consortium90% agricultural runoff + 10%
domestic wastewater 		Continuous pilot-scale/Se: 43%; N-NH4: 93%; TP: 77%; TCOD: 70%Feed supplementsProtein; PUFASe-enriched soybean replacementHigh protein content, ω−3 and ω−6 contentRisk assessment and downstream processing after harvest to reduce bacteria loads and pathogen risk[176]
Haematococcus pluvialisSynthetic dairy wastewater/0.55 ± 0.01 g L−1TN: 79–81%; TP: 57–79% and TCOD: 94–96%Feed stock Astaxanthin, lipids, and carbohydratesHigh value feed stockHigh astaxanthin productionOptimization of cultivation conditions[177]
Chromochloris zofingiensis0.65 ± 0.01 g L−1
Nannochloropsis gaditanaFish farm
effluents		Batch847.0 mg L−1/Fish feedsPUFAFish feed or prey of zooplanktonHigh
protein and polysaccharide content		/[178]
Nannochloropsis salinaPre-gasified industrial process waterBatch//Aquaculture feedEPAFish feed rich in EPA,
protein, tocopherols and carotenoids		High EPA, protein, tocopherols and carotenoids contentFurther extraction and fractionation of the biomass[179]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Su, M.; Bastiaens, L.; Verspreet, J.; Hayes, M. Applications of Microalgae in Foods, Pharma and Feeds and Their Use as Fertilizers and Biostimulants: Legislation and Regulatory Aspects for Consideration. Foods 2023, 12, 3878. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12203878

AMA Style

Su M, Bastiaens L, Verspreet J, Hayes M. Applications of Microalgae in Foods, Pharma and Feeds and Their Use as Fertilizers and Biostimulants: Legislation and Regulatory Aspects for Consideration. Foods. 2023; 12(20):3878. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12203878

Chicago/Turabian Style

Su, Min, Leen Bastiaens, Joran Verspreet, and Maria Hayes. 2023. "Applications of Microalgae in Foods, Pharma and Feeds and Their Use as Fertilizers and Biostimulants: Legislation and Regulatory Aspects for Consideration" Foods 12, no. 20: 3878. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12203878

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop