designing microencapsulated ingredients for food applications€¦ · source: global food...

Designing Microencapsulated Ingredients for Food Applications

CSIRO FOOD & NUTRITION

World Congress on Oils & Fats and 31st Lectureship Series 31st October – 3 November 2015, Rosario, Argentina

Mary Ann Augustin & Luz Sanguansri

Introduction

– Food Industry Trends

– Why microencapsulate food ingredients?

– Market drivers & Trends

Formulations & Processing of Microencapsulated Food Ingredients

– Design Principles

– Choosing Formulation and Processing Methods

Microencapsulated Ingredient – Fitness for Purpose

– Omega-3 oils

– Probiotics

– Polyphenols

Summary

Summary

Mary Ann Augustin | CSIRO

Traditional food

Food consumed to provide

adequate nutrients

Survival, satiety & food safety

Well-being and health &

Reducing disease risks

Functional food

Traditional and emerging food industry


Traditional and Functional Food Development

Traditional Food Processing

Conversion of raw material to edible, safe, wholesome & nutritious foods

– desirable physico-chemical properties, extended shelf-life

– desirable sensory properties and convenient

Processing of Functional Foods Adds Extra Dimensions to Traditional Food Processing

Creation of functional bioactive component and appropriate delivery systems

– Optimisation of functional component

– Incorporation into food without compromising food quality

Increased levels of complexity and monitoring


Microencapsulation

Process by which small particles of solid, liquid or gas (active core) are

packaged within a secondary material (encapsulant) to form a capsule

Microcapsules (micron size range 1 - 1000m)

Nanocapsules (submicron range)


A schematic representation of microencapsulated components Madene et al (2006) Int. J. Food Sci. Technol.

Why encapsulation?


Primary purpose

To produce particles that control mass transport behaviour

Shell material – prevents diffusion of material from the microcapsule or into a

microcapsule

Functions of the wall material (Encapsulant)

Protects sensitive ingredients from its environment (eg O2,H2O, light)

Converts difficult to handle liquids into free-flowing powders

Target / timed delivery of encapsulated component

core

wall material

Microencapsulation


•Capsules are stable during storage – prevents transport of material

• Trigger event – when this occurs, there is release of the core into the surrounding environment or transport

Storage

Components of

surrounding environment

core TRIGGER EVENT

OR

Release

core

Release is governed by how encapsulating material responds to the

trigger (pH, temperature, shear, moisture)

Microencapsulation in the Food Industry

Protecting sensitive food ingredients against degradation

Enhancing shelf-life and stability of foods

Conversion of difficult to handle liquids into free-flowing powders

Masking off –flavours

Controlled release

Increased bio-availability

Opportunities for the Traditional & Functional Food Industry

Ingredients and Food Products


Market size – Encapsulated Ingredients

Mary Ann Augustin | CSIRO Source: Global food encapsulation market, MarketsandMarkets, 2009

Market drivers & trends - Encapsulation


5395,2 5788,7 6222,6

9070,5

3776,1 4049,1

4347,1

6307,8

2807,2 3025,8

3267,7

4872,7

1619,1 1717,3

1823,9

2493,2

$0

$5.000

$10.000

$15.000

$20.000

$25.000

2007 2008 2009 2014

Macroencapsulation

Hybrid Technologies

Nano-encapsulation

Microencapsulation

Source: Global food encapsulation market, MarketsandMarkets, 2009 ** Global Business Insights – Innovations in delivery methods for nutraceutical food and drinks, 2011

CAGR 2009-14

$ M

illio

ns

Year

GLOBAL MARKET (2014) ~ $23 Billion

Formulations & Processing of Microencapsulated Food Ingredients


Food Industry interests in encapsulated Ingredients


Food Ingredients

Flavouring agents (eg sweeteners, seasonings, spices)

Acids, bases and buffers (eg citric acid, lactic acid, sodium bicarbonate)

Lipids (eg fish oils, milkfat, vegetable oils)

Enzymes and microorganisms (eg proteases, probiotic bacteria)

Artificial sweeteners (eg aspartame)

Antioxidants

Preservatives

Pigments and dyes

Essential oils

Minerals (eg calcium, iron, zinc)

Amino acids and peptides

Vitamins and pro-vitamins (eg vitamin A, carotene, vitamin K, vitamin C)

Novel solutions for improved delivery and protection

of food ingredients and enhanced food product quality

Encapsulants – Only food grade / GRAS ingredients may be used


Material Class Examples of types of materials

Proteins Albumin, caseinates, gelatin, gluten, peptides, soy protein, vegetable

proteins, whey proteins, zein

Simple sugars Fructose, galactose, glucose, maltose, sucrose

Carbohydrates/Gums Chitosan, corn syrup solids, cyclodextrin, dextrins, dried glucose syrup,

maltodextrins, modified starches, starches

Agar, alginates, carrageenan, gum acacia, gum arabic, pectins

Lipids Edible fats and oils, fractionated fats, hardened fats, beeswax

Emulsifiers Monoglycerides, diglycerides, lecithin, liposomes,

Food-grade surfactants

Cellulose Material Acetylcellulose, carboxymethyl cellulose, cellulose acetate butylate

phthalate, cellulose acetate phthalate, ethyl cellulose, methyl cellulose

Encapsulation – Costs constraint limits choice of Methods

•Food Industry has low profit margins compared to the pharmaceutical industry

•COST – continues to be important when adapting new technologies

•Powders, Gels and Emulsion-based systems most used in Food Industry

Method / process Relative

Operating Costs

Continuous/Batch

Process

Emulsion based Very low Batch /continuous

Spray Drying Very low Continuous

Co-extrusion Low to medium Continuous

Fluid bed coating Medium Batch

Coacervation High Batch

Liposome/

Nanoencapsulation

Very high Batch


Choosing the Process


The choice depends on the properties of the core, the encapsulant

materials and the requirements in the target food application

Delivery of Food Ingredients Consider solubility of ingredients in food environment

Water soluble (eg bioactive peptides, water soluble vitamins, mineral salts, leavening agents, some flavours)

Fat soluble (eg PUFA, stanols)

Dispersible (eg probiotics)

Sparingly soluble in water / oil (eg resveratrol, curcumin)

Challenges for delivery through food

Sensitive ingredients need to be protected during processing and storage

Release to be triggered by appropriate stimuli (eg chewing for release of flavours, in GI tract)

Incorporation of ingredients should not compromise sensory appeal of food

MICROENCAPSULATION – TAILORING SOLUTIONS TO OVERCOME CHALLENGES

FOR INCORPORATION OF INGREDIENTS INTO FOOD


Added Challenges for Delivery of Bioactives Stabilization of bioactive

Many are unstable once they are isolated from natural environment

Protection required throughout shelf-life

Enabling delivery in food

Masking taste – allowing addition without compromising sensory appeal

Preventing undesirable interactions with other food components

– Stability during food processing and in final food product

Bioavailability of bioactive

Delivery to target site of action, to exert desired physiological function

– Depends on intended health benefit

STRINGENT DEMANDS FOR DELIVERY SYSTEM –

SUPERIOR PERFORMANCE OFFERED BY MICROENCAPSULATION OF BIOACTIVES


Microencapsulation for delivery of Bioactives

Target delivery to GI tract

Different sites of delivery desired for various health outcomes

For Inflammatory gut diseases

– Distal small intestine

– Colon

Challenge – depending on target release site Protection against stomach acid & enzymes

Protection against enzymes in small intestine

– Amylases, Proteases, Lipases

Low pH Gastric

enzymes

Bile & Intestinal

enzymes

Gut

microflora

Targeting release – Microencapsulation

Appropriate materials, formulation & process


When are encapsulated delivery systems required for bioactives?


Bioactives identified for health is chosen

Encapsulation & delivery systems

required

Delivery systems may not be required –

Formulate directly into final product

Encapsulated ingredients

Application and formulation into final

product

Is the ingredient stable in current form?

NO YES

Ingredient not stable in final product

Encapsulation protects sensitive bioactives until their triggered release at a target site

and can potentially mask undesirable flavours

Microencapsulated Ingredients – Fitness for Purpose



Capitalising on protein-

carbohydrate functionality for

development of omega-3 oil

microcapsules

Protein: Good film former, emulsifier and has ability to form gels Carbohydrate: Provides matrix support and plasticisation

MicroMAX: Our Technology Platform

An innovative microencapsulation

“technology platform” for protection

and delivery of bioactives into

functional food

Using natural food grade materials

Using simple chemistry

No additives

Utilising standard food processing

equipment

Emulsion based delivery system

Protects and delivers bioactive cores


Capitalising on the Maillard Reaction to develop new Encapsulants

Mary Ann Augustin | CSIRO CSIRO’s MicroMAX® Technology

Sanguansri & Augustin (WO200174175)

MicroMAX fish oil powders


0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

12.0

15.0

0 m

ont

h

3 m

ont

hs

6 m

ont

hs

9 m

ont

hs

12 m

onth

s

15 m

onth

s

18 m

onth

s

24 m

onth

s

Storage Tim e (m onths )

Ra

ncid

Fla

vo

ur

Driphorm-50 25°C Driphorm-50 35°C

Driphorm-HiDHA 25°C Driphorm-HiDHA 35°C

Detectible

rancidity

50% oil powder (MicroMAX)

25% oil powder (Protein-CHO Blend)

MicroMAX®-50%oil(25°C)

Non-MicroMAX®-25%oil(25°C)



Detectible

rancidity

50% oil powder (MicroMAX)

25% oil powder (Protein-CHO Blend)





MicroMAX® Powder compared to Non-MicroMAX® Powder

Doubled the oil loading Doubled the shelf life

More robust capsules required for high shear & high temperature processing

For extruded products and UHT beverages; For tabletting (supplements)

Commercial use: Incorporation into milk powder and range of food products – So what is the next challenge?

CSIRO’s MicroMAX® Technology

Sanguansri & Augustin (WO200174175)

Stability of spray dried emulsions using MicroMAX Technology

MicroMAX powders (50% oil) were stable at 25°C and 35°C over 24 months

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

0 m

onth

3 m

onths

6 m

onths

9 m

onths

12 m

onths

15 m

onths

18 m

onths

24 m

onths

Storage Time

Pro

pan

al

Co

nte

nt

(ug

/g)

MicroMAX (50% oil) 25°C MicroMAX (50% oil) 35°C

Threshold for detectible rancidity

0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

12.0

15.0

0 m

onth

3 m

onths

6 m

onths

9 m

onths

12 m

onths

15 m

onths

18 m

onths

24 m

onths

Storage Time

Ove

rall

Qu

ali

ty


0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

12.0

15.0

0 m

onth

3 m

onths

6 m

onths

9 m

onths

12 m

onths

15 m

onths

18 m

onths

24 m

onths

Storage Time

Ran

cid

Fla

vo

ur

Inte

nsit

y


0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

0 m

onth

3 m

onths

6 m

onths

9 m

onths

12 m

onths

15 m

onths

18 m

onths

24 m

onths

Storage time (months)

% o

meg

a-3

an

d t

rig

lycerid

e

co

ncen

trati

on

% DHA % EPA % Triglyceride

Bread containing encapsulated fish oil (25% oil powder) - sensory evaluation

Day 1 Day 4

Response Untoasted Toasted Untoasted Toasted

Correct 22 22 20 22

Incorrect 28 28 31 29

Total number

of panellist

50 50 51 51

“No significant difference were detected between the

“control” and the “bread with added fish oil powder”

(Clover Corp / CSIRO

Use of microencapsulated fish oil in drinking yoghurt (60mg EPA+DHA /100ml serve)

Yoghurts with microencapsulated tuna oil (Driphorm 50®,

Gelphorm®) were preferred to those with free tuna oil

Sharma et al. AJDT 2003

Drinking Yogurt

0

2

4

6

8

10

Liking of odour Liking of flavour Liking of

aftertaste

Overall

acceptability

Sen

sory

score Control

Tuna oil

Gelphorm

Driphorm

aaa

a

aa a

b

aa a

a

ab

b

aba

MicroMAX Application in dairy products

The higher the mean score the more liked the product in terms of the attribute assessed. Any two mean score bars

for a sensory attribute that do not have a common letter are significantly different at p<0.05.

Omega-3 fortification using MicroMAX powder (50% oil) or MicroMAX UHT emulsion

(25% oil) is better than using unencapsulated oil

Sharma, R. et al 2003

In vitro testing of oil microcapsules

Before

Digestion

After Simulated

Gastric Fluid (SGF)

(37 C, 2 h)

After SGF+

Simulated Intestinal

Fluid

+bile+Ca

(37 C, 5 h)

Casein-Glucose-Resistant Starch Microcapsules

MicroMAX non-MicroMAX

MicroMAX microcapsules are less prone to

coalescence than non-MicroMAX

Micrographs

240 x 240μm

Oliver et al.

AJDT(2009)


Krill oil powders: - formulation & processing strategies

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

50% KO P1 50% KO P2 50% KO P3 50% KO P4

Pro

pan

al

GC

are

a (

x10-4

)

Day 0

Day 17

Day 28

50

60

70

80

90

100

EPA DHA EPA DHA EPA DHA

Day 0 day 17 Day 28

% r

em

ain

ing

of

LC

-n-3

PU

FA

s

50% KO P1 50% KO P2 50% KO P3 50% KO P4

Powders were stored under accelerated storage at 40°C for 28 days P1 - spray dried with maltodextrin P2 - encapsulated with protein only P3 - two step encapsulation with heated protein-carbohydrates P4 - one step encapsulation with heated protein-carbohydrates

Stability of krill oil powder is influenced by encapsulant matrix formulation

& process – Heated Protein-CHO are superior encapsulants

Shen et al CSIRO Patent

In-vitro and In-vivo Release of Omega-3 • In-vivo (Canola Oil Microcapsules in Smoothie) using Healthy

volunteers

• In-vitro and In-vivo (Fish Oil Microcapsules in Various Food Formats) using Ileostomy Volunteers

• In-vivo (Fish Oil Microcapsules in Flavoured Milk)


In Vivo: Delivery of canola oil microcapsules in Smoothie after human consumption

Microencapsulation enhanced peak and AUC

Microcapsules with SPI-pectin encapsulant – highest peak and AUC

Microcapsules with WPI has shortest time to peak height

Casein-Resistant starch-oil(Heat emulsion) Casein-Resistant starch (Heat Aq)-Oil Casein-Oligosaccharide- glucose syrup (Heat Aq)-Oil Whey protein-Resistant starch (Heat Aq)-Oil E=SPI-Pectin –Oil (No heat) F= Bulk Canola oil

Augustin et al., 2014, Food Funct 5(11): 2905-2912

+

(30 g oil/ 250 ml serve)

Images of enriched omega-3 (fish oil) foods during in vitro digestion


SGF

SIF

Powder in

Yogurt

Powder in

Cereal Bar

Powder in

Orange Juice Neat Powder

Microcapsule

Powder in Yogurt

Powder in Cereal Bar

Powder in

Orange Juice

Neat Powder Microcapsule

Simulated Gastric Fluid

Simulated Intestinal Fluid

4g of microencapsulated fish oil powder (50% fish oil) was added per food

serving

Shen et al., 2014, J Agric Food Chem 59, 8442-8449

In vitro: % omega-3 fatty acids released after exposure of omega-3 (fish oil) enriched foods to simulated gastric and intestinal fluids


A

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

control orange

juice

yogurt cereal

barDigested Samples

% O

me

ga

-3 f

att

y a

cid

s EPA DHA

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

control orange juice yogurt cereal bar

% O

me

ga

-3 f

att

y a

cid

s

Digested Samples

B

EPA DHA

In vitro data: Most of the omega-3 fatty acids are released in the

intestinal fluid with that released from cereal bar being the least

SGF SGF +SIF

Shen et al., 2014, J Agric Food Chem 59, 8442-8449


Human Ileostomy Study - Total LC omega-3 recovered from ileal effluent (with omega-3 (fish oil) taken as single dose)

Sanguansri et al 2013, J Funct Foods, 4, 74-82

0

400

800

1200

1600

2000

2400

2800

3200

Fish oil capsule Orange juice Yogurt Cereal bar

Re

co

ve

red

EP

A a

nd

DH

A (

mic

ro g

ram

)

EPA

DHA

% doserecovered

0.93 0.56 1.20 0.55 0.79 0.54 1.17 0.63

Total n-3 recovered is <2% of dose delivered >98% of n-3 delivered was digested and absorbed in the upper GI tract Omega-3 is bioavailable in different food matrices


Human study: % change in EPA & DHA in plasma of human volunteers over 48 hr with single dose of omega-3 (~1.0 g DHA+EPA) with flavoured milk

0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0

0 .0

0 .2

0 .4

0 .6

T im e (h )

% D

elt

a 2

0:5

n-3

(E

PA

)

***

**

A

0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0

0 .0

0 .2

0 .4

T im e (h )%

De

lta

22

:6n

-3 (

DH

A)

*

B

0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0

0 .0

0 .2

0 .4

0 .6

0 .8

T im e (h )

% D

elt

a t

ota

ln

-3 F

A

*

*

C

Change (delta) from baseline in the fatty acids as % of the total fatty acid pool in

plasma (n=15).

Fish oil gel capsules taken with a flavoured milk (o); Flavoured milk containing fish oil microcapsules

(MicroMAX1) (□)

Flavoured milk containing fish oil microcapsules (MicroMAX2) ()

Some minor differences in rate of change between samples but

no significant differences at 24 and 48 hr

Sanguansri et al 2015, Brit J Nutr 113, 822-831,


Human study – short term time course: omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids as % of total fatty acid pool in erythrocyte membranes after daily dose (1.0 g EPA +DHA)

Change (delta) from baseline in the fatty acids as % of the total fatty acid pool in

erythrocyte membranes (n=47).

Fish oil gel capsules taken with a flavoured milk (o); Flavoured milk containing fish oil microcapsules

(MicroMAX1) (□) Flavoured milk containing fish oil microcapsules (MicroMAX2) ()

Bioequivalence of fish oil microcapsules (MicroMAX) and gelatine

fish oil capsules when taken with flavoured milk

0 2 4

-2 .0

-1 .5

-1 .0

-0 .5

0 .0

0 .5

1 .0

1 .5

2 .0

n -3 F A

n -6 F A

A

T im e (w e e k s )

% D

elt

a F

att

y A

cid

s

a

b

b

b

b

0 2 4

0 .1 5 0

0 .1 7 5

0 .2 0 0

0 .2 2 5

0 .2 5 0

0 .2 7 5

0 .3 0 0

B

T im e (w e e k s )

n-3

/n-6

FA

ra

tio

a

b

b

Sanguansri et al 2015, Brit J Nutr 113, 822-831,


Capitalising on buttermilk

functionality for fish oil and

polyphenol delivery

Buttermilk - fish oil powder (50% oil)

Mary Ann Augustin | CSIRO CSIRO’s MicroMAX® Technology

Augustin et al. JFF (2014)

SMP (skim milk pH 6.6 heated 72°C/15 s) – Control

BMP1 (buttermilk with protein:CHO ratio1:1.6, pH 6.4 heated 72°C/15 s)

BMP2 (buttermilk with protein:CHO ratio 1:1.6, pH 7.5 heated 90°C/30 min)

BMP3 (buttermilk with protein:CHO ratio 1:2, pH 6.4 heated 72°C/15 s)

BMP4 (buttermilk with protein:CHO ratio 1:2, pH 7.5 heated 90°C/30 min) Low Powder free-fat :1-2%

Fat – Nile

Red

Phospholipid

- Rhodamine

DOPE

With judicious formulation, pH adjustment and heat treatment, buttermilk has

superior encapsulating properties compared to skim milk for fish oils


Resveratrol delivery in whole buttermilk

0 400 800 1200 16000

10

20

30

R2>0.99

Cream layer

Milk serum

Casein-rich precipitate

Concentration of RS (M)

( M

ole

/g d

ry b

asis

)

RS

conce

ntr

atio

n

8-9% in cream

35-41% in serum

51-57% in casein

300 350 400 450 5000

500

1000

1500

2000

362 nm

j

a

298 K

280 nm

Flu

ore

scen

ce i

nte

nsi

ty (

a.u

.)

Wavelength (nm)

Fluorescence spectra of buttermilk (10% TS) –

revseratrol mixtures (pH 6.54) at an λex of 280 nm

a- j:0- 40μM resveratrol

Distribution of resveratrol in buttermilk (10% TS) –

resveratrol (100-1600 μM) mixtures

Increased aqueous solubility of resveratrol by complexation to whole

buttermilk makes it an effective vehicle for carrying resveratrol

Ye et al. JAFC (2013)


Curcumin delivery in whole buttermilk

In buttermilk

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 6

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f cu

rcu

min

oid

s re

mai

ne

d (

%)

Incubation Time (days)

Bisdemethoxycurcumin

Curcumin

Bisdemethoxycurcumin

t=0 t=6d

t=0 t=6d

In 10mM phosphate buffer

Distribution % Total Solids (g) Protein (g) Curcumin %

Cream (18%) 0.64 0.06 11

Serum (73%) 2.89 0.35 42

Caseins (7%) 1.83 1.34 40

Fu et al. Food Chem (2014)

The ability of buttermilk to carry and stabilise curcuminoids has the

potential to enable the delivery of these components into functional foods


Capitalising on protein-

carbohydrate functionality for

probiotic delivery

Fortification of Foods with Probiotics

Fortification with Pre and Probiotics

Pre and Probiotics work synergistically to improve gut health, well being and boost the immune system

Dairy foods are ideal systems for delivery (eg fermented milks and yoghurts, cheese) but these are also added to other foods (spreads, frozen desserts, breakfast food, confectionery)

Use of probiotics

Lactobacillus casei shirota (Yakult), Lactobacillus acidophilus, Bifidobacterium bifidum) etc

Selection of appropriate acid and bile resistant strains / use of microencapsulated bacteria

Challenge to ensure stability and viability of strains



Delivery of probiotics – challenges

Probiotics - sensitive to heat, moisture, oxygen, and acid (Sensitivity is dependent on strain)

Challenges for delivery in functional foods

Addition to a wider range of food products for general health as well as disease-specific medical foods

Maintain cell viability (during process & storage)

Maintain probiotic functionality in the final product

Demonstrate long term effect – for health claims

Must be alive until it reaches the site of action in the body

MicroMAX® – Simple and flexible process

(Synbiotic formulations)

Lipid Protein Prebiotic

Emulsion

Probiotic

Mixing Reaction Drying

Film formed around bacteria

Excess bulk encapsulant

10 μm


Microencapsulated Probiotics:

Enhanced survival at intermediate water activity

Encapsulation significantly (**P<0.01) protected the spray dried probiotic Lactobacillus strain during storage

0.00000001

0.0000001

0.000001

0.00001

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

0 2 4 6

Tim e (w e e ks)

Pe

rce

nt

su

rviv

al

(Lo

g

sc

ale

)1

0

Encapsulated

probiotics

Non-encapsulated

probiotics

10 μm

10 μm

Storage Stability (25°C, 50% RH)

Encapsulation of probiotics offers protection

during storage Crittenden et al 2005


Encapsulation significantly (**P<0.01) protected the spray dried probiotic Lactobacillus strain during storage

0.00000001

0.0000001

0.000001

0.00001

0.0001

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

0 2 4 6

Tim e (w e e ks)

Pe

rce

nt

su

rviv

al

(Lo

g

sc

ale

)1

0

Encapsulated

probiotics

Non-encapsulated

probiotics

10 μm

10 μm

Storage Stability (25°C, 50% RH)

Hoobin et al Food & Function 2013


Moisture uptake properties and molecular mobility of the matrix composition, are better determinants of probiotic viability than RH

Encapsulation of probiotics offers protection during storage


Enhanced survival of probiotics at low pH

Potential to add probiotics into low pH products (eg Apple juice)

Encapsulation significantly protected the probiotic Lactobacillus

strain during storage at pH4, 10°C for 4 weeks

0,1

1

10

100

2 weeks 4 weeks

% v

iab

le

A1

A2

B1

B2

LGG

Free Cells: <1% viable

Encapsulated probiotics: Higher

% remained viable

CSIRO, Unpublished results


Viability of spray dried microencapsulated LGG in apple juice


LGG encapsulated in WPI; 4WPI:1RS;

1WPI:1RS; 1WPI:4RS; RS stored at

5°C

(A)

(B)

(C)

15m 15m 15m

Integrity of microencapsulated LGG

formulations containing (A) WPI, (B)

1WPI:1RS, and (C) RS dispersed in

apple juice

• Viability: LGG in (WPI alone or in combination with RS) > RS

• WPI creates a buffered microenvironment within the hydrated colloid particle

• WPI protects embedded LGG from the low pH external environment

Ying et al. JFF, 2013


Survival of probiotics in vitro

Encapsulation significantly (**P<0.01) protected the probiotic Lactobacillus strain during in vitro intestinal transit

Microencapsulation maintains survival of probiotics in vitro

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

Non-encapsulated

probiotic

Encapsulated

probiotic

Per

cent

sur

viva

l (Lo

g sc

ale)

In-vitro survival: Encapsulated

vs. non-encapsulated

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

Non-encapsulated

probiotic

Encapsulated

probiotic

Per

cent

sur

viva

l (Lo

g sc

ale)

In-vitro survival: Encapsulated

vs. non-encapsulated

A B

Crittenden et al., 2005 App Envi Micro Mary Ann Augustin | CSIRO

Chronic administration of a microencapsulated probiotic enhances the bioavailability of orange juice flavanones in humans


Orange juice consumption and chronic microencapsulated B longum for 4 weeks

excretion of higher flavanones intake and selected phenolic acids

overall bioavailability of 70%

Periera-Caro et al, FFBM, 2015


Summary

Successful Research to Market Development Model

Research &

Development

Ingredient

Supplier

Food Product

Manufacturer

Consumer

CSIRO

CSIRO Microencapsulation Technology

American Oil Chemists Corporate Achievement Award (CSIRO /Clover)

1996 2013

Commercialisation of 1st generation n-3 powder ingredient developed for Clover

CSIRO Patented 1st Generation MicroMAX technology

CSIRO Patented 2nd Generation MicroMAX technology

Start R&D on n-3 delivery

Australian AIFST Award

Australian Growth Partnership Collaboration with Clover Corporation

Licensing of CSIRO’s 1st Generation MicroMAX® technology “Driphorm-50”

Licensing of CSIRO’s 2nd Generation MicroMAX® technology “ThermoMAX-50”

Development of more robust extrudable and compressible formulations

CSIRO Patented MicroMAX-Probiotic technology

CSIRO Patented Krill Oil Encapsulation Technology

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

AOCS Award: Recognition for the “technological,

commercial and public health impact”

Augustin & Hemar (2009) Nano-structured assemblies for Encapsulation. Chem Soc Rev, 38, 902-912



Support: CSIRO P-Health Flagship & CSIRO

Major project Team

L Sanguansri – Project Leader

W Beattie

S Bhail

LJ Cheng

Z Shen

R Crittenden

R Weerakkody

DY Ying

CM Oliver

G Patten

M Abeywardena

J Rusli

Many others along the way

CSIRO colleagues

University colleagues

Students and visiting scientists

Various companies

Clover Corp

Various others

Science Leadership

MA Augustin

T Lockett

Business Development

C Downs, P Clarke, R McKay,

K Bechta-Metti & others

Human Trials

P Clifton

J Keogh

designing microencapsulated ingredients for food applications€¦ · source: global food...

Documents