What topics does this cannabis study cover?

This study covers research on: Endocannabinoid.

Where was this research published?

Published in Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.) on June 1, 2026.

Better protein extraction methods unlock hemp's nutritional potential

Comparison of ultrafiltration-diafiltration and isoelectric precipitation for producing albumin and globulin fractions from hemp (Cannabis sativa L.).

Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.) • June 1, 2026 • Observational • Moderately Relevant

🤖

AI Summary

Researchers compared two methods—ultrafiltration-diafiltration (UF-DF) and isoelectric precipitation (IEP)—for extracting and purifying protein fractions from hemp plants. The study examined how well each method preserved the structural integrity of albumin and globulin proteins, which are important components of hemp protein products. UF-DF proved superior at maintaining protein structure, producing albumin with 88.25% protein content compared to 73.76% for the IEP method, along with better preservation of the proteins' natural shape and chemical properties.

The UF-DF method preserved the α-helix structure of albumin proteins much more effectively, maintaining 9.03% α-helix content versus only 2.99% in the IEP-treated samples. This structural preservation translated directly into practical benefits: the UF-DF albumin remained more soluble across all pH levels, a crucial property for food and supplement applications. For globulin fractions, UF-DF also demonstrated advantages, particularly at higher pH values where solubility was significantly higher (59.09% vs 18.31% at pH 8), indicating less protein damage from the extraction process.

While UF-DF emerged as the superior extraction method, the research highlights an important trade-off: the method produced lower overall recovery yields, meaning less total protein was extracted from the starting material. The researchers suggest that further optimization is needed to balance quality with efficiency. Future studies will need to evaluate how these purified protein fractions perform in real food and beverage applications, potentially opening new markets for hemp-based nutritional products with superior functional properties.

📄 Original Abstract

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of ultrafiltration-diafiltration (UF-DF) and isoelectric precipitation (IEP) for producing albumin (Alb) and globulin (Glo) fractions from hemp protein isolate (HPI), and to compare their structural and surface properties as well as solubilities. Compared to the Alb-IEP, the Alb-UFDF exhibited higher protein content (88.25 vs 73.76%), greater surface hydrophobicity (48.94 × 103 vs 38.80 × 103 a.u.), higher free sulfhydryl groups (25.12 vs 14.78 μmol/g), a more negative ζ-potential (-22.36 vs -10.06 mV), and higher α-helix content (9.03 vs 2.99%), indicating a better-preserved conformational structure. This structural integrity resulted in higher solubility for the Alb-UFDF compared to the Alb-IEP, although both albumin fractions remained highly soluble across all pH values. Protein profiles showed a slight contamination of the Alb-UFDF with 7S globulin. Both UFDF and IEP globulin fractions exhibited similar protein content (∼81%) and ζ-potential (∼-8 mV), but the Glo-UFDF showed higher free sulfhydryl content (27.90 vs 18.41 μmol/g) and surface hydrophobicity (100.22 × 103 vs 16.21 × 103 a.u.), indicating more pronounced denaturation for the Glo-IEP. Moreover, the solubility of the Glo-IEP was lower, particularly at pH 8 (18.31 vs 59.09%). Overall, UF-DF better preserved the conformation and solubility of hemp albumins and globulins compared to IEP, however the lower recovery yields indicate that further process optimization is required. Future work should assess the techno-functional properties of these fractions to evaluate their potential applications in food systems.

Paper Type

👁️ Observational

Publication

Journal: Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.)
Published: June 1, 2026
PMID: 41942202
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2026.118950

Authors (6)

Marylise Ménard Langlois Department of Food Sciences, Institute of Nutrition and Functional Foods (INAF) and Dairy Science and Technology Research Centre (STELA), Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec G1V 0A6, Canada.
Ugo Berthelot Department of Food Sciences, Institute of Nutrition and Functional Foods (INAF) and Dairy Science and Technology Research Centre (STELA), Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec G1V 0A6, Canada.
Gabrielle Leduc Department of Food Sciences, Institute of Nutrition and Functional Foods (INAF) and Dairy Science and Technology Research Centre (STELA), Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec G1V 0A6, Canada.
Véronique Perreault Department of Food Sciences, Institute of Nutrition and Functional Foods (INAF) and Dairy Science and Technology Research Centre (STELA), Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec G1V 0A6, Canada.
Jean-Yves Lecompte Cintech Agroalimentaire, Food Technology Research and Expertise Center, Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec J2S 8E3, Canada.
+1 more authors