Research Note

Blue foods for sustainable nutrition

Isobel R. Short, 19/06/2023

Juni 2023 1
 Introduction

Subsistence comes at an environmental cost. In our and bivalves release the lowest amounts of CO2
current food system most dietary protein origina- equivalent per tonne of edible weight of any blue
tes from terrestrial animals and plants1. Terrestrial foods, and of almost any food group8 (see Figure 1).
agriculture practices have damaging environmental On the other hand, shrimp are further up the trophic
footprints (FPs) spanning multiple dimensions, in- ladder and require additional feed during aquacul-
cluding carbon, land, water, nitrogen (N) and phos- ture, usually fish and soybean meal, which increa-
phorus (P)2. At the same time, this unsustainable ses their carbon FP9. Wild bivalves, crustaceans such
food system fails to meet current global nutritional as shrimp and lobster, and flatfish are very fuel in-
needs. As the global population reaches an expec- tensive to capture. Consequently, they have higher
ted 11 billion people by the year 2100, food pro- carbon emissions per tonne of edible weight than
duction has to increase by at least 60%3 and pro- chicken meat, which has the lowest carbon FP of any
tein is one of the main ingredients that will be in major terrestrial animal source of protein8. In com-
short supply4: it is estimated that 56 million me- parison, wild small pelagic fish, such as anchovies,
tric tonnes of protein will be required per annum
by 2054 in Europe alone5. Discovering alternative
protein sources that are nutritionally adequate for
the human diet without harmful environmental FPs
is imperative.
Blue foods, foods from aquatic organisms, offer an
opportunity to reduce food system FPs whilst mee-
ting the protein needs of the global population6.
This alternative aquatic nutrition source provides
synergy between environmental sustainability and
human health, in line with the Sustainable Develop-
ment Goals to improve nutrition (Goal 2) with sus-
tainable consumption and production (Goal 12), and
sustainably utilise marine resources (Goal 14)7.
Figure 1: Graph showing the global warming potential of selected blue
foods, chicken, and beef, in tonnes of CO2-equivalent per tonne of edible
Environmental performance weight. Source of data Gephart et al. 20218.

Whilst blue foods present an opportunity for more

sustainable diets, there is a huge variation in the mackerel, herring and sardines, can be much more
FPs of different species groups and production met- efficiently captured, and so have favourable carbon
hods. For wild organisms, the carbon FP is deter- FPs10; approximately half the carbon emissions of
mined by the amount of fuel burnt during capture, chicken, per tonne of edible weight. Semi pelagic
whilst the key variable for farmed species relates to species groups, for example both farmed and wild
the carbon intensity of feed production. Micro and salmon and trout, are more carbon intensive than
macro-algae are primary producers, whilst bivalve small pelagics, but still have FPs per tonne of edible
molluscs (such as mussels, clams and oysters) are weight lower than chicken meat8. It is also worth no-
filter feeders that also occupy low trophic levels. As ting that the CO2-equivalent FPs of marine animals
a result, farmed algae and bivalves do not require are especially favourable compared to terrestrial
additional feed nor do they incur carbon penalties ruminants, due to the absence of enteric CH411.
from fuel burnt during capture. Thus, farmed algae With respect to land and freshwater FPs, marine

Juni 2023 2
species are naturally favourable in comparison to 47% in macroalgae16, comparable to those for other
terrestrial sources of protein12. Some seafood groups protein-rich plant-based foods, such as legumes18.
do have small land and freshwater FPs, as a result of The protein content of microalgae can be even hig-
feed production13. For example, shrimp aquaculture her, for example 58% in Chlorella vulgaris17, compa-
commonly involves administration of soybean meal rable to chicken. The protein content of bivalve mol-
or other terrestrial plant-based feeds, which requi- luscs ranges from 49-66% dw19-25. Small pelagic fish
re arable land and freshwater for production14. This are a very good source of protein, with contents ran-
enhances the advantage of non-fed aquaculture of ging from 50-75% dw26. Finally, lobster and shrimp,
algae and bivalves, as well as wild fish, which do not species of crustacean, both have very high protein
require additional feed. contents, above 80% dw. The high protein content of
Similarly, in terms of N and P emissions, fed or- these blue food groups makes them highly suitable
ganisms have the highest FPs of blue food groups, sources of protein for human nutrition21.
again due to feed production. For example, algae and
bivalves can have negative N and P emissions8, whilst
farmed fish and shrimp emit relatively high amounts
of N and P. Nonetheless, almost all blue food groups
outperform chicken per tonne of edible weight with
respect to N and P emissions. Overall, there is syner-
gy between low FP diets. Unfed aquaculture; farmed
algae and bivalves, are the marine blue foods with
the best carbon, N, P, water and land FPs, followed by
wild small pelagic fish. They have extremely favoura-
ble environmental impacts in comparison to terrestri-
al protein sources.

Ecosystem impact
Figure 2: Graph showing the protein content of selected food sources16-26.
An important advantage of aquaculture is the avoi-
dance of ecosystem stressors associated with captu-
re fisheries, including bycatch, food-web alterations, Nutritional quality
and stock depletion, which all have negative impacts The protein quality is determined by the amino acid
on biodiversity. It is important to note that if fish stocks composition: essential amino acid (EAA) profiles are
are depleted more fuel has to be expended per gram particularly relevant because it is important to recei-
of protein captured, increasing the carbon FP. A num- ve all EAAs, and in correct proportions27. Algae meet
ber of small pelagic species are already overfished, the FAO requirements for quality of human protein
and many more are at risk of population collapse as sources, with EAA profiles similar to those of egg and
fishing practices and climate change intensify. The- soybean28. Favourably, EAAs account for almost 50%
refore, sustainable fishing practices are required to of the total amino acid composition of algae prote-
maintain healthy fish stocks, which will in turn promo- ins, however many seaweed species have certain li-
te lower carbon FPs of captured fish. Whilst reduced miting EAAs29. Combining seaweed proteins with
ecosystem impact is a key advantage of aquaculture, complementary profiles would allow individuals to
fish farms can have adverse ecological effects. These obtain the required amounts of all EAAs30. The mi-
result from displacement of ecosystems and species croalgae Chlorella vulgaris and Arthrospira sp. have
due to farm site locations, as well as exposure to rai- highly favourable EAA profiles31. Small pelagic fish
sed nutrients and effluent, invasive species, diseases and shellfish, including bivalves and crustaceans are
and antibiotics15. Shrimp aquaculture is a prominent complete protein sources with EAA profiles that are
example of these impacts, as discussed below. highly similar to the recommended human dietary
EAA pattern32. A strong benefit from the consump-
Nutritional content tion of aquatic animals is the high levels of EAAs ly-
Sustainability has to be considered in conjunction with sine and methionine, often limiting in plants such as
nutritional performance. Fortunately, these species cereals33. The nutritional quality is determined by the
groups associated with low environmental stressors bioavailability in addition to the amino acid composi-
also have high protein contents (see Figure 2). The tion. Bioavailability is proportional to the digestibility
protein content on a dry weight (dw) basis can reach of proteins, which depends on protein structure and

Juni 2023 3
non-protein components12. Algae have cell walls that meat has other health benefits, chiefly attributed to
contain anionic polysaccharides and phenolic com- their beneficial fatty acids (especially high in small
pounds which bind to proteins, making them less ac-
cessible to gastrointestinal enzymes5. The high levels
of these compounds in algae can undermine the bio-
availability of proteins34-36. The in vitro digestibility of
algae is reported to range from 78-95% for macroal-
gae37-39 and 77-88% for microalgae4. This is lower than
animal sources of protein, but similar to that reported
for terrestrial plants40 (see Figure 3). Processing algal
biomass, for example with heat, fermentation and/or
drying can increase protein digestibility41,42, as can
protein extraction, which is discussed below. Animal
proteins show higher digestibility than plants21, and
moreover shellfish and finfish are considered nutri-
tionally superior in comparison to land animals. This
is largely as a result of the deficit of strong collagen-
ous fibres and tendons in fish muscle32. Less collagen
increases the sensitivity to proteolytic digestion, and
accounts for the softness of seafood meat compared Figure 3: Graph showing the in vitro digestibility of protein from selected
food sources4,27,131. The source ‘Fish’ includes shellfish and finfish.
to e.g. beef33. As a result, fish is a particularly good
source of protein for children, who have less develo- pelagics), micronutrient richness and peptides active
ped digestive systems43. Fish protein, including fin- against a vast array of pathologies46,47. For example,
fish and shellfish, consistently shows a digestibility bioactive peptides from bivalves have demonstrated
above 90%, which in conjunction with the associated anticoagulant, antihypertensive, anticancer and anti-
release of favourable proportions of EAAs, explains microbial properties48,49.
their excellent nutritive value32,44,45. Additionally, fish

Figure 4: Investment matrix for

blue food groups, chicken and
beef, distinguished based on
environmental performance
(EP; function of ecological
impacts, carbon, land,
freshwater, N and P FPs), and
nutritional performance (protein
quality and additional nutritive
properties, and protein content
(% dw)). Overall, algae, farmed
bivalves and wild small pelagic
fish optimise both nutrition and
EP. Algal biomass processing
stands to improve protein
quality (bioavailability). Novel
land-based indoor aquaculture
will improve the EP of farmed
shrimp.

Juni 2023 4
 Algae

Protein from algae outperforms aquatic animals in palmata (red) and Ulva sp. (green), alongside brown
terms of climate impact50,51. Algae are primary pro- seaweeds A. esculenta and S. latissima58. Generally,
ducers that occupy the first step on the trophic ladder. current consumption patterns utilise too few seaweed
Algae and plant-based diets are the most efficient species. Efforts should be made to expand the diver-
way to meet our nutritional needs, reducing emissions sity of edible seaweed markets, focusing on red and
compared to meat or dairy-based protein sources. green phyla, although further testing and verification
Cultivation of macroalgae also has a favourable car- is required. 
bon FP in comparison to land crop cultivation: 11% of
biomass from macroalgae farms leads to carbon se- Microalgae
questration in the deep sea and sediments52. In fact, Microalgae are a hugely diverse group of photosyn-
macroalgal growth rates exceed those of terrestrial thetic unicellular organisms and here we also inclu-
plants, and algae have a higher protein yield per unit de cyanobacteria in this category. The vast majority
area than traditional crops4. Moreover, algae have of microalgae protein consumed by humans comes
more favourable land, freshwater, N and P FPs. Whilst from just two species; Chlorella vulgaris and Arthro-
algae thus represent an extremely promising source spira sp. (a cyanobacteria known as spirulina). In a
of protein for human nutrition, the industry is massi- 2017 survey, these two algae were identified as being
vely underdeveloped. Here we will discuss key areas regularly purchased by 2.5–3.8% of the German po-
for investment, including species groups to focus on pulation59. Arthrospira platensis has a protein content
and the barriers to large-scale global consumption of of 63% dw and is a popular health food and dietary
algal protein. supplement60. Similarly, Chlorella vulgaris is a widely
used industry species due to its high protein content
Macroalgae  (51-58% dw), favourable amino acid composition and
Multicellular algae, macroalgae, are divided into three other beneficial nutrients14. Microalgae protein is high
main taxonomic groups based on their photosynthe- quality and has comparable digestibility to seaweed
tic pigments; rhodophyta (red), chlorophyta (green) and terrestrial plants4. Thus, microalgae represent a
and phaeophyta (brown). Brown seaweeds generally very promising alternative source of protein. Empha-
have 3-15% protein by dw53, with some exceptions; sis should be placed on developing other candidate
Undaria sp. and Sargassum sp. have been reported to species, such as the single-celled chlorophyte Sce-
contain up to 24% protein54. Green and red seaweeds nedesmus obliquus and the cyanobacteria Anabaena
are reported to have protein contents of 9-26% and cylindrica, reported to have a protein content of 69%
8-47% by dw, respectively54,5. dw61. Currently, a much greater variety of microalgae
Overall, red macroalgae, especially Porphyra sp., species are utilised for sustainable animal feeds, pro-
consistently report the highest protein content55 (see viding a list of candidates for human consumption.
Figure 1). Red and green seaweed proteins also en- The exact content and composition of algae pro-
joy higher bioavailability than brown species56,27 (see tein depends on the species, temperature, season,
Figure 2). Higher levels of polysaccharides and phe- and ecology of the harvest location62,63. The latter
nolics in brown seaweeds are largely responsible for
this trend57. Globally, the main commercially exploi- Insights
ted species belong to the brown seaweeds58. Since
brown seaweeds have lower protein content and qua- Integrated multi-trophic aquaculture system
lity this consumption pattern is not favourable with (IMTA): multi-species aquaculture set-up where
respect to maximising protein nutrition. Consumption the by-products of one species act as inputs for
patterns in the European seaweed market are more another e.g. waste production by fish or shrimp is
favourable, with 60% of consumed algae being Por- balanced by uptake by algae or shellfish64.
phyra sp. (red). The other main species include P.

Juni 2023 5
was exemplified by Machado et al who showed that Products from algal protein
production of four seaweed species in an integrated In the past, algae have been largely consumed whole,
multi-trophic aquaculture system (IMTA), a high nu- in a broad variety of formats including fresh, dried, as
trient cultivation environment, increases the quality flakes and as a powder81. The Republic of Korea, Chi-
of seaweed protein55. Improvements in protein quality na and Japan consume the greatest mass of seaweed
assessment will aid efforts to catalogue information per capita82. Seaweed consumption in Japan is around
on the variability of nutritional composition. This will 2 kg per capita per year, which is comparable to the
allow the industry members to identify harvesting consumption of salad in Europe, 3 kg per capita per
plans that optimise protein and amino acid contents27.  year83. The most consumed species are brown sea-
weeds Laminaria japonica – kombu (29% of global
Algal protein extraction seaweed consumption), Undaria pinnatifida – waka-
Extraction techniques can be used to overcome the me (9%), Sargassum fusiforme – hijiki (1%) and red
suboptimal bioavailability of algal protein, in particu- seaweeds from the genus Porphyra – Nori (7%)84.
lar brown macroalgae. Conventional extraction invol- Palmaria palmata – dulse, and Ulva lactuca – sea
ves chemical65 and physical66 methods, but these are lettuce, are also eaten whole and incorporated into
laborious and time-consuming, which restricts scale. foods on a notable scale, outside of Asia85. The micro-
Moreover, the release of vacuolic proteases compro- algae Chlorella vulgaris and Arthrospira sp., as well as
mises protein integrity. Novel techniques have been some types of cyanobacteria, are consumed whole in
designed to disrupt algae cell walls and generate a number of indigenous cultures. Subsequently, spi-
economically viable protein yields from algal bio- rulina and chlorella were marketed as a ‘health food’,
mass. Other methods include subcritical water and and are now consumed globally as powders and ta-
supercritical fluid extraction67, as well as fungal fer- blets, which can be added to drinks86. The success of
mentation of algae41. these products illustrates that improving the palata-
Enrichment methods, used in conjunction with cell bility and variety of algae-containing ingredients is
disruption techniques, are a promising strategy for crucial to expanding algal protein nutrition on a glo-
improving algal protein yields and bioavailability4. bal scale. Successful developments in this direction
Membrane technologies, including filtration and re- have begun: traditional food products with algae-de-
verse osmosis are widely used in the dairy industry rived ingredients have been launched, including coo-
and are non-thermal and environmentally friendly77. kies, pasta, bread and beverages, as well as meat and
A cascading membrane biorefinery process78 could dairy products5,58 (see Table 2). Such products are on
be used to isolate all valuable components from al- the rise in the European market87. It is important to
gae, and simultaneously remove heavy metals and note that incorporation of small quantities of algae
microorganisms from the final product79,80. derived ingredients does not significantly enhance
the macromolecular composition in foods, ergo the

Extraction Method Principle Advantage Disadvantage

Aqueous, acid, and alkali met-

Sub-optimal yield, partial degra-
hods break cell wall H-bonds. Simple and cost
Chemical extraction dation of proteins/bioactives (va-
Many centrifugation rounds for effective.
cuole protease release), slow68.
recovery. 
Physical grinding (e.g. with a Sub-optimal yield, partial degra-
Simple and cost
Physical processes Potter homogeniser) and osmotic dation of proteins/bioactive com-
effective.
shock.   ponents, slow66. 
Enzymes applied to degrade
Less use of organic Slow, specific temperature and pH,
polysaccharides within algal cell
Enzyme hydrolysis solvents; specific and high enzyme concentrations re-
walls. E.g. cellulases, xylanases,
mild technique. quired can be expensive69. 
alcalases.
EM radiation heats sample, for-
Microwave-assisted No organic solvents Use in dried seaweed biomass
ming vapour bubbles that ruptu-
extraction (MAE) and fast. may be limited70,71.
re cell wall. 
Acoustic cavitation produces
Ultrasound-assisted Fast, less organic sol- Potential structural changes within
vapour bubbles to disrupt cell
extraction (UAE) vents; high purity. polysaccharide structure72,73. 
walls. 
High voltage leads to electrop-
Pulse electric field Non-thermal, energy
oration to disrupt cell wall and Limitations on scaling up74-76. 
(PEF) efficient technique. 
membrane. 
Table 1: Techniques for the extraction of protein from algal cells. Source Obrien et al 20205.
Juni 2023 6
 algae industry remains a niche market with around
Algae species Product 500 metric tonnes of algae dw produced per an-
num105. However, this is set to grow dramatically.
Caulerpa racemosa (G) Semi sweet biscuits
The estimated value of the European algae products
Ulva intestinalis (G) Fish surimi market is expected to have increased by around 43%
between 2016 and 2023, forecasting a value of EUR
Ulva lactuca (G) Pork patties 1240 million by 2023106.  European seaweed produc-
tion in 2019 was 96% wild-harvested and 4% culti-
Himanthalia elongata (B) Meat based products vated. This is the opposite to patterns of production
in asia107. Cultivation is a more sustainable method
Fucus vesiculosus (B) White bread of production, avoiding the overexploitation of wild
seaweed resources and ecological impacts. Moreover,
Fucus vesiculosus (B) Pasta industrial scale aquaculture majorly reduces produc-
tion costs. As a result, European algae producers face
Undaria pinnatifida (B) Milk
heavy competition from Asia. Notably, Europe produ-
Grateloupia turuturu (R) Food colouring ces only 1% of the Porphyra sp. it consumes, with the
vast majority imported from Asia58. European pro-
Palmaria palmata (R) Bread duction may do better as ever more eco-conscious
consumers demand locally and sustainably sourced
Table 2: Food products developed with algal-derived ingredients. algae-based products108. The shift to seaweed aqua-
G = green, B = brown, R = red macroalgae. Source Obrien et al 20205. culture by European producers is imperative. IMTA
protein content88. systems where seaweed could be farmed together
with finfish or shellfish is a particularly beneficial
As well as a source of protein, algae can provide a approach. In Europe, microalgae are commonly pro-
number of other functionalities in human food. For duced in photobioreactors in closed and controlled
example, red seaweeds produce the gelling agent conditions. Unfortunately, as with macroalgae there
agar, carrageenan to improve the flavour and shelf is low technological readiness and lack of economy
life of foods, and phycoerythrin for use as a food of scale for microalgae cultivation and processing88.
colouring89-91. Algae are also an important source of In particular, biorefining of protein from microalgae
nutrients and bioactive peptides, which benefit health is un-optimised and costly.
beyond their nutritional value55. Many anti-hyper-
tensive peptides have been found in species of al- Currently, around 420 SMEs, distributed over 23
gae92-94. Widespread consumption of these seaweeds countries, are producing algae in Europe; 64% of
in Japan has been linked to its low incidence of co- which produce microalgae (46% spirulina) and 36%
ronary heart disease95. Similarly, algae have evolved seaweed109-111. In addition, two of the five global food
a huge variety of proteins with antioxidant proper- giants now have teams dedicated to developing algae
ties, which have strong health benefits including anti- and plant-based protein alternatives112. One of these,
cancer effects88. Additionally, anti-inflammatory96, Unilever, has partnered with Algenuity to realise the
anti-coagulant97, anti-diabetic98 and anti-bacterial99 ‘untapped potential of microalgae’113. Overall, there
peptides have been isolated from various species. is a huge potential for innovation and growth in this
These health benefits provide further advantages to sector, especially by expanding the number of spe-
consumption of algal protein and may be leveraged cies utilised and products generated. 
to help with marketing.
The main bottlenecks blocking the progress of algae
However, there are risks associated with consuming protein from current niche markets to larger ones are
algal protein that need to be considered and properly technical production constraints and high costs, envi-
managed. The dangers of exceeding the recommen- ronmental and health concerns, legislation, and con-
ded iodine intake100,101, as well as exposure to heavy sumers’ perception of the product58. Further research
metals102,103 and arsenic104, restricts intake of larger is needed to improve the foundational knowledge
algae portions. Better understanding of species spe- around the environmental concerns and the health
cific bioaccumulation and acceptable concentrations and safety risks for consumption of algal protein.
is required. Extraction practices and membrane filtra- Moreover, significant work is required to optimise al-
tion may help to circumvent this problem. gal cultivation and processing methods to bring down
the costs. Research and development focused on
Sector overview and opportunities creating a wider variety of more palatable products is
Whilst algae have been known as a sustainable also warranted. Academic partnerships will be crucial
source of protein for many decades, the European going forward114.

Juni 2023 7
 Aquatic animals

Bivalves ministered. Traditional shrimp feed includes fishme-

Bivalves are a sub-group of the phyla mollusca, in- al that has a high carbon FP and plant-based feeds
cluding many edible members such as mussels, such as soybean which are associated with unfavou-
clams, scallops and oysters. Overall, they have a fa- rable land and freshwater FPs8. Moreover, traditional
vourable protein content and protein quality, with shrimp aquaculture has other negative environmen-
very high digestibility, complete EAA profiles and tal externalities, including clearing of ecologically
additional beneficial nutrients. The environmental sensitive habitats for ponds (e.g. mangroves), and
performance of bivalves as a source of protein for pollution of coastal environments with organic waste,
human nutrition largely depends on whether they chemicals and antibiotics115. Innovative shrimp aqua-
are farmed or wild. Capturing wild bivalves has a high culture approaches are aiming to reduce these im-
carbon FP due to fuel expenditure and has negative pacts. These include utilising sustainable plant-ba-
ecosystem impacts. On the other hand, bivalve aqua- sed feeds116, and microbes to control water quality
culture does not require fuel, nor does it involve feed and serve as an additional food source117. Combining
production because bivalves obtain all necessary these approaches in land-based indoor farms mini-
food by filtering the water in which they are grown. mises both disruption of coastal ecosystems and risk
Thus, unfed bivalve aquaculture has highly favoura- of disease117. Moreover, unlike wild catch fisheries,
ble land, freshwater, N, P and carbon FPs. Moreover, farming does not contribute to or suffer from stock
bivalve aquaculture has been associated with positive depletion. Shrimp is currently the most valuable tra-
ecological impacts, including habitat creation and re- ded marine product, and production is growing at a
mediation114. Overall, unfed bivalve mollusc aquacul- rate of 10% per annum115. Novel land-based shrimp
ture represents a food source with impressive protein aquaculture represents an opportunity to sustainably
quantity and quality, in conjunction with exceptional benefit from the high quality of crustacean protein
environmental performance. Bivalves should be pro- and high demand for shrimp.
moted as a sustainable meat source. It should be no-
ted that the environmental performance of bivalves Finfish
varies across species groups: those with lower edible There are a huge variety of finfish, including small
yields, such as scallops and oysters, perform worse pelagic fish (anchovies, mackerel, herring and sardi-
in terms of CO2-equivalent produced per tonne of nes), semi pelagic fish (salmon and trout) and flatfish
edible weight, than mussels for example. (plaice and halibut), which are relevant to this report.
In comparison to terrestrial animal meat these speci-
Crustaceans es groups have superior protein contents and protein
Overall, crustaceans such as lobster, crab and shrimp quality, due to both higher digestibility and levels of
have high protein contents and high protein quality: the EAAs lysine and methionine. Small pelagic fish
they are a good source of protein for human nutri- are particularly nutritionally beneficial because they
tion. However, wild crustaceans perform poorly with contain high concentrations of polyunsaturated fat-
respect to carbon FP, mainly because capturing wild ty acids (PUFAs), notably omega-3 PUFAs. However,
species is very fuel intensive8. Aquaculture would there are huge differences in climate impact of these
circumvent this problem but farming of lobsters and different finfish groups. Flatfish are an unsustainable
crab is not commercially favourable due to their com- source of protein because capturing these species
plex lifecycles and slow development. On the other is extremely fuel intensive. Pelagic species can be
hand, 55% of shrimp produced globally comes from caught more efficiently and thus incur smaller car-
aquaculture115. Unfortunately, farmed shrimp has a bon penalties, with small pelagic fish having the best
poor sustainability profile, mainly due to the feed ad- carbon FP per tonne of edible weight of any finfish.

Juni 2023 8
Consequently, aligning consumption patterns with Sector overview and opportunities
the climate impact of different finfish species groups Aquatic animals are already very widely consumed.
would be environmentally beneficial; small pelagic In 2016, 171 million tons (Mt) of seafood was used for
species should be promoted. The ecological impacts human food, with fish contributing about 20% of total
of capture fisheries have to be considered, including average per capita intake of animal protein47. As such,
the effect on wild fish stocks. Farmed salmon outper- the market for blue food sources of animal protein
forms wild salmon with respect to carbon intensity, is well developed, served by a mature industry ope-
and also avoids ecosystem damage caused during rating at massive scales. Despite this massive scale,
capture. With respect to small pelagic fish, sustaina- global demand for blue food is rising faster than
ble stock management, fishing and processing racti- many other food sectors123: the UN predicts seafood
ces are necessary. For example, a huge proportion of consumption could grow by 21–44 million tonnes
captured biomass is lost to livestock and fish feed43. by 2050, an increase of 36–74%124. As the industry
continues to grow, the global community faces a uni-
Adjusting human dietary patterns to consume small que window to steer fish production and consumption
pelagics directly would have huge positive impacts on patterns towards optimal sustainability and protein
climate and health. Furthermore, a large proportion of nutrition8.
small pelagic catch biomass is lost to rancidity (due
to the high fat content) and during the filleting pro- Innovative SMEs are already developing sustainable
cess. The co-products from filleting can make up 40- farming practices for bivalves, shrimp and many fin-
60% of the catch weight and contain large amounts fish. Novel feed117 and medicinal technologies115, as
of residual protein118. Processing of these co-products, well as data analytics and artificial intelligence125, are
for example through the pH-shift process119, can pro- some of the most promising approaches for reducing
duce high-quality protein ingredients121. Investment aquaculture FPs and improving nutritional value8. An
to improve these processing methods would help to important industry wide intervention will be aligning
maximise protein yield from each catch, reducing the consumption patterns with the combined sustainabi-
carbon emissions per gram of protein122. lity and nutritional performance of aquatic animals.
For example, reducing consumption of environmen-
tally harmful shellfish such as wild crustaceans and
Insights
traditionally farmed shrimp. In their place, sustaina-
bly farmed shrimp and bivalve molluscs (in particu-
pH-shift process: proteins are solubilized
lar mussels) should be promoted.
using acid and alkali and then precipitated at
their isoelectric pH, producing protein extracts
Small pelagic fish are the largest species group lan-
from fish by-products120.
ded in capture fisheries globally126. Nonetheless, the
markets for many species, such as sprat and perch,
are under-developed and provide opportunities for
The carbon FP of small pelagic fish meat can also growth. Sustainable fishing practices ensure good
be minimised by reducing fuel use during capture, environmental performance for this nutritionally op-
through low-fuel gears and low emission technolo- timal protein source. Opportunities for improvement
gies for powering fishing fleets. The most important include using low carbon fishing fleets and avoiding
variable governing fuel use is the depletion state of catch losses to animal feed, rancidity and during fil-
the fish population: healthy fish stocks are crucial for leting. Technology to improve post-capture proces-
sustainable fisheries. sing holds the potential to increase edible biomass
without increasing pressure on fish stocks127,128.

Juni 2023 9
 Conclusion

Dual assessment of our eating habits is important; the algae. Further systematic and standardised tests are nee-
combined climate and nutritional performances of algae, ded to find the best species and maximise other variables
farmed bivalve molluscs and captured small pelagic fish affecting yield and quality. Limitations from risks of iodi-
are very positive129. Moreover, recent innovation in land- ne, heavy metal and arsenic exposure need to be properly
based shrimp farming is improving the sustainability of quantified and well managed. The European algae market
this high-quality protein source. A food system obtaining is currently incipient, with massive growth forecast. Overco-
protein from these blue food groups, rather than terrestri- ming the technical challenges and high costs of production
al animals and plants, would reduce the land, freshwater, of algae protein are key to unlocking this potential. In con-
carbon, N and P FPs of this system. Some blue food groups trast, the markets for farmed shellfish and captured small
have unsustainable FPs, particularly captured crustaceans pelagic fish are much more developed. Nonetheless, they
and flatfish. From a nutritional perspective, algae, shell- are forecast to grow dramatically, which provides the op-
fish and small pelagic fish have suitable protein quantities portunity for interventions to maximise the sustainability
and qualities. Moreover, seafoods have impressive nutrient and nutritional impact of these industries. Key interventions
richness, fatty acid profiles and bioactive peptides, which will include optimising consumption patterns, promoting
provide health benefits beyond the nutritional value. Such sustainable aquaculture practices, reducing fuel intensity
health benefits should be utilised to further promote con- of capture and reducing biomass waste.
sumption of these sustainable protein sources.
Overall, increasing the proportion of human protein needs
Algae represent the most sustainable source of protein of coming from algal sources would improve the efficacy and
all blue food groups130. The only drawback is that the quali- sustainability of our food system, additionally providing
ty of algal protein is lower than animal sources, due to less significant health benefits at potentially cheap prices. Far-
optimal EAA profiles and lower bioavailability. To overcome med bivalve molluscs and wild small pelagic fish also re-
the impact of polysaccharides and phenolics on digestibi- present sustainable sources of protein with high nutritional
lity, methods have been developed to extract algal prote- quality and health benefits. Newly developed approaches
in. Further work needs to be done to comparatively assess for shrimp aquaculture offer the opportunity for farmed
these methods and scale up the processes. Similarly, forms shrimp to also become a sustainable protein source. These
and products that are palatable to a wide audience need to aquatic animals will likely serve as key sources of protein
be developed from whole algae and protein extracts. These in future low-stressor diets: fish protein perfectly comple-
efforts should focus on the species with the highest nutritio- ments the EAA profiles of algae and plant-based diets and
nal quality (and additional health benefits); red seaweeds, represents an appealing alternative for consumers sear-
such as nori and dulse, and particularly promising micro- ching for low-stressor animal sources of nutrition.

Planet Ocean Fund’s current investment focus

Algae Sustainable fishing practices
• Diversity of edible seaweed and microalgae species • Stock management
• Efficiency and sustainability of cultivation practices • Low carbon technology to power fishing fleets
- IMTA for macroalgae • Small pelagic fish:
- Photobioreactor technology microalgae - Direct consumption
• Processing technology – reduce losses to animal feed
- Protein extraction and enrichment practices - Reduce losses to rancidity
- Biorefinery concept - Reduce losses to filleting process
• Diversity of products – extraction practices and production
of high-quality palatable protein products
Sustainable aquaculture practices
• Bivalve molluscs as low stressor meat option Bioprocessing for high quality proteins
• Data analytics and AI to inform farming practices • Finfish offcuts, algae extracts
• Food sources with low carbon and other FPs • Variety of appealing products for consumers
for semi pelagics e.g. salmon
• Sustainable (land-based) shrimp aquaculture

Juni 2023 10
 Bibliography
1. Reynolds, D., Caminiti, J., Edmundson, S., Gao, S., Wick, M., & Huesemann, M. (2022, July 12). Seaweed proteins are nutritionally valuable compo-
nents in the human diet. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqac190
2. Gephart, J. A., Davis, K. F., Emery, K. A., Leach, A. M., Galloway, J. N., & Pace, M. L. (2016, May). The environmental cost of subsistence: Optimizing
diets to minimize footprints. Science of the Total Environment, 553, 120–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.050  
3. Mendes, M., Navalho, S., Ferreira, A., Paulino, C., Figueiredo, D., Silva, D., Gao, F., Gama, F., Bombo, G., Jacinto, R., Aveiro, S., Schulze, P., Gonçalves,
A. T., Pereira, H., Gouveia, L., Patarra, R., Abreu, M. H., Silva, J., Navalho, J., Speranza, L. (2022, June 24). Algae as Food in Europe: An Overview of
Species Diversity and Their Application. Foods, 11(13), 1871. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11131871
4. Bleakley, S., & Hayes, M. (2017, April 26). Algal Proteins: Extraction, Application, and Challenges Concerning Production. Foods, 6(5), 33. https://
doi.org/10.3390/foods6050033
5. O’ Brien, R. O., Hayes, M., Sheldrake, G., Tiwari, B., & Walsh, P. (2022, February 16). Macroalgal Proteins: A Review. Foods, 11(4), 571. https://doi.
org/10.3390/foods11040571
6. Hoegh-Guldberg, , O. (n.d.). The Ocean as a Solution to Climate Change: Five Opportunities for Action . https://www.wri.org/events/2019/10/
ocean-solution-climate-change-5-opportunities-action
7. González-García, S., Esteve-Llorens, X., Moreira, M. T., & Feijoo, G. (2018, December). Carbon footprint and nutritional quality of different human
dietary choices. Science of the Total Environment, 644, 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.339
8. Gephart, J. A., Henriksson, P. J. G., Parker, R. W. R., Shepon, A., Gorospe, K. D., Bergman, K., Eshel, G., Golden, C. D., Halpern, B. S., Hornborg, S., Jonell,
M., Metian, M., Mifflin, K., Newton, R., Tyedmers, P., Zhang, W., Ziegler, F., & Troell, M. (2021, September 15). Environmental performance of blue
foods. Nature, 597(7876), 360–365. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03889-2
9. Preparing shrimp farms for wet weather. (2021, October 20). https://thefishsite.com/articles/shrimp-feeds-of-the-future
10. Parker, R. W. R., & Tyedmers, P. H. (2014, July 4). Fuel consumption of global fishing fleets: current understanding and knowledge gaps. Fish and
Fisheries, 16(4), 684–696. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12087
11. MacLeod, M. J., Hasan, M. R., Robb, D. H. F., & Mamun-Ur-Rashid, M. (2020, July 15). Quantifying greenhouse gas emissions from global aquacul-
ture. Scientific Reports, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68231-8
12. De Bhowmick, G., & Hayes, M. (2022, January 21). In Vitro Protein Digestibility of Selected Seaweeds. Foods, 11(3), 289. https://doi.org/10.3390/
foods11030289
13. Gephart, J. A., Pace, M. L., & D’ Odorico, P. (2014, May 1). Corrigendum: Freshwater savings from marine protein consumption (2014 Environ. Res.
Lett. 9 014005). Environmental Research Letters, 9(6), 069501. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/6/069501
14. Derby, C. D., Elsayed, F. H., Williams, S. A., González, C., Choe, M., Bharadwaj, A. S., & Chamberlain, G. W. (2016). Krill meal enhances performance
of feed pellets through concentration-dependent prolongation of consumption by Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei. Aquaculture, 458,
13–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2016.02.028
15. Cassidy, M. (2021, October 18). What Is the Environmental Impact of Aquaculture? Global Seafood Alliance. https://www.globalseafood.org/
blog/what-is-the-environmental-impact-of-aquaculture/
16. Garcia-Vaquero, M., & Hayes, M. (2015, July 31). Red and green macroalgae for fish and animal feed and human functional food development.
ood Reviews International, 32(1), 15–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/87559129.2015.1041184
17. Becker, E. (2007, March). Micro-algae as a source of protein. Biotechnology Advances, 25(2), 207–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biote-
chadv.2006.11.002
18. Patarra, R. F., Paiva, L., Neto, A. I., Lima, E., & Baptista, J. (2010, July 6). Nutritional value of selected macroalgae. Journal of Applied Phycology, 23(2),
205–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-010-9556-0
19. Lourenco, S. O., Barbarino, E., De-Paula, J. C., Pereira, L. O. D. S., & Marquez, U. M. L. (2002, September). Amino acid composition, protein co-
nent and calculation of nitrogen-to-protein conversion factors for 19 tropical seaweeds. Phycological Research, 50(3), 233–241. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1440-1835.2002.tb00156.x
20. Joy, M., & Chakraborty, K. (2016, June 27). Nutritional Qualities of the Low-Value Bivalve Mollusks Paphia malabarica and Villorita cyprinoides at
the Estuarine Waters of the Southwestern Coast of India. Journal of Aquatic Food Product Technology, 26(1), 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/10
498850.2015.1092486
21. Tacon, A. G. J., & Metian, M. (2013, January). Fish Matters: Importance of Aquatic Foods in Human Nutrition and Global Food Supply. Reviews in
Fisheries Science, 21(1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641262.2012.753405
22. Tabakaeva, O. V., Tabakaev, A. V., & Piekoszewski, W. (2018, October 1). Nutritional composition and total collagen content of two commercil-
ly important edible bivalve molluscs from the Sea of Japan coast. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 55(12), 4877–4886. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s13197-018-3422-5
23. Hong, H. K., Koo, J. H., Ko, J. C., Jeung, H. D., & Choi, K. S. (2022, April 19). Proximate Composition, Amino Acids, and Fatty Acids in the Adductor
Muscle of the Giant Honeycomb Oyster Hyotissa hyotis (Linnaeus, 1758) from Jeju Island, Korea. Journal of Shellfish Research, 41(1). https://doi.
org/10.2983/035.41.0107
24. Valenzuela, A., Oyarzún, P. A., Toro, J. E., Navarro, J. M., Ramírez, O., & Farias, A. (2022, July 7). Proximal and fatty acid analysis in Ostrea chilensis,
Crassostrea gigas and Mytilus chilensis (Bivalvia: Mollusca) from southern Chile. PLOS ONE, 17(7), e0270825. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0270825
25. Bilir, G., Khalesi, M., Cermeño, M., FitzGerald, R. J., & Ekinci, D. (2022, August 30). Extraction and Characterization of Protein Concentrates from
Limpets (Patella vulgata) and Peptide Release Following Gastrointestinal Digestion. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. https://doi.
org/10.1021/acs.jafc.2c00578
26. Tsighe, N., Wawire, M., Bereket, A., Karimi, S., & Wainaina, I. (2018, July). Physicochemical and microbiological characteristics of fresh Indian
mackerel spotted sardine and yellowtail scad, from Eritrea Red Sea waters. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 70, 98–104. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jfca.2018.05.001
27. Cherry, P., O’Hara, C., Magee, P. J., McSorley, E. M., & Allsopp, P. J. (2019, March 6). Risks and benefits of consuming edible seaweeds. Nutrition
Reviews, 77(5), 307–329. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuy066
28. Protein Quality Evaluation—Report of Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation. (1991). Food and Agriculture Organization; World Health Organiza-
tion. Rome, Italy.
29. Kazir, M., Abuhassira, Y., Robin, A., Nahor, O., Luo, J., Israel, A., Golberg, A., & Livney, Y. D. (2019, February). Extraction of proteins from two marine
macroalgae, Ulva sp. and Gracilaria sp., for food application, and evaluating digestibility, amino acid composition and antioxidant properties of
the protein concentrates. Food Hydrocolloids, 87, 194–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2018.07.047
30. Vieira, E. F., Soares, C., Machado, S., Correia, M., Ramalhosa, M. J., Oliva-teles, M. T., Paula Carvalho, A., Domingues, V. F., Antunes, F., Oliveira, T. A.
C., Morais, S., & Delerue-Matos, C. (2018, December). Seaweeds from the Portuguese coast as a source of proteinaceous material: Total and free
amino acid composition profile. Food Chemistry, 269, 264–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.06.145
31. Christaki, E., Florou-Paneri, P., & Bonos, E. (2011, May 16). Microalgae: a novel ingredient in nutrition. International Journal of Food Sciences and
Nutrition, 62(8), 794–799. https://doi.org/10.3109/09637486.2011.582460

Juni 2023 11
32. Venugopal, V. (2021, January). Nutrients and Nutraceuticals from Seafood. Springer International Publishing.
33. Jayasekara, C., Mendis, E., & Kim, S. (2020, August 11). Seafood in the Human Diet for Better Nutrition and Health. Encyclopedia of Marine Bio-
technology, 2939–2959. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119143802.ch131
34. Wang, T., Jónsdóttir, R., & Ólafsdóttir, G. (2009, September). Total phenolic compounds, radical scavenging and metal chelation of extracts from
Icelandic seaweeds. Food Chemistry, 116(1), 240–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.02.041
35. Wong, K., & Cheung, P. C. (2000). Nutritional evaluation of some subtropical red and green seaweeds Part II. In vitro protein digestibility and
amino acid profiles of protein concentrates. Food Chemistry, 72, 11–17. https://www.infona.pl/resource/bwmeta1.element.elsevier-7b2a7b89-
b3af-304c-b632-3b581fa7f50d
36. Kolb, N., Vallorani, L., & Stocchi, V. (1999, August). Chemical composition and evaluation of protein quality by amino acid score method of edi-
ble brown marine algae arame (eisenia bicyclis) and hijiki (hijikia fusiforme). Acta Alimentaria, 28(3), 213–222. https://doi.org/10.1556/aa-
lim.28.1999.3.1
37. Fleurence, J. (1999, January). Seaweed proteins. Trends in Food Science &Amp; Technology, 10(1), 25–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0924-
2244(99)00015-1
38. Bikker, P., & van Kampen, M. M. (2015). Biorefinery of the green seaweed Ulva lactuca to produce animal feed, chemicals and biofuels. J Appl
Phycol., 28(6), 3511–3525. https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10811-016-0842-3
39. Tibbetts, S. M., Milley, J. E., & Lall, S. P. (2016, May 6). Nutritional quality of some wild and cultivated seaweeds: Nutrient composition, total phenolic
content and in vitro digestibility. Journal of Applied Phycology, 28(6), 3575–3585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-016-0863-y
40. Becker, E. (2007). Micro-algae as a source of protein. Biotechnol. Adv., 25, 207–210. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17196357/ 
41. Marrion, O., Schwertz, A., Fleurence, J., Guéant, J. L., & Villaume, C. (2003, October 1). Improvement of the digestibility of the proteins of the red
alga Palmaria palmata by physical processes and fermentation. Nahrung/Food, 47(5), 339–344. https://doi.org/10.1002/food.200390078
42. Maehre,  H.K.;  Edvinsen,  G.K.;  Eilertsen,  K.-E.;  Elvevoll,  E.O.  (2016) Heat  treatment  increases  the  protein bioaccessibility in the red seaweed
dulse (Palmaria palmata), but not in the brown seaweed winged kelp (Alaria esculenta). J. Appl. Phycol. 28, 581–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10811-015-0587-4
43. Isaacs, M. (2016, November 25). The humble sardine (small pelagics): fish as food or fodder. Agriculture &Amp; Food Security, 5(1). https://doi.
org/10.1186/s40066-016-0073-5
44. Oehlenschläger, J. (2012, June 1). Seafood: Nutritional Benefits and Risk Aspects. International Journal for Vitamin and Nutrition Research, 82(3),
168–176. https://doi.org/10.1024/0300-9831/a000108
45. Hamed, I., Özogul, F., Özogul, Y., & Regenstein, J. M. (2015, May 5). Marine Bioactive Compounds and Their Health Benefits: A Review. Compre-
hensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 14(4), 446–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12136
46. Larsen, R., Eilertsen, K. E., & Elvevoll, E. O. (2011, September). Health benefits of marine foods and ingredients. Biotechnology Advances, 29(5),
508–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.05.017
47. Venugopal, V., & Gopakumar, K. (2017, October 25). Shellfish: Nutritive Value, Health Benefits, and Consumer Safety. Comprehensive Reviews in
Food Science and Food Safety, 16(6), 1219–1242. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12312
48. Grienke, U., Silke, J., & Tasdemir, D. (2014, January). Bioactive compounds from marine mussels and their effects on human health. Food Chemistry,
142, 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.07.027
49. Cheong, S. H., Kim, E. K., Hwang, J. W., Kim, Y. S., Lee, J. S., Moon, S. H., Jeon, B. T., & Park, P. J. (2013, November 14). Purification of a Novel Pepti-
de Derived from a Shellfish, Crassostrea gigas, and Evaluation of Its Anticancer Property. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 61(47),
11442–11446. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf4032553
50. Ray, N. E., O’Meara, T., Wiliamson, T., Izursa, J.-L. & Kangas, P. C (2018). Consideration of carbon dioxide release during shell production in LCA of
bivalves. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.23, 1042–1048. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1394-8
51. Tegtmeier, S. (2012). Emission and transport of bromocarbons: from the West Pacific ocean into the stratosphere. Atmospheric Chem. Phys.12,
10633–10648. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-10633-2012
52. Krause-Jensen, D., & Duarte, C. M. (2016). Substantial role of macroalgae in marine carbon sequestration. Nature Geoscience, 9(10), 737–742.
https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2790
53. O’ Connor, J., Meaney, S., Williams, G. A., & Hayes, M. (2020, April 24). Extraction of Protein from Four Different Seaweeds Using Three Different
Physical Pre-Treatment Strategies. Molecules, 25(8), 2005. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25082005
54. Bioactive compounds in seaweed: functional food applications and legislation. (2011). J Appl Phycol 23:543–597. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10811-010-9632-5
55. Machado, M., Machado, S., Pimentel, F. B., Freitas, V., Alves, R. C., & Oliveira, M. B. P. P. (2020, September 29). Amino Acid Profile and Protein
Quality Assessment of Macroalgae Produced in an Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture System. Foods, 9(10), 1382. https://doi.org/10.3390/
foods9101382
56. Urbano, M.G.; Goñi, I. Bioavailability of nutrients in rats fed on edible seaweeds, nori (Porphyra tenera) and wakame (Undaria pinnatifida), as
a source of dietary fibre. (2002). Food Chem. 2002, 76, 281–286. https://www.infona.pl/resource/bwmeta1.element.elsevier-0bdca786-
dec9-391d-9f8c-655bfec7c80b 
57. Mišurcová, L., & Stanislav, K. (2008). Nitrogen  Content,  Dietary  Fiber,  and  Digestibility in  Algal  Food  Products. Czech J. Food Sci. , Vol. 28(1),
27–35.
58. Mendes, M., Navalho, S., Ferreira, A., Paulino, C., Figueiredo, D., Silva, D., Gao, F., Gama, F., Bombo, G., Jacinto, R., Aveiro, S., Schulze, P., Gonçalves,
A. T., Pereira, H., Gouveia, L., Patarra, R., Abreu, M. H., Silva, J., Navalho, J., . . . Speranza, L. (2022, June 24). Algae as Food in Europe: An Overview of
Species Diversity and Their Application. Foods, 11(13), 1871. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11131871
59. Statista. Which of the Following Superfoods Do You Regularly Buy Because of Their Special Effect? (Accessed on 10 August 2022). Available on-
line: https://www.statista.com/statistics/788851/superfoods-purchase-germany/
60. Volkmann, H.; Imianovsky, U.; Oliveira, J.L.; Sant’Anna, E.S. Cultivation of arthrospira (Spirulina) platensis in  desalinator  wastewater  and  sa-
linated  synthetic  medium:   Protein  content  and  amino-acid  profile. (2008). Braz. J. Microbiol, 39, 98–101. https://doi.org/10.1590%2
FS1517-838220080001000022
61. Nagarajan, D., Varjani, S., Lee, D. J., & Chang, J. S. (2021, October). Sustainable aquaculture and animal feed from microalgae – Nutritive value and
techno-functional components. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 150, 111549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111549
62. Stengel, D.B.; Connan, S.; Popper, Z.A. (2011). Algal chemodiversity and bioactivity: Sources of natural variability and implications for commercial
application. Biotechnol. Adv. 29, 483–501. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21672617/ 
63. Mohy El-Din, S.M. Temporal variation in chemical composition of Ulva lactuca and Corallina mediterranea. (2018). J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 16,
5783–5796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-018-2128-6
64. Chopin, T., Buschmann, A. H., Halling, C., Troell, M., Kautsky, N., Neori, A., Kraemer, G. P., Zertuche-González, J. A., Yarish, C., & Neefus, C. (2001).
INTEGRATING SEAWEEDS INTO MARINE AQUACULTURE SYSTEMS: A KEY TOWARD SUSTAINABILITY. Journal of Phycology, 37(6), 975–986.
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1529-8817.2001.01137.x
65. Kadam, S. U., Álvarez, C., Tiwari, B. K., & O’Donnell, C. P. (2017, September). Extraction and characterization of protein from Irish brown seaweed
Ascophyllum nodosum. Food Research International, 99, 1021–1027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2016.07.018
66. Harnedy,  P.A.;  FitzGerald,  R.J.  (2013). Extraction  of  protein  from  the  macroalga Palmaria palmata. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 51, 375–382. https://
www.infona.pl/resource/bwmeta1.element.elsevier-b906e794-1406-3863-928d-8f303df97906 

Juni 2023 12
67. Herrero, M., Cifuentes, A., & Ibanez, E. (2006). Sub- and supercritical fluid extraction of functional ingredients from different natural sources:
Plants, food-by-products, algae and microalgaeA review. Food Chemistry, 98(1), 136–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.05.058
68. Harrysson, H.; Hayes, M.; Eimer, F.; Carlsson, N.G.; Toth, G.B. (2018). Production of protein extracts from Swedish red, green, and brown seaweeds,
Porphyra umbilicalis Kützing, Ulva lactuca Linnaeus, and Saccharina latissima (Linnaeus) J. V. Lamouroux using three different methods. J. Appl.
Phycol, 30, 3565–3580. https://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=US201900071988 
69. Mæhre, H., Jensen, I. J., & Eilertsen, K. E. (2016, October 26). Enzymatic Pre-Treatment Increases the Protein Bioaccessibility and Extractability in
Dulse (Palmaria palmata). Marine Drugs, 14(11), 196. https://doi.org/10.3390/md14110196
70. Barba, F. J., Grimi, N., & Vorobiev, E. (2014, October 24). New Approaches for the Use of Non-conventional Cell Disruption Technologies to Extract
Potential Food Additives and Nutraceuticals from Microalgae. Food Engineering Reviews, 7(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-014-
9095-6
71. Chemat, F.; Khan, M.K. (2011). Applications of ultrasound in food technology: Processing, preservation and extraction. Ultrason. Sonochemistry, 18,
813–835. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1350417710002385?via%3Dihub 
72. Chemat, F.; Rombaut, N.; Sicaire, A.G.; Meullemiestre, A.; Fabiano-Tixier, A.S.; Abert-Vian, M. (2017). Ultrasound assisted extraction of food and
natural products. Mechanisms, techniques, combinations, protocols and applications. A review. Ultrason. Sonochemistry, 34, 540–560 https://
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1350417716302358 
73. Parniakov,  O.;  Apicella,  E.;  Koubaa,  M.;  Barba,  F.;  Grimi,  N.;  Lebovka,  N.;  Pataro,  G.;  Ferrari,  G.; Vorobiev, E. (2015). Ultrasound-assisted
green solvent extraction of high-added value compounds from microalgae Nannochloropsis spp. Bioresour. Technol., 198, 262–267 https://www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960852415012912?via%3Dihub 
74. Martínez, J.M.; Delso, C.; Álvarez, I.; Raso, J. (2020). Pulsed electric field-assisted extraction of valuable compounds from microorganisms. Reviews,
19, 530–552. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12512
75. Goettel,  M.;  Eing,  C.;  Gusbeth,  C.;  Straessner,  R.;  Frey,  W.  (2013). Pulsed  electric  field  assisted  extraction  of intracellular valuables from
microalgae. Algal Res. 2013, 2, 401–408. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.algal.2013.07.004
76. Coustets, M.; Al-Karablieh, N.; Thomsen, C.; Teissié, J. (2013). Flow process for electroextraction of total proteins from microalgae. J. Membr. Biol.,
246, 751–760. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00232-013-9542-y
77. Kumar, P.; Sharma, N.; Ranjan, R.; Kumar, S.; Bhat, Z.; Jeong, D.K. (2013). Perspective of membrane technology in dairy industry: A review. Asian-
Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2013, 26, 1347. https://doi.org/10.5713%2Fajas.2013.13082
78. Yaich, H.; Garna, H.; Besbes, S.; Paquot, M.; Blecker, C.; Attia, H. (2011). Chemical composition and functional properties of Ulva lactuca seaweed
collected in Tunisia. Food Chem., 128, 895–901. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.03.114
79. Ye, H.; Wang, K.; Zhou, C.; Liu, J.; Zeng, X. (2008). Purification, antitumor and antioxidant activities in vitro of polysaccharides from the brown sea-
weed Sargassum pallidum. Food Chem., 111, 428–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2008.04.012
80. Denis, C.; Massé, A.; Fleurence, J.; Jaouen, P. (2009). Concentration and pre-purification with ultrafiltration of a r-phycoerythrin solution extracted
from macro-algae grateloupia turuturu: Process definition and up-scaling. Sep. Purif. Technol., 69, 37–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.sep-
pur.2009.06.017
81. Buschmann, A. H., Camus, C., Infante, J., Neori, A., Israel, L., Hernández-González, M. C., Pereda, S. V., Gomez-Pinchetti, J. L., Golberg, A., Tadmor-
Shalev, N., & Critchley, A. T. (2017, October 2). Seaweed production: overview of the global state of exploitation, farming and emerging research
activity. European Journal of Phycology, 52(4), 391–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670262.2017.1365175
82. Food and Agriculture Organization. (2013). Food Balance Sheets; Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations: Rome, Italy. 
83. Lucas, S.; Gouin, S.; Lesueur, M. (2019). Seaweed Consumption and Label Preferences in France. Mar. Resour. Econ., 34, 143–162. https://doi.
org/10.1086/704078.
84. Food and Agriculture Organization. (2016). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA): Rome, Italy. 
85. Mouritsen, O.G.; Williams, L.; Bjerregaard, R.; Duelund, L. (2012). Seaweeds for umami flavour in the New Nordic Cuisine. Flavour, 1, 4. https://doi.
org/10.1186/2044-7248-1-4
86. Belay, A. (2007) Spirulina (Arthrospira): Production and Quality Assurance. 1st Edition, CRC Press. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/
edit/10.1201/9781420052572-4/spirulina-arthrospira-production-quality-assurance-amha-belay
87. Nova, P.; Martins, A.P.; Teixeira, C.; Abreu, H.; Silva, J.G.; Silva, A.M.; Freitas, A.C.; Gomes, A.M. (2020). Foods with microalgae and seaweeds fostering
consumers health: A review on scientific and market innovations. J. Appl. Phycol., 32, 1789–1802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-020-02129-w.
88. Caporgno, M.P.; Mathys, A. (2018) Trends in Microalgae Incorporation into Innovative Food Products With Potential Health Benefits. Front. Nutr., 5,
58. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2018.00058
89. Kılınç, B.; Cirik, S.; Turan, G.; Tekogul, H.; Koru, E. (2013). Seaweeds for Food and Industrial Applications; IntechOpen: London, UK.  
90. Hotchkiss, S.; Brooks, M.; Campbell, R.; Philp, K.; Trius, A. (2016). The use of carrageenan in food. Carrageenans: Sources and Extraction Methods,
Molecular Structure, Bioactive Properties and Health Effects, 1st ed.; Nova Science Publications Inc.: New York, NY, USA; pp. 1–293
91. Munier, M., Jubeau, S., Wijaya, A., Morançais, M., Dumay, J., Marchal, L., Jaouen, P., & Fleurence, J. (2014, May). Physicochemical factors affecting
the stability of two pigments: R-phycoerythrin of Grateloupia turuturu and B-phycoerythrin of Porphyridium cruentum. Food Chemistry, 150,
400–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.10.113
92. Garcia-Vaquero, M.; Mora, L.; Hayes, M. (2019). In Vitro and In Silico Approaches to Generating and Identifying Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme I
Inhibitory Peptides from Green Macroalga Ulva lactuca. Mar. Drugs. 2019, 17, 204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.10.113
93. Furuta, T.; Miyabe, Y.; Yasui, H.; Kinoshita, Y.; Kishimura, H. (2016). Angiotensin I Converting Enzyme Inhibitory Peptides Derived from Phycobili-
proteins of Dulse Palmaria palmata. Mar. Drugs, 14, 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/md14020032
94. Sato, M.; Hosokawa, T.; Yamaguchi, T.; Nakano, T.; Muramoto, K.; Kahara, T. (2002). Angiotensin I-converting enzyme inhibitory peptides derived
from wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) and their antihypertensive effects in spontaneously hypertensive rats. J. Agric. Food Chem., 50, 6245–6252.
https://doi.org/10.1021/jf020482t
95. Brown, E.M.; Allsopp, P.J.; Magee, P.J.; Gill, C.I.; Nitecki, S.; Strain, C.R.; McSorley, E.M. (2014). Seaweed and human health. Nutr. Rev., 72, 205–216.
https://doi.org/10.1111/nure.12091
96. Lee, H.A.; Kim, I.H.; Nam, T.J. (2015). Bioactive peptide from Pyropia yezoensis and its anti-inflammatory activities. J. Mol. Med., 36, 1701–1706.
https://doi.org/10.3892/ijmm.2015.2386
97. Fitzgerald, C.; Gallagher, E.; O’Connor, P.; Prieto, J.; Mora-Soler, L.; Grealy, M.; Hayes, M. (2013). Development of a seaweed derived platelet activa-
ting factor acetylhydrolase (PAF-AH) inhibitory hydrolysate, synthesis of inhibitory peptides and assessment of their toxicity using the Zebrafish
larvae assay. Peptides, 50, 119–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.peptides.2013.10.006
98. Admassu, H.; Gasmalla, M.A.A.; Yang, R.; Zhao, W. (2018). Identification of Bioactive Peptides with α-Amylase Inhibitory Potential from Enzymatic
Protein Hydrolysates of Red Seaweed (Porphyra spp). J. Agric. Food Chem., 66, 4872–4882. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.8b00960
99. Beaulieu, L.; Bondu, S.; Doiron, K.; Rioux, L.E.; Turgeon, S.L. (2015). Characterization of antibacterial activity from protein hydrolysates of the ma-
croalga Saccharina longicruris and identification of peptides implied in bioactivity. J. Funct. Foods, 17, 685–697. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.
jff.2015.06.026
100. Wang, C.C., Yatsuya, H., Li, Y.Y. (2016). Prospective study of seaweed consumption and thyroid cancer incidence in women: the Japan Collaborative
Cohort Study. Eur J Cancer Prev., 25:239–245. https://doi.org/10.1097/cej.0000000000000168
101. Dominguez-Gonzalez M.R., Chiocchetti G.M., Herbello-Hermelo P. (2017). Evaluation of iodine bioavailability in seaweed using in vitro methods. J

Juni 2023 13
 Agric Food Chem.;65:8435–8442. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.7b02151
102. Zhao, Y., Shang, D., Ning, J. (2012). Arsenic and cadmium in the marine macroalgae (Porphyra yezoensis and Laminaria Japonica )—forms and
concentrations. Chem. Speciation Bioavailability. 24:197–203. https://doi.org/10.3184/095422912X13404690516133
103. Squadrone, S., Brizio, P., Battuello, M. (2017). A first report of rare earth elements in northwestern Mediterranean seaweeds. Mar Pollut Bull.122:236–
242 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.06.048
104. Taylor, V.F., Li, Z.G., Sayarath, V. (2017) Distinct arsenic metabolites following seaweed consumption in humans. Sci Rep. 7: 3920. https://doi.
org/10.1038/s41598-017-03883-7
105. Smith, A.G., Tredici, M.R., Boussiba, S., Verdelho, V., Cadoret, J.-P., Davey, M.P., Huete-Ortega, M., Acien F.G., Schmid-Staiger, U., Rodriguez, H.
(2020). EABA—Position Paper—What Are Algae?; EABA: Florence, Italy.
106. Statista. (Accessed on 10 August 2022). Estimated Value of Algae Market Worldwide from 2016 to 2023, by Region. https://www.statista.
com/statistics/1032615/global-market-value-of-algae-by-region/
107. .FAO. (Accessed on 10 August 2022). Global Production Statistics Database. http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/16140/en
108. Li, X., Li, J., Wang, Y., Fu, L., Fu, Y., Li, B., Jiao, B. (2011). Aquaculture Industry in China: Current State, Challenges, and Outlook. Rev. Fish. Sci., 19,
187–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641262.2011.573597
109. Araújo, R.., Vázquez Calderón, F., Sánchez López, J., Azevedo, I.C., Bruhn, A., Fluch, S., Garcia, Tasende M., Ghaderiardakani, F., Ilmjärv, T., Laurans, M.
(2021). Current Status of the Algae Production Industry in Europe: An Emerging Sector of the Blue Bioeconomy. Front. Mar. Sci.2021, 7, 626389.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.626389.
110. Fernández, F. G. A., Reis, A., Wijffels, R. H., Barbosa, M., Verdelho, V., & Llamas, B. (2021, March). The role of microalgae in the bioeconomy. New
Biotechnology, 61, 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2020.11.011
111. FAO. (Accessed on 10 August 2022). Global Production Statistics Database. http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/16140/en
112. Fédération des Spiruliniers de France. (Accessed on 9 May 2022). FAIRR ethical investor network. https://www.spiruliniersdefrance.fr/
113. Unilever PLC. (2021, November 2). Microalgae partnership marks move to fairer food. Unilever. Retrieved August 15, 2022, from https://www.
unilever.com/news/news-search/2020/microalgae-partnership-marks-move-to-fairer-food/
114. Carmichael, R., Walton, W., & Clark, H. (2012). Bivalve-enhanced nitrogen removal from coastal estuaries. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and
Aquatic Sciences, 69(7), 1131–1149. https://doi.org/10.1139/f2012-057
115. Mcnevin, A. (n.d.). Sustainable Shrimp Aquaculture. World Wildlife Fund. Retrieved August 15, 2022, from https://www.worldwildlife.org/indus-
tries/farmed-shrimp
116. Guo, J., Huang, Y., Salze, G., Roy, L. A., & Davis, D. A. (2019, September 22). Use of plant-based protein concentrates as replacement for fishmeal
in practical diets for the Pacific white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) reared under high stocking density and low salinity conditions. Aquaculture
Nutrition, 26(2), 225–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/anu.12982
117. NoraySeaFood. Technology | NORAY Seafood. Retrieved August 21, 2022, from https://www.norayseafood.es/en/content/32-technology
118. Our science. Biofeyn. Retrieved August 13, 2022, from https://biofeyn.com/science/ 57
119. Tacon, A. G. J., & Metian, M. (2009). Fishing for Feed or Fishing for Food: Increasing Global Competition for Small Pelagic Forage Fish. Ambio,
38(6), 294–302. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40390239 58
120. Surasani, V.K.R. Acid and alkaline solubilization (pH shift) process: a better approach for the utilization of fish processing waste and by-pro-
ducts. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25, 18345–18363 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2319-1
121. .Zhang, J., Ström, A., Bordes, R., Alminger, M., Undeland, I., & Abdollahi, M. (2023, January). Radial discharge high shear homogenization and
ultrasonication assisted pH-shift processing of herring co-products with antioxidant-rich materials for maximum protein yield and functionality.
Food Chemistry, 400, 133986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.133986 59
122. Marimetrics Retrieved August 16, 2022, from https://www.marimetrics.com/ 56
123. Sasidharan, A., & Venugopal, V. (2019, October 11). Proteins and Co-products from Seafood Processing Discards: Their Recovery, Functional Pro-
perties and Applications. Waste and Biomass Valorization, 11(11), 5647–5663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-019-00812-9
124. .Sustainable Seafood | UN Global Compact. (2022, September 8). https://unglobalcompact.org/take-action/ocean/communication/sustaina-
ble-seafood
125. Fishency Innovation | Stavanger | Fishency360. (2020). Retrieved August 13, 2022, from https://www.fishency.no/
126. Zhang, J., Abdollahi, M., Alminger, M., & Undeland, I. (2022, July). Cross-processing herring and salmon co-products with agricultural and marine
side-streams or seaweeds produces protein isolates more stable towards lipid oxidation. Food Chemistry, 382, 132314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodchem.2022.132314
127. Abdollahi, M., Wu, H., & Undeland, I. (2021, April 27). Impact of Processing Technology on Macro- and Micronutrient Profile of Protein-Enriched
Products from Fish Backbones. Foods, 10(5), 950. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10050950
128. Undeland, I., Kelleher, S. D., & Hultin, H. O. (2002, October 31). Recovery of Functional Proteins from Herring (Clupea harengus) Light Muscle by
an Acid or Alkaline Solubilization Process. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 50(25), 7371–7379. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf020199u
129. Hallström, E., Bergman, K., Mifflin, K., Parker, R., Tyedmers, P., Troell, M., & Ziegler, F. (2019, September). Combined climate and nutritional perfor-
mance of seafoods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 230, 402–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.229
130. European Algae Biomass Association. (Accessed August 13, 2022). https://www.eaba-association.org/en
131. Faber, T. A., Bechtel, P. J., Hernot, D. C., Parsons, C. M., Swanson, K. S., Smiley, S., & Fahey, G. C. (2010, April 1). Protein digestibility evaluations of
meat and fish substrates using laboratory, avian, and ileally cannulated dog assays1. Journal of Animal Science, 88(4), 1421–1432. https://doi.
org/10.2527/jas.2009-2140

Juni 2023 14
 Do you want to learn more about Planet Ocean Fund?
Feel free to reach out anytime at [email protected]

Juni 2023 15