JIPK.
Volume 17 No 3 October 2025 Sinta 1 (Decree No: 158/E/KPT/2.
e-ISSN:2528-0759.
p-ISSN:2085-5842 Available online at https://e-journal.
id/JIPK JIPK
(JURNAL ILMIAH PERIKANAN DAN KELAUTAN)
Scientific Journal of Fisheries and Marine Research Article Response Surface Methodology for Optimizing the Concentration of Gum Arabic.
Maltodextrin, and Whey Protein Isolate in Arthrospira platensis Phycocyanin Microcapsules Puspa Pebriyanti .
Siti Ari Budhiyanti* , and Nurfitri Ekantari Department of Fisheries.
Faculty of Agriculture.
Universitas Gadjah Mada.
Yogyakarta 55281.
Indonesia
Abstract
ARTICLE INFO
Received: June 19, 2025 Accepted: July 18, 2025 Published: July 28, 2025 Available online: Sept 27, 2025 *) Corresponding author:
E-mail: sitabudhiyanti@ugm.
Keywords:
Microencapsulation Arthrospira platensis Phycocyanin Response Surface Methodology (RSM) This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-SA license .
ttps://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.
Phycocyanin is a blue-green colored phycobiliprotein present in Arthrospira platensis and has antioxidant properties.
Due to its sensitivity to pH, temperature, light, oxygen, and moisture, its protection often involves microencapsulation through spray drying.
This process allows it to be rapidly entrapped within the microcapsule coating material, composed of gum arabic, maltodextrin, and whey protein isolate.
This study aims to determine the optimal combination concentrations of these components to optimize encapsulation performance.
Optimization used the Minitab application with Response Surface Methodology and a Central Composite Design.
The independent variables were the concentrations (%) of gum arabic, maltodextrin, and whey protein isolate.
The response variables included yield, phycocyanin content, antioxidant activity, encapsulation efficiency, phycocyanin retention, solubility, and particle size.
Scanning electron microscopy was utilized for the morphological analysis of the optimized microcapsules.
Minitab analysis recommended 20 potentially optimized solutions, with the highest desirability value of 0.
The selected optimal formula consisted of 8.
3% gum arabic, 11.
7% maltodextrin, and 2% whey protein isolate.
Its predicted response values were yield 75.
phycocyanin content 4.
55%, antioxidant activity 48.
87%, encapsulation 98%, phycocyanin retention 68.
57%, solubility 95.
15%, and particle size 212.
73 nm.
Validation results confirmed a yield of 81.
phycocyanin content of 3.
60%, antioxidant activity of 52.
36%, encapsulation efficiency of 94.
48%, phycocyanin retention of 61.
88%, and a particle size of 3 nm.
These findings indicate that the proposed solution is effective and Cite this as: Pebriyanti.
Ekantari.
Budhiyanti.
Response surface methodology for optimized concentration of gum arabic, maltodextrin, and whey protein isolate in Arthrospira platensis phycocyanin microcapsules.
Jurnal Ilmiah Perikanan dan Kelautan, 17.
:558-576.
http://doi.
org/10.
20473/jipk.
Copyright A2025 Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Universitas Airlangga Pebriyanti et al.
/ JIPK, 17.
:558-576
Introduction Phycocyanin is a blue-green, water-soluble phycobiliprotein derived from Arthrospira platensis, widely known for its antioxidant activity and therapeutic potential (Ashaolu et al.
, 2.
The blue color is produced by a chromophore called phycocyanobilin, which binds to proteins via thioether bonds (Jaeschke et al.
, 2.
Its antioxidant properties primarily derive from phycocyanobilin, an open-chain tetrapyrrole chromophore bound to the protein via thioether bonds (Yuan et al.
, 2.
Phycocyanin has been used to treat various diseases, including inflammation and cancer caused by oxidative stress (Adjali et al.
, 2022.
Nege et al.
, 2.
It is usually used as a natural colorant in foods, cosmetics, and as a synthetic coloring agent because it is nontoxic and noncarcinogenic.
However, its stability during processing and in the final product is a concern for the entire food industry as it is a limiting factor in its applicability (Garcya et al.
, 2.
Despite its biofunctional benefits, phycocyaninAos application is limited due to its sensitivity to heat, pH, light, and oxidation, which accelerates its degradation.
It easily degrades, resulting in color fading and a loss of antioxidant capacity during processing and storage, thereby reducing the quality of products (Adjali et al.
Ribeiro and Veloso, 2021.
Munawaroh et al.
Microencapsulation has emerged as an effective strategy to enhance the stability of phycocyanin against environmental stressors, thus extending its applicability in food and pharmaceutical formulations (Pan-utai and Iamtham, 2.
Microencapsulation is a micro-sized packaging technology for core materials that are wrapped in a polymer layer (Li et al.
, 2.
It can protect the core material from the environment, ensure the stability of bioactive compounds, and increase product shelf life (Ribeiro and Veloso, 2.
Spray drying encapsulation is often used because of its simple operation, high speed, and low cost (Samborska et al.
The selection of wall materials is based on the characteristics of the core material, such as emulsifying, solubility, and film-forming properties (Petkova et al.
, 2.
The most commonly used wall materials for spray drying are carbohydrate- and protein-based (Petkova et al.
, 2.
These are selected based on the characteristics needed to meet the expected quality of the final product.
Carbohydrate-based wall materials are most commonly used due to their abundance, low cost, biodegradability, and biocompatibility (Ribeiro et al.
, 2.
They can form a barrier or layer that protects the core material from oxygen.
In addition, a layer of this wall material forms on the microcapsule surface during drying, preventing heat transfer toward the droplet core due to its high glass transition tem- perature .
ter et al.
, 2.
Maltodextrin (MD) and Gum Arabic (GA) are the most widely used carbohydrate-based wall materials.
GA is very effective due to its excellent film-forming ability, stable emulsion formation, and plasticity that prevents cracking (Alfionita et al.
, 2022.
Ribeiro et al.
, 2.
MD has a relatively low cost, high hygroscopicity and solubility, low viscosity, and good protection against oxidation.
However, due to its low emulsifying capacity (Kang et al.
, 2.
, it performs better when mixed with other wall materials that can form a stable emulsion, such as GA and whey protein isolate (WPI).
Kurniasari et al.
reported that MD alone produces lower encapsulation efficiency than a combination of MD & GA.
According to Baysan et al.
, a combination of coating materials is preferred for suitable encapsulation, desired powder properties, and high microencapsulation efficiency.
The interaction of protein-based wall materials or proteins with carbohydrates is applied in fabricating the microcapsule wall material, in which the protein fraction functions as an emulsifier and a layer-former and carbohydrates as a matrix-forming material.
The most common combination in spray drying is WPI with MD or GA (Wangkulangkool et al.
According to lter et al.
, protein-based wall materials are excellent for microencapsulation by spray drying because of their high functional qualities.
WPI is one of the most commonly utilized wall materials, as it has a good emulsification capacity, increases the antioxidant activity of the bioactive compounds, and forms a film enveloping the core active material, which protects it from destruction by the external environment (Li et al.
, 2022.
Deng et al.
, 2.
Zhang et al.
, .
reported that WPI can enhance the storage stability of phycocyanin by encapsulating the chromophore in a protein and protecting it from oxidative attacks by external free radicals.
lter et al.
used a combination of carbohydrate-based wall materials (MD & GA) and protein-based wall materials (WPI & sodium caseinat.
in phycocyanin microcapsules.
the best combination was MD and WPI, but the encapsulation efficiency was higher using the combination of GA.
The effective coating of the core material is influenced by the encapsulation efficiency (Repka et al.
, 2.
Different wall materials can affect the efficiency because they affect the amount of active material that can be encapsulated.
Encapsulated phycocyanin has various benefits, such as increased stability, environmental protection, and controlled release (Li et al.
, 2.
Although binary combinations of wall materials are well-documented, the use of a ternary systemAicombining GA.
MD, and WPIAifor JIPK: Scientific Journal of Fisheries and Marine JIPK Vol 17 No 3.
October 2025 | Response Surface Methodology for Optimizing the Concentration of Gum Arabic.
phycocyanin encapsulation remains underexplored.
Various studies have used such a combination for the microencapsulation of turmeric oleoresin, citron extract, and anthocyanin (Mahdi et al.
, 2020.
Ribeiro et , 2020.
Yousefi et al.
, 2.
This research aimed to determine the effect of a ternary combination of carbohydrate-based wall materials (GA & MD) and protein-based wall materials (WPI) on phycocyanin microcapsules prepared by spray drying.
The research related to the optimization for the use of three wall materials for encapsulation has never been done, so in this study, optimization will be carried out using Central Composite Design (CCD) based on Response Surface Methodology (RSM) to obtain microcapsules with optimal response.
RSM evaluated the concentrations of GA.
MD, and WPI, which will be optimized to obtain high yield values, phycocyanin content, antioxidant activity, encapsulation efficiency, phycocyanin retention, solubility, and small particle size.
Materials and Methods 1 Material 1 The equipments The equipment used in this research included a spectrophotometer UV-VIS (Optima.
German.
, an MX-S vortex (DLAB.
Beijing.
Chin.
, a D-500 high speed homogenizer (DLAB), a refrigerator (LG), a chiller (Modena.
Jakarta.
Indonesi.
, a YC-015 spray dryer (Shanghai Pilotech Instrument & Equipment Co.
Ltd.
Shanghai.
Chin.
, a Nanotrac Wave II e.
AAS
and Micrometrix Particle Size Analyzer (PSA) (Microtrac.
PA.
USA), and a JSM-6510LA scanning electron microscope (SEM) (JEOL Ltd.
Tokyo.
Chin.
3 Ethical approval This study does not require ethical approval because it does not use experimental animals.
2 Method 1 Extraction of A.
platensis phycocyanin Phycocyanin extraction was conducted by dissolving 20 g of A.
platensis powder in 200 mL of 0.
M phosphate buffer .
H 7.
, followed by freezeAethaw cycles at Oe20EE for 24 hours and room temperature This cycle was repeated twice.
Next, the mixture was centrifuged at 2800x g for 10 min at -4EE.
The supernatant was filtered, and the phycocyanin extract was collected into a bottle wrapped in aluminum foil and stored in a chiller (Chittapun et al.
, 2.
2 Microencapsulation of Phycocyanin The required amounts of GA.
MD, and WPI for each treatment were placed in beaker glass, and 100 mL of distilled water was added.
The mixture was stirred at 600 rpm for 30 min at 60EE until homogeneity.
It was then cooled to 45EE and stored overnight in a chiller at 15EEAe20EE (Purba, 2.
3 Spray drying For this, 50 ml of phycocyanin extract were mixed with 100 mL of encapsulant solution .
:2 v/.
and homogenized at 12,000 rpm for 3 minutes.
The mixture was then dried using a spray dryer set at inlet and outlet temperature of 110AC and 65AC, respectively.
The resulting microcapsule powder was stored in lightproof plastic in a dry place (Iqbal and Hadiyanto.
Pan-utai and Iamtham, 2.
Table 1.
Values of independent variables at the three levels of the central composite design (CCD) Independent Variable Level Code Min value (-.
Max value ( .
Gum Arabic .
Maltodextrin .
Whey protein isolate .
2 The materials 4 CCD The materials used in this study included Arthrospira platensis powder (Algae Biotechnology Indonesi.
, maltodextrin (DE 10-12.
Qinhuangdao Lihua Starc.
, whey protein isolate (Puro Chari Makmur Indonesi.
, gum arabic (Ingredion.
Thailan.
, distilled water, ethanol (Merck.
German.
, and DPPH powder (Merck.
German.
This study optimized the microencapsulation wall materials utilizing RSM and a CCD.
The independent variables included the concentrations of GA.
MD, and WPI.
The dependent variables .
were yield, encapsulation efficiency, phycocyanin concentration, phycocyanin retention, antioxidant activity, solubility, particle size, and SEM.
A total of Copyright A2025 Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Universitas Airlangga Pebriyanti et al.
/ JIPK, 17.
20 run-order treatments were conducted.
The concentration of GA ranged from 10% to 15% (Adsare and Annapure, 2021.
Gharibzahedi et al.
, 2012.
Nthimole et al.
, 2.
, maltodextrin (MD) ranged from 5% to 10% (Aminikhah et al.
, 2023.
Mishra et al.
, 2014.
Sablania et al.
, 2018.
Yunilawati et al.
, 2.
, and WPI ranged from 4% to 5% (StEnciuc et al.
, 2018.
Zhao et al.
, 2.
The independent variable values at the three CCD levels are shown in Table 1.
Table 2.
Formulation design of phycocyanin microcapsules using the central composite design (CCD) 5 Microcapsule Characteristic Analysis 1 Yield The yield was calculated by comparing the weight of the microcapsule powder obtained to the total weight of the encapsulant and phycocyanin extract, then multiplying the result by 100% (Kurniasih et al.
The yield was determined by applying the following formula:
Yield = MW.
/(WE.
PW.
) x 100%.
Where :
= Microcapsule Weight = Encapsulant Weight = Phycocyanin Weight .
2 Phycocyanin content A total of 40 mg of phycocyanin microcapsule powder was diluted in 10 mL of 0.
1 M phosphate buffer .
H 7.
, homogenized, and then the OD615 and OD652 were measured (Pan-utai and Iamtham, 2020.
Purnamayati et al.
, 2.
The phycocyanin content was then calculated utilizing the following formula:
PC (%) = (A615nm-0.
474 A652n.
/5.
34 x 100%.
474 and 5.
34 = Molar absorption coefficient of PC
A615
= Absorbance value at wavelength () 615 nm
A652
= Absorbance value at wavelength () 652 nm.
Formula
GA (%)
MD (%)
WPI (%)
Description: GA = Gum Arabic.
MD = Maltodextrin.
WPI = Whey protein isolate.
Where :
= Phycocyanin concentration 3 Antioxidant activity A 200 AAM DPPH solution was prepared by dissolving DPPH in 100 mL of ethanol in a volumetric flask.
The solution was homogenized with a vortex and stored in an Erlenmeyer flask wrapped with aluminum foil.
The microcapsule powder was dissolved in ethanol to a final concentration of 1 mg/mL.
To determine the antioxidant activity, 2 mL of the microcapsule solution was mixed with 1 mL of the DPPH solution and vortexed.
The mixture was then incubated at room temperature for 30 min and the OD517 was determined using a spectrophotometer (Pan-utai and Iamtham, 2.
A blank solution consisting of DPPH and ethanol was employed as a reference.
The percentage of DPPH inhibition (%DPPH) was calculated utilizing the following formula:
JIPK: Scientific Journal of Fisheries and Marine JIPK Vol 17 No 3.
October 2025 | Response Surface Methodology for Optimizing the Concentration of Gum Arabic.
%DPPH Scavenging activity = (A2-A.
/A2 x 100%.
Where :
A1 = sample absorbance A2 = absorbance of blank .
and Pan-utai and Iamtham .
with modifications.
For total phycocyanin determination, 100 mg of the sample was dissolved in 10 mL of distilled water and homogenized with a vortex for 3 min.
The resulting mixture was centrifuged at 13,500 rpm and Table 3.
Analysis results of the phycocyanin microcapsule parameters Yield (%) Phycocyanin content (%) Antioxidant activity (%) Solubility (%) Formula 4 Encapsulation efficiency To evaluate the efficiency of phycocyanin microencapsulation, the total and surface phycocyanin contents of the microcapsules were ascertained employing a method reported by Laokuldilok and Kanha Encapsulation Retention of Efficiency (%) Phycocyanin (%) Particle Size .
25EE for 5 min.
The clear supernatant was collected and filtered through a 0.
45 mm membrane (Millipore.
MA.
USA) to ascertain the phycocyanin concentration.
To determine the surface phycocyanin, 100 Copyright A2025 Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Universitas Airlangga Pebriyanti et al.
/ JIPK, 17.
mg of the sample was extracted with 10 mL of 95% .
aqueous ethanol solution.
The mixture was homogenized with a vortex for 1 min, then centrifuged at 10,000 rpm and 25EE for 10 min.
After phase separation, the clear supernatant was filtered through a 0.
mm pore-size membrane (Millipor.
, and the surface phycocyanin was measured by absorbance.
The microencapsulation efficiency was calculated by applying the following equation:
EE = (TP-SP)/TP x 100%.
Where :
the extract before microencapsulation (Faieta et al.
Phycocyanin retention was calculated utilizing the following formula:
PR = PT/PE x 100%.
Where :
PT = Phycocyanin Total PE = Phycocyanin extract 6 Solubility Solubility identification followed the method described by lter et al.
A 1 g sample of the microcapsule powder was dissolved in 25 mL of distilled water and homogenized with a magnetic stirrer EE = Encapsulation efficiency TP = Total Phycocyanin SP = Surface Phycocyanin Table 4.
Model analysis of the response/parameters of phycocyanin microcapsules Response Model Math Significant .
<0.
Lackof-Fit .
<0.
Yield Quadratic Y1 = 353 Ae 19.
85 X1 0.
98 X2 Ae 81.
7 X3 0.
X1*X1 0.
211 X2*X2 4.
76 X3*X3- 0.
X1*X2 3.
58 X1*X3 Ae 0.
17 X2*X3
Phycocyanin Quadratic Y=13.
454 X1 Ae 0.
460 X2 Ae 4.
07 X3
0060 X1*X1 0.
0176 X2*X2 0.
589 X3*X3
Ae 0.
0102 X1*X2 Ae 0.
1370 X1*X3 0.
0410 X2*X3
Antioxidant Quadratic Y=-19 7.
62 X1- 6.
36 X2 16.
9 X3
Ae 0.
381 X1*X1 Ae 0.
253 X2*X2 Ae 5.
08 X3*X3
Ae 0.
094 X1*X2 0.
789 X1*X3 2.
697 X2*X3
Encapsulation Quadratic Y=172.
15 X1 Ae 4.
25 X2 Ae 35.
1 X3
Ae 0.
115 X1*X1 Ae 0.
043 X2*X2 3.
56 X3*X3
130 X1*X2 Ae 0.
326 X1*X3 0.
848 X2*X3
Phycocyanin Quadratic Y=-170 6.
24 X1 0.
17 X2 98.
4 X3
081 X1X1 0.
153 X2*X2 Ae 6.
42 X3*X3
137 X1*X2- 2.
56 X1*X3 Ae 1.
37 X2*X3
Solubility Quadratic Y = -7.
58 X1 0.
67 X2 28.
8 X3
Ae 0.
0459 X1*X1 Ae 0.
1273 X2*X2 Ae 1.
99 X3*X3
0652 X1*X2 Ae 0.
902 X1*X3 0.
236 X2*X3
Particle size Quadratic Y = -242 62X1 13.
8 X2- 34 X3
Ae 1.
74 X1*X1 Ae 0.
78 X2*X2 31.
9 X3*X3
25 X1*X2- 9.
03 X1*X3 Ae 9.
91 X2*X3
5 Phycocyanin retention Phycocyanin retention is defined as the ratio of the phycocyanin content in the microcapsules after spray drying to the initial phycocyanin content in for 30 min at room temperature.
The solution was then centrifuged at 3,000 rpm for 5 min.
The supernatant was transferred to a preweighed container and dried in an oven at 105EE for 5 h until constant weight.
The weight of the dried sample plus the container was then JIPK: Scientific Journal of Fisheries and Marine JIPK Vol 17 No 3.
October 2025 | Response Surface Methodology for Optimizing the Concentration of Gum Arabic.
Surface Plot of Yield vs Maltodextrin.
Gum arabic Surface Plot of Yield vs Whey protein isolate.
Gum arabic Hold Values Whey protein isolate 4.
Yield Surface Plot of Yield vs Maltodextrin.
Whey protein isolate Hold Values Maltodextrin 7.
Hold Values Gum arabic 12.
Yield Yield Maltodextrin Maltodextrin Whey protein Gum arabic Gum arabic Whey protein isolate Figure 1.
Surface plot of gum arabic, maltodextrin .
gum arabic, whey protein isolate .
maltodextrin, whey protein isolate and .
the yield parameter response.
Surface Plot of Phycocyanin Content vs Whey protein isolate.
Gum arabic Surface Plot of Phycocyanin Content vs Maltodextrin.
Gum arabic Hold Values Maltodextrin 7.
Hold Values Whey protein isolate 4.
Phycocyanin Content Phycocyanin Content Surface Plot of Phycocyanin Content vs Maltodextrin.
Whey protein isolate Hold Values Gum arabic 12.
Phycocyanin Content Maltodextrin Maltodextrin Whey protein Gum arabic Whey protein isolate Gum arabic Figure 2.
Surface plot of gum arabic, maltodextrin .
gum arabic, whey protein isolate .
maltodextrin, whey protein isolate and .
the response parameter of phycocyanin content.
Surface Plot of Antioxidant Activity vs Maltodextrin.
Gum arabic Surface Plot of Antioxidant Activity vs Whey protein isolate.
Gum arabic Surface Plot of Antioxidant Activity vs Whey protein isolate.
Maltodextrin Hold Values Maltodextrin 7.
Hold Values Whey protein isolate 4.
Hold Values Gum arabic 12.
Antioxidant Activity Antioxidant Activity Antioxidant Activity Gum arabic Whey protein Whey protein Maltodextrin Gum arabic Gum arabic Figure 3.
Surface plot of gum arabic, maltodextrin .
gum arabic, whey protein isolate .
maltodextrin, whey protein isolate .
of the response parameter of antioxidant activity.
Copyright A2025 Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Universitas Airlangga Pebriyanti et al.
/ JIPK, 17.
Surface Plot of Encapsulation Efficiency vs Maltodextrin.
Gum arabic Surface Plot of Encapsulation Efficiency vs Whey protein isolate.
Gum arabic Hold Values Whey protein isolate 4.
Encapsulation Efficiency Surface Plot of Encapsulation Efficiency vs Whey protein isolate.
Maltodextrin Hold Values Maltodextrin 7.
Hold Values Gum arabic 12.
Encapsulation Efficiency Encapsulation Efficiency Whey protein Whey protein Maltodextrin Maltodextrin Gum arabic Gum arabic Figure 4.
Surface plot of gum arabic, maltodextrin .
gum arabic, whey protein isolate .
maltodextrin, whey protein isolate and .
the response parameter of encapsulation efficiency.
Surface Plot of Phycocyanin Retention vs Whey protein isolate.
Gum arabic Surface Plot of Phycocyanin Retention vs Maltodextrin.
Gum arabic Hold Values Maltodextrin 7.
Hold Values Whey protein isolate 4.
Phycocyanin Retention Phycocyanin Retention Surface Plot of Phycocyanin Retention vs Maltodextrin.
Whey protein isolate Hold Values Gum arabic 12.
Phycocyanin Retention Maltodextrin Whey protein Whey protein Gum arabic Gum arabic Maltodextrin Figure 5.
Surface plot of gum arabic, maltodextrin .
gum arabic, whey protein isolate .
maltodextrin, whey protein isolate .
response parameters of phycocyanin retention.
Surface Plot of Solubility vs Maltodextrin.
Gum arabic Surface Plot of Solubility vs Whey protein Gum arabic Surface Plot of Antioxidant Activity vs Whey protein isolate.
Maltodextrin Hold Values Maltodextrin 7.
Hold Values Whey protein isolate 4.
Hold Values Gum arabic 12.
Antioxidant Activity Solubility Solubility Gum arabic Whey protein Whey protein Maltodextrin Gum arabic Maltodextrin Figure 6.
Surface plot of gum arabic, maltodextrin .
gum arabic, whey protein isolate .
maltodextrin, whey protein isolate .
of the solubility parameter response.
JIPK: Scientific Journal of Fisheries and Marine JIPK Vol 17 No 3.
October 2025 | Response Surface Methodology for Optimizing the Concentration of Gum Arabic.
The powder solubility was calculated employing the following formula:
Solubility = DS/SP x 100%.
Where :
DS = Dried Supernatant SP = Sample Powder 7 Particle size Particle size was analyzed following the method of Liang et al.
using a PSA.
A total of 0.
g sample of the microcapsule powder was diluted in 5 mL of distilled water, and a portion of this solution was transferred into a tube with a maximum length of 15 mm.
The data were displayed on a computer screen.
Table 5.
Response verification of the optimum formulation for phycocyanin microcapsules Optimum formula Response Prediction Verification STDEV Confidence level Predict level Low/low High Low/low High/high Yield (%) Phycocyanin content (%) Antioxidant activity (%) Encapsulation efficiency (%) Phycocyanin retention (%) Solubility (%) Particle size .
Surface Plot of Particle Size vs Maltodextrin.
Gum arabic Surface Plot of Particle Size vs Whey protein Gum arabic Surface Plot of Particle Size vs Whey protein Maltodextrin Hold Values Maltodextrin 7.
Hold Values Gum arabic 12.
Hold Values Whey protein isolate 4.
Particle size Particle size Particle size Whey protein Maltodextrin Gum arabic Gum arabic Whey protein Maltodextrin Figure 7.
Surface plot of gum arabic, maltodextrin .
gum arabic, whey protein isolate .
maltodextrin, whey protein isolate and .
the response parameter of particle size.
Copyright A2025 Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Universitas Airlangga Pebriyanti et al.
/ JIPK, 17.
8 Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) Particle morphology was observed using SEM according to the method of Ho et al.
The microcapsule powder samples were evenly distributed on the aluminum stubs and coated with gold using an Ion Sputter Coater (Hitachi.
Tokyo.
Japa.
The gold-coated samples were then examined using a SU3500 SEM (Hitachi.
Japa.
at 1,000x.
5,000x.
and 10,000x.
idant activity .
= 0.
, encapsulation efficiency .
= 0.
, phycocyanin retention .
= 0.
= 0.
, and particle size .
= 0.
These insignificant F-values indicate that the model fits the response data well (Purwoto and Christi, 2.
3 Analysis Data This research employed the CCD method of the RSM to optimize the combination variables (GA.
MD, and WPI).
The microcapsule characteristics .
analyzed were yield, phycocyanin content, antioxidant activity (Pan-utai and Iamtham, 2.
, encapsulation efficiency (Laokuldilok and Kanha 2017.
Pan-utai and Iamtham, 2.
, encapsulation efficiency (Laokuldilok and Kanha 2017.
Pan-utai and Iamtham, 2.
, phycocyanin retention (Faieta et al.
, 2.
, solubility .
ter et al.
, 2.
, particle size (Liang et al.
Validation was performed by comparing the predicted results generated by the Minitab 21 software with the actual analysis results at the optimum point.
The Minitab 21 software predicts values based on the analysis, identifying the optimum conditions.
Results and Discussion 1 Results 1 The effects of Gum Arabic.
Maltodextrin, and Whey Protein Isolate combination The effects of GA.
MD, and WPI combination on the yield, phycocyanin content, antioxidant activity, encapsulation efficiency, phycocyanin retention, solubility, and particle size are summarized in Table The yield ranged from 61.
44% to 87.
31%, phycocyanin content from 3.
10% to 4.
55%, antioxidant activity from 40.
00% to 60.
71%, encapsulation efficiency 56% to 99.
35%, phycocyanin retention from 85% to 89.
14%, solubility from 87.
58% to 94.
and the particle size from 204.
6 to 363.
0 nm.
ANOVA revealed that the selected model for all responses was quadratic.
This model indicated that all responses were markedly influenced by GA.
MD, and WPI, as well as their interactions.
The model was significant, with p-values <0.
05 for antioxidant activity .
= .
, phycocyanin retention .
= 0.
, solubility .
= 0.
, and particle size .
= 0.
However, the model was insignificant .
>0.
for yield .
= .
, phycocyanin content .
= 0.
, and encapsulation efficiency .
= 0.
The lack-of-fit F-values for all responses had p-values >0.
05, including yield .
= 0.
, phycocyanin content .
= 0.
, antiox- Figure 8.
Morphology of optimum formulation of phycocyanin Microcapsules with central composite 2 The optimum formula The Minitab program suggested 20 potential optimization solutions, from which we selected the optimum formula for validation.
As shown in Table 3, the program predicted the optimum formula would have a response of 75.
30% for yield, 4.
55% for phycocyanin content, 48.
87% for antioxidant activity, 98.
for encapsulation efficiency, 68.
57% for phycocyanin retention, 95.
15% for solubility, and 212.
73 nm for particle size.
A validation of the optimum formula resulted in an actual yield of 81.
45%, a phycocyanin content of 3.
60%, an antioxidant activity of 52.
an encapsulation efficiency of 94.
48%, a phycocyanin retention of 61.
88%, and a particle size of 205.
3 nm.
2 Discussion 1 Yield Yield represents the amount of the microcapsule product obtained after spray drying.
It also indicates the effectiveness of the microencapsulation The RSM equation used to optimize the con centration of the encapsulation materials for the yield response is as follows:
JIPK: Scientific Journal of Fisheries and Marine JIPK Vol 17 No 3.
October 2025 | Response Surface Methodology for Optimizing the Concentration of Gum Arabic.
Y1= 353 Ae 19.
85 X1 0.
98 X2 Ae 81.
7 X3 0.
260 X1*X1
211 X2*X2 4.
76 X3*X3- 0.
319 X1*X2 3.
X1*X3 Ae 0.
17 X2*X3 Equation .
Equation .
reveals that the yield response increases at higher MD concentrations in linear.
Quadratic effect of WPI can increase yield and interaction between GA and WPI can increase yield.
Figure 1 illustrates the surface plot depicting the relationship between GA.
MD, and WPI on the yield response.
has robust binding properties, enabling it to bind to more suspensions and enhance yields (Hasna et al.
It also helps reduce the emulsionAos viscosity.
Combining MD with GA and WPI facilitates the drying process.
Although GA has a high viscosity.
WPI stabilizes the emulsion, and together, enhances product output.
During drying, water molecules from the core material and encapsulant evaporate more readily, optimizing drying efficiency (Purnomo et al.
, 2.
In this study, the yield of phycocyanin microcapsules ranged from 61.
44% to 87.
12%, significantly greater than those made with MD and carrageenan, which ranged from 18% to 29% (Purnamayati et al.
The improvement in yield can be attributed to an increase in the glass transition temperature of the powder due to the addition of the GA.
MD, and WPI.
These high-molecular-weight materials reduce powder stickiness, enhancing the product yield during spray drying.
A combination of these three encapsulants elevated the yield by >50%, which is consistent with previous studies which reported a yield increase of 66.
6% when utilizing these three for the microencapsulation of palm fruit anthocyanins (Santana et al.
, 2.
Additionally, microcapsule yield is influenced by factors such as the ratio of core to protective material.
feed solid concentrations.
feed and drying air flow rates.
and inlet and outlet temperatures (Arpagaus et al.
, 2.
2 Phycocyanin content The phycocyanin content refers to the amount of phycocyanin present in all parts of the microcapsule.
This parameter determines the effectiveness of the encapsulation process for retaining phycocyanin across different combinations of GA.
MD, and WPI.
A combination of these encapsulant materials directly affects the encapsulation efficiency.
The RSM equation for optimizing encapsulant concentrations concerning the phycocyanin content is as follows:
Y2= 13.
454 X1 Ae 0.
460 X2 Ae 4.
07 X3 0.
0060 X1*X1
0176 X2*X2 0.
589 X3*X3 Ae 0.
0102 X1*X2
Ae 0.
1370 X1*X3 0.
0410 X2*X3 Equation .
Equation .
shows that the phycocyanin content response was directly correlated to the GA concentration in linear, quadratic effect of WPI can increase phycocyanin content and interaction of MD and WPI can increase phycocyanin content.
Figure 2 illustrates the surface plot indicating the relationship between GA.
MD, and WPI on phycocyanin content.
GA inclusion in the encapsulant material likely enhances phycocyanin retention because it functions as an emulsifier and film former (Wyasu and Okereke.
A thicker, more durable microcapsule wall helps trap more phycocyanin.
In this study, the phycocyanin content was higher than the values reported using MD and alginate, which ranged from 0.
05% to 2.
(Kurniasih et al.
, 2.
Dewi et al.
reported that phycocyanin microcapsules made with MD and carrageenan had phycocyanin contents of 0.
71 Iqbal and Hadiyanto .
suggested that the phycocyanin content in microcapsules depends on the ratio between the encapsulant and the core material.
For instance, a higher maltodextrinAephycocyanin ratio .
produced a lower phycocyanin content of 0.
compared to a lower ratio .
, which resulted in 86% yield.
Furthermore.
Purnamayati et al.
, .
explained that the inlet temperature also affects the phycocyanin concentration.
The microcapsules dried at an inlet temperature of 90EE had a phycocyanin content of 1.
729%, while those dried at 130EE had a lower content of 1.
Antioxidant activity Antioxidants are compounds that either accept or donate electrons, enabling them to prevent the formation of free radicals during oxidation reactions.
compound is considered to have antioxidant activity if it can donate hydrogen atoms to DPPH free radicals.
The RSM equation utilized to optimize the encapsulant material concentration for the antioxidant activity response is as follows:
Y3 = -19 7.
62 X1- 6.
36 X2 16.
9 X3 Ae 0.
381 X1*X1
Ae 0.
253 X2*X2 Ae 5.
08 X3*X3 Ae 0.
094 X1*X2
789 X1*X3 2.
697 X2*X3 Equation .
Equation .
indicates that the antioxidant activity was directly proportional to the WPI concentrations in linear, quadratic effect of MD can decrease antioxidant activity and interaction of MD and WPI can increase antioxidant activity.
Figure 3 illustrates the surface plot showing the relationships between GA.
MD, or WPI on the antioxidant activity.
A combination of these encapsulant materials plays a crucial role in maintaining antioxidant stability and preserving phycocyanin levels during spray drying (Dewi et al.
Copyright A2025 Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Universitas Airlangga Pebriyanti et al.
/ JIPK, 17.
According to Agustina et al.
, elevated phycocyanin levels correspond to greater antioxidant capacity, enhancing the ability of antioxidants to donate electrons and suppress free radical formation.
Encapsulation provides an additional layer of protection, preventing degradation caused by oxygen.
efficiencies ranging from 90.
56% to 99.
These results surpass those of previous studies, such as the encapsulation efficiency of 41.
42% achieved using 2% MD and 0.
8% alginate (Kurniasih et al.
, 2.
9% with a 1:1 combination of GA and WPI .
ter et al.
, 2.
In this study, phycocyanin extract coated with a mixture of GA.
MD, and WPI yielded antioxidant activities ranging from 40.
00% to 60.
71%, as measured by the DPPH inhibition method.
Zhang et al.
found that combining carbohydrates and proteins, such as GA and WPI, enhanced the antioxidant activity in Spirulina chlorophyll microcapsules.
Such an increase can be attributed to the Maillard reaction, which produces melanoidins that contribute to the antioxidant properties.
The reaction occurs in the protein component under high drying temperatures (Wang et al.
, 2.
, with melanoidin formation help to protect the active ingredients from oxidation and thereby improving product stability.
Furthermore, the WPIAos ability to prevent oxidation is associated with its sulfhydryl (-SH) groups, which reduce free radicals in spray-dried powders (Gad et al.
, 2011.
Ton et al.
Premi and Sharma, 2.
GA can achieve high encapsulation efficiency (Yousefi et al.
, 2.
As a highly branched sugar heteropolymer with a small amount of protein covalently attached to its carbohydrate chains.
GA functions as an excellent film-forming agent, effectively encapsulating molecules, by forming a protective matrix around the core material, shielding it from air.
The surface-active properties of GA help safeguard reactive or volatile core materials (Cilek et , 2.
ultrasonication time and core to coating ratio on encapsulation of phenolic compounds extracted from sour cherry pomace.
For this study, maltodextrin and gum arabic were chosen as coating materials.
Different maltodextrin/gum arabic ratios .
:0, 8:2, 6:4.
Additionally, proteins and polysaccharides serve as a bridge that allows bioactive components to maintain stability within complex food matrices (Zhang et , 2.
4 Encapsulation efficiency Encapsulation efficiency is a key parameter for evaluating the effectivity of the microencapsulation process in trapping or retaining the core materialAiphycocyanin extract.
It is a crucial indicator of microencapsulated particles, contributing to better stability and longer shelf life (Timilsena et al.
, 2.
The RSM equation for optimizing the encapsulant concentration to improve the encapsulation efficiency is as follows:
Y4 =
15 X1 Ae 4.
25 X2 Ae 35.
1 X3 Ae 0.
115 X1*X1
Ae 0.
043 X2*X2 3.
56 X3*X3 0.
130 X1*X2
Ae 0.
326 X1*X3 0.
848 X2*X3
Equation .
Equation .
suggests that the encapsulation efficiency was positively correlated with the GA concentration in linear, quadratic effect of WPI can increase encapsulation efficiency, and interaction of MD and WPI can increase encapsulation efficiency.
Figure 4 illustrates the surface plot indicating the relationship between GA.
MD, or WPI on encapsulation efficiency.
Dewi et al.
explained that the encapsulation efficiency is influenced by the type of polymer used, which can affect the hydrophobic characteristics of the Certain polymers, such as GA and WPI, are known for their ability to emulsify and maintain emulsion viscosity.
The combination of GA.
MD, and WPI employed in this study resulted in encapsulation Generally, two main types of interactions occur between proteins and polysaccharides: non-covalent complexation and covalent bonding.
Non-covalent bonds create bioadhesive states that facilitate the formation of micromaterials, while covalent interactions produce proteinAepolysaccharide conjugates with excellent amphiphilic properties, enabling them to encapsulate bioactive components (Sadiah et al.
, 2.
When the microstructure of such conjugates is established, they provide superior encapsulation performance.
Additionally, the encapsulation efficiency is also affected by the spray drying inlet Purnamayati et al.
demonstrated that using an inlet temperature of 90EE resulted in a higher encapsulation efficiency of 29.
623% compared 457% at 130EE.
This suggests that lower inlet temperatures help preserve the phycocyanin content.
Furthermore, the coreAeencapsulant material ratio is critical for achieving high encapsulation Iqbal and Hadiyanto .
reported that a phycocyaninAemaltodextrin ratio of 1:2 produced the maximal encapsulation efficiency of 61.
5 Phycocyanin retention Phycocyanin retention measures the effectiveness of spray drying in encapsulating the A.
phycocyanin extract.
It was determined by comparing the total phycocyanin content after microencapsulation with the initial phycocyanin content before microencapsulation.
A successful encapsulation method JIPK: Scientific Journal of Fisheries and Marine JIPK Vol 17 No 3.
October 2025 | Response Surface Methodology for Optimizing the Concentration of Gum Arabic.
relies on high retention of the core material and minimal core material present on the surface of the powder The RSM equation for optimizing the encapsulant material concentration to maximize the encapsulation efficiency is as follows:
Y5 = -170 6.
24 X1 0.
17 X2 98.
4 X3
081 X1X1 0.
153 X2*X2 Ae 6.
42 X3*X3
137 X1*X2- 2.
56 X1*X3 Ae 1.
37 X2*X3 Equation.
Equation .
shows that phycocyanin retention was directly proportional to the concentrations of WPI in linear, quadratic effect of MD can increase phycocyanin retention and interaction between GA and MD can increase phycocyanin retention.
Figure 5 illustrates the surface plot of the relationship between these encapsulant materials and phycocyanin retention.
Proper encapsulant levels play a crucial role in stabilizing the emulsion, directly impacting retention.
Enhanced solid content facilitates skin formation and accelerates drying, thereby improving retention.
This is also influenced by the emulsion viscosityAihigher solid content elevates viscosity, which reduces internal mixing, due to which the core components are less likely to migrate to the surface, allowing for more effective film formation and enhanced retention.
According to Charve and Reineccius .
, the film-forming and emulsification abilities of the encapsulant materials can vary significantly in terms of retention, even when they are acceptable.
Retention during drying with the WPI may be attributed to the excellent emulsifying and binding properties of -lactoglobulin, the main whey protein.
In this study, the retention of phycocyanin utilizing a combination of GA.
MD, and WPI ranged from 62.
85% to 89.
These results are comparable to those reported by Santana et .
, who observed retention values of 86.
1 1% (GA:MS:WPC) and 79.
0% (GA:MS:SPI) in microcapsules containing anthocyanin from palm fruits.
Similarly.
Faieta et al.
reported retention values >70% for anthocyanin spray drying with MD and trehalose.
Diaz et al.
observed 62% retention using GA to encapsulate blackberry Charve and Reineccius .
also noted a volatile retention rate of 87% when using WPI to encapsulate flavors during spray drying.
6 Solubility Solubility is a key parameter used to assess the performance of the microcapsule powders upon High water solubility enables easier release of the active ingredients during applications.
The RSM equation for optimizing the encapsulant material levels concerning the solubility response is as follows:
Y6 = -7.
58 X1 0.
67 X2 28.
8 X3 Ae 0.
0459 X1*X1
Ae 0.
1273 X2*X2 Ae 1.
99 X3*X3 0.
0652 X1*X2
Ae 0.
902 X1*X3 0.
236 X2*X3 Equation .
Equation .
indicates that the solubility was directly proportional to the concentrations of whey protein isolate in linear, quadratic effect of GA can decrease solubility and interaction between MD and WPI can increase solubility.
Figure 6 illustrates the surface plot suggesting the relationship between these three encapsulant materials and their solubility.
Solubility is influenced by the encapsulant type.
Higher MD concentrations enhance solubility because MD can bind to hydrophobic compounds and is highly water-soluble, forming a uniformly dispersed solution system (Ayu et al.
, 2.
Yuliawaty and Susanto .
also noted that MDAos hydroxyl groups interact with water during dissolution, resulting in elevated solubility levels as more free hydroxyl groups are available.
WPI, as an effective emulsifier, helps suspend compounds in both the oil and water phases.
This property can improve microcapsule dissolution when the WPI concentration increases (Hasna et al.
, 2.
A higher solubility value generally reflects better product quality and facilitates wider applicability.
lter et al.
reported that phycocyanin microcapsules encapsulated with MD and WPI had a solubility of 79.
52 A 2.
53%, while a combination of MD and GA yielded a lower solubility of 67.
However, in this study, a combination of GA.
MD, and WPI resulted in solubility values >90%.
This finding is consistent with that of Mahdi et al.
who reported a solubility of 91.
26 A 4.
26% for microencapsulated finger orange extracts using the same combination of wall materials.
Similarly.
Santana et .
observed elevated solubility values for palm fruit anthocyanin microcapsules produced with a blend of GA.
MD, and WPI (GA:MS:WPC = 1/6:2/3:1/6 = 5 A 2.
9% and GA:MS:SPI = 1/6:2/3:1/6 = 92.
7%).
7 Particle size Microencapsulation is a technique that involves employing coatings to encapsulate microscopic particles, typically ranging from 1 to 1000 m in size (Lodhi et al.
, 2.
The particle size has a remarkable impact on other microencapsulation characteristics.
Smaller particles can lead to higher encapsulation efficiency, better particle morphology, and faster release The RSM equation applied to optimize the encapsulant concentration for the particle size response Copyright A2025 Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Universitas Airlangga Pebriyanti et al.
/ JIPK, 17.
is as follows:
Y7 = -242 62X1 13.
8 X2- 34 X3
Ae 1.
74 X1*X1 Ae 0.
78 X2*X2 31.
9 X3*X3
25 X1*X2- 9.
03 X1*X3 Ae 9.
91 X2*X3 Equation .
Equation .
shows that the particle size was directly proportional to GA and MD concentrations rise in linear, quadratic effect of WPI can increase particle size and interaction between GA and MD can increase particle size.
Figure 7 illustrates the surface plot representing the relationship between GA.
MD, or WPI on the particle size response.
The particle size is influenced by the type of encapsulant material.
Shamaei et al.
the effects of wall material formula and spray drying conditions on physicochemical properties of walnut oil microcapsules were investigated.
Three different wall materials including skim milk powder (SMP explained that variations in the molecular structure and physicochemical properties of encapsulant materials, such as surface activity and molecular weight, can affect particle size.
GA, for instance, is highly viscous and forms a more viscid Fernandes et al.
found that GA as a wall material resulted in large particle sizes.
Jafari et .
further explained that larger particles have higher encapsulation efficiency.
However, adding MD helps reduce the particle size because of its low viscosity at high concentrations.
lter et al.
demonstrated that utilizing a combination of GA and WPI in phycocyanin microcapsules distributed the particles more homogeneously compared to MD and WPI.
Phycocyanin microcapsules using a 50:50 combination of GA and MD produced particles with a size of 54.
4AAm (Pan-utai and Iamtham, 2.
, while MD and alginate produced a much smaller sized particle of 3.
10 nm (Kurniasih et , 2.
In this study, microcapsules composed of GA.
MD, and WPI had small particle sizes ranging 6Ae363.
0 nm.
Optimization and Validation Results The measurement results for each parameter were evaluated employing ANOVA, and polynomial regression equations were derived for each response.
The optimization process aimed to identify the best combination of model parameters to achieve the desired outcomes.
Each parameter was standardized simultaneously to produce a desirability value, representing the target or ideal response level.
This desirability value reflects the relative importance of each response.
The simultaneous desirability value obtained was 0.
7656, determined using the Minitab software .
ttps://w.
com/en-us/products/ JIPK: Scientific Journal of Fisheries and Marine minitab/), based on the responses of the seven phycocyanin microcapsule parameters.
This desirability value, ranging from 0.
63 to 0.
80, indicated that the results were acceptable.
The optimal solution included 8.
3% GA, 11.
7% MD, and 5.
2% WPI, producing microcapsules that met 76.
56% of the desired target .
The next step was a verification test to confirm the values predicted by the Minitab software against the actual results under optimum conditions.
It showed that the actual yield and antioxidant activity values exceeded the predicted ones.
However, the existent values for particle size, phycocyanin content, solubility, encapsulation efficiency, and phycocyanin retention were slightly lower than the projected ones.
The SD between the predicted and actual values ranged from 6781 to 5.
2538, indicating that they were closely aligned.
The verification results were within the 95% prediction and confidence intervals, confirming that the optimization was accurate and reliable.
The response verification of the optimum formulation of phycocyanin microcapsules is shown in Table 5.
9 Morphology of the Microcapsules Fabricated Applying the optimized formula The morphological characteristics of the optimized microcapsules were a round shape, a uniform size, a smooth surface, and no flocculation.
Most microcapsules were round, with slight dents or indentations and a shrunken appearance.
This surface shrinkage can result from the rapid evaporation of water during spray drying and is common in polymeric coatings derived from polysaccharides (Purwaningsih et , 2.
Additionally, no clumping or cracking was The particle shape can be influenced by the uneven shrinkage during drying and the enhanced surface protein content (Hasrini et al.
, 2.
According to Tonon et al.
, surface shrinkage can occur due to low inlet temperatures, which slow down heat transfer and result in particles with more deformed Conclusion The concentrations of the three encapsulant ingredients (GA.
MD, and WPI) in the phycocyanin microcapsules influenced the resulting characteristics.
However, not all responses produced significant predictive models with a combination of these three Simultaneous optimization identified the optimum encapsulant formulation for phycocyanin microcapsules: 8.
3% GA, 11.
7% MD, and 5.
2% WPI.
The desirability value of 0.
7656 indicates that the optimum formulation can produce phycocyanin micro-
JIPK
Vol 17 No 3.
October 2025 | Response Surface Methodology for Optimizing the Concentration of Gum Arabic.
capsules meeting 76.
56% of the desired targets.
This value falls within the range of acceptable quality and suggests that the formulation can be effectively applied to the product.
Adsare.
, & Annapure.
Microencapsulation of curcumin using coconut milk whey and gum Arabic.
Journal of Food Engineering, 298.
Acknowledgment Agustina.
Aidha.
Oktarina.
, & Setiawati, .
Production process of virgin coconut oil (VCO) emulsion with phycocyanin as antioxidant.
Biopropal Industri, 11.
:95-105.
The authors are grateful to Universitas Gadjah Mada for the Final Project Recognition Program, with the Letter of Assignment No.
5286/UN1.
P1/
PT.
03/2024.
May 6, 2024.
We also thank the Department of Fisheries.
Faculty Agriculture.
Universitas Gadjah Mada, for facilitating this research.
This paper incorporates data from the first authorAos undergraduate thesis.
AuthorAos Contribution The contributions of each author were as follows: Puspa Pebriyanti carried out the experiment, collected data, analyzed the data for the research.
Mrs.
Siti Ari Budhiyanti as research coordinator, conceptualizing the idea, and designed the research.
and Mrs.
Nurfitri Ekantari conceptualizing the idea, designed the research, and analyzed the data.
All authors wrote and contributed the manuscript.
Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Declaration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) The author.
affirm that no artificial intelligence (AI) tools, services, or technologies were employed in the creation, editing, or refinement of this All content presented is the result of the independent intellectual efforts of the author.
, ensuring originality and integrity.
Funding Information The research was supported by Universitas Gadjah Mada for the Final Project Recognition Program, with the Letter of Assignment No.
5286/UN1.
P1/PT.
03/2024.
References