Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Oct 28;20(11):675.
doi: 10.3390/md20110675.

A Review of the Chemical Extraction of Chitosan from Shrimp Wastes and Prediction of Factors Affecting Chitosan Yield by Using an Artificial Neural Network

Ahmed Hosney  1 , Sana Ullah  1 , Karolina Barčauskaitė  1
Affiliations
Review

A Review of the Chemical Extraction of Chitosan from Shrimp Wastes and Prediction of Factors Affecting Chitosan Yield by Using an Artificial Neural Network

Ahmed Hosney et al. Mar Drugs. .

Abstract

There are two viable options to produce shrimp shells as by-product waste, either within the shrimp production phases or when the shrimp are peeled before cooking by the end user. This waste is considered a double-edged sword, as it is possible to be either a source of environmental pollution, through dumping and burning, or a promising source from which to produce chitosan as a biodegradable, biocompatible biopolymer which has a variety of agricultural, industrial, and biomedical applications. Chitosan is a deacetylated form of chitin that can be chemically recovered from shrimp shells through the three sequential stages of demineralization, deproteinization, and deacetylation. The main aim of this review paper is to summarize the recent literature on the chemical extraction of chitosan from shrimp shells and to represent the physicochemical properties of chitosan extracted from shrimp shells in different articles, such as chitosan yield, moisture content, solubility, ash content, and degree of deacetylation. Another aim is to analyze the influence of the main predictors of the chemical extraction stages (demineralization, deproteinization, and deacetylation) on the chitosan yield percentage by using a multilayer perceptron artificial neural network. This study showed that the deacetylation alkali concentration is the most crucial parameter, followed by the concentrations of acid and alkali of demineralization and deproteinization, respectively. The current review was conducted to be used in prospective studies for optimizing the chemical extraction of chitosan from shrimp wastes.

Keywords: chemical extraction; chitosan; neural networks; shrimp shells.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this paper.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The represented structures of chitin and chitosan (de-acetylated form of chitin).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Chitin and chitosan chemical extraction from shrimp shells.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Cationic soluble form of chitosan.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Solubility of chitosan recovered from shrimp shells in 15 experiments from reviewed articles [17,45,49,50,68].
Figure 5
Figure 5
Ash content (%) of chitosan extracted from shrimp shells by the chemical method in 15 experiments from reviewed articles [8,17,48,49,50,51].
Figure 6
Figure 6
Multilayer perceptron neural network architectural graph of chitosan yield (%).
Figure 7
Figure 7
ROC curve of the multilayer perceptron artificial neural networks.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Linear relationship between chitosan yield in reviewed articles with the predicted value.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Independent variables important chart of chemical extraction parameters.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Thornber K., Verner-Jeffreys D., Hinchliffe S., Rahman M.M., Bass D., Tyler C.R. Evaluating antimicrobial resistance in the global shrimp industry. Rev. Aquac. 2019;12:966–986. doi: 10.1111/raq.12367. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moss S.M., Moss D.R., Otoshi C.A., Arce S.M. An integrated approach to sustainable shrimp farming. Asian Fish Sci. 2010;23:591–605. doi: 10.33997/j.afs.2010.23.4.012. - DOI
    1. Issue-14-Euroshrimp-Newsletter-European-Shrimp-Production(1) [(accessed on 15 March 2022)]. Available online: https://www.euroshrimp.net/14-european-shrimp-production-in-2020/
    1. Valenti W., Kimpara J.M. Measuring Aquaculture Sustainability. World Aquac. 2011;42:26–30.
    1. FAO Environmental Impact Assessment and Monitoring in Aquaculture. 2009. [(accessed on 17 May 2022)]. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/i0970e/i0970e00.pdf.