Voice on air – DAVIDE EDERLE: Plant proteins and Biotechnologies

The role of biotechnologists is evolving as they explore innovative areas, such as the production of alternative proteins. To find out more, we asked the Business Development Manager and President of the Italian Association of Biotechnologists Davide Ederle, to describe the connection between biotechnology and alternative proteins, also focusing on the evolution of the biotechnologist towards a new circular economy.

The role of biotechnologists is generally linked to DNA. What is your opinion when it comes to plant proteins?

By definition, biotechnology is the exploitation of biological processes for industrial purposes and, until proven otherwise, agriculture and all fermentative transformations fall under this definition. Of course, today, we immediately think DNA when we hear the word biotechnology, but biotechnology is far more than that. The mission of biotechnologists has always been the transformation of the fascinating discoveries of biology into useful products able to change people’s lives. Just an example, discover the role of insulin in regulating the glucose levels is very interesting, and that’s biology. Using this knowledge to create a life-changing drug for diabetics is very useful, and that’s biotechnology, the “art” of turning science from interesting to useful.

Going back to plant proteins and alternative proteins in general, it is worth remembering that in every industrial biotechnology course there is always a class of Fermentation Chemistry as a fundamental brick of knowledge for anyone who wants to deal with the industrial aspects linked to biological innovations. After all, if you don’t also look at the industrial aspects of your research you should ask yourself if you are really doing biotechnology.

So yes, to answer your question, alternative proteins are biotechnology stuff.

Currently there are many companies and startups investing in fermentation technologies for the production of alternative proteins (e.g. the Israeli startup Amai Proteins). What opportunities do you think this technology has to offer? And what about possible challenges?

Amai Proteins is certainly interesting, it has developed a technology to produce large quantities of a sweet protein called thaumatin, to replace sugars as sweeteners. There was also a similar Italian project that used another protein, monellin, for the same purpose. This type of technology however represents only a very small fraction of the huge world of alternative proteins, that today includes other interesting segments and players such as Mycorena, with its vegan proteins derived from mushrooms, Solar Foods that uses microorganisms that grow fixing atmospheric nitrogen, or Legendairy foods that reproduces milk proteins by fermentation. There are also companies like Protera with its artificial intelligence platform to design and engineer functional proteins to produce food additives by fermentation. Other companies, like Prolupin, develop technologies to isolate the plant protein fraction which can be used to improve food and feed performance. There are also other very interesting systems that aim to create circular processes with zero waste. As example, 3FBIO has combined an industrial plant for the production of bioethanol with a second plant for the production of fungal biomass for alternative proteins. On the same line there are many other projects, also in Italy, in the attempt of giving waste a second life, such as olive vegetation water for producing single-cell proteins or active ingredients. There are also companies focused on the production of industrial enzymes, ranging from food to bioenergy, in plant systems.

All these activities, in the end, go into two main directions, which in some cases can match: circular economy, to reduce waste; production of new functional proteins.

The first direction is key if we look at sustainability. Keep in mind that producing one kilogram of poultry meat requires 2 kilograms of feed, red meat ranges from 4 for pigs to 6 for cattle, having low impact alternatives with good nutritional properties would be very useful. However, there are still hurdles that can’t be ignored, both of industrial and social nature. From a social point of view, the problem is acceptance. Just see the GMOs debate that ended with the ban of their use in Europe and the disruption of an entire very promising biotechnological sector, even for plant protein sources. We are now living the very same sad debate on genome editing. It would be wise not repeating the same mistakes.

From the industrial point of view, on the other hand, there are two main hurdles. First, have sustainable technological systems. A product, even if perfect from a technical point of view, if it costs too much, it will never meet its market.

Second, have a stable and affordable source of raw materials to justify the multi-million-euro investments.

Can you give us an overview of biotechnological processes for plant protein functionalization?

Plant biomasses have always been the ideal substrate for microbial fermentation, for the production of food and beverages, enzymes or drugs. Now we are moving one step further with the use of cellulose as a source of carbon. This would allow to turn a huge amount of biomass now wasted into new high-value raw material. Very interesting is also the research on new protein from plant hydrolysates in the effort of replacing those from animal origin. These products can act as biostimulants in agriculture, helping plants to overcome drought or heat waves.

There has been a lot of discussion lately in terms of alternative proteins, sometimes quite controversially, about cultured or in vitro meat production as one of the possibilities for the future. Can you give us your vision of cultured meat production and meat substitutes?

Cultured meat is, I would say, antithetic to vegetable proteins. Animal cells in vitro culture to reproduce real meat, in my humble opinion, is interesting only from a scientific point of view, to recreate complex biological systems from cell cultures. From a commercial perspective, however, it presents high costs of production, but also low sustainability. Meat analogues as alternative proteins were meant, on the contrary, to increase sustainability. For example, filamentous fungi have already been on the market for decades as substitutes for animal proteins, such as Quorn or even algae derivatives.

However, there is still a lot of work to do on these products. For example, there is the need to increase their palatability. They are often excellent from a nutritional point of view, but the taste does not help in the sales, as in the case of spirulina. The idea is to breed new strains more in line with consumer taste. If we are able to achieve this goal, it would be possible, for real, to transform animal meat consumption into a choice.

One last question, how do you think the role of biotechnologists will evolve in the future?

In recent years, biotechnologists have proven to be an amazing engine for innovation, able of developing many new interesting and game changing products and solutions. Unfortunately, there are huge, not scientifically grounded, regulatory constraints on theirs application. It is a shame not to be able to use very efficient solutions, which could help us reduce our environmental impact and increase sustainability, for no real reason.

However, we are at the beginning of a major paradigm shift. In the coming decades, the agri-food chains will change dramatically. Large scale meat consumption will become increasingly unsustainable, and the need of more efficient transformation processes, and the reduction and valorisation of waste, will be more and more pressing.

Biotechnologists will be the key to achieving all of these goals and a new circular economy.