the present invention will be further described in the following examples wherein the hydrophobin is always hfb ii . starting concentration 145 . 4 μg / cm 3 of hydrophobin in 4 . 5 cm 3 of a 25 mm citric acid solution . the solution was filtered leading to a concentration in filtrate of 67 . 9 μg / cm 3 in 9 cm 3 . starting concentration 146 . 3 μg / cm 3 of hydrophobin in 4 . 5 cm 3 of a 25 mm sodium citrate . the solution was filtered leading to a concentration in filtrate of 68 . 0 μg / cm 3 in 9 cm 3 . starting concentration 145 . 9 μg / cm 3 of hydrophobin in 4 . 5 cm 3 of a 25 mm citric acid solution + 1 % kappa carrageenan sheared gel . the solution was filtered leading to a concentration in filtrate of 3 . 8 μg / cm 3 hydrophobin in 9 cm 3 . then 9 cm 3 of 25 mm sodium citrate at ph 8 were passed through filter . the concentration in the filtrate was 40 . 9 μg / ml , therefore 56 % of the original hydrophobin was recovered that way . starting concentration 145 . 9 μg / cm 3 of hydrophobin in 4 . 5 cm 3 of a 25 mm citric acid solution + 1 % kappa carrageenan sheared gel . then add 0 . 325 cm 3 naoh ( to go to ph 7 . 0 ) and filter here , 100 % of the hydrophobin ended in the filtrate despite the use of carrageenan , showing the importance of ph . starting concentration 145 . 9 μg / cm 3 of hydrophobin in 4 . 5 cm 3 of a 25 mm citric acid solution + 1 % kappa carrageenan sheared gel . then add solid nacl to give a concentration of 0 . 5m nacl and filter . the concentration in filtrate is 50 . 9 μg / cm 3 in 9 cm 3 . so , about 70 % of the original amount of hydrophobin filtered through despite the right ph and the use of 1 % kappa carrageenan sheared gel then 9 cm 3 of 25 mm sodium citrate at ph 8 passed through filter leading to a concentration in filtrate of 13 . 8 μg / cm 3 . therefore , only 19 % of the hydrophobin was recovered that way , showing the influence of the ionic strength on the whole process . the higher the ionic strength , the lower the recovery , everything else being equal . starting concentration 145 . 9 μg / cm 3 of hydrophobin in 4 . 5 cm 3 of a 25 mm citric acid solution + 0 . 025 % iota carrageenan . the concentration in filtrate was 1 . 6 μg / cm 3 in 9 cm 3 , only 2 % of the original hydrophobin having passed through . then 9 cm 3 of 25 mm sodium citrate at ph 8 passed through filter , leading to a concentration in filtrate = 29 . 5 μg / cm 3 starting concentration 145 . 9 μg / cm 3 of hydrophobin in 4 . 5 cm 3 of a 25 mm citric acid solution + 0 . 025 % kappa carrageenan . the concentration in filtrate was 28 . 4 μg / cm 3 in 9 cm 3 , 39 % of the original hydrophobin having passed through . this example shows that iota carrageenan performs better that kappa carrageenan when retaining hydrophobin starting concentration 145 . 9 μg / cm 3 of hydrophobin in 4 . 5 cm 3 of a 25 mm citric acid solution + 1 % sheared pectin . the concentration in filtrate was 57 . 3 μg / cm 3 in 9 cm 3 , representing 79 % of the original hydrophobin , showing that pectin does not work . starting concentration 145 . 9 μg / cm 3 of hydrophobin in 4 . 5 cm 3 of a 25 mm citric acid and 1 % n creamer 46 . the concentration in filtrate was 64 . 2 μg / cm 3 in 9 cm 3 representing 88 % of the original hydrophobin , showing that hydrophobic starch does not work .