Literature DB >> 21094725

Invited review: A commentary on predictive cheese yield formulas.

D B Emmons1, H W Modler.   

Abstract

Predictive cheese yield formulas have evolved from one based only on casein and fat in 1895. Refinements have included moisture and salt in cheese and whey solids as separate factors, paracasein instead of casein, and exclusion of whey solids from moisture associated with cheese protein. The General, Barbano, and Van Slyke formulas were tested critically using yield and composition of milk, whey, and cheese from 22 vats of Cheddar cheese. The General formula is based on the sum of cheese components: fat, protein, moisture, salt, whey solids free of fat and protein, as well as milk salts associated with paracasein. The testing yielded unexpected revelations. It was startling that the sum of components in cheese was <100%; the mean was 99.51% (N × 6.31). The mean predicted yield was only 99.17% as a percentage of actual yields (PY%AY); PY%AY is a useful term for comparisons of yields among vats. The PY%AY correlated positively with the sum of components (SofC) in cheese. The apparent low estimation of SofC led to the idea of adjusting upwards, for each vat, the 5 measured components in the formula by the observed SofC, as a fraction. The mean of the adjusted predicted yields as percentages of actual yields was 99.99%. The adjusted forms of the General, Barbano, and Van Slyke formulas gave predicted yields equal to the actual yields. It was apparent that unadjusted yield formulas did not accurately predict yield; however, unadjusted PY%AY can be useful as a control tool for analyses of cheese and milk. It was unexpected that total milk protein in the adjusted General formula gave the same predicted yields as casein and paracasein, indicating that casein or paracasein may not always be necessary for successful yield prediction. The use of constants for recovery of fat and protein in the adjusted General formula gave adjusted predicted yields equal to actual yields, indicating that analyses of cheese for protein and fat may not always be necessary for yield prediction. Composition of cheese was estimated using a predictive formula; actual yield was needed for estimation of composition. Adjusted formulas are recommended for estimating target yields and cheese yield efficiency. Constants for solute exclusion, protein-associated milk salts, and whey solids could be used and reduced the complexity of the General formula. Normalization of fat recovery increased variability of predicted yields.
Copyright © 2010 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21094725     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2010-3262

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dairy Sci        ISSN: 0022-0302            Impact factor:   4.034


  2 in total

Review 1.  Milk Products from Minor Dairy Species: A Review.

Authors:  Michele Faccia; Angela Gabriella D'Alessandro; Andrea Summer; Yonas Hailu
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 2.  Coagulation Traits of Sheep and Goat Milk.

Authors:  Michele Pazzola
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-08-08       Impact factor: 2.752

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.