| Literature DB >> 29983974 |
Selin Alihanoğlu1, Demet Ektiren1, Çağım Akbulut Çakır1, Hasan Vardin1, Asliye Karaaslan2, Mehmet Karaaslan1.
Abstract
Calf rennet has long been used in cheese-making. Because of calf rennet shortage and high cost, novel proteases were needed to meet industry's increasing enzyme demand. Recombinant chymosins and camel chymosin were started to be used in the industry. There is no study in the literature subjecting use of rabbit rennet in cheese production. Chemical, rheological, and sensorial characteristics of white cheese made with rabbit rennet were investigated in this study. Quality characteristics of rabbit rennet cheese (RC) were compared to cheeses produced with commercial calf (CC) and camel chymosins (CLC). RC and CLC exhibited higher hardness and dynamic moduli values throughout the storage as compared to CC. Although moisture levels of cheese samples were similar at day 60, CC had much lower hardness and dynamic moduli values than CLC and RC. While the appearance and structure were better for CLC, the highest odor and taste scores were obtained by RC during 60 days of storage. The results of this investigation proposed that rabbit rennet could be a suitable milk coagulant for white cheese production. Our results showed that rabbit rennet has comparable cheese-making performance with camel chymosin and could be a good alternative for calf chymosin.Entities:
Keywords: camel chymosin; cheese; rabbit rennet; rheology
Year: 2018 PMID: 29983974 PMCID: PMC6021729 DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.649
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Food Sci Nutr ISSN: 2048-7177 Impact factor: 2.863
Composition, yield, and pH of white cheeses made with calf chymosin, camel chymosin, and rabbit rennet
| Parameters | Coagulant sources | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Calf | Rabbit | Camel | |
| Moisture (%) | 59.09 ± 0.01a | 54.09 ± 0.01b | 53.11 ± 0.03b |
| Fat (%) | 18.00 ± 0.01a | 21.66 ± 0.57b | 23.00 ± 2.00c |
| Protein (%) | 16.82 ± 0.01a | 19.58 ± 0.01b | 16.92 ± 0.05a |
| Salt (%) | 3.66 ± 0.26a | 3.58 ± 0.35a | 3.19 ± 0.13a |
| SM (%) | 6.19 ± 0.40a | 6.61 ± 0.64a | 6.01 ± 0.21a |
| MNSF (%) | 72.06 ± 0.02a | 69.04 ± 0.02b | 68.97 ± 0.03b |
| FDM (%) | 43.99 ± 0.02a | 47.17 ± 0.92b | 49.05 ± 3.00c |
| Yield (kg cheese 100 kg−1 milk) | 14.08 ± 0.01b | 12.86 ± 0.01a | 12.71 ± 0.01a |
| Moisture adjusted yield (kg cheese 100 kg−1 milk) | 12.28 ± 0.01a | 12.59 ± 0.01a | 12.71 ± 0.01a |
| pH | |||
| 1 day | 5.81 ± 0.01a | 5.84 ± 0.01a | 5.86 ± 0.01a |
| 15 days | 5.74 ± 0.17a | 5.79 ± 0.01a | 5.85 ± 0.01a |
| 30 days | 5.68 ± 0.01a | 5.51 ± 0.01a | 5.33 ± 0.01a |
| 60 days | 5.09 ± 0.01a | 4.57 ± 0.01b | 5.23 ± 0.02a |
SM, salt in moisture; MNFS, moisture in nonfat substance; FDM, fat in dry matter.
Values are means ± standard deviations; means within a row with different superscript letters are significantly different (LSD, p < .05).
Adjusted to 53.11% moisture.
Figure 1Moisture changes in white cheeses made with calf (CC), rabbit (RC), and camel coagulants (CLC) during 60 days of storage
Figure 2Urea polyacrylamide gel electrophoretograms of CLC, CC, and RC samples after 1, 15, 30, 60 days of storage
SAOS temperature sweep test results of white cheeses made with calf, rabbit, and camel coagulants during 60 days of storage
| Storage time (days) | Coagulant source | Storage modulus ( | Loss modulus ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10°C | 55°C | 10°C | 55°C | LTmaxT | ||
| 1 | Calf | 31,400 ± 254b,B | 983 ± 80b,A | 7,980 ± 138b,C | 915 ± 91b,A | 68 ± 0b,A |
| Rabbit | 41,800 ± 424a,B | 1,785 ± 27a,C | 10,400 ± 113a,B | 1,380 ± 113a,A | 84 ± 2a,A | |
| Camel | 43,600 ± 410a,A | 1,795 ± 62a,A | 10,790 ± 114a,B | 1,340 ± 24a,A | 78 ± 6a,A | |
| 30 | Calf | 22,800 ± 537b,C | 550 ± 43b,B | 5,670 ± 876b,D | 527 ± 70a,B | 65 ± 0a,A |
| Rabbit | 26,400 ± 183a,C | 829 ± 11a,B | 7,390 ± 593a,C | 544 ± 71a,B | 71 ± 0a,B | |
| Camel | 23,000 ± 424b,B | 728 ± 21a,C | 5,880 ± 183b,C | 584 ± 12a,C | 67 ± 4a,B | |
| 60 | Calf | 29,550 ± 459c,B | 210 ± 9c,C | 9,210 ± 154b,B | 195 ± 2c,C | 67 ± 0b,A |
| Rabbit | 40,800 ± 395b,B | 441 ± 11b,C | 11,400 ± 989b,B | 360 ± 6b,C | 66 ± 0b,B | |
| Camel | 43,750 ± 374a,A | 1,114 ± 12a,B | 12,050 ± 106a,AB | 801 ± 56a,B | 69 ± 0a,B | |
Values are means ± standard deviations.
a,b,cMeans within a row with different superscript letters are significantly different between coagulant source types (LSD, p < .05).
A,B,CMeans within a column with different superscript letters are significantly different between different storage times (LSD, p < .05).
Temperature at maximum loss tangent.
Figure 3SAOS temperature sweep test results of white cheeses made with calf, rabbit, and camel coagulants during 60 days of storage. Storage modulus (black symbols), loss modulus (open symbols), and loss tangent (gray symbols) of white cheeses made with calf (○), rabbit (∆), and camel (□) coagulants at day 1, day 30, and day 6. Results are the means of replicates
Texture profile analysis results of white cheeses made with calf, rabbit, and camel coagulants during 60 days of storage
| TPA parameters | Coagulant source | Storage time (days) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 30 | 60 | ||
| Hardness (g) | Calf | 2,423 ± 120b,C | 5,534 ± 80b,A | 1,106 ± 71c,B |
| Rabbit | 4,041 ± 385a,A | 6,320 ± 21a,B | 2,335 ± 185b,C | |
| Camel | 4,842 ± 388a,A | 6,479 ± 547a,B | 3,844 ± 159a,C | |
| Adhesiveness (g s) | Calf | −54 ± 4.3a,A | −239 ± 12.4a,B | −19 ± 7.2a,A |
| Rabbit | −75 ± 0.56a,A | −320 ± 70b,B | −19 ± 9.8a,A | |
| Camel | −77 ± 2.1a,A | −214 ± 120a,B | −22 ± 4.1a,A | |
| Gumminess | Calf | 540 ± 30b,B | 1,315 ± 67a,A | 526 ± 0b,B |
| Rabbit | 981 ± 52a,A | 1,018 ± 44b,A | 814 ± 93b,A | |
| Camel | 1,073 ± 40a,BC | 1,328 ± 426a,B | 1,652 ± 58a,A | |
| Chewiness | Calf | 280 ± 20b,B | 833 ± 10a,A | 334 ± 6b,B |
| Rabbit | 493 ± 60a,A | 406 ± 31b,A | 455 ± 87b,A | |
| Camel | 543 ± 46a,C | 1,037 ± 299a,B | 1,288 ± 67a,A | |
Values are means ± standard deviations.
a,b,cMeans within a row with different superscript letters are significantly different (LSD, p < .05).
A,B,CMeans within a column with different superscript letters are significantly different (LSD, p < .05).
Sensory analysis results of white cheeses made with calf chymosin, camel chymosin, and rabbit rennet after 1, 15, 30, 60 days of storage
| Storage time (days) | Coagulant source | Parameters | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outer appearance | Inner appearance | Structure | Odor | Taste | ||
| 1 | Calf | 4.25 ± 0.88b,AB | 4.50 ± 0.53a,AB | 3.87 ± 0.83b,A | 4.87 ± 0.35a,AB | 4.62 ± 0.51a,A |
| Rabbit | 4.87 ± 0.35ab,A | 4.75 ± 0.46a,B | 4.25 ± 0.70ab,AB | 5.00 ± 0.00a,A | 4.87 ± 0.33a,A | |
| Camel | 5.00 ± 0.00a,A | 4.87 ± 0.35a,A | 4.62 ± 0.51a,A | 5.00 ± 0.00a,A | 4.87 ± 0.35a,A | |
| 15 | Calf | 4.62 ± 0.74a,A | 4.75 ± 0.70a,AB | 4.37 ± 0.74ab,A | 5.00 ± 0.00a,A | 4.56 ± 0.49a,AB |
| Rabbit | 4.62 ± 0.51a,AB | 4.50 ± 0.53a,AB | 3.87 ± 0.83b,A | 5.00 ± 0.00a,A | 4.75 ± 0.46a,A | |
| Camel | 4.75 ± 0.70a,AB | 4.87 ± 0.35a,A | 4.87 ± 0.35a,A | 5.00 ± 0.00a,A | 4.71 ± 0.45a,AB | |
| 30 | Calf | 3.75 ± 0.70b,B | 4.50 ± 0.75a,AB | 3.87 ± 0.99b,A | 4.62 ± 0.51a,BC | 4.00 ± 1.06a,BC |
| Rabbit | 4.50 ± 0.53a,AB | 4.87 ± 0.35a,A | 4.50 ± 0.53a,B | 4.75 ± 0.70a,A | 4.50 ± 0.75a,A | |
| Camel | 4.50 ± 0.75a,ABC | 4.87 ± 0.35a,A | 4.75 ± 0.46a,A | 4.75 ± 0.46a,AB | 4.12 ± 0.83a,B | |
| 60 | Calf | 4.00 ± 0.75a,AB | 4.12 ± 0.64b,CD | 4.25 ± 0.70b,A | 4.50 ± 0.53a,CD | 4.12 ± 0.64a,AB |
| Rabbit | 4.25 ± 1.03a,AB | 4.50 ± 0.75ab,AB | 4.25 ± 0.70b,AB | 5.00 ± 0.00ab,A | 4.50 ± 0.92a,A | |
| Camel | 4.25 ± 0.70a,BC | 4.75 ± 0.46a,A | 5.00 ± 0.00a,A | 4.75 ± 0.46a,AB | 4.50 ± 0.75a,AB | |
Values are means ± standard deviations.
a,bMeans within a row with different superscript letters are significantly different (LSD, p < .05).
A,B,C,DMeans within a column with different superscript letters are significantly different (LSD, p < .05).