Birsen Bulut-Solak1, Nihat Akin2. 1. Department of Gastronomy and Culinary Arts, Faculty of Tourism, Selcuk University, Campus, Konya 42000, Turkey. 2. Department of Food Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Selcuk University, Campus, Konya 42000, Turkey.
Abstract
Processed cheeses (PCs) were made under varying cooking pH values (5.3, 5.4, 5.5, and 5.6) using a processed cheese cooker. Along with emulsifying salts (2.5%), distilled water, NaCl (2%) and a colouring agent under these cooking pH values, the PC samples made with either 100% fresh curd and rennet casein coded processed cheese control (PCC) as control or ~70% fresh curd-~30% traditional village cheese coded processed cheese with village cheese (PCv). The main aim of this study was to determine the effect of the varying cooking pH values on the textural properties for the PCv samples compared with the control sample during 90 days of storage. Chemical and textural properties of all PC samples were investigated over time. The chemical compositions of the PC samples (dry matter and ash) increased at d 90 of storage significantly, due to 1-d ripening of all PC samples at ambient temperature in terms of the manufacturing protocol of the cheese. The textural properties of the PC samples were altered by the varying cooking pH values. It may propose that the interactions of the proteins at the cooking pH values during processing and biochemical mechanisms in the cheese systems could likely affect the texture of the PC samples over time. Hardness, gumminess and chewiness values of all PC samples also increased over time (p<0.05). This study is also to give some knowledge on the design of PC manufacture to cheese makers, and a marketing opportunity to local cheese makers who individually make a traditional village cheese in Turkey.
Processed cheeses (PCs) were made under varying cooking pH values (5.3, 5.4, 5.5, and 5.6) using a processed cheese cooker. Along with emulsifying salts (2.5%), distilled water, NaCl (2%) and a colouring agent under these cooking pH values, the PC samples made with either 100% fresh curd and rennet casein coded processed cheese control (PCC) as control or ~70% fresh curd-~30% traditional village cheese coded processed cheese with village cheese (PCv). The main aim of this study was to determine the effect of the varying cooking pH values on the textural properties for the PCv samples compared with the control sample during 90 days of storage. Chemical and textural properties of all PC samples were investigated over time. The chemical compositions of the PC samples (dry matter and ash) increased at d 90 of storage significantly, due to 1-d ripening of all PC samples at ambient temperature in terms of the manufacturing protocol of the cheese. The textural properties of the PC samples were altered by the varying cooking pH values. It may propose that the interactions of the proteins at the cooking pH values during processing and biochemical mechanisms in the cheese systems could likely affect the texture of the PC samples over time. Hardness, gumminess and chewiness values of all PC samples also increased over time (p<0.05). This study is also to give some knowledge on the design of PC manufacture to cheese makers, and a marketing opportunity to local cheese makers who individually make a traditional village cheese in Turkey.
Processed cheese (PC) is traditionally manufactured by adding natural cheeses along
with emulsifying salts (ESs), water, NaCl, fat and other ingredients to the cheese
system, followed by stirring and heating the blend. The commonly used temperature
and time ranges in PC manufacture are from 70°C to 95°C and from 4 to
15 min, respectively. Moreover, mixing speeds also range from 50 and 3,000 rpm in PC
manufacture. However, these ranges depend on the formulation of the desirable
resultant product (Fox et al., 2000).ESs, which are basically one of the main ingredients for PC manufacture, are used to
improve emulsifying capacity of milk proteins. They have many properties to
solubilise and hydrate milk proteins during PC manufacture after chelating
Ca2+ from para-casein network. Moreover, the solubility of
milk proteins relates to surface hydrophilic and hydrophobic interactions. However,
the protein is more hydrated than in the natural cheese because of the addition of
ESs to the PC blends. Therefore, the addition of ESs gives greater differences to
processed cheeses (PCs) (Fox et al., 2000;
Pelegrine and Gasparetto, 2005).Natural cheese is one of the other important ingredients. Various types of natural
cheeses are used to manufacture PC, depending on the country, availability of
natural cheeses and marketing (Kapoor and Metzger,
2008). Guinee et al. (2004)
reported that the functionality of natural cheese is dynamic for PC manufacture,
with the different functional attributes undergoing particular changes during
ripening.Traditional village cheese is also made from semi-skimmed milk and/or skimmed milk
with rennet casein by local people in various parts of Turkey in order to obtain
economic value and/or cost reduction for their life-expenses. This cheese is a
common and semi-soft cheese with a white or whitish colour. It sometimes contains
small eyes in the inside of the cheese depending on the quality of milk, and is held
in brine (sodium chloride 12%) during ripening for 30 d. The flavor of the
traditional village cheese tends to become slightly tasteless and salty. Moreover,
the village cheese with a low price is used to reduce the expenses of processed
Kashar cheeses in Turkey. It also abounds in everywhere in Turkey to use it in the
PC manufacture. A semi-hard and popular traditional Kashar cheese with a yellow
colour is one of the most consumed cheeses in Turkey. There is no small eyes in the
inside of Kashar cheese. Kashar cheese is also classified either as fresh Kashar or
aged Kashar in terms of ripening according to Turkish Standards (Anonymous, 1999). Nowadays, because of reducing
expenses of Kashar cheese, it is manufactured with a processed cheese cooker instead
of the production of traditional Kashar which has less yield and longer
manufacturing time as compared to the production of processed Kashar cheese.PC has also manufactured for diversities, convenience, preservation and cost
reduction for more than two decades. Recently, the use of food ingredients has
widened the window for incorporation into PC. All ingredients, processing methods
and equipments used in PC manufacture are quite versatile (Guinee et al., 2004; Lee and
Anema, 2009). The compositional properties of the ingredients can also
use to improve some functional and textural properties of the desired resultant PC
(Lee and Anema, 2009). Besides these,
texture is one of the substantial quality evaluations of PC, with its development
being completely associated with the biochemical and physicochemical changes, such
as in ionic equilibria occurring during ripening and/or storage (Lucey et al., 2003; O’Mahony et al., 2005). However, one of the main factors
influencing characteristics of processed cheese is also pH values of natural
cheeses. pH has marked influences on the structure and texture of PC. Due to these
reasons, PC is usually prepared at a particular pH value of the resultant product.
Final pH of PC also regards to the solubility and interactions of milk proteins, as
well as the hydrolysis of ESs. It usually ranges from pH 5.4 to pH 5.9, mainly
depending on all the types of PCs (Guinee et al.,
2004; Lee and Anema, 2009; Lu et al., 2007). Recent studies have shown
that the cooking pH values can markedly influence the interactions of milk proteins.
These interactions could have a remarkable effect on the textural characteristics of
the PC (Anema and Li, 2003; Donato and Dalgleish, 2006; Lee and Anema, 2009; Rodriguez del Angel and Dalgleish, 2006). Moreover, some
experiments were also conducted in PCs with a variation of many treatments (Kapoor and Metzger, 2008). Lee and Anema (2009) reported that the textural
properties of the processed cheese spread samples can be manipulated by the cooking
pH, which can have a marked effect on the textural properties of the processed
cheese spreads to be. The kinetics of protein denaturation and aggregation is also
controlled by the heating conditions and the chemical environment with the pH which
is probably the most important factors in determining the rate and extent of protein
denaturation and the degree of the subsequent interaction of the whey proteins with
the casein micelles (Anema and Li, 2003; Corredig and Dalgleish, 1996). All these
differences could be likely due to the usage of different pH values of cheese,
different ESs, different types and ages of cheeses, and different conditions for PC
manufacture.The main purpose of present study was to investigate the effect of the varying
cooking pH values (5.3, 5.4, 5.5, and 5.6) on the textural properties for the
processed cheese with village cheese (PCV), in comparison to the
processed cheese control (PCC) which contained no traditional village
cheese during 90 days of storage.
Materials and Methods
Materials
Fresh curd (52.9% dry matter, 27.3% fat, 0.23% salt, and pH
5.30), 2 mon aged traditional village cheese (39.9% dry matter,
1.50% fat, 0.94% salt, and pH 4.85), rennet casein (93.9%
dry matter) were used as raw materials for PC manufacture. All chemicals,
reagents and used solvents were analytical grades and were purchased from Merck
(Darmstadt, Germany). Joha® PZ7 (sodium citrates,
potassium orthophosphates, and polyphosphates), Joha®
PZ14 (sodium citrates, orthophosphates, and polyphosphates) and
Joha® Tneu (orthophosphates) were purchased
Joha (Benckiser-Knapsack, Ladenburg, Germany).
Manufacture methods for the traditional village cheese and the fresh
curd
The traditional village cheeses were made by local villagers individually in the
Eastern Turkey according to same manufacture schedule. After filtrating raw
milk, full-fat cow’s milk, which was obtained from a local farm, was
separated from milk fat until it was semi-fat milk (~1%). Semi-fat
cow’s milk was applied to heat treatment at ~55±1°C
for 20 min by local village cheese producers. After heating, it was cooled to
~32±1°C. Then diluted rennet liquid [10 fold (strength
1:10.000)] added to the milk which was stirred into every tinned container of 20
kg milk. Then, it was held on 90 min for coagulation. The curd was cut into
small pieces (0.5 cm3), especially square-shaped pieces, with a long
knife. Afterwards, it was held on for 15 min. After syneresis, hot water
(90±1°C) was added to the curd until the temperature of the curd
reached by ~42±1°C. The curd was held for drainage (3 h),
and then it was brined (sodium chloride 12%) at 5°C for 1 mon.
Afterwards, the village cheeses were packaged with vacuum and stored at
5°C for further 1 mon.The fresh curd was manufactured in Seker Dairy Plant in Konya. The fat content of
milk was standardized to 3.4% as full-fat milk. The milk was pasteurised
at 68°C for 30 min. Then, it was cooled to 38°C. Thermophilic
starter culture (Christian Hansen TCC-3; 0.7 w/v) and calcium chloride (2 mg/kg)
added to the full-fat milk. When pH of the milk was at 6.3, diluted rennet
liquid (10 fold) added to the milk. The curd was cut 45 min later with a curd
knife in the shape of 1 cm3 cubes. It was also allowed to settle in
10 min. Heating applied to the curd until the temperature of the curd reached
from 35°C to 38°C within 20 min. While heating within 20 min, the
curd was also being agitated, and rate of the increasing temperature for each
1°C was carried out within 6 min. At the end of heating treatment, whey
was drained from the batch at pH 6.0. The fresh cheese curd was fermented by pH
5.2 value. Then, the remaining whey was redrained again.
Manufacture of the processed cheeses with and without the traditional village
cheese
The processed samples with and without the use of a traditional village cheese
were produced in the food processing facilities of Food Engineering Department,
Agriculture Faculty, Selcuk University. General target chemical composition for
the PCV and PCC blends was 49% dry matter and
19% fat. This chemical composition of the PC samples was targeted to the
ideal composition of processed Kashar cheese which is the one of most consumed
cheeses in Turkey (Temizkan et al.,
2014).The percentage of added ingredients for the PC samples is presented in Table 1. The curd and the traditional
village cheese were grinded to a size of <0.5 cm before PC manufacture.
The PCV samples were prepared from the curd (~70%), the
traditional village cheese (~30%), ESs (2.5% w/w) (ratio of
Joha® PZ7: Joha®
PZ14=3:2), distilled water and NaCl (2%) under the
varying cooking pH values using a pilot-scale processed cheese cooker (10 kg
capacity) equipped with indirect steam injection and a scraped surface stirrer
(Intermak, Konya, Turkey). The processed cheese cooker had also temperature and
speed settings using for heating and stirring the blends. The addition of
Joha® Tneu emulsifying salt was used to
increase pH values of all PC blends from their pH values to the aimed cooking pH
value (5.3, 5.4, 5.5, and 5.6). Before adjustment of the cooking pH value, the
blend was stirred at 7,265×g for 3 min at 50°C during processing.
After adjusting the pH values of the blend, β-carotene (20% v/v;
0.05% v/v) as a colouring agent was added to the blend at 70°C.
The blend was cooked at a temperature setting of 85°C for 4 min at
36,330×g. After cooking, the melted PC samples were filled into 7 tin
containers (1,000 g) for each trial. On the other hand, the PCC
samples were made with the fresh curd (100%) and rennet casein along with
other same ingredients used for the PCV samples, under the varying
cooking pH values with same circumstances. After processing, all PC samples
therein tins were kept at 20±2°C for 1-d ripening in order to gain
a desirable texture, colour and flavor of typical Turkish Kashar cheese. After 1
d of storage, the PC samples were removed from the tins, and packaged with
cryovac shrink-vacuum bags. They stored at 4°C up to 90 days. All PC
samples as a batch were manufactured in duplicate. All batches of the PCs were
prepared randomly by using the same processed cheese cooker. The PC samples were
analysed on up to 90 d for the chemical and textural properties. The PC samples
(PCV or PCC) were also coded according to the cooking
pH values, such as PCV-5.3 or PCC-5.3 for the 5.3 cooking
pH value. The rest of other samples were also coded similarly like those, such
as PCV-5.4 or PCC-5.4, PCV-5.5 or
PCC5.5 and PCV-5.6 or
PCC-5.6.
Table 1.
The percentage of added ingredients into the PCV and
PCC blends after calculating the blends’
formulas
Cheese type
Curd (%)
Village cheese (%)
Salt (%)
Distilled water (%)
Rennet casein (%)
Joha®
PZ7 (%)
Joha®
PZ14 (%)
Joha®
Tneu (%)
β-Carotene (20%v/v)
(μL)
PCV-5.3
64.57
27.31
2.12
5.99
-
1.5
1
1.7
0.05
PCV-5.4
64.57
27.31
2.12
5.99
-
1.5
1
1.9
0.05
PCV-5.5
64.57
27.31
2.12
5.99
-
1.5
1
2.7
0.05
PCV-5.6
64.57
27.31
2.12
5.99
-
1.5
1
3.5
0.05
PCC-5.3
67.25
-
1.83
19.68
10.80
1.5
1
-
0.05
PCC-5.4
67.25
-
1.83
19.68
10.80
1.5
1
0.01
0.05
PCC-5.5
67.25
-
1.83
19.68
10.80
1.5
1
0.03
0.05
PCC-5.6
67.25
-
1.83
19.68
10.80
1.5
1
0.05
0.05
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese; PCC,
processed cheese control.
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese; PCC,
processed cheese control.
Cheese sampling
After being received at the laboratory (delivery at 4°C), for chemical
compositional analyses, the PCs were sampled at d 1 while PCs were kept at
20±2°C for gaining a desirable texture, colour and flavor. They
were also sampled at d 90 of storage. However, for pH measurement the PCs were
also measured on different days of storage (at 1, 7, 15, 30, 60, and 90 d). When
taking the sample, the particular block was cross-cut and a 200 g inner (core)
part and a 200 g outer (adjacent to the foil) part of a slice was taken in the
case of every measuring cheese. Moreover, for textural analyses, they were
sampled on varying days of storage (at 7, 15, 30, 60, and 90 d). At each
chemical compositional sampling, a 5-cm piece of cheese was cut from the
exterior face of the block; the outer layer (0.5 cm) of the piece was discarded,
and the rest of it was used for the compositional analyses. For textural
analyses, a half of rectangular block of the cheese was used for each textural
sampling time after the outer layers (0.5 cm) of the block were discarded.
Measurement of the PC samples for the chemical properties
After sampling, grated all PC samples were analyzed for dry matter, fat, protein,
ash and salt contents. The samples were analysed for moisture and ash contents
using Gravimetric methods, fat content using the Gerber method, and protein
content using the Kjeldahl method by using a total nitrogen to protein
conversion factor of 6.38 (Marshall,
2005). Salt contents of the PC samples were also determined according to
the procedures described by Marshall
(2005). pH values of the PC samples were measured directly at ambient
temperature using a 315i/SET pH-meter equipped with a sentix glass electrode
(WTW, Weilheim, Germany). The measurements of the samples were conducted at
least three times for each trial.
Measurement of the PC samples for the textural properties
The textural properties of all PC samples were measured at 20±1°C
at d 7, 15, 30, 60, and 90 by a texture analyzer (model Universal TA.XT2,
Texture Technologies Corp., 18 Fairview Road, Scarsdale, NY 10583, USA) fitted
with a 5 cm diameter cylinder probe loaded with Nexygen TM software program. The
texture analyzer was equipped with a 25-kg load cell for texture profile
analysis (TPA). All PC samples were kept at 20±1°C for about half
an hour before testing. The dimension of the PC sample was at 5×5 cm. The
speed of crosshead was set at 1 mm/s in both upward and downward directions
between two cycles. Each sample was subjected to two subsequent cycles (bites)
of compression-decompression. The PC samples were uniaxially compressed to
40% of their original heights. The parameters of TPA were calculated as
described previously (Van Vliet, 1991).
Hardness (g) was measured as the force at maximum compression on the first
cycle. Fracturability (g) was measured as the force per unit area at the point
of fracture on the first cycle. Adhesiveness (g/s) was calculated as the
negative area after the first cycle in the texture profile curve as described
and expressed in absolute values (Van Vliet,
1991). Cohesiveness (dimensionless) was calculated as the ratio of
the area of the second cycle to that of the first cycle. Gumminess (g) is an
energy required to disintegrate a semi-solid food to a state ready for
swallowing (Szczesniak, 2002).
Springiness (dimensionless) was calculated as the ratio of distance of the
second cycle (peak) to the distance of the first cycle (peak). Chewiness (g/cm)
was calculated as the product of
hardness×cohesiveness×springiness. Resilience is tendency of the
PC sample to recover to its original dimensions upon removal of the applied
force (Kapoor and Metzger, 2008). Eight
textural parameters were obtained from TPA of those force-distance curves. TPA
was conducted at least six times for each trial.
Statistical analysis
All samples were prepared on two separate occasions, with all analytical
measurements conducted at least three times. The results are given as mean
values±standard errors. A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was
performed. SPSS 13.0 for Windows SPSS Inc was used for all analyses (Chicago,
IL, USA). Duncan’s multiple comparison test was used to determine
significant differences between the various treatments. The results with
p<0.05 were considered significantly different.
Results and Discussion
Cheese chemical composition and pH
In the present study, the chemical compositions for the PCV and
PCC samples are shown in Table
2. These results of the chemical properties are expected because all
PC samples were adjusted for dry matter and fat contents inferentially as
indicated before. The mean values of dry matter, fat and ash contents for the PC
samples increased significantly at d 90 due to having 1-d ripening at the
ambient temperature to obtain a desirable texture, colour and flavor of typical
processed Kashar cheese after PC manufacture for all PC samples (p<0.05).
Moreover, the mean values of dry matter and ash contents (51.9±0.22 and
6.38±0.07, respectively) for the PCV samples were higher than
the values (49.9±0.22 and 5.56±0.10, respectively) for the
PCC samples. This could possibly result from the further addition
of phosphate-based emulsifying salt into the PCV blends to increase
their first pH values to the desired cooking pH values, because the pH values
for the PCV blends were lower than the values for the PCC
blends during processing. Due to historical low pH values of the PCV
blends, the further addition of phosphate-based emulsifying salt into the blends
would increase the means of dry matter and ash contents in the PCV
samples. Besides, the mean dry matter contents for all PC samples were in
agreement with dry matter contents of the Kashar cheeses (Temizkan et al., 2014). The increasing in the dry matter
contents of the PC samples over time is also in agreement with one study studied
by Kocak et al. (1996). Moreover, there
were no significant differences between these values of the PC samples according
to the differences between the cooking pH values (p>0.05). However, the
highest mean of ash contents of the PC samples observed in which cooked at pH
5.6 during processing. Besides all these, the mean values of the other chemical
compounds’ of the PC samples were similar to each other’s between
the PC samples (p>0.05). The means of fat, protein and salt contents of
the PCV samples were 18.3±0.10, 20.9±0.32, and
3.06±0.11 whereas the values of the contents of the PCC
samples were 18.3±0.14, 20.9±0.28, and 3.00±0.06,
respectively. The changes at the chemical compounds in the present study are
also in agreement with previous study by Cheng et
al. (1997). Cheng et al. (1997)
also reported that an alteration in dry matter content in cheese depended on the
type of added salts.
Table 2.
The chemical properties of the PCV and PCC
samples with the standard errors at d 1 and 90 of storage
Cheese type
Storage
Dry matter
Fat
Protein
Ash
Salt
pH
1
90
Mean
pH
1
90
Mean
pH
1
90
Mean
pH
1
90
Mean
pH
1
90
Mean
PCV
5.3
51.39±0.68
52.16±1.00
51.85±0.22A
5.3
18.34±0.09
18.48±0.03
18.26±0.10
5.3
20.35±1.45
20.82±0.01
20.89±0.32
5.3
6.33±0.03
6.37±0.01
6,38±0.07A
5.3
3.10±0.06
3.55±0.06
3.06±0.11
5.4
50.83±0.33
52.18±1.10
5.4
18.13±0.13
18.90±0.35
5.4
21.85±0.59
22.78±1.16
5.4
6.60±0.21
6.81±0.26
5.4
2.72±0.04
3.54±0.10
5.5
51.68±0.05
51.57±0.40
5.5
17.82±0.19
18.42±0.33
5.5
20.67±0.48
20.87±0.64
5.5
6.03±0.05
6.08±0.02
5.5
2.61±0.00
3.45±0.05
5.6
52.50±0.46
52.46±0.46
5.6
17.75±0.00
18.25±0.05
5.6
19.13±0.13
20.63±0.20
5.6
6.39±0.04
6.43±0.06
5.6
2.41±0.03
3.10±0.01
PCC
5.3
50.17±0.28
50.71±0.16
49.94±0.22B
5.3
17.38±0.13
18.73±0.13
18.31±0.14
5.3
21.42±0.20
21.78±0.70
20.90±0.28
5.3
5.29±0.05
5.32±0.03
5,56±0.10B
5.3
2.79±0.00
3.30±0.19
3.00±0.06
5.4
49.03±0.31
50.11±0.07
5.4
18.03±0.03
18.53±0.53
5.4
19.62±0.79
19.97±0.68
5.4
5.20±0.02
5.31±0.03
5.4
2.85±0.11
3.13±0.10
5.5
49.00±0.24
51.04±0.37
5.5
18.07±0.07
18.93±0.33
5.5
19.83±0.36
20.26±0.91
5.5
5.50±0.01
5.92±0.24
5.5
2.93±0.03
3.23±0.09
5.6
48.85±0.18
50.58±0.05
5.6
18.03±0.03
18.83±0.08
5.6
21.53±0.55
21.90±0.43
5.6
5.57±0.33
6.34±0.21
5.6
2.73±0.00
3.06±0.07
Mean
50.43±0.35B
51.35±0.26A
Mean
17.94±0.07B
18.63±0.09A
Mean
20.55±0.30
21.24±0.28
Mean
5.86±0.13B
6.07±0.13A
Mean
2.77±0.05
3.30±0.05
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese; PCC,
processed cheese control.
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese; PCC,
processed cheese control.The pH values of the PCV and PCC samples are shown in Fig. 1. The pH values of the PC samples
slightly increased over time. The mean value of pH (5.70±0.02) for the
PCV samples was higher than the pH value (5.64±0.02) for
the PCC samples, due to the further addition of phosphate-based
emulsifying salt into the PCV blends in order to increase their first
pH values to the desired cooking pH values during PCv-processing.
There were significant differences in pH values during storage period
(p<0.05). The highest mean pH value (pH 5.71±0.04) of the PC
samples was observed at d 30 of storage, but the pH changed slowly after 30 days
of storage (p<0.05). The reason for major changes of the pH value seen
during d 15 and 30 of storage could possibly be due to higher hydrolysis of ESs.
The slight increase in the pH for all PC samples over time could also be due to
slow solubilisation of colloidal calcium phosphate (CCP) and the loss of lactic
acid. Moreover, the hydrolysis of ESs, especially oligo- and/or poly-phosphates,
creates new acid functions thus lowering the pH-value of the product and
inhibits an eventual pH increase (Chambre and
Daurelles, 1997). The pH values for all PC samples were higher than
that pH value (pH 5.49) of Kashar cheese (Oksuztepe et al., 2009). The increase at the pH values for all PC
samples is also in agreement with previous studies reported by Lucey et al. (2003) and O’Mahony et al. (2005). They
reported that slow solubilisation of CCP causes a slow increase in pH (Lucey et al., 2003). O’Mahony et al. (2005) reported that the amount of
insoluble calcium in the aqueous phase could increase the pH values of Cheddar
cheese samples after ageing. However, in cheeses, where residual lactose is
fermented, the production of lactic acid can balance the usual tendency for a pH
increase, with the result that the pH of cheese may be stable (Singh et al., 1997).
Fig. 1.
The pH values with the standard errors were measured at various days
of storage (at d 7, 15, 30, 60, and 90).
The PCV samples; PCV-5.3 (♦),
PCV-5.4 (■), PCV-5.5 (▲) and
PCV-5.6 (●). The PCC samples;
PCC-5.3 (◊), PCC-5.4 (□),
PCC-5.5 (△) and PCC-5.6 (○).
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese;
PCC, processed cheese control.
The pH values with the standard errors were measured at various days
of storage (at d 7, 15, 30, 60, and 90).
The PCV samples; PCV-5.3 (♦),
PCV-5.4 (■), PCV-5.5 (▲) and
PCV-5.6 (●). The PCC samples;
PCC-5.3 (◊), PCC-5.4 (□),
PCC-5.5 (△) and PCC-5.6 (○).
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese;
PCC, processed cheese control.
Cheese texture
The changes in the textural parameters for all PC samples during 90 days of
storage are shown in Fig. 2A, B,
Fig. 3A, B,
Fig. 4A, B, and Fig. 5A, B, respectively. However, there is no information
available about the textural properties of processed Kashar cheese including a
traditional village cheese. As seen in the figures, there were generally some
changes in the textural properties for all PC samples at d 15 and 30 of storage,
possibly due to the hydrolysis of CN and ESs because of the development of
cheese texture which depends on the extent of proteolysis and hydrolysis of ESs
and other components such as lactose (Fox et
al., 2000). The hydrolysis of ESs occurs over time, and involves more
gradual changes in the texture due to the small changes of pH values (Fox et al., 2000; Guinee, 2004). Moreover, the texture of processed cheese is
influenced by many other factors, especially biochemical and physicochemical
changes (Fox et al., 2000; Kapoor and Metzger, 2008; Tamime, 2011).
Fig. 2.
The hardness (A) and fracturability (B) values with the standard
errors for the PC samples during 90 days of storage are
presented.
The PCV samples; PCV-5.3 (♦),
PCV-5.4 (■), PCV-5.5 (▲) and
PCV-5.6 (●). The PCC samples;
PCC-5.3 (◊), PCC-5.4 (□),
PCC-5.5 (△) and PCC-5.6 (○).
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese;
PCC, processed cheese control.
Fig. 3.
The adhesiveness (A) and springiness (B) values with the standard
errors for the PC samples during 90 days of storage are
presented.
The PCV samples; PCV-5.3 (♦),
PCV-5.4 (■), PCV-5.5 (▲) and
PCV-5.6 (●). The PCC samples;
PCC-5.3 (◊), PCC-5.4 (□),
PCC-5.5 (△) and PCC-5.6 (○).
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese;
PCC, processed cheese control.
Fig. 4.
The cohesiveness (A) and gumminess (B) values with the standard
errors for the PC samples during 90 days of storage are
presented.
The PCV samples; PCV-5.3 (♦),
PCV-5.4 (■), PCV-5.5 (▲) and
PCV-5.6 (●). The PCC samples;
PCC-5.3 (◊), PCC-5.4 (□),
PCC-5.5 (△) and PCC-5.6 (○).
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese;
PCC, processed cheese control.
Fig. 5.
The chewiness (A) and resilience (B) values with the standard errors
for the PC samples during 90 days of storage are presented.
The PCV samples; PCV-5.3 (♦),
PCV-5.4 (■), PCV-5.5 (▲) and
PCV-5.6 (●). The PCC samples;
PCC-5.3 (◊), PCC-5.4 (□),
PCC-5.5 (△) and PCC-5.6 (○).
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese;
PCC, processed cheese control.
The hardness (A) and fracturability (B) values with the standard
errors for the PC samples during 90 days of storage are
presented.
The PCV samples; PCV-5.3 (♦),
PCV-5.4 (■), PCV-5.5 (▲) and
PCV-5.6 (●). The PCC samples;
PCC-5.3 (◊), PCC-5.4 (□),
PCC-5.5 (△) and PCC-5.6 (○).
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese;
PCC, processed cheese control.
The adhesiveness (A) and springiness (B) values with the standard
errors for the PC samples during 90 days of storage are
presented.
The PCV samples; PCV-5.3 (♦),
PCV-5.4 (■), PCV-5.5 (▲) and
PCV-5.6 (●). The PCC samples;
PCC-5.3 (◊), PCC-5.4 (□),
PCC-5.5 (△) and PCC-5.6 (○).
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese;
PCC, processed cheese control.
The cohesiveness (A) and gumminess (B) values with the standard
errors for the PC samples during 90 days of storage are
presented.
The PCV samples; PCV-5.3 (♦),
PCV-5.4 (■), PCV-5.5 (▲) and
PCV-5.6 (●). The PCC samples;
PCC-5.3 (◊), PCC-5.4 (□),
PCC-5.5 (△) and PCC-5.6 (○).
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese;
PCC, processed cheese control.
The chewiness (A) and resilience (B) values with the standard errors
for the PC samples during 90 days of storage are presented.
The PCV samples; PCV-5.3 (♦),
PCV-5.4 (■), PCV-5.5 (▲) and
PCV-5.6 (●). The PCC samples;
PCC-5.3 (◊), PCC-5.4 (□),
PCC-5.5 (△) and PCC-5.6 (○).
PCV, processed cheese with village cheese;
PCC, processed cheese control.Hardness, which is one of the important parameters for assessment of overall
quality, shows a resistance to deformation when the cheese sample is subjected
to an external force. The hardness values for all PC samples increased over time
due to the decrease of the pH values and the increase in the dry matter contents
(Tamime, 2011). The mean hardness
value (2,957±327 g) for the PCV samples was lower than the
value for the PCC samples (3,377±180 g) because the addition
of 2 mon aged traditional village cheese could possibly decrease the mean
hardness value of the PCV samples, as a result that including the low
level of intact casein content of the village cheese. As it is known, the
primary phase of proteolysis occurs during the first 2 to 4 wk and involves
weakening of the para-casein network, and finally results in softening of the
texture especially hardness (Guinee,
2003; Irudayaraj et al., 1999;
Lawrence et al., 2004; Lucey et al., 2003; O’Mahony et al., 2005). This is also related to a
previous study reported by Kapoor and Metzger
(2008). Kapoor and Metzger
(2008) reported that when the intact casein content of the natural
cheese used for PC manufacture decreased, hardness of the processed cheese could
decrease because of the increasing level of proteolysis. Moreover, an increase
in the hardness values for the PC samples over time could also be consistent
with the increasing levels of dry matter, which act as an important role on the
textural properties of the samples. An increase in the dry matter content could
also reinforce the structure of the cheese networks, and increase the coherence
of the protein matrix to become harder. However, the mean hardness value for the
PC samples at the 5.5 cooking pH was the highest value among the all mean
hardness values at the other cooking pH values (p<0.05). This reason may
be likely due to the increase of an interaction between the milk proteins, whose
structures could be possibly altered at the 5.5 cooking pH value during
processing. One of the most remarkable effects on the cheese hardness is also
that hydrolysis of peptide bonds releases two new charged groups that compete
for water, decreasing the free water content of the cheese (Guinee, 2003; Irudayaraj et al., 1999; Lawrence et al., 2004; Lucey et al.,
2003; O’Mahony et al.,
2005). The textural changes of the cheese samples also became slower
after 4 wk. These textural changes are also possibly attributed to the rate of
biochemical changes and increase in pH (Gunasekaran and Mehmet, 2004). Moreover, the increase in the dry
matter content on 90 d of storage also caused a restricting solvation of the
para-CN matrix of the cheese which leads to an increase in some textural
parameters in the cheese system, such as hardness, cohesiveness and springiness
(Guinee, 2003; Irudayaraj et al., 1999; Lawrence et al., 2004; Lucey et al.,
2003; O’Mahony et al.,
2005). Beside all these, this study is also in agreement with one of
the previous studies done by O’Mahony et
al. (2005). They reported that the primary softening of Cheddar
cheese texture occurring during the early stages of ripening (initial 2 wk) is
mostly correlated with the transfer of casein-bound calcium phosphate to the
aqueous phase of the cheese concentration of insoluble calcium (O’Mahony et al., 2005). There are
also some agreements with the previous studies (Marchesseau et al., 1997; Lucey et
al., 2003). Lucey et al.
(2003) reported that the hardness values of the PC samples decreased
with increasing the cooking pH values because of the increased electrostatic
repulsions between CN micelles. Marchesseau et
al. (1997) studied the microstructure of the processed cheese
manufactured with a different resultant pH value. They found that a processed
cheese with a lower pH (5.2) had increased interactions between milk proteins
since the proteins were closer to the isoelectric point of CN. It was also
founded that processed cheese at a higher pH (pH 6.1) had an open structure, and
therefore a weaker emulsion observed (Marchesseau et al., 1997).Fracturability is defined by an initial yield peak (Dimitreli and Thomareis, 2007). The mean fracturability
value (1,714±205 g) for the PCV samples was higher than the
mean fracturability value (1,186±219 g) for the PCC samples.
Nevertheless, the fracturability values for all PC samples decreased over time
(p<0.05). The reason of the decrease at fracturability values could
possibly be due to the changes in the chemical composition and biochemical
changes of the PC samples, especially the decrease of intact casein content.
Even if the changes did not show a clear trend, the decrease in fracturability
values may also be related to the hydrolysis of the ESs, which could lead to the
small changes at the cooking pH values, and affected the textural properties of
the PC samples at low temperature over time. Additionally, due to the fat
content in the protein matrix, it could possibly make all the PC samples more
elastic and less susceptible to fracture upon compression (Awad et al., 2002). Hence, all PC samples could be
undeformable at 90 d of storage.The adhesiveness, which is required a force to remove the material that adheres
to the mouth during the normal mastication process, has an opposite trend to
chewiness and gumminess (Awad et al.,
2002). Adhesiveness also implies a decrease in elasticity, and an
increase in water-protein matrix interaction (Costa et al., 2010). The mean adhesiveness values for the PC samples
are seen in Fig. 3A. There were no detected
significant differences at the adhesiveness values of the PC samples over time
(p>0.05). As seen in Fig. 3A, the
adhesiveness values for the PC samples during from 15 to 60 d of storage were
higher than the adhesiveness values of the PC samples on the other days of
storage, and then these values decreased on 90 d of storage. It was also
supposed that the adhesiveness values for the PC samples could be probably
influenced by the increase at the dry matter content, and the biochemical
changes in the components of the PC samples, especially hydrolysis of the ESs
and fat, the cooking pH values as well as the proteolysis of protein (Dimitreli and Thomareis, 2007). As seen in
the Fig. 3A, the adhesiveness values for
the PC samples could also be affected by the cooking pH values during processing
(p<0.05). At the lowest cooking pH (5.3), the adhesiveness values for the
PC samples were the lowest when compared to the values at the other cooking pH
values (p<0.05). The reason may be due to the greater interaction between
the milk protein and other components at 5.3 pH because they were closer to
isoelectric point of CN. Nevertheless, some researchers have agreed that the pH
range for a good-quality processed cheese should be between 5.4 and 5.8, even if
it depends on all the types of processed cheese (Marchesseau et al., 1997).Springiness, which refers to the elasticity, indicates the ability of the cheese
samples to go back to its undeformed condition after removing of the external
force, and depends on the emulsion state and mainly upon protein (Awad et al., 2002). The mean springiness
value (0.849±0.008) for the PCV samples was higher than the
value (0.834±0.003) for the PCC samples. This may be likely
due to the addition of 2 mon aged village cheese into PCV samples.
The springiness values for the PC samples increased over time, as seen in Fig. 3B. However, the springiness values on
30 d of storage for the PC samples decreased gradually due to possibly the
increasing levels of hydrolyse of ESs and proteolysis (p<0.05). The PC
samples at the highest cooking pH (5.6) had less mean springiness value when
compared to the values at the other cooking pH values (p<0.05). This
reason may also be due to the biochemical changes, as well as the changes of the
bonds which could likely lead to some changes in protein-protein interactions.
These mechanisms could also cause the decrease in springiness. This is also in
agreement with one study done by Shirashoji et
al. (2006). They also indicated that the proteins in the processed
cheese are less close to each other’s when the pH was increased, due to
the increase of net negative charges on the proteins. However, each type of ESs
influences the CN micelles with different mechanisms (Mizuno and Lucey, 2005).Cohesiveness is influenced by the strength of the internal bonds making up the
cheese system (Awad et al., 2002). The
cohesiveness values for all PC samples are seen in Fig. 4A. The mean cohesiveness value (0.690±0.003) for the
PCV samples was higher than the value (0.664±0.003) for
the PCC samples (p<0.05). There were no significant
differences at the cohesiveness values according to the cooking pH values for
all PC samples (p>0.05). The PC samples had the lowest cohesiveness
values until 2 wk of storage. After the 2 wk of storage, the cohesiveness values
for the PC samples increased with the increasing of storage (p<0.05).
This could be due to excessive interactions between milk proteins. The
cohesiveness values for the PC samples had opposite trends when compared to the
gumminess and chewiness values for the PC samples, as seen in Fig. 4B and Fig. 5A, respectively. One previous finding done by Lane et al. (1997) has also been in
agreement with the decrease in the cohesiveness value on 15 d of storage in this
study. Lane et al. (1997) reported that
the cohesiveness value among the textural properties of Cheddar cheese was more
related to primary proteolysis with a trend of decreasing with increasing
proteolysis.The gumminess and chewiness values for the PC samples are seen in Fig. 4B and Fig. 5A, respectively. The gumminess and chewiness values for all PC
samples had similar trends over time. The mean gumminess and chewiness values
(1,964±94.4 g and 1,675±84.2 g/cm) for the PCV samples
were lower than the values (2,255±127 g and 1,895±113 g/cm) for
the PCC samples, respectively. However, the gumminess and chewiness
values for all PC samples increased during 90 days of storage (p<0.05).
The reason of the increase at the gumminess and chewiness values over time may
be due to the increase in the dry matter content and the biochemical changes
between the compounds of the PC samples. These mechanisms may possibly reinforce
the protein-protein interactions in the PC samples. However, the interactions
could also be slightly affected by small changes at the cooking pH values during
processing. The changes at the cooking pH values could also increase the
interactions between milk protein and other components in the PC systems over
time. The PC samples at the 5.5 cooking pH value had higher gumminess and
chewiness values when compared to the values of the PC samples at the other
cooking pH values (p<0.05). This reason might be that the quantity to
simulate strength of the internal bonds could build up the body of the PC
samples. An increase in the interactions of milk proteins could also possibly
result in a denser network at the 5.5 cooking pH value. So that, the changes at
the gumminess and chewiness values of the PC samples were influenced by the
cooking pH values during processing. When the pH value is shifted, different
types of interactions in the cheese systems occur to different extents (Fox et al., 2000). Lee and Anema (2009) found that the dependency of pH with
thiol-disulphide exchange reactions may also account for some changes of the
textural properties for the PCs, depending on the cooking pH values. Therefore,
the final pH value of the processed cheese has been found to have a substantial
effect on the type of protein interactions in the processed cheese emulsion
(Kapoor and Metzger, 2008; Lee and Anema, 2009; Marchesseau et al., 1997). Apart from these, this study
could also be in agreement with previous work of Piska and Stetina (2004). They found that an increasing ratio of the
mature raw material in the PC blends decreased the rigidity of the processed
cheese which was expressed in terms of the textural parameters, such as
hardness, gumminess and chewiness (Piska and
Stetina, 2004).The resilience values for all PC samples are seen in Fig. 5B. The mean resilience value (0.309±0.006) for
the PCV samples was higher than the value (0.290±0.003) for
the PCC samples. This reason may be due to the increasing proteolysis
level in the PCV samples as a result of addition of 2-mo aged village
cheese. The small difference between the compositions of the PC formulation
could affect the resilience values, in regard to the interactions of the
proteins. The resilience values for the PC samples also increased at d 30 of
storage. However, the resilience values for the PC samples after 30-d of storage
generally decreased with increasing of storage. The decrease in the resilience
values after this time period may also be due to the decrease of pH values of PC
samples and the increase of hydrolysis of ESs, and some biochemical changes such
as ionic equilibria of the cheese networks (Tamime, 2011). The changes at the resilience values could be
possibly related to over time. The PC samples at the low cooking pH values (pH
5.3 and 5.4 values) had higher resilience values than the values for the PC
samples at the other cooking pH values (p<0.05). When the cooking pH was
shifted from pH 5.3 to 5.6 during processing, the resilience values of the PC
samples decreased, because of not close to isoelectric point of CN. Therefore,
the small changes at the cooking pH may also possibly influence of the
resilience values for all PC samples.
Conclusions
A small shift at the varying cooking pH values during processing could influence the
interactions between cheese chemical compounds in the cheese systems over storage.
This reason might be due to slight differences at both the chemical properties of
the PC samples and the biochemical changes, which have markedly influenced the
textural properties of the PC cheese. Thus, a small shifting at the cooking pH value
can be an effective mean to alter the textural properties of a processed cheese.
Consequently, the changes at the textural properties for the PC samples could
possibly attribute to the varying cooking pH values during processing, especially
the 5.5 cooking pH value. Using a traditional village cheese in the processed cheese
manufacturing is also of considerable economic importance for processed cheese
manufacturers, and gives a marketing opportunity to local cheese makers individually
in Turkey. To understand these mechanisms well in the cheese system, furthermore new
studies are needed to carry out in the future.