Raw milk (2,710 kg) was separated at 4 degrees C, the skim milk was pasteurized (72 degrees C, 16 s), split into 3 batches, and microfiltered using pilot-scale ceramic uniform transmembrane pressure (UTP; Membralox model EP1940GL0.1microA, 0.1 microm alumina, Pall Corp., East Hills, NY), ceramic graded permeability (GP; Membralox model EP1940GL0.1microAGP1020, 0.1 microm alumina, Pall Corp.), and polymeric spiral-wound (SW; model FG7838-OS0x-S, 0.3 microm polyvinylidene fluoride, Parker-Hannifin, Process Advanced Filtration Division, Tell City, IN) membranes. There were differences in flux among ceramic UTP, ceramic GP, and polymeric SW microfiltration membranes (54.08, 71.79, and 16.21 kg/m2 per hour, respectively) when processing skim milk at 50 degrees C in a continuous bleed-and-feed 3x process. These differences in flux among the membranes would influence the amount of membrane surface area required to process a given volume of milk in a given time. Further work is needed to determine if these differences in flux are maintained over longer processing times. The true protein contents of the microfiltration permeates from UTP and GP membranes were higher than from SW membranes (0.57, 0.56, and 0.38%, respectively). Sodium-dodecyl-sulfate-PAGE gels for permeates revealed a higher casein proportion in GP and SW permeate than in UTP permeate, with the highest passage of casein through the GP membrane under the operational conditions used in this study. The slight cloudiness of the permeates produced using the GP and SW systems may have been due to the presence of a small amount of casein, which may present an obstacle in their use in applications when clarity is an important functional characteristic. More beta-lactoglobulin passed through the ceramic membranes than through the polymeric membrane. The efficiency of removal of serum proteins in a continuous bleed-and-feed 3x process at 50 degrees C was 64.40% for UTP, 61.04% for GP, and 38.62% for SW microfiltration membranes. The SW polymeric membranes had a much higher rejection of serum proteins than did the ceramic membranes, consistent with the sodium-dodecyl-sulfate PAGE data. Multiple stages and diafiltration would be required to produce a 60 to 65% serum protein reduced micellar casein concentrate with SW membranes, whereas only one stage would be needed for the ceramic membranes used in this study.

The objectives of this study were to identify and compare the composition, flavor, and volatile components of serum protein concentrate (SPC) and whey protein concentrate (WPC) containing about 34% protein made from the same milk to each other and to commercial 34% WPC from 6 different factories. The SPC and WPC were manufactured in triplicate with each pair of serum and traditional whey protein manufactured from the same lot of milk. At each replication, SPC and WPC were spray dried (SD) and freeze dried (FD) to determine the effect of the heat used in spray drying on sensory properties. A trained sensory panel documented the sensory profiles of rehydrated SD or FD powders. Volatile components were extracted by solid-phase microextraction (SPME) and solvent extraction followed by solvent-assisted flavor evaporation (SAFE) with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and gas chromatography-olfactometry. Whey protein concentrates had higher fat content, calcium, and glycomacropeptide content than SPC. Color differences (Hunter L, a, b) were not evident between SPC and WPC powders, but when rehydrated, SPC solutions were clear, whereas WPC solutions were cloudy. No consistent differences were documented in sensory profiles of SD and FD SPC and WPC. The SD WPC had low but distinct buttery (diacetyl) and cardboard flavors, whereas the SD SPC did not. Sensory profiles of both rehydrated SD products were bland and lower in overall aroma and cardboard flavor compared with the commercial WPC. Twenty-nine aroma impact compounds were identified in the SPC and WPC. Lipid and protein oxidation products were present in both products. The SPC and WPC manufactured in this study had lower total volatiles and lower concentrations of many lipid oxidation compounds when compared with commercial WPC. Our results suggest that when SPC and WPC are manufactured under controlled conditions in a similar manner from the same milk using the same ultrafiltration equipment, there are few sensory differences but distinct compositional and physical property differences that may influence functionality. Furthermore, flavor (sensory and instrumental) properties of both pilot-scale manufactured protein powders were different from commercial powders suggesting the role of other influencing factors (e.g., milk supply, processing equipment, sanitation).

Milk serum protein concentrates (SPC) are proteins found in cheese whey that are removed directly from milk. Because SPC are not exposed to the cheese-making process, enzymatic or chemical reactions that can lead to off-flavors are reduced. The objectives of this study were to identify and compare the composition, flavor, and volatile components of 80% protein SPC and whey protein concentrates (WPC). Each pair of 80% SPC and WPC was manufactured from the same lot of milk and this was replicated 3 times. At each replication, spray-dried product from each protein source was collected. Commercial 80% WPC were also collected from several manufacturers for sensory and volatile analyses. A trained sensory panel documented the sensory profiles of the rehydrated powders. Volatile components were extracted by solid-phase microextraction and solvent extraction followed by solvent-assisted flavor evaporation with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and gas chromatography-olfactometry. Consumer acceptance testing of acidified 6% protein beverages made with 80% SPC and WPC produced in the pilot plant and with WPC from commercial sources was conducted. The SPC was lower in fat and had a higher pH than the WPC produced in the pilot plant or commercial WPC. Few sensory differences were found between the rehydrated SPC and WPC manufactured in this study, but their flavor profiles were distinct from the flavor of rehydrated commercial WPC. The pilot-plant WPC had higher concentrations of lipid oxidation products compared with SPC, which may be related to the higher fat content of WPC. There was a large difference in appearance between 80% SPC and WPC: solutions of SPC were clear and those of WPC were opaque. Concentrations of lipid oxidation products in commercial WPC were generally higher than those in pilot-plant SPC or WPC. Sensory profiles of the peach-flavored protein beverage included cereal, free fatty acid, and soapy flavors and bitter taste in beverages made from pilot-plant products, whereas cardboard flavors were detected in those made with commercial WPC. Consumer liking scores for the beverages made with SPC were ranked highest or equally high with beverages made with WPC for aroma, appearance, and mouthfeel, but the beverages made with SPC had lower flavor and overall liking scores compared with beverages made with 3 of the 4 WPC.

Most current research has focused on using ceramic microfiltration (MF) membranes for micellar casein concentrate production, but little research has focused on the use of polymeric spiral-wound (SW) MF membranes. A method for the production of a serum protein (SP)-reduced micellar casein concentrate using SW MF was compared with a ceramic MF membrane. Pasteurized (79°C, 18s) skim milk (1,100 kg) was microfiltered at 50°C [about 3 × concentration] using a 0.3-μm polyvinylidene fluoride spiral-wound membrane, bleed-and-feed, 3-stage process, using 2 diafiltration stages, where the retentate was diluted 1:2 with reverse osmosis water. Skim milk, permeate, and retentate were analyzed for SP content, and the reduction of SP from skim milk was determined. Theoretically, 68% of the SP content of skim milk can be removed using a single-stage 3× MF. If 2 subsequent water diafiltration stages are used, an additional 22% and 7% of the SP can be removed, respectively, giving a total SP removal of 97%. Removal of SP greater than 95% has been achieved using a 0.1-μm pore size ceramic uniform transmembrane pressure (UTP) MF membrane after a 3-stage MF with diafiltration process. One stage of MF plus 2 stages of diafiltration of 50°C skim milk using a polyvinylidene fluoride polymeric SW 0.3-μm membrane yielded a total SP reduction of only 70.3% (stages 1, 2, and 3: 38.6, 20.8, and 10.9%, respectively). The SP removal rate for the polymeric SW MF membrane was lower in all 3 stages of processing (stages 1, 2, and 3: 0.05, 0.04, and 0.03 kg/m(2) per hour, respectively) than that of the comparable ceramic UTP MF membrane (stages 1, 2, and 3: 0.30, 0.11, and 0.06 kg/m(2) per hour, respectively), indicating that SW MF is less efficient at removing SP from 50°C skim milk than the ceramic UTP system. To estimate the number of steps required for the SW system to reach 95% SP removal, the third-stage SP removal rate (27.4% of the starting material SP content) was used to extrapolate that an additional 5 water diafiltration stages would be necessary, for a total of 8 stages, to remove 95% of the SP from skim milk. The 8-plus stages necessary to remove >95% SP for the SW MF membrane would create more permeate and a lengthier process than required with ceramic membranes.

Raw milk (about 500 kg) was cold (4°C) separated and then the skim milk was pasteurized at 72°C and a holding time of 16s. The milk was cooled to 4°C and stored at ≤ 4°C until processing. The skim milk was microfiltered using a pilot-scale ceramic graded permeability (GP) microfilter system equipped with 0.1-µm nominal pore diameter ceramic Membralox membranes. First, about 155 kg of pasteurized skim milk was flushed through the system to push the water out of the system. Then, additional pasteurized skim milk (about 320 kg) was microfiltered (stage 1) in a continuous feed-and-bleed 3× process using the same membranes. The retentate from stage 1 was diluted with pasteurized reverse osmosis water in a 1:2 ratio and microfiltered (stage 2) with a GP system. This was repeated 3 times, with total of 3 stages in the process (stage 1 = microfiltration; stages 2 and 3 = diafiltration). The results from first 3 stages of the experiment were compared with previous data when processing skim milk at 50°C using ceramic uniform transmembrane pressure (UTP) membranes. Microfiltration of skim milk using ceramic UTP and GP membranes resulted in similar final retentate in terms of serum proteins (SP) removed. The SP removal rate (expressed by kilogram of SP removed per meter-squared of membrane area) was higher for GP membranes for each stage compared with UTP membranes. A higher passage of SP and SP removal rate for GP than UTP membranes was achieved by using a higher cross-flow velocity when processing skim milk. Increasing flux in subsequent stages did not affect membrane permeability and fouling. We operated under conditions that produced partial membrane fouling, due to using a flux that was less than limiting flux but higher than critical flux. Because the critical flux is a function of the cross-flow velocity, the difference in critical flux between UTP and GP membranes resulted only from operating under different cross-flow velocities (6.6 vs 7.12 for UTP and GP membranes, respectively). Conditions that allow microfiltration operation at higher flux will reduce the membrane surface area required to process the same amount of milk in the same length of time. Less membrane surface area reduces investment costs and uses less energy, water, and chemicals to clean the microfiltration system.