Cooling Systems for Transport of Unpreserved Milk Samples

Szijarto, L.; Harding, F.; Hill, A.R.; Melichercik, J.

doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(90)78911-4

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other mammals species milk samples (ruminants) were preserved (0.02%; Pettipher and Rodrigues, 1982;Ardö, 1982;Kroger, 1985;Hanuš et al, 1992a, b;Genčurová et al, 1993aGenčurová et al, , 1994Benda, 1995) by peletted bronopol 1,3 propandiol;Control System D&F Microtabs,England). First and also second samples were analysed either a er cold transport and storage (< 6 ºC; according to Szijarto et al, 1990 andSojková et al, 2009) or frozen preservation (−21 ºC), according to conditions, howe ver always in accordance with standard procedure. Previous papers (Hanuš et al, 2002Baumgartner and Landgraf, 2004) demonstrated also possibility of milk sample frozen preservation as usable procedure before analyse for obtaining reliable SCC results.…”

Section: Model Sample Fi Les Of Various Biological Kinds Of Milkmentioning

confidence: 99%

An experimental comparison of methods for somatic cell count determination in milk of various species of mammals

Hanuš

Sojková

Hanušová

et al. 2014

Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

HANUŠ, O., SOJKOVÁ, K., HANUŠOVÁ, K., SAMKOVÁ, E., HRONEK, M., HYŠPLER, R., KOPECKÝ, J., JEDELSKÁ, R.: An experimental comparison of methods for somatic cell count determination in milk of various species of mammals. Acta univ. agric. et silvic. Mendel. Brun., 2011, LIX, No. 1, pp. 67-82 Somatic cell count (SCC) is important foodstuff , hygienic and health indicator of milk and animal mammary gland. The goal of this paper was to evaluate an ability of chosen methods to reach the SCC reliable results in various biological kinds (species) of milk. The various methods of SCC determination were compared in cow (CM), goat (GM), sheep (SM) and human (HM) milk: direct microscopy (DM); fl uoro-opto-electronic (Fossomatic 90; Foss); fl uorescent (DCC; De Laval). Used methods had cow milk calibration basically. The DM, Foss and DCC result relations about SCC were very close, mostly > 0.92 (P < 0.001) for CM, GM and SM. In CM the regression equations between methods were near ideal form y = 1x + 0. The mean diff erences SCC data sets between mentioned methods were small for CM, larger for SM and HM and the largest for GM. It is possible to convert all DCC results in SM, HM and GM to DM or Foss method. The conversion equations were stated from DCC: to DM in cow milk y = 1.1293x − 5.5029; to Foss in goat milk y = 3.603x − 3171.4; to Foss in sheep milk y = 1.3805x − 18.149; to Foss in human milk y = 2.6246x + 158.63. Assesment of conversion equations should be individual laboratory event. Results had relatively good correspondence among DM, Foss and DCC for SCC determination in CM, GM, SM and HM for milk quality control. DCC had lower results in small ruminants as compared to Foss calibrated on CM using DM. DCC in HM had lower results as Foss adjusted by CM at good correlation (0.84; P < 0.001).Address doc. Ing.

show abstract

Section: Model Sample Fi Les Of Various Biological Kinds Of Milkmentioning

confidence: 99%

An experimental comparison of methods for somatic cell count determination in milk of various species of mammals

Hanuš

Sojková

Hanušová

et al. 2014

Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Various materials and ways of pilot sample preparation were investigated. From viewpoint of milk sample stability (preservation, cooling, freezing), pilot sample preparation and consequent checking of analytical instrument time stability (indirect methods) for measurement of main milk components, somatic cell counts and total mesophilic bacteria counts the row of studies was processed (Ng-Kwai-Hang and Hayes, 1982;Biggs et al, 1984;Szijarto and Barnum, 1984;Lintner et al, 1984;Kroger, 1985;Vines et al, 1986;Voort et al, 1987;Sato et al, 1985Sato et al, , 1987Coleman and Moss, 1989;Szijarto et al, 1990;Valenberg, 1990;Hill et al, 1991;Hanuš et al, 1992 a, b, d;Genčurová et al, 1993;Benda, 1995;Tomáška et al, 2006). Only information to question of deep freezing for pilot sample stability are missing or are sporadic respectively (Hanuš et al, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of deep freezing of pilot samples for checking of time stability of indirect analyses of basic milk composition and for their long shelf-life

Hanuš

Hering

Genčurová

et al. 2014

Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Essential part of raw milk component measurement is indirect infraanalyse. The checking of time measurement stability is important there. The preparation of pilot samples was described. Information about deep frozen milk pilot sample stability are sporadic. Aim of this work was to verify the stability of long-term stored and deep frozen pilot samples (FPSs). Pilot samples were frozen in liquid nitrogen bath −196 °C and after that stored at −21 °C for one month (A) and more months (B) till analyse. The pilot samples were measured by CombiFoss 6000: fat F (%); protein CP (%); lactose L (%); casein C (%); solid non fat SNF (%); urea U (mg/100ml); somatic cell count SCC (ths./ml). In the short-term (A) experiment the impact of freezing on pilot milk samples was relatively small, in the framework of acceptable value of repeatability (±0.02 %) for components. The stability of values of FPSs was better according to standard deviations for important F evaluation in H (Holstein) breed samples. The repeatability of values of FPSs in the time was very good for other components. The repeatability was better for SCC in J (Jersey) breed samples (±16.5 thousands/ml). That is why the higher variability (±30.1 thousands/ml) in H sample is visible less sceptically. The apparent result trends were not observable in the repeatability development of important milk indicators in FPSs. The mild trend was only in CP, but this trend covered absolutely very small shift (variation range). There are only oscillations, which are similar between J and H samples. It is possible to attribute these oscillations rather to instrument effects than to sample effects. The oscilations were markedly higher in the long-term (B) experiment. Between J and H samples the oscilations were very similar in curves F and L. It is also possible to attribute them more to instrumental effects. The repeatability values (standard deviations sd) of FPSs were mostly lower than ±0.06 %. It is acceptable for result agreement between indirect and reference method. Relevant sd varied from ±0.025 % for L to ±0.059 % for F (in J breed) with exception CP ±0.085 % in J sample. Also B procedure was shown as applicable for instrumental sability control in half year period. In practice the one reference value for concrete FPS is valid from one to next calibration. Persistent trend in repeatability of FPSs can indicate an inadequate instrumental drift. The applied FPS procedure is usable for stability control of instrumental measurement in milk laboratories.

show abstract

Hygienic quality

Harding¹

1995

Milk Quality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cooling Systems for Transport of Unpreserved Milk Samples

Cited by 5 publications

References 5 publications

An experimental comparison of methods for somatic cell count determination in milk of various species of mammals

An experimental comparison of methods for somatic cell count determination in milk of various species of mammals

Validation of deep freezing of pilot samples for checking of time stability of indirect analyses of basic milk composition and for their long shelf-life

Hygienic quality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About