The case for milk protein standardisation using membrane filtration for improving cheese consistency and quality

Abstract

Milk composition varies with season owing to stage of lactation and variation in diet and weather. Variation in the concentration of milk protein is conducive to inconsistency in cheese yield, composition and quality especially where standard operating procedures are not objectively standardised with reference to casein content. Milk protein standardisation (e.g. to 4.5%) by low‐concentration factor ultrafiltration (LCFUF) or microfiltration (LCFMF) provides an effective means of obtaining more consistent cheese manufacture. Consequently, LCFUF is now widely practised. The benefits of LCFUF and LCFMF and the effect of key processing parameters on the quality of cheese from protein‐standardised milk are reviewed.

Grazing of dairy cows on pasture versus indoor feeding on total mixed ration: Effects on low-moisture part-skim Mozzarella cheese yield and quality characteristics in mid and late lactation

“…Standardization of LL milk to a higher protein-to-fat ratio was undertaken to counteract the anticipated reduction in moisture of LL cheeses to a content below that of the corresponding cheese from ML milk, owing to the higher protein concentration (~0.5 to 0.6%, wt/wt) of all LL milk samples (Soodam and Guinee, 2018). Generally, all conditions being equal, increasing the protein of milk results in a reduction in moisture content (i.e., ~0.29% per 0.1% increase in milk protein in the range 3.0-4.5%; Guinee et al, 2006).…”

“…Increasing milk protein in the range of 3.0 to 4.5% when maintaining a standard protein-to-fat ratio gener-Grazing of dairy cows on pasture versus indoor feeding on total mixed ration: Effects on low-moisture part-skim Mozzarella cheese yield and quality characteristics in mid and late lactation ally results in higher cheese yield, but has little effect on protein recovery or cheese composition (Soodam and Guinee, 2018). The magnitude of the effect depends on the degree to which the protein concentration is increased and cheesemaking conditions (Soodam and Guinee, 2018).…”

“…Increasing milk protein in the range of 3.0 to 4.5% when maintaining a standard protein-to-fat ratio gener-Grazing of dairy cows on pasture versus indoor feeding on total mixed ration: Effects on low-moisture part-skim Mozzarella cheese yield and quality characteristics in mid and late lactation ally results in higher cheese yield, but has little effect on protein recovery or cheese composition (Soodam and Guinee, 2018). The magnitude of the effect depends on the degree to which the protein concentration is increased and cheesemaking conditions (Soodam and Guinee, 2018). Reducing protein-to-fat ratio of milk, by changing fat content in the range of 0.1 to 3.5% (wt/wt), has pronounced effects, the most notable being an increase in cheese firmness and fracture stress, impairment of cooking properties, and a deterioration in sensory qualities (e.g., a loss of typical cheese flavor and creaminess).…”

Microfiltration of Ovine and Bovine Milk: Effect on Microbial Counts and Biochemical Characteristics

“…Moreover, MF can be used to fractionate globular milk fat [10], to fractionate and concentrate casein or to purify β-Lactoglobulin (β-Lg) [5,11], while in combination with ultrafiltration, it is used in whey processing. In addition, MF has been studied in regards to pre-treatment of milk for cheese production [12]. All above applications, which are focused on bovine milk, require membranes of different pore sizes.…”

Transport properties and fouling issues of membranes utilized for the concentration of dairy products by air-gap membrane distillation and microfiltration

“…It is also estimated that the chemistry of the feed components will influence the fouling mechanism during the separation process of dairy products. The problem of membrane fouling by dairy products has been studied by various research groups in the case of micro and ultrafiltration (Barclay et al 2018;Chen et al 2018;Jukkola et al 2018;Nath et al 2018;Soodam and Guinee 2018) as well as membrane distillation (Gryta 2008;Hausmann et al 2011Hausmann et al , 2013a). In the case of MF/UF processes, the application of membranes possessing lower hydrophobicity (water contact angle of 60°-70°) was suggested (Barclay et al 2018;Chen et al 2018;Jukkola et al 2018; Soodam and Guinee 2018), whereas, in the membrane distillation utilization of hydrophobic porous membranes, e.g., polypropylene (PP) and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) is proposed (Gryta 2008;Hausmann et al 2013a).…”