Enhancing yield and acceptability of Kareish cheese made of Reformulated milk

Chia sẻ: _ _ | Ngày: | Loại File: PDF | Số trang:7

Thêm vào BST

Báo xấu

16
lượt xem 0
download

Download Vui lòng tải xuống để xem tài liệu đầy đủ

The moisture content in reformulated cheese was increased with increasing SMP and stabilizer percentage in the formula during pickling. Reformulated Kareish cheese samples showed different ash contents as a function of adding SMP and MPP to the blend. Manufacturing Kareish cheese from reformulated mix of SMP.

Chủ đề:

Bình luận(0) Đăng nhập để gửi bình luận!

Lưu

Nội dung Text: Enhancing yield and acceptability of Kareish cheese made of Reformulated milk

Annals of Agricultural Science (2015) 60(1), 87–93 H O S T E D BY Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University Annals of Agricultural Science www.elsevier.com/locate/aoas Enhancing yield and acceptability of Kareish cheese made of Reformulated milk R.A. Awad a, Wafaa M. Salama b,* , Waheed A. Ragb b a Food Sci. Dept., Faculty of Agric., Ain Shams Univ., Shoubra EL-Khaima, Cairo, Egypt b Dairy Research Department, Food Technology Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Giza, Egypt Received 8 March 2015; accepted 26 March 2015 Available online 25 April 2015 KEYWORDS Abstract Kareish cheese was manufactured from fresh buffalo skim milk as control and reconsti- Kareish cheese; tuted milk from skim milk powder (SMP), milk protein powder (MPP) and stabilizer (Uni cream). Milk protein powder; Skim milk powder (SMP), milk protein powder (MPP) and stabilizer (Uni cream) were added at Stabilizer; different ratios to water for making of Kareish cheese. Resultant cheeses were evaluated for their Yield; chemical, physical, microbiological and sensory attributes when fresh and during refrigerated stor- Chemical; age (5 ± 2 C) up to 4 weeks. The moisture content in reformulated cheese was increased with Physical; increasing SMP and stabilizer percentage in the formula during pickling. Reformulated Kareish Microbiological and sensory cheese samples showed different ash contents as a function of adding SMP and MPP to the blend. attributes Manufacturing Kareish cheese from reformulated mix of SMP, MPP and stabilizer in water resulted in lower pH values of resultant Kareish cheese compared to control (fresh skim milk). Among all treatments, control treatment (fresh skim milk) had the highest viscosity value. The pen- etration value was increased i.e. the ﬁrmness decreased, with increasing the ratio of stabilizer in reformulated treatment. The penetration values decreased in stored kareish cheese samples includ- ing control with prolonging the storage period. All reformulated Kareish treatments and control one were free of coliform bacteria either when fresh or during storage up to 4 weeks. Treatments containing lower percent of stabilizer remained as the best acceptable product followed by the con- trol while treatments containing higher percentage of stabilizer came last. ª 2015 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Introduction traditional kareish cheese had been made in the farms from ‘‘Rayeb’’ milk. Recently, where centrifugal separators were Kareish ‘‘skimmed milk’’ cheese is one of the indigenous white applied, this cheese is conventionally produced by acid coagu- soft cheese types in Egypt. It composes about 50% of white soft lation of mechanically skimmed milk by culturing with lactic cheese produced in Egypt (Hegazy et al., 2012). In the past, acid bacteria. Given the growing awareness of the health of the consumer, kareish cheese becomes very popular because * Corresponding author. of its remarkable health quality as only known relatively fat free cheese consumed by the Egyptians. It is often recom- Peer review under responsibility of Faculty of Agriculture, Ain-Shams mended for persons suffering from obesity, cholesterol and University. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aoas.2015.03.004 0570-1783 ª 2015 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
88 R.A. Awad et al. heart diseases. The increasing demand for it by the Egyptian Table 1 Chemical composition (%) of buffalo skim milk, consumers is mainly attributed to its lower price milk protein powder (MPP) and skim milk powder (SMP) used (Abou-Donia et al., 1975). It has high protein content and in the manufacture of Kareish cheese. makes a balanced meal when mixed with some vegetable oil and fresh pieces of tomato. As Kareish cheese commonly con- Ingredients Moisture Protein Lactose Ash tains high moisture content and is not pickled after processing, Buﬀalo skim milk 88.38 4.20 5.06 0.98 it must consume in a few days. Its maximum shelf-life does not MPP 3.90 82.80 4.10 7.40 exceed 12 days at 5 C (Abou-Dawood and Gomai, 1977). SMP 3.20 36.00 52.0 8.00 Youssef et al. (1981) tried to increase its shelf-life and organoleptic quality by pickling it in salted whey or by adding salt to the curd in addition to pickling. It is well known that the powder (MPP) produced by Australian Dairy products, Pty most important problem facing the manufacture of kareish Ltd., Australia, and were used. Table 1 shows the composition cheese from skim milk powder is the weak body and texture of buffalo skim milk, milk protein powder (MPP) and skim of the product during whey separation of Kareish. Therefore, milk powder (SMP) used in the manufacture of Kareish it has been practiced to fortify skim cow’s milk with nonfat cheese. Pure Yoghurt starter cultures of Str. salivarius dry milk, stabilizer or whey products to improve the quality subsp.thermophilus (EMCC1043) and lactobacillus delbrueckii of the resultant Kareish. subsp. bulgaricus (EMCC1102) were obtained from Cairo Dried milk, whole or skim, has been widely introduced to MIRCEN Culture Collection Center, Faculty of Agric., Ain most of the market dairy products e.g. liquid and fermented Shams University. Commercial stabilizer (Uni cream) was pur- milks and soft and hard cheeses. Several trails were carried chased from the Egyptian company of milk products and food out to produce kareish cheese either partially or completely additives, Maryoutia St. Giza, Egypt. Commercial table salt from reconstituted skimmed milk powder (RSM). The use of obtained from El-Nasr Company of Alexandria was used for dried skimmed milk for traditional kareish cheese manufacture Cheese salting. was studied by EL-Safty et al. (1976a,b). They found that, using dried milk in cheese making increased the yield, moisture Manufacture of Kareish cheese and acidity of resultant cheese. Concentrated milk proteins are recently introduced and now are commercially available as dairy products. It has a Seven batches of kareish cheese were made using 3 kg milk in wide range of protein percentages and generally contains low each. First batch was served as control which made from fresh lactose content with high ratio of proteins than milk powder, buffalo skim milk. The other six batches were manufactured which may produce different quality of dairy products. from mixture composed of 3% MPP with different SMP and Ur-rehman et al. (2003), Harvey (2006) used milk protein con- stabilizer ratios as follows: centrates to fortify cheddar cheese and found that protein and fat retention and yield were increased with no deﬁcit in sensory T1: 10% SMP + 0.05 % Stabilizer. attributes by fortiﬁcation at lower protein ratios. T2: 12% SMP + 0.05 % Stabilizer. Stabilizers are important ingredients that are frequently T3: 10% SMP + 0.1 % Stabilizer. used in formulated foods. These substances have been used T4: 12% SMP + 0.1 % Stabilizer. for a variety of purposes, including thickness aiding, stability T5: 10% SMP + 0.2 % Stabilizer. and improving mouth feel (Harris, 1990; Imeson, 1997. T6: 12% SMP + 0.2 % Stabilizer. Phillpis and Williams, 2000). Also, it prevents separation of various ingredients and increases the viscosity (Mehmood Stabilizer and MPP were dissolved in the required amount et al., 2008). of cold water ((4 C), Table 6) and aged at same temperature Cheese yield can be expressed simply as the quantity of for 4 h. before use. The previous mixtures were then wormed cheese produced from a given quantity of milk (kg/100 kg) up to 45 C and SMP was added to prepare the ﬁnal mix. with a deﬁned protein and fat content (Walstra, 2000). Low All milk mixtures either fresh or reformulated were heat trea- yield of Kareish cheese, and a lack of fresh skim milk produc- ted at 79 C for 15 s, then rapidly cooled to 40 C. At this point tion in the summer were the most important reasons for think- yoghurt starter culture was added at level of 1.5% to the base ing in this study. So, the present study was planned to mixture for coagulation. After complete coagulation, the curd investigate the use of different dairy products as a substitute was separately transferred into gauze for wheying off in 24hr., of milk in Kareish cheese making with the economic then cut and stored in its pasteurized salted whey (7% salt) for advantages. 24hr. before analyses (fresh cheese) and also during pickling. The resultant cheese was analyzed when fresh and after 2 and 4 wk during storage at refrigerator (5 ± 2 C). All treat- Materials and methods ments were of three replicates. Materials Chemical analysis Fresh buffalo skim milk was obtained from the herd of Faculty Moisture, total protein, ash and salt contents were determined of Agriculture, Cairo University and used for preparing according to AOAC (2000). Lactose was determined according Kareish cheese. Skim milk powder (SMP) and milk protein to Lawrance (1968).
Enhancing yield and acceptability of Kareish cheese made of Reformulated milk 89 Physicochemical analysis Chemical composition Values of pH were measured using a digital pH meter Chemical composition of Kareish cheese treatments manufac- ‘‘HANNA’’, with combined glass electrode. Cheese ﬁrmness tured from skim milk powder (SMP) and milk protein powder was measured using a penetrometer (Kochler ca Inc., USA) (MPP) with different stabilizer levels is shown in Table 3. It is as mentioned by El-Shabrawy et al. (2002). Viscosity values obvious from the data that there were differences in the mois- of kareish cheese samples were measured according to ture contents of control and all cheese treatments along the Viturawong et al. (2008) using a coaxial rotational viscometer, storage period. Total means of moisture content indicated that Brookﬁeld Engineering labs DV-III Ultra Rheometer, at shear reformulated kareish cheese had the highest moisture content rate ranging from 0.3333 to 195.8 s 1. along the storage period, whereas, lowest moisture content was recorded in the control. This is due to the functionality Microbiological estimation of stabilizer to produce cheese with high water holding capac- ity (Bahramparvar and Tehrani, 2011). The increase in cheese Total bacterial counts were determined according to the moisture was parallel to the increase in yield (Table 6), indicat- method described by Houghtby et al. (1992). Molds and yeast, ing that the increase in cheese yield was due to the increase in and coliforms were estimated according to Marshall (1992). the cheese moisture content. The moisture content in Kareish cheese treatments was increased with increasing SMP and sta- Sensory evaluation bilizer percentage. The moisture content increased in all treat- ments including control during pickling up to 2 weeks. This increase could be due to that the swelling process which tended Cheese samples were sensory scored by 8–10 panelists accord- to increase moisture content in the cheese. On the other hand, ing to their consistency in attending as mentioned by Nelson the moisture content decreased after four weeks of storage in and Trout (1964) for ﬂavor (50 points), body and texture (35 all treatments due to the development of acidity. These results points) and appearance (15 points). agree with Youssef et al. (1981). Statistical analysis of moisture All data were analyzed by the general Linear Model proce- values indicated a signiﬁcant difference at p P 0.05 among dure of SAS (1990). Least signiﬁcant difference test was per- Kareish treatments and during pickling process (storage per- formed to determine difference in means at P 6 0.05. iod). The data also, indicated that control treatment (fresh buf- falo milk) possessed the highest protein content compared to Results and discussion other Kareish treatments. Total protein of treated Kareish cheese was signiﬁcantly affected by addition of SMP and Acidity development in fresh skim and reconstituted milk MPP in the formula. However, there was decrease in protein content of treatments with increasing the added ratio of stabi- Table 2 shows the acidity development in different base mix- lizer. This decrease could be due to the increase in moisture tures of Kareish cheese compared to fresh buffalo skim milk. contents of treatments. On the other hand, addition of higher The data indicated that the acidity value increased in all amounts of SMP led to increase the protein percentage in Kareish treatments including control of fresh skim milk along resultant cheese. Total protein of all treatments including con- incubation time. The results indicated that development in trol was decreased during cheese pickling up to 2 weeks, then it acidity of fresh skim milk (control) was highest compared to increased at the end of pickling period. Youssef et al. (1981) all Kareish cheese of reformulated mixes. Therefore, the coag- found that pickling of kareish cheese for 4 weeks increased ulation time needed in fresh milk Kareish cheese was lowest. total nitrogen. Ash contents of reformulated kareish treat- Among Kareish treatments, there were slight differences being ments showed signiﬁcantly higher values compared to control more noticeable with adding higher amount of SMP in the for- treatment. This is due to the higher protein and ash values in mula. The acidity values were also increased with increasing SMP and MPP (Table 1). Treated cheese samples showed dif- the percentage of added SMP or stabilizer in the formula of ferent ash contents as a function of adding SMP and MPP to reformulated mixture. the blend (Table 1). However, samples contained high level of Table 2 Acidity development (as lactic acid %) in the mix of Kareish cheese treatments with added milk protein and different levels of skim milk powder and stabilizer during coagulation period. Incubation time after (h) Treatments Control T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 0.0 0.27 0.33 0.38 0.35 0.37 0.32 0.34 0.5 0.28 0.38 0.43 0.38 0.40 0.36 0.42 1.0 0.35 0.45 0.48 0.41 0.54 0.41 0.48 1.5 0.41 0.58 0.68 0.57 0.65 0.53 0.67 2.0 0.64 0.71 0.75 0.75 0.82 0.73 0.80 2.5 0.92 0.85 0.90 0.89 0.93 0.81 1.04 3.0 Coag. 0.93 1.08 0.95 1.20 1.10 1.27 3.5 Coag. Coag. Coag. Coag. Coag. Coag. Coag
90 R.A. Awad et al. Table 3 Chemical composition (%) of Kareish cheese treatments with added milk protein and different levels of skim milk powder and stabilizer when fresh and during storage. Storage period Treatments Control T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Moisture Fresh 72.19Db 73.74Cb 74.32BCab 74.57Bb 74.75Bb 75.91Ab 76.32Aa 2 wk 73.15Da 74.15Ca 74.77BCa 75.11Ba 75.78Ba 76.24Aa 76.65Aa 4 wk 72.75Eab 73.43DEb 73.89Db 74.82BCab 75.19Bb 75.78Ab 75.91Ab Protein Fresh 19.82Aab 18.54ABb 18.85Aab 17.58CDab 17.77BCb 16.51Eab 16.69DEab 2 wk 19.65Ab 18.31BCb 18.76ABb 17.32Db 17.86CDab 16.08Eb 15.88Eb 4 wk 20.08Aa 18.97ABa 19.12Aa 17.90Ca 18.03BCa 16.73Da 16.83Da Ash Fresh 4.82Db 4.98CDb 5.08BCb 5.12ABb 5.21Ab 5.19Ab 5.27Ab 2 wk 4.93Bab 5.11ABab 5.21Aa 5.28Aab 5.25Aab 5.42Aab 5.61Aab 4 wk 5.09Ba 5.21Ba 5.28Ba 5.33Ba 5.38ABa 5.59Aa 6.08Aa Salt Fresh 2.90Cb 3.00BCb 3.10BCb 3.20ABb 3.30Ab 3.50Ab 3.50Ab 2 wk 3.20Cab 3.30BCa 3.20Cab 3.50ABa 3.40BCab 3.70Aa 3.60Ab 4 wk 3.30Ca 3.50BCa 3.40BCa 3.50BCa 3.60ABa 3.70Aa 3.90Aa Control: fresh buffalo skim milk, T1: 10% SMP + 0.05 % Stabilizer, T2: 12% SMP + 0.05% Stabilizer, T3: 10% SMP + 0.1% Stabilizer, T4: 12% SMP + 0.1% Stabilizer,T5: 10% SMP + 0.2% Stabilizer,T6: 12% SMP + 0.2% Stabilizer. A, B, C: Means with same letter among treatments in the same storage period are not signiﬁcantly different. a, b, c: Means with same letter for same treatment during storage periods are not signiﬁcantly different. SMP produced cheeses with high ash contents. The differences to increase the acidity. The values of pH showed slight in ash contents of treatments could be due to the differences in decrease during storage at 5 C up to one month in all treat- the ratios of added SMP and stabilizer in the blends. The data ments including control. The decrease in pH values during indicated also that during storage the ash content increased in storage could be related to the hydrolysis occurred in lactose all treatments including control. This increase could be due to and protein contents. The results of the present study are in the decrease in moisture content occurred in all treatments. agreement with El-Gizawy et al. (2013) and Magdoub et al. From the same table it could be also noticed that salt content (1995) who reported that the decrease in pH values may be was signiﬁcantly affected by adding SMP and MPP in the due to the converting of the residual lactose in cheese to lactic blend and followed the same trend as ash content in acid which developed in the cheese at the end of storage per- treatments. iod. The acidity values of Kareish treatments had the opposite From the data in Fig. 1, it could be seen that control trend of pH value in all treatments including control. Kareish cheese had higher values of pH than that of all refor- mulated treatments. Among all reformulated Kareish treat- Physical properties ments, there were slight differences in pH values. The blends of milk protein powder, skim milk powder and stabilizer in Viscosity water resulted in lower pH values of reformulated Kareish cheese mix compared to control (fresh skim milk). This could Viscosity values (CP) of kareish cheese made of reconstituted be due to the high protein content of raw material used in the milk products with different levels of stabilizer when fresh blend of Kareish cheese. However, high of protein content led and after 4 weeks of storage at different shear rates are proved fresh 2wk 4wk fresh 2wk 4wk 4.5 2.5 4.4 Titratable acidity 4.3 2 pH values 4.2 4.1 1.5 4 1 3.9 3.8 0.5 3.7 3.6 0 con T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 con T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Treatments Treatments Fig. 1 Changes in acidity (%) and pH values of Kareish cheese treatments with added milk protein and different levels of skim milk powder and stabilizer when fresh and during storage period.
Enhancing yield and acceptability of Kareish cheese made of Reformulated milk 91 120 Con T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Fresh 2wk 4wk Penetration Values(mm) 100 8000 7000 A 80 6000 60 Viscosity(C.P) 5000 40 4000 3000 20 2000 0 1000 Cort. T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 0 Treatments 6 1 8 3 9 9 27 81 6 33 0. 1. 5. .2 .6 19 0. 16 48 Fig. 3 Changes in penetration values (mm) of Kareish cheese Shear rate (Sec-1) treatments with added milk protein and different levels of skim milk powder and stabilizer when fresh and during storage period. Con T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 6000 5000 mean that it was the ﬁrmest. The penetration value was B Viscosity(C.P) 4000 increased, i.e. the ﬁrmness decreased, with increasing the ratio of stabilizer in reformulated mix of cheese treatments. The 3000 higher penetration values of reformulated treatments com- 2000 pared to control are mainly due to the higher moisture con- 1000 tents in reformulated kareish cheese. The penetration values increased in all stored kareish cheese samples including control 0 with prolonging the storage period, i.e. the ﬁrmness decreased. 1 3 9 27 81 6 8 9 6 33 .2 .6 0. 1. 5. 19 This could be attributed to the changes in the protein during 16 48 0. Shear rate (Sec-1) storage as well as pH value. Fig. 2 Changes in viscosity values (CP) of Kareish cheese treatments with added milk protein and different levels of skim Microbiological properties milk powder and stabilizer when fresh (A) and after 4 weeks of Table 4 shows the changes in total bacteria count (TBC) of storage (B). different kareish cheeses treatments during storage period at refrigerator. From the results it can be seen that a gradual increase in TBC could be observed throughout the storage in Fig. 2 (A&B). The control treatment (fresh skim milk) had period to reach the maximum after 2 wk, in all treatments the highest viscosity among all treatments. The higher viscosity and then decreased at the end of storage period. The activity value of control treatment could be attributed to its low mois- of lactic acid bacteria in kareish cheese samples increased the ture and higher protein contents. Addition of SMP at higher acidity and consequently decreased the total bacterial count levels into reconstituted cheese milk increased viscosity values (Mehanna et al., 2002). It is clear that yeasts and molds could than that at lower levels. Addition of stabilizer at different not be detected in fresh samples. However, the counts started levels in cheese mix had different ability and capacity to bind to be detected and counted after 2 wk in all treatments water being a result of different gel strength and thus affect including control. These results are in line with the results the viscosity of resultant kareish cheese. From the data, it is reported by Mehanna et al. (2002) who found that the yeast clear that kareish cheese with high level of stabilizer had the and mold of soft cheese began to appear after 7 days of stor- highest viscosity values compared to other treatments includ- age. The data in the same table illustrated that the yeast and ing the control. It is well known that the stabilizing agents mold counts of all kareish cheese samples increased during reduce the free water in the matrix due to changing it to bound storage at refrigerator. All samples of Kareish cheese either water which increases the viscosity of the phase. Heyman et al. fresh or stored were free of coliform bacteria. This could (2010) mentioned that the presence of hydrocolloids introduces due to the efﬁcient heat treatment and good sanitation condi- a marked increase in viscosity. The data revealed also that the tions applied during manufacture and storage of cheese sam- viscosity decreased in all kareish treatments including control ples. These results are in agreement with the results of with increasing the shear rate through changing the viscometer Monzano et al. (1992) who reported that when homofermen- speed to the higher levels. After one month of storage, viscos- tative thermophilic lactic acid bacteria were found in cheese, ity values decreased in all kareish treatments including control. the resultant cheese was characterized by the presence of neg- The changes in viscosity values of stored samples could be ligible levels of coliform. attributed to the changes in cheese protein matrix and the degree and efﬁciency of holding water by stabilizing system. Sensory evaluation Sensory evaluation of food products is an important indicator Firmness of potential consumer preference. Data given in Table 5 repre- It is well known that penetrometer reading is inversely related sent the average scores for sensory properties of fresh and to the cheese ﬁrmness. The results in Fig. 3, indicated that the stored Kareish cheese as affected by using milk protein powder lowest penetration value was found in control treatment which and different levels of skim milk powder and stabilizers in
92 R.A. Awad et al. Table 4 Microbiological analysis (log cfu/ml) of Kareish cheese treatments with added milk protein and different levels of skim milk powder and stabilizer when fresh and during storage period. Properties Storage period Treatmentsa Con. T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Total Bacterial Count Fresh 7.69 7.85 7.04 6.96 7.90 7.78 7.30 2 wk 7.30 7.95 7.30 7.30 7.95 8.00 7.69 4 wk 7.00 7.78 7.00 7.18 7.78 7.82 7.48 Yeast & Mold Fresh ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2 wk 3.94 4.00 4.00 3.60 4.48 4.30 4.85 4 wk 4.60 4.49 430 4.48 4.77 4.69 5.00 Coliform Fresh ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 2 wk ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 4 wk ND ND ND ND ND ND ND a See Table 3 for details. Table 5 Sensory evaluation of Kareish cheese treatments with added milk protein and different levels of skim milk powder and stabilizer when fresh and during storage period. Storage period Properties Treatments* Con. T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Fresh Flavor (50) 47 46 48 48 46 45 44 Body and Text. (35) 32 33 34 34 31 30 29 Appearance (15) 15 14 14 14 13 12 11 Total (100) 94ABa 93Ba 96Aa 96Aa 90Ca 87Da 84Ea 2 wk Flavor (50) 46 45 46 47 44 44 43 Body and Text. (35) 31 32 33 33 30 30 28 Appearance (15) 14 31 13 12 12 11 11 Total (100) 91Aab 90Aab 92Aab 92Aab 86Bab 85Bab 82Cab 4 wk Flavor (50) 45 45 46 45 44 42 41 Body and Text. (35) 30 31 32 33 29 28 27 Appearance (15) 13 12 12 12 11 11 11 Total (100) 89Ab 88Ab 90Ab 90Ab 84Bb 81CDb 79Db A, B, C: Means with same letter among treatments in the same storage period are not signiﬁcantly different. a, b, c: Means with same letter for same treatment during storage periods are not signiﬁcantly different. * See Table 3 for details. formulation of cheese milk during storage at 5 ± 2 C. The This was noticed among fresh or stored samples. Storage of scores for ﬂavor and texture were affected by the level of kareish up to 4 wk decreased the quality of all treatments SMP and stabilizer. However, the scores of fresh samples indi- including the control. Treatments containing lower percent cated that kareish cheese treatments (T2) with 12% SMP, of stabilizer remained as the best acceptable product followed 0.05% stabilizer and (T3) with 10% SMP, 0.1% stabilizer by control treatment while treatments containing higher per- had the highest score compared to other treatments including centage of stabilizer (T5, T6) came last and became less prefer- control (fresh skim milk). Addition of stabilizer into cheese able to panelists after 4 wk of storage. Storage of Kareish base mix improved the body and texture as well as enhanced cheese treatments had signiﬁcantly affected the total score of the ﬂavor of resultant kareish cheese. The panelists cleared also cheese acceptance being lowered with prolonging the storage that, kareish cheeses with low stabilizer percentage were simi- period. lar to control in its outer appearance and better in ﬂavor. The total costs of different Kareish cheese treatments as However, the use of stabilizer with low percentage in produc- affected by different levels of milk protein powder (MPP), tion of kareish cheese was mostly preferred than that with high skim milk powder (SMP) and stabilizer are summarized in percentage. Addition of higher ratio of stabilizer in the for- Table 6. Manufacture of Kareish cheese from reformulated mula slightly decreased the ﬂavor score of resultant cheese recipes without fresh milk reduced the cost of ﬁnal product compared to other treatments. EL-Safty et al. (1976a,b) with different ratios depending upon the formula content. reported that Kareish cheese was preferred to consume when Furthermore, the cost can be reduced by up to 40% with high fresh especially that made from skim milk powder. Statistical acceptability and good sensory characteristics if the Kareish analysis for total score values of Kareish cheese treatments cheese was manufactured using reformulated mixes of 3% cleared that reformulated treatments T2 and T3 were not sig- MPP, 12% SMP, 0.05% uni cream stabilizer (T2) or 3% niﬁcantly different than control of fresh buffalo skim milk. MPP, 10% SMP, 0.1% uni cream stabilizer (T3).
Enhancing yield and acceptability of Kareish cheese made of Reformulated milk 93 Table 6 Total costs/Kg of different Kareish cheese treatments with added milk protein and different levels of skim milk powder and stabilizer. Raw material Treatmentsa Price (L.E/kg raw material) Con. T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Fresh skim milk 100 – – – – – – 4 Skim milk powder – 10 12 10 12 10 12 21 Milk protein powder – 3 3 3 3 3 3 40 Stabilizer – 0.05 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 8 Water – 86.95 84.95 86.90 84.90 86.80 84.80 – Starter 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 10 Total 101.5 101.5 101.5 101.5 101.5 101.5 101.5 Yield (%) 19.36 25.67 28.57 26.90 29.17 26.27 33.17 Cost of/kg (L.E) 21.44 13.46 13.56 12.86 13.29 13.19 11.72 Reduction of control (%) – 37.22 36.75 40.02 38.01 38.48 45.34 a See Table 3 for details. Conclusion Houghtby, G.A., Maturin, L.J., Koening, E.K., 1992. Microbiological count methods. In: Marshal, R.T. (Ed.), Standard methods for the examination of dairy products, 16th ed. American Public Health It could be recommended upon the previous results that, kare- Association (APHA), Washington, D.C., USA, pp. 213–246. ish cheese can be produced with high quality and acceptability Imeson, A., 1997. Thickening and gelling agents for foof, 2nd ed. using of skim milk powder, milk protein powder and stabilizer. Blackie Academic and Professional, London, UK. The ﬁnal product exhibited improved body and texture, and Lawrance, A.J., 1968. The determinations of lactose in milk product. better cheese ﬂavor; moreover the cost was reduced as com- Aust. J. Dairy Tech. 23, 103–105. pared to the traditional process of cheese manufacture. Magdoub, M.N.I., Osman, S.H.G., EL-Kenawy, M.M., 1995. Effect of different starter cultures on composition and microbiological quality of cheese. Egyptian J. Appl. Sci. 10 (1), 132–141. References Marshall, R.T., 1992. Standard methods for the examination of dairy products. American Public Health Association (APHA), Abou-Dawood, A.E., Gomai, A.Y., 1977. The use of high total solids Washington, D.C, USA. reconstituted skim milk in Kareish cheese making. Egyptian J. Mehanna, N.S., Sharf, O.M., Ibrahim, G.A., Tawﬁk, K.N., 2002. Dairy Sci. 5, 229–234. Incorporation and viability of some probiotic bacteria in functional Abou-Donia, Sirry, A., Abd El Rahman, S., 1975. Chemical and dairy food. 1 – soft cheese, Egyptian. J. Dairy Sci. 30, 219. microbilogical studies on Kareish cheese. Alexandria J. Agric. Res. Mehmood, S.T., Masud, T., Mahmood, T., Maqsud, S., 2008. Effect 23, 243. of different additives from local source on the quality of yoghurt. AOAC, 2000. Ofﬁcial Methods of Analysis. Association of Ofﬁcial Pakistan J. Nutr. 7, 695–699. Analytical Chemists. Washington, DC. Monzano, M., Citterio, B., Rondininl, G., Bertoldi, M., 1992. Bahramparvar, M., Tehrani, M., 2011. Application and functions of Microbiological aspects of natural starter in Montasio cheese stabilizers in ice cream. Food Rev. Int. 27 (4), 389–407. making. Ann. Microbiol. Enzimol. 42 (1), 163. El-Gizawy, S.A., Olfat, S.B., Sharaf, O.M., Kawther EL-Shafei, Nelson, J.S., Trout, G.M., 1964. Judging Dairy Product, 3rd ed. The Fatma, A.F., Hoda, EL-Sayed, S., 2013. Effect of growth condi- Olsen Publishing Co., Milwauke, U.S.A.. tions on the production of exopolysaccharides by microencapsu- Phillips, G.O., Williams, P.A., 2000. Handbook of Hydrocolloids. lated Lactobacillus bulgaricaus and use it to improve quality of CRC Press LLC, Boca Ruton, FL. Kareish cheese. J. Appl. Sci. Res. 9 (2), 1097–1109. SAS Institute, 1990. SAS User’s Guide/STAT ver.6.04th ed. SAS Inst EL-Safty, M.S., EL-Koussy, L., Foda, E.A., 1976a. Utilization of dry Inc, Cary, NC. skimmilk in Kareish cheese making ‘‘1-Technological aspects’’. Ur-Rehman, S., Farkye, N.Y., Considine, T., Schaffner, A., Drake, Agric. Res. Rev. 54, 145–149. M.A., 2003. Effect of standardization of whole milk with dry milk EL-Safty, M.S., EL-Koussy, L., Foda, E.A., 1976b. Utilization of dry protin concentrate on the yield and ripening of reduced- fat skimmilk in Kareish cheese making ‘‘2-Ripening changes’’. Agric. Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 86 (5), 1608–1615. Res. Rev. 54, 169–172. Viturawong, Y., Achayuthakan, P., Suphantharika, M., 2008. El-Shabrawy, S.A., Awad, R.A., Saad, S.A., 2002. Manufacture and Gelatinization and rheological properties of rice starch/xanthan properties of ﬂavoured processed cheese spread with different fruit mixtures: effect of molecular weight of xanthan an different salts. ﬂavour. J. Ann. Agric. Sci., Ain-Shams Univ. Cairo 10, 641. Food Chem. 111, 106–114. Harris, P., 1990. Food Gels. Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd, Essex, Walstra, P., 2000. Practical Guide for Control of Cheese Yield. UK. General Principles, IDF Bulltin-ref. S.I.001, Belgium. Harvey, J., 2006. Protein fortiﬁcation of cheese milk using protein Youssef, A.M., Fatma, A.S., Salama, A.E., 1981. Effect of some concentrate – yield improvement and product quality. Aust. J. technological factors on the manufacture of Kareish cheese from Dairy Tech. 61 (2), 183–185. reconstituted skim milk. Egyptian J. Dairy Sci. 9, 171–180. Hegazy, N.M., Nasr, M.M., Fayed, A.E., Youssef, M.S., 2012. Economics scale for processing of white soft cheese in Egypt. Egypt J. Agric. Econ. 22, 1079–1094. Further reading Heyman, B., Depypere, F., Delbaere, C., Dewettinck, K., 2010. Effects of non starch hydrocolloids on the physicochemical properties and Awad, R.A., 1996. Studies on emulsifying salt mixture for processed stability of a commercial be´chamel sauce. J. Food Eng. 99 (2), 115– cheese. Ph.D. Thesis. Ain Shams University, Faculty of 120. Agriculture, Food Sci., Department.