• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Australian Journal of Dairy Technology >How variable are retail vintage brands of cheddar cheese in composition and biochemistry?
【24h】

How variable are retail vintage brands of cheddar cheese in composition and biochemistry?

机译：切达干酪的零售年份品牌在成分和生化方面有多大差异？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Six leading brands of mature/vintage full-fat cheddar cheese were procured from retail stores in Ireland and the UK on six separate occasions over a six-month period, and analysed for composition, proteolysis, lipolysis and sensory characteristics. The aim of the study was to assess the consistency of leading retail brands of vintage cheddar cheese. Significant inter-brand differences were evident for gross composition, with the magnitude of the differences between means depending on the parameters: mean salt-in-moisture, S/M 4.18% to 5.74% (w/w); moisture-in-non-fat substances, MNFS 52.0% to 54.78% (w/w); fat-in-dry matter, FDM 50.0% to 52.63% (w/w); total lactate 1.06% to 1.46% (w/w); pH 5.09-5.38. The coefficient of variation (cv) of the mean of the six brand means indicated that this variation was highest for concentrations of L(+) and D(-) lactate (cv 25% and 50%) and S/M (cv similar to 12%), and comparatively low (<5%) for MNFS, pH and calcium-to-protein ratio. Similarly, significant inter-brand variation was noted for degrees of proteolysis with the mean pH 4.6 soluble N varying from 28% to 34% of total N, total free amino (FAA) acids from 27,000 to 57,000 mg/kg, ratio of FAA nitrogen to pH 4.6 soluble N from 30% to 70%, and free fatty acids (FFA) from similar to 900 to 1600 mg/kg. Intra-brand inconsistency in composition, and degrees of proteolysis and lipolysis were also notable, especially for concentrations of S/M (cv 4% to 20%), D(-) lactate (cv 30% to 110%), total FFA (cv 7% to 35%) and total FAA acids (cv 11% to 63%). Inter- and intra-brand variations in composition and biochemistry coincided with differences in aroma, flavour and texture attributes, and the scores for maturity and acceptability. Variations in milk composition, manufacturing conditions/technology, and added starter cultures/enzyme preparations are discussed as probable causes of the inconsistencies between and within brands. Aust. J. Daity Technol. 63, 50-60
机译：在六个月的期间内，分别从爱尔兰和英国的零售商店购买了六个领先品牌的成熟/老式全脂切达干酪，六个月中进行了六次分析，分析了其成分，蛋白水解，脂解和感官特性。该研究的目的是评估领先的老式切达干酪零售品牌的一致性。总体组成之间存在明显的品牌间差异，平均值之间的差异幅度取决于参数：平均水分盐分，S / M为4.18％至5.74％（w / w）;非脂肪水分，MNFS 52.0％至54.78％（w / w）;干脂肪，FDM 50.0％至52.63％（w / w）;乳酸总量1.06％至1.46％（w / w）; pH值5.09-5.38。六个品牌均值的均值的变异系数（cv）表明，对于L（+）和D（-）乳酸（cv为25％和50％）和S / M（cv与（12％），而MNFS，pH和钙蛋白比相对较低（<5％）。同样，发现蛋白水解度存在明显的品牌间差异，平均pH 4.6可溶性氮占总氮的28％至34％，总游离氨基（FAA）酸为27,000至57,000 mg / kg，FAA氮的比率pH值从4.6溶解氮从30％增加到70％，游离脂肪酸（FFA）从900到1600 mg / kg。品牌内的成分差异以及蛋白水解和脂解的程度也很明显，尤其是对于S / M（cv为4％至20％），D（-）乳酸（cv为30％至110％），总FFA（ cv 7％至35％）和总FAA酸（cv 11％至63％）。品牌之间和品牌内部的成分和生化变化与香气，风味和质地属性的差异以及成熟度和可接受性的得分相吻合。讨论了牛奶成分，制造条件/技术以及添加的发酵剂/酶制剂的变化，这可能是造成品牌之间和品牌内部不一致的原因。澳洲J. Daity Technol。 63、50-60

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号