Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research
  • Open Access

Influence of milling pH and storage on quality characteristics, mineral and fatty acid profile of buffalo Mozzarella cheese

Lipids in Health and Disease201918:33

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12944-019-0976-9

  • Received: 2 December 2018
  • Accepted: 16 January 2019
  • Published:

Abstract

Background

Currently, cheese fat is a major component of human diet due to change in eating habits. It contains a number of health destroying as well as health promoting fatty acids. Bovine milk cheese fatty acid composition is regulating by many factors. These may be breed of animal, animal health condition like mastitis and stage of lactation. It also differs with feed and dietary fat intake and seasons. Many studies demonstrated physicochemical, textural and sensory characteristics of Mozzarella cheese with variation in technological process but no literature found about the fatty acid profile and potential influence of milling pH on the fatty acid composition of buffalo Mozzarella cheese.

Methods

Buffalo Mozzarella cheeses were manufactured at 5.2, 5.1, 5.0, 4.9 and 4.8 milling pH, vacuum packaged and stored at 4 °C and analyzed for quality characteristics, mineral composition and fatty acid profile on days 1, 45, and 90. Results were analyzed by ANOVA according to complete randomized design.

Results

This study evaluated the effect of milling pH on chemical composition, mineral and fatty acid profile of buffalo Mozzarella cheese. Experimentally induced milling pH differences persisted and significantly affected chemical composition during first day of manufacturing but have no effect on fatty acid profile of cheese. However, storage effects significantly on chemical composition and fatty acid profile of cheese. Decreasing milling pH from 5.2–4.9 resulted in decrease in moisture content of cheese. As a result of changes in milling pH, all the cheeses experienced a significant loss in protein content. In contrast to protein content, fat content of cheese increases with decreasing milling pH. Ash contents of cheese decreased with decreasing milling pH. The level of calcium decreases from 77.82 mg/g to 69.1 mg/g with decreasing milling pH while there is no clear trend observed for potassium and sodium during change in milling pH. Saturated fatty acids presented higher concentrations reaching values of about 71.38 g/100 g throughout storage while monounsaturated fatty acids decreases with storage from 26.72 to 22.06 g/100 g. On the other hand, total polyunsaturated fatty acids exhibited lower concentrations than total monounsaturated fatty acids reaching values of 3.2 g/100 g and its value also decreased with ripening and reached to 1.6 g/100 g. Concentration of C18:1 t10–11 was observed 1.89% in freshly prepared cheese. Milling pH did not influence C18:1 t10–11 concentration but storage days significantly (p < 0.05) decreased its concentration.

Conclusion

In modern era, Mozzarella cheese is major source of dietary fatty acids. The study demonstrated that Mozzarella cheese is a rich source of saturated fatty acids that has detrimental effect on health but it is also observed that it is also a major source of essential fatty acids that has beneficial impact on health. It is concluded that technological conditions like milling pH minimally influence cheese fatty acid profile but after manufacturing treatments and conditions like packaging and storage greatly influence fatty acid profile of cheese. It was concluded that cheese may get oxidized if it is packed in inappropriate packaging material that have reduced air barrier resistance. Moreover, cheese storage under light may also become oxidized which is also harmful for health.

Keywords

  • Mozzarella
  • Fatty acid profile
  • Milling
  • pH
  • Storage

Background

Worldwide, consumer’s attention has been started to be focused on foods that have well specified health impacts. One of the important component of food that concerns more to consumer’s health is the fatty acid profile of food which includes short, intermediate and long chain fatty acids [1]. Recent advices for a good diet however, recommends less consumption of dairy fat, because of its saturated fatty acids, which have hypercholesterolemic effect. But dairy fat is also important due to presence of unsaturated fatty acids which is helpful in reducing blood cholesterol content and also provide protection against cancer and cardiovascular diseases [2].Changing lifestyle, eating habits and use of innovative technology in processing of Mozzarella cheese demands tailor made characteristics of this cheese. Therefore, cheese manufacturer are producing cheese that is well suiting to consumers requirements. In this aspect, increase in interest of consumers to know the fatty acid (FA) composition of cheese is continuously increasing, as certain unsaturated FA are recognized as bioactive substances [3]. Mozzarella cheese has become one of the dominant cheese varieties all over the world due to its primary utilization in pizza preparation. Buffalo milk is most demanded for Mozzarella due to its high fat and presence of essential fatty acids [4]. Pakistan is the 5th largest milk producer of the world and ‘Black Gold of Asia’ commonly known as buffalo milk donate a major part in total milk production of Pakistan and this black gold is very suitable for the production of mozzarella cheese [5].

Dairy fat is a vital component of human diet owing to their essential functions perform in to the body. Milk fat triacylglycerol are created from more than 400 types of fatty [6].The saturated and unsaturated fatty acids in milk accounts for about 70 and 27% by weight [7]. While, 2.7% of the fatty acids occur in Trans form. Many factors are associated with the variation in the amount and fatty acid composition of bovine milk lipids [8]. They may be of animal origin, i.e. related to genetics (breed and selection), stage of lactation, mastitis and ruminal fermentation, or they may be feed-related factors, i.e. related to fiber and energy intake, dietary fats, and seasonal and regional effects. In most of countries many customers are happy to pay more for handmade cheese as compared to cheese made on industrial scale. As there is a general adverse nutritional image that handmade cheese has attractive flavor and texture. But with a rising number of customers who are more careful about their food selections, artisanal cheese can’t be surpassed. Although milling pH processing step exist in both artisanal and industrial processing but artisanal producers get benefit of milk quality that differs with season and feed of animal. The animal feed affect the quality of cheese as different grazing pastures gives different fatty acid profile and flavor of cheese [9]. Artisanal cheesemakers change manufacturing schedule of different cheese varieties or change processing steps with time of year. It is concluded that artisanal cheese quality not solely depends on method of manufacturing but other parameters also influence cheese quality. Various researches indicating milk processing conditions that affect fatty acid profile of developed product. As the effects of processing conditions like heating, cooking, storage and aging on the fatty acid profile of milk fat and dairy products have often been deliberated disputed. Ha et al. [10] stated higher Conjugate Linoleic Acid (CLA) contents in cheese fat as compared to milk fat. Some scientist observed no change on the fatty acid composition of cheeses including Pecorino Romano cheese, blue cheese, Swiss cheese, Emmental cheese and Ricotta cheese [11, 12].In one study it is stated that processing, such as heating, can change the CLA isomer distribution in dairy products while the total CLA content is unchanged by conventional processing [13]. Lin et al. [14] observed significantly lower CLA content in vacuum packed cheese as compared to canned cheese. They also found minor influence of milling pH and antioxidant on fatty acid composition of Cheddar cheese. Gürsoy et al. [15] examined 30 commercial Turkish hard and soft cheeses and detected higher CLA content in aged hard cheeses. Some conditions other than processing may also influence fatty acid profile of cheese like diet of animal and season. Santillo et al. [16] studied the influence of dietary supplementation of flax seed on the fatty acid profile of milk and Cacioricotta cheese from Italian Simmental cows and concluded that long chain fatty acids particularly linolenic acid was found to be higher in cheese made from milk of cows fed with flaxseed. Seasonal variation also influence the fatty acid profile of cheese as it is directly or indirectly related to the diet of the animal. Pasture quality varies with the change in season [9].These contradictory reports about the fatty acid profile of cheeses do not countenance decisive remarks to be drawn. Modern dietary guidelines recommend knowing the fatty acid profile of each food item before consuming. Mozzarella cheese milling pH (The pH at which cheese is milled into small pieces and is ready for pasta filata process) is an important step that affect all functional and sensory characteristics of cheese. Formation of curd chips depends on milling pH which ultimately influence cheese composition and functional characteristics. Guinee et al. [17] studied that curd disintegrate at 5.75 milling pH. They found that curd will form its proper texture at 5.3 milling pH in case of cheddar cheese. Gulzar et al. [18] found that buffalo Mozzarella cheese exhibit more stretch properties at 4.9 milling pH. At higher milling pH curd do not stretch and disintegrate in hot water during pasta filata process and loses of fat occurs. Although many reports about influence of milling pH on physicochemical and functional characteristics of Mozzarella cheese have been given by several workers but, little literature found about the fatty acids profile and potential influence of milling pH on the fatty acid composition of buffalo Mozzarella cheese. In this study, we thus concentrated on the fatty acid composition of buffalo Mozzarella cheese at various milling pH.

Materials and methods

Heat stretched semi-soft “Mozzarella” cheese samples was made using raw milk exclusively from buffalo milk procured from Dairy Animals Training and Research Center University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore. For cheese making, partially skimmed (0.9 casein to fat ratio) pasteurized buffalo milk was inoculated and coagulated with thermophilic starter at 37 °C and bovine rennet respectively. Starter culture and rennet take 1 h and 50 min to develop curd and pH of 6.4. The curd is cut with knife into 3–4 mm curd particles. The curd-whey mixture is heated to 37–42 °C till 6.2 pH for whey removal. This curd-whey heating process continue for 30 min. The curd is placed for cheddaring process until 5.2, 5.1, 5.0, 4.9 and 4.8 milling pH resulted five treatment samples (M5.2, M5.1, M5.0, M4.9 and M 4.8). Cheddaring process last for 1 h and 10 min to develop required pH. The milled cheese was heat stretched at 94 °C and vacuum packed for a storage period of 90 days in polyethylene nylon food vacuum plastic bags of 100 μm thickness.

Physicochemical analysis

Moisture, Acidity, Ash [19], pH [20], fat [21] and protein [22] determinations in sample cheeses were performed according to prescribed methods.

Minerals analysis

Sodium potassium and calcium contents were determined using flame photometer as described by [23].

Fatty acid analysis

The fatty acid methyl esters were prepared by trans-esterification with potassium hydroxide according to method of ISO 5509:2000E [24]. The injected volume was 1 μL. Each sample was analyzed three times. Fatty acid profile of Mozzarella cheese including CLA was determined on GC-MS (Agilent Technologies, Model 7890-B) using SP-2560 fused silica capillary column (60 m long, 0.25 mm internal diameter, 0.25um phase thickness) on a flame ionization detector. Injection volume was 1 1 μL, the temperature program and operating conditions were as: injector and detector temperature 200 and 250 °C; carrier gas helium at 1.2 ml/min, hydrogen 4 ml/min and oxygen 40 ml/min, in a split mode, the column was maintained at 50 °C for 1 min then ramped at 10 °C/min to 220 °C and finally 3 min at 250 °C. Fatty acids were identified and quantified by FAME-37 standard (Sigma Aldrich, USA).

Sensory analysis

Sensory characteristics of Mozzarella cheese were determined in a well ventilated and illuminated sensory evaluation laboratory. Panel of ten trained judges were asked to adjudge color, appearance, texture) by the method [25].

Statistical analysis

Every treatment was run in triplicate, experiment was planned in a Completely Randomized Design (CRD) and data were analyzed by two way analysis of variance and significant difference among the treatments was determined by Duncan Multiple Range Test using SAS 9.1 software [26].

Results and discussions

Physicochemical analysis of buffalo Milk and cheese

The means of the physicochemical parameters (fat, protein, pH, acidity, total solids and calcium content) in buffalo milk were found (6.65, 4.5%, 6.6, 0.12, 12.12% and 1.7 mg/g) respectively. While, the physicochemical analysis of cheeses are given in Table 1.
Table 1

Mean and standard error of physicochemical composition of buffalo milk mozzarella cheese at different milling pH during storage

Treatments

Storage Days

pH

Acidity (%)

Protein (%)

Fat (%)

Ash (%)

Moisture (%)

M4.9 (Control)

1st day

4.90 ± 0.00a

0.92 ± 0.01c

25.26 ± 0.15d

22.00 ± 0.05a

2.33 ± 0.01d

46.23 ± 0.09a

45 days

4.86 ± 0.01b

1.51 ± 0.01b

25.16 ± 0.03d

22.46 ± 0.09a

2.32 ± 0.01d

45.23 ± 0.09b

90 days

4.62 ± 0.01c

2.32 ± 0.01a

25.1 ± 0.02d

22.03 ± 0.03a

2.33 ± 0.01d

44.23 ± 0.09c

M4.8

1st day

4.8 ± 0.00a

1.08 ± 0.04a

24.1 ± 0.06d

22.15 ± 0.00a

2.16 ± 0.03e

45.13 ± 0.09a

45 days

4.73 ± 0.02b

1.92 ± 0.01b

24.13 ± 0.03d

22.06 ± 0.03a

2.18 ± 0.04e

43.13 ± 0.01b

90 days

4.51 ± 0.01c

2.52 ± 0.01c

24.04 ± 0.03d

22.16 ± 0.09a

2.18 ± 0.04e

42.13 ± 0.09c

M5.0

1st day

5.0 ± 0.00a

0.83 ± 0.01c

25.53 ± 0.15c

20 ± 0.00b

2.45 ± 0.00c

47.11 ± 0.06a

45 days

4.95 ± 0.01b

0.93 ± 0.01b

25.81 ± 0.01c

20.2 ± 0.06b

2.45 ± 0.01c

46.11 ± 0.06b

90 days

4.76 ± 0.02c

1.13 ± 0.02a

25.1 ± 0.06c

20.03 ± 0.03b

2.45 ± 0.00c

45.11 ± 0.06c

M5.1

1st day

5.1 ± 0.01a

0.74 ± 0.02c

26.33 ± 0.03b

19.0 ± 0.01c

2.74 ± 0.05b

52.3 ± 0.07a

45 days

4.99 ± 0.01b

0.82 ± 0.02b

26.52 ± 0.01b

19.1 ± 0.02c

2.73 ± 0.03b

50.3 ± 0.06b

90 days

4.90 ± 0.03c

0.87 ± 0.01a

26.41 ± 0.02b

19.16 ± 0.03c

2.73 ± 0.03b

49.8 ± 0.05c

M5.2

1st day

5.20 ± 0.00a

0.62 ± 0.01c

27.72 ± 0.02a

17.0 ± 0.03d

2.91 ± 0.02a

53.79 ± 0.06a

45 days

4.88 ± 0.03b

0.92 ± 0.02b

26.3 ± 0.03b

19.23 ± 0.02c

2.74 ± 0.03b

50.36 ± 0.07b

90 days

4.81 ± 0.01c

0.82 ± 0.02a

26.86 ± 0.04a

17.3 ± 0.01d

2.92 ± 0.02a

49.79 ± 0.06c

Values are expressed as mean ± SD of three replicates

a,b,c,d,e different short case letters within column showed significant (P < 0.05) relationship

M4.9 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 4.9), M 4.8 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 4.8), M5.0 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 5.0), M5.1 (Cheese was heat stretched at milling pH 5.1), M5.2 (Cheese was heat stretched at milling pH 4.9)

Mineral analysis

The changes in levels of calcium, potassium and sodium in cheese made with milling pH of 5.2, 5.1, 5.0, 4.9 and 4.8 during 90 days of storage are shown in Table 2.
Table 2

Mean and standard error of mineral composition of buffalo milk mozzarella cheese at different milling pH during storage

Treatments

Storage Days

Calcium (mg/g)

Potassium (mg/g)

Sodium (mg/g)

M4.9 (Control)

1st day

72.16 ± 0.60e

8.60 ± 0.87a

12.33 ± 0.43d

45 days

72.19 ± 0.60e

8.26 ± 0.56a

12.60 ± 0.32d

90 days

72.15 ± 0.50e

8.73 ± 0.67a

12.66 ± 0.54d

M4.8

1st day

69.10 ± 0.60f

8.23 ± 0.45a

12.13 ± 0.21d

45 days

68.76 ± 0.50f

8.56 ± 0.65a

12.16 ± 0.61d

90 days

68.76 ± 0.30f

8.73 ± 0.76a

12.13 ± 0.63d

M5.0

1st day

74.23 ± 0.33c

8.96 ± 0.94a

12.96 ± 0.78b

45 days

73.9 ± 0.44d

8.63 ± 0.45a

12.96 ± 0.91b

90 days

73.9 ± 0.33d

8.40 ± 0.91a

13.16 ± 0.43b

M5.1

1st day

75.26 ± 0.54b

8.30 ± 0.76a

12.76 ± 0.78c

45 days

75.4 ± 0.56b

8.46 ± 0.58a

12.76 ± 0.76c

90 days

75.4 ± 0.67b

8.48 ± 0.72a

12.8 ± 0.12c

M5.2

1st day

79.03 ± 0.34a

8.10 ± 0.56a

13.1 ± 0.45b

45 days

75.4 ± 0.45b

8.50 ± 0.43a

12.83 ± 0.78a

90 days

79.03 ± 0.65a

8.63 ± 0.43a

13.23 ± 0.98b

Values are expressed as mean ± SD of three replicates

a,b,c,d,e,fdifferent short case letters within column showed significant (P < 0.05) relationship

M4.9 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 4.9), M 4.8 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 4.8), M5.0 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 5.0), M5.1 (Cheese was heat stretched at milling pH 5.1), M5.2 (Cheese was heat stretched at milling pH 4.9)

Fatty acid profile of cheese

Statistical results indicated that milling pH effects non-significantly while ripening affects significantly on fatty acid profile of Mozzarella cheese. Table 3 showed the saturated (SFA), monounsaturated (MUFA) and polyunsaturated (PUFA) fatty acid profiles of Mozzarella cheese prepared at various milling pH. SFA presented higher concentrations than total MUFA reaching values of 71.38 and 26.7 g/100 g lipids (Table 3), respectively, at 1st day. On the other hand, total PUFA exhibited lower concentrations than total MUFA reaching values of 3.2 g/100 g lipids at first day (Table 3). Saturated fatty acids presented higher concentrations reaching values of about 71.38 g/100 g throughout storage while monounsaturated fatty acids decreases with storage from 26.72 to 22.06 g/100 g. On the other hand, total polyunsaturated fatty acids exhibited lower concentrations than total monounsaturated fatty acids reaching values of 3.2 g/100 g and its value also decreased with ripening and reached to 1.6 g/100 g. The amount of CLA (C18:1 t10–11) was found 1.89% in freshly prepared cheese. Milling pH has no influence C18:1 t10–11 concentration but storage period significantly (P < 0.05) decreased its concentration.
Table 3

Mean and standard error of fatty acid profile of buffalo milk mozzarella cheese at different milling pH during storage

Fatty acid

Storage Days

M4.9 (Control)

M4.8

M5.0

M5.1

M5.2

Butyric acid C4:0

1st Day

1.86 ± 0.21a

1.86 ± 0.24a

1.85 ± 0.31a

1.86 ± 0.41a

1.84 ± 0.21a

45 Days

1.84 ± 0.41a

1.85 ± 0.33a

1.86 ± 0.22a

1.85 ± 0.31a

1.83 ± 0.41a

90 Days

1.84 ± 0.31a

1.82 ± 0.24a

1.83 ± 0.26a

1.83 ± 0.45a

1.82 ± 0.32a

Caproic acid

1st Day

1.66 ± 0.26a

1.63 ± 0.26a

1.63 ± 0.21a

1.64 ± 0.25a

1.65 ± 0.41a

45 Days

1.65 ± 0.61a

1.66 ± 0.51a

1.65 ± 0.26a

1.64 ± 0.46a

1.63 ± 0.26a

90 Days

1.66 ± 0.45a

1.63 ± 0.56a

1.65 ± 0.52a

1.66 ± 0.24a

1.66 ± 0.17a

Caprylic acid

1st Day

1.03 ± 0.22a

1.02 ± 0.29a

1.01 ± 0.11a

1.03 ± 0.32a

1.02 ± 0.31a

45 Days

1.01 ± 0.21a

1.03 ± 0.24a

1.04 ± 0.23a

1.03 ± 0.22a

1.03 ± 0.22a

90 Days

1.05 ± 0.29a

1.03 ± 0.31a

1.03 ± 0.35a

1.03 ± 0.25a

1.03 ± 0.21a

Capric acid

1st Day

2.98 ± 0.43a

2.96 ± 0.46a

2.96 ± 0.31a

2.97 ± 0.47a

2.98 ± 0.39a

45 Days

2.95 ± 0.24a

2.95 ± 0.15a

2.94 ± 0.22a

2.93 ± 0.34a

2.91 ± 0.51a

90 Days

2.96 ± 0.61a

2.94 ± 0.52a

2.93 ± 0.41a

2.93 ± 0.53a

2.94 ± 0.41a

Lauric acid

1st Day

2.80 ± 0.24b

2.70 ± 0.24b

2.70 ± 0.21b

2.81 ± 0.21b

2.82 ± 0.21b

45 Days

2.81 ± 0.11a

2.83 ± 0.15a

2.84 ± 0.21a

2.81 ± 0.35a

2.81 ± 0.45a

90 Days

2.83 ± 0.99a

2.80 ± 0.60a

2.82 ± 0.88a

2.81 ± 0.65a

2.82 ± 0.41a

Myristic acid

1st Day

15.16 ± 0.25b

15.14 ± 0.41b

15.14 ± 0.33b

15.16 ± 0.24b

15.15 ± 0.25b

45 Days

15.76 ± 0.22b

15.75 ± 0.43a

15.74 ± 0.22a

15.72 ± 0.25a

15.71 ± 0.53a

90 Days

15.6 ± 0.27a

15.56 ± 0.43a

15.54 ± 0.43a

15.40 ± 0.23a

15.54 ± 0.11a

Palmitic acid

1st Day

25.52 ± 0.42a

25.43 ± 0.13a

25.56 ± 0.52a

25.51 ± 0.51a

25.52 ± 0.21a

45 Days

25.34 ± 0.22a

25.33 ± 0.26a

25.33 ± 0.29a

25.21 ± 0.24a

25.12 ± 0.23a

90 Days

25.23 ± 0.26a

25.23 ± 0.46a

25.23 ± 0.47a

25.23 ± 0.61a

25.23 ± 0.43a

Palmitoleic acid

1st Day

1.026 ± 0.25a

1.1 ± 0.25a

1.36 ± 0.25a

1.01 ± 0.25a

1.16 ± 0.41a

45 Days

0.901b ± 0.24b

0.92b ± 0.25b

0.95b ± 0.23b

0.99b ± 0.14b

0.9b ± 0.59b

90 Days

0.85c ± 0.43c

0.82c ± 0.33c

0.80c ± 0.41c

0.82c ± 0.54c

0.80c ± 0.43c

Stearic acid

1st Day

17.97 ± 0.43a

17.93 ± 0.22a

17.93 ± 0.55a

17.91 ± 0.66a

17.95 ± 0.24a

45 Days

17.95 ± 0.43a

17.94 ± 0.57a

17.94 ± 0.51a

17.99 ± 0.23a

17.91 ± 0.43a

90 Days

17.25 ± 0.64b

17.23 ± 0.45b

17.20 ± 0.9b

17.19 ± 0.98b

17.18 ± 0.37b

Oleic acid

1st Day

25.09 ± 0.49a

25.01 ± 0.51a

24.09 ± 0.30a

24.09 ± 0.56a

26.09 ± 0.43a

45 Days

24.08 ± 0.56b

24.17 ± 0.47b

23.06 ± 0.32c

21.01 ± 0.92d

23.08 ± 0.81b

90 Days

22.11 ± 0.65e

21.17 ± 0.72f

20.12 ± 0.61f

20.12 ± 0.81f

21.12 ± 0.95d

Linoleic acid

1st Day

2.79 ± 0.56a

2.75 ± 0.72a

2.73 ± 0.95a

2.79 ± 0.29a

2.77 ± 0.91a

45 Days

2.13 ± 0.76b

2.43 ± 0.86b

2.63 ± 0.92b

2.53 ± 0.22b

2.59 ± 0.54b

90 Days

1.2 ± 0.73f

1.10 ± 0.22f

1.79 ± 0.25c

1.61 ± 0.24d

1.53 ± 0.91e

Linolenic acid

1st Day

0.48a ± 0.01a

0.46 ± 0.02a

0.48 ± 0.06a

0.45 ± 0.01a

0.50 ± 0.03a

45 Days

0.24 ± 0.02b

0.27 ± 0.01b

0.25 ± 0.01b

0.26 ± 0.02b

0.27 ± 0.01b

90 Days

0.15 ± 0.00c

0.13 ± 0.01c

0.1 ± 0.02c

0.18 ± 0.02c

0.16 ± 0.03c

Arachidic acid

1st Day

2.56 ± 0.15a

2.55 ± 0.43a

2.51 ± 0.98a

2.45 ± 0.32a

2.56 ± 0.26a

45 Days

2.51 ± 0.56a

2.46 ± 0.32a

2.52 ± 0.64a

2.46 ± 0.21a

2.45 ± 0.16a

90 Days

2.48 ± 0.23b

2.47 ± 0.24b

2.46 ± 0.76b

2.48 ± 0.54b

2.41 ± 0.39b

Eicosenoic acid

1st Day

0.73 ± 0.24a

0.72 ± 0.29a

0.75 ± 0.67a

0.71 ± 0.37a

0.73 ± 0.54a

45 Days

0.52 ± 0.34b

0.51 ± 0.65b

0.53 ± 0.78b

0.50 ± 0.69b

0.56 ± 0.45b

90 Days

0.34 ± 0.79c

0.32c ± 0.56c

0.34 ± 0.69c

0.31 ± 0.42c

0.35 ± 0.19c

C18:1 t10–11 (CLA)

1st Day

1.89 ± 0.06a

1.88 ± 0.04a

1.86 ± 0.02a

1.91 ± 0.01a

1.89 ± 0.03a

45 Days

1.85 ± 0.02a

1.86 ± 0.03a

1.82 ± 0.06a

1.83 ± 0.06a

1.86 ± 0.05a

90 Days

1.71 ± 0.07b

1.69 ± 0.01b

1.55 ± 0.09b

1.59 ± 0.10b

1.44 ± 0.02b

Values are expressed as mean ± SD of three replicates

a,b,c,d,e,f different short case letters within column showed significant (P < 0.05) relationship

M4.9 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 4.9), M 4.8 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 4.8), M5.0 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 5.0), M5.1 (Cheese was heat stretched at milling pH 5.1), M5.2 (Cheese was heat stretched at milling pH 4.9)

Sensory evaluation

Color change in mozzarella cheese

The whiteness of cheese samples decreased significantly (P < 0.05) with milling pH and storage as indicated from Table 4.
Table 4

Mean and standard error of color, appearance and texture scores of buffalo milk mozzarella cheese at different milling pH during storage

Treatments

Storage Days

Color (Whiteness)

Appearance (Score)

Texture (Score)

M4.9 (Control)

1st

55.23 ± 0.95a

8 ± 0.78a

7.33 ± 0.61a

45 days

51.23 ± 0.65b

9 ± 0.65b

6.22 ± 0.34b

90 days

47.23 ± 0.61c

6.96 ± 0.61c

5.33 ± 0.45c

M4.8

1st day

57.06 ± 0.35a

7 ± 0.51a

6.13 ± 0.34a

45 days

49.06 ± 0.51b

8 ± 0.72b

5.13 ± 0.23b

90 days

46.06 ± 0.78c

6.33 ± 0.91c

4.13 ± 0.65c

M5.0

1st day

58.2 ± 0.71a

5 ± 0.65a

8.00 ± 0.34a

45 days

53.2 ± 0.56b

6 ± 0.63b

7.23 ± 0.57b

90 days

49.2 ± 0.87c

4 ± 0.61c

6.23 ± 0.98c

M5.1

1st day

69.36 ± 0.13a

4.23 ± 0.67a

9.0 ± 0.56a

45 days

65.36 ± 0.62b

5.23 ± 0.62b

8.26 ± 0.35b

90 days

62.36 ± 0.6c

3.23 ± 0.56c

7.26 ± 0.56c

M5.2

1st day

74.93 ± 0.97a

4.3 ± 0.67a

9.00 ± 0.45a

45 days

71.26 ± 0.91b

5.3 ± 0.34b

8.26 ± 0.02b

90 days

68.26 ± 0.82c

3.3 ± 0.78c

7.26 ± 0.65c

Values are expressed as mean ± SD of three replicates

a,b,c different short case letters within column showed significant (P < 0.05) relationship

M4.9 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 4.9), M 4.8 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 4.8), M5.0 (Cheese heat stretched at milling pH 5.0), M5.1 (Cheese was heat stretched at milling pH 5.1), M5.2 (Cheese was heat stretched at milling pH 4.9)

Appearance

Appearance is a quick indication of cheese quality which indicates surface consistency and fusion of cheese shreds after cooking. The results of appearance scores are shown in Table 4. Appearance scores of cheese samples generally increased with decreasing milling pH however appearance scores decreases with storage.

Texture

With respect to hardness; cheese showed less compression force with decreasing milling pH Table 4. Maximum force was observed at 5.2 pH while lowest found at 4.8.

Discussions

The results demonstrated that decreasing milling pH from 5.2–4.9 resulted in decrease in moisture content of cheese. It is because of low pH which tends to unstable the protein network which releases more moisture [27].With reducing milling pH from 5.2 to 4.9 it was seen that starter cultures caused to increase titratable acidity form 0.70 to 1.78 which in turn increase the amount of whey separation [28]. As a result of the changes of the milling pH, all the cheeses experienced a significant loss in protein content. This was detected as a continuous decrease in whey level throughout cheddaring period which is a rich source of protein [29]. In contrast to protein content, fat content of cheese increases with decreasing milling pH. It might be due to more time taken to stretch the cheese which loses the fat contents of cheese [30]. Buffalo mozzarella cheese does not stretch at higher milling pH (from 5.2 to 5.0) which increases fat loses during stretching. Ash contents of cheese decreased with decreasing milling pH. It is due to development of acid that solubilize the micellar calcium phosphate and acting as a vehicle to expel minerals in whey [18]. The level of calcium decreases with decreasing milling pH while there is no clear trend observed for potassium and sodium during change in milling pH. The effect of milling pH on drainage affects calcium as the majority of the non-micellar calcium is lost in the whey. The changing of the pH at milling influences the level of calcium lost in the whey [27]. Storage affects minerals composition non- significantly (P > 0.05).

Processing condition (milling pH) has no effect on the fatty acid profile of Mozzarella cheese. During the storage period of 90 days, concentration of unsaturated fatty acids decreased and saturated fatty acids increased on percentage basis. Literature also support the findings of this investigation, amount of unsaturated fatty acids decreased in the long term storage of cheddar cheese [31]. Fatty acid profile of fresh and ripened cheddar cheese is different, also confirmed by the [32]. Concentration of C18:1 t10–11in freshly prepared Mozzarella cheese was 1.89%. Milling pH had no effect on the concentration of C18:1 t10–11, storage up to 45 days had a non-significant effect, after 90 days of storage of Mozzarella cheese, concentration of C18:1 t10–11in was significantly lower than the fresh cheese. Storage duration had a significant effect on concentration of conjugated linoleic acid in milk fat [33]. Cheese samples was wrapped in transparent plastic pouches, which have increased the phot-oxidation of lipids. Moreover, packaging materials used for cheese samples have reduced barriers towards light and oxygen which may result the oxidation of cheese. Alves et al. [34] also find out that Requeija o cremoso cheese get oxidized after exposure to light. It is concluding that cheese may get oxidized during transportation as well as inappropriate storage conditions rather than during modern production system [35].

At high milling pH protein network is less dense that allows more scattering of light which gives whiter color to cheese while as the milling pH decreased, the protein network becomes more compact and dense, the structure becomes more homogeneous that resist scattering of light and whiteness decreases [36]. The same happened with ripening when the casein network becomes more swollen and decreased light scattering consequently decreased whiteness of cheese. At higher milling pH the cheese were with grainy structure and did not fuse and stretch. However, surface rupture decreases as the milling pH decreases till 4.9 milling pH it is due to increase in elongation and strong casein network but as the storage period increases due to biochemical breakdown of protein network cheese appearance scores reduced as the cheese losses its consistency to stretch but fusion increases [37]. Cheese becomes soft as milling pH reduced due to dissociation of casein network in to smaller aggregates. As the pH drops, the casein integrity also lost [38]. This was probably because of the more compact structure of the cheese as lower pH of cheese curd decreases the electrostatic repulsion and strengthens interactions within and between casein aggregates which result in cluster formation and firmer texture [39].

Conclusion

Complete information about the fatty acid profile of Mozzarella cheese is the concerning matter of consumer’s health. Fatty acid profile of buffalo mozzarella cheese at various milling pH is demonstrated in this study. Buffalo milk cheese is rich with the saturated fatty acid but also exhibit unsaturated fatty acid that has strong health impact to control cardiovascular diseases and reduce the risk of cancer. It is a confusing nutritional concept among consumers about industrial scale produced cheese as it has less flavor and texture qualities as compared to artisanal cheese. In the present study it is concluded that processing technologies minimally influence the fatty acid profile of cheese rather than post manufacturing conditions. The study showed that unsaturated fatty acids of mozzarella cheese are chemically more sensitive as compared to saturated fatty acids and decreases with the storage of mozzarella cheese if it is not properly packed or stored.

Abbreviations

CLA: 

Conjugated Linoleic Acids

FA: 

Fatty acids

MUFA: 

Monounsaturated fatty acids

PUFA: 

Polyunsaturated fatty acids

SFA: 

Saturated fatty acids

Declarations

Acknowledgements

We sincerely thank the University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore for providing us with necessary resources and support during research study.

Funding

We acknowledged the financial support by Higher Education Commission (HEC), Islamabad-Pakistan to conduct research.

Availability of data and materials

Data of the present study are in the form of Tables.

Authors’ contributions

NG, SR and MN conceived and designed the study. NG, TS and IM conducted the research study, analyzed data and its interpretation. AK and MI drafted the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

We declare that there is no competing interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Dairy Technology, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, 55300, Pakistan
(2)
Department of Food Technology, University of Poonch, Rawalakot, 12350, Pakistan
(3)
Institute of Home and Food Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences, Government College University, Faisalabad, 38000, Pakistan

References

  1. Pariza MW, Park Y, Cook ME. The biological active isomers of conjugated linoleic acid. Prog Lipids Res. 2001;40:283–98.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Banni S, Murru E, Angioni E, Carta G, Melis MP. Conjugated linoleic acid isomers (CLA): good for everything? Sci Aliments. 2002;22:371–80.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Molketin J. Bioactive lipids naturally occurring in bovine milk. Nahrung. 1999;43:185–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Zicarelli L. Buffalo milk: its properties, dairy yield and mozzarella production. Vet Res Commun. 2004;1:127–35.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Athar IH, Anwar M. Comparison of mozzarella cheese prepared from buffalo milk by starter culture and direct acidification techniques. Pak J Sci Ind Res. 1996;4(35):108–11.Google Scholar
  6. Mansson HL. Fatty acids in bovine milk fat. Food Nutr Res. 2008;52. https://doi.org/10.3402/fnr.v52i0.1821.
  7. MacGibbon AHK, Taylor MW. Composition and structure of bovine milk lipids. In: Fox PF, McSweeney PLH, editors. Advanced dairy chemistry. New York: Springer; 2006. p. 1–42.Google Scholar
  8. Jensen RG. The composition of bovine Milk lipids: January 1995 to December 2000. J Dairy Sci. 2002;85:295–350.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Nudda A, McGuire MA, Battacone G, Pulina G. Seasonal variation in conjugated linoleic acid and vaccenic acid in milk fat of sheep and its transfer to cheese and ricotta. J Dairy Sci. 2005;88:1311–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Ha Y, Grimm NK, Pariza MW. Newly recognized anti-carcinogenic fatty acids: identification and quantification in natural and processed cheeses. J Agri Food Chem. 1989;(1):75–81.Google Scholar
  11. Werner SA, Luedecke LO, Shultz TD. Determination of conjugated linoleic acid content and isomer distribution in three cheddar-type cheeses: effects of cheese cultures, processing, and aging. J Agri Food Chem. 1992;(10):1017–21.Google Scholar
  12. Gnadig S, Chamba JF, Perread E, Chappaz S, Chardigny JM, Rickert R, Steinhart H, Sébédio JL. Influence of manufacturing conditions on the conjugated linoleic acid content and the isomer composition in ripened french emmental cheese. J Dairy Res. 2004;71:367–71.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Steinhart C. Conjugated linoleic acid - the good news about animal fat. J Chem Educ. 1996;73:302–3.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Lin H, Boylston TD, Chang MJ, Luedecke LO, Shultz TD. Survey of the conjugated linoleic acid contents of dairy products. J Dairy Sci. 1995;78:2358–65.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Gursoy O, Seckin AK, Kinik O, Metin M. Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) content of most popular Turkish hard and soft cheeses. Milchwissenschaft. 2003;58:622–3.Google Scholar
  16. Santillo A, Caroprese M, Marino R, d'Angelo F, Sevi A, Albenzio M. Fatty acid profile of milk and Cacioricotta cheese from Italian Simmental cows as affected by dietary flaxseed supplementation. J Dairy Sci. 2016;99:2545–51.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Guinee TP, O’Callaghan DJ. Simple empirical method for objective of the stretchability of cheese on cooked pizza pies. J Food Eng. 1998;31:147–61.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Gulzar N, Aysha S, Nuzhat H, Muhammad S. Influence of mozzarella and semi ripened cheddar cheese amalgamations on the chemical composition and textural attributes of processed pizza cheese. Pak J Agri Sci. 2016;53:209–16.Google Scholar
  19. AOAC. Official method of analysis. Washington, DC: The Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 17th Ed; 2000.Google Scholar
  20. Ong L, Henriksson A, Shah NP. Proteolytic pattern and organic acid profiles of probiotic products. Int Dairy J. 2007;17:67–78.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Marshall RJ. Physicochemical properties accounting for cheese texture. Acta Psychol. 1993;84:69–77.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. IDF. Determination of the nitrogen content and calculation of crude protein. Brussels: Int Dairy Federation; 1993.Google Scholar
  23. Kirk RS, Sawyer R. Pearson’s composition and analysis of foods. UK: Longman Scientific and Technical; 1991. p. 537–41.Google Scholar
  24. ISO, International standard. Animal and vegetable fats and oils. Preparation of methyl esters of fatty acids. Geneva: ISO 5509:2000(E), International Organization for Standardization; 2000.Google Scholar
  25. Jo Y, Benoist DM, Ameerally A, Drake MA. Sensory and chemical properties of gouda cheese. J Dairy Sci. 2018;101:1967–89.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Steel RGD, Torrie JH, Dickey DA. Principals and procedures of statistics. A biometerical approach. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co. Inc; 1997.Google Scholar
  27. Guinee TP, Feeney EP, Auty MAE, Fox PF. Effect of pH and calcium concentration on some textural and functional properties of mozzarella cheese. J Dairy Sci. 2002;85:1655–69.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Sert D, Ayar A, Akin N. The effects of starter culture on chemical composition, microbiological and sensory characteristics of Turkish Kasar cheese during ripening. Intl J Dairy Technol. 2007;60:245–52.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith R, Alistair JC, Matt G, David R. Mozzarella cheese – a review of the structural development during processing. Food Biophy. 2018;13:1–10.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Paz NF, Enzo GDO, Fernando JV, Margarita A, Adriana NR. Effect of pH at drainage on the physicochemical, textural and microstructural characteristics of mozzarella cheese from goat milk. Food Sci Technol. 2017;37:193–201.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Ahmad S, Nadeem M, Ayaz M, Jaspal MH. Effect of low melting fractions of Milk fat on Lipolysis of Cheddar cheese. J Food Process Preserv. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.12501.
  32. Batool M, Nadeem M, Imran M, Khan IT, Bhatti JA, Ayaz M. Lipolysis and Antioxidant properties of cow and Buffalo Cheddar cheese in accelerated ripening. Lipids Health Dis. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12944-018-0871-912944-2018-871.
  33. Nadeem M, Mahmud A, Imran M, Khaliuqe A. Enhancement of the oxidative stability of whey butter through almond (Prunus dulcis) Peel extract. J Food Process Preserv. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.12265.
  34. Alves RMV, Van Dender AGF, Jaime SBM, Moreno I. Stability of ‘ Requeija˜ o cremoso’ in different packages exposed to light. Paris: Poster, Congrilait 2002, 26th International Dairy Conference.Google Scholar
  35. Fletouris DJ, Maria AG, Evropi NB. The influence of retail display storage on the fatty acid composition of modified atmosphere packaged Graviera Agraphon cheese. Intl J Dairy Technol. 2015;68:218–26.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Pastorino AJ, Dave RI, Oberg CJ, McMahon DJ. Temperature effect on structure opacity relationship of non-fat mozzarella cheese. J Dairy Sci. 2002;85:2106–23.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. Joshi NS, Mu Hukumarappan K, Dave RI. Effect of calcium on physiochemical properties of fat free mozzarella cheese. J Food Sci. 2004;68:2289–94.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Roginski H, Fuquay J, Fox. Low fat cheese. In: Roginski H, Fuquay J, Fox, editors. Encyclopedia of dairy science. UK: Academic press; 2003. p. 438–44.Google Scholar
  39. Johnson, M. The melt and stretch of cheese. Dairy Pipeline; 2003. https://www.cdr.wisc.edu/sites/default/files/pipelines/2000/pipeline_2000_vol12_01.pdf. Acessed 17 June 2018.

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2019

Advertisement