4.7 Article

Application of exopolysaccharide-producing cultures in reduced-fat Cheddar cheese: Composition and proteolysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE
卷 88, 期 12, 页码 4195-4203

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)73105-2

关键词

reduced-fat Cheddar cheese; proteolysis; exopolysaccharide-producing cultures

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Proteolysis during ripening of reduced fat Cheddar cheeses made with different exopolysaccharide (EPS)-producing and nonproducing cultures was studied. A ropy strain of Lactococcus lactis ssp. cremoris (JFR1) and capsule-forming nonropy and moderately ropy strains of Streptococcus thermophilus were used in making reduced-fat Cheddar cheese. Commercial Cheddar starter was used in making full-fat cheese. Results showed that the actual yield of cheese made with JFR1 was higher than that of all other reduced-fat cheeses. Cheese made with JFR1 contained higher moisture, moisture in the nonfat substance, and residual coagulant activity than all other reduced-fat cheeses. Proteolysis, as determined by PAGE and the level of water-soluble nitrogen, was also higher in cheese made with JFR1 than in all other cheeses. The HPLC analysis showed a significant increase in hydrophobic peptides (causing bitterness) during storage of cheese made with JFR1. Cheese made with the capsule-forming nonropy adjunct of S. thermophilus, which contained lower moisture and moisture in the nonfat substance levels and lower chymosin activity than did cheese made with JFR1, accumulated less hydrophobic peptides. In conclusion, some EPS-producing cultures produced reduced-fat Cheddar cheese with moisture in the nonfat substance similar to that in its full-fat counterpart without the need for modifying the standard cheese-making protocol. Such cultures might accumulate hydrophobic (bitter) peptides if they do not contain the system able to hydrolyze them. For making high quality reduced-fat Cheddar cheese, EPS-producing cultures should be used in conjunction with debittering strains.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据