4.7 Article

Biodiversity and growth dynamics of lactic acid bacteria in artisanal PDO Ossau-Iraty cheeses made from raw ewe's milk with different starters

期刊

FOOD MICROBIOLOGY
卷 29, 期 1, 页码 33-42

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fm.2011.08.011

关键词

Lactic acid bacteria; Rep-PCR; Specific PCR; Growth dynamic; Ewe's milk cheese; Raw milk

资金

  1. Aquitaine Regional Council
  2. Pyrenees Atlantiques Council, ONILAIT (Paris, France)
  3. French State (FNADT)
  4. European Commission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The biodiversity and growth dynamics of Lactic Acid Bacteria (LA:3) in farm-house Ossau-Iraty cheeses were investigated from vat milk to 180 days of ripening in six independent batches made from six raw ewe's milks using five typical cheese-making methods. Commercial starter S1 was used for three batches, starter S1 combined with S2 for one batch and no starter for two batches. Up to ten LAB species from five genera and up to two strains per species were identified per milk; up to eleven species from five genera and up to three strains per species were identified per cheese. Lactococcus lactis, Lactobacillus paracasei, Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium, Enterococcus durans, and Leuconostoc mesenteroides were detected in all cheeses. Lactococci reached the highest counts irrespective of the milk and starter used. Lactococci and enterococci increased during manufacture, and mesophilic lactobacilli increased during ripening. Strain and species numbers, the percentage of isolates originating from the raw milk, maximum counts of each genus/species and time for reaching them, all varied according to whether or not a starter was used and the composition of the starter. The genotypes of strains within species varied according to the raw milk used. This generated distinct LAB microbiotas throughout manufacture and ripening that will certainly impact on the characteristics of the ripened cheeses. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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