Journal of Dairy Science
Volume 93, Issue 1 , Pages 12-18 , January 2010

Casein micelle dissociation in skim milk during high-pressure treatment: Effects of pressure, pH, and temperature

Received 26 March 2009 ,Accepted 6 October 2009.

  • Image Result

    The in situ turbidity (τ) of reconstituted skim milk powder under pressure (P) at temperatures from 5 to 40°C and pH from 5.5 to 7.5. The pressure was increased manually from 0.1 up to 500MPa, and for

    The in situ turbidity (τ) of reconstituted skim milk powder under pressure (P) at temperatures from 5 to 40°C and pH from 5.5 to 7.5. The pressure was increased manually from 0.1 up to 500MPa, and for every 50MPa, an intensity spectrum of the milk was measured. The in situ turbidity was calculated using the intensity at 600nm. For the improvement of visual comparison, the lines connecting turbidity values of milk at natural pH are in bold. Error bars represent the SD of 3 to 5 individual milk samples.

  • Image Result
    The logistical curve fitting based on Equation 2 of the measured in situ turbidity (τ) under pressure (P) of reconstituted skim milk powder at pH 7.0 and 30°C with the threshold pressure (Pt) marked.

    The logistical curve fitting based on Equation 2 of the measured in situ turbidity (τ) under pressure (P) of reconstituted skim milk powder at pH 7.0 and 30°C with the threshold pressure (Pt) marked.

  • Image Result
    The barostability diagram of casein micelles in reconstituted skim milk powder. The threshold pressure (Pt) for disruption of the casein micelle integrity in skim milk at temperatures (T) 5, 10, 20, 3

    The barostability diagram of casein micelles in reconstituted skim milk powder. The threshold pressure (Pt) for disruption of the casein micelle integrity in skim milk at temperatures (T) 5, 10, 20, 30, or 40°C and pH 5.5, 6.0, 6.7, 7.0, or 7.5 is presented. Data are means of 3 to 5 experiments on individual milk samples; the coefficient of variation was <5% for each threshold level.

PII: S0022-0302(10)70259-9

doi: 10.3168/jds.2009-2244

Journal of Dairy Science
Volume 93, Issue 1 , Pages 12-18 , January 2010