| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
South Dakota State University, Brookings 57007-0647
ABSTRACT
Dry sweet whey, whey protein concentrate, and sodium caseinate were used in this study to replace the nonfat dry milk in ice cream. Either whey protein concentrate, a blend of whey protein concentrate and dry sweet whey, or a blend of dry sweet whey and sodium caseinate were used to replace the milk solids-not-fat at 50 or 100%. All the experimental ice creams were compared to control ice creams using nonfat dry milk to increase the milk solids-not-fat.
All mixes were manufactured to produce an ice cream having 10.5% fat, 22% total milk solids, 13% sucrose, 3% corn syrup solids, and .3% stabilizer-emulsifier. The ice cream was manufactured in 114-kg batches, the mix being blended, pasteurized (72°C for 30 min), homogenized with a two-stage homogenizer (1080 kg/cm2), cooled to 4°C, flavored with pure vanilla extract, and frozen in a continuous freezer. The ice cream was packed in 1-L containers, then stored at –30°C.
The final products were evaluated for compositional analyses on two subsamples of each batch of mix; a panel evaluation for flavor, body, and texture by trained panelists; and a 52 family consumer evaluation to determine overall preference. The compositional analyses of ice cream averaged 10.5% fat, 3.9% protein, 5.7% lactose, .94% ash, and total solids of 38.7%. Standard deviations of these analyses were less than 1.00.
The panel evaluation showed no significant differences (P>.05) in flavor, body, and texture among the various ice creams. Sandiness was not judged a problem with any of the ice creams.
Fifty-two families were randomly selected from the City of Brookings, SD, for consumer evaluation of the ice creams. The 14-wk evaluation was conducted with each family receiving 5 L of ice cream as five 1 L cartons each week. Each week's ice cream delivery contained one sample from each of three treatment mixes, a control sample, and a duplicate of one of the other four samples. The samples of ice creams were rated on a nine-point hedonic scale (1 best, 9 worst).
No significant differences were found in the consumer flavor ratings among the ice creams made with dry sweet whey, whey protein concentrate — dry sweet whey blend (at both the 50% and 100% replacement levels), and the control. The ice cream made with the dry sweet whey-sodium caseinate blend received a significantly higher hedonic rating (P<.01), indicating a poorer quality product.
1 Published with the approval of the Director of the South Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station as Publication 2035 of the Journal Series.
2 Scientist, Land O'Lakes, Inc., Minneapolis, MN.
3 A. O. Smith, North Country Harvestore, P.O. Box 268, Middlebury, VT.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. R. Patel, R. J. Baer, and M. R. Acharya Increasing the Protein Content of Ice Cream J Dairy Sci, May 1, 2006; 89(5): 1400 - 1406. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. B. Alvarez, C. L. Wolters, Y. Vodovotz, and T. Ji Physical Properties of Ice Cream Containing Milk Protein Concentrates J Dairy Sci, March 1, 2005; 88(3): 862 - 871. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. R. Ruger, R. J. Baer, and K. M. Kasperson Effect of Double Homogenization and Whey Protein Concentrate on the Texture of Ice Cream J Dairy Sci, July 1, 2002; 85(7): 1684 - 1692. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
