JDS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 79 No. 1 145-148
© 1996 by American Dairy Science Association ®
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bertrand, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Bertrand, J. A.

Influence of Shipping Container, Preservative, and Breed on Analysis of Milk Components of Shipped Samples

J. A. Bertrand 1

1 Animal, Dairy and Veterinary Sciences Department, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-0361

An average of 50 milk samples from Holsteins and 16 samples from Jersey cows were collected monthly for 11 mo and allocated to one of four treatments: 1) preserved with potassium dichromate and shipped in plastic bags, 2) preserved with bronopol and shipped in plastic bags, 3) preserved with potassium dichromate and shipped in plastic vials, and 4) preserved with bronopol and shipped in plastic vials. Samples were shipped to a DHIA laboratory for determination of milk fat, milk protein, and SCC. Samples shipped in vials preserved with bronopol were statistically higher in milk fat. Overall, milk fat was higher in samples shipped in vials than in those shipped in bags and in shipped samples preserved with bronopol than in those preserved with potassium dichromate. Milk protein was lower for samples shipped in vials than for those shipped in bags but was higher for samples preserved with bronopol than with potassium dichromate. Effects of containers and preservatives were not different for SCC. Overall, shipment of samples in plastic vials using bronopol as a preservative yielded the highest results for the analysis of milk fat, and milk protein and SCC.

Key Words: shipping container • preservative • milk components

Submitted on March 20, 1995
Accepted on October 3, 1995




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J DAIRY SCIHome page
A. Sanchez, D. Sierra, C. Luengo, J. C. Corrales, C. de la Fe, C. T. Morales, A. Contreras, and C. Gonzalo
Evaluation of the MilkoScan FT 6000 Milk Analyzer for Determining the Freezing Point of Goat's Milk Under Different Analytical Conditions
J Dairy Sci, July 1, 2007; 90(7): 3153 - 3161.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J DAIRY SCIHome page
A. Sanchez, D. Sierra, C. Luengo, J. C. Corrales, C. T. Morales, A. Contreras, and C. Gonzalo
Influence of Storage and Preservation on Fossomatic Cell Count and Composition of Goat Milk
J Dairy Sci, September 1, 2005; 88(9): 3095 - 3100.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J DAIRY SCIHome page
C. Gonzalo, J. R. Martinez, J. A. Carriedo, and F. San Primitivo
Fossomatic Cell-Counting on Ewe Milk: Comparison with Direct Microscopy and Study of Variation Factors
J Dairy Sci, January 1, 2003; 86(1): 138 - 145.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Physiol. Rev.Home page
D. B. Shennan and M. Peaker
Transport of Milk Constituents by the Mammary Gland
Physiol Rev, July 1, 2000; 80(3): 925 - 951.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1996 by the American Dairy Science Association ®.