| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 Minnesota-South Dakota Dairy Foods Research Center, Dairy Science Department, and
2 Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Enginering, South Dakota State University, Brookings 57007
Corresponding author: Ashraf N. Hassan; e-mail: Ashraf.Hassan{at}sdstate.edu.
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Key Words: reduced-fat Cheddar cheese • exopolysaccharide • texture • meltability
Abbreviation key: EPS = exopolysaccharide, FFC = full-fat control cheese, MNFS = moisture in the nonfat substance, RF-3534 = reduced-fat cheese made with the moderate ropy strain Streptococcus thermophilus CHCC 3534, RF-5842 = reduced-fat cheese made with the EPS-negative genetic variant Streptococcus thermophilus CHCC 5842, RFC = reduced-fat control cheese, RF-JFR1 = reduced-fat cheese made with the ropy culture Lactococcus lactis ssp. cremoris JFR1, RF-Slab = reduced-fat cheese made with the capsule-forming nonropy strain Streptococcus thermophilus Slab
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Exopolysaccharide (EPS)-producing cultures have been used to improve the rheological and textural characteristics of fermented dairy products (Perry et al., 1998; Hassan et al., 2004). Different types of EPS with varied functional properties are produced by lactic acid starter cultures (Cerning, 1990; Broadbent et al., 2003; Hassan et al., 2003). Exopolysaccharides increase the water-holding capacity of milk gel and interfere with protein–protein interactions, 2 functions required in low fat cheeses (Mistry, 2001). The selection of an EPS-producing culture to be used in making cheese depends on many factors such as functions of the EPS produced and cheese type and making conditions. For example, whereas moderate ropy cultures were suitable for making acid-coagulated soft cheese such as Karish (Hassan et al., 2004), nonropy EPS-producing cultures were appropriate for making rennet-coagulated cheeses (our unpublished data). The amount and type of EPS are influenced by the culture used and growth conditions (De Vuyst et al., 1998; Gorret et al., 2001). The ropy type of EPS might not be desirable in making Cheddar cheese because of the expected increase in whey viscosity, which limits its use. However, functions of the non-ropy types of EPS in Cheddar cheese have not been reported.
We hypothesized that if EPS-producing cultures could increase the moisture level and improve texture of Cheddar cheese, reduced-fat cheese with similar characteristics to those of the full-fat types might be produced using traditional cheese making procedures without the need for modifications that are associated with several cheese defects. Our objectives were to study the effect of different types of EPS-producing cultures on the textural and functional properties of reduced-fat Cheddar cheese made using the traditional Cheddar cheese making protocol.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Cheese Making
Raw milk was obtained from the Dairy Research and Training Facility at South Dakota State University (Brookings). Cheddar cheese was manufactured from standardized (2% reduced fat or 3.6% full fat), pasteurized (63°C for 30 min and cooled to 31°C) milk. Cheese milk (100 kg) was assigned to a double-O cheese vat (Kusel Equipment Co., Watertown, WI). The following 6 treatments of cheese were made: 1) FFC = full fat made using the commercial Cheddar starter culture (DVS 850; 0.015% wt/wt); 2) RFC = reduced fat made using the commercial Cheddar starter culture (DVS 850; 0.015% wt/wt); 3) RF-JFR1 = reduced-fat made with the ropy strain Lactococcus lactis spp. cremoris JFR1 (2% vol/wt); 4) RF-Slab = reduced fat made with a capsule-forming nonropy Streptococcus thermophilus (0.4% vol/wt) plus the commercial culture (0.011% wt/wt); 5) RF-3534 = reduced fat made with EPS-producing Streptococcus thermophilus CHCC 3534 (0.4% vol/wt) plus the commercial culture (0.011 % wt/wt); and 6) RF-5842 = reduced fat made with the EPS-negative genetic variant of CHCC 3534 (Streptococcus thermophilus CHCC 5842) (0.4% vol/wt) plus the commercial culture (0.011% wt/wt). All 6 cultures produced similar acidification rate and cheese making time. Cheddar cheese was made as described by Awad et al. (2005). Curd was cooked to 39°C and held at this temperature for 30 min. The milling pH was 5.4 and salt level was 1.7%.
Texture Profile Analysis
Cheeses were cut into cylindrical samples of 20 x20 mm using a cork borer #12 and a wire cutter, placed in plastic bags, sealed (to prevent dehydration), and stored at 20°C for 1 h. Samples were obtained from the middle of the whole cheese block to avoid surface effects. A 2-bite compression test was performed using the Instron Universal Testing Machine (model SINTECH 2/D; MTS Systems Corp., Eden Prairie, MN) with a 45.4-kg load cell. A 25% compression test was used and the crosshead speed was 50 mm/min. Hardness, cohesiveness, gumminess, chewiness, and adhesiveness were determined in triplicate from the texture profile curve as described by Bourne (1978).
Estimating Softening Point and Flow Characteristics
A cheese block was cut into slices (~7 mm thickness) perpendicular to the long axis of the block using an electric food slicer. Cylindrical pieces (~30 mm diameter and 5 g) were cut out with a cork borer. The modified squeeze-flow apparatus described by Muthukumarappan et al. (1999) was used to study the softening properties of cheese. The test was performed by placing the cylindrical cheese pieces on a sample platform and lowering the circular disk to be in continuous contact with the cheese. The cheese was covered with mineral oil to prevent dehydration, and a constant oven temperature of 70°C was used. The softening temperature, softening time, and flow rate were calculated as described by Muthukumarappan et al. (1999).
Sensory Evaluation
Three faculty members experienced in evaluating cheese from the Dairy Science Department, South Dakota State University (Brookings), graded coded samples of cheese at 1, 3, and 6 mo. At each session, 6 cheeses were evaluated. Each individual was given 4 blocks (8 x2 x2 cm) of cheese per sample. Samples were presented in identical plastic sample cups sealed with plastic lids and identified by a random 3-digit number. The coded samples were randomly presented. The rating of 12 attributes included flavor (acid, bitter, or flat) and body and texture characteristics (crumbly, curdy, grainy, rubbery/firm, short, smooth, and weak) were recorded on a 1- to 9-point scale. Flavor and body and texture scores of 1 = none, 5 = definite, and 9 = pronounced. Overall flavor and body and texture scores of 1 = poor, 5 = average, and 9 = excellent.
Statistical Analyses
Data reported are the average of 3 measurements per replicate. Cheeses were made 3 times. The GLM procedure using the SAS package (SAS Institute, 1999) was used for ANOVA. Means separation was conducted using Duncan’s multiple range test. Differences were considered significant at P < 0.05.
|
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
. Fat in DM and salt in moisture were significantly higher in FFC than in all reduced-fat cheeses. Fat in DM was not significantly different (P > 0.05) among all reduced-fat cheeses. Cheese made with the ropy culture JFR1 had lower (P < 0.05) salt in moisture levels than all other reduced-fat cheeses. The FFC and RF-JFR1 cheeses contained a similar level of MNFS, which was higher than that in all other reduced fat cheeses (Table 1). This is significant because slight differences in moisture of Cheddar cheese may cause major differences in its rheological parameters (De Jong, 1978). There were no differences (P > 0.05) in the pH among all cheeses at d 1 after manufacture.
|
. Reduction of fat increased the hardness of all fresh cheeses except for RF-JFR1, which did not differ (P > 0.05) from the FFC. Among all reduced-fat cheeses, RF-JFR1 contained the highest moisture level (Table 1
) due to the ability of EPS to bind water. Results indicated that the hardness of fresh cheese increases as the total filler within the network (fat plus moisture) and the MNFS decrease and the protein level increases. The increase in moisture resulting from fat reduction did not offset the decrease in fat except in RF-JFR1, which did not differ (P > 0.05) in hardness from FFC. Although water acts as a lubricant or plasticizer between proteins, higher moisture content of cheeses does not necessarily soften the protein matrix (Bryant et al., 1995). The structural matrix of cheese is a cross-linked casein–calcium phosphate network in which fat globules are physically entrapped (Prentice et al., 1993). The protein matrix is elastic when the casein is largely intact (Jameson, 1990). The reduced hardness of RF-JFR1 is related not only to the relatively high MNFS but also to the modification in the protein network caused by the presence of EPS. Exopolysaccharide interferes with protein–protein interactions, resulting in reduced firmness (Hassan and Frank, 1997). Soft cheese made with EPS-producing cultures exhibited a porous structure in which the large pores were associated with visible EPS (Hassan et al., 2004). However, a compact structure with small pores was seen in cheese made with EPS-nonproducing cultures (Hassan et al., 2004). Cryo-scanning electron microscopy observations showed that EPS was associated with large pores within the microstructure of reduced-fat Cheddar cheese (Hassan and Awad, 2005).
|
After 1 mo of ripening, a sharp decrease (P < 0.05) in the hardness of all reduced-fat cheeses except RF-JFR1 was observed (Table 2). The FFC and RF-JFR1 were the only cheeses that did not show a decrease in hardness during the first month of ripening. The decrease in hardness during the early stages of ripening is due to the rapid transformation of the rubbery texture of young cheese into a smoother and softer product (Lawrence and Gilles, 1987). This early change in the texture is attributed to a number of factors such as proteolysis of casein network by rennet (Lucey et al., 2003), increasing protein hydration by absorbing serum from the fat-serum channels (McMahon et al., 1999; Guinee, 2002), and solubilization of colloidal calcium phosphate (Lucey et al., 2003). Water redistribution, which occurs mainly during the first few weeks of ripening (McMahon et al., 1999), seemed to play a major role in cheese softening. Microstructural observations showed that water redistribution during ripening was less pronounced in both FFC and RF-JFR1 than in the other reduced-fat cheeses (Hassan and Awad, 2005).
After 2 and 4 mo of ripening, the hardness started to increase again after the sharp decrease noticed in the first few weeks. The increase in hardness during ripening might result from the reduction in the level of free water, which increases cheese resistance to deformation (McMahon et al., 1999; Beal and Mittal, 2000).
The 6-mo-old FFC and RF-JFR1 were harder than the fresh cheeses, whereas the opposite was observed in all other reduced-fat cheeses (aged cheeses were softer than the fresh ones). The higher rigidity of aged, full-fat Cheddar cheese compared with the reduced-fat cheese has been previously reported (Drake et al., 1996; Guinee et al., 2000). It is an interesting observation that changes in hardness of both FFC and RF-JFR1 cheeses followed the same pattern, and were different from those in all other cheeses. Both cheeses showed the least changes in hardness during the first month of ripening, and they were the only 2 treatments that produced aged cheeses that were harder than the fresh ones. However, the mechanism by which hardness is developed in the 2 types of cheeses seems to be different. The EPS produced by RF-JFR1 form a 3-D network (Hassan et al., 2003; Hassan and Awad, 2005), which could entrap a significant amount of water, resulting in a lower level of water available for protein hydration and a firmer network. The addition of a carbohydrate-based mimetic has also produced Cheddar cheese that was firmer than the control (Ma et al., 1997). The microstructural observations of full-fat cheese showed that as cheese aged, less expressible serum resulted in more fat–protein interactions (Hassan and Awad, 2005). Such interactions might have increased hardness of FFC during ripening.
Cohesiveness
Cohesiveness is the strength of internal bonds making up the body of the product (Szczesniak et al., 1963; Bourne, 1978). Table 2 shows changes in cohesiveness of cheeses during ripening. Cohesiveness was similar among reduced-fat cheeses. Fat reduction increased (P < 0.05) cohesiveness of fresh cheese. Bryant et al. (1995) also reported that reduced-fat cheeses were more cohesive than were full-fat cheeses. None of the EPS-producing cultures reduced cohesiveness of the reduced-fat cheeses. The nature of the protein matrix and the extent of fat dispersion contribute to cohesiveness or the tendency of cheese to adhere to itself. During ripening, cohesiveness decreased (P < 0.05) in all cheeses. After 6 mo of ripening, FFC was the least cohesive, followed by reduced-fat cheeses made with EPS-producing cultures. Proteolysis disrupts the structural integrity of the protein matrix, leading to reduced cohesiveness (Irudayaraj et al., 1999). Proteolysis was higher in the less cohesive cheeses (Awad et al., 2005).
Adhesiveness
Adhesiveness is the work required to pull cheese away from a surface (e.g., tongue, teeth, palate) (Szczesniak et al., 1963; Bourne, 1978). Fat reduction increased (P < 0.05) adhesiveness of fresh cheeses (Table 2). There was a consistent decline in the adhesiveness of all cheeses except the full-fat type over the first 4 mo of ripening. However, a sharp increase in the adhesiveness was observed in all cheeses between mo 4 and 6. Adhesiveness increases with increasing ability of proteins to interact with water (Pastorino et al., 2003), which might take place during ripening. After 6 mo of ripening, both FFC and reduced-fat cheeses made with EPS-producing cultures had much higher adhesiveness than reduced-fat cheeses made with no EPS. Bryant et al. (1995) reported that adhesiveness of a 3-mo-old Cheddar cheese decreased with a decrease in the fat content. However, Olson and Johnson (1990) reported that low-fat cheeses exhibited a higher degree of stickiness when masticated.
Springiness
Springiness is the rate at which a deformed material returns to its original shape on removal of the deforming force (Szczesniak et al., 1963; Bourne, 1978). This parameter was lower in fresh FFC and RF-JFR1 than in the RFC cheese (Table 3). There was a sharp decrease in springiness in all cheeses between mo 4 and 6, with FFC representing the lowest value. This decline in springiness may be due to the hydrolysis of para 
-caseinate molecules, which are responsible for the springiness of cheese curd (Kanawjia et al., 1995).
|
). During the first month of ripening, although gumminess slightly increased in FFC and decreased in RF-JFR1, a sharp decrease in its value was observed in all other reduced-fat cheeses. After 6 mo of ripening, full-fat cheese exhibited the lowest gumminess, followed by reduced-fat cheeses made with EPS-producing cultures (RF-JFR1, RF-Slab, and RF-3534).
Chewiness
Chewiness is the energy required to chew a solid food product to a state where it is ready for swallowing (Szczesniak et al., 1963; Bourne, 1978). The chewiness was lower (P < 0.05) in fresh FFC and RF-JFR1 than in all other reduced-fat cheeses (Table 3). Furthermore, no significant differences were observed between the fresh FFC and RF-JFR1. During the first month of ripening, a sharp decrease (P < 0.05) in chewiness was observed in all cheeses except FFC and RF-JFR1, which remained unchanged. After 6 mo of ripening, full-fat cheese had the lowest chewiness. Cheeses made with EPS-producing cultures were much less chewy than those made with no EPS. There is a correlation between cheese hardness and chewiness—harder cheese is more difficult to chew (Beal and Mittal, 2000). Fat reduction increased both parameters. However, reduced-fat cheeses made with EPS-producing cultures were the least affected by fat reduction.
Softening and Flow Characteristics
The changes in the softening and flow characteristics of cheeses made with EPS-producing and nonproducing cultures are shown in Table 4. Fresh FFC and RF-JFR1 cheeses melted and softened in a shorter time and at lower temperatures than did all other reduced-fat cheeses. Protein–protein interactions during heating affect the melting and flow properties of cheese (Lucey et al., 2003). The loss of cheese elasticity during heating results in softening while flow occurs when the viscous modulus becomes greater than the elastic modulus (Lucey et al., 2003). The low MNFS in all reduced-fat cheeses except RF-JFR1 could be responsible for their lower meltability. Similar observations were reported for Mozzarella cheese (McMahon et al., 1999). The higher the MNFS, the lower the protein concentration and number of intermolecular bonds. This produces less viscous and shorter cheese, which would melt faster (Lucey and Fox, 1993; Kuo et al., 2001). Zhou and Mulvaney (1998) also reported that the ratio of casein to water rather than the fat level had a major effect on meltability of casein gels.
|
). No differences (P > 0.05) in softening time and temperature were observed among FFC, RF-JFR1, and RF-5842 after 6 mo of ripening. This indicated that RF-5842 (no EPS) cheeses softened during ripening at a higher rate than either FFC and RF-JFR1. Muthukumarappan et al. (1999) also reported that meltability of reduced-fat cheese increased to a greater extent during ripening compared with full-fat cheese. In addition, Kuo et al. (2001) showed that the meltability was higher in 1-wk-old full-fat Cheddar cheese than in reduced-fat cheese, whereas the opposite was found after 6 wk of ripening, as the meltability was higher in reduced- than in full-fat cheese. The casein matrix in cheese becomes softer and less elastic during ripening due to the breakdown of 
s1-casein. However, because proteolysis was greater in RF-JFR1 and FFC than in all other reduced-fat cheeses (Awad et al., 2005), our results confirm the speculation of McMahon et al. (1999) that factors other than proteolysis, such as redistribution of water in cheese during storage, may also contribute to cheese softening. If solubilization of colloidal calcium phosphate was a major factor causing the decrease in the hardness of cheese during the first few weeks of ripening, one would expect FFC and RF-JFR1 cheeses, which showed the most significant decline in their pH (Awad et al., 2005), to show a significant change in their textural characteristics. However, these 2 cheeses did not exhibit any reduction in hardness during the first month of ripening. During the first weeks of ripening, expressible water is absorbed from the fat-serum channels of the cheese in the protein matrix, which becomes more hydrated and softer (McMahon et al., 1999). The softening results were consistent with the microstructure (Hassan and Awad, 2005) and hardness data. Microstructural observations showed that water redistribution was much less in FFC and RF-JFR1 than in all other cheeses. In addition, these 2 cheeses were the only types that did not become softer as they aged for 6 mo (Table 2).
The flow rates were higher in fresh FFC and RF-JFR1 than in all other fresh cheeses (Table 4). There were no differences in the flow rates between the 6-mo-old FFC and RF-JFR1 and the corresponding fresh ones. However, the flow rates of all other 6-mo-old reduced-fat cheeses were much higher than those of the corresponding fresh cheeses. Interestingly, FFC and RF-JFR1 had similar melting patterns, which were different from those of all other reduced-fat cheeses. The FFC and RF-JFR1 cheeses became soft and creamy without losing shape when heated, whereas reduced-fat cheese made with EPS-nonproducing cultures ran and separated into solids and liquid. The similarity in the flow rate and pattern of these 2 types of cheeses might be due to the similar level of MNFS.
Sensory Assessments
The sensory evaluation results are shown in Tables 5 and 6. There were no significant differences in flavor among all cheeses at 1 mo of ripening (Table 5). After 6 mo of ripening, FFC had the highest flavor score among all cheeses. Bitterness was definite in RF-JFR1 cheese after 3 mo of ripening and in all other reduced-fat cheeses except RFC at 6 mo of ripening (Table 5). The acid, flat, and lack of typical Cheddar flavor were pronounced in all aged, reduced-fat cheeses except RFC. The FFC and RFC cheeses were the only 2 treatments made solely with commercial Cheddar starter.
|
|
). The FFC and RF-JFR1 cheeses were less crumbly, curdy, grainy, and rubbery than all other reduced-fat cheeses. They were also described as short, smooth, and soft. The crumbliness, curdiness, graininess, and rubberiness of all cheeses decreased during ripening (Table 6). The aged RF-JFR1 and FFC cheeses received the highest scores for overall body and texture. The main goal of this research was to select, among different EPS-producing cultures, the culture that produces reduced-fat Cheddar with similar textural and functional characteristics to its full-fat counterpart. Because the culture that gave the best results was not a typical Cheddar cheese starter, Cheddar cheese flavor did not develop. In current research in our laboratory, the JFR1 culture is used in conjunction with other cultures known for their ability to accelerate ripening and remove bitterness in making reduced-fat Cheddar. In addition, because JFR1 produced young reduced-fat Cheddar cheese with sensory, textural, and functional characteristics similar to those of the full-fat type, we see potential applications of such cultures in making reduced-fat process cheeses.
|
CONCLUSIONS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
|
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Current address: Department of Dairy Science and Technology, Faculty of Agriculture, Alexandria University, Egypt.
Received for publication May 1, 2005. Accepted for publication July 4, 2005.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTS AND DISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. N. Hassan ADSA Foundation Scholar Award: Possibilities and Challenges of Exopolysaccharide-Producing Lactic Cultures in Dairy Foods J Dairy Sci, April 1, 2008; 91(4): 1282 - 1298. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. N. Hassan, S. Awad, and V. V. Mistry Reduced Fat Process Cheese Made from Young Reduced Fat Cheddar Cheese Manufactured with Exopolysaccharide-Producing Cultures J Dairy Sci, August 1, 2007; 90(8): 3604 - 3612. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Agrawal and A. N. Hassan Ultrafiltered Milk Reduces Bitterness in Reduced-Fat Cheddar Cheese Made with an Exopolysaccharide-Producing Culture J Dairy Sci, July 1, 2007; 90(7): 3110 - 3117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Awad, A. N. Hassan, and F. Halaweish Application of Exopolysaccharide-Producing Cultures in Reduced-Fat Cheddar Cheese: Composition and Proteolysis J Dairy Sci, December 1, 2005; 88(12): 4195 - 4203. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. N. Hassan and S. Awad Application of Exopolysaccharide-Producing Cultures in Reduced-Fat Cheddar Cheese: Cryo-Scanning Electron Microscopy Observations J Dairy Sci, December 1, 2005; 88(12): 4214 - 4220. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. N. Hassan, S. Awad, and K. Muthukumarappan Effects of Exopolysaccharide-Producing Cultures on the Viscoelastic Properties of Reduced-Fat Cheddar Cheese J Dairy Sci, December 1, 2005; 88(12): 4221 - 4227. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
