Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T19:15:51.442Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

84. The Influence of Lactic Streptococci on the Ripening of Cheddar Cheese

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

I. R. Sherwood  and
H. R. Whitehead
I. R. Sherwood
Affiliation:
Dairy Research Institute, Massey Agricultural College, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
H. R. Whitehead
Affiliation:
Dairy Research Institute, Massey Agricultural College, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The process of ripening in experimental cheeses was followed by periodic estimations of the amounts of various types of protein degradation product formed.

2. No connection between the type of nitrogen partition and the commercial quality of the ripened cheese could be traced.

3. The proteolytic powers of the various pure cultures of streptococci used as starters in the cheese vats seemed to have little influence on the rate of proteolysis in the cheeses during the ripening period. The main trend of the protein breakdown was governed by the rate and total extent of acid formation in the milk and curd during the manufacturing process. This suggests that the rennet enzyme is the principal proteolytic agent, and that the most significant function of the streptococci is the formation of acid which in turn influences the rate of action of the rennet enzyme.

4. No specific connection between the numbers of streptococci present in the cheese milk at the time of renneting and the rate of ripening of the cheese could be traced.

5. Some evidence was found tending to suggest that minor differences in the type of protein degradation occurring during the ripening period influenced the changes of bacterial flora in the cheese. Lactobacilli appeared to develop earlier where the proportion of simpler protein derivatives was high.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , September 1934 , pp. 208 - 222
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1934

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

(1) Evans, Hastings and Hart, (1914). J. Agric. Res. 2, 167.Google Scholar
(2) Evans, (1918). J. Agric. Res. 13, 235.Google Scholar
(3) Hucker, and Marquardt, (1926). N.Y. Agric. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. No. 117.Google Scholar
(4) Barthel, (1915). Zbl. f. Bakt. II, 44, 76.Google Scholar
(5) Barthel, and Sandberg, (1919). Zbl. f. Bakt. II, 49, 392.Google Scholar
(6) Barthel, and Haglund, (1923). Proc. World's Dairy Congress, 1, 314.Google Scholar
(7) Barthel, and Haglund, (1926). Meddel. Centralanst. Försöksv. Jordbruks. (Abstract in Chem. Abs. 1927 21 285.)Google Scholar
(8) Kelly, (1932). N.Y. Agric. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. No. 200.Google Scholar
(9) Kelly, (1932). N.Y. Agric. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. No. 201.Google Scholar
(10) Anderegg, and Hammer, (1929). J. Dairy Sci. 12, 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(11) Eagles, and Sadler, (1932). J. Dairy Res. 3, 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(12) Wasteneys, and Borsook, (1924). J. Biol. Chem. 62, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13) Orla-Jensen, (1919). The Lactic Acid Bacteria. Køabenhavn: Høst og Søn.Google Scholar
(14) Virtanen, and Landmark, (1929). Milch. Forsch. 8, 375.Google Scholar
(15) Virtanen, (1923) Soc. Sci. Fennica Comment. Physico-Mathematicae, 1, 41.Google Scholar
(16) Davis, and Mattick, (1932). J. Dairy Res. 4, 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar