Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T06:51:16.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

229. Bacteriological testing of butter. New and simplified routine methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

G. M. Moir
Affiliation:
Dairy Division Laboratory, N.Z. Department of Agriculture, Wallaceville, Wellington
R. R. Russell
Affiliation:
Dairy Division Laboratory, N.Z. Department of Agriculture, Wallaceville, Wellington

Extract

Simple and rapid methods have been devised which utilize the minimum of apparatus and material for the routine bacteriological testing of butter. These involve the preparation of microplate cultures to obtain counts of total bacteria, “heat-resistant” bacteria, lipolytic organisms, yeasts, moulds; Grimes's method as a measure of the coliform content is also used.

The method for counting colonies of lipolytic bacteria is based upon their ability to produce round each colony a halo of white solid fatty acids in place of the clear glistening fat globules.

The new methods have been exhaustively compared with those hitherto accepted, and have been found to give satisfactory and reliable results.

A variety of comparisons has been carried out to improve still further the methods in use and to provide additional information about the nature of the bacteria contamination present in the butter. The roll-tube method seems preferable to the microplate for mould counts, and is quite suitable for yeast counts.

The results obtained confirm the view expressed by Wood & Thornton(6) that yeast and mould counts provide an inadequate criterion of factory sanitation, and should be supported at least by the total count of bacteria.

The employment of these methods has enabled large numbers of samples to be dealt with. Thus samples from most of the principal New Zealand butter factories have been regularly tested. The information so obtained has been of material value to the Dairy Division's Instructors in drawing attention to factories where sanitary conditions left room for improvement.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1939

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) Hammer, B. W. & Yale, M. W. (1932). J. Dairy Sci. 15, 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2) Robertson, A. H. (1925). Tech. Bull. N.Y. agric. Exp. Sta. no. 112.Google Scholar
(3) Johns, C. K. (1928). Sct. Agric. 8, 353.Google Scholar
(4) Barkworth, H. (1933). J. S.-E. agric. Coll. Wye, p. 197.Google Scholar
(5) Davis, J. G. (1931). J. Dairy Res. 3, 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6) Wood, F. W. & Thornton, H. R. (1935). Canad. J. Res. 12, p.Google Scholar
(7) Arup, P. S. & Gilmour, G. V. B. (1932). Irish Free State J. Agric. 31, 183, 226.Google Scholar
(8) Berry, J. A. (1933). J. Boot. 25, 433.Google Scholar
(9) Stark, C. N. & Soheib, B. J. (1936). J. Dairy Sci. 19, 191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(10) Grimes, M. (1934). J. Dairy Sci. 17, 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(11) Frazier, W. C. & Rupp, P. (1928). J. Bact. 16, 187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(12) Jacobsen, D. H. (1937). Bull. S. Dakota agric. Exp. Sta. no. 308.Google Scholar
(13) Moir, G. M. & Russell, R. R. (1937). N.Z. J. Agric. 54, 144.Google Scholar