Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T20:34:43.592Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The precipitation of whey proteins by carboxymethyl cellulose of differing degrees of substitution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

R. D. Hill  and
J. G. Zadow
R. D. Hill
Affiliation:
Division of Food Research, Dairy Research Laboratory, C.S.I.R.O., Melbourne, Australia
J. G. Zadow
Affiliation:
Division of Food Research, Dairy Research Laboratory, C.S.I.R.O., Melbourne, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The complexing of whey proteins in hydrochloric acid whey by carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) has been studied. The efficiency of precipitation of CMC (the ability to form insoluble complexes with whey proteins) increased with increasing degree of substitution (DOS) of CMC. At a DOS of greater than 1·4, efficiencies of precipitation of whey protein greater than 90% were achieved without the need for dilution of whey. CMC of high DOS would thus be useful in whey protein reclamation schemes. The amount of CMC necessary for maximum efficiency of precipitation also increased with increasing DOS. The composition of the CMC-protein complex varied little over the range pH 2·8–4·0. Under optimum conditions for binding, the complex contained 61–68% protein and more than 95% of the CMC originally in solution was precipitated in the complex.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , October 1974 , pp. 373 - 380
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1974

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

American Society for Testing and Materials (1964). ASTM D·1439·64T.Google Scholar
Aschaffenburg, R. & Drewry, J. (1959). 15th International Dairy Congress, London 3, 1631.Google Scholar
Basch, J. J. & Timasheff, S. N. (1967). Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 118, 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chowdhury, F. H. & Neale, S. M. (1963). Journal of Polymer Science A1, 2881.Google Scholar
Hansen, P. M. T., Hidalgo, J. & Gould, I. A. (1971). Journal of Dairy Science 54, 830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hidalgo, J. & Hansen, P. M. T. (1969). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 17, 1089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, R. D. & Hansen, R. R. (1964). Journal of Dairy Research 31, 291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klug, E. D. & Tinsley, J. S. (1950). U.S. Patent 2517577.Google Scholar
Rowland, S. J. (1938). Journal of Dairy Research 9, 42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar