During the 30 days of storage of the cheese samples, it was possible
to note the same behavior between the curves (Fig. 2), confirming
the hardness observed in the k values. As observed in
Fig. 2, Moresi and Bruno (2007) verified that the relationship
between the true stress and deformation tended to deviate with
a concave upward trend. By increasing the compressive stress
applied, there was a progressive re-orientation of the network,
thus resulting in material densification (Moresi and Bruno, 2007).
Already, the n values showed no differences (P < 0.05). However,
it was also noted a high correlation between the n values and the
protein (R = 0.771), lipid (R = 0.875) and ash (R = 0.985)
(P < 0.05) content. The data determined by Gwartney et al. (2002)
and Rogers et al. (2009) confirm the results obtained in the present
work. Hussain et al. (2012a) cited that the cross-linked network is
affected principally by protein and lipid content. The retention of
fat within the cheese matrix is heavily influenced by the initial
fat content of milk used for cheese making in relation to the protein
content. Protein-fat interaction is essential for matrix structure
and hardness of cheese. Depending on whether the fat
globule acts as inert filler, not affecting the protein matrix and
therefore the cheese hardness is not affected (Hickey et al.,
2014). However, there is a difficult to sort out the individual effects
able to alter the hardness of cheeses. Furthermore, according to
Hussain et al. (2011), it is noteworthy that the results verified for
cow milk cannot be totally extrapolated to buffalo milk, and probably
this explains the differences between their rheological properties.
Ahmad et al. (2008) emphasized that the micellar and
physicochemical changes in buffalo milk and in cow milk appear
to be qualitatively similar but quantitatively different.
During the 30 days of storage of the cheese samples, it was possibleto note the same behavior between the curves (Fig. 2), confirmingthe hardness observed in the k values. As observed inFig. 2, Moresi and Bruno (2007) verified that the relationshipbetween the true stress and deformation tended to deviate witha concave upward trend. By increasing the compressive stressapplied, there was a progressive re-orientation of the network,thus resulting in material densification (Moresi and Bruno, 2007).Already, the n values showed no differences (P < 0.05). However,it was also noted a high correlation between the n values and theprotein (R = 0.771), lipid (R = 0.875) and ash (R = 0.985)(P < 0.05) content. The data determined by Gwartney et al. (2002)and Rogers et al. (2009) confirm the results obtained in the presentwork. Hussain et al. (2012a) cited that the cross-linked network isaffected principally by protein and lipid content. The retention offat within the cheese matrix is heavily influenced by the initialfat content of milk used for cheese making in relation to the proteincontent. Protein-fat interaction is essential for matrix structureand hardness of cheese. Depending on whether the fatglobule acts as inert filler, not affecting the protein matrix andtherefore the cheese hardness is not affected (Hickey et al.,2014). However, there is a difficult to sort out the individual effectsable to alter the hardness of cheeses. Furthermore, according to
Hussain et al. (2011), it is noteworthy that the results verified for
cow milk cannot be totally extrapolated to buffalo milk, and probably
this explains the differences between their rheological properties.
Ahmad et al. (2008) emphasized that the micellar and
physicochemical changes in buffalo milk and in cow milk appear
to be qualitatively similar but quantitatively different.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
