NYS Cheese Manufacturers’ Association
Transcript of NYS Cheese Manufacturers’ Association
Microfiltration for whey protein removal in cheese making
D. M. Barbano• Department of Food Science Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
NYS Cheese Manufacturers’ Association
March 2, 2020
• Microfiltration (MF) of Milk• Membrane systems and performance
• Technical aspects of application of MF to remove milk derived whey proteins before cheese making
• Future:• Is MF approved currently in the US for this purpose?
• Is MF being used outside the US for this purpose?
• Will it be approved in the US?
• What will happen when it is approved in the US?
Outline
Membrane systems and performance
Ceramic MF systems
Polymeric MF systems
Microfiltration (MF) of Skim Milk
The Dairy Filtration Spectrum
Photo: TetraPak Dairy Processing Handbook, 2003
RO = Reverse OsmosisNF = Nanofiltration
UF = UltrafiltrationMF = Microfiltration
Higher Transmembrane Pressure (TMP) Smaller Pore Size
You Will Hear These Words Frequently
• Retentate – fluid retained by the membrane
• Permeate – fluid passed by the membrane
• Flux – mass or volume of permeate removed per unit membrane surface area per unit time (i.e., L/m2 h)
• Transmembrane Pressure (TMP) – the driving force of pressure-driven filtration processes
TMP = Pressure on retentate side - Pressure on permeate side
Spiral Wound versus Ceramic Membranes
Spiral Wound Membranes Ceramic Membranes
• Low chemical stability• pH restrictions• Temperature restrictions• Hydrophobic character leads to
higher protein adhesion• Foulant layer aids in separation• Low capital cost per unit of
membrane• Short life• Low flux
• High chemical stability• Chemical restrictions• High thermal stability• Hydrophilic character• High capital cost per unit of
membrane area• Long life• High flux
The “Ins and Outs” of Tubular Ceramic Microfiltration (MF) Membranes
RetentateFeed
Chapter 1
Membrane Surface
The “Ins and Outs” of Spiral Wound Polymeric Ultrafiltration (UF) Membranes
Photo: www.mtrinc.com
Chapter 1
Why MF milk prior to cheese making?
Whey proteins removed prior to cheese making are not contaminated with residual from annatto color, microbial cells and enzymes, color bleaching chemicals, and residual rennet. They have also have lower exposure to heat, a more bland flavor, and are less denatured than the same proteins isolated from whey after cheese making.
These characteristics increases their value. Whey proteins removed from milk before cheese making are referred to as milk serum proteins or “milk derived whey proteins”.
Microfiltration (MF) of Skim Milk
Microfiltration (MF) for Cheese MakingJ. Dairy Sci. 2005. 88:1891–1900.
A Microfiltration Process to Maximize Removal of Serum Proteins from Skim Milk Before
Cheese Making*B. K. Nelson and D. M. Barbano
Northeast Dairy Foods Research Center, Department of Food Science,Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Microfiltration (MF) for Cheese Making
Milk derived whey protein
Skim milk without whey proteins blended with fresh cream for cheese making
Microfiltration (MF) for Cheese MakingJ. Dairy Sci. 88:4183–4194
Yield and Aging of Cheddar Cheeses Manufactured from Milks with Different Milk Serum Protein Contents*B. K. Nelson and D. M. BarbanoNortheast Dairy Foods Research Center, Department of Food Science,
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
The Cheddar cheese aged normally and proteolysis was slightly faster in the low serum protein cheeses.
The protein content of the whey that from the conventional cheese making process is lower in protein and the relative amounts of minor milk proteins are higher than in cheese whey where the milk has not been microfiltered.
The economics and effectiveness of the process depends on how efficiently the milk derived whey proteins are removed from the skim milk prior to cheese making and the purity of the MF retentate and MF permeates.
Microfiltration – Serum Protein RemovalJ. Dairy Sci. 2009. 92 :1361–1377
Efficiency of serum protein removal from skim milk with ceramic and polymeric membranes at 50°C1
J. Zulewska*, M. Newbold † and D. M. Barbano †
* Faculty of Food Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland
† Cornell university Department of Food Science, Northeast Dairy Foods Research Center, Ithaca, NY 14853
Flux comparison by membrane type
Microfiltration – Serum Protein RemovalJ. Dairy Sci. 2009. 92 :1361–1377
Efficiency of serum protein removal from skim milk with ceramic and polymeric membranes at 50°C1
J. Zulewska*, M. Newbold † and D. M. Barbano †
* Faculty of Food Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland
† Cornell university Department of Food Science, Northeast Dairy Foods Research Center, Ithaca, NY 14853
Serum protein removal comparison in stage 1 of a 3 stage MF system by membrane type
Microfiltration (MF) for Cheese MakingJ. Dairy Sci. 2005. 88:1891–1900.
A Microfiltration Process to Maximize Removal of Serum Proteins from Skim Milk Before
Cheese Making*B. K. Nelson and D. M. Barbano
Northeast Dairy Foods Research Center, Department of Food Science,Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Purity of Micellar Casein Concentrates: Methods of Expression
There are two methods being used to characterize serum protein removal and MCC purity produced by an MF process that have different meanings.
1. Serum protein removal percentage2. MCC casein concentrate purity percentage
In practice the numbers can be “similar” but they are not the same and they have different meanings.
Serum Protein Removal PercentageThis a metric used to characterize the performance of a MF process.
Using the feed weight to estimate the mass of SP entering the system and the mass of permeate and percent true protein in the permeate, the mass of SPremoved is divided by the mass of SP entering the process. This is the percentage SP removal.
The normal range from 70 to 98% depending on the process. The higher the percent removal the higher the yield (recovery) of SPI.
MCC Purity Percentage
This a metric used to characterize the purity of the MCC (i.e., MF retentate).
This is typically done by measuring the casein and serum protein content of theMCC using the Kjeldahl method.
While in some cases SP removal numbers and the MCC purity numbers seem similar, but they are not. This can be source of confusion in product specificationand defining the performance of a MF membrane process.
Comparison of the two metrics – SPI yieldMetric Skim
milkMF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5
MCC purity1 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.8% 98.9% 99.6%
SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%
Membrane type
polymeric polymeric ceramic ceramic ceramic
SP yield (kg/1000 kg
milk)
0 38.02 41.47 48.96 54.72 56.48
SP yield increase (kg)
base + 3.456 + 10.944 + 16.704 + 18.432
1 casein as percent of true protein
Comparison of the two metrics – SPI yieldMetric Skim
milkMF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5
MCC purity1 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.8% 98.9% 99.6%
SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%
Membrane type
polymeric polymeric ceramic ceramic ceramic
SP yield (kg/1000 kg
milk)
0 38.02 41.47 48.96 54.72 56.48
SP yield increase (kg)
base + 3.456 + 10.944 + 16.704 + 18.432
1 casein as percent of true protein
Comparison of the two metrics – SPI yieldMetric Skim
milkMF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5
MCC purity1 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.8% 98.9% 99.6%
SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%
Membrane type
polymeric polymeric ceramic ceramic ceramic
SP yield (kg/1000 kg
milk)
0 38.02 41.47 48.96 54.72 56.48
SP yield increase (kg)
base + 3.456 + 10.944 + 16.704 + 18.432
1 casein as percent of true protein
Comparison of the two metrics – SPI yieldMetric Skim
milkMF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5
MCC purity1 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.8% 98.9% 99.6%
SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%
Membrane type
polymeric polymeric ceramic ceramic ceramic
SP yield (kg/1000 kg
milk)
0 38.02 41.47 48.96 54.72 56.48
SP yield increase (kg)
base + 3.456 + 10.944 + 16.704 + 18.432
1 casein as percent of true protein
Comparison of the two metrics – SPI yieldMetric Skim
milkMF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5
MCC purity1 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.8% 98.9% 99.6%
SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%
Membrane type
polymeric polymeric ceramic ceramic ceramic
SP yield (kg/1000 kg
milk)
0 38.02 41.47 48.96 54.72 56.48
SP yield increase (kg)
base + 3.456 + 10.944 + 16.704 + 18.432
1 casein as percent of true protein
Residual SP in a 2X MCC and cooked flavor1
Metric Skimmilk
MF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5
SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%
Membrane type
Spiral Spiral ceramic Ceramic ceramic
Residual SP (g/100 g MCC)
1.152 0.392 0.323 0.173 0.058 0.023
Cooked flavor intensity
High High ??? ??? ??? ???
1 6% protein, 15 g per 240 g serving
Comparison – Residual SP in a 2X MCC1
Metric Skimmilk
MF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5
MCC purity2 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.81 98.9% 99.6%
SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%
Membrane type
spiral spiral ceramic ceramic ceramic
Residual SP (g/100 g MCC)
1.152 0.392 0.323 0.173 0.058 0.023
Cooked flavor intensity
high high ??? ??? ??? ???
1 6% protein, 15 g per 240 g serving2 casein as percent of true protein
• Microfiltration (MF) of Milk• Membrane systems and performance
• Technical aspects of application of MF to remove milk derived whey proteins before cheese making
• Future:• Is MF approved currently in the US for this purpose?
• Is MF being used outside the US for this purpose?
• Will it be approved in the US?
• What will happen when it is approved in the US?
Outline