Production of camel milk yoghurt: Physicochemical and microbiological quality and consumer acceptability

31Citations
Citations of this article
49Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to make yoghurt from camel milk and determine its physicochemical, microbiological and sensory qualities. The quality of camel milk yoghurt was compared with cow milk yoghurt and all parameters were analyzed following standard procedures. Yoghurt of acceptable consistency was made from camel milk using 1.2% gelatin, 5% bovine skim milk powder, 1.5 ml/L of calcium chloride, 40 ml/L of maple strawberry syrup and 6% yoghurt culture (YF-L811) and by incubating the milk at 42 oC for 18 h. The average values for moisture, ash, syneresis, pH, titratable acidity and total solids of camel milk yoghurt were 83.4%, 1.13%, 58%, 4.37, 1.255% lactic acid and 16.7%, respectively. The corresponding values for cow milk yoghurt were 80.6%, 0.71%, 56%, 4.67, 0.865% lactic acid and 19.5%, respectively. The titratable acidity of camel milk yoghurt was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than cow milk yoghurt; however, no significant difference was observed between the two yoghurt types for the other parameters. Coliforms were not detected in both yoghurt types. The sensory analysis showed that cow milk yoghurt was more preferred by the panellists than camel milk yoghurt. Production of yoghurt from camel milk using the same procedure as for cow milk yoghurt proved to be difficult. Further research is called for to improve the acceptability of camel milk yoghurt using locally available and acceptable avouring agents. Research needs to be conducted to optimize the operating parameters and standardize the production procedures of camel milk yoghurt in the future.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Galeboea, O., Seifua, E., & Sekwati-Monanga, B. (2018). Production of camel milk yoghurt: Physicochemical and microbiological quality and consumer acceptability. International Journal of Food Studies, 7(2), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.7455/IJFS/7.2.2018.A5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free