The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products: Stephanie Clark Maryanne Drake Kerry Kaylegian Editors

Stephanie Clark
MaryAnne Drake
Kerry Kaylegian Editors
The Sensory
Evaluation
of Dairy
Products
Third Edition
The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products
Stephanie Clark • MaryAnne Drake
Kerry Kaylegian
Editors
The Sensory Evaluation

of Dairy Products
Third Edition
Editors
Stephanie Clark MaryAnne Drake
Department of Food Science and Human Department of Food, Bioprocessing
Nutrition, Iowa State University and Nutrition Sciences
Ames, IA, USA Southeast Dairy Foods Research Center
North Carolina State University
Kerry Kaylegian Raleigh, NC, USA
Department of Food Science
Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA, USA
ISBN 978-3-031-30018-9 ISBN 978-3-031-30019-6 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2023
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Preface
Cheeses undergoing sensory assessment at an American Cheese Society Judging & Competition.
(S Clark image)
v
vi Preface
The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products is intended for all persons who seek a
book entirely devoted to the sensory evaluation of dairy products and modern appli-
cations of the science. Three early editions of this book were published in 1934,
1948 and 1965, under the title Judging Dairy Products. Subsequently, the first edi-
tion The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products was published in 1988. The second
edition, published in 2009, has served as the primary reference on the topic for the
last decade. We are pleased to present this newest edition, which includes not only
significant updates/revisions of the previous chapters, but entirely new chapters
related to Mold-Ripened Cheeses (17), Goat and Sheep milk cheeses (18) and
Washed-Rind Cheeses (19).
Three different methods are available for tracing causes of sensory defects in
dairy foods: (1) chemical procedures, (2) microbiological tests and (3) sensory eval-
uation. The simplest, most rapid and direct approach is sensory evaluation. With its
focus on sensory evaluation, this book should serve well as (1) a reference text for
all persons interested in the history, art and science behind the sensory evaluation of
dairy products; (2) a guide to assist in tracing the origins of identifiable sensory
defects in dairy products with hints or strategies for their correction; (3) a practical
guide to the preparation of samples for sensory evaluation and (4) as a training tool
for personnel in the evaluation of dairy products.
A food technologist trained and experienced in flavor evaluation of dairy prod-
ucts has an “edge” over someone who is competent only in performing chemical
and/or microbiological methods of product analysis. Correct diagnosis of the type
and cause(s) of sensory defects is a prerequisite to application of remedial measures
in production, processing and distribution stages. For dairy processors, the most
important requirement of a comprehensive quality assurance program is careful and
Technical (left) and aesthetic (right) judges evaluate a variety of cheeses at a recent American
Cheese Society Judging & Competition. (S. Clark image)
Preface vii
competent flavor evaluation of all dairy ingredients – in addition to the standard

microbial and chemical component testing. Based upon sensory judgments, occa-
sionally some milk, cream or other dairy ingredients may merit rejection. An impor-
tant premise of the dairy industry is dairy product quality can be only as good as the
raw materials from which they are made.
In this book, the authors have attempted to present a reasonably complete over-
view of the sensory evaluation of most of the major commercial dairy products in
the United States and Canada. Furthermore, the authors have deemphasized the
terms “judging,” “scoring” and “organoleptic analysis” in favor of the more contem-
porary terms “flavor” or “sensory evaluation.” The latter terminology is more reflec-
tive of the marked progress made in relating objective flavor perception to the areas
of sensory panel methodology, statistics, human behavior, psychology and the psy-
chophysics of human sensory perception. In addition to traditional practices, this
book devotes several chapters to modern sensory evaluation methodology, since this
science has profoundly advanced since the first edition of this book.
The early chapters of this edition review the history, physiology and psychology
of human sensory perception, with emphasis on dairy products evaluation. Chapter
4 includes an overview of some of the different state, regional and national dairy
products competitions held annually in the United States. Chapters 5 through 10
focus on dairy products evaluated in the annual Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation
Competition, including descriptions of various sensory defects, their causes and
remedial steps to minimize or eliminate their occurrence in fluid milk, butter, cot-
tage cheese, yogurt, Cheddar cheese and ice cream. Chapters 11 through 19 cover
the sensory evaluation of several dairy products not included in the collegiate con-
test, but that are most assuredly evaluated in plants and judged at other various dairy
product competitions. Additionally, each of these chapters is intended to serve as a
guide to dairy foods manufacturers who seek to optimize the quality of their
products.
Chapter 20 is devoted to modern sensory evaluation practices, including an over-
view of modern affective and analytical sensory tests, as well as the application of
objective sensory languages (such as the Cheddar cheese lexicon) to scientific and
market research.
An appendix section guides coaches or instructors through chemical tests, and
preparation of samples for evaluation by Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation teams.
In preparing this edition of The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products, the
authors from industry and academia have applied their philosophy and instructional
techniques to convey their expertise at describing sensory quality and shortcomings
of dairy foods. This edition of the book brings together a historical perspective of
the sensory evaluation of dairy products, the stages of advancement of this field of
applied science, personnel development, improvements in sensory assessment tech-
niques and methodologies, as well as the role of statistical validation and other
modern and progressive approaches. Simultaneously, many of the chapter contribu-
tors to this edition have relied on the sound discussion and guidance of earlier
authors of the four earlier editions of Judging Dairy Products and The Sensory
Evaluation of Dairy Products. The current chapter authors retained many of the
viii Preface
pertinent details and clearly stated descriptions of the so-called “ideal products” and
the scope of various sensory defects pertaining to flavor, body and texture, color and
appearance, as so adequately delineated by the forerunner sets of authors. Hence,
the chapters dealing with given dairy product categories (e.g. Fluid Milk and Cream;
Butter; Cheese; etc.) are in many cases extensively reliant on the discussions and
perspective from earlier authors of the first four variations of this book. The current
authors have inserted focus and discussion on updating the science of sensory
assessment of the respective dairy products in line with ingredient changes, techno-
logical progress and the availability and application of modern sensory techniques.
The reader should recognize that a clear distinction exists between the concepts
of “quality,” “flavor profile,” “preference” and “acceptability.” The primary aim of
this book is to describe the subject of sensory quality, which is not directly associ-
ated with flavor profiles and not always directly associated with consumer accept-
ability. Product quality and consumer acceptability of products vary throughout the
United States, Canada and the world. For instance, cottage cheese curds that may be
evaluated as “firm/rubbery” are familiar and desirable to consumers on the US West
coast, while relatively “weak/soft” curds are more commonly preferred by consum-
ers on the East coast. Additionally, it is generally presumed that vanilla ice cream
consumers on the US East coast prefer higher intensities of the “vanilla note” than
customers from the West and/ or Mid-West. Consumer acceptability of a particular
product of one coastal region may differ from preferences in the Mid-West or on the
opposite coast. Goat cheese consumers in the United States prefer mild flavors,
Quality in the eyes of official judges does not necessarily guarantee success in the marketplace.
(S. Clark image)
Preface ix
while a more robust typical “goaty” aroma and flavor is expected in Europe. Ideally,
definitions of attributes and defects should not deviate from one coast to another,
though preferences for styles and intensities may vary. As previously emphasized,
quality and the presence of specific sensory attributes – designated either histori-
cally or by industry professionals as product defects – are not necessarily related to
consumer acceptance.
Many dairy products are defined in the US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
If product quality is perceived as the absence of sensory defects, the consequences
of compositional changes of a given dairy food (as introduced or changed by CFR
specifications) need not be reflected in quality changes. However, certain product
characteristics may change as the result of formula alterations. For instance, reduc-
tion of the milkfat content of ice cream from 12% to 10% certainly could affect the
given product’s sensory and hedonic characteristics without affecting quality. In
defining various dairy products, reference has been made to the CFR throughout the
book. The reader is cautioned that since changes in the CFR may occur at any time,
only the latest edition of this official document should be consulted for purposes of
legal compliance (see Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: https://www.ecfr.
gov/cgi-bin/ECFR?page=browse).
Technological progress has eliminated some sensory defects of dairy products
reviewed in previous editions of this text but has also introduced some sensory attri-
butes of dairy products not reviewed in previous editions. Some flavor descriptors
or terms have continued in use over the years more by habit than due to logic. In this
edition, an effort has been made to bridge the traditional terminology with more
advanced knowledge of the defects. By necessity, this transition process must be
gradual, to preserve our ability to accurately communicate the sensory properties of
dairy products.
The editors gratefully acknowledge the technical and creditable contributions by
our chapter authors, past and present. Without their outstanding efforts and dedica-
tion to the field of the sensory evaluation of dairy foods through the decades, this
book would not be complete.
Although two of the authors of earlier editions of this book have passed away, we
honor the pioneering work and original contributions of Dr. John A. Nelson
(1890–1971; Montana State University) and Dr. G. Malcolm Trout (1896–1990;
Michigan State University). We also recognize the 1988 volume, The Sensory
Evaluation of Dairy Products, by Floyd W. Bodyfelt (1937–present; Emeritus
Professor, Oregon State University), Dr. Joseph Tobias (1920–2011; University of
Illinois) and Dr. Trout, which well-served many needs of dairy sensory scientists for
two decades. Dr. Bodyfelt and Michael Costello (Washington State University) are
appreciated for their contributions to the 2009 edition. We also acknowledge the
untimely death of Pat Polowsky (1992–2021), who was the primary author one of
our newest chapters. May volume 3 of The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products
serve you well as you contribute to the field of dairy sensory science.
Ames, IA, USA Stephanie Clark

Raleigh, NC, USA MaryAnne Drake
University Park, PA, USA Kerry Kaylegian
Contents
1 History of Sensory Analysis�� 1

MaryAnne Drake and Stephanie Clark
2
Psychological Considerations in Sensory Analysis�� 9
Jeannine Delwiche
3
Physiology of Sensory Perception �� 19
Maria Laura Montero and Carolyn F. Ross
4
Dairy Products Evaluation Competitions�� 53
Stephanie Clark
5 Fluid Milk Products �� 79
Valente B. Alvarez
6 Butter�� 143
Robert L. Bradley and Marianne Smukowski
7 Creamed Cottage Cheese�� 173
Dave Potter and Doug Vargo
8 Yogurt�� 199
Don Tribby and Vanessa Teter
9
Cheddar and Cheddar-Type Cheeses�� 235
Stephanie Clark
10 Cream and Frozen Desserts�� 281
Ice
Valente B. Alvarez
11
Concentrated and Dried Milk Products�� 345
Scott Rankin
12 Pasteurized Process Cheeses �� 401
Stephanie Clark
xi
xii Contents
13 Cultured Cream Products �� 417

Stephanie Clark
14 Cheeses with Eyes�� 443
Vaishnavi Sankarlal and Stephanie Clark
15 Mozzarella�� 477
Valeria Rizzi, Mark E. Johnson, and Dean Sommer
16 Latin American-Style Cheeses�� 517
Luis A. Jiménez-Maroto and Rodrigo A. Ibáñez
17 Mold-Ripened Cheeses�� 545
Marc Bates and Stephanie Clark
18
Goat and Sheep Cheeses�� 571
Ris Kleve and Stephanie Clark
19 Washed-Rind Cheeses�� 589
Pat Polowsky, Mark E. Johnson, and Rodrigo A. Ibáñez
20 Modern Sensory Practices�� 621
Mary Anne Drake
Appendices�� 649
Index�� 661
Contributors
Valente B. Alvarez Department of Food Science and Technology, Wilbur A. Gould

Food Industries Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
Marc Bates Bates Consulting LLC, Cannon Beach, OR, USA
Robert L. Bradley Department of Food Science, University of Wisconsin,
Madison, WI, USA
Wisconsin Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
Stephanie Clark Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Iowa State
University, Ames, IA, USA
Jeannine Delwiche Tasting Science, LLC, Fairless Hills, PA, USA
MaryAnne Drake Department of Food, Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences,
Southeast Dairy Foods Research Center, North Carolina State University,
Raleigh, NC, USA
Rodrigo A. Ibáñez Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
Madison, WI, USA
Luis A. Jiménez-Maroto Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin-
Madison, Madison, WI, USA
Mark E. Johnson Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
Madison, WI, USA
Ris Kleve Montana Conservation Corps, Kalispell, MT, USA
Maria Laura Montero School of Food Science, Washington State University,
Pullman, WA, USA
National Center for Food Science and Technology (CITA), University of Costa
Rica, San José, Costa Rica
Pat Polowsky Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
Madison, WI, USA
xiii
xiv Contributors
Dave Potter Dairy Connection, Inc., Madison, WI, USA

Scott Rankin Department of Food Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
Madison, WI, USA
Valeria Rizzi Wisconsin Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin,
Madison, WI, USA
Carolyn F. Ross School of Food Science, Washington State University,
Pullman, WA, USA
Vaishnavi Sankarlal Cargill, Minneapolis, MN, USA
Marianne Smukowski Wisconsin Center for Dairy Research, University of
Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
Dean Sommer Wisconsin Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin,
Madison, WI, USA
Vanessa Teter Danone North America, White Plains, NY, USA
Don Tribby IFF, New Century, KS, USA
Doug Vargo IFF Nourish Division, Chicago, IL, USA
Chapter 1
History of Sensory Analysis
MaryAnne Drake and Stephanie Clark
Humans have used their senses to evaluate food for several thousands of years.
Given that so many phytotoxins and bacterial metabolites are bitter, sour, or rancid,
mankind has probably used sensory evaluation since before Homo sapiens were
human. Individuals can often tell by sight, smell, taste, and, to a lesser extent, touch,
whether or not given food or beverage items are good or bad (e.g., safe or toxic). As
civilization developed and the trading and selling of goods became commonplace,
the first seeds of food sensory testing as we know it were planted. Potential food or
beverage buyers tested or evaluated a small portion or a sample of products that
hopefully represented the whole or the entire given lot of product. The product price
was then established based on the relative quality of the product. This process of
standardized product quality grading, the precursor of modern sensory analysis,
subsequently emerged.
Several historical events in sensory science and the sensory analysis of dairy
foods have occurred since that time, and some of these key developmental events
are summarized in Table 1.1. In the early 1900s, the use of professional tasters and
consultants began in different food and beverage industries (Meilgaard et al., 2016).
US Federal grading standards for butter were initially established in 1913 (Table 1.1),
the first National Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest was conducted in
1916 (Bodyfelt et al., 1988, 2008; Trout & Weigold, 1981), and the original dairy
products evaluation textbook (Nelson & Trout, 1934, 1948, 1951, 1964) was
M. Drake (*)
Department of Food, Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences, Southeast Dairy Foods Research
Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
S. Clark
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 1

S. Clark et al. (eds.), The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_1
2 M. Drake and S. Clark
Table 1.1 Selected events in sensory science and sensory analysis of dairy foods
Date Item
1666 Newton introduced the color spectrum
1905 Color Notation manual published (Munsell color method)
1913 Grading established by the USDA for butter; Cheddar cheese subsequently
1916 First collegiate dairy products judging contest held (butter evaluation only)
1917 Milk and Cheddar cheese added to collegiate dairy products judging contest
1926 Vanilla ice cream added to the collegiate dairy products judging contest
1929 Improvements to Munsell color method by the Optical Society of America (OPA)
1930s Swedish Natural Color system proposed by Tryggve Johansson
1934 First edition of Judging Dairy Products (Nelson and Trout) published; with subsequent
editions published in 1948, 1951, and 1965
1940s Development of the Triangle test
1947 Committee for Uniform Color Scales formed (by the Optical Society of America)
1944 The Food Acceptance Research Branch established by the U.S. Army Quartermaster
Subsistence Research and Development Laboratory in Chicago, IL
1949 Development of the Hedonic scale by the US Army Quartermaster Laboratory
1957 First book published on the basics of sensory analysis by Tilgner (Polish)
1957 Flavor profile method (descriptive analysis) introduced by Arthur D. Little Company
1960 The OSA system of color evaluation adopted by the Optical Society of America
1962 Second sensory analysis book published by Masuyama and Miura (Japan)
1962 Cottage cheese added to the collegiate dairy products judging contest
1965 Third book on sensory analysis published by Amerine, Pangborn, and Roessler
1967 The AH-B theory for detection and measurement of sweet taste proposed
1968 American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) – First manual published
1970s Creation of the Spectrum™ Descriptive Analysis Method, by Civille and colleagues at
General Mills, based on experiences with the flavor profile and texture profile methods
1973 Institute of Food Technology (IFT) – Sensory Evaluation Division formed
1977 International Standards Organization (ISO 3591) Sensory analysis protocol –
standardized apparatus – a wine tasting glass design
1977 Strawberry Swiss-style yogurt added to Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation contest
1978 ISO 5492 Sensory analysis – apparatus – tasting glass for liquid product
1979 ISO 3972 Sensory analysis – determination of sensitivity of taste
1977 ISO 5492 Sensory analysis – vocabulary – Part I
1978 ISO 5492 Sensory analysis – vocabulary – Part II
1979 ISO 5492 Sensory analysis – vocabulary – Part III
1981 ISO 5492 Sensory analysis – vocabulary – Part I
1982 ISO 5492 Sensory analysis – vocabulary – Part V
1983 ISO 5495 Sensory analysis – methodology – paired comparison test
1986 Sensory Spectrum company incorporated: Spectrum™ Descriptive Analysis Method
1988 First edition of The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products (Bodyfelt et al.) published
1998 First edition of Sensory Evaluation of Food (Lawless and Heymann) published
(continued)
1 History of Sensory Analysis 3
Table 1.1 (continued)

Date Item
2002 Umani taste sensation officially accepted (based on the earlier work of Paris chef,
Escoffier, and the subsequent studies of Japanese chemist, K. Ikeda. He credited
glutamic acid as the source of the newest “taste” sensation, meaning “delicious” in
Japanese (Krulwich, 2007))
2009 Second edition of The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products (Clark, Costello, Drake,
and Bodyfelt) published
2010 Second edition of Sensory Evaluation of Food (Lawless and Heymann) published
2016 Fifth edition of Sensory Evaluation Techniques by Meilgaard, Civille, and Carr
2023 Third edition of The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products (Clark, Drake, and
Kaylegian)
Published
published in 1934. In the 1940s, the triangle difference test was developed in
Scandinavia (Bengtsson & Helm, 1946; Helm & Trolle, 1946).
Sensory analysis became a focus of attention to the US Army Quartermaster
Food and Container Institute in the 1940s and through the mid-1950s. Its focus was
research in food acceptance for the armed forces, rather than simple provision of
adequate nutrition (Peryam et al., 1954). In the 1960s and 1970s, the US govern-
ment failed to conduct sensory evaluations on foods developed for malnourished
people in several countries – the foods at issue were often rejected (Stone & Sidel,
2004). The food industry was quick to adopt sensory evaluation, quite possibly as a
result of both the government’s successes and most notable failures (Stone & Sidel,
2004). It was realized that sensory evaluation could contribute pertinent, valuable
information related to marketing consequences and simultaneously provide direct
actionable information. Organizing sensory evaluation tests through a basic struc-
ture, using well-defined (1) criteria (e.g., formal test requests, selection of an appro-
priate test method for an objective) and (2) selection of subjects, based on sensory
skill or target market, sufficed to establish the soundness of this new science. Thus,
this emerging field of sensory science substantially increased the likelihood of sen-
sory evaluation services becoming accepted as an integral part of the research and
development (R & D) process. Adoption of this new field of sensory analysis ulti-
mately led to long-term success within those companies that adopted this critical
step in their respective R & D programs and eventually marketing gains for pace-
setting food products and beverages.
University-based sensory evaluation research first became visible in the late
1940s and early 1950s (Stone & Sidel, 2004). The University of California, Davis,
University of Massachusetts, Oregon State University, and Rutgers University were
among the first US colleges to offer courses in sensory evaluation, commencing in
the 1950s.
One of the first tools developed for the instrumental evaluation of dairy product
quality was the glass pH electrode, which became available in 1930 (Deisingh et al.,
2004). This was one of the earliest forms of sensors available for the food industry.
Other types of sensors followed, in the 1960s through the 1980s, which led
ultimately to the development of electronic noses and electronic tongues (Deisingh

et al., 2004). One of the earliest recent reports of the application of an electronic
nose to detect complex vapors in the parts per billion range appeared in 1995
(Hodgins & Simmonds, 1995; Ampuero & Bosset, 2003; Harper, 2001). The devel-
opment of electronic tongues is still in early stages (Deisingh et al., 2004), but at
least one laboratory has reported application of the electronic tongue for milk evalu-
ation (Winquist et al., 1997).
Chromatographic techniques have been used in the dairy industry for decades.
For instance, early analysis of the fruity esters produced by psychrotrophic organ-
isms in milk was conducted with gas chromatography combined with pre-columns,
cold traps, and headspace samplings (Reddy et al., 1968; Hosono et al., 1974;
Pierami & Stevenson, 1976). Patton, at Pennsylvania State University (Patton, 1954;
Patton et al., 1956), and Day, at Oregon State University (OSU) (Day, 1967; Schultz
et al., 1964; Lindsay, 1967), were some of the first food scientists (flavor chemists)
to adapt chromatographic techniques, which were subsequently paired with mass
spectrometry for a more thorough and detailed analysis of the flavor of a wide range
of dairy products (i.e., fluid milks (Patton et al., 1956; Badings, 1984), concentrated
and UHT milks (Arnold et al., 1968; Scanlan et al., 1968, Jeon et al., 1978), sour
cream and buttermilk (Lindsay, 1967; Law, 1981), butter and cultured butter (Stark
& Forss, 1966), Cheddar (Marth, 1963; Morris et al., 1966; Day, 1967), Swiss
(Langler et al., 1966), and blue cheeses (Anderson & Day, 1966; Singh, 1968).
Morgan’s research at the University of Connecticut and subsequently at OSU
(Morgan, 1976) combined his research experiences in dairy microbiology with fla-
vor chemistry and explored the derivation of “malty,” “fruity,” and other developed
off-flavors in milk and various other dairy products (Morgan, 1970a, b, 1976). The
research area of flavor chemistry (identification of volatile and nonvolatile compo-
nents responsible for specific sensory-perceived flavors) continues to this day.
Identification of specific sources of desirable and undesirable flavors remains an
area of key interest and application for the industry, but there remains no machine
or instrument that can duplicate or fully replicate the human perception of flavor.
Sensory analysis remains the foundation.
Sensory science as we know it has evolved into a set of quantitative procedures
that enhance the efficiency and accuracy of food product development, quality con-
trol, market research, and marketing. Descriptive sensory analysis, an analytical
sensory tool, involves training panelists to recognize and scale intensities of specific
product attributes and allows powerful objective communication (Lawless and
Heymann, 2010; Meilgaard et al., 2016).
Sensory evaluation, alone or in combination with other analytical procedures, is
useful for quality control in the dairy industry. All told, predictability and quality of
dairy products have improved in the past century as a direct result of formalized
dairy product evaluation programs. With the combined goals and needs for progress
in the sciences and technical advancements in instrumentation, there soon arrived an
exponential expansion of rapid and precise, interlinked analytical tools to be closely
linked with the more precise and confident sensory evaluation protocols for food
Fig. 1.1 Example of a cheese sensory evaluation ballot with identified attributes, definitions and
an anchored scale. (S. Clark image)
products. Human sensory evaluation will always be a most critical component for
advancing the industry’s assurance of higher-quality dairy products for consumers.
References
Ampuero, S., & Bosset, J. O. (2003). The electronic nose applied to dairy products: A review.
Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, 94(1), 1–12. Elsevier Science B.V.
Anderson, D. F., & Day, E. A. (1966). Quantitative evaluation and effect of certain microorganisms
on flavor components of blue cheese. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 14, 241.
Arnold, R. G., Libbey, L. M., & Day, E. A. (1968). Identification of components in the stale flavor
fraction of sterilized concentrated milk. Journal of Food Science, 31, 566.
Badings, H. T. (1984). Flavors and off-flavors. In P. Walstra & R. Jenness (Eds.), Dairy chemistry
and physics (p. 336). Wiley.
Bengtsson, K., & Helm, E. (1946). Principles of taste tasting. Wallerstein Laboratories
Communications, 9, 171.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J., & Trout, G. M. (1988). The development of dairy products evaluation.
In The sensory evaluation of dairy products (pp. 1–7, 59–88). Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Drake, M. A., & Rankin, S. A. (2008). Developments in dairy foods sensory sci-
ence and education: From student contests to impact on product quality. International Dairy
Journal, 18, 729–734.
Day, E. A. (1967). Cheese flavor. In H. W. Schultz, E. A. Day, & L. M. Libbey (Eds.), The chem-
istry and physiology of flavor: A symposium (p. 331). AVI Publishers.
Deisingh, A. K., Stone, D. C., & Thompson, M. (2004). Applications of electronic noses and
tongues in food analysis. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 39, 587–604.
Harper, W. (2001). The strengths and weaknesses of the electronic nose. In R. L. Rouseff &
K. R. Cadwallader (Eds.), Headspace analysis of food and flavors: Theory and practice.
Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Helm, E., & Trolle, B. (1946). Selection of a taste panel. Wallerstein Laboratories
Communications, 9, 181.
Hodgins, D., & Simmonds, D. (1995). Sensory technology for flavor analysis. Cereal Foods World,
40(4), 186–191.
Hosono, A., Elliot, J. A., & McGugan, W. A. (1974). Production of ethylesters by some lactic acid
and psychrotrophic bacteria [Cheddar cheese, fruity flavor, defects]. Journal of Dairy Science,
57, 535–539.
Jeon, I. J., Thomas, E. L., & Reneccius, G. A. (1978). Production of volatile flavor compounds in
UHT processed milk during aseptic storage. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 26,
1183–1188.
Krulwich, R. (2007). http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyld=15819485. Date
accessed 11 Nov 2007.
Langler, J. E., Libbey, L. M., & Day, E. A. (1966). Volatile constituents of Swiss cheese. Journal
of Dairy Science, 49, 709.
Law, B. A. (1981). The formation of flavor and aroma compounds in fermented dairy products.
Dairy Science Abstract, 43, 143.
Lawless, H. T., & Heymann, H. (2010). Sensory evaluation of food. Springer Nature.
Lindsay, R. C. (1967). Cultured dairy products. In H. W. Schultz, E. A. Day, & L. M. Libbey
(Eds.), Chemistry and physiology of flavor: A symposium (p. 315). AVI Publishers.
Marth, E. H. (1963). Microbiological and chemical aspects of Cheddar cheese ripening: A review.
Journal of Dairy Science, 46, 869.
Meilgaard, M. M., Civille, G. V., & Carr, T. (2016). Sensory evaluation techniques. CRC Press.
Morgan, M. E. (1970a). Microbial flavor defects in dairy products and methods for their simula-
tion. I. Malty flavor. Journal of Dairy Science, 53(3), 270.
Morgan, M. E. (1970b). Microbial flavor defects in dairy products and methods for their simula-
tion. II. Fruity flavor. Journal of Dairy Science, 53(3), 273.
Morgan, M. E. (1976). The chemistry of some microbiologically induced flavor defects in milk and
dairy foods. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 18, 953.
Morris, H. A., Angelini, P., McAdoo, D. J., & Merritt, C. J. (1966). Identification of volatile com-
ponents of Cheddar cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 49, 710.
Nelson, J. A., & Trout, G. M. (1934). Judging and grading cheese. In Judging dairy products.
Olsen Publishing. 145 pages.
Nelson, J. A., & Trout, G. M. (1948). Judging and grading cheese. In Judging dairy products (2nd
ed.). Olsen Publishing. 494 pages.
Nelson, J. A., & Trout, G. M. (1951). Judging and grading cheese. In Judging dairy products (3rd
Nelson, J. A., & Trout, G. M. (1964). Judging and grading cheese. In Judging dairy products (4th
Patton, S. (1954). The mechanism of sunlight flavor formation in milk with special reference to
methionine and riboflavin. Journal of Dairy Science, 37, 446.
Patton, S., Forss, D. A., & Day, E. A. (1956). Methyl sulfide and the flavor of milk. Journal of
Dairy Science, 39, 1469.
Peryam, D. R., Pilgrim, F. J., & Peterson, M. S. (Eds.). (1954). Food acceptance testing methodol-
ogy. National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council.
Pierami, R. M., & Stevenson, K. E. (1976). Detection of metabolites produced by psychrotrophic
bacteria growing in milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 59, 1010–1015.
Reddy, M. C., Bills, D. D., Lindsay, R. C., Libbey, L. M., Miller, A., & Morgan, M. E. (1968). Ester
production by Pseudomonas fragi. I. Identification and quantification of some esters produced
in milk cultures. Journal of Dairy Science, 51, 656.
Scanlan, R. A., Lindsay, R. A., Libbey, L. M., & Day, E. A. (1968). Heat induced volatile com-
pounds in heated milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 51, 1582.
Schultz, H. W., Day, E. A., & Libby, L. M. (Eds.). (1964). The chemistry of flavor: A symposium
proceedings. Avi Publishing. 552p.
Singh, S. (1968). The chemical changes in the fat and protein of Limburger cheese during ripening.
Ph.D dissertation, University of Illinois. Dissertation Abstracts, Section B, 29:650.
Stark, W., & Forss, D. A. (1966). N-Alkan-1-ols in oxidized butters. The Journal of Dairy
Research, 33, 31.
Stone, H., & Sidel, J. L. (2004). Sensory evaluation practices (3rd ed., p. 377). Tragon Corporation.
Trout, G. M., & Weigold, G. (1981). Building careers in the dairy products evaluation contest
(60 years of student judging, 1916–1981). Dairy and Food Industry Supply Association. 16p.
Winquist, F., Wide, P., & Lundstrom, I. (1997). An electronic tongue based on voltammetry.
Analytica Chimica Acta, 357, 21–31.
Chapter 2
Psychological Considerations in Sensory
Analysis
Jeannine Delwiche
To many, the term “psychology” conjures the image of a distraught patient lying on
a couch, telling her most intimate thoughts to a bearded man smoking a cigar and
scribbling notes somewhere behind her. “What on earth do interpreted dreams,
unhappy childhoods, and envy for certain aspects of male anatomy have to do with
the sensory evaluation of dairy products?” you may ask. The answer is, “Not much.”
When we talk about psychological considerations in sensory analysis, we are not
calling upon the ghost of Sigmund Freud, but instead referring back to some of his
predecessors and contemporaries up north in Germany: Ernst Weber, Gustav
Fechner, and Wilhelm Wundt. These men were all pioneers in the area of experi-
mental psychology, a branch of psychology that does not rely upon interviews and
introspection but rather upon the experimental method. Experimental psychology,
in essence, does not trust the individual to be able to accurately tell the researcher
what features are most important in determining a response. Instead, through care-
ful design and controls, experimental psychology forces the individual to demon-
strate what aspects are most important and to more or less “prove it.”
The subdiscipline of experimental psychology known as psychophysics is of
greatest relevance to sensory analysis. Fechner, while working in Weber’s lab, gave
rise to psychophysics with the publication of Elemente der Psychophysik (1860).
Psychophysics is the area of natural science that deals with sensory physiology and
which strives to explain the relationship between sensory stimuli and human
responses. A major focus of psychophysics is to discover the relationship between a
stimulus (C) and the resulting sensation (R). In its simplest form, this expression
may be expressed as a mathematical function (f), R = f(C). Inspired by Fechner’s
treatise, Wilhelm Wundt is credited with establishing the first laboratory for psycho-
logical research. The tools upon which the psychophysicist relied, and often still
relies, were measured thresholds and direct scaling, tools that are often used today
J. Delwiche (*)
Tasting Science, LLC, Fairless Hills, PA, USA

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_2
10 J. Delwiche
in sensory analysis. A complete discussion of psychophysics was provided by

Amerine et al. (1965). Much of the early work in psychophysics was devoted to
discovering how well a person could detect a stimulus. This was sought through the
determination of threshold values, which is the minimal quantity of a substance or
compound that can be detected, or the boundary at which the subject crosses from
“not detecting” to “detecting.”
When conducting psychophysics, the researcher begins with an experimental
stimulus that can be measured objectively, and such stimuli can range from pure
tones of known energy to salt solutions of known concentration. The investigator
presents the stimulus in a neutral and repeatable fashion to the subject and then
records the subject’s assessment of that stimulus. After multiple presentations and
assessments of the test stimuli, often by more than a single subject, the respective
responses are analyzed statistically to determine the ways in which the subjects
perceive the test stimuli. Similarly, the sensory analyst starts with known products,
such as yogurts made at different production sites; presents the products in a neutral
and repeatable fashion to the panelist; and then records the panelist’s assessment of
the products. After multiple presentations and assessments of the products, typically
from more than one panelist, the responses are analyzed statistically to determine
the product characteristics.
In psychophysics, the goal is to understand how individuals perceive the physical
world, whereas in sensory evaluation, the goal is to understand the perceptual char-
acteristics of the products. Nonetheless, the tools used in both psychophysics and
sensory evaluation are the same and are subject to similar constraints when it comes
to best practices.
2.1 Tools of the Trade
The basic tools used by sensory analysts and psychophysicists are (1) thresholds,
(2) difference tests, and (3) ratings. One of the simplest tools utilized by both psy-
chophysicists and sensory analysts are threshold measurements, several types of
which have been identified to define more precisely the relationships between the
magnitude of a given response and the perceived sensations (Amerine et al., 1965;
Meilgaard et al., 2016). There are four types of thresholds (detection, recognition,
difference, and terminal) that can be measured, but only two (detection and differ-
ence) can be measured with sufficient objectivity to be reliable measures. The easi-
est threshold to conceptualize is the detection, or absolute, threshold. It is the
smallest amount of a particular stimulus that can elicit a sensation; stimuli of the
same type with less intensity do not give rise to sensations. When dealing with taste
and smell, the physical intensity is measured by concentration. Thus, the threshold
for a particular taste or smell is the lowest concentration of a compound that a panel-
ist can distinguish from water (or other solvent). At and above this concentration,
the panelist will indicate that a compound is present, while below this concentration
the panelist will indicate there is no compound present. Hence, detection thresholds
2 Psychological Considerations in Sensory Analysis 11
are one way of establishing the relative potencies of different compounds, although
caution must be used when making this comparison.
Actual differences in perception across individuals constitute a part of the vari-
ability in sensory data that sensory analysts learn to accept and psychophysicists
learn to measure. In a study that examined the sensory threshold of off-flavors
caused by either proteolysis or lipolysis of milk, 63% of the panelists detected an
off-flavor at or below 0.35 mEq of free fatty acids (FFA)/kg milk (Santos et al.,
2003). At a FFA concentration of 0.25 mEq FFA/kg milk, only 34% of the panelists
could detect the off-flavor (also called rancid off-flavor). As illustrated by this
example, the differences in individual thresholds may create a dilemma for milk
marketing and quality assurance of fluid milk processors. With a wide range of
individual consumer sensory thresholds for rancid off-flavor, where should the
acceptance FFA-value be established? Threshold values also vary with testing or
serving conditions (Amerine et al., 1965). For these reasons, threshold values are
difficult to compare and must be interpreted with caution.
The recognition threshold is the level of a stimulus at which the specific stimulus
can be recognized and identified. Typically, this level is higher than the detection
threshold for the same stimulus. For example, if one was determining the threshold
for diacetyl, the concentration at which it was detected would be lower than the
concentration at which the aroma would be identified as “buttery.” As mentioned
above, this sensory measure cannot be made with complete objectivity. The reason
has to do with the inability to control for response bias, a topic discussed below.
The difference threshold is the extent of change in a stimulus necessary to pro-
duce a noticeable difference. The amount of change needed is often referred to as
the just-noticeable difference or “jnd.” The difference threshold is quite similar to
the detection threshold, but instead of looking for the lowest intensity that can elicit
a sensation, one is determining the lowest increase in stimulation from some base-
line intensity that can elicit a change in sensation. For example, given a baseline
concentration of propionic acid, the jnd is the amount of propionic acid that must be
added to the baseline concentration before it can be distinguished from the sample
containing only the baseline concentration.
A complicating issue with the difference threshold is that the amount of stimulus
that must be added to the baseline to be noticeably different increases as the inten-
sity level of the baseline is raised. As an example, consider a room illuminated by
candle light with only 10 candles. Let us speculate that the difference threshold is a
single candle and that adding one candle’s illumination to the room will increase the
illumination by a just-noticeable amount. If we then raise the number of the candles
in the room to 100, adding a single candle will no longer raise the illumination level
by a noticeable amount. In fact, the just-noticeable difference (jnd) will now be 10
candles. This phenomenon is described by Weber’s law, which states that the differ-
ence threshold divided by the baseline intensity remains constant. Difference
thresholds change with stimulus intensity in a predictable way or stated
mathematically
12 J. Delwiche
Weber’s law : C / C k;
where C is the absolute intensity of the stimulus, k is a constant (usually between 0

and 1), and ΔC is the change in intensity of the stimulus that is necessary for 1 jnd.
Thus, using our candle illumination example above, we can see that
1/10 = 10/100 = 10%. Another way of stating this is that the size of a jnd is a con-
stant proportion of the original stimulus value.
Another practical interpretation of Weber’s law indicates that the amount of an
added flavor that is just detectable depends on the amount of that flavor that is
already present. Knowing k allows the determination of how much added flavor
compound is needed for a difference to be noted. Whereas Weber’s research sug-
gested the relationship between physical and perceived intensity was linear,
Fechner’s findings (1860) suggested the relationship between stimulus and
response was logarithmic:
Fechner’s law : R = k log C
where R is the magnitude of the sensation, k is a constant, and C is the magnitude of

the stimulus.
Later work by Stevens (1957) determined that the perceived magnitude of a
response grows as a power function of the stimulus intensity:
Stevens’ power law : R = kC n
where R is the response, k is a constant, C is the absolute intensity of the stimulus,

and n is the exponent of the power function (a measure of the rate of growth of the
perceived intensity, as a function of stimulus intensity).
When n is larger than 1, the perceived sensation grows faster than the stimulus,
as is the case for electric shock (3.5) or perception of weight (heaviness) (1.45).
When n is smaller than 1, as is the case for many odors, the sensation grows more
slowly in relation to the stimulus. A more comprehensive list of power functions is
available in Meilgaard et al. (2016). However, just as with thresholds, exponents
derived from power laws vary depending upon the subjects making the assessments
as well as the methods used to determine them, often making direct comparisons of
published values difficult.
The fourth type of threshold that can be measured is the terminal threshold,
which is the magnitude of a stimulus above which there is no increase in the per-
ceived intensity of the appropriate quality for that stimulus. Often, if the stimulus is
increased in intensity beyond this level, pain occurs instead. For example, a solution
of sodium chloride can become so concentrated that when it is sipped, it not only
elicits the sensation of saltiness but also sensations of burning and/or stinging. The
terminal threshold would be the highest concentration of sodium chloride above
which there is no increased saltiness, only increased burning and stinging. As is the
case with the recognition threshold, this measurement is prone to response bias and
thus cannot be established with complete objectivity. There are a variety of proce-
dures that can be used to determine thresholds, the details of which are beyond the
scope of this chapter. What is important to note is that all modern assessments of
thresholds, including those recommended by ASTM International, avoid single-
stimulus judgments and otherwise control for response bias.
As mentioned above, response bias interferes with the ability to make objective
measurements. When a person is asked to make a single-stimulus judgment, such as
whether or not an aqueous solution contains a compound or if it is simply water,
there are two distinct features that influence their decision: sensitivity and response
bias. When measuring a threshold, the researcher is interested only in the sensitivity
of the panelist. However, the response of the individual is also influenced by that
individual’s response bias or that individual’s willingness to say, “Yes, I detect
something other than water.” An individual’s response bias can be influenced by a
variety of circumstances that are independent from the samples and his or her sen-
sitivity, including emotional state, associated consequences of stating there is a
stimulus (will the subject receive payment if she is correct? A shock if he is incor-
rect?), the percent of time a test stimulus (such as a low concentration of sodium
chloride) is presented instead of a control stimulus (such as water), distractions
within the test environment, etc. As the interests of both psychophysicists and sen-
sory analysts are inclined toward measures of sensitivity, intended to assess sensory
systems or product differences, modern sensory procedures are designed to elimi-
nate response bias. To this end, a forced-choice difference test (discussed below) is
typically incorporated into the determination of thresholds. In other words, rather
than relying upon a panelist to state that he/she can detect a compound in solution,
the panelist is asked to demonstrate his/her ability to detect it by selecting the sam-
ple that contains the compound from a set that contains both blanks and the com-
pound in solution. In each sample set, the concentration of the compound is
increased until the panelist can reliably select the sample with the concentration
over samples that do not contain any compound (the blanks). In other words, instead
of relying on the panelist to introspect upon whether or not a compound is present,
the subject is asked to prove he/she can detect it.
As mentioned above, response bias cannot be eliminated from the measurement
of recognition and terminal thresholds, which makes them far less reliable measures
than detection and difference thresholds. When measuring a detection threshold, the
panelist is challenged to select which unknown in a set of blanks and test stimuli
contains the compound. When measuring a difference threshold, the panelist is
asked to select which unknown in a set of baseline concentrations and test concen-
tration contains more of the compound. Both of these tasks are forced-choice differ-
ence tests. Regardless of whether or not the panelist would be inclined to call all the
samples the same or all the samples different from one another, he/she is forced to
select a single sample, eliminating the individual’s response bias from the task. It is
not possible to set up such a force-choice situation for the measurement of either a
recognition threshold or a terminal threshold. Recognition relies upon the individu-
al’s willingness to say that he/she recognizes the stimulus, which is his/her response
bias. It is unfair to present a set of blanks and test stimuli and then ask the panelist
14 J. Delwiche
to indicate which he/she recognizes – in actuality he/she may recognize none of

them. Furthermore, it is unfair to ask a panelist to ignore pain when tasting extremely
high concentrations of compounds in the course of measuring a terminal threshold.
2.2 Neutrality Is Key
Regardless of the sensory tool used (difference test, ratings, or thresholds), neutral-
ity of sample presentation is key. This is because when measuring subtle differences
between test stimuli, the panelist will draw upon all available cues in making his/her
assessments. Sensory evaluation tradition suggests that samples be labeled with
neutral, randomly generated three-digit numbers. Numbers with inherent meaning
should be avoided (i.e., 666, 911, local area code, etc.). While it is not entirely nec-
essary to use such labels, they are among the safest choices. Labels should not
imply order or sequences, nor should they suggest quality; thus, labels such as A, B,
C or 1, 2, 3 are particularly problematic. Two-digit numbers are often associated
with sports figures and are generally less desirable for labeling samples. All labels
should be generated in the same fashion, either on sticker labels or written directly
on cups. All labels should be printed with the same font and style, or all written in
the same handwriting, and all should be of the same color.
Other aspects of sample presentation should also be neutral. All samples need to
be served at the same volume and same temperature. All samples should be served
in identical neutral containers. Crushed cups and dented lids should not be used.
When presented to the panelists, all samples should be presented with labels facing
forward. Careful presentation is necessary to ensure that assessments are based only
upon the characteristics of the samples themselves rather than upon extraneous cues.
2.3 Perception Is More Than a Sum of Its Parts
When asking panelists to assess dairy products, it is important to remember that the
perceptual experience that occurs when a sample is placed in the mouth is a gestalt –
a unified whole that cannot be derived from the summation of its component sensa-
tions. Not only are sensations of taste and smell elicited, but a variety of other
sensory systems are also activated including sight, temperature, and texture. These
sensations interact with one another and create the gestalt experience of flavor.
Furthermore, it is simply not possible for a panelist to ignore a particular sensation
while assessing others, even if the panelist attempts to comply with such instruc-
tions. A trained panelist may learn to separate the different aspects of the unified
experience, but these sensations interact in the creation of the whole and the altera-
tion of the components occurs before the panelist has the chance to disentangle them.
For example, taste and smell interact. Increasing the concentration of odor com-
pounds typically increases ratings of taste intensity, and increasing the
concentration of taste compounds generally increases ratings of smell intensity

(Bonnans & Noble, 1993; Frank et al., 1989; Murphy & Cain, 1980; Murphy et al.,
1977; Philipsen et al., 1995). Differential effects due to taste and odor qualities
further complicate the issue. For example, the addition of sucrose to fruit juices not
only increases sweetness and fruit odor but also decreases bitterness, sourness, and
unripe odor (von Sydow et al., 1974). Color also interacts with taste and smell,
wherein ratings of taste, smell, and flavor generally increase as color intensifies
(DuBose et al., 1980; Johnson et al., 1982, 1983; Johnson & Clydesdale, 1982;
Norton & Johnson, 1987; Teerling, 1992; Harrar et al., 2011; Harrar & Spence,
2013). Additionally, appropriately colored foods and beverages are identified cor-
rectly more often than uncolored and/or inappropriately colored items (DuBose
et al., 1980; Hall, 1958; Moir, 1936; Philipsen et al., 1995; Stillman, 1993; Teerling,
1992; Spence et al., 2015). This is likely due to individuals associating certain fla-
vors with specific colors, and when the colors are altered, identification becomes
more difficult.
Texture impacts the perception of dairy products both directly and indirectly.
How thick or thin, smooth or lumpy, crumbly or springy, etc., all impact assess-
ments of the product. However, texture characteristics also control the concentration
of taste and smell compounds released as well as the rate at which they are released
(Overbosch et al., 1991). Increasing a product’s thickness slows the diffusion of
components to the sensory receptors, while decreasing the thickness will increase
the rate of diffusion. This means that two items with identical amounts of taste and
smell compounds, but different body/texture will differ in perceived taste and smell
intensities. Additionally, the thicker-textured item will take longer to reach its peak
taste and odor intensities and peak intensities will typically be lower than those of
the thinner product. Recent work has also demonstrated that surface texture or tac-
tile properties can influence taste and flavor (van Rompay & Groothedde, 2019).
Similarly, temperature impacts the perceived taste and smell (Delwiche, 2004).
As a product is warmed, there is an increase in volatile components being released
from it, and correspondingly odor intensity becomes stronger. Temperature itself
can elicit taste sensations (Cruz & Green, 2000); thus, changing a product’s tem-
perature will alter its taste intensities. In addition, increasing product temperature
can also decrease product thickness, resulting in the concomitant increases of taste
and smell intensities as described above.
Appearance, aroma, flavor, body, and texture interactions are real, complex, and
beyond conscious awareness and control. For these reasons, it is simply not possible
for panelists to ignore specific perceptual features when making their assessments.
If the researcher is interested in flavor differences but the products differ in texture,
the researcher must realize that the flavor assessments will be impacted by the tex-
ture differences unless those differences are somehow eliminated. Nor is it possible
for a panelist to ignore a temperature difference between samples if they are served
at different temperatures. In fact, if a difference test is being conducted, sample
temperature may be one of the ways that panelists differentiate the products.
16 J. Delwiche
2.4 Sensory Analysis: A True Science
From the discussion just presented, it should be clear that sensory analysis, like
psychophysics, is a natural science. Like all natural sciences, measurements of sen-
sory characteristics of foods or beverages can and should be taken carefully. When
done properly, sensory information can provide great insight into the world. When
measures are undertaken poorly, they do more to mislead than to inform. Careful
controls must be implemented and followed when conducting sensory analysis,
including (1) neutrality in the presentation of samples, (2) elimination of response
bias, and (3) use of methods that require panelists to demonstrate their ability rather
than relying upon self-reports. Failure to adhere to any of these controls diminishes
the value of the resulting sensory data. By contrast, determining appropriate con-
trols and ensuring they are in place will result in reliable and useful information
about foods and beverages which no instrument can measure – their perceptual
characteristics.
References
Amerine, M. A., Pangborn, R. M., & Roessler, E. B. (1965). Principles of sensory evaluation of
food (p. 602). Academic.
Bonnans, S., & Noble, A. C. (1993). Effects of sweetener type and of sweetener and acid levels
on temporal perception of sweetness, sourness and fruitiness. Chemical Senses, 18, 273–283.
Cruz, A., & Green, B. G. (2000). Thermal stimulation of taste. Nature, 403(6772), 889–892.
Delwiche, J. F. (2004). The impact of perceptual interactions on perceived flavor. Food Quality and
Preference, 15, 137–146.
DuBose, C. N., Cardello, A. V., & Maller, O. (1980). Effects of colorants and flavorants on iden-
tification, perceived flavor intensity, and hedonic quality of fruit-flavored beverages and cake.
Journal of Food Science, 45(1393–1399), 1415.
Fechner, G. T. (1860). Elemente der Psychophysik. Breitkopf und Härtel.
Frank, R. A., Ducheny, K., & Mize, S. J. S. (1989). Strawberry odor, but not red color, enhances
the sweetness of sucrose solutions. Chemical Senses, 14, 371–377.
Hall, R. L. (1958). Flavor study approaches at McCormick and Co., Inc. In A. D. Little (Ed.),
Flavor research and food acceptance (pp. 224–240). Reinhold.
Harrar, V., & Spence, C. (2013). The taste of cutlery: How the taste of food is affected by the
weight, size, shape, and colour of the cutlery used to eat it. Flavour, 2, 1–13.
Harrar, V., Piqueras Fiszman, B., & Spence, C. (2011). There is more to taste in a colored bowl.
Perception, 40, 880–882.
Johnson, J. L., & Clydesdale, F. M. (1982). Perceived sweetness and redness in colored sucrose
solutions. Journal of Food Science, 47, 747–752.
Johnson, D. L., Dzendolet, E., Damon, R., Sawyer, M., & Clydesdale, F. M. (1982). Psychophysical
relationships between perceived sweetness and colour in cherry-flavoured beverages. Journal
of Food Protection, 45, 601–606.
Johnson, J. L., Dzendolet, E., & Clydesdale, F. M. (1983). Psychophysical relationships between
sweetness and redness in strawberry-drinks. Journal of Food Protection, 46, 21–25.
Meilgaard, M. M., Civille, G. V., & Carr, T. (2016). Sensory evaluation techniques (5th ed.,
p. 589). CRC Press.
Moir, H. C. (1936). Some observations on the appreciation of flavor in foodstuffs. Chemistry and
Industry, 14, 145–148.
Murphy, C., & Cain, W. S. (1980). Taste and olfaction: Independence vs. interaction. Physiology
& Behavior, 24, 601–605.
Murphy, C., Cain, W. S., & Bartoshuk, L. M. (1977). Mutual action of taste and olfaction. Sensory
Processes, 1, 204–211.
Norton, W. E., & Johnson, F. P. (1987). The influence of intensity of color on perceived flavor
characteristics. Medical Science Research: Psychology & Psychiatry, 15, 329–330.
Overbosch, P., Afterof, W. G. M., & Haring, P. G. M. (1991). Flavor release in the mouth. Food
Reviews International, 7, 137–184.
Philipsen, D. H., Clydesdale, F. M., Griffin, R. W., & Stern, P. (1995). Consumer age affects
response to sensory characteristics of cherry flavored beverage. Journal of Food Science, 60,
364–368.
Santos, M. V., Ma, Y., Caplan, Z., & Barbano, D. M. (2003). Sensory threshold of off-flavors
caused by proteolysis and lipolysis in milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 86, 1601–1607.
Spence, C., Wan, X., Woods, A., Velasco, C., Deng, J., Youssef, J., & Deroy, O. (2015). On tasty
colours and colourful tastes? Assessing, explaining and utilizing crossmodal correspondence
between colours and basic tastes. Flavour, 4, 1–17.
Stevens, S. S. (1957). On the psychophysical law. Psychological Review, 64, 153–181.
Stillman, J. A. (1993). Color influences flavor identification in fruit-flavored beverages. Journal of
Food Science, 58, 810–812.
Teerling, A. (1992). The colour of taste. Chemical Senses, 17, 886.
van Rompay, T. J. L., & Groothedde, S. (2019). The taste of touch. Enhancing saltiness impres-
sions through surface texture design. Food Quality and Preference, 73, 248–254.
von Sydow, E., Moskowitz, H., Jacobs, H., & Meiselman, H. (1974). Odor-taste interaction in fruit
juices. Lebensmittel-Wissenchaft und -Technologie, 7, 9–16.
Chapter 3
Physiology of Sensory Perception
Maria Laura Montero and Carolyn F. Ross
3.1 Introduction
Consumption and appreciation, the study of their physiology and the human reac-
tion to stimuli, are fundamental to sensory evaluation. Sensory evaluation of food
includes the critical examination and interpretation of important sensory attributes
of a given product. Components of sensory evaluation of dairy products involves,
but is not limited to, the perception of the color and symmetry of a wheel of cheese,
the odor characteristics of cottage cheese after it has been stored at room tempera-
ture for several days, the relative degree of creaminess of whole milk, and the tangi-
ness of a spoonful of yogurt.
During consumption of food, humans utilize their five primary senses to perceive
different sensory signals. The five primary senses are: sight, hearing, touch, taste,
and smell (Purves et al., 2018). The most primitive of these senses, taste, smell, and
touch respond to chemical stimuli (Brown & Deffenbacher, 1979). Other human
senses include temperature sensation (heat and cold), pain, visceral hunger, thirst,
fatigue, and balance (Purves et al., 2018).
This chapter commences with a general discussion of sensory attributes and per-
ception. A more detailed discussion of physiology involved in sensory perception
follows, beginning with vision and concluding with chemesthesis (chemical
mouthfeel).
M. L. Montero
School of Food Science, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA
National Center for Food Science and Technology (CITA), University of Costa Rica,
San José, Costa Rica
C. F. Ross (*)
School of Food Science, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_3
20 M. L. Montero and C. F. Ross
3.2 Perception of Sensory Attributes
Our perception of the environment, including food, happens through specialized

sense organs or sensory receptors. The eyes are used for determining appearance
and color, the nose for aromas, the tongue for taste, skin for touch, and the ear for
any possible sound effects. Stimuli are defined as factors from the environment that
elicit sensory impressions or perception (Dudel, 1981). Each sense organ responds
to a particular range of stimuli and transmits information to the brain via the central
nervous system (Dudel, 1981).
Response to a stimulus is best described as a chain (Schiffman, 1996):
Stimulus → Sensation → Perception → Response
In this scheme, a stimulus generates a response via nerve signal(s) to the brain.
Sensations involve the ability to transduce, encode, and perceive information gener-
ated by the stimuli (Purves et al., 2018). Specific sites in the brain are stimulated by
the initial sensory input, and the brain interprets the incoming information into a
perception. This perception is then translated into a response by the individual.
Up to a certain point, this response is proportional to the stimulus intensity. The
nerve response suffices as a function of the frequency of the electrical discharge
from the nerve, the higher the frequency, the stronger the sensation. However, all
human sensory receptors vary in their sensitivity to stimuli (Amerine et al., 1965;
Schmidt, 1981).
This chapter focuses on objective response to sensory perception, the type of
response that arises from a physical or chemical reaction within individuals and a
physiological response of the central nervous system (CNS).
3.3 Sensory Perception
The sensory perception of a person to food is a complex process. A number of over-

lapping sensory attributes bombard individuals as they first approach a food.
Generally, they first notice the appearance of the food since appearance can be per-
ceived quickly and noninvasively. Observation is typically followed by orthonasal
perception. Individuals sniff to perceive the odor or aroma of the food (Landis et al.,
2005). As the food is eaten, retronasal perception, “the perception of odors emanat-
ing from the oral cavity during eating and drinking,” (Landis et al., 2005) continues,
as well as perception of the texture, taste, and possibly sound of the food. All of
these attributes determine how individuals perceive the quality of the food, and this
perception influences their liking of the food. Each of these attributes will be briefly
discussed below.
Food or beverage appearance is a critical feature – it is often the first perceived
attribute and serves as a primary deciding factor of the product quality. Therefore,
3 Physiology of Sensory Perception 21
appearance influences purchase decisions (Lawless & Heymann, 2010;

McDougall, 1983).
Appearance is composed of a number of characteristics of the food, including but
not limited to color, size and shape, visual surface texture, glossiness, clarity/turbid-
ity, and carbonation level.
These attributes can be described in terms of spectrum terminology, which shows
the degree or the extent to which these attributes are experienced:
Description – the actual color name or hue
Intensity – the strength of the color from light to dark
Brightness – the purity of the color, ranging from dull to pure, bright color
Evenness – the distribution of the color, ranging from uneven/blotchy to even
(Meilgaard et al., 2007).
The final evaluation of the appearance of the food is determined by a combina-
tion of all the above-listed factors.
Odor or aroma is attributable to the detection of the volatile compounds that are
released from the food. A distinction may be made among the terms, odor (when the
volatiles are sniffed through the nose), aroma (odor of a given food product), and
fragrance (odor of a perfume or cosmetic) (Meilgaard et al., 1999). The sense of
smell is considered to be markedly more refined than the sense of taste, since an
individual requires a relatively high concentration of tastant (a compound that is
associated with a specific taste) in order to perceive a specific taste. The odor thresh-
old values of some aroma compounds in water (20 °C) could be as low as
0.0045 mg/L (hexanal), 0.02 mg/L (vanillin), or 100 mg/L(ethanol) (Belitz et al.,
2009). Meanwhile, the threshold concentration for some of the basic tastes are
higher, for example, for citric acid is about 2 mM; for salt (NaCl), 10 mM; and for
sucrose, 20 mM (Purves et al., 2018).
As a person masticates a food, the sensors in the mouth detect food texture and
consistency. Texture is a complex term, defined by the structure of the food product.
Food texture is a collective term of sensory experiences that originate from visual,
audio, and tactile stimuli (Chen & Rosenthal, 2015). Components of texture include
mechanical properties (including but not limited to hardness, cohesiveness, adhe-
siveness, springiness, denseness, and chewiness), geometrical properties (smooth,
gritty, grainy, chalky, and lumpy), moisture and fat properties (juicy, oily or greasy),
and air content or structure openness.
The noise produced by the food product is also related to texture, either during
the rupture or the mastication of the food. In sensory evaluation of foods, measure-
ments of noise include pitch, loudness, and the persistence of sounds. The sensation
of food texture plays a key role in influencing consumers’ liking of and preference
for a food (Chen & Rosenthal, 2015).
The term flavor has many definitions, but within this chapter, this term will be
defined as the “impressions perceived via the chemical senses from a product in the
mouth” (Caul, 1957). Flavor includes the aromatic compounds released from the
food in the mouth, the taste sensations (sweet, sour, salty, bitter, and umami) released
from the soluble substance in the mouth, and the chemical feel factors in the mouth
(astringency, cooling, metallic, spicy heat). Flavor is the sum of all of these sensory
impressions or sensations that are perceived when a food or beverage is in the mouth.
The five human senses are thoroughly covered in other textbooks (Amerine
et al., 1965; Lawless & Heymann, 2010; Piggott, 1984; Purves et al., 2018). Thus,
the following discussion provides an overview of the senses and their importance in
sensory evaluation, particularly in the sensory evaluation of dairy products.
Senses may be separated based on the type of stimuli to which they respond.
Sight, hearing, touch, and temperature are considered to be physical senses in that
they respond to physical stimuli. By contrast, the sensations of smell, taste, and pain
are considered to be chemical senses in that the respective receptor sites all respond
to chemical stimuli.
3.4 Vision
3.4.1 Vision: A Definition
The mechanism of vision has been the most persistently investigated. The terms
vision and appearance are separated by their definitions. Vision may be defined as
the psychological response to the objective stimulus generated by the physical
nature of the object viewed (MacDougall, 1984). Appearance is the recognition and
assessment of the properties (surface structure, opacity, color) associated with the
object seen. Aside from color, foods and beverages have a large variety of character-
istics associated with appearance. These characteristics include physical form and
optical properties (gloss, transparency, haziness, and turbidity) (Lawless &
Heymann, 2010).
3.4.2 How Vision Works
The first steps in the process of seeing involve the transmission and refraction of
light by the optics of the eye. The photoreceptors transduce the light energy into
electrical signals. These signals are then refined by synaptic interactions within the
neural circuits of the retina. The retina contains neurons that are sensitive to light
and transmit visual signals to central targets (Purves et al., 2018).
Response to a stimulus is best described as a chain of events:
Light Cornea Pupil Lens Retina the fovea
Vision is perceived through the eye (Fig. 3.1). It begins with light entering the eye
and ends with the formation of an image on the retina. As light enters the system
through the cornea, it moves through the aqueous humor and the pupil, which are
Fig. 3.1 Anatomy of the human eye. (From Purves et al., 2018)
both behind the cornea. The light is refracted by the crystalline lens. It then goes
through the vitreous humor to the retina (Vera-Diaz & Doble, 2012). The retina, the
innermost layer of the eye, contains neurons that are light sensitive. Five basic
classes of neurons can be found in the retina: photoreceptors, bipolar cells, ganglion
cells, horizontal cells, and amacrine cells (Purves et al., 2018). During perception,
light is either reflected from or passed through an object; then, it enters the eye and
is focused onto the fovea, a depression in the retina.
In the fovea, light is transformed into electrochemical impulses, which then
travel toward the brain (Vera-Diaz & Doble, 2012). The fovea, approximately
1.5 mm in diameter, is the region where vision is most acute (Purves et al., 2018).
Two types of photoreceptor cells, located on the fovea, rods,and cones, convert pho-
tons into electrochemical signals, which can stimulate biological processes (Vera-
Diaz & Doble, 2012). The human retina contains approximately 90–120 million
rods and 5 million cones; however, this number changes with ageing and certain
retinal diseases (Vera-Diaz & Doble, 2012). The rods and cones contain photosensi-
tive pigments that bleach upon exposure to light.
Rods are activated at the lowest levels of illumination/light or scotopic vision

(Purves et al., 2018). These photoreceptors are extremely sensitive and can be trig-
gered by a very small number of photons. Therefore, at very low light levels, the
visual signal comes only from the rods (Purves et al., 2018; Vera-Diaz &
Doble, 2012).
Cones are responsible for detecting color. They are the major determinant of
perception under conditions such as normal indoor lighting or sunlight (photopic
vision) (Purves et al., 2018). The distribution of the rods and cones across the sur-
face of the retina also has relevant consequences for vision (Purves et al., 2018). The
density of the rods sharply declines in the fovea, while the cones are exclusively and
most densely packed in the center of the fovea (Purves et al., 2018).
3.4.3 Perception of Color and Appearance
The perception of color is a two-stage process that involves a physical and a psycho-
logical stage. From a physical standpoint, color is the perception that results from
the detection of light as it has interacted with an object (Lawless & Heymann,
2010). The perceived color is affected by three factors: (1) the physical and chemi-
cal composition of the object, (2) the spectral composition of the light source illu-
minating the object, and (3) the spectral sensitivity of the given viewer’s eye
(Lawless & Heymann, 2010). The color of an object can vary in three dimensions:
hue (color), lightness (brightness), and saturation (chroma or the purity of the color)
(Lawless & Heymann, 2010).
During the physical evaluation of color, individual differences reflected in the
spectral sensitivity of the viewer’s eye are another critical factor to consider. Normal
human color vision is fundamentally trichromatic (Purves et al., 2018). Cones con-
tain three color-sensitive pigments that respond to blue, green, and red light (Lawless
& Heymann, 2010). Color blindness results if the individual presents difficulty in
distinguishing colors that are easily perceived by individuals with normal trichro-
matic vision (Purves et al., 2018). The most common type is red/green color blind-
ness. Color blindness affects about 8% of male population in the United States and
0.44% females (Lawless & Heymann, 2010; Purves et al., 2018). Therefore, panel-
ists should be screened for color blindness if sensory evaluation of dairy products
involves color evaluation.
The psychological step of the evaluation of appearance/color is accomplished by
translating either reflection or transmittance to trichromatic values and then to an
appropriate color space.
3.4.4 Sensory Testing of Color and Appearance
During sensory evaluation, when food products are tested simultaneously, colored
filters are often used to mask color differences. However, these efforts are often
unsuccessful. Appearance evaluation may be influenced by the use of these filters
since these filters mask differences in hue (color) but not always brightness and
chroma. Thus, it has been reported that panelists often give consistent responses
about a product’s color even when filters are used (Meilgaard et al., 1999). Therefore,
sensory data derived from evaluations that required color filters should be inter-
preted with caution.
3.4.5 Vision in the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products
The appearance of dairy products can indicate either the presence of good qualities,
or quality defects within the products (Alvarez, 2016; Bodyfelt et al., 1988). In
general, factors that may be evaluated by sight include: the product color, the style
of the product, the condition of the package, the attractiveness of product finish and
workmanship, and overall appearance characteristics. Using the aforementioned
cues, an evaluator is able to provide an initial or cursory assessment of the product,
which may be confirmed by subsequent sensory evaluation endeavors (Bodyfelt
et al., 1988).
Cheese In Swiss cheese, some typical appearance defects include blindness; this
defect is characterized by little to no eye formation; frog mouth, in this case, the
eyes have an elongated shape; and nesty/streuble, this defect is characterized by the
presence of small eyes clustered together in a localized area (Alvarez, 2016).
Butter Some common color and appearance defects in butter are color specks, and
surface color faded, or high. Color specks are characterized by the presence of small
spots in the butter body. The specks can present different colorations, such as black,
green, red, yellow, or white (Alvarez, 2016). Surface color faded or high means the
butter is either lacking an appropriate level of yellow or excessively yellow
(Alvarez, 2016).
Yogurt Yogurt can also present sensory defects associated with appearance and
color. Some examples are atypical color, color leaching, shrunken, free whey, and
lumpy (Alvarez, 2016). Atypical color is much lighter, darker, or different than the
specified flavor. Color leaching is when fruit color leaches into the yogurt body.
Shrunken and free whey can be noticed by the presence of a yellow liquid between
the yogurt and the container wall, where the yogurt pulled in. Meanwhile, a lumpy
body appears rough or similar to Greek yogurt curd after stirring (Alvarez, 2016)
(see Chap. 8, for a full description of possible defects in yogurt).
3.5 Hearing
3.5.1 Hearing: A Definition
The sound emitted when certain foods are bitten and chewed is considered a reflec-
tion of their auditory texture. Although hearing or sound is frequently excluded
from sensory evaluation, the contribution of this sense to the evaluation of food
quality and consumer liking should not be minimized.
Sound is the auditory perception of pressure waves formed by the vibration of air
molecules; sound is an auditory perception (Purves et al., 2018). Sound is perceived
through the vibrations conducted through the air. The external ear gathers sound
energy and focuses it on the eardrum, or tympanic membrane (Fig. 3.2; Purves
et al., 2018). The sound energy causes the eardrum to vibrate. The sound-induced
vibrations are then transmitted through the small bones in the middle ear to the inner
ear to create hydraulic motion in the fluid of the cochlea. The cochlea is a spiral
canal covered in hair cells. In the inner ear, the frequency, amplitude, and phase of
the incoming signal is carried by sensory hair cells. It is then encoded by the electri-
cal activity of the auditory nerve fibers (Purves et al., 2018). These hair cells send
neural impulses to the brain.
3.5.2 How Hearing Works
Figure 3.2 shows the structure of the human ear.
3.5.3 Auditory Texture
Auditory texture in foods is directly related with crispness, crunchiness, and crack-
liness (Lawless & Heymann, 2010). Crispness and crunchiness are noise-producing
mechanisms of food used to describe the auditory texture of wet and dry foods,
respectively. Crisp wet foods include fresh fruits and vegetables (Lawless &
Heymann, 2010). Crunchiness and crispness differ in their frequencies. Crunchiness
is more related to a larger proportion of low-pitched sounds (frequencies less than
1.9 kHz), while crispness is related to a larger proportion of high-pitched sounds
(frequencies higher than 1.9 kHz) (Seymour & Hamann, 1988; Vickers, 1985).
Crisp foods also break in a single stage, while crunchy foods break in several suc-
cessive stages of applied pressure (Szczesniak, 1991). The intensity and pitch of
crispness and crunchiness can be measured in terms of decibels.
Malleus Incus Stapes
Bone
Semicircular Tensor
Malleus Stapes canals tympani
Concha Incus Oval
window
Vestibular
nerve
Auditory Tympanic Stapedius Base of stapes

nerve membrane in oval window
Cochlea Inner
ear
Vestibule
Round
window
Eustachian Outer
tube ear
Pinna Middle
ear
External
Tympanic Jugular vein
auditory
membrane
meatus
Fig. 3.2 The organization of the human ear. (From Purves et al., 2018)
3.5.4 Hearing in the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products
Attributes of noise (sound) can also be used during the sensory evaluation of dairy
products.
Cheese In Swiss cheese, quality can be evaluated by gently tapping the outside of
the cheese with the fingers or a sampling device like a cheese trier, which projects
the relative size and/or distribution of eyes within the block of cheese.
Butter In butter, the relative amount of free moisture can also be estimated by the
character of the slushing sound made when the sample piece is reinserted into the
trier hole from which it was drawn (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
3.6 Olfaction
3.6.1 Olfaction: A Definition
The olfactory system coordinates a response to stimuli called odorants. Odorants

are volatile (vaporous), airborne, chemical stimuli. The olfactory system processes
information from these stimuli about their identity, concentration, and quality
(Purves et al., 2018).
3.6.2 How Olfaction Works
Figure 3.3 shows how olfaction works. Fig. 3.3a provides an overview of the anat-
omy of the system, while Fig. 3.3b provides a close-up of part of that anatomy.
Figure 3.4 shows the pathway by which olfaction happens.
Olfactory receptor neurons (ORNs) are bipolar neurons. Olfactory receptors
(ORs) are G-coupled proteins found on the cilia of the ORNs (Schiffman, 2007). G
proteins are specialized proteins that have the ability to bind the nucleotides guano-
sine triphosphate (GTP) and guanosine diphosphate (GDP). G-protein-coupled
receptors (GPCRs) are a large family of cell surface receptors that respond to a wide
variety of external stimuli (Nature Education, 2014). ORs are part of the same fami-
lies of proteins involved in vision and gustation (Mainland et al., 2014). The olfac-
tory cilia are short, microscopic hairlike structures that detect and transduce odorants
into an electrical signal (Reiserta & Reingruber, 2019).
The cilia of the ORNs provide a greater surface area for the OR to interact with
odorants. The OR extend nerve fibers into a smaller number of glomerular struc-
tures in the olfactory bulb. The glomeruli are dense areas of branching and provide
synaptic contact of the OR with the ORNs in the olfactory pathway (Lawless, 1991).
Fig. 3.3 Elements of the human olfactory epithelium. Part A: Peripheral and central components
of the olfactory pathway. Part B: Close-up of region boxed in Part A. Relationship between the
olfactory epithelium (which contains the ORNs) and the olfactory bulb (the central target of
ORNs). (From Purves et al., 2018)
Fig. 3.3 (continued)
The anatomy of the nose allows only a small fraction of inspired air to reach the
olfactory epithelium via the nasal turbinates (Fig. 3.3a). Under normal breathing
conditions, about 5% of inhaled air reaches the olfactory receptors. However, during
sniffing, the amount of air that reaches the receptors increases to about 20%
(DeVries & Stuvier, 1961).
ORs are activated by odorant molecules carried into the nose during inhalation
and dissolved in the mucus lining the nasal cavity (Fig. 3.4). Odorants are sensed by
the olfactory receptor neurons (ORN), which are found in the olfactory epithelium
(Fig. 3.3a) that line the interior of the nasal cavity (Fig. 3.3a, b). ORNs are activated
when odorants bind to the ORs. OR activation initiates a biochemical transduction
cascade that depolarizes the neuron(s) via the opening of ion channels located in the
ciliary membrane (Reiserta & Reingruber, 2019). Specifically, the G proteins initi-
ate a cascade of intracellular signaling events, which are propagated along the olfac-
tory sensory axon to the brain. When a signaling molecule binds to a GPCR, it
provokes activation in the G proteins, which triggers the production of any number
of secondary messengers (Nature Education, 2014).
During odor perception, when a person sniffs a food product such as cheese, the
mix of volatile compounds in the cheese flows over the ORs in the olfactory region
of the nose. However, only those receptors specifically responsive to the compounds
in the cheese will be activated. An important phenomenon in odor perception is
adaptation or the tendency to become unresponsive to stimuli that are stable in space
and time (Lawless & Heymann, 2010). By sniffing for 1–2 s, the optimal odorant
contact is achieved (Laing, 1983). However, after 2 s, the receptors have adapted to
the new stimulus, and 5–20 s are required for them to de-adapt before a new odor
can produce a sensation.
Fig. 3.4 Steps involved in the pathway for odorants detection. (From Press release. NobelPrize.
org. Nobel Media AB 2020. Wed. 11 Nov 2020. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2004/
press-release/)
In sensory panels, adaptation may manifest in the increase of sensory thresholds

or the frequency of zero intensity ratings for certain attributes. Adaptation also rein-
forces why sensory testing should be conducted in an odor-free environment and not
be rushed.
3.6.3 Olfaction Science
3.6.3.1 History
Numerous theories of odor recognition and perception have been developed over
the years (Amoore et al., 1967; Jones & Reed, 1989; Wright, 1954). Chemical,
physiological, and anatomical studies have suggested that odor perception is caused
by the chemical or physical attributes of response to odorants in the olfactory
receptor in the olfactory epithelium. Those responses create patterns that are inter-
preted by the brain as odorant quality.
In the early 1990s, evidence showed that olfactory transduction used a G-protein-
coupled pathway. Through molecular genetic techniques, Buck and Axel (1991)
identified a family of approximately 1000 genes that encoded for the same number
of different G-protein-coupled receptors in the olfactory epithelium of rats. The
authors also described the expression patterns of odorant receptor genes in the
olfactory epithelium. They showed that the axons of neurons that express the same
odorant receptor converged in the olfactory bulb on the same glomeruli.
Axel and Buck illustrated that a single odorant is detected by multiple receptors
and that different odorants are recognized by different combinations of receptors
(Malnic et al., 1999). Overall, the combination of Axel and Buck’s work showed
that humans have a few hundred types of ORs, each of which can detect only a lim-
ited number of odors. Their work also showed that only one kind of receptor appears
on each of the approximately 5 million odor-sensing nerve cells in the nose. In
2004, Buck and Axel were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for
their discoveries on the central role of OR proteins in the encoding of olfactory
information and the ORs gene family (Purves et al., 2018). The sense of smell long
remained the most enigmatic of our senses. The basic principles for the recognition
and remembrance of over 10,000 different odors were not well understood, but the
research from Axel and Buck helped to expand the understanding of the olfactory
system (Buck & Axel, 1991).
3.6.3.2 Human Thresholds
Mammals possess an olfactory system of incredible discriminating power (Amoore,

1970). Humans can differentiate among approximately 1 trillion odors (Bushdid
et al., 2014). However, the ability of an individual to be able to detect a specific
odorant as part of the aromatic profile of a food does not only depend on the con-
centration of the odorant in the food product but also on the odor threshold of that
odorant (Czerny et al., 2011).
Threshold values for odorants are highly variable within and across individuals.
A threshold can be defined generally as a stimulus intensity or the minimum con-
centration of a compound that produces a response in 50% of the individuals in a
test panel (Bi & Ennis, 1998; Lawless, 1991). The sensitivity of the ORs varies with
both the compound and the individual and may vary over a range of 1012 molecules/
mL of air or more (Meilgaard, 1975). Odor thresholds have been reported to range
from 1.3 × 1019 molecules/mL of air (ethane) down to 6 × 107 (allyl mercaptan)
molecules/mL of air (Harper, 1972).
The human nose remains the most sensitive tool for detecting odorants, surpass-
ing the sensitivity of instrumental means. With analytical techniques such as gas
chromatography, 109 molecules/mL air may be detectable. Because the human nose
is 10- to 100-fold more sensitive than this analytical technique, sensory evaluation
by human noses is critical in the analysis of odorants.
The condition known as anosmia describes a person’s inability to detect odor

compounds or complete loss of smell (Purves et al., 2018), while hyposmia describes
a partial loss of smell (Hannum et al., 2020). Specific anosmia is the inability to
detect some families of similar aromatic compounds. A specific anosmia is defined
as the condition in which the individual has an odor threshold greater than two stan-
dard deviations above the population mean concentration (Amoore et al., 1968).
Common anosmias include trimethylamine, a fish spoilage taint, (Amoore &
Forrester, 1976), and diacetyl, a compound associated with butter aroma (Lawless
et al., 1994). Anosmias, while rare, do exist; therefore, potential panelists should be
screened for sensory acuity prior to participation in a sensory panel.
As of Spring 2021, over 176 million people worldwide have been infected by the
severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes
coronavirus disease 2019 or COVID-19 (Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource
Center, COVID-19 Dashboard). In response to this pandemic, multiple studies have
tried to identify the causes and symptoms of the disease. Acquired anosmia and
hyposmia have been recently reported as symptoms of COVID-19; however, studies
of olfactory dysfunction show a prevalence that ranges from 5% to 98% (Hannum
et al., 2020). A fundamental question for olfaction science is whether SARS-CoV-2
affects olfaction directly, by infecting olfactory sensory neurons or their targets in
the olfactory bulb, or indirectly, by the perturbation of supporting cells. In a study
conducted by Brann et al. (2020), findings suggested that SARS-CoV-2 infection of
non-neuronal cell types leads to anosmia and related disturbances in the perception
of odorants in individuals with COVID-19.
Sensory scientists need to be aware of the impact that this virus may have on the
short- and long-term perception of odorants by individuals that presented with
acquired anosmia as part of COVID-19 symptomatology. This anosmia may com-
promise their acuity to conduct sensory evaluation, mainly when aroma testing is
crucial.
3.6.3.3 The Smell and Flavor Connection
Flavor detection involves the combination of olfactory and gustatory stimuli

(Spence, 2015). Therefore, the sensory evaluations of most food-related flavors are
dependent on olfactory perception. In order to perceive the odor of a specific chemi-
cal compound, the compound must be sufficiently heavy, lipophilic, and volatile
(Keller & Vosshall, 2016). The volatility of a compound depends upon its molecular
weight and molecular bonding properties. For odors to be perceived via the olfac-
tory system, the upper limit of their molecular weight (MW) needs to be within the
range of 300 daltons or lower (Moncrieff, 1967). The molecular geometry of odor-
ants, and, more specifically, the composition and structures of the functional groups
within the molecule play a key role in the perception of odorants (Keller & Vosshall,
2016). Keller and Vosshall (2016) used a sensory panel of 55 healthy people to test
their olfactory perception of 480 molecules. These molecules were structurally and
perceptually different and were presented at two concentrations. The authors found
Fig. 3.5 Perception of volatile compounds in the orthonasal and retronasal route. (From
Kringelbach, M.L., & Berridge, K.C. (Eds.). (2009) Oxford handbook: Pleasures of the brain)
a negative correlation between molecular weight and how intensely the participants
perceived the tested compounds.
The greater part of what is known as food flavor is mediated by smell (Lawless
1991). Orthonasal olfaction detects odors that are perceived through the nostrils.
Retronasal olfaction perceives those odors detected in mouth as the stimulus is
transported up from the back of the throat and into the region of the ORs (Fig. 3.5).
3.6.4 Sensory Testing Issues
While the number of odor families that people can recognize is large, labeling given
odors is not an easy task. Often individuals can recognize a smell but cannot make
the verbal connection to identify the odor. This difficulty in verbal connection is one
reason why many clinical tests of smell use a multiple-choice format to separate
difficulties in smelling from problems in labeling (Doty, 1991). The sense of smell
is also limited by the number of components present in a complex odor mixture.
Humans tend to perceive odors as whole patterns rather than individual compo-
nents. This perception pattern makes odor profiling difficult (Engen, 1982).
Over the years, many odor classification schemes have been proposed.
Historically, the challenges with odor classification lists have been the use and
application of broad, associative, and subjective descriptors (Moncreiff, 1967). In
1970, Amoore developed a classification system of specific anosmias that point to a
possible lack of a specific odor receptor type for a group of compounds. In Amoore’s
system, he proposed eight classes: ethereal, camphoraceous, musky, floral, minty,
pungent, putrid, and sweaty.
Nowadays, specific food and beverage products and related industries have their
own systems for aroma and flavor terminology. For example, the Wine Aroma
Wheel was developed to arrange commonly used wine aroma characteristics (Noble
et al., 1987). In this wheel, general terms are located on the innermost part of the
wheel, and these terms become more specific as the user moves toward the outside
of the wheel. Similarly, a cheese aroma wheel was developed for the evaluation of
hard and semihard cheeses (Berodier et al., 1997).
One way of reducing variability when conducting sensory evaluation of dairy
products is panel training. In this type of training, panelists are presented with the
sensory language (or lexicon). Then, with the guidance of the panel leader, the pan-
elists discuss these attributes as they relate or not to the products being tested
(Drake, 2007). Lexicons of sensory attributes have been developed for multiple
dairy products such as Cheddar cheese, dried dairy ingredients, chocolate milk, and
butter (Drake, 2007).
Despite these efforts, no currently available arbitrary scheme reflects biologi-
cally significant categories of odorants. However, one of the most consistent aspects
of olfactory perception schemes is the classification of odors as either pleasant and
attractive or.
unpleasant and repulsive (Purves et al., 2018).
3.6.5 Olfaction and the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products
Olfaction, or smelling, plays a critical role in the sensory evaluation of dairy prod-
ucts. Important details about product quality can be determined with olfaction. A
large component of flavor is the specific odor property of the food; hence, this attri-
bute is critical in providing a thorough assessment of any dairy product (Bodyfelt
et al., 1988).
Cheese In Cheddar cheese, a strong smell similar to the fragrance of alcohol in
yeast bread or an odd fruity/pineapple odor is associated with the aromatic defect
described as fermented/fruity (Alvarez, 2016). Another common defect is sulfide,
which results in an unpleasant rotten egg smell when extreme (Alvarez, 2016).
Butter In butter, an uncommon yeasty aroma and flavor is described as a scent in

butter, similar to yeast leavened bread dough, fragrant fruity, or vinegary aroma
(Alvarez, 2016). Another defect that may be present in stored butter is tallowy. This
defect provokes an aroma and flavor similar to oxidized tallow (Alvarez, 2016).
Yogurt Cooked aroma is an odor defect that may occur in yogurt made from
scorched milk. It is characterized by nutty, cooked egg white, and scorched milk
aromas (Alvarez, 2016).
3.7 Taste and Gustation
3.7.1 Taste and Gustation: A Definition
The sense of taste provides critical information about the origin and quality of food;
therefore, in humans, it leads to specific eating responses (consumption or rejection)
(Besnard et al., 2016). Taste is defined as the chemical sense responsible for the
detection of nonvolatile compounds in food (Keast & Costanzo, 2015). Taste
involves the detection of stimuli dissolved in water, oil, or saliva by the receptors in
the taste buds. Five basic taste modalities are commonly recognized: sweet, sour,
salty, bitter, and umami (a savory, meaty, broth-like, the taste of monosodium gluta-
mate) (Besnard et al., 2016; Yamaguchi & Ninomiya, 2000).
Specific receptors have been identified for these five basic tastes. Other sensa-
tions, such as metallic and fat, have also been proposed to join the group of primary
modalities (Besnard et al., 2016; Keast & Costanzo, 2015; Stevens et al., 2006).
Regarding alimentary tastes, Hartley et al. (2019) stated that it is pertinent to criti-
cally evaluate whether new tastes, including umami, are suitably positioned with the
four classic basic tastes (sweet, sour, salty, and bitter). The authors proposed the use
of a subclass named alimentary for tastes not meeting basic criteria.
However, these basic tastes sufficiently describe most taste experiences, and
adequate taste standards are reported in the literature (Lawless & Heymann, 2010).
3.7.2 How Gustation Works
Figure 3.6 illustrates the taste system. The important major components are papil-
lae, taste buds, and taste cells.
Papillae are mainly located on the surface of the tongue (the epithelium) and only
rarely in the mucosa of the palate and areas of the throat (Besnard et al., 2016).
Papillae are multicellular protuberances surrounded by local folds, which form a
furrow-like structure that concentrates tastants (Purves et al., 2018). Taste buds are
distributed along the sides of the papillae as well as along the sides of the furrow
(Purves et al., 2018).
Fig. 3.6 The human tongue (a), a distribution of taste papillae on the surface of the tongue. The
closeup indicates the location of individual taste buds on a circumvallate papilla. (b) Diagram and
light micrograph of a taste bud showing various types of taste cells and the associated gustatory
nerves. The taste cells make synapses on the gustatory afferent axons. (From Purves et al., 2018)
The distribution of taste buds is generally associated with certain papillae. On the
epithelium, taste buds are found in three specialized papillae: circumvallates, foli-
ates, and fungiforms (Besnard et al., 2016). Circumvallate papillae form a V-shape
on the back of the tongue. They are large and easily visible. Circumvallate papillae
contain most of the taste buds, approximately 48–50% (Besnard et al., 2016; Witt &
Reutter, 2015). The backside of the tongue also contains foliate papillae. This type
of papillae contains about 28% of the taste buds (Purves et al., 2018; Witt & Reutter,
2015). The fungiform papillae are large and mushroom-like in appearance. These
papillae are found only on the front two-thirds of the surface of the tongue. They are
most numerous and most dense at the tip of the tongue, where they can occur at 30/
cm2 (Purves et al., 2018). These papillae contain about 24–25% of the total number
of taste buds (Witt & Reutter, 2015).
Taste buds are located in the papillae of the tongue, the epithelium of the palate,
oropharynx, larynx, and the upper esophagus (Witt & Reutter, 2015). Taste buds are
specialized onion-shaped structures composed of 50–100 taste cells (Besnard et al.,
2016) and are stimulated by sensory nerve endings. Taste cells are located in the cell
membranes of taste buds and are renewed on average every 6–8 days (Purves et al.,
2018). Taste cells use multiple signaling pathways to detect chemicals in food. Each
taste bud is a heterogeneous assemblage of three different cell types (Besnard et al.,
2016). The different types of taste cells include type I cells, the most frequently
found, which serve as support cells. Type I cells have glial-like properties. Like the
glia cells in the central nervous system, these cells help to clear neurotransmitters
and redistribute ions (Witt & Reutter, 2015). They are thought to participate in
sodium detection (Besnard et al., 2016). Type II cells have G-protein-coupled recep-
tors. These cells detect bitter, sweet, and umami taste stimuli. Type III cells detect
sour and salty stimuli (Dutta et al., 2020; Witt & Reutter, 2015).
Saliva is another important part of the gustation system that plays a key role in
the orosensory perception or stimulation in mouth of food components (Besnard
et al., 2016, Møller, 2014). Saliva is a complex solution of water, amino acids, pro-
teins, sugars, organic acids, and salts that cover the gustatory sensors. Specific func-
tions of saliva include preparation of the food for swallowing by altering its
consistency, solvent action, cleansing action, and moistening and lubrication action
(Best & Taylor, 1943; Carpenter, 2012).
The composition of saliva serves to modulate taste response. The amount of
saliva secreted varies with the gland that is secreting the saliva. Saliva secreted by
the sublingual glands is thick and mucous-like, while saliva secreted from the sub-
maxillary (located in the floor of the mouth) is either thin and watery or thick and
viscous, depending upon the stimulus. Saliva secreted by the parotid gland (located
in the cheeks) is thin and watery; this is the saliva that is released in copious amounts
during mastication.
Manipulation of the sample in the mouth suffices to stimulate the flow of saliva;
hence, it is important to maneuver the sample around the mouth. Individuals show
variation in the way they manipulate food in the mouth. Some people eat rapidly
with just one or two chewing actions, while others chew food thoroughly before
swallowing, thus affecting flavor release (Taylor, 2002).
Taste perception begins on the tongue and involves the detection of stimuli dis-
solved in water, oil, or saliva. Tastants are detected over the full surface of the tongue
in the taste papillae. Chemical stimuli on the tongue first stimulate receptors in the
fungiform papillae and then in the foliate and circumvallate papillae (Purves
et al., 2018).
For flavor perception, the food must be masticated, solubilized, and diluted in
saliva in order for a taste reaction to occur. In flavor perception of food products,
both volatile and nonvolatile flavor compounds are released. The release of those
compounds is influenced by the food product structure and chemical and physical
properties.
Compared with olfaction, the contact between a solution and the taste epithelium
is more consistent. There is no risk of the contact being too brief, but there is risk of
oversaturation. Taste perception begins when chemical components of food interact
with receptor proteins, which are found on the taste receptor cells. These taste
receptor cells determine the identity, concentration, and qualities of chemical stim-
uli, such as pleasant, unpleasant, or potentially harmful (Purves et al., 2018).
Taste perception occurs when the taste receptor cell within the taste buds makes
contact with the outside fluid environment of the mouth through a pore at the top of
the cell. The taste molecules are thought to bind to the hairlike cilia near the opening
of the pore (Fig. 3.6b). In the pore, the taste receptor cells within the taste bud make
contact with the primary taste nerves over a gap connection. In response, neu-
rotransmitter molecules are released into the gap to stimulate the primary taste
nerves and send the taste sensation signal on to the brain.
In addition to concentration of taste stimulus, other conditions in the mouth
affect taste perception. These include temperature, viscosity, rate, duration, pres-
ence of other compounds in the food or beverage, and saliva flow and composition.
Both stress and time of day affect these parameters.
3.7.3 Thresholds
Taste perception differs among individuals, and these differences appear to play a
role in food choices. The simplest and best understood taste variation in humans is
the ability to taste phenylthiocarbamide (PTC). Discovered serendipitously by Fox
in 1931, PTC may be perceived by some individuals as intensely bitter (tasters) but
remains relatively tasteless to a large fraction of the population (nontasters). Many
studies have explored the genetic differences among individuals who are tasters
versus nontasters (Drayna et al., 2003; Kaprio et al., 1987).
The ability to taste the bitter compound 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) is also
genetically determined. PROP tasters have been divided into tasters, nontasters, and
supertasters, those individuals with a heightened sensitivity to the bitterness of
PROP (Bartoshuk et al., 1993b). PROP sensitivity has been correlated with increased
densities of both fungiform papillae and taste buds, with supertasters having the
highest density followed by tasters and then nontasters (Duffy et al., 1994). Several
studies have explored the hypothesis that PROP sensitivity may heighten sensitivity
to other taste compounds. For example, the perceived saltiness of NaCl, the burn of
capsaicin, and the intensity of ethyl alcohol were all perceived as stronger by those
individuals sensitive to PROP (Bartoshuk et al., 1998; Bartoshuk et al., 1993a).
PROP sensitivity has been linked with a greater frequency of food aversions
(Drewnowski et al., 1998).
Taste sensitivity has also been found to change with age. Using a variety of
threshold tests, the majority of research studies show a decrease in sensitivity with
increasing age (Murphy, 1986; Rolls & Drewnowski, 1996). More recently, detec-
tion thresholds of NaCl, KCl, sucrose, aspartame, acetic acid, citric acid, caffeine,
quinine-HCl, and monosodium glutamate were determined in 21 young people
(19–33 years) and 21 elderly people (60–75 years) (Mojet et al., 2001). As in previ-
ous studies, a significant effect in threshold was found for age but not for gender
(p < 0.05). However, the interaction of age and gender was shown to be important.
Older men were less sensitive than young men and women to acetic acid, sucrose,
citric acid, NaCl, and KCl.
3.7.4 Taste Perception in Dairy Products
3.7.4.1 The Role of Saliva
Understanding how saliva is affected by different conditions and how this may
impact sensory evaluation and dairy judging are important aspects to consider.
Some components of the matrix (such as sugar and salt) can also influence the
saliva-air partition of volatile compounds by changing the physicochemical condi-
tions of the saliva phase.
Saliva secretion occurs when dairy products are taken into the mouth for tasting,
with the amount and composition of the saliva varying with the type of dairy prod-
uct consumed. Ingestion of dairy products such as milk stimulates a mucousy, vis-
cous saliva. Ingestion of a semidry solid, such as cheese, results in the secretion of
a thick, viscous, lubricating submaxillary saliva, and large quantities of diluting
saliva from the parotid (Bodyfelt et al., 1988). Many dairy products are not in a
readily perceived state when they enter the mouth.
3.7.4.2 The Problem of Aftertaste
The persistence of milk aftertaste is an attribute of milk that impacts some individu-
als’ enjoyment. Aftertaste is a combination of tastes, flavors, textures, and feelings.
In a survey conducted in 2001 by Dairy Management Incorporated, results indicated
that the reason that the highest percentage of females did not consume milk was
“too much aftertaste.” In a subsequent study of milk likers and non-likers, Porubcan
and Vickers (2005) found that salivary flow did not differ between the two groups.
However, milk dislikers did have a higher salivary flow after consuming milk com-
pared to saliva flow rate after consuming water. This increase in saliva production
was attributed to the body’s attempt to rid the mouth of milk aftertaste. In PROP
analysis, results showed a significant interaction between taster status (nontaster,
taster, and supertaster) and the liking rating of mouthfeel after swallowing. The
authors concluded that women who disliked the aftertaste of milk may be more
likely to be tasters and supertasters.
3.7.5 Taste and Gustation in the Sensory Evaluation

of Dairy Products
Alvarez (2016) described a series of defects associated with taste and gustation in
multiple dairy products.
Cheese Bitter, high acid, and high salt are common taste-related defects in cottage
cheese. High diacetyl, fermented/fruity, and cooked are examples of flavor defects
in cottage cheese.
Butter The presence of specific tastes and flavors in butter are associated with
defects, including acid or bitter taste, cheesy, or rancid flavor (Alvarez, 2016).
Ice Cream Some commonly detected defects in ice cream flavor are cooked, oxi-
dized, high sweetness, and unnatural flavor (e.g., high or low flavoring).
Yogurt Acetaldehyde (green apple-like flavor), cooked, and yeasty flavor are some
examples of potential defects in yogurt (Alvarez, 2016).
3.8 Touch
3.8.1 Touch: A Definition
The somatosensory system is the most diverse of the sensory systems. It mediates a
wide range of sensations, including touch, pressure, vibration, limb position, heat,
cold, itch, and pain. All these sensations are transduced by receptors within the skin,
muscles, or joints and conveyed to a variety of targets in the CNS (Purves et al., 2018).
The somatosensory system can be divided into subsystems. One subsystem, the
tactile subsystem, transmits information from mechanoreceptors found in the skin
(cutaneous) and mediates the sensations of fine touch, pressure, and vibration. The
proprioceptive subsystem has specialized receptors associated with muscles, ten-
dons, and joints. This subsystem is responsible for proprioception, or humans’ abil-
ity to sense the position of the limbs (arms and legs) and other body parts in space.
Receptors in a third somatosensory subsystem provide information about painful
stimuli and thermal changes. This system also provides information about nondis-
criminative (or sensual) touch (Purves et al., 2018). This chapter focuses on the
tactile subsystem.
3.8.2 How Touch Works/Perception
In general, the skin senses are able to code three types of stimuli: mechanical, ther-
mal, and pain related. Kinesthesis, or the deep pressure sense, is the result of stimuli
pressing upon or displacing connective tissue without injury (Amerine et al., 1965).
Kinesthesis is felt through nerve fibers in muscles, tendons, and joints. Kinesthetic
perceptions correspond to the mechanical movement of muscles (heaviness, hard-
ness, stickiness); these perceptions result from stress exerted by muscles and the
sensation of the resulting strain. The relative level of the texture of a given food is
judged partially through the perception of the forces that are needed to physically
break down the structure of the food.
Somesthesis is the tactile sense or skin-feel caused by displacement of hairs or
deformation of the skin without injury. Tactile sensations may be transmitted from
a variety of sites as shown in (Fig. 3.7). The epidermis, dermis, and subcutaneous
layers are responsible for somesthetic sensations of touch, pressure, heat, cold, itch-
ing, and tickling.
Fig. 3.7 Cross-section of human skin. (From Purves et al., 2018)

3.8.3 Texture: A Definition
Jowitt (1974) built on the previous definition of texture provided by Szczesniak

(1963) to read that texture is “the attribute of a substance resulting from a combina-
tion of physical properties and perceived by the senses of touch, sight, and hearing.”
Physical properties may include size, shape, number, nature, and conformation of
constituent structural elements. The appreciation of texture involves the subtle inter-
action between both motor and sensory components of the peripheral and the cen-
tral nervous system.
3.8.4 Visual Texture and Oral Tactile Texture
Food texture is an important sensory evaluation parameter that is used as an indica-

tor of food quality. Texture is a composite property and is related to the physical
properties of foods and their complex relationships. In certain foods, the perceived
texture is the most important sensory attribute (i.e., crispy, crunchy foods like cheese
snacks). In other foods, the texture, while important, is not the primary sensory
characteristic (i.e., soup). Quite often, sensory assessments of texture are made on
the basis of sensations perceived when the food sample is manipulated in the mouth.
The sense organs involved in mastication and texture perception are located in and
around (1) the superficial structure of the mouth, (2) the roots of the teeth, and (3)
the muscles and tendons of the mouth and jaw.
Texture evaluation can also be undertaken by looking at the surface of a food
product. Characteristics such as shine (or sheen) and lumpiness provide visual tex-
ture cues.
Oral tactile texture attributes are those texture attributes perceived within the
mouth. One scheme used for texture classification (Szczesniak, 1963) is still used
today. In this classification scheme, three categories of textural characteristics were
proposed:
1. Mechanical characteristics – related to the reaction of food to stress or force
(Szczesniak, 1963). Information about the firmness, toughness, crispness, or
fibrousness of the product may be gained when a sample of solid food is manipu-
lated in the hand by squeezing, bending, or cutting it with a knife. The behavior
of a liquid or semisolid food when shaken, stirred, or poured may yield informa-
tion about its viscosity, smoothness, or stickiness. For butter or margarine, inter-
preted behavior during the course of spreading provides key information on the
textural properties of the product (Wilkinson et al., 2000).
2. Geometrical characteristics – related to the size, shape, and orientation of the
particles in the food, specifically the size and shape of the particles (Szczesniak,
1963). Soft, rounded or hard, flat particles with a size above 80 μm exhibit gritty
properties or characteristics. Particles that are hard, angular, and within the size
range of 11–22 μm are also gritty (Tyle, 1993).
3. Other characteristics – related to the perception of moisture and fat content of the
food (Szczesniak, 1963). In the specific case of fat globules, Richardson and
Booth (1993) reported that panelists were able to distinguish between average
fat-globule size and distance distributions in a range of 0.5–3 μm.
3.8.5 Mouthfeel
Mouthfeel is another oral tactile attribute that tends to change less dynamically than
other texture characteristics. Szczesniak (1979) classified mouthfeel attributes into
nine groups: viscosity (thick, thin), feel of soft tissue (smooth, pulpy) and carbon-
ation (tingly, foamy bubbly), body (watery, heavy, light), chemical (astringency,
numbing, cooling), coating of the oral cavity (clinging, fatty, oily), resistance to
tongue movement (slimy, sticky, pasty, syrupy), mouth after-feel related (clean, lin-
gering), physiological (filling, refreshing, thirst quenching), temperature (hot, cold),
and extent of wetness (wet, dry).
3.8.6 Touch in the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products
The sense of touch, including product texture and mouthfeel, is also an important
aspect for quality sensory evaluation of dairy products. The perception of rubberi-
ness or springiness of cheese and the creamy, icy, or sandy mouthfeel of ice cream
are indicators of product quality. For the evaluation of the external surface of some
dairy products, evaluators may use their fingers to assess the tactile perception. This
type of evaluation provides information on the relative springiness or hardness of a
product.
Cheese Sample size and serving temperature are important in evaluating hardness
and chewiness of cheeses. Cardello and Segars (1989) investigated the effect of
sample size on various texture attributes of cream cheese, American cheese, and
other dairy products. The sample sizes ranged from 0.125 to 8 cm3. Study results
showed that both hardness and chewiness increased as a function of sample size,
thus reflecting the dependence of texture attributes on sample size. Drake et al.
(2005) investigated the effect of the serving temperature on the perception of flavor
attributes of Cheddar cheese when tested by a trained panel. Three serving tempera-
tures were selected (5 °C, 12 °C, and 21 °C). Results showed that panelists found it
more difficult to evaluate the cheese when the serving temperature was 21 °C as
compared with 12 °C or 5 °C (see Chap. 9 on Cheddar cheese).
Milk Sample size is important in evaluating liquid dairy products, such as milk.
The taster should take small sips (i.e., 8–12 ml), keep each sip in the mouth for a
couple of seconds, and then wait 15–60 s before tasting again. The first and second
sips are the most sensitive. To effectively evaluate a solid sample, the recommenda-
tion is for at least 28 g of sample (Poste et al., 1991).
Butter Some potential defects of oral tactile texture in butter are gummy. In this
type of defect, butter presents a gumlike texture and does not melt in the mouth. For
mealy or grainy, butter has a grainy texture that is noted upon smashing it between
the tongue and the palate (roof of the mouth) (Alvarez, 2016).
Ice Cream In ice cream, the most objectionable and easiest to detect texture defect
is sandy. This defect is present when pressing a thin layer of ice cream against the
palate and hard regular sized particles/crystals of lactose do not dissolve quickly
(Alvarez, 2016).
When a texture attribute changes over time, it is referred to as phase change or
melting. Many foods undergo a phase change in the mouth due to increased tem-
perature in the oral cavity, with such notable examples as chocolate and cheese.
Phase change is also important in evaluating ice cream. The ice cream effect was
proposed by Hyde and Witherly (1993). This effect states that the dynamic contrast
(the moment-to-moment changes in texture contrasts within the mouth) is largely
responsible for the relatively high palatability of ice cream. In the development of
low-fat products, the concept of dynamic contrast needs to be seriously considered,
because when fat is removed, the melting attributes change markedly.
3.9 Chemesthesis
3.9.1 Chemesthesis: A Definition
Multiple sensations that are chemically induced can be perceived in the oral and
nasal cavities and also in the external skin. These chemically induced sensations do
not classify into the traditional classes of tastes and smells. These types of sensa-
tions are called chemesthetic sensations or qualities (Lawless & Heymann, 2010);
they can also be referred to as trigeminal chemosensation or irritation (Töle
et al., 2019).
Sensations such as the burn of hot peppers and spices, the tingle and prickling of
carbonation, and the sharp coolness of peppermint are all referred to as chemes-
thetic qualities. Chemical irritants such as horseradish, ginger, ammonia, menthol,
and onion stimulate the free nerve endings in the mucous membranes of the mouth,
nose, and eyes.
3.9.2 How Chemesthesis Works/Perception
Chemosensation occurs in sensory epithelia in the nose and mouth. The detection of
pungent chemicals, or chemesthesis, is mediated by oral and nasal afferents of the
trigeminal nerve (V) (Cooper et al., 2020) (Fig. 3.8). Trigeminal chemical stimula-
tion evokes the noxious or irritating sensations of burn, heat, cold, pungency, and/or
pain in the mucosa of the eyes, nose, and mouth (Amerine et al., 1965; Töle
et al., 2019).
The information about the texture, temperature of food, and the content of irri-
tants is conveyed in the trigeminal fibers in the mouth. Trigeminal fibers originate
from cell bodies in the trigeminal ganglion and terminate in the main and spinal
trigeminal nuclei of the brain stem (Töle et al., 2019). The trigeminal pathway then
Fig. 3.8 Chemosensory anatomy. (From Cooper et al., 2020)

ascends to a thalamic relay nucleus and from there to a cortical region in the post-
central gyrus, which is part of the primary somatosensory cortex (Small &
Green, 2012).
Irritant stimulation stimulates strong defensive reflexes in the body, including
sweating, tearing, salivary flow, and pain. Ammonia, for example, affects the nose
and eyes and other mucous surfaces of the body. Pepper and ginger stimulate taste
receptors and heat-sensitive pain receptors in the mouth. Peppermint evokes cool-
ness and sting due to menthol simulation of cold fibers and pain fibers, while pepper
evokes burning through capsaicin stimulation of heat-sensitive pain fibers. During
sensory evaluation, panelists often have difficulty separating chemical sensations
from tactile sensations, as the trigeminal nerves also signal tactile, thermal, and pain
sensations.
3.9.3 Trigeminal Thresholds
For the majority of compounds, the trigeminal response requires a concentration of

the irritant that is an order of magnitude higher than that which stimulates the olfac-
tory or gustatory receptors. Trigeminal effects assume practical significance when
the olfactory or gustatory threshold is high, which may be the case for certain com-
pounds or for people with partial anosmias. The effects may also be significant
when the trigeminal threshold is low, as for example with capsaicin.
Among individuals, a wide variety in pain response and tolerance exists. Some
individuals derive enjoyment from a certain degree of pain, such as the consumption
of excessively hot chili or hot coffee. In these situations, a certain degree of thrill-
seeking and desensitization are involved, in addition to psychological differences in
the desirability of pain (Prescott & Stevenson, 1995). Consumers of hot spices fre-
quently rate the extent of burn sensation from capsaicin lower than nonconsumers
do (Prescott & Stevenson, 1995).
In a recent study, Byrnes and Hayes (2015) investigated gender differences in the
influence of personality traits on spicy food liking and intake. The authors explored
if personality factors may play a role in determining an individual’s sensitivity to
and preference for foods that contain capsaicin. In a laboratory setting, the partici-
pants of the study evaluated a number of foods and sensations with a generalized
liking scale; after leaving the laboratory, they filled out an online personality survey,
which included Arnett’s Inventory of Sensation Seeking and the Sensitivity to
Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire. One of the main findings of
the study was that differential effects of the personality traits were seen in women
versus men. In women, sensation seeking was more strongly associated with liking
and intake of spicy foods, while in men, sensitivity to reward was more strongly
associated with liking and consumption of spicy foods. These differences suggest
that when comparing women and men, there may be dissimilar mechanisms leading
to the intake of spicy foods; specifically, women may respond more to intrinsic fac-
tors, while men may respond more to extrinsic factors (Byrnes & Hayes, 2015).
3.9.4 Temporal Quality of Chemesthetic Sensation
Chemesthetic sensations do possess a temporal quality in that they generally take

longer to develop and decay compared to tastes and smells (Lawless, 1984). This
time lag may be explained by physiology; most mucosal pain receptors lie within or
beneath the epithelium rather than in direct contact with the oral environment.
Another component of chemesthesis is desensitization, in which sensitivity is
diminished following exposure to sufficiently high concentrations of an irritant.
Desensitization occurs primarily after stimulation has stopped (Green, 1993) and
can last for a day or more (Karrer & Bartoshuk, 1995). Research has also shown that
given high enough concentrations at frequent consumption, recovery fails to be
complete and chronic desensitization sets in (Green, 1996).
Until recently, chemesthesis was regarded as a unidimensional warning system
that signaled only the presence and strength of chemical irritants (Silver, 1987).
However, human perceptual studies have provided evidence that chemesthesis adds
to the enjoyment of a particular food or beverage by contributing distinctive
qualities.
The trigeminal response to mild irritants, such as carbonation, mouth-burn as
caused by high concentrations of sucrose or salt, as well as the heat of snacks, may
contribute to rather than detract from product acceptance. For example, pepper is
often used as an ingredient because of its combination of sweet taste and slight
irritant action, which is heightened if the pepper gets into the nose. The combined
coolness and sting of peppermint, the tartness of citric acid, and the burn of cinna-
mon all may contribute to product acceptance (Green, 1996).
3.9.5 Chemesthesis in the Sensory Evaluation

of Dairy Products
Spicy dairy products are a growing trend in the dairy industry; therefore, conducting
sensory evaluation on this type of products has become very relevant. Schlossareck
and Ross (2019) investigated the consumer’s and the electronic tongue (instrumen-
tal/analytical technique) ability to discriminate among paneer cheese samples con-
taining different levels of capsaicin (1.875, 3.75, 7.5, 15, and 30 ppm). Over a period
of 2 days, consumers (n = 110) evaluated the paneer samples. The difference from
control test was used to conduct this evaluation. Consumers were able to distinguish
the spicy paneer sample from the control (0 ppm) at 3.75, 7.5, 15, and 30 ppm
(P < 0.05). The authors reported differences were found among sample 3.75, 7.5,
and 15 ppm (P < 0.05). However, no significant differences were found at the lowest
(between control and 1.875 ppm) and highest capsaicin levels (between samples 15
and 30 ppm) suggesting that a minimum concentration between 1.875 and 3.75 ppm
capsaicin may be required to result in consumers identifying the spiciness.
In a follow-up study, Schlossareck and Ross (2020) evaluated aftertaste intensity

and liking of spicy paneer cheese (0, 3.75, 7.5, and 30 ppm capsaicin) by consumers
(n = 79) for 15 min, at 1 min intervals. The authors also explored the influences of
consumer consumption patterns on spicy aftertaste. They observed significant dif-
ferences (P < 0.05) across aftertaste time periods (beginning, middle, and end) and
within consumer consumption categories. Overall, the more capsaicin content in a
sample of spicy paneer, the longer the sensation lasted, with a more intense spicy
and overall aftertaste. Some of the main results in the study showed consumers in
different categorization groups rated intensity of the samples differently and
reported liking the highest capsaicin paneer sample (30 ppm) differently.
Additionally, consumer’s spice level preference did not affect the time to abatement
of the intensity of the spicy aftertaste perceived by the consumers (Schlossareck &
Ross, 2020).
In the subsequent chapters of this book, detailed discussions of several categories
of dairy products, from liquid to solid, are included with descriptions of practical
techniques that have proved successful in the evaluation of dairy products’ quality
with respect to appearance and color, body and texture, and aroma and flavor.
Coupled with knowledge about the physiology of taste, odor, and mouthfeel (i.e.,
flavor) provided in this chapter, and a greater understanding of factors that influence
dairy products’ quality provided in subsequent chapters, dairy manufacturers, qual-
ity assurance personnel, and consulting scientists will be better equipped to reliably
provide high-quality products to consumers.
References
Alvarez, V. B. (2016). Sensory evaluation of milk and milk products. In R. C. Chandan, A. Kilara,
& N. P. Shah (Eds.), Dairy processing and quality assurance (2nd ed., pp. 467–487). Wiley.
Amerine, M. A., Pangborn, R. M., & Roessler, E. B. (1965). Principles of sensory evaluation of
food. Academic.
Amoore, J. E. (1970). Molecular basis of odor. Charles C. Thomas Publishing Company.
Amoore, J. E., & Forrester, L. J. (1976). The specific anosmia to trimethylamine: The fishy primary
odor. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 2, 49–56.
Amoore, J. E., Palmieri, G., & Wanke, E. (1967). Molecular shape and odor: Pattern analysis by
PAPA. Nature, 216, 1084–1087.
Amoore, J. E., Venstrom, D., & Davis, A. R. (1968). Enkephalin and substance P effects related to
trigeminal pain. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 26, 143–164.
Bartoshuk, L., Conner, E., & Grubin, D. (1993a). PROP supertasters and the perception of ethyl
alcohol. Chemical Senses, 18, 526–531.
Bartoshuk, L. M., Duffy, V. B., & Miller, I. J. (1993b). PROP tasting – Anatomy, psychophysics
and sex effects. Physiology & Behavior, 56, 1165–1171.
Bartoshuk, L. M., Duffy, V. B., Lucchina, L. A., Prutkin, J., & Fast, K. (1998). PROP supertasters
and the saltiness of NaCl. In C. Murphy (Ed.), Olfaction and taste XII. An international sym-
posium (pp. 793–796). Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
Belitz, H. D., Grosch, W., & Schieberle, P. (2009). Food chemistry (4th ed.). Springer.
Berodier, F., Lavanchy, P., Zannoni, M., Casals, J., Herrero, L., & Adamo, C. (1997). A guide to
the sensory evaluation of smell, aroma and taste of hard and semi-hard cheeses. LWT – Food
Science and Technology, 30, 653–664.
Besnard, P., Passilly-Degrace, P., & Khan, N. (2016). Taste of fat: A sixth taste modality?
Physiological Reviews, 96, 151–176.
Best, C. H., & Taylor, M. B. (1943). The physiological basis of medical practice. Williams and
Wilkins Cp.
Bi, J., & Ennis, D. M. (1998). Sensory thresholds: Concepts and methods. Journal of Sensory
Studies, 13, 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.1998.tb00079.x
Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J., & Trout, G. M. (1988). The sensory evaluation of dairy products. Van
Nostrand Reinhold.
Brann, D. H., Tsukahara, T., Weinreb, C., Lipovsek, M., Van den Berge, K., Gong, B., ... & Datta,
S. R. (2020). Non-neuronal expression of SARS-CoV-2 entry genes in the olfactory system
suggests mechanisms underlying COVID-19-associated anosmia. Science Advances, 6(31),
eabc5801.
Brown, E. L., & Deffenbacher, K. (1979). Perception and the senses. Oxford University Press.
Buck, L., & Axel, R. (1991). A novel multigene family may encode odorant receptors: A molecular
basis for odor recognition. Cell, 65, 175–187.
Bushdid, C., Magnasco, M. O., Vosshall, L. B., & Keller, A. (2014). Humans can discriminate
more than 1 trillion olfactory stimuli. Science, 343, 1370–1372.
Byrnes, N. K., & Hayes, J. E. (2015). Gender differences in the influence of personality traits on
spicy food liking and intake. Food Quality and Preference, 42, 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodqual.2015.01.002
Cardello, A. V., & Segars, R. A. (1989). Effects of sample size and prior mastication on texture
judgments. Journal of Sensory Studies, 4, 1–18.
Carpenter, G. (2012). Role of saliva in the oral processing of food. In J. Chen & L. Engelen (Eds.),
Food Oral processing fundamentals of eating and sensory perception (pp. 45–60). Blackwell
Publishing.
Caul, J. F. (1957). The profile method of flavor analysis. Advances in Food Research, 7, 1.
Chen, J., & Rosenthal, A. (2015). Food texture and structure. In Modifying food texture (pp. 3–24).
Woodhead Publishing.
Cooper, K. W., Brann, D. H., Farruggia, M. C., Bhutani, S., Pellegrino, R., Tsukahara, T., Weinreb,
C., Joseph, P. V., Larson, E. D., Parma, V., Albers, M. W., Barlow, L. A., Datta, S. R., & Di
Pizio, A. (2020). COVID-19 and the chemical senses: Supporting players take Center stage.
Neuron, 107(2), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2020.06.032
Czerny, M., Brueckner, R., Kirchhoff, E., Schmitt, R., & Buettner, A. (2011). The influence of
molecular structure on odor qualities and odor detection thresholds of volatile alkylated phe-
nols. Chemical Senses, 36(6), 539–553. https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/bjr009
DeVries, H., & Stuvier, M. (1961). The absolute sensitivity of the human sense of smell. In
W. A. Rosenblith (Ed.), Sensory communication (pp. 159–167). Wiley.
Doty, R. L. (1991). Psychological measurement of odor perception in humans. In D. G. Laing,
R. L. Doty, & W. Breipohl (Eds.), The human sense of smell (pp. 95–143). Springer.
Drake, M. A. (2007). Invited review: Sensory analysis of dairy foods. Journal of Dairy Science,
90(11), 4925–4937. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0332
Drake, M., Yates, M., & Gerard, P. (2005). Impact of serving temperature on trained panel percep-
tion of cheddar cheese flavor attributes. Journal of Sensory Studies, 20, 147–155. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.2005.00013.x
Drayna, D., Coon, H., Kim, U. K., Elsner, T., & Cromser, K. (2003). Genetic analysis of a complex
trait in Utah Genetic Reference Project: A major locus for PTC taste ability on chromosome 7q
and a secondary locus on chromosome 16p. Human Genetics, 112, 567–572.
Drewnowski, A., Henderson, S., Shore, A., & Barratt-Fornell, A. (1998). Sensory responses to
6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) or sucrose solutions and food preferences in young women.
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 797–801.
Dudel, J. (1981). General sensory physiology, psychophysics. In R. F. Schmidt (Ed.), Fundamentals

of sensory physiology (pp. 1–30). Springer.
Duffy, V., Miller, I. J., & Bartoshuk, L. M. (1994). 6-n-propylthiouracil (PROP) supertasters and
women have greater number of fungiform papillae taste buds. Chemical Senses, 19, 465.
Dutta Banik, D., Benfey, E. D., Martin, L. E., Kay, K. E., Loney, G. C., Nelson, A. R., Ahart, Z. C.,
Kemp, B. T., Kemp, B. R., Torregrossa, A. M., & Medler, K. F. (2020). A subset of broadly
responsive type III taste cells contribute to the detection of bitter, sweet and umami stimuli.
PLoS Genetics, 16(8), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1008925
Engen, T. (1982). The perception of odors. Academic.
Green, B. G. (1993). Evidence that removal of capsaicin accelerates desensitization on the tongue.
Neuroscience Letters, 150, 44–48.
Green, B. G. (1996). Chemesthesis: Pungency as a component of flavor. Trends in Food Science
and Technology, 7, 415–420.
Hannum, M. E., Ramirez, V. A., Lipson, S. J., Herriman, R. D., Toskala, A. K., Lin, C., Joseph,
P. V., & Reed, D. R. (2020). Objective sensory testing methods reveal a higher prevalence
of olfactory loss in COVID-19 positive patients compared to subjective methods: A system-
atic review and meta-analysis. MedRxiv: The Preprint Server for Health Sciences. https://doi.
org/10.1101/2020.07.04.20145870
Harper, R. (1972). Human senses in action. Churchill Livingston.
Hartley, I. E., Liem, D. G., & Keast, R. (2019). Umami as an ‘Alimentary’ taste. A new perspective
on taste classification. Nutrients, 11(1), 182. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11010182
Hyde, R. J., & Witherly, S. A. (1993). Dynamic contract: A sensory contribution to palatability.
Appetite, 21, 1–16.
Jones, D. T., & Reed, R. (1989). Golf: An olfactory neuron-specific G-protein involved in odorant
sensory transduction. Science, 244, 790–795.
Jowitt, R. (1974). The terminology of food texture. Journal of Texture Studies, 5, 351–358.
Kaprio, J., Koskenvuo, M., Langinvainio, H., Romanov, K., Sarna, S., & Rose, R. (1987). Genetics
influences on use and abuse of alcohol: A study of 5638 adult Finnish twin brothers. Alcoholism:
Clinical and Experimental Research, 11, 349–356.
Karrer, T., & Bartoshuk, L. (1995). Effects of capsaicin desensitization on taste in humans.
Physiology and Behavior, 57, 421–429.
Keast, R. S., & Costanzo, A. (2015). Is fat the sixth taste primary? Evidence and implications.
Flavour, 4(1), 1–7.
Keller, A., & Vosshall, L. B. (2016). Olfactory perception of chemically diverse molecules. BMC
Neuroscience, 17(1), 55. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12868-016-0287-2
Laing, D. G. (1983). Natural sniffing gives optimal odor perception for humans. Perception,
12, 99–104.
Landis, B. N., Frasnelli, J., Reden, J., Lacroix, J. S., & Hummel, T. (2005). Differences between
orthonasal and retronasal olfactory functions in patients with loss of the sense of smell. Archives
of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, 131(11), 977–981.
Lawless, H. T. (1984). Oral chemical irritation: Psychological properties. Chemical Senses,
9, 72–78.
Lawless, H. (1991). The sense of smell in food quality and sensory evaluation. Journal of Food
Quality, 14, 33–60.
Lawless, H. T., & Heymann, H. (2010). Sensory evaluation of food: Principles and practices (2nd
ed.). Springer.
Lawless, H. T., Antinone, M. J., Ledford, R. A. & Johnston, M. (1994). Olfactory responsiveness
to diacetyl. Journal of Sensory Studies, 9(1), 47–56.
MacDougall, D. B. (1984). Colour vision and appearance measurement. Sensory analysis of
foods/edited by JR Piggott.
Mainland, J. D., Lundström, J., Reisert, J., & Lowe, G. (2014). From molecule to mind: An inte-
grative perspective on odor intensity. Trends in Neurosciences, 37, 443–454.
Malnic, B., Hirono, J., Sato, T., & Buck, L. B. (1999). Combinatorial receptor codes for odors.
Cell, 96, 713–723.
McDougall, D. B. (1983). Assessment of the appearance of food. In A. A. Williams & R. K. Atkin
(Eds.), Sensory quality in foods and beverages: Its definition, measurement and control. Ellis
Horwood/Verlag Chemie.
Meilgaard, M. C. (1975). Flavor chemistry of beer. II. Flavor and threshold of 239 aroma volatiles.
Technical Quarterly Master Brewers Association of Americas, 12, 151–168.
Meilgaard, M., Civille, G., & Carr, B. (1999). Sensory evaluation techniques (3rd ed.). CRC Press.
Meilgaard, M., Civille, G., & Carr, B. (2007). Sensory evaluation techniques (4th ed.). CRC Press.
Mojet, J., Christ-Hazelhof, E., & Heidema, J. (2001). Taste perception with age: Generic or spe-
cific losses in threshold sensitivity to the five basic tastes? Chemical Senses, 26, 845–860.
Møller, P. (2014). Orosensory perception. In D. Bar-Shalom & K. Rose (Eds.), Pediatric formula-
tions: A roadmap (pp. 105–121). Springer.
Moncrieff, R. W. (1967). The chemical senses. Chemical Rubber Company Press.
Murphy, C. (1986). Taste and smell in the elderly. In H. L. Meiselmann & R. S. Rivlin (Eds.),
Clinical measurements of taste and smell (pp. 343–371). Macmillan.
Nature Education. (2014). GPCR. https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/gpcr-14047471/
Noble, A. C., Arnold, R. A., Buechsenstein, J., Leach, E. J., Schmidt, J. O., & Stern, P. M. (1987).
Modification of a standardized system of wine aroma terminology. American Journal of
Enology and Viticulture, 38, 143–146.
Piggott, J. R. (1984). Sensory analysis of foods. Elsevier Science Publishing Company.
Porubcan, A., & Vickers, Z. (2005). Characterizing milk aftertaste: The effects of salivation rate,
PROP taster status, or small changes in acidity, fat or sucrose on acceptability of milk to milk
dis-likers. Food Quality and Preference, 16, 608–620.
Poste, L. M., Mackie, D., Butler, G., & Larmond, E. (1991). Laboratory methods for sensory
analysis of food (pp. 9–13). Agriculture Canada Publication.
Prescott, J., & Stevenson, R. (1995). Effects of oral chemical irritation on tastes and flavors in
frequent and infrequent users of chili. Physiology and Behavior, 58, 1117–1127.
Purves, D., Augustine, G. J., Fitzpatrick, D., Hall, W. C., LaMantia, A. S., Mooney, R. D., Platt,
M. L., & White, L. E. (Eds.). (2018). Neuroscience (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Reiserta, J., & Reingruber, J. (2019). Ca2+−activated Cl− current ensures robust and reliable signal
amplification in vertebrate olfactory receptor neurons. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(3), 1053–1058. https://doi.org/10.1073/
pnas.1816371116
Richardson, N. J., & Booth, D. A. (1993). Multiple physical patterns in judgments of the creamy
texture of milks and creams. Acta Psychologica, 84, 92–101.
Rolls, B. A., & Drewnowski, A. (1996). Diet and nutrition. In J. E. Birren (Ed.), Encyclopedia of
gerontology (pp. 429–440). Academic.
Schiffman, H. R. (1996). Sensation and perception. In An integrated approach (4th ed.). Wiley.
Schiffman, S. S. (2007). Smell and taste. In J. E. Birren (Ed.), Encyclopedia of gerontology (2nd
ed., pp. 515–525). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-12-370870-2/00173-6
Schlossareck, C., & Ross, C. F. (2019). Electronic tongue and consumer sensory evalu-
ation of spicy paneer cheese. Journal of Food Science, 84, 1563–1569. https://doi.
org/10.1111/1750-3841.14604
Schlossareck, C., & Ross, C. F. (2020). Consumer sensory evaluation of aftertaste intensity and
liking of spicy paneer cheese. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 55,
2710–2718. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.14524
Schmidt, R. F. (1981). Somatovisceral sensibility. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Fundamentals of sensory
physiology (pp. 81–125). Springer.
Seymour, S. K., & Hamann, D. D. (1988). Crispness and crunchiness of selected low moisture
foods. Journal of Texture Studies, 19, 79–95.
Silver, W. L. (1987). The common chemical sense. In T. E. Finger & W. L. Silver (Eds.),
Neurobiology of taste and smell (pp. 65–87). Wiley.
Small, D. M., & Green, B. G. (2012). A proposed model of a flavor modality. In M. M. Murray &
M. T. Wallace (Eds.), The neural bases of multisensory processes (pp. 717–738). CRC Press/
Taylor & Francis.
Spence, C. (2015). Just how much of what we taste derives from the sense of smell? Flavour,
4(1), 1–10.
Stevens, D. A., Smith, R., & Lawless, H. T. (2006). Multidimensional scaling of ferrous sulfate and
basic tastes. Physiology and Behavior, 87, 272–279.
Szczesniak, A. S. (1963). Classification of textural characteristics. Journal of Food Science, 28,
385–389.
Szczesniak, A. S. (1979, October). Recent development in solving consumer-oriented texture
problems. Journal of Food Technology, 61–66.
Szczesniak, A. S. (1991). Textural perceptions and food quality. Journal of Food Quality, 14, 75–85.
Taylor, A. J. (2002). Release and transport of flavors in vivo: Physicochemical, physiological and
perceptual considerations. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 1, 45–57.
Töle, J. C., Behrens, M., & Meyerhof, W. (2019). Taste receptor function. In R. L. Doty (Ed.),
Handbook of clinical neurology (Vol. 164, pp. 173–185). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-
63855-7.00011-3
Tyle, P. (1993). Effect of size, shape and hardness of particles in suspension on oral texture and
palatability. Acta Psychologica, 84, 111–118.
Vickers, Z. M. (1985). The relationship of pitch, loudness and eating technique to judgments of the
crispness and crunchiness of foods sounds. Journal of Texture Studies, 15, 85–95.
Vera-Díaz, F. A., & Doble, N. (2012). The human eye and adaptive optics (pp. 119–150). Riejeka,
Croatia: InTech.
Wilkinson, C., Dijksterhuis, G. B., & Minekus, M. (2000). From food structure to texture. Trends
in Food Science and Technology, 11, 442–450.
Witt, W., & Reutter, K. (2015). Anatomy of the tongue and taste buds. In R. L. Doty (Ed.),
Handbook of olfaction and gustation (pp. 637–664). Wiley.
Wright, R. H. (1954). Odour and molecular vibration. I. Quantum and thermodynamic consider-
ations. Journal of Applied Chemistry, 4, 611–615.
Yamaguchi, S., & Ninomiya, K. (2000). Umami and food palatability. The Journal of Nutrition,
130, 921S–926S.
Chapter 4
Dairy Products Evaluation Competitions
Stephanie Clark
4.1 Introduction
Scorecard judging is a useful and practical tool for conducting the sensory evalua-
tion of dairy products. Scorecards contain standard terminology, which is associated
with established sensory descriptors that are described in subsequent chapters of
this book. Scorecards have serves as recording instruments for various county, state,
regional, and national dairy product evaluation competitions. Completed scorecards
may serve as records for processing plants, for routine and/or official grading of
dairy products, and for commercial dairy processors to receive feedback on prod-
ucts entered in contests.
A scorecard is best defined as a tabulated list of the factors that contribute to, or
describe, the quality of a product, with a numerical value assigned to each factor.
The factors are generally arranged on a scorecard in alphabetical order and often-
times are categorized. For instance, the flavor attributes are commonly grouped; an
alphabetized list of body and texture attributes is typically grouped; appearance and
color attributes are also grouped, with or without consideration of packaging.
Obviously, a scorecard for one product (e.g., milk) reads quite differently from a
scorecard for another product (e.g., yogurt) due to the inherent properties and differ-
ences in the various products. A so-called ideal product is designated as a “perfect”
score, which may be scored as “100,” or “10” or another preset number. For instance,
the “ideal” flavor scores on Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest score-
cards are based on a score of “10”; body and texture and appearance and color
scores are based on an ideal of “5.” In contrast, in the American Cheese Society
Judging and Competition, a perfect score includes the combination of an “aesthetic
judge” score of 50 and a “technical judge” score of 50, for a total of 100.
S. Clark (*)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_4
54 S. Clark
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Bureau of Dairy Industry
ScoreCard for Milk and Cream
(Approved by the American Dairy Science Association)
Place _______
Class _______ Exhibit no. _______
Perfect score Score allowed Remarks

Bacteria 45 Bacteria found per cubic
centimeter
Flavor and odor 25 Cowy, bitter, feed, flat, strong,

cooked
Sediment 10
Temperature 15 Degrees or percent

(street samples)
or acidicity
(prepared
samples)
Bottle and cap 5 Bottle
Cap
Total 100
Exhibitor _______
Address _______
Signed _______
Date _______
Fig. 4.1 A reproduction of the US Department of Agriculture Scorecard for Milk and Cream.
(Clark & Costello, 2009)
Deviations in quality from the ideal result in demarcations on the scorecard and
demerits in the total score. In some instances, these scorecards may include data
from instrumental, microbiological, and/or sensory analytical techniques (Fig. 4.1).
Additionally, more detailed scorecards may be used to evaluate dairy plant process-
ing and sanitation practices or to more objectively determine product quality and/or
shelf life. Although scorecards that include such data can comprehensively present
or represent the relative quality of products, product compositional analysis proto-
cols do not lend themselves to completion within a singular time period. Thus,
“abridged” or student scorecards, which only include sensory analysis assessments,
can provide meaningful sensory quality data in a single seating (Nelson &
Trout, 1951).
There are two main types of dairy product evaluation competitions: (1) those that
reward dairy manufacturers for outstanding dairy processing and (2) those that
reward student judges for their accurate sensory evaluation of dairy products, as
compared to an expert judging panel. This chapter is devoted to describing various
US Cheese Competitions (the former) and Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation
4 Dairy Products Evaluation Competitions 55
Contests (the latter). This chapter is not an exhaustive summary of all the various
dairy product contests and sensory evaluations that take place in the USA and the
world each year. Readers should gain a greater understanding and an appreciation
for what preparation, knowledge, and application of developed skills goes into the
training, organizing, and competing successfully in dairy products evaluation com-
petitions, as well as what steps are involved in conducting a dairy products judging
or competition.
4.2 Dairy Products Grading and Scorecard Evaluation
The official grading of dairy products did not commence until the latter part of the
nineteenth century. Establishment of product grades (with their attendant score-
cards), as well as standards for respective dairy products, paralleled quite closely
the technical growth of the dairy industry and development of dairy product mar-
kets. Because consumers rely so heavily on sensory perceptions when purchasing
products, evaluation and grading of dairy products is important if processors intend
to satisfy consumer desires. As early as the 1920s, Kelly and others (1929) touted
the benefits of milk and cream contests by stating, “The dairyman who furnishes a
product of high quality is rewarded by recognition of his service, and the dairyman
of less careful habits is spurred to greater endeavor. In extreme cases those who
insist on producing an inferior product are eliminated, for consumers are more dis-
criminating when they become better informed about milk qualities.”
The scorecard used in the early twentieth century, developed by the US
Department of Agriculture (USDA) and approved by the American Dairy Science
Association (ADSA), included consideration of bacteria, flavor and odor, sediment,
temperature, acidity, and the appearance of the bottle and cap or closure. A perfect
score was assigned 100. A reproduction of this scorecard, minus the scoring direc-
tions, is included in Fig. 4.1. Today, industry compliance with Grade “A” standards,
defined in the USPHS/FDA Grade “A” Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (USFDA,
2019), essentially eliminates the need for scorecard evaluation of bacteria, sedi-
ment, temperature, and acidity. Milk quality evaluation focuses on flavor attributes.
Examples of contemporary scorecards that are used to evaluate dairy products and
the attributes associated with those products are included in Chaps. 5, 6, 7, 8,
9 and 10.
The beginning of the twentieth century marked the establishment of brands and
trade names for dairy products, particularly butter and cheese. This development
necessitated a set of quality standards recognized by manufacturers, and the subse-
quent need for the grading of finished products by experienced, competent, and
consistent judges. Officially assigned USDA product grades, attached to many pri-
vate labels, enjoy prominent significance when seen on butter, cheese, and nonfat
dry milk.
While dairy products can be analyzed for chemical composition, microorgan-
isms, vitamin content, enzymatic activity, color, physical properties, etc., these
56 S. Clark
determinations do not measure the true or actual eating quality or sensory percep-
tions realized by consumers. Establishing the so-called eating quality of a dairy
product requires the application and “correct” interpretation of such sensations as
mouthfeel, taste, and aroma. The alert consumer experiences components of flavor
(taste, aroma, and mouthfeel) when the product is taken into the mouth. While two
samples of butter may have identical basic chemical composition, color, firmness,
and spreadability, one sample may be highly relished by consumers, while the other
product may leave a poor impression due to characteristics of flavor not observable
by routine chemical tests. Thus, grading and scorecard judging have a critical role
in the dairy industry. Although the essential parameters that constitute the eating
quality of dairy products cannot be easily measured chemically or physically, they
can be determined using sensory evaluation techniques, such as those used by com-
petent judges or trained panelists (Bodyfelt, 1981; Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
Milk producers, who are partners with dairy product manufacturers in establish-
ing a demand for uniform-quality dairy products, recognize that dairy products can-
not be of higher quality than the raw material from which they are made (Bodyfelt,
1980, 1983; Bodyfelt et al., 1988). Without definite knowledge as to what consti-
tutes desirable appearance, flavor, body, and texture attributes in finished products,
the successful production of high-quality raw material can be challenging.
Knowledge about origins of certain off-flavors and various desirable flavors plus
specific methods to minimize or eliminate objectionable off-flavors should enable
the production of milk (Gamroth & Bodyfelt, 1980) and milk products suitable for
inclusion in high-quality finished products, which should ultimately influence dairy
product sales. The increased sales of dairy products depend upon the production and
distribution of high-quality foods that impart a delicate and balanced, pleasant fla-
vor sensation to consumers’ palates.
The contests described in this chapter all have one goal in common: to promote
excellence in dairy manufacturing. The scorecards used in the Collegiate Dairy
Products Evaluation Contest have been developed and fine-tuned by hundreds of
academic and industry experts over a period of 100 years. Although designed for six
different dairy products (detailed in Chaps. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10), the commonality
among the scorecards is their ability to communicate deviation from a standard or
ideal product concept. Students properly trained for the Collegiate Dairy Products
Evaluation Contest gain skills to enter the dairy industry while possessing the tools
not only to evaluate product quality but also to remedy deviations from standard
quality parameters.
It is important to stress that scorecard judging involves assessment compared to
a standard or ideal product concept. A product sample that is assigned the highest
score in the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest cannot be guaranteed to
attain the greatest sales in the market. For instance, light-oxidized milk has become
quite common in the marketplace because of the convenience, product visibility,
and cost savings of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) milk containers. Most of the
clear or transparent plastic milk containers used in the marketplace (with the excep-
tion of H. P. Hood’s LightBlock® and some other examples of light-protective con-
tainers) permit transmission of ultraviolet light through the packaging material, thus
initiating both light oxidation and vitamin degradation. Light contributes to partial
loss of vitamins A, riboflavin (B2), C, D, and some amino acids (Bradley Jr. 1980;
Bradley et al., 2006). With the passage of time, a majority of US consumers have
thus become accustomed to this particular milk flavor, and they do not generally
consider this as a flavor defect. Compared to an assigned score of “10” for ideal
milk, a declared light-oxidized milk receives a score of “6” or lower in the Collegiate
Dairy Products Evaluation Contest. Nonetheless, more US consumers drink pack-
aged milk from translucent HDPE containers (that presumably have some degree of
light oxidation) than any other packaged form of milk in the marketplace.
Surprisingly and unfortunately, some cheese judges, upon the mere detection of
a sulfide note in a medium-aged Cheddar cheese, downgrade the sample, since it
tends to possibly deviate from the expected mild nutty character. However, many
consumers would actually select a sulfide-containing cheese over another cheese
devoid of such character. This is where a “balance of reason” needs to occur; once
a given Cheddar cheese achieves a certain point of maturity (e.g., aging), it is gener-
ally expected to exhibit some degree of “flavor complexity,” compared to a mild
cheese. Medium-aged Cheddar’s expected flavor intensity typically includes flavor
notes such as nutty-like, modest acidity, diacetyl and other carbonyls, and hopefully
a hint or more of a sulfur-like aroma in the end.
The American Cheese Society Judging and Competition and other dairy product
contests combine technical and aesthetic judging to determine award-winning prod-
ucts. As will be described later, technical judges subtract points for defects, while
aesthetic judges add points for features that may help sell the product. While score-
card judging in the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest involves only the
use of numerical scores, the evaluation forms used in other dairy product competi-
tions contain spaces for feedback in addition to numerical scores. The American
Cheese Society Judging and Competition and other dairy product contests are
designed to recognize excellence and encourage processors to improve.
Ultimately, consumers are the judges, not necessarily of dairy product quality,
but of what they like, and they make their final judgment when they exchange
money for a product. Nevertheless, recognition of superior quality from some con-
tests is sometimes noted on the product label or other promotional material and may
permit the manufacturer to eventually achieve a higher price for a product. On the
other hand, some state- and regional-based contests prohibit the use of any contest
or product evaluation “results” or “winnings” within any form of packaging, promo-
tions, advertising of any form (e.g., the Oregon Dairy Industries Association).
4.3 The Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contests
In 1916, the first National Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest was held in
Springfield, MA. That year, butter was the only product evaluated because of its
commercial importance at that time. Milk and Cheddar cheese were added to the
58 S. Clark
1917 competition, and vanilla ice cream, cottage cheese, and strawberry yogurt
gained inclusion in 1926, 1962, and 1977, respectively.
Since 1916, over 95 Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contests have been
held throughout the USA and Canada (contests were not held in 1918, during WWII,
1942–1946, or 2020–2021). Although the number of team competitors is limited by
official rules, many schools train more students than can officially participate in the
competition each year. Thus, while over 3000 students have participated since the
inception of the contest, many times that number have undertaken and received this
valuable dairy product evaluation training. The record year for greatest college par-
ticipation in the contest was in 1956, when 33 colleges and universities entered
student teams. During the nearly 100 national contests conducted, over 65 different
schools have participated (Table 4.1), with an average of 18 schools per contest. In
Table 4.1 Teams that have participated in the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest,
between 1916 and 2022
Aims Community College Iowa State U. Oregon State U.
Alabama A & M U. Kansas State U. Pennsylvania State U.
U. of Alberta (Canada) U. of Kentucky Purdue U.
Alfred U. Laval (Canada) Quebec (Canada)
U. of Arizona Louisiana State U. U. of Rhode Island
U. of Arkansas U. of Manitoba (Canada) Rutgers U.
Auburn U. U. of Maryland San Francisco Univ. at Quito
(Ecuador)
Brigham Young U. U. of Massachusetts South Dakota State U.
U. of California (Davis) Michigan State U. Southern Illinois U.
U. of California (Fresno) Middle Tennessee State U. U. of Tennessee (Knoxville)
California Polytechnic U. of Minnesota Tennessee State U.
State U.
Clemson U. U. of Missouri Texas A & M U.
College of the Sequoias Modesto Junior College Tuskegee U.
Colorado State U. Moraine Park Tech. Institute Utah State U.
U. of Connecticut Nanjing U. (China) U. of Vermont
Cornell U. U. of Nebraska Virginia Tech
U. of Delaware U. of New Hampshire Virginia State U.
U. of Florida U. of New Mexico Washington State U.
Florida State U. North Carolina State U. U. of West Virginia
The French National Dairy North Carolina Agri. & Tech. U. of Wisconsin (River Falls)
College (France) State U.
U. of Georgia Northwest Missouri State U. U. of Wisconsin (Madison)
U. of Guelph (Canada) The Ohio State U. U. of Wyoming
U. of Idaho Oklahoma State U.
U. of Illinois U. of Orange Free State (South
Africa)
addition to the cooperation of college and university faculty and students, 125–150
dairy industry companies participate in and support the contest each year by donat-
ing, transporting, and storing dairy product samples; providing employees as offi-
cial contest judges, proctors, and scorers; and donating the required supplies and
space. This contest requires a great deal of planning, organizing, coordination, staff-
ing, appropriate facilities, and product samples preparation.
Throughout the years, some regions of the country have held and conducted
regional (eastern, western, southern, and midwestern) contests prior to the National
Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest. Of these regional contests, only the
Midwest Regional Contest survives. The Midwest Regional Collegiate Dairy
Products Evaluation Contest is typically held 1 or 2 weeks before the national
contest.
For decades, the National Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest took
place in the fall. Since 2017, the contest has been held in the spring, alternating
between Milwaukee and Madison, WI. College students judge the quality of dairy
products in six product categories: butter, Cheddar cheese, cottage cheese, vanilla
ice cream, milk, and strawberry Swiss-style yogurt. Originally raw whole milk was
evaluated, then pasteurized whole milk, and now 2% fat pasteurized milk is evalu-
ated, based upon its dominance in the marketplace. For cottage cheese and yogurt,
the fat contents of the products have evolved from only their full-fat versions to
include a range of low, reduced, and full-fat versions in the contest. Yogurt also
allows with natural and/or high-intensity sweeteners, as well as Greek-style yogurt.
According to the official rules of the contest, “Any undergraduate student of a
land-grant, state or provincial agricultural college or a college of corresponding
rank who: (a) is regularly matriculated in a program leading to a Bachelor of Science
degree or its equivalent; (b) has never competed in the Collegiate Dairy Products
Evaluation Contest as a contestant or alternate; (c) has never acted as an official
judge of dairy products; and (d) has not taught the manufacturing of or the judging
of dairy and other food products, is eligible to compete in the contest.” Three stu-
dents from any one college or university constitute a team. Students from credit-
transferable 2-year agricultural colleges are also eligible, provided they meet the
criteria in (b), (c), and (d). One or two additional undergraduate or graduate students
from a school may compete if they meet the criteria, but compete for individual, not
team, awards. Additionally, on occasion, study-abroad students participating in col-
legiate dairy products judging training have been allowed to compete in the contest
representing their international institutions.
The first butter judging contest was sponsored by the National Dairy Association.
Between 1930 and 2005, the major sponsor of the Collegiate Dairy Products
Evaluation (CDPE) Contest was either the Dairy and Food Industry Suppliers
Association (DFISA) or the International Association of Food Industry Suppliers
(IAFIS) Foundation. Beginning in the 1980s, the IAFIS Foundation became the
only association to financially sponsor the contest teams, by providing a generous
stipend to each team to offset travel expenses for student competitors. Since the turn
of the twenty-first century, however, awards have been provided to top individuals
and top placing colleges and university teams, by numerous industry donors,
60 S. Clark
including but not limited to Agrana Fruit US, Inc.; Cheese Market News; Chr.
Hansen, Inc.; Dairy Foods; Danone Wave; Edlong; FairLife LLC; Idaho Milk
Products; Nelson Jameson; Pecan Deluxe; Tate & Lyle; United States Department
of Agriculture; Wisconsin Cheesemakers Association; and Wisconsin Dairy
Products Association.
In 2015, the CDPE Contest Board of Directors was established to conduct the
business of ensuring sustainability of the CDPE Contest. Formerly, governance was
regulated by a standing committee of the American Dairy Science Association. The
CDPE Contest Board of Directors guides “strategic development, [is] responsible
for the overall public image of the contests or events and strive[s] to enhance work-
ing relationships between educational institutions and dairy industries and industry
professionals.” The CDPE Contest Board of Directors is composed of no more than
15 members, who serve for 3-year terms and with a limit of two consecutive terms.
Members include four coaches, five judges, and four industry representatives. The
contest superintendent is an ex officio member. Financial management is overseen
by the National Dairy Shrine Executive Director.
The CDPE Contest Coaches Committee is responsible for the contest rules and
overall policy for conducting the contest. The Coaches Committee develops and
revises the official scorecards for the contest. The committee is also responsible for
any modifications to the scoring guides.
Prior to 2018, upon completion of each session of the contest, contestant score-
cards were turned over to the contest superintendent, who worked with industry
volunteers to enter the scorecard results into the official electronic reader. Specially
printed, “scanner-ready” scorecards were used, in which contestants filled in drawn
“bubbles” to indicate their assigned numerical scores and selection of flavor, body
and texture, and color/appearance characteristics per each product sample judged
per category. Each scorecard was scanned, and a computer using software written
specifically for the contest captured each contestant entry. Now, software has been
designed that enables tablet usage. The program effectively computes both indi-
vidual and team results according to the official contest rules and generates a rank-
ing of individuals and teams from the lowest composite score to the highest. A team
of contest officials carefully verifies scores and checks for potential ties and ascer-
tains that the scoring software has broken the possible ties according to the official
rules. Individual scores, along with team scores, are returned to each competing
team at the conclusion of the awards ceremony.
Since the early days of the contest, the USDA Agricultural Marketing
Service (AMS) has typically supplied the superintendent of the contest. The contest
superintendent is responsible for organizing the official judges, making arrange-
ments for on-site sample storage and distribution, maintaining current mailing lists
for officials and universities, and mailing the scoring guides and team forms to the
various possible participating schools, tabulating scorecards, and developing and
delivering results for the annual awards program.
The Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest is typically a 2- or 3-day com-
mitment. Day 1 generally involves travel to the contest site by teams and the Coaches
Committee meeting. Day 2 is the day of the contest and awards announcements.
Day 3 may include attending the WCMA Cheese Conference and/or travel home.
Contest sites have included the headquarters complex of large national or regional
dairy processors (Land-O-Lakes, Publix, Safeway, and H.E.B. Grocery) and dairy
convention or meeting sites ranging from Lakeland, FL, to San Francisco, CA, in
the USA, to Montreal (1975 and 1989) and Toronto (1998) in Canada. The contest
has been held in conjunction with the World Wide Food Expo (1979–2005) or the
Pack/Process Expo (2006) in Chicago, IL. Currently, the contest is held in conjunc-
tion with WCMA’s alternating between WCMA’s Milwaukee Cheese Expo (even
years) and WCMA’s Madison Cheese Con (odd years). The contests and student
teams are supported largely by the WCMA, the USDA AMS, and dozens of other
donor companies and individuals.
Team coaches must be aware of some important rules before even entering a
team into the national or a regional contest. Rules and entry forms are sent to institu-
tions at least 1 month prior to the contest, and entries are due to the contest superin-
tendent not later than 3 weeks before the contest. Eligible institutions may enter as
few as one student to as many as seven students. No more than seven students per
school are allowed to participate in the contest (i.e., a maximum of three under-
graduates, two graduates, and two alternates).
Coaches and students must be informed of the rules. For instance, contestants are
only allowed to take a cheese/butter trier and sheath, fanny pack, cup (if desired),
clipboard, and black lead # 2 pencils into the contest. Students are not allowed to
identify or reflect their respective school affiliations in any way, nor are they allowed
to carry bottled water or palate cleansers into the contest. Furthermore, contestants
are not allowed to use or apply strong aromatic perfume, cologne, shaving lotion,
etc., which could readily interfere with the sensory evaluation of the products.
Additionally, the use of cellular phones, paging, and/or internet devices, including
PDAs, is strictly prohibited.
The Coaches Committee meeting is held on the day before the contest, in order
to disseminate and discuss information related to the current-year contest proce-
dure. Additionally, future contest sites and potential changes to contest rules or
scorecards are discussed. The Coaches Committee meeting is attended by contest
officials, university team coaches, and official judges. Contest officials, board mem-
bers, contest superintendent, and proctors may also participate. Official and associ-
ate judges are selected by the contest superintendent from one or more commercial
dairy enterprises or other impartial (i.e., government) entities.
Head judges of each category contact potential donors for products to be evalu-
ated by student contestants. Products (at least eight different products for each of the
six categories) are donated by commercial dairy processors. The processors do not
receive awards for high scoring entries, as that is not the intention of the competi-
tion, and scores on products are not typically shared with the donors. Some lead
judges share official product scores with donors after they have been coded for pri-
vacy – the given donor would only ascertain their code to see how their product(s)
scored. Identities of other products remain secret. The products are stored under
appropriate refrigeration or frozen conditions at one or more dairy processing facili-
ties local to the contest site.
62 S. Clark
The Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest is a carefully coordinated

event. Official judges of the contest are established industry experts in the product
category. Some regional judges also participate in the national contest. However, it
is required that judges may not judge the same category in the regional and national
contests. All six products are evaluated by at least two, but generally three, judges
per product: a head judge and one to two judges. Official judges initially rate each
product set without input from coach judges and/or coach observers (described
later). Official judges typically evaluate 10–12 different products per category so
that the most representative or the most interesting may be selected for the contest.
The official judging occurs 1 day prior to the student contest.
On the day of the contest, “coach judges” and “coach observers” arrive early
(i.e., 6:45 or 7 am) at the contest site to review the official judges’ evaluations.
Coach judges and coach observers are university team coaches. Coach judges and
official judges evaluate the products along with the official judges, consult with one
another, and meet consensus about product attribute and scores on all eight product
samples entered into a given product category. The coach judges (typically ~3 for
each contest product) and coach observers (typically 1 for each contest product) are
invited to evaluate the set of products. If there is disagreement about either a product
attribute or score, the all products judge or contest superintendent is called to serve
as a referee. If the particular disagreement cannot be rectified, the lead official prod-
uct judge will then replace the sample(s) in question by another sample(s) for which
there is agreement. The additional responsibilities of the all products judge are to
examine all products set out for the contest, noting whether (a) the products selected
fairly represent the different sections of the country; (b) the set of samples constitute
a good, representative class for student judging; and (c) the products are appropri-
ately judged.
Official scorecards are filled out for each of the six product sets and signed by
official judges and coach judges. These six official scorecards are entered into the
computer system as the official scores against which all students’ product evalua-
tions are compared and scored (graded). While coach judges can be considered as
calibrators of the official judges, coach observers may be considered as apprentices.
Coach observers are individuals who may have little experience at the contest;
hence, they basically observe the “official scoring” process, in preparation for future
contests when they most likely will serve as coach judges.
Meanwhile, student teams meet in assembly with the contest superintendent;
contestants and alternates are assigned a contestant number and a group number, are
reminded of the contest rules, and are informed of any pertinent or limiting venue,
location, or site circumstances. The contestants are divided into six approximately
equal groups (since there are six contest products) and informed of the progression
of judging by assigned group. Contestants are given iPads, with unique identifiers,
to record judgments electronically.
At about 8:00 a.m., contestants are ushered into the contest arena, group by
group. Contestants are directed to be seated in chairs that are arranged in general
proximity to the tables that contain the contest products. Individual products per
category are arranged in sets of eight, within six distinct areas or regions in the
contest arena. Contestants are not allowed to commence judging until directed
to do so.
For contestants, there is no preset judging order, and the order of judging cannot
be predicted, since the product sample display tables and freezer cabinet(s) are set
up based upon convenience and/or efficiency, as the contest site may change annu-
ally. Ice cream cabinets must be near outlets, while temperature-sensitive yogurt,
milk, and cottage cheese are set up in close proximity to refrigerated units hidden
behind curtains or walls. Since butter and Cheddar cheese samples are not replen-
ished during the contest, these products can be placed at any non-utilized location
within the contest arena. Additionally, student contestants are randomly assigned to
groups and are allowed no preference for a starting (or ending) product.
Contestants are allowed 35 min for scoring each product category. Each contes-
tant criticizes, scores, and follows the marking instructions on the computer score-
card in the proper places. A 10-min notice or warning is given prior to the close of
each given scoring period. After completion of the judging of each product category,
students are directed to return to pre-arranged seats. Students are allotted 2 min to
check entries or fill in omitted scores. After the designated time interval has elapsed,
students are directed to rotate clockwise to the next product. A 5-min rest period is
allowed between the judging of each product. Strictly enforced is the rule that no
communication among any contestants is to occur during the contest or the 5-min
rest periods. The process continues as described until all six sets of eight samples
have been evaluated by all groups of contestants.
All products in each product category selected for evaluation in the competition
are labeled clearly with consecutive numbers (1–8). Any markings on the containers
that might indicate quality or brand identity are either removed or otherwise blocked
from view of contestants and observers.
In the case of milk, for each judging period, fresh 2% milk samples are set out at
a temperature of 10 °C (50 °F) at the time of scoring. A new set of milk samples is
used for each of the six rotating teams of contestants. Milk is evaluated only for
“flavor.”
The official ice cream lead judge assures that the ice cream is tempered properly
for dipping prior to the start of competition. The generally advised temperature
(optimum) range for sampling ice cream is −18 to −15 °C [0–5 °F] (Bodyfelt et al.,
1988), but it can be a logistical challenge to maintain this temperature throughout
the competition. A more practical, feasible, or likely upper limit for ice cream sam-
pling is <−13.3–12.2 °C (≤8–10 °F). In spite of the best efforts of the official judges,
precise temperature maintenance of the frozen samples within the aforementioned
ranges across the duration of the contest can be a struggle. The ice cream samples
must be scooped by individual contestants, who are expected to not leave the scoop
in the ice cream after sampling.
Butter and Cheddar cheese are generally provided as 40-pound blocks (Fig. 4.2).
Samples are tempered to 7.2–13.2 °C (45–55 °F) immediately preceding the con-
test. Butter is evaluated only for “flavor.” Butter blocks are sectioned off into 1/sixth
partitions to enable every set of students to evaluate the same product without open-
ing a new (and potentially different) block of butter. For each contestant group, a
64 S. Clark
Fig. 4.2 Student

contestants evaluate butter
quality in a Collegiate
Dairy Products Evaluation
Contest
Fig. 4.3 Extracted cheese plugs on display for student contestants in Collegiate Dairy Products
Evaluation Contest
fresh or “undisturbed” 1/sixth portion of the butter is revealed for contestant

evaluation.
Cheddar cheese is evaluated for “flavor” and “body and texture.” For observation
by students, a representative plug is drawn from each Cheddar cheese sample in the
contest and placed into a clean test tube, sealed, and securely taped in place beside
each corresponding cheese sample (Fig. 4.3). This display plug is used for grading
sample appearance and must not be disturbed or manipulated in any way during the
contest. For Cheddar cheese, the blocks are halved horizontally, and parchment
paper is placed between. The cheeses are partitioned so that contestants can only
draw plugs from one-quarter of the visible cheese surface area. For each contestant
group, a fresh quadrant of the Cheddar cheese is revealed for evaluation. Four sets
of contestants draw plugs from the upper half of the Cheddar cheese block prior to
the cheese being inverted to the other side (bottom four quadrants) for sampling by
the remaining groups.
Cottage cheese samples are of the small curd type. Samples for visual “appear-
ance” evaluation are carefully placed on platters with the aid of spoons, while sam-
ple portions for “body and texture” and “flavor” observations are placed in bowls.
The appearance samples are not to be handled by anyone during the contest. The
appearance samples need to be judged within the first 10 min, after which time the
plates are removed from the contest display area. A time warning is announced after
the elapse of the first 8 min. Official judges assure that the appearance display is
consistent among individual samples of a given sample number displayed across the
six time periods. By saving portions of such defects as matted curd, free cream, and/
or free whey for placement on observation plates, the official judges thus guarantee
fairness among the contestants by maintaining uniformity of “color and appear-
ance” displays.
The official judges of strawberry-flavored, Swiss-style yogurts provide three rep-
licates of each sample in their original commercial containers. Replicates #2 and #3
are covered with foil or a blank carton. Replicate #1 is inverted onto a plate for
observation (Fig. 4.4). The contestants are instructed not to disturb the display sam-
ple on the plate. These samples are to be judged in the first 10 min of the 35 min
Fig. 4.4 Student contestants are allowed 10 min to evaluate the appearance and color of eight
strawberry Swiss-style yogurt samples prior to removal of the cups and plates from the display
table. Cups with spoons in them remain for the entire 35 min period
66 S. Clark
judging period, after which they are removed from the contest area. A warning is
given after an 8 min elapse. Replicate #2 contains a spoon(s) for removal of samples
by the contestants. Samples for flavor and texture evaluation should be removed by
students without disturbing or contaminating the remainder of the cup. Replicate #3
is to be left undisturbed and is used to judge only for the attributes “free whey” and/
or “shrunken.” These samples must be judged within the first 10 min, after which
they are removed from the contest area. A time warning is given after the elapse
of 8 min.
Sometimes, simultaneously with the collegiate contest, coaches may participate
in a pre-arranged coaches clinic. These clinics enable coaches to focus on a specific
product (e.g., ice cream) and “recalibrate” their product-judging approaches for the
designated product. An expert judge (generally a lead judge) in a given product
category leads this flavor assessment session, explains definitions used within the
industry, and provides suggestions for training students to detect and identify par-
ticular attributes. Lively discussion and idea interchange are generally generated
because all coaches have unique insights into training and degrees of standardiza-
tion on descriptors, intensity, and scoring strategies.
With the use of tablets, scoring occurs simultaneously with the contest. A contes-
tant’s score for each sample is given a grade expressed by the difference between
his/her score, except as indicated below, and the official score. In essence, the com-
petitor’s objective is to earn zero points or no deviation from the official scorecard.
For example, if a contestant scores “flavor” as 7 and the judges’ score is 5, the
contestant receives a grade of 2 points. If, however, a contestant recognizes that the
sample scores perfect but fails to indicate that score on his/her scorecard, he/she
shall receive a grade equivalent to the maximum points cut for that sample. For
example, the normal range of score on “body and texture” of cottage cheese is 1–5,
so the maximum cut is 5 points. The contestant’s grade, therefore, shall be 5 when
she/he fails to indicate the numerical score for that given item. This particular rule
holds, regardless of the official score.
The grading of attributes assessment is independent of the grading of product
scores and is based on the contestant’s proficiency in recognizing the same quality
merits and defects of the various samples as noted by the official judges. Each attri-
bute indicated by the contestant will be involved in the grading. The contestant’s
grade on attributes for a single item is scored electronically. Details of the process
are beyond the scope of this chapter.
In this contest a “grade” means “points lost”; the contestant with the lowest grade
is declared the winner of the product evaluation. Each contestant’s grade on a given
sample is the sum of his/her grades on “score” and “attributes” of that sample. His/
her grade on a product accordingly is the sum of his/her grades on the eight samples
of that product. Student contestants are then ranked. A team grade for each product
is thus the sum of the ranks of its three respective members. The team with the low-
est sum of ranks is declared the winning team for the product evaluation. For exam-
ple, a team with team members ranking first, third, and 34th (sum 40) in butter will
Fig. 4.5 At the conclusion of the contest, official scores and explanations are placed near corre-
sponding entries (all 48 products)
place UNDER a team with team members ranking second, sixth, and 7th (sum 15)
because the sum is lower (stronger overall team).
Upon completion of the contest, product official judges display the official scores
and respective product criticisms (via a display card) for each of the eight samples
per product category in the contest (Fig. 4.5). All coaches and contestants are invited
to observe the official scores and product critical evaluations. The official judges
stand by at this time to help both the coaches and the contestants understand why
the particular decisions were made by the official judging team per each product
category and to help convey how to better recognize and score attributes.
At the closing of the event, an awards ceremony is held, where student contes-
tants and coaches are recognized for excellence in the sensory evaluation of dairy
products. Among the undergraduate competitors, the top 10 individuals for each
product and top 10 overall teams are recognized. To help build suspense within the
awards program, the place winners are announced tenth place through first place.
Also, special awards and recognition are given to the top three individuals and top
three teams per each product category; the top 10 individual and team winners in the
all products category are also singled out for recognition. The top performing grad-
uate student in each product category and best overall performing graduate student
for all products are also recognized.
In addition, one undergraduate student is recognized each year with the Joe
Larson Merit Award. This award acknowledges the student who “best upholds the
ideals of the Contest: potential leadership, professionalism, mature behavior, and an
understanding of the importance of the sensory techniques applied to dairy prod-
ucts.” Along with a plaque, the winning student receives a $500 award, funded by a
generous donation from the late Joe Larson, founder and president of the Sparta
Brush Company and a long-time, strong supporter of the contest.
68 S. Clark
4.4 Midwest Regional Collegiate Dairy Products

Evaluation Contest
The Midwest Regional Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest was initi-
ated in the mid-1950s, in conjunction with the International Dairy and Livestock
Show. Contest logistics were managed by the Chicago Dairy Technology Society.
After the International Dairy Exposition was terminated as part of the livestock
show, the Chicago Dairy Technology Society assumed full sponsorship of this
contest.
The Midwest Regional Contest is the sole survivor of a number of other regional
contests that were organized to provide additional training and competition oppor-
tunities for students and teams’ preparatory to the annual national contest. Because
all the other regional contests have ceased operation, the Midwest contest is no
longer strictly regional and attracts teams and contestants from across the USA;
however, international teams are not permitted in this regional event. The number
of participating teams fluctuates from 6 to 12 each year and averages approxi-
mately 8.
The rules of the Midwest contest are identical to the National Collegiate Dairy
Products Evaluation Contest except that contestants are not limited to a singular
lifetime participation. Contest official judges are recruited from industry and public
health associations with extensive experience in the products they judge. The all
products judge may be from industry or academia, provided that the judge is not
from an institution fielding a team in the contest. Judges are responsible for choos-
ing products used in this contest from commercial sources and only modify or
“adulterate” products as permitted by the National Collegiate Dairy Product
Evaluation Contest rules.
The contest is traditionally scheduled to precede the national contest by 2 weeks.
The Midwest contest was hosted for many years by the Kraft Research Center in
Glenview, IL. Along with the physical facilities, Kraft Foods (now Kraft-Heinz)
provided products, judges, a free continental breakfast for all workers, as well as a
free lunch for all contestants and work volunteers. A post-competition tour of Kraft
research facilities was also offered as a part of the Midwestern contest experience.
From 2017 to 2019, Continental Dairy Facilities, LLC, MI, hosted the Midwest
Regional Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest, along with a post-
competition tour.
The top four individuals in each product and in all products receive certificates
of achievement, and the top All Products individual is awarded a trophy. The top
teams in each product category earn additional recognition, with a special plaque
awarded to the top All Products team. Awards are also made to top performing
graduate students, who compete as individuals. All prizes are sponsored/provided
by industry sponsors.
4.5 American Cheese Society Judging and Competition
The American Cheese Society (ACS) Judging and Competition recognizes the
craftsmanship of artisanal and specialty cheese making (ACS, 2022). The goals of
the ACS competition are to (1) recognize quality cheese making and (2) to encour-
age better cheese making. The coordinators of the contest stress that promoting
good cheese making is the goal.
For four decades, the ACS Judging and Competition was conducted in conjunc-
tion with the ACS Annual Conference. But by 2019, the contest had grown so large
(120 categories and over 2000 entries) that the logistics of holding the Judging and
Competition at different locations every year had become unwieldy. In 2022 and
ongoing, the ACS Judging and Competition will be conducted in advance of the
ACS annual conference, in Minnesota.
Blind-coded entries are judged by pairs of one technical and one aesthetic judge
(Fig. 4.6), with each pair scoring each individual entry, based on a cumulative point
system. The judges are selected from the academic, dairy industry, dairy science,
cultures manufacturing, food retailing, food distributing, food press communities,
etc. While the technical judge subtracts 0.5–1 point from a perfect score of 50 for
each technical defect (depending on severity), the aesthetic judge adds single points,
up to 50 points, for aesthetic qualities and values. For instance, a fresh goat cheese
producer may lose points for “musty” and “unbalanced” (technical) off-flavors but
may gain points for the appearance of “vivid fresh flowers” on the surface of the
cheese. Technical judges’ scorecards begin with 3 points for aroma, 25 points for
flavor, 15 points for body and texture, and 7 points for appearance and numbers
decrease based on defects. Aesthetic judges must award a minimum of 1 and up to
3 points for aroma, minimum of 22 and up to 30 points for flavor, minimum of 3 and
up to 7 points for body and texture, and minimum of 5 and up to 10 points for
Fig. 4.6 Pairs of technical and aesthetic judges evaluate entire categories of dairy products.
(S. Clark images)
70 S. Clark
Fig. 4.7 Technical Judge Scoresheet for 2016 ACS Cheese Competition
appearance. This is based on the assumption that every entry must have some basic
level of achievement to reach at least the minimum score. Scorecards, previously on
paper (Figs. 4.7 and 4.8) and now (since 2022) computerized (Fig. 4.9), are orga-
nized with boxes for noting defects or attributes in products, with space left for
additional comments, which are required. Comments are meant to help processors
improve product quality.
Fig. 4.8 Aesthetic Judge Scoresheet for 2016 ACS Cheese Competition
Another key distinction from other dairy products competitions is the fact that all
entries are blind-coded to minimize potential for bias. Shipping materials with
codes that blind-code the producer and specify the subcategory are sent to entrants
for product labeling (Fig. 4.10). Points are subtracted from products revealing
identity.
72 S. Clark
Fig. 4.9 ACS J & C

Scorecards are now
computerized for
efficiency. (S. Clark image)
A great deal of coordination is involved in the successful administration of the

ACS Judging and Competition. A committee composed of volunteers and an ACS
staff liaison makes up the ACS Judging and Competition Committee, which works
all year to review and update rules, ensure appropriate category names and descrip-
tions, review and recategorize entries, select and invite judges, train judges, receive
products, oversee the event, announce and distribute awards, etc.
All entries are received by ACS Judging and Competition Committee members
and additional volunteers in a 2-day window. Although products initially arrive with
identifying information on the external box, once opened, blind-coded products are
revealed (Fig. 4.11a). The products are temperature checked, inventoried against the
entry information supplied by the producer, and sorted to separate products from
their identifying external boxes (Fig. 4.11b). Blind-coded products are categorized
by subcategory, placed on speed racks (Fig. 4.12), and taken to designated refriger-
ated trucks (i.e., smoked cheeses are placed in a single truck), where they are sorted
by category and size. Products are removed from the trucks according to a sched-
ule (based upon when they are to be judged) to ensure proper tempering prior to
judging. Volunteer stewards take speed racks of tempered products to judges, who
evaluate flights, at their own pace, until the entire category is evaluated.
Fig. 4.10 Entries in the

ACS competition are
blind-coded based on
company (in the example
below, 154, 161, and 246),
on category (i.e., C) and
subcategory (i.e., X), and
numbered entry for the
given company (first entry
by company 154, third
entry by company 161 and
second entry by company
246). Now, with the
computerized system,
simply the category letters
and a 4-digit code track the
product throughout the
process
Fig. 4.11 Once opened, blind-coded products (a) are temperature-checked, inventoried, and
sorted to separate products from their identifying external boxes (b)
74 S. Clark
Fig. 4.12 Blind-coded products are categorized by subcategory, placed on speed racks, and taken
to refrigerated trucks
Fig. 4.13 Cheeses are staged in preparation for the Best of Show Finalist round in the ACS
Judging and Competition
Awards in the ACS Judging and Competition are only earned by the top-scoring
products in each class, if the minimum score is attained. In fact, the quality of
American products has improved since the inception of the ACS Judging and
Competition, such that products must now attain a minimum of 85 points to earn the
third place award, a minimum of 90 to earn the second place award, and a minimum
of 95 points to earn the first place award. Only the three highest-scoring products
receive awards. However, for tie scores, multiple awards can be given. All first place
products become eligible for the best of show rounds of judging (Fig. 4.13). The
three top-ranking products in the entire ACS Judging and Competition are awarded
best of show and runners-up awards.
4.6 The US and World Dairy Product Contests
Hosted by the nonprofit Wisconsin Cheesemakers Association (WCMA), the

World Championship Cheese Contest is a technical evaluation of cheese and but-
ter, by class. Since its inception in 1957, the contest (conducted on even-number
years) has grown rapidly and is now the largest international cheese, butter,
yogurt, and dairy ingredients competition in the world (WCMA, 2022b). The 34th
biennial contest, held in 2022, had 141 classes. Entrants may send products in
their original packaging, with or without labels; labels are not considered in the
evaluation.
Products must be received at the shipping destination by an early spring dead-
line; judging takes place later in the spring; and awards are presented at the Cheese
Industry Conference in April. Judges of the World Championship Cheese Contest
are trained experts in cheese evaluation. Approximately 40 US and international
cheese experts evaluate products in teams of two. Starting with a maximum possible
100 points, each entry is examined for defects. Deductions are taken for each defect.
Defects are noted in the areas of flavor, body and texture, salt, color, finish, packag-
ing, and other possible appropriate attributes. Deductions are made in 0.1-point
increments. Thus, each entry is judged on its own merits against what the judge
considers perfection for that product. The judging teams work silently and the score
from each judge is averaged with his/her partner to determine the final score for
each entry. Gold, silver, and bronze medal winners are decided based on the highest
average scores in each class. Each entrant in the World Championship Cheese
Contest benefits from this professional evaluation. Official score sheets, marked and
signed by the judges, are returned to each entrant.
The Gold medal cheeses from appropriate cheese classes are judged a second
time to determine a World Champion Cheese. The entire panel of judges partici-
pates and the cheese that earns the highest average score is named “World
Champion.” The next two highest scores are awarded first and second runner-up.
This competition is open to public viewing and typically gains national media expo-
sure within the USA. Previous contest medal winners have built marketing cam-
paigns around their success in this highly competitive contest.
Gold medals and monetary awards are presented to the best of class winners.
Silver and bronze medals are awarded to second- and third-place entries. The World
Champion cheese maker currently earns a cash award of US $1000. All winners are
honored at a gala awards banquet during the International Cheese Technology
Exposition.
Since 1981, on alternate years (odd number), the US Championship Cheese
Contest is conducted by the WCMA (2022a). The 2023 contest, boasting 118 entry
classes, is the 21st biennial contest. It is run almost the same way as the World
Championship Cheese Contest.
76 S. Clark
4.7 World Dairy Expo Championship Dairy Product Contest
Sponsored by the Wisconsin Dairy Products Association (WDPA, 2022), the World
Dairy Expo Championship Dairy Product Contest welcomes entries into over 90
dairy product categories. Products range from fluid milk to powder, yogurt to drink-
able yogurt, sour cream to dips, and butter to ice cream. An additional class is called
“Open Class for Creative & Innovative Products.” Some entry examples include
smoothies, probiotic products, dairy-based beverages and desserts, novelty cheese
products, sports drinks, frappuccinos, calcium-fortified products, cheesecakes,
cajeta, etc. All entries must conform to their respective standards of identity and
contain a minimum of 25% dairy. Over 1500 products were entered in 2022 (WDPA,
2022). Entry fees support scholarships for students preparing for careers in the dairy
industry, culinary arts scholarships, and the National Collegiate Dairy Products
Evaluation Contest.
4.8 Conclusion
The contests described in this chapter all have one goal in common: they are
designed to promote excellence in dairy manufacturing. The primary objective of
the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest is to train students in the funda-
mentals of the sensory evaluation of dairy products in order to prepare them for
careers that promote a focus on high quality dairy products. Dairy products contests
are designed to recognize workmanship. These contests publicize their excellence
to the consuming public. Because consumers rely so heavily on sensory perceptions
when purchasing products, there will always be a place for sensory evaluation and
grading of dairy products if producers intend to satisfy consumer desires. Knowledge
about the relative importance and origins of certain off-flavors and various desirable
flavors, plus specific methods to minimize or eliminate objectionable off-flavors,
should enable the production of milk (Gamroth & Bodyfelt, 1980) and milk prod-
ucts suitable for inclusion in high-quality finished products, which should ultimately
influence dairy product sales.
References
ACS (American Cheese Society) Judging & Competition. (2022). Available at: https://www.chees-
esociety.org/acs-competition-2022/. Date accessed 7 Dec 2022.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1980). The dairy industries greatest asset: Quality. Dairy and Food Sanitation,
1(6), 26–30.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1981). Dairy product score cards: Are they consistent with principles of sensory
evaluation? Journal of Dairy Science, 64, 2303.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1983). Quality the consumer can taste: A primer on quality assurance procedures
that produce excellent milk flavor. Dairy Record, 84(11), 170–174.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J., & Trout, G. M. (1988). Sensory evaluation of cultured dairy products.
In The sensory evaluation of dairy products (pp. 227–299). Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Bradley, R. L., Jr. (1980). Effect of light on alteration of nutritional value and flavor of milk: A
review. Journal of Food Protection, 43(4), 314–320.
Bradley, D. G., Kim, H. J., & Min, D. B. (2006). Effects, quenching mechanisms, and kinet-
ics of water soluble compounds in riboflavin photosensitized oxidation of milk. Journal of
Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 54, 6016–6020.
Clark, S., & Costello, M. (2009). Chapter 4. In S. Clark, M. Costello, M. A. Drake, & F. Bodyfelt
(Eds.), The sensory evaluation of dairy products (2nd ed., pp. 43–72). Springer.
Gamroth, M., & Bodyfelt, F. W. (1980). Q-wallet-y: Off-flavors can hit you in the pocketbook.
Dairy Herd Management, 6, 19–21.
Kelly, E., Babcock, C. J., & Leete, C. S. (1929). United States Department of Agriculture
Department Circular 384. Washington, DC.
Nelson, J. A., & Trout, G. M. (1951). Judging dairy products (3rd ed.). The Olsen Publishing
Co. 480 p.
USFDA. (US Food and Drug Administration). (2019). Grade “A” Pasteurized Milk Ordinance.
2019 Revision. Available at: https://ncims.org/about/2017-procedures-constitution-bylaws/.
Date accessed 7 Dec 2022.
WCMA (Wisconsin Cheese Makers Association). (2022a). United States championship cheese
contest. About. Available at: https://uschampioncheese.org/about/. Date accessed 7 Dec 2022.
WCMA (Wisconsin Cheese Makers Association). (2022b). World championship cheese con-
test. About. Available at: https://worldchampioncheese.org/?page_id=118. Date accessed 7
Dec 2022.
WDPA (Wisconsin Dairy Products Association). (2006). World dairy expo championship dairy
product contest. 2022 Press Release. Available at: https://www.wdpa.net/wde-championship-
dairy-product-contest. Date accessed 19 Jan 2021.
Chapter 5
Fluid Milk Products
Valente B. Alvarez
5.1 Introduction
Milk is a nutritious food because it provides essential nutrients, including but not
limited to high-quality proteins, minerals such as calcium and phosphate, and vita-
mins A, D, B6, and B12 and niacin. High-quality milk has an almost neutral flavor
profile that is pleasantly sweet with no distinct aftertaste. The flavor is imparted by
the natural components such as proteins, fat, salts, milk sugar (lactose), and possibly
small amounts of other milk components. Whole milk has at least 3.25% milkfat,
reduced fat milk 2%, low-fat milk 1%, and skim <0.5%. Fluid milk composition and
flavor variations have been attributed to types of feed, seasonal variation, breed,
milk handling, storage conditions, processing, and packaging. Therefore, the sen-
sory evaluation of milk, in both the bulk and packaged forms, is of utmost impor-
tance to the market (fluid or beverage) milk industry.
The per capita fluid milk sale in the USA was about 63.95 L in 2019 (USDA,
2021). Since fluid milk is consumed regularly by people of all ages and most ethnic
groups, this product is constantly being assessed for quality by consumers. If the
flavor of milk is not appealing or appetizing, less of it will be consumed. Furthermore,
off-flavored milk may cast an unfavorable reflection on other dairy products that are
sold or distributed under the same brand name and thus unfavorably affect sales of
those products as well.
The sensory characteristics of any dairy product are most dependent on the qual-
ity attributes of the milk ingredient(s) used to produce them. An important truism of
the dairy industry is that “finished milk products can be no better than the ingredi-
ents from which they are made.” The quality and freshness of the various milk and
V. B. Alvarez (*)
Department of Food Science and Technology, Wilbur A. Gould Food Industries Center, The
Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_5
80 V. B. Alvarez
cream components is most critical to product sales. Most flavor defects of finished
dairy products could be substantially minimized, or perhaps eliminated, if all dairy
manufacturers would more critically assess the essential quality parameters of all
ingredients, especially the milk-based ones.
The differentiation of milk into different quality classes (known as grading)
demands keener, more fully developed senses of smell and taste than does the sen-
sory evaluation of other dairy products. Many of the off-flavors present in fluid milk
are more delicate, less volatile, or otherwise more elusive than those typically
encountered in other dairy foods.
Since milk (or cream) is the basic material from which all dairy products are
made, it behooves milk producers, dairy processors, distributors, and other person-
nel involved with dairy products to be aware of how various flavor defects of milk
affect the quality of manufactured products. Processing personnel should have the
ability to detect off-flavors in milk and be able to assess or project the impact of
these on the flavor quality of finished dairy products.
5.2 Milk Properties and Handling
Physical Properties Two physical phenomena are primarily responsible for the
visual appearance of milk. First, milk is a protein-stabilized emulsion of fat in a
continuous aqueous phase. Secondly, milk is a suspension of insoluble colloidal
mineral particles. The scattering (refraction) of light by the insoluble colloidal min-
erals, protein, and fat particles are mainly responsible for the opaqueness and white
color of milk (Deeth, 1986). By contrast, cream contains more fat globules with
associated carotene content; thus, yellowish-like light is scattered, lending a creamy-
yellow hue to cream products.
Chemical Properties Fresh milk is composed of water, fat, protein, lactose, and
minor mineral components. The lactose, at an average concentration of 4.8%,
imparts a mild sweet taste to milk (Kiesner et al., 2005). Milkfat is responsible for
the “rich” mouthfeel of full-fat milk in comparison to skim milk. However, overall
milk flavor is a complex sensation that is one of the most important attributes for
acceptability and preference by consumers. Thus, milk flavor and quality are com-
monly conducted by human sensory evaluation (Wolf et al., 2013).
Microbiological Properties Milk is typically sterile upon secretion within the

secretory glands and is presumably first contaminated with bacteria within the teat
canal (Vangroenweghe et al., 2001; Vissers & Driehuis, 2009). Milk handling on the
farm results in further contamination and growth of spoilage organisms. Sources of
microbiological contamination on the farm include equipment used for automated
milking, milk handling lines, and refrigerated bulk milk storage tanks (Hutchinson
et al., 2005; Polyanskii et al., 2005; Vissers & Driehuis, 2009). Psychrophilic bacte-
ria (i.e., the genus Pseudomonas sp.) are primarily responsible for spoilage or
5 Fluid Milk Products 81
d eterioration of milk prior to pasteurization (Poltronieri, 2017). Other bacteria that

negatively affect milk quality include lactic acid bacteria, which are indigenous to
dairy environments. A study assessing the bacterial quality of milk used in three
different fluid milk-processing plants reported that the average raw milk bacterial
counts were below the regulatory limit of 300,000 CFU/mL before pasteurization
and usually ranged between 12,000 and 60,000 CFU/mL. The bacterial count of
processed milk samples did not differ significantly among plants on the initial test-
ing day; however, there was a significant plant-by-day interaction throughout the
study. These results indicate that some plants have greater bacterial count differ-
ences among test days than others (Fromm & Boor, 2004). The findings suggest that
the processing plant as well as processing conditions, production, volume, and sani-
tation practices significantly influence the final microbial numbers.
Microbial spoilage of fluid milk after pasteurization has been attributed to either
Gram-negative bacteria that contaminate milk post-pasteurization or some Gram-
positive microorganisms that are able to survive pasteurization (Ternström et al.,
1993; Touch & Deeth, 2009). The most predominant microorganisms found in pro-
cessed milk from three commercial dairy plants were Gram-positive rods that made
up 87% of the processed milk microflora, followed in decreasing order by Gram-
positive cocci and Gram-negative rods. In the same study, the most common genera
found were Paenibacillus (39%), Bacillus (32%), and Microbacterium (14%). The
majority of Gram-positive cocci identified were Kocuria (5%). The Gram-negative
bacteria were Pseudomonas (3%) and Acinetobacter (1%) (Fromm & Boor, 2004).
A similar study found that fillers were the main source of microbial contamination
during processing and the common post-pasteurization contaminants were psychro-
trophic Gram-negative bacteria (Blaiotta et al., 2017; Gruetzmacher & Bradley,
1999). Milk will develop off-flavors, described as hydrolytic rancidity, fruity/fer-
mented, unclean-like, and/or bitter, due to the growth and metabolism of various
microbial contaminants if the raw milk is held too long or at temperatures >4 °C
(>45 °F) prior to pasteurization (Walker, 1988; Buchrieser & Kasper, 1993; Tetra
Pack, 2021).
5.3 Market Milk
5.3.1 Classes of Milk
In the USA, milk may be divided into two general classes: primarily, market milk
(Grade “A”) and some limited amounts of manufacturing grade milk.
Market Milk “Market” or “beverage” milk is typically consumed in the fluid form.
It is processed, packaged, and retailed or distributed to the consumer, restaurant,
hotel, school, or other food service institutions, where it is used for either beverage
or culinary purposes. This product form reaches the consumer in the natural, fluid
82 V. B. Alvarez
state, as contrasted to milk forms that may be converted into frozen dairy desserts,
cheese, butter, fermented milk foods, concentrated milk, or other types of dairy
products.
In the USA, market milk is currently “Grade A pasteurized” for all practical
purposes. The 2019 Grade A Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) specifies require-
ments for the production of Grade “A” raw milk for pasteurization and regulations
that pertain to pasteurization equipment and procedures, physical facilities, contain-
ers, packaging, sealing, and refrigerated storage of finished products (Fig. 5.1). The
pasteurization ordinances adopted by individual states and communities may differ
in some respects, and in some cases, it may be more stringent, but the 2019 PMO
proscribes that only Grade A pasteurized milk and milk products be sold to consum-
ers, restaurants, food service operators, grocery stores, or similar establishments.
Market milk is used primarily for consumption as whole milk or may be sepa-
rated by centrifugation and then standardized to produce reduced fat milk (2% milk-
fat), low-fat milk (1% milkfat), skim milk (<0.5% milkfat, light cream (18–30%
milkfat), whipping cream (30–36% milkfat), and/or half-and-half (10.5–18% milk-
fat). Some of the aforementioned products may be flavored or fermented. This class
of milk may be grouped or further categorized with respect to the particular heat
treatment to which the milk is subjected in processing, namely, as pasteurized
(HTST or Vat), ultra-pasteurized (UP), or ultra-high-temperature processed (UHT).
Manufacturing Grade Milk “Manufacturing grade milk” is basically any milk
intended for processing into dairy products other than market (fluid or beverage)
milk. Such milk may not fully comply with the specific sanitation and production
Fig. 5.1 The USPHS/FDA

Grade A Pasteurized Milk
Ordinance (PMO) 2019
recommendations (with
appropriate revisions)
serve as an important
model code for most states
and fluid milk and cream
products in interstate
commerce
facilities’ standards established for producing Grade A raw milk. Recommended

requirements for manufacturing grade milk have been issued by the US Department
of Agriculture, Consumer and Marketing Service, under the title “Milk for
Manufacturing Purposes and Its Production and Processing,” 2019. Currently, most
of the raw milk produced in North America meets Grade A requirements and prod-
ucts, such as fluid milk, cottage cheese, yogurt, must meet the Grade A standards.
Classes of Utilization The US federal government, through the Agricultural

Marketing Service of the Department of Agriculture, has issued specifications for
milk classes of utilization. These are intended to stabilize market conditions, benefit
producers, and consumers by establishing and maintaining orderly marketing con-
ditions and to always assure consumers of adequate supplies of pure and whole-
some milk.
The classes of utilization are intended to determine a minimum price for each
usage category of milk. Milk used in fluid products (i.e., Grade “A” milk) for direct
consumption is placed in Class I, the highest priced class. The price of milk is lower,
in descending order, for Classes II, III, and IV (i.e., manufacturing milk). A brief
description of each class is as follows:
Class I milk is processed into fluid milk products, i.e., Grade “A” pasteurized, ultra-
pasteurized, or UHT milk.
Class II milk is processed into fluid milk products in containers larger than 1 gallon,
including fluid cream products, cottage cheese products, milkshake and low-fat
ice cream mixes (or bases), frozen dairy desserts, frozen dairy dessert mixes
distributed in half-gallon containers or larger, whipped cream, sour cream prod-
ucts, yogurt, custards, puddings, pancake mixes, bakery product coatings, bat-
ters, and similar products, plus buttermilk used for baking, formulas for infant
feeding or dietary use, candy and soup production, bakery products, and sweet-
ened condensed milk.
Class III milk is used to produce cream cheese and other spreadable cheeses; hard
cheese and shredded, grated, or crumbled cheese; plastic cream; anhydrous milk-
fat; and butteroil.
Class IV milk is used to produce butter, evaporated or sweetened condensed milk in
a consumer-type package, and any milk products manufactured in a dried form.
5.3.2 Grades of Market Milk
Since the 1980s, health officials and dairy processors have recognized the practical-
ity and economic reality of a “single grade” of milk for human consumption. This
single grade is particularly true for market milk. The 2019 PMO refers to the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 21, Section 131.110, for the following legal
definition of milk:
84 V. B. Alvarez
Milk is the lacteal secretion, practically free from colostrum, obtained by the complete
milking of one or more cows. Milk that is in final package form for beverage use shall have
been pasteurized or ultra-pasteurized and shall contain not less than 8.25% milk solids-not-
fat and not less than 3.25% milkfat. Milk may have been adjusted by separating part of the
milkfat there from or by adding thereto cream, concentrated milk, dry whole milk, skim
milk, concentrated skim milk, or nonfat dry milk. Milk may be homogenized.
The various whole milk products that may require sensory evaluation include those
listed below.
5.3.3 Raw Milk
Grade A “Grade A raw milk for pasteurization” is that milk which conforms to the
latest regulations and the highest standards established by the US Public Health
Service, Pasteurized Milk Ordinance 2019. Grade A milk may also be produced
under a given state’s regulations, which usually conform closely to the federal stan-
dards, but may be slightly more rigorous for certain criteria.
5.3.4 Pasteurized Milk
Grade A Pasteurized Milk This is Grade A raw milk which has been pasteurized in
accordance with the regulations of the US Public Health Service Pasteurized Milk
Ordinance and Code. Such milk must meet all the regulations, pasteurization con-
firmation tests, and sanitary requirements for this grade.
5.4 Kinds of Market Milk and Associated

Quality Characteristics
Whole Milk “Whole milk” or simply “milk” may be pasteurized, ultra-pasteurized,

or commercially sterilized (UHT). Pasteurized milk is milk that has been subjected
to pasteurization temperatures for a prescribed period of time in equipment that
complies with the requirements of the PMO. With respect to times and temperatures
of pasteurization, the 2019 PMO states:
Every particle of milk or milk product is heated in properly designed and operated equip-
ment to one of the temperatures specified in the following table and held continuously at or
above that temperature for at least the time specified:
Temperature (°C) (Temperature, °F) Time

63 145 30 min

72 161 15 s
89 191 1s
90 201 0.5 s
94 204 0.05 s
100 212 0.01 s
*
If the milkfat content is 10% or more, or if it contains added sweeteners, the specified
temperature shall be increased by 3 °C (5 °F), provided that eggnog shall be heated to at
least the following temperature and time combinations:

69 155 30 min
80 175 25 s
83 180 15 s
When a minimum 30 min holding time is required, the pasteurization process is

known as the “batch,” “vat,” or “holding” method; with holding times less than this,
but greater than 1 s, the process is termed “high temperature-short time pasteuriza-
tion” (HTST); and with holding times of 1 s or less, the designation is “higher heat-
short time pasteurization” (HHST). Ultra-pasteurization requires heating to 138 °C
(280 °F) for at least 2 s, either before or after product packaging. The term “ultra-
high temperature” (UHT) designates a process for “commercially sterilizing” milk
at a temperature of about 149 °C (300 °F) or higher, with a holding time of a few
seconds. The sterile product is then aseptically packaged in sterile containers. The
equipment used for milk pasteurization or sterilization (Henderson, 1971; Jones &
Harper, 1976; Tetra Pak, 2021) varies widely in design and is very complex
(Fig. 5.2).
Most modern plants use plate heat exchangers, tubular heaters, or other forms of
heat exchangers, as vat pasteurization is considered inefficient by comparison (Tetra
Pack, 2021). Most commonly, heating is achieved by an indirect approach through
heated metal surfaces, but there are processing units that heat by directly introduc-
ing steam into the product. A vacuum chamber subsequently removes the equivalent
amount of water added to the milk due to the condensed steam (Tetra Pack, 2021).
Pasteurized Milk This product commonly possesses some degree of either a so-
called heated or cooked flavor, especially immediately after processing, but the
intensity of the cooked flavor diminishes during storage (Badings et al., 1981;
Boelrijk et al., 2003; Drake et al., 2008; Sliwkowski & Swaisgood, 1980; Swaisgood,
1980). The initial flavor intensity depends on the temperature and holding time
employed as well as the method of heating. The factors that may influence milk
flavor include (1) heating-up and cooling time, (2) temperature difference between
the product and the heating medium, (3) velocity of the product in a continuous
system, (4) occurrence of product “burn-on” of heat exchanger surfaces, and (5)
direct versus indirect heating methods.
86 V. B. Alvarez
Fig. 5.2 (a, b, c) Examples of typical pasteurization systems for fluid milk products. (a): A mod-
ern US HTST centralized pasteurization room. (b) Tetra Pak® Pasteurizer (c) Tetra Pak®
Indirect UHT-DE
UHT and Commercially Sterile Milk The 2019 PMO describes commercially
sterile and UHT milk as well as aseptically packaged milk. From a microbiological
standpoint, a “sterile” label implies the absolute absence of all microorganisms
(both pathogenic and spoilage types) in milk products. Commercially sterile milk
products can be successfully stored without need for refrigeration for an extended
time (up to 9 months). By contrast, the label “ultra-pasteurized” connotes extended
shelf life under refrigerated conditions. Depending on the method of sterilization or
heat treatment, commercially sterile and UHT products are generally expected to
exhibit varying intensities of cooked flavor. (Hansen, 1987). If intense, this flavor
defect may be variously described as scorched, scalded, burnt, or caramel. However,
with the advent of improved and better engineered sterilization systems, only the
more subtle cooked, sulfide-like flavor predominates in high-quality UHT milk.
During storage, the intensity of the cooked flavor gradually diminishes, so that
under the most favorable circumstances, a sterilized product may taste like pasteur-
ized milk. The discovery that addition of the enzyme sulfhydryl oxidase (Swaisgood,
1980) can reduce the cooked flavor in commercially sterilized milk may have sig-
nificant future implications for UHT-processed milk. It has been suggested that a
commercial process could be developed for treating heat-processed milk with an
immobilized form of sulfhydryl oxidase. In one experiment and subsequent flavor
panels, the enzyme-treated UHT milk could not be distinguished from pasteurized
milk (Sliwkowski & Swaisgood, 1980). A sensory evaluation study demonstrated
that UHT milk was less sensitive to LOF than pasteurized milk due to possible
masking or the antioxidant effects of volatile sulfur compounds (Harwood et al.,
2020). During prolonged storage, particularly when not refrigerated, various stor-
age flavors may be encountered, which result from lactose and protein interaction,
protein and/or fat degradation, and staling.
Other means of minimizing sulfide flavors in UHT milk by addition of natural

plant components have been described by Josephson and Inventor (1989) and
Sederstrom and Peterson (2005) and Molina et al. (2009). None of the preceding
methods of reducing cooked flavor in UHT milk have been commercialized.
ESL Milk Extended shelf life refers to the use of processing and packaging tech-
nologies to increase the shelf life of milk and food products beyond the pasteuriza-
tion level. ESL technologies may include UHT or UP, microfiltration, bacterial
removal, and aseptic packaging, among others. These alternative preservation strat-
egies extend the shelf life of milk by 30 or even 90 days but also cause important
modifications to the sensory quality of milk (Deeth, 2017). ESL technologies open
up new opportunities for marketing and shipping of milk to distant places where
milk production may be limited or not available. This is the case in the USA where
the production of milk in California is consumed in Hawaii or the shipped milk
produced in Ohio is consumed in Nevada. At the international level, similar situa-
tions can also be found, such as in the case of Asian markets importing milk from
Australia and New Zealand (Deeth, 2017; Sepulveda et al., 2005)).
Practically all milk marketed in the USA is both pasteurized and homogenized.
“Homogenized” is defined in the 2019 PMO as follows:
The term “homogenized” means that milk or the milk product has been treated to insure
breakup of the fat globules to such an extent that, after 48 hours of quiescent storage at 7 °C
(45 °F), no visible cream separation occurs on the milk; and the fat percentage of the top
100 milliliters of milk in a quart, or of proportionate volumes in containers of other sizes,
does not differ by more than 10% from the fat percentage of the remaining milk as deter-
mined after thorough mixing.
As pointed out previously, the definition of milk in Title 21 of the CFR ends with the
simple statement, “Milk may be homogenized.” Homogenized milk does not differ
in composition or any other provision of the definition from unhomogenized milk,
except for being homogenized. However, there are some differences between the
two products in their susceptibility to development of certain off-flavors (Richardson
et al., 1993; Schiano et al., 2017); for this reason, we shall examine them separately.
Unhomogenized Milk Since pasteurization standards represent the minimal time
and temperature requirements, milk is frequently heated in excess of the minimum.
However, it is less likely that unhomogenized milk would be heated much above the
minimum requirements because the cream line, which is the unique characteristic of
this product, is progressively reduced in volume by increasing the intensity of the
heat treatment. Therefore, it is also less likely that non-homogenized product will
ever exhibit a “pronounced cooked” flavor. Immediately after pasteurization, milk
may manifest a distinct “slight cooked” flavor if minimal pasteurization process is
applied. Processing at higher heat/time commercial pasteurization may result in
“definite cooked” to conceivably “pronounced cooked (scorched)” flavor. During
storage, the “cooked” flavor diminishes in intensity and may entirely disappear,
especially if significant levels of divalent cations are present in the milk (often
derived from water sources or equipment surfaces), as pointed out by Gould (1940)
88 V. B. Alvarez
or that it dissipates after several weeks when is replaced by a stale off-flavor note
(Gandy et al., 2008; Zabbia et al., 2012). Later studies reported that oxidation of
milkfat leads to the development of undesirable flavors in non-homogenized milk.
The decrease in milkfat oxidation, after homogenization, is due to antioxidant prop-
erties of sulfhydryl compounds formed during heat treatment of milk (Molina et al.,
2009; Shipe et al., 1978; Smith & Dunkley, 1962).
Research by Dunkley (1968) supported the tendency of milk flavor changes for
non-homogenized milk across storage time. Similar observations and measure-
ments were noted earlier and published originally by Trout (1945, 1950) and subse-
quently by others (Dunkley et al., 1962a, b; Parks, 1965; Simon & Hansen, 2001;
Wishner, 1964). The “redistribution” of protective components of the fat globule
membrane via homogenization serves as a “protectant” against the oxidation pro-
cess. The extent of the oxidative flavor deterioration depends on the storage time,
season of the year, the type of roughage fed to cows, and the relative levels of
cupric, ferric, and other divalent cations present in raw milk (Hedegaard et al., 2006;
Parks, 1965; Shipe, 1964; Tracy et al., 1933).
Unhomogenized milk is particularly susceptible to the cardboard-like or oxi-
dized off-flavor that results from the oxidation of lipids. Oxidation is usually greater
in the winter months and/or when pasture or green feeds are not available. Maximum
annual fat contents occur in November and December; minimum fat contents occur
in August (Goff & Hill, 1992; Hedegaard et al., 2006). Therefore, the presence of
antioxidants from pasture, green feeds, and haylage in the spring through mid-fall
seasons is important. Antioxidants are practically nonexistent in dried feeds and
especially low in alfalfa hay (winter feeding); thus, the susceptibility to milk oxida-
tion is more a function of presence/absence of natural antioxidants in green or
greenish feeds than the relative change levels of unsaturated fatty acids due to milk-
fat composition with season.
Milk flavor results mainly from proteins, lipids, and carbohydrates, which are the
precursors of aroma compounds. Milk flavor can deteriorate depending on the way
it is handled, processed, and stored (Molina et al., 2009; Nursten, 1997; Strobel
et al., 1953). Oxidation (auto-oxidative), and hydrolytic rancidity (lipolytic) reac-
tions are common in milk flavor development. Oxidation of milkfat produces the
development of undesirable flavors in non-homogenized milk. Oxidation reactions
result from interactions between reactive species of oxygen and lipids. Triplet oxy-
gen and singlet oxygen have been identified as main compounds involved in oxida-
tive changes of milk (Campbell & Drake, 2013; Min & Boff, 2002) Singlet oxygen
is the electron-rich reactive species of oxygen formed in the presence of light-
induced photosensitizers, such as riboflavin in milk, which absorbs energy from
light and transfers it to triplet oxygen to form singlet oxygen. The formation rate of
oxidative changes in milk via singlet oxygen is much greater than that of triplet
oxygen. Additionally, singlet oxygen oxidation end products differ from those
formed by triplet oxygen. Triplet oxygen is diradical and is considered the most
stable form of oxygen. This molecule can readily react with other radicals com-
monly found in foods. Light, heat, presence of metals, enzymes, and chemical
oxidants catalyze the formation of radicals in milk. The reaction between triplet
oxygen and radicals gives rise to the formation of hydroperoxides. Upon cleavage
of the hydroxyl group, flavorless peroxy radicals are formed (Campbell & Drake,
2013). Previous work reported that subsequent cleavage and molecular rearrange-
ment of these compounds lead to the formation of hydrocarbons, alcohols, acids,
aldehydes, and ketones responsible for oxidized flavors in milk. Oxidized, card-
board, metallic, tallowy, oil, and fishy flavors were identified as the flavors produced
by lipid oxidation reactions (Molina et al., 2009; Shipe et al., 1978; Thomas, 1981).
There are two types of rancid flavor that result from lipolytic activity of microor-
ganisms; “sickening” flavor that results from mixing raw and homogenized milk,
churning, intense agitation, or temperature fluctuation during processing; and
“unclean” flavor that is produced from foaming residues or by spontaneous lipolysis
(Shipe et al., 1978). The rancid (soapy-like) off-flavor that is encountered in raw
milk, due to the hydrolysis of triglycerides, should not develop in properly pasteur-
ized milk because lipase is inactivated by pasteurization temperatures. If a lipolytic
defect is noted, either this off-flavor was present (1) before the milk was pasteur-
ized, (2) homogenized milk was diverted back to the raw milk HTST balance tank
where lipase within the raw milk hydrolyzed the unprotected milkfat of the homog-
enized product, (3) the milk was contaminated post-pasteurization with bacteria that
possess lipase activity, or (4) processed milk contains thermoduric psychrophilic
bacteria and spore-forming bacteria. These microorganisms release lipases in milk
and are responsible for producing undesirable changes in milk as they survive pas-
teurization conditions. These enzymes are extremely heat resistant and are respon-
sible for limiting the shelf life of pasteurized milk (Fromm & Boor, 2004; Shipe
et al., 1978; Touch & Deeth, 2009). Additionally, psychrotrophic Gram-negative
microorganisms are responsible for post-pasteurization contamination of milk.
Among these microorganisms, Pseudomonas fluorescens has been identified as
major contributor of milk spoilage.
Homogenized Milk There are several properties and flavor characteristics of
homogenized milk that differentiate it from unhomogenized milk. First, since there
is little or no concern about a cream line in homogenized milk, higher processing
temperatures may be employed at the option of the manufacturer, resulting in a
higher incidence and/or greater intensity of the cooked flavor (Bodyfelt et al., 1988;
Lewis & Deeth, 2009). This flavor change occurs not only in ultra-pasteurized or
extended shelf-life (ESL) milk and sterilized milk (or cream products), but fre-
quently with pasteurized milk products as well. Homogenization of raw milk cre-
ates fat surface area that is susceptible to lipase, which is naturally present and
active in milk, particularly at warm temperatures. Hydrolytic rancidity off-flavors
will develop if pasteurization does not follow immediately (Deeth, 1986; Fitz-
Gerald, 1974). Such milk exhibits distinct hydrolytic rancidity (a strong and objec-
tionable off-flavor [rancid], which is often foul smelling with an associated bitter
taste) within a few hours of processing and becomes quite bitter and soapy within
24 h. Homogenization disrupts the fat globule membrane “coating” that serves to
protect lipids from the hydrolytic activity of lipase (present in the aqueous portion
90 V. B. Alvarez
of milk and cream). Halloran and Trout (1932) showed that all cows’ milk is subject
to the development of rancidity upon homogenization, unless adequately heat-
treated to inactivate the indigenous lipase. The subsequent structure changes of
milkfat globules related to industrial homogenization processes were later investi-
gated and reported (Argov et al., 2008). Doan (1933) found that the critical tempera-
ture for inhibiting rancidity development in homogenized milk by flash heating was
~63.9 °C (~147 °F). Other studies reported that milk lipase is partially inactivated at
pasteurization conditions 72 °C (161 °F), thus higher temperatures 88 °C (190 °F)
are required to completely inactivate the enzyme (Chandan & Shahani, 1964; Tetra
Pack, 2021). Furthermore, it must be emphasized that raw milk must never be mixed
with homogenized milk while processing, or a rancid off-flavor (via the hydrolysis
of di- and triglycerides) is almost certain to occur. The presence of a rancid off-
flavor in homogenized milk is an indication that either (1) all the milk ingredients
were not adequately heat-treated or (2) rancidity existed within the milk prior to the
pasteurization process.
Homogenized milk is distinctly less susceptible to the development of metal-
induced, cardboardy, or oxidized off-flavor than non-homogenized milk. This lower
susceptibility was first noted in studies by Tracy et al. (1933) and later substantiated
by other researchers (Cervato et al., 1999; Park & Drake, 2017; Tong et al., 2000)).
If homogenized milk products are properly pasteurized, properly refrigerated, and
not unduly exposed to light, the pleasant, rich flavor should remain fixed and stable
for a considerable time. This period of flavor stability is in excess of that within
which non-homogenized, pasteurized milk might be expected to exhibit some
degree of flavor deterioration.
Homogenized milk is more susceptible to the development of the light-activated
or light-induced off-flavor (sometimes also referred to as “sunshine flavor”) when
exposed to light, than unhomogenized milk, as initially pointed out by Hood and
White (1934). This off-flavor has a burnt-protein (or burnt-feathers) character and
should not be confused with the cardboardy taste and puckery mouthfeel sensation
of the generic oxidized flavor. Whited et al. (2002) reported that off-flavor develop-
ment and vitamin A degradation occur in milk after exposure to light. The authors
reported that the degradation of vitamin A was proportional to the length and inten-
sity of light exposure and inversely related to the milkfat concentration. After expo-
sure to light, milk rapidly develops a burnt, activated sunlight flavor attributed to
singlet oxygen oxidation of serum proteins and free amino acids (Min & Boff, 2002;
Molina et al., 2009; Shipe et al., 1978). The most common reaction is light-induced
oxidation of cysteine that produces mercaptan, sulfides, and dimethyl sulfides
responsible for the light-oxidized flavor defects in milk. Additionally, methional,
resulting from methionine degradation, plays an important role in light-induced fla-
vor development. Min and Boff (2002) reported that methyl mercaptan, dimethyl
disulfide, and methionine sulfoxide are by-products of light-induced methional deg-
radation in the presence of riboflavin, protein, and oxygen. Lipid oxidation can also
occur when milk is exposed to light; the flavor associated with it has been described
as cabbagey, burnt, burnt protein, burnt feathers, and medicinal (Molina et al., 2009;
Ogden, 1993).
Organic Milk This category of milk is processed following the guidelines for
Grade A Pasteurized Milk. However, the US Department of Agriculture has four
requirements to define milk as “USDA Organic”: (1) cows cannot be treated with
bovine growth hormone (BGH); (2) cows cannot be treated with antibiotics; (3) cow
feed is grown without pesticides, whether the feed is grass or grain; and (4) cows
must have access to pasture. In 2017, organic milk represented less than 1% of the
total 798.5 billion liters milk market. Although organic milk can sell for up to dou-
ble the cost of other milk, the demand for this milk continues to increase (KPMG,
2018). The demand for organic milk has been linked to perceived health benefits or
environmental and animal rights issues. This type of milk requires that cows have
pasture access and has flavors associated with feed. Also, organic milks are pasteur-
ized or UHT to ensure ESL, so they may have the cooked flavors that are discussed
in the corresponding sections of this chapter (Schultz, 2006).
Sedimentation Although sedimentation is not a prevalent issue in pasteurized fluid

milk, the following discussion may be helpful as a source of information in case it
may occur. In homogenized milk not subjected to sufficient centrifugal clarification,
the absence of milkfat separation may prompt destabilized protein, colloidal form of
soil, or any possible somatic (body) cells to readily precipitate and form a yellowish
to smokey-grey layer on the bottom of the container. When the milk container is
agitated slightly, or the milk is heated moderately, this deposit may clump into
feathery, wooly, or oily-appearing masses that resemble soil, oil, or extraneous
material in milk. A milk judge should be familiar with the possibility of sedimenta-
tion in homogenized milk as well as with its characteristic behavior upon handling.
Freshly packaged homogenized milk subjected to proper refrigeration and little or
no agitation generally shows no sediment formation when evaluated 6–8 h later.
However, the same milk examined after the elapse of 24 h, or after some agitation,
might show considerable sediment. Obviously, sedimentation is more readily noted
in transparent or translucent containers.
Watery Appearance If homogenized milk is allowed to freeze and then slowly

defrost, the upper portion usually appears watery due to precipitation of some of the
milk solids, including milkfat (Jeremiah, 2019; von Dorp, 1996). A competent milk
judge will have become familiar with the behavior of homogenized milk under
some of these unfavorable conditions of environment and storage, so that “suspect”
milk samples are not unduly criticized for possible water adulteration. Although not
water adulterated, such an appearance should be subject to criticism because freez-
ing milk reduces its quality.
Cream Layer, Cream Plug, or Fat Ring If homogenized milk is inadequately pro-
cessed, temperature abused, agitated severely, or held for an extended time at room
temperature, it may form objectionable cream layers, cream plugs, or fat rings
(sometimes referred to as “spaghetti”) of varied intensity. The occurrence of this
appearance defect is more common in cream products than in whole or reduced
fat milk.
92 V. B. Alvarez
Vitamin-Fortified Whole Milk The 2019 PMO and Title 21 of the Federal CFR do
not contain a separate definition for vitamin-fortified whole milk. Vitamin addition
is recognized as optional within the definition of milk, but specific provisions are
given only for vitamin A (2000 IU) and vitamin D (400 IU) per quart. Safe and suit-
able carriers (fat solvents) for vitamins A and D are also permitted. The added vita-
mins themselves apparently do not impair the flavor of fortified milk, but industry
experience has shown that occasionally the vitamin carriers may be suspected of
introducing some degree of off-flavor. Certain preparations of vitamin A concen-
trate have been known to impart a detectable, objectionable off-flavor, particularly
to skim milk and low-fat milk, and occasionally to whole milk products. Quality
control procedures that include actual flavor trials in milk (in the manufacture of
vitamin concentrates) should minimize defective batches of vitamin concentrate. A
“hay-like” off-flavor, associated with the presence of added vitamin A (or carriers)
in milk and subsequent exposure to light, has been reported in the literature (Schiano
et al., 2017; Whited et al., 2002).
Since vitamin-fortified milk is also homogenized, it is expected to behave the
same as homogenized milk with respect to flavor and other sensory characteristics.
Though vitamin fortification of whole milk is optional, the practice is near-universal
among US milk processors.
Low-Fat Milk The legal definition of milk is given in the US Code of Federal
Regulations, 21 CFR 131.110. However, 21 CFR 101.62 deals with the labeling of
low-fat products. Low-fat milk is milk from which sufficient milkfat has been
removed to produce a food having, within limits of good manufacturing practice,
one of the following milkfat contents: 0.5, 1, 1.5, or 2%. Low-fat milk is pasteurized
or ultra-pasteurized, must contain added vitamin A (not less than 2000 IU per quart),
and contains not less than 8.25% milk solids-not-fat and may be homogenized. The
addition of vitamin D is optional, but if the vitamin is added, the finished product
must contain 400 IU per quart.
Although low-fat milk may lack the typical richness and mouthfeel of whole
milk, this is a natural consequence of a lower milkfat content and is not considered
a defect per se. The product is evaluated in the same manner as whole milk and may
potentially possess the same off-flavors. Thus, a perfect flavor score, if deserved,
may be assigned to either a low-fat or whole milk based solely on the absence of
off-flavors. Obviously, individual taste preferences may or may not be the same for
whole and low-fat milk; preferences will vary with the individual.
Optional ingredients in low-fat milk include concentrated skim milk, nonfat dry
milk, or other milk-derived ingredients to increase the nonfat solid content, pro-
vided that the ratio of protein to total nonfat solids of the food and the protein effi-
ciency ratio of all protein present shall not be decreased as a result of adding such
ingredients. Stabilizers and emulsifiers are also permitted in an amount of not more
than 2% by weight of the solids in the optional ingredients actually used. According
to the CFR, low-fat milk may be labeled “protein-fortified” if it contains not less
than 10% of milk-derived nonfat solids.
When some of these optional ingredients are used, their relative freshness and
quality will impact the finished product. The processing history and age of these
optional ingredients may affect flavor. Long shelf-life products may develop a
“stale” flavor following storage or possibly an oxidized off-flavor. A history of high-
heat treatment may be responsible for cooked or caramel off-flavors. By exercising
thorough quality control of the added ingredients, any significant incidence of the
aforementioned problems is probably avoidable or at least minimized.
Skim Milk The legal definition of milk is given in the US Code of Federal
Regulations, 21 CFR 131.110. However, 21 CFR 101.62 deals with the legal
requirements for labeling milk as “skim.” Skim differs from low-fat milk only in the
requirement that its fat content be less than 0.5%. All provisions regarding optional
ingredients are the same. Most comments relative to the flavor of low-fat milk are
also applicable to skim milk. An off-flavor most commonly described as “lacks
freshness,” “stale,” “chalky,” or “storage flavor” is frequently encountered by judges
in the sensory evaluation of skim milk samples. The composition of skim milk
appears to favor occurrence of this off-flavor; it may partially stem from the ratio of
proteins to milkfat found in skim milk. Light-induced off-flavors (LOF) in milk
have been associated with the decrease in acceptability by consumers. Off-flavor
compounds identified as a result of light exposure of milk include methional, mer-
captan, dimethyl sulfide, disulfides, methanethiol, methionine sulfoxide, sulfur
compounds, hexanal, and heptanal (Harwood et al., 2020; Schiano et al., 2017).
Attempts to protect milk with light-protective packages are important current trends
because light exposure of milk is unavoidable during handling, processing, packag-
ing, and distributing (Fanelli et al., 1985; Wang et al., 2020). Sensory evaluation and
identification of compounds suggested that dimethyl disulfide was mainly respon-
sible for the light-induced off-flavor of skim milk. Dimethyl disulfide was formed
by the singlet oxygen oxidation of methionine in milk (Jung et al., 1998). Heat
treatments of milk such as HTST, UHT, and UP influence differently the develop-
ment of LOF. Trained panelists detected LOF in HTST-processed milk but not in
UP-processed milk (Harwood et al., 2020).
Concentrated Milk “Concentrated milk” is defined in 21 CFR 131.115 as the liq-

uid food obtained by the partial removal of water from milk; the milkfat and total
milk solids content must be not less than 7.5 and 25.5%, respectively. This product
must be pasteurized, will generally be homogenized, and may have vitamin D added
(25 IU/fluid ounce). Water is removed under partial vacuum as much as three parts
of the milk may be concentrated to one part of concentrated milk. Water is added
back by the consumer, and savings are realized in transportation and packaging
costs, although processing costs are higher.
Frozen concentrated milk and commercially sterile concentrated milk are differ-
ent and more complex product forms of fluid milk. They are intended for longer
storage, which unfortunately provides opportunities for physical and chemical fac-
tors to influence sensory properties. Flavor is a function of the processing tempera-
ture, storage temperatures, and age of the product. On prolonged storage, the flavor
94 V. B. Alvarez
may become stale, oxidized, or caramelized. Even a fresh concentrate may taste
somewhat flat upon reconstitution, although the flatness sensation is generally less-
ened upon storage. Reconstituted concentrated milk is usually evaluated from the
standpoint of utilization as a beverage or fluid milk.
Reconstituted Milk Reconstituted milk is the product resulting from either (1)
recombining milkfat and nonfat dry milk or (2) dry whole milk with water in appro-
priate proportions, to yield the milk constituent percentages that typically occur in
fluid milk. For this purpose, various forms of milkfat such as butter, anhydrous
milkfat, and fresh or frozen cream and nonfat dry milk, dry milk, or concentrated
milk may be used as ingredients. Any form of reconstituted milk is practically
always homogenized. Even though homogenization (an integral part of the process)
inhibits the development of an oxidized off-flavor in milk, an oxidized defect of
slight to moderate intensity may be present in reconstituted milk with some degree
of frequency. This off-flavor is generally derived from any one of several susceptible
dairy ingredients prior to their reconstitution. A wealth of published literature indi-
cates that the source of oxidized, fatty, painty flavors in reconstituted milk from
whole milk powder is due to lipid oxidation (Hall et al., 1985; Hall & Anderson,
1985; Hough et al., 1992; Lloyd et al., 2009). Other types of off-flavors associated
with reconstituted milk are flat, heated, cooked, and stale.
Evaporated Milk is a special type of sterile concentrated milk with its own defini-
tion in 21 CFR 131.130. Although this product can be made by a combination of
UHT processing and aseptic packaging, evaporated milk is commonly sterilized in
the final container at a lower temperature, but a much longer holding time. The addi-
tion of vitamin D (25 IU/fluid oz) is mandatory, and the use of emulsifiers and sta-
bilizers is permitted. The flavor characteristics of this product are influenced by the
heat treatment applied, storage temperature, and age. Off-flavors such as cooked,
caramel, and stale are frequently observed. This product may display varying
degrees of browning and excessive viscosity. Curdiness and fat separation are addi-
tional undesirable characteristics.
Half-and-Half and Cream Title 21 of CFR gives definitions for heavy cream (36%
milkfat), light whipping cream (30% to less than 36% milkfat), light cream (18% to
less than 30% milkfat), and half-and-half (10.5% to less than 18% milkfat). All of
these cream-based products are either pasteurized or ultra-pasteurized and may be
homogenized. Although not normally consumed as beverages, cream products are
listed here since their flavor characteristics are evaluated in basically the same way
as milk; they are subject to essentially the same off-flavors. Due to their higher fat
content and the optional presence of stabilizers and emulsifiers, the mouthfeel of
these products differs markedly from that of milk. In addition to sensory qualities,
important functional properties such as whipability (Lah et al., 1980) and coffee-
whitening properties should also be tested by recommended or standardized proce-
dures (Harper, 2008; Scott et al., 2003).
Miscellaneous Products The 2019 PMO describes low-sodium milk, whole milk,
low-fat milk, skim milk, lactose-reduced milk, and lactose-free milk. Other dietary
products may also be encountered where permitted by local ordinances, in the form
of mineral- and/or vitamin-fortified milk. This “low-sodium milk” must contain less
than 10 mg of sodium per 100 ml to be so labeled. Lactose-reduced products must
have sufficient lactose converted to glucose and galactose (a mixture which is
sweeter than lactose) by the addition of safe and suitable enzymes to cause the
remaining lactose to be less than 30% of its original concentration. Lactose-free
milk can be made by different techniques like crystallization, chromatography, and
membrane separation (ultrafiltration and nanofiltration) (Harju et al., 2012).
Lactose-free milk is also manufactured by using lactase enzyme (β-D-galactosidase;
β-D-galactoside galactohydrolase, E.C. 3.2.1.23). The enzyme is usually added
after pasteurization of milk. Lactose is hydrolyzed into glucose and galactose. These
carbohydrates are sweeter than lactose and are easy to digest and absorb by lactose-
intolerant people (Dekker et al., 2019). Hence, some effect on flavor (taste) would
be expected. The flavor properties of such products should be evaluated in a manner
like milk because lactose-free milk is often ultra-pasteurized for ESL, which can
impart cooked flavors.
5.5 Precautions for Evaluating Raw Milk
Raw milk has been, and continues to be, discussed for nutritional and safety reasons
in epidemiological literature. Therefore, there are no common rules regarding the
sale and consumption of raw milk in the USA. Among the 50 states and Puerto
Rico, 24 states do not permit the sale of raw milk directly to the consumer. Twenty-
seven states permit the sale of raw milk for human consumption either at the farm
where produced, in retail outlets, or through cow-share agreements. The number of
outbreaks traceable to non-pasteurized milk increased from 30 during 2007–2009 to
51 during 2010–2012 (Mungai et al., 2015). Consumption of raw milk has been
linked to campylobacteriosis, salmonellosis, tuberculosis, brucellosis, hemorrhagic
colitis, Brainerd diarrhea, Q fever, listeriosis, yersiniosis, and toxoplasmosis to
name a few (Plotter, 2002; Sayler, 2009). Outbreaks associated with the consump-
tion of raw milk occur every year. In 1995, the Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition and the US Food and Drug Administration published guidelines that
established a list of pathogen organisms transmitted through raw milk and milk
products, such as Salmonella spp., Staphylococcus aureus, Campylobacter jejuni,
Yersinia enterocolitica, Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli (both enterotoxic
and enteropathic), E. coli 0157:H7, Shigella spp., Streptococcus spp., and Hepatitis
A virus. Due to these facts, milk tasters/judges are “advised/warned” against tasting
raw milk unless an appropriate “in-laboratory” pasteurization process protocol is
employed.
The 2019 PMO contains the following statement: “Compilation of outbreaks of
milkborne diseases by the U.S. Public Health Service, over many years, indicates
96 V. B. Alvarez
that the risk of contracting disease from raw milk is approximately 50 times as great
as from milk labeled ‘pasteurized’.” This statement implies that even though raw
milk samples should not be swallowed, there is an inherent risk in tasting them.
Smelling raw milk samples, rather than tasting them, is substantially less risky,
especially if none of the milk comes in contact with the mouth of the person per-
forming the sensory evaluation for possible off-odor(s).
If tasting of the given samples of milk is imperative, then small milk quantities
should be “laboratory pasteurized.” There is no standard procedure for performing
this laboratory pasteurization. Hence, appropriate techniques need to be employed
to ensure that every particle of the milk sample has been subjected to the minimum
pasteurization temperature for the required time period to render it pathogen free.
Some possible heating combinations are (1) 65.5 °C (150 °F) for 30 min, (2) 70 °C
(158 °F) for 10 min, or (3) 74 °C (165 °F) for 2 min. The authors stress that the
aforementioned temperatures are intended to be actual, correctly measured milk
sample temperatures, not temperatures of the water bath or other heating media.
Timing should not begin until the sample has reached the required temperature.
Some agitation of “heated” milk samples is advised, since all milk particles within
any portion of the sample vessel must be properly heated and covered to insure
“complete pasteurization” of the milk sample(s). One approach is placement of raw
milk samples into appropriate-sized test tubes (identity labeled) and insertion into
plastic or metal racks for subsequent immersion into a heated water bath. The tubes
must be clean and sterile so as not to impart off-flavors to the samples. There must
be no milk residue on the upper portion of the test tubes, or the entire sample will
not receive the required heat treatment. Sensory detection of serious off-flavors in
raw milk is not affected by any of the above-listed laboratory pasteurization condi-
tions (Bodyfelt, 1983).
5.6 The Milk Scorecard
Scoring the quality of milk by using standardized evaluation procedures, including

a milk scorecard, has historically been an important function in the dairy industry.
In general, a scorecard is now only used for recording flavor observations, although
the importance of other quality factors that were included in the original scorecard
should not be ignored. Bacterial counts, milk sample temperatures, and sediment
tests can be important data provided by the laboratory; they continue to be compo-
nents of the overall quality profile for a given milk product. Evaluating the container
and the closure is also a valid quality criterion; they should be evaluated when
appropriate or required. Flavor on the current scorecard is evaluated on a 10-point
scale according to the scoring guide (Table 5.1). A 100-point scorecard similar to
the original US Department of Agriculture card (which allows a bacterial maximum
of 20,000 CFU/ml and a maximum temperature of 7.2 °C [45 °F]) may still be used
by industry and in some clinics, competitions, and state fair judging. Other instru-
ments for recording scores derived from sensory observations may be in use by
Table 5.1 A suggested Amount of sedimenta Score

scoring guide for sediment in 0 3
processed milk
<0/02 mg 2
0.02–0.025 mg 1
>0.025 mg 0
a
Stirred sample. Discs with so
little sediment do not reproduce
clearly enough to be illustrated
(See 7 CFR 58.134)
individual organizations and companies or have been developed for specific pur-
poses during producing, processing, or marketing milk. During production, farmers
and workers need to know when off-flavors or conditions are present in milk so they
can make the necessary corrections to maintain quality, which is the real purpose of
all judging and scoring. An example of a milk judging scorecard is the one used in
FFA (Future Farmers of America) dairy product judging contests (Fig. 5.3). Judging
continues in the commercial dairy plants where milk is processed. The Collegiate
Dairy Products Evaluation Contest Coaches Committee first implemented a revised
scorecard for electronic grading trials in 1984 in Walnut Creek, CA (SFO), and a
revised card was formally approved in 1987 for official contest usage. The score-
card presently used for the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest was modi-
fied in 2019 (Fig. 5.4).
Familiarity with the scorecard and use of the associated scoring guide is impor-
tant for the milk product judge. The scoring guide provides a standard yardstick to
be applied for day-to-day quality assurance activities and making comparisons of
different samples or brands of a given product.
5.7 Some Milk Scoring Techniques
Sample Preparation of Characteristic Milk Flavors The identification of the char-

acteristic flavors of milk requires experience and training. Therefore, it may be nec-
essary to prepare training samples to gain experience in judging milk. Some specific
methods for sample preparation are found in the Appendix of this book.
Order of Examination and Scoring A scoring routine, which enables the evaluator
to make efficient use of time and which enhances “concentration of thought,” should
be followed. Furthermore, this routine should enable the judge to make direct com-
parisons between different samples, with respect to the various categories listed on
the scorecard. Before beginning, the name (or other identification) of the evaluator
should be placed in the space provided on the scorecard. If not already indicated on
the card, the numbers or identity of the samples should be placed consecutively
thereon. A basic order of examination might be as listed in the following paragraphs.
98 V. B. Alvarez
Sample Score Cards

National FFA Dairy Foods Career Development Event
Form I
Name
ID Number
Chapter
State
Write scores only on the line marked for participant's score. Mark (X) in space opposite
the defect noted and in proper sample column. Do Not write in space indicating official
score, grade differences and grade on defects.
Milk Flavor Evaluation

Sample Number
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Score
No Defects Student Score
10 points Official Score
Grade Difference
Range 1-10 Grade on Defects
Defects
(Defects Acid
Valued at 2 Bitter
points each) Feed
Flat/Watery
Foreign
Garlic/Onion
Malty
Oxidized/Metallic
Rancid
Salty
Unclean
No Defect
California Mastitis Test (CMT)

Sample Number
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Score
8 points Student Score
Official Score
Grade Difference
Milk Sediment
Sample Number
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Score
8 points Student Score
Official Score
Grade Difference
Problem Solving Total Score
50 points Part 1-25 points - (Number wrong)

Part II - 25 points - (Number wrong)
Milk Production Test - (Number wrong)
Score on Part I
Fig. 5.3 Farmer’s Bulletin 2259 milk judging scorecard used in FFA (Future Farmers of America)
dairy products judging contests
Milk
SAMPLE 1
FLAVOR SCORE: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NO CRITICISM: 10 NORMAL RANGE: 1-10
___ 1. Acid ___ 6. Flat ___ 11. Oxidized - Light

___ 2. Bitter ___ 7. Foreign ___ 12. Oxidized - Metal
___ 3. Cooked ___ 8. Garlic / Onion ___ 13. Rancid
___ 4. Feed ___ 9. Lacks Freshness ___ 14. Salty
___ 5. Fermented / Fruity ___ 10. Malty ___ 15. Unclean
SAMPLE 2

SAMPLE 3

SAMPLE 4

Fig. 5.4 Milk scorecard of the National Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest
Sediment If appropriate or conducted, sediment scoring should be performed first.

The kind, the amount, and the size of the sediment particles should be carefully
observed and scored. In scoring sediment discs, visual examinations and scoring
may be compared with standard charts or photographs of standard discs. However,
a mental image of this chart or photograph should become a part of the evaluator’s
skill, so that continued comparisons of sediment discs with actual visual standards
is not always necessary. USDA Sediment Standards are listed in 7 CFR 58.134.
Sediment content charts are available from the USDA, AMS, Dairy Programs, and
Dairy Standardization Branch (Figs. 5.5 and 5.6).
100 V. B. Alvarez
Fig. 5.5 Standard discs that represent known weights of sediment for a given volume of tempered
milk sample (one pint)
Fig. 5.6 A small grouping of sediment discs that demonstrate various weights of extraneous mate-
rial per pint of milk
Closure After having evaluated the milk for sediment, the closure (if evaluated)
should be carefully observed and scored. A perfect closure has three main functions,
namely (1) to contain the milk in the package or bottle, (2) to protect the pouring
surface against contamination, and (3) to seal the container against tampering with-
out some visible detection. In order to fulfill the protection requirements for bottles,
the cap (if employed) must cover the pouring lip at its greatest diameter.
When appropriate, the evaluator should observe whether the cap is properly
seated, so that there is no leakage that might cause microbial contamination. If a cap
is covered, this covering should be tight, waterproof, and tamperproof. If possible,
it should be determined whether the closure was inserted by hand or by machine.
Hand capping is generally prohibited by milk ordinances, due to the greater risk of
contaminating milk through associated human contact. Thus, certain observations
and judgments should be made relative to the closure itself, namely, whether it fully
protects the pouring lip, whether it is properly seated, whether it is leaky, and
(should the closure be covered) whether the covering is fastened securely and made
of waterproof material and whether the closure adequately seals the container. The
2019 PMO states
Capping, closing, or sealing of milk and milk product containers shall be done in a sanitary
manner by approved mechanical capping, closing, and/or sealing equipment. The cap or
closure shall be designed and applied in such a manner that the pouring lip is protected to
at least its largest diameter and with regard to fluid product containers, removal cannot be
made without detection.
Although plastic bottles are the most common containers, in principle, the same
criteria apply to closures for glass and paper containers. An examination of the heat
seal of the carton is appropriate for paperboard. It must be adequate to prevent con-
tamination of the milk, but it should not be as rigid or tenacious as to make opening
of the carton unduly difficult. Also, excessive heat from the “sealing jaws” of the
carton filler may burn or scorch the polyethylene coating. This may lead to an unat-
tractive carton appearance at best and a “burnt-plastic” off-flavor at worst; the latter
(flavor) defect is most objectionable to consumers.
Container Multiuse containers should be examined for the extent of fullness,
cleanliness, and freedom from dents, cracks, or chips, especially on or near the
pouring lip. Any condition of the container that may interfere with contents’ safety
and wholesomeness should be carefully observed and noted. With practice, this
observation may be made quickly and accurately.
Single-service plastic containers have exactly the same requirements for cleanli-
ness and freedom from leakage and damage, but they generally lack the sidewall
rigidity to readily determine the precise level of fill. The 2019 PMO contains sanita-
tion guidelines for the manufacture of single-service containers for milk and milk
products. Single-service plastic and paper containers are examined for cleanliness,
rigidity, freedom from leakage, smoothness, and adherence of paperboard coating.
The correct fill level can best be determined by actual measurement of milk volume
per container by pouring contents into a graduated cylinder.
Flavor The evaluation of milk for flavor is generally done after the other items of
sediment, container, and closures have been considered. At the time of scoring, the
milk should be adequately tempered to optimize the detection of any possible
odor(s) in the sample(s). Simultaneously, the milk sample should be sufficiently low
in temperature that it will increase appreciably when the sample is placed into the
mouth. A temperature range of 12.8–18.3 °C (55–65 °F) for the sample has been
found to be most satisfactory for scoring milk.
102 V. B. Alvarez
Occasionally, when appropriate or a problem is suspected, the evaluator should

remove the cap before mixing the milk and closely inspect the underside of the
closure for possible adherence of cream or foam, and then examine the milk sample
for the possible presence of a cream plug.
Milk samples for tasting should be poured into clean, odorless drinking contain-
ers (i.e., sanitary and nontoxic) that are made of glass (preferably), plastic, or paper.
The products should be protected from both direct sunlight and overhead fluores-
cent lighting to prevent oxidative degradation. Any size between 3.18 cm (1.25 in)
and 1.0 cm (0.4 in) is appropriate. The milk judge should make certain that the milk
is well mixed by gently swirling the container contents in a circular pattern just
before sampling. By placing the nose directly over the container immediately after
the milk has been swirled in the container, and taking a full “whiff” of air, any off-
odor that may be present can be more readily noted.
Soon after the sample (10–15 ml) is poured, the judge should take a generous sip,
roll it about the mouth, note the flavor sensation, and then expectorate. Sometimes,
any aftertaste may be enhanced by drawing a breath of fresh air very slowly through
the mouth and then exhaling slowly through the nose. Swallowing raw milk as a
means of detecting off-flavors is an inadvisable practice.
Agitation (or swirling) of the milk leaves a thin film of milk on the inner surface
of the container, which tends to evaporate, thus readily optimizing the opportunity
to detect any odor(s) that may be present. If the evaluator is perceptive, even the
faintest odors may be detected in this way. If several judges participate in the sen-
sory evaluation, the container when temporarily uncapped and sniffed should always
be handled in a sanitary manner. Sniffing the individual sampling cup, after tasting
the sample previously in it, is a good option.
5.8 Requirements of High-Quality Fluid Milk
Evaluating Sediment in Milk Consumers want and insist that milk be free of for-
eign matter, which is certainly a reasonable expectation. The critical factors that
determine the entry of foreign or extraneous matter into milk are (1) the sanitation
and care during the milking process, (2) the efficiency of milk straining or filtering
on the farm, (3) the efficiency of clarification at the plant, (4) the cleanliness of
equipment and containers, and (5) avoidance of milk contamination whenever it is
exposed to the atmosphere.
Milk samples can be scored for sediment content either by observing the parti-
cles of sediment that may have settled to the bottom of a bottle or by observing the
sediment collected on a cotton disc. Obviously, direct observation for sediment is
only possible when transparent containers are used. When several samples are com-
pared, the container size or the sample size (from which the sediment is obtained)
should be standardized.
For the cotton disc method (US Department of Agriculture Sediment Standards
for Milk; 7 CFR, 58 2730), one-pint samples are used under standardized conditions
of temperature and aspiration. The comparisons with a chart or standard photograph
(Fig. 5.5) should be made on the potential sediment found in one pint of tempered
milk [35–38 °C (95–100 °F)].
The visual assessment for sediment particles on the bottom surface of bottles
(when held above the eyes) is somewhat tedious and inaccurate. When several eval-
uators are handling the same milk samples, some of the sediment particles are likely
to be remixed with the milk, which makes them invisible. In the absence of good
light, it is also difficult to observe all possible particles. On the other hand, scoring
sediment from the bottom of the bottle offers the advantages of speed and simplic-
ity, since no preparation of sediment discs is necessary. In the routine examination
of non-homogenized bottled milk, where emphasis is usually placed on the flavor
quality of the milk, the observation for possible sediment on the bottom of the bottle
is desirable, but it should be remembered that this method only furnishes an indica-
tion of the presence or absence of particles that are too large to be “rafted” upward
into the cream layer.
In the sediment disc method, the sediment (or extraneous matter) is concentrated
and firmly fixed on a white cotton or lintine disc, where it may be studied more care-
fully and “filed” for later reference. The sediment discs are prepared by filtering one
pint of tempered milk through a round, white cotton pad of 1.0-cm-diameter filter-
ing area. The sediment discs are protected and stored for later reexamination by
placing them on a cardboard receptacle (covered with cellophane) or placing them
in a clean, covered Petri dish.
For the occasional testing of raw milk from cans, the off-the-bottom method is
used, which employs a sediment tester especially designed for this purpose. One
pint of milk is collected from the bottom of an undisturbed can of milk, and the sedi-
ment is collected on a 1.25-in (3.18 cm) disc. One-pint samples are more frequently
collected from bulk tanks for sediment testing, after the milk has been well agitated.
The sediment tester for milk from bulk tanks is fitted with a 0.4-in (1.0 cm) diameter
orifice, so that the sediment is concentrated in a smaller cross-section. Pasteurized
milk may be sampled for sediment only after thorough mixing in the original
container.
Each disc may then be compared to a standard chart or photograph that reflects
the appropriate sediment ratings. To score “perfect” on sediment, there should not
even be a trace of foreign particles on the disc, or any discoloring of the disc, except
that due to the natural pigments of milk. Deductions are made in accordance with
the amount, kind, and size of foreign particles present, as well as for any smudgy
appearance. If the milk were not strained or filtered on the farm, the amount of sedi-
ment on the disc would readily indicate the general cleanliness and care taken in
production. However, if the milk were strained or filtered, the amount of sediment
merely indicates the efficiency of that process or the amount of sediment subse-
quently accumulated.
Sediment standards for raw milk have been developed by the USDA and are
published in the CFR, Title 7, Part 58.134. Standard discs containing known weights
104 V. B. Alvarez
of sediment are shown in Figs. 5.5 and 5.6. Discs prepared from milk samples are
evaluated by comparing them to these standard discs.
The presence of any sediment in the finished product is serious since the con-
sumer may be quick in registering a complaint. Thus, anything over a trace of sedi-
ment may cause the product to be unmarketable and should receive a score of “zero.”
Obviously, products in containers ready for the consumer should be scored differ-
ently than raw milk. While 0.5 mg of sediment/pint may be “acceptable” for raw
milk, this much sediment is excessive and should receive a score of “zero” if found
in any finished product. One possible scoring system for finished products is the
following: no sediment, 3; more than “no sediment” but less than 0.02 mg/disc, 2;
0.025 mg/disc, 1; and over 0.025 mg/disc, 0 (Table 5.1).
Evaluating Bacterial Content The maximum permissible bacterial counts for raw
Grade A and pasteurized market milk are specified in the 2019 Grade A Pasteurized
Milk Ordinance. For pasteurized milk, the upper limit of the PMO is 20,000 CFU/
ml and is not to exceed 10 coliforms/ml. Thus, a sample that has a standard bacterial
plate count (SPC) of more than 20,000 CFU/ml or a coliform count (performed by
standard methods) of more than 10 coliforms/ml should receive a score of “zero” for
bacteria. As emphasized earlier, a report of the actual bacterial count is usually more
meaningful than a bacterial score for most quality control purposes.
The examination of milk for bacterial content is a laboratory procedure that can
be performed by a qualified technician who may have no experience in milk judg-
ing. The bacterial count of milk potentially reveals the general conditions of sanita-
tion and temperature control under which the milk was produced, handled, and held.
High-quality milk should be relatively low in bacteria content, but milk with low
bacterial counts may not always necessarily exhibit satisfactory flavor characteris-
tics. If off-flavors in milk are the result of bacterial growth, the bacterial count is
usually in the millions per ml. However, serious off-flavors may also be found in
milk that is low in bacteria, since numerous milk off-flavors are not due to bacterial
activity. Frequently, there is no correlation between milk bacterial count and milk
flavor quality, unless there is sufficient growth and development of microorganisms
in the milk to form reaction end products such as lactic acid and/or volatile com-
pounds from proteolysis or lipolysis. However, in such instances, the physical
appearance of milk may be changed. A significant consequence of this (for quality
determination) is that many off-flavors produced by bacteria in raw milk usually
persist in the pasteurized milk, even though few of the bacteria are likely to survive
the heat treatment of pasteurization.
When evaluating market milk and other milk products for competitive purposes,
the scoring system should be based on both the total bacteria and coliform counts.
A suggested scoring guide for total bacterial and coliform counts of milk is shown
in Table 5.2. A sample may receive a score for bacterial content ranging from “0 to
5,” based on the outcome of either the total bacterial count or the coliform count (or
both counts). Typically the score is determined for each separately, and the lower of
the two scores is the score assigned to the sample. For example, a sample with
13,000 CFU/ml and 1 coliform/ml would receive a score of “2” on the basis of the
Table 5.2 A suggested Standard plate count CFU/ml Coliforms/ml Score

scoring guide for >20,000 >10 0
bacteria in milk
>16,000–20,000 10 1
>12,000–16,000 7–9 2
>8000–12,000 4–6 3
>3000–8000 1–3 4
≤3000 0 5
The score for each of the criteria is determined sepa-
rately; the lower of the two scores is assigned to the
given sample
bacterial count and a “4” on the basis of the coliform count. The lower score of “2”
would be assigned to the sample.
Evaluating Container and Closure Multiuse (glass and plastic) containers should
have an attractive appearance, be clean, and contain the full volume of milk (as
indicated by the label). The bottle contents should be protected from contamination
(Bodyfelt et al., 1976; Gasaway & Lindsay, 1979; Landsberg et al., 1977) by a well-
made, properly seated, waterproof cap that protects the pouring lip. Attractive milk
bottles should be free from dirt and dust and should exhibit no case wear and/or
caustic etching (surface abrasions). A chipped bottle lip often results in a leaky or
poorly seated cap and may harbor microorganisms due to roughened surfaces.
Single-service paper and plastic containers should reflect cleanliness, recent fill-
ing, and freshness and should possess a dry, firm, rigid, and milk solid-free surface.
A weakening of the packaging material, as indicated by pronounced bulging of the
container sidewalls, should not be evident. There should be no leakage of unopened
containers.
Fullness of the Container There is a legal requirement that milk containers must
be filled to the expected volume of milk, as indicated by the size of the container
and/or label statement. Tolerances and the methods of measurement may vary from
state to state, but certain compliance requirements are inescapable. Some containers
may have an indicated fill line and can be assessed for fullness by visual observa-
tion. These are usually rigid containers, such as those made of glass. When more
flexible packaging materials are used, or when the container is opaque so that the
level of fill cannot be seen, a volumetric measurement of the contents at a predeter-
mined temperature is necessary. It should be remembered that the density of a liquid
varies with temperature and the volume increases with temperature rise.
Bottle Closures As previously stated, the closure has three basic functions: (1) to
retain the milk within the container, (2) to protect the pouring lip from contamina-
tion, and (3) to seal the container against tampering. The closure is assessed on the
completeness with which it fulfills these three functions. The cap is intended pri-
marily to retain the milk within the bottle. In addition, a cap that meets the US
Public Health Service requirements for Grade A milk protects the pouring lip of the
106 V. B. Alvarez
bottle from contamination; it also protects the filled container against tampering and
should leave evidence if it has occurred.
In the past, more kinds of milk bottle closures or caps were used than are cur-
rently employed. As the recommendations of the PMO were more widely adopted,
many of the then-existing closures simply did not comply. Current container clo-
sures generally meet all of these requirements regarding protection of the pouring
lip and provide some safeguards against tampering. Table 5.3 lists possible defects
that apply to containers and closures of both multiuse and single-service containers.
The term “unsealed” is used to mean “not tamperproof.” Closures that meet the
requirements of the 2019 PMO satisfy the “sealed” criterion. The term “tamper-
proof” may be subject to legal interpretation, which cannot be adequately addressed
here. Approval of specific containers and closures by appropriate public health
enforcement agencies is a necessary requirement, as possible tampering with milk
would be a serious matter. When evaluating closures, the presumption that a pack-
age is sealed occurs when the closure cannot be removed and replaced without obvi-
ous detection. Unfortunately, to make a container absolutely tamperproof would
require extreme measures and perhaps prohibitive expense.
Scoring Containers and Closures Since there is no recently accepted system for
scoring containers and closures, the following may be used as a suggestion in devel-
oping a scoring guide (Table 5.4). A so-called “perfect” container could be assigned
a score of “5.0.” At the other extreme, any milk container that does not meet the
2019 PMO recommendations should be disqualified and assigned a score of “0.”
Table 5.3 A suggested scoring guide for the appearance and integrity of milk containers
Intensity of defect
Defecta Slightb Moderate Definite Strong Pronouncedc
Container: bulging/distorted 4 3 2 1 0d
Dented/defective 3 2 1 0 0
Dirty inside 0 0 0 0 0
Dirty outside 2 1 0 0 0
Leaky 0 0 0 0 0
Not full 4 3 2 1 0
Closure defective 0 0 0 0 0
Coating cracked/flaky 4 3 2 1 0
Heat seal defective 4 3 2 1 0
Illegible printing 4 3 2 1 0
Incorrect label/code 3 2 1 0 0
Pouring lip: chipped 4 3 2 1 0
Cover not waterproof 3 2 1 0 0
Unprotected 3 2 1 0 0
a
“No criticism” is assigned a score of “5.” Normal range is 1–5 for a salable product
b
Highest assignable score for a slight intensity of the given defect
c
Highest assignable score for a pronounced intensity of the given defect
d
An assigned score of zero (“0”) is indicative of an unsalable product
Table 5.4 Possible defects of milk containers and closures of the multiuse and single-service types
Container closure unsealed Flaky or cracked coating
Incorrect fill measurement Closure poorly sealed or leaky
Container dirty on the outside Defective heat seal
Container dirty on the inside Lip chipped
Container dented or defected Lip unprotected
Container leaky Lip cover not waterproof
Container bulging or distorted Torn closure cover
Illegible printing on container Lack of, or incorrect, code or labeling
Containers that are dirty inside and leaky or have closures that are defective or leaky
should also be disqualified and receive a score of “0.” Most other defects might
carry a penalty of 1 point for slight, 2–3 points for moderate, and 4 or 5 points for
pronounced intensity. In this scoring scheme, if several defects are encountered, the
deductions should be additive.
Evaluating Temperature The temperature at which pasteurized market milk and

other fluid products are held is very important in determining the keeping quality
and for retention of good flavor characteristics. Even commercially sterile milk,
which is microbiologically stable at room temperature, may actually suffer more
rapid flavor deterioration at higher storage temperatures.
The 2019 PMO recommendations for storage temperature of Grade A pasteur-
ized milk sets 7.2 °C (45 °F) as the maximum acceptable temperature. In view of the
longer keeping-quality demands placed on milk, 7.2 °C (45 °F) should be consid-
ered the highest milk storage temperature permissible; however, temperatures below
4.4 °C (40 °F) are definitely preferable for helping extend shelf life. Frequent line
temperature checks should be made of milk coming from the cooling section of the
pasteurizer, surge tanks, and filler and the product when packaged, in cold storage,
in transport, and in retail store coolers and display cases (Bodyfelt, 1974, 1980a;
Bodyfelt & Davidson, 1975, 1976; Lewis & Deeth, 2009).
Automation, artificial intelligence, and intelligent packaging are developments
that significantly influence dairy processing operations by improving hygiene and
protecting and prolonging the shelf life of dairy products, all the while diminishing
human involvement. Among these developments are continuous monitoring indica-
tors (CMI) for freshness, gases, package integrity, aroma, color, viscosity, and
serum properties, in addition to the widely accepted time-temperature indicators
(TTI) (Mirza Alizadeh et al., 2020). These technologies include instrumentation
such as barcodes, biosensors, and radiofrequency identification (RFID), an advanced
wireless data carrier that uses radio waves for identification and tracking of prod-
ucts. These instruments are powerful tools in monitoring food quality and safety.
Research has shown that use of RFID in raw milk transportation can prevent milk
deterioration (Dabbene et al., 2014).
Each technology has specific applications. Barcodes are the most economical
category and act as data carriers for traceability from field to table. Biosensors have
108 V. B. Alvarez
bio-diagnostic elements that convert biological responses into electrical signals that
can be traced and quantified. Gas sensors can measure the amount and composition
of gases produced by spoilage organisms or gases that enter the package from the
external environment and indicate spoilage with a chemical or enzymatic reaction
that changes the color of the sensor. Similarly, TTI produces irreversible visual
responses/changes such as mechanical transfiguration, color development, move-
ment or change due to time, and temperature-dependent chemical, microbiological,
mechanical, or enzymatic factors. In dairy packaging, the TTI enzymatic reaction,
which indicates the time-temperature change, is based on the reduction of pH and
subsequent color change due to temperature fluctuation caused by the production of
an acid by enzymatic hydrolysis (Mirza Alizadeh et al., 2020). Mimica Touch is a
dairy freshness indicator for milk packaging with three regions: a permanent smooth
surface, written expiration date, and a bumpy surface, which is initially smooth and
is converted to a bumpy surface when the food becomes spoiled. In the dairy indus-
try, nano sensors that are made of bio-nanocomposite polymer matrices are used for
the detection of microorganisms such as mycobacterium (Joyner & Kumar, 2015).
An applied example of these developments is the Xsense® system that continu-
ously monitors the temperature and relative humidity (RH) of refrigerators and
freezers at the Ohio State University’s Food Industries Center (Fig. 5.7a–c).
There is no generally accepted scoring system for temperature. What follows is
only a suggested approach that may be applied for scoring the temperature of milk
products. For in-house quality assurance program purposes, it seems more logical to
record or graph the actual temperature(s) (Bodyfelt, 1974) than to assign a score.
Integration of a computer data handling system with electronic temperature sensors
allows for enhanced efficiency of data gathering and interpretation. If a score is
more appropriate, such as in competitions (when samples are picked up at the plant
or from a retail establishment), a two-point scale may be employed. A sample that
Fig. 5.7 The Xsense® system is a cloud-based management and reporting system (a) that is acces-
sible from an internet browser by users with authorization. It ensures that temperature-sensitive
products are stored and shipped properly and safely. The system proactively monitors (b), ana-
lyzes, and disseminates temperature and relative humidity (RH) data (c) that can be reviewed by
all responsible personnel. The system also sends alerts of temperature and RH fluctuations from
pre-set thresholds and generates recommendations on how to maintain the quality of perishable
products throughout the cold chain
is above 7.2 °C (45 °F) is not in compliance and should conceivably receive a score
of “zero.” At the other extreme, samples at a temperature of 4.4 °C (40 °F) or lower
could be assigned a perfect score of “2.” When the sample temperature is between
4 °C and 7.2 °C (40 °F and 45 °F), a score of “1” would be assigned. Sample tem-
peratures of >7.2 °C (>45 °F) should probably be disqualified from competition,
since both quality and public health concerns may be at stake.
Requirements for Grade A raw milk for pasteurization as specified by the 2019
PMO are as follows: “Cooled to 7 °C (45 °F) or less within 2 h after milking, pro-
vided that the blend temperature after the first and subsequent milkings does not
exceed 10 °C (50 °F).” Thus, the “temperature scoring” of raw milk would depend
upon the time elapsed between the milking and the temperature of milk when it is
measured. After 2 h, the scoring system would be the same as that used for pasteur-
ized milk, since the requirements are identical. The milk should be disqualified from
competition whenever its temperature is above 10 °C (50 °F).
5.9 Evaluating Milk Flavor
Desired Milk Properties Typically, the flavor of whole milk should be pleasantly
sweet and should possess neither a foretaste nor an aftertaste other than that imparted
by the natural richness due to the milkfat and other milk solids (Bodyfelt et al.,
1988; Molina et al., 2009). The evaluator should not assume or expect that a sample
of good (high-quality) flavor milk will have a “taste,” per se. Judges should remem-
ber that when milk clearly exhibits a so-called “taste,” there is usually something
“wrong” with the flavor of that milk sample. Milk of excellent quality should seem
pleasantly sweet and leave only a clean, pleasing sensation after the sample has
been expectorated or swallowed. The mixed sample should also be perfectly homo-
geneous (i.e., exhibit no buttery particles or graininess). When the closure of the
unshaken bottle is removed, there should be no evidence of adhering cream, foam,
or butter granules, and the milk should not show a cream plug unless
non-homogenized.
Placing Samples into Flavor Groups With appropriate training, the evaluator
should be able to classify the flavor quality of milk samples into categories of excel-
lent (10), good (7–9), fair (4–6), poor (1–3), and unacceptable (0). The next step for
a milk judge might be to rate the samples within the group into which it falls; that
is, whether the flavor quality (relative merits) is such as to place it as average, high,
or low in that group. Since each group has a range of numerical scores, it should
become relatively easy to place a numerical flavor score or grouping on the respec-
tive samples. Further assistance has been provided by various professional groups
that have developed scoring guides that are illustrated in Tables 5.5 and 5.6, which
suggest scores for milk that possess varied intensities of specific defects. The scor-
ing guide for milk shown in Table 5.5 was adopted by the Collegiate Dairy Products
Evaluation Contest (CDPEC), now called the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation
110 V. B. Alvarez
Table 5.5 The Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest scoring guide for off-flavors of milk
and cream
Intensity of defect
Flavor defect Slight Definite Pronounced
Acid 3 1 a
Bitter 5 3 1
Cooked 9 8 6
Feed 9 8 5
Fermented/fruity 5 3 1
Flat 9 8 7
Foreign 5 3 1
Garlic/onion 5 3 1
Lacks freshness 8 7 6
Malty 5 3 1
Oxidized—Light 6 4 1
Oxidized—Metal 5 3 1
Rancid 4 1 a
Salty 8 6 4
Unclean 3 1 a
Note: A slight cooked flavor that is not objectionable may be scored a perfect 10 with no criticism
(butter only)
a
Unsalable
Coaches Committee. To use a guide, the evaluator should be somewhat proficient in

the identification of various flavor defects of milk.
Undesirable Flavors Milk is generally considered to have a flavor defect if it mani-

fests an odor, a foretaste, or an aftertaste or does not leave the mouth in a clean,
sweet, pleasant condition following tasting (Molina et al., 2009). Some samples
may simultaneously have more than one flavor defect. In this case, the assigned
flavor score usually corresponds to the most serious defect of the several noted. The
scoring guide in Table 5.5 lists the most frequently encountered off-flavors of milk.
Whenever a flavor defect is encountered that differs from those listed on the scoring
guide (which happens occasionally), it should be described in the most descriptive
or associative term(s) possible (e.g., “foreign”) and entered on a blank line of the
scorecard. In such a case, the assignment of a numerical score may be difficult,
particularly when such a defect may be encountered for the first time. Evaluators
must draw upon their experience and sound judgment in assessing the degree of
seriousness of uncommon defects.
The description, taste, and smell sensations, and cause(s) of the different off-
flavors of milk, follow in alphabetical order (as noted in Table 5.5). In general, off-
flavors of milk may be categorized into four major (A-B-C-D) groupings: absorbed
(barny, cowy, feed, garlic/onion), bacterial (acid, bitter, fruity/fermented, malty,
rancid, unclean [i.e., psychrotrophic]), chemical (astringent, cooked, lacks fresh-
ness, light oxidized, metal oxidized, rancid), and delinquency (flat, foreign, salty,
unclean). When considering the values associated with the various off-flavors on the
CDPEC milk scorecard, bacterial-derived off-flavors tend to receive lowest marks.
Understanding the root causes of the respective off-flavors should help the evaluator
remedy the situation. The terms astringent, barny, and cowy have been removed
from the CDPEC milk scorecard, due to general improvements in the quality of the
US milk supply. However, since these defects may occur in other countries or in rare
instances in the USA, they are included in the following discussion.
Acid Although acid/sour is a basic taste, the “acid” or “sour” off-flavor of milk is
detected by both the sense of smell and the sense of taste. When Lactococcus lactis
subsp. cremoris, or other acid-producing organisms, grow in milk and convert the
lactose (milk sugar) into lactic acid and other by-products, a distinguishable, char-
acteristic odor is emitted by the formed end products. Most milk judges can readily
detect this odor, despite the fact that up to this point, sufficient acid may not have
been produced to be detected by the sense of taste. As the fermentation progresses,
the acid taste becomes more pronounced, and the odor may become less offensive.
Acid milk that is likely caused by temperature abuse imparts to the tip of the tongue
a peeling or tingling effect. An acid taste tends to leave both the tongue and the
mouth with a general feeling of “cleanliness” or an enhanced ability to taste.
Astringent This sensory defect, “astringent,” is not very common in beverage milk.
Astringency is best noted by a peculiar mouthfeel after having rolled a sample of the
milk about the mouth and expectorating it. In astringency, the tongue and linings of
the mouth tend to feel shriveled, almost puckered. Some milk judges that have a
relatively high threshold value for rancid taste may possibly perceive this astringent
feel at the base and/or back of the tongue when they taste slightly rancid milk.
Hence, experiencing an astringency sensation may serve as a hint to such judges to
observe more carefully for possible rancidity.
Cowy, Barny, and Unclean Cowy is a characteristic flavor of milk that is mainly
attributed to the presence of low-molecular-weight fatty acids, nitrogen heterocyclic
compounds, phenolics, γ-lactones, phytol and acetone derivates, and volatile car-
bonyl products present in fresh milk. Methyl sulfide contributes significantly to the
characteristic flavor of milk (Bendall, 2001; Patton et al., 1956). Additional com-
pounds were reported by Bendall (2001) who identified 66 characteristic com-
pounds in fresh milk from cows fed with pasture and supplemented diets. The
compounds found in significant concentrations were hept-cis-4-enal, 2-acetyl-1-
pyrroline, 3-methylbutyric acid, benzothiazole, cis-3-methyl-γ-nonalactone, indole,
γ-12:2, and γ-16. Higher concentrations of alkyl phenols lead to formation of
“cowy” and “barny” off-flavors. Still higher concentrations of alkyl phenols lead to
generally unpleasant “unclean”-type flavors (Cadwallader & Singh, 2009; Lindsay,
2002). Usually, a “cowy” flavor defect implies a distinct cow’s breath-like odor and
a persistent unpleasant, medicinal, or chemical aftertaste. In the past, a number of
off-flavors were grouped together under the general heading of “barny.” The distinc-
tion between “smothered,” “cowy,” “barny,” and “unclean” off-flavors was thought
112 V. B. Alvarez
to be one of intensity rather than a difference in perceived sensory characteristics.

Currently, the term “smothered” is seldom used. The barny off-flavor is detected by
sniffing and/or tasting. A characteristic unpleasant aftertaste is most noticeable
immediately after sample expectoration. This off-flavor is suggestive of the fecal
odor of a poorly maintained barn and leaves a persistent, unclean aftertaste.
Bitter A pure, unassociated “bitter” off-flavor can be detected by taste only.

Compared to acid/sour, sweet, and salty, the reaction time for bitterness is relatively
slow; hence, the evaluator must guard against premature judgment. Bitterness is
best detected at the base of the tongue (back of the mouth), and this taste sensation
tends to persist for a relatively long time. Although a bitter off-flavor may be
encountered as a singular defect in milk, it may also be associated with other defects.
In some cases, an associated astringency may be noted. Some evaluators find bitter-
ness a distinctive feature of the rancid off-flavor, which will be discussed in subse-
quent paragraphs. A foreign off-flavor may also exhibit a bitter note, if the foreign
substance that entered the milk has a bitter taste. Two common causes of bitterness
are specific weeds (consumed as part of the roughage by cows) and certain micro-
organisms, especially some psychrotrophic bacteria. Proteolysis of milk proteins
often results in bitter flavors and further degradation of amino acids produces putrid
flavors in milk (Dolci & Cocolin, 2017; Shipe et al., 1978).
Cooked Although “cooked” is the only designation that commonly appears on

milk scorecards, this term actually represents a range of possible heat-induced sen-
sations of milk and milk products. Upon storage, the heat-induced flavor of pasteur-
ized milk tends to change both in intensity and character. Immediately after
processing, the flavor may be quite intense, but after 24 h has elapsed, there is usu-
ally a marked reduction in its intensity. Thus, with respect to the cooked flavor, milk
flavor may tend to improve during storage, or at least change in characteristics
(Anderson & Oste, 1992; Calvo & De La Hoz, 1992; Fink & Kessler, 1986; Zabbia
et al., 2012). This improvement in flavor is not the case with highly heated products
that have acquired a “caramelized” off-flavor that may be found in UHT, evapo-
rated, or condensed milk. This flavor defect is produced by a different mechanism
of chemical interaction of milk components; the caramellike note frequently inten-
sifies and becomes increasingly more objectionable with increased storage.
Gould (1939) demonstrated that the cooked flavor of milk appeared abruptly
within a very narrow limit at a temperature of 76–78 °C (168.8–172.4 °F). Below
this processing temperature, heated milk did not appear to develop the cooked fla-
vor. The flavor note that remains in moderately heated milk after refrigerated stor-
age, particularly when higher processing temperatures are used, is generally
described as “heated” (Boelrijk et al., 2003; Zabbia et al., 2012). This distinguishes
it from the more aromatic sensation suggestive of sulfides, which is more typical of
the cooked flavor (Boelrijk et al., 2003; Patton et al., 1956; Zabbia et al., 2012).
In the report of the American Dairy Science Association (ADSA) Committee on
Flavor Nomenclature and Reference Standards, Shipe et al. (1978) recognized four
kinds of heat-induced flavors: (1) cooked or sulfurous, (2) heated or rich, (3) cara-
melized, and (4) scorched. The variety of heat-induced flavor that is encountered
depends on a combination of the heating time and the attained temperature, the
length of refrigerated storage time for pasteurized milk, and the amount of “product
burn-on” in the heat exchanger.
Both the heated and cooked flavors are easily identified. Taste reaction time is
relatively quick, and the taste sensation that remains after sample expectoration is
usually considered to be pleasant. Cooked flavor may especially be noted by the
sense of smell. As the sampling container is brought to the lips and in close proxim-
ity to the nose, the characteristic volatility of the cooked note should provide the
judge with a hint of what particular flavor is present in the milk. The presence of
“moderately heated” flavors in milk is not particularly objectionable to consumers
(or judges), but a pronounced degree of “cooked” flavor is frowned upon. In extreme
cases, the aroma may be reminiscent of hard-boiled eggs. Of particular note, when
a heated flavor occurs in milk or cream products, an accompanying oxidized off-
flavor is seldom, if ever, present (Calvo & De La Hoz, 1992). This lack of oxidized
off-flavor is presumably due to certain formed end products of heated milk that have
“reducing ability.” Jenness and Patton (1959) reported that heated and dried milk
both contain reducing substances involving sulfhydryl (–SH) compounds, ascorbic
acids, and substances associated with browning reactions. Thus, in ice cream or but-
ter, a cooked or heated flavor is often recognized as “the flavor of assurance” for the
improved keeping quality of milk products, insofar as possible auto-oxidation of
milk lipids is involved. Fortunately, natural antioxidants are formed in milk by the
heating process. Additional merits of a cooked flavor in milk and cream are that it
(1) serves to help mask more objectionable feed off-flavors and (2) may provide
improved richness and/or mouthfeel sensations in the product.
Feed Some feeds, especially high-volume roughages, impart aromatic taints to
milk if fed to cows within a critical time frame before milking. The 0.5–3 h time
period is the most critical (Drake et al., 2008; Hedrick, 1955; Mounchilli et al.,
2005). This aromatic taint is especially true of succulent feeds, silage, some com-
modities, brewery wastes, and some hays (Table 5.6). A “feed” off-flavor is charac-
teristic in that it is aromatic, sometimes pleasant (i.e., alfalfa), and can usually be
readily detected by the sense of smell. A characteristic note (and mild aftertaste) of
“cleanliness” is associated with most feed off-flavors, when the milk sample is
expectorated. This cleanliness note distinguishes the feed off-flavor from cowy,
barny, or unclean off-flavors. Feed off-flavors usually “disappear” rather quickly
and thus leave the mouth in a clean state of condition. By contrast, cowy, barny, or
unclean off-flavors tend to persist with an accompanying unpleasant, somewhat
“dirty,” aftertaste. Beginner judges may experience some difficulty in distinguishing
between a slight barny and a feed off-flavor of moderate to definite intensity.
Obviously, the characteristic odor/taste of feed off-flavors varies with the type of
feed consumed by lactating animals. The odor of a given raw milk supply is gener-
ally characteristic of a particular feed. In some US dairy regions, a severe feed
defect is often observed early in the spring when the all-dry winter ration is
114 V. B. Alvarez
Table 5.6 Feed flavors transmitted to milk in relation to the quantity of roughage and length of
interval prior to milking
No. Feed Amount of feed (lb) Interval before milking (h) Flavor of resulting milk
1 Alfalfa hay 2–6 2 Objectionable feed
2 Alfalfa hay 2–6 4 Occasional feed
3 Alfalfa hay 2–6 5 No criticism
4 Alfalfa silage 5 1 Definite feed
5 Alfalfa silage 15–25 11 No criticism
6 Clover hay 6 2 Pronounced feed
7 Clover hay 15–20 11 No criticism
8 Clover silage 5 1 Definite feed
9 Clover silage 15–20 11 No criticism
10 Green corn 25 1 Slight feed
11 Green corn 25 11 No criticism
12 Dry beet pulp 7 1 Slight feed
13 Oat hay 12 2 No criticism
From: Hedrick (1955)
terminated and changed to one that includes fresh green pasture. Also, severe feed
off-flavors are likely to occur when there is a sudden change to a new, more odorous
form of roughage, such as from alfalfa hay to corn or grass silage.
To minimize the occurrence of objectionable feed off-flavors, milk producers
must be aware of the need to avoid the feeding of highly aromatic roughages in the
0.5–3 h just prior to milking. This time frame is an important production manage-
ment task if milk of good flavor quality is to be produced.
Current farm management options within the global dairy industry find renewed
reliance on pasture feeding, which is often considered more consistent and in line
with organic farming protocols. Farmstead cheesemakers are discovering and ben-
efiting from so-called “grassy flavors” within their milk with such extensive reliance
on grass grazing or feeding for the primary roughage source. The unique grassy
flavors of milk appear to transfer favorably and uniquely to the types of cheeses
produced under such production conditions.
Fermented/Fruity Certain microorganisms produce aromatic fermentation end
products that seriously taint milk; this off-flavor is variously described as “fer-
mented” or “fruity” (Crow et al., 2002; Hayes et al., 2002; Morgan, 1976;
Poltronieri et al., 2017). The off-flavor is quickly and easily detected by its odor,
which may resemble that of sauerkraut or vinegar (fermented) or pineapple,
apples, or other fruits (fruity). This flavor is considered a rather serious defect; it
is often found after extended storage of bulk raw milk, as well as in older pasteur-
ized milk. This off-flavor is commonly caused by the growth of psychrotrophic
bacteria, especially certain Pseudomonas sp. (e.g., P. fragi) (Cormier et al., 1991;
Molina et al., 2009).
Flat Since “flat” as a flavor defect is not associated with an odor, the sense of smell
furnishes absolutely no indication of its possible presence. However, when flat milk
is tasted, flatness is apparent soon after the sample reaches the tongue, partly as the
result of a marked change in perceived mouthfeel. This flavor defect can be simu-
lated by adding water to a sample of milk and noting the alteration of mouthfeel of
the mixture. A flat flavor should not be confused with a “lack of richness” sensation
in milk. The latter usually exhibits a level of sweetness, whereas the former does
not. Currently, in the CDPEC, 2% low-fat milk is evaluated, which contains approx-
imately 33% less milkfat than whole milk. For some evaluators, a slight intensity of
oxidized off-flavor may be perceived as a flat taste on initial tasting.
Foreign (Atypical) As the name implies, a “foreign” off-flavor is not commonly

developed in or associated with milk; in fact, it is most atypical of a fluid milk bev-
erage. In some instances, a foreign off-flavor in milk may be detected by the sense
of smell; in other cases, it may not be readily noted until the sample is tasted. The
sensory characteristics of this off-flavor differ with the causative agent(s). Foreign
off-flavors in milk may be caused by the improper use of various chemicals such as
detergents, disinfectants, and sanitizers; exposure to fumes from the combustion of
gasoline or kerosene; contamination from insecticides; drenching cows with treat-
ment chemicals; or from treatment of the udder with ointments or medications.
Dairy producers must exercise utmost caution in handling various farm chemicals
and medications if milk adulteration is to be avoided. The term foreign might also
be used to describe white milk that unexpectedly tastes like vanilla (flavored milk
put in the wrong container), carrots (contains excessive vitamin A), or fish (fish
oils added).
Garlic/Onion (Weedy) “Garlic” and “onion” off-flavors in milk are recognized by

the characteristic pungent odor and a somewhat persistent aftertaste (if tasted). This
most objectionable flavor defect may be expected in the spring through fall seasons
in those regions where pastures or hay crops become infested with weeds of the
onion family. In addition to garlic and onion, there are many other weeds that can
potentially taint milk when they are consumed by cows, especially if consumed a
short time before milking (Molina et al., 2009; Mostafa, 1999). The character and
intensity of weed off-flavors depend on the kind of weed and the time elapsed
between cow consumption and milking. Frequently, a weed off-flavor is accompa-
nied by a bitter aftertaste.
Milk judges should familiarize themselves with any potential or unique weed
problems in their locality. Evaluators and field department personnel should learn
the characteristics of each weed off-flavor (when found in milk) and then be able to
suggest a feeding routine to dairy producers that will either minimize or eliminate
these flavor defects. The flavor score assigned to milk with a weedy off-flavor
depends on the intensity and whether it is caused by a common or a noxious weed.
Lacks Freshness (Stale) This mild-to-moderate flavor defect lacks specific charac-
teristics to make description or identification easy. As the designation “lacks
116 V. B. Alvarez
f reshness” or “stale” suggests, milk with this off-flavor yields a taste reaction that
indicates a loss of those fine, pleasing taste qualities typically noted in excellent or
high-quality milk. Difficulty may be encountered in attempting to find something
specifically wrong with the flavor, yet the astute milk judge senses a certain inherent
shortcoming in the milk sample. In some cases, a perceived slight “chalky” taste,
perhaps reminiscent of some reconstituted nonfat dry milk, is one way to describe
this off-flavor. Stale milk is not as pleasantly sweet and refreshing or as free of an
aftertaste as is typically desired in milk. The lacks-freshness defect in milk can be a
“forerunner” of either oxidized or rancid off-flavors or off-flavors caused by psy-
chrotrophic bacteria.
Malty A “malty” off-flavor in milk is usually of either definite or pronounced

intensity and is quite suggestive of malt. Variations of the off-flavor may be encoun-
tered; one variation may suggest a “Grape Nuts®”-like flavor. Some describe the
flavor as “the milk left over after eating a bowl of cereal.” The malty off-flavor is
generally caused by the growth of Streptococcus lactis subsp. maltigenes bacteria in
the milk as the result of temperature abuse [~ 18.2 °C (~ 65 °F)] for 2–3 h (Morgan,
1976; Salama et al., 1995). This off-flavor can be detected by either smelling or tast-
ing the milk. The bacterial population of malty milk will generally be in the millions
per milliliter. Hence, this off-flavor is frequently a forerunner of acid or sour milk.
It is not uncommon to perceive the malty aroma and the acid taste (or odor) simul-
taneously. Some variations of feed flavor may also be perceived as malty-like by
relatively experienced judges, especially when brewer’s spent grains have been fed
to the dairy herd as a roughage source.
Oxidized (Light-Induced) This off-flavor has been variously described as burnt,

burnt protein, burnt feathers, cabbage-like, and as medicinal or chemical-like by
different authorities. Other names by which this off-flavor is known are light-
activated, sunlight flavor, or sunshine flavor. When milk is exposed to sunlight or
fluorescent light, two different off-flavors may develop. Light catalyzes a lipid oxi-
dation and a protein (amino acid) degradation, both of which are involved in the
development of the light-induced flavor defect. The latter reaction requires the pres-
ence of the vitamin riboflavin, which is naturally abundant in milk. The riboflavin
of milk functions as an efficient photosensitizer and will generate a very reactive
form of molecular oxygen, singlet oxygen, upon exposure to light (Choe & Min,
2006; Molina et al., 2009).
The light-induced type of oxidized off-flavor may be detected by smell; its odor
is quite different from that of the metal-induced, oxidized off-flavor. The aroma and
flavor of light-oxidized milk may manifest as similar to wet cardboard or wet paper.
Other mentioned descriptors for light-activated off-flavor have been burnt hair or
plastic or a distinct chemical-like note. Difficulties in precisely differentiating
between the metal-induced and light-induced off-flavors of milk primarily hinges
on the fact that the light-activated form of off-flavor is not typically free of lipid
oxidation components. Cadwallader and Howard (1998) and Chapman et al. (2002)
identified characteristic aroma-active compounds responsible for light-induced fla-

vor in milk with different fat levels. Milk exposed to light for 18 h developed a typi-
cal light-induced flavor profile that was described as “burnt protein,” “burnt
feathers,” “cabbage,” and “mushroom” (Chapman et al., 2002). The formation of
volatile compounds and intensity of light-induced aroma development were directly
related to the fat content of milk. Higher concentrations of acetaldehyde, pentanal,
hexanal, heptanal, 2,3-butanedione, dimethyl disulfide, and 1-octen-3-one were
found in 2% and whole milk compared to skim milk (Cadwallader & Howard, 1998;
van Aardt et al., 2005). Higher concentrations of compounds derived from light-
induced oxidation are often correlated with high-intensity aroma profiles; however,
other compounds at low concentrations might yield strong odors in milk. Moderate-
to-strong odors are associated with pentanal, hexanal, heptanal, and heptanol,
whereas compounds with the highest intensities are dimethyl disulfide,
2-methylpropanal, 1-hexen-3-one, and 1-octen-3-one (Molina et al., 2009; van
Aardt et al., 2005). Aroma-active compounds produced from light-induced oxida-
tion can be limited by proper storage, while other aroma compounds might persist
or increase over time as a result of a decrease of antioxidant capacity or exposure to
light. Concentrations of hexanal and heptanal increased to levels above aroma
threshold after 6 weeks of storage. However, 1-octen-3-one content in milk exposed
to light decreased significantly after 2 weeks of storage (van Aardt et al., 2005).
Hence, true oxidized and light-induced off-flavors tend to overlap each other. This
overlap complicates our efforts at detection, or at least detection with full confi-
dence of which form of oxidation a given milk sample may be guilty of possessing.
See Table 5.7 for a summary of the similar and dissimilar characteristics of the
light-induced off-flavor and the generic oxidized off-flavor.
Oxidized (Metal-Induced) The “oxidized” off-flavor results from lipid oxidation,
which is commonly induced by the catalytic action of certain metals. Metallic, oily,
cappy, cardboardy, stale, tallowy, painty, and fishy are terms that have been used to
describe qualitative differences of the generic “oxidized” off-flavor (Bassette et al.,
1986; Havemose et al., 2006; Hedegaard et al., 2006; Molina et al., 2009; Smith &
Dunkley, 1962). The oxidized off-flavor is characterized by (1) a “quick” taste reac-
tion when the sample is placed into the mouth, (2) its resemblance to some of the
off-flavors mentioned above (Table 5.5), and (3) its relatively short adaptation time
(Bodyfelt et al., 1988; Ogden, 1993). When intense, the defect can be detected by
smelling; oxidized products are especially perceptible when tasted. This off-flavor
is moderately persistent after the sample has been expectorated. A puckery mouth-
feel characterizes the oxidized off-flavor, especially when the intensity is relatively
high. Unhomogenized or cream-line milk is substantially more susceptible to the
development of this off-flavor than homogenized milk, for reasons that are not
clearly understood.
Fortunately, the “pure” metallic off-flavor of milk is only encountered occasion-
ally. Its presence may be noted by a definite, peculiar mouthfeel, somewhat like that
when a piece of metal foil, a penny, or a rusty metal is placed into the mouth. Both
the reaction and adaptation times are quite short. Frequently with the metallic
118 V. B. Alvarez
off-flavor, an initial flatness is suggested. The metallic off-flavor is generally associ-

ated with the early stages of metal-induced oxidation (cardboardy or papery).
Sources of metal-induced oxidation range from (1) direct contact with certain
raw metals, (2) induction by excessive trace metals in the feed source(s) of lactating
cows, and/or (3) the presence of divalent cations (Cu, Fe, Mn) in hot water supplies
used for cleaning milk-contact equipment on farms. The metals catalyze lipid auto-
oxidation by way of free radical formation, which yield aldehydes, ketones, and
other offensive end products within the milk.
Rancid The characteristic odor of rancid milk is derived from the unpleasant vola-
tile fatty acids that are formed as the result of lipid hydrolysis. Lipolytic rancidity is
caused by endogenous and/or exogenous lipases that hydrolyze milkfat triglycer-
ides (Fromm & Boor, 2004; Sfakianakis & Tzia, 2017; Shipe et al., 1978). Short-
chain fatty acids (butyric, caproic, caprylic, capric, and lauric acids) in the sn1 and
sn3 positions of a triacylglycerol are particularly susceptible to hydrolysis by lipase.
Rancid off-flavor is complex due to the factors that contribute to its development.
Therefore, it is important to point out that the predominant flavor of rancid milk is
the volatile perception of free fatty acids, reminiscent of baby burp, feta cheese, or
butyric acid. Hydrolysis occurs when (1) raw milk is agitated excessively (or fro-
zen), thus rupturing the milkfat globule membrane that exposes the milkfat to native
lipase (or lipases secreted by spoilage bacteria); (2) native milk lipase is not inacti-
vated by heating; or (3) raw milk is mixed with homogenized milk. Lipolytic
enzymes in homogenized milk have more surface contact area with the fat globule
and thus the rate of hydrolysis of fatty acids from the glycerol bond is increased
(Tunick et al., 2016).
Some evaluators find “rancid” milk samples extremely unpleasant; by contrast,
other persons may find little or no particular fault or objectionable characteristics in
rancid milk. Some individuals appear to be either insensitive or have a relatively
high threshold for the taste and odor of free fatty acids and their salts. Some of these
persons may, with guidance and practice, learn to recognize the defect but may still
not find it objectionable (Table 5.7). Fromm and Boor (2004) reported that concen-
trations of free fatty acid (FFA) of 0.50 mEq FFA/kg are indicative of the end of
shelf life of HTST pasteurized milk. However, data obtained from sensory threshold
studies to establish milk quality need to be considered carefully. Differences in fla-
vor threshold perception among consumers have been investigated. Santos et al.
(2003) reported off-flavor perception thresholds among 100 panelists, between
0.316 and 0.351 mEq of FFA/kg of 2% pasteurized milk. Moreover, 23% of the
panelists detected off-flavors in milk in the range of 0.17–0.20 mEq of FFA/kg of
milk. As the FFA concentration increased up to 0.25 mEq of FFA/kg of milk, the
authors reported that 34% of the panelists were able to detect off-flavors in milk
samples.
There are several characteristics of the rancid off-flavor, as it is perceived, that
may be noted in succession. Immediately after placing the rancid product sample in
the mouth, the flavor may not be too revealing initially, but a growing awareness of
the defect should commence as the sample is manipulated toward the back of the
Table 5.7 A comparison of hydrolytic rancidity (lipolytic), oxidative rancidity (oxidized), and
light-activated off-flavors in milk
Oxidized
Factors Lipolytic (rancid) (auto-oxidation) Light activated
Substrate(s) or Tri- or diglycerides of Unsaturated fatty acids Protein (methionine)
component(s) milkfat (i.e., phospholipids)
involved
End products of Short-chain free fatty Short-chain volatile Methional
reaction acids, salts of free fatty aldehydes, ketones
acids (soaps)
Sensory Papery, cardboardy, “Burnt” or chemical
characteristics metallic, painty, fishy odor/taste may
exhibited eventually become
similar to oxidized
defect
Chemical Soapy, bitter, “sour,” Peroxide radical “Oxidation” of an amino
mechanism(s) “blue cheese”-like formation on adjacent acid, with the
aroma, vomit carbon atom of a double participation of
bond riboflavin
Causes or Hydrolysis of the ester Oxygen incorporation Exposure to sunlight of
“triggers” of linkage of a short-chain Divalent cations (Cu++, fluorescent light
reaction fatty acid Fe++, Mn++)
Physical abuse ruptures Lack of antioxidants
the milkfat globule Low bacteria counts
membrane, activates High grain
native lipases in milk concentrations in
rations
Measurement of Mixing raw and Sensory Sensory
defect homogenized milk TBARSa
Peroxide value
Other features Sensory High-heat treatments Protective packaging
Foaming of raw milk minimize occurrence, and eliminate exposure
Freezing of milk also homogenization to light
Extreme temperature Nonenzymatic Nonenzymatic
changes
Late lactation milk
enzymatic
TBARs—thiobarbituric acid reactive substances test for malondialdehyde
a
From Bodyfelt et al. (1988)
mouth. The perceived sensation should now suggest rancidity—a soapy, bitter, and
possibly unclean-like aftertaste. At this stage, highly sensitive evaluators may find
this flavor experience somewhat nauseating or revolting. When the sample is expec-
torated, the soapiness and bitterness (or rancidity) tends to fade only gradually, and
an astringency or “roughness” of the interior mouth surface may occur. Most nota-
bly, the rancid aftertaste is persistent and unpleasant. For the more flavor-sensitive
individual, an intense rancid off-flavor may “come off” as nothing less than “foul,”
highly objectionable, and/or intense soapy/bitter. More pointed descriptors of
intense hydrolytic rancidity in certain dairy foods (especially Cheddar cheese) may
120 V. B. Alvarez
be quite reminiscent of baby “throw-up,” feta cheese, or pure butyric acid. If an

evaluator is unsure whether a milk sample is rancid or not, a drop may be rubbed on
the back of the hand, allowed to dry, and sniffed to determine the presence of free
fatty acid aroma.
Salty The “salty” taste of milk is perceived rather quickly upon placing the sample
into the mouth. The sense of smell is valueless in detecting this off-taste, as there is
no odor related to salty milk unless the off-flavor is in association with another
defect. Saltiness (like acidity) lends a cleansing feeling to the mouth. Some evalua-
tors note a “warm sensation” derived from the presence of salt in milk. This off-taste
is commonly associated with milk from individual cows that are in the most
advanced stages of lactation or with milk from cows that have clinical stages of
mastitis. These conditions result in an increase of NaCl in the milk and a decrease
of other mineral salts. A salty taste is infrequently encountered in commingled milk
supplies or market milk.
Unclean (Psychrophilic) Some forms of this off-flavor are becoming less common
in raw milk supplies due to the general improvement in farm sanitation and more
effective temperature control of milk. In either raw or pasteurized milk, this off-
flavor may develop by the action of certain psychrophilic bacteria, particularly
when the storage temperature is too high (~7.2 °C or ~45 °F) or milk is stored too
long. The end products of bacterial growth that are responsible for this highly objec-
tionable off-flavor may be produced either (1) directly by the bacteria when they
grow in the milk or (2) indirectly when they grow on improperly cleaned equipment
surfaces from which they are transferred into the milk. Spoilage by psychrophilic
bacteria has been the subject of numerous studies (e.g., Bodyfelt, 1974, 1980a, b;
Bradley Jr., 1983; Hankin et al., 1977; Hankin & Anderson, 1969; Hankin &
Stephans, 1972; Hutchinson et al., 2005; Kadri et al., 2021; Mikolajcik & Simon,
1978; Polyanskii et al., 2005).
The presence of an unclean off-flavor in milk may generally be readily noted by
its somewhat offensive odor and a failure of the mouth to clean up after tasting and
expectorating the sample. This objectionable off-flavor sometimes suggests extreme
staleness, mustiness, a putrid or spoiled (“dirty socks”) odor, or foul stable air.
Determination of Slight Differences Among Attributes As pointed out in the cor-
responding milk off-flavor sections, some flavor defects are easier to judge or
ascertain than others. The following is the protocol that the author follows when
training students on how to determine slight differences of off-flavors that are dif-
ficult to differentiate, such as cooked, malty, and light oxidized. Students learn first
what the proper or ideal flavor quality of milk is by tasting to a great extent milk
samples considered to exhibit excellent quality. Having in mind the ideal milk flavor
quality helps to differentiate samples that do not compare favorably with the ideal.
Once students develop confidence in recognizing the flavor of the so-called perfect
or near-perfect milk, they practice with prepared samples as shown in the Appendix
of this book. For the beginning or initial sessions, milk samples are prepared at the
suggested or higher concentration for easiest recognition. After several sessions,

when the specific off-flavor is usually readily recognized, the concentration of pre-
pared samples is gradually lowered to make the identification of the given off-flavor
more difficult, thus increasing the students’ levels of perception. These training ses-
sions are repeated as often as possible and as necessary to help students to become
more knowledgeable and confident in detecting those flavor defects that are difficult
to identify. Additional helpful activities conducted during the training are the fol-
lowing: (1) the sample is smelled before it is tasted; (2) the length of time of retain-
ing the sample in the mouth is similar for every sample (about 4–6 s); (3) the sample
tested is not swallowed during practicing; and (4) the mouth is reconditioned by
cleaning and rinsing frequently with clean, warm, or tepid water.
5.10 Tracing the Causes of Milk Off-Flavors: A Guide
The examination of innumerable milk samples for off-flavors has disclosed that
certain understandings and techniques are helpful in diagnosing the causes or fac-
tors contributing to the formation of milk flavor defects. The causes of most milk
flavor defects can be classified in one of several ways. Recognizing the more distin-
guishing characteristics of each possible defect should help the field person, plant
superintendent, or quality control person to trace the given off-flavor to its source;
from here, hopefully, the cause may be eliminated or at least minimized.
Distinguishing Characteristics of the General Causes of Off-Flavors Different
groupings or classifications of the causes of milk off-flavors have been suggested,
including the one mentioned previously in this chapter (absorbed, bacterial, chemi-
cal, and delinquency). The following classification, modified from those offered by
Hammer (1938) and reviewed by Bassette et al. (1986), may be the most
comprehensive:
Bacterial growth
Feed or weed
Absorption (direct and indirect)
Chemical composition of milk
Processing and handling of milk
Chemical changes (enzymatic and catalytic)
Addition of foreign material
Each of these groups of off-flavor causes has some unique or distinguishing char-
acteristics, which aid in the eventual identification of the flavor defect. From this
point, hopefully, the source(s) or the “trigger(s)” for the flavor problem can be pin-
pointed and remedial action taken to eliminate, or at least minimize, the impact of
the given flavor defect. The general distinguishing characteristics of the above
grouping of milk off-flavors are summarized in Table 5.8.
122 V. B. Alvarez
Table 5.8 Distinguishing characteristics of milk off-flavors by category

Cause of off-flavors Distinguishing characteristics of off-flavors
Bacterial growth High bacterial count in raw milk. The standard plate count of
(typically, 3.0– pasteurized milk will be high if the bacterial growth occurred after
5.0 × 106 CFU/ml) pasteurization
Feed or weed Bacterial count low; usually off-flavor is present when milk is drawn;
commonly more intense in evening milk; occurs when cows have had
access to offending feed shortly before milking; odor pronounced
(except bitterweed)
Direct absorption Encountered infrequently; occurs after long exposure of the milk to an
odiferous atmosphere; odor not present when milk first drawn or
handled. Some types of containers are pervious to highly odiferous
substances
Indirect absorption Bacteria count usually low; odor of milk suggests “uncleanliness”; odor
(from cows breathing present when milk is first drawn from the cow. Milk may smell “barny”
foul air)
Chemical composition Flavor defect is noticeable when the milk is first drawn; milk may be
of milk distinctly salty or cowy; inherent to individual animal, rarely noted in
mixed milk; defect more likely from an animal in advanced stage of
lactation, with an udder infection, or diseased condition
Processing and Pasteurized “heated” or “cooked” flavor. A sulfur-like odor detectable
handling of milk immediately after processing; flavor tends to disappear with increased
storage time
Chemical changes Off-flavor not present when milk is first drawn; develops readily at low
temperatures—Below 4.4 °C (40 °F); bacteria usually low
Three types
(1) Rancidity—In raw milk; bitter, soapy off-flavor; defect more
intense in cream than in milk and more intense in butter than in
cream
(2) Oxidized—Occurs most often in raw and unhomogenized
pasteurized milk; cardboardy; metallic; tallowy; odor similar to wet
cardboard
(3) Light induced—In pasteurized milk exposed to light; odor
suggests “burnt” protein
Addition of foreign Defect present in either raw or pasteurized milk; rarely increases in
material to milk intensity during storage; taints varied; may resemble brine, medicine,
paint, insecticides, or any other chemical substance with which the
milk may have been contaminated
From: Bodyfelt et al. (1988)
Troubleshooting Causes of Off-Flavors To eliminate or minimize the occurrence

of a milk flavor defect, its cause or source must first be identified. To find the pos-
sible cause, the milk judge should attempt to review the sensory problem by seeking
answers to a number of questions, such as those enumerated in Table 5.9.
Although any of the flavor defects discussed may be encountered by the fluid
milk industry, the most frequent consumer complaints relate to the keeping quality
of milk and cream. Unfortunately, psychrotrophic bacteria are common post-
pasteurization contaminants that can easily produce objectionable spoilage
Table 5.9 A list of questions to facilitate the troubleshooting of sensory problems related to milk
(order not prioritized)
1. What does the off-taste of the milk in question resemble?
2. Can customer complaints be categorized as (1) occasional or (2) general?
3. Is the defect limited to the raw milk or does it occur following separation (with particular
fat levels) and/or pasteurization?
4. Does the defect occur sporadically or has it persisted over an extended period of time?
5. Is the defect present immediately after the milk is drawn from the cows?
6. If the defect is not present when the milk is first drawn, how long does it take to develop a
definite intensity?
7. What are the bacteria, coliform, and/or SPC counts of the milk? Somatic cell count (not
bacteria)?
8. Does the defect occur in commingled milk or only in the milk from individual cows or
individual herds (producers)?
9. What kind and amount of roughage is fed to the cows?
10. How much time elapses between the time of feeding the roughage and the milking time?
11. Has the milk come in direct contact with any copper or rusty equipment (also consider CIP,
COP, and employee bracelets)?
12. Do farm water supplies, feeds, or mineral rations include elevated levels of copper, iron, or
manganese levels (do not assume—have them checked)
13. How long has the milk been held in refrigerated storage?
14. What is the storage temperature history of the milk?
15. In what type and/or size of containers does the defect develop?
16. Do various microbiological test results or keeping-quality tests reveal any potential
problems?
17. Can line-sample tests (microbiological results) pinpoint the source of the problem?
18. Is the milk harvesting equipment sound and functioning properly (no air leaks or excessive
agitation)?
These are meant as possible and general questions, depending on circumstances to help resolve
issues/problems, not readily “prioritized,” but may have a more “logical order”
off-flavors such as the fruity, unclean, rancid, and bitter off-flavors. With the
increased usage of transparent or translucent plastic milk containers, the light-acti-
vated off-flavor has become more prevalent (Hough et al. 2002; Molina et al., 2009;
Solano-Lopez et al., 2005; van Aardt et al., 2005).
The Seasonal Occurrence of Flavor Defects An awareness and knowledge of the
general occurrence of certain milk flavor defects at different months of the year may
be helpful in determining the cause. These seasonal differences in milk flavor hinge
on the availability of different feeds and on the stage of lactation (Tracy et al., 1933;
Stadhouders, 1972; Kilic & Lindsay, 2005; Potts & Peterson, 2018). Also, dry lot
feeding (with either none or minimal pasture or green feeds) has become quite prev-
alent with US dairy producers. Flavor defects of milk from dry lot-fed cows may
occur at any time. Increasingly, the stage of lactation also has become less of a fac-
tor, as cows are bred to freshen year-round to maintain production quotas through-
out the calendar year. The off-flavors closely associated with dry lot feeding are the
oxidized, rancid, and feed (silage) off-flavors. Late lactation tends to promote the
124 V. B. Alvarez
rancid and salty off-flavors of milk. The evaluator should be alert to the possible
occurrence of any flavor defect, regardless of the season.
Organic Milk Flavor The recent interest for organic milk that requires use of pas-
ture for dairy cattle was discussed earlier in this chapter. The interest for organic
milk is related to the perception that grass-fed cow’s milk has additional health
benefits by increasing the unsaturated fatty acid content, including conjugated lin-
oleic acid (CLA). Although the merits of organic milk are still disputed, it is
expected that feed may influence composition and flavor of fluid milk. A few studies
have investigated the composition of organic milk and compared it with conven-
tional fluid milk. Samples from 31 organic dairy farms were analyzed for gross
composition and somatic cells, fatty acids, urea, iron, and selenium contents. Results
showed small or no differences in the parameters investigated between organic milk
and milk from conventional farms (Toledo et al., 2002). Concentration of contami-
nants lead and cadmium was very low and did not differ between organic and con-
ventional milk. However, aflatoxin M1 in some but not all samples of organic milk
were significantly higher than those found in conventional milk (Ghidini et al.,
2005). Ellis et al. (2006) reported that organic milk had a higher proportion of poly-
unsaturated fatty acids relative to monounsaturated fatty acids and of n–3 FA than
conventional milk. Organic milk contained a consistently lower n–6:n–3 FA ratio
that is considered beneficial to human health. The study concluded that there was no
difference between organic and conventional milk with respect to CLA or vaccenic
acid content (Ellis et al., 2006). Slight differences in the content of n–3 fatty acids
were found in organic and conventional milk. Organic milkfat contained >0.56%
C18:3 n–3, whereas conventional milk contained 0.53% (Molkentin &
Giesemann, 2007).
Croissant et al. (2007) identified greater percentages of unsaturated fatty acids,
including two common isomers of conjugated linoleic acid in milk from cows fed
with pasture-based forage. Analytical results showed differences in the composition
of organic and conventional milk. However, these differences may or may not be
detected through sensory analysis. Trained panelists that compared sensory proper-
ties of pasture-based milk with conventional fluid milk identified greater intensities
of grassy and cowy/barny flavors in pasture-based milk compared with conventional
milk when evaluated at 15 °C. However, consumers were unable to differentiate
between the two types of milk consistently when evaluated at 7 °C, and cow diet had
no effect on overall consumer acceptance. The authors concluded that there were
distinct flavor and compositional differences between conventional and pasture-
based milk, but the differences were such that they did not affect consumer accep-
tance (Croissant et al., 2007). Currently, organic milk is not judged in the Collegiate
Dairy Products Evaluation Contest.
The Flavor of Milk from Individual Cows Milk from individual cows tends to dif-
fer in flavor and in its susceptibility to the development of certain off-flavors, espe-
cially the oxidized and rancid off-flavors. Theoretically, a relatively high proportion
of cows within a herd, whose milk is susceptible to the oxidized or rancid off-flavor,
could cause a whole shipment of milk to develop these off-flavors. Usually, how-
ever, there is an adequate dilution with normal milk, so that no apparent problem
may be encountered due to the shortcomings of one or several cows. On rare occa-
sions, the plant field person may elect to trace the possible source of a given flavor
problem to individual cows. However, with large dairy herds, this can be a formi-
dable task; unfortunately, little research has been conducted on heredity factors and
their possible effects on milk flavor.
5.11 Chocolate Milk
Of the flavored milk products (including low-fat milk and skim milk), chocolate
milk is by far the most popular one in the USA (Mahato et al., 2021; Thompson
et al., 2004). Dairy product judges are frequently asked to evaluate these products,
although it must be remembered that chocolate character and intensity, color, and
viscosity are a matter of consumer preference in a given market. Since it would be
presumptuous for the judge to tell consumers what to like and dislike, product eval-
uation should allow for a wide range of differences in sensory properties that merit
a “no criticism” judgment. On the other hand, actual milk off-flavors and other
apparent or obvious sensory defects should be noted. Chocolate flavoring tends to
mask (cover up) some of the off-flavors that might be present in milk, but any seri-
ous ones may be detected. Sour (high acid) chocolate milk, for instance, is per-
ceived as extremely unpleasant by most consumers of this product.
The examination of the container and closure of chocolate milk products should
be conducted similar to the approach used for judging milk. These packaging items
are subject to the same defects and are given a corresponding evaluation. In evaluat-
ing the other qualities of chocolate milk, however, an entirely different set of stan-
dards is usually employed. Emphasis is placed on the appearance, color, viscosity,
flavor, and freedom from cocoa sedimentation.
Appearance Chocolate milk should show a uniformity of appearance throughout.
The defects in the appearance of chocolate milk with which the judge should be
familiar are (1) stratification, (2) mottled or curdy, and (3) the presence of air bub-
bles. These defects should be recognized easily, but when they are present to a slight
degree, they may often be overlooked in a casual examination of the product.
Color Chocolate milk may vary widely in its color, but the product should probably
not be criticized in this respect if the color ranges from a light to a reddish-brown
color, such as ordinarily associated with certain cocoas or chocolate. The intensity
of color should neither be so light nor so dark as to lack visual appeal. Possible
defects of the color of chocolate milk are (1) unnatural, (2) too light, (3) too dark,
and (4) lack of uniformity.
126 V. B. Alvarez
Viscosity Wide differences in opinion exist as to the most desired viscosity for
chocolate milk. Some persons believe that chocolate milk should have the same
viscosity as normal milk. Other people prefer a thick, more viscous product. When
a small percentage of product stabilizer is added, elevated heat treatment is used,
and/or the product is homogenized, the chocolate milk will be more viscous than
regular milk. Development of a very thick viscosity that the chocolate milk pours
like syrup is not desirable nor is a body that creates a “slick” sensation when placed
into the mouth. Acceptance of a slightly increased viscosity to inhibit creaming is
typical, but a heavy, viscous product should probably be criticized by the evaluator(s).
Flavor Chocolate milk should have a chocolate flavor similar to that of fresh, high-
quality chocolate candy. The sweetness should be of medium intensity, so the appe-
tite will not be quickly satiated. Different varieties and manufacturing processes of
cocoas and chocolate liquors may be used in the preparation of the syrup or flavor-
ing material for use in chocolate milk. Various attempts may be made to enhance or
fortify the chocolate flavor by the addition of one or more of the following adjuncts:
malt, salt, vanilla, cinnamon, nutmeg, or other spices; consequently, a variety of
flavor notes may be observed. Furthermore, the type of sweetener used may impart
a non-chocolate flavor; molasses and excessive corn syrup are examples. Flavor
defects of chocolate milk that may be encountered are (1) unnatural, (2) too sweet,
(3) lacks sweetness, (4) syrup flavor, (5) lacks chocolate, and (6) harsh (or coarse)
chocolate. It should be borne in mind by the evaluator of any chocolate-flavored
products that different consumers prefer different types and levels of sweetener and
chocolate (Thompson et al., 2004).
Sedimentation The “settling out” or precipitation of chocolate and cocoa solids in

chocolate milk is quite common. While not particularly objectionable, it does have
the disadvantage of contributing to an unfavorable appearance. In aggravated cases,
the dark chocolate can form a distinct layer (or strata) under a light “white-livered”
upper layer. Furthermore, the consumer is then obliged to agitate the milk vigor-
ously to make the product homogeneous.
In judging chocolate milk for cocoa sedimentation, the evaluator should raise the
bottle slightly above the level of the eyes. Next, the judge should note the amount of
sedimentation, the quality or fineness of cocoa sediment, and the ease or resistance
with which it remixes with the milk. Homogenized chocolate milk generally shows
more tendency toward sedimentation than the same product that has not been
homogenized. Sedimentation of chocolate milk in paper containers may be ascer-
tained to an adequate degree of accuracy by first carefully decanting the liquid and
then observing the inside bottom of the container.
A more quantitative way to measure sedimentation is to pour the agitated con-
tents of a carton of fresh product into a transparent graduated cylinder and then store
this test sample in a refrigerator for the shelf-life period of the product. Observations
can be made at appropriate intervals, and the extent of cocoa sedimentation quanti-
tated, if desired.
5.12 Cultured Fluid Dairy Products
Cultured buttermilk and kefir are two fermented fluid milk beverages. Cultured but-
termilks may be made from whole, low-fat, or fat-free milk that has been either
pasteurized or ultra-pasteurized and then cooled to optimum incubation temperature
and carefully inoculated with specifically selected acid and aroma-producing lactic
starter cultures (e.g., Lactococcus lactis ssp. cremoris), allowing it to ripen for 4–6 h
(until a pH of approximately 4.6). The fermentation conditions, the substrate
requirements, and the ultimate flavor profiles are the same or quite similar. An
exception is the manufacture of Bulgarian-style buttermilk, which is traditionally
made with whole milk and is inoculated with a Lactobacillus sp. and/or Streptococcus
thermophilus (Bodyfelt et al., 1988) and is generally more acidic (often ≥1.0%
titratable acidity) (Table 5.10). The product is then homogenized and packaged.
Whatever the specific composition or the lactic culture utilized, the consumer gen-
erally expects a smooth and viscous product with a moderate to distinct acidity and
preferably a delicate, buttery aroma. The standards of identity related to milkfat,
total solids, and titratable acidity for various cultured milk products are shown in
Table 5.10.
Kefir is a slightly alcoholic fermented milk product that is traditionally produced
by the fermentation of water or milk by microorganisms present in the kefir grain
matrix. Kefir has been consumed for centuries in certain regions of the world,
mainly for its flavor profile and its potential to improve human health. Recently,
consumers are incorporating kefir into their lifestyle as a fermented probiotic bever-
age that can confer health benefits (Metras et al., 2021). Kefir is categorized by the
FDA Code of Federal Regulations Title 21 (Code of Federal Regulations, 1998) as
a cultured milk that contains aroma- and flavor-producing microbial cultures.
Dairy kefir is prepared at artisanal level by adding kefir grains (5–10%) as the
starter culture to whole, semi-skimmed, or skimmed pasteurized goat, sheep, camel,
buffalo, or—most commonly—cow milk. Fermentation takes place at 20–25 °C for
approximately 24–72 h. At an industrial scale, kefir is produced by either milk
Table 5.10 Standards of identity for cultured milk products (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997)
Product name Compositiona
Acidified milkb ≥3.25% milkfat
Cultured milkc ≥8.25% solids not fat
≥0.5% titratable acidity
Acidified low-fat milk ≥0.5% < 2.0% milkfat
Cultured low-fat milk ≥8.25% solids not fat
Acidified skim milk <0.5% percent fat
Cultured skim milk ≥8.25% solids not fat
a
Optional ingredients for all products include color, salt, citric acid, stabilizers, and flavoring
b
For acidified products, acidifying agents other than cultures are permitted
c
Cultured products are made using the appropriate microbial cultures
128 V. B. Alvarez
fermentation with pure freeze-dried commercial kefir culture or, by the “Russian
back slopping method,” a serial process that starts from the kefir production with
grains and is followed by subsequent fermentations with the fermented milk
obtained from the grains as a starter (Gonzalez-Orozco et al., 2022).
Sensory attributes of buttermilk and kefir are conferred by the reactions that take
place during the fermentation process. Milk lactose is degraded to lactic acid by the
lactic acid bacteria present. The lactic acid production causes a drop in the pH
(4.0–4.6), which confers a sharp acidic flavor (Gonzalez-Orozco et al., 2022). In the
case of kefir, ethanol (0.5–2.0%) and CO2 are also produced and give kefir a prickly
sensation; other aroma-flavor compounds like aldehydes, diacetyl, acetic acid, and
propionic acid are also generated during fermentation. Yeasty flavor has also been
described as part of the typical flavor of kefir (Irigoyen, 2005).
5.13 Other Uncultured Fluid Dairy Products
Included in this category are skim milk, low-fat milk, half-and-half, light cream,
light whipping cream, heavy cream, as well as lactose-free milk, ultrafiltered milk,
and other flavored milks (e.g., vanilla, strawberry) of varying fat content. Federal
Standards of Identity for these products permit the addition of specific optional
ingredients, including characterizing flavors. Many possible products, therefore, are
included within this group. As emphasized in the previous discussion on chocolate
milk, flavored products can be evaluated for quality, but appropriate allowances
must be made for differences in consumer preference. The sensory properties of
various unflavored milk products may be assessed by applying the milk scorecard
and scoring guide, with a few modifications.
Additional evaluation categories may be desirable for some of these products,
particularly in the case of those that have certain functional properties. A logical test
for whipping cream is a determination of its whipping properties, since even the
best-flavored whipping cream is of little value to the consumer if it will not whip.
Certainly, the coffee “whitening power” and freedom from “feathering” in coffee
cream (half-and-half) or light cream are important functional properties.
Obviously, cream and skim milk typically taste different from each other, as well
as different from whole milk, but this fact is of little consequence in the evaluation
for quality. The judge must memorize or “bear in mind” the normal or typical flavor
and criticize the product only when flavor defects are present. Generally, many of
the same off-flavors may be found in skim milk, low-fat milk, whole milk, and the
various creams. They may appear to have different characteristics, but much of that
is due to the different flavor background. Flavor-producing chemical compounds
that are fat soluble are more concentrated in cream than in skim milk. Since the
concentration of an odorant may influence both the intensity and qualitative charac-
teristics of the odor, one may expect to perceive the same off-flavor somewhat dif-
ferently in skim milk than in cream. Similar reasoning would also apply to aromatic
compounds that exhibit greater water solubility. This reasoning helps explain flavor
perception differences in low- and high-fat products. In any case, most of the defects
in low- or high-fat products will be readily recognized by an evaluator familiar with
these off-flavors in milk.
Skim Milk The CFR description of skim milk was given earlier in this chapter. The
product can vary in fat content from less than 0.1% to just under 0.5%. Milk solids-
not-fat (MSNF) may range from 8.25% to 10% or slightly more. Both flavor and
mouthfeel characteristics may be affected by the differences in composition within
the ranges for fat and MSNF. In a protein-fortified product, the flavor quality of the
source of concentrated milk solids can be a significant factor in determining the
sensory characteristics of the finished product.
An assumed form of storage flavor commonly encountered in skim milk is vari-
ously described as stale, lacks freshness, chalky, or wet paper. The factors respon-
sible for this off-flavor are not known. Skim milk is the test medium of choice for
the sensory examination of preparations of vitamin concentrate used in fortifying
milk. If a defective vitamin concentrate is likely to impart an off-flavor, skim milk
is a more sensitive detection medium than higher fat milk.
A hay-like off-flavor was first reported by Weckel and Chicoye (1954) in low-fat
milk fortified with vitamin A. Fluid milk processors continue to occasionally expe-
rience puzzling off-flavors in vitamin-fortified milk, apparently caused by the auto-
oxidation of vegetable oil carriers for the vitamin concentrates. The most common
descriptors used by evaluators (when this off-flavor is noted) is hay-like or a pecu-
liar stale note. Low-fat milk and skim milk seem to be more vulnerable than homog-
enized milk to this off-flavor, which may be imparted by sporadic “off-batches” of
vitamin concentrate.
Low-Fat Milk The CFR definition for low-fat milk was provided earlier in this
chapter. Since the milkfat content may vary from 0.5% to 2%, the sensory properties
of low-fat milk may be similar to skim milk at one extreme or approach the proper-
ties of milk at the upper end of the fat range. The label declaration must clearly
specify the actual milkfat content to the closest 0.1%.
Half-and-Half Half-and-half is basically defined in the CFR Title 21 Part 131.180

as that food that consists of a mixture of milk and cream, which contains milkfat
specifically limited to the range of 10.5–18%. It is either pasteurized or ultra-
pasteurized and is practically always homogenized. Optional ingredients may
include “safe and suitable” emulsifiers, stabilizers, nutritive sweeteners, and “char-
acterizing flavoring” ingredients (with or without coloring), which could include
fruit, fruit juice, and/or natural or artificial food flavoring. The majority of half-and-
half on the market is pasteurized, homogenized, and unflavored. The principal uses
of this product are as coffee cream and as a cereal or fruit topping.
The sensory qualities of half-and-half should be evaluated with the same
approach used for milk; the evaluator should be alert for the same defects. Factors
that may impact quality, but which are not typically listed on the milk scorecard are
appearance (possible cream or oil separation or a cream plug); viscosity
130 V. B. Alvarez
(appropriate for the product of a given composition), this is the same for milk; and
feathering (or other developed defects when added to coffee).
The viscosity of half-and-half may be measured instrumentally, by the use of one
of several commercially available viscosimeters. Since viscosity is substantially
influenced by sample temperature, all measurements must be made at a standard-
ized temperature. The logical temperature to use is 4.4–10 °C (40–50 °F) since this
is the typical temperature range at which the consumer will subsequently use the
product and observe the viscosity. Both the instrument and the sample should be
tempered to the preset standard temperature for conducting the viscosity
measurement.
There are three possible defects that may be noted when half-and-half is added
to hot coffee: feathering, oiling-off, and off-color (in coffee). Of these, feathering is
probably the most commonly encountered and the most objectionable.
Feathering Feathering of cream is considered a defect that develops by formation
of undesirable particulates when cream is added to coffee. Cream feathering is
related to the acidity of the environment, the use of high homogenization pressures,
and heat processing conditions (Scott et al., 2003; Waldron et al., 2020). Feathering
is evident in several ways depending upon the intensity of the defect. Such a product
may initially appear immiscible in coffee, wherein the cream may rise in flocculent
masses to the surface, and thus reflect a lack of homogeneity. Frequently, this defect
appears as a light, evenly serrated scum on the coffee surface, after the coffee, and
half-and-half mixture has become quiescent. Occasionally, this defect may be so
extensive that most of the added cream rises en masse to the coffee surface immedi-
ately after the half-and-half has been poured into it, wherein it may appear like
distinct chunks of sour cream. When the homogenization pressure is excessive, the
half-and-half may be more susceptible to feathering under certain conditions, par-
ticularly when the water used for coffee making has high calcium content. Actually,
with half-and-half of normal composition, the susceptibility to feathering is not
unduly affected by homogenization, even at high pressures. Creams are stable at
pressures up to 13.6/3.4 MPa during homogenization (Elling & Duncan, 1996).
However, if the milkfat content is high, and the effect of homogenization (and
higher homogenization pressures) becomes more apparent. The susceptibility of
light cream (to be discussed next) to feathering is considerably enhanced by higher
homogenization pressures. Additionally, half-and-half suffering from elevated
titratable acidity (~0.12% as lactic acid) may be more susceptible to feathering. The
presence of this developed acidity will be reflected as an acid or slightly sour off-
flavor in the product. Unfortunately, regardless of the cause of cream feathering in
coffee, the consumer usually believes that the cream is sour; hence, this can repre-
sent a rather serious defect of half-and-half.
Feathering can be prevented or reduced by the addition of salts before homogeni-
zation that improve the stability of cream in regard to clumping. Sodium citrate,
disodium phosphate, and sodium bicarbonate prevent feathering in coffee by acting
as buffering agents in cream system. The use of two-stage homogenizers is more
effective in improving stability of cream. A total pressure of 20 MPa at 70 °C is
applied to have a cream with a low degree of aggregation (Hoffmann, 2011). After
a second homogenization step, cream recovers its exhibited resistance to clumping
as a more dispersed fat globule system exists therein the emulsion system. In addi-
tion, increase of solid concentration, in the form of skim milk powder, diminishes
the extent of fat clumping in cream. An increase in solid concentration raises the
coagulation point of cream and thus improves its stability regarding heat (Doan,
1931; Geyer & Kessler, 1989; Van Der Meeren et al., 2005). The most practical
protocol is to homogenize the cream base at the lowest possible range of homogeni-
zation pressures in order to achieve non-cream-line half-and-half products.
Oiling-Off and Off-Color These defects are more apt to occur with light cream
than with half-and-half, particularly a cream that tends to have an “oily” body.
Freezing of the cream product or improper homogenization contributes to these dif-
ficulties. Droplets of butter oil may be noted on the coffee surface, and instead of
developing a light brown color, the coffee appears slate gray. Also, on occasion, a
cream plug, partial churning, and/or coalescence of fat globules may be observed in
the product before its addition to hot coffee. When such destabilized cream is added
to the hot beverage, oiling-off (and a possible off-color) is most likely to occur.
Preventative measures essentially rely on the utilization of no frozen cream sources
and application of the lowest functional homogenization pressures possible.
Light Cream Light cream is basically described in the CFR as a cream that con-
tains not less than 18%, but less than 30%, milkfat. With respect to processing and
optional ingredients, the definition of light cream does not differ from that of half-
and-half. Imitation “cream” toppings (or “coffee whiteners”) and half-and-half have
essentially replaced light cream in consumer food service markets. All of the poten-
tial defects enumerated for half-and-half also apply to light cream. In fact, light
cream is generally even more susceptible to these developed quality shortcomings.
The body and viscosity of light cream is somewhat more difficult to control than
that of half-and-half; thus, this merits a more detailed discussion.
The body of light cream should be smooth, uniform, and reasonably viscous,
given the higher percentage of milkfat than half-and-half. When poured into hot
coffee, the cream should be readily miscible and exhibit neither “feathering” nor
“oiling-off.” It should impart a pleasant color to the coffee. Some body defects are
readily apparent to the eye, while others may require physical examination of the
cream and/or tests that employ the use of hot coffee. The more common body
defects of table cream that are readily apparent by direct visual examination are
listed in the following paragraphs.
Cream Plug Within various cream products, a cream plug may be exhibited by the
following: (1) a lack of uniformity in the cream, particularly at the surface; (2) a
layer of frothy and sometimes heavy cream that adheres to the bottle closure; (3)
butter particles on the surface of the cream; and/or (4) a distinct, heavy, leathery
milkfat plug that obstructs the flow of cream from the container. A cream plug
should not be confused with “ropy cream,” which is a bacterial spoilage defect of
132 V. B. Alvarez
somewhat similar appearance. Cream displaying a definite cream plug often has a
distinctly thin body throughout the remainder of the product. When such cream is
poured into a hot coffee, droplets of milkfat are generally noted on the surface. This
defect varies widely in its intensity. The various intensities of the cream plug defect
listed in increasing order of relative defect seriousness and degree of being objec-
tionable because of cream functionality issues are a foamy plug, a large mass soft
plug, a buttery-like plug, and a firm leathery-like textured plug.
Oiling-Off The occurrence of oily cream is inclined to be seasonal; it is observed

more frequently when cows have just been placed on pasture or green grass. In real-
ity, this defect is closely associated with the cream plug defect; in the aggravated
state of oiling-off, a cream plug invariably forms. Cream that has this defect gener-
ally appears shiny and usually has a thin body. The presence of a distinct skim milk
layer is commonly found with oily cream. As far as prevention or control of the
“oiling-off” defect of whipping cream (should it occur) is concerned, a gradual
incorporation of green-feeds-produced milk to the overall plant milk supply may
suffice to prevent or resolve this product defect.
Separation of a Skim Milk Layer The separation of a skim milk layer is more
common within the lower-fat-content cream products. It results from the rising of
fat particles (creaming-off). The defect is best described as a bluish, watery-like
layer that may be from one-sixteenth to one-half inch in depth, at the bottom of the
product container. Its presence in cream connotes to the customer a dilution of the
product with skim milk. Presumably, this cream product deformity can be mini-
mized or prevented by assuring the use of only fresh cream sources and assuring
gentle cream-handling practices (i.e., restricted pumping, agitating, and no air leaks).
Two qualities must be considered in observing the serum or skim milk layer of
cream, namely, the depth of the layer and its distinctness. The latter quality seems
to be the more serious of the two. A relatively obscure, deep skim milk layer is prob-
ably less objectionable to a consumer than a distinct, shallow layer that displays a
pronounced line of demarcation.
Certain associations with a skim milk layer may be noted in cream. Usually,
cream with this defect does not exhibit a thin body, but instead manifests a relatively
viscous body, considering the amount of fat present. Sometimes an old, stale, or
oxidized off-flavor may be noted and associated with a cream displaying this par-
ticular body defect. The skim milk layer in light cream becomes more distinct upon
extended storage time.
Thin Body Thin appearing body is a quite common body defect of some light
creams. It is evidenced by a tendency to drip as it is slowly poured from the con-
tainer and/or a tendency to definitely “splash” (similar to milk) as the product is
poured onto a flat surface, from a distance of 6 in or more. Thin body may some-
times be associated with the cream plug defect, but it will rarely be associated with
the separation of a skim milk layer. While this defect may be objectionable on the
basis that it suggests to the cream customer a low milkfat percentage in the cream,
it is not as serious as certain other body defects.
Defects such as a cream plug, oily cream, and the separation of a skim milk layer
can also occur in light cream that is packaged in paper. However, these conditions
cannot be observed within an unopened container. The cream itself must be exam-
ined, sometimes after decanting the product into a glass container (such as a gradu-
ated cylinder) and storing for a time period sufficient for this defect to reform itself
within a quiescent state. If cream marketed in paperboard cartons has a thin body,
this defect may sometimes be detected (by those individuals with a “trained ear”) by
shaking the container and carefully noting an apparent difference in sound.
Whipping Cream The CFR recognizes light whipping cream and heavy whipping
cream. Except for their respective milkfat contents, the definitions for these prod-
ucts do not differ from those of light cream and half-and-half. Light whipping cream
must not have less than 30%, but less than 36%, milkfat. The fat content of heavy
cream must not be less than 36%. Whipping cream constitutes a modest volume of
the annual total production of Grade A milk and cream products in the USA. However,
demand for the various types of whipping creams peaks dramatically during the US
seasons of Thanksgiving and Christmas through the New Year’s holiday.
Interestingly, many US dairy processors no longer produce whipping cream prod-
ucts due to substantially lower demand for the majority of the year, as well as expe-
riencing excessively long storage times which can lead to substantial product losses
due to spoilage. The serious potential spoilage problem is deemed to be best
assumed by specialized plants that produce ultra-pasteurized versions of whipping
cream and then solicit the same milk processors to serve as product distributors of
these ESL specialty products. Additionally, much of the US sales for whipping
cream products have been lost recently to imitations and substitutes, which come in
many forms: powders, frozen, frozen pre-whipped, and toppings in pressurized
containers.
In general, a highly desired whipping cream possesses a clean, sweet, nutty fla-
vor, a relatively heavy body (which is uniform throughout), and a smooth texture.
The flavor, bacterial count, sediment, container, and closure features and defects
may be the same or similar to those encountered in milk, half-and-half, and light
cream. The most critical quality criterion is a whipping test. When performed under
standardized conditions, it should provide data on the required time to produce the
desired stiffness and appearance of whip; whether or not the desired stiffness and
dry, velvety appearance is achievable; an estimate of the final overrun; the stability
of the whipped cream; and the mouthfeel properties of the whipped cream.
Fat Content of Whipping Cream As long as the percentage of fat in whipping
cream conforms to the legal milkfat standard, the product cannot be faulted, despite
the possibility of higher percentages of milkfat in other samples. Most research
workers concur that the percentage of milkfat in whipping cream should be between
30% and 35%. Such a cream should be expected to respond to whipping and to
subsequently yield a reasonably stiff, stable, whipped cream of typical overrun
(approximately 100–200%).
134 V. B. Alvarez
Body Defects of Whipping Cream Whipping cream is subject to the same general
body defects as light cream, but to different degrees of intensity. The viscosity of
whipping cream, although higher than light cream, may sometimes be too low,
given the higher percentage of milkfat present; cream plug defects may be accentu-
ated; serum separation may be reduced to a minimum; and the feathering and oiling-
off problems (of the lighter creams) may be of little or no consequence.
Whipped Cream from Pressurized Containers A specially formulated whipped

cream dispensed from pressurized containers is commonly used by the general
retail market. Product formulation, type of propellant gas (usually N2), and the
design of the container and valve are under proprietary control. Upon release of the
gas, a saturated, pressurized cream is formed and removed through a special valve.
The cream seemingly explodes instantly into a relatively stable, sometimes almost
frothy, product similar to traditional whipped cream. The increase in volume is pro-
portional to the pressure at which the cream is saturated before being released; the
volume is independent of the milkfat content. The quality criteria for this product
are the same as those for whipped cream prepared by traditional methods, namely,
flavor, stiffness, dryness, stability (as exhibited by resistance to air cell collapse and
drainage or leakage), and overrun.
Eggnog Part 131.170 of Title 21 of the CFR describes eggnog as the food contain-
ing one or more of a set of listed dairy ingredients (cream, milk, skim milk, or par-
tially skimmed milk), one or more of the optional ingredients that provide egg yolks
(liquid, frozen, or dried egg yolks or whole eggs), and one or more of the listed
nutritive carbohydrate sweeteners (sugar, invert sugar, brown sugar, high-fructose
corn syrup, and others). Other optional ingredients for eggnog include certain other
milk-derived products, such as nonfat dry milk, whey, lactose, etc.; salt; flavoring
ingredients; color additives (except those that impart a color simulating egg yolk or
milkfat); and approved stabilizers. All ingredients used must be considered safe and
suitable. Eggnog must contain not less than 6% milkfat and not less than 8.25%
MSNF. The egg yolk solid content of eggnog must not be less than 1% by weight of
the finished food. The product must be pasteurized or ultra-pasteurized and may be
homogenized.
Important components of the sensory quality of eggnog are flavor, body (consis-
tency), and product appearance (Feet et al., 1963; Hedrick et al., 1962). As in other
flavored milk or cream products, consumer preference plays an important part, but
typical milk-related off-flavors can arise and become a quality problem. Since milk
and its derivatives make up the major portion of eggnog, the evaluator should be
alert to any off-flavor or flavor deterioration that may occur during processing and/
or storage. The potential off-flavor concerns of eggnog probably more closely
resemble those of ice cream than of milk or cream (see Chap. 6 for details).
There seem to be differing views as to the most desired viscosity of eggnog, but
industry authorities generally agree that the body should be smooth, somewhat
thicker, or heavier than milk, and uniform throughout. The color should be
characteristic of eggs and cream, and if particles of sweet spices have been incorpo-
rated into the product, they should be uniformly distributed.
5.14 Conclusion
Sensory evaluation of milk and cream products can be the simplest, most rapid, and
direct approach to identify their quality and sensory attributes. It is generally con-
ceded that evaluating milk demands well-developed senses of smell and taste. Due
to the complexity of the products and for accurate evaluations, it is necessary first to
have a good understanding of how the attributes that determine the quality and
acceptability of the finished products are associated with their physical, chemical,
and microbiological characteristics as well as with the processing conditions. These
subjects were presented in detail in this chapter along with some materials and tech-
niques that can be used by coaches or dairy plant personnel. However, an important
aspect to keep in mind is that being familiar with sensory evaluation techniques and
knowing how to use the grading scorecards is not enough. Experienced grader/
taster(s) develop the necessary skills by training and practicing continuously. Upon
successful training, personnel or students should be able to discriminate between
desirable and undesirable products, trace the causes of an existing or potential prob-
lem, and establish corrective actions.
Acknowledgments The author greatly acknowledges comments and contributions of the review-
ers. Special thanks go to editors S. Clark, M. Drake, and K. Kaylegian for their valuable revisions
and contributions. The author is most grateful for the materials from the previous editions by
F.W. Bodyfelt, J. Tobias, and G.M. Trout, 1988, and S. Clark, M. Costello, M.A. Drake, and
F. Bodyfelt. 2nd Edition, 2009 used in this chapter. The author also thanks his associate Brianda
D. Gonzalez-Orozco for her help.
References
Anderson, I., & Oste, R. (1992). Sensory quality of UHT milk. In P. F. Fox (Ed.), Heat-induced
changes in milk (p. 318). International Dairy Federation.
Argov, N., Lemay, D. G., & German, J. B. (2008). Milk fat globule structure and function:
Nanoscience comes to milk production. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 19(12),
617–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2008.07.006
Badings, H. T., Van der Pol, J. J. G., & Neeter, R. (1981). Aroma compounds which contribute to
the difference in flavour between pasteurized milk and UHT milk. In Flavour’81: 3rd Weurman
Symposium. de Gruyter.
Bassette, R., Fung, D. Y. C., & Mantha, V. R. (1986). Off flavours in milk. CRC Critical Reviews
in Food Science and Nutrition, 24, 1–52.
Bendall, J. G. (2001). Aroma compounds of fresh milk from New Zealand cows fed different diets.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 49, 4825–4832.
Blaiotta, G., Aponte, M., & Poltronieri, P. (2017). Growth needs and culture media for LAB and
dairy-associated species. In Microbiological opportunities and challenges in the dairy industry
(pp. 123–137). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119115007.ch7
136 V. B. Alvarez
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1974). Temperature control monitoring II: A method for fluid milk processing
plants. Journal of Dairy Science, 57(5), 592–593.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1980a). Is it time for a temperature audit? Dairy Recipes, 81(9), 96–98.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1980b). Heat resistant psychrotrophs affect quality of fluid milk. Dairy Recipes,
81(3), 96–98.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1983). Quality the consumer can taste: A primer on quality assurance procedures
that produce excellent milk flavor. Dairy Recipes, 84(11), 170–174.
Bodyfelt, F. W., & Davidson, W. D. (1975). Temperature control I: A procedure for profiling tem-
peratures of dairy products in stores. Journal of Milk and Food Technology, 38, 734–737.
Bodyfelt, F. W., & Davidson, W. D. (1976). Temperature control means longer shelf-life. Dairy
and Ice Cream Field, 158(6), 34–40.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Morgan, M. E., Scanlan, R. A., & Bills, D. D. (1976). A critical study of the
multiuse polyethylene plastic milk container system. Journal of Milk and Food Technology,
39, 481–485.
Nostrand Reinhold.
Boelrijk, A. E. M., de Jong, C., & Smit, G. (2003). Flavour generation in dairy products. In G. Smit
(Ed.), Dairy processing improving quality (pp. 130–148). CRC Press/Wood Head Publishing
Limited.
Bradley, R., Jr. (1983). How to minimize off-flavors in milk. Dairy Recipes, 84(2), 93–97.
Buchrieser, C., & Kasper, C. W. (1993). An improved direct viable count for the enumeration of
bacteria in milk. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 20, 227–236.
Cadwallader, K. R., & Howard, C. L. (1998). Analysis of aroma-active components of light acti-
vated milk. In Flavor analysis: Developments in isolation and characterization (ACS sympo-
sium series no. 700) (pp. 343–358). American Chemical Society.
Cadwallader, K. R., & Singh, T. K. (2009). Flavours and off-flavours in milk and
dairy products. In Advanced dairy chemistry (pp. 631–690). Springer. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-0-387-84865-5_14
Calvo, M. M., & De La Hoz, L. (1992). Flavour of heated milks: A review. International Dairy
Journal, 2, 69–81.
Campbell, R. E., & Drake, M. A. (2013). Invited review: The effect of native and nonna-
tive enzymes on the flavor of dried dairy ingredients. Journal of Dairy Science. https://doi.
org/10.3168/jds.2013-6598
Cervato, G., Cazzola, R., & Cestaro, B. (1999). Studies on the antioxidant activity of milk caseins.
International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition, 50, 291–296.
CFR – Code of Federal Regulations Title 21. (1998, March 24). 131 appear at 63 FR 14035.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-131. Accessed 6 Feb 2022.
Chandan, R. C., & Shahani, K. M. (1964). Milk lipases: A review. Journal of Dairy Science, 47(5),
471–480.
Chapman, K. W., Whited, L. J., & Boor, K. J. (2002). Sensory threshold of light-oxidized fla-
vor defects in milk. Journal of Food Science, 67, 2770–2773. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-
2621.2002.tb08813.x
Choe, E., & Min, D. B. (2006). Chemistry and reactions of oxygen species in foods. Critical
Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 46, 1–22.
Cormier, F., Raymond, Y., Champagne, C. P., & Morin, A. (1991). Analysis of odor-active vola-
tiles from Pseudomonas fragi grown in milk. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 39,
159–161.
Croissant, A. E., Washburn, S. P., Dean, L. L., & Drake, M. A. (2007). Chemical properties and
consumer perception of fluid milk from conventional and pasture-based production systems.
Journal of Dairy Science, 90(11), 4942–4953.
Crow, V., Curry, B., Christinson, M., Hellier, M., Holland, K., & Liu, S. Q. (2002). Raw milk flora
and NSLAB adjuncts. Australian Journal of Dairy Technology, 57, 99–105.
Dabbene, F., Gay, P., & Tortia, C. (2014). Traceability issues in food supply chain management: A
review. Biosystems Engineering, 120, 65–80.
Deeth, H. C. (1986). The appearance, texture, and flavor defects of pasteurized milk. In
D. O. Cerf (Ed.), International dairy federation bulletin no. 200 (pp. 22–26). International
Dairy Federation.
Deeth, H. (2017). Optimum thermal processing for extended shelf-life (ESL) milk. Food, 6, 102.
https://doi.org/10.3390/foods6110102
Dekker, P. J. T., Koenders, D., & Bruins, M. J. (2019). Lactose-free dairy products: Market devel-
opments, production, nutrition and health benefits. Nutrients, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/
nu11030551
Doan, F. J. (1931). The relation of feathering and heat stability of cream to fat clumping produced
by homogenization. Journal of Dairy Science, 14, 527–539.
Doan, F. J. (1933). Critical preheating temperatures for inhibiting rancidity in homogenized milk.
Milk Dealer, 23(2), 40–42.
Dolci, P., & Cocolin, L. S. (2017). Starter strains and adjunct non-starter lactic acid bacteria
(NSIAB) in dairy products. In Microbiological opportunities and challenges in the dairy indus-
try (pp. 178–189). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119115007.ch10
Drake, M. A., Miracle, R. E., & Wright, J. M. (2008). Sensory properties of dairy proteins. In Milk
proteins (pp. 429–448). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374039-7.00015-5
Dunkley, W. L. (1968). Milk flavour: Flavour quality control. Dairy Industry, 3, 162–165.
Dunkley, W. L., Franklin, J. D., & Pangborn, R. M. (1962a). Effects of fluorescent light on flavor,
ascorbic acid and riboflavin in homogenized milk. Food Technology, 16, 112–118.
Dunkley, W. L., Franklin, J. D., & Pangborn, R. M. (1962b). Influence of homogenisation, copper,
and ascorbic acid on light-activated flavor in milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 45, 1040–1044.
Elling, J. L., & Duncan, S. E. (1996). Physical properties of 20% milk fat reformulated cream
manufactured from cholesterol-reduced butter oil. Journal of Food Science, 61, 375–378.
Ellis, K. A., Innocent, G., Grove-White, D., Cripps, P., McLean, W. G., Howard, C. V., & Mihm,
M. (2006). Comparing the fatty acid composition of organic and conventional milk. Journal of
Dairy Science, 89(6), 1938–1950.
Fanelli, A. J., Burlew, J. V., & Gabriel, M. (1985). Protection of milk packaged in high polyeth-
ylene against photooxidation by fluorescence light. Journal of Food Protection, 48, 112–116.
Feet, O., Hedrick, T. I., Dawson, L. E., & Larzelere, H. E. (1963). Factors influencing acceptability
of eggnog. Quarterly Bulletin – Michigan State University, Agricultural Experiment Station,
46, 293.
Fink, R., & Kessler, H. G. (1986). Reaction kinetics evaluation of the oxidative changes in stored
UHT milk. Milchwissenschaft, 41(2), 90–94.
Fitz-Gerald, C. H. (1974). Milk lipase activation by agitation: Influence of temperature. Australian
Journal of Dairy Technology, 29, 28–32.
Fromm, H. I., & Boor, K. J. (2004). Characterization of pasteurized fluid milk shelf-life attributes.
Journal of Food Science, 69(8), 207–214.
Gandy, A. L., Schilling, M., Coggins, P., White, C., Yoon, Y., & Kamadia, V. (2008). The effect of
pasteurization temperature on consumer acceptability, sensory characteristics, volatile com-
pound composition, and shelf-life of fluid milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 91, 1769–1777.
Gasaway, J. M., & Lindsay, R. C. (1979). Flavor evaluation of milk held in returnable Lexan® poly-
carbonate resin containers after commercial usage. Journal of Dairy Science, 62(6), 888–891.
Geyer, S., & Kessler, H. G. (1989). Effect of manufacturing methods on the stability to feathering
of homogenized UHT coffee cream. Milchwissenschaft, 44, 423–427.
Ghidini, S., Zanardi, E., Battaglia, A., Varisco, G., Ferretti, E., Campanini, G., & Chizzolini,
R. (2005). 2005. Comparison of contaminant and residue levels in organic and conventional
milk and meat products from Northern Italy. Food Additives and Contaminants, 22(1), 9–14.
Goff, H. D., & Hill, A. R. (1992). Chemistry and physics. In Y. H. Hui (Ed.), Dairy science and
technology handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 1–62). VCH Publishers.
Gonzalez-Orozco, B. D., Garcia-Cano, I., Jimenez-Flores, R., & Alvarez, V. (2022). Milk kefir
microbiota: Direct and indirect antimicrobial effect. Journal of Dairy Science, 105(5),
3703–3715. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2021-21382
Gould, I. A. (1940). Control of flavor in milk heated to high temperature. Milk Dealer, 29(8), 70.
138 V. B. Alvarez
Gould I. A. (1939). Cooked and oxidized flavors of milk as affected by Ferrous Iron. Journal of
Dairy Science, 22(12), 1017–1023.
Gruetzmacher, T. J., & Bradley, R. L. (1999). Identification and control of processing variables that
affect the quality and safety of fluid milk. Journal of Food Protection, 62(6), 625–631.
Hall, G., & Anderson, J. (1985). Flavor changes in whole milk powder during storage. Relationship
between flavor properties and volatile compounds. Journal of Food Quality, 7(4), 237–253.
Hall, G., Andersson, J., Lingnert, H., & Olofsson, B. (1985). Flavor changes in whole milk powder
during storage. The kinetics of the formation of volatile fat oxidation products and other vola-
tile compounds. Journal of Food Quality, 7(3), 153–190.
Halloran, C.P., and G.M. Trout. 1932. The effect of viscolization on some of the physical proper-
ties of milk. In 27th annual meeting, Michigan American dairy science association university,
Kentucky, Lexington.
Hammer, B. W. (1938). Dairy bacteriology. Wiley.
Hankin, L., & Anderson, E. O. (1969). Correlations between flavor score, flavor criticism, standard
plate count and oxidase content on pasteurized milks. Journal of Milk and Food Technology,
32(2), 49–51.
Hankin, L., & Stephans, G. R. (1972). What tests usefully predict keeping quality of perishable
foods? Journal of Milk and Food Technology, 35(10), 574–576.
Hankin, L., Dillman, W. F., & Stephens, G. R. (1977). Keeping quality of pasteurized milk for
retail sale related to code date, storage temperature and microbial counts. Journal of Food
Protection, 40(12), 848–853.
Hansen, A. (1987). Effect of ultra-high-temperature processing and storage on dairy food flavor.
Food Technology, 41, 112–116.
Harju, M., Kallioinen, H., & Tossavainen, O. (2012). Lactose hydrolysis and other conversions in
dairy products: Technological aspects. International Dairy Journal, 22(2), 104–109. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2011.09.011
Harper, W. J. (2008). Model food systems and protein functionality. In Milk proteins (pp. 409–428).
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374039-7.00014-3
Harwood, W. S., Carter, B. G., Cadwallader, D. C., & Drake, M. A. (2020). The role of heat treat-
ment in light oxidation of fluid milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 103, 11244–11256. https://doi.
org/10.3168/JDS.2020-18933
Havemose, M. S., Weisbjerg, M. R., Bredie, W. L. P., Poulsen, H. D., & Nielsen, J. H. (2006).
Oxidative stability of milk influenced by fatty acids, antioxidants and copper derived from
feed. Journal of Dairy Science, 89, 1970–1980.
Hayes, W., White, C. J., & Drake, M. A. (2002). Sensory aroma characteristics of milk spoilage by
pseudomonas species. Journal of Food Science, 67, 448–454.
Hedegaard, R. V., Kristensen, D., Nielsen, J. H., Frost, M. B., Ostdal, H., Hermansen, J. E.,
Kroger-Ohlsen, M., & Skibsted, L. H. (2006). Comparison of descriptive sensory analysis and
chemical analysis of oxidative changes in milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 89, 495–504.
Hedrick, R. R. (1955). Feed flavor transmission to milk. Montana State University, Mimeographed
material.
Hedrick, T. I., Dawson, L. E., & Feet, O. (1962). A proposed eggnog score card. Quarterly
Bulletin – Michigan State University, Agricultural Experiment Station, 45, 293.
Henderson, J. L. (1971). The fluid Milk industry. AVI Publishing.
Hoffmann, W. (2011). Cream: Manufacture. In Encyclopedia of dairy sciences (2nd ed.,
pp. 912–919). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374407-4.00107-2
Hood, E. G., & White, A. H. (1934). Homogenization of market milk, Canada. Department of
Agriculture, Dairy and Cold Storage Branch.
Hough, G., Martinez, E., & Barbieri, T. (1992). Sensory thresholds of flavor defects in reconsti-
tuted whole milk powder. Journal of Dairy Science, 75(9), 2370–2374.
Hough, G., Sanchez, R. H., Garbarini de Pablo, G., Sanchez, R. G., Calderon Villaplana, S.,
Gimenez, A. M., & Gambado, A. (2002). Consumer acceptability versus trained sensory panel
scores of powdered milk shelf-life effects. Journal of Dairy Science, 85(9), 2075–2080.
Hutchinson, M. L., Thomas, D. J. I., Moore, A., Jackson, D. R., & Ohnstad, I. (2005). An evalu-
ation of raw milk microorganisms as markers of on-farm hygiene practices related to milk.
Journal of Food Protection, 68, 764–772.
Irigoyen, A. (2005). Microbiological, physicochemical, and sensory characteristics of kefir during
storage. Food Chemistry, 90, 613–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2004.04.021
Jenness, R., & Patton, S. (1959). Principles of dairy chemistry. Wiley.
Jeremiah. (2019). Freezing effects on food quality. CRC Press. https://doi.
org/10.1201/9780203755495
Jones, V. A., & Harper, W. J. (1976). General processes for fluid milk. In W. J. Harper & C. W. Hall
(Eds.), Dairy technology and engineering (pp. 141–184). AVI Publishing.
Josephson, D. B., & Inventor. (1989). Process for masking a cooked flavour in heated milk.
Mallinckrodt Inc., assignee. US Pat. No. 4,851,251.
Joyner, J. J., & Kumar, D. V. (2015). Nanosensors and their applications in food analysis: A review.
The International Journal of Science and Technoledge, 3(4), 80.
Jung, M. Y., Yoon, S. H., Lee, H. O., & Min, D. B. (1998). Singlet oxygen and ascorbic acid effects
on dimethyl disulfide and off-flavor in skim milk exposed to light. Journal of Food Science,
63(3), 408–412.
Kadri, Z., Spitaels, F., Cnockaert, M., Amar, M., Joossens, M., & Vandamme, P. (2021). The bacte-
rial diversity of raw Moroccon camel milk. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 341,
109050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2021.109050
Kiesner, C., Hoffman, W., Lorenzen, P. C., Radedecker, I., Martin, D., Einhoff, K., Hammer, P.,
Teufel, P., & Suhren, G. (2005). Use of microfiltration in the manufacture of consumer milk
with extended shelf-life. Kieler Milchwirtschaftliche Forschungsberichte, 57(3), 139–190.
Kilic, M., & Lindsay, R. C. (2005). Distribution of conjugated alkylphenols in milk from different
ruminant species. Journal of Dairy Science, 88, 7–12.
Kosikowski, F., & Mistry, V. (1997). Sensory evaluation. In; Cheese and fermented milk foods.
Volume 2: procedures and analysis. 265–283. F.V. Kosikowski, L.L.C. Westport, Connecticut.
KPMG. (2018, June). Global organic milk production market report. KPMG
Lah, C. L., Cheryan, M., & DeVor, R. E. (1980). A response surface methodology approach to the
optimization of whipping properties of an ultrafiltered soy product. Journal of Food Science,
45(6), 1720–1726.
Landsberg, J. D., Bodyfelt, F. W., & Morgan, M. E. (1977). Retention of chemical contaminants by
glass, polyethylene, and polycarbonate multi-use milk containers. Journal of Food Protection,
40, 772.
Lewis, M. J., & Deeth, H. C. (2009). Heat treatment of milk. In Milk processing and quality man-
agement (pp. 168–204). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444301649.ch7
Lindsay, R. C. (2002). Free alkylphenol flavor additives. U.S. Pat. No. 6,391,363.
Lloyd, M. A., Hess, S. J., & Drake, M. A. (2009). Effect of nitrogen flushing and storage tempera-
ture on flavor and shelf-life of whole milk powder. Journal of Dairy Science, 92, 2409–2422.
https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1714
Mahato, D. K., Keast, R., Liem, D. G., Russell, C. G., Cicerale, S., & Gamlath, S. (2021).
Optimisation of natural sweeteners for sugar reduction in chocolate flavoured milk and
their impact on sensory attributes. International Dairy Journal, 115, 104922. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2020.104922
Metras, B. N., Holle, M. J., Parker, V. J., Miller, M. J., & Swanson, K. S. (2021). Commercial
kefir products assessed for label accuracy of microbial composition and density. JDS
Communications, 2, 87–91. https://doi.org/10.3168/jdsc.2020-0056
Mikolajcik, E. M., & Simon, N. T. (1978). Heat-resistant psychrotrophic bacteria in raw milk and
their growth at 7°C. Journal of Food Protection, 41, 93–95.
Min, D. B., & Boff, J. M. (2002). Chemistry and reactions of singlet oxygen in foods. Comprehensive
Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 1, 58–72.
Mirza Alizadeh, A., Masoomian, M., Shakooie, M., Zabihzadeh Khajavi, M., & Farhoodi,
M. (2020). Trends and applications of intelligent packaging in dairy products: A review. Critical
Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2020.1817847
140 V. B. Alvarez
Molina, E., Amigo, L., & Quirós, A. (2009). Sensory profiling of market milks. In Milk
processing and quality management (pp. 294–316). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781444301649.ch11
Molkentin, J., & Giesemann, A. (2007). Differentiation of organically and conventionally pro-
duced milk by stable isotope and fatty acid analysis. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry,
388(1), 297–305.
dairy foods. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 18, 953–965.
Mostafa, M. B. M. (1999). Quality and ripening of gouda cheese made from goats milk as affected
by certain feeding rations. Egyptian Journal of Dairy Science, 27, 179–190.
Mounchilli, A., Wichtel, J. J., Bosset, J. O., Dohoo, I. R., Imhoff, M., Altieri, D., Mallia, S., &
Stryhn, H. (2005). HS-SPME gas chromatographic characterization of volatile organic com-
pounds in milk tainted with off-flavour. International Dairy Journal, 15, 1203–1215.
Mungai, E. A., Behravesh, C. B., & Gould, L. H. (2015). Increased outbreaks associated with
nonpasteurized milk, United States, 2007–2012. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 21, 119–122.
https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2101.140447
Nursten, H. E. (1997). The flavour of milk and dairy products: I. Milk of different kinds, milk
powder, butter and cream. International Journal of Dairy Technology, 50(2), 48–56.
Ogden, L. V. (1993). Sensory evaluation of dairy products. In Y. H. Hui (Ed.), Dairy science and
technology handbook: Principles and properties (Vol. 1, pp. 179–186). VCH Publishers.
Park, C. W., & Drake, M. A. (2017). The effect of homogenization pressure on the flavor and
flavor stability of whole milk powder. Journal of Dairy Science, 100, 5195–5205. https://doi.
org/10.3168/jds.2017-12544
Parks, O. W. (1965). Autoxidation. In B. H. Webb & A. H. Johnson (Eds.), Fundamentals of dairy
chemistry (pp. 197–223). Avi Publishing Co.
Patton, S., Forss, D. A., & Day, E. A. (1956). Methyl sulfide and the flavor of milk. Journal of
Dairy Science, 30, 1469.
Plotter, H. M. (2002). Raw milk and milk products for human consumption. Dairy Division, Indiana
State Board of Animal Health.
PMO. (2019). Grade “A” pasteurized milk ordinance. 2019 Revision. U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services. https://agriculture.vermont.gov/sites/agriculture/files/doc_
library/2019%20PMO.pdf
Poltronieri, P., Battelli, G., & Mangia, N. P. (2017). Metabolism and biochemistry of LAB and
dairy-associated species. In Microbiological opportunities and challenges in the dairy industry
(pp. 97–122). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119115007.ch6
Polyanskii, K. K., Altuhov, N. M., Semenov, S. N., & Ponomarev, A. N. (2005). Composition of
milk microflora on various stages of receiving. Molochnaya-Promyshlennost, 5, 69.
Potts, D. M., & Peterson, D. G. (2018). Identification of objectionable flavors in purported spon-
taneous oxidized flavor bovine milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 101, 10877–10885. https://doi.
org/10.3168/jds.2018-15045
Richardson, N. J., Booth, D. A., & Stanley, N. L. (1993). Effect of homogenization and fat content
on oral perception of low and high viscosity model creams. Journal of Sensory Studies, 8,
133–143.
Salama, M. S., Musafija-Jeknic, T., Sandine, W., & Giovannoni, S. J. (1995). An ecological study
of lactic acid bacteria: Isolation of new strains of Lactococcus including Lactococcus lactis
subsp. cremoris. Journal of Dairy Science, 78, 1004–1017.
Santos, M. V., Ma, Y., Caplan, Z., & Barbano, D. M. (2003). Sensory threshold of off-flavors
caused by proteolysis and lipolysis in milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 86, 1601–1607.
Sayler, A. (2009). Hazard Analysis (Appraisal) Critical Control Point (HACCP) in milk process-
ing – A practical overview. In Milk processing and quality management (pp. 253–293). Wiley-
Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444301649.ch10
Schiano, A. N., Harwood, W. S., & Drake, M. A. (2017). A 100-year review: Sensory analysis of
milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 100, 9966–9986. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13031
Schultz, M. (2006, November) Organic dairy profile. AgMRC, Iowa State University Extension.
Scott, L. L., Duncan, S. E., Sumner, S. S., & Waterman, K. M. (2003). Physical properties of
cream reformulated with fractionated milk fat and milk-derived components. Journal of Dairy
Science, 86, 3395–3404.
Sederstrom, C., & Peterson, D. G. (2005). Inhibition of key aroma compounds generated dur-
ing ultra high temperature processing of bovine milk via epichatechin addition. Journal of
Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 53, 398–402.
Sepulveda, D. R., Góngora-Nieto, M. M., Guerrero, J. A., & Barbosa-Cánovas, G. V. (2005).
Production of extended-shelf life milk by processing pasteurized milk with pulsed electric
fields. Journal of Food Engineering, 67(1–2), 81–86.
Sfakianakis, P., & Tzia, C. (2017). Dairy technologies in yogurt production. In Microbiological
opportunities and challenges in the dairy industry (pp. 279–298). Wiley. https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781119115007.ch15
Shipe, W. F. (1964). Oxidations in the dark. Journal of Dairy Science, 47, 221–230.
Shipe, W. F., Bassette, R., Deane, D. D., Dunkley, W. L., Hammond, E. G., Harper, W. J., Kleyn,
D. H., Morgan, M. E., Nelson, J. H., & Scanlan, R. A. (1978). Off flavors of milk: Nomenclature,
standards and bibliography. Journal of Dairy Science, 61, 855–869.
Simon, M., & Hansen, A. P. (2001). Effect of various dairy packaging materials on the shelf
life and flavor of ultrapasteurized milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 84, 784–791. https://doi.
org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74534-1
Sliwkowski, M. X., & Swaisgood, H. E. (1980). Characteristics of immobilized sulfhydryl oxidase
reactors used for treatment of UHT milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 63(Suppl. 1), 60.
Smith, G. J., & Dunkley, W. L. (1962). Pro-oxidants in spontaneous development of oxidized fla-
vor in milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 45, 170–180.
Solano-Lopez, C. E., Ji, T., & Alvarez, V. B. (2005). Volatile compounds and chemical changes
in ultrapasteurized milk packaged in polyethylene terephthalate containers. Journal of Food
Science, 70(6), 407–412.
Stadhouders, J. (1972). Technological aspects of the quality of raw milk. Netherlands Milk and
Dairy Journal, 26(2), 68–90.
Strobel, D. R., Bryan, W. G., & Babcock, C. J. (1953). Flavors of milk. A review of literature
(p. 91). U.S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin.
Swaisgood, H. E. (1980). Sulfhydryl oxidases properties and applications. Enzyme and Microbial
Technology, 2(4), 265–272.
Ternström, A., Lindberg, A. M., & Molin, G. (1993). Classification of the spoilage flora of raw and
pasteurized bovine milk, with special reference to Pseudomonas and Bacillus. The Journal of
Applied Bacteriology, 75(1), 25–34.
Tetra Pak. (2021). Dairy processing handbook. Tetra Pak Processing Systems AB.
Thomas, E. L. (1981). Trends in milk flavor. Journal of Dairy Science, 64, 1023–1027.
Thompson, J. L., Drake, M. A., Lopetcharat, K., & Yates, M. D. (2004). Preference mapping of
commercial chocolate milks. Journal of Food Science, 69(9), 406–413.
Toledo, P., Andren, A., & Bjorck, L. (2002). Composition of raw milk from sustainable production
systems. International Dairy Journal, 12(1), 75–80.
Tong, L. M., Sasaki, S., McClements, D. J., & Decker, E. A. (2000). Mechanisms of the anti-
oxidant activity of high molecular weight fraction of whey. Journal of Agricultural and Food
Chemistry, 48, 1473–1478.
Touch, V., & Deeth, H. C. (2009). Microbiology of raw and market milks. In Milk pro-
cessing and quality management (pp. 48–71). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781444301649.ch3
Tracy, P. H., Ramsey, R. J., & Ruehe, H. A. (1933). Certain biological factors related to tallowi-
ness in milk and cream (Illinois agricultural experiment station bulletin, 352). University of
Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station.
Trout, G. M. (1945). Tracing the off-flavors in milk: A guide. Quarterly Bulletin – Michigan State
University, Agricultural Experiment Station, 27(3), 266.
Trout, G. M. (1950). Homogenized milk. Michigan State University Press.
142 V. B. Alvarez
Tunick, M. H., Ren, D. X., Van Hekken, D. L., Bonnaillie, L., Paul, M., Kwoczak, R., & Tomasula,
P. M. (2016). Effect of heat and homogenization on in vitro digestion of milk. Journal of Dairy
Science, 99, 4124–4139. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-10474
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2021). USDA ERS – Dairy data [WWW Document]. Dairy Data.
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/dairy-data/. Accessed 30 Mar 2021.
Van Aardt, M., Duncan, S. E., Marcy, J. E., Long, T. E., O’Keefe, S. F., & Nielsen-Sims,
S. R. (2005). Aroma analysis of light-exposed milk stored with and without natural and syn-
thetic antioxidants. Journal of Dairy Science, 88, 881–890.
Van Der Meeren, P., El-Bakry, M., Neirynck, N., & Noppe, P. (2005). Influence of hydrolysed
lecithin addition on protein adsorption and heat stability of a sterilised coffee cream simulant.
International Dairy Journal, 15, 1235–1243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2004.12.007
Vangroenweghe, F., Dosogne, H., Mehrzad, J., & Burenevich, C. (2001). Effect of milk sampling
techniques on milk composition, bacterial contamination, viability, and functions of resident
cells in milk. Veterinary Research, 32, 565–579.
Vissers, M. M. M., & Driehuis, F. (2009). On-farm hygienic Milk production. In Milk processing and
quality management (pp. 1–22). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444301649.ch1
von Dorp, M. (1996). Starch ethers for milk products. Lebensmittletechnik, 28, 34–35, 37.
Waldron, D. S., Hoffmann, W., Buchheim, W., McMahon, D. J., Goff, H. D., Crowley, S. V.,
Moloney, C., O’Regan, J., Giuffrida, F., Celigueta Torres, I., & Siong, P. (2020). Role of Milk
fat in dairy products. In Advanced dairy chemistry (Vol. 2, pp. 245–305). Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48686-0_9
Walker, S. J. (1988). Major spoilage organisms in milk and dairy products. Journal of Dairy
Technology, 41, 91–92.
Wang, A., Duncan, S. E., Whalley, N. W., & O’Keefe, S. F. (2020). Interaction effect of LED
color temperatures and light-protective additive packaging on photo-oxidation in milk
displayed in retail dairy case. Food Chemistry, 323, 126699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodchem.2020.126699
Weckel, K. G., & Chicoye, E. (1954). Factors responsible for the development of hay-like flavor in
vitamin a fortified lowfat milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 37, 1346–1352.
Whited, L. J., Hammond, B. H., Chapman, K. W., & Boor, K. J. (2002). Vitamin A degradation and
light-oxidized flavor defects in milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 85, 351–354.
Wishner, L. A. (1964). Light-induced oxidation in milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 47, 216–221.
Wolf, I. V., Bergamini, C. V., Perotti, M. C., & Hynes, E. R. (2013). Sensory and flavor char-
acteristics of milk. In Y. W. Park & F. W. George (Eds.), Milk and dairy products in human
nutrition: Production, composition and health (1st ed., pp. 310–337). Wiley. https://doi.
org/10.1002/9781118534168.ch15
Zabbia, A., Buys, E. M., & de Kock, H. L. (2012). Undesirable Sulphur and carbonyl flavor com-
pounds in UHT milk: A review. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. https://doi.
org/10.1080/10408398.2010.487166
Chapter 6
Butter
Robert L. Bradley and Marianne Smukowski
6.1 Introduction
The product known as “butter” was defined by the US Congress in 1923, to comply
with the requirements of the Food and Drug Act of June 30, 1906 (USA Congress,
1923). Following that definition (US 7 CFR 58.305; US FDA, 2021), and for the
purpose of this book, “butter” means the food product usually known as butter and
which is made exclusively from milk or cream, or both, with or without common
salt, and with or without additional coloring matter, and containing not less than
80% by weight of milkfat, all tolerance having been allowed for.
Butter is generally marketed in the USA according to its quality grade. These
butter grades are based on sensory quality and are assigned by competent “official”
graders who conduct prescribed sensory examinations of the product. The standards
for US grades of butter are addressed in Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 58, and Subpart B (US FDA, 2021), and in the US Standards for Grades of
Butter (USDA, 1989). Although there are known regional preferences for certain
flavor characteristics, body and texture properties, salt levels, color intensity, and
shape and style of package, the basis for the sensory scoring or assessing butter
quality remains uniform across the USA.
In addition to milkfat, butter contains moisture, curd (milk proteins, milk miner-
als, lactose, and other minor constituents), and common salt (usually). Thus, the
R. L. Bradley
Retired from the Department of Food Science, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
Retired from the Wisconsin Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin,
Madison, WI, USA
M. Smukowski (*)
Retired from the Wisconsin Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin,
Madison, WI, USA
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_6
144 R. L. Bradley and M. Smukowski
possible off-flavors of butter are not necessarily limited to those associated with
milkfat, but flavor defects may also result from the previous action of microorgan-
isms on milk proteins, milkfat, lactose, and/or storage conditions.
Farm-churned butter was once a major source of the US butter supply, but for all
practical purposes, this form is nearly extinct. The primary method of manufactur-
ing butter has gradually changed from the traditional batch process to the continu-
ous method of churning. Industry trends are for an increasingly higher portion of
butter churned by the more efficient continuous process and for “lightly salted”
butter (1.0–1.5% added NaCl).
This chapter will describe the different kinds of butter, grades of butter, tech-
niques for butter grading, evaluation of butter quality, body and texture characteris-
tics, and flavors of butter.
6.2 Ingredients for Buttermaking
A typical butter manufacturing facility starts with fresh milk, which is separated at
the plant, or cream transported in as the raw material for buttermaking. During the
first half of the twentieth century, farmers typically sold milk and cream to cream-
buying stations, which in turn supplied the butter manufacturing plants. At the
creamery receiving platform, the milk, and cream had to be carefully graded, since
most of it came from small producers who produced the milk and cream over a
period ranging from several days to a week. Frequently, only slight attention was
given to the cleanliness of the cream separator, utensils, and containers or to the
storage temperature of the raw cream and milk.
The vastly improved quality of current US butter supplies is primarily due to the
“fresh milk system” of the creamery operation. As the overall quality of the US milk
supply continued to improve, low-grade butter has essentially disappeared
(Hunziker, 1940; Wilster, 1968).
6.3 Types of Butter
Sweet Cream Butter The majority of the butter in the US market is the “sweet
cream” variety. The “sweet cream” designation implies that the apparent titratable
acidity of the churning cream did not exceed 0.10% (measured as lactic acid).
Currently most cream probably has no “developed acidity.” Bulk forms of sweet
cream butter that are free of off-flavors normally receive US grades AA, A, or B
(when graded), which are described in Sect. 6.5 and Table 6.1 (USDA 1989).
Cultured Cream Butter “Cultured cream butter” is made starting with high-quality
sweet cream in which a pleasant delicate aroma was developed by the addition of
lactic acid bacteria starter culture prior to churning. The cream is inoculated with a
6 Butter 145
Table 6.1 USDA classification of flavor characteristics (USDA, 1989)

Flavor classification
Identified flavor AA A B
Feed Sa D P
Cooked D – –
Acid – S D
Aged – S D
Bitter – S D
Coarse – S –
Flat – S –
Smothered – S D
Storage – S D
Malty – – S
Musty – – S
Neutralizer – – S
Scorched – – S
Utensil – – S
Weed – – S
Whey – – S
Old cream – – D
S slight, D definite, P pronounced, “–” not applicable
a
carefully selected lactic culture for the production of desired aromatic compounds.
Cultured cream butter can usually be distinguished by its distinct aroma of diacetyl
and other pleasant volatile compounds. Properly made, cultured cream butter has a
delicate flavor that is sometimes referred to as “real butter flavor.” Some “cultured”
butter is made improperly or by a “short-cut” method by adding either starter or
starter distillate to the butter at the time of salting and by directly working it into
the butter.
Salted Butter The addition of salt to butter is optional as expressed in the Standard
of Identity (US 7 CFR 58.305; US FDA, 2021). The salt intensity of butter can vary
over a wide range (0.75–2.5%). Most of the butter in the US market is salted and in
recent years has been toward more slightly salted (≤1.5%) butter.
Unsalted Butter Contains no added salt and may be made with lactic acid or starter
distillate. May have a slight acid note because of the added lactic acid, and this is
acceptable. Preferred use for cooking or baking.
Whipped Butter Whipped butter is available for both institutional and home use.
The Standard of Identity (7 CFR 58.305; US FDA, 2021) allows for the use of air or
an inert gas. The gas (preferably nitrogen) is incorporated by a mechanical whip-
ping process that changes the body characteristics and generally improves product
spreadability.
Whey Cream Butter This butter is made from whey cream or a blend of whey
cream and regular cream. Whey cream is derived from the separation of milkfat
from cheese whey. Whey cream butter has a less desirable flavor character and fro-
zen storage stability than sweet cream butter, the USDA-Dairy Division wants none
of this cream in the butter it purchases. The flavor of whey cream butter is somewhat
similar to the cheese from which the cream was derived. Most whey cream butter is
made from mozzarella, Cheddar, Colby, or Swiss cheese whey cream. However, if
the given whey was improperly cared for or the whey cream contains cream derived
from Provolone, Romano, Parmesan cheese, etc., the finished butter will be objec-
tionable and undergrade by USDA standards. However, butter containing varying
amounts of whey cream is sold in Wisconsin and Minnesota and marked as an A
grade for the respective state(s). The unique flavor of whey cream butter is enjoyed
and often preferred by many consumers particularly on hot foods such as baked
potatoes.
Flavored Butters Sometimes referred to as compound butter, plain butter is mixed

with a flavoring, spices/herbs, honey, garlic, onion, bacon, or fruit that is used in the
home or restaurants (Fig. 6.1). There may be a concern with the microbial load of
the spice/herb addition. When judging or grading these flavored butters, align the
samples to be evaluated in order of persistence of flavor. The flavorant should blend
compatibly and not overpower the flavor of the butter.
Miscellaneous Spreads Other products which emulate butter are margarine, but-
ter–margarine blends, and “low-fat spreads” made from either milkfat and/or
Fig. 6.1 Butters with

herbs, garlic, pepper, and
other flavors. (Image:
K.E. Kaylegian)
6 Butter 147
v egetable oil. Vegetable oils are hydrogenated and have differing melting points.
Although sensory properties vary widely for all products in this group of “spreads,”
some generalities still apply for their sensory evaluation. The general prerequisites
for high-quality spread-type products are desirable flavor and appearance, the
absence of off-flavors, quality of workmanship, and product performance in terms
of intended functional properties such as melting, spreading, and non-burning when
used for frying.
6.4 Grading Milk and Cream for Buttermaking
Butter made from fresh, sweet cream usually grades higher in sensory quality than
those products made from other cream sources (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
The grade of cream used for buttermaking will reflect the flavor of the butter
made from it. Some off-flavors may result from poor quality cream or milk, han-
dling, processing, or churning and are listed in Table 6.1.
There is no advantage in mixing together cream (or milk) of different grades; the
most probable result is a reduction in quality of the raw material equivalent to the
poorer one. Segregation or rejection of cream by its various grades is a recom-
mended procedure prior to making butter. Due to the potential health hazard of
tasting raw dairy products, a laboratory pasteurization procedure should be designed
and used for small samples. Developed acidity in cream may require neutralization
with approved alkaline chemical prior to pasteurization.
Specifications for cream are defined as follows by the US Standards of Identity
and the USDA Butter Grading Standards:
Pasteurization The cream for buttermaking shall be pasteurized either in a vat at a
minimum temperature of not less than 165 °F (74 °C) and held continuously at tem-
perature for not less than 30 min or by HTST at a temperature of not less than
185 °F (85 °C) and held continuously for not less than 15 s, or it shall be pasteurized
by any other equivalent temperature and holding time which will assure adequate
pasteurization (US 7 CFR 58.334; US FDA, 2021).
Sensory Examination Cream received at a receiving plant or substation shall be

identified as to the source. Each shipment shall be examined for physical character-
istics (floating debris, churned fat), off-tastes, and off-odors. The sensory examina-
tion and segregation of the cream used to manufacture butter shall be consistent
with the applicable flavor classification of butter set forth in the US Standards for
Grades of Butter (USDA, 1989).
6.5 Grades of Butter
Since April 1977, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has recognized only
three consumer grades of butter, namely, US grades AA, A, and B (USDA, 1989).
The US grade C designation was deleted at a time in recognition of the substantial
improvements in quality.
The USDA grading system for butter should be examined. The following tables
provide an overview of the USDA butter grade scoring. For example, to merit US
grade AA, a given butter may exhibit a slight feed or a definite cooked flavor but
cannot exhibit any other off-flavors. In the workmanship category (for which per-
tains to butter body, color, and salt content), a concept known as a “disrating” is
used (Table 6.2). For grade AA butter, the total permissible disrating for a “work-
manship fault” is only ½ point (Tables 6.3 and 6.4). Thus, for a given butter, the
flavor classification may actually be “AA,” but the assigned US grade may be lower
due to assigned disrating(s) for product workmanship. When more than one flavor
is discernable in a sample of butter, the flavor classification of the sample shall be
established on the basis of the flavor that carries the lowest classification. When an
off-flavor is detected that is not listed in this classification, i.e., rancid (lipase), oxi-
dized, metallic, etc., the grade assigned to that butter is “grade un-assignable” or
“below grade.”
6.6 Techniques of Butter Grading
The Butter Scorecard The USDA grading system for butter may be inappropriate
for some quality assurance activities or for those situations wherein the quality of
one product is compared with that of others. A group of products may include some
samples for which a US grade is not assignable, but which require identification of
defects and assignment of a score that reflects the seriousness of the problem. Useful
instruments for assisting in this quality assurance endeavor are scorecards and scor-
ing guides.
An example of a different scoring system is the one used by the National
Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest. This scorecard (Fig. 6.2) is for flavor
only, with a perfect score of 10. Body and texture, and appearance and color are not
evaluated because product temperature cannot be sufficiently controlled over the
duration of the competition and the surface of the butter samples is marred by
numerous samplings.
Condition of the Judging Room The room used for scoring butter should always
be clean, well lighted, and well ventilated. Ideally, the temperature of the room
should be 60–70 °F (15–21 °C). There should be no strong, offensive, or irritating
odors within the room or from nearby areas.
6 Butter 149
Table 6.2 USDA characteristics and disratings for body, color, and salt of butter (USDA, 1989)
Disratings
Characteristics Sa D P
Body:
Short – ½ 1
Crumbly ½ 1 –
Gummy ½ 1 –
Leaky ½ 1 2
Mealy or grainy ½ 1 –
Weak ½ 1 –
Sticky ½ 1 –
Ragged boring 1 2 –
Color:
Wavy ½ 1 –
Mottled 1 2 –
Streaked 1 2 –
Color specks 1 2 –
Salt:
Sharp ½ 1 –
Gritty 1 2 –
S slight, D definite, P pronounced, “−” not applicable
a
Table 6.3 USDA flavor classification and total disratings in body, color, and salt characteristics
permitted in each grade of butter (USDA, 1989)
Flavor classifications Total disratings US grade
AA ½ AA
AA 1 A
AA 1½ B
A 1 B
B ½ B
Tempering Butter The delicate aroma of butter is more readily detected, and the
body and texture characteristics are more easily and precisely determined, when
butter is at the appropriate temperature. Butter stored at temperatures colder than
50 °F (10 °C) should be moved into the grading room in advance of judging to allow
tempering to 50 °F (10 °C). Guidelines for Federal (USDA) Graders state that the
temperature of butter at the time of grading is important when determining the true
characteristics of body and texture; products should be between 45 and 55 °F
(7–13 °C). The required tempering time also depends on the relative size of the but-
ter samples and the temperature of the judging room. One-pound prints will temper
in a relatively short time (1/2–3 h), while bulk butter (approximately 55 or 68 pounds
(25 or 36.4 kg)) requires a much longer time, like overnight depending on prior stor-
age temperature. Flavor may be evaluated satisfactorily at temperatures above 60 °F
(15.5 °C), but the body of the butter is likely to appear somewhat atypical at this
higher temperature.
Table 6.4 Examples of the relation of US butter grades to flavor classification and total disratings
for body, color, and salt classifications (USDA, 1989)
Disratings
Permitted in excess
Example Flavor Disrating Disrating Disrating Total total of total US
no. classification body olor salt disrating disrating permitted grade
1 AA ½ 0 0 ½ ½ 0 AA
2 AA ½ ½ 0 1 ½ ½ A
3 AA 0 1 0 1 ½ ½ A
4 AA ½ 1 0 1½ ½ 1 B
5 A ½ 0 0 ½ ½ 0 A
6 A 0 ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ B
7 A 0 1 0 1 ½ ½ B
8 B ½ 0 0 ½ ½ 0 B
Fig. 6.2 Scores designated for flavor evaluation of butter in the Collegiate Dairy Products
Evaluation Contest. (https://dairyproductscontest.org/coaches_corner/). S slight, D definite, P
pronounced
6 Butter 151
Fig. 6.3 Example of

various types and sizes of
butter triers
Use of the Butter Trier Samples are taken by a two-edged, curve bladed tool
known as a “trier” (Fig. 6.3). Means for cleaning the trier and disposal of waste but-
ter should be provided. The trier should not be washed in warm water (prior to use,
only after use) but should be wiped with a single-service towel or absorbent paper
between each sample. Washing the trier in warm water often results in a melted,
greasy surface on the first plug of butter taken. This obscures the true condition of
the body and makes observation of the color more difficult. Disposal of the refuse
should be made promptly after the evaluation is completed.
Obtaining the Sample Since hands will usually come in direct contact with butter
during sampling, hands should be thoroughly washed with non-fragrant soap before
evaluation. The trier should be cleaned between samples by wiping it with a single-
service towel. The number or code of the sample is recorded on the scorecard or
grading sheet, and the evaluation process is started. The judge(s) should stand
squarely in front of the sample and observe the relative cleanliness and neatness of
the package. Next, the cover or packaging material is removed and the sample
observed for evenness and neatness of the liner (if present) and/or the squareness of
the wrapping material. Also, the surfaces of the bulk butter should be checked for
possible discrepancies or quality shortcomings that may have been observed on the
trier. The total butter surface should also be inspected for possible mold or yeast
growth. The color of the plastic liner should not interfere with the observation of
possible mold growth through the liner even though it may be folded over on itself.
The judge should grasp the butter trier firmly in hand and insert the sampling
device as near as possible to the center of the butter sample (Fig. 6.4). Some evalu-
ators choose to insert the trier diagonally (at approximately a 45° angle) to gain a
better cross-sectional sample. However, considering the way that butter boxes are
typically filled, trier insertion straight down at the center is satisfactory. The trier
should be turned one-half turn and the plug (core sample) withdrawn with a twisting
pulling motion.
Fig. 6.4 Inserting a trier

into the center of a block
of butter. (Image:
K.E. Kaylegian)
Fig. 6.5 Assessing the

aroma of butter from the
back of trier on a freshly
pulled plug. (Image:
M. Smukowski)
Sequence of Observations Immediately after withdrawing the plug, and before

making any observations for color, the judge should pass the butter sample slowly
under the nose, slowly inhale, and note any aroma present. Some evaluators inhale
the “fresh” aroma from the back of the trier (Fig. 6.5). Because the metal is usually
warmer than the butter itself, this may lead to a clearer sensory observation. A
“mental record” of any observed odor should be made by the evaluator. The next
step is an examination of the butter sample’s color, especially for uniformity. At this
point, the judge should examine the body and texture for shortness by pressing the
ball of the thumb against the sides of the butter plug (core sample) until it shows a
break. The judge should also be concerned with the “nature” of the break, that is,
whether it is smooth or jagged. It is important that the judge should note the pres-
ence or absence of free moisture (or “beads” of water) on the sample surfaces and
the backside of the trier and their relative degree of clarity. Furthermore, the amount
6 Butter 153
Fig. 6.6 Appearance of an

ideal sample of butter from
the front and back of the
trier. (Image:
K.E. Kaylegian)
of butter and any free moisture clinging to the back of the trier should be carefully
noted. The appearance of an ideal butter sample on the trier is shown in Fig. 6.6.
Up to this point, evaluation of the butter has been performed primarily by the
senses of sight and smell. Now the judges’ sense of taste is “brought into action.”
The evaluator should remove approximately a ½–1 in. piece from the lower end of
the butter plug and place it into his or her mouth. This sample is generally obtained
by means of a stainless steel knife or spatula (cleaned and prepared in the same
manner as the trier). A disposable plastic knife or spoon would serve this purpose in
both a functional and sanitary manner. Then the sample should be gently chewed
until melted. The melted butter is then rolled around within the mouth until it attains
approximately body temperature. Meanwhile, the butter judge should consciously
try to feel for the possible presence of “grit” (undissolved salt) between the teeth
and/or between the tongue and the roof of the mouth. The evaluator should also note
the manner in which the butter melts; a homogenous smooth melting process is
desired.
Simultaneous to these other sensory processes, the judge should be experiencing
various sensations of taste and smell. The melting (or melted) butter should be
rolled around the tongue and the back of the mouth; then, the sample is expecto-
rated. Finally, the judge should carefully observe for the occurrence of any after-
tastes and particularly note whether off-flavor sensation(s) persists. The physical
scoring process of the sample is now complete, and the set of sensory observations
should be recorded on a butter grading sheet. It needs to be emphasized that less
experienced butter judges must be especially careful to avoid “imagining a flavor
which does not exist” in the butter samples.
6.7 Other Considerations in Butter Quality Evaluation
6.7.1 Package
The package in which butter is sold should be neat, clean, and tidy in appearance
and have a good “finish” (smooth, attractive surfaces). With the quality and wide
range of current-day packaging graphics, the package should be attractive. This is
important regardless of the type of butter package, whether a quarter pound or one-
pound print, a three-pound container, or a bulk container. Fingerprints must not be
in evidence on any packaging materials. All butter packages should be fastened
firmly and neatly. Any inner linings should impart an impression of neatness and
reflect a pride in workmanship. In the instance of one-pound cartons, removal of an
outer carton should always reveal uniform, neatly wrapped quarter-pound sticks of
butter or similar with a one-pound solid block (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
USDA graders will frequently comment on the general condition of bulk butter
containers, but packaging is not one of the criteria used for determining the US
grade of butter. However, this should not minimize the importance of providing
sound, attractive butter packages for facilitating quality assurance and merchandiz-
ing. Butter packages serve to protect the product and, simultaneously, must be clean
and neat; brand recognition must have an attractive appearance in order to appeal to
and invite purchase by consumers.
6.7.2 Salt
Individuals differ in their preference for the amount of salt in butter. Some consum-
ers prefer a highly salted butter (>2%), while some prefer a lightly salted butter
(1.0–1.5%), and some culinary applications require unsalted butter. Many consum-
ers demand and use unsalted butter, exclusively. Different buttermakers seem to
incorporate varying percentages of salt. A level of 1.5% is common in butter today.
Butter should be examined for possible undissolved salt when first placed into
the mouth; otherwise undissolved salt will quickly go into solution with saliva;
hence, it may not be detected. The presence of “grittiness” or “grit” (undissolved
salt) can be detected most easily by biting gently between the molars. If undissolved
salt is present, a gritty effect is usually noticed at once. Although a rarity, undis-
solved salt on the surface or wrapper of an exposed sample does not necessarily
indicate the presence of undissolved salt in the interior of the butter.
If butter is not “worked” sufficiently during the manufacturing process, then
water droplets that contain salt may reside on the surface of the butter. As the water
evaporates, salt in the form of white crystals remains on the surface of the butter. In
order for the butter to merit a perfect score, salt in the interior of the butter must be
completely dissolved. Salt only dissolves in the droplets of water distributed
throughout the finished butter. A sharp, salty taste sensation usually indicates
6 Butter 155
excessive salt in the butter, particularly when the butter is well “worked” (blended).
This is generally indicated by the absence of visible water droplets on the trier or
butter plug (the product is devoid of “leakiness”). Also, a sharp salty taste may be
an indication that the butter contains at least some whey cream, although this is not
the only criterion for butter-containing whey cream.
6.8 Color and Appearance
A uniform light, pale yellow color seems to most often meet the demand for expec-
tations of US consumers. As a rule, the shade of butter color is of little consequence
in scoring, providing the color is a natural shade of yellow and within the USDA
color standard (Fig. 6.7). The yellow color range in the standard (Fig. 6.7) is com-
monly associated with butter, especially if the intensity is no higher than the natural
color of the butter produced when cows consume green feed as a source of roughage
(higher carotene content imparts a deeper yellow color to butter). The primary item
to observe in scoring butter for color is the uniformity of color throughout the prod-
uct. However, the Grading Standard indicates that butter color may be adjusted
because of seasonal variation in color attributable to the availability of green feed.
The butter judge should be aware of the following possible color and appearance
defects in butter:
Black, green, red, white, or yellow specks
Bleached, dull, pale color
Lifeless color-faded surface
High-colored surface compared to butter underneath
Fig. 6.7 USDA color guide for butter. VL very light, L light, ML medium-light, M medium, MH
medium-high, H high, VH very high
Lack of color uniformity, generally due to mixed churnings

Mold and/or yeast discoloration
Mottled color
Color streaks
Unevenness of color
Unnatural color
Waviness of color
Poor buttermaking workmanship, particularly over- and underworking of butter
during the manufacturing process, is responsible for most color and appearance
defects. The size, number, and distribution of water droplets markedly influence the
color of butter. The same color aberrations are apparent in whipped butter because
of the size of air cells and dispersion. Microorganisms, including mold, can cause
serious quality deterioration problems in butter. Butter that is inadequately pro-
tected against moisture evaporation tends to exhibit an intense or high-colored sur-
face. There have been instances of escaped refrigeration gases (ammonia) reacting
with the color pigments and flavor of butter. Contamination with extraneous or for-
eign substances poses serious problems of esthetics that go beyond color or sensory
effects. Occasionally, even questions of wholesomeness and toxicity may be raised
as a consequence of product adulteration or contamination.
The more common color defects of butter can essentially be eliminated by proper
working at the time of manufacture. Generally, the flavor of poorly worked butter is
not as good as the flavor of the same butter, had it been properly worked. Furthermore,
butter with color defects due to insufficient working usually does not store or keep
as well as butter that was adequately worked. Salt is needed to control microbial
problems associated with possible off-flavor development. A 1.5% salt produces
about 0.9% salinity in the water droplets. This then produces water that may control
bacteria. Therefore, a color defect may serve as a hint to the judge to be more on the
alert for possible flavor defect(s) that may be associated with the cause of this
appearance shortcoming.
The color attribute “mottled” refers to spots of lighter and deeper shades of yel-
low, caused by an uneven distribution of moisture due to insufficient working.
“Streaks” are recognizable as an area of light color surrounded by more highly
colored portions. “Waviness” is an unevenness that appears as waves of different
shades of yellow. Insufficient blending of two different butter sources is the
usual cause.
6.9 Body and Texture
Immediately after examining a trier sample of butter for aroma and color, the body
should be examined. The judge should notice the plug surface and the back of the
trier for the possible presence of “beads” of water, for smoothness, for solidity, and
for the appropriate degree of firmness. Next, the evaluator should press the ball of
6 Butter 157
the thumb (good sanitary practices must be observed) against the sample surface
and notice how the plug “breaks” or responds. If a break in the plug appears on
withdrawal from the sample, this is termed “short,” and the same “short” applies to
cracks or “breaks” from pressing with your thumb or spatula.
The evaluator should determine whether the physical features of the plug seem
to disappear. High-quality butter should melt evenly. The evaluator should note the
mouthfeel characteristics of the sample with the tongue and the palate as it is melt-
ing. The body of good-quality butter should be firm and exhibit a distinct waxy,
close-knit texture. When broken, the appearance of quality butter should present a
somewhat jagged, irregular, wrought ironlike surface.
The physical–chemical system that determines characteristic body and texture of
butter is quite complex. Since milkfat is a mixture of fatty acids and triglycerides
that melt at different temperatures, butter at normal handling temperature is a mix-
ture of both crystalline and liquid forms of milkfat. The type of feed that cows
consume influences the relative proportion of high-to-low melting triglycerides in
the milkfat. The fat of the butter also exists in the form of globules and free fat. Both
the size of fat crystals and the diameter of fat globules influence butter body and
texture. Seasonal differences in milkfat composition, primarily due to different
feeds, may be partially compensated for by varying some manufacturing steps. In
much of the USA, butter tends to be harder (firmer) in the winter season due to a
smaller amount of oleic acid in the triglyceride structure. Generally, milkfat is softer
in the summer because it contains a larger proportion of oleic acid; hence, the butter
body may tend to be weaker and/or leaky in butter made in summer months. Butter
is a water-in-oil emulsion, in which milk proteins and possibly milk minerals may
play a stabilizing role.
Manufacturing steps that influence the body and texture of butter include (1) time
and temperature of tempering of the cream, (2) churning temperature, (3) extent of
working, (4) the method of adding coloring and salt if added, and (5) the manufac-
turing equipment and churning method used.
6.9.1 Body and Texture Defects of Butter and Their

General Causes
The terms “body and texture” refer to the physical properties of butter. These physi-
cal properties primarily depend upon the composition of milkfat, structure of fat
globules, rate of fat crystallization in cream and butter, amount of liquid fat, as well
as the number and size of the fat crystals in butter. Although the term “body” refers
to the general makeup or consistency of the butter mass, and the term “texture”
relates to the arrangement of the liquid and crystals that make up the mass, they are
so closely related that they are not considered separately when evaluating the physi-
cal properties of butter. The major body and texture defects of butter are as follows:
Crumbly
Greasy
Gummy
Leaky
Mealy/grainy
Ragged boring
Short
Sticky
Weak
Crumbly The fat crystals in a “crumbly”- or “brittle”-textured butter lack cohesion
and do not hold together. Some of the butter usually adheres to the back of the trier
and reflects a rough, ragged appearance. As the term “crumbly” suggests, the butter
appears dry and readily falls apart, rather than appearing waxy and homogenous
when pressure is applied to the plug. A crumbly texture suggests that the butter has
been under worked; however, if it is worked more, the body usually becomes sticky.
Finished butter that has been warmed and then cooled slowly to develop large crys-
tals may become crumbly. Also, some difficulty may be experienced in removing a
complete plug of butter with a trier.
Crumbliness in butter seems to be the result of relatively large fat crystals and a
deficiency in liquid fat. The defect is more often observed during late fall and winter
months. The temperature to which cream is cooled after pasteurization, the length
of the holding period, and churning practices are factors to be considered in limiting
this defect, and the rate of cooling butter after packaging and boxing (Wilster, 1958;
Wilster et al., 1941; Zotolla, 1958).
The temperature of butter samples during this evaluation is an important factor in
detecting crumbliness, since a normal body may appear crumbly at a lower sam-
pling temperature, while a crumbly butter may appear normal at a markedly higher
temperature.
Greasy A “greasy” butter consistency may be identified by the extreme smooth-
ness and immediate melting when a sample of butter is placed into the mouth. Also,
this defect may be suggested by the extreme ease with which a trier sample is
removed from the product. Instead of a clean, clear feeling in the mouth after expec-
torating (as when a desirable waxy sample has been tasted), the mouth may be left
with a sensation of greasiness. The most likely cause of greasiness is overworked
butter, particularly when the body of the butter is already too soft. A higher propor-
tion of low-melting point triglycerides is the physical–chemical factor responsible
for this defect. This defect is more prevalent in the summer months.
Gummy “Gummy”-bodied butter tends to stick to the roof of the mouth and may
leave a gumlike impression. This defect is more prevalent during the winter months.
Gumminess in butter is apparently due to an abnormally high percentage of high-
melting triglycerides, which cause a firmer or harder milkfat and can interfere with
butter spreadability; a slower cooling of the cream, a higher churning temperature,
6 Butter 159
Fig. 6.8 An example of “leaky” butter; note moisture droplets down the center of the plug. (Image:
K.E. Kaylegian)
and a longer working time are some of the manufacturing steps that have been found
to aid in control or minimization of this defect.
Leaky Butter that exhibits beads or droplets of moisture on the plug and/or the
back of the sampling trier is criticized as being “leaky” (Fig. 6.8). Such butter fails
to retain moisture within the product mass due to the larger size of water droplets.
Leakiness is usually caused by insufficient working. The butter has not been worked
to the point where the water droplets are reduced sufficiently in size to be evenly
distributed throughout the butter mass (Hunziker, 1940; McDowall, 1953; Totman
et al., 1939; Wilster, 1968). Butter that has been in frozen storage for a period of
extended time will frequently show some degree of leakiness. To minimize the
problems associated with this defect, cubes of frozen butter when printed should
first be microfixed, a process that softens the thawed butter and re-establishes the
water-in-oil emulsion.
Fortunately, the above problems associated with leaky butter have nearly disap-
peared with advent of the use of a continuous churn. However, traces of free mois-
ture can occasionally be found, in artisan butter or cold butter. Microfixing will
correct the problem of leaky butter.
Mealy/Grainy A “mealy” or “grainy” texture is easily recognized when a sample
of partially melted butter is compressed between the tongue and roof of the mouth
or a distinct “grainy” sensation is perceived. This is considered a somewhat serious
defect. Such butter lacks a smooth, waxy texture characteristic of good-quality but-
ter. A mealy (grainy) texture may be caused by improperly neutralized high-acid
cream, allowing milkfat to “oil-off” at some stage in the pasteurization process.
Improper melting of frozen cream or remelting butter rework in a vat where it
may separate without proper agitation may result in a grainy textured butter. The
buttermaker is in a position to prevent or control the mealy/grainy defect by proper
selection and processing of cream, appropriate churn and techniques, preparation
and control of the amount of rework used.
Ragged Boring Usually a full trier of butter cannot be drawn from butter that has a
sticky–crumbly texture; it is also somewhat difficult to replace the ill-shaped plug
into the formed trier hole. The butter simply seems to roll from the trier, rather than
the trier cutting a distinctly formed plug. Butter that exhibits this sampling difficulty
is referred to as “ragged boring.” This is considered a serious body defect as this
condition would interfere with cutting butter into individual serving-size patties.
This defect also unfavorably affects butter spreadability. To correctly determine
ragged boring, butter must be evaluated at between 45 and 55 °F (7–13 °C); other-
wise “ragged boring” may be observed in good butter at lower evaluation
temperatures.
Factors that cause the ragged boring defect in butter include the rate of cream
cooling after pasteurization, the holding temperature of cream after pasteurization,
and prior to churning, the churning temperature, or any processing condition that
tends to interfere with the formation of a well-made, close-knit butter texture.
Short A “short” body in butter refers to a product that lacks the desirable charac-
teristics of plasticity and waxiness. This defect is noted when the plug is difficult to
remove from the block or has a tendency to break sharply when moderate thumb
pressure is applied or even when a plug is removed from the block as seen in
Fig. 6.9. A butter sampled at less-than-typical temperature (<7 °C) for scoring and
a short-textured butter exhibit marked brittleness. Other factors that may be involved
in short-textured butter are (1) high-melting point fats (that contain relatively small
fat globules), (2) an extremely low curd content in the butter, (3) manufacturing
processes wherein part of the milkfat is melted (hence, normal butter granules are
not formed), and (4) rapid cooling of recently made butter to an extremely low
temperature.
Sticky As the term implies, a “sticky”-bodied butter adheres (sticks) to the trier and
appears to be quite dry. Usually it is difficult to secure a uniform, smooth-surfaced
plug from such butter (Fig. 6.10). The butter plug will appear “ragged” or “rough.”
Fig. 6.9 An example of

“short”-bodied butter
6 Butter 161
Fig. 6.10 An example of “sticky” butter. (Image: K.E. Kaylegian)
This is particularly the case when the trier is cold. Since users want a butter that
spreads relatively easily, a sticky body is quite undesirable. As stated earlier, when
crumbly or brittle-textured butter results from being overworked, the entire mass
tends to become sticky. In fact, sticky body and crumbly texture are often present
concurrently in butter. A sticky body is primarily a feed-related defect; it appears to
be more prevalent in areas where alfalfa is the major roughage fed to milk cows.
Various temperature treatments of cream and butter, as well as churn working con-
ditions, markedly affect the occurrence of the sticky defect.
Weak A “weak” body is typically indicated by an exaggerated softness of the butter

when it is exposed to ordinary room temperatures. This is not a particularly serious
defect, but it is a body/texture characteristic of butter that is, overall, not in good
favor with most butter graders or buyers. A weak-bodied butter often produces an
imperfect plug. When the ball of the thumb is pressed against a plug of “weak” but-
ter, difficulty is encountered in defining a distinct “breaking point” for the plug.
Weak body is due to a state of incomplete milkfat crystallization, which results in
an excess of milkfat in the liquid form within this butter. Incomplete crystallization
of the milkfat may be caused by inadequate tempering of pasteurized cream or a
relatively high proportion of low-melting point triglycerides. However, a weak-
bodied butter generally spreads well. Churning at too high a temperature and incor-
porating too much air or nitrogen during whipping may also lead to a
weak-bodied butter.
Based on natural variations in the composition of milkfat of different suppliers
due to diet and milkfat producing regions of the country, usually butter judges allow
for some leeway or range in butter body and texture characteristics. Consequently,
a weak body in butter is not generally considered a serious defect.
6.9.2 Correlation of Body and Texture Defects
Sometimes, two samples of butter may have distinctly different body and texture
characteristics, but due to regional preferences or grading interpretations, each sam-
ple may be given a similar or perfect (if warranted) body and texture score in the
grading process. As a rule, the body and texture of butter from different butter-
producing regions will not be exactly the same, even though made within the same
season of the year. Tolerances in grading allow for these different characteristics. If
a body/texture defect is noted when grading butter, it should be either sufficiently
intense or readily obvious to be recorded on the grading sheet. Also, it is not unusual
to have two or more body and/or texture defects occur in the same butter sample.
For instance, butter with a leaky defect may also exhibit a mealy texture; sticky-
bodied butter may also exhibit a crumbly texture. Due to the occurrence of these
dual defects, two criticisms are sometimes noted. However, in such cases both of the
defects must be sufficiently obvious, intense, or serious for the dual defects to be
recorded.
6.10 Flavor of Butter
The ability to consistently detect various off-flavors and assess their intensity is
probably the most difficult skill to develop when evaluating butter. To evaluate but-
ter flavor, the judge should recall the aroma that he or she mentally recorded at the
time when the trier plug of butter was obtained. The evaluator must be ready to cor-
relate, if possible, this perceived aroma with the taste sensation that is about to be
experienced. The judge should then remove about a 1 in. (2.5 mm) portion from the
end section of the butter plug with a knife, spoon, or spatula. If obtained properly,
this portion of butter should represent the approximate center of the butter sample.
The judge then places this small quantity of butter in the mouth and brings the butter
into a liquid state as soon as possible. The evaluator continues to manipulate the
sample within the mouth until the butter sample reaches approximately body
temperature.
It is most important that the butter judge take particular notice of the first hint of
a taste or smell to make an appearance. The evaluator needs to observe whether the
first taste sensation disappears or not.
The judge should mentally record, as the sensory procedure progresses, whether
there is a succession of detected flavors. Do the first flavors dissipate and other fla-
vor notes appear? The evaluator should bear in mind that the sense organs of taste
and smell are quite delicate, and with certain flavor sensations, the sensitivity of
these delicate organs is easily dulled. In this way, the flavor notes are either less
readily perceived or may no longer be observed. To help prevent sensory fatigue, a
butter sample should not be kept in the mouth too long. Also, if the evaluator
encounters a strong lasting off-flavor such as oxidized or rancid, rinsing the mouth
with a good sample prevents carryover of the strong flavor to the next sample(s).
6 Butter 163
After the judge notes the various flavor sensations that may be present, the sam-
ple is expectorated into a container or sink provided for that purpose. This generally
completes the sequence of observations with the butter sample. However, it is most
important that any aftertaste be carefully noted. The evaluator should observe any
taste sensation that remains in the mouth and note the relative degree of pleasant-
ness or unpleasantness as well as the extent of flavor persistence.
Following the sensory evaluation, depending on the current practice, the evalua-
tor should replace the remainder of the plug into the same hole from which it was
obtained, and the plug reinserted on level with the butter surface. Next, the trier hole
should be smoothed with a knife or spatula, which will help keep the butter surface
neat in appearance and restricts the access of air and mold spores to the sample
interior.
6.10.1 Characteristics of the Various Flavor Defects
High-quality butter should have a mild, slightly sweet, clean and pleasant flavor,
and a delicate aroma. A characteristic feature of such high-quality butter is that the
appetite seems to “crave more of the product.” To manufacture butter with “first-
class” flavor, the raw materials definitely must be free of objectionable flavor
defects. This is also true of cultured cream butter, which is expected to exhibit a
distinct culture flavor and an aroma with moderate levels of diacetyl, the delightful
buttery-like aroma as the principal component. A slight to definite level of “cooked”
flavor is allowed and often preferred by a majority of experienced butter judges. The
so-called cooked flavor attribute of butter is somewhat reminiscent of scalded milk
or the smell of milk heated in a double boiler.
Acid An acidic or sour off-flavor in butter usually develops from either churning
high-acid cream, over-ripened cream, excessive use of lactic starter culture, use of
too much lactic acid in unsalted butter, or excess retention of buttermilk in the butter
wherein lactose is fermented. When buttermilk is retained (frequently indicated by
a milky drainage), it is designated as a “buttermilk flavor” defect. An acid off-flavor
in butter is characterized by a biting tart taste on the sides of the tongue, as well as
an associated aroma, due to the presence of volatile acidic components. Generally,
this acidic taste is easily and quickly detected when the butter is placed into the
mouth; however, this flavor sensation usually clears up quickly and leaves little or
no aftertaste.
Aged/Old Cream An “aged” off-flavor in butter is best described by the terms

“lacks freshness” or “stale.” The lacks freshness sensation can typically be detected
by smelling or by noting a moderately persistent aftertaste. The aged off-flavor may
be confused with either “storage” or “old cream” off-flavors. If butter, especially
“printed” butter, is to be held for an extended time, it should be stored at 0 °F
(−18 °C) or lower to minimize the development of aged off-flavor. Failure to
promptly process milk or cream (even if it is of high quality) can result in a loss of
freshness and the aged flavor defect. This defect is the result of cream contaminated
with proteolytic and psychrotrophic bacteria that grow and produce various metabo-
lites as degradation products. USDA-Dairy graders distinguish between the aged
and storage off-flavors in determining US grades; however, only the “storage” criti-
cism appears on the grading sheet for the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation
Contest.
Briny/High Salt USDA-Dairy graders identify this defect as “sharp salt” under the
category of salt, rather than noting a “high salt” (“briny”) problem as a flavor defect.
Regardless of the category for designating this defect, a distinct to pronounced salt
taste in butter prevails beyond a “range of ordinary acceptability.” Usually, the cause
is simply the addition of too much salt, though uneven distribution of salt may also
produce this defect. If such is the case, then it should probably be criticized for high
salt. Whey cream butter may tend to exhibit more high salt contents because of
cumulative combinations of salt from (1) the whey and (2) the added salt.
Cheesy A “cheesy” off-flavor in butter has a striking resemblance to the aroma and
taste of ripened Cheddar cheese. The presence of this off-flavor is easily detected
from an initial sensory observation, due to both the intensity and peculiar cheesy
characteristics. From the instant of placing the sample in the mouth, through manip-
ulation of the sample and subsequent expectoration, to the last lingering aftertaste,
the “cheesy” flavor defect is unique and readily noticeable. The cheesy off-flavor is
persistent; the mouth definitely fails to “clean-up.”
In some extreme cases, a cheesy off-flavor in butter may somewhat resemble the
odor of limburger cheese or putrid meat. Cheesy-flavored butter is usually consid-
ered to be an extremely serious defect. Quite often, a bitter aftertaste will accom-
pany the cheesy flavor defect, due to proteolysis and some of the resultant peptide
end products. If butter has developed mold growth even if mycelial only, metabo-
lites may give the butter the flavor of blue cheese and even develop a rancid flavor;
thus, cheesy or cheesy/rancid could be the appropriate flavor descriptor(s).
Obviously, this is deemed to be a very serious defect of butter.
Coarse Butter which lacks that sweet, pleasing, delicate flavor that is generally
associated with fresh milkfat is generally criticized as being “coarse” in flavor. The
lack of butter flavor refinement is typically noticed when the sample is first placed
into the mouth. A “coarse” off-flavor does not give rise to a pronounced, undesirable
flavor sensation; the butter just seems to lack the overall pleasant flavor sensation or
the balanced taste and aroma characteristics that are anticipated in the highest qual-
ity product.
From a practical standpoint, however, whenever butter is found to lack a fine,
delicate, smooth flavor, the “coarse” criticism is employed when no other criticism
appears justified or appropriate. Thus, the criticism “coarse” for butter is similar to
the criticism “lacks fine flavor” which is applied to other dairy products. “Coarse”
6 Butter 165
is primarily reserved for that butter that has reasonably good sensory properties but
just seems to fall short of the top or best-quality product. Butter characterized with
the “coarse” flavor criticism often implies that individual lots of high-quality cream
may have been blended with various proportions of some older, lower quality cream
sources or low-quality rework was added, thus leading to that moderate harshness
of off-flavor referred to as “coarse.” The flavor sensation may be observed at the
back of the mouth where “bitter” is observed.
Cooked A “cooked” flavor is generally associated with high-quality and the best or
better grades of butter. This flavor note in butter should be easily recognized when
the sample on the trier is passed under the nose or when a portion of the sample is
first placed into the mouth. Unless the flavor is pronounced, its presence, as noted
by tasting or smelling, is of relatively short duration within the storage/distribution
time of the butter. Provided that other off-flavors are not present, butter exhibiting a
slight to definite “cooked” flavor “cleans up” completely and leaves absolutely no
aftertaste, other than a rather pleasant one.
A cooked flavor in butter, which can be described as a smooth, nutty-like,
custard-like character, is produced by pasteurizing sweet cream. It is not unusual
(and frequently desirable) to have a definite cooked flavor in freshly churned butter.
If the butter is free of an associated “coarseness,” and it is not “scorched” (i.e., pro-
nounced cooked), this flavor sensation in butter is not objectionable; in fact, it is
generally considered delightfully aromatic and pleasing (often reminiscent of
scalded milk). US butter grades allow a definite cooked flavor in the highest grade
(AA) of butter. Typically, much of this flavor note dissipates from the product before
the butter reaches the consumer. Pasteurization at higher temperatures also enhances
the keeping-quality of butter. The required high-heat treatment destroys microor-
ganisms that grow and possibly produce metabolites that could be noted in a profile
of possible off-flavors. Reducing compounds, such as sulfhydryls, formed from the
high-temperature heat treatment of the whey proteins in cream are effective
antioxidants.
Feed The presence of different “feed”-derived off-flavors can usually be detected
by the aroma and verified on the palate when the butter is melted. With most feed
flavor defects, the mouth usually cleans up quite soon after the sample is expecto-
rated. Most forms of dry feeds, such as hay, many of the grain concentrates, citrus
pulp, silage, green alfalfa, and various grasses generally lead to no worse than what
is referred to as a “normal” feed flavor note in butter. Even when fed in large quanti-
ties, these feeds only have a slight objectionable effect on butter flavor. Green alfalfa
tends to produce a characteristic, mild, sweet flavor (with a possible instantaneous
bitter-sweet tinge). When cows are placed on fresh grass pasture in spring or early
summer, the butter produced may exhibit a characteristic “grassy” off-flavor. A
slight or “normal” feed flavor is allowed in US grade AA butter. Rarely, some feed
sources may impart an objectionable “bitter” off-taste to butter.
Proper feeding routines for dairy cows can do much to eliminate or minimize
feed off-flavors in butter. Generally, if cows are not fed between 0.5 and 3.5 h of
milking time, feed off-flavors are substantially minimized in subsequently produced

butter. If large quantities of highly aromatic feeds are fed, the period of time between
feeding and milking should be increased beyond 3.5 h. Vacuum treatment of cream
during pasteurization will minimize these flavors. When a cooked flavor is imparted
to cream (and the resultant butter), it tends to mask any feed off-flavors in butter for
at least 1 month after product manufacture.
The feeding of strong-flavored vegetables and other strong-flavored feeds may
cause the milk and the subsequent cream and butter to acquire the same flavor as
that of the vegetable or feed consumed by the cows. Feed flavor is often caused by
the feeding of cabbage, turnips, potatoes, or silage from silo bottoms within 30 min
to 3.5 h prior to milking. Sometimes the off-flavor descriptor applied is “tainted
cream,” an objectionable off-flavor, which can be intense in the resultant butter.
These flavor notes are so typical of each “causative” vegetable that when encoun-
tered are easily recognized by both the senses of taste and smell. A “vegetable”
off-flavor in butter is actually a form of the more commonly recognized feed fla-
vor defect.
“Weedy” off-flavors in butter typically result from churning cream that has an
absorbed weed flavor, which sometimes occur due to seasonal pasture feeding pat-
terns. Specific weeds cause characteristic off-flavors in butter, and some weeds may
be more prevalent at different times of the year. Weed off-flavors are more pro-
nounced after samples are warmed to room temperature. Usually the flavor note that
is typical of a weed remains in the mouth after the sample has been expectorated. In
the past, a distinction was made between common and obnoxious weeds in identify-
ing this flavor defect. Obnoxious weeds are those that produce a particularly
unpleasant off-flavor. The assigned sample score reflects the degree of seriousness
of the imparted off-flavor. Wild onion and wild garlic are examples of weed off-
flavors. The Collegiate Contest scorecard does not have a separate category for
“weedy” but lists “feed” and “garlic/onion” separately.
Flat Butter that simply lacks a characteristic, full, pleasing “buttery” flavor is criti-
cized as being “flat.” The absence of typical butter flavor is noted when the butter is
first placed into the mouth. The lack of flavor character is most readily noted as the
butter melts in the mouth upon tasting. The flat defect is associated with the lower
flavor profile of lightly salted or unsalted butter. Unsalted butter may exhibit several
flavor notes in sufficient intensities for detection, but the lack of salt generally sup-
presses rather than enhances the flavor notes. In a product with a flat flavor defect,
there is little or no characteristic butter flavor. A flat defect is generally caused by an
apparent lack of volatile acids or low content of other flavor compounds like diace-
tyl, other carbonyls, and various volatile compounds that are partially responsible
for a desirable “buttery” flavor.
Dilution of churning cream with water or excessive washing of butter granules
during manufacture and/or low salt content may result in a flat flavor. Certain feeds
may also be more conducive to production of milkfat with less characteristic flavor.
Pasteurizing at a higher than legal minimum temperature develops a higher cooked
6 Butter 167
flavor in cream and is obviously the simplest expedient for masking the flat flavor
defect in butter.
Foreign Atypical off-flavors derived from the careless use of cleaning and sanitiz-
ing chemicals, absorption of combustion products, odors absorbed from gasoline,
iodine, chlorine, kerosene, fly spray, paint, varnish, etc., are unacceptable in butter.
Unfortunately, since milkfat can function as an excellent solvent for the chemicals,
any cream or butter contamination must be avoided. Even atmospheric vapors from
these kinds of compounds can be a serious problem in terms of possibly imparting
foreign or chemical-like off-flavors.
Garlic or Onion “Onion” or “garlic” off-flavors not deliberately added are occa-
sionally found in butter. They are easily detected from their distinctive odors. Both
of these off-flavors can be feed contaminants and are most pronounced when sam-
ples are warmed to body temperature. The flavors of garlic and onion are surpris-
ingly similar when detected in butter by tasting and/or smelling. Both are quite
odorous, as well as distinctly persistent in aftertaste; both are equally objectionable
and out of place in either fresh or stored butter, and both have some of the same
chemical compound constituents.
Malty The “malty” off-flavor that is occasionally encountered in butter resembles

the odor of malted milk or Grape Nuts® cereal. The flavor sensation generally per-
sists after the sample has been expectorated. The malty off-flavor results from the
outgrowth of Lactococcus lactis ssp. maltigenes in either milk or cream that has
been cooled inadequately. This implies that storage temperatures of milk or cream
were probably in excess of 55–60 °F (13–15.5 °C) and increased acidity of the milk
or cream subsequently occurred. Hence, a combined malty and high-acid off-flavors
are most probable.
Metallic As the name indicates a “metallic” off-flavor is the flavor sensation per-
ceived when a copper penny is held between the teeth. This flavor defect conveys a
slightly astringent and puckery sensation to the mouth interior. The metallic note
may be detected as soon as the butter is placed into the mouth; the sensation per-
ceived by the palate generally becomes more intense as the sample melts and is
liquefied. To some people, the initial taste perception experienced with the metallic
defect seems flat. This off-flavor persists after the sample has been expectorated; a
somewhat bitter taste or other objectionable aftertaste may appear at the end of the
tasting period and resembles the flavor derived from holding a copper penny
between your teeth. This off-flavor is a precursor to “oxidized” off-flavor.
Neutralizer The presence of a “neutralizer” off-flavor in butter can be observed

immediately after the sample has melted in the mouth. However, this defect is often
more readily perceived just after the sample has been expectorated, and air is inhaled
through the mouth. The aftertaste of added “acidity neutralizer” in butter is persis-
tent. This flavor note, depending on intensity, may be soda cracker-like or somewhat
alkaline, suggestive of bicarbonate of soda or similar compounds. The soda neutral-

izers may also produce an associated bitter-like aftertaste, sometimes referred to as
“limey-like.” A neutralizer off-flavor in butter results from the addition of concen-
trated solutions of neutralizer needed to counter high levels of lactic acid formed in
the cream. This defect is becoming substantially less common with the reduction of
temperature and storage time abused creams. However, whey cream remains a prob-
lem wherein contained cheese cultures actively develop lactic acid.
Old Cream Cream that is fresh, sweet, clean, and without production or handling
defects or undesirable off-flavors (as developed by certain psychrotrophic bacteria)
is certainly preferred for making butter. As cream ages, it gradually loses the desir-
able, delicately balanced flavor characteristics that should be transmitted to butter.
After reaching several days of age, some cream sources will exhibit a typical “old
cream” off-flavor, which carries through into the resultant butter. The old cream
defect may also be caused by exposing cream to improperly washed equipment,
unclean storage equipment, and/or inadequate cooling. Lactic acid development fre-
quently accompanies old cream off-flavor. Butter manufactured from old cream is
characterized by staleness or lack of freshness and a characteristic aroma that is
somewhat reminiscent of the unpleasant “background” odor noticed in a creamery
or dairy plant that has not practiced the best sanitation. When a butter sample with
this defect is first placed into the mouth, the flavor seems “to lag,” not making “an
appearance” until the sample is melted. Usually, the old cream defect is most notice-
able when the sample has been eliminated from the mouth; the off-flavor lingers and
does not clean up readily. When the defect is “definite” to “pronounced” intensity,
it can be readily detected by sense of smell.
Oxidized The oxidation of unsaturated fatty acids to form a group of aldehydes in

dairy products creates a series of different off-flavors that fall under the generic term
“oxidized.” However, since different flavor sensations are perceived in various
stages of development of oxidized butter, terms such as “metallic,” “oily,” “tallowy,”
“painty,” and/or “fishy” have been used to describe the observed defects. The term
“oxidized” best describes the light-induced form of oxidized flavor that is common
to milk and other dairy products. A characteristic cardboard-like flavor and often an
associated puckery mouthfeel are the usual distinguishing features. The so-called
oily stage, painty, and fishy off-flavors in butter are uncommon with current cream
and butter manufacturing and handling practices.
Rancid (Lipase) The “rancid” off-flavor of butter is unmistakably objectionable

and may be soapy and/or bitter. Rancidity of butter somewhat resembles the strong,
disagreeable off-flavor of Romano cheese, darkened, decayed nuts, baby breath,
gym bags, or dirty sneakers. The odor is pungent and is that of volatile short-chain
fatty acids. Hence, the odor may generally be noted from carefully smelling the
contents of the withdrawn trier. Often this off-flavor gives the taste impressions of
soapiness and frequently, definite, or intense bitterness. A rancid off-flavor is the
result of hydrolysis of milkfat through the enzymatic action of lipase, which liberates
6 Butter 169
fatty acids. A rancid off-flavor is attributed to the free, short-chain fatty acids and
the resultant salts of these fatty acids (e.g., technically a soap).
Pasteurization of cream that contains high levels of free fatty acids does not
eliminate the rancid off-flavor (Woo & Lindsay, 1984), but a vacuum pasteurization
treatment will significantly decrease the level. A characteristic of the rancid off-
flavor (useful for recognition) is a certain astringent mouthfeel, perceived at the
base of the tongue and upper throat. This mouthfeel persists after the sample has
been expectorated. Those individuals who may have a relatively high threshold for
the characteristic odor of fatty acids may still be able to recognize rancid butter by
this particular mouthfeel sensation; otherwise, they are advised to wait for the
delayed bitterness and the unclean-like aftertaste.
Scorched In contrast to cooked, a “scorched” off-flavor in butter is considered
objectionable. Causes include pasteurization at severely high temperatures (in
excess of 200 °F [93 °C] and/or with longer than minimal holding times), possibly
in the presence of developed acidity. When not extreme, scorched may manifest as
caramellike. At extremes, product “burn-on” may occur on heating surfaces due to
inadequate agitation in vat pasteurizers or too high a temperature differential across
the heater section. For improperly neutralized cream, a defect may develop that is
known as “scorched-neutralizer” which resembles the off-flavor of old nut meats.
Also, to cover or partially “mask” the whey flavor in butter made from a blend of
whey cream and sweet cream, manufacturers will often pasteurize at a higher tem-
perature than required by law. This may contribute a “scorched” flavor to the cream
and thus to the finished butter.
Storage Butter held for considerable time (>6 months to several years) in frozen
storage may gradually absorb odors from the storeroom environment. Under these
circumstances, the delicate flavor characteristics of high-quality butter are lost, and
the consequent flavor deterioration is referred to as the “storage” defect. After
extended storage, butter made from fresh, clean, flavored, sweet cream seems to
undergo this chemical change much more slowly (exhibit less flavor deterioration)
than butter that was made from lower quality cream.
The particular off-flavor that results from this overall loss of product freshness is
difficult to describe, since a storage off-flavor appears to be a composite of several
deteriorative processes. The desirable sensory characteristics that are attributed to
“product freshness” are distinctly absent in butter that exhibits the storage flavor
defect. Even butter of the highest sensory quality will gradually deteriorate during
storage, especially if odorous foods or materials are stored in close proximity to the
butter or if storage temperatures are too high. Protective wrappers mitigate this
problem flavor since is a surface defect initially.
Unclean As the term implies, the “unclean” off-flavor is indicative of poor cream
handling conditions and/or improper sanitary care of the storage and production
equipment in which the cream and butter are processed. Possibly, slow cooling rates
of the milk or cream, and/or elevated storage temperatures, may have promoted the
outgrowth of spoilage bacteria (psychrotrophs), which produce end products that

are responsible for causing this unpleasant off-flavor. Sometimes this flavor defect
is referred to as an “unclean,” or “dirty dishrag” off-flavor. This flavor defect in but-
ter manifests itself as a most unpleasant odor that intensifies as the sample is melted.
This off-flavor persists for some time after the sample has been expectorated.
The term “utensil” still appears in the USDA-Dairy grade classification, but its
use should be discontinued. It represents an anachronism that is no longer relevant
to current methods of cream handling and butter manufacture. Furthermore, this
defect is caused by spoilage bacteria and not by “utensils,” which might have har-
bored the bacteria.
Whey Butter made from cream separated from cheese whey exhibits flavor charac-
teristics that are generally similar to the type of cheese that was the source of the
whey cream. The nature and intensity of the “whey” off-flavor depend on the fresh-
ness and quality of the whey and the proportion of whey cream to sweet cream that
may have been blended to produce the butter. Practice with known or authentic
samples is usually required to insure correct identification of this attribute. A whey
off-flavor is somewhat similar to the combined coarse/acid flavor defects of butter,
plus an associated moderate odor and aftertaste suggestive of the given cheese whey.
A whey off-flavor may be similar to the old cream defect; however, flavor notes of
both “coarse” and “acid” are prevalent in this flavor defect. Some manufacturers
label “whey cream butter” as “old-fashioned style” butter or may employ another
fanciful product name.
Yeasty A “yeasty” off-flavor is detected in the early stages of development by its

typical fruity, vinegary, yeasty, and/or bread dough aroma, which is apparent when
the sample is first smelled or taken into the mouth. As the sample melts, the odor
becomes more and more distinctly yeasty (bread doughlike). This flavor defect in
butter occurs infrequently, but when it does happen, it is most often noted in butter
produced during the hot summer months. By-products formed by yeasts that have
grown in poorly handled, abused cream are responsible for this off-flavor. Old,
yeasty cream may also impart a bitter flavor to the resultant butter. A yeasty off-
flavor is a serious defect since the cream from which the butter was made had under-
gone considerable decomposition. Rejection of such cream at intake would be the
desirable, obvious approach.
6.11 Frequency of Sensory Defects in Butter
There are no known statistics available to quantify or document the continuous

improvement in butter quality over recent decades. However, anyone who has been
involved in the sensory evaluation of butter for a decade or longer would most cer-
tainly conclude that the overall quality of US butter has vastly improved. The one
development most responsible for this significant flavor improvement is the marked
6 Butter 171
change from farm-churned cream to factory-churned cream and subsequently farm-

separated cream to plant-separated cream (from fresh milk). Simultaneously, tech-
nological advances in butter manufacturing have substantially reduced defects that
were previously attributable to substandard workmanship. Continuous churns have
served to significantly reduce “personnel errors” through semiautomation and better
and more reliable process control. Two other significant factors are the universal
replacement of wood (circa late-1950) with stainless steel and the contribution of
dairy industry automation that has sufficed to eliminate manual contact with the
finished products. Annual summaries of the frequency of defects encountered by
USDA-Dairy graders provide only an approximate assessment of current butter
quality, since not all butter is graded.
While the delicate flavor of butter can be markedly influenced by the feed of the
bovine, flavor is amazingly consistent around the country. The evaluator quickly
finds out that 1.0–1.5% salt added to butter adds a whole, new dimension to per-
ceived flavor.
Understanding scoring techniques is vital. Flavor is the most significant portion
of any evaluation with body, texture, salt level, color, and appearance having lesser
effect on total points awarded. Remember flavor scores are not additive. Flavor
takes the score of the most serious defect if more than one is apparent.
6.12 Summary
Butter is a unique product. High-quality butter is a delicately flavored and compli-

cated food product. If butter is not manufactured precisely, a number of unfavorable
sensory attributes might be found in the finished product that would not be accept-
able by consumers. Hence, applicable quality assurance precautions must be taken
during the production of milk, cream separation, and the subsequent stages of butter
manufacturing.
Both unsalted and salted butter have unique flavors that have never been dupli-
cated, particularly the heated butter flavors. Flavored and compound butters made
with herbs, spices, peppers, and other condiments continue to grow in popularity.
Suggested Readings
Bradley, R. (2018). Better butter II. Wisconsin Center for Dairy Research. www.cdr.wisc.edu
Morgan, M. E. (1970). Microbial flavor defects in dairy products and methods for their simulation.
I. Malty flavor. Journal of Dairy Science, 53, 270–272.
dairy foods. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 18, 953–965.
References
Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J., & Trout, G. M. (1988). Chapter 9: Sensory evaluation of butter. In The
sensory evaluation of dairy products (pp. 376–417). Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Hunziker, O. F. (1940). The butter industry (3rd ed.). Published by the Author.
McDowall, F. H. (1953). The Buttermaker’s manual. Vol. I and II. New Zealand University Press.
Totman, C. C., McKay, G. L., & Larsen, C. (1939). Butter. Wiley.
US FDA. (2021). Electronic code of Federal Regulations. Part 58-Subpart B-General specifica-
tions for dairy plants approved for USDA inspection and grading service. Accessible at https://
www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=c6bad77deb3be19e54812b98afaa3ed3amp;node=pt7.3.
58&rgn=div5. Date accessed 3/20/2021.
USA Congress. (1923). Sixty-seventh Congress. Chap. 268.-an act to define butter and to provide a
standard therefor. Accessible at https://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-large/67th-congress/
Session%204/c67s4ch268.pdf. Date accessed 20 Mar 2021.
USDA. (1989). United States Department of Agriculture. Agricultural Marketing Service, dairy
division. United States standards for grades of butter. Available at https://www.ams.usda.gov/
grades-standards/butter-grades-and-standards. Date accessed 20 Mar 2021.
Wilster, G. H. (1958). Smooth spreading butter. Milk Products Journal, 49(4), 10.
Wilster, G. H. (1968). Practical buttermaking. Oregon State University Bookstores, Inc.
Wilster, G. H., Jones, I. R., & Hagg, J. R. (1941). Crumbliness and stickiness in butter: Physical
and chemical properties of the milkfat. National Butter and Cheese Journal, 32(1), 2.
Woo, A. H., & Lindsay, R. C. (1984). Characterization of lipase activity in cold-stored butter.
Journal of Dairy Science, 67, 1194–1198.
Zottola, E. A. (1958). Effect of certain manufacturing methods on the physical characteristics of
butter. M.S. Thesis. Oregon State University.
Chapter 7
Creamed Cottage Cheese
Dave Potter and Doug Vargo
7.1 Cottage Cheese Defined
Creamed cottage cheese is a soft, unripened cheese that is usually made by coagula-
tion of pasteurized skim milk by added lactic culture or acidulants, with or without
the addition of minute quantities of milk-coagulating enzymes (as curd condition-
ers). The coagulum is cut into various-sized curd particles by special sets of knives,
heated (cooked), and held for a sufficient time to facilitate firming of the curd and
removal of the whey. Once the curd has developed the appropriate consistency
(firmness or “meatiness”), the whey is drained. Then the curd is washed; creamed
(usually) with a salted dressing in which other flavoring agents, cultures, and preser-
vatives may be added; and packaged.
Cottage cheese is consumed as a fresh product and without preservatives will last
a maximum of 2–3 weeks. Consequently, the flavor attributes of this product depend
on a combination of the sensory qualities of skim milk and cream dressing ingredi-
ents, as well as properties of the lactic cultures employed in the manufacturing
process. The overall sanitation procedures and temperature control exercised in
manufacture also play a key role in determining product shelf life and sensory qual-
ity of this relatively perishable dairy product. Today, it is common practice among
US cottage cheese processors to incorporate either a liquid diacetyl flavor, potas-
sium sorbate, a dried fermentate produced from Propionibacterium shermanii
(Sandine, 1984), and/or some CO2 into cream dressing (Chen & Hotchkiss, 1991;
Hotchkiss & Chen, 1996) for better flavor and shelf life extension before addition to
the curd. This process has shown to routinely extend the shelf life of commercial
D. Potter
Dairy Connection, Inc., Madison, WI, USA
D. Vargo (*)
IFF Nourish Division, Chicago, IL, USA
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_7
174 D. Potter and D. Vargo
cottage cheese to up to 6 or 7 weeks. There remain few manufacturers who will

incorporate specially selected lactic cultures (Streptococcus lactis subsp. diacety-
lactis and/or Leuconostoc sp.) into the cream dressing to increase the “cultured
aroma” (and coincidentally inhibit psychrotrophic spoilage bacteria, i.e., competi-
tive exclusion). Hence, the addition of carefully selected lactic microorganisms to
the dressing can simultaneously serve to significantly enhance flavor along with
added liquid components such as diacetyl to increase the shelf life of creamed cot-
tage cheese.
7.2 Cottage Cheese – An American Original
Creamed cottage cheese is an American (or US-original) cheese. In fact, it is gener-

ally presumed that cottage cheese is but one of only a few cheese types that have
their actual origins in the USA. Several other cheese types considered to be US
developments are Monterey Jack, Colby, and string cheese. Prior to the first or sec-
ond decade of the twentieth century, skim milk, a by-product of farm milk separa-
tion, was either fed to pigs and/or chickens. The prime end product of
separation – cream – was shipped to the local creamery for ice cream or butter
manufacture. In a way, skim milk generated at the farm was often considered a
waste product. The eventual commercial development of a viable cottage cheese
industry in the Pacific Northwest in 1915 sufficed to change the nation’s disposition
of skim milk. A new segment of the cheese industry was born when Mr. and Mrs.
Charles West of Tigard, Oregon, said “let’s build a factory” to manufacture and sell
this new product we have mastered – creamed cottage cheese. Thus, commercializa-
tion of fresh creamed cottage cheese in the Pacific Northwest (Angevine, 1964;
Davies, 1942; Olsen, 1980) was the place and date (1915) of origin by this enterpris-
ing husband and wife team, and the springboard for would-be cottage cheesemakers
in the upper mid-western USA. This initial development of the US cottage cheese
industry and early technical expertise (the early pioneers and heroes) for the quality
manufacture of this product is explored in more detail at this chapter’s conclusion.
7.3 First Steps in the Development of Cottage Cheese
Centuries ago, most milk generally soured soon after it was collected from lactating
animals, since timely cooling was practically nonexistent. It was also duly noted
that “soured milk” does not readily undergo undesirable proteolysis and other
unwanted physical and chemical changes. Hence, harvested milk was typically han-
dled in a manner to insure souring and thus preserve it for several days or longer.
Each tribe, ethnic group or locale with lactating animals, developed its own method
of handling or treating the milk; consequently, the final products varied. This helps
explain why a variety of cultured (fermented) milk and cream products originated,
7 Creamed Cottage Cheese 175
each known and referred to by a unique name. The unique common denominator
was that each product required either the natural presence or the addition of lactic-
acid-producing bacteria to accomplish the preservation process.
Additionally, some of these products, such as kefir, underwent an alcoholic fer-
mentation. In many countries (probably most countries), fermented milk foods are
distinctly favored over fresh, fluid milk. This frequent preference for “sour milk” is
based on a combination of public safety, preferred flavor and texture, and purported
therapeutic effects. Where inadequate facilities for transport, storage, refrigeration,
pasteurization, and/or distribution of milk exist around the world, many health
authorities prefer that milk turns “sour” in the earliest stages of handling. In this
approach, the presence of high populations of harmless lactic acid bacteria and their
metabolic end products discourage and/or control the outgrowth of food spoilage
and disease-producing bacteria (pathogens). In many countries, nutritionists and
pediatricians prefer certain fermented milk products over fresh milk as a weaning
food for infants (National Dairy Council Newsletter 1996).
In other locales, fermented milk foods are blended with cereals and other food
ingredients to provide a nutritionally balanced food for the populace. For those
countries where few or none of the above-described conditions or health philoso-
phies exist, the acceptance of cultured milk products (such as cottage cheese) relates
more to “slimming diets or a protein alternative to meat,” cost considerations, adap-
tation of ethnic foods, recent food trends, and new technologies of food processing
and distribution. In numerous countries, fresh fluid milk is the dominant product of
commerce, but certain cultured milk foods enjoy increasing attention, modification,
and modest popularity.
Cottage cheese most likely originated for the following several reasons:
1. A ready supply of a raw material that was often otherwise wasted – skim milk.
2. The process of converting skim milk into a cheese was simple – place the skim
milk in a pot on the back of the warm stove top in the kitchen (or cottage).
3. The “skim milk cheese” lent itself to enhanced flavor by “dressing” it with whole
milk or cream. All of the flavor comes from the creamed dressing.
4. The flavor profile for this new cheese product was “mild” and fresh tasting – thus
providing flavor appeals to many prospective customers.
7.4 Types of Cottage Cheese
According to the US FDA Code of Federal Regulations (CFR Title 21. Part 133.128),
“Cottage cheese is the soft uncured cheese prepared by mixing cottage cheese dry
curd with a creaming mixture…The milkfat content is not less than 4 percent by
weight of the finished food, within limits of good manufacturing practice. The fin-
ished food contains not more than 80 percent of moisture.” Thus, creamed cottage
cheese is the general term used to designate the fresh, soft, uncured, high-moisture
cheese made from pasteurized skim milk, or occasionally from either reconstituted
nonfat dry milk or plain condensed skim milk. The inquisitive observer will note
several distinct types, forms, or styles of cottage cheese in North American retail
outlets. Various descriptor names as “schmierkase” (the name initially employed by
nineteenth century German immigrants) and “pot cheese,” and then later-used
names such as “farmer-style,” “country-style,” “old fashioned,” “sweet curd,” “small
curd,” “large curd,” and “popcorn cheese” have been employed to describe the prod-
ucts that result from variations in cheese manufacture. Some regional versions of
cottage cheese have been labeled as New York-style, Michigan-style, and California-
style (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997).
Several other product names used to designate certain cottage cheese types or
variations of cottage cheese have been “Dutch-,” “pressed,” “baker’s-,” and “hoop”-
type cheese (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997), and a unique Louisiana-style known as
“Creole cream cheese” (an uncooked and congealed curd with half-and-half added
as a dressing (Potter, 2007)).
Creamed cottage cheese marketed in US and Canadian commercial channels can
be classified according to the following methods of producing the curd or cream
dressing:
1. Producing the curd, whether by
(a) Lactic acid development by lactic culture only (acid curd).
(b) Lactic acid, plus a slight amount of milk-coagulating enzyme.
(c) Addition of approved food grade acidulants such as phosphoric and glucono-
delta-lactone acid (which must be called “direct set” or “acidified” cottage
cheese).
2. Breaking or cutting the coagulum by
(a) Rigorous stirring (i.e., farmer-style, old-fashioned, Michigan-style, or pot).
(b) Cutting with designed knife sets of varied wire spacing:
1. Small curd (0.6–0.9 cm (1/4 in.))

2. Medium curd (0.95–1.6 cm (3/8–5/8 in.))
3. Large curd (1.27–1.9 cm (1/2–3/4 in.))
3. Method of creaming (or not) by
(a) Traditional addition of cream dressing (˜9–10% milk fat) at a typical ratio
from 43% dressing to 57% curd to 52% dressing and 48% curd, resulting in
at least 4% milk fat in the finished product in the carton.
(b) Addition of a lower milk fat “dressing mixture” (˜3–4% milk fat content) to
attain a 1% or 2% milk fat content in the final product (low-fat cottage
cheese).
(c) Addition of a skim milk-based dressing (nonfat cottage cheese).
(d) Occasionally, addition of either “whipped” or other higher fat cream dress-
ings may be added to the curd to achieve a special effect (usually marketed
under a coined name for the product).
(e) Treatment of the cream dressing by
1. The addition of a lactic culture to the creaming mixture.

2. The addition of a liquid “starter distillate” or diacetyl flavor component.
3. Direct addition and fermentation of an aroma-producing lactic culture
(S. lactis subsp. S. diacetylactis and/or Leuconostoc spp.) to the cream-
ing mixture.
4. Addition of a dried cultured fermentate produced from Propionibacterium
shermanii (primarily via the Microgard™ or Durafresh™ process)
directly to the creaming mixture for a two to three-fold increase in shelf
life (Salih et al., 1990; Sandine, 1984).
5. Addition of a chemical preservative such as potassium sorbate or sor-
bic acid.
6. Incorporation of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the cream dressing (or the
dressed cottage cheese) as an effective technique of increasing product
shelf life up to 6–7 weeks or 52 days (Chen & Hotchkiss, 1991; Hotchkiss
& Chen, 1996).
7.4.1 Other Products or Processes
Cottage cheese curd (without cream) is referred to or labeled as “dry cottage cheese
curd.” Plain curd may be sold wholesale in bulk for later creaming, packaging, and
retail distribution or used as an ingredient substitution for other cheeses such as
ricotta. Dry unsalted curd is also sold in retail packages for use in cooking, baking,
and salads and for use in special “low-salt,” “low-fat,” “low-cholesterol,” and/or
“reduced calorie” diets.
Uncreamed cottage cheese is often evaluated by employing nearly the same
product evaluation procedures used for the creamed product. Much attention is
given to the body and texture of dry curd, but one will not find it to have much fla-
vor. Most likely, a distinctive flat or plain dull flavor will be obvious to most evalu-
ators of dry cottage cheese curd. Most dry curd cottage cheese is virtually devoid of
aroma, unless an especially selected diacetyl-producing culture was used for curd
manufacture. This causes other problems during curd manufacture such as gas pro-
duction and floating curd. The flavor of dry curd cottage cheese should be clean and
pleasantly acidic and show little persistence after the sample has been expectorated.
7.5 Sensory Evaluation of Creamed Cottage Cheese
7.5.1 Visual Observations
Cottage cheese is examined for sensory properties in a manner similar to other dairy
products – by a combination of sight, mouthfeel, taste, and smell.
Initially, creamed cottage cheese is visually examined (without pre-stirring to

optimize the first observations) for the possible presence or lack of “free whey” and
non-absorbed (free) cream dressing, as well as a set of curd appearance features
such as curd identity and the amount of fines present. If facilities and time are avail-
able, the equivalent of a large tablespoonful of creamed cottage cheese can be
“rinsed or washed” in a beaker or a small vessel of cold water (7.2 °C (45 °F)). The
spoonful of curd is allowed to settle and the milky water decanted. This process is
usually repeated 2–3 times until a practically dry (surface) curd is attained. The
washed curd is then closely observed for the relative shape and size of the curd
particles. Close examination of “washed” cottage cheese curd in this manner com-
monly reveals appearance defects (fines) that may have escaped identification oth-
erwise (i.e., by observing only unwashed cottage cheese). Subsequent observations
are expanded upon in the following sections.
7.5.2 Sensory Attribute Categories of Cottage Cheese
High-quality creamed cottage cheese is expected to possess many of the following

listed three major categories of sensory attributes (Elliker, 1949; Connolly et al.,
1984; Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997; Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
7.5.2.1 Color and Appearance
After the initial observation in the intact container, the creamed cottage cheese
should be mixed with a large spoon or ice cream scoop; then a representative sample
should be removed from the cup and placed in the center of a white plate. The
sample should be allowed to sit for no longer than 10 min before observations
are made.
The general appearance or visual impression of creamed cottage cheese should
be attractive and pleasing “to the eye.” The curd particles are expected to be separate
and distinct, moderately uniform in both size and shape (Bodyfelt et al., 1988; Tong
et al., 1994); the overall product should exhibit a glossy, creamy-white color. In
creamed cottage cheese, the bulk of the cream is expected to be absorbed by the
curd particles, with a minimum of “free” or separated cream. The cream dressing
should be reasonably viscous, relatively foam-free, and able to adhere or cling to the
curd particles. A limited amount of excess dressing should form a uniformly smooth
coating on the curd particles and be void of any separated water (free whey).
Preferably, highest-quality cottage cheese exhibits little or no particle shattering
(curd dust) and/or curd matting (lumps). However, the lack of any apparent shat-
tered curd in finished products as an objective within most cheese plants is consid-
ered most difficult to attain (Tong et al., 1994).
Most appearance and color defects of creamed cottage cheese can be rather obvi-
ous to the alert evaluator. The terminology for these various appearance criticisms
is specific and descriptive. The occurrence of such cottage cheese defects frequently
stem from deviations of generally recommended manufacturing procedures.
Table 7.1 lists the more common color and appearance defects of creamed cottage
cheese, their possible cause, and methods of control. Figure 7.1 illustrates various
appearance and color defects of creamed cottage cheese.
The Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest scoring guide for various sen-
sory defects of creamed cottage cheese (including flavor, body and texture, appear-
ance, and color) is presented as Table 7.3. This scoring guide serves as the
standardized guideline by which the contestants in the National and Midwest
Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation competitions assign scores for the slight, defi-
nite, and pronounced intensities for the respective defects noted for flavor, body and
texture, and color, and appearance of cottage cheese samples.
The curd particles should be reasonably uniform in both their size and shape,
regardless of the curd size (small or large) or the given product type. “Shattered
curd,” to some level of intensity, seems to occur in the vast majority of all commer-
cial cottage cheese. The finest sizes of particles resulting from “curd shattering” are
called either “grit,” “fines,” or “cheese dust.” Other than subjective visual appraisal,
Fig. 7.1 Examples of some appearance and color defects of creamed cottage cheese: (a) shattered
curd (score of 4); (b) shattered curd (3); (c) and (d) matted curd (3); (e) lacks cream (4); (f) free
cream (4); and (g) free whey (2)
Table 7.1 Common color and appearance defects of creamed cottage cheese and their probable
causes and remedial measures
Color/
appearance
defects Probable causes Remedial measures
Free cream 1. Excessive cooking which causes a Reduce cooking temperature to avoid
firm, rubbery curd; this prevents too firm a curd
dressing adsorption
2. Insufficient washing of curd (contact Allow wash water to remain in
time) contact with the curd for a longer
time
3. Cutting pH of curd too high Cut curd at a pH of 4.65–4.70
4. Too rapid temperature rise during Exercise better control of curd
cooking of curd (causes surface cooking (i.e., do not cook too fast)
denaturation and loss of dressing
permeability)
Free whey 1. Undercooking of curd retains an Increase cooking temperature to help
excess amount of whey expel more whey
2. Insufficient washing of curd Increase curd washing or draining
time
3. Cutting pH of curd too high Cut curd at pH of 4.65–4.70
Lacks 1. Uneven cutting of coagulum Repair/replace knife wires, avoid
uniformity overlap when cutting
2. Too aggressive/abusive agitation Use proper cutting techniques, train
during cooking personnel in careful cutting,
agitating, and curd cooking methods
Matted 1. Cutting pH of curd too high Cut curd at pH of 4.65–4.70. Employ
a “standardized” method of cooking
and stirring out
2. Insufficient/inadequate agitation
especially during the first hour of
cooking
3. Curd cooked too rapidly Initiate cooking slowly and
gradually, accelerate pace at
midpoint of the cooking stage
4. Missing wires in the knife sets Repair or replace knife sets
Shattered curd 1. Excessive heat treatment of the skim Use minimum pasteurization
milk conditions (temperature and time)
2. Excessive acidity (pH too low) at cut Cut curd at pH of 4.65–4.70
3. Total solid content of skim milk too Maintain total milk solids >8.75%
low
4. Overly severe vat agitation Stress gentle, careful agitation
5. Excessive quantity of coagulator used Use minimum coagulator amount
6. Rough handling of curd during Restrict/minimized curd handling to
draining, pumping, and packaging a minimum, if possible; use gentle
measures
Source: Adapted from Connolly et al. (1984). Courtesy of the American Cultured Dairy Products
Institute., Washington, D.C
Table 7.3 The Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest scoring guide for the sensory defects
of creamed cottage cheese (suggested flavor, body and texture, and color and appearance scores for
designated defect intensities)
Flavor Slight Definite Pronounced
Bitter 7 5 1
Cooked 9 8 6
Fermented/fruity 5 3 1
Flat 9 8 7
Foreign 7 4 1
High acid 9 7 5
High diacetyl 9 7 6
High salt 9 8 7
Lacks fine flavor 9 7 6
Metallic 5 3 1
Oxidized 5 3 1
Rancid 4 2 1
Sweet 8 7 6
Unclean 6 3 1
Whey 8 7 5
Body/texture
Firm/rubbery 4 2 1
Mealy/grainy 4 2 1
Overstabilized 4 3 2
Pasty 4 3 2
Weak/soft 4 3 2
Appearance
Free cream 4 2 1
Free whey 4 2 1
Lacks cream 4 3 2
Matted 4 2 1
Shattered curd 4 3 2
the Cornell Grit Test was developed. This method uses four sieve sizes as a separa-
tion process to more objectively assess the range of curd size and shape variations
(Tong et al., 1994; Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997).
Creamed (or dressed) cheese should exhibit a moderate degree of gloss or sheen,
and the cream dressing should definitely cling or adhere to individual curd particles.
Clumping of curd particles in large masses is considered a potentially serious defect,
since whey may be readily trapped and sealed inside the congealed curd pieces –
subsequently rendering the product to more likely exhibit “high-acid,” bitter, and/or
“whey” off-flavors.
Lacks cream is an uncommon defect in creamed cottage cheese. Creamed cot-
tage cheese with this defect lacks the “blanket” of cream dressing and may appear
dull and dry.
Free cream (or dressing) can appear when the cottage cheese curd has been
“dressed” with too high a level of cottage cheese dressing. When the dressing-to-
curd ratio is too high, the finished cottage cheese in the retail container can appear
“wet.” Free cream can also occur when the curd texture is not correct. If the curd has
been cooked to too firm of a texture it will not absorb the creamed dressing and will
also appear wet. Also when the cottage cheese dressing viscosity is too thin (not
enough stabilizer added), the dressing can easily run off of the curd (therefore no
cling), and the finished cottage cheese will appear wet in the retail cup.
Free whey occurs when there is a clear or slightly yellow liquid that separates
from the curd and dressing in the retail package. It will be observed on top or along
the sides of the retail container. It can also occur when the creamed dressing lacks
enough milk solids not fat (or total solids) in the dressing formulation. Free whey
can then run away from the curd and dressing mixture. Finally, free whey can occur
when the cottage cheese curd piece retains too much whey and/or rinse water on the
inside of the curd piece and does not get squeezed out sufficiently during draining
in the vat or through a mechanized piece of curd-draining equipment.
7.5.2.2 Body and Texture
The body and texture of cottage cheese can be well assessed by placing a half-
spoonful of curd in the mouth and pressing the curd to the roof of the mouth with
the tongue. The body should have a “meat-like” (meaty) consistency, but not be
overly firm, rubbery, or tough when it is first chewed or masticated (placed against
the teeth and gently, carefully masticated). The product texture should seem rela-
tively smooth (meaty, silky) across or throughout the curd pieces that are chewed
gently (Bodyfelt et al., 1988). The evaluator should be able to feel (as well as see)
distinct curd particles. The curd particles are expected to be relatively uniform in
both size and configuration for the given type of curd being considered. Ideally,
creamed cottage cheese should demonstrate a relatively firm but tender body and
exhibit a silky-smooth and meaty-like texture (Connolly et al., 1984; Bodyfelt
et al., 1988).
Understandably, the size of curd particles and the relative degree of firmness of
cottage cheese curd in the USA has not been fully and objectively standardized
(Kosikowski & Brown, 1973; Rosenberg et al., 1994a, b). Body and texture charac-
teristics are guided primarily by consumer preferences within a given market area
of the country. Many manufacturers market two distinct types of cottage cheese:
“small curd” and “large curd.” Although large curd is usually firmer and tends to
exhibit a somewhat more acidic taste (due to more entrapped lactic acid), both prod-
uct types are of comparable flavor character (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
The most desirable body for cottage cheese is presumably one that is apparently
neither too firm nor too soft and should have uniform consistency across the curd
particle (Connolly et al., 1984). The curd should be sufficiently firm to hold its gen-
eral shape and maintain its individual identity (vs. matting), yet simultaneously be
soft enough to yield a silky, “tacky” smear between the tongue and hard palate (also
observed when washed curd pieces are pressed lightly between the thumb and fore-
finger). Curd that is too firm tends to resist such pressing (i.e., there is a tendency for
the curd to “spring back” or retain its original shape when the pressure is released).
In 1963, a skilled Pacific Northwest cottage cheesemaker, Willi Sprenger of
Sunshine Dairy, Portland, devised the following simple, practical test for determin-
ing the appropriate curd firmness “end point” during the curd cooking stage.
Typically, when a thoroughly washed curd particle was dropped onto the plant floor
from waist level, an “appropriate-bodied” curd particle would exhibit a perceptible
bounce (2.5–7.6 cm (1–3 in.)). A too-soft-bodied curd, by contrast, would “splatter”
and break apart when it struck the floor, while a too-firm (tough, rubbery) curd gen-
erally “bounced” upward in excess of 7.6 cm (3 in.) when dropped from waist level
(Sprenger, 1963; Bodyfelt et al., 1988). Scientific, mechanical methods using a pen-
etrometer or a texture analyzer are now being evaluated to objectively determine
curd firmness during the manufacturing process (Potter, 2007). The key to achieving
consistent curd body is to employ a device that can be used in a cottage cheese pro-
duction environment that provides immediate results, versus after the fact discovery.
The appropriate body and texture properties of cottage cheese should be associ-
ated with consumer acceptance in the particular market area that it is sold, but it
should not be too firm or too soft. In a laboratory, an evaluator can “wash” creamed
cottage cheese with the aid of a fine-mesh sieve to void the dressing. This can serve
to present a truer picture of curd uniformity. By tearing apart curd particles, the
evaluator can readily perceive the extent of the so-called meatiness and overall con-
sistency of a cross-section of the curd (from the outer surface to the center). Curd
particles that are smooth, meaty, and tender tend to exhibit distinct striations of
protein fiber when the particle is torn apart and closely examined. Such curd texture
has been reported to exhibit good liquid capillarity, and thus this feature facilitates
more complete adsorption of added cream dressing. Conversely, curd that is under-
cooked with soft centers will not absorb the creamed dressing very readily and also
appear wet.
7.5.2.2.1 Body and Texture Defects of Creamed Cottage Cheese
The more common body and texture defects of cottage cheese are the following:
Firm/rubbery (tough) Overstabilized (“slick” mouthfeel)

Gelatinous (not on Collegiate contest scorecard) Pasty (sticky, doughy)
Weak/soft (mushy)
Mealy/grainy (gritty)
Brief descriptions of the characteristics that are indicative of the above-listed

body and texture defects of creamed cottage cheese are detailed in the following
paragraphs. The intensities of various body and texture defects are usually scored
according to the guide for scoring creamed cottage cheese shown in Figs. 7.2 and
7.3. Various causes and methods for controlling body and texture defects of cottage
cheese are summarized in Table 7.2.
Fig. 7.2 Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest scorecard for creamed cottage cheese
(used through 2017)
Fig. 7.3 Computerized scoresheet for the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest
Firm/Rubbery (Tough) When the curd of overly “firm or rubbery” cottage cheese
is pressed between the tongue and the roof of the mouth, a modest (but sometimes
subtle) resistance to crushing or mastication can be noted by the careful observer.
Further manipulation of the product in the mouth may suggest either a high solids
level or low moisture content of the internal curd structure. Unless this firmness is
quite pronounced and/or associated with non-adsorption of cream dressing, this
defect is not considered particularly serious. Refer to Table 7.3 for additional details.
Gelatinous This is a rare defect observed in commercial cottage cheese; hence, it

is no longer listed on the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest scorecard.
“Gelatinous” cottage cheese tends to have a sticky or slightly “jelly-like” character,
or may resemble tapioca pudding. This body defect may have an accompanying bit-
ter off-taste and a translucent curd appearance. A gelatinous defect is generally due
to proliferation of psychrotrophic bacteria in the product and, hence, an indication
of product spoilage; such a product is often unpalatable and, hence, unsalable cheese.
Mealy/Grainy (Gritty) Unfortunately, this is a quite prevalent defect in US cottage

cheese. The “mealy/grainy” (the term used generally depends on primary particle
size) defect can be detected by briefly pressing (with the tongue) masticated curd
against the roof of the mouth and carefully attempting to perceive the presence or
absence of a gritty or corn meal-like sensation (just prior to expectorating or swal-
lowing the sample). Excessive tiny particles remaining in the teeth crevices after
swallowing or expectoration also indicates the mealy/grainy defect. Another way of
detecting curd graininess is to “wash” away the cream dressing, carefully knead the
Table 7.2 Common body and texture defects of creamed cottage cheese, their probable causes,
and remedial measures
Body and texture
defects Probable causes Remedial measures
Firm/rubbery 1. Cutting pH of curd too high 1. Cut curd at pH of 4.65–4.70
2. Excessive cooking time or 2. Carefully determine the optimum
temperature cooking endpoint
Mealy/grainy 1. Cooking rate too rapid, 1. Slow, gradual cook temperature
especially during initial stages of increments, accelerate at midpoint of
cooking cook
2. Excess acidity developed 2. Cut curd at pH of 4.65–4.70
3. Inadequate vat agitation 3. Controlled, steady agitation
4. Too much curd in direct contact 4. Minimize temperature gradient
with hot vat surfaces
Pasty An extreme case of weak/soft
(see below)
Overstabilized Excessive use of stabilizer in Decrease amount of stabilizer in
dressing dressing
Weak/soft 1. Excessive heat treatment of 1. Use minimum pasteurization
skim milk conditions
2. Excessive acidity (low pH) at 2. Cut curd at pH of 4.65–4.70
cut and during cook
3. Inadequate cook-out 3. Carefully determine optimum
temperature cook-out
4. Overdressing the curd 4. Calculate and blend curd and
dressing at appropriate ration (typical
∼4/3 ratio)
Source: Adapted from Connolly et al. (1984). Courtesy American Cultured Dairy Products Institute
washed curd, and then smear it between the fingers. Instead of a silky, smooth smear
(which is characteristic of an “ideal” curd texture), the evaluator often will find a
somewhat dry, rough, serrated curd mass instead. The uncreamed curd of “gritty”
cottage cheese is similar to the curd formed in the manufacture of casein.
The mealy/grainy defect of cottage cheese may be caused by too-low moisture
and/or overdevelopment of acid during coagulum and/or curd formation (Connolly
et al., 1984). To minimize this curd defect, more moisture can be incorporated by
cooking the curd more gradually and by using lower cooking temperatures. Curd
cutting should only be undertaken when the coagulum reaches the isoelectric point
of casein (pH 4.65–4.70). Mealiness/graininess may also be caused by (1) nonuni-
form cutting of the curd; (2) uneven heating (cooking) of portions of the curd; (3)
too-rapid cooking of the curd/whey mixture; (4) inadequate agitation during the
cooking phase; and (5) allowing curd particles to contact extremely hot surfaces
during cooking. The major techniques for controlling the extent of graininess/meali-
ness are cutting the coagulum at the proper pH (to avoid excess acidity) and main-
taining sufficient, but gentle, agitation throughout the cooking stage of the
cheese-making process.
Pasty (Sticky, Doughy) The “pasty” defect in creamed cottage cheese is closely
associated with soft, weak, high-moisture curd or curd that is excessively ground up
or shattered. En masse, pasty-bodied cheese resembles cereal dough, a flour-like
paste, or glue. The curd particles have a tendency to mat or stick together in soft
clumps. Authorities on cottage cheese quality simply regard the pasty defect as a
possible extension or advanced degree of the weak/soft criticism (discussed next).
Weak/Soft (Mushy) This defect is characteristic of a higher-moisture cottage

cheese of relatively low solids content. If a less-firm- or weaker-bodied cottage
cheese is preferred for certain markets or customers, the cheesemaker has the option
of employing a lower cook-out temperature for designated lots of cheese; this varia-
tion favors a higher retention of whey (moisture) in the curd. Weak-bodied cottage
cheeses may not meet the legal maximum of 80% moisture content. Following stor-
age, a weak, soft-bodied cheese may often manifest a bitter taste, due to the
entrapped whey (and associated peptides). According to a quality manual published
by the American Cultured Dairy Products Institute (Connolly et al., 1984), probable
causes of the weak/soft and/or pasty defects in creamed cottage cheese are the
following:
1. Excessive heat treatment of cheese milk (above 80 °C/170 °F).
2. Excessive acidity (low whey pH less than pH 4.40) at time of the start of cooking
the curd and during the cooking process (final whey pH at the end of cook that is
between 4.20 and 4.30).
3. Too-low cooking temperatures.
Overstabilized (Slick) In an attempt to “thicken” dressing, minimize free whey in

the final product and/or enhance adherence of the dressing to the curd, processors
may occasionally overdevelop dressing viscosity through excessive use of nonfat
dry milk, stabilizers, and/or emulsifiers. The ideal dressing viscosity is between 45
and 60 s when measured on a Zahn #2 cup at 4 °C/40 °F. Overstabilized dressing
may exceed a draining time of 60 s when timed in a Zahn #2 cup, or not drain out of
the cup at all. Using ingredients in the stabilizer such as food starch, modified food
starch, or maltodextrin may tend to promote this slick texture. When this defect
occurs, it is quite apparent; creamed cottage cheese may appear markedly dry, and
some individual curd particles may appear to be surrounded by a thick, pasty coat-
ing. Overstabilized dressing is not considered a serious defect unless it is so severe
as to impart an off-flavor or unfavorable mouthfeel (slippery or slick) to the cottage
cheese. The overuse of guar gum in the dressing may give a slick or slippery feel in
the mouth when evaluated organoleptically. Decreasing the quantity or changing the
source of stabilizer can effectively eliminate the so-called slick or overstabi-
lized defect.
In addition to stabilizer, the use of fresh cottage cheese whey protein concentrate
(WPC) has resulted in an overstabilized defect as well (Potter, 2007). In most cases,
it is necessary to reduce the level of stabilizer to compensate for the moisture bond-
ing and thickening action of the whey proteins. Also, the use of elevated levels of
WPC can result in either pasty body and texture or possible off-flavor.
7.5.2.3 Flavor
Pertinent information about cottage cheese may be gained from a focused aroma
check of the opened package after stirring of the curd and dressing just prior to tast-
ing. Creamed cottage cheese of high quality should have a fresh, pleasant, clean,
delicate acid, and mild diacetyl (buttery) flavor (Elliker, 1949; Connolly et al., 1984;
Bodyfelt et al., 1988; Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997) that imparts no aftertaste when
the sample has been expectorated or swallowed. There should be no particular after-
taste and only a sufficient salty taste (Bodyfelt, 1982; Wyatt, 1983) to “bring out”
the desired flavor. There are conceivable regional differences across the USA,
wherein variations of the intensity of the acidity taste and the diacetyl flavor note are
either more or less preferred (Mather & Babel, 1959; Connolly et al., 1984; Bodyfelt
et al., 1988; Rosenberg et al., 1994a; Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997).
7.5.2.3.1 Evaluation of Flavor
Cottage cheese flavor attributes are a “composite” of curd acidity, volatile com-
pounds formed by the lactic culture fermentation, and/or from addition of aroma-
producing microorganisms or added diacetyl compounds to the cream dressing. The
composition of the cream dressing and the added salt also serve to greatly enhance
the flavor of creamed cottage cheese. Salt is a flavor potentiator. Cream dressing
should be added in such quantities that the curd can readily absorb it within a rea-
sonable time period before marketing (2–3 days). The evaluator should recognize
the possibility of two types of cream dressing, often depending on the US region:
(1) a dressing virtually devoid of much aroma, but seems clean, sweet, and pleas-
antly acidic and (2) the other type with either a detectable (or definite), diacetyl
(buttery-like), or cultured aroma with an acidic character. Both types of flavor char-
acteristics generally are considered equally appropriate in the discretion of experi-
enced dairy product judges, as well as most consumers.
7.5.2.3.2 Flavor Defects of Creamed Cottage Cheese
As a rule, creamed cottage cheese is a highly perishable product, even with rigorous
sanitation and product-handling precautions (Bodyfelt, 1981b) that are usually
practiced in manufacturing.
The specific flavor defects of creamed cottage cheese are as follows:
Bitter Malty (not on Collegiate Contest scorecard)

Cooked Metallic
Fermented/fruity Musty (not on Collegiate contest scorecard)
Flat (lacks flavor) Oxidized
Foreign, chemical, and medicinal Rancid
High acid (sour) Unclean (dirty aftertaste)

High diacetyl Whey
High salt Yeasty (vinegar-like; not on Collegiate contest
scorecard)
Lacks fine flavor (acetaldehyde, plain
yogurt-like)
Lacks freshness (stale, storage)
A brief description of the characteristic features of each of the off-flavors listed

above is helpful in trying to identify them; some flavor defects are distinctive and
unique to cottage cheese (refer to Table 7.3). Most cottage cheese produced today is
usually flat, lacks fine flavor, high acid, high diacetyl, or has a whey flavor. One
brand has a cooked flavor due to packaging the product “hot” to get extended
shelf-life.
Bitter A “bitter” off-taste in cottage cheese is characterized by its (1) relatively
slow reaction time and delayed perception; (2) detection at or near the back of the
tongue; and (3) persistence after sample expectoration. Pronounced bitterness is not
unlike the sensation imparted by quinine or caffeine. This defect is frequently
encountered in older samples of cottage cheese or in cheese stored at favorable
growth temperatures for psychrotrophic organisms (which are the principal caus-
ative agents). In the past, a bitter off-taste in cottage cheese may have resulted from
the consumption of certain weeds by cows; however, bitter cottage cheese from this
source would be extremely infrequent today.
Cooked Cottage cheese that is slightly cooked need not be faulted or critiqued.
However, excessive heating of the cream dressing typically imparts sulfur notes that
are considered detrimental to the desired delicate flavor of creamed cottage cheese.
Presumably, the cooked flavor note derives from a definite intensity of cooked flavor
of the cream dressing, rather than from the curd cooking process, which by neces-
sity must be limited in order to control curd firmness within the finished product.
Fermented/Fruity Surprisingly, a “fruity” or “fermented” defect may have a pleas-

ant, aromatic quality (to some individuals), suggestive of pineapple, apples, bananas,
or strawberries (Morgan, 1970b). Fermented cream cottage cheese is more reminis-
cent of vinegar. A mere “whiff” of the just-opened package usually confirms the
presence of this serious defect. Follow-up tasting usually suffices to substantiate the
already-noted aroma and may also reveal an associated unpleasant, distinctive lin-
gering aftertaste. The given cottage cheese may be near its “sell-by” date and/or
have been stored at elevated and favorable temperatures for psychrotrophic bacterial
growth. The product may soon reach a point of unpalatability. Complete spoilage is
often imminent.
Flat (Lacks Flavor) A “flat” flavor in cottage cheese may be noted by an absence
or lack of the characteristic flavor and aroma. Identification is that simple and direct.
A dry, unsalted, washed, “rennet curd” yields a distinctly flat taste, unlike that of
pure casein. A creamed cottage cheese may also tend to yield a flat taste and aroma
during an early or intermediate stage of the development of an oxidized off-flavor.
In this case, the initial “flatness” may lead to a delayed flavor perception that sug-
gests a metallic off-flavor; the evaluator should be alert to this possible follow-up
off-flavor. Even when pronounced, a flat flavor defect is not considered serious
enough to classify the cottage cheese as a poor product (unless an associated and
more objectionable off-flavor accompanies the flatness). Reduced fat and nonfat
cottage cheese products obviously exhibit lower flavor intensities, due to the reduc-
tion or absence of added cream dressing and its related richness and overall “flavor-
rounding” effects. The relative freshness and flavor quality of the skim or low-fat
milk sources for curd formation are important to the flavor attributes of the resultant
cottage cheese products. In today’s marketplace, due to the manufacturer wanting to
reduce the sodium content per serving of cottage cheese, the cottage cheese may be
judged as “flat” merely due to a reduced level or lack of salt in the cream dressing.
Foreign (Chemical/Medicinal) A “foreign” off-flavor, though only occasionally

noted in creamed cottage cheese, distinguishes itself by being entirely unlike any
off-flavor that might be anticipated in the product – it seems “atypical” or most
unusual. Sometimes, the actual nature of the off-flavor betrays its identity. The per-
sistent, atypical, or “out-of-place” off-flavor may suggest possible contamination
either by cleaning compounds, chlorine, iodine, phenol, or various other chemical
substances that may have accidentally or unfortunately gained entry to the product.
High Acid (Sour) The terms “high acid” or “sour” basically designate various
intensities of the same defect. They generally reflect an excess of lactic acid, a level
of acidity beyond that which is generally considered desirable or highly acceptable
to taste. However, it should be emphasized that this particular intensity is generally
clean and sharp (with no particular aftertaste). The so-called sour taste can be pro-
nounced, and it may sometimes be associated with other bacterial defects, such as
bitter or fruity/fermented.
The development of lactic acid by the culture inoculated into skim milk in mak-
ing cottage cheese is essential for curd formation, unless the cheese milk is chemi-
cally acidified (direct set). Also, the formed lactic acid or added acidulant helps
contribute to cheese flavor. However, if too much acid is developed in the course of
curd formation or curd cooking, it usually results in a high-acid (sour) curd. A high-
acid curd tends to mask some of the more delicate, volatile, organic compounds
responsible for the desirable flavor of cottage cheese. Insufficient washing(s) of the
curd prior to dressing may result in too much whey retention in curds and hence
cause or lead to high-acid flavor. A cottage cheese, such as just described, may
sometimes merit another related flavor criticism – “whey taint.”
The specific types of lactic culture(s) used in dressings for enhancing flavor and/
or product shelf life may become somewhat active within their shelf life period, and
hence produce additional levels of lactic acid, which can “announce” itself with
either definite or pronounced high-acid or sour flavors.
High Diacetyl This flavor defect is generally noted by an overall lack of aroma
balance, or a too distinct intense aroma of diacetyl, plus the possible masking of
other important or delicate flavor notes. It is often characterized by the presence of
a harsh buttery flavor and/or excess aroma, which seems “out of balance” for cot-
tage cheese. Additionally, some evaluators suggest the terms of “coarse” or “too
harsh” to help define the flavor character. Some product manufacturers appear
tempted to “over-flavor” reduced fat and nonfat cottage cheeses with either flavor
concentrates or whey distillates, and this approach may lead to products that may
seem “too high in diacetyl,” harsh and/or coarse in flavor character.
High Salt “High salt” manifests itself as an unwanted, sharp, piercing, biting taste
sensation that detracts from the pleasant delicate flavor of high-quality cottage
cheese. Addition the proper amount of salt (approximately 1% or less) enhances
cottage cheese flavor; however, oversalting defeats the purpose of this product
ingredient. Both the reaction and adaptation times of the taste buds are of short
duration for the salty taste sensation. The initial sensation encountered upon tasting
high-salt cottage cheese is soon dissipated and relieved by an induced copious flow
of saliva. Experienced evaluators of cottage cheese commonly recognize that
0.6–1.0% added salt is generally required to help enhance the flavor of cottage
cheese. However, a distinct or obvious “salty taste” in creamed cottage cheese
should not be consciously perceived by the product evaluator (Bodyfelt, 1982;
Wyatt, 1983).
Lacks Fine Flavor (Acetaldehyde, Plain Yogurt-Like) When a given lactic culture
that has been added to the cream dressing produces acetaldehyde as a principal
volatile component, a “green-apple” or yogurt-like off-flavor often occurs in the
final product. Such cottage cheese is said to “lack fine flavor,” due to formation of
substantial levels of acetaldehyde. The lacks fine flavor critique of cottage cheese
also suggests a note of “coarseness” or “harshness” off-flavor. The term may also be
used to describe cottage cheese that is clean, but lacks some flavor such as added
diacetyl or one that doesn’t use cultures in the dressing.
Lacks Freshness (Stale, Storage) These three off-flavors have been grouped
together because they have much in common. The relative age of the product or
ingredients seem to be the underlying factors for this group of flavor defects. A dif-
ference in defect intensity exists between “lacks freshness” and “stale.” The latter is
more obvious or intense, whereas the former defect tends to almost shield its true
identity; it is simply a general lack of refreshingness in the product. Staleness may
also be imparted by old ingredients (e.g., dry skim milk, cream, and stabilizer).
Cottage cheese flavor is usually at its best or “peak” within 1–5 days after manu-
facture. When properly made and adequately refrigerated, cottage cheese should
retain its “typical flavor” for a reasonable period of time (2–3 weeks). Frequently
during storage and distribution, even under adequate refrigeration (<4.4 °C
(<40 °F)), cottage cheese progressively deteriorates in flavor quality. This is
undoubtedly due to the simultaneous occurrence of microbiological and chemical

changes. This resulting flavor deterioration can be referred to as “lacks freshness,”
since the cottage cheese seems to lack the refreshing flavor characteristics of a more
recently made product. A storage off-flavor can develop in cottage cheese that is
packaged and subsequently exposed to “volatiles” within the refrigerator or cold
storage space. Hence, the “storage” off-flavor, if and when it does occur, is appro-
priately classified as an absorbed flavor defect.
Malty A “malty” off-flavor defect in cottage cheese is rather specific or distinctive;
maltiness tends to predominate over most flavor defects that may be present. This
off-flavor, which resembles “Grape Nuts®” or malted milk, is quite easy to identify
due to its uniqueness. It generally has a quick reaction time; the aftertaste is not
prolonged. Since a malty off-flavor is the result of contamination by an outgrowth
of S. lactis var. maltigenes, additional developed acidity (a sourness taste) may
accompany a malty aroma defect (Morgan, 1970a).
Metallic and Oxidized Fortunately, these two more serious off-flavors are infre-
quently encountered in cottage cheese. If they do occur, improper selection and/or
handling of the cream for preparation of the curd dressing is usually indicated.
“Metallic” has a slightly astringent, “rusty nail-like” taste, while “oxidized” is an
off-flavor more reminiscent of wet cardboard or paper. Smelling the sample usually
gives little indication of a metallic defect, but a weak off-odor may sometimes sug-
gest the characteristic or “generic oxidized” off-flavor. Some research indicates that
these two defects may be different intensities of the same basic defect (e.g., lipid
autoxidation) resulting from light exposure or copper or iron contamination of sus-
ceptible milk or cream used.
Musty “Musty” cottage cheese exhibits an aroma that resembles that of a damp,
poorly ventilated cellar. This serious, but seldom encountered, defect in cottage
cheese is due to the outgrowth of various microbial contaminants, primarily molds,
in cottage cheese. Cheese curd may sometimes become contaminated with certain
psychrotrophic bacteria (Pseudomonas taetrolens) as the result of faulty plant sani-
tation (Foster et al., 1957). When this development is coupled with inadequate
refrigeration and processing methods, the musty defect may occur; it usually inten-
sifies as cottage cheese is held in storage. The product would soon become unpalat-
able, if such is not already the case. This defect may be noted more frequently
during late fall, winter, or early spring, when cows are more apt to be on dry feed for
extended periods (Bodyfelt et al., 1988). Also, if a milk supply that is susceptible to
milk fat autoxidation is used to produce cottage cheese curd, this potential off-flavor
could likely be retained by the curd. An oxidized flavor defect will generally inten-
sify during storage and may occasionally develop into a distinct, “tallowy” off-
flavor. Any copper contamination, especially of the cream or milk used in preparing
the dressing, can easily catalyze development of an oxidized off-flavor.
Sweet The term “sweet” was recently added to the Collegiate Dairy Products
Evaluation Contest scorecard to account for an atypical (for the product) sweet off-
flavor that has become more notable since the advent of the use of lactose and/or
maltodextrin in custom blends of certain stabilizers that are used in the cottage
cheese industry. As new sources of ingredients continue to be utilized in the manu-
facture of creamed cottage cheese, novel and somewhat unfamiliar flavor notes
associated with this product are observed. Hence, new flavor descriptors may con-
tinue to be identified with the progress of innovations and time. Application of the
term “sweet” in conjunction with the acid-coagulated type of cheese seems contra-
dictive, but in the instance just cited, this descriptor is appropriate.
Rancid “Rancidity,” in cottage cheese, as in milk, may be noted by an astringent,

puckery feeling at the base of the tongue and throat, as well as an associated bitter
aftertaste, following sample expectoration. The objectionable rancid off-flavor tends
to persist as an unpleasant aftertaste for a considerable period of time. Short-chain
fatty acids (C4–C10) are readily formed by the hydrolysis of milk fat under certain
adverse physical conditions or improper processing protocols. Subsequently, the
free fatty acids react with the salts of milk, leading to formation of aromatic com-
pounds (i.e., soaps), thus leading to hydrolytic rancidity. Rancidity is variously
described as “soapy,” Romano cheese-like, with a delayed “bitter” aftertaste.
If rancid milk or cream is used to manufacture cottage cheese curd and/or dress-
ing, this serious off-flavor will carry over into the finished product. Since rancidity
is due to the action of the enzyme lipase on milk fat, this flavor defect is derived
from the added cream, not from the curd. This defect may intensify as the cheese
becomes older, particularly if the homogenized dressing was not adequately heat
treated. Proper pasteurization of all milk products used in making cottage cheese
prevents rancidity, providing the raw milk and cream supplies were free of this defect.
Unclean The designation for this serious defect is self-explanatory. The off-flavor
“unclean” cannot be easily expressed in other descriptor terms. Some judges have
dared to use the term “dirty” to describe the unpleasant, objectionable, unclean-like
off-flavor that sometimes proliferates as an undesirable aftertaste in cottage cheese
that has commenced to spoil or exhibit microbial deterioration. This unpleasant
flavor note, often accompanied by a distinct bitter off-taste, generally remains for
some time after sample expectoration; product palatability is at stake. Skim milk
used to make cottage cheese that might have a “barn-like or cowy-type” of flavor
could be also judged as “unclean.”
Whey The so-called whey off-flavor in cottage cheese manifests itself as either a
“sweet brothy-like” flavor (due to the presence of residual lactose), or an acidic
whey flavor (due to residual fermented whey), which results from insufficient chill
water rinsing of the curd prior to addition of the dressing. Added whey protein con-
centrate or added sweet or acid whey in the cottage cheese dressing as an economi-
cal solids source can also contribute to this flavor criticism. A processor strategy that
utilizes cottage cheese acid whey permeate as a solids source in cream dressing
formulation in order to help minimize whey disposal costs may contribute to the
“acidic whey” off-flavor defect. The whey flavor defect of cottage cheese may or
may not be associated with the visible “free whey” appearance defect as observed
within the product package upon opening the closure, inasmuch as product stabiliz-
ers and emulsifiers may aid in masking the visual defect.
Yeasty (Vinegar-Like) “Yeasty” and “vinegar-like” defects in cottage cheese have

a peculiar aromatic quality in addition to a possible associated high-acid note. While
this defect may be caused by growth of yeasts and tends to exhibit a yeasty or earthy
off-odor, the often-associated sharp, pungent taste may be suggestive of vinegar
(possibly due to bacterial fermentation). Various microbial contaminants, including
certain kinds of psychrotrophic bacteria, are generally responsible for this objec-
tionable off-flavor. Usually, serious sanitation shortcomings in manufacture and/or
packaging are at fault and in need of elimination to correct this serious off-flavor
problem in cottage cheese. The shelf life of this relatively perishable product is
significantly reduced by poor sanitation and lack of temperature control throughout
the distribution chain (Bodyfelt, 1981a, b; Morgan, 1970a, b).
7.6 Historical Development of the Cottage Cheese Industry
7.6.1 Improvements in Product Quality
Obviously, research conducted since the 1930s on lactic cultures and specialized
equipment at US and Canadian universities, as well as commercial suppliers (Olsen,
1980), has played a major role in solving many of the manufacturing, sensory qual-
ity, and shelf life challenges posed by delicate properties of creamed cottage cheese
over the decades. Research efforts focused on this fresh cheese category were quite
limited, if nonexistent, prior to 1930. At about this time, dairy technologists, scien-
tists, and microbiologists recognized that cottage cheese was gradually becoming a
significant product category for the North American dairy industry. Several forms of
technology transfer were implemented to bring new knowledge and sanitation pro-
tocols to the budding North American cottage cheese industry. The most common
and effective methods of product quality maintenance and improvement involved
the in-plant presence of trained personnel from lactic cultures and specialized ingre-
dients suppliers and cottage cheese-making equipment providers, who visited plants
and transferred their technical knowledge and scientific advances related to lactic
cultures selection, bacteriophage (an infectious virus) control, and reduction of
cheese culture/milk agglutinin interactions (i.e., curd sludge formation). Basic and
applied research at university experiment stations focused on modified, improved
cottage cheese manufacturing procedures (i.e., short and intermediate set proto-
cols), more specific sanitation and curd cooling/handling methods, and product
shelf life extension (Angevine, 1964; Olsen, 1980), which had been a limiting factor
in marketing cottage cheese beyond local market areas (<100 mi).
Traditionally, cottage cheese was only made with lactic acid producing meso-
philic culture based strains. Now, most of it is made with direct set cultures which
contain a blend of lactic-acid-producing mesophilic and thermophilic lactic acid
bacteria strains. This gives additional bacteriophage control and makes for a shorter
incubation time . With an elevated set temperature of the skim milk in the vat, ther-
mophilic lactic-acid-producing bacteria strains produce lactic acid faster and to a
greater degree over time than mesophilic lactic acid bacteria strains do. Whey pH
after cut needs to be monitored so a soft-textured cheese curd is not obtained. This
means adding less cooking acid or no cooking acid to the whey before cooking is
started. Additionally, higher cook temperatures need to be utilized in order to drive
the whey from the curd piece during cooking, since more acid produced from the
culture itself usually means softer cheese when cooked out to the same temperature
endpoint.
7.6.2 Cottage Cheese Industry Pioneers
Mr. Neil Angevine, who commenced his cottage cheese work in the early 1920s,
was saluted by Olsen (1980) as the one person (self-developed in requisite skill sets,
technical applications, and applied sciences) who more than any other individual
advanced the US and Canadian cottage cheese industries for over four decades. Mr.
Angevine did not benefit from the possession of a college degree. He learned his
lessons from personal contacts with several persons within the mid-western small
cottage cheese plants he worked in through the 1920s. By the 1930s, Mr. Angevine
had earned a reputation as being a superior “technologist” on lactic cultures, cul-
tured products, and creamed cottage cheese. He was soon employed by a cultures
supply company to visit plants all over the USA and Canada for demonstrating the
best preparation and use of cultures, with emphasis on his relatively new “short-set
method” for cottage cheese making. Thus, this was the beginning of a dedicated
career of over 40 years of service to the lactic cultures and cottage cheese industry,
which culminated in Mr. Angevine being appointed as the lead product judge when
cottage cheese was added to the National Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation
Contest in 1962. Angevine’s enthusiasm for demonstrations of “best techniques”
soon drew in other processor and supplier personnel involved with lactic cultures,
cottage cheese, and other cultured product processing. This “passion for more per-
fection” eventually evolved into regularly scheduled and conducted “Cultured Dairy
Products Training Schools,” which were subsequently transferred to the responsibil-
ity of the Cultured Dairy Products Institute, and eventually called the “Kurds and
Kultures Klinics.”
Another recognized “giant” of the cottage cheese and cultured products industry
in the USA was Erik Lundstedt, an immigrant in 1929 from Denmark, who earned
a degree in dairy chemistry from Iowa State College. After working several years in
US butter and cheese plants, he next became affiliated with H.P. Hood and Sons Inc.
of Boston, as the manager of Hood’s cottage cheese operations for 15 years, before
retiring as a worldwide consultant on cultures and cultured products and author of

numerous articles in his areas of expertise (Angevine, 1964; Olsen, 1980).
Lundstedt continually looked for better methods and better quality control in cot-
tage cheese and related products. Some of the significant achievements of
Lundstedt’s research were as follows:
1. Several new cultured products processing methodologies that were patented.
2. A device for more precisely determining the firmness of cottage cheese curd was
created.
3. The use of citrated whey for lactic culture propagation was begun.
4. A method for enhancing the aroma of various cultured products was developed.
5. A high-protein, low-fat, unripened cheese was developed.
6. A process for drying acid whey with subsequent applications was developed.
Erik Lundstedt continued in retirement as a prolific writer of practical and scien-
tific articles. Lundstedt, along with Dr. Frank Kosikowski and David Bandler of
Cornell University, founded the American Cottage Cheese Institute in 1959–1960,
with Lundstedt serving as the first president, and Angevine as the second. This orga-
nization later was re-named as the American Cultured Dairy Products Institute,
which commenced publishing a well-received journal by 1961.
A mid-western leader in developing what was generally recognized as the most
precise protocol for manufacturing consistent, high-quality cheese was Al Shock,
who developed the Nordica System process (Potter, 2007) of cottage cheese manu-
facture in South Dakota in the 1950s. The Nordica System process developed and
provided its own lactic cultures and manufacturing protocols, and formally licensed
plants in the USA and Canada to use the specific and detailed manufacturing proto-
cols (eventually extending the manufacturing system to England and Australia). By
the late 1960s, there were over 100 cottage cheese producers licensed under the
Nordica process.
7.7 Conclusion
US cottage cheese per capita consumption has continued to decline throughout the
past 20 years as reported by the USDA. It can be speculated that the primary reason
for little or no real growth in cottage cheese sales has been due to inconsistent prod-
uct quality and lack of market focus and promotion, as compared to the dairy indus-
try’s experience and successes with yogurt. Cottage cheese manufacturers have
reformulated their products over recent decades to maintain profitability in cottage
cheese production by increasing the ratio of dressing to curd and using less costly
or more functional ingredients. With each such change or innovation, new chal-
lenges are encountered to maintain or assure consistent flavor, texture, and appear-
ance attributes.
A prime example of an innovation that has not necessarily enhanced product
quality has been the introduction of automated curd washing and draining
equipment. The increase in particle fines and broken curds retention has led to the
vast majority of cottage cheese exhibiting markedly higher levels of less appealing
shattered curd. In turn, this results in inconsistent dressing absorption and more
visual defects in final product appearance and texture. The additional use of func-
tional ingredients – such as cottage cheese acid whey permeate to help with mini-
mizing cottage cheese whey disposal, improve dressing adsorption, and reduction
of stabilizer costs – also leads to additional flavor defects. By contrast, the benefits
of producing cottage cheese with longer shelf life periods (especially with CO2
incorporation into dressing) and extension of yields through solids (fines) retention
have helped the industry in several ways.
The future success of the cottage cheese industry will require continued develop-
ment of better manufacturing methods to make this product more consistent and
economical, while maintaining optimal flavor, texture, and appearance. The ability
of cottage cheese industry personnel to recognize and identify the resulting defects
and apply possible remedial measures will be more important than ever to expand
the cottage cheese market.
References
Angevine, N. (1964). The first commercial cottage cheese production in the U.S. American Cottage
Cheese Institute Review, 4(2), 1–2.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1981a). Temperature control monitoring for cottage cheese plants. Dairy Record,
82(1), 65.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1981b). Sensory and shelf-life characteristics of cottage cheese treated with sor-
bic acid. In Proceedings of the Biennial Marschall Int’l Cheese conference.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1982). Processors need to put some pinch on salt. Dairy Record, 83(4), 83.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J., & Trout, G. M. (1988). Sensory evaluation of cultured milk products. In
The sensory evaluation of dairy products (pp. 277–295). Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Chen, J. H., & Hotchkiss, J. H. (1991). Effect of carbon dioxide on the growth of psychrotrophic
spoilage bacteria in cottage cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 74(9), 1241–1245.
Connolly, E. J., White, C. H., Custer, E. W., & Vedamuthu, E. R. (1984). Cultured dairy foods. In
The quality improvement manual. American Cultured Dairy Products Institute. 40 p.
Davies, F. A. (1942). The history of Red Rock cottage cheese. The American Cottage Cheese
Institute Review, 4(2), 2–5.
Elliker, P. R. (1949). Practical dairy bacteriology. McGraw Hill Book Company.
Foster, E. M., Nelson, F. E., Speck, M. L., & Doetsch, R. N. (1957). Dairy microbiology.
Prentice Hall.
Hotchkiss, J. H., & Chen, J. H. (1996). Microbiological effects of the direct addition of CO2 to
pasteurized milk and cottage cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 79(1), 87.
Kosikowski, F. V., & Brown, D. B. (1973). Influence of carbon dioxide and nitrogen on micro-
bial populations and shelf-life of cottage cheese and sour cream. Journal of Dairy Science,
56, 12–18.
Kosikowski, F. V., & Mistry, V. (1997). Creamed cottage cheese. In Cheese and fermented milk
foods (Vol. I, pp. 131–145). Edwards Brothers.
Mather, D. W., & Babel, F. J. (1959). Studies on the flavor of creamed cottage cheese. Journal of
Dairy Science, 42(5), 809–815.
Morgan, M. E. (1970a). Microbial flavor defects in dairy products and methods for their simula-
tion. I. Malty flavor. Journal of Dairy Science, 53(3), 270.
Morgan, M. E. (1970b). Microbial flavor defects in dairy products and methods for their simula-
tion. II. Fruity flavor. Journal of Dairy Science, 53(3), 273.
National Dairy Council Newsletter. (1996). The nutritional contributions of cultured dairy foods:
Past and present.
Olsen, H. C. (1980). Cottage cheese no longer a cottage industry. Dairy Record, 8, 112–114.
Potter, D. (2007). Personal communication: A history of the Nordica process of cottage cheese
manufacture.
Rosenberg, M., Tong, P. S., Sulzer, G., Gendre, S., & Ferris, D. (1994a). California cottage cheese
technology and product quality: An in-plant survey. 1. Manufacturing process. Cultured Dairy
Products Journal, 29(1), 4–11.
Rosenberg, M., Tong, P. S., Sulzer, G., Gendre, S., & Ferris, D. (1994b). California cottage cheese
technology and product quality: An in-plant survey. 3. Physical properties of curds, dressing
and final products. Cultured Dairy Products Journal, 29(3), 4–11.
Salih, M. A., Sandine, W. E., & Ayers, J. W. (1990). Inhibitory effects of Microgard™ on yogurt
and cottage cheese spoilage organisms. Journal of Dairy Science, 73, 881–886.
Sandine, W. E. (1984). Use of pasteurized milk cultures of Propionibacterium shermanii as a micro-
bial inhibitor in cultured dairy foods. Unpublished communication. Oregon State University.
Sprenger, W. (1963). Cottage cheese processing methods that optimize product quality and yield.
A presentation at the annual conference of Oregon Dairy Industries.
Tong, P. S., Rosenberg, M., Ferris, D., Sulzer, G., & Gendre, S. (1994). California cottage cheese
technology and product quality: An in-plant survey. 2. Composition and curd particle size dis-
tribution. Cultured Dairy Products Journal, 29(2), 4–12.
U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Code of Federal Regulations Title 21. Part 133. Subpart B. Sec
133.128. Cottage cheese. Available at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/
cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=133.128. Date accessed 9 Apr 2021.
Wyatt, C. J. (1983). Acceptability of reduced sodium in breads, cottage cheese and pickles. Journal
of Food Science, 48(4), 1300.
Chapter 8
Yogurt
Don Tribby and Vanessa Teter
8.1 A Brief History of Yogurt
Yogurt has been consumed since recorded time. It is not exactly known how yogurt
was discovered, but it is assumed that it was by accident, perhaps by Mesopotamians
in about 5000 BC (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997). During this time, herdsman would
milk goats and sheep and carry the milk with them in pouches made from an ani-
mal’s stomach. These stomachs contained a natural enzyme, called chymosin,
which forms a gel or coagulum when added to milk. Given (1) the warm climate in
this part of the world, (2) the storage conditions available at the time, and (3) “natu-
ral starter culture” in the milk, either yogurt or cheese was made. Fermentation
probably began within a few hours. Most likely, these people noted that this soured
milk product tended to keep longer and they grew to prefer the flavor of yogurt to
that of fresh milk. These people also eventually realized the health benefits of eating
yogurt, and much later, some observers wrote about living a longer and healthier life
as a direct result of frequent consumption of the fermented products (Andrews, 2000).
Yogurt also traces its roots to the Caucasus Mountain region of Russia. The peo-
ple of this rugged region were commonly nomadic – and as subsistence used both
the milk and meat of cows, sheep, goats, and yaks. The fermented milk product
traditional to this region, kefir, is a liquid cultured product whose name translates to
“good feeling.” It also earned the reputation as being a healing drink and was con-
sidered a “gift of the gods.” Kefir was widely consumed by all families, and the
bacteria culture that was used to ferment this product was prized and guarded most
closely.
D. Tribby (*)
IFF, New Century, KS, USA
V. Teter
Danone North America, White Plains, NY, USA
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_8
200 D. Tribby and V. Teter
Yogurt also appears in many ancient writings, including the Indian Ayurvedic
scripts, the Bible, and historical literature by Pliny, Herodotus, Homer, and Galen.
In Genesis 18:8 Abraham may have served yogurt and milk to his guests, “Then he
(Abraham) took curds and milk and the calf that he had prepared, and set it before
them. And he stood by them under the tree while they ate.”
Cultured dairy products’ history also reports that Genghis Khan loved the taste
of cultured products and mandated that all of his soldiers consume them on a regular
basis. By the year 1215, Genghis Khan had conquered Mongolia, and Khan person-
ally believed that part of his military success could be attributed to the fact that his
army stayed strong and healthy by consuming the nutritious product kumiss.
Reportedly, his official orders required that his entire army, from the top generals to
the lowly slaves, were to eat this particular form of yogurt.
In 1542, a Jewish physician introduced yogurt into France from Constantinople.
The King of France, Francois I, suffered from acute depression and had undergone
every possible therapy known at that time. The “Ambassador to the Sublime Porte”
told him about this doctor from a distant land who made a concoction derived from
soured sheep milk. This particular fermented milk drink had been reported to pos-
sess therapeutic properties. The king sent for this doctor, who traveled with his
sheep from Constantinople to Paris, France. The king, after drinking this fermented
elixir, was reported to be healed. However, the sheep were not so fortunate – they all
died from the long trek and the cold climate. This doctor ultimately returned home
without surrendering his “formulation secret” to the king.
The broad popularity of kefir in Russia dates back to the early 1900s, when the
All-Russian Physicians Society contacted two brothers who owned a cheese plant
for help in obtaining some kefir starter culture. The society was looking to popular-
ize this product for its reputed health and aging benefits. The royal Caucasus family
closely guarded the culture used to produce kefir. According to legend, two brothers
hired a beautiful young lady to help obtain the prized culture (Mariani, 1999). She
failed in her attempt to gain the culture, but did win the prince’s love. He proposed
to the lovely lady, but she declined his hand in marriage, and left for home. The
prince became so angered with her refusal that he had her kidnapped, but she was
ultimately rescued. The lady and the Physicians Society sued the prince in the
Czar’s courts and won a legal settlement. The prince offered her gold and other
valuables, but she finally agreed upon gaining possession of some of the valuable
kefir culture, and thus, the case was finally settled. In September 1908, this success-
ful legal litigant took some of the kefir culture to Moscow, where it was used for
many years as the kefir culture strain, and was incorporated into many different
medicines. Thus, this beautiful lady was ultimately responsible for both the spread
and the popularity of kefir across Russia, and eventually to many parts of the rest of
the world.
Yogurt gained global attention in the early 1900s when the Russian bacteriolo-
gist Ilya Metchnikov conducted research on the extended life spans of certain
Bulgarians. He noticed that these people had longer life spans than those of the sur-
rounding countries. His studies emphasized that Bulgarian people consumed large
amounts of yogurt and related cultured milk products. His papers were widely
8 Yogurt 201
published and valued; he received a Nobel Prize and the popularity of yogurt signifi-
cantly increased.
As early as 1784, Turkish immigrants are credited with bringing yogurt to the
USA. However, yogurt popularity commenced in the late 1930s and 1940s when
Columbo and Danone (later renamed Dannon in the USA) began yogurt businesses
on the east coast in the USA (General Mills, 2007; Dannon, 2007). In 1947, Dannon
started adding strawberry preserves to the bottom of the cup, and thus made the first
“sundae”-style yogurt.
The global popularity of yogurt spread quickly in the USA after WWII. Many
soldiers tasted it for the first time in Europe; afterward, they brought the idea and the
interest to the US market.
Greek yogurt was introduced to the US market in 2007 by the Chobani Company.
Greek yogurt has a thicker consistency and higher protein and solids content com-
pared with yogurt products that were typical of the US market at the time, labeled
as stirred (Swiss) or cup-set. Greek yogurt is a cultured milk product made by the
addition of milk solids (referred to as Greek style) or by whey removal through
straining or centrifugation (referred to as Greek yogurt). This approach has been
used to manufacture many different, but similar, types of cultured products through-
out the world for thousands of years. Some products in this category, like Quark and
Skyr, are becoming more popular in the US market.
Similarly, thinner-cultured milk products, more commonly known as drinkable
yogurts, have also been made and consumed around the world since the beginning
of time. First natural cultures were used, and now the strains used were those that
evolved to give the best flavor and texture.
8.2 Yogurt Defined
The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR 131.200 (USFDA, 2020)) definition of

yogurt is “Yogurt is the food produced by culturing one or more optional dairy
ingredients with a characterizing bacterial culture that contains the lactic acid-
producing bacteria, Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus
(Olsen, 2002; USFDA, 2020)”. One or more other optional ingredients may be
added, but must be added prior to culturing. Yogurt, before the addition of bulky
flavors, contains not less than 3.25% milk fat and not less than 8.25% milk solids
not fat, and a titratable acidity of not less than 0.9%, expressed as lactic acid. The
food (base) may be homogenized and shall be pasteurized or ultra-pasteurized prior
to the addition of the bacterial culture. Flavoring ingredients may be added after
pasteurization or ultra-pasteurization. To extend the shelf life of the food, yogurt
may be heat treated after culturing is completed, to destroy viable microorganisms.
Optional dairy ingredients are described as cream, milk, partially skimmed milk,
or skim milk, used alone or in combination. Other optional ingredients include con-
centrated skim milk, nonfat dry milk, buttermilk, whey, lactose, lactalbumins, lacto-
globulins, and/or whey modified by partial or complete removal of lactose and/or
minerals, to increase the nonfat milk solids content of the food, provided that the
ratio of protein to total nonfat solids of the food and the protein efficiency ratio
(PER) of all proteins present shall not be decreased as a result of adding such
ingredients.
Nutritive carbohydrate sweeteners such as sugar (sucrose), beet, or cane; invert
sugar (in paste or syrup form); brown sugar; refiner’s syrup; molasses (other than
blackstrap); high-fructose corn syrup; fructose; fructose syrup; maltose; maltose
syrup and dried maltose syrup; malt extract and dried malt extract; malt syrup and
dried malt syrup; honey; and/or maple sugar may be used (USFDA, 2020).
8.2.1 Greek Yogurt Defined
There are two types of Greek yogurt, and as mentioned before, none have legal defi-
nitions. They are defined by their processing techniques more than any standard
definition. In the industry, there are two ways to create what consumers think of as
Greek yogurt. The first is by fortification – this can be done by adding various milk
protein powders (such as whey or casein into the product). This allows for two
things to happen simultaneously – the first is a thicker product as the proteins react
with the water in the product, and the second is the protein content itself is also
higher. In the industry, this is what’s referred to as a Greek-style yogurt – meaning
it is thicker and is higher in protein but is created simply by formulation.
The second way Greek yogurt can be created is by mechanical separation – this
can be done using ultrafiltration or centrifugation, essentially any processing tech-
nique that allows the curd to be concentrated and the acid whey removed from the
curd. This in turn creates a thick product as well as concentrating the proteins in the
curd itself, therefore driving up the protein content of the finished product. Because
this is how Greeks make yogurt, typically this is simply called Greek yogurt to the
consumer and this is how most companies.
While there are two different types of Greek yogurt, and many different ways of
creating those types, there is no CFR definition for Greek yogurt or Greek-style
yogurt. But the fact that the name has the fat content and the name “yogurt,” it must
adhere to the standard identity of each of the corresponding products, i.e., Greek
nonfat yogurt and Greek low-fat yogurt.
8.2.2 Drinkable Yogurt Defined
There is no CFR definition for drinkable yogurt. But, like Greek yogurt, the fact that
the name contains the fat level (nonfat, low-fat) and yogurt, it must conform to the
standard of identity or definition of yogurt. To make a drinkable yogurt, most times
different cultures are selected that do not create as much body and texture in the
8 Yogurt 203
product, and additional sheer will be added to the product post fermentation to help
break any bonds that are created during fermentation.
8.3 Yogurt Cultures (Microflora)
The special properties of cultured milk products begin with the unique properties of
the microorganisms used in their production. Perhaps more than any other type of
cultured dairy products, yogurt has enhanced the shelf life, appeal, and digestibility
of fresh milk for the North American consumer. Yogurt is a fermented dairy product
resulting from the symbiotic growth of Streptococcus salivarius subspecies ther-
mophilus and Lactobacillus delbrueckii subspecies bulgaricus to produce a smooth
viscous gel with a desirable cultured flavor. Various styles of yogurt are now tar-
geted for a variety of different consumer groups from children to geriatrics, and the
variety of products depends on the properties and microbiology of starter cultures
used in their production. Many companies use S. thermophilus and L. bulgaricus
strains for production of yogurts with distinctive nutritional or physical characteris-
tics. In addition, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Bifidobacteria species, and other strains
not required by the standard of identity are added for their purported health benefits.
In the current yogurt market, culture strains are selected based on their rate of acid
production, flavor profile, exopolysaccharide production, and bacteriophage resis-
tance to produce yogurts with specific textural properties, reduced post-fermentation
acidification, and milder flavor than products of the past.
8.3.1 Essential Microflora for Yogurt Production
1. Streptococcus salivarius subsp. thermophilus (S. thermophilus) are Gram-

positive cocci in pairs to long chains, with optimum growth temperature of
40–45 °C (104–113 °F), a maximum growth temperature of 50 °C (122 °F), and
are able to survive lower temperature pasteurization (63 °C/145 °F; University of
Guelph Dairy Science and Technology, 2007). This organism is extremely sensi-
tive to antibiotics (readily inhibited by 0.01 IU/ml of penicillin, with slight inhi-
bition apparent in as little as 0.001 IU/ml of penicillin). This sensitivity to
antibiotics as well as chemical cleaners underscores the need for high-quality
milk supplies and sensitive antibiotic testing procedures. While bacteriophage
also can be a problem for certain commercially popular strains, sensitive testing
procedures and good plant sanitation can minimize the chances of production
failures. S. thermophilus is weakly proteolytic and requires free amino acids
generated by L. bulgaricus (below), attained from either severe milk heat treat-
ment or exogenous sources. S. thermophilus produces formic acid and is respon-
sible for reduction of oxygen levels in associative growth with L. bulgaricus.
2. Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus (L. bulgaricus) are Gram-positive

rods that occur singly or in pairs in young cultures (University of Guelph Dairy
Science and Technology, 2007). In older cultures, Gram-variable rods occur
either in pairs or chains, with or without granules. L. bulgaricus is less sensitive
to antibiotics than S. thermophilus, with 0.30 IU/ml of penicillin required for
significant inhibition. A strict nutritive requirement for formic acid is satisfied by
severe heating of milk (e.g., 88 °C (190 °F)) for 30 min or by associative growth
with S. thermophilus. L. bulgaricus can be highly proteolytic, affecting yogurt
flavor and shelf life if it dominates the cocci organism. Up to 2–3% of lactic acid
is produced in pure cultures, as well as high levels of acetaldehyde. L. bulgaricus
can be attacked by bacteriophage, though not as readily as S. thermophilus.
Optimum growth temperatures are 40–43 °C (104–110 °F), with maximums of
53–60 °C (127–140 °F) for certain strains.
8.3.2 Optional Microflora for Yogurt
In addition to the cultures required by law for yogurt production, optional micro-
flora may be added to yogurt for health benefits, as in the case of probiotics, or for
textural reasons like the use of exopolysaccharide-producing cultures to increase
the body of the yogurt.
1. Lactobacillus acidophilus (L. acidophilus) is a Gram-positive rod, very similar
in morphology to L. bulgaricus, but it is not a major contributor to acid, flavor,
or texture when used as an adjunct microorganism in most yogurts. L. acidophi-
lus is able to survive in the small intestine because of its bile and phenol resis-
tance, which S. thermophilus and L. bulgaricus do not possess (Gibson, 2001;
Rahrs, 2005a, b). However, propagation and survival of L. acidophilus in yogurt
is difficult, due to peroxides generated by L. bulgaricus when oxygen is present.
The NCFM strain of L. acidophilus, which was developed at North Carolina
State University, is believed to implant in the small intestine and produce antimi-
crobial substances against undesirable intestinal anaerobes (Gibson, 2001). It
may also be beneficial in re-establishing intestinal flora in patients who have
undergone antibiotic therapy. Optimum growth temperatures for L. acidophilus
propagation are 35–38 °C (95–100 °F), with maximums of 45–48 °C
(113–118 °F).
2. Bifidobacterium infantis and Bifidobacteria longum (B. infantis and B. longum)
are small, Gram-positive irregular rods that occur singly or in pairs in milk cul-
tures. Clinical research indicates that these strains may be the predominant
organisms in the large intestine of infants and some adults. As with L. acidophi-
lus, this organism is considered preferable to the normal anaerobic organisms
that inhabit the intestinal tract. B. infantis is most common in infants and
B. longum appears more commonly in adults. The suggested health effects of
Bifidobacteria species include the ability to inhibit gut invasion by streptococci,
8 Yogurt 205
inhibition of colonization by E. coli, serum cholesterol reduction, and the ability

to elevate immunocompetence, as measured by impact on mean corpuscular vol-
ume of red blood cells and macrophages (Gibson, 2001).
3. Several types of microorganisms produce unique polysaccharides (exopolysac-
charides or EPS) that can be used to improve the viscosity of yogurt. Wise
discrimination in the selection and use of these microorganisms may relieve
excessive reliance on stabilizers, and a richer, creamier texture can be achieved
even in low-fat or nonfat products. Some producers elect to use these microor-
ganisms instead of hydrocolloids. The use of specialized heavy-body strains can
also improve consistency and control after acidification. Polysaccharide formers
are most often strains of S. thermophilus.
8.4 Yogurt Starter Handling and Fermentation
Commercial cultures are available as direct-set cultures or as bulk starter. Proper

handling and propagation of yogurt starters is critical for maintaining optimal strain
balance, flavor development, and shelf life. The choice between preparing a fresh,
milk-based starter culture versus using a frozen or freeze-dried direct-set entails a
trade-off between consistency and set times. Direct-set cultures take a little longer
than bulk starter and tend to be used in Swiss-style yogurt more than cup-set. With
the vast range of freeze-dried and frozen direct-set and bulk starter cultures, pro-
cessing plants can now select strains and propagation techniques that are most ame-
nable to different yogurt styles and production processes.
1. Starters. Most plants in the USA use frozen and freeze-dried direct-set types of
cultures that perform the basic functions of acid and flavor development. Freeze-
dried direct-set cultures are more stable than frozen cultures at storage tempera-
tures of up to 0 °C and tend to involve less risk in shipping, storage, and handling.
Fermentation times for freeze-dried cultures last from 5 to 7 h at 41–42 °C
(106–108 °F) until vat set, whereas frozen cultures take 5–6 h, depending on the
freshness of the culture. Propagation of bulk starter cultures is still used at some
plants that desire a faster product set time of 3–4 h. Good consistency with bulk
starter depends on keeping bacteriophage out of the milk-based starter, testing
starter milk for low-level antibiotics, and ripening to a consistent end-point
pH. The optimum ratio of either a bulk starter or direct-set culture depends on
the type of product – a traditional yogurt should be in the ratio range of 1:1 to 4:1
cocci:rods (S. thermophilus:L. bulgaricus); however, for mild-flavored yogurt,
the cocci:rods ratio may be as high as 15:1.
2. Fermentation. A properly conducted fermentation will promote balanced growth
of the essential yogurt microflora. Normally, L. bulgaricus stimulates early
growth of the cocci by enzymatically liberating essential amino acids from the
milk protein. This is one reason why sufficient inoculum levels are critical for
rapid fermentations. As a result of this early stimulation, the streptococci typi-
cally outnumber the lactobacilli by three or four to one within 1–2 h. The rods
begin to develop rapidly once the pH drops below the 4.8–5.0 range, and it is
only at or below a pH of 4.5–4.6 that the characteristic yogurt flavor begins to be
expressed. Most yogurts are considered “ripe” somewhere in the pH range of
4.0–4.5, depending on how strong or mild a product is preferred. A pH lower
than 4.0 is undesirable, since L. bulgaricus tends to produce excessive lactic
acid, acetaldehyde, and proteolytic by-products in this pH range. This culture
can help maintain a product pH of 4.1–4.3 throughout shelf life, thereby main-
taining a mild flavor and a pleasant product appearance. Such cultures can also
eliminate the graininess that commonly develops during breaking and cooling of
vat-set yogurts. Reducing yogurt temperature to 21–24 °C (70–75 °F) is usually
sufficient to stop culture activity and allow packaging without setting up the
stabilizer portion of the product. When fermentation is stopped at too high a pH
(above pH 4.7), the yogurt will often have a weak body and/or stringy texture;
hence the use of a pH meter for determining the break point is essential.
8.5 Yogurt Manufacturing
Yogurt process and formulation variations are as numerous as the number of manu-
facturers. The finished yogurt will vary regarding body and texture depending upon
the type of ingredients, processing, starter cultures, and flavor and in the packaging
that is used.
The processing of yogurt can be broken down into the following steps: batching,
pasteurization, homogenization, culturing and fermenting, fruit and flavor addition,
packaging and cooling, and storage.
Each step is extremely important in the process, and strict attention to detail must
be taken.
8.5.1 Batching of Yogurt Mixes
There are a number of different types of batching equipment used by yogurt manu-
facturers to blend the raw material ingredients together. Each blender has its own
advantages and disadvantages, but all are used to standardize the mix and blend
ingredients. At this point, any additional ingredients are added to the milk blend,
such as nonfat dry milk, whey or whey protein, sugars, and/or stabilizers. It is
important to add the dry ingredients to the milk at a point of highest agitation, but at
the same time, to avoid air incorporation or foam. Foam tends to hold large amounts
of milk solids, and if the foam is left behind in the mixing vat after pasteurization,
those solids are not incorporated into the base, and therefore the final product may
be low in total solids and have a weak body.
8 Yogurt 207
Many of the ingredients added to the yogurt base are very hygroscopic. When
these ingredients come into contact with milk, they will absorb liquid quickly and
can form lumps, “fish eyes,” or in extreme cases can clog a line. Therefore, it is
extremely important that the dry ingredients are added at a rate that they become
incorporated into the mix without agglomerating. “Fish eyes” are described as a
mass of dry material that has a layer of partially hydrated material on the surface,
but dry in the center. If the “fish eye” is made up of stabilizer material, this product
might not hydrate fully, regardless of the amount of heating and agitation that
ensues. These ingredients will not have their full functionality in the yogurt, and
thus the body and texture may be lacking. These lumps may be noticed floating on
the surface, in in-line filters, or remaining in the tank after emptying.
The most important aspect of ingredient blending is to incorporate as little air as
possible and to completely add the dry ingredients to the base without forming
lumps. After the blending process, it is common to hold the yogurt mix, with agita-
tion, for a short time prior to pasteurization to allow the stabilizers to hydrate and
become fully functional.
8.5.2 Pasteurization of Yogurt Mixes
Pasteurization of yogurt mixes can be accomplished by several different methods.

As with any other dairy product, the purpose for pasteurization is to heat treat milk
to eliminate pathogenic bacteria. Pasteurization also aids in the hydration of the
stabilizers and dry ingredients that were added during blending, as well as adding a
pleasant cooked flavor. Heat treatments beyond pasteurization are used to denature
the proteins and attain the highest level of functionality from the milk proteins,
which are important for product texture.
The three main types of pasteurization are (1) vat method (low temperature long
time (LTLT), 80 °C (175 °F) for 30 min), (2) high temperature short time ((HTST),
80–88 °C (175–190 °F) for 18–50 s depending upon the length of the holding tube),
and (3) ultrahigh temperature ((UHT), 138 °C (280 °F) for 2–4 s). The latter method
is not as common, but it is starting to gain application. Some manufacturers who
pasteurize using methods 2 and 3 hold their yogurt mixes in holding tubes for an
additional 5–20 min at the pasteurization temperature in order to denature whey
proteins and improve product viscosity.
It is common to pasteurize Greek-style yogurt mix at temperatures of 88–93 °C
(190–200 °F) with a hold time of 5–7 min.
8.5.3 Homogenization of Yogurt Mixes
Yogurt mix homogenization, though not essential, aids in hydration of stabilizers

and the interaction of stabilizers with milk proteins. In the manufacture of yogurt
and other dairy products, it is common to homogenize mixes at approximately
63 °C (145 °F), with a total pressure of between 7 and 10 MPa (1000 and 1500 psi)
in the first stage and 3 MPa (500 psi) in the second stage or alternatively, 7 MPa
(1000 psi) in the first stage and 3 MPa (500 psi) in the second stage. Different types
of homogenizers may be used (such as a microgap type), but the same pressure
conditions are applied. Some manufacturers homogenize after the regeneration sec-
tion of the pasteurizer and some homogenize after the cooling section. In all cases,
homogenization should never be conducted on raw milk, or hydrolytic rancidity will
be induced.
The composition of the yogurt stabilizer can influence the homogenization pres-
sure and temperature that is used. Some gums and starches require heat and shear to
activate or “bloom.” There are also certain types of starches that will be ineffective
if they are homogenized after they have become fully hydrated or bloomed. If this
happens, the entire functionality of the starch will most likely be lost, and many
body and texture defects in the finished yogurt may be noticed, such as weak body,
syneresis, or wheying-off. Processing recommendations from stabilizer supplier
representatives are advised for material sources and utilization strategies.
8.5.4 Culturing and Fermenting the Yogurt Mix
The sequence of the steps of culturing, fermenting, smoothing (when used), cool-
ing, flavor addition, and packaging are dependent on whether a stirred (Swiss) style
or a cup-set-style yogurt is made, regardless of formulation variables.
8.5.4.1 Culturing and Fermenting Stirred (Swiss) Style Yogurt
After pasteurization and homogenization, the yogurt mix is cooled to the optimum
setting temperature. Depending upon the bacteria used in the yogurt culture, normal
set temperatures range between 32 and 46 °C (90 and 115 °F), with a normal incu-
bation (set) more than 8 h. These incubation conditions are dependent upon the type
of cultures used and the type of yogurt produced.
After the yogurt mix has reached its “set” temperature, the culture is added.
Extreme care should be taken in the inoculation process of the vat. If contamination
occurs in the yogurt-making process, this is usually where it occurs. All containers
and equipment used in the inoculation process such as pails, buckets, hand agitators,
and culture packages and cans must be sanitized with an approved sanitizer.
After addition of the culture, the agitator must be left on low speed for a mini-
mum of 15 min to ensure adequate dispersion. Improper agitation may result in
pockets in the yogurt vat that have a higher-than-normal concentration of bacteria,
or hot spots, and will develop much faster than the rest of the vat. Also, there may
be pockets that have very little bacteria, and therefore will have little to no acid
development. When the main body of the vat is ready to be broken and cooled, this
portion may affect the finished body, texture, and flavor of the finished product.
8 Yogurt 209
Upon adequate agitation of the yogurt, the agitator must be shut off and the cul-
ture allowed to grow in the yogurt base and develop acid. During this process, it is
extremely important to not disturb the knit or mesh of the product. The agitator must
not be turned on for any reason – to do so would cause a weak body and mouthfeel
and/or a lumpy, watery, or wheyed-off final product. In extreme cases where an
agitator has been left on during the entire fermentation, the casein will precipitate,
and there will be no gel and no possibility to save the batch.
After the prescribed set time, the product should be checked for either % acidity,
by titratable acidity, or pH. It is advisable to take samples from several different
places around the top of the vat. When using a sanitary straw, the straw should be
inserted into the yogurt approximately 46 cm (18 in.). Aliquots obtained from the
different locations should be commingled and tested. If possible, it is also advisable
to take a sample from the bottom of the vat. Since it is common to have a tempera-
ture difference from the top to the bottom of the vat, differing acid levels or pH may
be seen.
After achieving the proper pH, the agitator may be turned on to the lowest speed
and the cooling process initiated. Depending upon the efficiency of the vat, or the
method of cooling, this should take anywhere from 2 to 4 h. It is common to cool
the yogurt base to between 10 and 20 °C (50 and 70 °F). When cooling, it is also
important to not over-agitate. Setting the agitator at higher than the slowest speed
may cause shear of some of the proteins and disturb the “knit process” that has taken
place during culture incubation.
Upon reaching the desired cool-down temperature, the agitator(s) should be shut
off and the product allowed to remain quiescent until the fruit is added.
As the product is pumped to either the flavor tank or the filler, it is a common and
advisable practice to pass the yogurt through an in-line “smoothing” device. This
may vary from a simple mesh-screen to a more elaborate bell-valve, or gum-drop-
type device. The purpose of any smoothing device is to simply smooth out or break
up any remaining yogurt lumps or curds that may have not been broken up during
the combined agitation and cooling process. Seek the advice of your stabilizer con-
sultant to ascertain if the selected smoothing device may affect any of the stabilizer
components. Some types of smoothing devices need to match up with the process
and the temperature that the yogurt is being pumped, blended, and handled.
8.5.4.2 Culturing and Fermenting Greek Yogurt
Greek yogurt culture temperatures range between 32 and 46 °C (90 and 115 °F)
depending upon what culture strains are being used. Because many Greek yogurts
do not contain stabilizer, it has become common for manufacturers to use a culture
that contains EPS-producing strains. These cultures produce a ropy texture that also
builds a heavy body. Normal break pH is 4.70.
After the culturing of Greek yogurt is completed, the product is agitated, and the
white mass is concentrated with approximately 30% of the volume removed as
whey. Larger production facilities use a separator or other mechanical methods of
separation, where some smaller operations may use either a cheese cloth or a semi-
porous bag or container. If using a separator, the white mass is pumped through the
separator at the culture temperature or slightly below. If using a cheese cloth, the
white mass is placed into the bag or cloth and hung on a rack for a specific amount
of time until sufficient whey drains through the pores and the desired total solids is
obtained. Whey and some lactose are removed during the concentration process. If
the whey removal is conducted in the culture temperature range, care and consider-
ation should be given to the culture type and strains used. The cultures will continue
to grow and produce acid that could affect the finished product quality. A final pH
of 4.4 is common for Greek yogurt. When considering the cultures used, the culture
supplier can assist in the selection of a yogurt culture that will slow its acid produc-
tion at the desired pH.
The product is then passed through a smoothing device on the way to the flavor-
ing tank. This device is either a stainless plate with small holes or slats cut into it or
a type of a modified sheer pump that will smooth the yogurt and break up any lumps
that may exist.
8.5.4.3 Culturing and Fermenting Cup Set Yogurt
After pasteurization and homogenization, the yogurt mix is cooled and inoculated
at a temperature slightly higher than the optimal setting temperature. The inoculated
yogurt mix is then pumped and filled into retail cups prior to incubation. During the
pumping and filling, it is common for the mix to cool several degrees. Therefore, it
is important that the processor adjust the inoculation temperature so that the product
is at the optimal incubation temperature upon reaching the incubation room.
Depending upon the bacteria used in the yogurt culture, normal set temperatures
range between 32 and 46 °C (90 and 115 °F), with a normal incubation (set) time of
5–6 h. These incubation conditions are dependent upon the type of cultures used and
the type of yogurt produced.
Many manufacturers add the culture “in line” after the mix has exited the regen-
erator section of the pasteurization unit. If contamination occurs in the yogurt-
making process, this is usually at this point, so caution must be taken to avoid any
possible contamination. All containers and equipment used in the inoculation pro-
cess such as pails, buckets, hand agitators, culture packages, and cans must be sani-
tized with an approved sanitizer.
Because the inoculated yogurt mix is placed into a cup prior to culturing, fruit
and flavor are also added to the bottom of the retail cup prior to packaging as well.
Addition of the fruit-flavor system is commonly completed in line. Some possible
concerns with the fruit are floating fruits. This can be rectified by adjusting the
amount of sugar or total solids in the white mass, and in the fruit-flavor systems. It
is recommended that the processor discusses these issues with the approved fruit
supplier.
8 Yogurt 211
After addition of the culture, the cup-set yogurt is moved to the incubation room
where it will be left until the pH reaches 4.4–4.6. This usually takes between 5 and
6 h depending upon regional differences and variations in solids levels, and heat
treatments. The product should be checked for pH after 3 h of ripening.
Upon reaching a desired pH, the ripened yogurt should be gently moved to a
cooler with a high amount of air movement, and cooled to stop the bacteria growth
as quickly as possible. A common practice is to put the pallets of finished yogurt in
front of a forced air cooler, open the cardboard boxes to allow adequate air move-
ment. Another common practice is the use of a blast cooler. The cases of yogurt are
placed on a conveyer through the blast cooler. If the yogurt is palletized, it is impor-
tant to place the cases of yogurt in a way that the product will allow for adequate air
flow throughout the pallet. This will speed up the cooling process and slow down
the acid development. Upon cooling the yogurt, the pallets should be carefully
moved to a refrigerated storage facility and not disturbed for 12–24 h. During this
time, the product firmness and whey retention is enhanced.
In the process of making cup-set yogurt, variability in culturing, incubating, and
cooling steps makes it common to have slight differences in product quality and
consistency from pallet to pallet.
8.5.5 Flavor and Fruit Addition
Fruit flavoring may be added in several different ways, either by means of a flavor
tank or by the use of a mixing pump. The flavor tank method involves pumping
yogurt into a tank and adding the yogurt fruit preparation on top. With this method,
an adequate agitator is necessary to properly blend the yogurt and the yogurt fruit.
After the product has been thoroughly blended, the yogurt is then pumped to
the filler.
With the mixing pump method, fruit flavoring material and yogurt are each
pumped separately and then mixed together as they both move toward the filler.
As with any fruit addition, keep in mind that the fruit needs to be completely
blended prior to reaching the filler, but over-agitation and excessive shear must be
avoided.
In many cases in Greek yogurt, 2–3% cream may be added back to the concen-
trated yogurt prior to adding flavor and fruit, dependent on the desired fat. This
added cream helps improve the mouthfeel to eliminate and reduce the “drying out”
of the tongue that is common with high-protein yogurts. It also helps with creamy
consistency, as well as flavor.
Drinkable yogurt, after breaking the white mass, is passed through a smoothing
device, cooled, and mixed with fruit and flavor. Many fruit preparations have a com-
bination of fruit, flavor, sweetener, and color added in as one blend. Amounts of
fruit/flavor with yogurt will depend upon the fruit flavor companies and the final
product requirements.
8.5.6 Packaging and Cooling
After the product smoothing and filling steps, the filled yogurt cups may be placed
into either a corrugated box or a tray, and then overwrapped with plastic film. These
packaged units will then be placed onto a pallet, which will soon be placed into the
cooler. Pallets with freshly filled yogurt should be positioned into a designated sec-
tion of the cooler, or specified pallet space where it will not be moved or disturbed
for a minimum of 18–24 h. After filling, the yogurt begins to re-knit and forms the
unique delicate texture that is important for the final body conformation or tactile
properties of the yogurt. If the yogurt is physically disturbed during this knitting
process, the end result(s) may be a weak body, syneresis on either the sides and/or
surface of the yogurt, and/or a nonhomogeneous appearance of the yogurt.
8.6 Yogurt Flavors
The preferred or top-selling yogurt flavors have not changed much in the past sev-
eral decades, especially with fruited, flavored, and yogurt drinks. Most of the yogurt
sold in the USA is packaged in 113-g (4 oz), 150-g (5.3 oz), 170-g (6 oz), and 910-g
(32 oz) containers. Some of the larger containers have changed in regard to the top
flavors, with strawberry usually at or near the top of the list. In the larger containers
sold (1815 g, 64 oz), vanilla or plain are the top sellers, followed by strawberry.
Most products are used for home culinary usage and in various food service areas.
The top flavors do not seem to change, regardless of the sweetener used.
The top ten flavors for stirred (Swiss) and fruit-on-the-bottom (FOB) yogurt,
ranked from most to least popular, are typically as follows:
Strawberry
Unflavored/plain
Vanilla
Blueberry
Peach, mixed berry/berry, raspberry, cherry, strawberry/banana, and coconut
Many additional yogurt flavors have been developed but are either a version of
the top ten or a combination of one of the above-listed flavors. It has also been a
trend to expand with indulgent flavors, such as honey, caramel, chocolate, and addi-
tional inclusions such as granola, nuts, and certain unique or heavier flavors to be
added to the yogurt. An interesting observation is that the top five flavors constitute
approximately 80% of all flavored yogurt sales.
The top flavors for drinkable yogurt are as follows:
Strawberry
Unflavored/plain
Strawberry banana
Berry, blueberry, mango, vanilla, piña colada, peach, and cotton candy
8 Yogurt 213
The top ten selling Greek yogurt flavors are as follows:

Unflavored/plain
Strawberry
Vanilla
Blueberry, peach, raspberry, berry, cherry, honey, and coconut
8.7 Yogurt Stabilizers
Stabilizer is a term commonly applied to describe an ingredient used to perform a

multitude of functions. Stabilizers generally serve to bind water, build viscosity,
contribute to creaminess, and protect against temperature abuse. Ingredients that are
normally used as components in yogurt stabilizers are starch, gelatin, guar gum,
locust bean gum, carrageenan, pectin, and xanthan gum. The particular makeup of
the stabilizer blend will depend on several of the following criteria: desired func-
tion, eating characteristics of the finished product, processing parameters, cost, stor-
age conditions and desired shelf life. Greek yogurt generally does not have stabilizer
added due to the protein level, smoothing process, and increased solids.
Starch Starch is the major carbohydrate reserve in plant tubers and seed endo-
sperm, where it is found as granules, each typically containing several million amy-
lopectin molecules accompanied by a much larger number of smaller amylose
molecules. The largest source of starch in the USA is corn (maize) with other com-
monly used sources being wheat, potato, tapioca, and rice. Amylopectin (without
amylose) can be isolated from “waxy” varieties of grains. Genetic modification of
starch crops has recently led to the development of starches with improved and tar-
geted functionality. Starch is versatile and inexpensive and has many uses as a thick-
ener, water binder, emulsion stabilizer, and gelling agent.
Gelatin Gelatin is one of the most versatile ingredients to be used as a yogurt sta-
bilizer. It is a protein that is derived from the partial hydrolysis of the skin, bones,
and connective tissue from cattle, pigs, and selective fish. The unique attribute of
gelatin is its ability to form a clear thermo-reversible gel with a melting point close
to the human body temperature. For this reason, it works very well in pre-stirred
yogurt. Gelatin will contribute to water-holding capacity in pre-stirred yogurt. If it
used excessively, products will develop a short texture and have the potential for
syneresis. It is extremely important to heat the product to 60 °C (140 °F) for com-
plete hydration. Gelatin will start to solidify and become a solid mass at a tempera-
ture of ~29 °C (85 °F).
Guar Gum (From Cyamopsis Tetragonolobus) Guar gum is a complex carbohy-

drate obtained from a legume. The guar plant is grown in the geographic regions of
India and Pakistan. The seedpod is harvested, and the seed coat and endosperm are
removed. The usable product component is then milled and sifted. The gum is read-
ily dispersible in cold solutions, has excellent water-holding capacity, and provides
good mouthfeel. Guar gum is relatively inexpensive. Excessive amounts of guar can
cause a slimy texture and a mouthfeel that is slick-like. Additionally, a distinctive
“beany” flavor may be attributed to high-usage levels. Guar gum that has not been
thoroughly cleaned in preparation stages can add undesirable dark-colored specks
to finished products.
Locust Bean Gum (Ceratonia siliqua) Locust bean gum (also called Carob bean
gum) is a galactomannan extracted from the seeds of the Carob tree (Ceratonia
siliqua). These trees are grown around the Mediterranean region, having a history
that predates Christ. It was used by the early Egyptians in the mummification pro-
cess and was also used as a standard weight measurement for gold and precious
gems. The term “carat” is derived from the Latin name Ceratonia. Locust bean gum
is an excellent stabilizer ingredient and, used at low levels, will impart a clean flavor
and creamy mouthfeel. Fluctuating prices and high demand are issues when consid-
ering this ingredient. Locust bean gum must be heated to 79 °C (175 °F) to properly
hydrate the gum prior to its use.
Pectin Pectin is a structural element in plant tissues. It is most commonly obtained

from the peels of citrus fruits such as lemon, lime, grapefruit, and orange. Pectin can
also be extracted from apple pomace and pressed sugar beet pulp. Pectin is derived
from the original source by initially being ground, then exposed to water and acid
extraction processes, followed by an alcohol-precipitation process. The pectin is
then dried, milled, and standardized. Pectin is considered by many as all natural
(though no standard of identity for “natural” exists as of the publication date of this
book) and is a popular ingredient in yogurt stabilizer. The use of pectin as an ingre-
dient in yogurt typically provides nice pudding-type consistency. The price is
dependent upon the particular weather patterns in the citrus-growing regions of the
world, especially in hurricane regions.
Xanthan Gum Xanthan gum is a high-molecular-weight polysaccharide gum, pro-

duced by a pure culture fermentation of a carbohydrate, by a bacterium called
Xanthomonas campestris. After fermentation, a sterilization step follows and the
sought-after component is precipitated with isopropyl alcohol, followed by centrif-
ugation, drying, and milling. Xanthan gum is soluble in cold water and is both
thixotropic and thermo-reversible. It is relatively shear and acid resistant, as well as
being freeze/thaw stable. It is used sparingly as an ingredient in yogurt stabilizers
since it has a tendency to cause graininess. It has a synergistic affect with other
gums such as guar and locust bean gums (Rahrs, 2005b).
Carrageenan Carrageenan is a natural product obtained from the pressing and

extraction of red or brown seaweed. The three main types of carrageenan are kappa,
iota, and lambda. During the extraction process, the seaweed is washed, filtered,
concentrated, precipitated with either potassium chloride or alcohol, then dried,
ground, and blended. Each of the three types of carrageenan produces different
8 Yogurt 215
structures. Kappa produces a rigid high-strength gel that is thermal reversible.

Kappa has the highest degree of milk reactivity. Iota carrageenans produce an elas-
tic gel that is also thermal reversible, have a high salt tolerance, and are thixotropic.
Iota carrageenan in the presence of calcium tends to gel and has low milk reactivity.
Lambda carrageenans are non-gelling, enhance viscosity, and have little to no milk
reactivity.
8.8 Procedures for Sensory Evaluation of Yogurt
The preparation for evaluating yogurt samples may be as critical as evaluating the
samples themselves.
8.8.1 The Space for Sensory Evaluation
Selecting the proper facility or location has an important effect in the way the sam-
ples are viewed. Make sure that proper attention is given to this objective.
It is important to select a room or area that has adequate natural lighting. The
enhancement of product colors and the range of color and appearance defects, when
using natural lighting without any shadows, is invaluable. It is also important to
select a location that is free of off-odors. Odors such as lab extraction smells, petro-
chemicals, ammonia, cleaning compounds such as chlorine, or sewer gas will affect
the evaluation.
8.8.2 Selecting Samples for Sensory Evaluation
Ongoing product review in yogurt plants occurs on a regular basis and should be
scheduled at a consistent time and location. Samples may be evaluated daily to
review the prior days production, and possibly end of shelf life or accelerated stor-
age products.
When determining who should attend the product review, it is suggested that
anyone who has direct contact with the process or product essentially resides in a
“pool” of potential participants, who have some level of interest and concern. The
processors who do the blending, processing, yogurt batch break, adding fruit, and
filling all should or need to be involved, as well as QA, R&D, and plant manage-
ment. In addition, sales and marketing representatives may want to be involved if
they reside in the general area. By reviewing the products, these people have a direct
responsibility and ownership in the product’s success. They will be able to see both
the good job that they are doing and areas or opportunities for improvement.
When setting up an evaluation process, it is important to decide if the purpose is

to evaluate the previous days’ production in order to determine whether the product
meets the requirements. Alternatively, the objective may be to review retained prod-
uct for the purpose of observing how the product holds up during shelf-life studies.
Regardless, samples need to be selected and placed in a safe location that is repre-
sentative of the conditions of the cooler or distribution process. Many processing
plants have a section of the cooler that is dedicated to samples only. This potentially
eliminates any issues with product being removed. Throughout the processing day,
samples need to be pulled routinely and labeled for time and date. These samples
then may be pulled in a series of different dates to review shelf life. It is common
that for each day of product review, samples from the previous day are reviewed as
well. Products in the middle of shelf life and at the end of shelf life should also be
reviewed. This process provides a good indication of how the product holds up dur-
ing a normal shelf life and will warn of possible issues that are noticed. Issues such
as flavor, color, or the beginning of a yeast or mold problem may be addressed
before the problem progresses to an “advanced stage.”
It is important to look at the product that has been retained in the cooler and the
product that has been through the distribution/marketing process. These samples
may be obtained by simply purchasing them at a local grocery store. These samples
are more representative of what the consumer will be purchasing, because they have
been subjected to temperature changes and handling issues. Many times there are
defects that show up when the product is shipped to a warehouse that are not noticed
in the samples kept in the plant cooler.
8.8.3 The Sensory Evaluation Process
When judging yogurt, it does not matter what type of yogurt is being reviewed −
Greek, stirred or Swiss style, or drinkable, yogurts are all evaluated under the same
criteria in regard to appearance and color, body and texture, and flavor.
When setting up the samples for review, examiners look first at the outside of the
container. They notice any smudges on the package, and whether the code date is
easy to read and in the proper place. The next step is to open the container without
disturbing the yogurt and view the top of the cup, particularly noticing any possible
mold or yeast growth, discoloration, or whey or watery liquid exudates. The observ-
ers also look around the sides of the cup for possible indications that the product
may have shrunken. Finally, the cup is tipped upside down on a plate and the cup
bottom is punctured. The cup is lifted off and the yogurt “mound” left on the plate.
Notice is made of any unusual aromas. A spatula or a knife is used to scrape out the
remainder of any yogurt in the cup bottom.
The precise time that the product is placed on the plate is noted. This is important
because yogurt will change in appearance as it warms up. Most visual changes
8 Yogurt 217
occur after it has been left at room temperature for more than 15 min. After the
yogurt has been placed on the plate, observers first notice the yogurt appearance on
the plate. For most yogurts, it should resemble a thick pudding with little to no
running.
Next, notice if there are color streaks or “color leaching,” or any unusual color of
the coagulum or fruit. There is a wide range of colors for yogurt, but generally, it is
most acceptable to have a color that is “true to the natural fruit.” If a blueberry
yogurt is being made, then the color should be similar to the color of a fresh blue-
berry, if a strawberry, then that of a fresh strawberry. If the yogurt color is very pale
or extremely dark, the product is characterized as “atypical color.” Otherwise, the
color variable is very wide.
A spoonful of yogurt is placed in the mouth, and notice of how the yogurt clings
or sticks to the tongue and sides of the mouth is made. Also, how fast the yogurt
dissipates off the tongue as it is being moved around the mouth determines if the
product is judged to be weak. If the yogurt is low in total solids, the yogurt and fla-
vor will dissipate; thus it is perceived to be weak. When the yogurt is rubbed on the
roof of the mouth, the desirable texture is smooth and not gritty. After noticing the
texture and mouthfeel, the first flavors and sensations perceived and where in the
mouth they are observed are recognized. One of the first sensations is the acidity of
the yogurt. The sensation is on the sides of the tongue. Sweetness is also one of the
first flavors perceived. It is noticed in the front and middle of the tongue. Sensing
too high an amount of acid and sweetness can cause these flavor notes to be over-
powering. Also noticed at the beginning of the tasting cycle may be strong off-
flavors like oxidized, atypical (foreign), old ingredient, unclean, and yeasty.
It is advisable to not swallow the yogurt but expectorate it (spit it out). Therefore,
the flavor will not stay in the mouth for a long time afterward. After the acid and
sweet sensations, the next flavors that are noticed are cooked, too high flavoring,
low flavoring, and some of the stabilizer flavors. Also noticed at this time are the
high-intensity sweeteners and different types of sweeteners such as acesulfame
potassium, aspartame, and sucralose.
Finally, at the end of the tasting cycle (after expectorating), some flavors that are
not associated with being the most pleasant are noticed. These include rancid, bitter,
old ingredient, lacks freshness, unnatural flavors, and acetaldehyde. Also noticed at
the end are some of the preservatives such as potassium sorbate and sodium benzo-
ate. These are noticed after spitting out the yogurt, and a burn is typically perceived
in the middle and back of the tongue.
8.8.4 Scorecards
Sensory evaluation is an invaluable tool that should be made a part of any quality
assurance program. The attributes chosen for routine evaluation and the scoring
system will vary based on the situation.
Fig. 8.1 Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest Swiss Style Yogurt scorecard. (Collegiate
Dairy Products Evaluation Contest, 2022)
One example of a scorecard (Fig. 8.1) and scoring system (Table 8.1) is the
Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Content scorecard for yogurt (Collegiate
Dairy Products Evaluation Contest, 2022). This example assigns a perfect score of
10 for flavor, 5 for body and texture, and 5 for color and appearance. Defects arising
from egregious manufacturing errors, such as rancid, old ingredient, or oxidized, or
from spoilage issues, such as unclean or yeasty, are assigned greater penalties than
less serious defects, such as low acid.
8.9 Sensory Defects in Yogurt
8.9.1 Appearance and Color Defects
Atypical Color Atypical color is when the color of the yogurt does not represent
the flavor of the named or labeled yogurt. For instance, a strawberry-flavored yogurt
should be a creamy-light red to pleasant pink color. If this color is either too dark,
or too light, or possibly the given yogurt has a different color all together, the
observed color is considered “atypical” for that flavor of yogurt (Figs. 8.2 and 8.3).
Atypical color is usually observed in those products that are labeled “all-natural,” or
8 Yogurt 219
Table 8.1 Proposed scores for strawberry yogurt

Flavor S D P
Bitter 9 7 5
Cooked 9 8 6
Foreign 8 7 6
High Acetaldehyde 9 7 5
High Acid 9 7 5
High Flavoring 9 8 7
High Intensity Sweeteners 9 7 5
High Sweetness 9 8 7
Lacks Fine Flavor 9 8 7
Lacks Freshness 8 7 6
Low Acid 9 8 6
Low Flavoring 9 8 7
Low Sweetness 9 8 7
Old Ingredient 7 5 3
Oxidized 6 4 1
Rancid 4 2 *
Unclean 6 4 1
Unnatural Flavor 8 6 4
Yeasty 6 4 2
Body/Texture
Gel-like 4 3 2
Grainy 4 3 2
Ropy 3 2 1
Too Firm 4 3 2
Weak 4 3 2
Appearance
Atypical Color 4 3 2
Color Leaching 4 3 2
Excess Fruit 4 3 2
Free Whey 4 3 2
Lacks Fruit 4 3 2
Lumpy 4 3 2
Shrunken 4 3 2
use lower quality fruits or flavorings, or colorants that are not stable under low-acid
conditions. It has also been observed that yogurts and yogurt fruit flavorings that
have been stored at improper temperatures may lose some of their sensitive pig-
ments. This is typically caused by an oxidation reaction of the fruit. At the 2023
National College Diary Product Judging Contest, The Coaches Committee met and
it was decided that the atypical color would no longer be judged or scored and the
term Atypical Color will be removed from the Appearance and Color section of the
Fig. 8.2 Strawberry yogurt exhibiting slight (left) and pronounced (right) atypical color (light).
The image on the right also lacks fruit (pronounced).
Fig. 8.3 Strawberry

yogurt exhibiting atypical
color (dark)
scorecard. The reason for the removal is that the colors that are used in in yogurt
have changed significantly over the years as the industry moves to a more natural
sources of colors. Determinining the difference between what yogurt color was
atypical and what was an acceptable strawberry color has become more difficult for
not only the judges but also the coaches.
Problem corrections involve the utilization of only high-quality fruit and fruit-based
materials that have acid-stable color, plus storage of yogurt and fruit flavorings
under proper temperature conditions.
8 Yogurt 221
Fig. 8.4 Color leaching in strawberry yogurt
Color Leaching This defect reflects a difference in color between the yogurt mass
and the added fruit. Color leaching commonly shows up as a ring or a halo effect
around pieces of fruit or berry (Fig. 8.4), which is caused by a difference in osmotic
pressure between the fruit piece and the yogurt mass. This pressure difference may
be the result of different sweeteners used: (1) in the fruit and (2) in the yogurt mass.
Color leaching can also be caused by using yogurt fruit that has an added color that
is not acid-stable, fruit that has had excessive color added, or by using a fruit source
that has not been properly stabilized.
Correction, or better control of the color-leaching issue, may be realized by com-
munication with fruit suppliers, confirming the final use of various fruit-based prod-
ucts, and confirmation that these flavor sources are properly stabilized for the
purpose of using them in cultured yogurt. Another option would be to substitute
some of the fructose used in the yogurt. This could possibly reduce osmotic pressure
differentials between the yogurt and the added fruit pieces.
Lacks Fruit This visual defect is either the result of an insufficient amount of fruit
added or usage of a poor-quality fruit that when a minimal amount of agitation is
applied to blend the fruit and yogurt mass together, the fruit simply breaks apart and
seems to disappear and leads to the impression of being insufficient (Fig. 8.5).
To best prevent or control the frequency of this defect, one needs to confirm that
the proper amount of fruit has been added. The use of higher-quality fruit that can
withstand minimum or typical amounts of agitation and avoidance of excessive
pumping and agitation can go a long way to minimize the “lacks fruit” defect
in yogurt.
Excess Fruit This yogurt appearance defect is usually provoked by excessive
quantities of fruit being added and mixed into the yogurt mass (Fig. 8.6), presum-
ably via improper calibration of metering devices. This costly situation and less-
than-optimal yogurt ingredient balance can usually be rectified by checking and
re-checking product-to-product formulation and calibration of pumps and metering
devices.
Fig. 8.5 Strawberry

yogurt exhibiting lacks
fruit defect
Fig. 8.6 Strawberry

yogurt exhibiting excess
fruit defect
Free Whey This is most noticeable by the translucent, greenish-yellow liquid on

the surface and around the sides of the cup of yogurt. It has many different causes,
such as (1) excessive agitation, especially above pH 4.7; (2) too low a pH because
of fast acid development; (3) disruption of the in-vat coagulum before the yogurt
was set; (4) heat shock of the yogurt; (5) subjecting the yogurt to extreme tempera-
ture conditions; and (6) freezing/thawing of the yogurt. Other possible causes for
wheying-off are improper pasteurization, homogenization, inadequate stabilization
(either too little or excessive), and rough handling of yogurt cups (Bodyfelt et al.,
1988; Lyck, 2004).
8 Yogurt 223
In determining a corrective action, it is a good idea to check all processing proce-

dures to ensure correct methods, times, and temperatures. Checking homogenization
efficiency is quick and accurate. Ascertain whether the homogenizer is working
properly and whether maintenance is necessary. Confirm thermometer accuracy, and
check pasteurization records to confirm that the yogurt base was treated to the proper
temperature to denature proteins. It is also advisable to check temperatures in cool-
ing areas as well as refrigerated transit trucks and trailers to confirm proper tempera-
tures are achieved and maintained. Finally, a critical point must be emphasized to
not disturb the curd while it is knitting together after the containers have been filled.
Lumpy This unpleasant appearance defect causes the yogurt mass to appear rough,
uneven, and nonhomogeneous (Fig. 8.7). It somewhat resembles the surface of cau-
liflower. Lumpy yogurt is unattractive although it may not affect the eating quality
of the yogurt. It is noticed after it has set-up and knit together as a smooth and uni-
form coagulum or custard-like light pudding. The subsequent development of the
lumpiness may be caused by (1) improper stabilization, (2) the use of too much
gelatin as a stabilizer, (3) inadequate agitation at the time the product is broken, (4)
not passing the product through a smoothing- device prior to adding the fruit flavor-
ing, (5) filling the yogurt at too high of a temperature (therefore the culture contin-
ues to grow), or (6) filling the cups of yogurt at an improper pH value or at too high
pH (incomplete, weak fermentation attained).
To minimize and eliminate the lumpy defect, determine that the proper amount
of stabilizer has been added to each yogurt mix. Consultation with stabilizer techni-
cal representatives may be advisable if yogurt lumpiness prevails. Cooling all yogurt
batches to 21 °C (70 °F) prior to packaging, allowing the finished yogurt adequate
time to agitate prior to filling, and the using a smoothing-device help eliminate
this issue.
Fig. 8.7 Slight (left) and pronounced (right) lumpy strawberry yogurt examples
Fig. 8.8 Strawberry yogurt samples with shrunken defect; the sample on the left does not exhibit
free whey, whereas the sample on the right has free whey in the gap between the yogurt and the cup
Shrunken This defect is characterized by the yogurt itself pulling away from the
side of the cup and leaving a gap, which usually fills in with free whey (Fig. 8.8).
Defect causes include heat shock (temperature abuse), too high acid production, too
high stabilizer usage or incorrect stabilizer used, or disruption of the yogurt mass
after filling and while the yogurt is knitting together.
8.9.2 Body and Texture Defects
Body and texture defects in yogurt are caused by many different factors, but quite
often, they may be prevented and/or minimized by following proper and recom-
mended yogurt manufacturing processes. Many of the defects are the result of
improper protocols and mishandling of ingredients and finished product. When
looking to correct any given defect, it is important to first identify the cause of the
defect and then apply the corrective action(s).
Following is a list of the most commonly found body and texture defects in
yogurt, their causes, and possible corrective action steps to eliminate or reduce the
problem. Some of the corrective actions are most obvious, while some may be more
difficult and complex. Many shortcomings may be corrected before they cause
problems in the yogurt. It is always important to screen all ingredients prior to pro-
cessing that are used in the yogurt. Firstly, tasting and smelling all the milk and
cream ingredients used is obviously the first critical step. Secondly, all dry ingredi-
ents such as whey, nonfat dry milk, stabilizers, and sugar should periodically be
smelled and tasted by making a 1:9 solution in either milk or water. Potentially
serious flavor defects may be detected if regularly scheduled tasting sessions occur.
The sugar storage tanks should be inspected for yeast and mold growth on a regular
8 Yogurt 225
basis. This is always a potential source of contamination to the finished yogurt and/
or potential off-flavors. At the 2023 National Collegiate Dairy Products Judging
Contest, the Coaches Committee met and agreed to add the term High Astringency
to the Body and Texture section of the scorecard. The scores will range from
Slight-4, Definate-3 and Pronounced-2. The need for adding High Astringency is
due to the large number of high protein or Greek yogurts that have entered the mar-
ket. This attribute is described as a mouth drying effect, similar to that of high tannin
wine. It also has gives a sensation of chalky mouth feeling and is caused by the acid
/ protein of the yogurt.
Gel Like/Too Firm This attribute has the appearance of formed gelatin in the cup
(or on the plate) and a very firm set (Fig. 8.9). It can also be noticed by pushing the
yogurt to the roof of one’s mouth and observing the extent of resistance. Yogurt with
the more ideal body characteristics (Fig. 8.10) should have little or moderate resis-
tance and should melt away very smoothly. Gel like or too firm can be caused by too
high stabilizer usage, or the wrong choice of stabilizer. It can also be caused by an
excessively high amount of milk or whey solids in the product base. To correct,
simply reduce the use of a specific stabilizer, the amount of total solids, or alterna-
tively contact the stabilizer technical representative to confirm proper usage and
incorporation of the best or correct stabilizer for the given yogurt mix formulation
(Lyck, 2004).
Weak This characteristic is observed within a finished product that appears “runny”
or too liquid-like or has little or no residence time on the tongue. When a spoonful
of yogurt is placed into the mouth, it should, for a short time, cling to or reside on
the tongue. If it does not, and the flavor dissipates rather rapidly, it is considered to
be a weak-bodied product. This defect is quite common with “no-fat- and/or no-
sugar-added” yogurts in which a nonnutritive sweetener has been used. It is simply
caused by a rather low amount of total solids in the formulation, but it can also be
caused by excessive heat treatment or types of agitation that breaks down the gel
Fig. 8.9 Strawberry

yogurt that has a gel-like
or too firm body and
appearance (to be
confirmed in the mouth)
Fig. 8.10 Strawberry

yogurt exhibiting an ideal
body and appearance
structure that was created by the stabilizer, culture and proteins, or combinations
thereof (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
Correcting this obvious defect requires adding more milk solids, which can add
to ingredient costs, or the manufacturer may need to consider an alternative stabi-
lizer (Lyck, 2004).
To correct this defect, first, try to identify and confirm what is causing the issue,
then implement heightened control to prevent this from happening. Make sure that
after the product is cup-filled and placed into the cooler, it is not moved until the
yogurt has a chance to knit together. Check thermometers to determine proper cali-
bration, and review batch sheets to confirm that proper formulation occurred
(Lyck, 2004).
Grainy This defect is associated with detection of small particles on the tongue
surface. It is an objectionable texture shortcoming that is quite noticeable and unap-
pealing. The defect causes are harder to determine because the occurrence of this
defect is typically an inconsistent event. Some of defect causes are heating the base
milk at too high a temperature, or increasing the temperature at a too rapid rate, such
that the protein precipitates out. Another cause is from too high and too rapid acid
development due to high fermentation temperature, agitation during acid develop-
ment, or improper mixing of the starter culture. Graininess may be reduced by rout-
ing the yogurt through a screening device prior to cup filling, since this eliminates
the small lumps of the coagulum (Lyck, 2004).
Ropy Ropy yogurt texture is detected by placing a spoon into a yogurt mass and
lifting the spoon for 5–13 cm (2–5 in.). If the observer readily views a trailing
stream (or stringiness) of yogurt between the spoon edge and the product container,
the product is considered “ropy” (Fig. 8.11). Ropy yogurt normally has a “slick”
mouthfeel. Such yogurt body is also often defined as slimy. Ropy-like body in
yogurt is usually the result of five different causes: (1) improper stabilizer or gums,
(2) microbial contamination, (3) use of yogurt cultures that contain polysaccharide-
8 Yogurt 227
Fig. 8.11 Yogurt

exhibiting a ropy defect
producing bacteria, (4) improper setting temperatures, and (5) too high sugar con-
tent in the product base (mix). If the “long texture” is being caused by contamination,
there is sometimes an associated offensive odor with the off-body incident.
To correct the negative attributes associated with ropy body/texture, one should
first check the calibration of the thermometers on the setting vat. Next confirm the
product formulation to ensure that proper amounts of each ingredient have been
added. Also check that any in-line filters or shearing devices designed to smooth the
texture are present and working properly. If these parameters seem acceptable, then
contact the stabilizer technical representative and the culture supplier to determine
future options or corrective actions. Also check the CIP-cleaning charts to deter-
mine that vats, lines, and all equipment are being cleaned and sanitized properly
(Lyck, 2004).
8.9.3 Flavor Defects
High Acetaldehyde Acetaldehyde is the chemical compound responsible for the

traditional green apple flavor produced by yogurt bacteria. This flavor note is a natu-
ral, always present flavor common to yogurts. It is noticed at the end or near the end
of the tasting sequence and typically lingers for some time. This flavor note is quite
similar to a green apple hard candy. A problem exists if a given yogurt exhibits too
high an amount of the acetaldehyde note for many consumers or “would-be” con-
sumers of yogurt. If the green apple flavor is clearly distinguished in combination
with other acidic flavors, it is presumed to be at too high a level.
There are quite a number of reasons for high levels of acetaldehyde in yogurt,
particularly in plain (non-flavored) yogurts. Some of these reasons are (1) improper
culture, (2) incorrect set temperature, (3) insufficiently low storage temperature, and
(4) the yogurt was broken at too high a pH (Tribby, 2001).
Bitter This yogurt defect is characterized by an offensive aftertaste that is sensed at
the back of the throat and at the end of the tasting sequence (i.e., delayed detection).
This defect is caused by the use of poor-quality or old milk that has been contami-
nated with psychrotrophic or spoilage bacteria or with certain starter cultures with
proteolytic activity. Bitterness can also be caused by poor-quality yogurt ingredi-
ents, such as NFDM powder, dry whey, and fruit flavorings, or by using starter
culture that is either old or contaminated. Another potential reason for bitter flavor
development is finished products being stored at too high a temperature (Bodyfelt
et al., 1988).
Using fresh, high-quality yogurt ingredients and milk suffices to eliminate many
potential points of contamination. A prime safeguard is to screen all incoming
ingredients and fruit, use a regular rotation of starter cultures, and to assure that
proper techniques are used when transferring cultures from the bulk tank, or trans-
ferring from the culture freezer to the culture tank.
Cooked A slight to moderate intensity of cooked flavor is considered a desirable
attribute by many yogurt producers, depending upon the relative intensity or sever-
ity. Cooked is typically perceived nearer the end of the tasting cycle at the top and
the back of the throat. Cooked may have an aroma like that of caramelized sugar, or
butterscotch; others are reminded of an eggy-like flavor sensation. Cooked notes are
usually caused by higher than optimum pasteurization temperatures and/or holding
times. Other dairy ingredients that have undergone severe heat treatments, such as
nonfat dry milk, condensed milk, or whey, may also be a cause of this type of flavor
note in yogurt. If large amounts of high-fructose corn syrup have been used as a
product sweetener, this may also provoke this defect. Fruit preparations that have a
jammy consistency and flavor, and are added at high levels, can also give the prod-
uct a cooked flavor. If the cooked flavor is at a level that is particularly noticeable or
overpowers the given yogurt flavor, then it is considered a defect.
Close monitoring of the pasteurization system can suffice to minimize or elimi-
nate the cooked defect; and careful screening of all incoming raw materials against
severely “heated” off-flavors is also most helpful.
Atypical (Foreign) An atypical, or foreign, flavor defect in most dairy products is
usually caused by the presence of an out-of-place aroma and/or an off-taste, remi-
niscent of residual cleaner, sanitizer, lubricant, or some other out-of-place material
within the processing system. Also, the use of excessive amounts of potassium sor-
8 Yogurt 229
bate as a mold inhibitor causes a foreign off-flavor. Many such atypical and objec-
tionable flavor off-notes are generally detected on the middle-backside of the tongue
recognized as either an off-taste or as an off-aroma or, in the case of potassium
sorbate, a burn on the middle of the tongue.
The serious aspect of the atypical (foreign) off-flavor is that QA and production
staff must prevent it from happening in the first place. All plant personnel have to be
absolutely sure that all tanks and lines have been properly rinsed and drained
prior to use.
Potassium sorbate is used to control yeast and mold in yogurt thereby extending
shelf life. Ways to eliminate this particular defect include (1) adding sorbate to
yogurt base directly, (2) requesting that the fruit supplier add potassium sorbate to
the fruit, (3) reducing or eliminating potassium sorbate, (4) switching to a different
mold inhibitor, or (5) using hepa-filtered fillers to eliminate spore contamination.
High Acid A certain amount of acid needs to be present in yogurt in order to coag-
ulate the proteins and form the coagulum typical of this product. If the acid level
becomes too high, the acid taste becomes too sharp, harsh, and/or offensive to a
majority of consumers. In addition, the intense acid taste masks the other flavor
notes of the yogurt. If the acid flavor is too low, the product will become flat tasting
and will seem too sweet and candy-like. It is important to have the correct balance
between sweet and sour. The defect of high acid is caused by many factors, such as
(1) improper set temperature, (2) too low a break pH, and (3) insufficient or slow
cooling after the yogurt, has been broken. It is noticed as a severe acid intensity on
the front and sides of the tongue, ranging from the beginning to the middle of the
tasting cycle. Certain yogurt cultures are also more acid tolerant and capable of acid
production during the first weeks of storage of the finished product.
In order to best control against development of the high-acid defect, first, it is
important to first check the calibration of the involved thermometers. Second, it is
important to monitor the cooling process and determine if the product is being
cooled properly. Other control strategies for limiting the high-acid off-flavor of
yogurt are as follows: (1) make certain that the yogurt is being broken at the proper
pH, (2) make certain that the correct yogurt cultures are being used or changed to
milder cultures, (3) check the formulation to confirm that the correct acid/sweetness
balance is achieved through the formulation, and (4) assure that the proper amount
of sugar is added either in the base or through the added fruit (Tribby, 2001).
Low Flavoring This is not necessarily a product defect, but may cause the given
yogurt to be perceived as not being of the highest quality. In some instances, the
low-flavoring defect is the result of poor-quality flavorings, or an improper amount
of flavor being added to the fruit or yogurt base. Checking to insure that the speci-
fied amounts of flavoring are being added and blended or changing the flavoring
system should solve the problem.
Lacks Fine Flavor This comment is used to describe yogurt that is generally a
good yogurt but is missing a key attribute that makes it a very good yogurt. It could
be product that may be to the end of the shelf life or product that may have had some
older fruit used to flavor the yogurt. When “lacks fine flavoring” is used, it usually
is given to yogurt that may have some other defects that are not advanced enough to
impart a negative flavor, but contribute slightly to bring down the overall quality of
the yogurt.
Lacks Freshness “Lacks freshness” describes product that has either a stale off-
flavor, a storage off-flavor, or is at or near the end of its shelf life. This unfavorable
flavor defect of yogurt is usually noticed at or near the end of the tasting sequence,
perhaps even after swallowing the product. Lacks freshness of yogurt may also be
the result of using old fruit, or some ingredient that has not been stored under proper
temperatures or conditions. Ingredients such as NFDM, whey, or stabilizers can and
will contribute to this off-flavor, if they have been subjected to high storage tem-
peratures and/or offensive smelling storage or transportation conditions.
It is important to screen all incoming ingredients for potential off-flavors prior to
their use in product formulation. The implementation of an aggressive ingredient
stock rotation program (with documentation) and adherence to ingredient shelf life
recommendations is an important prerequisite for consistently high-quality yogurt.
Low Sweetness This yogurt attribute (or defect) is generally associated with
improper formulation, and the result greatly impacts the eating quality of the yogurt.
It may also be caused by overheating the mix prior to inoculation or by use of an
improper blend of sweeteners. Several of the non-nutritive sweeteners are not as
heat-stable as sucrose or high-fructose corn sweetener, and therefore they may have
had some of their sweetening potency reduced during pasteurization. Also contrib-
uting to sweetness is the balance with the pH (or acidity level) of the final product.
If the acidity level of the finished product is too high, it will detract from or take
away the perception of sweetness in the finished yogurt.
Low Acid Inasmuch as yogurt is considered to be a cultured dairy product, and

hence should exhibit an acid taste, it is quite noticeable to the taster or consumer
when it lacks an “acid” profile. In yogurt manufacture, there are a number of causes
for a finished product to not have a sufficient amount of acid. Typically, low acid is
attributed to either too low a setting temperature, a poor-quality or inactive culture,
or breaking the fermentation prematurely. Yogurt culture “inactivity” can be caused
by the presence of inhibitor substances such as (1) residual cleaning compound or
sanitizers, (2) an antibiotic in the milk supply, or (3) it may be the result of bacterio-
phage attack on the starter culture. All of the aforementioned “inhibition incidents”
adversely affect the growth of the yogurt bacteria and prevent them from developing
the proper pH of the finished product.
For yogurt manufacturing plants, appropriate culture handling programs include
(1) comprehensive sanitation programs, (2) personnel training to maintain proper
GMPs, (3) a rotation program for the culture strains (established to neutralize bac-
teriophage lysis of cultures), and (4) routine calibration check of thermometers (to
8 Yogurt 231
assure that the proper culture incubation protocols are achieved). If slow vat sets
occur frequently, it is important to monitor culture freezer temperatures to ensure
that cultures are maintained at proper temperatures in order to assure culture activity.
Metallic The metallic defect has decreased in the last several decades due to the
elimination of metals other than stainless steel in dairy plant piping and equipment.
The earlier generation of softer and copper-bearing dairy metals triggered serious
and objectionable metallic off-flavors frequently. With the universal use of stainless
steel, metallic-type off-flavors are nearly a “defect of the past.”
Elimination or good control against the development of any metallic off-flavors
in yogurt milk and/or finished yogurt products requires the use of all stainless steel
equipment and utensils within all milk handling and transport throughout the plant.
Water supplies are another place to be on constant guard against the presence of
even moderate concentrations of divalent cations (Cu, Fe, and Mn). Depending
upon the given region of the country, many areas have hard water, which increases
the likelihood of having some unwanted minerals in the water. The presence of
these minerals can be controlled or eliminated by the use of either water treatment
and/or sanitary filters. Mineral additions to yogurt for nutrition reasons can be a
source of metallic flavors. Sensory screening of mineral fortifiers and dairy ingredi-
ents should suffice to identify any possible metallic off-flavors. In hard water areas,
regular scheduled checks of scale build-up on boiler pipes are an appropriate pre-
caution against metal ions being incorporated into the finished products
through steam.
Old Ingredient This defect may be one of the most offensive in yogurt or any dairy
product. It is described as a “dirty sock” or “dish rag” flavor, and usually is noticed
at the end of the tasting sequence. The flavor hangs around quite long after the prod-
uct is expectorated or swallowed and does not clean up very well. Either old or
outdated product or contamination from dirty equipment or ingredients frequently
causes this off-flavor. Processing milk that is older than 48 h (uncommon today) can
cause the old ingredient flavor defect. Using a yogurt starter culture that produces
only rather low amounts of acidity may also be a cause.
To prevent the old ingredient defect from occurring, all incoming ingredients
need to be flavor-screened prior to acceptance. Also, an ingredient rotation system
should prevent product from becoming old and out-of-code. Periodic inspections of
the CIP system to confirm that it is working properly is most helpful, as well as
conduct of examinations of equipment for cleanliness and sanitation.
Oxidized (Light-Activated) Oxidized yogurt is recognized by a distinctive “card-
boardy” or “burnt hair/burn feathers” odor and off-flavor that is caused by the prod-
ucts or ingredients being exposed to either ultraviolet light or direct sunlight. Severe
cases make the product unsaleable. This objectionable off-flavor usually is noticed
at the middle of the tasting cycle. Added vitamins, particularly vitamin C, can cause
a cardboard-like off-flavor when they oxidize in the product due to light oxidation.
Rancid This defect, if observed, may lead to the decision that the given yogurt is
unsaleable. It is noticed either by the characteristic aroma of hydrolytic rancidity or
by its unique off-taste, with bitter taste at the end of the tasting cycle in the back of
the throat. It also has an off-smell that resembles feta cheese. The mixing of pasteur-
ized and unpasteurized milk and cream causes hydrolytic rancidity. It may also be
caused by excessive mechanical agitation or freezing of raw milk. Holding raw
bases after ingredient-blending operations for extended periods of time prior to pas-
teurization (and inactivation of native milk lipase) will also cause this defect.
To prevent rancidity from occurring, it is extremely important to pasteurize all
milk and cream to inactivate the lipase enzyme and prevent all mixing of unpasteur-
ized milk and cream with product that has been homogenized. Eliminate as much
mechanical mixing of the product prior to pasteurization as possible.
High Flavoring This defect is the overwhelming flavor that is caused by the addi-
tion of too much of the individual fruit flavor base, or adding too much flavor itself.
It usually is picked up in the middle of the tasting experience and remains on the
tongue for an extended time after the yogurt has either been swallowed or
expectorated.
This defect can easily be remedied by either reducing the amount of fruit flavor
that is added or by asking the fruit supplier to reduce the amount of flavor that is in
the fruit. It is also a good idea to check and calibrate the pumps that are used to add
the fruit to the base to determine that they are in proper calibration.
High Sweetness This defect is usually the result of an unbalanced formulation that
contains either higher than normal amount of sweetener or a wrong acid sweetness
profile. It is noticed at the first start of the tasting process in the middle of the
tongue, and lasts until the tasting sequence is over.
The first remedy is to review the formulation to determine if the recipe was fol-
lowed properly. Second, if a blend of sugars is used, either high fructose or sucrose,
review should be done to make sure the proper ratio has been followed. Finally, if
there is not sufficient acid produced by the cultures, or by the fruit, the acid/sweet-
ness balance will not be proportional and the product will taste sweeter than normal.
A simple pH measurement will determine if the product pH meets the
specifications.
Unnatural Flavor An unnatural flavor defect refers to any detected flavor that is
not the listed flavor on the packaging label. An example would be if a product was
labeled “strawberry-flavored yogurt” and when the product was tasted, it instead
had a flavor more typical of raspberry, than of strawberry. This defect may also be
caused by the excessive use of flavor concentrates, poor-quality flavor concentrates,
or the use of poor-quality fruit that has been fortified with other flavors either natu-
ral or artificial that are not typical of the named flavor. Sometimes if the acid/sweet-
ness profile is not balanced, the product may have a different flavor profile than the
yogurt processor intended. Even human error may be involved in the cause for this
flavor defect. It is a common practice to push out the proceeding flavor on a produc-
tion line with the next flavor to be packaged. An example would be if the processor
8 Yogurt 233
is filling strawberry-flavored yogurt and the next flavor is raspberry. There will be
some mixing of products in the line, and it is up to the operators to ensure that this
mixed product is not packaged. If a miscalculation is made, there may be some
product that was filled under a different flavor.
Unclean This defect is characterized by a “dirty sock” flavor, and the mouth sim-
ply does not “clean-up” (the lingering unpleasant aftertaste remains). It is noticed at
the end of the tasting cycle and lingers in the mouth for an extended time. The defect
cause is usually the result of microbial contamination of the raw materials, the
yogurt cultures, or processing equipment. It is generally presumed that the causative
microbial agents are psychrotrophic bacteria (low temperature growing, Gram-
negative, spoilage bacteria).
The unclean defect may be an important indication that processing equipment is
not being cleaned and/or sanitized properly. Thorough inspection of the yogurt
making and filling equipment should be conducted. Proper screening of all incom-
ing ingredients should be conducted to determine if the problem may be caused by
product that is being added such as milk, cream, nonfat dry milk, whey, fruit, etc.
An inspection of how the starter culture is added to the yogurt vat should be con-
ducted to determine if any contamination occurs at this point due to poor aseptic
inoculation technique.
8.10 Conclusion
The ability to analyze dairy products is an invaluable tool that can have lasting ben-
efits to the dairy industry. To correct negative attributes in yogurt, the first step is to
identify the problem in order to understand the root cause. To look at the appear-
ance, feel the body of the yogurt in the mouth, and be able to identify the flavor
attributes, both positive and negative, is the best means to remedying the problem.
To become proficient in sensory evaluation can save a business time and money; it
is a valuable tool for anyone associated with yogurt manufacturing. With training,
patience, and practice, it can be mastered.
References
Andrews, T. (2000). Nectar and ambrosia: An encyclopedia of food in world mythology (p. 250).
Accessible online: https://foodtimeline.org/foodfaq2.html. Accessed 21 Aug 2006.
Berry, D. (2004, February). Most popular yogurt flavors. Dairy Field.
Nostrand Reinhold.
Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest. (2022). Yogurt scorecard. Accessible online: https://
dairyproductscontest.org/coaches_corner/. Accessed 28 June 2022.
Dannon. (2007). The Dannon Company. Accessible online: http://www.dannon.com/about_com-
pany.aspx. Accessed 12 Dec 2007.
General Mills. (2007). Our story: Columbo yogurt. Accessible online: http://www.colomboyogurt.
com/ourStory.asp. Accessed 12 Dec 2007.
Gibson, G. (2001). Bifido bacteria. Food Microbial Sciences Unit, School of Food Biosciences,
The University of Reading.
Kosikowski, F., & Mistry, V. (1997). Cheese and fermented milk foods. Volume I: Origins and
principles. F.V. Kosikowski and Sons, L.L.C.
Lyck, S. (2004). Troubleshooting in fermented milk products. Danisco USA Brochure.
Mariani, J. F. (1999). Encyclopedia of American food and drink (p. 355). Lebhar-Freidman.
Accessible online: http://www.foodtimeline.org/foodfaq2.html. Accessed 27 Aug 2006.
Olsen, S. (2002). Danisco A/S, Microstructure and rheological properties of yogurt, IDF Seminar.
Rahrs, V. E. (2005a). Danisco A/S, Technical Memorandum L. acidophilus NCFM-A probiotic
with proven efficiency.
Rahrs V. E. (2005b). Danisco A/S, Technical Memorandum, Introduction to Xanthan Gum.
Tribby, D. (2001). Flavor criticisms, causes and corrective action for cultured dairy products
(p. 3). Penn State University Cultured Products Short Course.
United States Food & Drug Administration (USFDA) Code of Federal Regulations. (2020). Title
21-Food and drugs. Part 131. Sec. 131.200. Yogurt. Accessible at: https://www.accessdata.fda.
gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=131.200. Date accessed 25 Feb 2021.
University of Guelph Dairy Science and Technology. (2007). Yogurt and other fermented milk
products. Accessible online: http://www.foodscil.uoguelph.ca/dairyedu/yogurt.html. Accessed
21 Aug 2006.
Chapter 9
Cheddar and Cheddar-Type Cheeses
Stephanie Clark
9.1 Introduction to Cheddar Cheese
Cheddar cheese is generally classified as a hard, internally ripened cheese and is the
most widely recognized and produced member of a group of cheeses often called
“Cheddar-type.” Until 2002, Cheddar was the most plentifully available cheese in
the USA. Commodity data from the US Department of Agriculture Economic
Research Service show that per capita consumption of Cheddar cheese increased
from 5.8 pounds in 1970 to 10.6 in 1987, fluctuated between 9.0 and 10.4 through
2019. Per capita consumption topped out in 2017, at 11.1, and dropped back to
10.1 in 2019 (USDA ERS, 2020). The burgeoning pizza market has led to the emer-
gence of mozzarella cheese as a contender for the honor of most available cheese.
During that same period, the per capita consumption of mozzarella has steadily
risen from 1.2 pounds in 1970 to 10.0 in 2005 and 12.5 papc in 2019. However, the
rapid rise of mozzarella does not diminish the importance of Cheddar cheese, which
continues to be strong as a stand-alone product and as an important ingredient for
the food industry.
The variations in processes and techniques involved in making cheeses within
the Cheddar-type group result in relatively small differences in cheese characteris-
tics when placed in the context of all cheeses. Therefore, Cheddar cheese grading is
the primary focal point for discussion in this chapter. An outline of the proper
This chapter is the result of careful work by previous authors of Judging Dairy Products (Nelson
& Trout, 1934, 1948, 1951, 1964) and The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products (Bodyfelt et al.,
1988; Partridge, 2009), with addition of new materials, deletion of redundancies, and a rearrange-
ment of content.
S. Clark (*)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_9
236 S. Clark
sequence of procedures for grading will be followed by a section defining defects

and attributes in detail. The use of the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest
(CDPEC) Cheddar cheese scorecard for the training of students to evaluate body
and texture and flavor characteristics will be woven into the general topic of grading.
9.2 Essential Steps of Cheddar Cheese Making
The US government Code of Federal Regulations (CFR Title 21, Part 133.113; US
FDA, 2022) defines Cheddar cheese as cheese made by the Cheddar process or by
another procedure that produces a finished cheese having the same physical and
chemical properties as that produced by the previously described Cheddar process.
This cheese is generally made from cow’s milk (but milk from goats, sheep or mixed
milk is common), with or without the addition of coloring matter (usually annatto
bean extract). Common salt (NaCl) is typically added.
The traditional method of converting of milk into Cheddar cheese can be divided
into nine essential steps:
1. Preparation of milk. Although raw milk may be used if the cheese is aged at
>1.7 °C (35 °F) for >60 days prior to sale, cheese milk preparation generally
includes pasteurization or thermization. Thermization is a sub-pasteurization
heat treatment that reduces bacterial numbers yet retains some indigenous
enzyme activity and requires >60 days of cheese aging at >1.7 °C (35 °F) because
it is classified as a raw milk cheese. Following heat treatment, the milk is adjusted
to the setting temperature of 30–31.1 °C (86–88 °F).
2. Ripening of milk. The first addition to the tempered milk in the vat is the appro-
priate starter culture, followed by the addition of colorant, if used. The starter
culture produces the required lactic acid as well as a variety of metabolic
enzymes. Often times, adjunct cultures are added along with the primary lactic
starter culture to provide unique flavor characteristics and/or to accelerate
ripening.
3. Setting and cutting the curd. Following 30–60 min of ripening, rennet or another
coagulating enzyme is added to induce the formation of the milk gel within
25–35 min. The milk gel (coagulum) is then cut into individual curds using
appropriate cheese knives (harps), with wires placed approximately 0.65 to 1 cm
(1/4 to 1/2 in) apart.
4. Cooking the curds. The curds are allowed to heal for 5–15 min, followed by
gentle agitation as the whey syneresis begins, and the individual curds develop a
cohesive body and texture. The milk temperature is simultaneously raised with
constant agitation to the final cooking (scalding) temperature of 37.8–40.0 °C
(100–104 °F) within 30 min, followed by an agitated cooking time that varies
with the target characteristics of the cheese.
5. Cheddaring. In the traditional Cheddaring stage, whey is drained from the curds,
which are allowed to bind together, thus forming mats of curd. The mats are
subsequently cut into loaves. Loaves are typically flipped and stacked, approxi-
9 Cheddar and Cheddar-Type Cheeses 237
mately every 15 min and maintained at appropriate temperatures to allow pro-

duction of additional lactic acid for modification of curd body and texture. The
Cheddaring stage is also an important process step for control of the final mois-
ture content of the finished cheese.
6. Milling. When the appropriate body and texture and a target acidity have devel-
oped, the curd mats are milled into approximately 2 × 2 × 5-cm (¾ × ¾ × 2 in)-
sized curds. Optional substitution for steps 5 and 6. The make procedures may
be modified to eliminate the Cheddaring step (for a stirred curd process) and/or
to add a wash step (water is added to the vat after partial whey removal, to reduce
the lactose available for fermentation).
7. Salting. Salt is added to the properly acidified curd to slow cultures and to help
with moisture control, as well as flavor, body, and texture development of the
finished cheese.
8. Molding. After mixing of the salt and curd, the curd is placed in the mold, which
gives the cheese the desired shape. Traditionally, curd is pressed in the mold for
about 18 h; however, modern, continuous pressing systems shorten the time
required. Proper handling of the curd in the molding process will help provide
the desired close-knit texture characteristic of Cheddar cheese.
9. Packaging and curing. After extraction of the cheese from the mold, one of sev-
eral types of coating or packaging materials may be applied to the block as a
barrier to oxygen and water, including the option for a natural rind (bandaging,
larding, cave aging; Fig. 9.1). Such barriers (except natural rind) have the poten-
tial for growth of molds and prevent drying. The Cheddar cheeses are then placed
in the aging facility for development of flavor and body and texture. The enzyme
activity from rennet and cultures is responsible for the catabolism of cheese curd
components resulting in the development of flavor components and body and
texture changes.
Fig. 9.1 Vacuum-sealed, rindless Cheddar cheese (left) and muslin bandage-wrapped Cheddar
cheese (right). (S. Clark images)
238 S. Clark
Table 9.1 Code of Federal Regulations for Cheddar-type cheeses (US FDA, 2022)
CFR, Title 21,
Cheese variety Paragraph
Cheddar/Cheddar for manufacturing/low-sodium Cheddar cheese 133.113/114/116
Colby/Colby cheese for manufacturing/low-sodium Colby cheese 133.118/119/121
Washed curd and soaked curd cheese/washed curd cheese for 133.136/137
manufacturing
Granular and stirred curd/granular cheese for manufacturing 133.144/145
Monterey and Monterey Jack/high-moisture Jack cheese 133.153/154
Numerous variations and subroutines within each of these general steps make pos-
sible the varieties included in the Cheddar-type cheese family. Definitions for
Cheddar and similar cheese types may be found in the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), Title 21, Part 133 (US FDA, 2022) (Table 9.1).
All of the varieties listed in Table 9.1 require a minimum milk fat content of at
least 50% by weight of the solids. Given a constant milk fat-to-casein ratio, the
hardness of a given cheese is a function of moisture content. The maximum mois-
ture content on a weight basis is 39% for Cheddar and granular/stirred; 40% for
Colby; 42% for washed/soaked; and 44% for Monterey/Monterey Jack cheeses.
Moisture content and acidity are regarded as the two most important factors in
the control of cheese properties. Generally, a firm, low-moisture cheese will result
in a slower rate of ripening, more selective microflora activity, milder flavor, longer
product keeping quality, and a cheese more suited for additional aging or maturing.
The salt content, the relative amounts of milkfat above the minimum require-
ment, and chemical changes that result from the controlled growth of starter and
adjunct microorganisms and associated enzymatic activity during manufacturing
and ripening processes will also help determine the sensory characteristics of the
cheeses between and within varieties. The addition of proteolytic and lipolytic
enzymes to the cheese milk before pressing can also modify the sensory character-
istics of the cheese. Hence, a combination of factors is responsible for yielding the
variety within the Cheddar-type classification.
9.3 Composition and Nutritive Value
In cheesemaking, marked changes in composition of the original cheese milk occur

at two distinct stages: (1) during separation of the curd from whey and (2) during
cheese ripening. Nearly all water-insoluble and some water-soluble components are
retained in the curd. For Cheddar-type cheese, protein, fat, calcium, phosphorus,
and vitamin A are concentrated approximately eight- to tenfold compared to the
amounts of these constituents found in milk. Most of the water-soluble components,
including the water-dispersible whey proteins, are “lost” to the whey. As a result,
lactose, whey proteins, and water-soluble salts are not appreciably retained by the
curd, and thus, are present only in small quantities associated with the relatively
small amount of moisture (whey) retained in the cheese curd. When using cheese
milk concentrated by membrane processing, more of the whey proteins are incorpo-
rated into the cheese curd, improving the nutrient profile and yield (Iyer &
Lelievre, 1987).
Cheese curd retains the most important nutrients of milk. Most notable are the
nutritionally complete protein, casein, calcium, phosphorus, and vitamin A. Cheese
is considered to be one of nature’s most versatile foods, being simultaneously nutri-
tious and readily digested (Miller et al., 2000).
Some Cheddar cheese is referred to as “full-cream cheese” because it is made
from whole milk (~4.0% fat). However, most Cheddar cheese is manufactured from
standardized milk, wherein the relative fat and casein proportions are adjusted, usu-
ally by adjusting the milk fat content of the cheese milk to approximately 3.8%, thus
maintaining a constant casein:milk fat ratio. To produce 1 lb (0.45 kg) of Cheddar
cheese requires approximately 10 lb (4.54 kg) of whole milk (almost 5 qt). Nearly
one-half of the total solids of whole milk remain in the cheese curd, including about
75% of the milk protein. The milk fat content of Cheddar cheese is about 31–35%
of the total weight (>50% of dry matter). Cheddar cheeses meeting the labeling
requirements of reduced (25% reduction in fat), low-fat (3 g of fat or less in a refer-
ence serving of 28 g), or nonfat (0.5 g of fat or less in a reference serving of 28 g)
are available and present many challenges to the cheesemaker due to toughening of
the cheese structure and reduction in flavor development.
Cheddar-type cheeses may be made from milk of other sources, such as goats or
sheep, and will have different sensory characteristics as a consequence of differ-
ences in milk fat and protein composition for each lactating species (refer to
Chap. 18).
9.4 Degree of Ripening
Much of the Cheddar cheese made from pasteurized milk is marketed shortly after
manufacture (≤ 90 days) as a mild cheese or for use in producing processed cheese
(Chap. 12). Historically, the ripening or curing of Cheddar cheese to develop char-
acteristic Cheddar cheese flavor is a slow, complex, bacteriological, chemical, and
enzymatic process that requires months, and sometimes years, for extra-sharp
cheese flavor. Consequently, Cheddar may be found on the market in various stages
of ripeness, or aging. For best results, cheese ripening requires carefully controlled
temperature and humidity.
Although not legally defined, unripened Cheddar cheese is often referred to as
“fresh,” “current,” or “green” cheese. Cheese at this stage is characterized as having
a flat or weak flavor (compared to a medium or sharp cheese) and a relatively tough,
curdy, or corky body. Good-quality Cheddar cheese that has been properly cured for
at least 3 months or longer has a moderate, slightly nutty, “Cheddar” flavor and is
generally referred to as a “young” or “mild” cheese. At 6–8 months of age, more of
240 S. Clark
Table 9.2 Generala Cheddar cheese classifications based on the extent of ripening
Classification Aging time
Mild 2–3 months
Medium or mellow 4–7 months
Sharp or aged 8–12 months
Extra-sharp Over 1 year
a
These are typical aging times for traditionally manufactured Cheddar and may vary slightly
among cheese manufacturers. Modern accelerated ripening techniques significantly shorten this
timetable
the distinct, aromatic Cheddar flavor should be evident; such cheese is considered
as “semi-” or “medium-aged.” Generally, a year or longer is required to develop the
fully aromatic or robust Cheddar cheese flavor desired in an “aged,” “sharp,” or
“matured” cheese. “Extra-sharp” Cheddar cheese is usually aged in excess of
1.5–2 years (Table 9.2).
The grading of cheese and assignment of extent of ripening designation for label-
ing is dependent on the organization doing the grading. If the USDA is the con-
tracted grading entity, the grader will designate the cheeses as either fresh/current,
medium, or cured/aged. However, outside of USDA grading practices, the assign-
ment of extent of ripening designations is entirely up to the organization with the
final approval on the label. Graders may be employed by the manufacturer, formula-
tors, brokers, or the wholesale buyers.
Whether the flavor of Cheddar cheese is mild or pronounced does not depend
exclusively on the aging process. The quality of the milk, the bacteriological and
chemical control in manufacture, moisture, salt content, and the temperature and
method of curing have much to do with the nature and intensity of flavor in the final
product. The development of typical Cheddar cheese flavor is highly dependent on
age, and it is generally advisable not to evaluate cheeses of various ages within the
same class. In educational cheese clinics, exhibits, and/or contests where Cheddar
cheese is to compete for awards, the cheese should be entered into different age
classes or categories. Young (mild) cheese (under 4 months old), semi-aged
(medium) cheese (from 4 to 8 months old), and aged (sharp) cheese (over 8 (or 12)
months old) are logical age classifications. Rindless and natural rinded cheeses may
also be judged in separate classes.
The use of “accelerated” ripening techniques such as added enzymes, adjunct
cultures, and elevated temperature has resulted in many if not most cheeses meeting
the sensory equivalent of “sharp” flavor in as little as 6 months. Cheeses that are the
product of accelerated ripening are not good candidates for the traditional timeline
displayed in Table 9.2, but should be judged by the same set of standards as any
Cheddar cheese. The acceleration of ripening will accelerate the development of
sensory defects as well as proper character; therefore, milk quality, make proce-
dures, and ripening regime must be followed with great care.
9.5 Form and Style
As market demands are identified, Cheddar cheese may be made in several sizes,
forms, or shapes, which are generally called styles. Usually, a judge will not be
concerned with cheese style, except to remember that large-sized cheeses are not as
prone to drying out as smaller ones; this may slightly affect the texture and flavor of
cured cheese.
The Cheddar cheese industry has developed a multiplicity of small sizes and
shapes (Fig. 9.2), but it has also recently produced larger, more utilitarian sizes of
cheese, as well. The rindless 40-lb block, 640-lb (291 kg) block, and 500-pound
(227 kg) barrel cheeses have evolved as the predominant forms and sizes in contem-
porary cheese manufacture for reasons of economy, ease of handling, and warehousing.
A “mammoth” is a large, oversized, attention-arresting Cheddar cheese. Such
cheeses are formed for the express purpose of display, advertising, and a focus of
interest for special occasions, such as the opening of a new supermarket or advent
of a festival that features cheese or dairy products. The size of a mammoth cheese
generally varies from 300 to 13,000 lbs. For many years, the largest cheese on
record was the 22,000-pounder made in Ontario, Canada, and exhibited at the
Columbian Exposition, Chicago, 1893. However, this one was exceeded by the
34,591-pound Wisconsin Cheese Foundation giant displayed at the 1964 New York
World’s Fair, followed in 1988 by a 40,060-pound Cheddar named “Belle of
Wisconsin,” and finally in 1996 by a 57,518-pound turned out by Agropur of Granby,
Quebec. Usually, these mammoths have excellent flavor and body and texture qual-
ity since the curd tends to cure quite well in a large cheese. In fact, since so much
value is at stake, every precaution must be taken, from the selection of milk and curd
handling to careful control of curing for such a cheese to be acceptable.
Fig. 9.2 Examples of some of the hoops or molds used to form various shapes and sizes of
Cheddar and related cheeses. (Bodyfelt et al., 1988)
242 S. Clark
9.6 Grading of Cheddar Cheese
The practice of “grading” is used to evaluate the potential use and relative value of
a cheese as it enters the channels of commerce leading to the consumer. Grading
may tell the manufacturer that the cheese in question is suitable for extended ripen-
ing or must be moved quickly as young cheese for further processing. The term
“judging” is generally reserved for competitions, but the judge uses the same crite-
rion as the grader as appropriate to the contest.
Much can be learned about the quality of a given cheese by its appearance. By
careful observation of the external appearance, and the internal body, texture, and
color characteristics of a cheese, an experienced judge can often place a given
cheese into a quality classification without actually tasting it.
The “ideal” Cheddar cheese should have (1) a clean, delicate, pleasing aroma
and, when cured, a nutty flavor; (2) a firm and springy body, showing smoothness
and waxiness (if cured) when worked between the thumb and fingers, and slight
curdiness if fresh; (3) a texture that reveals a smoothbore or closed appearance (few
or no openings); (4) uniform, translucent color, whether colored or uncolored (when
fresh, it may be slightly seamy); and (5) a smooth finish that is clean, well-shaped,
uniform in dimensions and overall size, with a complete, airtight package, and
mold free.
9.6.1 Federal Grading of Cheddar Cheese
The US Cheddar cheese sold in central markets, or on contract, is usually sold on

the basis of government grade. If sold on contract, the cheese age and style of pack-
age are generally specified. Such cheese is generally graded according to Federal
standards by a USDA grader; the cheese price is determined primarily on the “basis
of sensory quality.” Generally, a college student who has mastered the evaluation of
Cheddar cheese by the scorecard system can, after a short apprenticeship with a
Federal grader, become proficient in grading cheese according to Federal standards.
The Dairy Grading Branch of the Dairy Programs Division, Agricultural
Marketing Service of the USDA, recognizes four grades of Cheddar cheese. The
nomenclature for these grades is as follows: (1) US Grade AA; (2) US Grade A; (3)
US Grade B; and (4) US Grade C. Cheeses within Grades are also assigned one of
three degrees of curing: (1) fresh or current, (2) medium, or (3) cured or aged.
Detailed descriptions of the quality grades and US Standards for grades of Cheddar
cheese as well as Colby, Monterey (Monterey Jack), and bulk American cheese may
be found on the USDA AMS website (USDA AMS, 2022).
9.7 Sequence of Cheddar Cheese Grading Procedures
Following a logical and repeatable set of procedures for the grading of Cheddar and
Cheddar-type cheeses will allow the grader/judge to become more proficient and
efficient. This section provides a summary of the appropriate procedures for grading
and introduces the several example scorecards. The following section describes the
defects/attributes of Cheddar cheese in more detail.
9.7.1 Preparation for Evaluation
Appropriate facilities for cheese tempering, sampling, proper disposal of waste

cheese, and cleaning of sampling equipment should be provided for evaluators. The
facility should be well lit and air conditioned (approximately 65–68 °F) to ensure
cheese is neither too warm nor too cold during evaluation. Evaluators should dress
in layers, prioritizing cheese quality over comfort. Prior to sampling, one’s hands
should be washed and dried, since they directly contact exposed cheese surfaces. As
soon as the cheese samples to be evaluated are arranged in order and numbered or
coded for proper identification, the sensory evaluation process may begin.
Before evaluation, cheese samples should be tempered at l0–15.5 °C (50–60 °F)
for a sufficient length of time to ensure a uniform temperature throughout the
cheese. This usually requires 1–2 h for the smaller styles (≤5 lb) and 3–5 h for larger
ones. Generally, a cheese plug taken from a warm (over tempered) cheese appears
weak bodied; by contrast, a cold plug may appear short or corky. Actual body and
texture characteristics cannot be determined readily unless cheese samples are prop-
erly tempered before evaluation. Flavor and flavor defects can also be more readily
assessed at a warmer temperature.
9.7.2 Evaluation of Surface Appearance
The first procedure in grading Cheddar cheese is visual examination of surface fin-
ish or packaging material. The judge should note whether the sample appearance is
generally clean, neat, attractive, and symmetrical, or whether the surfaces might be
uneven, nonparallel, or rounded. Next, the evaluator should look more closely at the
surfaces and observe whether the coating of plastic film (or paraffin) or wax or ban-
dage is smooth and free from holes, tears, or wrinkles. Finally, the judge should
undertake a close examination of the surface for mold growth; a mental record of all
observations of the sample appearance should be made.
Obviously, this technique of evaluating appearance cannot be followed entirely
when cheese is encased in opaque wrappers. Laminated paper-Pliofilm or foil wrap-
pers serve to obscure the cheese from the critical eye of the judge. About the only
244 S. Clark
recourse the evaluator has in noting the appearance of such cheese is to note the
cleanliness of the wrapper, the evenness and tightness of adherence, and freedom
from breaks and tears.
9.7.3 Sampling
Cheese samples are usually obtained with a double-edged, curved-blade instrument

known as a cheese trier (Fig. 9.3). For best service, the edges of a cheese trier need
to be sharp. A trier that cuts a larger plug has an advantage over one of a smaller
diameter since the extent of “openness” and possible color defects are easier to
detect with a larger plug. A cheese trier with a 127-mm (5-in) cutting edge, 15.8 mm
(5/8 in) diameter at the base (top), and 14.3 mm (9/16 in) diameter at the tip is
recommended.
The trier should be inserted into the top surface of the cheese, preferably about
halfway between the center and the outer edge of the cheese sample. After insertion,
the trier should be turned one-half way around to cut a sample core. The plug is
withdrawn, by twisting and lifting, simultaneously. The process produces a long
tapered cylinder of cheese (Fig. 9.4). The back (warm) surface of the cheese trier,
with the freshly drawn plug in place, should immediately be smelled to detect any
volatile aroma components while at their strongest concentration. The upper
2.54 cm (1 in) of the cheese plug may be broken off and replaced, flush with the
surface of the original hole, though this practice is not always followed (Fig. 9.5).
This partially protects the cheese from developing mold contamination and retards
drying and cracking of the cheese surface surrounding the hole. Various wax-like
polymers of plastic or gels have been developed to seal trier holes to restrict the
access of oxygen to the center of the cheese.
Fig. 9.3 Cheese triers of various sizes

Fig. 9.4 Removing a cheese plug from a 5-lb block of Cheddar with a 127-mm (5-in) trier.
(Stephanie Clark images)
Fig. 9.5 Students in the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest try samples of Cheddar
cheese. (S. Clark image)
246 S. Clark
The evaluator should carefully examine the cheese plug and note whether the
plug has a clean-cut surface (with no loose particles) or whether it is rough (with a
feather-like edge as though the cheese had been cut with a dull knife). The evaluator
should make a mental note of these observations as anything less than a clean waxy
cut may be an indicator of defects such as short body and acid flavor. To remove the
plug from the trier while maintaining its shape, apply moderate pressure to the top
of the plug with the thumb of the hand holding the handle. Then, from the top,
loosen the plug from the trier by gently grasping and twisting with the thumb and
fingers of the free hand.
9.7.4 Evaluation of Color
The evaluator should observe the color of the cheese and determine whether the
appearance is bright and clear or dull and lifeless. The cheese should be free from
mottled or light and dark portions, curd seams, or faded areas surrounding any
mechanical openings. The cheese judge should re-examine the plug and observe
whether the cheese appears to be (1) translucent, which is desirable, or (2) opaque
(difficult for the eyes to observe beyond the surface), which is undesirable. The
evaluator should especially note whether the color is uniform throughout the sam-
ple. In quality evaluation, color uniformity is generally more important than the
shade of color. Some cheese consumers prefer an uncolored product (no added
annatto coloring). Uncolored (or lightly colored cheese) generally results in a light
cream shade (sample 7 in Fig. 9.6); this depends on the milk fat and/or carotene
content of the cheese milk. Other groups of consumers seem to prefer an intense
deep-orange color for Cheddar cheese (sample 5 in Fig. 9.6). A good judge will note
any defects in color that may be an indicator of defects in flavor or body and texture.
Fig. 9.6 Plugs of Cheddar cheese are placed in glass test tubes for evaluation by student contes-
tants in the CDPEC. (S. Clark images)
9.7.5 Evaluation of Body and Texture
The judge should observe the nature and extent of the mechanical (open) or gassy
defects in the cheese plug. Although visual, these defects are considered body and
texture defects. In the CDPEC, a single plug is drawn by the lead judge and is placed
in a glass test tube, capped, and taped to the table, so all student contestants may
observe the same plug (Fig. 9.6). The shape or configuration of openings or gas
holes should be examined closely to see whether they are regular, angular, rounded,
large, and/or small. For the purposes of the CDPEC, the defects variously identified
by USDA graders as either “pinny, sweet holes, gassy and slitty” are all scored as
the “gassy” defect. The luster or sheen of the inner surfaces of these openings and
whether the surfaces appear dry (preferable) or wet are helpful observations. Free
moisture within these openings is sometimes indicative of certain flavor defects
(i.e., whey taint, unclean) or potential quality shortcomings. See Fig. 9.7 for exam-
ples of gassy and open defects.
After the visual assessment, evaluators should take the ends of the cheese plug
by the forefingers and thumbs of both hands and bend the plug slowly into a semi-
circle, while carefully observing when the sample breaks, as well as the nature of
the break. A cheese plug that bends into approximately one-third to one-half of a
full circle before breaking apart demonstrates the preferred plasticity. Generally, if
the plug shows a definite resistance toward any bending and finally breaks abruptly,
a “short” defect is noted (Fig. 9.8); if the plug bends until the plug ends nearly touch
(if it breaks apart at all), a “weak” defect is noted.
Next, the judge should take one of the broken pieces of cheese between the
thumb and the forefingers and attempt to manipulate it into a uniform mass. The
relative resistance (or lack of resistance) offered by the cheese to applied pressure
from the thumb and fingers should be ascertained. A common procedure is to work
Fig. 9.7 Gassy (left) and open (right) defects evident in sliced cheese. (S. Clark images)
248 S. Clark
Fig. 9.8 A comparison of a “ideal”-bodied (a) and a “short”-bodied (b) Cheddar cheese. (Bodyfelt
et al., 1988)
the piece of cheese by compressing to about half its original diameter, twisting and
pressing the elongated portion to about half of its diameter, and repeating this pro-
cess 12–15 times. Consistency in piece size and working method allows the evalua-
tor to more objectively compare pieces of worked curd. The evaluator should try to
form a small ball or marble of the softened product. Formation of a cohesive sphere
of cheese is generally indicative of an appropriate degree of waxiness and elasticity
for a typical Cheddar cheese of any age.
Next, the formed “ball” of cheese should be placed into the depression between
the tips of the first two fingers, and with gentle to moderate pressure, the evaluator
should push the thumb (of the same hand) into the manipulated cheese. Then the
thumb should be slowly pulled from the slightly depressed “cheese ball.” If the
cheese sample adheres or sticks to the thumb or feels tacky or wet to the thumb’s
touch, the cheese sample is considered to demonstrate the pasty (sticky) defect. In
stark contrast, if the cheese sample tends to fall apart in response to thumb pressure,
either a curdy or crumbly defect is suggested, respectively, depending on the advanc-
ing age of the cheese. The “worked cheese” should remain smooth, waxy, and some-
what pliable for an “ideal” Cheddar cheese. The tempered sample should exhibit a
tendency to remain as a solid mass upon gentle finger manipulation.
An optional approach is to spread the cheese mass over the palm of the hand
(with the thumb of the opposite hand) and determine whether the thin smear of
cheese feels smooth, silky, waxy, and/or fine or whether the sample variously
appears to be sticky, pasty, mealy/grainy, or crumbly. The judge should then reas-
semble (or attempt to reassemble) the cheese particles and try to compress them into
a compact “ball” and note the response of the cheese to this form of manipulation.
Mealy/grainy may be better determined in the mouth than in the hands.
9.7.6 Evaluation of Flavor
By the time the sample has been worked into a semi-soft ball, the temperature of the
cheese mass should have increased from combined pressure and hand warmth and
thus enable easier detection of any aroma. The evaluator should place the tempered
cheese sample directly under the nose and observe the aroma a second time. The
judge should compare the aroma with that noted when the sample first was removed
from the cheese. For tasting, the evaluator should place a small portion of an
“unworked” plug into the mouth and chew until a semi-liquid stage is reached. The
judge should roll the macerated sample about within the mouth for sufficient time
to determine both taste and aroma, then expectorate the sample and determine the
overall flavor judgment(s). The evaluator should avoid using the previously worked
cheese sample due to the possibility of carryover from fingers from previous sam-
ples and loss of some volatile flavor components.
As a rule, too many samples tends to dull the sense of taste and smell; ideally, no
more than 15–20 samples should be tasted at one scoring, as they may eventually all
tend to taste alike. For beginners, about ten samples can be tasted successively with
some assurance that the taste sensing nerves are functioning normally or are not
overtaxed.
Rinsing the mouth occasionally with tepid water will allow appropriate recondi-
tioning of the mouth for subsequent sampling. After experiencing a particularly
poor-quality sample (i.e., rancid, garlic/onion, or intense sulfide/bitter), in a non-
contest environment, rinsing with a lukewarm saline solution to cleanse the mouth
of previous cheese flavors may be helpful. A pinch of common table salt placed into
the mouth and rinsed out with tepid water can be equally effective. Apple slices or
grapes are also useful for cleansing the mouth between intense-flavored cheese
samples. After any cleansing procedure, a final rinse of water is recommended.
Experienced judges find it most helpful to “go back to the best sample in the lot”
after evaluating a poor-quality sample.
9.7.7 Scoring
All sensory observations should be recorded on a designated cheese scorecard or a

tablet/computer provided for this purpose. The quality score of cheese is determined
by comparing the properties or characteristics of each cheese with their accepted
standards of perfection or “ideal.” These standards of perfection, when assembled,
form what is known as a scorecard for Cheddar cheese. The less-experienced judge
should strive to follow the aforementioned procedure quite closely. Deployment of
a scorecard enhances accuracy when more than two or three samples are evaluated.
The judge should strive to keep a mental image of each sample’s deviations from the
standard. Once this ability is attained, continual re-examination of the various sam-
ples becomes unnecessary. The practice of re-examining, reworking, and retasting
250 S. Clark
cheese is not typically conducive to the best evaluation performance. Such a prac-
tice leads to vacillating judgment, which is just as apt to be wrong as to be correct.
A confident judgment should be made following the initial sampling, if possible.
9.7.7.1 The Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest Scorecard
One example of a Cheddar cheese scorecard is the one used by the Collegiate Dairy
Products Evaluation Contest (CDPEC). Initially created by the Coaches Committee
of the American Dairy Science Association (ADSA), a committee since disbanded,
the official CDPEC scorecard was developed for use in training university students
in sensory evaluation of Cheddar. The standard of perfection is somewhat arbitrary
in origin, and the judge in training should realize that some characteristics listed as
defects on the CDPEC scorecard may, in fact, be desirable characteristics for given
market segments. The sulfide defect is an excellent example of a sensory character-
istic that may also be considered an attribute. A cheese given a score of “6” for defi-
nite sulfide may be considered a top-quality cheese if classified and marketed as a
New York-style Cheddar. For purposes of research, the use of the cheese lexicon
and descriptive analytical techniques or appropriate consumer acceptance testing
should be used. A discussion of proper sensory methods for research use is given in
Chap. 17.
The scorecard lists some essential factors or items by which a cheese is evalu-
ated; appearance and color are not a part of the scorecard. Each flavor and body and
texture attribute is assigned a point weighting that reflects the relative importance of
each factor in determining the overall sensory quality. For the novice cheese judge,
the scorecard (Fig. 9.9) and associated scoring guide (Table 9.3) can be essential
evaluation tools; as such, they should be studied in detail. The evaluator should keep
Fig. 9.9 The computerized CDPEC contest Cheddar cheese scorecard for sensory defects
Table 9.3 Suggested CDPEC scoring guide for flavor and body and texture of Cheddar cheese for
designated defect intensities (ideal = perfect 10 for flavor; 5 for body and texture)
Cheddar cheese
Slight Definite Pronounced
Flavor
Bitter 9 7 4
Feed 9 8 6
Fermented 7 5 3
Flat/low flavor 9 8 7
Fruity 7 5 3
Heated 9 8 7
High acid 9 7 5
Metallic 8 6 3
Oxidized 7 5 2
Rancid 6 4 1
Sulfide 9 7 4
Unclean 8 6 3
Whey taint 8 7 5
Yeasty 6 4 1
Body and texture
Corky 4 3 2
Crumbly 4 3 2
Crystals 4 3 1
Curdy 4 3 2
Gassy 3 2 1
Mealy 4 3 2
Open 4 3 2
Pasty 4 3 1
Short 4 3 2
Weak 4 3 2
in mind the relative values of the various scorecard items that are considered in the
quality grading process. The scorecard does not address issues of finish and appear-
ance, or color; however, these are important considerations when grading cheese for
industrial or regulatory purposes and will be discussed later in this chapter. When
evaluating cheese, the proper identification of an attribute(s) or a defect(s) is very
important in helping the manufacturer identify strengths and weaknesses in the
make procedures for the cheese in question.
In using the CDPEC scoring guide, one should keep in mind that if two or more
defects are noted, the lowest scoring defect within the flavor or body and texture
categories will set the category score for that product. The defect scores are not
cumulative.
252 S. Clark
9.8 Defects/Attributes of Cheddar Cheese
9.8.1 Finish and Appearance Evaluation
Cheese should generally exhibit symmetrical, parallel ends, square, and even edges
appropriate to the form in which they were made; packaging that is evenly folded,
neat, close-fitting plastic film or wrapper free from wrinkles; a clean, thin, uniform,
close-adhering coating of paraffin (if used) showing no blisters or scales; and free-
dom from pinholes, tears, breaks, cracks, undesirable mold, rot spots, or soiled areas.
The finish of the cheese is important during evaluation, as it furnishes an indica-
tion of the skill and care taken by the cheesemaker during manufacture of the cheese
and of the subsequent handling of the product. An ill-shaped, poorly formed and
packaged cheese indicates carelessness in manufacture, which may be correlated
with undesirable sensory properties. Untidy, soiled, or moldy cheese does not pres-
ent a pleasing appearance or full product utility. Defects in package finish are usu-
ally quite easy to observe and assess for their significance to maintaining product
integrity.
The beginner judge should become familiar with the possible defects in cheese
finish, and in turn correlate them, if possible, with other defects. The defects listed
in the following paragraphs are closely associated with cheese wrapped with vari-
ous types of protective coverings. (Common appearance defects, probable causes,
and remedies may be found in Table 9.4).
9.8.1.1 Rindless, Flexible-Wrapped, or Non-paraffined Cheese
Modern processing and merchandising has led to the introduction of new styles and
packaging materials for Cheddar cheese. Twenty-pound (9.1 kg) and 40-pound
(18.2 kg) blocks and 500-pound barrels and 640-pound blocks have displaced the
time-honored round “daisy” and “Cheddar,” which were covered with a cotton ban-
dage (cheese cloth) and paraffin. Taking the place of cotton and paraffin are a wide
variety of flexible wrappers constructed of multiple polymer, laminated films that
provide better oxygen and vapor barriers, greater tensile strength and bonding prop-
erties. In Cheddar cheese operations, these packaging materials are generally
applied directly to the pressed “wet curd” immediately after de-hooping, with vac-
uum treatment, followed by heat sealing of the wrapper. The film-packed cheese
may be placed in a fitted fiberboard box with a veneer reinforcement liner or other
suitable container for storing and shipping. The cheese judge should be alert to pos-
sible flexible-wrapper defects listed in the following paragraphs.
Damaged Coverings Torn or punctured wrappers readily permit air access and
microbial contamination of bulk cheese and thus must be prevented. Careless han-
dling contributes to the “damaged” package defect. Hopefully, for economic rea-
sons, damaged wrappers occur infrequently, but all wrapped bulk cheese warrants
close inspection in this respect.
Table 9.4 Common color and appearance, body and texture, flavor defects of Cheddar cheese,
their probable causes, and remedial measures
Appearance and color Probable causes Remedial measures
defects
Acid-cut: bleached or 1. Excessive acid developing in 1. Monitor acid development
faded, or dull looking the whey or at packaging stage carefully
(portions or entire 2. Nonuniform moisture 2. Take precautions to insure
cheese surface) distribution in the cheese consistent and uniform moisture
retention in curd
Crystals or white 1. If young cheese, results from 1. Use make procedures that limit
specks: Granules or calcium lactate complex the levels of lactic acid and
small hard mineral or formation (not desired) calcium in the serum of the cheese
protein deposits 2. If in aged cheese, derived from 2. Limit the fermentation of
proteolysis and crystallization of lactose through selection of
tyrosine appropriate cultures (pasteurized
milk cheese only)
3. Reduce the level of lactose
available in cheese milk by using
ultrafiltration/diafiltration
4. Minimize post-packaging acid
development
Mottled appearance: 1. Combining curds of different 1. Avoid adding starter culture

Irregularly shaped light colors, batches, or moisture after color incorporation
and dark areas on cheese content 2. Attempt to cut the curd into
surface 2. Uneven acid development in uniform-sized particles
curd 3. Handle all curd carefully to
3. Unwanted microbial growth: avoid drying during matting,
(a) H2O2 production, and/or (b) Cheddaring, or “holdovers”
fruity off-flavor and (c) pasty
body
Pinking: Develops a Oxidation of annatto color 1. Avoid storing cheese under
pink color on the surface fluorescent lighting
2. Allow proper development of
acid to develop during
cheesemaking
3. Package the cheese using a
good oxygen barrier
Seamy: Shows light 1. Exudation of milkfat from curd 1. Wash “greasy” curd at 32 °C
colored lines around pieces due to excessive forking, (90 °F) and thoroughly drain
curd pieces too-warm temperatures, and lack 2. Avoid over-forking of the curd
of salt dissolution 3. Allow all of the salt to dissolve
2. Over-stirred set completely
4. Press curd at 30–32 °C
(86–90 °F)
Moldy appearance Growth of mold on cheese 1. Insure airtight seals on cheese
surface packages
2. Avoid O2 in the packages by
vacuum or CO2 or N2 gas flushing
(continued)
254 S. Clark

Body and texture Probable causes Remedial measures
defects
Corky, dry and hard 1. Lack of acid development Follow standard or recommended
2. High salt in moisture phase procedures for cheesemaking
3. Not enough coagulant
4. Use of too much calcium
chloride
Crumbly, mealy/grainy Excessive acid production and 1. Avoid ripening at higher
low moisture retention in cheese temperatures
2. Control acid development and
moisture level in curd
Curdy or rubbery Inadequate curing conditions Optimize ripening temperature
and time
Pasty, sticky or wet 1. High moisture retained by curd Control acid development in
2. Excessive acid development relation to time and temperature
parameters
Weak or soft 1. Excessive fat content 1. Standardize fat in cheese milk
2. High moisture in cheese 2. Cook curd to desirable firmness
3. Failure to develop “body” in (higher temperature, longer time)
cheese during cooking 3. Avoid piling curd slabs too high
4. Low salt in moisture phase or too soon while Cheddaring
curd
Flavor defects Probable causes Remedial measures

Bitter 1. Excessive moisture 1. Use carefully selected cultures
2. Low-salt level 2. Reduce amount of starter
3. Proteolytic starter culture 3. Monitor salting levels and
strains method of adding
4. Microbial contaminants 4. Upgrade milk quality
5. Excessive acidity 5. Improve sanitation
6. Poor-quality milk 6. Control acid and rate of
7. Plant sanitation problems development
High acid 1. Development of excessive 1. Reduce ripening time
lactic acid 2. Reduce starter amount
2. Excessive moisture 3. Monitor milk acidity
3. Use of too much starter 4. Cook to slightly higher
4. Use of high-acid milk temperature
5. Follow a standardized
procedure for cutting, cooking,
draining, Cheddaring and salting
steps
Fermented Heterofermentative Lactobacilli 1. Improve cooling
(vinegar-like) 2. Short wash pasteurizer every
8–12 h
3. Review milk quality
(continued)

Flat (lacks flavor) 1. Lack of acid production 1. Check starter activity
2. Use of milk low in fat 2. Increase starter amount
3. Excessively high cooking 3. Increase curing temperature
temperature 4. Lengthen curing period
4. Use of too low a curing 5. Standardize cheese milk for fat
temperature content
5. Too short a curing period
Fruity 1. Certain strains of S. lactis or S. 1. Eliminate lactic strains that
diacetylactis produce ethanol
2. Low acidity 2. Monitor starter activity
3. Excessive moisture 3. Check salting procedures
4. Low-salt level 4. Upgrade milk quality
5. Poor milk quality
Rancid 1. Milk lipase activity 1. Standardize the Cheddaring
2. Microbial lipases from process.
contaminants 2. Avoid excessive agitation,
3. Homogenization of raw milk foaming, and severe temperature
4. Late lactation or mastitic milk fluctuations.
3. Improve sanitation
4. Monitor milk quality
Unclean 1. Poor-quality, off-flavored, or 1. Upgrade milk quality
old milk 2. Improve sanitation
2. Unwanted microbial 3. Market marginal quality cheese
contaminants as mild
3. Allowing off-flavored cheese 4. Standardize the Cheddaring
to be “aged” process
4. Improper technique of
Cheddaring
Whey taint 1. Poor whey expulsion from 1. Standardize the Cheddaring
curd process.
2. Improper Cheddaring 2. Constantly make sure expelled
techniques whey is free to drain away from
3. Failure to drain whey from Cheddaring curd
piles of curd slabs (especially 3. Wash curd with 32 °C (90 °F)
between pieces) water to remove excess whey
Sources: Compiled from Blake et al. (2005), Chandan (1980a, b), Johnson (2004), Van Slyke and
Price (1979), Wilson and Reinbold (1965), Wilster (1980), and Wendorf (2007)
Loosened Coverings For maximum protection against mold growth, air (oxygen)
must be excluded insofar as possible from under the wrapper of cheese coverings.
Some wrappers are bonded so tightly to cheese surfaces that loosening and remov-
ing of wrappers in cheese cutting and packaging operations may be difficult. All
non-bonded wrappers must be pressure- or vacuum-sealed to void as much oxygen
as possible. Usually, these wrappers cling to the cheese as though they were bonded.
“Loosening” and “ballooning” of the wrapper is generally undesirable, as mold
growth may occur within the air space provided if the integrity of the covering is
lost. Loosened wrappers may be noted by sight, or by stroking the cheese surface
with the hand. Cheese package edges and ends should be closely examined for any
unnecessary looseness and/or air pockets.
256 S. Clark
Soiled Coverings A “soiled (or greasy) wrapper” often denotes extreme careless-
ness in packaging, handling, and storage. Such a condition may suggest a general
lack of concern for both cleanliness and good housekeeping. This defect is even
more serious when accompanied by damaged wrappers.
9.8.1.2 Pliable, Wax-Coated Cheese
Microcrystalline paraffin and a variety of polymers yield adhesive, flexible, plastic-

like protective coatings when surface-dried cheeses are dipped into the melted wax.
These appealing, thick coatings may be produced in a wide variety of colors and
may be semi-transparent to opaque. The cheese must be handled with reasonable
precautions so that the coating will not chip or flake. This type of flexible wax is
often used as a cheese covering for any cheese that is subsequently cut into retail
portions, or for small units cut from bulk cheese to be cured and sold as miniature-
sized cheese. This coating is relatively free of defects if the proper form of wax
is used.
9.8.1.3 Paraffined Cheese
Although paraffin (wax) currently finds limited use as a covering material for
cheese, the cheese judge should be aware of the following defects, which may rarely
appear with poorly applied pliable wax coating but are often related to the use of
paraffin.
Blistered This defect manifests itself by areas of thin, loose paraffin, usually on the
end of the cheese where cheesecloth may be absent. Such a condition readily lends
itself to the possible entrance of mold and/or harboring cheese pests (see Cheese
Mites and Skippers in Sect. 9.8.1.6); therefore, blistering is quite objectionable for
paraffin-coated cheese.
Checked A “checked” or cracked paraffin is denoted by breaks or formed cracks in

the cheese covering. Applying a heavier-than-necessary paraffin coating usually
causes this defect. Checked paraffin offers an opportunity for mold and pests to gain
entrance to the cheese.
Rough Rough paraffin is manifested by a lack of surface smoothness or paraffin

finish. The paraffin surface seems to contain small hard particles; this leaves the
impression that the surface of the cheese may have been covered with tiny particles
of foreign matter prior to coating. Although not usually that serious, this defect is
somewhat undesirable as a surface blemish for what may otherwise be a high-
quality cheese. Roughness may be detected either visually or by running the hand
over the surface.
Scaly Loose or scaly paraffin offers poor protection for cheese; it permits moisture
to escape and mold to gain entrance; hence, this represents a serious packaging
defect. In cutting cheese, particles of paraffin often become intermixed with the
cheese itself, and thus produce an untidy, unappetizing cheese slice. Scaly-like par-
affin should seldom occur if the cheese surface is pre-dried sufficiently, then com-
pletely dipped into hot paraffin (not lower than 104.4 °C (220 °F) for at least 10 s).
The paraffin is then allowed to completely harden and solidify via allowing it to
cool to near ambient temperature before subsequent handling occurs.
9.8.1.4 Workmanship
High Edges Cheese showing this defect lacks square or symmetrical edges, such
as desired in well-finished cheese. Sometimes, edges of the cheese may be so long
that they tend to bend over (curl under) onto the end of the cheese, and thus form a
protected area for mold growth or pests. These undesirable long edges are usually
dry, do not cure properly, and thus represent waste.
Lopsided, Misshapen Nonparallel ends or sides, a result of uneven distribution of

curd in the hoops, possibly coupled with unequal pressure in the press, characterize
a misshapen cheese. Such defects detract from a neat appearance of the cheese
unit(s) under evaluation. This unwanted configuration may sometimes be correlated
with weak-bodied cheese.
Uneven Edges Heavy pressure against followers or press boards that are too small
for the hoop may cause the curd to squeeze out around the edges and form a narrow
raised edge or rim around the outer edge of the cheese, generally up to about one-
half inch thick. The presence of these raised, uneven edges not only detracts from
cheese appearance but additionally results in a waste of curd. The raised edge dries
out and does not cure properly. Cheese should be pressed in a manner that ensures
that the bottom edge of the cheese meets evenly with the sides.
Uneven Sizes Cheese of a designated style should be well within a specified weight
tolerance for that style of cheese; lack of size uniformity may result in an unattract-
ive appearance. Carelessness in assuring even distribution of the curd among the
various hoops is often correlated with other finish and/or appearance defects. An
“uneven size” of cheese also may result in excess trim losses when blocks are cut
subsequently into retail-sized pieces.
9.8.1.5 Surface
Bruised Slightly depressed areas over which the paraffin is broken indicate a
bruised surface. Cracks may radiate from the center of the break. Obviously, a
bruised surface permits mold contamination and pest infestation.
258 S. Clark
Light Spots A cheese that exhibits “light spots” has more or less irregular light-
and dark-colored areas over the flat surfaces. Though this defect is quite noticeable,
it is not a particularly serious one, as far as product protection is concerned.
Moldy “Mold growth” on cheese may occur on portions where the cheese covering
has been penetrated by a cheese trier, or from holes or tears in the packaging mate-
rial. The presence of even a slightly moldy portion not only substantially detracts
from the appearance but also may jeopardize the flavor and consumer acceptance of
the entire cheese. As soon as the cheese is cut, mold mycelia usually have the
opportunity to disperse across the entire cheese. Moldiness is considered a serious
product finish defect and is a constant problem; annually it results in considerable
waste and economic losses for the US cheese industry.
Additionally, some mold contaminants can pose public health problems due to
production of certain mycotoxins (carcinogenic aflatoxins). No absolutely success-
ful method has as yet been found and applied to prevent regrowth of mold from bulk
forms of cheese onto cut and rewrapped cheeses. Even cheese that has been thor-
oughly cleaned, scraped, and repackaged, and possibly treated with approved mold
inhibitors, may develop surface mold during extended storage or distribution.
Open Short depressions on or near the surface are referred to as an “open” surface.
This openness usually stems from insufficient curd pressing or a too-cold curd at the
time of pressing. This open surface typically reflects an open-textured cheese; there
tend to be many mechanical openings. Defects of surface openness are objection-
able because these surface depressions and openings serve to (1) increase the
amount of cheese trimmings and (2) provide sites for mold and/or cheese pests to
establish themselves.
Rough A “rough-surfaced” cheese exhibits severe irregularities of surface finish.

This defect may result occasionally from (1) the use of unclean press cloths to
which particles of dried curd have adhered; (2) insufficient or improper pressing of
“hooped” cheese; or (3) rough and uneven shelving. Cheese that has this defect
lacks the preferred neat and attractive appearance that facilitates marketing the
product.
Soiled, Unclean Most unfortunately, cheese takes on an untidy “soiled” or

“unclean” appearance when dirt or soil adheres to various cheese surfaces. Usually,
soiled surfaces are due to carelessness on the part of the cheesemaker and produc-
tion team. This defect should not be tolerated in the manufacture of high-
quality cheese.
9.8.1.6 Miscellaneous Factors
Huffed, Bloated The so-called huffed or bloated cheese results from gassy fermen-
tation (Fig. 9.10). A cheese suffering from this defect usually becomes rounded on
the sides and ends, producing a somewhat oval shape to the cheese unit. In occur-
rences of the huffed defect, the lower edges of the cheese may be raised slightly
above the top plane of the shelf. Occasionally, a gassy condition within the cheese
wrapper may develop to the extent that the general symmetry of the cheese unit is
distorted and the packaging material may be ruptured. A huffed cheese usually
yields a sample plug that is dominated by obvious gas holes. Plugs pulled from
some bloated cheese may exhibit openings in the shape of narrow slits; these open-
ings are commonly called “fish eyes” or “slits.” Huffed cheese generally portrays
poor sensory qualities; serious off-flavors frequently accompany gassy
fermentations.
Ink Smears Occasional “ink smears” from careless cheese branding often detract
from the appearance of cheese. Generally, this is a relatively minor defect that is not
correlated with other defects, other than careless workmanship.
Fig. 9.10 A lineup of Cheddar cheeses exhibiting vacuum-sealed plastic ((a) a tight seal with no
apparent defects; (b) loose packaging; (c) huffed or bloated cheese exhibiting extensive crystal
formation). (S. Clark images)
260 S. Clark
Cheese Mites and Skippers Fine, loose, brown dust on the surface of aged cheese,
cheese wrappers, or on the shelving usually manifests the presence of “cheese
mites.” Microscopic examination has revealed this brown dust to consist of live and
dead mite bodies, molted skins, excreta, and minute particles of cheese. In badly
infested cheese (which has not been moved for some time), the brown dust may
appear over extensive areas of the cheese; however, it is more generally localized in
favorable harboring places (such as cracks, under a folded edge or under loose par-
affin). Evidence of mites is often found on natural rinded Cheddars. Skippers, the
larvae of the cheese fly, are infrequently noted; they only occur as the result of poor
sanitation practices.
9.8.2 Color
The color of Cheddar cheese, regardless of the chosen intensity, should always be
uniform throughout the cheese. American Cheddar cheese may be uncolored, light
to medium colored, or high in color. For uncolored cheese, the most desired color is
a light cream shade; for medium-intensity-colored cheese, a deep cream color or a
pleasant yellow-orange hue is acceptable. Deep, intense shades of yellow-reddish
hues are generally discriminated against. Not only should the shade of color be
appropriate and uniform for the given cheese, but the color should exhibit some
luster. The cheese surface color should be slightly translucent – appearing as if one
could actually see into the cheese interior for a short distance. The “translucent”
quality of Cheddar cheese is closely associated with desirable body and texture.
Not only is cheese color one of the items capable of being most accurately evalu-
ated, but when carefully observed and correlated, may also serve as an index to
defects in body, texture, and flavor. Some color defects that may be associated with
Cheddar cheese, and associated body and texture attributes, are discussed in detail
below. Common color defects, probable causes, and remedies may be found in
Table 9.4.
Acid-Cut (Bleached, Faded) The color of “acid-cut” cheese generally appears dull
and lifeless, with an opacity that allows little light to be transmitted through even a
thin slice. Quite often, a degree of bleaching may be noted more or less uniformly
throughout the entire cheese (Fig. 9.11). In some cheese, acid-cut color may occur
only within close proximity to mechanical openings. In such instances, the cheese
may have a “mottled” appearance. Of these two defects, a uniform acid-cut color is
less objectionable than a mottled one; however, neither is desirable. Evaluators
should readily recognize the acid-cut color defect and be on the alert for the possible
association with a given body and texture or a specific flavor defect. Generally, the
faded color of acid-cut may be associated with high-moisture and high-acid devel-
opment in cheese, but it also may occasionally be observed in cheese with a dry
body and a crumbly texture. Cheese showing this defect nearly always has a distinc-
tive high acid or sour flavor. The acid-cut color defect is becoming less common due
Fig. 9.11 A lineup of Cheddar-type cheeses ((a) Cheddar with faded appearance; (b) Cheddar
with extensive crystals; (c) pepper Jack with typical appearance. (S. Clark image)).
to better control of acid development by cheesemakers, improved lactic cultures,

and better monitoring and control of the manufacturing process. However, the resur-
gence of pasture-based feeding has resulted in the fading defect appearing in cheeses
as a result of higher natural color content resulting from these feeding practices
(Wendorf, 2007).
Atypical Color Specks Atypical color specks take the form of occasional white or
black specks, rust spots, and/or red blotches. While there may be little or no associa-
tion between foreign specks and a specific off flavor, the presence of atypical color
deposits generally reflects carelessness in the manufacturing process. White specks
may result if addition of color to milk is made prior to addition of starter culture due
to small clumps of starter not getting colored. Other potential sources for specks
may include water condensation on pipes dripping into the vat, poor filtration of
milk, or lack of good environmental cleaning and sanitation procedures.
Color Too High (Unnatural) This defect is characterized by high yellow-orange

color intensity, especially when precut cheese is warmed to room temperature or
higher. There is generally no association between this defect and flavor, since the
defect stems from the use of an excessive amount of added colorant to the cheese
milk. More intensely colored Cheddar cheese may be preferred in some specific
markets, but in others it is often discriminated against.
262 S. Clark
Mottled The “mottled” color defect appears as rounded, irregularly shaped areas of
contrasting light and dark color, with one shade gradually blending into the other.
This defect may result either from certain physical causes during cheese manufac-
ture or be due to atypical microbiological activity during the curing process. Chief
causes often ascribed to this defect are the combining of curd from two different lots
of cheese or nonuniform development of acidity within the curd. When a mottled
color results from unusual microbial growth, an associated yeasty, fruity, or acid
off-flavor, and/or pasty body may sometimes accompany this appearance defect.
However, the mottled appearance is intended with Colby-Jack cheese.
Pinking A “pink” discoloration of cheese occurs when the water-based colorant

annatto is exposed to intense lighting (Fig. 9.12b) This defect is most often found in
cheese packaged for retail sale and subsequently subjected to extended exposure to
fluorescent lighting in display cases. The pinking reaction can be intensified if the
cheese has an atypical pH around 5.4 instead of the typical range of 4.8–5.1, or if
the packaging used does not present an effective barrier to oxygen (Hong et al.,
1995a, b).
Seamy (Uneven or Wavy) The appearance defect “seamy” is portrayed when the
cheese appears interlaced with dark- or light-colored lines around each original
piece of curd (Fig. 9.12a). This is particularly noticeable when one directly exam-
ines the block or the surface appearance of freshly cut cheese. The seamy appear-
ance defect may be seen in very young cheese, when proteolysis has not yet
progressed. The slight degree of seaminess that is occasionally noted in fresh or
young Cheddar cheese is not particularly objectionable, since this form of seami-
Fig. 9.12 A selection of Cheddar cheeses with appearance defects ((a) very slight seamy; (b)
pinking and crystals; (c) seamy, pinking, and crystals). (S. Clark images)
ness generally disappears with additional aging. Seamy can result from improperly
pressed cheese, or curd surfaces being physically altered by exuded or crystallized
milkfat, uneven or over-salting, or moisture evaporation that probably occurred
prior to curd pressing. Cheese exhibiting this color defect not only tends to lack
color uniformity but may also demonstrate a short-bodied, crumbly, and/or friable
texture. Occasionally, wider bands of discoloration may occur in cheese (without
the seaminess lines); this condition may be described as uneven or wavy color. The
wavy color character may be a result of inadequate dilution of the coagulant prior to
addition or excessive agitation or vibration after setting the milk.
9.8.3 Body and Texture
Cheddar cheese with the most desirable body and texture displays a full, solid,
close-knit plug (see Fig. 9.4) that is entirely free from gas holes or mechanical open-
ings, and possesses smoothness, meatiness, waxiness, and silkiness. Cheddar cheese
with the above-described quality attributes lends itself to uniform slicing into thin,
intact pieces.
The term “body,” as applied to cheese, usually refers to various physical attri-
butes that primarily affect the relative firmness or softness of the cheese. By con-
trast, the term “texture” refers particularly to the structure and arrangement of the
various parts that make up the whole cheese. Thus, texture in cheese is observed
visually by the quantity, size, shape, and distribution of openings and by the sense
of touch to uncover internal particles. Common body and texture defects, probable
causes, and remedies may be found in Table 9.4. The more common descriptors of
cheese body defects are listed below and are described in the following sections.
Body defect descriptors Texture defect descriptors

Corky (dry, hard, tough) Crystals
Crumbly (friable) Fissures
Curdy (rubbery) Gassy (holes or slits)
Greasy Mealy/grainy
Pasty (smeary, sticky, wet) Open (mechanical openings)
Short (flaky)
Spongy
Weak (soft)
9.8.3.1 Desirable Body and Texture Characteristics
As a general rule, a “closed” (few or no openings in the cheese mass) texture is

desired; however, a slightly open texture is not objectionable, providing the body
possesses such properties that the open texture does not give rise to a weak-bodied,
264 S. Clark
curd, or crumbly cheese. Worked plugs exhibiting various cheese body and texture
characteristics are shown in Fig. 9.13.
Firm Body A plug of Cheddar with desirable “firm” body feels solid and offers
some resistance to applied pressure. Firm-bodied cheese yields a clean-cut plug that
generally tears apart slowly on bending, rather than breaking suddenly. The pre-
ferred texture is closed; the curd particles should be well matted or fused together in
a high-quality cheese. A slice of firm-bodied cheese tends to tear apart somewhat
like a thoroughly cooked chicken breast. A firm-bodied cheese should not be con-
fused with either a dry, corky, or curdy body; the latter cheese body products often
resist pressure and seem excessively springy or quite rubber-like.
Waxy Body A desirable “waxy body” is exhibited when a cheese plug responds to
the combined pressure of thumb and fingers as would cold butter, tempered candle
wax, or modeling clay. In “breaking down” a waxy-bodied sample by finger manip-
ulation, little resistance is offered other than the normal force required to mold the
cheese into a cohesive “cheese ball” (Fig. 9.13a). Preferably, a “malleable” cheese
shows little tendency to “spring back” to the original position, but rather assumes or
retains a new configuration as a result of applied finger pressure. A waxy body is
generally associated with either medium-aged or aged (sharp) cheese. A pliable or
waxy body is a good indicator of desired slicing properties and proper flavor
development.
Silky, Smooth Body A “silky, smooth-bodied” cheese exhibits fineness of grain

and a continuous, slightly oily, silky smooth film when the mass, worked between
the thumb and fingers, is spread over the palm of the hand. The “worked cheese”
usually spreads evenly without forming irregular patches in the hand. The spread-
Fig. 9.13 “Worked” Cheddar cheese samples showing: (a) “ideal” body; (b) Corky; (c) Crumbly
and possibly Curdy; (d) Pasty. (Bodyfelt et al., 1988)
out cheese sample should readily reassemble into a small intact ball. The smooth,
silky-like property of the cheese sample is generally indicative of proper cheese
breakdown, flavor development, and desired mouthfeel.
9.8.3.2 Body Defects
Corky (Dry, Hard, Tough) This defect is generally associated with a low-moisture,
low-fat, and/or young cheese or a particularly dry aged cheese. Difficulty is some-
times encountered in trying to sample dry, tough cheese, due to initial resistance
against the trier during penetration. The drawn plug resists any form of pressure;
when sufficient finger pressure is applied, the plug may resist breaking down and/or
exhibits a distinct tendency to recover its original shape. The plug is stiff or rigid
upon bending; it seems to have a rubber-like consistency. When a portion of a so-
called corky cheese is worked between the thumb and forefingers, the desired
smooth, silky, even distribution of cheese particles is notably lacking (Fig. 9.13b).
The worked mass of cheese tends to curl up under sliding pressure of the thumb
over the forefingers and is usually distributed in irregular patches. This defect may
be associated with other body defects of which dryness is a closely related factor. A
dry-bodied cheese generally has an opaque appearance. This defect sometimes
appears to be associated with curd mealiness (a texture defect). Appearance defects
of seamy or acid-cut color may also be exhibited.
Crumbly (Friable) A “crumbly bodied” cheese is one that tends to fall apart when
tried, sliced, and/or worked (Fig. 9.13c). A plug of such cheese may be extremely
friable (Fig. 9.13c). This defect sometimes appears to be associated with curd mea-
liness (a texture defect) as well as with acid-cut and seamy color defects. A crumbly
cheese may sometimes be quite dry, but more often will be normal in this respect. A
crumbly, friable body is more likely to occur in aged cheese (~10 months of aging)
than in young cheese.
Curdy (Rubbery) This body defect is quite characteristic of freshly made, “green,”
or uncured cheese. Such cheese usually seems firm, almost hard or rubbery, but not
as dry or firm as corky. The plug resists finger pressure; when it does yield to pres-
sure, there is a tendency for the cheese to spring back to its original shape but to less
of an extent than corky. Additionally, when worked into a ball, if the cheese is curdy,
the ball will commonly display curds that were not adequately warmed or broken
down by body temperature to make a smooth ball (Fig. 9.13c). A cheese exhibiting
a curdy, rubbery body will likely exhibit a fresh, “green,” flat, or undeveloped flavor.
Since curdiness is primarily a characteristic of young, uncured cheese, before the
curd has had an opportunity to break down (undergo proteolysis), the defect is not
usually considered objectionable in mild-aged cheese. Such cheese should eventu-
ally develop the desired body and texture characteristics upon additional aging. A
curdy cheese that breaks along a seam between curds should not be confused with a
short-bodied cheese (see below).
266 S. Clark
Greasy A “greasy” cheese is one that has free fat on the surface, as well as in and
around openings within the cheese or surfaces of individual curds. The defect is
easily recognized by an almost oil-like appearance or feel. Greasy cheese often
exhibits marked seaminess or may develop it upon additional aging.
Pasty (Smeary, Sticky, Wet) Cheese showing the “pasty” defect is usually charac-
terized by the presence of high moisture. There is often difficulty in securing a full,
well-rounded plug; the cheese shape is easily distorted. Upon compression between
thumb and forefingers, the cheese breaks down easily into a pasty, sticky mass that
tends to adhere to the fingertips as the product is manipulated (Figs. 9.13d and
9.14b). This defect is often associated with a weak body and/or high acid, fruity,
and/or fermented off-flavors.
Short (Flaky) A “short,” “brittle,” or “flaky” body is characterized by a lack of

meatiness, waxiness, or overall homogeneity; the consistency of the cheese may
appear loose-knit (it takes a “short” time to break). The plug will break easily on
bending a short distance rather than tearing apart and will show a distinct lack of
elasticity. The break will occur at any point along the length of the plug and should
not be confused with a break occurring at the seam between curd particles, which is
Fig. 9.14 Examples of some common body characteristics (defects) of Cheddar cheese: (A) An
“ideal” waxy body (practically forms a marble); (B–A) distinctly “pasty” or “sticky” body; (C–A)
“crumbly” plug; (D–A) “weak” body. (Bodyfelt et al., 1988)
more indicative of a curdy cheese. The sample piece may appear dull in color, but
in many cases, may exhibit a fairly even and somewhat glistening surface. A cheese
having this body defect may be too acid and/or dry to exhibit more desirable body
properties. Sometimes a short-bodied cheese is inclined to be mealy when a piece
of a plug is worked between the thumb and forefinger (or by mouthfeel).
Spongy A spongy bodied cheese fails to yield a full, continuous plug, due to the
presence of excessive gas or mechanical openings that prevent an adequate degree
of firmness in the body of the cheese. When a spongy cheese is plugged, it tends to
sink immediately next to the trier. Such cheese is distinctly springy when pressure
is applied to the surface. This defect is commonly associated with gassy, high-
moisture, weak-bodied cheese.
Weak (Soft) A weak-bodied cheese is noted particularly by the ease of cheese trier
penetration, and/or by the relatively small amount of finger pressure necessary to
crush the structure. Weak-bodied cheese is soft and is closely associated with high-
moisture content. An aged, weak-bodied cheese may demonstrate fruity/fermented,
whey taint, and/or unclean flavor defects, enhanced presumably by relatively high
whey (moisture) content. When bent between the thumbs and index fingers of oppo-
site hands, weak-bodied cheese tends to approach touching end to end (Fig. 9.14d).
However, bending end-to-end is not always indicative of weak cheese. Consider
Swiss cheese, for instance; a plug can be bent end-to-end without breaking, but the
body is more firm/rubber or even corky-like.
9.8.3.3 Texture Defects
A closed textured cheese should yield a solid plug with practically no visible open-
ings (Fig. 9.4). The plug, however, may gradually break apart along a curd seamline,
especially in a young cheese. Mechanical openings may be a sign of insufficient
matting (Cheddaring) or pressing of the curd, or both. An “open” cheese yields a
plug that may contain numerous small or large irregularly shaped openings, referred
to as “mechanical openings.” This is in contrast to Cheddar cheese that exhibits “gas
holes” or “slits” as the result of CO2 formation from microbial activity; these open-
ings tend to be more symmetrical and are usually spherical or elliptical, in shape,
and shiny. The so-called late gas defect may occur in closed-textured cheese, but in
this instance, the plug will exhibit a split appearance.
Crystals or White Specks Small “white specks” interspersed throughout a cheese’s
mass and/or on its surface most commonly occurs in mature cheese; however it may
occasionally be a problem in young- and medium-aged cheeses. These white parti-
cles (Fig. 9.15) are generally assumed to be an admixture of calcium lactate, tyro-
sine, and other components. Sometimes these specks are so small that they may be
only noticeable when viewed from a close distance.
268 S. Clark
Fig. 9.15 The color/appearance defect of “white specks” or “surface precipitate” of calcium lac-
tate crystals evident along loose edges of a package of mild Cheddar cheese (left); tyrosine crystals
evident on surfaces of aged Cheddar cheese (right). (S. Clark images)
Curing of cheese that contains nonstarter lactic acid bacteria at elevated tempera-
ture, then followed by lower storage temperature, tends to favor accumulation of
calcium d-lactate, which is an insoluble complex. The formation of calcium lactate
crystals (CLC) is the most frequent cause of white specks in younger cheeses, and
results when the level of lactic acid in the cheese, combined with available calcium,
results in calcium lactate concentrations in excess of its solubility in the serum
phase. The prevention of CLC formation is not guaranteed by manufacturing prac-
tices that reduce available lactose or limit production of excess lactic acid, but the
current level of knowledge accepts these particular practices as appropriate proce-
dures for limiting the defect (Johnson, 2004; Blake et al., 2005). Accumulation of
tyrosine, on the other hand, may indicate to the evaluator that the cheese has been
aged long enough for protein to partially break down and yield this amino acid.
Some aged cheese that exhibits the combined appearance/texture characteristics of
white specks also frequently exhibits a desirable “buttery”-like body.
Even an inexperienced judge should be able to associate the presence of crystals
(and the possible associated mouthfeel) with an aged cheese; the cheese sample will
most likely also have a fully developed intense flavor. Crystals in a younger cheese
may be associated with a high-acid flavor. White specks, on their appearance alone,
should not be considered a serious color defect. Their presence may be noted, but a
deduction in score should not be made unless an excessive grainy or objectionable
gritty mouthfeel is present.
For the CDPEC, crystals are only considered a defect when detected during mas-
tication. It should be noted at this point that a “defect” from one person’s perspec-
tive may be considered an attribute from another person’s perspective. For instance,
for aesthetic judges in the American Cheese Society Judging and Competition, tyro-
sine crystals are often considered a delightful “crunch” in aged Cheddar.
Fissures A fissured texture is characterized by an elongated slit or extended sepa-
ration of the curd particles. The curd lacks cohesion, and such defects may be asso-
ciated with seaminess. This defect is not serious, but such an affected cheese often
lacks the desired meatiness of body.
Gassy (Pin Holes, Sweet-Curd Holes, Swiss Holes, Shot Holes, Slits, Fish Eyes,
Yeast Holes) Gas holes in cheese vary in size but may be fairly uniform in distribu-
tion and shape. They are formed from gas produced by undesirable microorganisms
within the cheese. The seriousness of these gas holes depends on the kind of
organisms that form the gas and the relative size and frequency of the gas holes. As
related earlier, all of the gas-related defects are lumped into the gassy category on
the CDPEC scorecard.
Gas holes are referred to as “pin holes” when they are about the size of a pinhead,
symmetrically rounded, evenly distributed, and/or show a tendency to be concen-
trated near the center of the cheese. Pin holes may result from the growth of undesir-
able bacteria from cheese milk, or a contaminated culture, or a “gassy” culture
(formed CO2) that contains Lactococcus lactis ssp. diacetylactis or Leuconostoc
species. Formed gas may also affect the flavor of the cheese; occasionally an objec-
tionable fruity flavor may occur. The development of numerous pin holes and other
gas holes may lead to a “huffed” cheese, especially if the cheese is cured at higher
temperatures. If there are sufficient gas holes in the cheese to weaken the overall
body structure, it is termed “spongy” cheese; undesirable flavor(s) is (are) often
associated with excess gas formation.
Slits, fish eyes, and yeast holes may be found in cheese made from poor-quality
milk or starter culture that has been contaminated with yeast (or possibly coliform
bacteria). The round, glossy-surfaced gas holes are the result of abnormal fermenta-
tion (Fig. 9.7a). Cheese that contains numerous yeast holes usually has a “spongy”
body due to excessive gas production. During plugging, the cheese tends to sag
immediately adjacent to the inserted trier. Such cheese usually yields a honeycomb-
like plug. Yeast holes in cheese may flatten out as the cheese is cured, forming long
narrow slits known as “fish eyes.”
The large, uniformly distributed gas holes found occasionally in Cheddar cheese
are usually the result of a particular bacterial growth. There is often a correlation
between their occurrence and the flavor (or off-flavor) of the cheese. Large gas holes
are often associated with a peculiar sweetish, flavor reminiscent of Swiss cheese;
consequently, they are sometimes referred to as “Swiss holes,” “sweet holes,” or
“shot” holes. The specific flavor defect that often develops may not be highly objec-
tionable, but it is not typical of Cheddar cheese.
Mealy (Grainy, Gritty) A cheese that is worked between the thumb and forefingers
and shows a lack of uniformity and smoothness, as well as irregularly shaped, hard
particles of cheese, is criticized as being mealy (grainy, gritty), depending on the
270 S. Clark
particle size. This physical condition often may be correlated with a dry, corky-
bodied cheese. When the manually worked cheese feels like cornmeal, and the
cheese tends to spread in irregular patches under sliding pressure of the thumb over
the forefingers, the texture is described as mealy. A mealy cheese tends to exhibit
dryness and seems to release fat readily. Often, a mealy textured cheese also exhib-
its a short body with little elasticity. Mealiness is most often associated with sharp
or aged cheese. The cheese judge should be able to detect a corn meal-like mouth-
feel when the cheese sample is masticated and pushed against the roof of the mouth.
Mealy should not be confused with crystals.
Open (Mechanical Holes) An “open,” porous, or loose texture is traceable to the

physical aspects of handling and pressing the cheese curd. Mechanical openings are
characterized by their asymmetrical, angular shape and size and by the dullness of
their surface linings (Fig. 9.8b). These irregular-shaped holes are derived from vari-
ous conditions during the matting and pressing of the curd. There is little or no
relationship between their presence and cheese flavor. In Cheddar cheese, as long as
mechanical openings are not connected and are neither so numerous nor so large as
to weaken the body or interfere with the integrity of the plug or slice, they should
not meet with serious objection.
9.8.4 Flavor
Once the physical properties of the cheese have been assessed, the flavor character-
istics should be evaluated. This is accomplished by (1) first noting the odor of the
freshly drawn plug as it is passed slowly under the nose; (2) then smelling the warm,
semi-soft cheese that results from the quick kneading of a portion of the plug
between the thumb and forefingers; and (3) finally tasting a small piece of the
cheese. The novice judge, however, should taste the sample not only to verify the
odors previously noted but also to perceive the nonvolatile taste sensations – bitter,
salty, sour, umami and sweet, which would otherwise go undetected. When a larger
number of samples are being tasted, an occasional rinse of the mouth between sam-
ples is helpful. This prevents any non-liquefied portions, which may lodge between
the teeth, from obscuring the flavor characteristics of subsequent samples.
High-quality Cheddar cheese should possess the characteristic “Cheddar flavor,”
which is best described as clean, moderately aromatic, nut-like, and pleasantly
acidic. While the same general flavor qualities are desired in fresh, medium-cured,
and aged cheese, the intensity of the characteristic Cheddar flavor will primarily
depend on the extent of curing and curing conditions. Usually, aged cheese has a
sharp, aromatic, intense flavor that is entirely lacking in young cheese. The flavor of
high-quality Cheddar cheese has been likened to that of freshly roasted peanuts or
hazelnuts by various investigators (Kosikowski & Mocquot, 1958; Van Slyke &
Price, 1979; Wilson & Reinbold, 1965; Wilster, 1980).
The flavor of Cheddar cheese is ascribed to a complex mixture of compounds,

produced by bacteriological and enzymatic action during aging. Singh et al. (2003)
published an excellent review of the chemical and sensory aspects of Cheddar
cheese flavor. The Cheddar flavor originates from (1) protein breakdown to simpler
and more volatile organic compounds; (2) acid developed in the curd; (3) milk fat
and milk fat breakdown products; and (4) the small amount of salt added before the
curd is pressed. Due to the relatively high degree of solids and the nature of the
organic constituents, Cheddar cheese has a distinct, desirable flavor when the appro-
priate bacteriological, enzymatic, and chemical changes have occurred during con-
trolled manufacturing and curing. When the components of Cheddar flavor get out
of balance, one or more distinct flavors may dominate and result in a distinctive
flavor profile that may be described alternately as a defect or an attribute.
The beginner judge should try to appreciate that the finish, appearance, color,
and body and texture characteristics reveal much regarding the flavor quality of the
cheese. The evaluator should carefully study both the desirable and undesirable
aspects of these quality criteria and note the flavors that may be associated with them.
9.8.5 Flavor Defects and Their Characteristics
Off-flavors in Cheddar cheese show wide variation. Descriptive terms are listed
below and are described in subsequent paragraphs (see Table 9.4 for probable causes
and remedial measures). Other descriptive terms such as brothy, nutty, diacetyl, etc.
are incorporated in the discussion of the Cheddar cheese lexicon in Chap. 17, but are
not included here due to lack of common use by graders and judges (Drake
et al., 2001).
Flavor defect descriptors
Bitter
Feed
Fermented
Flat/low flavor
Fruity
Garlic/onion (weedy)
Heated
High acid
Malty (“Grape Nuts®”)
Metallic
Moldy (musty)
Oxidized
Rancid
Sulfide
Unclean
Whey taint
Yeasty
272 S. Clark
Bitter Bitterness is a basic taste noted only by the sense of taste on the tongue, and
not from aromatic compounds perceived by the sense of smell. Bitter taste may
occur in mild cheese but is found more frequently in aged cheese as an aftertaste.
Certain lactic cultures, coagulating enzymes, and salt levels have been implicated in
the development of this troublesome defect. Bitterness has been observed to develop
in cheese made from both excellent-quality and poor-quality milk. “Sharpness” and
the high flavor intensity of aged cheese should not be confused with a bitter taste.
Sharpness gives rise to a temporary peppery sensation, whereas true bitterness is
somewhat distasteful to most individuals, resembling the taste of quinine or caf-
feine. The bitter sensation is somewhat delayed in terms of its initial perception and
tends to persist for some time after sample expectoration. Bitterness in cheese is
observed by a taste sensation that typically occurs at the base or back of the tongue.
Bitterness will normally intensify with maturation. If detected in a young cheese,
the cheese should not be kept for sale as a sharp or extra-sharp cheese. Bitter is one
of the most common off-flavors in Cheddar cheese.
Feed Some feeds, especially high volume roughages, may impart aromatic taints to
cheese if fed to cows within a critical time frame prior to milking. The 0.5–3-h time
period is the most critical. This is especially true of succulent feeds, silage, some
commodities, brewery wastes, and some of the hays. A “feed” off-flavor is charac-
teristic in that it is aromatic, sometimes pleasant (e.g., alfalfa), and can usually be
readily detected by the sense of smell. A characteristic note (and mild aftertaste) of
“cleanliness” is associated with most feed off-flavors, when the cheese sample is
expectorated. Feed off-flavors usually “disappear” rather quickly and thus leave the
mouth in a clean state of condition.
Obviously, the characteristic odor/taste of feed off-flavors varies with the type of
feed consumed by lactating animals. The odor of a given raw milk supply is gener-
ally characteristic of a particular feed. In some US dairy regions, a severe feed
defect is often observed early in the spring when the all-dry winter ration is termi-
nated and changed to one that includes fresh green pasture. Also, severe feed off-
flavors are likely to occur when there is a sudden change to a new, more odorous
form of roughage, such as from alfalfa hay to corn or grass silage. The current trend
for some producers to return to a seasonal, pasture-based feeding system or the
requirement of organic production practices to include access to pasture may also
contribute to feed off-flavors.
Fermented The fermented off-flavor in Cheddar cheese is suggestive of acetic acid
(vinegar-like). Some nonstarter lactic acid bacteria (NSLAB), such as heterofer-
mentative lactobacilli, may produce significant amounts of acetic acid in cheese
during ripening. Acetic acid is one of the myriad of components making up cheese
flavor that can exhibit an off-flavor when out of balance with other components.
Flat/Low Flavor Cheese exhibiting this defect is practically devoid of any Cheddar
flavor. A flat flavor is particularly noticeable when the sample is initially tasted.
Likewise, little odor is detectable. When associated with fresh or young cheese, the
defect is not serious or objectionable, since full cheese flavor may eventually
develop with additional aging. In an aged cheese, flatness (lacking flavor) represents
a more objectionable defect. A cheese with a defect such as bitter or high acid
should not be scored as a flat/low flavor sample.
Fruity The “fruity” off-flavor is peculiarly sweet and aromatic; it resembles the
odor of fermenting or overripe fruit, such as an apple or pineapple. At low levels it
may be considered complexity and appealing. At high levels, this flavor defect may
be associated with high-moisture cheese, and a weak, pasty body. The fruity defect
intensifies as the cheese ages and may eventually lead to an unclean or combined
fruity and unclean off-flavor. The fruity defect is attributed to the presence of
ethanol-forming microorganisms in the cheese milk or certain cheese cultures.
Esters formed from available ethanol and organic acids are responsible for the fruity
note (Bills et al., 1965; Vedamuthu et al., 1966; Bodyfelt, 1967).
Garlic/Onion This flavor defect is relatively easy to detect because the off-flavor
resembles that of garlic, onions, or leeks. Defective cheese usually shows a moder-
ate odor, unless the sample has been stored at a high temperature. When the sample
is tasted, the off-flavor is often quite pronounced and usually requires a thorough
rinsing of the mouth prior to tasting additional samples.
Heated (Cooked) The heated (cooked) off-flavor of cheese differs from the clean,
distinct cooked flavor of pasteurized milk; in cheese, this defect more resembles the
odor of old or spoiled milk, or the odor exhibited by melted Bakelite® forms of
plastic. This off-flavor is somewhat suggestive of the unclean odor, in addition to
whey taint. “Heated whey” is probably a more appropriate term to describe “heated”
or “cooked” off-flavor in cheese. A related group of products that demonstrate the
heated flavor are pasteurized process cheese, cheese food, and cheese spreads.
High Acid (Sour) Lactic acid is a normal component of Cheddar cheese flavor;
however, an excessive acid or sour taste is undesirable. Depending on age, the nor-
mal pH range of Cheddar cheese should be 5.15–5.45. The “high-acid” (sour) defect
generally results from a too rapid or excessive lactic acid production in the curd.
High acid is by far the most frequently encountered flavor defect of Cheddar cheese.
When a portion of high-acid cheese is placed into the mouth, a “quick” taste sensa-
tion is noted on the top and front sides of the tongue. This taste soon disappears
(usually), leaving the mouth free of any off-flavor sensations. High-acid flavor may
sometimes be associated with a dull, faded, or acid-cut color defect. For some indi-
viduals, the high-acid off-flavor is sharp and puckery to the taste, suggestive of
lactic acid. Numerous other off-flavors and bitterness may occur in conjunction with
a high-acid note.
Metallic The call for sodium reduction in the diets of some consumers has led to
development of reduced-sodium Cheddar cheeses. Some “salt substitutes” replace
sodium with potassium or other salts. One result of sodium reduction is the off-
274 S. Clark
flavor metallic. Additionally, in recent years, some cheesemakers have incorporated

sea salt into cheesemaking practices. The ions in sea salt sometimes provide metal-
lic tastes. Metallic may be described as copper penny-like or prickly and is most
readily noted at the gumline. Occurrence of a metallic (oxidized) off-flavor from
metal-oxidized milk is quite rare, due to the reduction-oxidation potential of the
cheese interior.
Malty (“Grape Nuts®”) The growth of malty Lactococcus lactis strains in cheese
milk, and a subsequently produced malty flavor compound (3-methylbutanal), is
responsible for this off-flavor (Tucker & Morgan, 1967). When this compound is
present in young (fresh/current) cheese at too high concentrations, malty flavor is
the outcome. However, when present in appropriate concentrations and with other
appropriate background compounds, 3-methylbutanal is the source of a pleasing
“nutty” flavor in Cheddar cheese (Avsar et al., 2004; Carunchia Whetstine
et al., 2006).
Moldy (Musty) A moldy or musty flavor defect often resembles the odor of a damp,
poorly ventilated (potato) cellar. This defect is easily recognized by a characteristic
smell. A slightly unclean off-flavor tends to persist after the tasted sample has been
expectorated. The most frequent cause is mold growth on cheese surfaces, due to
lost integrity of the cheese package and the admittance of air. In some cheeses where
extensive mold contamination has occurred, a Penicillium-like mold (blue-green)
growth may appear in the interior of the cheese, especially when it is open-textured.
Serious economic losses, consumer dissatisfaction, and potential toxicological and
allergenic consequences may occur from severe mold contamination of cheese.
Oxidized (Light-Induced) This off-flavor is characterized by a flat, cardboard-like

taste, and a puckery (mouthfeel) sensation may linger. The sense of smell is of little
or no value in detecting its presence. Oxidized cheese milk or light exposure in the
dairy case is the probable source for this cheese off-flavor.
Rancid (Lipase) A “rancid” off-flavor in cheese is characterized by (1) a relatively

slow or delayed reaction time; (2) a prominent odor that may be still noted after
sample expectoration; and (3) an unpleasant, persistent aftertaste. The off-flavor is
typically bitter, soapy, and usually somewhat repulsive. A rancid off-flavor in
Cheddar cheese can usually be detected by the sense of smell. Rancidity is caused
by activity of the enzyme lipase on milkfat; this yields volatile, unpleasantly fla-
vored short-chain free fatty acids and their respective salts (or soap). When the
concentrations of the free fatty acids from butyric (C4) to lauric (C12) exceed levels
desired for a balanced Cheddar cheese flavor, they impart an off-flavor variously
described as goaty, (cowy is ketone-like) unclean, bitter, or rancid. Rancid cheese
usually results from abusive handling of cheese milk prior to pasteurization; how-
ever, the production of lipases by contaminating bacteria or the lipase activity inher-
ent to raw milk may also contribute to rancidity, especially in aged cheese.
Sulfide (Skunky) The “sulfide” off-flavor of cheese is distinctive; it is similar to the

odor of water with high-sulfur content or boiled eggs. The cheese judge should keep
in mind that a low to modest level of sulfide is an important component of aged
Cheddar cheese flavor and aroma; it provides complexity and appeal to aged
Cheddar. However, when the sulfide note becomes dominant, to the point of obscur-
ing other flavor characteristics, this is perceived as an off-flavor and a serious defect.
In some regions of the world that produce Cheddar cheese, a moderate sulfide flavor
note is considered essential or highly desirable in sharp or extra-sharp cheese;
hence, it is not criticized when it appears. Sometimes an offensive sulfurous
(skunky) or spoiled egg odor may be noted in aged cheese. Frequently, there is an
associated bitter aftertaste, and/or a burning sensation within the mouth. Sulfide
cheese often has a related sticky, pasty body. Usually, sharp or extra-sharp cheese is
involved when this flavor attribute is incurred. Numerous sulfur-containing com-
pounds can be formed during the aging process.
Unclean (Dirty Aftertaste) An “unclean” off-flavor is difficult to describe, since it

often varies in intensity and lacks a definitive sensory description. Some describe
unclean as, simply, “complex.” At higher levels, this defect may suggest to the taster
a general lack of cleanliness in producing the product, given the dirty, lingering,
unpleasant aftertaste. This off-flavor persists long after the sample has been expec-
torated, and the mouth fails to “clean-up.” An unclean off-flavor may occur in con-
junction with other flavor defects such as high acid, bitter, and/or whey taint.
Poor-quality or “old” milk used for cheese manufacture is a principal cause of the
unclean flavor defect. Proteolytic and/or lipolytic enzymes, derived from psychro-
trophic bacteria or nonstarter lactic acid bacteria, may cause undesirable chemical
reactions to occur within the cheese and hence, result in an unclean off-flavor.
Whey Taint (Sour Whey) These terms describe various intensities of off-flavors in
cheese associated with retained cheese whey. The slightly dirty-sweet/acidic taste
and odor is characteristic of fermented whey. Ordinarily, the taste reaction of “whey
taint” is perceived rapidly and is of short duration; whey taint is the early stage of
unclean. The mouth tends to clean up soon after sample expectoration, unlike the
unclean defect. Some cheese authorities liken whey taint to the occurrence of a
“fermented/fruity” off-flavor, with an “unclean” off-flavor superimposed over it.
Whey taint cheese often has the body (rheological) characteristics of a high-moisture
cheese. Also, whey taint is sometimes found in young Cheddar cheese that exhibits
a seamy defect. Some judges may confuse whey taint and high-acid off-flavors;
however, only the former defect exhibits the distinctive aroma of fermented whey.
Yeasty This off-flavor may be identified by its sour, bread dough, yeasty, or some-
what “earthy” taste and characteristic aroma. Yeastiness in cheese may be detected
immediately after the sample has been put into the mouth. Since this defect is caused
by yeast growth, the cheese will usually have numerous medium- to large-sized gas
holes, which may be readily identified by their surface sheen, spherical or fish eye
shape, and frequency. Yeasty is a rare and serious defect.
276 S. Clark
Other Off-Flavors The off-flavors discussed above should be considered as the

more common or frequently encountered ones in Cheddar cheese. However, the
cheese judge should be alert to other possible flavor defects that may occur occa-
sionally. Examples are an “atypical Cheddar flavor” and a “catty” (or cat-box odor)
attribute; the latter is possibly caused by low concentrations of mesityl oxide in
cheese reacting with sulfides to produce this aroma.
9.9 Grading Fresh or Current Cheddar Cheese
Cheddar cheese can be graded at any stage between the time at the end of pressing
and the time of consumption. Experienced cheese graders agree that Cheddar cheese
ranging from only a few days to a few weeks old is more difficult to grade than a
more mature product. In grading a young or “green” cheese, the grader should pay
close attention not only to the flavor but also to those conditions that might precede
undesirable flavor development during ripening. There are occasions when a chee-
semaker, cheese buyer, or processor would like to have fresh or “green” cheese
graded, in order to (1) sell it on a quality basis; (2) determine the best use of the
cheese; (3) determine whether cheese quality will withstand storage; or (4) monitor
the day-to-day quality of the cheese. Different cheese-producing areas of the USA
often grade cheese independently of each other; consequently, those assigned grades
may differ slightly from Federal (USDA) cheese grade standards. Considering the
purposes for which cheese is graded in different geographical regions, the variations
in scorecards or grading forms and the wide interpretation of standards, there is lit-
tle wonder that there is lack of uniformity existing in grading Cheddar cheese.
Conversely, remarkable agreement exists in what constitutes high-quality or low-
quality cheese, regardless of the geographical region or the grading agency involved.
Grading of Young Cheese for Storage Some Cheddar cheese is bought and sold
when “green,” or only a few days after removal from the press. Fresh, uncured
cheese lacks the typical Cheddar flavor and body and must be graded on the basis of
predicted quality development during early to mid-stages of the curing period.
There is merit in grading fresh Cheddar cheese, in order to utilize the product to best
advantage. However, some differences of opinion exist as to the value of judging
“green” cheese to determine its future or “aged” potential. Since certain flavor,
body, texture, and workmanship qualities have a bearing on the curing of cheese, a
qualified cheese grader usually can reliably project or predetermine how a graded
young cheese will develop with additional storage (curing time). Careful sensory
evaluation of immature cheese (prior to storage) and records of manufacturing,
moisture content, and of the relative quality of cheese milk are helpful factors in
determining the probable success of cheese curing.
In grading young cheese for subsequent commercial use, Price (1943) suggested
dividing Cheddar cheese into the following categories:
Long hold – The quality level necessary for the most particular or discriminating use
of the cheese.
Short hold – Minor defects (slightly apparent), which will permit, short storage
periods without loss in commercial value.
Immediate use only – Distinct defects (easily detected, obvious) which require care-
ful sorting of the cheese according to given markets; immediate utilization of the
cheese is perhaps mandatory.
Limited use – Major defects (quite serious faults), which restrict use of the cheese
to a few markets, i.e., grinding purposes, process cheese, or immediate consump-
tion as a “cooking cheese.”
Culls – Inedible cheese not to be used for human consumption.
The specific product defects that necessitate placing cheese in the above respec-
tive classes are usually obvious and involve many of the defects listed on the cheese
scorecard. Flavor is usually considered more critically than other factors, although
body and texture, color, and appearance features of the cheese should not be
overlooked.
9.10 Colby, Monterey Jack, Colby-Jack,

and Flavored Cheese
In as much as the general manufacturing procedures and bacterial fermentations

occurring in Colby and Monterey Jack cheeses closely parallel those of Cheddar
cheese, these three related varieties tend to share common defects. Generally, due to
higher moisture content, lower acid and salt content, which facilitate higher micro-
bial and enzymatic activity, some sensory defects may reach greater intensity and
frequency in Colby and Jack cheese than in Cheddar. The above factors tend to limit
the keeping quality of Monterey Jack and Colby cheese, compared to Cheddar.
Flavor For cheeses 2–3 months of age, an acid flavor may be more apparent in Jack
and Colby cheeses than in Cheddar. The likelihood that a typical, nutty, Cheddar
flavor will develop in Colby or Jack cheese within several months is unlikely. The
“acid flavor” tends to be more obvious in the two stirred curd cheeses, since there is
no partial masking effect from a “Cheddar flavor.” A notable exception is certain dry
or low-moisture Monterey Jack cheeses, which can be aged 9 or more months and
often develop a distinct, full, nutty flavor. Frequently, when conventional Colby or
Monterey Jack cheese exceeds 100 days of age, a distinct bitter taste may develop,
which reflects a possible limitation for aging of these cheese types beyond 3 months.
Body and Texture Defects Colby and Monterey Jack cheeses tend to have a weak
body, due to their higher moisture content. This characteristic is anticipated and
278 S. Clark
tolerated, up to a certain point. With respect to cheese texture, mechanical openings

are expected and more tolerated in these two stirred curd forms of cheese, than in
Cheddar. Occasionally, solid or “blind spots” occur in Colby and Monterey Jack
cheese. These are usually related to the formation of curd lumps that developed
before or during curd washing, cooling, or salting. The typical remedy is to try to
continuously maintain the curd in a granular form by applying adequate agitation of
the curd and uniform distribution of the salt. Applications of higher pressure to
cheese hoops during pressing also account for the production of closed or blind
Colby and Monterey Jack cheeses. Solid or blind cheese of these two types has
apparently gained consumer acceptance; an open, granular, or stirred curd appear-
ance gradually has become a less common feature of Colby and Monterey
Jack cheese.
Flavored Cheese Cheddar and Cheddar-type cheeses are excellent carriers for a
variety of added flavors (e.g., sun-dried tomato, caraway seed, sage, horseradish,
dill) that are only limited by the imagination of the cheesemaker. The flavor and
body and texture characteristics of a good cheese should be enhanced by character-
istic and complimentary flavor and body and texture characteristics of the flavoring
component. An excellent example results from the addition of jalapeño peppers
during the salting step of any of the Cheddar-type cheeses. A properly manufactured
cheese will age well and present an, evenly distributed flavor of the jalapeños. Even
distribution of condiments is essential and should effectively represent the name on
the package without detracting from the underlying high-quality cheese flavor that
should be noted by the judge and ultimately the consumer.
9.11 Conclusion
Cheddar and related cheeses present a delightful but daunting task to the cheese
grader/judge. However, learning how to evaluate this extensive class of cheeses pro-
vides judges with wide array of sensory skills to apply to many cheese styles.
Students dedicating time to training in the use of the CDPEC scorecard for Cheddar
cheese will find themselves well prepared to continue training as full-fledged judges/
graders of Cheddar and Cheddar-type cheeses, with skills to apply to other catego-
ries of cheeses. Coupled with good cheesemaking record-keeping, learning to
observe the fine balance of flavor, body, and texture and to detect defects in cheeses
enables cheesemakers to produce the most consistent high-quality products to
consumers.
References
Avsar, Y. K., Karagul-Yuceer, Y., Drake, M. A., Singh, T. K., Yoon, Y., & Cadwallader,
K. R. (2004). Characterization of nutty flavor in Cheddar cheese. Journal of Dairy Science,
87, 1999.
Bills, D. D., Morgan, M. E., Libbey, L. M., & Day, E. A. (1965). Identification of compounds
responsible for fruity flavor defect of experimental Cheddar cheeses. Journal of Dairy Science,
48, 1168.
Blake, A. J., Powers, J. R., Luedecke, L. O., & Clark, S. (2005). Enhanced lactose cheese milk does
not guarantee calcium lactate crystals in finished Cheddar cheese. Journal of Dairy Science,
88, 2302.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1967). Lactic streptococci and the fruity flavor defect of Cheddar cheese. M.S. the-
sis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. 118 pp.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J., & Trout, G. M. (1988). Chapter 8: Sensory evaluation of cheese. In The
sensory evaluation of dairy products (75 pp). AVI, Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Carunchia Whetstine, M. E., Drake, M. A., Broadbent, J. R., & McMahon, D. (2006). Enhanced
nutty flavor formation in Cheddar cheese made with a malty Lactococcus lactis adjunct culture.
Chandan, R. C. (1980a). Flavor problems in Cheddar cheese varieties. Dairy Recipes, 81(4), 117.
Chandan, R. C. (1980b). Texture problems in Cheddar cheese. Dairy Recipes, 81(6), 94.
Drake, M. A., McIngvale, S. C., Gerard, P. D., Cadwallader, K. R., & Civille, G. V. (2001).
Development of a descriptive language for Cheddar cheese. Journal of Food Science,
66(9), 1422.
Hong, C. M., Wendorff, W. L., & Bradley, R. L., Jr. (1995a). Factors affecting light-induced pink
discoloration of annatto-colored cheese. Journal of Food Science, 60, 94–97.
Hong, C. M., Wendorff, W. L., & Bradley, R. L., Jr. (1995b). Effects of packaging and lighting on
pink discoloration and lipid oxidation of annatto-colored cheeses. Journal of Dairy Science,
78, 1896–1902.
Iyer, M., & Lelievre, J. (1987). Yield of Cheddar cheese manufactured from milk concentrate by
ultrafiltration. International Journal of Dairy Technology, 40(2), 45.
Johnson, M. (2004). Revisiting calcium lactate crystals in cheese. Dairy Pipeline, 16(1), 1.
Kosikowski, F. V., & Mocquot, G. (1958). Advances in cheese technology (FAO agriculture studies
no. 38) (263 pp). Food and Agricultural Organization, United Nations.
Miller, G. D., Jarvis, J. K., & McBean, L. D. (2000). Handbook of dairy foods and nutrition (2nd
ed., 423 pp). National Dairy Council/CRC Press.
Nelson, J. A., & Trout, G. M. (1934). Judging and grading cheese. In Judging dairy products (145
pages). Olsen Publishing.
Nelson, J. A., & Trout, G. M. (1948). Judging and grading cheese. In Judging dairy products (2nd
ed., 494 pages). Olsen Publishing.
Nelson, J. A., & Trout, G. M. (1951). Judging and grading cheese. In Judging dairy products (3rd
Nelson, J. A., & Trout, G. M. (1964). Judging and grading cheese. In Judging dairy products (4th
Partridge, J. A. (2009). Cheddar and Cheddar-type cheese. In S. Clark, M. Costello, M. Drake, &
F. Bodyfelt (Eds.), The sensory evaluation of dairy products. Springer.
Price, W. V. (1943, November 5). Comments on tentative cheese grades. Cheese reporter.
Singh, T. K., Drake, M. A., & Cadwallader, K. R. (2003). Flavor of Cheddar cheese: A chemical
and sensory perspective. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 2, 166.
http://members.ift.org/NR/rdonlyres/D612A5D2-F351-4FD5-A6AB-4C8DD16B9F/0/crfsfs-
v2n4p01390162ms20020702.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2006
Tucker, J. S., & Morgan, M. E. (1967). Decarboxylation of α-keto acids by Streptococcus lactis
var. maltigenes. Applied Microbiology, 15, 694.
280 S. Clark
US FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration). Code of Federal Regulations Title 21. (2022). Food
and drugs. Subchapter B – Food for Human Consumption. Part 133. Cheese and related cheese
products. Available at: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-133.
Date accessed: 11-19-22.
USDA AMS (U.S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service). U.S. Grade
Standards for Cheddar Cheese. Available at: https://www.ams.usda.gov/grades-standards/
cheddar-cheese-grades-and-standards. Date accessed: 11-29-22.
USDA ERS (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service). (2020). Dairy Data.
Per capita consumption of selected cheese varieties (Annual). Available at: https://www.ers.
usda.gov/data-products/dairy-data/. Date accessed: 11-28-22.
Van Slyke, L. L., & Price, W. V. (1979). Cheese (522 pp). Ridgeview Publishing Co.
Vedamuthu, E. R., Sandine, W. E., & Elliker, P. R. (1966). Flavor and texture in Cheddar cheese.
II. Carbonyl compounds produced by mixed-strain lactic starter cultures. Journal of Dairy
Science, 49, 151.
Wendorf, W. L. (2007). Preventing color fade in grass-based natural cheeses. Dairy Pipeline, 19, 1.
Wilson, H. L., & Reinbold, G. W. (1965). American Cheese Varieties (Pfizer Cheese Monographs)
(67 pp). Chas. Pfizer & Co. Inc.
Wilster, G. H. (1980). Practical Cheese making. Oregon State University Book Stores, Inc.
Chapter 10
Ice Cream and Frozen Desserts
Valente B. Alvarez
10.1 Introduction
Ice cream is among the most favorite desserts in the USA, and vanilla, chocolate,
and strawberry are the preferred flavors. Ice cream is a frozen food made of a mix-
ture of dairy products such as milk, cream, and nonfat milk, combined with sugars,
flavoring, and inclusions, such as fruits and nuts. Functional ingredients, such as
stabilizers and emulsifiers, are often included in the product to promote proper tex-
ture and enhance the eating experience. According to US standards, ice cream must
contain at least 10% milk fat, before the addition of bulky ingredients, and must
weigh a minimum of 4.5 pounds to the gallon. Ice cream containing at least 1.4%
egg yolk solids is called French ice cream or frozen custard. Superpremium ice
cream is a denser product because it contains 16–18% milkfat and low overrun
(20–50% range). Ice creams with reduced fat levels, which are described later in this
chapter, contain the same ingredients as regular ice cream, and follow the labeling
guidelines established by the FDA. Soft-serve ice cream is a frozen dessert that is
soft frozen just before serving on the premises, so the formulas differ from hard-
frozen products. The fat content of soft-serve mixes is in the range of 4–12%, and
the serum solids vary inversely from 11% to 14% with fat content (Marshall
et al., 2003).
Ice cream is one of the most popular desserts in the USA, with approximately
5.83 billion liters (2.6 billion gal) produced in 2019 (USDA, 2021). Most of the ice
cream produced in the USA is the hard-frozen type, but the production of soft serve
has increased over the past decade. The US per capita consumption of ice cream,
V. B. Alvarez (*)
Department of Food Science and Technology, Wilbur A. Gould Food Industries Center, The
Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_10
282 V. B. Alvarez
sherbet, and other commercially produced frozen dairy products was 18.7 pounds in
2019. It is estimated that 98% of all US households purchase ice cream (USDA, 2021).
Ice cream and related products are members of the “frozen dairy desserts family”
and are defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 21, Part 135. These
frozen desserts are defined as follows:
Reduced fat ice cream contains at least 25% less total fat than the referenced prod-
uct (either an average of leading brands or the company’s own brand). Light ice
cream contains at least 50% less total fat or 33% fewer calories than the refer-
enced product (the average of leading regional or national brands). Low-fat ice
cream contains a maximum of 3 g of total fat per serving (1/2 cup). Nonfat ice
cream contains less than 0.5 g of total fat serving.
Mellorine is a food similar to ice cream but having the milk fat replaced in whole or
part with vegetable or animal fat. The FDA Standard of Identity specifies that it
contains not less than 6% fat and 2.7% protein. The milk-derived protein has a
protein efficiency not less than that of milk protein. For mellorine containing
bulky-flavoring agents, the minimal content of fat and protein is calculated in the
same way as for ice cream. Vitamin A must be present at the rate of 40 IU per
gram of fat (21 CFR 135.130).
Sherbets have a milkfat content of between 1 and 2% and slightly higher sweetener
content than ice cream. Sherbet weighs a minimum 6 pounds to the gallon and is
flavored either with fruit or other characterizing ingredients (21 CFR 135.140).
Water ices are similar to sherbets, but contain no dairy ingredients; no egg ingredi-
ent, other than egg white; and the mix need be not pasteurized (21 CFR 135.160).
Other frozen dairy desserts, including but not limited to gelato and frozen yogurt,
are not defined in the CFR and are not regulated by the FDA.
Each product category may differ in the type of flavoring, the composition in
terms of dairy ingredients and other food solids, and the extent of product overrun
(increase in ice cream volume due to air incorporation). Table 10.1 summarizes the
compositional differences of the major classes of frozen dairy desserts. The optional
milk ingredients that these frozen dairy desserts may contain are listed in Table 10.2.
Within the restrictions imposed by the 2022 CFR, 21 CFR 135.110 (Table 10.1), ice
cream is basically defined as that food produced as a result of freezing, while stir-
ring, a pasteurized mix that consists of one or more of the dairy ingredients listed in
Table 10.2 and other non-milk-derived ingredients (that are safe and suitable). The
latter serve functions such as nutritive carbohydrate sweeteners, stabilizers, emulsi-
fiers, flavorings, and coloring agents.
The sensory evaluation of ice cream and frozen desserts is not easy. It requires
training and continuous practice with prepared samples before a person can develop
the necessary skills, knowledge, and senses to judge ice cream. In addition to the
expertise of the judge, proper environmental conditions during evaluation are neces-
sary to judge the products correctly. This chapter covers in detail the physical and
chemical characteristics of the most common frozen desserts, the ingredients, and
their influence on sensory attributes such as flavor, body, and texture. The possible
causes and corrections of off-flavor, body, and texture defects are discussed as well.
10 Ice Cream and Frozen Desserts 283
Table 10.1 Federal Standards of Identity for the composition of frozen dairy deserts
Total Egg
Total milk Whey yolk
Weight solids solids Milk solids solids Overrun
Product (lb/gal) (lb/gal) (%) fat (%) (%) (%) Caseinates (%)
Ice creama ≥4.5 ≥1.6 ≥20 ≥10 ≤2.5 <1.4 b 90–100
Bulky- ≥4.5 ≥1.6 ≥16 ≥8 ≤2.0 d b
flavored ice
creamc
Frozen ≥4.5 ≥1.6 ≥20 ≥10 ≤2.5 ≥1.4 b 90–100
custarde
Bulky- ≥4.5 ≥1.6 ≥16 ≥8 ≤2.0 ≥1.12 b
flavored
frozen
custarde
Mellorineh ≥4.5 ≥1.6 g f g i j
Reduced fat ≥4.5 k b
ice cream
Light ice ≥4.5 l b
cream
Low-fat ice m b
cream
Sherbet ≥6.0 2–5% 1–2% 0–4% i j 30–40
Water ices ≥6.0 0 0 0 0 0 25–30
From: Code of Federal Regulations Title 21, Part 135.110–135.160
a
Increases in milk fat may be offset with corresponding decreases in nonfat milk solids, but the
latter must be at least 6% in frozen custard and ice cream and 4% in low-fat ice cream. Corresponding
adjustments may be made in bulky-flavored products
b
May be added to ice cream mix containing not less than 20% total milk solids, providing that
caseinates are prepared by precipitation with gums, ammonium caseinate, calcium caseinate,
potassium caseinate, and sodium caseinate
c
Adjustment in composition in bulky-flavored frozen desserts is determined by calculation based
on the actual quantity of bulky flavor used. However, the analysis must never be lower than the
minima given in the table
d
Less than 1.4% egg yolk solids by weight of food exclusive of the weight of any bulky-flavor
ingredients
e
Also designated French ice cream or French custard ice cream
f
Milk fat replaced by a minimum of 6% vegetable or animal fat
g
At least 2.7% milk-derived protein having a protein efficiency ratio (PER) not less than that of
whole milk protein, 108% of casein
h
For bulky-flavored mellorine, in no case shall the fat content of the finished food be less than 4.8%
or the protein content less than 2.2%
i
Egg yolk solids are allowed
j
Caseinates are allowed
k
Ice cream made with 25% less fat than the reference ice cream
l
Ice cream made with 50% less fat or 1/3 fewer calories than the reference ice cream, provided that
in case of caloric reduction less than 50% of the calories are derived from fat
m
Solids from concentrated, dried, and modified whey used singly or in combination may not
exceed 25% of the total milk solids content permitted
Composition is determined by calculation based on actual quantity of the bulky flavor used.
However, the milk fat content and the nonfat milk solids content must never be lower than 2 and
7%, respectively. (Total milk solids must not be less than 9%)
284 V. B. Alvarez
Table 10.2 Optional dairy ingredients approved for use in ice cream and frozen custarda
Cream Fresh, dried, plastic (concentrated milk fat)
Butter and
butter oil
Milk Fresh, concentrated, evaporated, sweetened condensed, super-heated condensed,
dried, skim, concentrated skim, evaporated skim, condensed skim, super-heated
condensed skim, sweetened condensed skim, sweetened condensed part-skim
milk, nonfat dry milk, sweet cream butter milk, condensed sweet cream butter
milk, dried sweet cream butter milk, skim milk that may be concentrated from
which part or all of the lactose has been removed
Wheyb Whey and whey products recognized as GRAS by the FDA, whey solids are
limited to not more than 25% of milk solids nonfat
Caseinc Precipitated with gums
Caseinatec Salt of ammonium, calcium, potassium, or sodium
Buttermilkd Fresh, condensed, or dried; for churning of sweet cream
Hydrolyzed Added as stabilizers at a level not to exceed 3% by weight of ice cream mix
milk proteins containing not less than 20% total milk solids
From the Code of Federal Regulations Title 21, Part 135.110
a
The Federal Standards of Identity provide quality standards for certain of the above ingredients
b
Generally recognized as safe
c
Not considered to be milk solids (does not satisfy milk solids requirements)
d
Titratable acidity of not more than 0.17%, calculated as lactic acid, for a solution of 8.5%
total solids
The use of scorecards to evaluate and record the quality of ice cream is also part of
this chapter. Special emphasis is given to the Annual Collegiate Dairy Products
Evaluation ice cream scorecard. The information in this chapter should provide the
necessary background and guidelines for individuals to become skilled judges of
the quality of frozen dairy products after a reasonable period of rigorous training
and practice.
10.2 Ingredients
The quality of ice cream may be influenced by several factors: (a) the quality of mix
ingredients such as milk, cream, nonfat milk, sugars, flavoring, and inclusions; (b)
processing conditions; (c) freezing; (d) packaging; and (e) handling and storage
conditions. These factors determine the sensory attributes of the product as sweet
flavor, body and texture, and cold sensation that are perceived by consumers. The
quality and sensory attributes of ice cream can be evaluated through its color, micro-
bial, chemical, and physical analyses, although these measurements are not neces-
sarily a direct indication of the “eating quality” of the ice cream as perceived by the
consumer in terms of the most desirable flavor, texture, color, appearance, and over-
all quality. That is the reason why human senses, as opposed to machines, are still
used widely in evaluating ice cream products. Even though the perception and
preferences of the sensory attributes vary among different individuals, judging and
scoring of ice cream products are important tasks of the quality control programs of
ice cream processors. Finished products are evaluated for sensory quality after
freezing and throughout the different stages of storage, shipping, handling, and
distribution.
The sweeteners. The sweeteners commonly used in ice cream are sucrose (cane
or beet sugar), dextrose (corn sugar), and various corn syrups (Marshall et al., 2003;
Goff & Hartel, 2013). Honey, when used, imparts both sweetness and a characteris-
tic flavor. Corn syrup is produced by converting starch into a mixture of simpler
sugars including dextrose, maltose, maltotriose, maltotetraose, and dextrins (in
ascending order of molecular weights). Members of the mixture with lower molecu-
lar weights exhibit greater sweetness, while the higher-molecular-weight members
have the ability to limit water migration and ice crystal formation more effectively.
The dextrose equivalent (DE) designation of a given corn syrup provides an indica-
tion of the distribution of starch conversion sugars present. High DE values imply a
high degree of conversion into dextrose, the simplest sugar produced from starch.
Other available corn syrups are designated as high maltose and high fructose; the
latter is produced by an additional processing step that converts dextrose into fruc-
tose. Fructose provides the most sweetness for a given amount of added sweetener.
In an aqueous solution, such as found in ice cream, approximately 2 parts of 42
DE corn syrup, 3 parts of lactose, or 1 part of high-fructose syrup are required to
impart the equivalent sweetness of 1 part of sucrose (the common standard). The
generally accepted sweetness level for vanilla ice cream is a 13–15% sucrose equiv-
alent (equal to 13–15% sucrose in the mix).
The relative hardness of ice cream produced at any given temperature depends on
what proportion of water is frozen at that temperature, which in turn largely depends
on the freezing point of the ice cream mix and the temperature at which the finished
product is stored (Tobias, 1981, 1982; Bodyfelt, 1983a, b; Bodyfelt et al., 1988;
Goff, 2002; Clarke, 2006; Goff & Hartel, 2013). The freezing point of ice cream is
particularly influenced by soluble solids, especially sweeteners. Furthermore, the
amount of ice and the size distribution of ice crystals affect the relative hardness of
ice cream (Wibley et al., 1998; Hartel et al., 2004; Amador et al., 2017).
During freezing, latent heat of water is removed and this results in the formation
of ice crystals. The remaining solution becomes more concentrated in terms of the
soluble constituents because of the transformation of a part of water into ice crystals
by the freezing process. This process is called freeze concentration (Hartel, 1996;
Marshall et al., 2003; Goff & Hartel, 2013). Viscosity and glass transition states
influence the freezing process and textural properties of ice cream. Water bound by
stabilizers is not available to freeze initially or to refreeze during subsequent storage
(Miller-Livney & Hartel, 1997). Low storage temperature and the presence of stabi-
lizers reduce the kinetic energy of water molecules, thereby reducing their mobility
during temperature fluctuations of storage (Fennema, 1993). A high proportion of
bound water in ice cream, or other frozen dairy desserts, serves to reduce the amount
of water to be frozen. This increases the resistance of the ice cream to heat shock
286 V. B. Alvarez
during storage with less chance of recrystallization, thus improving the body and
texture of the product.
Mineral salts present in milk, lactose, and added sugars reduce the freezing point
of the ice cream mix (Hartel et al., 2004; Goff & Hartel, 2013). The monosaccha-
rides, fructose, and dextrose equally lower the freezing point of a solution (or a mix)
and concomitantly reduce the freezing point to a greater extent by weight than the
disaccharides sucrose, maltose, and lactose. The higher-molecular-weight sugars
that are present in corn syrup depress the freezing point to a lesser extent than do
disaccharides, when compared on an equal weight basis. Each of the various sugars
used in ice cream bind water to a different extent. The higher DE sugars and dextrins
in corn syrup are the most effective binders of water, with the exception of stabiliz-
ers. The low DE corn syrups (e.g., 36 DE and 42 DE) lack sweetening power com-
pared to the higher DE corn syrups, but the low DE sweeteners limit water migration
more effectively and therefore have greater “body building” properties in ice cream
and reduced fat ice creams (Anter et al., 1986; Marshall et al., 2003).
Liquid sugars of poor-quality or corn syrups can be sources of off-flavors in fro-
zen dairy desserts, especially in vanilla-flavored products (Marshall et al., 2003).
Dark syrups, wherein nonenzymatic browning (Maillard reaction or caramelization)
has taken place, may impart a stale, caramelized flavor. Certainly more serious is the
fermentation of liquid sugars or corn syrups, which generally makes them unusable
in ice cream. When conducting sensory evaluation of ice cream, one should be alert
to the possible flavor shortcomings that can stem from certain sweetener sources.
Indeed, one of the most common attributes of vanilla ice cream is “syrup flavor,”
which will be discussed fully later in this chapter.
Emulsifiers. Emulsifiers provide several important functions, such as decreased
whipping time, controlled fat destabilization, enhanced smoothness of texture,
increasing resistance to melting and shrinkage, and improved dryness (Pelan et al.,
1997; Goff et al., 1989; Goff & Hartel, 2013). A degree of destabilization of fat
globules is essential to produce ice cream with desirable body (Goff & Jordan,
1989; Amador et al., 2017). Fat destabilization is described as the following pro-
cess: emulsifiers, being better surfactants than the proteins, displace proteins from
direct contact with the fat globule surface (Segall & Goff, 2002; Goff & Hartel,
2013); during freezing of the mix, the fat globule partially crystallizes and is exposed
to shearing forces, allowing separate fat globules to partially coalesce with one
another (van Boekel & Walstra, 1981; Akbari et al., 2019). The partially coalesced
fat globules stabilize air cells, forming three-dimensional network structures with
the air cells (Berger, 1997; Zhang & Goff, 2004; Goff & Hartel, 2013). Emulsifiers
also contribute to the formation of small, uniformly dispersed air cells; protect
against texture deterioration due to heat shock; and provide a semblance of a “rich-
ness” sensation. Over-emulsification may result in fat churning, a grease-like mouth
coating, and/or an “emulsifier” taste. At times, even lower levels of emulsifiers may
impart an aftertaste when they and/or other ingredients are old, oxidized, or have
deteriorated in some other way. Commonly used emulsifiers include lecithin, mono-
and diglycerides of fatty acids, polysorbate 80 (polyoxyethylene (20) sorbitan
monooleate), and polysorbate 65 (polyoxyethylene (20) sorbitan tristearate)
(Marshall et al., 2003). Depending on the specific emulsifier(s) used, the concentra-
tion may vary from 0.03% to 0.2% (Mann, 1997). Polysorbate 80 leads to more
extensive fat destabilization compared to mono- and diglycerides (Hartel et al., 2004).
Stabilizers. There are many important functions of stabilizers in ice cream and
related products (Goff & Sahagian, 1996; Vega et al., 2004; Abbas Syed, 2018). One
of them is to bind water, which in turn promotes small ice crystal formation and
helps keep ice crystals from growing in size during recrystallization, i.e., when stor-
age temperatures fluctuate or become too high (referred to as “heat shock”)
(Donhowe & Hartel, 1996; Hagiwara & Hartel, 1996; Sutton & Wilcox, 1998;
Flores & Goff, 1999). Small ice crystals are favored by ice cream evaluators, as
large ones produce unappealing “coarse” or “icy” mouthfeel.
Stabilizers also prevent the separation of clear serum during meltdown by modi-
fying the ice crystal/serum interface (Sutton & Wilcox, 1998; Goff & Hartel, 2013).
Another stabilizer function is to develop viscosity in the ice cream mix, since a
more viscous mix has a better capacity to retain air bubbles (Cottrell et al., 1980;
Bolliger et al., 2000b; Chavez-Montes et al., 2004; Abbas Syed, 2018). Stabilizers
are usually proprietary blends of gums such as guar, locust bean, carrageenan, algi-
nates, and carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC). Depending on the type and concentra-
tion of gums in the frozen dairy dessert mix, and the milkfat and solid content of the
mix, stabilizers are used at levels ranging from 0.15% to 0.5% (Clarke, 2006). The
typical usage level for stabilizers in ice cream is 0.5% (Marshall & Arbuckle, 1996).
Although most commercial ice creams contain stabilizers and emulsifiers in small
concentrations, some manufacturers exclude these body and texture-modifying
agents from the formulation of certain brands, especially those products categorized
and promoted as “premium quality” or “all natural” (Tobias, 1981, 1982, 1983;
Bodyfelt, 1983a, b; Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
Flavoring and inclusion agents. Space does not permit the listing of all the pos-
sible or sum total flavorings used in ice cream and other frozen dairy desserts. As a
general principle, there is no point in comparing one flavor type against another, as
the choice is generally a matter of personal preference. The evaluator should be
aware that flavorings range from natural to artificial, but, as a general rule, the natu-
ral source may be preferred from several viewpoints. However, the use of natural
flavoring is not always a guarantee of high quality. For example, some sources of
fresh or frozen strawberries (as well as certain other berries or fruits) may be defi-
cient (lacking) in flavor intensity, though used at the recommended level (Bodyfelt
et al., 1988; Marshall et al., 2003; Goff & Hartel, 2013). Other possible problems
with berries or fruits may involve (1) the utilization of the wrong, or a less satisfac-
tory, variety; (2) improper stage of ripeness at harvest; (3) physical damage prior to
preservation; (4) excessive and/or improper storage prior to preservation; (5) high
and fluctuating temperatures in frozen storage; and/or (6) an inadequate quantity of
fruit incorporated into the product.
The most popular flavor of ice cream in the USA is vanilla, which accounts for
nearly one half of all ice cream sales (IDFA, 2017). Since vanilla is a delicate flavor-
ing, it will not “cover-up” or mask potential off-flavors as effectively as stronger
flavors such as mint or chocolate, which is not exactly a flavoring because the whole
288 V. B. Alvarez
ice cream base formulation needs to change when chocolate ice cream is made.
However, if used at the same level, double-strength vanilla is much more effective
at covering up possible flavor defects in frozen ice cream than single-strength vanilla
flavoring (Im & Marshall, 1998).
Off-flavors in the mix are more difficult to detect in the presence of stronger fla-
vorings, such as mint. To manufacture a vanilla ice cream with an ideal flavor
requires that (1) the dairy products, sweeteners, and all other ingredients be free of
flavor defects; (2) the mix be correctly processed; and (3) the vanilla flavoring be of
the highest quality. The perceived flavor should not only exhibit the desired inten-
sity but also blend pleasingly with the background or the complementary flavor
provided by the mix. While vanilla ice cream provides a rigid test for overall sen-
sory and quality control, these general manufacturing requirements also apply to
other ice cream flavors. A common axiom in the manufacture of dairy products is
that “the quality of the finished product can be no better than the quality of the
ingredients.”
The rating for bacteria content must be performed in the laboratory, where equip-
ment, laboratory technique, and additional time are required. Due to these require-
ments, bacteria are not evaluated in any sensory evaluation contests. In many
situations, the results of the standard plate count and coliform count may not be
available at the time the product is evaluated, in which case the “full score” may be
allowed with a notation that the data were not available or the analysis not under-
taken. As in milk evaluation, actual microbial counts are more meaningful than
point scores. For instance, coliform counts of >50 or total plate counts of
>500,000 CFU/ml require a score of “zero,” but obviously the latter reported values
would reflect a more inferior product.
10.3 The Ice Cream Scorecard
Measuring ice cream quality can be done by various standards, but numerical scores
are helpful in ice cream operations, academia, and institutions that need to judge the
quality of products based on established ideal characteristics. Bodyfelt et al. (1988)
developed a scorecard and scoring guides for ice cream. The card had various cat-
egory criticisms for flavor, body and texture, color appearance and package, melting
quality, and bacterial content. The scoring guide for vanilla ice cream had a score
range of 1–10 for flavoring system, sweeteners, processing, dairy ingredients, and
others. The scorecard and guidelines were modified through the years and served as
the basis for the development of the current Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation
Contest (CDPEC) scorecard. The scorecard in Fig. 10.1 is the one developed and
approved by the CDPEC coaches committee and is used throughout the USA in col-
lege judging contests. The card has two category criticisms, flavor plus body and
texture.
The scoring guides that accompany the scorecard are presented in Table 10.3.
Scoring guides are useful in training new evaluators and in promoting
Ice Cream
SAMPLE 1
___ 1. Acid ___ 6. Lacks Freshness ___ 11. Rancid

___ 2. Cooked ___ 7. Low Flavoring ___ 12. Salty
___ 3. High Flavor ___ 8. Low Sweetness ___ 13. Syrup Flavor
___ 4. High Sweetness ___ 9. Old Ingredient ___ 14. Unnatural Flavor
___ 5. Lacks Fine Flavor ___ 10. Oxidized ___ 15. Whey
BODY AND SCORE: 1 2 3 4 5 NO CRITICISM: 5 NORMAL RANGE: 1-5

TEXTURE
___ 1. Crumbly ___ 4. Gummy ___ 7. Soggy
___ 2. Fluffy ___ 5. Icy ___ 8. Weak
___ 3. Greasy ___ 6. Sandy
SAMPLE 2
___ 1. Acid ___ 6. Lacks Freshness ___ 11. Rancid

___ 2. Cooked ___ 7. Low Flavoring ___ 12. Salty
___ 3. High Flavor ___ 8. Low Sweetness ___ 13. Syrup Flavor
___ 4. High Sweetness ___ 9. Old Ingredient ___ 14. Unnatural Flavor
___ 5. Lacks Fine Flavor ___ 10. Oxidized ___ 15. Whey
BODY AND SCORE: 1 2 3 4 5 NO CRITICISM: 5 NORMAL RANGE: 1-5

TEXTURE
___ 1. Crumbly ___ 4. Gummy ___ 7. Soggy
___ 2. Fluffy ___ 5. Icy ___ 8. Weak
___ 3. Greasy ___ 6. Sandy
Fig. 10.1 Scorecard of the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest (samples 3–8 appear on
separate pages)
standardization of judgments among different evaluators. Further modifications of

the scorecard will be suggested later in this chapter when other frozen products are
discussed.
Various flavor defects that may be encountered in vanilla ice cream are described
as follows:
Acid: Tingly taste sensation on tongue, may be accompanied by unclean or other

bacterial flavors
Cooked: Common, eggy, custard, not serious defect, scorched or burnt definite defect
High flavor: Harsh taste when first placed in mouth, unbalanced blend.
High sweetness: Candy-like sensation, not refreshing
Lacks fine Harsh, lacks balance, not perfect, minor defect
flavor:
Lacks Stale, some marginally old dairy ingredient, slight old ingredient, or other
freshness: flavors
290 V. B. Alvarez
Table 10.3 Scoring guide for flavor defects of vanilla ice cream
Intensity of defect
Flavor criticisms S D P
Acid 4 2 U
Cooked 9 7 5
High flavor 9 8 7
High sweetness 9 8 7
Lacks fine flavor 9 8 7
Low flavoring 8 6 4
Low sweetness 9 8 6
Old ingredient 6 4 2
Oxidized 6 4 1
Rancid 4 2 U
Salty 8 7 5
Syrup flavor 9 7 5
Unnatural flavor 8 6 4
Whey 7 6 4
Normal range 1–10. Range of scores for each class of flavor quality: excellent 10 (no criticism),
good 8–9, fair 6–7, poor 5 or less
S slight, D definite, P pronounced
U indicates product of unsalable quality. Official rules prohibit the use of such products in contest
Low flavoring: Flat, bland, lacks vanilla

Low sweetness: Flat or bland taste
Old ingredient: Old or deteriorated dairy ingredients, persistent aftertaste, does not clean up
Oxidized: Cardboardy, astringent, oily, tallowy
Rancid: Persistently repulsive, unpleasant aftertaste, blue cheese, baby puke
Salty: Quickly perceived taste
Syrup flavor: Unnatural sweetness, (Karo) corn syrup, caramel, may be sticky or gummy
also
Unnatural Imitation vanilla, accidental mixing of another flavor with vanilla
flavor:
Whey: Graham cracker-like, stale condensed milk, slight salty taste, may be off color
or crumbly
10.4 Techniques of Ice Cream Scoring
As indicated earlier in this chapter, scoring and judging ice cream correctly is not
easy and requires knowledge and experience. Therefore, it is often done by students
and professionals who were trained in contests like the CDPEC and dairy industry.
With proper training, individuals are able to dependably evaluate the sensory quality
of ice cream and other related products more reliably than the untrained consumer.
In the CDPEC, products that meet the standards of ideal ice cream are given the
highest mark in the range 1–10 for flavor criticisms and 1–5 for body and texture
criticisms. Ice cream with no criticisms is considered perfect and is given a score of
10 and 5 in each category, respectively. Ice cream products rarely receive a perfect
score. When a defect is identified, the smallest deduction a judge can make is one
point. The deduction can increase depending on the severity of the defects identi-
fied. Defects are described as slight, definite, or pronounced depending on the inten-
sity of the defect. Those product samples (representative of a lot) that receive a
“zero” in any one or more quality categories should or would generally be regarded
as unsalable products.
Tempering the samples. The technique of judging ice cream (Bodyfelt et al.,
1988) is markedly different in many respects from the judging of other dairy prod-
ucts. Since ice cream is a frozen product, it must be evaluated, in part, in that condi-
tion in order to ascertain the typical or desired body and texture characteristics.
Consequently, arrangements must be made to store (temper) the samples at a uni-
formly low temperature so that the ice cream retains its appropriate physical proper-
ties, yet the temperature maintained must not be so low that the ice cream is intensely
cold and unnecessarily hard. When ice cream is too cold, the recovery of the sense
of taste from temporary anesthesia, due to extreme cold, requires a longer period
than is expedient for satisfactory and efficient work. Furthermore, evaluators will
have greater difficulty in determining the actual body and texture properties if the
ice cream is too firm. Additionally, tempering is necessary for practical purposes
since dipping will also be nearly impossible if the ice cream is really cold.
Generally, temperatures between −18 and − 15 °C (−0.4 and 5 °F) are satisfac-
tory for tempering ice cream prior to judging (Goff & Hartel, 2013). This can be
best achieved by transferring the ice cream samples from the hardening room to a
dispensing cabinet at least several hours prior to judging, or preferably tempered
overnight. This length of time ensures that the ice cream tempers uniformly.
Exposing ice cream to room temperatures for tempering purposes is most unsatis-
factory since the ice cream rapidly melts along the outer edges, while the center
remains too firm for dipping.
If satisfactory evaluation is to be performed, the importance of proper tempering
of ice cream and related products cannot be minimized. Significant, measurable loss
of ice crystal structure occurs between −20 and –10 °C (−4 and 14 °F), and the
frozen fraction of ice cream decreases rapidly from −10 to 0 °C (14–32 °F) (Eisner
et al., 2004). Some freezer cabinets are not satisfactory for product tempering, as
they do not maintain a uniform temperature throughout the unit. Temperatures
should be measured at different locations throughout the cabinet to help insure uni-
form tempering of samples. Overfilling a tempering cabinet can cause some sam-
ples to be warmer than others, since crowded conditions inhibit the movement of air.
Placement of all samples, if possible, at the same height within the cabinet (with air
space between containers) usually helps insure uniform tempering.
Conditions for best work. Convenience is an important adjunct to efficient evalu-
ation. The samples, therefore, should be arranged so that they are easily accessible
without causing too much inconvenience in securing portions for sensory
292 V. B. Alvarez
examination. This arrangement involves providing ample spacing of the samples to

minimize or eliminate possible congestion when a number of people are conducting
the product evaluation. Placing an especially designed “dolly” under the ice cream
case so that the cabinet may be moved and/or arranged at will has been found to be
a convenient form of mobility in the laboratory or evaluation setting (Bodyfelt et al.,
1988). Thus, the ice cream is readily accessible, conveniently located, and properly
tempered. The temperature of the room should be comfortably warm. Attempting to
judge ice cream in a chilly room usually results in hurried work and hasty, question-
able judgments; in fact, it is better that the room be too warm than too cold.
Sampling. When ice cream (or another frozen dairy dessert) is properly tem-
pered, sample portions may be easily secured for completing all aspects of the sen-
sory evaluation. Generally, a good-quality ice cream dipper, scoop, or spade, rather
than a spoon, is preferred for obtaining samples (Fig. 10.2).
Exercising certain precautions is deemed advisable for the sampling process
(Bodyfelt et al., 1988). If the product surface has been exposed, then any dried sur-
face layer (to a depth of approximately 0.8 cm (1/4 in)) should be removed before
securing the sample for evaluation. When a meltdown test is conducted, the test
sample need not be large, but its volume must be uniform across all lots of ice cream
being compared. For the meltdown examination, a No. 30 scoopful of ice cream
placed on a clean, numbered petri dish is quite satisfactory. The petri dish should be
set in a convenient place (but away from heat sources) where melting qualities may
be observed from time to time during the overall evaluation process. Small samples
for tasting may be removed from the product package by either a metal or plastic
scoop (dipper) when desired. Individual, 15.2-, 20.3-, or 25.4-cm (6-, 8-, or 10-in)
paper plates have been used satisfactorily for holding the individual samples during
the course of tasting. One or more samples may be placed on the same plate for
study and comparison. Care must be exercised that portions of several samples are
not intermixed.
Fig. 10.2 Several types of scoops and spades used for dipping ice cream samples
The manipulation and conveying of sample portions to the mouth for tasting may
be done by means of a clean plastic, bright metal, compressed paper, fiber, or
wooden spoon. Some judges prefer metal or plastic spoons to all others for judging
ice cream. Spoons should be easy to clean between samples. It is important that
spoons not impart any atypical or foreign off-flavors to the product. Plastic, com-
pressed paper, fiber, and wooden spoons are all generally satisfactory; providing an
adequate supply is available so that heavily used or worn spoons may be discarded
at will. Single-service plastic spoons are most commonly used. In using wooden
spoons, precautions must be taken to guard against a slightly “woody” taste.
Intermittent or unrestricted dipping of “used” spoons into the container of ice
cream should absolutely not be tolerated for reasons of personal hygiene. Having
placed a reasonable-sized portion (a small scoopful) of ice cream onto an individual
plate for sensory study, the evaluator can then taste from this “individual” sample as
often as needed. The evaluator is free to secure additional samples from any product
container (with the appropriate dipper) when needed, in order to complete the pro-
cess of product evaluation.
10.5 Sequence of Sensory Observations
Since the physical condition of ice cream changes so rapidly when exposed to ordi-
nary temperatures, the evaluator must be alert and constantly observing during the
“time restrictive” sampling and evaluation process, in order not to overlook any
possible sensory defects associated with a given product sample, particularly body
and texture features. An orderly sequence of observations (Bodyfelt et al., 1988) has
been found to be most effective in evaluating ice cream for sensory characteristics.
The steps are listed in the following paragraphs.
Examine the container. Note the type and condition of the container, the presence
or absence of a liner and cover on bulk containers, and any package defects that may
be present.
Note the color of the ice cream. Observe the color of the ice cream, its intensity
and uniformity, and whether the hue is natural and typical of the given flavor of ice
cream being judged.
Sample the ice cream. During the course of dipping the sample, carefully note
the way the product cuts and the feel of the dipper as its cutting edge passes through
the frozen mass. Note particularly whether the ice cream tends to curl up or roll in
serrated layers behind the dipper, thus indicating excessive gumminess or sticki-
ness. The “feel” of dipping (i.e., the resistance offered), the evenness of cutting, the
presence of spiny ice particles, and whether the ice cream is heavy or light and fluffy
should be especially noted. The way the sample responds in the dipping process
often gives a fairly accurate impression of its body and texture characteristics
(Fig. 10.3).
The “scoopability” (rigidity) of ice cream as perceived by human subjects has
been correlated with instrumental measurements. The effect of various ice cream
294 V. B. Alvarez
mix compositions and processes on the microstructural (ice crystal and air-cell
sizes) and sensorial (scoopability and creaminess) characteristics was studied using
cryo-scanning electron microscopy (cryo-SEM) and oscillatory thermo-rheometry
(OTR). Ice cream was prepared using conventional freezing and a combined freez-
ing and low temperature extrusion (LTE) process. The LTE-processed ice cream
was reported to have smaller ice crystals as the higher shear force of the process
prevented aggregation. Air bubbles were better stabilized in LTE ice cream because
of higher viscosity. However, the higher shear forces of the LTE process led to
increased aggregation and partial coalescence of fat globules. The OTR storage
modulus (G′ – indicator of elasticity) and loss modulus (G″ – indicator of flowabil-
ity) values were compared to sensory evaluation of scoopability and creaminess by
an industrial sensory panel on a six-point scale. The sensory characteristics were
reported to be a function of loss modulus. In the low temperature range (T = −15 °C)
(5 °F), a lower value of G″ indicated less rigidity and improved scoopability. In the
molten ice cream (T > −1 °C) (30.2 °F), higher G″ values corresponded to a higher
degree of creaminess. The LTE-processed ice cream was reported to be more scoop-
able and creamier than conventional ice cream. It was concluded that OTR can be
successfully used to quantify the quality of ice cream (Wildmoser et al., 2004).
Begin judging. After a sample portion has been secured, the examination for
further body and texture characteristics and for flavor should begin immediately. As
a general rule, little conception of the flavor may be gained by smelling the sample.
Until the ice cream is melted within the mouth, the sample portion is so cold that for
all practical purposes the odoriferous substances remain practically nonvolatile and,
therefore, little or no aroma may be detected. When the sample is liquefied and
warmed to near body temperature, detection of the flavor characteristics is not par-
ticularly difficult. This detection is best accomplished by placing a small teaspoon-
ful or bite of frozen product directly into the mouth, quickly manipulating the
sample between the teeth and palate, and simultaneously noting the taste and/or
volatile sensations (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
Since the body and texture characteristics of a frozen product are to be deter-
mined, the sample placed into the mouth should initially be in the frozen state.
Immediately after placing a portion into the mouth, roll the sample between the
Fig. 10.3 Examples of vanilla ice cream defects observed when whipping: (a) brittle, crumbly,
friable; (b) elastic, gummy, pasty, sticky; (c) shrunken. (Courtesy of Elizabeth C. Alvarez)
incisors and bring them together very gently, noting (relatively) how far apart the
teeth may be held by the ice crystals and for how long. The evaluator should note
also whether any grittiness is apparent between the teeth. A small portion between
the incisors may reveal the presence of minute traces of a gritty or sandy texture
(lactose, sucrose, or glucose crystals). By pressing a small portion of the frozen ice
cream against the roof of the mouth, thus melting the sample quickly, the relative
degrees of smoothness, coarseness, coldness, the presence or absence of sandiness,
and the relative size of ice crystals may be determined. Certain body characteristics
of the ice cream may become apparent by the resistance to mastication that the
product offers in the mouth. Further discussion about the proper chew for ice cream
evaluation is found later in the section on body and texture in this chapter.
Expect delayed taste reaction. When ice cream is first placed into the mouth, its
low temperature temporarily numbs the sense of taste. The sensation of cold is usu-
ally predominant. Until the sensory nerve centers recover from the temporary anes-
thesia, a flavor sensation is usually not experienced. The duration of this temporary
impairment of taste (Bodyfelt et al., 1988; Wehr & Frank, 2004) is dependent upon
the size of the sample, its temperature, and its heat conductivity. In order not to
needlessly impair the sense of taste, an evaluator should use as small or modest a
sample as possible to accommodate evaluation of body and texture. A robust cor-
relation between the melting of the ice crystals from −10 to 0 °C (14–32 °F) and the
sensation of coldness in an ice cream sample has been established (Eisner et al.,
2004). Evaluators should take care in consistent size of bites evaluated.
Sense the flavor. While manipulating the sample about the mouth to ascertain
some of its body and texture characteristics, the evaluator should be aware that (1)
the physical properties of the ice cream are constantly changing; (2) the period of
temporary taste anesthesia (from coldness) is of fairly short duration; and (3) a hint
of the flavor will soon manifest itself as an initial taste sensation. The judge should
be alert and prepared to detect this sensation, whether it is prompt or otherwise.
The first perceived sensory reaction will probably be one of the fundamental
tastes (if present), and in the order of salty, sweet, sour, and/or bitter. As the sample
is warmed in the mouth, the volatile, flavor-contributing substance(s) will soon
evoke a perceived aroma (smell). Since sweetness is practically always perceived
prior to detection of volatile, odor-contributing substances, the characteristics of the
sweetener should be noted at once. Ice cream may be perceived as pleasantly sweet,
intensely sweet, lacking in sweetness, or “syrup flavor”; the latter denotes a depar-
ture from a simple, basic sweet taste.
By the time the quality and quantity of sweetness is assessed, other flavor notes
will likely have registered with the taster, including possible off-flavors that may be
traceable to the dairy ingredients. The judge should note, particularly, whether the
flavor is harsh (coarse) or delicate, mild, or pronounced; whether the flavor seems
creamy, pleasantly rich, or possesses a pronounced, objectionable, or unnatural
taste; and whether the mouth readily “cleans up” after the sample has been expecto-
rated. These are but a few of the numerous characteristics that should be observed
and noted in the process of evaluating ice cream flavor (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
296 V. B. Alvarez
After the sample has been held in the mouth for sufficient time to nearly attain
body temperature, and the flavor characteristics noted, it should be expectorated.
Occasionally, a sample may be swallowed, but this is the exception rather than the
rule. When the sensory evaluation is in progress, the judge’s focus should be on tast-
ing and observing, not on satisfying one’s sense of hunger. Unfortunately, in ice
cream scoring, the keenness of flavor perception may soon be lost or destroyed.
Some experienced judges may actually consume a small amount of ice cream just
before judging begins in order to adjust their palates and mental processes to this
product. But once judging is underway, absolutely all samples should be expecto-
rated after completing the flavor evaluation task.
Note the melting qualities. By the time the flavor attributes have been deter-
mined, the samples previously set aside for the observation of melting properties
should have softened sufficiently to yield an impression of those characteristics.
The judge should observe whether each ice cream sample has retained its form and
approximate size, even though some free liquid may have leaked (oozed) out, and
whether the melted liquid appears homogenous and creamy, curdled, foamy, or
watery (wheyed-off).
Record the results. Once all of the sensory observations have been completed,
the judge should record the sensory observations on a scorecard and assign the
appropriate numerical values. If the ice cream judge is to make efficient use of lim-
ited time and be reasonably accurate in one’s observations, a certain routine or tech-
nique similar to that just described should be followed.
10.6 Requirements of High-Quality Vanilla Ice Cream
There are specific criteria for sensory quality that apply to each flavor of ice cream.
However, since so many flavors of ice cream (and other related products) are pro-
duced in the USA, only a select few will be discussed in depth here. Vanilla ice
cream is a logical candidate for in-depth coverage due to consumer popularity and
to its vulnerability to off-flavors. Out of a total of the 10 most popular flavors of ice
cream in the USA, vanilla and chocolate hold first and second place (IDFA, 2017).
10.6.1 Color and Package
Color. The color of vanilla ice cream or reduced fat ice cream should be attractive,
uniform, pleasing, and typical of the specific flavor (French, old-fashioned, vanilla
bean, etc.) stated on the label. Colorants may or may not be added to dairy frozen
desserts. As long as the shade of color reasonably resembles the natural color
(β-carotene pigment) of cream and is neither too pale nor too vivid, color criticisms
are generally resisted for vanilla-flavored products. Ice cream flavors other than
vanilla should also exhibit a color that is in harmony with and/or suggestive of the
stated flavor on the package. The possible color defects of vanilla ice cream are
discussed here.
Table 10.4 (Bodyfelt et al., 1988) is a guide for scoring the color, the appearance,
and the package of vanilla ice cream; however, with minor revisions it can be
adapted for all ice cream flavors.
Gray, dull. Though infrequently encountered, a gray, dull color is easily recog-
nized by its “dead,” soiled white, and unattractive appearance. Such ice cream sug-
gests lack of cleanliness in manufacture, and, therefore, it is one of the more serious
and objectionable color defects. If the gray color is caused by the use of flavoring
with ground vanilla beans, which may be apparent by the presence of small pepper-
like particles of the ground bean, the color should not be criticized. Ice cream that
displays ground particles of vanilla bean (often labeled “vanilla bean”) is in demand
by some consumers and may be preferred in some locales of the USA.
Not uniform. Lack of color uniformity in vanilla ice cream is comparatively
uncommon but may be easily recognized when it occurs. Although the most appeal-
ing color for vanilla ice cream may be a moderate creamy shade of white, certain
portions may be darker or lighter than others. Particularly, this may be true of the
top or bottom surface or portions next to the side of the container where some desic-
cation may have occurred. This defect is often associated with age (extended prod-
uct storage).
If the color uniformity defect is restricted to the surface layer (which is usually
discarded when taking samples), it is not considered serious. At times, streaks or
waves of different color may be encountered throughout the mass of a vanilla ice
cream. This appearance can be caused by varying overruns attained from multibar-
rel freezers or may derive from different freezers that have a common discharge.
Table 10.4 A scoring guide for color, appearance, and package of vanilla ice cream
Intensity of defect
Defecta Slightb Moderate Definite Strong Pronouncedc
Dull color 4 3 2 1 –d
Nonuniform color 4 3 2 –d –d
Too high color 4 3 2 –d –d
Too pale color 4 3 2 –d –d
Unnatural color 4 3 2 1 0
Soiled container 3 2 1 0 0
Product on container 4 3 2 1 –d
Underfill/overfill 4 3 2 1 0
Damaged container 3 2 1 0 0
Defective seal 2 1 0 0 0
Ill-shaped containers 4 3 2 1 0
a
“No criticism” is assigned a score of “5.” Normal range is 1–5 for a salable product. An assigned
score of “0” (zero) is indicative of an unsalable product
b
Highest assignable score for defect of slight intensity
c
Highest assignable score for defect of pronounced intensity
d
A dash (−) indicates that the defect is unlikely to occur at this intensity level
298 V. B. Alvarez
Sometimes, a nonuniform color may originate from successive changes in the flavor
source (and associated color) throughout the freezing and packaging process.
Too high, vivid. A high color level is often objectionable because it appears unat-
tractive and often connotes an “artificial” impression. Although individual prefer-
ences for color vary, evaluators have a general tendency to downgrade products that
have an obvious, excessive intensity of color. Such a product conveys the idea of
cheapness, imitation, poor workmanship, or a general lack of understanding and
care on the part of the manufacturer.
Too pale, chalky, lacking. A pale, chalky, or snow-like color is the opposite of too
high in color. This defect is not particularly serious, although a lighter-colored prod-
uct may not have as much eye appeal as a creamy shade of white color. However,
uncolored ice cream, especially vanilla, should not necessarily be criticized for lack
of color. For special markets, ice cream without any form of added color is a must;
many products meet that marketing objective, and it does not seem logical to penal-
ize the color in those circumstances.
Unnatural. Unnatural color of ice cream should be recognized at a glance; the
product appearance is not “in keeping” with the impression conveyed by cream (or
milk fat). An unnatural color may be any shade of yellow, orange, or tan – colors
that do not correspond to the true color characteristics of milk fat. Some more com-
mon off shades of color in vanilla ice cream include lemon yellows, light green
yellows, orange yellows, and occasionally red yellows or tan browns. Where the use
of food colors is permitted, some manufacturers may select a particular one or com-
bination of colorants that make their vanilla ice cream(s) appear unique or distinc-
tive. While the selected color may accomplish this purpose, it may nevertheless be
faulted by some ice cream judges. Unnatural color may also arise from the use of
extensive amounts of annatto-colored Cheddar cheese whey solids (Bodyfelt, 1979),
of product rerun, of remelted ice cream, or of commingling of successive freezer
runs of product (that have contrasting colors).
The criticism for unnatural color is a broad designation. As a general rule, this
descriptor of appearance is applied to the various deficiencies or shortcomings in
the hue of natural cream color. “Unnatural” color might also describe an ice cream
whose color is gray, dull, high, vivid, pale, chalky, or nonuniform. Application of
the most descriptive terminology possibly helps in pinpointing the source of the
problem within manufacturing operations. Generally, the several color defects of
vanilla ice cream do not occur at the “serious” level. Since different types of lighting
will significantly affect color characteristics as viewed by human subjects, the type
of light employed during examinations should certainly be standardized. Several
so-called all-natural products have appeared in the US marketplace, which abso-
lutely have no added color to any of the flavors of ice cream. Many consumers seem
to prefer products that comply with the claim “no color added.” However, in turn,
many ice cream judges tend to severely criticize such aforementioned products
(other than vanilla) for their appearance; the most common descriptor involved is
“unnatural color.”
Package. The ideal frozen dessert package or container should be clean, undam-
aged, full, neat, attractive (pleasant eye appeal), and protective of the product.
Multiuse containers (if used) should be free of dents, rust, paint, battered edges, or
rough, irregular surfaces. In general, ice cream packages should reflect neatness and
cleanliness throughout, giving the consumer the impression that by use of a clean,
well-formed container, the manufacturer is definitely interested in supplying a high-
quality product. Some more common package defects that may be encountered are
a slack-filled container, bulging container, improperly sealed container, ill-shaped
retail packages or product adhering to the outside of the container, ink smears, lack
of a parchment liner on the top of bulk containers, and a container that is soiled,
rusty, or damaged (the last two defects pertain to refillable containers).
These packaging defects, when they occur, are generally so obvious that addi-
tional descriptors or discussion hardly seem necessary. Encountering a high propor-
tion of defectively packaged products from a production run is most unlikely, but
such a problem might occur in the absence of adequate supervision. Just a few
defective packages or containers present a problem of some magnitude because
consumers will simply not select and purchase damaged units of products from the
retail ice cream cabinet. Thus, evaluators must keep in mind an appropriate perspec-
tive that defective containers generally render a product unsalable.
10.6.2 Melting Quality
High-quality ice cream should show little resistance to melting when a dish is
exposed to room temperature for at least 10–15 min (Bodyfelt et al., 1988; Goff &
Hartel, 2013). During the melting phase, the mix should flow from the center (high)
portion of the scooped ice cream. The melted product should be expected to form a
smooth, uniform, and homogeneous liquid in the dish. Generally, ice creams with
low-overrun melt more rapidly than those with high overrun (Sakurai et al., 1996;
Goff & Hartel, 2013).
The melting quality may be observed by placing a scoopful of the sample on a
dish and noting its meltdown response from time to time, as the other sensory quali-
ties are being examined. Although fiber dishes may be used, petri dishes seem to
permit more accurate observation of the melted ice cream; the contrast between the
product and the dish background is greater. Hartel et al. (2004) reviewed factors
affecting the melting rate of ice cream and described an ice cream melt procedure
that involves placing the test sample on a stainless-steel screen. In setting out the
samples and examining them for meltdown, some precautions are necessary:
1. Select a uniformly heated, well-lit area for placing and observing the samples
(>20 °C (70 °F), if possible).
2. Set the sample out for meltdown at the beginning of the judging (if feasible).
3. Absolutely avoid dipping some of the samples with a warm dipper and others
with a cold dipper.
4. Be sure that the sizes of the reasonably small samples used for the meltdown test
are uniform in volume (use the same scoop or spoon for each sample).
300 V. B. Alvarez
5. Always use a flat-bottom dish (not a cup), so the melted ice cream is free to
spread out.
6. Once melting has started, do not disturb the samples by tilting or swirling the
containers.
7. Observe the melting quality at various stages of melting (Fig. 10.3) and score on
the basis of the scheme suggested in Table 10.5.
The defects of melting quality frequently observed in ice cream judging will be
elaborated.
Does not melt, delayed melting. This defect is easily recognized since the ice
cream retains (or tends to retain) its original shape after it has been exposed to ambi-
ent temperature for a period in excess of 10–15 min. This defect is related to the use
of an excess of certain stabilizers and emulsifiers, high overrun, the age of the ice
cream, and several processing and product composition interactions that promote
formation of a highly stable gel (even when the temperature is above the freezing
point). This attribute is considered objectionable to some, as it conveys the impres-
sion that excessive amounts of product thickeners were used. However, in other
cases, this attribute is an objective.
Flaky, lacks uniformity. This defect may be noted when the sample is about half-
melted, but it is more noticeable when the sample has completely melted. Flakiness
is shown by a feathery, light-colored scum formation on the surface. Sometimes it
resembles a fragment of crust. Usually, no indication of wheying-off (water separa-
tion) accompanies the defect. Furthermore, it is not particularly objectionable.
However, it is not in keeping with an impression of the highest quality since the
product is not uniform or homogeneous in appearance.
Foamy, frothy, large air bubbles. A foamy meltdown is usually only noted when
the sample is completely melted. Ice cream that exhibits many small, fine bubbles
upon melting is not commonly criticized, but a sample that demonstrates a mass of
large bubbles, 0.3–0.5 cm (1/8–3/16 in) in diameter, is criticized. The meltdown
should be uniform and attractive; this is not the case when large air bubbles or
excessive foam occur. The consumer may associate the presence of foam with
Table 10.5 Scoring guide for the melting quality of ice cream
Intensity of defect
Defecta Slightb Definite Pronounced
Does not melt 3 2 1
Flaky 3 2 1
Foamy 3 2 1
Curdy 3 2 1
Wheying-off 3 2 1
Watery 3 2 1
Bodyfelt et al. (1988)
a
“No criticism” is assigned a score of “3.” Normal range is 1–3 for a salable product
b
Highest assignable score for defect of slight intensity
c
Highest assignable score for defect of pronounced intensity
excessive overrun, even though this defect may not be associated with high overrun,
but rather with some of the particular constituents used in the mix.
Curdy. A meltdown with a curd-like appearance lacks product uniformity and is,
for the most part, unattractive. The melted ice cream appears flaky; it separates from
the mass in small distinct pieces rather than leaving the impression of a creamy
fluid. The surface layer may exhibit formation of dry, irregular curd particles. To the
layperson, this defect suggests souring of the milk or cream, although the cause is
usually another matter. Any conditions that lead to the destabilization of proteins are
potential causes of this defect in frozen dairy desserts. A combination of factors
may be responsible, including (1) high acidity; (2) the salt balance (related to cal-
cium and magnesium salts); (3) age of the ice cream; (4) certain adverse processing
conditions (involving temperature, time, and method of heating, homogenization
pressure and temperature, and rate of freezing and hardening); and (5) the type and
concentration of stabilizers and emulsifiers.
The meltdown characteristics and the formation of a curdy/flaky appearance are
influenced by the protein stability, fat agglomeration, and air cell size. In the indus-
trial processing of ice cream, formulations and processing can be modified to
increase the availability of surface-active proteins for foam stabilization (Zhang &
Goff, 2004; Goff & Hartel, 2013). A partially coalesced three-dimensional network
formed by the fat globules with air and ice is in part responsible for the melt resis-
tance and smoother texture of the frozen dessert. The presence of surface-active
proteins will stabilize the weak fat-serum interface first. Increased emulsification
results in depletion of protein from the fat molecule that increases fat destabiliza-
tion, hence decreasing melting rate and enhancing shape retention during the melt-
ing process (Bolliger et al., 2000c). Stabilizers increase the resistance of the frozen
product to meltdown by decreasing the mobility of water through increasing the
viscosity of the serum phase (Stanley et al., 1996; Goff & Hartel, 2013). This pro-
cess has been previously explained in the separate section on emulsifiers and stabi-
lizers. Except for viscosity, all of the factors listed above, either independently or in
combination, affect fat agglomeration. Substantial fat agglomeration is responsible
for the “slow melt” and/or an unattractive dry, “flaky” surface of the melted product
(Abbas Syed, 2018). Protein destabilization will result in melting throughout and
hence “curdy” ice cream. Occurrence of these undesirable conditions may further
be prevented by minimizing temperature abuse (Stanley et al., 1996).
Wheying-off (syneresis). Wheying-off will usually be noted by the appearance of
a bluish fluid leaking from the melting ice cream at the initiation of the meltdown
test. If the sample is disturbed during melting or the observation is delayed, it may
be difficult to see this condition. Whey separation may be noted in some ice cream
and reduced fat ice cream mixes even before they are frozen. This separation is a
common complaint of operators of soft-serve freezers who buy their mix from a
wholesale manufacturer. These mixes tend to be stored longer and are subjected to
more abuse than those mixes that are made and frozen within the same plant. Factors
contributing to the difficulty include (1) the salt balance of milk ingredients, (2) the
mix composition (a product with a high protein-in-water concentration can be
expected to be less stable than one with a lower concentration), (3) certain adverse
302 V. B. Alvarez
processing conditions, and (4) the extent of abuse (excessive agitation, air incorpo-
ration, and “heat shock”).
Separation is a natural phenomenon occurring in soft-serve ice cream mixes;
increasing the amount of whey proteins while maintaining the same protein content,
and the use of k-carrageenan at >0.015% in the mix prevent visible separation,
although it still occurs on the microscopic level. Locust bean gum and sodium
caseinate are incompatible and undergo phase separation on a microscopic level.
k-carrageenan has a much weaker stabilizing effect upon soft-serve ice cream emul-
sions formulated with sodium caseinate and locust bean gum as compared to skim
milk powder emulsions stabilized with locust bean gum (Vega et al., 2005).
Watery, low-melting resistance. This defect is not consistent with the character-
istics of the highest-quality ice cream. As the terms suggest, the sample melts
quickly and the resultant meltdown has a thin, watery consistency. This defect is
commonly associated with low solids or low stabilizer levels in the mix and may
often be associated with a coarse, weak-bodied ice cream or ice milk.
Curdiness and delayed melting are two of the most common meltdown defects;
they may occur simultaneously. Whey separation may be observed frequently, since
protein destabilization is a common problem (Fig. 10.4).
Tharp et al. (1998) and Walstra and Jonkman (1998) reported that shape reten-
tion and melting rate depended on the degree of fat destabilization. Higher degrees
of fat destabilization resulted in less fat content in the drip loss of melted ice cream
samples (Tharp et al., 1998; Bolliger et al., 2000c). The presence of proteins or
polysaccharides in ice cream formulations influences the shape retention of treated
ice cream samples. Milk proteins affected melting and imparted body to ice cream
products. A proposed mechanism for protein effects on body and texture is the for-
mation of networks of phase-separated milk proteins and polysaccharides (Syrbe
et al., 1998; Abbas Syed, 2018). Polydextrose was an important factor to improve
shape retention in ice cream samples by binding water or reinforcing the existing fat
network due to its complex branched structure (Smiles, 1982; Craig et al., 1996;
Akbari et al., 2019). Ice cream with high overrun or fat tends to melt slowly. Air
cells insulate and fat stabilizes the ice cream structure (Marshall et al., 2003; Akbari
et al., 2019).
Body and texture are important properties of ice cream and good-quality indicators.
The associated body and texture defects are evaluated by biting and chewing the
product. Different guidelines have been developed to evaluate the sensory attributes
of ice cream (Bodyfelt et al., 1988; King & Arents, 1994). The following are the
evaluation and scoring guidelines for body and texture used in the CDPEC.
Unfortunately, the terms “body” and “texture” are often used indiscriminately
and loosely (Bodyfelt et al., 1988); adding to the confusion may be the combined
use of the two terms, either in reference to one or to the other term. As it relates to
Fig. 10.4 Examples of various meltdown defects of ice cream as observed after elapse of 0, 10,
15, and 20 min: (a) the “ideal” melting characteristics; (b) does not melt; (c) curdy meltdown (non-
homogenous); (d) wheyed-off (watery separation). (Courtesy of Stephanie Clark)
ice cream, body is best defined as the property or quality of the ice cream as a whole.
Texture refers to the parts or structure of ice cream that make up the whole. Both the
body and texture of ice cream may be partially determined by applying the senses
of touch and sight when the evaluator observes the product’s appearance on dipping.
The desired body in ice cream is that which is firm, has substance (has some resis-
tance), responds rapidly to dipping, and is not unduly cold when placed into
the mouth.
The following is a description by Tharp (1997) about the “proper chew for ice
cream evaluation” after transferring the portion to the mouth and beginning the oral
manipulation of the portion: “As oral manipulation of the portion begins, it is
304 V. B. Alvarez
important to remember that many of the desirable properties of ice cream are related
to the presence of ice, so focus first on those properties – the relative firmness of
body and smoothness of texture. The time available for that is relatively short,
because the ice disappears quickly at body temperature. If dental sensitivity per-
mits, begin the evaluation by biting down through the portion with the front teeth –
iciness will be reflected by the perception of a crunchy sound. Then, move the
portion about in the mouth with the tongue, cheeks, and lower jaw. Concentrate on
the degree of resistance to that movement (body) and the smoothness of the product
while it is still frozen sample (texture). There are two exceptions to the generaliza-
tion that body and texture stimuli will disappear when the product has melted. First,
the hard crystals that characterize the sandy characteristic will persist after melting,
particularly the lactose crystals. Also, the sensations that constitute the greasy char-
acteristic – a slippery coating on the inner surfaces of the mouth, especially on the
teeth – will continue to be perceived after the portion melts. After melting, with
closed mouth, concentrate on the nature of the flavor. Focus on the taste elements
perceived in the mouth (sweet, salty, acid, bitter). Then exhale nasally in order to
allow the vapors released from the warming product to contact the aroma perception
area in the nasal cavity. Concentrate on whether the aroma is acceptable and, if not,
on identifying the characteristics of the undesirable elements. Don’t swallow when
observations have been completed – it can lead to a feeling of satiety that dulls the
senses. Rather, the melted product should be expectorated in some appropriate way.
Multiple samplings may be necessary to clarify observations. Finally, reflect on the
flavor sensations that remain after expectoration. These residual perceptions,
referred to as ‘aftertaste,’ make up an important element of the overall flavor judg-
ment. A good quality product leaves behind a fresh, clean sensation, consisting only
of lingering hints of the characterizing flavor and the basic dairy character.
Consideration of aftertaste often makes possible the specific identification of such
characteristics as the whey flavor.”
Firmness, resistance, and coldness are strongly influenced by the product’s tem-
perature. As emphasized earlier, proper tempering of the samples from −18 to
−15 °C (0–5 °F) is essential, particularly for properly assessing the body of sam-
ples. The desired texture of ice cream is that which is fine, smooth, velvety, and
carries the perception of creaminess and homogeneity throughout. Small ice crys-
tals and small air cells are required for portraying good product texture. If the prod-
uct is too cold when evaluated, the texture may appear worse than it actually is. Just
the opposite is true when the product is too warm. An experienced evaluator of ice
cream will have learned to partially compensate for a less than optimum tempering
effort on the samples but will still definitely prefer to observe body and texture
characteristics when the product is properly tempered. Proper tempering assures a
competent, conscientious ice cream judge that more relevant and objective assess-
ments of the body and texture are being achieved. The scoring guides for the body
and texture of ice cream are given in Table 10.6. The various body defects that may
be encountered in ice cream are termed or classified as follows:
Table 10.6 Scoring guide for body and texture defects of vanilla ice cream
Intensity of defect
Body and texture S D P
Crumbly 4 3 2
Fluffy 3 2 1
Greasy 4 2 1
Gummy 4 2 1
Icy/coarse 4 2 1
Sandy 2 1 U
Soggy 4 3 2
Weak 4 2 1
Normal range 1–5. Range of scores for body and texture quality: Excellent 5 (no criticism)
S slight, D definite, P pronounced
U indicates product of unsalable quality. Official rules prohibit use of such products in contest
Crumbly: Brittle, falls apart when dipped.

Fluffy: Large air cells, disappears quickly in mouth, very weak.
Greasy: A distinct greasy coating of the mouth surface after expectoration, a tallowy
or Chapstick® sensation on the lips after evaluation.
Gummy: Opposite of crumbly, pasty, putty-like; feels somewhat sticky like gum
between the tongue and roof of the mouth.
Icy/coarse: Most common texture defect, not smooth, ice crystals or particles.
Sandy: One of the most objectionable defects in ice cream; fine hard particles, sand-
like, lactose crystals.
Soggy: Heavy, doughy, pudding-like, due to lack of air cells (low overrun).
Weak: Lacking body and resistance, low solids, watery, more like ice milk.
10.7 Description of Body Defects
Body defects shown in italic/bold are evaluated in the CDPEC.

Crumbly, brittle, friable. A brittle, crumbly, and friable body is evident by a
tendency of the ice cream to fall apart when dipped. The product appears to be dry,
open, and sometimes as friable as freshly fallen snow. The particles seem to lack the
needed property to stick together or be retained as a common mass (Fig. 10.4).
When such a sample is dipped, many loose particles are likely to be noted on the
remaining ice cream or the dipping implement. The defect may be provoked by the
use of certain gums, inadequate stabilization, too high an overrun, and/or low total
solids in the mix (Marshall et al., 2003; Abbas Syed, 2018). Lower-fat ice creams
(7%) tend to develop crumbly texture more readily than an ice cream mix with
higher fat content (10%) (Roland & Phillips, 1999; Akbari et al., 2019). A similar
defect is identified as flaky and snowy. In this case, a flaky, snowy-textured ice
cream manifests itself by a tendency to fall apart when dipped. In this respect, it has
306 V. B. Alvarez
the same characteristics as that noted in a crumbly body. The condition seems to be
associated with low solids, low stabilizer, and/or high overrun in the product
(Marshall et al., 2003).
Gummy, pasty, sticky, elastic. A gummy or sticky body is the exact opposite of a
crumbly body. Such ice cream seems pasty, putty-like, and, under certain conditions
of temperature and manipulation with a spoon, it somewhat resembles taffy
(Fig. 10.4). The ice cream hangs together, so much so that it has a marked tendency
to “curl” just behind the scoop as it is pulled across the surface, which leaves coarse,
deep, irregular waves. Frequently, there is a correlation between a gummy body and
a high resistance to melting; gummy ice cream often resists melting. If melting does
occur, the mass often tends to retain its original shape.
The gummy body defect is associated with an excessive use of stabilizers, certain
corn syrup sweeteners, or both (Marshall et al., 2003; Abbas Syed, 2018). One
should recognize that all ice cream is sticky to some extent, due to the concentration
of carbohydrates in the product. Ice cream should only be severely criticized when
the stickiness is so severe that it is obviously pasty and would probably be difficult
to dip or scoop. As an important economic consideration, gummy (or sticky) ice
cream fails to yield as many scoops per unit volume as typical-bodied products.
Shrunken. A shrunken ice cream manifests itself by the product mass being with-
drawn from the sides of the container. This defect is readily obvious when the pack-
age is first opened for examination, and the feature is not evaluated in the
CDPEC. This defect may be associated with high overrun, low mix solids, fluctua-
tions in air pressure, or substantial changes in altitude during product distribution
(Dubey & White, 1997). However, under certain storage and/or transport condi-
tions, any ice cream may shrink. Since heat shocking may be one of the contributing
causes, the judge should be alert to correlate, if possible, this defect with a coarse,
icy texture. All the reasons or causes of shrinkage are not clear to technologists;
occurrences of the problem are often quite unpredictable. Product shrinkage may
suddenly be encountered where none existed before, even when no changes were
made in the product’s composition or manufacturing procedures. A basic predispo-
sition to shrinkage is apparently imparted to frozen dairy desserts by certain milk
components, especially proteins (Goff et al., 1995: Abbas Syed, 2018). Certain
environmental conditions, such as season of the year, stage of lactation, feed, etc.,
may unfavorably affect the normal formation of strong air cell walls (which contain
proteins) in the frozen mix. Other associated factors seem to merely aggravate the
conditions that predispose ice cream to shrinkage.
Soggy, heavy, doughy, pudding-like. A heavy, resistant body is best described by
the terms heavy, doughy, or pudding-like. The descriptor “soggy” has also been
used in association with this defect (CDPEC scorecards), although perhaps inap-
propriately. This defect can readily be noted when the product is dipped. Portions of
an ice cream with this criticism, when placed in the mouth, seem colder than those
free of the defect. Apparently, this is due to a greater heat conductivity of heavy-
bodied products. This defect is associated with high solids content of the mix, espe-
cially increased fat and sugar (Dubey & White, 1997; Abbas Syed, 2018). Other
suggested causes are too much stabilizer and/or a low overrun. Through product
formulation, individual ice cream manufacturers can control the “degree of bite
resistance” in the body of their ice cream. Some processors may purposely strive for
an extremely heavy body in order to achieve product uniqueness. Many consumers
seem to prefer a product with a great deal of bite resistance.
The ice cream judge should be aware of the wide range of consumer preferences
and only criticize a heavy body as a defect when it is obviously “out of line.” Though
this trend may change in time, many consumers are willing to pay a premium price
for high solids, low overrun ice cream. The body of such products is generally quite
resistant, firm, or heavy. A study of different levels of fat and sugar on the sensory
properties of ice has determined that increasing levels of fat and sugar are associated
with an increase in doughy texture (Guinard et al., 1997; Abbas Syed, 2018).
Weak, watery. A weak, watery body is usually associated with a low-melting
resistance and a thin, milky, low-viscosity meltdown. A weak-bodied ice cream con-
veys the impression of having a low proportion of food solids, when a sample is
placed into the mouth. The mouthfeel of the sample may more likely resemble
reduced or nonfat ice creams (or the former, ice milks) more than ice cream. Such
an ice cream may be easily compressed by slight pressure of a spoon or scoop. This
defect may also be associated with coarse texture; low solids and high overrun also
contribute to causing a weak-bodied ice cream. Weak body defects have also been
attributed to heat shock (Morely, 1989).
10.8 Description of Texture Defects
Fluffy, foamy, spongy. A fluffy texture may be noted in high-overrun ice cream,
with a general “openness” throughout the product. Such an ice cream tends to com-
press substantially upon dipping or applied pressure with a flat object. This defect is
closely associated with a high overrun. A fluffy ice cream usually melts slowly in
the dish, yielding a relatively small proportion of liquid, which is often foamy and
spongy (Marshall et al., 2003). Fluffy is harshly criticized since the product may run
outside of the standard of identity (4.5 lb/gallon).
Greasy, buttery, churned. This defect may be noted by the presence of actual
butter particles in the mouth after the ice cream has melted, or by a distinct greasy
coating of the mouth surface after expectoration. Another way to recognize this
defect is by a tallowy or Chapstick® sensation on the lips after evaluation. Common
causes of a greasy mouthfeel are inadequate homogenization, a relatively high milk
fat content, and over-emulsification of the product. In soft-serve frozen dairy des-
serts, churning may be due to de-emulsification of milk fat during prolonged agita-
tion in the soft-serve freezer. If fat globule aggregation exceeds a size of about
30–50 μm, visible fat particles form in the samples with the associated buttery
defect (Eisner et al., 2004; Amador et al., 2017). High-fat mixes are more suscepti-
ble to this defect; incomplete homogenization and over-emulsification aggravate
this problem.
308 V. B. Alvarez
Icy, coarse, grainy, ice pellets, spiny. This defect ranks as the most commonly
encountered texture defect in frozen dairy desserts. Such a product may be charac-
terized by its structural makeup of comparatively large ice crystal particles; a feel-
ing of unusual coldness within the mouth; a simultaneous lack of a smooth, velvety
character; and a frequently associated rough visual effect. When a sample of a
coarse or icy product (most common descriptors) is placed between the upper and
lower incisors, a temporary resistance is exhibited before the incisors are finally
permitted to come together. This form of a slight, temporary resistance should not
be mistaken for another form of bite resistance provoked by another texture defect
known as sandiness (discussed later). The resistance of coarse texture or iciness is
quite temporary, almost instantaneous, while that of sandiness is of longer duration.
A coarse texture is due to comparatively large particles of frozen water; each ice
crystal is sufficiently large that the coarseness is obvious. When extremely coarse,
grainy textures are noted; the product is criticized as being icy or spiny. Ice cream
samples with a pronounced icy texture may be readily noted during the dipping
process from the “feel” of the scoop or spade as it strikes or breaks the tiny icicles
or spines. A coarse, icy texture may be manifested by either the presence of local-
ized, layer-like, ice crystals, or by grainy ice particles distributed throughout the
product. The layer-like crystals are frequently found along the sides of the container
where melting and subsequent refreezing may have occurred. Both kinds of ice
crystals are objectionable, since the product lacks the smooth, homogenous, and
velvety texture that is typically deemed most desirable for high-quality ice cream.
Ice crystals can be felt between the teeth and/or with the tongue, by immediately
pressing the ice cream sample against the palate upon oral sampling (Stampanoni-
Koeferli et al., 1996). As continuous melting of ice cream occurs in the mouth,
larger ice particles are momentarily left behind, and they register a distinct cold
sensation. Formation of ice crystals plays an important role in determining the qual-
ity of ice cream, and small crystal sizes are desirable (Adapa et al., 2000; Wildmoser
et al., 2004; Drewett & Hartel, 2007; Amador et al., 2017). Ice crystals have a natu-
ral tendency to increase in size with increased storage time; the larger crystals selec-
tively become larger at the expense of the small ice crystals, which disappear. As a
result, ice cream frequently becomes more coarse with time in storage.
Much of the technology of ice cream formulation, freezing, and storage is
designed to produce small ice crystals and delay their growth during storage or dis-
tribution. Since, almost invariably, ice cream will be exposed to some “heat shock”
(temperature fluctuations and storage at higher than ideal temperatures), specific
steps are advisedly taken to provide protection against fluctuations in storage tem-
perature (Lucas, 1941; Tobias & Muck, 1981; Tobias, 1982; Bodyfelt, 1983a, b).
Stable storage conditions at −20 °C (−4 °F) for 60 days prevented the observance
of noticeable texture differences during the course of the shelf-life study of ice
cream (Alvarez et al., 2005). Effective stabilizers and emulsifiers, microcrystalline
cellulose, and low DE corn syrups are commonly used as “protective” agents
(Stanley et al., 1996; Goff, 1997; Flores & Goff, 1999; Abbas Syed, 2018). Close
control of production, inventories, and rotation of product to help ensure that the
oldest product is used first are important measures to help keep storage time
minimal.
Among the many possible causes of coarse-textured ice cream are the following:
Faulty formulation
Inadequate protection against heat shock
Ineffective or improper stabilization and/or emulsification
Inadequate hydration of dry mix constituents
Incomplete protein hydration
Inadequate homogenization
Insufficient aging of the mix
Too high product temperature out of the freezer
Extended interval between freezing, packaging, and/or transfer to the harden-
ing system
Slow hardening
Too high a hardening temperature
Fluctuating storage temperatures
Extended storage and distribution times
Some production problems are mechanical, such as dull freezer blades, which
prevent the ice cream mix from freezing properly, while other product quality short-
comings are traceable to inadequate management and supervision. Sensory evalua-
tion helps to identify the nature of product defects and pinpoint deficiencies of
production and distribution.
Sandy, gritty. A sandy texture is certainly one of the most objectionable texture
defects encountered in frozen dairy desserts, but it is also one of the easiest to detect.
Such a texture conveys to the tongue and palate a definite lack of smoothness and an
associated distinct form of grittiness. When the sample melts, there remains in the
mouth fine, hard, uniform particles that suggest fine sand. These particles are crys-
tals of lactose.
The presence of these sand-like particles can be noted in several ways: (1) by
pressing a thin layer of the suspect ice cream against the roof of the mouth with the
tongue to secure quick melting; (2) by bringing the teeth together slowly on a por-
tion of it; or (3) by pressing a small quantity of the product between the thumb and
forefinger. Sandy texture should not be confused with the coarse, icy texture, which
results from the presence of comparatively large ice crystals. The lactose crystals
dissolve markedly more slowly than ice crystals; therefore, they may be noted even
after the ice cream has fully melted.
A high percentage of serum solids, high total food solids, product age, and “heat
shock” are all related to the development of this defect (Livney et al., 1995; Abbas
Syed, 2018). When sandiness occurs, the judge should be alert to the likely presence
of other defects that are commonly associated with frozen dairy desserts stored
under unfavorable conditions (coarse/icy, and/or shrinkage, and/or whey flavor).
310 V. B. Alvarez
10.9 Flavor
High-quality vanilla ice cream should be pleasantly sweet, suggest a creamy back-
ground sensation, exhibit a delicate “bouquet” of vanilla flavor, and leave a most
pleasant, but brief, rich aftertaste (Bodyfelt et al., 1988, Bodyfelt, 1983a; Kwak
et al., 2016). The flavor intensity of the vanilla, the sweetener, and the various dairy
ingredients should not be so pronounced that, when first tasted, one component of
the overall flavor seems to predominate over the others. All of the ingredients should
blend to yield a pleasant, balanced flavor (Piccinali & Stampanoni, 1996).
The flavor evaluation of ice cream offers some difficulties unlike those encoun-
tered in the scoring of butter, cheese, and milk. In comparison to most other dairy
products, ice cream is intensely sweet. This is the first obstacle confronted by the ice
cream judge. The sweetness is often so pronounced to inexperienced judges that
they frequently find it difficult to identify other flavor notes that may or should be
present. A second obstacle to the successful evaluation of ice cream flavor is simply
taste bud fatigue due to the combined effect of sweetness and coldness on the organs
of taste. A third obstacle for the ice cream judge is the mouth-coating effect of milk
fat. Some of the taste bud sites may be partially coated or blocked by milk fat, and
hence lessen the ease of taste perception (Stampanoni-Koeferli et al., 1996; Guinard
et al., 1997; Goff & Hartel, 2013).
Usually, inexperienced evaluators look forward to the judging of ice cream with
considerable enthusiasm. After tasting a few samples, however, this enthusiasm
probably begins to wane. The appetite is satisfied, and novice judges may have to
force themselves to continue judging a set of samples that have started “to taste
alike.” Fortunately, experienced judges score ice cream with about the same ease as
they evaluate other products. Some evaluators initially condition their mouths by
tasting several samples, in order to adapt to the sweetness and coldness before actu-
ally placing flavor judgments on any of them. Frequent rinsing of the mouth with
water between ice cream samples is apparently helpful for some evaluators, but this
is primarily an individual preference as to whether or not it is a beneficial technique.
When evaluating ice cream for flavor, tasting is usually performed from a scooped
sample on a plate. Taste sampling directly from the original container is not advised
due to potential risk of personal sanitation (hygiene) problems and irreversible tem-
perature abuse of ice cream samples. The authors and most ice cream judges prefer
to evaluate one sample at a time. In this approach, the judge compares the flavor,
body, and texture with a fixed, mental standard of the “ideal” product, rather than
with that of another sample.
Due to the severe coldness of ice cream and reduced fat ice cream, some off-
flavors may not be sufficiently volatile to be immediately detectable or recogniz-
able. As pointed out earlier, the body and texture of the ice cream must be determined
on the ice cream at the typical serving temperature, but any off-flavors present will
become more apparent as the sample warms up. Warming occurs within the mouth
as well as on the sample plate. After first assessing the body and texture of the
sample, the evaluator may taste a warmer sample portion for at least one of several
phases of the flavor judgment that should be completed. This approach may be
somewhat complicated by the fact that the “flavor balance” may change with tem-
perature and, hence, cause some of the flavor notes to dominate others at the higher
temperatures, but not at the lower ones. Thus, the best observations of the actual
“flavor balance” should be undertaken at normal consumption temperatures for fro-
zen desserts. This approach is especially important when a number of samples must
be evaluated in succession. The evaluator must try to maintain accuracy and objec-
tivity, and in the process, avoid both mental and physical fatigue as well as taste,
touch, and odor adaptation. When the human senses are continuously exposed to a
given stimulant, sensory perception diminishes because of the phenomenon of
adaptation.
Due to the numerous ingredients that may be used in ice cream manufacture, one
may expect a wide variety of flavors and potential off-flavors. In general, all frozen
dairy desserts are susceptible to the development of most of the off-flavors encoun-
tered in other dairy foods. The flavoring systems used for ice cream, reduced fat ice
cream, and sherbet may be obtained from several sources, and each one is manufac-
tured by different processes. Consequently, the given source of flavoring itself may
contribute to a surprising variety of flavors or flavor notes. Additionally, ice cream
possesses varying degrees and qualities of sweetness. The major flavor defects of
ice cream and reduced fat ice cream may be classified according to their origin, as
summarized in Tables 10.3 and 10.7.
Knowledge of the possible source of off-flavors is quite useful when trouble-
shooting, pinpointing, and correcting difficulties with sensory quality. While the
aforementioned tables cover most of the anticipated problems, there is always the
chance for the highly unusual or extraordinary to happen. For instance, the eggs
may be oxidized, the cream may have an intense absorbed or medicinal off-flavor,
or the liquid sugar or corn syrup may be fermented. Occasionally, when production
and quality control personnel least expect it, an off-flavor may be encountered that
defies description. As an aid to problem-solving, a description of some of the more
common flavor defects of frozen dairy desserts is presented as a review for the pro-
spective ice cream judge.
In evaluating ice cream, the judge should particularly note the kind, the quantity,
and the relative quality of the flavoring used in the product. If the ice cream is
vanilla, for instance, the judge should constantly keep in mind the desired delicate
“bouquet” (aroma note) that is so highly prized and sought in a high-quality vanilla
ice cream. The judge should not deviate from an established mental standard or
predetermined “flavor profile” of the “ideal” vanilla ice cream. Both the pure vanilla
(if used) or the vanilla/vanillin blend, and the amount used, should blend with the
other ingredients to provide a pleasing, refreshing, and appetizing product. The
judge should be eager for a second (and a third) bite of the ice cream if it is one of
high quality. Four flavor defects related to the product-flavoring system may be
experienced, which are described in the following paragraphs. Flavors showing in
italic/bold are evaluated in the CDPEC.
312 V. B. Alvarez
Table 10.7 Classification of ice cream flavor defects according to their cause of origin
I. Off-flavors due to the ingredients used
A. The flavoring system
1. Lacks (deficient) 3. High flavor (excessive)
2. Lacks fine flavor (harsh, lacks balance) 4. Unnatural (atypical)
B. Sweeteners
1. Lacks sweetness 3. Syrup flavor (malty, Karo-like)
2. High sweet
C. Dairy products 5. Oxidized (cardboardy, metallic)
1. Acid (sour) 6. Rancid (lipolytic)
2. Cooked (rich, nutty, eggy) 7. Salty
3. Lacks freshness (stale) 8. Whey (graham cracker-like)
4. Old ingredient
D. Other ingredients
1. Eggs (eggy) 3. Non-milk food solids
2. Stabilizer/emulsifier
II. Off-flavors due to chemical changes (in the
mix or product)
1. Lacks freshness (stale, old) 3. Oxidized (cardboardy, metallic)
2. Rancid (lipolytic) 4. Storage
III. Off-flavors due to mix processing
1. Cooked (rich, nutty, eggy) 2. Caramelized/scorched
IV. Off-flavors due to microbial growth in the
mix
1. Acid (sour) 2. Psychrotrophic (fruity/fermented, cheesy,
musty, unclean)
V. Off-flavors due to other causes
1. Foreign contaminants 2. Neutralizer
10.9.1 Off-Flavors from the Ingredients Used1
Typically, the first perceived flavor or off-flavor in a frozen dairy dessert is one asso-
ciated with the flavoring material used. Due to the volatility of flavor substances, it
tends to register early with the olfactory center. A defective source of flavoring
could contribute to any flavor defect.
High flavor (excessive). This flavor condition, when it occurs, is best recognized
when the sample is first placed into the mouth. The intensity of the flavoring seems
so striking or sharp that the desired, pleasant flavor blend is not achieved due to the
harsh tones imparted by the flavoring level observed in the product. Ice cream that
is too highly or excessively flavored is not severely criticized as a rule, especially if
1
The following materials are directly from the previous edition (Bodyfelt et al., 1998) unless oth-
erwise noted by the update reference.
the quality of the flavoring used is high. An associative “ethanol-like” note may be
present.
High sweet. An ice cream that is observed to be excessively sweet tends to
exhibit a candy-like taste sensation; this defect is readily noted upon the first stages
of tasting. Too much sugar (or other form of sweetener) tends to interfere with the
overall desirable blend of flavor(s). Another unfortunate characteristic of a given ice
cream that is perceived as being too sweet is a general lack of refreshing property.
Lacks fine flavor (harsh, coarse). This criticism is generally used to describe an
ice cream that is basically “good” or “very good,” but for some less than clear rea-
son, it seems to just barely fall short of being “perfect” or “ideal.” In some instances,
such an ice cream may simply lack an overall “flavor balance” (blend), but other-
wise the product appears to be free of any hint of detectable flavor shortcomings. In
other instances, the sensory dimensions of a pure (real) vanilla or a vanilla/vanillin
blend may be determined by close sensory examination to be slightly less than
expected or desired. Experienced ice cream judges are able to recognize the desir-
able, delicate, balanced flavor notes of a high-quality flavor. The novice judge
should remember that “lacks fine flavor” is not readily described in more definitive
or specific terms. Thus, this descriptor should practically be considered a “last
resort” in describing a minor flavor defect related to the flavoring system. The
observations of Gassenmeier (2003), considering the loss of vanilla flavor to xan-
thine oxidase–catalyzed oxidation, may also apply to the loss of fine flavor in ice
cream, as natural vanilla extracts contain a number of complementary flavor com-
pounds besides vanillin that are susceptible to oxidation.
Low flavor (lacks flavoring). An ice cream with this defect is often criticized as
flat, bland, or deficient in the amount of added flavoring. Even though the ice cream
may be pleasantly sweet and free from any dairy ingredient off-flavor, it seems to
lack the characteristic delicate “bouquet” of excellent vanilla; the desired intensity
is missing. The obvious cause of this defect is failure to use sufficient quantities of
flavoring. However, there are instances when certain ingredients mask the vanilla
flavor, thus invoking the “lacks flavor” criticism, even though the added quantity of
flavoring seemed adequate to the manufacturer.
Xanthine oxidase, an enzyme active in raw milk, may catalyze the loss of vanilla
flavoring by oxidation of vanilla to vanillic acid, when flavoring is added to raw ice
cream mix and stored under refrigeration prior to pasteurization (Gassenmeier, 2003).
Lacks sweetness. An ice cream that lacks sweetness is readily noted upon tast-
ing; the product simply manifests a distinct flat or bland taste. The desired or antici-
pated blend of flavor is missing. An adequate amount of sweetener is required to
bring out the full-flavor “bloom” in a given flavor, whether it is vanilla, fruit, or
chocolate ice cream. Since preferences for the desired level of sweetness vary
among individuals, the product is not severely criticized for lacking sweetness,
within reasonable limits, if this is the only flavor defect encountered. However, a
severe deficiency in sweetener solids may give rise to readily evident defects in
body and texture or mouthfeel.
Syrup flavor (malty or “Karo®”-like). A desired property of sweeteners in ice
cream as well as other food systems is that they impart the basic sweet taste and
314 V. B. Alvarez
simultaneously be free of other flavor notes. Some flavor technologists have coined
the term “clean sweet” for sucrose. In the past, the more complex flavor imparted by
some sweeteners was termed “unnatural sweetness.” This sweetener off-flavor is
still commonly encountered in certain forms of corn syrups and corn syrup solids;
hence “syrup flavor” is the common descriptor for this characteristic defect. When
honey is used as a sweetener, the resulting sweetness may be criticized as syrupy
unless the ice cream is intended to be honey-flavored. Frequently encountered
descriptions for syrup flavor might be malty, “Karo®”-like, Sugar Daddy®-like,
caramel-like, molasses-like, marshmallow, or similar to low levels of burnt sugar.
Some evaluators distinguish syrup flavor from high sweetness by the “catch” expe-
rienced in the throat, similar to the feeling after a dose of cough syrup. Certain
forms or sources of corn syrup solids, corn syrup, and some liquid sugar blends with
excessive levels of corn syrup, when used in ice cream in high proportion to sucrose,
may convey a slight to distinct malty or caramel-like off-flavor. Too often, a syrup
off-flavor may mask or otherwise interfere with the release of the given flavoring,
especially delicate flavors like vanilla. Additionally, syrup off-flavor tends to be
enhanced by the cooked flavor note of the mix. Simultaneously, a gummy or sticky
body can often be associated with an ice cream or ice milk that has also been criti-
cized for “syrup flavor.”
Unnatural flavor (atypical). Frequently, the manifestation of “unnatural flavor-
ing” in ice cream may convey the sensation of being too high in flavoring. The
impression of unnatural flavoring may be of several types and intensities, depending
upon the kinds and proportions of constituents used in preparation of the extract,
emulsion, or flavor concentrate. For example, synthetic or imitation vanilla, which
is often used to fortify vanilla extracts, may tend to produce a “quick,” sharp, pierc-
ing, or burning sensation on the sides and base of the tongue. Generally speaking,
the unnatural flavor criticism is observed more frequently in ice creams that are
labeled “vanilla flavored” or “artificially flavored vanilla,” than in products labeled
“vanilla” or “real vanilla.” Details of ice cream classification and associated labeling
requirements (as a function of vanilla or vanilla-flavoring category added to the
product) are summarized in Table 10.8. To minimize bias in ice cream judging or
any product evaluation, it is crucial that the sensory observations be conducted
without the evaluators examining the product labels before completion of the task.
Another form of unnatural flavor may occur due to the addition (usually uninten-
tional) of extracts other than vanilla to the ice cream mix; the imparted flavors may
be suggestive of spices, coconut, marshmallows, custard, candy, nuts, lemon, cherry,
maple, “buttery,” or “smoky.” Numerous other unnatural flavors are possible in fro-
zen dairy desserts, depending on the circumstances of manufacture. If one of the
aforementioned or another atypical flavor notes are perceived in vanilla ice cream,
the appropriate recourse is to criticize the sample for “unnatural flavor.” This flavor
also frequently arises through the accidental intermixing of two or more product
flavors when ice cream freezing machines are converted from one flavor to another.
Table 10.8 Labeling requirements for various categories of vanilla ice cream according to the
flavor source
Flavor Flavor
declaration requirements
Ice cream Characterizing Subsidiary
type or flavor flavor
category declaration declaration Sources Quantity
Category 1 Vanilla None Vanilla beans, Sufficient to impart
extract, or characterizing flavor
powder; no
artificial flavor
permitted
Category 2 Vanilla flavored “Vanilla and Vanilla beans, Vanilla beans, extract, or
artificial vanilla extract, or powder, in combination with
flavor” or powder plus vanillin, not to exceed 1 oz.
“artificial flavor artificial per “unit of vanilla
added” or vanilla: i.e., constituent” as described in
“artificial twofold, or vanilla standards.
vanilla flavor fourfold Concentrations may be used
added” vanilla-vanillin where ratio of “vanilla
extract (or constituent” and vanillin
powder) remain 1:1a
Category 3 Artificially None Artificial If the amount of vanillin
flavored vanilla vanilla, with or used is >1.0 oz. per “unit of
or artificial without vanilla vanilla constituent,” the
vanilla beans, extract, product must be labeled in
or powder accordance with this
category. Product may be
flavored exclusively or in
part with other artificial
vanilla, e.g., ethyl vanillin
Source: Adapted from Code of Federal Regulations 2006. Title 21, Part 135
a
For example, if 1 gal of vanilla extract contains extractive from 26.7 oz. of vanilla beans, a maxi-
mum of 2 oz. vanillin may be used. One (1.0) unit “vanilla constituent” = total extractable flavor
components of 13.35 oz. of vanilla beans with a moisture content less than or equal to 25%, or a
proportionally greater amount of vanilla beans if >25% H2O
In fact, this is probably the most common cause of this type of unnatural (or atypi-
cal) off-flavor in US commercial ice cream. This is unfortunate, since numerous
consumers (through surveys) have indicated that they were the recipient of a “sur-
prise flavor”; a “flavor” they did not bargain for at the time of purchase (Bodyfelt
et al., 1988; Goff & Hartel, 2013).
The unnatural flavor problem also frequently arises through the accidental inter-
mixing of two or more product flavors when ice cream freezing machines are con-
verted from one flavor to another.
316 V. B. Alvarez
10.9.2 Dairy Products as a Source of Defects
Acid (sour). An acid or sour off-flavor in frozen dairy desserts may be distinguished
from other off-flavors by a sudden, tingly, taste sensation (on the tip or top of the
tongue), plus an associated “clean and refreshing” mouthfeel. This flavor defect
may be caused by the use of acid whey in the ice cream mix (Westerbeek, 1996;
Abbas Syed, 2018). The off-flavor may also result from uncontrolled bacterial activ-
ity at elevated temperature; other bacterial off-flavors may also be present. In such
cases, the flavor defect(s) may be more appropriately described as a combination
acid (sour) and psychrotrophic bacteria-caused off-flavor (unclean, fruity, or putrid).
The acidity (and/or psychrotrophic defect) may have developed in one or more of
the dairy ingredients used, or the mix may have been stored at a favorable growth
temperature for lactic acid forming or other types of bacteria. In any severe tem-
perature abuse situation, the bacterial count would ordinarily be expected to exceed
established regulatory limits. A serious processing and product handling error or
disregard for quality control is evident when an acid taste is so intense that the
evaluator is inclined to think of the sample as a sour product. Such a product should
never reach the marketplace; the consumer would often be offended by the presence
of this unusual off-flavor in a sweetened product such as ice cream.
Cooked. The “cooked” flavor of ice cream is commonly experienced. It is also
referred to as “rich,” “eggy,” “sulfide,” “custard,” scalded milk, condensed milk, or
caramel-like. These flavors, although they may differ slightly in some respects,
actually have much in common. A cooked milk or cream “background flavor” is the
characteristic flavor note of this group of heated flavor sensations. Depending on its
intensity, this flavor sensation is usually somewhat delayed in terms of the initial
perception, but then it tends to persist after the sample has been expectorated. A
highly cooked or heated flavor of the product may tend to “mask” or modify the
vanilla flavoring. The resulting flavor sensation may be rather pleasant, although it
would usually be perceived differently than a pure vanilla flavor.
Cooked (or rich) flavor is not considered a serious defect in ice cream, unless it
is so intense as to be perceived as caramel, scorched, or burnt. In fact, some manu-
facturers intentionally strive for a slight to moderate degree of cooked (rich, nutty,
custard-like) flavor in vanilla ice cream. They believe, as do the authors (Bodyfelt
et al., 1988; Goff & Hartel, 2013), that a slight to modest cooked flavor note helps
convey a fuller, smoother, richer flavor in the product. Quite commonly, the dairy
ingredients incorporated into ice cream will have already been pasteurized, but fed-
eral and state regulations require that the assembled or final ice cream mix must also
be pasteurized. Second, or subsequent, heat treatment is likely to produce some
degree of cooked flavor in the mix. As indicated earlier, this is not typically objec-
tionable in ice cream; in fact, it may be quite desirable or preferred in many
instances.
An excessive-cooked off-flavor usually results from using ingredients that have
received such severe heat treatment that a scorched or burnt effect is attained. Mix
pasteurization, under some adverse conditions, may also develop a cooked
off-flavor. Even though pasteurization standards require heating at a minimum of

79.4 °C (175 °F) for 25 or more consecutive seconds, some manufacturers may opt
to heat to near the boiling point or above. Some mixes may be ultra-pasteurized or
commercially sterilized and aseptically packaged. Again, it should be emphasized
that a moderate-cooked flavor is not particularly objectionable. However, an obvi-
ous scorched or burnt off-flavor is to be avoided.
Lacks freshness (stale). The descriptor “lacks freshness” or “stale” refers to a
moderate off-flavor of ice cream and related frozen desserts. This flavor defect is
generally assumed to result from either a general flavor deterioration of the mix dur-
ing storage, or from the use of one or more marginal quality dairy ingredients in mix
formulation. For instance, some old milk, old cream, or stale milk powder (nonfat
milk solids) may have been incorporated as an ingredient. If the off-flavor imparted
by the “marginal” ingredients were quite intense, then “old ingredient” would prob-
ably be the most appropriate criticism. However, if the other milk components and/
or mix ingredients dilute the adverse sensory aspects of the dairy ingredient(s) in
question, a lacks freshness (or stale) descriptor is more applicable. Some evaluators
consider the lacks freshness defect as reminiscent of “freezer burn.”
Occasionally, relatively small quantities of cream or milk used as mix ingredi-
ents may manifest an old ingredient, oxidized, rancid, or unclean defect. But, unfor-
tunately, this situation was “missed” or overlooked by production and quality
control personnel. Subsequently, dilution of the “offending” dairy ingredient(s) (by
higher volume “quality” ingredients) results in an overall deterioration of flavor
quality, which is commonly described as stale or lacks freshness. When ice cream
and reduced fat ice cream lack freshness, there may or may not be a slight aftertaste.
However, if the aftertaste is strong or persistent, the judge should look for or con-
sider more serious defects such as old ingredient, storage, oxidized, or rancid.
Old ingredient. Nearly all dairy ingredients used in ice cream are subject to fla-
vor deterioration with age (extended storage). Poor sanitation in milk handling and
processing and subsequent bacterial action may produce psychrotrophic off-flavors
or an “old milk” or “old cream” flavor. Through chemical reactions, milk and whey
powders may become stale and caramelized in storage. Caseinates may acquire a
stale and glue-like off-flavor; syrups may ferment. With storage, various deteriora-
tive processes may occur in stabilizers, emulsifiers, and flavoring agents. The same
descriptor, “old ingredient,” is used to describe a relatively large number of possible
flavor defects. The cause of the problem should be pinpointed by checking all pos-
sible ingredients, through sensory examination, for their potential to adversely
affect the delicate flavor of the product.
To some evaluators, old ingredient and oxidized off-flavors may resemble each
other to some extent. With increased age (storage), the judge can expect that some
autoxidation may have occurred, along with other possible deteriorative changes. In
many instances, the old ingredient defect will not be noted immediately after the
sample is placed into the mouth; but usually an ice cream with this defect will
exhibit a persistent aftertaste. Typically, the aftertaste will not be pleasant; the taste
buds will fail to “clean-up.”
318 V. B. Alvarez
Oxidized (cardboardy, metallic). In dairy products, the oxidized off-flavor may

vary so widely in character and intensity that several terms or descriptors are used
to distinguish between the various stages. In ice cream or low-fat ice cream, this
off-flavor may be encountered to such a slight intensity that the product flavor seems
flat or “missing.” A further development of this off-flavor may be described more
accurately as astringent, metallic, or puckery (with an associated mouthfeel of
shrinking of the mucous membranes). Other, more moderate intensities of the off-
flavor might be described progressively as oxidized, papery, or cardboardy. In the
most intense stages of the oxidation of milk products, oily, tallowy, painty, or fishy
are common descriptors. The oxidized off-flavor is usually noted soon after the
sample is placed into the mouth; if intense, it may persist long after the sample has
been expectorated. Depending on the intensity, such an ice cream may not be
entirely repulsive to the evaluator or the consumer. However, an oxidized defect
definitely conveys the idea that the product is not made from high-quality ingredi-
ents, is not refreshing, or may be stale or old. Generally, the evaluator or consumer
is not very eager for a second bite of such a product. Hence, when an oxidized off-
flavor occurs in frozen dairy desserts, repeat sales for the product (or brand) are not
as likely to occur.
Some evaluators think of metallic off-flavor as a distinctly separate defect, even
though this off-flavor is commonly considered another stage or degree of the generic
oxidized off-flavor. Since stainless steel has replaced monel or “white metal” in
milk handling and processing equipment, the metallic defect has substantially
decreased as a problem. Historically, the conditions associated with the occurrence
of a metallic off-flavor were equipment made of copper or copper alloys, improp-
erly tinned equipment, rusty milk cans and utensils, and/or storage of milk products
in nonstainless steel containers or vessels. The metallic off-flavor is characterized as
having a peculiarly rough, astringent, puckery mouthfeel. As indicated previously,
the metallic defect is often considered one of several stages in the series of off-
flavors due to lipid oxidation. The light-induced form of the oxidized off-flavor
(protein oxidation) is much less likely to occur in ice cream than the metal-induced
form of oxidation.
Occasionally, a light-activated defect might be encountered in frozen desserts
packaged in containers that employ the transparent, “see-through” lid, but it is usu-
ally highly localized on the top surface and only after direct exposure to light
(Suttles & Marshall, 1993). Since light-oxidized flavor defect is rarely observed in
ice cream, it is not evaluated in the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest.
An implication of work by Gassenmeier (2003) is that the enzyme xanthine oxidase
may catalyze the formation of cardboard-tasting, lipid- and oxygen-derived off-
flavors in an unpasteurized ice cream mix under refrigerated storage conditions.
Light-oxidized off-flavor in ice cream is influenced mainly by the riboflavin content
and susceptibility of unsaturated fatty acids to oxidation (Shiota et al., 2002; Schiano
et al., 2017). Double-strength vanilla significantly masks off-flavors compared to
single-strength vanilla and freezing with nitrogen gas instead of air decreases oxi-
dized flavor formation (Im & Marshall, 1998).
Rancid. Fortunately, a rancid off-flavor is infrequently observed in ice cream

(Tobias, 1983; Abbas Syed, 2018). A specific, delayed, reaction time of perception
is characteristic of rancidity, and it has an attendant persistent repulsiveness.
However, the sweeteners and flavoring may tend to mask any potential rancidity to
the extent that unless the defect is quite pronounced, this off-flavor may not be rec-
ognized for what it actually is. If rancidity were to occur in ice cream, the peculiar
blend of flavors and off-flavors would typically terminate as an unclean or unpleas-
ant aftertaste, which is characteristic of the rancid defect. Rancidity is severely criti-
cized since it indicates either utilization of mishandled dairy ingredients or serious
processing errors that led to mixing raw milk or cream with homogenized milk
ingredients.
Salty. Occasionally, a salty off-taste may be encountered in frozen dairy desserts.
This taste may be readily detected, since the reaction time is relatively short; hence,
it is a quickly perceived taste. A salty taste could be due to added salt, the use of
salted butter as a milk fat source, or it may be associated with use of a high percent-
age of concentrated whey, whey solids, or milk-solids-not-fat (MSNF) in the formu-
lation. High displacement rates of MSNF with whey solids (i.e., in excess of 20–25%
replacement) seems to occasionally lead to a slight salty off-taste in ice cream or ice
milk. Other sensory defects may accompany the higher usage rates of some sources
of dry whey (see the following discussion on the whey off-flavor). To most evalua-
tors, a salty taste in frozen dairy desserts seems distinctly “out of place” for this
form of product; hence, it is usually criticized in line with the level of intensity and
the specific flavor involved.
Whey (“Graham cracker-like”). The Federal Standards of Identity limits the
maximum concentration of whey solids in ice cream to 25% of the MSNF (for prod-
ucts engaged in interstate commerce). While the quantity of whey used in the mix is
certainly a factor in the possible transmission of whey off-flavors, an even more
important aspect is the whey quality. The quality of whey solids should be carefully
determined; especially important is a close scrutiny of the flavor characteristics
(freshness and freedom from stale, old ingredient, or oxidized-like off-flavors).
Freedom from off-colors, caking (free flowing), or lumping is also critical for dry
whey. Preferably, the level of whey solids used in ice cream or ice milk should be
below the flavor detection threshold for the “whey flavor.” However, even lower
levels of whey (15–17% displacement of MSNF) may be detected by sensory test
when it is of poor quality.
A whey off-flavor in frozen dairy desserts is probably best described as being
“Graham cracker-like” or similar to stale condensed milk (Bodyfelt, 1979, 1988;
Goff & Hartel, 2013), with an associated slight taste of salt. Some evaluators con-
sider the sweetness “cloying” (initially pleasingly sweet, then excessive). The whey
off-flavor present in ice cream is very different from how whey manifests in other
dairy products; the flavor results from the complex interactions among ice cream
ingredients. Extremely old or poor-quality whey solids may reflect oxidized, cheesy,
320 V. B. Alvarez
rancid, and/or unclean defects, and subsequently transmit these off-flavors to the ice
cream. An unpleasant aftertaste may prevail, due to the amount and/or quality of
whey solids used in the mix. Sometimes ice cream and related products that exhibit
whey off-flavor may simultaneously display slight off-colors (reddish orange), as
well as a friable, crumbly body and/or a gritty texture.
10.9.3 Off-Flavors Due to Chemical Changes in the Mix

or Product
Lacks freshness (stale, old). This flavor defect may develop due to chemical
changes that can readily occur in the mix or is caused by the use of a faulty ingredi-
ent in low concentration. It may also result from adverse conditions of producing,
storing, transporting, handling, and distributing such perishable milk products cas
ice cream, mixes, and finished products. This defect was discussed earlier and can
be considered a light form of stronger defects like old ingredient, storage oxidized,
or rancid. Lacks freshness can be distinguished when evaluating ice cream by its
stale taste, some marginally old dairy ingredient, slight old ingredient, or other
flavors.
Oxidized (cardboardy, metallic). This off-flavor is generally associated with
chemical changes of the fat ingredient. Oxidized flavor can be identified as card-
boardy, astringent, oily, or tallowy when evaluating ice cream. Processes of staling,
“aging,” autoxidation of milk lipids, hydrolytic rancidity, and bacteria-induced
deterioration of milk proteins and milkfat represent a set of complex chemical and
enzymatic activities that takes its toll on flavor stability of frozen dairy products and
their mixes. The specifics of the possible off-flavors that can develop from these
chemical changes have been described earlier in this chapter, but one new category
that should be addressed is the so-called storage off-flavor.
Storage. The “storage” off-flavor generally refers to flavor that may develop
either in the mix or in the frozen ice cream (or low-fat ice cream) during the storage
period. When ice cream is stored for an extended period of time, the flavor loses its
initial luster, even though no specific defects seem to stand out. In one instance, the
product may simply lack the sensation of freshness. In another case, absorption of
odors from the environment can cause the product to acquire a “storage-like” off-
flavor, a form of “absorbed flavor” defect. Smoke, ammonia, and various chemical
odors are but a few examples of absorbed substances that may be responsible.
Serious storage flavor defects have been known to develop when odor, absorption,
and chemical change or deterioration in storage occurred simultaneously. The stor-
age off-flavor is commonly considered more serious or objectionable than the “lacks
freshness” (stale) defect in ice cream.
10.9.4 Off-Flavors Due to Mix Processing
Cooked (rich, nutty, eggy) and caramelized/scorched. These are heat-induced off-
flavors that might occur in ice cream and were discussed earlier under the heading
of “cooked,” within the section of this chapter on the role of dairy products imparted
off-flavors.
10.9.5 Off-Flavor Due to Microbial Growth in the Mix
Acid (sour), fruity-fermented, cheesy, musty, and/or unclean (psychrotrophic). Each

of these microbial-induced off-flavors is likely to occur as the result of varied
degrees of temperature abuse in the handling of milk and cream ingredients and/or
excessive storage temperatures of perishable mixes (i.e., higher than 4.4 °C (40 °F)).
For descriptions of each defect enumerated above, the reader is directed to the dis-
cussion of microbial off-flavors of milk and cream discussed in Chap. 5.
10.9.6 Off-Flavors Due to Other Causes
Foreign (atypical). As a rule, a foreign off-flavor may be easily detected, but the
exact substance or specific contaminant is often difficult to positively identify. This
flavor defect is definitely atypical (foreign) for dairy products, or the ingredients
ordinarily associated with good-quality ice cream. Detergents, sanitizers, paint,
gasoline, pesticides, and other chemicals of chance contact are some of the possible
serious offenders. Unfortunately, chemical substances may not only impart off-
flavors but also be nauseating or toxic. Obviously, any products found to contain this
defect must be severely downgraded and not marketed for human consumption.
Neutralizer. Although neutralization of lactic acid is not currently an accepted
step in ice cream manufacture, the judge should be familiar with the flavor defects
that may result from such an ill-advised contemporary practice. When neutralizer is
used to reduce the developed acidity of milk ingredients or the mix, the end prod-
ucts formed by the chemical reaction of neutralization are left as residual com-
pounds in the frozen product, where they may become apparent upon tasting. This
off-flavor is recognized by a peculiar alkaline off-flavor (reminiscent of sodium
bicarbonate (baking soda) or milk of magnesia). Sometimes, a slight bitter taste can
be associated with neutralizer off-flavors, though this bitter note is usually rather
mild. The taste reaction time for a neutralizer off-flavor is somewhat delayed, but
the peculiar taste persists for some time after the sample has been expectorated. Any
frozen dairy desserts exhibiting a neutralizer off-flavor are usually severely criti-
cized by ice cream judges. In this era, the use of neutralizers in ice cream manufac-
ture, or any type of dairy product, should certainly be discouraged, if not altogether
322 V. B. Alvarez
eliminated. In those instances where a neutralizing agent might be used, the ice
cream manufacturer is also likely to experience the development of other associated
serious off-flavors (besides the neutralizer defect), namely, lacks freshness or stale,
old ingredient, storage, and/or spoilage (psychrotroph) bacteria-related off-flavors.
10.9.7 Other Ingredients
Eggs (eggy). Part 135 of the CFR permits the use of egg solids, but regular ice cream
must contain less than 1.4% egg yolk solids by weight, exclusive of the weight of
any bulky-flavoring ingredients used. When the content of egg yolk solids (by
weight) is 1.4% or more, the product must be labeled “frozen custard,” “French
vanilla,” or “French custard” ice cream. Although not widely used in contemporary
ice cream, eggs have, or have had, definite functional roles in ice cream – namely,
stabilization and emulsification.
Egg yolks, whether in liquid, dry, or frozen form, do not necessarily impart an
off-flavor to ice cream, but they may impart a characteristic “eggy” flavor note. This
derived flavor is typical for egg yolks. However, off-flavored egg solids have the
capacity, similar to off-flavored milk solids, to introduce certain unwanted off-
flavors. Deteriorated, poor-quality whole eggs or egg yolks readily impart a flavor
defect to ice cream. A characteristic “egg flavor,” imparted by high-quality egg sol-
ids, is not that easy to distinguish, since this flavor note resembles the cooked (cus-
tard or nutty) sensation, although an egg flavor is usually more persistent. When
used at low levels in ice cream (less than 1.4%), high-quality egg solids are usually
compatible with the desired flavor blend. Since egg yolks have good emulsifying
properties, some ice creams are formulated to contain them as a supplement to, or a
substitute for, stabilizers and/or emulsifiers.
Stabilizer/emulsifier. These off-flavors are due to the incorporation of poor-
quality, deteriorated, or excessive amounts of stabilizers and/or emulsifiers. Low-fat
ice cream may be more susceptible to this defect since it generally contains higher
concentrations of these body and texture-modifying agents than ice cream.
Substances used as emulsifiers are somewhat prone to imparting an off-flavor gener-
ally described as “stabilizer-like” or “emulsifier-like.” Occasionally, some of the
mono- and diglycerides and other emulsifiers in proprietary blends of stabilizers
and emulsifiers may exhibit some degree of lipid autoxidation. Hence, this form of
stabilizer/emulsifier off-flavor may be confused with the generic oxidized flavor
defect. Certain soft-serve low-fat ice cream and ice cream novelty products are
more likely to manifest a slight to moderate intensity of emulsifier off-flavor than
conventional ice cream. The novelty products and low-fat soft-serve ice cream rely
on higher concentrations of polysorbates, mono- and diglycerides, or lecithin, to
provide “drier,” firmer products when drawn from the freezer; hence, they are more
prone to this off-flavor than ice cream.
Non-milk food solids. On a rare occasion, other approved food solids (other than
dairy derived, sweeteners, flavoring agents, and stabilizers/emulsifiers) may be
incorporated into frozen dairy desserts for a special flavor effect, body and texture,
or appearance function. Cookies, cake, and cheesecake are several examples that
come to mind. It is conceivable that certain off-flavors could be imparted to ice
cream from such sources, especially if used in relatively large quantities. Examples
of materials cited here, however, should not be encountered in vanilla ice cream.
10.10 Other Frozen Dairy Desserts
Low-fat ice cream. As noted in Table 10.1, this product (formerly called ice milk)
differs from ice cream principally in the quantity of milk fat content. Although low-
fat ice cream is offered in a variety of flavors, vanilla is the most popular. For evalu-
ating the sensory properties of low-fat ice cream, the ice cream scorecard and
scoring guide (Fig. 10.1 and Table 10.3) are appropriate for all sensory quality
parameters. Due to the lower milk fat content, low-fat ice cream would be expected
to lack the typical richness, mouthfeel characteristics, and the overall flavor blend
that most ice cream possesses. Also, the body and texture, as expected, can differ
considerably from ice cream, due to the lower total solids content of low-fat ice
cream. However, in spite of these inherent problems, many manufacturers have
mastered the required technology and art for producing low-fat ice cream of excel-
lent flavor, body, and texture. In fact, the sensory properties of many samples of
low-fat ice cream may be practically free of criticism, even though they might be
evaluated on the same general criteria as ice cream.
Mellorine. Despite the different language in the Federal Standards of Identity,
except for the source and type of fat, this product generally resembles either low-fat
ice cream (usually) or ice cream in composition. The ice cream scorecard and guide
are generally applicable for conducting sensory evaluation, but certain additional
defects that may be derived from vegetable or animal fats may be encountered and
recorded as appropriate on the scorecard. Flavor defects of main concern in mellor-
ine are the possibilities of oxidation, rancidity, the presence of a distinctive off-
flavor derived from the specific fat source, and a lack of flavor or “blandness” (which
can be attributed to varied fat sources other than dairy based). The relative hardness
and melting properties of the fatty acids that constitute the fat can influence the body
and mouthfeel of frozen mellorine (typically vegetable fat and/or other animal fats
other than dairy, or in a blend with milkfat).
Frozen custard. Basically, this product is identical to ice cream except for the
addition of egg yolk solids at a concentration of at least 1.4% by weight. Based on
this requirement, frozen custard should not be criticized for having an egg solids
flavor, unless a characteristic “poor egg solids” off-flavor is sensed (due to use of
poor-quality egg ingredients). A greater tolerance for a “cooked” or “eggy” flavor
should be extended in evaluating those products labeled “frozen custard,” “French
custard,” or “French vanilla” ice cream.
Frozen bulky-flavored products. Due to the relatively small quantity of required
flavoring, and a minimum dilution effect, ice cream composition remains essentially
324 V. B. Alvarez
unchanged when it is flavored with vanilla or other extracts. However, some flavor-
ings such as chocolate, fruits, bakery products, candy, and nuts are often added in
relatively high proportions – hence, the applied term of “bulky flavors.” Bulky fla-
vors may be added to ice cream, reduced fat ice cream, or frozen custard. Federal
standards allow for alteration of the product composition by bulky flavors, as indi-
cated in Table 10.1. Numerous bulky-flavoring ingredients are used in ice cream; a
few will be discussed to illustrate the applicable principles when sensory qualities
are assessed by sensory methods.
In ascertaining the quality of bulky-flavored frozen desserts (actually any flavor),
the evaluator should be alert to the possible occurrence of any of the defects that
may be manifested in vanilla ice cream. Some of the milder off-flavors of ice cream
may be masked or partially masked by some flavorings, but not by others. However,
the judge should bear in mind that even a masked off-flavor may modify the overall
perception of some flavorings in an undesirable way. A smooth, creamy texture is
usually desired regardless of the type of flavorings used, but somewhat different or
altered characteristics of body and texture should be recognized as the norm with
some flavors of ice cream. Generally, the higher the quantity of bulky flavorings
incorporated into any ice cream, the greater the tendency or likelihood for develop-
ment of a coarse or icy texture, and/or possibly a weaker product body. This likeli-
hood is primarily due to the dilution of solids, added moisture from some sources of
bulky flavorings, and/or higher overrun. When the added flavoring material does not
incorporate air, the ice cream portion may be excessively whipped to maintain mini-
mum weight (e.g., 4.5 lb/gal).
10.10.1 Other Ice Cream Products
Other ice cream products are the results of manipulating the processing conditions
and ice cream formulations. Under these altered conditions, the products have phys-
iochemical properties that may be like regular ice cream products or have unique
characteristics that are appealing to consumers. The properties that can be influ-
enced by manipulating the conditions may include total solids content, nutritional
values, sensory properties, sweetness, viscosity, freezing point, fat stabilization,
hardness, melting rate, overrun, and others.
Slow-Churned Ice Cream The typical steps in ice cream production start with
preparation of the premix of the ingredients, followed by aeration and freezing in a
scraped-surface heat exchanger. When making slow-churned ice cream, after the
aeration and freezing step, the mix is further processed in a low-temperature ice
cream extruder. Freezing and aeration of ice cream and other frozen desserts are
traditionally accomplished by a scraped-surface heat exchanger, where pasteurized,
chilled, and aged liquid mixes are subjected to low chamber temperatures, high-
speed dashers, and surface-scraping knives. The size and uniform distribution of
dispersed ice crystals, fat globules, and air bubbles are most critical for the textural
quality of finished ice cream, and the aeration and freezing steps are essential for
their development (Shrivastav & Goswami, 2017). Scraped-surface ice cream freez-
ers provide effective heat transfer and aeration to form the required ice crystals, fat
globules, and air bubbles, but the attainable draw temperature is limited to approxi-
mately −5 °C (Bolliger et al., 2000a). At this temperature, less than 50% of the
water in the formulation is frozen, so further freezing is typically conducted at
approximately −40 °C in a hardening tunnel or hardening room for up to 3 h. During
traditional hardening, ice crystals often grow and become detectable by consumers,
as the ice cream loses its desirable creamy texture.
Low-temperature extrusion (LTE), also referred to as the “slow-churned” pro-
cess, is an innovative rapid hardening and texturizing process that promotes the
formation of smaller ice crystals through the application of low temperatures, high
shear stresses, and high pressures (Shrivastav & Goswami, 2017; Goff & Hartel,
2013; Wildmoser et al., 2005). As ice cream exits the scraped-surface freezer, it
enters the low-temperature extruder and is cooled to approximately −15 °C within
minutes. This quick hardening often eliminates the need for traditional static hard-
ening, and the ice cream remains pumpable due to the LTE’s shear stresses that
prevent accretion of ice crystals. This process also provides greater resistance to
recrystallization during storage and distribution and results in a smoother texture.
Additionally, LTE creates well-dispersed, small air bubbles and reduces the size of
fat globules, which enhances creaminess and softens the texture, making slow-
churned products easier to scoop (Goff & Hartel, 2013; Wildmoser et al., 2005).
These enhanced qualities have led to the development of reduced-fat frozen desserts
with similar textural attributes and improved ease of use when compared to tradi-
tional full-fat formulations (Goff & Hartel, 2013).
High-Protein Ice Cream Conventional ice cream has 4% protein and it is usually
provided by skim milk powder. This level has been reported to be ideal for the sen-
sory properties of the ice cream. High-protein ice cream can be created by the incor-
poration of whey protein concentrate (WPC) and milk protein concentrate (MPC)
and has been shown to increase shape retention and viscosity of the product.
However, increasing protein content up to 7% has been found to be detrimental to
the quality attributes of ice cream with lower overrun and excessive hardness
(Alvarez et al., 2005). Patel et al. (2006) observed that acceptable high-protein ice
cream could be produced with a protein content up to 6.05% provided by MPC; the
authors found an increase in the overall structure, viscosity, and reduction in the ice
crystal size compared to the 3.78% ice cream. These changes were attributed to less
free water available to form ice crystals. One week after manufacture, sensory over-
all structure acceptance was higher and iciness (related to crystal size) was lower at
6.05% protein content; however, at 7.19% protein concentration, the overall flavor
acceptance was significantly affected. The authors reported that the vanilla flavor
was masked by the WPC and that at a higher protein concentration, additional flavor
needed to be added to overcome the effect on flavor. Similar results were reported
by Daw and Hartel (2015), who evaluated the effect of different protein sources
(skim milk powder, WPI, and MPC); the authors observed that increasing the
326 V. B. Alvarez
p rotein concentration significantly affected the coalescence of fat globules and

meltdown rates. Roy et al. (2022) evaluated the incorporation of whey protein iso-
late to increase protein content to 8 and 10%; the authors reported that the sensory
attributes like body and texture decreased in the high-protein samples compared to
the control (4% protein).
An increase in protein concentration of ice cream could enhance nutritional
value, but it has been shown to significantly affect the physicochemical properties
of the final product. Increasing protein content increases viscosity, lowers the over-
run, increases the ice cream melt rate, and disrupts the fat stabilization process dur-
ing manufacture (Daw & Hartel, 2015).
Lactose-Free and Reduced-Sugar Ice Cream Lactose and sugar are common
ingredients in regular ice cream formulations. Addition of sugars is very important
for sweet taste; it also helps in maintaining the solids content, helps to reduce the
freezing point of the mix, and affects the texture and sensory properties (Chamchan
et al., 2017). The common sweeteners used in ice cream are sucrose (cane or beet
sugar), dextrose (corn sugar), and various corn syrups. The functioning and proper-
ties of these sweeteners are discussed earlier in this chapter. Lactose is a disaccha-
ride that is made of two monosaccharides glucose and galactose linked by β-1,4
glycosidic bond. It is the principal carbohydrate present in milk and dairy products
made from milk and is also referred to as “milk sugar” (Özdemir et al., 2018). There
is a consumer trend toward sugar-free ice cream because of health concerns and
weight issues. Thus, the industry is developing products replacing the sugar and
high fructose corn syrup in ice cream formulations with low- or zero-calorie sugar
substitutes.
Lactose-free dairy products are gaining much interest and is one of the fastest-
growing sections in the dairy industry – it is expected to reach a turnover of $9 bil-
lion in 2022 (Dekker et al., 2019). Lactose-free ice cream is prepared by eliminating
or reducing lactose for individuals that are unable to digest lactose due to absence
of lactase enzyme, commonly known as lactose intolerance. In this case, lactose
ingestion can cause mild to severe symptoms and digestive discomfort. Lactose-free
ice cream can be prepared either by using lactose-free milk or powder and by using
lactase enzyme (β-D-galactosidase; β-D-galactoside galactohydrolase,
E.C. 3.2.1.23). The enzyme is usually added after pasteurization and incubated
before freezing when used directly in ice cream making. Lactose is hydrolyzed into
glucose and galactose, which is sweeter than lactose itself, thus partially eliminating
the addition of sugar, thereby reducing the calories as well Harju et al. (2012). It is
easy to digest and absorb glucose and galactose by lactose-intolerant people (Dekker
et al., 2019).
Reduced sugar ice cream is prepared by reducing the high amounts of added
sugars to make the product consumable for diabetic and obese people (de Medeiros
et al., 2021). Another way to reduce sugar is the use of natural sweeteners that can
affect the sensory perception in a positive way but does not increase the glycemic
index and caloric value. There are several noncaloric sweeteners used in ice cream
formulations such as sucralose, aspartame, acesulfame potassium, neotame, sac-

charin, and advantame. Sugar alcohols that have zero calories and zero carbohy-
drates are also used in ice cream formulations. Erythritol contains about 60–80% of
the sweetness of sugar and is widely used. The most common natural sweetener is
stevia, which has a sweetness level of 250–300 as compared to sucrose and is rec-
ognized as safe by the WHO and FDA (Alizadeh et al., 2014).
Removing lactose and reducing sugar have numerous effects on the final prod-
uct. Lactose hydrolysis affects the texture and sensory properties (i.e., increases the
viscosity, decreases the freezing point, increases sweetness, decreases total solid
content). However, the added sugar is also reduced by 25%. Lactose hydrolysis also
decreases the “sandiness” that is caused by the crystallization of lactose, a sensory
defect that affects overall acceptability. Similarly, reduction of sugar affects the
textural and sensory properties as well. It affects hardness and ice formation. The
texture is usually hard and ice crystals increase in size and content, which reduces
the overall acceptability as well. Sugar reduction also hinders melting, indicating
the role of sugar in not only sweetness but ice content in the product. Moreover, the
combined effects of lactose reduction/hydrolysis and sugar reduction give the high-
est acceptability properties (Abbasi & Saeedabadian, 2015).
10.10.2 Chocolate Frozen Desserts
The principal forms of chocolate flavoring for frozen dairy desserts are cocoa, choc-
olate liquor, or a combination of the two. Chocolate liquor contains the entire usable
portion of the cocoa bean, including about 50% cocoa butter. Cocoas are made by
removing varying amounts of cocoa butter from the liquor. However, the flavor
character of cocoa or chocolate liquor from different sources can vary markedly.
These flavor variations may be due to the source of the cocoa beans, climatic condi-
tions during growth, fermentation conditions, whether Dutch processed (alkali-
treated) or naturally processed, and the roasting conditions. Aside from flavor
variations, the resulting cocoa may be light, dark, or red colored. Although the bulk
of the characteristic flavor of chocolate is retained in the cocoa, some delicate,
unique aroma constituents may be lost into the cocoa butter. Thus, the fat content of
the given cocoa and the selected proportion of chocolate liquor to cocoa used in
flavoring the ice cream will influence the flavor balance of the chocolate.
Chocolate ice cream often employs an added substance to modify or enhance the
chocolate flavor; vanilla is most frequently used, but on occasion coffee, cinnamon,
or salt may be added. The intent of the selected flavor modifier may be to mellow
the chocolate sensation, diminish a certain harsh note, or simply to enhance or
“bring out” chocolate flavor. However, the flavor modifier or enhancer should not be
so intense as to actually predominate over the chocolate flavor of the ice cream.
The sweetness level of chocolate ice cream requires full consideration. Both
cocoa and chocolate liquor are quite bitter, and thus, they demand a higher sweet-
ness level in ice cream than vanilla or most other flavors. As an illustration, the
328 V. B. Alvarez
sweetness level of vanilla ice cream is commonly between 13% and 16%, expressed
as sucrose, while that of chocolate ice cream may be 17–18% (expressed as sucrose).
Obviously, there are distinct variations in consumer preferences for the type and
intensity of chocolate flavor in ice cream. Individual preferences may span the
intensity range from “just a hint of chocolate” to an overwhelming “double choco-
late,” from a light to a very dark color, and from a mellow, sweet to a bitter, harsh
chocolate. In evaluating the flavor of chocolate ice cream, the judge’s personal pref-
erence should not prejudice the rating, insofar as possible.
The overriding requirements for regular or conventional chocolate ice creams are
that (1) the true chocolate flavor be readily recognizable in a supposed “blindfold
test,” (2) that the cocoa and/or chocolate liquor that is used be of high quality, (3)
that no off-flavors be present, and (4) that any added non-chocolate flavor notes
“contribute, but not predominate” in the overall chocolate flavor profile. Although
some additional definitions of flavor terms and some new descriptors may need to
be added, the ice cream scorecard and scoring guide in Figs. 6.1 and 6.2 can be
applied to chocolate ice cream. Basic modifications are suggested in the following
paragraphs.
Lacks fine flavor/harsh/coarse. These terms describe a lack of proper, expected,
or desired chocolate flavor blend; an otherwise unidentifiable flavor defect or short-
coming of the chocolate; a flavor system that is somewhat lacking in the desired
delicate volatile components of chocolate; or describes a product that merely seems
not to project a “perfect,” “ideal,” or highly desirable flavor.
Lacks sweetness/bitter. This flavor defect of chocolate ice cream is self-
explanatory. Adjustment of the sweetener level (increased amount) usually elimi-
nates the defect in subsequent lots of the product.
Unnatural flavor/lacks chocolate character. These terms describe an artificial
flavor; a chocolate flavor that is not readily recognizable as chocolate per se; or a
flavor in which the non-chocolate components predominate. Basically, selection of
another source of chocolate flavoring is suggested.
Other quality factors of chocolate ice cream. The body characteristics of choco-
late ice cream are influenced by the relative proportions of cocoa and chocolate
liquor used, as well as by the sugar content of the mix. Approximately 1.67 lb
(0.74 kg) of chocolate liquor is required to impart the equivalent flavor intensity of
l lb. (0.45 kg) of cocoa; hence, ice cream has higher total solids content when choco-
late liquor is used exclusively or there is a high proportion of chocolate liquor to
cocoa. But even when cocoa is used exclusively as the source of chocolate flavoring,
the solids content of the mix is increased, and in either case, additional sugar (sol-
ids) is usually required and incorporated. The general effect of a product with higher
solids content is a mix with increased viscosity (Wibley et al., 2004; Goff & Hartel,
2013). Descriptors listed on a conventional ice cream scorecard to describe body
and texture defects are generally applicable to chocolate ice cream.
The various color defects listed on the regular (vanilla) scorecard also apply to
chocolate ice cream, except that a gray off-color would not be expected to occur in
chocolate. Departures from the desired range of chocolate color may be variously
described as dull, not uniform, too high (too dark), too pale (too light), or unnatural
(atypical).
When evaluating the meltdown characteristics, the package, or bacterial content,
the same criteria apply equally to vanilla and chocolate ice creams. Chocolate ice
cream is also made and/or packaged in combination with other flavors. Several
examples are chocolate almond (or other nuts), chocolate marshmallow, chocolate
mint, chocolate and berries, and other chocolate-based products sold under propri-
etary names; this list is by no means all inclusive.
10.10.3 Fruit Frozen Desserts
The flavor of berries and fruits (strawberries, peaches, etc.) may be imparted to
frozen dairy desserts by fresh, frozen, or processed fruits, natural extracts (that
sometimes contain other natural flavors), imitation flavors, or various combinations
of these. The flavor character, body and texture, and the appearance of the finished
product, are influenced by the type of flavoring used. Generally, the flavor of the
given ice cream should be reminiscent of sweetened fresh fruit and cream (e.g.,
strawberries and cream or peaches and cream). To overcome the problem of season-
ality, availability, and perishability of fresh fruit, frozen fruit preparations are com-
monly used (Bodyfelt, 1973, 1974; Goff & Hartel, 2013).
The choice of the particular variety of frozen fruit should be based on quality and
its suitability for ice cream. For example, a considerably softer, riper, and more
flavorful peach is required for ice cream than for pie baking. Processed fruit may
often exhibit a cooked, “fruit preserves” type of flavor that may not be objection-
able, but it is unlike the typical or more preferred flavor of fresh fruit. Processed
preparations of some fruits may be used alone, quite successfully, in combination
with other forms of flavorings, or as a part of a more complex flavoring system.
Processed cherries and some types of processed berries produce popular ice cream
flavorings, and processed pineapple has been successfully used in combination with
other flavors (especially for sherbet).
The sweetness level of fruit ice creams tends to be slightly higher than that of
vanilla; the sweetener should blend smoothly into the overall flavor sensation in a
well-made ice cream. There are two basic reasons for the incorporation of more
sugar into fruit ice creams. The first is to compensate for the tartness of the fruit and
optimize the intensity of the fruit flavor. Actually, the sweetness level of ice cream
(from the mix) may already be sufficiently high to accomplish that for some fruits;
hence the second reason becomes more important for quality considerations of the
product. That is, sugar is generally required in the fruit preparation to reduce the
freezing point of the fruit particles to prevent them from being ice-hard when the ice
cream is consumed. Frozen fruits typically contain about 20% added sugar (one part
of sugar to four parts of fruit).
330 V. B. Alvarez
A few flavor terms on the regular ice cream scorecard must be redefined in order
to apply this scoring tool to fruit-flavored ice cream. The suggested changes are
enumerated in the following paragraphs.
Lacks fine flavor. This term describes the lack of a highly desirable flavor blend;
an otherwise unidentifiable flavor defect of the fruit and/or fruit flavoring; a flavor
that lacks the full impact of fruit at the peak of its flavor development; or a flavor
that just seems to fall short of being “perfect” or “ideal.”
Cooked/processed. The terms “cooked” or “processed” describe a moderate off-
flavor produced by heat treatment of the mix and/or an off-flavor that resulted from
heat processing of the fruit.
Unnatural flavor/lacks specific fruit character. These terms attempt to describe
an artificial or atypical fruit off-flavor; a flavor sensation in which the specific fruit
is not readily recognizable; or a flavor note in which other fruit or nonfruit compo-
nents seem to predominate.
Lacks freshness/stale fruit. This set of flavor defect descriptors is generally self-
explanatory, but may include associated terms such as “musty,” “fermented,” or
“rotten.”
Body and texture of fruit ice cream. Since fruit preparations may be used in rather
high concentration in ice cream (15–24%), there is considerable dilution of the mix,
which, unless it is compensated for in some manner, can lead to a coarse texture and
a decidedly weaker body. For fruit ice creams, one slight modification, listed fol-
lowing, seems appropriate for the body and texture segment of the ice cream
scorecard.
Coarse/icy/icy fruit. The descriptor used to describe the relative coldness and
size of ice crystals in frozen dairy desserts is “expanded” to encompass potential
problems that may arise from fruit particles added to the product.
Other quality factors of fruit ice cream. Both the color and appearance of fruit ice
cream should be closely evaluated for esthetic appeal. As with other flavors of ice
cream, the color may be dull, not uniform, too deep, too light, or unnatural (atypi-
cal). The appearance also should be checked for any of the following possible
defects (where applicable):
Fruit particles too small
Fruit particles too large
Too few fruit particles
Too many fruit particles
Poor distribution of fruit
Atypical color of fruit particles
10.10.4 Nut Frozen Desserts
Pecans, walnuts, almonds, peanuts, macadamia nuts, hazelnuts (filberts), and pista-
chio nuts are among the most popular nuts added to ice cream in the USA. Generally,
ice cream is flavored with either an appropriate background flavor for the nuts (but-
ter pecan, chocolate almond, etc.) or a concentrate of the same basic nut flavor (e.g.,
pistachio, black walnut). The degree and the method of roasting the nuts (light or
heavy roast; dry or butter roasted) provide interesting variables that manifest them-
selves in the sensory properties of the ice cream. The initial quality and freshness of
the nuts must be good; no deterioration should occur as a result of storage. Since
some types of nuts contain a high proportion of unsaturated oil, they can be highly
susceptible to autooxidation. Some nuts (walnuts and hazelnuts) are also prone to
the development of hydrolytic rancidity due to the presence of lipolytic enzymes.
The size of nuts in ice cream may range from intact, whole nuts to small, broken,
or sliced pieces. Except in special cases, medium- to larger-sized pieces are gener-
ally favored. In any case, the nuts should retain their firmness, crispness, and fresh-
ness in the frozen product.
Vanilla (or chocolate) ice cream scorecards are generally applicable to nut-
flavored ice creams. The following revisions of flavor descriptors are suggested for
the flavor of nut ice creams.
Lacks fine flavor. This term describes a general lack of the desired flavor blend;
an otherwise unidentifiable, slight flavor defect of the nuts or background flavor; or
a flavor that simply does not quite attain the “ideal” or anticipated flavor.
Unnatural flavor. An artificial or atypical background flavor for the particular nut
is described by the term “unnatural” off-flavor.
Salty/excessively salty nuts. These self-explanatory descriptors cover the
instances of excessive incorporation of salt on the nuts or in the ice cream.
Oxidized/oxidized nuts/rancid nuts. Within nondairy segments of the food indus-
try, a generic “oxidized” off-flavor is often referred to as a “rancid” off-flavor.
However, walnuts and hazelnuts may also exhibit an actual rancid (lipolyzed) off-
flavor due to the lipase content of these nuts if they have not been sufficiently
roasted.
For assessing the body and texture of nut ice creams, one additional criticism is
suggested below.
Nut meats lack crispness. This term is generally self-explanatory; the nut pieces
absorb moisture and become somewhat waterlogged or soft in consistency.
Other quality factors of nut ice creams. Both color and appearance are important
criteria in measuring the sensory qualities of nut ice cream. Appearance is primarily
influenced by the size and uniform distribution of the nut meats, which help deter-
mine the eye appeal of the product. In addition to obvious color defects, the follow-
ing defects of appearance are possible in nut ice creams:
Nut particles too small
Too few nut particles
Too many nut particles
332 V. B. Alvarez
Poor distribution of nut meats

Atypical color of nut meats
Inclusion of nutshell fragments (important for teeth safety)
10.10.5 Candy Frozen Desserts
Chocolate chip and mint candy are probably the most popular representatives of this
group of products, though many others are produced by US ice cream manufactur-
ers. The background flavor may be vanilla, chocolate, or another flavor that is com-
patible with the given candy (e.g., mint chocolate chip). As with fruit and nut ice
creams, the evaluator should be somewhat familiar with the quality criteria of the
added materials. General quality requirements for candy-flavored ice creams are (1)
a pleasing flavor blend; (2) crispness of the candy components; (3) attractive color
and appearance (size and shape); (4) adequate and even distribution of candy pieces
throughout product; and (5) minimal or no color migration through the ice cream.
Some ice cream manufacturers have reported some success with minimizing the
occurrence of overly softened candy pieces and color migration by freezing the
candy before its addition to the frozen product. The suggested sensory descriptors
of defects for fruit and nut ice creams also apply to candy ice cream. The judge
should try to note whether a given defect seems to pertain to the background flavor
or to the candy itself. The various flavor defect definitions for chocolate ice cream
also apply to the flavor of any added chocolate chips or pieces.
10.10.6 Variegated Frozen Desserts
A variegated ice cream should basically emulate an ice cream sundae, although the
flavored syrup, sauce, or puree is dispersed throughout the product. Chocolate,
fudge, marshmallow, butterscotch, peanut butter, strawberry, and raspberry are just
a few of the flavors that may be variegated or marbled. The flavoring (or slurry)
syrup is usually pumped directly into the ice cream as it emerges from the ice cream
freezer; the variegating substance is intended to form a definite pattern within the
product. Although some indication of the regularity or uniformity of the variegation
pattern is obtained in the course of normal sampling of the ice cream, a more objec-
tive visual impression can usually be realized by examining both exposed surfaces,
after cutting through the center of the container. Sometimes, several cross-sectional
cuts may have to be made to properly assess the distribution or the “pattern” of the
variegating material with the frozen product. Typically, the ribbon of syrup should
be of medium thickness, and the pattern should essentially reach into all segments
of the container.
Other quality criteria include the flavor and consistency of the variegating syrups
used in the ice cream. In general, the flavor should be readily identifiable, be free of
off-flavors, and produce a pleasing blend with the background or the “other”
flavor(s) of the product. The syrup should not “settle out” or mix with the ice cream,
but simultaneously, it should not be overly hard, gummy, crusty, or icy. The follow-
ing modified definitions of flavor defects are suggested for better application in
evaluating variegated ice creams.
Lacks fine flavor. A lack of the desired flavor blend; an otherwise unidentifiable
flavor defect of the variegating syrup or background; or a flavor which just falls
short of being “perfect” is implied by this descriptor.
Lacks flavor/variegating syrup lacks flavor. Self-explanatory.
Unnatural flavor. “Unnatural” describes an artificial or atypical off-flavor in the
background flavor and/or in the variegating syrup.
Other quality factors in variegated ice cream. The body and texture of variegated
ice cream should be similar to that of its unvariegated counterpart.
Low “heat shock” resistance is a typical property of variegated ice creams; con-
sequently, it can be expected that frequently the body will be weaker and the texture
more coarse than plain or regular ice creams. Another reason for a weak, coarse
body in variegated ice creams is in the “overrun gradient” between the variegating
syrups and the ice cream. The variegating syrups are usually quite heavy; at the time
of freezing, air is incorporated only into the mix portion. If product is drawn at the
same weight/unit as that of the product without variegating syrup, the ice cream mix
portion obviously has to be much lighter. The same problem may be encountered in
other bulky-flavored ice creams in which no overrun is formed within the more
dense or solid-flavoring material.
Variegating syrup too hard, icy, or chewy. Due to the difference in physical and
chemical properties, especially the “overrun gradient” between the variegating
syrup and ice cream, a certain crustiness, chewiness, or iciness can occur in var-
iegated ice cream. Appropriate composition of the variegating syrup (accounting
for freezing point depression) should help guard against this defect.
Under color and appearance, the following possible criticisms for variegated ice
creams are likely to occur:
Poor pattern of distribution
Too thick a ribbon
Too thin a ribbon
Syrup settled out (precipitated)
Syrup mixed with ice cream
Unnatural or atypical color (of the ice cream or the variegating syrup)
334 V. B. Alvarez
10.10.7 Direct-Draw Shakes
This product, similar in composition to low-fat ice cream, emulates the traditional
milk shake (Holsinger et al., 1987). Depending on composition and whether a
“thick” or “thin” shake is desired, the product is drawn from the freezer in the tem-
perature range of −3.3 °C to −1.1 °C (26–30 °F). The mix may be flavored prior to
freezing, or flavoring syrup may be added to the frozen shake and dispersed in a
spindle-type mixer.
The finished product should possess a pleasing blend of flavor (chocolate is the
most popular flavor) and be free of off-flavors. Opinions may vary as to the desired
body and texture that appeals to the widest group of consumers. A thick, smooth-
textured shake that draws through a straw is probably the choice of a majority of
consumers. Product overrun is still another factor that affects coldness and mouth-
feel. A product with a high overrun yields comparably less liquid as it melts in the
mouth. A desirable range appears to be 40–60% overrun for direct-draw shakes.
Just as with soft serve, the sensory characteristics of shakes are also traceable to
either the mix, the freezer, or to the procedures of the freezer operator (Tobias,
1969). The resolution of a particular sensory defect may be as simple as resetting a
freezer control knob or as complex as reformulating the mix.
10.10.8 Frozen Yogurt
In some respects, frozen yogurt resembles ice cream, low-fat ice cream, and sherbet.
This product is available in packaged, novelty, (Isik et al., 2011) or soft-serve form
and in a variety of flavors, most commonly fruit flavors (Bodyfelt, 1978; Isik et al.,
2011). Frozen yogurt does not have standard of identity other than that yogurt is
required in the formulation. The general criteria used in the sensory evaluation of
frozen yogurts are comparable to those used for sherbets or low-fat ice cream.
“Chalkiness” may sometimes be observed in the mouthfeel of frozen yogurt; this is
quite possibly the result of dehydration of proteins by the combined action of heat
and acidity. The absolute levels of product sweetness and acidity, as well as the bal-
ance between sweetness and acidity, in association with the given flavor, are impor-
tant considerations for frozen yogurt quality.
Table 10.9 outlines the elements of flavor for the sensory evaluation of frozen
yogurt (Bodyfelt, 1993). This scheme assesses the given product-flavoring system,
culture system characteristics, sweetener aspects, process-related considerations,
and the potential for dairy ingredient off-flavors.
Table 10.9 Flavor elements of the sensory evaluation of flavored frozen yogurt
1. Flavoring system (a) Ideal, natural-like, no criticism
(b) Lacks fine flavor (lacks desired balance)
(c) Lacks flavor intensity
(d) Too high flavor intensity
(e) Unnatural flavor (harsh, not typical of stated flavor(s);
possible foretaste and/or aftertaste)
2. Culture-related aspects (a) Acetaldehyde (green apple-like, coarse)
(b) Bitter
(c) Too high acid
(d) Too low acid
3. Sweetener related (a) Ideal, just right, balanced, helps flavor balance
(b) Too sweet
(c) Lacks sweetness
(d) Syrup off-flavor (malty, Karo®-like)
4. Processing related (a) Cooked (eggy-like, nutty)
(b) Atypical (foreign)
5. Dairy ingredients related (a) Lacks freshness (stale)
(delayed aftertaste) (b) Old ingredient
(c) Oxidized/metallic
(d) Rancid
(e) Salty
(f) Whey
10.10.9 Soft-Serve Frozen Desserts
These products (usually low-fat ice cream or frozen yogurt) are commonly dis-
pensed from a special freezer for immediate consumption by the consumer. Since
the serving temperature is about −7.2 °C (19 °F), the hardening step is omitted,
which eliminates the “damaging effects” of slow freezing and subsequent tempera-
ture fluctuations. As a result, soft serve should generally exhibit creamy, smooth
mouthfeel properties, as well as provide excellent “flavor release.”
Generally, the same requirements apply to the flavor of soft-serve as to the cor-
responding hard-frozen product (low-fat ice cream or frozen yogurt). Most of the
body and texture criteria also apply, except that the desired or optimum characteris-
tics should be partially redefined. The body should be fairly resistant and firm (to
retain shape on a cone), but obviously not as firm as that of hardened products,
which are stored and consumed at much lower temperatures (−13 °C (8 °F)). The
desirable characteristics of soft serve (Tobias, 1969: Goff & Hartel, 2013) can be
summarized as follows:
A desirable flavor blend and absence of off-flavors.
Smooth texture: Small ice crystals; no lactose crystals; no butter granules; and no
excessive coldness.
Dry appearance; a pleasing color.
Some modest resistance to melting.
A reasonably firm, resistant body.
336 V. B. Alvarez
A neatly shaped serving portion that maintains its shape for a reasonable time before
consumption.
When sensory problems are encountered with soft-serve frozen desserts, they
may be traced to mix ingredients, mix composition, mix processing, age of mix, mix
handling, mechanical and sanitary condition of the freezer, freezer operation proce-
dures, and numerous other factors. For instance, on “slow business” days, the prod-
uct remains in the freezer under intermittent agitation for an extended time. The
effect on quality may be a progressively wetter, weak-bodied product (even though
the temperature may be unaffected or even decreased); problems with overrun
(weight of serving); fat separation (due to churning); and lactose crystallization
(sandiness). A well-formulated mix, along with good mechanical condition of the
freezer and a properly operated freezing machine, can minimize most of these
problems.
Most of the soft serve on the market is low-fat ice cream, but ice cream, sherbet,
water ices, and especially frozen yogurt are also available in many localities.
Although vanilla is the predominant flavor (along with a number of “sundae”
options), chocolate, fruit, or berry flavors and other flavor options are offered by
more and more retail stores.
10.10.10 Sherbet
Sherbet is defined according to 21 CRF 135.140. Though poor-quality dairy ingre-

dients may cause an off-flavor in sherbets, the mandatory low concentration of total
milk solids (less than 5%) somewhat reduces this likelihood. In fruit sherbet, the
quality is usually determined by the overall flavor blend of sweetness, tartness, fruit
flavor intensity, and by how closely the given fruit flavoring emulates the true fruit
flavor at its peak of quality. In nonfruit sherbet, quality differs with each specific
flavoring; therefore, only a vague, general statement pertaining to the desired flavor
can be made. In nonfruit sherbets, the flavoring and the sherbet base (mix) should
be free of perceptible defects, and the frozen product should have a pleasing fla-
vor blend.
The ice cream scorecard may be applied as a tool to evaluate the flavor of sher-
bets, if the evaluator considers the following additional criticisms and revisions of
definitions.
Defective flavoring/peel flavor. Defective flavoring may be any off-flavor due to
a manufacturing error, an oversight, or due to quality deterioration of the flavoring
materials during shipment or storage. A “peel” off-flavor is commonly encountered
in citrus fruits and is suggestive of an excessive concentration of essential oil of
citrus, which is found in the peel.
Unnatural flavor. This describes an artificial flavor, a flavor that is lacking in true
fruit character, or an off-flavor which is not recognizable as the flavor stated on the
product’s label.
Lacks tartness or excessive tartness. Self-explanatory.

Other quality factors of sherbet. The texture of sherbets can be nearly as smooth
as that of ice cream. The body of sherbet may range from weak to resistant, although
a heavy or even slightly gummy body need not be considered defective. Probably
the most common defects of sherbet body and texture are severe coarseness and
crumbliness. Inadequate stabilization, “heat shock,” high overrun, low solids con-
tent, and prolonged storage are usually responsible for the development of a coarse
and icy texture. Inadequate stabilization may also be responsible for crumbliness.
This defect seems to be more frequently encountered in orange-flavored sherbet,
presumably due to some unexplained property of one or more orange oil constitu-
ents. Addition of an emulsifier to the sherbet mix is helpful in correcting or limiting
the severity of the problem.
The sugars commonly used in sherbets are sucrose, corn syrups, and, to a lesser
extent, dextrose (corn sugar). The body of sherbet may be hard or soft, depending
on whether too little or too much sugar was used in the formulation. Several other
sherbet defects, common in yesteryear, may still be encountered occasionally.
“Surface crustation” may occur, particularly when the product surface is exposed to
air. Effective stabilization and partial replacement (25–50%) of sucrose with corn
syrup are good precautionary steps. “Ice separation” may occur in the continuous
freezer by the action of centrifugal force. Ice builds up on the freezer wall and even-
tually breaks away and “lands” in the product. Increasing the viscosity of the unfro-
zen portion of the mix by proper stabilization helps control this problem. “Separation,
drainage, or bleeding” of the unfrozen syrup within the sherbet may also be a prob-
lem of inadequate stabilization and/or holding the sherbet at too high of a storage
temperature.
The ice cream scorecard is satisfactory for evaluating the body and texture of
sherbets with the following minor modification.
Heavy/hard. The formulation and lower overruns (≤60%) of sherbet generally
leads to a heavier or harder product at the typical serving temperature. Sherbets that
may be formulated with lower levels of sweetener may not depress the freezing
point adequately, hence a greater likelihood of a heavy/harder product at or near the
serving temperature.
Both the color and appearance should be evaluated in sherbets, particularly in
multiflavored products (e.g., rainbow sherbet) in which the distribution pattern of
the different flavored products is a quality criterion, and in products to which fruit
particles or confectionery were added. Suggested descriptors for possible color
defects of sherbet are as follows:
Defective pattern
Too little added material
Poor distribution of added material
Poor appearance of added material
338 V. B. Alvarez
10.10.11 Sorbets and Water Ices
The US Federal Standards describes water ice as a food that is prepared from the
same ingredients as sherbets, except that no milk fat, milk-derived ingredients, or
egg ingredients (other than egg whites) are used. As indicated in Table 10.1, the
minimum weight (Federal Standard) for water ices is 6 lb/gal. Sensory evaluation
procedures for water ices differ little from those used for sherbet.
Water ices are products made from simple formulas and often low quality and
less concentrated flavoring sources (i.e., popsicles and novelty bars on a stick).
Water ices have been a long-time mainstay of the US frozen dessert industry and are
generally sold through food retail and convenience stores.
French- and American-style sorbets are frozen combinations of pureed fresh
fruits, fruit juices, and sweeteners; they contain no milk, cream, or eggs to reduce or
control ice crystals. Hence, sorbets are constantly stirred during the freezing stage
to limit or control ice crystals. High-quality sorbets are expected to exhibit a light
and fluffy texture and are generally presumed to be at their best when consumed
immediately after the freezing process. Some fancier styles of sorbets, originating
from France and Italy, contain wines and/or liqueurs. Sorbets are commonly made
fresh and sold directly to walk-up customers at retail stands and food service opera-
tions, although packaged and hardened sorbet is also available from the freezer
cabinets of retail food stores.
10.10.12 Frozen Novelties
A group of products referred to as frozen novelties may be made of ice cream, low-
fat ice cream, mellorine, sherbet, sorbet, ice, frozen yogurt, pudding, or combina-
tions of several of these. They may be in many forms, such as bars (with or without
a stick), coated or uncoated, “sandwiches,” pre-packaged cones, and other numer-
ous forms. Although they should be evaluated by the processor in ongoing quality
assurance procedures, novelties are seldom, if ever, judged competitively. The fla-
vor, body, and texture of these types of products should be evaluated just as criti-
cally as their packaged counterparts, but there are some unique, potential problem
areas that should be identified (Tobias, 1980). A listing of some of the more com-
mon quality problems of various types of frozen novelties that require special atten-
tion include the following:
Incomplete coverage with coatings
Coating too far down the stick
Incorrect volumes
Coating too thick
Coating too thin
Cracked coating
Slipped coating
Overrun too high

Overrun too low
Defective flavor
Defective texture
Damaged wrappers
Sticking wrappers
Broken sticks
Sugar “bleeding” from bars
“Soggy” wafers or cones (lack crispness)
High coliform count
Brine contamination
Due to their relatively small size, frozen novelties are markedly susceptible to the
irreversible, damaging effects of temperature fluctuations. “Heat shock” is probably
the most serious problem, but unfortunately, once the product enters the distribution
system, there is limited control of frozen storage temperatures.
10.11 Conclusion
The quality and sensory attributes of ice cream as perceived by the consumer in
terms of the most desirable flavor, body, and texture can be evaluated, but it is not
easy. For a successful and dependable sensory evaluation of ice cream and frozen
desserts, judges/students need to have experience and knowledge about the effect of
ingredients, product formulation, processing manipulation, and handling on the
properties of the products. Additionally, due to the uniqueness of frozen desserts, it
is important that samples are prepared properly, the evaluation is conducted in a
suitable environment, and the numerical standards for measuring the quality of the
product are available. These subjects were covered in detail in this chapter. Special
emphasis was given to the scorecard of the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation
Contest, along with the techniques and scoring guide for vanilla ice cream. The
guidelines include the description and identification of off-flavors, body, and texture
defects and their sources or causes. Sensory evaluation of other frozen dairy des-
serts that are commercially available was also included. The materials in this chap-
ter provide useful tools to learn and understand the sensory evaluation of frozen
desserts; however, it is essential to practice as much as possible to become an expe-
rienced and accurate evaluator of ice cream quality.
Acknowledgments The author greatly acknowledges comments and contributions of the review-
ers. Special thanks go to editors S. Clark, M. Drake, and K. Kaylegian for their valuable revisions
and contributions. The author is most grateful for the materials from the previous edition by
F.W. Bodyfelt, J. Tobias, and G.M. Trout (1988) and S. Clark, M. Costello, M.A. Drake, and
F. Bodyfelt. Second Edition, 2009, is used in this chapter. The author also thanks his associate
Brianda D. Gonzalez-Orozco for her help.
340 V. B. Alvarez
References
Abbas Syed, Q. (2018). Effects of different ingredients on texture of ice cream. Journal of
Nutritional Health & Food Engineering, 8. https://doi.org/10.15406/jnhfe.2018.08.00305
Abbasi, S., & Saeedabadian, A. (2015). Influences of lactose hydrolysis of milk and sugar reduc-
tion on some physical properties of ice cream. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 52(1),
367–374.
Adapa, S., Schmidt, K. A., Jeon, I. J., Herald, T. J., & Flores, R. A. (2000). Mechanisms of ice
crystallization in ice cream: A review. Food Review International, 16, 259–271.
Akbari, M., Eskandari, M. H., & Davoudi, Z. (2019). Application and functions of fat replacers in
low-fat ice cream: Areview. Trends in Food Science & Technology. 86, 34–40.
Alizadeh, M., Azizi-Lalabadi, M., & Kheirouri, S. (2014). Impact of using stevia on physicochemi-
cal, sensory, rheology and glycemic index of soft ice cream. Food and Nutrition Sciences, 2014.
Alvarez, V. B., Wolters, C. L., Vodovotz, Y., & Ji, T. (2005). Physical properties of ice cream con-
taining milk protein concentrates. Journal of Dairy Science, 88, 862–871.
Amador, J., Hartel, R., & Rankin, S. (2017). The effects of fat structures and ice cream mix viscos-
ity on physical and sensory properties of ice cream. Journal of Food Science, 82, 1851–1860.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.13780
Anter, E., Augustat, S., Groeschner, P., Maier, K., Poeschler, W., Richter, M., Schierbaum,
F., Schultz, P., Sellmer, I., & Doerr, U. (1986). Verfahren zur Herstellung von fetthaltigen
Speiseeis. [Production of fat-containing ice cream.] Pat. No. DD 235773
Berger, K. G. (1997). Ice cream. In S. E. Friberg & K. Larsson (Eds.), Food emulsions (3rd ed.,
pp. 413–490). Marcel Dekker, Inc.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J., & Trout, G. M. (1988). In: The sensory Evalaution of Dairy Products.
Van Nostrad Reinhold, New York, NY. Pages 166–266.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1973). Consumer preference vs. the experts for three flavors of ice cream. ameri-
can dairy review, 25(9), 24–26.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1974). The all-berry formulation for improved quality strawberry ice cream.
American Dairy Review, 26(3), 27–29.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1978). Has frozen yogurt joined the frozen dairy dessert club? Yearbook. National
Ice Cream Retailers Association.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1979). Ice cream quality – Who should be the judge? Yearbook. National Ice
Cream Retailers Association.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1983a). Ice cream: What really determines the quality? Dairy and Food Sanitation,
3(4), 124–128.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1983b). Quality assurance for ice cream manufacture. Dairy and Food Sanitation,
3(5), 164–170.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1993). A tool for the sensory assessment of frozen flavored yogurt. Presented to
the Kansas Dairy Processors Association. 6 p.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J., & Trout, G. M. (1988). The sensory evaluation of dairy products
(pp. 166–226). Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Bolliger, S., Kornbrust, B., Goff, H. D., Tharp, B. W., & Windhab, E. J. (2000a). Influence of
emulsifiers on ice cream produced by conventional freezing and low-temperature extru-
sion processing. International Dairy Journal, 10(7), 497–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0958-6946(00)00071-6
Bolliger, S., Goff, H. D., & Tharp, B. W. (2000b). Correlation between colloidal properties of ice
cream mix and ice cream. International Dairy Journal, 10, 303–309.
Bolliger, S., Wildmoser, H., Goff, H. D., & Tharp, B. W. (2000c). Relationships between ice
cream mix viscoelasticity and ice crystal growth in ice cream. International Dairy Journal,
10, 791–797.
Chamchan, R., Sinchaipanit, P., Disnil, S., Jittinandana, S., Nitithamyong, A., & On-nom,
N. (2017). Formulation of reduced sugar herbal ice cream using lemongrass or ginger extract.
British Food Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-10-2016-0502
Chavez-Montes, B. E., Choplin, L., & Schaer, E. (2004). Processing and formulation effects
on structural and rheological properties of ice cream mix, aerated mix and ice cream. In
B. Tharp (Ed.), Ice cream II: Proceedings of the second IDF international symposium held in
Thesaloniki, Greece, 14–16 May 2003 (p. 256). International Dairy Federation.
Clarke, C. (2006). Ice cream: A complex food colloid. Food Science & Technology, 20, 31–33.
Code of Federal Regulations. (2022). Title 21-food and drugs, 135.3 Ice cream and frozen custard.
135.130 Mellorine, 135.140 Sherbet. 135.160 Water ices. Government Printing Office. https://
www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-135#135.3
Cottrell, J. L. L., Pass, G., & Phillips, G. O. (1980). The effect of stabilizers on the viscosity of an
ice cream mix. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 31, 1066–1071.
Craig, S. A. S., Anderson, J. M., Holden, J. F., & Murray, P. R. (1996). Bulking agents. In H. Van
Bekkum, H. Roper, & A. G. J. Voragen (Eds.), Carbohydrates as organic raw materials III
(pp. 217–230). Wiley.
Daw, E., & Hartel, R. W. (2015). Fat destabilization and melt-down of ice creams with
increased protein content. International Dairy Journal, 43, 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
idairyj.2014.12.001
de Medeiros, A. C., Tavares Filho, E. R., & Bolini, H. M. A. (2021). Temporal profile of low
calorie lactose-free ice cream chocolate flavor: Temporal dominance sensation and multiple
time–intensity analysis. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 58(8), 3164–3173.
Dekker, P. J. T., Koenders, D., & Bruins, M. J. (2019). Lactose-free dairy products: Market devel-
opments, production, nutrition and health benefits. Nutrients, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/
nu11030551
Donhowe, D. P., & Hartel, R. W. (1996). Recrystallization of ice during bulk storage of ice cream.
International Dairy Journal, 6, 1209–1221.
Drewett, E., & Hartel, R. W. (2007). Ice crystallization in a scraped surface freezer. Journal of
Food Engineering, 78, 1060–1066.
Dubey, U. K., & White, C. H. (1997). Ice cream shrinkage: A problem for the ice cream industry.
Eisner, M. D., Wildmoser, H., & Winhab, E. J. (2004). The different role of emulsifiers in conven-
tionally freezered and ultra low temperature extruded ice cream. In B. Tharp (Ed.), Ice cream:
Proceedings of the second IDF international symposium held in Thesaloniki, Greece, 14–16
May 2003 (p. 187). International Dairy Federation.
Fennema, O. (1993). Frozen food: Challenges for the future. Food Australia, 45(8), 374–380.
Flores, A. A., & Goff, H. D. (1999). Recrystallization in ice cream after constant cycling tempera-
ture storage conditions as affected by stabilizers. Journal of Dairy Science, 82, 1408–1415.
Gassenmeier, K. (2003). Vanillin and xanthine oxidase – Key factors for the generation of a card-
board off-note in vanilla ice cream. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie, 36, 99–103.
Goff, H. D. (1997). Colloidal aspects of ice cream: A review. International Dairy Journal, 7,
363–373.
Goff, H. D. (2002). Formation and stabilization of structure in ice cream and related products.
Advances in Colloid and Interface Science, 7, 432–437.
Goff, H. D., & Hartel, R. W. (2013). Ice cream (7th ed.). Springer. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6096-1
Goff, H. D., & Jordan, W. K. (1989). Action of emulsifiers in promoting fat destabilization during
the manufacture of ice cream. Journal of Dairy Science, 72, 18–29.
Goff, H. D., & Sahagian, M. E. (1996). Freezing of dairy products. In L. E. Jeremiah (Ed.),
Freezing effects on food quality (pp. 299–335). Marcel Dekker, Inc.
Goff, H. D., Kinsella, J. E., & Jordan, W. K. (1989). Influence of various milk protein isolates on
ice cream emulsion stability. Journal of Dairy Science, 72, 385–397.
Goff, H. D., Weigersma, W., Meyer, K., & Crawford, S. (1995). Volume expansion and shrinkage
in ice cream. Canadian Dairy Journal, 74(3), 12–13.
Guinard, J. X., Zoumas-Morse, C., Mori, L., Uatoni, B., Panyam, D., & Kilara, A. (1997). Sugar
and fat effects on sensory properties of ice cream. Journal of Food Science, 62, 1087–1094.
342 V. B. Alvarez
Hagiwara, T., & Hartel, R. W. (1996). Effect of sweetener, stabilizer and storage temperature on
ice recrystallization in ice cream. Journal of Dairy Science, 79, 735–744.
Harju, M., Kallioinen, H., & Tossavainen, O. (2012). Lactose hydrolysis and other conversions in
dairy products: Technological aspects. International Dairy Journal, 22(2), 104–109. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2011.09.011
Hartel, R. W. (1996). Ice crystallization during the manufacture of ice cream. Trends in Food
Science and Technology, 7(10), 315–321.
Hartel, R. W., Muse, M., & Sofjan, R. (2004). Effects of structural attributes on hardness and
melting rate of ice cream. In B. Tharp (Ed.), Ice cream II: Proceedings of the second IDF
international symposium held in Thesaloniki, Greece, 14–16 May 2003 (p. 124). International
Dairy Federation.
Holsinger, V. H., Smith, P. W., Talley, F. B., Edmundson, L. F., & Tobias, J. (1987). Preparation
and evaluation of chocolate flavored shakes of reduced sweetener content. Journal of Dairy
Science, 70(6), 1159–1167.
Im, J. S., & Marshall, R. T. (1998). Effect of processing variables in the chemical and sensory
properties of formulated frozen dessert. Food Science and Biotechnology, 7, 84–89.
International Dairy Foods Association. (2017). Ice cream sales & trends – IDFA. Accessed May
25, 2021. https://www.idfa.org/news-views/media-kits/ice-cream/ice-cream-sales-trends
Isik, U., Boyacioglu, D., Capanoglu, E., & Nilufer Erdil, D. (2011). Frozen yogurt with added inulin
and isomalt. Journal of Dairy Science, 94, 1647–1656. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-3280
King, B. M., & Arents, P. (1994). Measuring sources of error in sensory texture profiling of ice
cream. Journal of Sensory Studies, 9, 69–86.
Kwak, H. S., Meullenet, J., & Lee, Y. (2016). Sensory profile, consumer acceptance and driving
sensoryattributes for commercial vanilla ice creams marketed in the United States. International
Journal of Dairy Technology. 69(3), 346–355.
Livney, Y. D., Donhowe, D. O., & Hartel, R. W. (1995). Influence of temperature on crystalization
of lactose in ice cream. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 30(3), 311–320.
Lucas, P. S. (1941). Common defects of ice cream, their causes and control: A review. Journal of
Dairy Science, 24(4), 339–368.
Mann, E. J. (1997). Ice cream-part 1. Dairy Industries International, 62(5), 17–18.
Marshall, R. T., & Arbuckle, W. S. (1996). Ice cream (5th ed.). Chapman & Hall. 349 Pages.
Marshall, R. T., Goff, H. D., & Hartel, R. W. (2003). Ice cream (6th ed.). Kluwer Academic/
Plenum Publishers.
Miller-Livney, T., & Hartel, R. W. (1997). Ice recrystallization in ice cream: Interactions between
sweeteners and stabilizers. Journal of Dairy Science, 80, 447–456.
Morely, R. (1989). Heat shock in ice cream. Ice-Cream-and-Frozen-Confectionery, 40, 282–283.
Özdemir, C., Arslaner, A., Özdemir, S., & Uğurlu, G. (2018). Ice-cream production from lactose-
free UHT milk. Journal of Food Science and Engineering, 8, 210–214.
Patel, M. R., Baer, R. J., & Acharya, M. R. (2006). Increasing the protein content of ice cream.
Pelan, B. M. C., Watts, K. M., Campbell, I. J., & Lips, A. (1997). The stability of aerated milk
protein emulsions in the presence of small molecule surfactants. Journal of Dairy Science, 80,
2631–2638.
Piccinali, P., & Stampanoni, C. R. (1996). Sensory analysis in flavor development. Creating new
vanilla flavors in the European ice cream market. Food Marketing & Technology, 10, 17–21.
Roland, A. M., & Phillips, L. G. (1999). Effect of fat content on the sensory properties, melting
color, and hardness of ice cream. Journal of Dairy Science, 82, 32–38.
Roy, S., Hussain, S. A., Prasad, W. G., & Khetra, Y. (2022). Quality attributes of high protein ice
cream prepared by incorporation of whey protein isolate. Applied Food Research, 2, 100029.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afres.2021.100029
Sakurai, K., Kobubo, S., Hakamata, K., Tomida, M., & Yoshida, S. (1996). Effect of production
conditions on ice cream melting resistance and hardness. Milchwissenschaft, 51, 451–454.
Schiano, A. N., Harwood, W. S., & Drake, M. A. (2017). A 100-year review: Sensory analysis of
milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 100, 9966–9986. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13031
Segall, K. I., & Goff, H. D. (2002). A modified ice cream processing routine that promotes fat
destabilization in the absence of added emulsifier. International Dairy Journal, 12, 1013–1018.
Shiota, M., Ikeda, N., Konishi, H., & Yoshioka, T. (2002). Photooxidative stability of ice cream
prepared from milkfat. Journal of Food Science, 67(3), 1200–1207.
Shrivastav, A., & Goswami, T. K. (2017). Low temperature extrusion of ice cream: A review.
Journal of Food, Nutrition and Population Health, 1(2), 11.
Smiles, R. E. (1982). The functional applications of polydextrose. In G. Charalambous & G. Inglett
(Eds.), Chemistry of food and beverages: Recent developments (pp. 305–322). Academic Press.
Stampanoni-Koeferli, C. R., Piccinali, P., & Sigrist, S. (1996). The influence of fat, sugar, and non-
milk solids on selected taste, flavor and texture parameters of vanilla ice cream. Food Quality
and Preference, 7(2), 69–79.
Stanley, D. W., Goff, H. D., & Smith, A. K. (1996). Texture-structure relationships in foamed dairy
emulsions. Food Research International, 29, 1–13.
Suttles, M. L., & Marshall, R. T. (1993). Interactions of packages and fluorescent light with the
flavor of ice cream. Journal of Food Protection, 56, 622–624.
Sutton, R., & Wilcox, J. (1998). Recrystallization in ice cream as affected by stabilizers. Journal
of Food Science, 63, 104–110.
Syrbe, A., Bauer, W. J., & Klostermeyer, H. (1998). Polymer science concepts in dairy systems –
An overview of milk protein and food hydrocolloid interaction. International Dairy Journal,
8, 179–193.
Tharp, B. W. (1997). Techniques and practices for the effective use of sensory evaluation in ice
cream quality control programs. In Proceedings of inter-eis 97 november conference. Solingen,
Germany.
Tharp, B. W., Forrest, B., Swan, C., Dunning, L., & Hilmoe, M. (1998). Basic factors affecting ice
cream meltdown. In W. Buchheim (Ed.), Ice cCream: International dairy federation special
issue 9803 (pp. 54–64). International Dairy Federation.
Tobias, J. (1969). Defects of soft-serve and direct draw milk shakes. In A success manual by the
Mixmaker (pp. 148–154). CAH Enterprises.
Tobias, J. (1980). Quality, production rate spell success in novelties. Dairy Recipes, 81(10), 85–87.
Tobias, J. (1981). Unraveling the mysteries of ice cream body. Dairy Recipes, 82(10), 64–65.
Tobias, J. (1982). Frozen dairy products. In I. H. Wolff (Ed.), Handbook of processing and utiliza-
tion in agriculture (Animal products) (Vol. 1, p. 315). CRC Press.
Tobias, J. (1983). Controlling rancidity in ice cream. Dairy Recipes, 84(4), 112–114.
Tobias, J., & Muck, G. A. (1981). Ice cream and frozen desserts. Journal of Dairy Science, 64(6),
1077–1086.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2021). USDA ERS – Dairy data. Accessed March 30, 2021.
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/dairy-data/
van Boekel, M. A. J. S., & Walstra, P. (1981). Stability of oil-in-water emulsions with crystals in
the disperse phase. Colloids and Surfaces, 3, 109–118.
Vega, C., Andrew, R. A., & Goff, H. D. (2004). Functionality of carrageenans in ice cream mix.
In B. Tharp (Ed.), Ice cream: Proceedings of the second IDF international symposium held in
Thesaloniki, Greece, 14–16 May 2003 (p. 79). International Dairy Federation.
Vega, C., Dalgleish, D. G., & Goff, H. D. (2005). Effect of kappa-carrageenan addition to dairy
emulsions containing sodium caseinate and locust bean gum. Food Hydrocolloids, 19, 187–195.
Walstra, P., & Jonkman, M. (1998). The role of milkfat and protein in ice cream. In W. Buchheim
(Ed.), Ice cream: International dairy federation special issue 9803 (pp. 17–24). International
Dairy Federation.
Wehr, M., & Frank, J. (2004). Standard methods for the examination of dairy products. American
Public Health Association.
Westerbeek, H. (1996). Milk proteins for ice cream. Food Reviews, 23, 33–35.
344 V. B. Alvarez
Wibley, R. A., Cooke, T., & Dimos, G. (1998). The effects of solute concentration, over run,
and storage of ice cream. In W. Buchheim (Ed.), Ice cream: Proceedings of the international
symposium held in Athens, Greece, 18–19 September 1997 (pp. 186–187). International Dairy
Federation.
Wibley, R. A., Bell, A. E., Levy, M., & Buxi, P. K. (2004). Texture development in ice cream –
Effects of adding cocoa solids. In Ice cream: Proceedings of the second IDF international
symposium held in Thesaloniki, Greece, 14–16 May 2003 (p. 276). B. Tharp, International
Dairy Federation.
Wildmoser, H., & Windhab, E. J. (2004). Impact of mechanical treatment of ice cream at ultra low
temperature on scoopability, melting behaviour and creaminess. In B. Tharp (Ed.), Ice cream:
Proceedings of the second IDF international symposium held in Thesaloniki, Greece, 14–16
May 2003 (p. 159). International Dairy Federation.
Wildmoser, H., Schweiwiller, J., & Windhab, E. J. (2004). Impact of disperse microstructure on
rheology and quality aspects of ice cream. LWT – Food Science and Technology, 37, 881–891.
Wildmoser, H., Jeelani, S. A. K., & Windhab, E. J. (2005). Serum separation in molten ice creams
produced by low temperature extrusion processes. International Dairy Journal, 15(10),
1074–1085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2004.10.002
Zhang, Z., & Goff, H. D. (2004). Studying the composition of the air interface in aqueous milk
protein foam and ice cream. In B. Tharp (Ed.), Ice cream: Proceedings of the second IDF
international symposium held in Thesaloniki, Greece, 14–16 May 2003 (p. 219). International
Dairy Federation.
Chapter 11
Concentrated and Dried Milk Products
Scott Rankin
11.1 Introduction
The common characteristic of various types of concentrated milk products is the

reduced water content. Generally, water is removed as vapor under reduced pressure
(a partial vacuum) at relatively low product temperatures (in the approximate range
of 43–80 °C [110–176 °F]). Other nonthermal technologies, such as those involving
membrane, have gained significant attention due to improvements in product qual-
ity and energy savings (Kotsanopoulos & Arvanitoyannis, 2015). The products in
this category vary with respect to (1) the degree of concentration; (2) percentage of
milkfat; (3) whether preserved or perishable; (4) the method of preservation (if pre-
served); and (5) the milk fraction(s) captured. Some forms of concentrated milk
products are intended for beverage consumption, while others are primarily used as
ingredients in the formulation of various food products. A thorough treatment of the
chemical changes manifest in such dairy products as a result of high heat treat-
ments, and long-term storage is available (Fox, 1995).
Currently, a growing volume of milk-derived ingredients is produced for bever-
age use. With pasteurized milk products of high quality readily available at reason-
able prices, US consumers tend to resist purchasing milk products manufactured
from rehydrated dairy ingredients. In areas or regions where modern dairy industry
infrastructure does not exist, such as those having land, cold-chain, transportation,
or resource constraints, dairy foods made from concentrated and dried milk prod-
ucts are more readily accepted and consumed. Considerable research has improved
our understanding of the technical problems encountered in manufacturing, storing,
and utilizing concentrated and dried dairy ingredients with regard to retaining or
improving functional performance and flavor character. Additionally, a growing
S. Rankin (*)
Department of Food Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_11
346 S. Rankin
amount of scientific evidence suggesting that specific milk components or fractions

have demonstrable nutritional values has further strengthened the market for such
ingredients (Miller et al., 1999).
11.2 Concentrated Milk Products
Included here, verbatim and in order of relevance, are several definitions from the
US Grade “A” Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (US Department of Health and Human
Services, 2017), providing federally recognized definitions of concentrated and
dried dairy ingredients:
Milk Products
Milk products include cream, light cream, light whipping cream, heavy cream,
heavy whipping cream, whipped cream, whipped light cream, sour cream, acidified
sour cream, cultured sour cream, half-and-half, sour half-and-half, acidified sour
half-and-half, cultured sour half-and-half, reconstituted or recombined milk and
milk products, concentrated (condensed) milk, concentrated (condensed) milk prod-
ucts, concentrated (condensed) and dry milk products, nonfat (nonfat) milk, reduced
fat or low-fat milk, frozen milk concentrate, eggnog, buttermilk, buttermilk prod-
ucts, whey, whey products, cultured milk, cultured reduced fat or low-fat milk, cul-
tured nonfat (nonfat) milk, yogurt, low-fat yogurt, nonfat yogurt, acidified milk,
acidified reduced fat or low-fat milk, acidified nonfat (nonfat) milk, low-sodium
milk, low-sodium reduced fat or low-fat milk, low-sodium nonfat (nonfat) milk,
lactose-reduced milk, lactose-reduced reduced fat or low-fat milk, lactose-reduced
nonfat (nonfat) milk, aseptically processed and packaged milk and milk products as
defined in this section, milk, reduced fat, low-fat milk or nonfat (nonfat) milk with
added safe and suitable microbial organisms, and any other milk product made by
the addition or subtraction of milkfat or addition of safe and suitable optional ingre-
dients for protein, vitamin, or mineral fortification of milk products defined herein.
Milk products also include those dairy foods made by modifying the federally
standardized products listed in this section in accordance with Title 21 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) 130.10-Requirements for foods named by the use of a
nutrient content claim and a standardized term.
This definition shall include those milk and milk products, as defined herein,
which have been aseptically processed and then packaged.
Milk and milk products that have been retort processed after packaging or have
been concentrated (condensed) or dried are included in this (the Title 21) definition
only if they are used as an ingredient to produce any milk or milk product defined
herein or if they are labeled as Grade “A” as described in Sect. 11.4.
Powdered dairy blends may be labeled Grade “A” and used as ingredients in
Grade “A” dairy products, such as cottage cheese dressing mixes or starter media
for cultures used to produce various Grade “A” cultured products, if they meet the
requirements of this Ordinance. If used as an ingredient in Grade “A” products, such
11 Concentrated and Dried Milk Products 347
as those listed above, blends of dairy powders must be blended under conditions
which meet all applicable Grade “A” requirements. Grade “A” powder blends must
be made from Grade “A” powdered dairy products, except that small amounts of
functional ingredients (total of all such ingredients shall not exceed 5% by weight
of the finished blend), which are not Grade “A” are allowed in Grade “A” blends
when the finished ingredient is not available in Grade “A” form, i.e., sodium casein-
ate. This is similar to the existing FDA position that such dairy ingredient in small
cans of freeze-dried starter culture need not be Grade “A.”
This definition is not intended to include dietary products (except as defined
herein), such as infant formula, ice cream or other frozen desserts, butter, or cheese.
Dry Milk Products
Dry milk products mean products resulting from the drying of milk or milk products
and any product resulting from the combination of dry milk products with other
wholesome dry ingredients.
Grade “A” Dry Milk Products
Grade “A” dry milk products mean dry milk products that comply with the appli-
cable provisions of the Ordinance.
Concentrated Milk
Concentrated (condensed) milk is a fluid product, unsterilized and unsweetened,
resulting from the removal of a considerable portion of the water from the milk,
which when combined with potable water in accordance with instructions printed
on the container label, results in a product conforming with the milkfat and milk
solids not fat levels of milk as defined in this section.
Concentrated Milk Products
Concentrated (condensed) milk products shall be taken to mean and to include
homogenized concentrated (condensed) milk, concentrated (condensed) nonfat
milk, concentrated (condensed) reduced fat or low-fat milk, and similar concen-
trated (condensed) products made from concentrated (condensed) milk or concen-
trated (condensed) nonfat milk, which when combined with potable water in
accordance with instructions printed on the container label, conform with the defini-
tions of the corresponding milk products in this section.
Grade “A” Concentrated (Condensed) Nonfat Milk
Grade “A” concentrated (condensed) nonfat milk means concentrated (condensed)
nonfat milk, which complies with the applicable provisions of this Ordinance.
Frozen Milk Concentrate
Frozen milk concentrate is a frozen milk product with a composition of milkfat and
milk solids not fat in such proportions that when a given volume of concentrate is
mixed with a given volume of water, the reconstituted product conforms to the milk-
fat and milk solids not fat requirements of whole milk. In the manufacturing pro-
cess, water may be used to adjust the primary concentrate to the final desired
concentration. The adjusted primary concentrate is pasteurized, packaged, and
immediately frozen. This product is stored, transported, and sold in the frozen state.
348 S. Rankin
Whey Products
Whey products mean any fluid product removed from whey or made by the removal
of any constituent from whey or by the addition of any wholesome substance to
whey or parts thereof.
Grade “A” Whey Products
Grade “A” whey products mean any fluid product removed from whey or made by
the removal of any constituent from whey or by the addition of any wholesome
substance to whey or parts thereof which have been manufactured under the provi-
sions of this Ordinance.
Dry Whey Products
Dry whey products mean products resulting from the drying of whey or whey prod-
ucts and any product resulting from the combination of dry whey products with
other wholesome dry ingredients.
Grade “A” Concentrated (Condensed) and Dry Whey and Whey Products
Grade “A” concentrated (condensed) and dry whey and whey products mean con-
centrated (condensed) or dry whey and whey products, which comply with the
applicable provisions of this Ordinance. The words “concentrated (condensed) and
dry milk products” shall be interpreted to include concentrated (condensed) and dry
whey and whey products.
Title 21 of the CFR Section 131 (2020) contains specific standards of identity
and compositionally based definitions for the following products of immediate sig-
nificance to this chapter, including the following:
131.110 Milk
131.115 Concentrated milk
131.120 Sweetened condensed milk
131.125 Nonfat dry milk
131.127 Nonfat dry milk fortified with vitamins A and D
131.130 Evaporated milk
131.147 Dry whole milk
131.149 Dry cream
All sections are available directly from the US Government Printing Office and
online. Although it is beyond the scope of this chapter to reproduce all of these sec-
tions in their entirety here, one complete section (131.125 Nonfat dry milk) is
included as an example of the type and degree of coverage included in these federal
regulatory documents.
11.2.1 Section 131.125 Nonfat Dry Milk
(a) Description. Nonfat dry milk is the product obtained by removal of water only
from pasteurized nonfat milk. It contains not more than 5% by weight of moisture
and not more than 1 and 1/2% by weight of milkfat unless otherwise indicated.
(b) Optional ingredients. Safe and suitable characterizing flavoring ingredients

(with or without coloring and nutritive carbohydrate sweetener) as follows:
1. Fruit and fruit juice, including concentrated fruit and fruit juice
2. Natural and artificial food flavorings
(c) Methods of analysis. The following methods of analysis are from “Official
Methods of Analysis,” 21st Ed. (2019). Copies may be obtained from the AOAC
INTERNATIONAL, 2275 Research Blvd, Ste. 300, Rockville, MD 20850 + 1
(800) 379–2622.
1. Milkfat content: “Fat in Dried Milk – Official Final Action”
2. Moisture content: “Moisture – Official Final Action”
(d) Nomenclature. The name of the food is “nonfat dry milk.” If the fat content is
over 1 and 1/2% by weight, the name of the food on the principal display panel
or panels shall be accompanied by the statement “Contains __% milkfat,” the
blank to be filled in with the percentage to the nearest one-tenth of 1% of fat
contained, within limits of good manufacturing practice. The name of the food
shall include a declaration of the presence of any characterizing flavoring, as
specified in Section 101.22 of this chapter.
(e) Label declaration. Each of the ingredients used in the food shall be declared on
the label as required by the applicable sections of parts 101 and 130 of this
chapter.
11.3 Sensory Considerations
Concentrated milk and derived milk products intended for use as a reconstituted
beverage milk or as an ingredient in other applications are generally evaluated for
sensory properties in a manner similar to the native, unconcentrated milk product by
first reconstituting it with good-quality potable or even distilled water. Many con-
centrated dairy products may also be evaluated without reconstitution with the
caveat that some tastes and aromas are generally more readily noticed after recon-
stitution or rehydration even after dilution with water. The phenomenon of improved
detectability of concentrated milk product sensory attributes may relate to the
entrainment or binding of flavor-active compounds within the dried protein and
lactose-based particles such as are found in nonfat dry milk powder. Due to the
generally higher sweet and salty background flavors of milk concentrates, dilution
of the concentrate to the original composition provides a more typical set of test
conditions for sensory evaluation. It is a generally accepted ideal that the reconsti-
tuted product should emulate its native counterpart in flavor, mouthfeel or consis-
tency, and appearance. In addition to flavor defects, any visible evidence of
immediate discoloration, thinning or thickening, particulate formation, or other
abnormalities should be noted as defects (Hammer, 1919; Hunziker, 1949; Sommer
& Hart, 1926). A generally accepted practice for preparing milk-derived powders
350 S. Rankin
for sensory evaluation suggests that an approximately 10% wt/wt solution in dis-
tilled water is adequate (Drake et al., 2003; Carunchia-Whetstine & Drake, 2007).
In the mid-1960s, considerable interest was generated in the market potential of
a 3:1 sterile concentrated milk, although only relatively small quantities were actu-
ally produced. The major sensory problems of this product involved shortcomings
of both taste and mouthfeel. The off-flavors that regularly developed in these prod-
ucts during storage were unique and somewhat difficult to describe given their
absence from native milk. Judges commonly labeled these off-flavors of sterile milk
concentrates as stale, caramel-like, or a combination of stale/caramel defect. These
particular off-flavors could be associated with the browning reaction of heated milk
(Arnold et al., 1966; Muck et al., 1963) and may not have been too far off of those
encountered in commercially sterile milk (Zabia et al., 2012). Any possible future
success of sterile milk concentrates will depend on processors’ ability to prevent
flavor and functional deterioration during storage.
Descriptive terminology as applied to concentrated milk products is somewhat
confusing; hence, a review of several key terms should be helpful. For example,
what is the difference between concentrated, condensed, and evaporated milk when
the products’ composition in all three cases may be identical? Evaporated and con-
centrated milk are clearly defined in the CFR, as is sweetened condensed milk. But
what kind of product is referred to by the term “unsweetened condensed milk”?
This confusion may be eased somewhat if it is assumed that “evaporated milk” rep-
resents a special type of sterile concentrated product, for which the composition and
processing are clearly defined. A reasonable suggestion and historical industry con-
vention is to reserve the term “concentrated” for products of beverage quality and
use the word “condensed” when the milk product is primarily intended as an ingre-
dient in cooking, baking, candy-making, or food manufacture.
In addition to meeting the legal composition and chemical requirements, high-
quality evaporated milk should be creamy white in color, have a relatively viscous
body, be uniformly smooth in texture, and possess a relatively mild, pleasant flavor
free of noticeable off-aroma. Furthermore, the container should present an attractive
appearance and exhibit a neat, well-applied label; the ends of the can or general
integrity of any packaging should appear well-finished and show no evidence of
tampering or misformation. The overall examination of the product includes flavor,
body, and texture/viscosity and appearance (color, fat separation, and serum separa-
tion). Outside of other physicochemical or microbial parameters, the examination of
evaporated milk may consider the following attributes:
Coffee whitening properties
Color
Container integrity
Curd tension
Fat separation
Fill of container
Film formation (protein “break”)
Flavor
Gelation
Lactose crystallization/sandiness
Sedimentation
Serum separation
Viscosity
Whipping quality
Instrumental assessments of concentrated milks require the use of colorimeters,
viscometers, electric mixers, and other specialized laboratory equipment. Sensory
assessments employ scorecards or rating scales through either highly trained panel-
ists or untrained consumer panels as defined in other chapters of this text. As with
other commodities, dried and concentrated dairy foods are routinely evaluated by
expert judges or graders, as are employed by USDA, using language published
within specific standards of identities or product specifications. An example (see
American Dairy Products Institute, 2002) may include such language as
“Reconstituted Extra Grade dry whole milk flavor shall be sweet, pleasing and
desirable. It may possess a slight feed flavor and a definite cooked flavor. It shall be
free from undesirable flavors.”
11.4 Examination Procedures for Evaporated Milk
Establishment of a clearly crafted protocol for examining evaporated milk can facil-
itate the evaluation of numerous samples and allow more defensible assessments
over time. The steps outlined in the following paragraphs have been found most
helpful in evaluating sample sets of evaporated milk (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
Undue agitation should be avoided when cans of the product are transported to
the laboratory. The product should be carried in an upright position and be placed
vertically on the table to avoid remixing any possible precipitates (sediment) or fat
layers into the product.
Examination of the can appearance should be done without lifting the can from
the table. The upper end of the can should be noted for the degree of polish and
seam integrity; the attractiveness of the label and the evenness of its application
should be observed. The evaluator should insert a knife under the label and cut it
from top to bottom. After partially or completely removing the label, the judge
should note the condition or integrity of the can, especially with respect to freedom
from rust spots or dents.
With an edge-cutting can opener, the evaluator should almost cut around the
entire periphery of the upper end of the can and turn back the lid. By opening a can
in this manner, both the container and the contents may be examined carefully.
Color Evaporated milk should display a light, uniform cream color but may tend
toward a light brown color. In case of brown discoloration, the exact shade of the
color may be determined either instrumentally with a colorimeter or by visual com-
parison with color charts (using a numerical or graphical intensity scale) or by not-
352 S. Rankin
ing and recording the relative intensity of darkening as follows: none, slight, distinct,
and pronounced.
Uniformity Evaporated milk should be uniform or homogeneous as evidenced by

the complete absence of a cream layer, curd formation, or destabilized milkfat.
Product uniformity may be more readily determined with the assistance of a spatula.
Results of the examination for product uniformity may be verified when the product
is examined for body and texture. In the macroscopic examination of the product for
uniformity, the evaluator should notice particularly the undersurface of the turned-
back lid for possible adherence of cream or precipitated salts or sugars.
Study the Body and Texture The contents of the can should be poured slowly into
a clean glass beaker; the judge should note the flow properties of the product. A
smooth, relatively viscous evaporated milk should pour in a similar manner to a thin
cream (without marked splashing action) without any apparent ropiness. The can is
allowed to drain completely; when the container is empty, the evaluator should look
for any possible types of deposits on the can’s interior surfaces. If the bottom metal
surface cannot be seen through the remaining film of evaporated milk, the can bot-
tom should be scraped with a spatula to determine whether a firm, tenacious deposit
is present. The can is set aside for later examination; the observer should proceed
with an examination of the evaporated milk for viscosity and texture. This is done
by spooning up some of the milk with a plastic or hard-rubber spatula and allowing
it to drip back into the beaker. The evaluator needs to note the relative thickness and
uniformity of the film that adheres to the spatula.
A test for examining the presence of particulate matter is achieved by examining
a film of the milk through which a light source has been transmitted. By means of a
1.27–1.90 cm (1/2–3/4 in.) wire loop (or a cutaway spoon), the milk film is observed
for surface evenness or uniformity. This is done by dipping the loop into the product
and withdrawing it carefully to form a film across the face of the loop. Next, the
milk film is held up to the light source, and the observer looks for curd particles of
pinpoint size. The appearance of small grains throughout the film indicates protein
destabilization or denaturation. If the milk appears rough, grainy, or lacks unifor-
mity, these conditions may be associated with excessive viscosity and could also
provoke the feathering defect in coffee.
Should evaporated milk lack uniformity of body/texture, the evaluator should try
to determine the possible cause. Contributing factors may be destabilized milkfat or
protein, the presence of precipitated salts, or foreign material. If destabilized milkfat
is responsible, the defect generally will appear as a cream layer or as butter-like
particles on the product surface. When denatured protein is the cause, the defect
usually appears as either various-sized curds (distributed throughout) or as a form
of gelation of different intensities. Salt deposits are responsible for formation of a
hard, gritty precipitate that may have settled on the can bottom. Foreign material is
the probable cause if the sediment is evident as a smudge-like discoloration on the
can bottom; this is only evident when the last traces of the product contents are
decanted. Lactose crystals may also be formed in such products and are noticeable
as a gritty precipitate with poor solubility.
Observe the Condition of the Container The observer should especially look for
either spangling, blackening of the seams, or container corrosion (rustiness).
Spangling refers to the appearance of alternate clean, bright and dark, overlapping
blotches on the surface (as though the tin were attacked by acids). Typically, any
such blotches are well distributed over the inner surfaces of the can. Next, the con-
tainer should be rinsed and the inner surfaces observed for any evidence of chemical
activity. Discoloration and rusting may occasionally be noted on any part of the can,
but it tends to occur particularly at the milk–air interface.
Determine the Product Reaction in Coffee Though the use of evaporated milk as
a coffee whitener has declined, there is still merit in checking its color reaction and
miscibility in coffee. Evaporated milk should impart a rich, golden-brown color to
coffee. The coloring power of evaporated milk may be readily determined by adding
approximately 10 ml of the product to 100 ml of test coffee of typical strength and
temperature. Occurrence of an iron contamination of the product may be indicated
by the development of a greenish-dark, muddy, slate-like discoloration in coffee.
Thus, this off-color in an evaporated milk–coffee mixture can often be associated
with container rust formation. Feathering in coffee is the result of protein denatur-
ation and typically manifests itself as finely divided, serrated curds shortly after a
susceptible evaporated milk has been added to extremely hot coffee.
Determine the Flavor For flavor determination, evaporated milk should be mixed
with distilled water in a 1:1 ratio. Sampling and flavor evaluation or flavoring are
conducted by the same procedure employed in evaluating fluid milk. High-quality
evaporated milk (made by a conventional process) tends to have a specific milk/
cream flavor, which some individuals find reminiscent of a delicate, high-quality
mushroom soup.
The evaluator should bear in mind that the source of added water might have an
adverse effect on the flavor of evaporated milk. Some experienced judges of evapo-
rated milk prefer direct tasting of the final sterile concentrate rather than evaluating
a diluted product. This method of sensory evaluation requires keen perception, but
it has the advantage of eliminating the flavor diluting effect of the water used for
product reconstitution.
The declining demand in the USA for evaporated milk has served to discourage
the development of product forms. As a result of improved concentration technolo-
gies, such as membrane processes, various forms of concentrated milk products
have gained a larger share of milk markets in this country. The body characteristics
of conventionally processed evaporated milks have been markedly improved
through the use of stabilizers that prevent physical separation during storage and
help keep the product smooth and creamy throughout typical distribution cycles
(Graham et al., 1981).
354 S. Rankin
The evaluator should be aware that evaporated milk is intended to be a shelf-

stable product; any evidence of bacterial growth, spoilage, or loss of container
integrity is unacceptable. The defects that will be subsequently discussed are the
result of physical causes and/or chemical activity, which proceed in the absence of
any viable microorganisms (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
11.5 Specific Sensory Defects of Evaporated Milk
Flavor The flavor defects that usually occur in evaporated milk are unlike those
commonly encountered in fresh beverage milk, due to concentration under vacuum
(which removes volatile off-flavors) and the extent of the applied heat during
sterilization.
Probably the most common storage defect of evaporated milk results from the
progressive age-darkening or browning of the product. No single term seems to
describe this off-flavor adequately. Such terms as old, strong, slightly acid, sour, and
stale coffee may suggest the nature of the defect. The term caramel, which is prob-
ably suggested by the brownish milk color, is not appropriately descriptive in this
instance; however, it does suggest the chemical origin of the off-flavor. A caramel
flavor, as in certain confections, generally connotes a pleasant, appetizing taste sen-
sation; however, this agreeable response is definitely lacking when this flavor occurs
in evaporated milk. A caramel off-flavor is associated with the age-darkening of
evaporated milk. When a caramelized sample is first placed into the mouth, the fla-
vor sensation is not particularly different from that of normal evaporated milk, but
soon a distinctly old or slightly acid off-flavor is evident. This flavor defect may
persist for some time, even after the sample has been expectorated. This off-flavor
may be accompanied by an odor that suggests staleness. The underlying taste reac-
tion of age-darkened evaporated milk is acidic. The extent of staleness is primarily
a function of product age and storage temperature.
A study by Sundararajan et al. (1966) determined flavor changes that occurred
during the storage of evaporated milk produced by the (1) conventional (long-hold
retort); (2) high-temperature, short-time (HTST) (short-hold retort); and (3) aseptic
(ultrahigh temperature – UHT) methods of processing. These workers concluded
that the type of heat processing had a significant effect on the initial flavor score.
The aseptic process yielded the best-flavored product initially and remained the best
when the product was stored at 10 °C (50 °F) or 27 °C (80.6 °F) for about 2 months.
After storage for 1 year, flavor scores of the HTST and aseptically made products
were similar, but the flavor of conventional evaporated milk was significantly lower
in quality. Flavor ratings of the conventionally processed product scored the lowest
of the three product forms throughout the storage study. These investigators
employed a fluid milk scorecard with a 40-point scale for flavor. The evaporated
milk samples were evaluated after appropriate dilution. The initial flavor of the con-
ventionally manufactured product was described as cooked and caramel. The
off-flavors that developed during subsequent storage were variously described as

acid, stale, storage, bitter, astringent, and puckery (mouthfeel).
Body and Texture Contemporary technologies applied to manufacture evaporated
milk have resulted in improved quality control. This has resulted in improved prod-
uct uniformity from batch to batch, as well as between processors. Currently, fresh
evaporated milk is remarkably free of body and texture defects. However, when
evaporated milk is held for extended time periods or under adverse conditions, some
body and texture defects may be encountered, such as the following:
Buttery, fat separation
Curdy
Feathering
Gassy
Grainy
Low viscosity
Sediment
Buttery, Fat Separation The buttery defect appears as a 0.64–1.27 cm (1/4–1/2 in.)
layer of heavy cream at the top of the can. The cream layer may be so dense and
tenacious that it is not miscible with the remainder of the milk. Under such condi-
tions, the shaken milk appears curdy, with floating masses of cream or butter parti-
cles within a liquid of relatively low viscosity. Several alleged causes of this defect
are (1) inadequate homogenization; (2) high storage temperature; (3) extended stor-
age period; and (4) improper handling while in storage, i.e., a combination of high
temperature, excessive agitation, etc. The incorporation of stabilizing agents has
helped to control this serious defect. Consumers object to this defect, since such
milk fails to pour readily and thus creates the suspicion that the product may have
spoiled. This body defect is not associated with any particular flavor defect. The
occasionally noted thin film and/or surface streaks of cream are undesirable product
features but do not dramatically alter the functionality of the product for the con-
sumer relative to the more complete cream separation noted above.
Occasionally, discs of free fat, from 0.08 to 0.32 cm (1/32–1/8 in.) in diameter,
may appear on the surface of evaporated milk; these rarely encountered droplets of
hydrophobic milkfat in the product are referred to as “moon spots.” The fat appears
yellowish, crystal clear, and as flattened spheres scattered sporadically on the sur-
face. This defect seems to be associated with inadequate homogenization, destabi-
lized protein, and low viscosity, which is probably accelerated by high-temperature
storage. Such evaporated milk lacks the homogeneity of a high-quality product.
Curdy Curdy evaporated milk may be noted by the presence of coagulated protein
particles interspersed throughout the milk or by a continuous mass of coagulum or
soft gel. This condition differs from the buttery defect in that it is associated more
with the formation of protein-based structure than with milkfat. With high milk
quality, modern processing, and technical control, this defect is observed rarely in
products consumed early in their shelf life. Nonetheless, a tendency toward age
356 S. Rankin
gelation should be watched closely. The presence and activity of the endogenous
milk enzyme plasmin have been indicated as a cause of age gelation in several milk
products with long shelf life (<3 months, ambient storage temperature). Plasmin
activity is more common in milks from animals with high somatic cell counts; the
enzyme is surprisingly heat stable, allowing its activity to continue work to hydro-
lyze milk proteins, namely, casein, throughout storage.
Feathering The feathering of evaporated milk in hot coffee is difficult to predict by

macroscopic examination; as such, it is more routinely ascertained by actually testing
the milk sample in hot coffee. Such a test was proposed by Whitaker (1931), wherein
he surmised that, upon examination of 52 cans of commercial evaporated milk, feath-
ering in hot coffee was not a common defect. In addressing the coffee-whitening prob-
lem, Mojonnier and Troy (1925) found that curd formation (when evaporated milk was
added to coffee) was due entirely to excessive viscosity of the product. A more recent
method for the assessment of feathering was published by Anderson et al. (1977).
Such feathering, as a defect, is distinctively different from a commonly encountered
use of the term “feathering” of cream or milk by baristas in the coffee service industry.
This latter feathering phenomenon refers to the generation and application of a deli-
cate milk-based foam layered on the surface of coffee-based beverages in contrast to
the appearance of a surface-based layer is relatively insoluble milk solids (Fig. 11.1).
Gassy Fortunately, gassy evaporated milk is uncommon. This defect is manifested

by bulged cans and sometimes by a hissing sound of escaping gas when the can is
punctured upon opening. This defect can be due occasionally to certain physical–
chemical causes, but microbial fermentation is the most typical cause.
Grainy Graininess, like curdiness, is related to the relative heat stability of milk
proteins. A grainy evaporated milk is one that lacks smoothness and uniformity
throughout; such a product appears coarse. If this defect is present, a film across a
loop or an open-bottom spoon will transmit light unevenly. Grainy evaporated milk
Fig. 11.1 Image of surface

of cup of coffee with added
creamer showing the
feathering defect. Although
the bulk of the creamer
readily combines with the
coffee, some remains on
the surface; the material
residing on the surface is
an example of surface
feathering of coffee
creamer. (S. Rankin image)
is often associated with an excessively heavy, viscous body. The evaluator should
recognize that grainy evaporated milk does not actually contain “grains” of sedi-
ment. The presence of curd particles of pinpoint size may be noted when a light
source is transmitted through a film of the product; hence, the visible grain is indica-
tive of protein break or denaturation.
Low Viscosity A low-viscosity evaporated milk may be noted by its more water-
like consistency; such milk lacks creaminess and pours from the container as readily
as fresh milk. The viscosity of evaporated milk is related to heat stability. Highly
stable milk and technical efforts to achieve high heat stability tend to produce low
viscosity; by contrast, low heat stability leads to high viscosity in the finished prod-
uct. The viscosity attained immediately after sterilization may change, depending
on several factors (storage temperatures, especially). Thinning or thickening (even
to the point of gelation) may occur as a result of product aging; this depends on such
factors as solid content, preheating temperatures, type of sterilization process, milk
quality, and initial viscosity. In conventional evaporated milk, the addition of stabi-
lizers has simplified the control of viscosity.
Sediment Sedimentation, as observed in evaporated milk, may be of two distinct

kinds; each type of precipitation may arise from entirely different causes. The sedi-
ment resulting from the settling of somatic cells (leukocytes), denatured protein,
and/or foreign material (of possible colloidal nature) is usually darker in color than
the product itself. Since these forms of sediment are readily miscible, they may only
be seen when an undisturbed can is emptied slowly. This infrequent defect is not
readily experienced by the consumer, since evaporated milk is subject to some agi-
tation, especially when decanted through small puncture holes in the can top.
The second type of sedimentation that may occur in evaporated milk results from
the crystallization of specific calcium and magnesium salts such as tricalcium phos-
phate (Ca3(PO)2), magnesium phosphate (Mg3(PO4)2), and tricalcium citrate
(Ca3(C6H5O7)2). These forms of gritty-like sedimentation frequently accompany the
aging of evaporated milk. The rate at which crystals form seems to be influenced by the
nature of the milk, conditions of manufacture, and storage temperature. Sato (1923),
Mojonnier and Troy (1925), and Gould and Leininger (1947) found these white, gritty,
sand-like particles to be chiefly lime salts of citric acid or tricalcium citrate
(Ca3(C6H5O7·4 H2O)). Their rather bland, chalky taste suggests a form of calcium salt.
These crystals vary from the size of a pinpoint to the size of a wheat kernel. They are
usually found on the container bottom and may be noted when the contents are emptied.
Color The principal color defect of evaporated milk is browning. This color defect
results from the Maillard reaction involving chemical interactions between lactose
and milk proteins (and their hydrolysis products) upon severe heat treatment and
subsequent storage. Numerous flavor compounds, including those involving
hydroxymethylfurfural, are also produced during the course of the browning reac-
tion, which can lead to corresponding flavor defects. The degree or intensity of the
brown discoloration is related to the intensity (time and temperature) of the steril-
358 S. Rankin
ization process and the storage temperature. Aseptic and HTST sterilization systems
generally yield a lighter-colored product than the conventional retort (long-hold)
process. However, additional darkening may occur during storage in all cases, as a
function of age and the storage temperature of the product.
11.6 Sweetened Condensed Milk
A description of sweetened condensed milk can be found in 21 CFR 131.120

(CFR, 2020):
(a) Description. Sweetened condensed milk is the food obtained by partial removal
of water only from a mixture of milk and safe and suitable nutritive carbohy-
drate sweeteners (Fig. 11.2). The finished food contains not less than 8% by
weight of milkfat and not less than 28% by weight of total milk solids. The
quantity of nutritive carbohydrate sweetener used is sufficient to prevent spoil-
age. The food is pasteurized and may be homogenized.
Whole Milk
Receive, Sample, Test
Cool, Storage
Clarify/Filter
Standardize (MF/TMS)
Preheat
>72C, >15 sec
Concentrate
via Evaporation (–50%) Homogenize
Concentrate
Homogenize via Evaporation (–50%)
Cool and Hold Add Sugar (44%) Concentrated Milk
Restandardize Restandardize
(MF: 7.5%; TMS 25.5%) (MF: 8.5%; TMS 28%)
Fill and Seal Cans

(Humid Air) Cool, Seed w/Lactose
Heat Process Cool, Crystallize Bulk, Sweetened

Condensed Milk
Cool, Dry Cans
Fill, Seal Cans
Label, Case, Storage
Label, Case, Storage
Evaporated Milk
Sweetened Condensed Milk
Fig. 11.2 Flow diagram for the manufacture of evaporated and condensed milks
(b) Optional ingredients. The following safe and suitable characterizing flavoring
ingredients, with or without coloring and nutritive carbohydrate sweeteners,
may be used:
1. Fruit and fruit juice, including concentrated fruit and fruit juice.
2. Natural and artificial food flavoring.
Sweetened condensed milk contains a sufficiently high percentage of sugar for
preservation via mechanisms of high osmotic strength; thus, sterilization is not
required for shelf stability. Additionally, the flavor sensation is predominantly (or
overwhelmingly) sweet. However, beyond this intense sweetness, the flavor of this
dairy product should be clean and pleasant, with a slight or trace aftertaste of milk
caramel. The body of the product should be smooth and uniform; the color should
be a light, translucent yellow (Fig. 11.1).
Whether sweetened condensed milk is used in the home kitchen or in a food
processing plant, its primary function is as an ingredient in candy, cookies, pies, and
ice cream and not as a beverage. Hence, its sensory properties are nearly exclusively
evaluated in the research or quality control laboratories of processors or end users
assessing ingredient performance. Careful consideration must be given to the func-
tional properties of this product, but sensory characteristics are also important in the
overall process of the quality evaluation of sweetened condensed milk before pur-
chase or inclusion in manufacturing.
11.7 Examination Procedures for Sweetened

Condensed Milk
The unique precautions and steps that were applicable in the evaluation of evapo-
rated milk are not as germane to the examination of sweetened condensed milk (in
consumer-size containers). However, a specified routine or protocol enables the
evaluator to best utilize the available time with greater assurance that the examina-
tion is thorough and comparable to previous assessments. Hence, the following rec-
ommended procedure may be helpful (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
The evaluator should place a representative container on a table for examination.
The can should be in exactly the same (upright) position that it had assumed prior to
examination. This readily enables the judge to open the container and make an ini-
tial examination of the top surface and product contents. Next, the evaluator should
cut and turn back the container lid so that the condensed milk surface may be closely
examined and the contents easily decanted from the container. The recommended
order of visual examination is listed below.
Appearance of the Container The sweetened condensed milk container should
appear to be in good condition. Since the container has not been subjected to high
heat treatment, as in retorting (which dulls container surfaces), the can ends should
360 S. Rankin
be as bright as new tin. It is advisable that the evaluator develops the habit of care-
fully scrutinizing or observing the relative condition of all containers.
Appearance of the Product Surface The product surface should have the same
color intensity as various underlayers of the condensed milk. The product should be
uniform in consistency with no indication of lumps, free fat, or film formation.
Color With a spatula, the judge should spoon up some of the product and note the
relative translucency of a condensed milk layer. The color should be uniform
throughout rather than have a lighter-colored layer at the container bottom. The
evaluator should determine whether the sweetened condensed milk has a creamy or
a less desirable brownish color.
Viscosity Next, the evaluator should tilt the container at an angle and then note the
relative ease with which the product is able to flow within the can due to gravity.
The product is poured into a beaker. The observed pouring characteristics (flow)
should resemble those of a medium-heavy molasses. There definitely should be no
indication of a gel or custard-like formation. Flow characteristics (viscosity) can
also be determined objectively by physical measurement.
Sediment After the can has been emptied, the evaluator should scrape the bottom
and note the presence or absence of a thickened layer (which may be a crystalline,
granular material). The color of the granules should be compared with the bulk of
the milk and the size of any precipitated crystals measured against any suspended in
the liquid.
Flavor After the above macroscopic examination has been completed, the judge
should note the flavor characteristics. With the sample at a typical room temperature
(e.g., 25 °C), a small teaspoonful of the sweetened condensed milk should be placed
into the mouth; the evaluator needs to observe the mouthfeel, taste, and aroma sen-
sations. The relative smoothness of the product and the grain fineness can be noted
by pressing some of the sample against the palate with the tongue. By this time, the
evaluator may have experienced a secondary taste reaction – a perceived flavor other
than sweetness. This delayed flavor note usually represents a blend of the sensory
perception of the added sugar and dairy ingredients.
11.8 Defects of Sweetened Condensed Milk
Flavor Sweetened condensed milk, due to its concentration under vacuum, tends
to have none of the volatile flavors that may occur in fresh milk. Since this product
is preserved by sugar rather than by heat, it should not exhibit those off-flavors that
result from the higher heat treatments applicable to evaporated milk and certain
other milk products. Hence, when this product is properly manufactured, it is
remarkably free of flavor defects. However, several off-flavors in sweetened con-

densed milk have been noted to develop with increased storage time, as indi-
cated below:
Metallic
Rancid
Strong
Tallowy
Metallic The metallic off-flavor of sweetened condensed milk is distinctly chemi-
cally induced; it is usually traceable to copper contamination. Hunziker (1949)
stated that “sweetened condensed milk may have a pronounced, disagreeable metal-
lic flavor – suggesting the puckery, copper-like taste of copper salts.” Copper con-
tamination should be encountered infrequently due to near ubiquitous use of
stainless steel equipment in modern processing systems.
Rancid Fortunately, a rancid off-flavor occurs most infrequently in sweetened con-

densed milk. As discussed earlier in this book, rancidity results from milkfat hydro-
lysis due to enzymes secreted by spoilage bacteria or indigenous milk lipase, which
may not have been heat inactivated or was active against the milkfat before the milk
was pasteurized. If the milk source was rancid, the peculiar, offensive odor associ-
ated with hydrolytic rancidity may be readily noted when the can is first opened.
Strong The term strong or strong caramel is often used to describe the off-flavor
that accompanies the progressive thickening and browning of condensed milk.
While this particular flavor sensation must be classified as a defect, it is not usually
a serious one. Unfortunately, a caked or gelled product, with its associated deep
brown color, often suggests that the product may manifest extreme flavor impair-
ment. However, such condensed milk occasionally may develop or display a rather
pleasant caramel-like taste.
Tallowy Rice (1926) observed in the instance of tallowy condensed milk that on
opening a tin, the sample may appear paler than normal. The aroma of the freshly
opened product may be reminiscent of beef tallow and remains noticeable even after
exposure to the air for several days. Tallowiness has become a rarely encountered
oxidation defect in sweetened condensed milk. Elimination of copper contamina-
tion and prevention of exposure of milk to light and air are the most likely reasons
why this off-flavor is practically extinct.
Off-Flavors Caused by Microorganisms Certain osmophilic and osmoduric

microorganisms, including yeasts, molds, and bacteria, can tolerate high sugar con-
centrations and, under certain conditions, can grow and cause spoilage in sweetened
condensed milk. The growth of these microorganisms or the activities of their
enzymes may be accompanied by characteristic physical and appearance changes,
gas production, off-flavors, and odors. Depending on the type of microorganism
362 S. Rankin
involved, the resultant odor may be acidic, stale, cheesy, unclean, or yeasty. Any
products that show evidence of microbial activity should be considered unsalable.
Body and Texture Due to the relatively high percentage of sugar required for pres-
ervation, sweetened condensed milk exhibits a relatively heavy body (somewhat
like molasses). Also, this product usually has a fine-grained, smooth, and uniform
texture. However, the following body and texture defects may be encountered:
Buttons
Lumpy
Fat separation
Gassy
Sandy (rough, grainy, granular)
Settled
Thickened
Buttons Although they generally change the consistency of a portion of the prod-
uct, formed “buttons” are visually observed as round, firm, cheesy curds at the prod-
uct surface. These buttons result from the proteolytic activity of certain molds.
Product losses due to button formation can be eliminated by preventing contamina-
tion by osmophilic molds and other microorganisms.
Lumpy Occasionally, a product may exhibit pronounced differences in viscosity

(lumpiness) within portions of the container contents. Sometimes, portions of the
product may have actually gelled. It should be determined whether this problem is
due to possible microbiological contamination or some other cause.
Fat Separation Fat separation in sweetened condensed milk seldom occurs. This
defect may be noted by either an off-color, fatty film at the surface and/or floating
droplets of free fat. Milkfat separation may be due to improper homogenization and
elevated temperatures during the course of storage.
Gassy Condensed milk that has developed gassiness may be recognized by a

bloated or huffed can. This defect results from contamination by and subsequent
outgrowth of gas-producing microorganisms. Hammer (1919) studied the formation
of gas in sweetened condensed milk and found the causative agent to be a yeast,
which he named Torula lactis condensi. A yeasty odor was associated with this
gaseous condition. Today, the defect is rarely noted.
Sandy (Rough, Grainy, Granular) All of these terms are used interchangeably to
describe sweetened condensed milk that contains detectable or oversized lactose
crystals. The solid lactose particles are sufficiently large enough to impart a distinct
grittiness and general lack of product smoothness, which is readily noticeable as the
sample is tasted. This defect can be readily detected by the consumer. The condition
referred to as sandiness is due to the presence of relatively large lactose crystals
(>50 μm). The so-called smooth condensed milk has minute-sized lactose crystals,
which seem to appear like a fine flour mixed into the condensed milk. If manufac-
turing conditions are not conducive to the formation of small lactose crystals
(<50 μm), then large, coarse crystals are likely to form (sandiness). The sandy defect
may also be caused by sucrose crystals, when the concentration of this sugar exceeds
the saturation level.
Settled The term settled is used to describe a condensed milk in which a distinct
settling of sugar crystals has occurred. The syrup that settles out forms a thick sug-
ary layer on the container bottom. This sugar sediment consists primarily of lactose
crystals, according to Hunziker (1949). Key measures for prevention of this defect
include efforts to ensure small crystals and development of an adequate product
viscosity to retard sedimentation.
Thickened Overly thickened condensed milk is one of the more common defects
that can be encountered in sweetened condensed milk. The defect is manifested by
an extensive gel formation, which leads to a product appearance more suggestive of
a solid than a liquid. Excessively thickened condensed milk is usually associated
with browning; both undesirable conditions become progressively more intense
upon additional storage (especially at elevated temperatures). This defect varies
markedly in intensity from a slight jelly to a firm custard consistency. As noted
above, a high-quality sweetened condensed milk should pour like molasses. When
the product is poured, it should gradually level out and leave no traces of folds on
the surface. The formation of a gel, even a soft gel, is entirely undesirable. Both
physical and chemical factors are commonly responsible for thickening of sweet-
ened condensed milk, but certain microorganisms may also cause product thickening.
11.9 Other Concentrated Milk Products
The evaluation of other concentrated milk products differs little from that of the
products previously described. Products such as milk protein concentrate, evapo-
rated nonfat milk, and sweetened condensed nonfat milk should be evaluated in a
similar manner to their water-containing counterparts. Obviously, one must allow
for the absence of fat in evaluating both the flavor and tactile properties. Some prod-
ucts are produced to provide certain functional properties for specific applications.
A good example is superheated condensed milk (or nonfat milk) for use as a milk
ingredient in ice cream manufacture. This product should possess a desirable flavor
and an appealing color as well as impart the desired body properties to ice cream.
Instrumental measurements of viscosity should supplement sensory-derived assess-
ments of product consistency. As a general principle, when a concentrated milk
product is intended for beverage purposes, sensory evaluation should ascertain how
closely the product quality approaches that of its unconcentrated, high-quality, fresh
milk counterpart. When a concentrated milk is used as an ingredient, the primary
364 S. Rankin
question becomes “Does the quality of this product as an ingredient reflect the target
quality of the finished product?”
11.10 Dry Milk Products
Since its commercial origin, dry milk has been graded on the basis of bacteria,
moisture, and certain physicochemical properties. More recently, flavor and other
sensory properties have become important criteria in grading dry milk products. In
addition to compliance with regulatory standards, dry milk must also have good
flavor characteristics if it is to gain consumer or processor acceptance. The relative
importance of flavor character is governed to a large extent by the intended use of
the product. The evaluator of dry milk should be familiar not only with the product
standards and the associated laboratory tests but also with the appropriate flavor
standards and potential flavor defects.
11.11 Methods of Producing Milk Powder
There are two principal methods of producing milk powder from concentrated milk,
namely, the roller process (nearly nonexistent in the USA) and the spray-drying
process. Numerous technical developments in the removal of water from concen-
trated milk have vastly improved certain properties of dried milk and facilitated the
drying of several milk product forms that would not have been possible otherwise.
It should be noted that by convention, native milks are first concentrated through
evaporation technologies to facilitate the final drying steps, namely, spray drying, to
proceed with more efficiency. One development that has served to improve the rehy-
dration of dried nonfat milk is the process known as agglomeration or instantizing.
This process involves slightly humidifying and then redrying previously dried milk
(referred to as rewet agglomeration) to attain a more soluble, porous particle form.
In newer spray-drying facilities, this process is achieved during the actual spray-
drying process (referred to as single-pass agglomeration). Other drying technolo-
gies include foam drying, freeze drying, and fluidized-bed drying, although these
methods have had a greater impact on foods other than dairy products and/or are
used in conjunction with standard spray-drying technologies.
The additional concentration of fluid milk that occurs at the instant of drying and
the type of drying process substantially influence the physicochemical properties of
the resultant dry milk. Thus, certain qualities of the finished product provide clues
to the method of product manufacture. A descriptive outline of several milk-drying
methods and some characteristic qualities of the respective dry products are
given below.
Atmospheric Roller In this process, milk is dried in the open air on the surface of
revolving, internally heated drums. The dried milk film is shaved from the drums
and pulverized. The end product is characterized by a relatively heavy body, coarse
texture, and comparative insolubility when it is initially added to water. Under the
microscope, the solid particles appear angular, flaky, and irregular; seldom are
spherical-shaped grains or particles noted.
Vacuum Drum This drying process is similar to the atmospheric roller process
except that the drum rolls are enclosed within a vacuum chamber and thus permit
drying at reduced temperatures. This is advantageous from a product quality stand-
point in that lower temperatures and times are necessary for dehydration, thus limit-
ing numerous thermal degradation reactions. Vacuum-drum-dried powder readily
solubilizes when added to water (similar to spray-process powder), but it may be
easily distinguished from the latter by its appearance under the microscope. Grains
of spray-process powder are generally spherical, whereas particles from the vacuum
drum process tend to be distinctly angular and fragmented.
Spray-Drying Process In this process, concentrated liquid milk is atomized (either

by a high-pressure nozzle or by a spinning disc) into a current of hot, dry air in a
high-volume vacuum chamber. The spray-drying process is much more efficient at
heat transfer/water removal than roller or drum drying, in part due to the substantial
increase in surface area – about 35 m2/l of milk. As such, the resulting particle size
of the powder is remarkably small and readily soluble. Under the microscope, the
grains appear bead-like or spherical and are of relatively uniform size.
Instantizing Instantizing, or agglomeration, is a unique modification of the spray

process of drying, which is generally applied to the drying of nonfat milk for home
use in beverage applications. The process may also be adapted to whole or low-fat
milk powders. The instantizing process substantially increases the particle size and
porosity of the given milk powder, which significantly minimizes the tendency to
ball up when dried milk is mixed with water. Agglomeration markedly improves the
dispersibility and reliquefaction characteristics of dried milks. Since the introduc-
tion of instantized milk products in the 1950s, a number of patents have been issued
that cover two basic processes, the two-step and one-step processes (Graham et al.,
1981; Hall & Hedrick, 1971). The two-step process, which appears to be the most
commonly employed method, consists of bringing previously spray-dried milk in
contact with water or steam (under appropriate conditions). The moistened particles
adhere to each other and form distinctly porous, agglomerated particles of larger
size, which are then redried to the desired moisture content. In a typical one-step
instantizing process, the drying is conducted in such a manner to enhance particle
clustering. The larger agglomerates that are formed are subsequently separated, and
the final drying step occurs in a secondary dryer. A wetting agent (generally leci-
thin) may or may not be added during the agglomeration process.
366 S. Rankin
Foam Drying In “foam drying,” the product is dried after a liquid slurry is con-
verted to a foam state. Two basic processes can be applied: (1) foam drying and (2)
foam-spray drying. In the former process, a nitrogen-gassed, whole milk concen-
trate (50% solids) is initially foamed and then applied to a continuous belt that leads
into a vacuum-drying chamber. In the foam-spray drying method, compressed air is
injected into concentrated milk through a mixing device that is located between a
pressure pump and the spray nozzle. The gas-injected milk subsequently forms a
foam upon sudden ejection into a heated air chamber. The thin air-cell films that are
formed dry as fragile, eggshell-type particles.
Freeze Drying “Freeze drying” consists of removing moisture from a frozen prod-
uct by sublimation under high vacuum. A food product dried by this method retains
many of its initial, natural qualities due to the relative absence of heat-driven reac-
tion conditions. However, freeze drying and some of the other drying processes
have enjoyed only limited application to dairy products. This limitation is due pri-
marily to rather substantial economic constraints related to energy inputs and the
lack of flow-through or continuous freeze-drying technologies of appropriate scale
as compared to more conventional processes for the large-scale production of dried
milk products.
11.12 Types of Dry Milk Products
As denoted in 7CFR58, 21CFR184, with additional product descriptions/standards

under specific USDA, Agricultural Marketing Service publications, some common
dry milk products are listed below:
Dry buttermilk and dry buttermilk product
Dry cream
Dry whey (sweet and acid)
Dry whole milk
Dry ice cream
Edible dry casein (acid); caseinates
Instant nonfat dry milk
Low-fat dry milk
Malted milk
Modified dry milk products
Nonfat dry milk (roller and spray process)
Whey protein concentrate (WPC35, WPC80)
Whey protein isolate
Milk protein concentrate
Each of these products may have standards of identity promulgated by the Food
and Drug Administration (CFR, 2020, with quality standards set and administered
by the US Department of Agriculture). Occasionally, state or local regulations apply
to the manufacture and use of these dried milk products. In certain instances, a defi-
nition may not exist for the dry form of a product, but when it is reconstituted, the
final product may have to comply with the definitions of its liquid counterpart. For
example, dried ice cream mix has no definition (or standard of identity), but ice
cream does. When dehydrated products are made into and sold as ice cream, the
final product form must comply with the existing regulations that pertain to the
respective type of frozen dairy dessert.
In the ensuing discussion, the major emphasis will be placed upon the sensory
properties of dried milk products, although some details or other pertinent facts will
also be provided. Some limited information from the CFR and several other docu-
ments related to dried milk will be cited. Since federal regulations may change from
year to year, the reader is urged to consult the most recent edition of the CFR for
current, authoritative information. Absolute compliance with USDA quality stan-
dards does not excuse failure to comply with certain rigorous provisions of the
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
11.13 Dry Whole Milk
The Food and Drug Administration has defined dry whole milk in 21 CFR 131.147
(CFR, 2006) as follows:
Description. Dry whole milk is the product obtained by removal of water only from
pasteurized milk, as defined in Section 131.110(a), which may have been homog-
enized. Alternatively, dry whole milk may be obtained by blending fluid, con-
densed, or dried nonfat milk with liquid or dried cream or with fluid, condensed,
or dried milk, as appropriate, provided the resulting dry whole milk is equivalent
in composition to that obtained by the method described in the first sentence of
this paragraph. It contains the lactose, milk proteins, milkfat, and milk minerals
in the same relative proportions as the milk from which it was made. It contains
not less than 26% but less than 40% by weight of milkfat on an as is basis. It
contains not more than 5% by weight of moisture on a milk solids not fat basis.
Other provisions include the optional addition of vitamins A and D (when added,
the content is regulated) and incorporation of the following safe and suitable
optional ingredients: carriers for vitamins A and D, emulsifiers, stabilizers, anticak-
ing agents, antioxidants, characterizing flavoring ingredients with or without color-
ing and nutritive carbohydrate sweeteners (including fruit, fruit juice, fruit juice
concentrates, and natural and artificial food flavoring).
Grading standards of the USDA are published through the Agricultural Marketing
Service in paragraphs 58.2701–58.2710 (Effective April 13, 2001). They pertain
primarily to basic dry whole milk, which optionally may be fortified with vitamins
A and D or both vitamins. Two USDA grades are recognized: (1) US extra grade
and (2) US standard grade. The grades are determined on the combined basis of
flavor, physical appearance, bacterial estimate, coliform count, milkfat content,
368 S. Rankin
Table 11.1 Classification of flavor for dry whole milka

Flavor characteristics US extra grade US standard grade
Cooked Definite Definite
Feed Slight Definite
Bitter NA Slight
Oxidized NA Slight
Scorched NA Slight
Stale NA Slight
Storage NA Slight
“NA” means not allowed at any level
a
USDA, AMS US Standards for Grades of Dry Whole Milk (April 13, 2001)
Table 11.2 Classification of physical appearance of dry whole milka

Physical appearance characteristics US extra grade US standard grade
Dry product
Unnatural color None Slight
Lumps Slight pressure Moderate pressure
Visible dark particles Practically free Reasonable free
Reconstituted product
Grainy Free Reasonably free
a
moisture content, scorched particle content, solubility index, and titratable acidity.
Tables 11.1, 11.2, and 11.3 summarize the requirements for the above two grades of
dry whole milk. Definitions of the terms used in these tables are presented in a later
segment of this chapter. Testing for certain other quality parameters may also be
done at the option of the USDA or when examination is requested by an interested
party. These optional requirements include vitamin addition (A and D), oxygen con-
tent (if gas packed), and protein content. Failure to meet “standard grade” or optional
quality requirements (when the tests are performed), or a direct microscopic clump
count in excess of 100 million/g, suffices to deny a given product the assignment of
a USDA grade. Deficiencies in so-called good manufacturing practices by a proces-
sor may also disqualify products from eligibility for USDA grade assignment.
Specific details for conducting each of these tests or assays are included and
described, as follows:
(a) Scorched particle content and solubility index shall be determined by the meth-
ods contained in the latest revision of 918-RL, Laboratory Methods and
Procedures, USDA/AMS/Dairy Programs, Dairy Grading Branch, Room 2746-
S, 14th and Independence Ave. S.W. Washington, DC 20250-0230.
(b) All other tests shall be performed by the methods contained in the latest edition
of the “Official Methods of Analysis,” published by AOAC International, 2275
Research Blvd, Ste. 300, Rockville, MD 20850; by the methods provided in the
latest edition of the “Standard Methods for the Examination of Dairy Products,”
Table 11.3 Classification according to laboratory analysis of dry whole milka

Laboratory tests US extra grade US standard grade
Bacterial estimate (SPC/gram) 10,000 50,000
(max)
Coliform count (per gram) (max) 10 10
Milkfat content (percent) Not less than 26.0, but less Not less than 26.0, but less
than 40.0 than 40.0
Moisture content (percent)b (max) 4.5 5.0
Scorched particle content (mg)
(max)
Spray process 15.0 22.5
Roller process 22.5 32.5
Solubility index (ml) (max)
Spray process 1.0 1.5
Roller process 15.0 15.0
Titratable acidity (lactic acid) Not more than 0.15 Not more than 0.17
(percent) (max)
a
Mild solids not fat basis

b
available from the American Public Health Association, 800 I Street NW,
Washington, DC 20001, or by methods published by the International Dairy
Federation, available from the International Dairy Federation AISBL, 70/B,
Boulevard Auguste Reyers, 1030 Brussels, Belgium.
11.14 Flavor Properties of Dry Whole Milk
Upon rehydration, ideal dry whole milk or whole milk powder (WMP) should have
flavor characteristics that are clean, rich, sweet, fresh, and pleasant, not unlike that
of fine pastry. Sensory defects may be due to either poor-quality raw material, han-
dling, and processing of the fluid milk; the drying method; or extended or abusive
storage conditions. The development of storage-based defects in dry whole milk is
most difficult to control or eliminate. Carunchia-Whetstine and Drake (2007) high-
lighted the application of descriptive sensory analysis to document the flavor and
flavor stability of WMP. This work denoted the relatively rapid onset of off-flavors
(as early as 3–6 months) in WMP as primarily a function of the generation of lipid
oxidation products. Descriptive terms used in their study to differentiate WMP over
the course of a 24-month storage period include fishy, astringent, fatty/fryer oil,
grassy/hay, and painty. Some additional common quality defects/terms encountered
in dry whole milk are scorched, stale, and oxidized.
Scorched A scorched off-flavor is likely to occur in those products that have been
subjected to excessive heat (during the drying stage) or have remained in the drying
chamber too long. This product defect is usually accompanied by numerous
370 S. Rankin
scorched particles; sometimes dark discoloration occurs. Terms used to describe

this defect include scorched, burnt, and burnt feathers.
Stale A “stale” off-flavor develops during storage, even in products that have been
packed in modified atmosphere and/or contain an extremely low oxygen concentra-
tion in the headspace of the container. Dry whole milks stored with a moderately
high level of oxygen in the headspace can develop this off-flavor. Effective preven-
tive measures against the development of a stale off-flavor have been pursued by
researchers for decades. Specific aids in inhibiting the development of stale odors
may include the use of light and oxygen barrier packaging, storage of product at
lower temperatures, and the exclusive use of only the highest quality raw milk. This
defect is characterized as having stale, wet dog, and brothy flavor characteristics.
Oxidized, Tallowy The oxidized, tallowy off-flavor is an especially troublesome

sensory defect of WMP. This off-flavor, suggestive of old tallow, renders WMP
unpalatable. Frequently, various stages of oxidation may be noted. Numerous fac-
tors seem to affect the development and rate of oxidation, notably (1) storage and
processing temperatures; (2) light exposure; (3) product acidity; (4) metallic salts;
(5) water activity; (6) headspace oxygen content; and (7) the type of packaging.
Differentiated from stale as being considered to involve more lipid-based precur-
sors, typical flavor descriptors for this defect may include wet cardboard, tallowy,
and painty.
11.15 Other Properties of Whole Milk Powder (WMP)
Tactile properties of WMP vary with the method of manufacture, the degree of con-
centration prior to drying, and the particle size and porosity after drying (Hall &
Hedrick, 1971; Hunziker, 1949). Dry whole milk manufactured by the spray process
may be extremely fine and uniform throughout, but two powder defects may occa-
sionally be noted: lumpy and caked.
Lumpy Lumpy powder lacks definite homogeneity in appearance. Hard lumps the
size of wheat grains or larger may be present in the powdered mass. This defect is
found more frequently in spray-process forms of WMP. The lumps can result from
insufficient drying, dripping spray nozzles, or particle exposure to moisture-laden
air. Dry whole milk, because of its relatively high fat content, may contain so-called
soft lumps. This condition is particularly characteristic of cold-stored products. It
stems from the unintentional agglomeration of powder particles. This defect should
not be confused with a “hard lumpy” product, wherein the formed particles (lumps)
feel firm and sometimes even sticky when they are pressed between the fingers.
Caked Usually, the caked defect is not encountered in WMP. However, when it
does occur, WMP loses it powdery consistency and becomes “solid as a rock.”
When this solid mass is broken up, the product remains as chunks and thus fails to
regain the original powdery state. This defect is considered most serious, since such
an altered WMP has lost sales value for human use.
Color Dry whole milk is typically light yellow in color, but it can vary seasonally
with the amount of pigmentation present in the milkfat. The color can range from a
creamy white to a deep yellow. The possible defects of color in dry whole milk are
browned or darkened, scorched, and lack of uniformity.
Browned or Darkened This color defect of WMP is associated with product age.
When this defect occurs, the typical creamy color has been replaced by a distinct
brown shade. Furthermore, this color defect is usually associated with a distinctive
stale off-flavor. This defect is potentiated by conditions that favor general Maillard
browning reactions, including water activity, high storage temperatures, extended
storage times, and pH extremes.
Scorched Discoloration due to burning (scorching) of milk solids is more com-

monly associated with roller-processed powders than spray-processed products.
Sections of large spraying systems, where even minor masses of product can accu-
mulate, can also result in this defect. The powder color may vary from light to dark
brown; rarely will burnt particles be so dark as to appear black. Milk powders that
exhibit discolored particles or foreign sediment are severely discriminated and
downgraded against the grading standards.
Lack of Uniformity This defect may be due to either partial discoloration (brown-
ing) that may develop after product packaging or the result of partial scorching
during the manufacturing process.
11.16 Nonfat Dry Milk (NDM)
The Food and Drug Administration has two definitions for nonfat dry milk, as noted
in 21 CFR 131.125 and 131.127 (2020). The only difference in the second definition
is that the product is fortified with vitamins A and D. Nonfat dry milk (NDM) is
defined as follows:
Description. Nonfat dry milk is the product obtained by removal of water only from
pasteurized skim milk. It contains not more than 5% by weight of moisture and
not more than 1 and 1/2% by weight of milkfat unless otherwise indicated.
Optional ingredients. Safe and suitable characterizing flavoring ingredients (with or
without coloring and nutritive carbohydrate sweetener) as follows: fruit and fruit
juice (including concentrated fruit and fruit juice) and natural and artificial food
flavorings.
372 S. Rankin
The following is the additional language for nonfat dry milk fortified with vita-
mins A and D:
Description. Nonfat dry milk fortified with vitamins A and D conforms to the stan-
dard of identity for nonfat dry milk, except that vitamins A and D are added as
prescribed by paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) Vitamin addition.
(1) V itamin A is added in such quantity that, when prepared according to
label directions, each quart of the reconstituted product contains 2000
International Units thereof.
(2) Vitamin D is added in such quantity that, when prepared according to
label directions, each quart of the reconstituted product contains 400
International Units thereof.
(3) The requirements of this paragraph will be deemed to have been met if
reasonable overages, within limits of good manufacturing practice, are
present to ensure that the required levels of vitamins are maintained
throughout the expected shelf life of the food under customary conditions
of distribution.
The USDA has quality standards for three types of NDM, namely, spray process,
roller process, and instant. The details of these standards may be found by accessing
the USDA, Agricultural Marketing Service (http://www.ams.usda.gov). A summary
of the requirements is given in Tables 11.4, 11.5, and 11.6. The products covered by
these standards must not contain buttermilk or any added preservative, neutralizing
agent, or other chemicals. Conditions under which a “U.S. Grade” is not assignable
vary for the different types of NDM. Only the “Extra Grade” is recognized for use
as instant nonfat milk. For spray- and roller-process nonfat milk, failure to meet the
requirements for US standard grade and/or a direct microscopic clump count in
excess of 100 million/g results in nonassignment of a grade.
Table 11.4 US grade classifications of nonfat dry milk (reliquified basis) based on flavor and odora
Flavor characteristics US extra gradeb US standard gradeb
Bitter NA Slight
Chalky Slight Definite
Cooked (spray and instant) Slight Definite
Feed Slight Definite
Flat Slight Definite
Oxidized NA Slight
Scorched NA Slight
Stale NA Slight
Storage NA Slight
Utensil NA Slight
a
USDA, AMS US Standards for Grades of Nonfat Dry Milk (Spray, Roller and Instant)
b
Instant nonfat dry milk is allowed only as US extra grade
Table 11.5 US grade classifications of nonfat dry milk based on physical appearance
characteristicsa
Physical appearance characteristics US extra grade US standard gradeb
Dry product
Lumpy Slight Moderate
Unnatural color NA Slight
Visible dark particles Practically free Reasonably free
Reconstituted product
Grainy NA Reasonably free
a
b
Applies only to spray and roller process. Only one grade, “U.S. Extra,” is recognized for instant
nonfat dry milk
Table 11.6 US Grade Classifications of Nonfat Dry Milk according to laboratory analysesa
Laboratory tests (or parameters) U.S. extra gradeb U.S. standard grade
Bacterial estimate, standard plate count/g 10,000 75,000
(max)
Milkfat content, % (max) 1.25 1.5
Moisture content, % (max) 4.0 (4.5 instant) 5.0
Scorched particle content, mg (max) 15.0 22.5
Solubility index, ml (max)
Spray 1.2 2.0
US high heatc 2.0 2.5
Roller 15.0 15.0
Instant 1.0
Titratable acidity, % (max) 0.15 0.17
Coliform count/g instant (max) 10
Dispersibility, instant (max%) 85
a
b
Instant nonfat dry milk may be assigned only one grade, “U.S. Extra”
c
Heat classification is as follows:
Low heat ≥6.0 mg undenatured whey protein nitrogen/g dry product
Medium heat 1.51–5.99 mg undenatured whey protein nitrogen/g dry product
High heat ≤1.5 mg undenatured whey protein nitrogen/g dry product
When NDM (especially the instantized form) is used as a beverage, a sensory

comparison with fresh fluid nonfat milk is inevitable. Under ideal conditions, the
sensory difference may not be that significant; even expert evaluators may find little
to criticize in reconstituted NDM of high quality. However, there are several points
to keep in mind. Fresh, liquid nonfat milk (or another liquid product) is not guaran-
teed to be free of flavor defects; in some instances, fresh nonfat milk may be inferior
to the dehydrated and rehydrated product. Generally, there is no logical basis for
comparing a good-quality fluid product with a poor-quality dry product or vice
versa. Each product form should be evaluated for its own merits and defects
(Fig. 11.3).
374 S. Rankin
Whole Milk
Receive, Sample, Test
Cool, Storage
Preheat
Separate
Cream
Pasteurize Nonfat
>72C, >15 sec
Concentrate Preheat,
via Evaporation (~50%) 85C, 20 min
Concentrate
Reheat (63C)
via Evaporation (~50%)
Pump (3000psi) Reheat (74C)
Spray Dry
Pump (3000psi)
~200C Outlet Air
Rewet Spray Dry

Cool (32C) (Humid Air) ~200C Outlet Air
Sift, Package, Store Agglomerate Cool (32C)
Cool (32C) Sift, Package, Store

Low Heat NDM
Sift, Package, Store High Heat NDM
Instantized NDM
Fig. 11.3 Flow diagram for the manufacture of three forms of nonfat dry milk: low heat, instan-
tized, and high heat
Fresh, fluid nonfat milk deteriorates with age (as do other highly perishable milk
products), generally due to microbial activity. On the other hand, flavor deteriora-
tion in a dry product is most commonly due to chemical mechanisms such as the
browning reaction, oxidation, and the process of staling. Also, since dry products
may be in storage for months or years (as opposed to a maximum of several weeks
for conventionally pasteurized fluid products), certain gradual chemical reactions
generally have adequate time to manifest themselves. Thus, a sample of 1-year-old
NDM may exhibit flavor characteristics inferior to that of fresh, fluid nonfat milk.
However, a year-old NDM may be substantially more acceptable in flavor than a
3-week-old fluid nonfat milk.
A noteworthy supplement to the NDM (spray process) grading standard is the
inclusion of criteria to distinguish the product based on heat treatment. Such details
are not a grade requirement, with the exception of when the higher solubility index
for high-heat powder is permitted. The nomenclature of the US Heat Treatment
Classification with definition is as follows:
US High-Heat
The finished product shall not exceed 1.50 mg undenatured whey protein nitrogen
per gram of nonfat dry milk.
US Medium-Heat
The finished product shall exceed 1.50 mg undenatured whey protein nitrogen per
gram of nonfat dry milk and shall be less than 6.00 mg undenatured whey protein
nitrogen per gram of nonfat dry milk.
US Low-Heat
The finished product shall be not less than 6.00 mg undenatured whey protein nitro-
gen per gram of nonfat dry milk.
The abovementioned assay for whey protein nitrogen, in essence, is intended to
measure the degree to which heat-labile whey proteins are affected as a function of
the thermal treatment of the whey. Manufacturers will produce powders differenti-
ated as such for specific food applications where the presence of undenatured whey
proteins may be desirable or, conversely, undesirable relative to their functionality,
e.g., high-heat powder as an ingredient in bread dough, low-heat powder used to
fortify cheesemilk. Methods for the conduct of this assay are described as follows:
The whey protein nitrogen test shall be performed in accordance with DA Instruction
918-RL, “Instruction for Resident Grading Quality Control Service Programs
and Laboratory Analysis,” Dairy Grading Branch, Dairy Division, Agricultural
Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC,
20090-6456, or the latest edition of “Standard Methods for the Examination of
Dairy Products,” as referenced earlier in this chapter.
Medium-heat powder is considered a type of globally available standard in the
manufacturing industry. Low-heat powder is used and available primarily in the
USA for use in the manufacture of cheese, and high-heat powder is used primarily
in the baking industry.
376 S. Rankin
Whereas US labeling regulations have prohibited the use of the term “skim”
when referring to any dairy product, the term “skimmed milk powder” or SMP is
recognized internationally by codex nomenclature standards. SMP has a higher
allowable milkfat content (1.5% max) as well as a higher allowable moisture con-
tent (5%). The criterion for protein content is also different, requiring a 34% milk
protein in milk solids nonfat of 34%. Specific additives are allowed to be used in the
manufacture of SMP including stabilizers, firming agents, acid regulators, emulsi-
fiers, anticaking agents, and antioxidants.
11.17 Sensory Properties of NDM
Flavor The flavor of high-quality NDM should be similar, when reconstituted, to

that of fresh fluid nonfat milk. Due to the extremely low milkfat content, NDM does
not possess the rich pastry flavor of products of higher fat content. The flavor should
be clean, sweet, and pleasant, but NDM may possess a slight cooked or heated fla-
vor. Likewise, the off-flavors found in reconstituted NDM have much in common
with those of WMP but differ in their relative importance. Caudle et al. (2005)
demonstrated a reduction in consumer acceptance toward products formulated with
off-flavored NDM powders. Interestingly, Lloyd et al. (2004) demonstrated that
even extremely aged samples of NDM were acceptable to consumers for use in an
emergency. Some common flavor defects of NDM include scorched, stale, storage,
old, and oxidized/tallowy.
Scorched As in the instance of WMP, a scorched off-flavor is also developed in

NDMs that have been subjected to abnormally high heat during processing. This
defect is usually accompanied by an excessive number of scorched particles in the
product; a darker, slightly brown color may be observed.
Stale, Storage, Old This flavor defect is frequently encountered in NDM. This par-
ticular off-flavor is even more quick to occur and distinct in NDM than in
WMP. Usually, this flavor defect is accompanied by a slight to definite darkening of
the powder color. However, some staleness may frequently be detected before any
change in color is noted. As pointed out elsewhere in this chapter, there are some
reasons for considering stale and storage off-flavors as separate entities. Many grad-
ers of milk powders do not attempt or even make the effort to distinguish between
these two off-flavors. In old, darkened products, a sharp, slightly sour taste may be
detected after the first sensation of staleness has completely disappeared. This
slightly sour taste is quite similar to that noted in darkened evaporated milk, which
may have resulted from storage at a high temperature for an extended time. Lea
et al. (1943) variously described this off-flavor as burnt, stale, or glue-like. They
reported that the so-called burnt flavor may have stemmed from a blend of the toffee
flavor (derived from milkfat) and slight lactose caramelization and that quite possi-
bly the stale off-flavor was derived from protein deterioration. Recent work (Caudle
et al., 2005) has described the storage-based flavor of NDM with such terms as
animal-like, wet dog, and fryer oil. Additional recent references include Karagul-
Yuceer et al. (2001), Drake et al. (2003), Karagul-Yuceer et al. (2004), and Drake
et al. (2006).
Oxidized, Tallowy This off-flavor is less frequently encountered in NDMs than in

WMPs. Since tallowiness is a fat-associated off-flavor, it develops when appreciable
fat constituents are present. Nonfat dry milk contains a negligible amount of milkfat
available to undergo autoxidation; nonetheless, under certain conditions, an objec-
tionable oxidized or tallowy off-flavor can develop. Studies have indicated that lipid
oxidation products are present in stored NDM (Karagul-Yuceer et al., 2001, 2002).
Of particular note for the dried milk products judge is that a tallowy product tends
to have a pronounced odor, whereas a stale powder does not exhibit an intense odor.
11.18 Physical Characteristics of NDM
Fineness and Homogeneity The grain fineness of high-quality NDM is dependent

upon the characteristics of spray nozzle(s) or atomization device, the extent of con-
centration prior to spray drying, the extent of deficiency of pulverization, and the
mesh of the bolting when the product is roller-dried. Nonfat dry milk manufactured
by the spray process usually exhibits a fine, uniform particle size (Fig. 11.4). The
dried product made by the roller process is much more coarse and less homoge-
neous, unless it is extensively pulverized after drying.
Instant NDM is usually quite granular; the product should pour as readily as corn
meal, hence the name, and should readily hydrate when added to water. In contrast,
non-instantized spray-dried NDM is light, dusty (nearly airborne) and has flow
characteristics similar to flour (see Fig. 11.3). Upon addition to water,
Fig. 11.4 Samples of

instantized (a) and
non-instantized (b) nonfat
dry milk powders; note the
large, porous structures of
the instantized product
allowing for improved
wettability properties as
compared to the fine
structure in sample B
where clumping can
readily occur during
rehydration
378 S. Rankin
Fig. 11.5 A scorecard depicting standards or grades of dry milk relative to the appearance/mass of
scorched particles. (ADPI, 2002)
non-instantized product, while easily hydrated, readily forms clumps or small nod-
ules that can hinder further processing steps or is at least visually unappealing to
consumers.
Color Nonfat dry milk, like dry whole milk, should be uniform in color and be free
of foreign specks and burnt particles (see Fig. 11.5). NDM should exhibit a creamy
white or light yellow color, though it may vary slightly in intensity with season of
the year. Under certain conditions, NDM tends to darken in color with aging; the
light yellow color darkens to a distinct brown. This appearance defect is usually
associated with a stale off-flavor. For reasons not well understood, spray-process
products seem to be more susceptible to age darkening (and to a greater intensity)
than roller-process powders. However, dry powders made by both processes are
susceptible to this defect.
11.19 Dry Buttermilk
The definitions and standards (USDA, Agricultural Marketing Service (effective

February 2, 2001 for dry buttermilk (protein ≥30%) and dry buttermilk product
(protein <30%) are defined as follows:
(a) Dry buttermilk (made by the spray process or the atmospheric roller process) is
the product resulting from drying liquid buttermilk that was derived from the
churning of butter and pasteurized prior to condensing at a temperature of
161 °F for 15 s or its equivalent in bacterial destruction. Dry buttermilk shall
have a protein content of not less than 30.0%. Dry buttermilk shall not contain
nor be derived from nonfat dry milk, dry whey, or products other than butter-
milk and shall not contain any added preservative, neutralizing agent, or other
chemicals.
(b) Dry buttermilk product (made by the spray process or the atmospheric roller
process) is the product resulting from drying liquid buttermilk that was derived
from the churning of butter and was pasteurized prior to condensing at a tem-
perature of 161 °F for 15 s or its equivalent in bacterial destruction. Dry but-
termilk product has a protein content less than 30.0%. Dry buttermilk product
shall not contain nor be derived from nonfat dry milk, dry whey, or products
other than buttermilk and shall not contain any added preservative, neutralizing
agent, or other chemicals.
The two US grades of dry buttermilk and dry buttermilk product, “US Extra” and
“US Standard,” are determined on the basis of “flavor, physical appearance, bacte-
rial estimate on the basis of standard plate count, milkfat, moisture, scorched parti-
cles, solubility index, titratable acidity, and protein content.” The US grade
requirements for dry buttermilk are summarized in Table 11.7.
The flavor of dry sweet cream buttermilk should be clean, sweet, and pleasant; it
should have a somewhat richer flavor than NDM. Whereas NDM contains less than
1.5% of milkfat, dry buttermilk is allowed not less than 4.5%. With this much milk-
fat present in sweet cream buttermilk, the product can possess a richer, fuller flavor
than NDM. On the other hand, the evaluator should remember that buttermilk is rich
Table 11.7 US grade classifications of dry buttermilk based on flavor, physical appearance, and
laboratory analysesa
Quality attributes (or laboratory tests) US extra grade US standard grade
Flavor
Unnatural NA Slight
Offensive NA NA
Physical appearance
Lumpy Slight Moderate
Visible dark particles Practically free Reasonably free
Bacterial estimate per g (max) 20,000 75,000
Butterfat content, % (min) 4.5 4.5
Moisture content, % (max) 4.0 5.0
Scorched particles, mg (max)
Spray 15 22.5
Roller 22.5 32.5
Solubility index, ml (max)
Spray 1.25 2.0
Roller 15.0 15.0
Titratable acidity, % ≥0.10 to ≤0.18 ≥0.10 to ≤0.20
Protein
Dry buttermilk (min) 30.0 30.0
Dry buttermilk product <30.0 <30
a
USDA, AMS US Standards for Grades of Dry Buttermilk and Dry Buttermilk Product (February
2, 2001)
380 S. Rankin
in lipid constituents that are quite susceptible to oxidation. Thus, dried buttermilk
powders are frequently quite vulnerable to rapid flavor deterioration and may have
unpredictably high flavor variability, even lot to lot from a specific manufacturer.
Off-flavors noted in dry buttermilk (stored under adverse conditions) in a study by
Davis (1939) included various intensities of stale, old, musty, sharp, bitter, soapy,
coarse, cheesy, rubbery, acid, fruity, tallowy, and putrid. A wider range of off-flavors
will probably be noted in evaluating buttermilk than when judging NDM for flavor.
The USDA standards with respect to flavor of dry buttermilk products evaluated as
reconstituted products are as follows:
For US Extra Grade: “Shall be sweet and pleasing, and has no unnatural or offensive
flavors.”
For US Standard Grade: “Should possess a fairly pleasing flavor, but may possess
slight unnatural flavors and has no offensive flavors.”
Although a great deal of research on buttermilk has not been published recently,
some work detailing the compositional and functional characteristics (Sodini et al.,
2006) as well as the possible nutritional value of buttermilk fractions (Rombaut
et al., 2006) is available in the current literature.
11.20 Dry Whey
The US standards for dry whey are available through USDA, AMS (effective
December 14, 2000). Whey and dry whey are therein defined as follows:
“Whey” is the fluid obtained by separating the coagulum from milk, cream, and/or
skim milk in cheesemaking. It shall conform to the applicable provisions of 21
CFR 184.1979. The acidity of the whey may be adjusted by the addition of safe
and suitable pH adjusting ingredients. Moisture removed from cheese curd as a
result of salting may be collected for further processing as whey if the collection
of the moisture and the removal of the salt from the moisture are conducted in
accordance with procedures approved by the Administrator.
“Dry Whey” is the product resulting from drying fresh whey which has been pas-
teurized and to which nothing has been added as a preservative. It shall conform
to the applicable provisions of 21 CFR 184.1979. It contains all constituents,
except moisture, in the same relative proportions as in the whey.
Only a single grade of dry whey, “US Extra Grade,” is recognized; compliance is
determined on the basis of flavor, physical appearance, bacterial estimate, coliform
count, milkfat content, moisture, and scorched particle content (see Table 11.8).
Acidity is not a component of the US grading requirement; however, acidity may be
assigned as sweet (<0.16% TA), as a stated percentage %TA (>0.16 to <0.35) or as
acid whey (>0.35%TA).
The flavor characteristics of dry sweet whey will vary with the whey acidity and
the drying process. The flavor of good-quality dry whey is usually pleasantly sweet,
Table 11.8 US grade classifications of dry whey based on flavor, physical appearance, and
laboratory analysesa
Category US extra grade standard
Flavor
Bitter Slight
Feed Definite
Fermented Slight
Storage Slight
Utensil Slight
Weedy Definite
Physical appearance
Color Uniform
Free flowing Reasonably
Lumpy Slight pressure
Visible dark particles Practically free
Bacterial estimate/g (max) 30,000
Coliform 10
Milkfat content % (max) 1.5
Moisture content % (max) 5.0
Scorched particles, mg (max) 15.0
USDA, AMS US Standards for Dry Whey (December 14, 2000)
a
with a subtle or slightly subdued acid aftertaste. Such assessments can be made by
rehydrating (10 g sample to 100 g distilled water tempered to 24 °C; see ADPI,
2002). The flavor may change markedly during storage toward a stale, slightly sour
flavor, accompanied by a definite browning of the product. Bodyfelt et al. (1979)
studied the quality impact of dried wheys of various degrees of age and flavor qual-
ity on vanilla ice cream mix. Gas–liquid chromatography analyses indicated several
pyrazines and 2-furfural to be partially responsible for mix off-flavors, variously
described by the investigators as lacks freshness, stale, and whey flavor. More recent
work on whey powders denotes additional detail on composition and function
(Banavara et al., 2003), flavor (Mahajan et al., 2004), and browning chemistry
(Dattatreya & Rankin, 2006) as well as shelf life estimation (Dattatreya et al., 2007)
relative to the development of brown discoloration. One approach to the attenuation
of whey color development involves the use of bleaching agents focused on denatur-
ing water-soluble, annatto-based pigments (see Croissant et al., 2009).
The initial flavor quality of whey depends on such factors as (1) the quality of milk
from which the cheese was made; (2) the type of cheese manufactured; (3) the method
of whey handling immediately after curd draining; (4) the elapsed time between
draining and pasteurization; and (5) the extent of adherence to good manufacturing
practices. The manufacture of cheese requires the combined activity of microorgan-
isms and enzymes, but these biochemical activities must be suddenly terminated in
the whey to prevent off-flavor(s) development (Carunchia-Whetstine et al., 2003).
Acid whey, the by-product of cottage cheese and other acid-set cheese types and
other dairy foods that recover low pH whey, e.g., Greek yogurt manufacturing,
382 S. Rankin
represents a significant challenge to dairy plants due to decreased functionality and

lower levels of valuable constituents. Although specific details are not readily avail-
able, many plants continue to dispose of rather than further refine acid whey for
value-added opportunities.
Another major category of dried dairy ingredients involves the use of membrane
separation and fractionation technologies and includes such products as whey pro-
tein concentrate and whey protein isolate. By subjecting either a native milk or
whey stream to a membrane separation system, specific fractions of these original
streams can be recovered, concentrated, and dried into powders with specific uses
(Kotsanopoulos & Arvanitoyannis, 2015). Literature detailing the manufacturing
and composition (Kumar et al., 2013) and sensory properties (Russell et al., 2006;
Carunchia-Whetstine et al., 2005) is available. Because of the increased value and
functionality of such products, continued work has focused on the application of
these novel ingredients in model and authentic food systems. Advancements in sep-
aration technologies coupled with other unit operations such as hydrolysis or cataly-
sis have resulted in increases in market opportunities and a modest proliferation of
ingredients that are permutations of the general fractionation and concentration
technologies. A complete listing of the collection of such ingredients is beyond the
scope of this work but includes such ingredients as whey protein concentrate and
isolate of various compositions, demineralized whey, individual whey protein frac-
tions, glycomacropeptide, lactose, and mineral concentrates.
11.21 Edible Dry Casein and Caseinates
The USDA, AMS definition (effective July 20, 1968) of edible dry casein (acid) is
cited as follows:
1. For the purposes of these standards, edible dry casein (acid) is the pulverized or
unpulverized product resulting from washing, drying, or otherwise processing
the coagulum resulting from acid precipitation of skim milk which has been
pasteurized before or during the process of manufacture in a manner approved
by the Administrator.
2. The product shall have been produced in a plant under conditions suitable for the
manufacture of human food and packaged in a container which will prevent
contamination, deterioration, and/or development of a public health hazard
under normal conditions of storage and transportation.
Two grades of edible dry casein are recognized, “U.S. Extra” and “U.S. Standard,”
which are assigned on the basis of flavor and odor, physical appearance, bacterial
estimate on the basis of standard plate count and coliform count, protein content,
moisture content, milkfat content, extraneous materials, and free acid. Additional
optional tests include Salmonella or Staphylococcus, percent metals (Cu), yeast,
ash, and mold (as listed in Section 58.2805) and particle size. The requirements and
recommended criteria for edible dry casein are summarized in Table 11.9.
Table 11.9 US grade classifications of edible dry casein (acid) based on flavor and odor, physical
appearance, and laboratory analysesa
Category US extra grade US standard grade
Flavor and odor Bland natural flavor and odor and Not more than slight unnatural
free from offensive flavors and flavors or odors and free from
odors such as sour and cheesy offensive flavors and odors such as
sour or cheesy
Physical appearance White to cream colored physical White to cream colored physical
appearance; if pulverized, free appearance; if pulverized, free
from lumps that do not break up from lumps that do not break up
under slight pressure under moderate pressure
Bacterial estimates:
Standard plate count/g ≤30,000 ≤100,000
Coliform count/0.1 g Negative ≤2
Protein content, ≥95 ≥90
N × 6.38, dry basis, %
Moisture content, % ≤10 ≤12
Milkfat content, % ≤1.5 ≤2
Extraneous materials Scorched particles not more than Scorched particles not more than
15 mg and free from foreign 22.5 mg and free from foreign
materials in 25 g materials in 25 g
Free acid Titrated to not more than 0.20 ml Titrated to not more than 0.27 ml
of 0.1 N NaOH per g of 0.1 N NaOH per g
Optional tests
(recommended
criteria):
Ash (phosphorus ≤2.2
fixed) %
Copper, ppm ≤5.0
Lead, ppm ≤5.0
Iron, ppm ≤20.0
Yeast and mold, per ≤5.0
0.1 g
Thermophiles, per g ≤5000
Reducing sugars (as ≤1.0
lactose) %
Staphylococcus Negative
(coagulase positive)
Salmonella in 100 g Negative
Particle size – 30, 60,
80 or other specified
mesh
30 mesh 100% must pass 30 ASTM screen,
10% may pass 60 ASTM screen
a
USDA, AMS US Standards for Grades of Edible Dry Casein (Acid) (July 20, 1968)
384 S. Rankin
Caseinates Acid casein is commonly recovered as a more usable form such as

sodium, potassium, or calcium caseinate. In the salt form, caseinates have found
wide application as food ingredients, principally in nondairy foods such as bakery
products, dairy product analogs, processed meats, and coffee whiteners, due to their
increased solubility relative to the acid or rennet forms. A blend of caseinate and
whey solids may be made to emulate the composition and functional properties of
nonfat dry milk. In various food applications, caseinates perform specific functions.
How adequately a given lot or source of caseinate performs the various food ingre-
dient functions should be a primary criterion of the quality evaluation process for
these milk-derived products. Hydrolyzed sodium caseinates are also available as
highly functional protein-based food ingredients.
Casein (rennet) and caseinates are subject to variations in sensory quality either
during the manufacturing process or as a result of deteriorative changes that occur
during storage. The USDA standards specify freedom from offensive flavors and
odors; off-flavors such as sour and cheesy are identified. A stale off-flavor may
develop during storage, which may be related to a similar off-flavor that occurs in
stored dry milk, sterile milk, and evaporated milk. More research is needed to better
chemically characterize this off-flavor and to learn the mechanism(s) of the stale
flavor formation.
In the process of manufacturing casein, the curd is washed to remove impurities
and residual milk components. Lactose is one of several compounds that may be
retained in excessive concentration if the casein curd is not adequately washed. The
USDA standards establish 1% as the upper limit for lactose in casein. The presence
of lactose in casein products unfortunately potentiates the Maillard (browning)
reaction, especially when casein has been converted to a more alkaline caseinate. A
brown pigment need not appear for off-flavors to manifest themselves, because pig-
ment formation occurs in latter stages of the nonenzymatic browning, after numer-
ous flavor compounds and precursors have been formed. Thus, low residual lactose
levels should be sought in dry casein products.
A frequent and serious flavor defect in caseinates is referred to as gluey. As the
term implies, this off-flavor is suggestive of protein degradation. Under alkaline
conditions (as with caseinates), protein degradation occurs at an accelerated rate.
Work to determine the chemical cause of off-odors in rennet casein identified such
compounds as guaiacol, indole, and ρ-cresol was conducted by Karagul-Yuceer
et al. (2003).
11.22 Dry Milk, Other Milkfat Levels
With the introduction of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990, some
traditional dairy product nomenclature was revised to comply with this cross-
commodity standard, e.g., skim milk was renamed as nonfat milk. One dry product,
low-fat dry milk and its accompanying descriptions, definitions, and standards was
also affected in this regulatory shift. What was once present as “Lowfat Dry Milk”
in 21 CFR 131.123 no longer exists as a discrete product under the new labeling
laws. Products that are intermediate to nonfat and whole dry milks now come under
the labeling/nomenclature and compositional requirements of 21 CFR 101.62,
Nutritional Content Claims For Fat, Fatty Acid, and Cholesterol Content of Foods.
11.23 Dry Cream
The FDA standard of identity for dry cream may be found in 21 CFR 131.149
(2020). The following is the description and list of optional ingredients for dry cream:
Description
Dry cream is the product obtained by removal of water only from pasteurized milk
or cream or a mixture thereof, which may have been homogenized. Alternatively,
dry cream may be obtained by blending dry milks as defined in Section 131.125(a)
and 131.147(a) with dry cream as appropriate, provided that the resulting product is
equivalent in composition to that obtained by the method described in the first sen-
tence of this paragraph. It contains not less than 40% but less than 75% by weight
of milkfat on an as is basis. It contains not more than 5% by weight of moisture on
a milk solids not fat basis.
Optional Ingredients
The following safe and suitable optional ingredients may be used: emulsifiers, sta-
bilizers, anticaking agents, antioxidants, and nutritive carbohydrate sweeteners.
Characterizing flavoring ingredients, with or without coloring, is as follows: fruit
and fruit juice, including concentrated fruit and fruit juice; natural and artificial food
flavoring.
No specific classification for grades of dry cream has been issued by the
USDA. Off-flavors in dry cream products parallel those that develop in dry whole
milk (i.e., stem from oxidation of lipid components during storage). In addition to
lipid oxidation, browning reactions and staling are significant quality problems of
dry cream. Dry creams have many applications as food ingredients, especially in the
formulation and manufacture of finished products in regions where a consistent
source of fresh cream is difficult to secure.
11.24 Dry Ice Cream Mix
Dry ice cream mix products differ from the other dry products in that mere reconsti-
tution with water does not yield the finished product, in this case, frozen ice cream
or low-fat ice cream. The reconstituted mix generally requires added flavoring, and
this mixture is then frozen. Thus, evaluation of the dry mix following reconstitution
may not be adequate, since the sensory properties of the resultant frozen product are
386 S. Rankin
of paramount interest. As a rule, a mix that has inferior flavor characteristics can be
expected to yield an ice cream of poor flavor quality. Freezing characteristics, body
and texture, and color/appearance are additional quality considerations for the
product.
Dry ice cream or low-fat ice cream mix may be made by spray drying the liquid
mix, although a portion of the sweetener may be withheld prior to drying to avoid
excessive browning. The remaining required sugar can be subsequently dry-blended
with the dry mix. Alternatively, the entire dry mix may be assembled by dry-
blending all of the various ingredients, such as nonfat dry milk, dry cream, sugars,
and any stabilizer/emulsifier. A concern would exist as to whether the reconstituted
mix can then be frozen without re-pasteurization (assuming the initial mix was pas-
teurized). Dry ice cream (and low-fat ice cream) mixes are subject to the develop-
ment of exactly the same defects as dry whole milk and dry cream. These defects
result from heat treatment, browning reactions, staling, and oxidation processes.
11.25 Miscellaneous Dry Products
A partial list of miscellaneous dry milk products includes milk protein concentrates
and isolates, instant chocolate drink, instant hot cocoa mix, instant breakfast drinks,
dry cheese, casein/whey blends, malted milk, nondairy coffee whiteners, and other,
novel dairy fractions such as whey protein phospholipid concentrate and de-lactosed
permeate. Products of this type are generally formulated according to proprietary
specifications; some are covered by specific patents. Sensory quality control of dry-
milk-based foods depends on maintaining a high level of consumer acceptability;
this embraces flavor, physical appearance, rehydration characteristics, and product
functionality. Some of these products are manufactured by drying from a high-
concentration liquid slurry state, while other dry products may be assembled as the
result of dry-blending various ingredients.
11.26 Scoring and Grading Dry Milk
Several sensory terms have been adopted in an attempt to classify flavor defects of
various dry milk products. Unfortunately, these particular descriptors have not been
used that consistently between technologists or researchers involved with dry milk
products. As early as 1957, a committee of the American Dairy Science Association
(Thomas, 1958) proposed definitions for the flavor and appearance characteristics
as well as for the packaging of dry milks. A suggested dry milk products scorecard
is presented in Fig. 11.5, and a suggested scoring guide for flavor is offered in
Table 11.10. A typical recommendation for the evaluation of dry milk products
involves rehydrating the product to a reasonable concentration (e.g., 10% w/w
Table 11.10 A suggested scoring guide for the flavor of dry milk (reliquified basis)
Scores for a given intensity
Defect Slight Moderate Definite Strong Pronounced
Acid 2 1 0 0 0
Astringent 8 7 6 5 0–4
Bitter 6 5 4 3 0–2
Chalky 8 7 6 5 0–4
Cooked 9 8 7 6 5
Feed 8 7 6 5 0–4
Fermented 6 5 4 3 0–2
Flat 9 8 7 6 5
Foreigna 2 1 0 0 0
Gluey 2 1 0 0 0
Metallic 4 3 2 1 0
Neutralizerb 0 0 0 0 0
Oxidized/tallowcy 4 3 2 1 0
Rancid (lipolysis) 5 4 3 2 0–1
Salty 7 6 5 4 0–3
Scorched 4 3 2 1 0
Stale 4 3 2 1 0
Storage 7 6 5 4 0–3
Unclean/utensil 5 4 3 2 0–1
Weedy 3 2 1 0 0
“No criticism” is assigned a score of “10.” Normal range is 1–10 for a salable product where 10
represents a product of ideal flavor character. A sample may be assigned a score of “0” (zero) if the
defect makes the product unsalable
a
Due to the variety of foreign off-flavor sources, a fixed scoring range is not appropriate. Some
foreign off-flavors warrant a score of “0” (zero) even if the intensity is slight (i.e., gasoline, pesti-
cides, lubricating oil)
b
The use of neutralizers is not authorized except in whey
c
When an oxidized off-flavor has progressed to the tallowy stage, the assigned flavor score should
be “0” (zero)
solution), allowing the product to fully rehydrate (Lloyd et al., 2004) and sampling
the product at the appropriate temperature. Higher sampling temperatures (e.g.,
45 °C) tend to make volatile aroma compounds more apparent to the imbiber. While
such a practice may yield an overly sensitive assessment, it may be appropriate
when the powder will be used in a food that requires a concentration step (i.e.,
cheese manufacture) or that has an extremely sensitive flavor profile. The lists below
contain terms and brief definitions that have traditionally been used for the quality
evaluation of most dry dairy ingredients. A more complete analysis of the sensory
attributes of dried dairy ingredients requires descriptive sensory analysis. Both this
technique and sensory attributes specific and descriptive of dried dairy ingredients
are addressed elsewhere in this book (Fig. 11.6).
388 S. Rankin
Product ID Date Sample #

Flavor Criticism/Score ----------------------->
No Criticism 10 Acid
Normal Range 4 to 8 Astringent
Unsalable 0 to 3 Bitter
Chalky
Cooked
Feed
Fermented
Flat Foreign
Gluey
Metallic
Neutralizer
Oxidized/Tallowy
Rancid (Lipolysis)
Salty
Scorched
Stale
Storage
Unclear/Utensil
Weedy
Physical Appearance Criticism/Score ----------------------->
No Criticism 5 Dry Product
Normal Range 2 to 4 Caked
Unsalable 0 to 1 Lumpy
Unnatural Color
Reconstituted Product
Charred Particle
Dark Particle
Grainy
Undispersed Lumps
Packaging Criticism/Score ----------------------->
No Criticism 5 Ruptured Vapor Barrier
Normal Range 2 to 4 Soiled
Unsalable 0 to 1 Unsealed
Laboratory Tests Criticism/Score ----------------------->
No Criticism 5 Chemistry
Normal Range 2 to 4 Alkalinity of Ash (mL/100g)
Unsalable 0 to 1 Alkaline Phosphatase (U/L)
Ash Phosphorous Fixed (%)
Copper (ppm)
Fat (%)
Iron (ppm)
Lead (ppm)
Moisture (%)
Oxygen Content (%)
Protein (%)
Reducing Sugars (as Lactose %)
Undenatured Whey Protein Nitrogen
(mg/gram)
Vitamin A (IU)
Vitamin D (IU)
Functionality
Dispersibility (Modified Moats-
Dabbah method (%))
Mesh (Screen %)
Scorched particles (mg)
Solubility Index (mL)
Titratable Acidity (% Lactic acid)
Microbiology
Coliform Count (per gram)
Direct Microscopic Count (per gram)
Salmonella Count (per 100 gram)
Staphylococcus Count (Coagulase+)
per gram
Thermophilic Count (per gram)
Total Plate Count (per gram)
Yeast and Mold Count (per 0.1 gram)
Signatures:
Fig. 11.6 A suggested dry milk product scorecard

11.27 Flavor Descriptors of Dry Milks
As a preface for purposes of providing definitions for the intensities of specific sen-
sory attributes, the USDA has defined the following terms:
Slight
Detected only upon critical examination.
Definite
Not intense but detectable.
Acid The term acid is used to describe the odor and taste (primarily) that result
from the action of lactose-fermenting bacteria in milk and milk products to produce
lactic acid that typically exhibits a clean, distinct sour taste.
Astringent Astringent refers to a puckery type of mouthfeel sensation similar to

that produced by a chemical such as aluminum ammonium sulfate and tannic acid;
unripe bananas may also be used as a standard. There is an associated tactile sensa-
tion to the astringent off-flavor; the mucous membranes of the palate and/or tongue
tend to shrink (Sano et al., 2005).
Bitter The bitter defect resembles the taste sensation imparted by bitter substances,
such as quinine, caffeine, and certain milk-protein-derived peptides. This defect is
often associated with the growth of proteolytic microorganisms in milk (certain
psychrotrophs and some spore-forming bacteria).
The USDA employs comparable definitions of bitter for several dry milk prod-
ucts. For instance, in describing bitterness in dry whole milk, the USDA states
“Similar to taste of quinine and produces a puckery sensation.” The USDA
Explanation of Terms sections for graded dairy products states “Distasteful, similar
to taste of quinine.” A direct statement such as “resembles the taste of quinine or
caffeine” seems to be an adequate definition of bitterness.
Chalky This descriptor of a common off-flavor in concentrated milk products sug-
gests the inclusion of fine, insoluble, chalk (powder) particles. The USDA definition
for chalky is “A tactual type of flavor lacking in characteristic milk flavor.” The
chalky off-flavor is more of an objectionable mouthfeel sensation than it is an off-
taste. The chalky defect frequently tends to manifest itself as a delayed mouthfeel –
an aftertaste response of the evaluator.
Cooked Cooked has an odor and flavor resembling that of milk that has been heated
to 73.8 °C (164.8 °F) or higher. The USDA definition for cooked flavor in dry milk
products is “Similar to a custard flavor and imparts a smooth aftertaste.”
Feed A milk off-flavor that is usually characteristic of the roughage (feeds) con-
sumed by milk cows is simply referred to as a feed defect. Several USDA definitions
390 S. Rankin
state “Feed flavors (such as alfalfa, sweet clover, silage, or similar feed) in milk
carried through into the nonfat dry milk.”
Flat The descriptor flat implies a lack of fullness of flavor; this flavor defect is sug-
gestive of added water. It is not detectable by odor perception. The listed USDA
definition for flat is “Insipid, practically devoid of any characteristic reconstituted
nonfat dry milk flavor.”
Fermented The following definition for fermented is taken from the USDA stan-
dards for dry whey: “Flavors, such as fruity or yeasty, produced through unwanted
chemical changes brought about by microorganisms or their enzyme systems.”
Foreign Foreign refers to any atypical or objectionable off-flavor that is not ordi-
narily associated with good-quality milk; sometimes a chemical- or medicinal-like
off-flavor may have occurred. This flavor defect usually stems from the fluid milk
used as a raw material to produce the dry milk and may relate to the presence of
residual sanitizer and/or cleaning agents in the product.
Metallic The off-flavor, metallic, is quite suggestive of the presence of copper or

iron in the raw material used to produce the dried product. Metallic is usually
regarded as a phase of oxidized (metal-induced) off-flavor.
Neutralizer The neutralizer off-flavor is an alkaline taste generally derived from

alkaline substances used to neutralize any developed acidity in milk. The USDA has
made provisions for the pH adjustment of dry whey using “safe and suitable pH
adjusting ingredients,” but acid neutralization of most other dry products is not
permitted.
Oxidized Milkfat oxidation is the cause of the defect described by the term oxi-
dized in many dairy foods, including dry milk products. The perceived sensation in
an oxidized off-flavor resembles wet cardboard, oily substances, or aged beef tal-
low, depending on the defect intensity. The USDA definition also includes the term
cappy, which refers to the bygone days when paperboard “caps” were placed on
milk containers, imparting a type of “wet cardboard” aroma.
Rancid Rancidity in dry milk products usually exhibits a strong, pungent odor that
may be accompanied by a soapy aftertaste. These sensory properties are primarily
due to the generation of small, short-chain fatty acids resulting from the hydrolysis
of milk triglyceride.
Salty A salty taste defect in dry milk products is simply a perceived primary taste
of salt or a salt solution; it resembles a milk product that contains excessive amounts
of salt. Perception of a salty taste on the front tip and sides of the tongue is relatively
rapid, compared to other experienced taste sensations.
Scorched This flavor defect is produced when milk powder has been subjected to
excessive heat in the drier or other heat-exchange processes; it is generally sugges-
tive of burnt protein. The USDA definition for scorched is “A more intensified flavor
than cooked,” plus an additional statement that this flavor defect is generally char-
acterized by having a burnt aftertaste.
Stale Stale generally implies a lack of product freshness. This flavor sensation in
dried milk products is ordinarily associated with deterioration of milk protein rather
than milkfat. Some dairy product evaluators tend to use the descriptor “lacks fresh-
ness” in lieu of the term “stale,” while other evaluators use both of the aforemen-
tioned descriptors interchangeably. The terms “stale” or “lacks freshness” are
commonly applied when the flavor is not as refreshing as expected by the evaluator.
There is an apparent anomaly in use of the terms “stale” and “storage” as flavor
descriptors. The USDA provides guidelines for various intensities of both stale and
storage off-flavors, but their singular definition treats them as one and introduces
some element of confusion for product evaluators (i.e., “Stale, storage. Lacking in
freshness and imparting a ‘rough’ aftertaste”). Such discrepancies suggest that more
mainstream sensory techniques should be applied to develop a more accurate
terminology.
The author notes that a logical argument can be made for the acceptance of sepa-
rate meanings of the terms “stale” and “storage.” It is true that a stale off-flavor in
dry milk can develop during storage but so can the oxidized off-flavor. Analogous to
the oxidized off-flavor, stale is a distinctively recognizable off-flavor that typically
develops over the course of storage. Unfortunately, thus far, research has not con-
clusively pinpointed the chemical precursor or the actual chemical entity that is
responsible for the stale off-flavor. The precursor could be any of the following: (1)
a protein, (2) a product of the Maillard reaction, or (3) some compound(s) derived
from milkfat. The chemical compound(s) produced from potential precursor(s) may
require that the substance(s) undergo oxidation to eventually produce the stale off-
flavor. The salient point is that the stale off-flavor is a distinct entity, whereas the
designation “storage off-flavor” is somewhat more generic. Hence, the descriptor
“storage” more appropriately encompasses a range of off-flavors that dry milk prod-
ucts may acquire during a period of storage. These shortcomings may range from
absorbed off-flavors (from the storage environment) to flavor defects that develop
from slow, gradual chemical reactions in the product, which can be appropriately
designated as a “lacks freshness” and/or “storage” off-flavor.
Unclean (Utensil) Typically, the unclean flavor defect in dry milks refers to an
unpleasant odor and lingering aftertaste that is suggestive of organic decomposition
products. The sensation of “uncleanliness” may vary from an odor that resembles
barny or barnyard-like, to that of spoiled feed or the decay of organic matter. These
objectionable sensory characteristics are usually due to proteolytic or lipolytic
activity by spoilage bacteria in milk. The unpleasant aftertaste is often dirty-like,
persistent, and generally objectionable, if not obnoxious.
392 S. Rankin
The USDA definition is somewhat more general and only relies on the antiquated
term “utensil.” Hence, unclean (utensil) is described by USDA terminology thus, “A
flavor that is suggestive of improper or inadequate washing and sanitation of milk-
ing machines, utensils, or manufacturing equipment.” Due to its questionable rele-
vance, the term utensil should probably no longer be used in describing this
off-flavor, yet it still exists in the standards. The activity of spoilage microorganisms
(e.g., psychrotrophs) in residual milk soils that remain on the equipment is respon-
sible for the defect, not the equipment and/or utensils themselves.
Undesirable The USDA uses the term undesirable to describe certain off-flavors
that are in excess of the permitted intensity in specific grades of dried milk products
or for those miscellaneous off-flavors that are not otherwise listed.
Weedy Weedy is a flavor characteristic of certain weeds that may be consumed by

cows that produced some of the raw material used for manufacture of the dried
product. See the dry whey grading standard (USDA, AMS, 2001).
11.28 Terms Describing the Appearance of Dry Products
The reader is advised to review Table 11.11 for a suggested scoring scheme for
physical appearance characteristics of dry milks. USDA grading literature also pro-
vides the following intensity definitions:
Practically Free
Present only upon very critical examination.
Reasonably Free
Present only upon critical examination.
Table 11.11 Suggested scoring guide for the physical appearance characteristics of dry milk
Scores for a given intensity
Defect Slight Moderate Definite Strong Pronounced
Dry:
Caked 2 1 0 0 0
Dark particles 3 2 1 0 0
Lumpy 4 3 2 1 0
Unnatural color 4 3 2 1 0
Color not uniform 4 3 2 1 0
Reconstituted:
Churned particles 3 2 1 0 0
Dark particles 3 2 1 0 0
Grainy 3 2 1 0 0
Undispersed lumps 3 2 1 0 0
“No criticism” is assigned a score of “5.” Normal range is 1–5 for a salable product where 5 repre-
sents a product of ideal appearance character. A score of “0” (zero) is assigned if the product is
determined to be unsalable
Moderately Free
Discernible upon careful examination.
Caked Caked means a hardened mass of powder that results from lactose crystal-
lization. It usually disintegrates into small hard chunks, which are practically undis-
persible in water.
Lumpy Lumpy refers to a nonhomogeneous appearance of dry milk, which is due

to sizeable lumps of agglomerated powder particles. The USDA definition for
lumpy is “Loss of powdery consistency but not caked into hard chunks.”
Reasonably Free Flowing This refers to the ability of the product to flow, in pow-
der form. USDA language is as follows: “Pours in a fairly constant, uniform stream
from the open end of a tilted container or scoop.”
Unnatural/Natural Color Unnatural color refers to an abnormal or atypical color

of the product due to either caramelization of lactose, nonenzymatic browning, or
added color. The USDA defines unnatural color for dry whole milk and nonfat dry
milk as follows: “A color that is more intense than light cream and is brownish, dull
or grey-like.” Conversely, natural color is defined as “A color that is white to
light cream.”
Visible Dark Particles Scorched powder particles or visible extraneous matter is

termed “visible dark particles.” A similar definition is offered by the USDA: “The
presence of scorched or discolored specks.” The American Dairy Products Institute
(see https://www.adpi.org/DairyProducts/tabid/62/Default.aspx) provides publicly
available standards for such particles for a variety of common dried dairy ingredients.
11.29 Terms Describing the Appearance

of Reconstituted Product
Churned Particles Masses of coalesced fat and/or coagulated protein that may
float to the surface (and eventually adhere to the side wall of the container) are gen-
erally called “churned particles.”
Grainy Grainy refers to visible insoluble particles in reconstituted milk products

that distinctly appear granular. This is the only appearance term defined by the
USDA for reconstituted dry products. The USDA definition reads “Minute particles
of undissolved powder appearing in a thin film on the surface of a glass or tumbler.”
Pressure This term refers to the dissolution of lumps as the product is rehydrated
and blended, similar to what will occur during manufacture, and is defined as fol-
lows: “Very slight pressure. Lumps fall apart with only light touch,” “Slight pres-
394 S. Rankin
sure. Only sufficient pressure to disintegrate the lumps readily,” and “Moderate
pressure. Only sufficient pressure to disintegrate the lumps easily.” Intuitively, the
term “undispersed lumps” refers to masses of caked or lumpy powder that do not
readily dissolve in water.
11.30 Terms to Describe Packaging Defects
The product package is not a defined criterion in the USDA grading system.
Documents included in 7 CFR 42 provide general requirements for the condition of
food-grade packaging. The US Dairy Export Council provides some description and
convention regarding adequate packaging design and application for dried dairy
ingredients in their publication, “Reference Manual for U.S. Milk Powders, 2005
revision.” A suggested guide for scoring the package integrity of dry milk products
is illustrated in Table 11.12.
Ruptured Vapor Barrier Any visible mechanical opening in the product package is
referred to as a “ruptured vapor barrier.”
Soiled The unsightly appearance of the package exterior due to adherence of dried
product or any foreign substance is simply called “soiled.”
Unsealed Unsealed refers to a closure that is not secured in such a manner to guar-
antee that access to the product is impossible without breaking or tearing a visible
seal on the product container.
11.31 Laboratory Tests of Dry Dairy Products
Certain laboratory tests are indispensable in helping to assess the quality parameters
of dry dairy products. Analyses provide objective, quantitative measures of hygienic
quality, product composition, rehydration characteristics, possible acidity develop-
ment (as well as evidence of neutralization of excessive acidity), compliance with
minimum pasteurization requirements, and potential keeping-quality
Table 11.12 A suggested scoring guide for the packaging of dry milk
Parameter Score range
Soiled package, graded and scored proportional to the nature 0–5
and quantity of soil
Unsealed package and/or ruptured or defective vapor barrier 0
Any packaging that fails to meet the requirements of regulatory 0
agencies
A score of zero (“0”) is assigned if the defect is so serious (or pronounced in intensity) as to render
the product unsalable
characteristics. Descriptions and procedures used for conducting such assays are
included in several well-recognized resources, listed below for reference.
AOAC, International. (2019) Official Methods of Analysis 21st Ed. Revision 1.
AOAC International, Arlington VA. See www.aoac.org
Standard Methods for the Examination of Dairy Products 17th Ed. (2004) H. M. Wehr
and J.F. Frank eds. American Public Health Association, Inc., Washington
D.C. See www.apha.org
From the U.S. Dairy Export Council (See www.usdec.org).
Reference Manual for U.S. Milk Powders
Reference Manual for U.S. Whey and Lactose Products
From the American Dairy Products institute (See www.adpi.org).
Dry Milks
Concentrated milk
Whey products
The International Dairy Federation (See www.fil-idf.org).
11.32 Methods of Reconstituting Dry Dairy Products

for Flavor Examinations
Limited quantities of reconstituted dry milk and whey products are used as beverage
products in the USA. However, even if they are used only as ingredients in dairy
products or other foods, the sensory properties of reconstituted dry dairy ingredients
must meet desired standards and favorably contribute to the desired quality criteria
of finished product(s). Therefore, a standardized procedure should be devised by
each user for evaluating dry dairy products for determining their suitability as a food
product ingredient. For example, if a poor-quality (off-flavored) NDM is used in ice
cream manufacture, the off-flavor(s) will most likely carry through into the ice
cream. On the other hand, a slightly off-flavor NDM may sometimes be incorpo-
rated into highly flavored products with little negative impact.
Two types of test situations may arise with dry dairy products to be consumed as
a beverage. In acceptability testing using a consumer panel, the product should be
reconstituted in exactly the same manner as the consumer is instructed to do by the
user directions on the container. The temperature at which the reconstituted product
is served in the test should be the typical consumption temperature for the product.
In grading or quality evaluation (discrimination) by trained evaluators or panelists,
conditions are chosen and defined in order to optimize detection of off-flavors but
not exaggerate their intensity; such assessments may include the incorporation of
the ingredient into an authentic dairy food (Lloyd et al., 2004; Caudle et al., 2005;
Drake et al., 2003). Since the perceived intensity of flavor characteristics varies with
temperature, comparative judgments should be made with reconstituted samples at
the same temperature. In most instances, USDA dairy product grading standards
396 S. Rankin
require that products be evaluated within a specific temperature range. However, a

study using trained evaluators and Cheddar cheeses showed that serving tempera-
ture had no impact on panelist or panel performance (Drake et al., 2005).
Normally, grading or quality evaluation should be performed on dry dairy prod-
ucts that are intended as ingredients for other foods. The odor perceived immediately
after the containers are opened should be carefully noted, since it provides an imme-
diate clue to a possible flavor problem. Precautions should be taken to avoid inhaling
powder. The powder should be reconstituted and evaluated under standardized con-
ditions, including a specified ratio of powder to water, source of water, manner of
mixing, temperatures and time interval between reconstitution, and actual testing.
The re-liquefied product should be evaluated in practically the same manner as its
fluid counterpart. The evaluators should know, learn, and “fix-in-mind” the desirable
flavor characteristics of whey, sweet cream, buttermilk, nonfat milk, etc., to which
they must mentally compare the flavor of the reconstituted product.
Distilled water is commonly used for reconstituting dry dairy ingredients for
flavor evaluation, even though tap water is more likely to be used in the home, as
well as in the plant. Since tap water varies in hardness and flavor in different loca-
tions, there is a rationale for specifying distilled water. However, since distilled
water may also vary in sensory properties (depending on residual impurities), a
good precaution is to ensure that the water is relatively tasteless and odorless.
Directions for determining the taste and odor of products derived from reconsti-
tuted milk were prescribed by the USDA as follows:
Reconstitute with an electric mixer 6.5 g of whey, 10 g of nonfat dry milk, or 13 g
of dry whole milk in 100 ml of distilled water. Allow samples to stand 1 hour, stir
thoroughly, and taste at room temperature. Observe odor and taste in a room free
of disturbance and off-odors. Report the flavor as satisfactory or report the off-
flavor in accordance with the appropriate US grade standards.
A directory of Codex Standards for the evaluation of dairy ingredients in found
in the document Codex Stan 234-1999 wherein the sampling method allows an
adjustment based on milkfat content (see IDF 50C and 113A).
11.33 Conclusion
With the ability to provide high nutrition, quality, and functionality, dry dairy ingre-
dients continue to be a strong component of the dairy foods industry, growing in
both volume and diversity. Coupled with the advent of improved manufacturing
technologies as well as novel technologies such as membrane separation systems,
dry dairy ingredients see applications as novel ingredients in a growing number of
food systems. In almost every case, however, dried dairy ingredients remain com-
plex both physically and chemically, requiring a sound, science-based understand-
ing of their properties to maintain the value of these ingredients in an increasingly
competitive market. Sensory assessments continue to provide a frontline of
information detailing the chemical, microbial, and physical properties of dry dairy
ingredients. Routine grading practices as well as formally defined consumer and
trained descriptive methods each have roles in the maintenance and understanding
of manufacturing dry dairy ingredients with desirable flavor and functional
properties.
References
American Dairy Products Institute, Inc. (2002). Standards for grades of dry milks, including meth-
ods of analysis (manual). 57 pp.
American Public Health Association (2004) Standard methods for the examination of dairy prod-
ucts (17th Edition). H.M. Wehr and J.F. Frank eds. American Public Health Association, .
Anderson, M., Brooker, B. E., Cawston, T. E., & Cheeseman, G. C. (1977). Changes during stor-
age in stability and composition of ultra-heat-treated aseptically packed cream of 18% fat con-
tent. The Journal of Dairy Research, 44, 111–123.
AOAC, International. (2019). Official methods of analysis (21st ed.). AOAC International.
Arnold, R. G., Libbey, L. M., & Day, E. A. (1966). Identification of components in the stale flavor
fraction of sterilized concentrated milk. Journal of Food Science, 31, 566–573.
Banavara, D. S., Anupama, D., & Rankin, S. A. (2003). Studies on physicochemical and functional
properties of commercial sweet whey powders. Journal of Dairy Science, 86, 3866–3875.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Andrews, M. V., & Morgan, M. E. (1979). Flavors associated with the use of
Cheddar cheese whey powder in ice cream mix. Journal of Dairy Science, 62(1), 51.
Nostrand Reinhold.
Carunchia-Whetstine, M. E., & Drake, M. A. (2007). Chapter 13: Flavor chemistry of dairy prod-
ucts. In K. R. Cadwallader, M. A. Drake, & R. McGorrin (Eds.), The flavor and flavor stability
of skim and whole milk powders (pp. 217–252). ACS Publishing.
Carunchia-Whetstine, M. E., Parker, J. D., Drake, M. A., & Larick, D. K. (2003). Determining
flavor and flavor variability in commercially produced liquid Cheddar whey. Journal of Dairy
Science, 86, 439–448.
Carunchia-Whetstine, M. E., Croissant, A. E., & Drake, M. A. (2005). Characterization of dried
whey protein concentrate and isolate flavor. Journal of Dairy Science, 88, 3826–3839.
Caudle, A. D., Yoon, Y., & Drake, M. A. (2005). Influence of flavor variability in skim milk pow-
der on consumer acceptability of ingredient applications. Journal of Food Science, 70(7),
S427–S431.
Code of Federal Regulations. (2020). Titles 7 and 21. U.S. Government Printing Office. Electronic
Code of Federal Regulations. Available at: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/ECFR?page=browse.
Date accessed 27 May 2021.
Croissant, A. E., Kang, E. J., Campbell, R. E., Bastian, E., & Drake, M. A. (2009). The effect of
bleaching agent on the flavor of liquid whey and whey protein concentrate. Journal of Dairy
Science, 92, 5917–5927.
Dattatreya, A., & Rankin, S. A. (2006). Moderately acidic pH potentiates browning of sweet whey
powder. International Dairy Journal, 16(2006), 822–828.
Dattatreya, A., Etzel, M. R., & Rankin, S. A. (2007). Kinetics of browning during accelerated stor-
age of sweet whey powder and prediction of its shelf life. International Dairy Journal, 17(2),
177–182.
Davis, R. N. (1939). Some properties of milk powders with particular reference to sweet buttermilk
powders. Journal of Dairy Science, 22, 179–189.
398 S. Rankin
Drake, M. A., Karagul-Yuceer, Y., Cadwallader, K. R., Civille, G. V., & Tong, P. S. (2003).
Determination of the sensory attributes of dried milk powders and dairy ingredients. Journal of
Sensory Studies, 18, 199–216.
Drake, M. A., Yates, M. D., & Gerard, P. D. (2005). Impact of serving temperature on trained panel
perception of Cheddar cheese flavor attributes. Journal of Sensory Studies, 20(2), 147–155.
Drake, M. A., Miracle, R. E., Caudle, A. D., & Cadwallader, K. R. (2006). Chapter 2: Sensory-
directed flavor analysis. In R. Marsili (Ed.), Relating sensory and instrumental analyses
(pp. 23–55). CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Publishing.
Fox, P. F. (1995). In P. F. Fox (Ed.), Heat-induced changes in Milk (2nd ed.). International Dairy
Federation. 455 pp.
Gould, I. A., & Leininger, E. (1947). Composition of the solids which deposit from evaporated
milk during storage. Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Quarterly Bulletin, 30(1), 54.
Graham, D. M., Hutton, J. T., & McIntire, J. M. (1981). Concentrated and dry milks and wheys in
the third quarter of the 20th century. Journal of Dairy Science, 64, 1055–1062.
Hall, C. W., & Hedrick, T. I. (1971). Drying milk and milk products (2nd ed., p. 338). AVI
Publishers.
Hammer, B. W. (1919). Studies on formation of gas in sweetened condensed milk (Iowa agriculture
experiment station research bulletin 54). Iowa State University.
Hunziker, O. F. (1949). Condensed milk and milk powder. Published by the Author. 502 pp.
Karagul-Yuceer, Y., Drake, M. A., & Cadwallader, K. R. (2001). Aroma-active components of
nonfat dry milk. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 49(6), 2948–2953.
Karagul-Yuceer, Y., Cadwallader, K. R., & Drake, M. A. (2002). Volatile flavor components of
stored nonfat dry milk. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 50(2), 305–312.
Karagul-Yuceer, Y., Vlahovich, K. N., Drake, M. A., & Cadwallader, K. R. (2003). Characteristic
aroma components of rennet casein. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 51(23),
6797–6801.
Karagul-Yuceer, Y., Drake, M. A., & Cadwallader, K. R. (2004). Evaluation of the charac-
ter impact odorants in skim milk powder by sensory studies on model mixtures. Journal of
Sensory Studies, 19(1), 1–13.
Kotsanopoulos, K. V., & Arvanitoyannis, I. S. (2015). Membrane processing technology in the
food industry: Food processing, wastewater treatment, and effects on physical, microbiologi-
cal, organoleptic, and nutritional properties of foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and
Nutrition, 55(9), 1147–1175.
Kumar, P., Sharma, N., Ranjan, R., Kumar, S., Bhat, Z. F., & Jeong, D. K. (2013). Perspective
of membrane technology in dairy industry: A review. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal
Sciences, 26(9), 1347–1358. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2013.13082
Lea, C. H., Moran, T., & Smith, J. A. (1943). The gas-packing and storage of milk powder. The
Journal of Dairy Research, 13(2), 162–215.
Lloyd, M. A., Zou, J., Ogden, L. V., & Pike, O. A. (2004). Sensory and nutritional quality of nonfat
dry milk in long-term residential storage. Journal of Food Science, 69(8), S326–S331.
Mahajan, S. S., Goddik, L., & Qian, M. C. (2004). Aroma compounds in sweet whey powder.
Miller, G. D., Jarvis, J. K., & McBean, L. D. (1999). Handbook of dairy foods and nutrition (2nd
ed.). CRC Press. 448 pp.
Mojonnier, T., & Troy, H. C. (1925). The technical control of dairy products. Mojonnier Bros.
Muck, G. A., Tobias, J., & Whitney, R. M. (1963). Flavor of evaporated milk. I. Identification of
some compounds obtained by the petroleum ether solvent partitioning technique from aged
evaporated milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 46, 774–779.
Rice, R. E. (1926). Sweetened condensed milk. VI. Tallowiness. Journal of Dairy Science, 9(5),
459–469.
Rombaut, R., Camp, J. V., & Dewettinck, K. (2006). Phospho- and sphingolipid distribution during
processing of milk, butter and whey. International Journal of Food Science and Technology,
41(4), 435–443.
Russell, T. A., Drake, M. A., & Gerard, P. D. (2006). Sensory properties of whey and soy proteins.
Journal of Food Science, 71(6), S447–S455.
Sano, H., Egashira, T., Kinekawa, Y., & Kitabatake, N. (2005). Astringency of bovine milk whey
protein. Journal of Dairy Science, 88, 2312–2317.
Sato, M. (1923). Sediments of evaporated milk. In Proceedings of world’s dairy congress II,
p. 1284.
Sodini, I., Morin, P., Olabi, A., & Jimenez-Flores, R. (2006). Compositional and functional proper-
ties of buttermilk: A comparison between sweet, sour, and whey buttermilk. Journal of Dairy
Science, 89, 525–536.
Sommer, H. H., & Hart, E. B. (1926). The heat coagulation of evaporated milk. Wisconsin
Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin, 67.
Sundararajan, N. R., Muck, G. A., McL, W. R., & Tobias, J. (1966). Flavor of evaporated milk.
II. Changes in flavor on storage of evaporated milk made by three processes. Journal of Dairy
Science, 49, 169–172.
Thomas, E. L. (1958). Dry milk products scorecard including scoring guide and definition of
terms; report of subcommittee to develop a scorecard for nonfat dry milk. 53rd annual meeting
on American Dairy Science Association.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2017). Grade A pasteurized milk ordinance.
Food and Drug Administration. Available at: https://www.fda.gov/media/114169/download.
Date accessed 26 May 2021.
Whitaker, R. (1931). The feathering of evaporated milk in hot coffee. Journal of Dairy Science,
14, 177–188.
Zabia, A., Buys, E. M., & De Kock, H. L. (2012). Undesirable Sulphur and carbonyl flavor com-
pounds in UHT milk: A review. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 52(1), 21–30.
Chapter 12
Pasteurized Process Cheeses
Stephanie Clark
12.1 Introduction
While natural cheeses tend to form free fat and moisture in cooking applications,
pasteurized process cheeses (often called processed cheese or American cheese) are
made to have smooth, uniform flow when melting occurs. The cooking stage of
process cheese manufacture tends to stop natural cheese aging, thereby extending
the flavor properties of mild- or medium-aged cheeses throughout a much longer
shelf life than would be the case of the natural cheeses from which they are made.
Further processing of natural cheeses affords manufacturers the ability to select
melting properties that range from free-flowing to partially restricted, to full melt
restriction. A free-flowing melt is desirable for hamburgers and in cooking applica-
tions such as macaroni and cheese. Partial melt restriction is typically desired for
cordon bleu applications where some ingredient flow is desired, but the cheese
should not just melt and flow away from the center of the plated item. Full melt
restriction is useful for cheese inclusions within further processed foods, e.g., hot
dogs or sausages. Process cheese products also allow for combinations of flavors,
e.g., American, Swiss, and other cheese blends.
Process cheeses tend to be versatile, and with appropriate control of ingredient
inputs, predictable and consistent for both flavor and texture attributes. These favor-
able characteristics justify the extensive popularity of process cheese foods in the
food service industry. The lower cost compared to natural cheese is another
The author of this revised chapter acknowledges Diane Kussy and Edward Aylward, for their origi-
nal work on this chapter for the 2nd Edition.
S. Clark (*)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_12
402 S. Clark
appealing factor. The retail price of American processed cheese in the USA from
1995 to 2020 has remained very close to $4 per pound ($1.80/kg) (Statista, 2021).
Retail sales of process cheese are not as robust as in food service. US retail process
cheese sales were $2.8 billion during the 52 weeks ending January 26, 2020 (a 1.5%
drop from 2019); natural cheese dollar sales exceeded $13.2 billion in the same
period (a 2.1% rise) (Canning, 2020). The USDA Economic Research Service
reported that total processed cheese consumption in the USA dropped to 7.0 lb. per
capita in 2019 (4.7 for processed cheese; 2.4 for cold pack, cheese foods, and other
processed foods and spreads), while natural cheese per capita consumption reached
38.6 lb.
Much knowledge and manufacture technology about process cheese formulation
and development has historically been proprietary. Hence, much less information
has been published in this product category compared to the more popular varieties
of natural cheese. An excellent review of applicable patents and the proprietary his-
tory involved in the development of the process cheese industry was provided by
Zehren and Nusbaum (1992). Fox et al. (2000) present a comprehensive overview
of process cheese ingredients functionality and their interactions during the manu-
facturing process.
Process cheese manufacture typically involves grinding natural cheese and melt-
ing it with the aid of an emulsifying salt, which interacts with casein. Hydrophobic
regions of casein are unfolded and surround fat droplets, holding them in a stable
process cheese matrix. Emulsifying salts are salts of organic or inorganic acids (e.g.,
sodium phosphates or trisodium citrate); they are not typical oil-in-water interface
compounds (such as lecithin) or other surface active agents that are used to emulsify
margarines. The function of these emulsifying salts in process cheese manufacture
is to exchange sodium ions for calcium and thus facilitate the unfolding of casein,
such that the respective hydrophobic and hydrophilic regions of casein may interact
with additional water and milkfat to form a stable emulsion.
12.2 Product Definitions
Pasteurized process cheese is defined within Title 21 of the Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR, USDHHS, 2021) under three main product categories:
1. Pasteurized Process Cheese (21 CFR133.169)
2. Pasteurized Process Cheese Food (21 CFR133.173)
3. Pasteurized Process Cheese Spread (21 CFR133.179)
These definitions address acceptable/allowed ingredients and final composition of
the cheese. For example, pasteurized process cheeses (process cheeses) are a mix-
ture of natural cheeses, heated with the aid of an emulsifying agent. Generally,
process cheeses must conform to the composition of the natural cheeses from which
they are made, with allowance made for an additional 1% moisture, typically derived
from steam condensate incorporated during the heating step.
12 Pasteurized Process Cheeses 403
Pasteurized process cheese foods (cheese foods) must contain ≥51% natural
cheeses by weight and are allowed to incorporate milk, skim milk, buttermilk, and/
or cheese whey. These optional dairy ingredients may be added to cheese foods by
hydration of their powder forms to produce a slurry for ease of ingredients metering.
Cheese foods are allowed to contain ≤44% moisture and must contain >23% fat.
Pasteurized process cheese spreads (cheese spreads) are allowed to contain all of
the dairy ingredients found in cheese foods, plus functional gums and sweeteners.
Cheese spreads also must contain as an ingredient ≥51% natural cheeses by weight.
US regulations allow cheese spreads to contain between 44% and 60% moisture,
and milkfat must be ≥20%.
The CFR defines many additional types of pasteurized process cheese options,
including but not limited to:
• Pasteurized process cheese with fruits, vegetables, or meats (21 CFR133.170).
They contain one or any mixture of two or more of any properly prepared cooked,
canned, or dried fruit, vegetable, or meat.
• Pasteurized process pimento cheese (21 CFR133.171). They conform to the
identity of pasteurized process cheese with fruits, vegetables, or meats, except
that pimentos, and only pimentos, make up not less than 0.2% of the finished
product weight.
• Pasteurized process cheese food with fruits, vegetables, or meats (21
CFR133.174).
• Pasteurized cheese spread (21 CFR133.175). The product differs from pasteur-
ized process cheese spread only in that no emulsifying agent is allowed.
• Pasteurized process cheese spread with fruits, vegetables, or meats (21
CFR133.180).
For products containing fruits, vegetables, or meats, as with any flavored prod-
uct, the distributions of condiments must be homogenous, and flavorings, colorings,
and textures should not detract from the quality of the underlying cheese.
An important product category that is not defined in the CFR is pasteurized pro-
cess cheese product. Pasteurized process cheese products may have associated fan-
ciful names (e.g., “style,” “loaf,” or “block”). This product category typically falls
outside of existing standards of identity due to the use of ingredients targeting func-
tionality (e.g., starches and/or gums), which are not specifically listed within defini-
tions of pasteurized process cheese or pasteurized process cheese food. Also,
pasteurized cheese products may be so named because they utilize protein sources
such as milk protein concentrates. Cheese analogues made by using vegetable oil
and/or vegetable proteins as an ingredient may sometimes be labeled as a cheese
“product.”
Cold-pack and club cheese (21 CFR133.123), cold-pack cheese food (21
CFR133.124), and Cold-pack cheese food with fruits, vegetables, or meats (21
CFR133.125) are entirely different from pasteurized process cheeses, spreads, and
products in that they are not pasteurized, do not contain emulsifying salts, and may
contain acidifying agents as long as the pH does not drop below 4.5. These products
404 S. Clark
are “prepared by comminuting, without the aid of heat, one or more cheeses of the
same or two or more varieties, except cream cheese, neufchatel cheese, cottage
cheese, low-fat cottage cheese, cottage cheese dry curd, hard grating cheese, semi-
soft part-skim cheese, part-skim spiced cheese and skim milk cheese for manufac-
turing, into a homogeneous plastic mass” (21 CFR133.123). Variations on the them
include “pub cheese,” “spreadable cheese,” and “cheese spread,” which are not
defined by the CFR. In addition to plain, Port wine-flavored cold-pack cheeses and
spreads can readily be found in the market (Figs. 12.1 and 12.2).
Fig. 12.1 A variety of cheese spreads, cheese dips, and pasteurized process cheese products.
(S. Clark image)
Fig. 12.2 A variety of spreadable cheeses and cold pack cheeses. (S. Clark image)
12.3 Sensory Evaluation
The application of sensory evaluation to ingredients and in-process stage changes is

an important element of process cheese manufacture. Cheeses (the primary raw
materials) are graded in a selection process when assembling various cheese blends
for subsequent reprocessing. Although the intended use of finished process cheese
products may have nothing to do with USDA regulations or guidelines, the stan-
dards for cheese grades published by the USDA (7 CFR 58.735; USDHHS, 2021)
are frequently implemented in evaluating the raw materials. These quality assess-
ment grades are based on ratings for flavor, aroma, body, and texture. In addition, a
sensory evaluation of the body and texture properties (i.e., “smear” or “breakdown”
characteristics) of representative cheese samples between the thumb and forefinger
is commonly used to predict the function and performance of selected cheeses
within a blend. Sometimes the objective is to blend out or minimize shortcomings
of certain natural cheese stocks in order to produce flawless process cheese. It is
common industry practice to blend so-called broken down, flavorful natural cheeses
with sources of minimally aged (younger) cheese that typically exhibit a more solid
texture, in order to manufacture a process cheese having sliceable texture with good
flavor characteristics. Young Cheddar or American cheese varieties are most often
chosen as the backbone of US process cheese varieties.
12.3.1 Grading of Raw Materials
Sources of natural cheese for use in process cheese manufacture include a young
variety to serve as a source of intact casein to provide structure in the finished prod-
uct. In the USA, this source is often granular cheese (21 CFR 133.144; USDHHS,
2021), often referred to as “barrel Cheddar.” Cheese flavor may be provided by
older cheese, e.g., aged Cheddar block or from cheese trim coming from cut and
wrap operations that convert block natural cheeses to retail chunk or slices. Trim or
“scrap” from these operations may be very useful sources of flavor when manufac-
turing process cheeses. The natural cheese selected for processing is graded by
using USDA standards for grades, which are primarily sensory tests. For example,
21 CFR 58.711 describes the characteristics of Cheddar cheese to be used in pas-
teurized process cheese manufacture as follows: “Cheese, used in the manufacture
of pasteurized process cheese products should possess a pleasing and desirable taste
and odor consistent with the age of the cheese; should have body and texture char-
acteristics which will impart the desired body and texture characteristics in the fin-
ished product; and should possess finish and appearance characteristics which will
permit removal of all packaging material and surface defects.”
Other dairy ingredients such as nonfat dry milk, butteroil, and buttermilk powder
are graded on a similar basis by using standards defined in Part 58 of 7 CFR. Other
raw materials such as nonfat dry milk and anhydrous milkfat can impart desirable or
406 S. Clark
undesirable flavors to finished products when using these dairy ingredients. It is

prudent to know and assess their flavor characteristics before given lots of such
ingredients are used in process cheese manufacture. Potential off-flavors can become
an issue as certain sources of whey fractions are used as product ingredients. Whey
protein interactions with casein may also result in unpredictable and/or unwanted
texture changes in process cheeses. The use of old or extended storage dairy powder
ingredients (nonfat dry milk, whey, whey protein concentrate, milk protein concen-
trate) often invites stale, storage, cardboard-like, and/or oxidized off-flavors. The
reader is directed to Chap. 11 for a comprehensive overview of the sensory evalua-
tion of various concentrated and dry milk products. In addition to typical milk off-
flavors, e.g., feed, rancid, or oxidized (see Chap. 5), dry dairy ingredients have their
own associated flavors such as cooked, scorched, and lacks freshness (stale). Intense
off-flavors derived from these added ingredients may not be masked in process
cheeses; occasionally these flavor defects may become more pronounced in the fin-
ished product.
High-fat ingredients (e.g., anhydrous milkfat, plastic cream, dry whole milk, or
dry cream) may impart oxidized or definitive feed off-flavors. Raw materials used
for the manufacture of the aforementioned ingredients, as well as adverse storage
conditions and handling practices, can diminish their sensory properties in ways
that may be detectable in process cheeses. Flavor assessment of all these ingredients
should be conducted prior to use in process cheese manufacture. Flavor assessment
of AMF and plastic cream could be conducted similarly to methods described in
Chap. 5 for whipping cream and/or half-and-half; the dry whole milk and dry
creams may be evaluated by first rehydrating the given dry ingredient with good-
quality water at a ratio back to the approximate moisture content of the original
high-fat ingredient.
There are certain off-flavors specific to process cheeses that may arise from the
addition of emulsifying salts or other inclusions. For example, phosphate-
emulsifying salts may contribute to subtle “emulsifier burn” or pronounced “soapy”
flavor defects. Phosphate emulsifiers, especially those having a trisodium phosphate
component, will raise the pH of process cheeses from typical natural cheese near
pH 5.1 to pH 5.8 or higher. As the pH nears or exceeds 6.0, a definite alkaline flavor
will become apparent and, in the extreme, can taste of detergent or soap. These
particular sensory characteristics tend to not be observed in those process cheeses
emulsified with citrates. Process cheese emulsified with trisodium citrate is typi-
cally in the pH 5.4 range.
Acids used for flavor and/or pH adjustment of process cheeses may suffice to
contribute either desirable or undesirable sensory properties. Up to 0.25% of acetic
acid may mimic flavors typical of “sharp” natural cheeses; however, acetic acid used
in excess may impart vinegar-like flavors to process cheese. Lactic acid is naturally
occurring in cheeses used for the manufacture of process cheeses but may contrib-
ute metallic off-flavors if added in excess of 0.25–0.30%. Lactic acid and acetic acid
may be used in combination to adjust pH and to drive desirable acidic flavors but
should not exceed 0.40% of typical process cheese formulas.
Sugars or maltodextrin may be used in process cheese spread manufacture to

balance the sensory properties of added acids. Sugars, obviously, may also impart
atypical sweet taste notes. Excessive lactose from whey powders may crystallize
within a process cheese matrix. Unfortunately, consumers have been known to per-
ceive formed lactose crystals as bits or shards of glass, thus potentially leading to
market withdrawals and most adverse publicity. Maltodextrin imparts less sweet-
ness than either sugars or corn syrup solids; however, maltodextrin may contribute
a slightly sweet flavor to process cheeses.
The addition of starter culture distillate to process cheese can impart fresh cheese
or buttery flavor notes, but if added in excess, the finished product may seem artifi-
cial and/or popcorn-like. Certain yeast extracts may provide flavor notes that simu-
late aged natural cheese, but they may also impart an undesirable flavor or an
aftertaste.
Added colorants do not typically provide flavor but are often diluted in a vegeta-
ble oil carrier. Vitamins and food coloring are often diluted in vegetable oil to facili-
tate adding small quantities to batches of process cheeses. The sensory properties of
some vegetable oils may adversely influence sensory properties of process cheeses.
Cardboard-like, oxidized, and other lipolytic vegetable oil off-flavors are undesir-
able. The sensory attributes of any vegetable oil used as a product ingredient may
adversely affect process cheese flavor. Oxidized off-flavors in process cheeses may
also be derived from the vegetable oil source used either as a colorant or as a vita-
min carrier. Vegetable oil vitamin carriers may also be perceived as imparting grassy
flavor to process cheeses.
Sorbic or propionic acids may be incorporated as antimycotics on consumer cuts
(sliced, diced, shredded) of process cheeses. These mold preservatives may contrib-
ute to undesirable acidic or mouthfeel “burning” sensory characteristics.
“Non-standard of identity” ingredients, such as enzyme-modified cheese (EMC),
are evaluated by appearance and aroma. Some EMC sources may have a profound
effect on process cheese flavor. EMC aroma may be monitored, but the associated
flavor characteristics are typically so intense that it is impractical to try to evaluate
directly. Employing EMC as an ingredient in processed cheese creates a need for
closely monitoring all finished products for flavor character contributions derived
from the EMC. Enzymatic breakdown of natural cheese protein and lipids to inten-
tionally create pronounced cheese-like flavors leads to the ability to use small quan-
tities of EMC to lend natural cheese flavor to process cheeses made from mild
natural cheeses which may otherwise not provide much flavor.
12.3.2 Evaluation of Finished Product
Evaluation of quality attributes of the finished products is essential to guarantee

consistency from batch to batch. The USDA has issued guidelines for evaluation of
the quality attributes of pasteurized process cheeses (7 CFR 58.736; USDHHS,
2021). These guidelines include flavor, body and texture, color, finish, and
408 S. Clark
appearance. Zehren and Nusbaum (1992) make reference to sensory evaluation of

process cheese with the following observation: “The organoleptic properties are
specified in the agreed upon standards between the process cheesemaker and his
customer. The customer usually has specific requirements or the process cheese-
maker has specific quality requirements to distinguish his brand. One customer may
desire a high flavored, high melt, softer bodied cheese while another may desire a
bland flavored low melting firm resilient body or in contrast a cheese that is hard and
brittle. For that reason, there is not a single unique quality standard for judging
process cheeses. The product needs to be judged against its standard.”
When establishing a “gold standard” or reference formulas, processors must be
attentive to the tendency for ingredient characteristics to change. As natural cheese
manufacturers adapt their processes to increase cheese yield and gain production
efficiency in their facilities, the performance and flavor characteristics of natural
cheese sources may change. The young Cheddar cheese sourced from a given plant
several years ago may be quite different from the same young Cheddar obtained
from that plant today.
Some detailed sensory testing methods for evaluating process cheese are given in
Process Cheese Manufacture; a JOHA™ Guide; edited by Prof. Dr. H. Klostermeyer
(1998). These tests are pertinent to process cheese manufactured for European mar-
kets. The testing methods are applicable to process cheese manufactured anywhere,
even though the targets or goals for specific attributes may be different in the USA
from those in Europe. Guidance is also provided by M. A. Thomas (1977) in The
Processed Cheese Industry for product evaluation and quality control protocols;
however, these guidelines are somewhat generic. In addition, various instruments
for measuring finished product firmness, crumbliness, and stickiness have been
developed or adapted for process cheese manufacture. Although these instruments
serve to add some degree of enhanced objectivity to measurement of these body and
texture attributes, the contemporary process cheese industry tends to make these
particular evaluations by subjective observation.
The sensory attributes of the cheese sources being processed (see Chaps. 9 and
14) should be somewhat evident in pasteurized process cheese. Process Swiss
cheese should exhibit flavors characteristic of natural Swiss cheese. Process
Monterey Jack may be difficult to distinguish from typical American process cheese
(other than shade of color), but there should be some element of acidity and moder-
ate salty taste typical of the natural cheese from which it was made. Stated in other
words – you do not necessarily need a whole new set of flavor descriptor terms
specific to process cheeses.
One of the appealing things about process cheese is the ability to “set” or lock in
the flavor of a natural cheese while terminating the aging or ripening process. At the
same time, common defects or quality shortcomings of natural cheeses may possi-
bly become sensory attributes of process cheese. The use of too much natural cheese
having a distinct bitter taste will result in a bitter-tasting process cheese. Use of a
highly acidic natural cheese typically results in a most acidic-tasting process cheese
with associated texture defects such as too firm and/or brittle. Process blue cheese
should taste like blue, not like a shoe.
When evaluating the sensory properties of pasteurized process cheeses, it is use-

ful to develop a sensory language or lexicon or vocabulary list and to use that sen-
sory language to provide the clients or colleagues common and accepted flavor,
texture, and mouthfeel definitions. Without an agreed-upon lexicon, cheese proces-
sors risk carrying on endless product development cycles in an attempt to reach
sensory attributes the two parties have not clearly defined. Dealing with numerous
lots of rework is a costly aspect of product development. Sensory lexicons have
been published for a wide variety of foods, e.g., Indian cuisine (Uhl, 2000), olive oil
(Frank, 2000), dried dairy ingredients (Drake et al., 2003), chocolate milk
(Thompson et al., 2004), and cheeses (Drake et al., 2001, 2005, 2010). The reader
is referred to Chap. 17, which provides an overview of lexicon development and
applications to many cheeses and dairy products. Table 12.1 offers a lexicon of sen-
sory attributes focused on process cheeses. Included are descriptions of defined
attributes and recommendations for mimicking suggested flavor or aroma attributes
of processed cheese via standards that can help focus product development and
quality assurance endeavors.
Texture is a key component of the sensory evaluation of process cheeses. Simple
manipulation of a process cheese sample with the fingers can reveal a great deal of
information regarding breakdown and smear characteristics. These characteristics
may also be identified with a targeted lexicon of texture attributes, and those attri-
butes in turn may be linked to objective measurements of process cheese firmness,
e.g., texture analyzer force readings. Lexicon definitions should be tied as closely as
possible to expected process cheese usage or customer expectations for flavor and
performance. Further objective tests based upon customer use of process cheese
should be clearly identified in written standard operating procedures (SOP).
Process cheese sensory scorecards are useful tools for use in sensory evaluation.
Scorecards may clearly define expected flavor and texture characteristics using a
company’s lexicon or may be more free-flowing with suggested attributes for evalu-
ators to use to guide their sensory comments. It is also possible to create a sensory
scorecard typical of those used in collegiate dairy product evaluation competitions.
These scorecards include a lexicon and suggested scores to be assigned for each
sensory attribute when identified at slight, definite, or pronounced intensity
(Table 12.2).
12.4 Applications Testing
12.4.1 Sauces
When a processor realizes that a specific form of process cheese is used as a primary
ingredient in an application such as sauces, then it is customary to evaluate sensory
properties in that particular application. When making sauces from process cheese,
the quality assurance entity needs to define standard operating procedures (SOP) for
410 S. Clark
Table 12.1 Terms used to describe sensory attributes commonly observed in process cheese
Attribute Description Reference
Aged cheese; Sulfurous aromatic typically associated with Natural Cheddar cheese aged 9
sulfur aged Cheddar cheese, hard boiled eggs, and or more months; sulfur may be
struck matches simulated using mashed boiled
egg
Browned/ Sweet, browned aromatics associated with Browned, melted cheese; or
toasted slight overheating toasted bread
Burnt Harsh aromatic associated with overheating Burnt toast
Diacetyl Aromatic associated with the chemical Diacetyl, 20 ppm
(buttery) compound diacetyl
Cardboardy Aromatics reminiscent of wet cardboard, also Wet piece of cardboard or
(oxidized) described as flat or stale brown paper sack, old nonfat
dry milk or old milk protein
concentrate
Milkfat Sweet aromatics associated with milkfat and Fresh whipping cream, delta
(creamy) lactone compounds found in milkfat octalactone, 100 ppm
Sour aromatic Sour aromatics reminiscent of the Cultured sour cream
fermentation of milk products
Unclean (dirty Sharp, sweaty, aromatics that also generally Kasseri or gruyere cheeses
socks) provide a lingering unpleasant aftertaste
Fruity Nonspecific fruity aromatic reminiscent of Fresh pineapple or canned
ripe fruit pineapple juice
Free fatty acid Aromatic associated with short-chain free Feta or Romano cheese; butyric
(rancid) fatty acids primarily butyric acid. At low acid, 200 ppm
concentrations, this is often perceived as a
delayed response after swallowing or
expectorating
Methyl ketone Sweet aromatic or flavor suggestive of Blue cheese, 2-octanone,
methyl ketones, typical of blue cheese 50 ppm
Musty Earthy aromatic reminiscent of a poorly Potting soil, geosmin, 10 ppb
ventilated cellar, musty hay or mold
Old oil Flat, stale, rancid oil flavor, and aroma Aldehyde (C9; nonanal) or
(rancid-like) aldehyde (C10; decanal) or old
margarine
Soapy Phosphate flavor characteristic of oxidized EMC powder with a lauric acid
fats and long-chain fatty acids component, or lauric acid,
500 ppm
Yeasty Aroma and flavor of fermented bread dough Brewer’s yeast
Acetaldehyde Pungent, penetrating aroma, and taste of 1% acetaldehyde in water; fresh
green apple plain yogurt; fresh asiago
cheese
Brothy Aromatics associated with boiled meat or Canned potatoes; beef broth
vegetable soup stock cubes, methional, 10 ppm
Cooked Aromatics of cooked milk Skim or 2% milk heated to
85 °C for 30 min
(continued)

Attribute Description Reference
Nutty Aromatics typically associated with nuts Lightly toasted unsalted
hazelnuts or walnuts; wheat
germ, 2/3-methyl butanal,
500 ppm
Whey (whey Aroma and flavor of cheese whey Fresh cheddar whey
taint)
Sweet taste Like sugar; basic taste which triggers taste Sucrose solution (80 g/1000 ml)
receptors
Sour taste Basic taste which triggers taste receptors. Citric acid solution
(acidic) Sharply acidic vinegary or tart (0.88 g/1000 ml)
Salty taste Salty taste at an intensity beyond expectation Salt water solution
(7 g/1000 ml)
Bitter A basic taste sensation (somewhat delayed) Caffeine (0.44 g/500 ml)
similar to strong black coffee, quinine, or
tonic water
Umami Basic taste associated with nucleotides and Monosodium glutamate (5%
monosodium glutamate solution)
Astringent Mouthfeel sensation, elicits a drying, Alum in water (0.3 g/100 ml)
puckering sensation of the oral tissues
Source: Adapted from Drake et al. (2001, 2003, 2005)
(1) the pertinent dilution factor and (2) the relative quality of the diluent(s) used.
Hard water or water that contains iron or sulfur may adversely impact sauce sensory
properties. The quality of milk used and whether it is fat-free, whole, fresh, a con-
centrated form, or reconstituted milk may also suffice to markedly influence sauce
sensory properties. For some applications, the end product user may wish to include
typical condiments (e.g., green chili peppers), but this will complicate efforts to
evaluate the sensory properties of the process cheese used to form the sauce.
Appropriate communications with marketing and the sales force help to define typi-
cal product use conditions. Perhaps a process cheese sauce will be boiled, then
cooled either slowly or rapidly, and conceivably be used immediately or over an
extended period of time. Responsible QA entities will want to write their SOP pro-
tocols to be as predictive and as relevant as possible of what all product customers
will see and experience during typical process cheese usages.
12.4.2 Cast Slices
Process cheeses earmarked for cast slices are typically made with sodium citrate or
a blend of sodium citrate and sodium phosphate. This form of process cheese forms
a band on a wide moving belt that is cooled from the opposite side (Klostermeyer,
1998). Cheese is cooled most rapidly compared to block process cheeses. Cooled
bands of cheese are formed with a knife, then layered, cut, and packaged. To avoid
412 S. Clark
Table 12.2 Examples of process cheese evaluation scorecard

Slight Definite Pronounced
Appearance criticisms
Browning 4 2 1
Gassy 4 2 1
Greasy 3 2 1
Matte 4 3 1
Pinking 3 2 1
Body and texture criticisms
Chalky 4 2 1
Pasty 3 2 1
Sandy 3 2 1
Short/brittle 3 2 1
Too firm 4 2 1
Too soft 4 2 1
Flavor criticisms
Bitter 9 7 4
Fermented, fruity 8 6 5
Flat, lacks flavor 9 8 7
Garlic, onion, weedy 6 4 1
Heated, cooked 9 8 7
High acid, sour 9 7 5
Malty 8 7 6
Metallic 7 5 3
Moldy, musty 7 5 3
Rancid, lipase, putrid 6 4 1
Sulfide, skunky 9 7 4
Unclean, dirty 8 6 5
Whey taint, sour whey 8 7 5
Yeasty 6 4 1
Barny 8 6 5
Brothy 8 6 5
Brown or toasted 9 8 7
Burnt 6 4 1
Cultured 9 8 6
Dairy sweet 9 8 7
Emulsifier burn 7 5 3
Goaty 5 3 1
Milkfat (lactone) 9 8 7
Nutty 9 8 7
Modeled after Table 9.3 Sensory Evaluation of Cheddar Cheese
air holes and subsequent weak places in the band of cheese or difficulty achieving
target weight for a stack of slices, a vacuum chamber is often included within the
processing line for manufacturing cast slices. Loss of moisture may be calculated,
and adjustments then made so that finished product meets composition targets.
Vacuum treatment will also remove some volatile flavor components. In some situ-
ations, this may be an end product quality advantage, but this product treatment can
also result in a blander flavor of cast slices.
Enzyme-modified cheeses (EMC) or a small quantity of aged cheese may be
incorporated into cast slice formulas to compensate for the vacuum effect upon fla-
vor intensity reduction. The use of aged cheese is limited in this application since
the use of young cheese is necessary to achieve ribbon texture. Enzyme-modified
cheeses may present flavor challenges of their own. Technologies for EMC making
and commercial EMC options have improved dramatically in recent years; however,
cast slice manufacturers must still be alert to excessive lipolysis or proteolysis and
associated rancid, soapy, or bitter off-flavors. A light coating of vegetable lecithin –
typically in refined, bleached, and deodorized vegetable oil – is applied to one sur-
face of cast slices to prevent or limit sticking. However, a mild vegetable oil flavor
may be detectable if cheese age and EMC use do not compensate for this process
treatment.
Flavor of cast slices may be evaluated at the same time as visual color evaluation,
surface appearance, stickiness/slice separation, “roll” test for resilience, and ribbon
uniformity are being conducted, typically at scheduled intervals throughout manu-
facture. Slice aroma and flavor may be evaluated in an adjacent, designated labora-
tory area separate from the manufacturing line in order to not violate the obligatory
“no eating” good manufacturing practice. The “roll” test involves rolling up a slice
in the direction it was cast and also rolling a slice in the direction opposite casting.
Slices should be resilient and should roll and unroll in each direction without crack-
ing or breaking. Slice separation is evaluated at this time, as well, and provides a
first indication of whether lecithin spray is effective or cheese texture is correct, so
that foodservice operations working with loaves of cast slices can easily separate
slices for application to burgers or other sandwich-like applications.
The more or less objective melt test is supplemented by the visual appraisal of
the appearance of the melted product including smooth or rough surface and degree
of browning. Excessive bubbling may indicate that the process cheese emulsion
contains water that is not tightly bound. Browning during the melt test may suggest
Fig. 12.3 Bulk “American Cheese” cast slices or “singles”. (S. Clark image)
414 S. Clark
Fig. 12.4 Examples of some of the options available in the market, including pasteurized process
cheese products, pasteurized process cheese spread with peppers, pasteurized prepared cheese
products, imitation process cheese foods, and reduced fat pasteurized prepared cheese products.
(S. Clark image)
excessive lactose. Appearance information from the melt test may therefore lead
formulators to examine choice and quantity of emulsifying agents, lactose level, or
total moisture. Melt properties should be evaluated with as much understanding of
customer expectations as possible so the result can help in creating robust formulas
(Figs. 12.3 and 12.4).
12.4.3 Package Conformation and Integrity
Five-pound net weight rectangular loaves of process cheeses are evaluated for uni-
formity and conformity of rectangle dimensions. While not typically hermetically
sealed, there will be some evaluation of seal integrity as well as ease of opening and
removing the packaging film. Unless the process cheese is of high moisture, e.g.,
spread, the liner should not stick to the cheese surface nor should process cheese
break off with the packaging upon opening. When the package is removed, the
cheese surface should be smooth and glossy. Air pockets at one surface are com-
mon, but should not be pronounced. Five-pound loaves of process cheese are typi-
cally sliced for retail sale in subunits of 0.5- or 1-pound net weight. Finished product
evaluation will include some measure of how well the cheese slices, whether there
is smearing on the slicer blade and whether slices tend to stick together after slicing.
Aroma and flavor should be typical of the natural cheese variety from which loaf
process cheese is made.
Cast slices in 5-pound loaf format should have good package conformity. If the
package appears squashed or slumped, this is a quick indication of lack of body. The
formula may need emulsifier adjustment or a shift toward younger natural cheese.
The package should not force out at the sides under gravity but should retain rectan-
gular conformity. Upon opening, cast slices should appear glossy and smooth. There
should not be any mottling from uncooked curd particles or burnt particles. Cast
slices rolled between the fingers should be resilient rather than brittle. Cast slices
should separate easily and should not feel tacky to the touch. These are often applied
to sandwiches in restaurant settings, so functionality evaluations should be
approached from the intended use point of view. The aroma and flavor of cast pro-
cess cheese slices should be typical of the natural cheese variety from which they
are made.
12.5 Conclusion
Process cheeses continue to be a large and important segment of the total cheese
market in the USA. Process cheeses offer the whole range of natural cheese flavor
possibilities with improved hot flow properties and targeted texture characteristics.
Flavor evolution, e.g., mild to medium to sharp Cheddar cheese, does not take place
in process cheeses. Mild Cheddar process cheese will remain mild throughout its
expected life. Texture may be selected across a broad range from soft and easily
spread to firm enough to slice or cube. Flow when heated is more uniform in process
than natural cheeses and can be targeted to free-flowing or completely restricted
from flow depending upon customer performance requirements.
Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) contains standard of identity
definitions for pasteurized process cheese, pasteurized process cheese food, and
pasteurized process cheese spread. CFR standards provide moisture maxima and
minimum fat percentages for each category. In addition to these defined categories,
process cheese “product” includes styles that do not meet CFR definitions due to the
use of milk protein concentrates, vegetable fats or which fall outside the fat, or
moisture ranges of the CFR categories.
Sensory evaluation of the natural cheeses used to manufacture process cheeses is
critical to achieving flavor and texture targets. Flavorful cheese may be combined
with mild cheese to achieve an intermediate level of cheese flavor. Additionally,
blending young cheese with older cheese provides a backbone of intact casein
which is useful in developing process cheese texture. Generally speaking, natural
cheese should have a pleasing flavor typical of the variety represented. In addition
to natural cheese, other dairy ingredients affect the sensory properties of process
cheeses and cheese products.
Sensory evaluation of process cheeses often involves creation of a target or “gold
standard”. Differences in raw material age and sensory characteristics may make
416 S. Clark
this challenging. Another useful tool for the sensory evaluation of process cheeses
is creation of a lexicon of terms to be used in evaluating process cheese samples.
Process cheeses, cheese foods, cheese spreads, and cheese products provide con-
sumers a wide variety of ways to enjoy the flavor of natural cheese varieties with
enhanced flavor stability and targeted texture characteristics. By applying sensory
evaluation practices from this text and those targeted to process cheeses in this
chapter, manufacturers can help to assure that their process cheese items deliver
sustainability to their enterprise by consistently meeting or exceeding customer
expectations.
References
Canning, K. (2020). Natural cheese is on a natural high. Dairy Foods. Available at: https://
www.dairyfoods.com/articles/94221-natural-cheese-is-on-a-natural-high. Date accessed 20
May 2021.
Drake, M. A., McIngvale, S. C., Cadwallader, K. R., & Civille, G. V. (2001). Development of a
descriptive sensory language for Cheddar cheese. Journal of Food Science, 66, 1422–1427.
Drake, M. A., Keziah, M. D., Gerard, P. D., Delahunty, C. M., Sheehan, C., Turnbull, R. P., &
Dodds, T. M. (2005). Comparison of cross-cultural differences between lexicons for descriptive
analysis of Cheddar cheese flavor in Ireland, New Zealand, and the United States. International
Dairy Journal, 15, 473–483.
Drake, S. L., Yates, M. D., & Drake, M. A. (2010). Development of a sensory lexicon for processed
and imitation cheeses. Journal of Sensory Studies, 25, 720–739.
Fox, P. F., Guinee, T. O., Cogan, T. M., & McSweeney, P. L. H. (2000). Fundamentals of cheese
science. Springer, 638 pp.
Frank, P. (2000). Premier salad dressings. Food Products and Design, 10(4), 36–63.
Klostermeyer, H. (editor). (1998). Processed cheese manufacture; A JOHA® guide. BK Ladenburg
GmbH (Germany), 238 pp.
Statista. (2021). Retail price of American processed cheese in the United States from 1995 to 2020.
Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/236861/retail-price-of-processed-cheese-in-
the-united-states/. Date accessed 20 May 2021.
Thomas, M. A. (1977). The processed cheese industry. Department of Agriculture, New South
Wales Bulletin D44 First Edition.
commercial chocolate milks. Journal of Food Science, 69(11/12), S406–S413.
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (USDHHS). (2021). Electronic code of federal
regulations. Available at: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/ECFR?page=browse. Date accessed 20
May 2021.
Uhl, S. R. (2000). Flavors of India. Food Products and Design, 10(4), 65–75.
Zehren, V. L., & Nusbaum, D. D. (1992). Process cheese. Cheese Reporter Publishing Company,
Inc., 376 pp.
Chapter 13
Cultured Cream Products
Stephanie Clark
13.1 Introduction
Archeologists place the time of the earliest use of milk fermentation at approxi-
mately 8000 bc. Until the European Middle Ages, the so-called let-it-be method of
milk fermentation was interfered with minimally. An early publication of the US
Department of Agriculture surprisingly recommended souring cream at the farm-
stead by permitting unpasteurized cream to incubate at room temperature “until it
thickens, assumes a glossy appearance, and is mildly sour.” The same publication
emphasized that a safer, more consistent product would result from cream pasteuri-
zation and cooling, followed by inoculation with a starter culture (White, 1917). In
many contemporary parts of the world, milk fermentation is still entrusted to wild
species of microflora.
Historically, every human culture that has produced and consumed dairy prod-
ucts has developed its own traditional fermented milk products. Typically, locally
produced fermented dairy products become closely identified with that region of the
world from which they derived. Interestingly, fermented foods carry a dispropor-
tionate share of a given culture’s identity. The wines, cheeses, breads, sausages, and
other fermented meat products, fish, and fermented vegetables tend to become cen-
tral elements of a given region’s or nation’s uniqueness and/or distinctiveness.
Fermented or cultured milks and cream-based products are a frequent or common
product category.
The author of this revised chapter acknowledges the original authors, Michael Costello, for setting
the groundwork by writing about sour cream for the second Edition.
S. Clark (*)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_13
418 S. Clark
This chapter will focus on spoonable cultured cream products, namely, cultured
sour cream, crema Mexicana agria (Mexican-style sour cream), crème fraîche, mas-
carpone, and cream cheese, and their reduced fat versions (light, lite, low fat, non-
fat). Cultured butter is covered in the chapter about butter.
The goal of this chapter is to (1) review manufacturing procedures as well as
faults that may yield less than satisfactory sour cream and other fermented milk
products; (2) provide the reader with a list of sensory characteristics found in the
preferred or “ideal” sour cream and related cultured milk products; and (3) provide
a vocabulary that will assist in communicating sensory attributes that a quality
assurance manager might convey to the production supervisor and/or manufactur-
ing team.
One form of a popular cultured cream product that recurs under different names
but in slightly different forms globally is known in the USA by the simple descriptor
“sour cream.” Variations from the US version are primarily in milkfat content and
local preferences as to the ideal level of acidity (sourness) and/or viscosity. In addi-
tion, the product’s final use or food application varies from country to country.
Hence, the consistency and the stability of cultured creams vary accordingly.
Cultured sour cream in the USA is commonly used as a convenient flavorful top-
ping, plain or flavored chip dips, baked desserts and pies ingredient, cake topping
component, and/or as a key ingredient in various warm or hot foods such as casse-
roles and stroganoff (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997). The French counterpart, crème
fraîche, is typically used as a cold topping for fruit or cakes or as a foundation for
sauces (Meunier-Goddik, 2004). The Italian soft cream product often used in des-
sert applications (e.g., Tiramisu), mascarpone, is not a cultured cream product but
thermal-acid-coagulated cream product. The popular firm version of cultured cream,
cream cheese, is available in blocks. Modified, lower-fat versions, “cream cheese
spread,” “whipped cream cheese spread,” and various flavored versions, are avail-
able in tubs throughout the USA. The reduced fat version (1/3 less fat), Neufchatel,
is also available in blocks and tubs. Classic cheesecake is made with cream cheese
but can also be made with Neufchatel.
Wherever it is manufactured and whatever its precise composition, cultured
creams represent an example of dairy food processors taking advantage of and ulti-
mately exerting aesthetic control over processes that would occur naturally – cream-
ing and souring. Once dairy manufacturers learned to exert measures of control over
cream fermentation processes, they commenced to create more consistent products
that satisfied the sensory and functional requirements of consumers and food-
service users.
13.2 Standards of Identity
Sour Cream
The US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR, USFDA, 2022c) Sec. 131.160, 2019
defines “sour cream” or “cultured sour cream” as the food that “results from the
13 Cultured Cream Products 419
souring, by lactic acid producing bacteria, of pasteurized cream. Sour cream con-
tains not less than 18% milkfat; except that when the food is characterized by the
addition of nutritive sweeteners or bulky flavoring ingredients, the weight of the
milkfat is not less than 18% of the remainder obtained by subtracting the weight of
such optional ingredients from the weight of the food; but in no case does the food
contain less than 14.4% milkfat. Sour cream has a titratable acidity of not less than
0.5%, calculated as lactic acid.”
Optional ingredients for sour cream products include:
1. Safe and suitable ingredients that improve or enhance body and texture, prevent
syneresis (water separation), impact flavor, or extend the shelf life of the product.
2. Sodium citrate in an amount not more than 0.1% may be added to the product
base prior to culturing as an aroma compound (diacetyl) precursor.
3. Rennet (optionally for potential body and texture enhancement).
4. Safe and suitable nutritive sweeteners (limited use in North America).
5. Salt (to potentiate flavor).
6. Possible flavoring ingredients, with or without safe and suitable coloring, as
follows:
(i) Fruit and fruit juice (including concentrated fruit and fruit juice)
(ii) Safe and suitable natural and artificial food flavoring
Additionally, reduced fat, light, lite, and fat-free sour creams are manufactured
and must meet the following criteria. In order to be labeled “reduced fat sour cream,”
the final product must contain a minimum 25% reduction in fat content and contain
“13.5% or less of total fat when compared to sour cream meeting minimum compo-
sitional requirements for fat” (USDA, 2000). To be labeled “light” or “lite,” the sour
cream product must deliver at least a 50% reduction in fat and contain “9.0% or less
of total fat when compared to sour cream meeting minimum compositional require-
ments for fat” (USDA, 2000). Finally, so-called nonfat sour cream is permitted to
contain “less than 0.5 g of fat per 50 g of product and less than 1.0% total fat”
(USDA, 2000).
Standards for the minimum titratable acidity remain consistent for all sour cream
products – namely, ≥0.5%. Whatever the specific final milkfat content, the product
quality goal of the sour cream manufacturer should be achievement of a “relatively
heavy, smooth appearing, viscous product, that exhibits a glossy sheen and should
possess a pleasant acidic taste, and a buttery-like (diacetyl) aroma” (Bodyfelt, 1981;
Connolly et al., 1984).
Acidified sour cream, also defined in the CFR (USFDA, 2022c; Sec. 131.162),
differs from sour cream in that lactic acid bacteria are not required for its produc-
tion. A suitable acidifying agent may be used instead.
Sour cream in the USA is typically marketed in wide-mouthed polypropylene
tubs. Consumer-sized packaging will range from 228 to 455 g (8 to 16 oz), with
food-service containers weighing as much as 1362 g (3 lb) (Fig. 13.1).
420 S. Clark
Fig. 13.1 A variety of sour cream brands, sizes, container styles, and fat contents are available in
the marketplace. (S. Clark images)
Fig. 13.2 Crema Mexicana (table cream) and Crema Mexicana agria (sour cream) are sold by
multiple producers, in multiple packaging formats. (S. Clark images)
Crema Mexicana Agria

Crema Mexicana agria, or Mexican sour cream, is not defined in the US Code of
Federal Regulations. Crema Mexicana agria should not be confused with Crema
Mexicana (table cream) (Fig. 13.2). Crema is made essentially the same way as sour
cream, but the fat content tends to be higher (20–30%, depending on brand). Salt is
sometimes added.
Crème Fraîche
Crème fraîche, the French equivalent of cultured sour cream, is not defined in the
US CFR. It is distinguished from the American product primarily in its fat content,
the absence of stabilizers, and by its milder (less sour) flavor (Meunier-Goddik,
2004). Crème fraîche, or more correctly, crème fraîche épaisse fermentée, possesses
a fat content between 30% and 45%.
Mascarpone
Mascarpone is not defined in the US CFR. Although similar in flavor, body, and
texture to crème fraîche, mascarpone is not cultured and is produced in a different
fashion. Fat content ranges widely in the marketplace, from about 27% to about
43%. Retail packaging is typically stout 8-ounce polypropylene tubs (Fig. 13.3).
Cream Cheese
The US CFR (USFDA, 2022a; Sec 133.133) defines cream cheese as the soft,
uncured cheese prepared from pasteurized milk, nonfat milk, or cream, cultured
with lactic acid bacteria, used alone or in combination, and clotting enzymes of
animal, plant, or microbial origin, with or without optional ingredients (e.g., salt,
whey, stabilizers (≤0.5%)). The final product must have a minimum fat content of
33% by weight and maximum moisture of 55% by weight.
Neufchatel cheese, the reduced fat version of cream cheese, is very similar to
cream cheese. The milkfat content is not less than 20% but less than 33% by weight
(1/3 less fat than cream cheese); moisture content is 65% by weight (USFDA,
2022b; CFR Sec. 133.162). Instead of using the name Neufchatel, sometimes cream
cheese is marketed as reduced fat cream cheese (1/3 less fat than regular cream
cheese) (Fig. 13.4).
Fig. 13.3 A variety of

plain and flavored
mascarpone products.
(S. Clark image)
422 S. Clark
Fig. 13.4 A variety of reduced fat cream cheese products displaying a range of fat content from
0% to 16%. (S. Clark images)
The CFR (Sec. 133.134) defines “cream cheese with other foods” as cream
cheese mixed with one or a mixture of two or more types of foods (except other
cheeses). The maximum moisture must not exceed 60% by weight, and milkfat
must not be less than 27% of the finished food. Stabilizers must not exceed 0.8%.
Such foods must be called “cream cheese with ___” or “cream cheese and ___” with
the blank indicating the name of the food(s) in order of predominance by weight.
Additionally, “pasteurized Neufchatel cheese spread with other foods” is specified
(Sec. 133.178) to not exceed 65% in water content and not be less than 20% fat by
weight of the finished food. Commercial products should be called “pasteurized
Neufchatel cheese spread with ___” (where the blank contains the common names
of the food(s) added).
Fig. 13.5 Flavored, whipped, and flavored whipped cream cheese spreads, reflecting a range in fat
composition from 15% to 33% fat and a variety of flavors from sweet to savory. (S. Clark images)
Other variations of cream cheese include “cream cheese spreads” (e.g., plain,
strawberry, honey pecan, chive and onion, etc.), “whipped cream cheese spread,” as
well as “Greek cream cheese” or “Greek cream cheese spread” (Figs. 13.5 and
13.6). The composition of these products is not specified in the CFR, and fat com-
position among commercial brands ranges from 13 to 35%. The “Greek” varieties
tout the extra protein (three to four times) compared to regular cream cheese.
Cream cheeses are marketed in a multitude of packaging options, including
food-service tubs, plastic, foil, and single-serve polypropylene cups, as well as con-
sumer foil-sealed and 8-oz polypropylene tubs.
424 S. Clark
Fig. 13.6 Greek cream cheese, prominently displaying fat and protein content in comparison to
regular cream cheese. (S. Clark image)
13.3 Manufacturing Methods
The following discussion describes a typical process for making cultured cream
products. There are certainly variations to the methods described that may be uti-
lized to yield products that serve niche markets, but most products found commer-
cially are manufactured by a process closely resembling those described here.
Achieving the subtle flavors that are expected of cultured cream products requires
the highest quality cream and a metabolic collaboration between homofermentative
and heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria. The necessity for selection of only high-
quality cream cannot be overstated. Cultured cream products will only be as “good”
as the quality of the cream used to manufacture them. The cream must be separated
from fresh milk, collected from healthy cows, properly cooled, agitated, and main-
tained at or below 7C for less than 48 hours. The fresh cream must be devoid of any
off-aromas or off-flavors, as any defect will become pronounced in the final prod-
uct. The reader is encouraged to read the chapter about fluid milk products to review
typical milk off-flavors.
The homofermentative bacteria generate primarily lactic acid from the fermenta-
tion of lactose. These species contribute little other than acid to the flavor of fer-
mented dairy products. Heterofermentative bacterial fermentation yields lactic acid
as its primary metabolite but also yields technologically significant quantities of
flavor compounds such as diacetyl, acetic acid, acetaldehyde, and sometimes carbon
dioxide (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997; Morgan et al., 1966). Kneifel et al. (1992)
screened commercially available US mesophilic starter cultures for their respective
biochemical, sensory, and microbiological properties for the successful propagation
of various cultured dairy foods, including sour cream and cream cheese. These
authors found a wide disparity in the production of diacetyl, acetaldehyde, and car-
bon dioxide among the cultures tested. Only those cultures that yielded a very low
diacetyl concentration were judged as low in odor and mild in flavor, and none were
judged as “green” even when the ratio of diacetyl to acetaldehyde favored acetalde-
hyde. In addition, the authors reported that CO2 helped potentiate diacetyl percep-
tion, probably by facilitating volatilization (Kneifel et al., 1992).
Mesophilic starter culture species and strains that contribute to the sensory qual-
ity of final products include both acid and aroma producers. Acid producers include
Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis and Lactococcus lactis subsp. cremoris (Meunier-
Goddik, 2004; Hutkins, 2006). The aroma-producing species include Lactococcus
lactis subsp. lactis biovar diacetylactis (Meunier-Goddik, 2004), Leuconostoc lac-
tis, and Leuconostoc mesenteroides subsp. dextranicum (Hutkins, 2006).
The primary desirable aroma compound in cultured cream products is diacetyl
(2,3 di-butanone). The so-called buttery note derives from diacetyl production via
citrate metabolism by citrate-fermenting (cit+) lactic acid bacteria. Without the
presence of this buttery-like aroma, most discriminatory consumers would most
likely find cultured cream products disappointingly “flat,” whereas experienced
dairy products judges would be inclined to declare that such a product “lacks cul-
tured flavor.” Lactic acid bacteria that produce diacetyl are often described as citrate
fermenters, or in shorthand, cit+. The cit + species and strains require either citric
acid or sodium citrate as a substrate if they are to produce diacetyl.
To gain and preserve the diacetyl, a number of conditions must be satisfied. First,
there must be adequate citrate in the cream prior to fermentation. For Cit + lactic
acid bacteria, citrate is an obligatory substrate for diacetyl production. The naturally
occurring citric acid content of milk (or cream) is largely influenced by diet. The
milk from cows fed on pasture will contain more citric acid than those fed rations
(Davies, 1939). To enhance flavor development, federal regulations permit supple-
menting the sour cream base with up to 0.1% sodium citrate prior to fermentation.
Care must be taken to ensure that fermentation is arrested, while residual citrate
remains or shortly after exhaustion, as these species can rapidly reduce diacetyl to
the odorless compound, acetoin (acetyl methyl carbinol), once citric acid is
exhausted (Monnet et al., 1996). Incubation temperature and rate of acid production
must be controlled, as both of these factors influence the evolution of diacetyl.
Incubation temperatures above 24 °C (75 °F) will favor the growth of homolactic
species, and too much lactic acid will be produced, resulting in the inhibition of
citrate fermenters. A fermentation temperature that is too low (<20 °C [<68 °F]) will
yield a cultured cream products that lacks acidity.
The citrate transport system requires some acid to be present, and diacetyl devel-
opment proceeds most rapidly when the pH is between 5.0 and 5.5. Once diacetyl is
produced, additional acid production helps protect the diacetyl that has already been
produced, as the pathway that reduces diacetyl to acetoin and 2,3 butanediol (both
odorless compounds) is inhibited by acidic conditions (Hutkins, 2006).
Sour Cream
Sour cream production involves ingredient blending, pasteurization, homogeniza-
tion (typically), cooling, culturing, coagulum breakage with cooling, and packaging.
A critical aspect of cultured sour cream manufacture is the requisite need for
fastidious pre- and post-process sanitation protocols, inasmuch as the presence of
numerous Gram-negative (i.e., psychrotrophs) bacteria produce vast quantities of
diacetyl reductase, which readily reduces diacetyl to the flavorless reduction end
product, acetyl methyl carbinol (Seitz et al., 1963; Bennett et al., 1964).
426 S. Clark
In order to satisfy a number of consumer and food-service user demands for

functionality and certain aesthetics in sour cream, stabilizers and/or emulsifiers may
be added, although they are not required. Generally, low concentrations (<0.5%) of
gelatin or other hydrocolloids provide satisfactory results yielding a sour cream that
does not separate when used as a topping on a wide range of foods, has a pleasant
mouthfeel, and possesses the level of viscosity and homogenous appearance
expected by most consumers. A food-service customer might prefer a highly stabi-
lized product that will keep its form when placed on a baked potato long before
serving. However, caution should be employed when using gelatin, as even slightly
overusing it will yield a body so stiff that it cannot be stirred with a lightweight
plastic spoon without breaking the spoon handle. More commonly, proprietary
blends of stabilizer/emulsifier will also yield sour cream that generally satisfy con-
sumer expectations.Use of excessive levels (>0.75%) of certain stabilizer/emulsifier
blends in sour cream can lead to undesirable, overly thick, and excessively viscous
finished products. Furthermore, the use of several different common stabilizer and
emulsifier agents in a model dairy system (simulating sour cream) was observed to
markedly reduce head space-available diacetyl (Rankin & Bodyfelt, 1995, 1996;
Chen et al., 1999).
Another variation of cultured sour cream sometimes employed by manufacturers
is the incorporation of additional skim milk powder into the formulation. By dramati-
cally increasing the milk solids nonfat fraction, the manufacturer can more effectively
bind water and inhibit whey expulsion (syneresis) in the container. Precautions should
be taken relative to the freshness of the skim milk powder used since sour cream is a
delicately flavored product and off-flavors or storage-related defects in milk powder
will carry through into the sour cream (Caudle et al., 2005). “Squeezable” forms of
sour cream are less viscous and are sold in a package similar to a small ketchup bot-
tle, with a flip top lid-dispenser that delivers sour cream easily when squeezed. To
achieve this “weak” or less firm form of body, the manufacturer may prefer to employ
xanthan gum and/or carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) as body stabilizers.
As is the case with yogurt, the cream base used for sour cream must be pasteur-
ized under high temperatures to partially denature the whey proteins. This extent of
denaturation enables incorporation of the whey proteins into the curd mass, which
improves the important water-binding capacity and viscosity of the curd. Since
minimum legal cream pasteurization temperatures are not adequate to fully dena-
ture the whey proteins, vat pasteurization at >82 °C (180 °F) for >30 min or HTST
at >85 °C (185 °F) for 25–60 s are typically utilized, although temperatures as high
as 95 °C (203 °F) for 5 min may be used (Lyck et al., 2006).
Pasteurization is typically followed by a single-stage homogenization (not
required by the CFR) at 14–21 KPa (2000–3000 psi), at a temperature between 40°
and 85 °C (104–185 °F), though this can vary depending upon the fat content and
stabilizers used (Lyck et al., 2006). These researchers recommended a homogeniza-
tion pressure of 15–20 KPa (2150–2900 psi) for 10% fat, 12–17 KPa (1700–2400
psi) for 18% fat, and 3–5 KPa (430–714 psi) for 38% fat cream. The use of single-
stage homogenization (as opposed to two stage) suffices to optimize the desired
viscosity properties of sour cream products.
A widely adopted processing variation includes a dual homogenization proce-

dure initially developed by Dr. Guthrie of Cornell University (Kosikowski & Mistry,
1997). He discovered that double homogenization of the cream yielded an extremely
thick, almost gelatinous sour cream that would hold its shape when cut with a knife.
L. J. Manus of Washington State University advocated a “double homogenization”
process for optimizing sour cream (and cottage cheese dressing) viscosity, without
the use of any added stabilizers or emulsifiers (Manus, 1957). The initial homogeni-
zation step was undertaken at pasteurization temperature, and then the sour cream
base was cooled to the range of 43–46 °C (110–115 °F) and homogenized a second
time. In the aforementioned processing protocol, only single (first)-stage pressure
was applied. Currently, the vast majority of pasteurized sour cream bases in the
USA are produced with the application of only the first-stage valve to maximize
product viscosity and surface sheen (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997). Single-pass
homogenization facilitates the re-agglomeration of homogenized milkfat globules,
which tends to markedly enhance sour cream base viscosity, as opposed to the
cream undergoing two-stage homogenization (Manus, 1957; Bodyfelt, 1981;
Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997).
The cream base is then cooled to about 21–22 °C (70–74 °F) and inoculated with
both acid- and aroma-producing lactic cultures and allowed to ferment. The choice
of culture sources and the incubation conditions are critical to the consistent pro-
duction of a high-quality sour cream.
Once the ideal pH is achieved, the sour cream is packaged with minimal agita-
tion and coagulum breakage and cooled as rapidly as possible (with gentle and
intermittent agitation). The finished product must come into direct contact with cold
surfaces of the incubation vessel within 30–45 min in order to stop bacterial activity
at a fairly precise pH endpoint (Meunier-Goddik, 2004).
Crema Mexicana Agria
Crema Mexicana agria is made essentially the same way as sour cream, but the
range in fat content may be higher (18–30%, depending on brand). Stabilizers are
not as commonly used, which leads to a weaker body and free whey. Salt is some-
times added to the product. Screw-topped PET jars are common.
Crème Fraîche
Crème fraiche is also made similarly to and with similar cultures (L. cremoris,
L. lactis, L. lactis biovar diacetylactis) as sour cream, but the fat content is higher
(30–45%). Full fat crème fraîche is a stable gel that will not separate in most appli-
cations. Reduced fat crème fraîche (˜15% fat), on the other hand, destabilizes when
heated. It could be made stable with the inclusion of commercial food grade stabi-
lizers; however, European Union legislation forbids the use of stabilizers in crème
fraîche. Like sour cream, an ideal crème fraîche is a viscous product. Since its pH is
often higher than sour cream, its flavor profile derives primarily from its aroma-
producing starter cultures. Crème fraîche is not yet a common product on US gro-
cery shelves and is usually much more expensive than sour cream. One can make an
acceptable crème fraîche at home by simply inoculating heavy cream with a table-
spoon of aromatic high-quality buttermilk and permitting it to ferment at room tem-
perature for 16–24 h.
428 S. Clark
Mascarpone
Macarpone is not a cultured cream product. Production begins with gradually heat-
ing cream to 85–95 °C and adding an acidifying agent (e.g., acetic, citric, tartaric,
or lactic acid, vinegar, or lemon juice) to drop the pH from 6.6 to 5.7 (Capozzi et al.,
2020; Zade & Ghosh, 2018). Draining commences for approximately 20 hours, and
the end product has 44–50% moisture and 40–45% fat. Although made similarly to
ricotta, mascarpone is more smooth (less grainy) in body and texture; it has a mild,
creamy, sweet flavor.
Cream Cheese
Cream cheese, Neufchatel, and cream cheese spreads are manufactured from stan-
dardized pasteurized and homogenized milk and/or cream (approximately 8–14%
fat or 5% fat, respectively) (Schulz-Collins & Senge, 2004). The total solids may be
increased to greater than 20% with powders (Brighenti et al., 2008). To increase
firmness, either a preheat treatment or chymosin may be used (Gutierrez-Mendez
et al., 2019). The standardized cream is inoculated with mesophilic starter cultures
and incubated until pH 4.5–4.8 is attained, after which point the curd is heat treated
to facilitate syneresis (Fox et al., 2000; Lucey, 2002). Whey is drained to attain
proper moisture (approximately 50–55% (cream cheese) or 60–65% (Neufchatel)),
mixed and/or homogenized, and additional ingredients (e.g., salt(s), hydrocolloid(s),
flavor(s), color(s)) are added, while the curd is heated (>70 °C) (Brighenti et al.,
2020; Guinee et al., 1993). Products are typically hot-filled, then cooled (Brighenti
et al., 2020).
Greek cream cheese spreads may be attained by using a centrifugal curd separa-
tor to more extensively reduce moisture content and increase protein or by using
additional solids (e.g., whey protein concentrate, nonfat dry milk) in the formula-
tion. Whipped cream cheese products require incorporation of air into the cheese
body, commonly coupled with the use of a strong stabilization system to maintain
air cell structure (e.g., gelatin, modified food starch). Fat-free cream cheese manu-
facture begins with concentrated skim milk (~25% nonfat solids), and fermentation
to a higher pH (i.e., 4.8 to 5.0), the use of emulisifer salts (e.g., sodium citrate),
bulking agents (e.g., buttermilk solids, corn syrup solids), and stabilizers (e.g., xan-
than gum, locust bean gum, guar gum) (Brighenti et al., 2008). Brighenti et al.
(2020) demonstrated that stabilizers affect cream cheese rheology differentially
across the temperature ranges of cream cheese production and utilization.
13.4 Sensory Evaluation
All cultured cream products must begin with high-quality cream, or the resulting
products will suffer defects. A summary of appearance, body, texture, and flavor
defects for cultured cream products is included in Tables 13.1 and 13.2.
Table 13.1 Body and texture, and appearance defects in cultured cream products, their
characteristics, and possible causes
Defect Characteristic Cause
Atypical Excess yellowish color, translucense, Excess carotenoid levels in the cream will
color or the absence of a cream-like color yield a darker than expected yellow color.
Low-fat or fat-free sour cream analogs will
often appear unnaturally white, dull, or
translucent
Curdy Exhibits nonhomogeneous mouthfeel Untimely agitation of a weak coagulum in
and/or contains lumps of firm curd the late stages of incubation.
Nonhomogeneous distribution of the
culture inoculum
Incomplete hydration of any or all of added
dry ingredients
Free whey The appearance of a hazy or greenish- Product improperly stabilized or
yellow liquid exudate on the surface or inadequately heat-treated cream. Whey
around the edges of the sour cream in may also appear in a product as it
the container approaches the product sell-by-date
Gassy Small effervescing or entrained CO2 Use of CO2-producing cultures or product
bubbles base post-pasteurization contamination by
gas-producing bacterial contaminants
Grainy Small, persistent particles in body of Incomplete rehydration of dry ingredients,
curd irreversibly denatured proteins, or final
product pH too close to the isoelectric point
of casein
Gel-like Gelatin consistency; product is stiff, Excessive use of or incorrect stabilizer
with sharp edges when spooned. When
stirring the product with a small
lightweight plastic spoon may readily
break
Over- An unnaturally slimy or “slick” Excess stabilizer or an inappropriate choice
stabilized smoothness – Almost a greasy of stabilizer
sensation within the mouth
Too firm High or excessive viscosity. When Excessive inclusion of milk solids, or
stirring the product with a small excessive heat treatment of the product
lightweight plastic spoon, it may base, or over-stabilization
almost break
Weak Low viscosity Low milk solids levels and/or insufficient
heat treatment of the product base
13.4.1 Product Packaging
The first sensory consideration when evaluating any product is package integrity.
Not only does a package provide customers information about product content, but
it influences their first impression regarding product identity and quality. Clean,
intact packaging is essential to quality and safety.
430 S. Clark
Table 13.2 Some flavor defects found in cultured cream, their brief description, and possible causes
Defect Description Cause
Bitter A basic taste, typically detected The most common cause of bitterness is
on the back of the tongue proteolysis by bacterial contamination. Typically
occurs when cream is either aged or stored at
elevated temperatures (>7.2 °F). Bitterness can
also result from prolonged storage as the lactic
acid bacteria will hydrolyze β-lactoglobulin to
bitter peptides
Cheesy Reminiscent of Cheddar or Can result from using contaminated lactic
other moderate to strong culture, any direct contact with unclean/
flavored cheese unsanitized processing equipment, or possibly
using old (aged) cream
Cooked Cooked milk, custard, or Excessive temperature treatment or
hard-boiled egg aroma, flavor, re-pasteurization
and/or aftertaste
Feed Suggestive of roughage feed A consequence of herd milking without
(weed) (e.g., silage, alfalfa, other hays, withdrawing feed from the cows for a suitable
brewer’s or cannery interval (∼3 h prior to milking) or feeding cows
by-products, certain grasses) a particularly pungent feed or silage
Foreign Atypical off-flavor and/or often An atypical off-flavor may derive from leaked
objectionable (e.g., cleansers, lubricants (most common), accidental
sanitizers, vitamins or minerals, contamination with cleaning chemicals, or
stabilizers or emulsifiers) residual sanitizers
High acid A tart (sour) taste sensation The fermentation temperature was either (1) too
(has a range of intensities), high, (2) the fermentation proceeded too long,
usually quickly perceived via (3) excessively long product-storage period, or
the taste buds on the sides of (4) temperature abuse after packaging
the tongue
Lacks Lacks creamy taste and/or Too low citrate concentration (<0.2%) in the
cultured lactic cultured aroma (i.e., cream base, improper selection, or performance
flavor (flat) diacetyl, acetic acid, and other of an aromatic (heterofermentative) lactic
aromatics) culture; or possible water dilution of product
base during processing
Lacks A stale aroma and/or flavor Product has been stored too long; code date was
freshness not properly established
(stale)
Low acid Product lacks characteristic The product was under inoculated, incubated at
subtle to moderate sour (acid) too low of temperature, or the fermentation was
taste arrested too early (too high pH (>5.5)
Old Stale aroma and/or flavor with Use of aged dry ingredients, (e.g., milk and/or
ingredient long-lasting unpleasant whey powder). Stabilizer and/or emulsifier
aftertaste. Some stabilizers or (many emulsifiers contain elevated levels of
emulsifiers develop a unique unsaturated fatty acids, which are vulnerable to
type of “oxidized/chemical- auto-oxidation
like” off-taste sensation
Oxidized Oxidized aroma, flavor, or Exposure of the milk or cream to transition metal
(metallic) aftertaste (i.e., copper penny, surfaces (i.e., copper, iron, and/or manganese) or
painty, fishy); possibly with their ions deposited on equipment surfaces
associated puckery mouthfeel
(continued)

Defect Description Cause
Oxidized Oxidized aroma, flavor or Exposure of cream to light, in particular
(light aftertaste (i.e., wet cardboard or fluorescent light or direct exposure to the sun
activated) cabbage-like “burnt hair or
feathers”). A light-oxidized
fat-free product will taste
different from a light-oxidized
full fat product
Rancid The odor is suggestive of Hydrolysis of triglycerides by contaminating
(lipolytic) Romano, kasseri or blue cheese bacteria
or baby vomit, accompanied Rough treatment (i.e., over agitation, air leaks,
typically with a somewhat freezing) of the raw milk that facilitates
delayed bitter aftertaste endogenous lipase activity due to fractured fat
globule membranes
Yeasty Smells like rising bread dough. Failure to maintain the milk or cream at a
Flavor possesses bread-like sufficiently low temperature, combined with the
notes. Product may exhibit gas exposure of processing lines and equipment to
or panelist may sense yeast
effervescence
A manufacturer who wishes to attain a premium price for their product(s) must
remind the consumer of a familiar brand name and should have artwork commensu-
rate with the quality promised within. On the other hand, manufacturers seeking to
carve out a niche within the community of the economy-minded might consider a
plain package that conveys the message that the lower price reflects savings achieved
in part by eschewing needless ornamentation and advertising and then passing those
savings on to the consumer.
The next component of packaging that deserves consideration is the tamper-
evident seal under the tub’s lid. This plastic seal should adhere tightly to the lip of
the tub. Such seals frequently bear an inscription describing themselves as con-
sumer confidence seals. Quite the opposite effect from instilling confidence results
when the seal is so loosely attached that it comes off when the container lid is
removed. The consumer must be able to discern if the seal came off when they
opened the package or if the seal had been tampered with prior to purchase
(Fig. 13.7). Cream cheese products must also exhibit clean, tamper-evident boxes,
foils, or overwraps (Fig. 13.7).
13.4.2 Appearance and Color
Upon opening the carton, the examiner should observe an opaque, glossy to semi-
glossy surface with a uniform color that may range from snow-white to a slight
straw-yellow color (Fig. 13.8). The consumer should expect to find an opaque prod-
uct, with no translucency. This can present a challenge in low and fat-free cultured
cream products. No “shrunken” (pulling in) should be evident in cups, and “free
432 S. Clark
Fig. 13.7 Sour cream and cream cheese displaying tamper-evident seals. (S. Clark images)
Fig. 13.8 Sour cream displaying appropriate gloss, smoothness, and white color (left), straw
color, shrunken, and free whey (middle), and shrunken, free whey, and grainy appearance (right).
(S. Clark images)
whey” should not be visible either on the surface or in a space between the curd and
the sidewall of the tub or foil wrap (Fig. 13.8). Free whey is often the result of either
an un-stabilized cultured cream product or one that would have benefited from a
higher heat treatment. This is often a particular problem with low-fat and nonfat
versions. Free whey in cream cheese may be suggestive of temperature abuse
post-packaging.
Upon stirring, sour cream products should smoothly mound up on the spoon
(Fig. 13.9) rather than crack (too firm) or splash (weak). For cream cheese, greater
resistance is expected, even with whipped products, and smooth spreadability is of
utmost importance.
Removing a spoonful from the original package and observing at eye level
(Fig. 13.10) or placing in a petri dish or plate can reveal body and texture defects.
An example of sour cream exhibiting an overly firm and grainy-like body and
Fig. 13.9 Freshly stirred

sour cream displaying
typical mounding up on
spoon. (S. Clark image)
Fig. 13.10 Two sour

cream samples displaying
firm (top) and weak
(bottom) body on spoons.
(S. Clark image)
texture (Fig. 13.11). The sample shown in Fig. 13.12 is a low-fat organic sour cream.
It exhibits both translucency and free whey. The sample shown in Fig. 13.13 is an
improperly stabilized sour cream that expelled a hazy whey “halo” within a short
time after spooning into a petri dish.
434 S. Clark
Fig. 13.11 Sour cream

exhibiting dull surface,
firm body, and grainy
texture. (Costello, 2009
image)
Fig. 13.12 Grainy texture

and free whey appearing in
a freshly opened cup.
(Costello, 2009 image)
A dull surface appearance (one that lacks gloss) can result from the use of chy-
mosin (rennet) to coagulate reduced fat cultured cream products. Free whey on the
surface is another potential consequence of chymosin usage (Lee & White, 1993).
Excessive usage of skim milk powder to increase sour cream viscosity may result in
a dull appearing surface, as will the inadequate rehydration of added dry ingredients.
Translucency commonly occurs commonly in light and fat-free sour cream prod-
ucts, which gives away the product’s reduced fat composition. Some product manu-
facturers may include titanium dioxide as a trace ingredient to impart an enhanced
opacity that attempts to better emulate the appearance of full fat sour creams.
Within the mouth, the texture of cultured cream products should be reasonably
or perfectly smooth, but without the mouthfeel of slime-like (e.g., slimy) or salve-
like (salvy). A fairly common texture defect of cultured cream products is grainy (or
Fig. 13.13 Sour cream

displaying a free whey
“halo”. (Costello, 2009
image)
grittiness – depending on particle size); it is characterized by the persistence of

small, firm particles within the mouth.
A grainy texture can result from a number of manufacturing oversights or short-
comings. One source of grainy texture that sour cream shares with other dairy prod-
ucts is inadequate rehydration of dry ingredients. Skim milk powder added via
improper usage of a powder funnel can predictably produce cultured cream prod-
ucts with grainy texture. Even skim milk powder incorporated using a liquefier may
yield a grainy product if the liquefier level is too low or too full, since fill level
affects turbulence. Empirically, the ideal level for full hydration is between 2/3 and
¾ capacity (Infanger, 2006, personal communication).
The occasional presence of residual acid cleanser residues (such as peroxyacetic
acid) on processing equipment and piping can irreversibly denature proteins on con-
tact (Infanger, 2006), which is another potential source of a grainy texture. Another
cause of a grainy-textured product is a final product pH that resides too close to the
isoelectric point of casein (Meunier-Goddik, 2004). Reduced fat sour cream prod-
ucts that are coagulated by using chymosin may also exhibit a texture described as
“grainy/gritty,” “too firm,” and/or “lumpy” (Lee & White, 1993).
One variable that needs to be considered when seeking to achieve an “ideal”
body and texture is the fermentation temperature and the rate of acid production.
The microstructure of the acid gel formed during fermentation is influenced by the
temperature, as gels form by different mechanisms when the temperature is above
30 °C or below 20 °C. Above 30 °C, the stability of the casein micelles is overcome
by collisions between micelles. These relatively high-energy collisions collapse the
“hairy” κ-casein surface layer. Below 20 °C, it is believed that the acidic conditions
solubilize the micellar casein (Hunt & Maynes, 1997). As the temperatures at which
sour cream is fermented fall between these ranges, the gel is formed through a blend
of these mechanisms, and small changes in fermentation temperature can alter the
436 S. Clark
mix gel “alloy” formed, and therefore, the functional characteristics might be pre-
dicted to change accordingly (Hunt & Maynes, 1997). A weak body or low viscosity
can result from low-fat content, low milk solids nonfat, improper homogenization
or heat treatment of the product base, incubation at too low a temperature, and inad-
equate acid development (Bodyfelt, 1981). A weak body may also result from
excessive curd disruption during pumping and packaging (Meunier-Goddik, 2004).
Another texture defect occasionally encountered in cultured cream products is
“gassy” due to CO2 formation. The gassy defect is a consequence of either a CO2-
producing lactic culture or a microbial contaminant that produces a gaseous fermen-
tation. The latter is usually a consequence of poor plant sanitation. Selection of
inappropriate starter cultures that produce CO2 must be avoided as well, although
minute amounts of CO2 may impart a pleasant effervescence or “zip” on the tongue
(Bodyfelt, 1981).
An additional characteristic that should be considered when it comes to cream
cheese products is the expectation of spreadability. Desired smooth, easy spread-
ability is displayed in Fig. 13.14. If the cream cheese curd lacks moisture, the curd
can flake and require excessive force to spread.
13.4.4 Flavor
The characteristic flavor of high-quality cultured cream products should include a

subtle to moderate lactic acid note and a buttery (diacetyl) aroma. Achieving the
ideal balance of flavor requires proper culture selection, close control of the lactic
acid development, along with the proper composition (fat content, milk solids not
fat, and citric acid concentration), and quality of the cream (free of hydrolytic ran-
cidity and auto-oxidation defects).
Fig. 13.14 Cream cheese

on a typical carrier (a
bagel), exhibiting expected
smooth, easy spreading
characteristics. (S. Clark
image)
Controlled manufacture of cultured cream products should impart delicate fla-

vors. As such, flavor defects originating in the raw materials will not be masked in
the products’ production. Hence, it is essential that the cream used for manufacture
be relatively free of flavor defects. Additionally, utmost care must be taken during
the manufacturing stages to protect it from development of any off-flavors. The
trend for cultured cream products in recent years has been toward a less acidic flavor
(Meunier-Goddik, 2004). Table 13.2 lists the most common flavor defects and their
origins.
Oxidation, rancidity, bitterness, and other objectionable defects that result from
the mishandling of dairy ingredients and finished products should be entirely absent
from marketable cultured cream products.
Certain contaminating microorganisms can contribute to a “flat” (lacks culture
aroma) cultured cream products. Pseudomonas fluorescens and Enterobacter aero-
genes possess acetoin dehydrogenase activity; hence, the unfortunate contamination
by these particular psychrotrophic microorganisms usually yields a distinct flat-
flavored product (Monnet et al., 1996). Prolonged storage may also yield a flat fla-
vor as aromatic compounds diffuse through the packaging material (Lyck et al.,
2006). Flavor attributes that are also affected by storage include acidity, acetalde-
hyde odor (green apple), acetic acid odor, bitterness, and a prickly (carbonated)
mouthfeel (Folkenberg & Skriver, 2001). Incubating the cream at too high a tem-
perature will also inhibit the growth and metabolism of flavor-producing organisms.
The flavor-producing organisms that thrive when cream is incubated at 22 °C will
vanish at 27 °C, yielding a relatively flavorless cultured cream product
(Hutkins, 2006).
With higher fat, the creamy flavor of crema Mexicana agria is more pronounced,
and acidity less pronounced, as a result. Additionally, some crema Mexicana agria
brands taste more salty because they contain more sodium than US sour cream.
The acidity of crème fraîche is lower than is typically found in sour cream, and
other flavor elements are more subtle as well. The flavors derived from fermentation
should be so delicate as to barely mask the fatty flavor of the cream. Because the
flavors are so delicate, only the highest quality cream is suitable for use in crème
fraîche fermentation.
Though typically more sweet and not as complex, because of the lack of fermen-
tation by-products, Capozzi et al. (2020) identified 27 volatile organic compounds
in 12 mascarpone cheeses. Nine aromatic compounds predominated, particularly
2-heptanone and 2-pentanone, which have been described as sweet, fruity, orange
peel and herbaceous.
13.5 Reduced Fat Cultured Cream Products
Health concerns motivate some American consumers to seek reduced fat products.
Nevertheless, consumers demand that reduced fat products possess sensory attri-
butes that approximate the traditional, full fat versions of familiar foods.
438 S. Clark
Manufacturers have responded to this demand with uneven success. As a rule,

reduced fat products simply do not elicit an equivalent sensory response to full fat
versions of the same food. Most consumers rank reduced fat products below the
original or full fat versions. Until reduced fat foods yield hedonic results similar to
full fat foods, there will be incentives to improve reduced fat foods.
Cultured cream products fall into the category of a relatively higher fat product
with a nutritional label that undoubtedly discourages some purchases. As such,
manufacturers have experimented with a variety of strategies to produce a product
that consumers will seek out for sensory attributes as well as lower fat content. The
perceived sensory deficiencies of reduced fat cultured cream products are both in
flavor and in body and texture.
The body and texture of reduced fat cultured cream products are often less
creamy-like than the full fat counterparts. Upon opening the container of a reduced
fat product, the consumer’s first view may more likely include surface free whey.
Additionally, the product may tend to exhibit a somewhat translucent character. The
flavor of some brands of reduced or fat-free sour cream can best be described as flat
or unbalanced. However, some contemporary manufacturers are producing reduced
fat cultured cream products either comparable or even superior to cultured cream
products with prudent formulation and modified manufacturing processes
(Durbin, 1996).
Characterization of rheological, textural, and sensory properties of 18 commer-
cial US cream cheese products with different fat contents (Brighenti et al., 2008)
revealed that full-fat cream cheeses were firmer, more cohesive, more difficult to
dissolve and spread, and less sticky than Neufchatel and fat-free cream cheese
products.
13.6 Flavored Cultured Cream Products
Consumers desiring variety often seek products with different styles and flavors –
manufacturers have answered the call with a multitude of flavor-added cultured
cream products. Of utmost importance is to acquire high-quality flavoring and col-
oring ingredients. Fruits, nuts, meats, herbs, and colorings must communicate the
product identity successfully but should also not overpower the underlying clean,
fresh, and delicate dairy product flavors of cultured cream products.
Additionally, in recent decades, clean labels (labels with simple and natural
ingredients) are preferred by many consumers. Food science skills are put to the test
when manufacturers are forced to modify established formulations. Proper selection
of ingredients, manufacturing practices, and code dates is essential to ensure flavor
and color consistency across lots and during storage.
13.7 Cultured Buttermilk
Although not a cultured cream product, cultured buttermilk was originally a by-
product of the cultured butter-making process, so deserves mention here. As a
“throwback” to a visual component of hand-made cultured buttermilk of the past, a
modest amount of contemporary commercial buttermilks may contain added butter
flakes to emulate or reproduce the appearance of the earlier period. Interestingly,
today’s cultured buttermilk has never seen a churn but retains the historical name of
buttermilk.
Cultured buttermilks may be made from whole milk, low-fat, or fat-free milk that
has been either pasteurized or ultrapasteurized; then cooled to optimum incubation
temperature; and carefully inoculated with specifically selected acid and aroma-
producing lactic starter cultures. Typically, the cultures used are the same as those
used in sour cream manufacture. The fermentation conditions, the substrate require-
ments, and the ultimate flavor profiles are the same or quite similar. An exception is
the manufacture of Bulgarian-style buttermilk, which is traditionally made with
whole milk and is inoculated with a Lactobacillus sp. and/or Streptococcus ther-
mophilus (Bodyfelt et al., 1988), and is generally more acidic (often ≥1.0% titrat-
able acidity).
Whatever the specific composition or the lactic culture utilized, the consumer
generally expects a smooth and viscous product with a moderate to distinct acidity
and preferably a delicate, buttery aroma.
Since the body and texture of buttermilk are derived primarily from the acid
precipitation of casein, the vast majority of the defects that one would predict from
such a process may occur when the process goes astray of the manufacturers’ best
intention – a common event when we trust to the providence of microbiology.
When a buttermilk’s texture is relatively nonuniform, this defect is described as
“curdy.” The curds are easily discerned by pouring the product slowly. Curdy but-
termilk often results from low milk solids, disturbance of the coagulum during incu-
bation, or the use of an inappropriate culture (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
Most consumers prefer a buttermilk that is not overly viscous. Heavy bodied is
the descriptive term for a product whose viscosity exceeds the normal range. Heavy-
bodied buttermilk will pour only slowly from the container and may even be diffi-
cult to drink. Potential sources of an overly viscous buttermilk include the use of
lactic cultures known to yield a higher viscosity, a base product too high in solids,
excessive heat treatment of the product base, entrained air, or over-stabilization of
the buttermilk (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
As one would predict, a thin-bodied buttermilk suffers from the opposite defect
as a heavy-bodied buttermilk. The thin-bodied buttermilk lacks the viscosity
expected by most consumers. Low solids, insufficient heat treatment, an inactive or
slow culture, or a culture with too little proteolytic activity are all potential causes
of a thin-bodied buttermilk. Since weak starter activity is a common cause of a thin-
bodied buttermilk, this defect is frequently correlated with a flat flavor and/or aroma
(Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
440 S. Clark
Wheying-off, or syneresis, is characterized by the presence of free whey, usually

near the surface, but occasionally occurring anywhere in the container. Wheying-
off, when caused by entrapped gas, is a result of an abnormal fermentation and
frequently manifests itself by the appearance of syneresis on the surface. Syneresis
attributable to excess buoyancy of the curd reveals itself as free whey in the mid-
levels or at the bottom of the container and may be a consequence of milkfat trapped
within the curd (Bodyfelt et al., 1988). In most cases, the solution to wheying-off is
adequate heat treatment of the milk prior to inoculation and fermentation, proper
culture selection, and the practice of good sanitation (Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
Departures from the ideal buttermilk (or lactic culture flavor) include such unfa-
vorable off-flavors as astringent (chalky), coarse (harsh), cooked (heated), foreign,
excess diacetyl, fruity/fermented, green (acetaldehyde), low acid, lacks freshness
(stale), oxidized/metallic, rancid, sauerkraut-like, stabilizer, unclean, and/or yeasty
(Bodyfelt et al., 1988).
Properly made, modern cultured buttermilk is a refreshing, healthful drink that
so far has not enjoyed the surge in popularity experienced by other cultured dairy
products. This may be a consequence of the passing of those generations who grew
up consuming traditionally made buttermilk. The generations that have followed
have not yet been introduced to this delightful dairy product, the health benefits of
which are similar to those credited to yogurt, which has seen rapid sales growth over
the past 30 years (Nauth, 2004). During this same period, buttermilk consumption
dropped by 50% between 1963 and 1993 (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997). Compared
with traditional or former buttermilk direct from the churn, contemporary cultured
buttermilk is a much more consistent product and possesses the potential to enjoy
the same surge in popularity that yogurt has seen. But health benefits are not always
enough to ensure good sales. The product must be pleasing to the consumer. As
such, buttermilk, if it does gain the popularity of yogurt, will have to be manufac-
tured in a manner that guarantees that the consumer will enjoy buttermilk for its
sensory experience as much as for its health benefits.
13.8 Conclusion
Cultured cream variations occur around the world, and the expectations for ideal
sensory quality vary according to local tastes, customs, raw material sources, and
quality as well as the final use for which the product was intended. In most western
cultures, achieving the ideal cultured cream requires using only raw materials of the
highest quality, as the delicate flavors of the final product will conceal no defects.
Additionally, numerous and detailed manufacturing details must be closely mon-
itored as is the case with any fermented food product. The functional microorgan-
isms incorporated for producing flavorful, aromatic end products tend to “behave”
or “misbehave” strictly according to the fermentation conditions and the relative
freshness and quality of the milk product substrates provided.
High-quality cultured cream products are largely defined by the consumers who
purchase them and who, more importantly, purchase them again if their first sam-
pling satisfies their needs and expectations. Keeping customers requires strict atten-
tion to detail, since product consistency and flavor predictability seem to be the
most important sensory characteristics that processors can impart upon any dairy
product.
References
Bennett, G., Liska, B. J., & Hempenius, W. L. (1964). Effect of other flavor components on the
perception of diacetyl in fermented dairy products. Journal of Food Science, 30(1), 35–37.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1981). Cultured sour cream: Always good, always consistent. Dairy Record,
82(1), 84.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J., & Trout, G. M. (1988). Sensory evaluation of cultured dairy products.
In The sensory evaluation of dairy products (pp. 227–299). Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Brighenti, M., Govindasamy-Lucey, S., Jaeggi, J. J., Johnson, M. E., & Lucey, J. A. (2020).
Behavior of stabilizers in acidified solutions and their effect on the textural, rheological, and
sensory properties of cream cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 103, 2065–2076.
Brighenti, M., Govindasamy-Lucey, S., Lim, K., Nelson, K., & Lucey, J. A. (2008). Characterization
of the rheological, textural, and sensory properties of samples of commercial US cream cheese
with different fat contents. Journal of Dairy Science, 91, 4501–4517.
Capozzi, V., Lonzarich, V., Khomenko, I., Cappellin, L., Navarini, L., & Biasioli, F. (2020).
Unveiling the molecular basis of mascarpone cheese aroma: VOSs analysis by SPME-GC/MS
and PTR-ToF-MS. Molecules, 25, 1242. 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25051242
Caudle, A. D., Yoon, Y., & Drake, M. A. (2005). Influence of flavor variability in skim milk powder
on consumer acceptability of ingredients. Journal of Food Science, 70(7), s427–s431.
Chen, L., Boyle-Rodin, E., & Rankin, S. A. (1999). Volatiles of short-chain fatty acids in a fer-
mented milk model system as affected by stabilizers. Journal of Food Science, 64(3), 390–392.
Connolly, E. J., White, C. H., Custer, E. W., & Vedamuthu, E. R. (1984). Cultured dairy foods
improvement manual (p. 40). American Dairy Products Institute.
Costello, M. J. (2009). Sour cream and related products. In The sensory evaluation of dairy prod-
ucts (2nd ed.). (S. Clark, M. Costello, M.A. Drake & F. Bodyfelt, Eds.). (pp. 403–426).
Davies, W. L. (1939). The chemistry of milk (pp. 162–190). D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc..
Durbin, B. (1996). Consumer panels prefers light sour cream over full fat and non-fat versions of
sour cream. The Oregonian (newspaper), The Food Section, p. 1 May 18.
Folkenberg, D. M., & Skriver, A. (2001). Sensory properties of sour cream as affected by fermenta-
tion culture and storage time. Milchwissenschaft, 56, 261–264.
Fox, P. F., Guinee, T. P., Cogan, T. M., & McSweeney, P. L. H. (2000). Fundamentals of cheese
science. Aspen Publ.
Guinee, T. P., Pudja, P. D., & Farkye, N. Y. (1993). Fresh acid-curd cheese varieties. In P. F. Fox (Ed.),
Cheese: Chemistry, physics and microbiology (Vol. 1, 2nd ed., pp. 363–419). Chapman & Hall.
Gutierrez-Mendez, N., Balderrama-Carmona, A., Garcia-Sandoval, S. E., Ramirez-Vigil, P., Leal-
Ramos, M. Y., & Garcia-Triana, A. (2019). Proteolysis and rheological properties of cream
cheese made with a plant-derived coagulant from Solanum elaeagnifolium. Food, 8(44), 11.
Hunt, C. C., & Maynes, J. R. (1997). Current issues in the stabilization of cultured dairy products.
Hutkins, R. W. (2006). Cultured dairy products. In R. W. Hutkins (Ed.), Microbiology and technol-
ogy of fermented foods (p. 107). Blackwell Publishing/IFT Press.
442 S. Clark
Kneifel, W., Kaufman, M., Fleisher, A., & Ulberth, F. (1992). Screening of commercially available
mesophilic starter cultures: Biochemical, sensory and microbiological properties. Journal of
Dairy Science, 75, 3158–3166.
Kosikowski, F. V., & Mistry, V. V. (1997). Buttermilk, sour cream and ripened butter. In Cheese and
fermented milk foods, Vol. 1 Origins and principles (Vol. 1, pp. 75–86). Kosikowski, F.V., LLC.
Lee, F. Y., & White, C. H. (1993). Effect of rennin on stabilized lowfat sour cream. Cultured Dairy
Products Journal, 28, 4–13.
Lucey, J. A. (2002). Acid and acid/heat coagulated cheese. In H. Roginski, J. W. Fuquay, &
P. F. Fox (Eds.), Encyclopedia of dairy sciences (pp. 350–356). Academic.
Lyck, S., Nilsson, L.-E., & Tamime, A. Y. (2006). Miscellaneous fermented milk products. In
A. Y. Tamime (Ed.), Fermented milks (pp. 217–236). Blackwell Publishing.
Manus, L. J. (1957). High viscosity cottage cheese dressing. Milk Production Journal.,
48(10), 56–58.
Meunier-Goddik, L. (2004). Sour cream and créme fraîche. In Y. H. Hui, L. Meunier-Goddik,
Å. S. Hansen, J. Josephsen, W.-K. Nip, P. S. Stanfield, & F. Toldrá (Eds.), Handbook of food
and beverage technology (pp. 147–158). Marcel Dekker, Inc..
Monnet, V., Condon, S., Cogan, T. M., & Gripon, J. C. (1996). Metabolism of starter cultures. In
T. M. Cogan & J.-P. Accolas (Eds.), Dairy starter cultures (pp. 44–100). VCH PublishersInc.
Morgan, M. E., Lindsey, R. C., & Libby, L. M. (1966). Identity of additional aroma constituents in
milk cultures of Streptococcus lactis var. maltigenes. Journal of Dairy Science, 49(1), 15–18.
Nauth, K. R. (2004). Yogurt. In Y. H. Hui, L. Meunier-Goddik, Å. S. Hansen, J. Josephsen,
W.-K. Nip, P. S. Stanfield, & F. Toldrá (Eds.), Handbook of food and beverage fermentation
technology (pp. 125–145). Marcel Dekker Inc.
Rankin, S. A., & Bodyfelt, F. W. (1995). Solvent desorption dynamic headspace sampling of fer-
mented dairy products. Journal of Food Science, 60(6), 1205–1207.
Rankin, S. A., & Bodyfelt, F. W. (1996). Headspace diacetyl as affected by stabilizers and emulsi-
fiers in a model dairy system. Journal of Food Science, 61(5), 921–923.
Seitz, E. W., Sandine, W. E., Elliker, P. R., & Day, E. A. (1963). Distribution of diacetyl reductase
among bacteria. Journal of Dairy Science, 46(2), 186–189.
Schulz-Collins, D., & Senge, B. (2004). Acid and acid/rennet-curd cheeses. Part A: Quark, cream
cheese and related varieties. In Cheese chemistry, physics and microbiology (Major cheese
groups) (Vol. 2, 3rd ed., pp. 301–328). Elsevier Science & Technology.
USDA. (2000). USDA specifications for sour cream and acidified sour cream. Available at: https://
www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/sourcream.pdf. Date accessed 12/10/22.
USFDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration). (2022a). Code of Federal Regulations Title 21.
Food and drugs. Subchapter B – Food for Human Consumption. Part 133. Sec. 133.133. Cream
cheese. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=133.133.
Date accessed 12/10/22.
USFDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration). (2022b). Code of Federal Regulations Title 21. Food
and drugs. Subchapter B – Food for Human Consumption. Part 133. Sec. 133.162. Accessible
at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=133.162.
USFDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration). (2022c). Code of Federal Regulations Title 21.
Food and drugs. Subchapter B – Food for Human Consumption. Part 131 Sec. 131.160. Sour
cream. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=131.160.
White, W. (1917 (Revised 1930)). Making butter on the farm. U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Farmer’s Bulletin No. 876. Washington, DC.
Zade, X., & Ghosh, B. C. (2018). Effect of coagulants, stage of cream addition and inulin incor-
poration on the quality characteristics of mascarpone cheese. Indian Journal of Dairy Science,
71(4), 368–373.
Chapter 14
Cheeses with Eyes
Vaishnavi Sankarlal and Stephanie Clark
14.1 Introduction
Cheeses with eyes include those manufactured in Switzerland (Emmentaler or

Swiss), the Netherlands (Gouda and Edam), Italy (Fontina, Provolone and Asiago),
Norway (Jarlsberg), Denmark (Havarti), and the United States (Brick, Swiss block
and Baby Swiss) (Steffen et al., 1993). Swiss-type cheeses trace their origins to the
Emmen valley in Switzerland. Emmentaler, the most popular Swiss cheese, is a
large, round wheel, usually weighing about 100 kg (220 lb). Each wheel is about
112 cm (44 in.) in diameter and 15–23 cm (6–9 in.) thick, with a smooth, cream-
colored to yellowish rind. Emmentaler is simply called “Swiss cheese” in the United
States and is a rindless block (Jenkins, 1996).
In Swiss-style cheeses, the main characteristic feature is the propionic acid fer-
mentation, resulting in the production of CO2 in the cheese, usually by propionic
acid-forming bacteria. Eyes (CO2-formed openings) are expected and contribute to
the cheese’s visual appeal (Fig. 14.1). The number, size, shape, and surface luster of
eyes are characteristic for each type of cheese. Microorganisms intentionally used
in the making of cheeses with eyes include (1) Streptococcus thermophilus (produce
lactic acid early in the cheese vat and the press), (2) Lactobacillus delbrueckii ssp.
bulgaricus (produce lactic acid at a greater rate later in the pressing stage rather than
in the vat), and (3) Lactobacillus helveticus (grow slowly and use up residual lactose
and galactose – which is necessary to minimize browning and provide desired body
and texture characteristics to cheese through proteolysis). Of particular importance
V. Sankarlal
Cargill, Minneapolis, MN, USA
S. Clark (*)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_14
444 V. Sankarlal and S. Clark
Fig. 14.1 The eyes in

Swiss-style cheeses
contribute to their aesthetic
appeal
is Propionibacterium freudenreichii ssp. shermanii (4), which plays a sequential

role in development of a key flavor element, propionic acid, and the production of
CO2, for characteristic eye formation. P. shermanii reproduce in the cheese but not
in the vat and require a temperature of >21 °C (70 °F). Extremes in eyes appearance
reflect adversely on workmanship and/or on milk quality.
The main visual characteristic features of Swiss cheese are:
(a) Natural, attractive, uniform ivory to light yellow color
(b) Mild, pleasing, characteristic sweet hazelnut-like flavor
(c) Round or slightly oval-shaped eyes that are relatively uniform in size (1–2 cm
[3/8–13/16 in.] in diameter) and distribution
(d) Uniform, firm, smooth texture, and slightly elastic body
Other related type bacteria that produce CO2 in cheese include Leuconostoc mes-
enteroides ssp. cremoris and/or citrate-positive Lactococcus lactis ssp. lactis. In
some Scandinavian-ripened cheeses, Leuconostoc mesenteroides ssp. cremoris and/
or citrate-positive Lactococcus lactis ssp. lactis generate sufficient CO2 to form
characteristic small round eyes.
Gas holes in cheeses outside the Swiss-type, Dutch Goudas, and Danish Havartis
are generally considered undesirable because they often indicate the presence of
undesirable lactic, spoilage, and/or pathogenic microorganisms (Escherichia coli
and Clostridia). Fermentation by Clostridia especially the spores of Clostridium
tyrobuturicum has the ability to germinate during the cheese production and
14 Cheeses with Eyes 445
transform lactic acid into butyric, acetic, and gas commonly known as butyric fer-
mentation. Unintended excessive gas formation in cheeses in the form of either
CO2, H2, and/or H2S is typically accompanied by several texture defects (slits,
cracks, irregular eyes) and an unclean-like off-flavor during the late stages of cheese
ripening. This late blowing leads to enoromous losses to cheese manufacturers as
cheese cannot be sold due to poor quality and flavor.
14.2 Composition of Swiss-Type Cheeses
US federal standards of identity for Swiss cheese require at least 43% fat on a dry
basis and not more than 41% moisture (21 CFR 133.195 and FDA, 2006). The fin-
ished product typically contains 27–28% fat, 26–28% protein, and 1–1.6% salt on a
wet weight basis. The composition of other related cheeses with eyes is compared
to Swiss and Cheddar in Table 14.1.
The basic characteristics of cheese structure are mainly determined by the acid
production in the vat. The given pH of whey at the time of draining from the curd is
the key for determining the final pH range of any basic cheese category and the
properties of the curd in the young and subsequently aged cheese. The pH of whey
at draining dictates the solubility of calcium ions into whey and thus the loss of
calcium phosphate from the curd. The amount of loss affects the extent to which the
casein submicelles that were originally in the milk will be disrupted and conse-
quently determines the basic structure of the cheese. For instance, little latic acid is
produced in Swiss cheese manufacture before the whey is drained, thus yielding a
higher calcium content that yields the characteristic elasticity observed in Swiss
cheeses (Lawrence et al., 1984). Curd washing for final pH control is key for most
varieties of cheeses with eyes.
Table 14.1 Typical composition of Swiss, Cheddar, and common cheeses with eyes (Kosikowski
& Mistry, 1997; Fox et al., 2000)
Fat Fat on dry basis Total solids Total protein Salt Ash pH
Asiago 31 42 73 31 3.6 6.6 5.3
Brick 30 50 60 23 1.9 4.4 6.4
Cheddar 32 51 63 25 1.5 4.1 5.5
Edam 24 44 57 26 2.0 3.0 5.7
Emmentaler/Swiss 31 45 65 28 1.2 3.5 5.6
Fontina 26 46 57 24 1.2 3.3 5.6
Gouda 29 47 59 27 2.0 3.0 5.8
Gruyere 30 45 67 30 1.1 4.1 5.7
Havarti 27 47 57 25 2.2 2.8 5.9
Provolone 27 47 58 25 3.0 4.0 5.4
Gruyere cheese, made in France and Switzerland, is similar to Emmentaler but is

smaller (about 55 kg [121 lb]) and displays eyes no larger than a cherry. Gruyere
exhibits a smooth, easy-to-slice body and presents a significantly more intense fla-
vor than Emmentaler, with an abundance of sweet–saline beefiness and an under-
tone of fruit (apples, pears) and hickory nuts (Jenkins, 1996). While Gruyere is
made with propionic acid bacteria in combination with regular Swiss cheese lactic
cultures, its flavor is mainly influenced by the growth of the surface microflora dur-
ing aging. Surface ripening begins with the growth of yeasts (e.g., Debaryomyces
hansenii) that utilize lactate and increase the surface pH of the cheese. When the pH
increases above 6.0, Brevibacterium linens, other coryneform bacteria and staphy-
lococci begin to grow and evolve the final characteristic flavors of Gruyere cheese
(Brennan et al., 2004).
Cheeses with eyes that originated in the Netherlands include Gouda and Edam.
Gouda and Edam range from semisoft to hard in body and are sweet-curd cheeses
(pH range of 5.7–5.9) made from cow milk. While Gouda is made with whole milk,
milk used for making Edam is typically skimmed to contain 2.5% milkfat. Both
cheeses have a pleasant, mild, clean, somewhat nutty flavor and a sweet and salty
taste. The body of aged Gouda and Edam is rather firm and crumbly, with or without
a small number of shiny eyes, while young variants of these cheeses are rather pliant
and rubbery-like. Gouda and Edam cheeses are generally ball shaped or somewhat
flattened ball shaped and are coated in either orange or red wax or plastic coatings
(USDA, 1978). The eyes in Edam and Gouda are typically smaller than those of
Swiss and Gruyere. These eyes result from citrate metabolism by citrate-positive
lactic cultures (Fox et al., 2000). Jarlsberg is a Norwegian cheese similar to
Emmentaler but softer in body. It typically has numerous large eyes, produced by
propionic bacteria. This cheese is light to medium yellow in color and may or may
not have a formed rind.
Cheeses with eyes that originated in Italy include Fontina, Provolone, and
Asiago. Fontina is a whole milk, semisoft to hard, slightly yellow cheese with a
nutty flavor and pleasing aroma. It is similar to Gouda but has a more robust or
intense flavor. It is made from either ewe (Italy) or cow (the United States) milk.
Fontina is round and flat and weighs between 12 and 35 kg (26 and 77 lb) and may
have a few small, round eyes. Provolone is an Italian pasta filata cheese, meaning
that the curd is stretched, much like Mozzarella. Provolone is light in color, mellow,
smooth, cuts without crumbling and has a pleasing mellow flavor. Typically,
Provolone is pear shaped or oblong and weighs anywhere from 3 to 90 kg (7–198 lb).
Provolone can be most easily distinguished from Mozzarella in flavor by its piquant
or rancid flavor (derived from the addition of lipase in the make procedure). The
presence of eyes is another common feature that distinguishes Provolone from
Mozzarella. Asiago was originally made from ewe milk but is now made from cow
milk. It is a sweet curd, semicooked grana-type cheese (dry and firm which lends it
to grating) with a pungent or rancid aroma. It is round and flat and generally weighs
between 7 and 10 kg (15 and 22 lb) (USDA, 1978).
Havarti is a cheese that is made from partially skimmed or full fat pasteurized
cow milk. It is soft to semisoft and presents many irregular openings. Havarti, like
Limburger and Muenster, is traditionally a surface-ripened cheese. The flavor of
fully ripened Havarti is reminiscent of fully matured Camembert, Muenster, and/or
Limburger (aromatically pungent and distinctly unclean-like flavor). The body
should be smooth and pliable and display eyes and/or openings (Kosikowski &
Mistry, 1997). Rindless Havarti, since it does not undergo surface ripening by
Bacterium linens, has a distinctly milder flavor (in both aroma and taste) than tradi-
tional Havarti cheese.
Brick, Maasdam, and Baby Swiss are US-developed cheeses with eyes. Brick is
a brick-shaped cheese with an open texture and numerous round and irregular-
shaped eyes. Brick cheese is a sweet curd, semisoft cow milk cheese with a pungent,
and sweet taste driven largely by the surface-ripening microorganisms. Brick cheese
is more closely related/comparable to aged Muenster, Havarti, mild Limburger,
Breakfast, Schloss, or aged Camembert, than Cheddar, and spans the range from
mild/young to extra sharp. The body of Brick cheese is softer than Cheddar but
firmer than Limburger, is elastic, and slices well without crumbling. The US version
of Swiss, Baby Swiss, may be made in a similar fashion to Swiss cheese or in a
highly automated fashion. Baby Swiss eyes are relatively smaller in size than aged
Swiss cheese and Dutch Maasdam. The distinctive small eyes in Baby Swiss reflect
a shorter curing time versus a longer time for block- or wheel-sized Swiss, thus
making it a milder cheese. Since the CO2 is produced more rapidly than in tradi-
tional Swiss, the critical pressure for bubble formation is quickly attained and
results in numerous smaller-sized holes. Of critical difference is that Baby Swiss is
made from pasteurized milk, due to its age, whereas Swiss can be made from pas-
teurized, thermalized, or raw milk. The cooking temperature of Baby Swiss is also
around 39 °C, instead of 54 °C in traditional Swiss. During the cooking step, some
of the whey may be washed out with hot water to remove lactose and increase the
curd temperature (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997). Baby Swiss is generally higher in
moisture and milkfat content; hence, it exhibits a softer or weaker body and a milder
flavor than traditional Swiss cheese. Baby Swiss may be produced in block or wheel
and weighs typically from 1 to 2 kg (2–4 lb) (Bodyfelt, 1988).
14.3 Swiss Cheese Production
Swiss cheese is one of the most challenging cheeses to make well due to the com-
plexity of microorganisms, unique cooking process, and aging parameters that must
be balanced to consistently produce high-quality cheese (USDA, 1978). The pro-
cessing steps are diagramed in Fig. 14.2.
Traditional Swiss cheeses are large, round, wheel-shaped cheeses that usually
weigh about 100 kg (220.5 lb). Traditional Swiss cheese possesses a rind that is
Standardization and clarification of fresh milk
Heat treatment 67ºC, 20 sec.

Cooling to 32ºC
Addition of starter cultures Streptococcus thermophilus

Lactobacillus delbrueckii bulgaricus
Propionibacterium shermanii
Addition of chymosin/rennet
Cutting of curd, 5-8 mm cubes
Cooking of curds, gradually, to 54ºC Cooking stage includes 3 stages:

fore-work, cook and post-work
Dipping and pressing of curds, 24 hr
Salting in brine, 10ºC, 2-3 days
Cold room treatment, 7-13ºC, 90% RH, 10 days
Warm room treatment, 20ºC, 85% RH, 4-5 weeks
Curing, 4ºC, 3-4 months
Fig. 14.2 Flow diagram of Swiss cheese production (Adapted from Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997)
“sufficient to protect the interior of the cheese” (USDA, 2001). However, traditional
Swiss cheese manufacturing methods have changed with large-scale mechaniza-
tion; hence, rindless varieties have become more common. Most of today’s US pro-
duction of Swiss cheese (over 90%) is in the rindless block form. Rindless cheeses
are “properly enclosed in a wrapper or covering which will not impart any objec-
tionable flavor or color to the cheese” (USDA, 2001). Ongoing differences in the
treatment of cheesemilk, the extent of mechanization, and methods of finished
cheese handling have sufficed to modify cheese weight, shape, ripening time, and
shelf life of the original Swiss cheese. Rindless block Swiss has a more flexible,
softer body and is less aromatic, tends to exhibit a sweeter flavor, and has more
uniformly distributed eyes that are typically closer to the surface. Rindless Swiss is
considered to be more suitable for sandwiches because of its easily sliceable body.
Generally, it is lower in salt, higher in moisture, and ripened for a shorter time
period than traditional Swiss cheese. The US federal standard of identity require-
ment for the moisture and fat content of rindless block is the same as round wheel
Swiss; however, the rindless form generally contains slightly more fat (Kosikowski
& Mistry, 1997).
The milk used in Swiss cheese manufacturing should be clarified, standardized,
and generally heat treated before pumping into the vat. Centrifugal clarification of
milk generally improves development and distribution of eyes in Swiss cheese. The
clarification step prevents excess eye formation by removing potential nuclei like
somatic cells, chaff, and other insoluble particles (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997).
Following clarification, the milk is standardized to 3% fat content. According to 21
CFR 133.195, Swiss cheese may be made from either raw, heat-treated (must be
aged for at least 60 days) or pasteurized milk. Traditional Swiss cheese produced in
Europe is manufactured from raw milk. For US Swiss cheese production, cheese-
milk is typically heat treated (thermalized) to 67 °C (152 °F) for 20 s for partial
destruction of undesirable flora and cooled down to 32 °C. Swiss cheesemakers
prefer not to employ full pasteurization protocols, inasmuch because it has been
presumed that superior Swiss cheese is produced with thermalized milk as opposed
to cheesemilk pasteurization (Reinbold, 1972). Optionally, one or more approved
dairy ingredients may be added to Swiss cheesemilk (benzyl peroxide as a cheese-
milk bleaching compound and hydrogen peroxide/catalase for inhibition of coli-
forms in cheesemilk). The milk is then inoculated with lactic acid-producing and
propionic acid-producing cultures. A milk clotting enzyme (chymosin or other ren-
net) is typically used in the production of Swiss cheese.
Starter cultures, S. thermophilus and L. delbrueckii subsp. Bulgaricus, are added
to provide a relatively slow development of lactic acid throughout the curd-making
process. S. thermophilus hydrolyzes lactose to glucose and galactose but further
metabolizes only the glucose moiety to lactic acid. The galactose moiety is metabo-
lized subsequently, relatively slowly, by L. delbrueckii subsp. Bulgaricus. The
extent of fermentation of residual galactose to lactic acid largely determines the
final pH of the curd. Swiss cheese is more anaerobic in its fermentation than Cheddar
cheese, and there is considerably less lactic acid development before the cheese is
pressed. The pH of 1-day Cheddar cheese may range from 5.3 down to 4.9, while
the pH of 1-day Swiss cheese should be 5.3 for desired eye development (Lawrence
et al., 1984). Selected propionic acid bacteria of the species P. freudenreichii are
added to obtain characteristic eyes and nutty flavor.
Approximately 30 min after rennet is added, a curd is formed. The coagulum is
randomly cut into fine-sized curds (~0.65 cm [1/4 in.]) with a curd harp and cooked
to 54 °C (129 °F) to remove whey. The cooking process is divided into three-time
periods, namely, forework, cooking, and postwork. The foreworking stage involves
slow agitation of the newly formed curds, without heat, for approximately 40 min.
During agitation, the curd particles tighten (curd gains firmness), expel whey, and
shrink in size. The pH drops to slightly less than 6.5 with the rapid growth of the
S. thermophilus and lactic streptococci cultures. In the cooking stage, curds are
cooked to a temperature of up to 54 °C (129 °F) for approximately 40 min to remove
whey and firm the curds (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997). The use of high cooking
temperature is responsible for the development of the springy, elastic curd of Swiss
cheese. The higher cooking temperature, in addition to acid development and gentle
stirring, drives whey out of the curd, which causes calcium-casein molecules to fuse
together to form continuous strands. This is necessary for the characteristic elastic
body of the Swiss cheese. The cooking rate should be managed carefully to control
the moisture and acid development. Rapid cooking results in case-hardening, where
the outside of the cheese becomes firm and dry while the inside remains high in
moisture and acid. Cooking too slowly leads to formation of curds that are too dry
or even too high in acidity. Initially, the temperature should be raised gradually, fol-
lowed by rapid heating (Reinbold, 1972). Finally, in the postwork stage, the curds
are agitated for an additional 45–60 min until the proper moisture level, curd firm-
ness, pH, and acidity are reached. The rate and amount of acid development at this
stage must be observed carefully. Curds high in acidity do not knit or drain readily
and acquire serious eye defects. The typical whey removal pH at the end of cooking
is 5.2–5.3. If acid development is insufficient (pH > 5.3), prolonged stirring is
applied.
The curds are dipped into metal hoops and pressed under vacuum for 20 min and
then pressed overnight at about 20 °C (68 °F). The cheeses are removed from the
press and placed into saturated (23%) NaCl and CaCl2 brine solution for 2–3 days.
Since propionic acid bacteria are sensitive to salt, brining is less intensive than for
other cheese varieties (Frohlich-Wyder & Bachmann, 2004). To avoid rind rot or
development of weak, soft surfaces during curing, cheese blocks should be dried
before wrapping. The drying process is performed through a heated, ventilated dry-
ing tunnel or by storage at 80% relative humidity and 12 °C (54 °F) for 24 h.
Wrapping is a very important step in rindless block Swiss manufacturing. The wrap-
ping material enclosing the cheese block should be sufficiently extensible to allow
the cheese to freely expand in all directions during eye formation to maintain the
desired shape. Covering should be sufficiently impermeable to oxygen transfer to
prevent mold growth while permitting the release of excessive CO2. Several applica-
tions, including prefabricated, double-wound bags, heat-shrinkable plastic pouches,
or water-/air-resistant sheet films are in common usage (Reinbold, 1972).
The aging process for Swiss cheese is essential to proper eye development. An
initial cool room treatment of 7–13 °C (45–55 °F) at 90% relative humidity for up
to 10 days is applied to stabilize the physicochemical, enzymatic, and microbiologi-
cal activities within the curd. During the precooling stage, the cheese loses most of
the residual lactose as the starter bacteria, and Lactobacillus helveticus use up resid-
ual lactose and galactose to form lactic acid. The pH decreases one or two-tenths of
a unit and the body of the cheese firms. Following the cool room treatment, Swiss
blocks are transported to a warm room at 20–24 °C (68–75 °F) and 80–95% relative
humidity for an additional 33–54 days for desired eye development. Propionic acid
fermentation begins with the ripening of cheese at warm room temperatures.
Propionic acid bacteria convert residual lactate into propionic acid, acetic acid, and
carbon dioxide. These metabolites contribute to the distinctive flavor and eyes of
Swiss cheese.
Production, spacing, and size of eyes are governed by the classical laws of gas
physics and the solubility and behavior of the gas within a gel structure (which leads
to saturation level). Gas generation must occur at an optimum rate, temperature, and
at the correct stage of aging. A critical gas pressure is created, which enables the gas
to evolve from solution as a small bubble or to become part of another bubble in a
favorable sector of the cheese. Gas generated in nearby areas tends to move to the
initial eye and expands in size rather than creating another bubble, because it is
physically easier to increase the size of a gas hole already present than to originate
a new one (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997).
The pressure, P, which creates and maintains the roundness effect of the gas
bubble suspended in a gel, is based on P = (2S/a), where S is the surface tension and
a the radius of the bubble. A gas bubble in a cheese with a greater radius (2 (1/4) = ½)
requires less pressure to become larger than a smaller bubble or a new starting
bubble (2 (1/2) = 1). Thus, depending upon the rate of gas generation and the pres-
ence and pattern of distribution of nuclei, Swiss eyes of large uniform size can be
produced for a given area and be spaced uniformly apart (Kosikowski & Mistry,
1997). The presence of unwanted somatic cells, soil, and/or other possible debris
could serve as a type of “object foci” for precipitating irregular and randomly spaced
“nuclei” and cause unintended eye formation. Clarification of milk prior to manu-
facturing helps to remove unwanted nuclei and thus contributes to uniform size and
even distribution of the eyes.
When gas is produced too slowly, a saturated gaseous state does not develop;
hence, few or no eyes are produced. When it is generated too fast, the gas does not
have enough time to migrate to a favorable point where nuclei for deposition are
situated. Critical pressures for bubble formation are quickly attained under these
circumstances, and the result is too many small holes. A gas (CO2) generation rate
that proceeds excessively fast tends to break down the cheese structure, and thus,
the gas forms large pockets, or the pockets may flow together to create a large blow-
hole (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997).
The ability of propionic acid cultures to utilize aspartate greatly affects the final
characteristics of Swiss cheese. Strong aspartase activity is generally coupled with
a high growth rate of propionic cultures, resulting in higher concentrations of pro-
pionate, acetate, and CO2. Cheeses made with cultures having strong aspartase
activity contain a greater number of eyes and larger eyes, due to increased CO2
release. The intensity of taste, odor, and aroma is also more pronounced due to high
concentrations of free short-chain acids produced through fermentation as well as
the free fatty acids, n-butyric, and n-caproic acids, released by lipolytic activity of
propionic acid bacteria. Such cheeses may require shorter ripening time in the warm
room since they are more likely to exhibit late fermentation during maturation
(Frohlich-Wyder & Bachmann, 2004).
As soon as a sufficient number and size of eyes are formed, the propionic acid
fermentation is slowed down by transferring the Swiss cheese blocks to a curing
room at 4 °C (40 °F). The purposes of cold room treatment are to limit eye develop-
ment to the proper size, to inhibit bacterial growth, to firm the cheese for easier
handling, and to prevent the onset of body and flavor defects. Curing is the last step
prior to cheese distribution and sale (Reinbold, 1972).
14.3.1 Flavor Formation
The predominate factors that affect flavor quality of Swiss cheese are raw milk qual-
ity, starter cultures, processing technology, and ripening conditions. Typical Swiss-
type cheese has a characteristic nut-like, sweet flavor, due to free fatty acids,
peptides, amino acids, carbonyls, or interactions among these compounds. The
volatile flavor compounds produced by glycolysis, proteolysis, and lipolysis are the
most important ones responsible for Swiss-type cheeses flavor (Noel et al., 1999).
The volatile short-chain fatty acids, primary and secondary alcohols, methyl
ketones, aldehydes, esters lactones, alkanes, and aromatic hydrocarbons are the
principal volatile flavor compounds identified in Swiss cheese (Bosset et al., 1993).
However, the characteristic flavor of Swiss-type cheeses is caused primarily by ace-
tic, propionic, n-butyric, isovaleric, and n-caproic acids (Bosset et al., 1993; Beuvier
et al., 1997; Rychlik & Bosset, 2001). Proteolysis of free amino acids (FAA) also
influences the development of Swiss-type cheese flavor. FAAs are converted into
volatile flavor components by peptidases and other amino acid-converting enzymes.
Plasmin, a native milk protease, affects flavor perception. Plasmin activity is known
to be higher in Swiss-type cheese (Ollikainen & Nyberg, 1988), as the higher cook-
ing temperatures inactivate chymosin and other rennets (Garnot & Molle, 1987)
allowing the plasmin activity to contribute to the flavor development in Swiss
cheese. Bastian et al. (1997) reported that increased plasmin activity resulted in
rapid hydrolysis of β-casein during 12 weeks of ripening and increased perception
of propionic acid and overall flavor. Generally, raw milk cheese develops a more
intense flavor than pasteurized milk cheese due, in part, to higher concentrations of
amino acids, fatty acids, or volatile compounds (Beuvier et al., 1997). The intensity
of odor, aroma, saltiness, and sourness increases during ripening due to complex
enzymatic and microbial processes.
Ji et al. (2004) suggested that it is necessary to keep Swiss-type cheese in the
warm room for at least 3 weeks to develop enough FFA and amino acids that are
required for typical Swiss cheese flavor. The release of FFA in the warm room
occurs simultaneously with the growth of propionic acid cultures. Thierry et al.
(2004) stated that P. freudenreichii is the organism responsible for the conversion of
branched chain amino acids, leucine, and isoleucine to isovaleric acid in Swiss-type
cheese. Other thermophilic starter cultures, especially L. delbrueckii subsp. lactis,
play a major role in flavor development because they have the enzymatic potential
to produce potent and varied aroma compounds from amino acids (Helinck et al.,
2004). Strain selection, make procedure, and ripening time can all have a large
impact on flavor. Ripening temperature in the warm room and acid production in the
vat at whey drainage influence the “nutty” and “sweet” flavors of the final product
(Lawlor et al., 2003). Compared to traditional Swiss cheeses produced in Europe,
commercially available Swiss-type cheeses in the United States have lower intensi-
ties of flavor characteristics. In a study conducted on flavor attributes of Swiss
cheese, 15 commercial Swiss-type cheeses in the United States (10 Swiss cheeses,
4 baby Swiss cheeses, and 1 Swiss Emmenthal) were assessed by a trained panel for
flavor characteristics. It was reported that most Swiss cheeses were characterized by
low flavor intensities. Nutty flavor was only detected in 2 of 15 Swiss-type cheeses
in an appreciable amount (Liggett et al., 2008).
14.3.2 Body and Texture Formation
Soft and elastic texture is the main requirement for desired eye formation in Swiss
cheese. The elasticity of texture is controlled by ensuring that the mineral content of
the curd is relatively high after lactic acid fermentation. The amount of acid pro-
duced before the whey is drained off should be correspondingly small (Lawrence
et al., 1984). Proteolysis control is essential for the development of desired texture
characteristics of Swiss cheese. Indigenous milk proteinase and proteolytic enzymes
of lactic acid bacteria are generally responsible for protein breakdown. Insufficient
proteolysis may lead to flat flavor and “long” texture consistency. Uneven openings
may also be observed. Contrarily, high levels of proteolysis, accompanied by intense
propionic acid fermentation, may lead to late fermentation, where additional or
excessive gas is produced after the desired fermentation has been completed. The
resulting texture will be low in elasticity, and the cheese can develop cracks that are
similar to those observed with either excessive and/or rapid CO2 production
(Frohlich-Wyder & Bachmann, 2004).
14.3.3 Appearance/Eye Formation
The shape, size, and distribution of the “eyes” are most important as a point of
emphasis in sensory evaluation. Cheese with eyes should have well-developed
round or slightly oval-shaped eyes that are relatively uniform in size, shape, and
distribution. The eyes should exhibit a glossy and velvety surface appearance, with
smooth and even walls. The majority of the eyes in Swiss cheese should be 1–2 cm
(3/8–13/16 in.) in diameter (Fig. 14.3), though other cheeses with eyes may have
smaller eyes. The eyes should be uniformly distributed throughout the cheese
matrix. The distribution of eyes at the center of the cheese tends to be more “ideal.”
If the Swiss cheese eyes are so large and/or so numerous as to “predominate” a plug
or a slice of the cheese sample, then such a cheese would be criticized severely
(Bodyfelt, 1988).
Fig. 14.3 Swiss cheeses exhibiting ideal (left) and small (right) eye size, with uneven
distribution
Eye formation is a desirable result of carbon dioxide production through propi-

onic acid fermentation. Eye development depends upon (a) time, quantity, and
intensity of CO2 production; (b) the number and size of the areas of future eye for-
mation; (c) CO2 pressure and diffusion rates; and (d) body, texture, and temperature
of the given cheese (Steffen et al., 1993). However, if spoilage microorganisms like
Escherichia coli, Acetobacter aerogenes, and/or Clostridia grow in the cheese,
hydrogen (H2) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) are produced in addition to CO2. The
resultant eyes are either too small, too numerous, or may grow excessively large.
Generally, the formation of such atypical gas-formed holes is accompanied by
unclean, atypical, or otherwise undesirable off-flavor(s).
14.3.4 Sensory Attributes of Cheeses with Eyes
Swiss cheese may be the most recognizable cheese available in the marketplace. Its
distinct appearance makes it a common feature in advertisements and clip art. As a
result, defects in appearance are readily recognizable to even the average or casual
Swiss-type cheese consumer. US Standards for Swiss cheese or Emmentaler cheese
include US Grade A, US Grade B, and US Grade C. The grading system differenti-
ates cheeses based on established quality criteria outlined in the US Standards for
Grades of Swiss Cheese, Emmentaler Cheese, established by the USDA Agricultural
Marketing Service Dairy Programs (USDA, 2001). Regular evaluation of Swiss
cheeses conducted by well-trained plant personnel, who use the guidelines described
in the following pages, suffice to serve well the product quality efforts of Swiss-
type cheese.
The first step in Swiss cheese evaluation is the training of personnel to recognize
the established quality standards. Becoming aware of the “ideal” sensory attributes
of Swiss cheeses enables product evaluators (cheese graders) to recognize devia-
tions from those ideal features. Grade A Swiss cheese flavor is expected to possess
the pleasing and desirable characteristic Swiss cheese flavor (nutty-like), consistent
with the age of the given cheese (more profound with advanced age), and needs to
be free from undesirable flavors (described later). The cheese body is expected to be
uniform, firm, and smooth. The cheese should be properly set, such that it possesses
well-developed round or slightly oval-shaped eyes that are relatively uniform in size
and distribution. The majority of eyes are expected to be 1–2 cm (3/8–13/16 in.) in
diameter. Swiss cheese rind, if present, should be sound, firm, and smooth, provid-
ing good protection to the cheese. Rindless Swiss should be reasonably uniform in
size and well shaped, and the flexible wrapper needs to adequately and securely
envelop the cheese, be neat, unbroken, and fully protect the surface of the cheese but
may be slightly wrinkled. Cheese color is expected to be white to light yellow and
natural appearing, attractive, and uniform (USDA, 2001).
Grade A Swiss cheese by USDA standards must be devoid of almost all the
defects listed in Tables 14.2, 14.3, 14.4, 14.5, and 14.6. Exceptions are given for
“eyes and texture” attributes and “finish and appearance” attributes, which may be
noted at slight levels in Grade A Swiss cheese. On the other hand, Grade C Swiss
cheese should conform to the same requirements as Grades B and A; however, the
cheese “may possess the following off-flavors to a slight degree: fruity, metallic, old
milk, onion, rancid, sour, weedy, whey-taint, and yeasty; and the following to a defi-
nite degree: acid, bitter, feed, flat and utensil (USDA, 2001).” The guidelines also
specify particular “body, eyes and texture, finish and appearance and color” attri-
butes that are considered acceptable for Grade A, B, and C Swiss cheeses. Swiss
cheese will not be assigned a US grade if it (a) fails to meet or exceed the require-
ment for US Grade C; (b) fails to meet composition, minimum age, or other require-
ments of the FDA; or (c) is produced in a plant found upon inspection to be using
unsatisfactory manufacturing practices, equipment, or facilities or to be operating
Table 14.2 Classification of flavor of Swiss cheese by United States Standards for Grades of
Swiss Cheese, Emmentaler Cheese (USDA, 2001)
Identification of flavor characteristics US Grade A US Grade B US Grade C
Acid – S D
Bitter – S D
Feed – S D
Flat – S D
Fruity – – S
Metallic – – S
Old milk – – S
Onion – – S
Rancid – – S
Sour – – S
Utensil – S D
Weedy – – S
Whey taint – – S
Yeasty – – S
S slight, D definite, − not defined
Table 14.3 Classification of body of Swiss cheese by United States Standards for Grades of Swiss
Cheese, Emmentaler Cheese (USDA, 2001)
Identification of body characteristics US Grade A US Grade B US Grade C
Coarse – – S
Pasty – – S
Short – – S
Weak – S D
Table 14.4 Classification of eyes and texture (cut surfaces) of Swiss cheese by United States
Standards for Grades of Swiss cheese, Emmentaler cheese (USDA, 2001)
Identification of eyes and texture characteristics US Grade A US Grade B US Grade C
Afterset – – S
Cabbage – – S
Checks VS S D
Collapsed – – S
Dead – VS S
Dull VS S D
Frog mouth – S D
Gassy – – S
Irregular – – S
Large eyes – – S
Nesty – VS S
One sided – S D
Overset – S D
Picks VS S D
Rough VS S D
Shell VS S D
Small eyes – – S
Splits – – S
Streuble VS S D
Underset – S D
Uneven – S D
VS very slight, S slight, D definite, − not defined
under unsanitary plant conditions. The following section elaborates on the attributes
that may be realized in finished Swiss cheese.
14.3.5 Preparation of Cheese for Evaluation
Evaluation of any lots of cheeses with eyes should be conducted on representative

samples. The rating of each quality factor must be established on the basis of char-
acteristics present in a randomly selected sample that represents a given vat of
cheese. In the instance of institutional-size cuts (i.e., multi-pound, wrapped cheese
Table 14.5 Classification of finish and appearance of Swiss cheese by United States Standards for
Grades of Swiss Cheese, Emmentaler Cheese (USDA, 2001)
Identification of finish and appearance characteristics US Grade A US Grade B US Grade C
Checked rind – – S
Huffed – S D
Mold on rind surface VS S D
Mold under wrapper or covering VS S D
Soft spots – – S
Soiled surface (rind) – S D
Soiled surface (rindless) – – VS
Uneven – S D
Wet rind – S D
Wet surface (rindless) – S D
VS very slight, S slight, D definite, − not defined
Table 14.6 Classification of color of Swiss cheese by United States Standards for Grades of Swiss
Cheese, Emmentaler Cheese (USDA, 2001)
Identification of color characteristics US Grade A US Grade B US Grade C
Acid cut – – S
Bleached surface – S D
Colored spots – – S
Dull or faded – – S
Mottled – – S
Pink ring – – S
portions, typically cut from a larger piece and product that is intended for use by
various foodservices), the designated samples may be selected on a lot basis.
Cheeses in their original, uncut form should be evaluated following appropriate
tempering (21 °C [70 °F]) for approximately 1–2 h depending on cheese size and
ambient temperatures. For determination of “flavor” and “body” characteristics, the
grader needs to examine a full trier plug of cheese withdrawn from the approximate
center of one of the largest flat surfaces of the given sample. Smaller portions of a
cheese plug are allowed if the samples are of insufficient size for a full plug (USDA,
2001). In order to best determine the “eyes and texture” and “color” characteristics,
the wheel or block should be divided approximately into two halves, thus exposing
two cut surfaces for facilitating examination (USDA, 2001).
Summaries of defects that may be encountered in cheeses are given for “color,
finish and appearance” (Table 14.7), “eyes and texture” (Table 14.8), “flavor”
(Table 14.9), and “body” (Table 14.10). Some terms have been combined in these
tables due to similarities among the attributes described. For greater understanding,
individual terms are explained in detail in the following pages, as defined based
upon US Standards for Grades of Swiss Cheese, Emmentaler Cheese, as produced
by USDA Agricultural Marketing Service Dairy Programs (2001).
Table 14.7 Common color and finish and appearance defects in cheeses with eyes, identification,
and their probable causes
Appearance
Color Identification Probable cause
Acid cut or Bleached or faded Excessive acid development during whey
bleached appearance that may extend drainage, overdressing and salting, nonuniform
surface into cheese moisture distribution in the cheese, incomplete
drying before wrapping
Colored spots, Colored areas, irregular Spoilage bacteria growth (pigmented
mottled or pink blotches, or other unsightly propionibacter or lactobacilli), poor quality
ring color variability milk, high moisture cheese and/or high pH
cheese, mixed curd from different vats, poor
drainage of whey
Dull or faded A color condition lacking in Excess fat in milk and curd
luster
Finish and appearance
Checked rind Numerous small cracks or Poor workmanship during ripening of cheese,
breaks in the rind lack of elasticity in relation to proteolysis,
improper dressing during pressing
Huffed Cheese is rounded or oval in Presence of late blowing activity of spoilage
shape instead of flat bacteria including clostridia, poor quality milk,
grass silage, and/or inadequate milking
practices
Mold on rind or Mold growth on surface or Exposure to mold spores in the presence of
under wrapper under wrapper oxygen, low-quality wrapping material
Soft spots Spots are soft to the touch, Poor workmanship during pressing and
may be faded, may be moist ripening of cheese, poor whey drainage
Soiled surface Milkstone, rust spots, grease, Exposure of cheese to contaminants
or other discoloration on the
surface of the cheese
Uneven One side of the cheese is Improper molding or jostling of molded cheese
higher than the other during press
Wet rind or Moisture adheres to the Poor drainage of whey
surface surface of the rind and may
or may not soften the rind or
cause discoloration
The extensive number of available score cards that have been employed over the
decades for Swiss cheese grading may seem overwhelming to the uninitiated pro-
cessing plant evaluators. Thus, the abbreviated score card presented as Table 14.11
provides an alternative to the multiple score cards shown in Tables 14.2, 14.3, 14.4,
14.5 and 14.6. Essentially, every cheese plant may determine and evaluate cheese
quality based upon the methodology appropriate to the setting.
Table 14.8 Common eye and texture defects in cheeses with eyes, identification, and their
probable causes
Appearance Identification Probable cause
Blind/ Little or no eye formation present Lack of propionic acid
underset fermentation; too acidic milk;
complete removal of particles
serving as nuclei
Checks/picks/ Range from small to sizable, irregular Excessive proteolysis and acid
splits cracks or ragged openings within the body production
Dull/dead Eyes lack a bright shiny luster or have Excess fat in milk and curd;
eyes completely lost their glossy or velvety improper pH; poor whey drainage;
appearance large block size; poor quality milk
Frog mouth Eyes which have developed into a lenticular High acid milk; over-ripening;
or spindle-shaped opening overuse of starter cultures; too
high cooking temperature
Irregular Eyes that have not formed properly and do Spontaneous fermentation,
eyes/collapsed not appear round or slightly oval, distorted, variations in moisture within
somewhat elongated, walnut-shaped eyes blocks; presence of Clostridia
species; increased moisture or low
pH
Nesty/streuble An overabundance of small eyes in a Abnormal gassy fermentation;
localized area, or just under the surface of lack of surface knitting of curd
the cheese particles; reincorporation of
chilled curd during initial pressing
Overset/ Excessive number of irregular eyes within Late gas blowing caused by
cabbage/ the major part of the cheese causing activity of Clostridia bacteria,
blowhole overcrowding, leaving only a paper-thin poor pressing of the curds,
layer of cheese between the eyes, giving a allowing formation of large weak
cabbage appearance areas
Rough or Eyes that do not have smooth, even walls; Insufficient rate and amount of
shell rough, nutshell appearance on walls whey drainage; low pH
Small eyes or Spherical and glossy eyes less than 1 cm in Excess gas generation or air
afterset diameter, or small eyes caused by secondary inclusion; afterset specifies
fermentation secondary fermentation,
indicating poor quality milk
Uneven or Overabundance of small eyes, reasonably Mishandling of cheese,
one-sided developed in some areas and temperature gradient in the curd
eyes underdeveloped in others (or one side) during pressing; high acid curd;
improper knitting; inadequate
pressing
14.3.6 Finish and Appearance
The first thing one will notice upon approaching a cheese with eyes is the external
surface or finish and appearance. With respect to finish and appearance, “very
slight” means the defect is detected upon most critical examination. “Slight” defect
intensity is detected upon moderately critical examination, while “definite” is not a
particularly intense defect level but is certainly detectable by an astute observer.
Table 14.9 Common flavor defects in cheeses with eyes, identification, and their probable causes
Flavor Identification Probable cause
Acid Sharp and puckery to the taste, Excess lactic acid, the use of high
characteristic of lactic acid acid milk
Bitter A basic taste similar to quinine or caffeineProteolytic starter culture,
microbial contamination
Feed/weed Feed flavors (such as alfalfa, sweet clover, Feeding cow strongly flavored
silage, or similar feed) feeds before milking
Flat/lack of Insipid, practically devoid of characteristic Contamination with other
flavor sweet hazelnut, typical flavor for the cheese bacteria, inadequate fermentation,
and proteolysis
Fruity A sweet fruit-like flavor resembling Pseudomonas fragi growth
pineapple, apple, or pears
Garlic/onion This flavor is recognized by the peculiar Feeding of onions/garlic or leeks
taste and odor suggestive of its name
Metallic A flavor having qualities suggestive of Oxidation of ingredients (milk)
metal, imparting a puckery sensation
Old milk Lacks freshness Old milk
Rancid A butyric acid flavor sometimes associated Mishandling of cheese milk, milk
with bitterness. Formation of volatile fatty lipolysis, or microbial lipase
acids (C4 through C12) activity
Sulfide Odor of hydrogen sulfide or spoiled eggs An abnormal fermentation
Unclean (dirty An undesirable, persistent, aromatic Undesirable microbial growth
aftertaste) aftertaste
Unnatural Generally has a relatively clean flavor, but May be chemical, enzymatic, or
(atypical) the overall sensory perception is atypical bacteriological in origin
for the given cheese
Whey taint A slightly acid taste and odor characteristic Too slow expulsion of whey from
of fermented whey the curd
Yeasty A flavor indicating yeast fermentation Contamination by yeast and mold,
poor packaging
Table 14.10 Common body defects in cheeses with eyes, identification, and probable causes
Body/texture Identification Probable cause
Coarse Rough, mealy, and sandy feeling Overcooking of curds
Crumbly Falls apart while working Low moisture retention
Firm/rubbery/ Resistance to mastication or Excess use of chymosin; too high
corky manipulation between thumb and cooking temperature and/or time; low
fingers moisture; lack of proteolysis
Pasty Sticky and smeary when rubbed Excessive acid production; high moisture
between the thumb and fingers content, poor drainage of whey;
excessive proteolysis
Short No elasticity to the plug when Excess proteolysis and acid production
rubbed between the thumb and
fingers
Weak Requires little pressure to crush, is High moisture; excessive proteolysis
soft but is not necessarily sticky like
pasty cheese
Table 14.11 Proposed score card for the evaluation of cheeses with eyes
Defects (Unofficial; modify scores accordingly) Slight Definite Pronounced
Flavor
Acid/sour 8 6 4
Bitter 9 8 6
Feed/weedy 9 8 6
Flat/lack of typical flavor 9 8 6
Fruity 8 6 4
Metallic 6 4 1
Old milk 6 4 1
Onion/garlic 5 3 1
Rancid 6 4 1
Sulfide 6 4 1
Unclean (dirty aftertaste) 8 6 4
Unnatural (atypical) 6 4 1
Whey taint 8 6 4
Yeasty 5 3 1
Body and texture
Coarse 3 2 1
Crumbly 4 2 1
Firm/rubbery/corky 4 3 2
Pasty 3 2 1
Short 4 3 2
Weak 4 2 1
Appearance
Blind/underset 4 2 1
Checks/picks/splits 3 2 1
Color defects 3 2 1
Dull/dead eye 3 2 1
Frog mouth 3 2 1
Irregular eyes/collapsed 4 2 1
Nesty/streuble 4 2 1
Overset/cabbage/blowhole 3 2 1
Small eyes 4 3 2
Uneven/one-sided eyes 3 2 1
Checked rind describes numerous small cracks and/or breaks in the cheese rind.
This defect may allow the intrusion of mold to the body of the cheese. Surface
cracks most usually result from improper dressing during pressing and rough
handling.
Huffed describes a cheese that has become somewhat rounded or oval in shape
instead of exhibiting the distinctly preferred symmetrically flat top and bottom
surfaces.
Mold on rind surface is self-explanatory; unwanted and unappealing mold growth

has occurred.
Mold under wrapper or covering. Broken or torn wrappers result from rough han-
dling, improper wrapping, and used of inferior materials for wrapping and cur-
ing, which permits oxygen to enter and growth of mold on the surface.
Soft spots are cheese surfaces that appear/feel soft to the touch and generally appear
faded and may feel moist.
Soiled surface describes formation of potential milkstone, rust spots, grease, or
other unusual and undesirable discoloration areas on the surface of the cheese.
Uneven is a term used when one side of the cheese obviously appears higher than
the other (i.e., misshapen).
Wet rind describes when moisture adheres to the surface of the rind and may or may
not soften the rind or cause discoloration.
Wet surface is a term used to describe a rindless cheese when moisture appears
between the wrapper and the cheese surface.
14.3.7 Cheese Color
Upon trying or slicing into a cheese, the color will be readily noted. With respect to
color, the term “slight” refers to attributes that are only detectable upon careful and
critical examination, while the presence of a “definite” quality defect is not intense
but is nonetheless readily detectable under close examination. Color defects of eyed
cheeses include the following:
Acid cut is defined as a bleached or faded appearance that sometimes varies through-
out the cheese.
Bleached surface describes a type of faded coloring, beginning at the surface and
extending inward a short distance. The main reason for this defect is high acid
resulting from improper whey drainage. When the salt concentration in the brine
has fallen dramatically low, the outer portions of the block become soft and
white. Improper dressing and salting may enhance bleaching by permitting the
surface to remain wet. Incomplete drying before wrapping will cause the color
change on the outer surface.
Colored spots are brightly colored areas (ranging from pink to brick red or gray to
black) of atypical bacteria growing as readily discernible colonies, randomly
distributed throughout the cheese. They are found mostly in winter cheese, low-
acid cheese, and cheese made from poor bacterial quality milk.
Dull or faded describes a color condition that is lacking in the expected level
of luster.
Mottled indicates irregular-shaped spots or blotches in which certain portions are
light colored and others are more highly colored. Also, an unevenness of color
due to the combination of curd from two different vats is sometimes referred to
as “mixed curd.” A mottled or wavy condition may result from exceedingly poor
technique in filling the molding vat and incomplete pressing.
Pink ring suggests a unique color condition, which usually appears pink to brown-
ish red and occurs as a uniform varied color band near the cheese surface and
which may also follow or accompany eye formation. The definite ring of color
rapidly disappears when a freshly cut cheese surface is exposed to air, which
indicates an association with changes in oxidation reduction potential. This
defect is rarely seen in young cheese but may appear in cheese 4 months of age
and older. Pink ring should not be confused with the many pigmented bacteria,
yeast, and mold that may grow on the surfaces of improperly dried and wrapped
cheese blocks.
14.3.8 Cheese Eyes and Texture
The defects related to eye and texture formation can be classified according to dis-
tribution, number, size, shape, and interior condition (Fig. 14.4).
14.3.8.1 Eye Distribution
One sided refers to cheese that is reasonably developed with eyes on one side and
underdeveloped eyes on the opposite side. This defect is more commonly related to
rindless blocks due to lower salt and higher moisture content. One possible reason
Fig. 14.4 Diagrams of cheese slices exhibiting a variety of eye defects

for the one-sided defect is a temperature difference between the surface and inside
of the curd at the press. The occurrence of one-sidedness can be reduced by prevent-
ing the press temperature from dropping below 24 °C. “Slight” means eyes are
evenly distributed throughout at least 90% of the total cheese area, while “definite”
means eyes are evenly distributed throughout at least 75% but less than 90% of the
total cheese area.
Gassy describes variously scattered gas holes of various sizes, shape, and appear-
ance that may be due to the unwanted development of atypical microbial gas forma-
tions. A “slight” intensity is defined as no more than three occurrences per any given
13 cm2 (2 in.2) of internal cheese surface.
Nesty refers to an overabundance of small eyes in a localized area (Fig. 14.5).
The occurrence of nesty is related to the disturbance of the curd during knitting.
Small nests are most frequently found on the outer top edge of cheese blocks due to
incomplete pressing of the top side or reincorporation of the curd that escapes
between the press plate and molding vat wall during initial pressing. The curd
should not be disturbed after it has started to knit in order to prevent the occurrence
of this defect. “Very slight” means occurrence is limited to no more than 5% of the
exposed cut area of the cheese. “Slight” means occurrence in more than 5%, but less
than 10%, of the exposed cut area of the cheese, and “definite” means occurrence in
more than 10%, but less than 20%, of the exposed cut area of the cheese.
Streuble refers to an overabundance of small eyes located just under the surface
of the cheese. This defect can also be described as a surface nest. It is mostly found
in wheel cheese where cheesemakers attempt to recover the remaining curd in the
kettle after dipping. Already chilled curd does not knit to the wheel completely and
causes streuble formation. The possible reasons for the occurrence of streuble in
rindless block cheeses are lack of surface knit, too cool surfaces, air on the surface
of the curd, and improper pressing or weight distribution. To prevent the formation
of this defect, avoid improper knitting of the curd particles. “Very slight” extends no
more than 0.3 cm (1/8 in.) into the body of the cheese. “Slight” extends 0.28 cm
(>1/9 in.) or more but less than 0.6 cm (1/4 in.) into the body of the cheese. “Definite”
Fig. 14.5 Cheeses exhibiting nesty (left), streuble (right), and uneven eye distribution
extends 0.6 cm (>1/4 in.) or more but less than 1.3 cm (<1/2 in.) into the body of
the cheese.
Uneven refers to cheese that is reasonably developed with eyes in some areas and
underdeveloped in other areas. The possible reasons for this defect may be (a) incor-
poration of air in the curd mass during filling of the molding vat; (b) unequal filling
of the molding vat; (c) major shifts of the curd mass during pressing; (d) high-acid
curd, causing improper knitting; (e) temperature variation in the curd; (f) inadequate
pressing of some portions of the curd mass; and (g) rupture of knitted curd during
brining. “Slight” means eyes are evenly distributed throughout at least 90% of the
total cheese area, while “definite” means eyes are evenly distributed throughout at
least 75%, but less than 90% of the total cheese area.
14.3.8.2 Eye Number
Blind is a term that describes the absence of eyes in portions of or in an entire block
of cheese. Any factor that prevents gas formation by propionic acid bacteria and
complete removal of particles serving as nuclei for gas collection would result in
blind cheese.
Underset describes when too few eyes are present. Similar factors that cause
blind cheese also may lead to underset cheese. “Very slight” is used when the num-
ber of eyes present exceeds or falls short of the ideal by a limited amount. “Slight”
indicates the number of eyes exceeds or falls short by a moderate amount (Fig. 14.6).
Overset describes an excessive number of eyes present within the cheese
(Fig. 14.7). The overset condition may be seen throughout the cheese block uni-
formly or may be localized in specific areas such as across the top, through the
middle, on one side, or at the edges. It is important to observe the location of the
defect carefully to obtain an idea about the probable cause of the defect. The over-
growth of undesirable gas-forming bacteria, inadvertent incorporation of air in the
curd mass before pressing, mishandling of the cheese during pressing, improper pH
and moisture levels, presence of unwanted particles, and other factors that would
Fig. 14.6 Cheeses exhibiting slits and underset (left) and uneven eye distribution
Fig. 14.7 Cheeses exhibiting overset, irregular eyes (left), uneven eye distribution, and slits (right)
Fig. 14.8 Swiss cheese exhibiting large eyes
prevent normal knitting of the curd before gas production by propionic acid bacteria
would cause overset cheese. “Very slight” is used when the number of eyes present
exceeds or falls short of the ideal by a limited amount. “Slight” indicates the number
of eyes exceeds or falls short by a moderate amount.
14.3.8.3 Eye Size
Blowhole describes the presence of a large, overblown air sac (typically more than
12.5 cm (5 in.) in diameter) within the body of the cheese (Fig. 14.4). Externally, the
cheese usually appears torn and deformed. One of the possible reasons for this
defect could be the growth of Clostridia. However, the problem is not necessarily
related to microbial activity only; it may also be caused by poor pressing of the
cheese that allows formation of large, weak areas in the curd mass. The presence of
unexpelled whey pockets is ideal for the formation of blowholes. Blowholes are
encountered very rarely in plants using careful, proper pressing procedures.
Large eyes are called “slight” when the majority of the eyes are more than 2 cm
(13/16 in.) but less than 2.5 cm (1 in.) in diameter (Fig. 14.8). The 0.6 cm (1/4 in.)
size is ideal. Large eyes can be caused by high moisture content and high pH (over
5.4) of the curds. Improper circulation and block stacking both in the warm room
and finished cooler may also contribute to the problem. Rapid and unimpeded cool-
ing is necessary after warm room treatment to prevent further development of eyes.
Small eyes are called “slight” when the majority of the eyes are less than 0.95 cm
(3/8 in.) but no more than 0.3 cm (1/8 in.) in diameter. The 0.6 cm (1/4 in.) size is
ideal for a typical Swiss or Maasdam cheese (smaller for other cheeses with eyes).
Afterset describes small eyes caused by secondary fermentation, which is also
known as late fermentation. This defect indicates a gaseous fermentation took place
after the growth of propionic acid bacteria and generally occurs in the curing room.
Poor-quality milk is one of the most common causes of the defect. “Very slight” is
used as an intensity descriptor when the number of eyes present exceeds or falls
short of the ideal by a limited amount. “Slight” indicates that the number of eyes
exceeds or falls short by a moderate amount.
14.3.8.4 Eye Shape
Cabbage describes those eyed cheeses having eyes so numerous within the major
part of the cheese that they crowd each other, leaving only a paper-thin layer of
cheese between the eyes, thus causing the cheese to have a “cabbage-like” appear-
ance and irregular-shaped eyes (Fig. 14.9). The most common causes are high mois-
ture, soft body, low acidity, weak inactive starter, and inhibitory compounds.
Collapsed describes eyes that have not formed properly and do not appear either
round or slightly oval but rather either flattened and/or appear to have collapsed
Fig. 14.9 Cheeses exhibiting slits (left), cabbage (both), and a split (right)
Fig. 14.10 Cheeses exhibiting irregular eyes, with frog mouth (left), and uneven eye distribution
Fig. 14.11 Cheeses exhibiting checks, splits and small, collapsed, and irregular eyes
(Fig. 14.10). Soft, pasty-bodied cheese cannot withstand pressure, and upon cooling
after warm room treatment, the eyes fold in upon themselves.
Checks/picks/slits/splits are similar attributes. Checks are small, short cracks
within the body of the cheese. Picks are small irregular or ragged openings within
the body of the cheese. Slits may appear as straight or jagged breaks in the body.
Splits are more sizable cracks, usually occurring in parallel layers and usually clean-
cut, found within the body of the cheese (Fig. 14.11). “Very slight” infers infrequent
occurrence (i.e., not more than 2.5 cm [1 in.] from the surface). “Slight” means
limited occurrence, not more than 1 in. from the surface, while “definite” means
limited occurrence throughout the cheese.
Frog mouth eyes have developed into lenticular or spindle-shaped openings
(Fig. 14.10). Frog mouth can be seen if the cheese curd is not elastic enough to open
normally under pressure to form a smooth, round eye. High-acid milk, overripening,
overuse of starter cultures, too long firework, and too high cooking temperature are
among the reasons for the formation of frog mouth.
Irregular eyes are eyes that have not formed properly and do not appear either
round or slightly oval, and the shape (conformation) is not accurately described by
other terms (Fig. 14.10). When the cheese body is soft and is not restrained during
warm room treatment, the developing eyes tend to form along stress lines. Variations
in moisture within blocks resulting from press temperature differences promote
irregular eye formation. “Very slight” is used when the characteristic is exhibited in
less than 5% of the eyes. “Slight” is used when the characteristic is exhibited in 5%
or more, but less than 10% of the eyes. “Definite” is used when the characteristic is
exhibited in more than 10% but less than 20% of the eyes.
14.3.8.5 Interior Condition
Dull/dead eyes are similar defects. Dead eyes are developed cheese openings but
have completely lost their preferred glossy or velvety appearance (Fig. 14.12). Dull
eyes have lost some of their bright shiny luster. The appearance of dull and dead
eyes on the top and outer edge of blocks indicates a relationship between this defect
and whey drainage. Other defects related to low pH, insufficient whey drainage,
poor-quality milk, and poor manufacturing procedures may be observed along with
dull and dead eyes.
Rough suggests that the cheese eyes simply do not exhibit the desired smooth
appearing, even wall surfaces (Fig. 14.13). Rough eye is essentially an exag-
geration of dull and dead eyes. Insufficient rate and amount of whey drainage
are a common cause of defects. High moisture content leads to excessive acidity
that causes the development of abnormal eyes attributable to the firm and
short body.
Shell (like) describes a unique, rough “nutshell” appearance (multidimensional)
on the wall surface of the Swiss eyes. The factors causing the formation of shell-like
eyes are the same described for dull, dead, and rough eyes.
Fig. 14.12 Cheeses exhibiting slight slits and blown areas with some dull eyes
Fig. 14.13 Cheeses exhibiting pronounced slits and blown areas, with rough appearance
14.3.9 Cheese Flavor
While Swiss cheese should have a pleasing and desirable characteristic hazelnut-
like flavor, all cheeses with eyes should exhibit their characteristic flavor, at an
intensity consistent with the age of the given cheese, and be free from undesirable
off-flavors. Swiss cheese industry experience has shown that there is a strong rela-
tionship between desirable flavor and proper eye formation. During manufacture
and curing, the lactic acid bacteria transform lactose to lactic acid, and finally pro-
pionic acid bacteria produce some propionic and acetic acids, as well as carbon
dioxide. Appropriate eye formation in Swiss cheese is considered a good indication
of typical Swiss cheese flavor (Bodyfelt, 1988).
With respect to flavor, “slight” refers to detection only upon critical examination,
while “definite” refers to a not intense but clearly identifiable level.
Acid is described as sharp and puckery to the taste, characteristic of lactic acid.
Bitter is a basic taste similar to quinine and, for many tasters, perceived after a
momentary delay in perception.
Feed flavors include alfalfa, sweet clover, grass hay, silage, haylage (wilted and
bagged grass), brewery wastes, and/or other similarly fed high-volume aromatic
roughages, fed within the critical time period of 0.5–3.5 h prior to milking.
Flat is a term used to describe a cheese that lacks the typical intensity of character-
istic cheese flavor for its presumed extent of aging.
Fruity provides a sweet fruit-like flavor (aroma) that resembles apples, pears, or
other similar fruit.
Metallic describes a flavor character having qualities suggestive of metal (copper or
tin-like) and also imparting a somewhat delayed puckery mouthfeel sensation.
Old milk describes a cheese that suggests the sensation of a product lacking fresh-
ness (i.e., a cheese made from less than the freshest milk [cheesemilk
≥4–6 days old]).
Onion/garlic is a distinctive cheese off-flavor that is recognized by the peculiar

tastes and/or odors suggestive of the names of the “wild” plants consumed by
milking cows (or goats) from foraging or from produced hays.
Rancid manifests the presence of butyric acid or other short-chain volatile fatty
acids and their formed salts (soaps). It may be accompanied by unclean-like or
otherwise objectionable odors and/or somewhat delayed bitter aftertastes as well.
Sour does not simply refer to an initial “acid” or sour taste but also to an accompa-
nying pungent aroma resembling lactic acid and/or vinegar. The occurrence of
sour milk generally implies inadequate cooling of raw farm milk, bulk transport
operations, and/or inadequate milk temperature control at the cheese plant.
Utensil/psychrotrophic is a term used to describe a flavor suggestive of improper or
inadequate washing and sanitizing of milking machines, utensils, and/or milk
handling equipment. This off-flavor is primarily caused by the presence and out-
growth of psychotrophic Gram-negative spoilage bacteria (i.e., dirty, unclean,
fruity/fermented flavor notes prevail).
Unclean (an unpleasant dirty-like and lingering aftertaste) is a succinct term that
best describes this most objectionable and unpleasant and lingering off-flavor.
The taste buds of the unfortunate taster frequently fail to “clean up” (clear up).
Often an accompanying offensive, objectionable off-smell will prompt the more
alert would-be taster to trust and rely on the focused sense of smell to determine
the objectionable flavor profile of the “tagged” off-flavors of “unclean” and/or
“utensil/psychrotrophic” off-flavors of milk.
Weedy is a flavor suggestive of aromatic weeds consumed by milking animals;
“weed” off-flavors are much likened to “feed” off-flavors. In fact, garlic/onion
off-aroma of milk supplies is nothing other than a variant of a weed (or feed)
category of milk supply off-flavor.
Whey taint, as it occurs in cheeses with eyes, tends to exhibit a slightly acidic taste
note and casts an odor characteristic of fermented whey (though sweeter than is
the case for Cheddar and other more acidic cheeses). A pasty body may occa-
sionally accompany the whey taint flavor character of eyed cheese varieties.
Yeasty is an occasional flavor character typically that indicates that yeast fermenta-
tion has occurred within the cheese; yeast-contaminated cheese starter cultures
may be suspect.
14.3.10 Cheese Body and Texture
The body and texture of cheese plug samples withdrawn from Swiss cheese variet-
ies should be reasonably firm, smooth, and moderately flexible when bent. Near the
surface, where aged cheese is generally drier, the body may be slightly crumbly. A
soft and pasty cheese body is often associated with high moisture or abnormal eye
formation and may be accompanied by poor flavor development (Bodyfelt, 1988).
Body and texture defects assigned “slight” level of intensity infers detection only
upon critical examination, while a “definite” degree is not intense but detectable.
The body properties can be examined by removing a plug from cheese and then
working a small piece of the sample between the thumb, index, and middle fingers.
Coarse implies the cheese body feels rough, dry, and sandy between the fingers and/
or in the mouth.
Firm, rubbery, or corky means the cheese is unusually resistant to efforts at com-
pression; corky is the most dry in this progression of terms.
Pasty describes an unusually weak product body that, when worked between the
fingers, atypically sticks to finger surfaces and readily smears.
Short body exhibits no elasticity when the plug is broken and worked between the
fingers.
Weak cheese requires little pressure to compress or crush. It is soft (perhaps sugges-
tive of higher moisture levels) but is not necessarily sticky like pasty cheese.
14.4 Modern Sensory Analysis of Swiss Cheese
Modern sensory analysis practices, detailed in Chap. 17, have worked effectively
for the evaluation of Swiss cheese. Drake et al. (2007) utilized modern sensory
practices to identify the compounds responsible for umami taste in Cheddar and
Swiss cheeses. A trained sensory panel familiar with the Spectrum™ descriptive
analysis method (Sensory Spectrum, New Providence, NJ) was utilized to select
four Cheddar and four Swiss cheeses (two with low and two with high umami taste
intensity for each type). The cheese flavor language included the basic taste umami,
which was identified in the initial development of a lexicon (Drake et al., 2001). The
compounds expected to contribute to umami taste (monosodium glutamate (MSG),
disodium 5′-inosine monophosphate (IMP), disodium 5′-guanosine monophosphate
(GMP), lactic acid, glutamic acid, proprionic acid, and succinic acid) were quanti-
fied by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) on the four cheeses. Taste
thresholds were determined for each compound (plus sodium chloride) using a
modification of the ASTM procedure E679-9 (ASTM, 1992), an ascending forced
choice method of limits. Comparison of analytical data and sensory thresholds indi-
cated that glutamic acid contributed most profoundly to umami taste in Cheddar and
Swiss cheeses; proprionic acid and succinic acid also contributed to umami taste in
Swiss cheese.
Determination of free fatty acids (FFA) or nonesterified fatty acids (NEFA) in
dairy products is often desirable because their presence can indicate quality and
maturation and enable categorization by cheesemakers (Koca et al., 2007). However,
determination of FFA is a challenge because FFA are often volatile, are found at low
levels, and exist in a wide range of carbon chain lengths (Chavarri et al., 1997). The
most common methodology for FFA quantification involves lipid extraction, isola-
tion of FFA, and gas chromatographic quantification (de Jong & Badings, 1990).
Koca et al. (2007) developed a rapid screening method to monitor the short-chain
FFA contents in Swiss cheese using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR).
Forty-four Swiss cheese samples were evaluated by their methodology and with gas
chromatography-flame ionization detection as a reference method. Infrared spec-
troscopy and chemometrics accurately and precisely predicted the short-chain free
fatty acid (acetic, proprionic, and butyric acids) content in Swiss cheeses and in
water-soluble fractions of the cheeses (Koca et al., 2007).
Proper eye formation and structural features have great importance on determin-
ing the commercial value and quality of Swiss-type cheeses. New emerging nonde-
structive methods have been developed for the detection of structural defects during
the ripening of Swiss-type cheeses. Rosenberg et al. (1992) demonstrated that mag-
netic resonance imaging (MRI) is a potential technique for the evaluation of eye
formation and structural quality. The MRI method was able to detect structural
defects rapidly and nondestructively with high spatial resolution. Ultrasonic moni-
toring has been used for the evaluation of structural quality of Swiss cheese
(Eskelinen et al., 2007). The method was capable of detecting and characterizing
cheese eyes and cracks in ripened cheese. Such tools provide valuable information
to improve and control the production process to obtain desirable structure in
Swiss cheese.
The potential for additional advances in understanding Swiss flavor development
and monitoring cheese quality is great with the numerous modern techniques avail-
able to the industry.
14.5 Conclusion
Swiss cheese and other cheeses with eyes have unique flavors and distinctive eye
formation that differentiate them from other types of cheeses. The production of
these cheeses requires careful orchestration of special cheese cultures, technical
inputs, complex manufacturing steps, unique cheese making equipment, brining
and aging strategies in order to consistently attain the desired characteristics, and
consistent quality. There are numerous factors that contribute to variation of product
quality such as processing/packaging methods and materials, as well as storage time
and conditions. The training of cheesemakers to not only understand the sensory
attributes described in these pages but also apply appropriate process control and
how to recognize probable causes of quality shortcomings can suffice to lead to
sound and improved cheese quality in the marketplace. Using the provided score-
cards for the consistent evaluation of produced cheeses with eyes should enable
processors to optimize product flavor, eye formation and uniformity, optimum tex-
ture properties, and appealing color and appearance in order to attract targeted con-
sumers and simultaneously better monitor day-to-day product quality.
References
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). (1992). Standard practice for determination
of odor and taste thresholds by a forced-choice method of limits. E679-91. In Annual book of
standards (pp. 35–39). American Society for Testing and Materials.
Bastian, E. D., Lo, C. G., & David, K. M. M. (1997). Plasminogen activation in cheese milk:
Influence on Swiss cheese ripening. Journal of Dairy Science, 80, 245–251.
Beuvier, E., Berthaud, K., Cegarra, S., Dasen, A., Pochet, S., Buchin, S., & Duboz, G. (1997).
Ripening and quality of Swiss-type cheese made from raw, pasteurized or microfiltered milk.
Bodyfelt, F. W. (1988). Sensory evaluation of cheese. In F. W. Bodyfelt, J. Tobias, & G. M. Trout
(Eds.), The sensory evaluation of dairy products (pp. 53–59). Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Bosset, J. O., Collomb, M., & Sieber, R. (1993). The aroma composition of Swiss Gruyere cheese.
IV. The acidic volatile components and their changes in content during ripening. Lebensmittel-
Wissenschaft und Technologie, 26, 581–592.
Brennan, N. M., Cogan, T. M., Loessner, M. L., & Scherer, S. (2004). Bacterial surface-ripened
cheeses. In P. Fox, P. L. H. McSweeney, T. M. Cogan, & T. P. Guinee (Eds.), Cheese: Chemistry,
physics, and microbiology (Vol. 2, 3rd ed., pp. 141–155). Elsevier.
Chavarri, F., Virto, M., Martin, C., Najera, A. I., Santisteban, A., Barron, L. J. R., & de Renobale,
M. (1997). Determination of free fatty acids in cheese: Comparison of two analytical methods.
The Journal of Dairy Research, 64, 445–452.
de Jong, C., & Badings, H. T. (1990). Determination of free fatty acids in milk and cheese:
Procedures for extraction, clean up and capillary gas chromatographic analysis. Journal of
High Resolution Chromatography, 13, 94–98.
Drake, M. A., McIngvale, S. C., Gerard, P. D., Cadwallader, K. R., & Civille, G. V. (2001).
Development of a descriptive language for Cheddar cheese. Journal of Food Science, 66,
1422–1427.
Drake, S. L., Carunchia Whetstine, M. E., Drake, M. A., Courtney, P., Fligner, K., Jenkins, J.,
& Pruitt, C. (2007). Sources of umami taste in Cheddar and Swiss cheeses. Journal of Food
Science, 72(6), S360–S366.
Eskelinen, J. J., Alavuotunki, A. P., Haeggstrom, E., & Alatossava, T. (2007). Preliminary study
of ultrasonic structural quality control of Swiss-type cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 90,
4071–4077.
FDA. (2006). Cheeses and related products: Swiss and Emmentaler cheese. Code of Federal
Regulations 21: 133.195. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
science (pp. 388–428). Apen Publishers, Inc.
Frohlich-Wyder, M. T., & Bachmann, H. P. (2004). Cheeses with propionic acid fermentation. In
P. Fox, P. L. H. McSweeney, T. M. Cogan, & T. P. Guinee (Eds.), Cheese: Chemistry, physics,
and microbiology (Vol. 2, 3rd ed., pp. 141–155). Elsevier.
Garnot, P., & Mollé, D. (1987). Heat-stability of milk-clotting enzymes in conditions encountered
in Swiss cheese making. Journal of Food Science, 52(1), 75–77.
Helinck, S., Bars, D. L., Moreau, D., & Yvon, M. (2004). Ability of thermophilic lactic acid bacte-
ria to produce aroma compounds from amino acids. Applied and Environmental Microbiology,
70, 3855–3861.
Jenkins, S. (1996). Cheese primer (pp. 266–289). Workman Publishing Company.
Ji, T., Alvarez, V. B., & Harper, W. J. (2004). Influence of starter culture ratios and warm room
treatment on free fatty acid and amino acid in Swiss cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 87,
1986–1992.
Koca, N., Rodriguqz-Saona, L. E., Harper, W. J., & Alvarez, V. B. (2007). Application of Fourier
transform infrared spectroscopy for monitoring short-chain free fatty acids in Swiss cheese.
Kosikowski, F. V., & Mistry, V. V. (1997). Cheese and fermented milk foods (Vol. 1, pp. 226–251).
F.V. Kosikowski.
Lawlor, J. B., Delahunty, C. M., Wilkinson, M. G., & Sheehan, J. (2003). Swiss-type and Swiss-
Cheddar hybrid type cheeses: Effects of manufacture on sensory character and relationships
between the sensory attributes and volatile compounds and gross compositional constituents.
International Journal of Dairy Technology, 56(1), 39–51.
Lawrence, R. C., Heap, H. A., & Gilles, J. (1984). A controlled approach to cheese technology.
Liggett, R. E., Drake, M. A., & Delwiche, J. F. (2008). Impact of flavor attributes on consumer
liking of Swiss cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 91, 466–476.
Noel, Y., Boyaval, P., Thierry, A., Gagnaire, V., & Grappin, R. (1999). Eye formation and Swiss-
type cheeses. In B. A. Law (Ed.), Technology of cheese making (pp. 222–250). CRC Press LLC.
Ollikainen, P., & Nyberg, K. (1988). A study of plasmin activity during ripening of Swiss-type
cheese. Milchwissenschaft, 43(8), 497–499.
Reinbold, G. W. (1972). Swiss cheese varieties (Pfizer cheese monographs) (Vol. 5). Pfizer Inc.
Rosenberg, M., McCarthy, M., & Kauten, R. (1992). Evaluation of eye formation and structural
quality of Swiss-type cheese by magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Dairy Science, 75,
2083–2091.
Rychlik, M., & Bosset, J. O. (2001). Flavor and off-flavor compounds of Swiss Gruyere cheese.
Identification of key odorants by quantitative instrumental and sensory studies. International
Steffen, C., Eberhard, P., Bosset, J. O., & Ruegg, M. (1993). Swiss-type varieties. In P. F. Fox (Ed.),
Cheese: Chemistry, physics and microbiology (Vol. 2, 2 nd ed., pp. 83–110). Aspen Publisher.
Thierry, A. D., Richoux, R., & Kerjean, J. R. (2004). Isovaleric acid is mainly produced by
Propionibacterium freudenreichii in Swiss cheese. International Dairy Journal, 14, 801–807.
USDA (United States Dept. of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Dairy Programs).
(2001). United States Standards for Grades of Swiss Cheese, Emmentaler Cheese. Available at
https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Swiss_Cheese%2C_Emmentaler_Cheese_
Standard%5B1%5D.pdf. Date accessed 12 Dec 2022.
USDA (United States Dept. of Agriculture) and National Cheese Institute. (1978). Cheese varieties
and descriptions. USDA Agriculture Handbook No. 54. 124 & 151.
Chapter 15
Mozzarella
Valeria Rizzi, Mark E. Johnson, and Dean Sommer
15.1 Introduction
Mozzarella is often referred to as a fresh cheese, as it is not deliberately aged to

develop flavor. When eaten fresh, it tastes like the milk from which it is made but
may have different intensities of buttery, salty, and acidic notes depending upon the
style. Mozzarella, in all its forms, ranks number one as the most consumed cheese
in the United States with 12.5 pounds eaten per person as of 2019. This accounts for
approximately one-third of the United States’ total cheese consumption (Dairy
Farmers of Wisconsin, 2020, personal communication).
Mozzarella is not one cheese variety but rather a family of cheeses differentiated
by composition and manufacturing protocol. The US Food and Drug Administration
(Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 21, Part 133.155–133.158) recognizes
four categories of mozzarella based on composition: mozzarella, low-moisture
mozzarella (also called whole milk mozzarella by the industry), part-skim mozza-
rella, and low-moisture part-skim mozzarella (LMPS). The CFR also lists scamorza
as an alternative name with all types of mozzarella. All types of mozzarella must be
made from pasteurized milk and can be made from all cow’s milk or buffalo milk
but not a mixture of the two. The CFR also accepts alternative manufacturing tech-
nologies for mozzarella if it produces a finished cheese having the same physical
and chemical properties for a particular category (see Table 15.1) and only uses
accepted ingredients as listed in the CFR. This has allowed for the manufacture of
low-moisture part-skim mozzarella without using the traditional cooking and
stretching of the curd step (often called the pasta filata step) and is direct salted
rather than brined. The cooking and stretching step is often referred to as the mixer
molder step in large-scale manufacturing as the curd is mixed in hot water and
V. Rizzi · M. E. Johnson (*) · D. Sommer

Wisconsin Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_15
478 V. Rizzi et al.
Table 15.1 Mozzarella and provolone standards of identity from the CFR Title 21, parts
133.155–133.158 and 133.181 (US FDA, 2022)
Moisture FDMa
(- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - % - - - - - - - - - - - - - -)
Mozzarella >52–60 max ≥45
Low-moisture mozzarella >45–52 max ≥45
Part-skim mozzarella >52–60 max 30 min − <45
Low-moisture part-skim mozzarella >45–52 max 30 min − <45
Provolone 45 max ≥45
FDM Fat in the dry matter
a
Fig. 15.1 Example of “fresh” mozzarella (left) and LMPS mozzarella (right)
transferred mechanically into forms while still molten. It is often called block moz-
zarella by the industry as it is pressed in very large blocks; 18–290 kg (40–640 pounds),
but after conversion, it is sold mainly in retail stores in 170–900 g (6–32 ounce)
packages. Block mozzarella allows for exact weight packages with less trim loss.
String cheese and whips must be labeled as the category of mozzarella whose
composition standards it meets, i.e., most commonly low-moisture part-skim moz-
zarella and occasionally low-moisture mozzarella.
The proposed Codex standards (WHO/FAO) recognize only two categories of
mozzarella, which are based on composition and on how the cheese is used. The
first is a mozzarella with high moisture and typically very little salt content (<0.5%)
and is ready for consumption immediately after manufacture. It has a shelf life of
only a few weeks. This cheese is commonly referred to in the United States as fresh
mozzarella (Fig. 15.1). The second category, over which there was considerable
discussion internationally, is a compromise to allow for a lower-moisture version of
mozzarella. This version was proposed due to the pervasive use in the United States
of the name mozzarella for a cheese lower in moisture and often lower in fat than
mozzarella. This style of cheese was developed in the United States to prolong the
shelf life and is principally used for pizza.
15 Mozzarella 479
Another difference between the two styles is that the first category of mozzarella
is too soft to be shredded while the second category is made for this purpose. The CFR
would recognize this second style as either low-moisture mozzarella, part-skim
mozzarella, or low-moisture part-skim mozzarella (LMPS).
The FDA (CFR) sets no requirements for pH, salt, sensory, or functional attri-
butes of mozzarella. However, the USDA (2008), pizza manufacturers, and other
commercial users of mozzarella set their own criteria for acceptability based gener-
ally on machinability and baking performance. These criteria are often initially
tested at the cheese plant. Retail stores simply ask that the mozzarellas they sell
meet the compositional standards set by FDA. Consumer complaints are directed
ultimately to the cheesemaker. Retail mozzarella is evaluated at the cheese factory
to ensure that it meets composition requirements, acceptable flavor, and machin-
ability, and again at the convertor for the ability to be sliced, cubed, or shredded.
However, cheese purchases at retail will have significant variability in shred and
bake performance that is outside the cheesemaker’s and converter’s control. This is
due to the differences in cheese age and storage conditions after the cheese has left
the factory.
In cheese contests, mozzarellas are evaluated on appearance, taste, body, and
texture but rarely on bake characteristics. Cheese contest judges also evaluate the
integrity of the packaging. Mozzarella contest categories include flavored or fresh
mozzarellas packaged in flavored oils or cheeses with smoked flavor. These are also
judged according to the quality and intensity of the flavor added. Many contests put
priority on cheese flavor rather than the added flavors. Excessive added flavor is
seen as a fault even though the consumer may prefer it.
15.2 Characteristics and Manufacturing Practices

for Mozzarella Cheeses
A general manufacturing outline for mozzarella cheeses is presented in Fig. 15.2.

The physical and functional characteristics of all mozzarellas beyond those imparted
by cheese composition are based on decalcification of the casein, pH, and ultimately
the extent of proteolysis. Acidification solubilizes calcium and initially determines
stretch and melt characteristics. Proteolysis will increase melt, decrease stretch
length, increase blister size and color, increase off-flavors, increase matting of
shreds, and can also result in a cheese that may be hard to shred or slice (Johnson &
Lucey, 2006). Proteolysis will cause the cheese to become pasty bodied with a
smooth mouthfeel.
480 V. Rizzi et al.
Fig. 15.2 General

manufacturing outline for
both stirred curd and
milled curd mozzarella
cheese and pasta filata and
non-pasta filata styles
15 Mozzarella 481
15.2.1 Mozzarella
Desired characteristics of Mozzarella, also called fresh mozzarella, are sweet, milky
flavors, easily sliced, and, if baked, has a long stretch and melts but does not flow
extensively. The main fault for this category tends to be the lack of the desired flavor
attributes (sweet and milky), which is referred to as flat or uncharacteristic of vari-
ety. Other potential undesirable attributes are bitter, unclean, acid, oxidized, or stale
and excessively soft body. If the cheese is warmed (>4 °C, 40 °F), some watering off
may be observed if the cheese is cut open, but this is unavoidable and therefore
acceptable. If oven baked, as is the case for Neapolitan style pizza, the cheese
should be soft but maintain its slice identity (usually a circle) and not flow into a
larger mass. Blister quantity should be very limited in size and number, and the
baked cheese should remain white, but there will be considerable amount of water
released, which is expected and taken into account by the pizza maker. As the fresh
mozzarella ages, it will start to develop some blisters and begin to flow more when
baked due to proteolysis by residual rennet (Figs. 15.3 and 15.4).
Fresh mozzarella is manufactured with pasteurized whole milk or partially
skimmed milk. Milk with a low casein to fat ratio will produce a cheese with exces-
sively high FDM and, if combined with a high moisture content, will result in a
cheese of excessively soft body, tendency to water off excessively, flow excessively
when baked, and have a very short shelf life even when held under refrigeration.
Fresh mozzarella is traditionally made by adding vinegar (acetic acid) to cold
milk to obtain pH 5.6–5.7. The desired pH is influenced by the casein content of the
milk, with more casein requiring more acidification, or lower pH. The temperature
is raised to 32–37 °C (90–98 °F), and a coagulant is added. Starter cultures and
calcium chloride are not added. The choice and amount of coagulant used is very
important since it is the main proteolytic agent in the cheese, and excessive prote-
olysis is the number one cause for body softening leading to a shorter shelf life and
excessive flow when baking. The recommendation is to use as little rennet or coagu-
lant as possible and one that is very specific in enzyme activity in order to avoid
Fig. 15.3 Example of a pizza baked with fresh mozzarella and oregano (left) pizza made with an
older mozzarella presenting more blistering (right)
482 V. Rizzi et al.
Fig. 15.4 Example of a pizza baked with fresh mozzarella presenting a lot of stretch (left) and a
close-up of the mozzarella with some water release (right)
bitterness and to slow proteolysis. After the addition of the coagulant, the milk is
clotted, and the coagulum is cut into large cubes, followed by very little if any stir-
ring, without additional heating. The curd is often allowed to settle before the whey
is drained and is handled very gently to avoid curd breakage which leads to moisture
loss. The drained curd is placed into hot water (71 °C, 160 °F) and kneaded (stretch-
ing step). Too high a pH may require excessive kneading, and this will lead to
greater fat loss and a tougher bodied cheese. Traditionally stretching was done by
hand and is often done this way in delis and with cheesemakers who make mozza-
rella at home, but commercially it is done mechanically.
Since both coagulant activity and growth of contaminants are influenced by tem-
perature of storage, the best means to control them is to store the cheese at very cold
temperatures (0 °C, 32 °F) until used. Unfortunately, fresh mozzarella cheese is
often stored in retail at too high a temperature and for too long which leads to exces-
sive proteolysis and off-flavor development. One solution that has been found effec-
tive at reducing the coagulant activity is to use very high heat during the mixing
molding step (>66 °C, 150 °F curd temperature).
Fresh mozzarella is formed into logs, or semispheres and various sizes and
shapes of spheres (ciliegine/cherry, perlini/pearl, ovolini/egg, bocconcini/bite-
sized), which are usually placed in a dilute (<0.5% salt), slightly acidified (pH
5.6–5.8) brine. Unless calcium chloride is added to the brine, the outer layer of the
cheese may become soft and slough-off. Sloughing-off is when pieces of cheese can
be easily peeled from the cheese surface without much pressure. Softening is due to
hydration of the outer layer due to loss of calcium from the casein. However, exces-
sive addition of calcium chloride to the brine can lead to bitterness.
Occasionally, yeasts may contaminate the cheese during packaging, and this can
result in a yeasty flavor, gassy or puffed packages, and occasionally off-colors. If the
cheese is contaminated with yeasts prior to packaging, the cheese can also develop
an open or gassy texture (Fig. 15.5). The brine may become cloudy with age because
whey entrapped in the cheese escapes into the brine or because of microbial growth
in the brine.
15 Mozzarella 483
Fig. 15.5 Severe gassy

defect in fresh mozzarella
ball caused by yeast
contamination in the
mixer/molder
15.2.2 Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella, Low-Moisture

Mozzarella, or Part-Skim Mozzarella
Milk is first standardized to a protein (casein) to fat ratio (generally a casein to fat
ratio of 0.94–1.1) to ensure that the desired fat-in-dry matter in the cheese is
obtained. Milk standardization is done by either the addition of casein (NDM, mem-
brane, or condensed skim milk) or removal of cream. The latter is used more by
traditionalists, while the former is used mainly to increase cheese yield and produc-
tivity. The milk is then pasteurized, cooled (33–37 °C, 92–98 °F), and starter is
added. If the milk has been standardized by addition of casein (higher % casein in
the milk), some manufactures will preacidify by adding an acidulant (CO2, glucono-
delta-lactone, acetic, lactic, or citric acids) prior to rennet addition. Rennet is
then added.
The starters used for pasta filata style mozzarella are thermophiles, typically
Streptococcus thermophilus (coccus), and rods, Lactobacillus delbrueckii or
Lactobacillus helveticus. Traditionally, combinations of both the cocci and rods
were used, but St. thermophilus is now often used by itself. All thermophilic strains
currently used in the manufacture of mozzarella release galactose into the cheese
(Hutkins & Morris, 1987). Consequently, there will always be residual galactose in
mozzarella (generally 0.3–0.6%) as well as some lactose (0.4–1.0%). Residual
sugar, mainly the galactose, will be very reactive in Maillard browning and caramel-
ization during baking which results in the blisters being light brown to dark brown
(Matzdorf et al., 1994). In addition, both sugars, especially lactose, can be fer-
mented by contaminating microorganisms. If the contaminants are heterofermenta-
tive, the result of fermentation may be gas holes in the cheese or blown (gassy)
packaged cheese. Some round holes in cheese may be occluded air from the stretch-
ing and molding operation, and these are generally more common than those pro-
duced by microorganisms (Fig. 15.6). These are only seen in slices or loaves of
mozzarella prior to shredding. Many graders view occluded air holes as a defect in
484 V. Rizzi et al.
Fig. 15.6 Entrapped air resulting in small holes. These holes are often called steam holes. The
cheese also exhibits some color variation called mottling and small pockets of free fat (thin
white lines)
workmanship and downgrade the cheese. However, air holes do not impact taste or
functional performance, nor do they impact shred appearance, and therefore, any
deductions should be minimal and perhaps relegated only to contests where physi-
cal perfection is held to high esteem.
The pH of the milk at coagulant addition is a critical control point for developing
the desired functional properties, as it is an indicator that the desired decalcification
has occurred. After the milk is clotted, the coagulum is cut, the curd and whey mix-
ture are heated (41–42 °C, 106–108 °F) to allow optimum starter activity and acid
development and to expel whey. At a prescribed pH, the curd and whey are sepa-
rated. The curd is either continuously stirred or allowed to mat. Additional fermen-
tation by the starter will continue to decrease the curd pH to the desired pH that will
allow the curd to be stretched and molded into shape. The pH of the curd at this step
is the second critical control point for the cheese to have the desired functionality.
Matted curd is milled and may be lightly salted. Stirred curd may also be lightly
salted prior to introduction of the curd into hot water (71–77 °C, 160–170 °F) of the
cooker stretcher (pasta filata step) where the curd is kneaded into a molten mass and
eventually shaped into blocks or strings. The blocks are cooled briefly and then
added to approximately 90% saturated brine.
There are two forms of mozzarella that could be made at the cheese factory:
pasta filata and non-pasta filata (pressed block). The latter being made in large
18–290 kg (40–640 pounds) blocks, curd is not heated and stretched after whey
drainage, curd is direct salted, and the salted curd is pressed for several hours. The
starters used for non-pasta filata style can be thermophiles, but mesophilic strains,
Lactococcus sp., or blends of thermophiles and mesophiles may be used. Lactococcus
strains do not release galactose. Because there is no pasta filata process, the cultures
would continue to ferment lactose, and this may result in excessive acidification.
15 Mozzarella 485
Consequently, after whey drainage, the curd is rinsed or soaked with water to reduce
the level of residual sugar. As a result of low sugar content or no galactose, the blis-
ters on a pizza made with non-pasta filata cheeses tend to be yellow rather than
shades of brown. Commercial pizza manufacturers generally do not like the yellow
blistering and, thus, usually use pasta filata mozzarella. Non-pasta filata style is
used for conversion into retail blocks for grocery store sales.
With non-pasta filata style after at least 2 weeks of storage, the blocks are typi-
cally cut into smaller retail-sized blocks rather than converted to shreds or slices.
The cheese may be curdy, but this is not a fault unless the cheese is crumbly and
cannot be shredded. The cheese should not be excessively soft or pasty as the con-
sumer hand shreds or slices the cheese prior to use. Main faults of non-pasta filata
are the same as pasta filata mozzarella. They may be more prone to bitterness due to
the cultures and coagulants used.
Non-pasta filata and pasta filata cheeses can be readily identified by bending the
cheese block and viewing the inside shape of the cheese. A pasta filata made cheese
will bend substantially before breaking, but the non-pasta filata cheese will break
across curd junctions. Mozzarella that is made by the non-pasta filata and stirred
curd process will have a curdy appearance, while mozzarella that has undergone the
pasta filata step will have a chicken breast-like texture (Fig. 15.7).
For pasta filata mozzarellas, the cheese is packaged after brining. In low-moisture
part-skim mozzarella, the cheese is generally held for a minimum of 7–10 days
prior to conversion into shreds, slices, or smaller blocks. During this time, there is
some loss of calcium from the casein, and this results in the absorption of most of
the entrapped whey into the casein network. In addition, the loss of calcium enhances
the flow (melt) and stretch characteristics. Care must be taken to prevent excessive
acidity in the cheese as this negatively impacts functional characteristics.
Low-moisture, low-moisture part-skim, and part-skim mozzarella can also be
made by direct acidification with vinegar but without the use of cultures, and this is
mainly used for string cheese. The make process begins with acidification of cold
Fig. 15.7 Visual comparison of stirred curd (left) vs. pasta filata (right) mozzarella
486 V. Rizzi et al.
pasteurized milk to pH 5.5–5.6 prior to rennet addition. Some manufacturers, espe-

cially those using higher casein milks, will use a combination of direct acidification
and starter addition. String cheese made with direct acidification may exhibit a
slight vinegar taste, but this is not considered a fault unless it detracts from enjoy-
ment of the cheese. In the United States, there are regional differences in consumer
acceptance with the Northeast favoring string cheese made by direct acidification
and the rest of the country favoring cultured string cheese.
15.2.3 Impact of Manufacturing Practices on Characteristics

of Low-Moisture Part-Skim Mozzarella or
Low-Moisture Mozzarella or Part-Skim Mozzarella
These mozzarellas should be milky, with a slight acidic flavor, as well as a slight to
definite salty flavor, and have a distinct buttery note before and after baking. Due to
the pasta filata process, the cheese will have a fibrous body and a mealy mouthfeel.
Samples should not be downgraded for possessing these qualities. However, the
cheese should not be dry, nor should it result in pieces clinging to the roof of the
palate. These mozzarellas must be machinable or able to be shredded into long
shreds or sliced, with few fines (small cheese particles that break off) being formed
during the process. The potential for machinability is in the pliability and firmness
of the cheese. Short-bodied or very soft cheese will not be machinable.
A plug or slice of the cheese should be extremely pliable and bend at least to the
point of almost touching and be firm. Upon squeezing a plug or square of the cheese,
the proper firmness for acceptable shredding is that the cheese gives slightly but
bounces back. A cheese is considered to be short bodied if it does not spring back or
is hard to squeeze. This type of body will result in excessive fines after shredding
Fig. 15.9 Weak-bodied cheese (left) and extremely weak-bodied cheese to the point it can be
molded like playdough (right)
15 Mozzarella 487
Fig. 15.8 Shreds with

excessive clumping and
number of fines due to a
weak body
(Fig. 15.8). A weak, soft, or pasty body (Fig. 15.9) will result in short shreds or
small pieces but excessive clumping. The cheese will also stick to the cutting blades
making slicing and shredding almost impossible. Temperature of shredding is
important as a cheese at 4 °C (40 °F) may be too soft and slightly inelastic, but the
same cheese at 0 °C (32 °F) will slightly firm and may shred without forming fines.
However, if this cheese is ultimately used in baking, it will exhibit excessive flow
with a weak or short stretch and more numerous and larger blisters.
Low-moisture or low-moisture part-skim mozzarellas are widely used as ingre-
dients in baking, especially on pizza. There is a wide range of desirable attributes,
and these will be examined later in the chapter. Additionally, the type of oven and
temperatures and times used in baking will influence acceptability. End users, typi-
cally pizza manufacturers, will set the desired criteria.
15.3 Evaluation Criteria for Fresh Mozzarella
Fresh mozzarella should be tempered to about 11 °C (52 °F) for evaluation. This is
to prevent free moisture release from the cheese. Some free moisture is inevitable in
fresh mozzarella made by direct acidification, especially if the cheese is warmed
above 5 °C (41 °F), which is sometimes unavoidable in retail.
Appearance is the first thing to grade. Cheese should be white to ivory or cream
in color. Fresh mozzarella should be free of mold and colored spots. There may be
a small amount of free moisture at the seams of packaged cheeses, but it should not
be excessive.
488 V. Rizzi et al.
The cheese should be smelled to check for undesirable odors especially yeasty,
rancid, unclean, or sulfur notes. The brine can be tasted for the same reason. If
cheeses are packaged in brine, one complete piece is taken out and rubbed with
some pressure to test for the ease at which the skin can be rubbed off (sloughing).
Effortless sloughing is considered an undesirable trait. Sloughing could be due to
lack of calcium in the brine, excessive proteolysis, or lack of proper acidification of
the brine (pH should not be above 5.8). Excessive calcium added to the brine can
impart bitterness to the cheese and may make the outer layer very firm.
Next, the piece of cheese is warmed in the mouth while chewing. There will be
some moisture release, but it should not be excessive. Excessive moisture release
may be accompanied by a flavor reminiscent of the brine. The cheese should be
slightly chewy and not melt in the mouth. The flavor should be sweet and taste like
fresh milk. Fresh mozzarella should have only a hint of salt and not be acidic nor
have a vinegar flavor. The major taste faults in fresh mozzarella are lacking flavor
(aka flat), bitter, oxidized, and unclean (Table 15.2). These flavors may come from
the milk used to make the cheese, but they may also develop during storage. If non-
fat dry milk powder (NDM) is used, it should also be tasted prior to being added as
any unwanted flavor in the powder, especially cooked, stale, and oxidized flavors
will be imparted to the fresh mozzarella. Sometimes manufactures will inadver-
tently add old cream that has oxidized or that has developed off-flavors such as
excessive acid, unclean, or rancid. Rancid cream is most likely due to the cream
coming from milk that has a high somatic cell count or has been agitated exces-
sively. It is common for manufacturers to add whey cream. This should be tasted by
the manufacturer prior to use, as a common defect in whey cream is oxidized flavor
that imparts a whey taint in the cheese. In retail samples, oxidation by intense light
exposure is common.
Table 15.2 Common flavor defects that can be found in fresh mozzarella cheese and their causes
Name Cause
Acid/ Low pH due to excessive starter fermentation or excessive addition of vinegar
vinegar
Bitter Excessive calcium chloride in brine or excessive proteolysis by starter/coagulant,
sometimes contamination with bacteria, especially Bacillus sp.
Cooked Excessive heat treatment of milk or addition of bulk starter media
Flat Lack of milky and buttery notes. The main contributing factor is excessive age
Oxidized Exposure of milk or cheese to light or sanitizers
Rancid Two main causes are use of milk from mastitic animals and excessive agitation of
raw milk. Pasteurization destroys the lipases naturally found in milk, but it may be
less effective with milk from mastitic animals as the level of lipase is increased
Unclean Metabolism of contaminating microorganisms or absorbed flavors from the
environment
15 Mozzarella 489
15.3.1 Fresh Mozzarella Made from Buffalo Milk
Buffalo mozzarella currently has an infinitesimal share of the mozzarella market in

the United States, but it is a major contributor in other countries such as Italy and
India. It is almost exclusively made as a fresh mozzarella cheese, acidified by added
acids, with no starter added. Much of the buffalo mozzarella cheese found in retail
in the United States is imported, and, unfortunately, this has resulted in much of it
being of poor quality. This is primarily due to excessive age (over 1 month) and poor
handling of the cheese, especially excessive exposure to light and warm tempera-
tures. One of the major flavor defects of this cheese is excessive animal flavor, a
somewhat ambiguous term in the United States since most graders or judges are
unfamiliar with fresh buffalo milk taste. A nondescript term used is unclean. Bitter
and excessively acid tastes are also common defects. Freshly manufactured buffalo
mozzarella made from high-quality buffalo milk can have a sweet taste if made
using direct acidification but is still a distinctly different taste from mozzarella made
from cow’s milk and should not be faulted for it. However, buffalo mozzarella that
is described as acidic, with a yoghurt odor, or is salty or cohesive indicates that the
cheese was made with a starter culture or wild strains of bacteria acidified the cheese
after manufacture (Pagliarini et al., 1997). In discrimination testing of cow milk
mozzarella and buffalo milk mozzarella by consumers in Italy, consumers who pre-
fer the cow milk mozzarella cheeses were clearly separated from those who prefer
the water buffalo milk products (Pagliarini et al., 1997).
15.4 Grading or Judging LMPS and Other

Mozzarella-Style Cheeses
15.4.1 String Cheese and Whips
String cheese and cheese whips (Fig. 15.10) are pasta filata style, mostly low-
moisture part-skim mozzarella, that are shaped into long tubes of cheese. The curd
may be acidified by direct addition of acid or by culturing. If made by direct acidi-
fication, the label will list vinegar but will not include the words culture. If the
cheese is made with direct acidification and added starter culture, both will be listed
(Fig. 15.11). The molten mass of curd is extruded through small openings to facili-
tate the formation of the tube or sticks of cheese. The tubes are cut into roughly
11.5 cm (4.5 in) long by 1.3 cm (.5 in) in diameter sections for string cheese and
91 cm (36 in) long by .6 cm (.25 in) in diameter for cheese whips. They are brined
briefly and packaged singly or in a bundle. The sticks of string cheese can also be
cut, breaded, and frozen.
Since string cheese and whips are low-moisture part-skim mozzarella, they are
judged under similar criteria. String cheese should taste milky and buttery, with lack
of acidity, but it may have more salt than low-moisture part-skim mozzarella. It will
490 V. Rizzi et al.
Fig. 15.10 Cheese whips
Fig. 15.11 Cultured (top) vs. acidified (bottom) string cheese labels. Enzymes are coagulants
be firm and not give under pressure. However, the most important attribute is the
stringy characteristic; it must string, and the fibrous structure must be evident
(Fig. 15.12). To assess the string character, the judge will pull on top of the cheese
to try to tear it lengthwise. It should rip off in strings, i.e., have a fibrous structure.
Excessive proteolysis will cause the cheese to soften and lead to the string breaking
before it has torn the total length of the piece of cheese.
Flavored string cheese is graded on the stringy character in addition to the quality
and intensity of the added flavor. The most popular flavors are smoke and pepper. As
with all flavored cheeses, the consumer will determine acceptability. In contests,
flavored cheeses are judged on whether the added flavors either compliment or out-
compete the cheese flavor, but consumers may want intense flavor and may not care
about the classic mozzarella flavor.
15 Mozzarella 491
Fig. 15.12 String cheese

with no stringing (top) vs.
string cheese with plenty
of stringing (bottom)
15.4.2 Oaxaca
Oaxaca cheese is a string cheese of Mexican heritage but with a twist. Instead of
brining, the cheese is direct salted after the string shape is formed, the string is not
cut, but a long length of the salted cheese is wrapped into a ball.
Because Oaxaca may be hand stretched, the long strings may not be of even form
or thickness. The ball is unraveled for consumption, but the unraveled pieces may
not always string due to the contortions of making the ball (Fig. 15.13). This is not
a defect, but a fibrous structure and mouthfeel must be observed. Oaxaca is gener-
ally not used in baking.
15.4.3 Burrata
Burrata is in a way a combination of mozzarellas. It is made by forming a hot mol-

ten mass of curd into a pocket or pouch and filling the pouch with fresh curd, before
it has been stretched, and that has been soaked in cream. It can alternatively be filled
with strips of stretched curd (basically string cheese pulled apart) soaked in fresh
cream (Fig. 15.14). Once filled, the pouch is sealed to keep the filling inside and
492 V. Rizzi et al.
Fig. 15.13 Oaxaca cheese raveled (left) and unraveled (right)
Fig. 15.14 Burrata cheese

cut open
then cooled immediately. It may be is sold in a weak brine (<0.5% salt). The curd is
stretched at a lower pH (~5.1) than low-moisture part-skim mozzarella to facilitate
ease of forming the pouch. Burrata is typically served at room temperature. Since
the shell is stretched at a lower pH, it may not be stringy, but this is not considered
a fault. Burrata is not meant for baking. The mouthfeel of the shell can be mealy but
not dry.
The Burrata shell may be slightly acidic, but since the cream is sweet and not
fermented, the overall taste is that of fresh cream. Burrata has a very short shelf life
due to its high moisture content, low salt, and fresh cream center. The major defects
are too much cream, stale, or oxidized flavor, and flat flavor usually associated with
faults of the cream, and slimy surface due to excessive proteolysis and microbial
growth. Due to its high interior pH, there is potential for rapid growth of undesirable
microorganisms and off-flavors associated with their metabolism. Since the cream
is not acidic, it can cause the shell and fresh curd within the shell to increase in pH,
15 Mozzarella 493
and this causes both to become very soft. This is not generally considered a defect
and may be a desired attribute.
15.4.4 Provolone
Provolone is a pasta filata cheese made similarly to low-moisture mozzarella cheese,

but it has a lower maximum moisture content of 45% (Table 15.1). Manufacturers
are allowed to make provolone cheese from raw milk, provided the subsequent
cheese is aged for 60 days at or above 1.7 °C (35 °F). Provolone cheese is often
molded in a salami shape but comes in a number of other unique shapes including a
pear shape (Mandarino) and a truncated cone (Gigante), among others. Like moz-
zarella, provolone may be sold within a few weeks of manufacture and is evaluated
on the same flavor and body characteristics of low-moisture mozzarella cheese
before and after baking on a pizza. It may or may not have detectable rancidity. It is
not a fault to have or to not have rancidity. It is most often used as a component of
the cheese blend on pizzas to add additional flavor (slight rancid notes), and its use
may result in an increase in free oil release. It is, therefore, evaluated on pizzas as a
blend and not by itself. Unlike mozzarella, provolone is often aged for several
months to develop very intense flavor notes. The desired flavor is sweet (but not
buttery) with a pleasing, balanced level of rancidity from butyric acid. Generally,
the desired level of rancidity in aged provolone is described as definite to pro-
nounced. Aged provolone may be brittle, have a mealy and dry mouthfeel (due to
the pasta filata process), and have poor stretch but will melt readily. These are not
faults for aged provolone cheese.
Lipase enzymes may be added to the milk to develop rancidity in the cheese.
Mild provolone may have no lipase added or relatively small amounts to give just a
hint of rancidity to the cheese. It may take several weeks before a rancid note is
detected. Traditionally, lipase enzymes from young mammalian animal sources
were used, including kid goat, lamb, and calf. Each of these enzymes gives different
flavor profiles to the cheese, with kid goat and lamb lipases giving sharper piquant
flavors and calf lipase giving milder piquant flavors. Frequently blends of these dif-
ferent species lipases were used to give a more rounded piquant profile to the cheese.
Many provolone cheese manufacturers have switched to using lipases derived
from microbial sources due to the need to have Kosher and Halal certification, espe-
cially if whey products are made. While microbial lipases are readily available and
offer lower cost than lipases derived from mammalian sources, the flavor profile
generated by microbial lipase enzymes is typically not as acceptable. This is likely
due to their nonspecific hydrolytic activity resulting in cleavage of longer chain
fatty acids. Longer chain fatty acids result in a cheese that lacks the sweet and
butyric flavor notes seen when animal sources lipases are used. A common sensory
defect in provolone cheese made using microbial lipases is the soapy flavor imparted
by the higher chain fatty acids.
494 V. Rizzi et al.
The standard of identity for provolone cheese specifically allows for smoke fla-
vors to be used. Traditionally, this smoke flavor was imparted to the cheese through
a cold smoking process. However, sometimes liquid smokes are used, either by
direct application to the curd prior to cooking and stretching or more commonly by
immersion of the finished salamis of provolone in a solution of liquid smoke.
Regardless of the type of smoking agent used, the flavor should not be harsh, biting,
and overly intense to the point that it overwhelms rather than compliments the flavor
of the cheese.
15.4.5 Cheese Slices
The most important criterion for sliced mozzarella is the ease of slice separation and
the integrity of the slice (complete, no corners missing). After visual inspections are
complete, the cheese is evaluated for flavor and body. The scoring system and list of
attributes vary depending on the end user. A scoring may be a simple +/− assess-
ment or a more detailed rating which quantifies attributes in terms of intensity
(slight, definite, pronounced).
15.4.6 Evaluation of Mozzarella as a Predictor of Performance
End-use application of mozzarella requires that it can easily be machined into

shreds and slices. The convertor does not want to purchase cheese that cannot be
easily sliced, cut into even weight blocks or shredded. This requires that either the
cheese manufacture’s grader or the convertor’s grader assess the cheese for the
potential to be machined prior to the actual conversion. What do they look for? A
premium is placed on slice characteristics as this is the characteristic that is often
the hardest to achieve. For a cheese to be sliceable, it must be cohesive, not curdy,
at least slightly flexible and not pasty. Pasta filata mozzarella is more apt to possess
these characteristics than non-pasta filata mozzarella so the latter is rarely, if ever,
used for slicing applications. The position in the slicer or shredded is important
since a crosscut can easily lead to fines (small pieces of cheese). Pasty cheeses will
gum up the blades, and they become ineffective for their purpose. Very short-bodied
cheeses do not slice and when converted to shreds may produce excessive fines.
Prior to conversion, mozzarella made by the pasta filata process is evaluated for
consistency of firmness. The most commonly occurring fault is soft end, but the
defect can be observed anywhere on the outside of the cheese. The ends may absorb
salt at a faster rate than the sides and much more so when the cheese is very hot
when placed into the brine. Since the cheese is still very hot, serum trapped within
the block is readily able to migrate to the outside of the blocks where the cheese is
high in salt. This can create a noticeable color difference. The high salt content
15 Mozzarella 495
attracts the serum, and this results in high-moisture cheese that is very soft and not
cohesive and may not be machinable. The serum comes from the interior of the
block, and this can lead to a drier, potentially brittle cheese prone to excessive fines
when shredded (Fig. 15.15). The high salt causes the casein to aggregate so that it
scatters light and appears white. In the interior, the casein network is more dispersed
(if the pH is around 5.1–5.2) and cannot scatter the light, so the appearance is straw
colored. This phenomenon occurs in lower fat mozzarellas, because in higher fat
cheeses, the fat will disperse the light. Rinsing or soaking the cheese in a cold-water
bath prior to brining can lessen or eliminate this issue. Coincidentally upon heating,
the straw-colored cheese will become white due to aggregation of the casein by
heat, but when cooled, it will revert to the straw color (Johnson & Lucey, 2006).
15.4.7 Contest Judging of LMPS Mozzarella
Low-moisture or low-fat versions of mozzarella cheeses are usually plugged hori-

zontally for judging. They are first examined for evenness of color, firmness, the
absence of excessive holes, and pliability. Next a sample is chewed to evaluate fla-
vor and body.
Most LMPS mozzarellas are used in baking applications; however, in contests,
they are not judged on their baking characteristics but rather on criteria that may
have no impact on baking performance.
Fig. 15.15 Influence of moisture, pH, and salt on color and body of cheese
496 V. Rizzi et al.
15.4.8 Defects in Appearance, Texture, and Body of Uncooked

LMPS Mozzarella
15.4.8.1 Open Texture
Open texture refers to openings or round holes in the cheese. The holes most com-
monly originate from entrapped air due to poor mechanics of transporting molten
curd into forms. It is possible that microbial fermentation is the source of the gas
that causes the holes but that is rarely the case. In the unlikely event that fermenta-
tion does happen to be the source of the gas holes, it is potentially due to fermenta-
tion of urea by the starter, Streptococcus thermophilus, which can release carbon
dioxide that accumulates as gas holes. Openness is cosmetic and will not influence
bake performance. Cheese may exhibit openness (holes and slits), and packages
may be blown due to metabolism of heterofermentative microorganisms such as
Leuconostoc, Lactobacillus, or yeasts.
15.4.8.2 Mottled Appearance
Mottled appearance refers to white broken by semitranslucent (straw colored) areas.

This is a defect because Mozzarella should be white without interruptions.
During the mixing molding step, fat accumulates in large pools. If there is too
much churning (long time), some areas of the cheese will be high in fat, and others
will be much lower in fat. Since fat reflects light, the low-fat areas will be straw
colored. Sometimes the cheesemaker will notice that the cheese coming from the
mixer molder will not have the desired smooth body and will put the cheese back
into the mixer molder to be “reworked.” Excessive amounts of “reworked” cheese
will result in a mottled appearance. Excessive mottling can alter the cheese bake
performance as there will be low- and high-fat areas, and fat has a major influence
on bake performance. Differences in pH can also cause mottled appearance in low-
fat cheeses with very high pH or low pH areas being white and cheeses with a pH or
5.1–5.3 being translucent.
15.4.8.3 Cream-Colored Specks or Globules in the Cheese
Cream-colored specks are churned fat. Sometimes specks are related to mottled
appearance, especially if rework cheese has been added. These fat pockets will have
a higher buttery flavor than the rest of the cheese.
15.4.8.4 Tiny White-Brown Specks in Cheese
Occasionally rehydrated dried milks are used in the manufacturing of reduced-fat or

skim milk mozzarella cheese. Undissolved powder will be caught in the casein net-
work during the clotting process and appear as very tiny specks. If the dried milk
15 Mozzarella 497
has been produced under excessive heat and there is substantial denatured protein,
the specks may appear brown to black. In this case, the cheese may taste overly
cooked and may brown as the cheese gets older due to continued Maillard brown-
ing. The melt and stretch characteristics of cheese made from milk that has substan-
tial denatured whey protein may also be impaired. Furthermore, there may be many
shreds that burn in place, and the network of cheese on the pizza may take on a
pocked-marked appearance. Once melted, the cheese may not stretch. Often upon
biting into a slice of pizza, the cheese may come away as one piece.
15.4.8.5 Surface Defects of Packaged Mozzarella
The three most common issues of packaged mozzarella are uneven color (mottled),
blown or gassy packages, and slimy (damp) surface. A mottled surface is most often
seen in low-fat cheese as the result of either excessive moisture loss in the brine due
to the brine being too high in salt or the cheese being excessively acidic. Blown or
gassy packages are the result of gas formation due to heterofermentation of residual
lactose or galactose by contaminants that have gained access to the cheese during
conversion. Leuconostoc mesenteroides has been used, albeit rarely, as a potential
diacetyl producer in cheese from metabolism of citric acid. It produces carbon diox-
ide from citric acid and residual lactose. A damp surface (usually only seen in fresh
mozzarella not packed in brine) is due to the high pH or very low pH often with
exposure to warm temperatures or excessive proteolysis. Free serum can lead to
slimy surfaces due to microbial growth.
15.4.8.6 Evaluation of Mozzarella for Non-pizza Baking Applications
A major use of mozzarella is in the use of lasagna, chicken parmesan, and fried
cheese curds. The main criteria are that the cheese melts but not excessively, that it
stretches, and that it is slightly chewy.
15.5 Assessing the Baking Performance of Mozzarella
15.5.1 Fresh Mozzarella
Fresh mozzarella should soften when baked but not have excessive flow. The cheese
stretch will often be extremely long (>90 cm, 3 ft), especially if the pH is around
5.7. Long stretch and lack of flow when heated are two characteristics that go hand
in hand. Excessive proteolysis limits shelf life and will cause the cheese to flow
excessively and have a short stretch. The edges of the cheese may also burn because
the cheese is thinner there. If the cheese has lost too much calcium or is low in pH
498 V. Rizzi et al.
(<5.6), the baked cheese may also flow excessively, have a shorter stretch, and form
blisters that will dry out and burn, especially at the edges where the cheese is thin.
Other mozzarellas when baked are assessed on blister coverage, blister color,
melt and stretch characteristics, free oil release, ability to cut cleanly, taste, and
mouthfeel including chewiness, cohesiveness, and fat release. Evaluations are based
on criteria set between the cheesemaker, convertor, and the end user, usually a pizza
manufacture.
15.5.1.1 Sample Preparation of Low-Moisture Mozzarella

for Baking Performance
The most common model for evaluating mozzarella bake performance, or function-
ality, is a cheese pizza made with a standardized minimal amount sauce and a stan-
dard amount of shredded cheese with no additional toppings. Toppings will
drastically change the surface characteristics of the baked cheese, especially the
blister coverage and color. Care also needs to be taken to ensure to choose a sauce
that will not impart a strong flavor. Oven type and temperatures and times used in
baking are set by the end-user specifications, as are crust thickness and type of bak-
ing pan. A suggested standard formulation for mozzarella pizza evaluation is as
follows: 30 cm (12 in) par-baked thin crust (ordered from the food service sector),
three tablespoons of tomato sauce, and 300 g (10.5 oz) of shredded cheese. The
pizza is then covered with plastic wrap and tempered to 4.2 °C.
Whole pizzas should be evaluated with only one mozzarella sample used per
pizza. Partial pizzas may cook differently, and evaluators can more accurately
appraise the surface characteristics on a whole pizza. Examples of cooking specifi-
cations for different types of ovens are as follows: home oven, 218 °C (425 °F) for
12 min, and forced air oven (i.e., impinger or conveyor oven) 260 °C (500 °F) for
5 min. Impinger ovens are often the industry standard and represent the harshest
conditions of baking since they effectively eliminate the protective moisture that
would otherwise protect the pizza surface against the heat. Thus, use of an impinger
oven can yield significantly different bake performances (Fig. 15.16).
Upon removal from the oven, the interior temperature of the mass of melted
cheese should be taken. With many samples tested, an average temperature range
can be established and will help in evaluation. Temperatures below or above this
average temperature may indicate improper baking or indicate changes in cheese
characteristics that might allow or prevent excessive evaporation.
15.5.1.2 Evaluation of Visual Pizza Characteristics
The appearance of the baked pizza provides an immediate quality impression. The
most common assessed surface characteristics are as follows:
15 Mozzarella 499
Fig. 15.16 Pizzas made with the same cheese but cooked in a conventional home oven (left) vs.
forced air oven (right)
15.5.1.3 Skinning
Skinning refers to a film of partially dehydrated cheese at the surface of the melted
cheese layer. Skinning is not the same as blistering as the skin is not burned cheese,
nor is it caused by the raised surface of the cheese due to internal steam being
released. It is very common when fat is not released during baking or when blisters
are not formed as occurs with fresh mozzarella. Very low-fat mozzarella baked
without condiments on the pizza often exhibits excessive skinning. In the latter, it
appears as though a plastic film was placed over the cheese as it was baked.
Excessive skinning can result in the entire cheese being pulled from the pizza sur-
face upon biting into it. To evaluate skinning, a fork is placed on the cheese surface
and pulled across the pizza, while it is still relatively fresh from the oven. The more
the cheese moves as a single sheet, the more skinning is present. It is not the same
as stretching as no cheese is pulled. Excessive skinning can result in the cheese
sticking to the teeth when it is eaten.
15.5.1.4 Blister Coverage and Blister Size
Blisters are defined as raised areas on the surface of the baked cheese. They are
common on pizzas baked in impinger ovens. Shreds that are not melted are not
considered blisters even though they are burned and browned.
Blisters occur due to steam from beneath the cheese surface, pushing upward on
the cheese. If the surface of the “pre-blister” dries before it can release the steam, a
blister is formed. The more continuous the casein network, the greater the potential
for blisters. Consequently, the higher the fat content of the cheese, the less blister
coverage (Fig. 15.17). A zero-fat mozzarella, as it ages, typically forms very large
blisters and in some cases one blister that covers the whole pizza surface when
baked on a pizza using a forced air oven. Young, zero-fat mozzarella may not blister,
and the shreds will not melt (Fig. 15.18).
500 V. Rizzi et al.
The addition of condiments will greatly reduce blister coverage and color. They
not only break up the casein network which prevents blisters, but they can release
either fat or moisture that may cool the surface preventing burning. Blends of skim
milk and whole-milk mozzarella to obtain a 10.5% fat content (required by USDA
for school lunch program) produce better surface characteristics than a cheese man-
ufactured with 10.5% fat content. Fresh mozzarella should not blister although the
edges of the mozzarella slices may dry and thus burn. This is more likely to occur
as the cheese ages (more proteolysis), and there is more flow when heated
(Figs. 15.19 and 15.20). Excessive flow can also occur if the pH is too low (<5.6) or
if the cheese is too high in fat.
Proteolysis may enhance blister size if there is enough intact casein network with
sufficient pliability to allow the blister to form. In older cheeses, the height of the
blister may be shorter, but the area covered by the blister will be larger. Proteolysis
will also result in a thin skin on a blister, which will dry and burn more rapidly. In
addition, free moisture release from the cheese may be enhanced as the hydrolyzed
casein may not be able to hold entrapped moisture and the moisture evaporates
quickly. Free oil release also increases since a hydrolyzed casein network can no
longer entrap it. Fat release does not prevent larger blisters from forming, but it may
reduce blister color if there is a lot of free oil release.
15.5.1.5 Blister Color
Blister color is defined as the intensity of browning at the surface of blisters. The
color is caused by the burning (dehydration) of the casein layer on the blister and
caramelization of residual sugars. Even though cheese under the blister may contain
Fig. 15.17 A pizza with

the left half made with
low-moisture part-skim
mozzarella and the right
half with low-moisture
whole-milk mozzarella
15 Mozzarella 501
Fig. 15.18 Very young

fat-free mozzarella cooked
in an impinger oven,
shreds do not melt
Fig. 15.19 Pizzas made with the same cheese but at different ages will present different melt
behaviors, from low melting at 2 weeks to larger blister development at 12 months
high amounts of residual sugar (>0.6%), it does not brown because it does not
become dehydrated. Lack of residual sugar in cheese will often result in yellow
blisters. Blister color is also increased by use of flow agents, forced air ovens, higher
bake temperature, longer bake time, and reduction in cheese fat.
502 V. Rizzi et al.
Fig. 15.20 Different degrees of blister quantity, from none to pronounced

15 Mozzarella 503
15.5.1.6 Oil Release
Oil release, more commonly referred to as free oil, is defined as the amount of fat
that pools at the cheese surface after baking. Often the pooling occurs around blis-
ters as fat drains downhill from the sides of the blister. It has been suggested that the
loss of fat from the blister surface allows for more moisture evaporation, which in
turn hastens the burning of the blister (Rudan & Barbano, 1998). Free oil should be
measured shortly after the pizza is removed from the oven at a predetermined
temperature.
Typically in cheese, fat is entrapped by the casein network during the clotting
process and remains in small discrete pools in the casein network. However, in pasta
filata mozzarellas, the cheese mass is churned in the mixing molding step, and the
casein network tightens due to the heat and aggregates into threads. Moisture is
squeezed out from the casein network and the molten fat and is now free to coalesce
into large pools between the casein threads. Even when the cheese cools, the pools
of fat remain since the casein network cannot reabsorb the fat; however, the mois-
ture will be reabsorbed if the pH is within the limits of approximately 5.1–5.7.
When the cheese is subsequently heated again, the casein tightens and the large
pools of fat are released. This is why care should be taken to consistently evaluate
this attribute at the same temperature, as the amount of oil release will increase
greatly as the pizza cools. Release of moisture is partially related to the pH of the
cheese. Shredded cheese offers a greater surface area and greater opportunity to
release fat. Proteolysis will cause the casein network to flow more readily, and this
will expose more of the pools of fat and consequently more free oil.
Fresh mozzarella, even though it has gone through the pasta filata process, only
shows minor free oil release, unless the cheese has undergone extensive proteolysis.
Much more moisture is released from fresh mozzarella compared to LMPS during
baking. Fresh mozzarella is higher in pH (pH 5.7) than cultured mozzarella (pH
5.2). Retention of moisture by casein is highest at pH 5.2 and falls off tremendously
at pH below 5.0 or above 5.7.
The amount of oil released is influenced by the same factors that affect cheese
flow: pH, fat content and proteolysis (age). Another major factor, at least initially, is
the manufacturing style: pasta filata vs. non-pasta filata. Pasta filata may exhibit
twice the amount of free oil than non-pasta filata style in a young cheese, but with
age, proteolysis will enhance oil release to similar amounts. Furthermore, cheese
baked in ovens in which cheese temperatures rise sharply (i.e., forced air ovens) or
where the heating process is disruptive (microwave or combination microwave/
forced air ovens) tend to exhibit more free oil.
15.5.1.7 Shred Identity or Shred Melt
Shred fusion is defined as the degree to which baked shreds melt (fuse) together into
a homogeneous mass. Evaluation is done by observing the number of individual
shreds that have burned in place without losing their shape. They are not blisters.
504 V. Rizzi et al.
The presence of burned shreds is caused by lack of cheese flow during baking and
perhaps lack of fat release, which allows the cheese to rapidly lose moisture and
burn. The shred is burned in place and is most likely very dark (Fig. 15.21).
Excessive shred identity is indicative of a tough dry cheese.
Some additional factors that contribute to the lack of flow and subsequent incom-
plete fusion are: cheese is very young, use of anticaking agents, and the pH of the
pizza sauce is too low. A young cheese (<2 weeks) can present an insufficient loss
of casein-bound calcium, resulting in a stiff protein network that will not flow.
Regarding the pizza sauce, if a pizza is made with excessive amounts of a low pH
sauce and allowed to sit for a few hours, the sauce will reduce the cheese pH. If the
pH drops below 5.0, the cheese may not flow when heated.
15.5.1.8 Flow-Off Crust
Flow-off crust refers to the degree to which the melted cheese flows off the crust. It
is related to cheese composition (high-fat melts more readily), use of flow agents
(restricts melt and flow off crust), and degree of proteolysis (more proteolysis more
flow-off crust).
Fig. 15.21 Pizza with

incomplete shred fusion
15 Mozzarella 505
15.5.1.9 When to Evaluate Surface and Stretch Characteristics

of Baked Pizza
Surface characteristics are the first attributes to be examined and should be evalu-
ated before any disruption to the surface is done. A standard evaluation temperature
should be designated for free oil and free moisture to ensure consistency across
measurements. The whole pizza is examined, and a judgment is based on median
intensity. An individual location should not be taken as the point of evaluation, but
rather the whole pizza surface should be looked at holistically.
The baked cheese is also evaluated for stretch characteristics at a designated
temperature, as stretch is strongly influenced by temperature. A typical evaluation
temperature is 91 °C (195 °F). If cheese is examined right out of the oven, the
stretch may be short and thin. The length of stretch is performed by placing a fork
tine 1 cm into the melted cheese and pulling up. The stretch test is done at three dif-
ferent areas on the pizza. There may be considerable variation in length, so more
sites may have to be evaluated. Blisters are to be avoided, and if they cannot, the
cheese underneath the skin or blister is evaluated. The fork is slowly and steadily
pulled upward until the strand of cheese breaks. To evaluate tenting and thickness of
the stretch, the cheese is only pulled to a height of 15 cm (6 in).
15.5.1.10 Stretch Characteristics
Stretch characteristics that are routinely evaluated are length, tenting, splintering,
and the force to stretch. The evaluator will not only determine the maximum length
of the cheese strand before it breaks but will also evaluate how much force it took to
pull the cheese and how the cheese pulled from the pizza surface.
Young cheese will require more force to pull the cheese, and the cheese will want
to stay on the pizza surface. Consequently, a cone forms at the base of the strands
being pulled. This is called tenting (Fig. 15.22). A low pH or proteolysis will
decrease tenting as well as decrease stretch length. Tenting is evaluated as it may be
indicative of the tendency of the cheese to separate from the crust as one piece,
when the pizza is initially bit into. Tenting will be indicative of a young or
tough cheese.
Splintering or cheese roughness is the amount of cheese strands that break away
from the main strand as the cheese is being pulled. Splintering indicates a cheese
with too much calcium bound to the casein. This is also indicative of a young,
firmer cheese.
The strand length and splintering are both affected by pH. A slightly higher
cheese pH (>5.25) and a higher FDM will increase stretch length and decrease
splintering. Long stretch may be a desired attribute for some pizzerias, especially in
China, but may not be so in others.
506 V. Rizzi et al.
Fig. 15.22 Example of

tenting during stretching of
cheese
15.5.2 Thickness
Strand thickness is defined as the width of the strands at a height of 8 cm (3 in)

above the pizza surface when the strand is pulled 15 cm (6 in) (Fig. 15.23). If the
cheese breaks before it reaches, 15 cm the thickness is scored as none.
15.6 Evaluation of Body and Mouthfeel Characteristics

of Pizza
15.6.1 First Chew Hardness
First chew harness is the force required to bite through a melted cheese sample
using the molars. This is evaluated by stripping a small square (approximately a
4 cm × 4 cm (1.5 in) of cheese from the pizza surface and folding it into quarters
(can be done in the mouth) by folding the outer surfaces inward to avoid the influ-
ence of skinning and blistering and then completely bite through it with the molars.
Evaluate the force required to bite through the cheese. Examination will require
that the cheese be at a prescribed temperature that will not burn one’s mouth and
15 Mozzarella 507
Fig. 15.23 Different degrees of strand thickness from very slight to pronounced
508 V. Rizzi et al.
Fig. 15.24 (continued)
is comparable to the temperature a consumer would usually consume a slice (62 °C

(145 °F)). Table 15.3 describes the effects of different factors on first chew
hardness.
15.6.2 Chewdown/Chewiness
Chewdown/chewiness is described as the total effort to break down the cheese

before the evaluator is ready to swallow the sample. This is a product of cohesive-
ness, hardness, and springiness. As these three factors increase, so does the
15 Mozzarella 509
Table 15.3 Effect of different factors/conditions on the intensity of first chew hardness
Factor Effect on first chew hardness intensity
Increased fat content Decreased
Higher protein Increased
Higher pH Increased
More calcium bound to casein Increased
Less proteolysis Increased
chewiness of the sample, albeit, these factors may increase or decrease indepen-
dently of each other. For example, as a cheese ages, it becomes softer (decreasing
chewiness) and more cohesive (increasing chewiness).
15.6.3 Cohesiveness
Cohesiveness is defined as the degree to which a sample holds together while chew-
ing. It is evaluated by chewing the cheese sample a specific number of times, then
gathering the sample to the palate, and evaluating how much of the mass is com-
pacted or in loose particles. High level of cohesiveness means that the chewed sam-
ple forms a continuous compact mass. However, this may or may not be indicative
of a chewy cheese. If a cheese rapidly breaks up into pieces, the smaller pieces may
still be firm enough to require substantial chewing.
15.6.4 Liquid Release
At times during the initial chew, the cheese will release copious amounts of fat and
moisture. This will occur more intensely in young cheeses and decreases with aging
due to proteolysis. It is assessed by chewing the sample a specific number of times
(typically 10–15), then pressing the chewed mass against the palate. The assessor
then evaluates the volume of the expelled liquid. The remaining cheese can be
chewy as it is made of mostly casein. The higher the fat and moisture content, the
greater the liquid release. It is particularly important to specify the number of chews
to be applied before assessing as the amount of liquid released changes with the
progression of chewing; the initial chews release the highest volume of liquid, while
the rate of liquid released decreases with chewing. To avoid mixing excessive saliva
into the released liquid, the cheese should be chewed on only one side of the mouth.
510 V. Rizzi et al.
15.7 Evaluation of Shreds
15.7.1 Evaluation of Shred Quality
It is of utmost importance that convertors can predict shred characteristics or slice-

ability of the mozzarella blocks. However, the temperature of evaluation can impact
the results. A cheese at 5 °C (42 °F) may not shred, but the same cheese at O °C
(32 °F) may do so beautifully. However, at O °C, the cheese is so cold that it can be
hard to evaluate clumping.
Once the cheese is shredded, the following attributes should be regularly
evaluated:
15.7.2 Matting and Fusion
The matting or clumping of shreds occurs when the shreds have been compressed
(Fig. 15.24a). Clumping is more likely to happen with high-moisture and high-fat
cheeses. Shreds should preferably present little to no clumping, especially if they
are to be sold to the consumer. However, some clumping can be forgiven if the
clumps break apart easily and are not sticky. If left to clump for too long, shreds can
eventually fuse back together, losing their individual shred identity (Fig. 15.24b).
Fig. 15.24 (a) Excessively clumped shreds. (b) Shreds which have started to fuse back together
15 Mozzarella 511
15.7.3 Flow Agents
Flow agents are compounds (usually either cellulose or potato starch based) that are
tumbled with the shredded cheese to allow it to move through processing and pack-
aging. They help to prevent the shreds from matting. However, excessive use of
these agents can give the cheese a powdery texture in the hands as well as in the
mouth (Fig. 15.25). The use of anticaking agents will also affect the bake of the
pizza, as they will tend to burn more readily and cause more blistering.
Fig. 15.25 Example of

shreds with excessive anti
caking agent (top); impact
of anticake on blistering
and color (bottom)
512 V. Rizzi et al.
Fig. 15.26 Shreds that

have an excessive number
of fines
15.7.4 Fines
Fines are pieces of shreds that have broken off during processing (Fig. 15.26). Fines
can be caused by an insufficient loss of calcium and are commonly formed when a
short-bodied, tough cheese is shredded. They can be examined by placing a prede-
termined amount in a pan and lifting or moving the shreds to see what fines fall
underneath. Fines are particularly a problem when making pizzas as they will burn
and dry in place during baking.
15.8 Manufacturing Parameters that Determine Mozzarella

Quality and Desirable Functional Characteristics
After the evaluation of mozzarella either for direct consumption (fresh mozzarella,
string) or for baking on a pizza, the question is: what can the cheese maker do to
accommodate the complaints?
The physical and bake characteristics of mozzarella cheeses are governed by
three basic concepts that the cheesemaker controls: cheese composition, loss of
calcium from the casein, and cheese pH (Guinee et al., 2002, Pastorino et al., 2003,
Lucey et al., 2003, Johnson & Lucey, 2006, Ah & Tagalpallewar, 2017). Most issues
with poor performance of mozzarella can be alleviated by adjusting these concepts
to fit the needs and desires of the end user.
However, even if the cheesemaker produces a cheese that exactly fits the criteria
that the end user desires, at some point, the cheese quality will deteriorate due to
proteolysis. Excessive proteolysis limits shelf life. This can be perceived by an
excessively soft body, lack of machinability, lack of string in string cheese, and
15 Mozzarella 513
undesirable bake performance noted by excessive free oil release, excessive melt,
loss of stretch, and excessive blister coverage and darkness of blister color (Johnson
& Lucey, 2006). In addition, there is always the potential for microbiological con-
tamination during manufacture of conversion.
Most undesirable cheese characteristics are due to one of seven causes, six of
which are under direct control of the cheesemaker. First, because of the mild, subtle
flavor characteristics of mozzarella, any flavor defects in any ingredient including
the milk used to make the cheese have the potential to carry over to the cheese. The
same holds true for any ingredient used in standardizing the milk, i.e., nonfat dry
milk (NDM) and whey or sweet cream. Stale and oxidized flavors from these ingre-
dients are readily imparted to the cheese. In addition, excessive heat application
during manufacture of NDM may produce scorched particles that if incorporated
into the cheese will be visible as very small brown to black spots. Browning of the
cheese may occur during storage as it appears that excessive heating during manu-
facture of the NDM can lead to intermediates of the Maillard reaction that continue
to form darker color in the cheese. Use of high-heat NDM can also lead to crumbly
cheese and restricted melt and stretch of the cheese when baked on a pizza.
Incorporation of denatured whey protein is used to boost cheese yield though an
increase in moisture can also lead to restricted melt, loss of stretch, and mealy
mouthfeel, if too much is added.
The second cause for undesirable characteristics is due to inconsistencies in
cheese composition, generally too much moisture and fat, due, in part, to inconsis-
tencies in milk composition. Milk composition in terms of casein to fat ratio (or
protein to fat ratio) determines the FDM of the cheese. The manufacturing schedule
determines the moisture content of the cheese. While this issue has generally been
solved by standardization of milk composition, it is sometimes not done correctly,
or manufacturing protocols are not adjusted for the method of standardization.
Adjustments in manufacturing schedules may have to be made to adjust moisture
content of the cheese in relation to the FDM.
A high FDM coupled with high moisture content can lead to excessively soft
cheese and shorter shelf life, which is manifested by issues with poor machinability
(gummy, pasty body) and bake performance including excessive free oil, excessive
melt, and low stretch length. Some of these issues can be alleviated by manufactur-
ing cheese with slightly higher pH and using as little as possible of a less nonspe-
cific coagulant. Blister size increases as the fat decreases, and with an increase in
proteolysis.
Most manufacturers standardize milk to a consistent protein to fat ratio (or fat to
protein ratio), but they should also be standardizing milk to a consistent percentage
of protein and fat. In conjunction with standardizing the milk composition, it fol-
lows that the rate and extent of acidification should also be standardized. However,
this works best if the milk is of consistent composition.
Third, many undesirable characteristics have their roots in improper acidification
of the milk prior to coagulant addition and improper cheese pH. The rate and extent
of acidification required will change due to the amount of casein in the milk and not
the casein to fat ratio. Higher casein in the milk will require more acidification prior
514 V. Rizzi et al.
to coagulant addition. As with any cheese, the bake characteristics are strongly
influenced by loss of calcium from the casein, pH, and proteolysis. Too high a pH
(less solubilization of calcium) will lead to a tough cheese, poor melt, and stretch.
Because calcium equilibrium (additional loss of calcium) may take several days to
2 weeks to occur, the baking characteristics will also change during that time. The
cheese will be firmer, and the shreds may not melt or flow when baked. This will
leave shreds that will burn. Consequently, evaluation prior to 2 weeks may lead to
an error in determining whether or not the mozzarella cheese will meet expecta-
tions. Fresh mozzarella however, which is acidified by addition of acid rather by
starter fermentation, can be evaluated the day of manufacture as very little if any
further loss of calcium occurs after the milk has been acidified.
Fourth, there is considerable residual rennet activity in mozzarella cheese, unless
the curd has been heated for several minutes above 74 °C (165 °F). Rennets, how-
ever, do vary in the sensitivity to heat. Extensive proteolysis by residual rennet will
soften mozzarella to the point of being pasty or weak bodied, and it will result in
excessive flow when baked accompanied by more fat release, loss of stretch, and
larger blister size which may also be darker compared to a cheese with less prote-
olysis. Cheesemakers can also decrease the amount of proteolysis by using less
rennet and using a rennet with a more specific activity. Cold storage of the cheese
will slow proteolysis and the colder the better, even as low as −2 °C (28 °F). Freezing
and thawing may result in an increase in the rate of proteolysis and result in more
blistering. Freezing may result in moisture accumulation in large ice crystals. When
thawed, the moisture may not reabsorb into the cheese and evaporates rapidly, and
this dries the cheese surface making it more prone to blister formation, burned
shreds, and skinning. Frozen, then thawed, but then refrozen cheese tends to dry
much faster than cheese only frozen once and may result in higher skinning, and
numerous, unmelted, and burned shreds. The cheese may also have reduced stretch.
Fifth, microbiological contamination either at the cheese plant (commonly yeasts
in the brine) or convertor (yeasts or molds) can cause off-flavors as well as visual
defects to the cheese. Nonstarter lactic acid bacteria such as Lactobacilli and
Leuconostoc can cause gas formation and unclean flavors.
Sixth, cheese picks up taints from the environment (air) or from the brine.
Excessive amounts of bromine in the salt or the use of antimicrobials such as chlo-
rine or hydrogen peroxide, especially with the presence of free fat at the surface of
the brine, can lead to the formation of halophenols (Lindsay, 1997; Mottram, 1998;
Schlegel & Babel, 1963). These flavors are often described as chemical or oxidized.
Seventh, retail abuse, i.e., warm exhibition temperatures and exposure of the
cheese to bright lights, can deteriorate mozzarella cheese quality. Warm tempera-
tures increase proteolysis and microbiological growth. Bright lights may be the
cause of the warm temperature, but they also can cause the development of light
oxidation of fat (cardboard or crayon-like flavors).
15 Mozzarella 515
15.9 Conclusions
What good is an evaluation if it is not used? Cheesemakers can make changes in

cheese manufacturing protocol if they know what the end-user needs are and if their
cheese is not meeting those expectations. Evaluations are done to ensure that speci-
fications are met, and if not, constructive comments can be given to the appropriate
entity to help rectify the situation.
Evaluations can be a moving target; a cheese that initially meets all expectations
may shortly after be considered unacceptable due to excessive proteolysis.
Alternatively, cheesemakers may alter manufacturing protocol to produce the
desired cheese for one buyer but the change can result in the rejection of the cheese
by another buyer.
Although mozzarella evaluations are often based on performance upon baking,
most baking applications are not done in such a minimalistic manner. Blister forma-
tion and skinning are often negated by the inclusion of condiments on a pizza and
are obviously not important when mozzarella is used in lasagna, baked or fried as
cheese sticks. In these applications, stretch quality is often the only criteria used for
evaluation. Fresh mozzarella is often used in non-baking application, so ease of slic-
ing, mouthfeel, and flavor evaluations are all that is required.
Because the evaluation of many attributes of mozzarella is subjective and done
as a pass-fail test, it is highly recommended that photos be taken during the evalua-
tion of the baked cheese. Such pictures could include stretch, flow, blister, or even
string characteristics. Furthermore, these pictures can be valuable in training panel-
ists as they can be used to create reference scales or anchors.
References
Ah, J., & Tagalpallewar, G. P. (2017). Functional properties of Mozzarella cheese for its end use
application. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 54, 3766–3778.
Guinee, T. P., Feeney, E. P., Auty, M. A. E., & Fox, P. F. (2002). Effect of pH and calcium con-
centration on some textural and functional properties of mozzarella cheese. Journal of Dairy
Science, 85, 1655–1669.
Hutkins, R. W., & Morris, H. A. (1987). Carbohydrate metabolism by Streptococcus thermophilus:
A review. Journal of Food Protection, 50, 876–884.
Johnson, M. E., & Lucey, J. A. (2006). Calcium: A key factor in controlling cheese functionality.
Australian Journal of Dairy Technology, 61, 147–153.
Lindsay, R. C. (1997). Impact of brine quality and salting on potential flavor defects. Wisconsin
Cheese Industry Conference, April 2. Green Bay, Wisconsin.
Lucey, J. A., Johnson, M. E., & Horne, D. S. (2003). Perspectives on the basis of the rheology and
texture properties of cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 86, 2725–2743.
Matzdorf, B., Cuppett, S. L., Keeler, L., & Hutkins, R. W. (1994). Browning of mozzarella cheese
during high temperature pizza baking. Journal of Dairy Science, 77, 2850–2853.
Mottram, D. S. (1998). Chemical tainting of foods. International Journal of Food Science &
516 V. Rizzi et al.
Pagliarini, E., Monteleone, E., & Wakeling, I. (1997). Sensory profile description of Mozzarella
cheese and its relationship with consumer preference. Journal of Sensory Studies, 12, 285–301.
Pastorino, A. J., Hansen, C. L., & McMahon, D. J. (2003). Effect of pH on the chemical compo-
sition and structure-function relationships of Cheddar cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 86,
2751–2760.
Rudan, M. A., & Barbano, D. M. (1998). A model of mozzarella cheese melting and browning
during pizza baking. Journal of Dairy Science, 81, 2312–2319.
Schlegel, J. A., & Babel, F. J. (1963). Flavors imparted to dairy products by phenol derivatives.
U.S. FDA. (2022). Electronic code of federal regulations title 21, Part 133.155 thru 133.158.
Cheese and related cheese products. Accessible at: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chap-
ter-I/subchapter-B/part-133/subpart-B?toc=1. Date accessed: 8/24/22.
USDA (2008) Specifications for Mozzarella Cheese. USDA Agricultural Marketing Service-Dairy
Division. Effective January 7, 1980.
WHO/FAO Codex Alimentarius Standards: Mozzarella Cheese (262-2007)
Chapter 16
Latin American-Style Cheeses
Luis A. Jiménez-Maroto and Rodrigo A. Ibáñez
16.1 Introduction
Latin American-style cheeses are often referred to as Hispanic cheeses in the United
States due to the way in which production of this type of cheeses is tracked. The
term Hispanic was coined as an ethnic category in 1976 with the passing of a federal
law that mandated the collection of data for “the ethnic group comprised of
Americans of Spanish origin or descent” by the US Census Bureau, which began
using it during the 1980 census. For the next two decades, Hispanic slowly morphed
from “pertaining to Spain, its people, and the Spanish language” to the official way
to refer to the people, things, and concepts associated with most countries of the
Americas that are not Canada or the United States. The term Latino, popular in
California and other southern states in the 1980s and 1990s to refer to people of
Latin American descent living in the United States, was not officially used in gov-
ernment forms until the 2000 census (Tienda & Mitchell, 2006). Thus, only the term
Hispanic was officially available in 1993, when the State of Wisconsin began track-
ing specialty cheese production, including that of “Queso Blanco and other Hispanic
cheeses” (Groves, 2016). Same thing in 1996, when the US Department of
Agriculture (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) began track-
ing the production of “Hispanic cheese,” which until then had been included in the
“all other types” category. However, when referring to Hispanic cheese, most
The authors of this revised chapter acknowledge the original authors, Jonathan Hnosko, Stephanie
Clark, and Diane Van Hekken.
L. A. Jiménez-Maroto (*) · R. A. Ibáñez

Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_16
518 L. A. Jiménez-Maroto and R. A. Ibáñez
people in the United States are more likely to be referring to cheeses that are com-
monly made not in Spain, but in countries of Latin America, that is, countries of the
Americas in which Spanish or Portuguese is the dominant language. So, it would be
more correct to call the cheese category Latin American style.
Interest in Hispanic, or more accurately, Latin American foods in the United
States began in earnest in the 1990s and truly expounded around the time when the
2000 US Census showed that the Hispanic or Latino population was the largest and
fastest growing ethnic population. As the Hispanic or Latino population increases in
the United States, so does the market potential for Latin American cheeses. The
combination of Hispanic population growth and increased interest in Latin American
food has allowed production of Latin American-style cheeses in the United States to
grow from 30.6 thousand metric tons (67.4 million lb) in 1996 to 159.4 thousand
metric tons (351.5 million lb) in 2021 (Fig. 16.1).
One last but very important fact to remember is: Latin America is not a single,
uniform political, economic, and cultural entity. Latin America refers to an area that
covers Mexico, Central America, South America, and most of the islands in the
Caribbean. As of 2021, that includes 20 countries and 6 non-sovereign territories
containing >658 million people (The World Bank, 2022) spread over ~19.2 million
km2 (7.4 million mi2) (The World Bank, 2020), each with its own culture, ideology,
cuisine, political leanings, economy, demographics, and history.
Fig. 16.1 Annual production trend for Hispanic cheeses in the United States. (NASS, 2022)
16 Latin American-Style Cheeses 519
16.2 A Brief History of Cheese in Latin America
Before the arrival of Europeans to the Western Hemisphere, there was no domesti-
cated livestock from which to obtain sufficient milk to sustain cheese production.
And although the Incas in South America domesticated the llama, they were primar-
ily used as beasts of burden and for the production of fiber and meat. Llamas pro-
duce ~1.9–2.3 l (64 – 78 oz) of milk per day (Tibary et al., 2014), but hand milking
llamas is difficult due to their short teats, limited udder storage capacity, and fre-
quent milking time requirements of every 2–3 h to reach that level of daily produc-
tion (Riek et al., 2007), not to mention their poor disposition toward milking (Morin
et al., 1995). There are few historical documents mentioning the consumption of
llama milk. The earliest appear to be a letter from the Bishop of Cuzco, Vicente de
Valverde, to the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V in 1553, where he lists the tithe
collected that includes “[…] wool from the sheep from here, cheese and milk […]”
(Torres Saldamando et al., 1888), and the book Desengaño y reparo de la guerra del
Reino de Chile by Alonso González de Nájera, who completed it in 1814, where he
mentions that the natives in Chile round up “some sort of rams […] that our people
call sheep of the land […] the natives use their wools to dress and their bones for
arrowheads […]” and that they “obtain as much milk from a female animal as they
do blood from the head of a male animal, which in times of hunger they bleed from
time to time” (González de Nájera, 1889), which can be interpreted as implying that
both the milk and the blood obtained are a very small amount. Valverde calls the
animals tithed in the region of what is now Peru “the sheep from here,” so there are
questions among historians if he was actually referring to llamas. Nájera uses the
term “ground sheep” to refer to herd animals with long wool in the region of what
is now Chile, which is thought to be llamas or alpacas. Both accounts are several
decades after the Spanish had conquered the regions, so it is also possible they refer
to some animal brought by the Europeans that had established in the area.
Latin American cheeses were developed using milk from Eurasian animals
brought to the region during the Colonial Era, and European cheesemaking tech-
niques that were then adapted to the local tropical and subtropical climates, and the
emerging cultures of the different regions of the Americas. They are the outcome of
several centuries of culinary cultural exchange and adaptation, resulting in unique
cheeses that are both culinary and cultural icons of their countries of origin.
16.3 Latin American Cheeses: Overview
The production of Latin American cheeses in the United States primarily focuses on
cheese varieties of Mexican origin, in part because Mexicans form the largest group
of Hispanics or Latinos in the United States (Table 16.1) and in part due to the popu-
larity of Mexican and Tex-Mex food.
Table 16.1 Estimated Hispanic or Latino population in the United States by origin for year 2021
Percentage
Hispanic or Latino by origin Estimated population year 2021 (%)
Hispanic or Latino 62,529,064 100.0%
Mexican 37,235,886 59.5%
Puerto Rican 5,798,287 9.3%
Cuban 2,400,152 3.8%
Dominican (Dominican Republic) 2,393,718 3.8%
Central American 6,306,931 10.1%
Costa Rican 188,054 0.3%
Guatemalan 1,771,850 2.8%
Honduran 1,148,209 1.8%
Nicaraguan 457,005 0.7%
Panamanian 237,706 0.4%
Salvadoran 2,473,947 4.0%
Other central American 30,160 <0.1%
South American 4,348,015 7.0%
Argentinean 297,155 0.5%
Bolivian 131,424 0.2%
Chilean 187,572 0.3%
Colombian 1,401,720 2.2%
Ecuadorian 812,838 1.3%
Paraguayan 29,389 <0.1%
Peruvian 720,626 1.2%
Uruguayan 65,571 0.1%
Venezuelan 659,631 1.1%
Other south American 42,089 0.1%
Other Hispanic or Latino 4,046,075 6.5%
Spaniard 995,583 1.6%
Spanish 905,797 1.4%
Spanish American 92,282 0.1%
All other Hispanic or Latino 2,052,413 3.3%
Made with data from US Census Bureau (2021)
However, a great diversity of other cheese varieties can be found throughout

Latin America and the Caribbean that are only produced locally in their countries of
origin (Table 16.2). These regions (excluding Mexico) exhibited an increase of
~14% between years 2010 and 2019, reaching levels of production of nearly two
million metric tons per annum, which represents nearly 22% and 8% of the Americas
and worldwide production, respectively (FAO, 2022). In this book chapter, we will
discuss about the diversity of major cheeses found in Latin American and the
Caribbean, with emphasis on several cheeses that trace their origin to Mexico due to
their significance in the US market, and we will describe some of the most represen-
tative cheese varieties from countries that exhibit either the largest records of cheese
production or the largest increase in cheese production rate in the region (e.g.,
Table 16.2 Statistics of total cheese production with emphasis on Latin American countries and
the names of their more recognized cheese varieties
Cheese
production in year Variation
2019 (metric since year
Region/country ton × 1000) 2010 (%) Main cheese varieties
North America 6927 +21.1
United States 6159 +20.9
Canada 592 +25.1
Mexico 175 +20.0 Añejo, Asadero (Oaxaca), Cotija,
Panela, Queso de bola, Chihuahua,
Manchego, Ranchero (Fresco),
Sierra
South America 1841 +10.3
Brazil 798 +35.6 Catupiri, Coalhada, Quartirolo, de
Coalho, de Manteiga, Minas,
Prato, Reino, Requijao
Argentina 429 −17.5 Crema, Gaucho, Goya, Quartirolo,
Reggianito, Sardo, Tafi, Patagras
Chile 101 +41.5 Chanco, Mantecoso, Quesillo,
Queso Fresco
Uruguay 67 −11.4 Colonia, Yamandu, Goya
Ecuador 121 +12.0 Quesillo, Andino
Colombia 62 +5.6 Bernian, Pera
Peru 27 +37.0 Mantecoso, Andino, Requesón
Bolivia 10 +0.7 Altiplano, Quesillo,
Benianco, Chaqueño
Venezuela 225 +4.1 Cuajada, Guayanes, Llanero,
Queso de Cavallo, Queso de
Cincho, Queso de Mano
Paraguay N/A N/A Campesino, Paraguay (Quesillo)
Central America 118 +31.1
Costa Rica 26 +105.0 Maduro, Turrialba, Palmito, Suero
Panama 14 +7.0 Queso Blanco
Honduras 15 −3.1 Quesillo de Honduras
Nicaragua 48 +43.3 Queso Blanco (Quesillo)
Guatemala 14 3.0 Queso Fresco
El Salvador 2 −20.6 Coyotlio, Duro Blando, Majado,
Petacones, Prunera
The Caribbean 21 −0.8
Cuba 12 −26.6 Patagras
Dominican 8 +105.0 Queso de Freir
Republic
Puerto Rico N/A Queso de crema, Queso de Hoja,
Queso del Pais, Queso de Prensa,
Queso de Puna
(continued)

Cheese
production in year Variation
2019 (metric since year
Region/country ton × 1000) 2010 (%) Main cheese varieties
Latin America 1980 +13.8
(excluding Mexico) and
the Caribbean (total)
World (total) 23,321 +13.0
Made with data from Path (2008), FAO (2022), (ODEPA-Chile, 2022), and USDA (2020, 2022)
N/A Not available
Brazil, Argentina, and Chile) between the years of 2010 and 2019 (before the
COVID-19 outbreak, Table 16.2).
16.3.1 Diversity of Latin American Cheeses and General

Factors Affecting Their Sensory Properties
The most common type of cheeses produced and consumed in Latin America are
fresh cheeses, and they most often have the name Queso Fresco (fresh cheese) or
Queso Blanco (white cheese). These cheeses are produced from rennet or acid-heat
coagulation, most commonly using cow’s milk and less commonly goat’s or sheep’s
milk. They are generally high in moisture, range in pH between 5.5 and 6.4, undergo
no ripening, and consequently have a very short shelf life and are highly susceptible
to microbial contamination.
Each region and country have specifically adapted cheese manufacture protocols
to obtain products with desirable shape, appearance, flavor, texture, functionality,
and shelf life according to their culture and climate conditions. Hence, a variety
of fresh cheeses with varying names and characteristics can be identified (Table 16.3).
For example, fresh cheeses produced in Chile may have two names: Queso
Fresco or Queso Chacra. But they only differ in their shape: the former is round, and
the latter is square. However, these names are commonly used interchangeably by
cheese manufacturers and retailers due to the lack of standards of identity for fresh
cheeses. Similarly, Mexican and Venezuelan fresh cheeses are often named after the
region where they are produced and do not necessarily differ in their cheesemaking
or physicochemical properties. Additionally, there are fresh cheeses with major dif-
ferences in their composition that will impact their sensory properties. Increasing
levels of salt not only affect the flavor (saltiness) and texture of the cheese (brittle
body and crumbly texture) but also the shelf life. For example, Queso Criollo from
Central America has a very high salt content (6–7% salt) and longer shelf life than
Quesillo from South America (1–4% salt). Fresh cheese made from skim milk in
Costa Rica (Queso Huloso, which means rubbery) has the translucent appearance
and hard, rubbery texture commonly found in low-fat cheeses. Acid set Queso
Blanco exhibits a grainy texture and sour aroma, contrasting with fresh cheeses
made with no acid added. Except for acid set cheeses, fresh cheeses generally have
low acid development (i.e., high pH values) that limits melting when heated, mak-
ing them suitable for baking, grilling, or frying applications (Fig. 16.2); examples
include Queso Panela (Mexico), Queso para Freir (frying cheese from Dominican
Republic), and Coalho (Brazil). When consumed, fresh cheeses are characterized by
their fresh milk flavor and tend to release water when pressed, and if the cheese is
truly recently made, a squeaky noise can be perceived during mastication. However,
these cheeses are prone to develop defects that are mainly affected by the quality of
raw materials as well as processing and storage conditions.
Some common defects that may occur in fresh cheeses include the following:
• Excessive watering-off (syneresis) due to temperature abuse during storage and
transportation
• Uncontrolled acid development (lactic and/or acetic acid) due to fermentation of
lactose and citrate from undesired bacteria
• Undesirable gas formation commonly observed as puffed or bloated packaging
and/or the formation of slits or round eyes of varying size in the cheese structure
Table 16.3 Different styles of Latin American fresh cheeses and their different regional names
Common names and countries of
Style of fresh cheese manufacture
Fresh cheese made with various types of coagulants Queso fresco (generic name in
(mainly rennet) from whole, partially skimmed or various countries of Latin America).
skimmed milk and varying salt content. Panela or canasta (Mexico), Paraguay
(Paraguay), Blanco (Nicaragua) or
Quesillo (Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador).
Del Pais or De la Tierra (Puerto
Rico).
Llanero, Maracay or Perija
(Venezuela).
Estera (Colombia)
Descremado or Huloso (Costa Rica)
Altiplano (Bolivia).
Coahlo (Brazil).
Crema or Criollo (various countries
from central and South America).
Campesino (Paraguay)
Chacra (Chile).
De Puna (Puerto Rico).
Ranchero (Mexico)
Fresh cheese generally made with acid and heat Blanco (Puerto Rico).
coagulation De Prensa (Mexico, Venezuela).
De Freir (Dominican Republic).
Sierra (Mexico)
Turrialba (Costa Rica)
Made with internal information from the Center for Dairy Research (University of Wisconsin-
Madison) and Path (2008)
due to fermentation of sugars and/or organic acids caused by contaminant

bacteria
• Development of bitterness due to:
–– Increased proteolysis caused by excessive use of coagulant (rennet) during
manufacture
–– Occurrence of contaminant microorganisms with high proteolytic activity
–– Temperature abuse during storage/transport
–– Low salt content
• Surface mold growth due to low acid development, low salt, and high moisture
content (i.e., high water activity)
• Blue discoloration due to contamination with Pseudomonas fluorescens during
storage at low temperature
• Development of cardboard-like off-flavors due to light-induced lipid oxidation of
milk prior to cheese manufacture or during transport/storage of the fin-
ished product
Several of the defects associated with microbial activity can be found exacer-
bated in raw milk cheeses made with poor hygienic practices.
Melting cheeses are very popular in Latin America and are highly valued for
their functional properties. Their characteristics are reminiscent of Pasta Filata
cheeses or Gouda-style cheeses, with pH values between 5.1 and 5.4, and moisture
contents of 45–60%. Examples of Pasta Filata cheeses include Oaxaca and
Chihuahua (Mexico), Quesillo (Honduras), Queso de Mano (Venezuela), and
Palmito (Costa Rica), whereas examples of Gouda-style cheeses include Prato
(Brazil), Gauda (Chile), Patagras (Cuba, Argentina), and Yamandu (Uruguay).
Fig. 16.2 Appearance of

fried Queso Fresco with
limited melting. (Photo
from the authors’ private
collection)
Semihard cheeses are also popular in various regions of Latin America. These
groups of cheese present a great diversity of specific and unique sensory character-
istics depending on manufacture and ripening/storage conditions. For instance,
Queso Colonia (Uruguay) resembles a Swiss cheese with typical eyes and nutty
notes; Queso Tafi (Argentina) has a rind that is fully covered by mold; and Queso
Chanco (Chile), Mantecoso (Peru), Minas Padrao (Brazil), Maduro (Costa Rica),
and Benianco (Bolivia) usually have mechanical openings and a rind of varying
thickness.
Aged cheeses are less common but still culturally important types of Latin
American cheeses. Dry, salty, hard, and often grated, they have strong flavors and
aromas that can be reminiscent of aged Parmesan or Romano cheese but can also
include flavors that are often considered defects, such as excessive rancidity, yeasty,
floral, barny, and fruity notes (Jimenez-Maroto et al., 2016). Examples of these
cheeses include Cotija and Cincho (Mexico), Duro (Costa Rica), Criollo (Central
America), Goya (Argentina, Uruguay), Majado and Petacones (El Salvador), Pera
(Colombia), de Prensa (Puerto Rico), Reggianito (Argentina), and Reino (Brazil).
Lastly, it is important we mention analogous or imitation cheeses in Latin
America. Generally, these are cheeses that have nondairy components, such as the
partial or total substitution of the milkfat for vegetable fat, or the use of starches in
their manufacture. These nondairy ingredients can change the flavor, texture, and
functional properties of the products in subtle or noticeable ways. And, although
they have their place in their domestic marketplaces, this chapter will not cover their
sensory properties, focusing instead only on natural cheeses.
16.3.2 Safety Concerns with Latin American-Style Cheeses
Raw milk may contain pathogenic bacteria such as Salmonella, E. coli, and Listeria,
which have been linked to many foodborne illness outbreaks (FDA, 2018).
Therefore, the Code of Federal Regulations dictates that cheese made from raw
milk must be held at no less than 1.7 °C (35 °F) for at least 60 days (CFR, 2022).
This is impractical in the case of Queso Fresco and Queso Blanco due to their high
moisture content and subsequently short shelf life. Thus, these cheeses must be
made from pasteurized milk. Latin American cheeses such as Queso Fresco, Panela,
and Queso Blanco may be sold in the United States only if they are made from pas-
teurized milk (FDA, 2018).
Yet the traditional use of raw milk in the production of Latin American cheeses
gives them distinctive flavors, textures, and cooking properties. Unfortunately, and
paradoxically, US-produced Latin American cheeses made from pasteurized milk
may not exhibit the full range of properties of cheeses made from raw milk. This
creates the dilemma of simultaneously trying to achieve both safety and consumer
acceptance quality in Latin American cheeses. One approach to this challenging
issue has been the incorporation of exogenous starter cultures. Since naturally
occurring lactic acid bacteria from raw milk are inactivated by pasteurization, starter
cultures are now more frequently added as adjunct microflora in the manufacture of
soft Latin American cheeses that are traditionally made with raw milk (Van Hekken
& Farkye, 2003). However, even if made from pasteurized milk, the commonly high
moisture content and pH level of Latin American cheese may prove problematic in
terms of food safety if any post-pasteurization contamination occurs (Path, 1991).
While yields increase with higher moisture cheeses, this comes with a loss in
shelf life and greater chance of survival of pathogenic post-pasteurization contami-
nants, especially with the high pH levels (~6.2) common to Latin American cheeses
(Path, 1991; Clark et al., 2004). Because soft Latin American-style cheeses (fresh)
are not aged, they rarely develop acidic conditions whereby unwanted bacterial
growth may be inhibited. Furthermore, if the cheeses are brined, an additional
advantage is afforded to Listeria spp., halo-tolerant microorganisms, over other bac-
teria if they happen to be present (Linnan et al., 1988). This emphasizes the impor-
tance of high-sanitation protocols and standards in the manufacture of Latin
American cheeses (Path, 1991). In 2002, the FDA and FSIS advised at-risk indi-
viduals, particularly pregnant women, not to consume soft cheeses (including Latin
American-style cheeses and soft cheeses made from pasteurized milk) due to
increased incidences and risk of contamination with L. monocytogenes (FDA,
2002). This warning was modified in 2003 to state that soft cheeses, including
Queso Blanco, Queso Fresco, and Panela, made from pasteurized milk and properly
stored were safe for consumption by at-risk consumers (FDA, 2003).
16.4 Latin American Cheeses: Mexico
16.4.1 Queso Panela
Queso Panela is a Mexican fresh cheese named after the name given to the basket
mold used in its manufacture (panela). It is related to Queso Blanco, but is self-
pressed, has an open body, and is not acid-set. It is typically made with whole or part
skim cow’s milk using mesophilic starters. The curd is cut and worked for a short
time, around 10 min, before draining the whey. There is no milling or grinding of
the curd, which can be direct salted or brined, and undergoes a self-press step where
the basket molds are stacked a few molds high and rotated every 4–6 h (Villegas de
Gante, 2004). Its typical composition range is: 53.2–58.3% moisture, 18.8–12.1%
fat, 18.4–20.5% protein, 1.3–1.8% salt, and pH values of 5.6–6.4 (Ramírez-López
& Vélez-Ruiz, 2012). The appearance of this cheese requires the presence of the
grooves left by the basket mold to be considered authentic (Jimenez-Maroto et al.,
2016), although the pattern can vary (Fig. 16.3). The body is open due to being self-
pressed, knit enough to be easy to cut and curdy but not crumbly: can be separated
into large curd particles if kneaded between the fingers unlike Queso Fresco, where
the curd is ground, the mouthfeel of Queso Panela should not be mealy or grainy.
Because it is a fresh cheese, its taste should be slightly salty and mildly acid, but
never bitter, as that would imply the whey is fermenting due to temperature abuse
and/or high microbial load due to lack of good manufacturing practices. The flavor
should be that of fresh milk: milkfat with perhaps a minor note of diacetyl depend-
ing on the cultures used, grassy notes are acceptable too since the milk is often from
grazing animals. A small amount of free whey is permissible, but large amounts can
indicate temperature abuse during storage or transportation, especially if the whey
is opaque. Its very mild flavors make defects readily evident, and most of the time
they are caused by the fermentation of the whey: bitter taste, whey taint, unclean,
fruity/fermented, barny, and even yeasty.
16.4.2 Queso Fresco
Queso Fresco, which translates to “fresh cheese”, is more commonly named Queso
Ranchero, Queso de Aro, or Queso Molido in Mexico. Debatably even more popu-
lar than Queso Panela due to the simplicity of its manufacturing process. It is a
fresh, soft, unpressed cheese typically found in the shape of a short cylinder in
pieces of 0.2–1 kg (0.4–2.2 lb) (Fig. 16.4). Its typical compositional range is:
47–60% moisture, 20–29% fat, 15–21% protein, 0.7–3% salt, and pH of 4.8–6.2
(Tunick & Van Hekken, 2010). This huge range of compositional values includes
artisanal cheeses made using raw milk and cheeses made with pasteurized milk and
industrialized equipment and hints at the large variation in texture, flavor, and func-
tionality that encompasses what can be considered a Queso Fresco.
Queso Fresco is traditionally made of whole or part-skim cow’s or goat’s milk,
raw if artisanal make, or pasteurized and with mesophilic starters if made at indus-
trial scale. The curd is cut soft, cooked at 30–35 °C (85 °F–95 °F), drained, salted,
and ground up. This grinding step used to be done by hand with a metate (a ground
stone tool used for processing foods, traditional in Mesoamerican cultures), but in
modern times, it is more often ground using a mill (Villegas de Gante, 2004). The
ground cheese is then packed into short cylindrical hoops, unmolded, and is ready
to be sold. The body is fairly closed, with the small curd particles packing closely
together but most often not fully knitting, making it very crumbly. This functional
property is critical to its authenticity, as it is often used as an ingredient crumbled
over soups, salads, beans, etc. Although high in moisture, they rarely present much
free whey. Because the curd was ground, it has a mealy or grainy mouthfeel. The
taste should be salty, with a slight acid note. Like other fresh cheeses, its flavors are
primarily those of fresh milk: milkfat, grassy, or feed, and sometimes a hint of
diacetyl depending on the cultures used. Its mild flavors make defects easy to detect,
which are often caused by temperature abuse allowing bacteria to ferment the whey
left in the cheese. Common defects include any amount of bitter, whey taint,
unclean, fruity/fermented, and barny.
Fig. 16.3 Queso Panela

must have the imprint of
the basked used in its
manufacture to be
considered authentic,
although the pattern can
vary. (Photos from the
authors’ private collection)
16.4.3 Queso Oaxaca
Queso Oaxaca gets its name from the state of Oaxaca in southern Mexico, where it
originates. However, in the state of Oaxaca, it is called Quesillo, and in other places
Queso de Hebra (string cheese). The origin story of this cheese, as told by the
inhabitants of the “cradle of Quesillo,” the Reyes Etla municipality in the state of
Oaxaca, is that in 1885, Leobarda Castellanos García, a 14-year-old girl in charge
of preparing her family’s cheese, got distracted and allowed the milk to set for too
long after adding the rennet. She tried to cover her mistake by adding hot water to
the firm curd in an attempt to soften it a bit, which resulted in a molten curd that
stretched without breaking when it was pulled. The resulting cheese was found to be
very pleasant and unique by the family and neighbors. This cheese was named
Quesillo, and it became popular enough for neighboring cheesemakers in the
Central Valleys region of Oaxaca to begin producing it too. Eventually, the cheese
was marketed in the neighboring state of Puebla, where it was called “Queso de
Oaxaca” (cheese from Oaxaca) and eventually renamed to Queso Oaxaca
(Osegueda, 2022).
Nowadays, its manufacture is based on Mozzarella cheese, with some adapta-
tions to perform better in subtropical and tropical climates (González-Córdova
et al., 2016). As such, there is no single manufacturing method: it can be made using
raw cow’s, sheep’s, goat’s, or water buffalo’s milk allowing the pH to drop from the
milk’s native flora, or using pasteurized cow’s milk either acid-set using organic
acids or with mesophilic or thermophilic starter cultures and rennet. The final curd
pH is a critical step and must be between 5.1 and 5.4, or it will not melt and stretch
properly (Villegas de Gante, 2004). The resulting cheese can be a Queso Oaxaca
compositionally similar to whole milk Mozzarella, part-skim Mozzarella, low-
moisture Mozzarella, or low-moisture part-skim Mozzarella, depending on the
composition of the milk and the manufacturing protocols. Typical composition
ranges are 49.3–52.4% moisture, 20.6–24.2% fat, 20.4–22.4% protein, 1.4–2.3%
salt, and pH values of 5.0–5.3 (Ramírez-López & Vélez-Ruiz, 2012). Like in
Fig. 16.4 Queso

Ranchero, de Aro, Molido,
or Fresco showing the
typical short cylinder shape
and crumbly, grainy
texture. (Photo from the
Mozzarella manufacture, this cheese goes through a cook-stretch step in which the
curds are placed in water at >70 °C (>160 °F), after which the molten curds are
stretched into a strand that is then rubbed with salt and rolled into a yarn-ball shape
(Fig. 16.5) that should maintain its definition throughout its shelf life and is critical
for its authenticity. The body and texture should be very similar to string cheese
Mozzarella, reminiscent of chicken breast when the strand is pulled apart (Fig. 16.6).
The taste should be slightly salty and mildly acidic, and the flavor should present
buttery and milky notes. Queso Oaxaca is highly sought after for its melting proper-
ties and extensively used in melting applications throughout Mexican cuisine.
16.4.4 Queso Asadero
Queso Asadero is pasta filata cheese developed in the Villa Ahumada municipality
of the state of Chihuahua, in northern Mexico. It is not a Queso Oaxaca in a loaf
form. Traditional manufacture of Queso Asadero mixes fresh raw cow’s milk with
day-old, acidified raw milk that is then warmed to 30–33 °C (86–91 °F) and set with
animal, microbial, or vegetable rennet extracted from the fruit of Solanum elaeag-
nifolium, a local, wild-growing plant commonly known as “trompillo” (Martínez-
Ruiz & López-Díaz, 2008). The curd is then cut wide, cooked, and drained but
retaining some of the whey. The curd is allowed to drop in pH to 5.1–5.3 in a pro-
cess similar to cheddarization, while the retained whey is heated to 70 °C (160 °F)
and added back to melt and knead the curd. Salt is added in the whey washing step.
The molten mass is then molded, often in loaves, but sometimes in the shape of flat
patties, balls, or stretched and rolled into a yarn ball like Queso Oaxaca. The indus-
trialized version uses pasteurized milk, starter cultures, and animal or microbial
rennet, keeping the rest of the process the same (Villegas de Gante, 2004). Its sen-
sory characteristics are very similar to Queso Oaxaca: good melting properties,
slightly less acid taste, and flavors similar to Mozzarella cheese.
16.4.5 Mexican Manchego
Mexican Manchego shares the name with Queso Manchego from Spain. But that is
where the similarities end: Mexican Manchego is made with cow’s milk instead of
sheep’s milk and is aged only a few weeks instead of months, resulting in very dif-
ferent texture and flavor profiles.
The story of Mexican Manchego’s development and commercialization begins
sometime in the second half of the twentieth century: a Mexican cheese manufac-
turer wanted to develop a new cheese for the Mexican market and called their cul-
ture house for help. The technician sent followed a make procedure that was a
variation on Monterey Jack cheese, but using different cultures. The resulting cheese
impressed the manufacturer so much that they decided to name it after their
Fig. 16.5 Two examples of Queso Oaxaca or Quesillo, showing variations of the yarn-ball shape
that gives them their authenticity. (Left: Photo from the authors’ private collection. Right: Photo
courtesy of Dr. Stephanie Clark)
Fig. 16.6 Chicken

breast-like texture of
Queso Oaxaca or Quesillo
after strands are pulled
apart. (Photo from the
personal favorite cheese: Queso Manchego. Its mild but pleasant flavor and melt
characteristics made it a success in the Mexican marketplace, quickly becoming
ubiquitous with consumers, who did not know the traditional Spanish version of
Queso Manchego.
Mexican Manchego is made with part-skim cow’s milk, mesophilic cultures,
undergoes a curd wash step, the curd is then ground, salted, molded, and pressed
into cylinders that then are ripened for 10–15 days at 10 °C (50 °F). The cylinders
are from 3 to 5 kg (6.6–11 lb), and their composition is typically 41–45% moisture,
27–30% fat, 22–25% protein, and 2–2.5% salt (Villegas de Gante, 2004). Mexican
Manchego has a light yellow color, a closed semisoft body, slightly salty and very
mildly acidic taste, and milky and buttery flavor notes. Although sometimes eaten as
a snack, it is most often used as an ingredient in melting applications.
16.4.6 Queso Chihuahua
Queso Chihuahua is a traditional cheese native to the state of Chihuahua in Mexico,

where it is known as Queso Menonita after the Mennonite community that lives in
the state and first developed and commercialized the cheese. These Mennonites,
however, call it Queso Chester, after the English Chester cheese they were initially
trying to produce while using Cheddar manufacturing techniques (González-
Córdova et al., 2016).
In the United States, the name “Queso Chihuahua” has been trademarked by one
cheese manufacturer, so it is often found in the marketplace under the moniker of
Queso Quesadilla. It is made of part skim cow’s milk inoculated with mesophilic
cultures. After cutting, the curd is cooked 30 min at ~32–38 °C (90–100 °F), drained
and must undergo a cheddaring step. The cheddared curds are then milled, salted,
molded, pressed, and ripened for 15–30 days (Villegas de Gante, 2004). The cheese
is sold in wheels of varying sizes (Fig. 16.7) depending on the end user and is highly
valued for its flavor and versatility, being used for snacking, pizzas, fondue, and
especially quesadillas. Its typical composition varies and can contain 32.5–44.9%
moisture, 26.2–36.1% fat, 17.6–27.6% protein, 0.73–1.55% salt, and a pH between
5.5 and 6.5 (Villegas de Gante, 2004; López-Díaz & Martínez-Ruiz, 2018). Its fla-
vor is similar to a mild Cheddar cheese and can develop excessive acid and bitter-
ness as it ages. Slight butter, brothy, and very slight sulfur notes are also sometimes
present in this type of cheese.
16.4.7 Queso Cotija
The name comes from the town of Cotija, in the state of Michoacan in Mexico,
although production of this cheese, with slight variations, occurs in the region
located along the mountain range known as Sierra Jalmich, between the states of
Michoacan and Jalisco. In 2005, a collective mark was registered for the manufac-
ture of this cheese in the Jalmich region, and over the last 20 years, the artisanal
manufacture of this cheese has been regulated and standardized to differentiate the
original Queso Cotija from imitations made in other states. Queso Cotija is the only
cheese in Mexico that has its artisanal production regulated by an official Mexican
Norm (González-Córdova et al., 2016).
Queso Cotija is produced exclusively from mixed native-Zebu livestock
(Holstein-Zebu, Brown Swiss-Zebu). The raw milk is standardized, allowed to natu-
rally acidify, rennet set, cut, drained, kneaded, and salted. The curds are placed in
cylindrical molds that are tightened with belts for 18–24 h, then pressed to further
remove water. The cylinders are aged for at least 3 months under conditions that
vary depending on the cheesemaker from refrigerated and moisture-controlled
caves to ripening chambers barely below room temperature (Villegas de Gante,
2004; González-Córdova et al., 2016). The exterior surface of Queso Cotija is
sometimes rubbed with chili pepper paste to add some flavor and make it stand out
in the marketplace (Fig. 16.8). The resulting cheese comes in cylinders that weight
from 1 to 30 kg (2.2–66 lb) and have a hard and dry texture, closed, crumbly body
(Fig. 16.9), with a unique blend of flavors developed by the native flora in the raw
milk that varies based on the environmental conditions during its ripening and that
can be harsh and unexpected to those unfamiliar with the cheese. The flavors in
Cotija cheese can include cowy/barny, cooked milk, fruity, floral, yeast, musty, sul-
fur, butyric, waxy, soapy, oxidized, bite, and burn (Jimenez-Maroto et al., 2016).
Queso Cotija-style cheese made outside of the Sierra Jalmich region can be
found under the names of Queso Sierra and Queso Cincho.
16.5 Latin American Cheeses: Brazil
16.5.1 Minas Cheeses
Minas (mines) cheeses are named after the state of Minas Gerais in Brazil, which
were originally made by Portuguese immigrants on the seventeenth century who
settled in that region to extract gold. Minas cheeses can be classified based on the
final moisture content: Frescal (>55%) and Padrao (<46%; Oliveira & Brito, 2006).
Minas Frescal is a soft cheese that is produced at various manufacture scales
(from small dairy farmers to high-scale industry), and its physicochemical proper-
ties are detailed in Table 16.4.
Fig. 16.7 Small format

cylinders of Queso
Chihuahua. (Photo from
the authors’ private
collection)
Due to its high moisture content, Minas Frescal cheeses are typically consumed
within 10 days after they are made. The manufacture protocol is similar to those
used for other fresh cheeses, including the use of mesophilic starter cultures or
direct milk acidification with lactic acid. These cheeses can also use different salting
methods that can also contribute to rather variable composition. Direct salting of
milk leads to an even distribution of salt in the final product, although a large pro-
portion of the salt is lost in the whey. The application of a salt brine to the surface of
the cheeses during the molding/turning stage produces cheeses with an uneven dis-
tribution of salt, which may lead to unbalanced flavors in the final product (lack of
saltiness and bitterness). The immersion of cheeses into brine is currently the most
common salting method used to unsure an even salt distribution in the final product.
Minas Frescal cheeses are produced in cylindrical shapes with varying sizes
(0.5–3.0 kg or 1.0–6.0 lb) and have a white-pale color with mechanical openings in
their structure. It is slightly salted and may have varying levels of acidity, which
mainly depends on the use of direct acidification at low levels (pH 6.1–6.3; low
acid, sweet cheeses) or the use of starter cultures. The latter tends to over-acidify
cheeses, which may contribute with watering off and a grainy, undesirable texture.
However, cheesemakers can address these issues during manufacture and thus avoid
several of the defects in the final product. It is important to highlight Minas Frescal
is closely related to a fresh cheese variety; hence, they can present various
attributes/defects previously discussed.
In contrast, Minas Padrao cheese originated from modifications of the cheese-
making protocol from Minas Frescal that leads to a product with extended shelf life
Fig. 16.8 Two varieties of Queso Cotija: enchilado (surface rubbed with chili pepper paste) on the
left, and plain on the right. (Photo courtesy of Dr. Arnoldo López-Hernández)
Fig. 16.9 Typical

appearance of Queso
Cotija, with a dry, hard
body. The red specks come
from close contact with the
surface of an adjacent
Queso Cotija that had red
chile powder. (Photo from
the authors’ private
collection)
and increased flavor development, due to a lower moisture content (<46%) and
extended ripening time, respectively. These changes include pre-pressing the curd
during whey drainage, pressing unsalted cheeses after molding and storing cheeses
in a dry room (10–12 °C and 70% relative humidity for 24–48 h), followed by a
ripening period (10–12 °C, or 50–54 °F, and 85% relative humidity for 10 days) to
induce rind formation, as well as 10 days of extra storage (10–12 °C) in sealed
packaging for flavor development and to avoid further moisture loss. The physico-
chemical properties of Minas Padrao cheeses are detailed in Table 16.4. These
cheeses are produced in cylinders of 0.8–1.0 kg (1.6–2.0 lb). On the exterior, they
have a yellow protective rind with varying thickness, while the interior has a pale-
yellow color with mechanical openings of irregular shape, caused by the way the
cheeses are pre-pressed and pressed during/after manufacture (Fig. 16.10). They
have a smooth body, slight acid development and tend to have a milky note due to
their reduced ripening time, with some slight development of buttery notes, which
is also dependent of the fat content.
16.5.2 Prato Cheese
In late 1880s, a Brazilian dairy manufacturer imported from Europe the technology
and knowledge to adapt the production of rennet-coagulated cheeses with scalded
(or cooked) curd step, similarly as traditional Dutch-style cheeses. Characteristic
manufacture steps for Prato cheese include the addition of annatto to increase yel-
lowness, the use of mesophilic starter culture blends for acid and flavor
Table 16.4 Physicochemical parameters of selected South American cheeses produced in Brazil,
Argentina, and Chile
Cheese Moisture (%) FDM (%) pH
Brazila
Minas Frescal 55.0–59.9 38.0–50.0 5.0–5.2 (microbial)
6.1–6.3 (acid-set)
Minas Pedrao 36.0–45.9 42.0–57.0 5.0–5.2
Prato 36.0–45.9 45.0–59.9 5.7–6.0
Argentinab
Cremoso 46.0–54.9 (high moisture) >50.0 5.1–5.4
>55.0 (very high moisture)
Reggianito <35.9 >32.0 5.3–5.5
Chilec
Gauda 46.0–48 0.0 45.0–59.9 5.1–5.3
Chanco (farmhouse – Young) 46.0–50.0 >52.0 5.2–5.4
Chanco (farmhouse – Matured) 44.0–48.0 >50.0 5.2–5.4
Chanco (industry made) 44.0–48.0 >45.0 5.2–5.4
a
Brazil, Ministério da Agricultura (1997, 2004, 2020) and Oliveira and Brito (2006)
b
ANMAT (2018) and Wolf et al. (2021)
c
Chile-INN (1999a, b) and Oliveira and Brito (2006)
development, a whey dilution step (i.e., partial whey drainage, around 25%, fol-
lowed addition of warm water to the original whey level) to reduce excessive acid
development, a curd-cooking step to 39–41 °C (102–106 °F) to reduce the final
moisture content, pre-pressing of the curd in the whey, the addition of sodium nitrate
(<50 mg/kg) to reduce the incidence of gas defects, brine salting, a 24 h drying
period in a cold room, followed by vacuum sealing, and ripening at 12–14 °C
(54–57 °F) for at least 25 days, but traditionally for 60 days. The physicochemical
properties of Prato cheese are detailed in Table 16.4. Due to the curd cooking step,
the moisture content is reduced (<46%) and exhibits relatively high pH values
(5.7–6.0), due to the application of whey dilution. This makes the use of sodium
nitrate critical, which is allowed by Brazilian legislation, to reduce the incidence of
undesirable gas formation. However, the manufacture of cheeses with lower pH
values (<5.6) and storage conditions that prevent the occurrence of gas defects are
being preferred in recent years to avoid the use of this compound. Prato cheese is
usually made in varying sizes, typically from <1 to 3 kg (<2 to 6 lb), and shapes:
cylindrical (Prato Coboco), a loaf shape (Prato Lanche) for slicing applications, as
well as a round shape (Prato Bola or Ball). Prato cheese has a characteristic yellow-
ish appearance due to the addition of annatto, with a soft-firm texture (suitable for
slicing) with milky and buttery notes, but milder overall flavor when compared with
traditional Dutch-style cheeses, due to the relatively reduced ripening time. This
variety does not form eyes and is considered as a defect when formed. Development
of excessive acidity can occur when cheesemakers target low pH values to avoid the
use of nitrates, which can lead to a brittle texture that makes them unsuitable for
slicing.
Fig. 16.10 Body of Minas

Padrao cheese exhibiting a
thin rind and mechanical
openings. (Photo from the
16.6 Latin American Cheeses: Argentina
16.6.1 Cremoso
Cremoso is one of the main varieties produced in Argentina, leading up to 40% of

total cheese volume produced. This cheese was originally developed by Italian
immigrants, who made a product with similar characteristics to the traditional
Italian varieties of Crecenza, Taleggio, and Bel Paese. Its manufacture process uses
mesophilic starter cultures for acidification and rennet for coagulation of pasteur-
ized milk, followed by cutting the curd, whey drainage, curd washing, molding,
brine salting, and a ripening time of 20–45 days at 12–14 °C (54–57 °F) and 85–90%
relative humidity. The physicochemical properties of Cremoso cheese are detailed
in Table 16.4. According to Argentinian legislation, Cremoso cheese can be made
with high (<55%) or very high moisture content (>55%). It is usually made in
2.5–5.0 kg (5–10 lb) square-like shapes, with a yellow-pale appearance, a soft, long
body, with no eyes or mechanical openings, pasty texture, very low acidity, and defi-
nite milky notes. Cremoso cheese is generally served with sweet deserts, such as
dulce de membrillo (a typical South American jelly made of quince) or dulce de
batata (sweet potato jelly), and is also used as a substitute of Mozzarella cheese for
pizza applications due to its melting properties.
16.6.2 Reggianito
Similar to Cremoso, this variety was originally made by Italian immigrants who
were trying to produce their own version of the traditional Parmigiano Reggiano
cheese. It is the only hard grana-style cheese produced in Latin America that is
made by cheesemakers from small and large manufacturing scales. The
physicochemical properties of Reggianito cheese are detailed in Table 16.4. When

compared with European varieties, Reggianito has a reduced ripening time
(6–12 months instead of ≥2 years), as well as higher moisture and fat contents. This
variety is made in wheels of 5 or 10 kg (10–20 lb) and contains a pale-yellow rind
of varying thickness (Fig. 16.11). The rind can also be painted, mostly black. It is
common to place labels above the rind, which can be glued or not. On the inside,
Reggianito cheese has an ivory-yellow appearance with a compact, grainy, and
hard-brittle texture. Depending the manufacture conditions (composition and press-
ing), mechanical openings can be observed. The flavor intensity could be milder
than traditional varieties due to its reduced ripening time but is perceived as definite
salted, with slight piquant notes and characteristic notes found in these varieties,
due to metabolism of main components of milk during cheese manufacture and
ripening. A common defect for this variety is undesirable gas formation caused by
metabolism of lactic acid by clostridia spores that can also produce butyric acid,
which is associated with development of undesirable aromas, known as “baby vomit.”
16.7 Latin American Cheeses: Chile
16.7.1 Gauda
This variety is a local version of the traditional Dutch-style cheese Gouda and is
considered one of the most common cheese varieties produced in Chile, with nearly
45% of the total volume produced. It was introduced by European manufacturers to
the Chilean dairy industry in the 1950s and nowadays is mostly made in large-scale
cheese plants. The manufacture protocols are similar than those used in Prato
cheese, although the target moisture content is higher in Gauda (Table 16.4) and can
be made in full-fat or reduced-fat versions. The use application of sodium nitrate is
allowed (≤50 mg/kg). It is ripened for 15–30 days at 10–15 °C (50–60 °F). The
physicochemical properties of Gauda cheese are detailed in Table 16.4. Cheese
blocks of rectangular shape vary in size from 2 to 15 kg (2–30 lb). It has no rind, a
yellow color, a semi-firm and elastic texture that makes it suitable for slicing and
may present small eyes in the body due to citrate fermentation. Similar to Prato, it
is a milder version of Dutch-style cheeses with milky and buttery notes.
16.7.2 Chanco
Chanco is a cheese variety named after the town of Chanco, located approximately
300 km (186 mi) south of Santiago, the capital of Chile. Originally made by Spanish
immigrants in the eighteenth century, Chanco is the second most common cheese
produced in Chile, making up ~25% of the total volume. It is made by small and
Fig. 16.11 Typical

appearance of Reggianito
cheese. (Photo courtesy of
Dr. Elisa Ale and Dr.
Guillermo Peralta
(Instituto de Lactologia
Industrial, Santa Fe,
Argentina))
artisan cheese manufacturers that typically use raw milk as well as by large cheese
companies that use pasteurized milk. This cheese is made with the use of mesophilic
starter cultures and rennet. As with Gauda and other Latin American varieties, a
whey dilution step is applied to reduce the level of acid development in the final
product, which can differ based on the scale of production. After partial (25–35%)
whey drainage, small/artisan cheesemakers add hot water (~70 °C; 158 °F) back
into the curd/whey mixture in the same proportion to that of the whey that was
drained to reach typical cooking temperatures (38–40 °C; 100–104 °F), whereas
large manufacturers add water at the same temperature to the curd/whey mixture,
following a gradual increase of temperature to reach cooking conditions. Chanco
cheese can be salted by various approaches:
1. Prior to molding, the curd is partially salted with 1 L (1 quart) of 30% (w/v)
brine solution per 100 L (25 gallons) of cheese milk, followed by brine salting of
the cheese blocks/wheels after pressing.
2. Salting the curd with a 2 L (2 quarts) of 18% (w/v) brine solution per 100 L
(25 gallons) of cheese milk.
3. Dry salting prior to molding.
One of the advantages of the last approach is that reduced levels of salted whey
are produced. The ripening time can range between 7 days and 6 weeks at 10–14 °C
(50–57 °F) and 85% of relative humidity (Fig. 16.12). During this time, cheeses are
turned daily to allow the formation of a homogeneous thin rind. In addition, the rind
is washed with a brine solution to avoid the formation of fungi. Alternatively,
cheeses can be coated with wax or other commercially available products

(Fig. 16.13).
The physicochemical properties of Chanco cheese are detailed in Table 16.4.
These parameters can differ based on the scale of production as well as the final use
of the cheese. For instance, Chanco cheese with increased moisture content is
referred as Mantecoso cheese and is desirable by some consumers that associate its
pastiness with increased fat content (creamier). Similarly with Gauda, the applica-
tion of sodium nitrate is allowed (≤ 50 mg/kg), although it is not generally used by
cheesemakers. Chanco cheese is also known as Campo Bueno, El Rincon,
Huentelauquen, Llifen, Los Alerces, Los Alpes, Los Fundos, Quilpue, and Ranco.
Nevertheless, there is no standard of identity for any of these names. Chanco cheeses
can be found in several sizes and shapes: rectangular cheese blocks of 5 or 10 kg
(10–20 lb.; Fig. 16.12), as well as wheels of 0.5 to 2 kg (1–4 lb.; Fig. 16.13). The
color is pale yellow, and the rind should be free of molds. On the inside, Chanco
cheese should only present mechanical openings of irregular shape (Fig. 16.14), due
to a relatively gentle pressing. Chanco cheese has a semi-hard consistency and a
creamy body and has typical milky and buttery notes. Some defects found in this
variety are development of excessive bitterness which can be caused by high resid-
ual chymosin activity that contributes with increased proteolysis, due to low salt
content, high levels of coagulant added during cheese manufacture, as well as tem-
perature abuse during ripening, storage, and transport; accumulation of calcium lac-
tate crystals on the surface of retail blocks (Fig. 16.14) and slices, due to development
of excessive acidity (inadequate control of acid by whey dilution) and temperature
abuse. However, this defect can also occur in various Latin American varieties if
those two conditions take place. Undesirable gas formation leads to the formation
of rounded eyes and is caused by the metabolism of sugars and/or organic acids by
Fig. 16.12 Ripening of

Chanco cheeses. (Source:
Guzman & Ilabaca, 2007)
Fig. 16.13 Typical

appearance of an artisan
Chanco cheese with waxed
rind. (Photo courtesy of
Hardy Aviles (Osorno,
Chile))
Fig. 16.14 Accumulation of calcium lactate crystals in the surface of a retail Chanco cheese
block. This defect is common in various cheese varieties that exhibit excessive acid development
and accumulation of serum in the surface. (Photo from the authors’ private collection)
nonstarter lactic acid bacteria and contaminants, such as coliforms or spores.

Interestingly, Chanco cheese has been made with different proportions of cow’s and
goat’s milk, in which increasing levels of goat’s milk lead to cheeses with a whiter
appearance, brittle texture, and goaty notes (Vyhmeister et al., 2019).
16.8 Final Remarks
Increased popularity of Latin American-style cheeses in the US market is caused by

a large proportion of consumers with Hispanic heritage, along with the high popu-
larity of Latin American cuisine among US consumers, which has increased >5
times the production of Latin American cheeses in US cheese plants over the last
25 years. However, most of the cheese varieties found in the United States are from
Mexican origin. Despite the great diversity of cheeses found throughout Latin
America (i.e., fresh-style cheeses, melting cheeses, semi-hard cheeses, and age-
hard cheeses), there are various examples of cheeses made with similar manufactur-
ing approaches and composition, although the final sensorial experience perceived
by consumers of Latin American cheeses can greatly differ, due to the cheeses’
historical, cultural, and regional background.
References
ANMAT. (2018). Codigo alimentario Argentino – Agencia Nacional de Medicamentos,

Alimentos y Tecnologia Medica. Accessed 15 Mar 2022. https://www.argentina.gob.ar/anmat/
codigoalimentario
Brazil, Ministério da Agricultura, P. e A. (1997). Portaria MAPA n° 358, de 04 de setembro de
1997 – Regulamento técnico para fixação de identidade e qualidade de Queijo Prato. Accessed
25 Feb 2022. https://pesquisa.in.gov.br/imprensa/jsp/visualiza/index.jsp?data=08/09/1997&jo
rnal=1&pagina=42&totalArquivos=160
Brazil, Ministério da Agricultura, P. e A. (2004). Instrução Normativa n° 04, de 01 de março de
2004 – Regulamento técnico para fixação de identidade e qualidade do Queijo Minas Frescal.
Accessed 25 Feb 2022. https://pesquisa.in.gov.br/imprensa/jsp/visualiza/index.jsp?data=05/0
3/2004&jornal=1&pagina=5&totalArquivos=120
Brazil, Ministério da Agricultura, P. e A. (2020). Instrução Normativa SDA n° 66, de 21 julho
de 2020 – Regulamento técnico que fixa a identidade e os requisitos de qualidade que deve
apresentar o queijo Minas Padrão. Accessed 28 Feb 2022. https://www.in.gov.br/en/web/dou/-/
instrucao-normativa-n-66-de-21-de-julho-de-2020-268265894
CFR (Code of Federal Regulations). (2022). 7CFR58.439: Cheese from unpasteurized milk.
Accessed 6 Oct 2022. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-7/subtitle-B/chapter-I/subchapter-C/
part-58/subpart-B/#58.439
Chile-INN. (1999a). Norma Chilena Oficial 2090 – Productos Lacteos – Queso Chanco –
Requisitos. Santiago, Chile.
Chile-INN. (1999b). Norma Chilena Oficial 2478 – Productos Lacteos – Queso Gauca – Requisitos.
Santiago, Chile.
Clark, S., Hillers, V., & Austin, J. (2004). Improving the safety of Queso Fresco through interven-
tion. Food Protection Trends, 24, 419–422.
FAO. (2022). Food and Agriculture Organization corporate statistical database. Accessed 4 Apr
2022. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/
FDA. (2002). FDA and FSIS issue health advisory about Listeria. Source: FDA News. Accessed
6 Oct 2022. https://web.archive.org/web/20070808035829/http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/
NEWS/2002/NEW00836.html
FDA. (2003). Quantitative assessment of relative risk to public health from foodborne Listeria
monocytogenes among selected categories of ready-to-eat foods. Source: CFSAN risk & safety
assessments. Accessed 6 Oct 2022. https://www.fda.gov/food/cfsan-risk-safety-assessments/
quantitative-a ssessment-r elative-r isk-p ublic-h ealth-f oodborne-l isteria-m onocytogenes-
among-selected
FDA. (2018). The dangers of raw milk. Source: Food facts. Accessed 1 Oct 2022. https://
www.fda.gov/food/buy-store-serve-safe-food/dangers-raw-milk-unpasteurized-milk-can-
pose-serious-health-risk
González de Nájera, A. (1889). Desengaño y reparo de la guerra del Reino de Chile. Imprenta
Ercilla.
González-Córdova, A. F., Yescas, C., Ortiz-Estrada, Á. M., De la Rosa-Alcaraz, M. d. l. Á.,
Hernández-Mendoza, A., & Vallejo-Cordoba, B. (2016). Invited review: Artisanal Mexican
cheeses. Journal of Dairy Science, 99, 3250–3262. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-10103
Groves, D. (2016). 20 years of hispanic cheese production growth (Cheese report 2).
Guzman, V., & Ilabaca, C. (2007). Utilización de leche de vaca, cabra y oveja en la pequeña
empresa. Fundacion para la Innovacion Agraria.
Jimenez-Maroto, L. A., Lopez-Hernandez, A., Borneman, D. L., & Rankin, S. A. (2016). A
comparison of fresh, pasta filata, and aged Hispanic cheeses using sensory, chemical, func-
tional, and microbiological assessments. Journal of Dairy Science, 99, 2680–2693. https://doi.
org/10.3168/jds.2015-10112
Linnan, M. J., Mascola, L., Lou, X. D., Goulet, V., May, S., Salminen, C., Hird, D. W., Yonekura,
M. L., Hayes, P., Weaver, R., Audurier, A., Plikaytis, B. D., Fannin, S. L., Kleks, A., & Broome,
C. V. (1988). Epidemic listeriosis associated with Mexican-style cheese. New England Journal
of Medicine, 319, 823–828. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198809293191303
López-Díaz, J. A., & Martínez-Ruiz, N. d. R. (2018). Sensorial and physicochemical profile of
Chihuahua Cheese considering consumer preferences. Agrociencia, 52, 361–378.
Martínez-Ruiz, N. R., & López-Díaz, J. A. (2008). Optimización de la extracción y estandarización
de un cuajo vegetal para la elaboración de Queso Asadero. Cienc. en la Front., 6, 173–176.
Morin, D. E., Rowan, L. L., Hurley, W. L., & Braselton, W. E. (1995). Composition of milk from
llamas in the United States. Journal of Dairy Science, 78, 1713–1720. https://doi.org/10.3168/
jds.S0022-0302(95)76796-0
NASS. (2022). Quick Stats: National Hispanic cheese production 1996 to 2021. Accessed 18 Sept
2022. https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/results/84593F2B-177B-38F6-91F5-FC21E7E39203
ODEPA-Chile. (2022). Boletin de la leche: Avance de recepción y producción de la indu-
stria lactea. Accessed 15 Mar 2022. https://bibliotecadigital.odepa.gob.cl/bitstream/han-
dle/20.500.12650/71446/Leche_Diciembre2021.pdf
Oliveira, M. N., & Brito, C. (2006). Brined cheeses and analogues from Latin American origin. In
A. Tamine (Ed.), Brined cheeses (pp. 211–248). Blackwell Publishing.
Osegueda, R. (2022). ¿Quién inventó el Queso Oaxaca y cuál es su verdadero nombre?, Source:
México Desconocido. Accessed 30 Sept 2022. https://www.mexicodesconocido.com.mx/
quien-invento-el-queso-oaxaca-y-cual-es-su-verdadero-nombre.html
Path, J. (1991). Hispanic cheeses: a promising new market for the specialty cheesemaker. UW
Dairy Pipeline, 3, 1–4.
Path, J. (2008). Hispanic cheese reference guide. Dairy Management, Inc..
Ramírez-López, C., & Vélez-Ruiz, J. F. (2012). Quesos frescos: propiedades, métodos de determi-
nación y factores que afectan su calidad. Temas Sel. Ing. Aliment., 6, 131–148.
Riek, A., Gerken, M., & Moors, E. (2007). Measurement of milk intake in suckling llamas (Lama
glama) using deuterium oxide dilution. Journal of Dairy Science, 90, 867–875. https://doi.
org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(07)71570-9
The World Bank. (2020). Rural environment and land use. Source: World Development Indicators.
Accessed 7 July 2022. http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/3.1
The World Bank. (2022). Population total – Latin America & Caribbean. Source: World Bank Open
Data. Accessed 4 Oct 2022. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=ZJ
Tibary, A., Johnson, L. W., Pearson, L. K., & Rodriguez, J. S. (2014). Lactation and neonatal care.
In C. Cebra, D. E. Anderson, A. Tibary, R. J. Van Saun, & L. W. Johson (Eds.), Llama and
alpaca care: Medicine, surgery, reproduction, nutrition, and herd health (1st ed., pp. 286–297).
Elsevier.
Tienda, M., & Mitchell, F. (2006). Multiple origins, uncertain destinies: Hispanics and the
American future. The National Academies Press.
Torres Saldamando, E., Patrón, P., & Boloña, N. (1888). Libro Primero de Cabildos de Lima. Parte
Tercera: Documentos. Imprimerie Paul Dupont, Paris.
Tunick, M. H., & Van Hekken, D. L. (2010). Rheology and texture of commercial queso fresco
cheeses made from raw and pasteurized milk. Journal of Food Quality, 33, 204–215. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4557.2010.00331.x
US Census Bureau. (2021). American community survey. 1-year estimates detailed tables of
Hispanic or Latino origin in 2021. Accessed 8 Feb 2022. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?
q=hispanicorigin&y=2021&tid=ACSDT1Y2021.B03001&moe=false
USDA. (2020). Dairy and products: Brazil. Accessed 30 Mar 2022. https://apps.fas.usda.gov/
newgainapi/api/Report/DownloadReportByFileName?fileName=DairyandProductsAnn
ual_Brasilia_Brazil_10-15-2020
USDA. (2022). Venezuelan dairy industry: Trends and outlook for 2022.
Accessed 5 June 2022. https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/Report/Dow
n l o a d R e p o r t B y F i l e N a m e ? f i l e N a m e = Ve n e z u e l a n D a i r y I n d u s t r y T r e n d s a n d
Outlookfor2022_Caracas_Venezuela_VE2022–0014.pdf
Van Hekken, D. L., & Farkye, N. Y. (2003). Hispanic cheeses: The Quest for Queso. Food
Villegas de Gante, A. (2004). Tecnología Quesera (1st ed.) (A. Villegas de Gante, Ed.). Editorial
Trillas.
Vyhmeister, S., Geldsetzer-Mendoza, C., Medel-Marabolí, M., Fellenberg, A., Vargas-Bello-Pérez,
E., & Ibáñez, R. A. (2019). Influence of using different proportions of cow and goat milk on
the chemical, textural and sensory properties of Chanco–style cheese with equal composition.
LWT, 112, 108226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2019.05.124
Wolf, V., Palma, S., Bergamini, C., & Perotti, M.C. (2021). Caracterizacion de quesos tipicos argen-
tinos. In J. Reinheimer (Ed.), Avances y Tendencias En La Industria Lactea – La Contribucion
Argentina Desde El INLAIN (pp. 91–105).
Chapter 17
Mold-Ripened Cheeses
Marc Bates and Stephanie Clark
17.1 Introduction
Historically, mold-ripened cheeses likely came about by accident. But the mold-
ripened cheeses of today are far from accidents—they are carefully crafted master-
pieces of science and art. Broadly speaking, mold-ripened cheeses can be subdivided
into two categories: those characterized by bloomy rinds (or surface mold-ripened
cheeses) or blue-veined. Within each of those categories, great variability exists
throughout the world, which will be further discussed in subsequent sections, along
with general make procedures, expected characteristics and defects, and explana-
tions for the sources of such characteristics.
The German scientist Weigmann (1906) reported that “It has long been known
that the characteristic rancid, sharp taste of French Roquefort, English Stilton, and
Italian Gorgonzola cheeses is caused by the green Penicillium.” Much of the early
published science on mold-ripened cheeses was conducted as a result of American
consumers’ desire for imported Roquefort, which was restricted after the First
World War. Some of the premier American blue cheese research pioneers included
Charles Thom, James Currie, and Kenneth Matheson (1900s–1920s) at the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Bernard Hammer and Clarence Lane at
Iowa State College (1930s–1940s), and Samuel Coulter and Willes Combs at the
University of Minnesota (1930s–1940s). Thom was the first to describe the impor-
tance of Penicillium camberti and P. roqueforti in mold-ripened cheeses. Thom and
colleagues at the USDA were instrumental in defining the taxonomy of Aspergillus
and Penicillium genera (Thom, 1906) and for determining microorganisms
M. Bates
Bates Consulting LLC, Cannon Beach, OR, USA
S. Clark (*)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_17
546 M. Bates and S. Clark
responsible for proteolysis and lipolysis (Thom, 1906). Currie (1914) stated that
“Every cheese connoisseur is familiar with the peculiar pepper or burning effect of
well-ripened Roquefort cheese on the organs of taste.” Currie went further to eluci-
date that P. roqueforti produces a water-soluble lipase, which is the chief factor in
causing fat hydrolysis and subsequent formation of the primary volatile fatty acids
responsible for typical blue cheese flavor: caproic, caprylic, capric acids.
Microbiologists Lane and Hammer are credited with establishing and patenting
the method later used to produce Maytag Blue Cheese in Newton, Iowa. Their
method involved separation of cow milk, homogenization of the cream (14–24 MPa
of pressure), and blending back in raw skim milk to promote milk fat hydrolysis by
the native lipase during ripening. Their research revealed that pasteurization of
homogenized raw milk more rapidly developed volatile acidity, yielded more typi-
cal flavor than cheese made from non-homogenized raw milk, but was inferior to
cheese made from raw homogenized milk (Lane & Hammer, 1938). Subsequently,
Coulter and Combs (1939) reported that the addition of a lipase enzyme (called
steapsin) enhanced flavor development in blue cheese, but cheeses had a bitter taste.
Later still, Parmelee and Nelson (1949) showed that addition of select microorgan-
isms that produce lipase (Candida lipolytica) to pasteurized, homogenized milk
improved blue cheese flavor, with no bitter taste.
Later, Morris, Jezeski, and Combs, from the University of Minnesota, created the
white-veined mold-ripened cheese called Nuworld cheese. The scientists induced
mutants of P. roqueforti from a parent Minnesota strain by irradiation with ultravio-
let light, then Morris et al. (1954) made “Minnesota Blue cheese” with the standard
and mutant strains. Their experiments revealed that “Excellent cheese can be made
with a white mutant… color, body, texture, and comparatively milder flavor are dif-
ferent enough from Blue cheese to constitute a new cheese, which may be classed
within the semi-soft, mold-ripened group of cheese.”
The classics among the surface ripened or bloomy cheeses are Camembert and
Brie in the United States. Valencay and Poligny should also be considered if we look
to include other styles originating from France. One legend credits Marie Harel, a
farmer’s wife from Normandie, France, with the origin of Camembert de Normandie
(AOC) in 1791. Brie de Meaux and Brie de Melun, both French AOC cheeses, are
made from raw milk. Here in the United States, we will likely only see a modern
Brie made from pasteurized milk due to the short aging time and the 60-day aging
requirement for raw milk cheeses. In France, the raw milk versions would be mar-
keted prior to 60 days of age.
Dupont/Danisco Technical Manual (2014) tells us about the flavor compounds
found in bloomy rind cheeses in Table 17.1.
These early works were instrumental in setting the groundwork for understand-
ing and producing high-quality mold-ripened cheeses worldwide.
17 Mold-Ripened Cheeses 547
Table 17.1 Flavor compounds associated with bloomy rind cheeses

Families Compounds Associated flavors
S-compounds Dimethyl sulfide (DMS) dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) Sulphur,
cabbage-like
Esters Ethyl acetate, ethyl butanoate, ethyl propanoate, ethyl Fruity, apple,
lactate, ethyl valerate, isoamyl acetate, isobutyl pineapple, sweet,
isobutanoate, ethyl hexanoate banana
Ketones Acetone, 2-butanone, 2,3-pentanedione, 2-heptanone, Solvent-like, etheric,
acetoin, diacetyl buttery, blue cheese
Aldehydes Acetaldehyde, 2-methyl butanal, isovaleraldehyde Green, malty
Alcohols Ethanol, 1-propanol, isobutanol, 2-methyl, 1-butanol Ethanol-like,
pungent, solvent-like,
malty
Source: 2014, TM 2106-2e Dupont-Danisco
17.2 Bloomy Rind Cheeses
17.2.1 Definitions and Standards of Identity
The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) includes a standard of identity for
soft-ripened cheese at 21CFR133.182. While nowhere in the standard is the term
“bloomy rind” used, this is the standard which provides for the production and mar-
keting of such cheeses in the United States. Key elements of the standard include a
minimum of 50% butterfat on a dry basis and the provision to be made from raw
milk only if such product is cured at a temperature of not less than 2 °C (36 °F) for
not less than 60 days. While the standard allows for the production of these cheeses
from raw milk, the requirement to age for at least 60 days uses up much of the
potential market suitability for the cheeses noted in the introduction.
The surface ripening cultures necessary for production of bloomy rind cheeses
are provided for in the standard as follows:
A. Harmless flavor-producing microorganisms may be added.
B. The cheese is cured under conditions suitable for development of biological cur-
ing agents on the surface of the cheese, and the curing is conducted so that the
cheese cures from the surface toward the center.
C. The word “milk” (in this particular standard) means cow’s milk, goat’s milk,
sheep’s milk, or mixtures of two or all of these.
Internationally, the Codex Alimentarius for Milk and Milk Products (FAO & WHO,
2011) has been established for Coulommiers, Brie, and Camembert. Some main
differences between these three international standards and our U.S. soft-ripened
standard are:
A. The harmless flavor-producing cultures include named cultures.
B. Each of the three cheeses must be made from cow or buffalo milk or mixtures
thereof.
Additional international standards are prevalent in the European Union. Union-wide

is the Protected Designation of Origin (PDO), while national systems like the
French Appellation d’Origine Côntrolée (AOC) and the Italian Denominazione di
Origine Protetta (DOP). The intent of these standards is to tie the production of a
particular named cheese to both methods and a geographic area or region, thus pro-
tecting the production of local foods.
The fat content of bloomy rinds may lead to different naming conventions, such
as double or triple-cream designations. Fat content is expressed as percent fat in the
dry matter, also called fat on a dry basis. The soft-ripened cheese standard 21CFR
133.182 requires a 50% minimum fat in dry matter (FDM) with no maximum,
which allows for the higher fat cheeses to be made under this standard. Codex stan-
dards for Brie and Camembert (FAO & WHO, 2011) show a minimum of 40% FDM
and 30% FDM, respectively, and further indicate a reference range of 45–55% as
being normal. While there is no legal definition in the United States, the French
require double crème to have 60–75% FDM and triple crème to be greater than
75% FDM.
17.2.2 Production of Bloomy Rind cheeses
The surface mold-ripened cheeses, also called bloomy rinds, are characterized by
the surface growth of white or off-white Penicillium camemberti and some yeast-
like cultures of Geotrichum and Debaromyces. The bloomy category, with its com-
mon white rind or crust, can have a variety of curd production methods (Table 17.2).
Lactic cheeses, more common in Europe and in the goat cheese industry, are distin-
guished by being acidified before coagulation. This technology may be referred to
as ‘traditional.” At the other extreme are what are referred to as “stabilized soft
Table 17.2 Comparison of bloomy rind technologies

Technology Traditional Stabilized
Parameter technology Mixed technology technology
Acidifying cultures Mesophilic Blends of mesophilic and Thermophilic
thermophilic
Coagulation Late-primarily caused Intermediate-aided by both Early- caused by
by acidification acidification and rennet rennet
Mechanical steps of Neither Large cut and little stirring Smaller cut with
cutting and stirring modest stirring
pH at unmolding ≤4.45 4.65–4.85 4.95–5.20
Ripening cultures Geotrichum + P. camemberti or P. album
Culture ratio 2:1 1:1 1:2
Optional adjuncts Corynebacteria Corynebacteria, P. Corynebacteria, P.
roqueforti roqueforti
Marketing window 2–9 weeks 6–10 weeks 7–15 weeks
Source: 2014, TM 2106-2e Dupont-Danisco
cheeses” or “enzymatic,” whose coagulation is caused by rennet action early in the

process with most acidification occurring after coagulation. Additionally, the cheese
makers get creative and use methodologies of production in between, referred to as
“mixed technology.”
It is no wonder that with all the possible technology variations for white surface-
ripened cheese there are so many different cheeses available. Considering milks
from different species, and mixtures of milks (e.g., goat and sheep), there are even
more cheeses in the mold-ripened cheese category. As we think of cow’s milk, we
have the classics, including Camembert, Brie, Coulommiers, and triple creams. For
goat milk, it would be the small crottins, bloomy logs, and pyramid shapes. Ewe’s
milk provides such classics as Perail de Brebis and Le Brebio. The American Cheese
Society Judging & Competition provides category B – Soft Ripened Cheese, where
makers can enter cheeses in the bloomy or white molded style. Subcategories
include opportunities for milk from each major species plus mixed milk
subcategories.
We will summarize the production steps of a classic bloomy rind such as
Camembert from cow’s milk. Bloomy rind cheeses are uncooked, meaning there is
no step beyond pasteurization that requires any further heat.
Milk Supply We need to have fresh, high-quality milk. Milk can be from a farm’s
own herd or be purchased from other approved dairy farms or companies.
Receiving/Storage The milk must be evaluated for quality, composition, and free
from contamination such as antibiotics during this step of the process. Its tempera-
ture must be kept below 4 °C (40 °F) to preserve quality and prevent outgrowth of
any pathogens.
Standardization Standardization is the process of adjusting the composition of

the milk’s fat:protein ratio. If done, it is usually done by separation/addition of
cream to achieve the desired composition. Not all makers have the ability to do this
step, so it may be a point of differentiation.
Pasteurization The milk is pasteurized as a critical food safety process. While the
standard allows for making from raw milk if aged for 60 days, it is typically not
done in the United States for reasons discussed in the introduction.
Pre-fermentation Post pasteurization, the milk is tempered to approx. 32 °C

(90 °F) and starter cultures or bulk starter are added so that they can become accli-
mated to the warm milk from the dry or frozen state the cultures may have come
from. This is also called ripening the milk, as the starter work through their lag
phase to growth phase and prepare to rapidly reproduce and ferment the lactose to
lactic acid. Depending on the source and amount of starter culture, the duration of
this step can be from 30 to 90 min.
Renneting/Coagulation The amount of rennet to use will be determined by

whether the cheesemaker is following a traditional technology or stabilized technol-
ogy (previously discussed). Coagulation in the traditional technology is primarily
acid driven, so very little rennet is required and it is more an aid to draining than
functioning as a coagulant. Stabilized technology depends on a rapid and complete
coagulation early in the process, with fermentation occurring mostly post-
coagulation. The stabilized technology uses enough rennet to coagulate the milk in
approximately 30 min. Rennet comes in single and double strengths so it is impor-
tant to know this when determining how much to use. The maker may also choose
several sources of rennet, including animal, plant, and fermentation-produced
sources. Calcium chloride may be added to aid/improve the rennet action, especially
in milk that has been pasteurized significantly above minimum requirements.
Cutting Traditional technology may not employ cutting as such but just ladling the
curd into the forms or molds (“dipping”). Stabilized technology would likely cut the
curds into ½–1 inch cubes according to the needs of their particular process. Ladling
and cutting increase the surface area available for moisture to escape or syneresis
from the curd to reach a desired firmness and moisture content.
Stirring Stirring is not used for the traditional technology because the cheese is
dipped into the form and drained. Stabilized technology uses some combination of
cut size (above) and stirring to aid in getting enough whey out to reach desired
moisture content and firmness. Stirring might be done with a few strokes every
3–5 min over about 25–30 min in a manual method. Mechanical stirring would only
be used for very large-scale production where it could be managed with program-
mable automation.
Draining This step begins with the curd and whey separation. About 1/3 of the
whey is pre-drawn or removed from the vat before transferring the remaining curds
and whey to the molds for further draining while also being shaped.
Molding Molding has the purpose of creating uniformly shaped and sized wheels
or discs of cheese. It also allows for continuation of drainage for as long as overnight.
Salting Salt may be applied to Camembert by either dry salting the curd or by plac-
ing the discs into a brine solution. Salting is usually done the next day, with param-
eters designed to achieve about 1% salt in the finished cheese. Dry-salted cheeses
may rest with occasional turning for about 24 h or longer before proceeding. Brine
salting for these small-format cheeses may take only an hour or two depending on
the salt concentration of the brine.
Ashing This optional step is done for two reasons. First, it helps neutralize the
surface acidity, making it a better environment for the ripening cultures to grow.
Second, it provides a striking visual appearance of the finished product (Fig. 17.1).
Ripening We are now at day 3 since the start, and moving the cheese to a con-
trolled temperature and humidity space where the Penicillium camemberti will liter-
ally ‘bloom’ on the surface over the next 10–12 days. Hence the name bloomy rind.
The Geotrichum or other yeast cultures will grow first, de-acidifying the surface and
making it more hospitable to the Penicillium. Penicillium blooms best at a humidity
level above 90% and temperatures in the 10–12 °C (50–54 °F) range. The ripening
cultures could have been added directly to the milk in the cheese vat. They could
have been delivered to the surface by mixing with salt and applying the dry salting
method. Otherwise, they would need to be applied to the surface by spraying or wip-
ing methods. Uniform development of the bloom is aided by turning the cheeses
every 3–5 days during this ripening step.
Packaging After a full bloom has developed over the surface of the cheese pieces,
they may be wrapped in appropriate materials such as sulfurized paper, cellophane,
or other patented wraps made especially for these cheeses. Depending on the tech-
nology used, desired product characteristics, and the market preferences, the prod-
uct could be ready in as little as in 2–3 more weeks.
17.2.3 Sensory Evaluation
17.2.3.1 Preparing Samples for Evaluation
Tempering bloomy rind cheeses takes a bit less time than large-format cheeses (e.g.,
Gouda) due to the small size of the cheese and the consequently greater surface area
to volume ratio, especially of the flat disc formats. Piece sizes of a pound or less
would likely temper from refrigeration to the mid 10 °C (50 °F) range in as little as
Fig. 17.1 Goat cheese with bloomy rind, exhibiting surface mold and layers of ash (S. Clark image)
30 min. Tempering helps the evaluator to sense and appreciate the volatile compo-
nents of the cheese, and having a set standard is best for comparing one cheese to
another and one occasion to another. A full-size Brie or Coulommiers, on the other
hand, will need 1–2 h to temper, as they may weigh as much as 6–8 pounds
(Fig. 17.2).
Knives or wire harps (Fig. 17.3) are both acceptable to cut or open the cheese for
visual inspection and portion it for tasting. When deciding how to portion the
cheese, it is important to consider that there may be variations in the cheese from the
exterior to the inner core of the cheese. Thus, we want to cut or slice so as to best
expose a representative cross-sectional view to allow one to see from the rind all the
way to the center of the cheese mass (Fig. 17.4).
17.2.4 Bloomy Rind Cheese Sensory Characteristics
Ideal Characteristics
Roustel (2020) described modern Camembert as having a rind with a fine white
bloom that may develop brownish striations when fully mature. Its flavor should be
mushroomy and earthy, with slight ammonia towards the end of its life. The paste
should be homogenous, supple, and slightly elastic, with occasional fermentative
openings. Mushroomy and earthy are terms that seem to be associated with most
cheeses in this category. As the milk source changes from cow to other species, we
expect to sense more animal notes associated with the shorter-chain fatty acids char-
acteristic of the milk from sheep and goats.
When evaluating samples, we use all our senses in some sequence. We first see
the external appearance and get some aroma. When cutting or slicing, we may get
more volatile aromas and a visual of the interior of the cheese. Decorative shapes,
leaves, spices, and/or condiments may be occasionally used on top of or inside some
bloomy rind cheeses (Fig. 17.5). We note textural characteristics as we slice and
handle the cheese, bringing it to our mouth. In the mouth, it gets really busy as we
continue to evaluate the mouthfeel, tastebud responses, and even more volatile aro-
mas via retro-nasal olfaction. A good product leaves us wanting more. If we are
evaluating more than just a couple of samples, it is important to expectorate each
sample to avoid satiation, which will dull our senses and fatigue us.
17.2.4.1 Defects in Bloomy Rind Cheeses
Bloomy rind cheese defects can be segmented into three categories: Appearance,
color, and mold development, Body and texture, Aroma and flavor. Defect descrip-
tions are included in subsequent pages. Many of the terms are also found in the
American Cheese Society’s T.A.S.T.E Test® scoresheets found on their website,
https://www.cheesesociety.org/ccse-scoresheets/.
Fig. 17.2 A full-size Brie

or Coulommiers may need
1–2 h to temper, as they
may weigh as much as 6–8
pounds (S. Clark image)
Fig. 17.3 Cheese knife

and small wire harp tools
for working with bloomy
rind cheese (Image by
Bates Consulting)
17.2.4.1.1 Appearance, Color, and Mold Development
Cracked or Disturbed Rind A jagged, cracked, or split rind may be due to exces-
sive drying or physical damage.
Discolored/Dull Color/Uneven Color Multiple terms are used when the color is
not a fine white bloom with only some fine tan striations.
Excessive Mold Coat/Rind The term is used when the mold coat or rind is quite
thick and upon further examination may even be tough or leathery when cutting or
in the mouth.
Greasy/Free Butterfat Sometimes when a bloomy cheese is temperature abused

such as in shipping or distribution the butterfat will come to the surface to yield
this defect.
Fig. 17.4 A disc and a pyramid shape cut to display a good cross section of each cheese
(S. Clark images)
Fig. 17.5 Examples show the presentation of the cheese may be enhanced by the addition of a
colored spice or condiment (left), wrapping with bark and adorning with leaves (center), or using
a unique shape (right) (S. Clark images)
Malformed/Crooked /Lopsided The terms are used to describe a lack of

symmetry.
Slipped Coat/Rind/Skin The terms are used when the rind is found to be separat-
ing from the cheese itself (Fig. 17.6).
Undeveloped/Immature Mold Coat If the bloom is very thin and/or does not
fully cover the cheese, or patchy coverage appears, these terms are used (Fig. 17.7).
Wet/Free Whey The terms should be used when the cheese has a wet appearance
or actual free whey or moisture on the surface.
Undesirable Mold Type The term is used with the appearance of obvious growth
of unintended or undesirable mold types not associated with the category (Fig. 17.7).
17.2.4.1.2 Body and Texture
Crumbly The term is used when the center cheese falls apart or crumbles when
sliced or pressure is applied, as with the thumb and forefingers or in the mouth.
Curdy In curdy cheese, the original, individual curd particles may be seen or felt
as the cheese is manipulated.
Excessive Gassy Some openings due to gassiness from flavor-producing bacteria

are expected, so this term is used when the structure of the cheese is threatened by
excessive gas holes.
Mealy/Grainy/Sandy A mealy texture is one that appears like and has the mouth-
feel of corn meal. Grainy might have randomly dispersed granules visible or that
can be felt in the mouth. Sandiness is usually a mouthfeel that persists after the
sample has been expectorated/swallowed. It can happen when excessive lactose
crystallizes.
Gummy/Pasty/Sticky These terms are applicable when the cheese doesn’t let go.
It sticks to the roof of your mouth, your fingers, and/or the knife.
Open The term open refers to the angular openings in the mass of the cheese left
when the individual curds have not compacted and knit into a smooth mass.
Short Short refers to the brittleness of the curd when manipulated with the fingers
and it readily breaks apart. The curd is inflexible.
Weak The term is applied when the cheese lacks resistance to pressure by the fin-
gers or tongue against the roof of the mouth. This lack of resistance may be associ-
ated with excessive moisture content of the cheese.
17.2.4.1.3 Aroma and Flavor
Ammoniated As bloomy cheeses ripen and the protein breaks down, some ammo-
nia is produced. Usually, it occurs in fully ripe cheese, and it may be present in a
slight amount but more than that it is a sign of overripe product.
Atypical The product does not contain the basic characteristics of the category
(see Ideal above) or includes attributes characteristic of a different cheese.
Barnyard The aroma or flavor is reminiscent of the barnyard, animals, and/

or manure.
Fig. 17.6 Examples of slipped coat defect (S. Clark images)
Fig. 17.7 Examples of ideal (left) vs. undeveloped/immature mold coat (center) and undesirable
“Wild” mucor mold type (right) (S. Clark images)
Bitter Bitter is a basic taste, detected only in the mouth and mostly at the back of
the tongue or pallet. It has no odor or aroma. One cause is bitter peptides forming
during the proteolysis that occurs during ripening or aging. For persons not blind to
bitterness, this is an undesirable attribute, as the flavor may linger or persist after the
sample is gone.
Chemical Chemical flavors are also described as medicinal, phenolic, or band-aid

like. They could be reminiscent of sanitizers like chlorine bleach or iodophors.
Feed Flavors from highly aromatic feeds like alfalfa or silage fed within 2 h of
milking or during milking can impact the milk’s flavor.
Flat/Lacks The descriptor is applied to products lacking the primary character of

the category. It could be applied to a mild cheese in an aged category.
Fruity/Fermented Fruity esters often remind us of apple or pineapple or other

sweetish flavors. Krautlike is a fermentation flavor associated with some particular
cultures.
High Acid This term is applied when the acid is the only flavor characteristic noted
or it is out of balance with other components of the product’s flavor. Bloomy rinds
are quite acidic in the first days, but as they bloom and begin to ripen the pH goes
up and so they become less acidic when ready.
High Salt The term is used when salt is out of balance and noticeable as a primary
characteristic.
Lacks Freshness/Old Milk If the product has a stale or old component that is
slightly unpleasing, the terms may be used.
Metallic Metallic is both a flavor and a mouthfeel that is puckery or astringent. It

is caused by the animals’ diet, especially on poor feeds in winter or by the metal in
the water system they drink from.
Moldy or Musty The flavor or aroma is very earthy or reminiscent of a damp base-
ment. It is not particularly pleasant, and not like the characteristic mushroomy fla-
vor of bloomy rinds.
Rancid The flavor is caused by the lipolysis of the butterfat splitting off butyric
acid from the fat molecule. Highly aromatic and is a positive component of blue
cheese or provolone flavors. Not expected in bloomy rinds. It is sometimes described
as baby’s breath.
Unclean This flavor is an unpleasant experience that may come as an aftertaste or

linger long after the sample is gone. It can come from the animals breathing air from
a dirty and poorly ventilated barn, or it may be caused by spoilage organisms
impacting on the milk or poor sanitation practices in the cheese room.
Unpleasantly Earthy See also moldy/musty above. The term describes flavor or
aroma that is very earthy or reminiscent of a damp basement. It may be associated
with a cave-aged cheese. It is not particularly pleasant and not like the characteristic
mushroomy flavor of bloomy rinds.
Whey Taint The flavor is often caused by excessive whey or moisture being left in
the curd. It can be unpleasantly sour or unclean in nature.
Yeasty The flavor is reminiscent of rising or fresh baked bread. It can be caused by
too much Geotrichum or other yeast in the culture system of bloomy rinds.
17.3 Blue-Veined Cheeses
17.3.1 Definitions and Standards of Identity
Blue-veined cheeses are made throughout the world from raw, heat-treated, or pas-
teurized milk of cows, goats, sheep, or mixed milk. Some of the most famous blue-
veined cheeses include Roquefort (France, discussed in Chap. 18), Stilton (England),
Gorgonzola (Italy), Cabrales (Spain), and Danablu (Denmark). Some blue-veined
cheeses have Protected designation of origin (PDO), Appellation d’origine protégée
(AOP, in French-speaking countries, Denominacion de origen (DOP, in Spanish-
speaking countries), or Denominazione d’origine controllata (DOC, in Italian-
speaking countries) status.
According to the U.S. FDA Code of Federal Regulations, Blue cheese “is char-
acterized by the presence of bluish-green mold, Penicillium roqueforti, throughout
the cheese. The minimum milkfat content is 50% by weight of the solids and the
maximum moisture content is 46% by weight… is at least 60 days old” (USFDA,
2022a). Nuworld cheese has the same requirements, except that it “is characterized
by the presence of creamy-white mold, a white mutant of Penicillium roqueforti,
throughout the cheese…” (USFDA, 2022b).
17.3.2 Production of Blue-Veined Cheeses
As with any dairy food operation, strict sanitation practices and use of fresh raw
ingredients are also essential for high-quality blue-veined cheese. Cream and/or
milk used to make blue cheese in the United States may be raw or pasteurized,
homogenized, or bleached. If benzoyl peroxide or a mixture of benzoyl peroxide
with potassium alum, calcium sulfate, and magnesium carbonate is used to bleach
the milk, the weight of the benzoyl peroxide must not exceed 0.002% of the weight
of the milk, and the weight of the potassium alum, calcium sulfate, and magnesium
carbonate, singly or combined, must not exceed six times the weight of the benzoyl
peroxide used. Additionally, if bleaching is conducted, vitamin A must be added to
the curd in a quantity sufficient to compensate for the vitamin A or its precursors
destroyed in the bleaching process (USFDA, 2022b).
Fresh milk (approximately 3.5% fat) is warmed (to approximately 32 °C (90 °F)),
then cultured with mesophilic (typically exclusively) lactic acid-producing bacteria
(i.e., Lactococcus lactis) and chymosin. Some processors have encouraged aeration
of blue cheese by adding gas-producing cultures (e.g., Leuconostoc species).
Leuconostoc can expand the mechanical openings in blue-veined cheeses, allowing
P. roqueforti to colonize the eyes formed (Pujato et al., 2014). In ideal conditions,
CO2 leaves via punch holes; in less ideal conditions, eyes are entrapped in the
cheese body.
Upon cutting, curds are gently scooped into perforated forms (approximately
19 cm in diameter, 15 cm in height), for whey drainage. Care should be taken to
maintain a somewhat open structure. Spores of Penicillium roqueforti may be added
to the milk or to the curds while filling forms. The forms are turned several times
during draining, then removed from forms when considered sufficiently dry. The
wheels of cheese are salted with dry salt or placed into a brine solution. Subsequently,
perforations (approximately 50 per cheese) are made with copper or stainless steel
“needles,” sufficiently long to penetrate through the entire wheel, to enable air cir-
culation, essential for mold growth throughout the open internal structure of the
formed cheese.
Punctured wheels are held at a temperature of approximately 10–12 °C
(50–54 °F), 90–95% relative humidity, until the characteristic mold growth has
developed (approximately 30 days). Mold-inhibitory compounds (antimycotics)
may be applied to the surface of wheels to prevent surface mold growth (Fig. 17.8).
Alternatively or additionally, cheese surfaces may be scraped to remove surface
mold or yeast outgrowth prior to packaging and distribution. Additional affinage
may occur in caves at 4–7 °C (40–45 °F), for approximately 60–90 days prior to
distribution.
Under European Union law, Gorgonzola is a protected designation of origin
(DOP) cheese, made only in specific Italian provinces of Lombardy and Piedmont.
It is made with unskimmed pasteurized milk, spores of P. roqueforti, and calf ren-
net, though some producers add lactic cultures (e.g., L. bulgaricus and S. thermoph-
ilus) and even selected yeasts of the Saccharomyces species. Curds are separately
made out of the morning and evening milk and then alternately layered in forms to
facilitate the open structure needed for aeration (Fox et al., 2000). Gorgonzola is
typically aged 3–4 months. Gorgonzola Piccante is aged longer (~3–12 months)
than “Gorgonzola Dolce” (at least 60 days) and has at least 48% fat on a dry basis.
Gorgonzola has a softer, more smooth, and less crumbly texture than Roquefort
unless aged (Gorgonzola Piccante). The body is cream to yellow in color; the pink-
to-grey rind is considered in-edible (DOP Italian Food Agency, 2022).
Under European Union law, Stilton (PDO) cheese can only be made in
Leicestershire, Derbyshire, and Nottingham, England, from pasteurized local cow
milk. P. roqueforti mold spores are added to the milk and renneted. Curds are
allowed to settle to the bottom of the vat, and cut to facilitate whey drainage, which
occurs slowly over a 12–18-h period (Fox et al., 2000). Curds are milled, dry salted,
and drained, with turning, for about 7 days in cylinder forms, at 26–30 °C (79–86 °F),
90% relative humidity (Fox et al., 2000). A rind develops during incubation in a
cooler room (13–15 °C (55–59 °F), 85–90% relative humidity) for 6–7 weeks.
Subsequently, cheeses are pierced, allowed 2–3 weeks to grow mold, then moved to
a cold room (5 °C/41 °F) (Fox et al., 2000). Stilton has a minimum of 48% milkfat
in the dry matter and resembles a high acid, flaky Cheddar cheese with blue-green
veining. Stilton cheeses typically harbor secondary microflora, including but not
limited to the adventitious (not intentionally added) yeasts Yarrowia lipolytica and
Kluyveromyces lactis, which contribute to the distinct aroma and flavor profiles in
the paste, veins, and brownish outer crust (Gkatzionis et al., 2009; Price et al., 2014).
Cabrales PDO cheese is made from raw cow milk or blended with goat and/or
sheep milk. Cabrales is made in a traditional artisan fashion by rural dairy farmers
in a small production zone in northern Spain. It has a fat content of 45% on a dry
basis. Cabrales is aged at least 75 days in natural caves with P. roqueforti spores
present (none are added during cheesemaking). Regulation requires that the cheeses
be sold in dark-green-colored aluminum foil with the stamp of the PDO Queso de
Cabrales (Worldnews, Inc. 2022).
Danablu is made with pasteurized cow milk, P. roqueforti spores, and chymosin.
Curds are cut and ladled into molds, drained, and then brined. Wheels are pierced,
then aged at least 60 days. Danablu has 50–60% fat on a dry basis.
17.3.3 Sensory Evaluation
17.3.3.1 Preparing Samples for Evaluation
Blue cheese stored under refrigeration should be tempered at room temperature for
approximately 30 min per pound prior to evaluation to facilitate release of volatile
components. Observe the quality of the packaging and the surface condition of the
cheese. A sharp knife or wire should be used to cut the blue cheese wheel in half
(wire), then into wedges (wire or knife), or crumbles (Fig. 17.9). Begin by observ-
ing the aroma upon slicing. Pay attention to the overall impact and impression as it
may reveal what is to come when tasting the product. Make note of the appearance
of the mold after cutting and again after tasting, as color may change. Pay attention
to the slicing properties of the cheese. Tasting should include quarter-sized samples
representing the center, middle, and exterior of the wheel to obtain a complete pic-
ture of the cheese quality.
17.3.3.2 Blue Cheese Sensory Characteristics
Besides Swiss cheese, blue cheese is likely the most visually recognizable cheese to
consumers. Surfaces of wheels of blue cheese may appear white- to cream-colored
or may display surface ripening of varying colors; wheels may be bandage-wrapped
or even foiled. Color loss may occur if blue cheeses are placed in retail packaging
before they are fully ripened (“in-pack maturing”). The atmosphere in which
P. roqueforti mature post-packaging affects not only conidial color but also the way
in which conidiophores are produced and develop morphologically; lanose or
“cotton-woolly” appearance forms in higher CO2 environments (Fairclough et al.,
2011). Upon cutting, abundant internal veins and pockets of vibrant blue-green
mold should be distributed evenly throughout an open-bodied white- to cream-
colored paste.
Blue cheese should slice cleanly, without excessive force or crumbling. The
cheese should break down into a smooth paste relatively quickly during mastication.
Similar to other cheeses, blue cheese’s body and texture is largely dictated by pH
because of its effect on mineral solubilization and casein dissociation from casein
micelles. The ratio of intact casein to moisture, manufacturing practices, and stor-
age conditions are also key factors. Further, blue-veined cheese body is affected by
proteolysis from fungal protease action as well as residual chymosin, plasmin, and
non-starter microorganism enzymatic activity (Diezhandino et al., 2016).
Blue-veined cheeses should have recognizable lactic acid and acetic acid aroma
upon opening. Blue-veined cheeses are expected to exhibit extensive, blue-green
veining throughout the body (from interior to just below the surface) of the white-
to-cream-colored open-textured paste (Fig. 17.10). Consumers associate more blue-
green veining with more intensely flavored cheeses, and associate yellow-brown
veins with over-ripening (Fairclough et al., 2011).
Blue-veined cheese aroma and flavor result from proteolysis and lipolysis during
ripening, yielding pleasing as well as potentially unpleasant flavors (Lawlor et al.,
2003; Diezhandino et al., 2015). The question of whether homogenization is neces-
sary for blue cheese flavor development was investigated by Cao and others (2014).
The findings indicated the facilitative effect of homogenization of milk fat to enable
P. roqueforti lipase to release free fatty acids and formation of methyl ketones in
aged blue-veined cheese. High et al. (2021) identified 172 volatile compounds that
discriminated 17 international varieties of blue cheese, including alcohols (22),
aldehydes (3), esters (38), free fatty acids (11), hydrocarbons (10), ketones (19),
lactones (3), nitrogenous compounds (7), sulfurous compounds (4), phenyl com-
pounds (5), terpenes (4), and other compounds (2). The study revealed that the
esters, hydrocarbons, ketones, and alcohols did the most to distinguish different
cheeses. Blue-veined cheeses are often characterized by words associated with
the chemical compounds, including but not limited to “moldy flavor” (methyl
ketones (i.e., 2-pentanone, 2-heptanone, and 2-nonanone), “musty”
Fig. 17.8 Antimycotic agents modify the surface appearance of blue-veined cheeses (left = with;
right = without) (S. Clark image)
(2,4,6-trimethoxy-benzaldehyde), “mushroom” (3-octan-3-ol), “rancid” or “lipase

flavor” (fatty acids (i.e., butyric, caproic, caprylic acids)), “waxy” (capric acid),
“soapy” (lauric acid), and fruity (ethyl hexanoate) (Drake, 2007).
17.3.3.3 Defects in Blue-Veined Cheeses
Blue cheese defects can be segmented into three categories: Appearance, color, and
mold development, Aroma and flavor, Body and texture. Defect descriptions are
included in subsequent pages.
17.3.3.3.1 Appearance, Color, and Mold Development
Terminology related to deviations from ideal or appearance and color defects in

blue-veined cheese are summarized in the next section.
Closed Properly manufactured blue cheese should possess an open body, enabling
oxygen-dependent molds to germinate and spread throughout the body of the
cheese. A closed body exhibits a lack of openings and lack of blue veining
(Fig. 17.11).
Crystals Blue cheese with extended aging may display crystals (e.g., tyrosine
crystals), resulting from extensive proteolysis.
Discolored Upon cutting, blue cheeses are expected to display vivid blue-green-
colored “veins” of mold that contrast a homogenous white paste. White, yellow,
brown, or gray mold is indicative of contamination by other mold species or inade-
quate ripening conditions (e.g., low pH, low salt concentration, low oxygen)
(Fig. 17.12). A yellow paste may be indicative of grass-feeding and, in such cases,
may not be considered objectionable.
Excessive Mold The term “excessive mold” may be used when the amount of
blue-green mold predominates the interior and surface of the cheese, with very little
white paste evident (Fig. 17.13).
Free Whey/Wet Free moisture inside the packaging or entrapped within the body
of the cheese, released upon slicing, should be faulted as free whey or wet
(Fig. 17.14).
Inadequate Piercing Approximately 30–50 needle channels are sufficient for a

wheel of blue cheese. Fewer than 25 may result in a cheese with a lack of veining
(Fig. 17.15).
Fig. 17.9 Two appropriate styles of blue cheese preparation for tasting (wedges (left) and crum-
bles (right)) (S. Clark images)
Lack of Veining or Undeveloped Mold Undeveloped mold and lack of veining

are similar. In a fully ripened cheese, extensive, even vein distribution throughout
the body of the cheese is expected. Lack of veining most commonly results from a
closed cheese body, caused by packing molds with soft curds, inadequate piercing,
excessive retained moisture in curds, and/or excessive proteolysis. Inadequate pack-
aging, ripening conditions, or forgetting to add mold spores during manufacture are
other causes (Fig. 17.16).
Malformed A cheese that does not display a uniform shape should be faulted as
malformed.
Surface Growth Unexpected surface mold or yeast growth should be faulted

(Fig. 17.17).
Uneven Mold Distribution Blue-green veining should be distributed evenly from

the cheese center to within a centimeter of the cheese surface (Fig. 17.18). Cheese
exhibiting uneven distribution or more than two centimeters of white paste at the
cheese surface should be faulted for uneven mold distribution.
17.3.3.3.2 Aroma and Flavor
Terminology related to deviations from ideal or defects in blue-veined cheese are

summarized in the next section.
Ammoniated Blue cheese that has undergone extensive proteolysis can exhibit pH
above 6.5 and have an ammonia aroma which is associated with the formation of
aroma from free amino acids. Ammoniated will also typically be associated with
bitterness and soft body.
Atypical The defect atypical is used when the blue cheese lacks typical “blue
cheese flavor.” In contrast to flat, which is an overall lack of flavor, atypical is the
presence of an unexpected flavor or a flavor not expected in blue cheese.
Bitter Bitter is one of the most common defects associated with aged cheese.
Bitterness results from excessive proteolysis and is recognized, by some, at the back
of the throat or tongue. It may be slow to progress, but it lingers for a long time.
Fermented Although some acetic acid aroma and flavor notes are expected in blue
cheeses, the defect “fermented” is indicated when the cheese has an excessive level
or predominant vinegar or fermented fruit aroma or flavor.
Flat or Lacks Flavor Flat may be used to describe young blue cheese or that
which lacks typical, piquant blue cheese flavor (it may lack blue-green veining).
The predominant flavor may be lactic acid rather than complex blue cheese flavors.
Fruity Although some fruity notes (e.g., apple, pineapple, or apricot) are expected
and desired in blue-veined cheese, if fruity flavors predominate or are exclusive (no
other flavors are noted), fruity may be considered a defect.
High Acid While lactic acid is formed in the production of blue cheese, with aging,
other aromatic and flavorful by-products should also characterize blue-veined
cheeses. When lactic acid predominates or is in excess of expected levels, the defect
“high acid” should be pointed out.
Fig. 17.10 Classic, open body and bright, blue-green mold extending close to within 1 cm of the
cheese surface (S. Clark image)
High Salt Blue-veined cheeses contain approximately 3.5–4.5% salt, which is

higher than many other cheeses. However “salty” should not predominate the flavor
profile of blue-veined cheeses. Salt should help to bring out the complex flavor of
blue cheese. If it is out of balance, high salt should be noted.
Rancid Although some rancid (free fatty acid) aroma and flavor notes are expected
in blue cheeses, the defect rancid is indicated when the cheese has an excessive level
or predominant rancid (butyric, caproic, caprylic, or capric acid) aroma or flavor.
Unclean Unclean blue cheese may have a fecal aroma upon opening the package.
Alternatively or additionally, it may have an objectionable flavor or aftertaste.
17.3.3.3.3 Body and Texture
Terminology related to deviations from ideal or body and texture defects in blue-
veined cheese are summarized here.
Mealy/Grainy Blue cheese that is too dry and/or crumbly will likely also be mealy
and grainy. During and after mastication, the cheese does not fully break down, and
after swallowing, the mouth does not clean up.
Too Crumbly Blue cheese that falls apart during slicing is considered too crumbly.
Although blue cheese crumbles have many applications (e.g., salads, dressings), the
most valuable blue cheese is available in wheel and wedge forms.
Too Dry Young or over-salted blue cheese is sometimes characterized by a dry

body. It may slice cleanly or crumble upon slicing.
Too Firm Blue cheese that is difficult to slice is considered too firm. It may also be
too dry and mealy/grainy.
Fig. 17.11 Pronounced closed body, lack of veining (right cheese also displays discolored mold
and surface growth (left cheese displays an ash coat)) (S. Clark images)
Fig. 17.12 Discolored mold (grey (left) and brown (right) mold formation) and crystals (left)
(S. Clark images)
Fig. 17.13 Excessive mold, surface growth, and uneven mold distribution exhibited in a freshly
cut wheel (S. Clark images)
Too Soft/Weak Blue cheese that is too soft will be difficult to slice and may crush
or smear. Blue cheese that contains too much moisture or that has undergone exten-
sive proteolysis will be soft, weak, and/or pasty.
Pasty Pasty blue cheese is commonly soft and sticky while slicing. The defect is
characterized by a sticky mouthfeel and a film may remain in the mouth after
swallowing.
Fig. 17.14 Moisture spots (left) and free whey exhibited on the surface (right) and exuding from
openings (right) of blue cheese (S. Clark images)
Fig. 17.15 Inadequate (left) or improper (right) piercings. The cheeses also exhibit discoloration
due to wild microbial growth and possibly mite infestation (S. Clark images)
Fig. 17.16 Blue cheese

exhibiting piercings but a
lack of mold development,
likely due to the apparent
closed body (S. Clark
image)
Fig. 17.17 Blue cheese exhibiting unsightly surface growth (the right cheese also lacks veining)
(S. Clark images)
Fig. 17.18 Fully developed blue-green mold within cheese interior. (a even mold distribution; b
uneven mold distribution (S. Clark images)
17.4 Conclusion
Readily recognized by their appearance, mold-ripened cheeses occupy a unique

niche in the cheese case and food supply. These beneficial molds are not a sign of
spoilage but of the delicate craftsmanship and maintenance of conditions allowing
them to properly develop. Meticulous care in sanitation practices, cultivation of
starter cultures and mold spores, production practices, and aging regimen yield a
multitude of delightful bloomy rind and blue-veined cheeses worldwide, represent-
ing milk of cows, goats, sheep, buffalo, or mixtures of milk from multiple species.
A breakdown anywhere in the system may yield sensory defects as elaborated upon
in this chapter. Both accidental and intentional changes to process or conditions
have occasionally led to novel cheeses for this category. Training of personnel to
recognize and combat sensory defects in mold-ripened cheeses will only improve
our ability to ensure consumers have the best-quality mold-ripened cheese
experiences.
References
Cao, M., Fonseca, L. M., Schoenfuss, T. C., & Rankin, S. A. (2014). Homogenization and lipase
treatment of milk and resulting methyl ketone generation in blue cheese. Journal of Agricultural
and Food Chemistry, 62, 5726–5733.
Coulter, S. T., & Combs, W. B. (1939). The use of steapsin in the manufacture of blue cheese
(Journal Series Paper 1683) (pp. 521–525). Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station.
Currie, J. N. (1914). Flavor of Roquefort cheese. Journal of Agricultural Research, 11(1), 1–14.
Diezhandino, I., Fernández, D., González, L., McSweeney, P. L. H., & Fresno, J. M. (2015).
Microbiological, physico-chemical and proteolytic changes in a Spanish blue cheese during
ripening (Valdeón cheese). Food Chemistry, 168, 134e141.
Diezhandino, I., Fernández, D., Sacristán, N., Combarros-Fuertes, P., Prieto, B., & Fresno,
J. M. (2016). Rheological, textural, colour and sensory characteristics of a Spanish blue cheese
(Valdeón cheese). LWT-Food Science and Technology, 65, 1118–1125.
DOP Italian Food Agency. (2022). Gorgonzola Cheese P.D.O. Available at: https://www.dopital-
ianfood.com/en/brands-dop-italian-food/cheeses-pdo-pgi/item/406-gorgonzola-cheese-p-d-o.
html. Date accessed: 4 May 2022.
Drake, M. A. (2007). Defining cheese flavor. In B. Weimer (Ed.), Improving the Flavor of Cheese.
CRC Press.
Dupont-Danisco. (2014). Technical Manual 2106-2e, Solutions for White surface ripened cheeses.
Fairclough, A. C., Cliffe, D. E., & Knapper, S. (2011). Factors affecting Penicillium roquefortii
(Penicillium glaucum) in internally mould ripened cheeses: Implications for pre-packed blue
cheeses. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 46, 1586–1590.
FAO and WHO (Food and Agriculture Organizaioin of the United Nations and World Health
Organization). (2011). Milk and milk products (2nd ed.). Available at: https://www.fao.org/3/
i2085e/i2085e00.pdf. Date accessed: 12 Dec 2022.
Fox, P. F., Guinee, T. P., Cogan, T. M., & McSweeney, P. L. H. (2000). Chapter 17. Principal fami-
lies of cheese. In Fundamentals of cheese science. Springer.
Gkatzionis, K., Linforth, R. S. T., & Dodd, C. E. R. (2009). Volatile profile of Stilton cheeses:
Differences between zones within a cheese and dairies. Food Chemistry, 113(2), 506–512.
High, R., Eyres, G. T., Bremer, P., & Kebede, B. (2021). Characterization of blue cheese vola-
tiles using fingerprinting, self-organiziing maps, and entropy-based feature selection. Food
Chemistry, 347, 128955.
Lane, C. B., & Hammer, B. W. (1938). Bacteriology of cheese III. Some factors affecting the ripen-
ing of blue (Roquefort type) cheese. Research Bulletin (Iowa Agriculture and Home Economics
Experiment Station), 21(237), Article 1.
Lawlor, J. B., Delahunty, C. M., Sheehan, J., & Wilkinson, M. G. (2003). Relationships between
sensory attributes and the volatile compounds, non-volatile and gross compositional constitu-
ents of six blue-type cheeses. International Dairy Journal, 13(6), 481–494.
Morris, H. A., Jezeski, J. J., & Combs, W. B. (1954). The use of white mutants of Penicillium
roqueforti in cheese making (p. 3093). Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station.
Parmelee, C. E., & Nelson, F. E. (1949). The use of Candida lipolytica cultures in the manufac-
ture of blue cheese from pasteurized homogenized milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 32(12),
993–1006.
Price, E. J., Linforth, R. S. T., Dodd, C. E. R., Phillips, C. A., Hewson, L., Hort, J., & Gkatzionis,
K. (2014). Study of the influence of yeast inoculum concentration (Yarrowia lipolytica and
Kluyveromyces lactis) on blue cheese aroma development using microbiological models. Food
Chemistry, 145, 464–472.
Pujato, S. A., Guglielmotti, D. M., Ackermann, H.-W., Patrignani, F., Lanciotti, R., Reinheimer,
J. A., & Quiberoni, A. (2014). Leuconostoc bacteriophages from blue cheese manufacture:
Long-term survival, resistance to thermal treatments, high pressure homogenization and chem-
ical biocides of industrial application. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 177, 81–88.
Roustel, S. (2020). Soft cheese step-by-step. France, Profession fromager.
Thom, C. (1906). Fungi in cheese ripening: Camembert and Roquefort. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture,
Bureau of Animal Industry. Bulletin, #82, 1–39.
USFDA. (2022a). Title 21—Food and drugs. Chapter I—Food and drug administration depart-
ment of health and human services subchapter B – Food for human consumption. Part 133 –
Cheeses and related cheese products. Subpart A – General provisions. 133.106 blue cheese.
Accessible at: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-133. Date
Accessed: 4 May 2022.
USFDA. (2022b). Title 21—Food and drugs. Chapter I—Food and drug administration depart-
ment of health and human services subchapter B – Food for human consumption. Part 133 –
Cheeses and related cheese products. Subpart A – General provisions. 133.164 Nuworld
cheese. Accessible at: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-133.
Date Accessed: 4 May 2022.
Weigmann, H. (1906). Herkunft der Bakterien der Milch. In F. Lafar (Ed.), Handbuch der tech-
nischen Mykologie (pp. 155–189).
Worldnews, Inc. (2022). Cabrales. Available at: https://www.cheese.com/cabrales/. Date accessed:
4 May 2022.
Chapter 18
Goat and Sheep Cheeses
Ris Kleve and Stephanie Clark
18.1 Introduction
Legend has it that cheese was discovered by nomads who carried milk in pouches
made of goat or sheep stomachs. It is likely that goats and sheep were domesticated
before cows and water buffaloes because of their manageable size and that the very
first cheeses were made from goat and sheep milk. Although the first livestock spe-
cies domesticated (Pereira et al., 2009), goat (and sheep) milk products have not
been studied or utilized quite as extensively as cow milk products (Salles et al.,
2002). Goat milk is reportedly the most consumed milk in the world (Gillingham,
2008) and is often a popular replacement for cow’s milk for people (especially chil-
dren) with allergies. The higher proportion of small fat globules and natural fat
globule homogenization makes goat milk easier to digest and a popular alternative
for infants and children (Golinelli et al., 2014; Clark & Mora Garcia, 2017).
In the United States, goat and sheep milk represent less than 1% of annual milk
production, and 75% of the goat milk and 95% of the sheep milk produced are made
into cheeses (Milani & Wendorff, 2011). Although the United States is better known
for making cheeses from cow milk, goat and sheep milk cheeses predominate in
other countries. As of January 1, 2020, U.S. sheep and lamb inventory was 5.2 mil-
lion head, and goat and kid inventory was 2.3 million head (NASS, USDA, 2020).
Dairy goats and kids made up 440,000 of that number, with highest counts in WI,
CA, IA, and TX. It has been reported that approximately 21% of all goats and sheep
in the world are dairy animals and produce 3.5% of the world’s milk; about 8% of
the total agricultural output in Greece and 0.9–1.8% of the total agricultural output
in France, Italy, and Spain (Pulina et al., 2018). The island of Sardinia is the source
R. Kleve
Montana Conservation Corps, Kalispell, MT, USA
S. Clark (*)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_18
572 R. Kleve and S. Clark
of about 65% of the total Italian production of sheep milk, most of which is pro-
cessed into the primary dairy product of Sardinia: Pecorino Romano (Idda et al.,
2018). More than 50 varieties of goat cheese are made in France alone, at least nine
of which have Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) status.
18.2 Composition of Goat and Sheep Milk
Before elaborating on goat and sheep milk cheeses, some general information about
goat and sheep milk will help lay the groundwork for what makes these cheeses
unique. From a proximate analysis standpoint, milk from goats and sheep (in par-
ticular), on average, contain more fat and protein than cow milk (Table 18.1). As a
result, during cheesemaking, there is potential for higher cheese yield since fat and
protein predominate cheese. However, the higher proportion of solids does not
always translate to a higher yield. For example, goat milk contains less alphas1-
casein than cow or sheep milk, which partially explains the softer body and lower
yield of goat cheese compared to cow and sheep cheeses (Clark & Sherbon, 2000).
Sheep cheese yield, on the other hand, is typically higher than that of either goat or
cow milk.
The milk and products made from the milk of goats, sheep, and even water buf-
falo are naturally more white in appearance (Fig. 18.1) than products made from
cow milk (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997a). This is because when goats and sheep
consume feeds rich in beta-carotene (a pigment yellow to orange in color), they
convert the nutrient to vitamin A, which is colorless (Fedele, 2008). Cows do not
convert beta-carotene to vitamin A, so the color of products made from cow milk
tends to be more yellow, particularly if they eat feeds rich in beta-carotene (e.g.,
organic or grass-fed).
Naturally, goat and sheep milk contain more short-chain-length volatile fatty
acids (VFA) and branched-chain fatty acids (BCFA) than cow milk (Ha & Lindsay,
1991). Sheep milk naturally contains more butyric acid (C:4) than goat or cow milk,
while goat milk naturally contains more caproic (C:6), caprylic (C:8), and capric
(C:10) acids than sheep or cow milk (Clark & Mora Garcia, 2017). Volatile
Table 18.1 Mean percent of components and Cheddar cheese yield from milk of cows, goats,
and sheep
Cow Goat Sheep
Water 87.4 86.9 83.6
Protein 3.3 3.7 5.2
Fat 3.8 4.2 6.1
Lactose 4.8 4.4 4.2
Ash* 0.7 0.8 0.9
Cheddar cheese yield 10.0 9.8 14.8
Adapted from Clark and Mora Garcia (2017)
*
Calculated by subtraction
18 Goat and Sheep Cheeses 573
Fig. 18.1 The interior of goat (left two) and sheep (right) cheeses naturally appear more white
than cow milk cheeses (S. Clark images)
compounds are aromatic, so they can be smelled. The 4-methyloctanoic acid of

sheep milk fat gives sheep milk products a mutton-like aroma and flavor, and the
4-ethyloctanoic acid in goat milk gives goat milk products a “goaty” flavor (Ha &
Lindsay, 1991).
18.3 Goat and Sheep Milk Cheeses
Just about any cheese that can be made from cow milk can also be made from goat
(and sheep) milk. An exception is pasta filata (stretched curd) cheeses like mozza-
rella; the different protein composition makes goat cheeses more difficult to stretch
(Niro et al., 2014; Faccia et al., 2015). Cheeses resulting from goat and sheep milk
have some different appearance, flavor, and body and texture characteristics than
cow milk cheeses, which are discussed elsewhere in this book.
Some cheeses require very specific making conditions in order to be labeled as
the cheese type. In the United States, cheese definitions are found in the Code of
Federal Regulations, Title 21, Chapter 133 (USFDA, 2019). The Appellation
d’origine controlée (AOC, primarily for wines), Protected designation of origin
(PDO), Appellation d’origine protégée (AOP) notation in French-speaking coun-
tries, Denominacion de origen (DOP) in Spanish-speaking countries, and
Denominazione d’origine controllata (DOC) in Italian speaking countries (or Italy),
systems protect the names of products throughout the European Union (Harbutt,
2009). The AOC, AOP, PDO, DOP, or DOC designation means a product has under-
gone all production stages according to recognized expertise in the same geographi-
cal area, which provides its characteristics. The designations embrace the concept
of terroir, wherein interactions between a physical and biological environment influ-
ence food produced in the region (NAOQ, no date). Many goat and sheep cheeses
have PDO, AOP, or DOP status.
In the United States, on the other hand, most goat and sheep cheeses are not
defined in federal standards of identity. However, 21 CFR 133.184 defines
“Roquefort cheese, sheep’s milk blue-mold, and blue-mold cheese from sheep’s
milk” as being made from pasteurized or unpasteurized sheep milk, aged at least
60 days, “characterized by the presence of bluish-green mold, Penicillium roque-
forti, throughout the cheese” and containing a minimum milk fat content of 50% on
a dry weight basis and maximum moisture of 45% by weight (USFDA, 2019). This
description does not comply with French regulations, which require that, to have the
name “Roquefort,” the cheese must be made exclusively from whole raw milk of
Lacaune ewes, pastured in southern France, and made and aged in caves only in the
Roquefort Causses region of Auvergne, France (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997a). The
first AOC cheese, Roquefort cheese has held that status since 1925 (Harbutt, 2009).
The reader is referred to Chapter 17 for additional discussion of mold-ripened
cheeses.
Cheeses made from sheep milk include but are not limited to: Manchego (DOP),
Idiazábal (DOP), Pecorino Romano (PDO), Fiore Sardo (DOP), and Serra da
Estrela. Up to 30% goat milk is allowed to be added to sheep cheeses in traditional
Greek cheeses (Litopoulou-Tzanetaki, 2012). Manchego has been a PDO/DOP
cheese since 1985. Made only in the La Mancha region of Spain from the milk of
Manchega ewes, it is enzymatically coagulated, cooked at about 40 °C, pressed,
dried or brine salted, and cured for 1–10 weeks (Kosikowski & Mistry, 1997b). The
hard cheese is the most popular cheese variety in Spain (Poveda et al., 2014).
Manchego can be made either from raw or pasteurized milk, but if the latter, a com-
mercial mixed-strain starter culture, typically composed of Lactococcus lactis
subsp. lactis and Lactococcus lactis subsp. cremoris is used. Manchego has a tradi-
tional dry grass mold or basket-weave rind. The dry blonde to straw-colored interior
of Manchego cheese may have mechanical openings. It is buttery and nutty in flavor
with lanolin notes and gains caramel and/or piquant flavors with age. Idiazábal
(DOP) originated in the Basque Mountains of Spain. It is an aged, hard, and chewy
cheese with tiny mechanical openings and a smoky flavor, obtained from beech
wood smoke (Harbutt, 2009).
Pecorino Romano (PDO since 2009) is a semi-cooked (68 °C for at least 15 s)
hard cheese made from whole ewe’s milk in specific regions of Italy: Sardinia,
Lazio, and the Province of Grosseto (Idda et al., 2018). Aged 5–12 months, and
cylindrical in shape, it has a somewhat sweet, nutty flavor with a salty tang and hints
of lanolin (Harbutt, 2009). Several similar varieties exist in Italy, including Pecorino
Sardo (PDO; drum-shaped; aged 1–2 months for dolce, 8 months for maturo),
Pecorino Siciliano (PDO; wheel-shaped; aged 4–12 months), and Pecorino Toscano
(PDO; drum-shaped; oil-rubbed rind; aged 1–6 months) (Harbutt, 2009).
Fiore Sardo (PDO) is an uncooked and long-ripened hard cheese that is made
from the raw whole milk of Sardo sheep, produced in Sardinia, Italy (Zazzu et al.,
2019). Serra da Estrela (PDO status since 1985) is a traditional soft (or hard if aged
over 6 months) Portuguese cheese made from raw milk of Churra Mondegueira and
Bordaleira Portuguese autochthonous breeds, coagulated with wild thistle flower
(Lima et al., 2019).
Cheeses typically made exclusively of goat milk include but are not limited to,
Chevre, Crottin de Chavignol (PDO), Sainte-Maure de Touraine (PDO), Valençay
(AOP), and Banon (AOP). Chevre is a soft, fresh “lactic” cheese made from pasteur-
ized milk, typically with the aid of chymosin. It is a fairly simple cheese to make.
As in the making of most cheeses in the United States, the goat milk is first pasteur-
ized and then cooled to a favorable temperature for mesophilic cultures to grow in,
often around room temperature or a bit higher. Culture and/or rennet is added and
the cultured milk is left to sit for between 6 and 24 h as the curd forms in response
to the lactic acid production by the bacteria. The product is then drained for 6–24 h
(depending on method and desired outcome), shaped, and salted. Herbs, spices,
flowers, fruits, and other condiments are often added internally and/or to surfaces.
Chevre may be served fresh or ripened. Oftentimes, the surface is dusted with food-
grade ash to reduce surface acidity, and a rind is allowed to form. The cheese is
often dried and aged (Hooper, 2009). For more on soft-ripened cheeses, see Chapter
17. Chevre is generally acidic with a pH around 4.2–4.5, with at least 55% moisture
(Santos et al., 2016).
Crottin de Chavignol (PDO since 1986) is a soft-ripened cheese made from raw
Alpine goat milk in the Loire and Chavignol regions of France. It is slightly ren-
neted, and the lactic coagulation lasts about 2 days (Rubino et al., 2004). After
draining, the cheese is salted (1–2% of the weight of the cheese) and then aged for
10 days and allowed to form a white surface mold (Litopoulou-Tzanetaki, 2012)
(Fig. 18.2). It has a nutty flavor, which gets more robust with age, along with a tex-
ture that becomes more dry and crumbly with age.
Sainte-Maure de Touraine (PDO) is made by a slow curdling, molding in a long
log shape (16–17 cm), and transferral onto pyroengraved rye straw (Rubino et al.,
2004; Litopoulou-Tzanetaki, 2012). The cheese is then salted and aged for at least
10 days, but generally 3–4 weeks (Harbutt, 2009; Le Jaouen, 1987). The cheese has
a white, soft paste under a grayish-blue, moldy rind from Penicillium candidum
(Harbutt, 2009; Rubino et al., 2004).
Fig. 18.2 Crottin de Chavignol style cheese made in the United States (S. Clark image)
Valençay (AOP) is a soft, blue-veined cheese made from raw goat milk in the
shape of a pyramid with a flattened top (Fig. 18.3). Originating in the Berry and
Loire Valley regions of France, the rustic blue-gray cheese (because it is typically
dusted with ash) develops during the 4-week ripening in caves (Le Jaouen, 1987).
The origin of Banon (AOP) is north of the Haute-Provence Alps. Pure goat milk
or a mixture of goat, sheep, and even cow milk may be used to make the small round
(6- to 7-cm diameter, 2-cm height) cheeses. Several varieties of Banon are available
in France (fresh, flowered rind), but the most famous is wrapped in chestnut leaves
(Fig. 18.4). After drying and ripening for 4–6 weeks, the ball is wrapped in dried
chestnut leaves and tied with raffia (Le Jaouen, 1987).
Several popular cheeses may be made from both goat and sheep milk, and some-
times cow milk is added. Feta, Kaseri, and Halloumi are examples. Feta, likely the
most famous white brined cheese (WBC), is in the most important class of cheeses
(brined cheeses) of the east-Mediterranean and neighboring countries (Alichanidis
& Polychronidaou, 2008). The WBC, characterized by their white color that results
from the use of goat and/or sheep milk, include but are not limited to Feta and
Teleme (Greece), Beyaz peynir (Turkey), Iranian white (Iran), Brinza (Israel),
Akawi (Lebanon), and Domiati (Egypt).
WBC production generally follows the same steps (Alichanidis and
Polychroniadou 2008), including:
1. Filtration and (maybe) standardization of cheese milk (C:F 0.72–0.75 for sheep
and/or goat milk or 0.75–0.8 for cow milk)
2. Pasteurization or thermization
3. Addition of CaCl2 and starter cultures (30–35 °C)
4. Renneting (commercial or artisanal chymosin)
5. Ripening (50–60 min)
6. Cutting (1–3-cm cubes)
Fig. 18.3 Valencay-style cheese made in the United States (S. Clark image)
Fig. 18.4 Banon-style

cheese made in the United
States (S. Clark image)
7. Healing (10–15 min)

8. Molding (rectangular/square or cylindrical molds)
9. Draining (usually under pressure, some without pressure)
10. Cutting (to final cheese dimensions)
11. Salting (mostly in brine, some with dry salt)
12. Packaging (with or without brine)
13. Ripening (16–18 °C for 5–15 days; until pH <4.6)
14. Sealing of the containers and storage (>4 °C)
Feta has been a European Union protected (PDO) name since 2002, and can only
be made in the mountainous regions of Macedonia, Thrace, Epirus, Thessaly, Sterea
Ellada, Peloponnesus, and Mytilini from goats and sheep that graze freely in those
areas (Harbutt, 2009). However, many U.S. producers make products they call Feta.
Feta is traditionally made in Greece from raw ewe milk with no starter and rennet
from lamb abomasa, or in large factories from pasteurized ewe milk with culture
and rennet (Bozoudi et al., 2018). In addition to being characterized as pure white,
feta has no rind, no eyes (gas holes), some mechanical openings, and a smooth, soft,
and crumbly body. The flavor is salty, acidic, and piquant, often reflecting the fatty
acid flavors representing the source of the milk. The flavors of WBC range from
very mild to very piquant, which is, in part, influenced by native or added lipase.
Kaseri (DOC), produced in Greece using a mix of goat and sheep (at least 80%
sheep) milk, is reportedly one of the oldest cheeses in the world (Harbutt, 2009). A
pasta filata cheese, Kaseri is stretched in hot brine; it is stringy when melted, slightly
sweet, and pungent in flavor.
Halloumi, a traditional cheese of Cyprus, is made from non-cultured raw milk
from goats and sheep and sometimes combined with cow milk (Harbutt, 2009;
Papademas & Robinson, 1998). The renneted coagulum is cut into grain-sized curds
(as with other low-moisture granular cheeses), allowed to rest (heal), then cooked in
whey with continuous stirring for about an hour prior to draining and pressing into
blocks. The pressed curd is cut into 10 × 15 × 3 cm blocks, then scalded in hot whey
(94–96 °C) for about 30 min (Alichanidis & Polychroniadou, 2008). Blocks are
allowed to drain, then surface-salted and sometimes sprinkled with crushed mint
leaves (Alichanidis & Polychroniadou, 2008; Papademas & Robinson, 1998).
Blocks are folded in half, kneaded, and chilled overnight, or salted whey is poured
into containers of halloumi for sale (Harbutt, 2009; Papademas & Robinson, 1998).
Halloumi has a mild flavor and is good for grating or frying (Papademas &
Robinson, 1998).
The by-product of cheesemaking, whey, can be made into several popular whey
cheeses: Gjetost (goat), Manouri (PDO, predominantly goat), and Mizithra or
Myzithra (predominantly sheep). Gjetost is a caramelized whey-and-cream cheese
of Norweigan origin. Dark brown in color and sweet in flavor, Gjetost is unlike any
other cheese except Mysost, the cow-whey-based version.
Manouri (PDO) and Mizithra are Greek heat- and/or acid-coagulated cheeses
produced predominantly from caprine (manouri) or ovine (mizithra) whey, but they
are not caramelized, so they appear white to cream-colored. Mizithra may have up
to 70% moisture, while Manouri may only have up to 60% moisture and a minimum
fat in dry matter of 70% (Kaminarides et al., 2013). Manouri and Mizithra have no
rind, a closed texture, a firm, granular body, and a mild flavor. Manouri is only pro-
duced from sheep or goat whey and whole sheep and goat milk and/or cream
(Kaminarides et al., 2013). The whey-based cheeses are made by first filtering whey
to remove curd particles, then heating to 88–92 °C for 40–45 min, under continuous
stirring (Alichanidis & Polychroniadou, 2008). If whole milk or cream is added (to
improve yield and quality), it is added early in the process (when the whey reaches
65–70 °C); salt is added to the whey at 73–75 °C. After curd particles start floating,
part-way through the heating process (at about 80–82 °C), heating is sped up and
stirring is slowed. A citric acid solution (100 g/L) is added at the rate of 6 mL/L at
approximately 90 °C, just before stirring is stopped. The curds are allowed to float
on the whey surface for about 15–20 min, then scooped into molds for drainage over
a period of 3–5 h (Alichanidis & Polychroniadou, 2008).
A summary of goat and sheep cheese composition is shown in Table 18.2.
18.4 Sources of Sensory Attributes of Goat

and Sheep Cheeses
Variability in goat and sheep milk and cheese quality arises, at least in part, from
variability in lactation stage, feeding system, and diet (Inglingstad et al., 2014).
Feeding systems have an impact on milk and cheese profiles due to the molecular
compounds in the feedstuffs. Feed nutrient composition is influenced by soil nutri-
ents, water quality, season, climate, maturity, and variety of species, among other
Table 18.2 Typical composition of goat and sheep cheeses

Fat Total solids Salt
Cheese Milk source (%) (%) (%) pH
Camembert Goat, sheep, cow, 23 47 2.5 6.9
mixed
Cheddar Goat, sheep, cow, 28 62 1.5 5.5
mixed
Chevre (fresh) Goat 6–16 15–35 1 4.4
Chevre (ripened) Goat 18–32 51–58 1.5 4.5
Crottin de Chavignol (AOP) Goat 20–23 40 – 41 1.5 4.6
Feta Goat, sheep, cow, 22 - 31 37 - 50 4.5 4.4
mixed
Gjetost Goat 30 77 0.5 6.5
Gouda Goat, sheep, cow, 28 59 2 5.8
mixed
Halloumi Goat, sheep, cow, 30 >54 <3 4.6
mixed
Manchego (DOP, Sheep 30–40 65–70 2.2 5.8
semi-mature)
Manouri (PDO) Goat, sheep, mixed 25 >40 1.5 5.0
Myzithra/Mizithra Goat, sheep, mixed 25 56 1.6 5.0
Ricotta Goat, sheep, cow, 18 30 <0.5 5.9
mixed
Pecorino Romano (PDO) Sheep 24–30 65–77 5.5 5.4
Roquefort (AOC) Sheep 31–33 57–60 3.5 6.4
Valencay (AOP) Goat 20–23 40–41 1.5 4.6
Fox et al. (2000), Bozoudi et al. (2018), Kosikowski and Mistry (1997a), Le Jaouen (1987),
Papademas and Robinson (2000), Raynal-Ljutovac et al. (2008), Papademas and Robinson (1998),
and Park (1999)
factors (Hooper, 2009). This implies that different feeds or pasture species can be
used to diversify product flavor (Fedele, 2008). Compounds that give flavor to
cheese include fatty acids, volatile organic compounds, amines, ketones, free amino
acids, phenols, alcohols, aldehydes, lactones, and sulfuric compounds, all of which
affect the cheese-making and ripening process and all of which can be attributed to
feed type (Tilocca et al., 2020). Branched-chain fatty acids give goaty flavor to
chevre, in particular 4-ethyl-octanoic acid, which is fairly specific to goat milk. It is
found in very low concentrations or not at all in cow milk but is curiously found in
some plants, such as tobacco. Scientists speculate that it is released during the aging
process of cheese as lipolysis occurs (Salles et al., 2002).
Concentrates and forages each contribute different qualities to milk and can be
used to manipulate characteristics of the end product. A dry lot system with a very
consistent ration of dry hay and grain yields milk and cheese with different sensory
characteristics compared to a variable pasture-based system or a silage-based ration
(Fedele, 2008). Indoor feeding systems generally involve a higher feed intake of
good-quality feeds but may also lead to overfeeding concentrates, which leads to
milk high in protein but comparatively low in fat (Morand-Fehr et al., 2007). As
concentrates become a larger portion of the ratio (>60%), milk fat drops due to a
lack of dietary fiber (Morand-Fehr et al., 2007).
Natural pasture leads to milk high in fat, fatty acids, vitamins, and volatile com-
pounds such as terpenes, which give milk grassy flavors (Morand-Fehr et al., 2007).
Terpenes are unsaturated hydrocarbons built of isoprene units that are volatile liq-
uids with strong odors found in plant flowers, leaves, and fruit (Fedele, 2008). When
grass is at an early growth stage, goat milk production and fat content may both be
higher, as well as having higher levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) and
conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) due to the higher feed quality (Morand-Fehr et al.,
2007). Early grazing season has more favorable rennet coagulation properties that
result from αs2-casein and calcium concentrations, prompting a shorter firming time
and higher curd firmness (Inglingstad et al., 2014). Pastured goats have more pro-
tein (αs1-casein and κ-casein) and milk yield, and thus a better cheese yield, than
hay-fed goats (Inglingstad et al., 2014).
Valdivielso et al. (2016) evaluated changes in the volatile composition and sen-
sory profile of raw milk cheeses made on farm from the milk of six commercial
flocks of Latxa sheep in the Basque region of northern Spain in different feeding
seasons throughout lactation. From a sensory standpoint cheeses made from milk
of mountain grazing sheep had lower overall intensity, buttery, toasty and nutty
aroma, salty taste, and elasticity and moisture in the mouth than cheeses made from
milk of indoor-feeding ewes (Valdivielso et al., 2016). Barlowska et al. (2018) con-
ducted a related study in Poland, with four farms (two mountainous areas; two
upland areas) raising Saanen goats and making artisan cheese during two produc-
tion seasons. From a sensory standpoint, mountain cheeses were more firm, aro-
matic, less goaty, less sour, sweeter, and saltier than upland cheeses (Barlowska
et al., 2018). Upland milk is also generally higher in PUFAs and MUFAs (Coppa
et al., 2019). In a study done regarding the ability to differentiate feeding systems
based on goat cheese aroma, 100% of the testers could distinguish both the taste
and odor of 20-day-ripened cheese from a grazing herd compared to a hay/concen-
trate system. The fact that fewer testers could distinguish the same two systems in
1-day-ripened cheese highlights how aging generally increases the taste and odor of
cheese (Fedele, 2008).
Vitamins and minerals also have an important role in milk and cheese quality.
Potassium and calcium chloride contribute bitterness to chevre, while free amino
acids, organic acids, and naturally present mineral salts all contribute to taste as well
(Salles et al., 2002). In addition to influencing flavor, vitamins and minerals are
important for milk quality. Deficiencies of zinc, selenium, manganese, and iron, as
well as vitamin A, vitamin C, and beta-carotene, have all been shown to impact the
health of the mammary gland and SCC (Nudda et al., 2020), thereby influencing
cheese quality and yield.
18.5 Evaluating Goat and Sheep Cheeses
Understanding the source of the milk, making procedures, and intention of cheese-
maker can all help during the evaluation of goat and sheep milk cheeses. At a mini-
mum, it is essential for evaluators to know if the source of milk is from a sheep, a
goat, or a mixture. With that base information, expectations for certain appearance
and flavor characteristics come to mind. As noted previously, goat and sheep cheeses
should be white in color. If goat milk is used, the caproic, caprylic, and capric acid
“goat notes” should be observed but not be overbearing (dirty buck). Lanolin (wool-
like) aroma/flavor should be noted in sheep cheeses but not remind the eater of old
mutton. Evaluating additional appearance, body and texture, and flavor quality char-
acteristics relies on some knowledge of intended cheese style. For instance, while a
fresh chevre would be expected to have a closed body and a soft, smooth paste;
mechanical openings and firm, crumbly body, and grainy texture would be more
typical in an aged Romano. The present document summarizes some of the com-
mon flavor defects and body and texture defects that might be observed in goat and
sheep cheeses (Tables 18.3 and 18.4). An example scorecard for evaluation of goat
and sheep cheeses is included in Fig. 18.5. The reader is encouraged to view addi-
tional references for detailed appearance, body and texture, and flavor notes about
goat and sheep cheeses. For instance, Talavera and Chambers (2016) further refined
an existing lexicon (language) to describe flavor characteristics of artisan goat
cheeses made in the United States. They worked with five highly trained descriptive
sensory panelists to establish a lexicon of 39 flavor attributes to represent sensory
characteristics for 47 artisan goat cheeses produced throughout the United States
Preparation of Cheese for Evaluation
When evaluating goat and sheep cheeses, tempering to room temperature is typi-
cally advised, as volatile components will become more prominent. An exception is
ricotta and chevre, which may be served on the cooler side of room temperature.
The cheeses should be sampled with tools that are appropriate to the style. For
instance, ricotta is often spread, feta may be sliced or crumbled, and Manchego is
commonly thinly sliced. For firm, large-format goat and sheep cheeses, triers should
be used to penetrate the cheese and extract a representative sample to observe for
mechanical openings or eyes. Cheese body can be examined by breaking the plug
and working between the thumb, index, and middle fingers. Surface-ripened, mold-
ripened, or washed-rind cheeses should be sliced open.
How to Evaluate
Similar to evaluation of all other cheese types, evaluation of goat and sheep cheeses
begins on the outside with appearance, color ,and rind development, and moves
inward. Since product evaluation typically involves comparison to a standard, any
shortcoming characteristic or “out-of-balance” attribute is characterized as a defect.
With respect to defects, the term “slight” refers to attributes that are only detectable
upon critical examination, while “definite” is not intense but is detectable; “pro-
nounced” defects are immediately noticeable and typically objectionable to most
Table 18.3 Common flavor defects in goat or sheep cheese, identification and their probable causes
Flavor Identification Probable cause
Bitter A basic taste sensation, commonly on Breakdown of proteins by proteolytic
the back of the tongue, similar to the starter culture or microbial
taste of quinine contamination
Flat/lacks Lacks characteristic piquant, lactic acid, Lower than typical level of short-chain
flavor or “goaty” free fatty acid aroma/flavor volatile fatty acids in milk
for goat or lanolin for sheep cheeses
Foreign Atypical aroma or flavor for goat or May be chemical (e.g., cleanser,
sheep cheese sanitizer), enzymatic, or bacteriological
in origin
High acid Unbalanced, overly sharp, and puckery Excess lactic acid production; may be
to the taste, characteristic of lactic acid coupled with low salt
High Goaty, “buck”, or mutton flavor is out of Mishandling of milk promotes lipolysis
animal balance that releases butyric, caproic, caprylic,
flavor and/or capric acid
High salt Salt is out of balance, too high, Over-salting
off-putting
Lacks Staleness or “refrigerator aroma” noted Stored improperly or too long
freshness in product
Low salt Cheese lacks salt; may be coupled with Under-salting
high acid or goaty flavor
Metallic A flavor having qualities suggestive of Oxidation of ingredients (milk),
metal, imparting copper taste or a contamination with free metals, or use
puckery sensation of sea salt (certain minerals)
Musty Atypical aroma of basement or mold Contamination with mold spores; poor
packaging
Oxidized Wet cardboard aroma and/or mouth- Exposure to light and oxygen facilitates
drying sensation or aftertaste autoxidation of unsaturated fatty acids to
produce aldehydes and ketones
Unclean An undesirable dirty gym socks or dirty Volatile compounds coming from fecal
dishwater aroma/flavor; fecal aroma, material or bacterial contamination
flavor, aftertaste in extreme cases
Yeasty A flavor indicating yeast fermentation, Contamination by yeast; poor packaging
may be appearance of gas eyes or slits
observers. Each plant may determine and evaluate cheese quality based on method-
ology appropriate to the setting. To assist in the process of developing an evaluation
criteria, an example scorecard is included in Fig. 18.5.
Appearance, Color, and Rind Development
Unripened goat cheeses are expected to be white; any discoloration in the form of
yeast, mold, or bacterial spoilage should result in downgrading. Sheep cheeses may
range from white to cream to slightly blonde color if aged. Surfaces of ripened
cheeses or washed-rind cheeses should be properly colored (light browns, pinks,
oranges) and uniform. A toad skin or rippled appearance is not unheard of. Blue-
green mold-ripened cheeses should exhibit vivid blue-green well-veined interiors.
Cheeses with ash may range from gray to black and must not be slimy or wet.
Table 18.4 Common body defects in goat and sheep cheesesa, identification and probable causes
Body/Texture Identification Probable cause
Crumbly Falls apart while cutting, working, or Low moisture retention; may be
spreading associated with high acid or high salt
Gassy Eye or slit formation within body of Contamination with yeast or
cheese or packaging gas-producing microorganisms
Grainy Atypical rough, mealy, gritty, or sandy Overcooking of curds
feeling
Pasty Sticky and smears when worked or Excessive acid production, high
rubbed between the thumb and fingers moisture content, poor drainage of
whey
Too firm Atypical resistance to mastication or Excess use of chymosin, too high
manipulation between thumb and fingers cooking temperature and/or time, low
moisture
Weak/Soft Cheese compresses very easily between Excess moisture or proteolysis
thumb and forefingers; may be difficult
to plug cheese
Weepy/Wet Whey syneresis from cheese body High moisture; poor drainage of
whey; improper storage
a
Defects are style-dependent (e.g., a brined white cheese would be expected to be crumbly; a fresh
or soft-ripened cheeses would be expected to be weak/soft)
Aroma and Flavor

Goat and sheep cheeses should have pleasing and desirable aroma and flavor char-
acteristics consistent with the source of the milk and the age of the cheese and
should be free from undesirable aromas and flavors. A term that should come to
mind is balance. Soft goat cheeses such as chevre are expected to be refreshing
(fresh) with a slight tang (lactic acid), have recognizable goat flavor (characterized
by caproic, caprylic, and capric acids), and be free from excessive goatiness or
“dirty buck” notes. Talavera and Chambers (2016) reported that the most common
attributes shared in U.S. goat cheeses included overall dairy (especially buttery,
dairy fat, and dairy sour), goaty, astringent, biting, pungent, sharp, salty, sour,
and bitter.
Goat cheeses should be downgraded if they lack typical goaty flavor, but goat
flavor should not overwhelm. The same can be said for sheep milk cheeses (lanolin
vs. mutton). A summary of the common off-flavors in goat and sheep cheeses is
included in Table 18.3.
Body and Texture
The body and texture of most goat and sheep cheeses vary depending on
cheese style, so a judge must be familiar with the intended style of the cheese to be
a fair evaluator. Deviations in body and texture often result from improper acidi
fication, moisture, salt balance, and/or proteolysis in aged cheeses. A summary of
the common body and texture defects in goat and sheep cheeses is included in
Table 18.4.
Fig. 18.5 Example scorecard, used in the Iowa State Fair Dairy Products Contest for the evalua-
tion of goat or sheep cheese
Potential Defect Sources

Defects come from a variety of sources. Along with originating in the milk, defects
may occur during harvesting, storing, or processing the milk or cheese. Animal
nutrition contributes to flavors because consumed compounds can enter the mam-
mary gland and be absorbed into the milk. Microbes produce distinct aromas and
flavors by releasing enzymes that alter fats or proteins. If milk is stored too long
before processing, cheese quality may suffer due to oxidation or hydrolysis of fatty
acids. Despite pasteurization, microbes originally present in the milk or introduced
during processing may contribute to defects prior to pasteurization; some spoilage
microorganisms and their enzymes survive pasteurization and can cause degrada-
tion (defects) later. Cheese may experience oxidation if it is not stored properly. If
utensils are unclean or if chemicals such as sanitizing agents are present on
equipment, the cheese may exhibit chemical off-flavors. Probable causes of com-
mon flavor and body and texture defects of goat and sheep cheeses are included in
Table 18.3 and 18.4, respectively.
18.6 Flavored Goat Cheeses
Goat cheeses are excellent carriers for a variety of added flavors (e.g., herbs, fruits,
flowers) that are only limited by the imagination of the cheesemaker. The flavor and
body and texture characteristics of a good cheese should be enhanced by character-
istic and complementary flavor and body and texture characteristics of the flavoring
component. Even distribution of condiments is essential and should effectively rep-
resent the name on the package without detracting from the underlying high-quality
cheese flavor that should be noted by the judge, and ultimately the consumer.
18.7 Conclusion
Goat and sheep cheeses have unique appearance and flavor attributes which differ-
entiate them from other types of cheeses. Understanding these characteristics, as
well as the intention of cheesemakers, enables fair judgment of goat and sheep
cheese to encourage consistent, high-quality cheesemaking. Using consistent lexi-
cons and scorecards for the evaluation of cheese will enable processors to optimize
products’ body and texture, flavor, and appearance to not only monitor product
quality but attract and keep consumers.
References
Alichanidis, E., & Polychronidaou, A. (2008). Characteristics of major traditional regional cheese
varieties of East-Mediterranean countries: A review. Dairy Science & Technology, 88, 495–510.
Barlowska, J., Pastuszka, R., Rysiak, A., Krol, J., Brodziak, A., Kedzierska-Matysek, M., Wolanciuk,
A., & Litwinczuk, Z. (2018). Physicochemical and sensory properties of goat cheeses and their
fatty acid profile in relation to the geografic region of production. International Journal of
Dairy Technology, 71(3), 699–708.
Bozoudi, D., Kondyli, E., Claps, S., Hatzikamari, M., Michaelidou, A., Biliaderis, C. G.,
& Litopoulou-Tzanetaki, E. (2018). Compositional characteristics and volatile organic
compounds of traditional PDO Feta cheese made in two different mountainous areas of Greece.
Clark, S., & Mora Garcia, M. B. (2017). A 100-year review: Advances in goat milk research.
Clark, S., & Sherbon, J. W. (2000). Genetic variants of alpha S1-CN in goat milk: Breed distribution
and associations with milk composition and coagulation properties. Small Ruminant Research,
38, 135–143.
Coppa, M., Chassaing, C., Sibra, C., Boudon, A., Ferlay, A., & Martin, B. (2019). Forage system is
the key driver of mountain milk specificity. Journal of Dairy Science, 102(11), 10483–10499.
Faccia, M., Trani, A., Gambacorta, G., Loizzo, P., Cassone, A., & Caponio, F. (2015). Production
technology and characterization of Fior di latte cheeses made from sheep and goat milks.
Fedele, V. (2008). Aromatic and nutritional quality of goat’s milk. In A. Cannas & G. Pulina (Eds.),
Dairy goats feeding and nutrition (pp. 95–117). UK:CAB International.
science. Aspen Publishers, Inc. 587 pp.
Gillingham, A. (2008). Goats and goat farming: History and overview. In Te Ara-the encyclopedia
of New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/goats-and-goat-farming/page-1
Golinelli, L. P., Carvalho, A. C., Casaes, R. S., Lopes, C. S. C., Deliza, R., Paschoalin, V. M. F., &
Silva, J. T. (2014). Sensory analysis and species-specific PCR detect bovine milk adulteration
of frescal (fresh) goat cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 97, 6693–6699.
Ha, J. K., & Lindsay, R. C. (1991). Contributions of cow, sheep, and goat milks to characterizing
branched-chain fatty acid and phenolic flavors in varietal cheeses. Journal of Dairy Science,
74, 3267–3274.
Harbutt, J. (editor in chief). (2009). World cheese book. DK Publishing. 352 pages.
Hooper, A. (2009). In a cheesemaker’s kitchen. The Countryman Press.
Idda, I., Spano, N., Addis, M., Galistu, G., Ibba, I., Nurchi, V. M., Pilo, M. I., Scintu, M. F.,
Piredda, G., & Sanna, G. (2018). Optimization of a newly established gas-chromatographic
method determining lactose and galactose traces: Application to Pecorino Romano cheese.
Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 74, 89–94.
Inglingstad, R. A., Steinshamn, H., Dagnachew, B. S., Valenti, B., Criscione, A., Rukke, E. O.,
Devold, T. G., Skeie, S. B., & Vegarud, G. E. (2014). Grazing season and forage type influ-
ence goat milk composition and rennet coagulation properties. Journal of Dairy Science, 97,
3800–3814.
Kaminarides, S., Nestoratos, K., & Massouras, T. (2013). Effect of added milk and cream on the
physiochemical, rheological and volatile compounds of Greek whey cheeses. Small Ruminant
Research, 113, 446–453.
Kosikowski, F. V., & Mistry, V. V. (1997a). Cheese and fermented milk foods, volume I: Origins
and principles (3rd ed.). F. V. Kosikowski, L.L.C. Chapter 19.
Kosikowski, F. V., & Mistry, V. V. (1997b). Cheese and fermented milk foods: Volume II:
Procedures and analysis. F. V. Kosikowski, LLC.. 330 pp.
Le Jaouen, J.-C. (1987). The fabrication of farmstead goat cheese. Cheesemakers’ Journal.
Lima, M. J., Reis, H., Bahri, J., Sá Morais, A. C. A., Veloso, L., Fontes, E., Lemos, T., & Peres,
A. M. (2019). Assessing serra da estrela PDO cheeses’ origin-production date using fatty acids
profiles. Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization, 13, 2988–2997.
Litopoulou-Tzanetaki, E. (2012). Goat milk cheeses. In Y. H. Hui, & E. O. Evranuz (Eds.),
Handbook of animal-based fermented food and beverage technology. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Milani, F. X., & Wendorff, W. L. (2011). Goat and sheep milk products in the United States. Small
Ruminant Research, 101, 134–139.
Morand-Fehr, P., Fedele, V., Decandia, M., & Frileux, Y. L. (2007). Influence of farming and feed-
ing systems on composition and quality of goat and sheep milk. Small Ruminant Research,
68(1–2), 20–34.
National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Agricultural Statistics Board, United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2020). Sheep and goats. Available at https://downloads.
usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/000000018/n296xf83n/m900pb410/shep0120.pdf.
Date accessed 30 Apr 2020.
National Institute of Origin and Quality (NIOQ). (n.d.). Protected/controlled designation of ori-
gin (PDO/AOC). Available at https://www.inao.gouv.fr/Les-signes-officiels-de-la-qualite-et-
de-l-origine-SIQO/Appellation-d-origine-protegee-controlee-AOP-AOC. Date accessed 26
Nov 2022.
Niro, S., Fratianni, A., Tremonte, P., Sorrentino, E., Tipaldi, L., Panfilli, G., & Coppola, R. (2014).
Innovative Caciocavallo cheeses made from a mixture of cow milk with ewe or goat milk.
Nudda, A., Atzori, A. S., Correddu, F., Battacone, G., Lunesu, M. F., Cannas, A., & Pulina,
G. (2020). Effects of nutrition on main components of sheep milk. Small Ruminant Research,
184, 106015.
Papademas, P., & Robinson, R. K. (1998). Halloumi cheese: The product and its characteristics.
Papademas, P., & Robinson, R. K. (2000). A comparison of the chemical, microbiological and
sensory characteristics of bovine and ovine Halloumi cheese. International Dairy Journal, 10,
761–768.
Park, Y. M. (1999). Cholesterol contents of U.S. and imported goat milk cheeses as quantified by
different colorimetric methods. Small Ruminant Research, 32, 77–82.
Pereira, F., Queiros, S., Gusmao, L., Nijman, I. J., Cuppen, E., Lenstra, J. A., Consortium, E.,
Davis, S. J. M., Nejmeddine, F., & Amorim, A. (2009). Tracing the history of goat pastoralism:
New clues from mitochondrial and y chromosome DNA in North Africa. Molecular Biology
and Evolution, 26(12), 2765–2773.
Poveda, J. M., Nieto-Arribas, P., Suseña, S., Chicón, R., Castro, L., Palop, L., & Cabezas, L. (2014).
Volatile composition and improvement of the aroma of industrial Manchego cheese by using
Lactobacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei as adjunct and other autochthonous strains as start-
ers. European Food Research and Technology, 238, 485–494.
Pulina, G., Milan, M. J., Lavin, M. P., Theodoridis, A., Morin, E., Capote, J., II, Thomas, D. L.,
Francesconi, A. H. D., & Caja, G. (2018). Invited review: Current production trends, farm
structures and economics of the dairy sheep and goat sectors. Journal of Dairy Science, 101,
6715–6729.
Raynal-Ljutovac, K., Lagriffoul, G., Paccard, P., Guillet, I., & Chlliard, Y. (2008). Composition of
goat and sheep milk products: An update. Small Ruminant Research, 79, 57–72.
Rubino, R., Morand-Fehr, P., & Sepe, L. (Eds.). (2004). Atlas of goat products. La Biblioteca
di Caseus.
Salles, C., Sommerer, N., Septier, C., Issanchou, S., Chabanet, C., Garem, A., & Le Quere,
J.-L. (2002). Goat cheese flavor: Sensory evaluation of branched-chain fatty acids and small
peptides. Journal of Food Science, 67(2), 835–841.
Santos, T. D. R., Goncalves, B. H. R. F., Carvalho, S. A., Fernandez, S. A. A., & Ferrao,
S. P. B. (2016). Physical, chemical and sensory characteristics of cream goat cheese produced
with Saanen and Alpine milk. International Journal of Engineering Research & Science, 2(2),
102–111.
Talavera, M., & Chambers, D. H. (2016). Flavor lexicon and characteristics of artisan goat cheese
from the United States. Journal of Sensory Studies, 31, 492–506.
Tilocca, B., Costanzo, N., Morittu, V. M., Spina, A. A., Soggiu, A., Britti, D., Roncada, P., & Piras,
C. (2020). Milk microbiota: Characterization methods and role in cheese production. Journal
of Proteomics, 210, 103534.
USFDA. (2019). CFR-Code of federal regulations title 21. Available at https://www.accessdata.
fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=133.184. Date accessed 30 Apr 2020.
Valdivielso, I., Albisu, M., de Renobales, M., & Barron, L. J. R. (2016). Changes in the volatile
composition and sensory properties of cheeses maded with milk from commercial sheep flocks
managed indoors, part-time grazing in valley, and extensive mountain grazing. International
Zazzu, C., Addis, M., Caredda, M., Scintu, M. F., Piredda, G., & Sanna, G. (2019). Biogenic
amines in traditional Fior Sardo PDO sheep cheese: Assessment, validation and application of
an RP-HPLC-DAD-UV method. Separations, 6(11), 1–17.
Chapter 19
Washed-Rind Cheeses
Pat Polowsky, Mark E. Johnson, and Rodrigo A. Ibáñez
19.1 Introduction
Washed-rind cheeses are notorious for their pungent, strong aroma and flavor
profiles. This family of cheese is heterogeneous and made up of different varieties
that vary in firmness and overall sensory characteristics. Soft, semi-firm, and firm
washed-rind cheeses have been in continual production in Europe for several centu-
ries. Well-known examples include Brick, Limburger, Taleggio, Reblochon, Livarot,
Munster (traditional), Port du Salut, Comte, Gruyere, and many others. Also known
as smear-ripened cheeses or bacterial surface-ripened cheeses, they get much of
their characteristic qualities from the formation of a red-orange microbial mat on
their rind surface. This mat, or “smear,” is formed by the washing action that takes
place during the aging of these varieties. Brine or other washing solutions are
scrubbed onto the surface, which encourages a complex ecosystem of microbes to
take root and grow. The combination of bacteria, yeasts, and molds leads to the
formation of diverse aroma/flavor compounds often described as “autumn-like,”
“sweaty sock,” “pungent,” or “sulfurous”. The metabolism of the surface-situated
microbes can also lead to a pronounced softening of the cheese body depending on
the overall making process, with near complete liquefaction occurring in
extreme cases.
This group of cheeses is a sub-set of surface-ripened cheeses, which also include
mold surface-ripened cheeses such as Brie and Camembert styles. Although washed-
rind cheeses also generally have molds colonizing their surface, they are distinct
from surface mold-ripened cheeses due to the complexity of the microbial smear
and the presence of a consortium of bacteria and yeasts in addition to molds. These
cheeses still rely on starter cultures (lactic acid bacteria) for acid production during
P. Polowsky · M. E. Johnson · R. A. Ibáñez (*)

Center for Dairy Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_19
590 P. Polowsky et al.
the making process, but their “identity” and dominant sensorial characteristics are
created by the action of surface microbes (yeasts, bacteria, and molds).
This microbial growth, and the concomitant formation of unique colors, flavors,
and textures, make this variety one of growing prominence in the artisanal cheese
“renaissance” occurring in the United States. The distinctive flavor profiles associ-
ated with some of these cheeses can rise to the level of having a cult following, such
as Rush Creek Reserve (Uplands Cheese, Dodgeville, WI), which often sells out
within weeks of going on sale each fall. The smear (washing liquid) also allows for
interesting inclusions of other flavors and sensory profiles. The use of beer, wine,
and cider and other spirits is becoming increasingly common and can be a promi-
nent marketing feature when advertised on the label. Willoughby (Jasper Hill
Cellars, Greensboro, VT) is a soft washed-rind cheese that has often been washed
with different alcohols via collaborations with local breweries, meaderies, distill-
eries, etc. These interesting selling points, when combined with the unique flavors
and textures exemplified by cheeses in this family, have poised washed-rind cheeses
to gain popularity and carve out a niche in the artisan cheese market.
19.1.1 Washed-Rind Cheese Prominence and Market
Washed-rind cheeses have emerged as a fast-growing segment of the cheese market-

place. The recent renaissance of artisanal cheese production in the United States,
along with consumer demand for complex flavors and textures, has led to tremen-
dous growth in the specialty cheese category. Annual sales in the specialty and natu-
ral cheese space are expected to top $21 billion by 2022, up from $15 billion in
2011. (Packaged Facts, 2016; Shoup, 2016) This increase in demand has resulted in
a burgeoning specialty cheese marketplace with ample room for new players to
enter the field. The number of artisanal cheese producers had risen to over 900 as of
2016, more than doubling from 400 in 2006. (Roberts, 2012; American Cheese
Society, 2018; Fanning, 2020) At the vanguard of the growing U.S. artisan cheese
movement is the request from consumers for bold, interesting flavors and textures.
Several categories of cheese have distinguishing sensory characteristics that fill this
niche. One such variety is soft washed-rind cheese (i.e., smear-ripened cheese, bac-
terial surface-ripened cheese). This type of cheese develops a very distinctive range
of flavors and textures that are sought-after by cheese aficionados.
Soft washed-rind cheeses are now in widespread production across the artisan
cheesemaking community. According to the American Cheese Society (2018),
approximately 40% of artisan and specialty cheese producers in the United States
sell washed-rind cheeses as part of their portfolio. This reflects the upward purchas-
ing trend this variety has exhibited in the past decade. (Sakovitz-Dale, 2006;
Packaged Facts, 2016) Washed-rind cheeses are particularly profitable due to the
fact that they fully ripen within weeks as opposed to months or years. This allows
for a quick turnaround time and frees up inventory/cash flow much more quickly
19 Washed-Rind Cheeses 591
than is possible with long-aged cheeses (Bouma et al., 2014; Durham et al., 2015).
This creates an optimal economic environment where cheese producers can gener-
ate much-needed profit from products high in consumer demand. The logical next
step is to further understand the crucial quality parameters associated with washed-
rind cheeses. The sensorial characteristics of washed-rind cheese, and cheese/food
in general, are often the major driver of liking for consumers.
19.2 Types of Washed-Rind Cheeses
A wide variety of washed-rind cheeses exist in the marketplace. This style of cheese
has been in production in many European regions for hundreds of years. The differ-
ing ripening protocols, and subsequent varied microbiota, can yield a diverse array
of colors, aromas, and flavors. Production location/geography, intensity of smear
application, type of washing fluid, and other cheese making or ripening parameters
can be used to help differentiate and categorize these cheeses. The most common
method of classifying washed-rind cheeses is by cheese firmness (i.e., moisture
content; Table 19.1). The most usual bifurcation is “soft” washed-rind cheeses (high
moisture) and “firm” or “semi-firm” washed-rind cheeses (low/moderate moisture).
Some sources indicate that the “smear-ripened” nomenclature refers to soft washed-
rind cheeses and “washed-rind” refers to firmed varieties (Gremmels, 2016).
However, the terminology is often used interchangeably with “washed-rind” and
“smear-ripened” being synonymous, both referring to bacterial surface-ripened
cheeses.
Table 19.1 General outline of the major types of wash-rind (bacterial surface-ripened, smear-
ripened) cheeses
Typical Typical fat
Cheese moisture content
type content (FDM) Examples Characteristics
Soft 45–60% ≥50% Limburger Very thin rind
Epoisse Complete softening and/or liquifaction
Rush Creek reserve of cheese body at advanced ages
Winnimere
Esrom
Semi- 40–50% ≥50% Fontina Thin rind
firm Taleggio Elastic body
Raclette Exhibit good melting and flowing
Pont L’Eveque characteristics
Firm <40% ≥45% Comte Thick, dry rind
Beaufort Firm cheese body that can become
Pleasant ridge somewhat short at lower moisture or
reserve older ripening times
Gruyere
19.2.1 Soft/High-Moisture Washed-Rind Cheese
Soft washed-rind cheeses include cheeses such as Port Du Salut, Reblochon,

Époisses de Bourgogne, Rush Creek Reserve, Red Hawk, and Winnimere. These
cheeses have a very soft rind, which is usually very aromatic and high in red-orange
coloration and is usually eaten as part of cheese evaluation. The moisture content of
these cheeses can often range between 45% and 60%, leading to a cheese body that
is very soft and often partially or fully liquified during the later stages of ripening.
19.2.2 Semi-Firm/Moderate-Moisture Washed-Rind Cheese
Semi-firm washed-rind cheeses include cheeses such as Limburger, Brick, Pont

l’Eveque, and Raclette. These cheeses are usually of moderate moisture content,
often between 40% and 50%. These cheeses often share aroma and flavor qualities
similar to that of soft washed-rind cheeses, although sometimes they are lower in
overall intensity. A critical feature of these cheeses is their functionality vis-à-vis
meltability. These cheeses are often used in cooked applications where appreciable
melting and flow is desirable. For example, raclette is usually melted and scraped
and poured over cooked potatoes or other vegetables. Brick cheese is the main
cheese used in Detroit-style pizza and must exhibit properties similar to that of moz-
zarella (e.g., melt, flow, stretch, browning, and blistering).
19.2.3 Firm/Low-Moisture Washed-Rind Cheese
Firm washed-rind cheeses include cheeses such as Cantal, Comté, Gruyère,

Beaufort, and Pleasant Ridge Reserve. These cheeses are usually relatively low in
moisture (compared to the varieties described above), ranging between 30% and
40%. This lower moisture content usually confers a firm, elastic body to the
cheese. The lower moisture content, combined with ripening conditions and sur-
face treatments and washing, usually results in a rind that is not consumed as part
of the eating experience (although it technically is edible). The typical washed-
rind aroma characteristics associated with softer varieties can still be experienced
in firmer types, although usually limited to the surface rind. The body of the
cheese usually has flavor attributes that range from brothy/umami, nutty, sweet,
and fruity.
19.3 Manufacture of Washed-Rind Cheese
Washed-rind cheeses have variable moisture contents (depending on firmness level),

are relatively low in acidity, and are aged in humid environments for several weeks.
During this aging time, a microbe-laden washing fluid is scrubbed into the surface;
alternatively, a solution that encourages native flora to grow can also be used (e.g.,
brine, beer, etc.). This process leads to the formation of the characteristic red-orange
smear at the cheese surface. The smear is composed of a menagerie of microbes that
include Brevibacterium, Corynebacterium, Micrococci species, Geotrichum spe-
cies, and others. (Bockelmann, 1999; Button & Dutton, 2012) This complex ecosys-
tem that forms on cheese rinds is still being fully elucidated. The metabolism of
each microbe, along with the interaction between them, can have dramatic effects
on how a cheese ages and ripens (Wolfe et al., 2014).
For the above reasons, the production of these cheeses is often divided into two
main phases: the production of the base cheese and the formation of the rind and
smear community. A common practice (especially in traditional/historical environ-
ments) is for multiple farmstead creameries to produce wheels of cheese, which are
then collected and aged in a centralized facility where the aging process occurs and
the rind is formed. The series of practices associated with the formation of the rind
and overall cheese care during aging is known as “affinage”.
19.3.1 Cheesemaking – Forming Cheese Body/Base
The production of soft washed-rind cheeses (e.g., Limburger, Reblochon) differs in

several key ways from the production of hard/firm washed-rind cheeses (e.g.,
Comte, Gruyere; Fig. 19.1). In the United States, soft washed-rind cheeses are usu-
ally produced from pasteurized milk, whereas firmer cheeses are made with raw,
heat-treated, or pasteurized milk, depending on the producer. This is due to the
required 60-day aging rule being a quality-limiting factor for the sale of these soft
cheeses. Many soft cheeses would experience too high levels of softening, proteoly-
sis, and general ripening post 60 days to meet customer quality standards. Of note
is that many European Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) washed-rind cheeses
must be produced with raw milk in order to meet PDO specifications (e.g., Comte,
Reblochon).
Another point of differentiation for soft and firm washed-rind cheeses is starter
culture selection during the initial stages of cheesemaking. The former often use
mesophilic mixed-strain cultures, and the latter often utilize thermophilic cultures
along with the standard mesophiles. Not only does this affect acidification dynam-
ics, it can also confer distinct flavors to certain varieties due to their proteolytic
activity and complex metabolic activity. A possible example would include the
sweet, caramelly notes associated with firm washed-rind cheeses such as Gruyere
or Cantal.
Fig. 19.1 General manufacturing steps and make procedure outlines for soft (left) and firm/hard
(right) washed-rind cheeses (Provided by author)
Soft washed-rind cheeses usually follow an uncooked, unpressed make schedule,

whereas firm varieties are usually cooked and pressed. During the coagulation and
cutting phases, soft washed-rind cheese coagulum is often cut to a size roughly
around 0.5 inches (~13 mm), with cooking ranging from no added heat to tempera-
tures around 100 °F (~38 °C). Curds are drained under their own weight, often
overnight, ending up at around pH 5.0. These are all critical factors yielding a higher
moisture cheese, which confers the ultimate soft texture of the finished cheese. Hard
washed-rind cheeses usually utilize a cut-size of around 5/16th inches (8 mm), with
cooking temperatures ranging from 105 °F to 125 °F (~40 °C to ~50 °C). Drained
curds are usually pressed anywhere from several hours to overnight. Both varieties
can be brine salted or dry salted via application to the finished cheese surface. The
amount/time of brining/salting varies widely depending on cheese size, shape, cul-
ture activity, desired flavor, and pH/moisture targets. (Jaeggi, 2019).
19.3.2 Affinage – Forming Cheese Rind
The ripening and aging process is critical for the final sensorial quality of washed-
rind cheeses. Considerations such as smear application, ripening room (cave) tem-
perature, relative humidity, air flow/exchanges, surface/rind scrubbing, and length
of aging time are all parameters that must be accounted for and controlled. This
process is holistically known as affinage; those who oversee this process are affi-
neurs (masculine), affineuses (feminine), or affineux (gender neutral; preferred term).
A complex microbial menagerie is formed during the affinage process. This can
either be accomplished: (1) deliberately, by applying a smear (brine-like solution)
inoculated with commercial cultures (Fig. 19.2), (2) passively, by allowing native
flora to get established on cheese rind (note that a brine or other solution is still usu-
ally applied to the surface to optimize growth conditions for aforementioned
microbes, or (3) by using what is known as “back slopping” or the “old-young
method,” where surface remnants of older cheeses are prepared into smear solution
and applied to young cheeses.
The smear solution often consists of a dilute salt (~5% w/w) solution with the
addition of yeasts, bacteria (Staphylococci, Micrococcus, Coryneform, Brevibacteria,
Arthrobacter, etc.), and mold-type cultures. This smear solution can be rubbed on
the surface (with a cloth, gloved hands, etc.), brushed onto the surface, and/or
sprayed using an aerosolizing device. This can either be an automated process or a
manual operation. The former utilizes cheese “robots,” which can take each wheel
and simultaneously apply smear and turn the wheels before replacing them on the
aging shelf. The latter is usually accomplished by trained staff who must touch each
wheel, which often leads to a large number of labor hours being devoted to the affi-
nage process for washed-rind cheeses.
The space in which the affinage process takes place is known as the aging space,
ripening room, curing room, or “cave”. The actual ripening room may be as formal
as a computer-control walk-in cooler or warehouse or as informal as an actual
underground dwelling (e.g., Kaltbach caves in Switzerland used by Emmi,
Fig. 19.3). The specific conditions and atmospheric parameters within the affinage
space are dependent on the type of washed-rind cheese (hard vs. soft) and specific
cheese in question (Limburger vs. Muenster). Air flow, humidity, temperature,
native microbiota, foot traffic, physical size and volume of space, cleaning prac-
tices, and building materials such as wood board, heating, ventilation and air
Fig. 19.2 Example of an affineux applying a smear solution and turning blocks of Limburger
cheese that are being aged on wood boards (Provided by author)
Fig. 19.3 The limestone Kaltbach caves in Switzerland (Photo by Emmi)

conditioning system, and wall/floor treatments are all parameters that can drasti-
cally influence the affinage process (Jaeggi, 2019).
Complementing the aforementioned aging space parameters and conditions, the
ripening protocols usually include frequency of smear application and moving
cheeses through a series of rooms in a stepwise fashion. Generally speaking, soft
washed-rind cheeses will be ripened in a different manner than firm washed-rind
cheeses. The soft variety is often ripened post-salting for 1–4 weeks, often in a
single room at around 50–60 °F (~10–~16 °C) and ~98% relative humidity. Hard
washed-rind cheeses are often moved through a series of ripening phases depending
on the cheese type and other complexities (e.g., eye development). A simplified
ripening schedule would move wheels of firm washed-rind cheeses through pro-
gressively cooler rooms with lower relative humidity (e.g., 60 °F (~16 °C) → 40 °F
(4 °C); 98% RH → 60% RH) for a longer period of time (3–12 months). Not only is
this important to attain the correct surface conditions for microbe growth progres-
sion and rind formation, but it also minimizes the chances for case hardening to
occur. Case hardening refers to an external layer of cheese dehydrating too quickly,
forming a non-permeable “case” around the wheel/block, thereby preventing exter-
nal moisture migration from the rest of the cheese body. Table 19.2 summarizes soft
vs. hard washed-rind ripening conditions.
19.4 Physical and Microbiological Characteristics

of Washed-Rind Cheese
Washed-rind cheeses undergo complex chemical, physical, and microbiological

changes during the cheesemaking and ripening process. The final appearance, taste,
aroma, and texture of the cheese are influenced by the interconnected nature of the
surface rind microbiota and the chemical nature of the cheese body that was estab-
lished during the cheese making procedure. Acid development during the make,
moisture content, ammonia, and carbon dioxide production during ripening, and
many other physiochemical factors can determine if the final cheese undergoes
complete liquefaction or retains a firm and chalky core. A thorough description of
rind ecology and chemical changes during ripening is outside the scope of this
Table 19.2 General outline of the ripening conditions for wash-rind (bacterial surface-ripened,
smear-ripened) cheeses
Ripening parameter Soft-type Firm-type
Number of ripening rooms 1 2 to 4
Residence time in ripening 1 to 4 weeks 3 to 12 months
Ripening room humidity ~98% RH ~60% RH to 98% RH
Ripening room temperature 50 °F to 60 °F 40 °F to 60 °F
Adapted from Jaeggi (2019)
chapter, but several key points will be highlighted below as these reactions dramati-
cally influence the final sensorial attributes of the cheese.
19.4.1 Rind Ecology
The main attributes that are distinctive characteristics of many washed-rind cheeses
are: bright surface coloration (red/orange), various degrees of radial softening, and
a complex bouquet of aromas and flavors that can range from subtle to highly pun-
gent. Each of these attributes is either a direct or an indirect action of the microbial
metabolism of the surface smear organisms. Until recently, only a very rudimentary
understanding of the surface microbes was available within the washed-rind cheese
industry. Brevibacterium linens was often touted as being the main, if not sole,
source of many of the distinctive colors and flavors of washed-rind cheeses. The
true complexity of the surface ecology is now being better elucidated due to
improved molecular genetic techniques. These new insights have identified numer-
ous genera of molds, yeasts, and bacteria that colonize cheese rinds – many never
previously associated with cheese rinds (Quigley et al., 2012; Wolfe et al., 2014).
Table 19.3 lists some of the main microbial genera found within the rinds of washed-
rind cheeses.
At the onset of ripening, washed-rind cheeses are usually acidic (pH ≈ 4.7–5.2,
depending on exact type; Brennan et al., 2004). This, combined with the high salt
content of these cheeses, usually prompts the growth of yeast species such as
Debaryomyces hansenii or Geotrichum candidum, to name a few. This genus, and
Table 19.3 Example Bacteria genera Fungi Genera (yeast/mold)

microbes isolated from rinds Arthrobacter† Aspergillus
of smear-ripened cheeses*
Brevibacterium† Acremonium
Brachybacterium Candida†
Corynebacterium† Chyrsosporium
Halomonas Debaryomyces†
Microbacterium Fusarium
Pseudomonas Galactomyces
Psychrobacter Geotrichum†
Serratia Kluyveromyces
Sphingobacterium Penicillium†
Staphylococcus† Saccharomyces
Vibrio Scopulariopsis
Adapted from Wolfe et al. (2014) and Cogan
et al. (2014)
*Not an exhaustive list; alphabetical order.
†Major genera
other related microbes, consume lactic acid and deacidify the surface of the cheese.
A gaseous by-product of this reaction can include carbon dioxide. Many of these
surface microbes are also strongly proteolytic and can create large amounts of
ammonia. This creates a less acidic environment and pH-sensitive microbes like
Corynebacterium can grow and proliferate. Generally, the pH at the cheese surface
can increase from approximately ~4.8–~5.5. The proteolytic reactions occurring
during the early phases of the ripening process can also free up nutrients (amino
acids) that allow other microbes to grow and proliferate. Eventually, the rinds of
smear-ripened cheese become fully colonized with a menagerie of microbes, quite
often reaching a pH near 6.0 or even 7.0 (Irlinger et al., 2015). Figure 19.4 outlines
this process visually.
19.4.2 Texture Development and Softening
While the softening process and exact chemical mechanisms of softening and tex-
ture development in soft washed-rind cheese have only been studied briefly
(Tansman et al., 2017), a similar process has been studied at some length in surface
mold-ripened cheeses, such as brie and camembert. Similar chemical and physical
phenomena are occurring, although due to different types of microbes (i.e., molds
vs. yeasts, bacteria, etc.). As discussed in the previous section, the surface microbes
Fig. 19.4 Schematic outline of microbe growth during ripening (Image provided by author)
Fig. 19.5 Schematic view of softening potential based on cheese moisture and extent of acid
development. Cheese images courtesy of Cowgirl Creamery (Emmi AG, Point Reyes Station, CA)
and Columbia Cheese (New York, NY)
cause the cheese surface’s pH to rise via lactate metabolization and ammonia pro-
duction due to proteolysis. The gradient of high pH at the surface and low pH within
the cheese body initiates a series of reactions that result in the radial softening of
washed-rind cheeses (note: this softening/liquification is experienced in the soft-
type cheeses, not in the hard-type cheeses; refer to Fig. 19.5).
The high surface pH values cause minerals such as calcium and phosphate to
precipitate and crystallize at the surface, forming crystals like brushite (calcium
phosphate), ikaite/calcite (calcium carbonate), and struvite (magnesium ammonium
phosphate). This surface crystallization phenomenon establishes a concentration
gradient, which prompts the migration of minerals from the cheese center toward
the surface in a radial fashion. The high pH environment, coupled with this demin-
eralization, shifts the dominant interactions within the cheese from the type casein-
casein to the type casein-water. Water is absorbed by the casein matrix, which swells
and leads to characteristic softening and liquefaction. Although proteolysis is a
critical reaction occurring during ripening, it has minimal direct effects on the radial
softening process. The proteolytic-derived products, such as sulfur compounds and
ammonia, have the largest impact on the sensorial attribute of washed-rind cheese.
Figure 19.6 summarizes the texture-related reactions occurring during ripening.
During ripening, metabolism by surface flora results in an increase in pH. The
pH increase is in part due to lactic acid metabolism but to a greater extent due to the
leaching of ammonia into the cheese. Ammonia is produced via proteolysis by the
surface microorganisms and leaches into the cheese (serum) and converts to ammo-
nium hydroxide. The increase in pH will solubilize the casein. However, the extent
of solubilization depends on the initial demineralization of the casein. The greater
the extent of demineralization prior to growth of the surface microorganisms, the
greater the degree of solubilization (hydration) of the casein. Thus, the main correc-
tive action that is taken to alter the body characteristics is to change the rate and
Fig. 19.6 Schematic view of reactions occurring in washed-rind cheese during ripening
extent of acidification and not just rely on duration of ripening to do so. At very low
initial pH (<4.8) the caseins are not well hydrated and remain as small aggregates
that are not linked extensively to other aggregates, resulting in a white, brittle body
that will disperse light. This is often seen as a white core in cheeses. This may or
may not be a fault in ripened cheeses. In cheeses that are usually retailed at a state
of complete liquefaction (such as Winnemere and Rush Creek Reserve), a solid/
chalky white core is considered a fault. However, many soft washed-rind cheeses
may not be ripened to such a degree and a solid core is common in cheeses such as
Oma (Jasper Hill Farms) or Red Hawk (Cowgirl Creamery).
As the pH increases and the casein becomes more hydrated, the interior of the
cheese changes to a straw color (i.e., translucent appearance). This is not a fault but
an indication of normal ripening events. As the pH increases the body becomes very
spreadable and gel-like, and in very ripened cheeses the body becomes more fluid.
This change is progressive. The evaluator must be aware that not all varieties of soft-
ripened cheeses desire a cheese that easily disperses when eaten but prefer the gel-
like body, and that some styles desire a residual white core. The later cheeses are
usually formed as thicker blocks or wheels. Those varieties that require full fluidity
are usually only about 1 inch (~2.5 cm) in height, and the cheese is often wrapped in
spruce cambium or placed in a ceramic form so the cheese does not flow during stor-
age and it provides a convenient form to serve the cheese. The most common body
fault with soft wash-rind cheeses is a gummy, gelatinous mouthfeel. This indicates
that the cheese was insufficiently demineralized initially (pH prior to rennet addition
or ripening was too high). The defect has been most noticeable in stabilized varieties.
19.5 Sensory Evaluation of Washed-Rind Cheese
Wash-rind cheeses are perhaps the most demanded cheeses to be evaluated due to
the wide range in the manufacturer’s desired body, flavors, and aromas. Many are
manufactured by artisanal cheese makers who produce distinct flavor profiles due,
in part, to feeding regimens and the diversity in the microflora of milk, cheesemak-
ing space, and ripening environment. Even if manufacturers use the same commer-
cial starters and ripening strains, passively contaminating microorganisms, often
referred to as native microflora, unique to a cheese plant (and milk) may eventually
become the dominant strains involved in producing distinctive flavors.
There are no standards of identity for body, flavors, textures, or aromas in these
types of cheeses. In fact, in order to differentiate their cheese from other wash-rind
cheeses, cheese makers often set their own criteria and then produce products to
meet those specifications. Consequently, sensory evaluators (e.g., quality control
professionals, contest judges, etc.) are met with tough decisions. A perceived defect
or fault may actually be a desired attribute the cheese maker wanted to develop. In
addition, there are categories in contests for type of milk used, (cow, sheep, or goat
and blends of two or more), age, firmness (low vs. high moisture), and even catego-
ries regarded as “open class”. The grader/judge must be aware of this diversity and
be prepared to assess a cheese based on its own unique attributes.
At the heart of the matter is the manufacturer’s expectations for their cheeses. Of
predominant influence is the diversity of microorganisms growing on the surface of
the cheeses and the complexities of their metabolic activities, which lead to a het-
erogeneity of flavors, aromas, and surface colors. A list of representative chemical
compounds responsible fot the general sensory properties of washed-rind cheeses
are shown in Table 19.4. For consistency in flavor, some manufacturers may use
strains of microorganisms purchased from companies that have isolated and selected
them specifically for washed-rind cheeses. However, since these cheeses are ripened
in an open environment, there is a likelihood that there will be strains of microor-
ganisms growing on the cheese that are passive contaminants, not intentionally
introduced to the cheese.
Contaminants may be unique to the milk and/or facility; some may be undesir-
able and others welcomed. At times, the contaminants may become the dominant
flavor-producing microorganism. Most common undesirable contaminants are
molds and gram-negative bacteria such as Enterobacteria, Pseudomonas, and
Proteus species. Occurrence of other contaminants, such as non-starter lactic acid
bacteria (i.e., heterofermentative and/or with decarboxylase activity) can develop
undesirable compounds, including gas defects. Some manufacturers have estab-
lished their own unique blend of strains and thus a unique flavor and aroma, and this
approach is becoming popular, especially amongst craft cheese makers.
There is a succession of growth of the different microorganisms on the surface of
washed-rind cheeses, leading to a progression of body softening and intensity of
flavors from the outside to the core as the cheese ages. However, slight variation in
initial acidity and water activity of the cheeses can have a major impact on the
succession of growth of microorganisms and therefore flavor characteristics of the

cheese. These factors are under control of the cheese maker and they are often the
first place to scrutinize to ascertain the source of undesirable attributes of a cheese
unless microbial contamination is obvious.
19.5.1 Visual Characteristics
Appearance is what first attracts a cheese to a consumer and is the first attribute to
be graded or evaluated in professional settings. Appearance includes: color, even-
ness of the microbial mat on the cheese surface (i.e., outer rind), obvious undesir-
able mold, slimy/sticky surface, cracked surface, and evenness of the shape of the
cheese. Color of the cheese surface is most likely to draw criticism where it is often
not warranted. Color will vary from yellow to pink to red to light brown (Table 19.4)
and there may be adventitious molds and bacteria of various colors present.
Individual strains of microorganisms may produce pigments, but the color may
depend upon the cheese environment (i.e., water activity, acid development;
Mounier et al., 2017), as well as the symbiotic relationship between microorgan-
isms. For example, the interaction of certain yeast and bacteria strains have been
shown to produce characteristic red-orange color in washed-rind cheeses (Wolfe
et al., 2014). What stands out as an undesirable attribute is unevenness of color (i.e.,
splotches of red on one side but not the other, or dark brown splotches in an other-
wise light pink surface; Table 19.4). If washed-rind cheeses are ripened with com-
mercially obtained strains of microorganisms, then the cheese surface generally has
shades of red to orange, and any deviation in the continuous, even color is easily
observed. Colonies of mold (most common are blue, black, or grey) are a source of
color variation (Fig. 19.7e–h). These are generally contaminants, although colorful
molds are sometimes found on specific varieties (e.g., many tomme-styles or some
firm washed-rind cheeses). In this case, it is evenly distributed throughout the cheese
surface. Another example of desirable mold presence is that of Fusarium domesti-
cum, which can impart a “frosty” white appearance to some washed rind cheeses
(Fig. 19.7a–d). In addition, Fusarium can also help aid in rind stability by limiting
excessive stickiness, although the mechanism is unknown (Bachmann et al., 2005).
The entire surface of the cheese should be of similar overall color, but often the
bottom and top of the cheese are not the same even color due to uneven drying and
exposure to air. This is a fault due to mishandling of the cheese during ripening.
Blue- and purple-colored rinds are not desirable and are the result of growth of
Pseudomonas and Proteus species. The shape of the cheese should not be lopsided,
but the surface may have patterns, ridges, or wrinkles and it does not have to be
smooth, but the patterns should be consistent over the cheese surface (excluding
sides). Lopsided cheese may be a result of poor workmanship or cheeses may dis-
tort during shipping and handling.
Soft cheeses tend to flow or slightly distort if allowed to sit too long without
being turned. This can also lead to the surface layer sticking to the boards the cheese
604
Table 19.4 Example of reported chemical compoundsa found in washed-rind cheeses responsible for color, aroma, and flavor attributes/defects
Chemical compound Characteristic Origin Reference
Color Carotenoids Yellow-red rind appearance. These Biosynthesized mainly Galaup et al.
compounds can also contribute to by Arthrobacter sp., (2007), Sutthiwong
inner core color Brevibacterium sp., et al. (2014),
Corynebacterium sp., Giuffrida et al.
Dietzia (2020), Yeluri
sp., Glutamicibacter Jonnala et al.
sp., Micrococcus sp., (2021)
Staphylococcus sp. and
others
Pyomelamin Brown rind defect Metabolism of tyrosine Williams and
by Y. lipolitica Withers (2007)
Indirrubin and indigo Purple rind defects Catabolism of Kamelamela et al.
tryptophan by Proteus (2018)
sp. and Psychrobacter
sp.
P. Polowsky et al.
19
Chemical compound Characteristic Origin Reference

Flavor and aroma Short-chain free fatty acids (<4 carbon atoms) Acid (all of them), sour (formic, Lactate fermentation Thierry et al.
acetic acids), and nutty notes (2011)
(propionic acid)
Short-medium and long free fatty acids Variable, depending on lipase Lipolysis of milk fat. Mounier et al.
(between 4 and 20 carbon atoms) activity and specificity, fatty acid Breakdown of amino (2017)
chain length and others (e.g., acids
butyric acid, rancid; octanoic acid,
Washed-Rind Cheeses
goaty; stearic acid, soapy)

Methyl ketones: Fruity, floral, and musty notes Oxidation of free fatty Mounier et al.
2 – Octanone, acids by enzymatic (2017)
2 – Nonanone, activity of G.
2 – Decadone and candidum.
2 - undecadone
Sulfur compounds: Complex cheesy, cabbage, and Possibly by catabolism Mounier et al.
S-methyl thioesthers (i.e., S-methyl thioacetate, cowshed notes of L-methionine, (2017), Berger
S-methyl thiopropionate, branched-chain amino et al. (1999),
S-methyl thiobutyrate, S-methyl acids (i.e., leucine, Jovillet et al.
thioisobutanoate, isoleucine, and valine) (1992)
S-methyl thioisovalerate, and/or short-chain fatty
S-methyl hexanoate) and sulfides (i.e., acids by several
dimethylsulfide and dimethyltrisulfide) bacteria and yeasts
Sulfur compounds: Sulfur, fruity, grapy, rhubarb, and Catabolism of sulfur Sourabie et al.
Ethyl thioesthers (i.e., ethyl empyreumatic notes at low amino acids (2008)
3-Mercaptopropionate) concentrations. (presumably
Skunky notes at high L-methionine).
concentrations
Biogenic amines (i.e., putrescine, cadaverine, Tingling and burning mouth Decarboxylation of free Benkerroum
histamine, and tyramine are more relevant sensation (mainly histamine and amino acids by (2016), Mounier
amines in cheeses; others are tryptamine, tyramine), as well as unclean/ bacteria, yeasts, and et al. (2017)
2-phenylethylamine, spermine, and putrid notes (putrescine and fungus with
605
spermidine) cadaverine) decarboxylase activity

a
Not an exhaustive list
Fig. 19.7 Examples of rind diversity among washed-rind cheeses. Presence of mold (a–d) is not
necessarily a defect if coverage is consistent and/or homogeneously covers rind and neutral in
color. Mold can be considered a defect (E-H) when it has inconsistent presence on cheese surface
and/or has strong coloration (e.g., dark blue-green). (Images courtesy of Uplands Cheese, Jasper
Hill Farm, Josh Windsor, Kathleen Cotter, and Heather McDown)
sits on during the ripening process and, therefore, an uneven or pitted surface. Some
varieties of soft-wash rind cheeses will flare out during aging and are held into
shape by strips of bark or ceramic molds. The cheese should not be huffed up or
puffy as this would indicate gas production by contaminants within the cheese. In
hard washed-rind cheeses, the surface should be checked for cheese mites (Fig. 19.8).
Mites are detected with a mite light (small flashlight with a magnifier) and mite
colonies often make the cheese surface appear pitted and may leave small anthill-
like residue. In some cheese contests, if a cheese has visible mites, the evaluation
stops and the cheese is wrapped and thrown out so as not to allow the mites to con-
taminate other cheeses.
The surface of washed-rind cheese may exhibit crystals, but they are not consid-
ered a fault unless excessive and would result in rejection by the consumer. The
evaluator must be able to differentiate between mold and crystals. However, crystals
may indicate excessive drying of the rind or over ripening. If so, the associated fault
of excessive rind will be obvious once the cheese is cut into. At the surface, the
crystals are generally fine-grained, somewhat shimmery in appearance, and at first
glance, may give the impression of residual salt or dried brine solution. They are
neither and have been identified by Polowsky et al. (2018) as brushite (calcium
phosphate), ikaite (calcium carbonate), and struvite (magnesium ammonium phos-
phate; Fig. 19.9).
In hard washed-rind cheeses, there may be larger crystals of either tyrosine, leu-
cine, or brushite. Tyrosine crystals may be indicative of the use of Lactobacillus
helveticus as a starter or flavor adjunct. They are firm, crunchy, and very white and
may appear as distinct white solid or slight diffused areas called star bursts within
the body of the cheese. They are rarely considered a fault but rather seen as
Fig. 19.8 An example of cheese with an extreme mite infestation
Fig. 19.9 Crystals embedded in the surface smear of a washed-rind cheese (a). Examples of sur-
face entities extracted from washed-rind cheese (b) remnants of wax-lined cheese paper, (c) stru-
vite crystals, (d) ikaite crystals (white) and struvite (colors) (colored; color due to microscope filter)
harbingers of anticipated sweet, fruity, and butterscotch flavors. Calcium phosphate

crystals are generally more numerous when present in the interior. However, they
are very hard, gritty, with a mouthfeel of fine-grained sand. They are generally con-
sidered a fault, especially when numerous and contrasting the otherwise smooth
mouthfeel.
19.5.2 Aroma Characteristics
One of the very first things an evaluator does is pick up the cheese and smell it,
sometimes even disregarding appearance. The best means to assess aroma is to
smell the cheese after it has been cut into and not to rely on the aroma of the surface.
Surface aroma may or may not be indicative of the quality of the cheese. Some
evaluators will not smell the cheese directly but will wave the aromas toward their
nose in a wafting motion. Undoubtedly, the most often quoted response of wash-
rind cheeses by consumers is that the cheese “stinks” or has a very “smelly” aroma,
especially soft and semisoft washed-rind cheeses. This is characteristic of these
cheese varieties and expert evaluators must further define the aroma attributes asso-
ciated with washed-rind cheeses. Examples of commonly acceptable aromas include
yeasty, sulfury, mushroomy, and earthy. In some cases, expect the aroma to be remi-
niscent of fermented fruit; sweet with a bit of alcohol and/or yeasty notes
(Table 19.4). Mild ammonia aroma is often common as well. It is not considered a
defect when present in low levels and is not the most dominant aroma attribute. As
this category of cheeses grows, more diverse aromas become present in the market-
place. Cruciferous-like (broccoli, cauliflower) or allium-like (oniony) aromas are
increasingly common. These could be considered a subset of the “sulfur” aroma
attribute (Table 19.4). Biogenic amines, such as putrescine and cadaverine, impart
putrid notes into the cheese (Table 19.4), which is often considered as a defect.
Unacceptable aromas often include strong barny, cowy, and fecal notes. These
undesirable aromas are usually produced by contaminant microorganisms. If the
evaluator/grader notices these aromas the evaluation often stops, especially if there
is indication of gas production. These are both signs of microbial species present
that are atypical of washed-rind cheeses.
Aroma plays a major role in cheese flavor evaluation; however, the aroma of a
non-cut wheel or block may not be identical to the aroma of the interior of the
cheese. This is not a fault. The exterior and interior of washed-rind cheeses are usu-
ally evaluated separately. If there is a fault with the aroma of the cheese, it can
sometimes be pinpointed as to the cause by doing the evaluation in a zonal manner.
The initial aroma of an uncut piece of washed-rind cheese may vary widely depend-
ing upon the microorganisms present and the age of the cheese. Also, expect the
aroma of the wash liquid if the cheese has been washed with fermented beverages
(beer, whiskey, wine).
19.5.3 Textural Characteristics
Texture is the term used to describe the manner of union of the particles of cheese.
If there are very few openings within the cheese body, it is called “closed” or “closed
bodied”. If there are numerous openings, it is called “open” or “open bodied”.
Openness can be either mechanical (i.e., mechanical openings) or caused by gas-
producing microorganisms (i.e., gas holes, splits, cracks). Mechanical openings are
naturally occurring areas where the curds have not knit together. This is often due to
the curds not being pressed with great force, often deliberate in nature. These should
not be considered a fault unless the openness is unevenly distributed (i.e., one side
of the cheese has a much more open body than the other side of the cheese).
Unevenly distributed openings can occur due to a lack of turning the cheese in a
periodic nature or adding more wet curd to the curd already in the cheese form after
the whey has drained (Fig. 19.10).
19.5.3.1 Texture Evaluation of Soft Washed-Rind Cheese
Although mechanical openings are very rare in soft washed-rind cheeses due to the
very soft, collapsible body of the cheese, many semi-firm and firm washed-rind
cheeses will have numerous mechanical openings, which may have been expanded
by carbon dioxide produced by the starters used (Leuconostoc sp.). The openings
may have uneven or smooth surfaces, with shiny or dull interiors. In firm washed-
rind cheeses, gas production may lead to formation of small round eyes or splits/
cracks in the cheese. Splits are considered a fault (Fig. 19.11). The grader should be
made aware of whether a gas-producing microorganism has been used in the
Fig. 19.10 Examples of open-bodied cheeses formed via gas production (left) and mechanical
openings (right)
Fig. 19.11 Splits, cracks, and excessively large openings in the body of a firm washed-rind cheese
(Beaufort-style)
production of any washed-rind cheese. The formation of gas may not be accompa-
nied by any detectable off-flavors, but occasionally the cheese may develop a fruity
or sulfury note, or more pungent aromas in the case of butyrate-forming microor-
ganisms (e.g., late blowing defect caused by Clostridium species, discussed fur-
ther below).
The difference in formation of round eyes or a split is due to the elasticity of the
cheese at the time gas was formed. The gas is usually carbon dioxide which is odor-
less and is derived from the metabolism of residual sugar or citric acid by either
starter bacteria, coliforms, yeasts, or heterofermentative lactobacilli. Clostridia sp.
will often produce a sulfur note along with slits. Gas produced by the added surface
microorganisms is not the cause of gas within the cheese. If gas is caused by yeast,
the associated flavor or odor of alcohol (raw bread dough) is observed. If the cheese
maker used a gas formed as part of the starter, the cheese would exhibit gas forma-
tion (splits or round holes) but a distinctive flavor may not be noticed, or it will be
slightly buttery if the cheese is very young.
19.5.3.2 Evaluation of Body Characteristics of Washed-Rind Cheese
Body refers to several attributes: firmness, cohesiveness, elasticity, and smoothness

(plasticity). These attributes are governed by cheese composition, rate/extent of acid
development during cheese making/at onset of ripening, metabolism of surface
microorganisms, and residual coagulant. Many soft-ripened cheeses are high in fat
(>55% FDB) and moisture (>45%). The fat content of cheese, often expressed as fat
in dry matter or fat on a dry basis (FDM or FDB), is determined by the casein to fat
ratio (c/f) of the milk. Cheese makers can select milks (often dictated by seasonal-
ity) with the appropriate c/f ratio or they can add cream (fat) to lower the c/f ratio
and increase the FDB. The moisture content of cheese is determined by the manu-
facturing and ripening practices. The rate and extent of acidification during manu-
facture will determine the initial level of demineralization of the casein. The extent
of initial demineralization will eventually influence the body of the cheese as it
ripens. As with all cheeses, proteolysis induced by residual coagulant, native milk
proteinases, and proteinases of starter and non-starter bacteria will eventually result
in a smoother body, decreased curdiness, and more flavor. Lower moisture cheeses
may develop a short body (i.e., brittle, inflexible), whereas higher moisture cheeses
may become pasty or sticky. Higher fat cheeses may have a weak body. However, in
soft washed-rind cheeses, this can be an advantage when coupled with high mois-
ture; as it may result in cheeses with the desired viscous body after ripening, result-
ing in a pleasing mouthfeel.
19.5.3.3 Evaluation of Body Characteristics of Soft Washed-Rind Cheese
Body evaluation in soft washed-rind cheeses is best evaluated by mouthfeel of a

small slice of cheese. In the case of cheeses that experience pronounced liquefaction
by the time of consumption (e.g., Winnemere, Rush Creek, Vacherin Mont D’Or)
the top of the rind is often removed or peeled away and the cheese body is then
spooned out for evaluation (Fig. 19.12). This also allows for evaluation of the rind
and cheese body to occur in separate tastings. The rind includes the microbial mat
and the portion of cheese immediately below the surface. In soft rind cheese, it
should usually be less than 1/16 inch (~16 mm) and it is edible, although some
evaluators and consumers might refuse to taste it due to intense aromas/flavors. A
firm or thick rind indicates excessive growth of microorganisms or drying, and a
cracked rind may also indicate excessive ripening.
The body of soft washed-rind cheeses is influenced most strongly by the metabo-
lism of the surface microflora and without it the cheeses will not obtain their soft,
smooth, fluid body. Neither the microorganisms nor the enzymes released by them
will penetrate the cheese. Instead, the softening of washed-rind cheese is due to the
interplay of retained calcium, pH changes, and casein water interactions (as
described above in Sect. 19.4.2 Texture Development and Softening).
The rind in soft washed-rind cheese refers to the microbial mat and for most
varieties, should be very thin, although there are exceptions as a thick mat of micro-
organisms may be desirable in some specific cheeses.
The rind may have a slight sandy crunch or mouthfeel due to the presence of
calcium phosphate, ikaite, or struvite crystals but this is not considered a fault unless
the crystals are excessively large and detract from the cheese body. Much of the
calcium and phosphate in soft-ripened cheeses is solubilized and will diffuse
through the cheese to the surface. The diffusion initially is due to differences in
water activity that develops (i.e., surface drying and application of salt to the cheese
Fig. 19.12 Rush Creek Reserve (Uplands Cheese, Dodgeville, WI) (left) is often consumed and
evaluated by first peeling back the top portion of its rind (right)
surface). As the pH increases at the surface and with sufficient concentration of

minerals, crystals will form. With the reduction in soluble minerals at the surface
due to crystallization, diffusion of more minerals from the interior of the cheese
occurs. This starts the cascade of softening reactions already described.
19.5.3.4 Evaluation of Body Characteristics of Semi-Soft and Firm

Washed-Rind Cheese
In semi-soft and firm washed-rind cheeses, a plug is pulled from the cheese using a
cheese trier. Pressure is exerted on the plug by slowly bending the plug. If the plug
breaks quickly the cheese is called short. If the plug cannot be broken until it is fully
or almost fully bent it is called long (Fig. 19.13). Semi-soft washed-rind cheeses are
slight to definite long but since hard washed-rind cheeses are usually evaluated after
considerable aging, (>6 months) a slightly short body may be observed. However,
attributes often accompanying a short body may not be acceptable. A lot of informa-
tion can be gleaned from the assessment of the plug, either through rubbing it
between the fingers or chewing the cheese. Short body may often be accompanied
by mouthfeel attributes of grainy, mealy, or curdy. Body firmness can also be evalu-
ated at the same time. Excessive firmness is a common fault in both semi-hard and
hard varieties.
Short body can be due to excessive acidity (low pH) which can also lead to a
grainy but easily broken-up paste when chewed or rubbed between the thumb and
index finger. Other sources of short body and mealy, curdy mouthfeel include exces-
sively dry cheese, insufficient loss of calcium during manufacturing (as indicated by
high initial pH of the curd prior to aging), and the curd may have been too dry or low
in fat or too high in salt at hooping. Curdiness is expected in semi-hard and hard
cheeses but the body should be cohesive. The curdiness may also result in mechani-
cal openings.
Fig. 19.13 Examples of short (left) and long (right) body cheese
19.5.4 Flavor Characteristics
The aforementioned breakdown of protein (casein), fat, and carbohydrate (lactate/

citrate) result in a wide array of flavor compounds within the many varieties of
washed-rind cheeses. (Table 19.4 and Fig. 19.14) Most cited faults in flavor of
washed-rind cheeses are bitter, ammoniated, lacks salt, lacks characteristic flavor,
acid, unclean (barney, cowy, catty), as well as a tingling/burning mouthfeel caused
by the presence of biogenic amines (i.e., histamine and tyramine). If the cheese is
labeled as having been washed with these beverages (e.g., beer, cider), the cheese
should have that flavor present. The penetration and overall impression of any added
flavor(s) are important criteria during evaluation. The flavor of the wash or added
flavor is expected to be sensed throughout the cheese even if the intensity is only
slight. Consequently, cheeses with added flavors either in a wash or introduced via
added ingredients are usually evaluated in a manner where the interior is tasted first,
then the exterior rind, so as not to have the intense exterior flavor of carryover to the
interior. A piece of cheese with both interior and exterior is then evaluated for flavor
to form a holistic impression of the cheese. More research is needed to fully develop
an understanding of the spectrum of possible flavor molecules present in washed-
rind cheese. There is a critical dearth in published literature as it relates to formal
descriptive or affective evaluation of this variety. However, the complexity of the
flavors these cheeses exhibit implies that any further formal sensory evaluation of
these cheeses will add much-needed knowledge to the washed-rind consuming
zeitgeist.
19.5.4.1 Evaluation of Flavor in Soft Washed-Rind Cheese
Expected flavor of soft and semi-soft washed-rind cheeses is cheese specific. Some
may have a slight yeasty note, especially if the surface microflora is only yeast. If
the variety uses Brevibacterium and Micrococcus species, a slight sulfur note should
be detected. Excessive sulfur or eggy flavor is considered a fault when not in
Fig. 19.14 Schematic view of flavor-generating reactions in washed-rind cheeses (Not exhaustive)
balance with other flavors. The complex metabolism and resulting array of flavors
make evaluation of these cheeses difficult for untrained judges.
Soft washed-rind cheeses are evaluated by cutting the cheese in half and then if
doable, by removing a slice. Some cheese may be so fluid that a spoon may be used
to dip into the cheese. It is the choice of the evaluator whether to eat the rind and
many evaluators do so. If the rind is not eaten, the evaluator must take cheese from
as near the surface as possible. If the rind is tasted, the most common defects in the
rind are excessive salt, bitterness, and ammonia “burn”. If the paste is bitter but the
rind is not, it is indicative of the coagulant and starter culture used. The cheese may
still have a white center. This portion is expected to be acidic and will lack salt.
These are not faults in this portion. It simply indicates that the cheese has not yet
reached full maturity. In some cases, this is desirable but in others, it may be a fault.
In contests, some evaluators will find fault if the cheese contains a white center,
while others will not fault the cheese either for the white center or the associated
acid flavor and lack of salt. However, if the center is bitter or has other off-flavors
they should be considered as faults.
19.5.4.2 Evaluation of Flavor in Semi-Hard and Firm

Washed-Rind Cheese
Flavor is evaluated by plugging the cheese or cutting a wedge from the cheese. The
microbial mat (exterior rind) is not usually tasted, but the layer of cheese directly
beneath it should be. Evaluate flavor from middle of the cheese separately from the
exterior portion. The flavor of a properly aged semi-firm/firm washed-rind cheese
should have consistent flavor throughout the cheese albeit progressively less in the
interior. The outer portion of the cheese will be stronger than the middle due to the
nature of the ripening process and faster migration of flavors produced at the sur-
face, along with penetration of salt/brine. The flavor components diffuse through the
cheese with time, however, the microorganisms do not. Expected flavor of hard
washed-rind cheeses can include earthy, salty, sulfury, sweet, umami/brothy, and
others (see Table 19.5). The flavor is contributed both by the surface microorgan-
isms and, in large part, to either native microflora or added flavor adjuncts. A very
common adjunct is Lactobacillus helveticus and results in a sweet, fruity note remi-
niscent of cooked pineapple or butterscotch. Excessive aging in these cheeses may
result in harsh cooked notes, which are not desired. Unclean off-flavors are often
described as chemical (phenolic, band-aid), cowy, barney, or catty. Given the dis-
tinctive names, these imply that they are usually considered as faults in contests, but
there are some manufacturers who strive to achieve these notes due to customer
Table 19.5 An example of a washed-rind sensory lexicon developed for descriptive analysis,
which encompasses soft, semi-firm, and firm washed-rind cheeses
Term Definition
Basic tastes Sweet Basic taste sensation elicited by sugars
Salt Basic taste sensation elicited by salt
Acid Basic taste sensation elicited by acids
Bitter Basic taste sensation elicited by bitter compounds
Umami Basic taste sensation elicited by peptides &
nucleotides. Appetitive taste. Savoriness. Induces
salivation and furriness sensation on tongue, throat,
roof, and back of the mouth
Dairy flavors Cooked Aromas and flavors associated with heated milk.
Includes sulfurous, sweet, and browned notes
Cowy/Barny Aroma associated with barns and barn animals,
indicative of animal sweat and waste
Butter (diacetyl) Aromatics commonly associated with natural, fresh
butter
Milky (lactones) Aromatics and flavor commonly associated with milk
or fresh cream
Scorched Aroma associated with extreme heat treatment of milk
proteins
Caramelized Aroma associated with caramelization of sugars
Whey Aromatics associated with cheese whey
(continued)

Term Definition
Aged dairy Animal/wet dog Aromas and flavors associated with gelatin or wet dog
flavors Butyric (rancid) Aroma and flavors associated with butyric acid,
cheesy, baby-breath/vomit
Cucumber Aroma and flavors associated with cucumbers
Goaty Aromatics associated with C6–C10 fatty acids
Waxy/crayon Aromatics associated with medium-chain fatty acids
Soapy Aromatics associated with long-chain fatty acids,
saponification
Malty Sweet, slightly fermented/sour grain note associated
with freshly kilned malt
Oxidized Aroma associated with oxidized fat
Cardboard Aroma associated with wet cardboard
Feed Aromatics and flavor commonly associated with cow
feed, Alfalfa, hay
Fruity Aromatics associated with different fruits
Rosy/floral Aroma associated with flowers
Sulfur Aromatics associated with sulfurous compounds
Brothy Aromatics associated with boiled meat or vegetable
soup stock
Green Aroma associated with freshly cut green vegetables
Nutty Nut-like aromatic associated with different nuts
Metallic Aromas and flavors associated with metal, copper
pennies.
Methyl ketone (bleu) Aroma associated with blue-veined cheeses
Medicinal/phenolic Disinfectant-like
Moldy Damp, mildewy aromatic associated with mold growth
Musty Aromatics associated with closed air spaces, dry
Mushroom Aroma associated with raw mushrooms, damp humus
Sour (dairy) Aroma reminiscent of acid fermentation, associated
with organic acid notes not pertaining to lactic acid, a
dirty fermentation aroma. Not related to the taste acid
Earthy Aromatic characteristic of damp soil, wet foliage
Yeasty Aromatics associated with fermenting yeast
Catty Aroma associated with tom-cat urine
Soy/soy sauce Aromatics associated with soybeans or soy sauce
Fecal Aroma associated with complex protein decomposition
Chemical Prickle Chemical feeling factor of which the sensation of
feeling factors carbonation on the tongue is typical
Pungent Chemical feeling factor of a hot, burning sensation in
the mouth caused by chiles
Metallic Chemical feeling factor of metallic sensation in mouth
Burn Chemical feeling factor associated with high
concentrations of irritants to the mucous membranes of
the oral cavity
Bite Chemical burning sensation felt in the mouth caused
by spices
Astringent Harsh, drying, puckering sensation on the surfaces of
the mouth
Adapted from the Center for Dairy Research Internal Descriptive Lexicon
demand. They do have niche markets. Rancidity (butyric acid) is usually not a wel-
comed flavor and may be due to use of mastitic milk or poor handling of milk. It is
not a common defect in washed-rind cheeses and is atypical of the variety.
19.6 Conclusion
Washed-rind cheeses are perhaps the most diverse cheese family in terms of cheese
appearance, texture/body, and aroma/flavor. With moisture content varying up to
30% across this category of cheeses, sensory evaluation must be carried out with as
much contextual and background information as possible. It is important to remem-
ber that judging at a contest is distinct from evaluating a cheese during the quality
control process. Context is often lacking as to what the cheese is “supposed to be”
and the consumer expectations of that cheese. As with many areas of the food indus-
try, the overall consumer acceptance of a product may be distinct from the tradi-
tional criteria in which the product was initially developed and evaluated. In other
words, consumer tastes often evolve at a quicker pace than the standards and proto-
cols for sensory quality control. Each evaluation of washed-rind cheese should be
approached with an open mind and the judge must know the ultimate goal of the
sensory critique in question.
References
American Cheese Society. (2018). State of the U.S. Artisan/Specialty cheese industry: Report of
key findings. Accessed https://www.cheesesociety.org/events-education/state-of-the-industry/
on 13 Apr 2021.
Bachmann, H. P., Bobst, C., Butikofer, U., Casey, M. G., Dalla Torre, M., Frohlich-Wyder, M. T.,
& Furst, M. (2005). Occurrence and significance of Fusarium domesticum alias Anticollanti
on smear-ripened cheeses. LWT-Food Science and Technology, 38, 399–407. https://doi.
org/10.1016/l.lwt.2004.05.018
Benkerroum, N. (2016). Biogenic amines in dairy products: Origin, incidence, and control
means. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Technology, 15, 801–826. https://doi.
org/10.1011/1541-4337.12212
Berger, C., Khan, J. A., Molimard, P., Martin, M., & Spinnler, H. E. (1999). Production of sulfur
flavors by Geotricum candidum. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 65, 5510–5514.
https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.65.12.5510-5514.1999
Bockelmann, W. (1999). Secondary cheese cultures. In B. A. Law (Ed.), Technology of cheesemak-
ing (pp. 132–162). Sheffield Academic Press.
Bouma, A., Durham, C. A., & Meunier-Goddik, L. (2014). Start-up and operating costs for arti-
san cheese companies. Journal of Dairy Science, 97, 3964–3972. https://doi.org/10.3168/
jds.2013-7705
Brennan, N. M., Cogan, T. M., Loessner, M., & Scherer, S. (2004). Bacterial surface ripened-
cheeses. In P. F. Fox, P. L. H. McSweeney, T. M. Cogan, & T. P. Guinee (Eds.), Cheese:
Chemistry, physics, and microbiology (Major cheese groups) (Vol. 2, 3rd ed., pp. 199–225).
Elsevier Academic Press.
Button, J. E., & Dutton, R. J. (2012). Cheese microbes. Current Biology, 22, R587–R589. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.06.014
Cogan, T. M. (2014). Smear-ripened cheeses. In C. A. Batt & M. L. Tortorello (Eds.), Encyclopedia
of food microbiology (Vol. 1, 2nd ed., pp. 421–426). Elsevier Academic Press.
Cogan, T. M., Goerges, S., Gelsomino, R., Larpin, S., Hohenegger, M., Bora, N., Jamet, E., Cea,
M. R., Mounier, J., Vancanneyt, M., Guéguen, M., Desmasures, N., Swings, J., Goodfellow,
M., Ward, A. C., Sebastiani, H., Irlinger, F., Chamba, J.-F., Beduhn, R., & Scherer. (2014).
Biodiversity of the surface microbial consortia from Limburger, Reblochon, Livarot, Tilsit, and
Gubbeen cheeses. Microbiology Spectrum, 2, 219–250. https://doi.org/10.1128/microbiolspec.
CM-0010-2012
Durham, C. A., Bouma, A., & Meunier-Goddik, L. (2015). A decision-making tool to determine
economic feasibility and break-even prices for artisan cheese operations. Journal of Dairy
Science, 98, 8319–8332. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2014-9252
Fanning, S. (2020). Specialty cheeses playing key role in driving sales growth. Cheese market
news: Perspective: Dairy marketing. Quarne Publishing, LLC.
Galaup, P., Gautier, A., Piriou, Y., de Villeblanche, A., Valla, A., & Duffose, A. (2007). First pig-
ment fingerprint from the rind of French PDO red-smear ripened soft cheese Epoises, Mont
d’Or and Maroilles. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 8, 373–378. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2007.3.017
Giuffrida, D., Monnet, C., Laurent, F., Cacciola, F., Oteri, M., Le Piver, M., Caro, Y., Donato, P.,
Mondello, L., Roueyre, D., & Dufosse, L. (2020). Carotenoids from the ripening bacterium
Brevibacterium linens impart color to the rind of the French cheese, Fourme de Montbrison
(PDO). Natural Product Research, 34, 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786419.2019.162210
7
Gremmels, D. (2016). Washed-rind cheese. In C. W. Donnelly (Ed.), The Oxford com-
panion to cheese (pp. 756–758). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/
acref/9780199330881.001.0001
Irlinger, F., Layec, S., Hélinck, S., & Dugat-Bony, E. (2015). Cheese rind microbial communi-
ties: Diversity, composition and origin. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 362, 1–11. https://doi.
org/10.1093/femsle/fnu015
Jaeggi, J. (2019). Manufacture of semisoft cheese, soft surface ripened, and hard surface rip-
ened cheeses. Center for Dairy Research – Cheese Technology Shortcourse. University of
Wisconsin-Madison.
Jovillet, N., Bezenger, M.-C., Vayssier, Y., & Belin, J.-M. (1992). Production of volatile com-
pounds in liquid cultures by six strains of coryneform bacteria. Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology, 36, 790–794. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00172196
Kamelamela, N., Zalesne, M., Morimoto, J., Robbat, A., & Wolfe, B. E. (2018). Indigo- and-
indirubin-producing strains of Proteus and Psychrobacter are associated with purple rind
defect in a surface-ripened cheese. Food Microbiology, 76, 543–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fm.2018.07.011
Mounier, J., Coton, M., Irlinger, F., Landaud, S., & Bonnarme, P. (2017). Smear-ripened cheeses.
In P. F. Fox et al. (Eds.), Cheese : Chemistry, physics, and microbiology (Cheese diversity)
(Vol. 2, 4th ed.). Elsevier.
Packaged Facts. (2016). Cheese: Natural and specialty cheese in the U.S. and global markets
(6th ed.).
Polowsky, P. J., Kindstedt, P. S., & Hughes, J. M. (2018). Size, shape, and identity of surface
crystals and their relationship to sensory perception of grittiness in soft smear-ripened cheeses.
Journal of Dairy Science, 101, 10720–10732. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2018-15165
Quigley, L., O’Sullivan, O., Beresford, T. P., Ross, R. P., Fitzgerald, G., & Cotter, P. D. (2012).
High-throughput sequencing for detection of subpopulations of bacteria not previously associ-
ated with artisanal cheeses. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 78, 5717–5723. https://
doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00918-12
Roberts, J. P. (2012). The atlas of American artisan cheese. Chelsea Green Publishing Company.
Sakovitz-Dale, J. (2006). Vermont farmstead cheese marketing study.

Shoup, M.E. (2016). US specialty and natural cheese market booming, hits $17.4bn in 2015. Dairy
Reporter. Accessed https://www.dairyreporter.com/Article/2016/05/19/US-specialty-and-
natural-cheese-market-booming-hits-17.4bn-in-2015 on 5 Mar 2021.
Sourabie, A. M., Spinnler, H.-E., Bonnarme, P., Saint-Eve, A., & Landaud, S. (2008). Identification
of a powerful compound in Munster and Cambembert cheeses: Ethyl 3-Mercaptopropionate.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 56, 4674–4680. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf800307d
Sutthiwong, N., Caro, Y., Milhau, C., Valla, A., Fouillaud, M., & Duffose, L. (2014). Arthrobacter
arilaitensis strains isolated from ripened cheeses: Characterization of their pigmentation using
spectrocolorimetry. Food Research International, 65, 184–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodres.2014.06.014
Tansman, G. F., Kindstedt, P. S., & Hughes, J. M. (2017). Crystallization and demineralization
phenomena in washed-rind cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 100, 8694–8704. https://doi.
org/10.3168/jds.2017-13067
Thierry, A., Deutsch, S.-M., Falentin, H., Dalmasso, M., Cousin, F. J., & Jan, G. (2011). New
insights into psysiology and metabolism of Propionibacterium freudenreichii. International
Journal of Food Microbiology, 149, 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijffoodmicro.2011.04.026
Williams, A. G., & Withers, S. E. (2007). Tyrosine metabolism in pigment-forming Yarrowia lipo-
lytica strains isolated from English and European specialty mould-ripened cheese exhibiting a
brown discoloration defect. International Journal of Dairy Technology, 60, 165–174. https://
doi.org/10.1011/j.1471-0307.2007.0034.x
Wolfe, B. E., Button, J. E., Santarelli, M., & Dutton, R. J. (2014). Cheese rind communities pro-
vide tractable systems for in situ and in vitro studies of microbial diversity. Cell, 158, 422–433.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.041
Yeluri Jonnala, B. R., McSweeney, P. L. H., Cotter, P. D., Zhong, S., Sheehan, J. J., & Kopec,
R. E. (2021). Comparison of the carotenoid profiles of commonly consumed smear-ripened
cheeses. LWT-Food Science and Technology, 135, 110241. https://doi.org/10.1016/l.
lwt.2020.110241
Chapter 20
Modern Sensory Practices
Mary Anne Drake
20.1 Introduction
When dealing with dairy foods, sensory quality is always involved on some level.
The best raw materials and ingredients produce the best products; hence, sensory
quality is a crucial consideration for finished product ingredients such as fluid and
dried milk. The sensory perception of finished products such as ice cream and
cheese is also critical. In many instances, a general measurement of product quality
or consistency may be all that is required. For the majority of product and market
research endeavors, more detailed and complex information on sensory properties
is required. The application of sensory perception is one of the keys to the nearly
ubiquitous, wholesome, and flavorful image that dairy foods continue to enjoy with
consumers. Due to the pivotal role that sensory perception occupies in the market-
ing of dairy foods, some means of sensory measurement are often a final step in
product development.
Sensory science is a relatively young discipline, which has been in formal exis-
tence for roughly 60 years. Many food technologists attribute its birth as a science
in the 1940s with the development of “consumer” or hedonic food acceptance meth-
odologies by the US Army Corps of Engineers. However, its scientific roots trace
back to the 1800s with the development and application of psychological theories to
measure and predict human responses to external stimuli (Lawless & Heymann,
2010a). Certainly, the importance of sensory quality is ageless, with basic capital-
ism driving individuals to market and sell the best and freshest products. As with
other fields of science, sensory science has progressed with time and continues to
evolve. Specific scientific methods have been developed to accurately, reproducibly,
M. A. Drake (*)
Department of Food, Bioprocessing and Nutrition Sciences, Southeast Dairy Foods Research
Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6_20
622 M. A. Drake
and either objectively or subjectively measure or estimate human responses to stim-

uli. Sensometrics is a field of sensory science that is specifically devoted to develop-
ment of tests to accurately measure human responses.
Sensory science is widely applied across many categories of consumer goods,
ranging from personal care products to pharmaceutical products to foods. For all of
these product categories, sensory perception must be considered. The degree of
“like” and “dislike” is not the only question answered by sensory analysis. Trained
panelists can be used to generate data that are objective and analogous to instrumen-
tal data. Threshold tests can be used to estimate sensory thresholds and qualitative
tests can be used to determine consumer emotional responses to products. Consumer
perception, as well as the degree of like and dislike, can be addressed; the impact of
storage, ingredient substitution, packaging, and process variability can be quanti-
fied; and relationships can be established between instrumental tests and sensory
perception. Dozens of types of sensory tests exist and can be fine-tuned to meet a
specific objective. Too often in sensory studies, a sensory test may be an after-
thought to an experiment or alternatively, an inappropriate test is used or an appro-
priate test is selected but somehow misused. When these unfortunate sensory study
situations occur, pragmatic results and conclusions cannot be drawn, just as the
same situation would apply to any other scientific test inappropriately selected or
conducted. Prior knowledge of which tests are available and when and how to use
them will yield powerful results.
20.2 Types of Sensory Tests
The sensory analysis of dairy products can be categorized into three basic categories
or groups of tests (Fig. 20.1). The first group of tests is traditional tools, which are
comprised of USDA grading and ADSA scorecard judging. These are sensory tools
that were developed in the early 1900s by the dairy industry to ensure product qual-
ity and consistency and to encourage and train students (Bodyfelt et al., 1988). By
these techniques, a product is assigned an overall quality score or grade based on a
designated list of defects. These techniques are still used today to troubleshoot
product quality problems, to train students, and to ensure baseline quality of govern-
ment commodities. However, they suffer from several scientific shortcomings that
make them entirely unsuitable for use in product or market research. Many of the
designated defects are dated and not well defined, which makes identification and
scoring subjective at best, rather than specific and clearly defined. Quality down-
grades for defects are not consistent (different declared defects are assigned varied
point deductions) and furthermore, within a specific defect, the point deductions are
not consistent. These varying point deductions ultimately mean that score assign-
ment is not linear, which precludes the use of parametric statistics. Finally, the pro-
cess of quality perception is not associated with consumer acceptance or preference;
nor are quality-based results actually descriptive of the total sensory profile of the
product. These issues are reviewed in detail elsewhere (Singh et al., 2003; Delahunty
20 Modern Sensory Practices 623
Traditional Scientific
Scorecard judging Analytical Affective

tests (consumer)
Grading tests
Difference Quantitative
Threshold Preference
Descriptive analysis Hedonic
JAR
Conjoint
Qualitative
Interview
Focus group
Focus panel
Fig. 20.1 Groups of sensory tools available for dairy foods
& Drake, 2004; Bodyfelt et al., 2008). These tools are dated at best and flawed at
worst and should not be used in research endeavors for any reason. There are numer-
ous mainstream sensory tools (ranging from very simple to complex) based on the
psychological, physical, and physiological science of human responses to external
stimuli – sensory science that can readily be applied to meet any specific sensory
research objective in dairy foods. Mainstream sensory tools are comprised of two
basic groups of tests: analytical tests and affective or consumer tests (Fig. 20.1).
Within each of these categories are groups of sensory tools for specific objectives.
20.2.1 Difference Tests
The best-known analytical sensory test is the difference test. The sole objective of a
difference test is to determine if panelists can detect whether a difference exists
between two or more products. The most common types of difference tests are the
triangle and duo trio tests, although there are several others. More recently, the
tetrad test has emerged as a powerful non-directional difference test (Ennis et al.,
2014). The selection of which difference test to use is often determined by the
amount of sample, number of samples, testing conditions, and specific test objec-
tives. These tests are relatively easy to set up and administer and the results are
easily computed using a simple binomial calculation or published tables (Lawless &
Heymann, 2010a). The number of panelists required varies depending on the spe-
cific goal. Generally, 25–50 panelists are recommended. Other subcategories of dif-
ference tests, such as a degree of difference (DOD) test, can be used to quantify the
degree of difference among samples, but this more advanced test generally requires
624 M. A. Drake
fewer, more experienced, or trained panelists. In contrast, another type of test simi-
lar to but distinct from difference testing is similarity testing; this test is conducted
similarly to a difference test, but generally requires larger numbers of panelists
(>75) (Meilgaard et al., 2016).
Difference tests are generally quite simple, but there are numerous different
types and subcategories of these tests, and they can fulfill a wide variety of func-
tions. Difference tests are less often used in sensory research than acceptability or
descriptive tests, but they can suffice as a preliminary test to determine if more
advanced or detailed sensory tests are required. The impacts of process changes and
ingredient substitutions can all be determined by this simple test. Jiamyangyuen
et al. (2002) used paired comparison tests (a type of difference test) to confirm that
wooden ice cream sticks from different wood types resulted in different perceived
flavors in ice cream mixes. Yeh et al. (2017) used triangle tests to determine if the
addition of vitamin premixes to fluid milk impacted consumer perception. It is
important to keep in mind that the sole purpose of this test is to determine if a dif-
ference exists. The nature of the difference, the degree of difference, or consumer
preference cannot be determined using this test, nor can these questions be asked of
panelists when undertaking a difference test. If those questions need to be answered,
a different or an additional sensory test is required (Lawless & Heymann, 2010a;
Meilgaard et al., 2016).
20.2.2 Threshold Tests
Threshold tests are another category of analytical sensory tests with a specific func-
tion: to determine thresholds. A threshold is defined as the lowest concentration at
which a sensory response is detectable (Lawless & Heymann, 2010a; Meilgaard
et al., 2016). There are other types of thresholds, such as absolute threshold (previ-
ously defined), recognition threshold (lowest concentration at which a compound
can be recognized), difference threshold (concentration at which differences in
stimuli can be detected), terminal threshold (concentration above which there is no
perceived increase in sensory stimulus), orthonasal threshold (threshold of volatile
compound perceived orthonasally), and retronasal threshold (threshold of volatile
compound retronasally). The latter is determined by having subjects wear nose clips
when taking a mouthful of the sample, followed by removal of the nose clip once
the compound is in the mouth. Thresholds are often applied to undesirable and
desirable components in foods. For example, at what concentration is dimethyl tri-
sulfide (DMTS), an off-flavor in whey protein isolate [WPI] identified? Such a
question can be answered only by (1) quantification of DMTS in WPI to determine
the concentration(s) of this compound in the product, followed by (2) threshold test-
ing of DMTS in water and WPI to determine what concentrations are detected by
humans (Wright et al., 2006). Thresholds can thus provide a powerful tool in relat-
ing sensory perception to instrumental analysis of volatile and nonvolatile
compounds (Carunchia Whetstine et al., 2005; Robinson et al., 2004, 2005; Jo

et al., 2019).
A search through the literature for ascertaining a threshold of a compound can be
confusing. Indeed, ranges of more than 1000-fold are reported for many compounds
throughout the literature (Rychlik et al., 1998; van Gemart, 2003). Several issues
must be addressed to determine an accurate and reproducible threshold value.
Thresholds are impacted by several things, and perhaps the most significant element
is a proper and consistent testing procedure. This includes an appropriate threshold
test method, an appropriate number of panelists, and a consistent methodology. The
two most common threshold procedures are the ascending forced choice or 3-AFC
method (method of limits) and the R-index method (signal detection theory)
(ASTM, 1992; Lawless & Heymann, 2010b). These tests were developed from
some of the original and historical tenets of sensory and psychological science
(Fechner’s law, discussed in previous chapters). An appropriate number of panelists
is the key to a reliable threshold determination. Thresholds are by their very nature
estimates at best since the population varies widely in sensitivity to compounds, and
a given individual, when tested multiple times, will also be variable. The value
obtained from threshold testing is referred to as a best estimate threshold (BET) and
that is the reason why. The goal is to obtain a reasonable estimate of the threshold.
As such, a large number of individuals need to be tested in order to obtain a reliable
threshold. The minimum recommended number of individuals is frequently noted
as 75–100, although testing 30–40 individuals on multiple days can also approach a
sound BET. Thresholds obtained from fewer individuals should be considered sus-
pect. Finally, the testing procedure can also be a source of variability. Temperature
and headspace volume will both impact threshold. Panelist training and/or experi-
ence also has an impact – generally, training can increase threshold sensitivity by as
much as 1000-fold for an individual. It is also important to note that thresholds are
based on consistent identification of a signal in a series of coded samples. One must
ensure that the signal detected is caused by the compound tested. When conducting
thresholds on nonvolatile compounds (such as bitter or umami compounds), nose
clips are often worn by panelists to ensure that the signal detected is the nonvolatile
component and not some volatile flavor or aroma inherent to the source of the non-
volatile compound.
20.2.3 Descriptive Tests
The third general group of analytical sensory tests is descriptive analysis. Descriptive
analysis consists of training a group of individuals (generally 6–12) to identify and
quantify specific sensory attributes or all of the sensory attributes of a food. This
sensory tool, unlike the previous analytical tests that use untrained or instructed/
screened individuals, requires training of the panelists. The extent of the training is
dependent upon the complexity of the sensory attributes that are to be profiled.
Training may be as brief as a few hours if there are only a few attributes and the
626 M. A. Drake
attributes are distinct in the samples. On the other hand, a significant amount of time
and/or financial commitment is required if flavor profiling of 16 attributes (or more)
of Cheddar cheese is desired. The simplicity of descriptive analysis is that the panel
and its training can be adjusted to meet the specific project goals. The panel can be
trained on a few attributes or a large number of attributes. The panelists are trained
(sometimes for several hundred hours) to operate in unison as an instrument, and
each individual panelist serves a function analogous to an individual sensor on an
instrument. The panel replicates measurements analogous to replication of instru-
mental measurements and the data collected are analogous to instrumental data.
There are different approaches and training techniques for undertaking descriptive
sensory analysis, but the primary goal is the development of a powerful instrument
to document sensory properties. The various techniques and approaches for the con-
duct of descriptive analysis are reviewed elsewhere (Lawless & Heymann, 2010a;
Murray et al., 2001; Delahunty & Drake, 2004).
Relevant to the objective of this book, it is worthy to address and demonstrate
how trained panel results differ from dairy product judging. Figures 20.2, 20.3, 20.4
and 20.5 demonstrate this point with cheese and skim milk powder. The reader will
note that the products are actually quite distinct from each other in their sensory
properties, although their assigned grades are not different. Thus, using judging or
grading would not differentiate these products and potentially valuable information
would be overlooked. Grading and judging protocols were designed to provide
quality scores based on predetermined defects. These tests were not designed to
generate sensory profiles of products, which is the goal of descriptive analysis. The
trained descriptive sensory panel functions as a qualitative and quantitative instru-
ment used to document sensory properties of different foods. Figures 20.6, 20.7 and
20.8 demonstrate application of a trained panel with a defined sensory language to
document differences in whey protein flavor and cheese texture, respectively.
For comparison of relatively few samples or few attributes, a means table or
figure is advisable (Figs. 20.3, 20.4 and 20.5). However, when multiple samples
(>6) and/or multiple attributes are evaluated (>6), a multivariate analysis and pre-
sentation of the data may assist with simplification and clarification of differences
among products. These techniques are essentially data compression procedures and
can be extremely useful for characterization of how products differ relative to one
another across all attributes or parameters evaluated. Principal component analysis
Fig. 20.2 Grades of two

Cheese 1 A SI. Bitter
16-kg blocks of 3-month
Cheddar cheese. Grades SI. flat
were provided by a
licensed USDA grader
Cheese 2 A SI. Bitter
SI. flat
cooked
5
bitter whey
4
3
salty diacetyl
2
1
cheese 1
0 cheese 2
sour lactone
sweet brothy
nutty sulfur
Fig. 20.3 Descriptive sensory profiles provided by a trained descriptive panel for the two 16-kg
blocks of Cheddar cheese in Fig. 20.2
Fig. 20.4 Grades for two

skim milk powders (SMP) Powder 1 US Extra SI. Cooked
within 1 month of
production. Grades were
provided by a licensed
USDA grader
Powder 2 US Extra SI. Cooked
(PCA) is the most commonly applied multivariate approach in sensory analysis,

although there are several techniques available. By this method, linear combinations
of variables (principal components – PCs) that explain the most variability within
the sample set are generated. A biplot of the samples and how they are differentiated
on the principal components is then generated. The variables that comprise each PC
can be ascertained from the statistical program and by viewing an overlay of the
vectors on the biplot (Figs. 20.6, 20.6 and 20.8). For example, Figs. 20.6 and 20.7
address the PCA for the descriptive analysis of a set of whey proteins (WPC80 and
WPI). PC1 explained 42% of the variability among the samples and was character-
ized by opacity, color, sweet aromatic, cereal, cardboard, soapy, metallic, astrin-
gency, and viscosity (Russell et al., 2006). PC1 primarily differentiated WPC80
from WPI while PC2, 3, and 4 differentiated individual whey proteins from one
another. A quick glance at Fig. 20.6 tells us that WPC80 and WPI were differenti-
ated from each other as groups (exception – WPC7) and that the differences between
628 M. A. Drake
Fig. 20.5 Descriptive sensory profiles provided by a trained descriptive panel for the two SMP in
Fig. 20.4
Fig. 20.6 Principal component biplot of descriptive analysis of whey proteins (PC1 and PC2).
(Taken from Russell et al., 2006). PC principal component, percentage following PC in parenthesis
explains amount of variability depicted by each principal component on each axis, WPC whey
protein concentrate, WPI whey protein isolate, Swt aromatic sweet aromatic
these products explained the most variability in the data set (42%). The WPC80
samples were generally characterized by high viscosity, sweet aromatic, cardboard,
cereal, and metallic flavors and sour taste and astringency compared to WPI. As a
Fig. 20.7 Principal component biplot of descriptive analysis of whey proteins (PC3 and PC4).
(Taken from Russell et al., 2006). PC principal component, percentage following PC in parenthesis
explains amount of variability depicted by each principal component on each axis, WPC whey
protein concentrate, WPI whey protein isolate, Swt aromatic sweet aromatic
whole, the WPI are more distinct from each other than the WPC80. WPI 7 and 5 are
distinct from the other WPI while WPC7 is distinct from the other WPC80. Similarly,
Fig. 20.8 documents trained panel texture differences among 20 Gouda cheeses of
different ages (Yates & Drake, 2007). The reader is referred to Lawless and Heymann
(2010a) or Meilgaard et al. (2016) for a more detailed discussion of the statistical
theory of this technique and other alternative approaches.
A key aspect of a trained sensory panel is that the results are analogous to instru-
mental data. As such, the sensory instrument should be as precise and reproducible
as possible. Training with defined sensory languages and replication of panel mea-
surements are used to achieve this goal. One way of minimizing variability is
through focused panel training where panelists are presented with the sensory lan-
guage (or lexicon) and then discuss these attributes as they relate to the products that
will be evaluated. However, a crucial step for facilitating panel training and panel
performance and establishing any relationship to physical or instrumental measure-
ments is to have clearly defined terms for sensory attributes (Drake & Civille, 2003;
Lawless & Civille, 2013). Defined terms facilitate panel training and minimize vari-
ability, but they also set the parameters for understanding instrumental measure-
ment of the sensory attribute. For example: Is cheese firmness measured by
compression with fingers, bite force with incisors, the molars, or compression
630 M. A. Drake
Fig. 20.8 Principal component plot of descriptive texture attributes of Gouda cheeses. PC princi-
pal component. Numbers represent cheeses, mfirmness – firmness in the mouth, hfirmness – firm-
ness by hand, hrate recov – rate of recovery determined by hand, hspring – springiness determined
by hand, smoothness – smoothness of the chewed mass, cohesive – cohesiveness of the chewed
mass, brkdown – degree of breakdown
between the tongue and the hard palate? Is free fatty acid flavor defined as the aroma
or a flavor reminiscent of hexanoic acid, butyric acid, methyl octanoic acid, or any
free fatty acid? In the case of texture: What is the defined size and shape of the
sample? Cheese firmness might be measured by the fingers, tongue, incisors, or
molars depending on the type of cheese. Many cheese texture attributes, in addition
to firmness, can be evaluated by hand manipulation in a specific manner (Drake
et al., 1999; Sandra et al., 2004). Ideally, references (food or chemical examples) are
also provided in addition to attribute definitions to aid panelists in training and attri-
bute identification and scale usage. Delahunty and Drake (2004) reviewed sensory
lexicons for cheese flavor and texture. Tables 20.1 and 20.2 demonstrate published
lexicon examples for cheese texture and Cheddar cheese flavor with definitions and
references. Similar languages have been identified for dried dairy ingredients, choc-
olate milk, and butter (Drake et al., 2003; Thompson et al., 2004; Krause et al.,
2007). As previously addressed, the sensory language can be simple or complex
depending on the specific test objective(s). Furthermore, sensory languages can be
expanded and/or modified and clarified with time and usage. Figure 20.9 demon-
strates this issue with a graphical representation of the cheese flavor lexicon initially
developed by Drake et al. (2001). The first layer in the wheel represents the basic
language, which in most cases is all that is needed to document flavor differences in
Cheddar cheese. The second layer of the wheel represents the more advanced ver-
sion of the language with subdivisions of descriptors in the basic language.
Table 20.1 Descriptive sensory language for cheese texture

Hand evaluation
terms Definition References
Hand firmness Press fingers completely through the sample. Velveeta™ = 3
Evaluate the force required to completely compress Muenster = 7
the sample Sharp Cheddar
(Kraft) = 10
Parmesan = 15
Hand springiness Depress sample 30% between thumb and first two Parmesan = 1
fingers. Evaluate total amount of recovery of sample. Velveeta™ = 4
(if sample fractures as it is depressed, it is not Sharp Cheddar
springy) (Kraft) = 7
Muenster = 13
Hand rate of Depress sample 30% between thumb and first two Feta = 1
recovery fingers. Evaluate rate of recovery (how long it takes Velveeta™ = 3
to recover to the original shape) Sharp Cheddar
(Kraft) = 6
Muenster = 9
Mouth evaluation Using molars, take one complete bite through the
terms – First bite sample
Firmness The amount of force required to completely bite Velveeta™ = 2
through the sample Muenster = 6
Sharp Cheddar
(Kraft) = 9
Parmesan = 14
Fracturability The amount of fracturability in sample after biting Velveeta™ = 1
Sharp Cheddar
(Kraft) = 5
Feta = 14
Mouth evaluation Chew the sample 5 times and evaluate the chewed
terms – Chew mass
down
Degree of Evaluate how much the sample has broken down Parmesan = 1
breakdown during mastication Muenster = 9
Sharp Cheddar
(Kraft) = 11
Velveeta™ = 14
Cohesiveness The degree to which the chewed mass sticks together Parmesan = 1
in the mouth Feta = 3
Muenster = 7
Sharp Cheddar
(Kraft) = 11
Velveeta™ = 14
Adhesiveness The degree to which the chewed sample sticks to the Parmesan = 1
surfaces of the mouth and teeth Muenster = 7
Sharp Cheddar
(Kraft) = 10
Feta = 12
Velveeta™ = 14
(continued)
632 M. A. Drake

Hand evaluation
terms Definition References
Smoothness of mass Evaluate the smoothness of the chewed mass Parmesan = 1
Feta = 3
Muenster = 8
Sharp Cheddar
(Kraft) = 10
Velveeta™ = 14
Mouth Expectorate the sample: Evaluate the residue in the
evaluation – mouth
Residual
Smoothness of Evaluate the degree of smoothness felt in the mouth Parmesan = 1
mouth coating Feta = 5
Muenster = 10
Sharp Cheddar
(Kraft) = 11
Velveeta™ = 14
Source: Brown et al. (2003)
Clear definitions and references for attributes also facilitate comparison with
other studies and instrumental analyses and provide a platform that can be further
expanded and applied. The sensory instrument then becomes applicable to a wide
array of applications. Drake et al. (2001) developed a sensory language for cheese
flavor. The language was developed specifically for Cheddar cheese but once the
base language was identified, it was subsequently applied to other cheeses including
Swiss, Mozzarella, Parmesan, and Gouda with minor modifications (Liggett et al.,
2008; Jo et al., 2018 Table 20.3). Drake et al. (2002) demonstrated that the defined
language could be used by panels at multiple locations to provide identical results
for the same samples. This same defined language has also been used for compari-
son and calibration with other descriptive panels (Drake et al., 2005) and interpreta-
tion of instrumental volatile analysis (Suriyaphan et al., 2001; Avsar et al., 2004;
Carunchia Whetstine et al., 2005; Carunchia Whetstine et al., 2006a, b; Carunchia
Whetstine and Drake, 2007; Drake et al., 2010; Jo et al., 2018). In the latter cases,
the trained descriptive panel played a critical role in elucidating flavor chemistry.
Many volatile component peaks generated on a detector are neutral or not aroma-
active and do not play crucial roles in flavor because either the compound has no
odor or its concentration is below human sensory detection (Drake et al., 2006). For
this reason, coordinating instrumental analysis results with sensory analysis by
using a trained sensory panel is an absolute requirement in flavor chemistry to
appropriately interpret instrumental results (Drake, 2004; Drake et al., 2006;
Cadwallader, 2007). Without accompanying sensory analysis, there is no relation to
flavor and thus, instrumental volatile analysis is simply a list of volatile organic
compounds present in the sample. Similar work with sensory analysis can be used
to interpret instrumental measurements of physical properties and determine exactly
how they relate to sensory perception of texture (Foegeding & Drake, 2007).
Another important application of descriptive analysis, other than enhanced prod-
uct understanding and identification of relationships to instrumental analyses, is to
Table 20.2 Basic Cheddar cheese flavor language

Descriptor Definition Reference
Cooked/ Aromatics associated with cooked Pasteurized skim milk heated to 85 °C for
milky milk 30 min
Whey Aromatics associated with Cheddar Fresh Cheddar whey
cheese whey
Diacetyl Aromatic associated with diacetyl Diacetyl, 20 ppm
/lactone Aromatics associated with Fresh coconut meat, heavy cream,
δ-dodecalactone, 40 ppm
Fruity Aromatics associated with different Fresh pineapple, ethyl hexanoate, 40 ppm
fruits
Sulfur Aromatics associated with sulfurous Boiled egg, H2S bubbled through water,
compounds freshly struck match
Free fatty Aromatics associated with short-chain Butyric acid, 20 parts per thousand
acid fatty acids
Brothy Aromatics associated with boiled meat Canned potatoes, Wyler’s low soup stock,
or vegetable sodium beef broth cubes, methional, 20
ppm, 2-methyl-3-furanthiol
Nutty The sweet roasted aromatic associated Lightly toasted unsalted nuts, wheat
with various germ, nuts, and unsalted roasted peanut oil, 2/3-methyl butanal,
wheat thins 500 ppm
Catty Aroma associated with tom-cat urine 2-Mercapto-2-methyl-pentan-4-one, 20
ppm
Cowy/ Aroma associated with barns and Mixture of isovaleric acid and p-cresol,
barny animal sheds, reminiscent of ruminant 100 ppm
sweat and urine
Mothball/ Aroma associated with mothballs or Mothballs, indole or skatole, 50 ppm
feed protein catabolism, sometimes
reminiscent of silage or grass compost
Sour Fundamental taste sensation elicited Citric acid (0.08 g/100 mL in water)
by acids
Salty Fundamental taste sensation elicited Sodium chloride (0.5 g/100 mL in water)
by salts
Sweet Fundamental taste sensation elicited Sucrose (5 g/100 mL in water)
by sugars
Bitter Fundamental taste sensation elicited Caffeine (0.08 g/100 mL in water)
by caffeine or quinine
Umami Chemical feeling factor elicited by MSG (1 g/100 mL in water)
certain peptides and nucleotides
Source: Drake et al. (2001)
gain an understanding of the consumer. Consumer or affective tests are addressed

later in this chapter, but generally these tests tell us what consumers “like.” In many
cases, why consumers like or prefer a product is not clear unless descriptive analysis
is applied to the same set of products. By descriptive analysis, we know the specific
sensory or texture profiles of the product; however, with consumer tests, we know
which product(s) consumers like or prefer. For a small number of products or treat-
ments, we can closely examine the sensory profiles of well-liked products and can
634 M. A. Drake
Fig. 20.9 Graphical representation of the basic and advanced levels of the Cheddar cheese flavor
lexicon (Table 20.2)
infer “why they are liked.” Often, the goal is larger than simply understanding why
a specific product is preferred over a few others. Instead, the identification of the
drivers of consumer liking is desired. For this specific goal, a wide range of a par-
ticular product is profiled by a trained sensory panel. Selected products are then
presented to consumers to obtain liking information. The two sets of data are com-
bined in a multivariate statistical technique generally called preference mapping. A
minimum of eight products with variable trained panel profiles is generally recom-
mended in order to obtain a robust statistical model. For example, if all products are
liked, it would not be possible to identify drivers of liking. This approach has been
applied to identify specific consumer likes and dislikes with many dairy products
(Jack et al., 1993; Hough & Sanchez, 1998; Krause et al., 2007; Thompson et al.,
2004; Young et al., 2004; Lawlor & Delahunty, 2000; Xiong et al., 2002; Murray &
Delahunty, 2000a, b; Richardson-Harmon et al., 2000; Drake et al., 2009; Shepherd
et al., 2013; Desai et al., 2013; Jo et al., 2018). The power of these studies is that
specific consumer groups with specific likes and dislikes are identified. Figures 20.10
and 20.11 demonstrate the application of this technique to Cheddar cheese and but-
ter, respectively.
Table 20.3 Swiss cheese descriptive analysis lexicon adapted and modified from the Cheddar
cheese lexicon
Descriptor Definition Reference
Cooked/ Aromatics associated with cooked milk Skim milk heated to 85 °C for 30 min
milky
Whey Aromatics associated with Cheddar Fresh Cheddar whey
cheese whey
Diacetyl Aromatic associated with diacetyl Diacetyl
Milkfat Aromatics associated with milkfat Fresh coconut meat, heavy cream,
δ-dodecalactone
Vinegar Aromatics associated with vinegar Distilled white vinegar, acetic acid
Dried fruit Aromatics associated with dried fruits, Dried apricot half
specifically peaches and apricots
Fruity Aromatics associated with different Fresh pineapple, ethyl hexanoate
fruits
Sulfur/eggy Aromatics associated with cooked eggs Hard-boiled egg, mashed
Sulfur/ Aromatics associated with cooked Boiled cabbage, dimethyl trisulfide
cabbage cabbage
Cheesy/ Aromatics associated with butyric acid Butyric acid
butyric acid
Brothy Aromatics associated with boiled meat Canned potatoes, Wyler’s low sodium
or vegetable stock beef broth cubes, methional
Nutty The nut-like aromatic associated with Lightly toasted unsalted nuts,
different nuts unsalted cashew nuts, unsalted wheat
thins
Sweaty Aromatic associated with human sweat Hexanoic acid
Cowy/ Aromas associated with barns and stock Band-aids, p-cresol, phenol
phenolic trailers, indicative of animal sweat and
waste
Sour Fundamental taste sensation elicited by Citric acid (0.08% in water)
acids
Bitter Fundamental taste sensation elicited by Caffeine (0.08% in water)
various compounds
Salty Fundamental taste sensation elicited by Sodium chloride (0.5% in water)
salts
Sweet Fundamental taste sensation elicited by Sucrose (5% in water)
sugars
Umami Chemical feeling factor elicited by MSG (1% in water)
certain peptides and nucleotides
Prickle Chemical feeling factor of which the Soda water
sensation of carbonation on the tongue is
typical
Metallic Chemical feeling factor elicited by Aluminum foil
metallic objects in the mouth
Source: Drake et al. (2001) and Liggett et al. (2008)
636 M. A. Drake
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
SEG 1 SEG 2 SEG 3 SEG 4 SEG 5 SEG 6
Chs 1 Chs 2 Chs 3 Chs 4 Chs 5 Chs 6 Chs 7
Fig. 20.10 External preference map of combined consumer data (n = 240) with descriptive analy-
sis results for 7 different Cheddar cheeses. Six consumer segments with distinct liking profiles for
7 selected Cheddar cheeses were identified. (Taken from Young et al., 2004)
9
P21 P28 P27 P29 P16 P25 P24 P23
8
6
Linking (9-point)
0
All Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5
Fig. 20.11 Overall acceptability scores for 6 butters (P16, P21, P23, P24, P25, P27) and 2 spreads
(P28, P29) within different identified consumer segments. Liking profiles for the 8 products are
distinct for each consumer segment. (Taken from Krause et al., 2007)
20.2.4 Affective or Consumer Tests
20.2.4.1 Quantitative Consumer Tests
The third group of sensory tests is affective or consumer tests. Similar to analytical
sensory tests, there is a large array of specific and sensitive tests in this category. To
the beginner, this group of tests seems to just measure preference and liking. In
contrast, this group of tests is like a glassy lake that looks shallow and smooth but
is in fact deep and quite complex. Qualitative and quantitative tests are available.
Consumer tests involve testing with consumers. This issue may seem obvious, but
the primary objective of these tests specifies that trained panelists should not be
used. Once individuals are trained to identify and quantify attributes of a product(s),
they cease to be typical consumers. Further, when quantitative consumer tests are
conducted, their objective is to determine or infer consumer likes and dislikes.
Consumers are highly variable and constantly changing due to age, advertising, new
experiences, new products, etc. For this reason, large and successful companies
have large sensory and/or market research departments that conduct these tests reg-
ularly and with large numbers of representative consumers. Demographic informa-
tion (age, gender, product usage rate) is generally collected from consumers to
determine if these variables influence product liking. Additional information
(income, ethnicity, product perceptions/attitudes) can also be probed in the screener
if desired (Fig. 20.17). For this reason, these screeners are sometimes called usage
and attitude screeners (or U & A information). Even for small research projects or
objectives, a minimum of 50 consumers is recommended in order to make any
conclusion(s) about product liking or preference – and these should be product con-
sumers, not trained panelists (IFT/SED, 1981; Resurreccion, 1998; Meilgaard et al.,
2016; Hough et al., 2006). In-house employees are also suspect since they are gen-
erally familiar with the company’s product(s) and tend to be biased. Certainly, they
can be and are used for “first pass” or preliminary assessment of product quality, but
they should not be used for decisions that impact new or improved products. The
reader is referred to several textbooks that address these issues in detail (Lawless &
Heymann, 2010a; Meilgaard et al., 2016; Resurreccion, 1998).
Quantitative tests are the best-known group of tools, with preference and accep-
tance testing the most used subset within this classification (Lawless & Heymann,
2010a; Meilgaard et al., 2016). Preference and acceptance testing are often used
interchangeably, but they are two distinct test methods. In preference testing, con-
sumers are presented with two or more samples and asked to indicate which sample
they prefer. If more than two samples are presented, consumers can also rank their
preferences (preference ranking). The test is generally a forced choice – that is a
preference must be indicated. A preference test is easy to conduct and the question
is readily understood by consumers of all ages, even those with minimal under-
standing of English. Nonparametric statistical analysis can be applied to determine
differences. However, a primary drawback is that the degree of liking is not deter-
mined. Consumers can dislike products and still have a preference for one when
638 M. A. Drake
forced to choose. Further, other consumer questions, besides overall liking, can be
asked with acceptance testing, and preference can be inferred from acceptance test-
ing. In short, with acceptance testing, more information along with preference can
be obtained.
Acceptance testing is also called “degree of liking.” Consumers are presented
with products and asked to indicate their degree of liking on a scale. The most com-
monly used scale is the 9-point hedonic scale (Fig. 20.12). This scale is bipolar – the
anchors are dislike and like – and has been widely used since its invention in the
1940s (Schutz & Cardello, 2001). In this sense, it has certainly stood the test of
time. The scale can be presented numerically or verbally, horizontally or vertically
(Schutz & Cardello, 2001) and is used to effectively indicate differences in con-
sumer liking of products. Other adaptations of this scale include a 7-point scale and
a smiley face scale that can be used with children or those that do not speak/read
English (Fig. 20.13). Research has suggested that issues of central tendency and
unequal scale intervals are shortcomings of this scale and other scales such as
labeled affective magnitude scales (LAM) have been proposed as more sensitive
alternatives (Schutz & Cardello, 2001; Greene et al., 2006) (Fig. 20.14). More
recent research has suggested that liking and disliking are actually completely dif-
ferent thought processes and should not be scaled on the same continuum (Herr &
Pages, 2004). Instead, degree of liking and/or degree of disliking should be scaled
on distinct unipolar intensity scales (Fig. 20.15). The 9-point hedonic scale will
certainly continue to be a mainstream quantitative consumer research tool. Indeed,
while studies have suggested that the LAM scale or nonpolar like and dislike scales
may be more sensitive in certain situations, in a vast majority of studies the 9-point
hedonic scale has proven to be a robust and perhaps more conservative estimate of
consumer liking. As with any sensory test, it is important to remember that specific
situations may call for a more specialized scale than the traditional 9-point hedonic
OVERALL LIKING
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Dislike Neither like Like
Extremely nor dislike Extremely
OVERALL LIKING
Like extremely
Like very much
Like moderately
Like slightly
Neither like nor dislike
Dislike slightly
Dislike moderately
Dislike very much
Dislike extremely
Fig. 20.12 Numerical and verbal representations of the 9-point hedonic scale
OVERALL LIKING
Dislike nor dislike Neither like Like

Extremely Extremely
Fig. 20.13 Seven-point smiley face scale used with children or with individuals that do not speak
or read English. Faces are converted to numerical values (1–7) for data analysis
STRONGEST IMAGINABLE GREATEST IMAGINABLE LIKE
LIKE EXTREMELY
LIKE VERY MUCH
LIKE MODERATELY
LIKE SLIGHTLY
VERY STRONG
NEITHER LIKE NOR DISLIKE
DISLIKE SLIGHTLY
STRONG DISLIKE MODERATELY
DISLIKE VERY MUCH

MODERATE
DISLIKE EXTREMELY
WEAK
BARELY DETECTABLE GREATEST IMAGINABLE DISLIKE
Fig. 20.14 Labeled affective magnitude (LAM) scales for measuring intensity and liking
scale. Such situations would potentially include testing with children, non-English
speaking populations, or different (non-US) cultures. For most situations, or the
standard research project where the goal is simply to determine if differences exist
between products in consumer acceptance, the 9-point hedonic scale is the scale
of choice.
The just-about-right or JAR scale is another often-used scale that is a subcate-
gory of acceptance testing (Fig. 20.16) (Lawless & Heymann, 2010a). This test is
often used in product development or optimization studies since the experimenter
640 M. A. Drake
Overall Liking
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
No Like
Opinion Extremely
Overall Dislike
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
No Dislike
Opinion Extremely
Fig. 20.15 Unipolar scales for scoring liking and disliking separately
JAR scale for sweetness
Much too Somewhat Just right Somewhat Much too

little too little too much much
Use of category scales to infer if sweet taste is optimal
Sweetness Intensity
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Low Moderate High
Sweetness Liking
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Dislike Neither like Like Extremely
Extremely nor dislike
Fig. 20.16 An example of a just-about-right (JAR) scale for sweetness intensity followed by an
example of obtaining similar information using category scales
can probe if a specific product attribute (such as sweetness or chocolate flavor) is

“just about right.” There are a limited number of categories and only nonparametric
statistical analysis is appropriate. Nine-point category scales can also be used to
obtain the same information, and parametric statistics (ANOVA) can be applied
(Fig. 20.16). By this approach, the attribute liking is probed, followed by the per-
ceived intensity of the attribute. Whether or not the attribute intensity is “right” or
“liked” can then be inferred.
Maximum difference scaling and Conjoint analysis are another group of quanti-
tative approaches that can be applied to consumer tests, usually surveys, and that
can be used to probe consumer perceptions. Unlike preference and acceptance tests
that generally deal with actual products that are tasted/evaluated by the consumer,
neither maximum difference scaling or conjoint analysis require actual products.
The premise of maximum difference (Maxdiff) scaling is that consumers are not
Fig. 20.17 An example of a demographic screener used with consumer acceptance testing of
drinkable yogurts
inherently good at ranking a list, but they can easily determine the “best” and
“worst” option from a list. As such, MaxDiff can be applied to assess key intrinsic
or extrinsic product properties. Maximum difference scaling has been applied to
identify key consumer attributes for fluid milk, cheese shreds, and protein products
(Harwood & Drake, 2018; Speight et al., 2019; Harwood & Drake, 2019). Schiano
et al. (2020) utilized Maxdiff scaling to identify key aspects of food sustainability.
642 M. A. Drake
Conjoint or trade-off analysis is a technique that takes into account the fact that
consumers make choices or trade-offs between independent (yet conjoined) attri-
butes in a product when making a purchase decision (Orme, 2006). Consumers are
presented with a list of product attributes and are then asked to go through a series
of trade-offs. Quantitative data are generated, which can be subjected to traditional
statistical analyses. The end-product is the determination of which product
attribute(s) are most important to the consumer – without having to manufacture
prototypes. For example, Jones et al. (2008) used conjoint analysis to determine
which aspects of meal replacement bars were most crucial to consumer selection
and purchase. Similarly, Childs et al. (2008) used this approach to probe consumer
perception of whey and soy proteins in meal replacement products. Kim et al.
(2013) identified desirable package claims for chocolate milk and Oltman et al.
(2015) identified key consumer attributes for protein beverages.
20.2.4.2 Qualitative Consumer Tests
The final group of consumer research tools are qualitative instruments. Using these
tools, insights into consumer perceptions, needs, and desires can be probed for
product development, advertising, and development of quantitative screeners and
questionnaires. The primary tests in this group are the focus group and the inter-
view. Focus groups are a qualitative research tool where an experienced moderator
leads a group of 8–12 participants through a guided discussion. The conversation
typically lasts for 1.5–2 h. The session is tape-recorded or video-taped or external
individuals may observe the session and record common themes. A focus panel is
similar except that the participants know each other and participate in these group
sessions regularly. The potential advantage of the focus panel over a focus group is
that you have a group of consumers that are familiar with each other as well as the
focus group process and potentially more ground can be covered and more group
interaction achieved.
Subjective information about product attributes, preferences, and motivations
can be gained in this manner (Lawless & Heymann, 2010a; Meilgaard et al., 2016;
Kreuger & Casey, 2000), and this tool is widely used in market research. Focus
groups have been used in various food studies examining a number of issues includ-
ing food preference, safety, and usage (Cotunga & Vickery, 2004; Sherlock &
Labuzza, 1992; McNeill et al., 2000; Kosa et al., 2004; Boon et al., 2005; Keim
et al., 1999; Jo et al., 2018; Speight et al., 2019; Rizzo et al., 2020). Optimally, a
focus group is conducted in triplicate with a target sampling of consumers. Common
themes and consensus opinions should be consistent among the three groups (simi-
lar to replications) in order for the results to be considered sound or valid (Kreuger
& Casey, 2000). The interview tool is conducted similarly except that it is generally
a one-on-one exercise. Although more time-consuming, more personal or detailed
information may be obtained in this manner. Because these tools are qualitative in
nature and generally low numbers of consumers are polled, results must be inter-
preted with caution. Ideally, a quantitative test would be conducted as a follow-up
to confirm or expand findings.
20.3 Common Misuses and Abuses of Sensory Tools
Sensory analysis is often written-off by individuals and companies as a subjective

or hit-or-miss tool due to unsatisfactory results. Generally, the source of said dis-
satisfaction is ignorance of the array of sensory analysis tools, which results in
selection of the wrong tool/test or misuse of the right tool. The following represent
some common mistakes and misuses of sensory analysis:
1. Trained panel results not replicated – The trained sensory panel is an analytical
instrument. As with any instrument, results are replicated to ensure reproduc-
ibility. This means that each panelist must evaluate each sample a minimum of
twice. In some cases, more replications are conducted by each panelist. More
replications are generally conducted when there are very small differences
between samples, when the panel is not highly trained, or when the nature of the
modality or parameter measured is variable or fatiguing.
2. The sensory language used is not defined or referenced. A well-defined sensory
language is crucial not only to have a sensitive and reproducible panel but also
for interpretation and/or replication of the results or for establishing relation-
ships with consumer liking or instrumental measurements. A given word can
mean different things to different people. It is crucial to define lexicon terms
(Drake & Civille, 2003; Foegeding & Drake, 2007).
3. Dairy judges are used in place of analytical or affective sensory testing. Dairy
judging was designed historically to provide a rapid measurement of general
quality based on predetermined (and common at the time) defects. It was not
designed to be an analytical research tool. The defects and their intensities are
not well defined, and thus quite variable and difficult to reproduce. Point deduc-
tions from quality are not equivalent for different defects and parametric statis-
tics are not possible. Defects are not necessarily objectionable to the consumer
and the quality score generated does not necessarily have any relevance to con-
sumer acceptance. Only predetermined defects are scored, not the entire flavor
or texture profile of the product, as would be the case with descriptive analysis.
The net result is that little relevant information to a research or marketing project
or objective is obtained. The solution is to select a modern sensory test appropri-
ate for the research or marketing objective.
4. A trained panel is used to measure liking, acceptance, or preference. Once panel-
ists are trained to identify and quantify attributes in products (or grades and
defects such as with product judging), they are no longer typical consumers. As
such, what they like or prefer generally is no longer relevant or comparable to
those of the average consumer. A further issue addressed below is that a minimum
of 50 consumers is needed to determine preference or acceptance of a product
with any degree of certainty.
5. Low numbers of individuals are used for consumer testing. When preference or
acceptance (liking) tests are conducted, the objective is to determine or infer
consumer liking or preference. Consumers, by their very nature, are highly vari-
able based on product usage, geographical location, ethnicity, nationality, etc. As
644 M. A. Drake
such, a large number of measurements are necessary to have any degree of con-
fidence in the results. Testing with 100–500 consumers at multiple locations is
conducted by large companies seeking to make sound market decisions.
Obviously, research studies do not always have the luxury, due to finances or
simply available samples, of testing large numbers of consumers. However, it is
widely agreed that a minimum of 50 consumers of the product, and in recent
years, a minimum of 75–100 consumers of the product, should be polled to make
sound conclusions regarding liking or preference (Lawless & Heymann, 2010a).
6. “Industry does it, so it must be okay.” This statement is widely used as a fail-safe
excuse for any manner of mistakes. This is an invalid issue for several reasons
from the old jump-off-the-bridge adage to the issue that not all companies con-
duct sound product development and research, much less sound sensory analy-
sis. The largest and most successful food (and nonfood) companies have large
sensory and market research divisions and/or make use of any of a large number
of sensory consulting firms. Clearly, much attention is given to appropriate
selection of sensory tools/tests and appropriate use of the selected tools.
20.4 Conclusion
Sensory quality is the ultimate measure of product quality and success. Modern
sensory analysis comprises a wide variety of powerful and sensitive tools to mea-
sure human responses to foods. Selection of the appropriate test, appropriate test
conditions, and data analysis results in reproducible, powerful, and relevant results.
Knowledge of product variability, stability, comparison to competitor product(s),
relationships to instrumental analyses, and consumer understanding are all require-
ments for a successful food product or beverage. Application of appropriate sensory
analysis is the only set of techniques that can provide the answers to all of these
questions.
References
ASTM. (1992). Standard practice for determination of odor and taste thresholds by a forced-choice
method of limits. E-679-91. In Annual book of standards. 15.07 (pp. 35–39). American Society
for Testing and Materials.
Avsar, Y. K., Karagul-Yuceer, Y., Drake, M. A., Singh, T. K., Yoon, Y., & Cadwallader,
K. R. (2004). Characterization of nutty flavor in Cheddar cheese. Journal of Dairy Science,
87, 1999–2010.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Tobias, J., & Trout, G. M. (1988). The sensory evaluation of dairy products
(p. 569). Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Bodyfelt, F. W., Drake, M. A., & Rankin, S. A. (2008). Developments in dairy foods sensory sci-
ence and education – From student contests to impact on product quality. International Dairy
Journal, 18, 729–734.
Boon, K., Penner, K., Gordon, J. C., Remig, V., Harvery, L., & Clark, T. (2005). Common themes
of safe food-handling behavior among mature adults. Food Protection Trends, 25, 706–711.
Brown, J. A., Foegeding, E. A., Daubert, C. R., & Drake, M. A. (2003). Changes in rheological
and sensorial properties of young cheeses as related to maturation. Journal of Dairy Science,
86, 3054–3067.
Cadwallader, K. R. (2007). Measuring cheese flavor. Chapter 18. In B. C. Weimer (Ed.), Improving
the flavor of cheese (pp. 401–412). CRC Press.
Carunchia Whetstine, M. E., & Drake, M. A. (2007). The flavor and flavor stability of skim and
whole milk powders. Chapter 13. In K. R. Cadwallader, M. A. Drake, & R. McGorrin (Eds.),
Flavor chemistry of dairy products (pp. 217–252). ACS Publishing.
Carunchia Whetstine, M. E., Cadwallader, K. R., & Drake, M. A. (2005). Characterization of aroma
compounds responsible for the rosy/floral flavor in cheddar cheese. Journal of Agricultural and
Food Chemistry, 53, 3126–3132.
Carunchia Whetstine, M. E., Drake, M. A., Nelson, B. K., & Barbano, D. (2006a). Flavor profiles
of full fat, reduced fat and cheese fat made from aged Cheddar with the fat removed using a
novel process. Journal of Dairy Science, 89, 505–517.
Carunchia Whetstine, M. E., Drake, M. A., Broadbent, J. B., & McMahon, D. J. (2006b). Enhanced
nutty flavor formation in Cheddar cheese made with a “malty” Lactococcus lactis adjunct cul-
ture. Journal of Dairy Science, 89, 3277–3284.
Childs, J. L., Thompson, J. L., Lillard, S. L., Berry, T. K., & Drake, M. A. (2008). Consumer
perception of whey and soy protein in meal replacement products. Journal of Sensory Studies,
23, 330–339.
Cotunga, N., & Vickery, C. E. (2004). Children rate the summer food service program. Family
Economics and Nutrition, 16, 3–12.
Delahunty, C. M., & Drake, M. A. (2004). Chapter 19: Sensory character of cheese and its evalua-
tion. In P. F. Fox, P. L. H. McSweeney, T. M. Cogan, & T. P. Guinee (Eds.), Cheese; Chemistry,
physics and microbiology, volume 1 General aspects, 3rd edition (pp. 455–487). Elsevier.
Desai, N., Shepherd, L., & Drake, M. A. (2013). Sensory properties and drivers of liking for Greek
yogurts. Journal of Dairy Science, 96, 7454–7466.
Drake, M. A. (2004). Defining dairy flavors. Journal of Dairy Science, 87, 777–784.
Drake, M. A., & Civille, G. V. (2003). Flavor Lexicons. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science,
2(1), 33–40.
Drake, M. A., Gerard, P. D., & Civille, G. V. (1999). Ability of hand versus mouth evaluation to
differentiate texture of cheese. Journal of Sensory Studies, 14, 425–441.
Drake, M. A., McIngvale, S., Gerard, P. D., Cadwallader, K. R., & Civille, G. V. (2001).
Development of a descriptive language for Cheddar cheese. Journal of Food Science, 66,
1422–1427.
Drake, M. A., Gerard, P. D., Wright, S., Cadwallader, K. R., & Civille, G. V. (2002). Cross valida-
tion of a sensory language for Cheddar cheese. Journal of Sensory Studies, 17, 215–229.
Drake, M. A., Yates, M. D., Gerard, P. D., Delahunty, C. M., Sheehan, E. M., Turnbull, R. P.,
& Dodds, T. M. (2005). Comparison of differences between lexicons for descriptive analy-
sis of Cheddar cheese flavour in Ireland, New Zealand, and The United States of America.
Drake, M. A., Miracle, R. E., Caudle, A. D., & Cadwallader, K. R. (2006). Relating sensory
and instrumental analyses. Chapter 2. In R. Marsili (Ed.), Sensory- directed flavor analysis
(pp. 23–55). CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Publishing.
Drake, S. L., Lopetcharat, K., & Drake, M. A. (2009). Comparison of two different methods to
explore consumer preferences for cottage cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 92, 5883–5897.
Drake, M. A., Miracle, R. E., & McMahon, D. J. (2010). Impact of fat reduction on flavor and
flavor chemistry of cheddar cheeses. Journal of Dairy Science, 93, 5069–5081.
646 M. A. Drake
Ennis, J. M., Rouseau, B., & Ennis, D. (2014). Sensory difference tests as measurement instru-
ments: A review of recent advances. Journal of Sensory Studies, 29, 89–102.
Foegeding, E. A., & Drake, M. A. (2007). Sensory and mechanical properties of cheese texture.
Greene, J. L., Bratka, K., Drake, M. A., & Sanders, T. H. (2006). Effectiveness of category and
line scales to characterize consumer perception of fruity fermented flavor in peanuts. Journal
of Sensory Studies, 21, 146–154.
Harwood, W. S., & Drake, M. A. (2018). Identification and characterization of fluid milk consumer
groups. Journal of Dairy Science, 101, 8860–8874.
Harwood, W. S., & Drake, M. A. (2019). Understanding implicit and explicit consumer desires
for protein bars, powders, and beverages. Journal of Sensory Studies, 34(3). https://doi.
org/10.1111/joss.12493
Herr, P. M., & Page, C. M. (2004). Asymmetric association of liking and disliking judgments: So
whats not to like? Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 588–601.
Hough, G., & Sánchez, R. (1998). Descriptive analysis and external preference mapping of pow-
dered chocolate milk. Food Quality and Preference, 9, 197–204.
Hough, G., Wakeling, I., Mucci, A., Chambers, E., Mendez Gallardo, I., & Rangel Alves, L. (2006).
Number of consumers necessary for sensory acceptability tests. Food Quality and Preference,
17, 522–526.
IFT/SED. (1981). Sensory evaluation guide for testing food and beverage products. Food
Jack, F. R., Paterson, A., & Piggot, J. R. (1993). Relationships between rheology and composi-
tion of Cheddar cheeses and texture as perceived by consumers. International Journal of Food
Science and Technology, 28, 293–302.
Jiamyangyuen, S., Delwiche, J. F., & Harper, W. J. (2002). The impact of wood ice cream stick’s
origin on the aroma of exposed ice cream mixes. Journal of Dairy Science, 85, 355–359.
Jo, Y., Benoist, D. M., Ameerally, A., & Drake, M. A. (2018). Sensory and chemical properties of
gouda cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 101, 1967–1989.
Jo, Y., Carter, B. G., Barbano, D. M., & Drake, M. A. (2019). Identification of the source of
volatile sulfur compounds produced in milk during thermal processing. Journal of Dairy
Science, 102, 8658–8669.
Jones, V. S., Drake, M. A., Harding, R., & Kuhn-Sherlock, B. (2008). Consumer perception of soy
and dairy products: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Sensory Studies, 23, 65–79.
Keim, K. S., Swanson, M. A., Cann, S. E., & Salinas, A. (1999). Focus group methodology:
Adapting the process for low-income adults and children of Hispanic and Caucasian ethnicity.
Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 27, 451–465.
Kim, M. K., Lopetcharat, K., & Drake, M. A. (2013). Influence of packaging information on con-
sumer liking of chocolate milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 96, 4843–4856.
Kosa, K. M., Cates, S. C., Post, R. C., & Canavan, J. (2004). Consumers’ attitudes toward labeling
food products with possible allergens. Food Protection Trends, 24, 605–611.
Krause, A. J., Lopetcharat, K., & Drake, M. A. (2007). Identification of the characteristics that
drive consumer liking of butter flavor. Journal of Dairy Science, 90, 2091–2102.
Kreuger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (3rd
ed., p. 234). Sage.
Lawless, L., & Civille, G. V. (2013). Developing lexicons, a review. Journal of Sensory Studies,
28, 270–281.
Lawless, H. T., & Heymann. (2010a). Qualitative consumer methods. In Chapter 16: Sensory
evaluation of food (pp. 379–402). Springer.
Lawless, H. T., & Heymann, H. (2010b). Sensory Evaluation of Food. Springer Nature.
Lawlor, J. B., & Delahunty, C. M. (2000). The sensory profile and consumer preference for ten
specialty cheeses. The International Journal of Dairy Technology, 53, 28–36.
Liggett, R., Drake, M. A., & Delwiche, J. (2008). Impact of flavor attributes on consumer liking of
Swiss cheese. Journal of Dairy Science, 91, 466–476.
McNeill, K. L., Sanders, T. H., & Civille, G. V. (2000). Using focus groups to develop a quantita-
tive consumer questionnaire for peanut butter. Journal of Sensory Studies, 15, 163–178.
Meilgaard, M. M., Civille, G. V., & Carr, T. (2016). Sensory evaluation techniques (5th ed.,
p. 589). CRC Press.
Murray, J. M., & Delahunty, C. M. (2000a). Consumer preference for Irish farmhouse and factory
cheeses. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research, 39, 433–449.
Murray, J. M., & Delahunty, C. M. (2000b). Mapping consumer preference for the sensory and
packaging attributes for Cheddar cheese. Food Quality and Preference, 11, 419–435.
Murray, J. M., Delahunty, C. M., & Baxter, I. (2001). Descriptive sensory analysis: A review. Food
Research International, 34, 461–471.
Oltman, A. E., Lopetcharat, K., Bastian, E., & Drake, M. A. (2015). Identifying key attributes for
protein beverages. Journal of Food Science, S1383–S1390.
Orme, B. K. (2006). Getting started with conjoint analysis: Strategies for product design and pric-
ing research. Research Publishers, LLC.
Resurreccion, A. V. A. (1998). The consumer panel. In Chapter 4: Consumer testing for product
development (pp. 71–91). Aspen Publishers.
Richardson-Harman, N. J., Stevens, R., Walker, S., Gamble, J., Miller, M., Wong, M., & McPherson,
A. (2000). Mapping consumer perceptions of creaminess and liking for liquid dairy products.
Food Quality and Preference, 11, 239–246.
Rizzo, P. V., Harwood, W. S., & Drake, M. A. (2020). Consumer desires and perceptions of lactose
free milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 103, 6950–6966.
Robinson, K. M., Klein, B. P., & Lee, S. Y. (2004). Utilizing the R-index measure for threshold
testing in model soy isoflavone solutions. Journal of Food Science, 69, SNQ1–SNQ4.
Robinson, K. M., Klein, B. P., & Lee, S. Y. (2005). Utilizing the R-index measure for threshold
testing in model caffeine solutions. Food Quality and Preference, 16, 284–289.
Russell, T., Drake, M. A., & Gerard, P. D. (2006). Sensory properties of whey and soy proteins.
Journal of Food Science, 71, S447–S455.
Rychlik, M., Schieberle, P., & Grosch, W. (1998). Compilation of thresholds, odor qualities, and
retention indices of key food odorants. In Deutsche Forschungsanstalt fur Lebensmittelchemie
and Instiut fur Lebensmittelchemie der Technischen Universitat Munchen.
Sandra, S., Stanford, M. A., McDaniel, M. R., & Meunier-Goddik, L. (2004). Method develop-
ment for assessing the complete process of crumbling cheese using hand evaluation. Journal of
Dairy Science, 69, SNQ127–SNQ130.
Schiano, A. N., Harwood, W. S., Gerard, P. D., & Drake, M. A. (2020). Consumer perception of
the sustainability of dairy products and plant based dairy alternatives. Journal of Dairy Science,
103, 11228–11243.
Schutz, H. G., & Cardello, A. V. (2001). A labeled affective magnitude (LAM) scale for assessing
food liking/disliking. Journal of Sensory Studies, 16, 117–159.
Shepherd, L., Miracle, R. E., Leksrisompong, P., & Drake, M. A. (2013). Relating sensory and
chemical properties of sour cream to consumer acceptance. Journal of Dairy Science, 96,
5435–5454.
Sherlock, M., & Labuzza, T. P. (1992). Consumer perceptions of consumer time-temperature indi-
cators for use on refrigerated dairy foods. Journal of Dairy Science, 75, 3167–3176.
Singh, T., Drake, M. A., & Cadwallader, K. R. (2003). Flavor of Cheddar cheese: A chemical and
sensory perspective. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science, 2, 139–162.
Speight, K. C., Schiano, A. N., Harwood, W. S., & Drake, M. A. (2019). Consumer insights on
prepackaged Cheddar cheese shreds using focus groups, conjoint analysis and qualitative mul-
tivariate analysis. Journal of Dairy Science, 102, 6971–6986.
Suriyaphan, O., Drake, M. A., Chen, X. Q., & Cadwallader, K. R. (2001). Characteristic aroma
components of British Farmhouse Cheddar cheese. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry,
49, 1382–1387.
commercial chocolate milks. Journal of Food Science, 69, S406–S413.
648 M. A. Drake
Van Gemart, L. J. (2003). Compilations of odour threshold values in air, water, and other media.
Oliemans Punter and Partners BV.
Wright, J. M., Carunchia Whetstine, M. E., Miracle, R. E., & Drake, M. A. (2006). Characterization
of a cabbage off-flavor in whey protein isolate. Journal of Food Science, 71, C91–C96.
Xiong, R., Meullenet, J. F., Hankins, J. A., & Chung, W. K. (2002). Relationship between sensory
and instrumental hardness of commercial cheeses. Journal of Food Science, 67, 877–883.
Yates, M. D., & Drake, M. A. (2007). Texture properties of Gouda cheese. Journal of Sensory
Studies, 22, 493–506.
Yeh, E., Schiano, A., Jo, Y., Barbano, D. M., & Drake, M. A. (2017). The effect of vitamin concen-
trates on the flavor of pasteurized milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 100, 4335–4348.
Young, N., Drake, M. A., Lopetcharat, K., & McDaniel, M. (2004). Preference mapping of
Cheddar cheeses. Journal of Dairy Science, 87, 11–19.
Appendices
ppendix A. Preparation of Samples for Instructing Students

A
and Staff in Dairy Product Evaluation
A glossary of descriptive terms that help convey the sensory attributes or defects
known to occur in dairy products is an invaluable tool for communication between
food technologists or to “prime the pump” so that the learning curve for students or
trainees may be shortened. But nothing can substitute for actually experiencing the
attributes with our own senses. And while some attributes may be found reliably in
just about any dairy case, instructors will find it helpful to actually provide students
with examples of dairy products that possess the attributes described within the
context of the dairy product’s natural sensory matrix.
A.1 Milk
Since milk provides the basis for all dairy products and happens to be the most sub-
tly and delicately flavored dairy product (and ingredient), it makes the natural
medium for introducing off-flavors or attributes to the student of dairy foods sen-
sory evaluation. Milk has the additional merit that the imparting of “sought” attri-
butes to it requires nothing more than the simplest “doctoring” step, with no
time-consuming product manufacture required.
Currently, all milk samples for the Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest
are 2% milk, so training should begin with 2% milk. The ideal first step is to find an
example of milk worthy of a “10” on the scorecard. But this can be difficult, as the
subtle flavor matrix of milk cannot hide even slight imperfections and defect-free
milk is quite rare. This qualification immediately excludes two of the more common
examples of milk found in the dairy case, ultra-pasteurized milk (cooked) and milk
marketed in plastic jugs (light oxidized). It is also important to note that milk
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to 649
Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6
650 Appendices
packaged in paperboard (gabletop) cartons frequently is also subject to flavor

defects (cardboard flavor, refrigerator/stale, lacks freshness). Ideally, high tempera-
ture short time (HTST) pasteurized milk packaged in amber glass or in a large vol-
ume (e.g., bag in box) that has been shielded from light is most likely to have an
“ideal” flavor profile.
The instructor may find it useful to adulterate milk samples to the intensity level
of “pronounced” (Table A.1) for the introductory student and then reduce this con-
centration once the student’s palate has been trained to identify the given attribute.
A.2 Ice Cream
Ice cream judging involves the evaluation of body and texture as well as flavor.
Initially, the instructor will find it useful to try to isolate the flavor attributes from
the texture attributes. Beginning students frequently find that the coldness of ice
cream numbs the palate, and this may pose as an obstacle to mastering some of the
subtleties of most effectively sorting out and evaluating the body and texture fea-
tures of this frozen product. Consequently, introducing flavor attributes to students
by means of using unfrozen ice cream mix is most helpful (Table A.2). The basic
mix described provides a suitable foundation for highlighting or focusing on flavor
attributes.
Basic Mix Recipe A basic mix can be made to contain a standard fat level (12%
fat), low sweeteness (10% sugar, 4% high fructose corn syrup), and a low intensity
of vanilla flavor by combining 620 g whole milk, 180 g heavy cream, 60 g sugar,
25 g corn syrup solids (CSS) or 25 mL high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), and 0.5 mL
vanilla extract. Alternatively, 800 g light cream can be blended with 60 g of sugar,
25 g CSS or 25 g HFCS and 0.5 g vanilla extract.
Care must be taken when presenting ice cream purchased at the store for student
evaluation, as not only must the brand name be concealed but possibly even the
shape of the carton. By ice cream industry marketing trends, cylindrical cartons
have primarily become associated with “premium” ice creams, while straight-
edged, rectangular, or the occasional square cartons are more commonly viewed or
associated with the so-called “economy” brands. These visual cues lead to bias.
For unbiased judgment, it is best to transfer ice creams from their original retail
containers into plain, white “deli” cartons for students to sample. This must be done
with care, as forcibly pressing the ice cream into the container will alter the ice
cream’s body and texture. However, a simpler approach for maintaining anonymity
is to pre-dip the ice creams from the original containers onto heavy-duty paper or
plastic plates and cover with plastic wrap within 1–2 h of the sensory training ses-
sion. This approach also has the advantage of minimizing heat exposure to the ice
cream samples.
Appendices 651
Table A.1 Recipes (per ~600 mL) for producing off-flavors in milk
Off-flavor Procedure for producing the sought off-flavor
Acid Add about 2% volume of cultured buttermilk to fresh milk. Please note that diacetyl
(sour) present in most commercial buttermilk may be confusing to new tasters.
Alternatively, add 6–7 mL of a 10% lactic acid or a 0.5% citric acid solution to the
milk
Bitter Add 2–2.5 mL of a 0.1% quinine sulfate solution milk, which will yield milk with a
bitter taste within the range of “pronounced”
Cooked Cooked milk samples can easily be found within most store dairy cases. Ultra-
pasteurized milk will typically exhibit a pronounced cooked flavor. Note that
certified organic milk (often ultrapasteurized) will likely also have the “feed” flavor.
Conventionally HTST pasteurized milk will often exhibit a slightly cooked flavor
A cooked flavor may be produced by heating a working quantity of milk in a vessel
to 80 °C (176 °F) and holding for 1 min. Be aware that elements of the cooked
attribute are volatile and will evaporate shortly after the container is opened
Feed Adding 4–7 mL of a prepared “tea” (from brewing alfalfa or timothy hay in water)
to milk will impart a pronounced feed flavor on the milk. An expanded intensity
range is a result of variability in the strength quantity of the tea
Most “grass-fed” and certified organic milk varieties will manifest the feed flavor.
However, they often also exhibit the “cooked” flavor as well (because they are
commonly ultrapasteurized)
Concentrate grain, distillers grain, molasses, and silage-related feed flavors may
also be encountered in milk. They exhibit more sweet than grassy notes
Flat Add about 20% water to 2% milk
An alternative is to serve nonfat or skim milk and compare it to 2% fat milk
Foreign/ Add about 2 mL of a 200 ppm chlorine solution to the milk immediately before
chemical presenting to the student. This off-flavor does not remain “stable,” so it cannot be
prepared far ahead of time
Foreign is anything that should not be present in 2% milk, so addition of a flavoring
(e.g., vanilla) is another good example of foreign
Serving lactose-free milk (enzyme-modified) is another option since the sweetness
is intensified
Serving milk with DHA or fish oil are other alternatives
Fruity/ The fruity/fermented defect can be closely approximated by using a mixture of six
fermented parts pineapple juice (fruity) and one part vinegar (fermented). Add 3–4 mL of this
mixture to the milk to yield a pronounced defect
Add 1 mL of a 1% stock solution of food-grade ethyl hexanoate to the milk
Garlic/ Add 2 mL of a 1% garlic powder (or 1% garlic or onion juice) mix (in water) to the
onion milk
Add a clove of garlic to infuse for about 2 h; then either decant the milk or retrieve
the clove using sanitized cheesecloth or a coffee filter
Lacks Open a carton of milk and store in the refrigerator for ≥7 days, or alternatively, use
freshness an unopened carton of milk that is 1 week beyond the pull date
The lacks freshness attribute may be approximated by adding 10–15 g of skim milk
powder to the milk
(continued)
652 Appendices
Table A.1 (continued)

Off-flavor Procedure for producing the sought off-flavor
Light Examples of light-oxidized milk can usually be purchased right off the grocery
oxidized store shelf. Exposing milk in transparent and/or translucent plastic jugs to
fluorescent lighting or sunlight will quickly produce light-oxidized milk
(15–30 min)
Milk can be transferred into a clear glass milk bottle and placed on a windowsill
exposed to direct, bright sunlight for the following results: (1) 7–10 min = slight
intensity; (2) 10–15 min = definite, and (3) 15–10 min = pronounced
Malty Add 1–3 g of malted milk powder to warm milk and swirl until thoroughly
dissolved. Add this mixture to the milk
Use an extract of Grape Nuts® cereal (add 15 g Grape Nuts® to 100 mL of milk and
allow the flavor to infuse for 20–30 min). Then decant or filter out cereal bits, and
add ~10,~20, and~ 30 mL aliquots to each volume of milk to produce a range of
intensities (i.e., slight, definite, and pronounced) of malty milk
Metal Immerse a sanitized copper penny or a copper wire in milk overnight
oxidized About 8–12 h before use, add one or two drops of a 1% solution of copper sulfate
to milk and leave in a refrigerator. This attribute takes about 4–8 h to develop
Rancid Add ~0.5 g of lipase powder to milk, agitate and hold at 21 °C (70 °F) for an hour
Add ~20 mg lipase to the same volume of milk and store at refrigerator temperature
for ~48 h
A quick resort technique is the addition of a few drops of a dilute solution of
butyric acid to milk
Salty Dissolve 0.25–0.5 g of table salt into 600 mL of milk
Unclean Combine rancid, fruity, and bitter milks. Most commercial milks will eventually
(spoiled) become naturally “spoiled” or unclean (≥7–10 days beyond the sell-by date). Small
quantities of such “out-of-date” samples can then be used to “doctor” fresh milk to
simulate a range of intensities of the unclean defect. Additionally, the source of
“lacks freshness” milk examples can be left in extended storage for an additional
1–2 weeks – which will generally evolve into the unclean or spoilage stage of milk
deterioration
A.3 Butter
As previously noted in Chap. 6, butter making automation has sufficed to improve

both the quality and the uniformity of butter. Currently, many of the attributes listed
on the USDA scorecard are encountered only infrequently, if at all, in North
American butter. Even when observed, the beginning student will find that many of
these butter attributes are actually too delicate to detect or identify. The instructor
will therefore find it helpful to hand-make or purposely adulterate stock butters
purchased directly from either butter manufacturers or retail sources (Table A.3).
Since butter is relatively easy to prepare in the laboratory or kitchen setting, other
attributes may be introduced by simply manufacturing butter from adulterated
cream. Butter exhibiting the “cheesy” or “old ingredient” attribute may be produced
by churning expired or “treated” cream in a countertop kitchen mixer. Similarly,
acid, bitter, feed, scorched (cooked), etc. “defects,” may be produced by adulterat-
ing the cream as described for milk in Table A.1 and churning that cream into butter.
Appendices 653
Table A.2 Recipes for off-flavors in ice cream mix (standard mix is composed of 620 g whole
milk, 180 g heavy cream, 60 g sugar, and 0.5 g vanilla extract)
Off-flavor Procedure for producing off-flavor
Acid Add 10 mL of buttermilk to 200 mL of the basic mix
Cooked Heat basic mix in a double boiler to 80 °C (176 °F) for 15 min. Filter through
sanitized cheesecloth if any particles or chunks result
High Add 1 mL vanilla extract to 200 mL of basic mix
flavor
High Add 5–7.5 g of sugar to 200 mL of basic mix, depending on intensity desired
sweetness
Low Use the basic mix to illustrate
sweetness
Lacks fine Add 25 mL whole milk to 200 mL basic mix
flavor
Low Use the basic mix
flavoring
Old Add up to 10 g of “old” (aka >12 months old) skim milk powder (NFDM) to
ingredient 200 mL of basic mix. This amount of skim milk powder addition should be
approached carefully since the flavor character of long-stored skim milk powder
deteriorates with age; thus the age and flavor character of the skim milk powder
must be carefully considered. In fact, the flavor of long-stored NFDM (>9–
12 months) can be quite overpowering. As little as 1 g of aged NFDM added to
200 mL of mix might be more than enough for some dry milk powder sources
Oxidized Utilize light-oxidized or metal oxidized milk (see Table A.1) or cream as the base
Salty Add 1 g of table salt to 200 mL basic mix
Syrup Add 5–10 g of HFCS to 200 mL basic mix, depending on intensity desired
flavor
Whey Add 10 g of whey powder to 200 mL basic mix
A.4 Cottage Cheese
Unlike butter, automated approaches to cottage cheese manufacture have not par-
ticularly improved cottage cheese in terms of either quality or uniformity (Rosenberg
et al., 1994). There are few attributes listed on the Collegiate Dairy Products
Evaluation Contest scorecard that are not found routinely in cottage cheeses conve-
niently purchased at either the supermarket, neighborhood grocery store, or the spe-
cialty or organic food store. Nevertheless, commercial cottage cheese samples may
be easily adulterated to highlight specific attributes for student instruction
(Table A.4).
Regarding the appearance, color, and/or body and texture attributes of creamed
cottage cheese, most of them can be observed in commercial products.
Cottage cheese is presented in two forms to student contestants: it must be judged
on a plate (untouched) and evaluated in the mouth.
The appearance attributes “free whey” and “free cream” are easily produced
within the laboratory if not readily found in commercial products. Free cream may
654 Appendices
Table A.3 Recipes for off-flavors in butter

Off-flavor Procedure for producing off-flavor
Feed Certified organic butter or butter made from cream from “grass-fed” cows will
exhibit feed flavor. Kerrygold butter commonly has a feed flavor
Garlic/ Store a stick of butter in a closed container with a clove of garlic for ~6 h. Remove
onion the garlic, re-close the container and refrigerate the butter and allow time for the
garlic aroma to penetrate the butter’s center mass
Musty Store the butter in a closed container beside an agar slant of the yeast microorganism
Streptomyces odorifer
Oxidized Store aliquot sticks of butter, lightly wrapped in paper, in a refrigerator for several
weeks to a month. The surface of the butter will undergo oxidization and the distinct
off-flavor will, in time, diffuse into the butter’s interior, although most of the
oxidized flavor will be surface concentrated
Rancid Place a stick of butter in a closed container with a small jar containing butyric acid
for about 6 h. Remove the butyric acid, re-seal the container and permit the butyric
acid to equilibrate throughout the butter for a week or more
Alternatively, butter may be stored for a few days in an enclosed container with a
slice of Asiago or Romano cheese
Storage Select grocery store “house brand” butters to either refrigerate for 4–6 months or
freeze for 8–12+ months, and then examine for a range of storage-like flavors
Whey “Whey butter” may not often be available in many parts of the United States or
Canada under that label. However, it can occasionally be found in specialty food
stores, neighborhood grocery stores, or online. It may be labeled as “Old Fashioned”
butter
be replicated by simply spooning enough cream onto the curd on the plate to create
a so-called cream halo of varying intensities (slight, definite, or pronounced).
The free whey defect can be simulated by removing enough cottage cheese from
the container such that a moderate well is formed. The container with the remaining
cottage cheese is returned to the refrigerator for a day or two. Typically, whey will
seep into the formed space and this liquid exudate may be spooned onto the obser-
vation plate, which will form a greenish-yellow thin liquid around the curds (Fig.
A.1). Alternatively, pineapple juice can be used to simulate the appearance of free
whey on a plate. Pineapple juice is also good at replicating the fruity off-flavor.
Combining pineapple juice with vinegar works well for fruity/fermented and
free whey.
Per all products used as “demonstration” samples, care should be taken to not
prejudice students by directly revealing the brand name of the various products
evaluated. Cottage cheese needs to be removed from its original container or else
the label should be entirely obscured (Fig. A.2).
A.5 Yogurt
Unless you have the facilities and are comfortable with yogurt making, you will be
best served by surveying the yogurts available in your area and identifying those
with distinct and repeatable sensory attributes.
Appendices 655
Table A.4 Recipes for off-flavors in cottage cheese

Off-flavor Procedure for producing off flavor
Bitter Add 2–3 mL 0.1% quinine sulfate to a pint of cottage cheese to yield a pronounced
bitter taste.
Cooked Heat ingredients to be used for dressing to 80 °C (176 °F) for 15 min in a double
boiler
Add 5–7 mL shelf-stable (UHT) milk to the creamed curds
Fruity/ The fruity/fermented defect can be closely approximated by using a mixture of six
fermented parts pineapple juice and one part vinegar. Add 3–4 mL of this mixture per pint of
cottage cheese
High acid Add approximately 2% buttermilk to a pint of cottage cheese
Titrate cottage cheese to the desired acidity by using a 10% lactic acid solution
High Add sufficient diacetyl to a pint of cottage cheese to achieve a concentration of
diacetyl approximately 0.01%. As an advisory, diacetyl in water solution (~5–10%) should
be easier “to control” the sought range of diacetyl intensities, than the use of the
pure compound. (The pure compound should be handled with the greatest care,
with appropriate personal protective equipment, under a fume hood as degenerative
pulmonary diseases have been linked to chronic exposure to diacetyl)
Rancid Treat cottage cheese with 0.5 g of lipase per pint and allow it to react at room
temperature for an hour or in the refrigerator for 24–48 h
Alternatively, for “last-minute preparation,” finely ground Romano, Cotija or
Kasseri cheese can be incorporated into the cheese sample to simulate rancidity
Salty Add 0.5 g of table salt per pint
Unclean Store commercial cottage cheese samples for 7–14 days beyond the sell-by date.
(spoilage) Use these samples directly; or alternately, use sample portions to “doctor” fresher
products to simulate the spoiled consequence of aging product. Alternatively, blend
bitter, fruity/fermented, and rancid examples together
Whey Acquire sweet liquid whey from a hard cheese manufacturer and use to “doctor”
cottage cheese samples “to taste”
Alternatively, add reconstituted (1:9 dilution) whey powder to achieve the desired
whey flavor intensity
Yeasty Add baker’s yeast to cream dressing and hold at room temperature overnight, and
then add the “treated” dressing to dry cottage cheese curds
Yogurt is presented for evaluation in three forms. First, yogurt must be presented
in its original cup so that the evaluator may look for the “free whey” and “shrunken”
attribute. No other attribute may be judged in the cup.
Secondly, the yogurt must be judged on a plate for “atypical color,” “color leach-
ing,” “excess fruit,” “lacks fruit,” and “lumpy ”.
Finally, a third container should be provided for the students to evaluate in
the mouth.
Of all the attributes listed on the scorecard, only the free whey attribute may be
easily replicated by the instructor or judge. This is achieved by simply dripping
water onto the surface of the yogurt in the cup used for judging free whey or
shrunken.
As with other products, you will need to conceal the brand name of the yogurt
from your students to preempt preconceptions. This is a particular problem with
yogurt, as its appearance is judged while in its original container. The most
656 Appendices
Fig. A.1 Creating an

observation plate of
cottage cheese that exhibits
“free whey”
Fig. A.2 Cottage cheese

prepared for tasting by
transfer to a secondary
container
convenient solution is to save empty containers and wrap them with either alumi-
num foil or duct tape, then drop the container to be judged into the container you
have obscured (Fig. A.3).
To present the yogurt on the plate for visual evaluation, it is best to disturb the
curd as little as possible, and in a manner that can be easily replicated. Inverting the
container and puncturing the bottom releases the yogurt onto the plate without
breaking the curd (Fig. A.4). The curd that releases should then be cut into quarters
and allowed to fall away in a manner that reveals the yogurt’s body.
Appendices 657
Fig. A.3 Yogurt placed

inside taped container to
conceal brand
A.6 Cheddar Cheese
It is difficult to adulterate cheddar cheese for taste/flavor and body/texture. However,

gassy (tiny eyes or slits) and open (jagged openings) might be creatively reproduced
in visual plugs. Usually, an assortment of cheddar cheese brands and varied degrees
of aging (maturing) can be purchased within the local marketplace (e.g., supermar-
kets, grocery stores, delicatessens, cheese markets (shops)), out-of-state mail order/
online supply businesses, and/or direct order from the sales departments of larger-
sized cheese manufacturers and cooperatives. Some Collegiate team coaches have
been known to purchase cheddar cheese samples (as well as other dairy product
samples, with the exception of ice cream) when traveling out of state, in order to
expand student (team members) exposure to a “much wider set” of product attri-
butes from other marketplaces.
658 Appendices
Fig. A.4 Preparing yogurt

for visual evaluation on the
plate
Appendix B. Resources
The following names and addresses and websites are included to enable the reader
to quickly access organizations that are involved in assessing, regulating, under-
standing, or promoting dairy products.
Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS): http://www.ams.usda.gov
American Dairy Science Association (ADSA): 1111 B, Dunlap Avenue Savoy, IL
61874 217-356-5146 http://www.adsa.org
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition: 5100 Paint Branch Parkway College
Park, MD 20740-3835 https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/fda-organization/
center-food-safety-and-applied-nutrition-cfsan
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): 1600 Clifton Road Atlanta, GA
30333 1-800-311-3435 https://www.cdc.gov/
Appendices 659
Code of Federal Regulations, Electronic (CFR): https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/

ECFR?page=browse
Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contest (CDPEC): https://www.dairyprod-
uctscontest.org/
Dairy Management, Inc.: https://www.usdairy.com/
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS): 200 Independence Avenue,
S.W. Washington, DC 20201 https://www.hhs.gov/
Food Processing Suppliers Association (FPSA): 1451 Dolley Madison Blvd., Suite
200 McLean, VA 22101 http://www.fpsa.org
Institute of Food Technologists (IFT): 525 W. Van Buren, Suite 1000 Chicago, IL
60607 312-782-8424 https://www.ift.org/
International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA): 1250 H Street, N.W., Suite 900
Washington, DC 20005 202-737-4332 https://www.idfa.org/resource-links
National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments: 123 Buena Vista Drive Frankfort,
KY 40601 502-695-0253 https://ncims.org/
National Dairy Council: https://www.usdairy.com/about-us/national-dairy-council
National Dairy Shrine: https://www.dairyshrine.org/
National Milk Producers Federation: https://www.nmpf.org/
Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO): https://www.fda.gov/media/114169/download
U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC): https://blog.usdec.org/usdairyexporter/
us-d airy-e xports-h it-a ll-t ime-r ecord-i n-m arch-0 ?_ga=2.109036802.
1404793352.1620699825-432021467.1620150806
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA): 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD
20857-0001 1-800-463-6332 https://www.fda.gov/
U.S. Public Health Service (PHS): https://www.usphs.gov/
Reference
Rosenberg, M., Tong, P. S., Sulzer, G., Gendre, S., & Ferris, D. (1994). California cottage cheese
technology and product quality: An in-plant survey. 1. Manufacturing process. Cultural Dairy
Products Journal, 29(1), 4–12.
Index
A Butter, vii, viii, 1, 2, 4, 25, 27, 32, 34, 35, 40,

Acidophilus, 203 42, 44, 55–57, 59, 61, 63, 64, 66, 75,
Affinage, 559, 593, 595–597 76, 82, 83, 94, 109, 110, 113, 122, 131,
Age, 38, 39, 93, 94, 168, 191, 239, 240, 242, 143–171, 174, 195, 264, 284, 307, 310,
248, 273, 277, 278, 297, 300, 301, 319, 327, 331, 332, 335, 347, 355, 378,
309, 317, 336, 354–356, 358, 371, 379, 418, 439, 532, 615, 630, 634,
375, 378, 381, 405, 413, 415, 417, 636, 652–654
447, 455, 463, 470, 479, 482, 488,
489, 503, 546, 547, 574, 575, 583,
602, 608, 637, 653 C
American, v, vi, 2, 43, 53, 55, 57, 60, 69–75, Cheddar cheese, vii, 2, 34, 43, 57, 59, 63–65,
112, 174, 176, 180, 186, 187, 194, 119, 164, 235–278, 298, 405, 408, 410,
196, 203, 242, 260, 269, 351, 369, 415, 430, 449, 532, 559, 572, 626, 627,
386, 393, 395, 401, 402, 405, 408, 630, 632–635, 657
413, 420, 437, 517–542, 545, 549, Chocolate, 34, 44, 125–126, 128, 212, 281,
552, 590, 652, 658 287, 288, 296, 313, 324, 327–329, 331,
Appellation d’origine controlée (AOC), 546, 332, 334, 336, 630, 640, 642
548, 573, 574, 579 Chocolate liquor, 126, 327, 328
Appellation d’origine protégée (AOP), 558, Code of Federal Regulations (CFRs), ix, 83,
573, 575, 576, 579 87, 92–94, 97, 99, 103, 127, 129, 131,
133, 134, 143, 145, 147, 175, 201, 202,
236, 238, 282–284, 315, 322, 346, 348,
B 350, 358, 366, 367, 371, 380, 385, 394,
Baseline concentrations, 11, 13 402–407, 415, 418–421, 423, 426, 445,
Blisters, 479, 481, 483, 485, 487, 498–503, 449, 477–479, 525, 547, 558, 573, 659
505, 513–515 Colby, 146, 174, 238, 242, 277–278
Bloomy, 545–557, 568 Collegiate, vii, 1, 2, 53, 54, 56–68, 76, 97, 99,
Blue-veined, 545, 558–566, 568, 109, 110, 124, 148, 150, 164, 166, 179,
576, 616 181, 183–185, 188, 189, 192, 195, 218,
Brevibacterium, 446, 593, 598, 604, 613 245, 250–251, 284, 288, 289, 318, 339,
Burrata, 491–493 409, 649, 653, 657, 659
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to 661
Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30019-6
662 Index
Color, viii, 2, 14, 15, 19–22, 24, 25, 48, 53, Dextrose equivalent (DE), 285, 286, 308
55, 56, 60, 65, 75, 80, 107, 108, 125, Diacetyl, 11, 32, 40, 57, 128, 145, 163, 166,
127, 131, 134, 143, 148–152, 155–156, 173, 174, 177, 181, 188, 189, 191, 271,
171, 178–182, 211, 215–224, 242, 244, 410, 419, 424, 425, 430, 436, 440, 497,
246–247, 250, 251, 253–256, 260–263, 527, 547, 615, 633, 635, 651, 655
265, 267, 268, 271, 273, 277, 284, 288, Difference threshold, 11, 13, 624
290, 293, 296–299, 328, 330–333, 335,
337, 350, 351, 353, 354, 357, 359–361,
363, 368, 371, 373, 376, 378, 381, 386, E
392, 393, 407, 408, 413, 428, 429, 431, Ecology, 597–599
438, 444, 446, 448, 455, 457, 458, Electronic noses, 4
461–463, 473, 479, 484, 487, 494, 495, Electronic tongue, 4, 47
497, 498, 500–501, 511, 513, 531, 534, Emmentaler, 443, 445, 446, 454–457
535, 538, 540, 546, 552–554, 559, 560, Emulsifying salts, 402, 403, 406
562–563, 572, 576, 578, 581, 582, 590, Enzyme-modified cheese (EMC), 407,
591, 598, 601–607, 627, 653, 655 410, 413
Conjoint analysis, 640, 642 Evaporated milk, 94, 348, 350–360, 376, 384
Corn syrup, 126, 134, 202, 228, 285, 286, 290,
306, 308, 311, 314, 326, 337, 407,
428, 650 F
Cream cheese, 43, 83, 176, 404, 418, 421, Fermentation, 111, 114, 127, 128, 175, 177,
422, 424, 428, 432, 438 188, 194, 199, 203, 205–206, 209, 214,
Crème fraiche, 427 223, 226, 230, 253, 259, 269, 277, 286,
Cultured buttermilk, 127, 439–440, 651 327, 356, 410, 417, 418, 424, 425, 428,
430, 435–437, 439, 440, 443–445,
449–451, 453, 454, 459, 460, 467, 471,
D 483, 484, 488, 496, 514, 523, 524, 527,
Dairy food, vi, vii, ix, 1–3, 60, 80, 119, 311, 538, 550, 556, 582, 605, 616
345, 346, 351, 381, 390, 395, 396, 418, Flavor, vi–ix, 2, 4, 12, 14, 15, 21, 22, 25,
424, 558, 621, 623, 649, 659 32–35, 37, 39, 40, 43, 48, 53, 55–57,
Defects, vi–ix, 25, 34, 35, 40, 44, 57, 65, 66, 60, 63–66, 69, 75, 76, 79, 80, 85–97,
69, 70, 75, 80, 86, 89–92, 94, 101, 106, 101–104, 107, 109–129, 133, 134,
107, 109–126, 128–134, 144, 148, 143–150, 153, 156, 162–171, 173–175,
155–171, 178–181, 183–194, 197, 208, 177, 179, 181, 182, 188–194, 196, 197,
215, 216, 218–233, 236, 240, 243, 244, 199, 201, 203–214, 216–218, 221, 224,
246–248, 250–278, 282, 288–291, 293, 225, 227–233, 236–243, 246, 247,
294, 297–309, 311–314, 316–324, 327, 249–251, 253–255, 258, 260, 261, 264,
328, 330–334, 336, 337, 339, 349, 350, 265, 267–278, 281–291, 293–298, 304,
352, 354–358, 360–364, 369–371, 373, 309–325, 327–336, 338, 339, 345,
376, 378, 384, 386, 387, 389–392, 394, 349–351, 353–355, 357, 359–361, 363,
405, 406, 408, 424, 426, 428, 430–432, 364, 367–370, 372, 373, 375–377,
434, 436, 437, 439, 440, 445, 450, 452, 379–384, 386, 387, 389–392, 395–397,
454, 455, 457–467, 469, 471, 473, 483, 401, 405–413, 415, 416, 419, 421,
488, 489, 491–494, 496–497, 513, 514, 423–425, 427, 428, 430–431, 436–440,
523–525, 527, 534, 536, 538, 540, 541, 444–449, 451–455, 457, 460, 461,
545, 552–557, 562–566, 569, 581–585, 470–473, 477, 479, 481, 482, 486,
601, 602, 604–606, 608, 610, 614, 617, 488–490, 492–496, 498, 513–515, 522,
622, 626, 643, 649–652, 654, 655 523, 525, 527, 530–536, 538, 546, 547,
Denominazione d’origine controllata (DOC), 552, 555–557, 559, 561–565, 573–575,
558, 573, 577 577–585, 589–593, 595, 598, 602–606,
Denominazione di origine protetta (DOP), 608, 610, 611, 613–617, 624–626, 628,
548, 558, 559, 573, 574, 579 630, 632–634, 640, 643, 649–655, 657
Index 663
Flavored, 82, 115, 125, 128, 134, 146, 169, Lactobacillus bulgaricus, 201, 203–206, 559
171, 212, 277–278, 282, 312, 314, 315, Lactose-free, 95, 128, 326, 651
324, 331, 332, 334, 335, 337, 395, 403, Low-moisture, 185, 238, 254, 265, 277, 460,
408, 418, 421, 423, 426, 430, 437, 438, 477–479, 483–487, 489, 492, 493, 495,
460, 479, 490, 561, 585, 649 498, 500, 529, 578, 583, 592
Free fatty acid (FFA), 11, 97, 98, 118–120,
169, 193, 274, 410, 451, 452, 472, 473,
561, 565, 582, 605, 630, 633 M
Fresh, 26, 63–65, 69, 80, 94, 102, 111, 114, Melt, 44, 153, 157, 166, 167, 170, 225, 291,
126, 132, 144, 147, 152, 164, 165, 299–304, 307, 309, 326, 334, 401, 408,
167–169, 171, 173–175, 187, 188, 194, 413, 414, 479, 481, 485, 488, 493,
199, 203, 205, 217, 228, 239, 240, 242, 497–499, 501, 503–504, 513, 514,
262, 265, 270, 272, 274, 276–277, 284, 529–531, 592
287, 304, 329, 338, 354, 355, 357, 360, Mexican Manchego, 530–531
363, 369, 373, 375, 376, 380, 385, 407, Mites, 256, 260, 567, 606, 607
410, 411, 424, 438, 477–479, 481–483, Monterey Jack, 174, 238, 242, 277–278,
487–489, 491, 492, 497–505, 512, 514, 408, 530
515, 522, 523, 526, 527, 530, 534, 549,
557, 558, 575, 576, 579, 581, 583, 615,
633, 635, 651, 652 N
Frozen dessert, 281–339, 347 Nonfat dry milk (NDM), 55, 84, 92, 94, 116,
134, 176, 187, 201, 206, 224, 228, 233,
284, 348–349, 366, 371–380, 384, 386,
H 390, 393, 395, 396, 405, 406, 410, 483,
Hearing, 19, 22, 26–27, 42 488, 513
I O
Ingredients, vii, viii, 34, 47, 75, 79, 80, 90, Olfaction, 27–35, 38, 552
92–94, 127–129, 131, 134, 144, 173, Organic, 37, 91, 114, 124, 190, 271–273, 391,
175, 177, 187, 191, 193, 194, 196, 402, 433, 437, 524, 529, 540, 572, 579,
197, 201, 202, 206, 207, 213, 214, 580, 616, 632, 651, 653, 654
217, 218, 221, 224, 226–228, 230,
231, 233, 235, 281, 282, 284–290,
295, 301, 310–324, 326, 334–336, P
338, 339, 345–350, 359, 360, 363, Part-skim, 284, 404, 477–479, 483–487,
364, 367, 371, 375, 380, 382, 384–387, 489, 492, 500, 526, 527, 529,
390, 393–397, 401–403, 405–409, 415, 531, 532
418, 419, 421, 425, 428–430, 434, Penicillium camemberti, 548, 551
437, 438, 449, 460, 477, 487, 513, Penicillium candidum, 575
525, 527, 531, 558, 582, 613, 621, Penicillium roqueforti, 545, 546, 548,
622, 624, 630, 649, 652, 653, 655 558–561, 574
Invert sugar, 134, 202 Potassium sorbate, 173, 177, 217,
228–229
Propionic acid, 11, 128, 407, 443, 444,
K 446, 449–454, 459, 465–467,
Kefir, 127, 128, 175, 199, 200 470, 605
Protected designation of origin (PDO), 548,
558–560, 572–575, 577–579, 593
L Provolone, 146, 443, 445, 446, 478,
Lactic acid bacteria, 81, 128, 144, 175, 195, 493–494, 557
268, 272, 275, 419, 421, 424, 425, 430, Psychrotrophic bacteria, 112, 114, 116, 122,
453, 470, 514, 525, 542, 589, 602 164, 168, 185, 192, 194, 233, 275
664 Index
Q 301, 319, 327, 331, 352, 357, 361, 370,

Quality, vi–ix, 1, 3, 4, 11, 12, 14, 15, 20, 380, 384, 390, 402, 406, 411, 419–421,
25–27, 31, 34, 35, 38, 42–44, 47, 48, 427, 428, 445, 449, 450, 462, 463, 471,
53–57, 59, 63, 64, 66, 69, 70, 74, 76, 478, 479, 482, 488, 489, 492, 494, 495,
79–81, 84–97, 103, 104, 107–109, 111, 497, 514, 522–524, 526, 527, 529–532,
113, 114, 116, 118, 120–122, 125, 126, 534, 540, 550, 551, 557, 559, 562, 565,
128, 129, 131–135, 143, 144, 147, 148, 577–580, 582, 583, 595, 598, 606,
151, 154–157, 164, 165, 169–171, 173, 611–615, 633, 635, 652, 653, 655
174, 187–191, 194–196, 210, 211, 217, Scorecard, 5, 53–57, 60–63, 66, 69, 70, 72,
219, 223, 229, 230, 238, 240–243, 246, 96–99, 110–112, 128, 129, 135, 148,
247, 249–251, 254, 255, 259, 260, 263, 151, 166, 183–185, 188, 189, 192,
270, 271, 276, 277, 284, 285, 287, 288, 217–218, 236, 242, 243, 249–251, 269,
290–292, 294–296, 299–305, 308, 309, 276–278, 284, 288–290, 296, 306, 323,
311, 313, 316, 317, 319, 320, 323–325, 328, 330, 331, 336, 337, 339, 351, 354,
328–334, 336–339, 345, 350, 351, 354, 378, 386, 388, 409, 412, 473, 581, 582,
355, 357, 359, 363–370, 372, 373, 375, 584, 585, 622, 649, 652, 653, 655
379, 381, 384–387, 394–396, 403, 405, Sensory analysis, 1–4, 9–16, 54, 124, 369,
407–409, 411, 413, 418, 419, 424, 425, 387, 472–473, 622, 626, 627, 632,
427, 428, 431, 436, 437, 440, 444, 445, 643, 644
452, 454, 456, 458–460, 462, 470, 472, Sensory evaluation, vi, vii, ix, 1–5, 9, 10, 14,
473, 479, 486, 489, 490, 498, 510, 19, 21, 22, 24–27, 31, 32, 34–35, 39,
512–515, 523, 525, 549, 560, 578–582, 40, 42–44, 46–48, 53–56, 61, 67, 76,
584, 585, 589, 591–593, 595, 602, 608, 79, 80, 84, 86, 93, 96, 102, 135, 147,
617, 621, 622, 626, 637, 643, 644, 163, 170, 177–194, 215–218, 233, 243,
652, 653 250, 276, 282, 286, 288, 292, 294, 296,
Queijo Minas, 521, 525, 533–535, 537 309, 323, 334, 335, 338, 339, 349, 350,
Queijo Prato, 521, 524, 535, 536, 538 353, 363, 405–412, 415, 416, 428–430,
Queso Asadero, 521, 530 453, 551–552, 560–566, 602–617, 649
Queso Chanco, 521, 525, 536, 538–542 Sensory science, ix, 1–4, 621–623
Queso Chihuahua, 521, 524, 530, 532, 533 Skim, 79, 93, 176, 190, 284, 376, 410
Queso Cotija, 521, 525, 532, 534, 535 Skim milk, 80, 82, 84, 92, 93, 95, 117, 125,
Queso Cremoso, 536, 537 127–129, 131–134, 173–176, 180, 186,
Queso Fresco, 521–527, 529 190, 191, 193, 195, 201, 284, 302, 325,
Queso Gauda, 524, 536, 538, 540 371, 380, 382, 384, 403, 404, 426, 428,
Queso Oaxaca, 521, 524, 529–531 434, 435, 483, 496, 500, 522, 546, 626,
Queso Panela, 521, 523, 525–528 627, 633, 635, 651, 653
Queso Ranchero, 521, 523, 527, 529 Slices, 249, 257, 260, 264, 270, 405, 411–415,
Queso Reggianito, 521, 525, 536, 538, 539 447, 453, 463, 479, 481, 483, 485, 486,
494, 497, 500, 508, 540, 552, 560, 565,
566, 611, 614, 654
R Slow-churned, 324, 325
Response bias, 11–13, 16 Sour cream, 4, 76, 83, 130, 346, 410, 417–419,
Ripened, 164, 211, 235, 447, 449, 473, 531, 424–427, 429, 432, 433, 435, 437–439
532, 538, 546, 549, 560, 563, 575, 579, Starter culture, 127, 144, 163, 199, 200, 203,
582, 597, 601–603 205, 206, 226, 228, 230, 231, 233, 236,
253, 254, 261, 269, 347, 407, 417, 424,
425, 427, 428, 436, 439, 449, 452, 459,
S 460, 468, 471, 481, 489, 525–526, 529,
Salt, 10, 21, 37, 39, 40, 47, 75, 79, 118–120, 530, 534, 535, 537, 539, 549, 568, 574,
126, 127, 130, 134, 143, 145, 148–150, 576, 582, 589, 593, 614
153–157, 164, 166, 169, 171, 181, Streptococcus thermophilus, 127, 201,
188–191, 193, 215, 236–238, 240, 249, 203–205, 439, 443, 449, 450, 483,
253, 254, 271–274, 277, 278, 284, 286, 496, 559
Index 665
Stretch, 479, 481, 482, 485, 487, 493, 497, 447, 453–457, 459–461, 463–469,
498, 505, 513–515, 529, 573, 592 471–473, 479, 482, 485, 496–497, 511,
Sweetened condensed milk, 83, 348, 522, 523, 525, 527, 529–531, 533, 534,
350, 358–363 536–538, 542, 546, 552, 555, 559, 561,
562, 565–566, 573, 575, 578, 581, 583,
585, 590, 594, 597, 599–602, 609–611,
T 617, 626, 629–633, 643, 650, 653, 657
Taste, 1–3, 10, 14, 15, 19–22, 35–40, 44, Touch, 1, 19, 20, 22, 40–44, 81, 89, 108, 247,
46–48, 56, 80, 86, 89, 90, 92, 94, 95, 248, 263, 303, 311, 393, 415, 458,
109–113, 115–120, 128, 135, 153–155, 462, 595
162–164, 166–168, 177, 182, 187, 188,
190–192, 194, 200, 229, 230, 232, 249,
270, 272–275, 277, 278, 286, 289–291, U
293–295, 304, 310, 311, 313, 316, 317, Umami taste, 37, 472
319–321, 326, 349, 350, 354, 357, 360, US grades, 143, 144, 148, 150, 164, 165, 242,
361, 376, 389, 390, 396, 405–408, 410, 367–369, 372, 373, 379, 382,
411, 419, 430, 431, 437, 440, 446, 447, 383, 454–457
451, 460, 470–472, 477, 479, 484, 486,
488, 489, 492, 497, 498, 526, 527, 530,
531, 545, 546, 556, 580, 582, 597, 611, V
615–617, 628, 633, 635, 651, 655, 657 Vision, 19, 22–25, 28
Test stimulus, 10, 13, 14
Texture, viii, 2, 14, 15, 20, 21, 26, 39, 41–45,
48, 53, 56, 60, 64–66, 69, 75, 133, 143, W
144, 148, 149, 152, 156–162, 171, 175, Whey protein, 165, 187, 206, 207, 238, 239,
177, 179, 181–187, 196, 197, 201, 202, 302, 373, 375, 382, 386, 406, 426, 428,
204–209, 212–214, 216–218, 224–227, 497, 513, 626–629
236, 237, 241–243, 246–248, 250, 251, Whey protein concentrate (WPC), 187, 193,
253–255, 260, 263–271, 276–278, 281, 325, 366, 382, 628, 629
282, 284, 286, 288, 291, 293–295, Whey protein isolate (WPI), 325, 326, 366,
301–310, 313, 320, 323–331, 333–335, 382, 624, 627–629
337–339, 350, 352, 355, 362, 365, 386, World, viii, 10, 16, 55, 61, 75, 76, 127, 175,
401, 403, 405–409, 412, 413, 415, 416, 199–201, 214, 241, 275, 417, 440, 518,
419, 421, 428, 432, 438, 439, 443–445, 522, 545, 558, 571, 577

The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products: Stephanie Clark Maryanne Drake Kerry Kaylegian Editors

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products: Stephanie Clark Maryanne Drake Kerry Kaylegian Editors

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products: Stephanie Clark Maryanne Drake Kerry Kaylegian Editors

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stephanie Clark

The Sensory Evaluation

ISBN 978-3-031-30018-9 ISBN 978-3-031-30019-6 (eBook)

competent flavor evaluation of all dairy ingredients – in addition to the standard

Ames, IA, USA Stephanie Clark

1 History of Sensory Analysis�������������������������������������������������������������������� 1

13 Cultured Cream Products ���������������������������������������������������������������������� 417

Valente B. Alvarez Department of Food Science and Technology, Wilbur A. Gould

Dave Potter Dairy Connection, Inc., Madison, WI, USA

MaryAnne Drake and Stephanie Clark

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 1

Table 1.1 (continued)

ultimately to the development of electronic noses and electronic tongues (Deisingh

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 9

in sensory analysis. A complete discussion of psychophysics was provided by

2.1 Tools of the Trade

where C is the absolute intensity of the stimulus, k is a constant (usually between 0

Fechner’s law : R = k log C

where R is the magnitude of the sensation, k is a constant, and C is the magnitude of

Stevens’ power law : R = kC n

where R is the response, k is a constant, C is the absolute intensity of the stimulus,

to indicate which he/she recognizes – in actuality he/she may recognize none of

2.3 Perception Is More Than a Sum of Its Parts

concentration of taste compounds generally increases ratings of smell intensity

2.4 Sensory Analysis: A True Science

Maria Laura Montero and Carolyn F. Ross

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 19

3.2 Perception of Sensory Attributes

Our perception of the environment, including food, happens through specialized

Stimulus → Sensation → Perception → Response

The sensory perception of a person to food is a complex process. A number of over-

appearance influences purchase decisions (Lawless & Heymann, 2010;

3.4.2 How Vision Works

Light  Cornea  Pupil  Lens  Retina  the fovea 

Rods are activated at the lowest levels of illumination/light or scotopic vision

3.4.3 Perception of Color and Appearance

3.4.4 Sensory Testing of Color and Appearance

3.4.5 Vision in the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products

3.5.2 How Hearing Works

Figure 3.2 shows the structure of the human ear.

Malleus Incus Stapes

Auditory Tympanic Stapedius Base of stapes

3.5.4 Hearing in the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products

The olfactory system coordinates a response to stimuli called odorants. Odorants

3.6.2 How Olfaction Works

Fig. 3.3 (continued)

In sensory panels, adaptation may manifest in the increase of sensory thresholds

Mammals possess an olfactory system of incredible discriminating power (Amoore,

The condition known as anosmia describes a person’s inability to detect odor

3.6.3.3 The Smell and Flavor Connection

Flavor detection involves the combination of olfactory and gustatory stimuli

3.6.4 Sensory Testing Issues

3.6.5 Olfaction and the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products

Butter In butter, an uncommon yeasty aroma and flavor is described as a scent in

3.7 Taste and Gustation

3.7.1 Taste and Gustation: A Definition

3.7.2 How Gustation Works

3.7.4 Taste Perception in Dairy Products

3.7.4.1 The Role of Saliva

Ames, IA, USA Stephanie Clark

1 History of Sensory Analysis�� 1

13 Cultured Cream Products �� 417

2.1 Tools of the Trade

2.3 Perception Is More Than a Sum of Its Parts

2.4 Sensory Analysis: A True Science

3.2 Perception of Sensory Attributes

3.4.2 How Vision Works

Light Cornea Pupil Lens Retina the fovea

3.4.3 Perception of Color and Appearance

3.4.4 Sensory Testing of Color and Appearance

3.4.5 Vision in the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products

3.5.2 How Hearing Works

3.5.4 Hearing in the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products

3.6.2 How Olfaction Works

3.6.3.3 The Smell and Flavor Connection

3.6.4 Sensory Testing Issues

3.6.5 Olfaction and the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products

3.7 Taste and Gustation

3.7.1 Taste and Gustation: A Definition

3.7.2 How Gustation Works

3.7.4 Taste Perception in Dairy Products

3.7.4.1 The Role of Saliva

3.7.4.2 The Problem of Aftertaste

3.7.5 Taste and Gustation in the Sensory Evaluation

3.8.2 How Touch Works/Perception

3.8.4 Visual Texture and Oral Tactile Texture

3.8.6 Touch in the Sensory Evaluation of Dairy Products

3.9.2 How Chemesthesis Works/Perception

3.9.4 Temporal Quality of Chemesthetic Sensation

3.9.5 Chemesthesis in the Sensory Evaluation

4.2 Dairy Products Grading and Scorecard Evaluation

4.3 The Collegiate Dairy Products Evaluation Contests

4.4 Midwest Regional Collegiate Dairy Products

4.5 American Cheese Society Judging and Competition

4.6 The US and World Dairy Product Contests

4.7 World Dairy Expo Championship Dairy Product Contest

5.2 Milk Properties and Handling

d eterioration of milk prior to pasteurization (Poltronieri, 2017). Other bacteria that

5.3.2 Grades of Market Milk

5.4 Kinds of Market Milk and Associated

5.5 Precautions for Evaluating Raw Milk

5.6 The Milk Scorecard

5.7 Some Milk Scoring Techniques

_ 1. Acid _ 6. Flat ___ 11. Oxidized - Light

_ 1. Acid _ 6. Flat ___ 11. Oxidized - Light

_ 1. Acid _ 6. Flat ___ 11. Oxidized - Light