Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g7rbq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-31T05:14:05.438Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

485. The effect of temperature on the development of broken cream

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

M. Jean Stone
M. Jean Stone
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, University of Reading
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Three strains of B. cereus were grown in milk at nine different temperature combinations. Broken cream could be prevented by holding milk at 5° C. or lower for 24 hr. before transferring to 15 or 18° C. for a further 24 hr., but with a subsequent period of storage at 22° C. the fault was not prevented. Broken cream developed after storage at 10° C. followed by 18 and 22° C., but not in milk kept at 10° C. and then transferred to 15° C. After preliminary storage at 15° C. the fault appeared within a further 24 hr. regardless of the subsequent storage temperature.

With two strains of B. cereus it was observed that pasteurization accelerated spore germination and hence the development of the fault. With low levels of inoculum there was delay in the appearance of the fault with one strain of the organism.

In twenty-four samples of commerically pasteurized milk it was shown that the fault could be controlled by refrigeration at 5° C. before distribution except when the subsequent temperature was allowed to rise to 22° C.

Contrary to the suggestion made by Davis (15) preliminary observations indicate that the growth of B. cereus and the development of broken cream is not inhibited by the presence of acid-producing organisms such as Str. lactis.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , October 1952 , pp. 302 - 310
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1952

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

(1)Stone, M. J. & Rowlands, A. (1952). J. Dairy Res. 19, 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2)Thomas, S. B., Jones-Evans, E., Jones, L. B. & Thomas, B. F. (1946). Proc. Soc. appl. Bact. p. 51.Google Scholar
(3)Broadhurst, J. & Krug, E. (1932). J. Dairy Sci. 15, 142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Crossley, E. L. (1943). Proc. Soc. agric. Bact. p. 42.Google Scholar
(5)Curran, H. R. & Evans, F. R. (1943). J. Bact. 46, 513.Google Scholar
(6)Curran, H. R. & Evans, F. R. (1945). J. Bact. 49, 335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Gavel, L. von (1951). Arch. Mikrobiol. 16, 28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(8)Reynolds, H. & Lichtenstein, H. (1950). J. Dairy Sci. 33, A35.Google Scholar
(9)Miles, A. A. & Misra, S. S. (1938). J. Hyg., Camb., 35, 732.Google Scholar
(10)Davis, H. (1940). Quart. J. Pharm. 13, 15.Google Scholar
(11)McGaughey, C. A. & Chu, H. P. (1948). J. gen. Microbiol. 2, 334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(12)McKenzie, D. A., Egdell, J. W., Clegg, L. F. L. & Thomas, S. B. (1949). Proc. 12th Int. Dairy Congr., Stockholm, 2, II, 536.Google Scholar
(13)Abd-el-Malek, Y. (1943). Proc. Soc. agric. Bact. p. 23.Google Scholar
(14)Egdell, J. W. (1951). J. Soc. Dairy Tech. 5, 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(15)Davis, J. G. (1940). Milk Trade Gaz. 10, 4.Google Scholar