Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T06:36:35.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

279. The estimation of lactose in milk

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

A. K. R. McDowell
A. K. R. McDowell
Affiliation:
Dairy Research Institute (N.Z.), Palmerston North, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The direct volumetric copper reduction method of estimation of lactose in unclarified milk gives results which are in good agreement with those on the same milk clarified and decalcified.

2. For the polarimetric' or iodometric methods of estimation of lactose the milk is best clarified with either zinc hydroxide or cadmium hydroxide. Clarification with acid mercuric nitrate or phosphotungstic acid for the polarimetric method and with dialysed iron or phosphotungstic acid for the iodometric method gives high results owing to failure to remove interfering substances.

3. Dialysed iron, phosphotungstic acid, cadmium hydroxide or zinc hydroxide are all suitable for deproteinizing the milk for the chloramine-T method of estimation of lactose.

4. The values for lactose content of milk as estimated by the above methods show good agreement and therefore may be accepted as the true milk sugar content.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , May 1941 , pp. 131 - 138
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1941

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)Whitnah, (1931). J. Amer. diem. Soc. 53, 300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2)Whitnah, Riddell, & Hodgson, (1933). J. Dairy Sci. 16, 347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(3)Jones, (1936). J. Dairy Res. 7, 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Lane, & Eynon, (1923). J. Soc. diem. Ind., Lond., 42, 32T.Google Scholar
(5)Fine, (1932). Biochem. J. 26,569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6)Eynon, & Lane, (1923). J. Soc. chem. Ind., Lond., 42, 143T.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Monier, Williams, (1930). Rep. Publ. Hlth. med. Subj. No. 57.Google Scholar
(8)Scheibe, (1901). Z. anal. Chem. 40, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(9)Farmer, (1930). Proc. N.Z. Dairy Sci. Ass. See McDowall & Dolby (1935), J. Dairy Res. 6, 251.Google Scholar
(10)Hinton, & Macara, (1927). Analyst, 52, 558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(11)Van Der, Plank, (1936). Biochem. J. 30, 457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(12)Gohr, (1930). Z. Untersuch. Lebensmitt. 59, 90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13)Blackwood, (1934). J. Dairy Res. 5, 245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(14)Hagedorn, & Jensen, (1923). Biochem. Z. 135, 46.Google Scholar
(15)Garrison, (1935). J. Ass. Off. Agric. Chem. 18, 408.Google Scholar
(16) Report of Milk Products Sub-Committee (1930). Analyst, 55, 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(17)Fujita, & Iwatake, (1931). Biochem. Z. 242, 43.Google Scholar
(18)Doak, (1939). N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. 21, 91B.Google Scholar
(19)Garrison, (1937). J. Ass. Off. Agric. Chem. 20, 343.Google Scholar
(20)Somogyi, (1930). J. biol. Chem. 86, 655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(21)Wiley, (1884). Amer. Chem. J. 6, 289.Google Scholar
(22)Garrison, (1939). J. Ass. Off. Agric. Chem. 22, 489.Google Scholar
(23)Richmond, (1910). Analyst, 35, 516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar