Skoči na glavni sadržaj

Pregledni rad

https://doi.org/10.15567/mljekarstvo.2023.0201

The importance of somatic cell count in dairy technology

Isfendiyar Darbaz ; Near East University, Faculty of Veterinary, Medicine Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nicosia, Cyprus
Beyza H. Ulusoy orcid id orcid.org/0000-0001-9278-2537 ; Near East University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Department of Food Hygiene and Technology, Nicosia, Cyprus
Tahire Darbaz ; Near East University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Department of Food Hygiene and Technology, Nicosia, Cyprus
Canan Hecer ; Istanbul Esenyurt University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, Istanbul, Turkey
Selim Aslan ; Near East University, Faculty of Veterinary, Medicine Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nicosia, Cyprus


Puni tekst: engleski pdf 99 Kb

str. 75-84

preuzimanja: 473

citiraj

Puni tekst: hrvatski pdf 99 Kb

str. 75-84

preuzimanja: 154

citiraj

Preuzmi JATS datoteku


Sažetak

Mastitis is an important infection that affects herd health, udder health and milk yield of individual animals. Somatic cells (SCs) naturally present in milk are used as an indicator of subclinical mastitis, but also to assess milk quality and safety. Somatic cell count is the main monitoring variable used in milk quality and safety assessment. This review especially focuses on the effect of SCs on milk as food and also their effect on the dairy technology. The most significant effect of SCC on dairy technology is provided by the enzymes released from these cells. Alternatively, a limited number of conclusions were reported that SCs may assist dairy technology. SCs pass to milk and continue inhibitory effect on bacteria.

Ključne riječi

somatic cell count; raw milk; quality; milk safety; dairy technology

Hrčak ID:

296410

URI

https://hrcak.srce.hr/296410

Datum izdavanja:

27.3.2023.

Podaci na drugim jezicima: hrvatski

Posjeta: 1.505 *




Introduction

Milk is a high-value biological fluid used for human nutrition. On the other hand, milk itself is a highly perishable food, containing suitable nutrients, moisture and optimum pH for microbiological growth, resulting in subsequent spoilage. From that point of view, spoilage prevention, together with monitoring safety and quality of raw milk are highly important with regards to public health and commercial benefits. Somatic cells (SCs) are naturally present in milk. The somatic cell count (SCC) represents the acceptable number of SCs, as a sign for monitoring subclinic mastitis in herd and also to evaluate quality and safety parameters. An increase in SCC above the defined limit is an indicative parameter for udder inflammation. Routine diagnosis of mastitis is based on the indicators of inflammation, and consequently the milk SCC has been used longly in the history and still being used (Leitner et al., 2016;Rainard et al., 2018). Mastitis is an inflammation of the mammary gland that can be caused by chemical, physical or traumatic accidents as well as by microorganisms, usually bacteria, which results in tissue damage (Bae et al., 2017;Carvalho-Sombra et al., 2021;Pegolo et al., 2021). Subclinical mastitis is 15 to 40 times more prevalent than clinical mastitis and causes high economic losses (Malik et al., 2018). In this regard, SCC with the standard plate count analysis are the main monitoring variables used for the assessment the quality of milk (Moradi et al., 2021;Naing et al., 2019). Increase of SCC in milk is related with changes in milk components, properties and microbiological contamination (Barlowska et al. 2009; Musayeve et al., 2016). Due to the huge importance of monitor the quality and safety aspects of raw milk, this review specially focuses on the role of SCs for tracking the quality parameters of milk and meaning of SCC in terms of milk technology.

Definition of somatic cells and meaning of somatic cell count in raw milk

The mammary gland has its own immune defence system for fighting against infections. Leukocytes and other immune system cells pass from blood into udder to fight pathogens. They also play a role on repairing the damaged tissues, thus causing an increase in the number of SCs that are released into the milk (Albenzio et al., 2019;Moradi et al., 2021;Petzer et al., 2017). The number of SCs are called somatic cell count (SCC) and accepted as a sign of udder health and is also used as a parameter to indicate milk quality and the products produced from these milks. Increased SCC is related with udder inflammation, which leads to pathogen contamination and a change in the sensorial and physicochemical parameters of milk (Paape et al., 2002;Talukder and Ahmed, 2017). When the pathogenic bacteria invade the mammary gland, an infection occurs. This infection causes inflammation and therefore white cells migrate from blood to mammary gland to fight against infection agents. The sheep and the goats have higher SCC than cows in normal conditions even if there is no infection in udders, which increases throughout the duration of the lactation stage. Milk secretion in cows is mainly via the merocrine way but in goats and sheeps the milk is secreted in apocrine pathway. This is the reason why the milk contains noncellular cytoplasmic particles which can be confused with SCs in milk from infected udders (Alhussien and Dang, 2018;Moradi et al., 2021;Paape et al., 2001;Stocco et al., 2019).

The SCs profile in milk varies depending on a number of factors such as species, breed type, lactation period, genetic factors, diurnal variation, milking intervals, sampling procedures/intervals, daily stress and/or trauma, herd management strategies, seasonality and storage conditions (Li et al., 2014). In this section, members of SCs and the roles they play are described. SCs include epithelial cells, leucocytes, macrophages, polymorphonuclear neutrophils cells (PMNs), and lymphocytes and they are generally the predominant cell types. Generally, macrophages are also predominant in healthy cows’ milk. In the beginning of infection, the macrophages secretes some chemical compounds such as messengers or chemoattractants, and these chemicals increase the number of PMNs in the local infection area (Burvenich et al., 2003;Li et al., 2014;Pham, 2006). In milk of cows which are free from mastitis, SCC is typically up to 100,000 cells/mL (nearly, 50% epithelial cells, 50% WBCs). If SCC is more than 200,000 cells/mL this generally indicates udder infection and the milk that in normal forms (Alhussien and Dang, 2018;Kelly et al., 2018;Panthi et al., 2017). Additionally, it is reported that the milk of goats and sheep without infection, includes typically higher SCC at about 200,000 cells/mL for sheep milk and 300,000 cells/mL for goat milk) (Hernandez-Ramos et al., 2019). Also, SCC may be as high as 2,000,000 cells/mL in the last period of the lactation with no infection (Moradi et al., 2021;Quintas et al., 2017). Another important point to highlight is the SCC is the total number of cells does not give any idea for distribution of cell types and cell profile. Hence, milk with different SC profiles has a particular fingerprint which may be related to the different final characteristics of the dairy product (Li et al., 2014).

The international limits for SCC in raw milk

International and national legislations have been established to provide the maximum acceptable limits of SCC in different countries (Table 1) (Moradi et al., 2021). The upper limit according to EU Regulation no. 853/2004 is 400,000 cells/mL in cows’ milk (EU, 2004), goat and sheep milk acceptable limits are not currently defined in the EU (Ducková et al., 2019;Li et al., 2014).

Table 1 The acceptable limits for SCs in bovine raw milk in different countries (Moradi et al., 2021)
Legal limit (cell/mL)Countries
350,000Switzerland
400,000Australia
New-Zealand
Canada
European Union
Sweden
Finland
450,000Iceland
Denmark
500,000Brazil
China
Iran
Turkey
Tunisia
700,000Russia
750,000USA
No limitChile
India

Bovine milk tank somatic cell count (BMTSCC) values are routinely analysed to define if the milk production meets the national and international regulatory standards. The national limits for BMTSCC vary from <400,000 cells/mL (EU, Australia, New Zealand and Canada) to <1,000,000 cells/mL (Brazil) (Ruegg and Pantoja, 2013). The BMTSCC is used for monitoring cow udder health and mastitis level. The optimal BMSCC is not definitively described, but it is generally considered to be <250,000 cells/mL for milk premium (De Vliegher et al.;2012).

The mean of high SCC in terms of milk safety and quality

The meaning of SCs in raw milk in terms of milk safety and milk quality is associated with two important issues: (1) the direct effect of the released SC endogenous enzymes, (2) indicatin the presence of contaminating bacteria which induce compositional and physicochemical changes in the milk (Albenzio et al., 2011). In many studies, SCs can be the sources of enzymes which change milk composition and cause defects in the end products. Numerous enzymes can be released into milk after the cell lysis and lipases (e.g., lipoprotein lipase), oxidases (e.g., catalase, lactoperoxidase), glycosidases (e.g., lysozyme) and proteases (e.g. cathepsins, elastase, collagenase) are those moft widely reported groups of enzymes (Ducková et al., 2019;Li et al., 2014;Murphy et al., 2019). The number of somatic cells gives an idea for both, individual animals' milk and for BMTSCC as well, as a measure of general intramammary health status of the herd (Moradi et al., 2021;Leitner et al., 2016)

Taking SCC under loop in terms of dairy technology

Qualified raw milk for manufacturing high quality and nutritious dairy products should (1) be complete in terms of composition (e.g. protein, fat, lactose amount); (2) be free from off- flavours; (3) be free from any residues and other adulterants; (4) have an acceptable microbiological load (5) have acceptable level of SCC (Murphy et al., 2019). If the main effects of SCC in milk and dairy products are summarized; lower cheese yield, fat and protein loss, high humidity-low total solids, shortened shelf-life and changes in sensory characteristics, more free fatty acids due to greater lipolysis are the most important statements regarding high SCC (Bezerre et al., 2020;Deshapriya et al., 2019;Fernandes et al., 2007;Ivanov et al., 2020;Ma et al., 2000).

As described above SCsʹ endogenous enzymes are the most important components which directly effect dairy processing. They are active in the udder and are kept at optimal conditions with the body temperature, however their activity continues even during the refrigerated storage and ultimately leads to changes in the unique properties of processed products (Kelly and Fox 2006). However, the enzymes released from SCs are difficult to measure and it is still not clear (Li et al., 2014), these enzymes can be classified as lipases, oxidases, glycosidases and proteases. Proteases are the most studied of these enzymes and are active on caseins. Therefore, proteases can modify the casein degradation of milk and their products and can change the textural and organoleptic properties of the final products, additionally, they may reults in a reduction in the total cheese yield. Cathepsin B, cathepsins G and elastase, which are important proteases from SCs, are responsible for the hydrolysis of αs1- and β-caseins. Another protease cathepsin D can hydrolyze all caseins (αs1-, αs2-, β- and κ-caseins) (Hurley et al. 2000). Plasmin which is a heat-stable protease, is a predominant enzyme for proteolysis in milk from healthy and infected udders (Leitner et al., 2006). High plasmin activity is associated with increased clotting time, decreased moisture in cheese, reduction in curd stability and yield (Kelly and Fox, 2006). Plasminogen activators related to SCs, may cause differences in plasmin activity (Albenzio et al. 2004). On the other hand, although, the profile of SC types present in milk is not fully identified in general, enzymatic activities may be considered as heterogeneous (Santos et al., 2003). Milk with different levels of SC counts including different endogenous enzymes reflect as different characteristics of the end product.

Another important SC endogenous enzyme is lipoprotein lipase. Lipoprotein lipases are generally considered responsible for "rancid" flavour in some dairy products. The real effect of lipase from SCs is unclear due to different sources of lipolytic enzymes in milk (Dherbécourt et al., 2010). Similar conclusions could be drawn for other SC enzymes. Added enzymes during the dairy process such as rennet and pepsin or fungal rennet and enzymes produced by natural or contaminant microbiota of milk can also contribute to this issue (Li et al., 2014).Moradi et al. (2021) reviewed all enzymes associated with SCs in their paper, which is presented inTable 2.

Table 2 SCs and their enzymes found in raw milk and dairy products (Moradi et al., 2021)
Somatic cell typeEnzymes
MacrophagesCathepsin B
Cathepsin D
Cathepsin H
Cathepsin L
Cathepsin G
Cathepsin S
Elastase
Lipoprotein lipase
Collagenase
Myeloperoxidase
PMNsCathepsin B
Cathepsin C
Cathepsin D
Cathepsin L
Cathepsin G
Cathepsin S
Elastase
Lipoprotein lipase
Collagenase
Myeloperoxidase
LymphocytesElastase
Epithelial cellsCathepsin B
Cathepsin D
Cathepsin L
UnknownCathepsin K
Catalase

Correlation between SCC and nutritional components

Research has shown that elevated SCC is a factor which changes the composition of the milk (Coelho et al., 2017).Geary et al. (2013) reviewed many of these publications in their meta-analysis study.Table 3 which is modified from the study ofGeary et al. (2013), represents the summary of the correlation between the SCC and nutritional components of milk.

Table 3 Effect of SCC on the milk components (Geary et al., 2013)
Components (%)Effect
Crude proteinNot consistent
True proteinNot consistent
Total nitrogenIncrease
Non-protein nitrogenNot consistent
Non-casein nitrogenNot consistent
CaseinNot consistent
Casein as a percentage of true proteinDecrease
Whey proteinIncrease
Whey fatNot consistent
FatNot consistent
LactoseDecrease
Total SolidNot consistent
Solids non fatNot consistent

AsLe Roux et al. (2003) concluded in their review article, during the infection, 3 mechanisms may be involved in milk composition change: reduction in synthesis of milk components, an increase in the permeability of the milk barrier and also in the proteolytic activities. As the conclusion of the study performed byGuariglia et al. (2015), the lactose levels decreased with increased SCC. On the other hand, defatted dry extract (DDE) is minimally influenced by increased SCC. It has been shown that the percentage of fat increased with increased SCC (Guariglia et al., 2015). This increase in fat content can be explained with the reduced milk production.Guariglia et al. (2015) andNoro et al. (2006) also observed that the milk protein concentrations increased with elevated levels of SCC. However, the casein level decreased with the high levels of SCC, whereby the plasma proteins migrate to inflammation site and increase the milk protein concentration. Reduced lactose content might be associated to the decreased lactose amount transferred from blood to the mammary gland due to the differences in membrane permeability (Pereira et al., 1999).

Effect of SCC on cheese technology

SC enzyme cathepsin D which has a similar amino acid sequence to chymosin and pepsin, is one of the most researched enzymes in milk and cheeses. Similarity to chymosin and pepsin allows this enzyme to contribute to the curd forming mechanism in the cheese making process (Lee et al., 1998;Li et al., 2014;Moatsou et al., 2008). On the other hand, cathepsin B which has similar cleavage sites to cathepsin D and chymosin and is active after heat treatment at about 55 °C /30 min or 72 °C/30 s (Magboul et al., 2001). Elastase which is another enzyme from SCs, influences coagulation like cathepsins and effective on cheese maturation. High SCC also increases plasmin activity and plasmin significantly active on breaking down of casein. In conclusion, all of the aforementioned mechanisms can promote more proteolysis in cheeses made with high SCC (Le Maréchal et al., 2011).

AsGeary et al. (2013) mentioned, there is a significantly negative relation between SCC and recoveries of protein and fat for variety of cheeses. SCC cause lower yield as a consequence of the decreased casein content and decreased level of albumins such as α-lactalbumin and β-lactoglobulin. On the other hand, high SCC increases lactoferrin and lysozyme levels and serum albumine. SCC also prolongs rennet coagulation time, which delays cheese manufacturing, decreased curd firmness, increased cheese moisture and reduced cheese quality. Many quality defects were observed by researchers in cheeses produced from high SCC milk.Auldist et al. (1996) experimentally produced cheddar cheese with milk including 252,000 and 1,400,000 cells/mL. They found that cheeses produced from milk with higher SCC had a higher moisture content. These authors also observed textural and flavour defects due to high moisture and fat oxidation by lipolysis.Vianna et al. (2008) studied on Prato cheese manufactured with milk with SCC lower than 200,000 cells/mL and higher than 700,000 cells/mL. They found a 3% higher moisture in the cheeses with high SCC. The level of SCs also affects the pH of the end product (Hachana et al., 2018)

Another important issue for cheeses is the level of biogenic amines (BAs). SCC is also considered as one of the factors related to BA formation in cheeses (Costa et al., 2018).Ubaldo et al. (2015) detected tyramine and tryptamine in Mozzarella cheese which is produced with milk including high SCC. However, these two BAs are not naturally found in this type of cheese.Ivanova et al. (2021) reported BA concentration of cheeses from milk with low SCC (< 400,000 cells/mL) and Medium SCC (between 500,000 and 600,000 cells/mL) remained below 10 mg/kg, while they reported an increase in the BA content during the maturation period and cold storage in the cheese produced from high SCC milk (> 1,000,000 cells/mL). The main BAs reported were tyramine, putrescine and cadaverine at the end of storage.

Effect of SCC on yoghurt technology

Higher SCC affects the pH and the lactose content of milk, and accordingly changes the acidifying dynamics during the yoghurt fermentation and leads to unsuitable texture and sensory scores (Vivar-Quintana et al., 2006).Oliveira et al. (2002) reported lower sensorial scores for yoghurt produced from milk containing more than 800,000 cells/mL.Hachana and Paape (2012) investigated the high SCC on the physico-chemical characteristics of stirred yoghurt under cold chain. For this study, yoghurts with low, intermediate and high amount of SCs (95,000 cells/mL, 398,000 cells/mL and 1,150,000 cells/mL, respectively) were experimentally produced. In conclusion, SCC did not significantly affect acidity or the pH of the yoghurt after 1 day of storing, but significant differences were observed after 14 and 28 days of storage. Yoghurt samples made from intermediate and high SCC milk showed higher viscosity and lower casein content on days 14th and 28th of storage. High FFA concentrations were detected only in yoghurt made from high SCC milk. As expected, high number of SCs increased both proteolysis and lipolysis in yoghurt while storing under cold chain and this leads to differences in its sensorial properties.Najaf Najafi et al. (2010) produced yoghurt with sheep milk and investigated the effect of SCC on yoghurt quality. They concluded that SCC did not affect the total solids and fat content of yoghurt produced from sheep milk. They also reported no effect on the acidity of the yoghurt after 24 h, but a significant effect was observed after 168 h of storage.Vivar-Quintana et al. (2006) showed that the pH values of yoghurt produced from sheep milk with high SCC were lower than yoghurt produced from low or medium SCC milk at the 15th day of storage under cold chain.Fernandes et al. (2007) reported that the casein amount in high SCC milk yoghurt was higher than that in low SCC milk yoghurt. However, Roger and Mitchell (1994) reported a negative correlation between SCC and yoghurt viscosity.

Ivanov et al. (2020) investigated the effect SCC on the volatile organic compounds of cow milk yoghurt. A lower diacetyl and acetoin content and a higher content of 2-heptanone, and butanoic and hexanoic acids were reported in yoghurt samples from batches with high SCC milk. Significantly lower concentrations of the carbonyl compounds and higher concentrations of butanoic and hexanoic acids were established in the yoghurt of high SCC batch compared to low and medium batches. These data highlight the fact that SCC has an important effect on the chemical composition which provides yoghurt with its unique sensorial properties. Specifically, diacetyl and acetone affect the aroma of fermented milk. From that point of view, high SCC could be considered as the reason of slightly expressed aroma in yoghurts. Additionally, higher butanoic and hexanoic acid contents may cause taste defects. The increased FFA levels originate from lipolytic processes. This may lead to higher butanoic and hexanoic acid contents in high SCC milk yoghurts because of lipolytic enzymes of SCs (Li et al., 2014).Ivanov et al. (2020) also reported the appearance and taste defects in yoghurts obtained from milk with high SCC and linked it to the high levels of butanoic and hexanoic acid. On the other hand, chemical (titratable acidity, pH, fat, total protein) and microbiological parameters were not affected by SCC during the 30-day storage.

Conclusion

Milk obtained from mastitis-bearing udder might contain high numbers of saprophytes that spoil the product and pathogens that cause food infections. In addition, immune system elements and epithelial cell debris in the mammary gland, which tries to protect itself from infection, pass into the milk we consume under the definition of "somatic cells". Those somatic cells give a valuable information about all these aforementioned events, but in fact they are undesirable in terms of dairy technology. For that reason, countries define legal limits for the count of somatic cells in milk and have pricing systems dependent on this count. The most important effect of SCC on dairy technology is the enzymes released from these cells. Limited number of conclusions were reported that SCs may assist dairy technology. However, it should not be ignored that the SCC must remain below a certain limit and the microbial load of the milk must remain at an acceptable level. Consuming milk with a high cell count has no direct risks to public health. But the relationship of milk with high SCC to clinic and subclinic mastitis, low hygienic conditions in farm, antibiotic residues and the presence of pathogen microorganisms can pose risk factors for consumers when high SCC milk is marketed.

References

1 

Albenzio M, Caroprese M, Santillo A, Marino R, Taibi L, Sevi A. Effects of somatic cell count and stage of lactation on the plasmin activity and cheese-making properties of ewe milk. J Dairy Sci. 2004;87(3):533–42. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(04)73194-X PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15202636

2 

Albenzio M, Santillo A. Biochemical characteristics of ewe and goat milk: Effect on the quality of dairy products. Small Rumin Res. 2011;101:33–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2011.09.023

3 

Albenzio M, Figliola L, Caroprese M, Marino R, Sevi A, Santillo A. Somatic cell count in sheep milk. Small Rumin Res. 2019;176:24–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2019.05.013

4 

Alhussien MN, Dang A. Milk somatic cells, factors influencing their release, future prospects, and practical utility in dairy animals: An overview. Vet World. 2018;11:562–77. https://doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2018.562-577 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29915493

5 

Auldist MJ, Coats ST, Sutherland BJ, Mayes JJ, McDowell GH, Rogers GL. Effect of somatic cell count and stage of lactation on raw milk composition and the yield and quality of cheddar cheese. J Dairy Res. 1996;63(2):269–80. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022029900031769 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8861348

6 

Bae H, Jeong CH, Cheng WN, Hong K, Seo HG, Han SG. Oxidative stress-induced inflammatory responses and effects of N-acetylcysteine in bovine mammary alveolar cells. J Dairy Res. 2017;84(4):418–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002202991700067X PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29154739

7 

Barłowska J, Litwińczuk Z, Wolanciuk A, Brodziak A. Relationship of somatic cell count to daily yield and technological usefulness of milk from. Pol J Vet Sci. 2009;12(1):75–9.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19459443/ PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19459443

8 

Bezerra JDS, Sales DC, Oliveira JPFD, Silva YMDO, Urbano SA, Lima DMD Junior, et al. Effect of high somatic cell counts on the sensory acceptance and consumption intent of pasteurized milk and coalho cheese. Food Sci Technol (Campinas). 2020;41:423–31.https://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=XS2021022671 https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.21620

9 

Burvenich C, Van Merris V, Mehrzad J, Diez-Fraile A, Duchateau L. Severity of E. coli mastitis is mainly determined by cow factors. Vet Res. 2003;34(5):521–64. https://doi.org/10.1051/vetres:2003023 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14556694

10 

Carvalho-Sombra TCF, Fernandes DD, Bezerra BMO, Nunes-Pinheiro DCS. Systemic inflammatory biomarkers and somatic cell count in dairy cows with subclinical mastitis. Vet Anim Sci. 2021;11:100165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vas.2021.100165 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33665474

11 

Coelho VRP, Rodrigues CEC, Corassin CH, Balthazar CF, Cappato LP, Ferreira MVS, et al. Milk with different somatic cells counts and the physicochemical, microbiological characteristics and fatty acid profile of pasteurised milk cream: is there an association? Int J Food Sci. 2017;52(12):2631–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.13550

12 

Costa M, Rodrigues B, Frasao B, Conte-Junior C. (2018): Chapter 2 - biogenic amines as food quality index and chemical risk for human consumption. In: Grumezescu AM, Holban AM (eds) Food quality: balancing health and disease handbook of food bioengineering, pp 75-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811442-1.00002-X https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811442-1.00002-X

13 

De Vliegher S, Fox LK, Piepers S, McDougall S, Barkema HW. Invited review: Mastitis in dairy heifers: Nature of the disease, potential impact, prevention, and control. J Dairy Sci. 2012;95(3):1025–40. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-4074 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22365187

14 

Deshapriya RMC, Rahularaj R, Ransinghe RMSBK. Mastitis, somatic cell count and milk quality: an overview. Sri Lanka Veterinary Journal. 2019;66(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.4038/slvj.v66i1.32

15 

Dherbécourt J, Bourlieu C, Maillard MB, Aubert-Frogerais L, Richoux R, Thierry A. Time course and specificity of lipolysis in Swiss cheese. J Agric Food Chem. 2010;58(22):11732–9. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf102572z PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20961108

16 

Ducková V, Čanigová M, Zajác P, Remeňová Z, Kročko M, Nagyová Ľ. Effect of somatic cell counts occurred in mılk on qualıty of Slovak tradıtıonal cheese - Parenıca. Potravinárstvo. 2019;13(1): https://doi.org/10.5219/1099

17 

EU. (2004): European Regulation no. 853/2004 of 29 april 2004.

18 

Fernandes AM, Oliveira CAF, Lima CG. Effects ofsomatic cell counts in milk on physical and chemical characteristicsof yoghurt. Int Dairy J. 2007;17(2):111–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2006.02.005

19 

Geary U, Lopez-Villalobos N, O’Brien B, Garrick DJ, Shalloo L. (2013): Meta-analysis to investigate relationships between somatic cell count and raw milk composition, Cheddar cheese processing characteristics and cheese composition. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research 119-133.https://t-stor.teagasc.ie/handle/11019/526

20 

Guariglia BAD, Dos Santos PA, De Souza Araújo L, Giovannini CI, Neves RBS, Nicolau ES, et al. Effect of the somatic cell count on physicochemical components of milk from crossbred cows. Afr J Biotechnol. 2015;14(17):1519–24. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJB2015.14540

21 

Hachana Y, Paape MJ. Physical and chemical characteristics of yoghurt produced from whole milk with different levels of somatic cell counts. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2012;63(3):303–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/09637486.2011.627839 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21999630

22 

Hachana Y, Znaidi A, M ́Hamdi, N. Effect of somatic cell count on milk composition and Mozzarella cheese quality. Acta Aliment. 2018;47(1):88–96. https://doi.org/10.1556/066.2018.47.1.11

23 

Hernández-Ramos PA, Vivar-Quintana AM, Revilla I. Estimation of somatic cell count levels of hard cheeses using physicochemical composition and artificial neural networks. J Dairy Sci. 2019;102:1014–24. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2018-14787 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30591330

24 

Hurley MJ, Larsen LB, Kelly AL, McSweeney PLH. The milk acid proteinase cathepsin D: a review. Int Dairy J. 2000;10(10):673–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-6946(00)00100-X

25 

Ivanov G, Bilgucu E, Ivanova I, Dimitrova M. Volatile organic compound profiles of yoghurt produced from cow’s milk with different somatic cell counts. Int Dairy J. 2020;73(3):563–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0307.12702

26 

Ivanova I, Ivanova M, Ivanov G, Bilgucu E. Effect of somatic cells count in cow milk on the formation of biogenic amines in cheese. J Food Sci Technol. 2021;58(9):3409–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-020-04935-z PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34366458

27 

Kelly AL, Leitner G, Merin U. (2018): Milk quality and udder health: Test methods and standards. In Reference module in food science. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.

28 

Kelly AL, Fox PF. Indigenous enzymes in milk: A synopsis of future research requirements. Int Dairy J. 2006;16(6):707–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2005.10.018

29 

Le Marechal C, Thiery R, Vautor E, Le Loir Y. Mastitis impact on tech- nological properties of milk and quality of milk productsda review. Dairy Sci Technol. 2011;91:247–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13594-011-0009-6

30 

Le Roux Y, Laurent F, Moussaoui F. Polymorphonuclear proteolytic activity and milk composition change. Vet Res. 2003;34(5):629–45. https://doi.org/10.1051/vetres:2003021 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14556698

31 

Lee AY, Gulnik SV, Erickson JW. Conformational switching in an aspartic proteinase. Nat Struct Biol. 1998;5(10):866–71.https://www.nature.com/articles/nsb1098_866 https://doi.org/10.1038/2306 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9783744

32 

Leitner G, Krifucks O, Merin U, Lavi Y, Silanikove N. Interactions between bacteria type, proteolysis of casein and physico-chemical properties of bovine milk. Int Dairy J. 2006;16:648–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2005.10.020

33 

Leitner G, Lavon Y, Matzrafi Z, Benun O, Bezman D, Merin U. Somatic cell counts, chemical composition and coagulation properties of goat and sheep bulk tank milk. Int Dairy J. 2016;58:9–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2015.11.004

34 

Li N, Richoux R, Boutinaud M, Martin P, Gagnaire V. Role of somatic cells on dairy processes and products: a review. Dairy Sci Technol. 2014;94(6):517–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13594-014-0176-3 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25309683

35 

Ma Y, Ryan C, Barbano DM, Galton DM, Rudan MA, Boor KJ. Effects of somatic cell count on quality and shelf-life of pasteurized fluid milk. J Dairy Sci. 2000;83:264–74. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(00)74873-9 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10714859

36 

Malik TA, Mohini M, Mir SH, Ganaie BA, Singh D, Varun TK, et al. Somatic cells in relation to udder health and milk quality-a review. Journal of Animal Health Production. 2018;6(1):18–26. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.jahp/2018/6.1.18.26

37 

Magboul AAA, Larsen LB, McSweeney PLH, Kelly AL. Cysteine protease activity in bovine milk. Int Dairy J. 2001;11:865–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-6946(01)00126-1

38 

Moatsou G, Katsaros G, Bakopanos C, Kandarakis I, Taoukis P, Politis I. Effect of high-pressure treatment at various temperatures on activity of indigenous proteolytic enzymes and denaturation of whey proteins in ovine milk. Int Dairy J. 2008;18(12):1119–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2008.06.009

39 

Moradi M, Omer AK, Razavi R, Valipour S, Guimarães JT. The relationship between milk somatic cell count and cheese production, quality and safety: A review. Int Dairy J. 2021;113:104884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2020.104884

40 

Murphy SI, Kent D, Martin NH, Evanowski RL, Patel K, Godden SM, et al. Bedding and bedding management practices are associated with mesophilic and thermophilic spore levels in bulk tank raw milk. J Dairy Sci. 2019;102(8):6885–900. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2018-16022 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31202649

41 

Musayeva K, Sederevičius A, Želvytė R, Monkevičienė I, Beliavska-Aleksiejūnė D, Stankevičius R. Relationship between somatic cell count and milk casein level obtained by two different methods. Czech J Food Sci. 2016;34(1):47–51. https://doi.org/10.17221/254/2015-CJFS

42 

Najaf Najafi M, Koocheki A, Valibaigy S. Effects of somatic cell counts on the physicochemical and rheological properties of yoghurt made from sheep’s milk. Int J Food Sci. 2010;45(4):713–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2010.02185.x

43 

Naing YW, Wai SS, Lin TN, Thu WP, Htun LL, Bawm S, et al. Bacterial content and associated risk factors influencing the quality of bulk tank milk collected from dairy cattle farms in Mandalay Region. Food Sci Nutr. 2019;7:1063–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.945 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30918649

44 

Noro G, González FHD, Campos R, Dürr JW. Effects of environmental factors on milk yield and composition of dairy herds assisted by cooperatives in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. (Fatores ambientais que afetam a produção e a composição do leite em rebanhos assistidos por cooperativas no Rio Grande do). Rev Bras Zootec. 2006;35(3):1129–35. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982006000400026

45 

Oliveira CAF, Fernandes AM, Neto OCC, Fonseca LFL. Composition and sensory evaluation of whole yoghurt produced from milk with different somatic cell counts. Aust J Dairy Technol. 2002;57(3):192.

46 

Paape MJ, Poutrel B, Contreras A, Marco JC, Capuco AV. Milk somatic cells and lactation in small ruminants. J Dairy Sci. 2001;84:237–44. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)70223-8

47 

Paape M, Mehrzad J, Zhao X, Detilleux J, Burvenich C. Defense of the bovine mammary gland by polymorphonuclear neutrophil leukocytes. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 2002;7(2):109–21. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020343717817 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12463734

48 

Panthi RR, Jordan KN, Kelly AL, Sheehan JJ. (2017): Selection and treatment of milk for cheesemaking. In P.L.H. McSweeney, P.F. Fox, P.D. Cotter, and D.W. Everett (Eds.), Cheese (4th ed., pp. 23-50). San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-417012-4.00002-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-417012-4.00002-8

49 

Pegolo S, Giannuzzi D, Bisutti V, Tessari R, Gelain ME, Gallo L, et al. Associations between differential somatic cell count and milk yield, quality, and technological characteristics in Holstein cows. J Dairy Sci. 2021;104(4):4822–36. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2020-19084 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33612239

50 

Pereira AR, Prada e Silva LF, Molon LK, Machado PF, Barancelli G. Efeito do nível de células somáticas sobre os constituintes do leite I-gordura e proteínaBrazilian. Journal of Veterinary Research and Animal Science. 1999;36:121–4. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-95961999000300003

51 

Petzer IM, Karzis J, Donkin EF, Webb EC, Etter EMC. Somatic cell count thresholds in composite and quarter milk samples as indicator of bovine intramammary infection status. Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 2017;84:e1–10. https://doi.org/10.4102/ojvr.v84i1.1269 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28397516

52 

Pham CT. Neutrophil serine proteases: specific regulators of inflammation. Nat Rev Immunol. 2006;6(7):541–50.https://www.nature.com/articles/nri1841 https://doi.org/10.1038/nri1841 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16799473

53 

Quintas H, Margatho G, Rodríguez-Estevez V, Jimenez-Granado R, Simoes J. (2017): Understanding mastitis in goats (II): Microbiological diagnosis and so- matic cells count welfare, health and breeding. In J. Simoes, and C. Gutierrez (Eds.), Vol. I. Sustainable goat production in adverse environments (pp. 335-358). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71855-2_19 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71855-2_19

54 

Rainard P, Foucras G, Boichard D, Rupp R. Invited review: low milk somatic cell count and susceptibility to mastitis. J Dairy Sci. 2018;101(8):6703–14. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2018-14593 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29803421

55 

Ruegg PL, Pantoja JCF. Understanding and using somatic cell counts to improve milk quality. Ir J Agric Food Res. 2013;•••:101–17.

56 

Santos MV, Ma Y, Caplan Z, Barbano DM. Sensory threshold of off- flavors caused by proteolysis and lipolysis in milk. J Dairy Sci. 2003;86:1601–7. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73745-X PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12778570

57 

Talukder M, Ahmed HM. Effect of somatic cell count on dairy products: a review. Asian Journal of Medical and Biological Research. 2017;3(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.3329/ajmbr.v3i1.32030

58 

Stocco G, Pazzola M, Dettori ML, Paschino P, Summer A, Cipolat-Gotet C. Effects of indirect indicators of udder health on nutrient recovery and cheese yield traits in goat milk. J Dairy Sci. 2019;102:8648–57. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2019-16369 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31351732

59 

Ubaldo JC, Carvalho A, Fonseca L, Glória M. Bioactive amines in Mozzarella cheese from milk with varying somatic cell counts. Food Chem. 2015;178:229–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.01.084 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25704706

60 

Vianna PCB, Mazal G, Santos MV, Bolini HMA, Gigante ML. Microbial and sensory changes throughout the ripening of Prato cheese made from milk with different levels of somatic cells. J Dairy Sci. 2008;91(5):1743–50. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0639 PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18420604

61 

Vivar-Quintana AM, De La Mano EB, Revilla I. Relationship between somatic cell counts and the properties of yoghurt made from ewes’ milk. Int Dairy J. 2006;16(3):262–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2005.03.006


This display is generated from NISO JATS XML with jats-html.xsl. The XSLT engine is libxslt.