Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to analyze and compare the quality and flavor of dromedary and bifocal camel yogurt. Methods: Through physicochemical analysis, texture analysis, rheological analysis, SPME-GC-MC, sensory evaluation, etc., the overall differences in quality and flavor of dromedary and bifocal camel yogurt were determined. Results: The viable bacteria count, protein, fat, total solids content, and antioxidant activity of dromedary camel yogurt were lower than those of bifocal camel yogurt （P<0.05）, but it exhibited better storage stability than bifocal camel yogurt （P<0.05）. Texture analysis showed that the hardness of bifocal camel yogurt was significantly higher than that of dromedary camel yogurt （P<0.05）, while the adhesiveness, cohesiveness, and gumminess of dromedary camel yogurt were significantly higher than those of bifocal camel yogurt （P<0.05）. No significant differences were found in elasticity and chewiness between the two. Rheological characteristics showed that both single and bifocal camel yogurt exhibited shear-thinning flow characteristics, with initial apparent viscosity values of 5.82 and 2.33 Pa·s, respectively. Both formed thixotropic loops, with areas of 2 421.82 and 3 674.16 Pa/s, respectively. The exhibited gel properties, with dromedary camel yogurt having higher elasticity and viscosity. A total of 48 volatile flavor substances were detected in single and bifocal camel yogurt, with significant differences in the content of volatile flavor substances shared by the two camel yogurt types （P<0.05）. The content of volatile acids, esters, aldehydes, ketones, and other substances with lower flavor thresholds was relatively higher in bifocal camel yogurt, making its flavor superior. The sensory evaluation score of dromedary camel yogurt was higher than that of bifocal camel yogurt （P<0.05）. Conclusion: Bifocal camel yogurt has higher nutritional and flavor substance content, while dromedary camel yogurt exhibits superior storage stability and taste.
Publication Date
7-22-2024
First Page
173
Last Page
179
DOI
10.13652/j.spjx.1003.5788.2024.80242
Recommended Citation
Yang, LI and Shuxing, CHEN
(2024)
"A comparative study on the quality and flavor of dromedary and bifocal camel yogurt,"
Food and Machinery: Vol. 40:
Iss.
5, Article 25.
DOI: 10.13652/j.spjx.1003.5788.2024.80242
Available at:
https://www.ifoodmm.cn/journal/vol40/iss5/25
References
[1] KHAN F B, ANSARI M A, UDDIN S, et al. Prospective role of bioactive molecules andexosomes in the therapeutic potential of camel milk against human diseases: An updated perspective[J]. Life, 2022, 12（7）: 990.
[2] 热孜姑丽·库尔班, 张志东, 孙建, 等. 生鲜驼乳及发酵驼乳中益生乳酸菌的研究进展[J]. 食品科技, 2024, 49（1）: 1-8.
KURBAN R Z, ZHANG Z D, SUN J, et al. Research progress on probiotic lactic acid bacteria in fresh camel milk and fermented camel milk[J]. Food Technology, 2024, 49（1）: 1-8.
[3] LI L Y, WANG J, LI M J, et al. Detection of the adulteration of camel milk powder with cow milk by ultra-high performance liquid chromatography （UPLC）[J]. International Dairy Journal, 2021, 121: 105117.
[4] 蔡树东, 黄浩, 阿里甫·努肉力, 等. 骆驼乳对疾病辅助治疗作用研究进展[J]. 中国草食动物科学, 2019, 39（6）: 52-55.
CAI S D, HUANG H, NUROULI A, et al. Research progress on the adjuvant therapeutic effect of camel milk on diseases[J]. Chinese Herbivorous Animal Science, 2019, 39（6）: 52-55.
[5] 王瑞, 周克夫, 汪建红. 骆驼奶对1型糖尿病小鼠的辅助治疗效果[J]. 厦门大学学报（自然科学版）, 2015, 54（3）: 331-334.
WANG R, ZHOU K F, WANG J H. The adjuvant therapeutic effect of camel milk on type 1 diabetes mice[J]. Journal of Xiamen University （Natural Science Edition）, 2015, 54（3）: 331-334.
[6] SOLEYMANZADEH N, MIRDAMADI S, KIANIRAD M. Antioxidant activity of camel and bovine milk fermented by lactic acid bacteria isolated from traditional fermented camel milk（Chal）[J]. Dairy Science & Technology, 2016, 96（4）: 443-457.
[7] BENKERROUM N, DEHHAOUI M, TLAIHA R. Chymosin addition for yogurt making from camel yogurt[J]. Agricultural Research, 2022, 11: 138-145.
[8] BUCHILINA A, ARYANA K. Physicochemical and microbiological characteristics of camel milk yogurt as influenced by monk fruit sweetener[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2020, 28（3）: 267-278.
[9] 陈军, 邓晓锋, 乔春华, 等. 新疆地区双峰驼品种来源及开发利用现状[J]. 黑龙江动物繁殖, 2021, 29（3）: 47-49, 54.
CHEN J, DENG X F, QIAO C H, et al. The source and development and utilization status of bactrian camel varieties in Xinjiang region[J]. Heilongjiang Animal Reproduction, 2021, 29（3）: 47-49, 54.
[10] 熊磊. 长货架期低热量发酵骆驼乳产品研究[D]. 无锡: 江南大学, 2016: 35-42.
XIONG L. Research on long shelf life low calorie fermented camel milk products[D]. Wuxi: Jiangnan University, 2016: 35-42.
[11] WANG L, HE Y, SWANSON O S, et al. Optimization of mediun composition and culture conditions for cell multiplication of a high quality milk beer fermentation yeast（Kluyveromyces marxianus）[J]. Food Science and Technology Research, 2020, 26: 351-361.
[12] WANG L, ZHONG H, LIU K, et al. The evaluation of kefir pure culture starter:Liquid-core capsule entrapping microorganisms isolated from kefir grains[J]. Food Science and Technology International, 2016, 22: 598-608.
[13] 王伟佳, 高晓夏月, 刘爱国, 等. 不同热处理无乳糖酸奶与普通酸奶品质的比较[J]. 食品与发酵工业, 2021, 47（5）: 99-104.
WANG W J, GAO X X Y, LIU A G, et al. Comparison of quality between lactose free yogurt and regular yogurt with different heat treatments[J]. Food and Fermentation Industry, 2021, 47（5）: 99-104.
[14] SON S, LEWIS B A. Free radical scavenging and antioxidative activity of caffeic acid amide and ester analogues: Structure-activity relationship[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2002, 50（3）: 468-472.
[15] 杨希娟, 张杰, 党斌, 等. 西藏灵菇中产胞外多糖假肠膜明串珠菌发酵性能及流变学特性研究[J]. 食品工业科技, 2017, 38（4）: 106-110, 115.
YANG X J, ZHANG J, DANG B, et al. Study on fermentation performance and rheological properties of leuconostoc pseud oenterica producing exopolysaccharide in Xizang Linggu[J]. Food Industry Technology, 2017, 38（4）: 106-110, 115.
[16] 赵晓, 杜琨, 张媛. 菊粉对合生元酸奶质构、流变学特性和微观结构的影响[J]. 食品工业科技, 2023, 44（1）: 72-77.
ZHAO X, DU K, ZHANG Y. The effect of inulin on the texture, rheological properties, and microstructure of synbiotic yogurt[J]. Food Industry Technology, 2023, 44（1）: 72-77.
[17] 韩秋煜, 许玮宸, 李雪飞, 等. 绵羊酸奶与山羊酸奶品质和风味的对比[J]. 安徽农业大学学报, 2022, 49（4）: 681-686.
HAN Q Y, XU W C, LI X F, et al. Comparison of quality and flavor between sheep yogurt and goat yogurt[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural University, 2022, 49（4）: 681-686.
[18] DOMAGATA J. Instrumental texture syneresis and microstructure of yoghurts prepared from goat, cow and sheep milk[J]. International Journal of Food Properties, 2009, 12（3）: 605-615.
[19] 孙鹏伟, 刘娅妮, 李然, 等. 不同添加量的双孢蘑菇粉对酸奶流变学和质构特性的影响[J]. 食品工业科技, 2024, 45（9）: 54-61.
SUN P W, LIU Y N, LI R, et al. The effect of different dosages of agaricus bisporus powder on the rheological and textural properties of yogurt[J]. Food Industry Technology, 2024, 45（9）: 54-61.
[20] 张亦, 王亮, 吕自力, 等. 牛、山羊和骆驼酸奶营养与理化特性的比较研究[J]. 中国乳品工业, 2022, 50（10）: 14-22.
ZHANG Y, WANG L, LU Z L, et al. A comparative study on the nutritional and physicochemical properties of yogurt from cows, goats, and camels[J]. China Dairy Industry, 2022, 50（10）: 14-22.
[21] 罗倩, 田计均, 唐媛, 等. 山葵酸奶工艺及挥发性风味物质研究[J]. 食品研究与开发, 2020, 41（7）: 149-158.
LUO Q, TIAN J J, TANG Y, et al. Research on the process and volatile flavor compounds of wasabi yogurt[J]. Food Research and Development, 2020, 41（7）: 149-158.