Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2010 Dec;93(12):5517-37.
doi: 10.3168/jds.2010-3262.

Invited review: A commentary on predictive cheese yield formulas

Affiliations
Free article
Review

Invited review: A commentary on predictive cheese yield formulas

D B Emmons et al. J Dairy Sci. 2010 Dec.
Free article

Abstract

Predictive cheese yield formulas have evolved from one based only on casein and fat in 1895. Refinements have included moisture and salt in cheese and whey solids as separate factors, paracasein instead of casein, and exclusion of whey solids from moisture associated with cheese protein. The General, Barbano, and Van Slyke formulas were tested critically using yield and composition of milk, whey, and cheese from 22 vats of Cheddar cheese. The General formula is based on the sum of cheese components: fat, protein, moisture, salt, whey solids free of fat and protein, as well as milk salts associated with paracasein. The testing yielded unexpected revelations. It was startling that the sum of components in cheese was <100%; the mean was 99.51% (N × 6.31). The mean predicted yield was only 99.17% as a percentage of actual yields (PY%AY); PY%AY is a useful term for comparisons of yields among vats. The PY%AY correlated positively with the sum of components (SofC) in cheese. The apparent low estimation of SofC led to the idea of adjusting upwards, for each vat, the 5 measured components in the formula by the observed SofC, as a fraction. The mean of the adjusted predicted yields as percentages of actual yields was 99.99%. The adjusted forms of the General, Barbano, and Van Slyke formulas gave predicted yields equal to the actual yields. It was apparent that unadjusted yield formulas did not accurately predict yield; however, unadjusted PY%AY can be useful as a control tool for analyses of cheese and milk. It was unexpected that total milk protein in the adjusted General formula gave the same predicted yields as casein and paracasein, indicating that casein or paracasein may not always be necessary for successful yield prediction. The use of constants for recovery of fat and protein in the adjusted General formula gave adjusted predicted yields equal to actual yields, indicating that analyses of cheese for protein and fat may not always be necessary for yield prediction. Composition of cheese was estimated using a predictive formula; actual yield was needed for estimation of composition. Adjusted formulas are recommended for estimating target yields and cheese yield efficiency. Constants for solute exclusion, protein-associated milk salts, and whey solids could be used and reduced the complexity of the General formula. Normalization of fat recovery increased variability of predicted yields.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources