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
. 2021 Apr 30;19(4):e06576.
doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6576. eCollection 2021 Apr.

The use of alkaline phosphatase and possible alternative testing to verify pasteurisation of raw milk, colostrum, dairy and colostrum-based products

The use of alkaline phosphatase and possible alternative testing to verify pasteurisation of raw milk, colostrum, dairy and colostrum-based products

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) et al. EFSA J. .

Abstract

Pasteurisation of raw milk, colostrum, dairy or colostrum-based products must be achieved using at least 72°C for 15 s, at least 63°C for 30 min or any equivalent combination, such that the alkaline phosphatase (ALP) test immediately after such treatment gives a negative result. For cows' milk, a negative result is when the measured activity is ≤ 350 milliunits of enzyme activity per litre (mU/L) using the ISO standard 11816-1. The use and limitations of an ALP test and possible alternative methods for verifying pasteurisation of those products from other animal species (in particular sheep and goats) were evaluated. The current limitations of ALP testing of bovine products also apply. ALP activity in raw ovine milk appears to be about three times higher and in caprine milk about five times lower than in bovine milk and is highly variable between breeds. It is influenced by season, lactation stage and fat content. Assuming a similar pathogen inactivation rate to cows' milk and based on the available data, there is 95-99% probability (extremely likely) that pasteurised goat milk and pasteurised sheep milk would have an ALP activity below a limit of 300 and 500 mU/L, respectively. The main alternative methods currently used are temperature monitoring using data loggers (which cannot detect other process failures such as cracked or leaking plates) and the enumeration of Enterobacteriaceae (which is not suitable for pasteurisation verification but is relevant for hygiene monitoring). The inactivation of certain enzymes other than ALP may be more suitable for the verification of pasteurisation but requires further study. Secondary products of heat treatment are not suitable as pasteurisation markers due to the high temperatures needed for their production. More research is needed to facilitate a definitive conclusion on the applicability of changes in native whey proteins as pasteurisation markers.

Keywords: alkaline phosphatase; colostrum; goat; indicators; milk; pasteurisation; sheep.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic presentation of a pasteurisation unit
Figure 2
Figure 2
D‐values of the inactivation of Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP) activity in cows’, sheep, goat and equine milk as derived from various studies

  1. LOR = Lorenzen et al. (2010); VAM = Vamvakaki et al. (2006); DUM = Dumitraşcu et al. (2014); WIL = Wilińska et al. (2007); and MAR = Marchand et al. (2009). A regression line for each species has been added.

Figure 3
Figure 3
Testing of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity in pasteurised milk of non‐bovine origin as provided by four different countries in comparison to bovine ALP data (a) and zoomed in for better visualisation without clipping the data (b)

  1. The dashed line represents the legal limit for bovine milk of 350 mU/L.

Figure 4
Figure 4
Comparison of ALP activity and Enterobacteriaceae levels in goats’ milk samples
Figure D.1
Figure D.1
Overview of mean ALP values from studies included in the assessment (Table 5)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Adachi S, 1958. Formation of lactulose and tagatose from lactose in strongly heated milk. Nature, 181, 840–841. 10.1038/181840a0 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Adachi S and Patton S, 1961. Presence and significance of lactulose in milk products: a review. Journal of Dairy Science, 44, 1375–1393. 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(61)89899-8 - DOI
    1. Albillos SM, Reddy R and Salter R, 2011. Evaluation of alkaline phosphatase detection in dairy products using a modified rapid chemiluminescent method and official methods. Journal of Food Protection, 74, 1144–1154. 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-10-422 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Alegbeleye OO, Guimarães JT, Cruz AG and Sant'Ana Sant'Ana AS, 2018. Hazards of a ‘healthy’ trend? An appraisal of the risks of raw milk consumption and the potential of novel treatment technologies to serve as alternatives to pasteurization. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 82, 148–166. 10.1016/j.tifs.2018.10.007 - DOI
    1. Ali F, Hussain R, Qayyum A, Gul ST, Iqbal Z and Hassan MF, 2016. Milk somatic cell counts and some hemato‐biochemical changes in sub‐clinical mastitic dromedary She‐Camels (Camelus dromedarius). Pakistan Veterinary Journal, 36, 405–408.

LinkOut - more resources