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
. 2024 Nov 5;10(21):e40162.
doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40162. eCollection 2024 Nov 15.

The characterization of Lactobacillus strains in camel and bovine milk during fermentation: A comparison study

Omar A Alhaj  1 , Zeineb Jrad  2 , Olfa Oussaief  2 , Haitham A Jahrami  3   4 , Leena Ahmad  1 , Mohammad A Alshuniaber  5 , Bhavbhuti M Mehta  6
Affiliations

The characterization of Lactobacillus strains in camel and bovine milk during fermentation: A comparison study

Omar A Alhaj et al. Heliyon. .

Abstract

This study aims to compare the characterization of three Lactobacillus strains (L. helveticus, L. acidophilus, and L. paracasei subsp. paracasei) in camel milk and bovine milk during fermentation. Our finding showed that the average total viable counts of all three Lactobacilli strains in both milk types reached more than 7.0 log CFU/mL after 16 h of fermentation and continued to increase significantly (p < 0.05) as fermentation increased, which is according to the FAO and WHO, higher than the minimum recommended daily probiotic dose to provide the potential health benefits. The total count of L. paracasei subsp. paracasei was greater in fermented camel and bovine milk (8.76 and 8.98 log CFU/mL, respectively) compared to L. helveticus, and L. acidophilus. The L. helveticus exhibited the highest significant (p < 0.05) acidifying ability for both camel and bovine milk; on the other hand, L. paracasei subsp. paracasei revealed the highest significant (p < 0.05) pH in both milk. The L. acidophilus strain exhibited significantly (p < 0.05) the highest levels of free amino acids groups (FAAGs) among other tested strains in camel milk. It is concluded that the growth, viability, and proteolytic activity of three Lactobacilli strains were found to be mainly dependent on incubation time, strain, and type of milk.

Keywords: Bovine milk; Camel milk; Fermentation; Lactobacillus; Proteolytic activity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. We confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all authors and that there are no other persons who satisfied the criteria for authorship but are not listed. We further confirm that the order of authors listed in the manuscript has been approved by all of us. We further confirm that any aspect of the work covered in this manuscript that has involved human patients has been conducted with the ethical approval of all relevant bodies. We understand that Dr. Omar Alhaj is responsible for communicating with the other authors about progress, submissions of revisions and final approval of proofs.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Changes in total viable counts (Log CFU/mL) of Lactobacilli strains during fermentation of bovine and camel milk. Error bars represent SD. Values with different superscript letters are significantly different (P > 0.05) for a particular hour of fermentation. ns: non significantly different. Zero hour represents unfermented milk samples.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Changes in pH values of fermented camel and cow milk by three Lactobacilli strains and during 104 h of fermentation period. Error bars represent SD. Mean values with different lowercase letters (a–c) were significantly different for each type of fermented milk with different Lactobacilli strains (P < 0.05); mean values with different uppercase letters (A–D) were significantly different for a particular hours of fermentation (P < 0.05). Zero hour represents unfermented milk samples.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Changes in titratable acidity during fermentation of camel and cow milk with different Lactobacilli strains. Error bars represent SD. Mean values with different lowercase letters (a–b) were significantly different for each type of fermented milk with different Lactobacilli strains (P < 0.05); mean values with the same uppercase letter (A) are non-significantly different for a particular hours of fermentation (P > 0.05). Zero hour represents unfermented milk samples.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Alhaj O.A., et al. Camel milk composition by breed, season, publication year, and country: a global systematic review, meta‐analysis, and meta‐regression. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2022;21(3):2520–2559. - PubMed
    1. Alhaj O.A., et al. Does total caloric count of camel milk differ by species, country, season and year of publication: a systematic review, meta‐analysis and meta‐regression. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 2024;77(1):15–34.
    1. Al-Haj O.A., Al Kanhal H.A. Compositional, technological and nutritional aspects of dromedary camel milk. Int. Dairy J. 2010;20(12):811–821.
    1. Alhaj O.A. Identification of potential ACE-inhibitory peptides from dromedary fermented camel milk. CyTA - J. Food. 2017;15(2):191–195.
    1. Mohamed A., et al. Rheological and structural properties of camel milk/sweet potato starch gel. J. Chem. 2019;2019(1)

LinkOut - more resources