Microfiltration for whey protein removal in cheese making

D. M. Barbano• Department of Food Science Cornell University, Ithaca, NY

NYS Cheese Manufacturers’ Association

March 2, 2020

• Microfiltration (MF) of Milk• Membrane systems and performance

• Technical aspects of application of MF to remove milk derived whey proteins before cheese making

• Future:• Is MF approved currently in the US for this purpose?

• Is MF being used outside the US for this purpose?

• Will it be approved in the US?

• What will happen when it is approved in the US?

Outline

Membrane systems and performance

Ceramic MF systems

Polymeric MF systems

Microfiltration (MF) of Skim Milk

The Dairy Filtration Spectrum

Photo: TetraPak Dairy Processing Handbook, 2003

RO = Reverse OsmosisNF = Nanofiltration

UF = UltrafiltrationMF = Microfiltration

Higher Transmembrane Pressure (TMP) Smaller Pore Size

You Will Hear These Words Frequently

• Retentate – fluid retained by the membrane

• Permeate – fluid passed by the membrane

• Flux – mass or volume of permeate removed per unit membrane surface area per unit time (i.e., L/m2 h)

• Transmembrane Pressure (TMP) – the driving force of pressure-driven filtration processes

TMP = Pressure on retentate side - Pressure on permeate side

Spiral Wound versus Ceramic Membranes

Spiral Wound Membranes Ceramic Membranes

• Low chemical stability• pH restrictions• Temperature restrictions• Hydrophobic character leads to

higher protein adhesion• Foulant layer aids in separation• Low capital cost per unit of

membrane• Short life• Low flux

• High chemical stability• Chemical restrictions• High thermal stability• Hydrophilic character• High capital cost per unit of

membrane area• Long life• High flux

The “Ins and Outs” of Tubular Ceramic Microfiltration (MF) Membranes

RetentateFeed

Chapter 1

Membrane Surface

The “Ins and Outs” of Spiral Wound Polymeric Ultrafiltration (UF) Membranes

Photo: www.mtrinc.com

Chapter 1

Why MF milk prior to cheese making?

Whey proteins removed prior to cheese making are not contaminated with residual from annatto color, microbial cells and enzymes, color bleaching chemicals, and residual rennet. They have also have lower exposure to heat, a more bland flavor, and are less denatured than the same proteins isolated from whey after cheese making.

These characteristics increases their value. Whey proteins removed from milk before cheese making are referred to as milk serum proteins or “milk derived whey proteins”.

Microfiltration (MF) of Skim Milk

Microfiltration (MF) for Cheese MakingJ. Dairy Sci. 2005. 88:1891–1900.

A Microfiltration Process to Maximize Removal of Serum Proteins from Skim Milk Before

Cheese Making*B. K. Nelson and D. M. Barbano

Northeast Dairy Foods Research Center, Department of Food Science,Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853

Microfiltration (MF) for Cheese Making

Milk derived whey protein

Skim milk without whey proteins blended with fresh cream for cheese making

Microfiltration (MF) for Cheese MakingJ. Dairy Sci. 88:4183–4194

Yield and Aging of Cheddar Cheeses Manufactured from Milks with Different Milk Serum Protein Contents*B. K. Nelson and D. M. BarbanoNortheast Dairy Foods Research Center, Department of Food Science,

Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853

The Cheddar cheese aged normally and proteolysis was slightly faster in the low serum protein cheeses.

The protein content of the whey that from the conventional cheese making process is lower in protein and the relative amounts of minor milk proteins are higher than in cheese whey where the milk has not been microfiltered.

The economics and effectiveness of the process depends on how efficiently the milk derived whey proteins are removed from the skim milk prior to cheese making and the purity of the MF retentate and MF permeates.

Microfiltration – Serum Protein RemovalJ. Dairy Sci. 2009. 92 :1361–1377

Efficiency of serum protein removal from skim milk with ceramic and polymeric membranes at 50°C1

J. Zulewska*, M. Newbold † and D. M. Barbano †

* Faculty of Food Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland

† Cornell university Department of Food Science, Northeast Dairy Foods Research Center, Ithaca, NY 14853

Flux comparison by membrane type

Microfiltration – Serum Protein RemovalJ. Dairy Sci. 2009. 92 :1361–1377

Efficiency of serum protein removal from skim milk with ceramic and polymeric membranes at 50°C1

J. Zulewska*, M. Newbold † and D. M. Barbano †

* Faculty of Food Sciences, University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland

† Cornell university Department of Food Science, Northeast Dairy Foods Research Center, Ithaca, NY 14853

Serum protein removal comparison in stage 1 of a 3 stage MF system by membrane type

Microfiltration (MF) for Cheese MakingJ. Dairy Sci. 2005. 88:1891–1900.

A Microfiltration Process to Maximize Removal of Serum Proteins from Skim Milk Before

Cheese Making*B. K. Nelson and D. M. Barbano

Northeast Dairy Foods Research Center, Department of Food Science,Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853

Purity of MCC and SPISDS Page – MF Process Goals:

minimal SP in MCC minimal casein in SPI

Purity of Micellar Casein Concentrates: Methods of Expression

There are two methods being used to characterize serum protein removal and MCC purity produced by an MF process that have different meanings.

1. Serum protein removal percentage2. MCC casein concentrate purity percentage

In practice the numbers can be “similar” but they are not the same and they have different meanings.

Serum Protein Removal PercentageThis a metric used to characterize the performance of a MF process.

Using the feed weight to estimate the mass of SP entering the system and the mass of permeate and percent true protein in the permeate, the mass of SPremoved is divided by the mass of SP entering the process. This is the percentage SP removal.

The normal range from 70 to 98% depending on the process. The higher the percent removal the higher the yield (recovery) of SPI.

MCC Purity Percentage

This a metric used to characterize the purity of the MCC (i.e., MF retentate).

This is typically done by measuring the casein and serum protein content of theMCC using the Kjeldahl method.

While in some cases SP removal numbers and the MCC purity numbers seem similar, but they are not. This can be source of confusion in product specificationand defining the performance of a MF membrane process.

Comparison of the two metrics – SPI yieldMetric Skim

milkMF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5

MCC purity1 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.8% 98.9% 99.6%

SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%

Membrane type

polymeric polymeric ceramic ceramic ceramic

SP yield (kg/1000 kg

milk)

0 38.02 41.47 48.96 54.72 56.48

SP yield increase (kg)

base + 3.456 + 10.944 + 16.704 + 18.432

1 casein as percent of true protein

Comparison of the two metrics – SPI yieldMetric Skim

milkMF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5

MCC purity1 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.8% 98.9% 99.6%

SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%

Membrane type

polymeric polymeric ceramic ceramic ceramic

SP yield (kg/1000 kg

milk)

0 38.02 41.47 48.96 54.72 56.48

SP yield increase (kg)

base + 3.456 + 10.944 + 16.704 + 18.432

1 casein as percent of true protein

Comparison of the two metrics – SPI yieldMetric Skim

milkMF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5

MCC purity1 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.8% 98.9% 99.6%

SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%

Membrane type

polymeric polymeric ceramic ceramic ceramic

SP yield (kg/1000 kg

milk)

0 38.02 41.47 48.96 54.72 56.48

SP yield increase (kg)

base + 3.456 + 10.944 + 16.704 + 18.432

1 casein as percent of true protein

Comparison of the two metrics – SPI yieldMetric Skim

milkMF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5

MCC purity1 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.8% 98.9% 99.6%

SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%

Membrane type

polymeric polymeric ceramic ceramic ceramic

SP yield (kg/1000 kg

milk)

0 38.02 41.47 48.96 54.72 56.48

SP yield increase (kg)

base + 3.456 + 10.944 + 16.704 + 18.432

1 casein as percent of true protein

Comparison of the two metrics – SPI yieldMetric Skim

milkMF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5

MCC purity1 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.8% 98.9% 99.6%

SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%

Membrane type

polymeric polymeric ceramic ceramic ceramic

SP yield (kg/1000 kg

milk)

0 38.02 41.47 48.96 54.72 56.48

SP yield increase (kg)

base + 3.456 + 10.944 + 16.704 + 18.432

1 casein as percent of true protein

Residual SP in a 2X MCC and cooked flavor1

Metric Skimmilk

MF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5

SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%

Membrane type

Spiral Spiral ceramic Ceramic ceramic

Residual SP (g/100 g MCC)

1.152 0.392 0.323 0.173 0.058 0.023

Cooked flavor intensity

High High ??? ??? ??? ???

1 6% protein, 15 g per 240 g serving

Comparison – Residual SP in a 2X MCC1

Metric Skimmilk

MF ret 1 MF ret 2 MF ret 3 MF ret 4 MF ret 5

MCC purity2 82% 93.1% 94.2% 96.81 98.9% 99.6%

SP removal (%) 0% 66% 72% 85% 95% 98%

Membrane type

spiral spiral ceramic ceramic ceramic

Residual SP (g/100 g MCC)

1.152 0.392 0.323 0.173 0.058 0.023

Cooked flavor intensity

high high ??? ??? ??? ???

1 6% protein, 15 g per 240 g serving2 casein as percent of true protein

• Microfiltration (MF) of Milk• Membrane systems and performance

• Technical aspects of application of MF to remove milk derived whey proteins before cheese making

• Future:• Is MF approved currently in the US for this purpose?

• Is MF being used outside the US for this purpose?

• Will it be approved in the US?

• What will happen when it is approved in the US?

Outline

Questions?

Dave Barbano, Cornell University, Ithaca, NYProfessor, Food Science