Jean-Yves Y Gassi
email: jean-yves.gassi@rennes.inra.fr-lleboeuf@ccpa.fr

M Thèves

Eric Beaucher

Benedicte Camier

Florence Rousseau

Frédéric Gaucheron

L Leboeuf-Schneider

E Lepage

M Thève

M B Maillard

oft goat cheese enriched with polyunsaturated fatty acids: manufacture, physico-chemical and sensorial characterizations

à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

Research Questions and Objectives

Cheeses Symposium, September 2011, Moorepark, Irland

• What are the effects on the feeding enriched in poly unsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) for goat on:

 Global biochemical quality of milk ?  Lipid fraction (amounts of PUFA, Omega-3,…) ?

 Cheese making parameters and cheese yields ?  Biochemical quality of cheeses during ripening ?  Sensorial quality of cheeses at the end of ripening ?

4 Strategy 1. Milks characterization total solids, contents in protein, fat and mineral, fatty acids profile and fat globule size distribution.

2. Monitoring of the cheese making parameters.

3. Evaluation of cheese proteolysis and lipolysis during ripening.

Sensory evaluation at day 30

Cheeses Symposium, September 2011, Moorepark, Irland

These experiments were performed in triplicate.

Two groups of 30 Alpine dairy goats (GAEC La Blanchardière, France) were fed with a traditional ration (control) or a ration supplemented with PUFA (linseeds + rapeseeds + soya = CAPALIAMEGA from CCPA group)  Cheese curd acidification and draining were similar.

Manufacture of soft cheeses

Results and discussion

Goat cheeses manufacture pH f(time)  Cheese yield  5.7 % with supplemented milk (higher fat and protein contents).  Biochemical modifications (proteolysis and lipolysis) during ripening equivalent.  Cheese fat composition was different:  PUFA (for example, C18:3 (n-3) increased from 0.8 to 1.83 %) and a  in SFA (66.8 to 60.4 %).  Sensorial analyses  similar for both cheeses (except crust perception)  It was possible to make soft goat cheese with milk enriched with PUFA. The parameters of the cheese making and the final quality of the cheese were positively affected.  The development of this type of cheese is in progress to be commercialised.

Cheeses Symposium, September 2011, Moorepark, Irland

  Characterisation at D +1, 10 +20 +30 pH, DM, Fat, Prot, FA profile D+30 FFA, sensorial analyses , 19 th mai & 3 rd june  Aspect  Crust color (white to cream)  Crust thickness (thin to thick)  Chalky core size (not significant to very significant)  Paste color (white to cream)  Texture in mouth  Firmness (not firm to very firm)  Creaminess (not creamy to very creamy)  Melting (not melting to very melting)  Smoothness (not smooth to very smooth)  Stickiness (not sticky to very sticky)  Crust perception (not perceptible to very perceptible)  Odour  Overall intensity (mild to intense) Flavour  Overall intensity (mild to intense)  Goat aroma (mild to intense)  Salty (not salty to very salty)  Acid (not acid to very acid)  Bitter (not bitter to very bitter)  Cream aroma (absent to intense)  Pungent taste (not pungent to very pungent)  Mushroom aroma (absent to intense)  Ammonia aroma (absent to intense)



  ripening (control vs supplemented)  pH  (lactic acid  and NH 3 )  Similar pH evolution Proteolysis during ripening was equivalent. Global sensorial analyses were similar for both cheeses  Crust more perceptible (P=0.046) Composition supplemented milk (DM, fat & protein) > control milk.  Cheese manufactures were similar (acidification & drainage).

Materials and methods -Analyses Sensorial analyses Sample : Control Goat Cheese vs Supplemented Goat Cheese (D + 30) Panel: 12 subjects trained on cheeses

   Determination of the sensory profile by a descriptive approach

Cheeses Symposium, September 2011, Moorepark,

Irland Composition of cheese raw milks (control and supplemented)

		pH °D	DM Fat TN NCN NPN Prot CN SP Fat/Prot Fat/CN Ca
			g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg			g/kg
	Means 6.71 19.0 120.9 35.3 33.0 7.5 2.7 30.3 25.5 4.8	1.2	1.4	1.20
	SD	0.06 1.0	4.3	2.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0	0.1	0.1	0.06
	 Supplemented milk: DM (+3,5%), Fat (+9,9%), proteins (+1,7%) & calcium (+2,5%)
	 Fat globule size was similar (~4 µm)

Control Results and discussion Cheeses Symposium, September 2011, Moorepark, Irland

	pH	°D	DM	Fat TN NCN NPN Prot CN SP Fat/Prot Fat/CN Ca
			g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg g/kg	g/kg

Means 6.72 18.0 125.1 38.8 33.5 7.8 2.7 30.8 25.7 5.1

							1.3	1.5	1.23
	SD	0.02 0.0	4.2	2.6 0.4 0.3	0.2	0.5 0.7 0.2	0.1	0.1	0.06

Supplemented 8 Acidification and drainage (control vs supplemented) Cheeses Symposium, September 2011, Moorepark, Irland

Gross cheese yield: kg per 100 kg de lait Corrected cheese yield*: kg per 100 kg de lait

	Dates	Control	Supplemented		Control	Supplemented
	05 05	15.56	16.01	+ 2.89 %	15.75	16.33	+ 3.68 %
	19 05	15.68	15.91	+1.52 %	15. 79	16.70	+ 5.76 %
	03 06	14.59	15.16	+ 3.91%	14.67	15.80	+ 7.70 %

Composition of wheys (control vs supplemented)

 Supplemented Whey: DM (+1,3%), proteins (+2,9%)

Supplemented

Lipolysis during ripening (control vs supplemented)

Results and discussion

Cheeses