Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T08:36:19.222Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Acetaldehyde and diacetyl production by Streptococcus thermophilus and other lactic streptoccocci

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

Vittorio Bottazzi  and
Franco Dellaglio
Vittorio Bottazzi
Affiliation:
Istituto di Microbiologia, Università Cattolica del S. Cuore, Piacenza, Italy
Franco Dellaglio
Affiliation:
Istituto di Microbiologia, Università Cattolica del S. Cuore, Piacenza, Italy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The quantities of acetaldehyde and diacetyl produced in skim-milk and MRS media are reported for strains of Streptococcus lactis, Str. cremoris, Str. diacetilactis, Str. faecalis and Str. thermophilus obtained from culture collections or freshly isolated from natural milk cultures used in cheese manufacture. The diacetyl: acetaldehyde ratio in skim-milk medium was found to be approximately 0·1:1 for Str. lactis and Str. cremoris, 0·5:1 for Str. diacetilactis (5:1 for Str. diacetilactis PIM 13 and K.2 strains) and for Str. thermophilus 0·3:1, in skim-milk medium, and 0·8:1, in MRS medium; in the latter species cultured in MRS medium the ratio varied from 3·5:1 to 0·04:1 and when cultured in milk from 1·2:1 to 0·03:1.

In both media all strains of Str. thermophilus formed more acetaldehyde and diacetyl than other homofermentative lactic streptococci.

The ratio diacetyl: acetaldehyde in 9 strains of Str. diacetilactis was found to be unsuitable for a good culture flavour.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 34 , Issue 2 , June 1967 , pp. 109 - 113
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bading, H. T. & Galesloot, T. E. (1962). 16th Int. Dairy Congr. vol. B, p. 199.Google Scholar
Bottazzi, V. (1966). 17th Int. Dairy Congr. vol. D, Section D:2, p. 509.Google Scholar
Harvey, R. J. (1960). J. Dairy Res. 27, 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keenan, T. W., Lindsay, R. C., Morgan, M. E. & Day, E. A. (1966). J. Dairy Sci. 49, 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, R. C. & Day, E. A. (1965). J. Dairy Sci. 48, 665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, R. C., Day, E. A. & Sandine, E. W. (1965). J. Dairy Sci. 48, 863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, M. E., Lindsay, R. C., Libbey, L. M. & Pereira, R. L. (1966). J. Dairy Sci. 49, 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pack, M. Y., Sandine, W. E., Elliker, P. R., Day, E. A. & Lindsay, R. C. (1964). J. Dairy Sci. 47, 981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pette, J. W. & Lolkema, H. (1950). Neth. Milk Dairy J. 4, 261.Google Scholar
Vedamuthu, E. R. (1966). J. Dairy Sci. 49, 151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar