Composition of camel milk and evaluation of food supply for camels in Uzbekistan

Pak, Valeriy V.; Khojimatov, Olim K.; Abdiniyazova, Gulnara J.; Magay, Elena B.

doi:10.1186/s42779-019-0031-5

Cited by 12 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Pak et al (2019), all components of camel milk decreased from December to February and had a tendency to grow from June to August. Also, food supply plays an important role and can explain the particular richness of camel milk.…”

Section: Physicochemical Analysis Of Milksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimization of flocculation and clotting time of camel milk with camel and goat rennets, and chicken pepsin in comparison with cow milk using response surface method (RSM)

Bouras

Aïssaoui-Zitoun

2022

Emir J Food Agric

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To solve the difficulty of coagulation of camel milk, three animal coagulating enzymes: Camel rennet, goat rennet, and chicken pepsin were used. The study was focused on the optimization of two milk coagulation key parameters: pH and temperature using the response surface methodology. The cow milk is used as reference. Characterization of the coagulating enzymes extract showed that the protein content is higher in chicken pepsin [20 ± 0.00 mg/ml] followed by camel and goat’s extracts [15.4 ± 0.00 mg/ml, 8.8 ± 0.00 mg/ml]. However, coagulating and specific activities were more important in camel rennet [111.12 ± 1.23 UP.ml-1, 7.21 ± 0.03 UP.mg-1] than in goat’s rennet and chicken pepsin. On the other hand, coagulant strength was for camel rennet 1/4166.67 SU, goat rennet 1/2531.64 SU, and chicken pepsin 1/6153.85 SU. Moreover, results of pH and temperature optimization of camel milk flocculation showed the following pairs: [X1 = 5.35, X2 = 42] for camel rennet, [X1 = 5.48, X2 = 30] for goat rennet and [X1 = 5.49, X2 = 39.45] for chicken pepsin. Also, the coagulation showed the following couples: [X1 = 5.37, X2 = 39.09] for camel rennet, [X1 = 5.36, X2 = 38.84] for goat rennet and [X1 = 5, X2 = 42] for chicken pepsin. The conclusion was flocculation and coagulation optimum points of camel and cow milk with coagulating enzymes studied are different based on surface plot analysis and the relationship between response and variables

show abstract

Section: Physicochemical Analysis Of Milksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimization of flocculation and clotting time of camel milk with camel and goat rennets, and chicken pepsin in comparison with cow milk using response surface method (RSM)

Bouras

Aïssaoui-Zitoun

2022

Emir J Food Agric

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Short chain fatty acids (4:0-12:0) are present in very small amounts in camel milk fat and lower than that of cow milk fat. Camel milk fat showed a higher content of 16:1, 18:0, 18:1 and 18:2n-6 but comparable level of 18:3n-3 to that of cow milk (Konuspayeva et al, 2009;Karaman et al, 2021;Pak et al, 2019). Although camel milk fat has a higher unsaturated/saturated ratio, the high content of unsaturated fatty acids and the appreciable amount of essential fatty acids contributes to the overall nutritional value of camel milk (Boughellout et al, 2016;Jilo & Tegegene 2016;Bouhaddaoui et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, heat treatments have direct influences on the nutritional, biological and functional properties of milk proteins (Hattem 2017;Shori 2015;Atakan et al, 2016). Additionally, the impact of regional and seasonal differences on camel milk composition has been widely suggested, which includes species and breeds, feeding conditions, and seasonal and physiological variations (Bouhaddaoui et al, 2019) as well, the stage of lactation and genetic differences within the species (Pak et al, 2019). The main composition of camel milk (g/100 ml) obtained from meta-analysis of literature data revealed 3.82 of fat, 3.35 total protein, 4.46 of lactose, 12.47 of dry matter and 0.79 for ash (Bouhaddaoui et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Congruent Assessment of human hypoglycemic effect through STZ-Induced Diabetic rats fed Dromedary Camel (Camelus dromedarius) milk

Baker¹,

Al-Saffar²,

Al‐Sughayer³

2022

KJS publishes peer-review articles in Mathematics, Computer Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diabetes mellitus (DM), a heterogeneous metabolic disorder, affect people at any point of their lives. Globally, a wide variation in the prevalence of diabetes was observed but, showed zero percent within people that regularly consume camel milk because of their highly nutritional and therapeutic potentials to treat many metabolic and autoimmune diseases. The present study validated the efficacy of camel milk by investigating the differential hypoglycemic effects in concurrence with related biochemical tests in rats fed with raw and pasteurized milk of the one-humped Arabian camel (Camelus dromedarius). Male Sprague-Dawley rats (60mg.Kg-1 body weight) fed separately with raw and pasteurized camel milk for three weeks and injected with streptozotocin induced DM besides the investigation on the levels of blood glucose, cholesterol, triacylglycerol (TAG), and insulin. Results showed a significant hypoglycemic effect with both raw and pasteurized camel milk but, more prominent with the raw milk. Three weeks consumption of raw camel milk significantly increased blood cholesterol levels while consumption of pasteurized camel milk caused the reverse. Both types of camel milk revealed significant decrease in the blood TAG levels and were statistically validated. Thus, the present study recommends the choice of camel milk consumption especially in diabetic patients as well, as an immunity booster in the wake of the present environmental health issues.

show abstract

“…Because of the rising market demand (Chamekh et al 2020) and the potential health-promoting properties (Al Haj and Al Kanhal, 2010), camel milk have been given much attention and many studies on milk quantity and quality have been published in the world (Ahmed et al 2012;Abdalla et al 2015;Nagy et al 2017;Ismaili et al 2019;Karaman et al 2021) and in Tunisia (Jemmali et al 2016;Ayadi et al 2018;Fguiri et al 2018;Chamekh et al 2020). Medium to large-scale variability in camel's milk Characteristics and quality aspects have been found in the literature showing that the main factors of variation were genetics (Aljumaah et al 2012;Nagy et al 2017), age (Al-Juboori, et al2013;Abdalla et al 2015;Singh et al 2017), stage of lactation (Konuspayeva et al 2010;Musaad et al 2013), parity (Ahmed et al 2012Musaad et al 2013;Chamekh et al 2020), season (Abdalla et al 2015;Nagy et al 2017), calf sex (Nagy et al 2017), geographical origin (Shuiep et al 2008;Adugna et al 2013), production system (Wafa et al 2014;Aljumaah et al 2012;Musaad et al 2013;Ayadi et al 2018), feed composition (Al-Saiady et al 2012;Faye et al 2013), milking practices (Ayadi et al 2009;Jemmali et al 2016) and health status (Konuspayeva et al 2009, Pak et al 2019.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compositional aspects and bacteriological quality of camel milk from Tunisian oasis

Khaldi¹,

Mounir²,

Tabarek³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was planned to investigate the raw milk characteristics and quality aspects and to evaluate the impact of nongenetic factors on physicochemical composition and microbial quality of milk from local Maghrebi camels (Camelus dromedarius) kept under a traditional system in oasis areas, southern west, Tunisia. Forty-nine individual milk samples were collected from lactating Negga over two periods of the year (winter and summer). Animals belonging to private flocks were between 5 and 17.5 years of age, with parity numbers ranging from first to sixth. Samples were analyzed for physical parameters, chemical composition, mineral concentrations, and microbiological features according to standard methods. The overall means of physical characteristics were 6.63 ± 0.22, 1030.63 ± 2.54, and 19.11 ± 4.08 for pH, density, and acidity, respectively. No significant association (P > 0.05) between physical characteristics and nongenetic factors has been observed. The average results of chemical composition for dry matter, protein, fat, casein, lactose, ash, and casein/protein ratio were 115.24±15.67g/L, 30.98±6.40 g/L, 32.84±4.88 g/L, 22.77±4.27 g/L, 37.21±4.64 g/L, 6.87±1.59 g/L, and 0.74±0.06 g/L respectively. Season, parity, and age were confirmed to impinge significantly on chemical components, except for lactose. The maximum contents of total solids, protein, casein, and fat content were observed during winter. The third lactation was characterized with the highest content of total solids, protein, casein, and lactose; while the highest fat content was recorded in the second lactation. Lactose content was stable throughout all the studied age classes (P > 0.05), whereas the other chemical constituents, showed an obvious superiority in the age class of 7≤ age ≤ 9 years. Season, parity, and age of the animal exerted a significant effect on all minerals. The highest levels of Ca, P, and K were recorded in the winter (P<0.01) whereas Na showed an opposite pattern and was higher in the summer (P<0.01). All major minerals were higher in milk from multiparous than primiparous camels, with maximum concentrations at the fourth lactation. The uppermost levels of mineral concentrations were recorded in the age class of 7≤ age ≤ 9 years. The lowest ones were those of animals over 12 years old. The microbial analysis of raw milk which is affected by season, parity, and age showed higher overall contamination levels in all studied bacterial counts. The highest levels were observed in winter, among the multiparous and oldest Negga. The results highlighted the complete absence of the two dangerous pathogens Salmonella and CSR in all analyzed samples.

show abstract

Composition of camel milk and evaluation of food supply for camels in Uzbekistan

Cited by 12 publications

References 17 publications

Optimization of flocculation and clotting time of camel milk with camel and goat rennets, and chicken pepsin in comparison with cow milk using response surface method (RSM)

Optimization of flocculation and clotting time of camel milk with camel and goat rennets, and chicken pepsin in comparison with cow milk using response surface method (RSM)

Congruent Assessment of human hypoglycemic effect through STZ-Induced Diabetic rats fed Dromedary Camel (Camelus dromedarius) milk

Compositional aspects and bacteriological quality of camel milk from Tunisian oasis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About