Principles of Membrane Filtration

Hausmann, Angela; Duke, Mikel; Demmer, T.

doi:10.1002/9781118457009.ch2

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The total protein content and profile in the feed, permeate, and retentate of the 1.4 µm MF stream did not significantly (p > 0.05) change (Table 3), which indicated that all measured caseins and whey proteins were able to pass through the 1.4 µm membrane in line with previous reports [29,30]. The 0.2 µm MF step retained 59.94% (w/w) of total protein (at a VCF of 3.2) at a protein content of 12.45 ± 1.27 g 100 g −1 of solution in the retentate (Table 3).…”

Section: Effect Of Membrane Filtration On Protein Contentsupporting

confidence: 88%

The Use of Membrane Filtration to Increase Native Whey Proteins in Infant Formula

Chen

Callanan

Shanahan

et al. 2021

Dairy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of membrane filtration during infant milk formula (IMF) processing represents an innovative approach to increasing native protein content compared to standard IMF. The objective of this study was to compare IMF powder produced using a standard process and IMF produced from raw bovine skim milk with added whey protein isolate using a split-stream process incorporating a ceramic 1.4 μm filter followed by a polyvinylidene difluoride polymeric 0.2 μm filter. Retentates from 0.2 μm microfiltration (MF) were blended with fat, lactose, and minerals and subsequently high-temperature treated (125 °C × 5 s). The heat-treated retentate was merged with the permeate from the 0.2 μm MF, homogenised, and spray-dried (referred to as membrane-filtered IMF or MEM-IMF). A control IMF was also produced using standard treatment (referred to as high-temperature IMF or HT-IMF) without membrane filtration. Both IMF products were characterised by high-performance liquid chromatography, particle size, and enzyme activity assays. MEM-IMF powder had significantly higher amounts of native (1.1 g per 100 g powder) and monomeric (1.48 g per 100 g powder) whey proteins when compared to 0.18 and 0.46 g per 100 g powder in HT-IMF, respectively. MEM-IMF also exhibited a lower degree of protein aggregation compared to HT-IMF. Comparison of microbial and Maillard by-products markers demonstrated that a safe IMF product could be produced at scale, although levels of the Maillard by-product marker, carboxymethyl-lysine, were not significantly reduced in MEM-IMF. This study demonstrates how membrane filtration can be used to retain native proteins during IMF manufacture.

show abstract

Section: Effect Of Membrane Filtration On Protein Contentsupporting

confidence: 88%

The Use of Membrane Filtration to Increase Native Whey Proteins in Infant Formula

Chen

Callanan

Shanahan

et al. 2021

Dairy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During skim milk ultrafiltration, low molecular weight substances like water, lactose, soluble salts and vitamins pass through the membrane into permeate, while high molecular weight compounds like fat, if any, and proteins are retained and thus concentrated by UF membrane (Cheryan 1998;Singh 2007;Mistry 2011 separation ability of the feed material through the addition of suitable solvent. Being universal solvent for the food systems, water is mostly added to retentate for dilution purpose, which dissolves soluble constituents and make them easily permeable through the membrane (Hausmann et al 2013). DF can be operated in batch and continuous mode using the same UF membrane so as to achieve higher concentration of proteins, which is not possible with UF alone (Smith 2013).…”

Section: Ultrafiltration and Diafiltration Of Skim Milkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Milk protein concentrates: opportunities and challenges

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Poor solubility of milk protein concentrates (MPCs) is a key deterrent factor in their wider applications in the food industry as compared to other protein-rich dried products such as casein, caseinates and whey protein concentrates and isolates. Apart from the processing factors, the protein content of a MPC also decides its solubility. Solubility is a pre-requisite property of MPCs on which its other functional properties are majorly depended. Further, there is a confusion about the term MPC itself in the literature. An attempt has been made to describe MPC and provide an understanding on the manufacture of MPCs. Further, mechanisms of insolubility, factors affecting solubility of MPCs and an insight into the recently evolved strategies for overcoming the challenges related to their poor heat stability and solubility have been reviewed. Potential applications of MPC to be utilized as a novel ingredient in food industry are also outlined.

show abstract

“…Protein Concentration Factor. The protein concentration factor (PCF) defines the ratio of the concentration of a protein in the retentate and was obtained using Equation [2] (Hausmann et al, 2013):…”

Section: Operational Modesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of skim milk treated with high hydrostatic pressure on permeate flux and fouling during ultrafiltration

Leu

Marciniak

Chamberland

et al. 2017

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultrafiltration (UF) is largely used in the dairy industry to generate milk and whey protein concentrate for standardization of milk or production of dairy ingredients. Recently, it was demonstrated that high hydrostatic pressure (HHP) extended the shelf life of milk and improved rennet coagulation and cheese yield. Pressurization also modified casein micelle size distribution and promoted aggregation of whey proteins. These changes are likely to affect UF performance. Consequently, this study determined the effect of skim milk pressurization (300 and 600 MPa, 5 min) on UF performance in terms of permeate flux decline and fouling. The effect of HHP on milk proteins was first studied and UF was performed in total recycle mode at different transmembrane pressures to determine optimal UF operational parameters and to evaluate the effect of pressurization on critical and limiting fluxes. Ultrafiltration was also performed in concentration mode at a transmembrane pressure of 345 kPa for 130 or 140 min to evaluate the decline of permeate flux and to determine fouling resistances. It was observed that average casein micelle size decreased by 32 and 38%, whereas β-lactoglobulin denaturation reached 30 and 70% at 300 and 600 MPa, respectively. These results were directly related to UF performance because initial permeate fluxes in total recycle mode decreased by 25% at 300 and 600 MPa compared with nonpressurized milk, critical flux, and limiting flux, which were lower during UF of milk treated with HHP. During UF in concentration mode, initial permeate fluxes were 30% lower at 300 and 600 MPa compared with the control, but the total flux decline was higher for nonpressurized milk (62%) compared with pressure-treated milk (30%). Fouling resistances were similar, whatever the treatment, except at 600 MPa where irreversible fouling was higher. Characterization of the fouling layer showed that caseins and β-lactoglobulin were mainly involved in membrane fouling after UF of pressure-treated milk. Our results demonstrate that HHP treatment of skim milk drastically decreased UF performance.

show abstract

Principles of Membrane Filtration

Cited by 9 publications

References 71 publications

The Use of Membrane Filtration to Increase Native Whey Proteins in Infant Formula

The Use of Membrane Filtration to Increase Native Whey Proteins in Infant Formula

Milk protein concentrates: opportunities and challenges

Effect of skim milk treated with high hydrostatic pressure on permeate flux and fouling during ultrafiltration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About